HomeMy WebLinkAboutTract Map 9833-2 Lot 13 Preliminary Soils
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-- -
1:
-
L.\7 qE,- OZS-5,"
~ . --
PRELIMINARY SOIL INVESTIGATION
for
Lot 13; Tract 9833-2
Manzano Drive, Temecula
March 30, 1998
Prepared for:
Dr. Brian A. Byrne
27403 Ynez Road, suite 108
Temecula, California 92591
(909) 699-2229
Prepared by:
Gunvant Thakkar, P. E.
45712 Classic Way
Temecula, California 92592
(909) 676-7541
r
-.......-.-.--.-...-
-, .-,--_.,-,
j; 7"'J1"t; .,r- '.P"-'~""- ~
""l 1- i ;.{,- '.:} ;~:;.
."' --\. .'. ..'''-'. .~.;'-"
," Ir:<: }:,~~J:_,f;,.
",- -,'..j"'~ .~.
_ ftP+
'L.,)4J ..... .
\
4ft! /~B
, I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
GUNVANT
THAKKAR,
PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEER
45712 Classic Way, Temecula, California 92592 (909)676-7541
March 30, 1998
Dr. Brian A, Byrne
27403 Ynez Road, suite 108
Temecula, California 92591
(909) 699-2229
Subject:
Preliminary Soil Investigation
Lot 13; Tract 9833-2
~nzano Drive, Temecula
Dear Dr. Byrne:
In ,accordance with your request and authorization, this
report presents the results of our soils investigation of
the subject Iproperty located on Manzano Drive, Temecula,
California ~see site Location Map Figure 1). The purpose of
the study was to evaluate the existing soil condition on the
subject 'property relative to the proposed development.
1. site DescriDtion
The property is located on Manzano Drive, Temecula,
Riverside County, California, and consists of
approx~mately 2 1/2 acres, and is mostly accessible.
The property is covered with green pastures and
vegetation. '- "'.
2. ProDOsed develoDment
It is our understanding that the property is proposed
to 'have a single residence with attached garage. The
site is relatively flat. The highest point on the
property is the southeast portion and inclines to
approxi,mately a 6 percent grade. Therefore, only a
relatively moderate amount of grading will be required
to create a pad. The grading plan has been prepared by
Gunvant Thakkar, P.E., Temecula, California. It is our
underst;anding that one or two story buildings utilizing
wood frame and/or masonry block construction, with
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.
4.
5.
slabs-an-grades and continuous footings are proposed.
Building loads are assumed to be typical for
reside~tial structures. It is also our understanding
that sewage disposal will be accommodated by a
subsurface sewage disposal system.
Field Studies
The field studies conducted during our evaluation of
the prqperty consisted of the following:
a. review of available geotechnical data in our files
pertaining to the site.
b. field reconnaissance by a soils engineer.
c. laboratory testing of selected representative soil
s~mples.
d. p~eparation of this report presenting our
f~ndings, conclusions, and recommendations.
Subsurface Investiaation Laboratory Testing
A total of two exploratory borings were excavated in
order to determine the conditions of the near-surface
natural material. The boring was logged, in-place
moisture and density of the exposed materials were
recorded, and representative bulk and relatively
und~sturbed samples were collected for laboratory
testing.
Laboratrorv Testina
a. Soil Classification
Soils were classified visually according to the
unified soils classification system. The soils
classifications are shown on the boring logs
(~ppendix A).
..~ ~
b. Soils Density
The field moisture content and dry unit weights
were determined for each undisturbed sample of the
soils encountered in the borings. The dry unit
Weight was determined in pound per cubic foot and
the field moisture content was determined as a
percentage of the dry unit weight. The results of
~is test are shown on the boring logs (Appendix
A).
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
7.
8.
9.
6.
General site Gradina
All gr~ding shall be performed in accordance with the
General Earthwork and Grading Specifications (Enclosure
C), and the specifications of the local agencies should
be impl;emented into the design of the proposed site.
Prior to grading, deleterious trash and vegetation
should lbe removed and hauled off-site. All areas
prepared and approved to receive fill should be
scarified, moisture conditioned, and compacted to a
minimum of 90 percent relative compaction prior to fill
placement.
Ground ,Water
,
No :groqndwater or evidence of seepage was encountered
within ,the exploratory boring at the time and location
of [exploration. However, other conditions may be there
that would effect the entire proposed project and final
plans and specifications.
Consolidation / CollaDse Potential
ConsidEi1ring the on-site low in-place densities, the
susceptibility for consolidation / collapse under the
proposed load is anticipated within the upper three
feet throughout the site.
Conblu~ion and Recommendation
a. ~neral
1. 'Based on our field exploration, laboratory
testing, and our soil engineering analysis,
it is our opinion that the project site is
suited for the proposed development from a
soils engineering viewpoint. The
recommendation presented below should be
incorporated in the design, grading, and
construction considerations.
