HomeMy WebLinkAboutTract Map 30668-2 As Graded Rough GradingAS-GRADED REPORT OF ROUGH GRADING
FOR HARVESTON TRACT 30668-2
CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
Prepared For:
~ennar Com~uni~ies
391 N. Main Street, Suite 301
Corona, California 92880
January 29, 2004
Project No. 110231-024
~ RECIEIVEI
~ ~x . MAR 0 2 2004
4u~
n . ~ ;ti~~ CITY OF TEMECULA
, ENGINEERING DEPARTM
.._~
Leigh~on and Associ~tes, lnc.
h ~EIGHTON GROUP CUNPANY
' ~
' -
' Leighton and Associates, Inc.
A LEIGHTQN GROUP COMPANV
, January 29, 2004
Project No. 110231-024
t
To: Lennar Communities
~ 391 N. Main Street, Suite 301
Corona, California 92880
' Attention: Mr. Bill Storm
Subject: As-Graded Report of Rough Grading for Harveston, Tract 30668-2, City of
, Temecula, Califomia.
In accordance with your request and authorization, Leighton and Associates, Inc. (L,eighton). has been
' providing geotechnical observation and testing services during rough gading operations of Tract
30668-2, located in the City of Temecula, Califomia (See Figure 1). The accompanying as-graded
report summarizes our observations, fieid and laboratory test results and the geotechnical conditions
' encountered during the rough grading of Home Sites i through 42 of Tract 30668-2 within the
Harveston Community.
' If you have any questions regazding this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office, we
appreciate this opportunity to be of service.
' ~~PED 6F~~
Respectfully submitted, ~~ oO~RT F q/y ~,+~
¢ Q N0. 1927 y ..~
' LEIGHTON AND AS CIATES CEHTIF:ED
> } ENGINEEHING ~
~ ciEOL00IST ~ pOFE98/a
6' /~' ~ ~~c ~F ~A1.~CS~"~Q ~ ~Q.~zoP~,~ T. ~4qM4
' Robert F. Riha, CEG 1921 (Exp. 02/29/04) . Guatelli, G 2~0, GE2320
Vice President/Principal Geologist Associate Engineer ~ Exp. 72-37-OS
* P
' RFR/ATG/mm ~T9 F~C~pQ$
1 I0231-024/finaVas-grd rpt hact 30668-2
' Copies To: (4) Addressee, (2 Unbound)
(2) Harveston Jobsite; Attention: Mr. Andy Hendrickson
' (4) I,ennaz Homes; Attention: Mr. Peter Vanek (1 Unbound)
~ ~
' 41715 Enterpnse Circle N., Suite 103 ^ Temecula, CA 92590-5661
909.296.0530 ^ Fax 909.296.0534 ^ www.leightongeo.com
~
,
TABLE OF CONTENTS
110231-024
]anuary 29, 2004
' Section paae
1.0 INTRODUCfION 1
' .........................................................................................................
2.0 SUMMARY OF ROUGH-GRADING OPERATIONS ............................................................. ......
......z
2.1 Site Preparation and Removals ...................... z
.........................................................
2.2 Feld Density Testin9 .................................... ...................
.......................... ............. ......
Z
.....
~
2.3 Laboratory Testin9 ................................................................................................ .
.
2
2.4 Fill Placement ....... .....
3
' ....................................................................:............................
2.5 Keyway Subdrains ................................................................................................. ......
......3
3.0 ENGINEERING GEOLOGIC SUMMARY ........................................................................... ......4
' 3.1 As-Graded Geologic Conditions ............................................................................... ......4
3.2 Geologic Units ....................................................................................................... ......4
, 3.2.1 Artificial FII (A~ ,,,,,,,,,,, „
. .................................................................................... 4
.....
3.2.2 Artificial FII Leighton (Afl) .................................................................................... .....4
3.2.3 Pauba Formation ~QP)
' ........................................................................................ .....4
3.3 Geologic Structure and Faultin9 ............................................................................... ...
3.4 Landslides and Surficial Failures
........................................... ..
5
' ....................................
3.5 Groundwater..... . . ... ..............................................................:..................
... . . .....
.....5
3.6 6cpansion Testing of Finish Grade Soils .............................................................. 5
1 4.0 CONCLUSIONS ..................................................
...............................................................6
4.1 General .......................................................................................................................6
' • 4.2 Summary of Conclusions ..............................................................................................6
5.0 RECOMMENDA7IONS ........................................................................................................$
' S.1 Earthwork ...................................................................................................................$
~ 5.1.1 F~ccavations ............................................................................................................ $
= 5.1.2 Utility Backfill, Fill Placement and Compaction ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,g
' 5.2 Foundation and Structure Design Considerations 8
...........................................................
5.3 Foundation Setback from SIoP~ .................................................................................10
5.4 Structure Seismic Design Parameters ..........................................................................10
' S.5 Corrosion . .............. ...........................................................11
. ... .
5.6 Lateral Earth Pressures and Retaining Wall Design Considerations ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,11
, 5.7 Concrete Flatwork ........................................................................................... .......12
....
' S.8 Control of Surface Water and Drainage Control 13
............................................................
5.9 Graded Slopes ................. .........................................................................................13
, 5.10 Irrigation, Landscaping and Lot Maintenance,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,13
' ~
' -' - Leighton
Z
~ 110231-024
January 29, 2004
:' Table of Contents (cont.)
, 5.11 Post-Grading Geotechnical Review,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,14
5.11.1 Construction Review ...........................................................................................14
' S.11.2 Plans and Specifications ......................................................................................14
6.0 LIMIfATIONS .....................................................................................:............................15
Accomoanvin4 Ficaures, Tables. Plates and Appendices
Fi ures
':' Figure 1- Site Location Map Rear of Text
Figure 2- Retaining Wall Drainage Detail for Medium F~cpansive Soils Rear of Text
~ Tables
' Table 1- lot by Lot Summary of As-graded Geotechnical
'
'i~
Conditions and Recommendations Rear of Te~
Table 2- Minimum Conventional Foundation Design Recommendations Rear of Text
Table 3- Minimum Post-Tensioned Foundation Design Recommendations Rear of Text
, Table 4- Lateral Earth Pressures Rear of Text
' Plates
Plates 1& 2- As-Graded Geotechnical Map In Pocket
~ A~oendices
Appendix A - References
' Appendix B- Summary of Field Density Tests
Appendix C- Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results
Appendix D- Lot Maintenance Guidelines for Owners
,
'
' ~
~ 3
' -"- Leighton
' 110231-024
]anuary 29, 2004
'
1.0 INTRODUCTION
' In accordance with your request and authorization, Leighton and Associates, Inc. (Leighton) has
performed geotechnical observation and testing services during October and November, 2003 for
' the most recent phase of rough-grading operations to create residential pads on Home Sites 1
through 42 of Tract 30668-2 within the Harveston Community. The subject tract had been
' previously "sheeY' mass graded under the observation and testing of Leighton (Leiu,hton, 2003).
~ This as-graded report summarizes our geotechnical observations, fieid and laboratory test resuits
' and the geotechnical conditions encountered during the recent rough grading of the subject lots.
In addition, this report provides conclusions and recommendations far the continued
development of the subject lots.
' The reference 40-scale grading plans for Tract 30668-2 (RBF, 2003) were annotated and utilized as
a base map (Plates 1& 2) to plot geotechnical conditions and the approximate locations of the field
' density tests taken during rough-grading operations.
'
1
'
1
~
'
'
,
' ~
~ -1 Leighton
~
, 110231-024
January 29, 2004
'
2.0 SUMMARY OF ROUGH-GRADING OPERATIONS
,
' Tract 30668-2 was inirially sheet graded as a portion of Lots 17 and 18 within Tract 29639-1 under the
observation and testing of Leighton (I,eighton, 2003). Rough gading to the approved design
configuration (RBF, 2003) was conducted by ACI, Inc. in October and November of 2003, under the
' geotechnical observation and testing services of Leighton. Leighton field technician('s) and geologist
were onsite on a full-time and as-needed basis, as required during grading operations. Grading
involved the iemoval of desiccated fill, erosion rills and surface erosion sed'unenfs to competent
' previously-placed compacted fill (L.eighton, 2003) and the placement of new compacted artificial fiil
to depths of appro~cimately four feet above previously existing grades to create the design residenrial
lots and associated madways. The total fill thiclmess is reported on Table 1(reaz of text).
' 2.1 Site Preoaretion and Removals
' Prior to grading, deleterious materials were removed from the azeas of proposed development
and disposed of offsite. Grading of the subject site was initiated by removal of unsuitable
surficial material. The removals were completed when competent previously-placed
, compacted fill (L,eighton, 2003) or Pauba Formation was encountered in accordance with the
recommendations of the project geotechnical reports (Appendix A) and the geotechnical
recommendations made during grading operations.
, 2.2 Fieid Density Testing ~
' Field density tesring was performed using the nucleaz gauge method (ASTM Test Methods
~ D2922 and D3017). Tested azeas appeaz to meet the niu~imum requued 90 percent relative
' compaction with optimum moisture content or above. Areas that tested less than the required 90
percent relative compaction, were reworked, moisture conditioned as necessary and compacted
unril the m;nimum 90 percent was obtained. The results and approximate locarions of the field
' density tests aze summarized in Appendix B. The approxunate locations of the field density tests
aze depicted on the enclosed As-Graded Geotechnical Maps (Plates 1& 2).
2.3 Laboretorv Testing
Laboratory compacUon characteristics (maximum dry density and optimum moisture),
' expansion index, Atterberg Innits, and soluble sulfate tests of representative onsite soils were
performed during the course of rough-grading and aze presented in Appendix C.~ A description
of the laboratory test procedures are also presented in Appendix C. The interpretation of the
, laboratory data for each lot is presented in Table 1 at the rear of text.
,
•
' /
`J
' -2 Leighton
, 110231-024
)anuary 29, 2004
'
' 2.4 Fill Placement
~, Fill materials consisting of the soil types listed in Appendix C was placed in lifts of
approximately eight to ten inches, processed and moisture conditioned to optimum moisture
~' content or above, and compacted in piace to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory
derived maximum dry density. Fill placement and compaction was accomplished with the
' use of heavy earthwork equipment.
