1997-5024 GRune V. Pham
James A. Laret, P.E.
2/26/97
#531
Xei( & iy Tomhany., tint.
CIVIL ENGINEERING • LAND PLANNING • SURVEYING • G.P.S. SURVEYING
DRAINAGE CALCS
OLIVENHAIN SELF - STORAGE
(CASE NO. 96 -032 MIN /DRN)
I -) r✓
Wayne W. Wheeler, P.L.S.
Dennis R. McCarty, P.L.S.
MAR U7 1991
ENGVNEEa1NGC1NITPS S
C4TY OF EN
This site lies on the south side of Olivenhain Road approximately 114 mile east of El
Camino Real. The site is currently being graded under a Stock Pile Grading Permit 4677 -
G. The graded area lies north of the 100 -year flood plain and westerly of the Scotts Valley
Park. Four areas of drainage study were evaluated for this project. They include two
pipelculvert systems proposed to be constructed under Olivenhain Road with the City of
Carlsbad road widening project per Plan No. 336 -5, the onsite drainage system as shown
and the oil /water separation drainage system as required per the Home Depot Specific
Plan text.
For this study and as indicated on our plans, we have assumed that the Olivenhain Road
widening project has been completed per the City of Carlsbad plans. As you are aware,
they have threatened to start many times in the past and still have not done so. Interim
drainage measures may be required as part of this project if the City of Carlsbad continues
to delay their construction schedule.
For the purposes of this study I have reviewed each of the following drainage measures.
1) Storm flow from 42" R.C.P. pipe at centerline Sta 13 +75 +/ north east corner of
rp oiect. The flow is 75.1 cfs for a 50 -year storm per City Plan 336 -5. The flow is
to traverse the site east of the crib wall (which has been grouted solid for first 6' + / -)
on vegetated native soil. The ground slope is about 1.1% and the lines of
inundation are as delineated on the attached drainage map. Refer to drainage
talcs attached hereto (sheets 1,2 &3).
2) Storm flow from 18" R.C.P. pipe at centerline Sta 10 +10 +/- north west corner of
rp oiect. The flow is 6.2 cfs for a 50 -year storm per City Plan 336 -5. The flow is to
be intercepted into a new type "A" clean out per our plan and diverted westerly in
a new 18" R.C.P. culvert that discharges at the east edge of the existing 150'
S.D.G. &E. Easement. It is to travel in a modified D -75 ditch westerly across the
existing gas line and into a standard D -75 ditch down to the rock rip -rap energy
dissipater near the oil /water separators in the parking area. Refer to the attached
calcs (sheet 4.)
5708 Calzada Del Bosque P.O. Box 9661 Rancho Santa Fe CA 92067 619 756 9374 FAX 619 756 4231
Drainage Calcs
#531 2/26/97
Page Two
3) Onsite surface flows. Most of the developed site consists of hard surface. The
surface flows are to be collected in the driveways and directed across the parking
area in a concrete curb and into two oil /water separators. Each separator has an
outflow capacity of 1.5 cfs per the design established by the Home Depot Specific
Plan text. They are intended to collect low flows to remove road oils with the peak
flows bypassing this system and traveling over the depressed curb and into the
treatment pond. Flows are then discharged onto the rock rip -rap energy dissipator
as shown. Refer to the attached calc sheets 5 & 6.
4) Oil /water separators. These systems are intended to collect low initial rain runoff
flows for separation of the road oils from the rain water. They were required on the
Home Depot site and are planned here also. I have proposed 2'x2' grated inlets on
each vault to collect surface flows in a non - traffic area. Peak flows will be directed
over the depressed concrete curb and into the pond area as shown. Refer to the
attached calc sheets 6 & 7.
Based upon my review of the site and the drainage system as planned, the site can be
developed as proposed. The drainage systems will provide for adequate storm flow
discharges which minimize the development impacts upon the adjacent wetland.
gen�531 drain
A.
No. 29375
EXP. 3 -31 -99
\C1V1\- /_<
. �.0i.✓,d6�' C'.eGcs
4Z " 2c 0-a CuL v _ .vT s'T.f 13t7S
/ 95o ^' 75. c,�'s ,a r ovrLcri Ti�� ,4jcs jg::;7i/.v�.<..
fo..J 5 .o C
L =,szrl �,.i /G�r.err Govt c� c�,..�•��G.
4 'r ,zs w�4x.' Awl etrw-) 62v4w ors
C2.aotf 1 ��' A�So ✓r3 �tAO(i) Td /ec%544 &- �cJo
Sa /• I `O N . So l0/lid�1 �i,�c o
gS� = 75.1 cFS
i2ll�n, va y�Tia cwo0 .S�lfcr� Z ��- �[�cii
Yep T..✓C e,� Svc v.✓ / / � Z -z � 3 . Z � F'f /s�► �
IV q= .4v 4> Y= A-
Y
Y
Q 23.
sedeG - z o p ?
fn2 5c�ca' /ate / -,�
75,1 cF5
�i•�r� ZD. 'coal
5. Z /./ 9.
,45sc•ns� GcJ,oTcnrc. LevcsC. � - �Cry 84 4
.�� ,4 g2/3 S/2-
213
4 (23, o) 2 3, o
7G, / cis
757.1
(41v /L
W.L. A 84.4 is O, K,✓
ev
�S.iG/�14` ,WAi 6ui✓ , LL�/LJ�. A � L L r ✓ = c�3.¢•
= S-
76,7 cFS x 7-s-1 cr's
R&,-e $6;4 %UrJ 2—Z
YA.
. = w•t• ,a;— B3,4�rs D.K.✓
;je
,-� u�c lcJ.c t� ✓crc_. ,Q - czi'-vu = 83.(
2 ,d 1T3 12
,a5' `22.SJ
7 7Cr'S ti 75. / cF5 w LA —0 83, 1 / S D. le. ✓
(>�' eai "Ie.<.J 3. Z #.
is w c��.C. $� (.uwcf 5 i z� �f /b �c, ✓c�Co c ' ;: s
1pa;r- ao 71> �� E2oSi ✓v' i� Lv�J ,�LuKJ
.47 �i� -v�os coo
', C= no�3c.?s0 VC,TC�c. its "s .42� �Occ�jo %�/SGc.
r
I
- .' 1
ff L I
IT
f
t� 1 I I i i I Its
l i i"_711-I is f. � ?
I I
lillulauu Q: sm
SNc, 4;%¢a9 7
2, �u� �/�.�s /� ''izcf' Cu�vcT►L-.v r ST.e /Otis t
G�' � IoZGFs
FLa�,.J F�J�%iG5 F�v�
4
WP
/f- Z 26 r�-
N
A) = . 416- 1/
`rJ ,4 (fit v I.cJP
1:5701 _
3A47
U� S
2- ,4 - T-rz /7�
— _ / t57oy
Z Z._
2z = m = 3,1447
,� QacK Q,O-�A�° �•✓czby B,SS.PA l �-¢U.
SO& -5oF 7
Tr ✓G" a.✓S /re, Su�,c�v�c� T— Cor,,�s .azc� i?� l3cr
Txrcr Dom- ✓G-��y s <' �iil �� �� T
d/L S!�/4A�A Ort� a' P,./O A/t[n¢ 41'
i�Cr
5tio.�l� oc> ��Ci 140,tA,✓, (/elencrn, i-2, 841il-1 /r7i0�J
46o 4&-n e, d?.s7U = C zrs o A
�rti x s ?5 .d ►.} _ 9¢. o — Via. 2
� o
4UC44 O /C. SG�O.o�uo+Qn.
OVT lC so J �iJ�i9c,T� OF
Lv(,� S. -oae"
eAa i Cgt;V cd,o,A 7,
Cj'S A 0,L stepm,o oN
/. -15 CAS / -C,c hold e"cf
,g:,Lvk<,�s
lost" 7
IIXRONGti -/v s'v ►.o.��>`02 5 .
���fc. /C�-,j .0 3 D C/:� Gam/ u- %� � 7X2ou Chi
TA 4 t/fiQ/2ff J f
wG�2. rlAr (P ' PC,C eNA6 /s a .sue
prt �s� c,n 7v
C /O.J 1%d-'i 7AC .
GJheac, qe4volo,re of tje,n,
- c�
ti _ 3 //
4e�r-ep >;> ::�.P/ ers .: o. 4.
.
/ i1 l t4vJ J (,-jO !,<,I, V 4
/- Z yZ � G✓li. —FO i.� C� T v.� �hG i?J/ vrC' (rie Lls
�•J /C �b �o GGt �.+'t' /icJii i.fl L /lio � .� � .., rJ v.C�
A ox 2
c ' 3 Lc 5
C/.), k.
TABLE 2
RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS (RATIONAL METHOD)
DEVELOPED AREAS (URBAN
NOTES:
(')Soil Group maps are available at the offices of the Department of Public Works.
(2)Where actual conditions deviate significantly from the tabulated impervious-
ness values of 800% or 90%, the values given for coefficient C, may be revised
by multiplying 80% or 90% by the ratio of actual imperviousness to the
tabulated imperviousness. However, in no case shall the final coefficient
be less than 0.50. For example: Consider commercial property on D soil group.
Actual imperviousness - 50'x,
Tabulated imperviousness - 806%
Revised C - 0 x 0.85 - 0.53
r
IV -A -9
APPENDIX IX -B
Rev. 5/81
Coefficient, C
Boll
Group '(1)
Land Use
A
B
C
D
Residential:
Single Family
.4o
.45
.50
.55
Multi -Units
.45
.50
.60
.70
Mobile homes
.45
.50
.55
.65
Rural (lots greater than 1/2 acre)
.30
.35
.40
.45
Commercial(2)
80% Impervious
.70
.75
.80
.85
Industrial(2)
.80
.85
.90
.95
90% Impervious
NOTES:
(')Soil Group maps are available at the offices of the Department of Public Works.
(2)Where actual conditions deviate significantly from the tabulated impervious-
ness values of 800% or 90%, the values given for coefficient C, may be revised
by multiplying 80% or 90% by the ratio of actual imperviousness to the
tabulated imperviousness. However, in no case shall the final coefficient
be less than 0.50. For example: Consider commercial property on D soil group.
Actual imperviousness - 50'x,
Tabulated imperviousness - 806%
Revised C - 0 x 0.85 - 0.53
r
IV -A -9
APPENDIX IX -B
Rev. 5/81
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
FLOOD CONTROL OF SAIJITATION G 510 -YEAR 64110 , PRECEPT I ATIO �
FLOOD CONTROL (`� 6`� 1�,
'20-/ ISOPLUVIALS OF 50 -YEAR 6411OUR
PRECIPITA T MN INi T EN 0s ('.�� it4
( G?n X 2.5 - � r
y,
-25
301
SAN a :3No� jjj
5 25 \ 2J
151 225
' CCAr
t:+:W:UiDU �l
1�1� _ 13�� Z J
33 3D .7.10NA
20 \ 0�.11,
22.5 X15 25y t!
5 U
i \ ,, .�
45' / n m,rv, 7 \ 1
Prep. •a nr r
U.S. DEPARTME, T Or COMMERCE l� /
NATIONAL OCEANIC AND IT "SPHERIC ADMINISTRATION q� 7. 5 JALl UI
C J 9} SP LCIAL STUDIES ARAN CH, OFFICE OP II .O ROL DGY, NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICC 20I q -p M 11
.�• y
301
1180 45' 301 151 117° 451 301 151 1169
ON
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
DEPARTMENT OF SANITATION b_ 50-YEAR 2- hiflU`R PRECIPITATION FLOOD CONTROL i
--20,/ ISOPLUV,I +LS Cr 50 -YEAR 24- ►�OUIt
45
PRECIPITATION M TENTHS OF All INCH
1 -� ,,,, ..Z ° \ \�..!�- /Ielci��;�r��: :....�55�����11��: 1���••.. `�..,...,
301
SAN CL ( MEN IE
151
33° n 155 MONA
\I I)EE I�JL� // /.
-- \ o \C2
451 Jrn _Y i
(/ 7
U.S. DEPARTMEW OF COMMERCE \\` •�5a / •� j �� ,•. "�
r
NATIONAL OCEANIC AND AT. OSPIIERIC AD.'.IINISTRATION - / "' , <I I I SQd 3J.
aPGCIAL STUDIES BRANCH. OFFICE OF 11 11ROLOGY. NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE SAIL �` qg
301 I I ,...may
M
1180 451 30' 151 117° 115' 30' 15' 1166
INTENSITY- DtMTiON DESIGN CHART
� �•o a@��11 I
I
s i -4 Duration (Min.)
L ®�
e
BII� !till I Illllllll
� ._� � 1999 911 I � �9i9�f1111111 I I IIII
II h Il�IIIII I I' III I �a_
all 1 li�1lll�ill !�HII11111,11.11111111IIII I
L1. .. ■ 1
GGG� f l GG G I f I C70i Z GG
�.. GI�Ef'(I! ! I '9111 'III' I! I �== ....:ao .._.
•iii. i i .....ow u
gB ss Di 0 ��j9ll 1! i 111 I
IN owl � i�;i!�t li i I!
C���C�������I�IIiI 11� �l�I�I��� �I) II .CS ■..� �mlii �il 11111
i
0
h
d
L
U
4�
>
�a
,, 06
F+
a
PO
92
M
X
x
�l
a10
15 20 30 40 50 1 2 . 3 4 5 6
0
s
a
A
n
ti
6.0 °'
5.0
a.s
.0 7
.5 s'
rD
.0
N
.5
.0
.5
.0
Directions for Application:
1) From precipitation maps determine 6 hr. and
24 hr. amounts for the selected frequency.
These maps are printed in the County Hydrology
Manual (10, 50 and 100 yr. maps included in tt
Design and Procedure Manual).
2) Adjust 6 hr. precipitation (if necessary) so
that it is within the range of 45% to 65% of
the 24 hr. precipitation. (Not applicable
to Desert)
3) Plot 6 hr. precipitation on the right side
of the chart.
4) Draw a line through the point parallel to the
plotted lines.
5) This line is the intensity- duration curve for
the location being analyzed.
Application Form:
0) Selected Frequency
1) P6 in., P24 45, *P6 = .S(o %*
�» P24
2) Adjusted *P6 2. �✓' in.
3) tc - _min.
4) I - ¢1 in /hr.
*Not Applicable to Desert Region
APPENDIX XI
IV -A -14
Revised I /85
i
sufficiently to eliminate the risk of flooding the structure and parking lot. The
finished floor elevation for the Home Depot pad is to be 92 feet. The parking lot
elevations will range from 92.0 feet at the building to a low of about 83.0 feet
adjacent to the wetlands area. Parking lot grades shall be kept as low as
possible while still maintaining sufficient grade to provide positive drainage to
the creek. This will reduce to a minimum the amount of fill needed within the
floodplain area. A portion of the floodplain will be excavated to provide a more
suitable area for wetlands revegetation. The excavated material will be used to
raise portions of the parking area above the anticipated flood level.
3. Nuisance Water Treatment
Commercial development significantly alters the characteristics of storm runoff.
Large paved parking areas collect motor oil and other products associated with
automobile usage. Landscaped areas contribute fertilizers and pesticides. The
accumulated impacts of such contaminants can have a detrimental effect on
downstream water courses. Other less harmful materials such as silt, sand and
ash tend to be transported more quickly to natural water courses across the
impervious paved surfaces thereby adding to the problem of siltation of the
stream beds and downstream lagoons.
There are two basic objectives to be met. The first objective is to treat the runoff
from the Home Depot site to remove harmful pollutants. The second objective is
to minimize the amount of silt and other solids which are deposited in Encinitas
Creek as a result of the project development.
Control of silt and other solids is a two -fold problem. The first occurs during
construction when grading is in progress and the ground has been disturbed.
Construction related silt will be controlled through conventional desilting basins,
silt fences and sandbagging. Also, grading is proposed to be performed during
the drier season of the year. Long term control of silt and debris from the
developed site will be accomplished by the use of oil/water separators in
conjunction with a routine parking lot maintenance and sweeping program.
The oil/water separator system is designed to protect the adjacent Encinitas
Creek from the "first flush` storm runoff which typically contains oils and other
deposits from the pavement and other hard surfaces. The system consists of oil
interceptors similar to septic tanks which separate the oily substances from the
water. The oily residue collects in the upper portion of the interceptors and is
periodically pumped out and removed to an approved disposal site. Sediment
will collect in the bottom of the interceptors and will also be pumped out and
removed. An oil/water separator is illustrated on Exhibit II -9.
II -16
29
Inflow Pipe from `" A
Oil / Water Separator
Plan
Section
our
rapacity 1,600 Gal.
"Umed Flow -650 GPM -1.5 CIS
11M.
Typical 011 / Water Separator
Marsh Treatment Area
� D
k I,p- �,1;\•
. v.
I I
High Water
Prepared Soil —/
Flow Through Pond Section
Not to Scale
zt
Treated Runoff
Drain
Concrete Overflow
Weir 3 Spillway
NUISANCE WATER TREATMENT
Exhib�� I I 9
.Hm .... : :: :The L o .
.
an41iw,,
.
T E
N
.
CA..
A 3 I N
U T
. . . . . . . . . .
.i+t . �
N A N S E N
. .
�.
...
rL,r ROUT
First flush flows and other minor flows will pass through the separators. Treated
effluent from the separators will then be routed to a nuisance water treatment
wetlands area for further treatment prior to entering Encinitas Creek. These
wetland treatment areas will contain marsh -type vegetation which has a
capacity to treat contaminants in the water. A typical nuisance water treatment
pond area is shown in section on Exhibit II -9. The Freshwater /Brackish Marsh
plant palette is described in Chapter III, Section C. Larger storm runoff volumes
will bypass the oil/water separators and go directly to the wetlands treatment
area. Concrete overflow weirs are provided for major storm flows which exceed
the holding capacity of the wetlands treatment area.
F. OPEN SPACE
The Home Depot Specific Plan consists of approximately 55.4 acres, of which about
44.3 acres or 80 percent will remain in some form of open space. The open space
system serves two primary functions. First, it acts as an aesthetic amenity to the
community. Second, it assures the preservation of significant environmental habitats.
Open space areas have been divided into three categories within the Specific Plan:
Wetlands Open Space, Upland Open Space, and Refined Open Space. Open Space
locations are illustrated on Exhibit II -10.
Wetlands Open Space
The implementation of the Home Depot Specific Plan will result in the
preservation of approximately 17.9 acres of wetlands open space. The
wetlands habitat which occurs within the Specific Plan area is a result of the
Encinitas Creek drainage system. Within the Specific Plan approximately 11.3
acres of wetlands open space is located in Planning Area 3 and 6.6 acres is
located in Planning Area 4. For further details regarding the wetlands area,
refer to the Wetlands Program described in Section D of Chapter III.
2. Upland Open Space
Areas designated as upland habitat open space within the Specific Plan area
are located on the west- and north - facing slopes of Planning Area 2, and the
north - facing slopes of Planning Area 4. Approximately 25.3 acres will be
placed in open space easements as a result of implementation of the entire
Specific Plan area. This will include 23.9 acres in Planning Area 2 and 1.4
acres in Planning Area 4. These open space slopes consist primarily of
Chaparral vegetation.
H[:3
T li
JUN 09 1997
SUMMARY OF FIELD OBSERVATIONS AND
TESTS FOR RELATIVE COMPACTION
MASS GRADING OPERATION
PROPOSED SELF - STORAGE FACILITY
OLIVENHAIN ROAD
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
PREPARED FOR:
MR. ROBERT HALLIDAY
4285 IBIS STREET
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92103
PREPARED BY:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
6280 RIVERDALE STREET
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92120
.n24- . CT
Providing Professional Engineering Services Since 1959
1
S5 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
T SOIL &TESTING, INC.
6280 Riverdale Street. San Diego. CA 92120
P.O. Box 600627, San Diego, CA 92160 -0627
619- 2804321, FAX 619 - 2804717
June 6, 1997
Mr. Robert Halliday
4285 Ibis Street
San Diego, California 92103
SCS &T 9511218
Report No. 6
SUBJECT: Summary of Field Observations and Tests for Relative Compaction, Mass
Grading Operation, Proposed Self- Storage Facility, Olivenhain Road, Encinitas,
California.
REFERENCE: "Reportof Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Self-Storage Facility, Olivenhain
Road;" by Southern California Soil and Testing, Inc., dated December 5, 1995,
9511218 -1.
Gentlemen:
In accordance with your request, this report has been prepared to summarize the results of field
observations and tests for relative compaction performed at the subject site by Southern California
Soil and Testing, Inc. These services were performed between October 3, 1996 and May 27,
1997.
SITE DESCRIPTION
The project site is a triangular- shaped parcel of land, identified as Assessor's Parcel Number 255-
04-06, located adjacent to and south of Olivenhain Road in the City of Encinitas, California. The
site is approximately 10.31 acres in size and is bounded on the east by a City of Encinitas Park
and open land, on the south by the Encinitas Creek flood plain, and on the west by open,
undeveloped land. Prior to grading, the site sloped gently to the south with differences in elevation
amounting to only a few feet. Vegetation consisted of a light to heavy growth of grasses, reeds,
brush and trees.
SCS &T 9511218 June 6, 1997 Page 2
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
It is our understanding that the site will be developed to receive two three -story structures of
masonry construction. The first level of each structure will be partially underground. Loffel block
type retaining walls up to ten feet high are anticipated. A portion of the site will be dedicated for
the realignment of Olivenhain Road. A concrete mat foundation /slab system is also planned for
construction.
AVAILABLE PLANS
To assist in determining the locations and elevations of our field density tests and to define the
general extent of the site grading for this phase of work, we were provided with a grading plan
prepared by Laret Engineering Company, Inc. of Rancho Santa Fe, California, dated September
25. 1996.
SITE PREPARATION
EXISTING DEBRIS: Site preparation began with the brushing and clearing of the existing
vegetation and deleterious matter from the areas to be graded. The material generated from said
operations was exported from the areas influenced by the grading. It should be noted, however,
that some of the material generated from the aforementioned operations was loosely placed
overlying the fill slope on the southern end of the site after construction of the slope. The matter
regarding said slope is further addressed in the "Fill Slope" section of this report.
BUILDING PADS: In accordance with our recommendations, the existing alluvial deposits
underlying the proposed building pads were removed to a depth such as to accommodate an
approximate four feet thick compacted fill mat beneath the proposed structures. The bottom of the
removals typically exposed soils in a saturated, spongy condition consisting of loose silty sands.
These removals generally extended laterally to the edge of the proposed development. Due to the
saturated condition encountered at the removal bottoms, removals typically extended deeper than
four feet of finished pad grade to allow for soil to be placed to "bridge" the soft /spongy removal
bottoms. The approximate horizontal extents of the removals are as noted on the attached plot
plan. Subsequent to the removals, fill soils were placed in the removal areas until designed
elevations were reached. The material generated from the removals was unsuitable for use as fill
due to its wet condition and high organic material content. The "unsuitable" material was
SCS &T 9511218 June 6, 1997 Page 3
stockpiled and, subsequent to the grading operations, was employed for use as material for the
surcharge fill. The surcharge fill is further addressed in a later section of this report. Soil was
imported to the site and was used for the fill material. Typically, fill soils were placed in thin,
moisture conditioned lifts and compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density.
Compaction was achieved by means of a Caterpillar 825 compactor and heavy construction
equipment.
FILL SLOPE: During construction of the fill slope located on the southern end of the site, fill
was placed in thin lifts as previously described and the face of the slope was compacted in vertical
increments typically not exceeding four feet. The fill slope face was compacted by means of a
Caterpillar 825 compactor and a crawler dozer. Upon completion, a layer of soil containing a wide
range of organic material was placed overlying the slope face. Said material was placed loosely
and is acting as a mulch layer for landscaping purposes.
SURCHARGE FILL: Subsequent to the completion of the site grading, a surcharge was placed
overlying the proposed building pads. The surcharge height was about four feet less than that
initially recommended. Settlement monuments were installed at various points throughout the site
and were monitored for vertical movements. Some of the monuments were placed in the building
area and some in the driveways where higher fills were required to achieve finish pad grades.
Some of these monuments were destroyed during subsequent grading operations. The readings
from the remaining monuments indicated relatively minor increases and decreases in elevation.
In general, the readings indicate that the majority of the settlement due to fill placed during grading
operations occurred instantaneously, as the fill was placed. The random nature of the readings may
be due to a rebound condition of the alluvium due to previous stockpiling of soils during site
preparation, and /or expansive soils or organics within the surcharge fill. The surcharge remained
for a period of about five months. Based on this time frame, and the lack of major movement
indicated by the settlement monuments, it is our opinion that no significant future settlement should
be anticipated. It was therefore recommended that the surcharge load be removed. The material
used for the surcharge fill generally consisted of highly organic native material. Some was
exported from the site and some was placed as mulch over fill slopes.
PAVEMENT AREAS: Site preparation for the areas of the site to receive paving generally
consisted of the same operations that were employed for the proposed structures. Typically, the
existing alluvial deposits were removed to the same depth as the building pad removals and the
resulting removal areas were filled with compacted material. The fill material was generally placed
SCS &T 9511218 June 6, 1997 Page 4
in thin lifts and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. This filling process
continued until designed elevations were reached.
