HomeMy WebLinkAbout25 SEAWATCH - SOILSNMG
Geotechnical, Inc.
September 16, 2003
Project No. 03022-01
To: Shea Homes
P.O. Box 1509
Brea, California 92822-1509
Attention: Mr. Todd Funk, Project Manager
Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Review of Model Precise Grading Plan, Lots 41
through 44, Tract 15811, a Portion of Area C-1 within Pacific Ridge
Development, Planning Area 5, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California
r INTRODUCTION
In accordance with your request, NMG Geotechnica1, Inc. (NMG) has performed a geotechnical
review of the proposed model precise grading plan for the subject site within the Pacific Ridge
development at Newport Coast, located in the County of Orange, California. The purpose of our
review was to evaluate the proposed precise grading and construction in light of the geotechnical
conditions at the site. The plans reviewed were Sheets 1 through 3 of 3 sheets of the 20-Scale
Model Precise Grading Plan for Lots 41 through 44 of Tract 15811, prepared by Douglas Bender
and Associates and received by NMG on September 4, 2003.
Currently, NMG is the geotechnical consultant of record during the ongoing preliminary
operations conducted by the Irvine Community Development Company (ICDC). The subject
site is part of a larger area that is being graded by ICDC within the Pacific Ridge development
(Lots 110 through 113 of Tentative Tract 15811). A geotechnical report of our observations will
be submitted to the County of Orange Development Services Department (COPDSD) once the
preliminary grading (Milestone 3) has been completed.
Our scope of work for this study included site visits during preliminary
referenced reports and other background materials, review of thegrading, review of the
precise grading plan and report
preparation. This report presents a summary of our findings and provides our conclusions and
preliminary recommendations for design and construction of the subject site.
.r
ATTACHMENTS
Figure 1 — Site Location Map — Rear of Text
Figure 2 — Retaining Wall Drainage Detail — Rear of Text
Appendix A — References
Appendix B — Seismic Data
Appendix C — General Earthwork and Grading Specifications
T)L7rlTTr /n/n\ /,/,n 1/,/,n rAV /n/.n1
03022-01
September 16, 2003
materials should be scarified; moisture -conditioned and, recompacted. Fills should be
compacted to a minimum 90 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM Test
Method D1557. Fill materials should be placed in loose lifts no thicker than 8 inches. Materials
should be moisture -conditioned and processed, as necessary, to achieve uniform moisture
content that is within moisture limits required to assure adequate bonding and compaction. Fills
placed against ground sloping more than 5:1 should be benched into competent material.
5. Seismic Design Guidelines
Seismic design data is provided in the table below based on the 1997 UBC criteria selection.
SEISMIC DESIGN VALUES BASED ON 1997 UBC
—"—V _VXA%a uvia rlg"o 10-2 4 _-
Soil Pro1"ile Type from Table 16-J S
Seismic Source Type from Table 16-U D
B
Closest Distance to Seismic Source 4 miles (6 km)
Closest Active Fault Newport -Inglewood (offshore)
6. Foundation and Slab Design
'! Shallow foundations and slabs -on -grade (including post -tensioned slabs) may be used for low-rise
structures. Based upon our knowledge of the subject site, expansion potentials of the near -surface
soils are anticipated to be in the "low" and "medium" ranges. The 1997 Uniform Building Code
(UBC) requires specific foundation and slab design for soils having an expansion index of 21 (low)
or greater. The design should be post -tensioned slabs per the Post -Tensioning Institute (PTI)
method or slab -on -grade per the Wire Reinforcement Institute (WRI) method. Any other
foundation and slab designs must be specifically submitted by the geotechnical and structural
engineers and approved by the building official.
i
Geotechnical parameters for the design of post -tensioned slabs in accordance with the PTI method
are provided in the following table (Geotechnical Guidelines for Design of Post -Tensioned Slabs).
