HomeMy WebLinkAboutRoughGradingLots22&25(Oct.24,2001) . . . . � � �oo� ra ��.
ToHoEo Soils Co. Inc. - -
Phone: (909) 678-9669 FAX: (909) 678-9769 - ail: tl esoilsco@aol.com
31705 Central Street, Suite A• Wildomar, CA 92595 N U � 1 3 2 0 01
CITY �F T�1��?��;�°LA
ENG���dE_.-�It�G �����'�r�'I
October 24, 2001
Mr. Gene DiLuigi
D.E.I.
1243 N. Tustin Avenue
Anaheim, California 92807-1603
SUBJECT: REPORT OF ROUGH GRADING
Vail Ranch Self Storage II
��ra —� d :
�L `ots 22 a of T ract No. °23172 �: �
George Cushman Road, North of Wolf Store Road
Temecula Area, Riverside County, California
Work Order No. 159901.22
Dear Mr. DiLuigi:
INTRODUCTION
In accordance with your request, we have prepared this Report of Rough Grading presenting the
results of our observation and testing during rough grading of the subject site. All compaction test
results aze included in this report in Appendiz B, Table I.
The 20-scale, "Conceptual Grading Plan, Vail Ranch RV and Boat Storage" prepared by brf
Enterprises of Temecula, California, was utilized during grading to locate our field density tests and
was adapted as a base map for our test locations presented as Plate 1.
ACCOMPANYING MAPS AND APPENDICES
Location Map - Figure 1
Density Test Location Map - Plate 1
Appendix A - References
Appendix B- Laboratory Test Results
Appendix C- Results of Compaction Tests
T.H.E. Soils Co. [nc. W.O. No. 159901.22
. � • •
Mr. Gene DiLuigi
DEI
October 24, 2001
Page 2
Proiect Description
The proposed development calls for the construction of a RV and Boat Storage facility with
concrete tilt-up fencing and concrete paved parking areas and driveways. Grading included
clearing, grubbing, overexcavation, and compaction of fill material to prepare the site.
Site Descrintion
The subject property consists of a nearly rectangular shaped, 3.23-acre, parcel of land bound on the
north by an existing G.T.E. station (northwest), a paved road (George Cushman Road), and a
vacant, mass-graded, commercial pad (northeast); on the south by Wolf Store Road and the
Temecula Creek Channel; and on the east and west by vacant, mass-graded, commercial lots in the
Temecula area of southwestern Riverside County, California. The geographical relationships of the
site and surrounding area are depicted on our Location Map, Figure 1.
Topographically, the subject site had been mass graded into a, large, relatively flat pad. Prior to
grading, vegetation on-site consisted of a sparse growth of annual weeds and grasses.
GRADING PROCEDURES
Site Prenaration
As recommended in the referenced report, overexcavation was performed across the site. Based on
the staking provided, overexcavation e�ended approximately 2-ft below existing grade and
extended a minimum of 5-ft outside.
Prior to the placement of fill, the exposed materials were scarified a minimum of 12-inches
below the ground surface, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture, and recompacted to a
minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density (as determined by ASTM D-1557). The
material was leveled and compacted with CAT D6 & 824 dozers, then wheel rolled with loaded
scrapers and water pull to achieve a minimum compaction of 90%.
Fill Placement
The materials used for fill consisted of on-site silty sands (Unified Soil Classification —SM) derived
from the on-site materials and imported from the adjacent site to the northwest. Fill placement and
compaction was achieved utilizing a Cat D4 dozer, loaded scrapers and a water pull. Moisture
conditioning was accomplished utilizing a water pull. The fill was placed in 4 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(Appendix B, Table I).
T.Ei.E. Soils Co. Inc. W.O. No. 159901.22
. .� •
T.H.E. Soils Co.
t'hunc: t9091 G7S-9GG9 FA.1: (909) G7�i-�I7G9
� 1'(l.� Ccntral Strcct, Suitc .a •!Yldom�r, G19359:?