LOFFEL BLOCK RETAINING WALL: Two loffel block retaining walls were constructed on
the eastern and western sides of the subject site. Our firm provided observation of the walls
construction on an on -call basis. A layer of structural fabric was placed immediately underlying
the bottom of the crushed aggregate base for the two walls. Structural fabric was placed at said
locations for the purpose of stabilizing "soft" areas exposed at the bottom of the footings. To the
best of our knowledge, the walls were constructed as per the specifications contained on the plan
prepared by Soil Retention Systems Inc., dated October 10, 1996. The wall backfill material was
typically placed in thin, moisture conditioned lifts and compacted to at least 90 percent of
maximum dry density. Compaction was achieved by means of gasoline powered hand whackers
and heavy construction equipment. It should be noted that it is our understanding that the loffel
block walls will be raised by an additional three to four feet than originally planned. Our firm
should be contacted when this operation occurs.
OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT: A portion of this site, located along the northern
boundary of the project site, was dedicated to the realignment of Olivenhain Road. The grading
work for the realignment project was performed by the contractor employed by the City of
Encinitas. The earthworking operations performed by the aforementioned contractor in the area
encroached the self- storage site. This area comprises a portion of the embankment area located
beneath the northern driveway. The fill placement was not observed or tested by our firm. It is
our understanding that fill placement in this area was observed and tested by the City of Encinitas
representatives.
FINAL GRADING: The final stage of grading was performed without our observation. In -place
density tests were performed after grading was completed. Based on the tests and observations
performed after final grading, additional work as described hereinafter will be necessary to address
some areas where lack of compaction of the surface soils was determined.
GRADING CONTRACTOR: The earthworking operations addressed in this report were
performed by Vinci - Pacific Corporation of Rancho Santa Fe, California.
Equipment typically utilized during the site grading operations included:
SCS &T 9511218 June 6, 1997
1 - Caterpillar 14G Motor Grader
I - Caterpillar D7G Crawler Dozer
I - Caterpillar DGH Swamp Cat
1 - Caterpillar 928F Rubber Tire Loader
FIELD OBSERVATION AND TESTING
Page 5
I - 5x5 Hitch Drawn Sheepsfoot Roller
1 - Caterpillar 825 Compactor
1 - Fiat Allis Crawler Dozer
2 - Gasoline- Powered Hand Whackers
Field observation and density tests were performed by a representative of Southern California Soil
and Testing, Inc. during the mass grading operations. The density tests were taken according to
ASTM D 1556 -90 (sand cone) and D2922 -91 (nuclear gauge). The results of those tests are shown
on the attached plates. The accuracy of the in -situ density test locations and elevations is a function
of the accuracy of the survey control provided by other than Southern California Soil and Testing,
Inc. representatives. Unless otherwise noted, their locations and elevations were determined by
pacing and hand level methods and should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by
the method used.
As used herein, the term "observation" implies only that we observed the progress of work we
agreed to be involved with, and performed tests, on which, together, we based our opinion as to
whether the work essentially complies with the job requirements, local grading ordinances and the
Uniform Building Code.
LABORATORY TESTS
Maximum dry density determinations were performed on representative samples of the soils used
in the compacted fills according to ASTM D1557 -91, Method A. This method specifies that a four
(4) inch diameter cylindrical mold of 1/30 cubic foot volume be used and that the soil tested be
placed in five (5) equal layers with each layer compacted by twenty -five (25) blows of a 10 -pound
hammer with an 18 -inch drop. The results of these tests, as presented on Plate Number 5, were
used in conjunction with the field density tests to determine the degree of relative compaction of
the compacted fill.
REMAINING WORK
Finish grade tests and observations performed after the final stage of grading operations was
performed indicate that minor (less than one foot) loose soils exist on the proposed building pads
SCS &T 9511218 June 6, 1997 Page 6
and some of the proposed driveway areas. It is recommended that these deposits be scarified,
moisture conditioned and compacted. It is anticipated that some of this work will be performed
as part of paving operations. Furthermore, temporary fill slopes located above the loffel block
walls are loose to a depth of about 2.5 feet. It is our understanding that these deposits will be
removed and replaced as compacted fill in conjunction with the raising of said walls. Additional
grading and backfill operations will also be required for the backfilling of utility trenches and
restraining walls and the preparation of the subgrade and base material placement in the paving
areas. It is recommended that field observations and relative compaction tests be performed during
these operations to verify that these operations are performed in accordance with job requirements
and local grading ordinances.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on our field observations and the in -place density test results, it is the opinion of Southern
California Soil and Testing, Inc. that the grading work was performed substantially in accordance
with our recommendations, the City of Encinitas grading ordinance, and the Uniform Building
Code.
FOUNDATIONS
GENERAL: It is our understanding that the two proposed structures will be supported on concrete
mat foundation /slab systems to be designed by the project structural engineer
SAND BLANKET AND MOISTURE BARRIER: A minimum four - inch -thick layer of coarse,
poorly graded sand should be placed underneath the slab of the proposed office building. A
visqueen barrier should also be placed at the midpoint of said sand layer. For the storage areas
of the buildings, a layer of one -inch of coarse, poorly graded sand, visqueen and four inches of
crushed rock (from top to bottom) should be placed underneath the proposed slabs.
FOUNDATION EXCAVATION OBSERVATIONS: All footing excavations should be observed
by a member of our engineering /geology staff to verify that the foundation excavations extend into
a suitable bearing stratum.
SCS &T 9511218 June 6, 1997 Page 7
LIMITATIONS
This report covers only the services performed between October 3, 1996 and May 27, 1997. As
limited by the scope of the services which we agreed to perform, our opinion presented herein is
based on our observations and the relative compaction test results. Our service was performed in
accordance with the currently accepted standard of practice and in such a manner as to provide a
reasonable measure of the compliance of the mass grading operations with the job requirements.
No warranty, express or implied, is given or intended with respect to the services which we have
performed, and neither the performance of those services nor the submittal of this report should
be construed as relieving the contractor of his responsibility to conform with the job requirements.
If you should have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office
This opportunity to be of professional service is sincerely appreciated.
Respectfully submitted,
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
DBA:DH:GET:mw
cc: (6) Submitted
N0.36037
OF
j
° VARIE eRSFK.,gt✓AGL' -.. %/ ( e FR�^r /NG = ., // 6"
QO CC tai��rL SCALE :I > 20'
0
B
�---y _CaAC SIOEWRCX
1
3
_ S =s+& t _.. f F -.. __ \ >�� ' � � �• � '" °3�aPnxcac-
z P`
Z SVp.
\. - _ 1 _ _ F , f - 1 iT ry , �j 3daRS aT3G•,OC �lA _ G.POUTEG tN -
eaNC A c_ �j !' ° NETLANDS PR3TEC IGkNC6I \ �e "' - i xACE r�
SECTION _
Ll
v�
c - _
� DETAIL 5( " -5P0 CP5a0�
SCA' aNCRETE
7aa "- 3, -p0 M:�ahHD 9ROW 'DITCH- iii
S Q
ry
1
g DETAIL 'A` 1 '
No cAC _ �(
�' !"ax /"T�re•, 'SECTION', --r'G"
NO CA
R�5MEF17,1 EA`! SF IICP STORAf
B40
CITY OF EN IN! AS
-
g.�R.J_ 7OR,4f ORNP✓tMPR4YEM NTS � � S
gcY -43� $ - --
\ /(' 4,831 ✓ PER PLAN
€ #y � .£OG IE ACC4S5 ,ZtEEF EXIST SLOPE -�1 -.o ---'- X ENO [CALL Xl F. -a EX /STIR "v, ca SEty z s __- _ — - /•
a� C �
ffow .uootFtEa 0 Ts— aQ rr� t t 'r I % —" !
BRQw OtTCN PEKOE74lL A" 6NQ�LL, � ', ^ d.�p rm 'PPRQX.LC'C6TlON .. ,, w. - - �H ^l'�TW j f
°_ ABOVE. (Le47p683x=°I :' ! 12� ) B ExtS7 GAS<lt1E 563 -.'C i w i
•--, currER f`.e,c.. ( - �,� , "I� SI
°i. ° _- _T'F \ _G Fc.K r�Y 04'a 3. -5 I�IQ
-GONG dIZOW Gil G` 0 -75 \ FS 82.e2 Q -e _._ ✓� T T '
E.2 - r
(N SR-3C' /5• Q5G �_. GA7e ': ��, _. �B.PC a /KE q -F go, Ed /S7 K "G&S- �STA /3 +4Q I'N 93 �....
- 4-� 7N FOOWG. 336 5 "�4. 0 fF5 O.6W_93 - O��
��
Va°_T cFS €i ael �" a2/
® a
GUTFER
FC.N 6E
i pROPOSE02 %O"
�4SE �, E�0 @3 i
CC.II pp'pKlNG ARA az az a ,
... ON GRADE ? S'a7.,' �� x /ST •ze '°eEi �C O- ^. $33 3 n-Tt LtR OWG 336lNG
W 'd"s �"' `ASE ✓C'ST.a.. _. - '2 -r F EP <6Z K a3 ' EXIST ORA /NAGS EA SEMENT
lr t l 7� TO .CITY OF ENC/NITAS PER
B�SE,yL L1 t N
F se wcs i� �I REC 3 4�9FOR
%� 4 �.so � ? �s Cl l
1�IEX /SF. if U,K`.�P SE/NEki °_I
��= m ae® sc oe a �Eaoo 20• r l 1 ` ' m ��
PER B3� .�
���� "�'
- ry, 97 Scak, % ( lY EXIST lO`SEWE ASE,I(Eh`TI
r M ✓ '. _ _ a — _ _
y, o m ®� °a @mss - °a m
lOV4.�X =ATEF SEfA4$4 _ *Tm'a �z, CFFIC' Flu '
_A "na'V SSCF YOA'tAK `_ 6'ct4°
a
,0 p05E0 E. R <N \ l _ e ®/ W I p/ ws ® F BW a3
-,Sfl €£F 3. -1- ' P� FENS AFE ; awEneE r_.a- �
r
€�
s3 €b/ WK s5G I
DHipK
ti. y�� �� ��EXIST tB "VCR
SO6 •0 E�(15T. ,j - J 1 �' _e>. W.a S I l SEN'EPT 4
a- ,vazACxa n d E AS \ - SSILC�!N E o \G I
�'
G4_0 Trr A t \ oR ErtEh$ ^ohE I%\ FguQGe�"a FF'�,a „erg �vo L' %T 4„
F,ar.o
b
(E 6A oo
F,
_- ' \ �. LE GRP 1 @N•, 1.8 � \ "�” _ -I asa ®se <�m� -�s r9 �� R cas as�3s TO ` � � _. �� Rwat� 3 S
PF �y
X15 QIk -
.t -
DETAIL
uon� °sPeLe .. � '1 --;-
00
i LO ".�> /`'. '*. AD '€iCi`'1 /_ e/ \ `.FL+ —__� ��'�. "..� sE R<3U! <O/,U ERMtT •ate'' A" rQ =3.25` %SEC z �''
"E N
c ? -
1' � . / -. z m - �p k;' - ' -� `` r5• r /✓C'C �-_ U> .P B s _PW � —G _���� �f ®3�'w 3 c�-�lz rc 6 1\4y _, s ' S • v j �'� // �
160 BWRB9- _RN PP66
P5RC.
PE
Sc
t LE l
PARK a �t6 B7 R 4° .4 6 Xl6N( SA'AoegGSA 7 FE
1 I
,
SCS& _ LEGEND
` SOOTHER-V CALIFORNIA Ncs -
SOIL &. TESTING, INC. 0 APPROXIMATE IN -PLACE DENSITY TEST LOCATION p °PN. 255 - 040-06
i rYQi�: LOWER BAG KOW TO 6r "
OLSVENHASN SEL €- STORAGE 5uR /ED E U - KGRADE, s� APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF REMOVAL < n Fi JGi jG
\ REMOVAL BOTTOM ELEVATION
A/j'A
$o
ia. DSAIOM sD >,E
05-19-97 TEMPORARY�SAND SAG
se I SCALz'. - SPECVAL ^SSTRtCT �,,.,
�,�Y1Sl0.4S APPFOVE4 GATE REFERENCES •LATE „tNCF1 A4ARK Fes,» pF ?M -� Yoh SVP R 'C�v O/F '. 'CC''vi \Eh� -'
AAP 0> ...5 CITY tJF CIRITAS °l;8 IC WORKS DEPARTMENT DRAWNG iN0 cc
% - i y -•E EL CAM /Nt) REAL AlOGlVEN!/ /N. 03ZON ?AL i I , 502
2 T
; •� E No, ze��� i � CASE N�`0I 96 032 MIN q�r��1
011 E
�RLt CPUNT'- `PENC/(NARK 6PQK FkGE1 vERnCh fvQIJG ' ice• wuu_= rec g i O.c• wrc -. 1 LL
LL
reo OATEfJ.aRtc ro8B cAL.coo20.- 3- vg _ reo. 531 PORTION QF 60T 1, MAP 84$ SHEET 2 OF 6
- 'tNOEX 3c`6-16 @3 (ttAO Zit Es k. CARET S /O�YP
' \.- .EL. =F4.Tt6 FEEF,. VSffS, At.S.d:OATUrN' '
JOB NAME: OLIVENHAIN SELF S rORAGE
IN-PLACE DENSITY TESTS
JOB NO: 9511218
TEST
DATE
LOCATION
ELEVATION
feet, MSL)
MOISTURE
(percent)
DRY DENSITY
.c.f.
SOIL
TYPE
REL. COMP.
(percent)
GRADING
1
10/3/96
See Plate Number 1
81.0
10.8
117.9
1
91.5
2
10/3/96
See Plate Number 1
81.0
12.9
112.2
1
87.1
3
10/3/96
See Plate Number 1
82.5
11.7
111.8
1
86.8
*4
10/10/96
See Plate Number 1
81.0
12.7
117.8
1
91.5
5
10/10/96
See Plate Number 1
81.0
13.2
110.3
1
85.6
6
10/10/96
See Plate Number 1
81.0
12.3
113.6
1
88.2
7
10/11/96
See Plate Number 1
79.5
13.2
112.8
1
67.6
8
10/11/96
See Plate Number 1
79.5
12.8
111.0
1
86.2
9
10/14/96
RETEST OF 7
79.5
13.1
116.1
1
90.1
10
10/14/96
RETEST OF 8
79.5
12.9
117.5
1
91.2
11
10/14/96
See Plate Number 1
80.0
13.6
112.3
1
87.2
12
10/14/96
RETEST OF 11
80.0
13.6
117.6
1
91.3
13
10/14/96
RETEST OF 5
81.0
13.4
116.8
1
90.7
14
10/14/96
RETEST OF 6
81.0
13.1
117.3
1
91.1
15.10/16/96
See Plate Number 1
80.5
13.7
113.6
1
88.2
1 6
110/16/96
RETEST OF 15
80.5
11.1
121.2
1
94.1
17110/16/96
See Plate Number 1
80.0
11.6
119.9
1
93.1
18;110/16/96
See Plate Number 1
80.5
10.4
120.4
1
93.5
19
10/17/96
See Plate Number 1
81.5
9.5
116.3
1
90.3 1
20
10/17/96
See Plate Number 1
82.0
10.0
121.6
1
94.4
21
10/17196
See Plate Number 1
82.0
9.8
124.9
1
97.0
22
10/17/96
See Plate Number 1
82.0
12.4
119.4
1
92.7
23
10/17/96
See Plate Number 1
83.0
10.9
116.2
1
90.2
24
10/21/96
See Plate Number 1
79.5
11.9
120.9
1
I
93.9
25
10/21/96
See Plate Number 1
80.0
11.6
118.1
1
91.7
26
10/21/96
See Plate Number 1
82.0
14.0
116.1
1
90.1
27
10/21/96
See Plate Number 1
82.0
12.8
117.0
1
90.8
28
10/23/96
See Plate Number 1
81.0
12.3
118.2
1
91.8
29
10/23/96
See Plate Number 1
81.0
12.9
116.1
1
90.1
30
10/23/96
See Plate Number 1
79.5
10.7
116.6
1
90.5
31
10/23/96
See Plate Number 1
80.5
10.1
119.5
1
92.8
32
10/24/96
See Plate Number 1
80.0
12.2
115.7
1
89.8
33
10/24/96
RETEST OF 32
80.0
13.2
118.3
1
91.8
34
10/24/96
See Plate Number 1
80.0
11.9
113.7
1
88.3
35
10/24/96
RETEST OF 34
80.0
12.4
119.3
1
92.6
36
10/24/96
See Plate Number 1
82.5
10.0
116.3
1
90.3
37
10/24/96
See Plate Number 1
81.0
15.1
111.3
1
86.4
38
10/24/96
RETEST OF 37
81.0
11.8
117.4
1
91.1
39
10/24/96
See Plate Number 1
81.0
11.7
118.6
2
92.7
40
10/25/96
See Plate Number 1
83.0
11.1
119.9
1
93.1
41
10125/96
See Plate Number 1
83.0
11.9
118.8
1
92.2
PLATE NO: 2
JOB NAME: OLIVENHAIN SELF S fORAGE
IN-PLACE DENSITY TESTS
JOB NO: 9511218
ITEST
DATE
LOCATION
ELEVATION
feet, MSL
MOISTURE
(percent)
DRY DENSITY
.c.f.
SOIL
TYPE
REL. COMP.
ercent
42
10/25/96
See Plate Number 1
82.5
10.8
117.3
1
91.1
43
10/25/96
See Plate Number 1
83.0
11.7
110.8
1
86.0
44
10/25/96
See Plate Number 1
83.0
11.2
111.2
1
86.3 i
45
10/29/96
RETEST FO 3 AND 44
83.0
11.6
116.5
1
90.5
46
10/29/96
RETEST OF 43
83.0
11.5
116.8
1
90.7
47
10/29/96
See Plate Number 1
83.5
14.2
115.9
1
90.0
48
10/29/96
See Plate Number 1
83.0
12.6
116.6
1
90.5
49
10/29/96
See Plate Number 1
83.0
12.8
113.3
1
88.0
50
10/29/96
RETEST OF 49
83.0
14.6
116.2
1
90.2
51
11/21/96
East Side of Site
85.0
11.9
122.9
1
95.4
52
11/21/96
East Side of Site
85.0
13.4
117.4
1
91.1
53
2/17/97
East Side of Site
86.5
13.8
116.6
1
90.5
54
2/17/97
East Side of Site
86.5
14.5
116.0
1
90.1
*55
2/24/97
East Side of Site
88.0
14.9
114.9
1
89.2
*56
2/24/97
East Side of Site
88.5
15.9
116.7
1
90.6
*57
2/24/97
South Drive Area
85.0
16.5
110.8
1
86.0
*58
2/24/97
RETEST OF 55
88.0
14.1
118.0
1
91.6
59
2/25/97
East Side of Site
89.0
10.0
123.9
1
96.2
60
2/25/97
South Drive Area
87.0
9.6
122.7
1
95.3
61
2/25/97
RETEST OF 57
85.0
12.7
122.1
1
94.8
*62
2/26/97
East Drive Area
90.0
12.8
121.9
1
94.6
*63
2/26/97
South Drive Area
86.0
13.2
123.6
1
96.0
*64
3/11197
North Drive Area
85.0
15.5
114.5
6
91.3
*65
3/11/97
East Drive Area
91.0
13.5
112.8
6
90.0
*66
3/11/97
South Drive Area
87.0
9.2
116.3
6
92.7
*67
3/12/97
North Drive Area
86.5
14.6
116.1
1
90.1
*68
3/12/97
East Drive Area
92.0
8.8
126.7
1
98.4
*69
3/12/97
South Drive Area
89.0
9.7
119.6
1
92.9
70
3/19/97
Slope Test
85.0
13.8
114.4
4
91.7
71
3/19/97
Slope Test
89.0
8.7
115.4
4
92.5
72
3/20/97
South Side Driveway
87.5
13.6
115.7
3
93.4
73
3/20/97
South Side Driveway
88.5
10.8
118.1
3
95.3
74
3/20/97
South Side Driveway
89.6
11.6
114.4
3
92.3
75
3/21/97
South Side Driveway
93.5
9.7
117.2
3
94.6
76
3/21/97
South Side Driveway
92.8
14.1
115.0
3
92.8
77
3/21/97
South Side Driveway
92.5
12.3
117.4
3
94.8
78
3121/97
South Side Driveway
91.5
11.1
118.7
3
95.8
79
3121/97
North Side Driveway
90.0
10.2
111.9
3
90.3
80
3/21/97
North Side Driveway
90.0
7.2
114.8
3
92.7
81
3/21/97
North Side Driveway
90.0
8.9
113.7
3
91.8
82
5/27/97
Building A
F.G. 85.0
8.1
112.6
3
90.9
83
5/27197
Building A
F.G. 86.0
5.2
114.7
3
92.6
PLATE NO: 3
JOB NAME: OLIVENHAIN SELF N fORAGE
IN -PLACE DENSITY TESTS
JOB NO: 9511218
TEST
DATE
LOCATION
ELEVATION
feet, MSL
MOISTURE
(percent)
DRY DENSITY
(P-C.f. )
SOIL
TYPE
REL. COMP.
(percent)
84
5127/97
Building A
F.G. 97.0
6.6
117.9
3
95.2
85
5/27/97
Building B
F.G. 87.0
8.5
113.8
3
91.8
86
5/27/97
Building B
F.G. 86.0
4.8
114.8
3
92.7
87
5/27197
Building B
F.G. 85.0
8.0
115.6
3
93.3
88
5/27/97
North P.C.C. Area
92.0
6.8
109.6
3
88.5
89
5/27197
North P.C.C. Area
94.0
5.4
107.8
3
87.0
90
5/27/97
South P.C.C. Area
94.0
5.7
113.3
3
91.4
91
5/27/97
South P.C.C. Area
93.5
7.2
116.1
3
93.7
92
5/27/97
East P.C.C. Area
94.5
7.1
110.1
3
88.9
RETAINING WALL
RW1
11/18/96
East Side Retaining Wall
83.0
11.1
114.9
1
89.2
RW2
11/18/96
East Side Retaining Wall
82.5
11.9
111.3
1
86.5
RW3
11/18/96
East Side Retaining Wall
82.5
11.7
115.6
1
89.8
RW4
11/18/96
East Side Retaining Wall
83.5
12.1
113.6
1
88.2
RW5
11/18/96
RETEST OF RW1
83.0
12.5
117.6
1
91.3
RW6
11/18/96
RETEST OF RW2
82.5
10.7
117.0
1
90.8
RW7
11/18/96
RETEST OF RW3
82.5
12.3
116.4
1
90.4
RW8
11/18/96
RETEST OF RW4
83.5
11.2
116.5
1
90.5
RW9
11/20196
East Side Retaining Wall
85.0
10.3
110.2
1
85.6
RW10
11/20/96
East Side Retaining Wall
84.5
11.1
111.6
1
86.6
RW11
11/20/96
East Side Retaining Wall
85.5
10.4
108.3
3
87.4
RW12
11/20/96
RETEST OF RW9
85.0
9.7
117.0
1
90.8
RW13
11/20/96
RETEST OF RW10
84.5
11.4
116.0
1
90.1
RW14
11/20/96
RETEST OF RW11
85.5
12.1
113.7
3
91.8
RW15
11/20/96
East Side Retaining Wall
85.0
8.8
119.7
1
92.9
RW16
11/20/96
East Side Retaining Wall
84.5
10.1
117.1
1
90.9
RW17
11/20/96
East Side Retaining Wall
85.5
10.8
116.2
1
90.2
RW18
11/21/96
East Side Retaining Wall
86.5
12.1
110.3
1
85.6
RW19
11/21/96
East Side Retaining Wall
86.5
13.8
112.2
1
87.1
RW20
11/21/96
RETEST OFRWI8
86.5
11.2
119.1
1
92.5
RW21
11/21/96
RETEST OF RW19
86.5
11.9
118.6
1
92.1
RW22
2/12/97
West Side Retaining Wall
81.0
15.6
113.9
4
91.3
RW23
2/12/97
West Side Retaining Wall
81.0
15.0
116.1
4
93.0
RW24
2112/97
West Side Retaining Wall
81.0
13.1
118.3
4
94.8
RW25
2/12/97
West Side Retaining Wall
81.0
13.4
120.9
4
96.9
RW26
2/12/97
West Side Retaining Wall
81.0
9.3
124.6
4
99.8
RW27
2/13/97
West Side Retaining Wall
83.0
12.9
113.1
4
90.6
RW28
2/13/97
West Side Retaining Wall
83.0
13.6
114.2
4
91.5
RW29
2/13/97
West Side Retaining Wall
83.0
13.5
114.6
4
91.8
RW30
2/13/97
West Side Retaining Wall
83.0
13.2
113.8
4
91.2
PLATE NO: 4
JOB NAME: OLIVENHAIN SELF afORAGE
IN -PLACE DENSITY TESTS
JOB NO: 9511218
TEST
DATE
LOCATION
ELEVATION
feet, MSL
MOISTURE
(percent)
DRY DENSITY
.c.f.
SOIL
TYPE
REL. COMP.
