HomeMy WebLinkAboutTract Map 9833-3 Lot 29 Limited Geotechnical Investigation (Nov.8,1999)
IT .H.E. Soils Co.
"hone: (909) 678-9669 FAX: (909) 678-9769
131705 Central Street, Suite A. Wildomar, CA 92595
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
E-mail: thesoilsco@aol.com
November 8,1999
RECEIVED
NOV 16 1999
. Mr. John McCusker
.29170 Via Norte
T emecula, California 92591
CITY Ur I Li,;i:\.,ULA
ENGINEERiNG DEPARTMENT
, SUBJECT: LIMITED GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
Proposed Single-Family Residence
Lot 29, Tract No 9833-3, APN 945-150-014
Calle de Velardo
Temecula, Riverside County, California
Work Order 148901.00
! Dear Mr. McCusker:
In accordance with your request, we have performed a limited geotechnical investigation for the
! proposed detached garage 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 "Grading & Erosion Control Plan", prepared by John T.
. Reinhart, RC.E. ofTemecula, California, was provided to us by the owner of the subject property.
The plan was used to locate our exploratory trenches and as a base map for our "Geotechnical Map",
Plate 1.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Prooosed Develooment
The subject site is proposed for the development of a single-family residence. It is our
understanding the proposed development will consist of a single-story residence with attached
garage, landscaping, driveway, and on-site sewage disposal system.
1.2 Site Descriotion
The subject site consists of an irregular shaped parcel of/and located on the east side of Calle
de Velardo, south-southwest of Pescado Drive in Temecula, southwest Riverside County,
California. The geographical relationships of the site and surrounding area are shown on our
Site Location Map, Figure 1. The site is bordered to the north and east by large parcel single-
family residential development and to the south and west by vacant large parcel residential
development.
T.H.E. Soils Company
W.o. NO. 148901.00
\
T .H.E. Soils Co.
Phulle: 19(J91678-9669 FA.\:: (909) 678-9769
.~ 17(J.i Ccntral Strcct, Suite A . Wildomar, C\ 92.;9.;
Burial ~;;6J~;C0:>::'/:"'~':'!:':~:::' ",
. //-...-./~~.~' ../...../<~
V\...V~/ ~ ~~.~
't: ..... . ~ ' If<?Z""' '^"~;:: ~{
../0 1'# Ollq' V""'o,Y'~ J
_j-/7 . ,." V ---- ~ ,",', K\'~~~~ ~
-'.., _'Temec..1a,' -----~ --= ~ /"~" ) ,if ( " ~
--"<.~ - ~.. _ "" r,'-= " -------/~"' i:Ac........ )~ . '-
\ r/:'.... ~:~:"fj ,,;,c;', ~ -'.--~ 111. ~ (\ ""--"C.:...b0~
,,/: "', ~ . ---- 'Oc";::=',.j. -~.\-:--,=,," ...... '<,----..:;;::::::-~
~ .~ .91 0 .,.--- - II ~ ~r:::::: "- '- -
I, \ .' """'''''''''''''~ At.?: \ ~.4___ =..r.t':::.:____a_.:::._~ ~.--.:: -=- --...., ~_~:<=~
'f'}-... '.:':- ',_" ( JfI ~ ''''''~'--.~'''Iii'%\ ~ ~'
,:" ,.r, V(;,t---' 0' '-~. _--'"' ,II' -,;'Cl- -1'"'~""
.' ,/ -<<'<7 V ;-),(~'c-~~K-. .~.:.., \:~< Qt\" --",,?!~
,. 'to7J*:- rp/ '~~'.:----::\ ...'}\\ >....,~ ~...':. -~
. .C~~~....r'L::::" _ -~ '.=:~, j-.....: \\.,.....,> -:J r .--;1,
~~~~~' _ ....1,\..._....---_. ___ \,"'........./_......~ :..t
ell ""'0___ -:-~- -............ (..--:> ~ \ ,',,,&-;?-,,r:=,,,\::::~
/' , ....;: - ""-..: -..., '-J -~ ~/-E......
, --.......:;;; ~ ~' ,'-"' -_...~-
~ ~\.~ ':, ----, ------- ----. .../:=:--
'J ~-_ - . _' \\' -:/~\ ",~","<
o ' [\~~ '~~~~~ -\j -~~.~.: ~~<~.~~
~ ~. h'~ ....:90 -', ;:::.:-rsROC':-:~~-"'"
-- '\>. / I'=-=::~.' ..,~."'.,..--: ;:'-;(;..:->.--~
~ '-""~:~~~.'_ c '- ~_ .-.... ,. "'.
." ) ':". ", ~"'""",. ". /, ':'
'~,_ ~ oWel1 I ~'t';~ ~N;'~ /~:_~:r :'~'-:'~
_. " ., I )~ "_ .':" '-. ~
.-/ V /\7//11:\ I .//"""~~~~:: ;:;" J> '""...,.
