HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 00-02; CALAVERA HILLS VILLAGE U; INTERIM REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION;Oey>
nWERIM RERKT OF
GBOTEXMUCAL INVESnGRTION
CALAVERA HEIQflS VILUVCS: U
TAMARACK AVQ]UE AND GOLLEXX BOULEVARD
CARLSBAD, CALIFCWNIA
PREPARED FDR:
Lyon Ccnnunities, Incorporated
4330 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 130
San Diego, Califomia 92122
PREPARED BY:
Southem Califomia Soil & Testing, Inc.
Post Office Box 20627
6280 Riverdale Street
San Diego, Califomia 92120
JO
SOUTHERN CALIFORN
6280 RIVERDALE ST. SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 92120
678 ENTERPRISE ST. ESCON
I A SOIL
TELE 2B0-432I
O I D a. CALIF.
AND TESTING, INC.
P.O. BOX 20627 SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 92120
92025 • TELE
May 22, 1990
Lyon Ccdtnunities, Incorporated
4330 La Jolla Village Drive
Suite 130
San Diego, Califomia 92122
SCS&T 9021053
Report No, 1
ATTENTION: Mr. George Haviar
SUBJECT: Interim Report of Geotechnical Investigation, Calavera Heights
Village U, Teunarack Avenue and College Boulevard, Carlsbad,
Califomia,
Gentlemen:
In accordance with your request, have conpleted an interim geotechnical
investigation for the subject project. Vie are presenting herewith our
findings and recommendations.
In general, we found the site suitable for the proposed developnent provided
the recommendations presented in the attached report are followed.
If you have any questions after reviewing the contents contained in the
attached report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. This
opportiinity to be of professional service is sincerely appreciated.
Respectfully svifendtted,
SOyilfe?N CmLIFQRN^J^^p^ & TESTING, INC,
Daniel B.^Adleft, R.C.E, '#36037 DBA:JRH:KAR:mw
cc: (2) Submitted
(4) Hunsaker and Associates
(1) SCS&T, Escondido
SOUTHERN CALIFDRNIA
hn R. High, C.E.G. #123
N D N C ,
TABU: OF coNiTSNiy
PAGE
Introduction and Project Description 1
Project Scope 2
Findings 3
Site Description 3
(General Geology and Subsurface Conditions 3
Geologic Setting and Soil Description 3
1) Basement Conplex-Jurassic Metavolcanics and
Cretaceous Granitics (Jmv/Kgr) 4
2) Lusardi Formation (Kl) 5
3) Itertiary Volcanic Rock (Tv) 5
4) Younger Quatemary (Holocene) Alluvium (Qyal) 6
5) Topsoil/Subsoil 6
6) Artificial Fill (Qaf) 6
Tectonic Setting 8
(Geologic Hazards 9
Groundshaking 9
Seismic Survey and Rippability Characteristics 9
General 9
Rippability Characteristic of Granodioritic Rock 11
Rippable Condition (0-4,500 Ft./Sec.) 11
Marginally Rippable Condition
(4,500 Ft./Sec.-5,500 Ft./Sec) 11
Nonrippable Condition (5,500 Ft./Sec. & Greater) 12
Rippability Characteristics of Metavolcanics and Associated
Hypabyssal Rocks and Tonalitic Rocks 12
Rippable Condition (0-4,500 Ft./Sec.) 12
Marginally Rippable Condition (4,500-5,500 Ft./Sec.) 13
Nonrippable Condition (5,500 Ft.Sec. & Greater) 13
Seismic Traverse Limitations 13
Groundwater 14
Conclusions and Recomnendations 14
General 14
(fading 15
Site Preparation 15
Select Cirading 16
Cut/Fill Transition 16
Inported Fill 16
Rippability 16
Oversized Rock 17
Slope Construction 17
Surface Drainage 17
Subdrains 1*7
Earthwork 17
Slope Stability 18
Foundations 18
General 18
Reinforcement 19
Interior Concrete Slabs-on-Grade 19
Exterior Concrete Slabs-on-Grade 19
Special Lots 20
TABUE OF CCNTEINTS (continued)
PAGE
Expansive Characteristics 20
Settlement Characteristics 20
Earth Retaining Walls 20
Passive Pressure 20
Active Pressure 20
Backfill 21
Factor of Safety 21
Limitations 21
Review, Observation and Testing 21
Uniformity of Conditions 22
Change in Scope 22
Time Limitations 22
Professional Standard 23
Client' s Respons ibility 23
Field Explorations 23
Laboratory Testing 24
ATTflCHMEOTS
TABOLES
Table I
Table II
Table III
(Generalized Engineering Characteristics of Geologic
Units, Page 7
The Maximum Bedrock Accelerations, Page 9
Seismic Traverse Sunmary, Pages 10 and 11
FIGURE
Figure 1 Site Vicinity Map, Follows Page 1
PLKTES
Plates lA-lB--IC Plot Plans
Plate 2 Unified Soil Classification Chart
Plates 3-10 Trench Logs from December 1982
Plate 11 Grain Size Distribution
Plate 12 Conpaction Test Results
E^^jansion Test Results
Plate 13 Direct Shear Sunmary
Plate 14 Oversize Rock Disposal
Plate 15 Canyon Subdrain Detail
Plate 16 Slope Stability Calculations
Plate 17 Vfeakened Plane Joint Detail
Plate 18 Retaining Wall Subdrain Detail
Plates 19-21 Caterpillar Charts
Plates 22-24 Seismic Results
APPENDIX
Reconmended Grading Specification and Special Provisions
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
6280 RIVERDALE ST. SAN OIEGO, CAUr. 92120 • TELE 280-4321 • P.O. BOX 20627 SAN OIEGO, CALIF. 921 20
67B ENTERPRISE ST. ESCONDIDO. CALIF. 9202S • TELE TAfi-^S**
INIERIM REPOTT OF CTXjrBCHNICAL mVESTIGftTION
CALAVERA HEIGHTS VILLflGE U
TAMARACK AVENUE AND COLLEGE BOULEVARD
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
INIRODOCTICN AND PROJECT DESCRIPTICN
This report presents the results of our interim report of geotechnical
investigation for Calavera Heights Subdivision, Village U, Tamarack Avenue
and College Boulevard located in the City of Carlsbad, Califomia. The site
location is illustrated on the following Figure Number 1.
It is our understanding that the site will be developed to receive a
residential subdivision with associated paved streets. It is anticipated
that the stmctures will be one and/or two stories high and of vrood frame
construction. Shallow foundations and conventional slab-on-grade floor
systems are proposed. Grading will consist of cuts and fills up to
approximately 25 feet and 30 feet deep, respectively. Fill slopes up to
approximately 30 feet and cut slopes up to approximately 25 feet high at a
2:1 (horizontal to vertical) are also anticipated.
To assist with the preparation of this report, we v^re provided with a
grading plan prepared by Hunsaker and Associates dated December 6, 1989. In
addition we reviewed our "Supplenental Soil Investigation, Calavera Hills
Subdivision," dated October 6, 1988, our "Report of Geotechnical
Investigation, Village Q and T, Calavera Hills Subdivision," dated January
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING. INC.
SOUTHIRN CALIFORNIA
^ SOiL A TUTINQ.INC.
CALAVERA HEIGHTS-VILLAGE U SOUTHIRN CALIFORNIA
^ SOiL A TUTINQ.INC. gy. KAR/EM DATI: 5-21-90
SOUTHIRN CALIFORNIA
^ SOiL A TUTINQ.INC.
JOINUMBCR: 9021053 FIGURir#1
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 2
10, 1984 and our "Sunmary of Geotechnical Investigation for Lake Calavera
Hills," dated August 6, 1984. The site configuration, topography and
approximate locations of the subsurface explorations are shown on Plates
Number lA, IB and IC.
PROJECT SCOPE
This interim report is based on the review of the aforementioned reports for
the subject subdivision. A site specific report will be prepared at a later
date when further field investigation and analysis of Laboratory data has
been completed. For the purpose of this report appropriate field
investigation and laboratory test data was extracted from the previously
nentioned reports. More specifically, the intent of this study was to:
a) Describe the si±»surface conditions to the depths influenced by the
proposed constmction.
b) The laboratory testing performed in the referenced report was used
to evaluate the pertinent engineering properties, including
bearing capacities, expansive characteristics and settlement
potential, of the anticipated materials which will influence the
development of the proposed stibject site.
c) Describe the rippability characteristics of the existing rock.
d) Define the general geology at the site including possible geologic
hazards v^ich could have an effect on the site development.
e) Develop soil engineering criteria for site grading and provide
reconmendations regarding the stability of proposed cut and fill
slopes.
f) Address potential constmction difficulties and provide
recomnendations conceming these problems.
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 3
g) Reconmend an appropriate foundation system for the type of
stmctures anticipated and develop soil engineering design
criteria for the reconmended foundation design.
FINDINGS
SITE DESCRTPnON
The subject site is an irregular shaped parcel of land located within the
Calavera Heights cemmunity in Carlsbad, Califomia. The site, designated as
Village "U", covers approximately 65 acres and is bounded by residential and
undeveloped land on the west and undeveloped land on the north, east and
south property boundaries. Topographically, the site consists of hilly
terrain with veil developed drainage courses. Elevations on site range from
approximately 380 feet (MSL) at the western property boundary to
approximately 90 feet (MSL) near the southeastem comer. Inclinations of
the natural hillside slopes are on the order of 2 to 1 (horizontal to
vertical) or flatter. Drainage is acconplished via sheetflow and several
well developed drainage courses drain in an overall easterly and southerly
direction. Vegetation is conprised of moderate to dense chaparral on the
hillsides and relative dense shrubs and small trees within the larger
drainage swales. The site is vaccint with the exception of overhead utility
lines which traverse the site in a southwest to northeast direction.
