The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutParcel Map 30798 Parcel 8-16 Geotechnical Investigation Proposed I I - I I I I I I I I I I I I I' I I I I GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED RANCHO COMMUNITY CHURCH TPM No. 30798, Parcels 8 through 16 Highway 79 South at Avenida de Missiones Temecula, California for Rancho Community Church 1170~u'2 \ I I I I I I I I I' I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical Rancho Community Church 43300 Business Park Drive Suite B104 Temecula, California 92590 March 27, 2003 Project No. 03G133-1 Attention: Mr. James Beckley Administrative Pastor Subject: Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Rancho Community Church TPM No. 30798, Parcels 8 through 16 Highway 79 South at Avenida de Missiones Temecula, California Dear Mr. Beckley: In accordance with your request, we have conducted a geotechnical investigation at the subject site. We are pleased to present this report summarizing the conclusions and recommendations developed from our investigation. We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. We look forward to providing additional consulting services during the course of the project. If we may be of further assistance in any manner, please contact our office. Respectfully Submitted, uthern California Geotechnical, Inc. , itchell, GE 2364 gineer Di ributio ( Addressee -(6) Diffenbaugh: Attn: John Murray 4~~ ,,~$'~*',~C,~'\\ I('~X~ 'J~;'.\,";'~~ " 7.,"" "~"'~" J LLII"':;'" '.:-"\''; ,j. 1''"1 V T.r. -'~'. _"_. ""' ?} 1 I 1 i<C1, 2" >: ,. \~;~]g~':~:f~i) '\;" " --.-,,-. . ~ if> ~~b;,~~%:~ ; 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 . Anaheim, California 92807-1951 . (714) 777-0333 . Fax (714) 777-0398 <? I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES 3 3.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 4 3.1 Site Conditions 3.2 Proposed Development 3.3 Previous Studies 4 4 6 4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 8 4.1 Scope of Exploration/Sampling Methods 4.2 Geotechnical Conditions 8 8 5.0 LABORATORY TESTING 10 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 12 6.1 Seismic Design Considerations 6.2 Geotechnical Design Considerations 6.3 Site Grading Recommendations 6.4 Construction Considerations 6.5 Foundation Design and Construction 6.6 Floor Slab Design and Construction 6.7 Retaining Wall Design and Construction 6.8 Pavement Design Parameters 12 14 15 20 21 22 23 26 7.0 GENERAL COMMENTS APPENDICES 29 A Plate 1: Site Location Map Plate 2: Boring Location Plan B Boring Logs C Laboratory Test Results D Grading Guide Specifications E UBCSEIS Output Southern California Geotechnical 4- Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula, CA Project Ne,_ 03G133-1 3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Presented below is a brief summary of the conclusions and recommendations of this investigation. Since this summary is not all inclusive, it should be read in complete context with the entire report. Site Preparation o Initial site preparation should include stripping of the native grass, weed and brush growth that exists throughout most of the site. Most of the boring locations were underlain by a surficial layer of topsoil and root mat material, extending to a depth of 3 to 6 inches. Topsoil extending to depths of 1 to 2:1: feet was encountered at five (5) of the twenty-eight (28) boring locations. All of the organics and topsoil materials should be removed and disposed of off-site. o Initial site preparation will also require remedial grading within the former retention basin that is located in the northwestern region of the site. This basin appears to be associated with former agricultural operations on the site. It is expected that it is underlain by softened soils and silt deposits to depths of 2 to 3:1: feet. o The near surface soils at this site consist of loose to medium dense, porous native sands and silty sands, extending to depths of 3 to 6:1: feet. Laboratory testing indicates that these materials possess a moderate potential for collapse as well as moderate consolidation. o Based on the collapse potential of the near surface native soils, remedial grading is recommended to be performed within the proposed building pad areas. The existing soils within the proposed building areas should be overexcavated to a depth of 3 feet below existing grade and to a depth of 3 feet below proposed pad grade. Within all of the building areas, the proposed foundation influence zones should be overexcavated to a depth of 3 feet below proposed foundation bearing grade. o Following evaluation of the subgrade by the geotechnical engineer, the exposed subgrade soils should be scarified, moisture conditioned as necessary, and recompacted. The previously excavated soils may be replaced as compacted structural fill. Building Foundations o Conventional shallow foundations, supported in newly placed compacted fill. o 2,500 psf maximum allowable soil bearing pressure. o Reinforcement consisting of at least two (2) No. 5 rebars (1 top and 1 bottom) in strip footings. Additional reinforcement may be necessary for structural considerations. Southern California Geotechnical ,;.. Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula, CA Project Nt>. 03G133-1 Page 1 -\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Building Floor Slabs . Conventional Slab-on-Grade, 5 inches thick. . Reinforcement consisting of at least No. 3 bars at 18-inches on-center, in both directions. Heavy welded wire mesh (6x6-W2.9xW2.9 WWF) may be used at the discretion of the structural engineer. The actual floor slab reinforcement should be determined by the structural engineer, based on the imposed loading. Pavements . Asphaltic Concrete: . Auto Parking Stalls: 3 inches asphaltic concrete over 3 inches aggregate base. . Auto Drive Lanes: 3 inches asphaltic concrete over 4 inches aggregate base. . Light Truck Traffic: 3% inches asphaltic concrete over 6 inches aggregate base. . Portland Cement Concrete (PCC): . Autos Only: 5 inches PCC over compacted subgrade. . Light Truck Traffic: 5% inches PCC over compacted subgrade. . This report also includes recommendations for pavement sections to be used within the proposed private streets that will be developed on the site. These pavement sections are presented in Section 6.8 of this report. Southern California Geotechnical ....... Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula, CA Project No. 03G133-1 Page 2 -5 I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of services performed for this project was in accordance with our Proposal No. 03P138A, dated February 10, 2003. The scope of services included a visual site reconnaissance, subsurface exploration, field and laboratory testing, and geotechnical engineering analysis to provide criteria for preparing the design of the building foundations, building floor slabs, and parking lot pavements along with site preparation recommendations and construction considerations for the proposed development. The evaluation of the environmental aspects of this site was beyond the scope of services for this geotechnical investigation. Southern California Geotechnical ~ Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula, CA Project No. 03G133-1 Page 3 ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 3.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 Site Conditions The subject site is located on the north side of State Highway 79, at the intersection with Avenida de Missiones in Temecula, California. The site is a portion of Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) No. 30798. The site is bordered to the east and west by vacant properties, to the north by single family residences, and to the south by Highway 79. The general location of the site is illustrated on the site location map, included as Plate 1 in Appendix A of this report. The subject site is currently vacant. Ground surface covel consists of exposed soil with moderate to heavy native grass and weed growth. No signs of previous development were apparent during our site reconnaissance. However, several small berms and possible remnants from former agricultural irrigation equipment are present on the property. A closed depression is located in the north western region of the property, within portions of Parcels 7, 9 and 10. The native grass and weed growth within this depression is greater than that elsewhere on the site. Several large trees, shrubs and brush are also present within the depression. Preliminary topographic information was obtained from the tentative parcel map prepared by Temecula Engineering Consultants, Inc. (TEC). This plan indicates that site topography generally dips downward to the southwest. Site grades range from a maximum of EI. 1052:!: feet MSL along the northern side of Parcel 12 to a minimum of EI. 1035:!: feet MSL at the southwestern corner of Parcel 8. The topography slopes relatively uniformly from northeast to southwest. The sites located north of the subject site are elevated above the grade of the subject site. A lalge depressed area is located in the northwestern region of the site, encompassing most of Parcels 7, 9 and 10. This depression is 5:1: feet in depth and is also bordered by a 2 to 3 foot high berm. This depression appears to have been used as part of former agricultural operations on the site. The base of the depression is indicated to have a minimum elevation of EI. 1034.3 feet MSL. 3.2 Proposed Development Preliminary information regarding the proposed development was obtained from the tentative parcel map prepared by TEe. A portion of this map has been used to prepare the Boring Location Plan, enclosed as Plate 2 in Appendix A of this report. The Boring Location Plan illustrates the scope of the proposed development. The portion of the development that was addressed by this investigation is summarized below: Southern California Geotechnical ...... Proposed Rancho Community Church T emecula, CA Project No. 03G133-1 Page 4 '1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . Parcel 8, Worship Center . Parcel 9, Family Life Center . Parcel 10, Preschool . Parcel 11, Elementary School . Parcel 12, Elementary School and Play Area . Parcel 14 and 15, Administration Building . Parcel 16, Parking Area The proposed structures will range in size from the 7,700:t ft2 elementary school building on Parcel 12 to the 55,OOO:t ft2 worship center on Parcel 8. All of the proposed structures are understood to be one and two story buildings of wood frame or masonry block construction. Detailed structural information has not been provided. However, based on the proposed construction, maximum column and wall loads are expected to be on the order of 75 kips and 3 kips per linear foot, respectively. The floor slabs are assumed to be subject to a maximum load of 150 psf. The proposed structures are not expected to include any significant amounts of below grade construction such as basements. Most of the structures will be surrounded by concrete flatwork and/or asphaltic concrete automobile parking and drive areas. The parking areas are assumed to be subject to automobile and light truck traffic only. Chapel Lane, which runs through a portion of the subject site, will be subject to varied traffic; including both automobiles and occasional medium to heavy trucks. Similar traffic loading information is assumed for Avenida de Missiones. The client has not provided traffic indices (TI's) for these private streets. The area located east of the subject site has been designated by Diffenbau~lh as the Bridgeport Site. This area consists of five (5) parcels of currently vacant property. As part of the proposed geotechnical investigation, we were requested to evaluate general soil conditions in this area. It is understood that this area will be rough graded simultaneously with the grading performed for the church site. The provision of detailed foundation design parameters for this portion of the site was beyond the scope of this geotechnical investigation. Only preliminary information, as needed for rough grading, was developed. The tentative parcel map provided by TEC provides preliminary building pad elevations for the proposed structures. Based on these finished pad elevations, in conjunction with the existing site grades, also indicated on the plan, the following maximum cuts and fills are expected to be required in the proposed building areas. Southern California Geotechnical . Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula. CA Project No. 03G133-1 Page 5 ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Parcel Approximate Maximum Cut (feet) Approximate Maximum Fill (feet) 8 9 10 11 12 14/15 1 1.5 5 o 1.5 0.5 3.5 2.5 1 1 0.5 1 3.3 Previous Studies Fault Location Study As part of the preliminary project information, we were provided with a copy of a previous fault investigation performed for the westerly adjacent site. This report is identified as follows: Fault Location Confirmation Investioation. Portions of Lots 3 throuoh 10 of Tract 15211. Citv of Temecula. Riverside County. California, prepared by Petra Geotechnical for Rancho Community Church, dated April 13. 2001, Job No. 15401. This report presents the results of an investigation performed by Petra Geotechnical to confirm the location of a fault within portions of Lots 3 through 10 of Tract 15211. This portion of Tract 15211 (which is not a portion of the Rancho Community Church Site currently being investigated by SCG) is crossed by an Alquist Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone associated with a splay of the Wildomar Fault, which is a part of the Elsinore Fault Zone. The location of this fault was projected across Tract 15211 (Kennedy, 1977). The purpose of this investigation was to verify the location of the fault and to have the fault location surveyed in order to accurately establish any setback zone requimments. As part of their study, Petra excavated two (2) fault trenches totaling 250:t linear feet, extending to depths of 6 to 15 feet below previously existing grades. The Wildomar Fault was identified at both trench locations. Petra determined that the fault strikes north 37 degrees to 45 degrees west and dips 65 degrees to 75 degrees northeast. Petra identifies the fault trace as being located approximately 20 feet northeast of the location previously identified by Pioneer Consultants in 1979. Petra indicates that the Wildomar Fault offsets Holocene age alluvium and is therefore considered to be active. Southern California Geotechnical T Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula, CA Project No. 03G 133-1 Page 6 a. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I Petra recommends that a setback zone be defined, extending 50 feet from either side of the fault trace. The Petra report also provides seismic design parameters for the Tract 15211 site. Additional considerations related to the Petra fault study are presented in Section 6.1 of the SCG report. Preliminarv Geotechnicallnvestiqation Also as part of the preliminary project information, we were provided with a copy of a previous geotechnical study performed for Tentative Tract 15211, which encompasses the subject site. This report is identified as follows: Preliminarv Geotechnical Investiqation, Church and Classroom Development, Tentative Tract 15211. State Hiqhwav 79. Temecula, California, prepared by Earth Technics for Temecula Engineering Consultants, dated June 27, 1999, Project No. 99221-01. This report identified subsurface conditions on the subject site that are generally similar to those encountered by SCG. Of the borings performed by Earth Technics, one extended to a depth of 40 feet and one extended to a depth of 50 feet. Neither boring encountered free water. In addition, Earth Technics conducted research to verify the historic high groundwater table in the vicinity of the subject site. The nearest well is reported to be approximately 35 feet north of Parcel 5 and has a historic high water level of Artesian flow at the ground surface as late June 1969 (Department of Water Resources, 1971). Earth Technics indicates that since that time, the Lower Mesa Subbasin has been operated by Rancho Water and the referenced well has been operated as Well No. 217. According to the 1984 Master Water Plan, and current information (Rancho Water, 1999), the level of water within this well has never been higher than 99.6 feet below the ground surface. As of June 26, 1999, the water level within this well was measured at 162 feet below the existing ground surface. Earth Technics indicates that Rancho Water reported that the basin in this area will continue to operate in an overdraft condition and that water levels will never approach the historic elevations, due to lack of recharge. Southern California Geotechnical .. Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula, CA Project No. 03G133-1 Page 7 \D I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 4.1 Scope of Exploration/Samplinq Methods The subsurface exploration conducted for this project consisted of twenty-eight (28) borings advanced to depths of 5 to 25:t feet below currently existing site grades. All of the borings were logged during excavation by a member of our staff. The borings were advanced with hollow-stem augers, by a truck-mounted drilling rig. Representative bulk and in-situ soil samples were taken during drilling and trenching. Relatively undisturbed in-situ samples were taken with a split barrel "California Sampler" containing a series of one inch long, 2.416:t inch diameter brass rings. This sampling method is described in ASTM Test Method D-3550. In-situ samples were also taken using a 1.4:t inch inside diameter split spoon sampler, in general accordance with ASTM D-1586. Both of these samplers are driven into the ground with successive blows of a 140-pound weight falling 30 inches. The blow counts obtained during driving are recorded for further analysis. Bulk samples were collected in plastic bags to retain their original moisture content. The relatively undisturbed ring samples were placed in molded plastic sleeves that were then sealed and transported to our laboratory. The approximate locations of the borings are indicated on the Boring Location Plan, included as Plate 2 in Appendix A of this report. The Boring Logs, which illustrate the conditions encountered at the boring locations, as well as the results of some of the laboratory testing, are included in Appendix B. 4.2 Geotechnical Conditions A surficial layer of topsoil and/or root mat material was encountered at all of the boring locations. These surficial organic materials generally extend to depths of 3 to 13 inches. A thicker layer of topsoil/colluvium, extending to depths of 1 to 2:t feet was encountered at Boring Nos. 8, 9, 14,25, and 27. The encountered topsoil generally consists of dark gray to dark brown silty fine sand and fine sandy silt with moderate organic content and trace to little clay. The topsoil is generally in a loose condition, and possesses elevated moisture contents. A surficial layer of possible fill soils was encountered at Boring B-26, extending to a depth of 4Y2:t feet. These possible fill soils consist of IOOSEl to medium dense, dark gray to dark brown fine sandy silt and silty fine sand. These soils were classified as possible fill based on their somewhat disturbed appearance and variable density. Southern California Geotechnical + Proposed Rancho CommLlnity Church Temecula. CA Project No. 03G133-1 Page 8 \\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The native soils encountered at this site generally consist of alluvial soils comprised of interbedded silty sands, sandy silts, fine to coarse sands and occasional zones of clayey silt to silty clay. These alluvial materials extend to at least the maximum depth explored of 25:t feet. In general, the alluvial soils encountered within the upper 5 to 10:t feet possess loose to medium dense relative densities. The relative density as well as the grain size of the alluvial soils generally increases with depth. At depths below 10:t feet, most of the borings encountered medium dense to very dense sands and silty sands. Occasional zones of moist to very moist silty clay and clayey silt were encountered within the upper 10:t feet at several of the boring locations. Free water was encountered during the drilling of Boring B-23 at a depth of 22:t feet. A delayed reading taken within Boring 8-23 measured standing water at a depth of 23:t feet. No free water was encountered during the drilling of any of the other borings. In addition, delayed readings taken within the other borings did not measure any free water. The water encountered at Boring B-23 may be indicative of a perched condition, possibly due to former agricultural operations. It was noted that Boring B-23 was drilled in the depressed area located on Parcel 9. Based on the water level reading~; and the moisture contents of the recovered soil samples, the static groundwater table is considered to have existed at a depth in excess of 25:t feet at the time of the subsurface exploration. Southern California Geotechnical .. Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula, CA Project No. 03G133-1 Page 9 \2-- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 5.0 LABORATORY TESTING The soil samples recovered from the subsurface exploration were retumed to our laboratory for further testing to determine selected physic:al and engineering properties of the soils. The tests are briefly discussed below. It should be noted that the test results are specific to the actual samples tested, and variations could be expected at other locations and depths. Classification All recovered soil samples were classified using the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS), in accordance with ASTM D-2488. Field identifications were then supplemented with additional visual classifications and/or by laboratory testing. The USCS classifications are shown on the Boring Logs and are periodically referenced throughout this report. In-situ Densitv and Moisture Content The density has been determined for selected relatively undisturbed ring samples. These densities were determined in general accordance with the method presented in ASTM D-2937. The results are recorded as dry unit weight in pounds per cubic foot. The moisture contents are determined in accordance with ASTM 0-2216, and are expressed as a percentage of the dry weight. These test results are presented on the Boring Logs. Consolidation Selected soil samples have been tested to determine their consolidation potential, in accordance with ASTM D-2435. The testing apparatus is designed to accept either natural or remolded samples in a one-inch high ring, approximately 2.416 inches in diameter. Each sample is then loaded incrementally in a geometric progression and the resulting deflection is recorded at selected time intervals. Porous stones are in contact with the top and bottom of the sample to permit the addition or release of pore water. The samples are typically inundated with water at an intermediate load to determine their potential for collapse or heave. The results of the consolidation testing are plotted on Plates C-1 through C-36 in Appendix C of this report. Maximum Dry Densitv and Optimum Moisture Content Representative bulk samples have been tested for their maximum dry density and optimum moisture content. The results have been obtained using the Modified Proctor procedure, per ASTM D-1557. These tests are generally used to compare the in-situ densities of undisturbed field samples, and for later compaction testing. Additional Southern California Geotechnical 4- Proposed Rancho Community Church Ternecula, CA Project No. 03G133-1 Page 10 \? I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I testing of other soil types or soil mixes may be necessary at a later date. The results of this testing are presented on Plates C-37 and C-38 in Appendix C of this report. Expansion Index The expansion potential of the on-site soils was determined in general accordance with Uniform Building Code (UBC) Standard 18-2. The testing apparatus is designed to accept a 4-inch diameter, 1-in high, remolded sample. The sample is initially remolded to 50:!: 1 percent saturation and then loaded with a surcharge equivalent to 144 pounds per square foot. The sample is then inundated with water, and allowed to swell against the surcharge. The resultant swell or consolidation is recorded after a 24-hour period. The results of the EI testing are as follows: Sample Identification B-9 at 0 to 5 feet B-24 at 0 to 5 feet Expansive Potential Medium Medium Expansion Index 61 53 R-value The R-(resistance) value was determined for a representative soil sample taken from the proposed private street, in accordance with CA Test Method 301. This test provides a measure of the pavement support characteristics of the soils, and is used in the pavement thickness aesign procedure. The results of the R-value testing are as follows: Sample Identification B-2 at 0 to 5 feet R-value 61 Soluble Sulfates Representative samples of the near-surface soils were submitted to a subcontracted analytical laboratory for determination of soluble sulfate content. Soluble sulfates are naturally present in soils, and if the concentration is high enough, can result in degradation of concrete which comes into contact with these soils. The results of the soluble sulfate testing are presented below and are discussed further in a subsequent section of this report. Sample Identification B-9 at 0 to 5 feet B-24 at 0 to 5 feet B-25 at 0 to 5 feet Soluble Sulfates (%) 0.004 0.003 0.004 UBC Classification Negligible Negligible Negligible Southern California Geotechnical ~ Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula, CA Project No. 038133-1 Page 11 \~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the results of our review, field exploration, laboratory testing and geotechnical analysis, the proposed development is considered feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. The recommendations contained in this report should be taken into the design, construction, and grading considerations. The recommendations are contingent upon all grading and foundation construction activities being monitored by the geotechnical engineer of record. The Grading Guide Specifications, included as Appendix D, should be considered part of this report, and should be incorporated into the project specifications. The contractor and/or owner of the development should bring to the attention of the geotechnical engineer any conditions that differ from those stated in this report, or which may be detrimental for the development. 6.1 Seismic Desiqn Considerations The subject site is located in an area which is subject to strong ground motions due to earthquakes. The performance of a site specific seismic hazards analysis was, beyond the scope of this investigation. However, numerous faults capable of producing significant ground motions are located near the subject site. Due to economic considerations, it is not generally considered reasonable to design a structure that is not susceptible to earthquake damage. Therefore, significant damage to structures may be unavoidable during large earthquakes. The proposed structure should, however, be designed to resist structural collapse and thereby provide reasonable protection from serious injury, catastrophic property damage and loss of life. Faultinq and Seismicity Research of available maps indicates that the subject site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Therefore, the possibility of significant fault rupture on the site is considered to be low. As discussed in Section 3.3 of this report, a splay of the Wildomar Fault, a portion of the Elsinore Fault Zone, traverses the westerly adjacent property. The fault study conducted by Petra Geotechnical indicates that this fault is active but is located within the limits of the designated Alquist Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. This fault zone is located more than 300 feet west of any of the structures proposed for the Rancho Community Church site. Therefore, no further investigations regarding fault rupture are considered warranted for the subject site. Southern California Geotechnical ~ Proposed Rancho Community Church T ernecula, CA Project No, 03G133-1 Page 12 .... \::> I I I I I I ., I I I I I I I I I I I I Seismic Oesiqn Parameters The proposed development must be designed in accordance with the requirements of the latest edition of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). The UBC provides procedures for earthquake resistant structural design that include considerations for on-site soil conditions, seismic zoning, occupancy, and the configuration of the structure including the structural system and height. The seismic design parameters presented below are based on the seismic zone, soil profile, and the proximity of known faults with respect to the subject site. The 1997 UBC Design Parameters have been generated using UBCSEIS, a computer program published by Thomas F. Blake (January 1998). The table below is a compilation of the data provided by UBCSEIS, and represents the largest design values presented by each type of fault. A copy of the output generated from this program is included in Appendix E of this report. A copy of the Design Response Spectrum, as generated by UBCSEIS is also included in Appendix E. Based on this output, the following parameters may be utilized for the subject site: . Nearest Type A Fault: . Nearest Type B Fault: . Soil Profile Type: . Seismic Zone Factor (Z): . Seismic Coefficient (Ca): . Seismic Coefficient (Cv): . Near-Source Factor (Na) . Near-Source Factor (Nv) Elsinore-Julian (14 km) Elsinore-Temecula (1 km) So 0.40 0.57 1.02 1.3 1.6 The design procedures presented by the Uniform Building Code (UBC) are intended to protect life safety. Structures designed using these minimum design procedures may experience significant cosmetic damage and serious economic loss. The use of a significantly higher lateral acceleration (Ca factor) such as 0.7 to 0.8 would be necessary to further reduce the risk of economic loss. However, since these values are much higher than those specified by the UBC. owners and structural engineers often regard them as impractical for use in structural design and with respect to the economics of the project. Ultimately, the structural engineer and the project owner must determine what level of risk is acceptable and assign appropriate seismic values to be used in the design of the proposed structure. Liquefaction The California Geologic Survey (CGS) has not yet conducted detailed seismic hazards mapping in the area of the subject site. However, the Riverside County Geologic Hazards Map indicates that the subject site is not located within a designated liquefaction hazard zone. In addition, the encountered subsurface conditions are not considered to be conducive to liquefaction. These conditions generally consist of dense Southern California Geotechnical ~ Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula. CA Project No. 03G133-1 Page 13 \tD I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I to very dense well graded granular soils below depths of 10:1: feet. Furthermore, based on the historic groundwater levels, as discussed in Section 3.3 of this report, the static water table is not expected to exist within the upper 50 feet of the subsurface profile at any time during the life of the proposed structures. Based on these conditions. and the information obtained from the Riverside County Geologic Hazards Map, liquefaction is not considered to be a significant design concern for this project. 6.2 Geotechnical DesiQn Considerations General The subject site is generally underlain by a near surface layer of loose, porous native soils. Laboratory testing indicates that these materials possess unfavorable consolidation and collapse characteristics. Remedial grading is therefore considered warranted within the proposed building areas in order to remove and replace these soils as compacted structural fill. The consolidation characteristics of the native soils encountered at depths of 5 to 6:1: feet are more favorable and these soils are expected to be suitable to serve as the structural fill subgrade. Several of the borings encountered a layer of moist to very moist clayey silt or silty clay at depths between 5 to 10:1: feet. The presence of these soils may result in minor to moderate subgrade stability problems during grading. Additional considerations related to subgrade stability are presented in a subsequent section of this report. The site was apparently formerly used for agricultural purposes. As such, it is expected that isolated areas of the site may be underlain by undocumented fill soils and concentrations of organic materials. Special care should be taken during grading to identify these soils. The recommended remedial grading program presented in Section 6.3 of this report will remove and replace the upper zone of existing soils, whether native or fill, as compacted structural fill. Settlement Laboratory testing indicates that the upper zone of native alluvial soils possesses a potential for collapse when exposed to moisture infiltration. These soils also possess a potential for moderate consolidation when exposed to load increases in the range of those that will be exerted by the foundations of the new structures. The consolidation characteristics of the underlying native soils generally improve with depth. The newly placed layer of structural fill that has been recommended in this report will tend to mitigate the collapse potential of the underlying soils and will also reduce the potential for surface moisture infiltration. Following completion of the recommended grading, post-construction settlements are expected to be within tolerable limits. Southern California Geotechnical ~ Proposed Rancho Community Church T emecula, CA Project No. 03G133-1 Page 14 \1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Expansion In general, the on-site soils consist of sands and silty sands that have been visually classified as very low to non expansive. Expansion index testing on selected soil samples that contain moderate clay content indicate that these materials possess medium expansion potentials (EI = 53 to 61). It is expected that significant mixing of the soils will occur during remedial grading. It is therefore expected that the resulting building pads will be underlain by soils possessing a low expansion index (EI < 50). Since low to medium expansive soils are expected to exist at this site, care should be taken to adequately moisture condition and maintain the moisture content of all compacted fills and exposed soil subgrades. Additional considerations mlated to expansive soils are presented in Section 6.4 of this report. Shrinkaqe/Subsidence Based on the results of the laboratory testing, removal and recompaction of the near surface native soils is estimated to result in an average shrinkage of 8 to 14 percent. Minor ground subsidence is expected to occur in the soils below the zone of removal, due to settlement and machinery working. The subsidence is estimated to be O.H feet. This estimate may be used for grading in areas that are underlain by native alluvial soils. These estimates are based on previous experience and the subsurface conditions encountered at the boring locations. The actual amount of subsidence is expected to be variable and will be dependant on the type of machinery used, repetitions of use, and dynamic effects, all of which are difficult to assess precisely. Gradinq and Foundation Plan Review Detailed grading and foundation plans were not available at the time of this report. It is therefore recommended that we be provided with copies of these preliminary plans, when they become available for review with regard to the conclusions, recommendations, and assumptions contained within this report. 6.3 Site Gradina Recommendations The grading recommendations presented below are based on the subsurface conditions encountered at the boring locations and our understanding of the proposed development. We recommend that all grading activities be completed in accordance with the Grading Guide Specifications included as Appendix D of this report, unless superseded by site-specific recommendations presented below. Southern California Geotechnical -4 Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula. CA Project No. 03G133-1 Page 15 \tb I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Site Strippinq and Demolition Initial site stripping should include removal of the moderate growth of vegetation and topsoil that is currently present over most of the site. The topsoil layer was estimated to extend to depths of 3 to 6:1: inches at most of the boring locations. As discussed in Section 4.2 of this report, five (5) of the boring locations were underlain by topsoil and/or colluvium, extending to depths of up to 2:1: feet. These materials should be removed and disposed of off-site or in non-structural areas of the development. The actual extent of site stripping should be determined in the field by the geotechnical engineer, based on the organic content and stability of the materials encountered. Existinq Retention Basin As discussed previously, a depressed area, apparently a retention basin associated with former agricultural operations, is located in the northwestern region of the property. Initial grading operations should include removal of any loose or softened soils that are present within this basin. Based on borings performed within the basin, up to 2 to 3:1: feet of loose or soft soil is expected to be present. The actual extent of excavation in the former retention basin should be determined by the geotechnical engineer during grading. Treatment of Existinq Soils: Buildinq Pads Remedial grading should be performed within the proposed building areas in order to remove the potentially collapsible native soils. Based on conditions encountered at the boring locations, the existing soils within the proposed building areas are recommended to be overexcavated to a depth of at least 3 feet below proposed building pad subgrade elevation and to a depth of 3 feet below existing grade, whichever is greater. Where not encompassed within the general building pad overexcavation, additional overexcavation should be performed within the influence zones of the new foundations, to provide for a new layer of compacted structural fill extending to a depth of 3 feet below proposed bearing grade, at all of the building locations. The overexcavation areas should extend at least 5 feet beyond the building perimeters. If the proposed structures incorporate any exterior columns (such as for a canopy or overhang) the area of overexcavation should also encompass these areas. Following completion of the overexcavation, the subgrade soils within the building areas should be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer to verify their suitability to serve as the structural fill subgrade. as well as to support the foundation loads of the new structures. This evaluation should include proofrolling with a heavy rubber-tired vehicle to identify any soft, loose or otherwise unstable soils that must be removed. Soils suitable to serve as the structural fill subgrade should possess an in-situ density equal to at least 85 percent of the ASTM D1557 maximum dry density, and a minimum Southern California Geotechnical ~ Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula. CA Project Nc.. 03G133-1 Page 16 \0.. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I saturation of 50 percent. Some localized areas of deeper excavation may be required if loose, porous, low density or otherwise unsuitable materials are encountered at the base of the overexcavation. As discussed previously, occasional zones of moist to very moist silty clay and/or clayey silt were encountered within the upper 10:!: feet of the subsurface profile. These layers are identified on the borings logs. If these soils are exposed at the base of one or more of the building pad overexcavations, moderate subgrade instability may result. Provided that grading occurs during a period of relatively dry weather, scarification, air drying and frequent mixing of these soils is expected to be sufficient in order to obtain a stable soil subgrade. If severe subgrade instability occurs, or if grading occurs during a period of wet weather, use of a geotextile or crushed stone stabilization layer may be required to achieve a subgrade suitable for new fill placement. After a suitable overexcavation subgrade has been achieved, the exposed soils should be scarified to a depth of at least 12 inches, moisture treated to 2 to 4 percent above optimum, and compacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. The previously excavated soils may then be replaced as compacted structural fill. Treatment of Existinq Soils: Parkinq Areas Based on economic considerations, overexcavation of the existing soils in the new parking areas is not considered warranted, with the exception of areas where lower strength, or unstable, soils are identified by the geotechnical engineer during grading. Subgrade preparation in the new parking areas should initially consist of removal of all soils disturbed during stripping and demolition operations. The geotechnical engineer should then evaluate the subgrade to identify any areas of additional unsuitable soils. The subgrade soils should then be scarified to a depth of 12:!: inches, moisture conditioned to at least 2 to 4 percent above optimum, and recompacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. Based on the presence of variable strength surficial soils throughout the site, it is expected that some isolated areas of additional overexcavation may be required to remove zones of lower strength, unsuitable soils. The grading recommendations presented above for the proposed parking areas assume that the owner and/or developer can tolerate minor amounts of settlement within the proposed parking areas. These grading recommendations do not completely mitigate the extent of potentially collapsible native soils in the parking areas. As such, if these soils are later exposed to moisture infiltration, significant settlement and associated pavement distress could occur. Typically, repair of such distressed areas involves significantly lower costs than completely mitigating these soils at the time of construction. If the owner cannot tolerate the risk of such settlements, the parking areas should be graded in a manner similar to that described for the building areas. Southern California Geotechnical ~ Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula, CA Project Ne,. 