' 2.5 K~av Subdrains
, The keyway subdrain was constructed during rough grading of Tract 30668-2 (Home Sites 40-
42) and Tract 3066-1 (Home Sites 20-21). The subdrain was constructed to outlet to the
planned permanent storm drain on Harveston Drive, approximate station 75+00. The.
' approximate location of the subdrain is presented on the As-Graded Geotechnical Maps (Plates
1 and 2). Canyon subdrains, as constructed, were surveyed by RBF.
,
'
1
'
,
s'
~
L~I
'
•
, /
l0
, - 3 Leighton
~
1
'
,
4~
Ld
1
,
~
110231-024
January 29, 2004
3.0 ENGINEERING GEOLOGIC SUMMARY
3.1 As-Graded Geoloaic Conditions
The as-graded conditions encountered during grading of the subject lots was essentially as
anficipated. A smnmary of the geologic conditions, including geologic units, geologic shucture
and faulting is presented below.
3.2 Geoloaic Units
The geologic units observed during grading of the subject lots consisted of Artificial Fill (A~,
previously-placed compacted fill (Afl), and the Pauba Formation (Qp), which aze discussed
below:
3.2.1 Artificial Fill (Afl - Locally derived artificial fill soils generally consisted of olive gray to
olive brown silry sand to locally slightly clayey silty sand. Artificial fill soils were placed
under observation and field density testing by Leighton representatives during this phase of
grading. After moisture conditioning and thomugh mixing, the artificial fill soils were
placed in lifts of approxnnately 8 to 10 inches and compacted utilizing heavy duty earth
conshuction equipment.
3.2.2 Artificial Fiil Leighton (~fll - The ar[ificiai fill encountered from the previous phase of
gading 2002/2003 generaily consisted of brown to dark bmwn, moist, medium dense to
dense silty sand. As encountered during grading, the artificial fill was generally moderately
dense near the surface, becoming more dense with depth. The weathered artificial fili
materials were scarified to a depth of 6 inches, moisture conditioned, thoroughly mixed
' and re-used as compacted fill.
3.2.3 Pauba Formation (Ool - The late Pleistocene-aged Pauba Formation generally consists
, of light brown to olive-brown to medium brown, damp to moist, medium dense to dense,
siltstone, sandstone and silty claystone. Fractures aze locally lined with calcium
carbonate. The Pauba formation was moisture conditioned and re-used as compacted fili.
3.3 Geologic Structure and Faulting
'
'
,
'
Based on our geoloac observations during site grading, the Pauba Formation is massive with
localized bedding, which is generally flat lying. No faulting or indications of faulting were
anticipated or observed within or immediately adjacent to the subject tract. The nearest
"zoned" active fault is the Temecula Segment of the Elsinore Fault Zone located approximately
0.9 miles (1.45 km) to the southwest.
~
-4 Leighton
1
, 110231-024
]anuary 29, 2004
1
3.4 Landslides and Surficial Failures
, Based on ow review of the project geotechnical reports (Appendix A) and our geologic
, observations during the course of grading operations, there were no indications of landslides or
other significant surficial failures within the subject tract. It should be noted that unplanted or
unprotected slopes aze subject to erosion and subsequent surficial instabiliry.
' 3.5 Groundwater
~ Groundwater was not encountered during recent or previous (Leighton, 2003) rough grading.
Canyon subdrains were constructed in general accordance with the project geotechnical
' reports (Appendix A) and our field recommendations during the previous grading (Leighton,
, 2003). However, unforeseen conditions may occur after the completion of grading and
establishment of site irrigation and landscaping. Perched groundwater may accuxnulate at layers
of differing permeability or at underlying bedrock/fill contacts. If these conditions should
, occw, methods should be taken to mitigate any resulting seepage. Presently the majority of the
subject site drains towazds the west and any surface runoff will tend to collect at low points
until such time that the proposed design drainage facilities aze constructed. If water is allowed
1 to pond in these azeas for any length of time the subgrade in these azeas may become saturated
, and additional grading recommendations may be required to mitigate this condirion. We
recommend that the project erosion control program be designed and implemented as soon as
, possible to limit the potential of erosion damage or adverse effects to compacted fill.
' 3.6 Ex~ansion Testing of Finish Grade Soils
Eacpansion index testing was performed on representative neaz finish grade soils of the subject
' lots. The test results indicate the on lot near-finish grade soils have a variable very low to high
expansion potential in accordance with Table 18-I-B of the 1997 UBC. Test results of samples
taken during the course of grading indicate that very low to very high expansive soils e~st on site
, at various depths and loca$ons on the Harveston project site. Test procedures and results are
presented in Appendix C. A lot by lot interpretation and recommended design expansion potential
for the subject lots is presented in Table 1.
~
II
~
'
, ~
' ~ 5 Leighton
~
1
,
' 4.1 General
1
~
4.0
110231-024
January 29, 2004
The grading of the subject lots was performed in general accordance with the project geotechnical
reports and geotechnicai recommendations made during the course of rough gading. It is our
professional opurion that the subject lots aze suitable for their intended residential use provided
the recommendations inciuded herein and in the project geotechnical reports aze incotporated into
the design and conshuction of the residential structures and associated improvements.
4.2 Summarv of Conclusions
' . Geotechnical conditions encountered during rough grading of the subject site were generally
as anticipated.
1 . Excava6ons were made to dense previously-placed compacted fill (Afl) material .or Pauba
Formation during the grading for the subject lots.
. Cut and fill slopes within the subject h~act range up to approximately IS to 16 feet in height,
' respectively. It is our opinion that the slopes on the subject tract are surficially and grossly
stable (under normal irrigarion/precipitarion patterns) provided the recommendations in the
project geotechnical reports and memorandums are incorporated into the post-grading,
' construction and post-construction phases of site development. Slopes aze inherently subject
to erosion. As such, measures should be taken as soon as possible to reduce erosion for both
short term and long term slope integrity.
' . Laboratory testing of soils encountered during the course of previous mass grading indicates
~ site soils may possess a very low to very high expansion potential and a negligible
, concentration of soluable sulfate. Some expansive soil related distress to flatwork should be
anricipated. Laboratory test results are contained herein Table 1 and Appendix C.
. Testing for minimwn resistivity, chloride concentrates, and pH was not conducted during
, the course of rough grading. A licensed conosion engineer should be contacted in regard to
determining the potential for corrosion if corrosion sensitive buried improvements aze to be
installed.
. The potentia( for ground-surface rupture on the site due to a seismic eveut is considered to
be low; however, as in most of southem California, strong ground shaking should be
anticipated during the life of the structures. The standazd design of structures to meet the
seismic design requirements of the Uniform Building Code (IJBC), Seismic Zone 4 will be
required.
1
'
r
'
• Where tested, fill material placed during grading of the subject tract was placed at a
minimum of 90 percent relative compaction (95 percent where recommended) at or above
the optimum moisture content. Field testing of compaction was performed by the nuclear
gauge method (ASTM Test Methods D2922 and D3017).
~
~ 6 Leighton
~
' 110231-024
]anuary 29, 2004
'
• Foundations should be designed and constructed in accordance with Leighton's minimum
,, recommendations herein, the requirements of the City of Temecula and the applicable
sections of the 1997 UBC.
' . Due to the relatively dense nature of the bedrock materials that underlie the subject site, the
competency of compacted fills, as well as the lack of permanent shallow groundwater, the
potential for liquefaction on the site is considered very low.
' . The front yard and driveway azeas were intentionally left below design elevations
(approximately 2 to 3.5 feet below pad grade) to accommodate future lot excavation spoils.
~ Filling of these azeas should be performed in acwrdance with the recommendations herein
for earthwork (secrion 5.1.2).
'
I
,
'
'
,
,
'rJ
'
1
~
r ,o
' ~ ~ - Leighton
, 110231-024
January 29, 2004
'
' S.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Earthwork
' We anticipate that future earthwork at the site will consist of precise grading of the building
' pads, foundation instailation, trench excavation and backfill, retaining wall backfill,
' preparation of street subgrade, and placement of aggregate base and asphalt concrete
pavement. We recommend that any addirional earthwork on the site be performed in
accordance with the foilowing recommendaUons and the City of Temecula grading
, requirements.
~ 5.1.1 Excavations -- Temporary excavations with vertical sides, such as utility trenches,
' should remain stable to depths of 4 feet or less for the period required to construct the
urility. However, in accordance with OSHA requirements, excavations greater than 4
feet in depth should be shored, or laid-back to inclinations of 1:1 (horizontal to
' vertical), if workers are to enter such excavations. Leighton does not consult in the
azea of safery engineering. The contractor is responsible for the safety of all
excavations.
, 5.1.2 Utili Backfil~, Fill Placement and Gompa ion -- All backfill or fill soils
, should be brought to optimum moisture conditions and compacted in uniform lifts to
at least 90 percent relative compaction based on the laboratory malcimum dry density
(ASTM Test Method D1557). The optimum lift thickness required to produce
' uniform compacrion wiil depend on the type, size and condition of compaction
equipment used. In general, the onsite soils should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8
inches in compacted thiclmess and placed on dense exisring compacted fill or other
, earth material appmved by the geotechnical consultant. The backfill that coincides
with pavement subgade should be reworked and compacted in accordance with
pavement design requirements.
, 5.2 Foundation and Structure Design Considerations
' It is Leighton's understanding that single-family structures founded on post-tensioned or
conventional foundation systems aze proposed. The pmposed foundations and slabs should
be designed in accordance with the shuctural consultants' design, the minimum geotechnical
' recommendations presented herein (text, Tabie 1 through 3), the City of Temecula
requirements and the 1997 UBC. In utilizing the minimum geotechnical foundation
,
recommendations, the structural consultant should design the foundation system to acceptable
, deflection criteria as deternuned by the struchual engineer and azchitect. Due to the highly
variable soil types with expansion potentials ranging from very low to high, it is
recommended that a high expansion potential be assumed for the subject home sites
, foundation/slab design (see Table 1).
