HomeMy WebLinkAboutTract Map 3883 Geotechnical Rpt & Compaction Test Results
: ~~EN C01P.oration
. Soil Eogineering and Consulting Services- Engineering Geology. Compaction Tesling
-lnspeclions-ConslruclionMaterialsTesting-LaboratoryTesling-PercolationTesling
-Geology-WaterResourceSludies . Phasel& II EnvironmentalSileAssessmenls
ENVIRONMENTAL & GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING NETWORK
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.J;' \
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT AND COMPACTION TEST RESULTS
ROUGH GRADING OPERATIONS
Lot 490 of Tract 3883, Del Rey Road
City of Temecula, County of Riverside, California
Project Number: T1755-C
July 15, 1999
Prepared for:
RECE\VEfJ
JUl 26 1999
CITY OF TEMECUL/,
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Ms. Anna Oi Lorenzo
6191 Rancho Mission Road, # 206
San Diego, California 92108
-\
I" -' I"
/ "- / ,,// -
, \ - - - \" I" \ _ _ _ \ ,-
/ " - " - "-
\ / "\ / I-
/' __ , "" -' __ I
~ : \ I ~ I, ,I I I 1 f ~ I
~!f~;~~{,~l_.~~
-' / " ,__ I_/" / "- -' -' _ -' / ... '" I ~.... _ -' / "- -' -' J _' _ ... / ..... -', I _ _ "/
I "" \ _ _ _ \ ~ I F \" -' , -' \ _ _ _ \,..-"'" I .r \ _ _ _ \ -' " ' , " \ _ _ _ \ __ " , , ..-
: ~ \ ~ \~_-; -':: /, \~_-; ~~_~_~-~ ~'I~~~I:: _~:.,~ ~~~,-~":-.~-:'n~I:..f--::-=-~'::'~_.':-.-'
-'--....,~. .'----.:...:::... ,
;, I Ii .,
E -t~("ill~l_Citci~'N rt ,SUitel,.,e;".c"la, CA92590,-"hooe:(99-919;Z~3095' lox: (9091 676'3294 .
11!,,~:g1.g~9'~n9~A e ue, S~q\!l-Ano,CA m07 " phone: [7141 546.4051 ,lox: [7141 546.4052
EEl'SiTE: w\Nw. N ENCeJRP.COM' E-MAIL: ENGENCORP@PE.NET
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'1
I
I
I
Ms. Anna Di Lorenzo
Project Number: T1755-C
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION NUMBER ANO TITLE
PAGE
1.0 SITE/PROJECT OESCRIPTION AND LOCATION ......................................................................1
1.1 PROJECT LOCATION ..."................." ................. "................................, ..... ........ ........ ..."....1
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ......,.................................................................... ............ .........,....1
1.3 SITE DESCRIPTION ..... ". ...,................." ".... ......................".............. .... "............. ,......."...,1
2.0 SCOPE OF WORK ..............................................................................................................2
2.1 TIME OF GRADING "........,...... ",...................."......".".........". ..""............"... ..... .............,..2
2.1 CONTRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT "......"........"........."................................."........................2
2.2 GRADING OPERATIONS......,......,..,....................,.................................................,..............2
3.0 TESTING ...........................................................................................................................2
3.1 FIELD TESTING PROCEDURES ...........".........."'...........".....,_......................'''..,.................2
3.1.1 LABORATORY TESTING..."'........""..........:.::.:. ,.......... ."........ ................. .....3
3.1.2 MOISTURE-OENSITY RELATIONSHIP TESL...."..........."'..............................3
3.2 EXPANSION INDEX TEST. ...... ..,..... ...,..................................,.."................."....,.............., ,..3
4.0 EARTH MATERIALS ...........................................................................................................3
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................3
5.1 FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ......""..........."..............."..",.................".........3
5.2 FOUNDATION SIZE................"......,.........".......................".,......,...........,...,.......................3
5.3 DEPTH OF EMBEDMENT.................,.........,.........,....................................,.................,........4
5.4 BEARING CAPACITY,............,.................,........,............,.".,...................................,.....,......4
5.5 SETTLEMENT .....,...................,........,.........................,....................,..............."..............".4
5.6 LATERAL CAPACITY......................,...................,....................,................."..................,.....4
5.7 SLAB-ON-GRADE RECOMMENDATIONS............"......................................,........................... 5
5.8 INTERIOR SLABS.........................,....................................,..........................,.............,....... 5
5,9 EXTERIOR SLABS..,............,.........,.........,..,.......................,..,.....................,...............,......6
5,10 GENERAL ,.,.......,..,.......,....................,.............,........................,...........,..............,.... 6
6.0 CLOSURE .......................................................................................................................6
ApPENDIX
TEST RESULTS
DRAWINGS
\
EnGEN Corporation
I~
I ..::,~, '~J". 'GEN
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I /
r
/(
Corporation
. SoilEngineeringandConsultingServires. Engineering Geology. Compaction Testing
-Inspections. ConstruclionMaterialsTesling. LaboraloryTesling. Percolation Testing
. Geology. Water Resource Studies . Phasel&IIEnvironmentllSileAssessments
ENVIRONMENTAL & GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING NETWORK
July 15, 1999
Ms. Anna Oi Lorenzo
6191 Rancho Mission Road, # 206
San Diego, California 92108
(909) 922-0853 I FAX (909) 922-0933
Attention:
ML Carmen Di Lorenzo
Regarding:
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT AND COMPACTION TEST RESULTS
ROUGH GRADING OPERATIONS
Lot 490 of Tract 3883, Del Rey Road
City of Temecula, County of Riverside, California
Project Number: T1755-C
References:
1.
