HomeMy WebLinkAboutParcel 1-9 Updated Geotechnical Study
I - -,
~" /
IIIL';~~GEN
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r:
/;;1/
~
r~'.17'~~Z.7
Coq~oration
. Soil Engineering and ConsullingServices . EngirleeringGeology.CompadionTesting
-Inspections- Cons!ructionMalerialsTesting. LaboratoryTesting-PercolationTesting
. Geology-WaterResourceStudies . Phase I & II Environmenlal Site Assessmenls
ENVIRONMENTAL & GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING NETWORK
UPDATED GEOTECHNICAL I GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Proposed Expansion of Existing Business Center
Parcels 1 through 9 of Tract 28657
Diaz Road, City of Temecula
County of Riverside, California
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 4,1998
RECFIVED
MAY 061998
CITY OF TEMECULA
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Prepared for:
Westside Business Centers
41965 Winchester Road
Temecula, California 92590
"
\
~=.===<,
, I" I" I""
/",,- "I....~" ~- ~/..../,,-- '-./,-- /
\ .... '" \ - - - \,... '__" - - - \ \ - ~ - \ /" " " I -" _ ~ \.r'" , .... \. - - \ F .... ' I .-
\' -,' '- ~ ",' - / '- - ~" - " - ~ " - / - "" - ," --:..., -- ".~-: _.,..~- / - - - ~
" __ I "" F __ I \ ,\__ I ,,\ " - ,,\ ,,\__ .1-~_.:: ,__I -\,.- - ~- - "-,.-
~F:::~~_~~ ".1 ~ ~ " /,:._ ~~~~~_:, ~/ ,"__j_.~__~ " _'_'.,' - __:",:__ ,Il__- , _' __ ~~+~- ~!~-, ,: :,__ _, ,_' c_"a
.,~<.."",e.QL'~W;~Iit~~~~i!. E te'Pfi~ecCircleN rt ,'suite:l;:Teinecuta, CA 92590-.~bhone;,(9QJllElIEl-309&' fax;;(909)El7El-3.;i~l~
,". < ~... :C,0~~t>iGs2~;Q:UNPlc@ 1~~El~!5;O'anQe A e . ue.'9,~~i~Ana, CA 92707 . phone; (714) 546,4051'J~j<;tT14)5.46..40:og, c,..' ......A
-. EB SITE: vVWW, N ENCORP:COM' E.MAIL: ENGENCORP@PE.NET ,..
, '
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Westslde Business Centers
Project Number. T13S1-GS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Number and Title Paae
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................,..............2
2.0 INTRODUCTION ...................,.................................................................................,..........2
2.1 Authorization
2.2 Scope of Study
2.3 Previous Site Studies
3.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT I PROJECT DESCRIPTION.............................................3
4.0 SITE DESCRIPTION..........................................................................................................3
4.1 Location
4.2 Legal Description
4.3 Topography
4.4 Vegetation
4.5 Structures
5.0 FIELD STUDY ..................................................................................................................4
6.0 LABORATORY TESTING .................................................................................................5
6.1 General
6.2 Classification
6.3 In-Situ Moisture Content and Density Test
6.4 Consolidation Test
6.5 Maximum Dry Density I Optimum Moisture Content Relationship Test
6.6 Direct Shear Test
6.7 Expansion Test
7.0 SITE CONDITIONS............................................................................................................8
7.1 Geologic Setting
7.2 Faulting
7.3 Earth Materials
7.3.1 Artificial Fill (At)
7.3.2 Slopewash
7.3.3 Alluvium (Qal)
7.3.4 Bedrock (Pauba Formation - Qp)
7.4 Groundwater
7.5 Liquefaction Evaluation
7.6 Secondary Effects of Seismic Activity
8.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...............................................................12
8.1 General
8.2 Earthwork Recommendations
8.2.1 General
8.2.2 Clearing
8.2.3 Excavation Characteristics
8.2.4 Suitability of On-Site Materials as Fill
EnGEN Corporation
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Westslde Business Centers
Project Number. T1381-GS
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cant)
Section Number and Title Paae
8.2.5 Removal and Recompaction ..................................................................13
8.2.6 Cut/Fill Transition Areas
8.2.7 Fill Placement Requirements
8.2.8 Compaction Equipment
8.2.9 Shrinkage and Subsidence
8.2.10 Subdrains
8.2.11 Observation and Testing
8.2.12 Keyways
8.2.13 Benching
8.2.14 Fill Slopes
8.2.15 Cut Slopes
8.2.16 Soil Expansion Potential
8.3 Seismic Design Recommendations ... ..... ...... ... .............. ..................................... ..19
8.3.1 Design Fault Zone
8.3.2 Ground Accelerations
8.4 Foundation Design Recommendations ................................................................19
8.4.1 General
8.4.2 Foundation Size
8.4.3 Depth of Embedment
8.4.4 Bearing Capacity
8.4.5 Settlement
8.4.6 Lateral Capacity
8.5 Slab-on-Grade Recommendations ......... ...... ......................... .................... ......... ..21
8.5.1 Interior Slabs
8.5.2 Exterior Slabs
8.6 Pavement Design Recommendations.. ............. .... ... ... ...................... .................. .23
8.7 Utility Trench Recommendations
8.8 Finish Lot Drainage Recommendations
8.9 Planter Recommendations
8.10 Temporary Construction Excavation Recommendations
9.0 PLAN REVIEW ................................................................................................................27
10.0 PRE-BID CONFERENCE.......... ... ..... .... ................. ....... ................... ......................... ..... .27
11.0 PRE-GRADING CONFERENCE......... .... ....... ......... ....... ............................................ ..... .28
12.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING .....................................................28
13.0 CLOSURE
APPENDIX:
...............................................................................................................~
TECHNICAL REFERENCES
EXPLORATORY BORING LOG SUMMARIES
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
DRAWINGS
EnGEN Corporation
z.
I
LZ;;;/" .. 2'h" ../#'"
I ~~GEN
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
. f
Corporation
-Soil Engineering and Consulting Services. Engineering GeolollY . Compaction Testing
.lnspeclions-ConstructionMaterialsTesting-LaboratoryTesting-Perco)ationTesting
. Geology. Water Resource Studies . Phase I & II Environmental Site Assessments
ENVIRONMENTAL & GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING NETWORK
May 4, 1998
Westside Business Centers
41965 Winchester Road
Temecula, California 92590
(909) 693-1430' FAX (909) 693-1429
Attention:
Mr. Max Harrison
Regarding:
UPDATED GEOTECHNICAL' GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Proposed Expansion of the Existing Business Center
Parcels 1 through 9 of Tract 28657
Diaz Road, City of Temecula
County of Riverside, California
Project Number: T1381-GS
References:
HLC Engineering, Tentative Parcel Map 28657 and Phasing Map,
Amendment No.5, plans amended March 10, 1998.
EnGEN Corporation, Fault Location Investigation, Existing Restricted Use
Zone, Parcel Maps 24085 and 24086, City of Temecula, County of
Riverside, California, Project Number: T1179-FS, report dated August 29,
1997 and County Response letter dated April 29, 1998.
EnGEN Corporation, Updated Geotechnical/Geological Engineering
Study, Proposed Expansion of Existing Business Center, Parcels 1 through
10 of Parcel Map 24085, Diaz Road, City of Temecula, Project Number:
T1075-GS, report dated August 19, 1996.
Geo Soils, Inc., Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation of Lots 14
through 22, Phase 1 of Tentative Parcel Map 24085, Temecula, Riverside
County, California; WOo 686-A-RC, report dated May 4, 1994.
Schaefer Dixon Associates, Inc., Report on Geotechnical Investigation,
Assessment District No. 155, Parcel Map 24085, 24086, 21029, 21382,
and 21383, Rancho California, Riverside County, California, report dated
June 7,1989.
Leighton and Associates, Report on Preliminary Geotechnical
Investigation, Proposed Industrial' Commercial Site West of Cherry Street
and Diaz Road, A. D. No. 155, Rancho California, Riverside County,
California, report dated June 23, 1986.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Dear Mr. Harrison:
"\
, .According to your request and signed authorization, we have performed an Updated Geotechnical
\ Geologic Engineering Study for the subject project. The purpose of this study was to evaluate
the existing geologic and geotechnical conditions within the subject property with respect to
. ~Q,AAljRQ~R o.!l..9padiog,.oJ e,.slt!3..~Od..i 'o..r.e.commeodations,.f.or,.fQuodatioQs,,.slabs, ,,' _ _,"
_ . __on; e,pavemen c.,-or eip ose eve 0 en.' u ml e; rewI ,.are 'eresu so .-','--
: '. ~-tt1is's'fihdings:a- recommen< -s;alo'ngwith e"supportingdata..:::' '__c~:".': :_~ '; ~ --: ',': ~~-
\ /\ _; \ ~,' /'___ 1\ ' ~ ,\' ".".>_~"',c..~,;.i,,, ~)~r--"-'-----'-'
~._:J,~~_.~~_ : -: ~~~, ~,I n ~-: ". e
"Coa 1l;[E.OEElCE4:i'60 E terpdseCiJci.'N rt,Suite.1,TemeCula. CA 92590'.'phone: (9091676-3095. fa.:. (909) 676,3294 "
. - --::_-"-:.":~'-'"-,,"-:,--,--~-- :'-~'-'" :'-'- ,',' -,----_:---<---::'-~,-_:_::- - - - - - - - ----~"-" - - - -- - ,'-:-'
".JDAANl:iS,Ci:ou~rYo 16",26.15'.o',ange'l\ e u~;S,.a"ri1,a, Ana. CA 92707, . ph, one: 1]141 546, -4051. la.:17141 546.4052
" ,,--.- Eii S'IIE: WWw.NENcilRP.COM . E.MAIL: ENGENCORP@PE.NET ,,'"
',c...--.
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 2
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
An updated geotechnical study of the subsurface conditions of the subject site has been
performed for the proposed development. Exploratory excavations have been performed
and earth material samples subjected to laboratory testing. The data have been analyzed
with respect to the project information furnished to us for the proposed development. It is
the opinion of this firm that the proposed development is feasible from a geotechnical ,
geologic standpoint, provided that the recommendations presented in this report are
followed in the design and construction of the project.
2.0 INTRODUCTION
2.1 Authorization: This report presents the results of the updated geotechnical \ geological
engineering study performed on the subject site for the proposed development.
Authorization to perform this study was in the form of a signed proposal from EnGEN
Corporation to Westside Business Centers, dated March 6, 1998.
2.2 Scooe of Study: The scope of work performed for this study was designed to determine
and evaluate the surface and subsurface conditions within the subject site with respect to
geotechnical characteristics, and to provide recommendations and criteria for use by the
Design Engineers and Architect for the development of the site and for design and
construction of the proposed development. The scope of work included the following: 1)
site reconnaissance and surface geologic mapping; 2) subsurface exploration; 3)
sampling of on-site earth materials; 4) laboratory testing; 5) engineering analysis of field
and laboratory data; and 6) the preparation of this report.
2.3 Previous Site Studies: Previous subsurface explorations and testing have been
performed on the subject site (See References).
bt;
EnGEN Corporation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
" I
Wests Ide Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 3
3.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT' PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project is the rough grading of 9 parcels for future development. It is our
understanding that each parcel will be developed into commercial \ industrial sites and will
be developed on an as-required basis and should be reviewed by the Geotechnical
Consultant to determine if additional geotechnical studies are required. It is assumed that
relatively light loads will be imposed on the foundation soils. The foundation loads are not
anticipated to exceed 4,000 pounds per lineal foot (pit) for continuous footings. It is
assumed that the proposed structure floors will consist of a concrete slab cast on
compacted subgrade. The proposed grading for the site will encompass maximum cuts
up to approximately 30 feet and fills ranging from 0.0 to approximately 10 feet. The
objective of the development is to create pads for industrial'commercial structures, with
associated driveways and parking area. The maximum slope (cut and fill) height will be
':'?"d 0(<...
approximately 22-feet at a ratio of 2: 1 (horizontal to vertical). The above project
description and assumptions were used as the basis for the field and laboratory
exploration and testing programs and the engineering analysis for the conclusions and
recommendations presented in this report. This office should be notified if structures,
foundation loads, grading, and'or details other than those represented herein are
proposed for final development of the site so a review can be performed, supplemental
evaluation made, and revised recommendations submitted, if required.
