Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGeotechnical Reports LQ io - 1 osa G � 01/03/14 CITY OF TEMECULA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE SUBJECT: FINAL GRADE CERTIFICATION LOT 13 OF TRACT MAP 26941 LD10-050GR ATTN: RUDY SHABEC LAND DEVELOPMENT INSPECTOR I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE PAD ELEVATION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATION AT 42605 CALLE MUSILEK PLACE IS 1248.50 WHICH COMPLIES WITH THE PAD ELEVATION ON THE APPROVED PRECISE GRADING PLAN FOR LOT 13 OF TRACT MAP 26941, I ALSO HERBY CERTIFY THAT THE BUILDING SETBACK DISTANCES, LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF THE DRAINAGE FACILITIES, SURFACE DRAINAGE ELEVATIONS, AND WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (WQMP) PROVISIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS IN THE FIELD CORRESPOND AND COMPLY WITH THOSE SHOWN ON THE APPROVED PRECISE GRADING PLAN AND WQMP DOCUMENT FOR LOT 13 OF TRACT MAP 26941. I ALSO HERBY CERTIFY THAT THE SLOPES IN THE FIELD WERE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE AND COMPLY WITH THE APPROVED PRECISE GRADING PLAN FOR LOT 13 OF TRACT MAP 26941. VENTURA ENGINEERING, LLC Q�OfESSlp4,9 27315 JEFFERSON AVE., STE J-229 �QF� ODOM/p�<<cy TEMECULA, CA 92590 Q y x 3 No. 66532 a -0 �y�C�e✓�/� * EXP. 6/30/— * ; Wilfredo Ventura, P.E. C66532 �fglf FiCAv1F'��`P 2731 S Jefferson Ave.,Suite J-229,Temecula,CA 92590 Tel No.: (951)252-7632 Fax No.:(951)346-5726 Email:ventura_engineering@yahoo.com 01/03/1# CITY OF TEMECULA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE SUBJECT: FINAL GRADE CERTIFICATION LOT 13 OF TRACT MAP 26941 LD10-050GR ATTN: RUDY SHABEC LAND DEVELOPMENT INSPECTOR I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE PAD ELEVATION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATION AT 42605 CALLE MUSILEK PLACE IS 124&50 WHICH COMPLIES WITH THE PAD ELEVATION ON THE APPROVED PRECISE GRADING PLAN FOR LOT 13 OF TRACT MAP 26941. I ALSO HERBY CERTIFY THAT THE BUILDING SETBACK DISTANCES, LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF THE DRAINAGE FACILITIES, SURFACE DRAINAGE ELEVATIONS, AND WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (WQMP) PROVISIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS IN THE FIELD CORRESPOND AND COMPLY WITH THOSE SHOWN ON THE APPROVED PRECISE GRADING PLAN AND WQMP DOCUMENT FOR LOT 13 OF TRACT MAP 26941. 1 ALSO HERBY CERTIFY THAT THE SLOPES IN THE FIELD WERE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE AND COMPLY WITH THE APPROVED PRECISE GRADING PLAN FOR LOT 13 OF TRACT MAP 26941. VENTURA ENGINEERING, LLC 27315 JEFFERSON AVE., STE J-229 QROFESSIp�yq TEMECULA, CA 92590 Q2�oSy�10 DOM/y�o`$FyZ Y W y _� ` A N0. 66532 a � Wilfredo Ventura, P.E. C66532 * EXP. 6/30/1 F CAME' 27315 Jefferson Ave.,Suite J-229,Temecula,CA 92590 3 Tel No.: (951)252-7632 Fax No.:(951)346-5726 Email:ventara_engineering@yahoo.com i y Lug G. R M Ajig iwlRkl All 1 �; �. . r % ,iv �fjl'y �.. !i.r <.t � ' ' �'jr"�st � � � ;IA{ k1; g , a : 21 '.� � , �� �;. tJ �� { r- n• a �� .•1t' Ssl:'»ru'.s � �u..t iU�' IW 41 r� Vol. " .�� • it " :t=;i rIV,?dell ' le �7i1�'�. f• _ 1r. J� vf� tll� e r Earth - Strata, Inc, Geoteconical.Environmental and Materlels Testing Consultants BETTER PEOPLE.BETTER SERVICE.BETTER RESULTS December 28, 2010 Project No. 10792-10A Mr. Wilfredo "Willy"Ventura VENTURA ENGINEERING,LLC 27315 Jefferson Avenue, Ste.J-229 ' Temecula, CA 92590 ' Subject: Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Proposed Detached RV Garage, Assessor's Parcel Number 965-220-018, Located at 42605 Musilek Place, City of Temecula, Riverside County,California INTRODUCTION Per your authorization, Earth-Strata, Inc. has provided observations and testing services during rough grading for the proposed detached RV garage, located at 42605 Musilek Place in the City of Temecula, Riverside County, California. This report summarizes the geotechnical conditions observed and tested during rough grading. Conclusions and recommendations with regard to the suitability of the grading for the proposed project are provided herein, along with foundation design recommendations based on the ' earth materials present at the completion of grading. Grading commenced in order to develop a building pad for construction of a one- and/or two-story RV M detached garage structure. The proposed development will consist of a detached RV garage building utilizing slab on grade, wood or steel-framed construction. Grading operations began in December 2010 and were completed in December 2010. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE ' Observations and selective testing have been performed by representatives of Earth-Strata, Inc. during the removal and recompaction of low-density near surface earth materials. Our services were performed in general accordance with the recommendations presented in the referenced reports (see References), the grading code of the reviewing agency, and as dictated by conditions encountered in the field. The earthwork described herein has been reviewed and is considered adequate for the construction now planned. The recommendations presented in this report were prepared in conformance with generally accepted professional engineering practices in this area at the time of this report and no further warranty is expressed or implied. 1 1 ' EARTH STRATA,INC.•26047 JEFFERSON AVENUE,SUITE C,MURRIETA,CA 92562•OFFICE(951)461.4028•FAX(951)461 4058•W W W.EARTH-STRATA.COM RIFT TER PEOPLE - BETTER SERVILE - BETTER RESULTS ' ENGINEERING GEOLOGY Geologic Units ' Earth materials noted during grading operations included topsoil, previously placed artificial fill, alluvium,and bedrock. Geolopjs Structure ' Geologic conditions exposed during grading operations were observed and mapped by Earth-Strata, Inc. The bedrock is generally massive to nearly horizontally layered and lacks significant structural planes. Groundwater Groundwater was not encountered during grading operations. Faulting ' No evidence of significant faulting was observed during grading operations. ' EARTHWORK OBSERVATIONS AND DENSITY TESTING Site Clearing and Grubbing Prior to grading, all trees,brush,shrubs,and grasses were stripped and removed from the compacted fill. ' Ground Preparation Removals throughout most of the fill areas ranged from approximately 1 to 2 feet below.original grades, ' with locally deeper removals. In cut building areas more than 3 feet below the original grades, the exposed cuts were observed and determined to provide adequate support for the proposed structures. Prior to.placing compacted fill, the exposed bottom surfaces were scarified to depths of 6 to 8 inches, ' watered or air dried as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture content and then compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Oversize Rock Oversize rock, generally greater than 1 foot in maximum dimension, was not encountered during the ' grading operations. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 2 ' Fill Placement and Testine ' All fills were placed in lifts restricted to approximately 6 to 8 inches in maximum thickness, watered or air dried as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture content, then compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density by rolling with a bulldozer, sheepsfoot, or loaded scrapers. The ' maximum vertical depth of compacted fill as a result of grading within the proposed building pads is approximately 0 feet, as the proposed garage will be on cut. Benching into competent earth materials was observed during fill placement and compaction operations. Field density and moisture content tests utilizing nuclear gauge methods were performed in accordance with ASTM Test Methods D2922 and D3017. Visual classification of the earth materials in the field was 1 the basis for determining which maximum dry density value was applicable for a given density test. Test results are presented in Table 1 and test locations are shown on the enclosed As-Graded Geotechnical Map, Plate 1. ' Compacted fills were tested to verify that a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density had been achieved. At least one density test was taken for each 1,000 cubic yards and/or for every 2 vertical feet of ' compacted fill placed. The actual number of tests taken per day varied depending on the site conditions and the quantity and type of equipment utilized. When field density tests yielded results less than the minimum required density, the approximate limits of the substandard fill were established. The ' substandard area was then reworked (most common) or removed, moisture conditioned, recompacted, and retested until the minimum density was achieved. In most cases, failed density tests were noted then retested in the same general vicinity at nearly the same elevation as the failed test. Slopes ' Slopes constructed within the subject property consist of 2:1 (h:v) compacted fill and cut slopes varying to a maximum height of approximately 25 feet. LABORATORY TESTING Maximum Dry Density Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for representative earth materials noted during ' grading operations were determined using the guidelines of ASTM Test Method D 1557-00. Pertinent test values are summarized in Appendix B. ' Expansion Index Tests Expansion index tests were performed on representative earth materials sampled near finish grade for select building pads using the guidelines of ASTM D 4829-03. Test results are summarized in Appendix B. Soluble Sulfate Analyses ' The soluble sulfate content of select samples was determined using the guidelines of California Test Method (CTM) 417. Test results are summarized in Appendix B. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 3 1 Chloride Chloride content of select samples was determined using the guidelines of CTM 422. Test results are summarized in Appendix B. Minimum Resistivity and off Minimum resistivity and pH tests of select samples were determined using the guidelines of CTM 643. Test ' results are summarized in Appendix B. ' POST GRADING CONSIDERATIONS Slope Landscaping and-Maintenance ' Control of site drainage is important for the performance of the,proposed project. Engineered slopes should be landscaped with deep rooted, drought tolerant, maintenance free plant species, as recommended by the project landscape architect. Unprotected slopes are highly susceptible to erosion and surficial slumping. Therefore to reduce this potential, we recommend that the slopes be covered with an erosion inhibitor until healthy plant growth is well.established. To further reduce the potential for surficial instability, measures"to control.burrowing rodents should be performed as well. Site Draina¢e 1 Adequate slope and building pad drainage is essential for the long term performance of the subject site. The gross stability of graded slopes should not be adversely affected, provided-all drainage provisions-are ' properly constructed and maintained. Roof gutters are.recommended for the.proposed structures. Pad and roof drainage should be collected and transferred to driveways, adjacent streets, storm-drain facilities, or other locations approved by the building-official in non-erosive drainage devices. Drainage should not be allowed to pond on the pad or against any foundation or retaining,wall. Drainage should not be allowed to Flow uncontrolled over any descending slope. Planters located within retaining wall backfill should be sealed to prevent moisture intrusion into,the backfill. Planters located next to raised ' Floor type construction should be sealed to the depth of the footings. Drainage control devices require periodic cleaning, testing, and maintenance to remain effective. At a minimum, pad drainage should be designed at the minimum gradients required by the UBC. To divert water away from foundations, the ground surface adjacent to foundations should be graded at the minimum gradients required per the CBC. Utility Trenches ' All utility trench backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557-00. For utility trench backfill in pavement areas the upper 6 inches of subgrade materials should be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM ' D 1557-00. This includes within the street right-of-ways, utility easements, under footings, sidewalks, driveways and building floor slabs, as well as within or adjacent to any slopes. Backfill should be placed in approximately 6 to 8 inch maximum loose lifts and then mechanically compacted with a hydro- hammer, rolling with a sheepsfoot, pneumatic tampers, or similar equipment. The utility trenches should EARTH-STRATA, INC. 4 1 ' be tested by the project geotechnical engineer or their representative to verify minimum compaction requirements are obtained. In order to minimize the penetration of moisture below building slabs, all utility trenches should be backfilled with compacted fill, lean concrete, or concrete slurry where they undercut the perimeter ' foundation. Utility trenches that are proposed parallel to any building footings (interior and/or exterior trenches), should not be located within a 1:1 (h:v) plane projected downward from the outside bottom edge of the footing. 1 FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS General ' Conventional foundations are recommended for support of the proposed structure. Foundation recommendations are provided herein. ' Allowable Bearing Values An allowable bearing value of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) is recommended for design of 24 inch square pad footings and 12 inch wide continuous footings founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. This value may be increased by 20 percent for each additional 1-foot of width and/or depth to a maximum value of 2,500 psf. Recommended allowable bearing values ' include both dead and frequently applied live loads and may be increased by'one third when designing for short duration wind,or seismic forces. ' Settlement Based on the 'settlement characteristics of the earth materials that underlie the building sites and the ' anticipated loading, we estimate that the maximum total settlement of the footings will be less than approximately 3/4 inch. Differential settlement is expected to be about % inch over a horizontal distance of approximately 20 feet, for an angular.distottion ratio of 1:480. It is anticipated that the majority of the ' settlement will occur during construction or shortly after the initial application of.loading. The above settlement estimates are based on the assumption that the construction is performed in accordance with the recommendations, presented in this report and that the project geotechnical consultant will observe or test the earth material conditions in the footing excavations. ' Lateral Resistance Passive earth pressure of 250 psf per foot of depth to a maximum value of 2,500 psf may be used to establish lateral bearing resistance for footings. A coefficient of friction of 0.36 times the dead load forces may be used between concrete and the supporting earth materials to determine lateral sliding resistance. The above values may be increased by one-third when designing for short duration wind or seismic ' forces. When combining passive and friction for lateral resistance, the passive component should be reduced by one third. In no case shall the lateral sliding resistance exceed one-half the dead load for clay, sandy clay,sandy silty clay, silty clay,and clayey silt. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 5 1 1 ' The above lateral resistance values are based on footings for an entire structure being placed directly ' against either compacted fill or competent bedrock. Structural Setbacks Structural setbacks are required per the 2007 California Building Code (CBC). Additional structural setbacks are not required due to geologic or geotechnical conditions within the site. Improvements constructed in close proximity to natural or properly engineered and compacted slopes can, over time, be affected by natural processes including gravity forces, weathering, and long term secondary settlement. As a result, the CBC requires that buildings and structures be setback or footings deepened to resist the influence of these processes. ' For structures that are planned near ascending and descending slopes, the footings should be embedded to satisfy the requirements presented in the CBC, Section 1806.3.1 as illustrated in the following 1 Foundation Clearances From Slopes diagram. FOUNDATION CLEARANCES FROM SLOPES 1 ' rth - Strata, Inc. 2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE Ea j-t. rara BUILDING SETBACK DIMENSIONS 1 rr[a wewrNa wrm rAMor H ws McHL Wies�ED n fff++.a mew EARTH[-S FRAIFA, ]INC. 6 1 ' When determining the required clearance from ascending slopes with a retaining wall at the toe, the ' height of the slope shall be measured from the top of the wall to the top of the slope. The structural setback for pools may be reduced by one-half. ' Footing Observations Prior to the placement of forms, concrete, or steel, all foundation excavations should be observed by the geologist, engineer, or his representative to verify that they have been excavated into competent bearing ' materials. The excavations should be moistened, cleaned of all loose materials, trimmed neat, level and square and any moisture softened earth materials should be removed prior to concrete placement. Earth materials from foundation excavations should not be placed in slab on grade areas unless the materials are tested for expansion potential and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density. Expansive Soil Considerations ' Laboratory test results, indicate onsite earth materials exhibit an expansion potential of LOW as classified in accordance with 2007 CBC Section 1802.3.2 and ASTM D4829-03. The following recommendations should be considered the very minimum requirements, for the earth materials tested. It is common practice for the project architect or structural engineer to require additional slab thickness, footing sizes,and/or reinforcement. ' Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 21 to 50) Our laboratory test results indicate that the earth materials onsite exhibit a LOW expansion potential as ' classified in accordance with 2007 California Building Code, Section 1802.3.2 and ASTM D 4829-03. Accordingly, the CBC specifies that slab on ground foundations (floor slabs) resting on earth materials with expansion indices greater than 20, require special design considerations in accordance with 2007 ' CBC Sections 1805.8.1 and 1805.8.2. The design procedures outlined in 2007 CBC Section 1805.8 are based on the thickness and plasticity index of the various earth materials within the upper 15 feet of the proposed structure. For design purposes,an effective plasticity index of 12 may be used. Footings • Exterior continuous footings may be founded at the minimum depths below the lowest adjacent final grade (i.e. 12 inch minimum depth for one-story, 18 inch minimum depth for two-story, and 24 inch minimum depth for three-story construction). Interior continuous ' footings for one-, two-,and three-story construction may be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. All continuous footings should have a minimum width of 12, 15, and 18 inches, for one-, two-, and three-story structures, respectively, per ' Table 1805.4.2 of the 2007 CBC and should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No. 4 bars, one (1) top and one (1) bottom. ' • Exterior pad footings intended to support roof overhangs, such as second story decks, patio covers and similar construction should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. The pad footings should be reinforced with a minimum of No. 4 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on center, each way, EARTH-STRATA, INC. 7 1 ' and should be placed near the bottom-third of the footings. ' Building Floor Slabs • The project architect or structural engineer should evaluate minimum Floor slab thickness and reinforcement in accordance with 2007 CBC Sections 1805.8.1 and 1805.8.2 based on an effective plasticity index of 12. Building Floor slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and ' reinforced with a minimum of No. 3 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on center, each way. All Floor slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or bricks to ensure the desired placement at mid-depth. ' • Interior Floor slabs, within moisture sensitive areas, should be underlain by a minimum 10-mil thick moisture/vapor barrier to help reduce the upward migration of moisture from the ' underlying earth materials. The moisture/vapor barrier used should meet the performance standards of an ASTM E 1745 Class A material, and be properly installed in accordance with ACI publication 318705. It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that the moisture/vapor barriers are free of openings, rips, or punctures prior to placing concrete. As an option for additional moisture reduction, higher strength concrete, such as a minimum 28- day compressive strength of 5,000 pounds per square inch (psi) may be used. Ultimately, the design of the moisture/vapor barrier system and recommendations for concrete placement and curing are the purview of the foundation engineer, taking into consideration the project requirements provided by the architect and owner. • Garage Floor slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and should be reinforced in a similar manner as living area Floor slabs. Garage Floor slabs should be placed separately from adjacent ' wall footings with a positive separation maintained with % inch minimum felt expansion joint materials and quartered with weakened plane joints. A 12 inch wide turn down founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across garage entrances. The turn down should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No. 4 bars, one (1) top and one (1) bottom. • The subgrade earth materials below' all Floor slabs should be pre-watered to achieve a moisture content that is at least equal or slightly greater than optimum moisture content, prior to placing concrete. This moisture content should penetrate a minimum depth of 12 inches into the subgrade earth materials. The pre-watering should be verified by Earth-Strata during construction. ' Post Tensioned Slab/Foundation Desien Recommendation s ' In lieu of the proceeding foundation recommendations, post tensioned slabs may be used to support the proposed structures. We recommend that the foundation engineer design the foundation system using the Post Tensioned Foundation Slab Design table below. These parameters have been provided in general accordance with Post Tensioned Design. Alternate designs addressing the effects of expansive earth materials are allowed per 2007 CBC Section 1805.8.2. When utilizing these parameters, the foundation engineer should design the foundation system in accordance with the allowable deflection ' criteria of applicable codes and per the requirements of the structural engineer/architect. It should be noted that the post tensioned design methodology is partially based on the assumption that soil moisture changes around and underneath post tensioned slabs, are influenced only by climate EARTH-STRATA, INC. 8 1 ' conditions. Soil moisture change below slabs is the major factor in foundation damages relating to ' expansive soil. However, the design methodology has no consideration for presaturation, owner irrigation, or other non-climate related influences on the moisture content of subgrade earth materials. In recognition of these factors, we modified the geotechnical parameters determined from this ' methodology to account for reasonable irrigation practices and proper homeowner maintenance. Additionally, we recommend that prior to excavating footings, slab subgrades be presoaked to a depth of 12 inches and maintained at above optimum moisture until placing concrete. Furthermore, we recommend that the moisture content of the earth materials around the immediate perimeter and below the slab be presaturated to at least 1% above optimum moisture content just prior to placing concrete. The,pre-watering should be verified and tested by Earth-Strata during construction. ' The following geotechnical parameters assume that areas adjacent to.the foundations, which are planted and irrigated„will be designed with proper drainage to prevent water from ponding. Water ponding near the foundation causes significant moisture change below the foundation. Our recommendations do not ' account for excessive irrigation and/or incorrect landscape design. Planters placed adjacent to the foundation, should be designed with an effective drainage system or liners, to prevent moisture infiltration below the foundation. Some lifting of the perimeter foundation beam should be expected even with properly constructed planters. Based on our experience monitoring sites with similar earth materials, elevated moisture contents below the foundation perimeter due to incorrect landscaping irrigation or maintenance, can result in uplift at the perimeter foundation relative to the central portion of the slab. Future owners should be informed and educated of the importance in maintaining a consistent level of moisture within the earth materials around the structures. Future owners should also be.informed of the, potential negative consequences of either excessive watering, or allowing expansive earth materials to become too dry. Earth materials will shrink as they dry, followed by swelling during the rainy winter ' season, or when irrigation is resumed. This will cause distress to site improvements and structures.. 