C3WEFJAL AM) SUBSURFACE COtfOmOtS
GSOLOGIC SEmNG AND SOIL DESCRIPTION: The subject site is located near the
boundary between the Foothills Physiographic Province and the Coastal Plains
Physiographic Province of San Diego County and is underlain by materials of
both igneous and sedimentary origin. Most of the site is underlain by the
basement complex rocks consisting of Jurassic-age metavolcanic rocks,
Cretaceous-age granitic rocks, and Tertiary-age volcanic rocks. The
renaining areas of the site are underlain by the conglomerate sediments of
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 4
the Lusardi Fomation, Holocene alluvium, and manmade fill. A brief brief
description of the materials observed, in general decreasing order of age,
is presented below.
1) BASEMENT OWPLEX - JURASSIC METAVQLONICS AND CRETflCBOUS (3RANITICS
(Jmr/Kgr): The oldest rocks exposed at the site are the Jurassic
metavolcanic and associated hypabyssal rocks. The metavolcanic
rocks are generally andesite or dacite in composition and the
associated hypabyssal rocks are their porphyritic equivalents (ie:
diorite porphyry to granodiorite porphyry). The fine grained
hypabyssal rocks are considered to be about the sane age as the
metavolcanics and are consequently older than the other intmsive
roclcs found at the site. Both the metavolcanics and the associated
hypabyssal rocks veather to dark, smooth hills or jagged, angular
outcrops with a clayey, rocky topsoil. The metavolcanic and
hypabyssal rocks are generally rippable with conventional
earth-moving equipment to depths of only a few feet.
The other rocks in the basement conplex are the granitic rocks of
the Cretaceous Southem Califomia Batholith which have intmded
the older rocks and are, to a large degree, mixed with them. The
granitic rocks at the project site appear to be both tonalitic and
granodioritic in composition. The tonalitic rocks are usually dark
gray, fine to medium grained rocks whereas the granodioritic rocks
are usually yellowish brown to grayish brown, medium to coarse
grained rocks. The weathering and rippability characteristics of
the tonalitic rocks appear to be somewhat similar to those of the
metavolcanic/hypabyssal rocks. The tonalitic rocks may be rippable
to greater depths than the metavolcanic rocks but ripping may be
difficult and time consimiing. In addition, it should be noted that
the material generated from the tonalitic rocks will have the
appearance of the metavolcanic rocks rather than that of good
quality "decomposed granite." In contrast to the weathering
characteristics of the metavolcanic/hypabyssal rock and the
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 5
tonalitic rocks, the granodioritic rocks commonly weather to
rounded outcrops or boulders in a matrix of grus ("decomposed
granite"). The granodioritic rocks are variable in their excavation
characteristics but commonly contain areas which are rippable to
depths of several feet or several tens of feet, yet include
localized areas of boulders or unweathered rock which are not
rippable with conventional heavy equipment.
The areas underlain by the respective rock types in the basement
complex are undifferentiated on the acconpanying geologic map. It
should be noted that the different rock types are mixed and the
areas on the map only indicate v^ch rock type is dominant. Where
the symbol for the metavolcanic rock is listed first (ie: Jmv,/Kgr),
the area is characterized largely by metavolcanic and hypabyssal
rocks with lesser amounts of granitic rock. Conversely, where the
symbol for the granitic rock is listed first (ie: Kgr/Jmv), the ara
appears to be underlain piredominantly by granitic rock with lesser
amounts of metavolcanic and hypabyssal rocks.
2) USARDI FORMKnON (Kl): The Lusardi Formation is a Cretaceous
conglomerate that rests nonconformably on the basement conplex and
was deposited on a high-relief surface called the "Sub-Lusardi"
unconformity. This formation consists largely of granitic and
metavolcanic boulders in a matrix of coarse grained sandstone and
siltstone. The conglomerate is usually poorly sorted and the clasts
are commonly angular to subrounded. The only area of Lusardi
Fomation on the subject sit proper v^ich is large enough to map as
part of this investigation is on the extrene eastem portion of the
site. Other areas of Lusardi Formation may be encountered at other
portions of the site in subsequent, more-detailed investigations.
3) TERTIAPy VOLCANIC ROCK (Tv): Cerro de la Calavera is part of a
volcanic neck that has intmded the older rocks in the Carlsbad
area. The volcanic rock is usually brown to brownish gray and
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 6
appears to include both dacite and andesite. The weathering
characteristics and excavation characteristics of the Tertiary
volcanic rock are similar to those of the Jurassic metavolcanic
rocks. The only area of Tertiary volcanic rock of sufficient
dinension to map for this project was found on the extreme eastem
portion of the site, just west of Cero de la Calavera. It is
possible that future grading operations or more detailed geologic
mapping may reveal more of the Tertiary volcanic rock.
4) TOONGER QUKTERNARY (HOLOCENE) ALLUVIUM (Qyal): Younger alluvial
deposits consisting of unconsolidated, loose to medium dense
deposits of clay, silt, sand, and gravel are present in the larger
drainage covurses. These deposits range in thickness from iess than
a foot to over ten feet. Due to their ubiquitous occurrence, the
younger alluvial deposits are not delineated on the geologic map
except in the larger channels.
5) TOPSOIL/SUBSOIL: A relatively thin layer of loose topsoils and
subsoils should be anticipated overlying the entire site. These
deposits consist of varying mixtures of silts, sands and clays. It
is estinated that these deposits do not exceed 3.5 feet in combined
thickness.
6) ARTIFICIAL FILL (Qaf): Several areas of manmade fill, which have
been obtained from the on-site native materials or other nearby
sources, were observed. These areas are generally limited to a
small earthen dam and/or minor roads associated with previous
agricultural operations.
Table I presents some of the pertinent engineering characteristics of the
bedrock materials at the site.
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 7
TABU: I
GENERALIZED ENGINEERING CHARACTERISTICS OF MAIN (3X3L0GIC UNITS
Unit Name
and Synfcol
Topsoils
Amount of
Oversize
Rippability Material
Rippable Nominal
Slope
Stability/ Expansive
Erosion Compressibility Potential
Moderately
to Highly
Erodible
Moderate to Low to
High High
Younger
.M luvium-Qyal
Rippable Nominal Moderately
to Highly
Erodible
Moderate to
High
Moderate
to High
Tertiary
Volcanic
Rock-Tv
Marginally
Rippable to
Nonrippable
Moderate
to High
Generally
Good
Ncmiinal Nominal
Lusardi
Formation-Kl
Rippable Low to
Moderate
Moderately
Erodible
Low Low
Granitic Rocks-
Kgr
(Granodiorite)
Generally
Rippable to
+ 15 Feet
Low to
Moderate
Good Nominal Nominal
Granitic Rocks-
Kgr (Tonalite)
Marginally
Rippable to
Nonrippable
Moderate to
High
Good Nominal Nominal
Metavolcanic
and Hypabyssal
Rocks-Jmv
Marginally
Rippable to
Nonrippable
Moderate to
High
Good Nominal Nominal
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 8
TECTONIC SETTING: A few small, apparently inactive faults have been mapped
previously within the vicinity of the site. No evidence of faulting was
noted in oior exploratory trenches for the referenced reports but it is
possible that future grading operations at the site may reveal some of these
faults. Due to their status of activity and geometry, these small faults
should be only of minor consequence to the project.
It should also be noted that several prominent fractures and joints are
present within the vicinity of the site. These are probably related, at
least in part, to the strong tectonic forces that dominate the Southem
Califomia region. These features are usually near-vertical and strike in
both a general northwesterly direction (subparallel to the regional
stmctural trend) and in a general northeasterly direction (subperpendicular
to the regional stmctural trend). All cut slopes should be inspected by a
qualified geologist to assess the presence of adverse jointing conditions in
the final slopes.
In addition, it should be recognized that much of Southem Califomia, is
characterized by major, active fault zones that could possibly affect the
subject site. The nearest of these is the Elsinore Fault Zone, located
approxinately 20 miles to the northeast. It should also be noted that the
possible off-shore extension of the Rose Canyon Fault Zone is located
approxinately eight miles west of the site. The Rose Canyon Fault Zone
conprises a series of northwest trending faults that could possibly be
classified as active based on recent geologic studies. It is anticipated
that the Rose Canyon Fault Zone will be classified as active in the near
future. Recent seismic events along a small portion of the Rose Canyon Fault
Zone have generated earthquakes of 4.0 or less magnitude. Other active fault
zones in the region that could possibly affect the site include the Coronado
Banks and San Clemente Fault Zones to the vest, the Agua Bianca and San
Miguel Fault Zones to the south, and the Elsinore and San Jacinto Fault
Zones to the northeast.
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 9
OEXDUOGIC HAZARDS: The site is located in an area which is relatively free of
potential geologic hazards. Hazards such as tsunamis, seiches, liquefaction,
and landsliding should be considered negligible or nonexistent.
GROUNDSHAKING: One of the most likely geologic hazards to affect the site
is groundsha]cing as a result of movement along one of the major, active
fault zones mentioned above. The maximum bedrock accelerations that would
be attributed to a naximum probable earthquake occurring along the nearest
portion of selected fault zones that could affect the site are sunmarized in
the following Table II.
TABLE II
Fault Zone
Maximum Probable
Distance
Bedrock Design
Acceleration Acceleration
Rose Canyon 8 miles 6.5 nagnitude 0. 36 g 0 23 g
Elsinore 20 miles 7.3 magnitude 0. 25 g 0 17 g
Coronado Banks 24 miles 7.0 nagnitude 0. 18 g 0 12 g
San Jacinto 43 miles 7.8 nagnitude 0. 14 g 0 10 g
Earthquakes on the Rose Canyon Fault Zone are expected to be relatively
minor. Major seismic events are likely to be the result of movement along
the Coronado BanJcs, San Jacinto, or Elsinore Fault Zones.
Experience has shown that stmctures that are constmcted in accordance with
the Uniform Building Code are fairly resistant to seismic related hazards.
