The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSDP 96-14B; LEGOLAND PIRATE SHORES; FINAL SOILS REPORT; 2012-05-25 AS-GRADED REPORT OF ROUGH, FINE, & POST GRADING, PIRATE ISLAND ATTRACTION, LEGOLAND THEME PARK, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: LEGOLAND CALIFORNIA One LEGOLAND Drive Carlsbad, California 92008 Project No. 960151-036 May 25, 2012 ----Leighton and Associates, Inc. ---• A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY May 25, 2012 Project No. 960151-036 To: LEGOLAND CALIFORNIA One LEGOLAND Drive Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Mr. Chris Romero Subject: As-Graded Report of Rough, Fine and Post Grading, Pirate Island Attraction, LEGOLAND Theme Park, Carlsbad, California Introduction In accordance with your request and authorization, Leighton and Associates, Inc. (Leighton) has performed geotechnical observation and testing services during the rough, fine, and post grading operations of the Pirate Island Attraction at LEGOLAND Theme Park, located in Carlsbad, California (Figure 1). This report summarizes our geotechnical observations, field and laboratory test results, and the geotechnical conditions encountered during the rough, fine, and post grading of the site. As of the date of this report, all grading activities are essentially complete. Project Description The subject attraction site is located in the north-center portion of the LEGOLAND Theme Park immediately north of the existing “Splash Battle” and “Soak ‘n Sail” attractions, and east of the existing “Water Park”. The proposed attraction includes the construction of the Pirate Island ride foundations and splash pool, two themed pirate ships with associated stairway and bridge, an addition to an existing mechanical building, shade covers at existing building locations, concrete retaining walls containing the splash pool area, extension of a Keystone segmental retaining wall, landscaping, curbs, sidewalks and utilities (Apel, 2012). 3934 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite B205 ■ San Diego, CA 92123-4425 858.292.8030 ■ Fax 858.292.0771 ■ www.leightongroup.com Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY 960151-036 -2- Previous Site Grading The subject site was originally graded as part of the LEGOLAND Theme Park development under the observation and testing of Leighton and Associates (Leighton, 1998). Grading operations in the area of the proposed Pirate Island Attraction included the placement of 4 to 18 feet of documented artificial fill overlying Quaternary-aged Terrace Deposits. It should be noted that up to 15 feet of stockpiled soil or undocumented fill was placed over the documented fill. Summary of Rough, Fine and Post Grading Operations The rough and fine grading for the project was performed by Sierra Pacific West, Inc. between February 21, 2012 and March 1, 2012. In general, the rough and fine grading operations included: 1) removal of existing stockpiled and potentially compressible existing artificial fill and weathered formational material; and 2) the placement of compacted fill soils to achieve the proposed finished grade. The post grading operations for the project were performed by Concrete Contractors Interstate, Curtis Hole Drilling, Berg Electric, Rand Engineering, and Sierra Pacific West between February 21, 2012 and May 8, 2012, and included: 1) utility trench backfill and compaction; 2) observation of foundations; 3) observation and testing of MSE retaining wall construction and placement of retaining wall backfills. Post-grading activities were performed under the observation and testing of a representative of Leighton in accordance with the project geotechnical recommendations (Leighton, 2011), additional recommendations made during the course of grading, and the requirements of the City of Carlsbad. Our field technician was on-site on a part-time basis, as needed, during the grading operations. The geotechnical conditions encountered during grading were generally as anticipated.  