The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTract Map 9833-3 Lot 10 Rough Grading � � �� '�. H. �. Soils Co. Inc. Plione: (951) 894-2121 FAX: (�951) 894-2122 E-mail: thesoilsco�aol.com 41548 Eastman Drive, Unit G• Murrieta, CA 92562 October 18, 2007 Mr. Dana Benson 4141 East 7`'' Street Long Beach, California 90804 SUBJECT: REPORT OF ROUGH GRADING Proposed Single-Family Residence APN: 945-160-010, Lot 10 of Tract No. 9833-3 43599 Calle De Velardo City of Temecula, Riverside County, California Work Order No. 843701.22A Dear Mr. Benson: INTRODUCTION In accordance with your request, we have prepared this Report of Rough Grading presenting the results of our testing of the house pad located at the above subject site. Compaction test results are included in this report in Appendix C, Table I. The subject pad was graded in accordance with the requireinents of the City of Temecula and the 2001 California Building Code (CBC). The 30-scale "Grading Plan" prepared by Vandenberg Civil Consulting of Canyon Lake, California, was utilized during grading to locate our field density tests. A reduced copy of the plan was utilized as a base map for our test locations presented as Plate 1. G.S.I. under the direction of Mr. Gary Ingles performed the grading operations. ACCOMPANYING MAPS AND APPENDICES Figure 1- Site Location Map (2000-scale) Plate 1- Density Test Location Map (reduced 30-scale) Appendix A - References Appendix B- Laboratory Test Results Appendix C- Results of Compaction Tests T.H.E. Soils Co. [nc. W.O. 843701.22A • � � Mr. Dana Benson October 18, 2007 Page 2 Proposed Development The proposed development calls for the construction of a single-family residence. Based on our observations and testing and the 30-scale "Grading Plan", it is anticipated that the subject structure will be founded entirely in engineered fill material. Site Description The subject site is located along Calle De Velardo, west of Pescado Drive in the City of Temecula, California. The site is bordered on the west by the San Diego aqueduct, on the east by Calle De Velardo and large parcel residential development, on the south by a vacant lot and on the north by a large parcel single-family residence. The location of the site and surrounding area are shown on our Site Location Map, Figure 1. Prior to gading, the subject site was vacant and previously gaded to create the Municipal Water District (MWD) easement located on the western portion of the site. Topographically, the subject site is located on a gently sloping elevated mesa. Vegetation on the subject site consisted of a dried, sparse, low growth (<6-inches) of annual weeds and grasses. Overall relief at the site for the proposed development was approximately 10+-ft. GRADING PROCEDURES Site Preparation The subject site was cleared of weeds and debris prior to commencement of gading, which were disposed of offsite. The pad was overexcavated a minimum of 3.0 feet below pad grade and extended approximately 5-ft outside the building footprint. The contractor staked the limits of the pad prior to overexcavation and recompaction. A keyway was established for the approximately 4-foot high fill slope along the northeast corner of the proposed house pad. The keyway was established a minimum of 2-feet into medium dense sedimentary bedrock units at the toe and tilted a minimum of 2% into the hillside. Sedimentary bedrock units of the Pauba formation exposed at the keyway bottom were free of pinpoint pores and roots. Prior to placement of fill within the removal, the bottom was scarified a minimum of 12-inches, brought to near optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 90% relative compaction as determined by ASTM D-1557 test method. The fill materials were leveled and mixed by a CAT D- 6 dozer and a CAT 613 scrapper. Compaction