HomeMy WebLinkAbout28190 Jefferson Lot 1 Precise Grading Report
, . T.II:E. Soils Co., Inc.-
.~~~;:(W~99i89tlC21 21'FAK:(9D!J)! 894-2122
". . 4~,,4~ E.is~nl111lDrive, UnltG,. MlIr~ieta, CA 92562
-
E-mail: thesoilsco@aol.com
RECEIVeD
MAR 2 4 2004
I
!
i March 23, 2004
Ms.' Manisha Konicki
3 I 791 Sandhill Lane
1'emecula, California 92591
SUBJECT: REPORT OF PRECISE GRADING
Proposed Single-Family Residence
Lot I of Tract Map No. 9833-2
31107 Mariposa Place
Gityof,Temecula, Riverside County, California
Work Qrder No. 999301.22A
REFERENCES:
T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc., 2000, "Report of Rough Grading, Proposed
,Single-Family Residences, Lots I & 2, TM 9833-2, Mariposa Place,
,Temecula, Riverside County, California", Work Order No. 084001.22,
,Dated September 15,2000.
T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc., 2000, "Review of Report of Rough Grading,
,Proposed Single-Family Residences, Lot I, TM 9833-2, Mariposa Place,
Temecula, Riverside County, California", Work Order No. 999301.29,
,Dated September 22,2003.
Dear Ms. Konicki:
INTRODUCTION
In accordance \\lith .your request, we have prepared this Report of Precise Grading presenting the
results of our observa.tion and testing during rough grading of the subject Lot I of Tract Map
No.9833-2. Al1icompaction test results are included in this report in Appendix B, Table I. The
subject site was graded in accordance with the requirements of the City of Temecula and the 2001
Galifornia Building Code (CBC).
]he 30-scale "Precise Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control Plan", prepared by Konicki
Engineering of Temecula, California, was utilized during grading and to locate our field density
tests and was utilized as a base map for our test locations presented as Plate 1. John Moore Tractor
Work, under the :direction of Mr. Tim Turpin, performed precise grading operations.
T:H.E. Soils Co., Inc.
W.O. 999301.22A
\
.c,.... c~r ~$c._..:.~. c', .,
>...~
-":"-."=-~.<_~?':-~~:::,ill~!io,
-- - _ ~-- 'C _"_-,:::r-~~,-,-.'..'__",;;:~~<_~,-
.~-.'---'-----
.--.-.----
-
-
Ms. Manisha Konicki
March 23, 2004
Page 2
Proposed Development
The subject Lot I of Tract Map No 9833-2 is an existing single-family residential pad with
associated driveways, landscape areas, and 2: I (horizontal:vertical) cut and fil1 slopes. Typical
cut/fill grading techniques were utilized to establish design grades during rough grading operations
(see referenced report). Current operations consisted ofthe overexcavation and recompaction of the
proposed building pad.
Site Description
The subject site is located on the extreme western end of Mariposa Place (311 07) in the city of
Temecula in southwest Riverside County, California. The subject site is surrounded on al1 sides by
,large parcel residential. development. The geographical relationships of the site and surrounding
area are shown on our Site Location Map, Figure 1.
Man-made improvements on the subject site, prior to precise grading, include a relatively flat rough
,graded residential pad with associated 2: I (horizonta1:vertical) cut and fill slopes. The cut slope on
!the southerly and easterly boundaries of the site has been previously planted for erosion control with
!associated irrigation systems. Vegetation on the pad prior to precise grading consisted of a very
:sparse growth of annual weeds and grasses.