4.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
4.1. Location: The site encompasses approximately 57 acres and is located west of Diaz
Road and north of Remington Avenue, in the City of Temecula, Riverside County,
California.
4.2 LeQal Description: Parcels 1 through 9 of Parcel Map 28657.
EnGEN Corporation
/'
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 4
4.3 TODOqraDhv: The topography of the site at the time of this study was relatively flat on the
eastern portion of the property and gently to moderately sloping on the west side of the
property. A portion of the west side of the property had been previously graded flat.
Drainage on the property was toward the northeast. A small pond exists north of
Remington Avenue on Lots 2 and 3.
4.4 Veqetation: At the time of the field study, vegetation across the site was light to moderate
and consisted of seasonal grasses, weeds, bushes and trees.
4.5 Structures: At the time of the field study, there were no existing buildings or other types
of structures on the site. However, there are two (2) man made dam structures (earthen
dams) once used for irrigation located on the site. One dam structure is located north of
Remington on Parcels 4 and 5 and the other dam structure is located on Parcels 8 and 9.
5.0 FIELD STUDY
Site observations and geologic mapping were conducted on March 12, 1998, by our Staff
Geologist. A study of the property's subsurface condition was performed to evaluate
underlying earth strata and the presence of groundwater. Six (6) exploratory borings were
excavated on the study site on March 12 and 13, 1998. The borings were performed by
ABC Drilling, using a truck-mounted, CME-75 drill rig equipped with 8.0-inch outside
diameter hollow-stem augers. The maximum depth explored was approximately 42-feet
below the existing land surface at the excavation locations. Bulk and relatively
undisturbed samples of the earth materials encountered were obtained at various depths
in the exploratory borings and returned to our laboratory for verification of field
classifications and testing. Bulk samples were obtained from cuttings developed during
the excavation process and represent a mixture of the soils within the depth indicated on
the logs. Relatively undisturbed samples of the earth materials encountered were
EnGEN Corporation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Westslde Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 5
obtained by driving a thin-walled steel sampler lined with 1.0-inch high, 2.42-inch inside
diameter brass rings. The sampler was driven with successive drops of a 140-pound
weight having a free fall of approximately 30-inches. The blow counts for each successive
6.0-inches of penetration, or fraction thereof, are shown in the Exploratory Boring Log
Summaries presented in the Appendix. The ring samples were retained in close-fitting
moisture-proof containers and returned to our laboratory for testing. The approximate
locations of the exploratory excavations are denoted on the Geotechnical Study Site Plan.
The exploratory boring excavations were backfilled with excavated soil.
6.0 LABORATORY TESTING
6.1 General: The results of laboratory tests performed on samples of earth material obtained
during the field study are presented in the Appendix. Following is a listing and brief
explanation of the laboratory tests which were performed. The samples obtained during
the field study will be discarded 30 days after the date of this report. This office should be
notified immediately if retention of samples will be needed beyond 30 days.
6.2 Classification: The field classification of soil materials encountered in the exploratory
borings was verified in the laboratory in general accordance with the Unified Soils
Classification System, ASTM 02488-90, Standard Practice for Determination and
Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedures). The final classification is shown in the
Exploratory Boring Log Summaries presented in the Appendix.
6.3 In-Situ Moisture Content and Density Test: The in-situ moisture content and dry
density were determined in general accordance with ASTM D2216-90 and D2937-
83(1990) procedures, respectively, for each selected undisturbed sample obtained. The
dry density is determined in pounds per cubic foot and the moisture content is determined
as a percentage of the oven dry weight of the soil. Test results are shown in the
EnGEN Corporation
'='
_...._..-~~_.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Weslside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 6
Exploratory Boring Log Summaries presented in the Appendix.
6.4 Consolidation Test: Settlement predictions of the on-site soil and compacted fill behavior
under load were made, based on consolidation tests that were performed in general
accordance with ASTM D2435-90 procedures. The consolidation apparatus is designed to
receive a 1.0-inch high, 2.416-inch diameter ring sample. Porous stones are placed in
contact with the top and bottom of each specimen to permit addition and release of pore
water and pore pressure. Loads normal to the face of the specimen are applied in several
increments in a geometric progression under both field moisture and submerged
conditions. The resulting changes in sample thickness are recorded at selected time
intervals. Water was added to the test apparatus at loads ranging from 800 psf to 6400
psf to create a submerged condition and to measure the collapse potential
(hydroconsolidation) of the sample. The resulting change in sample thickness was
recorded.
6.5 Maximum Dry Densitv , Optimum Moisture Content Relationship Test: Maximum dry
density' optimum moisture content relationship determination was performed on samples
of near-surface earth material in general accordance with ASTM D1557-91 procedures
using a 4.0-inch diameter mold. Samples were prepared at various moisture contents and
compacted in five (5) layers using a 10-pound weight dropping 18-inches and with 25
blows per layer. A plot of the compacted dry density versus the moisture content of the
specimens is constructed and the maximum dry density and optimum moisture content
determined from the plot.
6.6 Direct Shear Test: Direct shear tests were performed on selected samples of near-
surface earth material in general accordance with ASTM D3080-90 procedures. The
shear machine is of the constant strain type. The shear machine is designed to receive a
EnGEN Corporation
1
.
I
I
-.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 7
1.0-inch high, 2.416-inch diameter ring sample. Specimens from the sample were sheared
at various pressures normal to the face of the specimens. The specimens were tested in
a submerged condition. The maximum shear stresses were plotted versus the normal
confining stresses to determine the shear strength (cohesion and angle of internal friction).
6.7 Expansion Test: Laboratory expansion tests were performed on samples of near-surface
earth material in general accordance with the Uniform Building Code (UBC) Standard. In
this testing procedure, a remolded sample is compacted in two (2) layers in a 4.0-inch
diameter mold to a total compacted thickness of approximately 1.0-inch by using a 5.5-
pound weight dropping 12-inches and with 15 blows per layer. The sample should be
compacted at a saturation between 49 and 51 percent. After remolding, the sample is
confined under a pressure of 144 pounds per square foot (pst) and allowed to soak for 24
hours. The resulting volume change due to the increase in moisture content within the
sample is recorded and the Expansion Index (EI) calculated. The expansion test result is
presented on the UBC Laboratory Expansion Test Results sheet.
7.0 SITE CONDITIONS
7.1 Geoloaic Settina: The site is located in the Northern Peninsular Range on the southern
sector of the structural unit known as the Perris Block. The Perris Block is bounded on the
northeast by the San Jacinto Fault Zone, on the southwest by the Elsinore Fault Zone, and
on the north by the Cucamonga Fault Zone. The southern boundary of the Perris Block is
not as distinct, but is believed to coincide with a complex group of faults trending southeast
from the Murrieta, California, area. The Peninsular Range is characterized by large
Mesozoic age intrusive rock masses flanked by volcanic, metasedimentary, and
sedimentary rocks. Various thicknesses of colluvial' alluvial sediments derived from the
erosion of the elevated portions of the region fill the low lying areas. Pauba Formation
EnGEN Corporation
%
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..
J
..
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 8
bedrock, alluvium and undocumented fill underlie the subject property and surrounding
area. The earth materials encountered on the subject site are described in more detail in
subsequent sections of this report.
7.2 Faultincl: The Murrieta Creek Fault traverses the property and has been documented by
previous reports (References 2, 4 and 5). Offsets have been surveyed and placed on the
rough grading plans (Reference 1). The Wildomar fault segment of the Elsinore Fault
Zone is located approximately 2,500 feet northeast of the subject site. A maximum
credible earthquake on the Elsinore Fault Zone could produce a peak ground acceleration
of 0.86g at the subject site.
Elsinore Fault Zone: The Elsinore Fault Zone is a prominent and youthful structural
boundary between the Perris Block to the northeast and the Santa Ana mountains to the
southwest. The Elsinore Fault system is a major right lateral strike-slip fault system that
has experienced strong earthquakes in historical times, (1856, 1894, and 1910), and
exhibits late Quaternary movement.
7.3 Earth Materials: A brief description of the earth materials encountered in the exploratory
excavations is presented in the following sections. A more detailed description of the earth
materials encountered is presented on the Exploratory Boring Log Summaries presented
in the Appendix. The earth material strata as shown on the logs represent the conditions
in the actual exploratory locations and other variations may occur between the
excavations. Lines of demarcation between the earth materials on the logs represented
the approximate boundary between the material types; however, the transition may be
gradual.
7.3.1 Artificial Fill /Afll: Undocumented fill materials were observed at various locations
throughout the site (see plans). These materials are associated with dirt access roads,
EnGEN Corporation
<\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
! I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..
J
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 9
spoils from the construction of Remington Avenue and dams built for irrigation. These
materials consist of silty sand and sandy silt and were found to be dry to wet and loose to
medium dense. Maximum thickness of these fills in access road areas is thought to be up
to seven (7) feet thick. Maximum thickness for these fills along Remington Avenue is
thought to be less than three (3) feet. Maximum thickness for these fills in the two (2) dam
areas is thought to be approximately 15 feet for the dam located adjacent to Remington
Avenue and approximately 20 feet for the dam located on Parcels 8 and 9.
7.3.2 SloDewash (no maD svmboll: Slopewash covering the Pauba Formation bedrock was
encountered on the natural, gently to moderately sloping area in the central and
northwestern portions of the property. Slopewash materials were observed to depths of
1.5 to 3.0-feet and consisted of silty sands to sandy silts and were found to be moist and
soft.
7.3.3 Alluvium IQall: Alluvium was encountered on the lower eastern portion of the property to
the maximum depth explored (42-feet). These alluvial materials consisted of sandy silt,
silty sand, silty clay, clayey silt and sand and were found to be slightly moist to wet and
loose to dense in place. Alluvium was also observed in the narrow drainage areas located
on Parcels 3 and 4 and appeared to be of minimal thickness (2.0 to 3.0-feet) and
consisted of silty sands. Alluvium encountered on Parcels 8 and 9 was found to be
approximately six (6) to seven (7) feet thick and consisted of silty sand and sandy silt that
were found to be moist and medium dense to dense.
7.3.4 Bedrock (Pauba Formation - QD): Pauba Formation bedrock was encountered below
the slopewash and was exposed on the graded pad in the elevated portions of the site to
the maximum depths explored. Bedrock materials consist of sandstone, siltstone, sandy
siltstone and silty sandstone and were found to be slightly moist and dense in place. The
EnGEN Corporation
\.0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"I
Wests ide Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 1 0
top 1.0 to 2.0-feet of bedrock is weathered. Earlier studies (Reference No.5) and
observations of in-situ samples reveal relatively horizontal bedding.
7.4 Groundwater: Groundwater was encountered at 19 to 22-feet below the existing ground
surface in the lower flat lying portions on the east side of the property.
7.5 Liauefaction Evaluation: Liquefaction is a phenomenon where a sudden large decrease
of shearing resistance takes place in fine-grained cohesionless and'or low plasticity
cohesive soils due to the cyclic stresses produced by earthquakes causing a sudden, but
temporary, increase of porewater pressure. The increased porewater pressure occurs
below the water table, but can cause propagation of groundwater upward into overlying
soil and possibly to the ground surface and cause sand boils as excess porewater
escapes. Potential hazards due to liquefaction include significant total and'or differential
settlements of the ground surface and structures as well as possible collapse of structures
due to loss of support of foundations. It has been shown by laboratory testing and from
the analysis of soil conditions at sites where liquefaction has occurred that the soil types
most susceptible to liquefaction are saturated, fine sand to sandy silt with a mean grain
size ranging from approximately 0.075 mm to 0.5 mm. These soils derive their shear
strength from intergranular friction and do not drain quickly during earthquakes. Published
studies and field and laboratory test data indicate that coarse sands and silty or clayey
sands beyond the above-mentioned grain size range are considerably less vulnerable to
liquefaction. To a large extent, the relative density of the soil also controls the
susceptibility to liquefaction for ~ given number of cycles and acceleration levels during a
seismic event. Other characteristics such as confining pressure and the stresses created
within the soil during a seismic event also affect the liquefaction potential of a site.
