The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About; Carlsbad Pacific Center; Soils Report; 1985-02-22- - - ,- - - - - - - LEIGHTON and ASSOCIATES SOIL ENGINEERING GEOLOGY GEOPHYSICS GROUND WATER HAZARDOUS WASTES February 22, 1985 Project No. 4841485-01 TO: Caliber Development, Inc. 452 I Campus Drive, Suite 308 Irvine, California 927 I5 ATTENTION: Mr. Jim Bosler SUSJECT: Ceotechnical Investigation, Carlsbad Pacific Center, Palomar Airport Road and Avenida Encinas, Carlsbad, California In accordonce with your request, we have performed a geotechnical investigation at the site of the proposed Carlsbad Pacific Center. The purpose of our investigation was to provide geotechnical data for site development. This report presents the results of our investigation and onalysis and provides recommendations for site grading and foundation and pavement design. Accampanyinq Maps, Illustration, and Appendices Figure I - Site Plan - Rear of Text Figure 2 - Fault Location Map - Rear of Text Table I - Seismicity for Major Faults - Page 5 Appendix A - Boring Logs Appendix B - Laboratory Test Results Appendix C - General Earthwork and Grading Specifications 6421 AVENIDA ENCINAS. SUITE C, CARLSBAO, CACIFORNIASZWB (619) 931-9953 .- lR”lNE . WESTL,aKE,“ENTI,R,a . DIAMONO f3AWWALNUT . SAN BERNARDlNO,Rl”ERSlDE . SAN DIEG<~, PALM DESERT . SANTA CLARlTA,“ALENClA . CARLSBAD . TEMECuLAIRANCHO CALIFORNIA 4841485-01 - - - - - - .- -- - - .- - - - Description of Site The project site is along Avenida Encinas in Carlsbad, California (see Site Plan, Figure I), and consists of an irregularly shaped parcel of land whose topography is relatively flat. The site appears to have been previously used for agricultural purposes as evidenced by the soft fill soils cover which mantle the site. The site is presently vacant and is covered by native grasses. Drainoge is presently very poor as indicated by ponding across the site following rainfall. P roposed Construction Preliminary project drawings indicate that this phase of the proposed construction will consist of a S-story commercial building and adjacent paved porking (see Site Plan, Fig- ure I). The building will be founded on continuous and isolated spread footings. Addi- tional buildings may be planned for other portions of the site in the future. It is antici- pated that only minor grading will be necessary to bring the site to finished grade. Subsurface Exploration and Laboratory Testing Our subsurface exploration consisted of drilling three exploratory borings in the proposed building orea to a maximum depth of 50 feet. Borings were drilled with 4.5inch and 6- inch diameter truck-mounted flight augers and were continuously logged by a staff geologist. Samples were obtained at frequent intervals for laboratory testing. Standard penetration tests were also performed in one of the borings in order to provide informa- tion regarding the relative density and strength of the on-site soils. Boring locations are indicated on Figure I. Boring logs are provided in Appendix A. Laboratory tests were performed to determine the shear strengh, density, expansion, grain size, ond compressibility characteristics of the subsurface soils. A laboratory R-value test was performed on a sample obtained from the proposed parking orea (Figure I) for pavement design purposes. Appendix B. A summary of laboratory tests performed is provided in Geoloqx 0 Geologic Setting The project area is located within the coastal plain subprovince of the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province, Batholith. near the western edge of the southern Californio The topography at the edge of the batholith changes from the rugged landforms developed on the granitics to the more subdued landforms which typify the softer sedimentary formations of the coastal plain. The transition from sediments to batholithic materials occurs several miles east of the subject site. The predominant structural features of the area are associated with pre-Tertiary folding along a generally north-south axis. The post-Cretaceous sequences hove been regionally tilted gently to the west and northwest. -2- LEIGHTON and ASSOCIATES ._.-^^“^-_-_- 4341485-01 - - - - - - - - -. .