(percent)
RW31
2/14/97
West Side Retaining Wall
84.5
15.7
111.7
3
90.2
RW32
2/14/97
West Side Retaining Wall
84.5
18.0
112.0
3
90.4
RW33
2117/97
West Side Retaining Wall
86.0
13.2
118.1
5
100.0
RW34
2/17/97
West Side Retaining Wall
88.0
12.5
120.6
5
102.1
RW35
2/17197
West Side Retaining Wall
89.0
13.2
119.5
5
101.2
RW36
2/17/97
West Side Retaining Wall
87.5
10.4
115.5
4
92.5
RW37
2/17197
West Side Retaining Wall
88.0
9.0
113.4
4
90.9
RW38
2/17197
West Side Retaining Wall
87.5
9.5
115.6
4
92.6
RW39
2/25/97
East Side Retaining Wall
89.5
6.2
111.8
4
89.6
RW40
2/25/97
RETEST OF RW39
89.5
6.0
113.6
4
91.0
RW41
2/25/97
East Side Retaining Wall
89.5
6.1
112.7
4
90.3
*RW42
3/12/97
East Side Retaining Wall
92.0
6.5
120.8
4
96.8
RW43
3/14/97
East Side Retaining Wall
93.0
8.3
115.8
4
92.8
RW44
3/14/97
East Side Retaining Wall
91.0
8.0
113.5
4
90.9
RW45
3/14/97
East Side Retaining Wall
93.0
8.1
113.1
4
90.6
RW46
3/14/97
West Side Retaining Wall
89.0
9.4
112.2
3
90.6
RW47
i
3/14/97
West Side Retaining Wall
86.0
9.7
116.9
3
94.4
* Sand Cone Test Method (ASTM D1556 -90)
MAXIMUM DENSITY AND OPTIMUM MOISTURE SUMMARY (ASTM D 1557)
SOIL TYPE
SOIL DESCRIPTION OPTIMUM MOISTURE, %
MAXIMUM DENSITY, pcf
1
Golden Broom Slightly Silty,
8.4
128.8
Clayey Sand (Import)
2
White Brown Slightly Silty
7.7
127.9
Clayey Sand (Import)
3
Grey Broom Silty Clayey
10.5
123.9
Sand (Native Material)
4
Dark Golden Brown Silty
7.8
124.8
Sand with Pieces of Gravel (Import)
5
Ught Brown, Slightly Silty
9.8
118.1
Sand with Trace of Clay (Import)
6
Tan Brown Silty Sand with a
9.3
125.4
Trace of Clay (Import)
PLATE NO: 5
REPORT OF
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
PROPOSED SELF STORAGE FACILITY
OLIVENHAIN ROAD
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
APR 2 4 1996
ENGINEERING SERVICES
CITY OF ENCINITAS
PREPARED FOR:
MR. ROBERT HALLIDAY
4285 IBIS STREET
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92103
PREPARED BY:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
6280 RIVERDALE STREET
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92120
Providing Professional Engineering Services Since 1959
S SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOIL & TESTING, INC.
6280 Riverdale Street, San Diego, CA 92120
P0. Box 600627, San Diego. CA 92160 -0627
619.2804321, FAX 619 - 2804717
December 5, 1995
Mr. Robert Halliday SCS &T 9511218
4285 Ibis Street Report No. 1
San Diego, California 92103
SUBJECT: Report of Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Self Storage Facility, Olivenhain
Road, Encinitas, California.
Dear Mr. Halliday:
In accordance with your request, we have completed a geotechnical investigation for the subject
project. The findings and recommendations of our study are presented herewith.
In general, we found the site suitable for the proposed development provided the recommendations
presented in the attached report are followed. The site is underlain by alluvium with a moderate
to high consolidation potential, and a shallow groundwater table. These conditions will require
special site preparation and /or foundation consideration as described hereinafter.
If you should have any questions after reviewing the findings and recommendations contained in
the attached report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. This opportunity to be of
professional service is sincerely appreciated.
Respectfully submitted,
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING, INC.
DBA:MF:mw E oQROiESSlah./!
cc: (6) Submitted Q� ,�E� 8. AD�_Fr
N0. 36037
EXP. 6-30-9
1(�
Mike Farr. C.E.G. #1938
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
Introduction and Project Description ....................................... 1
Project Scope ..................... ............................... I
Findings....................... ............................... 2
Site Description .................. ............................... 2
General Geology and Subsurface Conditions ............................... 2
Geologic Setting and Soil Descriptions . ............................... 2
Alluvium................. ............................... 3
Delmar Formation ............ ............................... 3
Tectonic Setting ............... ............................... 3
Geologic Hazards ................. ............................... 3
General.................... ............................... 3
Groundshaking ................ ............................... 3
Surface Rupture and Soil Cracking .... ............................... 4
Liquefaction .................. ............................... 4
Flooding.................... ............................... 4
Groundwater ................. ............................... 5
Tsunamis ................... ............................... 5
Seiches..................... ............................... 5
Conclusions....................... ............................... 5
General....................... ............................... 5
Alluvial Deposits ............ ............................... 5
Groundwater ............... ............................... 6
Recommendations ................... ............................... 6
Grading...................................................... 6
Site Preparation ............... ............................... 6
Saturated Soils ................ ............................... 6
Imported Fill ................. ............................... 7
Surcharge Fill ................ ............................... 7
Surface Drainage ............... ............................... 7
Eart hwork................... ............................... 7
Slope Stability ................... ............................... 8
General.................... ............................... 8
Temporary Slopes .............. ............................... 8
Foundations.................... ............................... 8
General.................... ............................... 8
Reinforcement ................ ............................... 8
Foundation Excavation Observation ... ............................... 8
Settlement Characteristics ......... ............................... 8
On -Grade Slabs .................. ............................... 9
Interior Concrete Slabs -on -Grade ..... ............................... 9
Exterior Slabs -on -Grade .......... ............................... 9
Grading and Foundation Plan Review ..... ............................... 9
Earth Retaining Walls .............. ............................... 9
Foundat ions .................. ............................... 9
Passive Pressure ............... ............................... 9
Active Pressure ............... ............................... 10
Waterproofing and Subdrain Observation .............................. 10
Backfill.................... ............................... 10
Factor of Safety .............. ............................... 10
Limitations ...................... ............................... 10
Review, Observation and Testing ...... ............................... 10
Uniformity of Conditions ........... ............................... 11
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
PAGE
Change in Scope ................... ...............................
11
Time Limitations ................ ...............................
11
Professional Standard .............. ...............................
11
Client's Responsibility ............. ...............................
12
Field Explorations .................. ...............................
12
Laboratory Testing ................. ...............................
13
ATTACHMENTS
FIGURE
Figure 1 Site Vicinity Map, Follows Page 1
PLATES
Plate
1
Plot Plan
Plate
2
Unified Soil Classification Chart
Plates
3 -8
Boring Logs
Plate
9
Grain Size Distribution
Plates
9 -11
Hydrometer Test Results
Plates
12 -15
Consolidation Test Results
Plate
16
Direct Shear Test Results
Plate
17
Weakened Plane Joint
Plate
18
Retaining Wall Subdrain Detail
APPENDIX
Recommended Grading Specifications- General Provisions
STC SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOIL &TESTING, INC.
6280 Riverdale Street, San Diego, CA 92120
P.O. Box 600627, San Diego, CA 92160 -0627
619- 280 -4321. FAX 619 - 280-4717
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
PROPOSED SELF STORAGE FACILITY
OLIVENHAIN ROAD
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation for a proposed self storage facility to be
located adjacent and south of Olivenhain Road, in the City of Encinitas, California. The site location is
shown on the vicinity map provided as Figure Number I on the following page.
It is our understanding that the site will be developed to receive two three -story structures of masonry
construction. The first level of each structure will be partially underground. Retaining walls up to ten
feet high are anticipated. A portion of the site will be dedicated for the realignment of Olivenhain Road.
Shallow foundations and a concrete slab -on -grade floor system are proposed. Grading will consist of fills
up to ten feet high.
To assist in the preparation of this report, we were provided with a grading plan, prepared by Laret
Engineering Company, dated August 1, 1995 and architectural drawings prepared by Lawrence Winters
dated August 11, 1995. The site configuration, topography and approximate locations of our subsurface
explorations are shown on Plate Number l of this report.
PROJECT SCOPE
The investigation consisted of: surface reconnaissance, subsurface explorations, obtaining representative
disturbed and undisturbed samples, laboratory testing, analysis of the field and laboratory data, research
of available geological literature pertaining to the site, and preparation of this report. More specifically,
the intent of this analysis was to:
a) Explore the subsurface conditions to the depths influenced by the proposed construction.
4 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOIL & TESTING,INC.
ENCINITAS SELF STORAGE
ev: DBA /SD DATE: 11.14 -95
JOB NUMBER: 9511218 lFigureNo. 1
SCS &T 9511218 December 5, 1995 Page 2
b) Evaluate, by laboratory tests, the pertinent engineering properties of the various strata which
will influence proposed development, including their bearing capacities, expansive characteris-
tics and settlement potential.
c) Describe the general geology at the site including possible geologic hazards which could have
an effect on the site development.
d) Develop soil engineering criteria for site preparation and grading, and provide design
information regarding the stability of temporary slopes.
e) Address potential construction difficulties and provide recommendations concerning these
problems.
f) Recommend an appropriate foundation system for the type of structures anticipated and develop
soil engineering design criteria for the recommended foundation design.
FINDINGS
SITE DESCRIPTION
The project site is a vacant parcel of land located south of and adjacent to Olivenhain Road in the City
of Encinitas. The site is bordered by a park to the east, Olivenhain Road to the north, a 150- foot -wide
San Diego Gas and Electric easement to the west, and the Encinitas Creek floodplain to the south. The
site slopes very gently toward the south, with a maximum topographic relief of approximately four feet.
The site supports a dense growth of vegetation, including scattered trees, brush, native grasses and reeds.
The reeds are present in the low - lying, southern portion of the site where standing water is visible in
many areas. The site's eastern boundary is delineated by an eight -to- ten -foot high, 2:1 (horizontal to
vertical) slope which ascends to the park to the east. Improvements present within the SDG &E easement
to the east of the site include overhead transmission lines and underground fuel and gas lines.
GENERAL GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
GEOLOGIC SETTING AND SOIL DESCRIPTIONS: The project site is located at the northern
margin of the Encinitas Creek floodplain, within the Coastal Ranges Physiographic Province of San Diego
County. The site is underlain by Quaternary -age alluvial deposits and Tertiary -age sedimentary deposits.
SCS &T 9511218 December 5, 1995 Page 3
ALLUVIUM - Alluvial deposits were encountered in Borings Number 1, 2, 3 and 4 to depths of
18, 33, 21 and 23 feet, respectively. However, the alluvium may extend to a maximum estimated
depth of 50 feet at the southeastern corner of the site. The uppermost seven to eight feet of the
alluvium generally consisted of yellowish- brown, moist to saturated, loose, fine silty sand. The
alluvial deposits below seven to eight feet generally become more clayey with depth, and consist
mainly of grayish -brown to reddish- brown, wet to saturated, medium stiff to clayey sandy silt, sandy
clayey silt, clayey silt and silty clay, and loose to medium dense clayey silty sand.
DELMAR FORMATION - The alluvial deposits at the site appears to be underlain by sedimentary
deposits of the Tertiary -age Delmar Formation throughout the site. These deposits consist of olive-
green to rust, moist to wet, very stiff, silty clay, and extend to unknown depths
TECTONIC SETTING: It should be noted that much of Southern California, including the San Diego
County area, is characterized by a series of Quaternary -age fault zones which typically consist of several
individual, en echelon faults that generally strike in a northerly to northwesterly direction. Some of these
fault zones (and the individual faults within the zone) are classified as active while others are classified
as only potentially active according to the criteria of the California Division of Mines and Geology.
Active fault zones are those which have shown conclusive evidence of faulting during the Holocene Epoch
(the most recent 11,000 years) while potentially active fault zones have demonstrated movement during
the Pleistocene Epoch (11,000 to 2 million years before the present) but no movement during Holocene
time.
The active Rose Canyon Fault Zone is located approximately 7 miles west of the site; other active fault
zones in the region that could possibly affect the site include the Coronado Bank, San Diego Trough and
San Clemente Fault Zones to the west; the Elsinore and San Jacinto Fault Zones to the northeast; and the
Agua Blanca and San Miguel Fault Zones to the south.
GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
GENERAL: No geologic hazards of sufficient magnitude to preclude development of the site as we
presently contemplate it are known to exist. In our professional opinion and to the best of our
knowledge, the site is suitable for the proposed improvements.
GROUNDSHABING: One of the more likely geologic hazards to affect the site is groundshaking as
a result of movement along one of the major, active fault zones mentioned above. The maximum bedrock
SCS &T 9511218 December 5, 1995 Page 4
accelerations that would be attributed to a maximum probable earthquake occurring along the nearest
portion of selected fault zones that could affect the site are summarized in the Table.
TABLE I
Maximum Probable Maximum Bedrock
Fault Zone Distance Earthquake Acceleration
Rose Canyon
7 miles
6.5 magnitude
0.38 g
Coronado Bank
20 miles
7.0 magnitude
0.22 g
Elsinore
24 miles
7.3 magnitude
0.22 g
San Jacinto
44 miles
7.8 magnitude
0.13 g
San Clemente
55 miles
7.3 magnitude
0.08 g
It is likely that the site will experience the effects of at least one moderate to large earthquake during the
life of the proposed structures. It should be recognized that Southern California is an area that is subject
to some degree of seismic risk and that it is generally not considered economically feasible nor
technologically practical to build structures that are totally resistant to earthquake - related hazards.
Construction in accordance with the minimum requirements of the Uniform Building Code should
minimize damage due to seismic events.
SURFACE RUPTURE AND SOIL CRACKING: Based on the information available to us, we are not
aware of any evidence suggesting that faults are present at the subject site proper; therefore, the site is
not considered susceptible to surface rupture. The likelihood of soil cracking caused by shaking from
distant sources should be considered to be nominal.
LIQUEFACTION: The majority of the alluvial soils are fine- grained, cohesive soils which are generally
not considered to be susceptible to liquefaction. However, the possibility of liquefaction occurring within
sandy lenses interbedded with the cohesive soils cannot be ruled out. In our opinion, any such
liquefaction would be relatively limited in extent, and would not be likely to cause major damage to the
proposed structures. In addition, the proposed site grading and surcharging recommended in later
sections of this report will reduce the potential for liquefaction at the site by densifying the underlying
soils.
FLOODING: The site is located on the northern margin of a 100 -year flood plain. The proposed
grading, which will involve substantial raising of the southern portion of the site, will greatly reduce the
SCS &T 9511218 December 5, 1995 Page 5
risk of flooding at the site. The determination as to what other measures, if any, are required to
adequately mitigate the potential risk from flooding should be determined by the project civil engineer.
GROUNDWATER: As previously noted, standing surface water is visible in many areas of the southern
portion of the site. In addition, subsurface information obtained from the exploratory borings and
probing of the northern portion of the site indicate that groundwater is generally present at depths of one
to three feet throughout the site. Recommendations for the mitigation of potential adverse effects upon
the project due to the groundwater are presented in the following sections of this report.
TSUNAMIS: Tsunamis are great sea waves produced by a submarine earthquake or volcanic eruption.
Due to the site's location, it is not subject to tsunamis.
SEICHES: Seiches are periodic oscillations in large bodies of water such as lakes, harbors, bays, or
reservoirs. No such large bodies of standing water are located in an area that could possibly affect the
subject site.
CONCLUSIONS
GENERAL
In general, no geotechnical conditions were encountered which would preclude the development of the
site as presently proposed, provided the recommendations presented herein are followed. The main
geotechnical considerations for site development is the presence of potentially compressible alluvium and
a relative shallow groundwater table. This condition will require special site preparation and foundation
consideration as described herein.
ALLUVIAL DEPOSITS: The site is underlain by alluvial deposits. As encountered in our borings
this material ranges in depth from 18 feet to 33 feet. However, the maximum alluvium depth is
anticipated at the southeastern corner of the site where the alluvium depth is estimated to be about
50 feet. In general, most of the alluvium was found to be in a saturated, condition, and has a
moderate to high consolidation potential. In addition, it is anticipated that some of the alluvium may
be liquefiable if subject to credible magnitude earthquakes. It is proposed to raise the existing
grades by about four feet within the building areas, and by ten feet around the buildings. This
grading scheme will result in long term consolidation settlement of the underlying alluvium. In
addition, settlements due to the foundation loads need to be considered. Based on the proposed
SCS &T 9511218 December 5, 1995 Page 6
development scheme and the geotechnical characteristics of the site, it is our opinion that the most
practical site preparation alternative is the surcharge of the site. The amount of surcharge should
take into account the finish grade elevations and design soil bearing capacity. Based on these
parameters, it is our opinion that the surcharge should consist of a uniform fill with a height equal
to the highest proposed finish pad grade. This will require two grading operations, one to place the
surcharge fill and one to remove the excess material. In addition, unless stockpiling on site is
possible, a second import operation will be necessary to generate wall backfill soil. Construction
may begin after the majority of the long term settlement has occurred. It is anticipated that this
period will be no less than one month and no more than six months.
GROUNDWATER: Depending upon seasonal changes groundwater elevation at the site may be
at or within four feet from existing elevations. This condition will hamper grading operation, and
may require partial dewatering, handling of saturated soils and the placement of a stabilizing rock
blanket. This blanket will have the equal purpose of providing a stable bottom of excavation, and
dissipating pore pressures in the event of a liquefaction event.
As indicated in the geologic hazards section of this report, it is assumed that some of the alluvial deposits
are potentially liquefiable. In order to mitigate this condition, a pore dissipation blanket has been
recommended. Furthermore, special foundation and slab -on -grade consideration is recommended in form
of increased foundation and slab -on -grade reinforcement, and increased slab thickness.
RECOMMENDATIONS
GRADING
SITE PREPARATION: Site preparation should begin with the removal of existing vegetation and
deleterious matter from the area of the site to be developed. Existing alluvial deposits underlying
proposed building areas and settlement - sensitive improvements should be removed to a minimum depth
of six feet below finish grade. At this depth partial dewatering is likely to be necessary. The removed
soil should then be stockpiled and replaced as compacted fill after the stabilizing rock blanket is
constructed. Minimum horizontal removal limits of this operation should extend to the edge of the
proposed fill.
SATURATED SOILS: It is anticipated that the bottom of the excavation will expose saturated soils.
In order to provide for a stable bottom it is recommended that a layer of stabilizing geofabric (SUPAC
SCS &T 9511218 December 5, 1995 Page 7
8NP or similar) be placed at the bottom of the excavation. The geofabric should be overlain by two feet
of crushed rock. The geofabric should lap around the sides of the crushed rock. The crushed rock
should be covered with filter fabric (Mirafi 140N or equivalent). Saturated soils generated during the
removal operation will require aeration or mixing with drier soils prior to placement as compacted fill.
It is suggested that specialized grading equipment such as a swamp cat or an excavator be used for
removal operations.
IMPORTED FILL: Imported fill material should consist of granular and nondetrimentally expansive
(expansion index less than 50) soil with relatively low permeability characteristics. Imported fill should
be approved by this office prior to delivery to the site. Imported fill could also be used to backfill
proposed retaining walls.
SURCHARGE FILL: It is recommended that the site be surcharged by placing a uniform fill with a
height equal to the highest proposed finish grade. At least five settlement monuments should be installed
immediately after the surcharge fill is placed. It is recommended that one monument be placed in the
middle of the site, and one near each corner. The monuments should be surveyed biweekly, and the
elevations reading should be promptly forwarded to the soils engineer for evaluation. The surveying
intervals should be adjusted by the soil engineer as necessary. It is anticipated that the surcharging period
will range from a minimum of one month to a maximum of six months. Construction may begin after
the soils engineer has determined that most of the anticipated settlements have occurred and any
remaining settlement would not be detrimental to the proposed improvements.
SURFACE DRAINAGE: It is recommended that all surface drainage be directed away from the
proposed structures and the top of slopes. Ponding of water should not be allowed adjacent to
foundations. Rain gutters are recommended. Rain gutters should be connected to appropriate drainage
devices.
EARTHWORK: All earthwork and grading contemplated for site preparation should be accomplished
in accordance with the attached Recommended Grading Specifications and Special Provisions. All special
site preparation recommendations presented in the sections above will supersede those in the standard
Recommended Grading Specifications. All embankments, structural fill and fill should be compacted to
at least 90 percent relative compaction at or slightly over optimum moisture content. Utility trench
backfill within five feet of the proposed structures and beneath asphalt pavements should be compacted
to a minimum of 90 percent of its maximum dry density. The maximum dry density of each soil type
should be determined in accordance with ASTM Test D- 1557 -78, Method A or C.
SCS &T 9511218 December 5, 1995 Page 8
SLOPE STABILITY
GENERAL: it is our opinion that cut and /or fill slopes constructed at a 2:1 (horizontal to vertical)
inclination will possess an adequate factor -of- safety with respect to deep seated rotational failure to a
height of at least ten feet provided the recommendations of this report are implemented.
TEMPORARY SLOPES: It is anticipated that temporary cut slopes extending to a maximum height of
about ten feet will be necessary. It is recommended that these slopes be constructed at a 1:1 (horizontal
to vertical inclination). No surcharge loads should be placed within assistance of five feet from the top
of temporary cut slopes.
FOUNDATIONS
GENERAL: Shallow foundations may be utilized for the support of the proposed structures. The
footings should have a minimum depth of 24 inches below lowest adjacent finish pad grade. A minimum
width of 12 inches and 24 inches is recommended for continuous and isolated footings, respectively. A
bearing capacity of 2000 psf may be assumed for said footings. This bearing capacity may be increased
by one -third when considering wind and /or seismic forces.
REINFORCEMENT: Both exterior and interior continuous footings should be reinforced with at least
two No. 5 bars positioned near the bottom of the footing and at least two No. 5 bars positioned near the
top of the footing. This reinforcement is based on soil characteristics and is not intended to be in lieu of
reinforcement necessary to satisfy structural considerations.
FOUNDATION EXCAVATION OBSERVATION: It is recommended that all foundation excavations
be approved by a representative from this office prior to forming or placement of reinforcing steel.
SETTLEMENT CHARACTERISTICS: The anticipated total and /or differential settlements for the
proposed structures may be considered to be within tolerable limits provided the recommendations
presented in this report are followed. It should be recognized that minor cracks normally occur in
concrete slabs and foundations due to shrinkage during curing or redistribution of stresses and some
cracks may be anticipated. Such cracks are not necessarily an indication of excessive vertical movements.
SCS &T 9511218 December 5, 1995
ON -GRADE SLABS
Page 9
INTERIOR CONCRETE SLABS -ON- GRADE: Concrete slabs -on -grade should have a thickness of
five inches and be reinforced with at least No. 3 reinforcing bars placed at 12 inches on center each way.
Slab reinforcement should be placed approximately at mid - height of the slab. The slab should be
underlain by a four -inch blanket of clean, poorly graded, coarse sand or crushed rock. This blanket
should consist of 100 percent material passing the two -inch screen and no more than ten percent and five
percent passing #100 and #200 sieve, respectively. Where moisture sensitive floor coverings are planned,
a visqueen barrier should be placed over the sand layer. To allow for proper concrete curing, the
visqueen should be overlain by at least two inches of sand.
EXTERIOR SLABS -ON- GRADE: Exterior slabs should have a minimum thickness of five inches.
Walks or slabs five feet in width should be reinforced with at least No. 3 reinforcing bars placed at 24
inches on center each way provided with weakened plane joints. The exterior slab between both buildings
should be structurally tied to the buildings as recommended by the structural engineer. Any slabs
between five and ten feet should be provided with longitudinal weakened plane joints at the center lines.
Slabs exceeding ten feet in width should be provided with a weakened plane joint located three feet inside
the exterior perimeter as indicated on attached Plate Number 17. Both transverse and longitudinal
weakened plane joints should be constructed as detailed in Plate Number 17. Exterior slabs adjacent to
structures should be connected to the footings by dowels consisting of No. 3 reinforcing bars placed at
24 -inch intervals extending 12 inches into the footing and the slab.
GRADING AND FOUNDATION PLAN REVIEW
The grading and foundation plans should be submitted to this office for review to ascertain that the
recommendations contained in this report are implemented and no revised recommendations are necessary
due to changes in the development scheme.
EARTH RETAINING WALLS
FOUNDATIONS: The foundation recommendations provided in the foundation section of this report
are also applicable to retaining walls.
PASSIVE PRESSURE: The passive pressure for the prevailing soil conditions may be considered to
be 350 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. This pressure may be increased one -third for seismic
SCS &T 9511218 December 5, 1995 Page 10
loading. The coefficient of friction for concrete to soil may be assumed to be 0.35 for the resistance to
lateral movement. When combining frictional and passive resistance, the friction should be reduced by
one - third. The upper 12 inches of soil should not be considered when calculating passive pressures for
exterior walls.
ACTIVE PRESSURE: The active soil pressure for the design of unrestrained earth retaining structures
with level backfills may be assumed to be equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing 32 pounds per
cubic foot. For restrained walls an equivalent fluid pressure of 52 pcf may be assumed. These pressures
do not consider any other surcharge loads. If any are anticipated, this office should be contacted for the
necessary increase in soil pressure. This value assumes a granular and drained backfill condition.
Waterproofing specifications and details should be provided by the project architect. A typical wall
subdrain detail is provided on the attached Plate Number 18.