Liquefaction of soil does not generally occur below depths of 40 to 50-feet below the
ground surface due to the confining pressure at that depth. The potential for liquefaction
EnGEN Corporation
y\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
7.6
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 11
of the site is considered to be moderate-to-high due to the following conditions:
. The existence of nearby major faults may cause exceptionally high ground
accelerations at the site.
. The fine grained nature (silty fine sands, fine sands, fine to medium sands, and fine
sandy silts) of the earth materials encountered make them susceptible to liquefaction.
. Low to medium relative densities of some of the in-situ soils above and below the
groundwater table as determined by the Standard Penetration Resistance tests
performed and blow counts obtained in driving the ring sampler during the field study
and the in-situ densities of the soils.
. Historically, the groundwater table within the vicinity of the site has risen to less than
10-feet below ground surface. This data was taken into consideration when analyzing
for the potential for liquefaction.
Based on the proposed removal depths (see below) and the planned fills, a blanket of
engineered fill greater than 10-feet thick is expected below future proposed structures.
The proposed thickness (minimum of 10-feet) of this engineered fill is expected to mitigate
for the effects of liquefaction.
Secondary Effects of Seismic Activity: The secondary effects of seismic activity
normally considered as possible hazards to a site include various types of ground failure
and induced flooding. The probability of occurrence of each type of ground failure
depends on the severity of the earthquake, the distance of the site from the zone of
maximum energy release of the quake, the topography of the site, the subsurface
materials at the site, and groundwater conditions beneath the site, besides other factors.
The issue of hazards associated with fault rupture has been addressed (See Reference
No.2) and a restricted use zone has been established. Due to the overall favorable
geologic structure and topography of the area, the potential for earthquake-induced
landslides or rockfalls is considered low. Earthquake-induced surface flooding due to
seiches or tsunamis is considered low since there are no nearby large bodies of water up
gradient from the site.
EnGEN Corporation
\Z-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8.2
8.2.1
Westside Business Centers
Project Number. T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 12
8.0
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
8.1
General: The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on
the results of field and laboratory data obtained from the exploratory excavations located
across the property, experience gained from work conducted by this firm on projects within
the property and general vicinity, and the project description and assumptions presented in
the Proposed Development' Project Description section of this report. Based on a review
of the field and laboratory data and the engineering analysis, the proposed development is
feasible from a geotechnical' geologic standpoint. The actual conditions of the near-
surface supporting material across the site may vary. The nature and extent of variations
of the surface and subsurface conditions between the exploratory excavations may not
become evident until construction. If variations of the material become evident during
construction of the proposed development, this office should be notified so that EnGEN
Corporation can evaluate the characteristics of the material and, if needed, make
revisions to the recommendations presented herein. Recommendations for general site
grading, foundations, slab support, pavement design, slope maintenance, etc., are
presented in the subsequent paragraphs.
Specific earthwork and foundation
recommendations for each parcel should be made when specific grading and foundation
plans become available.
Earthwork Recommendations:
General: The recommendations presented in this report are based on the Reference No.
1 grading plan. No construction of habitable structures should take place in the
designated fault zones (restricted use zones). The grading recommendations presented
in this report are intended for: 1) the use of a conventional shallow foundation system and
concrete slabs cast on-grade; and 2) the rework of unsuitable, near-surface earth
EnGEN Corporation
\3>
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 13
materials to create an engineered building pad and suitable support for exterior hardscape
(sidewalks, patios, etc.) and pavement. If pavement subgrade soils are prepared at the
time of rough grading of the building site and the areas are not paved immediately,
additional observations and testing of the subgrade soil will have to be performed before
placing aggregate base material or asphaltic concrete or PCC pavement to locate areas
which may have been damaged by construction traffic, construction activities, and/or
seasonal wetting and drying. The following recommendations may need to be modified
and'or supplemented during rough grading as field conditions require.
8.2.2 Clearina: All debris, grasses, weeds, brush, trees and other deleterious materials should
be removed from the proposed building, exterior hardscape and pavement areas and
areas to receive structural fill before grading is performed. No disking or mixing of organic
material into the soils should be performed. Man-made objects encountered should be
overexcavated and exported from the site.
8.2.3 Excavation Characteristics: Excavation and trenching within the subject property is
anticipated to be relatively easy.
8.2.4 Suitability of On-Site Materials as Fill: In general, the on-site earth materials present
are considered suitable for reuse as fill. Fill materials should be free of significant amounts
of organic materials and'or debris and should not contain rocks or clumps greater than
6.0-inches in maximum dimension.
8.2.5 Removal and RecomDaction: All existing uncontrolled or undocumented fills (including
former fault trenches) and/or unsuitable, loose, or disturbed near-surface slopewash and
alluvium in proposed areas which will support structural fills, structures, exterior hardscape
(sidewalks, patios, etc.), and pavement should be prepared in accordance with the
following recommendations for grading in such areas.
EnGEN Corporation
\'\
I
I
.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Westslde Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 14
Parcels 1. 2. eastern portion of 3. 6 and 7: All undocumented fill shall be removed. All
unsuitable alluvium should be removed to competent alluvium. Removal depths in the
alluvial soils are expected to be approximately 5 to 7-feet. Removal depths at bottom of
pond area on Parcels 2 and 3 should be determined during grading by the Soils Engineer
representative. All natural bottom areas should be inspected by the Project Engineering
Geologist or the Project Geotechnical Engineer, or their representatives. Prior to placing
fill, the exposed surface should be scarified 12-inches, brought to within 2.0 percent of
optimum moisture content, and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative
compaction before placement of fill. It is possible that some bottom areas will require
special stabilization involving imported granular materials in the bottoms prior to
recompaction. Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for compacted
materials should be determined according to ASTM D1557-91 procedures. Although
removals are not necessary within the designated fault zones (unless specified by the City
of Temecula), removals may be required in these areas in the future if they exist within a
1: 1 plane projected outward from future proposed perimeter building footings.
Parcels 3. 4. 5. 8 and 9: All undocumented fill (map symbol Aft), slopewash, alluvium and
incompetent weathered bedrock should be removed to competent bedrock.
Undocumented fill removals in the dam areas are expected to be approximately 15 to 20
feet below the top of the dams. Undocumented fills along the north side of Remington
Avenue are expected to be less than three (3) feet but may be deeper in localized areas.
The small area of undocumented fill observed on the southwest side of Parcel 9 is
expected to need three (3) to five (5) feet of removals. The aerial extent of this fill is not
known and may project into Parcel 5. Slopewash removals are expected to be one (1) to
three (3) feet deep. Alluvial removals in the narrow drainage areas on Parcels 3 and 4 are
expected to be two (2) to three (3) feet deep but may be deeper in localized areas.
EnGEN corpol'2tion
~?
I
-I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wests ide Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 15
Alluvial removals on Parcels 8 and 9 are expected to be six (6) to seven (7) feet deep but
may be deeper in localized areas. All natural bottom areas should be inspected by the
Project Engineering Geologist or the Project Geotechnical Engineer, or their
representatives. In areas to receive fill, the existing ground surface should be scarified 12-
inches, brought to within 2.0 percent of optimum moisture content, and compacted to a
minimum of 90 percent relative compaction before placement of fill. Maximum dry density
and optimum moisture content for compacted materials should be determined according to
ASTM D1557-91 procedures. Although removals are not necessary within the designated
fault zones (unless specified by the City of Temecula), removals may be required in these
areas in the future if they exist within a 1: 1 plane projected outward from. future proposed
perimeter building footings.
8.2.6 Cut/Fill Transition Areas: The proposed grading will leave cut, fill transition areas in
graded Parcel Numbers 3, 4, 5, 8 and 9. These areas will need to be addressed when
final grading and building plans for each specific parcel become available. However,
removals of incompetent fill, slopewash, alluvium or weathered bedrock should also be
performed on the "cut" portion of all cut/fill transition zones so that only competent bedrock
and'or properly documented engineered fill exists in these pads.
8.2.7 Fill Placement Requirements: All fill material, whether on-site material or import, should
be approved by the Project Geotechnical Engineer and/or his representative before
placement. All fill should be free from vegetation, organic material, debris, and oversize
material. Import fill should be no more expansive than the existing on-site material. as
determined by UBC 29-2 procedures. Approved fill material should be placed in horizontal
lifts not exceeding 10-inches in compacted thickness and watered or aerated to obtain
near optimum moisture content (:1:2.0 percent of optimum). Each lift should be spread
evenly and should be thoroughly mixed to ensure uniformity of soil moisture. Structural fill
EnGEN Corporation
\C:::>
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 16
should meet a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Maximum dry density and
optimum moisture content for compacted materials should be determined in accordance
with ASTM D1557 -91 procedures. Moisture content of fill materials should not vary more
than 2.0 percent from optimum, unless approved the Project Geotechnical Engineer.
8.2.8 Compaction Eauipment: It is anticipated that the compaction equipment to be used for
the project will include a combination of rubber-tired and sheepsfoot rollers to achieve
proper compaction. Compaction by rubber-tired or track-mounted equipment, by itself,
may not be sufficient. Adequate water trucks, water pulls, and/or other suitable equipment
should be available to provide sufficient moisture and dust control. The actual selection of
equipment is the responsibility of the contractor performing the work and should be such
that uniform and proper compaction of the fill is achieved.
8.2.9 Shrinkaae and Subsidence: There will be a material loss due to the clearing and
grubbing operations. Shrinkage of approximately 10 to 20 percent of loose fill, slopewash
and alluvium that is excavated and replaced as compacted fill should be anticipated.
Minimal shrinkage of Pauba Formation bedrock should be expected. Subsidence of the
natural deposits due to the placement of fill is only expected to affect Parcels 1, 2, 6 and 7,
where a blanket of fill on the order of approximately 10-feet thick will be placed during
grading. The results of calculations indicate that subsidence of 3.0 to 5.0-inches may be
experienced. The majority of that subsidence is expected to be rapid, occurring within the
time frame anticipated for construction. Some secondary consolidation, however, is
expected to be realized as long-term settlement, but, due to the depth of recompaction is
projected as being relatively uniform across the limits of anyone parcel. It is
recommended that settlement monitors be placed on Parcels 1, 2, 6 and 7 at the removal
bottoms prior to recompaction and be read on a weekly basis until further
recommendations from the Geotechnical Engineer. Special care should be taken to
EnGEN Corporation
f1
I
'1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wests ide Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 17
ensure that the settlement markers do not get damaged during construction.
8.2.10 Subdrains: Although the need for subdrains is not anticipated at this time, final
recommendations should be made during grading by the Project Engineering Geologist.
8.2.11 Observation and Testing: During grading, observation and testing should be conducted
by the Geotechnical Engineer and'or his representative to verify that the grading is being
performed according to the recommendations presented in this report. The Project
Geotechnical Engineer and'or his representative should observe the scarification and the
placement of fill and should take tests to verify the moisture content, density, uniformity
and degree of compaction obtained. Where testing demonstrates insufficient density,
additional compaction effort, with the adjustment of the moisture content where necessary,
should be applied until retesting shows that satisfactory relative compaction has been
obtained. The results of observations and testing services should be presented in a formal
Finish Grading Report following completion of the grading operations. Grading operations
undertaken at the site without the Geotechnical Engineer and'or his representative present
may result in exclusions of the affected areas from the finish grading report for the project.
The presence of the Geotechnical Engineer and'or his representative will be for the
purpose of providing observations and field testing and will not include any supervision or
directing of the actual work of the contractor or the contractor's employees or agents.
Neither the presence and'or the non-presence of the Geotechnical Engineer and'or his
field representative nor the field observations and testing shall excuse the contractor in
any way for defects discovered in the contractor's work.