1 1 1 1 1 1 EARTH-STRATA, INC. 9 1 ' Post Tensioned Foundation Slab Design ' PARAMETER VALUE Expansion Index Low' Percent Finer than 0.002 mm in the Fraction Passing the No. <20 percent(assumed) ' 200 Sieve Type of Clay Mineral Montmorillonite assumed Thornthwaite Moisture Index -20 ' Depth to Constant Soil Suction 7 feet Constant Soil Suction P.F.3.6 Moisture Velocity 0.7 inches month Center Lift Edge moisture variation distance,em 5.5 feet ' Center lift,y. 2.0inches Edge Lift Edge moisture variation distance,em 3.0 feet Ed a lift m ' 0.8 inches ' Soluble Sulfate Content for Design of Concrete Mixtures in Negligible Contact with Earth Materials Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k (assuming presaturation as indicated below) 200 pn ' Minimum Perimeter Foundation Embedment 18 Under Slab Moisture/Vapor Barrier and Sand Layer 10-mil thick moisture/vapor barrier meeting the requirements of a ASTM E 1745 Class A material 1. Assumed for design purposes or obtained by laboratory testing.- 2. Recommendations for foundation reinforcement are ultimately the purview of the foundation/structural engineer based upon the geotechnical criteria presented in this report,and structural engineering considerations.. Corrosivity ' Corrosion is defined by the National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) as "a deterioration of a substance or its properties because of a reaction with its environment." From a geotechnical viewpoint, the "substances" are the reinforced concrete foundations or buried metallic elements (not,surrounded by ' concrete) and the "environment" is the'prevailing earth materials in contact with them. Many factors can contribute to corrosivity; including the presence of chlorides,sulfates, salts, organic materials, different oxygen levels,poor drainage, different soil types, and moisture content. It is not considered practical or ' realistic to test for all of the factors which may contribute to corrosivity. The potential for concrete exposure to chlorides is based upon the recognized Caltrans reference ' standard 'Bridge Design Specifications", under Subsection 8.22.1 of that document, Caltrans has determined that "Corrosive water or soil contains more than 500 parts per million (ppm) of chlorides". Based on limited preliminary laboratory testing, the onsite earth materials have chloride contents less ' than 500 ppm. As such,specific requirements resulting from elevated chloride contents are not required. Specific guidelines for concrete mix design are provided in 2007 CBC Section 1904.3 and ACI 318, Section 4.3 Table 4.3.1 when the soluble sulfate content of earth materials exceeds 0.1 percent by weight. Based on limited preliminary laboratory testing, the onsite earth materials are classified in accordance with Table 4.3.1 as having a negligible sulfate exposure condition. Therefore, structural concrete in contact with onsite earth materials should utilize Type 1 or II. 1 EARTH-STRATA, INC. 10 1 Based on our laboratory testing of resistivity, the onsite earth materials in contact with buried steel ' should be considered mildly corrosive. Additionally, pH values below 9.7 are recognized as being corrosive to most common metallic components including, copper, steel, iron, and aluminum. The pH values for the earth materials tested were lower than 9.7. Therefore, any steel or metallic materials that are exposed to the earth materials should be encased in concrete or other measures should be taken to ' provide corrosion protection. If building slabs are to be post tensioned,the post tensioning cables should be encased in concrete and/or encapsulated in accordance with the Post Tensioning Institute Guide Specifications. Post tensioning cable end plate anchors and nuts also need to be protected if exposed. If the anchor plates and nuts are in a recess in the edge of the concrete slab, the recess should be filled in with a non-shrink, non-porous, ' moisture-insensitive epoxy grout so that the anchorage assembly and the end of the cable are completely encased and isolated from the soil. A standard non-shrink, non-metallic cementitious grout may be used only when the post tension anchoring assembly is polyethylene encapsulated similar to that offered by Hayes Industries, LTD or O'Strand, Inc. The test results for corrosivity are based on limited samples in accordance with the current standard of ' care. Laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B. RETAINING WALLS Active and At-Rest Earth Pressures Foundations may be designed in accordance with the recommendations provided in the Foundation Design Recommendation section of this report. The following table provides the minimum ' recommended equivalent fluid pressures for design of retaining walls a maximum of 12 feet high. The active earth pressure should be used for design of unrestrained retaining walls, which are free to tilt slightly. The at-rest earth pressure should be used for design of retaining walls that are restrained at the top,such as basement walls, curved walls with no joints, or walls restrained at corners. For curved walls, active pressure may be used if tilting is acceptable and construction joints are provided at each angle point and at a minimum of 15 foot intervals along the curved segments. MINIMUM STATIC EQUIVALENT FLUID PRESSURES c PRESSURE "` BACKSLOPE CON_ LEVEL Active Earth Pressure 40 463 At-Rest Earth Pressuree 60 95 ' The retaining wall parameters provided do not account for hydrostatic pressure behind the retaining walls. Therefore, the subdrain system is a very important part of the design. All retaining walls should be ' designed to resist surcharge loads imposed by other nearby walls,structures, or vehicles should be added to the above earth pressures, if the additional loads are being applied within a 1:1 plane projected up from the heel of the retaining wall footing. As a way of minimizing surcharge loads and the settlement potential of nearby buildings, the footings for the building can be deepened below the 1:1 plane projected up from the heel of the retaining wall footing. EAR-f H-STRATA, INC. 11 Retaining walls less than 12 feet high are not required to be designed for earthquake loads for critical ' structures per Section 1806A of the 2007 CBC. As a result, it is our opinion that proposed retaining walls under 12 feet high do not need to be designed for earthquake motions. Upon request and under a separate scope of work, more detailed analyses can be performed to address equivalent Fluid pressures with regard to stepped retaining walls, actual retaining wall heights, actual backfill inclinations, specific backfill materials, etc. Subdrain System We recommend a perforated pipe and gravel subdrain system be provided behind all proposed retaining ' walls to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the proposed retaining walls. The perforated pipe should consist of 4 inch minimum diameter Schedule 40 PVC or ABS SDR-35, placed with the perforations facing down. The pipe should be surrounded by 1 cubic foot per foot of 3/4- or 1% inch open ' graded gravel wrapped in filter fabric.. The filter fabric should consist of Mirafi 140N or equivalent to prevent infiltration of fines and subsequent clogging of the subdrain system. t In lieu of a perforated pipe and gravel subdrain system, weep holes or open vertical masonry joints may be provided in the lowest row of block exposed to the air to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the proposed retaining walls. Weep holes should be a minimum of 3.inches in diameter and ' provided at intervals of at least every 6 feet along the wall. Open vertical masonry joints should be provided at a minimum of 32 inch intervals. A continuous gravel fill, a minimum of 1 cubic foot per foot, should be placed behind the weep holes or'open masonry. joints. The gravel should be wrapped in filter ' fabric consisting of Mirafi 140N or equivalent. The adequate retaining walls should be coated on the, backfilled side of the walls with a, proven ' waterproofing compound by an experienced professional to inhibit infiltration of moisture through the walls. ' Temnoraa Excavations All excavations should be,made in accordance with OSHA.requirements. Earth-Strata is not responsible ' for job site safety. Wall Backfill 1 Retaining-wall backfill materials should be approved by the geotechnical engineer or.his representative prior to placement as compacted fill. Retaining wall backfill should be placed in lifts no greater than 6 to 8 inches, watered or air dried as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture contents. All retaining wall backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum density as determined by ASTM D 1557. Retaining wall backfill should be capped with a paved surface drain. CONCRETE FLATWORK tThickness and Joint Spacine ' Concrete sidewalks and patio type slabs should be at least 3'h inches thick and provided with EARTH-STRATA, INC. 12 1 ' construction or expansion joints every 6 feet or less, to reduce the potential for excessive cracking. ' Concrete driveway slabs should be at least 4 inches thick and provided with construction or expansion joints every 10 feet or less. ' Suberade Preparation In order to reduce the potential for unsightly cracking, subgrade earth materials underlying concrete flatwork should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density and then moistened to at least optimum or slightly above optimum moisture content. This moisture should extend to a depth of at least 12 inches below subgrade and be maintained prior to placement of concrete. Pre- watering of the earth materials prior to placing concrete will promote uniform curing of the concrete and ' minimize the development of shrinkage cracks. The project geotechnical engineer or his representative should verify the density and moisture content of the earth materials and the depth of moisture penetration prior to placing concrete. Cracking within concrete flatwork is often a result of factors such as the use of too high a water to cement ratio and/or inadequate steps taken to prevent moisture loss during the curing of the concrete. Concrete ' distress can be reduced by proper concrete mix design and proper placemenrand curing of the concrete. Minor cracking within concrete flatwork is normal and should be expected. POST GRADING OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING. ' It is the property owner's sole responsibility to notify Earth-Strata_ at the appropriate, times for observation and testing services. Earth-Strata can not be responsible for any geotechnical recommendations where the appropriate observations and testing have not been performed. It is of the ' utmost importance that the owner or their representative request observations and testing for at least the following phases of work. ' Structure Construction Observe all foundation excavations prior to placement of concrete or steel ,to verify adequate ' depth and competent bearing conditions. If necessary, re-observe all foundation excavations after deficiencies have been corrected. 1 Retaininiz Wall Construction ' Observe all foundation excavations prior to placement of concrete or steel to verify adequate depth and competent bearing conditions. ' If necessary, re-observe all foundation excavations after deficiencies have been corrected. • Observe and verify proper installation of subdrain systems prior to placing retaining wall ' backfiil. Observe and test retaining wall backfill operations. 1 EARTH-STRATA, INC. 13 1 1 ' Garden Walls ' Observe all foundation excavations prior to placement of concrete or steel to verify adequate depth and competent bearing conditions. ' If necessary, re-observe all foundation excavations after deficiencies have been corrected. Exterior Concrete Flatwork Construction 1 Observe and test subgrade earth materials below all concrete flatwork to verify recommended density and moisture content. ' Utility Trench Backfill ' Observe and test all utility trench backfill operations. Re-Grading Observe and test the placement of any additional fill materials placed onsite. ' GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION RESPONSIBILITY ' It is the responsibility of the contractor or his subcontractors to meet or exceed the project specifications for grading and construction. The responsibilities of Earth-Strata did not include the supervision or direction of the contractor's personnel, equipment, or subcontractors performing the,actual work. Our field representative onsite was intended to provide the owner with professional advice, opinions, and recommendations based on observations and limited testing of the contractor's work. Our services do not relieve the contractor or his subcontractors of their responsibility, should defects in their work be ' discovered. The conclusions and recommendations herein are based on the observations and test results for the areas tested, and represent our engineering opinion as to.the contractor's compliance with the project specifications. REPORT LIMITATIONS This report has not been prepared for use by parties or projects other than those named or described herein. This report may not contain sufficient information for other parties or other purposes. Our ' services were performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable soils engineers and geologists, practicing at the time and location this report was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional tadvice included in this report. Earth materials vary in type, strength, and other geotechnical properties between points of observation ' and testing. Groundwater and moisture conditions can also vary due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. ' This report was prepared with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner or their EARTH-STRATA, INC. 14 1 ' representative, to ensure that the conclusions and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the other project consultants and are incorporated into the plans and specifications. The owners' contractor should properly implement the conclusions and recommendations during construction and notify the owner if they consider any of the recommendations presented herein to be unsafe or unsuitable. 1 Earth-Strata sincerely appreciates the opportunity to provide our services and advice on this project. ' Respectfully presented, IEAl1 II'HI-S'F1R.ATA, INC. L. Chad E. Welke, PG, CEG, PE Principal Geologist/Engineer �� QQpFESS/pyq St en M. Poole, PE, GE6� No.692 c z Principal Engineer y xP' �* a ' CW/SMP/am *JlgF�c � Attachments: Appendix A- References Appendix B - Laboratory Procedures and Test Results Table 1 - Summary of Field Density Tests ' Plate 1 -As-Graded Geotechnical Map Distribution: (4) Addressee 1 1 EARTH-STIKATA, 1(NC. 15 1 1 1 1 1 APPENDIX REFERENCES APPENDIX A ' REFERENCES ' California Building Standards Commission, 2007, 2007 California Building Code, California Code of Regulations Title24, Part2, Volume of2, Based on 2006 International Building Code. ' Earth-Strata, Inc., 2010, Preliminary Geotechnical Interpretive Report, Proposed Detached RV Garage, Assessor's Parcel Number 965-220-018, Located at 42605 Musilek Place, City of Temecula, Riverside County,.California, dated August 11. 1 National Association of Corrosion Engineers, 1984, Corrosion Basics An Introduction, page 191. ' Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC), 1999, Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction Hazards in California; March. 1 1 ' 1 1 " 1 1 1 1 APPENDIX B LABORATORY PROCEDURES AND TEST RESULTS ' APPENDIX B ' Laboratory Procedures and Test Results ' Laboratory testing provided quantitative and qualitative data involving the relevant engineering properties of the representative earth materials selected for testing. The representative samples were tested in general accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) procedures and/or California Test Methods (CTM). 1 Soil Classification: Earth materials encountered during exploration were classified and logged in general accordance with the Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual- Manual Procedure) of ASTM D 2488. Upon completion of laboratory testing sample descriptions were reconciled to reflect laboratory test results with regard to ASTM D 2487. ' Maximum Density Tests: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of representative samples were determined using the guidelines of ASTM D 1557. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPLE SAMPLE MATERIAL MAXIMUM DRY OPTIMUM MOISTURE NUMBER LOCATION DESCRIPTION DENSITY(pcf) CONTENT(%) 1 TP-1 @ 0-2 feet Clayey Sand 129.5 TS 2 Cut Area Clayey Sand 130.0 9.S 1 ' Expansion Index: The expansion potential of representative samples was evaluated using the guidelines of ASTM D 4829. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPLE MATERIAL 77 EXPANSION IND - IAL LOCATION DESCRIPTION Pad @ 0 feet Clayey Sand 23 Low ' Minimum Resistivity and pH Tests: Minimum resistivity and pH tests of select samples were performed using the guidelines of CTM 643. The test results are presented in the table below. LOCATION DESCRIPTION IMUM RESISTIVITYSAMPLE MATERIAL (oh Pad @ 0 feet---F Clayey Sand 8.8 4,700 Soluble Sulfate: The soluble sulfate content of select samples was determined using the guidelines of ' CTM 417. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPLE MATERIAL SULFATE CONTENT ' LOCATION DESCRIPTION T (%by weight) SULFATE EXPOSURE Pad @ 0 feet Clayey Sand 0.042 Negligible 1 Chloride Content: Chloride content of select samples was determined using the guidelines of CTM 422. The test results are presented in the table below. ' SAMPLE LOCATION MATERIAL DESCRIPTION CHLORIDE CONTENT(ppm) Pad @ 0 feet ClayeySand 240 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS Test Test Test Test Elevation Soil D Dens ry Moisture Max. Rel. Test Location Density Content Density ity No. Type Date of (feet) Type - (Pe9 (%) tP�) ' 1 N 11/30/10 NG Garage Pad Rear Sloe 49 2 117.4 9.0 130.0 90 2 N 11/30/10 CF Garage Pad Rear Sloe 50 2 118.9 9.7 130.0 91 3 N 12 01 10 CF Garage Pad Rear Sloe 52 2 118.2 8.2 130.0 91 ' 4 N 12/01 10 CF Garage Pad Rear Sloe 54 2 120.9 10.1 130.0 93 5 N 12 01 10 CF Garage Pad Rear Sloe 56 2 120.1 9.9 130.0 92 6 N 12 01 10 CF Garage Pad Rear Sloe 58 2 121.8 9.5 130.0 94 ' 7 N 12 01 10 CF Garage Pad Rear Sloe 60 2 119.5 9.0 130.0 92 8 N 1 12 02 10 CF I Garage Pad Rear Sloe 62 2 120.6 8.2 130.0 93 9 N K03 CF Garage Pad Rear Sloe 64 2 117.2 9.2 130.0 90 10 N CF Gara a Pad Rear Sloe 66 2 119.4 9.7 130.0 92 11 N CF Gara a Pad Rear Sloe 68 2 121.1 9.0 130.0 93 12 N CF Gara a Pad Rear Sloe 70 2 118.0 9.9 130.0 91 13 N CF Gara a Pad Rear Slo a 72 2 117.4 9.8 130.0 90 14 N CF Gara a Pad Rear Sloe 74 2 119.1 10.2 130.0 92 15 N CF Gara a Pad Rear Sloe 76 2 117.1 9.0 130.0 90 16 N CF Garage Pad West End 49 2 118.9 9.7 130.0 91 17 N 12/14/10 CF Garage Pad West End 51 2 119.8 8.4 1 130.0 92 18 N 12/14/10 CF Garage Pad West End 52 2 1 117.3 1 9.6 1 130.0 90 1 1 1 t ' N - Nuclear Test Method FG- Finish Grade Project No.: 10792-35A CF- Compacted Fill NG - Native Ground DECEMBER 2010 - LEGEND \. ALL LOCATIONS ARE AMORIMQH - - -- Geologic Units [V' 1 \_ w Afc - Artificial Fill,Compacted N&5'SJ'19 �_ R11 i � pnruc6lCo) Qps - Pauba Formation N _ , _ xrav5({[y, (Circled Where Buried) r � 20 I' _ Symbols_ ( vL Iz.l9 PRoP. )(RE 'CL'RNAROUSD xA � I n N ♦ � IhNIN �YAAOtD SW LE < ,! " PA a o) �1249) �� %iM� �� / S U 17 z - - � J F PA z� �� Limits of Report Q. I All le% ry 2 18 /' �0 4' o m EX MAIN GARAG y� '� F '^ A EX MAIN HOUSE a I a Geologic Contact z 6 -OIiG�FFk 2,yJ �6�% 1 rl \' 18 - 1250 • Field Density Test Location n3 [1249�r a \ �; Elevation of Removal Bottoms i AfC k onru ��- u �I �SR r 24il)Aft i i V �1 AS GRADED GEOTECHNICAL MAP \` APN 96&9Q6916,4260 MUSILEK PLACE ' - _ _ _ A ��\ \ TEMECULA,RIVERSIDE Cl CALIFGRNIA N B6'06'a9"F SJ6B1' PROJECT DETACHED RV GARAGE-TEMECULA CLIENT MR JAMES All / � A PROJECT NO. 10'lB2JOA DATE DECEMBERMO SCALE f:b - \ \ ---- DMXREFS REVPGP.MGD2al DRAlil GWG PLATE 1 1 ' - Ealyd e Strata, Inc, OwNCMNt'N.EmlronmanMxp NSN1Ya 1uWp LMruMr'h BEREfl PEOP(E.EET/ER SERNCE.GETTER RE51/L15 F4 AN �;.�/.r �-�i! v jti ?'a iN Ff ♦��� I��. .t �l°-1 <s�`� 1/ -�Mi r V SLc_M�i7' �I l �{ vrj )11RF. ��77 4 r P M `ill• ♦ p uR -.3� Ta•. •!( y�y �/ / ! d r,.. ,+ - e YMWO too or y"1ilfi �" r1 ff` ' .E /' i 1 iTrljil; llll �I 9@Gym / �• a. i fr wr 4 4"l-!R4 YVA� rt.�/ �ry�r` �/•k M � �% fA° � lv�i ' r. 49 if 0,4 i �- • s f a,w �Y� � Y ,l►t�� I � r IUlya 1 9 /a kv- 41' ' r y J re e t / ♦ . r / q[•- ,� �' `� it r ! I ' u. ' ., 1. . (!f/I Y.Q . �.1• r.. t'ti .r. t�/�/'.# ' %/� . r � /ji•Y �q- � ate ' r �1 1 Earth - Strata, Il in lc.. Geotechnical.EnNlonmenb/and Materbls TestIM Consultants BETTER PEOPLE.BETTER SERVICE•BETTER RESULTS ' December 28, 2010 Project No. 10792-10A ' Mr.Wilfredo "Willy"Ventura VENTURA ENGINEERING,LLC 27315 Jefferson Avenue, Ste.J-229 ' Temecula, CA 92590 ' Subject: Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Proposed Detached RV Garage, Assessor's Parcel Number 965-220-018, Located at 42605 Musilek Place, City of Temecula, Riverside County, California 1 INTRODUCTION ' Per your authorization, Earth-Strata, Inc. has provided observations and testing services during rough grading for the proposed detached RV garage, located at 42605 Musilek Place in the City of Temecula, ' Riverside County, California. This report summarizes the geotechnical conditions observed and tested during rough grading. Conclusions and recommendations with regard to the suitability of the grading for the proposed project are provided herein, along with foundation design recommendations based on the earth materials present at the completion of grading. Grading commenced in order to develop a building pad for construction of a one- and/or two-story RV detached garage structure. The proposed development will consist of a detached RV garage building utilizing slab on grade, wood or steel-framed construction. Grading operations began in December 2010 and were completed in December 2010. 1 REGULATORY COMPLIANCE Observations and selective testing have been performed by representatives of Earth-Strata, Inc. during the removal and recompaction of low-density near surface earth materials. Our services were performed ' in general accordance with the recommendations presented in the referenced reports (see References), the grading code of the reviewing agency, and as dictated by conditions encountered in the field. The earthwork described herein has been reviewed and is considered adequate for the construction now ' planned. The recommendations presented in this report were prepared in conformance with generally accepted professional engineering practices in this area at the time of this report and no further warranty is expressed or implied. ' EARTH STRATA,INC.•26047 JEFFERSON AVENUE,SUITE C.MURRIETA,CA 92562.OFFICE(951)461-4028•FAX(951)461-4058•WWW.EARTH STRATA.COM BETTER PEOPLE - BETTER SERVICE - BETTER RESULTS 1 ENGINEERING GEOLOGY Geologic Units Earth materials noted during grading operations included topsoil, previously placed artificial fill, alluvium, and bedrock. ' Geologic Structure Geologic conditions exposed during grading operations were observed and mapped by Earth-Strata, Inc. The bedrock is generally massive to nearly horizontally layered and lacks significant structural planes. Groundwater Groundwater was not encountered during grading operations. ' Faulting ' No evidence of significant faulting was observed during grading operations. EARTHWORK OBSERVATIONS AND DENSITY TESTING Site Clearing and Grubbing Prior to grading, all trees, brush,shrubs,and grasses were stripped and removed from the compacted fill. Ground Preparation Removals throughout,most of the fill areas ranged from approximately 1 to 2 feet below original grades, with locally deeper removals. In cut building areas more than 3 feet below the original grades, the exposed cuts were observed and ' determined to provide adequate support for the proposed structures. Prior to placing compacted fill, the exposed bottom surfaces were scarified to depths of 6 to 8 inches, ' watered or air dried as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture content and then compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. ' Oversize Rock Oversize rock, generally greater than 1 foot in maximum dimension, was not encountered during the grading operations. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 2 t 1 tFill Placement and Testing ' All fills were placed in lifts restricted to approximately 6 to 8 inches in maximum thickness, watered or air dried as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture content, then compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density by rolling with a bulldozer, sheepsfoot, or loaded scrapers. The ' maximum vertical depth of compacted fill as a result of grading within the proposed building pads is approximately 0 feet, as the proposed garage will be on cut. ' Benching into competent earth materials was observed during fill placement and compaction operations. Field density and moisture content tests utilizing nuclear gauge methods were performed in accordance with ASTM Test Methods D2922 and D3017. Visual classification of the earth materials in the field was the basis for determining which maximum dry density value was applicable for a given density test. Test results are presented in Table 1 and test locations are shown on the enclosed As-Graded Geotechnical Map, Plate 1. ' Compacted fills were tested to verify that a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density had been achieved. At least one density test was taken for each 1,000 cubic yards and/or for every 2 vertical feet of compacted fill placed. The actual number of tests taken per day varied depending on the site conditions and the quantity and type of equipment utilized. When field density tests yielded results less than the minimum required density, the approximate limits of the ,substandard fill were established. The substandard area was then reworked (most common) or removed, moisture conditioned, recompacted, and retested until the minimum density was achieved. In most cases, failed density tests were noted then retested in the same general vicinity at nearly the same elevation as the failed test. Slopes ' Slopes constructed within the subject property consist of 2:1 (h:v) compacted fill and cut slopes varying to a maximum height of approximately 25 feet. LABORATORY TESTING Maximum Dry Density Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for representative earth materials noted during ' grading operations were determined using the guidelines of ASTM Test Method D 1557-00. Pertinent test values are summarized in Appendix B. ' Expansion Index Tests Expansion index tests were performed on representative earth materials sampled near finish grade for ' select building pads using the guidelines of ASTM D 4829-03. Test results are summarized in Appendix B. Soluble Sulfate Analyses ' The soluble sulfate content of select samples was determined using the guidelines of California Test Method (CTM) 417. Test results are summarized in Appendix B. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 3 1 1 ' Chloride ' Chloride content of select samples was determined using the guidelines of CTM 422. Test results are summarized in Appendix B. ' Minimum Resistivity and off Minimum resistivity and pH tests of select samples were determined using the guidelines of CTM 643. Test ' results are summarized in Appendix B. ' POST GRADING CONSIDERATIONS Slope Landscaping and Maintenance ' Control of site drainage is important for the performance of the proposed project. Engineered slopes should be landscaped with deep rooted, drought tolerant, maintenance free plant species, as ' recommended by the project landscape architect. Unprotected slopes are highly susceptible to erosion and surficial slumping. Therefore to reduce this potential, we recommend that the slopes be covered with an erosion inhibitor until healthy plant growth is well established. To further reduce the potential for surficial instability, measures to control burrowing rodents should be performed as well. Site Drainage tAdequate slope and building pad drainage is essential for the long term performance of the subject site. The gross stability of graded slopes should not be adversely affected, provided all drainage provisions are properly constructed and maintained. Roof gutters are recommended for the proposed structures. Pad and roof drainage should be collected and transferred to driveways, adjacent streets, storm-drain facilities, or other locations approved by the building official in non-erosive drainage devices. Drainage ' should not be allowed to pond on the pad or against any foundation or retaining wall. Drainage should not be allowed to Flow uncontrolled over any descending slope. Planters located within retaining wall backfill should be sealed to prevent moisture intrusion into the backfill. Planters located next to raised Floor type construction should be sealed to the depth of the footings. Drainage control devices require periodic cleaning, testing, and maintenance to remain effective. ' At a minimum, pad drainage should be designed at the minimum gradients required by the UBC. To divert water away from foundations, the ground surface adjacent to foundations should be graded at the minimum gradients required per the CBC. ' Utility Trenches ' All utility trench backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557-00. For utility trench backfill in pavement areas the upper 6 inches of subgrade materials should be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM ' D 1557-00. This includes within the street right-of-ways, utility easements, under footings, sidewalks, driveways and building Floor slabs, as well as within or adjacent to any slopes. Backfill should be placed in approximately 6 to B inch maximum loose lifts and then mechanically compacted with a hydro- hammer, rolling with a sheepsfooq pneumatic tampers, or similar equipment. The utility trenches should EARTH-STRATA, INC. 4 1 1 ' be tested by the project geotechnical engineer or their representative to verify minimum compaction requirements are obtained. In order to minimize the penetration of moisture below building slabs, all utility trenches should be backfilled with compacted fill, lean concrete, or concrete slurry where they undercut the perimeter ' foundation. Utility trenches that are proposed parallel to any building footings (interior and/or exterior trenches), should not be located within a 1:1 (h:v) plane projected downward from the outside bottom edge of the footing. FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS General ' Conventional foundations are recommended for support of the proposed structure. Foundation recommendations are provided herein. ' Allowable Bearing Values An allowable bearing value of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) is recommended for design of 24 inch ' square pad footings and 12 inch wide continuous footings founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. This value may be increased by 20 percent for each additional 1-foot of width and/or depth to a maximum value of 2,500 psf. Recommended allowable bearing values ' include both dead and frequently applied live loads and may be increased by one third when designing for short duration wind or seismic forces. ' Settlement Based on the settlement characteristics of the earth materials that underlie the building sites and the ' anticipated loading, we estimate that the maximum total settlement of the footings will be less than approximately 3/4 inch. Differential settlement is expected to be about 1h inch over a horizontal distance of approximately 20 feet, for an angular distortion ratio of 1:480. It is anticipated that the majority of the ' settlement will occur during construction or shortly after the initial application of loading.- The above settlement estimates are based on the assumption that the construction is performed in ' accordance with the recommendations presented in this report and that the project geotechnical consultant will observe or test the earth material conditions in the footing excavations. ' Lateral Resistance Passive earth pressure of 250 psf per foot of depth to a maximum value of 2,500 psf may be used to ' establish lateral bearing resistance for footings. A coefficient of friction of 0.36 times the dead load forces may be used between concrete and the supporting earth materials to determine lateral sliding resistance. The above values may be increased by one-third when designing for short duration wind or seismic ' forces. When combining passive and friction for lateral resistance, the passive component should be reduced by one third. In no case shall the lateral sliding resistance exceed one-half the dead load for clay, sandy clay,sandy silty clay, silty clay, and clayey silt. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 5 t ' The above lateral resistance values are based on footings for an entire structure being placed directly against either compacted fill or competent bedrock. ' Structural Setbacks ' Structural setbacks are required per the 2007 California Building Code (CBC). Additional structural setbacks are not required due to geologic or geotechnical conditions within the site. Improvements constructed in close proximity to natural or properly engineered and compacted slopes can, over time, be ' affected by natural processes including gravity forces, weathering, and long term secondary settlement. As a result, the CBC requires that buildings and structures be setback or footings deepened to resist the influence of these processes. For structures that are planned near ascending and descending slopes, the footings should be embedded to satisfy the requirements presented in the CBC, Section 1806.3.1 as illustrated in the following Foundation Clearances From Slopes diagram. FOUNDATION CLEARANCES FROM SLOPES ' Earth Strata, Inc. 2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE BUILDING SETBACK DIMENSIONS -------------- ms lnQQ \; lh� \ w�rvrr�rorm ' Oe®glRr Mt ' fnQ Cf mom.... H i �a EARTIHr STRATA; ]INC. 0 1 ' When determining the required clearance from ascending slopes with a retaining wall at the toe, the height of the slope shall be measured from the top of the wall to the top of the slope. The structural ' setback for pools may be reduced by one-half. Footine Observations Prior to the placement of forms, concrete, or steel, all foundation excavations should be observed by the geologist, engineer, or his representative to verify that they have been excavated into competent bearing t materials. The excavations should be moistened, cleaned of all loose materials, trimmed neat, level and square and any moisture softened earth materials should be removed prior to concrete placement. ' Earth materials from foundation excavations should not be placed in slab on grade areas unless the materials are tested for expansion potential and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density. 1 Expansive Soil Considerations ' Laboratory test results indicate onsite earth materials exhibit an expansion potential of LOW as classified in accordance with 2007 CBC Section 1802.3.2 and ASTM D4829-03. The following recommendations should be considered the very minimum requirements, for the earth materials tested. ' It is common practice for the project architect or structural engineer to require additional slab thickness, footing sizes, and/or reinforcement. ' Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 21 to 50) Our laboratory test results indicate that the earth materials onsite exhibit a LOW expansion potential as classified in accordance with 2007 California Building Code, Section 1802.3.2 and ASTM D 4829-03. Accordingly, the CBC specifies that slab on ground foundations (floor slabs) resting on earth materials with expansion indices greater than 20, require special design considerations in accordance with 2007 CBC Sections 1805.8.1 and 1805.8.2. The design procedures outlined in 2007 CBC Section 1805.8 are based on the thickness and plasticity index of the various earth materials within the upper 15 feet of the proposed structure. For design purposes,an effective plasticity index of 12 may be used. ' FootinLys ' • Exterior continuous footings may be founded at the minimum depths below the lowest adjacent final grade (i.e. 12 inch minimum depth for one-story, 18 inch minimum depth for two-story, and 24 inch minimum depth for three-story construction). Interior continuous footings for one-, two-, and three-story construction may be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. All continuous footings should have a minimum width of 12, 15, and 18 inches, for one-, two-, and three-story structures, respectively, per Table 1805.4.2 of the 2007 CBC and should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No. 4 bars, one (1) top and one(1) bottom. • Exterior pad footings intended to support roof overhangs, such as second story decks, patio covers and similar construction should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. The pad footings should be ' reinforced with a minimum of No. 4 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on center, each way, EARTH-STRATA, INC. 7 t tand should be placed near the bottom-third of the footings. ' Building Floor Slabs • The project architect or structural engineer should evaluate minimum Floor slab thickness and t reinforcement in accordance with 2007 CBC Sections 1805.8.1 and 1805.8.2 based on an effective plasticity index of 12. Building Floor slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and reinforced with a minimum of No. 3 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on center, each way. ' All Floor slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or bricks to ensure the desired placement at mid-depth. ' • Interior Floor slabs, within moisture sensitive areas, should be underlain by a minimum 10-mil thick moisture/vapor barrier to help reduce the upward migration of moisture from the underlying earth materials. The moisture/vapor barrier used should meet the performance standards of an ASTM E 1745 Class A material, and be properly installed in accordance with ACI publication 318-05. It, is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that the moisture/vapor barriers are free of openings, rips, or punctures prior to placing concrete. As an option for additional moisture reduction, higher strength concrete, such as a minimum 28- day compressive strength of 5,000 pounds per square inch (psi) may be used. Ultimately, the design of the moisture/vapor barrier system and recommendations for concrete placement ' and curing are the purview of the foundation engineer, taking into consideration the project requirements provided by the architect and owner. ' • Garage Floor slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and should be reinforced in a similar manner as living area Floor slabs. Garage Floor slabs should be placed separately from adjacent wall footings with a positive separation maintained with % inch minimum felt expansion joint materials and quartered with weakened plane joints. A 12 inch wide turn down founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across garage entrances. The turn down should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No. 4 bars, one (1) top and one (1) bottom. ' • The subgrade earth materials below all floor slabs should be pre-watered to achieve a moisture content that is at least equal or slightly greater than optimum moisture content, prior ' to placing concrete. This moisture content should penetrate a minimum depth of 12 inches into the subgrade earth materials. The pre-watering should be verified by Earth-Strata during construction. Post Tensioned Slab/Foundation Design Recommendations ' In lieu of the proceeding foundation recommendations, post tensioned slabs may be used to support the proposed structures. We recommend that the foundation engineer design the foundation system using the Post Tensioned Foundation Slab Design table below. These parameters have been provided in general accordance with Post Tensioned Design. Alternate designs addressing the effects of expansive earth materials are allowed per 2007 CBC Section 1805.8.2. When utilizing these parameters, the foundation engineer should design the foundation system in accordance with the allowable deflection criteria of applicable codes and per the requirements of the structural engineer/architect. It should be noted that the post tensioned design methodology is partially based on the assumption that ' soil moisture changes around and underneath post tensioned slabs, are influenced only by climate EARTH-STRATA, INC. 8 1 1 ' conditions. Soil moisture change below slabs is the major factor in foundation damages relating to expansive soil. However, the design methodology has no consideration for presaturation, owner ' irrigation, or other non-climate related influences on the moisture content of subgrade earth materials. In recognition of these factors, we modified the geotechnical parameters determined from this methodology to account for reasonable irrigation practices and proper homeowner maintenance. ' Additionally, we recommend that prior to excavating footings, slab subgrades be presoaked to a depth of 12 inches and maintained at above optimum moisture until placing concrete. Furthermore, we recommend that the moisture content of the earth materials around the immediate perimeter and below ' the slab be presaturated to at least 1% above optimum moisture,content just prior to placing concrete. The pre-watering should be verified and tested by Earth-Strata during construction. ' The following geotechnical parameters assume that areas adjacent to the foundations, which are planted and irrigated, will be designed with proper drainage to prevent water from ponding. Water ponding near the foundation causes significant moisture change below the foundation. Our recommendations do not ' account for excessive irrigation and/or incorrect landscape design. Planters placed adjacent to the foundation, should be designed with an "effective drainage system or liners, to prevent moisture infiltration below the foundation. Some lifting of the perimeter foundation beam should be expected ' even with properly constructed planters. Based on our experience monitoring sites with similar earth materials, elevated moisture contents below the foundation perimeter due to incorrect landscaping irrigation or maintenance, can result in uplift at the perimeter foundation relative to the central portion of the slab., Future owners should be informed and educated of the importance in maintaining a consistent level of t moisture within the earth materials around the structures. Future owners should also be informed of the potential negative consequences of either excessive watering, or allowing expansive earth materials to become too Ary. Earth materials will shrink as they dry, followed by swelling during the rainy winter ' season, or when irrigation is resumed. This will cause distress to site improvements and structures. 1 1 1 EARTH-STRATA, INC. 9 1 ! Post Tensioned Foundation Slab Design ! VA WE Ex ansion Index Low' Percent Finer than 0.002 mm in the Fraction Passing the No. <20 percent(assumed) ' 200 Sieve Type of Clay Mineral Montmorillonite assumed Thornthwaite Moisture Index -20 ! Depth to Constant Soil Suction 7 feet Constant Soil Suction P.F.3.6 Moisture Velocity 0.7 inches month Center Lift Edge moisture variation distance,em 5.5 feet ! Center lift,y. 2.0 inches Edge Lift Edge moisture variation distance,em 3.0 feet Edge lift y. 0.8 inches ! Soluble Sulfate Content for Design of Concrete Mixtures in Negligible Contact with Earth Materials Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k (assuming presaturation as 200 pci indicated below ' Minimum Perimeter Foundation Embedment 18 Under Slab Moisture/Vapor Barrier and Sand Layer 10-mil thick moisture/vapor barrier meeting the requirements of a ASTM E 1745 Class A material ! 1. Assumed for design purposes or obtained by laboratory testing. 2. Recommendations for foundation reinforcement are ultimately the purview of the foundation/structural engineer based upon the geotechnical criteria presented in this report,and structural engineering considerations. ! Corrosiyity ' Corrosion is defined by the National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) as "a deterioration of a substance or its properties because of a reaction with its environment." From a geotechnical viewpoint, the "substances' are the reinforced concrete foundations or buried metallic elements (not surrounded by ! concrete) and the"environment" is the prevailing earth materials in contact with them. Many factors can contribute to corrosivity, including the presence of chlorides, sulfates, salts, organic materials, different oxygen levels, poor drainage, different soil types, and moisture content. It is not considered practical or ! realistic to test for all of the factors which may contribute to corrosivity. The potential for concrete exposure to chlorides is based upon the recognized Caltrans reference ! standard "Bridge Design Specifications', under Subsection 8.22.1 of that document, Caltrans has determined that "Corrosive water or soil contains more than 500 parts per million (ppm) of chlorides". Based on limited preliminary laboratory testing, the onsite earth materials have chloride contents less ! than 500 ppm. As such, specific requirements resulting from elevated chloride contents are not required. Specific guidelines for concrete mix design are provided in 2007 CBC Section 1904.3 and ACI 318, Section t 4.3 Table 4.3.1 when the soluble sulfate content of earth materials exceeds 0.1 percent by weight. Based on limited preliminary laboratory testing, the onsite earth materials are classified in accordance with Table 4.3.1 as having a negligible sulfate exposure condition. Therefore, structural concrete in contact with onsite earth materials should utilize Type 1 or 11. ! EA]KIFIH-sinkATA, IINC, 10 ! 1 Based on our laboratory testing of resistivity, the onsite earth materials in contact with buried steel should be considered mildly corrosive. Additionally, pH values below 9.7 are recognized as being ' corrosive to most common metallic components including, copper, steel, iron, and aluminum. The pH values for the earth materials tested were lower than 9.7. Therefore, any steel or metallic materials that are exposed to the earth materials should be encased in concrete or other measures should be taken to provide corrosion protection. If building slabs are to be post tensioned,the post tensioning cables should be encased in concrete and/or ' encapsulated in accordance with the Post Tensioning Institute Guide Specifications. Post tensioning cable end plate anchors and nuts also need to be protected if exposed. If the anchor plates and nuts are in a recess in the edge of the concrete slab, the recess should be filled in with a non-shrink, non-porous, t moisture-insensitive epoxy grout so that the anchorage assembly and the end of the cable are completely encased and isolated from the soil. A standard non-shrink, non-metallic cementitious grout may be used only when the post tension anchoring assembly is polyethylene encapsulated similar to that offered by Hayes Industries, LTD or O'Strand, Inc. The test results for corrosivity are based on limited samples in accordance with the current standard of care. Laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B. RETAINING WALLS Active and At-Rest Earth Pressures Foundations may be designed in accordance with the recommendations provided in the Foundation Design Recommendation section of this report. The following table provides the minimum recommended equivalent fluid pressures for design of retaining walls a maximum of 12 feet high. The active earth pressure should be used for design of unrestrained retaining walls, which are free to tilt slightly. The at-rest earth pressure should be used for design of retaining walls that are restrained at the ' top, such as basement walls, curved walls with no joints, or walls restrained at corners. For curved walls, active pressure may be used if tilting is acceptable and construction joints are provided at each angle point and at a minimum of 15 foot intervals along the curved segments. MUM STATIC EQUIVALENT FLU16 SSURES c E Active Earth Pressure 40 63 At-Rest Earth Pressure 60 95 1 The retaining wall parameters provided do not account for hydrostatic pressure behind the retaining walls. Therefore,the subdrain system is a very important part of the design. All retaining walls should be designed to resist surcharge loads imposed by other nearby walls,structures, or vehicles should be added to the above earth pressures, if the additional loads are being applied within a 1:1 plane projected up from the heel of the retaining wall footing, As a way of minimizing surcharge loads and the settlement ' potential of nearby buildings,the footings for the building can be deepened below the 1:1 plane projected up from the heel of the retaining wall footing. 