OVEREXCA V ATION AND RECOMPACTION OBSERVATIONS & TESTING
Precise grading operations consisted of the overexcavation and recompaction of the proposed
building pad a minimum of 3- feet below natural ground, which extended a minimum of 5- ft outside
the building footprint. The earth materials exposed within the bottom of the overexcavation
consisted of both dense sedimentary bedrock and previously placed engineered fil1. The bottom of
the overexcavation was scarified a minimum of 12-inches below the exposed surface, moisture
conditioned to near optimum moisture, and recompacted to 90% of the dry density, as determined
by ASTM 1557. The fill generated from the removal was then moisture conditioned to near
optimum moisture, placed and recompacted to 90% of the dry density, as determined by ASTM
1557. The materials used for fill consisted of on-site dark brown and orange brown clayey silty
sands (Unified Soil Classification-SM) derived from engineered fill and sedimentary bedrock units.
Fill placement and compaction was achieved utilizing a CAT D-6 bulldozer and moisture
conditioning was accomplished utilizing a water hose. The fill was placed in 6 to 8-inch thick lifts
and moisture conditioned with a water hose, as needed, to bring the material to near optimum
moisture content, and was then properly compacted by trackwalking with the D6 bulldozer. A
minimum degree of compaction of90% was required, as determined by ASTM 1557.
!T.H.E. Soils Co., Inc.
w.o. 999301.22A
7--
o
o
- /- ,~' ~.-2'\
,/ '-" -'"'7 -
," j ,f'-"
. i. _':
v"<-'Lj_ " <
0~)
,<"
.,.';
"
- /' ~ / ---.r-
. ~_..._." , / ","" ,-' r--
.," "of _; ..,._ /Y ,_J
. , . n. ,'~\.."" .-j..,. '". I /'--','--.-'
~Luli /} }0'%"" '-/ - \ ~.
rv-,,~ < - /-If(J':_,..__.<~~~+ . "J ,:i
(--.r ,,' / ~., ' ",-,\.:;;
- _ G -" (\ / ...~-.;.::_,r-' 0,- _','-__~-',~ ;",....
j \,.o!",\;;.Q_ . ~~~;.J . . .'~- ;;0"
5 ,/ ._-," +'" -;.-- ,:- _,-'" - t:~;~_";i,.. ,",-
-~-~--~ - ------~--'" ---1"...,1----
,-- - / .-' 4"'-;--- . ...-~.' '- ";~ 1.::,": ':')1
. " .,- . -:>?'..~. - ._1 -.-". "fi. \:: - .
~ ", 'C'~"J '-'.'0 ,'.' /
I '.fY. -~, . - '). .y" " ,'- ."-\,,> I ---
P ,.' '(', '"" . ""." ' '" /-', .. ' ,
.~~+" ,_...J ''',__" .('1:_.... :'....../'- '.
, 5'
&vv
iJ~\
J
i
/'
" ..-:I'~
-~if:""=="''''''
'i>>'HJ
';",~\"';~ . \"'-',
:Y'. '2" 4::-:-~'; f\j\
,S, ::i~"'J: , {i ", (
') ~t:,-.., (L;f \--..J
,:_"'-. \:" '~~;.:'.l\,,~) ',_
j, .\..-.....-.,
Lr" ,~-'~:'
o
,~
/
( ~\.
/
S\
,:'N
.:.~::~?~~:~~,:.:'~ ,..;.,
\ '>!...:...~.,'<....,~~'-.".,y.,.,
'~ .,'..'_". :~+:-1- .-::
..,'\.. -: 'j:'::':
.~~'" . I
> i)r ",
'-V <) '. ~ t
i :' "
, ,~
'%.' I
~"" I
,f I
'!!~~\/i"
..0,0 - , I ,/
" -
: C n.J;,.;r; "
,,-, ,/'T~ "I
7/ ~J..
~. ,., ~/
i: ~"~~
~\ : of I;~
..-i'::-"'~
t ."r
-"
\'
1.:-., ~~
\.\....,~" Indl
14~ B...n31 GrQU _
~~ ,,059 _"'"
y, oWe.!.k:
~"-;. . _f/
,,~~o:> ~
", --
- '.~ -'
.->'-"\
~ . /
\_.___i_.~
.,. .
