The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTract Map 3929 Lot 148 Rough Grading (2) ��. .. � � � T. H. �. Soils Co., Inc.� � . Phone: (909) 678-9669 FAX: (909) 678-9769 E-mail: thesoilsco@aol.com 31705 Central Street, Suite A• Wildomar, CA 92595 September 27, 2001 Mr. Brian Erdelyi 26921 Grace Lane Hemet, California 92543 SUBJECT: REPORT OF ROUGH GRADING Proposed Single-Family.Residence - Meadow View Development Lot 148 of Tract 3929 Del Rey Road Temecula, Riverside County, Califomia Work Order No. 277101.22 REFERENCE: T.H.E. Soils Company, May 21, 2001, "Limited Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Single-Family Residence - Meadow View Development, Lot 148, Traet No. 3929, Del Rey Road, Temecula, Riverside County, California", Work Order No. 277101.00 Dear Mr. Erdelyi: 1NTRODUCTION In accordance with your request, we have prepared this Report of Rough Grading presenting the results of our observation and testing during rough grading at the subject site. All compaction test results are included in this report in Appendiz B, Table I. The subject proposed single-family residence (L,ot 148 of Tract 3929) was graded in accordance with the requirements of the City of Temecula and the 1997 Uniform Building Code (LTBC). A 20-scale "Grading & Erosion Control Plan", prepared by John T. Reinhart was utilized during grading and to locate our field density tests and was used as a base map for our test locations presented as Plate 1. Monteleone Excavating under the direction of Mr. Mike Monteleone performed grading operations. ACCOMPANYING MAPS AND APPENDICES Location Map - Figure 1 (2,000-scale) Density Test Location Map - Plate 1(20-scale) Appendix A- Laboratory Test Results Appendix B- Results of Compaction Tests T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. W.O. 277101.22 �.. ' � � � Mr. Brian Erdelyi September 27, 2001 Page 2 Proposed Development The proposed development calls for the construction of a wood-framed, stucco e�cterior, single- family residence. Site Description The subject site is located on the south side of Del Rey Road west of Via Norte in the city of Temecula in southwest Riverside County, California. Prior to grading, the subject site was a vacant undeveloped large parcel residential lot bordered, on all sides, by existing large parcel residential lots, and on the northwest by Del Rey Road.. The geographical relationships of the site and surrounding area are shown on our Site Location Map, Figure 1. Prior to grading, topography on the subject site consisted of moderately sloping terrain, which slopes to the northwest toward Del Rey Road with natural gradients of approximately 13 to 20%. Vegetation on the site consisted predominately of a low thick growth of annual weeds and grasses. Overall relief on the subject site, prior to grading, was approximately 30+-ft. KEYWAY EXCAVATION AND RECOMPACTION OBSERVATIONS & TESTING Prior to rough grading, the proposed site was cleared of vegetation, which was removed from the subject site. Rough grading operations consisted of the excavation of a keyway along the toe of the proposed fill slope on the north and west sides of the proposed house pad. The keyway was founded approximately 4 to 5-ft below the existing ground surface and a minunum of 1-ft into dense sedimentary bedrock units of the Pauba Formation along the outside edge of