The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutGeotechnical Investigation ��5� t i� � 1 1 � GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS OF MOTOR CAR PARKWAY � FROM YNEZ TO SOLANO WAY CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA � ■ � Prepared For: 1 Temecula Auto Park Association , 26755 Ynez Road Temecula, California 92591 � � - � � Project No. 600333-001 , March 4, 2004 ♦ �� 0 5 004 MAR 2 � CITY OF 7EMECULA ENGlNEERING DEPARTMENT ! ighton Consult�ng, Ince ' A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY � ♦ � Leighton Consulting, Inc. ' A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY , March 4, 2004 Project No. 600333-001 To: Temecula Auto Park Association � 26755 Ynez Road Temecula, California 92591 � Attention: Mr. Dick Kennedy Subject: Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Improvements of Motor Car Parkway from `� Ynez to Solano Way, CitX of Temecula, California. Introduction � In accordance with your request, Leighton Consulting, Inc. (LCI} has erformed a eotechnical P g investigation for the proposed street improvements for Motor Car Parkway in the City of � Temecula, California. Our investigation included a site reconnaissance, subsurface exploration of the site, and preparation of this report. It is our understanding that the existing Motor Car Parkway is currently considered a private street and will be converted to a public street (within the City of � Temecula right-of-way) following the completion of the proposed improvements. � Site Description and Proposed Development Motor Car Parkway intersects Ynez Road and Solano Way in the City of Temecula (Figure 1). The area of the proposed improvements is bounded by a shopping plaza and car dealerships. , Based on our review of the preliminary project plans prepared by Engineering Ventures, Inc. � (Engineering Ventures, Inc., 2003), we understand the proposed development will include construction of a four lane road and appropriate improvements. The street improvements will be approximately 3,000 lineal feet (1 fl in length and will be in accordance with appropriate City of � Temecula standards. Field Investigation and Laboratorv Testina � On Febru 25 2004 LCI conducted a field ex loration of the sub'ect site usin a holl w- �'Y > > P ) g o stem auger drill rig. Our subsurface exploration consisted of the excavation, sampling and logging of six t hollow stem auger borings ranging in depth from 5 to 11.5 feet below the existing ground surface. The exploratory borings were excavated utilizing a truck-mounted, Mobile B-61 drill rig using 8- ' inch hollow-stem flight augers. During the drilling operation, bulk and relatively undisturbed � � 41715 Enterprise Circle N., Suite 103 ■ Temecula, CA 92590-5661 909.296.0530 ■ Fax 909.296.0534• www.leightongeo.com � 600333-001 March 4, 2004 ' samples were obtained from the borings for laboratory testing and evaluation. The relatively � undisturbed samples were obtained utilizing a modified California drive sampler, 2-3/8-inch I.D. (inside diameter), 3-inch O.D. (outside diameter), driven 18-inches with a 140 pound hammer dropping 30-inches in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D3550. The number of blows � required for each 6 inches of drive penetration were noted in the field. The number of blows to achieve the last 12-inches of penetration were recorded on the boring logs (Appendix B). Approximate locations of the borings are depicted on the Boring Location Map (Figure 2). � Sampling of the borings were conducted by a staff geologist from our firm and samples were transported to a laboratory for testing. After logging and sampling, the excavations were backfilled with spoils generated during excavation and capped with AC cold patching compound. ` The primary purpose of the borings was to evaluate the physical characteristics of the site soil materials. In addition, the excavations allowed us to determine the relative thickness: of AC and � aggregate base materials, fi11, and other natural material characteristics within the project site (see Boring Logs, Appendix B). ' . Laboratory testing was performed on representative samples to evaluate the R-Values, as well as insitu moisture and density. A brief discussion of the laboratory test methods performed, and a suminary of the laboratory test data are presented in Appendix C. The in-situ moisture and density � determinations are presented on the boring logs presented in Appendix B. , Geolo4v Site Geologic Units , The earth materials encountered in the exploratory borings consist of Undocumented Artificial Fill, and Pauba Formation. These units are discussed in the following sections in order of increasing � age Undocumented Artificial Fill ' Undoctunented artificial fill soils were observed in all borings. As encountered, the fill ranges approximately 2.5 to 5 feet thick and is believed to have been placed during previous grading � operations performed to create the existing Motor Car Parkway. These soils consisted of brown to dark brown, moist to very moist, silty to clayey sand. In general, the onsite soils are considered suitable for reuse as compacted fill if relatively free of organic material and debris. Very moist to , wet materials will likely require drying, depending on the actual conditions encountered and if reused as compacted fill. , Pauba Formation (map symbol Qps� The Pauba Formation encountered generally consists of light brown to brown, olive and reddish M brown in color, moist to very moist, loose to dense, silty and clean sands and medium stiff to ♦ ' - � Leighton , '� 600333-001 March 4, 2004 ' hard sandy silts and sandy clays. The Pauba Formation is generally considered suitable for use as � fill material and the support of additional fills and/or structural improvements. Structural Seismic Design Parameters � Our evaluation of the re �orial seismicit included a deterministic anal sis utilizin E SEARCH, � Y Y g Q and EQFAULT (Blake, 2000a & 2000b) and probabilistic analysis utilizing FRISKSP (Blake, � 2000c): The nearest known active fault and source of the design earthquake is the Temecula Segment of the Elsinore Fault Zone located approximately 1.2 miles (2 km) west of the site. The maximum moment magnitude earthquake is estimated to be magnitude 6.8Mw. � The Uniform Buildiri Code C established Seismic Zones often acc ted as minimum g � ) � � standards) based on maps showing ground motion with a 475-year retum period or a 10% probability � of exceedance in 50 years. Our analysis indicates a 10% probability that a peak gound acceleration of 0.68g would be exceeded in 50 years. The design earthquake therefore, is considered a moment '. magnitude 6.8Mw event on the Temecula segment of the Elsinore Fault Zone that would generate a probabilistic peak ground acceleration of 0.68g (FRISI�SP, Blake 2000c). The effect of seismic shaking may be mitigated by adhenng to the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC) and seisiruc design parameters suggested by the Structural Engineers Association of California. This site is ' located within Seismic Zone 4. Seismic design parameters are presented herein: , Seismic Zone = 4 Seismic Source Type = B Near Source Factor, N =1.3 � Near Source Factor, N� = 1.6 Soil Profile Type = SD Horizontal Peak Ground Acceleration = 0.68g , (10% probability of exceedance in 50 years) Conclusions and Recommendations � Based on our site reconnaissance, it is our professional opinion that the proposed Motor Car Parkway street improvement project is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint and may be , coristructed as planned provided the following preliminary recommendations are incorporated into the design and construction. The following sections discuss the principal geotechnical concerns ' affecting the site and recommendations that should be implemented during continued development. It should be noted that complete street improvement plans for the proposed project were not , available for review at the time this report was prepared. When such plans are available, we recommend that an evaluation of the proposed development be performed in order to provide updated pavement and utility trench designs and other appropriate construction recommendations , relative to the proposed development. ♦ ' - 3 Leighton ' ' 600333-001 March 4, 2004 , Earthwork , Earthwork should be performed in accordance with the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications in Appendix D and the following recommendations. The recommendations contained ' in Appendix D are general grading specifications provided for typical grading projects and some of the recommendations may not be strictly applicable to this project. The