HomeMy WebLinkAboutTract Map 31276 Supplemental Geotechnical Evaluation~, 3~'~
~~~1-~G~2
5UPPLEMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL E1lALUATION
AND PLAN REVIEW, TRACT 31276 ~ z~~~
SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOME SITE
HARVESTON
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
Prepared For:
Greystone Homes
40925 County Center Drive
Temecula, California 92591
Project No. 110231-054
September 17, 2Q04
•
L.eighton and Associates; Inc.
A LEIGHTON GR~UP COMPANY
~
•
~
Leighton and Associates, Inc.
A IEtGMTOF GROUP rOMPANY
September 17, 2004
Project No. 110231 A54
To: Greystone Homes
40925 County Center Drive
Temecula, California 42591
Attention: Ms. Mazy Ann Paradise
Subjxt: Supplemental Creotechnical Evaluafion and Pian Review, Tract 31276, Single
Family Detached Home Site, Harveston, Temecula, Califomia
References: Leighton & Associates, Inc, 2003, As-Graded Report of Mass Greding for Tract
29639-1, Harveston, City of Temecula, California, by, Project No. i L0231-006, dated
February 5, 2003.
RBF Consutting, Preliminary Rough Grading Plan and Erasion Conriol Plan, Tract
No. 31276, in the Ciry of Temecula, Califomia, Tune 28, 2004.
Ieimduction and Investlaatlon
In accordance with your request and authorization, Leighton & Associates, Inc. (Leighton) has
completed a Supplemental Geotechnical Evatuation of Tract 31276 the proposed Single Family
Detached Home Site located within the Harveston Project (Figure 1). T'he subject property was
previously sheet graded under the geotechnical observation and testing services of Leighton
(Leighton, 2003)_ The pucpose of this evaluation was to evaluate the expansion potential and
soluble sulfate test results of underlying earth materials of select samples collected during the
cutrent investigation and prepare preliminary gading recommendations, conventional and post-
tension foundation systems design parameters.
Cutrently, the project si[e is paztially occupied by a conex box and azeas enclosed with chain ]ink
fences. The site appeazed to be used as staging and storage azeas of nearby construction site.
Trees on wooden containers and stockpiles of dirt and construction debris with boulders and
asphalt concrete were observed tocally throughout the site. The sudace soils appeazed to be dry
with mini.T,al growth of weeds and vegetarion scattered across the site.
41715 Enterprise Cirde N.. Suite 103 . Temecula, CA 925945661 Z
909.296.0530. Fa~c 909.296.0534. www.leightongeo.com
110231-054
September 17, 2004
On August 24, 2004, Leighton conducted a field exploration which consisted ofthe excavation,
sampling and ]ogging of eight (8) exploratory test pits at selected locations throughout the
subject hact. The exploratory test pits were excavated to depths ranging from approximately 6 to
8 feet below the existing ground surface using a rubber-tired backhoe. Approximate locations of
the test pits aze depicted on the Geotechnical Map {Plate 1). A staf~' engineer from Leighton
conducted sampling and logging of the test pits. Soil materials were visually classified according
to the Unified Soil Classification System and further classified in the laboratory. Logs of the test
pits are presented in Appendix A. After logging and sampling, the excavarions were backfilled
loosely with spoils generated during excavation. Selected representative samp(es were delivered
to our laboratory for testing. Laboratory test results and test procedures aze summarized in
APPendix B.
Based on our review of the referenced rough-grading plans (RBF, 2004), it is our professional
opinion that future development of the site as planned is feasible &om a geotechnical standpoint
provided that the previous (Leighton, 2003) and cunent recommendarions aze incorporated
during the construction. Site rough grading will consist of cuts and fills of up to 2 feet. Remedial
over-excavation of the site is recommended. In addition, due to the existence of cuUfill
transition between existing fill and Pauba formation bedrock or the creation of cut 611 transitions
between planned fill and bedrock, and exposure of highly expansive soils, recommendations of
deeper over-excavations for specific building pads are presented on the subsequent section.
Based on laboratory e~cpansion index test results (Appendix B) and our observations, the subject
site soils possess expansion potenGals ranging from low to high. Based on laboratory test results
and Table 19-A-4 of the 1997 UBC, the sulfate exposure to concrete appeazs negligible.
Building pads on cuUfill transitions and building pads which expose highly expansive soils,
should be over-excavated to a dept6 of five feet or to soils which possess a medium e~cpansion
potential or less, whichever is the lesser depth. The limiu of overexcavation should extend
laterally a minimum of five feet outside the building footprint. The list of building pads
anticipated to be over-excavated in order to meet the recommended minimum fill thiclrness
recommendations overexcavated aze as follows:
Building Pads witl~ 5-foot Over-Excavation Due bo 6cpansive
Soiis or Cut/Fill Transitlon
Pad No. 1 Through 14, and 60
~
2 ~ leighton 3
,
1
t
~'
1
C
'
'
'
CJ
~
'
'
LJ
'
J
t
'
110231-054
September 17, 2004
The deternunation of lots to be over-excavated is based on limited test pit exposure and as-
graded documents. Actual over-excavation limits may vary pending the condition encountered
dwing grading. Additional dozer pits may be necessary during grading to confirm these findings
of recommendations. The resulting excavations should be backfilled with granulaz fill
(expansion index <90) compacted to minimum 90 percent (based on ASTM D1557). Expansion
potential testing ofactual building pad soils should be performed during grading to confum these
recommendations. Alternatively, if the recommended 5 feet over-excavation is not performed
the high expansion potential design criteria should be implemented at these lots.
~arthworlc and Site Prer~aration
We anricipate that future earthwork at the site will consist of site prepararion, rough-gading,
precise gading, foundation installation, trench excavation and backfi2l, permanent slope
construction, and construction of street sections. We recommend that any additional eazthwork
on the site be performed in accordance with the reference reports, the following
recommendations, and the City of Temecula grading requirements.
Existing, fill surfaces should be cleared of loose silt, or undocumented fill soils. Prior to
placement of additional fiils the exposed surface should be over-excavated to a minimum depth
of 1-foot. As mentioned, stockpiles of dirt were observed and considered undocumented fill.
Following the recommended removal and over-excavation, the azeas to receive additional fill
should be scarified a minimum of 6-inches, moisture conditioned as necessary and compacted to
a minimum 90 percent relative compaction based on ASTM D1557.
~xcavations
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 utiliry. However, in accordance
with OSHA requirements, excavations greater than 4 feet in depth should be shored, or laid-hack
to inclinations of 1:1 (horizontal to verticai) or flatter, if workers aze to enter such excavations.
Leighton does not consult in the area of safety engineering. The contractor is responsible for the
safety of all excavations.
Backfill, Fill Placement and Cam~ction
The onsite soils are suitable for reuse as compacted fill provided they aze relatively free of
organic materials and debris. If mcks lazger than 8-inches are encountered, they should be
crushed/broken in place to a size less than 8-inches or removed fmm the fill area. Rocks with
diameters greater than 8 inches should be placed in accordance with the alternatives presented in
App~dix C. Crushed asphalt concrete should not be placed as fill per City of Temecula.
All backfi(I or fill soils should be brought to oprimum moisture conditions and compacted in
uniform lifts to at least 90 percent relative compaction based on the laboratory maximum dry
~
~ 3 Leighton
4
~i
~~o~~_o~
, September 17, 2004
~~ density (ASTM Test Method DI557). The optimum lift thickness required to produce uniform
compaction will depend on the type, size and condition of compaction equipment used. In
general, the onsite soils should he placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in compacted thickness
and piaced on dense existing compacted fill or other earth material approved by the geotechnical
consultant. The backfill that coincides with pavement subgrade will be reworked and compacted
~ in accordance with pavement design requirements. Slope face of permanent slopes should be
~. compacted to the minimum requirement.
Foundation and Slab on Grade Reoemm .,d~r~,,..c
It is our undeistanding that the singl~family structures will be founded on post-tensioned or
conventional foundafion systems. The proposed foundaYions and slabs should be designed in
accordance with the shvctural consultants' design, the miuimum geotechnical recommendations
presented herein (Text, Tables 1 and 2), the City of Temecula requirements and the 1997 UBC. In
utilizing the minimum geotechnical foundation recorrunendations, the slructurai consultant should
design the foundation system to the acceptable deflection criteria, as determined by the struchmal
engineer and architect with consideration of the anticipated total and dift'erential settlement provided
heiein
Residential foundation footings may be designed with the following pazatneters:
Allowable Bearing Capacity: 2000 psf ai a minitnum depth of embedment of 12
inches, plus an additional 250 psf per 6 inches of
addirional embed~nent to a maacunum of 3000 psf.
(per 1997 UBC, capacities may be increased by 1/3
for short-teim loading conditions, i.e., wind, seismic}
$liding Coefficient: 035
Settlement Potential: Total: 1 inch Differenrial: 1 inch in 40 feet
For preliminary design and budgeting putposes, tUe following lot desig~ations aze provided without
consideration for remedial gading or import.
Expansion Potential
Preliminary Lot D~ignaUons
Lot Number Expansion Potential
1 through 14 High
IS through 60 Medium
~
4 Leighton
110231-054
September 17, 200q
The footing width, depth, reinforcement, sia~,reinforcement, and the slab-on-grade thicimess should
be designed by the structwal consultant based on recommendations and soil characteristics indicated
herein (Text, Tables 1 and 2), and the most recently adopted edition of the UBC. The under-siab
moishue retarder should consist of 2-inches of sand (S. E. > 30) over 10-mil visqueen over an
additional2-inches of sand. The recommended vapor retarder should be sealed at all penetrations
and laps. Moisture vapor tran9nission may be additionally reduced by use of concrete additives.
Moisture vapor retarde~s may reduce but not eliminate moisture vapor movement &nm the
underlying soils up through the slabs. A slipsheet or equivalent shoutd be utilized above the concrete
slab if crack-sensitive floor coverings (such as ceramic tiles, etc.) are to be placed directly on the
concrete slab.