" \ (
,~
...-,,-/
,..,-
// .-;;"
--J'"~~
~::-- :~".
A.......'.
....,..-
"
"
.~
<~.;\~,-~<
..-::
"
"
'I~ ,~
~!~ f~
I,. .
I.'~
ill1'~,'-
. 'I',~-
:. I!-,f ".' . ".
"fl lj '" ,,.
:: I' ;~;~'-<. ,/ ,.,."
_--.._tl".[I-o' .<'\:/
,t lru _",'~
"l~ ;' \.~...f:"" ~X':f, 1I:11J ~ !
\'~~"'.} .';?/:f" '.;%,~t-c~-~~...=~/I
3-0 TopoQllads Copyrigbt" 1999 ~I.onne Yarmoutb. ME 04096 Souru IllIta: USGS
,Q
.--/'" ,Trt t .~/.:{-~ ---""" \.,~j,'", .
-, -/~emec'''', ~, '~'-- . '~.
"-",'r - ,:JY :::);:~;-~~"~ ~-- -". \;':;t?~,..\.;
". '.;Y,/ . ] : ~C" "l:?/.... "'
.t>r,-.. , ..-,', \y~"
l' .~) 0 ).. . ' .. i..... 'ij: 'If'" 1\ -
...:.;~;;. /:::'? ->;::::::-7,...-<.."'--= ::. .~/~----~l .~, '~\~ (
~<-;.../."t4.,-:_ . (",/1' . ~La ".jj__;".cJ--~"/l:'''' 1'1\ \
'~,:;;::::;'<?' \'z:"~i,,~~< .~~~'$>.., '(~,):.~,
'O,(~":r-/ ;:-:_ .~~i"..<_ );. ':~~;l( -'
..,~}~~~:i~-> -. \'-,-., . .\:;8;:'\7=~
II",. '0'
-.,!I f"'<
j
If
1'1
'"
II
II:
"'-..
';)
1000 ft Sn1e: I : 15.000 Dd.il: 13-0 IllItum: WGS14
FIGURE 1 3>
,
.
.
.
'Ms. Manisha Konicki
'March 23, 2004
Page 3
TESTING PROCEDURES
I Field Density Testing
.Fie1d density testing was performed in accordance with ASTM Test Method D2922-91 (nuclear
,gauge). Areas failing to meet the minimum compaction requirements were reworked and retested
until the specified degree of compaction was achieved. The elevations and the results of the field
density tests are presented in Appendix B Results of Compaction Tests, Table I. The approximate
locations of the tests are shown on the Density Test Location Map, Plate 1.
: Maximum Density Determinations
, Maximum Density/Optimum Moisture determinations were performed in the laboratory on samples
. representative of on-site soils used in the fill operations. The tests were performed in accordance
with ASTM D-1557, Test Method A. The test results, which were utilized in determining the
. degree of compaction achieved during fill placement, are presented in Appendix A, Table I.
I Expansion Index Testing
I Expansion testing was performed at the completion of precise grading on representative soil
, samples obtained from the upper 3-ft of the building pad area. The test results yielded an expansion
,index of 10, which corresponds to a very low expansion potential (0-20, Table 18-I-A, 2001 CBC).
Test results are presented in Appendix A, Table II.
~ Sulfate Content
. It is anticipated that, from a corrosivity standpoint, Type II Portland Cement can be used for
,construction. Representative samples of the upper 3-ft. of the earth materials exposed on the pad
: surface were obtained for testing. Due to time constraints of this report, the test results were not yet
available and will be forwarded as an addendum to this report once they are received. E. S. Babcock
. & Sons, Laboratory of Riverside, California is performing the laboratory analysis.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Foundation System Design
Foundation elements for the proposed single-family home and garage should be founded entirely in
compacted fill. The structural engineer should design all footings and concrete slabs in
accordance with the allowable foundation pressures and lateral bearing pressures presented for
Class 4 soils 011 Table 18-1-A of the 2001 California Building Code (CBC). The allowable
T.H.E. Soils Co.. Inc.