It is, therefore, our opinion that stmctural damage is unlikely if such
buildings are designed and constmcted in accordance with the minimum
standards of the most recent edition of the Uniform Building Code.
SEISMIC SURVEY AND RIPPABILITy CHARACTERISTICS
GQiERAL: Four seismic refraction traverses have been performed within or
adjacent to the subject site. The results of that traverses are presented
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 10
below and on Plates Number 22 through 24. However, it is anticipated that
the rippability characteristics of the materials within Village "U" will be
similar to those of the surrounding areas. It is expected that the
metavolcanic and hypabyssal rocks will be rippable to depths of
approxinately 5 to 10 feet while the granitic rocks will be rippable to
greater depths, on the order of 10 to 20 feet.
TAHLE III
Seismic Traverse No. SU-10
Area: U
Geologic Unit: Ciranite Rock (Granodiorite)
Interpretation: 0' - 17' Rippable
17' + 30' Nonrippable
Seismic Ttavetse No. SU-IO-R
Area: U
Geologic Unit: Granite Rock (Granodiorite)
Interpretation: 0' - 17' Rippable
17' + 30' Nonrippable
Seismic Traverse No. SW-13
Area: W
Geologic Unit: Granite Rock (Tonalite)
Interpretation: 0' - 15' Rippable
15' - 30' Nonrippable
Seismic Traverse No. SW-14
Area: W
Geologic Unit: (Sranitic Rock (Tonalite)
Interpretation: 0' - 21' Rippable
21' - 30' Nonrippable
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 11
TABLE II (continued)
Seismic Traverse No. SW-14-R
Area: W
Geologic Unit: Granitic Rock (Tonalite)
Interpretation: 0' - 14' Rippable
14' - 30' Marginally Rippable
Seismic Traverse No. S-73-14
Area: W
Geologic Unit: Metavolcanic
Interpretation: 0' - 16' Nonrippable
RIPPABIIilTY CHARACTERISTIC OF aWNODIORITIC ROCK
RIPPABLE CONDITION (0-4,500 FT./SEC.): This velocity range indicates
rippable materials which may consist of decomposed granitic rock
possessing random hardrock floaters. These materials will break down
into slightly silty, well graded sand, whereas the floaters will require
disposal in an area of nonstmctural fill. Some areas containing
numerous hardrock floaters may present utility trench problems. Further,
large floaters exposed at or near finish grade may present additional
problems of removal and disposal.
Materials within the velocity range of fron 3,500 to 4,000 fps are
rippable with difficulty by backhoes and other light trenching
equipnent.
MARGINAEIiY RIPPABLE CONDITION (4,500 FT./SBC.-5,500 FT./SEC.): This
range is rippable with effort by a D-9 in only slightly weathered
granitics. This velocity range nay also include numerous floaters with
the possibility of extensive areas of fractured granitics. Excavations
may produce material that will partially break down into a coarse,
slightly silty to clean sand, but containing a high percentage of + 1/4"
material. Less fractured or weathered materials may be found in this
velocity range that would require blasting to facilitate removal.
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 12
Materials within this velocity range are beyond the capability of
backhoes and lighter trenching equipment. Difficulty of excavation
would also be realized by gradalls and other heavy trenching equipment.
NONRIPPAHLE aMDrnON (5,500 FT./SEC. & (SWEATER): This velocity range
includes nonrippable material consisting primarily of fractured
granitics at lower velocities with increasing hardness at higher
velocities. In its natural state, it is not desirable for building pad
subgrade. Blasting will produce oversize material requiring disposal in
areas of nonstmctural fill.
This upper limit has been based on the Rippability Chart shown on Plates
Number 22 through 24 utilized for this report. However, as noted in the
Caterpillar Chart on Plates Nunter 19 through 21, this upper limit of
rippability may sometimes be increased to 7,000 to 8,000 fps material
using the D-9 mounted #9 Series D Ripper.
RIPPABILITy CHARACTERISTICS OF MEIMWICANICS AND ASSOCIATED HyPABySSAL
ROCKS AMD TONALITIC ROCKS
PTPPARTJ: CONDITION (0-4,500 FT./SEC.): This velocity range indicates
rippable materials v^ich may vary from deconposed metavolcanics at
lower velocities to only slightly decomposed, fractured rock at the
higher velocities. Although rippable, materials may be produced by
excavation that will not be useable in stmctural fills due to a lack of
fines. E:qperience has shown that naterial within the range of 4,000 to
4,500 fps most often consists of severely to moderately fractured
angular rock with little or no fines and sizeable quantities of + 1/4"
naterial.
For velocities between 3,500 to 4,500 fps, rippability will be difficult
for backhoes and light trenching equipment.
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 13
MARGINALLY RIPPABLE CONDITION (4,500-5,500 FT./SEC.): Excavations in
this velocity range would be extremely time consuming and would produce
fractured rock with little or no fines. The higher velocities could
require blasting. Trenching equipment would not function.
NONRIPPABEE CONDITION (5,500 FT./SEC- & GREATER): This velocity range
may include moderately to slightly fractured rock which would require
blasting for removal. Material produced would consist of a high
percentage of oversize and angular rock.
Rippability of metavolcanics may be acconplished for higher velocities
using the Caterpillar D-9 with the #9 D Series Ripper. Due to the
fractured nature of sone metavolcanics, ripping might be accomplished in
as high as 8,000 fps naterial.
SEISMIC TRAVERSE LIMITKnONS
The results of the seismic survey for this investigation reflect rippability
conditions only for the areas of the traverses. Hovever, the conditions of
the various soil-rock units appear to be similar for the remainder of the
site and may be assumed to possess similar characteristics.
Our reporting is presently limited in that refraction seismic surveys do not
allow for prediction of a percentage of expectable oversize or hardrock
floaters. Subsurface variations in the degree of weathered rock to
fractured rock are not acciirately predictable.
The seismic refraction method requires that materials become increasingly
dense with depth. In areas where denser, higher velocity materials are
underlain by lower velocity materials, the lower velocity materials would
not be indicated by our survey.
All of the velocities used as upper limits for rippability are subject to
fluctuation depending upon such local variations in rock conditions as:
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 14
a) Fractures, Faults and Planes of Weakness of Any Kind
b) weathering and Degree of Deconposition
c) Brittleness and Crystalline Nature
d) Grain Size
Further, the range of rippability using Caterpillar equipment may be
increased using different equipment. However, it should be noted that
ripping of higher velocity materials may become totally dependent on the
tijTB available and the economics of the project. Ripping of higher velocity
materials can be achieved but it may become economically infeasible.
OROUNDWATER: No groundwater was encountered during our subsurface
explorations for the referenced reports. Even though no major groundwater
problems are anticipated either during or after constmction of the proposed
development, seasonal groundwater from precipitation runoff may be
encountered within the larger drainage swales during grading for the
developnent. It is suggested that canyon subdrains be installed within
drainage swales which are to receive fill. It should be realized that
groundwater problems may occur after development of a site even where none
were present before development. These are usually minor phenomena and are
often the result of an alteration of the permeability characteristics of the
soil, an alteration in drainage pattems and an increase in irrigation
water. Based on the permeability characteristics of the soil and the
anticipated usage of the development, it is our opinion that any seepage
problems which may occur will be minor in extent. It is further our opinion
that these problems can be most effectively corrected on an individual basis
if and v^en they develop.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
tiKKKAL
In general, no geotechnical conditions were encountered which would preclude
the development of the site as tentatively planned, provided the
recomtendations presented herein are followed.
SCS&T 9021053 I^Y 22, 1990 Page 15
The main geotechnical condition that will affect the proposed site
developnent include hard granitic, netavolcanic, volcanic and hypabyssal
rock, which will require heavy ripping and blasting in order to make the
proposed excavations. It is anticipated that the material generated from the
cuts of the granitic, metavolcanic, volcanic and hypabyssal rock will
contain relatively low amounts of fine soils and large amounts of oversized
material. Since rock fills require a percentage of fine soil, mining of the
site, inporting of fine materials or exporting excess rock may be necessary.
Existing loose surficial deposits such as topsoils, subsoils, younger
alluvium, and any weathered formational materials encountered are considered
unsuitable for the support of settlement sensitive inprovements, and will
require rentjval and/or replacement as conpacted fill. Expansive soils were
also present within the subject area. Where possible, select grading is
recomtended to keep nondetrimentally expansive soils within four feet from
finish pad grade. In areas viiere this is not feasible, special foundation
consideration will be necessary. However, it is anticipated that only minor
amounts of expansive soils will be encountered.
GRADING
SITE PREPARflnCNi Site preparation should begin with the removal of any
existing vegetation and deleterious natter from proposed improvement areas.
Removal of trees should include their root system. Any existing loose
surficial deposits such as topsoils, subsoils, uncompacted fills, and
younger alluvium in areas to be graded should be removed to firm natural
ground. The extent of the topsoils and subsoils will be up to approximately
one to two feet. Firm natural ground is defined as soil having an in-place
density of at least 90 percent. Soils exposed in the bottom of excavations
should be scarified to a depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned and
recompacted to at least 90 percent as determined in accordance with ASTM D
1557-78, Ifethod A or C, The minimum horizontal limits of removal should
include at least five feet beyond the perimeter of the stmctures, and all
areas to receive fill and/or settlement-sensitive inprovements.
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 16
SEUSCT GRADING: Expansive soils should not be allowed within four feet from
finish pad grade. In addition, expansive soils should not be placed within a
distance from the face of fill slopes equal to ten feet or half the slope
height, v*iichever is more. Select material should consist of granular soil
with an expansion index of less than 50. It is recommended that select soils
have relatively low permeability characteristics. In areas undercut for
select grading purposes, the bottom of the excavation should be sloped at a
minimum of three percent away from the center of the stmcture. Minimum
lateral extent of select grading should be five feet away from the perimeter
of settlement-sensitive improvements.