Site Preparation Prior to grading, the area was stripped of existing surface pavement, vegetation, and debris. These materials were hauled away for disposal off-site. Subsequently, the existing undocumented fill stockpiled over the area of the proposed improvements was removed to competent older fill soils and to the proposed site grades. As recommended, the upper 12 inches of soil in areas receiving improvements was removed and/or scarified and recompacted prior to the placement of additional fill in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Investigation (Leighton, 2011). The reprocessed soil was moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content and recompacted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction, based on ASTM Test Methods D1557. Leighton 960151-036 -3-  Fill Placement and Compaction After processing the area to receive additional fill, on-site soil was spread in 4- to 8- inch loose lifts; moisture conditioned as needed to attain near-optimum moisture content, and compacted. Field density test results performed during the grading operations indicated the fill soils were compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM Test Methods D1557. Compaction of the fill soils was achieved by use of heavy-duty construction equipment. Areas of fill in which field density tests indicated compactions less than the recommended relative compaction or where the soils exhibited nonuniformity, or had field moisture contents less than approximate 2 percent the laboratory optimum moisture content, were reworked. The reworked areas were recompacted and re- tested until the recommended minimum 90 percent relative compaction and near- optimum moisture content was achieved.  Trench Backfill Underground utilities (including sewer, water, storm drain, and electrical lines) were constructed during the development of the site. During the trench and backfill operations, native soils were moisture-conditioned, placed in 8 to 12 inch thick loose lifts, and compacted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM Test Method D1557). Compaction of the trench backfill soils was accomplished by whacker and/or vibratory wheel-rolling with heavy-duty construction equipment. The results and description of approximate location of the backfill tests are summarized in Appendix B.  Summary of Keystone (MSE) Retaining Wall Grading Observation The grading and construction of the Keystone (MSE) geogrid reinforced retaining wall located east of the addition to the mechanical building was performed between March 30 and April 6, 2012 by Geogrid Retaining Wall Systems, Inc. Prior to the construction of the Keystone retaining wall, the foundation and backcut excavations were geotechnically observed by a representative of Leighton and found to be in general accordance with the geotechnical recommendations and the retaining wall construction plans (Leighton, 2011). After the lower portion of the retaining wall was constructed (but prior to the backfill operations), a 4-inch perforated subdrain was placed at the base of the retaining wall and backcut. In addition, vertical panel drains were installed along the backcut and tied into the backcut subdrain. The locations of subdrain outlet(s) were “as-built” by the contractor on the civil plans. Leighton 960151-036 -4- During the construction of