ADAPTED FROM A U.s.G.s. 7.5 MINUTE QUADRANGLE MAP-
PECHANGA. CA.. 1968 (PHOTO REVISED 1988)
~.
,O/F
,
.
1000
1000
3000
'000
SCALE; FT,
SITE LOCATION MAP
c,
WG.#
148901.00
Dare:
NOV 1999
Fir;ure:
1
z..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. John McCusker
November 8, 1999
Page 2
Topographically the subject site consists of a relatively flat, partially graded, house pad with
natural slopes on the east and south portions of the subject site. Natural gradients vary from
approximately 20% on the south to 40% on the east. Overall relief at the site is approximately
66-ft. Based on our review of the proposed grading plan, fill slopes will be constructed at a 2: 1
(horizontal:vertical) slope ratio to a vertical height of approximately IO-ft on the existing
natural slopes (see Plate 1). Vegetation on the subject site consists of a sparse growth of
annual weeds and grasses on the pad area and on the south portion of the subject site and a
moderate growth of chaparral on the existing natural slope on the east portion of the site.
2.0 SITE INVESTIGATION
2.1 Baekl!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
October 29, 1999. A total of 3 exploratory trenches were excavated utilizing a Bobcat
trackhoe equipped with a 2-ft wide bucket. Exploratory trench T -3 was advanced to the
maximum depth explored of6.0-ft below the ground surface (bgs).
Information 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 and obtained in-place and bulk soil samples for laboratory testing, supervised excavation
of the trenches. Copies of our exploratory trench logs are presented in Appendix B.
.2.3 Laboratory Testinl! Prol!l1llll
Representative bulk samples of soils encountered during our subsurface 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
perform in-place density tests at varying intervals within the exploratory trenches.
Laboratory testing was conducted in accordance with ASTM, Caltrans, and Uniform Building
Code (UBC, 1997) test specifications, where applicable. The results of our laboratory tests are
presented in Appendix C of this report.
T.H.E. Soils Company
W.O. NO. 148901.00
~
----------------~--
'"
[
"
"-
"
;;:
OJ t-
. D
~ -j
otJ::o
'- ..
'"
mO
, "11
(0
~
~
\
\~
",-"
\<-
\~
\"
\
\
I
I
\
"
~,
A'
-<"ll.< 0
....~. o.
~~~ .. ~.
g~~ 0" ..,
E!:l; 8 h--f\ ~
n "ll .\:::l
<"l:rlQ en "I Z
oTI . "\ ~
~.::::.... .\ e5
~~: '\ ~
C"lX,; '\J
Tg ,r
,0
'i
to
:<l
o
'"
"
~
z"
~::r:
~
0"
~t"l
''"'1
:;;>
~
r-<
~
~
"
.
,
z
~ ' 0
Qq: ~
I 0
HJ
';~~I:;...'>-)}
.(-.... .,'
< i'f.'t:; ·
-<~:<l ') 01.
}'(j'f~
!;.... ~ : ~
~:i! ~ ,~
~;o: :: I ~
: ~ ~ ~
~ ' -
..- I ~
OgOIl"t"
:a
z:<l
o
~1l
<5"
~t"l
~~
i" . ~
It '. . ,
,. r_ (J ttf
It!l/Ft}~c.~ . m'
~.,.'f:\I-x,,~'>-
. ... .\-':t. J "'A
1 \1~ 1... ~ 'S;J ),0-
~~.<-~'.y!~I?A
'.', i l,'i.{. "fX.1/
-;:\ \''JB~iI-/
'\!,o>'F-L1 ~t. II
,,~ I ~q; ,
\GJ~ I I \<'to /
~~ 17,;,/
II"
~
~~
~
~
~
~
IZ~
>
;!
~
;:
>
~
a
.
~
~
m
~
~
~
z
o
~
a
,
~,
d
..
~
~
IS
~
8
is
~
.
m 6
!€h
~~g~~
i~~~~
g~_t~~
~8l~i
~ ~.~
~ ~~~
>-
"j ~---
O' '-'
Z 0 ___
~ I _ 0
c_ "'"'
n5 ~~. r-'
!~ 'i~
~s: ~'o~
o !!: t::..-: CD s;
e: ~ g&: 8:'-
i=i ..... I....
~ C;" ~ 0
~ t! "'~ 'r F
-l c: '20> ~...,
/Ol c: n'"" _ ::0
!l! ~....",
m ~ '-'" 1'"'1
<
8 ~:
z
~
o ..
