HomeMy WebLinkAbout3191; Stagecoach Park; Stagecoach Park Grading Operations; 1985-12-05FINAL REPORT OF TESTING AND OBSERVATION-'
SERVICES DURING GRADING OPERATIONS
FOR
STAGECOACH PARK
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
For
CITY OF CARLSBAD
Carlsbad, California
By
GEOCON, INCORPORATED
San Diego, California
December, 1985
I-/
GEOCON
INCORPORATED ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS • CONSULTANTS IN THE APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES
File No. D-3480-JO2
December 5, 1985
City of Carlsbad
1200 Elm Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
Attention: Mr. Jim McLean
Subject: STAGECOACH PARK
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
FINAL REPORT OF TESTING AND OBSERVATION
SERVICES DURING MASS GRADING OPERATIONS
Gentlemen:
In accordance with your request and our proposal dated September 25, 1985,
we have provided testing and observation services during the mass grading
of the subject subdivision. Our services were performed during the period
of October 23 through November 21, 1985. The scope of our services
included the following:
• Observing the grading operation, including the installation
of subdrains and the removal and/or processing of loose
topsoil and alluvial soil.
• Performing in-place density tests in the placed and compacted
fill.
• Performing laboratory tests on samples of the prevailing soil
conditions used for fill.
• Preparing an As-Graded Geologic Map.
• Preparing this final report of grading.
General
The grading contractor for the project was H & A Construction. The project
plans were prepared by Rick Engineering Company and are entitled "Grading
Plans for Stagecoach Park Site" with latest revision dated October 6, 1985
and a City approval date of August 28, 1985.
9530 DOV^DY DRIVE • SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92126 • PHONE (619) 695-2880
File No. D-3480-J02
December 5, 1985
The project soils report is entitled "Geotechnical Investigation for
Stagecoach Park, Carlsbad, California" prepared by Geocon, Incorporated and
dated July 5, 1985.
References to elevations and locations herein were based on surveyor's or
grade checker's stakes in the field and/or Interpolation from the
referenced Grading Plans.
Grading
Grading began with the removal of brush and vegetation from the area to be
graded and the material was then exported from the site. Loose topsoils
and loose alluvial soils in areas to receive structural fill were removed
to firm natural ground.
Prior to placing fill, the exposed natural ground surface was scarified,
moisture conditioned and compacted. Fill soils derived from onsite cutting
operations were then placed and compacted in layers until the design
elevations were attained.
As directed by the on-site superintendant, no observations of the grading
operations or testing of fills was performed by our firm in the creek area
or westerly of the creek area. This uncontrolled fill area is indicated on
the as-graded geologic map included herein. An approximately 1-foot-thick
layer of topsoil material was placed in the ball field area.
During the grading operation, compaction procedures were observed and in-
place density tests (ASTM D1556) were performed to evaluate the relative
compaction of the placed fill. Field observations and the results of the
in-place density tests indicate that the fill has generally been compacted
to at least 90 percent relative compaction. The results of the in-place
density tests are summarized in Table II. The approximate locations of the
in-place density tests are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 1.
Laboratory tests were performed on samples of material used for fill to
evaluate moisture-density relationships, optimum moisture content and
maximum dry density (ASTM D1557-70, Method C), expansion and shear strength
characteristics. The results of the laboratory tests are summarized in
Tables la, lb and Ic.
Slopes
Both cut and fill slopes have inclinations of 2.0 to 1.0 (horizontal to
vertical) with maximum heights on the order of 20 feet and 24 feet,
respectively. The fill slopes were periodically backrolled with a sheeps-
foot compactor during construction and were track-walked with a bulldozer
upon completion. All slopes should be plantedy drained and maintained to
-2-
GEOCON
AT E D
^-5
I N C O R P O R AT E D
File No. D-3480-J02
December 5, 1985
reduce erosion. Slope planting should consist of a drought-tolerant
mixture of native plants and trees having a variable root depth. Iceplant
should not be used on slopes. Slope watering should be kept to a minimum
to just support the vegetative cover.
Finish Grade Soil Conditions
During the grading operation, our observations and test results indicate
that granular soils were placed within at least the upper 3 feet of finish
grade on fill lots. The laboratory test results indicate that the
prevailing soil conditions within 3 feet of finished grade on each building
pad have an Expansion Index of 35 or less and are classified as having a
"very low" to "low" expansion potential as defined by UBC Standard Table
29-C).
Subdrains
Subdrains were installed at the general locations shown on the approved
Grading Plans. The subdrains were "as-built" for location and elevation by
the project Civil Engineer.
Buttress Fills
A buttress fill or deep "shear key" was placed in the slope area in the
western part of the site as recommended in the referenced geotechnical
report. The buttress excavation was observed by the project geologist
during construction. In addition, a deep key was made in an area of "soil
creep" in the north-central area of the property. The buttress and deep
key areas are indicated on the as-graded geologic map included herein.
Soil and Geologic Conditions
The soil and geologic conditions encountered during grading were found to
be similar to those described in the project geotechnical report. Materials
of the Delmar Formation were exposed in the cut areas. The enclosed
reductions of the approved Grading Plans depict the as-graded geologic
conditions observed. The approximate locations of subdrains, buttresses,
deep keys and "uncontrolled" fill areas are also indicated. No soil or
geologic conditions were observed during the grading which, in our opinion,
would preclude the continued development of the property as planned.
-3-
GEOCON
INCORPORATED
File No. D-3480-J02
December 5, 1985
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based upon laboratory test results and field observations, it is our
opinion that the prevailing soil conditions within 3 feet of finish pad
grade in the building area consist of "very low" to "low" expansive soils
as classified by UBC Table 29C.
We recommend the following foundation and slab design criteria for the
proposed structure.
Foundations
1. Conventional spread and/or continuous footings founded at least 18
inches below lowest adjacent grade in properly compacted or dense
undisturbed "very low" to "low" expansive soil may be designed for an
allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf (dead plus live loads).
Footings should have a minimum width of 12 inches. This bearing pressure
may be increased by up to one-third for transient loads such as wind or
seismic forces.
