HomeMy WebLinkAboutTract Map 3552 Lot 53 Limited Geotechnical Investigation
Ir .H.E. Soils Co.
(12 3~~d. ~r~~
Ihone: (909) 678-9669 FAX: (909) 678-9769
1705 Central Street, Suite A. Wildomar, CA 92595
E-mail: thesoilsco@aoI.com
I
i I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
July 24, 2000
Mr. Ron Varela
43910 Flores Drive
Temecula, California 92592
SUBJECI': LIMlTED GEOTECHNICAL INVESnGA nON
Proposed Driveway Access
43910 Flores Drive
T emecula, CaIifomia
Work Order No. 190001.00
Dear Mr. Varela:
In accordance with your request, we have perfonned a limited geotechnical investigation for the
proposed driveway access at the above referenced site. The purpose of our investigation was to
evaluate the engineering parameters of the on-site soils and provide design parameters including
allowable bearing values. A 20-scale "Precise Grading Plan", prepared by John T. Reinhart, Civil
Engineer, ofTemecula, California, was provided to us by the owner of the subject property. The plan
was used to locate our exploratory trench and as a base map for our "Limited Geotechnical Map",
Plate 1.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Prooosed Develooment
The proposed development calls for the removal of the existing concrete driveway and the
construction of an access bridge across the existing drainage course.
1.2 Site Descriotion
The subject site is located at 43910 Flores Drive in the city of T emecula in southwest Riverside
County, California. The site consists of an existing concrete constructed driveway with
associated landscaping and irrigation systems. The existing driveway is currently utilized as
access across the drainage course to the single-family residence from Flores Drive. The subject
site is bound on all sides by existing single-family residences. The geographical relationships of
the site and surrounding area are shown on our Site Location Map, Figure 1.
Topography in the vicinitY of the proposed access bridge generally consists of gently sloping
terrain with natural gradients of approximately 10 to 15%. Vegetation in the vicinity of the
proposed bridge access consists of manicured lawns and ornamental shrubs and trees.
T.R.E. Soils Company
W.o. NO. 19000\.00
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
T .H.E. Soils Co.
Phillie: (9091 678-9669 FAX: (9091678-9769
>170.; Centr.il Street, Suite A. Wildomar, CA 92.;9.;
SUBJECT
SITE
,:W
o. 1.,..-1
./
" vV11
-,: .: ~
.~~
" ~.'~..
ADAPTED FROM A 7.5 MINUTE U.S.G.S. QUADRANGLE MAP-
TEMECULA. CA., 1968, (PHOTO REVISED 1975)
aq
,
./1
r---;- Golf ::tl:'
I 1000--1;; I
,5' I
"'" ,j- I
,
~J~_ I
- ~,
.":,,, ,.,.",.,.,..,1 /" q::
';'\':" '>-%~l, '1.>...:
'.'" ~. -, ~, Golf
:( ~~.~ ,*:-1 Cours,
.1 ~ I. _"- _
,... . ~ ", - _. --
, i ~-~: -:-\~~
/1'> ~:~ ~: ,"'''< pit.0 ~
'.", - _:-.t-";:"_-~......-. )
o
1000
2000 3000
SCALE: FT.
4000
SITE LOCATION MAP
w.o. #
190001.00
Date:
JULY 2000
Figure: 1
'2.-
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Ron Varela
July 24, 2000
Page 2
2.0 SITE INVESTIGA nON
2.1 Backl!l'Ound Research and Literature Review
Several published reports and geologic maps were reviewed for the purpose of preparing this
report. A complete list of the publications and reports reviewed for this investigation is
presented in Appendix A.
2.2 Field Investil!ation
Subsurfuce exploration, field reconnaissance, and mapping of the site were conducted on June
13, 2000. A total of 1 exploratory trench was excavated uti1izing a Case 580K extenda-
backhoe equipped with a 2-ft wide bucket. Exploratory trench T -1 was advanced to the
maximum depth explored of8.3-ft below the ground surface (bgs).
Infonnation collected during our field mapping and the approximate location of the exploratory
trenches are shown on our Geotechnical Map, Plate 1. Our field geologist, who prepared field
logs, perfonned in-place density testing, and obtained bulk soil samples for laboratory testing,
supervised excavation of the trench. A copy of our exploratory trench log is presented in
Appendix B.
2.3 Laboratorv Testiol! Prol!nlm
Representative bulk samples of soils encountered during our subsurfuce exploration were
obtained for laboratory testing. Laboratory testing to determine the engineering parameters of
representative soils included maximum density/optimum moisture, sieve analysis, direct shear,
sulfate content, and expansion index. Our field geologist utilized a nuclear density gauge to
perfonn in-place density tests at varying intervals within the exploratory trench.
Laboratory testing was conducted in accordance with AS1M, Caltrans, and Unifonn Building
Code (UBC) test specifications, where applicable. The results of our laboratory tests are
presented in Appendix C of this report.
3.0 GEOWGY
3.1 . Geolol!ic Settinl!
The site is located within the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of Southern California.
The Peninsular Ranges, which extend southward from the Los Angeles Basin through Baja
California, are characterized by Mesozoic age intrusive rock masses flanked by volcanic,
metasedimentary and sedimentary rock. The Peninsular Ranges have a general northwest-
T.H.E_ Soils Company
W.o. NO. 190001.00
:?
./,,::.~
/r(f
'..\~
J.._.
, ,I
, "
\ -'-:-;:.~::
\
, I
1/--
I __
1/-
( ~%f0/ ",,'
'.......-, . 0
\ "'. \0.0,.,
I ,
" ,
" \
' . .._'....._--~\..
Q.,
/.< -
.,/ .
.r'-'~
f
.r
;-
st-t;
-I!:
-
~
!
\
///\
,\
o \
r-+-\
\
\
\
/
/
U
.\
..; '.
05D
o~
I
I
/
i
'-) 01 ()l
(_..;~. \ N
~' ~(",') ,fr!'\
",,-"j" r', J )
/?. /;
",'
I
f
\
i
.r
r"
l J
'-~
~-\.y
, '
\._~----'"
;
I
\\'{
S,<,')
\\(_:-:
\'".\\
I <';l., \
\ Ii ~\~\, )
: ci )'~
I~~\) ,
2~~\1.
f ~ ,
r:-,
{
'-
,'i
it. ".
!i i"f'
, I,
, ",!(I r
'.') i ~
'.
'. '
r-r-
J ......." \
If - ...... "
I "
I
I
\,
,
,
I~ial
I i
I ~
I
!
I
,
Ci\
, ////.x(,) W
,/'< ......1
\ // /~'" J
.......~-:............. V,-J,
......~.......fl. l
'/ I
, 0 ,............
\ ' ....
\r+\
\
\
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
v-)
/
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
/
/
" //
,~/
,
I
i
~
I
,;
n
~
-0
"'l
ij~ e
III ... ~
~;g c.l "tl
~~o ~ l'J g
. 1~ ~ B ~ ~ I
~ lei 5 .. /
i..to ~ g !; ,
b~~~ <0 / ,i,'
lI:!,<z <0 0/
~> ~ ,J,,,,,-, ','
in 'lto , /;
~ ~ 'lto"
'" .~r ;
e C;:>"'''' '....y'.
~"'\""-JJ"(
- ',~ (
"0 \,'
c;1 \
I
l\J
-
~
~
lia~
rM1
~III
-h
i
I
\
I
,
l
')
(
)
j.r---...,\
{ ~
\ I
\. r
I
I
I
~
I
~
~
./
-
i \ \ \1
~
I
[
~
I
f
~
r
E
.
!
!~l
t'.!l'
~
w
I &l
g~~
B 8.
.. It
&
i;j
i
if
.!l'
f
I
~
s
B
i
Ul
~
~
I
!f
gl
a
N
!!.
N
~~r
~ ~~~;
; 6~~~
I ~~~;r
. 1l~5"
~ Ii~ei
'-.~
~
o
~
~ I
~~ t",
c~
I~
f i~
~ .'
o ~
~ e i
" ~
n
~ i
--
.!\~
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Ron Varela
July 24, 2000
Page 3
trending structural grain that includes such geologic features as faults, bedding and foliation
trends, and geologic contacts.
