The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 83-01; Monarch Villas Lots 8-10; Soils Report; 1987-10-07LEIGHTON and ASSOCIATES .- - - - - ,- - - .~ - - -- - - - *SOIL ENGINEERING *GEOLOGY .GEOPHYS,CS .GROUND WATER .MATER,ALS TESTlNG .HAzAR~,OI,S WASTE ASSESSMENT October 7. 1987 Project No. 8840360-04 TO: ATTENTION: SUBJECT: S 8 5 Construction Company of San Diego 5845 Friars Road, Suite 1106 San Diego, California 92108 Mr. Jack Tilney Interim As-Graded Report of Rough Grading Operations for Building Pad Areas, Lots 8 Through 10, Proposed Condominium Complexes, Monarch Villas, Carlsbad Tract 83-1. Carlsbad, California Introduction In accordance with your request and authorization, provided herein is our interim as-graded report of rough grading operations for the subject condominium building pads. This report summarizes our observations, field and laboratory tests, and geotechnical conditions encountered during grading performed between September 24 and October 6, 1987. The subject site is located at the northeast corner of El Camino Real and Levante Street in Carlsbad, California (Figure 1). Accompanying Maps. Illustrations, and Appendices Figure 1 - Site Location Map - Page 2 Table 1 - Summary of Building Pad Expansion Potential - Rear of Text Table 2 - Foundation Design Considerations for Expansive Soils Underlying One- and Two-Story Residential Buildings - Rear of Text Plates 1 and 2 - Density Test Location Maps - In Pocket Appendix A - References Appendix B - Summary of Field Density Tests Appendix C - Laboratory Test Results Appendix D - General Earthwork and Grading Specifications Appendix E - Slope Maintenance Guidelines for Homeowners 5421 AVENDA ENCINAS, S”,TE C. CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA 921278 (619) 931-995s - lR”lNE . WESTLAKE,“ENT”RA . DlAMOND BAR/WA, NUT . SAN HERNAR”INO,R:“ERSIDE . SAN Dl! ‘i P.4LM DESERT . Sc,NTA CLARITAl”A,FNCII . CAHLSRA” . IEMFCI!, A!RANCWO CA, ,FORN,A - - - - - - 0 2000 4000 7 feet BABE MAP: USGS. ENCMITAB, CALIFORNIA QUADRANGLE SITE LOCATION MAP S 8 S / MONARCH CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA .~ - - - - - - .- - - - 8840360-04 It is our understanding that this interim as-graded report is intended to satisfy a requirement of the City of Carlsbad to obtain building permits. The informa- tion presented in this report will be incorporated into the more comprehensive, final as-graded report for the Monarch Villas subdivision to be prepared shortly after completion of rough grading for the entire site. This interim report summarizes our observations, test results, the geotechnical conditions of the building pad areas, and provides recommendations for design and construction of the proposed buildings. The grading plan (2D-scale) prepared by APEC. Inc., dated March 16, 1984, was used as a base map to present approximate locations of field density tests (Plates 1 and 2). Rough grading operations of the building pad area for Building Pads 8 through 10 were performed during the period of September 24 through October 6. 1987. Grading operations will be performed in the near future for the remainder of the subject site. As-graded geotechnical conditions and field density test locations of the entire site will be presented in the final as- graded report. Summary of Grading Operations Grading of the subject site is being performed by Reed-Thomas Company, Inc. Grading largely consisted of removal of the existing paved street, excavation of lower building pad areas, and minor cuts and fills of the pre-existing graded area. Specific operations during interim rough grading included: l Brushing and removal of surface vegetation (with the exception of slope vegetation) and debris prior to grading of the site. a Removal of the existing asphalt concrete paved street, and buried utilities. Geotechnical Engineering Summary l Site Preparation and Removals Prior to grading, the building pad areas on the subject site were stripped of surface vegetation and debris. The existing street asphaltic concrete pavement was ground in-place and processed with site soils to make an ag- gregate fill mix. Existing portland cement concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalk were removed from the site. Buried utilities, including storm drain, water main, and sewer main lines were removed from the site. Lot 9 was a cut/fill transition lot due to offsite grading performed for the Plaza de la Costa Real Development in 1981 (Appendix A, Reference 3). In order to minimize the potential for differential settlement and to provide a relatively uniform soil condition beneath the building foundation, Lot 9 was overexcavated to a minimum depth of 3 feet below finished pad grade. The bottom of the overexcavated area was scarified a minimum of 12 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction, as determined by ASTM D1557-78. The approximate limits of removals are shown on Plate 2. .- - -3- 8840360-04 - l Fill Placement - After processing the excavated areas, native fill soils and A.C. soil ag- gregate fill mix were spread in 6- to a-inch loose lifts, moisture conditioned as needed to obtain near-optimum moisture content, and compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent of the maximum dry density (ASTM Test Method -. - D1557-78). Areas of fill in which field density tests were less than 90 percent relative compaction were reworked, recompacted, and retested until the fill reached 90 percent relative compaction and adequate moisture content. In areas where fill placement was observed as being nonuniform, these areas were reworked until uniformity in soil mixture and adequate moisture was achieved. a Field and Laboratory Testing - Field density tests were performed by the sand cone, nuclear gauge, and drive cylinder methods in general accordance with ASTM Test Methods D1566-82. D2922-78, and D2937-71, respectively. The approximate locations of the field density tests are shown on Plates 1 and 2. The results of the field density tests are presented in Appendix B. Laboratory maximum dry density tests were performed in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557-78. The results are presented in Appendix C. It should be noted that the accuracy of test results is dependent on the preci- sion of the laboratory and field testing procedures as outlined by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). Representative