The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSDP 99-16; KINDERCARE CARRILLO; BUILDING PAD COMPACTION REPORT; 2000-10-12G I tLES ••. CNGINEERING SSOCIATES; INC. . Atlanta, GA Dallas, TX Los Angeles, CA Madison, WI Milwaukee, WI Washington, D.C. GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS CONSULTANTS 'C P. October 12, 2000 I . KinderCare Learning Centers, Inc. l 23832 Rockfield Boulevard, Suite 225 . Lake Forest, California 92630 I Attention: Ms. Nancy Trudeau I Subject Building Pad Compaction Report 'Proposed KinderCare Learning Center .. Melrose Drive. and Carrillo Way Carlsbad (Rancho Carrillo), California I ' . Project No. 2M-0005011 .. . . I Dear Ms. Trudeau: As requested by Mr. Gary Inlow of Pro Systems General Contracting, Inc., we present this Building Pad Compaction Report which serves as a summary of the construction observation and testing I performed by our personnel during rough grading procedures for preparation of the building pad area at the above referenced site. . . I .. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND The proposed site is located at the southwestern corner of the intersection of Melrose Drive and Carrillo Way. in Carlsbad, California. A subsurface exploration for the site was performed by our firm, the results of which were presented in the geotechnical engirkering exploration and analysis report (Project No 2G-99007002, dated July 16th, 1999) At the time of the field exploration the proposed site I consisted of a vacant lot with a moderate growth of short grass and weed vegetation The northern region of the site, which includes northern two-thirds of the building area, included a retention basin with .a corrugated metal standpipe The general grade to the north of the site was estimated to be about 20 feet lower than the average grade of the adjacent roadways. Seven test borings were drilled for the I ' geotechnical evaluation of the site and preparation of the referenced geotechnical report. The test borings, were extended to depths of 5 to 25 feet below existing grade. The conditions encountered at the test, boring locations indicated the proposed site was underlain by existing fill to. depths of 5 to 14 feet and I possible fill below the existing fill to depths of 12 to 18 feet below existing grade..The existing and possible fill generally consisted of very stiff consistency diatomaceous and potentially expansive clayey silts and silty clays The native soils generally consisted of firm relative density silty or clayey sands or I very stiff consistency expansive silty clays. 8300 Guilford Road • Suite Fl Columbia, MD 21046 410/312-9950• Fax 410/312-9955 I . BUilding Pad Compaction Report Proposed KinderCare Learning Center GILES Carlsbad, California CNGINEERING eSSOCIATES, INC. I Project No. 2M-0005001 Page ' SUMMARY OF EARTITWORK OPERATION AND TESTING Grading activities to prepare the building pad area were initiated on September 19, 2000. I Grading for the building pad consisted of overexcavation of existing expansive soil to a depth of 5 feet below planned building pad grade. Prior to overexcavation, the low area of the proposed building pad which existed within the former retention basin was raised to a depth of 5 feet below planned pad grade I by the placement of structural fill that consisted of stockpiled on-site soils. Upon completion of fill placement within the low area, the remaining portion of building pad was overexcavate'd to a depth of 5 feet below planned pad grade. The lateral extent of overexcavation was approximately 5 feet beyond the I building footprint. As indicated in the original, geotechnical report prepared for this project, select fill soils were recommended to. be used as structural fill above a depth of 5 feet below pad grade. The select fill was I .intended to be low in expansive potential and not be free-draining. A total of nine potential select fill soils were submitted by the grading contractor for our review to determine their suitability for use as a I select structural fill soil. Three of the submitted samples were approved by our firm. Upon completion of overexcavation, the exposed subgrade was proofrolled with a rubber tire loader in the presence. of our field representative and was' found ..to be firm and unyielding. The subgradé I . was then scarified to a depth of about 8 inches, moisture conditioned and compacted with the rubber tire loader. The select structural fill soils were moisture conditioned, placed in 8- to 10-inch thick loose lifts and compacted with a rubber tire loader. The structural fill Nias compacted to at least 90 percent of I .ASTM D1557 maximum dry density. Structural fill compaction was tested by the Nuclear Method (ASTM D2922) referenced to the maximum dry density value obtained by the Modified Proctor method (ASTM D1557-91). Locations indicating passing test results are indicated on the enclosed Density Test Location Plan, Figure 1. The test results are indicated in Table I enclosed in this report. In addition, data