Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTract Map 3552 Lot 8 Geotechnical Investigation I /."\ /'-., \ . '-" .- .//' - - ' - - - ~:- lJ ~ q '~... ~'-GEN I:.. .__-'" ,,~>,__ ~47'-0'-:\.F-'rtr. ' iT ',- I ~- R''''i''i;; :,C~l:!~... -'II ,:3'55;( Lo+$ 7'1-8 COf1~oration -Soil Engineering and Consulting Services eEngineeringGeology . Compaction Testing elnspeclions.ConslruclionMalerialsTesling.laboraIOl)'Testing-PercotationTesling -Geology . Water Resource Studies . Phase 1& II Environmental Site Assessments ENVIRONMENTAL & GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING NETWORK I I I I I I I I I I I I I I r - \ t;;i'I! HECETvED JAN 2 5 2005 CITY OF TEMf2CLJLA _ ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT GEOTECHNICAL REPORT AND COMPACTION TEST RESULTS ROUGH GRADING OPERATIONS Ahmed Property Assessor's Parcel Number: 922-170-002 Lot 8 of Tract 3552 Vallejo Avenue City of T emecula, County of Riverside, California Project Number: T1060-C1 January 25, 2005 Prepared for: Mr. Nasir Ahmed 24909 Madison Avenue, Suite 1511 Murrieta, California 92562 , , , 1- / " " - - - \ ~ '~'. - - ~ \ '- - I 1- ',' -~ / \' - ~ __ I __ _ _ I - - , , \ I ~ I , I , I - ~"': "- n ?O_,;_..J_ . ,,_ <.... \' .._-:'-1 I .:.. ~.' I ~~-.'11:.: .': ....:<,",...!-.,- ~_'...i.-F,. ., ,. '. ". 1 ;~i;iS;~~ .."1f;.aFitf~~W E ~tpb~~jfc!~ (lI rt ,SultEtl;:fem@a, CA925~o~.-pnbl\.~195j)~~~,2230.fa'" 19511296,d37- B.I')1:,;~~~~.iii: FI ii'~~l/;!if8~;l1!leA e U~<~ih~~~,a;qe92J07.. phQne:(714) 5~4051.f"x:, (714) ,546-4092, '> "".,m>.".. ". ,"'~. ','~' ..... ..; . B $rTE: www.en e corp.comef:-MAIL: engencorp@engencorp.com' - - , .~ " - , ' \ /' J , , - '-. - ~ , ~ "l~-' - \.:...:-,__----. --.- -~-~ '-. ~-,,-,' , , -- , " , ~:.~-:::..~.:...~,. r ...;;, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Ahmed, Nasir Mr. Project Number: T1060-C1 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION NUMBER AND TITLE PAGE 1.0 SITE/PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION ...................................................................... 1 1.1 PROJECT LOCATION ........................................... .............................................................. 1 1.2 SITE DESCRiPTION........................................................................................................... 2 1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................... 2 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK............................................................................................................. 2 2.1 TIME OF GRADING ....... ..................................................................... ................................ 2 2.2 CONTRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT ......................................................................................... 2 2.3 GRADING OPERATIONS..................................................................................................... 2 3.0 TESTING.......................................................................................................................... 3 3.1 FIELD TESTING PROCEDURES ........................................................................................... 3 3.2 LABORATORY TESTING..................................................................................................... 3 3.2.1 MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP TEST ................................................... 3 3.2.2 EXPANSION INDEX TEST ............................................................................3 3.2.3 SOLUBLE SULFATE TEST ........................................................................... 4 4.0 EARTH MATERIALS........................................................................................................... 4 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...... ...................................... ............ .................... 4 5.1 GENERAL....................................................................................................................... 4 6.0 CLOSURE......................................................................................................................... 5 APPENDIX: TEST RESULTS DRAWINGS EnGEN Corporation \ / I I it ~~~"~,;;;;;V;;"~ci~DIIGEN I I I I I I I I I I I I I I F'-'-\' . 