specific recommendations contained in the text of this report supersede the general recommendations in Appendix D. The ' contract between the developer and earthwork contractor should be worded such that it is the responsibility of the contractor to place the fill properly in accordance with the recommendations of this report and the specifications in Appendix D, notwithstanding the testing and observation of the , geotechnical consultant. Removal and Site Preparation , Prior to adin the ro osed shuctural im rovement areas i.e. all-structural fill areas . avement �' g, P P P � , P ' areas, etc:) of the site should be cleared of subsurface obstructions and construction debris. Roots and debris should be disposed of offsite. Voids created by removal of buried material should be backfilled with properly compacted soil in general accordance with the recommendations of this report. All removal bottoms should be reviewed by the geotechnical consultant prior to ' scarification and recompaction. , Based on the results of our subsurface investigation and subsequent laboratory testing the upper 2 �. feet of the in place subgrade soils are potentially compressible and/or relatively saturated and are judged to be unsuitable for support of the proposed improvements in its present condition. , Therefore, we recommend soils within the upper 2 feet of the existing subgrade (as measured from the bottom of the existing base section) not removed by the planned- grading should be removed down to competent materials, moisture conditioned (or dried back if necessary) and recompacted ' prior to fill placement or construction of improvements within the limits of site grading. Competent material for removal bottoms is considered to be subgrade soils with a relative compaction of at least 85 percent (based on ASTM Test Method D 1557). The resultant excavation should be filled ' with compacted fill (90 percent of ASTM Test Method D1557) at or above optimum moisture content. The actual depth of the removal should be determined in the field by the geotechnical consultant. Removed materials may be reused as compacted fill if relatively free of organic , materials and construction debris. Following completion of the recommended removals, �ery moist to wet soils should be allowed to dry and proof-rolled in accordance with the following recommendations. , D endin on the actual moisture content of the subgrade soils encountered in field, weather � g patterns and methods, drying time of the subgrade soils may vary from a few hours to several days ' and possibly weeks. Considering the possible delay in construction activities, it may be considered more economical to export the existing soils that have a high in-place moisture content and import select granular soils for use as compacted fill depending upon the project requirements. Utilizing a , select granular material within the upper 2 feet of subgrade will also likely result in a slightly ♦ ' . - 4 Leighton ' ' 600333-001 March 4, 2004 ' reduced pavement section if the project specifications require the contractor to import materials ' within as specified criteria (e.g. minimum R-value, gradation, etc.). The criteria for the selective materials to be used within the upper 2 feet of subgrade soils, may be provided as the project plans and specifications are developed. � All removal areas should be proof rolled with heavy-duty construction equipment (equivalent to a fully loaded water truck) under the observation of the geotechnical consultant. Localized areas of � yielding subgrade may require additional depth of removal. Alternative grading recommendations (e.g. stabilization fabric, crushed aggegate layer, etc.) for subgrade stabilization (if yielding conditions are encountered following the completion of the recommended removals) may be ' provided as the project plans are developed. After completion of the recommended removal of unsuitable soils, the approved surface should be ' scarified a minimum of 8-inches, moisture conditioned (or dried back if necessary) and compacted with heavy earthmoving equipment prior to placing fill. ' Structural Fills and Oversize Materials ' The orisite soils are suitable for reuse as compacted fill, provided they are relatively free of organic materials, debris and oversize materials. Materials greater than 8 inches in greatest dimension should not be used within structural fills. The optimum lift thickness to produce a uniformly � compacted fill will depend on the type and size of compaction equipment used. In general, fill should be placed in uniform lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness. Fill soils should be placed and compacted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction (as determined by ASTM Test , 1Vlethod D1557) at or above the optimum moisture content. Import Soils , In eneral, if im ort soils are necess to brin the site u to the ro osed ades these soils g P �Y g P P P �' , should be granular in nature, relatively free of organic material and have an expansion index less ' than 50 (per ASTM Test Method D4829). Import soils and/or the borrow site should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant prior to being imported to the site. t Utility Trenches , The onsite soils may generally be suitable as trench backfill provided they are screened of rocks over 6 inches in diameter (or governing agency requirements) construction debris and organic matter. Trench backfill should be compacted in uniform li$s (not exceeding 8 inches in compacted � thickness) by mechanical means to at least 90 percent relative compaction (ASTM Test Method D1557). ' Excavation of utility trenches should be performed in accordance with the project plans, specifications, and all applicable OSHA requirements. The contractor should be responsible for ♦ ' -5 Leighton 1 ' 600333-001 March 4, 2004 ' �� „ providing the competent person required by OSHA standards. Contractors should be advised that � sandy soils (such as native site alluvium and fills generated from the onsite alluvium) could make excavations particularly unsafe, even if all safety precautions are taken. In addition, excavations at or near the toe of slopes and/or parallel to slopes may be highly unstable due to the increased ' driving force and load on the trench wall. Spoil piles from the excavation(s) and construction equipment should be kept away from the sides of the trenches. � Preliminary Pavement Design Parameters For planning 'and estimating purposes we have made some assumptions based on the anticipated ' vehicle traffia usage. The appropriate pavement section will depend on the type of subgrade soil, shear strength, traffic load and planned pavement life. Since an evaluation of the actual subgrade soils cannot be made at this time, we have assumed an R-value of 22 based on our laboratory test ' results assuming a general blend of the onsite soils. Based on our conversations with Mr. Randy Flemming of Engineering Ventures, Inc., we understand a Traffic Index (Tn of 7 has been assigned for Motor Car Parkway by City of Temecula representatives. The following pavement � section is to be used for preliminary planning purposes only. Tests of the exposed subgrade soils during grading should be performed to confum the appropriate pavement section. We recommend that the full depth of the pavement section be placed prior to the commencement of construction in ' order to support heavy construction traffic. Preliminary Pavement Design , R-Value = 21 , � Asphaltic-Concrete (AC) Class 2 Aggregate Base (AB) Thickness (inches) R=21 Rock (R=78) Thickness (inches) , 7 4 12 For estimating purposes, an alternative preliminary pavement design is provided below assuming ' an R-value of 48 if select granular subgrade materials are used. The actual pavement section will depend upon the quality of subgrade materials. ' Preliminary Pavement Design R-Value = 48 � .�. Asphaltic-Concrete (AC) Class 2 Aggregate Base (AB) Thickness (inches) R=48 Rock (R=78) Thickness (inches) � 7 4 8* *City of Temecula minimum standard. 