HomeMy WebLinkAboutTract Map 9833-1 Lot 8 Rough Grade & Compaction Results
.
LAKESHORE
Engineering
. J.Pq7-0l{&~L
11< 1%'85-; J T?
Consulting Civil Engineering and Geologists
June 1, 1998
Project No. 96-032.COM
Client: Glenn and Pat Crowther
45539 Corte Narbonne
Temecu1a, CA 92592 (909) 731-3390
Subject: Building Pad Line and Grade Certification
Lot 8 of Tract 9833-1
Piasano Place, Temecula, CA.
A.P.N. 950-030-008-5
Gentlemen:
This letter is to certify that the rough grading on the subject
parcels was performed in substantial compliance to the approved
grading plan prepared by Lakeshore Engineering, dated October 3,
1997 at scale of 1"=20 feet.
No major deviations were noted in the field. All designed swales,
brow ditches, terrace drains, drainage flowlines and berms remained
to be reinspected at conclusion of building construction.
This certification letter is for general grades, elevation and
location of cuts and fills, except for the items of concern
presented below which is to be addressed during landscape/fine
grading. The building pad elevation was established within .10 feet
of proposed grade. The reference elevation of F.S. 95.0 was takwn
at centerline of proposed driveway approach.
Fine grading inspection is required to verify installation of paved
drive, planting of slopes, rip-rap and all permanent drainage
devices per approved plan.
It has been a pleasure to be of service to you on this project, If
you have any ques~ions please contact this office.
\
~:~~~~6~~ii~~d,
(j ~,
U! if:7~2 t~}
'" :-'l!..
",_ ..ct."
en\Yongr~R. 2
Exp.\ 6/30/00
cc: 2 copies to client and 1 copy to city
31606 Railroad Canyon Road, #201 . Canyon Lake, CA 92587 . (909) 244-2913 . FAX: (909) 244-2987
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ROUGH GRADE COMPACTION REPORT
PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
LOT 8 OF TRACT NO. 9833-1
PIASANO PLACE
TEMECULA. CALIFORNIA
FOR
GLEN AND PAT CROWTHER
PROJECT NO. 96-032.COM
DATED JUNE 1. 1998
Lakeshore Engineering
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LAKESHORE
Engineering
Consulting Civil Engineering and Geologists
June 1, 1998
Project No. 96-032.COM
Client: Glenn and Pat Crowther
45539 Corte Narbonne
Temecula, CA 92592 (909) 731-3390
Subject: Rough Grade Compaction Report
Lot 8 of Tract 9833-1
Piasano Place, Temecula, CA.
A.P.N. 950-030-008-5
Gentlemen:
INTRODUCTION
This is to report the results of density tests and observations
made during the placement of compacted fill on the subject site.
Periodic field density testing and inspections were provided by a
representative of Lakeshore Engineering to check the grading
contractors on compliance with the approved drawing and pertinent
grading job specifications. The presence of our field
representative at the site was to provide to the owner a source of
professional advice, opinions and recommendations based upon the
field representative's observations of the contractor's work and
did not include any supervision, superintending or direction of the
actual work of the contractors or the contractor's workmen. The
opinions and recommendations presented hereafter are based on our
tests made and observations of the grading procedures used, and
represent our engineering judgment as to the contractor's
compliance with the job grading specifications.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The subject 2.5 acre site, supported a small "turnaround show pad -
about 50' x 75' " prior to Lakeshore Engineering involvement at
this site. The natural terrain of the lot slopes downward from west
to east at about a 3:1 (H:V) pitch. The existing show pad, located
immediately adjacent to the road was enlarged to about .40 acre
(110'x 135') to accomodate a proposed single family home.
Rough grading operation consisted of the import of approximately
4,000 cubic yards to dirt to create a building pad about level with
the street at driveway approach. Proposed slopes are in the order
of 40 feet high for fill, and cut slope about 10 feet high.
Access to the property is by way of Jedediah Smith and Piasano
Place, both paved roads.