was achieved by wheel rolling by a water truck and track walking by the dozer and incidental contact with loaded and unloaded scrappers. T.H.E. Soils Co. [nc. W.O. 843701.22A • � � Mr. Dana Benson October 18, 2007 Page 3 TESTING PROCEDURES Maximum Densitv Determinations Maximum Density/Optimum Moisture determinations were performed in the laboratory on representative samples of onsite soils used in the fill operations. The tests were performed in accardance with ASTM D1557, Test Method A. Test results, which were utilized in determining the degree of compaction achieved during fill placement, are presented in Appendix B, Table I. Fill Soils Soils utilized for compacted fill typically consisted of inedium brown silty Sand (Unified Soils Classification-SM) derived from onsite formational materials. Compaction test results are presented in Appendix C, Results of Compaction Tests, Table I. Cut/Fill Transitions Rough grading operations at the site included overexcavation of the house pad to a minimum of 5-ft outside the building footprint to a minimum depth of 3-ft below finish grade elevation as staked by the contractor, which eliminated the cuUfill transition. Fill and Cut Slope Construction Fill slopes were constructed at a 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) slope ratio running along the northeast corner of the proposed house pad a ma�cimum height of 4-ft. The fill slopes were constructed from existing formational materials. An existing 4:1 (horizontal:vertical) cut slope has previously been constructed on the central portion of the site in conjunction with the MWD aqueduct. Field Densitv Testin� Field density testing was performed in accordance with ASTM Test Method D2922-01 (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 C, Results of Compaction Tests, Table I. The approximate locations of the tests are shown on the Density Test Location Map, Plate 1. T.H.E. SoilsCo. Inc. W.0.84370L22A . • • • . • ° --� T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. I � • � �� / ;` �`;,` •:'t , \ � � J � _ _ — p - r \ `� � Ne1�� . - � � � W /� �� '�k,�.:,��''.'firh. �`—•. � a�w ! �l�lb WAT�t 10 \� `�\ SIEhIFtGLPTE��.92ER1Yl: �`` / ry �� ..� / . • �;` � `, .. �� S ffi1EETRCIMACR�SSF'A44►�'A1' ��-`_ E ;� `� AfiU OVFR AC fMAE �N � _ , , - `----�'� 5zr.� � — _ ' r ��,� � f � % / , ' ` ti.�� .. -(-7, -.�rv�of ; , F;: h�'` �` '� � 11? �91 � ' 1 / n E!� ` �y , � C , 't "_ � �1� � 6.y ' R. ; .. . .. 11 �Ti:tCqY�REfE �� 4,�(a� . � RS . � ��O . ��_�� ... _ j' ... ``_`!1#Mf�?FRfF1U:� I � ! �- / / I ,' , �``� % —�`----_ l �-.�u. �� / / � ` � ��.t . �. _" ' K�}SZ� \- 1 °�~ � / , 1 �'�� / , �> / / ' f� C � F Be� ` _ .� �• � �,' i ' ?� . a� �= � , �.u� � ' �' � � 2 i / � � •. • a.=„�> `- . a { i rasi � � � / / ti� Q � ! . � ��'� �� 1 _�_ � ,� � ��.��a�-u»�� ` �:�, ��'= . , ... r� � � t__ . , . �N,:, g / I - • -.L,. _�_--^ _...... . _.,._ .-_..__ ._'3�_ - ��-... _. ._. ._.lU.o�O6ksECUt�.'E�VEfb�w ,..� � PAt�V .,�. - - c ' '�.�^- �SkS' � ' ��=r� ._..J � . + � ,� WtOTOYRTG*'St4S _ � � ,' • � 13 � � • �s �T % a '1 j G �+ � csea� 1 1 � 1 cv t" ' . / ' � �' C� ',� f �F' .�tit45 ..,� � �� r l � .. , . 6? �, :. �TtL2 A +. RE�E�f:� ,A� � -�•. � i � 1 � / � � � � ' `: 5ri� Ff64G b � I fE6t� � .;.� ��.6•s; �� . � �� .•' t�e�e � F368E 4 lo�Gtrv+� f-. : f'',, 'I�Ia�.�t�e(1nrtKt5E��Kxiar:FA'�ri.NCiC I , . � �- \ ".,�`, � A `"` -.�nv "i�� - . E � � � . � \ \�'` _� � ♦ � � � . \ `. me � �/ v�s�e �� f_� �� '� � � E C� `�-�_� , � � ' � � � � - ?�' •�� 0 � -� _ � � .� _ , � �J . . � cw r,ae ' RIT�' � � � �� ? 65 j EA4GtFN' ' � _ / � r ' $ Ui fc �j� 1 �1 I � t , --- - ` -��`/ Fsa ��. .- . , ' ., . n �� 4 � `. } �� — I ` � ' N -� 4 J `� Honee� 9 rs �.. � Me • ai�N � ^ $� y �___ -,, �d0�0' � . �(7a� ,. \ /:� zt , � ,`� ` ~ " ''. _ _' '— �' OJ \ O $tSB ' ' � , ' � (�� '' `. r:. /{' .! � . FIli0.1� . �'1 � m FSNS i . \ _' v ' �.