Lateral displacement and uplift of the region has occurred on a series of major northwest-
trending faults that are thought to be related to the regional tectonic framework. Some of
these fault zones have remained active to the present time, including the Elsinore Fault zone -
Glen Ivy (1997 UBC) located approximately O.4-kilometers to the northeast (Alquist Priolo
Special Studies zone Map). For design purposes, we have incorporated data presented in the
"Maps of Known Active Fault Near-Source Zones in California and adjacent portions of
Nevada" ICBO publication (1998), which places the center of the Elsinore Fault zone
approximately 1.00kilometer to the southwest.
Locally, the subject site is underlain by minor amounts of artificial fill, and Recent alluvial
materials (approximately 5-ft) overlying medium dense to dense sedimentary bedrock of the
Pauba Fonnation to the maximum depth explored of8.3-ft bgs.
4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDmONS
4.1 Artificial Fill (at)
Artificial fill materials were exposed at the ground surface in the vicinity of the proposed bridge
support and appeared to be fill placed during on-site improvements. The artificial fill material
in the vicinity ofT-1 was approximate1y3-ft in thickness and can generally be described as a
fine to coarse grained, slightly moist, dark brown silty sand (Unified Soil Classification - SM).
Minor pin point pores and fine roots were found within the top L5-ft.
4.2 Recent Alluvium
Recent alluvial material was encountered within exploratory trench T -1 at 3-ft bgs and was
observed to be approximately 2- ft in thickness. This unit can generally be described as a silty
sand (SM) that is dark gray, moist and fine to coarse grained.
4.3 Pauba Fonnation
Sedimentary bedrock units of the Pleistocene-age Pauba formation were exposed at a depth of
5-ft bgs within exploratory trench T -1. The sedimentary bedrock materials can generally be
described as dark gray brown clayey siltstone that is medium dense, saturated, micaceous and
clayey in part.
T.H.E. Soils Company
w.o. NO. 190001.00
':5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Ron Varela
July 24, 2000
Page 4
4.4 Groundwater
Groundwater was not encountered to the maximum depth explored of 83-ft bgs within
exploratory trench T-1. Based on nearby well water infonnation (Department of Water
Resources, 1971), historic high groundwater in the vicinity of the subject site is in excess of 50-
ft bgs of the lower elevations of the subject site.
4.5 Excavation Characteristics
The exposed earth materials including the artificial fill, Recent alluvium, and sedimentary
bedrock materials are anticipated to be easily excavated utilizing conventional grading
equipment in proper working condition.
4.6 Floodinl!
Based on our review of the Federal Emergency Management Agencies Flood Insurance Rate
Maps, dated September 30, 1988 (see references), the subject site is not located within a 100-
year flood zone.
5.0 SEISMICITY
5.1 Retrional Seismicity
The site is located in a region of generally high seismicity, as is all of southern California.
During its design life, the site is expected to experience strong ground motions from
earthquakes on regional and/or local causative faults. The subject site is not located within a
State of California Alquist Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. No active faults are known to
traverse the site. The closest known active fault is the Elsinore Fault Zone located about 1. 0-
mile to the northeast.
Significant changes to site-specific seismic criteria were made in the 1997 UBC, Chapter 16.
The fonnulas, which calculate the site-seismic coefficients (C. and Cv), incorporate several
detailed site factors including the distance from the closest active fault to the site (Maps of
Near-Source Zones, published by International Conference of Building Officials [ICBO],
1998), the type offault based on slip rate per year (ICBO, 1998, and 1997 UBC Table 16-U),
seismic zone in which the site is located (1997 UBC Figure 16-2 and Table 16-1), and the type
of soil or rock beneath the site (1997 UBC Table 16-J and Section 1636). From these site
characteristics, one can determine the near-source factors for acceleration (N.) and velocity
(Nv) from 1997 UBC Tables 16-S and 16-T, respectively. The seismic coefficients are then
determined by multiplying the coefficient of acceleration (C.) determined from 1997 UBC
Table 16-Q by the near-source factor of acceleration (N.) and multiplying the coefficient of
velocity (Cv), from 1997 UBC Table 16-R, by the near-source factor of velocity (Nv). The
T.H.E. Soils Company
w.o. :--.'0. 190001.00
(p
I
I
I
i I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Ron Varela
July 24, 2000
Page 5
preceding fonnula results in seismic coefficients, which are much more specific to each site
than the 1994 UBC method. This formula is intended to provide values that will be used to
properly design the structure, eliminating under or over designing.
Factors specific to the subject site are as follows:
The site is approximately l.O-kiIometer from the Elsinore Fault zone-Glen Ivy (ICBO,
1998).
The Elsinore fault is a Type B fault (ICBO, 1998; and 1997 UBC Table 16-U).
The site is within Seismic Zone 4 (1997 UBC Figure 16-2, Table 16-1).
The near source acceleration (N.) and velocity (Nv) with respect to the subject site are
1.3 and 1.6, respectively (1997 UBC Tables 16-S and 16-T).
The soil profile for the site is So (1997 UBC Table 16-1).
The site seismic coefficients of acceleration (C.) and velocity (Cv) are O.44N. and
O.64Nv, respectively (1997 UBC Tables 16-Q and 16-R).
Based on the above values, the coefficient of acceleration (C.) is 0.57 and a coefficient
of velocity (Cv) is 1.02 for the subject site.
Due to the site being underlain by medium dense to dense earth materials, the depth to
groundwater in excess of 50-ft bgs on the lower elevations of the site, and the absence of
known faulting, the potential for secondary seismic hazards including liquefaction, ground
rupture, and seismically induced soil settlement are considered unlikely.
6,0 RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 General Earthworl<
Recommendations for site development and design are presented in the following sections of
this report. The recommendations presented herein are preliminary and should be confirmed
during construction.
Prior to the commencement of site development, the site should be cleared of any vegetation
existing walkways, concrete foundations, electric lines, etc., which should be hauled off-site.
The client, prior to any site preparation, should arrange and attend a meeting among the
grading contractor, the design engineer, the soils engineer and/or geologist, a representative of
the appropriate governing authorities as well as any other concerned parties. All parties should
T.H.E. Soils Company
W.O. NO. 190001.00
'\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Ron Varela
July 24, 2000
Page 6
be given at least 48 hours notice. Earthwork should be conducted in accordance with the
recommendations specified in this report.
6.2 Overexcavation and Preparation of Existinl! Ground
We anticipate overexcavation of the existing earth materials underlying the proposed bridge
support foot to a minimum depth of 3-ft below the bottom of the proposed footing. The
overexcavation should extend a minimum distance of 10-ft beyond the support footprints. Prior
to the placement of fill materials, the exposed earth materials should be scarified, moisture
conditioned, and recompacted to a minimum of 95-percent of the maximum dry density (as
determined by AS1M D-1557. The removals should expose medium dense sedimentary
bedrock materials that are free of voids and roots. The soils engineer and/or geologist should
verifY the depth of removals in the field. However, in areas that do not yield competent
material and/or, areas containing large trees with deep root systems, basements, and/or septic
systems, deeper removals may be necessary.
6.3 Fill Placement
On-site artificial fill, Recent alluvial soils, and sedimentary bedrock materials are expected to be
suitable for use as structural fill. A qualified soil engineer should test import materials to
determine the feasibility for use as structural fill.
In areas to receive fill underlying the bridge support (to lO-ft beyond), approved fill material
should be placed in 6 to 8-inch lifts, brought to at least optimum moisture content, and
compacted to a minimum 95-percent of the maximum laboratory dry density, as determined by
the AS1M D 1557 test rnethod. In all other fill areas, approved fill material should be placed in
6 to 8-inch lifts, brought to at least optimum moisture content, and compacted to a minimum
9O-percent of the maximum laboratory dry density, as determined by the AS1M D 1557 test
method. No rocks, chunks of asphalt or concrete larger than 6 inches in diameter should be
used as fill material. Rocks larger than 6 inches should either be hauled off-site or crushed and
used as fill material.
6.4 Slone Stability & Construction
We anticipate that cut/fill slopes constructed at a 2: 1 (horizontal:vertical) slope ratio, to a
maximum height of approximately 10-ft, will be surficially and grossly stable if constructed in
accordance with the recommendations presented in this report and in Appendix D of this
report.