- - l Site Specific Geology The project area is underlain by Pleistocene terrace deposits and at depth by the Eocene Santiago Formation. These units are mantled by surficial deposits of topsoil and in some areas, agricultural fill soils. The bedrock deposits are not exposed ansite, but the terrace deposits are exposed in the existing cut slope along Interstate 5 along the eastern property boundary. The terrace deposits, OS observed, consist generally of silt/ sands with same interbedded clays. The terrace deposits are reusable as fill moterial and are anticipated to be 10-w to moderately exponsive. It is anticipated that excavations in the tzrace deposits can be accomplished with conventional hecvy grading equipment. Dosed on our boring information, it appears that the site is underlain by up to 3.5 feet of fill. Although the fill may be locally deeper in some areas of the site, early aerial photographs of the site (April I I, 1953) indicate no previous gulleys or canyons which may now be covered with fill. Therelore, areas of deep fill are not expected to be encountered during site grading. It appears that the land may have previously been used for agricultural purposes. The existing fill soils may be a result of plowing. Ground water was encountered in our borings at 2% to 33 feet below the existing ground surface. Ground water is not expected to impact the proposed project design. Seismicity l Reqional Seismicity The site can be considered a seismically active area, as can all of southern California. There are, however, no known active faults on or adjacent to the site. Seismic risk is considered low, as compared to other areas of southern California, due ta the distance from active faults. Seismic hazards within the site can be attributed to ground shaking results from events on distant active faults. Listed on Table I are the faults which can significantly affect the site. Figure 2 shows the geographic relationship of the site to these faults. l Earthquake Effects I) Earthquake Accelerations: We have analyzed the possible earthquake accelerations at the site and, in our opinion, for the intended use, the most significant event is a 6.7 magnitude earthquake located on the Elsinore Fault Zone. A magnitude 6.1 earthquake on the Elsinore Fault Zone could produce a peak bedrock acceleration of 0.179 at the subject site. Peok accelerations are not, however, representative of the accelerations for which structures are actually designed. Design of structures should be completed in compliance with the requirements of the governing jurisdictions and standard practices of the Structural Engineers Association of California. - -3- LEIGHTON and ASSOCIATES 4841485-01 2) 3) 4) .- 5) .- - _- - - Settlement of Soils: The earth materials underlying the site consist primorily of Firm bedrock and terrace deposits, which are not subject to seismically induced settlement. Liquefaction: Due to the density of the on-site Formotional soils, the materials at the site have a low potential For liquefaction. Lurching ond Shallow Ground Rupture: Breaking of the ground because of active Faulting is not likely to occur on the site due to the absence of active Faults. Cracking due to shaking From distant events is not considered a significant hazard, although it is a possibility at any site. Londslides: No areos within the site were identified as being susceptible to seismically induced landsliding. - - - - - -4- LEIGHTON and ASSOCIATES .Yr^^^^l____ - 484 1485-01 - - - - - .- - - - - - - TABLE I SEISMICITY FOR MAJOR FAULTS Distance Maximum Probable From Site Earthquake EstE;;;zkeak Rep~;;~~~jiigh (Miles) (Richter Moqni tude) Acceleration Acceleration Elsinore 23 6.7 0.179 0.179 Coronado Banks 21 6.0 O.llg O.llg San Jacinto 45 7.2 0.099 0.099 San Andreas 65 8.3 0.099 0.099 Newport/lnglewood 45 6.5 0.049 0.049 NOTES: I. After Albee and Smith, I966 and after Bonilla, 1970, in Greensfelder (I 974) 2. After Schnabel and Seed, 1973, in Greensfelder (I 974) 3. After Ploessel & Slosson (I 974) - - -5- LElG”TON and ASSOCIATES IYr^mm^s^-C^ 4841485-01 - CONCLUSIONS AtJD RECOMMENDATIONS - _~ - - .- - - -~ - - .- - - - - - - Based on the results of our investigation and anolysis, it is our opinion that the proposed construction is Feasible from o geotechnical standpoint. The on-site Formationol soils are generally considered to hove a low potential For expansion and excellent shear strength characteristics For Foundation support. The fill soils at the site, to the best of our knowledge, have not been placed under engineering observation and testing and, therefore, are considered unsuitable For structural support in their present state as are existing topsoils underlying the fill. Several grading considerations For the building and parking areas are discussed in the Following sections. Earthwork Earthwork at the site will consist of site preparation, excavation, and backfill. Earthwork should be performed in accordonce with the following recommendations and the General Grading and Earthwork Specifications provided in Appendix C. In the case of conflict, the Following recommendations shall supercede those issued in Appendix C. Site Preporation Prior to irading, the site should be cleared of any existing debris and vegetation. Removed materials not suitable for structural