~
'
' - 8 - Leighton
~~
' 110231-024
January 29, 2004
'
Foundation £ootings may be designed with the following pazameters:
' Allowable Bearing Capacity: 2000 psf at a minimum depth of embedment of 12
inches, plus an additional 250 psf per 6 inches of
, additional embedment to a maacimum of 2500 psf.
(per 1997 UBC, capacities may be increased by 1/3 for
short-term loading conditions, i.e., wind, seismic)
' Sliding Coe~cient: 0.35
' Static Settlement: Total: 1 Inch
Differential: 1 inch in 40 feet
,
The footing width, depth, reinforcement, slab reinforcement, and the slab-on-g~ade thiclrness
' shouid be designed by the structural consultant based on recommendations and soil
chazacteristics indicated herein (Tables 1 through 3), and the most recently adopted edition of
the UBC. The effects of seismic shaking on foundation soils may increase the static
, differential settlement noted above to approxnnately 1.25 inch in 40 feet.
' The under-slab moisture retazder should consist of 2 inches of sand (S.E. > 30) over 10 mil
visqueen over an additional2 inches of sand (a total of 4 inches of sand). The recommended
visqueen should be sealed at all penetrations and laps. Moishue vapor transmission may be
' additionally reduced by use of concrete additives. Moisture vapor retuders may reduce but
not eliminate moisture vapor movement from the underlying soils up through the slabs. A
slipsheet or equivalent should be utilized above the concrete slab if crack-sensitive floor
, coverings (such as ceramic tiles, etc.) aze to be placed directly on the concrete slab.
Our experience indicates that use of reinforcement in slabs and foundations will generally
' reduce the potential for drying and shrinkage cracldng. However, some cracking should be
expected as the concrete cures. Minor cracking is considered normal; however, it is often
aggravated by a high water/cement ratio, high concrete temperatures at the time of placement,
' small nominal aggregate size and rapid moisture loss due to hot, dry and/or windy weather
condirions during placement and curing. Cracking due to temperature and moisture
fluctuations can a7so be expected. The use of low slump concrete (not exceeding 4 to 5 inches
' at the time of placement) can reduce the potentiai for shrinkage cracking.
Future homeowners and homeowners' association should be made aware of the importance of
, maintaining a constant level of soil moisture. Homeowners should be made awaze of the
potential negative consequences of both excessive watering, as well as allowing soils to
, become too dry. Improperly designed, constructed, or maintained planters often pond water
and cause deep moisture penetration and soil moisture change. Since deep and repeated soii
moisture change can damage the adjacent structure, placement of planters adjacent to
E>
'
' - 9 Leighton
~~
' 110231-024
January 29, 2004
~
foundarions or other sensitive hazdscape, such as pools and spas, should be discouraged if
' adequate and proper maintenance can not be assured. Our recommendarions asstune a
reasonable degree of homeowner responsibility, if the homeowners do not adequately
' maintain correct irrigation and drainage, some degree of foundation movement should be
expected. However, this movement typically does not cause structural damage, but will cause
such things as stucco cracking and dry wall sepazation.
, The slab subgrade soils should be presoaked in accordance with the recommendations
presented in Table 1 prior to placement of the moisture retazder and foundation concrete.
, 5.3 Foundation Setback from Slopes
' We recommend a minimum horizontal setback distance from the face of slopes for all
struchual footings (retaining and decorative wails, building footings, pools, etc.). This
distance is measured from the outside bottom edge of the footing horizontally to the slope
~ face (or.to the face of a retaining wall) and should be a minimum of H/2, where H is the slope
height (in feet). The setback should not be less than 5 feet and need not be greater than 10
feet. Please note that the soils within the structural setback area possess poor lateral stability
, and improvements (such as retaining walls, sidewalks, Fences, pools, patios, etc.) constructed
within this setback azea may be subject to lateral movement and/or differential settlement.
The potential for distress to such improvements may be mitigated by providing a deepened
' footing or a pier and grade-beam foundation system to support the improvement. The
deepened footing should meet the setback as described above. Modifications of slope
inclinations neaz foundations may reduce the setback and should be reviewed by the design
, team prior to completion of design or implementation.
' S.4 Structure Seismic Desian Parameters
Structures should be designed as required by provisions of the Uniform Building Code (LTBC)
' for Seismic Zone 4 and state-of-the-art seismic design pazuneters of the Structural Engineers
Association of Califomia. This site is located with UBC Seismic Zone 4. Seismic design
pazameters in accordance with the 1997 UBC ate presented below. Please refer to the
' Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation (I,eighton, 2001) for additional information.
Seismic Source Type = B
, Near Source Factor, Na =1.3
Neaz Source Factor, N~ = 1.6
Soil Profile Type = So
' Horizontal Peak Ground Acceleration = 0.68g
(10% probability of exceedance in 50 yeazs)
'
' ~
' -10-
Leighton
~3
, 110231-024
January 29, 2004
~
, 5.5 Corrosion
For sulfate exposure and cement type refer to Table 1 and the corresponding sections of the
, UBC. Corrosion tests such as, pH, resistivity and chloride concentration were not
performed as part of this obsetvation during rough grading. Other than buried concrete
improvements, a licensed corrosion engineer should be contacted in order to determine the
~ potential for corrosion if conosion sensitive buried improvements are planned.
5.6 Lateral Earth Pressures and Retaining Wall Design Considerations
, The recommended lateral pressures for very low to low expansive soil (expansion index less
.:i
than 51) and level or sloping backfill are presented on Table 4(reaz of text). The onsite wall
' excavation materials should be reviewed by the geotechnical consultant prior to use as wall
backfill:
, Embedded shuctural walls should be designed for lateral earth pressures exerted on.them. The
magnitude of these pressures d,epends on the amount of deformation that the wall can yield
, under load. If the wall can yield enough to mobilize the full shear strength of the soil, it can be
designed for "active" pressure. ff the wall cannot yield under the applied load, the sheaz
~ strength of the soil cannot be mobilized and the earth pressure will be higher. Such walls
' should be designed for "at rest" conditions. If a structure moves towazd the soils, the cesulting
resistance developed by the soil is the "passive" resistance.
' The equivalent fluid weights of Table 4 assume very low to low expansive, free-draining
conditions. If conditions other than those assumed above are anticipated, equivalent flwd
weights should be provided on a case by case basis by the geotechnical engineer. Surchazge
' loading effects from adjacent structures should be evaluated by the structural engineer. All
retanring wall structures should be provided with appropriate drainage and waterproofing. The
outlet pipe should be sloped to drain to a suitable outlet. Typical wall drainage design is
' illustrated in Figure 2 and 3.
Lateral passive pressures may be detemuned using the values provided in Table 4. In
' combining the total lateral resistance, the passive pressure or the fi-ictional resistance should
__ be reduced by 50 percent. Wall footings should be designed in accordance with shuctural
considerations. The passive resistance value may be increased by one-third when considering
~ loads of short duration, including wind or seismic loads. The horizontal distance beriveen
foundation elements providing passive resistance should be a minimum of three times the
depth of the elements to allow full development of these passive pressures. The total depth of
~ retained earth for design of canrilever walls should be the vertical distance below the ground
surface measured at the wall face for stem design or measured at the heel of the footing for
' overhiming and sliding.
' ~
' -11- Leighton
~~.
, 110231-024
January 29, 2004
'
' Foundations for retaining walls in competent formational soils or properly compacted fill
should be embedded at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finish grade. At this depth,
an ailowable bearing capacity of 2,250 psf may be utilized. The bearing capacity may be
' increased by 250 psf for each additional six inches of embedment to a maximum of 4000 psf.
Wall backcut excavations less than 5 feet in height can be made neaz vertical. For backcuts
' greater than 5 feet in height, the backcut should be flattened to a gradient not steeper than 1:1
(horizontal to vertical). Backfill soils should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative
compaction (based on ASTM Test Method D1557). Backfill should extend horizontally to a
' minimum distance equal to one-half the wall height behind the walls. The walls should be
constructed and backfilled as soon as possible after backcut excavation. Prolonged exposure
of backcut slopes may result in some localized slope instability.
' For unrestrained retaining walls within this tract that are greater than 5 feet (exposed; retained
earth) or that may present a life/safety hazard during strong gound shaking, the lateral earth
, pressures should be increased by a seismic surchazge (seismic increment) in general
accordance with chapter 16 of the 1997 UBC. The location, dishibution and magnitude of this
surchazge will be provided if such walls aze proposed. Walls designed with such seismic
, increment should achieve a factor of safety between 11 and 1.2 when evaluating stability
(sliding and overtuming) of the wall (NAVFAC DM7.02).
, 5.7 Concrete Flatwork
, Expansive soils are lmown to exist onsite and therefore concrete flatwork should be designed
and constructed with the anticipation of expansive soil related distress. Closer spacing of
control joints, reinforcement and keeping the flatwork subgade at or above optnnum
, moisture prior to the placement of concrete may minimize cracking and differential
movement.
~ City of Temecula Standard No. 401 "Sidewalk and Curb" specifies aggregate base or
approved select material under sidewalks and curbs when expansive soil is present. In lieu of
the aggregate base or select material under sidewalks and curbs, and with the approval of the
,, City of Temecula, the sidewalk and curb subgrade may be presoaked such that 120% of
optimum moisture content to a minimum depth of 8 inches is achieved prior to the placement
of concrete. Moisture testing must be performed by the geotechnical consultant prior to
' concrete placement.
,
'
~
''
, -12- \~
Leighton
'
u
'
C
,
'
'
'
~
~
~
'
,
,
'
,
'
~
110231-024
January 29, 2004
5.8 Controi of Surface Water and Drainage Control
Positive drainage of surface water away from structures is very important. No water should be
allowed to pond adjacent to buildings. Positive drainage may be accomplished by providing
drainage away from buildings at a gradient of at least 2 percent for a distance of at least 5 feet,
and further maintained by a swale on dtainage path at a gradient of at least 1 percent. Where
1'united by 5-foot side yazds, drainage should be directed away from foundations for a
minimum of 3 feet and into a collector swale or pipe system. Where necessary, drainage paths
may be shortened by use of area drains and collector pipes and/or paved swales. Eave gutters
also help reduce water infilh~ation into the subgrade soils if the downspouts aze properly
connected to appropriate outlets.