C'" a
~"
" >
~ F- ~
~
< -
~ u'
"
_ N
o
~
o
~
-'
o
-~
~
.
o
~
~
I
g
~
~
,
~
~
(fJ
"
>
r-<
t"l
i'
,
,
I
"?
o
C"l'>j
:>:J
:>> '"'I
t:Jt"l
.. z;:::
- C"l t"l
~ "
0::::: .R> C
- 0 r-<
:o-:<n ['":I> '"0
'tll' C:U t%j
zgl/) 0 ::0
~<or; ~ E:
""e'1"0'" _
O\~ C '" ~
.!. ~ ::v~z ~ 00
~~ 1: () ,o;t
I. .... 0 M r-<
~p:l:;z~ 0
""~ g ~!il to
ci; lb ~ ~ to
'f r-' in I
~ ~::n::
'00 ""
~" ""
Z "
Ul C"l
_ :<l
~
o 2
::0 1;-
I I~
l\) !
"
'"
5
'"
<;
Z
w
c
~ '- g.
~ ;c II!>
" il::;
, ~
.-
o rn
. ~
~
~
~ c
ri ~ ii
<>-;:;:(
c: n ::l
o 0
<>-:> eJ
~ '"
,
~.
.
, "
- ~
, .
g ~ ~
g::::llt
rn
~
s
i
.-
"
N
C.
. .
fl g
M .
~ ~
~ '" Co.
~ .
. .
C ..
;0 :!:o
~ 0
. oz
.. :<.;"'"
8"
;j,
"
o'
"
M
~ ~:
:: Cn
I~ :"
" ~ f '"
~ "I r
.~.~~:i~~~1j, 0
';I!I>~ ~
'il".:sJ~! ~
". ~"r_ ."
R
~
,
I
~
.,
I
.
~
. ;;
n z
M z
z :-I
, .
~
"
fi ~!
. '
~
.
~
~
"
,
"
7
S
z
...
>
------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. John McCusker
November 8, 1999
Page 3
3.0 GEOLOGY
3;1 GeoIOlric Settin!!
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-
trending structural grain that includes such geologic features as fiwlts, bedding and foliation
trends, and geologic contacts.
Lateral displacement and uplift of the region has occurred on a series of major northwest-
trending fiwlts 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
(W"t1domar Fault), approximately 1, 400-ft to the southwest; the Murrieta Creek Fault, located
approximately 2.5-miIes to the northwest; and the Murrieta Hot Springs Fault, located
approximately 4.7 -miles to the northeast.
Locally, the subject site is underlain by medium dense to dense sedimentary bedrock of the
Pauba Formation to the maximum depth explored of6.0-ft bgs (exploratory trench T-3).
4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDmONS
4;1 Pauba Fonnatioll
The sedimentary bedrock materials can generally be described as dark orange to yellow brown
silty sandstone. This unit can be described as medium dense to dense, fine to coarse grained,
trace of gravel, well graded, dry (upper 1 to 2-ft) to moist, and weakly cemented in part. Minor
colluvial soils (<6-inches) were observed within exploratory trench T-l.
4;2 Groundwater
Groundwater was not encountered to the maximum depth explored of 6.0-ft bgs within
exploratory trench T -3. During our previous on-site sewage disposal investigation, no
groundwater was encountered within our exploratory boring B-l, which was advanced to a
depth of50-ft bgs (T.HE. Soils Company, 1999).
4.4 Excavation Characteristies
The sedimentary bedrock materials are anticipated to be excavated with ease to moderate
difficulty utilizing conventional grading equipment in proper working condition.
T.H.E. Soils Company
W.O. NO. 148901.00
-5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. John McCusker
November 8, 1999
Page 4
4.5 F1oodinl!
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 Reeional 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
1,200-ft to the southwest. No evidence of faulting was observed during our subsurface
investigation and aerial photographic review of the subject site.
The site is located within Seismic Zone 4 as designated by the Uniform Building Code (UBC).
According to UBC Standard 23-1, Seismic Zone 4 can be related to an "effective" peak
acceleration of 0.40g, or a peak acceleration of O. 6Og. The site can be characterized as soil
profile SB with a site coefficient of 1.0 as per Table No.16-J of the 1997 Uniform Building
Code. The subject site is located within 5-kiIometers of the Elsinore Fault zone (Temecula
Fault), which is classified in the 1997 UBC Table 16-U as a Type B fault (leBO, 1998).
Should additional information relating to criteria for seismic design be needed, a site-specific
geoseismic analysis should be performed.
Due to the site being underlain by medium dense to dense sedimentary bedrock, the depth to
groundwater in excess of 50-ft bgs, 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 RECOMMENDA nONS
6.1 General Earthwork
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.
'[.H.E. Soils Company
w.o. ;':0. 148901.00
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. John McCusker
November 8, 1999
Page 5
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
be given at least 48 hours notice. Earthwork should be conducted in accordance with the
recommendations specified in this report.