8.2.12 Kevwavs: The proposed grading will create fill slopes over cut slopes. If the proposed fill
slope is to be placed over natural ground with gradients steeper than 5: 1 (horizontal to
vertical) then a keyway should be installed. The keyway should be sloped downward (a
EnGEN Corporation
\co
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..1
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 18
minimum of 2 percent gradient) into the slope and be a minimum of 15-feet wide into
competent bedrock. All keyways should be inspected by the Project Geotechnical
Engineer or the Project Engineering Geologist and'or their representative.
8.2.13 Benchinq: Compacted fill placed on natural slope surfaces inclined at 5:1 (horizontal to
vertical) or steeper should be placed on a series of level benches excavated into
competent native materials. The benches should have a minimum 4.0-foot high backcut
into competent material.
8.2.14 Fill Slopes: Finish fill slopes should not be inclined steeper than 2:1 (horizontal to
vertical). Fill slope surfaces should be compacted to 90 percent relative compaction to the
face of the finished slope. Fill slopes should be constructed in a skillful manner so that
they are positioned at the design orientations and slope ratio. Achieving a uniform slope
surface by subsequent thin wedge filling should be avoided. Add-on correction to a fill
slope should be conducted under the observation and recommendations of the project
Geotechnical Engineer or Engineering Geologist. The proposed add-on correction
procedures should be submitted in writing by the contractor before commencement of
corrective grading and reviewed by the project Geotechnical Engineer or Engineering
Geologist. Compacted fill slopes should be backrolled with suitable equipment for the type
of soil being used during fill placement at intervals not exceeding 4.0-feet in vertical height.
As an alternative to the backrolling of the fill slopes, over-filling of the slopes will be
considered acceptable and preferred. The fill slope should be constructed by over-filling
with compacted fill a minimum of 3.0-feet horizontally, and then trimmed back to expose
the dense inner core of the slope surface.
8.2.15 Cut Slopes: Finish cut slopes in bedrock should not be inclined steeper than 2:1
(horizontal to vertical). All cut slopes should be observed by the project Geotechnical
EnGEN Corporation
\l\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Westslde Business Centers
Project Number. T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 19
Engineer, Engineering Geologist and'or their representative during grading to provide
supplemental recommendations for safe slopes, if required. Cut slopes that face in the
same direction as the prevailing natural slope will require top of cut paved interceptor
swales.
8.2.16 Soil Expansion Potential: Upon completion of fine grading of the building pad, near-
surface samples should be obtained for expansion potential testing to verify the
preliminary expansion test results and the foundation and slab-on-grade recommendations
presented in this report. The results of recent testing indicate expansion indexes from 0 to
43 which are classified as ranging from very low to low expansion potential.
8.3 Seismic Desiqn Recommendations:
8.3.1 Desiqn Fault Zone: The most significant earthquakes that may affect the site are
anticipated to occur along the Elsinore Fault Zone.
8.3.2 Ground Accelerations: An earthquake originating along the Elsinore Fault Zone with a
maximum credible magnitude of 7.5 could be expected to generate a peak ground
acceleration at the site in excess of approximately 0.86g. It should be noted that the
intensity of the anticipated motions will depend on the magnitude of the earthquake and on
the distance of the zone of maximum energy release from the site. If designed to the 1997
UBC, the following factors apply:
- Seismic Source Type: Type B Fault
- Distance to Closest Seismic Source: Less Than 2km
- Soil Profile Type: So
8.4 Foundation Desiqn Recommendations:
8.4.1 General: Final foundation recommendations should be made when proposed building
plans become available. The following foundation recommendations are tentative and are
based on field and laboratory data obtained from this investigation. Foundations for the
EnGEN Corporation
"2-0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wests Ide Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 20 .
proposed structure may consist of conventional column footings and continuous wall
footings founded upon properly compacted fill or competent bedrock. The
recommendations presented in the subsequent paragraphs for foundation design and
construction are based on geotechnical characteristics and a 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.
8.4.2 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 bar located near the top and one (1) NO.4 steel reinforcing bar located
near the bottom of the 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 doorway and garage entrances.
8.4.3 Depth of Embedment: Exterior and interior footings founded in properly compacted fill or
competent bedrock should extend to a minimum depth of 18-inches below lowest adjacent
finish grade.
8.4.4 BearinQ Capacity: Provided the recommendations for site earthwork, 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 2500 psf for continuous
footings and 2500 psf for column footings in properly compacted fill or competent bedrock
EnGEN Corporation
l,\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wests ide Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 21
material. This value may be increased by 20 percent for each additional foot of depth
and'or foot of width to a maximum of 3.0 times the designated allowable value. 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.
8.4.5 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 0.75-inch or a
differential settlement of 0.25-inch in properly compacted fill.
8.4.6 Lateral CaDacitv: 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 Fill - 200 pcf
Bedrock - 350 pcf
Compacted Fill - 0.35 pcf
Bedrock - 0.35 pcf
Allowable Coefficient of Friction:
Lateral load resistance may be developed by a combination of friction acting on the base
of 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 or competent bedrock 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.
8.5 Slab-on-Grade Recommendations: The recommendations for concrete slabs, both
EnGEN Corporation
zt..-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 22
interior and exterior, excluding PCC pavement, are based upon a low expansion potential
for the supporting material as determined by 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.
8.5.1 Interior Slabs: Interior concrete slabs-on-grade should be a minimum of 4.0-inches in
actual thickness and be underlain by a minimum of 1.0-inch of clean coarse sand or other
approved granular material placed on properly prepared subgrade per the Earthwork
Recommendations Section of this report. If floor slabs are to be subjected to crane loads
for the purpose of tilting panels, the minimum slab thickness should be 5-inches actual.
Minimum slab reinforcement should consist of #3 reinforcing bars placed 18-inches on
center in both directions, or a suitable equivalent. 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.
8.5.2 Exterior Slabs: All exterior concrete slabs cast on finish subgrade (patios, sidewalks,
EnGEN Corporation
z,'?
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8.6
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 23
etc., with the exception of PCC pavement) should be a minimum of 4.0-inches nominal in
thickness and be underlain by a minimum of 12.0-inches of soil that has been prepared in
accordance with the Earthwork Recommendation section of this report. 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 D1557-91 procedures
immediately before placing aggregate base material or placing the concrete.
Pavement Desio" Recommendations: The following are our recommendations for the
structural pavement section for the proposed parking and driveway areas for the subject
development. The pavement section has been determined in general accordance with
CALTRANS design procedures and is based on an assumed Traffic Index (TI) and an R-
Value of at least 20 based on past laboratory test results of the site vicinity. In areas
where normal loads (cars, pickup trucks) are anticipated, the assumed TI is 4.0 and the
pavement section should consist of a minimum of 3.0-inches of asphaltic concrete (AC.)
over 4.5-inches of Class 2 Aggregate Base (AB.). In areas where heavy loads (large
trucks, trash trucks, heavy machinery, etc.) are anticipated, the assumed TI is 5.0 and the
pavement section should consist of a minimum of 3.0-inches of AC. over 7.0-inches of
Class 2 AB. Asphalt concrete pavement materials should be as specified in Section 39 of
the current CAL TRANS Standard Specifications or a suitable equivalent. Aggregate base
should confonm to Class 2 material as specified in Section 26-1.02B of the current
CAL TRANS Standard Specifications or a suitable equivalent. The subgrade soil, including
utility trench backfill, should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. The
aggregate base material should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction.
Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for subgrade and aggregate base
EnGEN Corporation
ZA.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8.7
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 24
materials should be determined according to ASTM D1557-91 procedures. In dumpster
pick-up areas, and in areas where semi-trailers are to be parked on the pavement, such
that a considerable load is transferred from small wheels, it is recommended that rigid
Portland Cement concrete pavement with a minimum thickness of 6.D-inches be provided
in these areas. This will provide for the proper distribution of loads to the subgrade without
causing deformation of the pavement surface. Special consideration should also be given
to areas where truck traffic will negotiate small radius turns. Asphaltic concrete pavement
in these areas should utilize stiffer emulsions or the areas should be paved with Portland
Cement concrete. If pavement subgrade soils are prepared at the time of rough grading of
the building site and the areas are not paved immediately, additional observations and
testing will have to be performed before placing aggregate base material, asphaltic
concrete, or PCC pavement to locate areas that may have been damaged by construction
traffic, construction activities, and/or seasonal wetting and drying. In the proposed
pavement areas, soil samples should be obtained at the time the subgrade is graded for
R-Value testing according to Califomia Test Method 301 procedures to verify the
pavement design recommendations.
Utility Trench Recommendations: Utility trenches within the zone of influence of
foundations or under building floor slabs, exterior hardscape, and'or pavement areas
should be backfilled with properly compacted soil. All utility trenches within the building
pad and extending to a distance of 5.0-feet beyond the building exterior footings should be
backfilled with on-site or similar soil. Where interior or exterior utility trenches are
proposed to pass beneath or parallel to building, retaining wall, and'or decorative concrete
block perimeter wall footings, the bottom of the trench should not be located below a 1: 1
plane projected downward from the outside bottom edge of the adjacent footing unless the
utility lines are designed for the footing surcharge loads. It is recommended that all utility
EnGEN Corporation ,.
1--"':)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8.8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, I
,
!...
I
-..._,--.....~. ._---~-----;
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 25
trenches excavated to depths of 5.0-feet or deeper be cut back according to the
"Temporary Construction Cut" section of this report or be properly shored during
construction. Backfill material should be placed in a lift thickness appropriate for the type
of backfill material and compaction equipment used. Backfill material should be
compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction by mechanical means. Jetting
or flooding of the backfill material will not be considered a satisfactory method for
compaction unless the procedures are reviewed and approved in writing by the Project
Geotechnical Engineer. Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for backfill
material should be determined according to ASTM D1557-91 procedures.
Finish Lot Draina!:le Recommendations: Positive drainage should be established away
from the tops of slopes, the exterior walls of structures, the back of retaining walls, and the
decorative concrete block perimeter walls. Finish lot surface gradients in unpaved areas
should be provided next to tops of slopes and buildings to guide surface water away from
foundations and slabs and from flowing over the tops of slopes. The surface water should
be directed toward suitable drainage facilities. Ponding of surface water should not be
allowed next to structures or on pavements. In unpaved areas, a minimum positive
gradient of 2.0 percent away from the structures and tops of slopes for a minimum
distance of 5.0-feet and a minimum of 1.0 percent pad drainage off the property in a
nonerosive manner should be provided. Landscape trees and plants with high water
needs should be planted at least 5.0-feet away from the walls of the structures.
Downspouts from roof drains should discharge to a permanent all-weather surface which
slopes away from the structure a minimum of 5.0-feet from the exterior building walls. In
no case should downspouts from roof drains discharge into planter areas immediately
adjacent to the building unless there is positive drainage away from the structure and the
5.0-foot minimum discharge distance criteria is followed.
EnGEN Corporation
2f,o
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8.9
8.10
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 26
Planter Recommendations: Planters around the perimeter of the structures should be
designed to ensure that adequate drainage is maintained and minimal irrigation water is
allowed to percolate into the soils underlying the buildings. The planters should drain
directly onto surrounding paved areas or into a properly designed subdrain system.
Temporary Construction Excavation Recommendations: Temporary construction
excavations for rough grading, foundations, retaining walls, utility trenches, etc., more than
5.0-feet in depth and to a maximum depth of 15-feet should be properly shored or cut back
to the following inclinations:
Earth Material
Compacted Fill
Alluvium
Pauba Formation Bedrock
Inclination
1:1
1.5:1
1:1
No surcharge loads (spoil piles, earthmoving equipment, trucks, etc.) should be allowed
within a horizontal distance measured from the top of the excavation Slope equal to 1.5
times the depth of the excavation. Excavations should be initially observed by the project
Geotechnical Engineer, Geologist and/or their representative to verify the
recommendations presented or to make additional recommendations to maintain stability
and safety.
Moisture variations, differences in the cohesive or cementation
characteristics, or changes in the coarseness of the deposits may require slope flattening
or, conversely, permit steepening upon review by the project Geotechnical Engineer,
Geologist, or their representative. Deep utility trenches may experience caving which will
require special considerations to stabilize the walls and expedite trenching operations.