� o .� � v v � �-' \
� 11'� J`i ' , '��� V ��� v � � � � \'J ' (��� �J�n
�
����� � " � O � \
�� , ��o ( �� �.� ° l �"` ,_
� � „ �.,c�� ,, � ) %U' L '� ' \\ .� o � a � � ��,` ` �„
� , � ° �"�
` � �� � � ':� � � � �ti��,�
�/ � 0 :�� o o � \ ,� ;`,° r r;
� � � � „I � o �q : I a ,, `� ��' � �
% � u
� � � , �, ti i
` � � �� � 2 � � l � �,�°�'
/?O /,��� � ) � ' :'/ _
� �) ` d '� � � o N 1
� �,� l JI ,� /A`
1 , M �\\\` ' � /'
/ �� \ I �� // V �/ " � � � f ��'� '
% .11 /. - _-- __'.\
�\ � � � 'll �JM � 0 �. ' _
11 ° �
'� 0 �� >�I \\ II00 =__> 1%� _E-:� .
, �/'
.
a �� '
/� ��__ . ...` • o �/..� �� ■
,,, / � :' ;� ,�
�('� „ ; o �\ � �\ „ _ ` �
. ��
� � � __ -- - - _ `_-
,�,✓ J � � _ .
I .
. , � �� �. ,
. o � ` ' �� ' � - l�' �
� ��� � �,� � : i `�` ...-_ � P BJEC
a �+ ,� S TE
_ ' � �� �
�' `/. . � a . Indian , � : :::::�:',, i�Z��
� . � BM �� Burial Ground � . �"���p� �
.
,
, /
59
- ` , �Well �
,
_.._..- �� ; � 9 s ��
,
; ,
.
... _ �� � / .
�:: , � ,_ .:;.: c
-:::: :::;:::
. .
:;::::::`,
:;: . ..
. :::::::::;.
,.'.`::
::: ':;>'_,_. `. ,`"
..... ,�,19 _.... .. �
....... H � � ` "
� `
'��..... BjA� .� /, '91y� k > _ -_ - �j �� �
_ ...._. _
:�.:: ..
/p .o� �oo
�..... � �' ` �6 .
0
` _,� . C�
• `�...
�
.
� _
.__ __ �
o ��� � \ �2�6 � �.
.-� ii %��"�� �� � . O �
° ..r<��� - . � I
, i� . ..
o ..... `�..�
� �' �.... � '� �i ..��- ` �'��...� �.
emecu .a �l ... � .. , �. ,., --
��:..—... "� �� � ��z
...,� �
� , � � �� �� e �
;-- _ :. „ �
�`� �� ��! , -_ , \..
�`� �� i€ . i OO --- i � ��� _, � _ � �
•.. .'
„ , �__�,�;,: l � -_ __------- - ' _ � � -_. - - 9
.. �( ..-= ,,' / ------- - _=��,,�'9z $1 ��°°'\ ((`
, .
jl �� .. �- •.� l ,
. °
,.�., � -�',.._: ,, `n I � �.. � U
�i �� ;
n � � Q;
�� �
�, " --`" ��,�--�� ° �; , �...
_ ,` .
��� �,� o=, ,; \ � o � .
etf \ \ � �
, • �.., c -- ��;-� `�
� �� ., ° " � isoo
/ � � '�' � � ' � ` \ � ���� � ���
._� o '�� � � , `���� o �- '�' / .
� . � �� � � � �' „
�!o� o ;c�, � �v ,�,� �o �'1 ��oo, `�.. / 22 � �,
� � v \���� .��^� ���I ' �_� / � -`l l.
� � ,;��,���' ,��� �� �/ = '___..���
� � oWell \ �/C�,;7�_ '-.�����'� ���'��� / � F � \� �/�
� i �� / � � - i,' ��� r.� �� • ' � i ' C � � /����I �'.���� L� ,�
`�/ �'c,` �% � d y)� � � N �y .���\� �.1���1<;�t� ��— :�.