6.2 Overexcavation and Preoaration ofExistin2 Ground
Due to the existence of the bedrock materials throughout the subject site, no alluvial removals
are anticipated. Due to the anticipated cut-to-fill transition created during the proposed
grading within the building pad, the cut portion of the proposed building pad will require
overexcavation of the near surface materials a minimum of3.0-ft below the design grade or 2-
feet below bottom offooting, whichever is deeper. The overexcavation should expose medium
dense to dense sedimentary bedrock materials that are free of voids and roots. Overexcavation
should extend a minimum distance of 5-ft beyond the building lines and should not extend into
the proposed on-site sewage disposal areas. Prior to placement of fill materials, the exposed
earth materials should be scarified, moisture conditioned, and recompacted to a minimum of
90-percent of the maximum dry density (as determined by ASTMD-1557).
A keyway should be established a minimum of I-ft into competent material along the toe of the
proposed approximately 10-ft high fill slope along the south and east boundaries of the subject
site. The keyway should be tilted a minimum of2 percent into the slope and properly benched
during placement offill.
6.3 Fill Placement
On-site 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.
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 ASTM 0 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 Slooe Stability & Construction
We anticipate that cut/fill slopes constructed at a 2: I (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. 148901.00
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. John McCusker
November 8, 1999
Page 6
6.5 Exoansion Index Testin!!:
An expansion index test was performed 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 2, which corresponds to a very low expansion potential. Expansion
testing should also be performed 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
Equivalent Fluid Pressure for 2: 1 Slope
Active:
Passive:
35 pcf
580 pcf
Coefficient of friction (concrete on soil):
35 pcf
314 pcf
Active:
Passive:
0.30
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 Hemin!!: Caoacitv
An allowable safe bearing capacity of 1,800 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 500 psffor each additional foot of width and 750
psf for each additional foot of depth to a maximum of 2,800 psf The bearing value may be
increased by one-third for seismic or other temporary loads.
Total diiferential settlements under static loads of footings supported on properly compacted
fill and/or in-place bedrock materials and sized for the allowable bearing pressures 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 Desi!!:n
Foundation elements should be placed on engineered fill material compacted to a minimum of
90-percent of the maximum dry density. Continuous spread footings should be a minimum of
T.H.E. Soils COmpWlY
w.o. NO. 1..8901.00
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. John McCusker
November 8,1999
Page 7
12-inches wide and 12-inches below the lowest adjacent grade for single-story structures and a
minimum of 12-inches wide and 18-inches below the lowest adjaeent grade for two-story
structures. As a minimwn, all footings should have one NO.4 reinforcing bar placed at the top
and bottom of the footing.
Concrete slabs should be underlain with a vapor barrier consisting of a minimum of six mil
polyvinyl chloride membrane with all laps sealed. Due to the low expansion potential, a 2-
inch layer of clean sand should be placed above the moisture barrier. The 2-inches of
clean sand is recommended to protect the visqueen moisture barrier and aid in the curing
of the concrete.
The structural engineer should design footings in accordance with the anticipated loads, the soil
parameters given, and the existing soil conditions.
6.9 DrivewavPavinl! Recommendations
Based on an assumed R- Value of 40, we recommend the following structural sections for the
proposed driveway for either Portland cement or asphalt concrete.
The recommended pavement sections are:
TYPE
PAVEMENT SECTION
Asphalt Pavement
0.33' AC over native on-site materials
Portland Cement
6.0" PCC over native on-site materials
with 6x6-1 0/1 0 wire or fiber mesh
placed at mid-height
It is recommended that the subgrade materials be compacted to 95% relative compaction to the
maximum density of the respective materials, as determined by ASTM 1557-91 laboratory
tests. to a depth of 1 foot below subgrade elevation.
6.10 Utility Trench Backfill
Utility trench backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry
density determined in laboratory testing by the ASTM 0 1557 test method. It is our opinion
that utility trench backfill consisting of on-site or approved sandy soils can best be placed by
mechanical compaction to a minimum of 90 pereent of the maximum dry density. All trench
excavations should be conducted in accordance with CaI-OSHA standards as a minimum.
T.H.E. Soils Company
w.o. ~O. 148901.00
C\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. John McCusker
November 8, 1999
Page 8
6.11 Surface Draina2e
Surface drainage should be directed away from foundations of buildings or appurtenant
structures. All drainage should be directed toward streets or approved permanent drainage
devices. Where landscaping and planters are proposed adjacent to foundations, subsurface
drains should be provided to prevent ponding or saturation of foundations by landscape
irrigation water.
6.12 Sulfate Content
Based on sulfate testing performed 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. Sulfate 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. The test results will be
forwarded when received.
6.13 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:
. During grading.
. During excavation offootings for foundations.
. During utility trench backfill operations.
. When any unusual conditions are encountered during grading.
Our investigation was performed 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 natural 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. 148901.00
\0
II
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. John McCusker
November 8, 1999
Page 9
1\ccordingly, 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,.,~\"o=",-,...
/~~~".