�.� Ci � : � :. .,. ' ` ` I : � �f1YXCUUA4 r�E77a��;^�G�1CD7� 37FIIWffD tl 7 J."' �4 / a 5 . \ �� . � I / LOA'STPYG fNiKE1.'AYT05iPRTAf IT1FfOCECf -'.y�E... &"�� .�J' ��r. _ � �" `y� FX:ST�NGP �t9et f,Ot6itiU6�COHCRET5ttix ✓ ` '�, S• �m� � Y�� `` �- - �J' � `� �' (s�, � �+vaou:v rttmrxrr.[a,usro we.2o+ � " , -- � \ Es, rtves ,' ` R __ __ � _ �. � / J �'�. f� =�— � �,�� .� �K�6 � � � � j � �as�� j -�—�""`-=_.:� � ,: ��'. �.� _.� � :if�.�J f a,�n, �� ' •` `�'? / , P � �— e I � 6 �.,� ' .� ' "P'as7S � 1 i I � � ' ! ! I ' ' T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. DENSITY TEST LOCATION MAP PROPOSED SIN6LE�FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PAD 43688 CALLE DE VELARDO ll APN: 846�780-010 TEMECULA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA , WORKOROER: H7701]7A GTE: OLT-2001 ►UTE: 1 OF 1 ' 73 -11PPRORIMATELOfATpNOFGVMPAC710NTF0T3 . � � Mr. Dana Benson October 18, 2007 Page 4 RECOMMENDATIONS Expansion Testing Expansion testing was performed at the completion of rough gading on a representative near surface soil sample obtained from the building pad area. The results, which are listed in Appendix B, Table II indicate that the expansion potential for the onsite soils was a 1, which corresponds to a VERY LOW (0-20, Table 18-1-B, 2001 CBC) expansionpotential. Sulfate & Chloride Content Soluble Sulfate Content testing was performed on a representative near surface soil sample exposed at the pad surface. The test results yielded a.006 % by weight amount of soluble sulfate, which equates to a negligible attack hazard (0.0 to 0.10 percentage by weight, Table 19-A-4, 2001 CBC). It is anticipated that, from a corrosivity standpoint, Type II Portland Cement can be used for construction. Prime Testing Laboratory, Inc. of Murrieta, California performed the laboratory testing and test results are presented in Appendix B, Table [II. Additionally, the representative sample of the near surface soils was also tested for chloride content. Chloride test results were 70 ppm (parts-per-million). T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. does not practice corrosion engineering. If specific information or evaluation relating to the corrosivity of the onsite or any import soil is required, we recommend that a competent corrosion engineer be retained to interpret ar provide additional corrosion analysis and mitigation. Prime Testing Laboratory, Inc. of Murrieta, California performed the testing; all test results are presented in Appendix B, Table IV. Foundation System Design It is anticipated that the foundation elements should be founded entirely in properly compacted materials. T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. should perform a footing inspection, prior to placement of reinforcement, to insure the proposed footing excavations are in conformance with the job specifications. The structural engineer should design all footings and concrete slabs in accordance with the allowable foundation pressures and lateral bearing pressures presented for Class 3 soils on Table 18-1-A of the 2001 California Building Code (CBC). The allowable foundation and lateral pressures shall not exceed the values set forth in Table 18-1-A for Class 3 soils unless data to substantiate the use of higher values are submitted. Where the site is prepared as recommended, the proposed structures may bear on continuous and isolated footings. The footings should have a minimum width of 12-inches, and be placed at least T.H.E. Soils Co. Inc. W.O. 843701.22A . � Mr. Dana Benson October 18, 2007 Page 5 12-inches below the lowest fmal adjacent grade for one-story houses, with a minimum width of 12- inches, and be placed at least 18-inches below the lowest fmal adjacent grade for two-story houses. Footings