2. All continuous footings should be reinforced with at least two No. 4
reinforcing bars, one placed near the top of the footing and one near the
bottom.
3. Concrete slabs-on-grade should have a nominal thickness of 4 inches and
should be reinforced with 6x6-10/10 welded wire mesh. The slabs should be
underlain with 4 inches of clean sand and, where moisture sensitive floor
coverings are planned, a visqueen moisture barrier protected by 2 inches of
the sand cushion should be provided. Great care should be taken during the
placement and curing of concrete flatwork to reduce the potential for
shrinkage cracking.
4. Footings should not be placed within 7 feet of the top of slopes.
Footings that must be located in this zone should be extended in depth such
that the outer bottom edge of the footing is at least 7 feet horizontally
from the face of the slope.
5. No special subgrade presaturation is deemed necessary prior to placing
concrete, however, the exposed foundation and slab subgrade soils should be
sprinkled as necessary to maintain a moist condition as would be expected
in any such concrete placement.
Lateral Loads
6. The passive pressure exerted by an equivalent fluid weight of 300 pcf
should be used to provide resistance to design lateral loads. This design
value assumes that footings or shear keys are poured neat against properly
-4-
GEOCON
) R A T E INCORPORATED
File No. D-3480-J02
December 5, 1985
compacted granular fill soils or undisturbed formational soils and that the
soil mass extends at least 5 feet horizontally from the face of the footing
or three times the height of the surface generating passive pressure,
whichever is greater. The upper 12 inches of material not protected by
floor slabs or pavement should not be included in design for passive
resistance.
7. If friction is to be used to resist lateral loads, a coefficient of
friction between soil and concrete of 0.35 may be utilized.
Retaining Walls
8. Unrestrained retaining walls should be designed to resist the active
pressure exerted by an equivalent fluid weight of 35 pcf. This value
assumes that granular onsite material will be used for backfill, that the
backfill surface will be level, and that no surcharge loads will be acting
on the wall. For walls with backfill surfaces inclined at no steeper than
2.0 to 1.0, an active pressure exerted by an equivalent fluid weight of 45
pcf should be used.
9. For walls restrained from movement at the top, such as basement walls,
an additional uniform horizontal pressure of 7H psf (H equals the height of
the wall in feet) should be applied in addition to the active lateral
pressures given above.
10. All retaining walls should be provided with a backfill drainage system
adequate to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic forces.
Site Drainage
11. Adequate drainage provisions are imperative. Under no circumstances
should water be allowed to pond adjacent to footings. The lots and
building pads should be properly finish graded after buildings and other
improvements are in place so that drainage water is directed away from
foundations, concrete slabs and slope tops to controlled drainage devices.
Any additional grading performed at the site should be done under our
observation and testing. All trench backfill material in excess of 12
inches in depth should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compac-
tion. This office should be notified at least 48 hours prior to commencing
additional grading or backfill testing.
-5-
GEOCON
» A T E D INCORPORATED
File No. D-3480-JO2
December 5, 1985
LIMITATIONS
The conclusions and recommendations contained herein apply only to our work
with respect to grading, and represent conditions at the date of our final
inspection, November 21, 1985. Any subsequent grading should be done under
our observation and testing. As used herein, the term "observation" implies
only that we observed the progress of the work with which we agreed to be
involved. Our conclusions and opinions as to whether the work essentially
complies with the job specifications are based on our observations,
experience and testing. Subsurface conditions, and the accuracy of tests
used to measure such conditions, can vary greatly at any time. We make no
warranty, expressed or implied, except that our services were performed in
accordance with engineering principles generally accepted at this time and
location.
We will accept no responsibility for any subsequent changes made to the
site by others, by the uncontrolled action of water, or by the failure of
others to properly repair damages caused, by the uncontrolled action of
water.
If there are any questions regarding our recommendations or if we can be of
further service, please contact the undersigned.
Very truly yours,
GEOCON, INCORPORATED
Michael R. Rahilly / H. Tom Kuper
RCE 28188 CEG 1137
MRR:JEL:Im
(4) addressee
-6-
GEOCON
; A T E I INCORPORATED
I« PIRMir^fHOM THE Clt* tKCINEER KILL BE REQUIHED FOR «Nr VORK IN IHE Cllr RIGHI OF KAV.
«%^fn«u?^ .'.u,'?,' /l/oLSL,'!*^ "^t ENGINEER DOES NQt HUIHORUE dHY »ORK QR CRAOINO 10
PIRJU M!lf«EI! {ssl«. """^ PERMISSION HAS BEEN 08TAINE0 AND A VALID CRAOIHO
MPAR^''l^*oi°2iNSTni'T2n?^'"Ao';'''"'"'^ INCLUDING THE -ARMING UP. REPAIR, ARRIVAL. OtPARII^ OR RUNNING OF TRUCKS. EARTHMOVINC EOUIPMENT, CGNSIRUCTION EQUIPMENT AND ANY
?UNS" VACM iA*;"MS2D*?J'?„ISn?H"»'lA.;"*^^ TO THE PERIOD' BElyEEi yfoO A M \Z 5„ ""NOAy THROUGH FRIDAV. AND NO EARTHNOVINfi OR GRADING OPERAIIDNS SuAl i S^l2?^^','n"-?1,!|'KEKENCS 08 HOLIOAVS.Eic^PI As" Y BE APPR^^^^^^^ ENdlNEER 10 MEET fH£ CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE. uuoi
.'pp«o'';.?'piio!;*ro B'^iLiiNr^FUi.'"'"'"" "'° '"^ "«
GENERAL ^ERO^ION CONIK()L Nfl
1. IN CASE fMEWGENCY KOiiK IS REOUlRfcD, COlUACr POLICE DEPT. Al 43B-56I I
I
t
I
AND HASTE MATERIAL SHALL BE DEPOSITED AT. A IMPORT MATERIAL SH»LL BE OBTAINED FROM,
LS^Al. f;<«.«PPSJ»ee OT.THE CITY ENGINEER..
5Ml?L"«'A'?ifii5?S RS'*^^"^^LI^^t V *' '"^ SHE PRIOR TO BEGINNING OF .ORK AND
L^^^R^,v^v.'u^^^vu'^»Lro^"H7R"A'syE^^fyCONSTRUCTIOH. INSPEC,ION.
!iSLE^^\"p^cW^SL\S'^°;o\?D^"L\HV'pr.:s!"' "
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
I
I
ALL AREAS SHALL BE GRADED TO DRAIN.
NO TREES ARE TO BE REMOVED
PONDING OF HATER IS NOT PERMITTED.
EUU PMENI AND HOHKEHS FUR LMtHGtNCY WUHK SHAH BE HADE AVAU.Abl.E Al ALL TIMES DUNINU 1 Mt
RAINY SLAbUN. ALL NECtSSAKY MATEHIALS SMALL OE STOCKPILED ON SUE AT C ON VE N 1 E H1 L u C A-
TIONS TO FALILITATE RAPID CONSTHiUC T ION OF TEMPORARY DEVICES WHEN HAJN IS EMINENT.
°l!!}c^^ -^c""" °" '''•"''^ ^'"^^^ MC""0 OK MODIFIED HIIHOUT THE APPDOVAL OK I HE HuaLlC
IKE CONTUACIOR. SHALL HESTOilE ALL ENOSioN CUNIRUL DEVICES TO WUHKING U«OER lU IHE SATIS-
FACTION OF THE CIIY ENGINEER AFTER EACH RUN-OFF PRODUCING RAINFALL.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSIALL AODIIIUNAL EROSION CONIHQL MEASUKtS AS MAY HE HtUUlKEU dY
THE CITV ENGINEER DUE TO UNCOMPLEIED GRADING OPERATIONS OH UNfOHLSEEN CIKCUMSrANCES UHICH MAy AHJ5E.
THE COHTHACIOR SHALL BE KESPONSIbLE AND SHALL^IAKE NECESSARY P.ILCAUUONS IJ P.itVENI
PUBLIC TRESPASS ONTQ AREAS «HERt IMPUUNOED WATERS CREATE A HAZARDOUS CUNDllION,
5tt-^"°.1' '^'"'"^'iC MEASURES PROVIDED PEK THE APPROVED GRADING PLAN SHALL BE INCURPO-
GRADED AREAS AROUND THE PROJECI PERIMETER MUSI DRAIN AWAY FROM THE FACE UF SLOPE AT IHE
CONCLUSION OF EACH WORKING DAY.
ercc.
^//v/s/j' a^^a^ ^/A'£ ,43 CO
TYPICAL CONCRETE
GUTTER A
NOT TO SCALE
ALL CRADING AND DtlAIL KILL BE IN ACCORDANCE HITH THIS PLAN. THE CURRENT City OF
CWLS9AB ilANOARps ANC SPtCIFICATlONS AND GRADING ORDINANCES 8032 AND 60^3
^ CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE EROSION CONTROL MEASURES TO CONTROL SOIL MOVEMENT SA11 SFACTORY
TO IHE CIIY ENGINEER. IN THE EVENT THE SITE IS EXPOSED TO EROSION DURING THE PERIOD
• f FROM NOVEMBER 151 TO APRIL 15lH SPECIAL EROSION CONTROLS MAY BE REUUIRED EROSION CON-
- TR#L MEASURES SHALl INCLUDE. BUI ARE NOT LIMITED 10, SLOPE PROIECllONi STILLING BASINS,
SANDBAGS. AND STOm DRAINS. AN EROSION CONTROL PLAN WILL BE REQUIRED BETWEEN OCTOBER
lMHANDAPRILi3IH.|'
"•~«l.L JWALES AND OirCMES SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM \\ SLOPE.
»__INf CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DEBRIS OR DAMAGE OCCURRING ALONG IHE HAUL
ROUUS OR ADJACENt STREETS AS A DIRECT RESULT OF IHE GRADING OPERATION.
Ai SOON AS GRADING IS COMPLEIED, • AREAS SHOWN SHALL BE STABILIJED BY HYDR05EEDING,
MH'ICUMIOH, IHt,«t« »I« JHALL BE lOOJ ANNUAL RYE GRASS APPLIED AT A
RATE OF 120 PQijhDS^PER ACRE, THE MULCH SHALL BE APPuIEO Al
Ml llli tMA« 1,000 tOUMO* ri« ACM AMD THE FERTILIZER AT NOT LESS THAN 1,000 POUNDS PES
ACRE UM.CS| OIHERWISE SPECIFIED AND APPROVED BY THE CIIY ENGINEER.
SHORT TERM DUST PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH CONSIRUCIION SHALL BE MINIMIZED BY PROPER USE
OF DUSI SUPPRESSION MEASURES DURING GRADING OPERATIONS.
ALI SLOPES SHALL BE TRIMMED TO A FINISH GRADE TO PRODUCE A SMOOTH AND UNIFORM SURFACE OR
CROSS SECTION, THE SITE SMALL BE LEFT IN A NEAI AND ORDERLY CONOIUQN. i ALL SIONES.
SSPJiLr-SLm"'* I*'**'* %n\V\. BE REMOVED AND DISPOSED OF AT A LEGAL SI IE. APPROVED BY THE CiTV tMutNc EN
THE COHTHACIOR SHALL MAINTAIN THE PLANTING AND EROSION CONTROL MEASURES DESCRIBED ABOVE
UNTIL REtlEVEO OF SAME B« IHE CITY ENGINEER. IHE DEVELOPER SHALL PICK UP AND REPLACE ON
J^TMt SLOPES ALL MATERIAL INTERCEPTED BY IHE SAND BAGS AND STILLING BASINS AFTER EVERY
RUN-OFF PRODUCING RAlNFALLi£ROS|pN CONTROL MEASMRES WILL BE LEFT IN PLACE AND INTACT AT
HEITHtR THE CITV NOR THE ENGINEER OF WORK WILL ENFORCE SAFETY MEASURES OR REGULATIONS.
|H< CONTRACTOR SHALL PESIGM. CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN ALL SAFETY DEVICES, AND SHALL BE
ISOIEL* RESPONSIILI FOR CONFORMING 10 ALL LOCAL. STATE AND FEDERAL SAFETY AND HEALTH SIAN-
(AROti LAWS ANO REGULATIONS.