Very truly yours, r:-.f!oY~ \. FlE/I\j;;':;',/ "0,
i" 0'/ ~'- 7 '\~: "
{,,""FO i . .1
'Q:: ""S "'J... ~)
T~H.E. Soils Company i No. ACE 23464 \
G I &
'* .~
\<.fIr 1i>'''t
"'9 ~ OF CAl.1fit.
hn . Reinhart, RCE 23464
Registration Expires 12/31/01
4-/L ~~
;r~i Harrison
Project Manager
ACCOMPANYING MAPS. ILLUSTRATIONS. AND APPENDICES
Figure I - Site Location Map (2,000-scale)
Plate 1 - Limited Geotechnical Map (30-scale)
APPENDIX A - References
APPENDIX B - Exploratory Trench Logs
APPENDIX C - Laboratory Test Results
APPENDIX 0 - Standards of Grading
T.H.E. Soils Company
w.o. ::\'0. 148901.00
\\
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX A
Referenees
T.H.E. Soils Company
W.O. NO. 148901.00
\1--
I
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 96-706;
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. 060245-2740 B,
Scale: 1 "= 1,000';
Group Delta Consultants, Inc., October 16, 1991, "Preliminary Groundwater Resource Study,
Murrieta Basin, Murrieta, California", Project No. 1392-GE01;
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. I, pages 302-306;
Jemtings, 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;
Ploessel, M.R., Slosson, J.E., September, 1974, Repeatable High Ground Accelerations from
Earthquakes, California Geology;
Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Expansive Soils, Volume I, "Foundations on
Hydro-collapsible Soils, Pages 256-261;
T.H.E. Soils Company
w.o. NO. 148901.00
'{!;
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
REFERENCES (continued)
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".
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS UTILIZED
YEAR/SCALE FLIGHT #!FRAME # AGENCY
1962/1 "=2,000' Co. Flight/3 -406 Riv Co Flood Control
1983/1 "=1,600' Co. Flight/200,201 Riv Co Flood Control
T.H.E. Soils Company
w.o. ;\'0. 148901.00
\bt..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX B
Exploratory Trench Logs
T.H.E. Soils Company
/"
\-::>
W.O. 1\'0. 1...8901.00
B NO.1 4B901.00
I
METHOD OF EXCAVATION:BDBCAT TRACKHDE WI24 . BUCKET
DATE OBSERVED:10/29/99
ELEVATION:
LOCATION: SEE GEOTECHNtcAL
MAP
0 "l wi.< ,ii:
w ~o
Ww ~ ~i= O~
~~ ,
~~ < ~% ~~
~w
~~ 0 .~ ~"
~ 0%
,0 ~Z
Z ~ ZW
~ ~ 0 -0
TEST PIT NO. 1
DESCRIPTION
SOIL TEST
V COLLUVIUM MAXIMUM OENSlTYIOI'TlMUM MOISTURE
I SilTY SAND (8M) : DARK BROWN, ANE TO COARSE GRAINED. SOFT, LOOSE, WEll GRADED (MAX). DIRECT SHEAR, SIEVE ANAlYSIS,
I """\ NUMEROUS ROOTS (SA). EXPANSION INDEX. SULFATE
^ 10.5 95.0 BEDROCK PAUBA FORMATION CONTENT
\
Sll TV SANDSTONE: DARK RED TO ORANGE BROWN, ANE TO COARSE GRAINED, TRACE
GRAVEL. ClAYEY IN UPPER 2', DRY
--------- - --------.-----..
SILTY SANDSTONE: DARK ORANGE BROWN. ANE TO COARSE GRAINED, MOIST, LESS
ClAYEY MAlRlX, MODERATElY GRADED. DENSE
TOTAL DEPTH = 5.0'
NO GROUNDWATER
NO CAVING
LOG OF TEST PIT
FIGURE:T-l
'W
OGGED BY: JPF
METHOD OF EXCAVATlON:BOBCAT TRACKHOE WI24 . BUCKET
DATE OBSERVED:10129199
ELEVATION:
LOCATION: SEE GEOTECHNICAL
MAP
,'"
~o
O~
~E
50;
~z
Zw
-0
w
"
i ~
~
m
"
o
o
~
.
g
.
w.
~;=
~z
"w
~"
oz
~o
o
TEST PIT NO.
DESCRIPTION
2
SOIL TEST
BEDROCK PAUBA FORMATION
10.6 1 05.0 SILTY SANDSTONE: DARK YELLOWISH BROWN, ANE TO COARSE GRAINED WITH MINOR
GRAVEl, WEll SORTED. DENSE, MOIST WITH SUBROUNDED COBBLES UP TO 3-
IN DIAMETER
TOTAL DEPTH - 5.2'
NO GROUNDWATER
NO CAVING
LOG OF TEST PIT
FIGURE:T-2
JOB NO.14B901.00
(\
I
I OGGED BY: JPF METHOD OF EXCAVATlON:BOBCAT TRACKHOE WI24. BUCKET DATE OBSERVED:10129199
ELEVATION: LOCATION: SEE GEOTECHNICAL
h MAP
z >G:
0 ~ ~ wti
~ 0 ~ ~~
< 0 ~ ~ ~~ TEST PIT NO. 3
0 ~ ~ < ~E
r " ~ w !!d!! SOIL TEST
~ ~ ~ ~ oz 5~ DESCRIPTION
I ~ 5 ~o ~z
~ zw
w = 0 -0
0
'v BEDROCK PAUBA FORMATION
-
I I SilTY SANDSTONE: MEDIUM BROWN, FINE TO COARSE GRAINED, GRAVELLY IN PART WITH
I MINOR COBBLES UP TO 4~ IN DIAMETER, WEll. GRADED. NON-COHES1VE, MOIST
I
r ,^
TOTAL DEPTH - 6.0'
I NO GROUNDWATER
10
I
(
I I-
~
F
~
I l-
I-
l-
I ~
l-
I-
I l-
I-
~
I I-
~
~
I l-
I-
l-
f
,.