backfill should be disposed of off-site. All areas to receive fill or other surface improvements should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches, brought to near optimum moisture conditions, and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction as determined by ASTM Dl557- 78. Fill Placement and Compaction The on-site soils ore generally suitable for use as compacted Fill. Fill soils should be Free of organic material or debris. Any imported Fill soils (if required) should be non- expansive and approved by the geotechnical engineer prior to placement. All Fill (except pavement base) should be compacted to a minimum relative compac- tion of 90 percent as determined by ASTM Dl557-78. Pavement base material should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. Fill should be placed in uniform lifts not exceeding 8 inches. Placement and compaction of fill should be performed in accordance with recommendations issued in this report, and by using sound construction practice. Removal and Recompaction of Existinq Fill Existing Fill and topsoil are considered unsuitable For structural support in their present state and should be removed in the .proposed building area to competent Formational soils and recompacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction based on ASTM Dl557-78. The limits of removal and recompaction should extend at least IO Feet beyond the building perimeter. We estimate that the depth of removal should be on the order of 5 Feet below the existing ground surface in the building orea. -6- LEIGHTON and ASSOCIATES IYr^-..^-^-F^ 4841485-01 - - - - - - .- -- - - - -. - To reduce potential pavement distress due to Fill settlement, we recommend that soils in the proposed parking and driveway areas be removed and recompacted to a depth of 3 Feet below Finished grade or to competent formational soils as observed by the geotechnical consultant. Removed soils in the parking area should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (ASTM 01557-78). The limits of removal and recompaction should extend at least Five Feet beyond the edge of pavement. Foundation Desiqn Based on one laboratory expansion test, the near surface soils at the site appear to hove o low expansion potential. The Following design recommendations ore based on an assumed low potential For expansion. Additional testing during site grading is recommended. IF expansive soils are encountered, some design revisions may be necessary. l Footinqs The proposed buildings may be supported by conventional spread and/or strip-Footings at a minimum depth of 24 inches below the lowest adjacent Finished grade. At this depth, Footings may be designed for a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 4,000 psf if Founded in Firm Foundational soils or 2,000 psf if Founded in properly compacted fill soils. Footings should have a minimum width of I2 inches. The allowable pressures moy be increased to one-third when considering loadings of short duration such as wind or seismic Forces. Footings should have a minimum reinforcement of two No. 4 re-bars (one top and one bottom). Footings adjacent to slopes should be placed so that a minimurn horizontal distance of IO Feet is maintained between the Footing bottom and slope face. The maximum anticipated total and differential settlements For the above bearing pressures should be within tolerable limits. l Floor Slabs Floor slabs should have a minimum thickness of 4 inches and be reinforced with 6x6-6/6 welded wire mesh placed at mid-height in the slab. If moisture sensitive equipment or Floor coverings are used, we recommend that a moisture barrier (6-mil polyvinylchloride) be placed beneath slabs. A 2-inch sand layer between slab and barrier is recommended to aid in concrete curing. The moisture barrier should be underlain by a 2-inch thick sand layer. Slab soils should be moisture conditioned prior to concrete placement. l Lateral Load Resistance Foundations placed in natural soils or compacted Fill may be designed using a coefficient of Friction of 0.30 (total Frictional resistance equals coefficient OF Friction times the dead load). A design passive resistance value of 250 psf per Foot of depth (with a maximum value of 3,000 psf) may be used. The allowable lateral resistance can be taken as the sum of the Frictional resistance and the passive resistance provided the passive resistance does not exceed two-thirds of the total allowable resistance. The coefficient of Friction and passive re- sistance values may be increased by one-third when considering loods of short duration such OS wind or seismic Forces. -7- LEIGHTON and ASSOCIATES ._.