The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 80-34; PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK; GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION; 1977-09-19• Iii III September 19, 1977 218-3, 1822 • ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES Consulting Soil. Foundotlon & Geologlcol Engineers , Palomar Airport Business Park 6231 Yarrow Drive, Suite C Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Mr. Bernard W. Gilmore Re: Geotechnical Investigation Palomar Airport Business Park -Phase" Carlsbad, California Gentlemen: , In accordance with your request, we have performed a detail.ed geat'echnical investi- gation for the subject project. The accompanying report presents the results of our field investigation, laboratory tests, and engineering analysis. The soil and foundation conditions are discussed and recommendations for the geotechnical engineering aspects of the project ar~ presented. . If you have any questions concerning our findings, please can. Very truly yours, . ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES Robert Prater, C. E. RP:jsr cc: Addressee (4) Wi "dan Associates, Attn: Mr. Henry Worley (2) 11585 Sorrento Volley Road, Suite 101, San Diego, California 92121 • (714) 453-5605 II ~. , ,).,:t,1 t~ ~ ";; ',,-, ~ I J I I 11 I I _I I I n I t -- l 0 Q • , G E OT EC H N ICALI NVESTI GAT! 0 N For PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHASE II Carlsbad, California To PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK 6231 Yarrow Drive,. Suite C Carlsbad, California September 1977 II II] \)..4f ~ ., ( "f '1 ..( TABLE OF CONTENTS Letter of Transmittal Ti.tle Page Table of Contents INTRODUCTION SCOPE SITE CONDITIONS A. Surface B. Subsurface C. Grol,mdwater D. Seismicity CONCLUS"IONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Earthwork l. Clearing and Stripping 2. Preparat i on for Fi" i ng 3. Excavation 4. Materi alsfor Fi II .5. Expansive Soils 6. Slopes 7. Compaction 8. Trench Backfi II 9. Drainage 10, Construction Observation B. Foundations 1. Footings 2. Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert 3. SI abs-on -Grade 4. Lateral Loads C. Pavements Figl,Jre 1 -Site Plan Figure 2 -Recommendations for Fi Iling on Sloping Ground APPENDIX A -FIELD INVESTIGATION Figure A-l ..; Key to Exploratory Test Pit logs Exploratory Test Pit logs ,1 through 14 APPENDIX B -LABORATORY TESTING Figures B-1 and B-2 -Plasticity Chart and Data Figure B-3 -Gradation Test Data Figures B-4 andB-5 -Compaction Test Results Figures B-6 and B-7 ..:. Direct Shear Test Dat.a APPENDIX C -GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS -SITE EARTHWORK • Page No. 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 6 6 6 7 7 7 8 8 8 9 A-l C-1 1I~ r LI • • • • II ,II -- II -- =[J I - 1 "I -g ~ \ ... ~~ " 'I') A _ ..... ..,' .. -~ ~ INTRODUCTION GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR • PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHASE II CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA In this report we present the results of our geotechnical investigation for the Phase II portion of the 330-acre Palomar Airport Business Park locoted on the south side of Palomar Airport Road opposite Palomar Airport in Carlsbad, California. Ourpredeces- sor firm previously performed detailed geotechnical investigations for the existing Phase I portion of the business park and for the PT&T improvements along the alignment of Camino Vida Roble wifhin the Phase II portion of the park. Our predecessor firm also provided earthwork observotionand testing services in connection with these projects. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate in detail the subsurface conditions at the site ond to provide recommendations concerning the geotechnical engineering aspects of the Phase II development. It is our understanding that t,he Phase. /I portion of the business park will most likely be developed in one and two-story concrete tilt-up structures with slab-on-grade floors similar to·those already constructed in the Phase I portion of the park. Extensive earthwork will be required to attain the design finish site grades. Cuts of up to about 40 feet and fi lis of up to about 50 feet are presenlly planned" The lots wi II probably not be finish graded during the initial earthwork operations; large areas encompassing several lots will be graded smoothly for drainage to within about plus or minus 2 feet of the anticipated finish lot grades. Finish grading of lots to satisfy the specific needs of a given building· and parking area wi II be undertaken as individual lots are developed. As indicated on the improvement plans for Camino Vida Roble prepared by Rick Engineering Company, a' reinforced concrete box culvert wHI be constructed beneath Camino Vida Roble at the approximate lotation indicated on the Site Plan, Figure 1. SCOPE The scope of work performed for this investigation included a site reconnais~ance, sub- surface exploration., laboratory testing, engineering analysis of the field and laboratory data, and the preparation of this report. The data obtained and the analyses performed were for the purpose of providing deslgn and construction criteria for the required site earthwork, building foundations dnd slab-on-grade construction. SITE CONDITIONS A. Surface The Phase" portion of the site is irregular in shape and bounded by Palomar Airport Road to the northwest, on S. D. G. & E. right-of-way to the southwest, ond by the Phase'.1 por- {.. t , • 218-3 Page 2 tion of the business park to the east. The terrain is generally moderately rolling with ground surfac;e elevations ranging from a low of about el. 170 at the western extremity of the site to a high of about el. 310 in the northeast portion of the site adjacent to Palomar Airport Road. Surface vegetation generally consists of a moderate to heavy growth of brush and chaparral. A few trees are present in the lower lying areas. A large stockpile of topsoil from the Phase I grading operation is present on the south side of Comino Vida Roble in the southeast portion of the Phase II development area. B. Subsurface A subsurface investigation was performed at the site on August 22, 1977 using a Case 5808 backhoe. Fourt~en exploratory test pits were excavated to a maximum depth of 14 feet at the approximate locations shown on the Site Plan, Figure 1. Logs of the test pits and details regarding 'the field investigation a're presented in Appendix A. Defails of the laboratory testing and the laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B'. It should be pointed out that the elevations referred to on the test pit logs are only approximate and were roughly estimated utilizing the ground surface contours shown on the preliminary grading plan provided by Windan Associates. The soils encountered in the explQratory test pits consisted predominantly of resid~al surface soils, colluvial soils and formational sedimentary soils. Residual surface soils, generaJ.ly less than 2 feet thick and ranging in composition from silty sand to potentially expansive sandy clay, were encountered on ridges and hillsides at the lIpper elevations overlying the formational soils. The formational soils encountered over the maj<;>rity of the site consisted of sandstones and siltstones. Due to the denseness and cementation of some of the formational materials encountered, refusal to penetration was met in exploratory backhoe Test Pits 3 and 14 at depths of 5.0 and 5.5 feet, respectively. Most of the proposed cuts will be in formational· soils which possess good strength charaderist'ics with regard to slope stability. The sandstone formational soils are non-expansive and of good pavement subgrade qual ity. Colluvial soils consisting of loos.e to medium dense silty sands were encountered to a depth of about 6.S feet in Test Pit 9 which was located near the bottom of a ravine. The soils encountered in Test Pit 12 located in the low lying area of the southeastern portion of the site ~onsisted of about 4 feet of loose sandy and clayey silts overlying very st!ff to hard silty clay which possesses a high potential for expansion. The test pit 'Iogs and related information depict subsurface conditions only at the specific locations shown on the site plan and on the particular date designated on t·he log's. Sub- sl,Jrface conditions at other locations may differ from conditions occurring at these test pit locations. Also, the passage of time may res\Jlt in a change in the subsurface conditions due to environmental changes. C. Groundwater Free groundwater was not encountered in any of the exploratory test pits excavated at the sit~ and no groundwater seepages were observed. It must be noted, however, that II j' ~. , II • •• • I II I. I I I I 1] I 1 -I ~I Q Q (, 1'1 ~r 218-3 Page 3 fluctuations in the level of groundwater may occllr due to variations