the MSE geogrid reinforced retaining wall, on-site soils were placed in 6 to 12-inch thick loose lifts and moisture-conditioned as needed to obtain near-optimum moisture content. The fill soils were then compacted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM Test Method D1557). Compaction of the fill soils was accomplished by whacker and/or vibratory wheel-rolling with heavy-duty construction equipment. Based on our observations and testing, the soil used to construct the MSE wall were in conformance with the retaining wall construction plans, and retaining wall design parameters (Leighton, 2011). The field density test results and description of approximate location for the retaining wall testing are summarized in Appendix B.  Foundations Excavation Observation Excavations for conventional spread and continuous footings for the new structures were observed by representatives of Leighton and found to be with in competent fill soils or formational material, as recommended in the project geotechnical recommendations (Leighton, 2011). In addition, excavations for the deep foundations (drilled piles or CIDH) were observed by representatives of Leighton. The drilled shafts with diameters ranging from 24 to 72 inches were excavated to the proposed depths in accordance with the project plans. In general, no groundwater was encountered during the drilling of the shafts, excluding some minor seepage of perched ground water in two 24 inch diameter shafts east of the “unload station”. No caving was encountered during the drilling of the shafts. Field Density Testing Field density tests were performed during the placement and compaction of fill and reinforced fill. Density tests were performed in general accordance with the Nuclear- Gauge Method (ASTM Test Methods D6938). The results and approximate locations of the field density tests performed are summarized in Appendix B. The field density testing was performed in general accordance with the applicable ASTM standards, the current standard of care in the industry, and the precision of the testing method itself. Variations in relative compaction should be expected from the results documented herein. Laboratory Testing Laboratory maximum dry density tests of representative on-site soils were performed in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557. In addition, a remolded direct shear test, an Atterberg Limits, and a Particle Size Analysis was performed on the import soil Leighton 960151-036 -5- used for the reinforced zone of mechanically stabilized earth (MSE). The laboratory test results are presented in Appendix C. Summary of As-Graded Geologic Conditions  Geologic Units The geologic units encountered during the grading of the site were essentially as anticipated and consisted of artificial fill and Quaternary-aged Terrace Deposits. The artificial fill consisted mainly of soils derived from on-site excavations that were placed during and following the original site grading that occurred in the 1990’s (Leighton, 1998). The majority of the Quaternary-aged Terrace Deposits consists of silty fine to medium grained sand.  Faulting Based on our review of published geologic maps and geotechnical observations made during the rough grading operations for the project, no known faults are present on the site nor was any evidence of faulting encountered during site grading. The nearest active regional fault is the Rose Canyon Fault Zone located approximately 4.7 miles west of the site.  