Our e~cperience indicates that use of reinforeecnent 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 aggavated by a high
watedcement ratio, high concrete temperat~ses at the time of placement, stnall nominal aggregate
size and rapid moisture loss due to hot, dry and/or windy weather conditions during placement and
curing. Cracking due to temperaNre and moisture fluctuations can also be eapected. The use of low
slump concrete (not exceeding 4 to 5 inches at the time of placement) can reduce the potential for
shrinkage cracldng.
Future owners and/or their association should be made awaze of the iinpoRance of manitaining a
constant level of soil moisture. Ovmers should be made aware of the potential negarive consequences
of both eaccessive watering, as well as allowing soils to become too dry. Improperly designed,
constructed, or maintained planters often pond water and cause deep moishue penetrarion and soil
moishue change. Since deep and repeated soil moishue change can damage the adjacent structure,
placement of plantecs adjacent to foundations or othez sensitive hudscape, such as pools and spas,
sLould be discouraged if adequate and proper maintenance can not be assured. Our
racommendations assume a reasonable degee of owner responsibiliry, if the owners do not
adequately maintain coa~t imgation and drainage, some degee of foundation movement should be
expected However, Hus movement typically does not cause structural damage, but will cause such
things as stucco, slab and flatwocic cracking and dry wall separation.
The slab subgrade soils should be presoaked in accordance with the recommendaYions presented in
Tables 1 and 2 prior to placement of the moisture barrier and foundation concrete.
~
~ 5 Leighton
~
110231-054
September 17, 2004
We recommend a minicnum horizontal setback distance from the face of slopes for all sKructural
footings (retaining and decorative walls, building footings, slabs, patios, pools, etc.). This distauce is
measured &om 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 7 feet and need not be grzter than 10 feet. Please note that the soils within
the struchual setback area possess poor laterdl stability and improvements (such as retaining walls,
sidewalks, fences, pavements, etc.) constructed within this setback azea may be subject to latecal
movement and/or differenbal settlement. The potential for distress to such improvements may be
mitigated by providing a deepened foofing or a pier and grad~beam foundation system to support the
improvement. The deepened footing shouid meet the setback as described above. ModiScations of
slope inclinations near foundations may reduce the setback and should be reviewed by the design
team prior to complerion of design or implementation.
Structures should be designed as required by provisions of the Uniform Building Code ([JBC~ for
Seismic Zone 4 and state-of-th~art seismic design parameters of the St~uctural Engineers
Associaiion of Califomia. This site is located with UBC Seismic Zone 4. Seismic design pazameters
in accordance with the 1997 UBC aze presented below.
Seismic Source T}pe = B
Neaz Source Factor, Ne = 13
Neaz Source Factor, N~ = 1.6
Soil Pro81e Type = Sp
Horizontal Peak Ground Acceleration = 0.68g
(10% probabiliry of exceedance in 50 yeazs)
Construction Review - Construction observation and testing should be perfom~ed by the
geotechnical consultant during future excavarions, grading operations, and utiGry trench backfill at
the site. Site specific foundation recommendations should be provided based on observations and
]aboratory testing performed during site mugh gading. Addirionally, footing ~cavarions should be
observed and moisture determination tests of subgrade soils should be performed by the geotechnical
consultant prior to the pouring of concrete.
Plans and Soedfimtions - The geotechnical engineer should review foundation plans to evaluate
if the recommendatians herein have been iacoiporated. Foundafion design plans and specifications
should be reviewed by the geotechnical consultant prior to excavation or installation of residenrial
development.
~
Leighton ~
iio~i-osa
September 17, 20Q4
If you have any questions regazding this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office, we
appreciate this opportunity to be of service.
Respectfully submitted,
LEIGHTONAND ASSOCIATES ~ N0~ t921 '
• CEflTIF'ED ~
t ENGINEEqINO
/ OEOL0418T
//// r
/
Robert F. Rikta, CEG 1921(Exp. 02/28/~~ ~~~
Vice PresidenUPrincipal Geologist
c arcia
taf~'Engineer
RFR/AXT/RM/mm
~~~~~~~~~
Adam Te~ronez, RCE 62285
Senior Project Engineer
Figure 1 Site I,ocation Map Reaz of Text
Table 1 Minunwn Conventional Foundation Design Recommendations Rear of Te~ct
Table 2 Minunum Post-Tension Foundation Recommendations Rear of Text
Plate i Geotechnical Map In Pocket
Appendix A Test Pit Logs
Appendix B Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results
Appendix C General Earthwork and Grading Specifications
Distribution: (6) Addressee (1-Unbound}
~
- ~ Leighton
! _'1. i . .. ~ , . .' •ifr.>,, i'~.~i~ 1
av'~. ~,`, ..e~ /_t ~`~.1-~'~. , ~F.• ~...
< < _- ~! F, ~ t a~ p ~ ~ \~ bo ~~y ~
,~~•' •1 ~ J..,. 'ti~', L.~ .~`A'.;~ ~R} ~, F ,~, / ~;' ~::
~ !' . .. 1'I7 ~G.~ "..~4. •f '~y~~ 4ftti . . ~y +~: \/O\ ~~'~ ~`.. t~
~ f ,~~ .,/ ~a~ 4~, 7 . y 4fy~a ~ +~ 'Ff 1rri ` /~.~\
d` e ~ , ~ - " iy k. Ai ~~~ '~ ,, ~~y, > ~ ia3
. i/rq . ' si @` ~.'$ / oy '* ~~ fy," `y~a'''' ~,~~` ~"~~(~ ~ r~, ~ .
L
~ _.~. ~{ e,~,S ^ e~ , .~' q ~ ~``;3 ~ /~ ~ ~ °'% ai "y~fi %~ ~'y ~ o ~6
~ ~. ~ ~~ ~~1,~` a '~~ y ~`~~j '~ 1 ~'~` ~~ ,p,b~rt r,~- / f
.'`il / ~ . ~~~n:.~~ .aC:'wd! .~i ?°~r. ?p, ('. 4`,`, ~u ar_r 1•.5s,~a?f,..L.
Base Map: The Thomas Guide Digital Edition Inland Empire 2004, Not To Scale
Greystone Homes Project No. ~
Harveston,Tract 31276 $ITE LOCATION »oza~-osa
Temecula, California MAP Date
RivBf5id6 COUflty, Cal"rfomia September 2004 Figure No.1
1
110231-054
September ll, 2004
BLE 1
Minimum Conventional Foundatlor- Design Recommendations
UBC Espansion PotenUal
Low Medium
EI = 20 - 50 EI = 50 -90
12" 18„
1-Story Footing Depth of Embedment (Exterior and ~xterior and Interior)
Interior
2-Story. Footing Depth of Embedment 18" Exterior
12" Interior 18"
terior and Interior
Lsolated Column Footings Exterior of ~ 8„ 24>,
Minimum Foundation
Presoaking 120% of Optitnum Moisture - upper 12 inches
No. 3 rebaz placed at No. 3 rebac placed at
mid-slab height ~d-slab height spaced
Miiumum Slab Reinforcement spaced 18 inches on
IS inches on center,
Thiclaiess center, each way; each way; minimum
minimum S~ab slab thiclmess 5 inches
thicla~ess 4 inches
Two inches of sand over a 10-mil vapor retarder
Undetslab Treatrnent (Visqueen or equivalent) over an additional two
inches of sand.
Notes:
(1) Depth of interior or exterior footing to be measured from-lowcst adjacent soil grade. ljdrninage swale
Jlowline elevation is Iess thon 5 jeet laterally from jooting, jooting bottom m be miaimum 6 rnches below
swaleJlowline
(2) Living atea slabs should be tied to the footings as directed by the strucnnal engineer.
(3) Cange slabs should be isolated &om stem wall foobngs with a mini~num 3/8" fclt expansion joiot
(4) Underslab treatment sand should have a Sand Equivalent of 30 or greater.
~
iioz3i-osa
September 17, 2004
TABLE 2
Mlnimum Post-Tensioned Foundatlon Design Recommendations
Expansion Potenhal (UBC 18-2)
Design Criteria Low
EI = 21-50 Medinm
EI = 51-90 High
EI = 91-130
Edge Moisiure Center Lift: 5.5 feet
Vaziation, e,,, ~ge Lift: 3.0 feet
Differenrial Center Lifl: 2.0 inches 2.4 inches 4.5 inches
SWCll, ym
Edge LiR:
0.4 inches
0.8 inches
13 inches
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction (k) 125 psi/in 125 psilin 100 psilin
Minimum Perimeter Footing
~Embedment Depth 12 inches 18 inches 24 inches
Underslab Treatment Two inches of sand over a 10-mil vapor retarder (Visqueen
or e uivalent over an additional two inches of sand.
presoaking 120% of Optimum Moisture - upper l2 inches
(1) Depth of exterior footing to 6e roeasured from lowest adjacent soil grade or if drainage swak t]owline elevarion is
lacated lcss tLan 5 feet lateially from footing, a miniimim embednxnt of (rinchea below flowliue is recommended
(2) Living area slabs should be tied to the footings as directed by the sWchual tngineer.
(3) Detailing of expansion c:ack control joints for PT slabs per structural engineer.
(4) Undeislab tieannent sand should t~ave a Sand Equivalent of 30 or greater.
(5) Potential total and differential settlement should be included cumulatively with differential swell parxmeteis.