COT/FILL TRANSmON: It is anticipated that a transition line betveen cut
and fill soils nay run through some of the proposed building pads. Due to
the different settlement characteristics of cut and fill soils, constmction
of a stmcture partially on cut and partially on fill is not reconmended.
Based on this, we reconmend that the cut portion of the building pads be
undercut to a depth of at least three feet below finish grade, and the
materials so excavated replaced as uniformly conpacted fill. The minimum
horizontal limits of these recamendations should extend at least five feet
outside of the proposed inprovements.
IMPORTED FILL: All fill soil inported to the site shouid be granular and
should have an ejqansion index of less that 50. Further, import fill should
be free of rock and lunps of soil larger than six inches in dianeter and
should be at least 40 percent finer than 1/4-inch. Any soil to be inported
should be approved by a representative of this office prior to inporting.
RIPPABILITy: It is anticipated that the proposed cuts will require heavy
ripping and blasting. Plates Nunter 22 through 24 contain the results of our
seismic traverses. The results are sunmarized within this report. This
condition will be further evaluated during the preparation of the
geotechnical investigation report. A±iitional seismic traverses will be
performed in areas where deep cuts are proposed.
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 17
OVERSIZED ROCK: Oversized rock is defined as material exceeding six inches
in maximum dinension. It is anticipated that oversized material will be
generated from proposed cuts. Oversized material may bp placed in stmctural
fills as described in Plate Number 14,
SLOPE CONSTRUCTION: The face of all fill slopes should be conpacted by
backrolling with a sheepsfoot conpactor at vertical intervals no greater
than four feet and should be track walked v^en conpleted. Select grading
should be perfomed to limit expansive soils within ten feet from face of
fill slope or one half the slope height, whichever is greater.
Recommendations contained within this report reflect a select grading
condition. All cut slopes should be observed by our engineering geologist to
verify stable geologic conditions. Should any unstable conditions be found,
mitigating measures could be required.
SURFACE nxUVINfiGE: It is reconmended that all surface drainage be directed
away from the stmctures and the top of slopes. Ponding of water should not
be allowed adjacent to the foundations.
SUBDRAINS: A subdrain should be installed in canyon areas to receive fill in
excess of ten feet. A subdrain detail is provided in Plate Number 15.
EARIHHORK: All earthwork and grading contenplated for site preparation
should be accomplished in accordance with the attached Reconmended Grading
Specifications and Special Provisions. All special site preparation
recomnendations presented in the sections above will supersede those in the
Standard Reconmended Cirading Specifications. All entanJatents, stmctural
fill and fill should be conpacted to at least 90% relative conpaction at or
slightly over optimum moisture content. Utility trench backfill within five
feet of the proposed stmctures and beneath asphalt pavements should be
conpacted to minimum of 90% of its naximum dry density. The upper tvelve
inches of subgrade beneath paved areas should be conpacted to 95% of its
maximum dry density. This compaction should be obtained by the paving
contractor just prior to placing the aggregate base naterial and should not
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 18
be part of the nass grading requirements. The maximum dry density of each
soil type should be determined in accordance with ASTM Method D 1557-78,
Method A or C.
SLOPE STABnjTy
Proposed cut and fill slopes should be constmcted at a 2:1 (horizontal to
vertical) or flatter inclination. It is estimated that cut and fill slopes
will extend to a maximum height of about 20 feet and 30 feet, respectively.
It is our opinion that said slopes will possess an adequate factor of safety
with respect to deep seated rotational failure and surficial failure (see
Plate Number 16). The engineering geologist should observe all cut slopes
during grading to ascertain that no adverse conditions are encountered.
FOUNDATIGNS
GENERAL: If the lots are capped with nondetrimentally expansive soils,
conventional shallow foundations nay be utilized for the support of the
proposed stmctures. The footings should have a minimum depth of 12 inches
and 18 inches below lowest adjacent finish pad grade for one-and-two-story
constmction, respectively. A minimum width of 12 inches and 18 inches is
recomtended for continuous and isolated footings, respectively. A bearing
capacity of 2000 psf may be assumed for said footings. This bearing
capacity nay be increased by one-third v^en considering wind and/or seismic
forces. Footings located adjacent to or within slopes should be extended to
a depth such that a minimum distance of six feet and seven feet exist
between the footing and the face of cut slopes or fill slopes, respectively.
Retaining walls in similar conditions should be individually revieved by
this office. If it is found to be unfeasible to cap the lots with
nondetrinentally expansive soils as reconmended, special foundation and slab
design will be necessary. This generally consists of deepened and more
heavily reinforced footings, thicker, more heavily reinforced slabs.
Reconnendations for expansive soil conditions will be provided after site
grading when the expansion index and depth of the prevailing foundation
soils are known.
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 19
REINPOTCEMENT: Both exterior and interior continuous footings should be
reinforced with at least one No. 4 bar positioned near the bottom of the
footing and one No. 4 bar positioned near the top of the footing. This
reinforcement is based on soil characteristics and is not intended to be in
lieu of reinforcenent necessary to satisfy stmctural considerations. If
expansive soils exist within four feet of finish grade, additional
reinforcing will be necessary.
INTERIOR CONCRETE ON-GRADE SLABS: If the pads are capped with
nondetrinentally expansive soils, concrete on-grade slabs should have a
thickness of four inches and be reinforced with at least No. 3 reinforcing
bars placed at 36 inches on center each way. Slab reinforcement should be
placed near the middle of the slab. As an altemative, the slab reinforcing
nay consist of 6"x6"-W1.4xW1.4 (6'x6"-10/10) welded wire mesh. However, it
should be realized that it is difficult to maintain the proper position of
wire mesh during placement of the concrete. A four-inch-thick layer of
clean, coarse sand or cmshed rock should be placed under the slab. This
layer should consist of material having 100 percent passing the
one-half-inch screen; no nore than ten percent passing sieve #100 and no
more than five percent passing sieve #200. Where moisture-sensitive floor
coverings are planned, the sand or rock should be overlain by a visqueen
moisture barrier and a two-inch-thick layer of sand or silty sand should be
provided above the visqueen to allow proper concrete curing.
EEEERIOR SLflBS-aN-a»LE: For nonexpansive soil conditions, exterior slabs
should have a minimum thickness of four inches. Walks or slabs five feet in
width should be reinforced with 6"x6"-W1.4xW1.4 (6"x6 "-10/10) velded wire
mesh and provided with weakened plane joints. Any slabs between five and ten
feet should be provided with longitudinal weakened plane joints at the
center lines. Slabs exceeding ten feet in width should be provided with a
weakened plane joint located three feet inside the exterior perimeter as
indicated on attached Plate Number 17. Both traverse and longitudinal
weakened plane joints should be constmcted as detailed in Plate Nunter 17.
Exterior slabs adjacent to doors and garage openings should be connected to
the footings by dowels consisting of No. 3 reinforcing bars placed at
24-inch intervals extending 18 inches into the footing and the slab.
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 20
SPECIAL LOTS: Special lots are defined as lots underlain by fill with
differential thickness in excess of ten feet. The following increased
foundation reconmendations should be utilized for said lots. Footings
should be reinforced with two Nb. 4 bars positioned near the bottom of the
footing and two No. 4 bars positioned near the top of the footing. Concrete
on grade slabs should be reinforced with at least No. 3 reinforcing bars
placed at 18 inches on center each way. Lots with fill differentials in
excess of thirty feet should be evaluated on an individual basis.
EXPANSIVE CHARMnERISTICS: Metavolcanic rock generally weathers to a clayey
subsoil, and its presence within four feet of finish pad grade will require
special site preparation and/or foundation consideration.
SETTLEMENT CHZVP/CIERISTICS: The anticipated total and/or differential
settlements for the proposed stmctures may be considered to be within
tolerable limits provided the reconmendations presented in this report are
followed. It should be recognized that minor hairline cracks on concrete due
to shrinkage of constmction materials or redistribution of stresses are
normal and may be anticipated.
EAREH RETAINING WALLS
PASSIVE PRESSURE: The passive pressure for the prevailing soil conditions
may be considered to be 450 pounds per square foot per foot of depth up to a
maximum of 2000 psf. This pressure may be increased one-third for seisndc
loading. The coefficient of friction for concrete to soil may be assuned to
be 0.35 for the resistance to lateral movement. When combining frictional
and passive resistance, the former should be reduced by one-third. The upper
12 inches of exterior retaining wall footings should not be included in
passive pressure calculations v^en landscaping abuts the bottom of the wall.
ACTIVE PRESSURE: The active soil pressure for the design of unrestrained
earth retaining stmctures with level backfills may be assumed to be
equivalent to the pressure of a fluid veighing 35 pounds per cubic foot. For
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 21
2:1 (horizontal to vertical) sloping backfills, 14 pcf should be added to
the preceding values. These pressures do not consider any surcharge. If any
are anticipated, this office should be contacted for the necessary increase
in soil pressure. This value assumes a drained backfill condition.
Waterproofing details should be provided by the project architect. A
subdrain detail is provided on the attached Plate Number 18.
BACKFILL: All backfill soils should be conpacted to at least 90% relative
conpaction. Expansive or clayey soils should not be used for backfill
material. The wall should not be backfilled until the masonry has reached
an adequate strength.
FICIOR OF SAFETY: The above values, with the exception of the allowable
soil bearing pressure, do not include a factor of safety. .?^ropriate
factors of safety should be incorporated into the design to prevent the
walls from overtximing and sliding.
LIMITKTIONS
REVIEW, OBSERVKTICK AND "USSl'JJWS
The reconnendations presented in this report are contingent upon our review
of final plans and specifications. Such plans and specifications shouid be
made available to the geotechnical engineer and engineering geologist so
that they may review and verify their conpliance with this report and with
Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code.
It is recomiended that Southem Califomia Soil & Testing, Inc. be retained
to provide continuous soil engineering seirvices during the earthwork
operations. This is to verify compliance with the design concepts,
specifications or reconmendations and to allow design changes in the event
that sx±)surface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to start of
constmction.
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 22
UNiPORMrry OF OONDITIONS
The reconnendations and opinions expressed in this report reflect our best
estimate of the project requirements based on an evaluation of the
subsurface soil conditions encountered at the subsurface exploration
locations and on the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate
appreciably from those encountered. It should be recognized that the
perfomance of the foundations and/or cut and fill slopes may be influenced
by undisclosed or unforeseen variations in the soil conditions that may
occur in the intermediate and unexplored areas. Any unusual conditions not
covered in this report that may be encountered during site development
should be brought to the attention of the geotechnical engineer so that he
may make modifications if necessary.
CHSNGE IN SCOPE
This office should be advised of any changes in the project scope or
proposed site grading so that we may determine if the recommendations
contained herein are appropriate. This should be verified in writing or
modified by a written addendum.
TIME LIMETflTICNS
The findings of this report are valid as of this date. Changes in the
condition of a property can, however, occur with the passage of time,
v^ther they be due to natural processes or the work of man on this or
adjacent properties. In addition, changes in the Standards-of-Practice
and/or Government Codes nay occur. Due to such changes, the findings of
this report may be invalidated wholly or in peurt by changes beyond our
contml. Therefore, this report should not be relied upon after a period of
two years without a review by us verifying the suitability of the
conclusions and reconnendations.
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 23
PROFESSIONAL STANDARD
In the performance of our professional services, we comply with that level
of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of our profession
currently practicing under similar conditions and in the sane locality. The
client recognizes that subsurface conditions may vary from those encountered
at the locations where our trenches, surveys, and explorations are made, and
that our data, interpretations, and reconmendations are based solely on the
information obtained by us. We will be responsible for those data,
interpretations, and reconnendations, but shall not be responsible for the
interpretations by others of the information developed. Our seirvices
consist of professional consultation and observation only, and no warranty
of any kind whatsoever, express or implied, is made or intended in
connection with the work performed or to be performed by us, or by our
proposal for consulting or other services, or by our fumishing of oral or
written reports or findings.
CLIENT'S RESPONSIBILITy
It is the responsibility of Lyon Communities Incorporated, or their
representatives to ensure that the information and reconmendations contained
herein are brought to the attention of the stmctural engineer and architect
for the project and incorporated into the project's plans and
specifications. It is further their responsibility to take the necessary
measures to insure that the contractor and his subcontractors carry out such
reconnendations during constmction.
FIELD EXPLDRKTIONS
Six subsurface trench explorations vere made at the locations indicated on
the attached Plate Nunter IA and IB and IC on Decenter 16 and 21, 1982,
adjacent to or within the subject site (see Plates Number 3 through 7). In
addition. Plates Nunter 8 through 10 from the referenced reports contain
additional trench excavations made December 15, 1982, of similar soils
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 24
within the subject subdivision. These explorations consisted of trenches dug
by the neans of a backhoe. Three seismic traverses were also performed
January 11, 1983, and one April 14, 1973. The field work was conducted under
the observation of our engineering geology personnel. The results are shown
on Plates Nunter 22 through 24.
The soils are descrited in accordance with the Unified Soils Classification
System as illustrated on the attached siitplified chart on Plate 2. In
addition, a verbal textural description, the wet color, the apparent
moisture and the density or consistency are provided. The density of
granular soils is given as either very loose, loose, medium dense, dense or
very dense. The consistency of silts or clays is given as either very soft,
soft, medium stiff, stiff, very stiff, or hard.
LABORATORy TESTING
Laboratory tests were perfomed in accordance with the generally accepted
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) test methods or suggested
procedures. A brief description of the tests perfomed is presented below:
a) CLASSIFICKTION: Field classifications were verified in the
laboratory by visual examination. The final soil classifications
are in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System.
b) lOISIURE-COISITy: In-place moisture contents and dry densities
were determined for representative soil samples. This information
was an aid to classification and permitted recognition of
variations in material consistency with depth. The dry unit
weight is determined in pounds per cubic foot, and the in-place
moisture content is determined as a percentage of the soil's dry
weight. The results are sunmarized in the trench logs.
c) GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION: The grain size distribution vras
determined for representative sanples of the native soils in
accordance with ASTM D422. The results of these tests are
presented on Plate Number 11.
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Page 25
d) COMPACTION TEST: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture
content of typical soils vere determined in the laboratory in
accordance with ASIM Standard Test D-1557-78, Method A. The
results of these tests are presented on the attached Plate Number
12.
e) EXPANSION TEST: The expansive potential of clayey soils was
determined in accordance with the following test procedure and
the results of these tests appear on Plate Nunter 12.
Allow the triimed, undisturbed or remolded sanple
to air dry to a constant moisture content, at a
temperature of 100 degrees F. Place the dried
sanple in the consolidometer and allow to compress
under a load of 150 psf. Allow moisture to contact
the sanple and measure its expansion from an air
dried to saturated condition.
f) DIRECT SHEAR TESTS: Direct shear tests vere perfomed to
determine the failure envelope based on yield shear strength.
The shear box was designed to accommodate a sample having a
dianeter of 2.375 inches or 2.50 inches and a heiqht of 1.0 inch.
Samples vere tested at different vertical loads and a saturated
moisture content. The shear stress was applied at a constant
rate of strain of approximately 0.05 inches per minute. The
average shear strength values for granitic and metavolcanic rock
are presented on attached Plate Number 13.
INSERT
DRAWINGS
HERE
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LEGEND
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUP SYMBOL
Sieve size.
CLEAN GRAVELS
I. COARSE GRAINED, more than naif
of material is 1arger tnan
No. 200
GRAVELS
More tnan naif of
coarse fraction is
larger than No. 4
sieve size but
smaller tnan 3".
GRAVELS WITH FINES
(Appreciable amount
of fines)
SANDS
More tnan naif of
coarse fraction is
smaller tnan No. 4
sieve size.
:LEAN SANOS
GW
GP
GM
GC
SW
SP
SANDS WITH FINES SM
(Appreciable amount
of fines) SC
II. FINE GRAINED, more than
naif of material is sma Her
than No. 200 sieve size.
SILTS AND CLAYS
Liquid Limit
less than 50
SILTS AND CLAYS
Liquid Limit
greater than 50
ML
CL
OL
MH
CH
OH
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT
-Y?::AL NAMES
Well gradefi gravels, gravel-
sand mixtures, little or no
fines.
Poorly graoed gravels, gravel
sand mixtures, little or no
fines.
Silty gravels, poorly graded
gravel-sano-silt mixtures.
Clayey gravels, poorly
graded gravel-sand, clay
mixtures.
Well graded sand, gravelly
sands, little or no fines.
Poorly graced sands, gravelly
sands, little or no fines.
Silty sands, poorly graded
sand and silty mixtures.
Clayey sands, poorly graded
sand and clay mixtures.
Inorganic silts and very
fine sands, rocic flour, sandy
silt or clayey-silt-sand
mixtures witn slight plas-
ticity.
Inorganic clays of low to
medium plasticity, gravelly
clays, sandy clays, silty
clays, lean clays.
Organic silts and organic
silty clays or low plasticity.
Inorganic silts, micaceous
or diatomaceous fine sandy
or silty soils, elastic
silts.
Inorganic clays of high
plasticity, fat clays.
Organic clays of medium
to high plasticity.
Peat and other highly
organic soils.
US
Water level at time of excavation
or as indicated
Undisturbed, driven ring sample
or tube sample
CK — Undisturbed chunk sample
BG — Bulk sample
SP — Standard penetration sample
y\ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOIL A TESTINQ, INC.
CALAVERA HEIGHTS-VILLAGE U
BY: KAR
JOB NUMBER: 9021053
DATE: 5-15-90
Plate No. 2
Class
TRENCH .\'0. TT-A<i
Description
7,
SM/
SC
SO/
CL
Brown, Moist, Mediuin Dense, Clayey Silty
Sand (Topsoil)
Yellow-brown, Moist, Stiff, Sandy Clay
SM Yellow-brown and Gray-brown, Moist, Dense
to Very Dense, Gravely Silty Sand
(Granite Rock)
Trench Ended at 4 Feet
.--^ BOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
^^SL^ SOIL & TESTINQ , INC.
IAN OiraO, CALiranNIA
CALVERA HEIGHTS-VILLAGE U
BY
JOB NO.
CRB
9021053
DATE
12-If;-.q 2
Plate No. 3
TRENCH NO. TT-48
Class Description
Z
/
I
SM
:L
Brown, Moist, Mediuin Dense, Silty
Sand (Topsoil)
Gray-brown, Moist, Stiff, Sandy Clay
(Weathered Rock)
Yellow-brown and Gray-brown, Moist, Dense
to Very Dense, Silty Sand
(Granitic and Metavolcanic Rock)
Trench Ended at 5 Feet
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOIL & TESTING , INC.
•••o nivanoALB BTRMT
•AN oiaao, CAkiFonNiA ••iao
CALAVERA HEIGHTS-VILLAGE U
BY CRB
JOB NO. 9021053
OATE 12-21-82
Plate No.
I
Class
SM
TRENCH NO. TT-50
Description
Gray-brown, Moist, Dense to Very Dense,
Silty Sand (Decomposed Granite)
Trench Ended at 4 Feet
. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
X SOIL & TESTING , INC.
•AN oiaoa. CALiKHNiA ••^•a
CALAVERA HEIGHTS-VILLAGE U
BY
CRB
OATE
12-21-82 JOB NO. ~
9021053 Plate Mo. 6
TRENCH NO.