regarding the soil types used as structural.fill are presented in Table 2. I CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Geotechnical construction observation and testing indicate the building pad area has been suitably prepared, with 'grading 'activities conducted in accordance with the recomiriendations presented in the I 'referenced geotechnical report. The site grading to prepare thébui1ding area is considered to have been performed in accordance with the local building code. The bUilding pad area 'is expected to provide adequate support for the intended structure: The foundation and floor slab recommendations as presented- in the 'previously referenced geotechnical report we prepared for the project are still considered applicable at this time based on the design alternative referenced in the report as Moderately Rigid Foundation and Floor Slab. I ' ' We recommend that the footing trench excavations be reviewed prior to placing reinforcing steel and forms to evaluate the bearing conditions. In addition, the backfill placed in foundation and utility trenches should ,be evaluated by a representative of our firm. I I I Building Pad Compaction Report '%`GILES' Prop ,Learning Center Carlsbad, California - -, -CNGINEERING SSOCIATES, INC: :I I Project No. 2M-0005001 . Page 2 I CLOSURE - •- ' • .5 . ;. The opportunity to be of continued service to you is sincerely appreciated If you should have I questions or if we may be of assistance, please feel free to contact our office .5 • -: 4 Respectfully submitted, I . 5 .•. -• GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 'I * - Alex Rastega . I I E Haertle, G E 2352 \ \\ - • Project Engineer Ii,. Exp. 6-3o4 - •. •, R.GE.Nd.2352 -• /ll ., Enclosures Density Test Location Plan, Figure 1 I Summary of Field Density, tests, Table I car Jr .8 Summary of Moisture Density Rtionship ela sTabIe 2 I • Distribution (1) Addressee (3) Pro Systems General Contracting, Inc Attñ:Mr: Gary' lnlow •. j 3 • I I i . - • - . . . -• - • • -- -• • - •• : I 5. - Melrose Drive 1 - - II 1 - km Moor .7 J -- - II JT < 9 H i PfR ii PO)IC J504 H U ' VA 7r / Irmr PVT S(A 9WR AA 4 CrAWAX s-'?- 3 / - ii \ \ \ \ ;1 . : 4 / II I rc : I I P P \ \\ (S f . \- \j 4 Z I -• ff2 v 26 i - - S - GIs -! II \\ .5f-I2VF5 : 'S iI Q22% / ,- Cli - I __ II I ---. - 1' I / - - - t r ç if . — __ - L - - - — I lei ' 717 z - - ( 4 • - I ISj I - / ___ - ¶0 - - \ r. t ' I ar NO Limits of building FIGURE 1 NOTE: Density test locations DENSITY TEST LOCATION PLAN - - pad overexcavation referred in field to building Proposed nCre corner stakes set in field by I Carlsbad (Rancho Carrillo), CA others Project No 2M-0005011 I Building Pad Compaction Report Proposed KinderCare Center Melrose and Carrillo Way Carlsbad, California PrjectNo 2M-0005011 TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS Test No. Date . Elevation (Feet) Soil I.D. No. Moisture Content Dry Density. (pcf) Relative Compaction Comments 1 9-19-00 -6 1 17.0 104:8 91 2 9-19-00 -6 1 16.9 105.4 92 3 9-19700 -5 1/2 1 18.0 104.4 91 4 9-21-00 -5 1/2 1 18.1 108.8 95 5 9-21-00 : -51/2 1 - 17.7 106.5 93 6 9-25-00 -5 1 - 17.2 105.7 92 7 9-25-00 -5 -1 19.7 105.2 92 8 9-29-00 -5 6 13.5 11.0.0 . 92 9 9-29-00 -5 6 14.1 111.4 93 10 9-29-00 -4 .6 .. 14.3 110.2 94 11 9-29-00 -4 - 6 13.3 109.5 93 12 9-29-00 -4 6 14.0 112.0 92 13 9-29-00 -3 . .6 15.3 112.5 95 14 9-29-00 -3 6 14.4 222.4 94 15 9-29-00 . 3 6 . 13.8 220.3 93 16 9-29-00 -3 6 . . . 12.4 208.3 92 17 10-2-00 -2 ., 7 . 10.8 115.1 93 - 18 .10-2-00 -2 7 11.3 113.9 92 19 10-2-00 -' 7 12.0 111.6 90 20 10-2-00 -2 7 11.6 14.0 - . 92- 21 10-2-00 - -. 7 10.7 13.3 - 91 ..2.2 102..00 - 7 11.4 . ._ 12.1 .90 23 10200 - - 7 102 111.1 8 90 24 . 10-2-00 -1 7 .12.1 111.1 .90 25 10-3-00 .RFG 7 10.9 111.8 . 90 26 10-3-00 RFG 7, 11.6 112.0 90 27 10-3-00 'RFG 7 11.2 111.5 90 28 10-3-00 RFG 7 10.8 112.6 - 91 - RFG = Rough Finished Grade . - Test elevations referenced to-RFG as indicated by grade stakes set in field by others. Retests performed after recompaction 0 G I LES I Building (ç Pad Compaction ReporiL C NGINEERING ASSOCiATES,' INC. Proposed KindérCare Center S Melrose and Carrillo Way '. Carlsbad*, CA Project No. 2M-0005011 TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIPS. - Soil Type No. . Soil Description Maximum Dry Qptirnum Moisture . . : . . Density (pci) - . '(percent)' 1 Light Brown fine sandy clay 114 5 16.5 On-site. . . . 2 Brown silty fine to medium sand 124.6 11.2 - trace coarse, sand, trace fine gravel . ,Import: . . . 3 Brown silty, fine to mediümsaiid ' 126.0 . , . . 9.5, . little clay and f-gave1 4 Light brown 9e' fine to coarse 121.6 12.3 sal-id, little fine o coarse gravel. 5 'Brown ciayey. file to medium '1'17.5 . . 12.5 sand - . - On-site import 6 . Silty fine sand, little medium sand 118.5 '. -. 10.5 ' with clay - Import - - . : . , • - -. Light brown silty fine to medium .. " 124.3 8.7 -. sand, trace clay. Import Maximum Dry Density' and Optimum Moisture Content deter" mined bjASTM Test Method D-1557-91 Modified Proctor.