samples were collected from near-surface soils of finish graded pads. Laboratory tests for expansion index were performed on these samples in accordance with UBC 29-2. The results of expansion tests are presented in Appendix C. a Graded Slopes - - - Fill slopes in the "crawl space" areas between the interior and exterior footings were constructed in accordance with our recommendations contained in our geotechnical investigation report (Appendix A, Reference 3). The slopes between the upper and lower footings were located by projecting a 2:l (horizontal to vertical) slope upward from the lower pad grade to the upper pad. Fill slope faces were compacted by sheepsfoot rollers and then track- walked. Grading for the major slopes outside the building pad areas has not been completed at this time. As-graded geotechnical conditions of these slopes will be addressed in the final as-graded report. l Retaining Walls - -. A retaining wall is proposed west of the building pad at Lot 10 (Plate 2). As of this date, work has not begun on the construction of this retaining wall. Retaining wall footing excavations and backfill should be observed by a representative of this firm and will be addressed in the final as-graded report. - -b- - - - - - - - - - .- - - - - - 8840360-04 l Expansive Potential Expansion index tests were performed in accordance with UBC 29-2 on repre- sentative samples of the near-surface soils of the subject lots. Based on these test results and visual evaluation, the expansion index of these soils ranged from very low to medium. Results of the expansion index tests are presented in Appendix C. Foundation and slab recommendations for building pads with medium and high expansive potential soils within 3 feet of pad grade are discussed in our previous report (Appendix A, Reference 3). Conclusions Geotechnical aspects of the building pad area of the subject site have been evaluated and treated during grading in accordance with the recommendations presented in our geotechnical investigation report (Appendix A, Reference 3). field recommendations during the course of grading, and requirements of the City of Carlsbad. It is our opinion that the building pad areas of Lots 8 through 10 are suitable for their intended use provided the recommendations of this report and our previous report are incorporated into the design and construction. The following is a summary of our conclusions: l The geotechnical properties of the onsite soils encountered during site grading were generally as anticipated. a Site preparation and removal of utilities and pavements were observed and/or tested prior to fill placement. l Very low to low expansive soils at finish grade exist on the subject building pads. l A cut-fill transition lot (Lot 9) which affected building pads was overex- cavated a minimum of 3 feet below finish pad grade. The bottom of the overexcavated area was scarified and moisture conditioned a minimum of 12 inches, and fill was placed and recompacted to finish grade. o Fill soils were derived from onsite soils and A.C. soil aggregate fill mix. Fill soils in the pad areas of Lots 8 through 10 were placed and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction in accordance with the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications (Appendix D) and the requirements of the City of Carlsbad. Recommendations l Foundation and Slab Design Considerations Construction of foundations and slabs should be performed in accordance with the recommendations of our previous report (Appendix A, Reference 3). Laboratory test results indicate expansion potential should be very low to low (Table 1). Treatment of the foundation, slab and flatwork design for very low to low expansive soil designations should be based on Table 2. It should be noted that Table 2 of this report supersedes the Table 2 of our previous report (Appendix A, Reference 3). 8840360-04 - In order to help mitigate the potential for misalignment of the proposed garage door openings(s), we recommend a grade beam be provided across the garage door opening(s). This grade beam should be designed in accordance with the structural engineer's requirements and have a minimum reinforcement of two No. 4 rebars (one top and bottom). - The potential for slab cracking may be reduced by careful control of water/cement ratios. The contractor should take appropriate curing precau- tions during the pouring of concrete in hot weather to minimize cracking of slabs. We recommend that a slipsheet (or equivalent) be utilized if grouted tile, marble tile, or other crack-sensitive floor covering is planned directly on concrete slabs. All slabs should be designed in accordance with structural considerations. - l Surface Drainage and Lot Maintenance - - - - - - - Positive drainage of surface water away from the structure is very important. No water should be allowed to pond adjacent to the building. Positive drainage may be accomplished by providing drainage away from the building at a gradient of at least 2 percent for a distance of at least 5 feet away from the building, and further maintained by a swale or drainage path at a gradient of at least 1 percent. Where necessary, drainage paths may be shortened by use of area drains and collector pipes. We suggest the installation of eave gutters and downspouts on the buildings , which will facilitate roof runoff away from the foundation. The discharge water from the downspouts should be directed away from the buildings to an appropriate noncorrosive outlet. Drainage away from the slopes should be maintained at all times such that water does not drain over the top of the slopes. The need for and design of drainage devices on the site is within the purview of the design civil engineer. Planters with open bottoms adjacent to the building should be avoided, if possible. Planting areas at grade should be provided with adequate positive drainage directed away from the building. Planters should not be designed below grade unless provisions for drainage such as catch basins and pipe drains are made. Upon sale of housing units, maintenance of lots by the homeowner and/or by the Homeowners Association is recommended. Our Slope Maintenance Guidelines for Homeowners is therefore included in Appendix E for your review and distribu- tion to the future homeowners and/or Homeowners Association. -6- - LEIGHTON and ASSOClATES INCORPORATED 8840360-04 - a Subdrains