Class Description
/
SM
CL
SM
Brown, Moist, Medium Dense, Silty Sand
(Topsoil)
ray-brown, r-ioist, btitt, tlandy Ciay
(Weathered Rock)
Yellow-brown and Gray-brown, Moist, Dense
to Very Dense, Silty Sand (Granitic and
Metavolcanic Rock)
Trench Ended at 3 Feet
I
I
SOUTHBRN CALIFORNIA
•OIL & TESTING, INC. CALAVERA HEIGHTS-VILLAGE U
BY
JOB NO.
CRB
9021053
OATE 12-21-82
Plate No "5
Class
•i)
•61
7
SM/
^C
SM
TRENCH NO. TV-51
Description
Red-brown, Moist, Medium Dense, Clayey
Silty Sand (Topsoil)
Dark Gray, Moist, Dense to Very Dense,
Sandy Gravel (Granitic Rock)
Refusal at 1.5 Feet
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOIL & TESTING , INC.
•••o RivanoACB •TnaaT
• AN OIBOa, CAi.ll>aRNIA ••IBO
CALAVERA HEIGHTS-VILLAGE U
BY CRB
JOB NO. 9021053
OATE 12-21-82
Plate iNu.
r
I TRENCH NUMBER
< u
—1 15 u.
1 1 s 1 in
< 1
1 —. U 1 • EECi=;if="riCN
SM/Sq RED BROWN, CLAYEY SILTY
SAND (TOPSOIL)
•11
iii =
< tn a. —
X O
< 2
Z
Ul oc < a.
Q. CO z o o
z
c
o
z
Ui a
>-c
Q
IT
3 t-
W Z
CO Ui
1 z 2 o
(J
Ui
oc
<
a. S o u
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOIL A TESTING,INC.
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG
LOGGED BY:
CRB
JOB NUMBER '• 9021053
DATE LOGGED: 12-15-82
Plate No. 8
z t
TRENCH NUMBER -o
15
I
u. 1 5i_EVATlC: "sl
•ESC=i : N
- X
...
X ^ < tn a. — a. O
< Z
= z C
JJ oJ CO
ac
a. a. <
V)
tii
2
O
o
O
tfl
z _
Ui —
>
X
a
Oi il
X
3
I- Z
1 ^
2 O
Ui Q > —
< <
-< a.
•= o
BAG^M/SC
c:-: I
RED BROWN. CLAYEY SILTY
SAND (TOPSOIL)
MOIST MEDIUM
DENSE
SM
CK
CK
YELLOW BROWN, SILTY SAND
(DECOMPOSED GRANITE)
MOIST DENSE TO
VERY DENSE
118.2 10.8
TRENCH ENDED AT 8'
TRENCH NUMBER TO-7
CK
RED BROWN. SILTY SAND
(TOPSOIL)
MOIST MEDIUM
DENSE —
ML
SM
N
DARK GRAY, GRAVELY SILTY
SAND (DECOMPOSED GRANITE)
MOIST DENSE TO
VERY DENSE —
\
i
1
TRENCH ENDED AT 2'
—
J
^ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG
rr SOIL A TESTING,INC. LOGGED BY: „„„
CRB
DATE LOGGED: 12-15-82 rr SOIL A TESTING,INC.
JOB NUMBER: go2i053 Plate No. 9
r 1 f 'TRENCH NUMBER
~ : - : < I
I ^ I 5 ^ ; E_5VAT;-NJ
- I - I 71 L
Q. I 5 I ,^ f— < I < t
-I G I
< cn
Q. —
i o
• EEC=ilPTlCN
E < a a. <
— I—
X
O
CO
z _
Ui —
>
X
a
Ui
CO
O
s
z o a
Ui
>
Ui
E
Z
o
o < a 2 o
u
-
SM/ I RED BROWN, CLAYEY SILTY
SC I SAND (TOPSOIL)
MOIST MEDIUM
DENSE
GM
\-BAGI
GRAY, SANDY GRAVEL
(METAVOLCANIC ROCK) MOIST DENSE TO
VERY DENSE
— TRENCH ENDED AT 5' —
1 TRENCH NUMBER TQ-9 -
SM/
SC
RED BROWN, CLAYEY SILTY
SAND (TOPSOIL)
MOIST MEDIUM
DENSE —
CL GRAY BROWN, SANDY CLAY
(WEATHERED DECOMPOSED
GRANITE)
MOIST STIFF — GRAY BROWN, SANDY CLAY
(WEATHERED DECOMPOSED
GRANITE)
CK
SM YELLOW BROWN, SILTY SAND
(DECOMPOSED GRANITE)
MOIST DENSE TO
VERY DENSE 128.1 10.1 —
-si BAG
—
6
TRENCH ENDED AT 5'
1 ~
—
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG
SOIL A TESTING,INC. LOGGED BY: DATE LOGGED: 12-15-82 SOIL A TESTING,INC.
JOB NUMBER: 9021053 Plate No-. 10
Q 33 >
Z
N
m
2
CD c H
o z
sf 9
o ro
I—" o tn CO
5a
o
mO
pa •a
z
>
n > |—
m
36
100
90
ao
70
I 60
so
S 40
t 30
20
10
IOOO
US Standard Sieves
,- Kz" '4" •'<) •20 •40 iHiO
21
Hydrometer
(Minutes)
I 2 S JO IOO
»e 74 S « 1 i
180
DO
eo
70
10' tu
99 I i I « i 2
^ tt
•I.
20 —
U
1
rt
n>
o I
00
cn
CO
I
PARTICLE SIZE LIMITS
1
BOULDER! COBBLES
1
GRAVEL
Coorit Fint
(12 in ) 3 in. 3/4 in.
U. S.
Tq-2 @ 3'
TQ-2 @ 4'-5'
TQ-8 0 4'-5'
SANO
Coorit Mfdium Fina
SILT OR CLAY
No.4 No.lO
STANDARD
No.40
SIEVE
No.200
SIZE
}4AXiyUli DENSITY & OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT
,STM 01557-73 METHOD A
.AMP c DESCRiP'lON
Maximum
Densit y
(pet)
Optimum
Moisture
Cont (•/.)
-3' 1 Yellow Brown, Silty Gravelly Sand 114.8 13.8
iU-2 a 2 j Green Brown, Sandy Silty Clay 114.0 15.0
-2 0 4 -5' j Yellow/Reddish Brown, Silty Sand 112.6 14.8
|TQ-8 @ 3 ' -4' j Grey, Silty Sandy Gravel 128.4 11.7
EXPANSION TEST RESULTS
1 SAMPLE TQ-Z LJ 2'-3' TQ-2 (3 3'-4'
CONDITION Remolded 'i Remolded
1 NllTIAL M.C. (•/.) 1 1(3.1 ' 14.8 ! 1 '
INITIAL lEMSITY tPCFl 101.3 101.8 | j
• INAL M.C. (•/.) 30.5 26.0
1 ^'ORMAL STRESS CPSF) 150 150
1"
-XPANSION %
15.0 0
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOIL A TESTING, INC.
CALAVERA HEIGHTS-VILLAGE
BY: KAR
JOB NUMBER 9021053
DATE: 1-10-84
Plate No, 12
I
0)
UJ
£
)-
c
<
UJ
X
(A
DIRECT SHEAR SUMMARY
1 2
2M L 2L
NORMAL STRESS, KSF
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION
ANQLE OP INTERNAL
FRICTION (•)
COHESION INTERCEPT
(psf)
TQ-8(33'-4' Remolded to 90% 38 200
CALAVERA HEIGHl "S-VILLAGE
•T: KAR DATE: 5-01-90
JOB NUMBCR: 9021053 Plate No. 13
SOUTHBRN CALIFORNiA
SOiL A TESTING,INC.
o
n
01
H
O
z
o
(A o c
H
Z
PI
o
>
r
o
m a
CO o ro
I—• o cn
CO
Ol
rf
ID
>
H m
cn
I ' cn
I
CO
o
3>
m
TO
m
t—I tn 3: -I
c/1
I
cn
jm:fiSIZ£_BQClL_DISPQSAL_
( Slruclurul Soil" Rock Fill )
P/L
_ ^ min. ZONE D I
Q
. 12'
'min. •
mm
COi^tCttd toll rill tMII CMlKlR tt l«<lt 40 ptrctnt
tall itiM M*tlM 3/4.Uck «ltt«, (b| •tliht), tnd
k« coa^tct«4 U ccctrdMU xlU MMirictiloni for
itr«ct«r«l rill.
Itckt avar 4 rati U MIIMI 4laMflon not ptralttld
IN rill.
{OK «:
lUNC I:
IONC C:
IONC 0:
HUM
hu rock frtgncnti over i Incnci In qrtHtM
pitred In
Comfnam toll nil.
dUMAtloA.
RiKks 2 lo 4 feet In aiiiliiiui* diMefltlon
•:iMP4ClCd toll rill confurMlnf to IONC A.
toKki i Inchet lo ? <cel In KialiKM diaenilon unWomly dlvlrlbu-
led tn4 Mtll iptceii In coadicled toll nil tonforaU) le IOU «.
Nequired for tll ealvlln) tlopet (:| «nd tieeptr, 901 alnlmm
co^iMtlon. IONC A. I, or C Mtlcrltl aiy bc uted for lONt 0.
