The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 74-19; LAGUNA RIVIERA NO 6 AND 7; UPDATES SOIL INVESTIGATION REPORT; 1975-06-20WESTERN REGION 3467 Kurtz Street San Diego California 92110 Phone (714) 224-2911 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, GEOLqGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS June 20, 1975 Project No. 75-105-23 Revised 6/23/75 CT1~"-'lq--- l: I. Kamar Construction Company,' Inc. Post Office Box 1155 Carlsbad, California 92008 ItE C EJIVE D· Attention: Mr. Jerry L. Rombotis UPDATED SOIL INVESTIGATION REPORT. LAGUNA RIVIERA NO.6 AND 7 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA .. JUN 2 5 19·75 CITY OF CARLSBAD: Engineering DeRartment . In accordance with your request ·and the requirements of the City . , of Carlsbad Engineering Department, we are presenting an upda~ed soH investigation report for the subje~t si~e. This. report include~ the results of a recent visual inspection of the site; a review of three soil reports ~eviously issued concerning the subject site, a.nd a· general revi'ew of our files pertaining to the Laguna Riviera development. . A brief summary of the soil reports .previously. issued pertaining to the subject site is found below. (1) IIFoundation Soils Investigation for the Proposed Rancho Agua Hedionda· Subdivision, Carlsbad, Californiall , dated July 29~ 1965, and an addendum dated January 6, 1966, both prepared by Dresselhaus Engineers. This report presents a comprehensive study of the entire Laguna Riviera development and presents the result~ of field investigation including test borings and the results of ·1 aboratory tests performed on representati ve samples of the soils encountered. This report has provided the basis· for the development of other units in the Laguna Riviera development. {2} IIGrading Plan Review, Laguna Riviera Units No.6 and 7, Carlsbad, California ll , dated November 8, 1974 and prepared by Woodward-Gizienski & Associates. This letter type report presents the results of a review of the grading plans for the· subject units and also presents recommendations for site development including conclusions relative to the suitability for the site f6r the proposed developmen~, allowable soil bearing pressures -I Kamar Constructio~mpany, Inc. Project No. 75-105-23 June 20, 1975 Revised June 23, 1975 Page ,2, to be used in design of foundations, recommendat'lons for foundations placed on potentially expansive soils and conclusions relative to the stability of the proposed cut and. fill slopes. The report presented the results of 'stability analyses, the results of compaction tests taken on fill alreadY placed on the ~ite and specifications for controlled fill. _ (3) "Slope Stability and Earthwork Specifications, laguna Riviera Units No.6 and 7, Carlsbad, California", dated January 21, 1975, prepared by Hoodward-Gizienski & Associates. This report presents the results of additional field investigation including two test borings and the results of addition~l laboratory tests performed on samples secured from the test borings. Also presented are additional conclusions regarding the stability of cut and fill slopes based on the field and laboratory tests and a set of earthwork specifications to be used for grading. . It is our understanding that the grading plans reviewed as a part of the studies leading to the last two reports are stiJ1 current. These plans indicate that the units will be graded into twenty-two and twenty- eight lots, for Unit 6 and 7, respectively, which \'1111 receive single _ family one or two-story wood frame or stucco residential structures. The grading plans indicate cut and fill slopes having maximum slope inclinations of 1-1/2 to 1 for cut and 2 to 1 for fill, and maximum heights for cut and fill slopes of 45 and 30 feet, respectively. A recent visual inspection of the site was made by a project engineer of our firm on June 13, 1975. This inspection revealed that the subject site has been partially graded and that significant depths of fi11·have been placed in a major drainage area. Several of the lots in Unit 6 appear to be close to finish grade. It was noted that some uncompacted fill had been placed on the site and in s'ome cases spread around in re1atlve1y thin layers. Minor trash and rubble was also noted on the surface . throughout the site. The only natural ground shm'ling at thetime:of our· inspection was at the extreme western end of Unit 7 where a moderate growth of brush and native grasses waS present on a small hillside. . ' ;' Kamar constructio~ompany, Project No. 75-105-23 June 20, 1975 Inc. Page 3 A "review of our files concerning the subject site indicate that the major portions of the fill have been placed under controlled conditions and compacted in accordance with specification~. " No formal report of the filling has been issued to date other than the presentation of the results of the compaction tests on November 8, 1974. Observations made during grading and the results of compaction and laboratory tests will be issued in a final report when grading is complete. Our review of the previous soil reports indicates that the soil and geologic conditions on site generally consist of an overburden mantle composed of 1 to 3 feet of dry"silty sand topsoil underlain by formational materials composed of poorly to moderately indurated "tertiary sediments. These sediments consist of very light grer to white silty medium to coarse sand with some gravels, interbedded with layers and lenses of hard ~andy clay and clayey silt. In general, the granular sandy soils are nonexpansive in nature while the clays and silts rqnge from moderate. to highly expansive in nature. Based on the updated review previously described, we present· the following conclusions and recommendations at this time •. CONCLUSIONS AND RECor~MENDATIONS (1) It is our opinion that the ere1iminary soil studies presented above provide an adequate basis for evaluation of the existing soil. c~nditions on the site and provide a suitable basis for any additional analyses thQt may be required." (2) Based on a review of the slope stability calculations in previous rep'orts and a visual inspection of existing site conditions, it is our opinion that the proposed cut and fill sloQes will have adeguate indicated . = • factors of safety against deep-seated slope failure, if constructed in accordance with plans and specifications. (3) It is recommended that all trash and perishable items be r.emoved" from the site surface prior to grading and that all existing and uncompacted fill soils be excavated or scarified, as required, and properly compatt~d prior to placing any new fill or foundations. Rubble materials may be Kamar constructi~ompany~ Inc. - Project No. 75-l0~-23 June 20, 1975 _ Revised June 23,_ 1975 Page 4 broken down to maximum 2 foot size and placed and properly compacted around with fines in the deeper portions of the fills. (4) It is recommended that any clay soils exposed at grade in cut areas be excavated to a minimum depth of 2 feet and replaced with properly compacted nonexpansive soils or low to moderately expansive soils available on site. It is f.urther reconmended that the upper 2 feet of fill in design fill areas be composed of properly compacted nonexpansive --or low to moderately expansive soil. Moderate to.highly expansive materials may be properly placed and compacted in deeper fill areas. _ It is indicated that selective grading may have to be emplo~ed in order to arrive at satisfactory finish grade soil conditions,. This may include stockpiling of so1-1s for later use.and possible importing of suitably select material for use at finish grade. Special recommendations will be required for foundations placed on potentially expansive ~.oil~. It is reconmended that each lot be classifi-ed during or at the close of _ grading to determine the actual finish grade soil conditions. Special- recommendations for foundations will be presented in the final report,_ if this should be required. (5) It is recorrmended that all slopes be drained, maintained and planted in order to control erosion. (6) It is -recommended that the grading at the site be performed in accordance with, the attached "Spec ificaions for Controlled Fill". The grading period should be observed by and compact~on tests taken by' Woodward-Clyde Consultants. (7) It is recommended that a preconstruction conference be held at the site with the owner or developer, contractor, civil engineer and . . soil engineer in attendance; Any questions regarding grading plans or special soil handling may be answered at that time. t Kamal" constructiottompany. Inc. ' Project No. 75-105-23 June 20, 1975 lUlITATIONS e, Page 5, The conclusions and recommendations made in this report are based on the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate appreciably from those d~sclosed by the test'borings. If variations are encountered during construction, we should be notified so that we may ma'ke supplemental recommendations, if this should be required. Evaluation and utilization of s011 materials for support of structures includes investigation of the subsurface conditions, analysis, formulation of reconmendations, and inspection during grading. The 'soil investi'gation is not completed until the soil engineer has been able to examine the soil in excavations or cut slopes so that he can make the necessary modifications, if needed. We emphasize the importance of the soil engineer continuing his services through the inspection of grading, including construction of fills and foundation excavations. The engineer assigned to this project is Mr. Richard