~
O
C
~
~ \
m
W „
0 Q
~l
~
~'1 F
~ ~
m
~ (O~
O
~
n
N
O M
~ N
rl C
N ~''
O ~.,
.-I ~
rl ~
Z
d1 =
~~
U
0 ~
2
F- ~ T N
M ~'+ CJ ~
~ ~ ~ ---Nppp .'Y-~ O u V O
~ N N ~ ~ N O 'p ^ N
~Q ~
$ ~
~ ~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~ ~
(/i S ° ~ v d
> ~ ~' ~ ~[ C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
v ~ d m 0 ~ m CO tn K7
z
~ z F N
c1 I-
c""n l
V
.Z' c ~ -~r~. ~ c O
~ N
~ E c
u
. Z ,
0 ~'n N
g IP
~~ ~ ~
'G;~ ~
Z 10
v `~
t'n ~
-O
3 >
c~
C ,~ ~ o
z ~ O
E a
N z m
" ~ ~ z ~E °' ~ °
u .~ ~' ~ ~ z
lY
~
a
~i
~
g
m
~
0
3
m
E
p
°
m
L
5 ~-
m
`
~7, t~
> 3 ~
~ 3
F
~ ~ v
~
~
~
J
n O
~
'O
SC 7
~o ~+
'
N c C
'o ° ^
a ~ C
' °' ~ n
,
E o 3' L
aOf a o
~ C y
VI ~p
fA (~ ~ Z y
y o
C~ N v ~ (? ~ 11~~1 a~ (~
~ C ~ ~ Z ~ ~ ~ Z ~ ~
~ p~ Z N ~ N
O Z
~ Z
S '~ E 1~ ~
~ Q
g T
~ Q
3
~ 41
~
t ~~
Q ~ 'O Q
~
3 ~ rn
~n c S rpY
IL ~
v~ p >. z ¢ ~ Q ~
m O
~ y O
a y
~ m
1
~
c N
~ m
1 IL
~ ~
~ N
~ (~ (/l
I~' dW' t~
~ `~
m N
~
CL ~ d O J
" =
a O
` a~
° j
"
' >
a > ~+
~ J~Vl
"" 1-
Q Z
d
a ~ S4
j7 eo ~ I- C
i m F
- ~ O F l
i $ c
i~ a ~
vi
{j
j J
f
(~'
f
~
t~
V
~
~
f
u~i
U
~
~
a
V~i
V
N
~ ~ v~ N d ~ ~n ~ v
i
~ ~ ~ ~
~~
~
~
~
'
}
~ W ~
G
~
~ W
p,
~Y~
r- m m aMD a~0 m m m m
m
~~
~ N
~ 1~
~ M
o Vf
m W
v .-1
o M
ti ~ q' u1 l(1
W ~
G i rf o a, ~
~ p~, N0. Ma ~0.
d F r F F
\O
!.~
~ ~
~ ~
m
~ O
~
0
~
N
K ~
m
W „
Q Q
n
N
O M
~ d
~~
N t'j
O ?,
.-i
.-~ i
C7
Z
~J
d U
~ c
a z >-
N ~ g
i»
O u~
?
O
~ a~
O
T e~
p
N N N C ~
~ ~ ~ ~p
`~ N
~ OD 07 ~
~ O7 TW
~ ~
C ~
~ ~ Z Y
Y
} ~
C
.
~
~ (~
V
.~
CI
~
~
Y ~
g
~
~
m
~
'_
~
~ c
.1
~
;
~
Z V
-~ O
E T H
-~ ~ O
E !a g
v
~
A
i T
'° c
> ~
Z .
.
~ ~
~ c
>
o c
> ,~
o
~ c
~.y
~n a
>
~
~
`~
N
,Yn
'R
~
V
'~
~
V
d
c t~
p~
(~ Y
p 0
C
tC0 O
Z
~ ~
~
~ O
Z
£ O
Z r~.
T v1
o O
z
~
G Z
Q 3
m 0 ~ ~
" ai
'
~ ~ ~
~ ~ E N
` "
~ ~
t
i~
~'
~ N m
v
~ -p
~ Z
a m
3
•=' m
3 ~,n
~°~ ~ s-
~ A
~
a
~'
c
o
..
N
c
~
c
E
~
~ fi
c
~ a '~ ~ T ~ ?' o ;~. g o ,
~v T o
j~ Z ~ U~ L Z 10
~ U~ O~ (,j ~ ~ O V U~
E ~ ~
Z ~ z ~ ~+ 1''i~ z 3 c ~ p Z ~ aGi ~ o z
c a¢
~
~' i~
c" a
g ,
o ~n °'O
~ v~ E ic '~
c ~ c'"'n E io
Q
m ~Q w
> E ~
d E
m ~
~ ~
ai ~
~ 8i¢
c o ~ ~'
d Q~
m 0 3 {
ar
I .
~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ >
~p ~ o
v~
I ~ ~
~ o
a ~ I ~ ~ o
~ ~
J O J
J
~ J . ~ J
J J ~
~ ~ Q
i"'i am m` ° ~'"i a a' H° ~"'i~ O a ° C"iv~ O oC H
~
(,~
V
N
{n
V
J
()
In
J
J J
~'
J
U
~j h U ~ VI f tn V ~ U (.1 ~ V
~ v> v~ u~ j v~
~
~ ~
~
O „
E
~
~
~ W
0
W
W
~ W
p,
~}~ ~
N ~ 0~0 m m m m ONO m m oNG m
m
v
~
~
.~-i
O
1n
ti
CO
.~
N
~
~O
m
~'
~
~
N
M
~O
Q v ~ O .
+ N d ~ ~ O N M
'w ~
F N
~ ~O
~ 1~
H GD
~
~~
1 ~.
i
'
.~
~-
~
~`
~'
~'
~'
110231-054
September 17, 2D04
APPENDIX B
Laboratorv Testina Procedures and Test Results
Atterbere Limits: The Atterberg Limits were determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method
D4318 for engineering classification of the Sne-grained materials.
Classification or Grain Size Tests: Typical materials were subjected to mechanical grain-size
analysis by sieving from U.S. Standard brass screens (AST'M Test Method D422). Hydrometer
analyses were performed where appreciable quantities of fines were encountered and in accottiance
with ASTM Test Method D. The data was evaluated in dete~mining the classification of the
materials. The grain-size distribution curves aze presented in the test data and the Unified Soil
Classification (USCS) is presented in both the test data and the boring and/or trench logs.
Eacnansion Index Tests: The expansion poten6al of selected materials was evaluated in accordance
with ASTM Test Method D4829. Specimens aze molded under a given wmpactive energy to
approximately the optimum moisture content and approximately 50 percent sa[tuation or
approximately 90 percent relative compaction. The prepazed 1-inch thick by 4inch diameter
specimens are loaded to an equivalent 144 psf surcharge and are inundated with tap water until
volumetric equilibriwn is reached.
Soluble Sulfates: T'he solnb]e sulfate contents of selected samples were detemtined by standard
geochemical methods in accordance with DOT Califomia Test 417. The test results are presented
in the table below:
B-1
~2
~ ATTERBERG LIMITS
I..t:iyi~tnn Cons,u~:inr~.. inc ASTM D 4318
Lfq
Pla
Pla
US
PI~
On~
LL
PR
C
C
C
C
Projed Name: GREYS70NE HOMES Tested 8y : JMD Date: 81 3 112 0 0 4
Project No. : 110231-054 Input By: JMD Dale: 8131/2004
Boring No.: TP-2 Checked By: PRC Date: 8/31/2004
Sample No.: B-1 Depth (ft.): 3-5
Sample Description: ML, BROWN LEAN SILT
PLASTIC LIMIT LIQUID LIMIT
TEST NO. 1 2 1 2 3
NumberofBlows [N] t`;;;~ r~f t~~ ,+~.._ 35 25 13
Container No. A B C D E
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont (g) 827 21.85 15.64 17.13 15.30
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 6.43 16.39 11.28 12.08 10.73
Weight of Container (g) 1.29 1.30 1.35 1.35 1.39
Moisture Content (%) [1Nn1 ~ ~ ; ;; ~ , a~ ~ ;~ -43 ff
;, ~ "~9 t ': 48 S ;;
~ , ,
uid Limit 4'~j ?;= 66
-
stic Limit 36
_ 50 FatlcetificetionolMa
9~
°"~"0°'°'~'°""`"`
CwOH
SSiCih/IndeX ~~ a myn.erumanmmars.
9~^~va~~
q-LINE
~S Ciassification ML 0 40
a
a
~ 30
it "A" - Line = 073(LL-20) 19 av 20 cuo~
~-Point Liquid Limit Calculatioi R ntHron
=Wn(N25)o.tat a ~0 ~ ~ ;
JCEDURES USED ~ MUOL ~
I
IWet Preparation 0 10 20 30 4~ 50 60 70 80 90 100
Liquid Limlt (LL)
Dry Preparation ~
50.0
_'_
__ _ _.
. _. _.
I
48.0
Method A
I
Multipoint LL ~8'~ _ ~ j
? ~7.0
Method B d ae.o
c
One-point LL $ qs.o
~ aa.o -
g 43.0
42.0
47.0
aa.o i
io zo ~s ao ~o so so ~o ao eo +aa
~ NumberotBlows
~/
'
, ' ATTERBERG LIMITS
i i.ot~ttt.^.nCnnsuir?n,:~,lnq. ASTMD4318
;:r;;. ~.
.-i:-
LIq
Pla
pla
US
PI:
On~
LL
PR
C
C
C
C
Project Name: GREYSTONE HOMES Tested By : JMD Date: 8I30/2004
Projed No. : 1 1 02 31-054 Input By: AJP Date: 8/30l2004
Borin9 No.: TP-6 Cfrecked 6y: PRC Date: 8/31/2004
Sampie No.: B-1 Depth (ft.): 0-7
Sample Description: ML BROWN LEAN SILT
PLASTIC LIMIT LIQUID LIMIT
TEST N0. 1 2 1 2 3
NumberofBlows(N] ~°;~~F~€~; ~~~',~'' °
_ ,.. 37 23 13
Container No. F G H I J
Wet V1k. of Soil + Cont. (g) 2179 16.19 2020 21.95 21.80
~ry Wl. of Soil + Cont. (g) 17.80 13.30 ~ 16.30 17.32 17.01
Weight of Container (g) 1.30 1.32 1:34 1.36 1.36
Moisture Content (%) [Wn] 2d ~~ . ~ 84'1 'i ~`i : 29 0:: 3p 5, el
uid Limit ,~~C ,.
