The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTract Map 3929 Lot 236 Geotechnical Report & Compaction Results of Rough Grading II~- I ~~EN CorQoration 31;;{q L.Df;]30 . Soil EngineeringarldConsulling 5ervices- EngineeringGeology-CompaClionTesting -Inspections. ConslrlJClionMaterialsTesling-laboraloryTesling-PercolalionTestlng . Geology. Water ResourceSludies . Ptlasel& II Environmental Site Assessmenls ENVIRONMENTAL & GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING NElWORK I I I GEOTECHNICAL REPORT AND COMPACTION TEST RESULTS ROUGH GRADING OPERATIONS Lassig Residence, 32775 Del Rey Road City of Temecula, County of Riverside, California LD 99-110 GR Project Number: T1891-C I I October 15, 1999 I I 1 I I I I Prepared for: -I Mr. Donald Lassig 29996 Via Norte Temecula, California 92591 I ./ ---'\ '\-, ; , ; , / " ~ ~ - I " \ _ _ _ \..-- - ' - ~ " \ ,,\ / \- ., , " \ - - - \ - '- , / " ,,/ _.... - \ ~ / " ~ ~ I _' _ '/.... I _" " I I " \ - _ _ \ .-' '- / I __ \ - _ - \ -' '- , I " \ - - - \ .r '- .- , " L~~~~~~;;~~i~ij~~i~i~~~)~~~~~~'~~~~ii SIl_..W~ !l'lIl;l;_Eli_Gi_;li;i iJK!iiOl i!!t:~..,.~.... F-.....".1;iO """'l!i!'~;MIO<......... '"""'""' i;I;o)i\_~ @.~"l ------......---.....----...........-------....-...................,------, - ~'(9 - '" - - - - - --~. -~~ :;1 I, . , , -' \- -- \" - '- , " /' __ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Mr. Donald Lassig Project No: T1891-C TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION NUMBER AND TITLE PAGE 1.0 SITE/PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION ......................................................................1 1.1 PROJECT LOCATION ..........................................................................................................1 1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .....................................................................................................1 1.3 SITE DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................1 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK ..............................................................................................................2 2.1 TIME OF GRADING .............................................................................................................2 2.1 CONTRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT ..........................................................................................2 2.2 GRADING OPERATIONS......................................................................................................2 2.3 CUT/FILL TRANSITION........................................................................................................2 3.0 TESTING ...........................................................................................................................3 3.1 FIELD TESTING PROCEDURES ............................................................................................3 3.1.1 LABORATORY TESTING............................................................................... 3 3.1.2 MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP TEST ....................................................3 3.2 EXPANSION INDEX TEST ....................................................................................................3 4.0 EARTH MATERIALS ...........................................................................................................3 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................4 5.1 GENERAL........................................................................................................................4 6.0 CLOSURE .........................................................................................................................4 ApPENDIX TEST RESULTS DRAWINGS EnGEN Corporation 'l- I~ I ~~I~r.m ~m'GEN I I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I~:-- .. \ H" '. / ill ". CorQoration . Soil Erlgineeringand Consulting Services. EngineerinllGeology- Compaction Tesling -Inspections- ConslructionMalllfialsTesling. LaboratoryTesling-PercolalionTesling . Geology. Water Resource Studies . Phase I & II Environmental Site Assessments ENVIRONMENTAL & GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING NElWORK October 15, 1999 Mr. Donald Lassig 29996 Via Norte Temecula, California (909) 676-7974 92591 Regarding: GEOTECHNICAL REPORT AND COMPACTION TEST RESULTS ROUGH GRADING OPERATIONS Lassig Residence, 32775 Del Rey Road City of Temecula, County of Riverside, California LD 99-110 GR Project Number: T1891-C References: EnGEN Corporation, Limited Geotechnical Study, Lot 236 of Tract Map 3929, City of Temecula, report dated August 4, 1999. Manning Engineering, Grading Plan, Lot 236 of Tract Map 3929, Del Rey Road, City of Temecula, plan undated. 1. 