Construction of a "crawl space" subdrain should be performed in accordance with the recommendations of our previous report (Appendix A, Reference 3). The stability fill subdrain and outlets constructed during rough grading are identified on the As-graded Geotechnical Maps. Where outlets are not tied into the storm drains, they should be cleared of soil cover or other potential blockage which may have occurred since initial subdrain construction. Drainage design from outlets that are not tied into storm drains should be provided by the project civil engineer. It is recommended that the Homeowners Association further maintain these outlets, as well as retaining wall drainage outlets, to prevent future blockage for those drains in common areas. Individual homeowners should maintain outlets on their respective properties. The developer should provide this information to the homeowners. Should a subdrain be intercepted or damaged in the future, even if it is dry, we recommend that the subdrain be repaired. If a subdrain requires reloca- tion, the subdrain may be rerouted provided a minimum gradient of 1 percent is provided in the direction of the outlet. - If you have any questions regarding our report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. - - - Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Ro&E22YZ%? Chief Engineerilg Geologist - EO/SRH/RW/lk Distribution: (3) Addressee - - - -7- LEIGHTON and ASSOCIATES INCORPORATED -. 8840360-04 TABLE 1 Summary of Building Pad Expansion Potential Expansion Potential Low Medium Avery Low Expansion Index of Representative Test 24 51 3 - - - - - - - Lot - 8 9 10 LElGHTON and ASSOClATES INCORPORATED TABLE 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - _- FOUNDATION DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR EXPANSIVE SOILS UNDERLYING ONE- AND TWO-STORY RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS Isp*nsbm *nd*r 0 - 20 YERT LW E,PWSIO** Lay fIPA*s‘OY l “ED‘“” f,PA”Slcw “,GW IIPA”SlO”~ O"*-StOrY All footlnpr ‘I Inch*, foollnqr 1‘1 ,ooflnp* 12 lnrhrr Estwlor footlnpr ‘A E‘t*clor twllnps I4 deep. we Note I) foot!npr conttn- deep. footlngr conttn- "0"‘. On* "0. 4 rrbrr Incnrs deep. Interfor Inch.‘ dWP. ‘nterlor "O",. OM "0. 4 re0.r top an* batto.. top and botto.. root1n*, 12 fnrhcs deep. One IO. 4 .-lb,, top rnd footlnps ‘0 lnchrs *ttv. one "0. I ,.bw top Ifid botloa. bottm. ho-story All foothql ‘8 Inch*, All footlnq, ,q fnchcs foollnql deep. d.?~P. footl"gs conth- A‘1 footl"g* 10 ,ndlrs E.terlo, footlnp, 2, (se* Note 1) fooclngs cont,n- ,nclles Ll*eo. ‘nt.rlor "0"‘. On* "0. , r,ba, "O",. on* no. , Itba, deep. foothqr cant,"- YOY,. On* !I*. , ret,,, footlnp, IO IKhes deep. top 41 L!.mO.. tog ,"%I bottom. top and DOIIO.. on, "0. s CIbM tg ,ne bottom. Lwnq AreI 4 indws tbfct. 0x0- , ,nchM ub,ct. ore- 4 l"ChCS t‘le7. ho- ‘ Inch@* ul,ct. ,t floor Slab 101‘0 rcbm r,rr m5h. ‘0,‘0 rr‘dcd rlrc msh. o/o “r‘dld rtre ICSh. TCb., 0 ‘0’ on ce”ler (kc Not* 2) z-inch s&Id layer owr *-l”C.4 ran* layer owr rim f4 dowels , ‘0’ 0” 6 4‘ virqreen molst”rC .?-hCh ‘*ml Ir”*r OYW 0 ,,‘ Yl,q”~c” mol,t”Ce 6 d‘ “,rq”ctn eatstwe ccntw ritn Z4”Lh sand barrirr owr &,“Ch bawler over 2-l&! barrier *rep r-,ncn ,aycr ow, 4 .i, Yfsquee” rrnll b*s*. sand b&SC. Iand brrr. moisture barrier over ,-inch smd bare. ~:w~q. Floor 4 I"Ch., trlk.t. OS*- , ,ncller tnfch. ‘as- , lncher mkt. OS& , Inchrr thkk. ‘01‘0 "LldL.4 "ire OatI ,o,,o I@IPCd .Ir* mmh A/6 "elfled *,rc rm I, rtbm , IO' 0" ':':"y; or qurrter I,.b. 24nclI sand base. mybe: slab. Z-4nch or quarter slab. <enter ,nd qurtlr sm. ,4"Ch sand b&s*. I-h0 crml base. Presolllnp Soils mlltmed to mar SO& vppr 12 tnchrs Soak UPP(~ 24 InChe‘ 0‘ Llrlnq optbo. msisturr content to ,t ‘tart 1.2 I soal: vpper IO ,“Chll to LO at 111‘1 I.4 I DplfW Am* l l* ',",'.c;;:'m.a dcqtb of opthl. m1sture at least 1.3 I opthim mlslvrc content or mlstwe content Dr 6rraqc Slab contmt or 4 PerCInt rbore .,,Mu. oot‘turl S ~‘rcent above oqtlu. 5 perccnr tbwe OPttUrn SOi‘S nol,t"rc contmt. "h,Cb mirturr content. rhich- (se llotc 4, content. rh,cntrcr IS ercr IS qrcatcr. .,".w I, .prter. greater. l E:~nrlon 1nd.s deter.lntd In accordmce r!th lest “ethcd UK 29-2. “DES: L. "lnh,. ,oot‘nq r,dtk should b. 11 ,"che, ,or on.-,for" bu‘ldlnq,. IS tnchrl for t"o-,tOly bu“d,nq,. rnd 2, ,nctl*, to, ~solrfed spread tootlnqr. 2. "Ire .e,b md rebar ,hw,d be p,,ced ,t m of s‘lb. I I. “0I.t. prrrq, slab fro. ~(?l.eter footing‘. Slab ‘~"Cut, shwld be 1 .I”,.‘. Of I incn deep. 4. It ,hou,d b. noted th,t pr,,oetlnq .a)’ rtW,rc 4” l stmm, ,xrlod of ttl LO r*.Lh tllc recommdcd moistwe conrmt. I. for e,pm,,on Inde, over ‘10. ,prc‘r, r,~omendatIon, rll, be worlded b, th@ qeota,nica, con,u,tmt (,I naces‘ary, b,sed o” actotl field Condttlon‘. 6. A,, d~,,th, ,re rllrtlr, lo Sllb ,“bg’tdl Or fhl‘hd .JrOuWl S”I‘.LI. “hlC‘W”W (1 1WW. I. The ,bQ”l “bedarnt ,na r~hforcernl ~on,ldcrrttons .re .f”l.“. quidellner IlhlCl .*y be incrr,,r.d ,I WI* JiscreLlc4l 0‘ tn* ,trYCtUrtl mplnrrr. APPENDIX A - 8840360-04 - APPENDIX A REFERENCES - - - - - - - - ,- - - - -. 1. Associated Professional Engineering Corporation (APEC). 1984, Grading plans for Monarch Villas, Carlsbad Tract No. 83-l. 6 Sheets, Drawing No. 233-4A, Dated March 16. 2. Dale Naegle, AIA, Architecture and Planning, Inc., Plans for Monarch Villas, Prepared for Shape11 Industries, 37 Sheets, Dated April 1984, Revised November 17, 1986. 3. Leighton and Associates, Inc., 1984, Geotechnical investigation, Monarch Villas, Carlsbad Tract 83-1, Carlsbad, California, Dated June 6. 4. , Unpublished, in-house data. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS Date Source Scale Flight Photo No. 1973 San Diego County 1:12,000' 31 - 38 39 and 40 1978 San Diego County 1:12,000’ I78 - 31 32 and 33 A-i APPENDIX B __ 8840360-04 - - - - - APPENDIX B EXPLANATION OF SUMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS A. Test No. -: OOI* Field density test by Sand-Cone Method (ASTM 01556-82) 001’ Field density test by Drive Cylinder liethod (ASTli D2937-83) 0011 Field density test by Nuclear Nethod (ASTM 02922-81) 8. Test of: CF --- Compacted fill SF --- Slope face FG --- Finish grade NOTE: Soil type and descriptions are presented in Appendix C (Summary of Laboratory Test Results). - - - - - - - SJWRY ff FIELU DENSITY TESTS m I .- .