SfIC LIllllt 24
sticitylndex 4
:5 Classiftcation ML
it "A" - Line = 0.73(LL-20) 6
;-Point Liquid Limit Calculatioi
°Wn(W25)o.t2~
7CEDURES USED 60
~ Sp
v
%
9 ao
e
~ 30
~ 20
A
a 10
Fortlaaillatlona~fi~u
~"°d'°~~'°"°~^' CWOH
owronMaw~mm=ae
a'a"b'a~s A-IINE
.
CUOL
MWOH
MUOL
IWet Preparatlon
~ I
I p
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 BO 90 700
. Liquld L~mit(LL)
L
-
IDry Preparation
ethod A
Muttipoint LL
35.0
34.0
33'~
_ -
~
'
~ 32.0 ~
m
Method 8 st.o
c
One-
oint LL °
p ,,
, ao.o
~
.
- -
~ zs.o _
-
- ~
~ 28.0
i
27.0
26.0
25.0
~
p ~
0 ~5 ~
Numbe
r of Blow
w 5
s
0 60 10
8
0 B
-
D 100
~
~4
,_
'
'-
,
'
' i'
~
~~
i_nir3hton :::nnsuiiing. ir:c.
ATTERBERG LIMITS
ASTM D 4318
Projed Name: GREYSTONE HOMES Tested By : JMD Date: 8l31/2004
Projed No. : 110231-054 Input By: JMD Date: 6/31/2004
Boring No.: TP-6 Checked ey: PRC Date: 8l31/2004
Sample No.: B-2 Depth (8.y: 1-2
Sample Description: ML, BROWN LEAN 51LT
Liq
Pla
Pla
US
PI:
On~
LL
PR~
C
C
C
C
PLASTIC LIMIT LIQUID LIMIT
TEST NO. 1 2 1 2 3
Numberof Blows [N~ ;gF €` '~' -
er e
~ Y~ s~
z ~ 38 23 15
Container No. F G H I J
Wet 4Vf. of Soil + Cont. (g) 19.90 29.5~ 21.69 20.98 17.31
Dry 4Vt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 16.34 24.01 17.'18 - 16.30 13.34
Weight of Container (g)
Moisture Content (%) (UVn] '1.31
2~~ ; 1.31
,'~ ~4~, ~ 7.32
' "~~~P d~ :: 1.34
~~ 8, ~? 1.35
33 J :;-;
60
uid Lfmlt _..___~,,,i ~=
Stlc Limit
Z~{
sGcity Mdex 7
:S Classiflcatlon ML
it "A" - Line = 0.73(LL-20) g
~POint Liquid Limit Calculatlo~
°Nhl(N/25)o.~a
)CEDURES USED
.. 50
X
4 40
~ 30
u
a 20 -
;
a 10
~ rora...rc.auo~anne
a~roa.asawnM CH/OH
armnea m~auon a m.rw
qrenwuav q.~~NE
Cuo~
nnHroH
ntvOL
Wet Preparation 0 10 20 3D 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Liquid Limit ~LL)
Dry Preparation
as.o
-
.
.
_ _ . - - .
..
aa.o
Method A
Multipoint LL
as.o
~ 32
0 ~
.
g
Method B 3~.0
~
One-point LL
~ ~ ao.o
_
-~
~
~ ss.o - _
-
-~
° f
,~
28.0 ~
2
0
7. -
i -
28.0
25.0
l
0 2
0 ]5 ~
NUmbe
~w
r ol Blow
`~
s
~ >o
B
o 90 1W
~~
'_
~
~-
~,' ATTERBERG LIMITS
Leiyfi+.f.nn Cnn;;;;IHi,c,~. in.~. ASTMD4318
Projed Name~ GREYSTONE HOMES Tested By : JMD Date~ 8/30/2004
Projed No. : 110231-054 Input By: AJP Date: 8/3 012 0 04
Boring No.: TP-7 . Checkeu By: PRC Date: 8/31/2004
Sample No.: 63 Depth (ft.): 4.5-6
Sample Description: ML, BROVJN LEAN SILT
Liq
Pla
Pla
US
PI a
Oni
LL
PR~
C
C
C
C
PLASTIC LIMIT LIQUID LIMIT
TEST NO. 1 2 1 2 3
Number of Blows [Nj =} * o~ '~
3 32 21 12
Contalner No. F G H I J
Wet V1R. of Soil + Conl. (g) 11.05 19.88 19.52 18.48 17.65
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont (g) 9.07 16.21 15.50 14.58 13.71
Weight of Container (g~ 1.30 1.30 1.33 1.34 1.34
Moisture Content (%) [UVn] „ '~Ta~~' "': 24~ ': 28 4 ' a29 5 : ~9 9`. , ~
~
' 60
uid Limit .._~{~_,-_
~`:;
5Ut Limit 25
S1~C~~IfIdBX 4
IS Classt8cation ML
~t "A" - Line = 0J3(LL-20) 7
:-Point Liquid Limit Calculatia
=Wn(N/25)o.iz~
JCEDURES USED
~ Sp
v
%
v 40
e
~ 30
~ 20
~
a 10
p Fsdsssfimtbnotlro
a~+~ee.a~,.mm~ Cwoti
g.arieawuiw,mmvae
praiiwaadb A-LINE
vo~
MWOH
MUOL
I
~
Wet Preparation o ~0 20 a0 ao 5o so 7o eo so iao
Liquid Limit (LL)
Dry Preparetion
3
0
5. ~
- -
34.0
Method A
Multipoint LL 33.0
~ 32
0
. . .___ __.. __. ,
~,
~ '
Method B 3r.o
One-point LL $
30.0
~
~ --..._ _ -.
~ 29.0
n
_ ~
2 _
~
8"0
27
0
. ~
~
26
0
.
25.0
1
0 ]
0 ]5 ~
Numbe
r of 61ow
w '+
s
~
~ ~0
8
0 9
0 ~OU
`~
,_
'
~.
'
'
'i
I
'
~~
~~
60 Forclassitcatlono!
? 50 firre grained soils and CH-OM
~ k AnegreinedfracUOno1 A~LME
c 40 COdfe09~InEtl5oll9
~, 30
~ 20 c~-a
q MH-0H
a 10
O ML-0L
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Liquld Limit (LL) ~
USST.INOAR~SNESSiZE U6.bTM1MRDSIEVENUNBER HYDROMEIfR~
'o0 3 1 VT y{" y~ i~ /~ OIR p0 Y41 Y100 ~YIM1
I,
1
~ ~ ~~ I ~ 1 ~ ~' I ~' I I i
9~ _Y I_ 1-_ i I L , _ h~ ' : .
~ i I • i ' I I I' ~. i I ~ I ,
80 .;.. .__ ~ . . ..
i f i`--1 Ii ; j -II; i, ~--I ;. I I i
J~ '
_; a .
= 70 ~ 1- -- ~- ~, _ - -
I: ~ ~
~ so iI ~.~ _ I ~ I~ ~_ ~~ _
~ .
~ i , ~ ~1: ~ ~~
m 5~ ~ ~ ~. { _ : , ~..
I .... ... ..~ i ' ' ~ i
w ~ I~ i .. ~,. ~ ~ ~ I: ' ~
~ ~i
LL 4~ i i i . ~ ~ --, . i t ~ ._ . _.. . -
I i I i I
Z ~
I
W gp i !.. __._l. ~ ...._.. i: ~I I , .
W ~~II ! i ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~
, I I !
i
I a 20 rj , ~. ~_ I I-----....I i y t~--', - ._: }--~._..._ i..., t _..
~~i ~ i, ~i . ~, ~ I ~ ~ , .
i ~
10 i . _-. .Y- ~ : l. : __ __~ ~ - _ _ '____
I~ i i~ i i I I; ~ i '.
0
100.000 10.000 1.000 0.100 0.010
PAR7ICLE - 51ZE (mm)
•
SampleDescrlption: d~ Leighton Consulting~ ~n~'i.
SM. BROWN SILTY SAND
Pro'ect Name: GREYSTONE HOMES
Pro'ed Number: 110231-054
PARTICLE SIZE CURVE / ATTERBERG LIMITS
a,,,. o,-0~ ASTM C 136, D 422 / D 4318
BOring
No. Sample
No.
-.. Depth
_ ..
~ Soil Type
_ ..
--------~--- GR SA
. _._ ~
~,. _.~. FI
__
.. LL PL PI
'.
. ...... __.... .. .
TP-1 8-1 04 SM 0 58 42 ~ N/A
GRAVEL - SAND FINES
COARSE FINE ! COARSE ME~IUM FINE SILTlCLAY
~1
1_
,
I
I
'-
~
~.
so For ciassificalion of
a 5~ - fine grained soils and CHAH . -
.~ 40
~ 30
w 20
a 10
0
~~
8~
80
F 70
s
c~
w 80
3
>
m so
z
w
LL 4O
H
x
V 30
~
W
a 20
70
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Liquid Llmk (LL)
GRAVEL SAND j FINES
COARSE I FiNE ~ COARSE I MEDIUM FINE SILTlCLAY
t1.5.5TAN0ARO51VE551ZE US.STPNDABDSIEVENUMBEft HYDROMETE
~oo.ooo ~o.ooo ~.ooo
PARTICLE - SIZE (mm)
o.~oo o.o~o
Boring
NO. Sample
No. Depth
(R.) Soil Type GR SA FI
~~~~~ LL PL PI
TP-4
B-1
0-4 _
SM -
1 50 49 ---...._
0
~
DeSn~p~~~~ Leighton Consulting, Inc.
Pro ect Number: 110231-054
PARTICLE SI2E CURVE ! ATTERBERG LIMITS
R,, mm ASTM C 136, D 422 f D 4378
`~
1-
~eighton Cpnsul:;n~. irc.