2. Soils engineering and compaction services
should be provided during grading to aid the
contractor in removing unsuitable soils and
in his effort to compact the fill.
3. Ground water is not expected to be a, factor
in the development of the site. However,
caving and sloughing may be anticipated to be
a factor in all subsurface excavation and
trenching.
t\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4. At the time of preparation of this report,
the proposed finished pad grades, location of
any structures, type of structures and
loadings were all of a preliminary planning
nature.
b.
5. General earthwork and grading quidelines are
provided at the end of this report as
Appendix C.
Demolition/Grubbing
1. Existing shrubs, and any miscellaneous
construction materials and debris should be
removed from the site.
2. Any previous foundation, cesspools, septic
tanks, leach fields, or other subsurface
structures, uncovered during the recommended
removal should be observed by the soils
engineer so that appropriate remedial
recommendations can be provided.
3. Cavities or loose soils (including all
trenches) remaining after demolition and site
clearance should be cleaned out, inspected by
the soils engineer, processed and replaced
with a fill that has been moisture
conditioned to at least optimum moisture
content and compacted to at least 90 t of the
laboratory standards.
c.
Fill placement
1. Fill material should be brought to at least
optimum moisture, placed in thin 6 to 8 inch
lifts, and mechanically compacted to obtain
minimum relative compaction of 90 percent of
the laboratory standard.
2. Fill material should be cleansed of major
'vegetation and debris prior to placement.
3. Any oversized rock material greater than 10
inches in diameter should be placed under the
recommendations and supervision of this soils
engineer.
d.
General Foundation criteria
The proposed structure may be supported on
conventional spread, or continuous wall footings,
Provided that they are at least 12 inches wide,
and 12 inches below the final approved grade with
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
one I 4 rebar at the top and bottom or as designed
by the structural engineer.
F9Qtings may be designed for a maximum bearing
pressure of 1400 psf. A friction coefficient for
concrete on naturai and compacted soils of 0.36
may be employed. The effects of seismic shaking
can be mitigated through consideration of the
parameters presented above and by design in
accordance with the latest Uniform Building Code
and the Structural Engineers Association.
The allowable bearing pressure may be increased by
one-third when considering loadings of short
duration such as wind or seismic forces. This
foundation criteria is considered minimum and may
be superseded by more restrictive requirements of
the structural engineers, architects, or governing
agency.
e. Concrete Slabs on Grade
Sufficient fine grained materials exist within
near surface earth materials to possibly create
moisture problems. Therefore, we recommend that a
moisture barrier be placed under any concrete
slabs that might receive a moisture-sensitive
floor covering. This moisture barrier should
'. c~msist of a 10-mil polyethylene vapor barrier
sc;lndwiched between a one inch layer of sand, top
and bottom, to prevent puncture of the barrier and
e~ce curing of the concrete. Nominal
reinforc~nt of the slabs with light six inch by
six inch, 10"gauge/10 gauge welded wire fabric is
advisable. Slabs should be designed for any
special loads, such as construction crane loads,
if warranted. Large slabs should have crack
control joints on 10 foot centers and small slabs
s~ould have them on five foot centers.
f. E~ansive Soils
Bc;lsed on visual observations, lab testing, and
field classifications, there does not appear to be
any soils within the upper six feet of the surface
which appear highly expansive; however, if fill
materials are imported to the site, it is
recommended that expansion testing be performed
upon the completion of grading to evaluate any
expansion potentials.
'"
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
g.
h.
i.
j.
Earthwork Shrinkage and Subsidence
When the existing ,less dense materials is regraded
to compacted fill standards, ,earthwork shrinkage
should be estimated to range between 9 and 17
percent (based on an average of 92 percent
relative compaction), for a total 4 foot over-
e:J!:cavation below existing grade. This variation is
due to the large difference in in-place densities
oQtained during our soil sampling. It should be
nQted that these estimates are exclusive of any
lQsses due to any possible buried substructures
(i.e. septic tanks, pipes, etc.) or localized fill
PQckets. Earthwork operations should cause only a
nominal subsidence of approximately 0.1 foot or
less.
I.l;lteral Loads
Lateral loads in the near surface soils are:
I Active
35 pounds per square foot per
foot of soil depth (psf/ft)
64 psf/ft
250psf/ft - wood shoring
350psf/ft - concrete footings
Active means movement of the structure away from
the soil. At rest, means the structure does not
move relative to the soil (such as a loading dock
or building wall). Passive means the structure
moves into the soil. The coefficient of friction
bc;!tween the bottom of the footings and the native
soil may be taken as 0.35.
1 At Rest
i Passive
~ench stability
The near surface soil is a depth of 6 feet may not
stand vertically for'.more than several hours when
excavated as tension cracks or joints may be
locally found in the soils associated with past
seismic activity from nearby major faults.