1 EARTIHi-S"]['IRA-IrA, ]INC, 11 1 Retaining walls less than 12 feet high are not required to be designed for earthquake loads for critical structures per Section 1806A of the 2007 CBC. As a result, it is our opinion that proposed retaining walls ' under 12 feet high do not need to be designed for earthquake motions. Upon request and under a separate scope of work, more detailed analyses can be performed to address ' equivalent Fluid pressures with regard to stepped retaining walls, actual retaining wall heights, actual backfill inclinations,specific backfill materials, etc. ' Subdrain System We recommend a perforated pipe and gravel subdrain system be provided behind all proposed retaining ' walls to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the proposed retaining walls. The perforated pipe should consist of 4 inch minimum diameter Schedule 40 PVC or ABS SDR-35, placed with the perforations facing down. The pipe should be surrounded by 1 cubic foot per foot of 3/4- or 1% inch open ' graded gravel wrapped in filter fabric. The filter fabric should consist of Mirafi 140N or equivalent to prevent infiltration of fines and subsequent clogging of the subdrain system. In lieu of a perforated pipe and gravel subdrain system, weep holes or open vertical masonry joints may be provided in the lowest row of block exposed to.the air to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the proposed retaining walls. Weep holes should be a minimum of 3 inches in diameter and provided at intervals of at least every 6 feet along the wall. Open vertical masonry joints should be provided at a minimum of 32 inch intervals. A continuous gravel fill, a minimum of 1 cubic foot per foot, should be placed behind the weep holes or open masonry joints. The gravel should be wrapped in filter ' fabric consisting of Mirafi 140N or equivalent. The adequate retaining walls should be coated on the backfilled side of the walls with a proven ' waterproofing compound by an experienced professional to inhibit infiltration of moisture through the walls. ' Temnora[y Excavations All excavations should be made in accordance with OSHA requirements. Earth-Strata is not responsible ' for job site safety. Wall Backfill ' Retaining-wall backfill materials should be approved by the geotechnical engineer or his representative prior to placement as compacted fill. Retaining wall backfill should be placed in lifts no greater than 6 to ' 8 inches,watered or air dried as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture contents. All retaining wall backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum density as determined by ASTM D 1557. Retaining wall backfill should be capped with a paved surface drain. CONCRETE FLATWORK Thickness and joint Spacing Concrete sidewalks and patio type slabs should be at least 3�6 inches thick and provided with EARTH-STRATA, INC. 12 1 ' construction or expansion joints every 6 feet or less, to reduce the potential for excessive cracking. Concrete driveway slabs should be at least 4 inches thick and provided with construction or expansion ' joints every 10 feet or less. Suberade Preparation ' In order to reduce the potential for unsightly cracking, subgrade earth materials underlying concrete flatwork should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density and then ' moistened to at least optimum or slightly above optimum moisture content. This moisture should extend to a depth of at least 12 inches below subgrade and be maintained prior to placement of concrete. Pre- watering of the earth materials prior to placing concrete will promote uniform curing of the concrete and ' minimize the development of shrinkage cracks. The project geotechnical engineer or his representative should verify the density and moisture content of the earth materials and the depth of moisture penetration prior to placing concrete. ' Cracking within concrete flatwork is often a result of factors such as the use of too high a water to cement ratio and/or inadequate steps taken to prevent moisture loss during the curing of the concrete. Concrete ' distress can be reduced by proper concrete mix design and proper placement and curing of the concrete. Minor cracking within concrete flatwork is normal and should be expected. POST GRADING OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING ' It is the property owner's sole responsibility to notify Earth-Strata at the appropriate times for observation and testing services. Earth-Strata can not be responsible for any geotechnical recommendations where the appropriate observations and testing have not been performed. It is of the ' utmost importance that the owner or their representative request observations and testing for at least the following phases of work. Structure Construction Observe all foundation excavations prior to placement of concrete or steel to verify adequate ' depth and competent bearing conditions. • If necessary, re-observe all foundation excavations after deficiencies have been corrected. Retaining Wall Construction ' Observe all foundation excavations prior to placement of concrete or steel to verify adequate depth and competent bearing conditions. ' If necessary, re-observe all foundation excavations after deficiencies have been corrected. Observe and verify proper installation of subdrain systems prior to placing retaining wall backfill. Observe and test retaining wall backfill operations. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 13 1 Garden Walls Observe all foundation excavations prior to placement of concrete or steel to verify adequate depth and competent bearing conditions. ' If necessary, re-observe all foundation excavations after deficiencies have been corrected. Exterior Concrete Flatwork Construction Observe and test subgrade earth materials below all concrete Flatwork to verify recommended density and moisture content. Utility Trench Backfill ' Observe and test all utility trench backfill operations. Re-Grading 1 Observe and test the placement of any additional fill materials placed onsite. GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION RESPONSIBILITY ' It is the responsibility of the contractor or his subcontractors to meet or exceed the project specifications for grading and construction. The responsibilities of Earth-Strata did not include the supervision or direction of the contractor's personnel, equipment, or subcontractors performing the actual work. Our ' field representative onsite was intended to provide the owner with professional advice, opinions, and recommendations based on observations and limited testing of the contractor's work. Our services do not relieve the contractor or his subcontractors of their responsibility, should defects in their work be discovered. The conclusions and recommendations herein are based on the observations and test results for the areas tested, and represent our engineering opinion as to the contractor's compliance with the project specifications. REPORT LIMITATIONS ' This report has not been prepared for use by parties or projects other than those named or described herein. This report may not contain sufficient information for other parties or other purposes. Our ' services were performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable soils engineers and geologists, practicing at the time and location this report was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional ' advice included in this report. Earth materials vary in type, strength, and other geotechnical properties between points of observation ' and testing. Groundwater and moisture conditions can also vary due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. ' This report was prepared with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner or their EARTH-STRATA, INC. 14 1 representative, to ensure that the conclusions and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the other project consultants and are incorporated into the plans and specifications. The owners' contractor should properly implement the conclusions and recommendations during construction and notify the owner if they consider any of the recommendations presented herein to be unsafe or unsuitable. Earth-Strata sincerely appreciates the opportunity to provide our services and advice on this project. ' Respectfully presented, IEAIK1rH-S7I[`1RATA, IINC. Chad E.Welke, PG, CEG, PE Principal Geologist/Engineer JSzfESS/O*, ' �O �01C84 `FZ #Sthen . Poole, PE, GEa�No. 692 o m Principal Engineer xP G CW/SMP/am fghi OF C0.UF ' Attachments: Appendix A- References Appendix B - Laboratory Procedures and Test Results Table 1 -Summary of Field Density Tests Plate 1 -As-Graded Geotechnical Map Distribution: (4) Addressee 1 EA1R'gTHI-STRATA, IINC. 15 1 1 1 APPENDIX A REFERENCES ' APPENDIX A ' REFERENCES ' California Building Standards Commission, 2007, 2007 California Building Code, California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 2, Volume 2 of2, Based on 2006 International Building Code. ' Earth-Strata, Inc., 2010, Preliminary Geotechnical Interpretive Report, Proposed Detached RV Garage, Assessor's Parcel Number 965-220-018, Located at 42605 Musilek Place, City of Temecula, Riverside County, California, dated August 11. ' National Association of Corrosion Engineers, 1984, Corrosion Basics An Introduction, page 191. ' Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC), 1999, Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction Hazards in California, March. 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' APPENDIX B LABORATORY PROCEDURES AND TEST RESULTS ' APPENDIX B LaboratoEy Procedures and Test Results Laboratory testing provided quantitative and qualitative data involving the relevant engineering properties of the representative earth materials selected for testing. The representative samples were tested in general accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) procedures and/or California Test Methods (CTM). Soil Classification: Earth materials encountered during exploration were classified and logged in general accordance with the Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual- Manual Procedure) of ASTM D 2488, Upon completion of laboratory testing sample descriptions were reconciled to reflect laboratory test results with regard to ASTM D 2467. ' Maximum Density Tests: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of representative samples were determined using the guidelines of ASTM D 1557. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPLE SAMPLE MATERIAL MAXIMUM DRY OPTIMUM MOISTURE NUMBER " LOCATION ON CONTENT(%) ' 1 TP-1 @ 0-2 feet Clayey Sand 129.5 7.5 2 Cut Area Clayey Sand 130.0 9.5 1 Expansion Index: The expansion potential of representative samples was evaluated using the guidelines of ASTM D 4829. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPLE LOCAT[ Pad @ 0 feet I Clayey Sand 23 Low!!!:�:] 1 ' Minimum Resistivity and pH Tests: Minimum resistivity and pH tests of select samples were performed using the guidelines of CTM 643. The test results are presented in the table below. MATERIAL LOCATI DESCRIPTION Pad @ 0 feet Clayey Sand 8.8 4,700 1 Soluble Sulfate: The soluble sulfate content of select samples was determined using the guidelines of CTM 417. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPLE MATERIAL SULFATE CONTENT ' LOCATION DESCRIPTION (%by weight) SULFATE EXPOSURE Pad @ 0 feet Clayey Sand 0.042 Negligible 1 Chloride Content: Chloride content of select samples was determined using the guidelines of CTM ' 422. The test results are presented in the table below. ' SAMPLE LOCATION MATERIAL DESCRIPTION CHLORIDE CONTENT (ppm) Pad @ 0 feet Clayey Sand 240 1 1 1 1 t 1 ' TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS ' Test Test Test Test Elevation Soil Dry Moisture Max. ReL Test Location Density Content Density Density No. Type Date of (feet) Type - (Pefl (°�) (p i N 11/30/10 NG Garage Pad Rear Sloe 49 2 117.4 9.0 130.0 90 2 N 11 30 10 CF Garage Pad Rear Sloe so 2 118.9 9.7 130.0 91 3 N 12/01/10 CF Garage Pad Rear Sloe 52 2 118.2 8.2 130.0 91 ' 4 N 12/01/10 CF Garage Pad Rear Slope S4 2 120.9 10.1 130.0 93 5 N 12/01/10 CF Garage Pad Rear Sloe 56 2 120.1 9.9 130.0 92 6 N 12/01/10 CF Garage Pad Rear Sloe 58 2 121.8 9.S 130.0 94 7 N 12/01/10 CF Garage Pad Rear Sloe 60 2 119.5 9.0 130.0 92 8 N 12/02 10 CF Garage Pad Rear Slope 62 2 1 120.6 8.2 130.0 93 9 N 12 02 10 CF Garage Pad Rear Slope 64 2 117.2 9.2 130.0 90 10 N 12/03 10 CF Garage Pad Rear Slope 66 2 119.4 9.7 130.0 92 ' 11 N 12 06 10 CF Garage Pad Rear Sloe 68 2 121.1 9.0 130.0 93 12 N 12/06/10 CF Garage Pad Rear Sloe 70 2 118.0 9.9 130.0 91 13 N 12 06 10 CF Garage Pad Rear Slope 72 2 117.4 9.8 130.0 90 14 N 12/07 10 CF Garage Pad Rear Sloe 74 2 119.1 10.2 130.0 92 15 N 12 07 10 CF Garage Pad Rear Sloe 76 2 117.1 9.0 130.0 90 16 N 12/14 10 CF Garage Pad West End 49 2 118.9 9.7 130.0 91 17 N 12 14 10 CF Garage Pad West End 51 2 119.8 8.4 130.0 92 ' 18 N 12/14 10 CF Gara ePad West End 52 2 117.3 9.6 130.0 90 1 1 ' N - Nuclear Test Method FG - Finish Grade Project No.: 10792-35A CF- Compacted Fill NG - Native Ground DECEMBER 2010 LEGEND ALL LOCATIONS ARE AIROXNWE i Geologic Units - - Afc - Artificial Fill,Compacted ti. p � ,A.ucw cvl�� Qps - Pauba Formation (Circled Where Buried) m Symbols — I , ' -� PROP. FIRE TURNAROUND i� 6 _ .,,+ara s LE -� 49 u Limits of Report i. Aft / 0'1 -, ¢ IK �0���`e e EX MAIN GARAGE R _ • • a T a oTr�,`* (,�p5 " o EX MAIN HOUSE _ _ _ Geologic Contact tR r''da Pso FTOR`)C 3 �+ r 18 ag�z • Field Density Test Location 12 C1249] Elevation of Removal Bottoms Ta A �` #Afc _ -15• - - Aft Ex 20' DWY AS GRADED GEOTECHNICAL MAP APN 96S236018.42U*MUSILEK PLACE TEMECULA,RIVERSIDE COUNT$CALIFORNIA FEOPfRI✓GMY N ES06'FO'f Sf681' i \ _ PROJECT DETACH RVGARAGE-TEMECULA \\ CLAwr MR JAMES MARGIOTrA PROJECTNO. 10M VA DATE DECEMBER 1010 SCALE 1.0 DWG XREFS REVPGPA0020Ay i1 DRAR BY GNG HATE 1 Earth - Strata,. Inc, OwM1tlMeN.EmlmNrtlrMarEMaMltl�Tutl,q Ca,uWunb RETfER PEO%F.9FTIeR 9ERNCE.BEIIER RESIHIS Milt i� ;a � t, � � t ���,.� � '�,. ., c �• -i .I r....i ar�'�i { l �n f , Ci' In AG"..r • .� {� r Icy i�� ,oif«'+�lf� �. '. I f '�fiis N 'gyp+ Ill'= ,' _ - d� �Z 4 /I �. ', - ;� �� r ,�.'�•t.r��il� .6 t � vi.,.ux+�'" 2-�n °�_'tammmmm�� b< I }� ♦•z' / fill "J ,"� .' /j � 7� � � M r �( al�t+ ;'Y�( {l�r � Y.' ��1•]�'I 1. � t '. C, � i �J . `Mrs . n{, .' S r a' �� d iir �/ r f/ rj .d r PR1.°� r /i �r f +t>..,fm�PA� 6-f �• � / �ysl / C , "' . `.,. (/ 1 J , � .�/,�' Y �1 'f•.'•A Im�}�L•'�1m1�� 1 �i� 41 r ( r .rl .� ' e '+' A � rr / (/t '!,1 /..iMClmmmllO +•1 r r !'` �'h ': T` _.::Jy 1► _ �-�'y i jr.J�YjP!'y�.. tl'r T i ! PTIMMAN.MI rip �•? II � � �Y �.R'j � 1J .� r(.r" G'zf � r ,r/j''"'r I /r �.�,' J,� 'fir', / -,��+��,�� ���,Q��,�F''{// r• /1 � � .I "` ti.pJ.a'--:22. ' '' °.''Yp� r�'r�y7� '�'�!`� • ��� '` �1' o-�ay Y",�;. ��y7'�, (Y . y�+�..eiy� r�yp a. . r+�,n•'f:FrYrv.+W. .u,.e.. �c., v s r..nn•�wre. �,, mow/ n t s� ��s5a' •sa•a9ro z �P/ i `p .n r� r IS� �' - �"�. ! ��� . � •-> �i ?iii"r��i'� �' ',��E �r� %�:r .� `* ��1 1 Earth - Strata, Inc, Geotechnical.Environmental and Materials Testing Consultants BETTER PEOPLE.BETTER SERVICE.BETTER RESULTS tAugust 11, 2010 Project No. 10792-10A t Mr.Wilfredo "Willy"Ventura VENTURA ENGINEERING, LLC ' 27315 Jefferson Avenue, Ste.J-229 Temecula, CA 92590 ' Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Interpretive Report, Proposed Detached RV Garage, Assessor's Parcel Number 965-220-018, Located at 42605 Musilek Place, City of Temecula, Riverside County,California Earth-Strata is pleased to present our preliminary geotechnical interpretive report for the proposed ' detached RV garage, located at 42605 Musilek Place, in the City of Temecula, Riverside County, California. This work was performed in accordance with the scope of work described in our proposal, dated July 29, 2010. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the nature, distribution, engineering properties, and geologic strata underlying the site with respect to the proposed development. Earth-Strata appreciates the opportunity to offer our consultation and advice on this project. In the event that you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at your earliest convenience. ' Respectfully submitted, RI>,� EARTH-STRATA, Inc. 0• WC4f 6' U it t � EXp• �? Chad E.Welke, PG, CEG, PE ,,, 4 � Principal Geologist/Engineer W QQFESSip4 ' 4! #phenoole, PE, GE VQ�`Oa��MiCH4e 'L Principal Engineer W No,692 0 z CW/SMP/am �rq�OF ' Distribution: (6) Addressee t FARTH STRATA,INC.•26047 IEF FERSON AVENUE,SUITE C,MURRIETA,CA 92562.OF F ICE(951)461 4028•FAX(951)461 4058•W WW.EARTH ST RATA.COM LIFT TER PEOPI F: • BET1 ER SE F2VICF • BE I I ER HE Slll TS 1 ' TABLE OF CONTENTS ' Section Eal € INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................................................................1 SITEDESCRIPTION..............................................................................................................................................................................1 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND GRADING..........................................................................................................................1 ' FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING........................................................................................................3 FieldExploration............................................................................................................................................................................3 LaboratoryTesting........................................................................................................................................................................3 FINDINGS..................................................................................................................................................................................................3 RegionalGeology............................................................................................................................................................................3 LocalGeology....................................................................................................................................................................................4 ' Geologic Structure..........................................................................................................................................................................6 Faulting................................................................................................................................................................................................6 Landslides...........................................................................................................................................................................................6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................................................................................6 General.................................................................................................................................................................................................6 Earthwork...........................................................................................................................................................................................6 Earthworkand Grading.........................................................................................................................................................6 Clearingand Grubbing............................................................................................................................................................7 ExcavationCharacteristics...................................................................................................................................................7 Groundwater................................................................................................................................................................................7 Ground Preparation For Fill Areas..................................................................................................................................7 WetRemovals..............................................................................................................................................................................7 OversizeRock..............................................................................................................................................................................8 ' Compacted Fill Placement....................................................................................................................................................8 ImportEarth Materials...........................................................................................................................................................8 FillSlopes.......................................................................................................................................................................................8 ' Cut Slopes.......................................................................................................................................................................................8 StabilizationFills.......................................................................................................................................................................8 FillOver Cut Slopes...................................................................................................................................................................9 ' Temporary Backcuts...............................................................................................................................................................9 Cut/Fill Transitions..................................................................................................................................................................9 CutAreas.........................................................................................................................................................................................9 ' Shrinkage, Bulking and Subsidence............................................................................................................................. 10 GeotechnicalObservations............................................................................................................................................... 10 PostGrading Considerations................................................................................................................................................ 10 ' Slope Landscaping and Maintenance.......................................................................................................................... 10 SiteDrainage............................................................................................................................................................................. 10 UtilityTrenches.......................................................................................................................................................................11 ' SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS.......................................................................................................................................11 GroundMotions...........................................................................................................................................................................11 SecondarySeismic Hazards................................................................................................................................................... 12 ' Liquefaction.................................................................................................................................................................................... 13 GroundLurching..........................................................................................................................................................................13 GroundSubsidence.....................................................................................................................................................................13 ' TENTATIVE FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................................13 i General.............................................................................................................................................................................................. 13 I Allowable Bearing Values.......................................................................................................................................................13 Settlement........................................................................................................................................................................................ 14 LateralResistance....................................................................................................................................................................... 14 ' Structural Setbacks....................................................................................................................................................................14 FoundationObservations.......................................................................................................................................................15 ExpansiveSoil Considerations............................................................................................................................................. 16 I Very Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 20 or Less)................................................................. 16 Footings ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 16 BuildingFloor Slabs.............................................................................................................................................................. 16 Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 21 to 50)...................................................................................... 