2. Dear Mr. Lassig: According to your request and signed authorization, EnGEN Corporation has performed field observations, sampling, and in-place density testing at the above referenced site. Submitted, herein, are the test results and the supporting field and laboratory data. 1.0 1.1 SITE/PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION PROJECT LOCATION The subject site consists of approximately one acre located southwest of the intersection of Del Rey Road and Avenida Barca in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, California. 1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Prior to grading operations, topography and surface conditions of the site were moderately sloping with surface drainage to the north at a gradient ranging from 10 to 30 percent. 1.3 SITE DESCRIPTION It is understood that the_subject site is to be developed with a single family residence with / ." slab-on-grade concrete floors,. >" / ; , - ./ '- ~ ~ / _' - ~ / '- ~ / I _..... _ '/ '- ,~I _' _ "I " ' / " \ - - - \ '" '- ~ I , \ _ _ _ \ .... .... ~ , " ~ _ . _ \ -' '- ~ , ./' ~~ : _ ~~.::~~:::':~i:;~~~;;~~# ~~i~~~~~'~2~~F~::~~i~~I~~r <%:,:,-;;~~~:;~~~.~_~~~ilii~ ~.@!~:_'_~~ff~~;J:I;",,'g:if*_~~C'Htal!t'il :;~~::~!:~~!:==!:::-;::::~~~~~~~~;:;~~;::::;;~z~;r:;;;:;:~~;::~ - .." -- ... -- -. .. ~._-.....---~~~ I ~,,/ _' ~./ , \, "I " "F / I " ,_ _ _ \ , - , " '" ~-- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I. I Mr. Donald Lassig Project No: T1891-C October 1999 Page 2 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK 2.1 TIME OF GRADING This report represents geotechnical observations and testing during the construction operations from October 6, 1999 through October 11, 1999. 2.1 CONTRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT The grading operations were performed by Todd's Tractor Service through the use of one (1) J.D. 450G track-mounted dozer. 2.2 GRADING OPERATIONS Grading within the subject site consisted of a cut/fill operation. Grasses and weeds were removed prior to fill placement. Fill material was generated from the southern portions of the site, and used to bring the northern portions of the site to finish grade elevation. Removal of alluvium, slopewash, etc., was performed to a depth of 2.0-feet below original elevation. Over-excavated earth material was stockpiled and later used as fill. Bottoms were observed, probed and found to be into competent soil by a representative of this firm. Keying and benching into competent bedrock was observed during the grading operations. The exposed bottoms were scarified and moisture conditioned to a depth of 12-inches then compacted to 90 percent. No overexcavation was performed in the house pad since it was reported that the building footprint was entirely in cut. Fill was placed in lens thicknesses of 4 to 6-inches, thoroughly moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content, then compacted to a minimum of 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. 2.3 CUT/FILL TRANSITION Overexcavation was not performed on the cut portion of the parcel. Therefore, a cut/fill transition exists on the subject building pad. If a structure is to be built entirely on the cut portion of the pad, it is acceptable as graded. However, if a structure with a permanent foundation and slab-on-grade concrete floor is planned to be built over the cut/fill transition, it is recommended that overexcavation be performed in the cut portion of the building pad. In such a situation, overexcavation should be performed to a depth of 2.0 feet below the EnGEN Corporation A. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 Mr. Donald Lassig Project No: T1891-C October 1999 Page 3 bottom of the proposed footings and to a distance of 5.0-feet outside the proposed structure perimeter. The overexcavation bottom should be scarified to a depth of 12- inches, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. Fill should be placed in lift thicknesses of 4 to 8-inches, moisture conditioned and compacted to 90 percent. 3.0 TESTING 3.1 FIELD TESTING PROCEDURES Field in-place density and moisture content testing were performed in general accordance with ASTM-D-2922-81 (90) and ASTM-D-3017-88 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 placed and 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. 3.1.1 LASORA TORY 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. 3.1.2 MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP TEST Maximum dry density - optimum moisture content relationShip tests were conducted on samples of the materials used as fill. The tests were performed in general accordance with ASTM D1557-91 procedures. The test results are presented in the Appendix (Summary of Optimum Moisture Content I Maximum Dry Density Relationship Test Results). 3.2 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 procedure utilized was the Uniform Building Code Test Designation 18-2. The material tested consisted of silty sand, which has an Expansion Index of 7. This soil is classified as having a very low expansion potential. The results are presented in the Surnmary of Expansion Index Results in the Appendix of this report. 