~enches in excess of 5 feet in depth should have
the sides laid back at 1:1 or shored in accordance
w~th OSHA requirements.
General site Grading
1 . General
All grading should be performed in accordance
with the standard grading and earthwork
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4.
'\
5.
2.
specifications outlined in Appendix C, or
unless otherwise modified in the text of this
report .
Clearing and Grubbing
The site should be clear of any vegetation
and hauled off site. Any and all of the
debris, and all the deleterious and oversized
material should be carefully removed and also
hauled off site. The soil should be over-
excavated as described below.
3.
site Preparation
The site will require removal of loose
natural soils and fill materials (if found),
based on field observation and laboratory
testing.
On all buildings that may have columns
extending into the native materials, no
preparations of soil is necessary when in
place densities indicate 85 percent relative
compaction beneath the footings providing all
foundations are in natural soils.
Placement of Compacted Fill
Compacted fill is defined as that material
which will be added to the site and/or
replaced in the areas of removal, due to
relatively low density soils. All fill should
be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent based
upon maximum density obtained in accordance
with ASTM D1557-78 procedure. The area to be
filled will be prepared in accordance with
preceding section 3.
Review of Grading Plan and Specifications
We recommend that the soils engineer have the
opportunity to review the final grading plan
and the specifications to ensure that they
include the item of the soil report for the
benefit of the owner and the contractor, in
particular, to verify the over-excavation
depth and elevation, if proposed grade
elevations are different from that of
existing ground surface present at the time
of our field investigations.
B
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
9.
6.
Pre-Job Conference
Prior to the ~ommencement of grading, a pre-
job conference should be held with the
representative of the owner, developer,
contractor, architect, and/or engineer, and
soil engineer, in attendance. The purpose of
this meeting will be to clarify any questions
relating to the intent of the grading
recommendations and to verify that the
project specifications comply with the
recommendations of this report.
7.
Testing and Inspection
During grading, density testing should be
performed by a representative of the soils
engineer in order to determine the degree of
compaction being obtained. Where testing
indicates insufficient density, additional
compactive efforts shall be applied with the
adjustment of moisture content, where
necessary, until at least 90 percent relative
compaction is obtained. The subgrade of the
over-excavations and the footing excavations
should be inspected and improved by us prior
to placement of fill and/or concrete. The
maximum dry density shall be determined in
accordance with ASTM D1557-78 procedure.
8.
Summary
All grading should, at a m1n1mum, follow the
"Standard Grading and Earthwork
Specifications" as outlined in Appendix C,
unless otherwise modified in the text of this
report. The recommendations of this report
are basad on the assumptions that all
footings will be founded in properly
compacted fill soil or natural dense soil as
approved by the soils engineer. All footing
excavations should be inspected prior to the
placement of concrete in order to verify that
footings are founded on satisfactory soil and
are free of loose and disturbed materials.
All gradings and fill placement should be
performed under the testing and inspection of
a representative of the soils engineer.
Investigation Limits
The materials encountered on the project site
and utilized in the laboratory are believed
'\
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
representative of the total area; however,
soils materials may vary in characteristics
between test excavations. Since our
investigation is based upon the site
materials observed, selective laboratory
testing, and engineering analysis, the
conclusions and recommendations are
professional opinions. It is possible that
variations in soil conditions could exist
beyond the points explored in this
investigation. Also, changes in the ground
water condition could occur sometime in the
near future due to variations in temperature,
regional rainfall, and other factors. Should
conditions be encountered during grading that
appear to be different than those indicated
by this report, the soils engineer should be
notified. These opinions have been derived in
accordance with current standards of practice
and no warranties are expressed or implied.
We sincerely appreciate this opportunity to be of
service. If 1 you have any questions concerning this report,
please contact us at 909/676-7541.
Very truly yours,
.' ~--*, /7---c-L-
Gunv,ant Thakkar, P. E.
RClt 52856 : - c ',: " _
Exp ~)..2/3lJ98
"
", \'....1.
,
\0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Enclosures: rigure 1: Site location map
:plate 1: Boring location map
Appendix A: Exploratory trench logs
~ppendix B: Laboratory test,data
Appendix c: Standard grading and earthwork specs.
,
'.." ~
\\
"
I
I
I
I !
I
I
...
c..
I
I ----
I I
'''~4UQ
"" I,
I I
........,.,. I
I
I PI2a.rECT
I SITE
I:'
I
I .- -'.' ,
I
I VICINITY MAP
,- -
I IV T .j
\1"
I DATE: 'l-P--9'B SITE LOCATION PLAN FIG, ,',
. . " -
I ','
I
,/
'J'U1"
I
I
I
I
I
,,0
\
.
I
~
I
I
I
I
" \
\ \
\ \
\ 2 \ \
~
k" -.\ \
\ \ \
\ \ \
\ \
\ \
\ \ \ \ \
I
)
:1 I
I
\ ~\
I
I V .