WATERPROOFING AND SUBDRAIN OBSERVATION: The geotechnical engineer should be
requested to verify that waterproofing has been applied and that the subdrain has been properly installed.
However, unless specifically asked to do so, we will not verify proper application of the waterproofing.
BACKFILL: All backfill soils should be compacted to at least 90% relative compaction. Expansive or
clayey soils should not be used for backfill material. The wall should not be backfilled until the masonry
has reached an adequate strength.
FACTOR OF SAFETY: The above values, with the exception of the allowable soil bearing pressure,
do not include a factor of safety. Appropriate factors of safety should be incorporated into the design to
prevent the walls from overturning and sliding.
LIMITATIONS
REVIEW, OBSERVATION AND TESTING
The recommendations presented in this report are contingent upon our review of final plans and
specifications. Such plans and specifications should be made available to the geotechnical engineer and
engineering geologist so that they may review and verify their compliance with this report and with
Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code.
SCS &T 9511218 December 5, 1995 Page 11
It is recommended that Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc. be retained to provide continuous soil
engineering services during the earthwork operations. This is to verify compliance with the design
concepts, specifications or recommendations and to allow design changes in the event that subsurface
conditions differ from those anticipated prior to start of construction.
UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS
The recommendations and opinions expressed in this report reflect our best estimate of the project
requirements based on an evaluation of the subsurface soil conditions encountered at the subsurface
exploration locations and on the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate appreciably from those
encountered. It should be recognized that the performance of the foundations and /or cut and fill slopes
may be influenced by undisclosed or unforeseen variations in the soil conditions that may occur in the
intermediate and unexplored areas. Any unusual conditions not covered in this report that may be
encountered during site development should be brought to the attention of the geotechnical engineer so
that he may make modifications if necessary.
CHANGE IN SCOPE
This office should be advised of any changes in the project scope or proposed site grading so that we may
determine if the recommendations contained herein are appropriate. This should be verified in writing
or modified by a written addendum
TIME LIMITATIONS
The findings of this report are valid as of this date. Changes in the condition of a property can, however,
occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the work of man on this or
adjacent properties. In addition, changes in the Standards -of- Practice and /or Government Codes may
occur. Due to such changes, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or in part by changes
beyond our control. Therefore, this report should not be relied upon after a period of two years without
a review by us verifying the suitability of the conclusions and recommendations.
PROFESSIONAL STANDARD
In the performance of our professional services, we comply with that level of care and skill ordinarily
exercised by members of our profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in the same
SCS &T 9511218 December 5, 1995 Page 12
locality. The client recognizes that subsurface conditions may vary from those encountered at the locations
where our borings, surveys, and explorations are made, and that our data, interpretations, and
recommendations be based solely on the information obtained by us. We will be responsible for those
data, interpretations, and recommendations, but shall not b e responsible for the interpretations by others
of the information developed. Our services consist of professional consultation and observation only, and
no warranty of any kind whatsoever, express or implied, is made or intended in connection with the work
performed or to be performed by us, or by our proposal for consulting or other services, or by our
furnishing of oral or written reports or findings.
CLIENT'S RESPONSIBILITY
It is the responsibility of Mr. Robert Halliday, or his representatives to ensure that the information and
recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the structural engineer and architect for
the project and incorporated into the project's plans and specifications. It is further his responsibility to
take the necessary measures to insure that the contractor and his subcontractors carry out such
recommendations during construction.
FIELD EXPLORATIONS
Four subsurface explorations were made at the locations indicated on the attached Plate Number I on
October 17, 1995- These explorations consisted of borings drilled utilizing a truck mounted drill rig
equipped with a continuous flight auger. The field work was conducted under the observation of our
engineering geology personnel.
The subsurface explorations were carefully logged when made. These logs are presented on the following
Plates Number 3 through 8. The soils are described in accordance with the Unified Soils Classification
System as illustrated on the attached simplified chart on Plate Number 2. In addition, a verbal textural
description, the wet color, the apparent moisture and the density or consistency are provided. The density
of granular soils is given as either very loose, loose, medium dense, dense or very dense. The consistency
of silts or clays is given as either very soft, soft, medium stiff, stiff, very stiff, or hard.
Disturbed and "undisturbed" samples of typical and representative soils were obtained and returned to
the laboratory for testing. Representative undisturbed ring samples were obtained by means of a split tube
sampler driven into the soils by means of a 140 -pound weight free falling a distance of 30 inches. The
number of blows required to drive the sampler is indicated on the boring lots as "penetration resistance."
SCS &T 9511218 December 5, 1995 Page 13
Standard penetration tests (SPT) were also performed at selected locations to determine the relative
density of the subsurface soils.
LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with the generally accepted American Society for Testing
and Materials (ASTM) test methods or suggested procedures. A brief description of the tests performed
is presented below:
a) CLASSIFICATION: Field classifications were verified in the laboratory by visual
examination. The final soil classifications are in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification
System.
b) MOISTURE - DENSITY: In -place moisture contents and dry densities were determined for
representative soil samples. This information was an aid to classification and permitted
recognition of variations in material consistency with depth. The dry unit weight is determined
in pounds per cubic foot, and the in -place moisture content is determined as a percentage of
the soil's dry weight. The results are summarized in the boring logs.
c) GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION: The grain size distribution was determined from
representative samples of the native soils in accordance with ASTM D422. The results of these
tests are presented on Plates Number 9.
d) HYDROMETER: The grain size distribution was determined from representative samples of
the native soils in accordance with ASTM D422. The results of these tests are presented on
Plates Number 9, 10 and 11.
e) COMPACTION TEST: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of a typical
soil as determined in the laboratory in accordance with ASTM Standard Test D- 1557 -78,
Method A. The results of this test are presented on below.
COMPACTION TEST RESULTS
Maximum Optimum Moisture
Sample Description Density (pcf) Content ( %)
B1 ® 1' -3' Brown Silty Sand 114.1 11.1
SCS &T 9511218 December 5, 1995 Page 14
f) CONSOLIDATION TEST: Consolidation tests were performed on selected "undisturbed"
samples. The consolidation apparatus was designed to accommodate a 1- inch -high by 2.375 -
inch or 2.500 -inch diameter soil sample laterally confined by a brass ring. Porous stones were
placed in contact with the top and bottom of the sample to permit the addition or release of
pore fluid during testing. Loads were applied to the sample in a geometric progression after
vertical movement ceased, and resulting deformations were recorded. The percent
consolidation is reported as the ratio of the amount of vertical compression to the original
sample height. The test sample was inundated at some point in the test cycle to determine its
behavior under the anticipated loads as soil moisture increases. The results of this test are
presented in the form of a curve on Plates Number 12, 13, 14 and 15.
g) DIRECT SHEAR TESTS: A direct shear test was performed to determine the failure
envelope based on yield shear strength. The shear box was designed to accommodate a sample
having a diameter of 2.375 inches or 2.50 inches and a height of 1.0 inch. Samples were tested
at different vertical loads and a saturated moisture content. The shear stress was applied at a
constant rate of strain of approximately 0.05 inch per minute. The results of this test are
presented on the attached Plate Number 16.
0
40 80 160` /-
Q66_�ZCFS-
5'sCREEN EEN E
R O<'TA /L q'•
SCOTT VALLEY
<t Rc31 PARK
\ \�
�RL CB�TEroOBE�\
RETANNG
All,
\PFOPOSfO A.0 PARX /NO
AREA ON ORADRS
m
T /on/s \ d 'EX , e °vcP SEx�R/ —v. Ersrzrvl 1! =f
M
2 Da 'a(�t ROAD
�� P •Y3µ 3 i P> � ST 2 u'A L � • � -/
"f-`'� 901 1 X ' I r � TY'PE N<ET �c {!ST/NG /M1'G20 ✓EMEN75
. �-" -a2 M1' - UC ✓ERT EX /ST RiW�
1 �' Tara "`i -SLO EEASFwYENT PER OfYG EPA -5
eft �E,:/srsmPE a ✓- ° i �ci-� I�T'r,i
SECTION A -A" -�- \-
NO SCALE EX /57 /t✓G CNA /NG /N /! - - 2eg
FENCE ARE-A5 TO RENA /,V_� -
�e y
tza Bo.w.NE
I � "fi- 6KEUN�'e•� as w,6 xF�.w+�a�#- i \`i / �� ew � �_sza %�` / / {/ `e:/,�LE �`.
\\
PRIME ARTERIAL
OLIVENHAIN ROAD
TO BE IMPROVED BY CITY OF CARLSBAD � ENCINITAS
O SCALE
8, k Ili Catl C, Link
SPI Y RIIII such es
DI KA. rtzmin9 ! Cel f i fl a @
5 024 O1 S pSCME Ar 0.51 AC. G . t 06
i°
10.31 AG' NETY
Now—
WISH ndS Protection Fence - DETAIL °A"
NO SCALE
�'„� 99• 5d 25 50" 30
t--
a
E
/M17aR0✓EMEN75P R \ 'L - / \ �PROPOSEB OPEN SPACE
80- C/TY OF URCSBAO -80 \ EASEMENT TO CITY OF ENCLN /TA;
PL AN N� 836 -5 E{ ST CRODU L /NE \ \ \{
SECTION B -B
SCALES: HORIZ. I " =AO'
VERT. i"_ 20'
Ol_i Vc?:i1AiN A,
�1 ICS &T LEGEND
4D APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION
� o \
N u i Qo
h
ti R eoW oa ` °- HOME DEPOT \\
c� S1 Tr PRaFCFnTLFR��o�r F, —
F /GFUTI' Na TONAL TI Lc -
DEen 9502772 0 +-/P s5 W
f•EMS N / 2 6 /O Q //
VICINITY MAP MENOTDEFiNEDLO T,ONSANDA 'lLOTTED
NO SCALE PE Sa ry OE I
0
ED =_F. DA AND LCTTEO � \
M
aN<cvs
dW 90
\— reR RAP
KC MINOR USE ' I '
9g
C
PREPARED BY:
A a e2PROPOSEO CR /B wALL AP N. 255-040-06
M1 2 T6
JAMES A. LARET R.C.E. 29375 DATE - _
naE �q �•
FOR
SELF STORAGE FACILITY
CRa�GOY¢ @1�G•1 -TNP PL4ST'N'c•stIIR•EVING•CR.S SORVBS'U'G I
95t 1218 0. 1 --
Cr' /ST /B t!C.P
SEWER -
OWNER:
9"
SCOTT VALLEY PARK ` LEUCAD,A PARTNERS LTD.
Bw B55
FE % BOB HALO /DAY
65 "'1" ST.
SAN DIE_-,O, CA. 92103
y�5
0
LC 4J
MAP ,C, -,, APPLICANT I�� ti, r. �,
ENGNtTAS SELF STORASE LTD.
_
C/e BOB A/A1114t4Y
% 4285
16L
SAN D /COOS C CA. 9c`10.3
(6!91295 °x100
j
LEGAL DESCPIPT /O:Y
PCB . 107 1, PV0. LAS ENC 1NilA5
o f
. , ?N, 255-22r Z., OWNER
/
T, eS -7 -
\
E�(16T /NG I
-OPEN
BPACE EAJEAF -ENT Bt,
� LEUCADlA PARTNERS LTD.
j€
' E�CISi. SEWER EASEMENT
LAND
USE I
THIS 51TE IS DESIGNATED AS
P L A N N I N AREA 4
(COMMERCIAULIGHi INDUSTRIAL) IN
THE HOME DEPOT SPECIFIC PLAN
i N
ADOPTED BY THE ENCINITAS C"
COUNCILONSEPTEMBER221993AS
N
ORDINANCE NO 9317 STORAGE
0
0
99, BUILDNGS ISELFSTORAGE) ARE
N
2 - - - - --
X000 AVOWED IN PLANNING AREA A WRH
- THE APPROVAL OF A MINOR USE
�-..
l
PERM i AND SUBJECT TO T. E S
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS =
SPECIFIED IN PAGES 111 C 11166 g
C OF THE ADOPTED SPECICI IFC PLAN i
9P TEXT. :
WOOD RD.
ORCHARD
9g
C
PREPARED BY:
SOUTH. ;RN CALIFORNIA
SOIL TESTING,INC�.
M1 2 T6
JAMES A. LARET R.C.E. 29375 DATE - _
naE �q �•
.ENCINITAS SELF STORAGE
ar. OBAjSD __F.TE - tt 27 -95
CRa�GOY¢ @1�G•1 -TNP PL4ST'N'c•stIIR•EVING•CR.S SORVBS'U'G I
95t 1218 0. 1 --
510BCeIZeCa Dal BOSQUe *i6f9)iSG93]4
P.O. Bes90Bt ftanc ^o Santa Fe, CA 9206]' Fax (819) ]S6d231
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LEGEND
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUP SYMBOL
TYPICAL NAMES
I. COARSE GRAINED,
more than half
of material is
lar er than
SILTS AND CLAYS
No. 200 sieve
size.
GRAVELS
CLEAN GRAVELS
GW
Well graded gravels, gravel -
oA re an half of
mixtures with slight plas-
sand mixtures, little or no
coarse fraction is
ticity.
Liquid Limit
fines.
larger than No. 4
less than 50
GP
Poorly graded gravels, gravel
sieve size but
clays, sandy clays, silty
sand mixtures, little or no
smaller than 3 °.
clays, lean clays.
fines.
Organic silts and organic
GRAVELS WITH FINES
GM
Silty gravels, poorly graded
SILTS AND CLAYS
(Appreciable amount
Inorganic silts, micaceous
gravel -sand -silt mixtures.
of fines)
GC
Clayey gravels, poorly
or silty soils, elastic
graded gravel -sand, clay
Liquid Limit
CH
Inorganic clays of high
mixtures.
SANDS
CLEAN SANDS
SW
Well graded sand, gravelly
More than half of
sands, little or no fines.
coarse fraction is
PT
SP
Poorly graded sands, gravelly
smaller than No. 4
organic soils.
sands, little or no fines.
sieve size.
SANDS WITH FINES
SM
Silty sands, poorly graded
(Appreciable amount
sand and silty mixtures.
of fines)
Sc
Clayey sands, poorly graded
sand and clay mixtures.
II. FINE GRAINED, more than
half of material is smaller
than No. 200 sieve size.
SILTS AND CLAYS
ML
Inorganic silts and very
fine sands, rock flour, sandy
silt or clayey- silt -sand
mixtures with slight plas-
ticity.
Liquid Limit
CL
Inorganic clays of low to
less than 50
medium plasticity, gravelly
clays, sandy clays, silty
clays, lean clays.
OL
Organic silts and organic
silty clays or low plasticity.
SILTS AND CLAYS
MH
Inorganic silts, micaceous
or diatomaceous fine sandy
or silty soils, elastic
silts.
Liquid Limit
CH
Inorganic clays of high
greater than 50
plasticity, fat clays.
ON
Organic clays of medium
to high plasticity.
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
PT
Peat and other highly
organic soils.
1 — Water level at time of excavation
or as indicated
US — Undisturbed, driven ring sample
or tube sample
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOIL i TESTING, INC.
CK — Undisturbed chunk sample
BG — Bulk sample
SP — Standard penetration sample
Y: UBA
ENCINITAS SELF STORAGE
TE: II -1
013 NUMBER: 9511218 Plate No. 2
6 IOS I I I I I 6 1 100.9 1 24.6
SM Grey Brown to Red Brown, Satur- Loose
$ CLAYEY SILTY SAND ated
10 BG
US 12 103.3 20.6
12
14 ML/ Grey Brown, SANDY CLAYEY Satur- Medium
CL SILT /SILTY CLAY ated Stiff
16 H BG I I I I 12 100.0 1 23.3
18
CL/ DEL MAR FORMATION, Green Moist Very
ML to Rust, SANDY SILTY Stiff
20 CLAY
40
22
24
26 US 36
Boring Ended at 26'
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG
SOIL &TESTING, INC. LOGGED BY: MF DATE LOGGED: 10 -17 -95
JOB NUMBER: 9511218 Plate No. 3
BORING NUMBER 1
W
r "'
o w
r
_
w "
z
Z
Z
W
Z r
W y
—
<< p
z
W
S
W
J U
ELEVATION
¢ r
r
¢ z
¢ r
_
w _
r z
r r
a
o
U
o
N
O
< 2
a Z
< O
z y a
W w;
�. —
¢
o Z
2 O
w a
¢
J
DESCRIPTION
O¢
U
W¢ d
U
O
O
U
—
U
SM
ALLUVIUM, Yellow Brown,
Moist
Loose
SILTY SAND
2
BG
Water Table
Wet
'
Satur-
4
ated
6 IOS I I I I I 6 1 100.9 1 24.6
SM Grey Brown to Red Brown, Satur- Loose
$ CLAYEY SILTY SAND ated
10 BG
US 12 103.3 20.6
12
14 ML/ Grey Brown, SANDY CLAYEY Satur- Medium
CL SILT /SILTY CLAY ated Stiff
16 H BG I I I I 12 100.0 1 23.3
18
CL/ DEL MAR FORMATION, Green Moist Very
ML to Rust, SANDY SILTY Stiff
20 CLAY
40
22
24
26 US 36
Boring Ended at 26'
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG
SOIL &TESTING, INC. LOGGED BY: MF DATE LOGGED: 10 -17 -95
JOB NUMBER: 9511218 Plate No. 3
—_
OL
—
BORING NUMBER 2
w
a
_
o
v
t
w
a
Medium
Z
_
r
i
z
¢
z w_
Stiff
r
z°
y
¢
SM/
W
>
O
=
W
J U
_
E L E V A T I O N
W
¢
US
W
¢ w
N
z
<<
¢
Loose
O
z _
w_
24.0
z
a
1
a
p
22
Medium
p
M
-
O
d tll
C Z
D
z
N
°
G
a
-
O
Z
z
W
W
<
d
US
¢�
W
W
C
¢
i
O
¢
i
DESCRIPTION
U
2
d
°
U
O
U
U
0
SM ALLUVIUM, Yellow Brown, Humid Loose
SILTY SAND to
2 Moist
US 9 95.3 5.7
4 Water Table
Satur-
6 1 US ated 9 99.8 18.0
8
SM Grey Brown to Red Brown, Satur- Loose
CLAYEY SILTY SAND ated
10
US 10 96.9 26.1
12
14 CL/ Red Brown to Grey Brown, Satur- Medium
ML SANDY SILTY CLAY /CLAYEY ated Stiff
SILT
16 OS 12 105.9 20.6
18
ML/
Yellow Brown, CLAYEY SILT
Satur-
Medium
CL&
and CLAYEY SILTY SAND,
ated
Stiff
20
SM/
Interbedded
and
US
SC
Loose
12
103.0
24.0
to
22
Medium
Dense
24
US
11
101.4
23.7
26
128
1 30
ML/ I CLAY Brown, SANDY SILTY Satur- (Stiff
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG
TL' SOIL &TESTING, INC. LOGGED BY: MF DATE LOGGED: 10 -17 -95
JOB NUMBER: 9511218 Plate No. 4
—
w
r
O
BORING NUMBER 2
w_
r
=
U
_
H
<
Z ¢
2 W-
r Z
h
w
¢
W=
> O
(CONTINUED)
c ._
y i
¢
w Z
~ Z
r
F
W <
p O
p=
Z
O¢
ul �
W W ;
r
¢
O
O
G 2
DESCRIPTION
U o
p¢ c
°
U
O
3D
U
U
US
CL/
Grey Brown, SANDY SILTY
Satur-
Very
36
107.3
20.8
ML
CLAY
ated
Stiff
32
CL/
DEL MAR FORMATION,
Wet
Very
34
ML
Olive Green, SANDY SILTY
Stiff
CLAY
US
20
36
Boring Ended at 36'
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
TSOIL &TESTING, INC.
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG
LOGGED Br: MF DATE LOGGED:10-17 -95
JOB NUMBER: 9511218 Plate No. 5
—_
BG
z
0
BORING NUMBER 3
W
Z
0 U
=
w x
Satur-
I
I
I
¢
z
z
N
¢
2
W
J U
ELEVATION
W
CL/
F
Medium
y
m c)
ML&
Interbedded SANDY SILTY
—
Stiff
❑
<
N
SM/
< I
< O¢
W w
¢
O
N
SAND
DESCRIPTION
Loose
U
BG
O
V
8
_
Medium
Dense
SM
ALLUVIUM, Yellow Brown,
Moist
Loose
2
BG
SILTY SAND
V ater Table
14
US
US
Satur-
I
I
I
13
ated
SP
4
11
r6
CL/
Grey Brown to Red Brown,
Satur-
Medium
ML&
Interbedded SANDY SILTY
ated
Stiff
6
US
SM/
CLAY and CLAYEY SILTY
and
9
SP
SAND
Loose
BG
to
8
Medium
Dense
10
US
17
16
US
I
I
I
I
13
12
SP
11
14
CL/ I Grey Brown, SANDY CLAYEY Satur- Medium
24 ML SILT /SILTY CLAY ated Stiff
26 SP 5
28 CL/ DEL MAR FORMATION, Olive Wet Very
ML Green, SANDY SILTY CLAY Stiff
30
99.2 1 24.9
w z
Y O
H H
< V
J <
W 6
O
U
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG
SOIL &TESTING, INC. LOGGED Br: MF DATE LOGGED: 10-17 -95
SOB NUMBER: 9511218 Plate No. 6
US
17
16
US
I
I
I
I
I
SP
11
r6
CL/ I Grey Brown, SANDY CLAYEY Satur- Medium
24 ML SILT /SILTY CLAY ated Stiff
26 SP 5
28 CL/ DEL MAR FORMATION, Olive Wet Very
ML Green, SANDY SILTY CLAY Stiff
30
99.2 1 24.9
w z
Y O
H H
< V
J <
W 6
O
U
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG
SOIL &TESTING, INC. LOGGED Br: MF DATE LOGGED: 10-17 -95
SOB NUMBER: 9511218 Plate No. 6
US
I
I
I
I
I
SP
14
220
CL/ I Grey Brown, SANDY CLAYEY Satur- Medium
24 ML SILT /SILTY CLAY ated Stiff
26 SP 5
28 CL/ DEL MAR FORMATION, Olive Wet Very
ML Green, SANDY SILTY CLAY Stiff
30
99.2 1 24.9
w z
Y O
H H
< V
J <
W 6
O
U
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG
SOIL &TESTING, INC. LOGGED Br: MF DATE LOGGED: 10-17 -95
SOB NUMBER: 9511218 Plate No. 6
W
Z
BORING NUMBER 3
r w
>
r U>
Z W
O U
>
�-
-
W M
_
_
K
Z w~
F- Z
VI
_
T
> O
_
(CONTINUED)
¢ r
s y Z
¢ r ..
r
a
1
LL
< N
<_ W
F- N
O u
0 w
< U
J <
<
VI
a O
o. Z
< O S
= N •
w
>
G
O =
z
w a
Q
N
J
DESCRIPTION
U O
W
a s o
�
O
O
U
O
30
U
US
CL/
Olive Green, SANDY SILTY
Wet
Hard
59
ML
CLAY
Boring Ended at 31'
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOIL &TESTING, INC.
LOGGED BY: MF
DATE LOGGED: 10 -17 -95
JOB NUMBER: 9511218
Plate No. 7
r-7 Water Table —
4 Satur-
ated
6
g ? ?
CL/ Grey Brown to Red Brown, Satur- Medium
ML& Interbedded SANDY SILTY ated Stiff
10 SM/ CLAY and CLAYEY SILTY and
Sc SAND Loose
to
12 Medium
Dense
14
16
18
20
22
CL/ DEL MAR FORMATION, Wet Very
24 1 ML Olive Green, SANDY SILTY Stiff
CLAY to
Hard
26 SP 40
28 � I I Boring Ended at 26.5'
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG
TC� SOIL &TESTING, INC. LOGGED Br: MF DATE LOGGED: 10 -17 -95
JOB NUMBER:9511218 Plate No. 8
>
z
°-
BORING NUMBER 4
W
_
•
o
=
W
_
W
F
U
ELEVATION
W M
¢ `-
W N
¢ y z
<< `p
¢ F
2
w=
F
r z
r F-
a
a
p W
< y
<_ w
y_
❑„
h w
< O
W
❑
7
<
y N
y
a -
a O
a m❑
a z
y� -
z M
;
n
r-
- f.
O z
<
W M
N
<
DESCRIPTION
<
< O¢
v O
W w
a¢ n
¢
°
2 O
v
¢ f
O
D
O
1
1
1
-
O
SM
ALLUVIUM, Yellow Brown,
Moist
Loose
SILTY SAND
2
r-7 Water Table —
4 Satur-
ated
6
g ? ?