T.H.E. Soils Company
w.o. NO. 190001.00
2>
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Ron Varela
July 24, 2000
Page 7
6.5 Exoansion Index Testinl!
An expansion index test was perfonned on a representative on-site soil sample collected during
our investigation. The result, which is listed in Appendix C, indicates that the expansion index
for the on-site soils is a 0, which corresponds to a very low expansion potential. Expansion
testing should also be perfonned on imported soils prior to their approval as structural fill
material.
6.6 Lateral Load Resistance
The following parameters should be considered for lateral loads against permanent structures
founded on fill materials compacted to 90-percent of the maximum dry density. Soil
engineering parameters for imported soil may vary.
Equivalent Fluid Pressure for Level Backfill
Active: 35 pcf
Passive: 525 pcf
Coefficient of friction (concrete on soil): 0.35
If passive earth pressure and friction are combined to provide required resistance to lateral
forces, the value of the passive pressure should be reduced to two thirds of the above
recommendations. These values may be increased by one third when considering short-term
loads such as wind or seismic forces.
6.7 Allowable Safe Beariol! Canacitv
An allowable safe bearing capacity of 2,000 pounds per square foot (pst) may be used for
design of continuous footings that maintain a minimum width of 12-inches and depth of 12-
inches. The bearing value may be increased 100/0 for each additional foot of depth and/or width
to a maximum of 2,000 psf The bearing value may be increased by one-third for seismic or
other temporary loads.
Total differential settlements under static loads of footings supported on properly compacted
fill are not expected to exceed about 1/2 to 3/4 of 1 inch. These settlements are expected to
occur primarily during construction. Soil engineering parameters for imported soil may vary.
6.8 Foundation Svstem Desil!ll
Foundation elements for the bridge support should be placed on engineered fill material
compacted to a minimum of 95-percent of the maximum dry density, Continuous spread
footings should be a minimum of 12 inches wide and 12-inches below the lowest adjacent
T.H.E. Soils Company
W.O. NO. 190001.00
a..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Ron Varela
July 24, 2000
Page 8
grade. As a minimum, all footings should have one NO.4 reinforcing bar placed at the top and
bottom of the footing.
The structural engineer should design footings in accordance with the anticipated loads, the soil
parameters given, and the existing soil conditions.
6.9 Utilitv Trench Backfill
Utility trench back:fill should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry
density determined in laboratory testing by the ASTM D 1557 test method. It is our opinion
that utility trench back:fill consisting of on-site or approved sandy soils can best be placed by
mechanical compaction to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density. All trench
excavations should be conducted in accordance with Cal-OSHA standards as a minimum.
6.10 Surface Draina2e
Surface drainage should be directed away from foundations of buildings or appurtenant
structures. All drainage should be directed toward streets or approved pennanent drainage
devices. Where landscaping and planters are proposed adjacent to foundations, subsurfuce
drains should, be provided to prevent ponding or saturation of foundations by landscape
irrigation water.
6.11 Sulfate Content
Based on sulfate testing perfonned on a representative sample of the on-site soils, it is
anticipated that, from a corrosivity standpoint, Type II Portland Cement can be used for
construction. Soluble sulfate test results indicated II 0 ppm (parts-per -miIlion) which
corresponds to a negligible sulfate exposure (1997 UBC Table 19-A-4). SuIfute content
testing should be conducted on imported soils prior to their approval as structural fill material
and at the completion of grading. Laboratory analysis was performed by Babcock & Sons,
Laboratory of Riverside, California, and the test results are presented in Appendix C.
6.12 Construction Monitorin2
Continuous observation and testing under the direction of qualified soils engineers and/or
engineering geologists is essential to verifY compliance with the recommendations of this report
, and to confirm that the geotechnical conditions found are consistent with this investigation.
Construction monitoring should be conducted by a qualified engineering geologist/soil engineer
at the following stages of construction:
T.H.E. Soils Company
W.O. NO. 190001.00
\0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Ron Varela
July 24, 2000
Page 9
. During grading.
. During excavation of footings for foundations.
. During utility trench backfill operations.
. When any unusual conditions are encountered during grading.
Our investigation was perfonned using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar
circumstances, by reputable Geotechnical Engineers and Geologists practicing in this or similar
localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional
advice included in this report.
The samples taken and used for testing and the observations made are believed representative of the
entire project; however, soil and geologic conditions can vary significantly between test locations.
The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a
property can occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to naturaI processes or the works of
man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may
occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge.
T.H.E. Soils Company
W.O. NO. 190001.00
\\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Ron Varela
July 24, 2000
Page 10
Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our
control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and revision as changed conditions are identified.
This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you have any questions, please call.
Very truly yours,
T.H.E. Soils Company
~~
/t~ Manager
JPF/JTR/JRH:jek
ACCOMPANYING MAPS. ILLUSTRATIONS. AND APPENDICES
Figure 1 - Site Location Map (2,000-scale)
Plate 1 - Limited Geotechnical Map (20-scale)
APPENDIX A - References
APPENDIX B - Exploratory Trench Log
APPENDIX C - Laboratory Test Results
APPENDIX D - Standards of Grading
T.H.E. Soils Company
w.o. NO. 190001.00
\2--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
APPENDIX A
References
T.H.E. Soils Company
W.o. NO. 190001.00
\?/
I
I
I
,.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
REFERENCES
Black & Veatch, dated February 1989, "Water Master Plan and Wastewater Master Plan, Murrieta
County Water District, Murrieta, California", Project No. 14243.100;
California Division of Mines & Geology, 1997, "Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic
Hazards in California", Special Publication 117;
California Division of Mines & Geology, 1996, "Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State
of California", DMG Open File Report 96-08, USGS Open File Report %-706;
California Division of Mines & Geology, Effective January 1,1990, "State of California Special Studies
Zone, Temecula, California", Scale: 1" = 2,000';
Coduto, Don, P., 1994, "Foundation Design Principles and Practice", Prentice Hall, pages 637-655;
Department of Water Resources, August 1971, "Water Wells and Springs in the Western Part of the
Upper Santa Margarita River Watershed, Riverside and San Diego Counties, California", Bulletin No.
91-20;
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Effective Date September 30, 1988, "Flood Insurance Rate
Map, Riverside County, California (Unincorporated Areas), Community Panel No. 060245-33350,
Scale' 1 "= 1 000"
. "
Group Delta Consultants, Inc., October 16, 1991, ''Preliminary Groundwater Resource Study,
Murrieta Basin, Murrieta, California", Project No. 1392-GEO 1;
Hart, EW., 1994, "Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California", California Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication 42;
Houston, S. L., 1992, "Partial Wetting Collapse Predictions", Proceedings of the 7th International
Conference on Expansive Soils, Vol. L pages 302-306;
Jennings, c.w., 1975, Fault Map of California, California Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic
Data Map No.1;
Kennedy, Michael P., 1977, "Recency and Character of Faulting Along the Elsinore Fault Zone in
Southern Riverside County, California", California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Report
131;
P1oesse1, M.R, Slosson, J.E., September, 1974, Repeatable High Ground Accelerations from
Earthquakes, California Geology;
T.H.E. Soils Company
W.o. NO. 190001.00
\~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
REFERENCES (continued)
Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Expansive Soils, Volume 1, "Foundations on
Hydro-collapsible Soils, Pages 256-261;
Rodgers, Thomas H., 1965 (fifth printing 1985), Geologic Map of California, Santa Ana Sheet",
California Division of Mines & Geology, Scale: 1 :250,000;
Rancho California Water District, March 1984, "Water Resources Master Plan".