Project Name:
Project No. :
Boring No.:
Sample No. :
Sample Description:
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Tested By: RGO Date: 8l27J04
Checked By: PRC Date: 8/31/04
Depth (ft.): 3-5
Location:
D Wei ht of Soil + ConL O ~f~Q~p:.:
Wei ht of Conqiner ( -- ~ ~ -°:_
D YVt. of Soil (g) 2000.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve g 1~,(y .:'..
Percent ReWined on # 4 Sieve 0.0
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S cimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S cimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 0.6178
Wei ht of Soil & Rin 5~ 7,g -; ~.rgfiQ
~
Wei ht of Rin 178.5 178.5
S cific Gravi Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. ..:: ~-4i E-6
Wet Wei ht of Soii + Cont. 312.0 59i.~
D Wei hl of Soil + Cont. 275.4 297.7
Wei ht of Container 12.0 178.5
Moisture Content % 13.9 38.6
Wet Densi 702.3 105.1
D Densi 89.8 75.8
Void Ratio 0.877 1.098
Total Porosi 0.467 0.523
Pore Volume cc - 96.7 66.9
De ree of Saturation °k S meas 42.8 94,g
SPECIMEN INUNDATION: ~nundate with distilied water for a period of 24 hours or until lhe expansion rate is less
than 0.0002 in./hr. in no less than three hours.
Date Time Pressure (psi) Elapsetl 7ime Dial Readings
(min.) in.
e~~~~ ,zi~ ~.o 0 o.soao
8/27/04 2:40 1.0 70 ::'Q4~97 ',
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
828/04 - 7;~2 - 1.0 1732 ;:q ~1
7
8/28(04 8:32 1.0 1792 .
0.6178
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) ! Initiai Thidc.) x 1000 118.1
Expansion Index ( EI )~ = EI meas -(50 -S measjx((65+EI meas) /(220-5 meas)) 111
Fev. Hd3
\~
1
' .
~.
~`
EXP
ANSION INDEX of SOILS
'.: ~eighton Consulting, Inc, ASTMD4829
~ Projed Name: GREYSTONE HOMES Tested By: RGO Date: 8/27/04
' Project No. : 1 7 02 31-054 Checked B
:
rc D
8/31/04
t
B y
p
a
e:
,- aring No.: TP-3 Depth (ft.): 0.3
j Sample No. : 8-1 Location:
,' Sample Description: ML, BROWN LEAN SILT
Dry Weight of Soil + Cont. O , g$gg,fl~~,
Weight of Container (g) ff {7
Dry Wt. of Soil (g) 9889.0
WeightSoilRetainedontWSieve~( ) ~9$~0~.
~
Percent Retained on ~J 4 Sieve ~,p
MOLDED SPECIMEN Befare Test After Test
S cimen Diameter in. q.p~ q.p~
S cimen Hei ht in. 7.0000 0.5311
Wei ht of Soil & Rin 5gq,g ;; ~~z ,y ;
Wei htofRin ~g~.Z ~g~ Z
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2.70 2.70
ContainerNo. - ~,g
~~~ E_g
Wet Wei ht of Soll + Cont. 37 7.8 624.5
D Wei htofSoil+Cont. pg2,2 g~Z~
Wei htofContainer ~1,g ~g~ 2
Moisture Content % 11.0 18.9
Wet Dens' 124.8 127.7
D Densi 112.4 107.4
Void Ratio 0.500 0.548
Total Porosi 0.333 0.353
Pore Volume cc 69.0 38.8
De ree oi Saturation % S meas 59.5 93.6
SPECIMEN INUNDATION: ~nuntlate with distilled water for a period of 24 hours or until the expansion rate is less
than 0.0002 in./hr. in na less than three hours.
Date Time Pressure (psi) Elapsed Time
min. Dial Readings
in.)
8~~~~ ,a an a.o 0 osooo
srz~ioa z:,o ,.o ,o .96oi~
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
8/28104 ~ `, ''7.~Q . - 1.0 1760 ~;fj ~,1 "!ir
8/28/04 8:30 1.0 1820 0.5311
Expansion Indeac (EI meas) = ((Final Rdg - Initiai Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 100D 30.1
Expansion Index ( EI )~ = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-5 meas)) 36
Rev H.03
v
'-
, ~
,_ Leiyhton C.a~sulting; Inr..
~
,
1
'.
t.
'.
'.
'.
,~
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: GREYSTONE HOMES Tastad By: RGO Date: 8/27/04
Projed No. : 110237-054 Chedced By: PRC Date: 6f31/04
Boring No.: TP-8 Depth (fl.): 0-1
Sample No. : 8-1 Location:
Sample Description: ML, BRQWN LEAN SILT
D Weight of Soil + Cont. g) g7gg;q•~~:.
Wei ht of Container (g) p,~y "_
Dry WI, of Soil (g)
Wei ht Soil Retained on #4 Sieve (g) 6798.0
z~;p ;_
Percent ReWined on # 4 Sieve 0.4
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test Afler Test
S ecimen Diameter in. ~ 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in.
Wei ht of Soil 8 Rin 1.0000
5gp.~ 0 5267
;, 6~ ~;q. ~,-, _ ~~
~
Wei ht of Rin 198.9 198.9
S ecific Gravi Assumed
Container No. 2.70
•~~ ~i4 2.70
E-11
Wet Wei ht of Soil + Cont. 311 9 611.4
D Wei ht of Soil + Cont. 283.4 355.8
Wei htofContainer ~~.g ~gg,g
Moisture Content % 10.5 15.9
Wet Densi 118.6 119.6
D Densi c 107.3 103.2
Void Ratio ~ 0.571 0.613
Total Porosi 0.363 Q.380
Pore Volume cc 75.2 41.4
De ree of Saturatlon % S meas 49.7 70.2
Date Time Pressure (psi) Elapsed Time Dial Readings
min.} in.
8~27/~ '~;QO - 1.0 0 0.5000
8/27/04 2:10 1.0 10 : i:4'q$99
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
8/28l04 ;~;dU - 1.D 1730 ;.,'~,4.~"~F7'
8l28/04 8:00 1.0 1790 0.5267
SPECIMEN INUNDATION: ~nundate with distilled water for a period of 24 hours or until the expansion rate is less
than 0.0002 in./Ar. in no less than three hours.
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Inibal Thick.) x 1000 Q6,$
Expansion Index ( EI )~ = EI meas -(50 •S meas)x((65+EI meas)/(220-S meas)) 27
Rsv.11d2
2~
1
,
,
'.
'.
,.
'.
,.
'.
''
'.
'T
'.
~-
~
Leiyhton Consulfir.g, Inc.
Project Name:
Projec[ No. :
Boring No.:
Sample No. :
Sample Description:
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Tested By: RGO Date: 8R7/04
Checked By: PRC Data: 8131/O4
Depth (ft.): 1-2
Location:
T
D Wei ht of Soil + Cont. (g) 4679.Oi? ~
Wei ht of Container (g) (J p;.;}
D Wt. of Soil g) 4079.0
Wei ht Soil Retained on #4 Sieve (g) -- ~ p:;; -
Percent ReWined on # 4 Sieve Q.7
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S eamen Diameter m. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in.
Wei ht of Saii 8 Rin 1.0000
596.8 0 5314
~1~ 1:;
Wei ht of Rin 189.0 189.0
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2.70 2.70
ConpinerNo. :~~,~ ~.7 - E_7
Wet Wei ht of Soil + Cont. 311.9 630.1
D Wei ht of Sail + Cont. 282.2 367.4
Wei ht of Container 11.9 189.0
Moisture Content °,6 11.0 20.1
Wet Densi 123.0 127.0
D Densi 110.8 105.8
Void RaUo 0.521 0.569
Total Poros' 0.343 0.363
Pore Volume cc 70.9 39.9
De ree of Saturation °h S meas 57.0 95.2
SPECIMEN INUNDATION: ~nundate with distilled water for a period of 24 hours or until the expansion rate is less
than 0.0002 in./hr, in no less than three hours.
Date Time Pressure (psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
81~~~~
_:; •:
21OQ - 1.0 0 0.5000
Bf27l04 2:1U 1.0 10 ~';-:064
Add Distilled Water to the Specime n
8l28ID4 ;T~„-,~'#~, - 1.0 1760 ~fl ,~~~ --
8J28/04 830 1.0 1820 0.5314
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / I~idal Thick.) x 1000 $Q.$
6cpansion Index ( EI )~ = EI meas -(50-S meas)x((65+E! meas)! (2205 meas)) 35
qev. No2
~
'
'.
,-
'
'
,
,i
~
~a
'
~:
~t
m
~~
L.eighYo~~ Co~SUltina, IrIC.
Project Name:
Projed No. :
eoring No.:
Sample No. :
Sample Description:
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
asrnn o nass
T
Tested By: RGO Date: 8f27/04
Checked By: PRC Date: 8/31/04
Depth (ft.): 4.5-6
Location:
D Weighl of Soil + Cont. O 3367 4!'_.
Weight ot Container (g ~~4,~ ~~;_- -
D Wt. of Soil () 3351.0
WeigM Soil Retained on #4 Sieve 82.D, 6'.
Percent Retained on # 4 Sieve 1.9
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S cimen Diameter in. a.ot 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht In. 1.0000 0 5451
Wei ht of Soil & Rin 592.1 ~8 3:;' -
~
Wei ht of Rin 201.1 201.1
S ecific Grav' Assumed 2.70 2.70
ContainerNo. ~'; E.1~~ '';~ ",..~ E-10
Wet Wei ht of Soil + Cont. 312.0 638.3
D Wei ht of Soil + Cont 282.3 352.3
Wei ht of Container 12.0 201.1
Moisture Content % 11.0 24.1
Wet Densi 1 t7.9 123.4
D Densi 106.3 99.4
Void Ratio 0.587 0.658
Total Porosit D.370 0.397
Pore Volume cc 76.5 44.8
De rea af Saturatlon %) S meas 50.6 98.9
SPECIMEN iNUNDATION: ~nundate with distilled water for a period of 24 hours or until the expansion rete is less
than 0.0002 in.Rv. in no less than three hours.