P. While of our firm. If you have any questions concerning our updated study of the, soil conditions on site, please call him or write at your convenience. , WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS lJL/R~W/ jr Attachmen.ts (4 ) i Project No. 75-l~3 • SPECIFICATIO~S FOR CONTROLLED FILL I. GENERAL ATTACHMENT "Page l"of 4 These specifications cover preparation of existing surfaces to receive fills; the type of soil suitable for use in fills; the control of com- paction and the methods of testing compacted fills. It shall be the Contractor's responsibility to place, spread, water and compact the fill tn strict accordance with these specifications. A Soil Engineer shall be the Owner's representative to inspect the construction of fills. Exca- vation and the placing of fill shall be under the direct inspection of the Soil Engineer and he shall' give written notice of conformance with the specifications upon completion of grading. Deviations from these specifications will be permitted only upon written authorization from the Soil Engineer. A soil investigation has been made for this project; any recommendations made in the ~eport of the soil investigation or subsequent reports shall become an addendum to these specifications. II. SCOPE The placement of controlled fill by the Contractor shall include all clearing and grubbing, removal of existing unsatisfactory material, preparation of the areas to be filled, spreading and compaction of fill in the areas to be filled, and all other work necessary to complete the grading of the filled areas. III. MATERIALS 1. Materials for compacted fill shall consist of any material imported" or excavated from the cut areas that, in the opinion of the Soil Engineer, is suitable for use in constructing fills. The material shall contain no rocks or hard lumps greater than 6 inches in size and shall "~ontain at least 40% of material smaller than 1/4 inch in size. No material of a perishable, spongy, or othen~ise improper nature shall be used in filling. 2. "Material placed within 24 inches of rough lot grade shall be select material that contains no rocks or hard lumps greater than 6 inches in size and that swells less than 3% when .compacted as hereinafter specified for compacted fill and when subjected to an axial pressure of 160 psf. 3. Representative samples of mat.erial to be used for fill shall be tested in the laboratory by the Soil Engineer in order to determine the maximum density, optimum moisture content and classification of the soil. tn addition~" the Soil Engineer shall determine the apprOXimate bearing value of a recom- pacted, saturated sample by direct shear tests or other tests applicable to the particular soil. 4. During grading operations, soil types othe"r than those analyzed in the report of the soil investigation may be encountered by the Contractor. The"" So11 Engineer shall be consulted to determine th'e suitability of these soils. -.. I Project No. 75-l~3 IV. COMPACTED FIllS 1. . General ATTACHMENT Page 2 of 4 (a) Unless otherwise specified, fill material shall be compacted by the Contractor \'lhile at a moisture content near the optimum· moisture content and to a density that is not less than 90% of the maximum density detenni ned in accordance \'/i th ASTH Test No. D1557-70T, or other density methods that will obtain equivalent results. (b) Potentially expansive soil s may be used in fill s belO\'I a depth of 24 inches and shall be compacted at a moistuie content greater than the optimum moisture content for the material. 2. Clearing and Preparing Areas to be Filled (a) All trees, brush, grass and other objectionable material shall be collected, piled and burned or otherwise disposed of by the Con- tractor so as to 1 eave the areas tha t have been cleared \'Ii th a neat finished appearance free from unsightly debr.is. (b) All vegetable matter and objectionable material shall be removed by the Contractor from the surface upon which the fill is to be .placed and any loose and porous soils sha 11 be removed 'or compacted to the depth shown on the plans. The surface shall then be plowed or scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches until the surface is free from uneven features that \'/ould tend to prevent uniform compaction by the equfpment to be used. . (c) Where fills are constructed on hillsides or slopes, the slope of the original ground on which the fill is to be placed shall be stepped or keyed by the Contractor as shO\'/n on the attached figure. The steps shall extend completely through the soil mantle and into the underlying formation materials. (d) After the foundation for the fill has been cleared, plowed or scarified, it shall be disced or bladed by the Contractor until it is unifonn and free from clods, brought to the proper moisture content and compacted as specified for fill." 3. Placing, Spreading, and Comoaction Fill Material (a) The fill material shall be placed by the Contractor in layers that. when compacted shall not exceed 6 inches. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during the spreading to obtain uniformity of material in each layer. (b) Hhen the moisture content of the fill material is above that specified by the Soil Engineer, the fill material ~hal1 be aerated by the Contractor by blading, mixing or other' satisfactory methods until . the moisture content is as speCified. . .. 0' I Project No. 75-l~23 ·e ATIACHNENT Page ·3 of 4 'Cc) When the moisture content of the fill material is below that.' specified by the Soil Engineer, water shall be added 'by the Con- tractor until the moisture content is as specifiod. Cd)' After each layer has been placed, mixed and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly:' compacted by the Contractor to the sped fi,ed density. Compaction shall be accomplished by sheepsfoot rollers, vibratory roller, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers or other types of acceptable cC>r.lpacting equipment. Equipment shall be of such , design that it \'/ill be able to compact the fill to the specified density.' .(;ompaction shall be continuous over the 'entire area and the equ;'pment shall make sufficient trips to insure that the desired density has been obtained throughout the entire fill. ee) Surface of fill slopes shall be compacted and there shall be no loose soil on the slopes. V. INSPECTION 1. Observations and compaction tests shall be made by the Soil Engineer during the filling and compaction operations so that he can state his opinion that the fill was constructed in accordance with the, sRecifications. '2; The Soil Engineer shall make field density tests in accordance with ASTM Test No. 0-1556-70 •. Density tests shall be made' in the compacted materials' below the surface where the su~face is disturbed. When these tests indicate' that the dens i ty of any 1 ayer of fi 11 or porti on thereof is belo\'l the -specified density, the particular layer or portions shall be re\'wrked uritil the specified density has been obtained. VI • PROTECTI ON OF WORK 1. During construction 'the contractor shall properly grade all excavated surfaces to provide positive drainage and prevent ponding of \'later. He shall control surface water to avoid damage to adjoining properties., or to finished \'lOrk on the site. The Contractor shall take remedial measures to prevent erosion of freshly graded areas and until such time as permanent drainage and erosion control measures have been installed. 2. After completion of grading and the Soil Engineer has finished his observations of the work, no further excavation or filling shall be done e'xcept under the observation of the Soil Engineer. .. 1r j 1 ~ .~ FHA Strip as"Specified --Original Ground Slope Ratio· li Remove all Topsoil The mlnimUtll width ''Btl of key shall be 2 feet .. dder than the compaction equiprcent, and not less than 1(1" feet. The outside edge of bottom key shall be below topsoil or loose surface material. Keys are required where the natural slope is fteeper than 6 horizontal to 1 vertical, or where spe<:ified by 5011 Engineer. M /..a),"),,">~ I See Note <ace::::::: 14 B ,I See "Note '"'0 6 c..... Cl) o c+ :2: o ...... U1 I ..... (.oJ ;x:. =I' " ;x:. " n ~ TTl :2: -I 1 ~ 3467 Kurtz Street San Diego California 92110 (714) 224·2911 .: WOODWARD:. GIZIENSKI & ASSOCIATES . CONSULTING SOIL AND FOUNDATION ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS An aHiliat~ of Woodward -Clyde Consultants Januar1 21,1975 Project No. 72-·102-4 . . . RECEIVED APR 3 0 19}5 CITY OF CARLSBAD· Engineering Department Kamar Construction Company, Incorporated Post Office Box 1155 Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Mr. Jerry L. Rombotis Cfl'1-Ili SLOPE STABILITY AND EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS LAGUNA RlVIERA UNIT NOS. 6 AND 7 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA In accordance with your request and our proposal dated December 13, 1974, we have made additio.nal soil ·studies regarding slope stability at the subject sites. A review of the grading plans indicates fhat there will be 50 lots. Cut slopes will have a maximum hei ht of 45 feet at a slope ratio of . 