'r t;1 , , n, /' '-......,..- -Soil Engineering and Consulting Services -Engineering Geology -CompaGtionTesling -Inwections -ConslruclionMalerialsTesling -LaboraloryTesting. Percolation Testing -Genlogy . Waler Resource Studies . Phase I &11 Environmental Site Assessments COfJ~oration ENVIRONMENTAL & GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING NETWORK January 25, 2005 Ahmed, Nasir Mr. 24909 Madison Avenue, Suite 1511 Murrieta, California 92562 (207) 577-0444 / FAX (951) 696-1251 Attention: Mr. Nasir Ahmed Regarding: GEOTECHNICAL REPORT AND COMPACTION TEST RESULTS ROUGH GRADING OPERATIONS Ahmed Property Assessor's Parcel Number: 922-170-002 Lot 8 of Tract 3552 Vallejo Avenue City of Temecula, County of Riverside, California Project Number: T1060-C1 References: 1. EnGEN Corporation, Geotechnical Report and Compaction Test Results Rough Grading Operations, Ahmed Property, Assessor's Parcel Numbers: 922-170-001 and 922-170-002, Lot 8 and Portion of Lot 7, Tract 3552, Vallejo Avenue, City of Temecula, County of Riverside, California, Project Number: T1060-CS, dated November 30, 2004. 2. FES, Inc., Precise Grading Plan, Lot 8, Tract 3552, 28945 Vallejo Avenue, Temecula, California 92592, plans dated January 11, 2005. Dear Mr. Ahmed: In accordance with 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 SITE/PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION 1.1 PROJECT LOCATION The subject site consists of approximately 2.5-acres, located on the southwest side of Vallejo Avenue, southwest of the intersection of Vallejo Avenue and Ynez Road, in the City of Temecula, County of RiWlrside, California. ,,,,'o'C ,___"_,_,___,,,,,,",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,''''',,,,,,,,=_",'''''''''-_''~___ 1- ; , ,~ - - /'" , \ " ' ~ , -' " - - ~ \ ,.' , I .... ,'0 _ _ \ -' " ' I / - / - _/ :--~ ~.>.'-_-:.-.-. ~-..:...:; - ~---~.:.....'-~_/ _..::..--;:.:-::,....- -- \-- -, - , , ___ 1 . I" \_ - ,; - '- - - - \ '. . '. , I __ " _ _ _ \ -, . -, - " -, . - , \ '. , ~ " __ I / - - i :..:. .'____,'.-...1-_ ;, _' i * "./6""'0:i . " .' E ~iP~i~0~cle.t'l rt .S~it~~1;J'etl1':"(jla;CA 92590 ~-phon.c(9!1112~fio2230. faJCJ951 I 296:2237 FI ,~~J!"!110range A e .ue, !jan.ta Ana, C,A 92707 . phone: (714) 546-4051 . fax: (714) 546-4052 e:5rTE:' ~w.l.,~e~ e corp:com t.l:-.MAll: engehcorp@engencorp.com ~" I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Mr. Nasir Ahmed Project Number: T1060-C1 January 2005 Page 2 1.2 SITE DESCRIPTION Prior to current grading operations, topography and surface conditions of the site were gently sloping with surface drainage to the south at a gradient of less than 10 percent. According to the Referenced No. 1 Report, this site was previously rough graded and is underlain by approximately 10 to 14-feet of previously engineered fill materials. 1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION It is understood that the subject site is to be developed with a single family residence with slab-an-grade concrete floors supported on conventional continuous and pier footings, with associated driveway as well as hardscape and landscape improvements. 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK 2.1 TIME OF GRADING This report represents geotechnical observations and testing during the construction operations from January 21, 2005 through January 24, 2005. 2.2 CONTRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT The grading operations were performed by Custom Dirt Work through the use of one (1) Trac-Loader. 2.3 GRADING OPERATIONS Grading within the subject site consisted of cut/fill operation as well as an overexcavation and replacement operation. Grasses and weeds were removed prior to fill placement. Fill material was generated from the cut portions of the pad area, and used to bring the building pad and fill portions of the pad area to finish grade elevation. Overexcavated earth material was stockpiled and later used as fill. Bottoms were observed, probed and found to be into competent previously engineered fill material by a representative of this firm. Overexcavation was performed throughout the entire building pad to a depth of 5-feet below original grade elevation and to a distance of 5-feet outside the proposed structure. 