Landslides and Surficial Failures Based on our geotechnical observations during the rough and fine grading operations, there were no indications of landslides or other surficial failures within the subject site. Conclusions of Grading Based on our geotechnical observations and testing, it is our professional opinion (i.e., certifying as defined by the California Business and Professions Code) that the soil engineering and engineering geologic aspects of the grading are in general compliance with the approved geotechnical investigation (Leighton, 2011), geotechnical recommendations made during grading, and the City of Carlsbad requirements. Limitations The presence of our field representative at the site was intended to provide the owner with professional advice, opinions, and recommendations based on observations of the contractor’s work. Although the observations did not reveal obvious deficiencies or deviations from project specifications, we do not guarantee the contractor’s work, or his Leighton 960151-036 A-1 APPENDIX A References R.W. Apel, Inc, 2012, Site Plan, Pirate Island, LEGOLAND California, Sheets 001 and 002, dated February 2, 2012. Dunn Savoie, Inc, 2012, Foundation Plan, Pirate Island, LEGOLAND California, Sheets S-2.0, S-2.1, S-2.2, S-2.3, S-3.0, and S-3.1, dated February 2, 2012. Hofman Planning & Engineering, 2012, Precise Grading and Drainage Plan, Pirate Island, LEGOLAND California, Sheets: C-1.1, C-1.2, and C-1.3, dated February 2, 2012. Leighton and Associates, Inc., 1998, Final As-Graded Report of Rough-Grading Lego Family Park, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 960151-003, dated February 10, 1998. _____________, 2011, Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Pirate Island Attraction, LEGOLAND Theme Park, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 960151-035, dated August 12, 2011. _____________, 2012, As-Graded Geotechnical Conditions and Certification of Pirate Island Attraction, LEGOLAND Theme Park, Carlsbad, California, dated May 9, 2012. 960151-036 B-1 APPENDIX B Explanation of Summary of Field Density Tests Test No. Prefix Test of Test of Abbreviations Test No. Prefix Test of Test of Abbreviations (none) GRADING Natural Ground Original Ground Existing Fill Compacted Fill Slope Face Finish Grade NG OG EF CF SF FG (SG) (AB) (CB) (PB) (AC) SUBGRADE AGGREGATE BASE CEMENT TREATED BASE PROCESSED BASE ASPHALT CONCRETE (S) (SD) (AD) (W) (RC) (SB) (G) (E) (T) (J) (I) SEWER STORM DRAIN AREA DRAIN DOMESTIC WATER RECLAIMED WATER SUBDRAIN GAS ELECTRICAL TELEPHONE JOINT UTILITY IRRIGATION Bedding Material Shading Sand Main Lateral Crossing Manhole Hydrant Lateral Catch Basin Riser Inlet Fire Service Water Services Head Wall B S M L X MH HL CB R I FS WS HW Curb Gutter Curb and Gutter Cross Gutter Street Sidewalk Driveway Driveway Approach Parking Lot Electric Box Pad Trash Enclosure Loading Ramp Building Pad C G CG XG ST SW D DA P EB TE LR BP (RW) (CW) (LW) (SF) RETAINING WALL CRIB WALL LOFFELL WALL STRUCT FOOTING Footing Bottom Backfill Wall Cell F B C (P) PRESATURATION Moisture Content M (IT) INTERIOR TRENCH Sewer Lateral Storm Drain Electric Line S SD E N represents nuclear gauge tests that were performed in general accordance with most recent version of ASTM Test Methods D6938-08a. S represents sand cone tests that were performed in general accordance with most recent version of ASTM Test Method D1556. 