17 IFootings ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 17 BuildingFloor Slabs.............................................................................................................................................................. 17 Post Tensioned Slab/Foundation Design Recommendations........................................................................... 18 ' Corrosivity.......................................................................................................................................................................................20 RETAININGWALLS...........................................................................................................................................................................21 Activeand At-Rest Earth Pressures..................................................................................................................................21 ' Subdrain System..........................................................................................................................................................................21 TemporaryExcavations...........................................................................................................................................................22 RetainingWall Backfill.............................................................................................................................................................22 CONCRETEFLATWORK.................................................................................................................................................................22 Thicknessand joint Spacing..................................................................................................................................................22 SubgradePreparation ..............................................................................................................................................................22 IGRADING PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES........................................................................................23 REPORTLIMITATIONS..................................................................................................................................................................23 ' Attachments: Figure 1 -Vicinity Map (Page 2) Figure 2 - Regional Geologic Map (Page 5) ' APPENDIX A - References (Rear of Text) APPENDIX B- Exploratory Logs (Rear of Text) APPENDIX C - Laboratory Procedures and Test Results (Rear of Text) ' APPENDIX D- Seismicity (Rear of Text) APPENDIX E - General Earthwork and Grading Specifications (Rear of Text) Plate 1 - Geotechnical Map (in Pocket) I 1 EARTH-STRATA, INC. Page ii Project No. 10792-10A I J — �� ��ff�\ ��\a O� E.��MT•Do � M -='�� `z1N . VIA UILO II I, g J CORI SRNT/�; tlNLIN�? / EE\ 10792-10A Detached Garage- remec u/a 3 \\�� �p ,Approximate5iteLocatAm Oq NVEN�g9AD1 IA\1MIMO DE, R� 1 M17Q1L Yi s LI,E.ARNRZ_" � � DE �^I✓ � O p T�T� PMW�� iH rmn. ivmenrlo R �+`'I Pp GhK LA WAY Q coloy, rp M%✓ U P r J v L k "O 2007 DeLorme (www.dalorma.eom)Top* USAe". iF --In _ DETACHED GARAGE 10792-10A Earth G Strata, Inc, VICINITY MAP SEE BAR SCALE 6a 4I Mea ll.Enm—o Wand NolMala 1-.n,C—ft nh AUG. 2010 FIGURE 1 6ETER OEOPLE.BERER SERNCE.BETTER RESVI IS WY voa f QFIS g d 0 rS7 i �PF Clq�i mo ew rao raw moo P 2 ¢ \? 9C Data Zo t3.0 JV MM v C CS� �Fi CALLE \ 1 u PrAGOZA-m _ �FOy y r VISTA )t� VVIS.TAok MONTE •4 !' \p T V 1 R ty 9 i�� GIaOA r�_ lj1 c• eaa• I L. y Y � PNCH ON' NCriTaoaP S m P�NN 7r-2 ltttt �� Uu✓Sd Aj. Z pl p b s rr s nr�A J O AO ,sm 1.Qr J1196 ¢� Ipl mF'Ir_.yr•1 foPh�%°�y4 �c . {4Pr 5 NOPP��'�a 5i O �`� JO LPMO - �c a�Y _ 10792!OA Detached 6oroge - Temec'1 Approximate Siet Location �i W "r `(= ,> `!¢SF(1..��'0� Pq�gOR a \— / I f(+v%• - p 1 CPllE3E`?/-E�OO Oj4 ENID P IFl VI>4L r14EQGeLL. G2 J REFERNCES: Morton, D.M., Hauser, Rachel M., and Ruppert, Kelly R.. 2004, Preliminary Digital Geologic Map of the Santa Ana 30' x 60' Quadrangle, Southern California, Version 2.0: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 99-0172. "0 2007 DeLorme (www.delorme.com) Topo USA®". _ DETACHED GARAGE 10792-10A ' Earth - .Strata, Inc. SEE BAR SCALE REGIONAL GEOLOGIC MAP �TTeePEaPU.SET,as .W �aun AUG. 2010 FIGURE 2 ' Geologic Structure ' The bedrock described is common to this area and the geologic structure is consistent with regional trends. The sandstone bedrock is generally massive and lacks significant structural planes. ' Faulting .' The project is located in a seismically active region and as a result, significant ground shaking will likely impact the site within the design life of the proposed project. The geologic structure of the entire southern California area is dominated by northwest-trending faults associated with the San Andreas ' Fault system, which accommodates for most of the right lateral movement associated with the relative motion between the Pacific and North American tectonic plates. Known active faults within this system include the Newport-Inglewood,Whittier-Elsinore,San Jacinto and San Andreas Faults. No active faults are known to project through the site and the site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, established by the State of California to restrict the construction of new habitable structures across identifiable traces of known active faults. An active fault is defined by the State of ' - California as having surface displacement within the past 11,000 years or during the Holocene geologic 0 time period. ' Based on our review of regional geologic maps and the computer program (USGS 2002 Interactive Deaggregation), the Elsinore Fault with an approximate source to site distance of 6 kilometers is the closest known active fault anticipated to produce the highest ground accelerations, with an anticipated ' maximum modal magnitude of 6.8. Based on the data compiled during the preparation of this report, it is our interpretation that the potential for surface rupture to adversely impact the proposed structures is very low to remote. ' Landslides ' Landslide debris was not observed during 'our subsurface exploration and no ancient landslides are known to exist on the site. ' CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ' General From geotechnical and engineering geologic points of view, the subject property is considered suitable ' for the proposed development, provided the following conclusions and recommendations are incorporated into the plans and are implemented during construction. ' Earthwork Earthwork and Gradine The provisions of the 2007 California Building Code (CBC), including Appendix J Grading, should be applied to all earthwork and grading operations, as well as in accordance with all applicable ' grading codes and requirements of the appropriate reviewing agency. Unless specifically revised EARTH-STRATA, INC. 6 August 112017 tor amended herein, grading operations should also be performed in accordance with applicable ' provisions of our General Earthwork and Grading Specifications within the last appendix of this report. ' Clearine and Grubbine Vegetation including trees, grasses, weeds, brush, shrubs, or any other debris should be stripped ' from the areas to be graded and properly disposed of offsite. In addition, laborers should be utilized to remove any roots,branches, or other deleterious materials during grading operations. ' Earth-Strata should be notified at the appropriate times to provide observation and testing services during Clearing and Grubbing operations. Any buried structures or unanticipated conditions should be brought to our immediate attention. ' Excavation Characteristics ' Based on the results of our exploration and experience with similar projects in similar settings, the near surface earth materials,will be readily excavated with conventional earth moving equipment. Excavation difficulty is a'function of the degree of weathering and amount of fracturing within the ' bedrock. Groundwater '. Groundwater was not observed during our subsurface exploration. Ground Preparation For Fill Areas ' For each area to receive compacted fill, the removal of low density, compressible earth materials, such as topsoil and colluvium, should continue until firm competent bedrock is encountered. ' Removal excavations are subject to verification by the project engineer, geologist or their representative. Prior to placing compacted fills, the exposed bottom in each removal area should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches or more, watered or air dried as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture conditions and then compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557. The intent of remedial grading is to diminish the potential for hydro-consolidation, slope instability, and/or settlement. Remedial grading should extend beyond the perimeter of the proposed structures a horizontal distance equal to the depth of excavation or a minimum of 5 feet, whichever is greater. For cursory purposes the anticipated removal depths are shown on the enclosed Geotechnical Map, Plate 1. In general, the anticipated removal depths should vary from 1 to 3 feet below existing grade. 1 Wet Removals Wet alluvial materials will probably not be encountered within the low lying areas of the site. If removals of wet alluvial materials are required, special grading equipment and procedures can greatly reduce overall costs. Careful planning by an experienced grading contractor can reduce ' the need for special equipment, such as swamp cats, draglines, excavators, pumps, and top loading EARTH-STRATA, INC. 7 August 112010 1 1 tearthmovers. Possible solutions may include the placement of imported angular rock and/or ' geotextile ground reinforcement. More specific recommendations can be provided based on the actual conditions encountered. Drying or mixing of wet materials with dry materials will be needed to bring the wet materials to near optimum moisture prior to placing wet materials into ' compacted fills. Oversize Rock ' Minimal oversize rock is expected to be encountered during grading. Oversize rock that is encountered (i.e., rock exceeding a maximum dimension of 12 inches) should be disposed of offsite or stockpiled onsite and crushed for future use. The disposal of oversize rock is discussed in greater detail in General Earthwork and Grading Specifications within the last appendix of this report. ' Compacted Fill Placement Compacted fill materials should be placed in 6 to 8 inch maximum (uncompacted) lifts, watered or ' air dried as necessary to achieve uniform near optimum moisture content and then compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557-00. Import Earth Materials Should import earth materials be needed to achieve final design grades, all potential import materials should be free of deleterious/oversize materials, non-expansive, and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to delivery onsite. Fill Slopes When properly constructed, fill slopes up to 20 feet high with inclinations of 2:1 (h:v) or Flatter are ' considered to be grossly stable. Keyways are required at the toe of all fill slopes higher than 5 feet and steeper than S:1 (h:v). Keyways should be a minimum of 10 feet wide and 2 feet into bedrock, as measured on the downhill side. In.order to establish keyway removals, backcuts should be cut ' no steeper than 1:1 or as recommended by the geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist. Compacted fill should be benched into bedrock. ' Cut Slopes When properly constructed, cut slopes into bedrock up to 25 feet high with inclinations of 2:1 (h:v) or Flatter are considered grossly stable. Cut slopes should be observed by the engineering geologist or his representative during grading,but are anticipated to be stable. tStabilization Fills Currently, stabilization fills will not be required for cut slopes in the bedrock. Our engineering geologist or his representative should be called to evaluate all slopes during grading. In the event that unfavorable geologic conditions are encountered, recommendations for stabilization fills or Flatter slopes will be provided. 1 EARTH-STRATA, INC. 8 August 112010 i iFill Over Cut Slopes iThe fill portion of fill over cut slopes should not be constructed until the cut portion of the slope has been cut to finish grade. The earth materials and geologic structure exposed along the cut i slope should be evaluated with regard to suitability for compacted fills or foundations and for stability. If the cut materials are determined to be competent, then the construction of the keyway and subdrain system may commence or additional remedial recommendations will be provided. iTemporary Backcuts It is the responsibility of the grading contractor to follow all Cal-OSHA requirements with regard i to excavation safety. Where existing developments are upslope, adequate slope stability to protect those developments must be maintained. Temporary backcuts will be required to accomplish i removals of unsuitable materials and possibly, to perform canyon removals, stabilization fills, and/or keyways. Backcuts should be excavated at a gradient of 1:1 (h:v) or flatter. Flatter backcuts may be required where geologic structure or earth materials are unfavorable. It is imperative that grading schedules minimize the exposure time of the unsupported excavations. iAll excavations should be stabilized within 30 days of initial excavation. Cut/Fill Transitions Cut/fill transitions should be eliminated from all building areas where the depth of fill placed within the "fill"portion exceeds proposed footing depths. This is to diminish distress to structures resulting from excessive differential settlement. The entire foundation of each structure should be founded on a uniform bearing material. This should be accomplished by overexcavating the "cut" portion and replacing the excavated materials as properly compacted fill. Refer to the following itable for recommended depths of overexcavation. DEPTH OF FILL 'fill'portia i Uo to 5 feet Equal Depth 5 to 10 feet 5 feet Greater than 10 feet One-half the thickness of fill placed on the"fill'portion i10 feet maximum i Overexcavation of the "cut" portion should extend beyond the building perimeter a horizontal distance equal to the depth of overexcavation or a minimum of 5 feet,whichever is greater. iCut Areas Where low density surficial earth materials such as any undocumented artificial fills, topsoil, colluvium and/or alluvium are not removed in their entirety in cut areas, the entire lot should overexcavated a minimum of 3 feet below the proposed foundations and replaced with compacted fill. Final determination of areas that require overexcavation due to transition conditions should ' be determined in the field by a representative of Earth-Strata. i EAII TIHI-S1MA1fA, ]INC. 9 August 112010 1 1 ' Shrinkage,Bulking and Subsidence ' Volumetric changes in earth material quantities will occur when poorly consolidated earth materials are replaced with properly compacted fill. Estimates of the percent shrinkage/bulking factors for the various geologic units observed on the subject property are based on in-place ' densities and on the estimated average percent of relative compaction achieved during grading. 7 1 `dGue Colluvium 10 to 15 Topsoil 5 to 10 7' Bedrock 0 to 5 Subsidence from scarification and recompaction of exposed bottom surfaces is expected to be negligible. The estimates of shrinkage/bulking and subsidence are intended as an aid for project engineers in determining earthwork quantities. Since many variables can affect the accuracy of these estimates, they should be used with caution and contingency plans should be in place for balancing the project. GeotechnicalObservations ' Clearing operations, removal of unsuitable materials, and general grading procedures should be observed by the project geotechnical consultant or his representative. No compacted fill should be placed without observations by the geotechnical consultant or his representative to verify the ' adequacy of the removals. The project geotechnical consultant or his representative should be present to observe grading ' operations and to check that minimum compaction requirements and proper lift thicknesses are being met,as well as to verify compliance with the other recommendations presented herein. ' Post Grading Considerations Slope Landscaping and Maintenance Adequate slope and building pad drainage is essential for the long term performance of the subject site. The gross stability of graded slopes should not be adversely affected, provided all drainage provisions are properly constructed and maintained. Engineered slopes should be landscaped with deep rooted, drought tolerant maintenance free plant species, as recommended by the project landscape architect. ' Site Drainage Control of site drainage is important for the performance of the proposed project. Roof gutters are recommended for the proposed structures. Pad and roof drainage should be collected and transferred to driveways, adjacent streets, storm-drain facilities, or other locations approved by the building official in non-erosive drainage devices. Drainage should not be allowed to pond on the pad or against any foundation or retaining wall. Drainage should not be allowed to Flow EARTH-STRATA, INC. 10 August 112010 1 uncontrolled over any descending slope. Planters located within retaining wall backfill should be ' sealed to prevent moisture intrusion into the backfill. Planters located next to structures should be sealed to the depth of the footings. Drainage control devices require periodic cleaning, testing and maintenance to remain effective. ' At a minimum, pad drainage should be designed at the minimum gradients required by the CBC. To divert water away from foundations, the ground surface adjacent to foundations should also be graded at the minimum gradients required per the CBC. ' Utility Trenches ' All utility trench backfill should be compacted at near optimum moisture to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM test method D 1557-00. For utility 1 trench backfill within pavement areas the upper 6 inches of subgrade materials should be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557-00. This includes within the street right-of-ways, utility easements; under footings, sidewalks, driveways ' and building floor slabs, as well as within or adjacent to any slopes. Backfill should be placed in approximately 6 to 8 inch maximum loose lifts and then' mechanically compacted with a hydro- hammer, rolling with a sheepsfoot, pneumatic tampers, or similar equipment. The utility trenches should be tested by the project geotechnical engineer or their representative to verify minimum ' compaction requirements are obtained. In order to minimize the penetration of moisture below building slabs, all utility trenches should ' be backfilled with compacted fill, lean concrete or concrete slurry where they undercut the perimeter foundation. Utility trenches that are proposed parallel to any building footings (interior and/or exterior trenches), should not be located within a 1:1 (h:v) plane projected downward ' from the outside bottom edge of the footing. ' SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS Ground Motions ' Structures are required to be designed and constructed to resist the effects of seismic ground motions as provided in the 2007 California Building Code Section 1613. The design is dependent on the site class, ' occupancy, category 1, 11, 111, or IV, mapped spectral accelerations for short periods (S:), and mapped spectral acceleration for a 1-second period (Si). In order for structural design to comply with the 2007 CBC, a computer program, Earthquake Ground Motion Parameters, Version 5.0.9, dated October 6, 2008, was used to compile.spectral accelerations for the subject property based on data and maps jointly compiled by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and the California Geological Survey (CGS). The data found in the following table is based on the Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) with 5% damped ground motions having a 2% probability of being exceeded in 50 years (2,475 year return period). The seismic design coefficients were determined by a combination of the site class, mapped spectral accelerations, and occupancy category. The following seismic design coefficients should be implemented EARTH-STRATA, INC. 11 August 112010 1 during design of the proposed structures. Summaries of the Seismic Hazard Deaggregation graphs and ' test data are presented in Appendix D. Site Location Latitude: 33.5040 Longitude: -117.0808 Site Class D Mapped Spectral Accelerations for short periods,Ss 1.50 Mapped Spectral Accelerations for 1-Second Period,S1 0.60 Site Coefficient,Fa 1.00 _ ' Site Coefficient,Fv 1.50 Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response 1.50 Acceleration for Short Periods,Sms ' Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response 0.90 Acceleration for 1-Second Period,Smi Design Spectral Response Acceleration for Short 1.00 Periods,SDs ' Design Spectral Response Acceleration for 1-Second 0.60 Period,SD1 Seismic Design Category D ' Importance Factor Based on Occupancy Category 11 ' We performed the probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for the site in accordance with the 2007 CBC, Section 1802.2.7. The probabilistic seismic hazard maps and data files were jointly prepared by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and the California Geological Survey (CGS) and can be found at 1 the CGS Probabilistic Seismic Hazards Mapping Ground Motion Page. Actual ground shaking intensities at the site may be substantially higher or lower based on complex variables such as the near source directivity effects, depth and consistency of earth materials, topography, geologic structure, direction of fault rupture,and seismic wave reflection,refraction, and attenuation rates. Secondary Seismic Hazards 1 Secondary effects of seismic shaking considered as potential hazards include several types of ground failure as well as induced flooding. Different types of ground failure, which could occur as a consequence ' of severe ground shaking at the site, include landslides, ground lurching, shallow ground rupture, and liquefaction/lateral spreading. The probability of occurrence of each type of ground failure depends on the severity of the earthquake, distance from faults, topography, the state of subsurface earth materials, groundwater conditions, and other factors. Based on our experience, subsurface exploration, and laboratory testing,all of the above secondary effects of seismic activity are considered unlikely. Seismically induced flooding is normally a consequence of a tsunami (seismic sea wave), a seiche (i.e., a wave-like oscillation of surface water in an enclosed basin that may be initiated by a strong earthquake) or failure of a major reservoir or retention system up gradient of the site. Since the site is at an elevation ' of more than 1,200 feet above mean sea level and is located more than 20 miles inland from the nearest coastline of the Pacific Ocean, the potential for seismically induced flooding due to a tsunamis is considered nonexistent. Since no enclosed bodies of water lie adjacent to or up gradient of the site, the likelihood for induced flooding due to a seiche overcoming the dams freeboard is considered nonexistent. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 12 August 112010 It is considered remote that any major reservoir or retention system up gradient of the site would be ' compromised to a point of failure. Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading Liquefaction occurs as a result of a substantial loss of shear strength or shearing resistance in loose, saturated, cohesionless earth materials subjected to earthquake induced ground shaking. Potential impacts from liquefaction include loss of bearing capacity, liquefaction related settlement, lateral movements, and surface manifestation such as sand boils. Seismically induced settlement occurs when loose sandy soils become denser when subjected to shaking during an earthquake. The three factors ' determining whether a site is likely to be subject to liquefaction include seismic shaking, type and consistency of earth materials, and groundwater level. The proposed structures will be supported by compacted fill and competent bedrock. 