- PROJECT tiwm : 8E4f!360-04 PROJEClhWlE:SbSC[P(STRVCTION/lWrYIRMVl~ TEST TEST TEST ta DRTE OF II 9126187 a 26 9/26/07 CF 34 9/266/07 a 46 912aia7 CF 54 g/28/87 CF 66 9t2aia7 CF 711 9/28/07 LT 0t 9120fa7 CF 96 9/20/07 CF icw 9t20ta7 a 114 9l2w.7 a 12# 9/23/07 w 13 9ma7 a 14 9129107 a 151 9ma7 CF 1M Y/29/07 a 171 9i29ta7 a 10i 9mia7 CF 19^ 9iwa7 SF m YlW07 GF 21s 9l3t.101 CF m 9mva7 CF 238 9iiaia7 a 24t Y/W87 a TEST LOT 4 LOT 4 LOT 2 LM 3 LaT 4 LOT 6 LOT 3 LOT 3 LM 4 LM4 LOT 4 LOT 4 LOT 2 LOT 2 LOT2 LOT 2 LOT 2 LOT2 LM2 LOT 2 LOT2 LOT 2 LOT 2 LOT2 LOCRTION SmL TYPE NleJlR El@215 4 NlW5 El0205 4 Nl@l@S El0290 4 Nl@lW El0175 4 NW45 El0155 4 NW20 El'%48 4 N101a El0185 4 NiB115 El0220 4 Nl@&E El0155 4 NW45 El0110 4 N18258 El8898 4 N10365 El8128 4 Nl@ll@ El0290 4 NW15 El@280 4 N1023Z El8278 4 NlWS El&Z70 4 N10198 El@250 4 NW40 El0305 7 N10115 El&?% 7 NM2BB El@295 5 NW215 El6278 5 N10140 El8325 4 NM255 El0285 4 NW64 El&?25 4 ELEV OR CUTH (FEET) 67.8 70.0 68.0 73.5 73.0 73.8 74.5 74.0 73. a 76.0 70. a 77.0 61.0 78.0 69.0 73. a 71.0 7b.a 75.0 12.0 71.0 70.8 75.8 77.5 DRY CENStPCF) KGKlREI%) RELATIVE RUMKS FIELD IUlX FIELD OPT COWFICTION 118.3 117.5 11.5 12.0 105.3 117.5 11.8 12.0 lea.2 117.5 12.1 12.8 112.1 117.5 12.8 12.0 111.6 117.5 13.1 12.0 113.9 117.5 12.8 12.8 114.1 117.5 11.a 12.0 MY.2 117.5 11.7 12.8 111.6 117.5 12.5 12.8 187.6 117.5 14.5 12.0 106.1 117.5 11.9 12.8 107.4 117.5 11.8 12.0 w.1 117.5 13.1 12.0 107.0 117.5 12.1 12.0 113.4 117.5 14.0 12.8 111.5 117.5 13.2 12.8 109.5 117.5 Il.7 12.8 l&B 116.5 13.3 13.5 105.2 116.5 13.0 13.5 107.5 li3.a 19.3 17.0 104.9 113.0 16.6 17.0 105.8 117.5 11.7 12.0 112.1 117.5 13.8 12.0 110.7 117.5 11.1 12.8 WI 94. 90. 92. 95. 95. 97. 97. 93. 95. 92. 98. 91. 92. 91. 91. 9s. 93. 91. 98. 3% 93. 90. 95. 94. - - - - - - ,.- - -. - -. _- SWRYDf FIELDDEWTV TESTS P@E2 PROJECT HUMEER : 0040360-04 PROJECTKA'IE:S~SCO&TRUCTION IlwwllRcH VILLRS TFST TEST TEST TEST LOCATION SOIL ELEV OR DRY DENS(PEF) MOISTUREI~) RELFITIK REM-IRKS ND Dm OF TYPE DEPTH FIELD lyIX FIELU OPT WlpAcTIW (FEET1 251 Y/30/07 ff CII loylRcR NM295 El0428 4 70.8 26r lmia7 ix LDT 4 ~18378 Etaila 4 75.0 27# 10l81l07 F6 LOT 3 NW25 El@05 4 75.6 281 laiwa7 F6 LOT 3 N10210 ElWY5 4 75.6 2W 18/01/07 FG LOT 2 N10140 El0365 4 79.5 3By le/alia7 F6 LOT 2 N16255 El0315 4 79.5 31Y 10/01/07 CF Cn WONARW NW75 El0195 1 63.0 324 waiia7 ff 33t 10/01/07 a 34r walia7 cF 351 1wa1lE7 a 36# 10/01/07 CF 371 10/01107 a 3at 10/01/07 a 3% leialia7 a 4at leialia7 CF 41) 10102l07 SF 421 10102l07 CF 43 laicwa7 a 44t 1em/a7 a 451 10/6?/07 a 464 kww07 CF 471: law07 a 404 1awa7 Y- LOT 5 N18538 El0310 4 71.8 Loll N10705 E182%3 4 76.8 LOT 5 N18)98 El8265 1 66.8 LOT 5 NW@ El0315 4 73.5 LM5 NW15 El&?65 4 75.0 LOT 5 NI0475E16248 1 69.0 LOT a N10625 El0110 1 62.0 LOT 4 N10370 El0160 1 77.0 LM5 Nl0370 El0350 7 76.0 LOT 2 N10210 El8395 1 73.8 LM5 NW70 El0200 4 73.8 LOT 7 NM565 Elm 7 75.5 LOT0 NIB625 El0125 4 65.0 LOT6 NItI El0110 4 75.5 LM7 NlLW5 El0315 1 77.5 LOT 6 NM495 El0070 5 70.0 LOT3 NIB126 El0158 1 72.6 186.0 117.5 13.2 12.0 189.0 117.5 13.5 12.8 100.7 117.5 11.2 12.8 im.9 117.5 ii.1 12.8 110.6 117.5 11.4 12.0 110.2 117.5 11.7 12.0 111.3 119.5 t1.a 10.5 189.7 117.5 ii.0 12.8 110.2 117.5 12.2 12.8 109.9 119.5 11.4 10.5 MY.9 117.5 11.7 12.0 110.2 117.5 11.2 12.8 Ice.2 119.5 11.4 10.5 100.1 119.5 11.1 10.5 112.9 119.5 13.5 10.5 188.2 116.5 14.5 13.5 110.7 119.5 18.0 18.5 189.3 117.5 12.7 12.0 100.9 116.5 16.5 13.5 107.0 117.5 12.0 12.8 10Y.Y 117.5 12.3 12.8 112.3 119.5 14.3 10.5 104.7 113.0 16.0 17.0 218.9 119.5 11.1 10.5 0) 91. 93. 93. 93. 94. 94. 93. 93. 94. 42. 94. 94. 91. 98. 94. 93. 93. 93. 93. 92. 94. 94. 93. 93. SlMlRY W F1Ei.D CENSITV TESTS ME3 PROJECT t&wER : aem60-04 PROJECT t&W : S 6 S CWSTRUCTION I KhWKH VILLRS TEST TEST TEST TESTLOCATIDN SDIL ELEV OR ORY DENsfWFl MIISTWELII REL(ITIVE REMRiG No DRTE OF 4% wcwa7 CF ~BI lwwa7 a 51~ 1wwa7 CF 528 iemva7 sF 534 1ema7 F6 548 10/U/87 FG 551 1&?3/87 CF 56s lm/a7 a 57# im/a7 F6 581 wa3/87 FG 594 wcwa7 SF 6ei lemia7 a 611 le/wa7 F6 62t iwwa7 SF 651 10/05/87 W 644 10mia7 CF 651 l-am/a7 a 66s 10/05/87 CF 674 km/a7 a 684 1ema7 a 6% iwma7 FS 781 lkvwa7 F6 71* 1wawa7 SF 7r 18/@5/87 a LOT a LOT 7 LM 7 LOT 4 LDT 4 LOT 4 LM 6 LOT 5 LM 6 LM6 LOT 6 LOT 7 LDT 5 LOT 5 LM 5 LOT 7 LDT 1 LM a LOT 7 LOTa LDT 7 LOT 7 LOT 7 LOT a TYPE DEPTH FEET1 NlWS EKWS 7 68.0 NM645 El@265 7 73.5 Nl8628 El8153 5 75.5 NM265 EM115 4 76.8 NM285 El0128 4 73.5 NIB368 El@95 4 79.0 NIB)@5 El0185 4 79.0 N18338 El0275 4 78. -a NM395 ElkW5 4 79.9 NM438 EIWS 4 74.5 NM410 El0145 4 77.5 NM94 El0238 1 77.0 NM475 El8368 7 BB.0 NM460 El8270 7 77.5 NM475 El0360 4 74.7 Nl8688 El8298 5 79. B NH785 ElW5 7 76.8 Nl05M El0138 2 74.5 Nl0690E10230 7 78.0 NM565 El0010 7 75.0 NM75 E1WS 1 a0.0 NM15 El8185 1 74.8 N18575 El0300 1 77.5 NM633 El0115 I 77.8 FIELD lyIW FIELD OPT MWUCTION 104.9 116.5 12.2 13.5 104.8 1185 13.7 13.5 l&Z.0 113.0 17.4 17.0 103.2 117.5 11.9 12.0 114.0 117.5 11.9 12.0 114.4 117.5 12.1 12.8 114.2 117.5 11.5 12.0 112.3 117.5 11.8 12.0 113.9 117.5 11.6 12.0 113.8 117.5 13.3 12.0 110.8 117.5 11.1 12.8 111.1 119.5 11.2 LB.5 109.4 116.5 11.9 13.5 199.7 116.5 12.1 13.5 110.8 117.5 18.9 12.0 len.5 113.0 17.0 17.8 108.7 116.5 15.7 135 112.4 119.5 11.9 11.5 107.3 116.5 14.3 13.5 185.9 116.5 12.7 13.5 lM.7 119.5 11.7 10.5 111.7 119.5 10.8 10.5 111.0 119.5 10.9 10.5 110.5 119.5 12.4 18.5 WI 98. 53. 93. 93. 97. 97. 97. 96. 97. 97. 94. 93. 94. 94. 94. %. 93. 94. 92. 91. 93. 93. 93. 'E2. - - SUmRAY OF FIELD WlsITV TESTS PAGE4 - - - - PRCLIECTNUN~ER:~E~U~H~ PRoJEcT~:SLS~lRucTIoN/loNRRmVILLAs TEST LCCRTION SOIL ELEV OR TEST TEST TES1 No lKlTE OF 73~ liwwa7 a 74~ lcmiia7 s 75d lWW87 FG 76) 10/05/87 FG n* lm/a7 sF iat 10/06/87 FG 79~ 10/06/87 CF ml; 10/06/87 CF al* 10/ffi/a7 SF 82~ 10wa7 a a.?# lwwa7 F6 a411 10/86/87 FG 83 1wwa7 FS 864 10wa7 a a78 1wa6ia7 F6 am 10wa7 SF 891: lw6/87 SF LOT a LOT 4 LOT a LOT a LOT a LOT 3 LOT 9 LOT9 LOT a LOT 9 LOT 10 LOT 9 LM 9 LOT 1 LM 10 LOT 10 LOT9 m DEPTH (FEET1 NlW35 ElQW5 7 78.0 N10290 El0945 4 68.0 Nl0645 ElWl0 4 73.7 Nl062-d El0875 4 79.8 N10565 E9975 7 76.5 N10185 El0138 1 70.3 NW50 El8870 a 76.0 NlW5 El8828 7 73.5 Nl@SaB El'@25 4 76.5 NW15 El0075 4 79.0 Nl8875 El@820 1 al.8 NM785 El@%5 4 80.8 NlW5 El@45 4 74.7 N10745 El0215 5 2&B Nl0910 E18838 1 81.5 NlW5 El@25 1 83.0 Nl'iW3 El0020 4 88.0 DRY DENS(W) IIOISTUFE(%) RELATIVE t7ENAWi FIELD WLX FIELD OPT ClWKTIDN 107.8 116.5 13.3 13.5 LE.6 117.5 11.7 12.0 109.7 117.5 12.3 12.8 188.1 117.5 12.8 12.8 107.4 116.5 14.2 13.5 114.3 119.5 a.7 10.5 107.0 116.5 15.7 16.5 186.3 116.5 12.6 13.5 110.5 117.5 12.1 12.8 105.9 117.5 13.1 12.0 115.8 119.5 10.5 10.5 106.1 117.5 14.4 12.0 107.1 117.5 10.4 12.0 101.3 113.0 19.4 17.8 111.5 119.5 11.3 10.5 116.8 119.5 18.1 la5 lea.5 117.5 12.2 12.0 Ia) 93. 