03G133-1 Page 17 7.P I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .. Treatment of Existinq Soils: Bridqeport Site As discussed previously, we were requested by Diffenbaugh to drill five (5) additional borings in the area located east of the Rancho Community Church site. This area has been designated by Oiffenbaugh as the Bridgeport site. The purpose of these borings was to evaluate general soil conditions in this area of the site and to provide preliminary grading recommendations. Boring Nos. B-10 through B-14, drilled in this area of the site identified a surficial layer of relatively low strength soils comprised of loose fine sands and fine sandy silts as well as medium stiff clayey silt. These low strength surficial soils ex1end to depths of 2 to 5:f: feet. Prior to development of the Bridgeport site, it will be necessary to remove these low strength soils and replace them as compacted structural fill, within the limits of any proposed structures. Based on the size of the Bridgeport site relative to the area that could be occupied by future structures, complete removal and replacement of these low strength soils is not likely to be economically feasible. Therefore, remedial grading could' be postponed until the precise locations of the structures on this parcel are determined. In this case, the ground surface should be scarified to a depth of 10 to 12 inches, moisture conditioned to 2 to 4 percent above optimum moisture content and recompacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. Any new fill soils may then be placed over this prepared subgrade. As an alternative, the existing low strength soils on the Bridgeport site could be removed and replaced as compaded structural fill. The depths at which competent native soils will be encountered will vary, but is expected to be in the range of 2 to 5:f: feet. If remedial grading will be performed at the present time, it should be completed in accordance with the recommendations presented above for the proposed Rancho Community Church building areas. Treatment of Existinq Soils: New Street Subqrades The proposed project will include construction of two (2) new private streets, identified as Avenida de Missiones and Chapel Lane. It is recommended that remedial grading be performed within the areas of these new streets, in order to provide for a new layer of compacted structural fill, ex1ending to a depth of 2 feet below the pavement subgrade elevation. The soils exposed at the base of the overexcavations within the street areas should be evaluated in accordance with the recommendations presented above for the proposed building pads. Fill Placement . Fill soils should be placed in thin (6:t inches), near-horizontal lifts, moisture conditioned to 2 to 4 percent above the optimum moisture content, and compacted. Southern California Geotechnical . Proposed Rancho Community Church T emecula. CA Project No 03G133-1 Page 18 2-\ I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I . On-site soils may be used for fill provided they are cleaned of any debris to the satisfaction of the geotechnical engineer. Some of the soils encountered within the upper 10:!: feet currently possess moisture contents well above the anticipated optimum moisture content:. Drying of these soils will be required in order to achieve a moisture content suitable for recompaction. . All grading and fill placement activities should be completed in aCGordance with the requirements of the UBC and the grading code of City of Temecula and/or the County of Riverside. . All fill soils should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. Fill soils should be well mixed. . Compaction tests should be performed periodically by the geotechnical engineer as random verification of compaction and moisture content. These tests are intended to aid the contractor. Since the tests are taken at discrete locations and depths, they may not be indicative of the entire fill and therefore should not relieve the contractor of his responsibility to meet the job specifications. Imported Structural Fill All imported structural fill should consist of low expansive (EI < 50), well graded soils possessing at least 10 percent fines (that portion of the sample passing the No. 200 sieve). Additional specifications for structural fill are presented in the Grading Guide Specifications, included as Appendix D. Utilitv Trench Backfill In general, all utility trench backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. As an alternative, a clean sand (minimum Sand Equivalent of 30) may be placed within trenches and compacted in place (jetting or flooding is not recommended). Compacted trench backfill should conform to the requirements of the local grading code, and more restrictive requirements may be indicated by City of Temecula and/or Riverside County. All utility trench backfills should be witnessed by the geotechnical engineer. The trench backfill soils should be compaction tested where possible; probed and visually evaluated elsewhere. Utility trenches which parallel a footing, and extending below a 1 h:1v plane projected from the outside edge of the footing should be backfilled with structural fill soils, compacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 standard. Pea gravel backfill should not be used for these trenches. Southern California Geotechnical .... Proposed Rancho Community Church T emecula, CA Project No. 03G133-1 Page 19 7JV II I I I I I . 6.4 Construction Considerations Excavation Considerations The near surface soils generally consist of relatively dry sands and silty sands. These materials are expected to be subject to caving within shallow excavations. Where caving occurs within shallow excavations, flattened excavation slopes may be sufficient to provide excavation stability. Deeper excavations may require some form of external stabilization such as shoring or bracing. Maintaining adequate moisture content within the near-surface soils will improve excavation stability. All excavation activities on this site should be conducted in accordance with Cal-OSHA regulations. Groundwater I The static groundwater table at this site is considered to exist at a depth in excess of 25:t feet. Isolated zones of perched water and/or very moist soils are expected to exist at depths of 15 to 25:1: feet, especially during periods of wet weather. Based on the encountered conditions, groundwater is not expected to impact grading or foundation construction activities. I I Expansive Soils I Portions of the near surface soils have been determined to possess a medium expansion potential. As discussed in Section 6.3 of this report, subsequent to the completion of the recommended remedial grading, the resulting building pads are expected to be underlain by soils possessing a low expansion potential. However, due to the presence of isolated zones of medium expansive soils at this site, care should be taken to proper moisture conditioning of all building pad subgrade soils to a moisture content 2 to 4 percent above the modified proctor optimum, during site grading. All imported fill soils should have low expansion characteristics. In addition to adequately moisture conditioning the subgrade soils and fill soils during grading, special care must be taken to maintain moisture content of any expansive soils at 2 to 4 percent above the modified proctor optimum. I . . . . . Due to the presence of expansive soils at this site, provisions should be made to limit the potential for surface water to penetrate the soils immediately adjacent to the structure. These provisions should include directing surface runoff into rain gutters and area drains, reducing the extent of landscaped areas around the structure, and sloping the ground surface away from the buildings. Other provisions, as determined by the civil engineer, may also be appropriate. .--' . . . . Southern California Geotechnical ~ Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula, CA Project No. 03G133-1 Page 20 z~ I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I 6.5 Foundation DesiQn and Construction Based on the preceding grading recommendations, it is assumed that the new building pads will be underlain by structural fill soils used to replace existing collapsible native soils. These new structural fill soils are expected to extend to depths of at least 3 feet below proposed foundation bearing grade, underlain by one additional foot of soil that has been densified and moisture conditioned in place. Based on this subsurface profile, the proposed structures may be supported on conventional shallow foundation systems. Foundation Desiqn Parameters New square and rectangular footings may be designed as follows: . Maximum, net allowable soil bearing pressure: 2,500 Ibs/fe. . Minimum wall/column footing width: 14 inches/24 inches. . Minimum longitudinal steel reinforcement within strip footings: Two (2) NO.5 rebars (1 top and 1 bottom). . Minimum foundation embedment: 12 inches into suitable structural fill soils, and at least 18 inches below adjacent exterior grade. Interior column footings may be placed immediately beneath the floor slab. . It is recommended that a grade beam footing be constructed across all exterior doorways. This footing should be founded a depth similar to the adjacent building foundations. Any f1atwork adjacent to the exterior doors should be doweled into this grade beam in a manner determined by the structural engineer. The allowable bearing pressures presented above may be increased by 1/3 when considering short duration wind or seismic loads. The minimum steel reinforcement recommended above is based on geotechnical considerations; additional reinforcement may be necessary for structural considerations. The actual design of the foundations should be determined by the structural engineer. Foundation Construction The foundation subgrade soils should be evaluated at the time of overexcavation, as discussed in Section 6.3 of this report. It is further recommended that the foundation subgrade soils be evaluated by the geoteChnical engineer immediately prior to steel or concrete placement. Soils suitable for direct foundation support should consist of newly placed structural fill, compacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. Any unsuitable materials should be removed to a depth of suitable bearing Southern California Geotechnical .;;,.. Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula. CA Project No. 03G133-1 Page 21 7A I , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I compacted structural fill, with the resulting excavations backfilled with compacted fill soils. As an alternative, lean concrete slurry (500 to 1,500 psi) may be used to backfill such isolated overexcavations. The foundation subgrade soils should also be properly moisture conditioned to 2 to 4 percent above the Modified Proctor optimum, to a depth of at least 12 inches below bearing grade. Since it is typically not feasible to increase the moisture content of the floor slab and foundation subgrade soils once rough grading has been completed, care should be taken to maintain the moisture content of the building pad subgrade soils throughout the construction process. Estimated Foundation Settlements Post-construction total and differential settlements of shallow foundations designed and constructed in accordance with the previously presented recommendations are estimated to be less than 1.0 and 0.5 inches, respectively. Differential movements are expected to occur over a 3D-foot span, thereby resulting in an angular distortion of less than 0.002 inches per inch, which is considered within tolerable limits for the proposed structures, provided that the structural design adequately considers this distortion. Lateral Load Resistance Lateral load resistance will be developed by a combination of friction acting at the base of foundations and slabs and the passive earth pressure developed by footings below grade. The following friction and passive pressure may be used to resist lateral forces: . Passive Earth Pressure: 300 Ibs/ft3 . Friction Coefficient: 0.35 These are allowable values, and include a factor of safety. When combining friction and passive resistance, the passive pressure component should be reduced by <me-third. These values assume that footings will be poured directly against compacted structural fill. The maximum allowable passive pressure is 3000 Ibs/ff. 6.6 Floor Slab Oesicm and Construction Subgrades which will support new floor slabs should be prepared in accordance with the recommendations contained in the Site Grading Recommendations section of this report. Based on the anticipated grading which will occur at this site, the floors of the new structures may be constructed as conventional slabs-on-grade supported on newly placed structural fill, extending to a depth of at least 3 feet below finished pad grade. Based on geotechnical considerations, the floor slabs may be designed as follows: Southern California Geotechnical ..... Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula, CA Project No. 03G133-1 Page 22 2-t I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . Minimum slab thickness: 5 inches. . Minimum slab reinforcement: NO.3 bars at 18 inches on-center, in both directions. Heavy welded wire mesh (6x6-W2.9xW2.9 WWF) may be used at the discretion of the structural engineer. . Slab underlayment: 10 mil vapor barrier overlain by 2 inches of clean sand. Where moisture sensitive floor coverings am not anticipated, the vapor barrier and the 2 inch layer of sand may be eliminated. . Moisture condition the floor slab subgrade soils within 2 percent of the Modified Proctor optimum moisture content, to a depth of 12 inches. The moisture content of the floor slab subgrade soils should be verified by the geotechnical engineer within 24 hours prior to concrete placement. . Proper concrete curing techniques should be utilized to reduce the potential for slab curling or the formation of excessive shrinkage cracks. The actual design of the floor slab should be completed by the structural engineer to verify adequate thickness and reinforcement. 6.7 RetaininQ Wall DesiQn and Construction Although not indicated on the site plan, some small retaining walls may be required to facilitate the new site grades. The parameters recommended for use in the design of these walls are presented below. Retaininq Wall Desian Parameters Based on the soil conditions encountered at the boring locations, the following parameters may be used in the design of new retaining walls for this site. We have provided parameters for two different types of wall backfill: on-site soils and imported select granular material. The on-site soils generally consist of silty sands and sands. Based on their composition, these on-site soils have been assigned a friction angle of 30 degrees. Use of the clayey silts and silty clays that were encountered at various depths across the site, for retaining wall backfill is not recommended. In order to use the design parameters for the imported select fill, this material must be placed within the entire active failure wedge. This wedge is defined as extending from the base of the retaining wall upwards at an angle of approximately 1 horizontal to 2 vertical (63.5 degree angle of inclination from the heel of the retaining wall). Southern California GeoteChnical ~ Proposed Rancho Community Church T emecula, CA Project No. 03G133-1 Page 23 ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I RETAINING WALL DESIGN PARAMETERS 50 Ibs/ft Soil TVDe d On-Site ase Siltv Sands 300 3 120 Ibs/ft3 3 40 Ibs!ft3 3 64 Ibs/1't3 :l 60 Ibs!ft3 A Design Parameter Internal Friction Angle (~) Unit Weight Equivalent Fluid Pressure: ACtive Condition level backfill Active Condition 2h:1v backfill At-Rest Condition level backfill 130 lbs/ft 30 Ibslft 44 Ibs/ft Regardless of the backfill type, the walls should be designed using a soil-footing coefficient of friction of 0.35 and an equivalent passive pressure of 300 Ibslft3. The structural engineer should incorporate appropriate factors of safety in the desi!Jn of the retaining walls. The active earth pressure may be used for the design of retaining walls that do not directly support structures or support soils that in turn support structures and which will be allowed to deflect. The at-rest earth pressure should be used for walls that will not be allowed to deflect such as those which will support foundation bearing soils, or which will support foundation loads directly. Where the soils on the toe side of the retaining wall are not covered by a "hard" surface such as a structure or pavement, the upper 1 foot of soil should be neglected when calculating passive resistance due to the potential for the material to become disturbed or degraded during the life of the structure. Retaininq Wall Foundation Desiqn The retaining wall foundations should be supported within newly placed compacted structural fill, extending to a depth of at least 2 feet below the proposed bearing grade. Where the new retaining walls are contiguous with any of the proposed structures, the retaining wall foundation areas should be overexcavated to a depth of at least 3 feet below proposed bearing grade. Foundations to support new retaining walls should be designed in accordance with the general Foundation Design Pararneters presented in a previous section of this report. Southern California Geotechnical .. Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula, CA Project No. 03G133-1 Page 24 '211- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Backfill Material It is recommended that a minimum 1 foot thick layer of free-draining granular material (less than 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve) be placed against the face of the retaining walls. This material should extend from the top of the retaining wall footing to within 1 foot of the ground surface on the back side of the retaining wall. This material should be approved by the geotechnical engineer. If the layer of free-draining material is not covered by an impermeable surface, such as a structure or pavement, a 12-inch thick layer of a low permeability soil should be placed over the backfill to reduce surface water migration to the underlying soils. The layer of free draining granular material should be separated from the backfill soils by a suitable geotextile, approved by the geotechnical engineer. All retaining wall backfill should be placed and compacted under engineering controlled conditions in the necessary layer thicknesses to ensure an in-place density between 90 and 93 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by the Modified Proctor test (ASTM D1557-91). Care should be taken to avoid over-compaction of the soils behind the retaining walls, and the use of heavy compaction equipment should be avoided. Subsurface Drainaqe As previously indicated, the retaining wall design parameters are based upon drained backfill conditions. Consequently, some form of permanent drainage system will be necessary in conjunction with the appropriate backfill material. Subsurface drainage may consist of either: . A weep hole drainage system typically consisting of a series of 4-inch diameter holes in the wall situated slightly above the ground surface elevation on the exposed side of the wall and at an approximate 8-foot on-center spacing. The weep holes should include a 2 cubic foot pocket of open graded gravel, surrounded by an approved geotextile fabric, at each weep hole location. . A 4-inch diameter perforated pipe surrounded by 2 cubic feet of gravel per linear foot of drain placed behind the wall, above the retaining wall footing. The gravel layer should be wrapped in a suitable geotextile fabric to reduce the potential for migration of fines. The footing drain should be extended to daylight or tied into a storm drainage system. Southern California Geotechnical ,; Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula, CA Project Nc.. 03G133-1 Page 25 2f> I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 6.8 Pavement Oesiqn Parameters Site preparation in the pavement area should be completed as previously recommended in the Site Grading Recommendations section of this report. The subsequent pavement recommendations assume proper drainage and construction monitoring, and are based on either PCA or CAL TRANS design parameters for a twenty (20) year design period. However, these desi!~ns also assume a routine pavement maintenance program to obtain the anticipated 20-year pavement service life. Pavement Subqrades It is anticipated that the new pavements will be primarily supported on a layer of compacted structural fill, consisting of scarified, thoroughly moisture conditioned and recompacted native soils. In the case of the proposed automobile parking and drive areas, these new structural fill soils will extend to a depth of at least 12 inches. For the new private streets, the layer of compacted structural fill should extend to a depth of at least 24 inches. Based on the results of R-value testing, as discussed in Section 5.0 of this report, a representative sample of the on-site soils was determined to possess an R-value of 61. Based on the variability of the soil conditions encountered across the site, the subsequent pavement design is based on an R-value of 50. Any fill material imported to the site should have support characteristics equal to or greater than 50. R-value testing should be performed at the completion of rough grading operations to verify the R-value of the as-graded pavement subgrades. Asohaltic Concrete Presented below are the recommended thicknesses for new flexible pavement structures consisting of asphaltic concrete over a granular base. The pavement designs are based on the traffic indices (TI's) indicated. The client and/or civil engineer should verify that these Tl's are representative of the anticipated traffic volumes. If the client and/or civil engineer determine that the expected traftjc volume will exceed the applicable traffic index, we should be contacted for supplernentary recommendations. The design traffic indices equate to the following approximate daily traffic volumes over a 20 year design life, assuming six operational traffic days per week. Traffic Index No. of Heavy 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 Trucks o 1 3 11 Southern California Geotechnical ,,;.. Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula, CA Project No. 03G133-1 Page 26 '2At I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I For the purpose of the traffic volumes indicated above, a truck is defined as a 5-axle tractor trailer unit with one 8-kip axle and two 32-kip tandem axles. All of the traffic indices allow for 1,000 automobiles per day. ASPHALT PAVEMENTS Parkina and Drive Areas Thickness (inches) Materials Auto Auto Drive Light Truck Moderate Parking Lanes Traffic Truck Traffic ITI =4.0\ ITI = 5.0) (TI = 6.0) (Tl = 7.0) Asphalt Concrete 2Y:, 3 3Y:, 4 Aggregate Base 3 3 4 5 Aggregate Subbase -- -- --- -- Compacted Subgrade 12 12 12 12 ASPHALT PAVEMENTS Private Streets Thickness (inches) Materials TI = 7.0 TI = 8.0 Tl = 9.0 Asphalt Concrete 4 4Y:, 5 Aggregate Base 5 f) 7 Aggregate Subbase -- -..