in surface topography, subsurface stratification, rainfall and other possible factors which may not have been evident at the time of our field investigation • D. Seismicity Based on our reconnaissance and review of available published information, there are no active faults known to exist at the site and the nearest known major active favlts are the Elsinore and San Jacinto Fault Zones located approximately 24 and 4.6 miles northeast of the site, respectively. . Although research on earthquake prediction has greatly increased in recent years, seis- mologists have not yet reached the point where they can predict when and where an earthquake will occur. Nev~rtheless, on the basis of current technology, it is reasonabl'e to assume that the proposed structures wHI be subject to at least onemoc/erate earthquake during their design lives. During such an earthquake, the danger from fault offset through the site is remote but strong shaking of the site is likely to occur. ' CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS From a soil and foundation engineering standpoint I the site is suitable for construction Qf the proposed Phase" portion of the bus·iness park providing the conclusions and recommen- dations of this report ore incorporated into the design and construction of the proje'ct. The primary feature of concern at the site is the moderate to high expansion potential of some of the more clayey soils encountered in the exploratory test J'>its. We don't anticipate, however, that expansive soils will be encountered to any significant degree on the higher, lots comprising the northern portion· of the site. Substantial quanti.ties of expansive soils are most li~ely to be exposed over large areas in the cuts comprising the lower-lying lots bordering the north si'de of. Camino Vida Roble. Where expansive soils are exposed at or near the finish subgrade level of building pads; the proposed bui Idings and slabs-on-grade could be subject to damage due to heave 'of the expansive materials. Therefore, on those building pads where such a condition exists, it will be necessary to 1) extend the building foundations somewhat deeper tha~ would normally be required, and 2) provide a mat of non-expansive fill beneat,h ,all slabs-on- grade. In order to minimize the necessity of special design features and problems associated with expansive materials in fill areas, the site grading work should be planned and carried out so as to assure that all fills are capped with a layer of non.,;.~xpansive sandstone fill. In cut areas where the naturd subgrade is comprised ,of expansive soiis, it will be necessary to overexcavate the expansive soils within building areas and replace them with non-expansive sandstone fill. With regard to pavements, substantially thicker pavement sections will be required where clayey soils are exposed at or near the finish subgrade surface than wi II be required in those areas where sandstone (natural or as fill) is present. II • A. Earthwork 1. Clearing and Stripping • 218-3 Page 4 All areas to be graded should be cleared of debris, brush, chaparral, designated trees, and associated roots. The cleared mat~rials sh9uld be disp9sed of off-site. Any grading planned for the area presently occupied by the topsoil stockpile on the south side of Camino Vida Roble in the south~ast portion of the site will require thaf the stockpjJe first be rel9cated. After clearing, any cultivated areas as well as all other areas supporting a growth of surface grass and weeos should be stripped to a sufficient depth 'to remove af.! surface vegetation. Over much of the site little or no surface vegetation other than he,avy brush and chaparral is present~ In these areas, stripping will not be required assuming that the clearing operation accomplishes removal of the brush and chaparral. 2. Preparationfor Filling After the site has been cleared, stripped, and prior to placing ftU, the exposed subgrade soils should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted to the tequirements for structural fill. In general, the surface soils in ravines and draws are loose to depths of only several inches and as a result, the normal scarification and recoin- paction process should be adequQte to effectively stabilize these soils. However, based on our experience in connection with fhe mass grading operations for the adjacent Phase I portion of the business park, we anticipate that isolated pockets of loose, saturated colluvial soi Is wi II I ike Iy be exposed during the Phase II site grading work. The necessity for remov,:", ing and recompacting those isolated pockets should be determined by the soil engineer in the field duri.ng construction. ' Fills constructed on natural slopes having an inclination steeper than, 5 horizontal to 1 vertical should be keyed and benched into firm natural ground below any loose surface soils as i,llustrated on Figure 2. 3. Excavation Based on the results of our exploratory test pits, and our experiences with similar materiQls, i.t is our opinion tha~ theon-site soils and formational materials can be excavated utilizing ordinary heavy earthmoving equipment.' Some heavy ripping could, however, be required in the deeper cut areas of the sHe where layers of cemented formational materials may be encountered. . 4. Materials for Fill All existing on-site soils are ,n general suitable for reuse as fill. Fill material should not, however, contain rocks or lumps larger than 6 inches in greatest dimension wHh not more n'·( , , 11 • • • • 11 • • • • • U I .1 • -- 11 II '. ".0) :_ 218-3 Page 5 than 15 percent larger than 2.5 inches. The use af potentia lIy ~xpansive soi·1 as f.HI should conform to the requirements of Item A.5.', "Expansive Soils." All material for use as HII should be subject to approval by the soil engineer's field representative. The existing topsoil stockpile I'ocated in the sOl!theast portion of the site may be reused as fi" in the lower porf.ions of the deeper site fi lis. How,ever, any concentrations of organic material shQuld be sel ectiyely removed and disposed of off-site. 'The method af placement and suitability of the materials should be subject to the soil engineer's approval. 5. Expansive soas Potentially expansive soils taken from the required site excavations should'be used as fill only up to within 2 :feet of the design finish grades in street pavement areas and on lots; the upper 2 feet offill should be comprised of non-expansive sandy fill material. The determination as to which materials are expansive and which are not should be made in'the field' during construction by the soil engineer's representative. Based on the limited information provided by our field exploration work, it would at this stage be impossible to predict the actual conditions that will exist 'on each and every building lot (in cut) at the proposed' design finish grades. A more accurate determination of the expansive soil. conditions on individual lots in cut can be made subsequent to the rough site grading work. Prior 'to constructing buildings, however, each individual buiJding lot should be evaluated in order fo accurately determine the' extent and severity of any expansive sails that may be present at or near the finish lot grades •. 6. Slopes Based on the results of our exploratory test pits, laboratory tests, and stability analyses, it is our opinion that the proposed cut slopes and fill slopes up to 50 feet .in height will be safe against .mass instability if constructed to an inclinatian na steeper than 1.5 horizontal to 1 vertical. It is .essential that the soil engineer's representative inspect the materials exposed in the proposed cuts during the excavation work to check for any signs of potentially unstable areas and to verify that t.he materials encountered throughout the /~xcavations correspond to thoseanticip'ated from our exploratory test pits. Fill slopes should be constructed so as to assure that a mini'mum degree of compa'ction of 90 percent is attained to within 18 inches of the finished slope face and that a minimum degree of compaction of 85 percent is attained in the outer 18 inches. This may be accomplished by "backrolling" with'a sheepsfoot roller or other suitable equipment in 5 to 8 foot vertical increments as the fill is raised. Placement of fill near the tops of slopes should be carried out in such a manner as to assure that loose, uncompacted soils are n~t sloughed over the tops and allowed to accumulate on the slope face~ The on-site sandy soils and formational sandstones will be quite susceptible to erosion where exposed on slopes. Therefore, the project plans and specifications should contain . ( • 1\-;1· 218-3 'Page 6 all necessary features and construction requirements to prevent erosion of the slopes both during and after construction. Slopes ond other exposed ground surfaces should be oppro- priotely planted with a protective ground cover. It should be the grading contractor's obligation to take all measures deemed necessary during grading to provide erosion control devices in order to protec;:t slope areas and adja- cent properties from storm damage and flood hazard originating on this project. It should be made the contractor's responsibility to maintain slopes in their os-graded form unti I all slopes are in satisfactory compliance with the job specifications, all berms have been properly constructed, and all associated drainage devices meet the requirements of the, civi I engineer. 