EnGEN Corporation, Limited Geotechnical Study, Proposed Single Family
Residence, Lot 490 of Tract 3883, Del Rey Road, City of Temecula, County
of Riverside, California, Project Number: T1755-LGS, report dated June 9,
1999.
2.
Manning Engineering, 20 Scale Grading Plan, for Lot 490 of Tract 3883,
Assessor's Parcel Number: 919-320-009, plan undated.
Oear Mr. Oi Lorenzo:
According to your request and signed authorization, EnGEN Corporation has performed field
observations, sampling, and in-place density testing at the above referenced site. Submitted, herein,
are the test results and the supporting field and laboratory data.
1.0 SITElPROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
1.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The subject site consists of 0.5 acres, located east of the intersection of Del Rey Road and
Buena Suerte in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, California.
1.2
PROJECT OESCRIPTION
Prior to grading operations, topography and surface conditions of the site were moderately
sloping with surface drainage to the south at gradient ranging from 18 to 26 percent.
1.3
SITE OESCRIPTION . - ~
Present plans call for a stngle family residence with slab-on-gradeci:mcrete floors.
-"\ ~/
~,/ ..... ~ ~ I _' ,r,/ "- _ ~ _ /'/.... :: ~ / ~ _ / _" ~, I, _' :: ~ , ' _,/ _.... _'_' ',_' ,_,. ," _,/ :- _'_", _" ._ ~"")" -' /
. I ,...- \ _ _ _ \ .... I,.. \ _ _ _ \ "__ \ _ __ _ \ _ \ _ _... "\ . -" ' '\ - .... ' &;....;
~ ~~/ \~_~; '/- \ " \~_~; \~ :: \ /, \~_-; ~:; ~// \~_-, ~~ ~; ~~ \~.:~~~ ~'.~~;_ ':r'::h_~'-'~-2,-':~-::-~=>_,~~.----
I I \ I "I, , I I \ I --' I , ~~.';".L. __-4_...", _ -:1 L I:
~~~~;---' ,:,_L_'~,l..:, __>-:'::"'.~"_' ,:JI ", """" ",:_ ' ___ ,_ 'I, I:, _ ':
~~~+~~, _A1!i~F~;gt E r,~p4s.cjtd'eN rt ;Suile.l,~Teh,e1iula, CA 92590 .';h110M:(9!lll.L![7.~3095 ..fa.,(909) 676,3294.
::0~'<".~:~J1AM~B'!fi:pUN1iy'O IE'~~J~Qraoge A e uei$aD1a Ana,CA 92707 . phone: 17141546.4051 . fax: 1714) 546.4052
~,- ~';~_.' ,,-- ,,--.- -.~ --'- ' EB siTE: Www. N ENCORP.COM-E:.MAlL: ENGENC-ORP@PE.NET--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ms Anna Di Lorenzo
Project Number: T1755-C
July 1999
Page 2
2.0 SCOPE OF WORK
2.1 TIME OF GRADING
This report represents geotechnical observations and testing during the construction
operations from July 1, 1999 through July 12, 1999,
2.1 CONTRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT
The grading operations were performed by P.O.Q. Equipment through the use of one (1)
Cat D8 track mounted dozer, one (1) motorgrader and several dump trucks.