CL/ Grey Brown to Red Brown, Satur- Medium
ML& Interbedded SANDY SILTY ated Stiff
10 SM/ CLAY and CLAYEY SILTY and
Sc SAND Loose
to
12 Medium
Dense
14
16
18
20
22
CL/ DEL MAR FORMATION, Wet Very
24 1 ML Olive Green, SANDY SILTY Stiff
CLAY to
Hard
26 SP 40
28 � I I Boring Ended at 26.5'
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG
TC� SOIL &TESTING, INC. LOGGED Br: MF DATE LOGGED: 10 -17 -95
JOB NUMBER:9511218 Plate No. 8
G
W
4H
N
0
S
T� SOIL AND TESTING
Wo
By: DBA
N
DATE:
D
Q
a
N
a
1
N
o
V1
Plate
0
N
N
a
W
n
E 9 'SCALE CORRECTION'
0 0
o
0
0
N
H
J
a E W
e W N
o N N
N W
a U
f7
Ca
a
w o
N
i
a
p O
N
N
N
O
O �
a O
O O
o_ 8i a 0 °m r 0
PERCENT FINER
O
r
c
Z
W
PROJECT:
N
STORAGE
N
T� SOIL AND TESTING
By: DBA
� W
DATE:
11 -15 -9
7
c
2 W
1
V)
9511218
Plate
0
o Q
Q
i =
H
N
o N
2 7
N
O
�1
V
m
m
III♦-II.II�
®
®��
®®
®
®
®
®
®
®
®
®
®®
rarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrarrra
Illlff
1111111
®
®
®
®
®
®
®®
®®®®®®®®
®®
®_®_®_®_®_®_®_®_®_®_
�Irw��l���lllwll�l
l�
■■yy■■■.■■■■
IIIII�IIIII■
mmmm111111�111111
1111�1�
■■■■■■■■■■
®®®®®®®®®®
aaaalaaaYaYYYYYYaW��
WY
0
0
N
H
J
a E W
e W N
o N N
N W
a U
f7
Ca
a
w o
N
i
a
p O
N
N
N
O
O �
a O
O O
o_ 8i a 0 °m r 0
PERCENT FINER
O
r
c
Z
W
PROJECT:
N
STORAGE
N
T� SOIL AND TESTING
By: DBA
� W
DATE:
11 -15 -9
7
c
2 W
1
V)
9511218
Plate
0
o Q
Q
i =
H
N
o N
2 7
N
O
�1
V
m
m
in
r
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
PROJECT:
ENCINITAS SELF
STORAGE
T� SOIL AND TESTING
By: DBA
DATE:
11 -15 -9
1
JOB NUMBER:
9511218
Plate
No. 9
tl
0
0
0
m
2
W �-
~ W �
'SCALE CORRECTION'
0
i
n
r
r
0
H
i
J
W
N
W
W
J
V
H
Q
I
J
U
g
N
a
pp LL
Zt
W
N
Q
O
U
LL
J
W
W
N
Q
O
U
J
m
O
U
IE
e
N
G
Z
W
N
V1
r W
Z '
W
uN
o Ix
Q
Z Z
H
N
6 N
Z �
w
ie
ZD
M �
m m
L SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PROJECT: ENCINITAS SELF STORAGE
�T SOIL AND TESTING BY: DBA DATE: 11 -15 -95
+ JOB NUMBER: 9511218 1 Plate No. 10
�
___®A_I___
m=mff1®im®®
.
mmmffmwi�=
O..®
®
®®®.1M1M=
MOORE
MEMMEMMMME
monmmmmmmmm
®
®
®
®
®
®
®
®
®®
®
®
®
®
®
®
®
®
®®
®
®
®
®
®
®
®
®
®®
®
®
®
®
®
®
®
®
®®
®il_
®_�flfli�YWfifYYW
IYY
ww�_�_�ww�ww�ww�ww�ww�ww�wrw
IIII■III���II��I��IIIII■
®
®
®
®
®
®
®
®
®®
®
®
®
®
®
®
®
®
®®
Y.IYYIYYIYYIYYIYYI..IYYIYY�Y.�
H
i
J
W
N
W
W
J
V
H
Q
I
J
U
g
N
a
pp LL
Zt
W
N
Q
O
U
LL
J
W
W
N
Q
O
U
J
m
O
U
IE
e
N
G
Z
W
N
V1
r W
Z '
W
uN
o Ix
Q
Z Z
H
N
6 N
Z �
w
ie
ZD
M �
m m
L SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PROJECT: ENCINITAS SELF STORAGE
�T SOIL AND TESTING BY: DBA DATE: 11 -15 -95
+ JOB NUMBER: 9511218 1 Plate No. 10
E V 'SCALE CORRECTIOW
V o
0 1
0
0
0
0
o �
m - n
¢ J
w.. m U
uj
W �
oo@ o r
O� N
i v N
N '
N .
m O
N m Om _
O
N N
o.. .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... N
o H y
uj
v W
0
N W < 3 2 W
N H y
O¢ ........ .... .... .... ............ .... .... mm o N N G
m.... I . ....... .... ........ ................ _ y W 4
J
Q ; U w Z z
N ¢ N
n
Q N
a U
m 2 �
n -
.... .... .... .... .... ...... ...... .... .... W N
n .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .... .. .. .... ..
W � Pl
.... .... .... .... .... .. .. .. .. .... .... ..... `
m U
m °o
- W
m
m m
O
U
r.. .. ........ .... .... .... .... .... ....
_ W¢ r
O
m
n o
0
PERCENT FINER
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PROJECT: ENCINITAS SELF STORAGE
�-� SOIL AND TESTING BY: OBA DATE: 11 -15 -95
+ JOB NUMBER: 9511218 Plate No. 11
3' W (11) JOINT 3'
�
W (11)
3'
LOWAT
CONT RDL
JOINT
TRANSV
CONTROL
IN
JOTS
UDNAL
ERSEW /2
W/2 W/2
SLAB ON GRADE 10 FEET OR GREATER IN WIDTH SLAB ON GRADE 5 FEET TO 10 FEET IN WIDTH
NOTE: 1.'W' SHOULD NOT EXCEED 15 FEET.
2 JOINT PATTERN SHOULD BE NEARLY SQUARE.
'T/2
•T
-T /4
TOOLED OR SAWED JOINT
REINFORCEMENT
PER REPORT
(2' MIL COVER)
"T = THICKNESS PER REPORT
CONTROL JOINT DETAIL
NO SCALE
��
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
T SOIL & TESTING, INC.
PROJECT: ENCINITAS SELF STORAGE
BY* DBA DATE: 12 -06 -95
JOB NUMBER: 9511218 Plate No. 17
I I
I I
I I
I I
6' MAX.
I
6' MIN.
o WATERPROOF BACK OF WALL PER
�. ARCHITECT'S SPECIFICATIONS
o'
0
° 3l4 INCH CRUSHED ROCK OR MIRADRAIN
-- -- 6000 OR EQUIVALENT
o'
o __-- GEOFABRIC BETWEEN ROCK AND SOIL
�o -
o '
0
0
12
° TOP OF GROUND
• o OR CONCRETE SLAB
o. '.�
6' MIN.
MINIMUM
4 INCH DIAMETER
PERFORATED PIPE
RETAINING WALL
SUBDRAIN DETAIL
NO SCALE
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ENCINITAS SELF STORAGE
SOIL & TESTING, INC. Br: DBA DATE: 12 -06 -95
jog NuMEEII: 9511218 Plate No. 18
APPENDIX
SCS &T 9511218 December 5, 1995 Appendix, Page 1
SELF STORAGE FACILITY, OLIVENHAIN ROAD, ENCINITAS
RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS - GENERAL PROVISIONS
GENERALINTENT
The intent of these specifications is to establish procedures for clearing, compacting natural ground,
preparing areas to be filled, and placing and compacting fill soils to the lines and grades shown on the
accepted plans. The recommendations contained in the preliminary geotechnical investigation report
and /or the attached Special provisions are a part of the Recommended Grading Specifications and shall
supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case of conflict. These specifications shall only be
used in conjunction with the geotechnical report for which they are a part. No deviation from these
specifications will be allowed, except where specified in the geotechnical report or in other written
communication signed by the Geotechnical Engineer.
OBSERVATION AND TESTING
Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc., shall be retained as the Geotechnical Engineer to observe and
test the earthwork in accordance with these specifications. It will be necessary that the Geotechnical
Engineer or his representative provide adequate observation so that my may provided his opinion as to
whether or not the work was accomplished as specified. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor
to assist the Geotechnical Engineer and to keep him appraised of work schedules, changes and new
information and data so that he may provided these opinions. In the event that any unusual conditions
not covered by the special provisions or preliminary geotechnical report are encountered during the
grading operations. The Geotechnical Engineer shall be contacted for further recommendations.
If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Engineer, substandard conditions are encountered, such as
questionable or unsuitable soil, unacceptable moisture content, inadequate compaction, adverse weather,
etc.; construction should be stopped until the conditions are remedied or corrected or he shall
recommended rejection of this work.
Tests used to determine the degree of compaction should be performed in accordance with the following
American Society for Testing and Materials test methods:
Maximum Density & Optimum Moisture Content - ASTM D- 1557 -91
Density of Soil In -Place - ASTM D- 1556 -90 or ASTM D -2922
SCS &T 9511218 December 5, 1995 Appendix, Page 2
All densities shall be expressed in terms of Relative Compaction as determined by the foregoing ASTM
testing procedures.
PREPARATION OF AREAS TO RECEIVE FILL
All vegetation, brush and debris derived from clearing operations shall be removed, and legally disposed
of. All areas disturbed by site grading should be left in a neat and finished appearance, free from
unsightly debris
After clearing or benching the natural ground, the areas to be filled shall be scarified to a depth of 6
inches, brought to the proper moisture content, compacted and tested for the specified minimum degree
of compaction. All loose soils in excess of 6 inches thick should be removed to firm natural ground
which is defined as natural soils which possesses an in -situ density of at least 90 percent of its maximum
dry density.
When the slope of the natural ground receiving fill exceeds 20 percent (5 horizontal units to 1 vertical
unit), the original ground shall be stepped or benched. Benches shall be cut to a firm competent
formational soils. The lower bench shall be at least 10 feet wide or 1 -1 /2 times the equipment width,
whichever is greater, and shall be sloped back into the hillside at a gradient of not less than two (20
percent. All other benches should be at least 6 feet wide. The horizontal portion of each bench shall be
compacted prior to receiving fill as specified herein for compacted natural ground. Ground slopes flatter
than 20 percent shall be benched when considered necessary by the Geotechnical Engineer.
Any abandoned buried structures encountered during grading operations must be totally removed. All
underground utilities to be abandoned beneath any proposed structure should be removed from within 10
feet of the structure and properly capped off. The resulting depressions from the above described
procedure should be back£lled with acceptable soil that is compacted to the requirements of the
Geotechnical Engineer. This includes, but is not limited to, septic tanks, fuel tanks, sewer lines or leach
lines, storm drains and water lines. Any buried structures or utilities no to be abandoned should be
brought to the attention of the Geotechnical Engineer so that he may determine if any special
recommendation will be necessary.
All water wells which will be abandoned should be backfilled and capped in accordance to the
requirements set forth by the Geotechnical Engineer. The top of the cap should be at least 4 feet below
finish grade or 3 feet below the bottom of footing whichever is greater. The type of cap will depend on
SCS &T 9511218 December 5, 1995 Appendix, Page 3
the diameter of the well and should be determined by the Geotechnical Engineer and/or a qualified
Structural Engineer.
FILL MATERIAL
Materials to be placed in the fill shall be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer and shall be free of
vegetable matter and other deleterious substances. Granular soil shall contain sufficient fine material to
fill the voids. The definition and disposition of oversized rocks and expansive or detrimental soils are
covered in the geotechnical report or Special Provisions. Expansive soils, soils of poor gradation, or soils
with low strength characteristics may be thoroughly mixed with other soils to provide satisfactory fill
material, but only with the explicit consent of the Geotechnical Engineer. Any import material shall be
approved by the Geotechnical Engineer before being brought to the site.
PLACING AND COMPACTION OF FILL
Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in layers not to exceed 6 inches
in compacted thickness. Each layer shall have a uniform moisture content in the range that will allow
the compaction effort to be efficiently applied to achieve the specified degree of compaction. Each layer
shall be uniformly compacted to the specified minimum degree of compaction with equipment of adequate
size to economically compact the layer. Compaction equipment should either be specifically designed
for soil compaction or of proven reliability. The minimum degree of compaction to be achieved is
specified in either the Special Provisions or the recommendations contained in the preliminary
geotechnical investigation report.
When the structural fill material includes rocks, no rocks will be allowed to nest and all voids must be
carefully filled with soil such that the minimum degree of compaction recommended in the Special
Provisions is achieved. The maximum size and spacing of rock permitted in structural fills and in non-
structural fills is discussed in the geotechnical report, when applicable.
Field observation and compaction tests to estimate the degree of compaction of the fill will be taken by
the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative. The location and frequency of the tests shall be at the
Geotechnical Engineer's discretion. When the compaction test indicates that a particular layer is at less
than the required degree of compaction, the layer shall be reworked to the satisfaction of the Geotechnical
Engineer and until the desired relative compaction has been obtained.
SCS &T 9511218 December 5, 1995 Appendix, Page 4
Fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepsfoot rollers or other suitable equipment. Compaction
by sheepsfoot roller shall be at vertical intervals of not greater than four feet. In addition, fill slopes at
a ratio of two horizontal to one vertical or flatter, should be trackrolled. Steeper fill slopes shall be over-
built and cut -back to finish contours after the slope has been constructed. Slope compaction operations
shall result in all fill material six or more inches inward from the finished face of the slope having a
relative compaction of at least 90 percent of maximum dry density or the degree of compaction specified
in the Special Provisions section of this specification. The compaction operation on the slopes shall be
continued until the Geotechnical Engineer is of the opinion that the slopes will be surficially stable.
Density tests in the slopes will be made by the Geotechnical Engineer during construction of the slopes
to determine if the required compaction is being achieved. Where failing tests occur or other field
problems arise, the Contractor will be notified that day of such conditions by written communication from
the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative in the form of a daily field report.
If the method of achieving the required slope compaction selected by the Contractor fails to produce the
necessary results, the Contractor shall rework or rebuild such slopes until the required degree of
compaction is obtained, at no cost to the Owner or Geotechnical Engineer
CUT SLOPES
The Engineering Geologist shall inspect cut slopes excavated in rock or lithified formational material
during the grading operations at intervals determined at his discretion. If any conditions not anticipated
in the preliminary report such as perched water, seepage, lenticular or confined strata of a potentially
adverse nature, unfavorably inclined bedding, joints or fault planes are encountered during grading„ these
conditions shall be analyzed by the Engineering Geologist and Soil Engineer to determine if mitigating
measures are necessary.
Unless otherwise specified in the geotechnical report, no cut slopes shall be excavated higher or steeper
than the allowed by the ordinances of the controlling governmental agency.
ENGINEERING OBSERVATION
Field observation by the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative shall be made during the filling and
compaction operations so that he can express his opinion regarding the conformance of the grading with
acceptable standards of practice. Neither the presence of the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative
SCS &T 9511218 December 5, 1995 Appendix, Page 5
or the observation and testing shall not release the Grading Contractor from his duty to compact all fill
material to the specified degree of compaction.
SEASON LIMITS
Fill shall not be placed during unfavorable weather conditions. When work is interrupted by heavy rain,
filling operations shall not be resumed until the proper moisture content and density of the fill materials
can be achieved. Damaged site conditions resulting from weather or acts of God shall be repaired before
acceptance of work.
RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS - SPECIAL PROVISIONS
RELATIVE COMPACTION: The minimum degree of compaction to be obtained in compacted natural
ground, compacted fill, and compacted backfill shall be at least 90 percent. For street and parking lot
subgrade, the upper six inches should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction.
EXPANSIVE SOILS: Detrimentally expansive soil is defined as clayey soil which has an expansion
index of 50 or greater when tested in accordance with the Uniform Building Code Standard 29 -C.
OVERSIZED MATERIAL: Oversized fill material is generally defined herein as rocks or lumps of soil
over 6 inches in diameter. Oversized materials should not be placed in fill unless recommendations of
placement of such material is provided by the geotechnical engineer. At least 40 percent of the fill soils
shall pass through a No. 4 U.S. Standard Sieve.
TRANSITION LOTS: Where transitions between cut and fill occur within the proposed building pad,
the cut portion should be undercut a minimum of one foot below the base of the proposed footings and
recompacted as structural backfill. In certain cases that would be addressed in the geotechnical report,
special footing reinforcement or a combination of special footing reinforcement and undercutting may be
required.
REVISED LOFFEL WALL
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
OLIVENHAIN SELF STORAGE
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
FOR
SOIL RETENTION SYSTEMS
W.O. 679 -1 -02 - JUNE 12, 1997
JASAJohn A Sayers and Associates, Inc.
Geotechnical Consultants
Soil Retention Systems June 12, 1997
6120 Paseo Del Norte, Suite Q -1 W.O. 679 -1 -02
Carlsbad, California 92009
Attention: Mr. Jan Jansson
Subject: Revised Loffel Wall Structural Design. Olivenhain Self Storage, Encinitas.
California
Gentlemen:
In accordance with your request, this report has been prepared to present the revised structural
design and supporting calculations for the improvements to be made to the existing geogrid
reinforced wall. Wall Type B. located at the subject site in Encinitas, California.
Based on a review of the submitted plan prepared by Laret Engineering Company, Inc.. the
maximum proposed exposed wall height will be 13± feet. Backfill behind the wall will be level.
The exposed wall height of Wall Type B will be increased by 4 blocks, or 2.17 feet.
Strength parameters for soil were obtained from Southern California Soils and Testing, Inc., the
geotechnical engineer of record for the project. Soils which will be used in the reinforced zone
should possess a minimum internal angle of friction of 33 degrees. Direct shear testing should
be performed during construction on proposed fill soils to verify strength parameters.
The proposed geogrid (Miragrid 5T) has been assigned a long term design strength (LTDS) of
1,050 lb/ft as determined by Mirafi, Inc., the grid manufacturer. One additional geogrid layer
will be added to the wall stack prior to the placement of the last 4 blocks.
The calculations included herein address internal and external stability of the soil reinforced wall
only. "Global" stability of the overall slope should be performed by the geotechnical engineer
of record.
27071 Cabot Road, Suite 101 • Laguna Hills, California 92653 -7009 • (714) 582 -2144
Soil Retention Systems
Page 2
W.O. 679 -1-02
June 12, 1997
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. If you should have any questions, please call.
Respectfully submitted,
JOHN A. SAYERS & ASSOCIATES
DAO /JS /mw
Encl: Appendix A - References
3
Appendix B - Local Wall Stability Analysis
Appendix C - Formulas, Equations and Variables
Plate I - Structural plan
Dist: (7) Addressee
I
JOHN A. SAYERS & ASSOCIATES
APPENDIX A
REFERENCES
JOHN A. SAYERS & ASSOCIATES
Soil Retention Systems
Page 3
W.O. 679 -1-02
June 12, 1997
1. Design Manual for Segmental Retaining Walls (1997), Second Edition, Concrete and
Masonry Association.
2. "Soil Parameters For the Design of Loffel Retaining Walls, Olivenhain Self Storage,
Encinitas, California," Prepared by Southern California Soils and Testing, Inc., dated
September 17, 1996
JOHN A. SAYERS & ASSOCIATES
APPENDIX B
LOCAL WALL
STABILITY ANALYSIS
JOHN A. SAYERS & ASSOCIATES
CALCULATIONS FOR LOFFEL WALL DESIGN
using the NCMA design manual for SEGMENTAL RETAINING WALLS
REVISED DESIGN - WALL TYPE B - OLIVENHAIN SELF STORAGE, ENCINITAS, CA
13.17 FT. MAXIMUM EXPOSED HEIGHT LOFFEL WALL WITH LEVEL BACKFILL
STATIC CALCULATION
SOIL PARAMETERS
--------- - - - ---
Soil parameters in degrees unless noted
Peak internal friction angle of retained soil 30
Peak internal friction angle of reinforced soil 33
Peak internal friction angle of base soil 30
External interface friction angle 20
Backslope angle 0
Wall batter angle ( +from vertical) 20
Depth of Embedment 2 ft
Foundation soil cohesion 100 psf
Coulomb failure angle for reinforced soils 49.8
Coulomb failure angle for retained soils 48.1
Horizontal ground acceleration 0 g -ft /sec *sec
Unit weight of retained soil 115 pcf
Unit weight of reinforced soil 115 pcf
-------------------------------
EXTERNAL STABILITY CALCULATIONS
Ka ret= .1743026
Ka rein= .1452624
Live surcharge load= 200 psf
Dead surcharge load= 0 psf
Bearing capacity factors (Nc, Nq, & Ny):
Nc= 30.1
Nq= 18.4
Ny= 22.4
embedment= 2
Base Grid length= 6
Wall height= 15.16676 ft
Number of blocks= 28
check against base sliding
--------------------------
Weight of reinforced soil= 10465.06 lbs
Weight of overburden= 0 lbs [Eq.5-14]
Psoil= 2305.458 [Eq.5-5]
Psurcharge= 414.0585 [Eq.5-6]
Seismic loading= 0
Total Horizontal Load= 2719.517
Sliding Resistance= 6042.001 lbs
check against overturning
---- -- ------------- - - - - --
Resisting moment= 60280.04 ft -lbs
Overturning moment= 14795.41 ft -lbs
check for adequate bearing capacity
----------------------------- - - - - --
Bearing capacity factors
Nc= 30.1
Ny= 22.4
Nq= 18.4
Qult= 11501.85 lbs [Eq.5 -25]
Qa= 3426.237 lbs [Eq.5-24]
B= 3.307337 ft [Eq.5 -22]
ECCENTRICITY 1.346331
[Eq.S -13]
FSliding= 2.221719 [Eq.5 -15]
[Eq.5 -9]
[Eq.5 -11]
[Eq.5 -16]
(Eq.S -20]
FSot= 4.07424 (Eq.5 -21]
FSbearing= 3.356992 (Eq.5 -26]
Wall height= 15.16676 ft
---------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNAL STABILITY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Soil self weight(internal calcs.). Pa'= 2361.982 lbs
Grid spacing
Number blocks
Number blocks
Number blocks
Number blocks
Number blocks
Number blocks
measured
between
between
between
between
between
between
in blocks
layer 0 and
layer 1 and
layer 2 and
layer 3 and
layer 4 and
layer 5 and
layer 1 4
layer 2 4
layer 3 4
layer 4 4
layer 5 4
layer 6 4
Number of grids 6
E(x)= distance from base of wall up to layer x
Ac(x)= contributory area of grid x [Eq.5 -36]
D(x) =dist. below top of wall to middle of contributory area [Eq.5 -41]
Fg(x) =force in geosynthetic layer x [Eq.5 -35]
E(
1 )=
2.16668
Ac(
1 )=
3.25002
E(
2 )=
4.33336
Ac(
2 )=
2.16668
E(
3 )=
6.50004
Ac(
3 )=
2.16668
E(
4 )=
8.66672
Ac(
4 )=
2.16668
E(
5 )=
10.8334
Ac(
5 )=
2.16668
E(
6 )=
13.00008
Ac(
6 )=
3.250017
D(
1 )=
13.54175
Fg(
1 )=
829.6317
D(
2 )=
14.08342
Fg(
2 )=
572.6934
D(
3 )=
11.91674
Fg(
3 )=
494.2709
D(
4 )=
9.750057
Fg(
4 )=
415.8485
D(
5 )=
7.583378
Fg(
5 )=
337.426
D(
6 )=
1.625009
Fg(
6 )=
182.6462
Safety Factors WRT overstress [Eq.5 -30]
FS overstress in layer( 1 )= 1.928567 with 1600 lb grid
FS
overstress
in
layer(
2 )=
1.833442
with
1050
lb
grid
FS
overstress
in
layer(
3 )=
2.124341
with
1050
lb
grid
FS
overstress
in
layer(
4 )=
2.524958
with
1050
lb
grid
FS
overstress
in
layer(
5 )=
3.111794
with
1050
lb
grid
FS
overstress
in
layer(
6 )=
5.74882
with
1050
lb grid
Safety Factors WRT reinforcement pullout [Eq.5 -43]
Layer(
1
) gridlength
= 6
feet
Layer(
2
) gridlength
= 6
feet
Layer(
3
) gridlength
= 7
feet
Layer(
4
) gridlength
= 8
feet
Layer(
5
) gridlength
= 10.5
FS
pullout
in
layer(
5 )=
feet
Layer(
6
) gridlength
= 12
feet
FS
pullout
in
layer(
1 )=
6.54113
FS
pullout
in
layer(
2 )=
5.39394
FS
pullout
in
layer(
3 )=
4.906251
FS
pullout
in
layer(
4 )=
4.29022
FS
pullout
in
layer(
5 )=
5.90205
FS
pullout
in
layer(
6 )=
6.141556
(The grid length used in all external stability calcs. is 6 ft.)