�` v /�� ,, ���� - ��; \ \,s,�_
y „j , ��� -;�,3<a,�,-= �.:�.�I�� r�
„ �, : � , „-- .�--, .�, � —
� `\ _ .. �� BM �1095 0 /p i ��\\ i :, � � �r�'�J � f � I� C /� / . _�1 - •
r / � I .� � i
� ' i \ �i' �f)�'.✓l ,�_;`�� ' O �!,
i� � 05� / \\ q � / � � � �.; ,r' ��� .� C :.
/� I I l� �e . _. . ` .a� \ ii� /� /i�� ` r - ',�.. _-•_ '�/\ r-�_. �J� `� �.J ��
ADAPTED FROM A USGS 7.5 MINUTE QUADRANGLE MAP-
PECHANGA, CA., 1968, (PHOTOREVISED 1988) o loo0 2000 300o to0o
SCAI.� FT.
SITE LOC,�TION MAP
i�!O.# 159901 .2� - Date: ��`2�1�1 � Figurc: �
. . • •
Mr. Gene DiLuigi
DEI
October 24, 2001
Page 3
Fill Soils
Soils utilized for compacted fill typically consisted of on-site and imported silty sands. Test results
are presented in Appendix B.
Cut/Fill Transitions
Rough grading at the site included overexcavation as well as fill placement and compaction. The
subject site was previously a mass graded fill pad.
Slone Construction
No permanent slopes over 3 feet in maximum height were constructed at the site.
TESTING PROCEDURES
Fieid Densitv Testing
Field density testing was performed in accordance with ASTM Test Method D2922-91 (nuclear
gauge method). 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. T'he
approximate locations of the tests are shown on the Density Test Location Map, Plate 1. Physical
testing of the rock fill was not possible, therefore, full time observation was required to assure the
recommended methods were employed.
Mazimum Densitv Determinations
Maximum Density/Optimum Moisture deternunations 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 D1557-91, Test Methods A. The test results, which were utilized in
determining the degree of compaction achieved during fill placement, are presented in Appendiac
B, Table I.
Expansion Testin�
Expansion testing was performed at the completion of rough grading on a representative sample of
soil obtained from the building pad area. The Expansion Index test result was 0, which corresponds
to a very low expansion potential. Test results are presented on Table II, in Appendix B.
T.H.E. Soils Co. Inc. W.O. No. 159901.22
. . I � � ��p' RC� I • •
i � �, � ,� � i�. x�"
�� � x,�a �.����� I ' �WS, ba .«ES5 � � LOT 24
� �� � _ � � � i
6 I J �
z
z �
' paST. G.T.E ' ; �
c st. e• r•u or cw r. STA?lON Z`s � �; I'�
wcrca cy� r.+� I I � rI I � I�I ; g <� "�' m
u w�u� l LGT 21 .-{ R '� � V °' �`''; v`� � PHa,SE 3 SEWER �
J � I 1 � ( 1 o z = .`n � I 6� PARKING _ �� ��'
I I = I o `+ o� ti I w � \ I TRACT 23172 - � :
I c . � �/ � , �Ixl � W �, SETBACK
w[[� sTOO , �' �•��o� a �°� 4h �°°� . e.� �/ o �'or � •�, PA . 229 30 tP
EXIST. f.S. I . h 4 p �— 1 � z Q6' I�. q�� a606
— �/7' � 0.79� AC PA�(YCMf �I ` l L� [7u5T. C t-G � _� !-- �•� ` a � p'1� 's7_� 11 + N72� �—
__ _ �. .^ ; `�
?�� $ . 9fl� � .-_. ... .�. .. -�� ti.-. �- _ =�a.7J 2.1x
� � {,M : CpST N12'�5'Od E B �� 6 � �
f r ti `�'�- --_..—� _ �— � f °� o
I . __ - t� C— � � � 6 � SO / i 9 � '
� � ��' -- � ef °R ` ' 0 � . ' 15 _ _ � ^^ — ° —�--- ti
� / ' ° — ` — — O b �
SECTION "A°A� I - y �o �,, ,,,cH, . _ — — — — d'� o.ss Lo / w �� . / 3
N�5 V 4 _ r „, 21 /— o _� -
�, a
D9j )-- � \� �Ya 25 / V � J� i I 6 �, T _ 2 � -O . i� �
w I' � T � � a zs' s' �
R -•--- VB � � / e' �' _ ., 4 y ef '� .
n 2 � , � �O i t '' R EASEYENT . v q � �.n .