IMI CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE EXISTENCE AND LOCATION OF ALL UTILITIES BEFORE COMMENC-
|INQ yORK, NOTICE OF PROPOSED WORK SHALL BE GIVEN TO IHE FOLLOWING AGENCIES:
ALL REMOVEAULE PKUIECIlVt DEVICES SHOWN SHALL BE IN PLACE Al THE END
WHEN THE FIVE-DAY RAIN PSDbABlLITY FUHECAST EXCEEDS FURTY PERCENT.
A,
TYPICAL 60'
GRADING SECTION
EACH WOHKING DAY
\\ \arn.
I
1
I
G h A U I N G
CRADINU SHALL CONSIST UF ALI, CUlb AND FIU.S Ab SHOWN ON. IllESt PMNS MM UIIIIINLIJ IN IilL tftHlH-
WORK SPtClFlC/<HO»S AND IN ACCUlVDnNCE Willi CIIY UF CnRLbllAD SIANOIUlDS,
GRADING SHALL BE DONE U1 III 1N A TOLERANCE OF 0.1'l Of IHE GRADES
ANO tlEVAIIONS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS AND ALL SLOPES SHALL BE
CONStHUClCD WIIHIN O.S'lOF IHE LOCATION SHOWN ON iHt FLANS. IN
NO WAY 00 IHE ABOVE lOLEHANCES RELIEVE THE CONTRAClUR Of IHE
RESPONSieilITr Of PHOVIOIHG A FINISH SURFACE IIIAI WILL NOI PONO.
/30
\/or£ AVAO i^MT. suaBAse ^ CUK&. son£f< ^ e/omALK" M/.CJ\
J IL
26 /Z5
"COM:, qt/rrf/f S£f AB^VE:
TYPICAL 130'
GRADING SECTION
.K 1
L I
I" i t tun
TBlCt.
=1
20. (
I
fND
ttnEg; LtuctBU-jiAm-Eiimja-
IINDER6RDUND SERVICE ALERT:
|)«»rEg: OLIVENHAIN MUNICIPAL WAIER Pl^lRlPT
|ALL FILLS 10 BE COMPACIEO 10 JOX RELATIVE COMPACTION UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY SOILS
ENGINEER.
PIPE BEDDING AND TRENCH COMPACIIQH lp BE AS DIRECTED BY SOILS ENGINEER.-
"4 & '^•^'^ 0-39. / ^ 03a ( sAAj o/eeo
^ 3-g- _| / f-TOPOf MML
'a
1 JJJLK__J 0_ B_ E U 0 N E
IHL IMPKOVl Mt H 1 S CUNSISI OF IHC FOLLOWING WUKK 10 BE DONE ACCUKDINl, h
IHEiE PLANS. Tilt CURRiNI CITV OF CARLSBAD ENGIHttRlNC UtpAKIHl.d
SfANDAHl) DHUKlNUb A N 1.- 5 P t C I F 1 C A I I 0 N S , AND IHL SAN DILGO KLGlllllAl
SIAHDARD urtA.lNNS. 'DLNUItS CIO OF CAKLS8AD blANOSKU DRAWINGS.
L_£.i!^E_Jli! ^
FILL BANK (2:1 MAXIMUM) ^
cui ijAiiK (2:1 MAXIMUM)
CUI/FllLLlliE -
PROHUSLD COHIbllR --------1--.
EXISIING CUNIOUK - - - -
LINED DIICH -------- 0-75 TIPE U
--—(M—
?I0
•=0
EARIH SWALE - -- - - - - -
CONCRETE LUG
I yPE "a" Ila.E I - (NO WINCiSI
TYPE " A " C I. L A U U U r - - - -
I Y P t " K " C A I C H li A S I N - - -
SrukH DrlAlfl PIPE - - - - -
SUbUHAIN - - . . -
PER DEIAU- - -
\)•^^~•
D-2.1 1 UEIAIL Sill. NO.
D-J - . . . . .
u-;.i i uEiAU Sill. Nii,
0-60.1- -
PER SOUS REPIJRI- , - -
Ei---
STKAIJHI HIADWALL ----- U-30-
U- <|0. 1-
DV 5:^.1-
U-62.1-
1) d.l -
m£rcavs7/t. SECTION B-B
KEY MAP L^GFNO
TRACT BOUNDARY - . STORM DRAIN PIPE TYPE "A" CLEANOUI
TYPE "B" INLET
TYPE "F" CATCH BASIN. „
TYPE "0" CATCH BASIN-_.
STRAIGHT HEADWALL
EXISTING STREET LIGHT- .
EXISTING FIRE HYDRANI--
EXISIING SEWER .
EXISTING WATER i VALVE .
INLET APRON-_
SI D
iHlb GnAUlHG in.AH HAS btEH HtVltwcU dY IllE
UNDLRSIGNLD ANU FOUND lU HE IN C ONF G |(M ANCE WITH
TllL H L COMME ND« I I ONS AS OUILINED IN OUR lIlll.S
rttl'UHl FOr* IIIIS SIIUDIVISUIN, UAIEO .lULY '> , ISB'j.
FILE NO. D-S^flO-JOl I *
GEOCON, INC. 9530 OOWDV UfilVE SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 PHONE: 69b-28BQ
RIP RAP ftlERUY DISSIPAItR
INLtl Al'niJH
PI PL CO I. LA ft ' - - - - -• -
rvpL "G" LAICK OAS IN - - -
UUILDJHC PAD LLEVAIION - - - . - -
ExIblING KINibii Gr(AOt tltVAIVOH -
CURO (luui,it) LIMIT OF FUTURE PARKING AHEAS- - -
CURb 1 GlIlltK (FurUHE) - - .