2.2 GRADING OPERATIONS
Grading within the subject site consisted of a cuUfill and import fill operation. Grasses and
weeds were removed prior to fill placement. Fill material was generated from a off-site
source and the northern portions of the site, and used to bring the entire site to finish grade
elevation. Removal of alluvium, slopewash, etc., was performed to a depth of 3.0-feet
below original elevation. Over-excavated earth material was stockpiled and later used as
fill. Bottoms were observed, probed and found to be into competent bedrock by a
representative of this firm. Keying and benching into competent bedrock was observed
during the grading operations. The exposed bottoms were scarified and moisture
conditioned to a depth of 12-inches then compacted to 90 percent. Fill was placed in lens
thicknesses of 6 to 8-inches, thoroughly moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture
content, then compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction, Moisture
conditioning of the on-site soils was performed during the compaction process, through the
use of a water hose attached to a hydrant. The pad area was generally graded to the
elevations noted on the Grading Plan. However, the actual pad location, dimensions,
elevations, slope locations and inclinations, etc. were surveyed and staked by others and
should be verified by the Project Civil Engineer.
3.0 TESTING
3.1 FIELD TESTING PROCEDURES
Field in-place density and moisture content testing were performed in general accordance
with ASTM-D-2922-81 (90) and ASTM-D-3017-88 procedures for determining in-place
density and moisture content, respectively, using nuclear gauge equipment. Relative
compaction test results were within the 90 percent required for all material placed and
compacted. Test results are presented in the Appendix of this report. Fill depths and test
locations were determined from review of the referenced grading plans.
EnGEN Corporation -3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ms. Anna Oi Lorenzo
Project Number: T1755-C
July 1999
Page 3
3.1.1 LABORATORVTESTING
The following laboratory tests were performed as part of our services during the grading of
the subject site. The test results are presented in the Appendix of this report.
3.1.2 MOISTURE-OENSITY RELATIONSHIP TEST
Maximum dry density - optimum moisture content relationship tests were conducted on
samples of the materials used as fill. The tests were performed in general accordance with
ASTM D1557-91 procedures. The test results are presented in the Appendix (Summary of
Optimum Moisture Content I Maximum Dry Density Relationship Test Results).
3.2 EXPANSION INDEX TEST
A soil sample was obtained for expansion potential testing from the building pad area upon
completion of rough grading of the subject site. The expansion test procedure utilized was
the Unifomn Building Code Test Designation 18-2. The material tested consisted of silty
sand, which has an Expansion Index of 15. This soil is classified as having a very low
expansion potential. The results are presented in the Summary of Expansion Index
Results in the Appendix of this report.
4.0 EARTH MATERIALS
The natural earth materials encountered on-site, generally consisted of silty sand with
minor amounts of clay.
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 FOUNDATION OESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
Foundations for the proposed structure may consist of conventional column footings and
continuous wall footings founded upon properly compacted fill. The recommendations
presented in the subsequent paragraphs for foundation design and construction are based
on geotechnical characteristics and a very low expansion potential for the supporting soils
and should not preclude more restrictive structural requirements. The Structural Engineer
for the project should determine the actual footing width and depth to resist design vertical,
horizontal, and uplift forces.
5.2 FOUNDATION SIZE
Continuous footings should have a minimum width of 12-inches. Continuous footings
should be continuously reinforced with a minimum of one (1) NO.4 steel reinforcing bars
located near the top and one (1) NO.4 steel reinforcing bars located near the bottom of the
EnGEN Corporation 4.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ms. Anna Di Lorenzo
Project Number: T1755.C
July 1999
Page 4
footings to minimize the effects of slight differential movements which may occur due to
minor variations in the engineering characteristics or seasonal moisture change in the
supporting soils. Column footings should have a minimum width of 18-inches by 18-inches
and be suitably reinforced, based on structural requirements, A grade beam, founded at
the same depths and reinforced the same as the adjacent footings, should be provided
across garage door openings and other doorway entrances.
5.3 OEPTH OF EMBEDMENT
Exterior and interior footings founded in properly compacted fill should extend to a
minimum depth of 12-inches below lowest adjacent finish grade for the structure.
5.4 BEARING CAPACITY
Provided the recommendations for site earth work, minimum footing width, and minimum
depth of embedment for footings are incorporated into the project design and construction,
the allowable bearing value for design of continuous and column footings for the total dead
plus frequently-applied live loads is 1,500 psf for continuous footings and 1,500 psf for
column footings in properly compacted fill material. The allowable bearing value has a
factor of safety of at least 3.0 and may be increased by 33.3 percent for short durations of
live and/or dynamic loading such as wind or seismic forces.
5.5 SETTLEMENT
Footings designed according to the recommended bearing values for continuous and
column footings, respectively, and the maximum assumed wall and column loads are not
expected to exceed a maximum settlement of 0.5-inches or a differential settlement of
O.25-inches in properly compacted fill.