Q t�t7 (TO BC YACATE ` �f�' „� � '�i . I ^ B�.
�,� , � 9 � � 1 � ` �&,; �
} �� 61 `fc � . "�' _ _�� � 9 ,b c � d � � _ � _ I
1' OR 6• / � J ' ' CAHOPY T �� G I ■
�.\Ll . b T�� ' �6 E \ / i �
u 1 � � ]LO' v�
PERtYETER � � � . O ��- \ �� E ' ` 12 \ �
cuu wKi ° (� o � (� .� °S ,� ef � ♦ � � �z.o �
(O' TO 12' H�) 55 ... � X '_ / ` . \ q N 4 6 . E y �4 ' �� ' � � � .i ¢
' }' PIJM G lJ �� L \ V � q '� ^I' '1 4 'l ,. / `'.^,
s�re�ac � Z \ � 4y e� �� �,. v e � r p0 y. � � ii
w+E� s�or E1aST. CROUHO (E10ST. P.l) r� O /� / e� � e� / 3 I � .� +" O � V �
/ 90 � b O � �' � �� �� � �� S P.ANKWG
W _ {� 10 � x � 6 �• � � � _ O � A 7I 66 SEiBAGK
0.29� AC PA1rElIENT � 1 Y � �/ \: �. PAD E L E V 67.0 76 y ��� A . f.� .•� �5 6p
f � ` ���9
� .� Q
i d ,I � /
• � ?.� � `� fi• o S a o o � o� � . � / W �t¢� t+i
+f'f � t0 � � r � q 6� {S
r v.�. I, " 1 e , a' � SCAPE �` Z � H . o LOT 25 . 6z Q °��
� . 4 N l
o Q " O �� n � ff ^ �� � � q b� 4y ��ry � � ^ �, • �
� ; . " � ' p5 fC V C^ ^b � . �•b�y 12 � I tl' •� � . � 6S � . / .
a e,�O 07' � py 7: � �
°b e I t+ �` u � T� �4 1 4 �
SECTION ~B-8" n� � 1 5 �c' ti LQT 22 � �` � es'' � z n i� •� � 4 ".`� � E�,
N.T.S. _ . �� � �' 4 `' QS' F I �� +) � . /�' ° S,f� � as� .oe� ¢� �
� ,. 0!� ��, 1 � :, ef �,�� � ` E �;�/ � . � �
CONSTRUCTION NOTES: � � - s �,.} �
,3 � „ ' s' � � I I � , ` �� �� aes T D n ezsa vs AREA
/ PE �
2 CONSTRUCT 029' AC. PAVEMENT OVER 0.83' �.8. C��SS II B B 6 � �� ( p �'� � � f10 4 I .�+ �/'� �� fl6 F w �� �NDSCA , '�
3 CONSTRUCi 6' CURB o /'\f\ `� / o / q , � . L � I I qy L 9g, �y S 5 , �� 4" L���
� CQNSTRIJCT 6' Ct1RH µD GUTTER. I k � 3--- � t0 / �h D J.7 � 0'�� 31 � � � 0433' ,��E� l�^ �
5 CONSTRUCT �' TN1CK PCC SLAB. / / 6 i tp � 6y� IW }� � � �\ � ybg7-88 �, �
6 COHSTRUCT ]' RIBBON GUTTER. / g � � ' 9E.31 TY `/ � � �.157.36 `����
7 CONSTRUCT CONCRETE DRIVEVnr PER y � h � 0.6 7 L .� � `�, ��`� i �
RIVERSIDE COUHTY STD. DV4 NU� 207. �"
O8 PA(NT �• vH1TE S0.fD UNE PMKIdG SiRIPP1NG. , d yse 11 �O J, , (t� � . ` aa` ey a�' — �
9 PAINT �' CROSS iMTCM PAVC�ENT MARKINGS �S �_ y� �� AREA w fD 4 � P � e y�� II — ����
, .,r, IJ>NDSCAPEs. � ,.
