HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 90-03; As-Graded Report of Rough, Fine, and Post Grading; Grading Report; 2004-07-29AS-GRADED REPORT OF ROUGH, FINE, AND POST GRADING,
RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS,
STATION NO. 10+04 TO 42+31,
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
C.Z 90-0.3
CONTINENTAL HOMES
5927 Priestly Drive Suite 200
Carlsbad, California 92008
Project No. 851855-011
July 29, 2004
- Leighton and Associates, Inc. -
A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY
- Leighton and Associates, Inc.
A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY
+ July 29, 2004
Project No. 851855-01 1
To: Continental Homes
5927 Priestly Drive, Suite 200
Carlsbad, California 92008
Attention: Mr. Carleton Clark
Subject: As-Graded Report of Rough, Fine, and Post Grading, Rancho Santa Fe Road
Improvements, Station No. 1 O+04 to 42+3 I, Carlsbad, California
In accordance with the request and authorization of representatives of Continental Homes, we have
performed geotechnical observation and testing services during the rough, fine and post grading operations
for the Rancho Santa Fe Road improvements between station No. 10+04 and 42+31 in Carlsbad, California.
This as-graded report of rough, fine, and post grading summarizes our geotechnical observations, geologic
mapping, field and laboratory test results, and the geotechnical conditions encountered during the grading
operations relative to the construction of the roadway. As of this date, the grading operations performed
during the construction of the Rancho Santa Fe roadway improvements between station No. 10+04 and
42+3 1 are essentially complete.
Based on geotechnical observation and testing services performed during the grading operations, it is our
professional opinion that the grading operations were performed in general accordance with the project
geotechnical recommendations (Appendix A) and the City of Carlsbad specifications. If you have any
questions regarding our report, please contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service.
Distribution: (6) Addressee
Respectfully submitted,
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC
Senior Associate
3934 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 8205 I San Diego, CA 9212W25 858.292.8030 I Fax 858.292.0771 D w.ieightongeo.com
L
851855-011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODU~ON 1
1 1.1 PROJECT D~CW'TIoN .................................................................................................
2.0 SUMMARY OF GRADING OPERATIONS 3
2.1 ROUGH AND FINE GRnDING 3
3 2.1.2 Wick Drain System Installation 4
2.1.3 Fill Placement 4
2.2 POST GRADING 5
2.2.1 Trench Backfill 5
2.2.2 Structural Pavement Section Grading 5
2.3 FIELD AND LABORATORY TESTING ................................................................................... 2.4 GRADED SLOPES 7 a 2.5 SmLEMEM MONUMENT MoNrroRING .............................................................................
3.0 ENGINEERING GEOLOGIC SUMMARY 9
9 3.1 AS-GRADED GEOLCf.iIC CoNDmoNs ................................................................................. 3.2 GEoLCf.iIC UNITS 9
3.2.1 Artifical Older Fill Soils (Map Symbol - Afo) 9
3.2.2 Topsoil (Unmapped) 9
Alluvium/Colluvium (Map Symbol - Qal/Qcol) ..................................................... 10 3.2.4 Delmar Formation (Map Symbol - Td) 10
3.3 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY 10
3.4 GROUNDWATER 11
3.5 GEOLOGIC SrRucruRE 11
3.6 LANDSLIDES AND SURFICIAL FAILURES 11
4.0 CONCLUSIONS 12
4.1 GENERAL 12
4.2 SUMMARY OF CoNCLUsIoNs 12
...........................................................................................................
..........................................................................
...........................................................................................
2.1.1 Site Preparation and Removals ........................................................................... ............................................................................ ................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................... .................................................................................................. ................................................................. 7 .........................................................................................................
.............................................................................
........................................................................................................ ........................................................... .......................................................................................... 3.2.3 ................................................................ ........................................................................................... ....................................................................................................... ............................................................................................... ...........................................................................
...........................................................................................................
................................................................................................................ ........................................................................................
5.0 RECOMMENDAnONS 14
5.1 FUTURE EARTHWORK 14
6.0 LIMITATIONS 15
..................................................................................................
.................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
I Leighton
851855-011
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Table
Table 1 - As-Built Rancho Santa Fe Road Pavement Sections - Rear of Text
Fiaure
Figure 1 - Site Location Map - Page 2
- Plate
Plate 1 - As-Graded Geotechnical Map of Rough Grading - In Pocket
Amendices
Appendix A - References
Appendix B - Summary of Field Density Tests
Appendix C - Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results
C-ii Leighton
851855-011
1.0 INTRODUCTION
In accordance with the request and authorization of representatives of Continental Homes, we have
performed geotechnical observation and testing services during the rough, fine and post grading
operations for the Rancho Santa Fe Road improvements between approximate Station No. 10+04
and 42+31 in Carlsbad, California (Figure 1). This as-graded report of rough, fine, and post grading
summarizes our geotechnical observations, geologic mapping, field and laboratory test results, and
the geotechnical conditions encountered during the grading operations relative to the construction
of the roadway. Rough and fine grading consisted of the removal of potentially compressible soils
(to competent material or to 2 feet above the ground water elevation); installation of wick drains
and placement of surcharge fills to accelerate the settlement of the left-in-place alluvial soils; and
placement of fill soils creating the roadway and associated slopes. Post-grading operations
included observation and testing during excavation and backfilling of utility trenches and during
the placement and compaction of the street pavement section, center median, and sidewalks. As
of this date, the grading operations performed during the construction of the Rancho Santa Fe
roadway improvements between approximate Station No. 10+04 and 42+3 1 (associated with the
Arroyo Vista project) are essentially complete.
The 40-scale grading plans for Rancho Santa Fe Road Improvements prepared by Project Design
Consultants (PDC, 2002), were utilized as a base map to present the as-graded geotechnical
conditions and approximate locations of the field density tests taken during the rough and fine
grading operations. The As-graded Geotechnical Map of Rough Grading (Plate 1) is presented in
the pocket at the rear of the text.
1.1 Project Description
The Rancho Santa Fe Road improvements were constructed in conjunction with the Arroyo
Vista development located in the southeastern portion of Carlsbad, California (Figure 1).
The roadway improvements included the widening of Rancho Santa Fe Road from
approximate Station No. 10+04 and 42+31. Improvements constructed during the grading
operations included: 1) widening both sides of the roadway creating two travel lanes in each
direction; 2) construction of a center median; 3) turn lanes and other improvements at the
Calle Acervo, Las Olas Court and Olivehain Road intersections; 4) construction of two new
box culverts across the roadway; 5) construction of a new stom drain system along a
portion of the eastern side of the roadway; 6) installation of new utility lines in the roadway
and easements; 7) new sidewalks along portions of the roadway; and 8) landscaping of the
associated slopes along the roadway.
c
Leighton
4SE MAP: Thomas Bros. GeoFinder for ~~ ~
ndows, San Diego County, 1995. Page 1147 0 1000 2000 4000
1"=2,000' = ~rn - Scale in Feet ~~~ ~~~
Rancho Sante Fe Road
Carlsbad, California
C.T. 90-03
Fioure No.