For preliminary design purposes, we recommend the low to medium category (Category 2) be
used. Final design parameters will be provided for the subject site based upon the as -graded
conditions.
For design of the post -tensioned slabs, a soil/concrete coefficient of 0.75 may be assumed when
the concrete is underlain by the polyethylene moisture barrier (1997 UBC Section 1816.4.6).
Slab subgrades should be at the moisture contents described in the following table just prior to
placement of concrete. Presoaking of the soil may be necessary to achieve these moisture contents.
If remedial grading is necessary during building pad recertification, the placement of fill at or near
this moisture content generally is helpful in reducing (in some cases considerably) the amount of
effort required during presoaking.
The post -tensioned slabs should also be designed to meet the settlement criteria presented in
Section 2 of these recommendations.
I030916.doc
rl AA r.,
03 022-01
I, September 16, 2003
" 'DESIGN ECHMCAL GUIDELINES FOR
OF POST -TENSIONED SLARR
Parameter
Estimated Range of Expansion Classification
Center Lift
• Edge Moisture Variation Distance,
em
• Center Lift, ym
Edge Lift
• Edge Moisture Variation Distance,
em
• PA— r :,a --
Modulus of Elasticity of Soils, Es
Presaturation, as needed, to obtain the
minimum moisture down to the minimum
depth
Category
1 2 3
Very Low to Low to 4
Medium to High to Very
Low
Medium Niah rr ,
4.6 feet 5.3 feet 5.6 feet
2.1 inches 2.5 inches 3.8 inches 6.0 feet
4.0 inches
2.5 feet 3.0 feet 3.5 feet
0.5 inch 0.7 inch 1.0 inch
Inn,.
2.000 nci � en
1.2 x —
---- .-'
1.2
optimum
optimum
down to
down to
12 inches
IN in,-ho.
50 pci
1,000 psi
1.3 x
optimum
down to
,0,
lo---r.,,... -, 1 lwimg nelow 12 inches -_ — •�•���oa
West adjacent grade 18 inches 18 inches
* Based on Method zn UBC S
4.0 feet
1.1 inch
25 pci
50--- 0 psi
1A x
optimum
down to
24 inches
24 iirs es
ectton 1616
7. Allowable Bearin
g Capacity
An allowable bearing pressure of 1,500 psf may be applied to post tension slabs if
design and used for convention nee
al shallow footings having a minimum embedment in approved
for
material of 1 foot below the lowest adjacent
allowable bearing pressure may be increased by�S00 psf ade or each additional th
1 foot. The
ment
in approved material and b of
y 350 psf for each additional foot of width, to a maximum bale of
3,000 psf Allowable bearing pressure may be increased by one-third for wind ,
loading. For sliding resistance, the friction coefficient of 0.35 may be used at t 02' seismic
soil interface, he concrete and
8. Moisture Mitigation for Concrete Slabs
In addition to geotechnical and structural considerations, the project owner should al
various other factors that relate to slab design and construction. Please note that these ar
consider
not within the purview of the geotechnical consultant but we provide the foIlowin e are
for your consideration. g info rma tion
The intended use of the interior space, type of flooring (if any), and the type of goods
with the floor may dictate the need for and design of measures to mitigate potential otent al in contact
moisture emission from and/or moisture vapor transmission through the slab. effects of
Typically, for habitable structures, a minimum 10-mil Visqueen (or equivalent) vapor t
is
recommended under the slab to help mitigate moisture transmission through slabs. r The m
ost
030916.doc
7
Ia1AAr
03022-01
September 16, 2003
recent guidelines by the American Concrete Institute (ACI 302.1R-96) recommend that the vapor
retarder be placed directly under the slab where there is the potential for moisture sensitive
flooring. The use of a §nd layer between the vapor retarder and slab has been a common local
practice but frequently results in water from rain and other construction operations being trapped
between the vapor retarder and slab in the sand layer. Although this granular layer may help
protect the vapor retarder from damage and facilitates slab curing, it should be not used unless it
can be kept dry prior to the slab pour. If damage to the vapor retarder without a sand layer over
it is of significant concern, a higher strength retarder or barrier may be appropriate.
