HomeMy WebLinkAboutRoughGradeCompaction(Oct.10,1989) �:
F
J ; `�+ `; f ��� *:
�"'�� �� SOUTH COAST
l � .1 ^ Y e .1:
,F . .�� J
� � � � �� �� i �� �EO�o�ic
;. f ' 9
;�,�� �.
� i � . SERVICES, iNC,
- � 24692 Del Prado Avenue
�" � Dana Wint. CA 92629 �
'�.. ° . � � ~ r �`{�'� (714) 496-8504
� �� �.�::.
..
ROUGH GRADE COMPACTION REPORT
for
_ LOTS�'.�.. i�'i'f�OUGH=2:9 ;: — � : =TY2-A(���`"3t- :2�'2'.0'�
RIVERSIDE COUN'I'Y, CALIFOI2NIA • ,
: iog rro 219032
-- ------- --�---- - - ----- ---
_ - ._ 4 � °� - : . . - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
".� --
_. _ � . _ - � : � : . ..: _ _ ;. PREPARED EOR . , . . . . . . _ . . . .
; . � _ . . .. - Mr . Gary Dix . . . . . . . . _
. Dix Development
. � 22865 Lake Forest Drive
� E1 Toro, CA 92630
- - �- CIVIL ENGINEER � -
- C.M. Civil Engineering Associates � �
_ -- 225 East Airport Drive •
� P.O. Box 6087
San Bernardino, California 92412
Project No. 88201.2
Report Date: October 10, 1989 � .
� , . � .
Tract 23220 TABLE OF CONTENTS .
PAGE
1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................... 1
1.1 General .......................................... 1
1.2 Site Location and Description .................... 1
1.3 Scope of Work .......................:............. 1
2.0 LABORATORY TESTING .................................... 2
2.1 Compaction Test ................................... 2
2.2 Expansion Index Test .............................. 2
2.3 Soluble Sulfate Test .............................. 2
3.0 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS .................................... 2
. 3.1 General ........................................... 2
3.2 Fill (Pre-existing) ............................... 2
3.3 Topsoil .............................. ............ 2
3.4 Alluvium .......................................... 3
3.5 Old Alluvium (Qoal) ............................... 3
3.6 Groundwater .................:..........�........... 3
3.7 Geologic Hazards .................................. 3 •
4.0 SITE GRADZNG ........................................... 3 �
4.1 General ........................................... 3
4.2 Site Preparation.:.::� ............................. 3
4.3 Test Procedure .................................... 4
' 4.4 Compacted Fill..� .................................. 4 •
4.4.1 General .................................... 4
4.4.2 Fill Slopes ................................ 4
4.5 Overexcavated Areas ............................... 4
4.6 Cut Slopes ........................................ 4
5 .0 DISCUSSION ............................................. 5
6.0 CURRENT SITE CONDZTIONS ................................ 5
7.0 RECONIl�IENDATIONS ........................................ 5
7.1 General ........................................... 5
7.2 Trench Backfill ................................... 5
7.3 Foundations ....................................... � 6
7.3.1 General .................................... 6
7.3.2 Structural Footings ........................ 6
7.3.3 Lateral Loads .............................. _7
7.4 Retaining Walls ................................... .7
7.4.1 Wall Pressure .............................. 7
7.4.2 Wall Foundation ............................ 7
7.4.3 Lateral Resistance ......................... 8
7.4.4 Wall Backfill ............................. 8
7.4.5 Prewetting of Slab Areas ................... 8
7.4.6 Moisture Barrier ........................... 8
7 .5 Concrete .......................................... 9
7.6 Landscaping ....................................... .9
7.7 Drainage ..................................... .... 9
8.0 ADDITZONAL TESTING AND INSPECTION ...................... 9
9.0 CONCLUSIONS ................ .......................... 10
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �N�.
i . . � �r
'Fract 23220 TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Tables
1-2 MAXIMUM DENSITY VALUE/SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TEST
RESULTS �
3 REQUIREMENTS FOR CONCRETE EXPOSED TO SULFATE-CONTAINING
SOLUTZONS � �
4 FOUNDATION RECONID'lENDATIONS-LOW EXPANSION .
. , .>-..:
CONVENTIONAL SLAB ON GRADE '� ���� �
� . �: . .. , --�: -.� __��: . �_�... _:_. _. •
--'- � �� List of Figures �
1 ----� -�RETAINING WALL DETAZL . .
� _� l:1 . IY. L'` 1 �i :3c"� �. ` ���+' '. , _ . _ .
,��,.�1. �.��+ 5. "11 :3� ' S . :,i. ..:,'"_
� � List of Plates _
� -�<<: �. � -, :.t_. -- - ::e ��• :,�;-. .._ ,
;� �; - . , .._..: :,;.i. .'. h�±: : �a�;: :
__ __ .. . . 1 � - � DENSITY _ TEST LOCATION ,,_MAP _ - :.,r.� __ _ _
. . ____ _ = ---- - - - -� -
- _
_-� . . _ ;�:� -:`� ;�:�:. -�� - - �
.-. '.-. . List of Appendices •':'. : __
+ - =,� � . . . _-- .. ^ � . : _ �-•�� = �: _" • _ -_ --• -
. -.. .� _ _-�� .�- - - . . v :
. A �' �'� - LI ST OF REFERENCES � � � ��j � � �
_ , . — _1S'�.� ._ _ .,, v. c. �� �,� . '�.3 .� . . : �, �:? _ �.JT i -
- ';�' � �--.� �G�� , aJ]1dYT? .. _v-'�: - - _ . � '�si.'_' 3:
�-. .
. _� :;� .r . �.u�:�c�� _ . .,-��fn� _ .�d`;c. .. ��;c; �._.,..
-�,� _ - .�ab':. . �u�; :: _-io^� - �°;� �T�;: _ .
. _ , � - :,� -.- - _ � .
, • -`_� . . _�:.- :L:, : .� `��:_
-� _ -... ;%'.. � ; ..._
• : ,a �+_:: _. .. . - .� ; : _ -
�,_ . . ' : -, �• :�'":T: .. . ; es e i . . . ::�i... . . .
_ � . _ :a _
r., - • _
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, wc.
, • r�
1:0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
This report presents the results of our testing and observation during rough
grading for Lots 1 through 29, Tract 23220, Riverside County, California.
Reference is made to our report and letters listed in Appendix "A".
The purpose of this report is to obtain rough grade release for Lots 1
through 29, Tract 23220, the associated street areas, and the adjacent slopes
within the development.
1.2 Site Location and Description
The site is bounded to the north by undeveloped property and to the south
by a newly developed single family residential subdivision. An existing �
Metropolitan Water District easement bounds the westerly project boundary
while an existing unpaved road/utility easement bounds the eastern property
line .
1.3 Scope of Work . ° . - � � �
The purpose of the work performed at the site as described in this report
was to provide level pads for building and to direct site drainage to an
approved location . Essentially, grading consisted of removal and recompaction
of the existing unsuitable soil and cut/fill operations to create level �
building pads .
The scope of our work included the following:
*Laboratory testing;
*Observation during site preparation, excavation and subsurface :
preparation prior to placement of fill;
*Geologic observation of cut slopes;
*Geologic observation of fill bench excavations;
*Observation and field density testing during placement of fill at the
site; and,
*Preparation of this report.
The following sections present specific details of the above items. .
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, iNC.
, , . _ ���,
• Tract 232201 Riverside County -2-
2.0 I.ABORATORY TESTING
2.1 Compaction Tests
Compaction tests were conducted on samples of ttie soils placed as compacted
fill at the site . This test is performed in the laboratory in accordance with
the ASTM Test Method D1557. A summary of the maximum dry densities and
optimum moisture contents of the fill soils is presented in Table 1.
2.2 Expansion Index Test
Expansion index tests in conformance with the Uniform Building Code
Standard No. 29-2 have been conducted on samples of soil considered to be
representative of the soil within the influence of the proposed structures.
Test results indicate that the soils placed at the site have expansion indices
ranging between 1 and 15. Based on this, the fill soils at the site are
considered to have a low potential for expansion. .
2.3 Soluble Sulfate Test .
Samples of soils exposed in the building pads were obtained for sulfate
content testing. The soluble sulfate content determination was conducted in
conformance with the test method described as "California 417A" . The test
results indicate that the soils tested have soluble sulfate contents ranging
between .015 and .02 percent.
3.0 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS : �
3.1 General - . -:: - - — - -- -
Geologic conditions as exposed during grading were substantially in
conformance with those anticipated in our referenced report. The geologic
units encountered are described below.