NATURAL
3ROUND
BENCHING REMOVE
UNSUITABLE
MATERIAL
SUBDRAIN TRENCH: SEE DETAIL AAB
ETAIL A
FILTER MATERIAL
e CUBIC FEET/FOOT
I
i
I
I
FILTER MATERIAL SHALL BE CLASS 2
PERMEABLE MATERIAL PER STATE OF
CALIFORNIA STANDARD
SPECIFICATIONS, AND APPROVED
ALTERNATE. CLASS 2 FILTER MATERIAL
SHOULD COMPLY WITH THE
FOLLOWINQ LIMITS
OETAIL
A-1
PERFORATED
PIPE 4' «
MINIMUM
DETAIL
A-2
PERFORATED PIPE SURROUNDED
WITH FILTER MATERIAL
SIEVE SIZE
1
3/4
3/8
No. 4
Ho. a
No. 30
No. 60
No. 200
% PASSINQ
100
90-100
40-100
28-40
18-33
5-16
0-7
O-S
ETAIL B DETAIL OF CANVON SUBDRAIN TERMINAL
« MIN OVERLAP DESIQN FINISH
QRADE
FILTER
FABRIC MIRAFI 140
OR
APPROVED
EOUIVALENT)
"TTTT —r-— .MP
•.io 1 <
ETAIL \ 1 1/2 MAX QRAVEL OR / DETAIL
B-1 ^ APPROVED EOUIVALENT V-2
6 CUBIC FEET/FOOT
1/2"QRAVEL WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC
'^'JBDRAIN INSTALLATION:SUBDRAiN PIPE SHALLBE INSTALLED WITH
PERFORATIONS DOWN
ISUBDRAIN PIPE'-SUBDRAIN PIPE SHALL BE PVC OR ABS, TYPE SDR 35 FOR FILLS
UP TO 35 FEET DEEP, OR, TYPE SDR 21 FOR FILLS UP TO 100 FEET DEEP
/X SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CALAVERA HEIGHTS-VILLAGE
SOIL A TESTING, INC. BY: KAR DATE: 5-15-90 SOIL A TESTING, INC.
JOB NUMBER: 9021053 Plate No. 15 I
I
i
I
I
SLOPE STABILITY CALCULATIONS
Janbu's Simolified Slooe Stabilitv Method
Assume Homogeneous Strength Parameters througnout the slooe
^ C(psf) W.(pcf) Incl. H (ft)
38 200 130 2:1 30 2.3
Metavolcanic &
Granitic Rock *
:ut & Fill Slopes
* Average Shear Strength Values
VJhere: ,3'
C
w
s
H
FS
Angle of Internal Friction
Cohesion (psf)
Unit weight of Soil (pcf)
Height of Slope (ft)
Factor of Safety
yv SOUTHBRN CALIFORNIA CALAVERA HEIGHTS - VILLAGE
{nr^ SOIL A TESTING,INC. BV: KAR DATE: 5-15-90 {nr^ SOIL A TESTING,INC.
JOB NUMBER: 9021053 Plate No. 16
TRANSVERSE
WEAKENED
PLANE JOINTS
Q' ON CENTER
(MAXIMUM)
SLABS IN EXCESS OF
10 FEET IN WIDTH
PLAN
NO SCALE
w/2 w/2 i
» »
SLABS' 5 TO 10
FEET IN WIDTH
1
n TOOLED JOINT
r/2
(6'X6-.10/10) WELDED
WIRE MESH
\ \
WEAKENED PLANE JOINT DETAIL
NO SCALE
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOIL 1 TESTING, INC.
CALAVERA HEIGHTS-VILLAGE
BYI KAR-
9021053
DATE... 5-15-90
Plate No. 1 7
WATERPROOF BACK OF WALL PER
ARCHITECTS SPECIFICATIONS
3/4 INCH CRUSHED ROCK OR
MARIDRAIN MOO OR EQUIVALENT
QEOFABRIC BETWEEN ROCK AND SOIL
4" DIAMETER PERFORATED PIPE
HOUSE ON QRADE SLAB
i
I
HOUSE RETAINING WALL
SUBDRAIN DETAIL
NO SCALE
SOUTHBRN CALIFORNIA CALAVERA HEIGHTS-VILLAGE U
^^t^ SOIL A TESTING, INC. BV: KAR DATE: 5-15-90 ^^t^ SOIL A TESTING, INC.
JOB NUMBER: 9021053 Plate No. 18
Salamic Velocity
•••t POT •• • 1000
OSL
CATERPILLAR
PERFORMANCE HANDBOOK
Edition 17
October 1986
^0 11 12 13 14 15
TOPSOIL
CLAY
IGNEOUS ROCKS
QRANITE
3ABALT
SEDIMENTARY ROCKS
SHALE
SANDSTONE
SILTSTONE
CLAYSTONE
CONOLOMERATE
METAMORPHIC ROCKS
SCHIST
SLATE
yy 1/
y \y
i y
z TTT
1.'" I
RIPPABLE MARaiNAL L NON-RIPPABLE L
DSL Ripper Performance
• Multl or Single Shank No. 8 Ripper
• Estimated by Seismic Wave Velocities
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOIL & TESTING, INC.
CALAVERA HEIGHTS-VILLAGE
BY: KAR
JOB NUMBER: 9021053
DATE: 5-15-90
Plate No. 19
DSL
CATERPILLAR
PERFORMANCE HANDBOOK
Edition 17
October 1986
Salamic Velocity
'••I Pmr »maamm u lOOO
10 n 12 13 14 15 TOPSOIL
CLAY
IGNEOUS ROCKS
aHANITE
3ASALT
SEDIMENTARY ROCKS
3HALE
SANDSTONE
SILTSTONE
CLAYSTONE
CONOLOMERATE
METAMORPHIC ROCKS
SCHIST
SLATE
il
i K \y I
RIPPABLE MARQINAL L NON-RIPPABLE L
D9L Ripper Performance
• Multi or Single Shank No. 9 Ripper
• Estimated by Seismic Wave Velocities
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOIL 3. TESTING, INC.
CALAVERA HEIGHTS-VILLAGE
BY: KAR
JOB NUMBER; 9021053
DATE: 5-15-90
Plate No. 20
f
I
I
I
CATERPILLAR
PERFORMANCE HANDBOOK
Edition 17
October 1986
jolamic Velocity
"at Pm nmmmmm • iooo
I
I
I
I
D1 1 N Ripper Performance
o Multl or Single Shank No. 9 Ripper
• Estimated by Seismic Wave Velocities
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
^ ^ SOIL 1-TESTING, INC.
CALAVERA HEIGHTS-VILLAGE
JOB NUMBER; 9021053
f RIPPABILITY NDEX
NO RIPPING SOFT MEDIUM HARD BLASTING
T |"l"|"r'|" r . p-j 1 ' I ' I'
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 700O 8000 9000 10000
VELOCITY, FT/SEC.
RESULTS
TRAVERSE NO.
secPHi
NOTE.* THE ABOVE RESULTS ATTEMPT TO SHOW DEPTHS TO HORIZONS OF VARYING
DENSITY INDIFFERENT LOCATIONS OVER THE STUCYAREA, SEISMIC TRAVERSE
NUMBERS REFER TO LOCATIONS PIDTED ON ATTACHED PLANS.
THE*RIPPABIUTY INDEX'lS A MODIFICATION OF CHARTS BY THE CATERPILLAR
CO. AND ARTICLE IN 'ROADS AND STREETS; SEPT^ 1967.
SOUTHEniM CALIFOniMIA
SOIL & TESTIMB LAB, INC.
• ••O RIVEPOAl.* BTnEET
•AN OIBOO, CALIFOPNIA aaiso
CALAVERA HEIGHTS-VILLAGE U
SEISMIC RESULTS BY DBA
JOB NO. 9021053
DATE 1-11-83
Plate No. 22
RIPPABILITY INDEX
NO RIPPING SOFT MEDIUM HARD BLASTING
6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
VELOCITY, FT/SEC
RESULTS
T:^ AVERSE NO.
33PHi a I b —r~
X ai
Q
NOTE: THE ABOVE RESULTS ATTEMPT TO SHOW DEPTHS TO HORIZONS OF VARYING
DENSITY INDIFFERENT LOCATlC.*;S C. THE STUCY AREA. SEISMIC TRAVERSE
NUMBERS ^ REFER TO LOCATIO^.S r iO: ZD ON ATTACHED PLANS.
T«'RIPPABIUTY INDEX'lS A MCDIFICATION OF CHARTS BY THE CATERPILLAR
CO. ANO ARTICLE IN 'ROADS A:;D STrZETS' SEPT. 1967.
i
I
SOUTHEHN CALIFO-rjrA
SOIL & TESTIMG LAE . .. ^
•••a RivanoALE smEEv
BAN OIBOO, CAt-IPOniMIA BS. ..z:
CALAVERA HEIGHTS-VILLAGE U
SEISMIC RESULTS DBA
JOB Na 9Q21Q53
DATE 1-11-83
Plate No. 23
RIPPABILITY NDEX
NO RIPPING SOFT MEDIUM HARD BLASTING
. •'^-i—'—r"^—r ,
1000 2000 3000 400O 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
VELOCITY, FT/ SEC.
RESULTS
TRAVERSE NO.
S73-5 S73-6 S73-8 S73-9 S73-lCS73-l;S73-l^S73-l; S73-l(
GEDPH, IE a |&
0.
IU
Q
ft
MJ
I I
1
NOTE: THE ABOVE RESULTS ATTEMPT TO SHOW DEPTHS TO HORIZONS OF VARYING
DENSITY IN DIFFERENT LOCATIONS OVER THE STUW AREA. SEISMIC TRAVERSE
NUMBERS REFER TO LOCATIONS PIOTED ON ATTACHED PtANS.
THE'RIPRABIUTY INDEX'lS A MODIFICATION OF CHARTS BY THE CATERRLLAR
CO. AND ARTICLE IN 'ROADS AND STREETS; SEPT 1967.
SOUTHERN CAUFORNIA USTINQ
LABORATORY. INC
eaao RIVERDALE intccr
CAUFORNIA 92120 134
CALAVERA HEIGHTS-VILLAGE U
SEISMIC RESULTS DBA
JOB Na 9021053
BATE 4-14-73
Plate No. 24
CALAVERA HEICSfTS VTLLflS: U, TAMARACK AVEHUE AND COLLEGE BOULEVARD, CARTSBAD
RBCXHMENDED GRADING SPECIFICKTIONS - (3NERAL PROVISICNS
GENERAL INHNr
The intent of these specifications is to establish procedures for clearing,
conpacting natural ground, preparing areas to be filled, and placing and
compacting fill soils to the lines and grades shown on the accepted plans.