91. 93. 92. 92. 96. 32. 91. 94. 98. 97. 93. 91. 98. 93. 98. 52. APPENDIX C - - ,- - - - - - -_ - - - - .- - _- -. - -. MAXIMUM DENSITY TEST RESULTS MAXIMUM OPTIMUM SAMPLE SOIL DESCRIPTION DRY DENSITY MOISTURE (PCF) CONTENT W 1 Light brown, silty sand (Fill) 119.5 10.5 2 Gray-brown, clayey sand (Topsoil) 119.5 11.5 3 Gray-brown, slightly silty, fine sand 119.0 12.0 4 Light brown, fine sand 117.5 12.0 5 Green, silty clay 113.0 17.0 6 Processed A.C. with sand 125.0 10.0 7 Light to medium brown, silty sand 116.5 13.5 8 Green, sandy clay 116.5 16.5 8840360-04 S & S CONSTRUCTION/MONARCH VILLAS APPENDIX D - 8840360-04 - GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS 1.0 - 2.0 - - - - 3.0 - - General Intent These specifications are presented as general procedures and recommendations for grading and earthwork to be utilized in conjunction with the approved grading plans. These general earthwork and grading specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report and shall be superseded by the recommendations in the geotechnical report in the case of conflict. Evaluations performed by the consultant during the course of grading may result in new recommendations which could supersede these specifications or the recomnendations of the geotechnical report. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to read and understand these specifications, as well as the geotechnical report and approved grading plans. Earthwork Observation and Testing Prior to the commencement of grading, a qualified geotechnical consultant should be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for conformance with the recommendations of the geotechni- cal report and these specifications. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to assist the consultant and keep him apprised of work schedules and changes, at least 24 hours in advance, so that he may schedule his personnel accordingly. No grading operations should be performed without the knowledge of the geotechnical consultant. The contractor shall not assume that the geotechnical consultant is aware of all grading operations. It shall be the sole responsibility of the contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the work in accordance with applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, recomnendations in the geotechnical report, and the approved grading plans not withstanding the testing and observation of the geotechnical consultant. If, in the opinion of the consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable soil, poor moisture condition, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than recommended in the geotechnical report and the specifications, the consultant will be empowered to reject the work and recommend that construction be stopped until the conditions are rectified. Maximum dry density tests used to evaluate the degree of compaction should be performed in general accordance with the latest version of the American Society for Testing and Materials test method ASTM D1557. Preparation of Areas to be Filled 3.1 Clearing and Grubbing: Sufficient brush, vegetation, roots, and all other deleterious material should be removed or orooerlv disoosed of in a method acceptable to the owner, design engineer, 'gov&nin$ agencies and the geotechnical consultant. -i- - - 8840360-04 3.2 - ,- 3.3 - - - - - - 3.4 3.5 3.6 -. -- ..- - - - 3.7 The geotechnical consultant should evaluate the extent of these removals depending on specific site conditions. In general, no more than 1 percent (by volume) of the fill material should consist of these materials and nesting of these materials should not be allowed. Processing: The existing ground which has been evaluated by the geotechnical consultant to be satisfactory for support of fill, should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground which is not satisfactory should be overexcavated as specified in the following section. Scarification should continue until the soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and until the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features which would inhibit uniform compaction. Overexcavation: Soft, dry, organic-rich, spongy, highly fractured, or otherwise unsuitable ground, extending to such a depth that surface processing cannot adequately improve the condition, should be overex- cavated down to competent ground, as evaluated by the geotechnical consultant. For purposes of determining quantities of materials overexcavated, a licensed land surveyor/civil engineer should be utilized. Moisture Conditionin : Overexcavated and processed soils should be watered, dried-back, b ended, and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a uniform moisture content near optimum. Recompaction: Overexcavated and processed soils which have been properly mixed, screened of deleterious material, and moisture- conditioned should be recompacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent or as otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant. &cnhi5n3 Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper (horizontal to vertical), the ground should be stepped or benched. The lowest bench should be a minimum of 15 feet wide, at least 2 feet into competent material as evaluated by the geotechnical consultant. Other benches should be excavated into competent material as evaluated by the geotechnical consultant. Ground sloping flatter than 5:l should be benched or otherwise overexcavated when recommended by the geotechnical consultant. Evaluation of Fill Areas: All areas to receive fill, including processed areas, removal areas, and toe-of-fill benches, should be . evaluated by the geotechnical consultant prior to fill placement. - 8840360-04 - 4.0 Fill Material 4.1 4.2 - 4.3 -~ - General: Material to be placed as fill should be sufficiently free of organic matter and other deleterious substances, and should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant prior to placement. Soils of poor gradation, expansion, or strength characteristics should be placed as recormnended by the geotechnical consultant or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material. Oversize: Oversize material, defined as rock or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 6 inches, should not be buried or placed in fills, unless the location, materials, and disposal methods are specifically recommended by the geotechnical consultant. Oversize disposal operations should be such that nesting of oversize material does not occur, and such that the oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material should not be placed within 10 feet vertically of finish grade, within 2 feet of future utilities or underground construction, or within 15 feet horizontally of slope faces, in accordance with the attached detail. Import: If importing of fill material is required for grading, the import material should meet the requirements of Section 4.1. Sufficient time should be given to allow the geotechnical consultant to observe (and test, if necessary) the proposed, import materials. 