1 ♦ ' - 6 Leighton 1 L 600333-001 March 4, 2004 ' The sub ade soils in the u er 6 inches should be ro erl com acted to at least 90 er gr pp p p y p p cent � relative compaction (ASTM D1557) and should be moisture-conditioned to near optimum and kept in this condition until the pavement section is constructed. Proof-rolling subgrade to identify localized areas of yielding subgrade (if any) should be performed prior to placement of aggregate ' base and under the observation of the geotechnical consultant. Minimum relative, compaction requirements for aggregate base should be 95 percent of the ' maximum laboratory density as deternuned by ASTM D1557. Base rock should conform to the "Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction" (green book) current edition or Caltrans Class 2 aggregate base having a minimum R-value of 78. , The relimin ` avement sections rovided in this section are meant as minimum if thinner or P �' P P , highly variable pavement sections are constructed, increased maintenance and repair may be , needed. Plan Review ' Final improvement plans and specifications should be reviewed by Leighton Consulting, Inc. ' before grading to evaluate if the recommendations in this report are incorporated in project plans. . � Construction Observation 1 The recommendations provided in this report are based on preliminary design information and subsurface conditions encountered by widely spaced excavations. The interpolated subsurface ' conditions should be checked in the field during construction. Construction observation of onsite excavations and field density testing of compacted fill should be performed by a representative of this office so that construction is in accordance with the recommendatioris of this report. At a , minimum, we recommend that the geotechnical engineer and/ar his/her representative be present to observe and provide testing during the following contraction activities: � • Site grading of cuts and fills; • Placement of all fill, backfill and pavement struchzral sections; , � Proof-rolling the subgrade; • When any unusual conditions are encountered during grading; , • Backfilling of utility trenches; and • Excavation/demolition of existing structures. � Limitations The conclusions and recommendations in this report are based in part upon data that were obtained ' from a limited number of observations, site visits, excavations, samples, and tests. Such ♦ ' -7- t Leighton ' 600333-001 March 4, 2004 ' information is by necessity incomplete. The nature of many sites is such that differing 1 geotechnical or geological conditions can occur within small distances and under varying climatic conditions. Changes in subsurface conditions can and do occur over time. Therefore, the findings, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this report can be relied upon only if Leighton ' Consulting, Inc. has the opportunity to observe the subsurface conditions during grading and construction of the project, in order to confirm that our preliminary findings are representative for the site. ' If ou have an uestions re ardin this r ort lease do not hesitate to contact this office. We Y Yq g g � �P appreciate the opportunity to be of service. � Respectfully submitted, ' LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC.,��FESS�p� ��p �� ,� ��.� T ER��y ��/ ,,�,,�� R� � 9 °c ' - � �� CEfiTBF ED 9 Nt � � N0.�85� � EPi(sINEERiNG Adam Terronez, RCE 62285 EXP, �_.• Robert F. Riha, CEG 1921 '� S��LOl�IST �` ' Project Engineer * � Principal Geologist `� ,�s � CI�111. �Q,�� ,¢� CA�-� AXT/RFR/mm O� �; qa ' FinaU600333-0O1 /Prelim Geo Inv Motor Car Attachment: Figure 1- Site Location Map ' Figure 2- Boring Location Map Appendix A - References Appendix B - Boring Logs ' Appendix C- Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results Appendix D- General Earthwork and Grading Specifications for Rough Grading ' Distribution: (6) Addressee � � � ' ♦ ' - 8 - Leighton ' 1 f ..., i . _ . .,�., f��_ �. ��. , � �-��,,�' � � �� , .� t„ � �`� ti :�,} ��. _�P.e�, ti, � r �r:?� f � S�> ti � � �U,+�Yu:7+s '"�;r � ''.�, 5 � . n, ,, � �, �� :��, y uk�'I�:i '�s �1 � I � � � , �t G, ; ''� 1r o� 4 �� ` � /_ 4�!: L ��r1P� y �',�(�� ' � F ��,rSf r�� ' �P'.. 1��. J � r r' �,, _,�."^'V.'k` �� ,,,•+ ti �,cSY � � ; ..,-� �� j �� a �� ,� , ��o. � 1 � � c'' 1 , , '� �4 "�' s� � �� ; � �� _ f � 1�'i�l� , ,.�-•. i�';� � , . � �, ,,;.. . �� :* 1.,� � r°f ' z LZtiG�IjJ �4 ��. i,�,.q . .�G �' � . 4�1 4 � I V. � �. 'f�`,+r� �. � � �� `5. r ? � ��u^�"� �' �C�(! �{it�k. {��ir�.- t �� . ' ... �l"74'i � i , ,'�'Z. � '�,r ' �j... „ ---w.,, ,, ,.._ If�� . . _ ' ^' � � ,. I ��,� , �' �� _ __ _ _ q . - �' . ��i>.): "�� I = 1 . . �^ - �`�' 4' S (&�� 1.r?'; t ` ,� { �,� r p� � _ _ _ -_ ' I � Y + y " y � "`" ��e '°� �r� _-- ,x��:� I ,l �:?5 l��l � � I K d?:' � ~l �.l; ��" � � .� �, _ �. `by`TMS frj'j' � �^�, �{} � C - . „�°' � �]' ��' �1 t"' �� F�r.-' �' �- ' I t l- �•,� �', -_ _ _.r � � �2 ! �' t � , , � � c >`�1Qj�� . . .,�y,�,.', ��. �""" �� i. �� f � A ,�'y �"� d L:' �..�' i •'Yd�t51 s.R�s �,: �t , � /'��.f�! $';. T k�i� �,r,r � ' � r J.f.� . e� _.a�.e,t_f� �, .�I � . �,.. L ` _ �i�t' , _. y �rt .,!'. . . .. i' �- .. ! . _. .1 � 5 . . v .' c � , . - "x`f" - �. � � - . L'r„ .,�`�1. � I 4r,�;'1'eiti" , i � � •_ b , ;.? 9 -'*`' �, ` �"aA'B' � � � U�L� ' �t1? ,, � � �` �,�, '� " � �� .a� P � -�'¢`Q,' � � . � ,� k �� ' � . � . �;�+? • �1,�„- + � ' �� „_ � �+� �� I !�� i:��E 7 � � 1 t „ . � � \ �, l } � "�. ' y �,r �ti, � ` . , fi��o j?A �� ! _..:[.._...�_.__.._--�'� :� a �,�.�'�''' � x�� s cas, c � �� ,r ....� '� �_,t�:��__ � '� SITE ��, t �' �;' � � �d 1 A � =. � o � ° 1 n��,(.,"',�-, � � , �� , LOCATION �'��x��at -� �'`y' �? ; % �'�' � �� ' t � �l �i.u�.�Cbi_ti �-�P,��7Avty5 � . I ti c �� vP ;s `UP[�i5 ``, r _ �'.'` J L'�ilri: �t_f•' �\\ . � i �' L ' � p-k1` �t q I? �. � � Mofor C'ar' �.� ��- ��. �:� � -�� -�-� :, j .. t` i, y � ; �[�*1�:n*; � :� � , i , �,� wr, �' � ;, �� ., � ' ` � f?'a��rk�wa�y �,��. ,.- ; �- -.--� � ��-� r ° ��I �'1� f ,..' �'\' ,•� +`,�', 1� � -var'� � �,,� C:�� j n7��• 4, f �� s, ��_' • . . . . � #�' , r. ''� „ �'+s r e,y„�� ` • � y � ' "��` � �, � T� �`, l li �� .J� �; t ,�ir ' "Y)iA'�� ' i �.� '".SC � �� _ � y � ' ' �_____________�SF�I� �f rp� j �+' ` �u l `�� r� � 4 fi �,r . "` i" '' ,�`'t,�� '� '` , � � rr ,,��'�'��' �� `,� �"� ,,,. �'�r�� CkLl2.� ��1 � �, ''� � y. - 1 � ��; r `, ' 4 � y,v, �''ti� , ,, _ k �✓ }.' � F� .k'3ifA. ' �"� ` ,. il � . �� r� � � C';1" � I l � � � � " � ' ,r.� t�r� � � '� � F [- A� � r r� , { !d!:L� � � IS��'= �+ li . I , � � 1�'. � \ .1� � �� Y Iv � �, .�� s�"„_ratt ` � � � `� � ..,,-� , �«� s�� Q, , 'ia, ;�S CGl.ltin'tY ` '�, r� •�`, a 5:; j' ~ � i� � :x?,r � _,, f� �5� (I � 1 � { �t � �' 3-�+v si IP.�' � ' `yi E, Ie141f `� � �lt �,V,'. ? � , Pt , .�, j � 2^, �� ._..,._a�. " 1.a� ` 't,. S , � �� ` �F �� ,� G � � {� f�4',�`•�Jr'` i. f '` r-i Vrk { ',jrQcr ' � ' ' b ' ? < ti t � Q �' � �'� `I . �i .t �' Zi ❑ �,,�i �� ', �1 c ,��, �� J > > ,�,,. e�h ;r` �J' '�'� ,, � � ? ��,, '� �f �� i �,�,, , `�` ` , � a w�` f'` =,, ,��,�... �+� /r�„ y � • � ',� �P,� �S �,�,in �. ' � �.�` ��D) � ..�' �� i * , � 1 �� •f�' - � ' --�---- y a� ,� �, �'�. f �,,��I � 1� �,, � � - �, ; �- � ,: � w r k °n 1 r r 1 . ,,�A �� . r^ t �. �=�� t �'.. `+.. l�k�`/ � ��, �� .�t f.i�j � 1 . ' ` a ;_ . '`- . .. - _ ""- -. .. .. . . �. �. � _ 'k ` � � / �f ��!� �- *� '�, '+� � �; ,`YrF�I. � �w. � ti \ �� r • �� _,,, ; �',, y d?" �4,�. �, ��\ � 11' .�� ' �,'�� + �:tir 1. -` , _� �_. �'}G'r;(A � t7�J�' � \ ' ' 't' A�` a� �1� , �` �' � `A` � • �.� 4 . ', 1 � �� ` 1 j , �k �(�''_ ,�; '•�. • ` '� �� '' C= A'�T�-�? � -----° � ;-_ , `�, • �y, cS' t . 1 `.a . _ . . +� ` � , . �. - � . . . � , 4 r , `�. , . . ti � ,;,,, �� , , �.. �, , �� s . �:� � �s f, � � � �, � . .'t. ' .l�z r n, +, r'�,o�¢�� s \ . . ❑ ' Ct ?", '�, �', , . . — 1 .i . �.r .:i �, � ' 'i �`'�.� ,�' t� ��s, �� ;', �.Ft!;z_� � "`� �r� i� ' �'v` ` ,,� 1 F L�lf � r ' .� -�.��n� �,�, ��ki ��,� �' � `'�,,�: i ''� A ,� �, � t'� r , Ca ' � ; ' �h' ' �� 1', ' � '1 �� '�; �' uv , �'' (� � ❑ �� •r �'�! ' �ii :� i �� 1 , �.1� ••• �, - - - - � � � �� Base Map: The Thomas Guide Digital Edition San Bernardino and Riverside, 2004, Not To Scale ' Project No. O Motor Car Parkway 0�,� ' Street Improvement �ITE LOCATION 600333 Investigation Mqp Date ' Riverside County, California March 2004 Figure No.1 � �� ;€ 4 � � ' ._._ . ........ ...... ..� � ; : J � � �— , ? p 1 f. 1 . � f �` ° _ / f ' �1 �\ �. � � - . . . _. . _ . ._ _ � , -_. _ _. - __� .... � �l,, � /� l, � F � ----Z /�-. ._. . 1 - �1 _,, f. _ ._� � � ,� . ^ _ �, ;- � • . ..� , � , , �: /r � �.. ._ µv_' Y_'��m'_.w.-.�i ° .�..- f i_. �..,,/ i_. _!i ° �` . �' �_ t.__ 7 ' w. � _-. . S� .✓ ' � � ' . r - - - _. L. ._,..{ ......... . �.... ..__ � - r � ,/ t . _ _ � Y �� R I Sf . • 5 :�.� :., � .._.�. _..__ .. . , .. _ °_ .../ � L..., � s , � i . � _ ::,;e �.�. _... j t I z f 1� - - - f- - - � � €; i }: � � � `1, • :�,. • ,li.___ (: €� y �....._ ,�._..._..,.._.._....._ __ . .�_.......� �' �.. . � � �3 € I i l - -'�= _ � _ �_ �- - �= - _- �� - V � - S -�- -�.�_ -�r� ��_ _" _�_ _ ° _ _.....,._......_ �� € . �. ' y 1 , ' _'; �' ' ° �� _ .- _ '�__._-- _ _� __ ___�_ARKWA _" _ �. _�_ _ --- _m._. _ _ _ _ _ � ; ' . - � - - Mf) T �� A P Y � �,� ; r ` �.' � �_ _ — _ _ M ,;. �.� r - -- -�.- , . � .� - � _ _. � l '. / ° . "'�, " '/� "��t��} x- �:�:..