15A represents first retest of Test No. 15 SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS Test Test Test Location Test Soil Dry Density Moisture (%) Relative(%) No. Date Of Lot# Elev (ft) Type Field Max Field Opt. ComJ!action Remarks w 1 3/29/12 M E. Side of Pool 162.0 1 116.2 129.0 8.2 10.0 90 w 2 3/29/12 M E. Side of Pool 164.0 I 117.9 129.0 9.3 10.0 91 w 3 3/30/12 M N. ofMant. Bldg 164.0 2 112.4 124.5 8.6 8.5 90 w 4 3/30/12 M E. of Pool 165.0 2 114.6 124.5 8.7 8.5 92 ' Proiect Number: 960151-036 -~~ Proiect Name: LEGOLAND/PIRATE ISLA Proiect Location: 0 ~~ Client: a Pa1re 1 of 1 5/24/2 2:09:28PM SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS Test Test Test Location Test Soil Dry Density Moisture (%) Relative (%} No. Date Of Lot# Elev (ft) Type Field Max Field Opt. ComQaction Remarks E l 3/22/12 M S. of Bull Pen 163.0 2 115.5 124.5 13.1 8.5 93 E 2 3/22/12 M S. of Bull Pen 164.0 1 122.l 129.0 11.2 10.0 95 E ,., 3/23 /12 M S. of Pool 165.0 1 119.2 129.0 9.4 10.0 92 :, E 4 3/23/12 M N ofMaint. Bldg 166.0 1 118.9 129.0 11.2 10.0 92 E 5 3/23/1 2 M N ofMaint. Bldg 167.0 1 118.2 129.0 13.3 10.0 92 E 6 3/23/12 M S. of Pool 164.0 1 119.1 129.0 11.6 10.0 92 E 7 3/24/12 M S. of Pool 163 .0 1 118.2 129.0 12.2 10.0 92 E 8 5/2/12 M N.E. of Pool 165 .5 1 121.5 129.0 8.0 10.0 94 E 9 5/2/12 M S. of Pool 165.5 1 110.9 129.0 8.8 10.0 86 Retest on 9A E 9A 5/2/12 M S. of Pool 165.5 1 118.9 129.0 8.8 10.0 92 Retest of9 E 10 5/2/12 M S.E. of Pool 165 .5 1 116.4 129.0 7.9 10.0 90 E I 1 5/2/12 M S. of Pool 165.5 1 118.6 129.0 9.8 10.0 92 Proiect Number: 960151-036 ~ Proiect Name: LEGOLAND/PIRATE ISLA Proiect Location: 0 ~ Client: 0 Page 1 of 1 5/24/2 2:09 :48PM SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS Test Test Test Location Test Soil Dry Density Moisture (%) Relative(%} No. Date Of Lot# Elev (ft) Tvpe Field Max Field Opt. Com~action Remarks SD l 2/22/12 M W. Site 163.0 1 116.6 129.0 9.8 10.0 90 SD 2 2/22/12 M V-i. Site 164.5 l 116.9 129.0 10.2 10.0 91 SD 3 2/27/12 M W. Site 166.0 1 120.9 129.0 10.6 10.0 94 SD 4 2/27/12 M S.W. Site 164.0 2 112.3 124.5 9.9 8.5 90 SD 5 2/27/12 M S.W. Site 165 .0 1 117.4 129.0 10.4 10.0 91 SD 6 3/24/12 M S.E. of Pool 164.0 2 113 .2 124.5 7.7 8.5 91 SD 7 3/28/12 M K.W. of Pool 164.0 2 113.4 124.5 11.5 8.5 91 SD 8 3/28/12 M K.W. of Pool 163.0 2 112.7 124.5 10.4 8.5 91 SD 9 3/28/12 M K.W. of Pool 166.0 2 103.6 124.5 11.5 8.5 83 Retest on 9A SD 9A 3/28/12 M K.W. of Pool 166.0 2 112.7 124.5 11. l 8.5 91 Retest of9 SD 10 3/28/12 M E. of Pool Area 164.0 2 114.2 124.5 9.7 8.5 92 SD 11 3/29/12 M W. of Pool Area 163 .0 2 112.5 124.5 12.1 8.5 90 SD 12 3/30/12 M S. of Pool Area 165.0 2 113.2 124.5 9.6 8.5 91 . . . Proiect Number: 96,]151-036 Proiect Name: LEGOLAND/PIRATE ISLA ., Proiect Location: 0 ~ Client: 0 Pag:e I of 1 5/24/2 2:10 :12PM SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS Test Test Test Location Test Soil Dry Density Moisture (%) Relative(%} No. Date Of Lot# Elev (ft) Type Field Max Field Opt. Com(!action Remarks s 1 2/21/12 M Pool Drain S. Site 164.0 1 112.5 129.0 9.2 10.0 87 Retest on lA s IA 2/22/12 M Pool Drain S. Site 164.0 1 117.1 129.0 10.1 10.0 91 Retest of 1 s 2 2/21/12 M Pool Drain S. Site 162.0 1 109.9 129.0 10.6 10.0 85 Retest on 2A s 2A 2/22/12 M Pool Drain S. Site 162.0 1 117.5 129.0 10.2 10.0 91 Retest of2 s 3 2/22/12 :Ml-I Pool Drain S. Site 162.0 1 116.6 129.0 11.4 10.0 90 s 4 2/22/12 MH Pool Drain S. Site 164.0 2 111.9 124.5 11.0 8.5 90 s 5 2/22/12 :Ml-I Pool Drain S. Site 165.0 1 117.1 129.0 10.2 10.0 91 s 6 2/22/12 M Pool Drain S. Site 166.0 1 119.2 129.0 9.5 10.0 92 s 7 2/22/12 M Pool Drain S. Site 165.0 2 111.8 124.5 8.2 8.5 90 s 8 2/22/12 M Pool Drain S. Site 166.0 2 112.5 124.5 10.2 8.5 90 s 9 2/22/12 :Ml-I Pool Drain S. Site 163.0 1 119.7 129.0 9.8 10.0 93 s 10 2/22/12 :Ml-I Pool Drain S. Site 165.0 1 118.4 129.0 10.6 10.0 92 s 11 3/9/12 M E. ofS. Shio 164.0 1 117.3 129.0 9.6 10.0 91 s 12 3/9/12 M S.ofN. Ship 164.0 1 118.5 129.0 10.6 10.0 92 s 13 3/9/12 M S.E. ofN. Ship 164.0 1 117.7 129.0 11.7 10.0 91 Proiect Number: 960151-036 ~ Proiect Name: LEGOLAND/PIRATE ISLA ~~ Proiect Location: 0 ~,~_., Client: 0 Pa12:e 