5.0 Fill Placement and Compaction - 5.1 5.2 5.3 Fill Lifts: Fill material should be placed in areas prepared and previously evaluated to receive fill, in near-horizontal layers approximately 6 inches in compacted thickness. Each layer should be spread evenly and thoroughly mixed to attain uniformity of material and moisture throughout. Moisture Conditioning: blended, and/or mixed, content near optimum. Fill soils should be watered, dried-back, as necessary to attain a uniform moisture Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been evenly spread, moisture- conditioned, and mixed, it should be uniformly compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum dry density (unless otherwise specified). Compaction equipment should be adequately sized and be either specifi- cally designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability, to efficiently achieve the specified degree and uniformity of compaction. - iii - - - - - - - .-. - - - - - - 8840360-04 5.4 5.5 6.0 7.0 8.0 Fill Slopes: Compacting of slopes should be accomplished, in addition to normal compacting procedures, by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at increments of 3 to 4 feet in fill elevation gain, or by other methods producing satisfactory results. At the completion of grading, the relative compaction of the fill out to the slope face should be at least 90 percent. Compaction Testing: Field tests of the moisture content and degree of compaction of the fill soils should be performed by the geotechnical consultant. The location and frequency of tests should be at the consult- ant's discretion based on field conditions encountered. In general, the tests should be taken at approximate intervals of 2 feet in vertical rise and/or 1,000 cubic yards of compacted fill soils. In addition, on slope faces, as a guideline approximately one test should be taken for each 5,000 square feet of slope face and/or each 10 feet of vertical height of slope. Subdrain Installation Subdrain systems, if recommended, should be installed in areas previously evaluated for suitability by the geotechnical consultant, to conform to the approximate alignment and details shown on the plans or herein. The subdrain location or materials should not be changed or modified unless recommended by the geotechnical consultant. The consultant, however, may recommend changes in subdrain line or grade depending on conditions encountered. All subdrains should be surveyed by a licensed land surveyor/civil engineer for line and grade after installation. Sufficient time shall be allowed for the surveys, prior to commencement of filling over the subdrains. Excavation Excavations and cut slopes should be evaluated by a representative of the geotechnical consultant (as necessary) during grading. If directed by the geotechnical consultant, further excavation, overexcavation, and refilling of cut areas and/or remedial grading of cut slopes (i.e., stability fills or slope buttresses) may be recommended. quantity Determination For purposes of determining quantities of materials excavated during grading and/or determining the limits of overexcavation, a licensed land surveyor/civil engineer should be utilized. - iv - - - - - -~ .- .- - -. - - .- - - - STABILITY FILL / BUTTRESS DETAIL LOWEST SUSORAIN SHOULD SE slTUAtEo AS LOW AS POSSIBLE to ALLOW SUITABLE OUTLET 9/4=-l-112’ CLEAN QRAVEL (3ft?ift. MIN.)- / SEE T-CONNECTION DETAIL 4= 0. ON-PERFORATE PIPE 1 FILTER FABRIC iNvfi~oPE (MIRAFI 4’ MIN. 40N OR APPROVED SEOOINQ 1OUIVALENT)* SUBDRAIN TRENCH DETAIL I *IF CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL IS USED IN PLACE OF 3/4’-l-112’ QRAVEL. FILTER FABRIC MAY SE DELETED I SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL I I U.S. Standard Sieve Size % Passing 1 1” 100 3/4” go- 100 3/0” 40-100 No. 4 25-40 No. a 18-33 No. 30 S-15 No. 50 o-7 No. 200 o-3 Sand Equivalent>75 NOTES: For buttress dlmw#~lonr. sm. geotechnlcal ~r~Dort/Dl~n% Actual dlmenrlona ot buttrerr’mtd. rubdr& may be changed by the g~ot*chnlenl conwltwt baaed on HeId condltlorw. SUSORAIN INSTALLATION.Subdr&I DID* rhould be Inrtalled with D.rfOf~tlOn* down a# depicted. At location* recommended by the goot~chnlc~h conrultwt. nonperfor~t~d DID* rhould be bst~ll~d SUBORAIN TYPE-Subdrain tyDe should bo Acrylonltrll. Sutadlww Styron* (A.S.S.). Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) or l DDiOV*d l qulwlwt. Claw 12S.SOR 92.6 should ba wed for maxImum fill deptha ot 3S toot Clam 204SDR 21 ehould bo ur*d for mAxImum fill depth* of 100 t**t. - \ TRANSITION LOT DETAILS ,- CUT-FILL LOT EXISTING - WOUND SURFACE - - OVEREXCAVATE AND RECOMPACT COMPETENT BEDROCK OR MATERIAL EVALUATED /-- BY THE QEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT CUT LOT fXlSTlNQ - QROUND SURFACE - - - OVEREXCAVATE COMPETENT BEDROCK R MATERIAL EVALUATED A BY THE QEOTECHNICAL - CONSULTANT - *NOTE: Deeper or laterally more exten8lve overexcavation and recompaction may be recommended by the peotechnloal consultant based on actual field conditions encountered’ and locatlonr of proposed lmprovementr - ROCK DISPOSAL DETAIL - - f- FlNlSli WADE ----m--w------- -----------___ --------------- ------e---v-_ -- ---u-B-------- --------------- TYPiCAL PROFILE ALONG WINDROW I 1) Rock with maximum dimensions greater than 6 inches should not be used within 10 feet vertically of.finiah grade (or 2 feet below depth of lowest utility whichever la greater), and 16 feat horizontally of slope faces. I -I 2) Rocks with maximum dimensiona greater than 4 feet should not be utilizad In fills. I