�.;». '., „..�.:�v,: ... �a_.��.: � 1� (f .�, �b. _..._ ._.._ 3 : �?P7�. Cr"' 7�.'._.: n: � _ ,`'� : ._��' __ "' � ►�`-`",., i t . . R I'� ,r ir ..�. J. 4 T , ' h �� \� (} •�� . � .. ��' �1 � . n �I " � }�� i � '+�* i;� `� i� � j 3 ; STR/PING LEGEND 1 � . � } _ �' � � ' , � ( � �: ` ,i �' � � rQ auvr e saa »,«rE aivv�uz� ur� lo�,.u� .�a, € i i: Y � s � " _;� �! � s 0 Auvr r�' ooue�e rFUOw wm+ J' e�.�c ca+rm srxroe (oEUn. tr) � � ` E ii 1 i 0 v�wr rs' sttro inarE u�ar ur�E � � � � � � il 1 � ? Q vwwr �Rrrow' 1wartu�c (�rv� M1J) I�A � � � .I � I€� � i l� � 0 HW! 51fa°� SiA PAYEXfM WRKMaG � ,`.+ � �* �� 1 Z �� E i � PAN/ i1HFAD' S70. PAYEYE/Vf �MIWOMG ' �� } � Q akscui sww ps ��al e r�asr (vfx an sra) • I I -� j ; `� ��: ( � � aauorFUt nnsra�rc t�onsucrm�c smwaac wrrrr m� '' ' wt� s�eusravc as aaEC�v er n�' ow�vgx a tNE F�to , ��.� t �i � � i w r• � � . t 1� j SIOW S'liN STD S/OW ANEAD 5lpV5 ARE M' MNMN/M. ` f�l I � i� 0 v�wr �• amarav wrme t� � (oErac 0 � . � �� j� : t . � v.wr s• wrMre r.v+E ur� (�oar�v a�r�c ae) � �� I�I� I �.-- 3 tl � �` ��l iE� � � ` • ' E � �� I E '+`� i � � ' � [� F � � . t E� � ; } i � t � � � � j� i � + +�q* � � � �! � ' S � a '' , /� � ;�� . / � � ; / II� � � '�� i � . . �� . __ __ v... .. ..� � _ ....__/ / . �°i -___. ._ T_ . _. ._.. _.. _.. ._.. .�.. _�. ._. _._ ........ ......_. ......_ ......... ..._... ......... _.___ .__ .___ __ .._._ ...._ w____. .__ _.. .._.. _._ __ __, ._. .... ___. _.._._.. .....__ _.._ _..._ __ .._..._ .___ ._.._. __. _ � ......... .._. ._. _ __- r -_. �� .. - -` , -.� .�--� �-� � � � :.w.�_, .__ ._....�...._ __ .___. _ ____._ ._ _..________ �.__ ____________. _ ._..�. _._.____ ____-_-_ - - - - z - - - - 1 � - - ' - - - - - - - �� — — '� — r — —� — '� — � — —N�--- — - - - --�— '�� ' - - - - - - - - - � � __ , __ _ YNEZ ROAD _ �_ _..._ _. ____ __ _�.___ _ �.___ _ . _ . . . - -- --- - -- --- - -- - _ _ .�._. . _ _ _.. �_� � -� -� _ _ _ _ __ ___ _. ..__. _ _ __ __. _ ____ -- _ _- ___ _ _ __ __ _ �_ _ . ..... .. _.. � _. _ �_ _ -- -._ _ _-_____-- .... ... .... ...... .. . _...._____----_ _ ______--______________.. ---_____-__..._____�_ ___ _ — _______________ ___ __� ____.__ _ _ __._.__________ _____ ___, .�.. - _�_ _ - - �- �_________________________ � �` � � = f' � STRIPING NOTES , i �: ' ,. „�,� � �� ,� ,� � �,�,a„ ,�„� � �� „�, �.. .�„�,. ,�. � ��.�� LEGEND ""°'� �.` w'�" `�" � "` °E',�''�'� � ' BORING LOCATION MAP �� '� a'WS A-ZO ANO A-pM 7D A-?ID. „ � �o o zo eo �20 `y Motor Car Parkway � � �� PA �� ` � aa�o�o er �r savoecASnn� aR u�rrion aavaio�n ev n+E �z � B -6 Approximate Location of � , �� , � � y �� 1 . � �. City of Temecula r� an r,vm. Riverside County, Califomia Exploratory Boring th1S s ,� ��,� ��, �,� GRAPHIC SCAL£ ' Fi ure 2 a � S�p�+ �� V� �ED PAYYEAIEM /NRICERS PER MW.M,ABLE EM � investigation �.� �,� ENGINEERING VENTURES n�c. Project No. 600333-001 Scale: Not to Scale � � p�� yy � ��, ��,� � � �, �� . � � sre urour (ar varorr ro � srnrrc urm et.urnnra • etva m+cn�eau+a Engineer/Geologist: AXTIRFR Date: Maroh 2004 utm svRVExrtic s ro o a� �(sj a� �'� ro�a �vNn�carTMV,wv°�r. rcuc ee � ' r. aseo0 �0! PJ6 CY.. pOt • SO�i.911 fr aieW � LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. °`�.�.� °�°° a►,�: lEi� � � coNSnevcrtoN nscoau n�ra er �oers �oco wn smrca �uas SCALE �"°°�0jr� neaao•a e� �.o �s ce«�a e� x.��.naw er• �u: CITY OF TE�vtECULA z�r-oe.a.` s.x.a a.r.r � Horisonfel Shw Plm� �ms Prspared Uader SL� Supm�ldo¢ m: STRIPING PLAN G+ � � MOTOR CAR PARKWAY V � �� 1" = l00' e 4 u/7yb rt Dnts g�: &, �� v CIVI�. RANDOIPH P. FIEI�rG. RCS � 9axun r. cam�.�ms ar waac �a� Deta: � PFFaMED itM: N/A �o�� s.cs. No. �sea� s:v�r�: iz-si-oe acs. Na. ie�s� s��.: e-so-zooa �iORM REEVES SUPER GROUP sna.c e or e ' • 600333-001 March 4, 2004 ' APPENDDC A References , American Concrete Institute, ACI, 1985, Manual of Concrete Practice Part 3, Use of Concrete in � Buildings-Design, Specifications and Related topics. Blake T.F., 2000a, EQSEARCH, A Computer Program for the Estimation of Peak Horizontal � Acceleration from Southern California Historical Earthquake Catalogs, Users Manual. , Blake T.F., 2000b, EQFAULT, A Computer Program for the Deterministic Prediction of Peak " Horizontal Acceleration from Digitized California Faults, User's Manual, 77pp. ' Blake T.F., 2000c, FRISKSP, Version 3.01 Computer Programs, for Determining the Probabilistic Horizontal Acceleration, User's Manual, 99pp. ' Blake, T.F., 2000d, UBCSEIS, Version 1.0, User's Manual for Evaluating the Seismic Parameters _ in accordance with the 1997 UIBC, 53pp. � Engineering Ventures, Inc., 2003, Striping Plan for Motor Car Parkway, Sheet 6 of 6, dated December 9, 2003. � International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO), 1997, Uniform Building Code, Volume I- Administrative, Fire- and Life-Safety, and Field Inspection Provisions, Volume II - Structural Engineering Design Provisions, and Volume III - Material, Testing and 1 Installation Provision, ICBO. , � � , � , ♦ ' A-1 � Leighton ' GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG 6-1 Date 2-25-04 Sheet 1 of 1 � Project Temecula Auto Park Project No. 600333-001 Drilling Co. Cal Pac Type of Rig B-61 Hole Diameter 8" Drive Weight 140 Ibs Drop 30" , Elevation Top of Hole +/. ' Location See Map _ ° � �' �►� N" DESCRIPTION " � °� �� _ � � N o c _�,' �� ' >LL a RJ o a o� p a y� c�� o � � C9 Z � m � a g o �o� Logged By SER a w N a � U � v Sampled By SER � ' � .� . SP ARTIFICIAL FILL BY OTHERS (Afo) • . C��ace: 3.5" AC � 3.5-14.5": Base , � 14.5": Brown, very moist, medium dense, fine to coarse SAND 1 39 118.9 11.4 UATERNARY PAUBA FORMATION • Bulk 3@ 2.5': Light brown, very moist, medium dense, Sne to coarse SAND RV . . 2 _�� ' S ,�• 2 42 SP @ 5': Light brown, moist, medium dense, fine to coarse SAND with •.• 112.2 6.9 mica flakes, friable ' •.� .• 4 55 @ 7.5': Light brown, moist, medium dense, fine to coarse SAND with mica flakes, friable � 10 ... ,, 5 54 111.6 7.6 @ 10': Lig6t brown to brown, moist, medium dense, fine to coarse SAND with mica flakes, friable ' , IS Total Depth 12' No Groundwater Encountered BackSlled with Native and AC Patch 2-25-04 � r 20 � , Z5 � , SAMPLE TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: � SU SULFATE HCO HYDROCOLLAPSE CS CORROSION SUITE �j.:••� S SPLIT SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE HD HYDROMETER MC MOISTURE CONTENT DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS SE SAND EQUIVALENT `�' �'�'" R RING SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE c• B BULK SAMPLE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY AL ATTERBERG LIMITS -200 200 WASH '.�'� CN CONSOLIDATION EI EXPANSION INDEX RDS Remolded DS .� �'?�` , T TUBE SAMPLE CR CORROSION RV R-VALUE LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. 1 ' GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-2 Date 2-25-04 Sheet 1 of 1 � Project Temecula Auto Park Project No. 600333-001 Drilling Co. Cal Pac Type of Rig B-61 Hole Diameter 8" Drive Weight 140 Ibs Drop 30" ' Elevation Top of Hole +/_ ' Location See Map o � z ° w•N �� ,'" DESCRIPTION � R� c,� n,a � � 3o c'� r c t°��j � ' G! U �� p R z G. � p G' O = Vy � C9 � m° � a go o� Logged By SER °� W � a � U N � Sampled By SER � , 0 SM ARTIFICIAL FILL BY OTHERS (Afo) Su ace: 5" AC 5-17": Base 17": Brown, moist, dense to medium dense, silty, fine to medium , AND 1 6 98.0 24.3 ML UATERNARY PAUBA FORMATION Bulk 3@ 2.5': Yel ow- rown to brown, moist, me ium stif� sandy SILT; RV 2-7' highly weathered ' S 2 16 @ 5': Yellow-brown to brown, moist, stif�SILT; scattered root casts 96.3 29.5 � • 4 49 SP @ 7.5': Top of Sample- Light brown, moist, medium dense, fine to .• .• . ___ 114.1 12.6 i medium SAND; sli ht� friable_ — ---- -- -- -- -- — ML Bottom of Sample- Ye low-brown, moist, stif� sandy SILT r �o ___ _ �� .� _ ____ __ __ __ __ __ 5 42 M/M @ 10' Yellow-brown, moist, medium dense, silty, very Sne to medium SAND with scattered pebbles to sandy SILT , ' 15 Total Depth 12' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled with Native and AC Patch 2-25-04 ' ' 20 , ' 25 , SAMPLE TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: "�` SU SULFATE HCO HYDROCOLLAPSE CS CORROSION SUITE �:'••:� 5 SPLIT SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE HD HYDROMETER MC. MOISTURE CONTENT DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS SE SAND EQUIVALENT `� �. R RING SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY B BUIK SAMPLE AL ATTERBERG LIMITS -200 200 WASH , T TUBE SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION EI EXPANSION INDEX RDS Remolded DS CR CORROSION RV R-VALUE LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. 