1-1/2 to 1 (horizontal to vertical , this maximum height is to be located on the northeastern end of the subdivision. The fill slopes throughout the subdivision range in height from less than 24 feet to a maximum of 30 feet. The slope ratios range between 1-1/2 to 1, and 2.3 to 1'. In order to evaluate the proposed and existing slopes, two (2) test borings were made with a truck-mounted, 8-inch diameter power auger for the purpose of sampling the soil for laboratory testing. Test Boring No.1 was made on Lot 204 and Test Boring No: 2 on Lot 208 under the supervision of a staff engineer from our firm. Field logs of the test borings were made by the engineer on the basis of cuttings from the drilling equipment, the samples obtained and the existing exposed cuts and fills in the area. The Logs of Test Borings shown on Figure 1 and 2 are based on an inspection of the· samples, on the laboratory test results and on the field logs of borings. Test borings were located in the field with the aid of the Grading Plan dated November 7, 1974, prepared by Raymond R. Ribal, Civi·l Engineer. The samples and exposed soils were visually classified and evaluated with respect to strength, dry density and moisture content. The strength of soils was evaluated by performing soaked direct shear tests on selected samples representative of those materials in cut slopes and those representative Kamar Construction ~any, Inc. Project No. 72-102-~ January 21, 1975 • Page 2 of fill materials. A laboratory compacti-Qn test was made on the fill soil in order to determi ne the proper 1 aboratory densHy ,for compaction of the sample prior to testing for strength values. The results of the direct shear test and laboratory compaction test on this sample ' are reported in Figure 4. Direct shear tests on relatively undisturbed samples are reported on Figures 5 and 6. A reconnaissance of the area indicates that the on site materials 'are similar to'sediments of Tertiary age. These deposits 'consist of interbedded silty to clayey sands, clayey silts and silty and sandy clays. Results of the direct shear tests indicate that the materials have relatively_ high in-situ strengths and mocerate strength,when used as fill. Our studies of slope stability are based on the aforementioned Grading Plan, the direct shear tests, and a reconnaissance of the area. The slope stability analyses were done using "Stability Analysis of Slopes ,with Dimensionless Parameters" by N. Janbu. It has been our experience that there is a good correlation between the Janbu method and the Lease II Computer program which uses the Bishop' Method of Slices for simple slopes that are considered to develop a circular arc as the mode of failure for static conditions. We have also noted that a seismic factor O.lg applied to the slope by means of the computer analysis results in a reduction in safety factor of 15 to 20 percent. Our computations by the Janbu method are attached (Figures 7 through 10). These attachments represent the maximum slope heights and ratios for cut slopes and various fill slope combinations. It is therefore our opinion that the £roposed cut and fill slope~ proposed on the Grading Plan dated November 7,1974, prepared by Raymond R. Riba1, Civil Engineer, will have adequate safety factors, including a O.lg , seismic force, it constructea in accoraance with the plans and 'specifications. A set of Earthwork Specifications is attached. It is r.~~qIDmenq~~, that ~gradin.9 operations be done in accordance with these "§'P'eci,fications. In regard to the use of modera:te to high otential ex ansibilit,Y soils within 2 feet of finish graae ecause of tne possible lack of select on site), it is recommended that each lot be inspected and evaluated as finished during graaing and final foundation and floor slab design established at that time. Our recommendations with respect to this' will be included in our final report of grading. If you have any questions, please call at your convenien~e. WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSUL TArns Loui s J. L~(R. E:i4i29 LJLjJGK/jr (4) Attachments WQODWARD • GIZIENSKI & ASSOCIATES CONSUlTING SOil AND FOUNDATION ENGINEEIIS AND GEOlOGISTS • . DEtnTH ~.....;..;TEr:-S.;..T ...;.,D.;.;,A T;-.A_-t OTH*ER SAMPLE FEET *MC * DO * BC TESTS HUMBER 5 - - -. - 10 - - - - 15 - - - 20 - - - - 25 - LC DS 26/61 DS 83 56 4 f~;:;~Jr~ 5 I~ ~ t~11~ e Bori ng 1· Location -lot 205 SOIL DESCRIPTION Medium dense, moist, gray clayey sand (SC) Stiff, moist, brown sandy clay (CH) Dense to very d'ens'e, moist, light gray clayey to. silty sand (SC-SM) Very' stiff, moist., 'gray sandy cl ay (Cl) Very dens.e, moi.st, light gray silty sand (SM) 30 -:kk;~ 31 ____ -+ ___ -+ ___ -+ ____ -r ____ -+~=%=J~------------------------------------------------------------------~ Bottom of Hole --- ----*For description of symbols. see legendp Figure 3., lOG OF TEST BORING 1 LAGUNA RIVIERA UNITS 6 AND 7 DRAWN BY: ALS I CHECKED BY:~ I PROJECT NO: 72-102-4 I DATE: 1':'10-75. JFIGURE NO: 1 ' WOODWARD· GIZIENSKI & ASSOCIATES CONSULTING SOIL ANO fOUNOATION [NGIN[~IIS AND GEOLOGISTS .,to' Boring 2 Location Lot 209 DEr~ _. TEST DATA OTH*ER SAMPLE FEET' *MC "DO *BC TESTS NUMBER SOIL DESCRIPTION' 5 10 15 20 22 66 OS 1 LL = 40, PI = 17 76 3 4 41/61 5 Very dense, moist, light brown clayey silt (ML) Very dense, moist, light gray silty sand (SM) Bottom of Hole *For description of symbols. see Legendn Figure 3. LOG OF TEST BORING 2 LAGUNA RIVIERA UNITS 6 AND 7 DRA\'m BY: ALS I CHECKED By:J1t<.. ! PROJECT NO: 72-102-4 I DATE: 1-10-75 !FIGURENO: 2 WOODWARD· GIZIENSKI & ASSOCIATES CONSULTING SOIL AND fOIlNDATlON ENcilNEEIIS AND GEOLOGISTS lEG E N· 0 MC = Moisture Content in percent of dry weigh't. DD = Dry Density in pcf. BC = Number of blows by 14-0 pound hammer fall·ing 30 inches to drive sampler 12 inches. '. . . 5:f-= Water Le~el at time of drillin.Q or as' noted. (SM) = Group classification symbol in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. Cal ifornia Drive S'ample. Pitcher Samp~e· {P}, or Shelby Sample (S), Disturbed Sample. Refusal = Unable to exten~ excavation. practically. with equipment being used in the exploration. GS = Grain Size Distribution. (-none) LC = Laboratory Compact i on Test'. CC = Confined Compression Test. CT = Consoliciation Test. (none.) ST = Loaded Swell Test. (none') see Figure 4. (none) PI = Plasticity Index. see Figure 2. UCS = Unconfined Compressive Strength in psf, (none) OS = Direct Shear Test. see, F;'gu.res 4, 5 and 6. TX = Triaxial Compression Test. (none) LEGEND LAGUNA RIVIERA UNITS 6 AND 7 DRAWN BY: ALS ICHECKED By:.9nlpROJECT NO: 72-102-4 JOATE: 1-10-75 IFIGUREHO: 1· WOODWARD· GIZIENSKI & ASSOCIATES CONSU~TING SOI~ AND FOUNDATION ENGINUIIS AND GEOLOGISTS . :"" DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA I Dry Densi ty, pcf 114 Initial Water Content, % 10 Final Water Content. % 17 Apparent Cohesion. psf 280 Apparent Friction Angle. 0 31 \ \ ~ \ \ '\ ' toEaiAN,ICAl ANALYSIS 100 3 t ~ 10'110 200 80 C!:I z: (I) ~ 60 Q.. r-ifjqo .(.) 0::: w Q..20 o I I 1-1 J I I I 1000 100 10 1.0 O. I 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS ICO~BLESI GRAVEL I SANr lSI LT & CLAY I _ . . c If .. c I m _.f. ' , 130 1--+-+--+-..1,1--++-\\1\ \ PLASTICITY CHARACTERISTICS 1 ~V \ \1\ / 1\ ~ \ I \1\ r\ 1\ ' \ 120 .... 0 c. \1\ f\ 1\ \ \ r: ~ ~ 110 'W 3; r- \1\ 1\ 1\ \ \I\~ z: :::> >-0::: Q 100 - " \1\ Liquid limit, % -'-Plasticity Index. % ~--------~----+-~~--~ ClassificatiQn by Unified Soil Classification System SWELL TEST DATA Initial Dry Density. pcf --~~----+----+--~r---~ IniHal Water Content, % ~~~----+----+--~r-~~ Load. psf Percent Swe II SPECIFIC GRAVITY 90 MAX I MUM DRY I DENSITY, pcf 127 .0 ~ .... ' ZERO AIR VOIDS CURVES ~------------~~-+----~--~~~~ OPTIMUM MOISTURE "I ~~ CONTENT, % 9 . 5 f\. rx !\. NOTE: Specimen I = Sample 1-1 /wi{) I STURE COHTEMT1 % 10 20 30 LABORATORY CGPACTIOH , EIi.tSUITABILIlY TESTS, LABORATORY COMPACTION TEST METHOD: ASTM-D 1557 70 CONSULTING SOIL ION ENGINEERS ·AND 'GEOLOGISTS CALI,FORN IA .. . '4 ,_._--:--. . i .... 3 , 'I-. V U' C/) -C/) c: V ~ I / C/) 2' V C/) Q) I.-.... / CI.) I.-/V '" Q) ..c: I I CI.) 1 / / / 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 : Normal Str~ss -Tons/sq.ft. SAMPLE DATA Samole H.umber . )-2 . C1 avev sand {SC Classification SPECIMEN NUMBER .' I 2 Diameter, inches l.94 1 94 Initial Hei ght, inches 0.817 O. 8T7 . , Initial Dry Den.sity pet 108.1 108.1 Initial ~oisture Content, 'i 6_0 4.9 Final Height, inches 0.809 o 781 Final DrY .Dens i tv ocf lnq.? li~ 1 F i n.a t 1>10 i.sture ,Con.tent, "/. 17.5 15.9 . Rate 'of Shear j'ng, inlm+n x 10-3 0.288 . 0 .. 288 Angl.e of Friction, f=42° Cohesion, CI = 600psf 01 REC'T SHEAR TEST· LAGUNA RIVIERA UNITS 6 AND 7 . WmOWARD -Gill ENSKI ~ ASSOCI AI~~ , CONSULTING SOIL AND FOUNDATION EMGINEE~ AltO GEOLOGISTS SAN DIEGO, CALifORNIA :DRoBY: ALS APPROX. SCALE: --.-PROJ, HO~ 72-1 02-4 ICK'IDBY-, _~7-t' I DATE: ,10-75 FIGURE MO: 5 .. .. 4 ,.;-~ '-- ~ I ~ . +' 3 .... I ....--. J~V--c::r If) -If) c --~ . t If) 2 en cu ~ +' (I) ~ ~ cu .s::: I (I) 1 I o 0 1 2 -3 4 5 Normal Stress -Tonsl sq. ft. SAMPLE DATA Sample Number 2-1 " Cl ayey si 1t (ML) Classification SPECIMEN NUMBER .' J 2 Diameter. inches 1.94 1.94 Initial Height, inches 0.817 O. 8ll. Initial Dry Density pcf 124.3 122.7 In it i al Moi sture Content, % 12.6 12·L Final Height, inches 0.815 a 804 F i na 1 DrY Dens i tv. D'Cf ' 124.6 124.7 Final Moisture Content, "/. 15.1 14.2 Rate of Shearing, in/min x 10-3 0.288 0.288 Angle of Friction, f=18° Cohesion, C'= 4800 psf DIRECT SHEAR TEST .' , LAGUNA RIVIERA UNITS 6 AND 7 WOODWARD -GIZIENSKI .~ .ASSOCIATES . CONSULTING SOIL AND FOUNDATION E)lG'INEE~S AND GEOLOGISTS SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA ORo BY: _8L.i, APPROX. SCALE: ---_rROJ~ NO: 71'-1 O?-LI CK'D BY: rJ?6 DATE: I-ln-7E FIGURE NO: n N , . . " .. :' Assumptions: '. 