Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutParcel Map 10426 Parcel 1 Soils Report I I I I I 'I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LAKESHORE Engineering fftl \ oiU. ?cu.. \ EstaOliShed 1985 May 15,2005 Project No. 05-027.C Consulting Civil Engineers Attention: City of Temecula Department of Public Works Client: Mr. Stuart Harmon (951) 721-7350 39318 Kimberly Lane Temecula, CA 92591 Subject: Rough Grade Compaction Report Proposed Single Family Home Construction Parcell of Parcel Map 10426 39318 Kimberly Lane, Temecula, CA. 92591 INTRODUCTION Per the property owner Mr. Stuart Harmon request, Lakeshore Engineering was retained to assume the geotechnical consultant responsibility for the subject site. This report presents our test results and summary of observations made during placement of compacted fill on the subject lot. Periodic field density tests and site observations were provided by a representative of Lakeshore Engineering to check the grading contractors on compliance with approved drawings and job specifications. The presence of our filed representative at the site was to provide to the owner a source of professional advice, opinions and recommendations based upon the field representative's observations of the contractor's work and did not include any supervision, superintending or direction of the actual work of the contractors of the contractor's workmen,. The opinions and recommendations presented hereafter are based on our field and laboratory testing and observations of the grading procedures used, and represent our engineering judgment as to the contractor's compliance with the job specifications. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Prior to Lakeshore Engineering involvement with this project, the subject property supported a mobile home with a small detached garage to the immediate south. Associated improvements included a lap rect~gular swimming'pool to the north of the mobile home and driveway access to Kimberly Lane at the southwesterly comer of property. The house, garage and pool sits on a truncated ridge nose, located approximately north center of the property, with level pad area made by benching into slope. The mobile home was recently burned to the ground, however the detached garage left untouched by fire. This phase of grading operation consisted of the removal of all surface and subsurface debris within the proposed replacement house pad, and filling in or replacing cavities caused by grading debris removal with compacted fill to desired pad grade. No changes in original ground contours and/or building pad grade were made during this phase of grading operation (ground preparation). \ 31520-A Railroad Canyon Road' Canyon Lake, CA 92587 . (909) 244-2913 . FAX: (909) 244-2987 ,. I ! I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L~KESHORE !Engineering Ci ~ L 1iI ~ ~ ~'" '~ '1(, I i~ ,.~. .'. -'_','IV1Y~II,:.'t6.' I'-~T I<J 'l.Q """'Pi2 ~,~=='.,..... "-'I...':JL~""" ,"'....... ~' ~3 ~: ~ ' J: I/l~ ~ (C>~ * ' I -L:..' E.Fa;;' r<e.. . N ?J:a{', '\Z~: .. ' H ), uj ~ l ~8 ~~' 82: ~B , 41' 1,0 III 1", 'i YIt7}:L\: e>a ". .~ MONTh ~ SINGLE FAMILY HOME CONST. PARCEL 1 OF P.M. 10426 39318 KlMBERL Y LANE STUART HARMON 1-- Da1e ' 5/15/05 Agure No: Project No: , CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS 05-027.C 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I May 15, 2005 Project No. 05-027.C Page Two Site improvement plan was drawn by Lawrence Phelps, RCE, at scale 1 "=20', plan dated 9/21/04. With the exception of a swimming pool built along the toe of cut slope, northerly of the proposed house (original mobile home), no deviation and/or changes form plan were noted in the field. This recent completed scope of work was limited to the reworking of the upper 24-30 inches of existing topsoil to prepare the ground ready for support of proposed construction. The area of rework extended just beyond the footprint of the residence. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT A 3,000+/- square feet, new one story, single family home is planned for construction to be sandwich between the existing northerly garage wall and the southerly pool decking. Construction type as understood by us, will be of conventional of wood framed walls supporting tile roof. Foundation is planned for convention spread footings with slab-on-grade floor. FEILD TESTING AND GRADING OBSERVATION The rough grading operation was conducted by Harmon Grading and Excavating Company. Equipment used ,included a track hoe with wheel roll attachment and dump track, with water derived from onsite meter. Grading demolition work and ground preparation was accomplished during the month April, 2005 and was observed to be accomplished as follows: I. Surface and subsurface debris (old foundation, concrete flatwork slabs removal and miscellaneous buried utility service lines were excavated, removed and disposed offsite. 2. Loose and disturbed topsoil were removed/excavated to expose competent ground on which to start placing the new fill. The depth of topsoil removal was about 18-24 inches with the exposed bottom scarified another 6 inches. 3. The native soils exposed at the bottom (Pauba Formation) of topsoil removal were inspected and determined to be competent for support of new fill dirt placement. 4. Approved soils were placed in thin layers on the prepared ground surface, and each layer at about 8-12 inches thick, compacted to the minimum relative density before the next layer was added. 5. The minimum acceptable degree of soil compaction was 90 percent relative density of the laboratory determine maximum dry density, for each soil type. 6. Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content were determine by A.S.T.M. Dl557-78 method. 7. Field density tests were performed utilizing the drive tube (ASTM D2937) and/or the sand cone test method (ASTM. Dl556). lakeshore Engineering ~ I I I I ! I II il II I I I I I I I I I I I May 15, 2005 Rroject No. 05-027.C Page Three 8. Fill dirt were derived from onsite excavations. The onsite soils were classified as a medium brown, Silty SAND (SM/SC), with clay trace. 9. Field density tests were conducted at random in the fill to determine the degree of relative compaction and the moisture content of the soil being placed. The field density test results are presented in the Summary of "Field Density Tests", and the approximate test locations conducted are shown on the Plot Plan, figure 2. Also shown are the approximate limits of grading operation. GRADING DEVIATION FROM PREPARED SITE PLANS At the conclusion of the rough grading operation, no deviations in pad features and/or pad elevations were noted in the field when compared to the site plan on file. LABORATORY TESTING Maximum Drv Density and Optimum Moisture Content Determination Representative surface soils encountered were classified as Clayey SAND (SCISM) and the test results were taken from referenced geotechnical investigation report. The summary of test results are presented below: Soil Type Soil Description Optimum Moisture Content Max. Drv Density A Lt. Bm. Silty SAND(SM) wltrace clay 8.8 % dry wt. 130.2p.c.f. LABORATORY EXPANSION TESTING A laboratory Expansion Index Test was conducted on a representative soil sample recovered from the building pad area. The laboratory expansion test was performed in accordance with U.B.C. Test method 29-C, and the pertinent test results are presented below: Soil Description Loc./Depth Moist. Before Test Exp. Index Exp. Potential SAND (SM/SC) w/trace clay Bldg/F.G. 29 LOW 8.1 Based upon the test result of 29, the