1 ' GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-3 Date 2-25-04 Sheet 1 of 1 , Project Temecula Auto Park Project No. 600333-001 Drilling Co. Cai Pac Type of Rig B-61 Hole Diameter 8" Drive Weight 140 Ibs Drop 30" � Elevation Top of Hole +�_ ' Location See Map �� _ � � �, •_ �Y ��; DESCRIPTION � ' >�► �� g o a oLL °��, na�i UV o LL L� �J � _N � � t7 Z � m °� � �o �o� Logged By SER n. w � a � U �� Sampled By SER � , s 0 SC ARTIFICIAL FILL BY OTHERS Afo Sur ace: 4" AC 4"-1': Base , — _ — — — — — — — — 1': Brown, moist, medium dense, clayey SAND — — — — — — 1 10 116.1 14.0 SGCL @ 2.5': Dark brown to brown, moist, loose to medium stif� clayey Bulk 2@ SAND to sandy CLAY RV 2-5' ' S � Obstruction Encountered, Total Depth 5' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled with Native and AC Patch 2-25-04 ' 10 ' ' 15 1 ' 20 ' , 25 � SAMPLE TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: '� HCO HYDROCOLLAPSE CS CORROSION SUITE S SPLIT SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE SU SULFATE HD HYDROMETER MC M013TURE CONTENT �' R RING SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS SE SAND EQUIVALENT `r;� B BULK SAMPLE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY AL ATTERBERG LIMITS -200 200 WASH , T TUBE SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION EI EXPANSION INDEX RDS Remolded DS CR CORROSION RV R-VALUE LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. 1 , GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-3A Date 2-25-04 Sheet 1 of 1 � Project Temecula Auto Park Project No. 600333-001 Drilling Co. Cal Pac Type of Rig B-61 Hole Diameter 8" Drive Weight 140 Ibs Drop 30" , Elevation Top of Hole +/_ ' Location See Map � � ° � N �� N� DESCRIPTION " �� o s °� a� 3° a � i '� � c `—°�j �" ' �� Q �� Z a o� o o- ' c C�� ° C7 £ m � �+ go 'o� Logged By SER °1 W N a p U �`'' � 1 s Sampled By SER F 0 SM ARTIFICIAL FILL BY OTHERS Afo �� Sur ace: 4" AC 4"-1': Base 1': Brown, moist, medium dense, silty, fine to coarse SAND; slightly � clayey SC UATERNARY PAUBA FORMATION (Qa) ' g 4': Brown; moist, dense, clayey SAND 1 27 5': Dark brown to brown, mo�st, medium dense, clayey SAND; iron 122.7 12.5 oxide staining present � 2 29 CL @ 7.5': Brown, moist, very stif� sandy CLAY; scattered pebbles, iron 125.6 12.1 oxide staining present � 10 . ---- -- -- 23-8 Tl.� -- ---------------------------- 3 53 SC @ 10': Brown, moist, medium dense, clayey SAND � ' IS Total Depth 12' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled with Native and AC Patch 2-25-04 ' ' 20 ' � 25 � SAMPLE TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: � HCO HYDROCOLLAPSE CS CORROSION SUITE S SPLIT SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE SU SULFATE HD HYDROMETER MC MOISTURE CONTENT �� R RING SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS SE SAND EQUIVALENT ':�� B BULK SAMPLE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY AL ATTERBERG LIMITS -200 200 WASH ..`...� ' T TUBE SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION EI EXPANSION INDEX RDS Remolded DS CR CORROSION RV R-VALUE LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. 1 , GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-4 Date 2-25-04 Sheet 1 of 1 ' Project Temecula Auto Park Project No. 600333-001 Drilling Co. Cal Pac Type of Rig B-61 Hole Diameter 8" Drive Weight 140 Ibs Drop 30" � Elevation Top of Hole +/_ ' Location See Map o � Z y +�' 'N �� N� DESCRIPTION � � y " w� r rn a�'i a► 3g =�- w= `—°t� o >� �u�. R� C o- � O a y:: V�j W � C9 Z � m a � g o �o� Logged By SER a � s � � U � Sampled By SER � 0 SM ARTIFICIAL FILL BY OTHERS (Afo) �� Surface: 4" AC 4-11' : Base 11 ": Red-brown, moist, medium dense, silty, very Sne to medium , AND with scattered ebbles 1 34 122.4 12.8 CL UATERNARY PAUBA FORMATION Bulk 3@ 2.5': Dark red-brown, moist, very sti sandy CLAY RV 2-7' I 5 ---- -- -- -- -- -- ------ -------- •' 2 41 SP @ 5': Brown, moist, medium dense, fine to medium SAND ' • ' 114.0 12.3 , 4 45 SM @ 7.5': Red-brown, moist, medium dense, silty, fine to coarse SAND 121.5 11.1 10 :'. : •� ---- -- -- ?D:3 I8.2 -- =--------------------------- ' S 33 ML @ 10': Olive-brown, moist, stiff, sandy SILT , ' 15 Total Depth 12' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled with Native and AC Patch 2-25-04 1 , 20 , � 25 ' SAMPLE TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: "�'" SU SULFATE HCO HYDROCOLLAPSE CS CORROSION SUITE �°:� S SPLIT SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE HD HYDROMETER MC MOISTURE CONTENT R RING SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS SE SAND EQUIVALENT `�. �. B BUIK SAMPLE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY AL ATTERBERG LIMITS -200 200 WASH ',;;."� � T TUBE SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION EI EXPANSION INDEX RDS Remolded DS CR CORROSION RV R-VAIUE LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. � ' GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-5 Date 2-25-04 Sheet 1 of 1 � Project Temecula Auto Park Project No. 600333-001 Drilling Co. Cai Pac Type of Rig B-61 Hole Diameter 8" Drive Weight 140 Ibs Drop 30" Elevation Top of Hole +/_ ' Location See Map i � o � � Z N � 'N d� ��; DESCRIPTION � , >� �� o a o� p��' n° v o �"' O �'� z E md �, go �o� Logged By SER � W S � a � U � v Sampled By SER �' ' o SM ARTIFICL�L FILL BY OTHERS (Afol Sur ace: 4" AC 4"-1': Base 1': Brown, moist to very moist, medium dense, silty, Sne to medium � SAND 1 20 110.1 10.5 @ 2.5': Brown, moist, medium dense, silty, very fine to medium �• Bulk 3@ SAND; scattered pebbles RV . 2-7' ' S 2 29 ML UATERNARY PAUBA FORMATION 98.6 18.0 5': Yellow-brown to brown, moist, stif� sandy SILT; scattered sand pods ' 4 29 @ 7.5': Gray-brown, moist, stiff SILT ' 10 5 34 1003 23.2 @ 10': Gray-brown, moist, stif�SILT; mottling present , ' 15 Total Depth 12' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled with Native and AC Patch 2-25-04 � � 20 � � 25 � , SAMPLE TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS; � SU SULFATE HCO HYDROCOLLAPSE CS CORROSION SUITE a�> S SPLIT SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE HD HYDROMETER MC MOISTURE CQNTENT R RING SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS SE SAND EQUIVALENT `��• B BULK SAMPLE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY AL ATTERBERG IIMITS -200 200 WASH , T TUBE SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION EI EXPANSION INDEX RDS Remolded DS CR CORROSION RV R-VALUE LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. � t GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-6 Date 2-25-04 Sheet 1 of 1 , Project Temecula Auto Park Project No. 600333-001 Drilling Co. Cal Pac Type of Rig B-61 Hole Diameter 8" Drive Weight 140 Ibs Drop 30" , Elevation Top of Hole +/_ ' Location See Map o � � Z .� •N �� y� DESCRIPTION � � l0 � c'� c'� ''�' a o� p�i N«� U�Ujj o � OC W� � (� z � m a � � o �o� Logged By SER � � � U Nv Sampled By SER � ' o SM ARTIFICIAL FILL BY OTHERS Afo Sur ace: 4" AC 4"-P� Base 1': Brown, moist, medium dense, silty, very fine to medium SAND; � cattered ebbles 1 31 102.5 20.9 UATERNARY PAUBA FORMATION .• • Bulk 3@ 2.5': Gray-brown to light rown, moist, medium dense to dense, RV �• 2-7' silty, fine to medium SAND , 5 ---- — -- -- — ------ — — --- — -- 2 31 ML @ 5': Gray-brown, moist, stiff to hard, sandy SILT; scattered sand 90.1 33.1 pods ' • 4 45 108.8 9.9 SP @ 7.5': Top of Sample- White, moist, medium dense, fine to medium . . •---- -- --- -- -- -- mSAND�fnable ---------------- — SM Bottom of Sample- Gray-brown, moist, medium dense, silty, very fine to medium SAND ' 10 ---- — 5 37 1 ITi.B CL @ 10': Gray-brown, moist, very sti� sandy CLAY � � 15 Total Depth 12' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled with Native and AC Patch 2-25-04 , ' 20 , � 25 � SAMPLE TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: "�' SU SULFATE HCO HYDROCOLIAPSE CS CORROSION SUITE �'� S SPLIT SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE DS DIRECT SHEAR HD HYDROMETER MC MOISTURE CONTENT R RING SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE SA SIEVE ANALYSIS SE SAND EQUIVALENT �'�. . B BULK SAMPLE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY AL ATTERBERG LIMITS -200 200 WASH ��%�: :;.:,, , CN CONSOLIDATION EI EXPANSION INDEX RDS Remolded DS '''�.'