10 INSTKL VNECL S10P. '/� N 6B'S�S1 E � 6 �C �µµ �� d ��°' � I � �--
1 COHSTRUCT �RIM[iER CMU v��. cSEE SC[lld+ B-B� � I 1 � �0 4 � E% � � a�ti ` � 0 �� J � �—
12 CpHSTRt/CT 8' VIDE 110DIPIED CONCRETC MRON PER 81v. COUf1TY STD. 209-� i0 `� L O �
1 O \ �
ti '�
Q1 CONSiRUCT I 1/2' nC SLOPE OVER NATIVC � d �a �� `e r _ Cri 51 A.0 PAVEYEHT� _ '/ j ' �'-
� REMOVC Ex1STING CONCRETC �PROt� I ��L — `+! - � J ,�. � ` ���...��'"� -�
ca+sTRUCr ir o�c �� � (f�VATF� %'� I
Q CONSiRUCf C�TCH B�SIN NQI VCA RCPCD STD. NO CBI00 <V=7'� I ��RW � /,� _ _ ��� f_ I P
'� N
� I _ -_ �
Rc�ovc cxur oaav niTC� THE SOILS COMPANY
�--- — �cparo
RC110VC C%ISi. 2�• RCP W
CONSTRUCT C/WY{L PCp DC7AIL '�' �CRCON. �
_ s -�� � a
PRpPOSCD B' SEVER PER PH/12E 7 SEVCR TRA�T 27172
�o raoPasco .• s[vice ��r. vca Pw�s� � s�v�a IRACI z�nz cxis�. , -e `� ef - c�c�ID�w. DENSITY7ESTLOCATIONMAP g
PROPOSED R.V. & BOAT STORAGE, LOTS 22 8 25 TRACT # 23772
� ��� NORTH OF WOLF STORE ROAD
�� �D�uir cx�i� �t[ nu��[ _�—�— //�� $y}Kgp($ 7EMECULA,RIVERSIDECOUNTY,CALIFORNIA
� �.- _. _ ----- - - �i� T-4 �
� ` - AtPiIOXAtATE IACwTLON OF F7CPLARATOItY 7AF?!C}�S o
WORK ORDER: 159901.22 DATE: OCT. 2001 PLATE: 1 OF 1 0
� 6 • �� cKiST. cuu wk��� i 12 - APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF COMPACTION TESTS �
>
GRAPHIC SCALE � �� Fs � ��P.i <
'n
� rtEHSior� �ron o�rt �
6" CURB � � ��. . �Y � �
� � �� brf enterpr2ses _ }�� 2 �
(M/Qfl �' f;r��RCiC PPOP. Nµ,l " �
��- ° � . Civi! E'nginaering. Plantting n�...w. u w•www r �� PLJ1N a 2 v�rs. �
DETAIL "A DETAIL ' B Surveying ....,. �.«,....... VAL RMJC�i RV MO BOAT 6TOFVt(]E
N r s. �-'7' r.. rw.� -�«, nc �o Y
- ---------- ----- - . ._ . �.�� �• • �� = ' �
. • • �
Mr. Gene DiLuigi
DEI
October 24, 2001
Page 4
Sulfate Content
Based on past soluble sulfate testing on the site, it is anticipated that, from a corrosivity
standpoint, Type II Portland Cement can be used for construction. The percent of soluble sulfate
is anticipated to be less than 150 ppm (parts per million), which equates to a negligible sulfate
exposure (Table 19-A-4, 1997 UBC). To confirm previous findings, sulfate content testing was
conducted on a representative sample of the on-site soils at the completion of rough grading and
will be forwarded as an addendum to this report once the results are received. Babcock and Sons,
Laboratory of Riverside, California is performing the laboratory analysis.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Utilitv Trench Backfill
Utility trench backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 90% of the maximum dry density, as
determined by the ASTM 1557 test method. It is our opinion, that utility trench backfill, consisting
of on-site 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.