7. ,Compaction AU structural fill should be compacted to a minimum degree of compaction'of 90 percent based upon ASTM Test Designation D1557-70. The upper 6 inches of subgrade soils beneath pavements should be cempacted to a minimum degree of compaction of 95 percent. Fill material should be spread and compacted in uniform horizontal lifts not exceeding, 8 inches in uncompacted thickness. ' Based on the results of the laboratory tests we estimate that the on-site formational materials will undergo no shrinkage due to compaction and may in, fact result in on overall ihcreasein volume in the compacted state relative to',the natural in-place density. ' However, due to the presence of residual surface soils and colluvial soils which may be'subject .to significant shrinkage upon compac.tion, we feel that on over-all overage shrinkage factor of between -3 and +3 percent would be reasonable for planning purposes. 8. Trench Backfill Pipeline trenches should be backfi.lled with compacted fill. Backfill material' should be placed in lift thicknesses appropriate to the type of compaction equipment ufilizedand compacted to a minimum. degree of compaction of 85 percent by mechanical means. In all slab-<:!n-grade and pavement areas, the upper portion of the backfi.1I to a depth equql to 1.5 times the trench width, but not less than 3 feet, should be compacted to a minimum degree of compaction of 90 percent. In pavement areas, that portion of the trench backfill within the pavement section should conform to the materi 01 and compaction requirements of the adjacent pavement section. 9. Drainage Positive surface gradients should be provided adjacent to i?uildings so as to direct surface water away from foundations and slabs toward suitable discharge facilities. Ponding of surface water should not be allowed adjacent to structures, or on pavements. 1-: ' " . II • .' • • a' •• • • I -- 11 • -- I ---II U 10. Construction Observation 2'18-3 Page '7 Variations in soil conditions are possible and may be enc<?untered during construction. In order to permit correlation between the preliminary soil data and the actual soil conditions encountered during constr,uction, and so to assure conformance with the plans and specifications as originally contemplated, it is essential that the soil engineer be retained to perform on-site revi ew during the course, of const'ruction • All earthwork should be performed under the observation of the soil engineer's representa- tive to assure proper site preparation, selection of satisfactory fill materials, as well as placement and compaction of the fills. Sufficient notification prior to earthwork operations is essentiql to make certain that the work will be properly observed. All earthwork should be performed in accordance with the Guide Earthwork Specifications pres'enteel in' ' Appendix C. It should be pointed out, however, that the guide specifications 'qre onry general in nature and t,he actual job specifications should also incorporate all requirements contained in ,the text of this report • B. Foundations The foundation requirements for individual buildings on spec;:ific lots will vary depending upon the type of materials actually comprising the finish subgrade of the bui Iding pad. As i~dividual lots are finish graded, the soil engine'er should determine the founda'tion require- ments based on his evaluation of the actual subsurface conditions withi., the area of the 'proposed building construction. 1. Footings The proposed buildings may be supported on conventional continuous and/or individual spread footings. Where non-expansive materials are exposed ot the finish subgrade surfgce to a depth of at least 2 feet, footings should be founded at least 16 inches below the lowest adjacent finished grade or 12 inches below rough pad grade, whichever is deeper. , Where expansive materials are present at or within 2 feet of t,he finhh subgrade surface, footings should be founded at least 24 inches below 'the lowest adjacent finished grade or 20 inches below rough pad grade, whichever is deeper. " In cut areas where footings will be founded in undisturbed formational materials, th~y may be designed for allowable bearing pressures of 4,000 pounds per square foot (psf) for dead loads, 5,000 psf for combined dead and live loads, and 6,500 psf for all loads including wind or setsmic. In areas where footings will be founded in compacted fill and/or natural soils, t,hey should be designed for allowable bearing pressures of 2,500 psf for dead loads, 3,500 psf for combined dead and live loads, and 4,500 psf for all loads including wind or seismic. All footings should, however, have a minimum widt:h of 12 inches. Footings located adjacent to the tops of either cut or fill slopes should be founded at sufficient depth so as to provide at least 5 feet of horizontal cover between the footing'- and the slope face at the footing bearing level. • 11 • • • • • D f ) ). --.. :,.--- '. 218-3 Page 8 All continuous footings should be reinforced with top and bottom reinforcement to provide structural continuity. and to permit spanning of local irregularities. To assure that footings are founded in material of adequate bearing capacity, it is essential fhat the soi I engineer inspect the footing excavafions prior to placing reinforcing steel or, conc;rete. 2. Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert A reinforced concrete box culvert will be constructed beneath Camino Vida Roble at the approximate location indicated on the Site Plan, Figure 1. Based on qur evaluation of the soils in the general vicinity of the proposed culvert, we anticipate that the foundation soils will be suitable for the direct support of the culvert. We estimate that any settlements resulting from the weight of the culvert and overlying fill loads will be negligible. 3. Slabs-cn-Grade We recommend that all building floor slabs as well as exterior concrete slabs-on-grade be supported on a 24-inch minimum thickness of non-expansive soH. On those lots where expansive soils are present within a 24-inch depth of the finish subgrade surface, we, recommend that the subgrade soils within the building area be removed and replaced with non-expansive fill tp a minimum depth of 24 inches. In buildings of relatively large areal extent, the required thickness of non-expansive fi II within the building area may be reduced to 12 inches at a distance of 25 feet from the perimeter footing of the building. Slab rein.forcing should be provided in accordance wHh the anticipated use and loading ,of the slab. As a minimum, however, we recommend that the slabs be reinforced with 6x6-10/10 wire mesh for control of shrinkage cracks. In areas where moisture-sensitive floor coverings are to be utilized and in otner areas where floor dampness would be undesirable, we recommend that consideration be given to providing an imper~ea6le membrane beneath the slabs. The membrane should be covered with 2 inches of sand to protect it during construction. The sand should ,be lightly moistened just prior to placing the concrete. 4. Lateral Loads, ' Lateral load resistance for building foundations may be developed in friction betwe,en the foundation bottoms and the supporting subgrade. An allowable friction coeffieientof 0.30 is consi.dered applicable. An additional qllowable passive resistance equal to an equivalent fluid weighing 300 pounds per cubi~ foot acting against the 'foundations may be used in design provided the footings are poured neat against undisturbed soil. For footings founded in undisturbed formational material, an allowable friction coefficient of 0.35 and a passive resistance of 2,000 pounds per square foot are applkable. II .. t l) ( . 