•'s T TUBE SAMPLE CR CORROSION RV R-VALUE LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. � � 600333-001 March 4, 2003 � APPENDIX C , Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results , "R"-Value The resistance "R"-value was determmed by the Cahfornia Matenals Method No. 301 ' for subgrade soils. Three samples were prepared and exudation pressure and "R"-value determined on each one. The graphically determined "R"-value at exudation pressure of 300 psi is summanzed in the table below: � Sample Location Sample Description R-Value ' B-1 @ 2-7' Brown silty SAND 59 B-2 @ 2-T Brown clayey SAND 10 ' B-3 @ 2-5' Brown clayey SAND 22 B-4 @ 2-7' Red brown clayey SAND 22 ' B-5 @ 2-7' Brown silty SAND 48 B-6 @ 2-7' Brown silty SAND 19 � 1 ' � ' , � � ' C-1 ' , LEIGHTON. CONSULTING INC , ' GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING. SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROUGH GRADING ' 1.0 General 1.1 Intent: These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are for the grading and ' earthwork shown on the approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the geotechnical report(s). These Specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report(s). In case of conflict, the specific recommendations in the ' geotechnical report shall supersede these more general Specifications. Observations of the earthwork by the project Geotechnical Consultant during the course of gading may result in new or revised recommendations that could supersede these specifications or the , recommendations in the geotechnical report(s). 1.2 The Geotechnical Consultant of Record: Prior to commencement of work, the owner. shall ' employ the Geotechnical Consultant of Record (Geotechnical Consultant). The Geotechnical Consultants shall be responsible for reviewing the approved geotechnical . report(s) and accepting the adequacy. of the preliminary geotechnical findings, conclusions, ' and recommendations prior to the commencement of the grading. Prior to commencement of grading, the Geotechnical Consultant shall review the °work � , plan" prepared by. the Earthwork Contractar (Contractor) and schedule sufficient personnel to perform the appropriate level of observation, mapping, and compaction testing. , During the grading and earthwork operations, the Geotechnical Consultant shall observe, map, and document the subsurface exposures to verify the geotechnical design assumptions. If the observed conditions are found to be significantly. different than the � interpreted assumptions during the design phase, the Geotechnical Consultant shall inform the owner, recommend appropriate changes in design to accommodate the observed conditions, and notify the review. agency where required. Subsurface areas to be geotechnically observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested include natural ground � after it has been cleared for receiving fill but before fill is placed, bottoms of all "remedial removal" areas, all key bottoms, and benches made on sloping ground to. receive fill. � The Geotechnical Consultant shall observe the moisture-conditioning and processing of the subgade and fill materials and perform relative compaction testing of fill to deternune the attained level of compaction. 'The Geotechnical Consultant shall provide the test results to , the owner. and the Contractor on a routine and frequent basis. ' 1.3 The Earthwork Contractor:. . T'he Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, experienced, and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparation and processing of gound to receive fill, moisture-conditioning and processing of fill, and compacting fill. � The Contractor. shall review and accept the plans, geotechnical report(s), and these Specifications prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for. performing the grading in accordance with the plans and specifications. ' The Contractor. shall prepare and submit to. the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant a work plan that indicates the sequence of earthwork grading, the number of "spreads" of � 3030.1094 , ' Leighton Consulting, Inc. • GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS , Page 2 of 6 � work and the estimated quantities of daily earthwork contemplated for the site. prior to commencement of gading. The Contractor shall inform the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant of changes in work schedules and updates to the.work plan at least 24 hours in ' advance of such changes so that appropriate observations and tests can be planned and accomplished. The Contractor. shall not assume that the Geotechnical Consultant is aware of all grading operations. ' The Contractor shall have the sole responsibility. to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the earthwork in accordance with the applicable grading codes and , agency ordinances, these Specifications, and the recommendations in the approved geotechnical report(s) and grading plan(s). If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Consultant, unsatisfactory. conditions, such as unsuitable soil, improper moisture condition, ' inadequate compaction, insufficient buttress key size, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifications, tbe-Geotechnical Consultant. shall reject the work and may recommend to the owner. that construction be stopped_until ' the conditions are rectified. ' 2.0 Preparation of Areas to be Filled 2.1 Clearing and GrubbinQ: Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots, and other deleterious material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed of in a method acceptable to , the owner, governing agencies, and the Geotechnical Consultant. The Geotechnical Consultant shall evaluate the extent of these. removals depending on ' specific site conditions. Earth fill material shall not contain more than 1 percent of organic . materials (by. voltune). No fill lift shall contain more than 5. percent of organic matter. Nesting of the organic materials shall not be allowed. � If potentially hazardous materials are encountered, the Contractor shall stop work in the affected area and a hazardous material specialist shall be informed immediately for proper , evaluation and handling of these materials prior to continuing to work in that area. As presently. defined by the State of California, most refined petroleum products (gasoline, , diesel fuel, motor. oil, grease, coolant, etc.) have chemical constituents that are considered to. be hazardous waste. As such, the indiscriminate dumping or spillage of these fluids onto the ground may. constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or. imprisonment, ' and shall not be allowed. , ' ' 3030.1094 � r Leighton Consulting, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS ' Page 3. of 6 ' 2.2 Processin�: Existing ground that has been declared satisfactory. for support of fill by the Geotechnical Consultant shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6. inches. Existing ground that not satisfactory shall be overexcavated as specified in the following section. � Scarification shall continue until soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features that would inhibit uniform compaction. ' 2.3 Overexcavation: In addition to removals and overexcavations recommended in the approved geotechnical report(s) and the grading plan, soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy, , organic-rich, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be overexcavated to competent ground as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. , 2.4 Benchin�: Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1. (horizontal to vertical units), the ground shall be stepped or. benched._. Please see the Standard Details.. for. a graphic illustration. . The lowest bench or key shall be a minimum of 15: feet.wide and ' at least 2 feet deep, into competent material as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant. Other benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet into competent material or as otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. Fill placed on gound sloping ' flatter than 5:1 shall also be benched or. otherwise overexcavated to. provide a flat subgade for. the filL 2.5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas: . All areas to receive fill, including removal and , processed areas, key bottoms, and benches, shall be observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by. the Geotechnical Consultant as suitable to receive fill. The Contractor. shall obtain a written acceptance from the Geotechnical Consultant ' prior to fill placement. . A licensed surveyor shall provide. the survey control for . - deternuning elevations of processed areas, keys, and benches. , 3.0 Fill Material ' 3.1 General: Material to be used as fill shall be essentially free of organic matter and other deleterious substances evaluated and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptable gradation, high , expansion potential, or low strength shall be placed in areas acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory. fill material. ' 3.2 Oversize: Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 8 inches, shall not be buried or placed in fill unless location, materials, and placement methods are �specifically accepted by. the Geotechnical Consultant. ' Placement operations shall be such that nesting of oversized material does not occur and such that oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill.. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10. vertical feet of finish grade or. within 2 feet ' of future utilities or underground construction. 3.3 Import: If importing of fill matenal is required for grading, proposed import material shall ' 3030,1094 , ' Leighton Consulting, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS ' Page 4. of 6 ' meet the requirements of Section 3.1. The potential import source shall be given to the Geotechnical Consultant at least 48 hours (2 working days) before importing begins so that its suitability can be deternuned and appropriate tests performed. ' 4.0 Fill Placement and Compaction � 4.1 Fill Layers: Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill (per Section 3.0) in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thiclrness. . The , Geotechnical Consultant may accept thicker. layers if testing indicates the grading procedures can adequately compact the thicker layers. Each layer shall be spread evenly and mixed thoroughly. to attain relative unifornuty of material and moisture throughout. ' 4.2 Fill Moisture ConditioninQ: Fill soils shall be watered, dried back, blended, and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a relatively. uniform moisture content at or slightly over optimum: ' Maximum density. and optimum soil moisture content_ tests shall be performed in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM Test Method D 1557-91). ' 4.3 Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been moisture-conditioned, mixed, and evenly spread, it shall be uniformly compacted to not less than 90. percent of maJCimum dry density (ASTM Test Method D1557-91). Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be � either. specifically. designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability to efficiently achieve the specified level of compaction with unifornuty. , 4.4 Compacrion of Fill Slopes:: In addition to. normal compaction procedures specified above, compaction of slopes shall be accomplished by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at increments of 3. to 4 feet in fill elevation, or. by. other methods producing , satisfactory. results acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant. Upon completion of grading, relative compaction of the fill, out to. the slope face, shall be at least 90 percent of maximum density. per ASTM Test Method D 1557-91. r 4.5 Comnaction Testing: Field tests for moisture content and relative compaction of the fill soils shall be performed by the Geotechnical Consultant. . Location and frequency of tests , shall be at the Consultant's discretion based on field conditions encountered. Compaction test locations will not necessarily. be selected on a random basis. Test locations shall be selected to verify adequacy of compaction levels in areas that are judged to be prone to , inadequate compaction (such as close to slope faces and at the filUbedrock benches). 4.6 Frequencv of Compaction Testing:. Tests shall be taken at intervals not exceeding 2 feet in ' vertical rise and/or. 1,000 cubic yards of compacted fill soils embankrnent. In addition, as a guideline, at least one test shall be taken on slope faces for each 5,000 square feet of slope face and/or each 10. feet of vertical height of slope. The Contractor shall assure that fill ' construction is such that the testing schedule can be accomplished by. the Geotechnical Consultant. . The Contractor shall stop or slow. down the earthwork construction if these minimum standards are not met. , . 3030.1094 , ' Leighton Consulting, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 5 of 6 ' 4.7 Compaction Test Locations:. The Geotechnical Consultant shall document the approximate ' elevation and horizontal coordinates of each test location. . The Contractor shall coordinate with the project surveyor to assure that sufficient grade stakes are. established so that the Geotechnical Consultant can determine the test locations with sufficient accuracy. -. At a. ' minimum, two grade stakes within a horizontal distance of 100 feet and vertically. less than 5 feet apart from potential test locations shall be provided. ' S.0 Subdrain Installation ' Subdrain systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved geotechnical report(s), the grading plan, and the Standard Details. . The Geotechnical Consultant may recommend additional subdrains and/or changes in subdrain extent, location, grade, or material depending on conditions ' encountered during grading. All subdrains shall be surveyed by a land surveyor/civil engineer. for line and grade after installation and prior to burial. Sufficient time should be allowed by. the Contractor for these surveys. 1 6.0 Excavation O Excavations, as well as over-excavation for remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. . Remedial removal depths shown on geotechnical plans are estimates only. . The actual extent of removal shall be detemuned by the Geotechnical , Consultant based on the field evaluation of exposed conditions during grading. . Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded, the cut portion of the slope shall be made, evaluated, and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement of materials for. construction of the fill portion of the , slope, unless othenvise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. ' 7.0 Trench Bacldlls 7.1 The Contractor shall follow. all OHSA and CaUOSHA requirements for safety. of trench ' excavations. 7.2 All bedding and backfill of utility trenches shall be done in accordance with the applicable , provisions of Standard Specificarions of Public Works Construction. Bedding material shall have a Sand Equivalent greater than 30 (SF>30). The bedding shall be placed to 1 foot over the top of the conduit and densified by jetting. Bacicfill shall be placed and ' densified to. a minimum of 90 percent of maximum from 1 foot above the top of the conduit to the surface. , 73 The jetting of the bedding around the conduits shall be observed by the Geotechnical Consultant. ' 7.4 The Geotechnical Consultant shall test the trench bacl�ill for relative compaction. At least one test should be made for. every 300. feet of trench and 2 feet of fill. ' 3030.I094 , 1 Leighton Consulting, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 6. of 6 ' 7.5 Lift thickness of trench backfill shall not exceed those allowed in the Standard � Specifications of Public Works Construction unless the Conh can demonstrate to the Geotechnical Consultant . that . the fill lift can be . compacted to.. the minimum . relative compaction by his alternative equipment and method. ' ' , , ' ' � ' ' � , ' � ' ' 3030.1094 , _ � " — =-cauPAC� __- = ==—�LL— —�-- — -- 'T_ �� PROJE�7'Efl Pf.JWE ----__ '--?^`' 1 TO 1 MAbMtJ11A Fr'aC11A TOE --- --- —_ — — OF SLOP� TO AFPFiOV� GR�UND _-- 1= ?- �� iLL SLOPE � _r--- -- � �+ove NATURAL --�=--- -- 4' TYPlGL UNSi11TA8LE GROUND = �'- � �� _�—_= BE�IC}I �9E3rC7-1 ' " �X i1IN.-+°' HE3GFiT � �15' YIN.---� 2' WPL LOWEST HEHC}i K� f DEr�'TH �� I _ — t'.A�AFACTED="" �'� - — Flu==�'=-.=z� FiLL-0VEr�-CiJT __�_ = — ''�` SLOPE � Na�ru� -- — =_ — — 4' ��cu , GAQUND _??_ _ i � �' — � �.. BEi+I 7i � BEi�lC}�1 —= HE3GHT � �" =t`== � �� — •2% RIIfV.-+.— RE�t�VE � UNSUffABL � �+-1b' MIN.� �AAI'E�IAL . � � 1LlYYESTBEiNC}f • � 2' �flii. �'� KE7 DEr�T'H C3JT Fi�►Cf . . ' st�L s� �uoa , TO F1L PLACc'�AB�ff TO ASSURE C31T FACE A�ECUATE G��(.OGiC CIX�JDR7CNS TQ BE PFdCA TO F�l. PLACE31�tEalT / j . ' w�TURai. / CLlT-01/E�??-FiLL GAOUND / — SLOPE � • � // /� � OYEr'�BUIL7 AND ' F-- 7R1�1 BACX '�--- � !`_-_____ . For Subd�ains Se� DE51GN SLOP� !�� R � o � Standard Deta�1 C PfiWE�iED PLANE �-- —�Z — UNSUiTAHIE , 1 TO. 1 MA`AAAUM Fr'�M � _�_ � b1ATEft1AL TOE OF SLLP� TO =--r-_ APQf30VE7 C3F�OUND --z- 4' TYPfCAL �?--- -- � PACTED BENCN 8E'�C}i HE:GFR � j --�r�'iLL-- _L —� ------ gE�JG�ItNC3 SI�iALL 8E DONE VYHEaJ SLOPE3 —2x �IIN -+— MJCLE ZS Efll.WLTO CR GRE�TE� THAfV S:1 2' �11N. �s• MIAi. MtMMUM BE�! HE.'(�HT SrfAL.L BE 4 F'e=� ' � D � LOVYEST BE'V� MINIMUM F1LL WipTy SNAL(, gE 9 eF""'-� i . ' --- -. -_.. .__.