851855-011
2.0 p
2.1 Rouqh and Fine Grading
The rough and fine grading operations for the Rancho Santa Road improvements were
performed between April 2001 and March 2003. Signs and Pinnick performed the rough
and fine grading operations while Leighton and Associates performed the geotechnical
observation and testing services. Our field technicians were on site full-time during the
grading operations while ow field and project geologists were on site on a periodic basis.
Rough and fine grading of the site included: 1) the removal of potentially compressible
topsoil, colluvium/slopewash, alluvium, existing fill soils and weathered formational
material to competent material or to within 2 feet of the ground water elevation; 2)
installation of wick drains and placement of surcharge fills to accelerate the settlement of
the left-in-place alluvial soils; 3)preparation of areas to receive fill; 4) placement of a
canyon subdrain along the eastem side of the roadway; and 5) placement of fill soils creating
the roadway and associated slopes. Up to 25 feet of fill was placed within the limits of the
grading operations. The as-graded geotechnical conditions of the rough grading operations
are presented on the As-Graded Geotechnical Map of Rough Grading (Plate 1).
2.1.1 Site Preparation and Removals
Prior to grading, the areas of the proposed roadway improvements were stripped of
surface vegetation and debris and these materials were disposed of away from the
site. Removals of unsuitable and potentially compressible soils (including topsoil,
colluvidslopewash, alluvium, desiccated existing fill soils and weathered
formational materials) were made to competent material or within 2 feet of ground
water elevation. The removals of potentially compressible material were performed
in accordance with the recommendations of the project geotechnical reports
(Appendix A) and geotechnical recommendations made during the course of
grading.
In areas where the potentially unsuitable alluvium was unable to be removed due to
the relatively shallow ground water condition, the alluvium was removed to within
approximately 2 feet of the existing ground water elevation. Once the removals were
made to as close to the ground water elevations as practical, a thin layer of fill was
placed in the removal area to facilitate the movement of the heavy-duty construction
and wick drain installation equipment. Wick drains were then installed, as discussed
in Section 2.1.2. Removals were performed in accordance with the recommendations
of the project geotechnical reports (Appendix A) and geotechnical recommendations
made during the course of grading.
Saturated alluvium was left in place beneath portions of Rancho Santa Fe Road
between approximate Station No. 14+50 26+00. Alluvium/colluvium was also left-
-3- Leighton
851855-011
in-place along the eastern side of the roadway between approximate Station No.
26+00 and 42+00 in the 1 :1 to 1.5: 1 (horizontal to vertical) excavation made down
and away from the existing roadway during the removals of the compressible soils
east of the roadway. The approximate limits of left-in-place alluvium/colluvium are
shown on the As-graded Geotechnical Map of Rough Grading (Plate 1).
After removals were made, areas flatter than 5:l (horizontal to vertical) were
scarified a minimum of 12 inches, moisture-conditioned as needed to obtain a near-
optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum 90 percent relative
compaction (as determined by American Society for Testing and Materials [ASTM]
Test Method D1557). The steeper hillsides and the excavation made down and away
from the existing roadway were benched as fill was placed. Representative bottom
elevations in the removal areas are shown on the As-graded Geotechnical Map of
Rough Grading (Plate 1).
2.1.2 Wick Drain Svstem Installation
Areas where saturated alluvium was left-in-place along the roadway improvement
(Le. between approximate Station No. 14+50 to 26+00), a wick drain system was
installed in areas where more than approximately 10 feet of fill was placed in order
to drain the saturated alluvial soils left-in-place and to accelerate the settlement of
the alluvial soils below the ground water table. In order to allow construction of the
wick drain system, a minimal amount of fill was placed to provide a flat and level
working area. The wick drain system was comprised of vertical wick drains installed
on 5-foot center intervals. In general, the wick drains were installed to depths on the
order of 15 to 50 feet into the relatively dense formational material beneath the
alluvial soils. Once the vertical wick drains w-ere installed with the drill rig, the tops
of the wick drains were connected together with 4-inch wide drainage panels and
covered with compacted fill. The drainage panels extend laterally to the outer edge
of the fill area. The approximate limits of wick drain systems are presented on the
Geotechnical Map of Rough Grading (Plate 1).
2.1.3 Fill Placement
After processing of the excavated areas and installation of the wick drains, native soil
was moisture conditioned as needed to attain a near-optimum moisture content,
spread in 4 to 8 inch lifts, and compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry
density in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557. Compaction was achieved
by use of heavy-duty construction equipment, Areas of fill soils in which field
density tests indicated less than 90 percent relative compaction. exhibited non-
uniformity and/or showed an inadequate or excessive moisture content were
reworked, recompacted, and re-tested until a minimum 90 percent relative
-4- Leighton
L
851855-011
compaction and near-optimum moisture content was achieved. The field density test
results are summarized in Appendix B
2.2 Post Gradinq
The post grading operations during construction of the Rancho Santa Fe Road
improvements were performed between August 2001 and August 2003. The post grading
operations performed included: 1) sewer, water, storm drain and joint utility trench
backfill and compaction; 2) street, median, and sidewalk subgrade preparation and
compaction; 3) aggregate base material placement and compaction within the roadway;
and 4) placement and compaction of the asphalt concrete.
Compaction testing and observations were performed by representatives of our firm who
were on-site on an as-needed basis during the post grading operations. Specific
observation and testing services conducted during the post grading operations are
presented below.
2.2.1 Trench Backfill
Underground utilities including sewer, storm drain, water, and joint utilities were
installed during the Rancho Santa Fe Road improvements. During the trench
backfill operations. native and imported soils were moisture-conditioned as needed
to obtain a near-optimum moisture content, placed in 4 to 8 inch thick loose lifts,
and compacted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM Test
Method D1557). Trench backfill compaction was accomplished by hand held
tampers, sheepsfoot wheel rollers and wheel rolling with heavy-duty construction
equipment. The results and approximate location of the backfill tests are
summarized in Appendix B.
2.2.2 Structural Pavement Section Gradinq
Minimum structural pavement sections were provided for Rancho Santa Fe Road
based on laboratory R-value testing of representative samples of the subgrade soils
(Leighton, 2002hl 2002171, 2003a and 2003~). The as-built pavement sections for
Rancho Santa Fe Road are presented on Table 1.
After the street was fine-graded, the subgrade soils were scarified to a minimum
depth of 12 inches and moisture-conditioned to near-optimum moisture content,
Based on our test results. the subgrade soils were then compacted to at least 95
percent relative compaction (based on ASTM Test Method D1557). Due to the
presence of saturated and/or 'pumping' subgrade soils, stabilization fabric
(consisting of Mirafi 600X) was placed on portions of the western side of Rancho
Leighton
851855-011
Santa Fe Road prior to the placement of the aggregate base material. After the
subgrade soils were compacted andor the stabilization fabric was placed, the
aggregate base material (i.e. Class 2 aggregate base material and subbase consisting
of pulverized AC and existing base material) placed beneath the curblgutter andor
on the street was compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry
density (based on ASTM Test Method D1557). The results and approximate
location of the street subgrade soil and base material density tests are summarized in
Appendix B.
Representatives of Leighton and Associates also performed observation and field
density testing during the placement of the asphalt concrete on the roadway. As
required by the City of Carlsbad, field density tests were obtained by the nuclear-
gauge method during the paving operations and the results are presented in
Appendix B. The test results indicate that the AC placed on the subject streets has a
minimum relative compaction of at least 95 percent (per the Hveem Method -
California Test Method 304).