1I - j II II ~ -• II II -- 11 II - 1 1 11 ]) • C. Pavements 2-18-3 Page 9 Based on our past experience in connection with the construction of the phase I portion of the business park, we anticipate that R-values of about 10 and 40 will be typical for the on-site expansive clayey soils and the better quolity sandy sbils, respectively. Far comparison and preliminary planning purposes, we have developed the following typical pavement sections using Procedure 301-F of the State of California Department of Public Works, Division of Highways. Pavement sections are preser:lted for traffic indjc;es of 3.5, 5.0 and 7.5. The 3.5 index is considered to bea reasonable value for automobile parking ar~as and the 5.0 index reasonable for parking'Qreas and access driveways which are subjected to light truck traffic. A traffic index of 7.5 was required by the City of Carlsbad for Camino Vida Roble in the Phase I portion of the business park. Subgrade Material Type' SANDY SOILS CLAYEY SOILS TYPICAL PAVEMENT SECTIONS Pavement Components Design Asphalt Traffic Design Concrete Aggregate Base Index R-Value (Inches) Class 2 (Inches) 3.5 40 2.0 4.0 5.0 40 2.5 5.0 7.5 40 4.0 8.5 3.5 10 2.0 6.5 5.0 10 2.5 10.0 7.5 10 4.0 16.5 Total Thickness (Inches) 6.0 7 •. 5 12.5 8.5 12.5 20.5 Note: The pavement sections given above for the sandy subgrade soil would be applicable to clayey subgrade areas provided that ·12 inches of sandy fill soil overlies clayey soil. The above pavement sections are for general information only and represent the approximate extremes. in pavement requirements anticipated at the site based on th~ quality of the sub- grade materials. Pavement designs should be performed for individual lots based 6n the actual material type(s) compris·ing the subgrade and the anticipated use of and vehicular loadings on the pavements. Asphalt concrete, aggregate base, and preparation of the subgrade should conform to and be placed in accordance with the California Division of Highways, Standard Specifications, January 1971 edition, except that t·he test method for compoction should be determined by ASTM 01557-70. II LEGEND TP-4 &. 2 0 14 -$- 6 0 5 6 Bose: An undated / -~ . / Approximate Scale (feet) ~-» #~ o 250 500 100 Indicates approximate location of exploratory test pit performed by Robert Prater Associates for Phose 1/ investigation. Indicates approximate location of exploratory test pit performed by Lowney/Kaldveer Associates fqr PT & T alignment investigation. Indicates approximate location of explor<;ltory boring performed by Lowney/Kaldveer Associates for Phase I investigation. Indicates approximate location of exploratory test pit performed by Lowney/Kaldveer Associates for Phase I investigation .• Indicates approximate location of exploratory boring performed by Woodward-Gizienski & Associates for preliminary investigation report doted June 181 1973. . Wi IIdan Associates. SITE PLAN ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHASE·" Carlsbad, California Cor,.vl/.rll $0.1, Fovndo/.on , G~o/OIl.(oi Enll.n~~" PROJECT NO. DATE 218-3 September 1977 Figure (I: < .,,;..'------,..-------"-] (I • • • • d .' III - II :11 11 11 11 \ Existing ground s\Jrface Notes: Horizontal benches into -firm ground Compacted Fi II Toe Key -width to be determined by Soil Engineer I but not less than 10 feet Toe Key - 2 ft. min. into firm grolJnd Zone of loose surface soU 1) Fi lis to be keyed qnd benched as shown into existing ground where the existing slopes are steeper than 5 horizontal to 1 vertica-I. 2) Finished fill slope inclination to be no steeper than 1.5 horizontal to 1 verticql ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES Cbr.lvll'~Q s",,-fovndol.cn & GI':oloQ.col Eng.nl':I':'S SCHEMATIC ONLY NOT TO SCAL~ RECO NDATIONS FOR FILLING OPING GR D PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHASE" Carlsbad, California PROJECT NO. E 218-3 September 1977 Figure 2 .i APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION A-l The field investigation consisted of-a surface recannaissance and a subsurface exploration program using a Case 580S backhoe. Fourteen exploratory test pits were excavated at the site on August 22, 1977 to a maximum depth of 14 feet at the approximate locations shown on the Site Plan, Figure 1. The materials encountered in the test pits were con- tinuously logged in the fieid by our soil engineer and described in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM 02487). The approximate elevations shown on the test pit logs were estimqted from an uhdated preliminary grading plan provided by- Willdan Associates. The logs of the test pits as well as a key for soil classification are included as part of. this appendix. Representative samples were obtained from the exploratory test pits at selected depths appropriate to the investigation. All samples were returned to ol;lr laboratory for evalua- tion and appropriate testing.' . The test pit logs show our interpretation of the subsurface' conditions on the date and at the locations indicated, and it is not warranted that theY'are representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times. I·:' I I • • I • • I I I I 1 PRIMARY DIVISI. GROUP S DIVISIONS SYMBOl GRAVELS CLEAN GW Weiln~~~ded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no ...J GRAVELS ~ MORE THAN HALF (LESS THAN Poorly 9raded gravels or gravCl-san.d mixtur~s, little or fJ) .0:0 GP ...J Wo 5% FINES) no fines, . (5 ~N OF COARSE fJ) ~ , FRACTION IS GRAVEL GM Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines. 0 0 u.Z w LARGER THAN WITH w Oz N FINES GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures, plastic fi~es. Z u.c{ iii NO.4 SIEVE ~ ...JI w c{t-> SANDS CLEAN SW Well graded sands, gravelly sands. little or. no fines. t!) I w SANOS a: iii w zw MORE THAN HALF (lESS THAN fJ) c{l!J SP Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little. or no fir.es. Ia: 5% FINES) a: t-« OF COARSE 8 ...J w FRACTION IS SANDS SM . Silty sand.s, sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines. a:1Jl 0-SMALLER THAN WIT.H ~ NO.4 SIEVE FINES SC Clay€y sand,s, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. w SIl,TS AND CLAYS ML Inb~?:y~~ ~i~~S :a~~s' or' c~~~/~G~swffhc~Ii~R~81~~ltli~it~~ ~ N u. a: iii (5 o~ Cl 1~~1:;t~~~CI~; Silt~~1~1s~IJ'~~s~r-;;~~'. gravelly ...J w LIQUID LIMIT IS fJ) u. c{ > ...J ~ W 0 c{ iii LESS THAN 50% I IJl OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of 'Iow plasticity. w Z z !!2 0 ~ « 0 Ino'i.rt,~iCsqilb~'1 mic,!ce0Js Of diatomaceous fine sandy or I ...J N SILTS .AND CLAYS MH t-~ 0 ' 'elastiC slits. t? wffi z UQUID LIMIT IS CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity. fat clays. w ~~ z Z ::E ~ c{ GREATER THAN 50% iI I OH Orga~ic clays of medium to high plasticity ,organic silts. t- HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS Pt Peat and other highly organic soils. DEFINITION OF TERMS U.S. STANDARD SERIES SIEVE CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPEN!NGS 200 40· 10 4 3/4R 3" 12" SAND' GRAVEL SILTS AND CLAYS I 1 .1 COARSE COBBLES BOULDERS FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE GRAIN S.lZES SANDS.GRAVELS AND BLOWS/FOOT t CLAYS AND STRENGTH' BLOWS/FOOT t NON-PLASTIC SILTS PLASTIC SILTS VERY LOOSE 0-.. VERY SOFT 0 -1/4 0 ...: 2 LOOSE .. -10 SOFT 1/4. -1/2 2 -4 FIRM 112 - 1 4 - 8 MEDIUM DENSE 10 -30 STIFF 1· - 2 8 -16 DENSE 3)-50 VERY STIFF 2 -.. 16 --32 VERY DENSE OJER 50 HARD OVER 4 OVER 32 RELATIVE DENSITY CONSISTENCY t Number of blows of 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches to drive II 2. inch 6.0, (;-3/8 inch 1.0J split spoon (ASTM 0-1586). . + Unconfined compressive strength in tons/sq. ft. as determined by laboratory testing or approximated by the standard penetration lest (ASTM 0-1586). pocket penetrometer, torvane, or visual 6bservari9ll. KEY TO EXPLORAtORY TEST PIT LOGS . Unified Soil Classification~~~m CASTM 0-2487) ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES PALOMAR AIRPOR' BUSINESS PARK -PHASE II Con\"Ir;n~ So,I. fcwndohon , G~olog.col fng.n~~r, Carlsbad, Califprnia PROJECT NO. DATE 218-3 c. .l 1977 Figure A-l , ,,)-=t'10::1I11.10::1 RIG Case 580B Backh~e' SURFACE ELEVATION 240(ap;i.) I LOGGED BY eRG DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER None Test Pit excavated with 24 inch bucket on 8/22/77 DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS I~'S~' COLOR CONSIST. SOIL TYPE SILTY SAND (SANDSTONE~ SANDY and CLAYEY SILT (SILTSTONE) Bottom of Test Pit = 13.0 Feet Notes: 1) "x" denotes jar sample. 2) liS II denotes sack sampl~. l~,I~~~ liraimcotlon II .... ,.,.,e .. nt the appraICi_Ie I:-::':-Z .. between _I.rlol typel end the lronlilion -y Ibey .......... I. R08.ERT PRATER ASSOCIATES . Con",It"'g So.I, FOtittdoftOft 'Geologlcol Erog.nt:er, gray medium dense - dense very dense SM ~ I- I- I- I- ~ ~ - 1 .. - 2 -X 10 - 3 - .. 4 ,- gray - tan very. dense, ML I-, "-5- grayish brown ~ - I-6 -S 17 I-- I-7 - I-- I-8 -X 19 I--' I-9 - I-- 1-10-x 1-' - l-II - I-- I-12 - '""' - 13 - I-- I-- I-- I-- ""' - '""' - I-- I-- I-- I-- I-- I-- I-- EXPLORATORY tESTPIT lOG PALOtv\AR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHASE II Carlsbad, Caljfornia PROJECT NO. . DATE TEST PIT NO. 218-3 September 1977 1 _. 11-..- II I. • • • I I I -I I 1- I 1 g U RIG Case 580B Backhoe 1J SURFACE ELEVATION254 (,;;pIt)1 LOGGED BY eRG DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER None Test Pit excavated with 24 inch bucket on 8/22/77 DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS I~~tt' COLOR· SILTY SAND -SANDY SILT SILTY SAND (SANDSTONE) Bottom of T estPiJ = 14.0 Feet Notes: 1) "X" denotes jar sample. 