'e, LAGUNA "RIVIERA UNIT NO. 6 '& 7 ,FILL SLOPE STABILITY H = 30 ft. l' '. (1) 'Maximum height of slopes, (2) Maximum slope inclination, (3) Unit weight of soil, (4) Apparent angle of internal friction, (5) Apparent cohesion, , '~_.:1~ a = 26.5° y = 130 pcf t = ,31°, , , c = 280 ps f , ' (~) No seepage forces • References: (l) -Janbu, N., "Stability Analysis of Slopes with Dimensionless , -·Parameters ", Harvard Soi 1 Mechani cs S'eri es No. 46, 1954. (2)' Janbu, N., "Dimensionless Parameters for Homogeneous Earth Slopes", JSMFD, No. SM6, November, 1967. Analysis: Safety Factor, F.S. X H tan p c = ~here Ncf is the stability No. for slopes with both c and~. 130 (30}(.601) = 8 4 280 • From Fi gure 10 of Reference 2 N = 28 cf F .5. = (28)(280) (130)(30) = 2;{) OK for Seismic FIGURE 7 WOODWARD· GIZIENS'KI & ASSOCIATE'S CONSULTING SOIL ANO FOUNDATION ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS ", I " . .:~ .. ".' ,.. ., " '- ,-- , . .. , " .. '~ . . ~ . :-:' . . : ... " ' .', ' LAGUNA RIVIERA UNIT NO. 6 & 17 FILL SLOPE STABILITY Assumptions: (1) . (2) (3) (4 ) (5) (6) Reference: Maximum height of slopes, Maximum slope inclination, Unit weight of soil, Apparent angle of internal friction, Apparent cohesion, No seepage forces. H =.30 -ft. 1 1/2:1, e = 36~ _Y = 130 pcf + = 31° c = 280 psf (1.) Janbu, N., "Stability Analysis of Slopes with Dimensionless '_ Parameters", Harvard Soil Mechanics Series No. 46, 1954 • .- Analysis: Safety Factor, F.S. c = Ncf --yrr-Where Ncf is the stability No. -for slopes wit~ both c and $. '. -Acf = y H tan p c = 130 (30}(.60l) = 8 4 280 - . From Fi gure 3-1 of Reference: Ncf, = 2~. 5 F.S. = 23.5 (280) ..:. 1 -7-130 _ ( 30 ) M, .' OK for Seismic PlGURE 8 WOODWARD· GIIJENSKf & ASSOCIATES CONSULTING SOIL AND FOUNDATION ENGIN[ERS AHD GEOLOGISTS , r-. , .. ' f.,'· 1 ~ "' '. . . '.: . .e· '.: J. ': LAGUNA 'RIVIERA UNIT· NO.6 &.7 ',' . '. . .. ' . . . . " FILL SLOPE STABILITY : . '.. -' " .: '" t' .' .. ' .... -,-~. ", '.' . '. to" .... : .: . . :. ',,: .. ' "~ ':.". " . . . . . ",' " :;.: .. ' Assumptions: ;' ," '.' .::. ' . . . '., -". (1). Maximuin height of slopes ~ . ,;.: .. ,>: .... : ". : . .... .'. ,.,(2) Maximum slope inclination, ::'-;' .. : .",,' .'. : ........ =---.: (3) . Unit weight of soil, -.' . H·= 24ft • .... ::..:.: .... -.:' ..... :::-:.:: .···(4)· Apparent angle'of internal friction, .'.>:'.':~. >. .' ..... .... . (5) Apparent cohesion, . 1 1/2:1,'S = 360 . " y =130pcf ., ::= 31 0 :'.:; .. ;:-: .... : .... : .' ." : :-.":: ' .. ':, -<,-.·.(6) No seepage forces • . ':. '... . . '.' . ' . . c =280 psf . :.~:: .. ' '.-.". ':' ,...." . .-. '. Reference: ,-:. . .'. . .' '. ': ... '. . " ~.:. ~ :" .'~ . . .' ':.,' ,. . , . ," -".'., .' -' : ...... ~ ~ :." . ':: .'. ' .. Janbu, N., "Stability Analysis of Slopes with 'Dimensionless Parameters", Harvard Soil M~chanics Series No. 46, 1954~ ': ... ~. . .... . ':.;' . . ~>:·.·.·· ... ~.':·'::."··· ... ·'· .. >·~afety Factor, F.S. = Ncf y~ . Wher.e Ncf is the s tabil i ty No. for slopes with both ~ and ~. ~I' • ", • ',-.. , .. ': ,',. ~ .. ~" ; " . " ;., " ", . z . ..... .' .' ,::., ... . ',' " .. . ').' :..' X H ta n p ef = e o 30} (24) (. 601.) = 280 = 6.7 From Figur:-e 3-1 of Reference: Nef = 20.0 ·F.S. = (20}(280) {(30) (24) = 1.8 OK for Seismic FIGURE 9 WOODWARD· GIZIENSK.' & ASSOCIATES CONSULTING SOIL AND FOUNOATION ENGINEEIIS ANO GEOLOGISTS ·1 N' . J,., ! •. . ",. ."' .. .... -.,' . ~.' :. .: :'.-.: . ,,:, . '. ' . .... . . " ," ,', . .. ' :' .. LAGUNA'RIVIERA UNIT NO.6 & 7 . . CUT StOPE STABILITY ..' Assumptions: Maximum height of slopes, Maximum slope inclination, Unit weight of soil, Apparent angle of internal friction, Apparent cohesion, No seepage forces. . Reference~: . . '-.. . . H = 45 ft. '. .. ,. 1/2: 1, B = 360 . r = 130 pcf··. ~ = lSo c = 1000 psf. . . . . ", -~ -. -......... -_. ..- . , .' " .: . .... ' ....... {r) Janbu; N., "Stability Analysis of Slopes wi.th Dimensionless ." .',' '"'. ..... ,Parameters", Harvard Soil Mechanics Series. No. 46, 1954 • .. : " .... . . .' . -', . : -. . ... :".::: .' . (2) . Janbu, N., "Dimensi onl ess Parameters for Homogeneous Earth : . . .:' Slopes", JSMFD, No. SM6, November, 1967. ... " .. ,', Analys·is: , .. . :·Safety Factor, F.S. = Ncf c .. ' . Where Ncf is the'stability ~o. Yfi for slopes wlth both c and ~ .' .Acf = ): H tan ~ = 130 (45)(. 325} = 1.90 .. c 1000 From Figure, 10 of Reference 2 Ncf = 10.S F.S. = (l~oS~~~)OO) = 1.S OK for Seismic FIGURE 10 WOODWARD· GIZIE'NSKI' & ASS.QCIATES CONSULTING SOIL AND fOUNDATION £NQINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS ,. ,. ot ' 1. Project No. 72-102-~e ATTACHMENT e Page r' of' 4 . ' . .. SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONTROLLED FILL GENERAL These specifications cover preparation of' eXisting surfaces to receive fills; the type of soil suitable for use in fills; the control of com- paction and the methods of testing compacted fills. It shal) be the Contractorls responsibility to place, spread, water'and compact the fill in strict accordance with these specifications. A Soil Engin~er shall be the Ownerls representative to inspect the construction of fills. Exca- vation and the placing of fill shall be under the direct inspection of the Soil Engineer and he shall give written notice of conformance with the specification~ upon completion of grading. Deviations from these specifications will be permitted only upon written authorization from the Soil Engineer. A soil investigation has been made for this project; any recommendations made in the report of the soil investigation or subsequent reports shall become an addendum to these specifiGations. 'II. SCOPE The' pl acement of controll ed fill by the Contractor shall include all c1ear'ing and grubbing, removal of existing unsatisfactory mat-eri,a1, preparation of the areas ,to be filled, spreading and compaction of fill in the areas to be fille9, and all other, work necessary to complete the ,grading of the filled areas. III. MATERIALS 1. ~1aterials for compacted fill shall consist of any material imported or excavated from the cut areas that, in the opinion of the Soil Engine~r, is suitable for use in constructing fills. The material shall contain no rocks or hard lumps greater than 6 inches in size and shall contain at least 40% of material smaller than 1/4 inch in size. No material of a perishable, spongy, or other~vise improper nature shall be used in filling. 2. Material placed within 24 inches of rough lot grade shall be select material that contains no rocks or hard lumps greater than 6 inches in size and that swells less than 3% when compacted as hereinafter specified for compacted fill and It,hen subjected to an axial pressure of 1-60 psf~ 3. Representative samples of material to be u~ed for fill shall be tested in the laboratory by the Soil Engineer in order to determine the maximum density, optimum moisture content and classification of the soil. In addition~ the Soil Engineer shall determine the approximate bearing value of a recom- pacted, saturated sample by direct shear tests or other tests applidtble to the particular soil. 4. During grading operations, soil types other than those analyzed in the report of the soil investigation may be encountered by the Contractor., The Soil Engineer shall be consulted to determine the suitability of these soils. WOODWARD· GIZIENSKI & ASSOCiATES CONSULTINQ lOlL AHD 'OUNDATION INOINE,EIII, AHD G~EOLOOI'TS -' -, " -I I #, ProJect No. 72-102-e -IV. COMPACTED FILLS ,1. General e· ATTACHMENT ,Page 2 of'4 .. (a) Unless otherwise specified, fill material shall be compacted r by the Contractor while at a moisture content near the optimum moisture content and to a density that is not less tha'n 90% 'of the maximum density determined in accordance with ASTM Test No. D1S'S7-70T, or other density methods that wi.ll obtain equivalent results. . (b) Potentially expansive soils may be used in fi.lls below a depth· of 24 inches and shall be compacted at a moisture content greater. than the optimum moisture content for the material. 2. C1~aring and Preparing Areas to be Filled (a) All trees, brush, grass and other objectionable material shall be collected, piled and burned or otherwise disposed of by.the Con~ tractor sO'as to leave the areas that have been cleared with a neat finished appearance free from unsightly debris • . (b) All vegetable matter and objectionable material .shall be removed by the Contractor from the surface upon which the fill is to be placed and any loose and porous soils shall be removed or compacted to the . depth shm-l/n on the plans. The surface shall then be plowed or scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches 'until the surface is free from uneven features that would tend to prevent uniform compaction by the equipment to be used. (c) Where fills are constructed on hillsides or slopes, the slope of the original ground on which the fill is to be placed shall be·stepped or keyed by the Contractor as shown on the attached figure. The steps .shall extend completely through the soil mantle and into the underlying· formation materials . . (d) After the foundation for the fill has been cleared, plowed o~r' scarified, it shall be disced or bladed by the Contractor until it is uniform and free from clods, brought to the proper moisture content and compacted as specified for fill. ·3. Placing, Spreading, and Compaction Fill Material (a) The fill material shall be placed by the Contractor in layers that when compacted sha 11 not exceed 6 inches. Each 1 ayer sha 11 be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during the spreading to obtain uniformity of material in each layer. (b) When the moisture content of the fill material is above that .specified by the Soil Engineer, the fill material shall be aerated ·by the Contractor by blading, mixing or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is