W.O. 999301.22A
A
i i f ~ II
!'i ~ ."
i ~ ' 0
ill ~I:l ~ ~
'" I :<
8 to) d: n
~ g~g F "
gl5 ;:I, m
~ ~
~ I~~ mi!1 ~
;~'.~ ~h [g
2~ ~ ~~ ~
~ ~~~ ~.~~ ~
~ ~I~:::l ~
~I! ~ ~
~ 8~
dn ~
~ e ~
i
Ii ~
'lf~
~ ,
a ~
I!I I!I;;!~I" li~li ~
~i~ 111611~II~i ~
,!! i!~i'~II~'!11 ~
liq s is ~ l U~B z
B;! ii~l~ ~ ~'I~iit ~
S ~ I~I~I~I * II n
i! i' 1;;.11 lill! ~
a~ i*i- e ~1*le ~
hj~i~ ~z
ii i~!!:!~ i~I~1 ~
~h I~il~~ 1M, ~
:~ e! ia:1 ~X~~I ~
Ii S III I~;IL
!i ~~ I i~ ~
I'; ~= i ,Q
5i ili i~ i~lal
~i ~ ~h= IIllil
~ ;* h~1 !Im
~! Il~ ~
.~
, ~
~ I
~'~~:~~Ii~ .,
~ e ~ ~ il ~ . ~~ ~
?I ~ I ~~~s~ ~
-~~ ?I a ~ iU~~ ~
r. ~ I '. ~" ~ i!~ ~
I~ ~ H ~ .
~f q
jht ~ ....
.......
- '
,~ .....'vA..
I~ ~r~
/;.~ /
~ 1'0 ~ / "
V' !fir ~,/ /
C1) / ,/
,~,~ ~ 1 ~ ~ r f I i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ a ~ ~ uu : ~
immnPIP It; i! 1"16 ~!! i~
'~7 ~ ~ i q ~ I ~ I;~
:p ~ ~ ~ III
.l ' II :~! ~ fil: E !~Ii~!~: II!
'I~f~ i~IU;g 5i;~ ~ . ;i~ ii(: I;!
';, ~;~ ~ .1 i i ~ i ~ N ~ 0 ~~II
tll .. ~ -< o::IJ " I
!! ~ ~ !:a g
~ (Jl ,
()
=<
o
. ..,.,
-I"
;uZ'." .'-'i
:> . fT1
() .. !I::
-I .. fT1
lIlB ()
~elil c
)>i1~ );:
"~l;
co - "
CXl8~ I
ri~ ~
I\) ~ "
"!j1 ~
i I! ill
5 ~ ~ g
-I "...
!6 :z:'
- ~ ~
b~
It~
o~
~~~
lr. r "\)
. - C)
'" ~ I
,., .....
V\
-
Ill: III' I: I; I' 'i' PI' II; ilr 1!!Ii QF G !f n i llF 'If "III' II' ~
I ~ · ~ l' ~ ~! I II I . ~ I!' i ill · I~ I ". ! Ua q
11*!i I:I! I iI! ~ !!ili~ II!I !!Ij!~ jl i I! I Ii ~! ~II:; ~ IJ 01 ..
~I! 1.1 ! ! jlll! 11'1 !~ ! 1!lll!1 !~~ !i -II ~,I i ~!~: ~I I!l ~
;i:~ ~I~ ! ; i ~I! III i~~ ~ II i,~~ !! I~ !~ !Iml ~ ! .: i;a :II~;
1~1! III . I ! I~II;~ g I; ~ II; I~I I !; III ~ III !~ IIi !I! II .