I fOB NO.148001.00 LOG OF TEST PIT FIGURE:T -3
I
\~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX C
Laboratory Test Results
TH.E. Soils Company
w.o. XO. 148901.00
\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 performed on a representative sample of the on-site soils
remolded and tested under a surcharge of l44Ib/fe, in accordance with Uniform Building
Code Standard No. 29-2. The test result is presented on Figure C-l, Table I.
C. Maximum Densitv/Ootimum Moisture Content
Maximum density/optimum moisture content relationships were determined for typical
samples of the on-site soils. The laboratory standard used was ASTM 1557-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 Detennination
Particle size determination, consisting of mechanical analyses (sieve), were performed on
representative samples of the on-site soils in accordance with ASTM 0 422-63. The test
results are shown on Figures C-4 & C-5.
E. Direct Shear
A direct shear strength test was performed 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 performed 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-l, Table m.
T.H.E. Soils Company
1--()
W.o. NO. 148901.00
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-l @0-4ft 2 Very Low
TABLE II
MAXIMUM DENSITY/OPTIMUM MOISTURE RELATIONSHIP
ASTM D 1557
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY OPTIMUM MOISTURE
TEST LOCATION (pet) (%)
T-l@0-4ft 127.8 9.6
T-2 @ 5-7 ft 122.0 10.4
TABLE ill
SULFATE CONTENT
TEST LOCATION SULFATE CONTENT
T-2 @ 5-7' 50 (ppm)
Figure C-1
T.n.E. Soils Company
W.o. [\'0. 148901.00
'2-\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Water content~ %
Test specification: ASTM D 1557-91 Method R~ Modified
Oversize correction applied to final results
Elev/ Classification Nat.
Sp.G.
Depth uses AASHTO Mo i st.
~
()
"- 130
.
:n
...
~
c
"
"tl
:n 125
L
a
.0~4
MAXIMUM DENSITY/OPTIMUM MOISTURE
140
.......
.....
"-
"" "-
.....
....
....
.. 'lIIl: ..
t... ..- ..... ....
~ ... ..... .....
.... I"-
.....
.....
r....
r-..
ZAV for
Sp. G. =
2.56
135
120
115
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
LL
% >
No.4
% <
No.200
PI
SM
9.68 % 2.56
TEST RESULTS
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Maximum dr~ density = 127.8 pcf
Optimum moisture = 9.6 %
SILTY SAND (SM)
DARK BROWN
...
Remarks:
Project No.: 148901.00
Project: McCusker
Location: T-1
Date: 11~01-1999
MAXIMUM DENSITY/OPTIMUM MOISTURE
Fig. No.
C-2
'J}/
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
<+-
,u
,a. 125
,
:n
...
..
c
"
."
;;)") 120
~
'"
MAXIMUM DENSITY/OPTIMUM
MOISTURE
135
\.
,
\.
\
I\..
I\-
,
"
I\..
~ \.
.,.
.
"'
"
I"\"
"
I"
1'\
"
I'
130
115
ZAV for
Sp. G. 0
2.65
110
5
10
7.5
12.5
15
17.5 20
Water content, %
Test specification: ASTM D 1557-91 Method A, Modified
Oversize correction applied to final results
Elev/
Depth
0-5 FT
Classification
USCS RASH TO
Nat.
Moist.
PI
~ > ~ <
No.4 No.Z00
Sp.G.
LL
0.00 % 2.65
TEST RESULTS
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Maximum dr~ densit~ = 122.0 pcf
Optimum moisture = 10.4 %
LIGHT BROWN SANDY
SOIL
Project No.: 148901.00
Project: MCCUSKER
Remarks:
Location: T-3
Date: 11-05-1999
MAXIMUM DENSITY/OPTIMUM MOISTURE
~, :-
~i9' No.
C-3
7/J
OO'1069v l lrr
- - -
66:",m-ll 0100 Ml : '8
p-o
~ 38rtnN
1181HX3
)ft
NIV'Cl8
NOI.Lnsn:LLSIG 321S
.lH~13M An
N \,>I J>
000
I
(J)
/TI
<
/TI
(J)
N
/TI
(J)
I
c
(J)
(J)
-I
1>
Z
o
1>
::0
o
_._!-L-::
=J=
l:t:
-
-
..