Surface drainage should be controlled along the top of the slope to preclude erosion of the
slope face. If excavations are to be left open for long periods, the slopes should be
sprayed with a protective compound and'or covered to minimize drying out, raveling,
EnGEN Corporation
z.,1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wests ide Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 27
and'or erosion of the slopes. For excavations more than 5.0-feet in depth which will not
be cut back to the recommended slope inclination, the contractor should submit to the
owner and'or the owner's designated representative detailed drawings showing the design
of shoring, bracing, sloping, or other provisions to be made for worker protection. If the
drawings do not vary from the requirements of the OSHA Construction Safety Orders
(CAL OSHA or FED OSHA, whichever is applicable for the project at the time of
construction), a statement signed by a Registered Civil or Structural Engineer in the State
of California, engaged by the contractor at his expense, should be submitted certifying that
the contractor's excavation safety drawings comply with OSHA Construction Orders. If
the drawings vary from the applicable OSHA Construction Safety Orders, the drawings
should be prepared, signed, and sealed by a Registered or Structural Engineer in the
State of California. The contractor should not proceed with any excavations until the
project owner or his designated representative has received and acknowledged the
properly prepared excavation safety drawings.
9.0 PLAN REVIEW
Subsequent to formulation of final plans and specifications for the project, but before bids
for construction are requested, grading and foundation plans for the proposed
development should be reviewed by EnGEN Corporation to verify compatibility with site
geotechnical conditions and conformance with the recommendations contained in this
report. If EnGEN Corporation is not accorded the opportunity to make the recommended
review, we will assume no responsibility for misinterpretation of the recommendations
presented in this report.
10.0 PRE-BID CONFERENCE
It may be desirable to hold a pre-bid conference with the owner or an authorized
EnGEN Corporation
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 28
representative, the Project Architect, the Project Civil Engineer, the Project Geotechnical
Engineer, and the proposed contractors present. This conference will provide continuity in
the bidding process and clarify questions relative to the grading and constnuction
requirements of the project.
11.0 PRE-GRADING CONFERENCE
Before the start of grading, a conference should be held with the owner or an authorized
representative, the contractor, the Project Architect, the Project Civil Engineer, and the
Project Geotechnical Engineer present. The purpose of this meeting should be to clarify
questions relating to the intent of the grading recommendations and to verify that the
project specifications comply with the recommendations of this geotechnical engineering
report. Any special grading procedures and'or difficulties proposed by the contractor can
also be discussed at that time.
12.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING
Rough grading of the property should be performed under engineering obse/Vation and
testing perfonmed by EnGEN Corporation. Rough grading includes, but is not limited to,
overexcavation cuts, fill placement, and excavation of temporary and permanent cut and
fill slopes. In addition, EnGEN Corporation should obse/Ve all foundation excavations.
Obse/Vations should be made before installation of concrete forms and'or reinforcing steel
to verify and'or modify the conclusions and recommendations in this report. Obse/Vations
of overexcavation cuts, fill placement, finish grading, utility or other trench backfill,
pavement subgrade and base course, retaining wall backfill, slab presaturation, or other
earthwork completed for the subject development should be performed by EnGEN
Corporation. If the obse/Vations and testing to verify site geotechnical conditions are not
perfonmed by EnGEN Corporation, liability for the performance of the development is
EnGEN Corporation
1,,0..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 29
limited to the actual portions of the project observed and'or tested by EnGEN
Corporation. If parties other than EnGEN Corporation are engaged to perform soils and
materials observations and testing, they must be notified that they will be required to
assume complete responsibility for the geotechnical aspects of the project by concurring
with the recommendations in this report or providing alternative recommendations.
Neither the presence of the Geotechnical Engineer and'or his field representative, nor the
field observations and testing, shall excuse the contractor in any way for defects
discovered in the contractor's work. The Geotechnical Engineer and'or his representative
shall not be responsible for job or project safety. Job or project safety shall be the sole
responsibility of the contractor.
13.0 CLOSURE
This report has been prepared for use by the parties or project named or described in this
document. It mayor may not contain sufficient information for other parties or purposes.
In the event that changes in the assumed nature, design, or location of the proposed
development as described in this report are planned, the conclusions and
recommendations contained in this report will not be considered valid unless the changes
are reviewed and the conclusions and recommendations of this report modified or verified
in writing. This study was conducted in general accordance with the applicable standards
of our profession and the accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices at
the time this report was prepared. No other warranty, implied or expressed beyond the
representations of this report, is made. Although every effort has been made to obtain
information regarding the geotechnical and subsurface conditions of the site, limitations
exist with respect to the knowledge of unknown regional or localized off-site conditions
which may have an impact at the site. The recommendations presented in this report are
valid as of the date of the report. However, changes in the conditions of a property can
EnGEN Corporation
?:P
I' I
I
I
-I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
May 1998
Page 30
occur with the passage of time, whether they are due to natural processes or to the works
of man on this and'or adjacent properties. If conditions are observed or information
becomes available during the design and construction process which are not reflected in
this report, EnGEN Corporation should be notified so that supplemental evaluations can
be performed and the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report can be
modified or verified in writing. This report is not intended for use as a bid document. Any
person or company using this report for bidding or construction purposes should perform
such independent studies and explorations as he deems necessary to satisfy himself as to
the surface and subsurface conditions to be encountered and the procedures to be used
in the performance of the work on this project. Changes in applicable or appropriate
standards of care or practice occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening
of knowledge and experience. Accordingly, the conclusions and recommendations
presented in this report may be invalidated, wholly or in part, by changes outside the
control of EnGEN Corporation which occur in the future.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide our services. If we can be of further service or you
should have questions regarding this report, please contact this office at your convenience.
&~
Osbjo ratene, GE 162
Princi al Geotechnical Engineer
Ex . es 09-30-01
TD'OB'ch
Distribution: (4) Addressee
EnGEN Corporation
'?\
-I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Westside Business Centers
Project Number. T1381-GS
Appendix Page 1
APPENDIX
EnGEN Corporation
?Z--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
Appendix Page 2
TECHNICAL REFERENCES
Allen, C.R., and others, 1965, Relationship between seismicity and geologic structure in the southem
California region: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 55, no. 4, p. 753-797.
California Division of Mines and Geology, 1954, Geology of southem California, Bulletin 170.
California Division of Mines and Geology, 1969, Geologic map of California, San Bernardino Sheet,
Scale 1 :250,000.
Department of Conservation, Geology map of the Santa Ana 1:100,000 Quadrangle, California,
Division of Mines and Geology Open File Report 91-17.
Dibblee, T.W, Jr., 1970, Regional geologic map of San Andreas and related faults in eastern San
Gabriel Mountains and vicinity: U.S. Geologic Society, Open-File Map, Scale 1:125,000.
Engel, R., 1959, Geology of the Lake Elsinore Quadrangle, California: California Division of Mines
and Geology, Bulletin 146.
Envicom Corporation, 1976, Seismic safety and safety elements, Technical report for County of
Riverside Planning Department.
Hart, E. W, 1992, Fault-rupture hazard zones in Califomia: Califomia Division of Mines and
Geology, Department of Conservation, Special Publication 42, 9 p.
Hileman, J.A., Allen, C.R. and Nordquist, J.M., 1973, Seismicity of the southem California region, 1
January 1932 to 31 December 1972: Seismological Laboratory, California Institute ofTechnology.
Housner, G.W, 1969, Earthquake Engineering, Weigel, R. L. (ed.), Prentice Hall, Inc., 1970, Chap.
4.
Jennings, C.W, 1975, Fault map of California with locations of volcanoes, thermal springs and
thermal wells, 1 :750,000: Califomia Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Data Map NO.1.
Jennings, C.W, 1985, An explanatory text to accompany the 1:750,000 scale fault and geOlogic
maps of California: California Division of Mines and Geology, Bulletin 201, 197p., 2 plates.
13.
Kennedy, M.P., 1977, Recency and character of fauiting along the Elsinore fault zone in southern
Riverside County, Califomia: California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Report 131,12 p., 1
plate, scale 1 :24,000.
14.
Lamar, D.L., Merifield, P.M. and Proctor, R.J., 1973, Earthquake Recurrence Interval on Major
Faults in South em California, in Moran, Douglas E., et. ai, 1973, Geology, Seismicity &
Environmental Impact, Association of Engineering Geology, Special Publication.
15.
Leeds, D.J., 1973, Geology, Seismicity & Environmental Impact, Association of Engineering
Geology, Special Publication.
EnGEN Corporation
'??
I
I
I
.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
Appendix Page 3
TECHNICAL REFERENCES (Continued)
Mann, J.F., Jr., October 1955, Geology of a portion of the Elsinore fault zone, Califomia: State of
California, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Mines, Special Report 43.
Ploessel, M.R. and Slosson, J.E., 1974, Repeatable High Ground Accelerations from Earthquakes:
Important Design Criteria, California Division of Mines and Geology, California Geology, Vol. 17, No.
9, pp 195-199.
Riverside County Planning Department, June 1982 (Revised December 1983), Riverside County
Comprehensive General Plan - Dam Inundation Areas - 100 Year Flood Plains - Area Drainage
Plan, Scale 1 Inch = 2 Miles.
Riverside County Planning Department, January 1983, Riverside County Comprehensive General
Plan - County Seismic Hazards Map, Scale 1 Inch = 2 Miles.
Riverside County Planning Department, February 1983, Seismic - Geologic Maps, Murrieta -
Rancho Califomia Area, Sheet 146, Sheet 147 (Revised 11-87), Sheet 854B (Revised 11-87), and
Sheet 854A (revised 11-87), Scale 1" = 800'.
Rogers, T.H., 1966, Geologic Map of Califomia, Olaf P. Jenkins Edition, Santa Ana Sheet, CDMG.
Schnabel, P.B. and Seed, H.B., 1972, Accelerations in rock for earthquakes in the western United
States: College of Engineering, University of Califomia, Berkeley, Earthquake Engineering Research
Center, Report No. EERC 72-2.
Seed, H.B. and Idriss, I.M., 1970, A simplified procedure for evaluating soil liquefaction potential:
College of Engineering, University of Califomia, Berkeley.
Seed, H.B. and Idriss, I.M., 1982, Ground motions and soil liquefaction during earthquakes:
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Volume 5 of a Series Titled Engineering Monographs on
Earthquake Criteria, Structural Design, and Strong Motion Records.
State of California, January 1, 1980, Special Studies Zones, Elsinore Quadrangle, Revised Official
Map, Scale 1" = 2 Mi.
State of California Department of Water Resources, Water Wells and Springs in the Western Part of
the Upper Santa Margarita River Watershed, Bulletin No. 91-21.
Uniform Building Code (UBC), 1994 and 1997 Edition.
EnGEN Corporation
Y\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
Appendix Page 4
EXPLORATORY BORING LOG SUMMARIES
(B-1 through 8-6)
EnGEN Corporation
...
,??
--
I EXPLORATORY BORING LOG SUMMARY REPORT
BORING LOG NO. B-1 SHEET 1 OF 9 SHEETS
I Project: Westside Business Center Client: Oalo: 3-12-98 Preje.t No: T1381-CS
Ground Surfa.a Elevation: Starting Tima: Loggad By: C.M. Location: . Diaz Road
Ground Water Oapth: Equipmant: Diameter Boring: 8 inches Drilling Co.: ABC Drilling
I Total Depth of Boring: 42 feet Driving Weight: 140 Ibs Drop: 30 inches Assistant
I So~ Symbols
SamplerSyrrdlob Blows per Dry Density Moisture Percent
ElevationJDepth Groundwater Depth USCS Des . . & Remarks 6.lnches Sa 101 Ipsij Content 1%1 Canso!.
I 0
Alluvium
Silty sand,very darlt grayish brllMl
110 yr 3/21,moist loosa, very fine
2 sand.
I 3 8M 8.5.5 103.9 16.9
4
I 5
8M 2-2.2 97.4 25.9
6
I 7
8 Ml Sandy silt very dark grayi!h brown. 3.3-5- 99.5 25.5
I {10yr3/2I,moistloose.