Planters with open bottoms adjacent to buildings should be avoided, if possible. Planters
should not be desigied adjacentto buildings unless provisions for drainage, such as catch
;basins and pipe drains, are made. No ponding of water from any source (including
irrigarion) should be permitted onsite as moisture infiltration may increase the potential for
moisture-related distress. Experience has shown that even with these controls for surface
drainage, a shallow perched ground water or subsurface water condition can• and may
develop in azeas where no such condition previously existed. This is particularly hue where
a substantial increase in surface water infiltration resulting from site irrigation occurs.
Mitigation of these conditions should be performed under the recommendations of the
geotechnical consultant on a case-by-case basis.
5.9 .Graded Slopes
It is recommended that all slopes be planted with drought-tolerant, ground cover vegetation
as soon as practical to protect against erosion by reducing runoff velocity. Deep-rooted
vegetation should also be established to provide resistance to surficial slumping.
Oversteepening of existing slopes should be avoided during fine grading and construction.
Retaining structures to support graded slopes should be designed with structural
considerations and appropriate soil pazameters pmvided in Section 5.6.
5.10 Irriqation, Landscapina and Lot Maintenance
Site irrigation should be controlled at all times. We recommend that only the minimum
amount of irrigation necessary to maintain plant vigor be utilized. For imgation of trees and
shrubs, a drip urigation system should be considered. We recommend that where possible,
landscaping consist primarily of drought-tolerant vegetation. A landscape consultant should
be contacted for proper plant selection. For large graded slopes adjacent to open space
areas, we recommend native plant species be utilized and that irrigation be utilized only
until plants are well established. At that time, irrigation could be significantly reduced.
4
13 - Leighton
~~
1
'
110231-024
January 29, Z004
Upon sale of home sites, maintenance of lots and common areas by the homeowners and
' homeowner's association, respectively, is recommended. Recommendations for the
maintenance of slopes and pmperty are included in Appendix D for your review and
_ distribution to future homeowners and/or homeowner's associations.
5.11 Post-Grading Geotechnical Review
, 5.11.1 Construction Review -- Construction observation and testing should be performed
by the geotechnical consultant during future excavations, utility trench backfilling
' and foundarion or retaining wail construction at the site. Additionally, footing
excavations should be observed and moishue determination tests of subgrade soils
should be performed by the geotechnical consultant prior to the pouring of concrete.
' ' 5:11.2 Plans and Suecifications -- The geotechnical engineer should review foundation
plans to evaluate if the recommendations herein have been incorporated. Foundation
' design plans and specifications should be reviewed by the geotechnical consultant
prior to excavation or installation of residential development.
~
'
'
,
'
'
'
'
~
-14 - Leighton
~1
, 110231-024
January 29, 2004
;'
6.0 LIMITATIONS
~ The presence of our field representative at the site was intended to provide the owner with
, professional advice, opinions, and recommendations based on observations of the contractor's
work. Although the observations did not reveal obvious deficiencies or deviations from project
specificaGons, we do not guarantee the contractor's work, nor do our services relieve the contractor
' or his subconh~actor's work, nor do our services relieve the contractor or his subcontractors of their
responsibility if defects aze subsequently discovered in their work. Our responsibilities did not
include any supervision or direction ofthe actual work procedures of the contractor, his personnel,
~ ar subcontractors. The conclusions in this report are based on test results and observations of the
grading and earthwork procedures used and represent our engineering opinion as to the compliance
- of the results with the project specifications.
' This report was prepared for Lemiaz Communiries, based on their needs, directions, and requirements
at the time. This report is not authorized for use by, and is not to be relied upon by. any party
' except, Lennaz Communiries, with whom L,eighton contracted for the work. Use of or reliance on
this report by any other party is at that party's risk. Unauthorized use of or reliance on this
Report consritutes an agreement to defend and indemnify Leighton and Associates from and
' against any liability which may arise as a result of such use or reliance, regardless of any fault,
negligence, or strict liability of Leighton and Associates.
1
'
'
I >.;'
'
'
' ~
' - is - Leighton
,~
~ ;`--~~r ~ ~, •~ ~,`~ ~
`f~~ C b
I
`
~\
y / ~. ._ y `L.r~,:,~~ ''o-;,:
~J:l J' a u„' ~~~ - Y,{-
~
~
~ 'l
~
~
t~~~
O
~
' ` ~~
. ~
~\
'
\ L
°~
~~' ~
~
(~
~
~
Ja
~ t .\
4 • ~s • ~ ~ %;
.~ ..
4
`
C
o;~ . .
' .f' .~\ .' ~' ~V~d '
,~
~ R
J~~`
` ~1~~ e~~~
`',- ~~ ~ ~~ /~ . /
.~~.. 'f J :, p; ~\o-Q:~., 4' `GtU
~
~~ y ~
`C
$
.c
.
`
:'P
~
~ \~ ~
n /
4'~
~%~ 9'r
'
\
~i
r
~
o • e-l`
'°~'
' ~.
v
-' `r i',~s
' '~~ ^ o`\`'
..
~'j
~
~
'~ ~
p
,I
~
~
/
._,
.F
=~ '~, . ~f 9
~~~i_Cf
`
y
~~~~
~~
~
~ [\
?
~ ~' , c.
. ~ ...~ '~~\
4,
'~p
'~`
1j
`
:
\
h AR.~:~(tHli.L -^~
~
~
~.i.
~
~,
-I
~, r
f;~
1`', (i ~
o ~'
a1
~
\
V
•~µ J ^
C/'
~tQ-,
~~ Qii , t!ti
-,~. i, r r,'.~' ~.4'
~'_
_
~Q. ~~'-C' [~~
~
,
~
`
'.:~0~~(.9i ~ ~15~ . nf-v
~ r
, .Qp- a . q ~~.~
'~ ~4
~ .
'
~'i
i 4
~~. ~
~, .f '' y a.Fa, .
H
4:
~ ~. ~'
`~
''' ''. ~1J_ Op~',~ 4- Y~C . C~
`~
~
'
, vf~
,~
.~
1
~~ ~- ~,so<
~
'6i:~ .~ .
'~4' `Cq
' ifl ,
~ ~
~~
~ tia. t~
..- ~ ~ ~ e -- .,~
.~' ~~ , o z' • ~.
E `r r
'
~!Ri l! ~,
{.
vld lll
E BU~SS
pQ' t'~ ~~,~;'o ,. ~ ,1,
F
l ~
,
.
,. ~,~ :-~. , . ~o
,~~- ~-
('
/
~Q JF~ Pf ~~ _'!
p~ ~r ,oo~ '
G ~ ~jTa~~ . zl~~'- 3 0
o~ L
~
~
+
°
~
'
~
o ;
~ ~;r, . t
I~' ~~
~
~
=
.u ;,
~~
~ Q~
~
`~ ~«~t,;,~.~5 ~~,::;s~ii
_ ~~ ,
'' R'D /
'
,~ ° ~
-s
~p,R
F Y ,
, Q,~ ~.
r
~n
.
'
t~ '
~
/
o
~ i w i
~a ~I
~ ~t#A"r.i+F.Sr'~jy
Site Location --_
'
Lq~~ ~.ti.~: •
. ~;y - -
_~SE ~~-~
,A
"~ ~ ,~ o
~
~~,
A9
DR °
G
.
~------- ~0. c
~ ~ ,pp~,ti
a
o .P l~:4~1i=~it.~.'
+
~ ,KtL~.~01lS p
~
'~ER _ -- ~ ~' a~y
P~
~ F4U r
~``'~ . ~~
~
/
Ty
DR - V'~
.
fo° ,
~ ~ W~.+4`CHE~T R -r ~
+ ;+,°A,YKET
~ ~~,
~
~ ?~` ACf p~ 9 ci
'
~ >
rc~,+.Yi,55 a
~J
', ~ .~\ ,: ` ~ ~ ~l'
'S iEK=CL-Ln N o,t~A`~i~
- ~-:
Base Map: The Thomas Guide Digital Ed'Rion Inland Empire 2004, Not To Scale
Harveston
Tract 30668-2,
Temecula, California
Riverside County, California
SITE LOCATION
MAP
Project No. ~
/
110231-024 ~
Date
January 2004 Fgure No.1
\~
SUBDRAIN OPTIONS AND BACKFILL WHEN NATNE MATERIAL HAS DCPANSION INDDC OF >50
WALL HQGFR
OR HEEL W[DTH
WHICHEVER
IS GREATFR
WATERPROCF
PER DE4GN
ENGIN~2
WEEP HCIE ~
(SEE NQTES)
6" hIIN.
QEW SNJD BAIXF[LL
WITH SE>?0.
~ APPROVED BY SOILS HJGIN~2
(M4Y BE DBV4Flm BY ~MPACfION
OR.WATER.~TfING)
FICIER FABRIC
(SEE NO7E4)
4' PERFORATED PIPEAN06RAVa
(SEE NOTES 2 AND 3)
NQTE: AS Ml ALT62NA1E TO QEAN 54ND Bl~CIffRi,
CIfP.N GRAVEL M4Y BE U7ILIIED WIiN APPROVED ftLTHt FABWC A
SECOND ALTERNATE IS TO UTILIZE PN AGGPEGAiE BASE MP.'fFRIA1
COMPACiED T090 °/a RELATIVE COMPACTION. A SoMPLE Cf iHE
PROPOSED BASE MUST BE APPROV~ 6Y 7HE GEOiEOiNIfP1
CCNSULTANT PRIOR TO BACI~ILL FOR 9JITPB[IITY. COMPACi1IXJ
SHOUID BE AQiIEVED WI'fHWT DAMAGING THE WALL.
NOIES:
~ Waterproofing should 6e provided where moisture nuisance prob~em through tf~e wall is undesirable.