Due to ‘pumping’ subgrade conditions andor areas of existing pavement requiring
additional asphalt in order to provide the necessary street surface grade, thickened
AC sections were placed in a number of places during the Rancho Santa Fe Road
construction operations. These areas included:
1) placement of approximately 10 to 12 inches of AC along the western 2- to 3-
foot section of the road from approximate Station No. 3 1+20 to 41+80;
2) placement of up to 20 inches of AC adjacent to the storm drain inlet
structure at Station No. 33+55;
3) placement of 12 to 14 inches of AC around western side the manhole structure at Station No. 32+15;
4) placement of IO to 12 inches of AC over the existing telephone conduits on
the west side of the road between approximate Station No. 12+70 to
13+85;
5) placement of up to 10 additional inches of AC over the existing pavement
section in the intersection of Las Olas Court and the western side of
Rancho Santa Fe Road; and
6) placement of up to 12 inches additional inches AC over the existing
pavement section in the intersection of Rancho Santa Fe Road and Calk
Acervo.
Leighton
L
851855-011
2.3 -g
Field density tests were performed during the rough, fine and post grading operations in
accordance with the Nuclear-Gauge Method (ASTM Test Methods D2922 and D3017).
The results and approximate locations of the field density tests performed are summarized
in Appendix B. The approximate locations of the field density tests taken during the
rough and fine grading operations are presented on the As-Graded Geotechnical Map of
Rough Grading (Plate 1). The locations of the tests taken during the post-grading
operations are summarized in Appendix B.
In accordance with the project specifications and City of Carlsbad criteria, soils placed
during the rough and fine grading operations and the trench backfill soils were compacted
to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction (in accordance with ASTM Test Method
D1557). Street subgrade soils and aggregate base material placed in Rancho Santa Fe
Road (including beneath the curb and gutters) were compacted to a minimum 95 percent
of the maximum dry density (as determined by ASTM Test Method 01557). As indicated
in Appendix B, areas in which field density tests were less than the required 90 or 95
percent relative compaction or where soils were observed to be non-uniform, were
reworked, recompacted, and re-tested until the minimum 90 or 95 percent relative
compaction was achieved.
Representative soil samples (including native soil and imported material) were tested for
maximum dry density and optimum moisture content in accordance with ASTM Test
Method D1557. Representative ‘4C samples were tested for maximum density in
accordance with the California Test 304-Hveem Method. The laboratory test results are
presented in Appendix C.
2.4 Graded SloDes
Graded slopes along the roadway are considered grossly and surficially stable from a
geotechnical standpoint. The manufactured slopes were surveyed by the civil engineer and
constructed with slope inclinations of 2: 1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter.
-7-
Leighton
851855-011
2.5 Settlement Monument Monitoring
Upon the completion of the rough grading operations (including the installation of the wick
drains and the placement of surcharge fills) in the areas where saturated left-in-place alluvial
was encountered, settlement monuments were placed. The settlement monuments were
initially surveyed within a few days following the installation and on a periodic basis,
generally weekly to bi-weekly. The results of the survey readings were provided to Leighton
and Associates so that the settlement values could be evaluated. Based on our evaluation of
the settlement monument survey data obtained, we provided letters (Leighton, 2001d,
2002a, and 2002b) indicating that the primary settlement of the fill soils was essentially
complete and construction of the improvements in these areas could begin.
Leighton
851855-011
3.0 ENGINEERING GEOLOGIC SUMMARY
3.1 As-araded Geoloqic Conditions
The geologic and geotechnical conditions encountered during the rough and fine grading of
the Rancho Santa Fe Road improvements were essentially as anticipated. A comprehensive
summary of the geologic conditions (including geologic units, geologic structure and
faulting) is presented below. The as-graded geologic conditions are presented on the As-
graded Geotechnical Map of Rough Grading (Plate 1).
3.2 Geoloqic Units
The geologic units encountered during the rough and fine grading operations consisted of
older fill soils, topsoil, alluvium/colluvium, and the Delmar Formation. Due to the
potentially compressible nature of the topsoil, alluvidcolluvium, and weathered
formational material, these soils were removed to competent material andor to within 2 feet
of the ground water elevation during the grading operations. The geologic units are
discussed (youngest to oldest) below.
3.2.1 Artificial Older Fill Soils [MaD Symbol - Afo)
Documented and undocumented fills associated with the existing roadway consisted
of silty sands, silty clays and clayey silts. As encountered during the rough grading
operations, the fill soils were found to be moist and moderately well compacted.
3.2.2 ToDsoil (UnrnaDDed)
A relatively thin veneer of topsoil was removed from the hillsides along the eastern
side of the roadway. The topsoil, as encountered, consisted predominantly of a
brown, damp to moist, stiff, sandy clay and minor clayey to silty sand. The topsoil
was generally massive, porous, and contained scattered roots and organics. Topsoil
removals were on the order of 1 to 4 feet in thickness. During the grading operations,
topsoil was observed to have been removed within the limits of grading.
-9-
Leighton
851855-011
3.2.3 AlluviumlColluvium lMaD Svmbol - Oal/Ocol)
Alluvium and colluvium was encountered during the rough and fine grading
operations along most of the roadway. As encountered, the alluvial and colluvial
soils consisted of 1) dark brown, moist to saturated, medium dense to stiff, clayey
sands and sandy clays; and 2) pale yellow-brown to light brown, moist to saturated,
medium dense silty sands. Where encountered, these soils were removed to
competent material or to a depth approximately 2 feet above the existing ground
water elevation within the limits of grading. Up to approximately 20 to 25 feet of
alluvium/colluvium was removed during the rough and fine grading operations.
3.2.4 Delmar Formation (Map Svmbol - Td)
The Delmar Formation, as encountered during rough and fine grading, consisted
primarily of claystones and siltstones and, to a lesser extent, silty sandstones. The
siltstones and claystones were generally olive-green, gray to gray-brown, damp to
moist, stiff to very stiff, moderately weathered and fractured. The sandstones
encountered consisted of light brown to light gray-brown, and mottled yellow to
orange-brown, damp to moist, very dense to hard, silty fine- to medium-grained
sandstone.
3.3 Faultina and Seismicity
Based on our geotechnical observations and geologic mapping during the rough and fine
grading operations, no faults or evidence of faulting was encountered. The nearest known
active fault is the Rose Canyon Fault Zone located approximately 6 miles west of the site.
The subject property can be considered to lie within a seismically active region, as can all of
Southern California. Seismic hazards that may affect the site include ground shaking, ground
rupture along a pre-existing fault, ground lurching, liquefaction and dynamic settlement.
The seismic hazard most likely to impact the site is ground shaking resulting from an
earthquake on one of the major regional active faults. Due to the relatively close proximity
of the Rose Canyon Fault Zone to the site, the most significant ground shaking from one of
the regional faults will most likely occur on the Rose Canyon Fault Zone. Ground rupture
generally is considered to occur along pre-existing fault strands. Since no active faults have
been mapped crossing the site or in the general vicinity of the site, ground rupture is
considered unlikely. Due to the dense nature of the onsite soils and fine-grained nature of
most of the saturated alluvial soils, it is our professional opinion that the liquefaction hazard
at the site is considered low.