9
10
Ml 3~" 98.4 26.3
I 11
12
I 13
14
I 15
SM Silty sand,verydark grayish brown. 5.]-10 110.0 19.5
16 (10 yr 3/2), moist medium dense.
17
I 18
"
I 20
8P Sand,very dark grayish brown, 5.1).7 103.8 19.2
21 110 yr 3121. wet. loose.
I 22
Groundwater at 22 fll9t
23
I 24
25
Ml Sandy silt very dark gray, 5-]-17 113.7 18.4
I 26 110 yr3/2J. W\lt. mediwn dense.
27
I 28
I ~
I
EXPLORATORY BORING LOG SUMMARY REPORT
Project: Westside Business Center
Ground Surface Elevation:
Ground Water Depth:
Total Depth of Boring: 42 feet
I
I
I
Eleyation/Depth
2ll
I
30
31
I
32
33
I
34
35
I
36
37
I
38
39
I
40
41
42
I
43
44
I
45
46
I
47
48
I
49
50
I
51
62
I
53
54
I
I
57
I
Soil Symbols
Sampler Symbols
Groundwater Depth
55
56
Client
Starting Time:
Equipment:
Driving Weight 140 Ibs
BDRING LOG NO. B.1 (cont.l
Date: 3-12-98
Logged By: c'M.
Diameter Boring: 8 inches
Drop: 30 inches
uses
Dese . tion & Remarks
5'
Sand,gray110yr511l,wet,medilDll
dense.
SP
Sand, very dark gray 110 yr 3/11,
wet. dense.
No retrieval.
Total depth 42 f8tlt
Groundwater at 22 feet
Blows per
6-lnches
Sampler
7-10.14
SPT
10-15.18
SPT
12-16.24
SHEET 2 DF 9 SHEETS
Project No: T1381-GS
Location: Diaz Road
Drilling Co.: A8C Drilling
Assistant
Dry Density
(psI)
Moisture Percent
Content (%) Consol.
~1
----
-.-------- --'.--.--- ---. .-..- --------.-
I EXPLORATORY BORING LOG SUMMARY REPORT
I BORING LOG NO. B.2 SHEET 3 OF 9 SHEETS
Project Wests ide Business Center Client Date: 3-12-98 Project No: . T1381-GS
Ground Surface Elevation: Starting Time: Logged By: CM. Location: Diaz Road
I Ground Water Dopth: Equipment: Diameter Boring: 8 inches Drilling Co.: ABC Drilling
Total Depth of Boring: 42 feel Driving Weight 140 Ibs Drop: 30 inches Assistant
I Soil Symbols
Sampler Symbols Blows per Dry Density Moisture Percent
Elevation/Depth Groundwater Depth uses Description & Remarks 6.lnches Sam ler IpsfJ Content Ill! Canso!.
I 0
Alluvium
Siltysandy,blackllOyrZI1I.
slightly moist mediurn dense.
I 2
3 SM 4-6-12 93.4 25.9
I 4
S
SM Siltysand,brownl1Dyr5131, 7.13.16 94.7 15.6
I 6 slightly moist medillll dense.
7
I 8 SM Silty sand. grayish brown 110 yr 5121 ].15-18 96.1 20.3
slightly moist. dense.
9
10
I SM Silty sand,. daribrown. 110 yr313J, ..,.8 102.2 10.6
11 sli~tIVmoistlDO$e.
12
I 13
14
I 15
ML Sandv s~t, very dark grayish broWl'l, ...... 99.6 23.6
16 110yr3/2J,slightlymoist, loose.
I 17
18
I 18
20
ML Sandy sat dark gril'1ish brown, 6-8-12 101.6 24.6
I 21 110 Vr 4121, moist. metfjurn dense.
22
Groundwater at 22 feet
I 23
24
25
I Ml Clayey s~t. dark gray, 110 Yf 4/11, 6-8-12 100.0 27.1
26 wet, medilm dense.
27
I 28
I
?~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EXPLORATORY BORING LOG SUMMARY REPORT
Project: Wests ide Business Center
Ground Surface Elevation:
Ground Water Depth:
Total Depth 01 Soring: 42 leet
Elevation/Depth
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
39
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
..
49
Soil Symbols
Sampler Symbols
Groundwater Depth
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
Client:
Starting Time:
Equipment:
Driving Weight: 140 Ibs
SORING LOG NO. S.2 (.onL)
Date: 3-12-98
Loggad Sy: C.M.
Diameter Soring: 8 inches
Drop: 30 inches
uses
Descri tion & Remarks
SP
Sand. gray It 0 yr 5111, wet medium
dense.
SP
SP
Tatal depth 42 feet
Groundwater at 22 feet
BJowsper
6.lnches
Sam ler
1.12.16
SPT
5.12.16
612.16
SPT
SHEET 4 OF 9 SHEETS
Project No: T1381-GS
Location: Diaz Road
Drilling Co.: ABC Drilling
Assistant
Dry Density Moisture Percent
(psfJ Content!"') Conso!.
105.2
20.1
~
II
I
EXPLORATORY BORING LOG SUMMARY REPORT
Project Westside Business Center
Ground Surface Elevation:
Ground Weter Depth:
Total Depth of Boring: 42 feet
I
I
Elevation/Depth
29
I
30
31
I
32
33
I
34
35
I
36
37
I
3a
39
I
40
41
I
42
43
44
I
45
46
I
47
48
I
49
50
I
51
52
I
53
54
I
55
56
I
57
I
Soil Symbol,
Sampler Symbols
Groundwater Deptb
Client:
Sterling Time:
Equipment:
Driving Weight: 140 Ibs
BORING LOG NO. B.3 (cont.)
Date: 3-12-98
Logged By: CM.
Diameter Boring: 8 inches
Drop: 30 inches
USCS
Oescri lion & Remarks
Cl
Siltyclay,verydarkgray110yr3I1J.
wet,firm.
Ml
Clayey silt,. very dark IIray
(10yr311I,wet.firm.
sM
Silty sand. gray 110 yr 5111,
wet dense.
Total depth 42 feet
Graundwaterat19feet
Blows per
6-lnehes
Sampler
3+7
sPT
5.6.]
12.14-17
SHEET 6 OF 9 SHEETS
Project No: T1381-GS
location: Diaz Road
Drilling Co.: A8C Drilling
Assistant
Dry Density
{o,ij
Moisture Percent
Content (%1 Consol.
101.1
27.0
102.5
24.9
AO
---- -~~~-- ~-~ .:..---:---~~_._-
- -------,-- .~ ------ - - ,~
I
I
I
I
B"ation/De1ltll
o
I
2
I
3
.
I
5
6
I
7
I
10
I
11
12
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8
9
13
"
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2'
25
26
27
28
EXPLORATORY BORING LOG SUMMARY REPORT
22 feet
Soil Symbols
Sampler Symbols
Groundwater Depth
BORING LOG NO. B-4
Client:
Starting Time:
Equipment:
Driving Weight: 140 Ibs
USGS
Description & Remarks
fill
8M
S~tysand,hlown.moistmedium
densB.
Project: Westside Business Center
Ground Surface Elevation:
Ground Water Depth:
Total Depth of Boring:
8M
Silty sand,dark broWll,moist loose.
Ml
Alluvium
Sandy silt, brown 110yr4l31,
slightly moist dense.
8M
Siltysand,brownl10yr4/3l,
slightly moist, dense.
Bedrod:IPaubaFormationl
8M
Silty sandstone, yellowish brown.
sliglltlymoist, very densa.
8M
Silty sandstone, gray, wel.
dense, trace days.
Total depth 22 feet
Groundwatarat16feet
oete:
Logged By:
3-13-98
CM.
SHEET 7 OF 9 SHEETS
Project No: T1381-GS
Location: Diaz Road
Drilling Co.: ABC Drilling
Assistant
Diameter Boring: 8 inches
Drop: 30 inches
Blows per
6.lnches
7.7.8
3-3-3
12.13-22
14-17.28
11.27.29
20.20-21
rporatlon
S ler
Dry Density
IpsO
Moisture Percent
Content 1%) Consol.
114.7
14.9
113.5
15.1
120.1
10.8
120.5
12.1
107.4
17.5
109.3
17.9
A.,\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EXPLORATORY BORING LOG SUMMARY REPORT
Project: Westside Business Center
Ground Surface Elevation:
Ground Watar Dapth:
Total Dapth 01 Boring: 12 feet
EJeyationlllopth
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
26
26
27
2'
Soil Symbol>
Sampler Symbols
Groundwater Depth
o
2
3
4
6
6
,
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
BORING LOG NO. B.5
Cliant
Starting Tima:
Equipmant
Driving Waight: 140 Ibs
uses
Descri tion&Remarks
BedrocklPauba F1lrmatillnl
8M
Silt y sandstone, n;ht yellowish
slightly moist, dense.
8M
Silty sandstone, light gray, slightly
moist dense.
Total depth 12 feet
No Groundwater
Data: 3-13-98
Loggad By: eM.
Diamatar Boring: 8 inches
Drop: 30 inches
BJowsper
&.lnches
Sa ler
18-18-21
18-21.28
SHEET B OF 9 SHEETS
Proiact No: T1381-GS
Location: Diaz Road
Drilling Co.: A8C Drilling
Assi,tant
Dry Density
fpsO
Moisture Percent
Content 1%1 Consol.
103.1
22.8
92.3
7.3
A,2-
I
I
EXPLORATORY BORING LOG SUMMARY REPORT
Project: Wests ide Business Center
Ground Surface Elevation:
Ground Water Depth:
Total Depth of Boring: 17 feet
I
I
Elsvation/Depth
o
I
2
I
3
4
I
I
I
10
I
11
12
I
13
14
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Soil Symbols
Sampler Symbo:b
Groundwater Depth
5
6
7
9
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
BORING LOG NO. B.6
Client
Starting Time:
Equipment
Driving Weight: 140 Ibs
uses
Description & Remarks
~
Ml
Sandysilt,brownll0yr4l3J,maist.
mlldiumdense.
Bedrock lPauba Fonnation)
SM
Silty sandstone darlr. yellowish
moiS1,verydenstl,ironstains.
SM
Silty sandstone. very pale hrown.
sliglitly moist very dense.
Total depth 17 feet
No Groundwater
Date: 3-13-98
Logged By: eM.
Diameter Boring: 8 inches
Drop: 30 inches
Blows per
6.lnches
Sampler
10.14.15
20-36-50+5
SPT
31.38-50
SHEET 9 OF 9 SHEETS
ProiectNo: 11381-GS
Locetion: Diaz Road
Drilling Co.: ABC Drilling
Assistant
Dry Density
(psfl
Moisture Percent
Content 1%1 Conso!.
118.5
15.0
121.9
12.9
114.3
10.4
A,?/
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I.
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
Appendix Page 5
M
EnGEN Corporation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
use Laboratory Expansion Test Results
03/18/98
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------.------------------------------.-
JOB NO.:
JOB NA~1E:
LOCATION:
SP~i'4FLE SOURCE:
EAt-'1F~;:::
'C,'.J"
.'-' , ~
T1381-GS
WESTSIDE BUSINESS CENTER
DIAZ RD 85 @ 0-10
SAMF'LE 3
;::1'1
JivlB
SILTY 6AND~ BROWN
-----------------------------------.------------------------------.--------.--
--------------------------------------.--------------------------------------
Li:':1E TECH ~
F;~El,.!!~r~:Ks ;:
';;3Af.1F':_= DESC;:
WET COMPACTED WT.
RIr..jG Wi.
NET L!JET t~T m
WET DENS I T'y'
l!JET SO I L + Ti~i~:E
DP'!' SO I L + T i~F;E
TAEE
INTITAL MOISTURE%
INTITIAL DRY DENSITY
I. SATUFATID~~
D I;;L
Cl."h~~i\\GE
TIr'lE
. .-...... ~
'='L...:....::..
1'7'6. =,
426.7
.128.9
REf~D T i\H.:> ~f U 00 :\j I A '-:,()(',
" " -.
READ I r...JG :i-i: - UC u "1
u " ~ - ~.