-^^^^----- - - - - - - - - -. -. - - - - - 484l’r85-01 Retoininq Walls Retaining walls backfilled with the on-site soils should be designed using the Following equivalent fluid pressures. These values assume non-expansive (granular) level bockfill, and Free-draining conditions. Cantilever wall (yielding) Restrained wall (non-yielding) Equivalent Fluid Pressure 35 pcf 50 pcf Walls should be provided with appropriate drainage as shown in Appendix C. Woll Footings should be designed in accordance with the previous building foundation recommendations and reinforced in accordance with structural considerations. Pavement Desiqn A laboratory R-value test wos performed on a sample obtained from the proposed parking area (Figure I). Based on the design R-value of 42 and assumed traffic index (TI) of 5, the Following pavement design was obtained: Assumed TI Laboratory R-Value 5.0 42 Design Pavement Section 2.5 inches asphaltic concrete over 5.5 inches aggregate base (Caltrons Class II). Base moterial should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction based on ASTM Dl557-78. It is recommended thot odditional R-value testing be performed when the parking area is brought to rough Finished grade to check the adequacy of the obove design section. Construction Observation The recommendations provided in this report are based on preliminary structural design information For the proposed Facilities and subsurface conditions disclosed by widely spaced borings. The interpolated subsurface conditions should be checked in the Field during construction. All Footing excovotions and backfill should be observed by o representative of this firm so that construction is performed in accordance with the recommendations of this report. Final project drawings should be reviewed by this office prior to Construction. -8- LEIGHTON and ASSOCIATES *Yr^Dm^---C^ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 484,1$85-01 If you have any questions regarding our report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Manager/Chief Geotechnical Engineer SRHISJIANIlm Distribution: (6) Addressee (I) Walter P. Moore & Associates Attention: Ali Harrison -9- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I --J c----xs4 L ‘A -- ‘ENNUI *w(YIr no*0 LEGEND B-3 Approximate location of 8 exploratory boring R-l Approximate location of 0 R-valve sample BASE MAP: Site Plan for Pacific Center One, Carlsbad Pacific Center by Approximate Scale Goleman 8 Rotfe Associates Inc. - TV’ ~‘--.- r ____._. .._._ pro ]oct No. 0 ‘120 4841485-01 SITE PLAN CALIBER / CARLSBAD PACIFIC CENTER Figure 1 - CEOTECHSICAL BORING LOG Date f/fd/BF Drill Hole No. s-/ Sheet/of& - Project CAL/B&e o,sv~~ophf&fl7 Job No. &4/485- 01 Drilling Co. GEODR/u Type of Rig CM&- 550 Hole Diameter 6” Drive Weight /GU PUUND5 Drop 30 in. - - - - - - - - -1 - Elevation Top of Hole,qf pi ” z c ‘234 m Y6.J 22 3 2,” 3u. & .:: =: I < c - - __ - - __ SOOA (2/?71 -- - !2.1 -- :z .f - I/. 2 3.6 y-2 GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION RLW 0.i npled by RLW u Dark brown, vet-y molit fo wet, firm, Sandy c/a y. ___--A---- ----- Rc!TOlL 3’ Dark brown, ma~if. med/itm dense. si/tv sgnd; clgyey. __---me--- ---- L Et s?-ocEM& TERRACE LE=%-f 75 65’ Medium golden brown, mo&, medl’un? dense. s/X+y Fne fo - e=&wz zccks@-&, _ _ _ _ _ 7’ Mediutn yoidan brown to dark qo/d@~ brown, mcdt’unt dense fo denS8, s/;lfy flna to med/*um SF&; $l~$hf/ydayey ----e--w-- ----- 14’ Liqhf qofden brown fo very &h f 9rey hwn fv mcd/um przy browe,mo&$ medtitm dense It, d&se Send; s/@h?i, Sl;lfy. medticm &nSe f0 d&5-e, Sly/y fine .Smwi. @ 25’ mot*rQ confenf &co~eS WPF. ------- --- !T Cqhf ye/low brown, moirt, dense, c/zlcz! fina fo very curse rend. ILeiohton 8 Associates GEOTEUiNICAL BORING LOG Date ///d/,65. Drill Hale No. 5-I Sheet 2 of z- -- Project cut /BER OCVCt./P~f#7 Job No. 4%/-/465-d/ - Drilling Co. ~E~D.J~/LL Type of Rig CME Yz5-0 Hole Diameter 6’ Drive Yeight /$P PdU~OS Drop 30 in. - Xeution Top of tiole Ay P&gkmRef. or Datum M~+,u ,-yy.+z L~L/~L. CEOTECttUICAL DESCRIPTION SODA (2/77) Leighton & Associates GEOTECIISICAL BORING LOG - Date ///O/$F Drill lfole h'o. 6-2 Sheet / of Z- -- Job No. cA#/@FS-Oo/ - Drilling Co. ~&ODC-/L.L Type of Rig CMb- 53-o Hole Diameter 6" Drive Keight Drop 30 in. - - - -- - - - - - - - - - Elevation Top of tlole ,4S p&g MOD Ref. or Datum M&U/v SEA L&V&L I i - : ;: :w 3” ac& Y - - - - - M : . 2” F 2: zs c: - - - - .- :I 2’; ncn 1; z”! ;2 - - CL - SC -. 54 GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION I1 %wd by RLW II ampled by RLW 1 w t I ‘I Medium f~ dark brown, very mutti AT j wef,mOder3fQ/y firm, ale w7ciy i clay. 4 --- _________ ‘3.SOark bmwn. vvrv mot&. medium c i! _ -d~~seLc~a@y hmf. ’ ----- ‘LElsVoC6~6 ?