HomeMy WebLinkAboutTract Map 3883 Lot 205 Compaction Results Rough Grading
I ~\ '') ,,/'
~~G
I " " ,- d""":";:l[=,~ Il! EN
3~g3
L -d05
corr~oration
. Soil Engineering and Consulling Services. EngineeringGeology.CompactionTesting
-Inspections. ConstrlJCtionMalerialsTesling. LaboratoryTestinge Percolation Testing
. GeOlogy. Water Resource Studies . Phasel&IIEnvironmentalSileAssessments
ENVIRONMENTAL & GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING NETWORK
I
I
I
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT AND COMPACTION TEST RESULTS
ROUGH GRADING OPERATIONS
Brackin Residence
Assessor's Parcel Number: 919-073-001
Lot 205 of Tract 3883
29961 Via Norte
City of Temecula, County of Riverside, California
Project Number: T2797-C
I
I
I
December 11, 2003
I
I
II
I
REC,EiVED
JAN 1 4 2004
CITY OF TEMECULA
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
I
I
I
Prepared for:
I
Mr. Tom Brackin
_ 29697 New Hub Drive, Suite D
Sun City, California 92591
"
- ' -
,
-- \
. .
. ,
. .
'. ,
. . ,
. '
. .
. ,
, -
I ~ I "-
- /"" J _ _
\ F ~ " I ,. ,- - - \ ,... " ~
. ,
~ ~ - - - \ ~
"\' - / \-
\ .
~ - - I
F _ _ J ,
, - - I
" - , '- ,. , '
~,~~~ >~~~~~ ~i~lii~~~~~~i~g~~~~~~~~~~~]i~~'~~i~~~
~~'~*~~!~~~=~=~~~~~~.~~~_~:~=~W~~~B~~~=~
. .. ..' -... - ......-"" --;;~
_,_~~~_~'., ,/~ ~~~. ~/ _J'~c,~-:::--~~_I
~(2L&~"DlBeE4i..~ E -w;g[~Ir2i~N
,~)f!!N~li;{;1;~~ FI &~f~~~~
~ :;0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Tom Brackin
Project Number: T2797-C
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION NUMBER AND TITLE
PAGE
1.0 SITE/PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION ..................................................................... 1
1.1 PROJECT LOCATION ............................................... .......... .................. .......... ............ ........ 1
1.2 SITE DESCRIPTION .,............................................... ....."... ...,................................,.,. .,."... 1
1 ,3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............,........"..."."...,.,.,... ......,... ................,.,..,....,..................... 2
2.0 SCOPE OF WORK ............................................................................................................. 2
2.1 TIME OF GRADING ............................................................................................................ 2
2.2 CONTRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT ...........................................................,..,.......................... 2
2.3 GRADING OPERATIONS...................................,......,......,.........,...............................,.,....,.. 2
3.0 TESTING .......................................................................................................................... 3
3.1 FIELD TESTING PROCEDURES ......................................,.................................................... 3
3.2 LABORATORY TESTING ...................................................................................,... ..,........... 3
3.2.1 MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP TEST ................................................... 3
3.2.2 EXPANSION INDEX TEST ............................................................................ 3
3,2,3 SOLUBLE SULFATE TEST ........................................................................... 4
4.0 EARTH MATERIALS ........................................................................................................... 4
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................... 4
6.0 CLOSURE......................................................................................................................... 5
APPENDIX:
TEST RESULTS
DRAWINGS
Z--
EnGEN Corporation
I k'.:~', ,/..,::-:.- ../~
I ~GEN
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r'~---- --
j -
1'1-
,S\
-
. Soil Engineering and Gonsulling Ser~ices. Engirreering Geology. Compaction Testing
-Inspections. Constnx:lionMaterialsTeslirlg-laboraloryTesting- PercolalionTesting
-Geology-WalerResourceStudies . Phase I & II Environmenlal Site Assessmenls
COfl~oration
ENVIRONMENTAL & GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING NETWORK
December 11, 2003
Mr. Tom Brackin
29697 New Hub Drive, Suite D
Sun City, California 92591
(909) 672-3900 / FAX (909) 672-2907
Regarding:
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT AND COMPACTION TEST RESULTS
ROUGH GRADING OPERATIONS
Brackin Residence
Assessor's Parcel Number: 919-073-001
Lot 205 of Tract 3883
29961 Via Norte
City of Temecula, County of Riverside, California
Project Number: T2797-C
References:
1.