5.6 LATERAL CAPACITY
Additional foundation design parameters based on compacted fill for resistance to static
lateral forces, are as follows:
Allowable Lateral Pressure
(Equivalent Fluid Pressure), Passive Case:
Compacted FiII-150 pcf
Allowable Coefficient of Friction:
Compacted FiII- 0.3
Lateral load resistance may be developed by a combination of friction acting on the base of
EnGEN Corporation S
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5.7
5.8
Ms. Anna Oi Lorenzo
Project Number: T1755-C
July 1999
Page 5
foundations and slabs and passive earth pressure developed on the sides of the footings
and stem walls below grade when in contact with undisturbed, properly, compacted fill
material. The above values are allowable design values and have safety factors of at least
2.0 incorporated into them and may be used in combination without reduction in evaluating
the resistance to lateral loads. The allowable values may be increased by 33.3 percent for
short durations of live and/or dynamic loading, such as wind or seismic forces. For the
calculation of passive earth resistance, the upper 1.0-foot of material should be neglected
unless confined by a concrete slab or pavement. The maximum recommended allowable
passive pressure is 5.0 times the recommended design value.
SLAB-QN-GRADE RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations for concrete slabs, both interior and exterior, excluding PCC
pavement, are based upon the anticipated building usage and upon a very low expansion
potential for the supporting material as determined by Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building
Code. Concrete slabs should be designed to minimize cracking as a result of shrinkage.
Joints (isolation, contraction, and construction) should be placed in accordance with the
American Concrete Institute (ACI) guidelines. Special precautions should be taken during
placement and curing of all concrete slabs, Excessive slump (high water/cement ratio) of
the concrete and/or improper curing procedures used during either hot or cold weather
conditions could result in excessive shrinkage, cracking, or curling in the slabs, It is
recommended that all concrete proportioning, placement, and curing be performed in
accordance with ACI recommendations and procedures.
INTERIOR SLABS
Interior concrete slab-on-grade may be a minimum of 4-inches nominal in actual thickness
and be underlain by a properly prepared subgrade. Slab reinforcement may consist of #3
bars placed at 18 inches on center, each way, supported on cement blocks for proper
placement. The reinforcing should be placed at mid-depth in the slab. The concrete
section and/or reinforcing steel should be increased appropriately for anticipated excessive
or concentrated floor loads. In areas where moisture sensitive floor coverings are
anticipated over the slab, we recommend the use of a polyethylene vapor barrier with a
minimum of 6.0 mil in thickness be placed beneath the slab. The moisture barrier should
be overlapped or sealed at splices and covered by a 1.0-inch minimum layer of clean,
moist (not saturated) sand to aid in concrete curing and to minimize potential punctures.
EnGEN Corporation "
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ms. Anna Oi Lorenzo
Project Number: T1755-C
July 1999
Page 6
5.9 EXTERIOR SLABS
All exterior concrete slabs cast on finish subgrade (patios, sidewalks, etc., with the
exception of PCC pavement) should be a minimum of 4-inches nominal in thickness,
Reinforcing in the slabs and the use of a compacted sand or gravel base beneath the slabs
should be according to the current local standards. Subgrade soils should be moisture
conditioned to at least optimum moisture content to a depth of 6.0-inches and proof
compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction based on ASTM 01557-91
procedures immediately before placing aggregate base material or placing the concrete.
5.10 GENERAL
Based on the observations and tests performed during grading, the subject site in the
areas noted has been completed in accordance with the City of Temecula, or as amended
in the field base on conditions encountered, the project plans, the project plans and the
Grading Code of the City of Temecula. The graded site in the areas noted as graded is
determined to be adequate for the support of a typical residential development. Any
subsequent grading for development of the subject property should be performed under
engineering observation and testing performed by EnGEN Corporation. Subsequent
grading includes, but is not limited to, any additional fill placement and excavation of
temporary and permanent cut and fill slopes. In addition, EnGEN Corporation should
observe all foundation excavations. Observations should be made prior to installation of
concrete forms and/or reinforcing steel so as to verify and/or modify, if necessary, the
conclusions and recommendations in this report. Observations of overexcavation cuts, fill
placement, finish grading, utility or other trench backfill, pavement subgrade and base
course, retaining wall backfill, slab presaturation, or other earth work completed for the
development of subject site should be performed by EnGEN Corporation. If any of ~he
observations and testing to verify site geotechnical conditions are not performed by
EnGEN Corporation, liability for the safety and performance of the development is limited
to the actual portions of the project observed and/or tested by EnGEN Corporation.