~
I
I
\
I
I
I
I
Ilr
I
CONe lJ
Cd~Y>YE ('
00/",
. B-1 8D/2/NG
LoCA7ftJ '"
I
-r.r;v~/) 12<1.qn
"'=
: --
Wi?llNO OR/~-
, ---
I
\;,
I
BOR./NG
~_~o..-______
LOCATION
frJlJP
FIG, -2
.'
II
I
i I
I
!.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX A
Exploratory Trench Logs
"
,
.": ~
\~
I
, I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ProJect N a,ln. .;.
rroloet Numbet'.
Q-e.
Elev.,lofl
Equlpm.nl
~Q.IAI\
~'t~/Z-
Trench No ~
. --=--
! .
:J.. D
. " ~;r :a GEOTECHNICAl. OE6CIlIPTION
! i ..
a G l
... .. I u ..
. c ,\! :0 logg~ :: GT
& .. & uft by - 1-2}-'38
II. a ' 2
. '" ; .. :s . Dare =
& ! . ~ ,;I - ~ Sample..! by -
~ 0 JI - ,
0
- , '-
i
- ) ~ ,,," <:
.- ~.. . (/) Dark brown, coarse grained! friaple, i
No I ~ ,
6- - mottled in general, low mo~st !
- -
- " .
- "
- -
10- Total depth
- 6 feet
- No ground water
. No caving
-
1$-
-
-
-
GRAPHIC LOG Irend scale: 1": S'
- ,
- - . Test Symbols
-
- - O. e..,. 8:a"'ote
, . , . ': ~ n - Rllli' Sa",.'.
. . , .
_T I , . . . I , , I ,- !Ie. ...... COne
. .
- MO- M".l"'um o.l'Ulty
f- . os- Q..I" $Ize
f- - SF- - S~nd P'1u1va'9nl
'_V".,,_.
c- - EI - rap."'Sh..... l...tf4!'W
.. ns - nemoJd.-d Sloe...
f- -
f- --
- .- -
-
r ,\ I I . . . r , r I r l.flfrID ~~~~,r:NCES
I T
- .- r , I
f--
.,,- ~... f-
.' . P.o. Sol( 'M9
- f- I,...... r:.",',a. r^ fJ""lij,'"
f-
\.{
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!I
I
IPtOJ6c:.t Na.". ..
rroloet flumbel'
llR ' _ 'B 121,4.t-J
qrAHIi- . Ele....Uon
E'l"'p"'.nt
T,enc'h No l? '
. ---
.
~ t D GEOTECHNICAl. DESCflIPTlON
. .. ~Zl :1l
! i .. R j
.. c! . ~ oJ . lOll9W (;1' Nn/)A
c . .~ wi ~ by
'; . c3 5 Dare
a lI. U ~ ~ b~
ll. ':0
. .. :I - ~ Sampled by
.& . ~
~ .. D JI
0
- -
- I'. . I2sU::K brown, coarse grained, friable,
- lI) , .... .[ mottled in general, low moist, with
' - l:! \'- ,V) minor clay
6
-
,- - ,.'
-
- Total depth 6 feet
- i
- No ground water I
-0- No caving
,- I
I
- \
-
, -
15-
,-
-
-
GRAPHIC LOG Irend- scale: 1"= 5'
t- . Test Symbols
- t-
- t- 0- e",lll .~",.I.
, ' A - R'"i la",.f.
, I , .- , '. I '- sc. &.... Co".
'-r I 1 r . . . . . - MO- M....."......'" O.""IfJ'
t-
r- - C5.. 0..," Sit_
S" - S~l1d "'1v'".""'
- "~'~-'" -
, , - "I - E'~."'Jlu" ....dll!'..
-
.. /lS - ntm"ld'e<I She_
,.. - .,
.. -
r- -
-
I , . , I I I I I .#--::'.'
" 1-'-- .. ~'Jrfili TERRA
. . . . . l: [;V GEOSCIeNCES
, ,- . .' rC' 80'1 'Mil
1:........1:...'.... ("^ ,,.H-*
-
-
\~
I.
I
I
I
! I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX B
Laboratory Test Data
,
,
:"..
\'\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Location
A
Maximum Drv Densitv Test Results
soil Description
Dark brown
Sil ty sand
Maximum Dry
Densitv (DCf)
129.3
Optimum
Moisture
7.4%
\~
~R 2~'98 12:S~ FR
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
0
c. 130
,;.
...
..,
..
c
.,
u
,., 125
r..
0
909 699 ~46 TO 676~5C~
P.02
MAXIMUM DENSITY/OPTIMUM MOISTURE
140
,
i , ~ I i
j i" I [
, I ,
.... I
i .....
, ! ....
.
,
..... I I
I ... [ I
j " I i
, I .... i
,
! , I I ....:
, I ....