-10- Leighton
851855-011
3.4 Ground Water
The perched ground water elevation along Encinitas Creek was encountered at a depth of
approximately 5 to 15 feet below the ground surface in the general vicinity of Station No.
14+00 to 26+00. Minor to moderate seepage was also encountered along the eastern side of
the roadway between approximate Station No. 30+00 to 42+00. The seepage was
encountered in more permeable layers of the colluvial soils and along the contact between
the colluvium and underlying formational material. A subdrain system was installed along
the eastern side of the roadway, between approximate Station No. 27+00 to 36+50, as
indicated on the As-graded Geotechnical Map of Rough Grading (Plate 1).
Based on the site-specific as-graded geotechnical conditions and OUT geotechnical analysis
during site grading, the geotechnical consultant has analyzed conditions that may result in
ground water seepage. Appropriate recommendations to mitigate this seepage if necessary,
have been made. However, unanticipated seepage or shallow ground water conditions may
occur after the completion of grading and establishment of site irrigation and landscaping. If
these conditions should occur, steps to mitigate the seepage should be made on a case-by-
case basis.
3.5 Geoloaic Structure
Based on our geologic mapping during rough and fine grading, bedding on site is
generally massive to indistinctly bedded. Bedding is considered to be flat lying to slightly
dipping (less than 5 degrees) to the west.
3.6 Landslides and Surficial Failures
Based on our review of the project geotechnical reports (Appendix A) and our geologic
mapping during rough and fine grading, there was no evidence or indication of landslides
or other surficial failures along the roadway.
-11- 4
Leighton
851855-011
4.0 CONCLUSIONS
4.1 General
The rough, fine and post grading operations for the Rancho Santa Fe Road improvements
between Station 10+04 and 42+31 were performed in general accordance with the project
geotechnical reports (Appendix A), geotechnical recommendations made during the
course of grading, and the City of Carlsbad requirements. It is our professional opinion
that the subject is suitable for its intended use provided the recommendations included
herein and in the project geotechnical reports are incorporated into the post construction
phase of development. The following is a summary of our conclusions concerning the
rough, fine and post grading of the site.
4.2 Summarv of Conclusions . Geotechnical conditions encountered during rough, fine and post grading were
generally as anticipated.
Potentially compressible and desiccated existing documented fill soils, topsoil,
colluvium, alluvium, and weathered formational material were removed to
competent material or to within 2 feet of the ground water table within the limits of
grading
Following removals of the soil above the ground water table, a wick drain system
was constructed in order to drain the saturated alluvial soils and to accelerate the
settlement of the alluvial soils left-in-place below the ground water table. The wick
drains were installed on 5-foOt center intervals, to a minimum depth of 15 feet into
dense formational material beneath the saturated alluvial soils.
9
9
Site preparation and removals were geotechnically observed
Fill soils were mainly derived from on-site soils. Fill soils placed during the site
grading, utility trench backfill, and sidewalk subgrade preparation and compaction
operations were tested to have at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on
ASTM Test Method D1557) and a near-optimum moisture content. Field density
testing also indicated that the street subgrade soils and aggregate base materials were
compacted to a minimum 95 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM Test
Method D1557). Field density testing also indicated that the AC placed on the street
has a minimum relative compaction of at least 95 percent (per the Hveem Method -
California Test Method 304). The compaction operations were performed in
accordance with the recommendations of the project geotechnical report (Appendix
A) and the requirements of the City of Carlsbad. A summary of the results of the field
density tests is presented in Appendix B.
-12- Leighton
851855-011
. Landslides were not encountered nor anticipated during the grading operations at the
site. . Evidence of faulting was not encountered during the grading operations.
Both a shallow ground water elevation and minor to moderate seepage were
encountered during site grading. Appropriate recommendations for the mitigation of
ground water seepage, if necessary, have been made.
It is our opinion that the slopes along the roadway are considered surficially and
grossly stable (under normal irrigatiodprecipitation patterns), provided the
recommendations presented in this report and in the project geotechnical reports
(Appendix A) are incorporated into the post-construction phases of site development.
.
-13- 4
Leighton
851855-011
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Future Earthwork
The rough, fine and post-grading operations relative to the Rancho Santa Fe Road
improvements between Station 10+04 and 42+31 are essentially complete as of the date
of this report. Additional or future earthwork that is needed should be performed in
accordance with the recommendations presented in the appropriate project geotechnical
reports (Appendix A), in accordance with a new geotechnical report based on the future
proposed improvements; and in accordance with the City of Carlsbad specifications.
-14- Leighton
851855-011
6.0 LIMITATIONS
The presence of our field representative at the site was intended to provide the owner with
professional advice, opinions, and recommendations based on observations of the contractor’s
work. Although the observations did not reveal obvious deficiencies or deviations from project
specifications, we do not guarantee the contractor’s work, nor do our services relieve the contractor
or his subcontractors of their responsibility if defects are subsequently discovered in their work. Our
responsibilities did not include any supervision or direction of the actual work procedures of the
contractor, his personnel, or subcontractors. The conclusions in this report are based on test results
and observations of the grading and earthwork procedures used and represent our engineering
opinion as to the compliance of the results with the project specifications.
-15- 4
Leighton
851855-011
Table 1
As-Built Rancho Santa Fe Road Pavement Sections
East Side (Northbound) I 6
Station 10+04 to 14+30
Rancho Santa Fe Road
East Side (Northbound) 6
Station 14+30 to 24+00
Rancho Santa Fe Road
East Side (Northbound) 6
Station 24+00 to 42+40
Rancho Santa Fe Road
West Side (Southbound) 6
Station 12+70 to 13+90
Rancho Santa Fe Road
West Side (Southbound) 6
Station 13+90 to 33+00
Rancho Santa Fe Road
West Side (Southbound)
3+00 to 35+65
West Side (Southbound)
-
Class 2 Aggregate
Base (inches)
19
17
18
17
24
18
13
Leighton
851855-011
APPENDIX A
References
Carlsbad, City of, 1996, Standards for Design and Construction of Public Works Improvements
in the City of Carlsbad, California, Project No. 05332-12-01, dated April 20, 1993,
revised December 10, 1996.
Leighton and Associates, Inc., 1986, Geotechnical Investigation for Proposed Development, East of
Rancho Santa Fe Road and Southeast of Olivehain Road, Encinitas, California, Project
No. 4851855-01, dated April 25, 1986.
, 1995, Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation, Shelley Property, Carlsbad Tract
No. 90-3, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 4851855-007, dated December 18, 1995.
, 1998, Update Geotechnical Investigation, Shelley Property, Carlsbad Tract No. 90-3,
Carlsbad, California, Project No. 485 1855-008, dated September 8, 1998.
, 2000, Results of Additional Field Investigation, Shelley Property, Carlsbad Tract No.
90-3, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 040137-001, dated August 14,2000.
, 200 1 a, Geotechnical Recommendations Concerning Saturated Sandy Soils in
Rancho Santa Fe Road, Arroyo Vista, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 851855-01 1,
dated August 22, 200 1.
, 2001b, Pipe Bedding Support Layer, Proposed 60-inch Storm Drain, Rancho Santa
Fe Road, Arroyo Vista Development, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 851855-01 1,
dated August 28, 2001.