1 of 1 -~ 5/24/2 2: 10:46PM SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS Test Test Test Location Test Soil Dry Density Moisture(%) Relative(%} No. Date Of Lot# Elev (ft) Type Field Max Field Opt. Comuaction Remarks RW 1 3/30/12 B Keystone Wall Station 1 +09 165.4 1 116.1 129.0 8.5 10.0 90 RW 2 3/30/12 B Keystone Wall Station 1+30 165.4 1 116.9 129.0 10.3 10.0 91 RW 3 3/30/12 B Maint. Bldg 160.0 2 111.8 124.5 12.2 8.5 90 RW 4 3/30/12 B Maint. Bldg 162.0 2 112.4 124.5 11.5 8.5 90 RW 5 3/30/12 B Keystone Wall Station 1 + 11 167.6 1 117.6 129.0 10.6 10.0 91 RW 6 3/30/12 B Keystone Wall Station l+ 26 167.6 1 116.7 129.0 11.3 10.0 90 RW 7 3/31/12 B Keystone Wall Station l+ 13 169.6 1 115.9 129.0 8.5 10.0 90 RW 8 3/31/12 B Keystone Wall Station l+ 23 169.6 1 116.2 129.0 10.0 10.0 90 RW 9 3/31/12 B Keystone Wall Station l+ 3 8 169.6 1 115.8 129.0 10.3 10.0 90 RW 10 3/31/12 B Keystone Wall Station 1+20 171.6 1 116.7 129.0 9.5 10.0 90 RW 11 3/31/12 B Keystone Wall Station 1 +40 171.6 1 117.7 129.0 10.4 10.0 91 RW 12 3/31/12 B Keystone Wall Station 1+30 173.0 1 117.9 129.0 11.1 10.0 91 RW 13 4/4/12 B Maint. Bldg 163.0 1 118.1 129.0 9.2 10.0 92 RW 14 4/4/12 B Maint. Bldg 161.0 1 122.7 129.0 9.6 10.0 95 RW 15 4/4/12 B Maint. Bldg 163.0 1 120.1 129.0 9.2 10.0 93 RW 16 4/4/12 B Maint. Bldg 165.0 1 121.1 129.0 9.1 10.0 94 RW 17 4/4/12 B Maint. Bldg 164.5 1 116.1 129.0 8.4 10.0 90 RW 18 4/4/12 B Maint. Bldg 163.0 1 116.8 129.0 8.5 10.0 91 RW 19 4/4/12 B Maint. Bldg 164.0 1 117.4 129.0 11.2 10.0 91 RW 20 4/4/12 B Maint. Bldg 165.0 1 118.0 129.0 8.2 10.0 91 RW 21 4/6/12 B Slope Above Keystone Wall 175.0 1 116.5 129.0 9.9 10.0 90 RW 22 4/6/12 B Slope Above Keystone Wall 177.5 1 117.3 129.0 12.3 10.0 91 RW 23 4/9/12 B East Pool 164.5 1 113.6 129.0 9.0 10.0 88 Retest on 23A RW 23A 4/9/12 B East Pool 164.5 1 117.4 129.0 10.2 10.0 91 Retest of23 RW 24 4/9/12 B East Pool 163.5 1 119.1 129.0 9.8 10.0 92 RW 25 4/9/12 B East Pool 164.0 1 119.2 129.0 11.6 10.0 92 RW 26 4/9/12 B East Pool 164.5 1 116.4 129.0 10.9 10.0 90 RW 27 4/10/12 B East Pool . 166.0 1 116.5 129.0 9.9 10.0 90 RW 28 4/10/12 B East Pool 166.0 1 117.5 129.0 10.2 10.0 91 RW 29 4/13/12 B South End of Pool 160.0 1 117.3 129.0 9.1 10.0 91 RW 30 4/13/12 B South End of Pool 159.0 1 123.3 129.0 9.2 10.0 96 RW 31 4/13/12 B South End of Pool 158.0 1 120.0 129.0 10.0 10.0 93 Proiect Number: 960151-036 Proiect Name: LEGOLAND/PIRATE ISLA ~'!!! Proiect Location: 0 g;~ Client: 0 Pa2:e 1 of 3 5/24/2 2: 11 :05PM SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS Test Test Test Location Test Soil Dry Density Moisture(%) Relative(%} No. Date Of Lot# Elev (ft) Type Field Max Field Opt. ComQaction Remarks RW 32 4/13/12 B South End of Pool 161.0 1 124.3 129.0 9.5 10.0 96 RW 33 4/13/12 B South End of Pool 160.0 1 120.7 129.0 9.2 10.0 94 RW 34 4/13/12 B South End of Pool 158.0 1 121.9 129.0 9.8 10.0 94 RW 35 4/13/12 B South End of Pool 162.0 1 115.6 129.0 10.7 10.0 90 RW 36 4/13/1 2 B South End of Pool 161.0 1 120.4 129.0 10.1 10.0 93 RW 37 4/13/12 B South End of Pool 162.0 1 118.6 129.0 9.5 10.0 92 RW 38 4/18/12 B S. Inside Pool Area 160.0 1 115.7 129.0 10.1 10.0 90 RW 39 4/18/12 B S. Inside Pool Area 158.0 1 118.6 129.0 11.2 10.0 92 RW 40 4/18/12 B S. Inside Pool Area 159.0 1 122.5 129.0 9.3 10.0 95 RW 41 4/18/12 B S. Inside Pool Area 161.0 1 117.7 129.0 11.7 10.0 91 RW 42 4/18/12 B S. Inside Pool Area 160.5 1 123.1 129.0 10.9 10.0 95 RW 43 4/18/12 B S. Inside Pool Area 162.0 1 120.4 129.0 10.2 10.0 93 RW 44 4/19/12 B N. Outside of Pool Area 163.0 1 126.1 129.0 10.0 10.0 98 RW 45 4/19/12 B N. Outside of Pool Area 162.0 1 119.4 129.0 9.2 10.0 93 RW 46 4/19/12 B N. Outside of Pool Area 163.0 1 124.1 