U.S.G.S., 1968 (photorevised 1975), 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Map, Temecula, California, scale:
1"=2,000';
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS UTILIZED
YEARlSCALE FLIGHT #/FRAME # AGENCY
1962/1 "=2,000' Co. Flight/3-405,3-406 Riv Co Flood Control
1983/1 "= 1 ,600' Co. Flight/199,200 Riv Co Flood Control
T.H.E. Soils Company
W.O. NO. 190001.00
\~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX B
Exploratory Trench Log
T.H.E. Soils Company
w.o. NO. 190001.00
\(P
I
LOGGED BY: JPF METHOD OF EXCAVATION: CASE NO. 680L EXTENDAHOE W/24" DATE OBSERVED:06I13/DD
BUCKET
ELEVATION: LOCATlON: SEE GEOTECHNICAL
MAP
'" ~ 0 ~ wi >'"
w 8 w ~~
w mw ~ .." TEST PIT NO, 1
'" '" .." ~ "z ~~
~ "~ ~w SOIL TEST
x ~! ~~ ~o; DESCRIPTION
~ ~ ~8 ~z
w z " Zw
0 m " m -0
l- V ARTIFICIAL FILL MAXIMUM DENSITYIOPTTMUM MOISTIJRE,
l- I 11.5 103.0 SIL TV SAND (8M): DARK BROWN. sumfTL Y MOIST, ANE TO COARSE GRAINED. MINOR (MAX). SIEVE ANALYSIS (SA)
^ ROOTS TOP 1', MINOR PIN POINT PORES IN TOP 1.5'
I- ALLUVIUM
5 SILlY SAND (SM): DARK GRAY, MOIST. ANE TO COARSE GRAINED, MEDIUM DENSE.
l- V ......... MODERATE EXCAVATION MAX. SA, DIRECT SHEAR, EXPANSION
l- I 15.8 98.0 PAUBA FORMATION INDEX. SOLUBlE SULFATE CONTENT
I- ^ CLAYEY S1lT: DARK GRAY BROWN, SATURATED, DENSE, MICACEOUS, CLAYEY IN PART
I-
11!' TOTAL DEPTH = 8.3'
l- VERY MOIST AT BOTTOM OF TRENCH
l-
I-
I-
~
l-
I-
l-
I-
~
-
-
-
-
~
-
-
-
'-
~
l-
I-
l-
I-
~
l-
I-
l-
I-
~
JOB NO:19CXXl1,00 LOG OF TEST PIT FIGURE: T-l
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\"'\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
II
APPENDIX C
Laboratory Test Results
T.H.E. Soils Company
W.O. NO. 190001.00
\'0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LABORATORY TESTING
A. Classification
Soils were visually classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System.
Classification was supplemented by index tests, such as particle size analysis and moisture
content.
B, Exoansion Index
An expansion index test was perfonned on a representative sample of the on-site soils
remolded and tested under a surcharge of l44Ib/fe, in accordance with Unifonn Building
Code Standard No. 29-2. The test result is presented on Figure C-l, Table L
C. Maximum Densitv/Ontimum Moisture Content
Maximum density/optimum moisture content relationships were determined for typical
samples of the on-site soils. The laboratory standard used was ASTM l557-Method A.
The test results are summarized on Figure C-l, Table II, and presented graphically on
Figures C-2 and C-3.
D. Particle Size Determination
Particle size determination, consisting of mechanical analyses ( sieve), were perfonned on
representative samples of the on-site soils in accordance with ASTM 0 422-63. The test
results are presented as Figures C-4 & C-S.
E. Direct Shear
A direct shear strength test was perfonned on a representative sample of the on-site
undisturbed soils. To simulate possible adverse field conditions, the sample was saturated
prior to shearing. A saturating device was used permitting the samples to absorb moisture
while preventing volume change. Test results are graphically displayed on Figure C-6.
F. Sulfate Content
A sulfate content test was perfonned on a representative sample of the on-site soils. The
laboratory standard used was California 417 A. The test results are presented on Figure
C-I, Table IV and graphically displayed on Figure C-7.
T.IlE. Soils Company
w.o. :-'-0.190001.00
\0..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE I
EXPANSION INDEX
TEST LOCATION EXPANSION INDEX EXPANSION POTENTIAL
T-! @5-8ft 0 Very Low
TABLE n
MAXIMUM DENSITY/OPTIMUM MOISTURE RELATIONSHIP
ASTM D 1557
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY OPTIMUM MOISTURE
TEST LOCATION (pet) (%)
T-! @0-3 ft 129.7 9.4
T-! @5-8ft 116.8 13.2
TABLE IV
SULFATE CONTENT
TEST LOCATION SULFATE CONTENT
T-I @5-8' 110 (ppm)
, Figure C-1
T.H.E. Soils Company
W.O. NO. 190001.00
1,j:)
II
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
...
0
Q, 130
,
:;n
...
..
C
IIJ
."
:n 125
'-
Q
MAXIMUM DENSITY/OPTIMUM
MOISTURE
140
...
"
.....
..... ..
r-...
I'-..
... ....
...... ...
.... ...
.....
....
- 1,00 ,.. $
, lIiii ....
.... '-
~ ....
I'. ...... .....
...... .....
ZAV for
Sp. G. =
2.65
135
120
115
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Water content, %
Test specification: A5TM D 1557-91 Method A, Modified
Oversize correction app lied to fino) results
EJev/ Classification Nat. Sp.G, LL PI % > % <
Depth uses AASHTO Moist. No.4 No.200
13-3 SM 7,2 % 2.65
TEST RESULTS
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Maximum dr~ densit~ = 129.7 pcf
Optimum moisture = 9.4 %
YELLOW BROWN
SILTY SAND
Remarks:
Project No,: 190001.00
Project: VARELLA
Location: TEMEeULA
T-l
Date: 6-22-2000
MAXIMUM DENSITY/OPTIMUM MOISTURE
Fig. No.
C-2
~\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
...
0
Do 1213
,
:n
...
'"
c
"
."
115
:n
L
Cl
MAXIMUM DENSITY/OPTIMUM
MOISTURE
1313
r-...
.....
""'-
.... .....
I"""
..... ....
.... .....
.... .....
.... I-...
.....
......
,
..... ......
.... .....
- ....
, ". ......
,.. "
~ ~ "
~ '"
~ "
ZAV for
5p. G.'
2.55
125
1113
1135
113
12
15
13
14
15
11
Water content, %
Test specifIcatIon: ASTM D 1557-91 Method A, ModIfIed
Oversize correction applied to final results
Elev/
Depth
5-8
Classification
USCS AASHTO
% > % <
No . 4 No . 21313
Nat.
Mo i st.
Sp,G.
LL
PI
SM
2.55
11.0 %
TEST RESULTS
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Maximum dr~ densit~ . 115.8 pcf
Optimum moIsture = 13,2 %
DARK GRAY BROWN
CLAYEY SILT
Remarks:
Project No.: 191313131.1313
Project: RON VERELLA
Location: TEMECULA
T-1
Date: 5-21-20013
MAXIMUM DENSITY/OPTIMUM MOISTURE
--z:v
'i9' No,C-3
I
I
I
:1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
100
90
so
,
i '
I
I I
,
I
70
~
W60
Z
li:
!zso
W
o
~
W40
IL
30
20
10 I .
, I
, ;
o
500
"COBBLES
~
=
II:
, ,
i ili
"
,
I:: ,
1'1:: :
Ii j
:'
I':
"
I:
"
,
I '
II Iii
III,": i
I', .
I I"
I "
I '
11:1
II:'
i" "
I,:' ,
, I ~ i I
Particle Size Distribution Report
,," ""
~ 5! ~ ;
l ~ !:J! i I ;:11
uo...' "I' ,
il~III_:J:t
I: ii" I II
~:i:!
I:l:~:
" ,: I;j
I i:il! I i:
!:tll I!: I
1:'1:,' ii' i: II
Ill. I'
i,;; I I
;'1':' " I
i; ill 1 ill
i1li; II i
hli':" '
iq;'1 j: i
1'11'1 I' I
ill",'" I
i,::!' ,
i:!11 I i: I' 'I
ill:! I jl, !
~
~ ~ ~
1:I:i II: I
1':'11 II:!
I . I I
I.f,' ,
I' i ! ~ i II I
ii!' 1:1!
: Ii I
Iii
"
10
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC: PASS?
SIZE RNER PERCENT (X=NO)
3/4 in. 95.5
1/2 in. 93.1
3/8 in. 89.3
#4 83.1
#10 75.6
#30 58.1
#50 38.6
#100 18.1
#200 7.0
I ,
I
,
I
I I:' i 1'1:
: !: 1 II
Iii'
, I':
I"
I. ,"
100
,
,
,
i.
" ,
!: I:
I:
I'
i I I'
II Ii
! : I ~
I'
i!