the slope. The keyway was tilted at a minimum inclination of 2% into the existing hiliside. The exposed earth materials within the keyway were scarified a minimum of 12-inches below the exposed surface, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture and recompacted to 90% of the dry density, as determined by ASTM 1557. Benching was maintained into medium dense to dense sedimentary bedrock during grading operations. All topsoiUcolluvial soils were removed during benching operations and were utilized as fill materials. The materials used for fill predominately consisted of on-site dark brown to yellow brown silty sand (LJnified Soil Classification — SIVn derived from the on-site topsoiUcolluvial & sedimentary bedrock units. Fill placement and compaction was achieved utilizing a John Deere No. 450 dozer and incidental contact from loaded and unloaded scrapers. Moisture conditioning was accomplished utilizing a water hose. The fill was placed in 6 to 8-inch thick lifts and moisture conditioned, as needed, to bring the material to near optimum moisture content, and was then properly compacted. A minimum degree of compaction of 90% was required, as determined by ASTM 1557. T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. W.Q. 277101.22 �.. T.H.E. Soils Co. I'hc�uc: (909) G78-9GG9 EAIt: (909) G78-9769 .�l?O� Ccntral Strcct, Suitc A• VVildomar, CA 92595 ( J ( � � �J O v `-`)� _ _ � OO / \/ M ✓ , O �/ i ( \� � �, � //i� .>n V o / o � -- �: �� l n �� i s Q % I n O , � � o O /'. v / � ^ �. _ ; ii �7��' i2oo / ,� ii o \ �o � � /) ir I �� o o --' ii ` ` 7j `J /, `� �• . / / i� �� /i / d � �� O Q J% ° �� y / • o ii / ��i \� � ;,• � Q �, „ Q ,. p ,.. �� ,, � . �� n ° o M �� ' � Q,,� _ = p �� i2oo ,: ' � , � � �� ,�\ �% ' . � � � �� ;� /�// o V'/@�� 1 ' , a • ryp d � // ,o=., O O � \ „� // , \� ' � � \�.-. Qi� b �•Ji � � . �//42� i ° �6 II�� . ' ' � o r Q ,O f � :O i �"/� / � � . p / p j10 ,� � -- ' / � I O /2p� ,� � _ - � � h j o D • • � � e o_ - Q �� z i 'a� • � \ ��a `` - - _ r�r • � E y FlD c� • �°s �" - ^ o � = o , Rese ir�� I l/� � �Q � o 1 � SUBJECT .o o - - SITE i ` 2o Y c, / � v " Q � D P . \ o , � o .lL �;;:-• . I.. 5 ./ �J __ > - �:.K; � -� o � o ° � � y� � � �;�`- `, � ,�� ,� c o , IC 1 D \ I �' , o � � �. � ` �ti� q � ° Q � ?� � ,�� .--- a ,� 9 C] ' � � -- ��' �!� � '� Q V • / �� O I. b' n y o ,__ � �� .::. �a.... --- �;, ._ ..• � , f - � '; �:.: -. . '. ,, �, ,- \� � '_ 'i-A-== / I ;- i- ( ' � .� `,. � :. ,\✓ �_�- , o -�_; �+' ,� � � � � � P � ��`� . �o ,'��, ` �` ,• , , � � p Q•� i O :o`\ � � �o « Q �� '- / b � ' S tv, JFD �`��,"�`�� i' i� ' ° �� l� \� ♦ ��t� GP ' o � � i � ++ � � • � . �,O F _ . C�..�: // p \ �`� � • � / \,• ! ' �- � ++ _�..:' � �` :�� 0' _- �� se oir Ranch4� i' ��`\ �.�j '�� P -� �\\,. � / �. Californr� , �) �:,�� ° �' � ( � � A�rport '*+ :� ' � 1 �) oP\ ,e •�". _ �� `j• •� �( ,�`?� � ° _ - , ��.. '� ' � • n `��` _ _ • • � 'I��'f :'�� ';• ��_ ". ADAPTED FROM A U.S.G.S. 7. MINUTE �UADRANGLE MAP- MURRIETA, CA., 1953 (PHOTOREVISED 1979) 0 1000 2000' 3000 4000 SCAI.E: FT. SITE LOCATION MAP w.o.