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 EnGEN Corporation 3> I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Mr. Nasir Ahmed Project Number: T1 060-C1 January 2005 Page 3 90 percent relative compaction. Moisture conditioning of the on-site soils was performed during the compaction process through the use of a water truck. 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 2922-03 and ASTM D 3017-01 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 tested, which is an indication that the remainder of the fill placed has been properly 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. 3.2 LABORATORY TESTING 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. 3.2.1 MOISTURE-DENSITY 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 D 1557-02 procedures. 3.2.2 EXPANSION INDEX TEST A soil sarnple was obtained for expansion potential testing from the building pad area upon completion of rough grading of the subject site. The expansion test was performed in accordance with ASTM D 4829-03. The material tested consisted of light brown silty sand, which has an Expansion Index of 1. This soil is classified as having a very low expansion potential. EnGEN Corporation "\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Mr. Nasir Ahmed Project Number: T1060-C1 January 2005 Page 4 3.2.3 SOLUBLE SULFATE TEST Based on this firm's familiarity with the soils used to construct the building pad, it is our opinion that soluble sulfates are not a concern, and as a result, normal Type II cement can be used in concrete making contact with the native soils. 4.0 EARTH MATERIALS The natural earth materials encountered on-site generally consisted of brown silty sand. 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS No conditions were encountered which would cause a change in the previously provided design and construction recommendations. As a result, design and construction should adhere to the recommendations provided in the Referenced No. 1 Geotechnical Report and Compaction Test Results, Rough Grading Operations. 5.1 GENERAL Based on the observations and tests performed during grading, the subject site, in the areas noted as test locations, has been completed in accordance with the Referenced No. 1 Report, 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 the subject site should be performed by EnGEN Corporation. If any of the 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. EnGEN Corporation ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Mr. Nasir Ahmed Project Number: T1060-C1 January 2005 Page 5 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 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. Distribution: (4) Addressee FILE: EnGEN/ReportinglCfT1060-C1 Nasir Ahmed, Lot 8 EnGEN Corporation (", I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Mr. Nasir Ahmed Project Number: T1060-C1 Appendix Page 1 APPENDIX: TEST RESULTS EnGEN Corporation 1 I I I Mr. Nasir Ahmed Project Number: T1060-C1 Appendix Page 2 FIELD TEST RESULTS (Summary of Field In-Place Density Test Results) (Nuclear Gauge Test Method) (S. G.) = Subgrade / (F. G.) = Finish Grade Test Test Depth Max Moisture Dry Relative Required I No. Date Test Locations Elevation Soil Type Density Content Density Compaction Compaction (2005) (FT) (PCF) (%) (PCF) (%) (%) I 1 01-21 North Fill 1008 J\2 130.9 8.7 125.0 95.5% 90.0% 2 01-21 South Fill 1007 J\2 130.9 9.2 124.1 94.8% 90.0% 3 01-21 South Fill 1009 J\2 130.9 8.6 123.2 94.1% 90.0% I 4 01-21 North Fill 1010 J\2 130.9 8.2 125.1 95.6% 90.0% 5 01-24 North Pad 8 FG J\2 130.9 9.0 119.6 91A% 90.0% I 6 01-24 Central Pad 8 FG J\2 130.9 10A 120.5 92.1% 90.0% 7 01-24 South Pad 8 FG J\2 130.9 9.1 120.1 91.7% 90.0% I I I I I I I I I I I I EnGEN Corporation 8 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Mr. Nasir Ahmed Project Number: T1060-C1 Appendix Page 3 SUMMARY OF OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY RELATIONSHIP TEST RESULTS ASTM D 1557-02 Soil Description (USeS Symbol) Soil Type Maximum Dry Optimum Moisture Content Density (PCF) (%) Silty Sand Brown (SM) A2 130.9 8.8 SUMMARY OF EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS ASTM D 4829-03 Dry Moisture Moisture Expansion Soil Type Depth (FT) Density Condition Condition Index (pet) Before Test After Test E1 -1 113.6 9.2% 14.0% 1 "