- --., Compacted Subgrade 24 24 24 The aggregate base course should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the ASTM D- 1557 maximum dry density. The asphaltic concrete should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the Marshall maximum density, as determined by ASTM D-2726. The aggregate base course may consist of crushed aggregate base (CAB) or crushed miscellaneous base (CMB), which is a recycled gravel, asphalt and concrete material. It should be noted that the City of Temecula and/or Riverside County may require that the aggregate base within the private drives consist of crushed aggregate base. The gradation and durability of both materials should comply with appropriate CAl.TRANS specifications. Southern California Geotechnical 4> Proposed Rancho Community Church Ternecula, CA Project No, 03G133-1 Page 27 ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Portland Cement Concrete The preparation of the subgrade soils within concrete pavement areas should be performed as previously described for proposed asphalt pavement areas. The minimum recommended thicknesses for the Portland Cement Concrete pavement sections are as follows: . Automobile Parking and Drive Areas 5 inches Portland Cement Concrete over 12 inches compacted subgrade (95% minimurn compaction) . Light Truck Traffic Areas (TI = 6.0) 5% inches Portland Cement Concrete over 12 inches compacted subgrade (95% minimum compaction) The concrete should have a 28-day compressive strength of at least 3,000 psi. Reinforcing within all pavements should consist of at least heavy welded wire mesh (6x6-W2.9xW2.9 WWF) placed at mid-height in the slab. The maximum joint spacing within all of the PCC pavements is recommended to be equal to or less than 30 times the pavement thickness. Southern California Geotechnical . Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula, CA Project No. 03G133-1 Page 28 ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 7.0 GENERAL COMMENTS This report has been prepared as an instrument of service for use by the client, in order to aid in the evaluation of this property and to assist the architects and engineers in the design and preparation of the project plans and specifications. This report, may be provided to the contractor(s) and other design consultants to disclose information relative to the project. However, this report is not intended to be utilized as a specification in and of itself, without appropriate interpretation by the project architect, civil engineer, and/or structural engineer. The reproduction and distribution of this report must be authorized by the client and Southern California Geotechnical, Inc. Furthermore, any reliance on this report by an unauthorized third party is at such party's sole risk, and we accept no responsibility for damage or loss which may occur. The client(s)' reliance upon this report is subject to the Engineering Services Agreement, incorporated into our proposal for this project. The analysis of this site was based on a subsurface profile interpolated from limited discrete soil samples. While the materials encountered in the project area are considered to be representative of the total area, some variations should be expected between boring locations and sample depths. If the conditions encountered during construction vary significantly from those detailed herein, we should be contacted immediately to determine if the conditions alter the recommendations contained herein. This report has been based on assumed or provided characteristics of the proposed development. It is recommended that the owner, client, architect, structural engineer, and civil engineer carefully review these assumptions to ensure that they are consistent with the characteristics of the proposed development. If discrepancies exist, they should be brought to our attention to verify that they do not affect the conclusions and recommendations contained herein. We also recommend that the project plans and specifications be submitted to our office for review to verify that our recommendations have been correctly interpreted. The analysis, conclusions, and recommendations contained within this report have been promulgated in accordance with generally accepted professional geotechnical engineering practice. No other warranty is implied or expressed. Southern California Geotechnical . Proposed Rancho Community Church Temecula, CA Project No. 03G133-1 Page 29 3Z; II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I APPENDIX A SITE LOCATION MAP BORING LOCATION PLAN ?O I I .. ~ -...;,."t......_ , I / --L-rp/l> 1 ~, , -' I I I I I I I .~ o n ?5 -, ~ '" n C.' I r '2i~T I, I i I r I~ ~ II 30 .. $/~ q-/ ..' "/ / , , .. #;'>,'; / 28 .-/. .. -' I 25 " " 29 / 36 31 32 ~~ ~% \)LI.- ~. 3 .1_ . + I I I ~ i&- ~ SITE LOCATION MAP RANCH() COMMUNITY REFORMED CHURCH TEMECULA. CALIFORNIA SOURCE: RIVERSIDE COUNTY THOMAS GUIDE, 2001 1""2400' DRAWN: DRK CHKD: JMK SCG PROJECT 03G1:i3-1 PLATE 1 Southern California Geotechnical 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 Anaheim, Califomia 92807 Phone: (714) 777-0333 Fax: (714) 777-0398 1A I I I .1 I I I .. I I I I I I I I I I I I I APPENDIX B BORING LOGS ?9 I I I I I I I I I BORING LOG LE SAMPLE TYPE GRAPHICAL SYMBOL AUGER CORE GRAB CS NR SPT SH I I I VANE DEPTH: COLUMN DESCRIPTIONS Distance in feet below the groun SAMPLE: BLOW COUNT: I I I I I I I POCKEN PEN.: GRAPHIC LOG: DRY DENSITY: MOISTURE CONTENT: LIQUID LIMIT: PLASTIC LIMIT: PASSING #200 SIEVE: UNCONFINED SHEAR: S DES SAMPLE COLLECT CUTTINGS. NO FIE SOIL STRENGnt ( ROCK CORe SAMP WITH A [){AMONO- TYPICALLY USEO 0 CONSOLlOA rED B SOIL SAMPlE TAKE SPECIAUZEO EQU A STOCKPilE OR T (OISTURBEO) CAlIfORNIA SAMP BARREL SAMPLER BRASS RINGS. OR (RELATIVELY UUOI NO RECOVERY, TH DID NOT RESULT IN SIGNIFICANT SOil STANDARD PENET IS A 1.<4 INCH INSID BARREl, DRIVEN 1 HAMMER. (OISTUR SHElBY TUBE: rAKE SAMPlE TUBE, PU AND THEN EXTRAC VANE SHEAR TEST OBTAINED USING A DEVICE. TYP1CALl CLAYS-NO SAMPl Sample Type as depicted above Number of blows required to adv a 140 Ib hammer with a 3D-inch refusal (>50 blows) at 3 inches. hammer was sufficient to push th Approximate shear strength of a by the pocket penetrometer. Graphic soil symbol, as depicted Dry Density of an undisturbed or Moisture content of a soil sample the dry weight. The moisture content above whic The moisture content above whic The percentage of material finer The shear strength of a cohesive unconfined state. GEND AMPLE CRIPTlON EO FROM AUGER LO MEASUREMENTS Of OISTURBEO) lE; TYPICALLY TAKEN TIPPED CORe BARREL Nt Y IN HIGHt Y EOROCK. N WITH NO IPMENT. SUCH AS FROM HE GROUND SURFACE. LER; 2.1n INCH 1.0. SPUT . UNED iMTH 1-tNCH HIGH IVEN VV1TH SPT HAMMER. STURBEO) E SAMPUNG A TTEUPT RECOVERY OF ANY OR ROCK MA TERlAL RATION TEST: SAMPLER E lAAMETER SPLIT 8 INCHES WITH THE SPT BEO) N WITH ^ THIN WALL SHED INTO THE SQll .TED. (UNDISTURBED) : SOIL STRENGTH 4 BlADED SHEAR Y USED IN SOFT E RECOVERED. d surface ance the sampler 12 inches using drop. 50/3" indicates penetration WH indicates that the weight of the e sampler 6 inches or more. cohesive soil sample as measured on the following page, relatively undisturbed sample. , expressed as a percentage of h a soil behaves as a liquid. h a soil behaves as a plastic. than the #200 standard sieve. soil sample, as measured in the ~ I I SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART I MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMBOLS TYPICAL GRAPH LEITER DESCRIPTIONS I CLEAN GW WELL-GRADED GRAVELS. GRAVEl- GRAVEL GRAVELS SAND MIXlURES, LITTlE OR NO AND FINES GRAVEllY I SOilS GP POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS. (LITTLE OR NO FINES) GRAVEL - SAND MIXTURES. LITTlE OR NO FINES COARSE I GRAINED GRAVELS WITH GM SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL- SAND. SOilS MORE THAN 50% FINES SILT MIXTURES OF COARSE FRACTION I RETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE (APPRECIABLE GC CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND- AMOUNT OF FINES) CLAY MIXlURES I SAND CLEAN SANDS SW WELL-GRADED SANOS. GRAVELLY MORE THAN 50% SANDS, LITTlE OR NO FINES OF MATERIAL IS AND lARGER THAN SANDY I NO. 200 SIEVE SOilS 8P POORLY -GRADED SANDS. SIZE (LITTLE OR NO FINES) GRAVELLY SAND. LITTlE OR NO FINES I SANDS WITH 8M SILTY SANDS. SANO - SILT MORE THAN 50% FINES MIXTURES OF COARSE FRACTION I PASSING ON NO. 4 SIEVE (APPRECIABLE SC CLAYEY SANDS. SAND - CLAY AMOUNT OF FINES) MIXTURES I INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE ML SANOS, ROCK FLOUR. SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY I SilTS INORGANIC CLAYS: OF LOW TO FINE AND LIQUID LIMIT MEDIUM PLASTICllY, GRAVELLY GRAINED CLAYS LESS THAN 50 CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS. SILTY SOilS CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS I ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY I MORE THAN 50% INORGANIC SILTS. MICACEOUS OR OF MATERIAL IS DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR SMALLER THAN SILTY SOILS NO. 200 SIEVE I SIZE SILTS AND LIQUID LIMIT INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH CLAYS GREATER THAN 50 PLASTICITY I OH ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY. ORGANIC SILTS I ~ , ~ , , , , HIGHLY ORGANIC SOilS I, ,II, ,11, ,1/, PT PEAT. HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH ,I', ,1/, ,1/, ,1/ HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS I I NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS 31 I I, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-1 JOB NO.: 03G133 DRILLING DATE: 3/4103 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: 5 feet LOCATION: Temecula. California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RESULTS ~ I- Z " >- 1f!. * 0_ Z 0 I- - wu. '" w ~ w .... DESCRIPTION (ij w- Cll;!; z'" I- ~ 0 0. 0 Z 0::1- u:t:. Z w 0 l- I w ~z 0 z!!' Zo:: w I .... W 0_ I-w 0 >= :2 0. s: "'- -'" 0<( I- ~ >-u. ",I- -I- "'I- "'0 :2 0. :2 0 Ou. _Z ~- <(- "'0 Ow w <( .... 0'" 0:: SURFACE ELEVATION: 1043.0 feet MSL 0::0 00 0:2 ....:2 <(N ZI 0 0 '" '" o.t:. Cl D~ :20 :::i::i 0.:J 0." ~'" 0 ,T7;', 3 to 6 inches T ODSoillRoot Mat Laver "- Brown Silty fine Sand, medium dense - dry to damp 5 ~ 14 - X 15 4 Boring Terminated at 5' 1 I M o ~ N M ~ Q " o w g ~ " o ~ , ~ " M M " M o ~ m ~ TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-1 3f> I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-2 JOB NO.: 03G 133 DRilLING DATE: 3/4/03 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Churdl DRilLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: 5 feet lOCATION: T emecula. California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RESULTS i=' f- Z Cl >- :;; ~ o_ w Z w 0 DESCRIPTION f- . - w"- (/) W ::J 0.. ..J in w- Cl~ Z(/) f- !!- 0 f- U Z ",f- U u:t:- Z w U I w ::Jz z!!' z'" w I ..J ;;: W 0_ f-W 0 >= -(/) ::;; f- 0.. "'- !l: (/)f- -f- (/)f- (/)0 0.,; 0.. ::;; 0 U"- >-"- -Z ::J_ :5~ Uw ::;; w .,; ..J o(/) '" SURFACE ELEVATION: 1 043.5 feet MSL ",U 00 0::;; ~o ZI 0 0 (/) lD o..f- Cl , 00.. ::;;U ::::;::::; 0..:J o..ll: ::J(/) U " , 3 to 6 inches-To soillRoot Mat laver S 9 Brown Silty fine Sand, loose to medium dense - damp 8 X 22 4 Boring Terminated at 5' M ~ N ~ ~ " " o w " ~ << " o ~ ~ ~ " M M i.j o ~ m ~ TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-2 ?:P. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-3 JOB NO.: 03G133 DRILLING DATE: 3/4/03 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: 5 feel LOCATION: Temecula, California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RESULTS ;::- .... z <.!) >- ,. 0_ '" . W Z 0 .... - W"- (I) W DESCRIPTION . W :J 0. ...J u; w- <.!)~ z(I) .... ~ 0 u z "'.... iLe. z W u .... I W :Jz u z~ z'" W r ...J :;: W 0_ ....w 0 i= -(I) :2 .... 0. >t_ ~ >-"- (I).... -.... (I).... (1)0 0..: :2 0. :2 0 u"- _z :J_ :5~ ~~ uw W ..: ...J 0(1) '" SURFACE ELEVATION: 1042.0 feet MSL ",u 00 0:2 zr 0 0 (I) OJ o.e. <.!) o~ :2U :J:J o.:J 0." :J(I) u , '.-' 3 to 6 inches To soil/Root Mat Laver '- 5 Dark Brown fine Sandy Silt, loose. moist 23 ~ '- 7 21 !X @ 4 to 5 feet, little Clay " Boring Terminated at 5' M o " " M >- C " C w " ~ c '" ~ ~ " M M ii M o ~ ~ >- TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-3 /Jt) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-4 JOB NO.: 03G133 DRILLING OA TE: 3/4/03 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: Steel LOCATION: Temecula, California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RESULTS i=" I- :i (!) >- :& #- o_ w z w 0 DESCRIPTION l- . - WIL Ul W ::> 0.. -' en W- l'~ ZUl I- !!:. 0 u Z ",I- iLt:. Z W U l- I W ::>z u _.w z'" W I -' ;: W 0_ I-W 0 >= "::'00 ;;; l- ll.. "'- ~ >-IL Ull- -I- Ull- U)O 0<( ;;; 0.. ;;; 0 uIL _z ::>- :5~ Uw W <( OUl a: ",U 00 0;;; <llo ZI 0 -' SURFACE ELEVATION: 1040.5 feet MSL <'N 0 Ul III o..t:. (!) oe,. ;;;U ~:J 0..:; Q." ::>Ul U , ,.,' 3 to 6 inches T onsoil/Root Mat Laver -- X BroWn Silty fine Sand to fine Sandy Silt, loose to medium 8 dense - damp 6 '-' - 12 6 X Boring Terminated at 5' , ! M ~ N " ~ " " " w " J ~ U o "' ~ ~ " M M " M o J '" ~ TEST BORING LOG PLATE 8-4 A.\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-5 JOB NO.: 03G133 DRilLING DATE: 3/4/03 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRilLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: 16 feel LOCATION: Temecula, California lOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS I LABORATORY RESULTS i=' I- eZ. t'l >- ;;;- rf.. o_ w Z w 0 DESCRIPTION I- ~ - w"- '" w :0 a. ..J en WI- (?~ Z'" I- !::. 0 U Z "'z -I- Z I- U "-- W U I w :Ow _.w Z'" w I ..J W D_ O ~ ",:,(f.j ::;; I- a. s: ><- !1t: 1-1- -I- "'I- Ci30 0<( a. ::;; 0 U"- >-"- !Qz :0_ <(- ~~ Uw ::;; w <( ..J 0'" '" SURFACE ELEVATION: 1 043.0 feet MSL ",U 00 0::;; ..J::;; ZI 0 0 '" al a. I- t'l o~ ::;;u :J:J a.:J c." "'''' U " \ 3 tc 6 inches T opsaiVRaol Mat Laver -- ~ 15 Brown Silty fine Sand, trace fine Root fibers, slightly porous. 91 5 loose to medium dense - damp ~ ~ 22 101 3 ~ Light Brown to Gray Brown Silty fine sand, trace leachate -- 5 ~ 24 deposits, medium dense - dry to damp 102 3 '--' B 21 @ 7 to 8 feet, trace medium Sand 95 3 ~ 16 100 4 10- '-' Dark Brown fine Sandy Silt, loose - moist to v~ry moist '- 25 Ix 7 15 f- Light Brown fine to medium Sand, dense. dry to damp - 50/5" 4 X .. .. Boring Terminated at 20' due to large Rock I M 5; N " >- o " o w " ~ <l " o ~ ~ ~ " M M " M o ~ m >- TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-5 ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-6 JOB NO.: 03G133 DRILLING DATE: 314103 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: 22 feet LOCATION: 'Temecula, California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RESULTS ~ l- i (!) >- :::. 0_ '" . w z w 0 DESCRIPTION l- . - wu. '" W ::>' 0. ...J iii w- (!)!!i z'" I- ~ 0' U Z ",I- -I- Z W I- ::>z u u._ u I W z~ z'" W I ...J W 0_ I-W 0 ;:: ::< I- 0. ;:1 "'- !l:: ",I- -'" 0<( >-u. -I- "'I- "'0 ::< 0. ::< 0 Uu. -z ::>- <(- Uw W <( ...J 0'" '" SURFACE ELEVATION: 1042.5 feet MSL ",u 00 0::< ...J::< ~~ ZI 0 0 '" m! 0.1=. (!) o~ ::<u :J:J o.::l 0." ::>'" U ,. , 3 to 6 inch T onsoil/Root Mat laver ~ 11 Dark Brown Silty fine Sand, trace Clay. trace organics -moist 96 8 ~ Ught Brown Silty fine Sand, trace leachate seams, medium ~ 26: dense - damp 104 7 ~ 5 ~ 19 ~ 108 8 ~ ~ light BrolNJ'l fine Sand, loose to medium dense - damp 98 3 17' ~ ~ 9 @ 9 to 10 feet, little Silt, trace Clay - moist 103 10 10 <....: Brown fine Sandy Silt, loose - moist ~ 9 17 15 Light Brown fine to medium Sand, some Silt, medium dense. damp .. .. .. Oar!<: Brown fine Sandy Silt, little Clay, loose - moist to very moist - 40 X 7 20 '..... Brown fine to medium Sand, some Silt, loose - moist Ix 11 i 22 .. .. Brown Clayey Silt, some fine Sand, stiff - very moist 39 Boring Terminated at 25' ~ o ;n N " >- o " @ " ~ < " o ~ , ~ " ~ ~ " ~ o ~ ~ >- TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-6 A,70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-7 JOB NO.: 03G133 DRILLING DATE: 3/4/03 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRIUING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: 22 reet LOCATION: Temecula, California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RESULTS >=' .... :i Cl >- '* * o- w Z w 0 DESCRIPTION .... - WIL en W :::> Q. ..J ti5 w- t? '!! zen .... ~ 0 U Z a:.... u:t:. Z W U .... I W :::Jz U _w Za: W I ..J ;: W 0_ ....W Cl r= ~:Ci5 ::; .... Q. ><- !l:: >-IL en.... -.... en.... eno 0<( ::; Q. ::; 0 UIL _Z :::J_ <(- Uw W <( ..J Oen a: SURFACE ELEVATION: 1042.5 feet MSL a:u 00 0::; ..J::; ~~ ZI 0 0 en "' Q.t:. Cl ClQ, ::;U ::i::i Q.:J c. 'It :::Jen U " , 3 to 6 inches Tonsail/Root Mat Laver -- ~ 9 Dark Brown Silty fine Sand, slightly porous, trace fine Root 91 13 fibers loose - moist ~- '-' Brown Silty fine Sand, slightly porous, loose to medium denSE! ~ -damp 17 98 4 ~ Light Brown fine Sandy SilL trace Clay, trace leachate -- 5 ~ 19 deposits, slight porosity, medium dense - damp to moist 101 10 <....: ~ 16 Light Brown fine Sand, loose to medium dense - damp 97 5 <....: ~ Light Brown fine Sandy Sill, little Clay, loose - moist 20 11 95 10- <....: - 9 21 X 15 '-- Dark Brown fine Sandy Silt, loose - very moist ~ 8 40 20- Brown Silty fine Sand, medium dense - very moist I- 27 rX 13 Boring T enninated at 25' M e ~ ~ M ~ o CJ o w CJ 5 o ~ ~ ~ CJ M M <> M o J m ~ TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-7 bA I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-8 JOB NO.: 03G 133 DRIlliNG DATE: 3/4/03 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: 23 feet LOCATION: Temecula, California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RESULTS ;::- I- :i C> ,. ~ 0_ '" 0 W Z W 0 I- 0 - WIL en W ::0 n. ..J DESCRIPTION en w- e'~ zen I- !!o- 0 u Z ",I- -I- Z I- ::oZ U IL_ W u I W :z-~ z'" W r ..J W 0_ I-w 0 ;:: ::;: n. ;: "'- !l: -en 0", I- ,."- en I- -I- enl- cr.' 0 ::;: n. ::;: 0 u"- -z ::0_ "'- Uw oen "'u 00 0::;: ..J::;: u.'O 0 W '" ..J '" SURFACE ELEVATION: 1042.0 feet MSL "N Zr 0 en '" n.t:. C> 0"'- ::;:u :J:J n.:J n... ::0 en U ". , TOPSOIL: Dark Brown fine Sandy SilL trace Clay, trace ~ B " ,II, organics. fine Root fibers, loose- moist to very moist 79 25 " , ....., Gray SilL slightly porous, trace fine Root fibers, loose to ~ 22 medium dense - dry to damp 83 19 ~ Ughl Brown fine Sandy Sill to Silty fine Sand, loose to medium dense - damp 5 ~ 23 101 7 '--' ~ 16 @ 7 to 8 feet, Gray Silt, trace fine Sand 91 9 '--' ~ Brown Silty fine to medium sand, medium dense - damp 36 111 6 10- ~ Light Brown fine to medium sand, trace fine Gravel, trace coarse sand. dense - dry to damp - .. 5 6 30 15 .. Light Brown fine Sand, dense - damp - 43 7 6 20- .,.) Brown Clayey Silt, little fine Sand, very stiff - moist - 25 21 X Boring Tenninated at 25' I M ;j; ::; >- " " o w " ~ ~ u o 00 ~ ~ " M M " M o ~ " >- TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-8 4;5 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-9 JOB NO.: 03G133 DRILLING DATE: 3/4/03 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: 13 feet LOCATION: Temecula, California LOGGED BY: Oaryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RESULTS ;:: f- ;i Cl ,.. '* #- o- w Z 0 f- - W"- (/) W :0 W ...J DESCRIPTION en w- Cl~ Z(/) f- !!:. 0 ll. U Z o:f- -f- Z W f- :oZ U "-- U r w z!!! Zo: w I ...J W 0_ f-W 0 ;:: :2 ll. ;;: "'- -(/) 0<( f- !a: (/)f- -I- (/)1- (/)0 ll. :2 0 U"- ,.."- -Z :0_ ::i~ (/)0 Uw :2 W <( ...J O(/) 0: SURFACE ELEVATION: 1042.0 feel MSL o:U 00 0:2 <(N ZI 0 0 (/) '" ll.c. Cl oil. :2u ::i:J 1l.:J ll." :O(/) U "- , TOPSOIL: Dark Brown to Black fine Sandy Silt, some Clay, ~ 15 " ,I_I, trace Organics. loose to medium dense ~ moist 98 22 ~ Brown to Light Brown fine Sandy Silt. medium dense - damp to moist ~ 19 102 9 ~ 5 ~ 16 98 11 ~ ~ Light Gray fine Sand, trace Silt, loose to medium dense - 13 damn- - 90 4 ~ Dark Gray fine Sandy Silt - damp to moist ~ 14 W 95 15 10- ....., Dark Gray to Black fine Sandy Clay, trace Organics, slightly porous, very stiff - damp to moist light Brown fine to medium Sand. medium dense - damp - 8 X 29 .. .. Boring Terminated at 15' I I I M o ;;; i'! >- o '" o w '" J " U o ~ ~ 0- '" M M " M o J m >- TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-9 iJ(o I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-10 JOB NO.: 03G133 DRilLING DATE: 3/4/03 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRilliNG METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: 10 teet lOCATION: T emecula, California lOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READiNG TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RESULTS t= I- ;i Cl >- ~ *' o_ w z w 0 DESCRIPTION l- . - wu.. en w :> 0.. ..J in w- ,,'!! zen I- ~ 0 0 Z ",I- u:c. Z W 0 l- I w :>z 0 w z'" W I ..J ;: W 0_ I-w 0 ;:: ~Ci5 :2 I- 0.. "'- !l: en I- -I- en I- ~o 0<( 0.. :2 0 Ou.. >-u.. -z :>- <(- Ow :2 w <( ..J Oen '" SURFACE ELEVATION: 1044.0 feet MSL ",0 00 0:2 ..J:2 <(~ ZI 0 0 en lD o..c. Cl 0""- :20 :J:J 0..:J Cc" :>en 0 ~., 3 to 6 inches T oDsoil/Root Mat Laver -- ~ 8 Brown Silty fine Sand to fine Sandy Silt, loose - damp to mois t 102 12 ~ Light Brown Silty fine Sand to fine Sandy Silt, slight porosity, -- ~ 14 loose to medium dense ~ damp to dry 91 4 ~ 5 ~ 27 96 6 ~ ~ 17 -- 99 6 ~ Ught Brown fine Sandy Silt, little Clay, loose to medium densEI - damp to moist ~ 16 94 15 Boring Terminated at 10' I M o ~ ~ ... o " o w " ~ <3 o ~ ~ ~ " M M ~ o ~ '" ... TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-10 ~1 I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-11 JOB NO.: 03G133 DRILLING DATE: 314/03 PROJECT: Rancho Community Church ORILLlNG METHOD: Hollow Stem Aug LOCATION: Temecula. California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas FIELD RESULTS ;:: .... z c> w Z w 0 DESCRIPTION w ::J <L ...J ~ W 0 .... U U I I ...J S: w ti: <L ><- 2i: ::E 0 uu. w <( ...J 0'" 0:: SURFACE ELEVATION: -- MSL 0 '" al <Lt:- C> , ,.