near surface building pad subgrade are considered to be LOW in expansion potential. Lakeshore Engineering ~ I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I May. 15, 2005 Project No. 05-027.e Page Four SUTIPHATECONTENTTEST Laboratory soleplate content Test was performed on a representative sample in accordance with E.P.A. Test Method 375.3, and the pertinent test results are presented. The sulphate content tested is below 150 p.p.m.and the recommended cement type is TYPE 11 Portland Cement~ CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the results of our field and laboratory testing, on observations of construction procedures used in the field and on our past experience on this kind of work, it is our opinion that the compacted fill placed and as shown on Plot .Plan figure 2, has been placed in accordance with the applicable portions of the grading specifications, as found in the 1998 California Building Code, Appendix Chapter 33, as amended by Ordinance 99-23. Any fill added beyond the limits or above the grades shown on the attached plot plan should be placed under engineering control and in accordance with the job specifications, ifthe work is to be covered by the conclusions and recommendations hereon. Based upon our field testing results, the compacted fill placed are in our opinion compacted to at least 90 percent relative density. The onsite soils are a mix of granular with trace amount of clay, and considered to be low in expansion potential, as verified by the laboratory expansion test. The conclusions and recommendations presented hereon below should be incorporated into the house planning, design and construction phase, unless superseded in this report. FOUNDATION DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION Proposed foundation should be design for allowable soil bearing pressure of 1500 pounds per squared foot maximum, and conform to UBC building code values for granular, low expansion subgrade soils. Footings are to be 18 inches deep and 12 inches minimum in width, reinforced with two no. 5 rebars, with one at near top and one at bottom. CONCRETE -SLAB-ON-GRADE FLOOR Concrete slab-on-grade should be at least 4 inches thick, cushioned with at least 2 inches of clean sand to aid in the concrete cure. Slab should be reinforced with 6"x 6"/#1 Ox #10 W.W.M. Presaturation of subgrade soils is considered optional, however, the subgrade soils should be moist (wetted down) prior to visqueen and sand barrier placement. :5 Lakeshore Engineering I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I May 15, 2005 Project No. 05-027.e Page Five FOOTING TRENCH.INSPECTION A site inspection was conducted on the morning of May 13,2005 to inspect the suitability of the exposed trench bottom for its intended use. Footing trench excavations were completed and bottom found to be of competent bearing soils, deemed suitable for intended use. SITE DRAINAGE Positive drainage should be provided around the perimeter of the entire structure to minimize water infiltratoing into the underlying soils. Finished grades adjacent to exterior footings should be slope down and away at a minimum of 4 percent for at least 3 horizontal feet and continue at 2 percent to swale flowlines to facilitate surface drainage. All drainage should be directly off-site via non-erosive devices such as ditches and/or manufactured swales. The homeowner should be made aware of the potential problems which may develop when drainage is altered through the construction of garden walls, patios, pools and gazebos. Ponding water situations, leaking irrigation systems, over watering or other conditions which could lead to ground saturation must be avoided. ADDITIONAL GRABING AND SUMMARY The project consultant should be notified prior to any additional fill placement regarding