",. .... ... , I'-..
... i"'" j ~ !
I io'" I I .... I
, ! I "'"
, ....
I
[ ~
.
I , -
,
i
,
I I .
I : !
13S
ZAV for
SP.G.-
2.65
120
li5
!5
9
11
6
8
10
7
watQr conter,t, X
Test epecific..~ion: A5'TM 0,1=57-81 MethOd A. MoOl ~leOl
Oversl%e correc~10n applied to fine~ re~ul~5
E'.evl
Oe~th
Clllseificl!Jtion
uses AA~HTO
Nat.
~Qist.
% ;-
NO.4
% <
NI;I.200
5p.G.
LL
PI
5101
2.65
TEST RESULTS
MAT~RIAL DESCRIPTION
Ml!Jximum dry density - 128.3 pcf
Optimum moisture - 7.4 %
DA>'lK B>'lOWN
SILTY SAND
Remo:""k:!l:
Pr-oject No.:
Project: GUNVANT
Location;
Date: 3-2S-19ge
MAXIMUM DENSITY/OPTIMUM MOISTURE
1~1I:,I.ir'fiXCAL & ENVIRaNMENTAL
, ENBtNEERS. INC.
F10. No. 1
\~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
MHR 27'98 12:51 FR
-0.030
~:I;::;::;:
!..~+.j..j,
. . .. ..
:j::~:rt: :Tr
.........-. .......
,.... .,
.... ..
<:
~
-0.020
;..i ..;.. ;..i.. '. :..i..; .~..l..i,,~,
-0.010 !+i:,:>tP+H+
. '! .~.. ~ " : . . ~ .:..! ";"' . '1 ":"
cuaUQn :{~:}}: T:;:Tr :Tr
o
E
t.
o
't-
<D
Q
, , , , I '
t:!::U:: ::Lt
, . . .. ,.
. " ..
,." ,,,.' .... ..".~.
. . " ..
. .:.. i"~' .;.. ..;. ~.
.... ..
"...4........
.. .-........
. .. .,~,/..:..:..
-
..
()
~
t
<D
>
Canool.
"l.-;-,\,,!,
0.010
,. . ,.,.
.'" ..~... ". .'
+Ht:II :::::,:~
0.020
. . ... .
.... .... ....
......-.._. ............, .............
.... .". . ..
.<.~....'" T:~::P:: :';::r.:t::: :~:;:T:;:
0.030 err::: ",.,., ".. ,.'.,':. .".,.,.,
" 0.1 0.2 0.3 0,4
HCI"iz. Deform.. in
2~00
. . . . ... . . .
:t~::i:r ::)::t:~::;:: :r;::~':::.
:r:~::~:~:: ::r:~:~::i:: :t:F:l':~:
. . ~" .! .1" i .
.. '1' ':" ~..,.
2000
. . ., .., ....
:t~::):t :::::~}:i:: :rtLt
... ....
.... ,~.... ... ........ .....
.... ....
.... ...
.......~"... ..~.........
, . . ...
. '
~
"
0.
::::~:r:l::
1800
. .. ..... . . .
IHl :fUI: TH+
,;
"
"
..
...
CD
t.
..
"
.c:
'"
1200
IAJf .11::1 Jrl:r 11.:.I
800 ," ,.,. ,..~"..
I
4001
,
.. ..
... ..-
........' '." ... ..;>~.....
.. ....
..\":,,...:....!..;...:..;..
. . . . .
.............
";"l"!"-'
. . .. ....
..................".....
.... .,..
. .! ..~ . ~. : . . r . -:' . ~.. . . . ~ .
. . ~ ..:. ..;. . \ .. ",. ~.. : "; .
..;..~.~..;.. ": .
.. . .
c
o
)..;.,;.;
'~";"l'"
. 'i"!"~ ";"
0.1
Hcr1z.
0.2 0.3
Deform.. in
SAMPL:; DATA
'SAMPLE TYPE:
DESCRIPTION:
L..L..~ PL..-
SPECIFIC GRAYITYa 2.6~
REMARKS:
"I.
F!G. NO.
9~9 699 9445 ,C 67675<::
P.03
3600
... ti:j:
'''!'
RESULTS
C. ost 9 .~..
4>. dell 38,7 .~. .
TAN , 0.80
....
"i"
~
"
"
::1
240C
..;..
,;
"
"
..
...
'"
..
ro
"
.c:
'"
'"
"
"
Co
.;..
~
I'.'.
,...;,.;.
.. .""'" .~..
..;,;,;;.j,<..
. '.(..:.,
. .
. ~
1200
,;
..
, ., .
"
" , "
o
o
":"~ . '.' . r', ,..
.:. " .~ .~ .