as sp~cified. WOODWARD· GIZIENSKI & ASSOC'IATES CONSULTING SOil AND fOUNDATION ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS ,- I.. « ' Project No. 72-102-4 • • ATTACHMENT P.age 3 of 4 (e) ~~hen the moisture content of the fill material i's below that " speci fi ed. by the Soi 1 Engi neer, water sha 11 be added by the ~on- . tractor until the moisture content is'as specified. , . . . (d) After each layer has been placed, mixed and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly:' compacted by the Contractor to the specified density. Compaction shall be accomplished by sheepsfoot rollers, .. vibratory roller, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers or other types of acceptable compacting equipment. Equipment shall be of such design that it \'Iill be able to compact the fill to th'e specified de'nsity. ~ompaction shall be continuous over the entire area and the equipment shall make sufficient trips to insure that the desired density has been obtained throughout the entire fill. ~ (e) Surface of fill slopes shall be compacted and t.here'shall be no loose soil on the slopes. V. . INSPECTION 1.. Observations and compaction tests shall be made by the 50·11 Engineer during the filling and compaction operations $0 that he carr· state his opinion that the fill was constructed 'in accordance with the ~pecifications. '2~ The Soil Engineer shall make field density tests in accordance with ASTM Test No. 0-1556-70 .. Density tests shall be made in' the compacted materials below the surface \'Ihere the surface is disturbed. Hhen thes'e te'sts i'ndicate that the density of any layer of fill or portion thereof is below the 'specified density, the particular layer or portions shall be reworked until the specified density has been obtained. VI. PROTECTION OF· WORK 1. During construction the contractor shall properly grade all excavated surfaces to provide positive drainage and prevent ponding of water. He shall control surface water to avoid damage to adjoining properties. or to finished work on the site. The Contractor shall take remedial measures to prevent erosi on of freshly graded are'as .and unti 1 such time as permanent drainage and eros10n. control ~easures have been installed. ~ 2\' After completion of grading and the Soil Engineer has finished his observations of the \'Iork, no further excavation or filling shall be done except under the observation of the .Soil Engineer. WOODWARD· GIZIENSKI & ASSOCIATES CONSULTING SOIL ANO fOUNDATION ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS Slope to be such that Sloughing or Sliding does not occur " Strip liS Specified Original Ground Slope Ratio - N M , . ,/'lin , '.' ~ -4. '. ,~ r ""0 '"1 o '-'. '(I) n M- :z o '-I N I --' o N • Remove all Topsoil I... ~ I~t_~~ft~'*=== I See Note, NOTES , 'l'he mini~um. width "Bit of key shall be 2 feet "Ii'lder than the compaction equipment, and 'not: less than 1(1 feet. The outside edge of bottom key shall be below topsoil' , or loose surface material. Keys are required whe"+e the natural slope is £, teeper than 6 horizontal to 1 vertical, or where spe(~;i.fied by, Soil ~ngineer. .... ~ se.e B Note 1 ' . . \ " ': .. , ' ./ e :.~~ • (Q ~ , (I) :;t:. , . ("') .'.p.:r: '3: ,Om -fl·Z '-I . .p. , ',' • • WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS WESTERN REGION 3467 Kurtz Street San Diego California 92110 'Phone (714) 224-2911 November 10, 1975 Project No. 75-105-23 K~mar Constru~tion Company, Inc. Post Office Box 1155 Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Mr. Jerry Rombotis President FINAL REPORT OF ENGINEERING OBSERVATION AND COMPACTION TESTING LAGUNA RIVIERA , LOTS 174 THROUGH 19$ -UNIT NO.6 LOTS 196 THROUGH 22j -UNIT NO.7 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA RECEIVED NOV 1 3 1975 CITY vr CARLSBAD Engineering Department , , In accordance with your request, and our agreement dated September 22, 1975, we have provided soil engineering services in conjunction with the grading of the subject site. These services included: (1) Engineering observation of the grading operation. (2) Observation of the removal or scarification' and recompaction qf loose surface soil and loose fill soils, where enCountered, prior to placing compacted fill. (3) Observation of the removal of potentially highly expansive soil from the top 2 feet of rough lot grade and replacing it with nonexpansive or low to moderately expans~ve soil. ' (4) Taki'ng field density tests in the fill placed and compacted. (:3), Performing laboratory tests on representative samples of the materia) used for fill. Current site preparation, compaction, and testing were done between September 24 and October 27, 1975 in accordan~e with the "Specifications for Controlled Fillll in our report entitled "Updated Soil Investigati,on Report, Laguna Riviera No.6 and 7, Carlsbad",California ll , dated June 20, 1975 and revised on June 23, 1975. #-. Kamar Construction Co~y, Inc. Project No. 75-105-23'" November 10, 1975 •• page 2 . Prior fill placed under controlled conditions was compacted and te'sted on this site in 1974. The results of compaction tests are included in. this report. During this initial grading period, fill was placed in a canyon area in Unit 7. Some excavation was done on both Unit 6 and 7. Fill was placed, compacted, and tested during the current grading periog . on Lots 174 through 185 and 187 through 195 in Unit No.6 and on Lots 196 through 206, 208, 209 and 213 through 223 on Unit No.7. As the site grading progressed, the compaction procedures were observed, and field density tests were made to determine the relative compaction of the fill in place. Field observations and field density test results indicate that the fill has been compacted to 90% or more of maximum laboratory density. The approximate locations of field density tests and the limits of compacted fill have been recorded on a copy ~f the grading plan for reference. The results of" field density tests and of relative compaction, expressed as, a percent of maximum laboratory density, are given on the attached forms. Laboratory tests to determine moisture-density relationships, maximum dry density, optimum moisture content, grain size distribution, plasticity' charatteristics, and swell characteristics were performed on representative samples of the material used for fill. The results of laboratory tests . are given on the attached forms. During the grading operation certain lots were specially treated to ,provide a specified depth of selected soil at finish grade. This special treatment consisted of the placement of special finish grade' soil ~nd undercutting of highly expansive clay from finish gradp and replacing it with soil of less expansive nature. The lots were then classified in regard to whether the soil at finish grade is nonexpansive or low to moderately expansive in nature. In general, finish grade soil refers to the upper approximate 2 feet of soil on the lot as defined by rough or compacted lot grade. Rough lot grade is defined as that grade set in the field by. the grade checker from reference stakes established by the surveyor and represents rough grade at the time we were inspecting the removal and replacement, of expansive soils. Likewise the depths of undercutting of expansive soil and/or depths of placement of nonexpansive soil were in accordance with measurements made by and grades set by the contractor's grade checker. Summary of Finish Grade Soil Conditions (1) Cut, fill or cut-fill lots having nonexpansive soils at finish grade are,Lots 177 through 184,186,196, 197, 198, 204, 205, 206, 208, 210, 211, 212, 214, 215 and 219 . . (2) Cut, fill or cut-fill lots having low to moderately expansive " finish grade soils are Lots 174, 175, 176, 185, 187 through 195,199 through 203, 207, 209, 213, 216, 217, 218, and 220 through 223. WOO D WAR D -C L Y DE. CON S U.L TAN T S CONSULTIfi.Q ENGIH£EItI. OEOLoa'STIl AND E:~V."OHM[HTAL SCIENTISTS ,- \ ~amar construction Company, Inc. Project No. 75-l05~ Nqvember 10, 1975 ~ Page 3 (3) On those lots where potentially expansive soil is evident or where it is encountered in footing excavations, special foundation.design should be observed. Special foundations for single or two-story . ·residential structures on lots that contain such potentially expansive soil, should be designed in accordance with the recommendations in Paragraph (2) below. Foundation Recommendations (1) Foundations for single or two-story residential structures placed on nonexpansive undisturbed soil or nonexpansive properly compacted fill may be designed for a bearing pressure of 2,000 psf at a depth of 12 inches below compacted fill or undisturbed cut lot grade. (2) Foundations for single or two-story residential structures on lots that contain low to moderately expansive soil should be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf and should include the following reinforcing. Rough or Compacted Grade 12" min. • L 12" I r min;'1 4" mino concrete slab with 6x6 10 10 mesh -#4 Bars, top and bottom The above design recommendations are not intended to eliminate heave, but are intended to minimize its effects. Footings p)aced on expansive soils should be expected to experience local he~ving. (3) The bearing pressures given above are for total dead plus live load and may be increased for loads that include wind or seismic forces. All footings should have a minimum widtfi of 12 inches. '(4) Th~ exposed soils within footing excavations and under slabs should not be allO\lJed to dry out before construction. Soils should be wetted as required prior to placment of concrete. (5) Structures that