2) liS" qenotes sack sample. Not.: The stratification' lines rep,.,.ftt the approximate bcwndoty betw.en _t.,101 types and the t .. ",ition -y be fIOduol. R.OBERT PRATER ASSOClAT~S C""'u/''"P So.I, FOtIrtdo"on '.G.olog.col E"Q''''.'' reddish medium brown dense yellow-dense ish ton light Igray -very lyel,low-dense ish ton ISM-I-- x 20 ML I-1 - -SM I-2 - I-- I-3 - l-.: I-4 .. l-... 1--5-s I-- I-6 - I-- .... 7 -.. I-a - I--.... 9 - -- I--10-- >-- f-11 - I-- I-12 ... I-- I-13 - I-- 14 I-... f--- \ -I-- I-- I-,.. I-- I-- I-- I-- I-- I-- r-,. '- EXPLO,RATORY TEST P.JTLOG PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHASE 1/ Carlsbad, California PROJECT NO. DATE TEST PIT NO. r---~2~1a--~3----~Se-p-t-em-b~,e-r-1-9-77-J' 2 . RIG Case 5808 Backhoe SURFACE ELEVATION 272~1Jil LOGGED BY CRG DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER None Test Pit excavated with 24 inch bucket on 8/22/77 DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFIOA TlON Zw~ .. W ow- Qot: -. x z· w>x If: a:;: zu;: .... w ~~~ If::;~_ DEPTH ..J W z <za:"-f~< II. ~Iii~ ""w 1~6~· (FEET) ~ < .... "''''0''' a:w'" SOIL ~i1ig ~z ~a: .... ~ 0.. a:"~ DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS COLOR CONSIST. < liiljj . ~ .... TYPE '" li'a:~ 0 0'" 0 0 CLAYEY SAND brown ~edi m SC Jense f-- SANDY CLAY brown I;t~ff -CL ~ 1 .. x 19 I-- I hQrcf 2 - SILTY SAND (SANDSTONE) tan dense SM f-- I-3 -x '-.. 4 -. SANDY GRAVEL . tan very GP (CONGLOMERATE) dense -x 5 Bottom of Test Pit =j5.0 Feet -- (met refusal) , -- f-- ,.. -, -- -- Note: 1) "X" denotes jar-sample. - I-- I-- ----, -- I-- P. - -- f-- -- ~ - f-- , ~ - f--- ,.. - f-- f-- I-- f-- f-- I-- Note: The Ifnstincotlon IIM~ ,e,..~~nt the ~rol<l_t" I-- _ flro~r""'.en _t.,lol typel onellhe lronlilion -y f--- be • EXPLORATORY TEST PIT LOG - ROBERT PRAnR ASSOCIATES pALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHASE" COtIkllr'''Q So,I. FCWftdor.on 'G.olag.col EIIQ,nU'1 Carlsbad, California PROJECT NO. DATE TEST PIT NO. PI 218-3 September 1977 3 RIG Case 580B Backhoe. SURFACE ELEVATION 210(0-;;;..-LOGGED BY eRG DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER None Test Pit excavated with 24 inch bucket on 8/22/77 -; DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION . a::;:: ~z ~< w DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS ~'gt-COLOR CONSIST. SOIL TYPE :t~ o o SILTY SAND (SANDSTONE) light brown medium dense dense - grayish very tan dense light gr9Y SM _ - - 1 - I-- - 2 --- - 3 .:.. -.. I-4 .. - -5- -- - 6 --- -7--- - 8 -x 8 -- - 9 - I-- ~==================~~====~==~==~10~=F==~~==~~~ Bottom of Test Pit = 10.0 Feet - - -- e------ -- Note: "x" denotes jar sample. -- I-- I-- -- -- : - ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES Consulhng So,I. FOtIItdo'oO~ 'G.olog,col Eng,tter', 1-. - -- -- ''';' - I-- I-- .-- ...,. - EXPLORATORY TEST PIT LOG PALOI'IIAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHASE II Carlsbad, California t-___ --:-E_C_T-:N:-O_.-..,-t---__ D...;.A_T_E_~~ TEST PIT NO. 218-3 Sc..,~ember 1977 4 II • n n RIG Case 580B Backhoe. SURFACE ELEVATION 2Z5(~ LOGGED BY eRG DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER None Test Pit excavated with 24 inch bucket on 8/22/77 DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS ~6~· COLOR Z",-. w· !~ cr Qu~ '. :rz i=zu.. a:;: a::; ~ _ DEPTH '" «' II ...J cr ... 1Il W z .< z a:: .... ... ....(/) ~ ~~ wwof/.) ·(FEET) ::Ii CONSIST. SOIL < ~iiig 3:z ~a: ... ~ TYPE VJ ~~~ 0 !ii~ u SILTY SAND -SANDY SILT medium SM-I--dense ML dense SM light brown ~ _________________ ~ ____ ~ __ -4 __ ~~'~-+~~~-4~~~. 1 S IL TY SAND (SANDSTONE) gray Bottom of Test Pit = 9.0 Feet Note: "Xli denotes jar sample. Nol.: The slrolHicollon 11,..1 repr.,enl lhe appro.I...". !be lI,o~tlw.en """.,101 type, and lhe lrond'i"" ...,y ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES Conluh.ng So,I. 'o...ttdor.on 'G.o/og.col E"Q.ne~" -, - -2 - f-- , . f-3 - l-.- I-4 .. - f--5'--' I-- I-6 ""1 I---7 - --x 9 -S - --9 1-' .- -- ,... - -- I-- -- -- -- -- f-- I-- -- -- I-- I--, I-- ~ - -.... I-- .1-- i-- f--- EXPLORATORY TEST PIT LOG PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHASE II Carlsbad, California t-_P_R-;OJ::-;-;::EC:--T-;:;-N_O_'_f-=-__ D~A,-;T_E--:-:_~ TEST PIT NO. 21 B-3 St:J>tember 1977 .5 .~. 11: 11 • -. • • II .' • • • [I .' • • • 11 II , , RIG Case 580B Backhoe SURFACE ELEVATION 240 (OP~ LOGGED BY eRG DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER None Test Pit excavated with 24 inch bucket on 8/22/77 DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION ~~):: .. 1&1 IPL . rZ a: t=~~ 0::;: a::;~_ DEPTH .... -' ~>-II) W z < za:: "-.... z .... 'Co. >-I/)~ >-.... "' .... 0'" ~~~ (FEET) :I! «>- CONSIST. SOIL <0: .... ·in° ~z ~a:>-!S TYPE I/) z",-' 0 lii~ :I!>- ,~II: ~ U 01/) U DESC.RIPTION AND REMARKS [~6~-COLOR SltTY SAND (SANDSTONE) light gray medium dense SM f-- i , , ; , , ' \. Bottom of Test Pit = 9.0 Feet Note: "x" denotes jar. sample. ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES Consult,ng So,/. Founda',an 'G~o'og'ca/ Eng,n~~(l. ... 1 --- dense - 2 - f-- f-3 - f-.. very dense -4 .- f- I-5 -- f-- f-6 '-... - ~ 7 -. I-- f-8 - x 9 , I-- 9 -- -"- -.., -..:. -- "-- ;... - --- I-- ;... - -- r-- -- f-.'" e-,.. >-- -' - I-- f-- f-- I-- I-- EXPLORATORY TEST PIT LOG PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS. PARK -PHASE II Carlsbad, California ECTNO. 218-3 DATE TEST PITNO. September 1977 6 g. RIG Case 580B Backhoe __ SURFACE ELEVATION 255 ~ LOGGED BY CRG DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER None Test Pit excavated with 24 inch bucket on 8/22/77 ~ ____________ ~ ____ ~ ____ ~--~--.------r-------r~~DEPTH DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION (FEET) 1~6~-COLOR CONSIST: li~~~ DESCRIPTIQN AND REMARKS SILTY and CLAYEY SAND (SANDSTONE) ~ILTY SAND (SANDSTONE) Bottom of Test Pi t = 8 Feet Notes: 1) "x" denotes jar sample. 2) "s" qenotes sack sample. ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES COIIW'''!'Q So,I. F~rtdOI'OIl 'G~IOQ.col fllQ'IIe~" reddish Idense -SM-f--x tan Ivery SC 1- Idense r-" - light Ivery gray dense SM f-2 - f-- r-3 --., f-4 .- -f- f-5- '"" - ..... 6 .,. f-- f-7 - f--s 8 f-- ~ - f-- f-- f-... f-- f-.... ~ - I'-... f-- f--.-- ~ - f-- ~ - ~ - ~ -.-- f-- f-- f-- f-- r-- f-...... EXPLORATORY TeST PIT LOG PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK --PHASE II Carlsbad, California-- r-_P...,R_OJ-=-::-EC_T_N:;-O_._I-__ D_A_T __ E,....-_-I TEST PIT NO. 218-3 September 1977 7 d ~I ~. , U • •• • • II • • • • • [J • 11· • •• • 11· ,. SURFACE ELEVATION 184 (a~ LOGGED BY Case 580~ Backhoe"tJ • J CRG ·RIG DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER None Test Pit excavated with 24 inch bucket on 8/22/77 Z·IU--. W OU"': . rZ rr ~zu.. a::;:: .. t;~ -DEPTH w « ...... W z DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS SILTY SAND SILTY SAND (SANDSTONE) Bottom of T e5t Pit Log = 13.5 Feet Notes: 1) "X" denotes jar sample. 2) liS II denotes sock sample. !Nole: The .Irotlncollon 11M, ,epre,enl the approxlmale between IIIOle,lol types and the tro",llion _y be ero.b.l. !~btt COLOR light' brow.n CONSIST. medium dense dark dense brown light very brown dense fight tan SOIL (FEET) TYPE SM f-.- SM r-'-1 - I-- 2 - I-- I-3 - ,:... .. I-4 .. - -5- -- I-6 - I--,.. 7 - -- -8 - - f-9 - f-- ~ 10-'--- -11 - I-- ,.. 12 --- -13 - f-14 - f-- ~ --- -- f-- .... - f-- I-:--- I-- f-- f--- J a:~." C>. ~ U)~~ I-w :Ii <~ ~~g :tz < '" ~cr~ 8 5 X 9 , I;XPLORATORY TEST PIT lOG <za::"-wwo'" ~rrl-~ ~>-"'!P OIU UJ > l: ~Hlt;~ "-wz -Zrrw OC>.a: u,,~ Zo'" ::lu· ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHASE II COfIkI'IInQ So,I. foundOfoon 'Geolog'co' Eng';IUI, Carlsbad, California . P OJECT NO. DATe TEST PIT NO. ~--~--------~----~----~ 218-3 September 1977 8 II --III • D .. " , RIG Case 580B Back SURFACE ELEVATION 218 ~ LOGGED BY CRG DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER None Test Pit e~cavated'with 24 inch bucket on 8/22/77 : Z",-. UJ DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION ~~~ Ou": . J:Z a: ;:z· ... cr-a::;~_ DEPTH '" «' UJI-I, Ul ~;;: ~ reI-V> I-Z <za:'" 0. t-V>~ <'" UJwof./) ",ZUl a:w", (FEET) ~ SOIL ~~g ~z ~'<r'1-~ o.a:_ CONSIST. < ~t- TYPE '" ~a:~ 0 ~~ 58'" u DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS 1~6~· COLOR SILTY SAND SILTY SAND (SANDSTbNE) Bottom of Test Pit = -12.5 Feet Note: "x" denotes Jar sample. Note: The IlTotirieotion llnel 'lIpre .. nt the Gpproximole boundcory between moterlol typlll and th. transition tftO'1 be ,rocIuol. ROBERT PRATER A,SSOCIATES Con,"/"ng So./. FCkIftdor.on ,G..,IOQ'(o/ Eng.t>e,"" tan light -tan - gray loose - medium dense SM I-- I-1 -X 27 -- -2 - -- -3 - l-.. I-4 .. -' .,-5.,- -- f,-6 - -tan -dense gray SM -7- -- -8 -X 9 l-.... ~ 9 - I-- '-10- - - I--11 - I-- I--12 - .... 