EnGEN Corporation, Geotechnical Feasibility study, Brackin Residence,
Assessor's Parcel Number: 919-073-001, Lot 205 of Tract 3883, Via Norte, City
of Temecula, County of Riverside, California, Project Number: T2797-GFS,
report dated March 7, 2003.
2.
Bratene Construction & Engineering, Precise Grading Plan, Brackin
Residence, 29961 Via Norte, Temecula, California, plans dated June 11,2003.
Dear Mr. Brackin:
In accordance with your request and signed authorization, EnGEN Corporation has performed field
observations, sarnpling, and in-place density testing at the above referenced site. Submitted, herein,
are the test results and the supporting field and laboratory data.
1.0 SITE/PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
1.1
PROJECT LOCATION
The subject site consists of approximately 0.5 acres, located on the east side of Via Norte
east of the intersection of La Corona Court and Via Norte, in the City of Temecula, County
of Riverside, California.
1.2
SITE DESCRIPTION
Prior to grading operations, 'topography and surface conditions of the site were gently to
moderately sloping with surface drainage to the southeast at a gradient of approximately 5
to 25 percent.
~~=--~~--- '" ,
, .
/ '- ,,?''''':;:'''r''-,''=,'7'O':''
F ,_ _ _ \ __ ~
~ / '- '" I "-
, , \- --- \ /
. -
, .
~ '- - I
, '
" ,
" ,
,
, ,
/ ,,- - - \ ~
, "
" -' __ I
.
. .
,-- \..
,,- "-
. .
, .
,- " ~
. -
, "
F _ _ I ~
____~...._....,.;__J, _.... .,....
.<" '~',,, ;.,:! .:i<' <\._"~..dlj ",,', "", __.~'_~'" "..,. ".'
" --.... -." -,," '-'_ _,_,. _'''C'", "',', __--_._.__._.,,"'~.,."""""...~.., ''''''''''''0
E iijr;pos..ijtCircUfN: rt';~SUite.,t~~Jfrtie:cV_. _'e
I ~~j€~~t : tg~~?~f~~ engencorp
. ,~~~. -~;"'
M_ .~~&~~ ~~~wx~~
,.- . " ., .'-^ '-"- '-~' ~~ "';;.:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Tom Brackin
Project Number: T2797-C
December 2003
Page 2
1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
It is understood that the subject site is to be developed with a single family residence with
slab-an-grade concrete floors supported on conventional continuous and pier footings, with
associated driveway as well as hardscape and landscape irnprovements. The site is
separated by retaining walls into three (3) different pad heights and areas.
2.0 SCOPE OF WORK
2.1 TIME OF GRADING
This report represents geotechnical observations and testing during the construction
operations frorn August 29, 2003 through September 9, 2003.
2.2 CONTRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT
The grading operations were performed by S.W. Hochstetler through the use of one (1)
CAT D4 dozer, one (1) vibrating roller and one (1) water truck.
2.3 GRADING OPERATIONS
Grading within the subject site consisted of a cut/fill operation as well as an import fill
operation. Grasses and weeds were removed prior to fill placement Fill material was
generated from the western portions of the site, as well as from off-site sources and used
to bring the tennis court and the residential pad portions of the site to finish grade
elevation. Removal of undocumented fills, slopewash, etc., was performed to a depth of 3
to 4-feet below original elevation. Bottoms were observed, probed and found to be into
competent Pauba Formation bedrock by a representative of this firm. Keying and benching
into competent Pauba Formation bedrock was observed during the grading operations.
Backfilling of the retaining walls for the proposed residential structure, as well as
the backfilling of the retaining wall above the tennis court, and the proposed wall
located at the eastern property line was not performed at the time of this report.
These walls are to be backfilled and tested at a later date. The retaining wall below
the tennis court, along the southwest property line, however, was backfilled as part
of the work reported herein.