~:E,;D 1 j'-.lG # 0 " 099 --1 ,'..-"'-'
F:EAD T r-'.~G iT 0 " 0'?8 C'"-',f'''
. '.-,...."...
F:EAD I i"-IG # 'i 1 UU N ICi N,/ r
" ~
102.4
r~=,.o
0.0
, .w
.119.6
~51 .4
FINAL WT. + RING WT 637.9
441.4
39~;.9
.-11: c::
'-+--'. ~,
~D--:-:- t::.
,_, i '_..' . ,-'
118.8
11.6
E;.;oansion In.jei'~:
'.)
!"~ET :=:~ (-j::4L ~IJT.
DPY ~:;T.
LOE:3
;'<~ET D:-::-'{ l~.iT.
;::-INi::;L DEi\..lSI T\'
SATURATED MOISTURE
Adjusted Expansion Index:
\.) . ;:;'-~'
==========================================================================
(ASTM ~ 4829 10.1.2)
EnGEN Corporation
41607 Enterprise Circle ~or~h
Temecula. CA 92590
A.-5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
UBC Laboratory Expansion Test Results
03/17/98
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
JOB NO.:
JOB NAME:
LOCATION:
SAMPLE SOURCE:
SAI"JPLE BY:
LAB TECH:
REMARKS:
SAMPLE DESC:
Tl381-GS
WESTSIDE BUSINESS CENTER
DIAZ RD
SAMPLE 2
CM
JM8
83 @ 0-15
CLAYEY SILT DARK BROWN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
WET COMPACTED WT.
RING WT.
NET WET WT.
WET DENSITY
WET SOIL + TARE
DRY SOIL + TARE.
TARE
INTITAL MOISTURE/.
INTITIAL DRY DENSITY
i'. SATURATION
FINAL WT. + RING WT.
NET FINAL WT.
DRY WT.
LOSS
NET DRY WT.
FINAL DENSITY
SATURATED MOISTURE
610.5
192.5
418.0
126.2
104.9
96.4
0.0
8.8
116.0
52.6
649.9
457.4
384.1
73.3
381.1
115.1
19.2
DIAL CHANGE TIME
------------------------------
READING # 0.100 N/A ~ee
..o~~
READING # 0.122 22 410
READING # 0.123 23 425
READING # 0.141 41 800
READING # 0.100 N/A NIT
Expansion Index:
41
==========================================================================
Adjus~d Expansion Index:
(ASTM .~ 4829 10.1.21
42.67
EnGEN Corporation
41607 Enterprise Circle North
Temecula. CA 92590
A,t:.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
UBC Laboratory Expansion Test Results
03/18/98
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
JOB NO.:
JOB NAME:
LOCATION:
SAMPLE SOURCE:
SAMPLE BY:
LAB TECH:
REMARKS:
SAMPLE DESC:
T1381-GS
WESTSIDE BUSINESS CENTER
DIAZ RD B2 @ 0-20
SAMPLE 1
CM
JMB
SILTY SAND DARK BROWN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
WET COMPACTED WT.
RING WT.
NET WET WT.
WET DENSITY
WET SOIL + TARE
DRY SOIL + TARE
TARE
INTITAL MOISTURE/.
INTITIAL DRY DENSITY
'l. SATURATION
FINAL WT. + RING WT.
NET FINAL WT.
DRY WT.
LOSS
NET DRY WT.
FINAL DENSITY
SATURATED MOISTURE
607.7
192.5
415.2
125.4
106.6
97.3
0.0
9.6
114.5
54.7
645.6
453.1
379.0
74.1
375.5
113.4
19.7
DIAL CHANGE TIME
------------------------------
READING # 0.100 N/A 945
READING # .0.126 26 1000
READING # 0.132 32 1015
READING # 0.139 39 800
READING # 0.100 N/A NIT
Exoansion Index:
39
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjusted Expansion Index:
(ASTM ~ 4829 10.1.2)
41.94
EnGEN Corporation
41607 Enterprise Circle North
Temecula. CA 92590
A"\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2400
<t-
III
0.
1600
~
III
III
-oJ>
'-
.....
en
'-
tel
oJ>
~. see
2400
2080
<t-
III 1600
0.
~
III
III
oJ> 1200
'-
.....
en
'-
td 800 , .
oJ>
.c.
en
400
RESULTS
C, PST 300
<p, deg 27. 6
TAN oi> 0.52
......i..!............
. ..1.. .
.. ..!.. .. ~ . .
............
....;..j..
......!..:..
. .. .
..!......!...+. ""j"ih ..i....
......i..j..
....!..!..
o
o
800
1600
2400
3200
4000
4800
Normal Stress, PST
SAMPLE NO.
WATER CONTENT, ~
~ DRY DENSITY, pCT
~ SATURATION, r.
~ VOID RATIO
:: DIAMETER, in
HEIGHT, in
~lATER CONTENT, r.
~ DRY DENSITY, pCT
(j) SATURATION, ~
~ I}OID RATIO
~ DIAMETER, in
-<3: HEIGHT, in
NORMAL STRESS, psi'
123
8.7 8.7 8.7
111.6111.6111.6
47.7 47.7 47.7
0.4820.4820.482
2.42 2.42 2.42
1. 00 1. 00 1. 00
18.8 18.2 17.7
111.6111.6111.6
103.4 100.1 97.3
0.4820.4820.482
2.42 2.42 2.42
1.00 1.00 1.00
1000 2000 3000
MAX. SHEAR, psi'
861 1272 1907
2.0002.13013 2.131313
o
o 0.1 0.2 0.3
Hot" iz:. Dei'ot"m.,
STRAIN RATE, ~/min.
0.4
in ULT. SHEAR, PST
851 1135 1898
SAMPLE DATA CLIENT: WESTSIDE CITY ONE ASSOC.
SAMPLE TYPE: REMLD
DESCRIPTION: CLAYEY SILT DK BRNPROJECT: WESTSIDE BUSINESS CENTER
LL= PL= PI=
SPECIFIC GRAVITY= 2.65
REI1ARKS:
SAMPLE LOCATION: SAMPLE 2
B3 @ 0-15
PROJ. NO.: T1381-GS DATE: 03/17/98
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
SOIL TECH LABORATORIES
bro
STRAIN RATE, %/min.
13.41
in IULT. SHEAR, PST
I
SAMPLE DATA 'CLIENT: WESTSIDE CITY ONE ASSOC.
SAMPLE TYPE: REMOLDED
DESCRIPTION: SILTY SAND DRK BRN PROJECT: WESTSIDE BUSINESS CENTER
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2400
~
011
"-
- 1600
011
011
GI
...
....
(f>
RESULTS
C, PST 342
<jl, deg 28.3
TAN <jl 13.54
. .
u.. ........... .....
..i......j......!..!..!....!......
..............
........... ..... " .. .. .. ..
...
p$
GI
ti5 800
. .. .. ~ .. ~ .. !.. .. j . .
o
13
81313
161313 24013 32013
Normal Stress, PST
2400
2000
~
011 1680
"-
-
Ul
011
GI 121313
...
....
(f> .,..j..,..
... . .
p$ 800 .. .
GI
.t::
(f>
400
SAMPLE NO.
WATER CONTENT, %
~ DRY DENSITY, pCT
~ SATURATION, ~~
t:; VOID RATIO
i5 DIAMETER, in
I HEIGHT, in
WATER CONTENT, %
~ DRY DENSITY, pCT
(I) SATURATION, %
l=! VOID RATIO
~ DIAMETER, in
.~ HEIGHT, in
NORMAL STRESS, PST
MA)<. SHEAR, PST
o
a 0.1
13.2 13.3
Horiz:.
DeTorm. ,
LL=
SPECIFIC
REMARKS:
PL= PI=
GRAVITY= 2.65
... "j'+'
............
"i'.i..
u!,,!,.
......,.:;::
4000
48130
123
8.5 8.5 8.5
113.4113.4113.4
48.8 48.8 48.8
0.4590.4590.459
2.42 2.42 2.42
1. 130 1. 013 1. 130
18.4 17.9 16.8
113.4113.4113.4
Hl6.2183.3 96.9
8.4590.4590.459
2.42 2.42 2.42
1. 00 1. 00 1. 00
1000 2000 3000
773 1633 1849
2.0002.0002.000
763 1633 1849
SAMPLE LOCATION: SAMPLE 1
B2 @ 0-213
PROJ. NO.: T1381-GS DATE: 03/18/98
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
SOIL TECH LABORATORIES
~<\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3600
'+-
'"
...
ft 240e
'"
'"
lI.I
..
....,
iJ)
..
'"
lI.I
~ 1200
600e
500e
...
'"
...
4000
RESULTS
C, psi' 179
ljl, deg 40.6
TAN 41 0.86
. ......................
. . -. .
. ::::::::::i::j::j::j::::i::
'"
'"
lI.I
..
....,
iJ)
..
'"
lI.I
.c
iJ)
3000
20010
.... .
.-.........................
.... .
'''i-''';''
.... .
.... ..
. . .. .'
........................
. . .' ..
. ..... :::: :.::::1:i::l:: :IF : : n .. .. ..
............
::::i::::j::
.. .. ~.. ..!..
.. . .
... .. .
. .......... .........-.. ...... ....
. .
....i..;..i........j..i....i... ,.. .
. ..... -.
......................................
.... ...
... ..
. . .. ...
. .......
.....................................-..
. . .. ..
....j.+++...\..i..i.. ....
............
.........,..
.. .........
.... ...
..................................
.... ...
... ..
. . . . .
............................-...... ...
. . . ." .
:: :111: :: :: ::1::1:: j" .
.... ..
.... ...
. . .. ..'
.........................
..,. ....
. . ~.. ~:: ~: :;:: :: (: : ;: : ; : : ~ ::
1000
'qi'I'i'UIU.i.tU::t MA~<. SHEAR, ps~
o . ..... .... q,..,..'..'n ISTRAIN RATE, ,:/min. 2.0002.0002.000
o 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.41
Horiz. Dei'orm., in IULT. SHEAP, ps~
I
I
iCLIENT: WESTSIDE BUSINESS CENTER
BROWN I PROJECT: DAIZ RD
ISAMPLE LOCATION: B5 @ 0-10
o
o
1200
2400
3.500
4800
Normal Stress, ps~
;(::1
. . ; ..; . i .. ~ . . I
SAMPLE NO.
WATER CONTENT, ~
~IDRY DENSITY, pc~
:.... SATURATION, ;{
t: VOID RATIO
3 DIAMETER, in
HEIGHT, in
WATER CO~nENT, r.
~ DRY DENSITY, pc~
f3 'ISATURATION, r.
~ VOID RATIO
~ IDIA~1ETER, in
.cr: ,HEIGHT, in
!NORMAL STRESS, ps~
.. ..
.. ..
..........-.........
.. ..
..h.... ........ ".
.' -.
................,..
.. ..,..,q:..,ql
.. ."-
.. ....
.....................
... ....
.... . -..
............................
. . -. ....
.... ....
.... ....
-...............,...........
. -.. ....
::!::!/.t: ::;:: :t:~:: ::;..;.tt: :tttt:
I
""":X.;::l
;Hq'j
SAMPLE DATA
SAMPLE TYPE: REMOLDED
DESCRIPTION: SILTY SAND
LL=
SPECIFIC
REMARKS:
PL= PI=
GRAV ITY= 2.65
.. --i" ..!""
6€10(1
7200
1 2 3
8.6 8.6 8.6
116.6116.6116.6
54.8 54.8 54.8
0.4180.4180.418
2.42 2.42 2.42
1. 00 1. 00 1. 00
15.2 14.6 13.5
116.6116.6116.6
96.3 92.3 85.5
0.4180.4180.418
2.42 2.42 2.42
1. 00 1. 00 1. 00
1000 20100 30100
1105
1751
2817
929
1722 25.53
PROJ. NO.: T1381-GS DATE: 03/19/98
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
SOIL TECH LABORATORIES
"50
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'\.
...
"
"
1'1.
j;' !It.. , !