'As such, the potential for earthquake induced liquefaction and ' lateral spreading beneath the proposed structures is considered very low to remote due to the recommended compacted fill and shallow bedrock. Ground Lurching ' The physics of ground lurching are not well understood, but it,is generally thought to effect lightly loaded ' structures such as pavement, pipelines, and sidewalks. Heavier structures typically resist damage from ground lurching. Loose cohesionless earth materials near the surface are prone to ground lurching. Due to the recommendations herein and the lack of loose cohesionless earth materials near the surface, the potential for ground lurching is not expected to occur. ' Ground Subsidence Groundwater or oil withdrawal from sedimentary earth materials can cause the permanent collapse of pore space previously occupied by the fluid. The consolidation of subsurface sediments resulting from Fluid withdrawal could cause the ground surface to subside. If sufficient differential subsidence occurs it can significantly damage engineered structures. Since no excessive withdrawal of Fluids is planned in the vicinity of the proposed.project, the potential for subsidence is considered low to remote. ' TENTATIVE FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS General Provided grading is performed in accordance with the recommendations of this report, shallow foundations are considered feasible for support of the proposed structures. Tentative foundation recommendations are provided herein and graphic presentations of relevant recommendations may also be included on the enclosed map. Allowable Bearine Values An allowable bearing value of 2,000 pounds per square foot (pso is recommended for design of 24 inch square pad footings and 12 inch wide continuous footings founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. This value may be increased by 20 percent for each additional 1-foot of width and/or depth to a maximum value of 2,500 psf. Recommended allowable bearing values EARTH-STRATA, INC. 13 August 112010 1 ' include both dead and frequently applied live loads and may be increased by one third when designing ' for short duration wind or seismic forces. Settlement ' Based on the settlement characteristics of the earth materials that underlie the building sites and the anticipated loading, we estimate that the maximum total settlement of the footings will be less than ' approximately 3/4 inch. Differential settlement is expected to be about % inch over a horizontal distance of approximately 20 feet, for an angular distortion ratio of 1:480. It is anticipated that the majority of the settlement will occur during construction or shortly after the initial application of loading. ' The above settlement estimates are based on the assumption that the grading and construction are performed in accordance with the recommendations presented in this report and that the project geotechnical consultant will observe or test the earth material conditions in the footing excavations. Lateral Resistance ' Passive earth pressure of 250 psf per foot of depth to a maximum value of 2,500 psf may be used to establish lateral bearing resistance for footings. A coefficient of friction of 0.36 times the dead load forces may be used between concrete and the supporting earth materials to determine lateral sliding resistance. The above values may be increased by one-third when designing for short duration wind or seismic forces. When combining passive and friction for lateral resistance, the passive component should be reduced by one third. In no case shall the lateral sliding resistance exceed one-half the dead load for clay, sandy clay,sandy silty clay,silty clay, and clayey silt. The above lateral resistance values are based on footings for an entire structure being placed directly ' against either compacted fill or competent bedrock. Structural Setbacks and Buildinu Clearance Structural setbacks are required per the 2007 California Building Code (CBC). Additional structural setbacks are not required due to geologic or geotechnical conditions within the site. Improvements constructed in close proximity to natural or properly engineered and compacted slopes can, over time, be affected by natural processes including gravity forces, weathering, and long term secondary settlement. As a result, the CBC requires that buildings and structures be setback or footings deepened to resist the ' influence of these processes. For structures that are planned near ascending and descending slopes, the footings should be embedded ' to satisfy the requirements presented in the CBC, Section 1805.3.1 as illustrated in the following Foundation Clearances From Slopes diagram. 1 EARTH-STRATA, INC. 14 August 112010 FOUNDATION CLEARANCES FROM SLOPES 2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE Earth - Strata, Inc. BUILDING SETBACK DIMENSIONS �nr,o,a.�rr��nv.�rrvaan ne®o�srw�c 1 r.aa MWrt MTFII�ED O iRTYAR / ' mes ' When determining the required clearance from ascending slopes with a retaining wall at the toe, the height of the slope shall be measured from the top of the wall to the top of the slope. The structural setback for pools may be reduced by one-half. Foundation Observations In accordance with the 2007 CBC and prior to the placement of forms, concrete, or steel, all foundation excavations should be observed by the geologist, engineer, or his representative to verify that they have been excavated into competent bearing materials. The excavations should be per the approved plans, moistened, cleaned of all loose materials, trimmed neat, level, and square. Any moisture softened earth materials should be removed prior to steel or concrete placement. ' Earth materials from foundation excavations should not be placed in slab on grade areas unless the materials are tested for expansion potential and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density. 1 EAI[ TH-sirRATA, INC. 15 August 112010 Expansive Soil Considerations ' Preliminary laboratory test results indicate onsite earth materials exhibit an expansion potential of LOW as classified in accordance with 2007 CBC Section 1802.3.2 and ASTM D4829-03. Additional, testing for ' expansive soil conditions should be conducted upon completion of rough grading. The following recommendations should be considered the very minimum requirements, for the earth materials tested. It is common practice for the project architect or structural engineer to require additional slab thickness, ' footing sizes, and/or reinforcement. The preliminary design and construction recommendations herein are intended for the various levels of expansion potential anticipated at the completion of rough grading. Vert/Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 20 or Less) Our laboratory test results indicate that the earth materials onsite exhibit a VERY LOW expansion potential as classified in accordance with 2007 CBC Section 1802.3.2 and ASTM D4829-03. Since the onsite earth materials'exhibit expansion indices of 20 or less, the design of slab on ground foundations is exempt from the procedures outlined in Section 1805.8.1 or 1805.8.2. Footines • Exterior continuous footings may be founded at the minimum depths below the lowest ' adjacent final grade (i.e. 12 inch minimum depth for one-story, 18 inch minimum depth for two-story, and 24 inch minimum depth for three-story construction). Interior continuous footings for one-, two-, and three-story construction.may be founded at a minimum depth of 12 ' inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. All continuous footings should have a minimum width of 12, 15, and 18 inches, for one-, two-, and three-story structures, respectively per Table 1805.4.2 of the 2007 CBC, and should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No. 4 ' bars;one (1) top and one (1) bottom. • Exterior pad footings intended to support roof overhangs, such as second story decks, patio covers and similar construction should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade_. No special reinforcement of the pad footings will be required. BuildinE Floor Slabs • Building Floor slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and reinforced with a minimum of No. 3 bars spaced a maximum of 24 inches on center, each way. All Floor slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or bricks to ensure the desired placement at mid- depth. • Interior Floor slabs, within living or moisture sensitive areas, should be underlain by a ' minimum 10-mil thick moisture/vapor barrier to help reduce the upward migration of moisture from the.underlying earth materials. The moisture/vapor barrier used should meet the performance standards of an ASTM E 1745 Class A material, and be properly installed in ' . accordance with ACI publication 318-05. It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that the moisture/vapor barriers are free of openings, rips, or punctures prior to placing concrete. As an option for additional moisture reduction, higher strength concrete, such as a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 5,000 pounds per square inch (psi) may be used. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 16 August 112010 1 1 ' Ultimately, the design of the moisture/vapor barrier system and recommendations for ' concrete placement and curing are the purview of the foundation engineer, taking into consideration the project requirements provided by the architect and owner. • Garage Floor slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and should be reinforced in a similar manner as living area Floor slabs. Garage floor slabs should be placed separately from adjacent wall footings with a positive separation maintained with % inch minimum felt expansion joint materials and quartered with weakened plane joints. A 12 inch wide turn down founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across garage entrances. The turn down should be reinforced with a.minimum of two (2) No. 4 bars, one (1) top and one (1) bottom. • The subgrade earth materials below all Floor slabs should be pre-watered to promote uniform curing of the concrete and minimize the development of shrinkage cracks, prior to placing ' concrete. The pre-watering should be verified by Earth-Strata during construction. Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 21 to 50) ' Our laboratory test results indicate that the earth materials'onsite exhibit a LOW expansion potential as classified in accordance with 2007 CBC Section 1802.3.2 and ASTM D4829-03. Accordingly, the CBC ' specifies that slab on ground foundations (floor slabs) resting on earth materials with expansion indices greater than 20, require special design considerations in accordance with 2007 CBC Sections 1805.8.1 and 1805.8.2. The design procedures outlined in 2007 CBC Section 1805.8 are based on the thickness ' and plasticity index of the various earth materials within the upper15 feet of the proposed structure. For preliminary design purposes,we have assumed an effective plasticity index of 12. Footings • Exterior continuous footings may be founded at the minimum depths below the lowest adjacent final grade (i.e. 12 inch minimum depth for one-story, 18 inch minimum depth for two-story, and 24 inch minimum depth for three-story construction). Interior continuous footings for one-, two-,and three-story construction may be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. All continuous footings should have a minimum ' width of 12, 15, and 18 inches, for one-, two-, and three-story structures, respectively, and should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No. 4 bars,one (1) top and one (1) bottom. ' • Exterior pad footings intended to support roof overhangs, such as second story decks, patio covers and similar construction should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. The pad footings should be ' reinforced with a minimum of No. 4 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on center, each way, and should be placed near the bottom-third of the footings. Buildine Floor Slabs • The project architect or structural engineer should evaluate minimum floor slab thickness and ' reinforcement in accordance with 2007 CBC Sections 1805.8.1 and1805.8.2 based on an assumed effective plasticity index of 12. Building floor slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and reinforced with a minimum of No. 3 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on center, each way. All floor slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or bricks to EARTH-STRATA, INC. 17 August 112010 1 ' ensure the desired placement at mid-depth. ' • Interior Floor slabs, within living or moisture sensitive areas, should be underlain by a minimum 10-mil thick moisture/vapor barrier to help reduce the upward migration of ' moisture from the underlying earth materials. The moisture/vapor barrier used should meet the performance standards of an ASTM E 1745 Class A material, and be properly installed in accordance with ACI publication 318-05. It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure ' that the moisture/vapor barriers are free of openings, rips, or punctures prior to placing concrete. As an option for additional moisture reduction, higher strength concrete, such as a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 5,000 pounds per square inch (psi) may be used. Ultimately, the design of the moisture/vapor barrier system and recommendations for concrete placement and curing are the purview of the foundation engineer, taking into consideration the project requirements provided by the architect and owner. ' • Garage Floor slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and should.be reinforced in a similar manner as living area Floor slabs. Garage floor slabs should be placed separately from adjacent wall footings with a positive separation maintained with % inch minimum felt expansion joint ' materials and quartered with weakened plane joints. A 12 inch wide turn down.founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across garage entrances. The turn down ' should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No.4 bars, one (1) top and one (1) bottom. • The.subgrade earth materials below all Floor slabs should be pre-watered to achieve a ' moisture content that is at least equal or slightly greater than optimum moisture content, prior to placing concrete. This moisture content should penetrate a minimum depth of 12 inches into the subgrade earth materials. The pre-watering should be verified by Earth-Strata during ' construction. Post Tensioned Slab/Foundation Design Recommendations In lieu of the proceeding foundation recommendations, post tensioned slabs may be used to support the proposed structures. We recommend.that the foundation engineer design the foundation system using the Preliminary Post Tensioned Foundation Slab Design table below. These parameters have been provided in general accordance with Post Tensioned Design. Alternate designs addressing the effects of expansive earth materials are allowed per 2007 CBC Section 1805.8.2. When utilizing these parameters, the foundation engineer should design the foundation system in accordance with the allowable deflection ' criteria of applicable codes and per the requirements of the structural engineer/architect. It should be noted that the post tensioned design methodology is partially based on the assumption that soil moisture changes around and underneath post tensioned slabs, are influenced only by climate conditions. Soil moisture change below slabs is the major factor in foundation damages relating to expansive soil. However, the design methodology has no consideration for presaturation, owner ' irrigation, or other non-climate related influences on the moisture content of subgrade earth materials. In recognition of these factors, we modified the geotechnical parameters determined from this methodology to account for reasonable irrigation practices and proper homeowner maintenance. Additionally, we recommend that prior to excavating footings, slab subgrades be presoaked to a depth of 12 inches and maintained at above optimum moisture until placing concrete. Furthermore, we recommend that the moisture content of the earth materials around the immediate perimeter and below 1 EARTH-STRATA, INC. 18 August 112010 1 the slab be presaturated to at least 1% above optimum moisture content just prior to placing concrete. ' The pre-watering should be verified and tested by Earth-Strata during construction. The following geotechnical parameters assume that areas adjacent to the foundations, which are planted and irrigated, will be designed with proper drainage to prevent water from ponding. Water ponding near the foundation causes significant moisture change below the foundation. Our recommendations do not account for excessive irrigation and/or incorrect landscape design. Planters placed adjacent to the ' foundation, should be designed with an effective drainage system or liners, to prevent moisture infiltration below the foundation. Some lifting of the perimeter foundation beam should be expected even with properly constructed planters. Based on our experience monitoring sites with similar earth ' materials, elevated moisture contents below the foundation perimeter due to incorrect landscaping irrigation or maintenance, can result in uplift at the perimeter foundation relative to the central portion of the slab. Future owners should be informed and educated of the importance in maintaining a consistent level of moisture within the earth materials around the structures. Future owners should also be informed of the ' potential negative consequences of either excessive watering, or allowing expansive earth materials to become too dry. Earth materials will shrink as they dry, followed by swelling during the rainy winter season, or when irrigation is resumed. This will cause distress to site improvements and structures. ' Preliminary Post Tensioned Foundation Slab Design PARAMETER Expansion Index Very Low' Low' Percent Finer than 0.002 mm in the <20 percent(assumed) <20 percent(assumed) Fraction Passing the No.200 Sieve ' Type of Clay Mineral Montmorillonite assumed Montmorillonite assumed Thornthwaite Moisture Index -20 -20 Depth to Constant Soil Suction 7 feet 7 feet Constant Soil Suction P.F.3.6 P.F.3.6 Moisture Velocity 0.7 inches month 0.7 inches month Center Lift Edge moisture 5.5 feet 5.5 feet variation distance,em 1.5 inches 2.0 inches Center lift,y. Edge Lift Edge moisture 2.5 feet 3.0 feet variation distance,em 0.4 inches 0.8 inches Edge lift,y. ' Soluble Sulfate Content for Design of Concrete Mixtures in Contact with Earth 'Negligible 'Negligible Materials ' Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k (assuming presaturation as indicated 200 pci 200 pci below Minimum Perimeter Foundation 12 18 ' Embedment Under Slab Moisture/Vapor Barrier and 10-mil thick moisture/vapor barrier meeting the requirements of a ASTM E 1745 Sand Layer Class A material ' 1. Assumed for design purposes or obtained by laboratory testing. 2. Recommendations for foundation reinforcement are ultimately the purview of the foundation/structural engineer based upon the geotechnical criteria presented in this report,and structural engineering considerations. LAik m-gir]KA­IrA, ]INC. 19 August 112010 1 ' Corrosivity ' Corrosion is defined by the National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) as "a deterioration of a substance or its properties because of a reaction with its environment." From a geotechnical viewpoint, the "substances" are the reinforced concrete foundations or buried metallic elements (not surrounded by concrete) and the "environment" is the prevailing earth materials in contact with them. Many factors can contribute to corrosivity, including the presence of chlorides, sulfates, salts, organic materials, different ' oxygen levels, poor drainage, different soil types, and moisture content. It is not considered practical or realistic to test for all of the factors which may contribute to corrosivity. ' The potential for concrete exposure to chlorides is based upon the recognized Caltrans reference standard 'Bridge Design Specifications", under Subsection 8.22.1 of that document, Caltrans has determined that "Corrosive water or soil contains more than 500 parts per million (ppm) of chlorides". ' Based on limited preliminary laboratory testing, the onsite earth materials have chloride contents more than 500 ppm. As such, specific requirements resulting from elevated chloride contents are required. Therefore, structural concrete in contact with onsite earth materials should utilize a minimum water to cement ratio of 0.4 and a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 5,000 psi. ' Specific guidelines for concrete mix design are provided in 2007 CBC Section 1904.3 and ACI 318, Section 4.3 Table 4.3.1 when the soluble sulfate content of earth materials exceeds 0.1 percent by weight. Based ' on limited preliminary laboratory testing, the onsite earth materials are classified in accordance with Table 4.3.1 as having a negligible sulfate exposure condition. Therefore, structural concrete'in contact with onsite earth materials should utilize Type I or 11. ' Based on our laboratory testing of resistivity, the onsite earth materials in contact with buried steel should be considered mildly corrosive. Additionally, pH values below 9.7 are recognized as being ' corrosive to most common metallic components including, copper, steel, iron, and aluminum. The pH values for the earth materials tested were lower than 9.7. Therefore, any steel or metallic'materials that are exposed to the earth materials should be encased in concrete or other measures should be taken to ' provide corrosion protection. If building slabs are to be post tensioned, the post tensioning cables should be encased in concrete and/or ' encapsulated in accordance with the Post Tensioning Institute Guide Specifications. Post tensioning cable end plate anchors and nuts also need to be protected if exposed. If the anchor plates and nuts are in a recess in the edge of the concrete slab, the recess should be filled in with a non-shrink, non-porous, ' moisture-insensitive epoxy grout so that the anchorage assembly and the end of the cable are completely encased and isolated from the soil. A standard non-shrink, non-metallic cementitious grout may be used only when the post tension anchoring assembly is polyethylene encapsulated similar to that offered by ' Hayes Industries, LTD or O'Strand, Inc. The preliminary test results for corrosivity are based on limited samples, and the initiation of grading may blend various earth materials together. This blending or imported material could alter and increase the detrimental properties of the onsite earth materials. Accordingly, additional testing for chlorides and sulfates along with testing for pH and resistivity should be performed upon completion of grading. ' Laboratory test results are presented in Appendix C. 1 EARTH-STRATA, INC. 20 August 112010 ' RETAINING WALLS ' Active and At-Rest Earth Pressures Foundations may be designed in accordance with the recommendations provided in the Tentative Foundation Design Recommendation section of this report. The following table provides the minimum recommended equivalent fluid pressures for design of retaining walls a maximum of 12 feet high. The ' active earth pressure should be used for design of unrestrained retaining walls, which are free to tilt slightly. The at-rest earth pressure should be used for design of retaining walls that are restrained at the top,such as basement walls, curved walls with no joints, or walls restrained at corners. For curved walls, ' active pressure may be used if tilting is acceptable and construction joints are provided at each angle point and at a minimum of 15 foot intervals along the curved segments. PRE 3 YP STATIC EQUIVALENT PLUI'D PIIESSURES ION ' Active Earth Pressure 40 63 A -Rest Earth Pressure 60 95 ' The retaining wall parameters provided do not account for hydrostatic pressure behind the retaining ' walls. Therefore,the subdrain system is a very important part of the design. All retaining walls should be designed to resist surcharge loads imposed by other nearby walls,structures,or vehicles should be added to the above earth pressures, if the additional loads are being applied within a 1:1 plane projected up ' from the heel of the retaining wall footing. As a way of minimizing surcharge loads and the settlement potential of nearby buildings,the footings for the building can be deepened below the 1:1 plane projected up from the heel of the retaining wall footing. ' In general, properly constructed retaining walls without excessive pore water pressure perform well during earthquakes. Retaining walls less than 12 feet high are not required to be designed for ' earthquake loads for critical structures per Section 1806A of the 2007 CBC. As a result, it is our opinion that proposed retaining walls under 12 feet high, that do not provide support for habitable structures do not need to be designed for earthquake motions. ' Upon request and under a separate scope of work, more detailed analyses can be performed to address equivalent fluid pressures with regard to stepped retaining walls, actual retaining wall heights, actual backfill inclinations, specific backfill materials, higher retaining walls requiring earthquake design ' motions, etc. Subdrain System We recommend a perforated pipe and gravel subdrain system be provided behind all proposed retaining walls to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the proposed retaining walls. The perforated ' pipe should consist of 4 inch minimum diameter Schedule 40 PVC or ABS SDR-35, placed with the perforations facing down. The pipe should be surrounded by 1 cubic foot per foot of 3/4- or 1% inch open graded gravel wrapped in filter fabric. The filter fabric should consist of Mirafi 140N or equivalent to ' prevent infiltration of fines and subsequent clogging of the subdrain system. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 21 August 112010 1 ' In lieu of a perforated pipe and gravel subdrain system, weep holes or open vertical masonry joints may ' be provided in the lowest row of block exposed to the air to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the proposed retaining walls. Weep holes should be a minimum of 3 inches in diameter and provided at intervals of at least every 6 feet along the wall. Open vertical masonry joints should be ' provided at a minimum of 32 inch intervals. A continuous gravel fill, a minimum of 1 cubic foot per foot, should be placed behind the weep holes or open masonry joints. The gravel should be wrapped in filter fabric consisting of Mirafi 140N or equivalent. ' The retaining walls should be adequately coated on the backfilled side of the walls with a proven waterproofing compound by an experienced professional to inhibit infiltration of moisture through the walls. ' Temporary Excavations ' All excavations should be made in accordance with 'Cal-OSHA requirements. Earth-Strata is not responsible for job site safety. Retaining Wall Backfill Retaining wall backfill materials should be approved by the geotechnical engineer or his representative ' prior to placement as compacted fill. Retaining wall backfill should be placed in lifts no greater than 6 to 8 inches,watered or air dried as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture contents. All retaining wall backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ' ASTM D 1557. Retaining wall backfill should be capped with a paved surface drain. ' CONCRETE FLATWORK Thickness'and-IointSpacing Concrete sidewalks and patio type slabs should be at least 31h inches thick and provided with construction or expansion joints every 6 feet or less, to reduce the.potential for excessive cracking. ' Concrete driveway slabs should be at least 4 inches'thick and provided with construction or expansion joints every 10 feet or less. ' Subgrade Preparation In order to reduce the potential for unsightly cracking, subgrade earth materials underlying concrete flatwork.should be compacted at near optimum moisture to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM test method D 1557-00 and then moistened to at least optimum or slightly above optimum moisture content. This moisture should extend to a depth of at least 12 inches below subgrade and be maintained prior to placement of concrete. Pre-watering of the earth materials prior to placing concrete will promote uniform curing of the concrete and minimize the development of shrinkage cracks. The project geotechnical engineer or his representative should verify the density and ' moisture content of the earth materials and the depth of moisture penetration prior to placing concrete. Cracking within concrete Flatwork is often a result of factors such as the use of too high a water to cement ' ratio and/or inadequate steps taken to prevent moisture loss during the curing of the concrete. Concrete EARTH-STRATA, INC. 22 August 112010 ' distress can be reduced by proper concrete mix design and proper placement and curing of the concrete. ' Minor cracking within concrete flatwork is normal and should be expected. ' GRADING PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of VENTURA ENGINEERING, LLC and their authorized representative. It likely does not contain sufficient information for other parties or other uses. Earth-Strata should be engaged to review the final design plans and specifications prior to construction. This is to verify that the recommendations contained in this report have been properly ' incorporated into the project plans and specifications. Should Earth-Strata not be accorded the opportunity to review the project plans and specifications, we are not responsibility for misinterpretation of our recommendations. We recommend that Earth-Strata be retained to provide geologic and geotechnical engineering services during grading and foundation excavation phases of the work. In order to allow fordesign changes in the ' event that the subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to construction. Earth-Strata should review any changes in the project and modify and approve in writing the conclusions ' and.recommendations of this report. This report and the drawings contained within are intended for design input purposes only and are not intended to act as construction drawings or specifications. In the event that conditions encountered during grading or construction operations appear to be different than those indicated in this report, this office should be notified immediately, as revisions may be required. 1 REPORT LIMITATIONS Our services were performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable soils engineers and geologists, practicing at the time and location this report was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice included in this report. ' Earth materials vary in type, strength, and other geotechnical properties between points of observation and exploration. Groundwater and moisture conditions can also vary due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. As a result, we do not and cannot have complete knowledge of the subsurface conditions beneath the subject property. No practical study can completely eliminate uncertainty with regard to the anticipated geotechnical conditions in connection with a subject property. The conclusions and recommendations within this report are based upon the findings at the points of ' observation and are subject to confirmation by Earth-Strata based on the conditions revealed during grading and construction. ' This report was prepared with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner or their representative, to ensure that the conclusions and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the other project consultants and are incorporated into the plans and specifications. The ' owners' contractor should properly implement the conclusions and recommendations during grading and construction, and notify the owner if they consider any of the recommendations presented herein to be unsafe or unsuitable. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 23 August 112010 1 1 1 APPENDIX A REFERENCES 1 ' APPENDIX A ' References ' California Building Standards Commission,2007,2007California Building Code, California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 2, Volume 2 of2, Based on 2006 International Building Code. ' DeLorme, 2004, (www.delorme.com) Topo USA®. Hart, Earl W. and Bryant, William A., 1997, Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, CDMG Special ' Publication 42, revised 2003. Jenkins, Olaf P., 1978, Geologic Map of California,Santa Ana Sheet, CDMG,Scale 1:250,000. ' Kennedy, M.P., 1977, Regency and Character of Faulting Along the Elsinore Fault Zone in Southern Riverside County, California, California Division of Mines and Geology Special Report 131. Morton, D.M., Hauser, Rachel M., and Ruppert, Kelly R., 2004, Preliminary Digital Geologic Map of the Santa Ana 30'x 60' Quadrangle, Southern California, Version 2.0: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 99-0172. National Association of Corrosion Engineers, 1984, Corrosion Basics An Introduction, page 191. ' Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC), 1999, Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction Hazards in California, March. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 APPENDIX B ' EXPLORATORY LOGS 1 ' Earth - Strata, Inc. o.arMaMnt.lei arw...Yll.a.a.W WI..w Ma�M. .. SYMBOLSAND TERMS USED ON LOGS eeye tar.M'.er MMaerH s'MT etMMpaza ' The No. 200 Standard Sieve is about the smallest particle visible to the naked eye. Clean Gravels GW Well-graded gravels,little or no fines ' (less than 5%fines) GP Poorly—graded gravels,little or nofinse; Symbols Gw-GM Well-graded ravel with silt GRAVELS GW-GC Well-graded ravel with clay f Ring Sample Higher percentagege 5-12%floes N y coarse fraction is larger GP-GM Poorl- radetl gravel with sift SPT Sample m than 44 sieve Glfi[ Pao raded gravel with day N R No Recovery v m Gravels PI<a GM sit Gravels C m g fvoes PI>7 Gc Clayey Gravels Q Groundwater « ^r Clean Sands Sw Well-graded sands,little or no fines dr m c (less than 5%fires) IPwrly-gradetl sands,little or no floes ' @ c Sw-561 Well-graded sand with silt INI Well-graded sand with clay A Higher percentage of 5-12%fines 54,50A Poorly-graded sand with silt coarse fraction Is smaller than M4 sieve V-X Poorly-graded sand with clay ' Sands PI<4 Sr4 Silty Sands with PI>7 SC Clayey Sands fines PI 4-7 6ca1A Silty clayey sands PI<4 MI. Inorganic sifts&san sibs SILTS&CLAYS PI>7 C Inorganic clays of low to medium plartkiry,gravelly, m Liquid Limit Less Than 50 clays,sandy clays,lean clays y « m a IN 4-7 MI.Q tlth&clays of low plasticity,sandy silly clry,siky, ay mE « a MIN Inorganic silts,micaceous or diatomaceous silt, m O = N SILTS&CLAYS sandy Silt 'o Liquid Limit CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity,fat clays,sandy us.A E Greater Than 50 clays, ravel) clays call Organic silts and clays of medium-to-high plasticity ' Highly Organic Soils Py Peas,humus swamp soils with higher organic content Grain Size ' Description Sieve Sue Grain Sue Approximate Sue goulders >12' >32' Larger than basketball-sized MOIStUFE Cobbles 3-12` 3-12' Fin-sized to basketball-sired Content Coarse %-3" %-3" Thumb-sized to fist-sized Gravel Fine 114-31" 0.19-0.75" Pea-sued to thumb-sued Slightly Moist ' Coarse MIG-MI 0.079.0.19" Rock sale-sized topea-sized Moist Sand Medium 1140-0110 0.017-0.079' Sugar-sized to rock sale-sued Very Moist Fine #200440 0.0029.0.01-r Flour-sized to sugar-sized Wat Fines Passin M20D <0.0029" Fkwr-sized and Smaller ' Consistency—Fine Grained Soils Modified CA Apparent SIFTsampler Field Test Density (ll Mows/foot) (a blows cot) VVY soft <1 <2 Easily penetrated by thumb;exudes between thumb and fingers when squeezed in hand Soft 2.3 3-6 Easily penetrated one Inch by thumb;molded by light finger pressure Medium 4-6 7-11 Penetrated over%inch thumb with moderate effort;molded Still by try Strong finger pressure sli f 7-10 13-15 Indented about%inch by thumb but Worsted only will great effort Very Stiff I1-20 16-30 Readily indented thumbnail Hard >20 >30 Indented with difficulty by thumbnail ' Relative Density—Coarse Grained Soils Modified CA Apparent SPT Sampler Field Test Density Ill bhnvs/loot) (M blows/foot) ' Very Loose <2 4 Easily penetrated with%inch reinforcing rod pushed by hand Lowe 3.5 4.10 Easily penetrated with Y,inch reinforcing rod pushed by hand Medium Dense 6-25 11.30 Easily penetrated 1-foot with%inch reinforcing rod driven with a 5-lb hammer Dense 16-25 31-50 Difficult to penetrate 1-foot with%inch reinforcing rod driven with a 5-Ib hammer ' Very Dense >25 >50 Penetrated only a few inches with Inch reinforcing rod driven with a 5-I1,hammer JUNE 2007, Auto 1 ' Geotechnical Hand Auger Log HA -1 Date:August 3,2010 Project Name:Detached Garage Page: 1 of 1 ' Project Number: 10792-10A Logged By:CW Drilling Company:NA Type of Rig: Hand Auger Drive Weight(Ibs): NA Drop(in): NA Hole Diameter(in): 3 ' Top of Hole Elevation(ft): 1,249 Hole Location:See Geotechnical Map Gl W u n c ' o > 0 o z v n v ° v Z> ° N y O E < MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 Quaternary Colluvium(Qcol): SC Clayey Sand; moderate yellowish brown, slightly moist, loose Quaternary Pauba Formation f0os): Sandy CLAYSTONE; dark yellowish brown, moist,soft to moderately hard Practical Refusal @ 2.5 feet 5 No Groundwater ' 10 ' 15 ' 20 ' 25 L' 30 ' 26047 JEFFERSON AVENUE,SUITE C, MURRIETA, CA 92562 Earth- Strata, Inc. eenw Reese.ins�Rr.�nssn 1 ' Geotechnical Hand Auger Log HA -2 Date:August 3,2010 Project Name:Detached Garage Page: 1 of t ' Project Number: 10792-10A Logged By:CW Drilling Company:NA Type of Rig: Hand Auger Drive Weight(lbs): NA Drop (in): NA Hole Diameter(in): 3 ' Top of Hole Elevation (it): 1,246 Hole Location:See Geotechnical Map N Ol u i 0 o z C s U 0 0/ w ' � V u o E o 0 m M - Q MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 Quaternary Coiluvium(QCOI): SC Clayey Sand; light brown, slightly moist, loose ' Quaternary Pouba Formation(Qas): Sandy CLAYSTONE, dark yellowish brown, moist, soft to moderately hard Practical Refusal @ 2.5 feet 5 No Groundwater 1 10 ' 15 ' 20 1 25 1 30 ' E26047 JEFFERSON AVENUE, SUITE C, MURRIETA, CA 92562 Earth- Strata, Inc. 1 M M = M = = M = M M Name: DETACHED GARAGE Pro'ect No.: 10792-10A Equipment:N/A I Logged by:CW 8-3-2010 Depth(f,) Sample No. Moisture(%) Dry Density Classification Graphic Log:North Wall Scale: V = 5' Orientation: EW Elevation(feet):1268 (Pcf) 0-2 BAG I @ 0-2 5c A - Topsoil: Clayey SAND: reddish brown, slightly moist, loose to medium dense 2-4 B Quaternary Pauba Formation (Qps): Silty SANDSTONE: moderate yellowish brown,slightly moist, moderately hard to hard Total Depth(feet): 4 No Groundwater PRACTICAL REFUSAL @ 4' EXISTING CUT SLOPE I B HAND AU ER PRACTICAL REFUSAL @ 4' Earth - Strata, Inc. Test Pit 1 o�wew.w.ea,.u...�.i.r.rnr.rwsca�rr 1 1 1 1 ' APPENDIX C ' LABORATORY PROCEDURES AND TEST RESULTS 1 ' APPENDIX C Laboratory Procedures and Test Results ' Laboratory testing provided quantitative and qualitative data involving the relevant engineering properties of the representative earth materials selected for testing. The representative samples were tested in general accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials(ASTM)procedures and/or California Test Methods(CTM). ' Soil Classification: Earth materials encountered during exploration were classified and logged in general accordance with the Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual ' Procedure) of ASTM D 2488. Upon completion of laboratory testing, exploratory logs and sample descriptions were reconciled to reflect laboratory test results with regard to ASTM D 2487. Maximum Density Tests: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of representative samples were determined using the guidelines of ASTM D 1557. The test results are presented in the table below. ' SAMPLE MATERIAL. MAXIMUM DRY OPTIMUM MOISTURE LOCATION DESCRIPTION DENSITY(pcf) CONTENT(%) tTP-1 @ 0-2 feet Clayey Sand 129.5 7.5 Expansion Index: The expansion potential of representative samples was evaluated using the guidelines of ASTM D 4829. The test results are presented in the table below. ' SAMPLE MATERIAL. EXPANSION INDEX EXPANSIO . OTENTJAL. LOCATION DESCRIPTION TP-1 @ 0-2 feet Clayey Sand 36 LOW t Minimum Resistivity and 11H Tests: Minimum resistivity and pH Tests of select samples were performed using the guidelines of CTM 643. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPLE MATERIAL pH MINIMUM RESISTIVITY LOCATION DESCRIPTION (ohm-cm) TP-1 @ 0-2 feet Clayey Sand 6.7 3,100 ' Soluble Sulfate: The soluble sulfate content of select samples was determined using the guidelines of CTM 417. The test results are presented in the table below. ' SAMPLE MATERIAL SULFATE CONTENT LOCATION DESCRIPTION (%by weight) SULFATE EXPOSURE TP-1 @ 0-2 feet Clayey Sand 0.049 Negligible 1 ' Chloride Content: Chloride content of select samples was determined using the guidelines of CTM 422. The test results are presented in the table below. ' SAMPLE LOCATION MATERIAL DESCRIPTION CHLORIDE CONTENT (ppm) TP-1 @ 0-2 feet Clayey Sand 530 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 APPENDIX D SEISMICITY 107922- 10A Geographic Deagg. Seismic Hazard 7.1 for 0-00-s Spectral Accel. 0.80% g 8.9 PGA Excecdance Rcturn Time: 2475 vears B.7 Max. significant source distance 15. km. 8.5 M Red lines trpirsent Quatrmaty fault locations 8.3 Gridded-source hazard accum in 45'intervals Rock site. Average Vs=760 rots top 30 m 8.1 5.9 ti C, A � G km <. E33010 aaa310 ISM---5 S1UC"M:-1170BD 113N&04 l dsM W,am wl EicdPar W--E-BrmlumhwgMRop to E.Pale Redd a s:hlsIvical YhgAk",F" Prob. Seismic Hazard Deaggregation c 10792-10A 117.08(° W, 33.504 N. Peak Horiz. Ground Accelx0.8090 g Mean Return Time 2475 Years Mean i R,M,Ep) 6.' km, 6.63, 1.32 s Modal iR,M,Eo)= 5.9 km, 6.64. 1_2 1 (from peak R,M bin) Modal iR,M,E*)= 5.9 km,6.64. 1 to '_ sigma (from peak R,M,E bin) Binning: DeltaR 10. km,deltaM=0', DeltaE=1.0 0 � �J 6� Prob. SA, PGAC�- <median I RAI :modianaS Zo< 0<£O<0.5�Q�S ^� -2«O <-1 0.5<EO< 1 Q \ram -1 <epc-0.5 1 <�< 1.5 --<%<3 � J is -0.5<£O <0 1.5 <EO<—' 2003 update USGS PSHAQ� ac' mix 10 =ug 1013 S6_S N%Ub a,Alr CJIUO -Td I ap'JIM,EDE idaaggnxpfbnt aJUMWOCKayv 7#' MSM30MUSGSC,3-f PSHA37T.3 UP DATE en%Wnna03acanVh mrnae ' Pagel of 3 ... Deaggregation of Seismic Hazard for PGA 6 2 Periods of Spectral Accel. ••• ' •'• Data from U.S.G.S. National Seismic Hazards Mapping Project, 2002 version '•• PSHA Deaggregation. %contributions. site: 10792-10A long: 117.080 w., lat: 33.504 N. USGS 2002-03 update files and programs. dM-0.2. Site descr:ROCK Return period: 2475 yrs. Exceedance PGA -0.8090 g. %Pr(at least one eq with median motion>-PGA in 50 yrsl=0.00000 DIST(KM) MAG(WI) ALL_EPS EPSILON>2 1<EPS<2 0<EPS<l -1<EPS<0 -2<EPS<-1 EPS<-2 5.7 5.05 0.709 0.656 0.054 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.7 5.20 1.414 1.115 0.299 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.8 5.40 1.424 0.924 0.500 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ' 12.0 5.41 0.090 0.090 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.9 5.60 1.438 0.757 0.681 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 12.3 5.61 0.148 0.148 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.9 5.80 1.434 0.596 0.838 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ' 12.6 5.80 0.212 0.212 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.8 6.01 1.803 0.589 1.191 0.023 0.000 0.000 0.000 12.8 6.01 0.301 0.3D1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.3 6.20 2.479 0.595 1.695 0.189 0.000 0.000 0.000 ' 12.6 6.20 0.460 0.455 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.1 6.40 2.662 0.499 1.747 0.416 0.000 0.000 0.000 12.3 6.39 0.587 0.521 0.066 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.9 6.64 42.565 9.928 32.189 0.448 0.000 0.000 0.000 12.3 6.60 0.542 0.470 0.072 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 �- 5.9 6.86 35.248 10.861 24.008 0.380 0.000 0.000 0.000 12.8 6.79 0.558 0.495 0.062 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.8 7.07 4.119 0.954 2.'924 0.241 0.000 0'.000 0.000 14.7 6.94 0.631 0.607 0.024 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ' 15.5 7.14 0.876 0.876 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 15.5 7.34 0.248 0.246 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Summary statistics for above PSHA PGA Deaggregation, R=distance, e-epsilon: Mean src-site R- 6.2 km; M= 6.63; eps0- 1.32. Mean calculated for all sources. Modal src-site R= 5.9 km; M- 6.64; eps0- 1.21 from peak (R,M) bin Gridded source distance metrics: Rseis Rrup and Rjb MODE R•- 5.9km; M•- 6.64; EPS.INTERVAL: 1 to 2 sigma % CONTRIB.- 32.189 ' Principal sources (faults, subduction, random seismicity having >10% contribution) Source Category: % contr. R(km) M epsilon0 (mean values) California SS faults 78.36 6.2 6.76 1 .29 California shallow gridded 21.64 6.4 6.13 1.45 Individual fault hazard details if contrib.>1%: Elsinore-18 1.68 15.5 7.10 2.57 Elsinore-17 76.67 6.0 6.76 1.26 .....•.............. Southern California ........................................ PSHA Deaggregation. %contributions. ROCK site: 10792-10A long: 117:080 d W., let: -33.504 N. ' USGS 2002-2003 update files and.programs. Analysis on DaMoYr:10/08/2010 Return period: 2475 yrs. 1.00 s. PSA =0.7296 g. 4Pr(at least one eq with median motion>=PSA in 50 yrs)=0.00000 DIST(km) MAG(Mw) ALL EPS EPSILON>2 1<EPS<2 0<EPS<l -1<EPS<0 -2<EPS<-1 EPS<-2 5.2 5.41 0.063 0.063 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.3 5.61 6.151 .0.151 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.4 5.81 0.284 0.263 0.021 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.1 6.02 0.556 0.425 0.132 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ' 12.7 6.02 0.099 0.099 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.6 6.21 1.090 0.567 0.523 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 12.8 6.21 0.256 0.256 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.2 6.40 1.631 0.502 1.129 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 12.7 6.40 0.448 0.44E 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ' 5.8 6.64 32.607 9.493 23.071 0.043 0.000 0.000 0.000 12.8 6.60 0.617 0.567 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 22.1 6.60 0.053 0.053 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.9 6.86 40.905 12.692 27.999 0.214 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.8 6.79 1.188 1.022 0.166 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 23.0 6.80 0.096 0.096 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.8 7.07 5.599 0.971 4.336 0.292 0.000 0.000 0.000 15.2 6.95 3.583 3.452 0.131 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ' http://cgint.cr.usgs.gov/eq-men/deaggint2002//10792-IOA_I9404_txt 8/10/2010 ' Page 2 of 3 26.7 6.93 0.144 0.144 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ' 30.5 6.95 0.121 0.121 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 15.5 7.14 6.051 .4.833 1.218 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 29.9 7.21 0.636 0.636 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 30.5 7. 14 0.171 0.171 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 15.5 7.32 2.222 1.153 1.069 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 29.9 7.39 0.426 0.426 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 60.6 7.78 0.347 0.347 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 60.6 8.07 0.261 0.261 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 60.6 8.21 0.270 0.270 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ' Summary statistics for above 1.03 PSA deaggregation, R=distance, e=epsilon: Mean src-site R- 8.0 km; M- 6.81; epsO- 1.4B. Mean calculated for all sources. Modal src-site R- 5.9 km; M- 6.86; epsO= 1.35 from peak (R,M) bin ' Gridded source distance,metrics: Rseis Rrup and Rjb MODE R•- 5.9km; M•- 6.87; EPS.INTERVAL: 1 to 2 sigma % CONTRIB.= 27.999 Principal sources (faults, subduction, random seismicity having >10% contribution) Source Category: % contr. R(km) M epsilonO (mean values) California SS faults - 88.58 6.2 6.85 1.40 California shallow gridded 11.41 6.6 6.53 1.54 Individual fault hazard details if contrib.>18: sj10 1.11 29.9 7.28 2.57, Elsinore-18 11.94 15.5 7.11 1.97 Elsinore-17 74.25 6.0 6.79 1.36 ................... Southern California ....................................... PSHA Deaggregation.•%contributions. ROCK site: 10792-10A long: 117.080 d N., tat: 33.504 N. USGS 2002-2003 update files and programs. Analysis on DaMoYr:30/08/2030 Return period: 2475 yra. 0.20 s. PSA -1.9837 g. IPr(at least one eq with median motion>=PSA in 50 yral-0.00000 DIST(km) MAG(Mw) ALL EPS EPSILON>2 1<EPS<2 O<EPS<i -1<EPS<O -2<EPS<-1 EPS<-2 5.7 5.05 0.700 0.682 0.019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.8 5.20 1.396 1.200 0.196 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.9 5.40 1.385 0.939 0.446 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 12.1 5.41 0.102 0.102 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.0 5.60 1.375 0.761 0.614 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ' 12.5 5.61 0.1'/6 0.176 0.000 0.000• 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.0 5.80 1.358 0.603 0.755 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 12.8 5.80 0.262 0.262 0.000 0.000, 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.8 6.01 1.694 0.603 1.006 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 ' 12.9 6.01 0.382 0.382 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.3 6.20 2.281 - 0.610 1.541 .0..130 0.000 0.000 0.000 12.7 6.20 0.583 0.567 0.016 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.1 6.40 2.423 0.513 1.565 0.344 0.000 0.000 0.000 12.4 6.40 0.728 0.618 0.111 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.9 6.64 44.459 12.664 31.442 0.353 0.000 0.000 0.000 12.4 6.60 0.686 0.567 0.119 0.000 - 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.9 6.85 25.022- 8.081 16.630 0.311 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.1 6.79 0.760 0.646 0.113 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.9 6.,98 11.221 1.942 8.881 0.398 0.000 0.000 0.000 14.9 6.94 1.064 1.022 0.042 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 15.5 7.17 1.813 1.813 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 15.5 7.45 0.052 0.052 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ' Summary statistics for above 0.2s PSA deaggregation, R=distance, a=epsilon: Mean src-site R- 6.4 km; M- 6.63; epsO- 1.35. Mean calculated for all sources. Modal arc-site R- 5.9 km; M- 6.64; epsO- 1.27 from peak (R,M) bin ' Gridded source distance metrics: Rseis Rrup and Rjb MODE R•- 5.9km; M*- 6.64; EPS.INTERVAL: 1 to 2 sigma % CONTRIB.- 31.442 Principal sources (faults, subduction, random seismicity having >10% contribution) Source Category: % contr. R(km) M epsilonO (mean values) ' California SS faults. 78.85 6.3 6.77 1.31 California shallow gridded 21.15 6.8 6.13 1.53 Individual fault hazard details if contrib.>1%: Elsinore-18 2.89 15.5 7.09 2.40 http://egint.cr.usgs.gov/eq-men/deaggint2002//I0792-1 OA_19404_txt 8/10/2010 Page 3 of 3 1 Elsinore-17 75.97 5.9 6.76 1.26 ' ................... Southern California ........................................ 