13 - -- I-- I--- I-- r-- -- I--.... I-..,. 1--. - I-- I-- I-... I--.- f--.,- EXPLORATORY TEST PIT LOG PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK·-PHASE If Carlsbad, California PROJECT NO. DATE TEST PIT NO. 218-3 September 1977 9 II • • • • • • • • I I-;[1 ;. '. t . • • "11 11 ,. RIG Case 580B Backhoe SURFACE ELEVATION 245 (a~.)1 LOGGED BY CRG DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER None Test Pit excavated wifh 24 inch bucket on 8/22/77 %",~ . W 0'" DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION 20t: . rz w>r a: 11:;:--... UI 1-%, a::;~_ !::lCl~ <<(Ill W z DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS 1~'Jt COLOR SILTY SAND (SANDSTONE) tan gray Bottom of Test Pit = 14.0 Feet Note: "x" denotes jar sample. ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES COr.S"IMp So". FO<ittdor,on ,G.o'O(/'co' E"P.,,"I' i CONSIST. dense very dense DEPTH SOIL (FEET) TYPE SM -- f-1 - 'f-- -2 - I-- f-3 - l-.. I-.4 -- -5- -- -6 - -- -7 - f-- ~ 8 - I-- >-9 --- -10- -- 11 - -- I-12 - I-- I-13 - f-- 14 >-- ...,... ...., ..., - - >-- :-...., -- -- I-- I------- ..J Go. :::;;~ !c~ ~ w-O ~z < zl/)..J III W"'CD 0 ... G:_ 0 X .. x 17 EXPLORATORY TEST PIT LOG ~Za:1L "'wz ~wo~ Za:w 1/)' a: I--0 ... a: o::fl-lii~ zo'" ~o PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHASE" Carlsbad, California t-_P_R-:OJ:-::-::~N_O"". ___ I-:-__ O_A_T_E __ ~ TEST PIT NO., 218-3 September 1977 )0 , • II RIG Case 580B Back~ SURFACE ELEVATION 284 (ap •• ~ LOGGED BY CRG DEPTH to GROUNDWATER Ncme Test Pit excavated with 24 inch bucket on 8/22/77 DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION Bottom of Test Pit = 14.0 Feet Notes: 1) "X" denotes jer semple. 2) "S" denotes sack sample. Nola: 1M .tralmealion n .... rcpr.Mnl the approxlmcil. bovncIcaty.~Iw •• n _lerloll):JHI ... c!.the 1_"lIion_1 be , .. dual. ROBERt PRATER ASSOCIATES" COtlwl""Q So.t. fOtlftdor.on 'G.olog.col E"IiI.~erl -x 1 -- -x 19 2 - - 3 -.. 4: .• ; - f-5- : -- -6 -s -- f-7 --- -8 - ---9 - f-- 1-10-.... - -11 - f-- I--12 - f-- I--13 - -- 14 I---, f---- ~ - I-- ---- -- I------- -- EXPLORATORY TEST PIT LOG PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHASE II Carlsbad-, Cel ifornia PROJECT NO. DATE TEST PIT·NO. r---~~~--+---~----~ 218-3 September 1917 11 .. '''~~~--'------------------';'------------'''''''"'-''''''....I • • I. ~. • • RIG Case 580B Backhoe e SURFACE ELEVATION 200 (ap •• ~ LOGGED BY eRG DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER None T est Pit excavated with 24 inch bucket 6n 8/22/77 DESCRIPTiON AND CLASSIFICA nON DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS SANDY and CLAYEY SILT SILTY CLAY Bottom of Test" Pit = 10.0 Feet ~'btt" COLOR light brown gray- Itan CONSIST. SOIL TYPE loose very stiff hard ML CH -- -1 -x -- -2 ~ I---, 3 ... -.. 4 .- - 1--5 -... - -6- -..... I-7 -x 1'9 -- -8 - ---9 - I-- 10 -- ~-- I-- I-'- f-- I-- --• Note: 1) "x" denotes jar sample. 11 • • • • • • No •• : The "I'O.tnco'lon 11 .... repr ... ,,' the appraxlmai. :' "tw •• n _ •• rlol type, and lhe lran.ilion ""'Y ~...i''a~I. ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES Cor''''/i''f/l So.I. FOul'lc/ol.on "G~IOQ.,ol E"f/I.ne~', I-- I-- I--...,.- 'I-- I-- I-- ---- -- I-- .... - ---- EXPLORATORY TEST PIT LOG PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHASE /I Carlsbad, 'California PROJECT NO. DATE, TEST PIT NO. ~~77~~-----~--~~--~~ 218-3 September 1977 12 . , , ~ I • b II " RIG Case 580B Backhoe SURFACE ELEVAT!ON I LOGGED BY eRG DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER None Test Pit excavated with 24 inch bucket 6n 8/22/77 Z",-.. w 0'" DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION ,00"': . rz ",>r cr ;:ZIL a:;: crt;~-z;:;;o- DEPTH ... "'''' ..... -(/)Cl-~z IL ... Z ~, ...J crl-(/) <za:::"'-a. o-(/)!r; <UJ z'a:. w ' ~wo~ SOIL (FEET) ~ ~~g !r;~ Oa.cr CONSIST. '" (/)o:t--O~I- TYPE (/) 0 1-). ~a:~ 0 (/)CI) zo"" ;:)0 DESCRIPTION AND Rf:MARKS 1~:6't COLOR SILTY SAND (SANDSTONE) Bottom of Test Pit = 6.5 Feet Note: IIXII denotes jor sample. ROBERT PRA·TER ASSOCIATES COtISV/htlg So". Fourtdol.on 'Gff>IOQ.eol f tIg,"~~" brown medi urn reddish-dense ,orange dense SM f- f- I- - 1 .. X - tan- white very dense -2 - f-- .... 3 - x 11 f-.. '-4 - ~ -5- f-- '"" 6 - '""' 7 - ~ - -- -- r--... - -- r-- f-- >---- ---- -- f--... - -- -- f-- -- -- ... ' - -- f-- f-- .-,- f--- EXPLORATORY TEST PIT lOG PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHAS'E II Carl sbad, Co Ii forn i 0 PROJECT NO. DATE TEST PIT NO. ~--~~~--~~--------~-4 218-3 September 1977 13 [1:1, II • ;,. • -. II ~. • • • • TI • • _. -I -I -I' --. J LOGGED BY eRG SURFACE ELEVATION • > RIG Case 580B Bac DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER None Test Pit excavated witch 24 inch bucket on 8/22/77 DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS ~6~· COLOR CONSIST. CLAY EY SA N D brown ! ~~~i u;;' ~~ ________________________ ~--~o~ra Inge dense SILTY SAND (SANDSTONE) white very Bottom of Test Pit -5.5 ~Feet (met refusal) Notes: 1} "X" denotes jar sample. 2) "S" denotes sack sample. INo'a: The 1'",lmc:ol"'" line, ,apreMlnt the approxl ..... ,. __ .:.~~lwean tnateriol type' ."d the lrondtion -r be 11"'-"';". brown - o~e 'dense SOIL TYPE SC SM DEPTH (FEET) I-..., 1 .. -- ~ 2 - I-- ..., 3 - -.~ -4 .. -= 1--5- -6' - - - I-- -- -- -- - - I-- -.- -- -- I--, -- -- -- -- I-- I-- -- -- I---- I---'- -' -: I-- I-- !'"" - I--~ zw-.. 00"': • GO ~z&L a:~ w «' -J a:o-Ill Wz 0. .... 1Il~ o-w ::f' w-O < ... < z(/)-J ~z (/) ",wID 0 0. GO_ u S X 6 '\ EXPLORATORY TEST PIT lOG w rZ GO :; ~ _ ~za:~ r Wo ", fl)a:~-:n~ OW w > r ziii'" -(/)Cl-~\Uz~ oa:,w" u Cl a:,_ z::f:n ;)0 0 - ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES Conlu".ng So.I. fourtdOI.on 'G~/og,col fng""f!rll PA~OMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHASE" Carlsbad, California PROJECT NO. DATE TEST PIT NO. ~--~~~----~~--~----~ 218-3 Sept,ember1977 14 I II II' • APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING • B-1 The natural water content was determined on s·elected.samples and is recorded on the test pit logs at the appropriate sample depths. Two Atterberg limits tests pnd twelve No. 200 sieve tests were performed on selected samples of the subsurface materials to determine the range 9f water ~ontent over which these materials exhibit plasticity and to aid in classifying the soils according to' the Unified Soil Classification System. The results of these tests are presented on Figures B-1 and B-2. Two laboratory gradation tests were performed on selected samples of the materials en- countered in the test pits. The result~ of these tests are presented on Figure B-3. Two I aboratory compaction tests (AST M D 1557-70) were performed on se I ected bul k samples of the on-site mat.erials. The resu'lts of these tests are presented on Figures. B-4 ~:md B-5. Two laboratory direct shear. t.ests Were performed on remolded samples of the on-site materials compacted to approximafely 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Test Designation D 1557-70. The samples were shear~d at a constant rate 'under' various surcharge press~res. Failure was taken at the peak shear stress. The results of the direct shear tests are presented on Figures B-6 and B-7. .:' --r. r'I .' I ' II II • I. I I 1'1, • -. -~ 1 • l .. I .. ~ .' .... : -~ "". .. .. ~ .. ., 60 V 50 ,.. CH V f!e. ~v \oJ y 40 1/ )( / w Cl 0 z > 30 V ~ U MH t= ~ fI) 20 V or ct ...J OH Q. A 19 ; 7 ~ , I 4 ' CL-ML V// V.# Mlor Ol "------ 0 ML /' I 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 . LIQUID LIMIT C%) " TEST NATURAL PA~SING UNIFIED KEY PIT SAMPLE LIQUID PLASTICITY LIQUIDITY SOIL SYMBOL DEPTH WATER LIMIT INDEX NO. 200 INDEX NO. CLASSIFICATION CONTENT SIEVE SYMBOL (feet) % % % % 1 2.0 10 18 \. SM --------: 0 1 6.0 17 38 11 69 --' ML --1 8.0 19 --79 --ML --2 0.5 20 -- --50 --'SM"'ML --3 1.0 19 ----65 --CL --'4 8.0 8 ----17 --'SM --8 9.0 9 ----37 --SM --9 1.0 27 ----46 --SM 9 8.0 9 -- --38 --SM ! - PLASTICITY CHART AND ()ATA " ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES PALOMAR AIRPORT' BUSINESS PARK -PHASE II COnlul,.nQ So.I. Foundolton 'G~oIoglcol Eng,"eefl Carlsbad, CaliJornia PROJECT NO. DATE " Figure B-1 218-3 September 1977 , \ 60 V 50 ,... CH V ~ .v v Y 40 V X w Cl / 0 ~ r.. >-30 V ... U MH i= ~ (/) 20 V or <t ..... / OH 0- 10 7 '~ 4 CL-ML V// VI Mlor Ol 0 ML t/ , 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 ~O 90 100 lIaUIIJ LIMIT C%) TEST NATURAL PLASTiCITY PASSING UNIFIED " KEY PIT SAMPLE LIQUID LIQUIDITY SOIL SYMBOL Nb~ DEPTH WATER LIMIT INDEX NO, 200 INDEX, Iri b.<:<:I~IC·ATION CONTENT SIEVE SYMBOL ( feet) % % % % ---10 11.0 17 ----36 --SM ---11 1.5 19 ----55 --CL 0 12 7.0 19 59 30 90 --CH PLASTICITY CHART AND DAtA , ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHASE II Consu/ltng Sool. FoundOhon 'Geo/og.eol Eng'~~/S Carlsbad, Col ifornia PROJECT NO. DATE ' 218-3 September 1977 Figure ~-2 I;" I rl .