-6RRAC& D&?POS/TS %O’ h?cd/%m fo &rk ye/den nen’/Lim C%WS-Q yo &mu, fOCW/y cfayQy, .dor chanqes - ------;--a w q~-yQfqv &mw*, UQry mocq, wry j dOnSQ, S//e clayey F/'oQ fb awe send. i SODA (2/77) Leighton & Associates - GEOTEC!!NIC,\L BORING LOG Date ///O/&7 Drill tlole No. 8-Z Sheet 2 of 2 - -- _ Project CrLffl&R DFVELOPWEWT Job No. 64/dY?-a/ Drilling Co. we- 55-p Hole Diameter 6"' Drive Keight I& PO vxo s Drop 30 in. _- - - - - - .- Elevation Tou of Hole 47 ,q :e i I-- .I: i, cop f: 2s IL & I v ._ .T 1. 5- r ‘4G I I I I I SDDA (2/77) - - = Ref - - il SC - fun -_ M&&J SF4 ~t?lEL I GEOTEUINICAL DESCRIPTION I wzed by ampled by RLW RLW r W/5-TUcErvE 7-?333C~ O&PcS/fl f~W/~O~~ ‘zg Lf’@f ye//ow drcwr,, Plo/Irt, very dense, S/rfy c/2ycy fih~ fo l@ry ~W2 S2ncf. TO?-% D&mu = 3-j’ GkOvND WA%.‘7 EVM~‘JG=ED 0 f 2&’ I @AcrtFlLL~D ///O/U h/O CkVlNC i = -eighton & Associates -. GEO~~INICAI, BORING LOG Date I-g- A5 Drill Hole No. C-3 Sheet / of Z- -- - Project Ca-t/BGC Job No. 04/FP5-0/ Drilling Co. fl0RR/FU,A/ Type of Rig 9VCO 2.400 ~-. Hole Diameter 6.5 ” Drive Weight /J 0 Fl’UJJDS Drop 30 in. r EIevation Top of Hole & ,q I I - - - - - .- - -. - - - -_ - - krd - ,x ;: g: 7 L k 3 - - - - It., - 0.5. 107. 119. ‘12. - VO 1 ?ef. or Datum ,t1&,4U ~CZG L~V& \ - f! 3 :: g , - - ;: - lb*’ 3.< - - ;rb 7.5 - d 2 - GEOTECKNICAL DESCRIPTION II .ogged by RI II ianpled by RZ I SM L SC i Pi- .5C CL - ZC- SC -- SC I- 584 rc - h‘ki&rn 6rw.w7, mofjf ts WC/, /OMC h mcdt’~m &nsc, s/;//y szzwd wv/G~ c/ny/ s-ome f/lti tvofick iti 9f7n/Lt?psrf/~n. --_-_---- --. w ?3’ L/~ytiht qrcy brown, mo/$, tned/‘uwr dCnSQ C/%‘)d!/ r2nd. --- -A-----_ ~EE%CEME ?-lze&?CE l?e#S/sg WY hfQ&dS of m-y ffpif yray 6mq damp, rnW~ti*r? drn,%? Sf#y szw4 wh4 &i, /eyer~ of qray~ bnwh, damp, rwd/irM a&w@ ul?y”y yLiw$. @‘4’ Lcpr of a?~+-?? qciau, mohf, stiff, .s=wdy c&y wfh brown, davnp to m&t, C&~C,V /b M’ wnd; some mdd19h brown di50lor2hb~ - - - -.-- ---- 5 q~Zhzr-f~cwe=d 7ayt mm-f, /ned/&- shYf, s&ndy thy rpnd 6nwnl s’amp, medt’um cfcnre clayey set&. ---------- %ft 6mw y”y; damp fo mo/& dmse, slYfy medmn pwi SAG w/‘#, fmca of~~y---------- -- b%?’ 6my , rvmrf, dmre, sl/phtiy s/2’.., tn&hM cin;l# f@&%$ -------__ =‘Grw wet p*o& iv very wee c/ayey .m&; CC?n?Qt?fd. Ii . . 1.~_ 0 A ^^^_ :_*-- - CLOT :?IICAL BORING LOG Date I/T/$( kill llole No. e-3 Sheet 2 of 2- -- - Project MWg7E.Q of=vFLoPM&,ur Job No. &3#/@T-00 Drilling Co. &fCrOfi,Q1~8M Trpc of Rig S/MC0 SW0 Hole Diameter 45” - Drive Weight Mu PdVAfDJ Drop 3’0 in. - - - - - .- - - - - - - - - - .I: 5, =cO 3-s g-z 5. 1 ? 30 -. 1.. :. ..: 1. _-.: : : .: 2 .‘Y C’., > ..L 1: ..I’ i -2. :-,. .: 5 .G - . :: :,. .- .: :.y : 1:: i . ‘- : . I-. ..! .- .: -’ .‘-_ f : . .I. :. 4. 2. : IO -.-: . . . : :. : . L .-.. . . .,. -: .- ..’ , ‘, ..L T’. .- $ I’~, .-:. ::: ‘_ .:., I .-.- .- ..-. -. 4. ‘. .~.. ‘I ye., ,2:- ’ : :: . . .,-’ .-’ . .- .’ “7.. I k ~ ‘5 -- - Hole& pcj eA 7- %f’Al - : I iw 1: : ?.iF - - = - SC 5-G = GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION wed by ampled by #Qr ?30’ m-y kyht qmy no/if fi /vi+, m-y deosc, s/qv rmd ----__-----. ?33’ Lip-fit qrsy, w-y WG+ to 5ai4mkd, sl/‘phf/y chyey M&fig M 9ra/i Sa%i( S2mpW d&%rbQd due fv Free m& -----___-- ‘35’ Lr9W qtay, mfwrafed, very d&l-se, rJiyhf/y c/$ey rmdj s;M~I&~ fwm/?m%d due fD ~ftlrcfe~ c4&iL/b5. Tom-L DEPW=W FRE di?.OV~4 u&i22 tWW/vlE@ e 33 ’ Am W&VC &GWUGb //gitZ 5DDA (2/77) Leiahton & Associates - , STRESS IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT 0 '. 05 0.1 0.5 50 100 . . - -3.0 s - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - = -2.0 o_ z 2 1: - 1.0 0 , _. ..__. 2 _.._ ~.., ,/, C-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~...J ~.~‘~...!...I~+ . . . . . . . . .,.,... ~._. : / +.~I l.Lt. ;~... ~~,,~.. ..-.~ 1.0 g#J ~-11_1_~~~~,i-l:-:ii;. /:,,q : : ::i::~i:-:~:!~.~-I 1 A.. ,J L! I~ _..I.__ :A,,. ._~ 2.0 5.0 6.0 __ 7.0 FIELD MDlSTVAE BORlNG NO.: SATURATED SAMPLE NO.: CALIBER - LOADING --- RESOUND DEPTH IFTt : SOILTYPE : RESULTS I Figure B- .I - - - - MOO 3coo NORMAL STRESS (PSF) DESCRIPTION SYMBOL BORING SAMPLE DEPTH (FEET) COHESION FRICTION SOIL NUMBER NVMBER IPSF) ANGLE TYPE Sil*/ I- ine to #Medium . B-l I 5 950 x0 SM Sands I I DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS I Figure B-, 2 .c 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4cuJ Moo 3000 NORMAL SFRESS (PSFl DESCRIPTION SYMBOL BORING SAMPLE DEPTH 1 FEET) COHESION FRICTION SOJL NUMBER NVMBER (PSFI ANGLE TYPE Silty Fine to Medium l B-l 2 IO 500 45O SlM Sand CALIBER DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Figure 8. - - - - .- - - SAMPLE IHITlIL COMPMED DRY FINAL “DL”METR,C EXPANSION EXPIHSVJ” LDC*TIOH UalSTURE I%1 OENS,Ty ,PcFl YOlST”RE (%I SWELL I93 INDEX FOTEHTIAL l-1,Sample #l 6.3 116 18.4 4.9 @ l’-2’ 49 Low ProJec’ No- 4841485-01 3 CALIBER/CARLSBAD EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS Fig”,* B-< -.. - ,,..