The exposed bottoms were scarified and moisture conditioned to a depth of 12-inches then
compacted to 90 percent. Fill was placed in lens thicknesses of 6 to 8-inches, thoroughly
moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content, then compacted to a minimum of
A..
EnGEN Corporation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Tom Brackin
Project Number: T2797-C
December 2003
Page 3
90 percent relative compaction. Moisture conditioning of the on-site soils was performed
during the compaction process through the use of a water truck.
The pad area was generally graded to the elevations noted on the Grading Plan, However,
the actual pad location, dimensions, elevations, slope locations and inclinations, etc. were
surveyed and staked by others and should be verified by the Project Civil Engineer.
3.0 TESTING
3.1 FIELD TESTING PROCEDURES
Field in-place density and moisture content testing were performed in general accordance
with ASTM D 2922-96 and ASTM D 3017-96 procedures for determining in-place density
and moisture content, respectively, using nuclear gauge equipment. Relative compaction
test results were within the 90 percent required for all material tested in the areas of the
proposed tennis court and 95 percent in the areas of the proposed residential structure.
which is an indication that the remainder of the fill placed has been properly compacted.
Test results are presented in the Appendix of this report, Fill depths and test locations
were determined from review of the referenced grading plans.
3.2 LABORATORY TESTING
The following laboratory tests were performed as part of our services during the grading of
the subject site. The test results are presented in the Appendix of this report.
3.2.1 MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP TEST
Maximum dry density - optimum rnoisture content relationship tests were conducted on
samples of the rnaterials used as fill. The tests were performed in general accordance with
ASTM D 1557-00 procedures.
3.2.2 EXPANSION INDEX TEST
A soil sample was obtained for expansion potential testing from the building pad area upon
completion of rough grading of the subject site. The expansion test was performed in
accordance with ASTM D 4829-95. The material tested consisted of light brown silty sand,
which has an Expansion Index of 5. This soil is classified as having a very low expansion
potential. The results are presented in the Summary of Expansion Index Results in the
Appendix of this report.
'5
EnGEN Corporation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr, Tom Brackin
Project Number: T2797-C
December 2003
Page 4
3.2.3 SOLUBLE SULFATE TEST
Based on this firm's familiarity with the soils used to construct the building pad, it is our
opinion that soluble sulfates are not a concern, and as a result, norrnal Type II cement can
be used in concrete making contact with the native soils.
4.0 EARTH MATERIALS
The natural and imported earth materials encountered on-site generally consisted of light
brown silty sand,
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
No conditions were encountered which would cause a change in the previously provided
design and construction recommendations. As a result, design and construction should
adhere to the recommendations provided in the Referenced No. 1 Geotechnical Feasibility
Study.
The backfill of the retaining walls referenced in Section 2,3 will need to be certified at a
later date. Some of the referenced backfill will provide support for the walls of the
residence.
Based on the observations and tests performed during grading, the subject site, in the
areas noted as test locations and with the exceptions noted above, has been completed in
accordance with the Referenced NO.1 Report, the project plans and the Grading Code of
the City of Temecula. The portion of the site graded to date and reported herein is
determined to be adequate for the support of a typical residential development.
Any subsequent grading for development of the subject property should be performed
under engineering observation and testing performed by EnGEN Corporation. Subsequent
grading includes, but is not limited to, any additional fill placement and excavation of
temporary and permanent cut and fill slopes, In addition, EnGEN Corporation should
observe all foundation excavations. Observations should be made prior to installation of
concrete forms and/or reinforcing steel so as to verify and/or modify, if necessary, the
conclusions and recommendations in this report. Observations of overexcavation cuts, fill
placement, finish grading, utility or other trench backfill, pavement subgrade and base
course, retaining wall backfill, slab presaturation, or other earth work completed for the
development of the subject site should be performed by EnGEN Corporation. If any of the
observations and testing to verify site geotechnical conditions are not perforrned by
re.
EnGEN Corporation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
Mr. Tom Brackin
Project Number: T2797-C
December 2003
Page 5
EnGEN Corporation, liability for the safety and performance of the development is limited
to the actual portions of the project observed and/or tested by EnGEN Corporation.