Date Time Pressure (psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
in.
B/27l04 - ~;OD 1.0 0 0.5000
8/27104 2:10 1.0 10 ~I~6
Add Distillad Water to the Specimen
eas~oa ~,3U. " . to ~~so ,a 1
8/28/04 8:30 1.0 1820 0.5451
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / IniUal Thick.) x 1000 ~ 44.9
Expansion Index ( EI )~ = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) !(220-5 meas)) 45
n... nas
!r
,
' ~
' Leiy1-iioi~ Cor~sutting: Inr.
'
~
'
~
'
~.
~,
'.
~:
~;
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: GREYSTONE HOMES Tested By: RGO Date: 8l27/04
Project No. : 110231-054 Checked By: PRC Date: 8/31/04
Boring No.: TP-7 Depth (ft.): 3.5-4.5
Sample No. : B-2 Location:
Sample Desuiption: ML, BROWN LEAN SILT
D Weighl ot Soil + CoM. ) 52~3;9:'
Wei ht of Container (g) (~~} ; }
D WI. of Soil () 3223.0
Weight Soll Retained on #4 Sieve (g) ;-~: ,3.0 _;, _.. , ;~~~
Percent Retained on # 4 Sieve 0.1
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test AHerTest
S ecimen Diameter i~. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 0 5956
Wei ht of Soil & Rin 575.2 ;~i~g~ ';' _
Wei ht of Rin 206.8 208.8
S ecific Grevi Assumed
Container No. 2.70
~;~ ~-5 2,7p
E-5
Wet Wei ht of Soil + Cont. 311 9 626.9
D We' ht af Soil + Cont. 281.0 328.6
Wei ht of Co~tainer 11.9 2pg.g
Moisture Content °k 11.5 272
Wet Densi c 110.5 109.8
D Densi 99.1 88.3
Void Ratio 0701 0.863
Total Porosi 0.412 0.463
Pore Volume cc 85.3 57.1
De ree of Saturation % S meas 44.3 85.2
SPECIMEN INUNDATION: ~nundate with distilled water for a period of 24 hours or untll the expansion rate is less
than 0.0002 in./hr. in no less than three hours.
Date Time Pressure (psi) Elapsed Time Dial Readings
(min.) (n.)
8/27l04 ~;~1~ , ; ::; 1.0 0 0.5000
8/27/04 2:to t.o t0 0 6 1 =-
Add Distllled Water to the S ecimen
8128l04 _- r ° . ,7,s~3 - 1.0 1753 -.~15 6. -
8/28/04 8:23 1.0 1813 0.5956
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / IniHal Thick.) x 1000 92.5
Expansion Index ( EI )~ = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65aE1 meas) !(220.S meas)) $~
flw. fl.02
~
,
'.
,
'-
,_
'
,'
'.
1.
,i
,,
':
,:
~
,,
~
~
~
~
Leigl~tc~t: t;ansulting, lnr..
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
AS7M D 4829 ~
Project Nama: GREYSTONE HOMES Tested By: RGO Date: 827/04
Project No.: 110231-054 Checked By: PRC Date: 8/31/04
Boring No.: TP-8 Depth (ft.): 2•3
Sample No. : B-1 Location:
Sample Description: s(CL-ML) PALE BROWN SANDY LEAN SILT WITH CLAY
Dry Wei ht of Soil + Cont. ( - - ~ $6:0':~ , -
Wei ht of Container O p.p '
Ory Wt. of Soil (g) 7086A
Wei ht Soil Retained on #4 Sieve ( ~ g2,p -' ,;
Percent Retained on q 4 Sieve ~,z
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 0.5351
Wei ht of Soii & Rin 562.5 '~, . g~~~q'. r _;;;~.
~
Wei ht ot Rin ~ 199.6 199.6
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2,7p Z,~p
Container No. - i= ~ ~~ g_~Z
Wet Wai ht of Soll + Cont. 312.0 613.9
D We' ht of Soil + Cont. 283.5 328.4
Wei ht of Container 12.0 199.6
Moisture Content °/a 10.5 26.2
Wet Densi c 109.5 118.6
D Densi 99.1 94.1
Voitl Ratio 0.702 0.761
Totai Porosi 0,412 0.432
Pore Volume cc gs.q q~ g
De [ee of Saturation °k S meas 40.4 92,7
SPECIMEN INUNDAT~ON: ~nundate witti distilled water for a period of 24 hours or until the expansion rate is less
than 0.0002 in./hr, in no less than three hours.
Date Time Pressure (psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
in.
8f27104 _ .1:y~,3D , 1,p 0 0.5000
B/27/04 11:40 1.0 10 ~;R 999T
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
8/28/04 7:1$ 1.0 1175 ~~j;6f}3.~t
8/28/O4 ~8:15 1.0 1235 0.5351
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 ~,~j,¢
Expansion Index ( EI )~ = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) !(220-S meas)) $0
Rev.t1-0P
~~
,,
~
':
':
,
'.
'
,
'.
'.
s
Soluble Sulfates
{Hach Sulfate Test Kit)
t_eic7h~tor~ Cons~_i:+:ing, ;nc.
Projed Name: GREYSTONE HOMES Date: 8127/2004
ProJect Number: 110231-054 Tested By: AJP
Cheeked By: PRC
Raadinn
Sam le Identification Dilution Water Fraction ~Tube Readin °~ Sulfates
Boring No.: TP-6 25 X 5 6
Sample No: B-2 ;: 3';:1
Depth (ft.): 1-2
.. . ~
= ,50 PPM <0.0159
Soil T e: ML
Boring No.: TP-3 25 X ~SYJ °:i:;;
Sample No: B-1 :; ~: -~3~~ :7
Depth (ft.): 03 ._. _,_ , _
= <150 PPM <D.0150
Soil T e: ML
Rw OiA3
~
,
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATF.S, ATC
GENERAL EARTHWpgK ,yN~ GgpDING SPF.,CIFICATIONS FOR ROUGH GRADING
1.0 General
I.1 Intent: These General Earthwork and Grading Spec~cations are for the grading and
earthwork shown on the approved grnding plan(s) and/or indicated in the geotechnical
report(s). These Specifications are a part of the recommendarions contained in the
geoteclmical report(s). In case of conflict, the specific recommendaNons in the
geotechnical report shall supersede these more general Specifications. Observations of the
earthwork by the project Geotechnical Consultant during the wiase of grading may result
in new or revised recommendations that could supersede these specifications ar the
recommendations in the geoteclmical report(s).
1~ The Geoteclmioal Consultant of Record: Priot to commencement of work, the owner shal]
employ the Geoteclmical Consultant of Record (Geotechnical Consultant). T'he
GeotecLnical Consultants shali be responsible for reviewing the approved geotec}mical
report(s) and accepting the adequacy of the preliminary geotechnical findings, conclusions,
and recommendations prior to the commencement of the grading.
Prior to commencement of gad'mg, the Geotechnical Consulmnt shal( review the "work
P1an" prepared by the Farthwork Conuactor (Contractor) and schedu]e suflicient personnel
to perfoTm the appropriate level of observation, mapping, and compaction testing.
During the grading and earthwork operations, the Geotechnical Consultant shall observe,
map, and document the subsurface exposwes to vetify the geotectuiica] design
assumptions. If the observed conditions are found to be significantly different than the
intetpreted assumpHons during the design phase, the Geotechnical Consulfant shall inform
the owner, recommend appropriate changes in design to accommodace the observed
conditions, and notlfy the review agency where required. Subsurface azeas to be
geotechnically observed, mapped, elevations recorded, andlor tested include nahua] ground
after it has been cleazed for receiving fill but before fill is placed, bottoms of atl "remedial
removal" areas, all key boUoms, and benches made on sloping ground to receive fill.
The Geotechnical Consultant shali observe the moisture-conditioning and processing of the
subgrade and fill materia]s and perform relative compaction testing of 6ll to deteimine the
attained level of compaction: The Geotechnical Consultant shall provide the test results to
the owner and the Contracfor on a routine and frequent basis.
13 The Earthwork Contractor: The Farthwork Contractor (Contractor),shall be qua]ified,
experienced, and ]mowledgeable in earthwork logistics, prepazation and processing of
ground to receive fill, moishue~conditioning and processing of fill, and compacting fill.
The Contractor shatl review and accept the plans, geotec}mical repoR{s), and these
Spxifications prior to commencement of gading. The Contractor shall be solely
responsible for perfornilng the gading in accordance arith the plans nnd specifications.
The Confiactor shall prepere and submit to the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant a
work plan that indicates the sequence of earthwork grading, the number of "spreads" of
3a3o.tas~
2~
,:
'I Leighton and Associates, Inc.
GENERAL EAftTfIWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
~ , Page 2 of 6
work and the estimated quantities of daily earthwork contemplated for the site prior to
commencement 4f,grading. The.ConhacWr shall infomi,the owner and.the.Geotechnical .. .
° Consultanhof changes-inworkschedules and updates tocthe workplan at leasr?Ahours~in^°-~ ~'~- ~°
-~ <~~-advance•oF~such-changes~so thahappropriate-observarions~and=tests:can`be'plaztned and~°- `:::'..°; .~:.
accomplished. The Contractor shall not assume tt~at the Geoteclmical Consultani is aware
of ail grading operations.
The Contractor shall have the sole responsibility to provide adequate equipment and
methods to accomplish the earthwork io accordance with the applicable g~ading codes and
agency ordinances, these Specifications, and the recommendations in the approved
geotechnical report(s) and grad'mg plan(s). If, in the opinion of the Geotectmica!
Consultant, unsatisfactory aonditions, such as unsuitable soil, improper moisture condition,
inadequate compaction, insufficient buttress key size, adverse weatha, etc., are resulbng in
,.