31606 Railroad Canyon Road, #201 . Canyon Lake, CA 92587 . (909) 244-2913 . FAX: (909) 244-2987
\
I
LOCATION MAP
I
I
I
I
I
I
<
.
o
o
\
\-
,
,
\
:
I
.
S~OW"lrE.'l
'0
I
0"
I
J
I
,0'
\,0" "
,<'
I
I
(<$.~r.
$>'
- - - - - - -QC
moo
I
il
II~~
I~~
---' -,:
.,.".
"
I
I
I
T(l,i2b'>..
P&..12b L-S
I
PROPOSED RESIDENCE
GLENN & PAT CROWTHER
PIASANO PLACE
LAKESHORE
Engineering
I
loject No:
98-032.COM
Date
6/01/1998
Flgule No:
\
I
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
N
N.T.S.
z.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
June 1, 1998
Project No.: 96-032.COM
Page Two
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The site was rough graded to support a single family residence. The
building pad will be benched level into the. side of a natural
slope, with cut and fill slopes in the order of 10 and 40 feet
high, respectively.
Proposed construction will consist of a one and/or story single
family residence, approximately 3 to 4,000 square feet, of
conventional, wood framed and stucco construction. Foundation will
likely be spread footings with concrete slab-on-grade flooring.
GRADING OBSERVATION AND TESTING
Grading operation was conducted during the month of May, 1998.
Equipment used included a CAT D-6 and D-8, and water truck. The
grading operation was observed to be performed in the following
manner:
I. Vegetation, trees and surface debris were cleared from the
areas to be graded.
2. Unsatisfactory soils were excavated to expose competent
materials on which to start the fill. The maximum vertical
depth of fills placed was approximately 15 feet located at the
southeasterly corner of the fill pad.
3. A keyway approximately 16 feet in width by 4 feet (inside
key depth) angled into toe of slope at about 5 % was
constructed along the toe of slope prior to fill placement.
4. The native soils exposed at the bottom of slope keyway and
benches and/or excavation were inspected and in our
opinion, considered suitable for support of compacted fills.
Prior to placing any fills, the exposed sub grade was first
scarified, moisture conditioned and then compacted.
5. Approved soils were placed in layers on the prepared surface,
and each layer was compacted to the specified density before
the next layer was added.
6. The minimum acceptable degree of compaction content was 90
percent of the laboratory maximum dry density.
7. Maximum density and optimum moisture content were determined by
the A.S.T.M. D1557-78 method.
Lakeshore Engineering
3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
June 1, 1998
Project No.: 96-032.COM
Page Three
8. Field density tests were performed utilizing the sandcone
method (A.S.T.M. D1556) and the drive tube method.
9.. The soils used in the compacted fill consisted predominantly of
on-site and import Light brown Silty SAND (SM).
10. Based on review of grading plan and our field inspections, the
house will sit on variable depths of compacted fill. The
thickness of fills ranged from 4 1/2 feet to 13 feet below the
house footprints. The cut portion of the house pad was
overexcavated 4 feet and the bottom scarified another 6 inches.
11. Field density tests were made during the.placement of fill to
determine the degree of compaction and moisture content. Where
tests or field observations indicated insufficient density,
additional compaction with adjustment of the moisture content
where necessary was performed before the next layer was added.
All field density tests are listed in the "Summary of Field
Density Tests", and their approximate locations are shown on
Figure No.2. Also shown are the limits of the compacted fill
placed during this grading operation.
GRADING DEVIATIONS FROM APPROVED PLAN
Near the conclusion of rough grading operation, no major deviations
were noted in the field when compared to approved plan.'
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES
MAXIMUM DENSITY COMPACTION TEST
Soil samples obtained from the field were visually identified and
when necessary, additional laboratory testing was performed to
confirm identification. All soils were classified with the Unified
Soil Classifications System. The procedures outlined in A.S.T.M.
Method D1557-78 were used to determine the compaction
characteristics of the fill materials.