- r-I ~ ~ • -,. • • • I • • • • I I 100 90 10 70 " ! .. 60 .. .. L .... % 50 III U It III L 40 30 20 10 0 . _ 4If UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (AST'" D 422·72) U. S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES 7 , , 2 I 3/4 1/2 1/4 4 • 10 "20 ')0 40 50 60 10 100 200 325 0 10 --20 . , 30 , ' ." 40 50 60 ~ 70 10 90 100 100 50 10.0 S.O 1.0 O.S 0.1 .05 .01 ,005 .001 PARTICLE SIZE IN MILLIMETERS GA ... VIEL SAND CO •• LE5~-------r--------+---~r-----~--T---------~ COAPt51E. COAlltS£ MEDIUM ,.aNi[ TEST 'UNIFIED 'KEY PIT SAMPLE ELEV. SOIL SYMBOL DEPTH (Ieel) CLASSIFICATION SAMPLE DESCRIPTION NO. (Ieel) SYMBOL -1 6.0 236 Ml SANDY and CLAYEY SILT, .gray-tan ---2 5.0 249 SM SILTY SAND, yellowish tan' . GRADATION TEST DATA ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES CO~lolr,ng So,I. Four>dor.on 'G~olog,col EiIg'M~/s PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHASE'll Carlsbad, California-. PROJECT NO. DATE r-----.,.-:---=-----+-------.--~ FIGURE 8:....3· 218~3 September' 1977 0 '" '2: .. .... '" 0: • • • II a· . , SAMPLE DEPTH SPECIFIC LlO UID PLASTIC "0. IFT.l SAMPLE DESCR I PTION GRAVITY LI(~1 INDEX TP-l 6.0 SANDY and CLAYEY SILt (ML), gray-ton f ------ ! , Zero Air Voids Curve Specific Gravity = 2.70 . 125 1\ \ .f I 1\ 120 \ r\ , \ .... (.) Cl. -\ >-I-115 ---C/) -.~ r-.... \ z /" ........ lIJ /' "-, : Cl ;-0 r-... ~ '\ \ h.. >-/ \~ a: 1\ c '\ 110 \ \ .\ ).-.,' \ ~ r\ 105 " 0 5 10 15 20 25 MOISTURE CONTENT % OPTIMUM WATER CONTENT 0/0 .. 13~6 MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY I pef 114.9 . TEST DESIGNATION ASTM D ]557-70 COMPACTION TEST RESULTS ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES PALOMAR AIRPORT:BUSINESS PARK -PHASE II' Con,u".nQ So.I. FovlldOI.on I. Gro'oQ'CO' EnQ,"rr', Carlsbad, California PROJECT NO. DATE 218-3 I September 1977 FIGUREB-4 .:< --JI • • • i: .: • • • '. • • • • -. • I I' . , . SAMPLE DEPTH SPECIFIC Li , 10 PLASTIC NO. IfT.I SAMPLE DESCRJPTION GRAVITY L~~kl INDEX TP-2 5.0 SILTY SAND (SM), yellowish tan ------. , . ,. Zero Air Voids Curve Specific Grayity =2.60 130 I \ \ \ \ M ~, 125 1\ \ \ -(.) ~ ~ . \ >-I-120 , . , -(/) \ z IJ.J ~ 0 ,,- >- f":'(v \ \ 0: / >-.:.I y... 0 ,'-; i\ / ' , 115 ./ , ). ~ ~\ / \ \ \ lln " .' . () 5, 10 15 20 25 , MOISTURE CONTENT 0/0 ' , , OPTIMUM WATER CONTENT % 12.5 . , MAXIMUM DRY DEN SIT Y,P (;f 1'18.4 TEST DESIGNATION ASTM D 1557-70 COMPACTION TEST RESULTS _OBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHASE n Consul""g So". FOurtdolootl 'Grolog,col Eng'" •• '1 Carlsbad, California PROJECT HO. DATE 218-3 September 1977 FIGURE B-5 III • II II· , 5.0 4.0 .. u:-~ )..;.-C/) 3.0 :::a:: ~ -(/) ~ (/) .----w ex: ....---.... (/) ~ ex: / < : ......-W 2.0 J: ~ ~ p (/) ,J V ~ -1.0 .' .' .. 0 1.0 . 2.0 3.0 4.0 5 .• 0 6.0 NORMAL PRESSURE (KSF) , . .. . SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA DESCRIPTION: SANDY and CLAYEY SILT (ML), TEST NUMBER 1 2 3 • gray-ton NORMAL PRESSURE.IKSF) 1.00 2.5.0. 5.00 ; SHEAR STRENGTH IKSF) 1.75 1.93· 3.09 T est Pit No.: 1 INITIAL H,O CONTENT ("Ie) 13.6 13.6 13.6 DEPTH (II.): 6.0 I ELEVATION (11):234 approx FINAL H,o CONTENT (%) 21.9 21.9 21.9 TEST RESULTS I.NITIAL DRY DENSITY (PC f) 103.4 1-03.4 103.4 "" APPARENT COHESION (e): 1.28 ksf FINAL DRY DENSITY (PCF) --------- APPARENT ANGLE OF INTERNAL FRICTION 14»: 19<> STRAIN RATE: 0.02 inches/minute (approx.) Note: Test was performed on sample remolded to approximately 900k pf the laboratory maximum density and then allowed to saturate before shearing. - DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHASE II COII'"Ir.nQ So.I. FoundOI.on 'G.oloQ.col fllg.~el' Carlsbad, CaJjfornia PROJECT NO. 218-3 Sept~"ib~1 1977 Figure 8-6 •. ~~ t ) F> • I· ~. J J J • . J J "I J 1 1 1 -. I I -I -L..----V ____ l.---- 4.0~--+---~--+-~+---+~--~=--+---+---4~~~--~~ _ t..----l.---- u:-L..----~ ty ~ 3.0~~-+----+---~----4----4----~----~--~----+---~~--~--~ f/) f/) w a: I-:-f/) a: « w 2.0~~-+----~---+----+---~----~--~~~~----~---+----4-~~ :r: f/) 1.0r---~---+----~--;----+----r---~---+----~~~---4--~ o 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 NORMAL PRESSURE (KSF) SAMPLE DATA T'EST DATA - DESCRIPTION: SILTY SAND (SM), yellowish tan TEST NUMBER 1 2 3 NORMAL PRESSURE (KSF) 1.0C -5.00 -. SHEAR STRENGTH (KSF) 3.42 4.70 Test Pit No.· 2 INITIAL H,O CONTENT (%1 12.6 12.6 - DEPTH (11.):5.0 j ELEVATION (flJ:249(approx. FINAL tI,o CONTENT (%) 16. 1 ,16. 1 TE~T RESULTS INIT·IAl DRY DENSITY (PCF) 106.3 106.3 APPARENT COHESION (e): 3. 11 ksf FINAL DRY DENSITY (PCF) , --- APPARENT ANGLE OF INTERNAL FRICTION (f>J: 170 STRAIN RATE: 0.02 inches/minufeapprox.) Note: Test was performed on sample remolded to approximately 90% of the laboratory maximum density al;ld then allowed tosatura~e before shearing_ DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA 6.0 ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES Con,,,lhng So.I, Foundor.on 'Geolog.col Eng,nee', PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHASE II Carlsbad, CaHfornia PROJECT NO. DATE 218-3 Septemher 1977 Figure 8-7 I II 1. GENERAL A. Scope of Work • • APPENDIX C GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS -SITE,EARTHWORK FOR PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK -PHASE JJ. CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA C-1 These sp:ecifications and applicable plans pertain to and include all site earthwork includ- ing, but not limited to, the furnishing of Elil labor, tools, and equipment necessary for sit~ clearing and stripping, disposal of excess ma~erials, excavation, preparaHon of foundation material:s for receiving filt, and placement and compaction of fill to the lines and grades shown on the project grading plans. B. Performance The Contractor warrants all work to be performed and all moterials to be furnished under fhis contract against defects in materials or workmanship for ~ period of year(s) from the date of written acceptance of the enti re construc tion work by the Owner. Upon written notice of any defect in materials or workmanship during said year period, tbe Contractor shall, at the option of the Owner, repair or replace said defect • ' :' .' f and any. damage to other work caused by or resul ti ng from such defect without cost to the Owner.; This shall riot limit any rights of the Owner under the "acceptance and'inspection'" clause of this contract. , ' The Contractor shall be responsible for the satisfactory completion of ElII site earthwork in' accordance with· the proiect plans and specifications. This work shall be observed and tested by a representative of Robert Prater Associates, hereinafter known as t:he Soil Engineer. Both the Soil Engineer ond the Architect/Engineer are the Owner's representatives. If t.he Contractor should foil to meet the technical or design requirements em\;>odiedin this document. and on the applicable plans, he shall make the necessary readjustments until all work is deemed satisfactory as determined by the Soi/. Eng'ineer and the Architect/Engineer. No qeviation from the specifications shall be made except upon written appr.ovalof the Soil Engineer or Architect/Engineer. No si te earthwork shall be performed wi thout the physical presence ,or approval of the Soil Engineer. The Contractor shall notify the Soil Engineer at least 24 hours prior to commencement of any aspect of the site earthwa'rk. The Soil Engineer shall be the Owner's representative to observe the earthwork operations during the site preparation work ond placement and compaction'of fills,. He sholl make ~ ....... - JJ'~ , , J, .; >. • ' 1 • • • • _I '. • • -. • • • • • ,I " . ,. '. • C-"2 ' enough visits to the site to familiarize himself generally with the progress and' quality of the work. He sholl make a sufficient number of tests and/or observations to enable him to form on opinion regarding the adequacy of the sHe preparation, the acceptabilityof the fill material, and the extent to which the compaction of the fill, as placed, meets. the specification requirements. Any fil·1 that does not meet the -specification requirements shall be removed and/or recompacted until the requi rements are satisfi ed • In accordance with g,enerally accepted construction practices, the Confrac.tor shall be solely and completely responsible for working conditions at the job site, including safety of all persons and property during performance of the work. This requirement shall apply continuously and shall not be limited to normal working hours. Any consitruction revi ew of the Contractor's performance conducted by fhe Soil Engineer is nat intended to include review of the adequacy of the Contractor's safety measures in, on or near the construction site. Upon completion of the construction work, the