may be designed for a maximum safe soil bearing pressure for Class 3 soils as per Table 18-1-A of the 2001 CBC for dead plus live loads. Concrete slabs, in moisture sensitive areas, should be underlain with a vapor barrier consisting of a minimum of six mil polyvinyl chloride membrane with all laps sealed. A 2-inch layer of clean sand should be placed above the moisture barrier. The 2-inches of clean sand is recommended to protect the six mil polyvinyl chloride moisture barrier and aid in the curing of the concrete. Total settlements under static loads of footings supported on in-place bedrock materials and sized for the allowable bearing pressures are not expected to exceed about 1/2 to 3/4 of I inch. Differential settlements under dynamic loads of footings supported on properly compacted fill materials and sized for the allowable bearing pressures are expected to be '/2 of the total settlement. These settlements are expected to occur primarily during construction. Soil engineering parameters for imported soil may vary. Utilitv Trench Backfill Utility trench backfill should be compacted to a ininimum of 90% of the maximwn dry density, as determined by the ASTM 1557 test method. It is our opinion, that utility trench backfill consisting of onsite or approved sandy soils can best be placed by mechanical compaction to a minimum of 90% of the maximum dry density. All trench excavations should be conducted in accordance with Cal-OSHA standards, as a minimum. The soils encountered during rough grading are generally classified as Type "C" soil in accordance with the CAL/OSHA (California, State of 2007) excavation standards. Unless specifically evaluated by the project engineering geologist, all temporary excavations should be performed in accordance with CAL/OSHA (California, State of, 2007) excavation standards for Type "C" soil. Based upon a soil classification of Type "C", the temporary excavations should not be inclined steeper than 1.5:1 (horizontal:vertical) for a maximum depth of 20-ft. For temporary excavations deeper than 20-ft or for conditions that differ from those described for Type "C" in the CAL/OSHA excavation standards, the project geotechnical engineer should be contacted. 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. T.H.E. Soils Co. Inc. W.O. 843701.22A � � � Mr. Dana Benson October 18, 2007 Page 6 Construction Monitoring Observation and testing, by T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. is essential to verify compliance with recommendations and to confirm that the geotechnical conditions encountered are consistent with the recommendations of this report. T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. should conduct construction monitoring, at the following stages of construction: � • At completion of 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. This firm did not provide any surveying services at the subject site and does not represent that the building locations, contours, elevations, or slopes are accurately depicted on the plans. The findings of this report are valid as of the report date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether 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. SUMMARY Our description of rough gading operations, as well as testing services, is limited to rough grade testing only between August 27, 2007 and Septemberl4, 2007. The conclusions and recommendations contained herein have been based upon our observation and testing, as noted. It is our opinion the work performed in the areas denoted has generally been accomplished in T.H.E. Soils Co. Inc. W.O. 843701.22A . � Mr. Dana Benson October 18, 2007 Page 7 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 gading. No warranty as to the current conditions can be made. This report should be considered subject to review by the controlling authorities. This opporlunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you have any questions, please call. Very truly yours, T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. ,�'�'�%� �� '�,�,. f��' �` ��'' `�x`"'\\ ��s �' � '`�� 1 a �, �i r� �. �i:',�� zs�d6e � � � � �� ..;i�es i2a4�? �; 4 �� :�� `Fi �� `"�� I' Jo P. Frey John T. Reinh , RCE 23464 r ject Geologist Civil Engineer, Expires 12-31-07 .