3 . 2 Fill ( Pre
Pre-existing unsuitable fill was encountered during rough grading along the
northern property line adjacent to Walcott Lane and within the northern and .
eastern portions of the site at the locations of previously graded pads. The
pre-existing fill encountered on site was entirely removed. .
3.3 Topsoil
Topsoil ranging in depth to a maximum of 2 feet and consisting of brown silty
sand was removed during grading operations and reused as compacted fill.
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �NC.
'Fract 23220/Riverside County -3-
•- r
3:4 Alluvium
Recent alluvium consisting predominantly of silty sand was encountered in the
central gully area. Unsuitable alluvium was removed and replaced as
compacted fill. •
3.5 Old Alluvium (Qoal) � ' �
Well consolidated floodplain material (old alluvium) consisting of a reddish �
brown sand to silty sand with light brown sand lenses was encountered
beneath the surficial soils . This material was found to be suitable for both
foundation and fill support . �- - , = =- � � � - •
.:.�.
. _... ._.. . .. ._ - i:. : . :;_ . _ :
3. 6 Groundwater - � +�' = ��i • � � • -
, ._.. . �e ...,..- .;_:�r.-. _ ;�: : .:.._... _
No groundwater was observed in the canyon bottom =•during grading. �
Subdrains within the canyon bottom were not considered necessary. =�='�::�== -
: .ci�f�2'• " i�y:stiEiS_ 'ia�:C�:.._; V� . _ ...'4. :i'._.
3.7 Geolo�ic - Hazards .-���:::ai% . -� e.`:c; . �r:_ c.c;:. -.�, �: '
..-.:�:- � -
-- __...._.__. 1 /� - � -• f �+►� � - - �-- - - - - —�-�-- �
� . _ . .4'V.. � � .� 4���� � T� -. _.— r��ZLS� - _ .i � _ " .. �:K. •µV�:�+ot� ' "
"�= No evidence `of landslides or �faults were encountered during grading. ��•'�y���z:' :
�. - _- :. �r�� L:_� � �.���n . �g��;:���_. . _ _�_ __-�- �::�:
- = 4.0 SITE GRADING � :z�.r`-�,;�, ,. . . '.�`tki�ic!: • � ; =�;� �.~; _ __ �_
� - ..s.�.-s- ..�: -_
' ' '" . - , • . . �::l: � - �� � � ' •
� 4.1 General - � - - -
� Observation' and testing during excavation and placement �of fill within _that
• portion of the site as described in this report was conducted between August .
16, 1988 and January 26, I989. Field density test results are presented in
Table 2.
.. . _ �.; :�; � _ ,_.. _ .
Approximate locations where density tests were taken are indicated on Plate 1
entitled "Density Test Location Map" . Plate 1 is based on the "Rough
Grading Plan" dated October 1988 by CM Engineering Associates. Additional
information was added based on our field observations . Plate 1 should be
considered approximate . � - -- - �
4.2 Site Preparation
The site was cleared of organic material and debris. Prior to placement of
new fill, unsuitable soil was removed over that portion of the site to receive
fill. Removals averaged 4 feet in depth. Once excavation was complete, the
exposed surface was observed and determined to be suitable for support of
fill and the proposed structures. The exposed surface was scarified,
moisture conditioned as necessary, and compacted.
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �NC.
_ � • �' -
Tract 23220/Riverside County -4-
4.3 Test Procedure _
Test Procedure ASTM D1556 (6-inch sand cone) was used for field density
testing of compacted fill placed at the site. The results of these field
density tests were compared to the maximum dry density determined by Test
Procedure ASTM D1557. '
4. 4 Compacted Fill � � �
4.4.1 General -. - � .-.-. .
,"
On-site soils were used as ,., compacted fill _ and consisted . generally of
fine to coarse grained silty sands"�_ ranging in color from brown to red brown.
Fill materials were placed in horizontal lifts approximately 8 inches in loose
thickness . Materials were moisture :conditioned as necessary and mechanically
compacted to at least 90 percent _ relative compaction, based on the maximum
dry , density determined by Test _:Procedure ASTM D1557. When , field density
tests , produced failing results, ',.the approximate limits of substandard soil
were established. .' �Additional compactive effort was then added �and the area
retested. � Compaction was achieved �primarily by ;using a rubber tired dozer -
and'sheepsfoot. ��Other rubber tire � equipment also contributed to compaction
�- efforts . The maximum depth of fill is approximately 40 feet, located within
_ Lot 24. Field density test results are tabulated in Table 2. ���` -
- - ::�t ,i•. � -�.� .u�. _ _.. :s•L��_. . .....�� :._. ._ �3'�S� . %ti .
� `��+; ,� ...�., : 4'{f �f��.. . .:F'i'c+j,��� . . - .i�.11i131�=,�rl -._ . � . . . .''_."
4. 4. 2� Fill Slopes � �,� �� _ �
., .:.,; { --� �x� . �� . t = - _
A foot high ,(approximate) , 2:1 fill slope has been constructed along the "
western portion 'of Lot 24. Fill was benched into firm natural material during
- placement. ------- - -- ------- - _ -_ . ---
4. 5 Overexcavated Areas �=- � = _ _, '.. . . ;
„k.L,�_: �. . • :�,i`!� t . ..
Lots 1, 8 through ,�,12, 16 through 18, and 21 �exposed cut/fill transitions
within the building area. The cut portion of these lots was �overexcavated to
a depth of at least 4 feet to provide more uniform foundation support.
Overexcavation limits are indicated on the "Density Test Location Map" (Plate
1 � ' ._ --
4.6 Cut Slopes , �
Cut slopes at u a gradient of� � 1�:1 and 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) were
constructed in old alluvium and attain a maximum height of approximately 20
feet. The cut slopes were observed and considered to be stable against deep
seated instability, although the potential for erosion exists, especially where
the more granular materials are exposed.
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �NC.
• Tract 23220/Riverside County -5-
, � - r ,
5.0 DISCUSSION �
The findings and recommendations in this report are based upon the
referenced report and letters, the requirements of the County of Riverside, �
and our observations and testing during grading. Fill as described in this
report is intended to support the proposed development as described in the
referenced report. Development other than anticipated will require further
analysis .
6.0 CURREPIT SITE CONDITIONS
Due to the extended period of time elapsed since completion of rough grading,
. a site visit was made on October 3, 1989 to observe the current site
conditions with regard to surficial slope stability and site deterioration.
Based on our observations, site earthwork as described in this report has
deteriorated primarily due to erosion. Although erosion to depths ranging
from 12 to 18 inches was observed, the site is considered from a geotechnical
standpoint to be suitable for the intended use. Erosion repair should be
undertaken as soon as possible to reduce the potential for future site/slope
instability. Surficial vegetation observed is considered to be
' minimal.
If a prolonged delay in construction occurs, the slab areas should be
evaluated prior to slab placement. This evaluation may be conducted at the
same time footing excavations are observed.
7.0 RECOD�IlVIENDATIONS -
? .1 General - - - - . - .
Recommendations presented in the referenced report are considered a part of
this report. The site should be developed in conformance with the require-
ments of the governing agency and the recommendations presented in this and
the referenced report. Footing trench spoils should not be cast or spread
across slab or pavement areas without being compacted to the same compaction
specifications as primary fill. Backfill returned to footing trench excavations
to restore grades after the construction of footings, walls etc. , should also
be mechanically compacted to the same compaction specification requirements in
order to minimize the potential for edge cracking of slabs . Subgrades below
slab and pavement areas should be "proof compacted" to an unyielding
condition just prior to any base placement.
7.2 Trench Backfill
Utility trenches should be placed outside of a 1:1 plane extending downward
from the base of structural footings except where passing under the footing.
The backfill in the pipe trench should be compacted to reduce the potential
for future settlement. Utility trenches should be backfilled with fill placed
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, iNC.
- _ �. - - , - --- ---------- _ .--- .
_.. . ."__'" . ,"".' "_' " ' __ .. .
•Tract 23220/ Riverside County -g-
y i . ,, f :
in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in uncompacted thickness. If on-site soil is
used, the material should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative
compaction by mechanical means only. Imported sand may also be used for
backfilling trenches over the level portion of the site provided it is compacted
to at least 90 percent relative compaction. If imported sand is used,
sufficient water should be added during the trench backfilling operations to
prevent the soil from "bulking" during c�mpaction.
? . 3 Foundations
7.3.1 General ' -
•::, ,:.