Water pro~ng of the walls is not under purview of the geotechnical engineer
All d2ins should have a gradient of 1 percent minimum
*Outlet portion of tfie subdrain should have a 4-inch diameter solid pipe discharged into a suita6le disposal area designed bythe project
~ngineer. The subdrain pipe should be aaessible fur maintenance (rodding)
~her subdrain bac~il options are subject to the review by the geotechnical engineer and modification of design parameters.
Notes:
) Sand should have a sand equivalent of 30 or greater and may be densfied by water jelting.
~) 1 Cu. R. per ft. of 1/4- to 1 1/2-inch size gravei wrapped in filterfabric
3) Pipe type should be ASTM D1527 Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS)SDR35 orASiM D1785 Poly~inyl Chlonde plastic (PJC~, Schedule
0; Artnco A2000 PVC, or approved equivalent. Pipe should be installed with perforadons down. Perforations should be 3(8 inch in
~lameter placed at the ends of a 120-degree arc in two rows at 3-inch on center (staggered)
) FiRer fabric should be Mi~afi 140NC or apprrrved equivalent
5)1Neephole should be 3-inch minimum diameter and provided at 10-foar maximum intervals. If e~ccposure is permitted, weepholes should
fonted 12 inches abwe finished grade. If e~cposure is not permitted such as for a wall adjacent to a sidewalWarb, a pipe under the
idewalk to be discharged through the curb face or equivalent should be provided. For a basement-type wall, a proper subdrain outlet
system should be provided.
~) Retaining wall pans should be reviewed and approved by the geotechnical engineer.
) Walls over six feet in height are subject to a special review by the geotechnical engineer and modifiotions to the above reyuirements.
~
~ RETAINING WALL BACKFILL AND SUBDRAIN DETAIL '~'
FOR WALLS 6 FEET OR LESS IN HEIGHT
WHEN NATIVE MATERIAL HAS IXPANSION INDEX OF >50 ~
_~
Flgure No. Z
' o 0
''y N
' N ~
O N
°-i Z.
.y ?
C
' ^
'
'
'
'
LJ
L
'
,
'
'
'
1
~
~n
N .n
N ~n
N ~n
Y m
N v~
~ ~n
~ v~
N rn
N v~
N vi
CJ m
4J v~
N m
N v~
N
~ .'L'
U .q
V .!:
U .f:
U ,~
U .'L"
U ..'
U .C';
U ~L
U .r
U .L;
U .C
U .5.;
U .S:
U ~
U
~ ~ .~ .~~" .~ .~~" .F .'~~' .'~~" .C .~ .~ .~ •~~" .[ .'~~' .C
O
'
; Q 00
r 00 00
-r 00
.y N
--~ N
-r N
--i N 00 00
--i 00 00 N N N
,
o
ro
b . . . . ~ . ~ ~--i .-..
~
N ~
O v
i-~
Y v
i-i
Y a~
1-~
Y a~
L~.
Y a~
L~.
~ a~
F+
Y a~
L
~ a~
i-,
~ v
i-i
~ a~
ir
y a~
1^~-'~.
L a~
Yr
Y a~
L
Y a~
1-~.
~ a~
1-r
~
C
~ a>
i m
O m
O m
O m
O rn
O m
O m
O v~
O rn
O rn
O N
O m m ~n
~ m
~ R
[
~ ~
r
G
~ ~
+
F ~
r
F ~
i
/ ~
r
/
~ ~
i
G ~
r
G ~
+
/ ~O+
C O
~ rO
F ~Or
/
C
~
~ ~r
C. i
C
G ~r
G i
~ ~.+.
F -
+
~ -
~.+
^ ~!
G '
~+
G i
C
G' -.
~. ~~++.
iy C
G ^r
G -
~y+
G
y
° ,~
~O 7
~ '3
E 7
'
~" 7
~ 7
~ ~
C'
' ~
~ ~
~ 'a
B 7
E '~
'~
' a
E '~
~ ?
~ ~
~
~
~ i
~ ~ ~r
w+ .
Y ~
Y .
IJ ,
Y ~
V .
Y V .
V V .
_
V .
Y i~ V Y~
Q ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O
.
V
G~ ~
O ~
O ~
O \
O \
O ~
O ~
O ~
O ~
O ~
O ~
O ~
O ~
O ~
O .
O
O
~ Q
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N
~ ~-. ~-. '. .-. .-~ .-~ .r .-. .-+
10
Vl
O ^. N
~
~
~
y
~ f
,
~ U y
~ ~ Q ~
O vJ W
N M
V M
V M
V M
V - M
V M
V M
V M
V M
V M
V M
V M
V M
V M
V M~
V'
N U O
vq b
C"
`a
a
~
~
~ ~
i ~ y
.
.~~ .
4
S3' W U a
Q ~] ^A
~
,
C
J O L
y F
m M V
~ ~
+
Q ~+ a
L ~ '~
~
m
v :d
m
Y
cd F ~ N
F C7
O 1-i N
. ~ ?~ o".
~
~ U 0~~ b M M M M M M ~ V M M V 7 '7 7 7
q ~ O.. ~ E"' -M1+
~
e+ ~ ~~w o
~
H
a o
O ~
C7
N~
a~
a~
a~
a~
a~
a~
v
v
a~
a~
a~
v
a~
a~
a~
m ~ a~ a. ~ p ;a .O
^
' A
' p
' ;a L S] .O A ;~ .O .0 p-
'"
~ w, o on 6n en o
'° ~o o~n an ~o ?,n ~n ?o ~n ~n nn n
^n .
~ ~ ~ a o~n o~n o~n o~n ~o o~n o~n o~o o~n c~n ~n o~n o~n ~n c~n
~ ~ w z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z
~
0
J ~
a ~o~
p
~ C ~~
'ob
~0
0 y+
b0
~b
D
~
~ y~
W
~bn
~t
u
'~h
Lo
A y~
W
~0
0
'071
~CO
J xi ~
.~i x+ ~
xi r~"+ xi r~ti .~i ~
r~. ~r ~
xi xi ~
i-~'. ~' ~y .
w W a
~
~
~
O
•
N
M
z N M ~ Vl ~D l~ 00 T
-- .
~ V h
--
0
a
' 2\
, O O
~y N
' N N
O ~
~ ~
~
C
n
, ~
'
lJ
,
J
'
'
~
'
'
,
'
'
[A
N VJ
N V1
N N
N N
N N
N VJ
N (n
N VI
N VJ
N Vl
~ Vl
N rA
N (n
N VJ
N
L
~„ ~" ' .~ L' .S: . "L" .S: .1: ~-+ .3_; .p .C .7; .L"' J"-. .f7
N p,
y U
G U
G U
G U
G U
C U
C
, U
C U
G U
~ U
~ U
C~ U
~ U
C U
C U
A
~
O
~Y
Q .
N .
N
l
l .
N
l .
N
r-I .
N ~
.
N
'-1 .
N .
N .
N
~ .
N .
o0 .
00 .
00 .
00 .
00
~
~ r r r rl
~
N ~ ~
~ ~
7 ~
~ ~
7 ~
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~ ~
~
C ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ i y ~ " y ~ ~
~
l
O
O
O
O
O
O n
O v
i y m
y C
i
~ ~
r
C ~
r
/
~ ~
+
G
~ ~
r
/
~ O
~ ~Oi
/ ~O+
! ~Or
/ rO
G O
~ ~O-+ O
~
C
3
+~ ~
'~
~ ~ -
.
~ ~ ~
~ C
G
'~ qqq-.
~ C
G
a ~
7 ~-+i,
^
7 -~
~ C-~
G r
^^
iy ~ !-.
~
' ~
y c
~ y
~
C'
~'
~
~
'~"
~
~
F ~
~ 7
~ a ~
~ 7
' ~
~
. ~
~ v
i
^~ O
~ Y ..
s
~~N y i~.~ ~Y y ~Y Y .
H V V ~
4.~ ~Y ~
~..~ Y
.
~ ~
~ O O O O O O O O O O O O
CI O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~
9 N N N N
~ N
'. N
.-r N N N N
~-. N
.--~ N N N
r. N
R
C
O " y
:: y O
_
: ~u' ~^
H ~~ ~
o
C X"" y ~"~
O y N M
V M
V M
V M
V M
V M
V t~1
V M
V M
V M
V M
V fn
V M
V M
V M
V
Q
V ~
a i G ~a
N ~" w c~i a
fp
~ ~ U Q Q .~
'C F
J O
V
m M O
Q ~+ s~+
H '«. a> 'd y .-,.
~
O
i ~ ~ y ~
y ~
F ~ U ~ ~~--~
~ X
~~'~~. ~
V
00
00
~!1
M N
O~
[~
7
Vl
7
Vl
Vl
Vl
N
~' F"
'p
~ ~
~ P.
R~.
~ ~ w o
~
N v
Q O
O N
C7
N~
u~
~
~
~
v
v
v
a>
a~
a>
a~
a~
a~
c~
y
't. 'c7
'b a~ ~.
m p
0 :o
D A
~y0 p
b
A A
~
A p
~
A ;O
l .fl :n
~ :.O
b ?
C p
~b ;a
0 .fl p
b
1p
~ w ~
. b
.
. ~
. e
. S
. ~
. b0
. D ~ D A 11 bA A
~
~ '~ i3~
~ W CA OA oD OA OA OA W bA b0 bA OA bA bA Oq
W z z z z z z z z z z Z Z Z z Z
7
H ~
O
J ~
a ~ o=
'
a+
O ~
fn •;~
^~. .~
bA
~ y~
~D
ro
b ,~
oA .~
oA .c
a0
~ y~
00
' 03 .~
00 .~
oA .c
00 .~
bu .c
oA
~ x x x ~
x x x x x .
x x x x x x x
w W a
~
~
~O
[~
00
O1
O
~
N
M
7
V
~
~
Z
~--~
N
N
N
N
N 1
N p
N I
N 00
N p\
N O
M
N
~~l
11
V
'
1 N O
O O
''y N
' M ~j
N N
O ~
~ N
7
C
' ^
'
~
'
~
1
1
~
,
~
'
,
'
'
i
,
I
'
vi
N y
N ~n
N r/~
~ m
N
' Vi
~ v~
~ vl
N
' v1
N Vi
~ m
N V~
~
~ ~
~ .~
U .C
U ,~
U ,L
U L
U .C
U .~
U .s
U ~
U .~
U .C
V .~
U
~n
~ y
j C
. ~
. C
. G
. C
. C
. C
. C
. C
. .f~,
. G
. .T^.,
.