Safety Factor WRT internal sliding [Eq.5 -47]
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
1 )=
3.150273
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
2 )=
3.45965
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
3 )=
3.923716
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
4 )=
4.69716
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
5 )=
6.24405
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
6 )=
58.48679
CALCULATIONS FOR LOFFEL WALL DESIGN
-----------------------------------
using the NCMA design manual for SEGMENTAL RETAINING WALLS
REVISED DESIGN - WALL TYPE B - OLIVENHAIN SELF STORAGE, ENCINITAS, CA
13.17 FT. MAXIMUM EXPOSED HEIGHT LOFFEL WALL WITH LEVEL BACKFILL
SEISMIC CALCULATION
SOIL PARAMETERS
--------- - - - - --
Soil parameters in degrees unless noted
Peak internal friction angle of retained soil 30
Peak internal friction angle of reinforced soil 33
Peak internal friction angle of base soil 30
External interface friction angle 20
Backslope angle 0
Wall batter angle ( +from vertical) 20
Depth of Embedment 2 ft
Foundation soil cohesion 100 psf
Coulomb failure angle for reinforced soils 49.8
Coulomb failure angle for retained soils 48.1
Horizontal ground acceleration .15 g -ft /sec *sec
Unit weight of retained soil 115 pcf
Unit weight of reinforced soil 115 pcf
---------------------------------------------------------------------
EXTERNAL STABILITY CALCULATIONS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Ka ret= .1743026
Ka rein= .1452624
Live surcharge load= 200 psf
Dead surcharge load= 0 psf
Bearing capacity factors (Mc, Nq, & Ny):
Nc= 30.1
Nq= 18.4
Ny= 22.4
embedment= 2
Base Grid length= 6
Wall height= 15.16676 ft
Number of blocks= 28
check against base sliding
--------------------------
Weight of reinforced soil= 10465.06 lbs
Weight of overburden= 0 lbs [Eq.5 -14]
Psoil= 2305.458 [Eq.5 -5]
Psurcharge= 414.0585 [Eq.5 -6]
Seismic loading= 1569.759
Total Horizontal Load= 4289.276
Sliding Resistance= 6042.001 lbs
check against overturning
------------------- - - - - --
Resisting moment= 60280.04 ft -lbs
Overturning moment= 29080.3 ft -lbs
check for adequate bearing capacity
----------------------------- - - - ---
Bearing capacity factors
Nc= 30.1
Ny= 22.4
Nq= 18.4
Qult= 14921.89 lbs [Eq.5 -25]
Qa= 1900.452 lbs [Eq.5-24]
B= 5.962646 ft [Eq.5 -22]
ECCENTRICITY .0186768
Wall height= 15.16676 ft
Soil self weight(inte
Grid spacing measured
Number blocks between
Number blocks between
Number blocks between
Number blocks between
Number blocks between
Number blocks between
[Eq.5 -13]
FSliding= 1.408629 [Eq.5 -15)
[Eq.5 -9]
[Eq. 5-111
[Eq. 5-16]
[Eq. 5-20]
FSot= 2.072882 [Eq.5 -21]
FSbearing= 7.851758 [Eq.5 -26]
--------------- - --
INTERNAL STABILITY
rnal calcs.), Pa'= 2361.982 lbs
in blocks
layer 0 and layer 1 4
layer 1 and layer 2 4
layer 2 and layer 3 4
layer 3 and layer 4 4
layer 4 and layer 5 4
layer 5 and layer 6 4
Number of grids 6
E(x)= distance from base of wall up to layer x
Ac(x)= contributory area of grid x [Eq.5 -36]
D(x) =dist. below top of wall to middle of contributory area [Eq.5 -41]
Fg(x) =force in geosynthetic layer x [Eq.5 -35]
E(
1 )=
2.16668
Ac(
1 )=
3.25002
E(
2 )=
4.33336
Ac(
2 )=
2.16668
E(
3 )=
6.50004
Ac(
3 )=
2.16668
E(
4 )=
8.66672
Ac(
4 )=
2.16668
E(
5 )=
10.8334
Ac(
5 )=
2.16668
E(
6 j=
13.00008
Ac(
6 )=
3.250017
D(
1 )=
13.54175
Fg(
1 )=
869.2656
D(
2 )=
14.08342
Fg(
2 )=
589.3012
D(
3 )=
11.91674
Fg(
3 )=
550.1376
D(
4 )=
9.750057
Fg(
4 )=
510.974
D(
5 )=
7.583378
Fg(
5 )=
471.8102
D(
6 )=
1.625009
Fg(
6 )=
546.1648
Safety Factors WRT overstress [Eq.5 -30]
FS
overstress
in
layer(
1 )=
1.840634
with
1600
lb
grid
FS
overstress
in
layer(
2 )=
1.781771
with
1050
lb
grid
FS
overstress
in
layer(
3 )=
1.908613
with
1050
lb
grid
FS
overstress
in
layer(
4 )=
2.054899
with
1050
lb
grid
FS
overstress
in
layer(
5 )=
2.225471
with
1050
lb
grid
FS
overstress
in
layer(
6 )=
1.922497
with
1050
lb
grid
Safety Factors WRT reinforcement pullout [Eq.5 -43]
Layer(
1
) gridlength =
6
feet
Layer(
2
) gridlength =
6
feet
Layer(
3
) gridlength =
7
feet
Layer(
4
) gridlength =
8
feet
Layer(
5
) gridlength =
10.5
in
layer(
4 )=
4.69716
FS
feet
Layer(
6
) gridlength =
12
feet
FS pullout in layer( 1 )= 6.242889
FS pullout in layer( 2 )= 5.241926
FS pullout in layer( 3 )= 4.40802
FS pullout in layer( 4 )= 3.491531
FS pullout in layer( 5 )= 4.220987
FS pullout in layer( 6 )= 2.053833
(The grid length used in all external stability calcs. is 6 ft.)
Safety Factor WRT internal sliding [Eq.5 -47]
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
1 )=
3.150273
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
2 )=
3.45965
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
3 )=
3.923716
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
4 )=
4.69716
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
5 )=
6.24405
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
6 )=
58.48679
APPENDIX C
FORMULAS,
EQUATIONS AND
VARIABLES
JOHN A. SAYERS & ASSOCIATES
The coefficient of active earth pressure K. is calculated as:
K =
c; s� (P —W)
sin((p - 3) sin(9 -�}
cos(t� -a) 1 • cos(V-6) cos(w +A) J
[Eq. 3 -10]
�l
6-0
NCMA ANALYTICAL ASSUMPTION
I- P.M BASED ON COULOMB EARTH PRESSURE THEORY.
Z MALL FRICTION. 6, ds 'LOWER OF n OR •r
ii -0.667 •T .
3. VERTICAL COMPONENT OF Pte, it P.�y 5
CONSERVATIVELY IGNORED. THEREFORE: P. -P.
P, -Pm eos(6 —t).
4. P, BASED ON EXPANDED STRUCTURE HEIGHT (H +h).
3. ACTIVE EARTH PRESSURE FOR INTERNAL STABuTY
P' CALCULATED IN SAME MANNER BUT BASED CN
Sh CTURE HE]GHT (H).
POTENTIAL FNLL'
PLANE
/ h
I /
POTENTIAL
PLANE
a+ ,
, 1
H FRICTION
/ FORCES
/ P.('
m::
/ 4"l r� 1Z
N
p K i
L
REINFORCEMENT
NOTE: (D VERTICAL WALL FACE FOR EXTERNAL STABILITY OF MULTIPLE DEPTH SF?Ws.
m INCUNED WALL FACE FOR EXTERNAL STABILITY SOIL REINFORCED SRWs
FIGURE 3 -9: EARTH PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION AND FORCE
RESOLUTION SRN SYSTEMS
M
?T
c)
c
m
m
rTIO
FTT
mn
D�
rD
NZ
—t 0
co 0
Fm
�O
n�
D�
r
n .n
rCrO
D�
O�
ZO
to r-
m
Z
q
O
m
n
m
O
E'
WALL INCLINATION:
♦ - y ♦Ib
Ih
H
It. I
7W
L
Lp — I y q
Lp /2 I u
L
i
I
W
r I
I
I
I.
Ip
L
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l-2a-
0 APPLIED FOUNDATION
° PRESSURE
BEARING CAPACITY IS GOVERNED BY
FOUNDATION SOIL PROPERTIES
i
I
IN It
Z
a°1�I�
q -DEAD LOAD SURCHARGE
qI .LIVE LOAD SURCHARGE
i PRESSURE AT BACK
OF REINFORCED
C —1 —W. cos io ZONE
L- l' tao44an}
m- a�ioni
Lp -1 i I'
h.-I plonp
P. -13. 1 P,
A, - EXTERNAL INTERFACE FRICTION ANGLE - Or OR I)
R, -USING COULOMB EQUATION 3 -10 b
RETAINED SOIL PROPERTIES (#r)
II. - EFFECTIVE HEIGHT SEE Eq. 4 -3
NOTE: IF 11,,-0, H. -H
Ady- CONTRIBUTORY AREA TO DETERMINE FORCE
IN REINFORCEMENT, FEW
D. -DEPTH TO MIDPOINT OF CONTRIBUTORY
AREA, A.W
F.fy -FORCE IN REINFORCEMENT AT LAYER n
d. - AVERAGE DEPTH OF OVERBUROEN OVER
REINFORCEMENT ANCHORAGE LENGTH. L.W
a; -ORIENTATION OF INTERNAL FAILURE SURFACE
E- - ELEVATION OF LAYER n ABOVE REFERENCE
DATUM
Edy - EFFECTIVE ELEVATION OF LAYER n ABOVE
REFERENCE DATUM (SEE EO. 5 -30)
L-W -ANCHORAGE LENGTH OF LAYER n
AC. - ANCHORAGE CAPA.CfTY OF LAYER n
H, - EFrcCTNE HEIGHT (SEE E0. 4 -3)
q. - CEAO LOAD SURCHARGE
a, - UvE LOAD SURCHARGE
q, - HORIZONTAL PRESSURE (SE: F'C. ` -4)
'F -WALL INCLINATION (W +i.) I q-
} 1
D. ' °''
Aldq
3
�1 Fin
A dA Dr
i
i
i
H, -r—�
1' Lam_
Ad1) '{.
H LH
PROJECTED VERTICAL
1 SURFACE
1
Adr) i
I a;
IL '
LEVELING PAD ElEVA7)ON
REF. DATUM -0.00
L
a; =SEE Eq. 3 -73
4=743+ q.
d3)
2
Ed -)
EdA
E-m
Edr)
FIGURE 5 -5: FORCES & STRESSES USED IN CALCULATION OF INTERNAL
STABILITY FOR GEOSYNTHETIC SOIL REINFORCED SRW
'
1
1
'
I
i
} 1
D. ' °''
Aldq
3
�1 Fin
A dA Dr
i
i
i
H, -r—�
1' Lam_
Ad1) '{.
H LH
PROJECTED VERTICAL
1 SURFACE
1
Adr) i
I a;
IL '
LEVELING PAD ElEVA7)ON
REF. DATUM -0.00
L
a; =SEE Eq. 3 -73
4=743+ q.
d3)
2
Ed -)
EdA
E-m
Edr)
FIGURE 5 -5: FORCES & STRESSES USED IN CALCULATION OF INTERNAL
STABILITY FOR GEOSYNTHETIC SOIL REINFORCED SRW
NOTATIONS & ABBREVIATIONS
Ay,c
contributory area for tensile Iced in no
layer of reinforcement (ft)� ae wally ft,
but unit width understood
AC. = anchorage rapacity for ath rcinforcemem
layer (lb/ft)
L = apparent mini = ultimate connection
strength between geosynthetie
rcrnforcc=ent and segmental units (ibift)
a', = apparcat minimum service state
eccnecicn sccag!h Se ae--a geosynthetie
z : :.fcrce. -cnt and sey— ..ental a:is Jbift)
ACS = apca.-at c: cuing size of '.'te gectezrle
a, = appa -nt m zurritta ui :=atc shear
caoac:y Sc:.vccn scgmcatal uni3 (lbift)
a', = acpa- =nt SCr'. ^C i:a:e sbcw
anaery be -i=n segmental units ('ibtit)
B = eq•;iva.car foct.:n4 w.d:h of ccczz ally
loaded foundation base of sod reinforud
Saws (ft)
Br = expanded footing width for gravity
SR "Vs (ft)
equivalent footing width for eccentrically
loaded gravity Saws (ft)
e = cohesion of soil (psf)
C. = coefficient of direct sliding
cr = cohesion of foundation soil (psf)
q = coefficient of shear stress interaction
CRF = creep reduction factor for geosynthetie
reinforcement
d, = average depth of overburden of n' layer
of reinforcement over the anchorage
length. L,c,r
D. = depth to mid -point of contributory area
of A„r of n' reinforcement layer (ft)
e eccentricity of resultant vertical beating
fora (ft)
E.n = effective elevation of a' reinforcement
layer above bearing pad elevation (R)
E, = elevation of no reinforcement layer
above base of wall (ft)
_..— =tr.cry of self- weig',tt of -Cinforct'
One pltu surcharge (ft)
4 = cx---a-claton rato
F3 —a :Cnal f3c:or for ;roio eel Ceg�ca :on
FC = =a:c.nal factor for constrarcn site
damage
FD = , a :cnal factor for cbemieal deg2daten
i
e = T_�rrtal fac-.or for creep eztrapc :atZca
Fan = force in no geosynthetie reuafo==Czt
aye: (lbrft)
FS,, = factor of seery. bearing capacity
FSw = partial factor of safety for biological
degradation Nethod A)
FSm = partial factor of safety for cbcmical
deg^adation (Method A)
Fs. = factor of safcry, oonnecioa strength
FS,, = partial factor of safety for c=ep
deformation (Method A)
FS it = factor of safcry, global stability
FS, = partial factor of safety for irs:alaton
damage (Method A)
FSarr = partial factor of safety for joints (seaas
and connections) (Method A)
FSwu = partial factor of safety for =ateral
uncertainties (Method A)
FS. M factor of safety, overrunning
FSP, • factor of safety, pullout
ESQ : factor of saftey. shear eapacaty
FS. = factor of safety, sliding
FS. = factor of safety, tensile overstress
G. = horizontal center of gravity of segmental
unit (ft), vertical center of gravity
assumed at Hr2
.c -„asc :n hx :p.r d= ;o Sackslape (ft)
:O tai 'weight of wall (ft)
tr,.csed height of wail (ft)
a c..copiag for sc-�_—cnai unit (,.)
effective 3cigtt for bancrcd SR'.L's (ft)
v = :oral wail embedmeat (ft)
v = �i -gt `eig!t of SRW (ft)
1: = seg.catal unit height (ft)
4 = :nc'.i:ation of SRW base (deg)
= active Garb pressure cocTic-icat
lr , ' = normal permeability of geoteztile (ft/sec)
k_r = soil permeability (ft/see)
L = width of reinforced zone at top of wall
(ft)
L'• nc:. in width dire to bacltslope 0 (ft)
= horizontal width of reinforced zone at
nee.- section with backslope, p (ft)
L,.) = anchorage length for a' reinforcement
layer (ft)
L. = effective length of reinforcement during
Pullout test
= length of reinforcement at base of
internal sliding wedge (ft)
L', width of reinforced zone at top of waD
for internal sliding on the nth
reinforcemcm layer (ft)
LTDS =
long term design strength (lb/ft)
LIDS, =
long -term design strength of
reinforcement type tr (lb/ft)
L,
= segmental runt length (ft)
H,
= overturning moment (ft- lb/ft)
?.f,
= resisting moment (ft-lb /ft)
.qS=
= - ech,nmcally stabilized eanh
= _=be of as individual layer of
:e ::.forcz::: eat
Y -�*c: of orcemcat layers m design
N. 'N" Vt = beat ag mpaci:1 fac or
= minimum number of reinforcement
laves
= active each force (:bift)
p = active earn force acting over the
effeetive bcight of rye wall (Ib/ft)
p horizontal component of active earth
force (lb /ft)
p.Cn = total active earth force (lb/ft)
p = vertical component of active earth force
(lb /ft)
pc resultant horizontal force due to active
earth pressure from uniform surcharge, (b
+ q, (lb/ft)
p = resultant bonzontal force due to active
earth pressure from soil self- weight
(lbift)
Q = applied bearing stress (psf)
9r or q, = uniform surcbargc loading at top of wall
(psf) (live or dead)
Q. = ultimate bearing capacity of foundation
soils (psf)
7ti a apparent angle of friction for peak
connection strength of segmental units b
gcmyntbetic teinforCemeta (deg)
= apparent angle of friction between
segmental units for peak shear capacity
(deg)
�'. = apparent angle of friction for service
state connection strength of segtncnw
traits to geosyntbetic reinforcement (deg)
= apparent angle of friction between
segmental units for servi¢ state shear
crcac:ry (deg)
µ� = coe°;cert of inter_`acc -^cnon for
segmental unit slidirg on scils
a, = active each pressure ()sf)
CIS = ncr=ai Suess (asf)
a, = vertical soil stress (ps7
*, = angle of ::.z. —.al f:ic:or, d.aiagc 911
(deg)
or = angle of;nte.:al ! etiom. foundation soil
(deg)
♦, = angle of internal friction, retained soil
(deg)
q = angle of internal friction, innll soil (deg)
tY = total wall inclination from vertical
clockwise positive ((A)+i,) (deg)
ty = unit inclination due to setback per SRW
unit F. (deg)
4
(Eq. 5 -11 L' - L - W. (con ib)
[Eq. 5 -21 L' L' tan 0 tan t
1 - tan p tan t
[Eq. 5 -31 L, L• + L"
r==. 5 -41 h - L, tan 0
0.5<e 7r(ede + - ^.i -CCS Ibe — IF)
r?q.
5 -51
?q =
(c, cam) K. (He + h) cos (be - t)
L-- Eq.
5-71
Ys =
(He +h) /3
[_q,
5-81
yq =
(He + h) /2
[Eq.
5-91
Pe =
P"I+ Pq +Fx;Jo;c
[Eq.
5-101
P,.a.;c
= (W,`) r W.6) Qh
[Eq.
5 -111
Re =
[qd L, Qv) (W'F)' Nei), t °^ �*]tEW „t. (1 - a- )i"Ofty- c01 510 «el
[ = q .
5-121
W.rt.
_ Lt CAreo .f
[£q.
5 -131
Wr(i)
= L7, He
[Eq.
5 -141
Wro)
_ (L' 7 ;L, sin d) / (2COS p)
[Eq. 5 -151 FSs( = Re /Ps
[Eq. 5-161 Mr = Wr(i) Xr(i) + Wr(i) Xr(&) + qd 1'' Xq(j)
[Eq. 5 -171 Xr(i) _ (L + H. tan 0 / 2
[Eq. 5-18)
R-:,) , tan + - H� can w + (ccs 3 [ ((L' - h can +) /cos 3) + L' cos 31
ilu ccs :y + 'L' s' -n 3) /3
7-171, Yq(,)
5-20; m -
-- _ o = ' y s 's 'q ' v
q
[Eq. 5-211 Fsoc ° Mr /Mo
[Eq. 5 -221 B = L - 2e
[Eq. 5 -231
P s • + Y P a Y a - W r(1,) (X r(1,) - L /2) - W A r( (X r(o) - L /2) - gdL•(Xq(.) - L /2)
e =
Wr(i) + Wr(o) + qd Lr
[Eq. 5-241 Qa = [Wr(i) + Wr(s) + (ql + qd) Lrl /B
(Eq. 5 -251 Qulc = Of Ne + 0.S-If 3 N7 + -(f H.oti Nq
(Eq. 5 -261 FSyc = Quls /Q+
[Eq. 5 -271 Ps' = 0.5Ra y1, H.2 Cos (a, - q')
Eq.
5 -281
Pq• _
(q( + gd)Ke He COS (d) - r)
[Eq.
5 -291
Pe' =
Fe' + PqI
[Eq.
5 -301
FSLe LTDStr(n) /FY(n)
[Eq.
5 -351
F9(n)
_ [Y( Dn + qi + qd1 Ke COS (8( - `Y)AC(n)
[Eq.
5 -361
Ac(1)
(Ee(23 + EK1)) / 2
[Eq.
5-371
Ac(n)
[ (Ee(ml) + Eo(n)) /21 - (Ee(n) +Ee(n -t)) /21
[Eq.
5-381
Ac(n)
_ (Ee(n.)) " Ee(n -1)) /2
[Eq.
5-391
Ac(M)
= He - IEe(w) + Ee(M -1)) / 21
[Eq.
5 -401
D) =
He - (ACM / 2)
(Eq. 5 -411 Dn - He - Accl) - Ac(2) - Ac(n -t) - (Ac(n) /2)
(Eq. 5-421 Dy - (Ac(w) 12)
(Eq. 5 -431 FSP = ACM / F9(n)
(Eq. 5 -441 ACM 2 La(n) C; (dn Y, + qd) tan
[Eq.
5 -451
Le(n)
- L
- W. COSib - Ee(M) tan (90
- a() +
Ee(n)
tan
[Eq.
5-461
do -
(He -
Ee(n) + I (Ee(n) /tan aO -
He tan
* +
(La(n) /2)) tan d
Eq.
5 -471
FSst(n) [R' a(n) + Vh
(COO
3y) 1 /Patn)
Eq.
5 -481
R's(n) ' Cda (qd Lr(n)
+ Wr(),n) +W(r(r.n)) tan +i
Eq.
5 -491
L's(n) L - (W. Cos
ib) -
AL
Eq.
5 -501
oL = (E.(n•t) - E•(n))
/ tan
as
'Eq.
5 -511
Lns(n) = L's(n) tan 0
tan �
1 - tan A
tan ti
(Eq.
5 -521
Low L's(n) + L %(n)
[Eq.
5 -531
hn = L,tn) tan d
[Eq.
5 -541
W'r(i,n) ' L's(n)(He -
E.tn))
7i
[Eq.
5-551
W'rt..n) _ (TiLs(n) L'scn) sin
0) / (2cos 0)
i
General Notes
1. LofO t p t t unit t d "I
me °. an nuns turaeru sap f
staggered a r ) fill t units, with
ma taros spec'fed by the s e g .e ., Fend
tamped into place. Tap rails should b exposed
pro, to pacement of the next Walls cannot
be built steeper than 'nd cote d 1 Loffe ste n
.,its must have a ,th o' 4000 PSI
It 28 days per ICRD rIp", I,,, 4o1D, dated June
1994.
2, n —plane wall must be to be within a
mutative tolerance of 6 inches a a ^g both wan
height and width. E. black calls_ must be p #aced
to a tolerance of 1/2 tdoh
3. Maximum spoeng between bucks is 10 inches.
4. Allow 0.25 inch to 0.5 inch gap minimum between the
top lip of the first exposed u and the next unite posed units may To" cad generate active earth
pressure on the wall.
5. Temporary cuts as directed by ' .echnicol
engineer based upon field conditions,
6. Sp echo. Is required or t^ placement of
black and back£ .
]. Wall must be di,baned 1, accordance with
cogn,,d eng g prinel end ICBO report
No 4610, dated June 1994. T�b d,,iq,1 must be
approved by a building office. A soils report must
be provlded for ea project s" e. The report must
specify soil strength parameter.
8. Geogrid layers Installed per manufacturers
specifications and approved by the sails engineer per
the soli, report.
9. Before this grading plan :s "AS GRADED" the
soils engineer shall attest i ' n e "AS GRADED"
soils report that he has fall r cted the
astrachan of the Loffel Wo is e d he shall
ertify that the o arch cape v steak with the
Loffel Walls in place.
10. Soils within blocks need not be -clack ,canY
compacted.
11. Overlap of geogrids is y'. Edges
may be butted. Joints 'a I! ad in the
strength direction of the geogrid Geogrid,
should be installed with _ h direction
perpendicular to the wall '--a.
2 Mara
Mira rid 5T L = 0.641
Number of Blocks
between Primary
Geogrid Layers 4
M'va rid 5T L - O.S9H
Maximum Height Rl,ltbod soils
H = 14.0 ft. $ = 33° mm.
4
Miragrid 5T L = 0.50H Retalnea Sons
$ _ 30° min.
4
Mira rid 5T L = 0..H
4
Miragrid 7T L = 0.341
z
I E 4 Backdra n per soils Engineer
< H. of Records Recommendafwn
F ndahen Soils
7.0 ft.
jjj Wait Type "A"
Dross- S.cSer Through Maz mum Height
17
Number of Blocks
between Primary
Geogrid Layers
1 4
Maximum Height
H
?38 ff.
Irid 5T L = 0
Re'sfcrced Soils
I ti
Base Langk. =0.33t! ".„.•°._.�
11 Foundation So'es
$ . 30° ma
Wcli Type
Goss Section ma el"lh Mas':a —iihi
scdc 1 " =2'
Revisions
4
Miragrid IT L = 0.791
Retained So is
$ 3G °inn
B. karain per SWLS Engineer
of Recoras Recom -ddion
Aggregate Base
Leveling Pad
-Note: Required for H > 5.42 ft.
Retained Soils
$ = 30° min.
Agg .gate Base
ling Pea
'Note: Required for H > h 42 H_
Soil Retention Systems 'no.
Geogrid Reinforced Loffel Wall
Project: Qlivenhoin Self Storage
Location: Encinitas, CA
W. 0, No.: 679 Plate 1
0 ate: 9/23/96 Sheet I of I
MMEM
4
Number of 8mcks Mira rid 5T L = 0.69H
Between Primary d
Geogrid Layers
� 4 m
Mira rid 5T L = 0.63H
Maximum Height
Reinforced Soils
H= 15.;7ft.
4 4
Miragrid 5T L = 0.46H
4 °� A
Miragrid 5T L = 0.401
_ Maximum
Water Level
t
{e
<ouRSE o�a�s..s
2.0 ft. 4
�w
p
M ragrid 7T L = 0.401
Smbs —I 4
20 ft
a,
Base Length = 0.82H
Foaaemiaa Sans
$ = 30° mm.