6.0 CLOSURE
This report has been prepared for use by the parties or project named or described above.
It mayor may not contain sufficient information for other parties or purposes. The findings
and recornmendations expressed in this report are based on field and laboratory testing
performed during the rough grading operation and on generally accepted engineering
practices and principles. No further warranties are implied or expressed beyond the direct
representations of this report.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide these services. If you should have any questions
regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office at your convenience.
SRW/OB:lc
Distribution: (4) Addressee
FILE: EnGEN/ReportinglCfT2797-C Tom Brackin, Rough Grading
1
EnGEN Corporation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Tom Brackin
Project Number: T2979-C
Appendix Page 1
APPENDIX:
TEST RESULTS
B
EnGEN Corporation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Tom Brackin
Project Number: T2797-C
Appendix Page 2
FIELD TEST RESULTS
(Summary of Field In-Place Density Test Results)
(Nuclear Gauge Test Method)
(s. G.) = Subgrade / (F. G.) = Finish Grade
Test Test Depth Max Moisture Dry Relative Required
No. Date Test Locations Elevation Soil Type Density Content Density Compaction Compaction
(2003) (FT) (PCF) (0/0) (PCF) (0/0) (0/0)
1 08-29 Tennis Court 1170 A1 125.5 10.9 114.9 91.6% 90.0%
2 08-29 Tennis Court 1171 A1 125.5 13.3 115.7 92.2% 90.0%
3 09-02 Tennis Court 1172 A1 125.5 13.2 113.7 90.6% 90.0%
4 09-02 Tennis Court 1173 A1 125.5 11.7 115.2 91.8% 90.0%
5 09-02 Tennis Court 1174 A1 125.5 12.9 114.6 91.3% 90.0%
6 09-04 House Pad 1182 A1 125.5 7.7 113.8 90.7% 95.0%
7 09-04 House Pad 1182 A1 125.5 7.4 123.4 98.3% 95.0%
8 09-04 Tennis Court 1172 A1 125.5 9.0 121.8 97.1% 90.0%
9 09-04 House Pad 1183 A1 125.5 8.7 120.7 96.2% 95.0%
10 09-05 Retest #6 1182 A1 125.5 11.6 123.8 98.6% 95.0%
11 09-05 House Pad 1185 f>.2 126.7 7.6 124.4 98.2% 95.0%
12 09-05 Tennis Court 1174 f>.2 126.7 11.9 124.9 98.6% 90.0%
13 09-05 House Pad 1186 A1 125.5 9.6 120.5 96.0% 95.0%
14 09-05 House Pad 1186 A1 125.5 8.9 122.1 97.3% 95.0%
15 09-09 House Pad 1187 A1 125.5 9.1 121.2 96.6% 95.0%
16 09-09 House Pad 1187 A1 125.5 8.8 122.6 97.7% 95.0%
17 09-09 House Pad 1187 A1 125.5 8.4 123.1 98.1% 95.0%
18 09-09 Tennis Court 1187 A1 125.5 9.6 121.0 96.4% 90.0%
19 12-05 House Pad FG f>.2 126.7 6.2 121.1 95.6% 95.0%
20 12-05 House Pad FG f>.2 126.7 6.7 120.9 95.4% 95.0%
'\
EnGEN Corporation
I
I
I
I
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Tom Brackin
Project Number; T2797-C
Appendix Page 3
SUMMARY OF OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY RELATIONSHIP TEST RESULTS
ASTM D 1557-00
Soil Description (USCS Symbol) Soil Type Maximum Dry Optimum Moisture Content
Density (PCF) (%)
Silty Sand Light Brown (SM) A1 125.5 10,1
Silty Sand Light Brown (SM) A2 126.7 9.6
SUMMARY OF EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS
ASTM D 4829-95
Dry Moisture Moisture Expansion
Soil Type Depth (FT) Density Condition Condition Index
(pcf) Before Test After Test
E1 -1 116.4 8,8% 14.0% 5
\fJ
EnGEN Corporation
I Mr. Tom Brackin
Project Number: T2797-C
Appendix Page 4
I
I
I APPENDIX:
I DRAWINGS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I \\
I EnGEN Corporation