II~ :d ~ ~ I "Iii iii ll; is I!~! 1!l1 I; :lle id;I;! Ii! I~I
~~~ ~ ., ~ ~ ~ ! II ~ 8 Ii I I~ I. ~I' I
\
\
,@ ~
~
'''0
:;0
111
(")
(J)
1"11
1.1
:;0 I
:l>
I:J
-iZ
:::o.G1
~
OM
-i:;o
~O
~(Jl
lJO
:z I
(!)
(Xl
(H~
(HZ
II:J
I\) (/l
IT]
I:J
5~
-iz
...,
-"
. .
.
~I~~
"a I
. M~ ~_
,;
"
- ~~
. J; ;0
~ '; "
= I~ rI.l
· ~E
ij
"
- ~
;J
~ ~~G /
ij
o
~
I
(")
o
z
...,
:;0
0'
1-'
..
1-
.1>
:z
IIUlar ~
~ iUiM Q
! ijilln ;
~ !ilil;! ~
~ ill U~
t IIII!'~
! ~i~~.11
~ Il~gl:~
i U1iR
i a~l~ II
~ h ~i
~ n I!
I
lili,li II! I! m !!~I; f 8 ~ Iii ii~i. ~ :
lSll I JI~ ,~ ,~ ia ~ 0 ~ i~i "~~ 0 1-
~~ia ii ,Qi Ai I i~! ~ ~ ~ 1;1 =Iil ~
~!!~ 5~ d! i! II al; (Jl m I~ f h :z
I~~i :i I!~ ~~ g; 81! ~ !IIII; ~ !
i~i ~ Ii! II! I; B:j ~li i
;I~ I! ~IIU! the ~ ~ ,
Rill G: ~ql ~q=! ~
! ~ ~I ~~~ ~~ J~ Ige '~
il; :l ~!: i 'II Ii:
I, 1m I~ I 1.8,
i ,
.
.
Ms. Manisha Konicki
March 23, 2004
Page 4
foundation and lateral pressures shal1 not exceed the values set forth in Table 18-1-A for Class 4
soils unless data to substantiate the use of higher values are submitted.
.Where the site is prepared as recommended, the proposed structures may bear on continuous and
:isolated footings. The footings should have a minimum width of 12-inches, and be placed at least
12-inches below the lowest final adjacent grade for one-story houses, with a minimum width of 12-
'inches, and be placed at least 18-inches below the lowest final adjacent grade for two-story houses.
Footings may be designed for a maximum safe soil bearing pressure for Class 4 soils as per Table
J8-1-A of the 2001 CBC for dead plus live loads.
.Concrete slabs, in moisture sensitive areas, should be underlain with a vapor barrier consisting of a
minimum of six mil polyvinyl chloride membrane with all laps sealed. 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.
Footings should be set back from the top of al1 cut or fill slopes a horizontal distance equal to at
least Y:z the vertical slope height with a minimum setback of at least 5- ft.
ITota1 settlements under static loads of footings supported on compacted fill materials 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. Differential settlements under dynamic loads of footings supported on
properly compacted fill materials and sized for the allowable bearing pressures are not expected to
.exceed 114-inches for a span of 40-ft. These settlements are expected to occur primarily during
construction. Soil engineering parameters for imported soil may vary.
: Surface Draina~e
: 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 water.
: Construction Monitoring
Observation and testing, by T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. is essential to verify compliance with
. recommendations and to confirm that the geotechnical conditions encountered are consistent with
the recommendations of this report. T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. should conduct construction
monitoring, at the following stages of construction:
T.H.E. Soils Co., Inc.
W.O. 999301.22A
(",
.
.
Ms. Manisha Konicki
March 23, 2004
Page 5
. During excavation offootings for foundations
. During any fill placement
. During utility trench backfill operations
. During retaining wall backfill operations
SUMMARY
Our description of rough grading operations, as well as observations and testing services, are limited
to those precise grading operations performed between March 15,2004 and March 17,2004. The
conclusions and recommendations contained herein have been based upon our observation and
testing, as noted. It is our opinion the work performed in the areas denoted has generally been
accomplished in .accordance with the job specifications and the requirements of the regulating
agencies and is suitable for the proposed development. No conclusions or warranties are made for
the areas not tested or observed. This report is based on information obtained during rough grading.