I 3) Rock Placement. flooding pf granular soil, and fill placement ahould be observed by gaoteohnical consultant. the I -. I 4) Maximum crire and spacing of windrowa should be in accordance with the above Wldth of wlndrow should not exceed 4 feet. Windrows should be staggered details vertically (as depicted). - I 6) Rock should be placed In excavated trenches. Granular soil (S.E. greater than or equal t0 30) should be flooded in the windrow to completely fill voids around and beneath rooks. CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAILS - UN8lJITA8LE MATERIAL TRENCH SEE BELOW SUBDRAIN TRENCH DETAJLS a* MIN. OVER FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE (MIRAFI 140~ OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT)+ 8. YIN. OVERLAP 314--t-112’ CLEAN 314*-t-112’ CLEAN QRAVEL (Slt.3/ft. M PERFORATED PIPE IF CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABL MATERIAL IS USED IN PLACE. OF 3/4*-i-112’ QRAVEL. FILTER FABR MAY SE DELETED DETAIL OF CANYON SUBDRAIN TERMINAL DESIQN FINISH SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL U.S. Standard Sieve Size X Passing :;4” 3/a” No. 4 100 go-100 40-100 X-40 No. 8 ii-33 No. 30 5-15 No. 50 o-7 No. 200 o-3 Sand Equivalent>75 ‘NONPERFORATED 8. 0 MiEl? Subdrain should bo c’onrtructod only on compotont motorlal ao l voluotod by the Sootochnlcol oon*ultmt. SUEDRAIN INSTALLATION SubdraIn 01~0 l hould bo lnotollod with porforotlonr down . . doplctod. At locotlonr rocommondod by the Sooiochnlcal conoultont. nonpotforotod plpo rhould bo lnotollod. SUBDRAIN TYPE-Subdroln typo rhould bo Acrylonltrllo Butodlono Styrono (A.&S.). Polyvinyl Chlorldo (PVC) or oppfovod l qulVllont. clooo 123, SDR 32.8 l hould bo uood for moxlmum Ill1 dowho of 38 foot. Clooo 2OS,aoR 21 should bo uood for moxlmum fill doptho of 100 foot. - - - - -. - I - - .- - - - - - FINISHED SLOPE FACE I PROJECT I IV I L,~S FROM TOP OF SLOPE TO OUTSIDE EDQE OF KEY OVERBURDEN OR FINISHED CUT PAD PAD OVEREXCAVATION DEPTH AND RECOMPACTION MAY BE RECOUUENDED BY THE QEOTE BASED ON ACTUAL FIELD CONDI TIONS ENCOUNTERED. ZHNICAL CONSULTANT COMPETENT BEDROCK OR WATERIAL A8 EVALUATED BY THE QEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT NOTE: Subdraln detaila and key wldth recommendations to be provlded baaed on exposed subsurface oonditldns I -. 1 KEY AND BENCHING DETAILS - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - NO1 FILL SLOPE PROJECT 1 TO 1 LINE FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO COMPETENT MATERIAL EXISTING QROUND SURFACE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL DEPTH BENCH (KEY) FILL-OVER-CUT SLOPE CUT SLOPE (TO BE EXCAVATED PRIOR TO FILL PLACEMENT) FE: Back drain may be recommended by the geotechnlcel consultant baaed on actual field conditlonr encountered. Bench dimenrion rocommendationr may alro be altered bared on field condition8 encountered. - - - - - -~ -~ -~ - ,.- - - - -~ - - RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL RETAININQ WALL- WALL’ WATERPROOFING PER ARCHITECT’S SPECIFICATIONS FINISH QRADE SOIL BACKFILL. COMPACTED TO SC PERCENT RELATIVE COMPACTION’ - YZ (YIRAFI 140N OR APPROVED 72 EQUIVALENT>* 0 0 0 “ y&z z.rz A--- 6 0 0 , 1’ MIN. , :-~Z-Y< .z.-L=: ---- 314=-l-112= CLEAN aRAVEL++ Lr e FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE 4’~tMIN.) DIAMETER PERFORATED ‘PVC PIPE (SCHEDULE 40 OR EQUIVALENT) WITH PERFORATIONS ORIENTED DOWN AS DEPICTED MINIMUM 1 PERCENT QRADIENT TO SUITABLE OUTLET . ‘3= MIN. SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL U.S. Standard Sieve Size X Passing 1" 100 3/4" go- 100 3/B" 40-100 No. 4 X-40 No. B 18-33 No. 30 5-15 No. 50 No. 200 ;:: Sand Equivalent>75 \ COMPETENT BEDROCK OR MATERIAL AS EVALUATED BY THE QEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT ‘BASED ON ASTM 013S7 l *IF CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL (SEE QRADATION TO LEFT1 IS USED IN PLACE OF 3/4*-1-l/2= QRAVEL. FILTER FABRIC MAY SE DELETED. CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL SHOULD SE COMPACTED TO 90 PERCENT RELATIVE COMPACTION l NOT TO SCALE APPENDIX E - 8840360-04 - SLOPE MAINTENANCE GUIOELINES FOR HOHEOWNERS - .- .- ,- - - ,- TIPS FOR THE HOMEOWNER Homesites, in general, and hillside lots, in particular, need maintenance to continue to function and retain their value. Many homeowners are unaware of this and allow deterioration of their property. In addition to his own property, the homeowner may be subject to liability for damage occurring to neighboring properties as a result of his negligence. It is therefore important to familiarize homeowners with some guidelines for maintenance of their properties and make them aware of the importance of maintenance. Nature slowly wears away land, but human activities such as construction increase the rate of erosion ZOO, even 2,000 times that amount. When we remove vegetation or other objects that hold soil in place, we expose it to the action of wind and water and increase its chances of eroding. The following maintenance guidelines are provided for the protection of the homeowner's investment, and should be employed throughout the year. a) b) cl d) e) f) 9) h) Care should be taken that slopes, terraces, berms (ridges at crown of slopes), and proper lot drainage are not disturbed. Surface drainage should be conducted from the rear yard to the street by a graded swale through the sideyard, or alternative approved devices. In general, roof and yard runoff should be conducted to either the street or storm drain by nonerosive devices such as sidewalks, drainage pipes, ground gutters, and driveways. Drainage systems should not be altered without expert consultation. All drains should be kept cleaned and unclogged, including gutters and downspouts. Terrace drains or Gunite ditches should be kept free of debris to allow proper drainage. During heavy rain periods, performance of the drainage system should be inspected. Problems, such as gullying and ponding, if observed, should be corrected as soon as possible. Any leakage from pools, waterlines, etc. or bypassing of drains should be repaired as soon as possible. Animal burrows should be filled since they may cause diversion of surface runoff, promote accelerated erosion, and even trigger shallow soil failures. Slopes should not be altered without expert consultation. Whenever a homeowner plans a significant topographic modification of the lot or slope, a