-.. .- . ..-. SAND d Medwm I Fans FINES ISilt or Clrv) I ~.S.STANOA~~~I~~E~E bw.wms HYDROMETER GRAIN sm IN MILLIMETERS SYMBOL BORlNG SAMPLE NUMBER NVMBER E&Y L1a”IO ‘u.s~~C PLASTICITY SOIL LIMIT !NOEX TYPE B-2 3 II-13 SM U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER C&N% IN MILO;:M??iiRS 0.01 0.w o.mc O.ooo6 ISyM.oL BORINO SAMPLE DEPTH ‘) NVUBER NVMBER (FEET, M&:” Pub.;;’ PLASTICITY SOIL INDEX T-es GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVES Figure B-5 I - - - - - - - - - - .- - .-~ - - - MAXIMUM DENSITY TEST RESULTS SAMPLE SOIL DESCRIPTION NAXIMUM OPTIMUM IIWDD~~ITY ElOISTURE CONTENT (%: B-3 Sample $1 @ 3'-15' Brcwn silty sand, slightly clayey 123 11.5 I CALIBERKARLSBAD Figure B GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS - - 1.0 2.0 - - - - - - - 3.0 - - General Intent These specifications present general procedures and requirements for grading and earthwork as shown on the approved grading plans, including preparation of areas to be filled, placement of fill, installation of subdrains, and excavations. The recommendations contained in the geotechnical report are a part of the earthwork and grading specifica- tions and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case of conflict. Evaluations performed by the consultant during the course of grading may result in new recommendations which could supersede these specifications or the recommendations of the geotechni- cal report. Earthwork Observation and Testing Prior to the commencement of grading, a qualified geotechnical consult- ant (soils engineer and engineering geologist, and their representatives) shall be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report and these specifications. It will be necessary that the consultant provide adequate testing and observation so that he may determine that the work was accomplished as specified. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to assist the consultant and keep him apprised of work schedules and changes so that he may schedule his personnel accordingly. It shall be the sole responsibility of the contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the work in accordance with applicable grading codes or agency ordinances, these specifica- tions, and the approved grading plans. If, in the opinion of the consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as questionable soil, poor moisture condition, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifica- tions, the consultant will be empowered to reject the work and recommend that construction be stopped until the conditions are rectified. Maximum dry density tests used to determine the degree of compaction will be performed in accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials test method ASTM 01557-78. Preparation of Areas to be Filled 3.1 Clearing and Grubbing: All brush, vegetation and debris shall be removed or piled and otherwise disposed of. - - - - - - - - - - 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 tjyocessinq: The existing ground which is determined to be safiTz%?y-for support of fill shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground which is not satisfactory shall be overexcavated as specified in the following section. Scarification shall continue until the soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and until the working surface is reasonably uniform and free of uneven features which would inhibit uniform compaction. Overexcavation: Soft, dry, spongy, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground, extending to such a depth that surface process- ing cannot adequately improve the condition, shall be overexcavated down to firm ground, approved by the consultant. Moisture Conditioning: Overexcavated and processed soils shall be watered, dried-back, blended, and/or mixed, as required to attain a uniform moisture content near optimum. Recompa;tion: Overexcavated and processed soils which have been proper y mixed and moisture-conditioned shall be recompacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. 