CCNCRtIc i;ulltK (FUlUHE) PEii DETAIL - SHEt I 2
BY
LEGEND
R.C.E. '•^till^S MEEI): A^c, 24. /-ya;-
"B££iaSlUON HE RESPONSIBLE CHARGE"
1
TiJPfV: /^OiV/ ' "tStBY DECLARE tllAI I AM ENGINEER OF WORK FOR THIS PROJECT, THAI
/l/r ur ni/tVl. , ^AVE EXERCISED RESPONSIBLE CHARGE OVER THE DESIGN OF THE PKOJECI
AS DEFINED IN SECIION ^7043 OF THE BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE
AND THAI IHE DESIGN IS C0N5IS1ENI WITH CURRENT SIANDARDS
Ocf.-
Quf
.COMPACTED FILL
..UNCONTROLLED FILL
DEL MAH FOHMATION
.APPHOX LOCATION OF IN-PLACE
DENSITY TEST
Fli .. . FINISH GRADE TEST
S SLOPE TEST
GEOCON
1 NCOHfOHATEO
FILE NO D-StbO-J02
DATE li:-9-la85
FIGURE I
SECTION A-A
RICK ENGINEERING COMMNY
ClVk. f HQINEERS . PLUOUHQ C0N8ULDUITt : SUDVEVOHS
M30 FfXAHl HCAD &AN DUfaO. CALtfOANlA 13 110 Ifi IB] 2f | o/of
3CU PIO PiCOOAlve CAfUSBAO. CALtfOKNlA •JOOt (BIBJ raV4»a7
S «ANCNO SANIA Ft fW) &AM MAi^COS CA B;06B («)«) ?4*
A''4'-r'y'&>'
SECTION C-C
I UNDERSIAHD THAI IHE CHECK (IF PROJECT DRAWINGS AND SPEC 1F i C A I 1 ON S
BY IHE CITY OF CAKLSbAD IS CONFINED TO A REVIEW ONLY AND DUES NOT
RELIEVE ME, AS ENQINEER OF WORK, OF MY RESPONSIBILITIES FOR PRO.IECI BENCH MARK
DESCRIPTION: STO. BRONZE DISC. IN CONC. MON
RICK ENGINFFRINI- rnMPANv LOCATION: ABOUT 200' NORTH OF STA.
RICK ENIilNfERlNg COMPANY , 261 » 98.72 RANCHO SANTA FE RQAD-
R.S. 454- NEAR FENCE EAST SIDE OF ROAD
41L fiHAAJ S£(:r/0/V W£WS 6W^yA/ A'Or TO SC4i£' 0'M£-SS AX?r£0.
•FIRM:
ADDRESS:
CIIY, STATE
TELEPHONE:
BY:
365 S. RANCHO SANTA FE RD, STE 100
SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA 92069 .
(619) 7<iV-(illQ0 •
ENDER
rill.
RECORD FROM: 0302
ELEVATION: 176.18
COUNTY BENCH LEVELS J-
DATUMi u scao S.
PARKS DEPARTMENT - CITY OF CARLSBAD
BY ^2'^.
•'4'i. 'A.
DATE
ENGINEER OF WORK
-S^s^Q^X
BARRY C IBENDER RCE 28448 "OAVE"
.1^
\TE
0£ SIGNED av APHRGVt D APHRGVt D
f RIVATC CONTRACT
SHEET
I CITY OF CARLSBAD
ENaiNEERINa OCPARTMeNT
GRADING PLANS FOR:
STAGECOACH PARK SITE
APPROVED :
OWN BY:
CKKII HV
PROJECT NO.
DATE:
•CALESr
HOBZ.,
ONAWMO M
"AS SlIC
STORM DRAIJi
DELTA OR 8RG
A/.a4''tV- -
M64'iV. ^
A/. 41'£. i
RADIUS
-* ZZO.OO
180'
Z50O'
'WW
e^'ffcr. /350-0
moo
30-/f.C.f; I3VH>'
1390-17
TYPE 'F* CATCH BASIN
W/ BROW "ITCH INTO SfPE
• M.tS. .
RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY
civil EHOIWOW: PLANN»IO CORSUtlMTR : »UBViYO«»
MIOIWAAI "OAO «AH MQO. CAI»0«>I1A •HU) HH) ItHHOl
soil ro PICO onivt CAKIIBAI). CAI»O«»A fiooi mil TI»«II
V. HAMCHO SAMIA re BO SAN yAnnOi CA tlcwB laitl r4« «»oo
HORIZONTAL CONTROL NOTE:
ALL HORIZONTAL CONTROL TO BE
SCALED WITH MINIMUM DIMENSIONS
HELD AS SHOWN.FOR IMPROVEMENTS
SEE IMPROVEMENTS PLANS BY OTHERS
^ //V /^S/tP/V £S7X>Mr/A', S££ <i>''^' INCOnrOKATID
FILE NO. 0-3480-J02
DATE 12-9-1985
FIGURE ' 2
ENGINEER OF WORK
BARRY C
DRAWN 1)1- iDESIOHfOBr | CHECKED Bi
J.O.f.C.
APPROVED B>
BENCH MARK
DESCRIPTION. STO. BRONZE OlSC. IN CONC. MON
LOCATION: ABOUT 2°° NORTH OF STA
261 •98.72 RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD
R.S 454 -NEAR FENCE E*ST SIDE OF ROi
RECOROFROM: COUNTY BENCH LEVELS J-O302
ELEVATION • 176.18 DATUM : U.S.C.B G.S
\mrTcoTo 6"c.a
GRADING PLANS FOR'
STAGECOACH PARK SITE
APPROVE!) : .
•CALC*:
HOnZ: l*> A
JtBtr
MAWMO '
v-i -
V £x/srwa S4p/i^
S££ O^VS.^5^•7A\
- /.''O
-£x/sr /B'X/s' ae/7//V/itS£ £ASM r.