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.
Structural Section
We recommend the following tentative structural section for the on-site parking and driveway
areas. The tentative design of the pavement sections for the parking and driveway areas are based
on an assumed R-value of 38 and Traffic Indexes (T� of 5.0 and 8.0. R-value testing should be
conducted at the completion of rough grading to verify soils exposed at subgrade, and a final
structural section design should be recommended at that time.
The recommended tentative pavement section is:
�A TI PAVEMENT SECTION
Parking Areas 5.0 0.25' (3") AC over 0.35' (4.2") ABII
Driveways (heavy truck tr�c) 8.0 0.38' (4.6") AC over 0.75' (9.0") ABII
Concrete Drives 8.0 0.33' (4.0") PCC over 0.5' (6.0") ABII
Or 0.42' (5.0")PCC over Native at 95%
T.H.E. Soils Co. Inc. W.O. No. 159901.22
. . • i
Mr. Gene DiLuigi
DEI
October 24, 2001
Page 5
It is recommended that the subgrade materials be compacted to a depth of 1 foot below
subgrade elevation and that both the subgrade materials and the ABII be compacted to 95%
relative to the m�imum density of the respective materials, as determined by ASTM 1557-
921aboratory tests.
Fill Placement
On-site soils are expected to be suitable for use as structural fill. Imported soils, if utilized, should
be evaluated by THE Soils Co. for suitability as structural fill when specific borrow locations are
identified.
Approved fill material should be placed in 6 to 8-inch lifts, brought to near optimum moisture
content and compacted to a minimum of 90% of the maximum laboratory dry density, as
deternuned by the ASTM 1557 test method. No rocks larger than 6-inches in diameter should be
used as fill material. Rocks lazger than 6-inches should either be hauled off-site or crushed to a
suitable dimension and used as fill material.
Foundation Plan Review
THE Soils Co., Inc. should review the final foundation plans to verify conformance with the
intentions of these recommendations and those in the referenced reports. Some additional field or
laboratory work may be necessary, at this time.
ConstrucNon Monitorin�
Continuous observation and testing, by THE Soils Co., Inc. is essential to verify compliance with
recommendations and to confirm that the geotechnical conditions encountered are consistent with
the recommendations of this report. Construction monitoring should be conducted by THE Soils
Co., Inc. at the following stages of construction:
Following excavation of footings for foundations;
During utility trench backfill operations;
During pazking area subgrade preparation and placement and compaction of base material;
When any unusual conditions are encountered during grading.
SUMMARY
Our description of rough grading operations, as well as observations and testing services, were
limited to those rough grading operations performed between September 19, 2001 and October 3,
2001. The conclusions and recommendations contained herein have been based upon our
observation and testing as noted. It is our opinion that the work performed in the areas denoted
has generally 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
T.H.E. Soils Co. Inc. W.O. No. 159901.22
.. .. • •
Mr. Gene DiLuigi
DEI -'
October 24, 2001
Page 6
observed. This report is based on information obtained during rough grading. No warraniy as to
the current conditions can be made. This report should be considered subject to review by the
controlling authorities.
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 in formation 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.
This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you have any questions, please call.