, No information regarding structural loading was available to us at the time of
this report. Once specific structural and location plans are available for the
proposed structures they should be reviewed by our office for additional
recommendations . � �. .
The following design value recommendations are based on values presented in
the Uniform Building Code and are presented for preliminary design only.
Laboratory testing can be performed if requested, which may justify the use
of higher design values . .
7 .+� . I : -�ss�I = - - - --_. - - - _ _
For the purpose of this report it is assumed that 1 and 2 story structures
will be built and supported on conventional continuous footings extending into
firm bedrock or compacted fill. Footings supporting 1 floor and a roof should
be �at least 12 inches deep and 12 inches wide. Footings supporting 2 floors
and a roof should be at least 18 inches deep and 15 inches wide for two story
structures, measured below lowest adjacent grade acceptable to the soil
engineer. Footings on or within 10 feet of top of slopes should be deepened
to have a horizontal projection of at least 10 feet from the lowest outside edge
of the footing to the slope face. - - •
. �,� c, _ , . .
7.3.2 Structural Footings
Strip footings having a depth and width of 12 inches may be designed for an
allowable bearing capacity of 1500 psf . This value may be increased by 300
psf for each 1 foot of increased width and/or depth to a maximum of 4500
psf .
A summary of these minimum foundation recommendations, including reinforce-
ment for conventional footings and slabs on g�rade is presented on Table 4.
The weight of the footing below lowest adjacent grade can be neglected. The
allowable foundation pressure may be increased up to one-third the given
value for earthquakes or other temporary forces.
SOUTH COAST GEDLOGIC SERVICES, �NC.
♦a.......� �v_...i�........�.�..._. �,,,... ,'
i ! � � R
Footings adjacent to retaining walls or other footings should be deepened
below a 45 degree plane extended from the base of the adjacent footing or
wall .
7.3.3 Lateral Loads -
Lateral loads for footings and slabs on compacted fill �r bedrock may be
designed for using a combination of lateral sliding resistance along the bottom
of slabs and passive earth pressure against the sides of footings . Lateral
sliding resistance may be determined by multiplying the dead load by a
coefficient of friction of 0.25. Passive earth pressure is zero at the ground
surface and increases with depth at the rate of 150 psf per foot of depth to a
maximum of 2250 psf for firm alluvium and compacted fill.
Lateral bearing and lateral sliding resistance may be combined.
7.4 Retainin� Walls
The following recommendations are presented for preliminary use only. Plans
for retaining wall (including location) must be submitted to South Coast
Geologic Services, Inc. for review prior to final design.
7.4.1 Wall Pressure
Non-rigid retaining walls up to 10 feet in height, which retain level, drained
backfill should be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure of 30 pcf
(minimum) .
A vertical component equal to one-third of the horizontal force may be
assumed at the plane of application of the force. The depth of the retained
earth shall be the vertical distance below the ground surFace measured at the
wall face for stem design or measured at the heel of the footing for
overturning and sliding.
Surcharges on walls due to footings above a 45 degree plane extended up
from the base of the wall footing should be added to the wall pressure
indicated above. Automobile loads may be assumed to be equivalent to 12
inches of soil. �
7.4.2 Wall Foundation
Wall footings should be extended at least 18 inches into approved strata
measured below lowest adjacent firm surface and should have a footing width
of at least 2 feet. Wall footings proportioned as recommended above may be
designed for an allowable bearing capacity of 1950 psf .
S�UTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �NC.
li':,Ll:l �.�.._Vr.�t �.��..:�,j .,
, t .. i . -
? . 4. 3 Lateral Resistance
Lateral loads for wall footings can be designed for using a coefficient of
friction of 0.25 (to be multiplied by the dead load) and a passive pressure
value of 150 psf . This passive pressure value may be increased by 150 psf
for each additional foot of depth into firm approved soil to a maximum value
of 2250 psf. ,
7.4.4 Wall Backfill
The wall backfill should consist of predominantly granular material and should
be drained. A continuous layer of well graded (as specified on Figure 1)
gravel 12 inches in width (minimum) should be placed along the intersection
, of backfill and surface of the backcut. This gravel blanket should extend to
within 2 feet of the ground surface (on-site soil is to be used as a cap to
seal the gravel blanket against surface water infiltration) . Weepholes should
consist of unmortared joints in block walls or one (1) inch diameter round
holes in poured walls. The openings should be at least 6 inches above
finished grade to prevent surface water from flowing back into the holes.
Provisions should be made, to collect the water from the weepholes and
conduct it via non erosive device to an approved location away from parking
and walkway areas .
Walls to remain dry may be drained by placing a perforated pipe, holes down,
in the g�ravel and grading the pipe to daylight (2 percent gradient,
minimum) . Figure 1 depicts a typical retaining wall backdrain system. The
pipe should be lower than the top of the floor slab and should be graded to
dra.in towards an approved location. The back of the wall should be
waterproofed . �
Wall backfill should be compacted to a density of at least 90 percent of
maximum density using light compaction equipment only. A paved drainage
ditch should be placed slong the top of walls where runoff is anticipated and
should conduct the water to an approved location.
Gravel and pipe placement should be observed by quaLified geotechnical
personnel prior to placement of backfill.
7.4.5 Prewetting of Slab Areas
Laboratory test results indicate that the soil which currently mantles the site
has a low potential for expansion. No prewetting is required.
7.4.6 Moisture Barrier
Moisture barriers should be placed below concrete slabs in moisture sensitive
areas . Barriers should overlay 2 inches of clean sand and should consist of
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, wc.
. ,,.. ..
a� plastic film (6 mil polyvinyl chloride, minimum). The barrier should be
covered with a minimum of (1) inch of clean sand. Sand overlying the
barrier should be lightly moistened ust
sand should ] prior to placing the conci•ete. The
provide a suitable working surface and aid in the cure of the
concrete. All joints of the barrier should be sealed or overlapped at least 12
inches. Care should be taken not to damage the barrier during construction.
? . 5 Concrete �
The concentration of soluble sulfate in the soil samples was determined to
range from .015 to .02 percent. Concrete in contact with site soils should be
proportioned using design designation "A" listed on Table 3.
, 7.6 Landscapin�
Newly constructed slopes or existing slopes where vegetation is not sufficient
or has been damaged due to construction should be planted as soon as
possible with a deep rooting ground cover requiring a minimum of irrigation.
Burrowing rodents should be actively discouraged. Slope surfaces should be
maintained at a relatively constant moisture content. Periodic checks of slope
conditions should be made to search for and correct potential surficial
instability.
Fill slopes should be planted as soon as possible with a dee rootin
cover requiring a minimum of irrigation. Slope surfaces should be maintained
at a relatively constant moisture content.
Time, weather, plants, animals and man himself have an adverse affect on
natural and man-made slopes. Shallow slope failures can occur in time. If
the slopes are properly maintained it is our opinion that they will remain
stable .
7.7 Draina�e
The finished surface of the site should be graded so that water will drain
away from retaining walls and structures and slopes.. Ponding of water
adjacent to structures should not be permitted: Roof drainage should be
collected and directed via non erosive device to an approved location.
Planters should be sealed, excess water collected and directed via non erosive
device to an approved location. Planter water should not be allowed to
percolate into the underlying soil.
8.0 ADDITIONAL TESTING AND INSpECTION
We recommend that remedial erosion repair be tested and/or observed by our
representative. Retaining wall, storm drain, utility trench and miscellaneous
excavations should be backfilled and compacted as recommended in the
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �N�.
Y' ' „ ` ' _ " _ _ " ' ' . _ . _ . .. . .. . . .. . . . _ ..
� + , � r
referenced report. All such backfilling operations should be observed by
qualified geotechnical personnel. Foundation excavations and slab subgrade
areas should be observed by qualified geotechnical personnel prior to placing
reinforcing steel and moisture barriers .
9.0 CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results of our testing and observation, it is our opinion that
that portion of the site as described in this report was rough graded in
accordance with the County of Riverside g�rading requirements, the referenced
report and/or recommendations prese�t�d during grading as field conditions
warranted. As constructed, the compacted fill described in this report
should perform adequately for the intended use provided the recommendations
of this and the referenced report are considered for final structural design
and construction. Both cut and fill slopes should be stable as graded with
respect to deep-seated mavement and with proper maintenance under normal
weather conditions, should remain so.
� SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, Inc.