I I I , I I I'. " I
I i ,/ 1 I , ... ,
I I I .,. '-I I
i -' I '\.:
I I IX
I I I'" 1
I I I "- I
I I "-
I , "-
,
1 I 1 ! I I'..
I 1 ! I i , i'.1
! i ~
I I I I I
I I I I
I I i I I i
PROCTOR TEST REPORT
135
130
<t-
v
0..
~
:ro
....
.~
...
C
>lJ
"'0'
125
:ro
'-
<=l
120
115
110
9 11.5 14
Water content, r.
>>Modi~iedn Proctor, ASTM D 1557, Method A
16.5
4
6.5
Elev/
Depth
N/A
Classi~ication
USCS AASHTO
, Na t . S G
Moist. p..
111.6 r.: 2.75
LL
PI
SM-ML
,
j
1
i
1
I
i
i
I
i
I
,
ZAV ~>::)t' i
Sp.G.= I
2.75 I
I
19 I
!
r.> r.<
No.4 No.2001
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
SILTY SAND BLACKISH BRN
ALLUV IUM
TEST RESULTS
Optimum moisture = 11.4 r.:
Maximum dry density = 126.1 pc~
Project No.: T1381-GS
Project: WESTSIDE BUSINESS CENTER
Location: DAIZ RD. !
B2 @ 0-20
Date: 03/16/98
PROCTOR TEST REPORT
SOIL TECH LABORATORIES
I Remarks:
SAMPLE .
COLLECTED CM
03/13/98
I
Figure t~o.
~\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
c:
.~
en
c 6.250
Ql
~
Ql
0..
10.000
11.250
12.500 .1
CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT
"'--
-,....
.... ...
....:-,
WATER ADDED .... ....
i'o.
"
~
"
\
1\
l'
1\
1\..
\ I
I \ I
,
b
I -
I
I
1
0.000
1.250
2.500
3.750
5.000
7.500
8.750
.2
.5
2
Applied Pressure - ksf
Overburden Pc
(ksf) (ksf)
3.07
5
10 20
50
Swell
%
Swell Press.
(ksf)
Natural
Sat. Moist.
Dry Dens.
(pet)
Sp.
Gr.
Cc
Cr
eo
LL
PI
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
USCS
AASHTO
SM
SILTY SAND, VERY DARK GRAYISH BROWN, MOIST, LOOSE
Project No. Tl381-GS Client:
Project: WESTSlDE BUSINESS CENTERS
Remarks:
Location: BORING I 5
,~~ =-:-~.'::;
. ~ ~ - ..
, , 1 , .
i l : : '
_-_,""_'~"'U~'!O;(: 1<l.;"~.:1" .'.!T"'~
Environmental and Geotechnical
Engineering Network Corporation
Plate
-5-v
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0.000
1.250
2.500
3.750
5.000
"
.~
-
(()
- 6.250
"
Q)
!:!
Q)
a.
7.500
8.750
10.000
11.250
CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT
.....i'
r...
.........
t---~
i'.
1/ .
'l
I Q.
I"
I
II
I
I
! I
1
\ II
~I,I
i\
~~
\
Ib
12.500 .1 .2 .5 2 5
Applied Pressure - ksf
Natural Dry Dens. LL Sp. Overburden Pc Cc
PI
Sat. Moist. (pc!) Gr. (ks!) (ks!)
4.59
WATER ADDED
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
SANDY SILT, VERY DARK GRAYISH BROWN, MOIST, LOOSE
Project No. Tl381-GS Client:
Project: WESTSIDE BUSINESS CENTERS
Location: BORING 1 10
i"''''' =<1l:&
"', ,~ ,~- . - -- "
j , j j ~
--:-"-_."'.........""{"':fl' 'l!". y- '..(~~'~
Environmental and Geotechnical
Engineering Network Corporation
! I
I
10 20 50
Cr Swell Press. Clpse. eo
(ks!) %
0.4
USCS AASHTO
ML
Remarks:
Plate
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT
0.00
0
I I I
:.....
0 r---
....~
...... ....
.......
0 I)
, I
0 , I I i I
I i WATER ADDED i ,
I I , '}lll !
, !
I I i i
0 I I I ,
, i ~ I
I . , I I
, ,
I ! \ ,
I ; I I I I I
I i I , ,
I I , I u I , I I
;
I ,
I I i I
I I I !
I
I i I I
I
I ,
,
I ,
, , i
I I ! I I
i I
I I I i I I II
,
! I i !
I I : II
I ! i i
I I i I II , , I I I I
,
I I . I , i I
, I , I
, : I
I I ,
i ! I ! ! I
, i , I , I
i ' , ; I , I I I
I ! i
! I i I
. I
i
i I I I
I !
1.25
2.50
3.75
5.00
c:
'iij
~
Ci5
C 6.250
Q)
f:!
Q)
a.
7.500
8.750
10.000
11.250
12.500 .1 .2
2 5
Applied Pres}ure . ksf
Overburden.. Pc Cc
(ks~ (ksn
6.81
10 20 50
Cr Swell Press. Clpse. eo
(ksn %
0.5
USCS AASHTO
ML
Remarks:
.5
Natural Dry Dens.
Sat. Moist. (pcn
Sp.
Gr.
LL
PI
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
SANDY SILT, VERY DARK GRAY, WET, MEDIUM DENSE
Project No. Tl381-GS. Client:
Project: WESTSIDE BUSINESS CENTERS
Location: BORING 1 25
~':"~-'. ~..,. ,~?-<
. .
j , ! '
__=__'-"''''<''l''':'''''::':''''~
Environmental and Geotechnical
Engineering Network Corporation
Plate
9-.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
<::
.~
-
(f)
c: 6.250
Ql
l:!
Ql
0.
10.000
11.250
CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT
0.00
0 ~,
I""'-~I-o. ....
r WATER AODE 01 ....
0
"
"
~"
0 "'
~
~
r\
I
\ I
Ib
I
,
I
1.25
2.50
3.750
5.000
7.500
8.750
12.500 .1 .2
.5
2 5
Applied Pressure - ksf
Overburden Pc Cc
(kst) (kst)
3.06
10 20 50
Cr Swell Press. Swell eo
(kst) %
0.3
USCS AASHTO
SM
Remarks:
Natural Dry Dens.
Sat. Moist. (pet)
LL
Sp.
Gr.
PI
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
SIL IT SAND, BROWN, SLIGHTLY MOIST
Project No. Tl381-GS Client:
Project: WESTSIDE BUSINESS CENTERS
Location: BORING 2 5
,j>'>'<i =-c
~ ". - - --
, . , ' ,
! . Ii.
I ' j i I
--'-'"-'''''-'''''''~''O;O'!H'l!>''':ll.l']''~
Environmental and Geotechnical
Engineering Network Corporation
Plate
":5S
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT
c:
.0;
~
U5
-
c:
Q)
~
Q)
a.
" .......
.....
'"
....... r-..
....
WATER ADDED ....... I'.
1\
\ I
I~
\ I
I
I I
1\
Ib
N
,\
\
\
I \
b
I
,
0.000
1.250
2.500
3.750
5.000
6.250
7.500
8.750
10.000
11.250
12.500 .1 .2
10 20 50
Cr Swell Press. Swell eo
(ksf) %
0.1
uscs AASHTO
ML
Remarks:
.5
2 5
Applied Pressure - ksf
Overburden Pc Cc
(ksf) (ksf)
2.91
Natural Dry Dens.
Sat. Moist. (pcf)
LL
PI
Sp.
Gr.
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
SANDY SILT, VERY DARK GRAY, WET
Project No. T1381-GS Client:
Project: WESTSIDE BUSINESS CENTERS
Location: BORING 3 5
......:.... 7~ ~~
1 ~ ~ '
j ~ i ; ,
~-_''''_'~'''''''!..'''''''" l.f,'l<~'", .,~.,.,,---_.-
Environmental and Geotechnical
Engineering Network Corporation
Plate
~b
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT
1.25
0 ~~J
I I ............
II 11.......1 ..... I
,
0 I I I i..... +{ , I
l'-.... :
i I ,
I i I I , I
I , I
, i
, I
I i II I I l'... I . I I
I WATER ADDED I ....:-., I , I
I I I~ I i I
, I
I I I I i
,
I , N I
i
I i ,
I I ,
! I I
! , I I
\
I Ib I I
I I I 1 II I I
I I I , , II I
I I ;
I I ! ,
i I I I I I I
! I I : I
I I
I I I I , , I
I I I
I ! I I I
I !
i
I I ! I I
I I
0.000
2.500
3.75
5.000
c:
.~
en
c 6.250
'"
e
'"
0..
7.500
8.750
10.000
11.250
12.500 .1
1 2, 5
Applied Pressure - ksf
Overburden. Pc
(ksf) (ksf)
6.83
10
20 50
.2
.5
Natural
Sat. Moist.
Sp.
Gr.
Cc Cr Swell Press. Clpse. eo
(ksf) %
0.1
USCS AASHTO
ML
Remarks:
Dry Dens. LL
(pel)
PI
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
CLA YEY SILT, DARK BROWN, MOIST, FIRM
Project No. T138I-GS Client:
Project: WESTSIDE BUSINESS CENTERS
Environmental and Geotechnical
Engineering Network Corporation
Plate 5,\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0.000
1.250
2.500
3.750
5.000
c
.~
Ci5
- 6.250
c
Q)
<!
Q)
a.
7.500
8.750
10.000
11.250
12.500 .1
Natural
Sat. Moist.
CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT
"
............
I...... i'...
.2
Dry Dens.
(pel)
LL
N- II
11'1' ' I
I ,
, ,
: ,
I II ~i{ I
I
I
II I ,
I t I I I
WATER ADDED I
I I I I
I '
1 I
........
11'\, '
~'\,i! i
'\
! i \
I ! b
I '
i ;
I '
I
I ;
I :
i
i
I
I I
I i I
Ii
I
I
I
.5
1 2, 5
Applied Pressure - ksf
Overburden " Pc
(ksl) (ksl) Cc
6.76
10
PI
Sp.
Gr.
Cr
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
CLAYEY SILT, DARK GRAY, VERY MOIST
Project No. TI381-GS Client:
Project: WESTSIDE BUSINESS CENTERS
Location: BORING 3 25
.;7~ ~"
. .' ,
I >, .
1 ~ I j i -
-~--,-,:,~."",..,~ Ul""'<.- ':('~
Remarks:
Environmental and Geotechnical
Engineering Network Corporation
Swell Press.
(ksl)
USCS
ML
I I
I
I
! I
I II
I
I
i II
i II
I I
II
20 50
Swell
%
eo
AASHTO
Plate
~B
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'.
I
II
0.000
1.250
2.500
3.750
5.000
c
'(;j
~
Ci5
C 6.250
Ql
u
~
Ql
a.
7.500
8.750
10.000
11.250
12.500 .1
Natural
Sat. Moist.
CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT
....'....!
:--...
I
....... ""?-
....
I
,
,
: '
I
I
I
I
I
"I
I !
i i
l~~
I, ~
I
I ! ,
I
I
I
II
.2
.5
.....
I 1
'\1 I
IN
I
1\
I Ib
I I
I !
, ,
Iii
1.1 I
: I
Dry Dens.
(pet)
LL
PI
WATER ADDED I
I : I
I
I i
I i
i i
[ !
, I
I I
10 20
Sp.
Gr.
1 2 5
Applied pres!ure - ksf
Overburden . Pc Cc
(kst) (kst)
4.23
Cr
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
CLAYEY SILT, VERY DARK ORA Y, WET
Project No. TI381-0S Client:
Project: WESTSIDE BUSINESS CENTERS
Remarks:
Location: BORING 3 35
___ Environmental and Geotechnical
Engineering Network Corporation
Swell Press.
(kst)
USCS
ML
I I
I
I '
I
i
!
,
,
I
I
I !
II i
I
I
I
I I
50
Clpse.
%
eo
0.1
AASHTO
Plate
5q
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'.
I
I
I
I
II
Westside Business Centers
Project Number: T1381-GS
Appendix Page 6
DRAWINGS
0>0
EnGEN Corporation