I,
"GRAVEL
. (no specifi.caticn provided)
Sample No.: 190001.00
location: T-l
= u a i i 8
;; ;;
I I ,
, i ,
,I
1
GRAIN SIZE - mm
"SAND
76.1
1000 GRAMS
Pl=
065= 6.15
030= 0.229
Cu= 6.91
USCS= SM
1000 GRAMS
Source of Sample:
I I Client V ARELLA
T.H.E. SOilS CO. ::::NO: 190001.00
, ,
~ D
;;
:1 1[1
"I'll
" ,
:: C I
,t II
'Ii'
Ii 'I "
.1 I,
'iiill i
:!II:II
" ' '
! I:, I
I:! i
'i
!
:1
I::
:i
:i-;
"- ,
'!!';
0.1 0.01
"SILT
Soil Descrigtjon
Atterbera Limits
ll=
Coefftclents
Oeo= 0.654
015= 0.129
Cc= 0.85
Classlftcatlon
AASHTO=
Remarks
7.0
PI=
0.001
"CLAY
050= 0.438
010= 0.0947
Date: 6-22-00
ElevJDepth: t>-3
\
11.b
Plate C-4
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
100
90
so
70
1560
Z
ii:
~50
W
o
0::
W4Q
Q.
50
20 , ,
I '
I
I
10
o
500
SIEVE
SIZE
3/4 in.
1/2 in.
3/8 in.
#4
#10
#30
#50
#100
#200
%COBBLES
0.0
Particle Size Distribution Report
.
G
.
~ :! ~:
1:11' I i: I: I:
II 11 II I,
Ii i I
I: I'
1'1
I: I
I
,
,
I
I
,
I
I ,
I
i
I '
,
I
I
,
, ,
I: I:
I' I'
, I'
, !:
111:,1' i, Ii: i:
II, I I'! I
100
%GRAVEl
3.6
PERCENT
ANER
100.0
99.4
99.2
96.4
86.3
63.3
44.7
26.9
14.1
SPEC:
PERCENT
. (no specification provided)
Sample No,: 190001.00 T-I
Location:
. .
! ~
i:111 i I"
Ii II! II!
I Id1i;:1 i
1'111 i I' I
i'll 11'1
:1: 'oJ
, 'III : II i
III! III
!:li! i!: I
, 1:11:'1 i j::
II I I I,', I
),:, I
I Iii!! iF
! I i ~ ! :
I ji'll;
'r!.1
!Ii:: i,l!
1"1111" I
Iii!! i',.
1.1:1' I, I
'1:11'1 j I: [
,il.l! II i
:'11: "
/'11.1 : ill"
.:I i II:: I
"I' i' II
1:!ll:!: I
1'1,', I
I"!'I" i, 'I
1:11, i i: I
10
;
c
i
,
a ~ ~ II
I':ll: 1:1
11:11:: :1
i Ii
1,1
I'i
II!
i Ii i
Iii r I
! 'i
, "
''i
;!I
lid
-i,1
:il: I '!
ii'!I'
,:;1 I q
i'.11 t
:!Iil I!:
ij'l: I
'!'!II) ,:
1
GRAIN SIZE - mm
% SAND
82.3
PASS?
(X=NO)
1000 GRAMS
PL=
085= 1.83
030= 0.172
Cu=
uses= SM
1000 GRAMS
Source of Sample:
T.H.E. SOilS CO.
Client V ARELLA
Project
Pr ect No: 190001.00
8 ~ ~
i i
" Iii I
ii )11
<II 1'1 I
.:1 ..,
,II "j i
di Ii:
" 'd
~! I 'j !
'II , i
'Ii i 1
" ,
I'
,
,I , ,
,
,
0.1
Soli Description
Atterbera Limits
LL=
Coefftclents
Oeo= 0.526
015= 0.0791
Ce=
Classification
AASHTO=
Remarks
%SILT
II' '
ili i
,"
Ii,
Ii: .
I"
,;'
ii'
"
"
II
Ii;
"
i!: :
!Iil
'I I
iii' ,
Iii!
I','
!Ii:
iii;
iil!:
, "
Iii'
i :
, ,
,
i
II
'I
I
I,
:ii'
II'" '
, 1
[I"
,I,
0.01
0.001
% CLAY
14.1
PI=
050= 0.363
010=
Date: 6-23-00
Elev JDepth: 5-8
Plate C-5
1A
I
I
I:
I'
10
I,~
I,
I;
I
I:
"
I'
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
JUN-23-00 12,13 FROM: GS! CARLSBAO
10, 76093 J 0915
PAGE 3
3000 ~1
I
I I
, I
i I
, I !
I
, I
I
,
7'5fi'l0 I
I I
I I
21U'"
I
I
,
;
"-
1/1
<L
T I
... 15:.:'10 i
'"
z
...
'"
I'
v>
"
q
..
r
1/1
11"11"
~I "''' '
0'
"
I
I
5..
I J
10e~ U50lt zema
2500
I
Jeee
NO_"AL STRESS (PS~)
l:./ll'r'ln""~1Ionl 1'i0001Tl o..tn (ft): '5.8
Legend,
Reaultu:
Ct)huBIQn (pal}: ".
f',' I C1', on Ang Ie: JI
COh..1on C p..l : ZJO
S::-rlctlon AnQIIl: J.
. Pri"'ar",
TS6t Method:
~~molded to ~0x of 11&.9 pof 0 13.'.
. R..ldlJal
S.rn.'lu I~n'lndat.d Prior To T...I~O
GaoSolla. Inc.
DIRECT SHEAR
TEST RESULTS
THE SOILS COMPANY
1ol.0 Z4"i'Et-5.C
JUI"l. 2Q00
P I at.:
C-6
1..;5
I
I
I
"
I
j
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,-
I
I
1
I
I
:,:~;-:;::t1:-~~;'_..
E.S. BABCOCK
& SONS, INC,
ESTABUSHEO 19O1l
73
Client:
T, H, E, Soils Co,
Attn: John p, Frey
31705 Central Street
Wildomar,CA 92595
Client I.D.:
Site:
Description:
Matrix:
Constituent
Water Extractable Sulfate
Environmental laboratory Certification #1156
6100 Quail Valley Court Riverside. CA 92507-0704
PO. Box 432 Riverside. CA 92502-0432
PH (909) 653-3351 FAX (909) 653.1662
e--mail: esbsales@aol.com
www.babcocklabs.com
Laboratory Results
r Page: 1 of 1
!Lab No.: L71015-001
Date Reported: 06/29/00
Collected By:
Date:
Time:
Submitted By: Roberto
Date: 06/23/00
Time: 1305
T-1 @ 5-8
RON VARELLA
1990001,00
soil-ag
Result
Date /
Analyst
Method
RL
110
Ion Chrom.
10
000627/KOS
ppm
ND = None detected at RL (Reporting Limit). RL units same as result.
cc:
Results reported in ppm expressed on air-dried soil basis.
Project Reviewer
1lP
C-7
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
APPENDIX D
Standards of Grading
T.H.E. Soils Company
W.O. NO. 190001.00
~"\
,
I.
I~
1-
STANDARD GRADING AND EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS
These specificalicm pn:satt T.n.E. Soils Company. _liard rea>mmaldaticm for gIOdiog and eonhwork.
No deviatioo from these specificalions should be permitted unless specifically supcnedc:d in the gewx:bnical rqJort oflbe projea. or by written communicatioo si~ed by the
Soils Consuhant. Evaluations performed by the Soils Consuttant during the course of grading may resuh in subsequent reconunendations which could supersede these
specifications or the recommendations oflhe geotedmical rqJort.
.-
I~
I
1-
1
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
1.0
GENERAL
1.1 The Soils Consultant is the Owna"s or Developer's rqJn:smt8live on the projelL For the purpose of these specifiCB1ions. obsemItions by the Soils
Coosuhant include obsavatims by the Soils Engineer, Soils Engineer, Engineering Geologist.. and ~ezs employed by and responsible to the Soils
Consultant.
1.2 All clearing. site pn:paration. or earthwork performed on the projed: shan be condutted and directed by the Cootrador undfJ' the aDowance or
supervision oflhe Soils Coosuhant..