will not tolerate differential settlements (such as foundations, swimming pools, concrete decks, walls, ·etc.) should not be located within 5 feet of the top of a slope. (6) All slopes should be properly drained, planted and maintained in order to help control erosion. WOO D WAR D • elY DEC 0 N S U l r 1\ N· T S . CONsuLTING: ENOINE£PtS. Q£OLOQ'$T5 ANO ENV.ftONM£NTAL SCIENT.ST .. Kamar Construction Company) Inc. Project No. 75-l05-2~ Nov.ember 10) 1975 • The elevations of compact'ion tests shown 'as finished grade (FG) tests correspond to the elevations shown on the grading plans' for "Carlsbad- Tract 74-19", dated September 18, 1975, prepared by Raymond R. Ribal, Brea, California. Elevations and locations shown in this report are based on fi e 1 d surveys establi shed by others. Page 4 This report covers the fill placed under our observation during the dates specified herein. Additional fill placed after these dates, as well as the backfill in utility trenches located within 5 feet of a building and greater than 12 inches deep, or any trench 5 feet or more from a building and in excess of 5 feet in depth, should be compacted - under the observation of this office and tested to assure compliance with the earthwork specifications for the project. This office should be contacted at-least 24 hours prior to backfilling operations. Utility· service trenches within 5 feet of a building that are perpendicular to the building footings and are less than 12·inches wide and less than 3 feet deep are not subject to this recommendation. The inspections of foundation preparation) types of materials and soil placement and compaction as well as tests of compactio~ made during the period of our services on the subject site were in accordance with the local acceptable standards for this period. The conclusions or opinions drawn from the tests and site inspections apply only to our w00k with respect to grading and represent conditions at the date of our final inspection. We will accept no responsibility for any subsequent changes made to the site by others or by uncontrolled action of water or by failure of others to properly repair damages caused by uncontrolled -action of water. - HOODI'/ARD-CL YDE CONSULTANTS James E. Cavallin) R.E. 17553 I' - JEC/EHP/RP~J/jr Attachments (5) Kamar Construction Company (1) Carlsbad Building Inspection Department WOO D WA RD· eLY DECO N SU L T A NT S CONSULTING [:HQIN£EJ'S, OEOLOGISTS AND EHVIItONM£NTAL. $CI£HTUTS ",' ~ 4itOMPACTION TEST RESULT' . JOB NAME LAGUNA RIVIERA 6 & 7 OAT!:: REPORTIi:D li-lO-75 JOB NUMBER 75-105-23F DATES COVERED September 25, 1975 through October 23, 1975 PAGE .1 OF 4 MO'STURlt !"'ELO LAlSORATORY Rl!:I..ATIVE . DATE nST RETEST LOCATION ELEVATiON CONTENT DJ!:NS'TY DItNSIIT COMPACTION NUMB!::H ot-~ . OF TEST 'J\, DRY WT. f'CF "C~ ./. OF LAB. DENS. ------- SEPT 25 1 LOT 223 113 1 12.3 127.2 127.0 100+ . 2 LOT 218 122" 12.3 119. 1 127.0 93.8 3 LOT 220 113' 13.0 118.8 127.0 93'.5 4 LOT 220 116 1 13.6 115.0 . 124.0 92.6 -SEPT 29 5 LOT 219 124' 11. 1 119.8 127.0 _ 94.4 6 LOT 218 132' 9.0 115.3 127.0 90.7· 7 LOT 215 113' 11. 1 ·110.0 121.0 90.0 8 LOT 214 . 117' 16.3 117.0 121.0 91.4 9 E OF LOT 217 135 1 14.9 112.8 122.5 92.1 SEPT 30 10 LOT 190 110 1 12.3 11-4.8 121.0 94,.6 --'-11 LOT 217 128' 14.9 112.2 91.6 122.5 12 LOT 219 125' 13.6 112.2 121.0 92.8 13 LOT' 218 127' 16.3 109.8 121,.0 90 ~6 14 \ LOT 219 UPPER 130' 14.3 113.0 122.5 92.3 , I i5 LOT·215 LmoJER 117' 12.3 115.3 121.0 9~.5 1 '1 16 LOT 216 LOWER 119 1 14.3 ·110.4 121 .0 91.3 17 LOT 216 UPPER 123 1 ·14.9 115.0 122.5 93.8 18 LOT 219 Lm.JER 128' 14.9 122.4 122.5 99.8 OCT 1 19 LOT 219 UPPER 134 1 12.3 123.0 127.0 96.6 20 LOT 217 128' 11.7 118.6 122.5 96.8 21 LOT 216 UPPER 127' 16.3 114.2 122.5 9~.2 22 LOT 218 138' 11. 7 117 .6 121.0 97.2 ' 23 LOT 215 UPPER 122' 12.3 114'.6 122.5 93.5 24 LOT 218 140' 10.5 110.7 121.0 91.4 GCT 2 25 LOT 196 96' 13.0 121.9 122.5 99.5 26 LOT 197 104' 12.3 113.9 122:5 92.9 27 LOT 223 116 l 13.0 120.7 126.0 98.0 < 28 LOT 198 110' 14.3 120.1 122.5 95.6 29 LOT 196 100' 1.4.9 115. 1 122.5 93.9 30 LOT 199 117' 12.3 119.3 122.5 97.4 31 LOT 196 112' 13.0 112.5 122.5 91.8 32 LOT 217 130' 11.7 117.3 121.0 96.9 OCT 6 33 LOT .196 110' 17.6 110.2 116.0 95.2 ---LOT 197 116' 113.8 34 13.6 . 122.5 92.8 35 LOT 196 UPPER 112' 12.3 121.0 122.5 98.7 36 LOT 198 117 ! 12.3 115.2 122.5 . 94.0 37 LOT 218 141' 13.6 119.0. 127.0 93.7 38 LOT 215, 123' 12.3 116.8 ,127.0 91.8 39 LOT 216 128 1 14.3 120.2 127.0 94.6 40 LOT 196 1141 10.5 116.6 127 .5 91.5 -~------ ~' e.:OMPACTION TEST RESUL,e , • JOB NAME LAGUNA RIVIERA 6 & 7 DATE REPORTl::O 11-10-75 JOB NUMBER 75-102-23F ,0; .. : DATES COVERED September 25, 1975 through October 23, 1975 PAGE: 2 OF 4 MOISTURlI: P'IELO LAIIORATORY RI!:LATIVE DATE nST RETEST t:oCATION ELEVATION CONTl!:NT OI!:NSITY DENSITY COMPACTION NUMBCR OF OF TEST 'lit DRYWT. PCF PC~ 'I. C!P LAB. DEN$. OCT 7 41 LOT 197 1171 10.5 114.0 127.5 90.0 42 LOT 198 119' 10.5 111. 2 127.5 87..2 43 LOT 199 121' 7.6 117 .3 127.0 92.5 44 LOT 200 126' 8.7 120.2 127.0 94.6 45 LOT 201 132' 14.3 124.2 127.5 97.4 OCT 8 46 LOT 195 88' 13.6 108.7 120.5 90.2 47 LOT 174 85' 16.3 114.,0 120.5 94.5 48 LOT 194 93' 14.9 109.8 120.5 90 . .8 49 LOT 190 103 1 14.3 110.0 ' 120.5 91.2. 50 LOT 202 134' 12.3 115.4 127.0 90.9 51 LOT 203 138' 14.3 117.8 127.5 92.4 52 LOT 204 140' 13~ 6 118.3 127.5 92.7 53 LOT 205 141' 12.3 119.7 127.5 93.9 OCT 9 54 LOT 195 91 1 13.0 109.4 119.:5 91.5 55 LOT 194 93' 14.9 105.8 119'.5 . 8.8.5 56 LOT 174 89' 13.6 111.2 122.5 . 90.7 57 55 LOT 194 93' 14.3 108.0 119.5 90.3 OCT 10 58 SLOPE LOT 192 114' 14.3 li6.0 122~5 94.8 59 SLOPE LOT 187 135 ~ 12.3 112.5 122.5 91.8 60 SLOPE LOT 191 119' 13.6 113.0 . 122.5 92.2 61 SLOPE LOT 188 127~ 14.9 116.6 122.5 9~.1 OCT 13 . 62 42 LOT 198 119' 12.3 117.2 127.5 92.2 63 LOT 218 FG 142.0' 10.5 119.8 124 .. 0 96.5 64 LOT 219 UPPER FG 136.3' 10.5 109.6 1.25.0 87.8 65 LOT 222 FG 121.0' 12.3 107.4 119.5 90.0 66 LOT 221 FG 120.0' ·11 .7 117.0 127.5 91.8 67 LOT 223 FG 119 ~ 51 13.6 108.3 119.5 90;6 OCT 14 68 . 64 LOT 219 UPPER FG 136.3' 11. 1 117.3 125.0 93.·8 69 LOT 219 LOWER FG 132.0' iLl 116.0 125.0 92.8 70 LOT 206 FG 143.0 1 9.9 125.8 127·0 99.1 71 LOT 205 FG 142.0' 9.9 118.9 127.0 93.6 72 LOT 204 FG 141.0 I 10.5 125.9 127.0 99.1 73 LOT 217 FG 132.5' 11.7 122.4 '127.5 95.9 74 LOT 216 UPPER FG 129.3' 14.9 113.9 124.0 91.9 . 75 LOT 203 FG 139.0 1 12.3 119.6 127.5 93.7 76 LOT 202 UPPER FG 139.3' 12.3 T21.6 127 .5 95.4 77 LOT 202 LOWER FG 135.0 1 9.3 114.9 127.0 90.5 , ~OMPACTION TEST RESULT. JOB NAME LAGUNA RIVIERA 6 & 7 DATE REPORTED 11-10-75 JOB NUMBE.R 75-105-23F DATES COVERED September 25, 1975 through October 23, 1975 PAGE 3 OF 4 ' MOlllTURlt .. IELD LAISORATORY "!!:LATIVlt , DATE TltsT RE:l'EST LOCATION ELEVATION CONTl!:NT D~NSIT'" DENSITY COMPAC"'iION NUMBCR OF OF TEST % DItY WT. PCF PcP 'I, OF LAB, DENS. ----- OCT '15 78 LOT 216 LOWER FG 125.31 11.1 116.7 127.5 91.5 79 LOT 215 UPPER FG 124.3' 12.3 116.4 127.0 91.6 80 LOT 215 LOWER FG 120.0' 9.9 109.2 127.0 86.0 81 LOT 201 FG 133.0' 15.6 , 124.7 ' 127.5 ' 97.8 82 LOT 200 FG 127.0' 13.6 116.6 127.,5 91 . .5 83 LOT 199 FG 122.5' 13.0 121.5 127.5-95.2 84 LOT 198 FG 120.0' 13.0 120. 1 127.0 94.5 85 LOT 178 105' 14.3 119.1 127.0 93.8 OCT 16 86 LOT 197 FG 118.8' 10.5 114.9 127.0 90.5 87 LOT 196 UPPER FG 115.7' 12.3 115.4 '127.0 90.9 88 LOT 196 LOWER FG 112.7 1 13.6 119.1 127.0 93.7 - '89 80 LOT 215 LOWER FG 120.0' 11. 1 116.2 127.0 91.5 90 LOT 181 112' 13.0 116.3 127.5 91.4 OCT 17 ,91 LOT 208 FG 142.6 1 11.7 124.7 127..0 98.1 92 LOT 209 FG 142.41 13.6 119.0 127.5 93.3 93 LOT 214 FG 120.3 1 11 . 1 . 117.3 127.0 92.4 .OCT 20 94 LOT 177 FG 103.9 1 9.9 111.5 127.0 87.8 95 LOT 178 FG 106.5 1 n.7 118.5 1'27 .. 0 93.3 96 LOT 179 FG 108.2' 11.1 116.9 127.0 92.0 97 LOT 180 FG 112.0' 10.5 115.2 127.0 90.7 98 LOT 181 FG 113.4' 10.5 109.8 127.0 '86.4 99 94 LOT 177 FG 103.9 1 12.3 117. O' 127.0 92. i 100 LOT 182 FG 111.5 1 14.3 118. 1 127.5 92.7 101 LOT 183 FG 108.6 1 13.6 119.3 127.5 93.6 GCT 21 102 98 LOT 181 FG 113.41 11. 7 115.4 127.0 91'.0 103 LOT 220 FG 119..0' 14.3 116.3 124.0 93.8 104 LOT 189 UPPER 112 ' 10.5 120;4 127.0 94.8 105 LOT 176 FG' 100.7' 15.6 111.9 119.5 93.5 106 LOT 192 FG. 100.2' 14.9 123.0 127.5 96.6 107 LOT 193 UPPER FG 99.2' 15.6 122.2 127.5 95.8 108 LOT 174 UPPER 87' 12.3 116.0 127.5 91. 3 109 LOT 174 LmJER 90' 13.6 115.6 127.5-90.8 OCT 22 110 LOT 193 UPPER FG 95.21 13.6 119.8 126.0 95.0 111 LOT 194 FG 94.6' 13.6 117.3 126.0 93.0 112 LOT 192 FG 100.2' 13.6 120.2 127.5 94.3 113 LOT 191 LOWER FG' 100.8' 11.7 115.0 127.5 90 .. 2 114 LOT 189 UPPER FG 113.21 14.3 116.9 126.0 92.8 115 LOT 188 FG 112.6 I 13.6 115.0 127.5 90.2 116 LOT i87 FG 113.5 1 14.9 114.8 127 .5 90.0 -COMPACTION TEST RESULT' JOB NAME LAGUNA RIVIERA 6 & 7 DATE REPORTED 11-10-75 JOB NUfvlBER 75-105-23F DATES COVERED September 25. 1975 through October 23, 1975 PAGE 4 OF 4' MOISTURE Y'I!:LD LAIIORATORY Rl!:LAT I VI!: DATE TUST RETEST LOCATION ELEVATION CONTENT DI!:NS,TY DEI'IIIITY COMPACTION /'lUMBER OF Of" TEST .,., DItYWT. pcp PCI'. % OF LAB. D£NS, --- OCT 23 117 LOT 184 FG 106 .. 8 1 11. 1 118 LOT 185 LOWER FG 107.6 12.3 119 LOT 189 LOWER FG 108.4' 13.6 120 LOT 190 UPPER FG 109.5' 11. 1 121 LOT 190 LOWER FG 105.21 14~3 122 LOT 191 UPPER FG 104.8' 14.9 123 LOT 195 FG 92.2' 14.9 124 LOT 175 FG 97.6' 14.3 125 LOT 174 UPPER FG '92.7' 13.6 126 LOT 174 LOWER FG 88.0' 15.6 117.1 127.0 92.2 114.9 127.5. 90.0 123.1 127.5 96.5 l20.7 126.0 95.7 121. 