129.0 11.6 10.0 96 RW 47 4/19/12 B N. Outside of Pool Area 162.0 1 125.9 129.0 10.4 10.0 98 RW 48 4/19/12 B N. Outside of Pool Wall 163.0 1 122.6 129.0 10.3 10.0 95 RW 49 4/19/12 B N.E. Outside Pool Wall 165.0 1 115.8 129.0 10.3 10.0 90 RW 50 4/20/12 B N.E. Outside Pool Wall 165.0 1 117.1 129.0 11.3 10.0 91 RW 51 4/20/12 B S. Side Outside Pool Wall 162.0 1 123.5 129.0 10.5 10.0 96 RW 52 4/20/12 B S. Side Outside Pool Wall 164.0 1 122.0 129.0 10.6 10.0 95 RW 53 4/20/12 B S. Side Outside Pool Wall 165.0 1 122.3 129.0 10.3 10.0 95 RW 54 4/23/12 B W. Outside Pool 163.0 1 120.0 129.0 10.6 10.0 93 RW 55 4/23/12 B S.W. Outside Pool 165.0' 1 122.9 129.0 9.8 10.0 95 RW 56 4/23/1 2 B S. Outside Pool 166.0 1 118.4 129.0 12.5 10.0 92 RW 57 4/23/12 B S. Outside Pool 165.0 1 120.8 129.0 10.2 10.0 94 RW 58 4/24/12 B N.W. Outside Pool 164.0 1 120.0 129.0 9.1 10.0 93 RW 59 4/24/12 B S.E. Outside Pool 166.0 1 119.3 129.0 9.7 10.0 92 RW 60 4/24/12 B S.E. Outside Pool 163.0 1 117.5 129.0 9.5 10.0 91 RW 61 4/30/12 B N.E. Outside Pool 165.8 1 125.1 129.0 10.5 10.0 97 RW 62 4/30/12 B N. Outside Pool 165.3 1 122.5 129.0 10.3 10.0 95 RW 63 4/30/12 B N. Outside Pool 165.0 1 120.6 129.0 9.0 10.0 93 Proiect Number: 960151-036 ~' Proiect Name: LEGOLAND/PIRATE ISLA Proiect Location: 0 ~i Client: 0 Pa!!e 2 of 3 5/24/2 2: 11 :05PM SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS Test Test Test Location Test Soil Dry Density Moisture (%) Relative{%) No. Date Of Lot# Elev (ft) Tvpe Field Max Field Opt. Com(!action Remarks RW 64 4/30/12 B N.W. Outside Pool 165.8 1 117.7 129.0 8.8 10.0 91 RW 65 4/30/12 B W. Outside Pool 165.5 1 120.1 129.0 10.0 10.0 93 Proiect Number: 960151-036 ~ Proiect Name: LEGOLAND/PIRATE ISLA Proiect Location: 0 ~i Client: 0 Paize 3 of3 5/24/2 2: 11 :05PM 960151-036 C-1 APPENDIX C Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results Maximum Density Tests: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of typical materials were determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557. The results of these tests are presented in the table below: Sample Number Sample Description Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (%) 1 RED-BROWN SILTY SAND (SM) 129.0 10.0 2 RED-TAN SILTY SAND (SM) 124.5 8.5 Particle Size Analysis: Particle size analysis was performed by mechanical sieving methods according to ASTM D6913. A plots of the sieve results are provided on a Figure in this appendix. Direct Shear Test: A direct shear test was performed on a remolded sample which was soaked for a minimum of 24 hours under a surcharge equal to the applied normal force during testing. After transfer of the sample to the shear box and reloading of the sample, the pore pressures set up in the sample (due to the transfer) were allowed to dissipate for a period of approximately 1 hour prior to application of shearing force. The sample was tested under various normal loads utilizing a motor-driven, strain-controlled, direct-shear testing apparatus at a strain rate of 0.005 inches per minute. After a shear strain of 0.2 inches, the motor was stopped and the sample was allowed to "relax" for approximately 15 minutes. The stress drop during the relaxation period was recorded. It is anticipated that, in a majority of samples tested, the 15 minutes relaxing of the samples is sufficient to allow dissipation of pore pressures that may have set up in the samples due to shearing. The drained peak strength was estimated by deducting the shear force reduction during the relaxation period from the peak shear values. The shear values at the end of shearing are considered to be ultimate values and are shown in the attached figure. I I I I I I I I I I