3,1
1.3 The Contra<tor should be n:spmsible for the safety of the proj... and satisfildory """Pldioo of all gIOdiog. During gIOdiog. the Contra<tor mall
remain accessible.
1.4 Prior to the commcncemmt of grading. the Soils Consuttant shaU be anpJoyed for the purpose of providing field. laboratory, and office SC%Vices for
conformance with the recommendations oflhc geoo:dmical rqJort and these specifications. It will be nea:ssary that the Soils Consultant provide
adequate te&ing and observations so that he may provide an opinioo as to daamine that the work. was accomplished as specified. It shall be the
responsibility of the Coatractor to assist the Soils Cmsuhaut and keep him apprised of work. sdlcdules and aUlIlges so that he may sdledule his
p<ISOIIIlel aocordingly.
1.~ h shall be the sole responaibility of the CmlraWlr to provide adequate equipmcm and mdhods to aa::omplish the work in accordance with
applicable grading codes. agmcy ordinances. these specifications. and the approved grading plans. If:. in the opinion of the Soils Consul:tant.
lUlsatisfad.ory conditions. such as questioo.able soil, poor moisture condition. inadequate compaaion, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality
of work less than required in these specifications. the Soils Consu.ltant will be empowcn:d to rcjed. the work and recommcnd that ocmtruclion be
stopped until the oonditians are n:dified.
It is the Contrad.or's responsibility to provide safe access to the Soils Consultant for teaing and/or grading observation purposes. This may require
the excavation of test pits andlorthere1ocatim ofgradingequ.iprnent.
1.7
SITE PREPARATION
A final n:port shall be issued by the Soils Consuttant ldtestingtothe Coutrad.or's coofonnance with these specifications.
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
All vegetation and deleterious material shall be disposed of otf~site. This removal shall be observed by the Soils Consultant and concluded prior to
fill placement.
Soil. alluvium, or bedrock materials dd.ermioed by the Soils Consultant as being \UlSUitable for placemcm in compad..ed fills shall be removed from
the snc or used in open areas as determined by the Soils Ccnsuftant. Any material incorporated as a part of a compacted fill must be approved by
the Soils Consuhant prior to fill placement..
After the ground swfaceto receive fill has bem cleared. it shall be scarified. disced and/or bladed by the Contrad.or wrtil it is uniform and free from
ruts. hollows, hummocks. or other lUlCVCfl features which may prevent Wliform compad.ion.
The scarified ground surface shall thcu be brougbl to optimum moisture,. mixed as required. and compalUd as specified. Ifilie scarified zone is
greater than twelve indies in dqJth. the excess shall be removed and placed in lifts not to exceed six inches or less.
Prior to placing fill. the ground swfaceto receive fill shall be observed. teSted. and approved by the Soils Consultant.
.~y underground strud.ures or cavities such as cesspools., cisterns., mining shafts. twmels. septic tanks. wells, pipe lines. or other.; are to be removed
or treated in a manner presaibed by the Soils Consuhant.
In an-fiU transition lots and where an lots are partially in soil, oollu\ium or unweathered bedrock materials. in order to provide uniform bearing
conditions. the bedrock portion of the lot eXlmding a minimum of 5 fael outside of building lines shall be overexcavated a minimum of 3 fed. and
rf4'laced with compad.ed fill. Greater overexcavation oould be required as ddennined by Soils Consultant. Typical ddails are attached.
3.0 CO~IPAcrED FILLS
I
I
I
1.6
~aterial to be placed as fill shall be free of organic matteI" and other ddaerious substances. and shalt be approved by the Soils Consultant. Soils of
poor gradation. expansion, or strength characteristics shall be placed in areas desi~ated by Soils Consuhanl or shall be mixed with other soils lo
save as satisfad.ory till material. as dired.ed by the Soils Consuhant.
~
I
Standard Grading and Earthwork. Specifications
Page 2
.-
.
3.2
,.
I
3.3
3.4
I
3_5
I
3.6
I
3.7
3.8
I
I
3.9
I
3.10
3.11
I
3.12
I
3.13
I
3.14
4.0 CUT SLOPES
I
4,1
4,2
I
4,3
1
4.4
I
4.5
I
Rock. fragments less than six inches in diamder may be ulilized in the fill. provided:
They are not placed or nested in conCll1tnlted pocke!s.
There is a sufficient amount of approved soil to surround the rocks.
The distribution of rocks is supervised bytbe Soils Consultant.
Rocks. greater'than twelve indu:I in diarnda- shan be tab:D off-sita, or placed. in aocordance with the recommendations of the Soils Consultant in
..... desil!l'lWod as suitablo for rock disposal (A typical dolail for Rod< Disposal is attadIod.)
Mataial that is spongy, subjea. to decay, or otbawiso oonsidcn:d UDmilable shall nel be used in the compacted fill.
Representative samples ofmataials to be utilized as compaacd fill shaD be analyzed by the laboratory of the Soils Consultant to ddennine their
physical properties. If any material otherthan that previously tasted is mcountcn:d during gruding. the appropriate analysis of this material shall be
OOIlduaod by tho Soils C'-..- before being oppr1lV1ld as fill mal<rial
Material used in the compacting proocss shall be evenly spread. watered, processed. and compal;ted in thin lifts nol to e.'{ceed six inches in thickness
to obtain a uniformly dmse layer. The fill shall be placed and compaaed on a horizontal pilUle, wtless cdterwise approved by the Soils Consultant.
If the moisture cmtcDl or relative compaaion varies from tIHl required by the Soils Consultant. the ContnIa.or shall rework. the fill until it is
approved by tho Soils CaIsuIIant.
Each layer shall be compac:ted to at least 90 percart of the maximum density in compliance with the teQ.ing method specified by the controlling
govemml2Ilalagmcyor ASTM 1557-70, whichov....pplios.
If compadioo to a lesser pera::otage is authorized by the CClIltrOUing govermnmtal agency because of a specific land use or expansive soil condition.
the area to receive fill ClOIDpA~ to less than 90 paa:nt sball eicbcr be delineated 00 the grading plan and/or appropriate refen:nce made to the area
in tho gootoclmica1 report.
All fills shall be keyed and benched through all topsoil. colluvium. alluvium. or aeep mat.c:riaL into sound bedrock or firm material where the slope
m;e:iving fill exceeds a ratio offive horizontal to one vertical or in aocordance with the recommendations of the Soils Consultant
The kcy for side bill fills shall bea minimum width of IS fed. within bedrock or firm. materiaLs., unless otherwise specified in the ge<<edmical rqJort.
(s..._ilallachod.)
Subdrainage devices shall be constructed in compliance with the ordinances of the CQIItrolling governmental 8galcy. or with the reconunendations of
the Soils Consultant. (Typical Canyon Subdrain ddaHs are attached.)
The contractor will be required to obtain a minimum re1alive compad.ioo ofat least 90 pe:rcutt. 01.4 to the finish slope face offill slopes. buttresses.
and stabilizatioo fills. This may be achieved by eithc:r OVCI' building the slope and wtting bade. lothe compacted oore,. or by direct ccmlpaaion of the
slope face with suitable equipmmt, or by any <Xhcr proocdurc, wbida produces the required compaction approved by the Soils Consultant.
All fill slopes should be planted or prote<1ed fhm1 erosion by other mWlods specified in tho Soils report.
FilI~ver-a.n slopes shan be properly keyed through topsoil. colluvium or a-eep material into rock or rum mataials., and the transition shall be
slripped of all soil prior to placing fill. (Soo attadted _i1.)
The Soils Consultant shall inspea: all cut slopes 81 vertical intavals exceeding five feet.
If any conditions not anticipated in the geotedmical report sudl as perd1ed water. seepage. lenticular or confmed strata of a potentially adverse
nll1Ure. Wlfavorably inclined bedding. joints or fault planes aloount.ered during grading. these conditions shall be analyzed by the Soils Consultant.
and reconunendations shall be made to mitigatethese problems. (Typical details for stabilization of a portion of a cut slope are attached.)
Cut slopes that face in the same diro1ion as the prevailing drainage shall be proted:ed from slope wash by a non-erodible interceptor s\\'ale placed at
the top of the slope.
Unless otherwise specified in the geotechnical fq)ort. no cut slopes shall be excavated higher or steeper than that allowed by the ordinances of
controlling goverrurn.ntal agmcies.