O L~ o0 00 00 00 00 7 7 V V V o0 00
'. +
~ .-~ N N N N N
b
N
N £J N
~
~ N
~ ~
7 N
~ N
7 N
~ GJ
~ N
~ ~
7
' ~
~
~ N
y N
~
~
C
~ y
Y O N
O in
O r"ii
O m
O y
O ~
O fn
O v}
i
O O m
O
' A L
. ~
-+
4
~
~ ~
+
F r
F
~
~ ~
r
I
~
~ ~
r
F ~Or
/
[
k' ~
y ~
~
~ C
F i
~ i
~
~
~ ~-.+.
G
£' ~+
.~r ~i!
G ~ry
-
G
~
. c
tl
~
~ p '~
~ '3
'~" 7
~''
'~
7 ~
~ ~
~ ~
~ 7
~ ~
~ 7
~ ~
~ ~
~
£ ^~ ~ Y Y N ~
{~ Y Y N ~N
Y .
~.
4a . .
.
.N
y
Q w O O O O O O O O O
~
d
o ~
o ~
e ~
e ~
o ~
0 ~
0 ~
o ~
e ~
o ~
0 °
0
p~ o
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N
~
C
I .-~ ... .-. .-. ~--~ ~--~ ~--i ~--~ ~ ~-. ,--~
C
N
O ^ y
:: '~ O
'~
~ ~w ~^
~~d~
C ~k ~~+ rn W
"
~ M
V M
V M
V M
V M
V Ki
V c~1
V c~1
V M
V M
V M
V M
V
O
N V 7 a
i b
O a
~'Z'
a~i ~ a
~ V p
,
~
C
rl
W ~D ~C
s
`~ Q -
H
J O
m M V
N ~
~
F~ ~ d .
:d «y m ^
`~~° Eo y
~
H C7
0 a
i
. ~ -~ ~
~ U ~~~~ Vl 7 7 M M V' M V ~ tn t~1 c~1
~ ~y~HP,
~ ~ ~~w o
o+ ~
a
O o
v
C7
N
a~
y
a~
a~
a>
a~
a~
a~
a~
a>
a~
v
m
b ~
w ~ a
ou a
oq a
'a'b p
5n p
5n ;a
eu a
a~ a
5n ~
nn a
nn a
on :n
'on
£ ~
~ a.
~o
n .
~c
n
~o .
~o
~'t
n ._
~n .
~n .
~o .
~o
n
~a
n
~o
~o
n
~ w ~
z ~
z z z ~
z z z z ~
z ~
z z ~
z
~
~
0
~ ~
~ ~ o=
'
o ~j
" •~ ~oo
F
c
b ~
ou ~
o
n .~
c
o .~
on '~
o
n ah '~on ~
o
n '[cn '~ao ~
~
~~il Oi O h-~
~+i ~
r
h
~+i'
.~i h
rr
~+i ~.
r
W
~ ~.
i
W ~r
W ~.y
W ~
er
Ki
.~.
.~i
~' W Q~
w
i
~ '
I
A
~
'z ~-+
M N
M M
M V
M v1
t+'1 ~O
M l~
f~1 oo
M O~
M O
~ ~--~
V N
V'
y
l
f~l
~
nY
q O~
~~
o~
~F
~U
A~
~
~ o
~v
n y
b R
~ ~
~ N
V~
'
,
'
,
~
1
i
'
~
'
,
~
'
1
'
i
,
~
'
'
irozsi-oz4
)anuary 29, 2004
Notes:
(1) Depth of interior or exterior footing to be measured from lowest adjacent finish grade. /f droinage swale
Jlowline elevation is less than 5 feet latera[ly from footing, footing bottom to be minimum 6 inches below
swale flowline
(2) Living azea slabs should be tied to the footings as directed by the shuctural engineer.
(3) Garage slabs should be isolated from stem wall footings with a nrinimum 3/8" felt expansion joint.
(4) Underslab treatrnent sand should have a Sand Equivalent of 30 or greater (e.g. washed concrete sand).
(5) The lower two inches of underslab treatrnent sand may be omitted on lots which possess a very low
expansion poten6al(see Table 1).
TABLE 2
Minimum Convenrional Foundation Design Recommendations
UBC Expansion Potential
Very Low to Low Medium
1-Story Footing Depth of Embedment 12 18"
(Exterior and
Interior (Exterior and Interior)
2-Story Footing Depth of Embedment 18" Exterior 1 g"
12" Interior (Exterior and Interior
Isolated Column Footings Exterior of »
Minimum Foundation 18 24"
Presoaking See Table 1
No. 3 rebar placed at
mid-slab height No. 3 rebar placed at
Minimum Slab Reinforcement
spaced 18 inches on mid-slab height spaced
Thiclmess
center, each way; 15 inches on center,
muumum slab each way; minimum
thiclmess 4 inches slab thickness 5 inches
Two inches of sand over a 10-mil polyvinyl
Underslab Treatment membrane (Visqueen or equivalent) over an
additional two inches of sand.
~
1
,
'
~
~
;'
i s>:i
'
'
'
;
'
1
'
,
,
`~
'
'
110231-024
January 29, 2004
TABLE 3
Minimum Post-Tensioned Foundation Design Recommendations
Expansion Potential (UBC 18-2)
Design Criteria Very Low Low Medium High
EI= 0-20 EI= 21-50 EI= 51-90 EI = 91-130
Edge Moisture Center Lift: 5.5 feet
Variation, em Edge LiB: 3.0 feet
Center Lift: 1.25 inches 2.0 inches 2.4 inches 4.5 inches
Differential
Swell, ym Edge Lift: 0.4 inches 0.4 inches 0.8 inches 13 inches
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction (k) 150 psi/in 125 psi/in 125 psi/in 100 psi/in
Plasticity Index Non Plasric * * *
Minimum Perimeter Footing 12 inches 12 inches 18 inches 24 inches
Embedment Depth
Two inches of sand over a 10-mil polyvinyl membrane
Underslab Treatment (Visqueen or equivalent) over an addirionai two inches of
sand.
Presoaking See Table 1
(1) Depth of exterior footing to be measured from lowest adjacent finish grade or drainage swale flowline elevarion
(less than 5 feet laterally from footing, per code).
(2) Living azea slabs shou(d be ried to the footings as directed by the structural engineer.
(3) Detailing of expaasion crack con~ol joints for PT slabs per structural engineer.
(4) Underslab heatment sand should tiave a Sand Equivalent of 30 or greater (e.g. washed concrete sand).
(5) The lower two inches of underslab Rea~nent sand may be omitted on lots which possess a very low
expansion poten6al(see Table 1).
(6) Potential total and differenrial settlement should be included cumulatively with differenrial swell pazameters.
* Plasticity index to be provided upon request if a ribbed UBC type (Secrion 1815) slab is preferred.
' ~
,
'
'
1
,
,
.'
110231-024
January 29, 2004
TABLE 4
Lateral Earth Pressures`' °
For Ve Low to Low Ex ansive Soil Backfill
Equivalent Fluid Weight (pc~
Conditions
Level Backfiil2 2:1 Slope Backfill
Active 45 67
At-Rest 65 95
Passive3 300 125 (Sloping Down)
, '
Assumes drained condition (See Figure 1)
zAssumes a level condirioo behind and in front of wall foundarion of project.
~ 'Maximum passive pressure = 4000 psf, level conditions.
aasive soil (EI= 0-50)
low to low ex
°Assumes use of ve
.
p
ry
'
,
'
~
I r'
,
'
'
i
'
' ~
, 110231-024
January 29, 2004
~
APPENDIX A
' References
' Leighton and Associates, 2001, Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation and Geotechnical
a Review of 100-Scale Mass Grading Plan, Tentative Tract No. 29639,
Harveston, Temecula, California, LDO1-058GR, Project No. 1 1 023 1-003,
' dated August 15, 2001.
Leighton and Associates, 2003, As-Graded Report of Mass Grading Harveston, Tract 29639-1, City
' of Temecula, California, Project No. 110231-006, dated Februaty 5, 2003.
, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, 1986a, Soil mechanics design manual 7.01, Change 1:
U.S. Navy, September.
' Naval Faciliries Engineering Command, 1986b, Foundations and earth structures, design manual
7.02, Changes L U.S. Navy, September.
RBF Consulting, 2003, Harveston Tract 30668, -1, and -2 Rough Grading and Erosion Control
, Plan, October 2003, LD03-013GR, Sheets 3& 4 of 5.
~
'
,
~
'
t
'
•
' 2~
' A-1 Leighton
110231-OZ4
January 29, 2004
APPENDIX B
Ex~lanation of Summary of Field Densitv Tests
A: Retest of previously failing compaction test.
B: Second retest of previously failing compaction test.
Compaction tests taken during mass grading of site unless indicated by:
FG: Compaction tests taken on rough finish grade.
SF: Compaction tests taken on slope face.
Test Location: Indicated by lot number.
Test Method: Compaction test by Nuclear Gage (ASTM 2922) unless indicated by
S: Sand Cone Method (ASTM 1556).
Test Elevation: Approximate elevation above mean sea level.