# 277101.22 Da�e: SEPT.2001 Figure: � ,_- � . Mr. Brian Erdelyi September 27, 2001 Page 3 TESTING PROCEDURES Field Density Testing Field density testing was performed in accordance with ASTM Test Method D2922 (nuclear gauge). Areas failing to meet the minimum compaction requirements were reworked and retested until the specified degree of compaction was achieved. The elevations and the results of the field density tests are presented in Appendix B, Results of Compaction Tests, Table L The appro�cimate locations of the tests are shown on the Density Test Location Map, Plate 1. Maximum Density Determinations Maximum Density/Optimum Moisture determinations were performed in the laboratory on representative samples of on-site soils used in the fill operations. The tests were performed in accordance with ASTM D1557, Test Method A. The test results, which were utilized in determining the degree of compaction achieved during fill placement, are presented in Appendig A, Table I. Ezpansion Index Testing An e�cpansion index test was performed on a representative on-site soil sample collected during our investigation. The result, which is listed in Appendix C, indicates that the expansion index for the on-site soiLs is a 14, which conesponds to a very low expansion potential. E�cpansion testing should also be performed on imported soils prior to their approval as structural fill material. Soluble Sulfate Content Based on our previous soluble sulfate testing of the on-site soils (T.H.E. Soils Company, 2001), it is anticipated that, from a corrosivity standpoint, Type II Portland Cement can be used for construction. We anticipate the on-site soils exposed in the upper 2-ft to have a percent soluble sulfate content of less than 150-ppm (parts-per-million), which equates to a negligible sulfate exposure (Table 19-A-4, 1997 UBC). Slope Construction Fill and cut slopes located on the subject site were constructed at a 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) slope ratio to a ma�cimum height of approximately 10 and 12-ft, respectively. Fill slopes were constructed to approximate finish grade elevations and were then subsequently track walked with the dozer to achieve the required percent compaction. T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. W.O: 277101.22 n • / l / . �/ / .�'� .. I � I'i � i� %� ��(,�,��J(��! /. i 7 �� I I I � i 4�''� 11� 12' P �, i� ' � �� _ � i i 6 j 6' �+� i � � I I ,� . �(�, l: j 1 r � i • . '/ �/� /�� `'/ { `\ 4 � ` I � � �l :�`vl C , (�� ; i� / ..��i". � ;ryh� S<0 � / - '� . , �`� ' 0 i . I ' � I , '. / � fi�\° , �//;. � _ .__. -, . E , /\ � `, . � \ �' 'V � � � i � ?� .. _ _ �` I �� / . i \ � / I � � � I t � � \ I �:; / �, � ,/ / . .. aP� 9' MIN �� ' .� � I i I � � � � i ./ � e 4' TNICK CONCRETE ; ,'/, � �� ( 1 � � :;� � I / � � � \ \\\ ,\��i� % - � ; � � ��°%' BROWDlfCH � � 1 % ,�l � Q , . , \ � . � / � % / � ; � .� �� ,. a , � � r r ' I � i 1 / ��j c... - - �d � �'.. %�� , i 6�L�� '.. 1 � �Fl, � � � � . i i 1� � Y� 9 G� ° � 3O � \\ � � . 1 :,,N -= / � ;' , ,; 1�� ' .ai : � : '-' '; , ,\ ' � � `;" � i � i ��v ,��0�.� _ _ Ex c,� `�o� BROWDITCH DETAIL N.rs. , �_ \ �4i % i �� , C�, /' // �. .,� o �'� � ' 6 � � 3 . � ��6 ` t , . � � �� i � � � (� ,� Qj � . , v�/ � � AT TOP OF CUT SLOPES 1<`k� � " � C �� \`,.� //, ' a /o� e � / '." * Q \ � Q10 2 ,g fs` � � i i � i� ' '�' � �� 5`�, 1 i �' !� N'� � �'� .y . � '�O'i � Ria � , �' �\ to0=� : � ' � : j � / � '�� ; � �D� \� c � �$ti � � � � � � � / lI, y u � � i t�' , 1 1 i i ' � ��\ ` !�, � ,. 6 iz' �z• ��'� � i = � ,y, p � ��1�� .'�, �..