Drainage terraces shall be constructed in compliance with the ordin:mces of controlling goyernmental agencies. or with the recomm~dations of the
Soils Consuhant.
z.o...
Standard Grading and Earthwork Specifications
Page J
5.0 TRENCH BACKFILLS
~ .1 Trend! excavatioo shall be inspeded prior to strudure plaa:merd. for compd.ent bottom.
~.2 Trend! excavations for utility pipes shan be backfilled under-the supervision of the Soils Consuhant.
~.3 Afterthe utility pipe has been laid, the space under and aroundthepipe shan be backfilled with clean sand or approved granular soil to a depth of at
least one foot over the top of the pipe. The sand badd:i11 shall be uniformJy jetted into place before the controlled baddiIl is placed over the sand
~.4 The on-sitemateriaIs. or othcrsoils approved by the Soils Consultant, shall be watered and mixed. as necessary, prior to plaocrnent in lifts over the
sand baddill.
s.' The controlled baddill shall be compaaed to at Icm 90 peromt of the maximum laboratory dimity, as d4crmined by the ASTM D1557-70 or the
controlling governmental agency.
l.6 Field dimity t=s and inspeai... of the bac:ldi1l procedures shall be made by the Soils Consultanl doring baddilling to "" that proper moisture
ccatcnt. and \Dlifonn ~aaion is being maintained. The cootrac:t.or shall providetest holes and exploratory pits as required by the Soils Consuttant
to wable sarq>>Iing and testing.
6.0 GRADING CONTROL
6.1 Inspection of the fill placanan shall be provided by the Soils Consultant during the progress of grading.
6.2 In general,.dt:asity tC!ltI should be made at intavala not exceeding two fed. of fill height or every soo wbic yards offill placed. This altaia will
vary depending on soil cm.ditions and the size of the job. In any event., an adequate number' of field density tcsIs shall be made to verify that the
required~... is being achieved.
6.3 Density tests should also be made OD the native surface material to receive fill as required by the Soils Consuhant.
6.4 All clean-om. processed growtd to received fill. key excavations, subdrains, and rock disposals should be inspeaed and approved by the Soils
Consultant prior to placing any fill. It shall be the Cootrad.or's re5pOllSllrility to notify the Soils Ccnsultant when such areas will be ready for
inspeai....
7.0 CONSTRUCfION CONSIDERATIONS
7.1
Erosion control measures,. when neceuary, shall be provided by the Contractor during grading and prior to the completion and construction of
pennanan drainage controls.
7.2
Upon compldion of grading and termination of inspections by the Soils Consultant. no further filling or excavating.. including that necessary for
footin&" foundations,.1arge tree wells. rtlaining walls, or lXher features shall be perfonncd without the approval of the Soils ConsuhanL
7,3
Care shall be taken by the Contraaor during final grading to preserve any bcnns, drainage terraces, intcrcqrt:or swales, or other devices of
pennanentnature on or adjacent to the property.
-;P
.-,
.-
.-
j
.-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
ROCK
DISPOSAL DETAIL
___ FINISH GRADE
--:.:-:----:...-----:=i- --:... - - -- --:...-:...- - - ----_-__:..._:...-::
--------- ----------
--:... ---:...-----:...--~~~----:...---:...---------: COM P ;CT-::O :-:::-:::-::
-----:...-----:...-:...---: 10' MIN. ::...-_-__:...-___ ~ c _____
---====::~~~~~~~~=~~~:~~~~;~i~~~~
_-_-__:... _:... _:...-_-_-..T_-_-:.:fl.-:..-_-_-_-_-__:...-:..~ -:...__-_-:...-_-_-_-:...-~:.-
--------~---~-------~~--------~
--, ===~~::~~~=::=:~~:::-:-:~~~:t:-~===:~~-:-:
--~---------a--::==t:::- -U-------l]
.,..-::....._----~---- ---- --, -------- ----:...---
"'0' MIN --...,......---- -- -~ E--------
-- ,,-------------------- -------t-------:-
------ ,--'------------ 4' MIN - -- -------
-----.,.--~------------- . --t--15' MIN "..;..---.
-----:::r:...,...------------- -.,...__ '_....,___
----:...v-~~-----------------~----------
::::====~::~~~;*=~~~:~:~~~~~---_-:...~~~====~====~:~-:...--
------y--------~-------------
'--:...------7------:..._:..._:...-__:...-__:...-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-__:..._: --
~.= :;,;>----:...-----:...-----..: OVERSIZE.,----
WINDROWl
SLOPE
FACE
GRANULAR SOIL'
. To 1TIT voids,
densified by
flooding
PROFILE
ALONG WINDROW
/.~
~\
Ii
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I~
I,
I.
I
I
I
I
SIDE HILL
CUT PAD DETAIL
-
NATURAL", __--
GROUND :;.--
--
-
-
-
/
/
./
/
--
OVER EXCAVATE
/
/
FINISHED CUT PAD
SUB DRAIN AND KEY WIDTH REQUIREMENTS
DETERMINED BASED ON EXPOSED SUBSURFACE
CONDITIONS AND THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN
~
i
I'
I.
f
f'
"
I
I-
I
I
I~
I
I
I-
.-
I
I
I
I
I
...
TRANSITION LOT DETAILS
CUT-FILL LOT
NATURAL GROUND
I
T _
-
-
--
-
- ~
-
~
~ ..-" -- -- 5' f-
- - - - MIN, I
- - ,
- -\:. -,.--
: CCiMPACTED ~FILL:-:::-:~~--:::"::_~~l.p..-.:::.;~-------+----------__-_- 36" MIN,
------------------.."-\ ---J;..:
..::..-----------------~~---~L~:---l~--C--- ^\~ '1 I ~\\' -r.
-:::-:::-~:~:~S~\\p..~--..;:;~------ OVER EXCAVATE AND RECOMPACT
~.,.."!;:"~- .::-u _ ""'/^
:----=~.O'>J ~_-_-.,;;...-:::'-___
-..:."'~\~ --...;::...~---------
, ,
UNWEATHERED BEDROCK OR J
r-- MATERIAL APPROVED BY ----I
1 THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT
CUT LOT
-
-
--
-
--
--
NATURAL GROUND
I
T_
--
-
--
-
-
-
--
-
-
_ -.:::::: REMOVE __ -
_ _ - - I;lNSUITABLE _____ __ -- 5' I~
- - MATERIAL _ MIN. I,
:----------:-----:::...-- --------::----- --::=:.:-~-------------T---------:::--------------- 36" MI N,
.~ COMP ACTED ::-.:::-:"= -..2:::__ "y, ~ ^, T
~:..:~~~~~~ OVER EXCAVATE AND RECOMPACT
UNWEATHERED BEDROCK OR J
,- MATERIAL APPROVED BY ---1
T THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT
NOTE:
Deeoer overexcovotion ond recomooction sholl be oerformed
if de!ermined '0 be necesscry by the ceatec~"ic::1 consultant.
- ,
1>7
.-
Ij
I~
I
f
I:
I~ KEY I':
,DEPTH I
I --L- -
, - - - ~ -:...-- -- -- -7--1
I f:.:--:"'-:"'~---:Z",-,-.,...-_-:...-----------;~
'" t.------- ,0' MJ[l:.-_-_----:;.r_l
I' 2' ~IN. I ECUI?,..?,i~~.~~~Jl;.y ISF""oET.1
I
I-
I
I
I
I ·
1 ·
I ·
I
I ·
I
SLOPE BUTTRESS
REPLACEMENT FILL
OUTLET PIPES
4" OI'Jonperforated Pipe,
lOa' Max. O,c. Horizontally,
30' Max, O,c. Vertically
OR L /5' I
DETAIL I~MIN'I I
~-- ""--~---_.
~_-_-:-:-:~--..c: , .\
--:-:=S:..~=E1~ F!L~ BLANKE-
---:...---:...-----:...-.c: 30" MIN.
_-:...-:...-:...-:...---:...-:...- BACK CUT
----::::-::-::-::-:-::::-:;.- - ~^ I: I OR FlA TIER
- --:-::::-::-:~-:.:-::- - BENCH I NG
-------2%---____-_-
-
SU60RA1N
SEE AL TERNA TES A &. f
- - ......