Contractorshallcettify that all compacted fi lis and foundations are in place at the correct locations, have, the correct dimensions, are plumb, and have been canstructed il') accordance with sound construction practice. In oddition, he shall cert~fy that the materials used are of the types, quantity and quality requir-ed by the pl'ans qnd'specifications. C. Site and Foundation Condi trons The Controctor is presumed to have visHed the site and to have familiarized himself with existing site conditions and the soil report ti-tled "'Geotechnical Investigat,ion, Palomar Airport Business Pork -Phase II, Carlsbad, Caf.ifornia," dated September 19, 1977. The Contractor shall not be relieved of liability under the contract for dny loss sustained as a result of any variance between conditions indicated by or dedLic,ed from the sail report and the actual conditions encountered during the course of the work. TheContractor sholl, upon becoming awar~ of surface and/or subsurface conditions differ- ing from those di sclosed by the original soil investigation, promptly noti'fy the Owner as to the nature and extent of the differing conditions, first verbally to permit verific~tion of the conditions, and then in writing. No claim by the Contractor for any conditions differing from those anticipated in the plans ond specifi-cotibns and ·disclosedby the soil investigation will be allowed unless the Contractor, has-so notified the Owner; verbol'ly and in writing, as required above, of such chonged conditions. D. Dust Control The Contractor shall assume responsibility for the alleviation or prevention uf any dust nuisance on or abol:lt the site or off-site borrow areas. Th~,Confractor shall assume all liability, including court costs of co-defendants, for all claims related to dust. or wind- blown materials 9ttributable to his work. III III • -.J D. .. • • -.;, C-3 II. DEF IN ITI ON OF TERMS STRUCTURAL FILL -All soil or soil-rock material'plac~d at the site -in order to raise grades or to backfill excavations, and upon which the Soil Engineer has made sufficient tests and/or obserVations to enable him to issue a ~ritten statement that, in his opinion, the fill has been placed and compacted in 9ccordance with the specificat-ion requhements. ON-SITE MATERIAL -' Material obtained fro'm the required site excavations. IMPORT MATER IAL -Material obtai ned from off-sHe borrow areas. ASTM SPECIFICATIONS -The 1970 edition of the American Society for Testing> and Materials Standards. DEGREE' OF COMPACTION -The ratio, expressed as a percentage, of the in-place dry density of the compacted fi II materiel to the maximum .dry density of the same ma.terial as determined by ASTM Test Designafion D 1557-70. III. CLEARING AND STRIPPING Allcireas to be grade,d shall be cleared of debris, brush, chaparral, designated trees, and associated roots. The ·cleared materials shall be disposed' of off-site. After clearing, any culfivated arees as well as all other areas supporting a growth of surface gross and weeds sholl be stripped to a sufficient depth to remove all surface vegetation and organic laden topsor!. The actual stripping d~pth sholl be determined in the fi eld by the Soi I Engineer at the time of construcUon. IV. EXCAVATION All excavation sholl be performed to the lines and grades and within the tolerances . specified on the ·project grading plans •. AII over-excavation below the grades specified shall be backfilled at the Contractor's expense and shall be compacted' in accordance with the specifications. 'the Contractor shan assume full responsibility for the stability of all temporary construction slopes at the site. V. PREPARATION FOR FILLING Surfaces to receive compacted fill sholl be scarified to a minim.um depth of 6 inches, moisture conditioned and compacted. Any pockets of-loose, saturated colll,lvium sholl be removed and recompacted. The need for removal and recompaction sholl be det.ermined by the Soil Engineer in the field at the time of construcfion. All ruts, hummod<s, or other uneven surface features sholl be removed by surface grading prior to placement of any fill materials. All areas which are to receive fill material sholl be approved by the S6il Engineer prior to the placement of any fill mater;'ol.· . A': 1<-J. • ~ t" 1 I I J I I I • • • I I 1 • 1 • • I" •• • C-4 Fills constructed on natural slopes having an inclination steeper than 5 horizontal to 1 verfical shall be keyed and benched into firm natural ground below any loose surfac~ soi,ls at the direction of the Soi I Engi neer. ' VI. MATERIALS FOR FilL All existing on-site soils ate in general suitable for reuse as fill. Fill materi'alshan not, however I contain rocks or lumps larger than 6 inches in, greatest dImension with not more than 15 percent larger than 2.5 inches. The use of potenfiaHy'g,~nsive soil as fill shal'l conform to the requirements of Section VI-! I "EXPANSIVE SOILS. II All material for use as fil~ shall be subject'to approval by the Soil Engineer. The existing topsoil stockpile located in the southeast portion of the site may be reus~d as' fill in the lower 'portions of the deeper sHe fills. However I any c:oncentration of organic material ~hall be selectively removed and disposed of off-site. The method 'of placement and suitability of the matertals shall be subject to the Soil Engineer's approval.: VII. EXPANSIVE SOILS Potenti ally expan~ive soHs taken from the required site excavations shall be used as fi II . only up t~ within '2 feet of the design finish grades in street pavement areas and on lots; the upper 2 feet of fill shall be comprised of non .... expansive sandy fill material. Th~ determination as to which materials are e.xpansiveand which are not shoU be mode in the field during constructi.on by t·he Soil Engineer. VIII. PLACING AND COMPACTING FILL MATERIAL AU structural fill shall be compacted by mechanical means to produce a minimum degree of compaction of 90 percent as determined by ASTM Test De~jgnation D1551.,...70. Field density tests shall be performed in accordance with either ASTMTest Designation 01556-64 (Sand-Cone Method) or ASTM Test Designati,on D2922-71 and D3017-72 (Nuclear Probe Me.thod)~ The locations and number of field den~ity tests sh~1'l be determined by the SoH Engineer~ The results of these tests and compliance with these specifications sholl be the basis upcm which satisfactory compleHon of work shall be judged by the Soil Engineer. . . Fill mate,rial shall be placed in uniform lifts not exceeding 8 inches in uncompoctedthick-' ness. Before compaction begins, the fill shall be brought to a wat.er content that will. permit proper compaction by either: 1) aerating the fill if it is too wet I .or2) moistening the fill with water if it is too dry. Each lift shall be thoroughly mixed before, compacnon to insure a uniform distribution of moist·ure. . Fill slopes shall be constructed so as to assure that a minimum degree ofcompacticmof 90. percent is attained to wi~hin 18 inches of the finished slope face and that a minimum degree of compaction of 85 percent is aHained in the outer 18 inches. This shall be occomplished, by IIbackrollingi' with 0 sheepsfoot roller or other suitable equipment in5 'to 8 foot vertic:al increments as the fill is raised. Placement of fill near th~ tops of slopes shall be carried out in such Q manner 'as to assure that loose, uncompacted soils are not sloughed over the tops and allowed to accumulate on the slope face. ,.'" • • C-5 ,. It shall be the Contractor's obligation to take all measures deemed necessary during grading to provide erosion control devi ces in order to protect .slope areas and adjacent properties from storm damage and flood hazard originating on this project •. It shall be the Contractor's responsibrlity to maintain slopes in fheir as-graded form until all slopes, berms, and assocIated drainage devices are in satisfactory compliance with the project plans and specifications •. IX. TRENCH BACKFILL Pipeline trenches shall be backfilled with compacted fill. Backfill material shall be placed in lift thicknesses appropriate to the type of cqmpacfion equipment utilized and compact~d to a minimum degree of compaction of 85 percent by mechanical means. In. all slab-on-grade and pavement areas the upper portion of the backfill to a depth equal to 1..5 times the trench width·, but hot less than 3 feet, shall be compacted to a minimum degree of compaction of 90 percent • In pavement areas, that portion of the trench backfi U within the pavement section shall conform to the material and compaction requirements of the adjacent pavement section~ -. .' x. TREATMENT AFTER COMPLETION OF EARTHWORK Af~er th~ earthwork operations have been completed and the Soil Engineer hqs finished his observation of the work,no further operations shall be pe·rformed except with the approval. of and under the observation of the Soil Enl;jineer.