�� �
�- `�"( ��`°�
J. Eric Johnson Mel Todd
Field Technician Manager, Field Services
� � FSSlO��
r�
��'c, /', � :: �. ^�,p .��6:
., c.�� � � ~ 4� ��`
-'t. � � � �l
« '� G �Q.l..�� � � '+' t — i
Ca � �'� . • � i��: ;.c��
� y �,� Maire La a 1�e� E�,, ��
. vG. 41�80 �' R.C.E. Il ��
C£RT�FIED
* ENGINEERING * J I CI`U'•�- ���
�/` ��f �:A�����
�.�_
lm � ���� o��\� ~ �
�F CAI�F .
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �►vc.
� ! e r
�.g 1
. MAXIMUM DENSITY VALUE
• (ASTM D1557)
Optimum Maximum
Curve Soil Moisture Dry
No. Description Content (�) Densitv (vcf)
1 Bro�+n S i 1 ty SAND 7. 5 129 . 5
2 Bro�+n Silty SAND�'� 8.0 131.0
3 Red Bro�+n Silty SAND�'� 8.0 127.5
4 Brown Silty SAND 8.8 124.5
• '�Fine to Coarse Grain.
TAHLE 2 .
SUrIIMRY OF FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS _
Test �- Elevation Test Compaction Field Dry Field Relative Test
No. Date (ft) Location Curve Densitv Moisture Comaaction 1�ve�
1 08-16-88 1256 Lot 25 1 112.4 6.3 - 86.8 SC
U OS-16-88 1256 Lot 25 1 119.9 8.4 92.6 SC
2 08-17-SS 1259 Lot 25 1 120.1 9.4 92.7 SC
3 08-17-88 1252 Lot 24 1 121.7 8.7 94.0 SC
4 08-17-88 1260 Lot 24 1 118.3 8.1 91.3 SC
S 08-17-88 1254 Lot 24 1 121.5 9.1 93.8 SC
6 08-17-88 1261 Lot 25 1 110.4 5.7 85.3 SC
6A 08-17-88 1261 Lot 25 1 120.8 2.8 93.3 SC
7 08-17-88 1257 Lot 25 1 118.3 9.2 91.3 SC
8 08-17-88 1260 Lot 26 1 116.8 8.0 . 91.4 SC
9 OS-17-88 1263 Lot 19 1 119.2 9.0 90.2 SC
10 OS-17-88 1268 Lot 19 1 118.5 8.4 91.5 SC
11 08-18-88 1258 I.ot 24 1 119.0 9.4 91.9 SC
12 08-18-88 1270 Lot 24 1 117.9 9.2 91.0 SC
13 08-18-88 1257 Lot 20 1 122.4 9.7 94.5 SC
14 OS-18-88 1263 Lot 26 1 118.5 8.7 91.5 SC
15 08-18-88 1263 Lot 25 1 120.4 9.8 93.0 SC
(1) SC Sand Cone Test (ASTM D1556)
Lots 1 through 29, Tract 23Z20
Rivarside County, California
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �N�.
_ '- '--- --°_ . -- '- - - - . ._. ... . _ �
� 2ASLH 2
, f.. .�
SU1q1ARY OF FIELD DIIVSITY TEST RESULTS
Test Elevation Test Compaction Field Dry Field Relative Test
No. Date {ft) Location Curve Densitv Moisture Compaction TYpe�
16 08-18-88 1274 Lot 14 1 122.8 10.0 94.8 SC
17 08-18-88 1260 Lot 24 1 120.4 9.0 93.0 SC
18 08-18-88 1266 Lot 26 1 121.8 9.7 94.1 SC '
19 08-18-88 1261 Lot ZS 1 119.8 8.9 92.5 SC
20 08-19-88 1263 Lot 20 1 122.4 8.4 94.5 SC
21 08-19-88 1262 Lot 25 I 120.0 8.6 92.7 SC
22 08-19-88 1274 Lot 14 1 122.5 8.1 94.6 SC
23 08-19-88 1270 Lot 19 1 118.5 8.8 91.5 SC
24 08-19-88 1263 Lot 26 1 121.6 9.3 93.9 SC
25 08-19-88 1265 Lot 26 1 119.7 9.5 92.4 SC
. 26 OS-19-88 1280 Lot 6 1 119.1 9.3 92.0 SC
27 08-19-88 1265 Lot 24 1 121.0 9.8 93.L SC
28 OS-19-88 1270 Lot 27 1 122.2 9.5 94.4 SC
29 08-19-88 1270 Lot 15 1 114.1 6.2 88.1 SC
29A 08-19-88 1270 Lot 15 1 120.5 9.2 93.1 SC
30 08-19-88 1270 Lot 13 1 119.7 8.4 92.4 SC '
31 08-19-88 1274 Lot 20 1 121.5 9.1 93.8 SC
32 OS-22-88 1299 Walcott Lane 1 118.4 9.2 91.4 SC
33 08-22-88 1300 Walcott Lane 2 121.2 8.1 92.5 SC
34 08-22-88 1293 Lot 7 2 120.8 9.1 92.2 SC
35 08-22-88 1293 Lot 7 2 113.2 9.2 86.4 SC
35A 08-22-88 1293 Lot 7 2 119.7 8.4 91.4 SC
36 08-22-88 1284 Lot 55 2 119.0 9.4 90.8 SC
37 08-22-88 1268 Lot 13 2 118.7 9.2 90.6 SC
38 08-23-88 1267 Lot 26 2 117.9 9.1 90.0 SC
39 OS-23-88 1302 Waicott Lane 2 119.6 8.7 91.3 SC
40 08-23-88 1293 Lot 7 2 121.3 9.0 92.6 SC
41 08-23-88 1278 Lot 6 3 118.4 8.8 92.9 SC
42 08-23-88 1269 Lot 20 2 118.6 9.b 90.5 SC
43 08-23-88 1272 Lot 19 3 117.9 9.2 92.5 SC
44 08-23-88 1272 Lot 15 3 118.8 9.5 93.2 SC
45 08-23-88 1305 Walcott Lane 2 119.9 8.9 91.5 SC
46 08-23-88 1307 Walcott Lane 2 120.0 9.1 91.6 SC
47 08-23-88 1282 Lot 4 3 118.8 9.2 93.2 SC
48 08-23-88 1275 Lot 15 3 118.3 8.7 92.8 SC
49 08-23-88 1282 Lot 6 2 120.9 8.4 92.3 SC
(1) SC Sand Cone Test (ASTM D1556)
. Lots 1 through 29, Tract 23220
Riverside County, California
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �N�.
� TASLE 2
i 1 �. , • 'l
SUhQMRY OF FIELD DINSITY TEST RESULTS
Test Elevation Test Compaction Field Dry Field Relative Test
No. Date (ft) Location Curve Densitv Moisture Compaction Tvne�
50 08-23-88 1304 Lot 7 2 119.8 8.9 9i.5 SC
51 08-23-88 1268 Lot 27 2 118.9 8.4 90.8 SC
52 08-2�-88 1275 Lot 21 3 117.5 9.1 92.2 SC
53 08-24-88 1270 Lot 19 2 119.7 8.7 91.4 SC
54 OS-24-88 1270 Lot 26 3 115.9 8.8 90.9 SC
55 08-24-88 1278 Lot 14 3 116.4 8.1 91.3 SC
56 OS-24-88 1294 Lot 7 2 121.4 8.4 92.7 SC
57 08-24-88 1282 Lot 5 2 118.4 9.0 90.3 SC
58 OS-24-88 1268 Lot 23 2 122.0 8.6 93.1 SC
59 08-24-88 1272 Lot 25 3 117.8 8.1 92.4 SC
60 08-24-88 1270 Lot 20 2 120.2 9.2 91.8 SC
61 08-24-88 1283 Lot 14 2 121.3 9.2 92.6 SC
62 08-24-88 1268.5 Lot 19 2 120.5 8.7 92.0 SC
63 08-24-88 1292 Lot 7 2 119.5 9.1 91.2 SC
64 09-01-88 1284 Lot 6 2 118.7 8.8 90.6 SC
65 09-01-88 1273 Lot 19 2 121.1 9.4 92.4 SC �
66 09-01-88 1267 Lot 25 2 120.5 8.1 92.0 SC
67 09-01-88 1268 Lot 23 2 120.3 8.4 91.8 SC
68 09-01-88 1268 Lot 26 2 120.9 8.8 92.3 SC
69 09-06-88 1247 Lot 29 2 121.2 9.5 92.5 SC
70 09-06-88 1249 Lot 29 2 120.2 8.4 91.8 SC
71 09-06-88 1250 Lot 29 2 119.7 8.1 91.5 SC
72 09-06-88 1252 Lot 29 2 119.4 8.8 91.1 SC
� 73 09-06-88 1254 Lot 29 2 120.7 8.8 92.1 SC
74 09-06-88 1255 Lot 29 2 119.8 8.6 ' 91.5 SC �
75 09-06-88 1257 Lot 29 2 120.0 9.8 91.6 SC
76 09-06-88 1258 Lot 29 2 119.7 9.1 91.4 SC �
77 09-06-88 1258 Lot 29 2 120.5 8.6 92.0 SC
78 09-OS-88 1259 Lot 29 2 119.4 8.7 91.1 SC
79 09-08-88 1278 Lot 19 2 120.7 9.0 92.1 SC
80 OS-08-88 1273 Lot 27 2 120.5 9.2 92.0 SC
81 09-08-88 1260 Lot 29 2 119.7 8.1 91.4 SC
82 09-08-88 1268 Lot 25 2 118.8 8.6 90.7 SC
83 09-08-88 1286 Lot 5 2 119.1 8.4 90.9 SC
84 09-08-88 1305 Lot 7 2 121.4 9.8 92.7 SC
85 09-08-88 1295 Lot 7 2 118.8 8.6 90.7 SC
(
f
(1) SC Sand Cone Test (ASTM D1556) ,
Lots 1 through 29, Tract 23220
Riverside County, California
i
i
1
i
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �N�.