�� ames R. Harnson Project Manager JPF/JTR/JRH: jpf T.H.E. Soils Co. Inc. W.O. 843701.22A . � APPENDIX A References T.H.E. Soils Co. Inc. W.O. 843701.22A . � REFERENCES: Sladden Engineering, 2005, "Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Single-Family Residence, 43599 Calle De Velardo, Temecula, California", prepared by, Project No. 644-5125, dated November 30, 2005. T. H. E. Soils Company, Inc., 2007, "ENGINEER OF RECORD, Proposed Single-Family Residence, 43599 Calle De Velardo, APN: 945-160-010, Lot 10 of Tract No. 9833-3, City of Temecula, Riverside County, California, Work Order No. 843701.22", dated August 24, 2007. T.H.E. Soils Co. Inc. W.O. 843701.22A . � � APPENDIX B Laboratory Test Results T.H.E. Soils Co. Inc. W.O. 843701.22A . � � TABLEI Maximum Density/Optimum Moisture % Description Lbs/Ft� Moisture 1 Medium Brown Silty Sand 126.0 9.5 TABLE II Expansion Index Test Locallon Expansion Index Expansion PotenNal Pad Surface 1 Very Low TABLE III Soluble Sulfate Test Location Sulfate Content Sulfate Hazard Pad Surface 0.006 % by weight Negligible TABLE N Corrosivity Suite Test Locallon Saturated Resistivity Pg Chloride Content Pad Surface 3600 7.5 70 ppm T.H.E. Soils Co. Inc. W.O. 843701.22A � � � � ., � , Prime Testing, Inc. 38372 Innovation Ct Ste 102 Murrieta, CA 92563 ph (951) 894-2682 • fx (951) 894-2683 Work Order No.: 712C01 Client: T.H.E. Soils Company Project No.: 843701.22 ;; Project Name: Dana Benson � RepOrt D�te: September 25, 2007 � , LaboratoN Test(s) Resuits Summary � .� i The subject soil sample was prvicessed in accordance with California Test Method CTM 643 and tested for pH / Minimum Resistivity (CTM 643}, Sulfate Content (CTM 417} and Chloride Content (CTM 422). The test results follow: Minimum Sulfate Suffate Chloride Sample Identification phi Resistivity Content Content Content {ohm-cm) {mg/kg) (% by wgt) (ppm) 43579 Calle Del Velardo 7.5 3,600 60 .006 70 "ND=No Detection We appreciate the opportunity #o serve you. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any ques#ions or clarifications regarding these results or procedures. � /�— • /�� " f Ahmet K. Kaya, Laboratory Manager � � i F � Si I: (! �: �nr�, i : ; ,. `.:_�ul��./ � �� IMtBRMAiIONAG ; : OkGA�111.�t�ONAt : ; M e M e e a ; • Form No. CP-iR � . .....................; www.prrmetesting.com Rev.05/06 J ' � � APPENDIX C Results of Compaction Tests T.H.E. Soils Co. Inc. W.O. 843701.22A . . � TABLE I RESULTS OF COMPACTION BENSON Job No. 843701.22A October-07 Test Test Elev / Moisture Unit Dry Rel. Soil Location No. Date Depth Content Density Comp. Type (ft.) (%) (PCF) (%) 1 8/28/2007 1258.0 11.5 118.8 94 N 1 SEE PLATE 2 8/28/2007 1260.0 9.7 114.0 90 N 1 SEE PLATE 3 8/28/2007 1263.0 11.3 118.9 94 N 1 SEE PLATE 4 8/31/2007 1265.0 9.5 116.8 93 N 1 SEE PLATE 5 9/10/2007 1262.0 7.9 117.7 93 N 1 SEE PLATE 6 9/10/2007 1263.0 7.8 120.5 96 N 1 SEE PLATE 7 9/10/2007 1267.0 9.2 116.8 93 N 1 SEE PLATE 8 9/10/2007 1267.0 99 116.3 92 N 1 SEE PLATE 9 9/10/2007 FG 7.5 118.3 94 N 1 SEE PLATE 10 9/10/2007 FG 7.0 118.1 94 N 1 SEE PLATE 11 9/10/2007 FG 7.3 117.6 93 N 1 SEE PLATE 12 9/10/2007 FG 8.6 117.0 93 N 1 SEE PLATE 13 9/10/2007 FG 9.2 116.4 92 N 1 SEE PLATE SEE PLANS FOR DETAILS SC-Sand Cone ASTM D1556-64; DC-Drive Cylinder ASTM D2937-71; N-Nuclear ASTM D3017-93, and D2922-91; NG-Natural Ground + 85%= Passing Test; **-Test Failed, See Retest