RAP SLOPE PROTECTION •jMf r- aa rr cousr / •)Wfi ro rop ecev. SHOWU /
W3L
.--\80-£-Of? S£CT/<yj"6-S
<9££ SMSET 4
I
I
DETAIL' GRADED SWALE
NTS.'- - -
wore-: OMIWHUM I% icmQiTuoiNAL eaAoieur DenaveL BAes siLr reAP AT Miv. loorr iNTinvALs. eee DETAIL ^/?ienT
' ' &ri6£T4
GRAVEL BAGS SILT TRAP
DETAIL
^eAoeo SWALE ie^TAlL 7/^/3
STORM DRAIN DATA
NOWfLTAOKBftG RADIUS LENGTH REMARKS
30o' 14-1't IO'BCP(I3SO-Bi.
^ p 44'£ H-BCPUiSO-D]
• « «
(to' t II •
NO SCALE ^
WDICATES TEMPORE <£R06/0AJ CO^rmXj q/?AD£D SWALE. SEE DErA/L- W/3SWEET
see f/O
HORIZONTAL CONTROL NOTE^ /
ALL HORIZONTAL CONTROL TO BE
SCALED WITH MINIMUM DIMENSIONS
HELD AS SHOWN .FOR IMPROVEMENTS
SEE IMPROVEMENT PLANS BrOTHERS.
NOr£. FOR txisr. IMPBOVeMB/iTS
IN MI3I0N eSTANCiA , SEE RTY
Of CARLSBAD Otta. NO. tOS-t\
SWALE
TeMPORAKYfE/fOSION COIJTKQL)
• SAHDBAG DOm/DKAM FLUME
9 • Z BAGS MBhl
PLAN
INDICATES TEMPOfiAR\ . (EROSION CONTROL) 6MDEP SWALE.SEE bETAIL THIS 5HT. „^
80TroM-/&aG-
^-•fi^nm^SECTION "B -B"—
RICK ENGINEERING COMRANY
CIVIL EMOMEERt: KANNMO CONSULIKHTS : ftURVEVORS
M2a FRtARt ROAD lAH OIECM. CALVORHIA «lnO III O'Or
MM PIO PtCO ORtVS CARLSBAD. CAl If OnWA 12001 (eiBI fit 4»IT
MA 8 RAMCHO SANTA Ff RO %M UARCOS. CA f ?0«B (S II) M4 4100
—SECTION "A-A"!—
SANDBAG DOWNDRAIN FLUl
FOR TEMP (EROSION CONTRi
NO SCALE
/ I—t L r:
J 7a^£x/STLvrl6ioP£::^__
d>60-
BENCH MARK
r O II A T • D
NO. 0-3460-JOZ
DATE . 12-9-1985
FIGURE ' 3
ENGINEER OF WORK
BARRY C\ BENDER RC 28448 DATE
ORA*N Bi DESIGNED BY CHECKED 8i APPROVED
J.D.
pnnm COWTIIACT
MISION ESTANCIA
DESCRIPTION : STD BRONZE OlSC. IN CONC MON.
LOCATION: ABOUT 200 NORTH OF STA 26U98 72
RANCHO SANTA FE ROAO-R S . 45 4 - NEAR FENCE EAST SIDE OF ROAD. RECORD FROM.COUNTY BENCH LEVELS J-03O2 ELEVATION. 176.18 DATUM U S C.B 6 S.
T FIITIIRF CAI I F flCFn-vn ^ I ^
EXIST. le'ACP
BY nFv'Kinti'J ^
MEET
3 CITY OF CARLSBAD
Ewoweewwa DEPARTMENT
GRADING PLANS FOR.
STAGECOACH PARK SITE
APPROVED :,
RE:iaT?9 cirif tW&lHKT-
DWN BY:
CHKD BY:
Fin n BY-11 PROJECT NO.
OATl:g.g/
SCALE*:
HORt- I . 40'
VER; -
DRAWMO NC
/VOTE 4lt 0£T4aS •
OTHfO rH4N THOSE SHOtVi
4AE ro ge COMST pea o
MOD. INLET OPENING DETAIL
NTS.
IVO DELTA ORBRG RADIUS LENGTH REMAf,
w N. 3a • kV 74't ll'a.CP. 0:
U 36- W 90": lA'O.CPd
..JS1_ A/. 47-L 60't IO"llC.P(l
Si H. 25'30'£ iza: lO'RC.P.d
& /V. 36- tV lt"B.C.Ptl
igi H 54' 3o' W tfecpu
a di
HORIZONTAL CONTROL NOTE ;
ALL HORIZONTAL CONTROL TO BI
SCALED WITH MINIMUM DIMENSH
HELD AS SHOWN.FOR IMPROVED
SEE IMPROVEMENT PLANS BY OT
BENCH MARK
DESCRIPTION 'STO BRONZE DISC. IN CONC MOr LOCATION: ABOUT 200 NORTH OF STA. 26lt9(
RANCHO SANTA FE ROAO - R S.454 - NEAR
FENCE EAST SIDE OF ROAO
RECORD FROM; COUNTY BENCH LEVELS J-03C ELEVATION: 176.18 DATUM U.S C ft G.S.
I
GEOCON
INCOKrORATBO
FILE NO. D-34eO-J02
DATE • 12 - 9 -1985
FIGURE ' 4
ENGINEER OF WORK
BARRY a BENDER RCE 28448 DATE
DRAWN B^
JO
DESIGNED 8» I CHECKED 9r
RICK ENGINEERING COMMNY
Cmi. IHOMCEIU1 n-ANNMQ CONSUUJUITS : SURVEYOflS
Mlo rniAiis ROAD lAH ocao. CALITORNIA ati ID (titl iti cror
Kt* PN) PKO OniVE CAW.BBAD. CAllfORMA lloot l«tt> lrft«ltT
PRIVXTC CONTRACT
^ ADD^EEfE /AREA', ADD SECTION5 i
OyAOD NOfE. REVISE CONTOURS
SHEET
4 CITY OF CARLSBAD
CNOMEERMO DEPARTMENT
SHI
7
GRADING PLANS FOR:
STAGECOACH PARK SITE
iPPROVEO ^
Rgi 16729
t^,y.:tf..l
IDWN BY:
CHKO BY:
{ PROJECT NO.