' ' '; ' - TAHI.H 2
SUhQ1ARY OF FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS •
Test Elevation Test Compaction Field Dry Field Relative Test
No. Date (ft) Location Curve Densitv Moisture Comaaction Twe�
86 09-OS-88 1295 Lot 7 2 119.1 9.0 90.9 SC
87 09-08-88 1275 Lot 19 2 122.5 9.7 93.5 SC
88 09-08-88 1260 Lot 29 2 117.9 6.6 90.0 SC
89 09-08-88 1271 Lot 20 2 112.9 6.9 86.2 SC
89A 09-08-88 1271 Lot 20 2 118.7 8.7 90.6 SC
90 09-08-88 1283 Lot 15 2 120.7 8.6 92.1 SC
91 09-08-88 1279 Lot 18 2 111.8 6.1 85.3 SC
91A 09-08-88 1279 Lot 18 2 120.2 9.1 91.8 SC
92 09-09-88 1261 Lot 29 2 118.8 8.4 90.7 SC
93 09-09-88 1260 Lot 29 2 119.1 8.8 90.9 SC
• 94 09-09-88 1262 Lot 29 2 121.5 8.1 92.7 SC
95 09-09-88 1263 Lot 29 2 122.1 9.1 93.2 SC
96 09-09-88 1262 Lot 29 2 123.6 9.3 94.4 SC
97 09-09-88 1263 Lot 29 2 121.9 9.1 93.1 SC
98 09-09-88 1264 Lot 28 2 121.1 9.2 92.4 SC •
99 09-09-88 1265 Lot 28 2 121.2 8.6 - 92.5 SC
100 09-09-88 1266 Lot 29 2 121.1 8.4 92.4 SC
101 09-09-88 1267 Lot 28 2 122.4 9.3 93.4 SC
102 09-09-88 1268 Lot 28 2 ' 122.1 8.1 93.2 SC
103 09-12-88 1269 Lot 29 2 122.3 8.4 93.4 SC
104 09-12-88 1269 Lot 28 2 120.2 9.0 91.8 SC �
105 09-12-88 1270 Lot 28 2 118.5 8.8 90.5 SC
106 09-12-88 1270 Lot 27 2 119.0 8.0 90.8 SC
107 09-12-88 1271 Lot 29 2 120.2 8.8 91.8 SC `
108 09-12-88 1271 Lot 28 2 119.6 8.6 91.3 SC �
109 09-12-88 1272 Lot 28 2 118.3 9.1 90.3 SC
110 09-13-88 1275 Lot 20 2 118.4 7.9 90.4 SC �
111 09-13-88 1278 Lot 19 2 119.0 8.4 90.8 SC
112 09-13-88 1288 Lot 6 2 119.8 8.1 91.5 SC
113 09-13-88 1307 4lalcott Lane 2 119.2 7.9 91.0 SC
114 09-13-88. 1307 Walcott Lane 2 121.8 8.7 93.0 SC
115 09-13-88 1276 Lot 20 2 119.5 8.4 91.2 SC
116 09-13-88 1284 Lot 14 2 120.9 8.6 92.3 SC
117 09-13-88 1280 Lot 15 2 122.8 4.5 93.7 SC
118 09-13-88 1281 Lot 15 3 116.0 5.8 91.0 SC
119 09-13-88 1280.5 Lot 19 2 123.2 5.8 94.0 SC
t
�`
t
(1) SC Sand Cone Test (ASTM D1556)
Lots 1 through 29, Tract 23220
Riverside County, California
i
�
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �NC.
. � ., , ,. : TABLH 2
SUhAtARY OF FIII.D DENSITY TEST RESIJLTS
Test Elevation Test Compaction Field Dry Field Relative Test
No Date (ft) Location Curve Densitv Moisture Compaction TYpe�
120 09-13-88 1282 Lot 18 2 122.5 6.9 93.5 SC
121 09-13-88 1283 Lot 4 2 124.1 8.6 94.7 SC
122 09-14-88 1287 Lot 7 3 117.3 7.1 92.0 SC
123 09-14-88 1303 Lot 7 2 125.8 8.7' 96.0 SC
124 09-14-88 1298 Lot 7 2 119.8 7.8 91.5 SC
125 09-14-88 1295 Lot 4 2 120.4 8.1 91.9 SC
126 09-14-88 1310 Lot 7 2 120.4 9.2 91.9 SC
127 09-14-88 1305 Lot 7 2 121.8 9.5 93.0 SC
128 09-14-88 1287 Lot 14 2 119.0 9.2 90.8 SC
129 09-14-88 1290 Lot 14 2 118.4 9.9 90.4 SC
, 130 09-14-88 1297 Lot 7 2 122.1 9.1 93.2 SC
131 09-14-88 1288 Lot 5 2 121.4 8.4 92.7 SC
132 09-14-88 1285 Lot 14 2 122.5 8.8 93.5 SC
133 09-14-88 1307 Walcott Lane 2 119.8 8.1 91.4 SC
134 09-14-88 1307 Lot 8 2 120.1 8.4 94.0 SC
135 09-14-88 1298 Lot 7 2 120.7 9.3 _ 92.1 SC �
136 09-14-88 1288 Lot 5 2 119.8 9.0 91.5 SC
137 09-14-88 1297 Lot 5 2 123.2 7.2 94.0 SC �
138 09-14-88 1293 Lot 15 2 120.9 10.2 92.3 SC
139 09-14-88 1312 Lot 7 2 120.8 8.4 92.2 SC
140 09-14-88 1311 Walcott Lane 2 121.3 ,8.1 • 92.6 SC
141 09-14-88 1317 Walcott Lane 2 119.Z ,8.7 91.0 SC �
142 09-14-88 1308 Walcott Lane 2 ' 120.5 8.4 92.0 SC
143 09-14-88 1304 Lot 2 2 121.1 9.1 92.4 SC �
144 09-14-88 1310 Walcott Lane 2 118.1 9.1 90.2 SC
1L5 09-14-88 1311 Lot 7 2 123.1 9.3 94.0 SC
146 09-14-88 1300 Lot 7 2 121.8 8.4 93.0 SC �
147 Q9-14-88 1313 Walcott Lane 2 121.2 9.2 92.5 SC
148 09-14-88 1297 Lot 4 2 120.8 9.0 92.2 SC
149 09-15-88 1320 Walcott Lane 2 120.0 8.4 91.6 SC j
150 09-15-88 1293 Lot 6 4 112.3 9.8 90.2 SC �
151 09-15-88 1305 Lot 2 122.1 8.1 93.2 SC �
152 09-15-88 1320 Walcott Lane 2 119.7 8.8 91.4 SC '
153 09-15-88 1315 Walcott Lane 2 120.8 8.6 92.2 SC
154 09-15-88 1307 Lot 1 2 122.4 9.1 93.4 SC '
155 09-15-88 1317 Walcott Lane 2 119.2 8.0 91.0 SC
1
i
(1) SC Sand Cone Test (ASTTf D1556) �
Lots 1 through 29, Tract 23220
Riversida County, California
i
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �NC.
�
,��, .,
TABi.E 2
- SUhAtARY OF FIELD DIIJSITY TEST RESULTS
Test Eleva[ion Test Compaction Field Dry Field Relative Test
No. Date (ft) Location Curve Densitv Moisture Comnaction Twe�
156 09-15-88 1302 Lot 2 4 112.6 10.0 90.4 SC
157 09-15-88 1302 Lot 4 2 119.7 8.4 91.3 SC
158 09-15-88 1305 Walcott Lane 2 120.8 13.3 42.1 SC
159 09-15-88 1300 Lot 2 4 113.0 7.0 90.8 SC
160 09-15-88 1300 Lot 4 2 122.4 11.7 93.4 SC
161 09-15-88 1298 Lot 5 2 119.3 13.3 91.1 SC
162 09-15-88 1303 Lot 7 2 119.0 13.6 90.8 SC
163 09-15-88 1307 Walcott Lane 2 119.2 10.1 91.0 SC
164 09-15-88 1310 Lot 7 4 112.0 10.0 90 0 SC
, 165 09-15-88 1312 Walcott Iane 2 123.3 9.7 94.1 SC
166 09-15-88 1310 Walcott Lane 2 120.7 9.0 92.1 SC
167 09-15-88 1318 Walcott Lane 2 122.8 8.4 93.7 SC
168 09-15-88 1322 Walcott Lane 4 112.2 9.8 90.1 SC
169 09-15-88 1324 Walcott Lane 4 I13.0 10.1 90.8 SC '
170 09-15-88 1322 Walcott Lane 2 120.2 8.7 - 91.8 SC
171 09-15-88 1320 Walcott Lane 2 122.4 9.5 93.4 SC
172 09-16-88 1328 Walcott Lane 3 � 116.7 - 17.3 = 91.5 SC
173 09-16-88 1326 Walcott Lane 2. 118.0 12.6 90.1 SC •
114 09-16-88 1324 Walcott Lane 2, 118.7 13.6 90.6 SC
175 09-16-88 1329 Walcott Iane 3 115.4 15.9 90.5 SC
176 09-16-88 1328 Walcott Lane 4 113.6 13.9 91.2 ' SC
177 09-16-88 1327 Walcott Lane 4 112.6 6.4 90.4 SC
178 09-16-88 . 1327 Walcott Lane Z 118.6 12.6 90.5 SC
179 09-16-88 1308 Lot 2 L 115.1 9.7 92.4 SC
180 09-16-88 . 1310 Lot 7 4 113.9 10.8 91.5 SC
181 09-16-88 1309 Lot Z 4 114.1 11.1 91.6 SC
182 09-16-88 1316 Lot 2 4 114 J 11.8 92.1 SC
183 09-16-88 1318 Lot 2 4 113.7 10.5 91.3 SC
184 09-16-88 1310 Lot 7 4 114.4 11.1 91.9 SC
• 185 09-16-88 1320 Lot 1 4 114.5 10.3 92.0 SC
. 186 09-16-88 1315 Lot 2 L 115.3 10.4 92.6 SC
187 09-16-88 1321 Lot 1 4 116.5 8.8 93.6 SC
188 09-19-88 1320 Lot 1 4 114.3 9.2 91.8 SC
189 09-19-88 1300 Lot 3 4 113.6 9.4 91.2 SC
� 190 09-19-88 1301 Lot 4 4 114.5 9.1 92.0 SC
191 09-19-88 1318 Lot 2 4 113.7 9.2 91.3 SC
� (1) SC Sand Cone Test (ASTM D1556)
Lots 1 through 29, Tract 23220
Riverside County, California
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �NC.
. ' 1 a � � .
LH 2
SUt�P1ARY OF FIELD DF7�SITY TEST RESULTS
Test Elevation Test Compaction Fisld Dry Field Relative Test
No Date (ft) Location Curve Densitv Moisture Compaction 'Iwne�
192 09-19-88 1322 Lot 1 4 113.1 11.2 90.8 SC
193 09-19-88 1284 Lot 20 2 118.7 8.8 90.6 SC
194 09-19-88 1284 Lot 20 2 116.8 5.4 89.2 SC
. 194A 09-19-88 1284 Lot 20 2 120.8 8.1 92.2 SC
195 09-19-88 1285 Lot 19 2 120.1 8.6 91.7 SC
196 09-19-88 1302 Lot 6 2 122.4 9.5 93.4 SC
197 09-19-88 1304 Lot 5 2 120.3 8.4 91.8 SC
198 09-19-88 1320 Lot 2 3 115.6 14.6 90.6 SC
199 09-19-88 1300 Lot 13 2 122.5 11.1 93.5 SC
200 09-19-88 1303 Lot 4 2 126.3 11.1 96.4 SC
201 09-19-88 1304 Lot 6 4 97.9 5.2 78.6 SC
201A 09-19-88 1304 Lot 6 2 118.8 8.4 90.7 SC
202 09-19-88 1270 Lot 25 2 125.4 10.2 95.7 SC
203 09-20-88 1270 Lot 23 2 118.0 9.2 90.1 SC •
204 09-20-88 1271 Lot 24 1 119.7 8.5 - 91.4 SC
205 09-20-88 1275 Lot 27 2 121.1 9.7 92.4 SC
206 � 09-20-88 1271 Lot 25 -' 2 =120.3 - 8.6 =-- 91.8 SC
207 09-20-88 � 1274 Lot 26 4 -106.0 3.8 85.1 SC
207A 09-20-88 1274 Lot 26 4 112.0 3.2 90.0 SC
208 09-20-88 1290 Lot 19 4 113.9 8.0 "91.5 SC
209 09-20-88 1291 Lot 13 2 121.1 8.1 92.4 �SC
210 09-21-88 1301 Lot 13 2 �119.2 8.5 91.0 SC
211 09-21-88 1292 Lot 15 2 119.4 9.7 91.1 SC
212 09-21-88 1301 Lot 13 2 119.5 9.2 91.2 SC
213 09-21-88 1298 Lot 15 2 119.4 8.8 91.1 SC
214 09-21-88 1305 Lot 6 2 118.4 9.2 90.3 SC
215 09-21-88 1302 Lot 12 2 121.4 9.5 92.6 SC
216 09-21-88 1303 Lot 13 2. 118.8 8.4 90.6 SC
217 09-21-88 1301 Lot 13 2 119.7 8.9 91.3 SC
218 09-21-88 1304 Lot 5 2 122.1 8.1 93.2 SC
'� 219 09-21-88 1306 Lot 7 2 120.6 8.6 92.0 SC
220 09-21-88 1299 Lot 15 2 119.6 8.7 91.2 SC
221 09-21-88 1300 Lot 14 2 120.3 8.0 � 91.8 SC
222 09-21-88 1301 Lot 5 2 119.0 7.8 90.8 SC
223 09-21-88 1301 Lo[ 13 2 118.3 7.7 90.5 SC
224 09-22-88 1300 Lot 14 2 118.5 7.8 90.5 SC
(1) SC Sand Cone Test (ASTM D1556)
Lots 1 through 29, Tract 23220
Riverside County, California
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, iNC.
, _ _ - - - -= - --- _ -- : ---- - _
, ` « ' 1 • • ' )
• �
. gUP4MRY OF FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS ��
Test Elevation Test Compaction Field Dry
Field Relative Test� I
pa, Date ft Location Curve Densit Moisture Co action e
q 117.9 11.6 90.0 SC
225 09-22-88 1302 �t 5 91.8 �
q 120.3 11.0
226 09-22-88 1303 LO� 3 124.8 12.4 95.3 SC
227 09-22-88 1299 Lot 14 2 123.8 11.1 94.5 SC
228 09-22-88 1299.5 Lot 13 � 120.0 9.9 91.6 S�
229 09-22-88 1304 L°t 6 2 120.8 11.3 92.2 �
230 09-22-88 1303.5 L°t S 119.0 5.0 90.8 S� ,
231 09-22-88 1300 ' Lot 15 2 SC
Z 119.9 10.1 91.5 .
232 09-22-88 1300.5 ^=Lot 13 Z 121.3 8.1 92.6 SC � -
233 09-22-88 1304 `-L°t 4 2 119.6 7.7 91.3 SC
• 234 09-22-88 1304 '• L°t �5 119.9 10.9 91.5 SC
235 09-22-SS 1278 �Lot 24 � _.118.5 11.6 90.5 SC �
236 09-22-88 1277 :Lot 25 � 123.8 11.7 ` 94 S � '
� 237 09-22-88 1276 Lot 27 2 :T.�92.9 SC �
2 � =; 121.7 12.3 __ , .