B-1 ~
' P
'
~
L
t E
a
' e G
o O
N U ~ N M M N N~ M M N N N O N t+l N M N O~--~ c~l ~--~ Vl V~--~ ~--~ ~D N O O
D R O~ O~ O~ O~ T 01 01 Q~ 01 O~ Q~ 01 O~ O~ O~ O~ O~ Q~ O~ O~ O~ 01 O~ 01 T O~ 01 01 O~ Q~ Oi O1
~ E
w o
' a U o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0~n ~n ~n ~n o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o y ~d~o~o~c~o~o~d~6~d~d~o~c~~ooooooooo;o~a;o;ooooo0
~ ~o ~_ ___~..~~ ~~ .._ .. _
Y
~ 9 ~ vl (~ vl ~p p~ rr~ ~n O~D ~D O~ .-~ vl [~ O oo V' ~ a0 M O N M O O~ a vt O~ .-+ N N
" •~ <+ [~ 1~ l~ ~~~~~ o0 1~ tD ~O ~ V~ '+ N.+ N.+ O O O O~ G1 O~ oo O O O O O O
~'w ~.,~ ~~..~ ..~~..~.,~..^ ., .,
1 N ~ ~~nv,~nh~.,~n~n~n~.~,~n~n~.,v,oooooooo~n~~~nooooo0
` ~~~~~~~~~^~^~ O O O O O N N N N~ ~ N fV tV N N N
• ~ ~ •--i .--i .-. ... ..~ .r .+ .r .--i .--i .--i .-. .-. N N N ~ ~ c~l c+l t+l .-~-~ ~ .-~-i ~ ~ M M M M .-~-i ~
' 'A C ~r .~ .--~ .--. .--~ .--~ .--~ .+ ~ e-~ .-~
vI
d [~ r1 .-• N h T.--~ M~O O~ 1~ O~ ~n ~~~D .. 00 .-. 1~ N v~ G~ O~ ~O O~ ~D 01 N O.-. O~
Q ~
~ v~ ~O ~D vl 7 h ~O ~O v~ v~ '7 c~ .-. .-. O N O~ O~ O N O~ < c~l O~ O~ O O~ ~D N T o0
~ ~w O O O O O O O O O O O O O^~~^ O~~~^~ N^^ N~ N N~^
~ A .. '. .--. '. .-. .-. '+ '. .~ .. .+
W
' ~ . I
Z VI L'p b~O ~O b b~D b b b b b b l~ Vl l0 b b b!~ r r r l~ I~ I~ I~ l~ [~ I~ !~ l~ r
' ~ ^ ~p .-. W.-. .-. W.--' .-. .. ^. .-- oo ~~D ~D O N ~D o0 00 00 00 00 00 ~~ o0 00 O\ O~ 00 00 ~
Q O O O O O O O O ~--~ --~ oo O~ O~ O~ ~^ 4.
` --~ O O O O ~ O
' ~ d d a
' J FW a
W ~
LL ;
~ N <I' ~O ~ ~G ~n ~D o0 O ~ 00 O N N ~-+ O O ~ ~ ~ ~
~ a N N N c~ M N~-+ ~--~ N 00 M N M 7 7 7 ~^y N crl 7 Vl ~O l~ 00 O~ n+
~ ~
~
~
, ~
C L'
G o
~ a
' ~
, N ° ~
° W U
' m > W
~ = W
' vw wwwwwwwcz.wwwwwwwwwwC~C7c'JC7C7vC7C7c.7t7C7C7C7c7
FO DUUUVVUVVUUUUUUVUUwwwwwwwwwwwwww
H1 c~1 c+l Nl t+1 t+l t+l c~l ~'~1 t+l M M M t'1 M M M M L C
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M M m M M en rn <+t rr1 M M M m rn p
y O O O i~l i~l M M t~l r~+l M C 7 V 7 i+l ~~n v) O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 9~ w
~-+ ~--~ '+ M M i~1 M M M M i'~1 f'1 c~l t~l t~1 M M ~
' F Q o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~~ 0
~ Z 2 J
N M C N t+i vt ~O l~ 00 O 7 ~ O~ N~O 1~ 00 O~ 00 O~ O.-• N t+l V v1 b 1~ a0 Oi O ~1 C1 C1 ir
Vl vl v1 ~D ~D ~D ~O ~O l0 i~ t~ t~ l~ 00 cn M Nl M t~ f~ 00 00 00 00 00 a0 00 00 00 00 O~ O~ d Q) G~ C
' Fz vv~vvvv vvaCVVVVVVVVNivNivNivNivNive~ivt~iv~ivtviv~iv~iv`~ivNivNi a a dU
z
~
~
~
N
ti
N
N
O
N
Q
,
'
'
'
'
~
1
'
'
'
'
t
'
'
r
'
1""'
N
~L
r
Z
W
~
~
W
~
~
~
~
Q
~
~
N
~
~
L
R
d
a
e C
o O
~ V h N~ h ~D v'1 N O~ vl d~ ~O 1~ M '+ O M ~--~ ~D O O o0 00 00 v~ op p~
> R Q~ 01 01 01 O~ 01 O~ O~ a0 O~ 00 O~ 00 O~ 00 O~ 01 O~ O~ O~ O~ O~ Q~ O~ 01 O~ O~ O~ 01 O~ O~ O~
R ~'
a~ O
~ U O O O O O O O O~n vt ~n ~n vl O~ O~/t O O O O vt ~n v1 ~n vt v~ Vl v~ y~ O O
p d O O O C O O O O O G C C O N~ C~ G C O O O o0 00 00 00 0o p p O C O O
~ O ^ N N N N N N
L
7
y 9 T(~ ~D- vl N~ t~l ~T N V1 O ~O a0 h.-. N f'~ vl h V V' .. 00 h ~O 1~ O~ .~. O~ l~ N O
•~ ~ Q~ O O O.-~ O O G N O N O O~ ~n O M O O O O O O 01 O~ O~ oo C.+ O O.-~ N
~ [ry ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ N N N N N N
~ I O O O ~n vi Vi vt O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O v1 ~n vi ~n O O
~p N N N ~O ~D ~D ~O N O O G O O ~O O b O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
~, ~ c~ r~ M N N N N M N N N N N ~--i N^+ N nl c~l rt ~+1 M M M c+l rt O O O O O O
~
d~p h N 1~ ~O .-. v~ [~ v~ rl l~ .•. R'7 .~ N O~ .-. v~ I~ 00 a0 00 7 00 M V O~ N M h ~ M
A ao -+ O N~ O~D O~D N tV M~'fi ~O ~~n ~--~ O~ O~ ao N O\ ~O O~ O~ O\ O O O t~ C~--~
i w N~ N~~ N~~ O~ ^ O~ O O O O.--~ ~~ y N~--i N'+ .--~ O O O O~ O O
Q ~ '. .-. ... ... ..+ .-~ '. .-. ~ .-. ... .-. ... .~
p G
~
p~
1~ h 1~ M M M M h 1~ l~ h h[~ v1 h Vi [~ h h h h M M M t+l M N N N N O O r.
.~
^
V] F h 1~ h l~ l~ 1~ h 1~ ~D ~O ~O ~O ~O O ~O O ~O h[~ h t~ v~ vl v1 v~ vl N N N N M M ,~
~
~
~O ~O ~O ~D vi ~n O~ Q~ ~--~ ~'-'
cV
tV
M
M
tV
N O~ O~ O O.-. O O O O T T~O ~O vi vl
tV M ~V
.-
. .-
. .-
-i .-
- .-
. .-
.
~--~ O O•-+ O O O'+ O O O O O O W O
W O '4
~. ~,.
~n ti ~--i ~--~ r.r ~ ^ ti n-i ~--~ ~--i ~--i ~-n ~--i ~--i ~--i ti ~ r.~ ~+ ti ~ ~--i ~--~ r .--i ~--i ~-.i ~--i ~--i ti
N y
Q
F W
W N 'p
A
ctl
a
o
xt
o
a
v~~o~ooa. o cv....-.~nM~nv,~c~c~fn~~n~oroorno...NC.ivvi~c~
^^ ^^ ~
en
~
N N N N N N N N N N N~ N N N N N N N ~+1 t~1 M M t'1 M~+1 rl N
a
0
R
U
a
Z
N ~ ~, O
~ ~ ~ ~
N g
W U
~ ~ ~ ~ °
~`'> > W
a a a ce ° Q w
.- x ~
u~- c7c7C~c7UC7c7c7wwwwwwwwwc7c7t7c7wwwwwc~c~c7C7C7c5
FO wwwwwwwwrncnrnv~v~rncn(nrnwwwwUUUUUwwwwww
L C
M M M M~+1 t~1 t'~1 M O 7 O 7 O 7 O 7 O M t'~~ t~l t+l c~l t+1 C~1 M M t'~1 M M r1 t~1 M
~ O
y O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
~ 00 00 00 OO 00 ~ ~ ~
v
"
~
~
O
0
V
~
4/
V
y t+l Nl t+l ^
1 t~1 H1 th M \
` l
O \
O ~
\ \1 \ \
l v1 \ \1 \t
1 \1 \1 Vl V1 \1 \t
o0000 00 0
£
~ ({f
ii
F Ca .-. :.-.~,-.~..~.-,...-,....~...,,-..-. ;..,-. :.::.-,...