3 127.0 95.5 120.8 127.5 _ 94.7 120.6 126.0 95.7 117.5 127.5 92.2 115.8 127'.5 90.8 118.8 127.5 93.2 I"i .' , . .I i " ~' " ~OMPACTION TEST RESULT' JOD NAM£ LAGUNA RIVIERA 6 & 7 DATE REPORTED 11-10-75 JOB NUMBER 75-105-23F (Streets) DATES COVERED September 29, 1975 through October 24, 1975 PAGE S-l OF S-l NOISTURIt P'II!:LD LADOR ... TORY RnATIVE DATE naT RETEST LOC ... ·T10N ELEVATION CONTI!:NT DI!:NSITY DIWalTY COMPACTION NUMBCR OF OF TEST % DRY WT, PCI' PCI' ~. 01' LAB. DENS. --- SEPT 29 S-l HILLSIDE DRIVE: Opp LOT 220 1171 11. 1 115.2 127.0 90-.7 5-2 OPP LOT 219 124' 15.6 121.4 122.5 99.1 ' S-3 OPP LOT 218 133 1 16.3 .111.8 121.0 92.4 S-4 OPP LOT 218 130' 17.6 115.6 122.5 . 94.4 SEPT 30 S-5 HILLSIDE DRIVE: Opp LOT 217 132 1 15.6 116.8 122.5 95 .• 3 OCT 9 S-6 HILLSIDE DRIVE: OPP LOT 195 92 1 14.3 111. 9 122.5 91. 3 S-7 Opp LOT 196 981~ 13.6 111.2 122.5 90 . .7 OCT 13 S-8 HILLSIDE DRIVE: OPP LOT 195 98' 11.7 113.2 122.3 92.4 5-9 OPP LOT 196 107' 13.6 117.2 122.3 95.6 OCT 15 S-10 HILLSIDE DRIVE: OPP LOT 216 126' 12.3 118.4 127.5 92.8 S-l1 NEBLINA DRIVE: 'OPP LOT 220 113' .13.6 120.0 127.5 94.3 OCT }6 S-12 NEBLINA DRIVE: OPP LOT 223 111' 12.3 110.0 ·121.0-91.2 OCT 17 S-13 NEBLINA DRIVE: OPP LOT 215 11? ' 11. 1 117 .. 8 127.5 92.3 S-14 HILLSIDE DRIVE: OPP LOT 196 106' 13.6 119.8 127.Q 94.2 OCT 24 S-15 REFUGIO AVENUE: OPP LOT 174 84' 12.3 118.0 127.5 . 92.5 S-16 OPP LOT 195 88' 11.7 <117.0 127.5 91.7 S-17 HILLSIDE DRIVE: OPP LOT 217 135' 15.6 108.6 119.5 90.8 PLASTICITY CHARACTERISTICS 1 Liquid Limit, % --r-29 Plasticity Index, % 14 Classification by Unified Soil Classification System SC . 150 \ \ \ \ ZERO AIR VOIDS CURVES \ 1\ \,-2.80 SG' \ 1\ 2.70 SG ~ \ 1\ 2.60 SG \ \ \ 2.50 SG ,140 \ \ f\ \ \ 1\ \ r\\ \ \ \ \ 130 f--l'--j.-+-+i\-\+-'c\~I\ \1\ \ \ T\ 2 50 34 S£ r\ \\f\ Maximum Dry Density. pcf Optimum Moisture Content, % 123 124.0 121.( 122.5 11.5 12.5 12.5 f ,f I MOISTURE CONTENT. % 10 20 30 LABORATORY COMPACTION TEST • 3 f SILT &-CLAY 35 '18 CL 100 ~ 80 en en, -g: 60 f-Z w 40 o cc ~ 20 o 1000 ~ \ \ \ Q '~ f-3 1.\ \. '\ ""-. ~ ". 1 --..:.:". ......... I I I I, 100 10 1.0 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE, mm . MECHANICAL ANALYSIS DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA ;', ~ 0.001 Dry Density. pet ~----------~--~----+-~~ Initial Water Content. % ~~.~~----~~~----+-~~ Final Water Content, % --~~------r-~~----~~~ Apparent Cohesion. psf --~~------~--~--~~~~ Apparent Friction Angle. degrees SWEL,L TEST DATA 1 2 3 Initial Dry Density. pcf 112.2 ..:--~~~-----r--~~--4---~ Initial Water C.:.,..o_n.:....te_nt..!.... ~% ____ --l_1.!-1~.:....::;44--'-.,..--i~.:....:.:..-J Final Dry Density. pet 107.9 --~--------l~~~--~~---I Final Water Content. % 17.2 --~~------l~~~--~~---J 160 4.0 --- f-,L~ad, psf Swell, percent ~--------~----~--~~~~ SAMPLE LOCATION , 1 LOT 220 2 LOTS 216 & 217 3 lOT ?l?I?B 40 LABORATORY COMPACTION TEST METHOD: ASIM-D 15~7-70 A FILL SUITABILITY TESTS LAGUNA RIVIERA 6 AND 7 DRAWN BY: ALS I CHECKEDBY:~ PROJECT NO: 75-105-23F I DATE: 11-10-75 I FIGURE NO: 1, WOODWARO-Cl VDE CONSULTANTS PLASTICITY CHARACTERISTICS 4 5 Liquid Limit, % --28 --f- Plasticity Index, % --11 Classification by Unified Soil Classification System --SC 1 50 r--...-r-r-\\"T'Y 1 \--' 1\ \ 1\ ZERO AIR VOIDS CURVES \ 1\ ''\ 2.80 SG \ \ 1\ 2.70 SG \1\ 140 r-t-'!T-=~~--2.50 SG \ 1\ \ 2.60 SG 1\ \ \ ~ \ \ \ \ 130 1---1f---+-I--'i-I\·H4\·-"I\ )('F\'.~ \ \ \f\' Maximum Dry Density. pcf Optimum Moisture Content, % 120.5 127.0 127.5 . 14.0 10.0 11.0 I I I MOISTURE CONTENT, % 10 20 30 LABORATORY COMPACTION TEST 6 p.!-!-'T=:=+-~~---l S I L T & CLAY 30 12 SC 100 ~ 80 tf) tf) ~ 60 I-~ 40 u a: ~ 20 I I 0 \ .\ ,\, \ 1\ \. \ L_ -4 i5 -~,\ .\ .\ 1\ \ n ~ 1"- "-t'. l""-=--~ I I, o 1000 100 10 1.0 0.1 GRAIN SIZE, mm 0.01 0.001 MECHANICAL ANALYSIS DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA Dry Density,-=-p_cf _____ I__-_+---l--_1 Initial Water Content, % ~~.~~---I__-_+----l--_I Final Water Content, % ----~-----4----+_-- Apparent Cohesion, pst ~~~----~~-~---~-~ Apparent Friction Angle, degrees SWELL TEST DATA 4 5 6 14.4 Initial Dry Density, pct -~~--~~-~~~I---~ 11. 7· Initial Water Content, % -~~----~-~~~~~~~ Final Dry Density, pcf --~-----4---~-~ 10.8 17.5 Final Water Content, % --~~----1----~~~~~~ f-Load, psf 60 3.3 Swell, percent ~--------~--~~~~~~ SAMPLE LOCATION 4 LOT 216 5 TOP OFF -LOT ?ll1_?lQ 6 ~lIX FRot~ LOTS 210/212.- 40 LABORATORY COMPACTION TEST METHOD: ASTt1-D 1557-70 A FILL SUITABILITY TESTS LAGUNA RIVIERA 6 AND 7 DRAWN BY: ALS I CHECKED BY:~ PROJECT No:15-105-23F' I DATE: 11-10-75 I FIGURE NO: 2 WOODWARD-Cl VOE CONSULTANTS '" • r ,.-• PLASTICITY CHARACTERISTICS 7 Liquid Limit, % -- Plasticity Index, % -- Classification by Unified Soil --Classification System , 150 \ \ 14 1\ \ 1\ ZERO AIR VOIDS CURVES \ 1\ ' \" 2.80 SG \ 1\ 2.70 SG \1\ 2.60 SG 0 \ '\ \ \ 2.50 SG \ 1\ \ \ 1\ \ 1\ \ 0 \ \\ 1\ 13 .,\ ~ \ 9 ~. ., ~ \ ,-t-/ / ~, \\ 0 j ~ ~\ 1\ 8 -;-/ \ ~ 1\ ..... 12 u 1\ \ ,\\ r\ 0. 1---i \ ~ r\\ ::r: 7 f-:;. <.? [\\ \ ~ w 3; \ 1\ ,,\ I- Z \ ~ :J \ \ f\\ >--0:: 1').\ \ 1\ 0 ___ .1 __ . t--I \ 1\' 1\ 1\' 100 1\\ \ -- j 8 ---- -- \\ .\ 1\ .\ [\\ I~ 1\' 9 NP 100 ~ 80 CI) CI) g: 60 I-~ 40 'U 0:: ~ 2 o o \. 1\\ ,\ '\.\ IR ' 1-..\ 9 - , , I 1\ \ \--'f<-'-7 \ 1"\ ~\ ' \,.. '\. "-~ f' ........ I'---.. , ""'-'-' ... 1'>" . ...; I I 1000 100 10 1.0 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE, mrn MECHANICAL ANALYSIS DIRECT SH EAR TEST DATA Dry Density, pcf Initial Water Content, % Final Water Content, % 'Apparent Co hesion, psf Apparent Fri ction Angle, degrees SWELL TES T DATA 7 8 9 ' Initial Dry D ensity, pcf 107.7 112.6 114.0 Initial Water Content, % 14.4 12.0 10.9 Final Dry De nsity, pC;f . 102.6 i10.9 113.5 Final Water C ontent, %. .7 16.3 14.4 I-Load, psf 160 160 160 4.9 l.5 0.5 Swell, percen t r-..\ t-----t---I-1\.\ l\ 1\ 90 '80 a SAMPLE LOCATION Maximum Dry 7 8 9 [\.\ l"-' f\. 'Density. pcf 119.5 125.0 h27.0 ~ ,'\ f\(r-.. f-'\ ~f\.: Optimum Moisture 13.5 11. 5 10.5 Content, % . '\ " ~ , 7 raTS 222 & 223 8 LOT 219 9 OT 198 TO EAST . I I I I MOISTURE CONTENT, % K ~1 10 20 30 LABORATORY COMPACTION TEST 40 LABORATORY COMPACTION TEST METHOD: ASH1-D 1557:-70 A FILL SUITABILITY TESTS LAGUNA RIVIERA 6 AND 7 DRAWN BY: J\LS I CHECKED BY: 4%'1 PROJECT NO: 75-105-23F I DATE: 11-10-751 ,FIGURE NO: 3 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS , .J " PLASTICITY CHARACTERISTICS 10 Liquid Limit, % 31 Plasticity Index, % 15 Classification by Unified Soil SC Classification System . 15 0 \ i\ \ \ :\ ZERO AIR VOIDS CURVES \ \ \ '\ 2.S0 SG \ \ 2.70 SG \ \ 1\ 2.60 SG 0 '\ '\ 2.50 SG 14 \ 1\ \ \ f\ 1\ 1\ \ 0 \ \ !\ ' \ f\ 1\ 13 \ \ \ V\ ~\ [\ 10 -);! ~I 1\ \\\ \- V \ \\ [\\ " \ ~ ~~ .... '\ u \ 0. I \ r: ~ \ 1\ \\ I 120 (!) ,\ \ ~ w 3i: \ \ i\\ I- Z i\ 1\ \ ~ ::J \ \ >:-1\ 0:: f\' '\ r\ 0 f--I.~.-.i..-. I \\ 1\ 1\ 1\\ 110 100 ~\ \ f--. '--.- ~ 1---f---1-. .------. \\ \ '\ ,\ \.\ \ \. • ~~==+--':~"('---l S I L T & CLAY 100 ~ SO (f.) (f.) ~ 60 I-Z w 40 u 0:: ~ 2 o o \. \ I I 1\ \ \-~1 \ \... ............ r---- . I . I 1 000 100 10 . 1.0 0.1 o.oi 0.001 GRAIN SIZE, mm MECHANICAL ANALYSIS DIRECT SH EAR TEST DATA Dry Density, pcf Initial Water Content, % Final Water Content, % Apparent Co hesion, psf Apparent Fri ction Angle; degrees' SWELL TES T DATA 10 Initial Dry De nsity, pcf 113.3 Initial Water Content, % 11.4 Final Dry De nsity, pcf Final Water C ontent, % J 8. 3 f-Load, psf 160 Swell, percen t 3.5 r\\ r\ \ [\. ..... .\ .'\ 90 SAMPLE LOCATION Maximum Dry 10 r\. Density, pcf 126.0 '\ ,,,,-~ Optimum Moisture '\ ~ " Content, % 11.5 .", " ~ I I I MOISTURE CONTENT, % I'-' ,,'I 10 20 30 LABORATORY COMPACTION TEST FILL SUITABILITY TESTS LAGUNA RIVIERA 6 AND 7 ' 10.LOT195-194 DRAWN BY: ALS I CHECKED By:tM PROJECT NO: 75-1 05-LJI-I DATE: 11-10-75 .1F'GURENo: 4 WOODWARD·Cl YDE CONSULTANTS ~OHM I~ .I" Testing Engineers· San Diego 3467 KURTZ ST .. P.O. BOX 80985. SAN DIEGO. CA 92138 (714) 225.9641 LABORATORY NUMBER SD31-586 File No. 507, TESD 4ft 1086 DAvE February 26, 1976 JOB DATA: Laguna Riviera 6 & 7, Job 4175-105-23 F SAMPLE DATA: Refugio Street, opposite Lot 173, Carlsbad. Sample submitted to Woodward-Clyde Consultants the laboratory February 20, 1976. 3467 Kurtz Street San Die g,o, California 92110 , , R • V,ALUE DATA GRADING ANALYSIS A ,B C 0 E " SIEVE PERCENT PASSING COMPACTOR PRESS • P.S.I. 150 270 350 SIZE As Rcvo. As USED MOIST @ COMPACTION. % 13.9 4" 12.2 11.3 DENSITY. #/Cu. FT. 117.,0 121.0 120.8 3" R.VALUE • STABILOMETER 16 30 57 2" EXUD. PRESSURE. P.S.1. 100 270 440 1" STAB. THICK. FEET ---------3104" " EXPAN. PRESS. THICK. FEET 0.17 0.37 0~60 lh" .. T. I. (ASSUMED) = ---%" w BY STAB. @ 300 P.S.1. EXUD. = Z::J 34 C).J #4 -0( l{l> By EXPANSION PRESSURE = o· ---0:: #8 AT EQUILIBRIUM = 34 #16 SAND EQUIVALENT = 24 #30 -DURABILITY (COARSE) = LIQUID LIMIT = #50 DURABILITY (FINE) = PLASTIC LIMIT = - i #100 P.,I. = ! #200 .. REMARKS: ", (1) Woodward-Clyde Consultants TESTING ENGINEERS. INC. WLC:rm By Jd (h A ....... ( (;.r I ~ . ...... -!. ' -~ William L. Cochrane, R.E. #24445 . ' • '-Or\M HI JI' ' .. Testing Engineers· San· Diego 3467 KURTZ ST .. P.O. BOX 80985. SAN DIEGO. CA 92138 (714) 225.9641 LABORATORY NUMBER SD31-589 File No.. 507, TESD # 1086 ,DATE February 26, 1976 - JOB DATA: Laguna Riviera 6 & 7, Jo.b 1f:75-l05-23F SAMPLE DATA: Hillside Street, o.ppo.site Lo.t 218, Carlsbad. Sample submitted t'o. the Wo.o.dward-C1yd.e Co.nsu1tants 1abo.rato.ry February 20, 1976. 3467 Kurtz Street San Di.ego., Califo.rnia 92110 R • VALUE DATA GRADING ANALYSIS A B C 0 E SIEVE PERCENT PASSING COMPACTOR PRESS • P.S.I, 125 75 270 SIZE As RCVD. As USED MOIST @ COMPACTION. % 13.4 15.2 11.7 4" DENSITY. #/Cu. FT., 118.5 114.5 124.2 3" R.VALUE • STABILOMETER 14 8' 35 2" EXUD. PRESSURE. P,S.1. 