qualified geotechnical consultant should be contacted. If plans for modification of cut, fill, or natural slopes within a property are considered, an engineering geologist should be consulted. Any over- steepening may result in a need for expensive retaining devices. Undercutting of the bottom of a slope might possibly lead to slope in- stability or failure and should not be undertaken without expert consultation. If unusual cracking, settling, or earth slippage occurs on the property, the homeowner should consult a qualified soil engineer or an engineering geologist immediately. E -i - - - - - - - 8840360-04 1) The most common causes of slope erosion and shallow slope failures are as follows: o Gross neglect of the care and maintenance of the slopes and drainage devices. o Inadequate and/or improper planting. (Barren areas should be replanted as soon as possible.) I Excessive or insufficient irrigation or diversion of runoff over the slope. l Foot traffic on slopes destroying vegetation and exposing soil to erosion potential. j) Homeowners should not let conditions on their property create a problem for their neighbors. Cooperation with neighbors could prevent problems and also increase the aesthetic attractiveness of the property. Winter Alert It is especially important to "winterize" your property by mid-September. Don't wait until spring to put in landscaping. You need winter protection. Final landscaping can be done later. Inexpensive measures installed by mid-September will give you protection quickly that will last all during the wet season. Check before storms to see that drains, gutters, downspouts, and ditches are not clogged by leaves and rubble. Check after major storms to be sure drains are clear and vegetation is holding on slopes. Repair as necessary. Spot seed any bare areas. Broadcast seeds or use a mechanical seeder. A typical slope or bare areas can be done in less than an hour. Give seeds a boost with fertilizer. Mulch if you can, with grass clippings and leaves, bark chips or straw. Use netting to hold soil and seeds on steep slopes. Check with your landscape architect or local nursery for advise. Prepare berms and ditches to drain surface runoff water away from problem areas such as steep, bare slopes. Prepare bare areas on slopes for seeding by raking the surface to loosen and roughen soil so it will hold seeds. - _- E - ii - 8840360-04 CONSTRUCTION - - - Plan construction activities during spring and summer, so that erosion control measures can be in place when the rain comes. Examine your site carefully before building. Be aware of the slope, drainage patterns and soil types. Proper site design will help you avoid expensive stabilization work. Preserve existing vegetation as much as possible. Vegetation will naturally curb erosion, improve the appearance and the value of your property, and reduce the cost of landscaping later. Use fencing to protect plants from fill material and traffic. If you have to pave near trees, do so with permeable asphalt or porous paving blocks. Preserve the natural contours of the land and disturb the earth as little as possible. Limit the time in which graded areas are exposed. Rinimize the length and steepness of slopes by benching, terracing, or constructing diversion structures. Landscape benched areas to stablilize the slope and improve its appearance. As soon as possible after grading a site, plant vegetation on all areas that are not to be paved or otherwise covered. TEtlPORARY REASURES TO STABILIZE THE SOIL Grass provides the cheapest and most effective short-term erosion control. It m quickly and covers the ground completely. To find the best seed mixtures and plants for your area, check with your local landscape architect, local nursery, or the U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. Mulches hold soil moisture and provide ground protection from rain damage. They movide a favorable environment for starting and growing plants. Easy-to- obtain mulches are grass clippings, leaves, sawdust, bark chips, and straw. .- Straw mulch is nearly 100 percent effective when held in place by spraying with an organic glue or wood fiber (tackifiers), by punching it into the soil with a shovel or roller, or by tacking a netting over it. - Commercial applications of wood fibers combined with various seeds and fer- tilizers (hydraulic mulching) are effective in stabilizing sloped areas. Hydraulic mulching with a tackifier should be done in two separate applications: the first composed of seed fertilizer and half the mulch, the second composed of the remaining mulch and tackifier. Commercial hydraulic mulch applicators - who also provide other erosion control services - the phone book. - are listed under "landscaping" in Rats of excelsior, jute netting, and plastic sheets can be effective temporary Grs, but they must be in contact with the soils and fastened securely to work effectively. E . . . - 111 8840360-04 Roof drainage can be collected in barrels or storage containers or routed into lawns, planter boxes, and gardens. Be sure to cover stored water so you don't collect mosquitos. Excessive runoff should be directed away from your house. Too much water can damage trees and make foundations unstable. - STRUCTURAL RUNOFF CONTROLS - .- Even with proper timing and planting, you may need to protect disturbed areas from rainfall until the plants have time to establish themselves. Or you may need permanent ways to transport water across your property so that it doesn't cause erosion. - To keep water from carrying soil from your site and dumping it into nearby lots, streets, streams and channels, you need ways to reduce its volume and speed. Some examples of what you might use are: -. l b - b - b - 0 b b -. Riprap (rock lining) - to protect channel banks from erosive water flow. Sediment trap - to stop runoff carrying sediment and trap the sediment. Storm drain outlet protection - to reduce the speed of water flowing from a pipe onto open ground or into a natural channel. Diversion dike or perimeter dike - to divert excess water to places where it can be disposed of properly. Straw bale dike - to stop and detain sediment from small unprotected areas (a short-term measure). Perimeter swale - to divert runoff from a disturbed area or to contain runoff within a disturbed area. Grade stabilization structure - to carry concentrated runoff down a slope. ,- - - - - - E - iv