The results of our laboratory compaction tests are presented below:
Soil Type Soil Description Optimum Moisture Max. Drv Densitv
A Silty SAND (SP/SM) 11.5 % dry wt. 123.0 P.C.F.
B * Silty SAND/SAND 9.4 % dry wt. 126.0 P.C.F.
C * Silty SAND 9.8 % dry wt. 125.5 P.C.F.
* - import dirt
Lakeshore Engineering
4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
June 1, 1998
Project No.: 96-032.COM
Page Four
LABORATORY EXPANSION TEST
A Laboratory Expansion Index Test was performed on a representative
soil sample recovered from within the proposed building area at the
subj ect site. The laboratory expansion test was performed in
accordance with U.B.C. Test Method 29-C, and the pertinent test
results are presented below:
Soil
Description Depth
Moisture %
Before Test
Expan.
Index
Expansion
Potential
Silty SAND -6"
trace of clay
9.0
44
LOW/MEDIUM
Based upon a test result of 44, subgrade materials are considered
to be LOW/~PIUM in expansion potential.
SULPHATE CONTENT TEST
A Laboratory sulphate content Test was performed on a
represeI;ltative soil sample recovered from within the proposed
building area at the subject site. The laboratory test was
performed in accordance with E.P.A. Test Method 375.3, and the
pertinent test results are presented below:
Sample
Location
Depth
Sulphate
Content
Recommended Cement
~
BLDG. PAD
- 6"
< 350 ppm.
Portland Cement TYPE 11
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the final results of field density tests, on observations
of the grading operation procedures used in the field and on our
past experience. it is Lakeshore Engineering opinion that the
compacted fill shown on the Plot Plan, figure no. 2 attached has
been placed in accordance with the applicable portions of the
grading specifications and in accordance with ordinance and
regulations of the City of Temecula.
Any fill dirt added beyond the limits or above the grades shown
should be placed under engineering inspection and in accordance
with the applicable grading job specifications, if it is to be
covered by the recommendations of this report.
Lakeshore Engineering
=>
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
June 1, 1998
Project No.: 96-032.COM
Page Five
Based upon our field testing results, the compacted fill in our
opinion has been compacted to at least 90 percent relative density.
The on-site foundation soils exposed during rough grading operation
a~e considered LOW/MEDIUM in expansion potential as verified by the
laboratory test results. Foundation should be constructed and
reinforced as follows:
Footings for one and two story structure should be 18 inches deep
and 12 inches wide, minimum. All footings shall be reinforced with
at least two no.4 rebar at top and two at 2 1/2" from bottom (total
of four rebars).
Due to the variable fill depths placed under the house footprints,
deepening of footings along the southeasterly corner of the house
is recommended so the entire house footings sits on a relative
uniform(similar thickness) of compacted fill. This is suggested to
mitigate differential settlement within the house footings and to
comply with slope setback requirements. The actual depth of
deepened footings (estimated from 3 to 8 feet) should be determine
by the consultant in the field, per the actual field layout of the
house.
CONCRETE SLAB-ON-GRADE
The local subgrade soil is considered low to moderate in expansion
potential. The floor slabs may be supported directly on. properly
prepared subgrade. Presaturation of subgrade soils to 12 depth
penetration prior to concrete pour is recommended. If a floor
covering that could be critically affected by moisture, such as
vinyl tile, slabs should be protected by a plastic vapor barrier of
six-mil thickness. The sheet should be covered by at least two
inches of sand cushion to prevent punctures and aid in concrete
cure.
The concrete floor slabs should be reinforced with at least 6"x 6"-
#10/#10 welded wire mesh or equivalent bar reinforcing (no. 4
rebars at 24 inches on center, both ways) and installed at
mid-height. Concrete floor slabs should be at least 4 inch thick
nominal.
FOOTING INSPECTION
Footing trench excavations should be inspected by a representative
of Lakeshore Engineering prior to concrete placement to verify
proper embeddment into competent soils. Deepen footing section
should also be determine at time of footing trench preparation.
.
Lakeshore Engineering ~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
June 1, 1998
Project No.: 96-032.COM
Page Six
SLOPES AND EROSION CONTROL
Th,e manufactured fill and cut slopes, pitched at 2:1(H:V) are
considered grossly stable from deep seated failure. However, due to
the sandy nature of the onsite soils, it is our opinion that
existing slope faces are sensitive to surficial erosion. In order
to mitigate surficial erosion, the recommended drainage devices on
the approved plans should be installed and follow up
recommendations are presented:
1.0) Slopes should be planted as soon as possible with
vegetation which is drought resistant and whose root system
extends a minimum of 18 inches into the slope face.
Immediate planting of the slopes is particularly important
where relatively loose sand is exposed.
2.0) High water content in slope soils is a major factor in
slope erosion or slope failures. Vegetation watering should
be such that a uniform near optimum content is maintained
year-around. A landscape architect should be consulted in
this regard.
3.0) Shrub and/or tree root excavations should be minimized in
size so that water will not collect and cause saturation of
the surficial materials. Also, back cuts for tree wells are
geotechnically inadvisable because they create a localized
over-steepened condition.
4.0) Excavated slope and footing soils should not be spread
loosely on the slope face. Burrowing animals should be
controlled (burrows become avenue for water penetration).
6.0) All berms should be regularly maintained. Surface drains
should be kept free of debris at all times.
7.0) Seemingly insignificant factors, such as recreational abuse
(e.g., motorcycles, BMX cycles, etc.), human trespass, small
concentrations of uncontrolled surface/subsurface water, or
poor compaction of trench backfills on slope can result in
major erosion and slope distress.
8.0) A slope area maintenance program should be developed for
use by the home owner.
Lakeshore Engineering 7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
June 1, 1998
Project No.: 96-032.COM
Page Seven
DRAINAGE
Positive drainage should be provided around the perimeter of all
structures to minimize water infiltrating into the underlying
soils. Finish subgrade adj acent to exterior footings should be
sloped down and away to facilitate surface drainage. All drainage
should be directed off-site to the street via non-erosive devices.
The homeowner should be made aware of the potential problems which
may develop when drainage is altered through construction of
retaining walls, patios and pools. Ponded water, leaking irrigation
systems, overwatering or other conditions which could lead to
ground saturation must be avoided.
ADDITIONAL GRADING
The project soil engineer should be notified prior to any fill
placement, regrading of the site, or backfilling of trenches, after
rough grading has been completed. This report is limited to the
earthwork performed through May 30, 1998, the date of our last site
inspection.
Any future appurtenant structures such as a detached garage
buildings, home office, barn, spas or pools, etc., that are not
shown on the approved grading plan should be reviewed for subgrade
suitability prior to construction.
Our findings have been obtained in accordance with accepted
professional engineering practices in the fields of geotechnical
engineering. This warranty is in lieu of all other warranties,
either express or implied.
It has been our pleasure to be of service to you on this project.
If you have any questions, please contact this office at your
convenience.
cc: 2
nt and 1 copy to city- public works department
Attached: 1) PLOT PLAN, FIGURE 2
2) SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS
s
Lakeshore Engineering
"'~ .
"...:>.
:11 ~c';
\
\
\
"-
- ---'\
~6-,)J2.?ERC.
/
r/
,...': /.
.'
, "
-;/
t.
l"'To:;..Pc's..:r:f__
"-IoU Wec::.O. FtK
:/1 fl'!: ,
.
-~~
.'.
",
I
\
.<
,::".;:::---::
,..--- - - ~
-------- "'"
,/
.' '-----------
/
.,
'"
'- .
'-/
U \,\f ~
I' /
I I'
I I. \/
" \
1-'"
<if 1-;:' ~ 1-
:'
i ... \ .,
I :,1
"0\ ~
, ~~. "
, __ 1/' I' I '
1- -' '.
-
\\
I
=-==-- ~
- . :i/' l
~~~c>,};~/ \
'..c.1. _ \
,
,
I
\
\
j""'~O'~-:
'..I~D
I
~ '-
--;:/- ,....,
..... --#- - ~
~
'....-
~..