330 180, 750 1" STAB. THICK. FEET 0.93, ------%" EXPAN. PRESS. THICK.FEET Lll ------lh" T.I. (ASSUMEO) = ---%" w By ,STAB. @ 300. P.S.I. Exuo. = z:> 13 Cl..l . #4 -« , g]> By EXPANSION PRESSURE = o· ---#8 e:: AT EQUILIBRIUM = l3 #16 SAND EQUIVALENT = 14 #30 . DURABILITY (COARSE) = LIQUID LIMIT = #50 DURABILITY (FINE) = PLASTIC LIMIT = #100 . ' P. I. = #200 REMARKS: (1) Wo.o.dward-Clyde Co.nsultants TESTING. ENGINI:;ERS, INC. WLC:rm ByJ,~~ William L. Co.chrane, R.E. 1124445 I'OnM 10.1" .... I." Testing Engineers -San Diego 3467 KURTZ ST .. P.O. BOX 80985. SAN DIEGO. CA 92138(714) 225.9641 . LABORATORY NUMBER SD3l-588 File No. 507, TESD # 1086 DATE February 26, 1976 JOB DATA: Laguna Riviera 6 & 7, Job inS -105-23F SAMPLE DA:rA: Neblina Street, opposite Lot .204, Carlsbad .• g'amp1e submitted to the Woodward-Clyde Consultants laboratory on February 20, 1976. 3467 Kurtz Street San Diego, California 92110 R • VALUE DATA GRADING ANALYSIS A B C D E SIEVE PERCENT PASSING COMPACTOR PRESS • P.SJ. 90 230 350 SIZE As RCVD. As USED MOIST @ COMPACTION. % ·14.0 12.2 11.3 4" DENSITY. #/Cu. FT. 117.0 121.9 122.4 3" R.VALUE • STABILOMETER 10 18 46 2" EXUD. PRESSURE. P.S.1. 210 370 530 1" STAB. THICK. FEET ---------3A" EXPAN. PRESS. THICK. FEET 00 27 lh" 0.53 0.70 T. I. (ASSUMED) = ---%" .. Ul BY.STAB. @ 300 P.S.I. EXUD. = 13 z::> #4 C).l -« .~> By EXPANSION PRESSURE = o· ---#8 0:: AT EQUILIBRIUM = 13 #16 , SAND EQUIVALENT = 19 #30 . DURABILITY (COARSE) = LIQUID LIMIT = #50 DURABILITY (FINE) = PLASTIC LIMIT = #100 P. I. = #200 REMARKS: (1) Woodward-Clyde Consultants TESTING ENG1Ni;:ERS. INC. WLC:rm BY~~~( :. f1_/J_-=---- William L. -cochr~445 ." ~ . ... '. Testing Engineers -San Diego 3467 KURTZ ST •• P.O. BOX 80985 •. SAN DIEGO. CA 92138 (714) 225.9641 LABORATORY NUMBER SD3l-587 File No. 507, TESD # 1086 DATE February 26, 1976 . JOB DATA: Laguna Riviera 6 & 7, Job :ft75-105-23F SAMPL.E DATA: . Neb lina Street, o,pposite Lot 222, Carlsbad. Sample submitted to the Woodward-Clyde Consultants laborato ry February 2D, 1976. 3467 Kurtz Street San Diego, California 92110 R • VAL.UE DATA GRADING ANALYSIS A B C D E SIEVE PERCENT PASSING COMPACTOR PRESS. P.S.I. 125 310 200 SIZE As RCVD. As USED MOist @ COMPACTION. % 14.0 12.3 13.1 4" DENSITY. #/Cu. FT •. .. , 118.0 12.2.3 120.0 3" - R.VAL.UE • STABIL.OMETER 11 36 19 2" EXUD. PRESSURE. P.S.I. 220 540 360 1" STAB. THICK. FEET ------'WI" EXPAN. PRESS. THICK. FEET 0.07 0.30 0.13 *" T. I. (ASSUMED) = ---%" 111 By.sTAB. @ 300' P.S.I. EXUD. = 15 Z::l #4 C)..l -< gj> By EXPANSION PRESSURE = c· ---#8 0: AT EQUIL.IBRIUM = 15 #16 SAND EQUIVAL.ENT = 15 #30· . DURABIL.ITY (COARSE) = LIOUID LIMIT = #50 DURABIL.ITY (FINE) = PL.ASTIC LIMIT = #100 P. I. = #200 REMARKS: (1) Woodward-Clyde Consultants TESTING ENGINE,:ERS, INC. Bv~L~~I..~ " WLC:rm William L. Cochrane, R.E. :ft24445 rOfl).1 us .HI .. Testing Engineers .. San Diego 3467 KURTZ ST .. P.O. BOX 80965. SAN DIEGO. CA 92138 (714) 225.9641 LABORATORY NUMB~R SD3l-585 File No. 507, TESD 11 1086 DATE February 26, 1976 JOB DATA: Laguna Riviera 6 &·7, Job 11 75-l05-23F SAMPLE DATA: Refugio Street, opposite Lot 181, Carlsbad. Sample submitted too the Woodward-Clyde Consultants laboratory February 20, 1976. 3467 Kurtz Street San Diego, California 92110 R • VALUE DATA GRADING ANALYSIS A 'B C D E SIEVE PERCENT PASSING COMPACTOR PRESS. P.S.I. 125 105 185 SIZE As RCVD. As USED MOIST @ COMPACTION • % 14.7 15.6 . 13.8 4" DENS.lTY • #/Cu. FT. 116.3 113.7 117.6 . 3" o' R.VALUE • STABILOMETER 15 11 20. 2" EXUD. PRESSURE. P.S.I. 320 280 540 1" STAB. THICK. FEET %" ------..... _- EXPAN. PRESS. THICK.FE;ET 0.63 0.40 0.97 lh" T. I. (ASSUMED) = ---. %" \1J By.sTAB. @ 300 P.S.I. EXUD. = 13 Z::l #4 (!)-l -« ffi> By EXPANSION PRESSURE = o· --'!'" #8 0: AT EQUILIBRIUM = 13 #16 , SAND EQUIVALENT = 12 #30 -DURABILITY (COARSE) = LIQUID LIMIT = #50' DURABILITY (FINE) = P"LASTIC LIMIT = #100 P. I. = #200 REMARKS: (1) Woodward-Clyde Consultants TESTING ENGINEERS. INC. WLC:rm By htik~A-L_~L _____ ~~~ William L. Cachrane, R.E. • WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS WESTERN REGION 3467 Kurtz Street San D'iego California 92110 Phone (714) 224-2911 CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS April 27, 1976 Project No. 7S-10S-23F Kamar Construction Company P . 0 . Box 1115 Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Mr. Jerry Rombotis President LAGUNA RIVIERA UNITS 6 & 7 SEWER TRENCH, STORM DRAIN TRENCH BACKFILL AND STREET SUBGRADE COMPACTION TEST RESULTS CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Att:J.ched are the results of field density tests taken at the subject project at the. request and under the di recti o'n of Mr. Jerry Baron, Project Supervi sor and Mr. Steave, City Inspector, on the dates indicated and at the locati.ons given. These tests represent the relative compaction and 'water contents at the locatfons tested. Opinions as to the relative compaction, water content or sui,tability of the fi 11 in areas not tested wi 11 be expressed by us only where we have observed the pl~cement of such fill, and have satisfied ourselves that construction procedures followed in other areas are represented by the areas tested, WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS JLH/EHP/mrk Attachments (5) Kamar Construction Company (1) Carlsbad City Engineering Division ;:r' , 'l 4l:0MPACTION TEST RESUL,-e JOB NAME LAGUNA RIVIERA UNITS ,6 & 7 DATE REPOfln:D Ap'ri 1 27', 1976 JOB NUMBER 75-105-23F (Streets) OATES COVERED Apr; 1 21 through April 23, 1976 PAGE S-l OF S-l MOISTURE P'IELO LABORATORY III!:LATIVE DATE TEST RETEST LOCATION ELEVATION CONTENT DENSITY DENSITY COMPACTION NUMBER OF OF TEST '!II DIIYWT. PCP' PCI' % 01' LAB. DENS. --- APRIL 21 S-18 REFUGIO DRIVE: , OPP LOT 180 5G 11 .1 124.0 ]27.5 97.2 S-19 OPP LOT 176 SG 10.5 123'.0 125.0 98.4 APRIL 22 S-20 HILLSIDE DRIVE: OPP LOT 218 SG 10.5 115.1 119.5 96.3 S-21 NEBLINA DRIVE: OPP LOT 221 SG 11. 1 115.1 119.5 96.3 S-22 OPP LOT 207 SG 11.1 120.7 125.0 96.6 S-23 OPP LOT 211 SG 10.5 122.3 127.5 95.9 S-24 OPP LOT 214 SG 13.6 123·.7 127.5 97.,0 APRIL 23 $-25 HILLSIDE DRIVE: OPP LOT 195 SG 9.3 113'.7 126.0 90.2 S-26 OPP LOT 196 SG 10.5 120.7 126.0 95.8 , . .COMPACTION TEST RESUL-e JOB NAME LAGUNA RIVIERA UNITS 6 & 7 JOB NUMBER 75-105-23F (Storm Drain Trench Backfill) DATES COVERED Apr; 1 21 through Apr; 1 23, 1976 DATE TEST NUMBER APRIL 21 SD-1 SD-2 APRIL 23 SD-3 RETEST OF LOCATION HILLSIDE DRIVE: OPP LOT 218 OPP LOT 215 HILLSIDE DRIVE: OPP LOT 174 ELEVATION OF TEST SURFACE -21 -21 -1. 51 MOISTURE CONTENT % DftYWT, 10.5 16.3 12.3 OAT~ RcI'Olrfl',O Apri 1 27, 1976 PAGE: SD-1 OF SD-:-1 I'IELD .i.AISORATORY RELATIVE DENSITY DENSITY, COMI'ACTiON PCP' PCI' %'OI"LAB, DE;NS, 113.3 118. Q 114.2 119.5 127.5 121.0 94.'8 92.6 94.4 " .OMPACTION TEST RESUL4· t.-.-' If .. , . LAGUNA RIVIERA UNIT 6 & 7 • DATE REPORTE:D Apri 1 27, 1976 JOB NAME JOB NUMBER 75-105-23F (Sewer Trench Backfi 11 ) DATES COVERED April. 21 through April 23, 1976 PAGE; SW-1 OF SW-l MOISTURE ,.IELD LABORATORY ,utLATIVE DATE TEST RE:TEST LOCATION ELEVATION CONTENT DENSITY DENSITY COMPACTION NUMBER , OF OF TEST . % OilY WT. Pc,. PCI' ,/, 01' LAB. DEN •• --- SURFACE APRIL 21 SW-1 REFUGIO DRIVE: OPP LOT 182 -3 1 9.9 116.5 127.5 91.4 SW-2 OPP LOT 190 :-3 1 11. 1 12~ .2 127.5 95.0 SW-3 OPP LOT 194 -3 1 10.5 118.4 "27.5 92.9 APRIL 22 SW-4 HILLSIDE DRIVE: OPP LOT 220 -3 1 11.7 119.2 127.5 93.5 SW-5 NEBLINA DRIVE: OPP LOT 222 -3' 10.·5 114.9 125.0 91. 9 S~V-6 AT. INTERSECTION OF HILLSIDE DRIVE -3' 10. -5 113.3 125.0 90.5 SW-7 OPP LOT 200 -3 1 11.7 112.7 125.0 90.1 SW-8 OPP LOT 205 -3 1 9.3 114.1 127.0 90.0 APRIL 23 SW-9 HILLSIDE DRIVE: OPP LOT 196 -3 1 11.7 1,.6.3 126.0 92.3 SW-10 OPP LOT 174 -3 1 12.3 115.3 121'. a 95.3 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS ANI) ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS WESTERN REGION 3467 Kurtz Street San Diego California 92110 Phone (714) 224·2911 Aspha lt Servi ce Box "C" Apri 1 30, 1976 Project No. 76-103-25 Oceanside, California 92054 Attenti~n: Mr. Roger Weston BOB LYNCH PIT NORTH SANTA FE SACK SAMPLE 1 TEST RESULTS SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA REC£lVED M~'l. -_3 1976 C\1''< ,OF CARLSBA~t Engineering Depar!m CT7if:-/9 Attached are the results of laboratory tests performed on a sample of the material used for street base on Laguna Riviera Units 6 and 7. woom·JARD-CL YDE CONSULTANTS LJL/EHP/we Attachments (4) Asphalt Service . (1) City of Carlsbad, Engineering·Division (1) Kamar Construction Company • • 1'011101 15 ,jp Testing Engineers -San Diego 3467 KURTZ ST .. P.O. BOX 80985. SAN DIEGO. CA 92138 (71'4) 225.9641 LABORATORY NUM,BER SD3l-l232 File No. 507 DATE April 21, 1976 > JOB DATA: 76-103-25 Lynnch -North Santa Fe Pi SAMPLE DATA: Sample 1, sack ifl, import to Laguna Riviera from North Santa Fe Pit •• Woodward-Clyde Consultants Sample submitted to the laboratory on April 3467 Kurtz Street 23, 1976. San Diego, California 92110 - R • VALuE DATA :0 ., GRADING ANALYSIS A B C E 'IEVE PERCENT PASSING COMPACTOR PRESS. P.S.1. 350 350 350 ';IZE As RCVD. As USED MOIST @ COMPACTION • % 10.4 9.6 9.3 ,4" DENSITY. #/Cu. FT. 126.6 126.6 127.8 3" R.VALUE • STABILOMETER 72 81 82 2" EXUD. PRESSURE. P.S.1. 110 300 480 1" STAB. THICK. FEET ---' ------%" EXPAN. PRESS. THICK.FEET I --------- 'j 112" T. I. (ASSUMED) = ---Y£" . a W BY.STAB. @ 300 P.S.I. EXUD. = 100 z:> 82 #4 C).J -« l3> By EXPANSION PRESSURE = . 1110-80 00:: --- 1120 51 AT EQUILIBRIUM = 82 , --- #40 34 SAND EQUIVALENT = 49 #60 24 DURABILI'TY (COARSE) = L!QUID LIMIT = #140 12 DURABILITY (FINE) = PLASTIC LIMIT = P. I. = ~200 9 E MARKS: (1) Woodward-Clyde Consu 1tants , TESTING E~GINEERS. IN0 I , TIlC:rm BY--.---~lLa~o-~cc-' -' • ' 'Thoma.s 1I. Chpprilll1 R.E. 11:12882 .. ,