--, 3 to 6 inches T oosoil/Root Mat Laver ~ 9 Dark E!rown Silty fine Sand. loose - moist '-' Light Brown Silty fine Sand to fine Sandy Silt, medium dense - ~ 20 damp :....: 5 - 18 @ 510 6 feel, little Clay, slightly porous ~ ~ 17 r---' ~ Light Brown fine Sandy Silt,little Clay, loose to medium dense 15 -moist Boring Terminated at 10' I I I I I I I I I M ~ :;; I I I ~ o " o w " ~ <( u o '" ~ ~ " ,.; M ii M o ~ m ~ TEST BORING LOG er WATER DEPTH: Dry CAVE DEPTH: 9 feet READING TAKEN: at Completion LABORATORY RESULTS >- ;i <ft 0_ .... - wu. '" u; w- c>g! z'" .... Z 0::.... -.... Z ::Jz U u._ w z!!! Zo:: w 0_ ....w 0 t= -'" 0<( ::; >-u. "'.... -.... "'.... "'0 ::E -z ::J_ :):E ~I'l uw o::U 00 O::E ZI 0 o~ ::Eu :J:J a.::; a... ::J'" U 104 10 102 4 96 g 98 6 102 16 PLATE B-11 ~~ I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-12 I I I JOB NO.: 03G133 DRILLING DATE: 3/4/03 PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Au LOCATION: Temecula, California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas FIELD RESULTS >=' I- :i {'J W Z W 0 DESCRIPTION W :J n. -' !t:- O I- tl W tl I I -' W l- n. ;;: "'- ~ n. :;; 0 tl"- W <{ -' 0(1) a: SURFACE ELEVATION: -- MSL 0 (I) '" n.c. ('J " , 3 to 6 inches lODsoil/Root Mat Laver ~ 10 Dark Brown fine Sandy Silt, trace Clay, slighUy porous, trace fine Root fibers. moist f---' ~ Light Brown Silty fine Sand. medium dense - dry to damp 25 ~ 5 ~ .,'" Light Brown fine Sand, medium dense - damp 17 : ~ ~ Brown Clayey Silt, little fine Sand, stiff - very moist 9 2.5 '-' ~ Light Brown Silty fine Sand, loose to medium dense - damp 14 Boring Terminated at 10' I I I I I I I I I I I I M e ~ >- o '" o w '" <!. " o w I I ~ 0- '" '" M " M o ~ m >- I TEST BORING LOG WATER DEPTH: Dry r CAVE DEPnI: 9.5 feel READING TAKEN: at Completion LABORATORY RESULTS >- :i *- 0_ l- . - W"- (I) Cii W- ~,~ z(I) I- Z a: I- -I- Z :Jz tl "-- W _.w Za: W 0_ I-w 0 ;:: ~:(i5 :;; >-"- (1)1- -I- (1)1- u'o o<{ :;; -z :J_ tlw a:tl 00 0:;; <{- Ulo 0 -,:;; 4.", ZI o eo. :;;tl :J:J n.:J a. .. :J(I) tl - 95 23 - 101 6 - 108 6 - 87 30 - 102 10 A,\ ge PLATE B-12 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-13 JOB NO.: 03G 133 DRILLING DATE: 3/4/03 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: 9leet LOCATION: Temecula, California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RESULTS ~ I- Z Cl >- ;i #. 0_ Z W 0 DESCRIPTION l- . - wu. '" W :0 n. ...J u; w- Cl~ Z'" I- ~ 0 u Z ",I- u:1::. Z w U l- I w :oZ u z!!! z'" w J: ...J ~ W 0_ I-w 0 ;:: -'" ::; Ii: n. "'- !l: ",I- -I- "'I- "'0 00( ~ 0 uu. >-u. -z :0_ 0(- Uw ::; W ...J 0'" '" SURFACE ELEVATION: -- MSL "'u 00 0::; ...J::; ~o ZJ: 0 0 '" III n.1::. Cl 0"'- ::;u ~:i n.::i n.~ :0'" u 2.25. 3 to 6 inches TODsoillRoot Mat Laver ~ 10 Dalk Gray Clayey Silt, little fine Sand, trace fine Root fibers, 83 32 stiff - very moist ~ ~ Brown fine Sandy Silt, trace Clay, loose - moist 10 107 20 r-: 5 ~ I Dalk Brown Clayey Sill, little fine Sand, medium stiff - very 103 24 8 1.6 moist r-: ~ Brown Silty fine Sand, loose to medium dense - very moist 14 '110 16 ~ ~ Brown Silty tine to medium Sand, medium dense - moist 15 13 .. Boring Terminated at 10' I ~ ~ o " N ~ ... D " o w " ~ < o o '" ~ ~ " M ~ Ci ~ o ~ m ... TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-13 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-14 JOB NO.: 03G133 DRilLING DATE: 314/03 WATER DEPTH: Ory PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRilLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: 81eet lOCATION: T emecula, California lOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RESULTS ;::: .... z C) ,.. ~ *' o- w Z w 0 DESCRIPTION .... . - wu. '" w :> u. .... en w- C)~ z'" .... !:. 0 () z "'.... -.... z w () .... :>z () u._ I w z'!! z'" w I .... W 0_ ....w 0 ;:: :2 .... u. :;: "'- !l: "'.... -'" 0<( ()u.. ,..u.. -.... "'.... "'0 :2 u. :2 0 -z :>- <(- ~i'l ()w w <( .... 0'" '" SURFACE ELEVATION: --- MSL "'() 00 0:2 ....:2 ZI 0 0 '" OJ u.c C) ou. :2() :J:J u.:J u." :>'" () TOPSOil: Gray to Black Silty fine Sand to fine Sandy Silt, ~ 8 trace Organics, loose - moist to very moist 86 22 ~ Ught Brown Silt, some fine Sand, slightly porous. damp to dry ~ 28 101 8 ~ 5 ~ Light Brown Siity fine Sand, medium dense - damp 16 104 5 ~ ~ Ught Brown fine Sandy Silt, some Clay, medium dense - moist 17 100 14 <....: ~ Dark Gray to Black Clayey Silt, trace fine Sand, trace 12 4.25 Organics. very stiff - moist 101 20 Boring Terminated at 10' I 5\ 8 ~ N M ~ o '" o w '" 5 o ~ ~ ~ '" ~ " M o ~ '" ~ TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-14 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-15 JOB NO.: 03G133 DRILLING DATE: 3/5/03 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTtt: 8 feet LOCATION; Temecula, California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RESULTS i=" .... eZ Cl >- '" #. o- w Z w 0 DESCRIPTION .... . - w"- '" W :J a. ..J Cii w- ~l i!! Z'" .... !:. 0 u Z "'.... -.... Z .... :JZ U "-- W u I w _.w Z'" W I ..J ;; W 0_ ....w 0 ;:: '::-'C;; ::?: !i: a. ,,- !l: "'.... -.... "'.... UJo 0", ::;; 0 u"- >-"- -Z :J_ Uw ::?: w 0'" '" ",U 00 0::;; :5::E 010 ZI 0 '" ..J SURFACE ELEVATION: 1041.0 feet MSL ~:~ 0 '" III o.c Cl o~ ::?:u :::::i::i a.::; :J'" U .' , 3 to 6 inches To soillRoot Mat Laver __ ~ 12 BrolNTl Silty tine Sand, loose to medium dense. damp to moist 102 9 ~ ~ 23 104 4 ~ Light Brown Silty fine Sand to fine Sandy Slit, slightly porous, -- 5 ~ 27 medium dense - dry to damp 107 5 ~ Ught Brown Silty fine Sand, some Clay, medium dense. -. ~ 16 damp 104 5 ~ Brown fine Sandy Silt, trace Clay, loose to medium dense- -. ~ 12 damp 88 12 TIT Boring Terminated at 10' 5z. M o ~ N ~ ~ o " o w " ~ ~ u o o ~ ~ " M M " M o ~ m ~ TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-15 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-16 JOB NO.: 03G 133 DRILLING DATE: 3/5103 WATER DEPTH: Doy PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem AU~ler CAVE DEPTH: 5 feet LOCATION: TemecuJa, California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LAB ORA TORY RESULTS ~ .... z " >- ~ * o_ w z w 0 DESCRIPTION .... 0 - wu. Ui w :> a. ..J en w- t')'!! ZUi .... ~ 0 0 Z 0::.... -.... Z w .... :>z 0 u._ 0 I w zl!! Zo:: w I ..J W 0_ ....w 0 ~ :;;; .... a. ~ "'- ~ CIl.... -CIl 0<( >-u. -.... Ui.... Uio :;;; a. :;;; 0 ou. _z :>- :5=" CIlo Ow w <( ..J OCll 0:: SURFACE ELEVATION: 1041.5 feet MSL 0::0 00 0:;;; ;,:~ ZI 0 0 CIl "' o.c. " o eo. :;;;0 :J:J a.::; :>CIl 0 , '.' 3 to 6 inches T oDsoH/Root Mat Laver ~ 33 Gray Brown fine Sandy Silt, dense - damp 7 r.x Ught Brown Silty fine Sand, medium dense - dry to damp 25 6 Boring Terminated at 5' 5~ M o ~ " ~ o Cl o w Cl ~ < L> o ~ , ~ Cl M M " M o ~ m ~ TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-16 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-17 JOB NO.: 03G133 DRILLING DATE: 3/5103 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTft 10 feet LOCATION: Temecula, California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS l LABORATORY RESULTS ~ I- :i Cl ,. ~ * o_ W Z W 0 DESCRIPTION I- 0 - WIL '" W ::> a. ... 0; w- t~ !!! z'" I- ~ 0 0 Z a: I- u:c. Z W 0 l- I W ::>z 0 _.w Za: W J: ... $: W 0_ I-w 0 ~ ~U5 ::;; I- a. '-'- !;\: ,.IL ",I- -I- 001- 0'0 0<( ::;; a. ::;; 0 OIL -z ::>- <(- ~1': Ow W <( ... 0'" a: SURFACE ELEVATION: 1040.0 feet MSL ",0 00 a::;; ...::;; ZJ: 0 0 '" OJ a.c. Cl o~ ::;;0 :::::i:::i a.::; c." ::>'" 0 ,. , 3 to 6 inches To soiVRoot Mat Laver -- I- 16 Brcwn Silty fine Sand to fine Sandy Silt, trace fine Root fibers, 93 15 ~ medium dense ~ damp to moist -- I- 34 Light Brcwn Silty fine Sand tc fine Sandy Silt. slightly pcrcus, 98 5 ~ medium dense - dry to damp 5 ~ 35 104 10 <-.: Gray Brown Silt, little Clay. little fine Sand, trace leachate -- ~ 27 deposits, medium dense - moist 97 13 '-' ~ 4.5_ Brown Clayey Silt, some fine Sand, very stiff - moist 90 21 20 Boring Tenninated at 10' 54 M o ~ " M >- o " o w " ~ " u o '" , ~ " M M " M o ~ '" >- TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-17 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-18 JOB NO.: 03G133 DRILLING DATE: 3/5/03 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: 5 feel LOCATION: Temecula, California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RESULTS t= I- Z t'l ,. ,. *' o_ w Z w 0 DESCRIPTION l- . - wu. '" w ::> a. ...J Cii w- ~)'!i z'" I- !::. 0 u Z ",I- u:t:. Z w U l- I w ::>z u 2'~ Z'" W I ...J W 0_ ....w 0 ;:: ., I- a. ~ "'- ~ ",I- _:CI) 0...: ,.u. -I- "'.... "'0 ., a. ., 0 uu. -z ::>- ...:- Uw w ...: ...J 0'" '" SURFACE ELEVATION: 1039.5 feet MSL ",u 00 0" ...J" ~~~ ZI 0 0 '" lD a.t:. t'l De, .,u :J:] a.:; (1,,", ::>'" U " , 3 to 6 indies T oDsoil/Root Mat Laver >< 24 Brown to Dark Brown Silty fine Sand, medium dense - damp to 9 moist '- rx 28 9 Boring Terminated at 5' SS' M o ~ N ~ ~ o " o w " ~ o ~ , ~ " M M " M o J m ~ TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-18 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-19 JOB NO.: 03G133 ORILLlNG DATE: 315103 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: 9 teet LOCATION: T emecula, California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RESULTS ~ I- :i C) >- ~ #. 0_ Z W 0 DESCRIPTION I- 0 - wu. <JJ W :0 0.. ..J en w- C)~ Z<JJ I- !!:. 0 l- t> Z ",l- t> u:t:. Z w U I w :lZ z~ Z'" W I ..J W 0_ I-W 0 ;:: ::;; 0.. ;: "'- -<JJ 00( I- ~ >-11. <JJI- -I- <JJI- <JJo ::;; 0.. ::;; 0 Uu. -Z :0_ ~~ Uw w 0( O<JJ '" ",U 00 0::;; <JJo ZI 0 ..J SURFACE ELEVATION: 1038.5 feet MSL o(N 0 m lD o..t:. C) 00.. ::;;U ~::i 0..::; 0.." :om U , I..' 3 to 6 inches T oDsoillRoot Mat Laver -- ~ 24 Dark Brown Silty fine Sand, trace fine Root fibers, medium 108 14 dense - moist ~ l- UghtBrown fine Sandy Silt to Silty fine Sand. slight porosity, ~ 51 dense - damp 101 7 5 ~ 29 92 4 ~ ~ light Brown fine Sand, trace Silt, medium dense. damp 22 96 4 L.: ~ I Dark. Brown Clayey Silt, some fine Sand, stiff to very stiff - 22 4.0 moist 98 18 Boring T ermlnated at 10' I I I I I 5''- M o ~ ~ ~ o " o w " ~ "" u o ~ , ~ " M M 5 M o ~ m ~ TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-19 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-20 JOB NO.: 03G 133 DRILLING DATE: 3/5/03 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: 5 feet LOCATION: T emecula. California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RESULTS i=' .... :i (!) >- * * D_ W Z W 0 DESCRIPTION .... - w"- en w ::J a. ...J en w- (?~ zen .... !:. 0 0 Z 0::.... u:t:. Z w 0 .... I w ::Jz 0 z~ Zo:: w r ...J ;: W 0_ ....w 0 ;:: -= en :2: .... a. "'- ~ >-"- en.... -.... en.... eno 0<( :2: a. :2: 0 0"- _Z ::J_ <(- Ow W <( oen 0:: 0::0 00 0:2: ...J:2: eno Zr 0 ...J SURFACE ELEVATION: 1038.0 feet MSL <(N 0 en 1Il a.t:. (!) o~ :2:0 :J:J a.:J o. .. ::Jen 0 " , 3 to 6 inches TOOsoil/Root Mat Laver -- I-- Brown fine Sandy Silt, slightly porous, loose to dense. damp 9 ~ 12 tx 46 9 Boring Terminated at 5' M ~ N '" >- D <.? o w <.? J ~ " o ~ ~ <.? M M 5 M o J '" >- TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-21 JOB NO.: 03G133 DRilLING DATE: 3/5103 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRilLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: 9 fee! lOCATION: Temecula, California lOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RES-UL TS ;:: I- Z C) >- "* * o- w z w 0 I- - w"- m w ~ a. ...J DESCRIPTION iii w- C)~ zm I- !:o- 0 Z I- -I- Z I- () "'z () "-- w () I w ~w z~ z'" w I ...J ;: W 0_ 1-1- 0 ;:: -m 0<( :2 I- a. >'- 9;: >-"- !!lz -?- mI- mo :2 a. :2 0 ()"- ~- <(- ~1'J ()w w <( ...J Om '" SURFACE ELEVATION: 1 037.0 feet MSL "'() 00 0:2 ...J:2 ZI 0 0 m Ol a.c C) 00. :2() :J::i a.::; a... ~m () " , 3 to 6 inches T oosoiVRoot Mat Laver ~ 28 Brown fine Sandy Silt, medium dense - damp to moist 103 13 ~ ~ 39 103 8 ~ 5 ~ Brown Silty Clay. little fine Sand, very stiff - moist 85 28 18 4.5+ '-' ~ 27 375 m 100 16 '-' ~ Dark Brown fine Sandy Silt, trace Clay, medium dense - moist 94 12 17 Boring Terminated at 10' , 51 M ~ " M >- o " o w " ~ '" u o ~ ~ ~ " ..; M " M o ~ m >- TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-21 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-22 JOB NO.: 03G133 DRILLING DATE: 3/5103 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: 5 feel LOCATION: Temecula. California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RESULTS i=' I- :i (!) >- * ~ o_ w z w 0 I- - wu. '" w => 0.. -' DESCRIPTION en w- e'~ z'" l- \!,. 0 U Z 0:1- u:c. Z W U l- I w =>z U w Zo: W I -' W 0_ I-w 0 ;:: ~Cii ::; I- 0.. ;: ,,- !l: >-u. ",I- -I- "'I- u'o o<{ ::; 0.. ::; 0 uu. -z =>- :'\~ Uw 0'" o:U 00 0::; CI~o ZI 0 W <{ -' 0: SURFACE ELEVATION: 1036.5 feet MSL ~.~ 0 '" !Xl o..c. (!) ofS ::;u :J::J 0..::; =>(J) U , ,..,> 3 to 6 inches Topsoil/Root Mat Laver Brown fine Sandy Sill to Silty fine Sand, loose to medium -- ~ 9 dense - damp to moist 18 X 20 7 Boring T enninated at 5' 5'S ~ ~ ~ >- " " " w " ~ .: u " ~ , ~ " ~ ~ " ~ o ~ .. >- TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-22 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-23 M o ~ N M ... o " o w " ~ < u o ~ ~ ~ ~ " M o ~ m ... JOB NO.: 03G133 DRILLING DATE: 3/5103 WATER DEPTH: 23 feel PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: 24 feel LOCATION: T emecula, California LOGGED BY: Dary! Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RESULTS ~ I- :i (!) >- .. ~ o_ w Z w 0 I- - wu. (/) W :J a. ...J DESCRIPTION Ui w- (!)~ z(/) I- \S 0 0 Z <<I- -I- Z I- :JZ 0 u._ W 0 I w z!!! Z<< w :J: ...J W 0_ I-w 0 ;::: -(/) :; I- a. ;: >::- ~ >-u. (/)1- -I- (/)1- (/)0 0<( :; a. :; 0 ou. _Z :J_ :s~ ~o ow w <( ...J o(/) << SURFACE ELEVATION: 1036.5 feet MSL <<0 00 0:; Z:J: 0 0 (/) CD a.c. (!) oe, :;0 :J:J a.::; a.ll! :J(/) 0 " , 3 to 6 inches T oDsall/Root Mat Laver ~ 18 Brown fine Sandy Silt. little Clay, medium dense. moist to 98 20 very moist ~ ~ Ught Gray Brown Silty fine Sand, trace medium Sand, dense 105 4 50/6" to very dense - dry to damp '--' 5 ~ 56 120 7 '-' ~ 62 @ 7 to 8 feet, grades coarser 119 6 - ~ Red Brown fine to medium Sand, trace Silt, trace Clay, dense 36 . damp to moist 101 8 10- '--' Brown fine to medium Sand, dense - moist ~ 42 19 15 .. .. .. .. Brown fine Sandy Silt, little Clay. dense - moist ~ 42 23 20- 1 1 Brown fine to medium Sand, dense - wet yj X 65 -j 16 .. .. Boring Terminated at 25' ~ TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-23 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-24 JOB NO.: 03G133 DRILLING DATE: 3/S/03 WATER DEPTH: Doy PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem AUflel CAVE DEPTH: 1SIool LOCATION: Temecula, California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RESULTS >=' I- ei. t'l >- "'- ~ o_ w z w 0 DESCRIPTION I- ~ - WLL 00 W ::> a. -' en WI- C!I~ zOO I- !!0- w 0 I- U Z "'z U u:c. z U I W ::>w z!!! z'" W I -' W 0_ 0 >= :< I- a. ;;: "'- & 1-1- -00 0<( a. :< ULL >-LL !Qz 5t: 001- ct;:o Uw :< 0 000 ",U 00 0:< 5~ U;'o ZI 0 W <( -' '" SURFACE ELEVATION: 1037.0 feet MSL ~~ 0 00 III a.c. t'l o!!" :<u ::;::; a.:J ::>(1) U , '..' 3 to 6 inches T oDsoiVRool Mat Lavor ~ 11 3.1 ~ Dark Gray Brown Clayey fine to medium Sand, loose - moist 113 14 ~ ~ I Gray Brown Clayey fine Sand, trace Silt. medium dense - 116 14 18 2.6 moist L.: S ~ 1S 2.7 116 13 '--' ~ Orange Brown fine to coarse Sand. dense - damp SO 4.S 111 4 '--' ~ 61 3.0 @ 9 to 10 feet, some coarse Gravel, possible Cobbles, very 121 4 10- '--' dense tx @ 13 to 15 feet, some coarse Gravel, possible Cobbles, very 6 SO/S" dense 1S f- ... Light Brown fine to medium Sand, trace Silt, dense ~ damp to moist ~ 63 10 X .... Boring T enninated at 20' ~ M o ~ N M e- o " o w " ~ <l o "' , ~ " M M ~ o ~ m e- TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-24 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. 8-25 JOB NO.: 03G133 DRILLING DATE: 3/5/03 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: 23 feet LOCATION: Temecula, California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS l LABORATORY RESULTS ;= f- Z Cl >- ~ ~ o_ w z w 0 DESCRIPTION f- . - WIL '" W :J a. -' 1ii W- t?~ Z'" f- ~ 0 U Z ocf- u:t:. Z W U f- I W ::>z U z~ Zoc W I -' W 0_ f-W 0 >= _: en ::< f- a. ~ >::- 2: >-IL ",f- -f- "'f- "'0 0< ::< a. ::< 0 UIL _Z ::>- :)~ Uw W < -' 0'" oc SURFACE ELEVATION: 1040.0 feet MSL OCU 00 0::< ~~ ZI 0 0 '" III a.t:. Cl o!!' ::<U :J:J a.:J o. ::>'" U " , TOPSOIL: Gray to Black fine Sandy Silt, little Clay, some ~ 17 II-~ organics - moist 105 22 ~ " , -- Gray Brown fine Sandy Silt, medium dense - damp to moist I- ~ 24 15 5 ~ Gray Brown Silty fine Sand, trace Clay, medium dense - moist -- 115 7 29 '---" Gray BrOlMl Silty fine Sand, trace Clay, dense - moist -- ~ 56 120 7 '---" Brown fine to coarse Sand, medium dense to dense - moist -- ~ 41 114 6 10- '-' - @ 13 to 15 feet, trace fine Gravel 16 36 7 15 ~ -- .. .. Brown Clayey Silt, little fine Sand, very stiff. moist t>( 36 4.0 18 20- "--' mJ:! Brown Silty fine Sand, dense - damp to moist I- 12 Ix 51 --= Boring Tenninated at 25' <Pl M o :;; N " ... o " o '" " ~ 0: U o "' ~ ~ " M M " M o ~ m ... TEST BORING LOG PLATE 8-25 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-26 JOB NO.: 03G133 DRILLING DATE: 315/03 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Churdl DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: 16 feet LOCATION: Temecula, California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS I LABORATORY RESULTS ;:- I- :i " >- ;;;- ;;;- 0_ 0 W Z 0 I- - WIL W DESCRIPTION ~ en W ::l 0. ...J u; WI- t, !!! zen l- i!- 0 U z "'z -I- Z W I- U IL_ U I W ::lw z~ Z'" w r ...J w 0_ 1-1- 0 >= _: en ;, I- 0. ;: "'- ~ >-IL !!lz -I- en I- u'o 00{ ;, 0. ;, 0 UIL ::l_ :5~ ~o Uw w 0{ ...J oen '" SURFACE ELEVATION: 1039.0 feet MSL ",U 00 0;' Zr 0 0 en III o.c. " o~ ;'u ::i::i 0.::J a: 11 ::len () ~, 3 to 6 inches To soil/Root Mat Laver POSSIBLE FILL: Dark Brown fine Sandy Silt, trace Clay. -- ~ 25 loose - moist 106 17 '-' POSSIBLE FILL: Dark Gray Brown Silty fine Sand to fine -- 8 25 Sandy Silt, slightly porous, medium dense - moist 99 12 Dark Gray Brown to Brown Silty fine Sand to fine Sandy Slit. -- 5 ~ 40 little Clay. slightly porous, dense - damp 115 9 '-' ~ Gray Brown fine to medium Sand, some Silt, trace coarse 68 Sand, dense - dry to damp 124 4 r---' ~ 50 @ 9 to 10 feet. some coarse Sand 114 5 10- r---' .. .. Ught Brown fine Sandy Silt, dense - damp to moist ~ 37 16 15 .. Light Brown fine to medium Sand, medium dense - damp X 30 4 .. Boring Terminated at 20' ~z. M ~ ~ " M >- o " o w " ~ -< u o '" ~ .. " ,~ " M o ~ ~ >- TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-26 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-27 JOB NO.: 03G133 DRILLING DATE: 3/5103 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Churdl DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH: 15 feet LOCATION: T emecula, California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING TAKEN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RESULTS i=' I- :i el >- ;;: ~ o_ w z w 0 DESCRIPTION l- . - wu. U) w :> a. ..J u; w- t?~ zU) I- !::. 0 0 Z ",I- U u:t:. z w 0 l- I w :>z _.w z'" w I ..J W 0_ I-W 0 >= ~Ci5 ;;; I- a. ;;: "'- !it >-u. U)I- -I- U)I- 0", ;;; a. ;;; 0 uu. -z :J_ :5~ rllg 0w W '" ..J oen '" SURFACE ELEVATION: 1038.5 feet MSL ",0 00 0;;; <N ZI 0 0 U) lD a.t:. el 0"'- ;;;0 ::::i~ a.::; o. " :>U) 0 " , TOPSOIL: Dark Brown fine Sandy Sill. trace Clay, slight ~ 15 1/.,1/, organics, loose to medium dense - very moist 102 22 " , -- ~ Light Brown Silty fine Sand, medium dense - damp ~ 24 97 6 "-' Dark Brown Clayey fine to medium Sand to fine Sandy Clay, -- 5 ~ 21 4.5+ hard - moist 110 16 ~ Gray Brown Silty fine to coarse Sand, trac..e fine Gravel, trace -- ~ 52 Clay, dense - damp 127 5 f--' ~ Brown fine to coarse Sand. dense to very dense - dry to damp 3 70 123 10- ~ X 42 .. .. 9 ... 15 '---' ... tx 65 10 .... Boring Terminated at 20' I ! I ~3 ~ o i); " ~ ~ o " o w " ~ <( u o o 0' " ~ ~ " ~ o ~ ~ ~ TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-27 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-28 JOB NO.: 03G 133 DRIlliNG DATE: 3/5/03 WATER DEPTH: Dry PROJECT: Rancho Community Church DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auuer CAVE DEPTH: 18 feet LOCATION: T emecula, California LOGGED BY: Daryl Kas READING T AI<EN: at Completion FIELD RESULTS LABORATORY RESUL T5 i=" .... Z C9 > * * o- w z w 0 DESCRIPTION .... - wu. '" W ::l 0. ...J en w- C9~ z'" .... !S 0 () z .... iLe. z w .... Irz () () I w ::lw z!!! Zlr w J: ...J W 0_ 0 ;:: :;; 0. ;: "'- ~ ........ -'" 0" .... ()U. >u. !!lz -.... "'.... "'0 :;; 0. :;; 0 ::l_ ()w w " 0'" Ir Ir() 00 0:;; :5~ "'0 ZJ: 0 ...J SURFACE ELEVATION: 1038.0 feet MSL <:'~ 0 '" m o.e. C9 oe,. :;;() :J:J a.::; ::l'" () , '--' 3 to 6 inches T oDsoiVRoot Mal Laver - 11 Dark Brown fine Sandy Silt, some Clay. loose - moist 106 19 ~ Brown fine Sandy Silt to Silty fine Sand, medium dense - damp to moist ~ 39 100 9 -' 5 ~ Ught Gray fine Sand, trace Silt, slightly porous, medium densE! 22 - damp to dry 91 4 f--' ~ 45+. Dark Gray to Black Clayey Silt, some fine Sand. some 18 organics, stiff to very stiff - very moist 82 32 '--' ~ 46 Gray Brown Silty fine to coarse Sand, little Clay, dense - damp 117 6 10 '--' Light Brown fine to medium ~and, little Silt, medium dense to dense - dry to damp g 23 2 15 .. .. .. ... .. .. X 58 5 .. .. .. Boring Terminated at 20' 'A M o ~ N ~ >- o ~ o w ~ ~ <3 o ~ , 0- ~ M M ;, M o ~ m >- TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-28 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I APPENDIX C LABORATORY TESTING &,"!) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 4 o 2 6 8 ~ E 10 .. " Ol S 12 '" .. :!! ~ 14 c o (.) 16 18 20 22 24 0,1 10 Load (ksf) Classification: Dark Brown Silty fine Sand, trace Clay B-6 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moistum Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pct) Final Dry Density (pct) Percent Collapse (%) Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) 1 to 2 2.4 1.0 100 10 18 97.2 110.7 1.63 - --~:;"~ Southern California Geotechnical ..... Rancho Community Church Temecula. California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C-1 1260 North Hancock Street, ~uite 101 Anaheim, California 92807 Phone: (71oi) 777.(1333 Fax: (714) 777-0398 ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 0 2 4 6 8 C .E 10 ~ .b Ul 5 12 '" ~ :!'! ~ 14 ~ 0 <..> 16 18 20 22 24 0,1 10 100 Load (ksf) Classification: Light Brown Silty fine Sand Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) B-6 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 7 17 106.1 117.8 2.25 3 to 4 2.4 1.0 Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C- 2 Southern California Geotechnical ... 1260 North Hancock Street, SuitCt 101 Anaheim, Califomi.. 92807 Phone: (71.) 177~333 Fax: (7141 777"()398 (", I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results c .5 10 .. D <n g 12 '" .. :!! ~ 14 ~ o U 16 18 20 22 ,~ ' ." .~:; 24 0,1 " 10 Load (ksf) Classification: Light Brown Silty fine Sand Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) B-6 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 5 to 6 2.4 1.0 Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE c- 3 ~: - 100 8 18 106.7 113.5 0.08 Southern California Geotechnical . ~~.....,..,.- -- 1260 North HancOC;k Street, Suite 101 Anaheim, C;illifomla 92807 ,,~ Phone: (714) 777~333 Fax: (714) n7-0398 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results ~ 2 4 6 8 E 10 .. b rn a 12 '" .. :!! ~ 14 ~ o (J 16 18 20 22 ~ t,;; ~ ,. {c.'1 ,.., 24 0.1 10 Load (ksf) Classification: Light Brown fine Sand Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) B-6 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 7 to 8 2.4 1.0 100 4 25 95.5 99.8 0.18 Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE c- 4 Southern California Geotechnical ...... ~-,,-- 1260 North Hancock Street. Suite 101 Anaheim, California 92807 ~C\ Phone: (714) 771-0333 Fax; (714) 7n-<l398 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results o ~ 2 4 6 8 .E 10 .. ., ., g 12 '" .. :!! ~ 14 c o U 16 18 ~ ~~, t 5 20 22 " ~ :t ':, 24 0.1 10 Load (ksl) Classification: TOPSOIL: Dark Brown fine Sandy Silt, trace Clay Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) 8-8 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 1 to 2 2.4 1.0 Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE c- 5 ,." it tt '<"; 100 22 32 83.4 96.2 1.23 Southern California Geotechnical . 1260 North H.ancock Street. Suite 101 Ano1.heim. Coillifomia 92807 Phone: (714) 777-0333 F.u: (71.) 777.0398 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results ~ 2 4 6 6 .f 10 ~ ~ Ul S 12 '" ~ :!! ~ 14 c o u 16 18 20 22 24 ' 0,1 1(0 Load (ksf) Classification: Gray Silt, trace fine Root fibers Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) B-8 Initial MoistUrE? Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 3 t04 2.4 1.0 100 10 30 83.0 92.6 1.82 Rancho Community Church Temecula. California Project No. 038133 PLATE C- 6 Southern California Geotechnical ., -,~..., 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 Anaheim, California 92807 Phone: (714) 777-0333 Fax: (714) 777~398 ,\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 0 2 4 6 8 ~ E 10 .. J> '" l5 12 " .. :!! ~ 14 " 0 u 16 18 20 22 ;:- .;, 24 0,1 10 100 Load (ksf) Classification: Light Brown fine Sandy Silt to Silty fine Sand Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pct) Final Dry Density (pct) , Percent Collapse (%) B-8 5 to 6 2.4 1.0 4 21 99.4 105.6 0.65 Southern California Geotechnical ...p Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C-7 --'- 1260 North Hancock Street,. Suite 101 Anaheim, California 92M7 Phone: (714) m~333 Fax: (714) m~398 It.- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '. I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results ~ 2 4 6 8 .5 10 .. D II) 5 12 '" .. :E ~ 14 c o u 16 18 20 22 24 0.1 10 Load (ksf) Classification: Gray Silt, trace fine Sand Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) B-8 7 to 8 2.4 1.0 100 6 25 96.0 102.2 0.13 Southern California Geotechnical ..... Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE c- 8 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 Anaheim, California 92&07 Phone: (714) 777-0333 Fax: (714)777-(1398 I:!> I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I: I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 0 2 4 6 8 ~ .5 10 m b U) g 12 .. m :!! g 14 c: 0 0 16 18 20 22 24 , 0.1 10 100 Load (ksf) Classification: Brown Silty fine Sand to fine Sandy Silt Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) B-10 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 1 to 2 2.4 1.0 16 23 98.7 106.7 0.48 """~~. Southern California Geotechnical . Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE c- 9 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 Anaheim, California 928117 Phone: (714) 177-0333 Fax: (714) 777-Cl398 14 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ., I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 0 2 4 6 8 ~ c 10 'iij D en c 12 0 ., m :!! ~ 14 c 0 u 16 18 20 22 24 0.1 10 100 Load (ksf) Classification: Light Brown Silty fine Sand to fine Sandy Silt Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) 8-10 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 5 to 6 2.4 1.0 6 26 98.8 105.1 0.08 IJIC. _ -~.,...,. Southern California Geotechnical ., Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C-10 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 Anaheim, California 92807 Phone: (714) rn.o33J Fax: (7UJ 777-0398 15' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) Consolidation/Collapse Test Results ~ 2 4 6 8 .5 10 .. b ., l5 12 '" .. :E g 14 0: o o 16 18 20 22 C~~: 24 0.1 ~~ 'Q:' 10 Load (ksf) Classification: Light Brown fine Sandy Silt, little Clay B-10 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 7 to 8 2.4 1.0 100 9 29 95.2 100.9 0.14 -- --~.... Southern California Geotechnical .. Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G 133 PLATE C-11 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 Anaheim, California 92807 Phone: (714) n7.o333 Fax: (714l777'()398 .,,, I I I I I I I I I I '. I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results o ~ w 2 4 6 8 E 10 ~ .j, <Il a 12 ., ~ "C ~ 14 " o '-' 16 18 20 22 24 0,1 10 Load (ksf) Classification: Light Brown fine Sandy Silt, little Clay Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) B-10 9 to 10 2.4 1.0 100 11 29 93.8 100.2 0.28 --T~~- Southern California Geotechnical ., Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C-12 1260 North Hancock Street. Suite 101 Anaheim, Califomia 928(>7 Phone: (714) 777..(l333 Fax; {71417n-0398 .,1 I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) Consolidation/Collapse Test Results ~ 2 4 6 8 .= 10 .. ~ rJl 6 12 '" .. :>! g 14 c o U 16 18 20 22 ."} 24 0.1 10 Load (ksf) Classification: Brown Silty fine Sand B-15 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 1 to 2 2.4 1.0 100 7 19 105.4 116.9 3.44 Southern California Geotechnical ...... Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C-13 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 Anaheim, California 928n7 Phone: (714) 777.(1333 F.n;; (714) 7n-0398 1e I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 0 2 4 6 8 ~ of 10 .. .to rn B 12 ., .. :!! "0 14 .. c 0 u 16 18 20 22 24 0.1 10 100 Load (ksl) Classification: Brown Silty fine Sand Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pct) Final Dry Density (pct) Percent Collapse (%) 5 21 99.6 110.1 3.16 B-15 3 to 4 2.4 1.0 Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C-14 Southern California Geotechnical . .-,.~~- 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 Anaheim, California 928V7 Phone: (714) 777"()333 Fax: (714) m..o398 19 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 0 2 4 6 8 C .E 10 ~ .b III 5 12 " ~ :E ~ 14 c 0 u 16' 18 20 22 24 0,1 10 100 Load (ksf) Classification: Light Brown Silty fine Sand to fine Sandy Silt Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) B-15 5 to 6 2.4 1.0 5 19 108.2 112.9 0.08 ~ _ ....,..-----!!!S.--,..... Southern California Geotechnical ., Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C-15 1260 North Hancock Stnet, Suite 101 Anaheim, California 928C7 Phone: (714) m-0333 Fax: (714) m-0398 80 I I I I 'I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results '. ~ 6 8 .5 10 .. ~ Ul 5 12 ., .. :!;! ~ 14 c o o 16 18 20 22 24 0.1 10 Load (ksf) Classification: Light Brown Silty fine Sand, some Clay Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) B-15 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 7 to 8 2.4 1.0 100 12 25 96.8 108.4 0.33 '.'~~~ Southern California Geotechnical ., Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C-16 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 Anaheim, California 92807 Phone: (714) 777-0333 Fax: (71") m-0398 8\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) Classification: Brown fine Sandy Silt B-21 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent COllapse (%) 13 20 97.2 110.8 2.70 1 to 2 2.4 1.0 Rancho Community ChUrch Temecu/a, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C-17 Southern Califaiiria Geotechnical .. ' - 1260 North H.... Street., Suite .... Anaheim, 0Ii:wnta 928(+1 ~ Z- Phofle:(714Jm-. Fa:m<c}m-<<J98 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 0 2 4 6 8 ~ .!; 10 .. .to ., IS 12 '" .. :!! g 14 " 0 u 16 18 20 22 24 0.1 H) 100 Load (ksf) Classification: Brown fine Sandy Silt Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) B-21 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pet) Final Dry Density (pct) Percent Collapse (%) 3 to 4 2.4 1.0 7 17 108.6 116.8 0.25 Rancho Community Church Temecula. California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C-18 Southern California Geotechnical ., --~- - 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 Anaheim, california 92!07 Phone: (714) 7T7~333 Fax: (114) 777.0398 8~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results ~ 6 8 .E 10 .. b Ul 5 12 .. .. :!! g 14 c o u 16 18 20 22 .~; r.;" 24 0.1 ::~: ~ - 10 Load (ksf) Classification: Brown Silty Clay Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) B-21 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pct) Final Dry Density (pct) Percent Collapse (%) 5 to 6 2.4 1.0 100 28 26 85.8 98.6 0.91 Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C-19 .,,_ C. _.".-_ Southern California Geotechnical ., 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 Anaheim, California 92807 84' Phone: (714) 777-4333 Fall.: (714)777-0398 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 0 2 4 6 8 ~ .E 10 .. .b VI c 12 0 ., .. :!! "0 14 .. c 0 u 16 18 20 22 24 0.1 10 100 Load (ksf) Classification: Brown Silty Clay Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) B-21 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 7 to 8 2.4 1.0 Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C- 20 15 19 104.2 110.9 0.06 -~_. Southern California Geotechnical . 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 Anaheim, California 92807 ~~ Phone: (714) 7n-4333 Fax: (7141 m-03911 I I I I I 'I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results ~ 6 8 E 10 ~ .b '" S 12 '" ~ !! ~ 14 c o U 16 18 20 22 24 , 0.1 10 Load (ksf) Classification: Brown fine Sandy Silt, little Clay B-23 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) 1 to 2 2.4 1.0 100 20 23 100.5 107.2 0.51 ~--~_. Southern California Geotechnical ~ Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G 133 PLATE C- 21 1260 North HancOI::k Street, Suite 101 Anaheim, California 92801 8r2> Phone: (714) 177-0333 Fax: (714)777-0398 -. .. . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 0 2 4 6 8 ~ .E 10 ~ .to rn 6 12 '" ~ :!;! ~ 14 c 0 u 16 18 20 22 24 , 0.1 10 100 Load (ksf) Classification: 'light Gray Brown Silty fine Sand, trace medium Sand Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pct) Final Dry Density (pet) Percent Collapse (%) 8-23 3 t04 2.4 1.0 4 13 101.5 120.2 3.97 Southern California Geotechnical ..... Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C- 22 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 Anaheim, California 92807 ~ 1 Phone: (714) 7n-0333 Fax: (714) 777-0398 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 6 8 C c 10 "ii ., fJ) c 12 0 '" .. :!! "0 14 ~ c 0 () 16 18 20 22 24 - -,,,"' 0.1 10 100 Load (ksf) Classification: Light Gray Brown Silty fine Sand, trace medium Sand Boring Number: 8-23 Initial Moisture Content (%) 7 Sample Number: Final Moisture Content (%) 12 Depth (ft) 5 to 6 Initial Dry Density (pcf) 122.4 Specimen Diameter (in) 2.4 Final Dry Density (pcf) 130.9 Specimen Thickness (in) 1.0 Percent Collapse (%) 1.23 Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C- 23 Southern California Geotechnical . _.....-.!!!h.-T_ 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 ClS Anaheim. California 92B07 0 Phone: (71417T7~333 Fax: (714) m~398 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 0 2 4 6 8 ~ .E 10 .. ., <II IS 12 ... .. :!! ~ 14 c: 0 u 16 18 20 22 24 0.1 1(1 100 Load (ksf) Classification: Light Gray Brown Silty fine Sand, trace medium Sand 8-23 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 7 to 8 2.4 1.0 6 12 123.8 130.2 1.08 Southern California Geotechnical . Rancho Community Church Temecula, California' Project No. 03G 133 PLATE c- 24 - ._~- 1260 North Hancock Street, S.ulte 101 Anaheim, c.t.llfomia 521107 80. Phone: (714J m.o333 Fax: (714) m-0398 . \ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results ~ 2 4 6 8 .5 10 ~ ~ Ul a 12 '" ~ :E ~ 14 c o u 16 18 20 22 24 0.1 10 Load (ksf) Classification: Dark Gray Brown Clayey fine to medium Sand Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) B-24 1 to 2 2.4 1.0 100 14 13 108.0 123.4 0.15 Southern California Geotechnical .. Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G 133 PLATE c- 25 1260 North Hancock Street, ~uile 101 Anaheim, California 92807 q 0 Phone: (714) 7n~333 Fax: (7141 n7..()398 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 0 2 4 6 8 ~ ~ .E 10 .. b '" a 12 ., .. :!! ~ 14 c 0 u 16 18 20 22 24 0.1 10 100 Load (kst) Classification: Gray Brown Clayey fine Sand, trace Silt Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) B-24 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 3 to 4 2.4 1.0 Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C- 26 14 13 117.3 124.5 0.10 Southern California Geotechnical ..... 1260 North HancQl;k StTeet, Suite 101 Q Anaheim, California 92807 - \ \ Phone: {714}7n-tl333 Fait: (714)777-0398 I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results . ", ~ 2 4 6 8 .E 10 .. b I/) 15 12 '" .. :!! ~ 14 c o o 16 18 20 22 24 0.1 1(1 Load (ksf) Classification: Gray Brown Clayey fine Sand, trace Silt Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) B-24 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 5 to 6 2.4 1.0 100 13 16 116.3 123.3 0.14 Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C- 27 Southern California Geotechnical .. 1260 North Hanccx:k Street, Suite 101 Anaheim. California 928Q7 q l... Phone: (714)777-0333 Fax: (714) 777-0398 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 0 2 4 6 8 ~ ~ .5 10 .. b '" 6 12 '" .. :!! ~ 14 r:: 0 U 16 18 20 22 24 0.1 10 100 Load (ksf) Classification: Orange Brown fine to coarse Sand Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) Initial Moisture Content (%) final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pct) final Dry Density (pct) Percent Collapse (%) B-24 7 to 8 2.4 1.0 4 20 108.4 114.0 0.19 Southern California Geotechnical ..... Rancho Community Church Temecula. California Project No. 03G133 PLATE c- 28 1260 North Hanco<:k Street, Suit" 101 Anaheim, Califomia 92807 q~ Phone: (714)777.4333 F.u:: (714) m.o398 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 0 2 4 6 8 ?! .5 10 : ., S 12 '" co :!! ~ 14 c 0 l..l 16 18 20 22 24 0,1 10 100 Load (ksf) Classification: TOPSOil: Gray to Black fine Sandy Silt, little Clay Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) B-25 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pct) Final Dry Density (pet) Percent Collapse (%) 1 to 2 2.4 1.0 20 19 104.8 118.1 2.17 Southern California Geotechnical ., Rancho Community Church Temeeula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE c- 29 ._--~- 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 Anmelm, Cillifomiil 92807 qi\- Phone: (714) 777-0333 Fax: (71") m.o398 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) Consolidation/Collapse Test R~sults ~ 2 4 6 8 .E 10 .. .., Ul g 12 '" .. :E ~ 14 ~ o tJ 16 18 20 22 24 0.1 10 Load (ksf) Classification: Gray Brown fine Sandy Silt B-25 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 3 to 4 2.4 1.0 100 15 21 97.0 107.5 0.11 Southern California Geotechnical ., Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C- 30 -~~- . 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 ~ ~ Anallelm, CalifonU.J 12807 -r.,Ji Phone: (714)777-0333 Fax: (714) 777-<1398 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 0 2 4 6 8 ~ .E 10 .. ., III a 12 .. .. :!! S 14 c: 0 () 16 18 20 22 24 0.1 10 100 Load (ksf) Classification: Gray Brown Silty fine Sand, trace Clay Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) B-25 5 to 6 2.4 1.0 8 13 110.8 120.7 1.90 Southern California Geotechnical ~ Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE c- 31 ~~-. - 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 q'. Anaheim. California 92807 '<0 Phone: (714)777-0333 Fax: (714) 771-03" I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 0 2 4 6 8 ~ .EO 10 .. ~ en g 12 '" .. :E ~ 14 " 0 0 16 18 20 22 24 0.1 10 100 Load (ksf) Classification: Gray Brown Silty fine Sand, trace Clay Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) B-25 Initial Moistum Content (%) Final Moisture, Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 7 to 8 2.4 1.0 6 12 118.2 125.8 0.84 Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE c- 32 Southern California Geotechnical . 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 tll Anaheim, Califomiil 92807 , Phone: (714)777.0333 Fax: (71.4)777-0398 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 0 2 4 6 8 ~ .5 10 .. " Ul 6 12 ., .. :E .~ 14 c 0 0 16 18 20 22 24 0.1 H) 100 Load (ksf) Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C- 33 Classification: TOPSOIL: Dark Brown fine Sandy Silt, trace Clay B-27 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pet) Final Dry Density (pct) Percent Collapse (%) 22 18 101.9 111.8 0.22 1 to 2 2.4 1.0 Southern California Geotechnical . ~~- 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 Anaheim, Cafifornia 51807 c; ~ Phone: (7141 n74333 Fax: (714)777-0398 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results ;< ~ 2 4 6 8 E. 10 ~ ., Ul S 12 '" ~ :!! ~ 14 c o U 16 18 20 22 24 0.1 10 100 Load (ksf) Classification: Light Brown Silty fine Sand Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pet) Final Dry Density (pet) Percent Collapse (%) 6 25 98.2 110.8 3.08 B-27 3 to 4 2.4 1.0 Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C- 34 Southern California Geotechnical . --~- 1260 North Hanc;odl; Street, Suite 101 AIlaheim, California 92807 ,\0 Phone; (7141 m-0333 Fax: (714) m-0398 ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 0 2 4 6 8 ~ E. 10 ~ ., Ul l5 12 '" ~ :!! ~ 14 c 0 u 16 18 20 22 24 0.1 10 100 Load (ksf) Classification: Dark Brown Clayey fine to medium Sand to fine Sandy Clay Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pet) Final Dry Density (pet) Percent Collapse (%) B-27 5 to 6 2.4 1.0 16 22 103.8 114.9 1.40 Southern California Geotechnical ..... Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C- 35 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 Amiheim, California 92807 \ ~O Phone: (714) 7n-0333 F.u: (714) n7-o398 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 0 2 4 6 8 ~ E. 10 ~ ., Ul S 12 '" ~ :!! ~ 14 c 0 u 16 18 20 22 24 . 0.1 10 100 Load (ksf) Classification: Gray Brown Silty fine to coarse Sand, trace fine Gravel Boring Number: Sample Number: Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) B-27 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pet) Final Dry Density (pet) Percent Collapse (%) 7 to 8 2.4 1.0 5 18 119.6 125.4 0.21 Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No. 03G133 PLATE C- 36 Southern California Geotechnical ..... 1260 North Hancock StTeet, Suite 101 Anaheim, California 92807 Phone: {71417n.oJ33 Fax: (71.4) n7-0398 \e\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 118 1? 0; @. 116 >- - 'iij C '" C 114 >- ~ C 112 MoisturelDensity Relationship ASTM 0-1557 126 ., ';~ ;;,,<:: 'f': 1"'.h';kccji\lcq."'F'''l:2.1'~:;;;''R;:jh1nl''.'H ;11Q'Eil'" :i;r ,:'~ <:"I .,... - ::;%.\.:. 1fJ. +> , '2<';- lL':) ~; ;p) ~~',: ~I",'::l~ '. ~ '~ ~ ;:'!C1i :"4f: ~;&; ::;;\} ~ '-'>...' :${ .iW oo'iil S.:"'! .;U: ~:-; ","",," ';:,-': ,<"i a ~ ~ ~...' ;~ 07 ".~. " 0 ,e.. i;~1 ,; ;; ~'"' ,~4 ",3 .~ ;(.F "" ~, ~l~' Zero Air Voids C u rYe: "", :,it{ )~ t'l .>tj; .;... Sp ecific G ravity = 2. 7 1~ " ;1oi ~"h M +;~ ."'"1' :4h ~~ $,; li' ~1~ 'i!ii ;:', ~~: $ ~,~. >~'; 1;", ~"1: ~.,,::i ,.' 1;,', }':.r ~j ,i ;;i: ;:i< , ~.:~ .~f' 'J ;~' 7.?: J1(r ~l;; p . . '~^. ,'{ :',J! 'lli! 1:5. ;7;~; 7S'i ~h;"W"! ;.."., Ii' :G; '7, ~J: C;; ~1f i!J-" 1;' "III' 'f. "'m; IT 1'- '-<," t!jj'1) ):v7h{' '"i,'; "!.-:.; .' , ~.. #,;[c ; 'j:", -,") ....~ C' .,., . Y1 :',;' j~ }"; ,..;.... ~~ ;.;.," ;1:$ Ii /. ~ :11: l'l';;, (', '" I,,'; I'j ~: ~ .~ i~f~ ''Ii; ;'" "'C' ~ !:;>__ t.;Y; .fg :;/, ;, h., ..; Iii ~; m; :':j?f!I~ ~ , , <0 18 I,' r,'" ~. ,;~ ,.". ,,', ,; ..' ~y .; ~ I' ~1 ~ ~ ,~ >t' . (C', ,,,,- ~ I' . ,,; ,', r"" -:: II ~ :~~t ,::~ C :.~' ".> , ., > .. " r -." ITSi W r>'" ~"'1i r...; 4: vffiTt( :.;E ~M-" .' , .~". .~ 1.< ]~\ " 0; , " 'ZP ',!" ?:~ \'" l.,',. In -~~' l1: " .';'7 .:~:: ~~, ~ k~ " I' .- :...., 'o; , , ,. .!: '<>~ .", ;," 1',\ I',,, , . .. '11. ;?;;;, '~,', '" .',L '",.,~ :': I,,, ;,,1.:,. ',' ..,' " .~. .~ l'i ~~:{ ~ ^'jS "'ii: ~-,.!~ :tt~ 'n+< ,.." "' .- I'i'; ~~J ;c, " ',," ,'f t^ '$'~ 'i~ :;0' i"f ;'r1t.- r'." ...., ~ i-! ",;: 'i; 'f 1';. -?' , " i: .. :- ". ,'. ". .' '. iy{ ~+\ \:f41.<'!oI#Tr,' >" '~f> . ^~; ;, ... .. " " ... , ... :;:;;- ~;.:. ... 124 122 120 110 108 106 104 8 22 24 18 20 12 14 16 10 Moisture Content (%) SoillD Number B-9 o timum Moisture % 16.5 Maximum Dry Density (pet) 112.5 Soil Dark Brown Silt Classification (B-9 @ 0 to 5 feet) Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No, 03G133 PLATE C-37 Southern California Geotechnical ., -~- 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 \0 z... Anaheim, Califomia 92807 Phone: (714) m-0333 Fax: 17141777-0398 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Moisture/Density Relationship ASTM 0-1557 122 120 of 118 0; @. 116 >- - 'iij l: '" C 114 >- ~ C 112 '~'Wi?0i y;~ :,jfi ~ ,~::~~;:;:' ''ii ;:q1r:,c 110 ~'r~ ^,..., ".'.' 