\
\,
,
,
,
\
\
\~
\lJ<-&;"
<,l.
/
'f,;::'
, / '
, /'1_ \\
-~',;-- \
"',; \
O~\ ,-,- I
,
t. )..\" I
f}'..../ I
-,
>"
,~l
~ ~
~
/'~ ~'~I':.T:':: TC:.. ~
-'
"
~'<
:;l ~ t!.
. I.?;i'..
! -- \
lJ.olo.i
I .}:./--~
'-A.9~ ,
-
~,
~.
.
U)
.
I-:
_Z
J-Z-<
(
Il'(,~
-'~ -
, ......---
1C/
".\;/
c.,
., //J
..,",:.-.-
---_...--:---
~-_//
L1~t'
PLOT PLAN
,',
,\ ?'~
EXP LANA T ION ''''''''
"',
X-16
-L
-.
LAKESHORE
Engineering
BASE MAP: PRECISE GRADING PLAN, 20 SCALE
LAKE SHORE ENGINEERING
DATED OCTOBER, 1997
I
APPROX. LOC~.
I
APPROX. LIMITS
INSPECTED 1
I
OF FIELD DENSITY TEST
OF
FILL
PLACED
&
-;
ROUGH GRADE COMPACTION REPORT
PAT AND GLENN CROWTHER
PIASANO PLACE
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
Project No:
96-032.C
0018
6/1/98
Rgure No:
FIG. 2
9
SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
l FIELD ~~
DATE EL E V A R EFER- MAXIMUM ~
I 0- -\'" ,," 0..-
TEST OF TION EfKE DP.Y \~A TER DRY u
LOCATlorl \::<-.'-~" RENARKS o~
NO. TEST (feet) C URVE DENS ITY C ONTENT DEI~S ITY ,,~ "'-~ ~~
(pcf) (%) (pef) ~<.; ,,'5 V> :::
I
I J 5/1{, ~~A" +z A \~~.o e.3 Icq.Cj' 10 II
"2 ~I!.b . f;E.'1 W-A'I +z. A 1l3.0 8.3 l/ifl 16 1/
I ske, Kf'l wA'1 A 8/ V
.3 +z.. 123.0 OJ __4 I/z..o
I <i- 6118 l~f'\l WA'i +2- A \ 27,,0 Iq~ IIS-.[ !<1Lf /
I E) '5/20 'bLO PE. FlW: -+4- p.., l'2.b.(; q,~ 11315 Cia if
I C; 5""/2U SLO P F- -tf, ~ n.{,.o go Jlb-O qz. 1/
~ s-Izu 'SlOfS . -t5 ~. IZb'O e-/ 1/6.2 \GfL II
I
I ~ b{l ~LO.fE te E> \u.o leu; 1'2D-~ l'1h II
q 6/, 3>Lof~ -flO ~ lu'.o '1\5 12/-/ ~l / I
lto bl, S~E. +1'2... f:> 12'=>.0 10'0 Iw-,l t1~ 1/1
Ie;, I' <d...-oYIZ- B '3 '7 tis- 1/
/I -/-\ 2- 1\1.'" -0 I7./). 0
I I z., bll ~~ t L~ ~ Ilb'O q'3> I 'Zt, I I1b II
I l~ 611 j1Lll(; . P Illi -ff b lU.-o '13 It $() f1/ /
I Ilf 61, l-'\ 1.1 -t1 b \1.;(".0 lO'~ 11f2,.2. Cf!i /
IS' lblt \1 ff, ~ 1'2./0.0 ~.O ItR,Y. ql I
1<\
I It, bll h ,I \=(, b. \60'( 9\0 1'2/. C) ~ 1
.
I
I .LAKESHORE ~LaNI c;t fA\ ('J2t)(..unf[j~-- .
Engineering P \ As"'tlND p~ 10
I Proj. No' 00'" Ie; & Tabl.. .1.. OEL
Consulting Civil Engineering and Geologists CJ6-~2..c Gl
j~ t