2.;;;";;;: Where fills are to be placed on ground slopes steeper . (horizontal to vertical units), the ground shall be stepped or benched. The lowest bench shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide, shall be at least 2 feet deep, shall expose firm material, and shall be approved by the consultant. Other benches shall be excavated in firm material for a minimum width of 4 feet. Ground sloping flatter than 5:l shall be benched or otherwise overexcavated when considered necessary by the consultant. All areas to receive fill, including processed areas, and toe-of-fill benches shall be aooroved bv the consultant 4.0 Fill Material 4.1 General: Material to be placed as fill shall be free of organic matter and other deleterious substances, and shall be approved by prior to fill placement. the consultant. Soi.ls of poor gradation, expansion, or strength characteristics shall be placed in areas designated by the consultant or shall be mixed with other soils to serve as satis- factory fill material. - - - - 4.2 Oversize: Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 12 inches, shall not be buried or placed in fills. unless the location, materials, and disposal methods are specifically approved by the consultant. Oversize disposal operations shall be such that nesting of oversize material does not occur, and such that the oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 feet vertically of finish grade or within the range of future utilities or under- ground construction, unless specifically approved by the consultant. - 4.3 Import: If importing of fill material is required for grading, -import material shall meet the requirements of Section 4.1. - 5.0 Fill Placement and Compaction - 5.1 .- - 5.2 - - 5.3 - - - - 5.4 Fill Lifts: Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 6 inches in compacted thickness. The consultant may approve thicker lifts if testing indicates the grading procedures are such that adequate compaction is being achieved with lifts of greater thickness. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during spreading to attain uniformity of material and moisture in each layer. Fill Moisture: Fill layers at a moisture content less than o~fi?G-%TT-!?e watered and mixed. and wet fill lavers shall be aerated by scarification or shall-be blended with d-rier material. Moisture-conditioning and mixing of fill layers shall be blended with drier material. Moisture-conditioning and mixing of fill layers shall continue until the fill material is at a uniform moisture content at or near optimum. Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been evenly spread, moisture-conditioned, and mixed, it shall be uniformly compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum dry density. Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and shall be either specifi- cally designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability, to efficiently achieve the specified degree of compaction. Fil! Slopes: Compacting of slopes shall be accomplished, in ition to normal compacting procedures, by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at frequent increments of 2 to 3 feet in fill elevation gain, or by other methods producing satisfactory results. At the completion of grading, the relative compaction of the slope out to the slope face shall be at least 90 percent. - - - - - - - .- 5.5 Compaction Testing: Field tests to check the fill moisture and degree of compaction will be performed by the consultant. The location and frequency of tests shall be at the consultant's discretion. In general, the tests will be taken at an interval not exceeding 2 feet in vertical rise and/or 1,000 cubic yards of embankment. In addition, on slope faces, at least one test shall be taken for each 5,000 square feet of slope face and/or each 10 feet of vertical height of slope. 6.0 Subdrain Installation Subdrain systems, if required, shall be installed in approved ground to conform to the approximate alignment and details shown on the plans or herein. The subdrain location or materials shall not be changed or modified without the approval of the consultant. The consultant, however, may recommend and upon approval, direct changes in subdrain line, grade or material. All subdrains should be surveyed for line and grade after installation and sufficient time shall be allowed for the surveys, prior to commencement of filling over the subdrains. 7.0 Excavations Excavations and cut slopes will be examined during grading. If directed by the consultant, further excavation or overexcavation and refilling of cut areas shall be performed, and/or remedial grading of cut slopes shall be performed. Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded, unless otherwise approved, the cut portion of the slope shall be made and approved by the consultant prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the slope. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TRANSITION PLOT DETAILS CUT-FILL LOT ~NAT~AL GR0UN0 I -----------“~======----c=---?c--- ---a---- .-- A--.h --- ---- _ -.COMPACYJED =FILl .