The reconitEndations contained in the preliminary geotechnical investigation
report and/or the attached Special Provisions are a part of the Recaimended
Grading Specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained
hereinafter in the case of conflict. These specifications shall only be
used in conjunction with the geotechnical report for which they are a part.
No deviation from these specifications will be allowed, except where
specified in the geotechnical report or in other written communication
signed by the Geotechnical Engineer.
OBSERVAnCN AIO lESTING
Southern California Soil and Testing, Inc., shall be retained as the
Geotechnical Engineer to observe and test the earthwork in accordance with
these specifications. It will be necessary that the Geotechnical Engineer
or his representative provide adequate observation so that he may provide
his opinion as to VN^iether or not the vrork was accomplished as specified. It
shall be the responsibility of the contractor to assist the Geotechnical
Engineer and to keep him appraised of work schedules, changes and new
inforniation and data so that he may provide these opinions. In the event
that any unusual conditions not covered by the special provisions or
preliminary geotechnical report are encountered during the grading
operations, the Geotechnical Engineer shall be contacted for further
reconnendations.
(R-9/89)
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Appendix, Page 2
If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Engineer, substandard conditions are
encountered, such as questionable or unsuitable soil, unacceptable moisture
content, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc.; construction should
be stopped until the conditions are remedied or corrected or he shall
reconmend rejection of this vork.
Tests used to determine the degree of conpaction should be performed in
accordance with the following American Society for Testing and Materials
test methods:
Maximum Density & Optimum Maisture Content - ASTM D-1557-78.
Density of Soil In-Place - ASTM D-1556-64 or ASTM D-2922.
All densities shall be expressed in terms of Relative Compaction as
determined by the foregoing ASTM testing procedures.
PREPARATION OF AREAS TO RECEIVE FILL
All vegetation, brush and debris derived from clearing operations shall
be removed, and legally disposed of. All areas disturbed by site grading
should be left in a neat and finished appearance, free from unsightly
debris.
After clearing or benching the natural ground, the areas to be filled shall
be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, brought to the proper moisture content,
conpacted and tested for the specified minimum degree of conpaction. All
loose soils in excess of 6 inches thick should be removed to firm natural
ground vMch is defined as natural soils v^ich possesses an in-situ density
of at least 90% of its maximum dry density.
(R-9/89)
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Appendix, Page 3
When the slope of the natural ground receiving fill exceeds 20% (5
horizontal units to 1 vertical unit), the original ground shall be stepped
or benched. Benches shall be cut to a firm competent formational soils. The
lower bench shall be at least 10 feet wide or 1-1/2 times the the equipment
width whichever is greater and shall be sloped back into the hillside at a
gradient of not less than two (2) percent. All other benches should be at
least 6 feet wide. The horizontal portion of each bench shall be conpacted
prior to receiving fill as specified herein for conpacted natural ground.
Ground slopes flatter than 20% shall be benched when considered necessary by
the Geotechnical Engineer.
Any abandoned buried structures encountered during grading operations must
be totally removed. All underground utilities to be abandoned beneath any
proposed structure should be removed from within 10 feet of the structure
and properly capped off. The resulting depressions from the above described
procedures should be backfilled with acceptable soil that is compacted to
the requirements of the Geotechnical Engineer. This includes, but is not
limited to, septic tanks, fuel tanks, sewer lines or leach lines, storm
drains and water lines. Any buried structures or utilities not to be
abandoned should be brought to the attention of the Geotechnical Engineer
so that he may determine if any special reccnTtendation will be necessary.
All water wells v^ich will be abandoned should be backfilled and capped in
accordance to the requirenents set forth by the Geotechnical Engineer. The
top of the cap should be at least 4 feet below finish grade or 3 feet below
the bottom of footing whichever is greater. The type of cap will depend on
the diameter of the well and should be determined by the Geotechnical
Engineer and/or a qualified Structvural Engineer.
(R-9/89)
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Appendix, Page 4
FILL MKIERIAL
Materials to be placed in the fill shall be approved by the Geotechnical
Engineer and shall be free of vegetable matter and other deleterious
substances. Granular soil shall contain sufficient fine material to fill
the voids. The definition and disposition of oversized rocks and expansive
or detriitental soils are covered in the geotechnical report or Special
Provisions. Expansive soils, soils of poor gradation, or soils with low
strength characteristics may be thoroughly mixed with other soils to provide
satisfactory fill material, but only with the explicit consent of the
Geotechnical Engineer. Any import material shall be approved by the
Geotechnical Engineer before being brought to the site.
PLACING AND COMPitTION OF FILL
i^roved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in
layers not to exceed 6 inches in conpacted thickness. Each layer shall have
a uniform moisture content in the range that will allow the conpaction
effort to be efficiently applied to achieve the specified degree of
compaction. Each layer shall be uniformly compacted to the specified
minimum degree of conpaction with equipment of adequate size to
economically compact the layer. Conpaction equipment should either be
specifically designed for soil conpaction or of proven reliability. The
minimum degree of conpaction to be achieved is specified in either the
Special Provisions or the reconnendations contained in the preliminary
geotechnical investigation report.
When the structural fill material includes rocks, no rocks will be allov^
to nest and all voids must be carefully filled with soil such that the
minimum degree of compaction recommended in the Special Provisions is
achieved. The naximum size and spacing of rock permitted in structural
fills and in non-structural fills is discussed in the geotechnical report,
v^en applicable.
(R-9/89)
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Appendix, Page 5
Field observation and conpaction tests to estimate the degree of compaction
of the fill will be taken by the Geotechnical Engineer or his
representative. The location and frequency of the tests shall be at the
Geotechnical Engineer's discretion. When the conpaction test indicates that
a particular layer is at less than the required degree of conpaction, the
layer shall be reworked to the satisfaction of the Geotechnical Engineer and
until the desired relative conpaction has been obtained.
Fill slopes shall be conpacted by means of sheepsfoot rollers or other
suitable equipnent. Compaction by sheepsfoot rollers shall be at vertical
intervals of not greater than four feet. In addition, fill slopes at a
ratio of two horizontal to one vertical or flatter, should be trackroUed.
Steeper fill slopes shall be over-built and cut-back to finish contours
after the slope has been constructed. Slope conpaction operations shall
result in all fill material six or more inches inward from the finished face
of the slope having a relative conpaction of at least 90% of maximum dry
density or the degree of conpaction specified in the Special Provisions
section of this specification. The conpaction operation on the slopes shall
be continued until the Geotechnical Engineer is of the opinion that the
slopes will be stable surficially stable.
Density tests in the slopes will be made by the Geotechnical Engineer during
construction of the slopes to determine if the required compaction is being
achieved. Where failing tests occur or other field problems arise, the
Contractor will be notified that day of such conditions by written
conmunication from the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative in the
form of a daily field report.
If the method of achieving the required slope conpaction selected by the
Contractor fails to produce the necessary results, the Contractor shall
rework or rebuild such slopes until the required degree of conpaction is
obtained, at no cost to the Owner or Geotechnical Engineer.
(R-9/89)
SCS&T 9021053 I^y 22, 1990 Appendix, Page 6
COT SLOPES
The Engineering Geologist shall inspect cut slopes excavated in rock or
lithified formational material during the grading operations at intervals
determined at his discretion. If any conditions not anticipated in the
preliminary report such as perched water, seepage, lenticular or confined
strata of a potentially adverse nature, unfavorably inclined bedding, joints
or fault planes are encountered during grading, these conditions shall be
analyzed by the Engineering Geologist and Soil Engineer to determine if
mitigating measures are necessary.
Unless otherwise specified in the geotechnical report, no cut slopes shall
be excavated higher or steeper than that allowed by the ordinances of the
controlling governmental agency.
ENGINEERENG OBSERTKEIGN
Field observation by the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative shall
be made during the filling and conpacting operations so that he can express
his opinion regarding the conformance of the grading with acceptable
standards of practice. Neither the presence of the Geotechnical Engineer or
his representative or the observation and testing shall not release the
Grading Contractor from his duty to compact all fill material to the
specified degree of conpaction.
SEASON UMTTS
Fill shall not be placed during unfavorable weather conditions. When work
is interrupted by heavy rain, filling operations shall not be resumed until
the proper moisture content and density of the fill materials can be
achieved. Daitaged site conditions resulting from weather or acts of God
shall be repaired before acceptance of work.
(R-9/89)
SCS&T 9021053 May 22, 1990 Appendix, Page 7
RBCXWMENLED GRADING SPECIFICATICNS - SPECIAL PROVISIONS
RELATIVE CCMEflC!nON: The minimum degree of compaction to be obtained in
conpacted natural ground, conpacted fill, and conpacted hackfill shall be at
least 90 percent. For street and parking lot subgrade, the upper six inches
should be conpacted to at least 95% relative conpaction.
EXPANSIVE SOILS: Detrimentally expansive soil is defined as clayey soil
which has an expansion index of 50 or greater when tested in accordance with
the Uniform Building Code Standard 29-C.
OVERSIZED MKIERIAL: Oversized fill material is generally defined herein as
rocks or lumps of soil over 6 inches in diameter. Oversize materials should
not be placed in fill unless reconmendations of placement of such material
is provided by the geotechnical engineer. At least 40 percent of the fill
soils shall pass through a Nb. 4 U.S. Standard Sieve.
TRANSmON DDIS: Where transitions betveen cut and fill occur within the
proposed building pad, the cut portion should be undercut a minimum of one
foot below the base of the proposed footings and recompacted as structural
backfill. In certain cases that would be addressed in the geotechnical
report, special footing reinforcenent or a confcination of special footing
reinforcement and undercutting may be required.
(R-9/89)