ofthe site. This report is limited to the earthwork performed through May 13, 2005, the last day of our site inspection. and/er testing conducted. Any future appurtenant construction such as cabana, gazebo, pool or spa should be plan checked and permitted under separate additional permits by the City of Temecula. Our findings have been obtained in accordance with accepted professional engineering practices in the field 'of soil engineering. This warranty is in lieu of all other warranties, either expressed or implied. We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions concerning this report or reqdi~eflnformation'anCtservices, please contact this office at your convenience. ~J . . '''\ ':~ lI' .r .; Itespec 1 /I' .- lJakes ., '" .0) (~ Fen 0 , E~p.1 /3 1 ..l ;1, ;% I~J l~ , ~ EncleSll&!' ,pJotIPlan";l,figurll"'~'" Density Test Result Sheet Xerox copy of Reference Site Plan. cc: 3 copies to client (p Lakeshore Engineering I' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I LAKESHORE I Engineering I PLOT PLAN ~ "":4'-~ ....." P -~.' IDE I""!:'''''' cUT \V'INTO fll2M I'4A L..~L.. ~ ~ , '. "~f.bC<o 1% To . IN, ,.'.,. / / /"---- ''''_-..,. ,.00 ' <.,.~ ~ - ".... ' -'I\(J .-- , /"" ' ~""7~ '.":". ", /C,. """~'. """'''''1 ~J ~j ~ ~ I EXPLANATION "m APPROX. LOCATION OF DENSITY TEST .. ~ APPROX. LIMITS OF FILL PLACED APROX. DEPTH OF SOIL REWORKED @@ ..-~ 5E _r I I , \ \ I I SINGLE F AMIL Y HOME CONST. PARCEL 1 OF P.M. 10426 39318 KlMBERL Y LANE STUART HARMON CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS Project No: 05-027.C Date 5/15105 N N.T.S. '\ FIgure No: 2 I I I , I I , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I " SUMMARY OF FI ElO o E tI S ll1...li.ill , , FIELD .~ ~~. DATE ELEVA REfER- MAX IMUM '~ ' i:'- ~(", ~<$l , EST OF LOCATION TI Ofl EIICE DRY , WAiER DRY ,,~'> ~ RENARKS u NO. TEST (feet) ~URVE, DENS ITY CONTENT OEI;5 ITY , f.<.\'~ ~~ ~~ *' (pct) (~) (pct) ~ G' <X: I::!; V\~ I i 51'1:3 p~ ..... 'INliJ -z. A 1';0'2- "3 125., 4(. II r-LO.I, 'Z, 1611s.. " u ....2. ~ 130. 'Z;, S! .lJ. Itq\~, flZ. l .. 3' 5/,~ II 11 -:-2- A t1l>'2.. ,./' 1/1.() , ~o J . ~. , .' . -- --, i1FftOM FG. fF/1\ ISloffiO PAD 6MVJ ~. . . . , ' . ' . . , , . .' . , ., . . , ' , . ~....:.. . . .. SINGLE F AwL Y HOME CONST. PARCEL 1 OF P.M. 10426 .LAKESHORE 39318 KIMBERLY LANE dO' , " Englneerln~ ' STUART HARMON Consulting Civil Engineering and Geologists Pro!. Nol,' IDa.' 5/15/051 Toblal 3 05-027.C , ' . NVla -3.l.~~; t$" , , , 'j II ''PO ~rr.:.'3\X.3J.. ;IJ'lQ', ..Ai1~",,,)1 Ol-G~ ..,....;1.l..NOIOlr;:.';~ i;..,(wvd:':;1'!)NtS kn, ~\tI.LbQ:; t.:.:..t""" '?Z"'\7'ol ON J..tW''T3~ '3!'1.L.'V"1.N31. . ,~n.LV'cJ ~Zf 'CO." 30"'~"~ ',~ 1.0 ,19 ~J ;tG ~ '..,ZVOI "0"1 ,dV\N 1;102f'<:7'd 'I ..,3:::l<lQ'c:/ :/"olOlL.dI2t::>$'3C "i~"31 O'3n;;2;;l ~ i:<', IJ l'g3Hg" ;~ '- .. ~ Ir IL " ~ ...., ~" o . 0 Cl 0 i= : ~ f It G' ~ g ,I c - 4 ~ f > ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ j""l g H~ ~.. o~O ~ J. !.~~,,~ ~ ul" Il..(l O~ ~ ul: t- ,: ~~PO~n ~i~ ,U ~ ~'l- U H "t- o 't' 1 ~. > r ~<4~>,~~F'''GU ~ ~~>H~~~'''!808 ~ m!2~uq~.~O il.:l, , (lJi=.w - fiU) .::t oJ <t1LJ1Jl~ ~ Gill tL. Ul z 11""l, " <,:;]~~<EJ~~~~ --;-\ - '\ """3"3;; '"", ~- J.N<fW;:tSV'.a~,~=-~ . .....tc:tv::I J,~ t" ,1.0 ,ll ..V -N "rv~ ';;; ...,.. . ,'7} 'trb , " , ~, I r '1 , ! ~ \ \ \. \ l< '2: \ , , \ \ \ '~ pZ-' ~ ~ \J ill 'Q , \ ) I / I / ___I <i ~ > z o 'Jl t- O -- ~ I / ./ '~ ~ ..# " //-----.. ; , iP t,;R ,~ .H ~~ .., r a yw~ -~-- " .~v'" ! . . ~ 0' ", ~ ~, ,~ , , '.~"~" ~. "~", '-.." ~"" ~ , !~ , ,1I<<~ -~ '\ " , , Q<>'9'I'"' " " ~,. ,",," ~:_ c. . \ \ \ ~ i " 'I ,'--- ---:---'------------,-::;7:,..,',..,.. ~~ "''?:v0I h\N "T3~.:I ~- , .. )..v~Zl ' . 'fI/l.;.; 0] ~"\'I '3 N'V'l-- .,..,- '-~'~----c-- ^ 121';lJ ~I; '-, nn -,.r-.' I 'J">.),~ ~I,,~ 1" , \ -~ -~ ,.."" ~"". -'----'-