SCALCS:
HOnZ: l''.40'
DRAWMO NO
File No. D-3480-J02
December 5, 1985
TABLE la
Summary of Laboratory Compaction Test Results
ASTM D1557-70
Maximum Dry Optimum
Sample Density Moisture
No. Description pcf % Dry Wt.
1 Dark brown, Silty CLAY 116.8 12.5
2 Yellow-tan, Silty SAND 121.0 12.4
3 Dark brown, Silty-Sandy 121.9 10.3
CLAY
4 Yellow-tan. Clayey SAND 129.1 11.0
TABLE lb
Summary of Direct Shear Test Results
Angle of
Dry Moisture Unit Shear
Sample Density Content Cohesion Resistance
No. pcf % psf Degrees
2 108.9 12.4 290 31
3 109.5 10.9 270 13
4 115.9 11.1 180 31
5^ iu j ^usSS"
GEXXDN
INCORPORATED
File No. D-3480-J02
December 5, 1985
TABLE Ic
Summary of Laboratory Expansion Index Test Results
Moisture Content
Before After
Test Test Dry
Sample Density Expansion
No. % % pcf Index
1 13.1 25.3 99.2 46
2 10.6 18.5 108.2 0
3 12.6 27.8 100.6 85
4 10.3 21.9 108.8 35
GEOCON
INCORPORATED
File No. D-3480-JO1
TABLE II
Summary of Field Density Test Results
Q
Date Test
1985 No.
10/26 1
2
3
4
5
10/28 6
7
8
Q
y
10
11
12
13
14
10/29 15
16
17
18
19
Location
South of Stagecoach Monument
Retest of #7
Retest of #8
South of Stagecoach Monument
I! . II II tl
Retest of #10
South of Stagecoach Monument
North
20
Elevation
Feet
Dry Dens,
pcf.
Moisture
% Dry Wt
Rel Comp
% of Max
Soil Type
& Remarks
167 105.4 12.4 90 1
170 112.5 15.4 93 2
172 112.8 15.4 93 2
174 111.5 12.7 92 2
175 112.4 13.2 93 2
177 112.1 14.9 96 1
178 96.8 9.1 83 lCk.8
178 100.5 11.1 86 l.Ck.9
178 107.0 13.2 92 1^ :
180 97.4 10.7 83 lCk.l2
182 107.9 13.6 92 1
180 105.9 14.1 91 1
183 106.9 15.8 92 1
186 107.8 14.9 92 1
192 118.0 11.1 91 4
190 119.6 10.7 93 4
194 110.1 15.4 91 2
195 111.9 14.5 93 2
192 111.7 15.8 92 2
198 112.7 14.9 93 2
File No. D-3480-JO1
SO
TABLE II (Continued)
Summary of Field Density Test Results
Date
1985
Test
No. Location
Elevation
Feet
Dry Dens,
pcf.
Moisture
% Dry VJt.
Rel Comp
% of Max
Soil Type
& Remarks
10/29 21 North of Stagecoach Monument 195 109.6 14.1 91 2
22 II II II 11 201 113.6 15.4 94 2
10/30 23 II II II II 203 110.4 14.5 91 2 •
24 II II II It 199 113.0 14.9 93 2
25 II II II tl 202 111.3 15.4 92 2
26 Southwest of Pad 212 183 109.1 13.2 90 2
27 1! II II 185 109.4 13.6 90 2
28 Pad 212 187 109.2 13.2 90 2
29 II II 189 109.0 13.6 90 2
30 II II 187 118.6 10.7 92 4
10/31 31 II II 192 111.0 14.9 92 2
32 North of Pad 212 190 109.6 14.5 91 2
33 Pad 212 193 118.0 11.1 91 4
34 North of Fad 212 193 121.4 11.5 94 4
35 Bedrock Creep Area 177 . 118.1 11.1 94 4
36 II 180 120.8 12.4 94 4
37 II II 178 117.4 11.9 91 4
38 1, 182 119.6 12.4 93 4
39 1. 189 118.1 11.5 91 4
40 1. II 194 116.9 11.1 91 4
File No, D-3480-JO2
Date
1985
11/1
11/2
11/4
Q
gu/3
O
a
TABLE II (Continued)
Summary of Field Density Test Results
Test
No. Location
Elevation
Feet
Dry Dens,
pcf.
Moisture
% Dry Wt.
Rel
% of
Comp
Max
S(
&
41 Bedrock Creep Area 187 107.4 13.5 92 1
42 II tl II 192 106,8 14.1 91 1
43 II II II 193 109.1 13.2 93 1
44 II tl 11 196 108.2 14.1 93 1
45 II II II 195 105.6 13.2 90 1
46 . II II II 199 105.9 12.8 91 1
47 II II II 198 119.3 10.7 92 4
48 II II II 203 120.7 11.1 93 4
49 II II II 200 117.7 11.5 91 4
50 II tl It 202 118.2 11.1 92 4
51 Parkin g Area West of Buttress 165 113.1 12.8 93 3
52 II II II II II 167 112.4 11.9 92 3
53 II II It tl II 169 110.9 11.9 91 3
54 II It It II It 170 110.2 12.4 90 3
55 tl It tl It It 171 113.0 12.4 93 3
56 It II II It 11 172 117.9 11.1 91 4
57 It II It It II 167 111.8 7.1 87 4C
58 tl II It II II 172 118.6 10.7 92 4
59 Retest of //57 167 119.9 11.1 93 4
60 Parking Area West of Buttress 169 120.8 10.7 94 4
File No. D-3480-JO2
Date
1985
Test
No.