No warranty as to the current conditions can be made. This report should be considered subject to
review by the controlling authorities.
LIMITATIONS
This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or his
representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to
the attention of the project architect and engineer. The project architect or engineer should
,incorporate such information and recommendations into the plans, and take the necessary steps to
see that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field.
This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the
contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for other than our own personnel on the
site. Therefore, the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should
notify the owner if he considers any of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe.
This firm did not provide any surveying services at the subject site and does not represent that the
,building locations, contours, elevations, or slopes are accurately depicted on the plans.
The findings of this report are valid as of the report 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.
Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside
our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and revision as changed conditions are
,identified.
T.H.E. Soils Co., Inc.
w.o. 999301.22A
1
.
.
Ms. Manisha Konicki
March 23, 2004
Page 6
,This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you have any questions, please call.
,Very truly yours,
n JJr.
iJ' . Fre
#i Goo osi"
T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc.
J T. Reinhart, RCE 23464
Civil Engineer, Expires 12-31-05
~
/ Project Manager
IJPFIJTR/JRH:jek
ACCOMPANYING MAPS AND APPENDICES
Location Map - Figure 1 (2,000-scale)
!Density Test Location Map - Plate 1 (30-scale)
. Appendix A - Laboratory Test Results
Appendix B - Results of Compaction Tests
T.H.E. Soils Co., Inc.
W.O. 999301.22A
~
.
T.H.E. Soils Co., Inc.
.
APPENDIX A
Laboratory Test Results
W.O. 999301.22A
'\
.
.
TABLE I
Maximum Deusity/Optimum Moisture
il I I 0/0 I
Description Lbs/Fe Moisture
I Dark Brown Silty Sand 121.3 11.7
2 Dark Orange Brown Silty Sand 119.5 9.5
I TABLE II I
Expansion Index
Test Location Expansion Index Expansion Potential
House Pad 19 Very Low
T.H.E. Soils Co., Inc.
W.O. 999301.22A
\0
.
.
APPENDIX B
Results of Compaction Tests
T.H.E. Soils Co., Inc.
W.O. 999301.22A
\\
. .
.
.
.
TABLE I
RESULTS OF COMPACTION TESTS
W.O. No. 999301.22A
Manisha Konicki
DATE: MARCH. 2004
Test. Test Elevation Moistnre Unit Dry Relative Soil Test Location
No. . Date Depth Content Density Compaction Type (See Plate 1)
. (Feet) (%) (pCF) (%)
1 . 3-15-04 75 10.0 115.2 94N 1 SEE PLATE 1
2 ; 3-15-04 75 10.5 115.0 94N 1 "
3 . 3-15-04 76 9.5 107.3 90N 2 "
.
4 , 3-16-04 76 9.2 110.7 93N 2 "
.
5 3-16-04 78 10.7 119.4 97N 1 "
:
6 3-17-04 78 9.0 115.8 97N 2 "
7 i 3-17-04 78 11.7 115.2 94N 1 "
8 ! 3-17-04 FG 10.2 115.1 94N 1 "
9 . 3-17-04 FG 9.5 115.8 97N 2 "
10 : 3-17-04 FG 10.4 115.8 94N 1 "
SEE PLAN FOR TEST LOCATIONS
SC - Sand Cone ASTM D1556; DC-Drive Cylinder ASTM D2937; !:!-Nuc1ear ASTM 3017; **TEST FAILED, SEE RETES~
NG-Natural Ground + 85% = Passing Test; FG-Fiuish Grade
T.H.E. Soils Co., Inc.
W.O. 999301.22A
\1.--