--::t-------------<-"
------ --------=-------- -
--- -----
-----------r--------- ---- -------
------,------
----::::-::-:-::- :::::::=t-r :-::::-::-::-::-----
-------- ------
--------- -----
----:...-------:...-:...-----:... -:...-:...---:...-:...-:z:
---::-:-::::-:-:-:-::- :::::::-:-:-~:-:::::::-:-
~-------- Z"'.--:..T----z
~_ _ .0_ .,.. _..,...~
FILTER MA Tc;:HAL
Jh.l/fr. \ ~
T-CONNEC710N . ,:: d....N
. "., I..C:.
S'lI....'N :.;:..;....,..,
~.1f:J;" -::_ :..' --- 1J-L
-:'OulCEJ pll'E /,W/j t
Pe;;.FOR.I.. i~a PIPS 4- MIN.
4" a MIN.
AL TERNA TE A
8'"MIN.OVE.?!..A.r'
'POSIT1Ve Sa:A1..~
SHOULC aE V
PROVIOED ~
AT THE JOONT , J. -
, . .
S% MrN ..., # . .
" ___" r . .
OUTLET ,..-::. _~
PIPE-..:"'..:'...... /
MIRAFI 140 FILTE~
FABRIC OR APPRovEO
EOUIVALENT
TEMPORARY
FILl. LEV EL
1~.MltJ.
GRAVEL. OR
( APPROveO
", !QUrJAL.5:~n
. . - - llECOMPACTED FILL
'.!Iu. = =,
-,-
O '"iMIN, SELECT BEDCING
.....L BACKFILL.
"0 M~"', NONPERFORA TED
PIPS:
DETAIL A-A'
ALTERNATE 6
NOTES:
FILTER MA TERrAL:
Filter material shall be
Class 2 permeable materiol
per State of California
Standard Specifications,
or epproved alternate.
Class 2 grading as follows:
Fill blenket, beck cut, key width and
key dep th are sub j ec t to fi eld change,
per report/plans,
Key heel subcrain, blanket drain, or
vertical drain may be required at the
discretion of the geotechnical consultant.
SUBDRAIN INST ALLA TION - Subdrain
pipe shall be installed with perforations
cown or, at locations designated by
the geotechnical consultant, shall be
nonperforated pipe.
SUBDRAIN TYPE - Subdrain type shall
be ASTM 02751, SOR 23.5 or ASTM 01527,
Schedule 40 Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene
(ABS) or ASTM 03034 SOR 23,5 or ASTM
01785, Schedule 40 Polyvinyl Chloride Plastic
(PVC) pipe or approved equivalent,
SIEVE SIZE
PERCENT PASSING
I"
3/4"
3/8"
No,4
No.8
No, 30
No. 50
No. 200
100
90-100
40-100
25-40
18-33
5-15
-J-7
0-3
'Y\
.'"
..
I .-
I.
...
I..
I~
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I:
I
I
I
1
BENCHING DETAILS
FiLL SLOPE
,,,'
-~~--~COMPACTED .---------.
- --:~-:~-::::-:..:~~ FI LL :.:"'.:-=~ ~-=-:-
---------------------
- ----------_-:...--~ -=--------:_---::.:-,..;::;.-~_-:.:
------------------;...- - -- --=- - - - - --=--=:::
_ _-:-:-=-=-:-:-:-:-:-:?i---::---- __~-~- "
__:_=---=--=-=-:-~~--::_ ~_-:- I. ~ ,
PROJECTED PLANE ---------.....----...=-:~--
I to I maximum from toe ----.:.:-----_;....-~------:.-;....___:,-
oi slope to cpproved ground .::-:-::::_:~L~-:::-:-;-:-:::- '\
__-_-_-_-..;:__-_-_-_-... ! /, REMOVE
_-_-=-,;:.::.~ ~---.;:...._--- UNSU IT AB LE
-~~-----~--- -
"'::"---::-:-:-::_.....r' '^' MA I ERIAL
- ---~---;..-~----- ~41 MIN ~ "-
I 1 --,<-------;..-~--------- BE H' BENCH
~ l -r----------- NC
--I- _-':::~:.:~-~T~-:::::: (typical) ~~~J~~
------=:;;;.----
T ^'" /.~
2' MIN. I IS' MIN. I
KEY ~OWEST BENCH "1
DEPTH (KEY)
NATURAL
GROUND \
_-= COMPACTED ::::-:-:;:::"':"
---------1 FILL .:---,;...::.--~~
_-:::=:::=::::-:.?:~-~-:-:--z:
-------~~---~---
_7:-:-~:-:-__: . ~ 1''''
_-___-...:::..~_-_-___~-~-_ I
--.........-------- ..
REMOVE. NATURAL z-::_~-:-::::_::?:_3 ,^,{ ~
UNSUITABLE GROUND :.?'----------~ I \
MATERIAL \ ,,-.... ^ r41 MIN, BENCH
.... ...."" --~--- BENCffOi HEIGl;iT
.... .... (typicaf)1 VARIES
--
--- ......-: ',""
"..
"......- ~15IMIN.~
.... .... I LOWEST BENCH I
FILL OVER CUT SLOPE
...-
....
....
....
CUT
FACE
To be constructed prior
to fill placement
NOTES:
LOWEST BENCH; Depth and width subject to field change
based c,-, consultant's inspection.
S;";~DRAI:JAGE:, e~,,"k ,:~:.:.," mey be required at the
jiscretlon oi the geotechnical consultant.
?-=>
,
I j
I.
I'
.-
I'
I
I
i
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CANYON SUBDRA1N DETAIL
~NATURALGROUND
REMOVE
- UNSUITABLE
~~-._________c_____________~"'-~_~ . MATERIAL
--~~~~--------------------------- -~
- --~~-:'::-::=-::=-:-COMPACTED FILL=-=-=-=-:::---~-:::-, /
-_.....-:...--~-:...---:.:~-- - - ---=~=-::..--~-=-=-_-:...----~-:..--
-~~---~-----------------~~--
--- -_-:..._---------------------------=---.;::... -- -- -
f~~-------------------' ~
-----~~--------~~
------------------~-~
:::=~=~~==~=~~=~~=~::~~---~ .:<
~-------~ '
-----:::~~~: SUB DRAIN TRENCH
. . SEE AL TERNA TES A&B
SUBDRAIN Perforated Pipe Surrounded With
ALTERNATE A: Filter Material
FILTER MATERIAL
3
9 ft. 1ft.
FILTER MATERIAL:
Filler materieJ sholl be
Class 2 permecble maTerial
per State of California
Standard Specifications,
or approved oJternQte~
Clc.ss 2 gradiN;l as (ollows:
SIEVE SIZE
PERCENT PASSING
Alternate A- 1
BEDDING
4" MIN~""~r;.~ernate A-2
PERFORATED PIPE/
6"flMIN.
I"
3/4"
3/8"
No, 4
No,8
No, 30
No. 50
No, 200
100
~O-I CO
40-100
25-40
18-33
5-15
0-7
0-3
SUBDRAIN 1 1/2" Gravel Wrapped
AL TERNA TE B: in Filter Fabric
~ S"jyiIN. OVERLAP ~
~fY / -j:r-
,0 /'\:-'\
MIRAFI 1 40 FILTER
FABRIC OR
APPROVED
EOUIV ALENT
I Vz" MIN, GRA VEL OR
APPROVED EaWVALENT
9 ft. 31ft.
NOTE:
In addition to the wrapped
gravel, outlet porticn of the
subdrain should be' equipped
with a minimum of 10 feet
long perforated pipe con-
nected to 0 nonperforated pipe
having a minimum of 5 feet in
length inside the wrapped
grovel.
B-2
· SUBORAJN INST ALLA nON - Subdrain pipe sholl be installed with perforations down or.
at locations designated by the geotechnical consultant, shall be nonperforoted pipe,
. SUBORAIN TYPE - Sub drain type shall be ASTM 02751, SDR 23.5 or ASTM 01527, Schedule 40
Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) or ASTM 03034 SOR 23.5 or ASTM 01785, Schedule 40
Polyvinal Chloride Plastic, (PVC) pipe or approved equivalant
~