......~.,. ....-,
1200
2400
3600
Normal Str"ss
o.~
SAMPLE I~O. 1 2 3
!WATER CONTe.NT. l\I 7,4 7.4 7.4
:;i OR'y DENSITY. ~Cf 114.9 114.9 114,9
::: SATURATION. ~ 44.8 ~4.8 44.8
z VOID RATIO C,~3S 0.439 0.439
I-
01 AMETER. in ;;1.'50 2.50 2.!50
GHT in 1 00 1.00 1.00
. WA TER CONTENT. l\I 15,9 1S.0 16,3
~IDRY DENSITY. pef 117,0 115,9 115.5
~ SATURATION. l\I 101,9 533.0 99,6
... VOID R...nO 0,414 0.427 0.433
<< OIAMETER. in 2.50 2.50 2.50
H GHT. in 0.98 0,99 1.00
NORMAL STRESS. pg, 2000 1000 500
~A)(!MU~ SHEA". pSf 1619 766 425
RES!DUAL $kEAR, p&f
Strein rete. :l:/r.lin 0.015 0.016 0,016
CL;ENT: GUNVAN7
I
1";>0":10:-: DR,. r!,lf I? /II /l:
I
~SAM~L.e: LO:A THiN:
I
P"OJ. NO,:
DATE:: 3-26-98
TEST REPORT
DIRECT SHEAR
BEDn:rHaCAL a Bh__lIEKTAL EN&DIEERS. DlC.
1f)
~HR 27'98 12:51 FR
909 6'39 9446 TO 676754:
P.64
I
I
i I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EXPANSION INDEX TEST
Job No.
Project b'J'-" v (,'0/' \-
Test UBC Tested By \:>uv Lo, Checked By ~v~
Method . No. 29.2 Date ~.J$'c, r 3 -1>-<=;...-
Date
,Lotl# Tract
iDepth (ft.) Sample
iSamplelLab No. Description
INITIAL CONDmONS FINAL CONDmONS
,Initial Moisture, W % ~.> $'.:1 Wet Son + Tare (g) 42'1.28'
IRemolded Wet Soil + Tare 5'1q,tl (:,/9. ) Dry Soil + Tare (g) 31'21..
,Tare (g) 1l1't .,) ,:;1.) Water (g)
~ IWet Soil, Wt (g) i ,qq.~ '-(l'1, r( Tare (g) -----
, iDry:Soil, WI'. (g) )If( ViC"L Dry Soil, WI'. (g)
Remolded Wet Density at l 'L j,( \11;., r Moisture, W %
'ot:, Wt(o.302) (Pa) ,
i' ad Ill).L(
Remolded Dry Density II!,!> EQUATIONS
od ='We(O.302) (Pa) I
, VOL. RING "'" 12.63 in]
,Weight of Water Ww ! c(. '-i 10.1.- Gs-2.70
~w : 62.4 PCF 3
'Ww :~t -3'd (PCF) : 0.007309 FT
Solids Vo.lume. VI'. (FT]) " 'Is :lfd/Gs1lw
,t...i ,(..q W$ : WV1 + W S = Ww x 1OO/-g wVv
,Va : lfd .. 168.5 (
iVoids Volume, Vv (Ff3) NOTES
Vv .. 1 . VI'. '^> ') .) l
Sample Height,: 1.0 in.
(Hi)
iDegree of Saturation S y ~ % Saturation 48 to 52
, ~o8\"l. 1-> I
IS:: WW x 100/62.4 IX Vv('!.) ~ \ % PaiSillg No.4 Sieve
1"1, '\'1'! EXPANSION RESULTS
Rellllll'ks: Initial Reading (in)
Fin2.l Reading (ill)
Height Change, A H (in)
Expanstou lIldex, EI 0
*~ TOTAL PAGE.004 ~*
2-\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX C
'standard Grading and Earthwork Specifications
"
..:~ "
z;L.-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
:STANDARD GRADING AND EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS
These specifications present our recommendations for grading
and earthwork. No deviation.from these specifications should
be permitted, unless where specifically superseded in the
geotechnical report of the project or by written
communicati9ns signed by the geotechnical consultant.
Evaluation performed by the consultant during the course of
grading may: result in subsequent recommendations which could
supersede ~ese specifications or the recommendations of the
geotechnical report.
1.0 General
1.1 The geotechnical consultant is the owners or
developers representative on the project. For the
purpose of these specifications, observations by
the geotechnical consultant include observations
by the soils engineer, geotechnical engineer,
e~gineering geologist, and those performed by
Persons employed by, and responsible to the
geotechnical consultant.
1.2 All clearing, site preparations, or earthwork
Performed on the project shall be conducted and
directed by the contractor under the supervision
of the geotechnical consultant.
1.~ The contractor should be responsible for the
s~fety of the project and the satisfactory
completion of all grading. During grading, the
contractor should remain accessible.
1.4 Prior to commencement of grading, the geotechnical
consultant shall be employed for the purpose of
providing field, laboratory, and office services
for conformance with the recommendations of the
geotechnical report and these specifications. It
will be necessary that the geotechnical consultant
provide adequate testing and observations so that
he may determine that the work was accomplished as
specified. It shall be the responsibility of the
contractor to assist the geotechnical consultant
and keep him apprised of work schedule and changes
so that he may schedule his personnel accordingly.
1.5 It should be the sole responsibility of the
contractor to provide adequate equipment and
m4;!thods to accomplish the work in accordance with
applicable grading codes or agency ordinance,
~ese specifications, and the approved grading
p~ans. If, in the opinion of the geotechnical
c9nsultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as
questionable soil, poor moisture condition,
7P
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.0
inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc. are
r~sulting in a quality of work less than required
in these specifications, the geotechnical
cpnsultant will be empowered to reject the work
and recommend that construction be stopped until
the conditions are rectified.
1.6 It is the contractor's responsibility to provide
apcess to the geotechnical consultant for the -
t~sting and/or grading observation purposes. This
may require excavation of the test pits and/or the
relocation of grading equipment.
1.~ & final report shall be issued by the geotechnical
consultant attesting to the contractor's
cpnformance with these specifications.
site Prenaration
2.1
All vegetation and deleterious material shall be
d~sposed of off site. This removal shall be
opserved by geotechnical consultant and concluded
p~ior to fill placement.
2.2
Spil, alluvium, or bedrock materials determined by
the geotechnical consultant as being unsuitable
for placement in compacted fills shall be removed
- by the site or used in landscape areas as
d~termined by the geotechnical consultant. Any
material incorporated as a part of compacted fill
must be approved by the geotechnical consultant
prior to fill placement.
After the ground surface to receive fill has been
c~eared, it shall be scarified, disked, or bladed
by the contractor until it is uniform and free
f~om roots, hollows, hummocks, or other uneven
features which may prevent uniform compaction.
2.(3
The scarified ground surface shall then be brought
to optimum moisture,;.mixed as required, and
cpmpacted as specified. If the scarified zone is
greater than 12 inches in depth, the excess shall
be removed and placed in lifts restricted to 6
i~ches.
Prior to placing fill, the ground surface to
receive fill shall be observed, tested, and
approved by the geotechnical consultant.
2.4 Any underground structures or cavities, such as
c~sspOols, cisterns, mining shaft, tunnels, septic
tanks, wells, pipelines, or others, are to be
'J,~
I
!I
!I
il
II
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.0
r~moved or treated in the manner prescribed by the
g~otechnical consultant.
2.5 In cut fill transition lots and where cut lots are
partially in soil, colluvium, or unweathered
~drock materials, in order to provide uniform
bearing conditions, the bedrock portion of the
lot, extending a minimum of 5 feet outside of
building line, shall be over-excavated a minimum
of 3 feet and replaced with compacted fill.
Comnacted Fills
3.1 Materials to be placed as fill shall be free of
organic matter and other deleterious substances,
and shall be approved by the geotechnical
cpnsultant. The soils of poor gradation,
e~nsion, or strength characteristic shall be
placed in areas designated by the geotechnical
consultant or shall be mixed with other soils to
serve as satisfactory fill materials, as directed
by the geotechnical consultant.
3.2 Rock fragments less than 6 inches in diameter may
be utilized in the fill, provided:
a. They are not placed in concentrated pockets.
b. There is sufficient percentage of fine
grained materials to surround the rocks.
c. The distribution of rocks is supervised by
the,~eotechnical consultant.
3.3 Rocks greater than 6 inches in diameter shall be
t~en off site or placed in accordance with the
recommendation of the geotechnical consultant in
areas designated as suitable for rock disposal.
3.4 Materials that is spongy, subject to decay, or
otherwise unsuitable,. should not be used in the
compacted fill.
3.5 Representative samples of materials to be utilized
as compacted fill shall be analyzed by the
lo;lboratory of the geotechnical consultant to
d~termine their physical properties. If any
mo;lterial other than that previously tested is
e\lcountered during grading, the appropriate
a\lalysis of this material shall be conducted by
the geotechnical consultant as soon as possible.
3.6 Ml;lterials used in the compacting process shall be
evenly spread, watered, processed, and compacted
t?
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.7
3.8
3.9
3.10
3.11
3.12
in thin lifts not to exceed 6 inches in thickness,
to obtain a uniformly dense layer. The fill shall
be placed and compacted on a horizontal plane
~less otherwise approved by the geotechnical
cc;msul tant.
If the moisture content or relative compaction
varies from that required by the geotechnical
cQnsultant, the contractor shall rework the fill
until it is approved by the geotechnical
consultant.
Each layer shall be compacted to 90 percent of the
m~imum density, in compliance with the testing
method specified by the controlling government
agency or ASTM 1557-78, whichever applies.
If compaction to a lesser percentage is authorized
by the controlling governmental agency because of
specific land use of expansive soil condition, the
area to receive fill compacted to less than 90
percent shall either be delineated on the grading
p~an or appropriate reference made to the area in
the geotechnical report.
All fill shall be keyed and benched through all
tQPsoil, colluvium, alluvium, or creep materials,
iQto sound bedrock or firm materials where the
slop receiving fill exceed a ratio of 5 horizontal
to 1 vertical, in accordance with the
recommendations of the geotechnical consultant.
The key for $ide hill fills shall be a minimum
width of 15 feet within bedrock or firm materials,
unless otherwise specified in the soils report.
Sub drainage devices shall be constructed in
cQmpliance with the ordinance of the controlling
government agency or with the recommendations of
the geotechnical consultant.
'"
The contractor will be required to obtain a
relative compaction of 90 percent out of the
finished slope face of fill slopes, buttresses,
and stabilization fills. This may be achieved by
either overbuilding the slope and cutting back to
the compacted core, by direct compaction of the
s],ope and cutting back to compacted core, by
direct compaction of the slope face with suitable
equipment, or by any other procedure which
produces the required compaction approved by the
geotechnical consultant.
7JP
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.13 All fill slopes should be planted or protected
from erosion by other methods specified in the
geotechnical report.
3.14 Fill-over-cut slope shall be properly keyed
through topsoils, cOlluvium, or creep materials
i~to rock or firm materials, and the transition
shall be stripped of all soils prior to placing
fill.
4 . 0 cut Slo9E!
4.1 The geotechnical consultant shall inspect all cut
slopes or vertical intervals not exceeding 10
feet.
4.2 If any conditions not anticipated in the
geotechnical report, such as perched water,
seepage, lenticular, or confined strata of
potentially adverse nature, unfavorably-inclined
bedding, joints, or fault planes encountered
during grading, these conditions shall be analyzed
by the engineering geologist, and recommendations
shall be made to mitigate this problem.
4.3 cut slopes that face in the same direction as
pJ;:evailing drainage shall be protected from slope
wash by a non-erodible interceptor swell placed at
the top of the slope.
4.4 Unless otherwise specified in the geotechnical
report, no cut slopes shall be excavated higher or
steeper than that allowed by the ordinance of
controlling governmental agencies.
4.5 Drainage terraces shall be constructed in
cQmpliance with the ordinances of controlling
governmental agencies, or with the recommendations
of the geotechnical consu1tant or engineer
geologist.
5.0 Trench:Backfills
5.1 TJ;:ench excavations for utility pipes shall be
~ckfilled under the supervision of the
geotechnical consultant.
5.2 ~ter the utility pipe has been laid, the space
under and around the pipe shall be backfilled with
clean sand or approved granular soil to a depth of
at least 1 foot over the top of the pipe. The sand
~ckfill shall be uniformly jetted into place
before the controlled backfill is placed over the
sand.
~1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
5.:3 The onsite materials, or other soils approved by
the geotechnical consultant, shall be water and
mix as necessary prior to placement in lifts over
the sand backfill.
5.'4 The controlled backfill shall be compacted to at
l~ast 90 percent of the maximum laboratory density
as determined by ASTM D1557-78 or the controlling
governmental agency.
5.,5 Fill density test and inspection of the backfill
procedures shall be made by the geotechnical
cpnsultant during backfilling to see that proper
mpisture content and uniform compaction is being
~intained. The contractor shall provide test
holes and exploratory pits as required by the
g~otechnical consultant to enable sampling and
t~sting.
6.0 Gradina Control
6.1 I~spections of the fill placement shall be
provided by the geotechnical consultant during the
progress of grading.
6.2 In general, density tests should be made at
intervals not exceeding 2 feet of fill height or
every 500 cubic yards of fill placed. This
criterion will vary, depending on the soil
condition and size of the job. In any event, an
a~equate number of fill density tests shall be
made to ~erify that the compaction is being
achieved. .
6.3 Density tests should also be made on the surface
material to receive fills as required by the
geotechnical consultant.
6.4 All cleanup, processed ground to receive fill, key
e~cavations, subdrains, and rock disposals should
be inspected and approved by the geotechnical
consultant prior to placing any fill. It shall be
the contractors responsibility to notify the
geotechnical consultant when such areas are ready
for inspection.
7.0 Construction Consideration
7.1 E~osion control measures, when necessary, shall be
provided by the contractor during grading and
prior to the completion and construction of
permanent drainage control.
16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
7.2 ~pon completion of grading and termination of
inspectors by the geotechnical consultant, no
~urther filling or excavating, including that
~ecessary for footings, foundations, large tree
wells, retaining walls, or other features shall be
performed without the approval of the geotechnical
consultant.
7.3 Care shall be taken by the contractor during final
grading to preserve any berms, drainage terraces,
~nterceptor swells, or other devices of permanent
nature on or adjacent to the property.
t\