Very truly yours, ��,�
o�'cP�� CIVIC F�o
T.H.E. Soils Company Inc P��� ; ���` E ��y�'��, �
� �,
c �, �O '9
a Rfo RCE 23464 �
�
� � � L(. * S
i ��` Exnires: I�( al d
o P. Frey o T. einhart, R�E 464 �, 8
P'ect Geologist Civil Engineer, Expire�l�'Z.�,�l./Ol ��,00°�
o m �� �Q�a
James R. Harrison
Project Manager
T.H.E. Soils Co. Inc. W.O. No. 159901.22
.. .. • •
APPENDIX A
References
T.H.E. Soils Co. [nc. W.O. No. 159901.22
.. .. • •
� REFERENCES
T.H.E. Soils Co., 2000, "Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Vail Ranch Self Storage II,
Proposed R. V. and Boat Storage, Lots 22 and 25 of Tract No. 23172, George Cushman Road,
North of Wolf Store Road, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California", dated June 2, 2000,
Wark Order No. 159901.00;
T.H.E. Soils Co. Inc. W.O. No. 159901.22
,_ ._ • •
APPENDIX B
Laboratory Test Results
T.H.E. Soils Co. Inc. W.O. No. 159901.22
.. ., � �
TABLE I
159901.22
DEI
Maximum Density/Optimum Moisture
% General Source
Description Lbs/Ft Moisture Area
1 Dark Brown Silty Sand 124.8 1 l.l PAD
2 Brown Silty Sand 130.3 9.8 PAD
3 Dark Brown Silty Sand 127.2 10.7 IMPORT
T.H.E. Soils Co. Inc. W.O. No. 159901.22
,. .. • •
APPENDIX C
Results of Compaction Tests
T.l�.E. Soils Co. Inc. W.O. No. 159901.22
,. ... • •
TABLE I
RESULTS OF COMPACTION
D.E.I. -Wolf Store Rd.
Job No.159901.22 DATE:9/22/O1
Test Test Elev / Moisture Unit Dry Rel. Soil Location
No. Date Depth Content Density Comp. Type
(ft.) (°/a) (PCF) (%)
1 9/14/O1 1082.0 10.0 118.3 95N 1 PAD FILL
2 9/14/Ol 1082.0 9.9 119.0 95N 1 PAD FILL
3 9/17/O1 1083.0 9.2 121.6 96N 2 PAD FILL
4 9/17/O1 1084.0 9.1 118.9 95N 1 PAD FILL
5 9/18/O1 1085.0 10.2 117.9 95N 1 PAD FILL
6 9/18/O1 1086.0 9.0 120.7 95N 2 PAD FILL
7 9/20/O1 FG 9.7 121.7 96N 2 PAD FILL
8 9/20/O1 FG 8.7 118.7 95N 1 PAD FILL
9 9/20/Ol FG 7.4 120.2 95N 2 PAD FILL
10 9/20/O1 FG 9.4 120.8 95N 2 PAD FILL
11 9/20/O1 1085.0 6.6 110.3 88N** 1 PAD FILL
11A 9/21/Ol 1086.0 11.0 122.2 96N 2 PAD FILL
12 9/21/O1 1085.0 8.9 123.0 97N 2 PAD FILL
13 9/24/O1 1086.0 9.8 121.9 96N 2 PAD FILL
14 9/24/O1 FG 8.7 123.7 97N 2 PAD FILL
15 9/24/Ol FG 9.9 122.9 97N 2 PAD FILL
16 9/24/O1 FG 9.0 123.3 97N 2 PAD FILL
17 9/24/O1 FG 10.5 122.0 96N 2 PAD FILL
18 10/2/O1 FG 9.2 113.7 90N** 2 PAD FILL
18A 10/3/O1 FG 10.3 119.0 95N 2 PAD FILL
19 10/2/O1 FG 7.7 114.5 90N** 2 PAD FILL
19A 10/3/Ol FG 9.9 119.9 95N 1 PAD FILL
20 10/2/O1 FG 9.4 120.7 95N 1 PAD FILL
21 10/3/O1 FG 10.9 121.7 96N 2 PAD FILL
SEE PLANS FOR TEST LOCATIONS
SC-Sand Cone ASTM D 1556-64; DC-Drive Cylinder ASTM D2937-71; N-Nuclear ASTM D3017-93, and D2922-91; NG-Natural Ground +
85%= Passing Test; **-Test Failed, See Retest