, 2001c, Pipe Bedding Support Layer, Proposed 60-inch Storm Drain, Rancho Santa
Fe Road, Arroyo Vista Development, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 851 855-01 1,
dated August 3 1, 200 1.
, 2001d, Summary of Settlement Monitoring, Unit 4 and Rancho Santa Fe Road
Widening, Arroyo Vista, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 851 855-01 1, dated October 16,
2001
, 2001e, Revised Geotechnical Recommendations Concerning Saturated Sandy Soils
Beneath Storm Drain, Rancho Santa Fe Road Station No. 10+00 to 14+00, Arroyo Vista,
Carlsbad, California, Project No. 851855-01 1, dated November 14,2001.
A- 1
851855-011
APPENDIX A (Continued)
, 2001f, Geotechnical Settlement Evaluation, 60-inch RCP Storm Drain, Station No.
5+00 to 14+00, Rancho Santa Fe Road, Arroyo Vista, Carlsbad, California, Project No.
851855-01 1, dated December 19,2001.
, 2002a, Summary of Settlement Monitoring, Rancho Santa Fe Road, Widening -
East Side, Station No. 14+75 to 16+50, Arroyo Vista, Carlsbad, California, Project No.
851855-01 1, dated January 7,2002.
,2002b, Summary of Settlement Monitoring, Rancho Santa Fe Road Widening, West
Side, Approximate Station No. 15+00 to 25+00, Arroyo Vista, Carlsbad, California,
Project No. 851855-011, dated January29,2002.
, 2002c, Improvement and Grading Plans for Rancho Santa Fe Road, Carlsbad,
California, Drawing No. 380-1K, Project No. 851855-01 I, dated March 29,2001, revised
January 30,2002.
-, 2002d, Timeline of Events Related to the Geotechnical Conditions During the
Placement of the 60-Inch Storm Drain in Rancho Santa Fe Road, Arroyo Vista, Carlsbad,
California, Project No. 851855-01 1, dated February 28.2002 (revised March 5, 2002).
, 2002e, Summary of Geotechnical Conditions along the 60-inch RCP Storm Drain,
Station No. O+OO to 14+00, Rancho Santa Fe Road, Arroyo Vista, dated Project No.
851855-01 1, Carlsbad, California, dated March 13, 2002.
~~ ~ ~
, 2002f, Geotechnical Conditions Based on Three Test Pit Excavations Along the
Proposed Sewer Main, Rancho Santa Fe Road, Project No. 851855-01 1, dated May 8,2002.
, 2002g, Geotechnical Conditions Based on Three Test Pit Excavations Along the
Proposed Sewer Main, Rancho Santa Fe Road Between Approximate Station No. 24+00
and 25+12, Arroyo Vista, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 851855-011, dated May 9,
2002.
-, 2002h, Preliminary Pavement Design Recommendations. Eastside of Rancho Santa
Fe Road, Arroyo Vista, Carlsbad Tract No. 90-03, Carlsbad, California, Project No.
851855-01 1, dated June 27,2002.
A-2
851855-011
APPENDIX A (Continued)
,2002i, Estimated Remedial Earthwork Quantities, Proposed Grading along the West
Side of Rancho Santa Fe Road between Approximate Station No. 14+50 and 25+00,
Carlsbad, California, Project No. 85 1855-01 1, dated August 8, 2002.
, 2002j, West Shoulder Settlement Evaluation, Rancho Santa Fe Road Widening,
Arroyo Vista, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 851855-01 1, dated August 22, 2002.
, 2002k, Geotechnical Opinion Concerning the Utilization of Shoring and/or
Dewatering Systems Adjacent to the Box Culvert, Rancho Santa Fe Road, Carlsbad,
California, Project No. 851855-01 1, dated November 22,2002.
, 20021 Revised Geotechnical Recommendations Concerning Remedial Grading of
Box Culverts Nos. 1 and 2, West Side of Rancho Santa Fe Road, Arroyo Vista, Carlsbad,
California, Project No. 851855-01 1, dated December 9,2002.
, 2002111, R-value Test Results of Sub-Base Material and Addendum Geotechnical
Recommendations for Asphalt Concrete Pavement, Western Side of Rancho Santa Fe
Road, Station No. 29+00 to 42+31, Arroyo Vista, Carlsbad Tract No. 90-03, Carlsbad,
California, Project No. 851855-01 I, dated December 17,2002.
-, 2003a, Addendum Gcotcchnical Rccommendations for Asphalt Concrete Pavement,
Western Side of Rancho Santa Fe Road, Station No. 15+00 to 29+00, Arroyo Vista,
Carlsbad Tract No. 90-03, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 851855-01 1, dated February
6,2003.
-, 2003b, Geotechnical Conditions along Sewer Alignment Between Approximate
Station No. 22+00 and 26+50 of Ranch Santa Fe Road, Carlsbad, California, Project No.
851855-01 1, dated February 19,2003.
,2003c, Evaluation of Street Subgrade Soil Conditions and Addendum Geotechnical
Recommendations, Western Side of Rancho Santa Fe Road, Station No. 14+55 to 25+00,
Carlsbad Tract No. 90-03, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 851855-01 1, dated March 13,
2003.
, 2003d, Toe-of-Slope Subdrain Recommendations, West Side of Rancho Sante Fe
Road Between Station No. 29+58 and 40+00, Arroyo Vista, Carlsbad. California, Project
No. 851855-011, dated March 14.2003.
A-3
851855-011
APPENDIX A (Continued)
Project Design Consultants, 2001a, Grading and Erosion Control Plans for Shelley Property Unit
No. 3, Carlsbad Tract No. 90-03, Drawing No. 380-1G, 11 Sheets, dated March 28,2001.
, 2001b, Plans for the Improvement of Shelley Property Unit No. 4, Carlsbad Tract
No. 90-03, Carlsbad, California, Project No. CT 90-03, Drawing No. 380-1E, 7 Sheets,
dated April 4,2001.
, Improvement and Grading Plans for Rancho Santa Fe Road, Carlsbad, California,
Drawing No. 380-1K, dated March 29,2001, revised February 12,2002.
A-4
851855-011
Test No.
Abbreviations Prefix
- -
Test No.
Prefix
(none)
- - Test of Test of
GRADING
Natural Ground
Original Ground
Existing Fill
Compacted Fill
Slope Face
Finish Grade
SEWER
STORM DW
AREA DRAIN
DOMESTIC WATER
RECLAIMED WATER
SUBDRAIN
GAS
ELECTRICAL
TELEPHONE
JOINT UTILITY
IRRIGATION
Bcdding Material
Shading Sand
Main
Lateral
Crossing
Manhole
Fire Hydrant Lateral
Catch Basin
Inlet
Clean-Oout
Water Service
RETAINING WALL
CRIB WALL
LOFFELL WALL
STRUCT FOOTNG
Footing Bottom
Backfill
N represents nuclear gaugc tests
Methods D2922 and D3017.
B
S
M
L
X
MH
FL
CB
I co ws
SUBGRADE
AGGREGATE BASE
CEMENT TREATED BASE
PROCESSED BASE
ASPHALT CONCRETE
Curb
Gutter
Curb and Gutter
Cross Gutter
Street
SidewalkiWalkway
Driveway
Driveway Approach
Center Median
11 (P) I PRESATURATION
L
Sewer Lateral
Storm Drain
Electric Line
t were performed in general accordance with most recent versic
Test of
Abbreviations
C
G
CG
XG
ST sw
DW
DA
CM
M
S
SD
E
of ASTM Test
S represents sand cone tests that were performed in general accordance \\ith mosl recent version of ASTM Test Method Dl556
15A represents first retest ofTest No. 15
158 represents second retest ofTest No. 15
"0" in Test Elevation Column represents test wa taken at the ground surfacc (e.8. finish grade or subgrade)
"-1" in Test Elevation Colum reprcsents test wa taken one foot bclo~ the ground surfacc
c B-1
< - N c- e v, w em 01 c - N m vl w c m m c - N rl e m m w c 01 m o - - - - - - - - - N PI N N rr CI ri N N PI ri c-
N r- 'i 0
al al fd a
-
999999999999999999999999999~~99 --"fs-i""------NNN---------Nmm-- NN N N N N N PI N N N N N N N N N N N N N - - N N
* ri vi '0 vi vi w w u * * 7 7 xi rrj rrj r? * * 7 * * * * u u m - - * P
- N C 0
m .- I z
N r-
'& 0
N
% 2
>
L
L -0 * 9! -a E 5 -3
v)
v) F v) -w I- > -I- -
v) 2 W -n n
LL -0 * E
a E -3
v)
-a
v) I-
v) W I-
). I-
v) z w P
P -I w
LL
-
-
). p?
ru -a A$
I
ZU 00
N P 'c. 0 m 5 a
>
cn I-
v) W I- >. I-
v) z W
-
n n
W
LL 0 >. p! < E E 3 cn
N r-
i 0
W 9 e
>
O-NO--mN-- NNO-O--Nw-cO-N-m-N-N- mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
" 2 2 N I-, m m r1 - - - - - - - - - - N PI N N N N m N N N N PIN
ccc C 0
m .- c .o .o .o mmm ccc z rnrnrn
r4 t. c 0 r. 5 a
0 Y m N ..
C 0
m .- L
j;
00 ++ r-t- NN
mm 0 t- + m N
C 0 .- 5 v)
r r + C
0: k ;
>
e 0 x
? > m
C W C
c 0
.-
._ c
0 00
I
----N-oO-OONN-moN-N-o-oNNr.o---o mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
'0 N + m N C 0
m .- I
5
on00 v) 0 InOd'0 P W
-m~m P NN" N N
++++ & + 0 Pi +
N
C 0
m
.- c m 5
0 + 0 m
c 0
m .-
5
I" r'
'i 0
aJ a0 m a
m
>
0 W + m N 8
5
.- * m
In c + m N
C 0 .- c m j;
00 ++ mm NN
< Q d < d - N c1 d m w c m m 01 0 - rl r? rr mn w c e m m 0.0 - - N m r? rf '0 w WwwWwwWwwwccc~~~~cccccmm~mmmm~m N N rr N PI N N N ri PI PI c-I PJ PI ri PI ri PI PI PI PI N N N pi N N N N N
N r- L 0 E: 3 a
>
PI PI PI c" c" 2 2 N N N PI 5 0 0 0 --- e--- -----mmm~cm~~-~mmm
0 + P N
>
0 x P
'F
' .G
L
I_ s m
,a,
C 0
IC
0 00
v) I- v) w I- > I-
v) z w
-
n n -.I W
LL
LL 0 > E
E 3
v)
-
a
9 m E
L
2 bbbb dddd bbbb dddd
0 'v, 0 om (1 + m ++ 'Om NN N
.- .- .- EE .-
m *- mm zz z
N t- L. 0
$!
0 00 m a
>
dd --"
ZUZL 0000
swsw MM
OM InN ++ cw NN
CC .o .o +?s *r
rnrn
PI e c. 0 m - 3 f
>
0 >r P I 5 m
C a, S
C 0
+-
._ c
0 00
u) I- u) w I- >
2 w
5
n
0 P - * c 0
CJ
fK
.- I
I
0 c + 0 -r
C 0
m .- I rz
d d
N e %. 0 P
3 a
>
0 m t c
C 0
m .- + z
00 '0 00 0 iow m "io m + +t NN +
-3-q U dtb d cc C cc 00 0
m
- 22 -
.- I .- .- .- siz m 6 fzz 5
c .o .o E!z cc
mV1
PI r- L C m .... 3 a
>
v) I- v) W I- > c
n J W u. -
u. 0
dd 00--
zlkzu. 0000
**
++H+ dddd
0 0 00 0 + m o+ +N r'" P
C 0
m
CC
mm .- I .o .o
zz z I*
00 m r' ++ 00 **
CC .o .o
zm "5
m m '0 d + + 0 " P 5
z ti
C 0
m .- c .- m c
N r' L 0 'D
2
"i t- + t-
.- I m fz
0 w + PI b
C 0
m
III
.- c -
>
n
W
v)
m mw r-+ +m mrn
.- 8 .z
4-c mm 55
m 0 00 m + c +o c+ mm m
N r. h 0 m
ai a0 m a
-
>
v) I-
v) W I- > I-
v) z W
-
n n J W
LL
LL
-
0 * p?
E E 3
v)
a cc .o .o mm -I
mm
'0 rt + m N
v, C lnv) NN ++
"
fie
mm
.E! .o zm zz
n, n,
>
0 x 2 L
N c L 0
0'
5 &
00 "i NN m ++ mm mm + d C ce 0 .o .a
m mm z vlvl
*I .- +
0 7
. . . . . . . . . . 5E55E dAAdd
N r- Lcl 0
0 N 5 a
r.-NO-N--mNO-O--oNN-Omm---woooo- mrnrnrnrnmhrnmrnmrnrnrnrnmrnrnrnrnmmrnrnmmmmmmm
000 00 Vlmm 00 t+ ww +++ WW" mnm mm ccc cc
em* mm rnrnrn
.o .F!
SS
.s" .s" .s" -4-
1-1
0 0 + - n
C 0
m .- c z
>
0
L -0 & -4 B B -3
v)
+ n m
C 0
m .- I
j;
-w - u.
L
%
-0
ir -a E E -3 u)
0
m u
.- I s
- Md F-z
m P + 0 m
C 0
m ... I z
0 P + m C?
C 0
m .- I z
PI P-
v) I-
v) W I- > I-
v) z W
-
n
e 0
m u
.- *
3
0 a + N 0
C 0
m .- + z
m c + m
C 0
v)
.- 3
N e L 0
P N a 00 id a
>
v) 000-
w+ t-mm mN mmmv cc CCCC .o .o .o .o .o .o
ZGi v)vIvIvI
oomo 7" ttt?
e* drn zzzz
>
cn I- cn W I- + I- cn z W
-
n n
W
LA
LA
-
0 >. ar:
E
3 cn
a
v) - 0
m + N 0 0
- +
C 0
m
C 0
m .- i .- c
j; z
000 0 0 --r, N 0 + 0
c m +++ + nrnr-4 0 (1 m m c1 m t N
c VI cz
*s am cn
In yi + u 0 m u PI c 0 -1
In 0 m W + m + 0 rn N
C 0
m
s
z z
.- 1 .- m c
N r- L G
h
>
0 x 9 L 5 m c al c
c 0
c
._ c
0 00
Lg In r- 0 + + In m N m C 0
m .- c .- - z E! VI
0 e + 0 c7 a 0 .- 3 VI
v) I-
v) -w I- * -I-
cn I- u) w I- > I- cn z W
-
n n J W
LL -
'om em AA
0 m + rl m
C 0
m .- c
j;
0 'o + -
w c -
N r' c 0
0 m
OJ OD d a
>
cn I- cn W I- > I- cn z W
-
n
LL 0 >
ovinoooooooooooooooooooonnviooo'?'? c.ic.jmr.iooooooooooooooooor.iri~~~~~~~~ - N 23- ............................
In vi "
Zbb - PI N vi N + +++
ccc C 0
m .- c .a .4! .a zzz **c
j; mrnm
N c c 0
CCI
rd
a
....
2
N C L 0
N c1 9 a
>
dddd
>
v) I- v) -w I- > -I-
v) 2 - w
-
n n -I -w
LL -
v) I- v) W I- > I-
v) z W 0
O
-
o o ~n 10 cn o v, o o o 0 0 o N u c - m o R c o PI d m 0
mmmmmmmoo N N N N CI N N CI M c) C? c) 0
++++++++++&+A v,v,ooyiv,mmo u3\0IDu3v,v,O\oW +++++++++ mmmmmplmmm NNmc)c)mNNN c c c c c E E c c .;" .o .;" .;" .s .;" .s .;" .g msmmmmm35 ZmGZZGZmm
N e + 0
v, CCI
0 M m a
>
I- m W I- >. k m z W
-
n
>. p! Q: E E 3 m
zr. 88 -- ZU 00 ++ dd
N r'
h 0
W m
al
a 2
>
v) I- v) -w I- + -I- -
v) z W -n n J -w
L -
L -0
-a E E
v) I-
v) W I- > I-
Z W
z
n n
E
-I W
> Ip! 4 E E 3
v)
m m N m - - 0 - m N w m - N - - vi rr w ~0 0 0 - - 0 0 0 - 0 - 0 mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
N
>
cn I- cn W I- > I- cn z W
-
n
L 0
ZUZLL 0000 ZLr 00
>
N c- 'ir 0
0 d aJ 00 m a
u. 0
0 -r + m
C 0
m .- *
5
d
II 50 m a
>
---NN-OO--~-~-OQ--NO-O~-~~--~~N mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
0 0 IC) - +
E 0
m m
+ x (1
5 z
.... * .- c
e,
rJ ; E V
N r'
h- 0
N d tC m R
>
to I- to w I- > I-
to z W
-
n n A W
L -
8 > E
z E 3 to
a
0 'I) Cl m NW + ++
0 00 0 + N m
0 a om + ++
N r. L 0
d d u 00 m a
>
N - N N - 0 0 N - 0 - N N u - N - d <'i N N m N 0 0 - - C? m - N mmmmmm~mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm01mmmmm
0 10 + 2
010 me ++ "2
mr: .E .E 00
P .- s
0 +
N P c 0
W -r
al 00 m a
v) I-
v) W I- * I-
v) Z W
-
n n
W u. -
LL 0
9999099999999999999999o999o9ooo NxtwmONxtw000000000000oomNoooooo~ """""D'O'DU -- - $0' -
om 00 ++ mrr err
ww w w aa a a -0-0 -0 -0 mv) v) v1
CC .i? .i? 55 mv)
00 cc mw
rAV1 aa
>
N r'
4- 0 m d 5 a
..
>
e 0 2,
u,
LL 0
ZLr 00
N r' 9- 0
0 In
aJ a0 d a
>
tn I- tn W I- >. I- tn z W
-
n n -I W
U -
c VI gz
0 XT + '0
fi 0
m .- I
5
>
>
o-----oo--cccwmcc~~~------~,v,~~~ N N PI N N N N N N N - - - - - - - N""N--
N In + c c 0
m .- c z
0 I : w m
>
v) I-
v) W I- >- I-
v) z W Q
-
I. r-
L, 0
I- _. Ln 5 a
v) I- v) W I-
d
v)
00 me ++ sn N NN cc .o .o mm 55
*I
2g ++
N r- ‘i. C
W m
e, bo m a
>
m-N-m~NNNN-N-mNNNON---m--mN-mNN mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
ooocccooooocoooooooo~~oo0000oco oooooooooooooooooooooooooocoooo
N r- Lc C
>
e 0 x
tn I- tn W + > I-
v) 2 W
-
n N I. i 0 m vi
e, bo m n.
00,000~~0m00000000000000000000000 -co~~~&dooooooooooddoOooooom~c~ m0
-N" - "--00 """NN
N e +. 0 ,2 3 e
>
+. Y GJd --%
N r' %. 0
0 W 3 a
>
9999999999999999999990999099900 0000000000000000000000000000000
N r- u.. C
W
e, M m a
>
cn I- -cn W I- >. -I- - cn z -w tJ
>. p!
B B -3 cn
-a
9 9 9 9 0. 9 9 9 9 9 0. 9 9 9 4 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9'? 9 0 9
~~~""~""""~""~----ooooo"o~-- --------- - -- o o o o o w LA we N m m 'o - c m N w e m m o - m sn P c m - m ~n
N r' c 0
N W
a, OD m a
tn I- -tn W I- > I- - - tn z -w n
L -0 > w -a E E -3 tn
b 0
w
LL 0 0 m +
Vlo -am ++ 22 cc
mm .o .o
zz +--
cn I-
). c
n
I s
fi 0
m u
.- *
s
I z& i-z
NO---ON---ON-O-O-mN-PIo-NN-ON-*N mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
0 c +
C 0
m
'0
.- 1 z
N c c 0
W 9 a
>
0 x
e 0 .- c E s
'? c? 0 0 '? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
d rr 2 N 2 PI 2 2Zto"mm -- -- - - N c10 P N m v, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m N 0 P n -T "I
d/ //I// 1
N r.
h 0
W W 3 P,
>
N N N m N N 0 - - -PI mmmmmmmmmmm -0 mm o-N--NO-N mmchmmmmmrn
'? Lo Lo " " '? " Lo Lo " " """"""""""" "" 2% Lo?'?'?" NNN"
-9nl0-4 r-mr-wm -----
Lo"'??? 00000 ""2
P? -0 0"
N I c
99 "4 --
0 0 0 0 In P, In W-io-id +++++++ '0 '0 In In i Cl PI N N r-I N N N PI c E c G G G .o .o .o .o .o .o .o 1;; z 1;; 1;; 1;; 1;; 1;; -**I-"- w? w? w? rn w? rn w?
ir
-- a
uu ca
mrn 20
LLLL vu LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL 0 u v u u u u v u
el c c. 0 m '0
e,
n. Y
>
9999999999999999999999999909999 ooooooccmmmwmc-coooooocoovloooco N"NNZi3Z x 132
PI c L 0
W m
9 R
>
n
h E
c"" * w>
w
LL 0
0000000000000000000000~00000~c~ c o o o o c c o o o o o c o o o o 0 o o o o o o o o o 2-n c (7 '-1 ?I - -I--
- x +
C 0
h !x
.- I
I
-OmN---NNO---ON-PmO-ac1N-oN-No-rq mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
m m 0 m P ';f 0 u, 3 ti - 0 0 G- m e 10 m ti m m m I c1 m d P P P m N CI PI N PI ri - - - IC, 3 m 0. 01 % m N N N N N N N N N PI r-I PI PI CI PI r, r, - - - - ,
oouo aaaa 0000
~mcm 0000 "NN
5555
rnmmm
-1-1-1-1
'0 c m m 0 - N Fl -t In w c m 0. 0 - "I n 7 r w c m 01 0 - c-1 0 d m 10 -r 7 d d 10 tn 10 10 r, L? 'II VI 'n VI w w ij '0 0 0 w 10 w w c c c P c c t. 000000000000~000000000000000000 PI N PI N PI N N ri pi r-1 c-I ri PI ri N CI rt PI C, CI N pi CI PI N pi N N pi PI N
>
v) I-
v) W I- >. I-
v) z W
-
n n J w
LL
LL
-
0 >. w
5 s 3
v)
a
- CT) m - - N - - N m N 01m0101mmmmmmm
N r-
'i 0
N r' 3 R
>
$
i58 -0
bb dcr:
cn I- cn w I- > I-
z W
z
n n -I W
L
LL
-
0
). E
E E 3 cn
a
';f - e - m N m m m m m m m m
olnlnoooln ln-wNmNN +++++++
--N-NNN ccccccc
mmowmcm
.o .Ei .o .o .Ei .o .Ei mS;j,;j,mmm zzzzzzz c **.-cc
N h O
N
0 bl m a
v) I- -v) W I-
LL -0
iY
E E -3
v)
-a
b '+ 0
c1
0 ar m a
N-00N-N---N~nn~~'II'IIn0~-000 mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
d i C
d : 2
- N rn u VI w c m a 0 - ri c? t v, w c 30 c- c - N D VI 'o c m a o - N ---------- PI N N N c-l N N N N N M 0 rn
VI VI v1 VI w m 'A v: w II: v) v: II:, VI vi VI vi 'a T LI. ;n v1 Vl rn VI m VI VI VI m VI VI
tn I- tn W I- + F
tn z W
-
n n 1 W
LL
LL
-
0 + K
E 5 3 tn
a
m
% 0
N
al OL id a
m L
m m u m a
0
4444344444444344~4344~4444~44444 00000000000000000000000000000000 ddddddddddddddddddddddddddddZdd~
Tc c C
PI al D1 m a
-N*N- mmmmm
PI PJ 5 NN
vvuww mrJmmm 00000 e?dZe?d
e 0 2
I-
-
to I- -cn W I- > I- - - cn z -w n
0
-$ > IY -a z E -3 cn
ss
PwPPewPPmwwwCwm-O-mOmvi~wPmwwmmmw mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
I? '+ 0
N o bo m a
m 'i
m 0
3 a
mmnnnnnnnnn~n~~n~~n~~n~n~~n~~~~n m m m m m m m m m m m m m m 0 0 m m m m (7 m m m (1 C? 0 n m m 0 (1
00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000
v) I- v) w I- >- +
v) z W
-
n n -I W
L
L
-
0 >-
E E 3
v)
a
??? www
LL 0
mmwmwwwv,nv,nnwnnwwwn~wwmmcwwnnnnm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
99999999999990999999999999999900 00000000000000000000000000000000
mmmwmmw-wmcmwcm-cNc mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
9099999999999999990 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
oooOmoooOoooooo~"oo +++++++++++++++~~++ - -0~"~""""~""r'"
.o .o .o .o .o .o .o .o .o .e .o .o .o .o .o .o .o .o .o c rn~ZZZ88888ZZ8Z888ZZ zfA5ciizzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
om v o o m m N N o m c w c o mm
NN -r*" cCcCcCccC~ccCCCcCcc
00000000000000000000000000000000
00000000000000000000000000000000
mcccooccmcdcoomcwmwwcwmwmmmwwwm~oow mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
00000000000000000000000000000000
00000000000000000000000000000000
00000000000000000000000000000000
00000000000000000000000000000000
"
v) I- v) W + > I- cn z W
-
n n
W ii
L 0 > PL
E E 3
v)
a
00000000000000000000000000000000
00000000000000000000000000000000
10 c 0 m 9 a
99999999999999999999999999999090 00000000000000000000000000000000
wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww~w~wwwwwwww bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb~bbbbb6bbb6bbb
90999099099099999999999999999999 00000000000000000000000000000000
-u
-v) ?K
-e DL 06 00
mwmmlnwwm mmmmmmmm
9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 00000000
wwwwwwww <b<<<<b<
09999999 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
000000wo o o o o o to N w +++if+++
NN Tr-Lm~m~~~
KKKKCCCC .g .s .s .s .g .s .g .s mmmmmmmm _I*_I***cc rnvIvIv)v)vIv)vI
v, ‘i. 0
‘II !i a
851855-011
2
3
4
5
APPENDIX C
Dark gray-brown sandy clay 121.5 13.0 Y
Yellow-brown sandy silty clay 103.5 22.0
Gray-brown sandy clay 105.5 21.0
Light brown silty sand 116.0 14.0
Laboratow Testinq Procedures and Test Results
Pale yellow-brown silty sand
Maximum Density Tests: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of typical soils
were determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557. The results of these tests are
presented in the table below:
120.0 12.0
Sample Description
Olive green-gray sandy clay 116.0 14.5
8
9
10
11
12
Brown sandy silty clay 122.0 11.5
Pale yellow-light brown tine to medium sand 119.0 12.0
Olive-gray sandy silt 114.5 16.5
Medium olive-brown sandy clay till mix 122.0 12.5
Olive-brown clavev sandy silt 118.5 13.5
23
c-1
Green silty sandy clay 111.5 16.5
24 Miscellaneous Recycled Aggregate Base 128.5 9.0
851855-011
Maximum Dr/ Densiw (fl Sample Description Sample
Number
APPENDIX C (Continued)
Optimum
Moisture Content (YO)
26
21
25 1 Limetreated subgrade soil 1 111.0 I 17.0 11
Lime-treated subgrade soil 113.0 16.5
Miscellaneous Recycled Aggregate Base 116.0 14.0
Lime-treated subgrade soil 109.5
31 Class 2 Aggregate Base 141.5 6.0
11 36 1 Sub-Base (AC, Class 2 Base Sand Mix) I 146.5 I N/A 11
Shading sand 132.0 8.5
AC Laboratory Maximum Density Tests: The laboratory maximum density of the asphalt concrete
samples were determined by the Hveem Method, California Test Method Nos. 304 and 308. The
results of the tests are presented in the table below:
\ Laboratow Densib (Dm Sarntie Number
33
34
35
AC 1 3/4-inch AC 141.5
Class 2 Aggregate Base 142.0 6.0
Recycled Class 2 Aggregate Base 121.0 11.0
Class 2 Aggregate Base 134.0 7.5
II AC2 I 3/4-inch AC I 155.0 II
31
38
II AC3 I 3/4-inch AC I 144.0 II
Class 2 Aggregate Base 139.5 6.5
Recycled Class 2 Aggregate Base 124.0 10.5
II AC4 I li2-inch AC I 140.0 II
AC5 1/2-inch AC 143.5
c-2
AC6 IiZ-inch AC 145.5