TABLE II (Continued)
Summary of Field Density Test Results
Location
Elevation Dry Dens. Moisture Rel Comp Soil Type
Feet pcf. % Dry Mt. % of Max & Remarks
11/5
11/6
11/7
61 Buttress Area 153 111.6 13.2 92 2
62 II tl 155 110.6 13.6 91 2
63 It It 156 112.5 13.2 93 2
64 II It 159 112.0 13.2 93 2
65 It . 11 158 109.3 14.1 90 2
66 It tl 147 109.6 13.6 91 2
67 II II 165 113.9 13.2 94 2
68 II tl 170 111.1 13.2 92 2
69 Pad 212 200 112.3 13.6 93 2
70 II II 203 110.2 12.8 91 2
71 Buttress Area 160 113.0 14.1 93 2
72 II II 162 111.1 13.6 92 2
73 II II 163 111.7 13.6 92 2
74 II It 163 110.0 13.2 91 2
75 II It 166 113.1 13.6 94 2
76 II tl 167 113.9 14.1 94 2
77 Parking Area West of Buttress 169 112.8 . 1^-1 93 2
78 II II It It II 170 111.7 13.6 92 2
79 Buttress Area 171 108.5 12.4 89 2(
80 II It 171 103.9 11.1 86 2(
File No. D~3480-JO2
TABLE II (Continued)
Date
1985
11/7
11/8
11/13
Test
Summary of Field Density Test Results
Elevation Dry Dens, Moisture Rel Comp , Soil Type
No. Location Feet pcf. 7, Dry Wt. % o£ Max &
81 Retest of //79 171 111.6 13.2 92 2
82 Retest of #80 171 110.1 13.6 91 2
83 Buttress Area 172 115.1 14.1 95 2
84 It II 173 112.3 14.5 93 2
85 It It 173 109.3 13.6 90 2
86 . II II 172 110.7 13.2 92 2
87 It tl 174 111.3 13.6 92 2
88 II II 175 112.8 13.6 93 2
89 It II 175 98.5 9.1 84 , 1
90 It It 175 100.0 9.1 86 1
91 Retest of #89 175 105.9 12.8 91 1
92 Retest of #90 175 107.6 13.2 92 1
93 Buttress Area 176 107.9 12.8 92 1
94 II II 178 108.7 13.6 93 1
95 Pad 194 180 111.8 14.9 92 2
96 It It 180 110.2 14.5 91 2
97 It It 182 113.0 14.1 93 2
98 II II 183 111.1 • 14.1 92 2
99 II II 184 109.7 13.2 91 2
100 11 II 185 112.0 12.8 93 2
Ck.91
Ck.92
File No. D-3480-JO1
so
TABLE II (Continued)
Summary of Field Density Test Results
Date Test Elevation Dry Dens. Moisture Rel Comp S
1985 No. Location Feet pcf. % Dry Wt. % o£ Max &
n/14 101 Fad 194 187 110.4 14.1 91 2
102 II II 188 110.7 13.6 92 2
11/15 103 II It 188 115.2 14.1 95 2
104 It It 189 112.7 14.1 93 2
105 II tt 190 112.0 13.6 93 2
106 It II 192 114.7 13.2 95 2
107 II It 191 113.0 13.2 93 2
108 It It 193 113.7 14.1 94 2
109 II It 193 113.0 14.1 93 2
110 Pad 212 195 110.4 13.6 91 2
11/16 111 It It 197 110.4 14.1 91 2
112 It II 198 113.0 13.6 93 2
113 It II 201 110.6 13.2 91 2
114 II II 203 109.7 14.1 91 2
115 It It 205 111.7 14.5 92 2
116 II It 207 114.5 13.6 95 2
117 Bedrock Creep Area 204 109.6 13.6 91 2
118 It It II II 206 110.5 ' 14.1 91 2
11/18 119 II II It II 204 111.6 13.6 92 2
120 II II 11 It 205 110.7 13.6 92 2
File No. D-3480-J01
Date
1985
11/18
11/19
11/20
O m o
z; a
TABLE II (Continued)
Summary of Field Density Test Results
Test Elevation Dry Dens. Moisture Rel Comp , Sc
Ho. Location Feet pcf. % Dry Wt. % o£ Max &
121 Bedrock Creep Area 207 iio.5 14.5 91 2
122 It II It II 210 112.7 14.1 93 2
123 II II tl tl 208 115.7 13.6 96 2
124 It It II II 209 112.0 14.1 93 2
125 It It It II 209 112.8 13.6 93 2
126 II It It It 210 110.6 14.1 91 2
127 It It It II 210 109.9 14.1 91 2
128 II II tl II 212 112.0 14.5 93 2
129 It It II It 212 120.2 11.9 93 4
130 II It It tl 213 117.6 12.4 91 4
131 It It II II 214 119.4 11.9 93 4
132 ti II tt It 214 117.2 12.4 91 4
133 Pad 212 208 117.9 12.4 91 4
134 II It 208 118.9 11.9 92 4
135 It It 209 119.0 12.8 92 4
136 It II 209 117.5 12. 91 4
137 It It 210 117.1 12.4 91 4
138 II II 211 120.8 12.4 94 4
File No. D-3480-JO1
TABLE II (Continued)
= SLOPE TEST
Sunmiary of Field Density Test Results FG FINISH GRADE
Date
1985
Test
No. Location
Elevation
Feet
Dry Dens,
pcf.
Moisture
% Dry Wt
Rel Comp
% of Max
Soil Type
& Remarks
11/21 IS Slope on pad 212 205 113.9 13.6 94 2
2S Slope on Pad 194 185 109.7 13.2 91 2
3S Slope North of Pad 194 180 120.8 ^4.1 85 2Ck.8S
4S Slope North of Stagecoach Monument 200 110.4 14.1 91 2
5S Slope North of Stagecoach Monument 195 106.6 13.6 88 2Ck.9S
11/22 6S Slope West of Bedrock Creep Area 207 110.1 13.2 91 2
7S Slope West of Bedrock Creep Area 211 110.8 13.2 92 2
8S Retest of #3S 180 109.3 14.1 90 2
9S Retest of #5S 195 110.0 13.6 91 2
11/22 IFG Pad 194 FG 194 112.8 12.8 93 2
2FG Pad 212 FG 194 117.2 11.9 91 4