^ ~ ~ O
2 Z J
d
d
N M 7 v~ ~O 1~ 00 O~
N N V~~n v
i ~D O N c+l V ~t ~D l~ a0 O~ O.. N t1 V C1 1.7 ~1 jr
' O~ T O~ O~ O~ O~ O~ O~ i0 ~D ~O ~O ~O ~O ~D ~D ~O O O O O O O O O O O-+ d d d C
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
V~'1 VNl V~1 V~1 V~
V~
V~
h h h h
~
~'
~'
~'
h
H
~
~ • •
~
l
j
1
V
1 V
l V
V
1 V
t V
l V
V
1 V
l V
1
l
1 ~
1 V
l V
/1 V
1 V
1 V
1 V
1 V
1 V
1 ~ ~ Q
F I~i a a a c~
~ ~
y N
s N
R
E
CG
o C
e O
W N ~O ~D l~ O t~1 N M O 7 rn ~D
i R 01 01 O~ O~ O~ O~ Q~ O~ O~ O~ O~ T
~ E
'v o
av
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
e y o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~
O N N N ~--~ N
L
7
'^ 9 O O~ ~O c+l h N M N 7~D a0 a0
~ d ~+1 O O O O O O O O O O
~ ~y N N N N
~ O O O O O O O O O O O O
~p N tV N N N fV N N N N N N ~
D, ~+ o O o ~ ~ ~ ~ .-~. .-~. ~ ~ ~
w
N
~
d~p rl ~D N N~ v1 00 N N et O l~
'~' oO l~ O~ 00 N.. O~ M O~ E' M 1~ ~
L w Qi 01 Qi .--~ ..N+ .~-~ .r .~-~ ~ .-N-i ~ ~
Q
U
~ Q ti
~ ~ ~ r~ r~ ~~ r~ ~
VI F M t~l Nf t~ f~ 1~ P 1~ [~ 1~ (~ M y
m
V R 7 V-vt O.. 00 00 rl 00 [~ M ~G
O O O O O O~ O O O O Q~ O~ W O
Y;,~ ... ... .-. ... O .-~ .. O O O v'
.-. ~-. ~-. Q
~
F a ~
W ctl ~
P. ^
# o
.. ~
0 00 O~ O N M e}' ~ N N~+ O
-~ M M 7 7 7 d' V M R V V 7 d
a
q
0
a
0
.7
Z
~ O J
° W U
~ Q W
~ S F-
FO wwwwwUw~r4`i~rwi~rwn~u"i,
M M M M M M M M t'~1 Pl ch t'~1 ~ O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a~
°..' ~~ h h~ h~ ~ v ao 0o m •'
f.~ Q .. ^. .. .-~ .+ ... .~ ~ .~. ~ ~ .~. O R V
2 2 J ~
., « .+
~n ~o [~ oo rn o..» t~ oo v~n ~o t> t1 t) ::
~ N N N N~ V 7 d d ~ C
~D b ~O ~D ~O ~O ~D W W 00 00 00
a"i o ~n ~n ~n vi vi v~ v~ vi ~n v~ v~ v~ O O O d
H z a a` a` c,~
'
'
'` APPENDDC C
Laboratory Testin4 Procedures and Test Results
110231-024
January 29, 2004
' Expansion Index Tests: The expansion potential of selected materials was evaluated by the
Expansion Index Test, ASTM test method D4829 or U.B.C. Standard No. 18-2. Specnnens aze
molded under a given compactive energy to approximately the optimum moisture content and
' approximately 50 percent saturation or approximately 90 percent relative compaction. The
prepued 1-inch thick by 4-inch diameter specimens are loaded to an equivalent 144 psf surchazge
' and aze inundated with tap water until volumetric equilibrium is reached. The results of these tests
aze presented in the table below and in the soil characteristics table herewith Appendix C:
t
~
'
'
,
,
'
'
1
'
Sample Location Sample Description Expansion
Index Expansion
Potential
Lots i-4 Brown silty clayey sand, SC-SM 50 Medium
Lots 5-8 Brown silty clayey sand, SGSM 24 Low
Lots 9-12 Brown silty clayey sand, SGSM 21 L,ow
Lots 13-17 Brown silty sand, SM 11 Very Low
Lots 18-21 Pale olive silty sand, SM 13 Very Low
L,ots 22-26 Brown silty clayey sand, SGSM 33 Low
I.ots 27-31 Brown silty clayey sand, SGSM 32 Low
L,ots 32-35 Pale olive brown lean clay, CL 78 Medium
L.ots 36-40 Pale olive lean clay, CL 105 High
I.ots 41-44 Pale gray brown clayey sand, SC 79 Medium
' G1 ~/
/
'
No
~ N ~~
~ 3
F"~
~ N
~
O
1 O
~z [~ •
~
~
~ ~
~
~ ~
~~
3
' ~
~
~ 0.
' O M
~ b
~ o
~ w
' b ~
~~
~
~ N
~
;3 F
, '~U' api
. ~ O
' 3 ~
~ ~
~~
~~ :b
~°
a~
'
7
e r~j' ~
~a
1
$
C
o "' ~
~ £+ O
U A
C a+
~
G ~ c~
tl
' F ~
~
~0 •~
.
~ ~
' M ~
~
~ a
~
O
~ i
a
~ ~
w,
~p
~I . . ~ P'
^~
' , ~
.
~"!
~
O
y
~
~ ~ :?
' ~ 3 ~
'
~ «
Y
O
' b y
G~
~' °
N
~~
~w ~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ ti
~ ~ ~
a -~
t
~ o Q
y
~ ~ ~
~
y ~ f--~
~
.,,
~ r ¢
' y ~ T
a+ ~/1 L
Q
~
I ~
C
.
~°~
~~~
V] -/+ 'O
'
~ ti U U ti
U y
~'+~
~
~ ~
a~
00 c0
a td
a N
a
~
~~
a z z z z
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~
~
Ix O
a
~
~ O
.a O
a O
a
3
G' o x a~
~ ?
S'i' v ~
~ a~Oi
~ ~' a~i c~i ~,pj
W F`" ~ 7 ' ~ 7 ~
0
~
~'e ~
~ ~
a
~
~
~
o
v
~
N
~ a
w
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ s. p L P p p .C p ~ p F
w~y G
9 00 00 00 b0 W W 50 b0 SD
~ ~K ~
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d ~ ~ ~
w z z z z z z z z z z
~ ~o
~
=~c~
~ p ~
ti ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
v~ 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~
A o 0 0 o v v v o 0 0
~
3w~
~
.
~ ~
~ ...N o O Vl O ~~ O O ~n ~ O O
O Fi O`~~-'
v N N N ~ V iC O ~ C O
~~
g
F o v, o o v~ ~n o v~ o
~,~„ \O N N f`I O ~ O ^ ~O N
~ O O m N N M N cn
~ Q
~
z
~
b ~
~
Y ~
~' T F" ¢ ~
U 7 V ~ ~ ~
; o ~ .° '" '
A
ay
p
O
~,
p
~
y
~ 3
r'~
~
Q
~
~ ~
~
~ p o ~ ~ a ~ ~
~tl
~ O p ^ U V] V] V] T
;
y
m ~ ~ ~' ~' ~` y ~a
. ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
' ~
C ~ T
~ 3 3 3 3 ~ ~
~
' .
W a~ a~
C7 .-7 P. Q W 0.1 CC W P. 0.l
_~
p,
~ T
F
~
N
~M
V1
vt
~D
~D
(~
[~
f~
~
~
~
~
V
w
bA
C
'n
.~
~
w
0
~
c°
~
v
~
U
C
.~
~
~
~
~
L
~
~
Q
¢
O~
z
~
~
F
b
O
U
m
b
.~
~
a
x
W
O
^
0
.~
b
~
~
~
~
'.
~
Y
C
0
~
~
*
N
U
~~
, 110231-024
)anuary 29, 2004
~ APPENDIX D
Lot Maintenance Guidelines for Owners
'
Development areas, in general, and hillside lots, in particulaz, need maintenance to continue to
, function and retain their value. Many owners aze unaware of this and allow deterioration of the
property. It is important to familiarize owners with some guidelines for maintenance of their
properties and make them awaze of the importance of maintenance.
~ Some goveming agencies require hillside property developers to utilize specific methods of
engineering and construction to protect those investing in improved lots or constructed homes. For
~ example, the developer may be required to grade the property in such a manner that rainwater will
be drained away from the lot and to plant slopes so that erosion will be minnnized. They. may also
_ be required to install permanent drains.
~ However, once the lot is purchased, it is the buyer's responsibility to maintain these safety features
by observing a pnxdent program of lot care and maintenance. Failure to make regulaz inspection
, and maintenance of drainage devices and sloping areas may cause severe financial loss. In addition
to their own property damage, they may be subject to civil liability for damage occurring to
, neighboring properties as a result of his negligence.
The foilowing maintenance guidelines aze provided for the protection of the owner's investment.
~ a) Caze should be taken that slopes, terraces, berms (ridges at crown of siopes) and proper lot
drainage are not dishubed. Surface drainage should be wnducted from the reaz yard to the
' street through the side yazd, or alternative approved devices.
b) In general, roof and yazd runoff should be conducted to either the street or storm drain by
, nonerosive devices such as sidewalks, drainage pipes, ground gutters, and driveways. Drainage
systems should not be altered without expert consultation.
, c) All drains should be kept cleaned and unclogged, including gutters and downspouts. Terrace
drains or gunite ditches should be kept free of debris to allow proper drainage. During heavy
' rain periods, performance of the drainage system should be inspected. Problems, such as
~ gullying and ponding, if observed, should be corrected as soon as possible.
d) Any leakage from pools, water lines, etc. or bypassing of drains should be repaired as soon as
' practical.
e) Animal burrows should be eliminated since they may cause diversion of sutface runoff,
' promote accelerated erosion, and even trigger shallow soil flowage.
~ Slopes should not be altered without expert consultation. Whenever a significant topographic
' modification of the lot or slope, is desired a qualified geotechnical consultant should be
contacted.
~ g) If the owner pians to modify cut or natural slopes are proposed, an engineering geologist
should be consulted. Any oversteepening may result in a need for expensive retauung devices.
' D-1 '1~
'
~
'
t
~
1
.;
'
1
'
~
'
1
'
'
1
'
1
110231-024
January 29, 2004
Undercutting of a toe-of-slope would reduce the safety factor of the slope and should not be
undertaken without expert consultation.
h) If unusual cracking, settling or earth slippage occurs on the property, the owner should consult
a qualified soil engineer or an engineering geologist immediately:
i) The most common causes of slope erosion and shallow siope failures aze as follows:
• Gross neglect of the caze and maintenance of the slopes and drainage devices.
• Inadequate and/or improper planting. (Barren areas should be replanted as soon as
possible.)
• Excessive or insufficient irrigation or diversion of runoff over the slope.
j) Hillside lot owners should not let conditions on their property create a problem for their
neighbors. Cooperation with neighbors could prevent problems, promote slope stability,
adequate drainage, proper maintenance, and also increase the aesthetic attracriveness.of the
community.
k) Owner's should be awaze of the chemical composition of unported soils, soil amendments, and
fertilizers to be urilized for landscaping purposes. Some soils, soil amendments and fertilizer
can leach soluble sulfates, increasing soluble sulfate concentrations to moderate or severe
concentrations, negatively affecting the performance of concrete improvements, including
foundafions and flatwork.
D-2 ~