---------_- ----------A---. I ~~~pD~~~-IJL-~z-l , --I OVEREXCA~~ATE AND RECOMPACT UNWEATHERED BEDROCK OR r’ MATERIAL APPROVED BY c THE GE,OTECHNlCAL CO,NSULTAflT CUT LOT --- cd ‘MATERIAL - OVEREXCAVATE AND RECOMPACT UNWEATHERED BEbRi3CK OR +- MATERIAL APPROVED EjY f THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT NOTE: overexcovation ond recompaction shall be performed If determined to be necessary by the geotechnical consultoni. - - - - - - - - - - SIDE HILL CUT PAD DETAIL / I- OVEREXCAVATE 0 0 FINISHED CUT PAD AND RECOMPACT /I.p,,qw’ra\ (REPLACEMENT ~lLL)/$~-:>:+ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pad overexcavation and recampacticn shall be performed if determined ta be necessary by the geotechnical /gTp$q”, consultant. Ur$+THERED BEDROCK OR . . 2 /II, - naLl-lTFI,*, *ppT)n\,g f .A. -...n- r.. . ,,w. ,D BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT NATURAL GROUND/\= HAM 0 0 .)@ / .’ /- 0 0’ 0 0 0 0 / SUBDRAIN AND KE’! WIDTH REQUIREMENTS DETERMINED BASED ON EXPOSED SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AND THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN - - - - BENCHL~NG DETAILS - - - - - - - - - - - - FILL SLOPE FILL-OVER-CUT, SLOPE cm FICE To Be CDnrtNCtd w*r to Fi II PhCIU(L CUT-OVER-FILL SLOPE NAT”RA GLO”ND \ o”o~“lLo ‘ TLI” BAI \ EG--~ - c==-== _ *I- ----- K”O”E “IISUITABLE ,L E >y---> --- IUTELIAL CZT.. - .--- - - r,w,sn SURFACE l.&? --- _ ze.r* M >~~~fZzze- P”0JLr.T *LANE \: -= -4: - ;-fz~2cz= + , ~~ , ~x,Iu ,-,L- ~~~;~--e5?? 5---- --- ---- 2 ;4 14. riPlCP.L &A ‘BE”CH “Llwl ~~~~ I -+;i Xiz------ cl::, LMIT lE"C" wml NOTES: LOWEST BENCH: Depth and width subject to field change based on consultant’s inspection. SUBDRAINAGE:. Back drains may be required at the discretion of the geotechnicol consultant. ROCK DISPOSAL DETAIL - - - - - - - - - ____,~~ i-- _______ ---A-- __-_------- __-_--_-. -_-----.T------- -OVERSIZE:----- ..JNDROW -- GRANULAR SOIL To fill voids, densified by flooding PROFILE ALONG WINDROW -- - - --- -- _--- CANYON SLJBORAIN DETAIL - - - - - - - - - A-- NATURAL GROUND :MOVE JITABLE SUBDRAIN TRENCH SEE ALTERNATES A&B \ FILTER MATERIAL SUBDRAIN Perforated Pi,,e Surrounded With ALTERNATE A: Filter MaterM FILTER MATERtAt. Filter material snail be Class 2 permeable material per State of California Standard Specifications. or approved alternate. Class 2 grading as follows: PERFORATED PIPE 6” 0 MIN. SIEVE SIZE PERCENT PASSING 1’ 3/4’ d%o 310’ 40- 100 No. 4 25-40, No. 0 No. 30 y:;; No. 50 o-7 I SUEDRAIN 1 112” Gravel Wmpoed ALTERNATE 8: in Filter Fabric 6” MIN. OVERLAP , DETAIL OF CANYON SUSORAIN TERMINAL - l SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION - Subdrain pipe shall be installed with perforations down or, - at locations designated by the geotechnical consultant, shall be nonperforated pipe. l SUBDRAIN TYPE - Subdroin type shall be ASTM C508 Asbestos Cement Pipe (ACP) or ASTM 0275 I, SDR 23.5 or ASTM D 1527, Schedule 40 Acrylonitrile Butodiene Styrene CABS) or ASTM 03034 SDR 23.5 or ASTM DI 785, Schedule 40 Polyvinyl Chloride Plastic (PVC) pipe or approved equivalent. SLOPE BUTTRESS OR REPLACEMENT FILL DETAIL rLET PIPES 4” 0 Nonperforated Pipe, 100’ Max. O.C. Horizontally, 30’ Mox. O.C. Vertically . - . .-, . - - . - - FlLi BLANKET 30” MIN. BACK CUT -------- I :I OR FLATTER BENCHING ALTERNATE A 2’ MIN. +- KEY WIDTH,-+ EaJlpMEw SIZE - CENWY IS FEET - DETAIL A-A’ ,- NOTES: Fill blanket, back cut, key width and key depth ore subject to field change, per report/plans. Key heel subdrain, blanket drain, or . . . . . * . . __a vertrcoi aroin may De requrrea at me discretion of the geotechnicol consulronr. SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION - Subdroin pipe shall be instolled with perforations down or, at locations designated by the geotechnical consultant, shall be nonperforated pipe. SUBDRAIN TYPE - Subdroin type shall be ASTM CSOE Asbestos Cement Pipe (ACP) or ASTM 0275 I, SDR 23.5 or ASTM 01527, Schedule 40 Acrylonitrile Butodiene Styrene (ABS) or ASTM 03034 SDR 23.5 or ASTM Dl785, Schedule 40 Polyvinyl Chloride Plastic (PVC) pipe or opproved eauivolent. IBDRAIN :E ALTERNATES A & B FtLTER MATERlAL Filter material. shall be Class 2 permeable material per State of Calitomia Standard Specifications. or approved alternate. Glass 2 grading as follows: i SIEVE SIZE PERCENT PASSING 4;; . ::3: 100 No. 4 25-40 No. a No. 30 y-f; No. 50 ‘No. 200 DETAIL OF BUTTRESS SUBDRAIN TERYINAL / - - - - - - - - - - - - - SPECIFICATIONS FOR CLASS 2 PERMEABLE HATERIAL (CALTRANS SPECIFICATIONS) Sieve Size X Passinq I, i/4” 3fa” No. 4 No. 8~ No. 30 No. 50 No. 200 100 go- 100 40-100 25-40 la-33 5-15 o-7 o-3 / Soil backfill, Compacted to 90 percent relative density* Retaining Wall Finished Grade Floor Slab :Wall Footing' * 1’ 0 minimum, 0 000 00 . r-i . 0. 0 0 oo * O 0 000 0 .- D 00 0 4- F \ \ .Class 2 Permeable Filter / aterial. Compacted to 90 percent relative densi 6" Diameter perforated PVC pipe (schedule 40 - or equivalent). Minimum -1 percent gradient to suitable outlet Minim& 6" layer of filter rock beneath pipe *Based on ASTM D1557- 82 tY*