Wall Type "B"
Gass Section Through Maximum Height
Scats: f : 2'
Retained So is
$ 3G °inn
B. karain per SWLS Engineer
of Recoras Recom -ddion
Aggregate Base
Leveling Pad
-Note: Required for H > 5.42 ft.
Retained Soils
$ = 30° min.
Agg .gate Base
ling Pea
'Note: Required for H > h 42 H_
Soil Retention Systems 'no.
Geogrid Reinforced Loffel Wall
Project: Qlivenhoin Self Storage
Location: Encinitas, CA
W. 0, No.: 679 Plate 1
0 ate: 9/23/96 Sheet I of I
MMEM
LOFFEL WALL STRUCTURAL DESIGN
OLIVENHAIN SELF STORAGE
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
FOR
SOIL RETENTION SYSTEMS
W.O. 679 -1 -01 - SEPTEMBER 23, 1996
�ri'� � � I � T
CT 09 1996
F yC oy pFrENClS11tAS S
JASAJohn A Sayers and Associates, Inc.
Geotechnical Consultants
Soil Retention Systems September 23, 1996
6120 Paseo Del Norte, Suite Q -I W.O. 679 -1 -01
Carlsbad, California 92009
Attention: Mr. Jan Janson
Subject: Loffel Wall Structural Design, Olivenhain Self Storage, Encinitas, California
Gentlemen:
In accordance with your request, this report has been prepared to present the structural design and supporting
calculation for the proposed geogrid reinforced walls to be located at the subject site in Encinitas, California.
Based on a review of the submitted plan prepared by Laret Engineering Company, Inc., the maximum wall
heights will be 10.00 feet, 11.00 feet, and 9.38 feet. Backfill behind the walls will be level.
Strength parameters for soil were obtained from the geotechnical engineer of record for the project, Southern
California Soils and Testing, Inc. Soils which will be used in the reinforced zone should possess a minimum
internal angle of friction of 33 degrees. Direct shear testing should be performed during construction on proposed
511 soils to very strength parameters.
Wall type "B" and "C" include an aggregate base leveling pad to reduce the bearing capacity of the geogrid
reinforced wall to 1000 psf per recommendation of the geotechnical engineer for the project.
The proposed geogrids ( Miragrid 5T and Miragrid 7T) have been assigned a long term design strength (LTDS)
of 1,050 lb/ft and 1.600 Ib /ft, respectively, as determined by Mirafi, Inc., the grid manufacturer.
The calculation included herein address internal and external stability of the soil reinforced wall only. "Global"
stability of the overall slope should be performed by the geotechnical engineer of record.
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. If
JOHNW SAYEILV& ASSOCIATES
'Ml
Staff
DAO /JS /mw
in
Dist: (8) Addressee
Encl: Appendix A - References
Appendix B - Local Wall Stability Analysis
Plate I - Structural Plan
should have any question, please call.
No. 2294
GE 22
Exp. 12/31/98
_
NNi
27071 Cabot Road, Suite 101 • Laguna Hills, California 92653 -7009 • (714) 582 -2144
Design Manual for Segmental Retaining Walls (1993), National Concrete Masonry Association
"Soil Parameters for the Design of Loffel Retaining Walls, Olivenhain Self Storage, Encinitas,
California," prepared by Southern California Soils and Testing, Inc., dated September 17, 1996
JOHN A. SAYERS & ASSOCIATES
Appendix B
CALCULATIONS FOR LOFFEL WALL DESIGN
-----------------------------------
-----------------------------------
using the NCMA design manual for SEGMENTAL RETAINING WALLS
OLIVENHAIN SELF STORAGE, ENCINITAS, CA
10 FT. MAXIMUM HEIGHT LOFFEL WALL WITH LEVEL BACKFILL AND SLOPING TOE
STATIC CALCULATION
SOIL PARAMETERS
--------- - - - - --
Soil parameters in degrees unless noted
Peak internal friction angle of retained soil 30
Peak internal friction angle of reinforced soil 33
Peak internal friction angle of base soil 30
External interface friction angle 22
Backslope angle 0
Wall batter angle ( +from vertical) 20
Depth of Embedment 4 ft
Foundation soil cohesion 100 psf
Coulomb failure angle for reinforced soils 49.8
Coulomb failure angle for retained soils 48.1
Horizontal ground acceleration 0 g -ft /sec *sec
Unit weight of retained soil 115 pcf
Unit weight of reinforced soil 115 pcf
---------------------------------------------------------------
EXTERNAL STABILITY CALCULATIONS
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ka ret= .1724485
Ka rein= .1438245
Live surcharge load= 200 -paf --
Dead surcharge load= 0 psf
Bearing capacity factors (Nc, Nq, & Ny):
Nc= 21.5
Nq= 18.4
Ny= 22.4
embedment= 4
Base Grid length= 5
Wall height= 14.08342 ft
Number of blocks= 26
check against base sliding
--------------------------
Weight of reinforced soil= 8097.965 lbs
Weight of overburden= 0 lbs [Eq.5-14]
Psoil= 1965.526 [Eq.5 -5]
Psurcharge= 375.6096 [Eq.5 -6]
Seismic loading= 0
Total Horizontal Load= 2341.136
Sliding Resistance= 7075.358 lbs
check against overturning
------------------- - - - - --
Resisting moment= 40999.76 ft -lbs
Overturning moment= 11872.04 ft -lbs
check for adequate bearing capacity
----------------------------- - - - - --
Bearing capacity factors
Nc= 21.5
Ny= 22.4
Nq= 18.4
Qult= 14228.34 lbs [Eq.5 -25]
Qa= 3123.346 lbs [Eq.5-24]
B= 2.806165 ft [Eq.5 -22]
ECCENTRICITY 1.096918
Wall height= 14.08342 ft
[Eq.5 -13]
FSliding= 3.02219 [Eq.5-15]
[Eq. 5-9)
[Eq.5 -11]
(Eq.5 -16)
(Eq. 5-20]
FSot= 3.453471 [Eq.5 -21]
FSbearing= 4.555479 [Eq.5 -26]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNAL STABILITY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Soil self weight(internal calcs.),
Pal=
2044.137
lbs
Grid spacing measured
in blocks
Number
blocks
between
layer
0
and
layer
1
4
Number
blocks
between
layer
1
and
layer
2
4
Number
blocks
between
layer
2
and
layer
3
4
Number
blocks
between
layer
3
and
layer
4
4
Number
blocks
between
layer
4
and
layer
5
4
Number
blocks
between
layer
5
and
layer
6
4
Number of grids 6
E(x)= distance from base of wall up to layer x
Ac(x)= contributory area of grid x [Eq.5 -36]
D(x) =dist. below top of wall to middle of contributory area [Eq.5 -41]
Fg(x) =force in geosynthetic layer x [Eq.5 -35]
E(
1 )=
2.16668
Ac(
1 )=
3.25002
E(
2 )=
4.33336
Ac(
2 )=
2.16668
E(
3 )=
6.50004
Ac(
3 )=
2.16668
E(
4 )=
8.66672
Ac(
4 )=
2.16668
E(
5 )=
10.8334
Ac(
5 )=
2.16668
E(
6 )=
13.00008
Ac(
6 )=
2.166677
D(
1 )=
12.45841
Fg(
1 )=
762.7198
D(
2 )=
13.00008
Fg(
2 )=
527.8796
D(
3 )=
10.8334
Fg(
3 )=
450.2807
D(
4 )=
8.666718
Fg(
4 )=
372.6819
D(
5 )=
6.500038
Fg(
5 )=
295.0829
D(
6 )=
1.083339
Fg(
6 )=
101.0856
Safety Factors WRT overstress [Eq.5 -30]
FS
overstress
in
layer(
1 )=
2.097756
with
1600
lb
grid
FS
overstress
in
layer(
2 )=
1.98909
with
1050
lb
grid
FS
overstress
in
layer(
3 )=
2.331879
with
1050
lb
grid
FS
overstress
in
layer(
4 )=
2.817416
with
1050
lb
grid
FS
overstress
in
layer(
5 )=
3.556322
with
1050
lb
grid
FS
overstress
in
layer(
6 )=
10.38723
with
1050
lb
grid
Safety Factors WRT reinforcement pullout [Eq.5 -43]
Layer(
1 )
gridlength
= 5
feet
Layer(
2 )
gridlength
= 6
feet
Layer(
3 )
gridlength
= 7
feet
Layer(
4 )
gridlength
= 8
feet
Layer(
5 )
gridlength
= 9
feet
Layer(
6 )
gridlength
= 11.5
internal
sliding
in
layer(
5 )=
feet
FS
pullout
in layer(
1 )=
4.538446
FS
pullout
in layer(
2 )=
5.266667
FS
pullout
in layer(
3 )=
4.712372
FS
pullout
in layer(
4 )=
3.989287
FS
pullout
in layer(
5 )=
2.964252
FS pullout in layer( 6 )= 4.868105
(The grid length used in all external stability calcs. is 5 ft.)
Safety Factor WRT internal sliding [Eq.5 -47]
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
1 )=
2.757052
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
2 )=
3.009641
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
3 )=
3.406565
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
4 )=
4.12103
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
5 )=
5.788119
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
6 )=
121.0287
CALCULATIONS FOR LOFFEL WALL DESIGN
-----------------------------------
-----------------------------------
using the NCMA design manual for SEGMENTAL RETAINING WALLS
OLIVENHAIN SELF STORAGE, ENCINITAS, CA
10 FT. MAXIMUM HEIGHT LOFFEL WALL WITH LEVEL BACKFILL AND SLOPING TOE
SEISMIC CALCULATION
SOIL PARAMETERS
--------- - - - - --
Soil parameters in degrees unless noted
Peak internal friction angle of retained soil 30
Peak internal friction angle of reinforced soil 33
Peak internal friction angle of base soil 30
External interface friction angle 22
Backslope angle 0
Wall batter angle ( +from vertical) 20
Depth of Embedment 4 ft
Foundation soil cohesion 100 psf
Coulomb failure angle for reinforced soils 49.8
Coulomb failure angle for retained soils 48.1
Horizontal ground acceleration .15 g -ft /sec *sec
Unit weight of retained soil 115 pcf
Unit weight of reinforced soil 115 pcf
---------------------------------------------------------------
EXTERNAL STABILITY CALCULATIONS
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ka ret= .1724485
Ka rein= .1438245
Live surcharge load= 200 psf
Dead surcharge load= 0 psf
Bearing capacity factors (Nc, Nq, & Ny):
Nc= 21.5
Nq= 18.4
Ny= 22.4
embedment= 4
Base Grid length= 5
Wall height= 14.08342 ft
Number of blocks= 26
check against base sliding
--------------------------
Weight of reinforced soil= 8097.965 lbs
Weight of overburden= 0 lbs [Eq.5-14]
Psoil= 1965.526 [Eq.5-5]
Psurcharge= 375.6096 [Eq.5-6]
Seismic loading= 1214.695
Total Horizontal Load= 3555.831
Sliding Resistance= 7075.358 lbs
check against overturning
------------------- - - - - --
Resisting moment= 40999.76 ft -lbs
Overturning moment= 22136.28 ft -lbs
check for adequate bearing capacity
----------------------------- - - - - --
Bearing capacity factors
Nc= 21.5
Ny= 22.4
Nq= 18.4
Qult= 16614.56 lbs [Eq.5-25]
Qa= 1881.297 lbs [Eq.5 -24]
B= 4.65882 ft [Eq.5 -22]
ECCENTRICITY .1705902
[Eq.5 -13]
FSliding= 1.98979 [Eq.5-15]
[Eq.S -9]
(Eq. 5-11]
(Eq. 5-16)
[Eq. 5-20)
FSot= 1.852152 [Eq.5 -21]
FSbearing= 8.831437 [Eq.5 -26]
Wall height= 14.08342 ft
---------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNAL STABILITY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Soil self weight(internal calcs.), Pal= 2044.137 lbs
Grid spacing measured
in blocks
Number
blocks
between
layer
0
and
layer
1 4
Number
blocks
between
layer
1
and
layer
2 4
Number
blocks
between
layer
2
and
layer
3 4
Number
blocks
between
layer
3
and
layer
4 4
Number
blocks
between
layer
4
and
layer
5 4
Number
blocks
between
layer
5
and
layer
6 4
Number of grids 6
E(x)= distance from base of wall up to layer x
Ac(x)= contributory area of grid x [Eq.5 -36]
D(x) =dist. below top of wall to middle of contributory area (Eq.5 -41]
Fg(x) =force in geosynthetic layer x [Eq.5 -35]
E(
1 )=
2.16668
E(
2 )=
4.33336
E(
3 )=
6.50004
E(
4 )=
8.66672
E(
5 )=
10.8334
E(
6 )=
13.00008
D(
1 )=
12.45841
D(
2 )=
13.00008
D(
3 )=
10.8334
D(
4 )=
8.666718
D(
5 )=
6.500038
D(
6 )=
1.083339
Ac(
1 )=
3.25002
Ac(
2 )=
2.16668
Ac(
3 )=
2.16668
Ac(
4 )=
2.16668
Ac(
5 )=
2.16668
Ac(
6 )=
2.166677
Fg(
1 )=
804.6188
Fg(
2 )=
545.9975
Fg(
3 )=
507.6575
Fg(
4 )=
469.3174
Fg(
5 )=
430.9773
Fg(
6 )=
335.1267
Safety Factors WRT overstress [Eq.5 -30]
FS
overstress
in
layer(
1 )=
1.988519
with
1600
lb
grid
FS
overstress
in
layer(
2 )=
1.923086
with
1050
lb
grid
FS
overstress
in
layer(
3 )=
2.068324
with
1050
lb
grid
FS
overstress
in
layer(
4 )=
2.237292
with
1050
lb
grid
FS
overstress
in
layer(
5 )=
2.436323
with
1050
lb
grid
FS
overstress
in
layer(
6 )=
3.133144
with
1050
lb
grid
Safety Factors WRT reinforcement pullout [Eq.5 -43]
Layer(
1
) gridlength
= 5
feet
Layer(
2
) gridlength
= 6
feet
Layer(
3
) gridlength
= 7
feet
Layer(
4
) gridlength
= 8
feet
Layer(
5
) gridlength
= 9
feet
Layer(
6
) gridlength
= 11.5
internal
sliding
in
layer(
5 )=
feet
FS
pullout
in layer(
1 j=
4.302116
FS
pullout
in layer(
2 )=
5.091903
FS
pullout
in layer(
3 )=
4.179768
FS
pullout
in layer(
4 )=
3.167866
FS
pullout
in layer(
5 )=
2.029573
FS pullout in layer( 6 )= 1.468387
(The grid length used in all external stability calcs. is 5 ft.)
Safety Factor WRT internal sliding [Eq.5 -47]
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
1 )=
2.757052
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
2 )=
3.009641
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
3 )=
3.406565
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
4 )=
4.12103
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
5 )=
5.788119
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
6 )=
121.0287
CALCULATIONS FOR LOFFEL WALL DESIGN
using the NCMA design manual for SEGMENTAL RETAINING WALLS
OLIVENHAIN SELF STORAGE, ENCINITAS, CA
10.5 FT. MAXIMUM HEIGHT LOFFEL WALL WITH LEVEL BACKFILL
STATIC CALCULATION
SOIL PARAMETERS
--------- - - - - --
Soil parameters in degrees unless noted
Peak internal friction angle of retained soil 30
Peak internal friction angle of reinforced soil 33
Peak internal friction angle of base soil 30
External interface friction angle 22
Backslope angle 0
Wall batter angle ( +from vertical) 20
Depth of Embedment 2 ft
Foundation soil cohesion 100 psf
Coulomb failure angle for reinforced soils 49.8
Coulomb failure angle for retained soils 48.1
Horizontal ground acceleration 0 g -ft /sec *sec
Unit weight of retained soil 115 pcf
Unit weight of reinforced soil 115 pcf
---------------------------------------------------------------------
EXTERNAL STABILITY CALCULATIONS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Ka ret= .1724485
Ka rein= .1438245
Live surcharge load= 200 psf
Dead surcharge load= 0 psf
Bearing capacity factors (Nc, Nq, & Ny):
Nc= 30.1
Nq= 18.4
Ny= 22.4
embedment= 2
Base Grid length= 6
Wall height= 13.00008 ft
Number of blocks= 24
check against base sliding
--------------------------
Weight of reinforced soil= 8970.054 lbs
Weight of overburden= 0 lbs [Eq.5 -14]
Psoil= 1674.768 [Eq.5-5]
Psurcharge= 346.7166 [Eq.5 -6]
Seismic loading= 0
Total Horizontal Load= 2021.485
Sliding Resistance= 5778.858 lbs
check against overturning
------------------- - - - - --
Resisting moment= 48131.68 ft -lbs
Overturning moment= 9511.043 ft -lbs
check for adequate bearing capacity
----------------------------- - - - - --
Bearing capacity factors
Nc= 30.1
Ny= 22.4
Nq= 18.4
Qult= 11607.01 lbs (Eq.5-25]
Qa= 2902.555 lbs (Eq.5-24]
B= 3.388984 ft (Eq.5 -22]
ECCENTRICITY 1.305508
Wall height= 13.00008 ft
Soil self weight(inte
Grid spacing measured
Number blocks between
Number blocks between
Number blocks between
Number blocks between
Number blocks between
Number of grids 5
(Eq. 5-131
FSliding= 2.85872 (Eq.5 -15)
[Eq.5 -9]
(Eq.5 -11]
(Eq. 5-16]
(Eq. 5-20]
FSot= 5.06061 [Eq.5 -21]
FSbearing= 3.998894 [Eq.5 -26]
--------------- ---
INTERNAL STABILITY
rnal calcs.), Pa'= 1770.498 lbs
in blocks
layer 0 and layer 1 4
layer 1 and layer 2 4
layer 2 and layer 3 4
layer 3 and layer 4 4
layer 4 and layer 5 4
E(x)= distance from base of wall up to layer x
Ac(x)= contributory area of grid x [Eq.5 -36]
D(x) =dist. below top of wall to middle of contributory area [Eq.5 -41]
Fg(x) =force in geosynthetic layer x [Eq.5 -35]
E(
1 )=
2.16668
Ac(
1 )=
3.25002
E(
2 )=
4.33336
Ac(
2 )=
2.16668
E(
3 )=
6.50004
Ac(
3 )=
2.16668
E(
4 )=
8.66672
Ac(
4 )=
2.16668
E(
5 )=
10.8334
Ac(
5 )=
3.250018
D(
1 )=
11.37507
Fg(
1 )=
704.5207
D(
2 )=
11.91674
Fg(
2 )=
489.0801
D(
3 j=
9.750058
Fg(
3 )=
411.4813
D(
4 )=
7.583378
Fg(
4 )=
333.8824
D(
5 )=
1.625009
Fg(
5 )=
180.7281
Safety Factors WRT overstress (Eq.5 -30]
FS overstress in layer(
1 )=
2.271048 with 1600
lb grid
1 )=
FS overstress in layer(
2 )=
2.146888 with 1050
lb grid
in layer(
FS overstress in layer(
3 )=
2.551756 with 1050
lb grid
sliding
FS overstress in layer(
4 )=
3.144819 with 1050
lb grid
internal
FS overstress in layer(
5 )=
5.809834 with 1050
lb grid
FS
Safety
Factors
WRT reinforcement
pullout
(Eq.5 -43)
Layer( 1 ) gridlength =
6
feet FS pullout in
layer( 1
)= 6.416937
Layer( 2 ) gridlength =
6
feet FS pullout in
layer( 2
)= 5.052871
Layer( 3 ) gridlength =
7
feet FS pullout in
layer( 3
)= 4.420039
Layer( 4 ) gridlength =
8
feet FS pullout in
layer( 4
)= 3.562295
Layer( 5 ) gridlength =
10.5
feet FS pullout in
layer( 5
)= 5.509671
(The grid length used in all external stability calcs. is 6 ft.)
Safety Factor WRT internal sliding [Eq.5 -47]
FS
internal
sliding
in layer(
1 )=
3.704809
FS
internal
sliding
in layer(
2 )=
4.225911
FS
internal
sliding
in layer(
3 )=
5.094413
FS
internal
sliding
in layer(
4 )=
6.831419
FS
internal
sliding
in layer(
5 )=
57.85891
CALCULATIONS FOR LOFFEL WALL DESIGN
-----------------------------------
-----------------------------------
using the NCMA design manual for SEGMENTAL RETAINING WALLS
N SELF STORAGE, ENCINITAS, CA
10.5 MAXIMUM HEIGHT LOFFEL WALL WITH LEVEL BACKFILL
SEISMIC CALCULATION
SOIL PARAMETERS
------ --- - - - ---
Soil parameters in degrees unless noted
Peak internal friction angle of retained soil 30
Peak internal friction angle of reinforced soil 33
Peak internal friction angle of base soil 30
External interface friction angle 22
Backslope angle 0
Wall batter angle ( +from vertical) 20
Depth of Embedment 2 ft
Foundation soil cohesion 100 psf
Coulomb failure angle for reinforced soils 49.8
Coulomb failure angle for retained soils 48.1
Horizontal ground acceleration .15 g -ft /sec *sec
Unit weight of retained soil 115 pcf
Unit weight of reinforced soil 115 pcf
-------------------------------
EXTERNAL STABILITY CALCULATIONS
Ka ret= .1724485
Ka rein= .1438245
Live surcharge load= 200 psf
Dead surcharge load= 0 psf
Bearing capacity factors (Nc, Nq, & NY):
Nc= 30.1
Nq= 18.4
Ny= 22.4
embedment= 2
Base Grid length= 6
Wall height= 13.00008 ft
Number of blocks= 24
check against base sliding
--------------------------
Weight of reinforced soil= 8970.054 lbs
Weight of overburden= 0 lbs [Eq.5 -14]
Psoil= 1674.768 [Eq.5-5]
Psurcharge= 346.7166 [Eq.5-6]
Seismic loading= 1345.508
Total Horizontal Load= 3366.993
Sliding Resistance= 5778.858 lbs
check against overturning
------------------- - - - - --
Resisting moment= 48131.68 ft -lbs
Overturning moment= 20006.07 ft -lbs
check for adequate bearing capacity
----------------------------- - - - - --
Bearing capacity factors
Nc= 30.1
Ny= 22.4
Nq= 18.4
Qult= 14620.95 lbs [Eq.5-25]
Qa= 1717.004 lbs [Eq.5 -24]
B= 5.728998 ft (Eq.5-22]
ECCENTRICITY .1355008
Wall height= 13.00008 ft
(Eq.S -13]
FSliding= 1.716326 [Eq.5 -15]
(Eq.5 -9]
(Eq. 5-11]
(Eq. 5-161
(Eq. 5-20]
FSot= 2.405854 (Eq.5 -21]
FSbearing= 8.515384 [Eq.5 -26]
---------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNAL STABILITY
---------------------------------------------------------------
Soil self weight(internal calcs.),
Pal=
1770.498
lbs
Grid spacing measured
in blocks
Number
blocks
between
layer
0
and
layer
1
4
Number
blocks
between
layer
1
and
layer
2
4
Number
blocks
between
layer
2
and
layer
3
4
Number
blocks
between
layer
3
and
layer
4
4
Number
blocks
between
layer
4
and
layer
5
4
Number of grids 5
E(x)= distance from base of wall up to layer x
Ac(x)= contributory area of grid x [Eq.5 -36]
D(x) =dist. below top of wall to middle of contributory area [Eq.5 -41]
Fg(x) =force in geosynthetic layer x [Eq.5 -35]
E(
1
)= 2.16668
E(
2
)= 4.33336
E(
3
)= 6.50004
E(
4
)= 8.66672
E(
5
)= 10.8334
D(
1 )=
11.37507
D(
2 )=
11.91674
D(
3 )=
9.750058
D(
4 )=
7.583378
D(
5 )=
1.625009
Ac(
1 )=
3.25002
Ac(
2 )=
2.16668
Ac(
3 )=
2.16668
Ac(
4 )=
2.16668
Ac(
5 )=
3.250018
Fg(
1 )=
737.8131
Fg(
2 )=
501.4604
Fg(
3 )=
463.1204
Fg(
4 )=
424.7803
Fg(
5 )=
479.0172
Safety Factors WRT overstress [Eq.5 -30]
FS overstress in layer(
1 )=
2.168571 with 1600
lb grid
layer(
FS overstress in layer(
2 )=
2.093884 with 1050
lb grid
sliding
FS overstress in layer(
3 )=
2.267229 with 1050
lb grid
FS
FS overstress in layer(
4 )=
2.471866 with 1050
lb grid
3 )=
FS overstress in layer(
5 )=
2.191988 with 1050
lb grid
in
Safety
Factors
WRT reinforcement
pullout
[Eq.5 -43]
Layer( 1 ) gridlength =
6
feet FS pullout in
layer( 1
)= 6.129294
Layer( 2 ) gridlength =
6
feet FS pullout in
layer( 2
)= 4.928123
Layer( 3 ) gridlength =
7
feet FS pullout in
layer( 3
)= 3.927193
Layer( 4 ) gridlength =
8
feet FS pullout in
layer( 4
)= 2.800007
Layer( 5 ) gridlength =
10.5
feet FS pullout in
layer( 5
)= 2.07874
(The grid length used in all external stability calcs. is 6 ft.)
Safety Factor WRT internal sliding [Eq.5 -47]
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
1 )=
3.704809
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
2 )=
4.225911
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
3 )=
5.094413
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
4 )=
6.831419
FS
internal
sliding
in
layer(
5 )=
57.85891
CALCULATIONS FOR LOFFEL WALL DESIGN
-----------------------------------
-----------------------------------
using the NCMA design manual for SEGMENTAL RETAINING WALLS
OLIVENHAIN SELF STORAGE, ENCINITAS, CA
9 FT. MAXIMUM HEIGHT LOFFEL WALL WITH LEVEL BACKFILL
STATIC CALCULATION
SOIL PARAMETERS
--------- - - - - --
Soil parameters in degrees unless noted
Peak internal friction angle of retained soil 30
Peak internal friction angle of reinforced soil 33
Peak internal friction angle of base soil 30
External interface friction angle 22
Backslope angle 0
Wall batter angle ( +from vertical) 20
Depth of Embedment 2 ft
Foundation soil cohesion 100 psf
Coulomb failure angle for reinforced soils 49.8
Coulomb failure angle for retained soils 48.1
Horizontal ground acceleration 0 g -ft /sec *sec
Unit weight of retained soil 115 pcf
Unit weight of reinforced soil 115 pcf
---------------------------------------------------------------------
EXTERNAL STABILITY CALCULATIONS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Ka ret= .1724485
Ka rein= .1438245
Live surcharge load= 200 psf
Dead surcharge load= 0 psf
Bearing capacity factors (Nc, Nq, & Ny):
Nc= 30.1
Nq= 18.4
Ny= 22.4
embedment= 2
Base Grid length= 5
Wall height= 11.37507 ft
Number of blocks= 21
check against base sliding
--------------------------
Weight of reinforced soil= 6540.665 lbs
Weight of overburden= 0 lbs [Eq.5-14]
Psoil= 1282.244 [Eq.5 -5]
Psurcharge= 303.377 [Eq.5 -6]
Seismic loading= 0
Total Horizontal Load= 1585.621
Sliding Resistance= 4376.251 lbs
check against overturning
------------------- - - - - --
Resisting moment= 29891.43 ft -lbs
Overturning moment= 6587.34 ft -lbs
check for adequate bearing capacity
----------------------------- - - - - --
Bearing capacity factors
Nc= 30.1
Ny= 22.4
Nq= 18.4
Qult= 10943.83 lbs [Eq.5 -25]
Qa= 2507.689 lbs [Eq.5 -24]
B= 2.87409 ft [Eq.5-22]
ECCENTRICITY 1.062955
Wall height= 11.37507 ft
Soil self weight(inte
Grid spacing measured
Number blocks between
Number blocks between
Number blocks between
Number blocks between
Number of grids 4
[Eq. 5-13)
FSliding= 2.75996 [Eq.5 -15]
[Eq.5 -9]
[Eq. 5-11]
[Eq. 5-16]
[Eq. 5-20)
FSot= 4.537709 [Eq.5 -21]
FSbearing= 4.364109 [Eq.5 -26]
--------------- ---
INTERNAL STABILITY
rnal calcs.), Pa'= 1396.413 lbs
in blocks
layer 0 and layer 1 4
layer 1 and layer 2 4
layer 2 and layer 3 4
layer 3 and layer 4 4
E(x)= distance from base of wall up to layer x
Ac(x)= contributory area of grid x [Eq.5 -36]
D(x) =dist. below top of wall to middle of contributory area [Eq.5 -41]
Fg(x) =force in geosynthetic layer x [Eq.5 -35]
E(
1 )=
2.16668
Ac(
1 )=
3.25002
E(
2 )=
4.33336
Ac(
2 )=
2.16668
E(
3 )=
6.50004
Ac(
3 )=
2.16668
E(
4 )=
8.66672
Ac(
4 )=
3.791688
D(
1 )=
9.750059
Fg(
1 )=
617.222
D(
2 )=
10.29173
Fg(
2 )=
430.881
D(
3 )=
8.125049
Fg(
3 )=
353.2821
D(
4 )=
1.895844
Fg(
4 )=
227.8243
Safety Factors WRT overstress [Eq.5 -30]
FS overstress in layer(
1 j=
1.701171
with 1050
lb grid
3.09136
FS overstress in layer(
2 )=
2.436868
with 1050
lb grid
3.543963
FS overstress in layer(
3 )=
2.972129
with 1050
lb grid
4.398877
FS overstress in layer(
4 )=
4.608816
with 1050
lb grid
37.16596
Safety
Factors WRT reinforcement
pullout
[Eq.5 -43]
Layer( 1 ) gridlength =
5
feet FS
pullout in
layer( 1
)= 4.333683
Layer( 2 ) gridlength =
6
feet FS
pullout in
layer( 2
)= 4.659982
Layer( 3 ) gridlength =
7
feet FS
pullout in
layer( 3
)= 3.861142
Layer( 4 ) gridlength =
9
feet FS
pullout in
layer( 4
)= 4.772172
(The grid length used in all external stability calcs. is 5 ft.)
Safety Factor WRT internal sliding [Eq.5 -47]
FS
internal
sliding
in layer(
1 )=
3.09136
FS
internal
sliding
in layer(
2 )=
3.543963
FS
internal
sliding
in layer(
3 )=
4.398877
FS
internal
sliding
in layer(
4 )=
37.16596
CALCULATIONS FOR LOFFEL WALL DESIGN
using the NCMA design manual for SEGMENTAL RETAINING WALLS
OLIVENHAIN SELF STORAGE, ENCINITAS, CA
9 FT. MAXIMUM HEIGHT LOFFEL WALL WITH LEVEL BACKFILL
SEISMIC CALCULATION
SOIL PARAMETERS
------- -- - - - - --
Soil parameters in degrees unless noted
Peak internal friction angle of retained soil 30
Peak internal friction angle of reinforced soil 33
Peak internal friction angle of base soil 30
External interface friction angle 22
Backslope angle 0
Wall batter angle ( +from vertical) 20
Depth of Embedment 2 ft
Foundation soil cohesion 100 psf
Coulomb failure angle for reinforced soils 49.8
Coulomb failure angle for retained soils 48.1
Horizontal ground acceleration .15 g -ft /sec *sec
Unit weight of retained soil 115 pcf
Unit weight of reinforced soil 115 pcf
---------------------------------------------------------------------
EXTERNAL STABILITY CALCULATIONS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Ka ret= .1724485
Ka rein= .1438245
Live surcharge load= 200 psf
Dead surcharge load= 0 psf
Bearing capacity factors (Nc, Nq, & Ny):
Nc= 30.1
Nq= 18.4
Ny= 22.4
embedment= 2
Base Grid length= 5
Wall height= 11.37507 ft
Number of blocks= 21
check against base sliding
--------------------------
Weight of reinforced soil= 6540.665 lbs
Weight of overburden= 0 lbs [Eq.5 -14]
Psoil= 1282.244 [Eq.5-5]
Psurcharge= 303.377 [Eq.5 -6]
Seismic loading= 981.0997
Total Horizontal Load= 2566.721
Sliding Resistance= 4376.251 lbs
check against overturning
------------------- - - - - --
Resisting moment= 29891.43 ft -lbs
Overturning moment= 13283.39 ft -lbs
check for adequate bearing capacity
----------------------------- - - - - --
Bearing capacity factors
Nc= 30.1
Ny= 22.4
Nq= 18.4
Qult= 13581.02 lbs [Eq.5-25]
Qa= 1464.427 lbs [Eq.5 -24]
B= 4.921602 ft [Eq.5 -22]
ECCENTRICITY 3.919882E -02
Wall height= 11.37507 ft
Soil self weight(inte
Grid spacing measured
Number blocks between
Number blocks between
Number blocks between
Number blocks between
Number of grids 4
[Eq.5 -13]
FSliding= 1.704997 [Eq.5-15]
[Eq.5 -9]
[Eq.5 -11]
(Eq.5 -16]
[Eq.5 -20]
FSot= 2.250287 [Eq.5 -21]
FSbearing= 9.273953 [Eq.5 -26]
--------------- - --
INTERNAL STABILITY
rnal calcs.), Pa'= 1396.413 lbs
in blocks
layer 0 and layer 1 4
layer 1 and layer 2 4
layer 2 and layer 3 4
layer 3 and layer 4 4
E(x)= distance from base of wall up to layer x
Ac(x)= contributory area of grid x [Eq.5 -36]
D(x) =dist. below top of wall to middle of contributory area [Eq.5 -41]
Fg(x) =force in geosynthetic layer x [Eq.5 -35]
E(
1 )= 2.16668
Ac( 1
)= 3.25002
E(
2 )= 4.33336
Ac( 2
)= 2.16668
E(
3 )= 6.50004
Ac( 3
)= 2.16668
E(
4 )= 8.66672
Ac( 4
)= 3.791688
D(
1 )= 9.750059
Fg( 1
)= 656.6299
D(
2 )= 10.29173
Fg( 2
)= 447.3383
D(
3 )= 8.125049
Fg( 3
)= 408.9982
D(
4 )= 1.895844
Fg( 4
)= 522.8481
Safety
Factors WRT overstress
[Eq.5 -30]
FS
overstress in layer(
1 )= 1.599074
with 1050
lb grid
FS
overstress in layer(
2 )= 2.347217
with 1050
lb grid
FS
overstress in layer(
3 )= 2.567248
with 1050
lb grid
FS
overstress in layer(
4 )= 2.008231
with 1050
lb grid
Safety
Factors WRT
reinforcement
pullout [Eq.5 -43]
Layer( 1 ) gridlength =
5 feet
FS pullout in
layer( 1 )=
4.073595
Layer( 2 ) gridlength =
6 feet
FS pullout in
layer( 2 )=
4.488545
Layer( 3 ) gridlength =
7 feet
FS pullout in
layer( 3 )=
3.335155
Layer( 4 ) gridlength =
9 feet
FS pullout in
layer( 4 )=
2.079412
(The grid length used in
all external stability
calcs. is 5
ft.)
Safety
Factor WRT
internal sliding
[Eq.5 -47]
FS
internal sliding in
layer( 1 )=
3.09136
FS
internal sliding in
layer( 2 )=
3.543963
FS
internal sliding in
layer( 3 )=
4.398877
FS
internal sliding in
layer( 4 )=
37.16596
The coefficient of active earth pressure I. is calculated as:
K=
cos' (P - V)
ccs'yr cos(V - a) 1 +
sin(O +b) sin(O-P)
Cos (W -b) cos(tV +P)
[Eq. 3 -10]
NCMA ANALYTICAL ASSUMPTION
1. PM BASED ON COULOMB EARTH PRESSURE THEORY.
2. WALL FRICTION, 6. 6a =LOWER OF 0j OR •,
67 0.667 •I .
3. VERTICAL COMPONENT OF P.M. ie P�vf IS
CONSERVATIVELY IGNORED. THEREFORt: P. =P txy
P. =P,m ccs(6 -f).
4. P. BASED ON EXPANDED STRUCTURE HEIGHT (H +h).
5. ACTIVE EARTH PRESSURE FOR INTERNAL STABILITY
P' CALCULATED IN SAME MANNER BUT BASED ON
STRUCTURE HEIGHT (H)-
I.-
y -0 ' 0
POTENTIAL FAILURE
PLANE
/ h
I-- -------------- -- /------- - - - - - :
/
/
FRICTION
/ FORCES
(D
1 )................
L
POTENTIAL FAILURE
PLANE
P 11
/
/
/
/
/
6;-*
3
REINFORCEMENT
NOTE: O1 VERTICAL WALL FACE FOR EXTERNAL STABILITY OF MULTIPLE DEPTH SRWs.
m INCLINED WALL FACE FOR EXTERNAL STABILITY SOIL REINFORCED SRWs.
FIGURE 3 -9: EARTH PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION AND FORCE
RESOLUTION SRW SYSTEMS
Cut
M
7
OW
i
¢
N N
O
4J
W l
O J
Ie
v' o
n� <
v' vC
C
N
z
O
z
U
v 3
z
I
J i
3
i
0 1,
L
S w.
Y � Q
Y
v �-
i I
a' i
J
—^ Ix
3' LI
r :e L
3
n"1 � _
i —
Z ;
511
_T Z
I O
1 r
1 O <
N O
Z
O
W W
¢
w W y=j
J J {A
d W
n1¢
CL
0
0
Y
m
O
W
Z N
W
¢
W
U a0
V1 ¢
-a
J
<0
z
0
O G
zz
ma
FIGURE 5 -2: FORCES AND GEOMETRY FOR SOIL REINFORCED SRW
EXTERNAL STABILITY CALCULATIONS
r
¢
a
.
Y
U<
e
m
O
J
¢ W
N
Z
1 •
1
V I¢ W
z W
V
Ocx
P
W
a00
W
W
Op
N 1
W
W ¢
ma
_ S
¢
W
3 J
V O
$
05
= 1
O 0
� W
w 0o
`}
m
ri
w
O z
L-
w
3e a
o
+
O+
X
r�
V1 W
W
W
1 r
l
J
d
W
7¢
z
•� �
1
a c a
o
x
=
_T Z
I O
1 r
1 O <
N O
Z
O
W W
¢
w W y=j
J J {A
d W
n1¢
CL
0
0
Y
m
O
W
Z N
W
¢
W
U a0
V1 ¢
-a
J
<0
z
0
O G
zz
ma
FIGURE 5 -2: FORCES AND GEOMETRY FOR SOIL REINFORCED SRW
EXTERNAL STABILITY CALCULATIONS
Ad.)= CONTRIBUTORY AREA TO DETERMINE FORCE
IN REINFORCEMENT. F,IN
D. -DEPTH TO MIDPOINT OF CONTRIBUTORY
AREA. A.(.)
Fd.) -FORCE IN REINFORCEMENT AT LAYER n
d• = AVERAGE DEPTH OF OVERBURDEN OVER
REINFORCEMENT ANCHORAGE LENGTH. L.(.)
a; = ORIENTATION OF INTERNAL FAILURE SURFACE
E. -ELEVATION OF LAYER n ABOVE REFERENCE
DATUM
E.{.)- EFFECTIVE ELEVATION OF LAYER n ABOVE
REFERENCE DATUM (SEE E0. 5 -30)
L.(.)-ANCHORAGE LENGTH OF LAYER n
AC- = ANCHORAGE CAPACITY OF LAYER n
H, - EFFECTIVE HEIGHT (SEE E0. 4 -3)
q, =DEAD LOAD SURCHARGE
q, -LIVE LOAD SURCHARGE
G„ = HORIZONTAL PRESSURE (SEE FIG. 5 -4)
`Y -WALL INCLINATION (W +i, )
A-0)
I
Ajd3)
}— H,
A a2)
AIc< ,)
L
a; =SEE Eq. 3 -13
E.(.)
FIGURE 5 -5: FORCES & STRESSES USED IN CALCULATION OF INTERNAL
STABILITY FOR GEOSYNTHETIC SOIL REINFORCED SRW
NOTATIONS & ABBREVIATIONS
Aq,r
= contributory area for tensile load in n°
e
= eccentricity of resultant vertical bearing
layer of reinforcement (ft), actually ft=,
force (ft)
but unit width understood
E,r,r
= effective elevation of n° reinforcement
AC,
= anchorage capacity for nth reinforcement
layer above bearing pad elevation (ft)
layer (lb /ft)
Ey
= elevation of n° reinforcement layer
av
= apparent minimum ultimate connection
above base of wall (ft)
strength between geosynthetic
reinforcement and segmental units (]b /ft)
e,
= eccentricity of self - weight of reinforced
zone plus surcharge (ft)
a'v
= apparent minimum service state
connection strength between geosynthetic
E,
= extrapolation ratio
reinforcement and segmental units (lb /ft)
L
= eccentricity of gravity SRW (ft)
AOS
= apparent opening size of the geotextile
FB
= material factor for biological degradation
a,
= apparent minimum ultimate shear
capacity between segmental units Qb/ft)
FC
= material factor for construction site
damage
a',
= apparent minimum service state shear
capacity between segmental units (lb/ft)
FD
= material factor for chemical degradation
B
= equivalent footing width of eccentrically
FE
= material factor for creep extrapolation
loaded foundation base of soil reinforced
SRWs (ft)
Fx,r
= force in n° geosynthetic reinforcement
layer (]b /ft)
B,
= expanded footing width for gravity
SRWs (ft)
FS,
= factor of safety, bearing capacity
B',
= equivalent footing width for eccentrically
FSw
= partial factor of safety for biological
loaded gravity SRWs (ft)
degradation (.'vfcthod A)
e
= cohesion of soil (psf)
FSm
= partial factor of safety for chemical
degradation (Method A)
C.
= coefficient of direct sliding
FSs
= factor of safety, connection strength
C,
= cohesion of foundation soil (psf)
FScit
= partial factor of safety for creep
Cu
= coefficient of shear stress interaction
deformation (Method A)
CRF
= creep reduction factor for geosynthetic
FSy
= factor of safety, global stability
reinforcement
FSm
= partial factor of safety for installation
d,
= average depth of overburden of n" layer
damage (Method A)
of reinforcement over the anchorage
length, L,t,r
FSxT
= partial factor of safety for joints (seams
and connections) (Method A)
D.
= depth to mid -point of contributory area
of Aq,r of n° reinforcement layer (ft)
FS.
= partial factor of safety for material
uncertainties (Method A)
FS„
= factor of safety, overturning
FSp
= factor of safety, pullout
17%
= factor of saftey, shear capacity
FS,
= factor of safety, sliding
FS„
= factor of safety, tensile overstress
G.
= horizontal center of gravity of segmental
.ASE =
unit (ft), vertical center of gravity
n =
assumed at F./2
h
= increase in height due to backslope (ft)
1-1
= total height of wall (ft)
H'
= exposed height of wall (ft)
H_ = cap /coping height for segmental unit (ft)
K
= effective height for battered SRWS (ft)
H,
= total wall embedment (h)
H.
= hinge height of SRW (ft)
L, =
= segmental unit height (ft)
4
= inclination of SRW base (deg)
K
= active earth pressure coefficient
k _' = normal permeability of gcotextile (fVsee)
k—I = soil permeability (ft/see)
L' = width of reinforced zone at top of wall
(ft)
L" = increase in width due to backslope P (ft)
= horizontal width of reinforced zone at
LP intersection with backslopc, P (ft)
Lx.) = anchorage length for n' reinforcement
layer (ft)
LI = effective length of reinforcement during
pullout test
L, = length of reinforcement at base of
internal sliding wedge (ft)
L', = width of reinforced zone at top of wall
for internal sliding on the nth
reinforcement layer (ft)
LIDS =
long term design strength (lb/ft)
LTDS, =
long -term design strength of
Nom, =
reinforcement type tr (lb /ft)
L, =
segmental unit length (ft)
Ivy =
overturning moment (ft-lb /ft)
=
resisting moment (ft-lb /ft)
.ASE =
mechanically stabilized earth
n =
number of an individual layer of
reinforcement
N =
number of reinforcement layers in design
No NI, Nr
= bearing capacity factor
Nom, =
minimum number of reinforcement
layers
p =
active earth force (lb /ft)
p =
active earth force acting over the
effective height of the wall (lb/ft)
p.Cm� =
horizontal component of active earth
force (Ib/ft)
p<n =
total active earth force Ob/ft)
p'_'� =
vertical component of active earth force
(]b /ft)
pq =
resultant horizontal force due to active
earth pressure from uniform surcharge, q,
+ q, (lb/ft)
p =
resultant borizontal force due to active
earth pressure from soil self- weight
(lb /ft)
Q, = applied bearing stress (psf)
qt or q, = uniform surcharge loading at top of wall
(psf) (live or dead)
Q.4 = ultimate bearing capacity of foundation
soils (pSO
= apparent angle of friction for peak
connection strength of segmental units to
geosyntlictic reinforcemem (deg)
= apparent angle of friction between
segmental units for peak shear capacity
(deg)
k'e
= apparent angle of friction for service
state connection strength of segmental
units to geosynthetic reinforcement (deg)
apparent angle of friction between
segmental units for service state shear
capacity (deg)
µ,
= coefficient of interface friction for
segmental unit sliding on soils
o,
= active earth pressure (psf)
Cy.
= normal stress (psf)
o,
= vertical soil stress (psf)
¢�
= angle of internal fiction, drainage fill
(de g)
¢r
= angle of internal friction, foundation soil
(de g)
= angle of internal friction, retained soil
(deg)
q = angle of internal friction. infil] soil (deg)
W = total wall inclination from vertical
clockwise positive ((,)+ij (deg)
w = unit inclination due to setback per SRW
unit K (deg)
(Eq. 5 -11 L' = L - Wu (Cos ib)
(Eq. 5 -21 L" = L' tan 9 tan
1 - tan 6 tan i
(Eq. 5 -31 L, = L, + L"
[Eq.
5 -41
h =
L, tan 0
(Eq.
5 -51
Pe =
0. 5K, 7, (He +
h)2Cos(be - Y)
(Eq.
5 -61
Pq =
(q1 + qd) K. (He
+ h) cos (de - :)
(Eq.
5 -71
Ye
(He +h) /3
(Eq.
5 -81
Yq =
(He + h) /2
[Eq.
5 -91
Pe =
Pe + Pq
(Eq.
5 -101
Rs =
Cd, (qd L, +Wr(i)
+ W,(,)) tan i
(Eq.
5 -111
R= =
Cds (qdL, + Wrfi)
+ Wr(,)) tan }d
(Eq.
5 -121
Rs =
Cde [Cf L + (qd
L, +Wr(i) + Wr(o)) tan +fl
(Eq.
5 -131
WrO)
' L-ri He
[Eq.
5 -141
Wro)
_ (L'yiL, sin
j6) 1(2Cos 0)
(Eq. 5 -151 FSs( = Rs /Pa
[Eq. 5 -161 Mr = Wr(i) Xr(() + Wr(o) Xr(a) + qd LA Xq(b)
[Eq. 5 -171 Xr()) _ (L + He tan *) / 2
[Eq. 5 -181
Wr(a) = He tan - Hu tan m + [Cos 0 [ ((L' + h tan *) /COs 9) + L' Cos 01 /31 +
Wu Cos iy + (L' sin2 0) /3
(Eq.
5 -191
Xq(j)
= L + ((He + h) tan *1 - (4/2)
[Eq.
5 -201
Mo =
Ps Ys + Pq Yq
[Eq.
5 -211
FSot
= Mr /Mo
(Eq.
5 -221
B =
L - 2e
(Eq. 5 -231
PsYs + PgYq - W,0) (X,0) - L /2) - Wro) (Xr(e) - L /2) - gdL.(Xq(a) - L /2)
e =
Wr(i) + Wr(r) + qd L,
[Eq. 5 -241 Qa = [Wr(i) + Wr(e) + (q( + qd) L,1 /B
[Eq. 5 -251 Qu(t = Cf Nc + 0.5yf B Ny + yf Hwb Nq
[Eq.
5 -261
FSix
= Qu(t /Qa
[Eq.
5 -271
Ps' =
0.5Ka 71 Hat COS (6i - F)
(Eq.
5 -281
Pq' _
(q( + qd) Ka He cos (bi
- �)
[Eq.
5 -291
Pe' =
Pe' + Pq'
(Eq.
5 -301
FSto
= LTDStr(n) /F9(n)
[Eq.
5 -351
Fe(n)
_ (yi Dn + q( + qd1 Ke cos
(6i -
*)Ac(n)
(Eq.
5 -361
Aco)
= (Ee(2) + EOM) / 2
(Eq.
5-371
Ac(n)
( (Ee(n.1) + Ee(n)) /�1 -
[Ee(n)
+Ee(n-1)) /21
[Eq.
5 -381
Ac(n)
= (Ee(n+t) - Ee(n -1)) /2
(Eq.
5 -391
Ac(w)
= He - [Ee(w) + Ee(w -t)) /
21
(Eq.
5 -401
D) =
He - (Ac()) / 2)
[Eq.
5 -411
Dn =
He - AcO) - Ac(2) - ...
- Ac(n -u - (Ac(n) /2)
[Eq.
5 -421
DM =
(Ac(N) /2)
(Eq.
5 -431
FSP
= ACS / Fe(n)
[Eq.
5 -441
ACn
2 Le(n) Ci (dn y; + qd)
tan
(Eq.
5 -451
Le(n)
= L - Wu cosib - Ee(n) tan(90
- ai) + Ee(n) tan
(Eq.
5 -461
do =
(He - Ee(n) + ( (Ee(n) /tan
cri) -
He tan * + (Le(n) /2) ] tan 0
[Eq.
5 -471
FSs((n) _ WSW + Vh
(COS
iy) ) /Paco)
[Eq.
5 -481
R's(n) = Cds (qd Low
+ Wr(i,n)
+W(ro,n)) tan
[Eq.
5 -491
L's(n) = L - (Wu cos
iy) -
eL
[Eq.
5 -501
cL = (E000) - Ee(n))
/ tan
as
(Eq.
5 -511
L "a(n) = L's(n) tan p
tan
1 - tan 0
tan
(Eq.
5-521
L,(n) = L's(n) + L "s(n)
[Eq.
5 -531
hn = L,(n) tan 0
(Eq.
5 -541
W'r(i,n) = L's(n) (He -
Ee(n))
7(
[Eq.
5 -551
W'rb,n) _ (YiL,(n) L's(n)
sin
0) / (2cos 0)