4.0 EARTH MATERIALS The natural earth materials encountered on-site, generally consisted of silty sand, with minor amounts of clay. EnGEN Corporation .;; I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Mr. Donald Lassig Project No: T1891-C October 1999 Page 4 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 Limited Geotechnical Study. 5.1 GENERAL Based on the observations and tests performed during grading, the subject site in the. areas noted has been completed in accordance with the Referenced No. 1 Limited Geotechnical Study report, or as amended in the field base on conditions encountered, the project plans, the project plans and the Grading Code of the City of Temecula. The graded site in the areas noted as graded is determined to be adequate for the support of a typical residential development. Any subsequent grading for development of the subject property should be performed under engineering observation and testing performed by EnGEN Corporation. Subsequent grading includes, but is not limited to, any additional fill placement and excavation of temporary and permanent cut and fill slopes. In addition, EnGEN Corporation should observe all foundation excavations. Observations should be made prior to installation of concrete forms and/or reinforcing steel so as to verify and/or modify, if necessary, the conclusions and recommendations in this report. Observations of overexcavation cuts, fill placement, finish grading, utility or other trench backfill, pavement subgrade and base course, retaining wall backfill, slab presaturation, or other earth work completed for the development of subject site should be performed by EnGEN Corporation. If any of the observations and testing to verify site geotechnical conditions are not performed by EnGEN Corporation, liability for the safety and performance of the development is limited to the actual portions of the project observed and/or tested by EnGEN Corporation. 6.0 CLOSURE This report has been prepared for use by the parties or project named or described above. It mayor may not contain sufficient information for other parties or purposes. The findings and recommendations expressed in this report are based on field and laboratory testing performed during the rough grading operation and on generally accepted engineering practices and principles. No further warranties are implied or expressed beyond the direct representations of this report. EnGEN Corporation ~ I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 Mr. Donald Lassig Project No: T1891-C October 1999 Page 5 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. Respectfully submitted, EnGEN Corporation ~D'L~ Field Operations Manager JDG/OB:ch Distribution: (4) Addressee FILE: EnGEN/Reporting/CIT1891 C Lassig Residence. Rough Grade EnGEN Corporation "\ I Mr. Donald Lassig Project No: T1891-C I Appendix Page 1 APPENDIX 1 FIELD TEST RESULTS (SUMMARY OF FIELD IN-PLACE DENSITY TEST RESULTS) (NUCLEAR GAUGE TEST METHOD) 1 Depth Max Moisture Test Test Soil Dry Relative Required No. Date Test Locations Elev. Type Density Content Density Compaction Compaction (1999) (FT) (PCF) (%) (PCF) (%) (%) I~ 10-6 N. Keyway Fill 103' A1 124.2 10.7 121.3 97.7 90 10-6 N. Keyway Fill 103' A1 124.2 11.9 114.7 92.4 90 I~ 10-6 N. Fill Slope W. End 105' A1 124.2 15.2 112.0 90.2 90 10-6 N. Fill Slope W. End 105' A1 124.2 15.7 108.9 87.7 90 5 10-7 N.E. Keyway Fill 102' A1 124.2 13.0 113.4 91.3 90 I~ 10-7 N.E. Keyway Fill 102' A1 124.2 13.7 114.6 92.3 90 10-7 Retest of #4 105' A1 124.2 14.7 116.2 93.6 90 8 10-7 N. Fill Slope 107' A1 124.2 13.1 115.3 92.8 90 1190 10-7 N. Fill Slope 107' A1 124.2 12.7 114.1 91.9 90 10-7 N.E. Fill Slope 104' A1 124.2 12.1 115.9 93.3 90 111 10-7 N.E. Fill Slope 104' A1 124.2 12.6 116.3 93.6 90 12 10.7 N.E. Fill Slope 106' A1 124.2 11.0 118.9 95.7 90 13 10-7 N.E. Fill Slope 106' A1 124.2 11.2 117.0 94.2 90 114 10-11 N.E. Fill Slope 107.5' A1 124.2 12.1 113.2 91.1 90 15 10-11 N.E. Fill Slope 107.5' A1 124.2 10.7 114.1 91.9 90 116 10-11 Pad Area F.G. A1 124.2 10.1 114.0 91.8 90 17 10-11 Pad Area F.G. A1 124.2 9.3 115.7 93.2 90 18 10-11 Pad Area F.G. A1 124.2 10.7 113.9 91.7 90 119 10.11 Driveway F.G. A1 124.2 11.3 114.9 92.5 90 (FG.) Indicates Finish Grade. I 1 I 1 I EnGEN Corporation ~ I I 1 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 I Soil Type I 1 I I 1 I 1 I 1 Mr. Donald Lassig Project No: T1891-C Appendix Page 2 SUMMARY OF OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT I MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY RELATIONSHIP TEST RESULTS ASTM 01557-91 Optimum Soil Maximum Moisture Soil Description Dry Density Content Type (USCS Symbol) (PCF) (%) A1 Silty Sand, Brown (SM) 124.2 9.2 Depth (FT) 1.5 SUMMARY OF EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS Dry Density (PCF) 116.5 Moisture Condition Before Test (%) Expansion Index Moisture Condition After Test (%) 7.9 14.6 7 EnGEN Corporation <\ I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 I I I I Mr. Donald Lassig Project No: T1891-C Appendix Page 3 DRAWINGS EnGEN Corporation \0