6.0 CLOSURE
This report has been prepared for use by the parties or project named or described above.
It mayor may not contain sufficient information for other parties or purposes. The findings
and recommendations expressed in this report are based on field and laboratory testing
performed during the rough grading operation and on generally accepted engineering
EnGEN Corporation 7
I
I
I
I
I
Respectfully submitted,
I EnGEN (j)oration
I ~'D. G;",1At/-
Field Operations Manager
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ms. Anna Oi Lorenzo
Project Number: T1755-C
July 1999
Page 7
performed during the rough grading operation and on generally accepted engineering
practices and principles. No further warranties are implied or expressed beyond the direct
representations of this report.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide these services. If you should have any questions
regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office at your convenience.
JDG/OB:ch
Distribution:
(4) Addressee
FILE: EnGEN/Reporting/CIT1755C Carmen Oi Lorenzo. Rough Grading
EnGEN Corporation
&
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ms. Anna Oi Lorenzo
Project Number: T1755-C
Appendix Page 1
APPENDIX
TEST RESULTS
9
---
1 Ms. Anna Oi Lorenzo
Project Number: T1755-C
1 Appendix Page 2
1 FIELD TEST RESULTS
(SUMMARY OF FIELD IN-PLACE DENSITY TEST RESULTS)
(NUCLEAR GAUGE TEST METHOD)
1 Test Depth Max Moisture Dry Relative Required
Test Soil
1 No. Date Test Locations Elev. Type Density Content Density Compaction Compaction
(1999) (FT) (PCF) (%) (PCF) (%) (%)
1 7-1 Key Way 69.0 A1 123.0 11.8 110.3 90.5 90
1 2 7-1 Pad Fill 71.0 A1 123.0 8.6 116.9 95.0 90
3 7-1 Key Way 73.0 A1 123.0 10.8 112.4 91.4 90
4 7-1 Orive Entrance 90.0 A1 123.0 10.6 113.6 92.4 90
I 5 7-1 Pad Fill 84.0 A1 123.0 12.2 113.7 92.4 90
6 7-1 Driveway 86.0 A1 123.0 10.1 117.6 95.6 90
1 ~ 7-1 Pad S, End 76.0 A1 123.0 13.9 113.2 92.0 90
7-1 Pad S. End 79.0 A1 123.0 11.5 115.7 94.1 gO
9 7-1 Fill Slope S.W 82.0 A1 123.0 11.5 113.3 92.1 90
110 7-1 Fill Slope S.E. End 84.0 A1 123.0 12.5 120.3 97.8 90
11 7-2 S. Fill Slope SW. End 87.0 A1 123.0 8.5 112.9 91.8 gO
112 7-2 SE Fill Slope S.W 89.0 A1 123.0 10.3 112.9 91.8 gO
13 7-2 S.E. Side of Pad 91.0 A1 123.0 12.1 113.7 92.4 90
14 7-2 Center of Pad 92.0 A1 123.0 9.6 117.2 95.3 90
115 7-2 S.W Side of Pad 93.0 A1 123.D 12.7 113.3 92.0 90
16 7-7 N. Side of Pad 94.0 A1 123.0 10.2 113.7 92.5 gO
17 7-7 Center of Pad 94.0 A1 123.0 9.9 121.1 98.5 90
118 7-12 S.E. Side of Pad F.G. A1 123.0 10.3 117.4 95.4 gO
19 7-12 SW. Side of Pad F.G. A1 123.0 9.8 119.3 97.0 90
120 7-12 N. Half of Pad F.G. A1 123.0 10.1 116.4 94.6 90
F.G.) Indicates Finish Grade.
I
1
1
1
I
1 EnGEN Corporation \0
I
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
I
I
I
Ms. Anna Oi Lorenzo
Project Number: T1755-C
Appendix Page 3
SUMMARY OF OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT I
MAxiMUM DRY DENSITY RELATIONSHIP TEST RESULTS
ASTM 01557-91
Optimum
Soil Maximum Moisture
Soil Description Dry Density Content
Type (USCS Symbol) (PCF) (%)
A1 Brown, Silty Sand 123.0 11.5
SUMMARY OF ExPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS
Soil
Type
1
Depth
(FT)
Dry Density
(PCF)
Moisture
Condition Before
Test (%)
Moisture
Condition After
Test(%)
Expansion
Index
1.5
113.4
7.9
16.1
15
EnGEN Corporation
\I
I
I
1
1
1
1
I
1
I
I
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
I
I
Ms. Anna OJ Lorenzo
Project Number: T1755-C
Appendix Page 4
DRAWINGS
EnGEN Corporation 12.