-
'r-
.~r
.'I-'-lt"
.- - -.._-
.., "j-1- -
N
o
b
o
b
-c -
1> <=>
::0
-I
n
r
/TI
o
:l>
~
/TI
-I
fTl
::0
o
~ "-
r
r
~
/TI
-l
/TI
::0
(J)
o
8
t
G"l
:Xl
:I>
<
fTl
r
n
u>0
l>:I>
Z:Xl
OU>
fTl
n
r
:I>
-<
;
U>""T1
:1>-
ZZ
ofTl
u>
r
-I
Z
o
01-1
I I
J> ~
."
:-i
-u r
. .
- r
l> C
~ ~
Ul ."
iiii
90
n n
rr
l> l>
u>Ul
u>Ul
(f)
~
o
f"'1
-u
-i
:t
7~ 9-8 00' ~069v I
'NT
-
113BrmN 66:"1:0-l ~ 0100. Ml. : A.8 I
1181HX3
NOI.LnSI t:ll.SIG 3ZIS NI'ittl9
.,
- -
.lH~13M A8 Cl3NI.:l .lN3:) Cl3d I
0 N ~ .t> ~ ~ ..., ~
0 0
0
1'1
"U I
--i t
I -
-
-
-
-
- I
-
Cl
::u
z. :P
0 < I
1'1
r .
0 -I I
., ,
c.>
--
(") I
"TJ VlO VI
\l
:-i :I>:P :l> m
z::u ::tI < I
OVl -I m
1'1
C"'l VI
r . - I
"U r m ;; N
-- i fTI
:-r 0 VI
:l> I
~ I
m c:
Vl"Tl -I
:1>- 1"'1 - VI
zz ::tI - I
01'1 - VI
I - -I
0 -
~ :.. :l>
Z
r 0 I
r :l>
~ ::tI
-- 0
m
-I I
m
::tI
J> C VI
. Z
:P _ I
Vl "TJ Vl -
-
I 1'1 r -
-
90 -I -
-
-
(") (") -
b - I
r r
:P :P -
VlVl
(J)Vl
en -- I
-0
() I
r
:P
-<
; n -=t-- I
u ... u
C ' ,
I
I
J'.O,
I
I
I
'5~..
I
I
zeeit
I
.. I
.. 15J
L
%
~
..
;Z ,
'" !
" I
I,
.. I
" I
c
..
X I
..
lIiUUJ
I
I
I
I
~..
I
I
..
..
5..
I'"
II..
20..
Z.88
'181
~R"~L ITR&II (~~F)
I
11IIf'llor.fIQnl 14a'iHTl Depth Clt}1 e..
1....,..111
. 'rl..,."
R..ul~.;
CDh..'O" (De") : "'11
''''0''01''1 Anl.e: 2f
cQn..~o" c..,) . JAZ
~rlct 10"" Anllle. 21
I
r.., t1.tt'lDch
R..UI~.a to 'er. of 121.8 ~.I . '.8.
. fir.. I dlola'
11:....,.1. X"""l"ftt.ted Prior To T..tlnll
I
I
Oeolo I I.. !lI'\e.
DIRECT SHEAR
TEST RESULTS
THE sOILI CO"~ANY
NOv....O..- I ,~.
W. O. Z.".-Sl;
I
C-6
I
"
I
1Jp
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX D
Standards of Grading
T.H.E. Soils Company
W.o. NO. 148901.00
1,- '\.
I
STANDARD GRADING AND EARTHWORK SPEClFlCA TIONS
I These specifications presan T.R.E. Soils Company. stanclan! """"""",dati..,. (or Ill"dUtgmd earthwork.
No deviation from these specifications should be pennitted unla;s specifically superseded in the gettedmical report of the project or by written corml1\Ulica1ion signed by the
I Soils Consu1tant. Evalualions perfonned by the Soils Consultant during !he course of grading may re>ull in subsequent reconunendations whidJ could sup~ these
specifications or the recortUlU21dations of the gealedmical report.
1.0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
GENERAL
1.1 The Soils Consultant is the Owner's or DevelCJfH%'s representative 00 the projea.. For the pwpose of these specifications. observations by the Soils
Consultant include obsa'vations by the Soils Fnginea-. Soils Engineer. Engineering Geologist. and othen employed by and responsible to the Soils
Consultant.
1.2 All clearing. site pl'q)aration, or earthwork pmonned on the projea shall be conducted and direded by the Contractor under the aUowanc:e or
lupenislon of the Soils Consultant.
1.3 The Contnla.or should be responsible for the safely of the projea and sal.isfaaory complwon of all grading. During grading. the Contrad.or shall
remain accessible.