108 106 104 8 10 12 14 22 16 18 20 24 Moisture Content ("!o) SoillD Number B-25 o timum Moisture % 14 Maximum Dry Density (pel) 117,5 Soil Dark Brown Sandy Clay, Classification trace Silt (B-24 @ 0 to 5 feel) Rancho Community Church Temecula, California Project No, 03G133 PLATE C-38 Southern California Geotechnical +'" 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 \C~ Anaheim, California 92M7 Phone: (714) n7-0333 Fal(; (714) n7-0398 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I APPENDIX 0 GRADING GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS \0'\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Grading Guide Specifications Page 1 GRADING GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS These grading guide specifications are intended to provide typical procedures for grading operations, They are intended to supplement the recommendations contained in the geotechnical investigation report for this project. Should the recommendations in the geotechnical investigation report conflict with the grading guide specifications, the more site specific recommendations~in the geotechnical investigation report will govern, General . The Earthwork Contractor is responsible for the satisfactory completion of all earthwork in accordance with the plans and geotechnical reports, and in accordance with city, county, and Uniform Building Codes. . The Geotechnical Engineer is the representative of the Owner/Builder for the purpose of implementing the report recommendations and guidelines. These duties are not intended to relieve the Earthwork Contractor of any responsibility to perform in a workmall~like manner, nor is the Geotechnical Engineer to direct the grading equipment or personnel employed by the Contractor. . The Earthwork Contractor is required to notify the Geotechnical Engineer of IIle anticipated work and schedule so that testing and inspections can be provided. If necessary, work may be stopped and redone if personnel have not been scheduled in advance. . The Earthwork Contractor is required to have suitable and sufficient equipment on the job~ site to process, moisture condition, mix and compact the amount of fill being placed to the specified compaction. In addition, suitable support equipment should be available to conform with recommendations and guidelines in this report. . Canyon cleanouts, overexcavation areas, processed ground to receive fill, key excavations, subdrains and benches should be observed by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to placement of any fill. It is the Earthwork Contractor's responsibility to notify the Geotechnical Engineer of areas that are ready for inspection. . Excavation, filling, and subgrade preparation should be performed in a manner and sequence that will provide drainage at all times and proper control of erosion. Precipitation, springs, and seepage water encountered shall be pumped or drained to provide a suitable working surface. The Geotechnical Engineer must be informed of springs or water seepage encountered during grading or foundation construction for possible revision to the recommended construction procedures and/or installation of subdrains. Site Preparation . The Earthwork Contractor is responsible for all clearing, grubbing, stripping and site preparation for the project in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Engineer. . If any materials or areas are encountered by the Earthwork Contractor which are suspected of having toxic or environmentally sensitive contamination, the Geotechnical Engineer and Owner/Builder should be notified immediately. . Major vegetation should be stripped and disposed of off~site. This includes trees, brush, heavy grasses and any materials considered unsuitable by the Geotechnical Engineer. - \()~ I I I I I I I I I I il I Grading Guide Specifications Page 2 . Underground structures such as basements, cesspools or septic disposal systems, mining shafts, tunnels, wells and pipelines should be removed under the inspection of the Geotechnical Engineer and recommendations provided by the Geotechnical Engineer and/or city, county or state agencies. If such structures are known or found, the Geotechnical Engineer should be notified as soon as possible so that recommendations can be formulated. . Any topsoil, slopewash, colluvium, alluvium and rock materials which are considered unsuitable by the Geotechnical Engineer should bo removed prior to fill placement. . Remaining voids created during site clearing caused by removal of trees, foundations basements, irrigation facilities, etc., should be excavated and filled with compacted fill. . Subsequent to clearing and removals, areas to receive fill should be scarified to a depth of 10 to 12 inches, moisture conditioned and compacted . The moisture condition of the processed ground should be at or slightly abov.3 the optimum moisture content as detennined by the Geotechnical Engineer. Depending upon field conditions, this may require air drying or watering together with mixing and/or discing. Comoacted Fills . Soil materials imported to or excavated on the property may be utilized in the fill, provided each material has been determined to be suitable in the opinion of the Geotechnical Engineer. Unless otherwise approved by the Geotochnical Engineer, all fill materials shall be free of deleterious, organic, or frozen matter, shall contain no chemicals that may result in the material being classified as "contaminated: and shall be low to non-expansive with a maximum expansion index (EI) of 50, The top 12 inches of the compacted fill should have a maximum particle size of 3 inches, and all underlying Gompacted fill material a maximum 6- inch particle size, except as noted below. I II I I I I I . All soils should be evaluated and tested by the Geolechnical Engineer. Materials with high expansion potential, low strength, poor gradation or containing organic materials may require removal from the site or selective placement and/or mixing to the satisfaction of the Geotechnical Engineer. . Rock fragments or rocks greater than 6 inches should be taken off-site or placed in accordance with recommendations and in areas designated as suitable by the Geotechnical Engineer. Acceptable methods typically include windrows. Oversize materials should not be placed within the range of excavation for foundations, utilities, or pools to facilitate excavations. Rock placement should be kept away from slopes (minimum distance: 15 feet) to facilitate compaction near the slope. . Fill materials approved by the Geotechnical Engineer should be placed in areas previously prepared to receive fill and in evenly placed, near horizontal layers at about 6 to 8 inches in loose thickness, or as otherwise determined by the Geotechnical Engineer. . Each layer should be moisture conditioned to optimum moisture content, or slightly above, as directed by the Geotechnical Engineer. After proper mixing and/or drying, to evenly distribute the moisture, the layers should be compacted to at least gO percent of the maximum dry density in compliance with ASTM D-15!;7 unless otherwise indicated. . Density and moisture content testing should be performed by the Geotechnical Engineer at random intervals and locations as determined by the Geotechnical Engineer. These tests are intended as an aid to the Earthwork Contractor, so he can evaluate his workmanship, \<XO I I Grading Guide Specifications Page 3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I equipment effectiveness and site conditions. The Earthwork Contractor is responsible for compaction as required by the Geotechnical Report(s) and governmental agencies. . After compacted fills have been tested and approved by the geotechnical engineer, the contractor should moisture condition the soils as necessary to maintain the compacted moisture content. Compacted fill soils that are allowed to become overly dry or desiccated may require removal and/or scarification, moisture conditioning and replacement. Soils with medium to high expansion indices are especially ~,usceptible to desiccation. Sandy soils that are allowed to dry can also lose density . Fill areas unused for a period of time may require moisture conditioning, processing and recompaction prior to the start of additional filling. The Earthwork Contractor should notify the Geotechnical Engineer of his intent so that an evaluation can be made. . Fill placed on ground sloping at a 5-to-1 inclination (horizontal-to-vertical) or steeper should be benched into bedrock or other suitable materials, as directed by the Geotechnical Engineer, Typical details of benching are illustrated on Plates G-2, G-4, and G-5. . Cut/fill transition lots should have the cut portion overexcavated to a depth of at least 3 feet and rebuilt with fill (see Plate G-1), as determined by the Geotechnical Engineer. . All cut lots should be inspected by the Geotechnical Engineer for fracturing and other bedrock conditions. If necessary, the pads should be averexcavated to a depth of 3 feet and rebuilt with a uniform, more cohesive soil type to impede moisture penetration. . Cut portions of pad areas above buttresses or stabilizations should be overexcavated to a depth of 3 feet and rebuilt with uniform, more cohesive compacted fill to impede moisture penetration. . . Non-structural fill adjacent to structural fill should typically be placed in unison to provide lateral support. Backfill along walls must be placed and compacted with care to ensure that excessive unbalanced lateral pressures do not develop. The type of fill material placed adjacent to below grade walls must be properly tested and approved by the Geotechnical Engineer with consideration of the lateral earth pressure used in the design. Foundations . The foundation influence zone is defined as extending one foot horizontally from the outside edge of a footing, and then proceeding downward at a Y, horizontal to 1 v'lrtical (0.5:1) inclination. . Where overexcavation beneath a footing subgrade is necessary. it should be conducted so as to encompass the entire foundation influence zone, as described above. . Compacted fill adjacent to exterior footings should extend at least 12 inches above foundation bearing grade. Compacted fill within the interior of structures should extend to the floor subgrade elevation. Fill Slopes . The placement and compaction of fill described above applies to all fill slopes. Slope compaction should be accomplished by oveliilling the slope, adequately compacting the fill in even layers, including the oveliilled zone and Gutting the slope back to expose the compacted core. . Slope compaction may also be achieved by backrolling the slope adequately every 2 to 4 vertical feet during the filling process as well as requiring the earth moving and compaction equipment to work close to the top of the slope. Upon completion of slope construction, the \b1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I Grading Guide Specifications Page 4 slope face should be compacted with a sheepsfool: connected to a sideboom and then grid rolled, This method of slope compaction should only be used if approved by the Geotechnical Engineer. . Sandy soils lacking in adequate cohesion may be unstable for a finished slope condition and therefore should not be placed within 15 horizontal feet of the slope face, . AU fill slopes should be keyed into bedrock or other suitable material. Fill kel'S should be at least 15 feet wide and inclined at 2 percent into the slope. For slopes higher than 30 feet, the fill key width should be equal to one-half the heighl of the slope (see Plate G-5). . All fill keys should be cleared of loose slough material prior to geotechnical inspection and should be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer and govemmental agencies prior to fiiling. . The cut portion of fill over cut slopes should be made first and inspected by the Geotechnical Engineer for possible stabilization requirements. The fill portion should be adequately keyed through all surficial soils and into bedrock or suitable material. Soils should be removed from the transition zone between the cut and fill portions (see Plate G-2). Cut Slopes . All cut slopes should be inspected by the Geotechnical Engineer to determine the need for stabilization, The Earthwork Contractor should notify the Geotechnical Engineer when slope cutting is in progress at intervals of 1 0 vertical feet. Failure to notify may result in a delay in recommendations. . Cut slopes exposing loose, cohesion less sands Sllould be reported to the Geotechnical Engineer for possible stabilization recommendations. . . All stabilization excavations should be cleared of loose slough material prior to geotechnical inspection. Stakes should be provided by the Civil Engineer to verify the location and dimensions of the key. A typical stabilization fill detail is shown on Plate G-5. . Stabilization key excavations should be provided with subdrains. Typical subdrain details are shown on Plates G-6. Subdrains I I I I I I . Subdrains may be required in canyons and swales where fill placement is proposed. Typical subdrain details for canyons are shown on Piate G-3. Subdrains should be installed after approval of removals and before fiiling, as determined by the Soils Engineer. . Plastic pipe may be used for subdrains provided it is Schedule 40 or SDR 35 or equivalent. Pipe should be protected against breakage, typically by placement in a square-cut (backhoe) trench or as recommended by the manufacturer. . Filter material for subdrains should conform to CALTRANS Specification 68-1.025 or as approved by the Geotechnical Engineer for the specific site conditions. Clean Yo-inch crushed rock may be used provided it is wrapped in an acceptable filter cloth and approved by the Geotechnical Engineer. Pipe diameters should be 6 inches for runs up to 500 feet and 8 inches for the downstream continuations of longer runs. Four-inch diameter pipe may be used in buttress and stabilization fills, \OB I I I I I II ~^I GRADE _ Nl\.iUrv"'-_ - ::~E/ _ ~~EI'-\I\.I.- _ ___ CUT LOT - - - - . ..- .... -:"..- . , .. - .. .. :. 0.". .~..-" ..cOMPACrED FILL.' '., :-. _._. - '''._,_ .,0. .. . :... .-. .. ....::.....:. .:~'.::- ::~:.... '--.'-~'0:''''''''''''. Ot" ?'.- . ": -- -- - - --- --- -- --- S'MIN. j - 3'MIN. r OVEREXCI\.VATEAND RECOMPACT COMPETENT MATERIAL. AS APPROVED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER CUT/FILL LOT (TRANSITION) l'-f,oE. \'-f'~~/ ~~ ." :::ci2~;;>',.,;;~?f:' '.-,', .. " ',-.:. ." ,~~\~~. %,:...:.... ,..,....'..,,~ .'\l~~'I'-\N-'..,:. .. ',' .':.... "".'-"'::'8'':--'" ..,.~~ ,',;. .... .~. ". /." ~'-'''''''''':'-'_. ". .<..... ~.:~... -~..::...~- . :;:../": -~:.' .:: :"..:" " ..- ., . ....--....;.... ~-" .~. . -,- ;: -: '". -- -- ---- ..-----' - - ~ 3'MIN. r OVEREXCAVA TE AND REC:OMPACT DEEPER OVEREXCAVATION MAY BE RECOMMENDED BY THE SOIL ENGINEER IN STEEP TRANSITIONS _A. - COMPETENT MATERIAL. AS APPROVED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER TRANSITION LOT DETAIL GRADING GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS NOT TO SCALE DRAWN; JAS CHKD: GKM Southern California Geotechnical .- 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 \0<\ Anaheim, California 92807 Phone: (714) 777-0333 Fax: (714) 777-0398 PLATE G-' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I NEW COMPACTED FILl CUT/FILL CONTACT SHOWN ON GRADING PLAN "";1: ,." "-'~ .- "'. ~.. . ." ..." .,..:..~ . ..- ~.. :?,. r 9' MIN. -j . ':"::' . ..:..?:. ":..';Ea.1f.'\-:.,:- - .--- 'I;........ , , "....-: i'"I.l"j>.!l~. ,,~ '. ..,..:,-:-:.: EMOiJi.'.'.Il"'~. ',,' . . -.' . ~~~., .'.,~.:.:. , ",' .. ~ ":"':~A6LE .'" 4 MIN. ____ 1:-.:;;.:.. ": "i: . ...~~. o. .:. ":'" ".:. ..<..'-~.:.:":~' ;;..:-. . ..'" 1 ". "w "_0.": ,:., ...: --1.. COMPETENT MATERIAL CUT/FILL CONTACT TO BE SHOWN ON "AS-BUlL r ~--''i - CUT SLOPE - - CUT SLOPE TO BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF FILL MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF BENCHES IS 4 FEET OR AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER L MINIMUM l' TILT BACK OR 2% SLOPE (WHICHEVER IS GREATER) BEDROCK OR APPROVED COMPETENT MATERIAL KEYWAY IN COMPETENT MATERIAL MINIMUM WIDTH OF 15 FEET OR AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. KEYWAY MAY NOT BE REQUIRED IF FILL SLOPE IS LESS THAN 5 FEET IN HEIGHT AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. FILL ABOVE CUT SLOPE DETAIL GRADING GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS NOT TO SCALE DRAWN; JAS CHKD; GKM Southern California Geotechnical .. 1260 North Hancod< Slreel. Sun" 101 \ \0 Anaheim. California 92807 Phone: (714) 777-0333 Fax: (714) 7n-0398 PLATE G-2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I ',..'. \. :-.' ' :,-- . , . .'\:' ..... . , '-, \. ' .\: -' . . ...r ..".". .\:" _'" ;s.: '. " -, tJ~ TURMo 9R0UND - /'" 'j' , . '- " '. " ;.. ~~~~~~~;~P:;I~~ y-..'., _' . ':. ,'. .' ,- . -. '. '. ,,--. '-Y--' . "....----:- . 0". '- /' ' . . ~ -,' , -............ '- ' . .' "'I' :. .-". .' . . - . , - 6" MIN.. ' , .' ~: " ..- ,~. -. . .'l,. . -:- : ki.~bUTEtCA~ATIPN ' =------. .. -- . ~.- .,~ . -... "., ".- . ......... . . . .~.-:4~~.~....":1L.~.:,:_... .... _' :":~,~i -(:.-:,~~,::'!, .- I - .- .". ~::::.. ~:.~. . .'. FIRM NATIVE SOIUBEDROCK :YB:;:}}~:::\:..~-:..:,; . ....... -: :r. .... . -: _. .".". - .- <' -. .'~' ;" '.:. ~ .,;.~.: 4. :_ . - 24" MIN. 18" MIN. l ~18'MIN.~ " "'-, MINUS 1" CRUSHED ROCK COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY FILTER FABRIC. OR ClJ\SS II PERMEABLE MATERIAL 4"MIN. 6" DIAMETER PERFORATED PIPE - MINIMUM 1 % SLOPE PIPE MATERIAL ADS (CORRUGATED POLETHYLENE) TRANSITE UNDERDRAlN PVC OR ABS: SDR 35 SDR21 DEPTH OF FILL OVER SUBDRAIN 8 20 35 100 SCHEMATIC ONLY NOT TO SCALE CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAIL GRADING GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS NOT TO SCALE DRAWN: JAS CHKD: GKM Southern California Geotechnical . 1260 North Hancock SU... Sun. 101 \ \ \ Anaheim, California 92807 Phone: (714) 777..0333 Fax: (714) 7n..o398 PLATE G-3 I I I I I I I I I FINISHED SLOPE FACE NEW COMPACTED FILL7 OVERFILL REQUIREMENTS PER PLATE NO.4 COMPETENT MA:IAL J . TOE OF SLOPE SHOWN ~<:..' ,,":', . -.. ON GRADING PLAN /:.~:;;<_.., > .:. ::':':;1/~.:':':,::':' PROJECT(~;O~~RADIENT . . ~,' ,:,:~.~'.r,":"~~:>::: ~:~: '.5~',0 PLACE COMPACTED BACKFILL . <.: ",: '" '" . ":.' '.' ':', :.,~. :." ':::-" ...:.:,..... TO ORIGINAL GRADE ] / ~ ': .". '.'_'. .,....;,::.:- '. ....., ", /.... ...:..: :...;"':.~'..~.~..., -'0:"'- ....__. BACKCUT.VARIES ~ .:'.: :' " ..' - '---,".' , . .' ~ < 4' MIN. ./',' : .', ~.;;l1;RII>l- ':, ..,.'!.~~U;::, .. ./,' '. ',' lABL-"'" .. ~ 1'\':" ";"OVEOllsUl, ~ :. .' . ~./~,,=..-~--.., -'. --- --- -- '>'~"-~<"'::>':: :,~.< U ~~~~~~~I:~~6~~~~~~~D --- --- II '~""'~/.ll;A'l""" '. '1 BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER L MINIMUM l' TILT BACK 2' MINIMUM . OR 2% SLOPE KEY DEPTH (WHICHEVER IS GREATER) KEYWAY IN COMPETENT MATERIAL. MINIMUM WIDTH OF 15 FEET OR AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GEOTECHNIAL ENGINEER. KEYWAY MAY NOT BE REQUIRED IF FILL SLOPE IS LESS THAN 5' IN HEIGHT AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. NOTE: BENCHING SHALL BE REQUIRED WHEN NATURAL SLOPES ARE EQUAL TO OR STEEPER THAN 5:1 OR WHEN RECOMMENDED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. FILL ABOVE NATURAL SLOPE DETAIL GRADING GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS NOT TO SCALE DRAWN: JAS CHKD: GKM Southern California Geotechnical ~ 1260 Noofu Hancock 51,.... SuRe 101 \ \ 2- Anaheim. Cafifomia 92807 Phone: (714) 7n-a333 Fax: (714) n7-0398 PLATE G-4 I I I I I I 3' TYPICAL BlANKET FILL IF RECOMMENDED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER TOP WIDTH OF FILL AS SPECIFIED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER COMPETENT MATERIAL ACCEPTABLE TO THE SOIL ENGINEER CJ. . ~ '~'.: "'J..O ~ '.: :'. ~:':~'(~ .~. ..;: ~.....:.:..: FACE OF FINISHED SLOPE '. '\" '/.'..'. .1.':;"~'.~<:.~S~:'~r.:'~ .....,:.:' :".,.' -.' .'- -" .".". '. ....:. ... .. -.... ..... . , , " ., :..'.,.. '</: VARIABLE .. ;. ~~'-::..~' ~ <:.. ./.>:~ ~- .:..... . .-.:~ ". .i' ::."., '.~ -: . . -. MINIMUM HEIGHT OF BENCHES IS 4 FEET OR AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER ..' ".\~ "":: :"~ <': ~'~::.."> 1 . . .' .,. -. '.. . . ".---1.. II ~~~"""'j' LMINIMUM1'T1LTBACK 2' MINIMUM. , OR 2% SLOPE KEY DEPTH KEYWAY WIDTH, AS SPECIFIED (WHICHEVER IS GREATER) BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER STABILIZATION FILL DETAIL GRADING GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS PLATE G-5 Southern California Geotechnical .. 1260 North Hancock St_~ Suite 101 \ \ ~ Anaheim, California 92807 Phone: (714) 777-0333 Fax: (714) 777-0398 NOT TO SCALE DRAWN: JAS CHKO: GKM I I, I 2' CLEAR DESIGN FINISH SLOPE OUTLETS TO BE SPACED AT 100' MAXIMUM INTERVALS. EXTEND 12 INCHES BEYOND FACE OF SLOPE AT TIME OF ROUGH GRADING CONSTRUCTION. BUTTRESS OR SIDEHILL FILL ~ -'--T- BLANKET FILL IF RECOMMEN[~~~R l BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGI~ . ."- . ": -. . ':- ....:' . _ ". "_ _1 _ .. .,.. ",l1i',MI~. ,: . :, ;,25:.w.x ".:- , .... ., .' 15'MAX. J ~ .... -.-;' .- "'.": :." , .... '., ~.. :- . " '" ." , - " .... .....; ,::-- "'.- ...::- -. ."' . . (. . . .... .., ".":" ..";.':":;" 1 -:.: ... . . .- . . \ 4-INCH DIAMETER NON-PERFORATED L OUTl.ET PIPE TO BE LOCATED IN FIELD BY THE SOIL ENGINEER. ,.' , " "FILTER MATERIAL" TO MEET FOLLOWING SPECIFICATION OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT: (CONFORMS TO EMA STD. PlAN 323) OUTLET PIPE TO BE CON- NECTED TO SUBDRAlN PIPE WITH TEE OR ELBOW SIEVE SIZE 1" 3/4" 3/8" NO,4 NO.8 NO. 30 NO. 50 NO. 200 "GRAVEL" TO MEET FOLLOWING SPECIFICATION OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT: PERCENTAGE PASSING 100 90-100 40-100 25-40 18-33 5-15 0.7 0.3 MAXIMUM SIEVE SIZE PERCENTAGE PASSING 11/2" 100 NO.4 50 NO, 200 8 SAND EQUIVALENT = MINIMUM OF 50 FILTER MATERIAL - MINIMUM OF FIVE CUBIC FEET PER FOOT OF PIPE. SEE ABOVE FOR FILTER MATERiAl. SPECIFICATION. ALTERNATIVE: IN LIEU OF FILTER MATERIAL FIVE CUBIC FEET OF GRAVEL PER FOOT OF PIPE MAY BE ENCASED IN FILTER FABRIC. SEE ABOVE FOR GRAVEL SPECIFICATION. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE MlRAFI140 OR EQUIVALENT. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE LAPPED A MINIMUM OF 12 INCHES ON ALL JOINTS. ~ MINIMUM 4-INCH DIAMETER PVe: SCH 40 OR ABS CLASS SDR 35 WITH A CRUSHING STRENGTH OF AT LEAST 1,000 POUNDS, WITH A MINIMUM DETAIL "A" OF 8 UNIFORMLY SPACED FERFORATIONS PER FOOT OF PIPE INSTALLED WITH PERFORATIONS ON BOTTOM OF PIPE. PROVIDE CAP AT UPSTREAM END OF PIPE. SLOPE AT 2 PERCENT TO OUTLET PIPE. NOTES: 1. TRENCH FOR OUTLET PIPES TO BE BACKFILLED WITH ON-SITE SOIL. SLOPE FILL SUBDRAINS GRADING GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS NOT TO SCAlE DRAWN: JAS CHKO: GKM Southern California Geotechnical . 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 \~ Anaheim, California 92807 Phone: (714) 777-0333 Fax; (714) 7n.0398 PLATE G" I I I I I I I I I I I MINIMUM ONE FOOT THICK LAYER OF LOW PERMEABLlLlTY SOIL IF NOT COVERED WITH AN IMPERMEABLE SURFACE .... '. -' ." . ". '. '. ,- ;::~ -.;.-'" '~'~;:"':'-' :-~:~:...:~. 4 " . 4 A . -.: 414 A . " " MINIMUM ONE FOOT WIDE LAYER OF FREE DRAINING MATERIAL (LESS THAN 5% PASSING THE #200 SIEVE) ------- FILTER MATERIAL - MINIMUM OF TWO CUBIC FEET PER FOOT OF PIPE. SEE BELOW FOR FILTER MATERIAL SPECIFiCATION. ALTERNATIVE: IN LIEU OF FILTER MATERIAL TWO CUBIC FEET OF GRAVEL PER FOOT OF PIPE MAY BE ENCASED IN FILTER FABRIC. SEE BELOW FOR GRAVEL SPECIFICATION. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE MlRAFI140 OR EQUIVALENT. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE LAPPED A MINIMUM OF 6 INCHES ON ALL JOINT:;. MINIMUM 4-INCH DIAMETER PVC SCH 40 OR ABS CLASS SOR 35 WITH A CRUSHING STRENGTH OF AT LEAST 1.000 POUNDS. WITH A MINIMUM OF 8 UNIFORMLY SPACED PERFORATIONS PER FOOT OF PIPE INSTALLED WITH PERFORATIONS ON BOTTOM OF PIPE. PROVIDE CAP AT UPSTREAM ENO OF PIPE. SLOPE AT 2 PERCENT TO OUTLET PIPE. ". <! A "FILTER MATERIAL" TO MEET FOLLOWING SPECIFICATION OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT: (CONFORMS TO EMA STD. PLAN 323) SIEVE SIZE 1" 3/4" 3/8" NO.4 NO.8 NO. 30 NO. 50 NO. 200 PERCENTAGE PASSING 100 90-100 40-100 25-40 18-33 5-15 0.7 0-3 , ." .'44.d '. "GRAVEL" TO MEET FOLLOWING SPECIFICATION OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT: MAXIMUM SIEVE SIZE PERCENTAGE PASSING 11/2" 100 NO.4 50 NO. 200 8 SAND EQUIVALENT = MINIMUM OF 50 RETAINING WALL BACKORAINS GRADING GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS NOT TO SCALE DRAWN: JAS CHKD: GKM Southern California Geotechnical PLATE G.7 ~V. 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 \'V-:) Anaheim, Califomia 92807 Phone: (714) 777-0333 Fax: (714) 777-0398 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I : I I I I APPENDIX E UBeSEIS COMPUTER PROGRAM OUTPUT \\(P - - --------- I I 0 . L!) I~ L!) . I~ ~ I~ 0 " I~ Q ~ UCZl L!) ~Q) " C'0 I~ 8 en IU"J 8 0"0 "c ~ C'0 0 I~ ~ () U"J~ L!) Q) "en IZ ~ N "0 , 0 " 0 o "C I~ ~ "Q) Na.. IU"J S L!) ~N " ! I~"~ "t"""" S 0 IZ .~ . "t"""" 19 CZl L!) " : I~ 0 0 IQ . 0 L() 0 L() 0 L() 0 I " . " " " . N N ~ ~ 0 0 I (5) UO!l8Jele~~V' 18Jl8eds \\1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I *********************** * * * U B C S E I S * * * * Version 1,00 * * * *********************** COMPUTATION OF 1997 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS JOB NUMBER: 03G133 DATE: 03-06-2003 JOB NAME: Rancho Church FAULT-DATA-FILE NAME: CDMGUBCR,DAT SITE COORDINATES: SITE LATITUDE: SITE LONGITUDE: 33,4780 117,1115 UBC SEISMIC ZONE: 0.4 UBC SOIL PROFILE TYPE: SD NEAREST TYPE A FAULT: NAME: ELSINORE-JULIAN DISTANCE: 14.5 km NEAREST TYPE B FAULT: NAME: ELSINORE-TEMECULA DISTANCE: 1.8 km NEAREST TYPE C FAULT: NAME: DISTANCE: 99999,0 km SELECTED UBC SEISMIC COEFFICIENTS: Na: 1. 3 Nv: 1.6 Ca: 0,57 Cv: 1.02 Ts: 0,716 To: 0,143 **************************************************-k~**************** * CAUTION: The digitized data points used to model faults are limited in number and have been digitized from small- scale maps (e.g., 1:750,000 scale). Consequently, the estimated fault-site-distances may be in error by several kilometers. Therefore, it is important that the distances be carefully checked for accuracy and adjusted as needed, before they are used in design. * * * * * * * * * * * * * **************************************************k~'**************** \~~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS Page 1 I APPROX. 1 SOURCE I MAX. I SLIP FAULT ABBREVIATED 1 DISTANCE I TYPE I MAG. I RATE I TYPE FAULT NAME 1 (km) 1 (A,B,C) 1 (M.,) I (mm/yr) 1 (SS,DS,BT) ==================================/========/=======1==--==1=========1========== ELSINORE-TEMECULA I 1,8 1 B 1 6,8 / 5,00 I SS ELSINORE-JULIAN I 14,5 I A I '/ ,1 1 5,00 I SS ELSINORE-GLEN IVY 1 28,6 / B I 6,8 I 5.00 I SS SAN JACINTO-ANZA 1 33,9 1 A 1 '/,2 I 12,00 1 SS SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY I 34.3 I B / 6,9 1 12,00 1 SS NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) I 45,4 I B I 6.9 I 1.50 / SS ROSE CANYON I 48.4 I B 1 6,9 / 1.50 I SS SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK / 56,0 1 B I 6.8 1 4.00 I SS CHINO-CENTRAL AVE, (Elsinore) 1 57,5 1 B 1 6,7 I 1,00 / DS EARTHQUAKE VALLEY I 59,2 I B / 6,5 I 2,00 I SS SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO I 61,1 I B I 6,7 I 12,00 I SS SAN ANDREAS - Southern I 62.9 I A I '/,4 I 24,00 I SS ELSINORE-WHITTIER / 64.2 / B I 6.8 1 2.50 I SS CORONADO BANK I 73.0 1 B 1 7,4 I 3.00 I SS PINTO MOUNTAIN I 73.9 I B I '/,0 I 2,50 / SS NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (L.A. Basin) I 76.6 I B I 6.9 1 1.00 I SS PALOS VERDES I 79.5 I B I 7.1 I 3,00 I SS CUCAMONGA I 84.0 I A I 7.0 I 5.00 I DS BURNT MTN. 1 85.7 I B I 6.5 I 0.60 I SS NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (West) I 86,4 1 B I 7,0 / 1.00 I DS SAN JOSE I 88.6 I B I E.5 I 0,50 I DS CLEGHORN I 89, 6 1 B 1 6 . 5 1 3 , 00 I SS ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN I 89.9 I B I 6.B I 4.00 I SS NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East) I 90,0 I B I 6.7 I 0,50 / DS EUREKA PEAK / 90,3 / B / 6.5 I 0,60 I SS SAN JACINTO - BORREGO I 90,5 I B I 6,6 1 4,00 I SS SIERRA MADRE (Central) I 92,4 1 B I 7.0 / 3.00 I DS LANDERS I 99,8 / B / 7,:) I 0,60 / SS SAN ANDREAS - 1857 Rupture I 100,4 A I 7,3 1 34,00 SS HELENDALE - S, LOCKHARDT I 101. 8 B I 7.1 I 0.60 SS LENWOOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN SPRGS I 106,9 B I 7.:) / 0,60 SS CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT I 108.7 B I 6,!; I 0,50 DS JOHNSON VALLEY (Northern) I 111. 9 B I 6, '7 I 0.60 SS RAYMOND I 112,9 B I 6,!; I 0.50 DS EMERSON So, - COPPER MTN. I 113.8 B I 6,9 / 0.60 SS VERDUGO / 120.9 B / 6.7 I 0.50 DS SUPERSTITION MTN. (San Jacinto) I 122.8 B I 6.6 I 5.00 SS PISGAH-BULLION MTN. -MESQUITE LK I 125,4 B I 7.1 I 0.60 SS CALICO - HIDALGO / 125,6 B I 7,1 I 0.60 SS HOLLYWOOD I 125.9 B / 6.!; I 1.00 DS ELMORE RANCH / 126.8 B I 6.6 I 1. 00 SS SUPERSTITION HILLS (San Jacinto) I 128.9 B I 6,6 I 4,00 SS BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE 1 131. 1 B I 6,!; I 25,00 SS SANTA MONICA I 13 7.7 B I 6,6 I 1. 00 DS SIERRA MADRE (San Fernando) / 141.2 B I 6.'./ I 2.00 DS ELSINORE-LAGUNA SALADA / 141.5 B I 7,() I 3,50 SS \\'\ II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS Page 2 I APPROX. I SOURCE I MAL I SLIP FAULT ABBREVIATED I DISTANCE 1 TYPE / MAG, 1 RATE / TYPE FAULT NAME I (km) I (A,B,C) I (Mw) I (mm/yr) 1 (SS,DS,BT) ==================================1========/=======1======1=========1========== SAN GABRIEL I 143.1 I B I '/.0 1 1.00 I SS MALIBU COAST I 14 5,4 I B I " ,,/ I 0.30 I DS GRAVEL HILLS - HARPER LAKE I 156,1 1 B I " ,9 I 0,60 I SS IMPERIAL I 156,1 I A I '/ ,0 1 20.00 1 SS ANACAPA-DUME I 157,3 I B I '/,3 I 3.00 1 DS SANTA SUSANA 1 159,1 I B I 6,6 / 5,00 I DS HOLSER I 168,1 I B I 6,5 I 0.40 I DS BLACKWATER I 172.1 1 B 1 6,9 I 0,60 I SS OAK RIDGE (Onshore) 1 179,1 I B I 6,9 1 4,00 I DS SIMI-SANTA ROSA I 180,6 I B I 6,7 I 1.00 I DS SAN CAYETANO I 186,5 I B I 6,8 / 6,00 1 DS SANTA YNEZ (East) I 205,7 1 B I 7,0 j 2,00 I SS GARLOCK (West) I 210.9 I A / 7,1 I 6,00 1 SS VENTURA - PITAS POINT I 211.5 1 B I 6.8 I 1,00 I DS GARLOCK (East) 1 218.0 I A I 7.3 1 7,00 1 SS M,RIDGE-ARROYO PARIDA-SANTA ANA I 220.2 1 B I 6.7 I 0,40 I DS PLEITO THRUST 1 222,7 I B I 6.8 I 2,00 I DS RED MOUNTAIN I 225,8 I B I 6,8 1 2,00 I DS SANTA CRUZ ISLAND I 230,1 I B 1 6,B I 1.00 I DS BIG PINE 1 230.7 1 B I 6.7 I 0,80 1 SS WHITE WOLF I 237,6 I B I 7.2 I 2,00 I DS OWL LAKE I 237 . 7 I B I 6 . 5 I 2 , 00 I SS PANAMINT VALLEY 1 238.0 I B I 7..2 I 2.50 I SS So. SIERRA NEVADA I 240,8 I B I 7.1 I 0,10 1 DS TANK CANYON I 240,9 I B I 6,5 I 1.00 I DS LITTLE LAKE 1 242.3 1 B 1 6,'/ I 0.70 1 SS DEATH VALLEY (South) 1 244.9 I B I 6,:J I 4,00 I SS SANTA YNEZ (West) I 259.4 I B I 6.:J 1 2.00 I SS SANTA ROSA ISLAND I 266,2 1 B 1 6,9 I 1.00 1 DS DEATH VALLEY (Graben) I 287,9 I B 6.9 I 4,00 I DS LOS ALAMOS-W, BASELINE I 302,4 I B 6,13 I 0,70 1 DS OWENS VALLEY I 312,3 I B 7,6 I 1.50 1 SS LIONS HEAD I 319,9 I B 6," I 0,02 I DS SAN JUAN 1 322.9 I B 7,0 I 1.00 I SS SAN LUIS RANGE (S. Margin) I 327,5 I B 7,0 1 0.20 I DS HUNTER MTN, - SALINE VALLEY I 334,8 I B 7,0 I 2,50 I SS CASMALIA (Orcutt Frontal Fault) 1 337.1 I B 6,'; I 0.25 I DS DEATH VALLEY (Northern) I 341. 9 I A 7.;! I 5.00 I SS INDEPENDENCE I 348 . 3 I B 6 ,9 I 0 , 20 I DS LOS OSOS 1 356 . 9 I B 6 . II I 0 . 50 I DS HOSGRI I 366 . 0 I B 7 .:1 1 2 . 50 1 SS RINCONADA I 375.1 I B 7. J I 1. 00 I SS BIRCH CREEK 1 405.1 I B 6.~; I 0.70 I DS WHITE MOUNTAINS I 408.8 I B 7.1 I 1.00 I SS SAN ANDREAS (Creeping) I 425,5 I B 5.0 I 34.00 I SS DEEP SPRINGS I 426,4 I B 6,6 I 0,80 1 DS \20 I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETEES Page 3 I APPROX, I SOURCE I MAL I SLIP FAULT ABBREVIATED I DISTANCE 1 TYPE I MAG. I RATE I TYPE FAULT NAME I (km) I (A,B,C) I (Mw) I (mm/yr) I (SS,DS,BT) ==================================1========1======= ==--==1=========1========== DEATH VALLEY (N, of Cucamongo) I 429.5 I A '1.0 1 5.00 I SS ROUND VALLEY (E, of S, N, Mtns,) I 441. 3 I B ';.8 I 1. 00 I DS FISH SLOUGH 1 447,8 I B ';,6 I 0,20 I OS HILTON CREEK I 467,7 I B 6.7 I 2.50 I DS HARTLEY SPRINGS I 492,7 I B 6.6 I 0,50 I DS ORTIGALITA I 506,9 I B 6.9 I 1. 00 I SS CALAVERAS (So, of Calaveras Res) I 514.5 I B 6,2 I 15,00 I SS MONTEREY BAY - TULARCITOS I 520,4 I B 7.1 I 0.50 I OS PALO COLORADO - SUR I 523,7 I B 7,0 I 3.00 I SS QUIEN SABE I 527,1 I B (;,5 1 1. 00 1 SS MONO LAKE I 528,9 I B 6,6 I 2,50 I OS ZAYANTE-VERGELES I 546,6 I B 6.8 I 0,10 SS SARGENT I 551. 4 I B 6 . 8 I 3 , DOSS SAN ANDREAS (1906) I 551. 8 I A 7.9 I 24.00 SS ROBINSON CREEK I 560.4 I B 6.5 I 0.50 DS SAN GREGORIO I 595,6 I A 7.3 I 5.00 SS GREENVILLE I 598.6 I B I 6.9 I 2.00 SS HAYWARD (SE Extension) 1 600.6 I B I 6.5 I 3.00 SS ANTELOPE VALLEY I 601,1 I B I 6.7 I 0,80 OS MONTE VISTA - SHANNON 601.6 I B I 6.5 I 0.40 DS HAYWARD (Total Length) 619.9 I A I 7.1 I 9,00 SS CALAVERAS (No,of Calaveras Res) 619,9 I B I 6.9 I 6.00 SS GENOA 627.2 I B I 6.9 1 1.00 DS CONCORD - GREEN VALLEY 666.3 I B I 6.9 I 6.00 SS RODGERS CREEK 705.6 I A I 7.0 I 9.00 SS WEST NAPA 705.8 I B I 6.5 I 1,00 SS PO INT REYES 72 6 ,8 I B I 6 . a I 0 . 30 OS HUNTING CREEK - BERRYESSA 727,0 I B I 6.3 I 6,00 SS MAACAMA (South) 767,7 I B I 6.3 I 9.00 SS COLLAYOMI 783 ,8 I B I 6 ,', I 0 , 60 SS BARTLETT SPRINGS 786,2 I A I 7,1 I 6.00 SS MAACAMA (Central) 809,3 A I 7,1 I 9.00 SS MAACAMA (North) 868,1 A I 7,1 I 9.00 SS ROUND VALLEY (N. S.F.Bay) 872,8 B I 6.8 I 6.00 SS BATTLE CREEK 890.7 B I 6.', I 0,50 DS LAKE MOUNTAIN 931. 2 B I 6 . 'I I 6 , DOSS GARBERVILLE-BRICELAND 949.0 B I 6,9 I 9.00 SS MENDOCINO FAULT ZONE 1006.2 A I 7. <I I 35.00 OS LITTLE SALMON (Onshore) 1011,2 A I 7.0 I 5.00 OS MAD RIVER 1013.0 B I 7,1 I 0.70 OS CASCADIA SUBDUCTION ZONE 1020.6 A I 8.:1 I 35.00 DS McKINLEYVILLE 1023.7 B I 7,0 I 0.60 OS TRINIDAD 1025,0 B I 7,] I 2.50 DS FICKLE HILL 1025.8 B I 6,9 I 0.60 DS TABLE BLUFF 1032.0 B 1 7.0 I 0.60 DS LITTLE SALMON (Offshore) 1045,2 B I 7.1 I 1. 00 DS \2.'\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS Page 4 ---------------------------_________________________n__________________________ / APPROX, I SOURCE I ~{. I SLIP I FAULT ABBREVIATED 1 DISTANCE 1 TYPE I MAG, / RATE I TYPE FAULT NAME I (km) I (A,B,C) I (Mw) 1 (mm/yr) 1 (SS,DS,BT) ==================================1========1=======1-==-==1=========/========== BIG LAGOON - BALD MTN,FLT,ZONE / 1061.5 I B / 7.3 I 0.50 1 DS ****************************************************~**H*********************** \ z.Z- I,.:> oy. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~VUIM~nt~ ~~~~run(~~~ UCVjC~MJ~~~ALi/l~ /,/ u~~~i 1\,'3Y-,i I -IJ.J. :;; JoJ,~t';j Page 1/2 ,Southern California Geotechnical Rancho Community Church 43300 Business Parle Drive Suite B 104 Temecula, Califomia 92590 May 28. 2004 Project No. 03M178-7 Attention: Mr. Gary Barry Subject: Floor Slab Design Proposed Preschoo: and ;:amil\' Life Center 8\Jjldina~ Rancno Community (;hurchr Phase 1 .., TPM Nc. 30798, Parcels 8 Through 16 Highway 79 South at Avenida de Missiones Temecu!a, California Reference: Geotechnical Investioation, Pro[)osed Ranche. Communitv Church. TPM No. 30798. Parcels 8 throuah 16. Hichwav 79 South at Avenid€ de Missiones. Temecuia. California, prepared for Rancho Communitv Church by Southern California Geotechnicai. Inc.. dated March 27. 2003. SCG Project No. 03G133-1. Genllemer:: 11'1 ac::ordance with the request of Ledge of Diffenbaugh. we are providing this letter to document our recommendations for the floor slab design for the proposed buildings at the project site. The original fioor slab design parameters were presented in the above referenced report. Those floor slab design parameters are summarized below: . Minimum slab thickness: 5 inches, . Minimum slab reinforcement: No, 3 bars at 18 inches on-center, in both directions, Heavy welded wire mesh (6x6-W2.9xW2.9 WWF) may be used at the discretion of the structural engineer. · Slab underlayment: 10 mil vapor barrier overlain by 2 inches of clean sand, Where moisture sensitive floor coverings are not anticipated, the vapor barrier and the 2 inch layer of sand may be eliminated. . Moisture condition the floor slab subgrade soils within 2 percent of the Modified Proctor optimum moisture content, to a depth of 12 inches, The moisture content of the floor slab subgrade soils should be verified by the geotechnical engineer within 24 hours prior to concrete placement. . Proper concrete curing techniques should be utilized to reduce the potential for slab curling or the formatlon of excessive shrinkage cracks, 1260 North Hancock Street, Suil.l01 . Anaheim, California 92807-1951 . (714) 777-0333 . Fax (714) 777-0398 \2.3 .f" Y I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~uu I HCNI~ l,:AL.l.t-UHN1A lieu I i::.CHNICAL; 714 777 0398; May.27.04 5:35PM; Page 2/2 Based upon the completed remedial grading conducted wnhin the building pad areas at the project site, the above floor slab design parameters ara still considered appropriate from a geotechnical standpoint. The actual design of the floor slab should be completed by the structural engineer to verify adequate thickness and reinforcement. We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to be of continued service on this project. If we may be of further assistance in any manner, please contact our office. Respectfully Submitted, Southern California Geotechnical. Inc:. ~e..L Gary R. Conrads Field" ~ ~.l perations i ~anage~ . ~ .~ itch ell. GE 2364 gineer Distribution: (1) Addressee (1) Diffenbaugh: Fax @ 909-676-223 '~ Saatllem.Calllorala.GeJ!tecllnlca, .... Rancho COmmunity Cnurct>-Temecula, CA Project No. 03Ml'I8-7 Page 2 \ 2-AI. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southern California Geotechnical ..,.;....- ...,.,~ Rancho Community Church 43300 Business Park Drive Suite B104 Temecula, California 92590 April 29, 2004 Project No, 03M178-4 Attention: Mr. Gary Barry Subject: Pavement Design Recommendations Rancho Community Church, Phase 1 TPM No, 30798, Parcels 8 Through 16 Highway 79 South at Avenida de Missiones Temecula, California Reference: Geotechnical Investiqation. Proposed Rancho Communitv Church. TPM No, 30798. Parcels 8 throuqh 16, Hiqhwav 79 South at Avenida de Missiones, Temecula. California, prepared for Rancho Community Church by Southern California Geotechnical, Inc., dated March 27, 2003, SCG Project No. 03G133-1. Gentlemen: As requested by Ledge, the project superintendent for Diffenbaugh and as required by the City of Temecula, we have prepared this letter in order to provide revised pavement sections for proposed asphaltic concrete pavements within the on-site parking lot and interior streets, Also included is a revised pavement design for the proposed Portland cement concrete driveway approaches and bus turnout pavements located on State Route 79, R-Value testing was performed on several representative soil samples that were obtained from the proposed pavement subgrades throughout the project site, The results of the recent R-value testing are as follows. Sample Identification R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-5 R-Value 45 42 1i9 :10 60 Based on these results, the previously provided pavement section recommendations presented in the above referenced report have been revised for the on-site asphaltic concrete pavements, Significant mixing and processing of the on-site soils was performed during the course of rough grading activities on the project site, It is anticipated that additional blending of the on-site soils will occur during future grading activities within the proposed pavement areas, Based on the recent laboratory testing ..... \20 1260 North Hancock Streel, Suite 101 . Anaheim, California 92807-1951 . (714) 777-0333 . Fax (714) 777-0398 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I and the anticipated grading activities which will take place on the subject site, an R- Value of 35 was used for the revised pavement designs, Asphaltic Concrete Pavements Presented below are the recommended thicknesses for new flexible pavement structures consisting of asphaltic concrete over a granular base, The pavement designs are based on the traffic indices (Tl's) indicated, The client and/or civil engineer should verify that these Tl's are representative of the anticipated traffic volumes. If the client and/or civil engineer determine that the expected traffic volume will exceed the applicable traffic index, we should be contacted for supplementary recommendations, The design traffic indices equate to the following approximate daily traffic volumes over a 20 year design life, assuming six operational traffic days per week, Traffic Index No. of Heavv Trucks Der Dav 4,0 0 5,0 1 6,0 3 7,0 11 8,0 35 9,0 9a 10,0 226 For the purpose of the traffic volumes indicated above, a truck is defined as. a 5-axle tractor trailer unit with one 8-kip axle and two 32-kip tandem axles, All of the traffic indices allow for 1,000 automobiles per day, ASPHALT PAVEMENTS Parking and Drive Areas Thickness (inches) Materials Auto Auto Drive Light Truck Moderate Parking Lanes Traffic Truck Traffic (TI = 4,(l) (TI = 5,0) (TI =6.0) m = 7,0) Asphalt Concrete 3 3 3% 4 Aggregate Base 3 5 6 9 Aggregate Subbase --- -- --- --- Compacted Subgrade 12 12 12 12 \ z.C:. Southern California GeotechnIcal ... Pavement Recommendations - Rancho Community Church Project No. 03M178-4 Page 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ASPHALT PAVEMENTS Private Streets Materials Thickness (inches) TI = 8,0 TI = 9,0 TI = 10.0 Asphalt Concrete 4% 5 6 Aggregate Base 10 12 13 Aggregate Subbase --- --,- ..-- Compacted Subgrade 24 24 24 The pavement subgrade soils should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density, The aggregate base course should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density, The asphaltic concrete should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the Marshall maximum density, as determined by AS~M D-2726, The aggregate base course may consist of crushed aggregate base (CAB) or crushed miscellaneous base (CMB), which is a recycled gravel, asphalt and concrete material. It should be noted that the City of Temecula and/or Riverside County may require that the aggregate base within the private drives consist of crushed aggregate base, The gradation, R-Value, Sand Equivalent, and Percentage Wear of the CAB or CMB should comply with appropriate specifications contained in the current edition of the "Green book" Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, Portland Cement Concrete The subgrade soils within concrete pavement areas should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density, According to information provided by Diffenbaugh, a TI of 10 should be utilized for the design of the bus turnout lane and driveway approach pavements located on State Route 79, The minimum recommended thicknesses for the Portland Cement Concrete pavement sections are as follows: . Automobile Parking and Drive Areas 5 inches Portland Cement Concrete over 12 inches compacted subgrade (95% minimum compaction) . Light Truck Traffic Areas (TI = 6,0) 5% inches Portland Cement Concrete over 12 inches compacted subgrade (95% minimum compaction) \7..1 Southern California Geotechnical .,... Pavement Recommendations - Rancho Community Church Project No. 03M178-4 Page 3 I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . Bus Turnout Lane and Driveway Approaches 011 State Route 79 (TI = 10,0) 10 inches Portland Cement Concrete over 12 inches compacted subgrade (95% minimum compaction) The concrete should have a 28-day compressive strength of at least :1,000 psi. Reinforcing within all pavements should consist of at least heavy welded wire mesh (6x6-W2,9xW2,9 WWF) placed at mid-height in the slab, The maximum joint spacing within all of the PCC pavements is recommended to be equal to or less than 30 times the pavement thickness, We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. If there are any questions concerning this matter please contact our office at your convenience, Respectfully Submitted, Southern Call1ornla Geolechnlcal, Inc. ~( Cc Gary R. Conrads F' Id Operations Manager j itchell, GE 2364 I Engineer (1) Addressee (2) Diffenbaugh Attn: Ledge \~ Southern California Geotechnical + Pavement Recommendations - Rancho Community Church Project No. 03M178-4 Page 4