_.. a quality of..work:less;ihan: required, in fhese-specifications,. the Geotechnical.Consultant _.,
shalkreject-lhe work and<mayreconunend to fhe owner tharconstmcdon be,s .-
topped untll-.
the conditions aze rectified. .
2A Preoaration of Areas to be Filled
2.1 Clearing and Grubbing: VegetaHon, such as brush, grass, roots, and other deleterious
material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed of m a method acceptable to
the owner, govemmg agencies, and the Geotechnical Consultant.
The Geotechnical Consultant shall evaluate the eztent of tl~ese removals depending on
specific site conditions. Earth fill tnaterial shall not contain more than I percent of organic
materials (by:volume). No fill liYt sha]I contain more than:5 percent of organic matter..
NesHng of the organic.materials shall not be allowed.
If potentially ha~rdous materials are encotmtered, the Contracror shall stop work in the
affected azea, and a ha7ardous material specialist shall be informed inunediatety for proper
evaluation and handling of these materials prior to continuing to work in that area,
As presently defined by the State of Califomia, most refined petroleum products (gasoline,
diesel fuel, motor oil, gease, coolant, etc.) have chemical constituents that are considered
to be hazardous waste. As such, the indiscruninate dumping or spillage of tliese fluids
onto the ground may constitute a misdetneanor, punishable by fines and/or imprispntnent,
and st~all not be allowed.
~aw.~oss
2$
~
~I
LeigM1ton and Associates, lnc.
I ~'BNERAL BAR~~Hk`~RK A2.'D GRADING SPECIFICA770NS
Page 3 of 6
'-
Z•2 Processine: Faristing ground that has been declared satisfactory for support of fill by the
~' Geotectmical Consultant shall be scarified to a.mitrimum.depth of 6inches. Existing
er c
gtoundlhat is not satisfactory shall be overe~ccavated as specified m the following.seotton. ..: -
-~,~ Scaz-ification shall-continue,unHl soils aze broken down:and~free.of lazge.claylumps or -...:,
clods and the working surface is reasonably imifomi, flat, and &ee of uneven features that
~r would inhibit uniform compac6on.
2•3 Ovcrexcavation: In addiflon to ~emovals and overexcavaNons recommended in the
~ aPPro~ S~teclmical teport(s) and the S~~B P~~, soft, loose,
or io-ric hi ~'> ~~~, SPongy,
~ h. P~Y ~~ed or otherwise unsuitable ground shail be overexcavated to
competent ground as evaluated by the Geotechnica] Consu~tant dwing gading.
~ 2.4 Benchin¢: Wliere fills are tp be placed on gtound with slo s s er
.. ._.to eertical ~mits ,.the Pe ~P than 5:1 (horizontal
) ground shall be stepped or benched. Please see the Standard Details.
~ for a gaphic illustration :The lowest bench or keyshall be a.minimum of 15 feef wide and
:.at least2fee[deep; into:competent.materialas evaluated by:the Geotechnical.Consultant ...:. _
Other benches shall be ezcavated a minimum height of 4 feet into wmpeterit material or as
~ otherwise recormnended by the Geotectuiical Consultant. Fill placed on ground sloping
flafter U~an 5:1 shall aLso be benched or ofherwise overexcavated ta provide a flat subgade
_ for the fill.
2.5 Evaluation/Acceotance of Fi11 Areas: All aceas to receive fill, including removal and
processed azeas, key bottoms, and benches, shall be observed, mapped, e]evaHons recorded,
and/or tested prior to beiag accep[ed by the Geotechnical Consultant as suitable to receive
fill. The Contractar shall obffiin a written acceptance from the Creotechnical Con.sultant
prior to fill..p)acetnent. A licensed surveyor shall provide the sutvey...control for
determining elevations of pmcessed azeas, keys; and benches.: : -.
3.0 Fill Material
3.1 General: Material to be used as fiil shall be essentially hee of organic matter and other
deleterious substances evaluated and accepted by the Geotechnical Consuitant prior to
placemettt. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptab(e gradation, high
expansion poten6al, or low strength shall be placed in areas accepfable to the Creotechnical
Consultant or mixed with other soils to aclveve saHsfactory fill material.
3.2 Oversize: Oversiu material defined as.rock, or other umducible material with a maximum
d~mens~on ~eatei' than 8 inches, shal] not be bm-ied or placed in fill unless tocation,
materials, and placement methods are specifically. accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant.
°' Placenient opuadonsishall be such that nesting ofoversiud material does notoccur and
such fl~at oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill.
Oversize material sha11 not be placed within 10 vertical feet of finish grade or within 2 f¢et
of firture utilities or undergrow~d conshuction.
33 Imnort; If importing of fill material is required for grading, proposed import material shall
smaiovn
v~
,
'
'
,
~
''
I
'
I
,
~i
;f
Leighmn and Associates, Iuc.
GENSRAL EAA'[HWOAK AND GRADWG
Page 4 of 6
meet the requirements of Section 3.1. The potenfial import source shall be given to the
_. Geotechnical Consultant at least 48 ho~us {2 worldng days) before importing begins so tt~at
._ its suitability can~be detem~ined and appropriate tests performed: _. .-. ._,
4.0 Fill Placement and Comoaction
4.1 Fill La~; Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill (per
Section 3.0) in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thiclmess. 'I'ho
Geotechnical Consultant may accept Uucker layers if testing indicates the grad'mg
procedures can adequately compact the thicket layers. Fach layer shall ba spread evenly
and mixed thoroughly to attain relative uniformity of material and inoisture throughout.
4.2. ;. Fill Moish~re Condi@onine; Eill soils shall_be.watered, dtied back„blended;,and/pr mixet{,.
as necessaryto attain a relatively unifotm moisture' content'ator slighUy over optimum. ~
_ ~ :~.:•Maacimum;density..and;.optimum-,soil.,moistwe .content•.tests: sha1L>be..perfonned in
accordance with the.American Saciety of Testing and Materials (ASTM Test Method
D~557-91).
43 Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been moistureconditioned, mixed, and evenly
spread, it shall be uniformiy compacted to not ]ess than 90 percent of maacimum dry density
(AST'M Test Method DI557-91). Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be
either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability to efficientty
achieve the spacified level of compaction with imifomuty.
4.4. .; Comtrection of Fill Sloue.c: ,_ in addipon to normal.compac6on procedures specified above,
-compaction of~slopes shall be accomplished°by baclvolling of slopes with sheepsfoot.
mllers at increments of 3: to 4 feet.. in fill elevation; or by other methods producing
sadsfactory..results.acceptable to,the:Gcotechnical.Consultant. Upon completion of
grading, relative campaction of the fill, out to the slope face, shall be at least 90 pereent of
mazim~nn density pei AST'M Test Method D1i57-91.
4.5 Co action Testin : Field tests for moisbue content and relative compaction of the fill
soils shall be performed by the Geotec}~nical Consultant. Location and frequency of tests
sball be at the Consultant's discretion based on field conditlons encountered, Compaction
test locations will not necessarily be selected on a random basis. Test locations shall be
selected to verify adequacy of coiry~action levels in areas that are judged to be prone to
inadequate compaction (such as close to slope faces and at the fill//beedrock benches).
4.6 .;:. ;Frequencv of Comoaotion Testiu~,;: .TesLs shall be. taken at intervals not e~ccecding 2 fcet in
`.., r.:_.. -.:.vertical rise andlord,000..cubic..yazds,of compacted.fill soils embankme~tt. In: addirion, as a
guideline, at least one test shall be taken on slope faces for each 5,000 square feet of slope
face and/or each 10 fcet of vertical height of slope. The Contractor shall essure that fill
construction is such that the testirtg schedule can be accomplished by the Geotechnical
Consuttant. The Contractor shall stop or slow down the ea~thwork construction if these
minimum standards are not mek
3030.1094
~
'
~
~
,
'
,
,.
,
Leighton ena Associates, Inc.
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIPICATtONS
Page 5 of 6
4.7 Comnaction Test Locations: The Geotechnical Consultant shall document the approximate
elevaiion and horizontal coordinates of each test location. The Contractor s2w11 coordinate
_..with.the:project surveyar to_assure.that sufTcient.grade.stakes are established.so that:the.., ,: „
Geotechnical Consuitant can detern~ine the'test locations with~suf~icient:accucacy.. At a-.
.<. •.minimum;•two grade stakes withirra horizontaPdistance of 100•feet and verticallyless.than' _ -::
5 feet apart from potential test locations sLall be provided.
SA Subdrain Installation
Subdiain systems st~all be inst8lled 'm accordance with the approved geotechnical report(s), the
graciing plan, and the Slandard Details. The Geotec}mical Consultant may recommrnd additional
subdrains ancUor changes in subdrain extent, lceation, grade, or material deprnding on conditions
encountered.drning grading. Ail subdrains shall be surveyed by a land surveyor/civil engineer for
]me and gade aRer installa6amand prior to burial:°~Sufficientrtime should be-allowed.:by°the
Conhaotor foi these surveys.
6.0 fixcavation
ExcavaGons, as well as oververzcavation for remedial pwposes, shall be evaluated by the
Geotechnical Consultant dising gtading. Remedial removal depths shown on geotechnical plans
are estimates only. 'I'he actuat extent of removal shal] be deteimined by the Gentechnical
Consultent based on the field evaluatian of e~osed condidons during grading. Where ftll-0ver-cut
slopes are to be graded, ihe cut portion of the slope shall be made, evaluated, and accepted by the
Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement of materials for cons4vction of the fill portion of the
slope, iinless otherwise recommended by the Geoteclmical Consultant .:. . . : . . . : . . .
7.0 Trench Backfills
ZI The Contractor shall folbw all OHSA and CallOSfIA requiiements for safery of trench
excavations.