1.4 Prior to the commeocernent of grading,. the Soils Consultant shall be employed for the purpose of proYiding field. laboratory. and office services for
confonnance with the recommendations of the geoledmical report and these specifications. It will be necessary that the Soils Consultant provide
adequate testing and observations so that he may provide an opinion as to daennine that the work was aa::omplished as specified. It shall be the
responsibility of the Cmtractor to assist the Soils ConsuhmL and ~ him apprised of work sc:b.edules and dtangal so that be may schedule his
pe:soonelaooonlingly.
1.3 It ~all be the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the work in accordomce with
applicable grading codes. agency ordinances. these specifications, and the approved grading plans. It: in the opiniOn of the Soils Consuhant..
unsatisfactory conditions. such as questionable soiL poor moisture condition. inadequate compaction., adverse weather. de.. are resuhing in a quality
of work less than required in these specificatiClllS. the Soils Consultant. will be empowered to rejea the work. and recommend that consuua.ion be
stopped until the CUlditiOOS are f'eli1ified.
1.6 It is the Contractor's responsibility to provide safe access to the Soils Consullant fortest.ing and/or grading observation purposes. This may require
the e.xcavation oftest pits and/or the relocation of grading equipment.
1.7 A finalrrport shall be issued. by the Soils COllsnttMtt a:a.esting to the Coaltactor's conformance with these specifications.
2.0
SITE PREP AHA TlON
2.1
All vegdation and de1tterious material shall be disposed of off-sitc. This removal shall be observed by the Soils Consultant and concluded prior to
fill placement.
2.2
Soil. alluvium.. or bedrock materials deUnnined by the Soils Consuhant as being unsuitable for placemmt in compad.ed fills shall be removed from
the site or used in opal areas as dctc:rmined by the Soils ClXISUhant. Any material inoorporated as a pan of a compad.ed fill must: be approved by
the Soils Consuhant prior to fill plac:analt
2.3
A..tlerthe ground surface to receive fill has been cleared. it shall be scarified. disced and'or bladed by the Contractor until it is uniform and free from
ruts. hollows, hummocks, or other uneven features which may prevent uniform compaction.
The soarified ground swface shall then be brought to optimum moisture. mixed as required and compacted as specified. If the scarified zone is
greater than twelve inches in depth. the excess shall be removed and placed in lifts nOl to exceed six inches or less.
Prior to placing fill. the ground surface to receive fill shall be observed. tested. and approved by the Soils Consuhant.
2.4
.~y underground stru~ures or cavities such as ospools. cisterns. mining shafts, tunnels, septic tanks, wells. pipe lines. or others are to be removed
or treated in a manner presaibed by the Soils Consultant.
2.5
In cut-fill transition lots and where cut lots are partially in soil oollu"ium or unweathered bedrock materials., in order to provide Wliform bearing
oonditions. the bedrock portion of the lot e.\1ending a minimum ofS f~ oUlSide of building lines shall be overexcavated a minimum or 3 f...-a and
replaced with compacted fill. Greater overex.cavation could be required as ddennined by Soils Consultant. Typical ddails are anadled.
3.0 COMPACfED FILLS
J.l
Material to be placed as fill shall be free of organic matter and other delderious substances. and shall be approved by the Soils Consuhant. Soils of
poor gradation. expansion. or strength dlaraaeristics shall be placed in areas designated by Soils Consuhant or shall be mixed with 04.h<.lt' !'ioils to
serve as satisfaaory till material. as directed by the Soils Consuhant.
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ROCK OISPOSAL DETAIL
FINISH GRADE
--- - .
--- ------ -------:-~-:----==:j:::::=:::~~O-M-P~~~E~-~=:j:~
-----------------: 10' MIN. ::...-___-_-___ __:...__-_~
_-=-=~==~~!~~tF~~~~[ii~~~}~~~~~
--------~---~-------~---------~
--. ==~~~:::~~~===:~~~~-:-=;:~~~:~:==-:.:~~f-:
--~---------il--3::;- -D-------U
--=....._----~---- ---- --, --------- --=--=----
.10' MIN --7'"----- -- -~ r::-------- ---
-- ~-------------------- -------~-----
--- --. . -....------------ 4' MIN - -- -- -
--------~------------- . --t--15' MIN ,------:-
------r~------------- -~__ .~___
------LrfU- ------------------~-------~--
:=:=: ~~:==:::::-~ ~- ~:==:=::==_~~-:.r-,-~=====:::::::::~:=~"7----
:..---------------:;..~---- ---- -..... -----------------~~-::E-----------:. --
.-------~-------~------------ -----
------~---------------------- --
----~----------------------
-:..--:s.-- ----- ---------: -O-VE-R-S-IZ-E-:---- ---- - ---
~ --------- .
WINDROWl
SLOPE
FACE
GRANULAR SOIL'
. To FiiT voids,
densified by
flooding
PROF1LE ALONG WINDROW
--- --
------ ---
-- -------
/.~
, ,,\\,y/^-"
7Y\