238 09-22-88 1277.5 Lot 25 ';..118.2 7.9 -"_'90.2 S� � ; �
239 09-23-88 1275 Lot 28 Z ;: 126.9 6.4 __=.96.9 SC ;
240 09-23-88 1276 ' - Lot 26 Z '' `�:. 123.8 6.5 -' �?~=..94.5 S� j
=: . • 241 = 09-23-88 1275 . 5 �_ Lot 29 . 2 -- - =�.`'T "124.7 7 . 7 =:,:,-,.z-.95.2 SC _ �: �� _ __ _i `
' 242 09=23-88 1279 .-_ I.ct 24 Z ' _ � 1-
Z <, 126.7 7.5 _ �� '.. 96.7 s� '� - -
243 09-23-88 1276.5 Lot 28 ;.,..119.8 7.9 �-� 91.5 SC �
2 - - - - '
-" 244 . 09-23-88 1279.5 --_:.Lot 25 . _ - ':_� : 123.2 8.6 „_5=�,; 94.0 SC � _ � �
245 09-23-88 1280 T ° Lot 24 2 . ' 123.0 11.0 -�` 94.0 SC '� ��
' �� � SC �:, f �
• 246 09-23-88 1277 . 5 {� Lot 26 ;.':; :119.6 7.5 :`.��;. 91.3
.. 247 09-23-88 1277 � --. �t 21 � - - .- . 122.3 9.5 `��` 93.4 SC _ . i '
- 248 09-26-88 1282 ; Lot 18 - _:' 93.4 S�
2 - ":: 122.4 6.7 i
249 09-26-88 1284 `' Lot 25 � 126.2 12.3� `�:96.3 SC _ i;
Lot 24 Z �
" 250 09-26-88 1290 = i 106.1 19.4 �`="- 85.2 � �
251 09-26-88 1291.5 Lot 23 4 119.9 8.8 _- 91.5 SC - i
- - -- -- -- -
25 L+, 10-20-88 1291.5 Lot 23 --- 120.0 8.1 _: 91.6 � . -�
. 252 10-20-88 1302 Lot 13 � 118.2 8.7 � 90.2 S�
253 10'-20-88 1303 - Lot 15 . �119.8 8.5 91.4 S� �
254 10-21-88 1308 Lot 10 � .. 120.1 9.4 91.6 �
255 10-21-88 1306 Lot 12 Z 119.9 10.5 91.5 S�
256 10-21-88 1304 Lot 13 118.6 8.0 : 90.5 S� ;
257 10-21-88 1287 Lot 17 Z 90.3 S� ;
118.3 9 • 5
258 10-21-88 1290.5 Lot 16 Z 121.9 9.1 93.0 S� �
259 10-21-88 1292.5 Lot 16 Z ii
�;
(1) SC Sand Cone Test (ASTM D1556)
Lots 1 throuBh 29, Tract 23220
Riverside County, California
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �N�.
. �..�, � .. �
i�s1.E�
- SUha1ARY OF FIII.D DF�ISITY TEST RESULTS
Test Elevation Test Compac[ion Field Dry Field Relative Test
_No. Date fft) Location Curve Densitv Moisture Comnaction Tti+pe�
260 10-25-88 1309 Lot 7 2 122.6 8.8 93.6 SC
261 10-25-88 1310 Lot 9 2 124.2 9.5 94.8 SC
262 10-25-88 1304 Lot 12 2 120.8 8.1 92.2 SC
263 10-25-88 1287 Lot 21 2 119.5 8.4 91.2 SC
264 10-25-88 1289 Lot 21 2 123.1 8.6 94.0 SC
265 10-25-88 1310 Lot 7 2 118.6 8.9 90.5 SC
266 11-08-88 1313 Wallcott Lane 2 122.0 8.4 � 93.1 SC .
267 11-OS-88 1315 Wallcott Lane 2 118.8 8.1 90.7 SC
268 11-08-88 1317 Wallcott Lane 2 120.0 9.7 91.6 SC
. 269 11-09-88 1319 Wallcott Lane 2 119.6 8.4 91.3 SC
270 11-09-88 1321 Wallcott Lane 2 120.4 9.5 91.9 SC
271 11-09-88 1323 Wallcott Lane 2 120.5 9.8 92.0 SC
272 12-OS-88 1320 Lot� l'. 2 119.1 7.9 90.9 SC
273 12-OS 88 `. 1316.5 Lot 2 2 • 118.2 8.4 90.2 SC '
274 12-OS-88 � 1304.5 Lot 15 ' Z � 119.8 8.6 ` - 91.5 SC
275 12-OS-88 ' 1303.5 Lot�14 `�'�' 2 118.6 8.8 ' 90.5 SC
- .. - � - 276 12-05-88 =_.-�: 1312 Lot =_7 �;_::. . 2 =.120.1 7.1 '._� .�.:-. 91.7 SC - -.
277 12-06-88 .` 1278 Lot 29 2 -~�120.1 7.9 • 91.7 SC
218 12-06-88 1279 Lot 27 � 2 f 122.3 8.4 '' � 93.4 SC
279 12-06-88 -` 1281.5 Lot 26 � 2 -T � 118.8 8.5 ^..' �. � 90.7 SC
280 12-06-88 1285.5 Lot 25 2 -121.3 8.9 . 92.6 SC
, 281 12-06-88 1291.5 Lot 24 `-'� '� 2 '' =119.1 9.4 � 90.9 SC
282 12-06-88 1318 Lot 7� 2 118.8 9.7 90.7 SC
283 12-07-88 1306 Lot 13 '.- - 2 == 120.7 10.0 92.1 SC
284 12-07-88 1306.5 Lot 12 2 = �'.118.8 8.3 90.7 SC
285 12-07-89 1307.5 Lot 11 � Z 120.2 8.6 � 91.8 SC
286 12-07-88 1310.5 Lot 10 2 120.3 9.1 _.._ _ 91.8 SC -- --
287 12-07-88 1311.5 Lot 9 2 119.7 8.5 91.4 SC
288 12-07-88 1301.5 Lot 3 2 121.5 9.2 92.7 SC
289 12-07-88 '-" 1302.5 Lot 4 2 119.4 8.4 91.1 SC
290 12-08-88 � 1296 Lot 19 ' 2 118.0 9.4 90.1 SC
� 291 12-08-88 1285 Lot 20 2 121.0 8.9 92.4 SC
292 12-08-88 1290.5 Lot 21 2 118.4 8.6 90.4 SC
293 12-08-88 1294.5 Lot 16 2 118.7 7.8 90.6 SC
Z94 12-OS-88 1288.5 Lot 17 2 121.5 9.1 92.7 SC
(1) SC Sand Cone Test (ASTT! D1556) •
Lots 1 through 29, Tract 23220
Riverside County, CaliEornia
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �N�.
_ _ _. ._ _ __ __----- ---- - o
J
'' 1�✓��i � , �
llf[�1�6 �
` SUP4MRY OF FIII.D DF�7SITY TEST RESULTS
Test Elevation Test Compaction Field Dry Field Relative Test
No. Date (ft) Location Curve Densitv Moisture Comnaction Twve�
295 12-08-88 1304 Lot S 2 120.4 8.8 91.9 SC
296 12-08-88 1307 Lot 6 2 120.9 8.1 92.3 SC
297 12-09-88 1282.5 Lot 18 2 119.8 1.7 91.5 SC
298 12-09-88 1280 Lot 19 2 121.5 8.6 92.7 SC
299 12-09-88 1293 Lot 23 2 1Z1.8 1.4 93.0 SC
300 12-10-88 1324 Walcott Lane 2 107.1 16.4 81.8 SC
300A 12-29-88 1324 Walcott Lane 2 120.3 10.0 91.8 SC
301 12-10-88 1311 Lot 8 2 111.0 10.0 84.7 SC
. 301A 01-26-89 1311 Lot 8 2 118.9 9.8 90.8 SC
302 12-14-88 1280 Lot 23 2 112.5 10.4 85.9 SC
302A 12-27-88 1280 Lot 23 2 118.2 11.1 90.2 SC
303 12-14-88 1264 Lot 24 2 � 112.9 7.5 86.2 SC
303A 12-28-88 1264 _.... Lot 24 . 2_. 121.6 .. 10.6 92.8 SC ' �
304 12-30-88 1270 Lot 28 2 118.7 9.4 - 90.6 SC
305 01-26-89 1317 Wallcott Lane 2 121.3 8.4 92.6 SC
306 01-26-89 1275 Lot 27 2 119.7 8.6 91.4 SC
- - - -- - _ .._ . _ . ._ _. . _ . . .. ..._._ . �
�
(1) SC Sand Cone Test (AS1M D1556) i
. _ .. �
Lots 1 through 29, Tract 23220 i
Riverside County, California �
{
!