1 1 1 1 1 f 1 1 • L 1 1 ' http://egint.cr.usgs.gov/eq-men/deaggint2002//10792-1OA_19404_.txt 8/10/2010 Project Name = 10792-1 OA - Date = Tue Aug 10 11?0 AO PDT 2010 Conterminous 48 States 2005.ASCE 7 Standard Latitude = 33.504 Longitude = 117.0808 Spectral Response Accelerations,Ss and S1 Ss and S1 = Mapped Spectral.Acceleration Values Site Class B - Fa = 1.6,Fv = 1.0 Data are based on a 0.00999999977.6482582 deg grid spacing Period Sa (sec) (g) 0.2 1.500 (Ss, Site Class B) 1.0 0.600 (S1, Site Class B) 1 1 1 1 1 APPENDIX E GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS 1 ' EARTH-STRATA General Earthwork and Grading Specifications General ' Intent These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are intended to be the minimum requirements for the grading and earthwork shown on the approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the geotechnical report(s). These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications should be considered a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report(s) and if they , are in' conflict with the geotechnical report(s), the specific recommendations in the geotechnical report shall supersede these more general specifications. Observations made during earthwork operations by the project Geotechnical Consultant may result in new or revised recommendations that may supersede these _specifications and/or the recommendations in the geotechnical report(s). The Geotechnical Consultant of Record: The Owner shall employ a qualified Geotechnical Consultant of Record (Geotechnical Consultant), prior to ' commencement of grading or construction. The Geotechnical Consultant shall be responsible for reviewing the approved geotechnical report(s) and accepting the adequacy of the preliminary geotechnical findings, conclusions, ' and recommendations prior to the commencement of the grading or construction. ' Prior to commencement of grading or construction, the Owner shall coordinate with the Geotechnical Consultant, and Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) to schedule sufficient personnel for the,appropriate level of observation,mapping,and compaction testing. During earthwork and grading operations, the Geotechnical Consultant shall ' observe, map, and document the subsurface conditions to confirm assumptions made during the geotechnical design phase of the project. Should the observed conditions differ significantly from the interpretive assumptions ' made during the.design phase, the Geotechnical Consultant shall recommend appropriate changes to accommodate the observed conditions, and notify the reviewing agency where required. ' The Geotechnical Consultant shall observe the moisture conditioning and processing of the excavations and fill materials. The Geotechnical Consultant ' should perform periodic relative density testing of fill materials to verify that the attained level of compaction is being accomplished as specified. 1 1 The Earthwork Contractor: The Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, experienced, and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparation and processing of earth materials to receive compacted fill, moisture- conditioning and processing of fill,and compacting fill. The Contractor shall be provided with the approved grading plans and geotechnical report(s) for his review and acceptance of responsibilities, prior to commencement of grading. ' The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing the grading in accordance with the approved grading plans and geotechnical report(s). Prior to commencement of grading, the Contractor shall prepare and submit to the Owner and the Geotechnical Consultant a work plan that indicates the sequence of earthwork grading, the number of "equipment" of work and the estimated quantities of daily earthwork contemplated for the site. The Contractor shall inform the Owner and the Geotechnical Consultant of work schedule changes and revisions to the work plan at least 24 hours in advance of such changes so that appropriate personnel will be available for observation ' and testing. No'assumptions shall be made by the Contractor with regard to whether the Geotechnical Consultant is aware of all grading operations. e It is the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the earthwork operations in accordance with the applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, these specifications, and the ' recommendations in the approved geotechnical report(s) and grading plan(s). At the sole discretion of the Geotechnical Consultant, any unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable earth materials, improper moisture ' conditioning, inadequate compaction, insufficient buttress keyway size, adverse weather conditions, etc., resulting in a quality of work less than required in the approved grading plans and geotechnical report(s), the Geotechnical Consultant shall reject the work and may recommend to the Owner that grading be stopped until conditions are corrected: ' Preparation of Areas for Compacted fill Clearing and Grubbing: Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots, and other ' deleterious material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed in a method acceptable to the Owner, Geotechnical Consultant, and governing agencies. ' The Geotechnical Consultant shall evaluate the extent of these removals on a site by site basis. Earth materials to be placed as compacted fill shall not ' contain more than 1 percent organic materials (by volume). No compacted fill lift shall contain more than 10 percent organic matter. ' Should potentially hazardous materials be encountered, the Contractor shall stop work in the affected area, and a hazardous materials specialist shall immediately be consulted to evaluate the potentially hazardous materials, prior to continuing to work in that area. 1 It is our understanding that the State of California defines most refined petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, grease, coolant, etc.) as ' hazardous waste. As such, indiscriminate dumping or spillage of these fluids may constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or imprisonment, and shall be prohibited. The contractor is responsible for all hazardous waste ' related to his operations. The Geotechnical Consultant does not have expertise in this area. If hazardous waste is a concern, then the Owner should contract the services of a qualified environmental assessor. ' Processing: Exposed earth materials that have been observed to be satisfactory for support of compacted fill by the Geotechnical Consultant shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Exposed earth materials that are not observed to be satisfactory shall be removed or alternative recommendations may be provided by the Geotechnical Consultant. Scarification shall continue until the exposed earth materials are broken down and free of oversize material and the working surface is reasonably uniform, Flat, and free of uneven features that would inhibit uniform compaction. The ' earth materials should be moistened or air dried to near optimum moisture content, prior to compaction. ' Overexcavation: The Cut Lot Typical Detail and Cut/Fill Transition Lot Typical Detail, included herein provides a graphic illustration that depicts typical overexcavation recommendations made in the approved geotechnical report(s) and/or grading plan(s). Keyways and Benching: Where fills are to be placed on slopes steeper than ' 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), the ground shall be thoroughly benched as compacted fill is placed. Please see the three a Keyway and Benching Typical Details with subtitles Cut Over Fill Slope, Fill Over Cut Slope, and Fill Slope for a graphic illustration. The lowest bench or smallest keyway shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide (or % the proposed slope height) and at least 2 feet into competent earth materials as advised by the Geotechnical Consultant. ' Typical benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet into competent earth materials or as recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. Fill placed on slopes steeper than 5:1 should be thoroughly benched or otherwise ' excavated to provide a fiat subgrade for the compacted fill. Evaluation/Acceptance of Bottom Excavations: All areas to receive ' compacted fill (bottom excavations), including removal excavations, processed areas, keyways, and benching, shall be observed, mapped, general elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by the Geotechnical ' Consultant as suitable to receive compacted fill. The Contractor shall obtain a written acceptance from the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placing compacted fill. A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for determining elevations of bottom excavations, processed areas, keyways, and 1 benching. The Geotechnical Consultant is not responsible for erroneously located, fills,subdrain systems, or excavations. ' Fill Materials General: Earth material to be used as compacted fill should to a large extent ' be free of organic matter and other deleterious substances as evaluated and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant. Oversize: Oversize material is rock that does not break down into smaller pieces and has a maximum diameter greater than 8 inches. Oversize rock shall not be included.within compacted fill unless specific methods and guidelines acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant are followed. For examples of methods and guidelines of oversize rock placement see the enclosed Oversize Rock Disposal Detail. The inclusion of oversize materials in the compacted fill shall only be acceptable if the:oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted fill or thoroughly jetted granular materials. No oversize material shall be placed within 10 vertical feet of finish grade or within 2 feet of ' proposed utilities or underground improvements. Impo : Should imported earth materials be required, the proposed import ' materials shall meet the requirements of the Geotechnical Consultant. Well graded, very low expansion potential earth materials free of organic matter and other deleterious substances are usually sought after as import materials. However, it is generally in the Owners best interest that potential import earth. materials are provided to the Geotechnical Consultant to determine their suitability for the intended purpose., At least 48 hours should be allotted for the appropriate laboratory testing to be performed, prior to starting the import operations. ' Fill Placement and Compaction Procedures Fill Layers: Fill materials shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in ' nearly horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. Thicker layers may be accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant, provided field density testing indicates that the grading procedures can adequately compact the ' thicker layers. Each layer of fill shall be spread evenly and thoroughly mixed to obtain uniformity within the earth materials and consistent moisture throughout the fill. Moisture Conditioning of Fill: Earth materials to be placed as compacted fill shall be watered, dried, blended, and/or mixed, as needed to obtain relatively ' uniform moisture contents that are at or slightly above optimum. The maximum density and optimum moisture content tests should be performed in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM test method D1557-00). 1 1 ' Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been moisture-conditioned, mixed, and evenly spread, it should be uniformly compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM test method D1557-00. Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for compaction of earth materials or be proven to consistently achieve the required level of compaction. Compaction of Fill Slopes: In addition to normal compaction procedures specified above, additional effort to obtain compaction on slopes is needed. This may be accomplished by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers as the'fill is being placed, by overbuilding the fill slopes, or by other methods producing results that are satisfactory to the Geotechnical Consultant. Upon completion of grading,relative compaction of the fill and the slope face shall be a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density per ASTM test method D1557- 00. Compaction Testing:of Fill: Field tests for moisture content and relative density,of the compacted fill earth materials shall be periodically performed by the Geotechnical Consultant The location-and frequency of tests shall be at the Geotechnical Consultant's discretion based on field observations. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be'random. The test locations may or may not be selected to verify minimum compaction requirements in areas that are typically prone to inadequate compaction,such as close to slope faces and near ' benching. Frequency of Compaction Testing: Compaction tests shall be taken at ' minimum intervals of every 2 vertical feet and/or. per 1,000 cubic yards of compacted materials placed. Additionally, as a guideline, at least one (1) test shail,be taken on slope faces for each 5,000,square feet of slope face and/or for ' each 10 vertical feet of slope. The Contractor shall assure that fill placement.is such that the testing schedule described herein can be accomplished by the Geotechnical Consultant The Contractor shall stop or slow down the earthwork operations to a safe level so that these minimum standards can be obtained. ' Compaction Test Locations: The approximate elevation and horizontal coordinates of each test location shall be documented by the Geotechnical 'Consultant. The Contractor shall coordinate with the Surveyor to assure that ' sufficient grade stakes are established. This will provide the Geotechnical Consultant with sufficient accuracy to determine the approximate test locations and elevations. The Geotechnical Consultant can not be responsible ' for staking erroneously located by the Surveyor or Contractor. A minimum of two grade stakes should be provided at a maximum horizontal distance of 100 feet and vertical difference of less than 5 feet. 1 - 1 ' Subdrain System Installation Subdrain systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved geotechnical report(s), the approved grading plan, and the typical details provided herein. The Geotechnical Consultant may recommend additional subdrain systems and/or changes to the subdrain systems described herein,with regard to the extent, location, ' grade, or material depending on conditions encountered during grading or other factors. All subdrain systems shall be surveyed by a licensed land surveyor (except for retaining wall subdrain systems) to verify line and grade after installation and ' prior to burial. Adequate time should be allowed by the Contractor to complete these surveys. ' Excavation All excavations and over-excavations for remedial purposes shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant ,during grading operations. Remedial removal depths indicated on the geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actuaI'rem oval depths and extent shall be determined by the. Geotechnical Consultant based on the field ' evaluation of exposed conditions during grading operations.' Where fill over cut slopes are planned, the cut portion of the slope shall be excavated, evaluated, and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement of the fill portion of the proposed slope, unless specifically addressed by the Geotechnical Consultant. Typical details for cut over fill slopes and fill,over cut slopes are provided herein. ' Trench Backfill 1) The Contractor shall follow all OHSA and Cal/OSHA requirements for trench ' excavation safety.. 2) Bedding and backfill of utility trenches shall be done in accordance with the applicable • provisions in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction. Bedding materials shall have a Sand Equivalency more than 30 (5E>30). The bedding shall be placed to 1 foot over the conduit and thoroughly jetting to provide densification. Backfill should be compacted to a ' minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry density, from 1 foot above the top of the conduit to the surface. 3) Jetting of the bedding materials around the conduits shall be observed by the ' Geotechnical Consultant 4) The Geotechnical Consultant shall test trench backfill for the minimum compaction requirements recommended herein. At least one test should be ' conducted for every 300 linear feet of trench and for each 2 vertical feet of backfill. 5) For trench backfill the lift thicknesses shall not exceed those allowed in the ' Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction, unless the Contractor can demonstrate to the Geotechnical Consultant that the fill lift can be compacted to the minimum relative compaction by his alternative equipment or method. 1 1 - �stra ter- - STABILIZATION FILL TYPICAL DETAIL Gem,hnlaal,Environmental and Maeenals Testing C. .11anM BETTER PEOPLE.BETTER SERVICE.BETTER RESULTS MIN.OF 5 FEET DEEP COMPACTED FILL,BUT VARIES AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT 15 FEET MI 4 INCH PERFORATED PROPOSED GRADES PVC BACKDRA 4INCH SOLID PVC 10 FEE MIN OUTLET TYPICAL BENCHING INTO EARTH MATERIALS 4INCH PERFORATED TYPICAL BENCHING INTO H PVC BACKDRAI COMPACTED FILL EARTH MATERIALS 4 INCH SOLID PVC t 30 FE T MAX OUTLET P 2 FEE MIN 5 FEE M�N GEOFABRIC(MLRAFI 140N OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT) PERFORATED PVC PIPE WITH PERFORATIONS KEYWAY BOTTOM SHOULD FACING DO W 150 FEET DESCEND INTO SLOPE KEYWAY DIMENSIONS PER GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT/ GEOLOGIST(TYPICALLY H/2 OR 15 FEET MIN.) 12 INCH MIN.OVERLAP, SECURED EVERY 6 FEET SCHEDULE 40 SOLID PVC OUTLET PIPE, SURROUNDED By COMPACTED FILL, OUTLETS TO BE PLACED EVERY 100 FEET OR LESS.-� 5 CUBIC FEET/FOOT OF Ya INCH-I%INCH OPEN GRADED ROCK ----,Earlth Stir-ata->• -f �- BUTTRESS TYPICAL DETAIL G Whniml,Envi o mantel aM Mamtlals Te dng ComubanM BETTER PEOPLE.BETTER SERVICE.BETTER RESULTS MIN.OF 5 FEET DEEP COMPACTED FILL,BUT VARIES AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT IN— PROP05ED GRADE 15 FEET M 4 INCH PERFORATED PVC BACKDRAI 4 INCH SOLID PVC OUTLET IOFE TMIN � TYPICAL BENCHING INTO COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS 4 INCH PERFORATED TYPICAL BENCHING PVC BACKDRA / OMPACTED FILL INTO COMPETENT 4 INCH SOLID PVC � �R`�5. 30 FE T MAX EARTH MATERIALS H OUTLET / SE co 2 FEA MIN / . ............................................ . . .. .. ................................................................................. 5 FEE MIN GEOFABRIC(MIRAFI 14ON OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT), PERFORATED PVC PIPE WITH PERFORATIONS *T5 0 FEET KEYWAY BOTTOM SHOULD FACING DO DESCEND INTO SLOPE KEYWAY DIMENSIONS PER GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT/ GEOLOG15T(TYPICALLY H/2 OR 15 FEET MIN.) 12 INCH MIN.OVERLAP, SECURED EVERY 6 FEET SCHEDULE 40 SOLID PVC Of PIPE. SURROUNDED By COMPACTED FILL. OUTLETS TO BE PLACED EVERY 100 FEET OR LESS.- 5 CUBIC FEET/FOOT OF Y INCH-I Y INCH / OPEN GRADED ROCK- - Ear -h-® StrataP in CC_ CANYON SUBDRAIN SYSTEM TYPICAL DETAIL Geohchnfcel,EnWmnmenlal and Mafadala Tesdng ConwlRnla BETTER PEOPLE.BETTER SERVICE.BETTER RESULTS CONTACT BETWEEN SUITABLE AND UNSUITABLE MATERIAL TO BE REMOVE PROPOSED GRADE COMPACTED FILL .:. GEOFABRIC(MIRAFI 140N OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT) 6INCH COLLECTOR PIPE — (SCHEDULE 40 PERFORATED PVC PIPE WITH PERFORATIONS FACING DOWN) EXISTING NATURAL GRADE 12 INCHES MIN.OVERLAP.SECURED EVERY 6 FEET / 6INC�MIN UNSUITABLE MATERIALS TO BE REMOVED \ 1 .• •���r 9 CUBIC FEET/FOOT OF Y.INCH f INCH CRUSHED ROCK TYPICAL BENCHING INT COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS NOTES: xY X,Y),Y� Y x Y>,Y 1-CONTINUOUS RUNS IN EXCESS OF 500 FEET LONG WILL REQUIRE AN 8INCH DIAMETER PIPE. 2-FINAL 20 FEET OF PIPE AT OUTLET WILL BE SOLID AND BACKFILLED WITH COMPACTED FINE-GRAINED EARTH MATERIALS. CANYON SUBDRAIN TYPICAL OUTLET 0.0 FEET MI GEOFABRIC(MIRAFI NON OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT) — oROPO5ED 6RADE— — TYPICALLY 10.0 FEET COMPACTED FILL BUT VARIE / 1 0 6 INCH SOLID PVC PIP / � 2% INCH INCH CRUSHED ROC% 0 FEET MIN INCH SOLID PVC PIPE INCH PERFORATED SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE __IE,arth ® Strata, Inc,- CUT LOT TYPICAL DETAIL Geohwhnlnal,EnvlronmmWl and Mahulals TeaHlg Consultants BETTER PEOPLE.BETTER SERVICE.BETTER RESULTS REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL PROPOSED GRADE I PROJECTION TO COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS T ORIGINAL GRADE OVEREXLAVATE AND RELOMPACT A COMPACTED PILL I \� 5 FEET MIN BUT VARIES COMPETENT 97RTH MATERIALS Ll PROJECTION COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS NOTE:REMOVAL BOTTOMS SHOULD BE GRADED WITH A MINIMUM 2%FALL TOWARDS STREET OR OTHER SUITABLE AREA(AS DETERMINED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT)TO AVOID PONDING BELOW THE BUILDING NOTE:WHERE DESIGN CUT LOTS ARE EXCAVATED ENTIRELY INTO COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS,OVEREXCAVATION MAY STILL BY NEEDED FOR HARD-ROCK CONDITIONS OR MATERIALS WITH VARIABLE EXPANSION POTENTIALS IErarrrth d Strata, Inc, CUT / FILL TRANSITION LOT TYPICAL DETAIL Gealechnical,Envbonnrenial and Materials TW,fi gConsWNnts BETTER PEOPLE.BETTER SERVICE.BETTER RESULTS DE VLlr PROPOSED GRADE I ,(SOp50� q�bJJI�SJIT AgI j ,/ jj �� Id PROJECTION TO COMPETENT EARTH — ' MATERIALS COMPACTED FILL ;•r ,4•/� — OtlEREXCAv TVE Af�D fJ ACT 5 FEET MIN BUT VARIES COMPEL j NOTE:REMOVAL BOTTOMS SHOULD BE GRADED WITH A MINIMUM 2%FALL TOWARDS STREET OR OTHER SUITABLE AREA(AS Jy DETERMINED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT)TO AVOID TYPICAL BENCHING INTO PONDING BELOW THE BUILDING COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS NOTE:WHERE DESIGN CUT LOTS ARE EXCAVATED ENTIRELY INTO COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS,OVEREXCAVATION MAY STILL BY NEEDED FOR HARD-ROCK CONDITIONS OR MATERIALS WITH VARIABLE EXPANSION POTENTIALS ------------ s - , - x� . - KEYWAY & BENCHING TYPICAL DETAILS arthGeotechnical,Environmental and Materials Testing Consultants CUT OVER FILL SLOPE BETTER PEOPLE.BETTER SERVICE.BETTER RESULTS PROPOSED GRADE CONTACT BETWEEN SUITABLE AND -: UNSUITABLE MATERIALS TO BE REMOVED f EXISTING NATURAL GRADE PROPOSED GRADE OVERBUILD AND CUT BACK TO THE PROPOSED GRADE COMPACTED FILLpF TO BE CUTBACK O 1:1 PROJECTION TO �.1�w)W � COMPETENT EARTH MATERIAL TEMPORARY 11 CUT / <� CIO y. . . . .. . .. . .. . . . .. ...... .... ....... ......... . ......... .�� 5.0 2.0 FEET MI KEYWAY BOTTOM SHOULD DESCEND INTO SLOPE 15 0 FEET KEYWAY DIMENSIONS PER GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT/ GEOLOGIST(TYPICALLY H/2 OR 15 FEET MIN.) NOTE: NATURAL SLOPES STEEPER THAN 5:1(H:V)MUST BE BENCHED INTO COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS ------��-th -� --------------- KEYWAY & BENCHING TYPICAL DETAILS G.Whnlaal,Envlronmental and M.Wmla Teatlng C...lWnlg FILL OVER CUT SLOPE BETTER PEOPLE.BETTER SERVICE.BETTER RESULTS ........................................................................................................................................................ L D FTL PROPOSED GRADE O�ppC� 6 yam. EXISTING NATURAL GRADE / 'Cop j•J� YCOMPACTED FILL �. pPS � y VARIES (4 FEET TYPICAL) JLv JSS P�' CONTACT BETWEEN SUITABLE AND UNSUITABLE H EARTH MATERIALS TO BE REMOVE CUT SLOPE VARIES(B FEET TYPICAL KEYWAY BOTTOM SHOULD DESCEND INTO 150 FEET SLOPE KEYWAY DIMENSIONS PER GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT/ NOTES: GEOLOGIST(TYPICALLY H/2 OR 15 FEET MIN-) NATURAL SLOPES STEEPER THAN 5:1(H+V)MUST BE BENCHED INTO COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS THE CUT SLOPE MUST BE CONSTRUCTED FIRST - ' ------------------- - KEYWAY & BENCHING TYPICAL DETAILS Earth - Strata, lnc FILL SLOPE Gaufechrucal,Environmental and Materials Testing Consultants BETTER PEOPLE•BETTER SERVICE.BETTER RESULTS PROPOSED GRADE / COS G,- ••� EXISTING NATURAL 6RADE / COMPACTED FILL CONTACT BETWEEN SUITABLE AND VARI/ /, (4 FEET RYE ICAL) H UNSUITABLE MATERIALS TO BE REMOVE 1:1 PROJECTION TO COMPETENT EARTH / PRMATERIALS FROM OPO ED TOE OF SLOPE TEMPORARY 1:1 CUT / Cop1y pN�°irk — — — — ;.: 0-1 .......................................... ...................................... VARIES(B FEET TYPICAL Z.0 FEET KEYWAY BOTTOM SHOULD DESCEND INTO 15.0 FEET SLOPE KEYWAY DIMENSIONS PER 6EOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT/ &EOLOrIST(TYPICALLY H/2 OR 15 FEET MIR) NOTES NATURAL SLOPES STEEPER THAN 5:1(H:V)MUST BE BENCHED INTO COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS Eartlh ® Strata, InC, OVERSIZE ROCK TYPICAL DETAIL G"Mchn/cal,Emimnmenfal anti U&NIIals TastlnB ConauRnrts BETTER PEOPLE.BETTER SERVICE.BETTER RESULTS PROPOSED GRADE ?G_O TChT MLti _ r r� ri PROPOSED SLOPE FACE - COMPACTED FILL 10.0 FE T MIN I 15 0 FEET MIN 20.0 FE T MIN COMPACTED FILL 2:I021 LATTER 4 FEET MIN 9 L5.0 FEET MIN- COMPACTED COMPACTED FILL COMPACTED FILL WINDROW PARALLEL TO SLOPE FACE CROSS SECTION A-A' VERSIZED COMPACTED FILL BOULDER SETTING OF APPROVED NOTES: GRANULAR MATERIAL Y h' OVERSIZE ROCK I5 LARGER THAN S B INCHES IN MAX DIAMETER �v EXCAVATED TRENCH OR DOZER V-CUT