___ CKE'f1 GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING � EYING AND BENCHING SPECIFICATIONS - � STANDARD DEi'AILS A Re,,. � 00 . _ � FINISH GRADE ' — — — _ — — — _ COMPACT� FILL —_— — — —_ _ — MIN. - — — SLOPEFACE ---- --_— -- — --- ---- — ----�-- —� �==� —`--- �� ' --- --� �-- — —�� -- --- �. — — — — — /— � — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — ' __ —_ _---Y—_ —__ _-_— _ — ---- — —_— _-- _L — � -- 10'-- —�/ — ---- —°-- �-o-- ---- —" =- — — — MIN. — — s� — — — — — — — — — 4� P — — — 15' MIN. _ — - - - _ - _ __ _� _ __ � _ _� = _'- _ _�--_ _-- __� __ 1 = ___ -�_� ------ -_ _ ---_�_---�- -_ _ _�� __ __-__= - -- OVERSIZE --- ---- --- � — —�--- — — WINDROW-------• _ �- - - - - - - - - - - - = - JETTED OR FLOODED APPROVED SOIL ' - - - - � ° Oversize rock Is larger than 8 inch� _ _ _ _ in largest dimension. • Backfili with approved soil jetted or — ' flooded in place to fill all the voids. � O � Do not bury rock within 10 fe� of _ _ _ _ _ _ � finish grade. — — - —_ o Windrow of buried rock shali be parellel to the finished slope face. ' SECTION A-A' ; - - - - - -PROFILE ALON6 WINDR�W � ------ -------------- - --- ------- - --�-- ----- -- --- - 0 0 0 --- �= �= =- ==� -= =-A' -__ -_-- = ==--_--- JEi�'ED OR FLOODED APPROVED SOIL OVERSIZE ROCIC DISPOSAL GENERAL EARTHWORKAND GRADING _ SPEQFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS B REV. 7 , ' NATURAL � ' GROUND ` / � � _ -- -- -- — ---_ _— ------ — \.� — — — — COMPACTED FILL — — — —% �� —�— ---- -- --- -- ' � r�� _ —'�� — — — �� — — — _ _ � i\� TYPICAL BENCHING �— ------� — — — — REMOVE ' \�� _ — �--��. \,�` UNSUITABLE MATERIAL � �� SUBDRAIN (See Aiternates A and B) � ' SUBDRAIN AL7ERNATE A P �� ROI�lD� FILTER MATERIAL W1TH FlLTER MAT82IAL FILTER MATERIAL SHALL BE CLA55 2 PHtMFA6LEMATERIALPERSTATEOF CALIFORNIA SfANDARD SPEQFICATION, OR APPROVED ALTERNATE FILTER MA?ERIAL (9FT �F'f) CLASS 2 GRADING AS FOLLOWS: ' _ Sieve S¢e Peroerrt Passirq 1" 100 ,� • .:� .; - 3/4" 90-100 �'� �n.cwea �s� 3/8" 40-100 No.4 z�� ' - �.��_ � ;` No. 8 1&33 � °� No.30 5-15 � 4" MIN '' •. . • No. 50 0 '� No.200 0-3 SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE A-1 � SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE A-2 PERFORATm PIPE � 6" D MIN. ' SUBDRAIN ALTERNA B DEfAIL �� CANYON SUBDRAIN TERMINAL ; , 3/4" GRAVEL WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC 12" MIN. OVERLAP Fws m Fn�nrne�c ,� (niRn�t iqwori FILTER FABRIC 10' MIN. 84G'�IlL AWfi�VED EQUNAIFNn � . (NIIRAFf 140NC OR ' _ APPROVED EQUNALEN'n . . 7 • F � � • ' ' �' . � � . . .�' 2% ! • f • AP ' 'e• � `. `• � 1S M1N. � 0' MIN. . ' SMW. PBttOPATED 3K'OPETIGRADEDGPAVa 3/4" MAX. GRAVEL OR r+or� �xraan.� 6'Rl r@J. ORMfROYED EQUNAIENT ALTERNAIE B-T qppROVED EQUNALENr ALTERNATE B-2 � 6 •° "�. (9Ff 3 /� ' C3 PERFORATED PIPE IS OPTIONAL PER GOVERNING AGENCY'S REQUIRQ�1ENT5 ' � GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING CANI��N SPECIFICATIONS , SUBDf�AAI�J STANDARD DEfAILS C ftev. % W ' � 15 MIN. � _ _ __ -'_ _=1` , OUTLET PIPES - � _ _ 4"� NON-PERFORATED PIPE, - -� 100' MAX. O.C. HORIZOM'ALLY - - - - - _ - - - - 30' MAX. 0. C. VERTICALLY -----_- � -� _- -� =�--2��o M�v. _ = BACKCUT ' . = � =- ___ ___ �- -- -__________ - BENCHING � �_- -_ =__ =- � ' _ —_ _ ___- - =___ � 1'f --� =__�_ = = __- - � -__ _ _�%MIN� ---- - � ' --------------- --- - -__- ---- =___----_ = SUBDRAINALTERNATEB - - - _=e.� 2% MIN. _ _' - - ' 15 MIN - MIN. 12" OVERLAP FROM7HETOP KEY DEPTH KEY WIDTH 2' MIN. S U BD RAIN ALTERNATE A Posinve sEa� srau� ae � �� FILTER FABRIC '. .:, a PROVIDED AT THE )OINT / ''` .��/ (MIRAFI 190 OR - APPROV� � CALTRANS QASS 2 ° �• EQUNALEN� FILTER MATERIAL (3FT3/F� 5 /o Il�� --� ' •. _ `. (NON-PERF �j ��\ i� ` � OUTLET PIPE ` _ (NON-PERFORATID) . .. . �" MIN. 3/4" ROCK (3FT3/F� W.RAPP� IN FILTB2 FABRIC / �" MIN. ' / T-CONNECTION FRCM COLLECTION PIPE TOOUTLEf PIPE . . ' • SUBDRAIN INSTALLATlON - Subdrain collector pipe shali be instailed wiifi perforations down or, , unless otherwise designated by the geotechnical consultant Ou�et pipes shail be non-perforated pipe. The subdrain pipe shall have at least 8 perforations uniformly spaced per foot Perforation shall be 1/4" to 1/2" if drilied holes are used. All subdrain pipes shail have a gradient at least 2% towards the , outlet 0 SUBDRAIN PIPE - Subdrain pipe shall be ASTM D2751, AS7M D1527 (Schedule 40) or SDR 23.5 ABS pipe � or ASTM D3034 (Schedule 40) or SDR 23.5 PVC pipe: .. All outiet pipe shall be placed in a trench and, after flll is placed above it, rodded to verify integrity. BUTTRESS OR GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING � REPL.ACEMENT FILL SPECIFICATIONS SUBDRAINS �TAPIDARD DETAILS D Rev: � , 1 ' CUT-FILL TRANSTlION LOT OVEREXCAVATION � ' REM(NE � UNSIIITABI.E � / � . GROUND � � / / ' I � 5' � / � MIN. / ' _ - - - .'-- - - - - - - - _�i - - - - - � \`/. — — -COMPACTED FIIL — — — — '`� � --- — — 4' MIN. ' — _— — — — — — — —i — — — ___ �'_ __ —> � -��-i' _ ___`_ \�� \� •--� ------ �'-- �------- � — — — — — � _ �\/•' over�xcavA -_ _ _ __,/ _ __ � AND RECOMPACT ' _ TYPICAL _ �_ �� BENCFQNG j — UNWEATHERED BEDROIX OR MATERIAL APPROVED `` `� i BY 7HE GEUfKHNIG�L CONSULTANT � � � :' SIDE HILL FILL FOR CUT PAD "aT�� GROUND � / / ✓ - / / / / / / e RESTRICTED USEAREA � / i � OVEREXCAVATE / / AND RECOMPACf � / FIrlISHEDCUf PPD ' (REPLACEMENTFILL) — — — — / -------�� ` \ .\ i\ \ \ : OVERBUROEN _ � _ _— — — � — . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . OR UNSUifABLE - - — — — — � ' MATERIAL —_—_— �� ' �— PAD OVEREXC�IVATION AND RECOMPACTIaN — � — — --_ �_ SHAIL BE PERFOFtMED IF SPEQFlED � — — — � - �/ i -� BY 7HE GEOTECHNICAL CCNSULTANT , __ � 1 _ BENChQNG \ � — / /�� _ 2°�? s,�q— — � SEE STANDARD DETAIL FOR SUBDRAINS ' WHEN REQUIRED BY GEQfECHNICPI CONSULTPNT 9' MIN. 2' M1N. � I�Y , DEPTH UNWEA11iERED BEDRACK OR MATERIAL APPROVED BY lHE GEaiECHNICPL CONSULTANT _.__.. 1 - TRANSITIOIV LOT FILLJ GENERAL EARTHWORK AND (,�L4DING SPECIFICATIONS I AND SIDE HILL FILLS srANOaR� a�r�t�s E Rev. 7 00 ' ' SUBDRAIN OPTIONS AND BACKFILL WHEN NATIVE MATERIAL HAS DCPANSION INDEX OF <,�0 OPTION 1: PIPE SURROUNDED W1TH , CtASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL OPTION 2: GRAVEL WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC WifH PROPER WIfH PROPER SURFACE DRAIIVAGE SURFACE DRAINAGE , SLAPE SLOPE OR LEVEL OR LEVEL 12 " 12" � � NATNE NATIVE WATERPROOFING , ' -: � (SEE GENERAL NOTES) � WATERPROOFING �'r . (SEE GENERAL NOTES) FICIER FABRIC , � 12" MINIMUM (SEE NOTE 4) ' �� 12" MINIMUM CLASS 2 PERMEABLE � � �1 t WEEP HOLE FILTER MAIERUU. WEEP HOLE Ya ro 1Yz mCH SIZE (SEE NOTE � (SEE GRADATION) (SEE NO?E 5) GRAVEL WRAPPED IN FATER 4 INCH DIAMEfER a ' FABRtC LEVELOR PERFORATEDPIPE LEVELOR SLOPE (SEE NOTE 3) g�,ppE � Class 2 Filter Permeabie Maberial Gradation Per Caltrans Specifications Sieve Size Percent Passing 1° 100 3/4" 90-100 3/8" 40-100 No.4 25-40 No. 8 18-33 No.30 5-15 No.50 0-7 No. 200 . 0-3 GENERAL NOTES: * Waterproofing should be provided where moisture nuisance p�oblem through the wall is undesirable. * Water proofing of the walis is not under purview of the geotechnical engineer * All drains should have a gradient of 1 percent minimum *Outlet portion of the subdrain shoufd have a 4-inch diameter solid pipe discharged into a suitable disposal area designed by the project engineer. The subdrain pipe should be accessible for maintenance (rodding) *Other subdrain bacld�'ill options are subject to the review by the geotechnical engineer and modification of design parameters. Notes: 1) Sand should have a sand equivalent of 30 or greater and may be densified by water jetting. 2) 1 Cu. ft. per ft. of 1/4- to 1 1/2-inch size gravel wrapped in filter fabric 3) Pipe type should be ASTM D1527 Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) SDR35 or ASTM D1785 Polyvinyl Chloride plastic (PVC), Schedule 40, Armco A2000 PVC, or approved equivalent. Pipe should be installed with perforations down. PerForations should be 3/8 inch.in diameter placed at the ends of a 120-degree arc in two rows at 3-inch on center (staggered) 4) Filter fabric should be Mirafi 140NC or approved equivalent. 5) Weephole should.be 3-inch minimum iliameter and provided at 10-foot maximum intervals. If exposure is permitted, weepholes should be located inches above finished grade. If exposure is not permitted such as for a wall adjacent to a sidewalk/curb, a pipe under the sidewalk to be discharged through the curb face or equivalent should be prnvided. For a basement-type wall, a proper subdrain outlet system should be provided. 6) Retaining wall plans should be r�viewed and approved by the geotechnical engineer. 7) Walls over six feet in height are subject to a special review by the geotechnical engineer and modifications to the above requirements. RETAINING WALL BACKFILL AND SUBDRAIN DETAIL FOR WALLS 6 FEET OR LESS IN HEIGHT WHEN NATIVE MATERIAL HAS DCPANSION INDIX OF <50 Rev. 7 00 : Figure No.