A layer of sand may also be needed below the vapor retarder to help protect it from puncturing
during concrete placement if the pad contains rocks or other objects that can puncture the
sheeting. The thickness of the sand layer(s) should be incorporated in the pad grade design. The
vapor retarder, when used, should be overlapped minimum 6 inches at the joints, sealed around
pipes and other appurtenances, and repaired when punctured in general accordance with the
manufacturer's recommendations.
Concrete mix design and curing are also significant factors in mitigating slab moisture problems.
Concrete with lower water/cement ratios results in de
nser, less permeable slabs. They also "dry"
faster with regard to when flooring can be installed (reduced moisture emissions quantities and
rates). Rewetting of the slab following curing should be avoided since this can result in
additional drying time required prior to flooring installation.
Concrete mix and the appropriate location of the vapor retarder should be determined in
�a coordination with all parties involvedprouct,.
structural engineer, architect, concete subcontractors, hand flooring subcontractors.including the ro�ect owner,
9. Lateral Earth Pressures and Retaining Wall Design
Conventional footings for retaining walls should be designed using the lateral earth pressures
presented below for backfill material derived from approved
pp oved on site sorts in drained conditions:
Equivalent Fluid Pressure psf/ft.
Conditions Level
2:1 Slope
Active 40 65
Al Rest 60 85
Passive 360 165 (if slo ing in front of wall)
If clean sand, having a sand equivalent equal to or greater than 30, is used for backfill, lower
equivalent fluid pressures may be utilize
d. ze. The equivalent fluid pressure of 30 psf/ft for level
backfill and 43 psf/ft for 2H:1 V sloping backfill may be used for the active conditions.
i Oversized rock and soils that have high expansion potential should not be used in the wall
backfill.
To design an unrestrained retaining wall, such as a cantilever wall, the active earth pressure may
be used. For a restrained retaining
pressure should be used. Passive pressure ishused to cas a lompute lateral soils t or at restrained aresis resistance ll corners, developed
the at -rest
against lateral structural movement. Further, for sliding resistance the friction coefficient of 0.35
030916.doc
leiAAf,-
03022-01
September 16, 2003
may be used at the concrete and soil interface. In combining the total lateral resistance, either
the passive pressure or the frictional resistance should be reduced by 50 percent. In addition, the
passive resistance is taken into account only if it is ensured that the soil against embedded
structure will remain intact with time. The retaining walls may also need to be design for
additional lateral loads if other structures or walls are planned within a 1:1 projection.
Our typical retaining wall drainage detail is included as Figure 2 (rear of text). Proper surface
drainage, such as a concrete V-ditch, should also be provided along the top of walls. Down
drains (outlets) for surface drainage should not be tied into the subdrain system for walls the
should be outlet separately. y
10. Retaining Wall Subdrains
Future retaining structures should be provided with a subdrain system approved by the
geotechnical consultant. In general, retaining walls are susceptible to minor seepage out of the
faces of walls if subjected to significant amounts of infiltration, even with a subdrainage system.
If such conditions are unacceptable from an aesthetic standpoint, we recommend the walls be
waterproofed and provided with a geocomposite "sheet" drain,. such as Miradrain 6000 (or
approved equivalent) behind the wall. Typical retaining wall subdrain recommendations are
provided on Figure 2 at the rear of text. Proper surface drainage, such as a concrete V-ditch,
should also be provided along the top of walls. Down drains (outlets) for surface drainage
should not be tied into the subdrain system for walls, they should be outlet separately.
11. Structural Setbacks
COPDSD requires that footings of structures located above descending slopes be setback from
the slope face in accordance with the minimum requirements of the County of Orange building
code or the UBC criteria, whichever is greater. The setback distance is measured from the
outside edge of the footing bottom along a horizontal line to the face of the slope. The table
provided below summarizes the minimum setback criteria for structures above descending
g
Structural Setback Requirements for
Footings Above Descending Slopes
Slope Height[H]
Minimum Setback
(feet)
from Slope Face(feet)
Less than 10
5
10to20
%2*H
20 to 30
10
More than 30
'/ * H (maximum of 40')
For the subject site, the maximum descending slope height is approximately 250 feet. Therefore,
the maximum required setback from the slope face should be 40 feet. A waiver for this setback
criteria within the PA 2C, 5 & 6 site will be submitted at the completion of preliminary grading.
The waiver will request a maximum 20-foot setback for structures at the top of descending
030916.doc
KlAAr
03022-01
September 16, 2003
slopes over 60 feet in height. Based upon review of the subject plan, the setback criteria to be
requested in the waiver appear to be satisfied for the residential structures.
p
12. Slope Creep, Lateral Fill Extension and Improvements Near Tops of Slopes
Both manufactured and natural slopes can undergo deformations over time due to changes in
moisture content and gravitational forces. Slope creep is the tendency of the outer portion of
slopes to move downhill over time under the force of gravity as the near surface soils shrink and
swell with moisture variations. Lateral fill extension is thought to be the result of deeper wetting
of expansive soils. It is sometimes referred to as "lot stretching" since the resulting movement at
the pad surface near top of slope includes a lateral component. These phenomena are not
completely or well understood. They appear to be related to the height of the slope, the
steepness of the slope and the composition of the slope (soil type). Higher slopes, steeper slopes,
and slopes composed of more expansive soils are believed to have a greater tendency to
experience such slope deformations. The depth of the creep zone seems to be greater as these
factors increase.
Improvements at or near the tops of slopes that are within the creep zone may be subject to
effects such as leaning (walls parallel to slope) and differential settlement slabs
Perpendicular to slope). Depending upon the tolerances of improvements to such effects, vari uls
forms and degrees of distress can result. Mitigation measures can take various forms, depending
upon the sensitivity of the improvements and the type of improvements. Mitigation is typically
by means of setbacks, deeper foundations for. structures, specialized jointing, and/or stiffening the improvements. g of
As a result of the predominately low to medium expansion potential of materials within the slopes,
we estimate that surficial materials in the upper 1 to 2 feet of slopes over 30 feet in height may
experience movements as a result of slope creep. Additionally, the zone of influence may extend
approximately 10 to 15 feet laterally away from the top of descending slopes. We anticipate that
the minimum setback criteria for structural footings, provided in Section 11, should provide
sufficient mitigation for the slope creep phenomenon. Additional recommendations for to -of -
slope walls and fences are provided within the following Section 13. p
13. Walls and Fences
The design of walls and fences is ultimately the purview of the structural engineer. Desi
loading. Provided in the table
ground conditionsbelow, are
should accommodate for wind and seismic e
recommendations for minimum footing depths and slope -face setbacks for top of slope and level
..
030916,doe
10
KLkAr
I
03022-01
September 16, 2003
Wall/Fence Footing Depth
and Slope Face Setback Criteria
Level Ground and Slopes Less Than 20
Type of eet High Top of Slope Greater
Structure Minimum Footin Than ZO eet In Hi h
De th (ft.) g Slope Face Minimum Footing Slope Face
MasonryPilaster
( ) Setback (ft.)
2 Depth (ft.) Setback (ft.)
1% 8 iz
Tube -Steel Fence 2 5 12
5 3 8
For freestanding walls are located near tops of slopes, we recommend that the wall footings
be
designed with a grade beam and caisson foundation system. In front of the top of slope walls,
the slope creep phenomenon generally decreases the passive resistance of the footing ystem as
the result of soils moving down the slope and loosing firm contact with the footin elem
Behind the top of slope walls, the grade beam portions of the system should be designedits.
to
withstand retained soil conditions as a result of slope creep movements in front of the all.
j Design should accommodate a retained condition that is, at minimum, the depth
beam and, at maximum, 2 feet deep (the depth of the slope creep zone). of the grade
Passive resistance of soil in front of wall foundations is taken into account
�± that the ma unt o materials embedded against the structure will remain intact with time. For held sign of
caisson footings for walls atop descending slopes, we recommended the use of a passive pressure
of 165 pounds per square foot per foot (psf/ft) of burial in the upper 5 feet.
this 5-foot zone should be neglected for passive resistance. Below 5 feet the
e upper p feet ressurof
e
for caisson footings may be increased to 360 psf/ft of burial. Behind the wall, the retained soils
should be designed for an active force of 40 psf/ft of depth. It is our o used for designpinion that these strengths
are more than .the creep limiting strength of the onsite material; therefore,
continuous creep will not occur behind the wall under these lateral earth pressures.
14.
Cement Type and Structural Concrete
�. We anticipate that the onsite soils should have a "negligible" soluble su1
(based on the classification for concrete exposed to sulfates in the 1997 UBC Table 19-A-4 level
recommend that all cement in contact with onsite soil shall be "Type II" unless otherwise
e
i specified, ise
Structural concrete elements are considered to be footings, slab -on -grade foundations, and floors.
Table 19-A-4 also establishes the structural concrete requirements for maximum water -cement
ratio and minimum compressive strength based on the sulfate exposure level. Additional
provisions for the design of concrete structures in Chapter 19 of the 1997 UBC and/or the
governing agency requirements may also be applicable.
The near -surface subgrade soils should be tested at the completion of preliminary adin
operations in order to verify to soluble sulfate content of the onsite soils. gr g
030916.doc
11
KLkA r
03022-01
September 16, 2003
15. Exterior Concrete
Table 201-1.1.2 of the 1997 Standard Specification for Public Work Construction (Green Book)
provides concrete class and compressive strength requirements typically used for street surface
improvements. Exterior concrete elements that are considered to be nonstructural (i.e.,
Pavements, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, etc.) may be based on this specification provided more
stringent requirements by governing agency or designer are not given.
Additional geotechnical recommendations for design of nonstructural exterior concrete elements
constructed over expansive soils also need to be considered. Exterior concrete elements are very
susceptible to lifting and cracking when constructed over expansive soils. For this project, the
subgrade soil is anticipated to have "low" to "medium" expansion potential. We recommend that
the provisions in the "medium" category in the following table be used during design and
construction.
TYPICAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONCRETE FLATWORK/HARDSCAPE
R
nsion Potential
ecommendations Very Low Low Medium
High
Very High
(< 20) Slab Thickness (Min.); nominal (20 — 50) (51— 90)
(91-130)
(5130)
thickness exce t where noted. 411 411 411
4"
4" Full
Subbase; thickness of sand or
gravel layer below concrete N/A N/A Optional
2" — 4"
2" — 4"
Presaturation; degree of optimum
moisture content (opt.) and depth Pre -wet 1.1 x opt. 1.2 x opt.
1.3 x opt.
1.4 x opt.
of saturation Only to 6" to 1211
to 18"
to 24"
Joints; maximum spacing of
control joints. Joint should be % of 10, 10, S'
6'
total thickness
6'
Reinforcement; rebar or
equivalent welded wire mesh Optional
N/A N/A
placed near mid -height of slab (WWI' 6 x 6 —
No. 3 rebar, 24"
O.C. both ways
No. " rebar,
W1.4/W1.4)
Restraint; slip dowels across cold
or equivalent
wire mesh
24 O.C.
both ways
y s
joints; between sidewalk and curb N/A N/A Optional
Across cold
Across cold
joints
joints (and
into curb)
The subgrade for the concrete areas should be
competent material
approved, properly compacted, and
that has been
geotechnically
moisture -conditioned in accordance
specifications. For reducing the potential adverse
with project
affects of expansive
recommend a combination of presaturation of subgrade soils;
soils on
reinforcement
concrete, we
and restraint;
moisture barriers/drains; and a sub layer of granular material. Though these types of measures
may not completely eliminate adverse impacts, application of these measures .can significantly
reduce the impacts
from post -construction expansion of soil.
Please note that reducing concrete problems is also a function of proper design and construction
practices. We recommend that the design and construction be performed in adherence with the
2 ('1
03OR 16.doc 12
kIAAr
03 022-01
September 16, 2003
American Concrete Institute (ACI) guidelines for site paving. The amount of post-constrction
u watering or lack thereof can have a significant impact on the adjacent concrete flatwork,
particularly when onsite'soils are expansive. Design and maintenance of proper surface is important for reducing potential problems in hardscape/flatwork areas as a result of wetting
■ and expansion of the subgrade soils.
Additional measures, such as additional subdrains, root barriers and/or moisture barriers, should
be considered where planter or natural areas with irrigation are located adjacent to the concrete
improvements.
16. Street Pavement and Temporary Model Parking Lot
Th
e final recommended pavement sections for the site are the purview of the County of Orange
Public Works Department. Pavement design should be based on the expected Traffic Index (TI)
for the streets and the R-values of exposed subgrade soils. For preliminary Purposes,
section on the order of 4 inches of asphalt concrete over 6 inches of aggregate base may be
assumed. This is based on a TI of 5 and an R-value of 20.
The pavement section for the temporary model parking lot may consist of 3 inches of asphaltic
concrete over compacted native subgrade soils. The compaction criterion for the native subgrade
soils is 95 percent relative compaction in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1557.
N 17. "Utility Construction
Trenches, including interior utility, should be either backfilled with native soil and compacted to
90 percent relative compaction or backfilled with clean sand (SE 30 or better), which may be
densified with water flooding or jetting. Exterior trenches should at be capped with a minimum
of 12 inches of native soils and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction.
Trenches excavated on a graded slope face for utility or irrigation lines and/or for an y Purpose
should be properly backfilled and compacted in order to obtain a minimum 90 percent relative
compaction to the slope face. Observation/testing should be performed by the geotechnical
consultant during all trench backfill.
18. Corrosivity Towards Metals
Measures consistent with local practice should be taken to protect metals in contact with soil.
Corrosivity of near -source soils at the site should be evaluated following the completion of
grading.
19. Surface Drainage and Irrigation
In order to mitigate the potential for development of adverse moisture conditions resulting. from
rainfall or irrigation water build-up, which would adversely affect the design function of post -
tension slabs and foundations in accordance with the Post -Tensioning Institute PTI)method, the
following recommendations should be relayed to the future homeowners. (
030916.doe
13
lei AA P';
o
03022-01
September 16, 2003
22. Geotechnical Observation and Testing
Geotechnical observation and testing should be conducted during the following stages:
• During site preparation and clearing, prior to site processing;
• During precise grading and placement of any fill;
• Upon completion of any foundation excavation prior to placement of steel and pouring of
concrete;
• Upon completion of presaturation of subgrade for structural slabs and/or for sidewalks;
• During pavement subgrade preparation;
• During aggregate base and asphalt concrete placement;
• During backfill for utility trenches; and,
• When any unusual or unexpected soil and/or geotechnical conditions are encountered
during grading and construction.
If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact our office. We appreciate the
opportunity to provide our services.
Respectfully submitted,
NMG GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Darien Osborne, RCE 64108
Project Engineer
DAO/TD/er
Tom Devine, CEG 2236
Project Geologist
Distribution: (2) Addressee
(3) Mr. Daniel Kim, Hunsaker & Associates (includes two copies for submittal
to COPDSD)
p p{iOFESSI
w m
No.64108
EXP.12/31/06
lA' 1MC
ST CIVIL �Y
OP CAL1FC�a�
7
��1GINEER/NG
"oPS R. DQFO� cf
F
w N
V No. 2236 �
*\ EXP.2/04 /*
��NP\` CALl p�
030916.doc 15
0
NMG
Provide proper surface drainage
(drain separate from subdraln)
1'to 2�—r
Retaining wall
Waterproofing (optional)
Weep Hole (optionao
rrr
Provide proper surface drainage
(drain separate from subdrain)
I'Cover
OPTION 1:
AGGREGATE SYSTEM DRAIN
Native backfill
lean sand vertical drain having sand equivalent
of 30 or greater (can be densified by water jetting)
or other free -draining granular material
• min
L�tE
Minimum 1 W/ft, of 1/4 to 1 1/2" size gravel
or crushed rook encased In approved
Filter Fabdo
r * flinch diameter perforated pipe with proper
outlet, (See Notes below for alternate discharge
system)
Native backflll
Alternative: Class 2 permeable
filter material (Per Caltrans
specifications) may be used for
vertical drain and around
perforated pipe (without filter fabric)
OPTION Z:
COMPOSITE DRAINAGE SYSTEM
Wrap filter fabrio
Retaining wall flap behind core
Miradraln 8000, J Drain.100, or equivalent .
drainage composite for non -waterproofed walls; .
Miradrain 6200 or J Drain 200 for waterproofed walls,
Weep Hole (optional) Out back of core to match size of
weep hole, Do not out fabrio.
3*^
4--inch diameter perforated pipe with proper outlet,
Peel back the bottom fabric flap,place pipe next to core,
wrap fabric around pipe and tuck behind core. (SeeNotes
for alternate weep hole discharge system)•
NOTES:
1. PIPE TYPE SHOULD BE PVC OR ASS, SCHEDULE 40 OR SDR35 SATISFYING'THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM TEST STANDARD
D1527, D1785, D2751 , OR 03034.
2. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE APPROVED PERMEABLE NON WOVEN POLYESTER, NYLON, OR POLYPROPYLENE MATERIAL.
3, DRAIN PIPE SHOULD HAVE A GRADIENT OF 1 PERCENT MINIMUM. .
4. WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE MAY BE REQUIRED FORA SPECIFIC RETAINING WALL (SUCH AS A STUCCO OR BASEMENT WAL
S. WEEP HOLES MAY BE PROVIDED FOR LOW RETAINING WALLS (LESS THAN 3 FEET IN HEIGHT) IN LiEU OF A VERTICAL DRAIN
AND PIPE AND WHERE POTENTIAL WATER FROM BEHIND THE RETAINING WALL WILL, NOT CREATE A NUISANCE WATER
CONDITION. IF EXPOSURE IS NOT PERMITTED, A PROPER SUBDRAIN OUTLET SYSTEM SHOULD BE PROVIDED.
G. iF EXPOSURE IS PERMITTED; WEEP HOLES SHOULD BE 24NCH MINIMUM DIAMETER AND PROVIDED AT 25-FOOT MAXIMUM
SPACING ALONG WALL. WEEP HOLES SHOULD BE LOCATED 3+ INCHES ABOVE FINISHED GRADE,
7. SCREENING SUCH AS WITH A FiLTER FABRIC SHOULD BE PROVIDED FOR WEEP HOLESIOPEN JOINTS TO PREVENT EARTH
MATERIALS FROM ENTERING THE HOLESIJOINTS,
8.OPEN VERTICAL MASONRY JOINTS (I.E., OMIT MORTAR FROM JOINTS OF FIRST COURSE ABOVE FINISHED GRADE) AT 32-INCH
-MAXIMUM INTERVALS MAY BE SUBSTITUTED FOR WEEP HOLES.
9 THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT MAY PROVIDE ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RETAINING WALLS DESIGNED FOR
SELECT SAND BACKFILL,
RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL I NMG
Gzatachnical, Inc.