� / �� _ � �`� ^ � � h o �.si n. , " :� i �� tk'45 l I { � ��. - �\ �� U �"' .. ... _. '•.. /, . TOP I � � t!' �i ..I � � r1 , y °� ry . . k � � �� F' /� � . � i ' I � �% � � '� - ��, � � �� . �' ' I �T�e'�V. �� ,� � � �� ,. S<OPE � � , , . •i i i�" . � .. ° �- � �`a I " s M � 'b ` i . : ,.� � . � �. 9��0 � . � .�- �� ; /�_ � �IF•� y �� P�� 9� MIN � 7 � � CS i � ,;. ;� � . � v z9.ion- . .. . L� W'�. '�0. � �' � . � � 1 ..� .. ;:�. �, s;., ,�_.p... � �: -,� ' � `1 �� ?Ip8 � .__- . 5 �' 0 �J�� . ` /. � % �'j :. ., . . p, i . �y 5'.. � � , - . / ` ` � _ / � /�� :� ��.° . � � '� p , : \ �� .� ! ry � � 42. 9� ro �� `� . � 6 V0 � ...\ � . Q � � � / \!�! % �� , �' . �?\ �--- ' - � �( p � ' ' ''� j _ , / , y ,� )� ' K ` t1 ' � ��. i� � � .� � � ` � i � ��Q� ��Q ',�`,.� y � / / / . •�y f �� - ` � C " I� �^ N ��'�;�� + i ti. \ �,�' � s / C��l � �d ' EARTHEN � � ' / . i ,iC 'b. i t��t�� u� �!� �� : ^� C�r9� 1 �i `�� ,: � � . J,� i; � ; i � � � � ,� �,., r; . h� �,� � t� � BROW DITCH DETAIL N.r.s. �L�� .�iL� i /� � � � �� 5 ; � `� I ` �.� �. �° 2� ,� +�� -- �.,\\ ! ' . r�� f�� q:� A7 TOP OF CUT SLOPES % / ��/ / 4 ` d'y� � ,/ I i i �.: ' n� 'V � � � i` f ,/ ry ,� �ry 1 �� i rri� p� � 1 � �', � � � � ,, �C 't�'- �� I � , .�/' � `-. , �„ ; ' , � `\ `; \ '�� a i \ ,\ '� , i 1� , � '� y , i � 1 i1 � z t2a 9 � I H � �se � � '� ,, � � . i� � v y �� ' �PIACE PER PUN) � � a' �/ �, / � � I i '� �`.� ` .,n;�irar � �U o. , � �snxc caam vexiEs i' .i - ' � � , , N , , � s' ` \ r,soo �`\ �+; �__—,{ mraw �vEa vow) \\ c� / ,, d �Q � �Lt`" 'N? , f5. •� Lc�uavJ � 4 � i� " /, � 0 � 6 � � I �� i `� � , � �\ srs�iu \ * J �" 1e. \ � � , .- ; . • , ' � f , + � r�, � , A � ss.a n�rcK• r�mnFl �oox °�� — � '� � � � ' = "`� p�e � 7 _: � .4. - �'9,� � q ''� �\��F S FO� � � ` , Z � t.,� (PER PIAN) rxttx r�e�c \,, �� ; � ; / %� ;��' , .: � or••/�� iy�,�. i a+. �3T— , . . . ' ; :r , , d �� .,, zs.2 . ., " ce ��*� �, �� N', 4• n�icx �d ,. ,,. . �4:. '' �0� �/ ' ' � r `Qdr � CF * �\ �\ , �� -- , • ., � � , ,' , � % , J l' ^ � '� �+ ' � �., r ` ; . F gftlC COVER 4 �. • �� - • . � �\ Z � � � , 6. d � -� � p � � �.. �'' �l-� �;.�.', "T ,, . �,� . �''.. � re' � . 1564� . � s . 1 � \-� \ � . \ e`��'� �( ) i ' �°.' �' 29. 1 ., `• � � �.. � ; t! � �" il1 � PER PLW � / 23.�t . � y ° �"� � . 4 � �° \ ` \ �� \ �� ' Fi`�r "? � � N 6j '� Q" � 'i . � . �� ... � � �B ��. , � ��;I., �: ' � RIP RAP DETAIL ` ,- ^ , �� `/� . ' , .� , �� ,o �� \ ',, . \ I s, ,EROSION PROTECTION �� -' / �. °'o . . • ,�° 2 ' •44 2 � � \ \ � � � Q N. LS. r , � 0 0 •�� , i. � ` ` , . /�� e , �/ ; s � .., � .. `�s . .. _ �. �� 1h � `� \ � \ � .'_ � � �. n s , � � \ . ' ( )� ��;, .� �, /,�'� ' �`;Y� �..\ ��.. r� � Rk ..� \ . \ , .. c J. .\ `' . . �'�, �y �;. st' 4 ,\. � °' � i � , � !' � '"� � y '- �� ' G�, � r � // s -._.!Z qB. . '� ./ �, ,; , < � � �5,�/Y.., �,� �l ..� � \ ..'�� J / �, �� . � "W :� % �. o / �' �� S �. `'�\ �;� � ��ij'ti �.� .� `� � �i � q ' S. �� ..A J /,� � ' ', �1 /� T �,�,� � \ 9 ''SS• �',y� � � `.. ��._ +� 7 :y � � t ' -_ `\ 4.0' �' r B � � ,{� �� ,, ' � � r '.. ' �40� %,' � �, �,�'Pa�,�(qc '� �� .�, .?�`r � V C:, � � .'N '? � .. - .. � �/�� • 18' IB' /. � �c' rE E� . ♦ 1 \ � p� � � � `� ` ��, �V 6' 6' p � �4/�. r �,� % , � r� F� •� %/'_. '' , �� S. ,� ,BfCIN � \ I ` � �� J.0' TC1P W701H� 2.25' . , �q � % ! � i I \ �b ¢ J � � � � , ,� y a � :a � '� 6 � � � 0100 WATER SURFACE: f � ��. ' � �� o� �bti ��, � . . . �i `� '�. � � OEPTN= 0.75 �� '" ti0 �H' ��`� / /� / ; `� �`>'qi� � ` � , '., ,,,'u�� `�� ,� g � ��r1 , � F.C. F.G. 6 � � �� i � b ``�, � � ` 1^ f ' y , `��^/'S • ^ �� '(�C� ''� `/ / :.., r I � `'� � N �is .`�• /v, �,.` � APPHOXIMATE IOCATI N •,•\ \�� .. \ � ` / : . 1Y MIN 4' 1MCK CONCRE7E WITH � ,�' ,�,-F` -( � ,�,� � � sy `�� pyj , OFKEVWAV \ ', \ � � i-i/z• x �-�/z• n cnuce � °' •I `� � � �: �(, F�� ('7 � 1''��i l I � ,� ry ,�,�' / � •'� � � ��..` \\ \ , \ � . � �. 1 . SNCCO NE7TiNG ,�r,�P'� ! � A, \ l � j� �� V . � I V 6 "'�' \ i � ��''� i �; I '•� ,�!��', � s;' I�` � �\ � � I r ,� �� CONCRETE SWALE DETAIL�N.rs. , � � ''� ! � ��1� � � '� � � � � s °�. �( � .' ' � � / / % � � (TO REPLACE EXISTING-DAMAGED 2' WIDE SWALE) , r , ,, , ; �• � / � ��1�� /� , / ; ;� �! � _ � '� °� � �� % / l % � , / � � ;' � � Qmax= 8.5 cfs / S= 0.042 / Vmox= 10.0 fps i ' �. � �,/ _ / � , i - , ; ; ` / � i - ' �,�, '� i ' � / / i `. '. � ti - �' � / � ,- ... > i , __.._ ... „�,- . .� �* � � � / �- // i � � � � . 1 �''� i ,... : ;/ ' � / l ; �? � i � � � � % _. . � L �' � "� SAN ( , � � ' I � �i'... ,--` : • - .,'� � �) � / �� % �/ x DBAGS HIGH) . ,. , , • �� _ • . / ,_ _ _ - � i. - - ,-- M� �Ar�. '� N , . - , ; -' � ' 2 : .. : '` � ,� '�°'� ' � SANDBAGS (1 HIGH) . __ ,�. - � � � �' , Y THE 50I7 S COMPANY � - . �/ - - - . , .� `;:� ". ,�� , , OENSfTYTESTLOCATIONMAP ftFAn THIS NOTICE % % ` " � �` ��` i� ��` ��` PROPOSED SINOLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE � NEADQW VIEW DEVELOPMENT - LOT 148 OF TRACT �929 1NE ISSUANCE OF 7HI5 PERMIT BY THE CITY OF TEMECULA � DELREYROAD i TO THE CONTRACTOR: DOES NOT IMPLY di PROVIDE ANY (xEARANCES FROM ?p O 10 20 40 80 - THNECULA,RNER8IDECOUNTY,CAIlFORNIA ' STA1E OR FEDERAL MALDLIF'E AGENGES REWLATING 7HE - � ' UNDERGRWND UTILIilES OR PftON510N5 OF ?HE CALIFORIiIA OR NATONAL ENDANGERED �� WAS OUTAINED OY A SEARCH OF SPECIES ACTS. � � WORKORDER: 1a1 DATE: SEpT;2001 PLATE:IOF1 �R KNOWLEDGE, niERE nRE NO 3CALF'' 1"� 20 SECTION 1-H" 277 .0 N ON THESE PLANS. THE YOV ARE RESPON51BlE FOR OBTAINING iHE APPROPRIATE � � . PRECAUTIONARY MEASURF.S TO CLEARANCES FROM THESE ACENCIES PRIOR TO ANY SITE CONTOUR INTERVAL= 1 FOOT , O] �: �. APPROX9AATE LOCATION OF W�MPACTpN TE3T9 !V OiHER uNES Oa SiRUCtURES �� ' �'- � 4ESPONSIBLE FOR 7HE PROTECiION OISTURBANCE OF2 GRADING. . SANDBAG DETAIL N.LS. oa S�"°nRES. REF: LDO1-089GR FOR EROSION CONTROL _. . Date: 8 22 Ol CONSTRUCTiON RECORD pA7�[i gy REVISIONS ACCb DAlE HENCH MARK � °+p Deslgned By Drnen H Checked H _ G�d -Plan.dw SCALE � t.r��N Y y CITY OF TEMECULA Mtlrecta - FOUND 1.25" IRON PIPE. �% � y J Con Recommendad B�: �ele: D6PART!(EN'f OF PUBLiC IIORKS TAGGED LS. 3799, A7 »ortzantet �J � 17�ese plans Rere preperod Unaer 17ie 9uperdelan or: GRADING & EROSION CONTROL P�1rTS �p�� — THE NORTHERLY PROPERTY j•� $p' n.c.c rro. sa�6�t Acaepted By: Dste: � GR-2 CORNER OF SUBJECT LOT u�. �:p+/o� Dete RONAID J. PARK9 s.ac. � Erdel Residence ! .� MkGI�1Aid + 148, M.B. 62�67-80. er ce �Q� T, R6R71iART DEPUTY DiREC70R OF PUBIIC 1fORi(3 � n ,� crv �� , �,,;;; �c i4e �e ��e aexe Y.B. 82/87 ` EI_FV.= 1133.2 (ASSUMED). N/A ��!' R.C.6. xo._____29494 Ezplree: 12-91-01 R.C.E. No. IB74s _____. E:plree: 08-90-01 A.P,N. 921-120-008 9hee�. 2 of 2 �� ' . ,. . __'___ .�. . � Mr. Brian Erdelyi September 27, 2001 Page 4 Cut-to-Fill Transition The cut portion of the proposed building pad was overexcavated a minimum of 3-ft below proposed finish grade elevations and to 10-ft outside of the building footprint. The proposed house is anticipated to be founded entirely in compacted fill materials. The contractor staked the house location and footprint prior to overexcavation. Total and differential settlements under static loads of footings supported on compacted fill materials and sized for the allowable bearing pressures are not expected to exceed about 1/2 to 3/4 of 1 inch over a distance of 40-ft for continuous footings. These settlements are expected to occur primarily during construction. RECOMMENDATIONS Foundation System Design It is anticipated that the foundation elements should be founded entirely in compacted fill materials. T.H.E. Soils Company should perform a footing inspection, prior to placement of reinforcement, to insure the proposed footing excavations are in conformance with the job specifications. Where the site is prepared, as recommended, the proposed structures may bear on continuous and isolated footings. For one-story houses the footings should have a minimum width of 12-inches, and be placed at least 12-inches below the lowest final adjacent grade. For two-story houses the footings should have a minimum width of 12-inches and placed at least 18-inches below the lowest final adjacent grade. As a minimum, all footings should have one No. 4 reinforcing bar placed at the top and bottom of the footing. Concrete slabs, in moisture sensitive areas, should be underlain with a vapor barrier consisting of a minimum of six mil polyvinyl chloride membra.ne with all laps sealed. A 2-inch layer of clean sand should be placed above the moisture barrier. The 2-inches of clean sand is recommended to protect the visqueen moisture barrier and aid in the curing of the concrete. The structural engineer should design footings in accordance with the anticipated loads, the soil parameters given in this and previous limited geotechnical report (T.H.E. Soils Company, 2001) and the existing soil conditions. Footings should be set back from the top of all cut or fill slopes a horizontal distance equal to at least %2 the vertical slope height, with a minimum setback of at least 5-ft. T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. W.O. 277101.22 Mr. Brian Erdelyi September 27, 2001 Page 5 Surface Drainage Surface drainage should be directed away from foundations of buildings or appurtenant structures. All drainage should be directed toward streets or approved permanent drainage devices. Where landscaping and planters are proposed adjacent to foundations, subsurface drains should be provided to prevent ponding or saturation of foundations by landscape water. ConstrucNon Monitoring Observation and testing, by T.H.E. Soils Company is essential to verify compliance with recommendations and to confirm that the geotechnical conditions encountered are consistent with the recommendations of this report. T.H.E. Soils Company should conduct construction monitoring, at the following stages of construction: • Following excavation of footings for foundations • During fill placement • During utility trench backfill operations LIMITATIONS This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the project architect and engineer. The project architect or engineer should incorporate such information and recommendations into the plans, and take the necessary steps to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field. This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for other than our own personnel on the site. Therefore, the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if he considers any of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe. The findings of this report are valid as of the report date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and revision as changed conditions are identified. T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. ' W.O. 277101.22 � � � Mr. Brian Erdelyi September 27, 2001 Page 6 SUMMARY Our description of rough grading operations, as well as observations and testing services; are limited to those precise grading operations performed between September 10, 2001 and September 21, 2001. The conclusions and recommendations contained herein have been based upon our observation and testing, as noted. It is our opinion the work pe�rformed in the areas denoted has been accomplished in accordance with the job specifications and the requirements of the regulating agencies. No conclusions or warranties are made for the areas not tested or observed. This report is based on information obtained during rough grading. No warranty as to the current conditions can be made. This report should be considered subject to review by the controlling authorities. This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you have any questions, please ca11. Very truly yours, Qp �p�.000 0 �� T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. o o R EO c�v�� F �� . a°� � -� . R E� tic,°� . � � _� �� '�' 2 �r o ��, � 9 ��0 � No. RCE 234�4 g a � ( � e� Jo ' P. Fre J T. einh RCE 23464�� 3� D *° Y l P ject Geologist Civil Engineer, Expiie cl� ,�01 If � P Q�e ° t''°� uG � � ��a ames R. Harrison Project Manager JPF/JTRIJRH:jek T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. W.O. 277101.22 ' � � ' APPENDIX A Laboratory Test Results T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. W.O. 277101.22 TABLE I 277101.22 Mazimum Density/Optimum Moisture % Description Lbs/Ft3 Moisture 1 Yellow Brown Silty Sand 127.1 10.2 T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. W.O. 277101.22 APPENDIX B Results of Compaction Tests T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. W.O. 277101.22 .-` Y � � ' TABLE I RESULTS OF COMPACTION TESTS Job No.: 277101.22 Name: Brian Erdelyi Date: September 2001 Test Test Elevation Moisture Unit Dry Relative Soil Test Location No. Date Depth Content Density Compaction Type (Feet) (%) (PCF) (%) 1 09-11-01 1127 3.2 107.8 85N-NG 1 See Plot Plan 2 " 1129 3.0 108.7 86N-NG 1 " 3 " 1130 11.6 115.6 91N 1 " 4 09-12-01 1132 10.4 117.1. 92N 1 " 5 " 1134 8.7 114.4 90N 1 " 6 " 1136 8.6 118.0 93N 1 " 7 09-13-01 1138 14.2 112.9 88N** 1 " 7A " 1138 103 104.8 90N 1 " 8 09-17-01 1140 13.3 114.5 92N 1 " 9 " 1140 12.0 114.3 92N 1 " 10 " 1142 9.9 115.7 91N 1 " 11 " 1142 10.0 116.0 95N 1 " 12 09-20-01 1143 18.1 104.6 82N** 1 " 13 " 1143 15.1 110.1 87N** 1 " 12A 09-20-01 1143 10.7 118.4 92N 1 " 13A " 1143 9.7 116.8 92N 1 " 14 09-21-01 FG 9.9 114.5 90N 1 " 15 " FG 10.0 114.5 90N 1 " 16 " FG 10.1 115.0 90N 1 " SEE PLAN FOR TEST LOCATIONS SC - Sand Cone ASTM D1556; DC-Drive Cylinder ASTM D2937; N-Nuclear ASTM 3017; NG-Natural Ground + 85% = Passing Test **TEST FAILED, SEE RETEST T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. W.O. 277101.22