7.2 AIl bedding and bacldill of utility henches shall be done in accordance with the applicable
provisions of Standard Speci$cations af Public Worla Const[uction. Bedding material
shall have a Sand Equivalent geater than 30 (SD30). The bedding shall be placed to 1
foot over the top of the conduit and densified by jettmg. Bacldll shall be placed and
densified to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum from 1 foot above the top of the conduit
to the surface.
-73 - The jettmg-of the bedding-azoimd-the-condtits sha11 be observed by the Geotechnical
Consuliant.
7.4 The Geotechnical Consultant sha[1 test the trench bacldll for relative compaction. At least
one test should.be made for every 300 feet of trench and 2 feet of fill.
3030.I094
~`
,
'
'-
~
~-
~•
~
~`
~j
Leighton and Associetes, Inc. ~
GENERAL EART[IWORK AND GRADIN6 SPECIFICATTONS
Page 6 of 6
7.5 Lift thickness of trench bacl~ll shall not exceed those allowed in the Standard
Specifications of Public Works Construction unless the Contractor can demonstrate to the
--.-::.Geotec6nical.Consulffint that..the:fill.::lift.can.be.compacted..to.ihe minimum.relative --_ - .
compaction by his altemaGve equipment and method.- ..
3030.1094
32'
rao.,~t~n r+unE
t To ~ ~+um~tna ~'roE
oFSio~TO aAa,No
NaTUwu. .
GAOtlNO
_ -~
2' i11N.J rL~ '~„
1~7DEFfH ~
NaTUrvLL
~ ~ =r
+~ -R%A
~ ~16'I
~ ~ L~VIIES'7
` r wN.
' 1~Y DEPiIi
W! fJ1C8 ~
SitAI.L BE C~f87FkJCIID PPoOR
TO Fdl. PLACE,i@IT70 IISSUFiE
A~JpI'E dEDLOC'ak. COIJOfi701J3
Ffi0.1ECJED PUNE
7 TQ 1 MIWMUM FriCM
T'OE OI? SLOP£ TO
l~PPfICJVEI C~id7NO\
ovweua.r
huw eacx
QESlGt1 SI.OPE
r MM''~ LfWESr 81
~_ .. ~_~~ fIQ11
~9ENCH
HEiOHf
ne~ave
IHSURABL'
WTENIAL
FiLL S,LOpE
P1LL-0VER.Cl7T
SLOPS
~TYPtGL
'H BENCN
HE16HT
HE~IOYE
(N9bfTA8L
~~IAI'EiifAL
GlT t/1C~ - .
TO BB f~67FiLk,'{Ep PldOF
TO FRL Pl.AC~JT ~ /
NATIlRAL /
GAOUND ~
~ //
RQ16VE
~r+surrneu
IAA'IEf1Y1L
CIJTAIIEA-F~L,1,
SLOpE
For Subdrains See
Standard Defaii G
4' TYPlCAt,
~BENGlHEQHT ,
B6VG1710 9FW18E OCNE WHQJ SLOPES
AfiOIE 18 EGLW. TO CR OFiEr~TE,~ TFU~N S7
. MPIDNUM B@7Ctl FfEqtii` 9F41LL HE ~ Fc!
64NOAl1M F41 YV~M 9ifAlt HE 9 F~t
GENERAL EARTHWp(tl( qIVD 6RqpING ~
I~YING AND BENCHING SPECIFlCATIONS
STi4NDARD DETAILS A
~.~~ ~
', ~
~
~.
~, .
CUT-FlLL 7RANSITION LOT OVEREXCqVA7I0N
a~nrne
uraurme~
~
GPDUD ~
~
I
~
/
~ - -- - -COMCAClEO FIl1 - - - -~. t--' _- - -_ -
_ ----.-- r-.,-'"'-'~~--y
-----r--~-----r-- ~
- -y~~----- -- ~ __
- - - - -
~ .
-
------
~ ~`-~--------
- ~ - - _ ~ _ OVEREM'AVA7E'
- - - - - ~.t _ _ _ ANDRFQfAPACf
- - - - - - - TYPIC/1
' B@A@~G
_ ~_
~ ~
~
i
' ~.
5' ~ ,
4'HIN.
~
~ - UMNFA7NBi~ B~IbIX OR M47EIIIAL APPfO~ID
~ \ ~ ~ BYIXEGEOIEClN[CPLLQIMTPM ~
SIbE FQLL FILL FOR CUT PAD
RKIR[CIEO 1I5E0RFA~
OVEPEkLAVAIE
At/D RECdAPAR ~
(PEPVCEM@lTiIll) . -
01EPBUROBI - ~
atuawrznae . - - -
!
r.uharni ;
~
_ _
~
----/-
-
_ _'_i--~~
/ --_~-~ ~
' ~ C _ _
NATURAL
. . ' GPDU~D ~.
i'
/ ~
/
/ /
/ / / /
/ ~
/ /
/ / / FWS}EDCIlfPOD
' ' _ ~ ~ .\ l.
'~~ y •~ PDD O~.EPE7~AVATi~N AND AE~PI~YQI •••
SFMLL BE PEFFQiM~D ff SPE~ -
BY 7HE GEOfEC1WI[Pl.'COtiAATiWT
9kNCF@~Ci .
!~\~l -u VNLLIKINL~IKJURWVR)
y, ~ wren ~Qumm er c~orecr-ncx ca+aa.rnrrr
z~ntm.
~r
°~'" uxwFanirn~e~waoar~u~munrrrrn+~
er 1ne cEOr~cre~rcn cawsv.nwr
TRANSITlON LOT FILLS
AND SIDE HIL(. FILL5
GENERAL EAR7FiVl+ORK AND GRADTNG
saECo-~ranons
STANLWRD DET/ULS E
~J~
,-
'~
~
' I
~~
~
';
SUBDRAIN OPTIONS AND BACKFILL WHEN NATNE MATERIAL HAS EXPANSION INDIX OF ~50
OPRON 1: P1PE SVRRWND~ WITH ~
~ CtA55 2 PERMEA9t,E M418lUL
~ OPTfON 2: GRAVEL 4VRAPPEp
-
~ IN FILTER FABRiC
, WiiH 1'ROPFR ' WIIH FROGER
SUIIFA(E DRAINAGE
. ... SURFA~ DRAINAGE
SIAPE
'
~ SIAFE
~
j r~
OR LEVEL 1
'~j OR ItVEL
r---•
1P .....__. .
NATI4E
~ WATEAPROOfING '
(SEE GENERALNOtFSJ ~ ~ WATERPROOFING
. ~"' (SEE GEN8IP1 NQI'ES)
. ~ Il' MINAIUM ~
CIA55 2 PHtFffhNE
WfEP HOIE FRTER MA7BUAL ~ WEEP HOIE
(SEENQTE~ (SEEGRADATION) (SEENO7E,7
~ 11NO1 DIAMEfER ' -`~-
G~~
LEVELOR
~ PERFOIUlIDP~E LEYELOR ~
~
S(DPE
. (Sff NOTE ~ SIOPE
~i`""'
12'
t.
.12' NINIMUM
. Ya ro 1Y.1Ip15~
GMYII NRNPED-1 F47ER
FABRIC
CWs 2 Fllter Peimeabie Malerlal Gradanon
Per Calbans Spectlkaymg ,
Sleve Size Percent Pa~nn
1" 100
3/4' 90-l00
3/8" 40~1OD
Na 4 75-MI
Na 8 ~ 18-33 ~
Na 30 5-IS
Na 50 a7
Na 200 . 0.3
* WatapraoHng should be proNded where rtaisWre.nuLsance plablem through the waA is undeslrable.
' WaMr piooflng d the wafls is rwt under purview of the geohechNml engineer
' M drafns should have a gradient of 1 percent minlmuni
'OuBet partlm of the subdrain stauld have a 4anch dlameter sdid plpe dischart.~ed IMO a-suttable disposal area designed by the pmject
Odier su ~nbacldi IPopUons~are subJect W'~the revlew by ~the g(eotechn~iol engineer and modiflcatfon aF d
e.ign Paramete~s.
Notes
I) Send ShoUld have a sand equivalent oi 30 or gmater and may pe de~fied b, wyteriepirg
2)1 CU. ft. per ft. d i/4- to 11[2~nch siae gravel wr~ped In Fllter (aMk
3) Pipe lype 3~oold be ASTM D1527 Acrylonkrile_ &iWdlene Styrene (AgS~ SDR35 or 0.STM Dll85 Vdyvlnyl Chloride plastic (PVC), Sched~Ae
'10, Mnco AZ000 PVC, or appmved equivakrd. Pipe should be h~stalled with pe{oratlms dawn. Perfarations stroWd be 3/B Inch.In
dlameter placed at the ends of a 120-degree arc ~ lwo iw~s at 3-Ineh on oenper (stayyaep~
4) RRa fabdc shouM be r9rafi 140NC or apqwed equMalerrt.
S) Weephole shauld.ba 3-inch mlNmum diameter and provlded at 10-faa[ mmdrtn~m inte~vats. If e~nsure Ls pemUtbed, weephp~e,shauld
be located.121nches above flnished grade. If expasure Is not permitted wdi as for a wali adjacent 6~ a sidewalk/curb, a pipe under the
sldewalk M be discharged through the cuW face w equivalent should 6e prwided. Fa a Gase~r~ent•type r~all, a proprl su6draln audet
system should be pwlded.
6) Retalning wall plans ~ould be reviewed and aPP~d by the geWechNcal engirre~.
7) Walis over slx feet In height are wbjeU to a spedal revlew by the geo~hnkal engineer ancl modifl~as to y~e aba~ ~,
REi`AINING VIfALL BACKFILL AND SUBDRAIN DETAIL
FOR WALLS 6 FEEf QR LESS IN HQGNT
WHEN NATNE MATERIAL HAS IXPANSION INDIX OF 550
iJ"
Figure No.
'
~~~~I~~~ ,
F E B 1 0 2005
CITY OF TEMECULA '
.~r_iniccarnir: f1FPARTMENT
~
,
'
'
~
~
,
1
'
'
'
'
'
Iu
'
~