- - _ .._ _ . ;
-- . I.
' -- - --- . �
�
I
I
;
�
t
SOUTH COASTGEOLOGICSERVICES, iNC.
^
, . �.. , .. .
TABLE 3
REQUIREMENTS FOR CONCRETE EXPOSED TO SULFATE-CONTAINING SOLUTIONS
Modified from "Table No. 26-A-6, Uniform Building Code," 1988 Edition
Horater. rsc��cc�
�c� �cna
W� �nc�►� c�axc�� �
SOLUBLH Maximum Ninimum �
• i
SUI.FATS SUI.FATS Water-Cement Compressive �
DESIGN SUI.FATS (SO IN SOII. (SO IN C�! Ratio Strangth,
DFSIGNATION �OSURH (� BY WEI(�) WA'�t, PR1 TYPB (By Weightl) fc'psi
A Negligible 0.00-0.10 0-150 � . �
---- ------ --------- �
(
B Moderate 0.10-0.20 � 150-1500 II,IP(MS)� 0.50 � 3750
_. IS(MS)
C Severe 0.20-2.00 1500-10,000 V 0.45 4250
D Very Over 2.00 Qver 10,000 V plus 0.45 4250
Severe � . - pozzolan
l A lower water-cement ratio or higher strength may be required for
watertightness or for protection against corrosion of embedded items or
freezing and thawing (Table No. 26-A-5).
Z Seawater. �
3 Pozzolan that has been determined by test or service record to improve
sulfate resistance when used in concrete containing Type Vi cement.
Tract 23220
Riverside County, California
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �NC.
r
.. ,�,; ,��, . .
TABLE 4
( FOUNDATION RECO1�4•tENDATIONS-LOW EXPANSION
CONVENTIONAL SLAB ON GRADE
I � Surficial Soil Expansion Index: 0-SO
�Footings supporting 1 floor and a roof (2 story structure with slab on grade)
Footings supporting 2 floors and a roof (3 story structure with slab on grade)
I Foundation - �
�
Exterior FootinQ 4 Minimum width = 12"�, 15"
Minimum depth below lowest adjacent grade = 12"�`
'; Allowable footing pressure =1500 sf� 18"
�i Lateral bearing pressure =150 psf� •
Lateral sliding resistance (friction coefficient)=0.25�
'� Minimum reinforcement � T�ro number 4 bars, one near
the top and one near the bottom.��-
:.. . . . ;.\ -. -•-:�
Interior FootinA - Minimum width -,=.12". - �.Y�t'y
�:/t .
� �for slab floors) Minimum depth below�top of slab -,'12" '
t Allowable footing pressure =1500 �
�t Minimum reinforcement � Two number 4 bars, one near the
� _
i�` -- _- = = top and one near the bottom. � �': �°'' '= ° �
�= 1;"'•'
Lateral bearing pressure = 150 psf,��
;�; _�__;_ . Lateral sliding resistance (friction coefficient) =0.25� '
�. , ,. - - --- ;' � .� :•�:,� :
� - ��.. ,,.�. :
Floor Slabs - Livin� Areas '
�-: ��., :£�_. _
��=; ,::�.
T� .:��: .
� Minimum thickness � 4" :�.�;;� � -
� �: _��,
. Lateral sliding resistance (friction coefficient) �0.25�
_ Minimum reinforcement � 6" x 6'!,- 10 x 10 welded wire
mesh. - _ - . _ . _
! Moisture Barrier - LivinR Areas -- " ' � ��-�
� 2.inches clean sand overlain by plastic film, minimum
6 mil. polyvinyl chloride or equivalent overlain by
I a minimum of 1 inch clean sand to provide a working
suzface and aid in concrete curing.-
I Prewettin� - Slab Areas --
Slab area should be thoroughly moistened immediately
prior to placing moisture barrier.
I (1) The allowable bearing value may be increased by 300 psf for each
additional foot of width and/or depth to a maximum value of 4500 psf.
(2) The lateral bearing pressure may be increased by 150 psf for each
additional foot of depth to a maximum of 2250 psf.
(3) Coefficient to be multiplied by dead load.
(4) Includes interior piers and footings for raised floors.
(5) Structural Engineer is responsible for foundation design and reinforcement.
Tract 23220
Riverside County, California
SOUTH COAST GEDLOGIC SERVICES, �N�.
. �
- zt� ,•-...�
_ 2 FOOT NATIVE
SOIL CAP
� •'G,•;1
vO�o. ' �Q;,�i:�
b�aClv a� �
�:Q•°••••0::••• 9
. o�:.; � ��. �,00
O..�d°'� ..'.�' !
.•� •.: ::.. '.o�o�o•.ro..
GRAVEL (FILTER MIX WHERE .Q'r%. •''•�:r•�'•(�
:��'� cb %� ��'
FILTER FABRIC IS NOT USEO) •,.�p:•'re••••.,� �
. ,. a. : i
o • 'o � o �
; Q .,, � ; . t � .
•.' .b�...
•� ' ��:Q�b� �
•�•' , '•' - O�• "�Q''�I FILTEk FABRIC
..;' �'°.'O.•e:l�,,°�' :Q°' -
. - - q •�.°.°. � (MIRIFI 140 OR
_ , _ _ "' '• O .y'� .p . ,. ,y,�
• •�'� � ��� L E N T
'••A�ti ��' D�a� E O 1 V A )
-- -.. _ . .. _ �'�+ •.pbn Q'p� ; '
q� a�v
. .�,0 0 � a • q � , • .p :,�: ;:
: . o : j?GZ:•c•.••Q71.•Q:bY'
• ►. ° :�°' • , '�!. �
. , ,d:4,;v"
a �. . .a�o• •�
•'• ��� Q;p
��:o Q.•
�•
� �c�%`°.pQQ�il
. ;c��,4 •'0 :
4' PERFORATED PIPE . HOLES OOWN n '�'O � �
. �l1' .�
TO BE PLACED LOWER THAN TOP OF �•.°.¢�:ap�:•'�%'•�:�
:�:c�0°OQ.sp�� - -
A�JACENT FLOOR SLAB ..
•: � :•�.00 : o.
s� • e
: : °%�r . Q ��d�
�,� .'O:
'',�: .•:�o�
.� . .�
r 1 � �'��
• •r• •s Oo U
. . • 1.�.'.Y. •
.: .:. ; Q:q-
• b 6 (Minimum)
O M
¢. . o�a :
: ��. �.. �
:.� 12"
� (Minimum)
"f1�TE R MATFRIAL ro �EE7 FOLLOw1NG SPEClFI R E T A I N I N G W A L L D E T A I L
CATION OR APPROVEO EOUIVA�ENT: (CONfOR�1S TO
EMA $Tj). PLAN 1323 (1986 E01TIpN))
SiEVE SQE PERCENTAGE PASSING
�' �oo TRACT 23220
' 3/4' 90- t 00
� �e' �a-�oo R I VERSIDE COUNTY, CA
N0. 4 25-<0
Na. 8 18-33
HQ.30 5-15 OCTOBEH t989 FIGURE t
N0. 50 0-7
_
No.�oo .0-3 SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SEflVICES
J
� i� � r . �f►•
APPENDIX "A"
- List of References
1) Geotechnical Report for a Proposed 29 Single Family Home Subdivision
within the 10 Acre Parcel Described as Tentative Tract 23220.
Report prepared by: South Coast Geologic Services, Inc. �
Report date: Februsry 12, 1988
2) Geotechnical Commentary on Slope Stability for Tract 23220, County of •
Riverside, California. �
Letter prepared by: South Coast Geologic Services, Inc. i
�
, Letter date: January 30, 1989
3) Slope Stability Analysis for the 1�:1 (horizontal:vertical) Cut Slope Along �"
the. Northerly Property Line of Tract 23220, North Lots 1, 2, 3, and
Lots 16, 17 and 18. '
Letter prepared by: � South Coast Geologic Services, Inc. � .
-� Letter date : January _31, 1989 _ " i
_ _. _ . - .:::;= �:_- .. - - _ : _ �., �.;�,-
_ :,:�� -
. --- -_ � : _ _ -
. , _ �.. ,
.._. . _..
-- - --. : - �
��
�
. I
�
SOUTH C�AST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �NC.