The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutParcel Map 35039 Geotechnical Report Aug. 3, 2006T.H.E. Soils Co., Inc. 35Q -3,C? Phone: (951) 894-2121 FAX: (951) 894-2122 E-mail: thesoilsco@aol.com ' 41548 Eastman Drive, Unit G • Murrieta, CA 92562 August 3, 2006 Ms. Yvette Anthony 43135 Avenida De San Pasqual Temecula, California 92595 SUBJECT: F.IMTTFD GE0TF.CHNYCA1, iNVIESTIGATION Proposed 3 Parcel Residential Development Tentative Parcel Map No. 35039 Santiago Road at John Warner Road City of Temecula, Riverside County, California Work Order No. 650601.00 Dear Ms. Anthony: In accordance with your request, T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. has perfonned a limited geotechnical investigation for the proposed.3 parcel single-family residential development at the above -referenced site in the city of Temecula. The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate the engineering parameters of the onsite soils and provide design parameters. For our investigation we were provided with a 40 -scale topographic "Tentative Parcel Map No. 35039", which was utilized to locate the subject site and as a base for our Geotechnical Map, Plate 1. 1.0 1.1 Proposed Develo ment The proposed development calls for the construction of three separate single-family residential pads with associated driveways and landscape areas. It is our understanding that the proposed residences will consist of wood -framed, stucco -sided structures with conventional footings. MEMO.nllll The subject site is an irregular-shaped 4.17 -acre parcel of land located along Santiago Road at ' John Wamer Road in the city of Temecula in southwest Riverside County, California. The subject site is bordered on the north and west by large parcel residential development, on the east by vacant land, and on the south by Santiago Road and large parcel residential ' development. The geographical relationships of the site and surrounding area are shown on our Site Location Map, Figure 1. ' Prior to grading, the subject site was in a relatively natural condition. Topography on the subject site varied from gently sloping to moderately steep terrain with natural gradients of 10 ' T H E. Soils Company, Inc W 0. N0. 650601.00 MAMMA WK-ROZ. M. - ON MAN �I!l M -law, ME 200 in. 01 - _ I I I- ri A"- Dob�II rmp lex— /'r. iw Vi. �,mmmmmowz,�� 1-- I lUUHL, Al ' Ms. Yvette Anthony August 3, 2006 ' Page 2 ' to 40 percent. At the time of our investigation, vegetation on the subject site consisted of a low new growth of annual weeds and grasses up to approximately 6 -inches in height. Overall relief on the subject site is approximately 80 -ft. 1 2.0 SITE. INVESTIGATION t2.1 Rackgrnnnd Research and Literature Review — - Several published and unpublished reports and geologic maps were reviewed for the purpose ' of preparing this report. A complete list of the publications and reports reviewed is presented in Appendix A. ' 2.2 Field investigation Subsurface exploration, field reconnaissance, and mapping of the site were conducted on July 19, 2006. Two exploratory trenches were advanced utilizing a New Holland No. B-95 extenda-backhoe equipped with a 2 -ft bucket. Exploratory Trench T-1 was advanced to the maximum depth explored of 15.8 -ft below the ground surface (bgs). Additionally, three exploratory borings were previously advanced to the maximum depth explored of 50.0 -ft below the ground surface (bgs) during our percolation investigation of the subject site (see references). Information collected during our field mapping and the approximate location of our sample locations is presented on our Geotechnical Map, Plate 1. Our field geologist mapped the site and obtained bulk soil samples for laboratory testing. Copies of our exploratory trench and boring logs are presented in Appendix B. Representative bulk samples of soils encountered during our investigation were obtained for laboratory testing. Laboratory testing to determine the engineering parameters of representative soils included maximum density/optimum moisture, remolded direct shear, sieve analysis, corrosivity suite including soluble sulfate and expansion index. Laboratory testing was conducted in accordance with ASTM, Caltrans, and Uniform Building Code (UBC) test specifications, where applicable. The results of our laboratory tests are presented in Appendix B of this report. Prime Testing, Inc., of Temecula, California performed direct shear testing and corrosivity suite testing. T.H E Sods Company, Inc. W.O. NO 650601.00 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 35039 P \ I ori IC i 1NM01 AAM M4 MY :.''. oinm ARiNpOL suE � . TYPICAL SECTICK.'A' STREET CITY OF IEAEECULA Sf0. N0. f0e NOT TO SCN.E .. . NY �r 1, 1 1R'aT9 ' Gal '-'RScm;rAulmuM OPS •SSDaffifr YWWR000OF7 ?AU 1`0 110N snalots T—Z. . AFPROIOMAIEI.00ATIONOFwLojtATORYTRSNC B-3'AFPROXDAATBI.00ATIONOFE%PCORATORYSORO.'OS •• ( (fNE SPIDCuvyuD, 0e. 2006) i �APFRO@ T9LOCATI0NOF0EOL001000MACIS IL MT& NET NEA LAM SOFT. = AO IS ETDA MO00 ZOE NFDOl100R ZDNE X. qI1 OFEDT-IFAII EI000 MAK PER FIRM MANKIn PANT N0. 014PQ 0010 B DATED NOg10FA ZR im _ DAIE OF MRPNGTIDA A Y 25. ZNS T.H.E. SO" COMPANY INC. OLOUMICALNU PROPO=]PARC'®.IOLSlDZKm DRYLIAPAfYPrr T ATRRPARCRI.l NO.0!079 MMUOOROADATJOFDIWAIIN WAD CM OF TRMHCULA, RNBt X HOMY, CALIFORNIA WORROJU)M6j QjA DAM AM, 2006 PWTIAIOPI PEANMAV APPUCII70N NUMBER Xd',,, Ms. Yvette Anthony August 3, 2006 Page 3 3.0 Locally, sedimentary bedrock units of the late Pleistocene -age Pauba formation are exposed both at the ground surface and at shallow depths throughout the subject site (Kennedy, 1977 & Tan & Kennedy, 2000). Minor amounts of alluvial soils (t5 -ft) were encountered within the drainage Swale located on Parcel 3. Approximately f5 -ft of alluvial soils were encountered within the drainage Swale located on the easterly portion of Parcel 3. This unit generally consists of silty Sand (Unified Soils Classification - SM) that can be described as dark gray brown, fine to coarse grained, minor gravel, abundant fines, moderately sorted, dry (top 1 to 2 -ft) to slightly moist, loose with abundant pinpoint pores and fine roots. 3.2 Sedimentary bedrock units of the late Pleistocene -age Pauba formation were observed both ' at the ground surface and at shallow depths throughout the subject site and extended to the maximum depth explored of 50 -ft bgs (T.H.E., 2006). The bedrock materials can be ' described as interbedded silty Sands (Unified Soils Classification — SM), Sands (SW), and Silts (ML). The silty Sands encountered during our subsurface investigation can generally be described as medium brown, fine to coarse grained, minor gravel, moderately to well graded, weakly cemented and moderately permeable. The Silts can be described as olive brown, moist, dense, and micaceous and clayey in part. ' Minor amounts of colluvial soils consisting of dark gray brown sandy Silt (ML) that can be described as dark grayish brown, sandy in part, with numerous pinpoint pores and fine roots. 3.3 Groundwater Groundwater was not encountered during our subsurface exploration to the maximum depth ' explored of 50 -ft below the existing pad surface within exploratory boring B-1. The silty sands were damp between 25 to 35 -ft bgs above the silts encountered from approximately 40 to 50-11 bgs. However, no free water was encountered within the exploratory borings. Based ' on our review of historic groundwater data (Rancho Water District, 1984), historic high groundwater is anticipated to be a minimum of 60 -ft below the lower elevations of the subject site. ' T H E. Soils Company, Inc. W.O. NO. 650601 00 Ms. Yvette Anthony August 3, 2006 ' Page 4 ' 3.4 Excavation Characteristics We anticipate that the alluvial/colluvial soils can be excavated with ease utilizing ' conventional grading equipment (Caterpillar D-9 bulldozer or equivalent) in proper working condition. We anticipate that the sedimentary bedrock materials can be- excavated with moderate ease to moderate difficulty utilizing conventional grading equipment (Caterpillar D- - ' ' 9 bulldozer or equivalent) in proper working condition. 4.0 SEISMICITY 4.1 Regional Seismicity ' The site is located in a region of generally high seismicity, as is all of southern California. During its design life, the site is expected to experience strong ground motions from earthquakes on regional and/or local causative faults. The subject site is not located within ' ! a State of California Alquist Priolo Fault Rupture Hazard Zone (Hart, 1997 & CDMG, 2000). The Elsinore Fault zone (Temecula segment) is located approximately 2.0 - kilometers southwest of the subject site. No active or inactive faults are known to traverse ' the site (Kennedy, 1977 & Tan & Kennedy, 2000). The Elsinore fault zone (Temecula segment) is characterized as a right lateral strike slip fault with a total length of approximately 42 -kilometers (CDMG, 1996). The State of California has assigned the Elsinore Fault (Temecula segment) a slip rate of 5 mm/yr. (+/- 2 mm/yr.) ' with a recurrence interval of 240 years (CDMG, 1996). This fault segment has been assigned a maximum moment magnitude of 6.8. ' Historically, significant earthquakes causing strong ground shaking have occurred on local and regional faults near the site. To evaluate historical seismicity, we have utilized a computer software program titled EPI, which utilizes an earthquake database compiled by t California Technical Institute to analyze earthquakes of various magnitude that have occurred within a specified radius about the site. A total of 135 earthquakes of magnitude 5.0 or greater have occurred within 160.9 - kilometers (100 -miles) of the site since 1932. The closest earthquake was a 5.1 magnitude event, which occurred approximately 30.6 -kilometers (19 -miles) northeast of the subject ' site on Monday, September 23, 1963. The largest earthquake recorded within the specified search area occurred on Sunday, June 28, 1992, located approximately 99.8 -kilometers (62 - miles) to the northeast as a 7.3 magnitude earthquake. A graphical representation of the historical seismicity is shown on Figure 2. IT H E. Soils Company, Inc W.O. NO 650601.00 1 M5 I I I + 4 + N+ + EPI SoftWare 2000 Seismicity 1932-2006 (Magnitude 5.0+) 100 mile radius 1 0 SITE LOCATION: 33.4933 LAT. -117.12625 LONG MINIMUM LOCATION QUALITY: C 0 50 100 TOTAL # OF EVENTS ON PLOT: 251 MILES TOTAL # OF EVENTS WITHIN SEARCH RADIUS: 135 MAGNITUDE DISTRIBUTION OF SEARCH RADIUS EVENTS: 5.0-5.9: 120 6.0-6.9: 13 7.0-7.9: 2 8.0-8.9: 0 CLOSEST EVENT: 5.1 ON MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 1963 LOCATED APPROX. 19 MILES NORTHEAST OF THE SITE LARGEST 5 EVENTS: 7.3 ON SUNDAY, JUNE 28, 1992 LOCATED APPROX. 62 MILES NORTHEAST OF THE SITE 7.1 ON SATURDAY, OCTOBER 16, 1999 LOCATED APPROX. 90 MILES NORTHEAST OF THE SITE 6.7 ON MONDAY, JANUARY 17, 1994 LOCATED APPROX. 94 MILES NORTHWEST OF THE SITE 6.7 ON SUNDAY, MAY 19, 1940 LOCATED APPROX. 108 MILES SOUTHEAST OF THE SITE 6.6 ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 09, 1971 LOCATED APPROX. 96 MILES NORTHWEST OF THE SITE FIGURE 2 1\1. 1ff 1 M5 I I I + 4 + N+ + EPI SoftWare 2000 Seismicity 1932-2006 (Magnitude 5.0+) 100 mile radius 1 0 SITE LOCATION: 33.4933 LAT. -117.12625 LONG MINIMUM LOCATION QUALITY: C 0 50 100 TOTAL # OF EVENTS ON PLOT: 251 MILES TOTAL # OF EVENTS WITHIN SEARCH RADIUS: 135 MAGNITUDE DISTRIBUTION OF SEARCH RADIUS EVENTS: 5.0-5.9: 120 6.0-6.9: 13 7.0-7.9: 2 8.0-8.9: 0 CLOSEST EVENT: 5.1 ON MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 1963 LOCATED APPROX. 19 MILES NORTHEAST OF THE SITE LARGEST 5 EVENTS: 7.3 ON SUNDAY, JUNE 28, 1992 LOCATED APPROX. 62 MILES NORTHEAST OF THE SITE 7.1 ON SATURDAY, OCTOBER 16, 1999 LOCATED APPROX. 90 MILES NORTHEAST OF THE SITE 6.7 ON MONDAY, JANUARY 17, 1994 LOCATED APPROX. 94 MILES NORTHWEST OF THE SITE 6.7 ON SUNDAY, MAY 19, 1940 LOCATED APPROX. 108 MILES SOUTHEAST OF THE SITE 6.6 ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 09, 1971 LOCATED APPROX. 96 MILES NORTHWEST OF THE SITE FIGURE 2 Ms. Yvette Anthony August 3, 2006 ' Page 5 ' 4.2 2001 CBC: Seismic Factors specific to the subject site are as follows, The site is located approximately 2 -kilometers from the Elsinore fault (Temecula segment) (ICBG, 1998). The Elsinore fault (Temecula segment) is reported as a Type. B fault (ICBG, 1998; and'2001 ' CBC Table 16-U) in the vicinity of the subject site. The site is within Seismic Zone 4 (2001 CBC Figure 16-2, Table 16-1). ' The soil profile for the site is So (2001 CBC Table 16-J). o - ' The near source acceleration (Na) and velocity (N,) with respect to the subject site are: -1.3 and : _ - 1.6, respectively (2001 CBC Tables 16-S and 16-T). The site seismic coefficients of acceleration (Ca) -and velocity (Cr) are 0.44Na and 0.64N,, respectively (2001 CBC Tables 16-Q and. 16-R). Based on the above values, the coefficient of acceleration (Ca) is 0.57 and a coefficient of velocity (Cv) is 1.024 for the subject site. 31111Freork1•' ul „1 5.1 Liquefaction Soil liquefaction is the loss of soil strength due to increased pore water pressures caused by a significant ground shaking (seismic) event. Liquefaction typically consists of the re- arrangement of the soil particles into a denser condition resulting, in this case, in localized areas of settlement, sand boils, and flow failures. Areas underlain by loose to medium -dense cohesionless soils, where groundwater is within 30 to 40 feet of the surface, are particularly susceptible when subject to ground accelerations such as those due to earthquake motion. The liquefaction potential is generally considered greatest in saturated loose, poorly -graded fine-grained sands with a mean grain size (D5o) in the range of 0.075 to 0.2mm. Typically, liquefaction has a relatively low potential at depths greater than 45 -ft and is virtually unknown below a depth of 60 -ft. Procedures outlined in two publications, 1) The Guidelines for Evaluation and Mitigation of Seismic Hazards in California, Special Publication 117: Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (1997); and 2) Recommendations for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117: Guidelines of Analyzing and Mitigation, Liquefaction Hazards in California: Southern California Earthquake Center University of Southern California (1997), provide for a "screening study" in lieu of a complete liquefaction analysis. T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. W.O. NO. 650601 00 ' Ms. Yvette Anthony August 3, 2006 ' Page 6 ' It is our opinion that, due to the absence of shallow (t60 -ft) groundwater (Rancho California Water District, 1984), as well as the medium -dense to dense sedimentary bedrock underlying the subject site at the ground surface, liquefaction and other shallow groundwater related ' hazards are not anticipated, and further analysis appears to be unwarranted at this -time. The proposed building pads will be founded entirely in engineered fill overlying sedimentary ' bedrock. Based on the above information, the liquefaction potential is anticipated to be negligible. e. ' 5.2 Ground Rupture Ground rupture during a seismic event normally occurs along pre-existing faults. Owing to ' the absence of known faulting on the subject site (Kennedy, 1977 & Tan & Kennedy, 2000), breaking of the ground during a seismic event is anticipated to be low. ' 5.3 Seismically induced Sail Settlement Any proposed structures will be founded in medium dense to dense engineered fill compacted to 90% relative compaction (as determined by ASTM 1557). The settlement potential, under seismic loading conditions for these onsite materials is anticipated to be negligible. ' 5.4 i andslidinu No geomorphic expression of landsliding or slope instability was noted during our aerial photograph examination or site mapping. In general, the potential for landsliding during a seismic event is considered negligible under current conditions. r505 Rockfall Pntential The subject parcels are underlain by sedimentary bedrock units (Kennedy, 1977 & Tan & Kennedy, 2000) that are free of large rocks. The potential for rockfall is anticipated to be low. 5.6 Seiches and Tsunami Considering the location of the site in relation to large bodies of water, Seiches and tsunamis are not considered potential hazards of the site. m WIVIN R ski [slow The proposed development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint provided the recommendations presented in the following sections are adhered to during site development. T.H E Soils Company, Inc. W.O. N0. 650601 00 ' Ms. Yvette Anthony August 3, 2006 ' Page 7 • Locally, sedimentary bedrock units of the late Pleistocene -age Pauba formation are exposed both at the ground surface and at shallow depths throughout the subject site (Kennedy, 1977 ' & Tan & Kennedy, 2000). Minor amounts of alluvial soils (t5 -ft) were encountered within _ the drainage Swale located on Parcel 3. • Groundwater was not encountered during our subsurface exploration to the maximum depth explored of 50 -ft below the existing pad surface within exploratory boring B-1. The silty sands were damp between 25 to 35 -ft bgs above the silts encountered from approximately -41) to 50 -ft bgs. However, no free water was encountered within the exploratory borings. Based on our review of historic groundwater data (Rancho Water District, 1984), historic high groundwater is anticipated to be a minimum of 60 -ft below the lower elevations of the subject ' site. • We anticipate that the alluvial/colluvial soils can be excavated with ease .utilizing conventional grading equipment (Caterpillar D-9 bulldozer or equivalent) in proper working condition. We anticipate that the sedimentary bedrock materials can be excavated with ' moderate ease to moderate difficulty utilizing conventional grading equipment (Caterpillar D- 9 bulldozer or equivalent) in proper working condition. ' The subject site is not located within a State of California Alquist Prieto Fault Rupture Hazard Zone (Hart, 1997 & CDMG, 2000). The Elsinore Fault zone (Temecula segment) is located approximately 2.0 -kilometers southwest of the subject site. No active or inactive ' faults are known to traverse the site (Kennedy, 1977 & Tan & Kennedy, 2000). • Ground rupture during a seismic event normally occurs along pre-existing faults. Owing to ' the absence of known faulting on the subject site (Kennedy, 1977 & Tan & Kennedy, 2000), breaking of the ground during a seismic event is anticipated to be low. • The potential for seismically induced settlement, landslides, rockfall, tsunamis, and seiches are considered negligible. ' The potential for liquefaction during a local seismic event is considered low. 7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 General F,arthwark ' Recommendations for site development and design are presented in the following sections of this report. The recommendations presented herein are preliminary and should be confirmed during construction. T H E Soils Company, Inc. W.O. NO. 650601.00 ' Ms. Yvette Anthony August 3, 2006 ' Page 8 ' Prior to the commencement of site development, the site should be cleared of any vegetation, existing asphalt driveways, concrete walkways,, concrete foundations, water lines, electric lines, etc., which should be hauled off-site. The client, prior to any site preparation, should ' arrange and attend a meeting among the grading contractor, the design engineer, the soils engineer and/or geologist, a representative of the appropriate governing authorities as well as any other concerned parties. All parties should be given at least 48 hours notice. Earthwork should be conducted in accordance with the recommendations specified in this -report.. - - 7.2 Preparation of F,xisting Ground ' Prior to placement of fill, all alluvial/colluvial soils, and weathered bedrock should be removed until dense sedimentary bedrock that is free of pinpoint pores and fine roots (+85% relative compaction as determined by ASTM D-1557) are achieved. Depths of alluvial removals within the drainage Swale on the easterly portion of Parcel 3 and the southwesterly portion of Parcel 1 are anticipated to varyfrom a minimum of 4.5 to 5.5 -ft below the original ' ground surface. A keyway should be established along the toe of any proposed fill slope. The outside edge of the keyway should be founded a minimum of 2 -ft into dense sedimentary bedrock (+85% relative compaction as determined by ASTM D-1557) and inclined into the hillside at a minimum 2% gradient. The keyway excavation should expose sedimentary bedrock ' that is free of pinpoint pores and fine roots. Any loose topsoil/colluvial soils should be completely removed by benching during rough grade operations. Depths of alluvial removals ' within the keyway areas are anticipated to vary from a minimum of 4.5 to 5.5 -ft below the original ground surface on the outside edge of the keyway. Where fill is planned over the existing high pressure gas lines located along the easterly portion of the subject site, the top 6 to 12 -inches should be scarified, 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. Care should betaken to keep heavy equipment off of the existing gas lines whenever possible. Prior to placement of any fill materials onsite, the exposed earth materials should be scarified, moisture conditioned, and recompacted to a minimum of 90 -percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D-1557. H 7.3 Fill Placement Approved fill material should be placed in 6 to 8 -inch lifts, brought to at least optimum moisture content, and compacted to a minimum of 90% of the maximum laboratory dry density, as determined by the ASTM D 1557 test method. No rocks, chunks of asphalt or ' T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. W.O. NO. 650601.00 Ms. Yvette Anthony August 3, 2006 Page 9 7.4 7.5 concrete larger than 6 inches in diameter should be used as fill material. Rocks larger than 6 inches should either be hauled off-site or crushed and used as fill. material. Cut -to -fill transitions should be eliminated from building pads where the depth of fill exceeds 12 -inches. This should be accomplished by overexcavating the cut portion and replacing the materials as properly compacted fill. Limits of excavation should be verified by the project _ civil engineer. The building pad should be overexcavated a minimum of 5.' beyond the building footprint or equal to the overexcavation depth, whichever is greater. Recommended depths of overexcavation are as follows: Depth of Fill on "Fill" Portion 0 to 6 -ft > 6 -ft Depth of Clverexnavation "Cut" Portion 3.0 -ft %x Depth of Fill to Maximum Depth of 15 -ft We anticipate that cut/fill slopes constructed at a 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) slope ratio, to a maximum height of approximately 3041, will be surficially and grossly stable if constructed in accordance with the recommendations presented in this report and in Appendix C of this report. The proposed f40 -cut slope planned on Parcel 2 is anticipated to expose dense sandy silts and silty sands of the late Pleistocene age Pauba formation that are medium dense to dense and generally massive with no out of slope bedding. No adverse geotechnical conditions are anticipated within the proposed 40 -ft high 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) cut slope. The project engineering geologist should map the proposed cut slope during rough grading operations and a slope stability analysis should be performed on as -built conditions at that time. ' Proper seeding and planting of the slopes should follow as soon as practical to inhibit erosion and deterioration of the slope surfaces. Proper moisture control will enhance the long-term stability of the finish slope surface. 7.6 Expansion index T sting An expansion index test was performed on a representative onsite soil sample collected during our investigation. The results, which are listed in Appendix C, indicate that the expansion potential for the onsite soils was a 0, which corresponds to a VERY LOW expansion potential (0 to 20 - 2001 CBC, Table 18 -I -A). Expansion testing should also be T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc W.O. NO 650601.00 ' Ms. Yvette Anthony August 3, 2006 Page 10 performed on the earth materials exposed within the upper few feet of the pad surfaces.at the completion of grading and on imported soils prior to their approval as structural fill material. ' 7.7 Sohihle Sulfate Cnntent Based on our sulfate content testing, itis anticipated that, from a corrosivity standpoint, Type II Portland Cement can .be used for construction. Laboratory analysis results- indicated non -, detected (ND) percentage by weight sulfate content, which equates to a NEGLIGIBLE - - sulfate exposure (Table 19-A-4, 2001 CBC). Sulfate content testing should be conducted within the building pads at the completion of grading. Prime Testing, Inc. (PTi) of Murrieta, ' California performed the laboratory analysis. ' 7,8 Carrosinn Potential „ Corrosivity test results, which are summarized in Appendix C, indicated a saturated ' resistivity of 5,900 ohms/cm for the onsite near surface soils, which indicates the onsite soils are mildly corrosive (MACE International, 1984). Results for pH and Chlorides are included in Appendix C. 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 or ' provide additional corrosion analysis and mitigation. Prime Testing, Inc. (PTi) of Murrieta, California performed the laboratory analysis. ' 7.9 Lateral bond Resistance The following parameters should be considered for lateral loads against permanent structures ' founded on fill materials compacted to 90 percent of the maximum dry density. Soil engineering parameters for imported soil may vary. ' Equivalent Fluid Precsure for Level Backfill Active: 35 pef Passive: 483 pcf Coefficient of friction (concrete on soil): 0.42 If passive earth pressure and friction are combined to provide required resistance to lateral ' forces, the value of the passive pressure should be reduced to two thirds of the above recommendations. These values may be increased by one third when considering short-term loads such as wind or seismic forces. T H.E Soils Company, Inc. W.O NO. 650601 00 ' Ms. Yvette Anthony August 3, 2006 Page I1 ' 7.10 Allowable Safe RearingCnacityy For footings founded in competent engineered fill, an allowable safe bearing capacity of ' 2,700 pounds per square foot (psf) may be used for design of -continuous footings that maintain a minimum width of 12 -inches and a minimum depth of at least 12 -inches below the lowest adjacent grade. The bearing value may be increased by 10% for each additional ' foot of depth and/or width to a maximum of 3,700 psf. The bearing value may be increased by one-third for seismic or other temporary loads. ' Total settlements under static loads of footings supported on properly compacted fill and/or in-place bedrock materials and sized for the allowable bearing pressures are not expected to exceed about 1/2 to 3/4 of 1 inch for a span of 40 -ft. 'Differential settlementsJbetween ' footings designed for the maximum recommended- bearing value are expected to be less than 1/2 -inch for a span of 40-11. These settlements are expected to occur primarily during construction. Soil engineering parameters for imported soil may vary. 7.11 ' Foundation elements should be placed entirely in medium dense to dense engineered fill compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined with ' ASTM D-1557. For one-story or equivalent structures, continuous spread footings should be a minimum of 12 -inches wide and 12 -inches below the lowest adjacent grade. For two-story or equivalent structures, continuous spread footings should be a minimum of 12 -inches wide ' and 18 -inches below the lowest adjacent grade. As a minimum, all footings should have one No. 4 reinforcing bar placed at the top and bottom of the footing. Footings should be founded entirely in engineered fill. Concrete slabs, in moisture sensitive areas, should be underlain with a vapor barrier consisting of a minimum of six -milliliter -thick 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 visqueen moisture barrier and aid in the curing of the concrete. The structural engineer should design footings in accordance with the anticipated loads, the soil parameters given in this report, and the existing soil conditions. 1 7.12 Utility Trench Rackfill Utility trench backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined in laboratory testing by the ASTM D 1557 test method. It is our opinion that utility trench backfill consisting of onsite or approved sandy soils can best be placed by T.H E Sods Company, Inc. W.O. NO 650601.00 ' Ms. Yvette Anthony August 3, 2006 Page 12 mechanical compaction to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density. All trench excavations should be conducted in accordance with Cal -OSHA standards as a minimum. ' 7.13 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 irrigation water. 7.14- Construction Monitoring Continuous observation and testing under the direction of qualified soils engineers and/or ' engineering geologists is essential to verify compliance with the recomgtendations of this report and to confirm that the geotechnical conditions found are consistent with this investigation. Construction monitoring should be conducted by a qualified engineering ' geologist/soil engineer at the following stages of construction: • During excavation of keyway. ' During placement of fill. • During overexcavation of the building footprint. • Following excavation of footings for foundations. ' During utility trench backfill operations. When any unusual conditions are encountered during grading. Our investigation was performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable Geotechnical Engineers and Geologists practicing in this or similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional ' advice included in this report. The samples taken and used for testing and the observations made are believed representative of the ' entire project, however soil and geologic conditions can vary significantly between test locations. The findings of this report are valid as of the present 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. T.H.E. Sods Company, Inc. W.O. NO. 650601 00 Ms. Yvette Anthony August 3, 2006 Page 13 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, T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. /Yames R. Harrison (AProject Manager JPF/JTR/JRH:jek Figure 1 - Site Location Map (2,000 -scale) Figure 2 - Historic Seismicity Search (264,000 -scale) Plate 1 - Geotechnical Map (40 -scale) APPENDIX A - References APPENDIX B - Exploratory Trench & Boring Logs APPENDIX C - Laboratory Test Results APPENDIX D - Standards of Grading JohnV,-yinhart; RCE 23464 Registration Expires 12/31/07 No. KE 2UU Wt" V3121 T H E. Soils Company, Inc W.O NO. 650601.00 APPENDIX A References T H E Soils Company, Inc. W.O. N0. 650601.00 California Division of Mines & Geology, 1997, "Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California", Special Publication 117. California Division of Mines & Geology, 1996, "Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State of California", DMG Open File Report 96-08, USGS Open File Report 96-706. California Division of Mines & Geology, Effective January 1, 1990, "State of California Special Studies Zone Maps, Pechanga, California", Scale V = 2,000'. Coduto, Don, P., 1994, "Foundation Design Principles and Practice", Prentice Hall, pages 637-655: Department of Water Resources, August 1971, "Water Wells and Springs in the Western Part of the Upper Santa Margarita River Watershed, Riverside and Sari Diego Counties, Califomia", Bulletin No. 91-20. Hart, E.W., and Bryant, William A., 2000, "Fault -Rupture Hazard Zones in California", California Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42, CD-ROM Version. International Conference of Building Officials, 2001, "California Building Code". International Conference of Building Officials (ICBG), February 1998, "Maps of Known Active Fault Near -Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada to be Used with 1997 Uniform Building Code" prepared by California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology. ' International Conference of Building Officials, 1997, "Uniform Building Code" (UBC). Jennings, Charles W., 1994, "Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas with Locations and Ages of Recent Volcanic Eruptions", California Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic ' Data Map No. 6, scale 1:750,000. ' Kennedy, Michael P., 1977, "Recency and Character of Faulting Along the Elsinore Fault Zone in Southern Riverside County, California", USGS Special Report 131. Rancho California Water District, March 1984, "Water Resources Master Plan". Rodgers, Thomas H., 1965 (fifth printing 1985), "Geologic Map of California, Santa Ana Sheet", ' California Division of Mines & Geology, Scale: 1:250,000. Tan, Siang S and Kennedy, Michael, 2000, "Geological Map of the Temecula 7.5' Quadrangle, ' San Diego and Riverside Counties, California", U. S. Geological Survey in Cooperation with the California Geological Survey, Scale: F'= 2,000'. T H E. Soils Company, Inc W.O. NO. 650601 00 1 REFERENCES (CONTINUED) ED) U.S.G.S., 1997 "Pechanga, CA., 7.5 Minute Series Topographic Quadrangle Map", Scale 1" _ 2,000'. U.S.G.S., 1968 (photorevised 1975) "Temecula, CA., 7.5 Minute Series Topographic Quadrangle Map", Scale 1" = 2,000'. YEAR/SCALE FLIGHT #/FRAME # AGENCY N 1939/1"=1,667' C-5750/211-74, 211-75 Fairchild Collection 1962/1"=2,000' Co. Flight/3-401, 3-402 Riv Co Flood Control 1974/1 "=2,000' Co. Flight/1039, 1040 Riv Co Flood Contiol 1980/1"=2,000' Co. Flight/1057, 1058 Riv Co Flood Control 1983/1"=1,600' Co. Flight/200, 201 Riv Co Flood Control 1990/1"=1,600' Co. Flight/19-21,19-22 Riv Co Flood Control 1995/1"=1,600' Co. Flight/19-17,19-18 Riv Co Flood Control T H E Soils Company, Inc. W.O. NO. 650601 00 APPENDIX B Exploratory Trench & Boring Logs T.H E. Soils Company, Inc. W.O. NO. 650601.00 LOGGED BY: JPF METHOD OF EXCAVATION: NEW HOLLAND #B-95 EXTENDA-BACKHOE DATE OBSERVED: 7119106 EQUIPPED WITH A T BUCKET ELEVATION: LOCATION: SEE GEOTECHNICAL MAP w w 0 a g w ww �x on TEST PIT NO. 1 SOIL TEST a m o o x o 0 5 i DESCRIPTION Qw U m j J Z0 2� V ALLUVIAL SOILS MAXIMUM DENSITY/OPTIMUM MOISTURE SILTY SAND (SM) DARK GRAY BROWN, FINE TO COARSE GRAINED, MINOR GRAVEL, CONTENT, REMOLDED DIRECT SHEAR, ABUNDANT FINES, MODERATELY SORTED, DRY (TOP 1-2 FT) TO SLIGHTLY MOIST, SIEVE ANALYSIS, EXPANSION INDEX, _ ABUNDANT PINPOINT PORES 1 CORROSIVITY SUITE s A _ PAUBA FORMATION SILTY SAND (SM): DARK BROWN, FINE GRAINED, MINOR MEDIUM AND COARSE, MOIST, 1 MEDIUM DENSE, RARE PINPOINT PORES IN TOP 1-FT, TRACE OF CLAY — i 10 i 15 AT 15-FT DARK BROWN, SILTY SAND, AS ABOVE, INCREASING IN MEDIUM AND COARSE GRAINS i [20 TOTAL DEPTH = 15.8' i NO GROUNDWATER 25 30 35 40 JOB NO: 650601.00 LOG OF TEST PIT FIGURE: T-1 LOGGED BY: JPF METHOD OF EXCAVATION: NEW HOLLAND #13-95 EXTENDA-BACKHOE DATE OBSERVED: 7119106 EQUIPPED WITH A Y BUCKET ELEVATION: LOCATION: SEE GEOTECHNICAL MAP o S N TEST PIT NO. 2 S s LL in o f 0 3. Y N W 2 z O F S m DESCRIPTION SOIL TEST 0 5 u zo u COLLUVIUM SANDY SILT (ML) DARK GRAY BROWN; SANDY IN PART, NUMEROUS PINPOINT PORES AND FINE ROOTS - PAUBA FORMATION 5 SILT (ML) DARK BROWN, DRY, MINOR SAND GRAINS. OCCASIONAL PINPOINT PORES - AND OCCASIONAL"SUOROUNDED COBBLES TO VIN DIAMETER' 1 SILT (ML): DARKYELLOWISH BROWN, DENSE, SLIGHTLY MOIST, NO PINPOINT PORES I -- 10 TOTAL DEPTH = 8.0' NO GROUNDWATER _ { 15 20 25 30 35 40 JOB NO: 650601.00 LOG OF TEST PIT FIGURE: T-2 LOGGED BY: JPF METHOD OF EXCAVATION: MOBILE NO. B-61 TRUCK MOUNTED DRILL DATE OBSERVED: 3/30/06 RIG EQUIPPED WITH 4" HOLLOW STEM AUGERS ELEVATION: + 1130 LOCATION: SEE PLOT PLAN w g m J rc rc� BORING LOG NO. 1 N x o i i DESCRIPTION SOIL TEST o 5 O m O ' o PAUBA FORMATION SILTY SAND (SM). DARK BROWN, FINE TO COARSE GRAINED, MODERATELY GRADED, SLIGHTLY MOIST 5 SILTY SAND (SM). MEDIUM BROWN, FINE TO MEDIUM GRAINED, MINOR COARSE, _ Eanlrea 12-3t-��/ MODERATELY GRADED � - CAI- AS1SILTY SILTYSAND (SM): MEDIUM BROWN, AS ABOVE - 1 15 SAND (SW): MEDIUM TO LIGHT BROWN, MEDIUM TO COARSE GRAINED, MODERATELY GRADED, MOIST, DENSE, MODERATE DRILLING 20 SILTY SAND (SM)MEDIUM TO DARK BROWN, FINE TO COARSE GRAINED, GRAVELLY IN PART, MOIST, SUBANGULAR TO SUBROUNDED, MODERATLEY GRADED 25 30 SILTY SAND (SM) MEDIUM BROWN, AS ABOVE, BECOMING VERY MOIST, MODERATELY GRADED, NO FREE MOISTURE 35 40 SILT ML: OLIVE BROWN, VERY MOIST, CLAYEY IN PART JOB NO: 650601.00 LOG OF BORING 7FIGURE1 LOGGED BY: JPF METHOD OF EXCAVATION: MOBILE #B-61 TRUCK MOUNTED DRILL RIG EQUIPPEC DATE OBSERVED: 3/30/06 4" HOLLOW STEM AUGERS ELEVATION: + 1130 LOCATION: SEE PLOT PLAN � o =w ^ uz BORING LOG NO. 1 <� OZ S N DESCRIPTION SOIL TEST 2 0 o = �o V I I CLAYEY SILT (ML) OLIVE BROWN, CLAYEY IN PART, MOIST, DENSE SIEVE ANALYSIS 45 JiY/I Y� toNO. rAr RCE 234611 SILTY SAND (SM): LIGHT BROWN, FINE TO MEDIUM GRAINED, MODERATELY GRADED, - ETWs 12-31 50 SLIGHTLY MOIST - cP:- J, 9�OP CAL64��\� TOTAL DEPTH = 50.0' j 55 60 i 65 70 75 80 JOB NO: 650601.00 LOG OF BORING FIGURE: B-1 LOGGED BY: JPF METHOD OF EXCAVATION: MOBILE NO. B-61 TRUCK MOUNTED DRILL DATE OBSERVED: 3/30/06 RIG EQUIPPED WITH 4" HOLLOW STEM AUGERS ELEVATION: + 1126 LOCATION: SEE PLOT PLAN F LL z 0 8 m �w w x _. ¢LL �- BORING LOG NO. 2 i i y s ;� F u Z DESCRIPTION SOIL TEST Q g o PAUBA FORMATION SILTY SAND (SM): DARK BROWN, FINE TO MEDIUM GRAINED, MINOR COARSE AND GRAVEL, MODERATELY GRADED, SLIGHTLY MOIST, MEDIUM DENSE 5 PCE 23ASS-1 -es 12-31 }L7 SILTY SAND (SM). MEDIUM BROWN, FINE TO COARSE GRAINED, ABUNDANT FINES, _— s�.4 MODERATELY TO POORLY GRADED PaQ- - OFCAI�F� . 10 i SAND (SM). LIGHT BROWN, FINE TO MEDIUM GRAINED, MINOR COARSE, MODERATELY 15 GRADED, DENSE, MOIST SILTY SAND (SM) MEDIUM BROWN, FINE TO MEDIUM GRAINED, ABUNDANT COARSE, 20 MOIST, MODERATELY GRADED 25 30 SILTY SAND (SM) DARK BROWN, FINE TO COARSE GRAINED, MODERATELY GRADED, VERY MOIST, MINOR CLAY 35 M CLAYEY SILT (ML)OLIVE BROWN, MOIST, DENSE, CLAYEY IN PART r 40 TOTAL DEPTH = 40.0' JOB NO: 650601.00 LOG OF BORING FIGURE: B-2 LOGGED BY: JPF METHOD OF EXCAVATION: MOBILE NO. B-61 TRUCK MOUNTED DRILL DATE OBSERVED: 3130/06 RIG EQUIPPED WITH 4" HOLLOW STEM AUGERS ELEVATION: + 1137 LOCATION: SEE PLOT PLAN m X mu BORING LOG NO. 3 DESCRIPTION SOIL TEST PAUBA FORMATION SILTY SAND (SM): MEDIUM BROWN, FINE TO MEDIUM GRAINED, MINOR COARSE, MODERATELY GRADED, SLIGHTLY MOIST, DENSE < t\\ °I ,a I .0 ;Expires 12 -31 - CLAYEY SILTY SAND (SM): YELLOW BROWN, FINE TO COARSE GRAINED, MODERATELY -, _ - PC GRADED, SLIGHTLY MOIST, CLAYEY IN PART -, 10 ' I 15 SILTY SAND (SM) YELLOW BROWN, FINE TO MEDIUM GRAINED, MODERATELY SORTED, SLIGHTLY MOIST, MINOR GRAVEL - 20 SILTY SAND (SW) MEDIUM BROWN, MEDIUM TO COARSE GRAINED, MODERATELY SORTED, MOIST, NO FREE WATER 25 GRAVELLY SILTY SAND (SM) MEDIUM BROWN, FINE TO COARSE GRAINED, MINOR GRAVEL, WELL SORTED, SLIGHTLY MOIST 30 35 CLAYEY SILT (ML) OLIVE BROWN, MOIST, DENSE, MINOR SAND SILTY SAND (SM). MEDIUM BROWN, FINE TO MEDIUM GRAINED, MOIST, MODERATELY 40 GRADED TOTAL DEPTH = 40.0' JOB NO: 650601.00 LOG OF BORING FIGURE: B-3 APPENDIX C Laboratory Test Results T H.E Soils Company, Inc. W.O NO. 650601 00 ' A. Classiification ' Soils were visually classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Classification was supplemented by index tests, such as particle size analysis and moisture content. B. Expansion index An expansion index test was performed on a representative sample of the onsite, soils. . remolded and tested under a surcharge of 1441b/ft , in accordance with Uniform Building .. - . Code (UBC) Standard No. 29-2. The test result is presented on Figure C-1, Table I. 1l .. I I I I 1• I\ I I 1111 17 I 1 1 • 1 A maximum density/optimum moisture content relationship was determined for a typical sample of the onsite soils. The laboratory standard used was ASTM 1557 -Method A. The test results are summarized on Figure C-1, Table II, and presented graphically on Figure. C-2. 1 1• n 1. 1 1 Particle size determination, consisting of mechanical analyses (sieve), was performed on a representative sample of the onsite soils in accordance with ASTM D 422-63. Test results are shown on Figure C-3. A direct shear strength test was performed on a representative sample of the on-site undisturbed soils. To simulate possible adverse field conditions, the samples were saturated prior to shearing. A saturating device was used which permitted the samples to absorb moisture while preventing volume change. Test results are graphically displayed on Figure C-4. F. CorrosiAty Suite Corrosivity suite testing including resistivity, soluble sulfate content, pH and chloride content was performed on a representative sample of the onsite soils. The laboratory standards used were CTM 643, CTM 417 & CTM 422. The test results are presented on Figure C-1, Table III and Figure C-5. T.H E. Soils Company, Inc. W O. NO, 650601 00 TABLE EXPANSION INDEX TEST LOCATION EXPANSION INDEX EXPANSION POTENTIAL T-1 @ 0-5 ft 0 VERY LOW 6.3It 11 ND % by weight 1 II TABLE II MAXIMUM DENSITY/OPTIMUM MOISTURE RELATIONSHIP ASTM D 1557 TEST LOCATION MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY (pcf) OPTIMUM MOISTURE N T-1 @ 0-5 ft 123.3 4.9 6.3It 11 ND % by weight 1 TABLE III CORROSIVITY SUITE SATURATED CHLSULFATE RESISTIVITY pH CONTENTDE CONTENT TEST LOCATION T-1 @ 0-5 ft 5,900ppm 6.3It 11 ND % by weight 1 Figure C-1 T.H E Sods Company, Inc. W 0 NO. 650601.00 T 1 i 11 1 COMPACTION TEST REPORT Project No.: 650601.00 Project: YVETTE ANTHONY Location: Elev./Depth: 0-5 Remarks: Sample No. T-1 TEST RESULTS__ Maximum dry density = 123.3 pcf - Optimum moisture = 4.9 % Date: 7/19/06 Water content, % Plate C—`Z .H.E. Soils Company, Inc MATERIAL DESCRIPTION i Description: DARK GREY SILTY SAND ({ Classifications - USCS: AASHTO: Nat Moist = Sp.G. = 2.60 1 Liquid Limit= Plasticity Index L %>No.4= % %<No.200= TEST RESULTS__ Maximum dry density = 123.3 pcf - Optimum moisture = 4.9 % Date: 7/19/06 Water content, % Plate C—`Z .H.E. Soils Company, Inc 100 90 80 70 w W 60 Z LL Z 50 Z W 0 W 40 M 2C 10 C Particle Size Distribution Report GRAIN SIZE - mm %GRAVEL I %SAND %FINES %COBBLES CRS. FINE CRS. MEDIUM FINE SILT I CLAY 0.0 0.0 3.0 2.1 36.7 32.8 25.4 1/2 in. 99.2 I 3/8 in. i I I i i 97.0 1 I #10 i I 'I i I #30 74.8 — 42.0 i #100 28.3 #200 { Son in in 1 0.1 0.01 0001 GRAIN SIZE - mm SIEVE SIZE %GRAVEL I %SAND %FINES %COBBLES CRS. FINE CRS. MEDIUM FINE SILT I CLAY 0.0 0.0 3.0 2.1 36.7 32.8 25.4 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT FINER SPEC.* PERCENT PASS? (X=NO) 3/4 in. 100.0 1/2 in. 99.2 3/8 in. 98.9 #4 97.0 #10 94.9 #30 74.8 #50 42.0 #100 28.3 #200 25.4 Material Description DARK GREY SILTY SAND Atterbem Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D85= 0.817 D60= 0.440 D50= 0.361 D30= 0.179 D15= D10= Cu= CC= Classification USCS= AASHTO= Remarks F.M =1.59 (no specification provided) Sample No.: T-1 Source of Sample: Date: 8/1/06 Location: Elev./Depth: 0-5 E ANTHONY T.H.E. Soils Company, Inc. Client: YYVTTTEANTHON Project: YVETTE ANTHONY /� q Murrieta, CA Pro ect No: 650601.00 Plate C—J Mi FRI DIRECT SHEAR ASTM D 3080 T.H.E. Soils Company PN: 650601.00 Yvette Anthony, Sample: T-1 @ 0-5' Soil Description: (SM) Very Dark Grayish Brown, Silty Fine -Coarse Sand Displacement Rate. 0 050 in/m Box Gap0.025 in Max Data _ 123.3 @ 4 9% Remold Target Data 91 % = 112.2 pcf 6.9 %Mc( -No 10) 2.65 GS(assumed) ` - *As Received Mc. 5.6 % Adjusted Mc: 8.1 % "After Shear Mc: 'Existing Gradation for undisturbed specimens, -No.10 fraction for remolded specimens ❑ Undisturbed "Test 1 Specimen (Highest Normal Stress) ■ Remolded Test 1 Pounds Test 2 Test 1: _. Test.3 SHEAR RECORD: Prov. Ring Vert. Dial Prov Ring Vert. Dial Prov. Ring -Vert.. Dial; Displacement (in): 0.010 32 -35 22 -9 17,--. ----2 0.020 75 -54 46 -14 I 38 3 0.030 99 -66 66 -19 r - 53 23— is 0.040 118 -71 81 -15 60 50 0.050 134 -72 90 1 62 79 - 0.060 145 -72 95 17. 62 107 0.070 153 -72 98 36 60 128 0.080 160 -70 97 54 '' 56 144 0.090 164 -65 97 70 i 53 152 0.100 165 -59 96 83 51 157 0.110 165 -54 94 92 0.120 164 -49 91 100 0.130 163 -45 0.140 161 -43 0.150 159 -42 0.160 0.170 0.180 0.190 0.200 0.210 0.220 0.230 0.240 0.250 'SHEAR STRESS: Divisions Pounds psf Test 1: 165 68 2149 Test 2: 98 42 1310 Test 3: 62 27 859 'Peak Values NORMAL STRESS (psf): Test 1:1 2764 Test 2:1 1382 Test 3: 691 Proving Ring SN 1155-16-11938C Calibrated 25 -Jan -06 0= 31,6° C=J 439psf/ /NW /terI� gZ1,10O Reviewed By, Date Form No 40R Rev. 03/06 rrrECC�C�C��C CC�CCC�� CCCC�CCCCC--No�C 0000110mon C NONE rrr EE=Ewall _===EZONE EEEEE —E--- rr COCC EEO � �E EEEEEEE0 r rrr rrr rrr rrr C-4 RUG -1-2006 09:52R FROM:PRIME TESTING (951)892-2683 70:98942122 P.1 i�i Prime Testing, Inc. 36372 Innovation Ct Ste 102 Murrieta, CA 92563 ph(951)894-2682 • fx (951) 894-2683 Client: Report Date: Client No: Work Order: Project No: Project Name: T.H.E. Soils Company August 1, 2006 C01 6G5 650601.00 Yvette Anthony Laboratory Test(s) Results Summary The subject soil sample was processed 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: Client DataMinimum pH Resistivity Sulfate Content Sulfate Content Chloride Content Sample Sample Depth No. Location (ft) (ohm -cm) (mg/kg) (% by wgt) (ppm) — T-1 0-5 6.3 5900 ND ND 140 .'v We We appreciate the opportunity to serve you. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any questions or clarifications regarding these results or procedures. wnwYtrowu WC411I YTIOY�L MfMBER Ahmet K. Kaya, Laboratory Manager Form No. 63R Rev.05/06 C-5 APPENDIX D Standard Grading and Earthwork Specifications T H E. Soils Company, Inc W.O. NO 650601.00 STANDARD GRADING AND EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS These specifications present T.H.E. SoitS Company, standard rocortmherhdations for grading and ®tthwodc No deviation limn these specifications should be permitted unless specifically superseded in the gectedmical report of the project or by written communication signed by the Soils Consultant. Evaluations performed by the Soils Consultant during the course of grading may result in subsoquad recommendations which could supersede these specifications orthe reconmhandatians of the geatedhnical report. 1.0 GENERAL. 1.1 The Soils Corsultart is the Owner's or Developer's representative on the project For the purpose of these specifications, observations by the Soils Cmmhaot include observations by the Soils Engineer, Soils Engineer, Engineering Cwlogisl, and others employed by and responsible to the Soils Cmhsultant. 1.2 All clearing site preparation, or earthwork performed on the project shall be conducted and directed by the Contractor, under the a0mrance or supervision ofthe Soils Consultant 1.3 The Contractor should be responsible far the safety of the pnlject and satisfactory completion of all grading Dmtng grading the Contractor shall remain accessible. 1.4 Prior to the eomrmcamet of grading the Soils Consultant shall be employed for the purpose of providing field, laboratory, and office service for eonfmmmwe with the reoommerhdafions of the geotechnical report and these specifications it will be necessary that the Soils Consultant provide adequate testing and observations so that he may provide an opinion his to determine that the walk was accomplished as specified It shall be the repmnb"y of the Contractor to assist the Soils Consultant and keep h® apprised of work schedules and efianges an that he may schedule his P—d aoomduwy . 1.5 It shall be the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the work in accordance with applicable gmdmg codes, agency ordinances, these specifications, and the approved grading plans. If, in the cpioiva of the Soils Cansuham, unsatisfactory conditions, such ss questionable soil, poor moisture condtioru, inadequate oompadion, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work les than required in these specifications, the Soils Consultant will be empowered to reject the work and recommend that construction be stopped until the aoaddions are ratified 1.6 his the Contractor's responsibilityto provide safe access to the Soils Consultant for testing and/or grading observation purposes. T his may require the excavation oftest pits and/or the relocation of grading equpm ot- 1.7 A final repot shall be issued by the Soils Consultant atlestmgto the Cuwdrador's conformance with these specifications. 2.1 All vegetation and deleterious material shall be disposed of offsite This removal shall be observed by the Soils Consultam and concluded prior to fill placement. 2.2 Soil, alluvium, or bedrock materials determined by the Soils Camsuhsm as being uosutable far placement in conspaded fills shall be removed from the site or used in open areas a ddermmed by the Soils Consultant. Any material inmporated as a pan of a compacted fill must be approved by the Soils Comsultam prior to fill plac®erhL 2.3 After the ground surface to receive fill has been leered, it shall be scarified, disced and/or bladed by the Contractor until it is uniform and free from rhos, hollows, hummocks, or other uneven features which may prev i t uniform eompactim. The scarified ground surface shall then be brm& to optimum moisture, mixed as required, and compacted a specified If the scarified me is greater than twelve inches in depth, the excess shall be removed and placed in lifts not to exceed six inches or less. Prim to placing fill, the ground surface to receive fill shall be dived, tested, and approval by the Soils CaosuhanL 2.4 Any underground structure or cavities such as mens pcols, casans, mining shafts, turmels, septic tanks, wells, pipe linea or others are to be removed ortreated in a mama prescribed by the Soils Conmllm t 2.5 In cull -fill transition lots and where out Ids are partially in soil, wlluvium or Unweathered bedrock materials, in order to provide umifortn (searing conditions, the bedrock potion of the Id extending a minimum of 5 fed outside of building limes sell be ovaexcavated a minimum of 3 feel and replaced with conpaded fill. Greater over"ca vation could be required as determined by Soils Comauham. Typical details are attached 3.0 COMPACTED FILLS 3.1 Material to be placed as fill shall be fise of agamic nutter and other deleterious substances, and shall be approved by the Soils Consultant. Soils of poor gradation, etpensioq or strength eharacteristica shall be placed in areas desigruted by Soils Coosultmd or shall be mixed with other soils to serve as satisfactory fill material, as directed by the Soils Consultant. ' Standard Gredmg and Earthwork Spemficathons Page 2 3.2 Rode fragments less than six inches in diameter may be milized in the fill, provided. They are not placed or nested in concentrated pockets. There is a sufficient amount of approved soil to surround the rocks. • The distribution of rocks is supervised by the Soils Consultant. 3.3 Rocks greeter than twelve incus in diameter shall be taken off-site, or placed in accordance wdh the recommendations of the Soils Ccessultant in areas designated as suitable for rock disposal. (A typical detail for Rock Disposal is attached.) 3.4 Material that is spongy, subject to dray, or otherwise considered unsuitable shall net be used in the compacted fill. 3.5 Represerdative samples of materials to be utilized as compacted fill shall be analyzed by the laboratory of the Soils Consultant to determine their physical properties, If my material afherthan that previeusy tested is enewmtaed during grading the appropriate matyss of this material shall be., conducted bythe Soils Consultand before being approved as fill motorist 3.6 Material used or the compacting process shall be evenly spread, watered, processed, and compacted in thin lifts not to exceed six inches in thidmess to obtain a uniformly deme layer. The fill shall be placed and compacted an a horizontal plant, unless otherwise approved by the Soils Consultant. 3.7 . If the romsbme comas or relative oompadion varies fiom that requved by the Soils Co Asha the Contractor stall rework the fill until it is approved by the Soils Consultant 3.8 Each layer shall be compacted to at teat 90 pace of the maximum density in compliance with the testing method specified by the controlling govemmerdal agency or ASTM 1557-70, whichever applies. If compaction to a lesserperounage is authorized by the corbelling guvemmmtal agency because of a Wocific Ind use or expansive soil condition, the area to rete ve fill compacted to lea than 90 percent shall other be delineated on the gaad'mgpim andror appropriate reference made to the area in the geotechmical report 3.9 All fills shall be keyed and batched through all topsoil, colluvium, alluvium, or creep material, into sound bedrock or firm material where the slope receiving fill exceeds a ratio of five horizontal to me vertical or in aorordanca with the r000nmhendatims ofthe Soils Cons rhmM1. 3.10 The key for side hill fills shall be a minimum width of 15 fed wilhm bedrock or firm materials, no]= otherwise specified in the geatedmical report (See detail attached) 3.11 Subdramage devices shall be constructed in compliance with the ordinances; ofthe controlling governmental agency, or with the recommendations of the Soils Consultmt (Typical Cmym Subdram details are attached) 3.12 The contractor will be required to obtain a m ininn m relative compaction of at least 90 permt our to the finish slope face of 611 slopes, buttresses, and stabilizationfills. Ibis may be achieved by either over buddmgthe slope and cutting book to the compacted oore or by direct oom pmuon of the slope Imewth suitable equipment, or by my otherprooadtuq which produces the requucd compaction approved by the Soils Conwdtot 3.13 All fill slopes should be phoned or protected from erosion by other methods specified in the Soils report. 3.14 Fill -over -cut slopes shall be property keyed through topsoil, colluvium or creep material into rock or firm materials, and the transition shall be dripped of all act prim to placing fill. (Set attached detail.) 4.0 CDT SLOPES 4.1 The Soils Co ssukam shall igpm all cep slopes at vortical intervals exceeding five feel. 4.2 If my conditions not anticipated in the geotechnical report such as perched water, seepagt, lemimlar or confined abate of a potentially adverse nature unfavorably ivied bedding joints or fault planes encountered during grading, these conditions shall be analyzed by the Soils Ccrosuftan, and remmnendmons shall be madeto mhigstethese problems. (Typical details fa alabiliffiion of a portion of a cut slope are attached) 4.3 Cut slopes that face in the same direction as the prevailing drainage shall be protected from slope wash by a non -erodible interceptor male placed at the top ofthe slope. 4.4 Unless otherwise specified in the goatedmicel report, no cep slopes shall be excavated higher or steeper than that allowed by the ordinances of controlling governmental agencies 4.5 Drainage terraces shall be constructed in Compliance with the ordmmm of controlling governmental agencies, or with the recommendations; of the Soils Cansuhard. ' Standard Grading and Earthwork Specifications Page 3 SO TRENCH BACKFILLS 5.1 Thench excavation shall be inspected prior to slruoture place cin fm competent bottom 5.2 Trench excavations for utility pipes shall be backfilled under the supervision of the Soils Consultant. 5.3 After the utility pipe has been laid the space under and around the pipe shall be backfilled with dean sand or approved granular soil to a_depth of at least one fact over the top of the pipe The sand backfill shall be uniforndyjmed into place before the controlled backfill is placed over the sand. 5.4 The on-site materials, or other suits approved by the Soils Consultant, shall be watered and nixed, as necessary, prior to plaochnort in lifts over the sand badclill. 5.5 The controlled badcfill shall be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum laboratory density, as determined bythe ASTM D1557_-70 or the controlling governmental agency. 5.6 Field density tests and mepeoion of the backfill procedures shall be made by the Soils Conmham during badcfillmg to see that proper moisture content and uniform compaction is being maintained. The contractor shall providetest holes and exploratory pits as required by the Soils Camsuhani to enable sampling and unsling. - - 6.0 GRADING CONTROL - 7.0 6.1 Impaction ofthe fill placement shall be provided by the Soils Co oulted duringthe progress of grading - - - - - 6.2 In general, density testa should be made at intervals not evading two fed of fill height or may 500 cubic yards of fill placed. This criteria will vary depending on add conditions and the she of the job. In my event, an adequate number of field density tests shall be made to verify that the requmsd eoupection is being achieve& - 6.3 Density teas should also be made on thenative surface material to receive fill, as required by the Soils Cosuham 6.4 All clean-cut, processed ground to received 61L key excavations, subdrains, and rock disposals should be inspected and approved by the Soils Censuhant prim to placing my fill. It shall be the Comsactols responsibility to notify the Soils Cerauha t wbon inch areas will be ready for Inspection. 7.1 Erosion control measures, when necessary, shall be provided by the Comracam during grading and prim to the completion and construction of permanent drainage controls. 7.2 Upon completion of gnd'mg and termination of inspections by the Soils Consultant, no fimbor filling or excavating including that necessary fm faotutp foundations, Iargetree wells, re ammgwalls, or other features shall be performed without the approval ofthe Soils Consultant- 7.3 onsultant7.3 Care shall be taken by the Contractor during final grading to preserve my barns, drainage terraces, Intercepter males, or other devices of permanent nature on or adjacent to the property. SIDE HILL CUT PAD DETAIL NATURAL / GROUND Y / OVEAEXCAVATE / i i / FINISHED CUT PAD AND RECOMPACT (REPLACEMENT FILL) Pad overexcavation and recompactior OVERBURDEN — — 1 (MIN.% == shall be performed if determined to MATERIAL =—_ = y Y OR UNSUITABLE __ _ _�=' = be necescr b the geotechnical t—BENCHING consultant. --� UNWEATHERED BEDROCK OR 1 sr T MATERIAL APPROVED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT SUBDRAIN AND KEY WIDTH REQUIREMENTS DETERMINED BASED ON EXPOSED SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AND THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN ROCK DISPOSAL DETAIL FINISH GRADE ------------------- :-_4 - - - - - -- 7 -- 7 - ' COM PACTED -- ----- 10m --- FILL-- SLOPE--------------- ---------- --- ---- - FACE- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _------_- - - - ----- - - - - - - - - -- - - - --- - - - - -- - - - - - - - 7 -------------------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 wt�: - -MI ' -15 - - - - - - - - -Ht__-- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Z -- - - - N - t 7�� ---- - ------------- ----- ---- ------- ---------- --- ---- - ------------- -- --------------- - --------------- - - - - - - - OVERSIZE-:---- WINDROW! GRANULAR SOIL To fill voids, densified by flooding PROFILE ALONG WINDROW TRANSITION LOT DETAILS CUT -FILL LOT NATURAL GROUND JT I MIN. ' :COMPACTED _FILL __ rEP\=T = --_1r� � - 36"MIN. _------_E—uptSPBL-_– ----- OVEREXCAVATE AND RECOMPACT- -- – UNWEATHERED BEDROCK OR t MATERIAL APPROVED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT CUT LOT REMOVE —� UNSUITABLE MATERIAL NATURAL GROUND - I_ / 5' MIN. t �_____ - --------- ----------------- _-== _s- _ =- =____� 36"i ---_-_---_-_--------- -------- _---------- CO_MPACTED __FILL OVEREXCAVATE AND.RECOMPACT UNWEATHERED BEDROCK OR MATERIAL APPROVED BY ___ THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT NOTE: Deeper over excavation and recoMDaCtion shall be performed if de?ermined -o be necesscry by the geotechnical consultant. ' SLOPE BUTTRESS OR REPLACEMENT FILL DETAIL MIN. 1 I ' OUTLET PIPES------ - _____� 4" p Nbnperforated Pipe, FILL BLANI 100' Max. O.C. Horizontally, __ 30 MIN. BACK C 30' Max. O.C. Vertically _ __ UT ' _ 1:1 OR FLATTE --- BENCHING ' - -- _----�SU60RAIN SEE ALTERNATES A 1 _� - - -__ - --_-_- ---- _- _-_- - -_-_ -- *--- ----- = FILTER MA'ERIAL _ _ _ — —� — — —_— — KEY l ------____ _— _— T -CONNECTION- 5 D'cFTi1� -_-- --- - - - 1� "�-- - 5% MIN ___ ---- --- L ._2o-'Mln_. I v _ PEnFORATE7 PTFE 4• MIN. 2' MIN. �---- KEY WIDTH o"OMW ' coulPr.:ENT SIZ - C-cNERALLY 15 FEET I _ ALTERNATE A Ir 1A IN. aVEP.LA? ' - DF VEL POSITIVE SEALSHOULD BE �/ 14^ LAIN. PROVIDED ' GRAVEL OR MPACTED FILL AT THE JO'r+T �APPROVED EQUNALENT LECTBEDOING MW,SACXFILL OUTLET PERFCRATE j PIPE -,1_ MIRAFI 140 FILTER ' FABRIC OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT ' DETAIL A -A' ALTERNATE B NOTES : FILTER MATERIAL: ' • Fill blanket, back cut, key width and Filter material shall be key depth are subject to field change, Class 2 permeable material per report/plans. per State of California ' 0 Key heel Subdrain, blanket drain, or . Standard Specifications, vertical drain may be required at the or approved alternate. discretion of the geotechnical consultant. Class 2 grading as follows: ' • SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION - Subdrain SIEVE SIZE PERCENT PASSING pipe shall be installed with perforations down or, at locations designated by 1" 100 the geotechnical consultant, shall be 3/4" 90-100 nonperforated pipe. 3/8" 40-100 • SUBDRAIN TYPE - Subdrain type shall No. 4 25-40 ' be ASTM D2751 SDR 23.5 or ASTM D1527, No. 8 18-33 Schedule 40 Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene No. 30 5-15 (ABS) or ASTM D3034 SDR ' 23.5 or ASTM No. 50 3-7 - - No. 200 0-3 D1785, Schedule 40 Polyvinyl Chloride Plastic BENCHING DETAILS --------------- FALL SLOPE __ ----.0 0 M P A C T EP =-_FI L_L_--_-_- ------------------ i '---------------- - --------------- --- _� _- t�� PROJECTED PLANE —____��--- -r----- I to I maximum from toe=_=====r-----� of slope to cporoved ground =-__a ='=_ NATURAL ' GROUND' __- -_— -_--,, . REMOVE a . ------ _ -' _----�- - __ -y -- UNSUITABLE -r =----- ___ MATERIAL -- ----- -�___�-'-�- �W MIN. ----- BENCH BENCH HEIGHT to MIN. -__- (typical) VARIES I ..w.- 2' MIN. IS' MIN. KEY kOWEST BENCH DEPTH (KEY) FILL OVER CUT SLOPE REMOVE. UNSUITABLE ' MATERIAL i i NATURAL COMPACTED ===FILL —% =— ------- ---- ------- _--- —1 --- - GROUND \,,-___---'----- - -- I W MIN. BENCH BENCH T .2 IIN.- I (typical) VARIES ES / H—!S' MIN. CHCH LOWEST BENI CUT ' FACE To be constructed prior to fill placement ' NOTES= LOWEST BENCH • Depth and width subject to field change based on consultant's inspection. ' SLEDRAINAGE:. E^^v :r rncy be required at the jnscretion of the geotechnical consultant. BENCHING CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAIL NATURAL GROUND -- --_-—__-__------_----_-___ —=—_=f __- COMPACTED_ TE FILL__ _ — --7== -� -_-_- -_-- — __ -___- REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL SUBDRAIN TRENCH' = _SEE ALTERNATES A&B SUBDRAIN Perforated Pipe Surrounded With ALTERNATE A. Filter Material A1!ernate A-1 FILTER MATER 9 ft. 3/ft.. * COVER 6" MIN.—' DING 4" MIN. PERFORATED PIPE 6" 0 MIN. Alternate A-2 "SUBDRAIN 1 1/2" Gravel Wrapped ALTERNATE B: in Filter Fabric ,� 8" ivllN. OVERLAP L �, ` / o ° aa° ° MIR,•�Fl 140 FILTER o °° ° ° 0 FABRIC OR APPROVED Afternate B-1 EQUIVALENT v DIY:"MIN. GRAVEL OR-�Alternate B-2 APPROVED EQUIVALENT 9 ft. 3/ft. FILTER MATERIAL - Filler material shall be Class 2 permeable mcTerial Per State of California Standard 5pecifications, or approved alternate. Class 2 grading os follo.�s: SIEVE SIZE PERCENT PASSING 1" 100 3/4" 90-100 3/8" 40-100 No.4 25-40 No. 8 16-33 No. 30 5-15 No. 50 0-7 No. 200 0-3 NOTE: In addition to the wrapped gravel, outlet portion of the subdrain should be , equipped with a minimum of 10 feet long perforated pipe con- nected to a nonperforated pipe having a minimum of 5 feet in length inside the wrapped gravel. • SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION - Subdrain pipe shall be installed with perforations down or, at locations designated by the geotechnical consultant, shall be nonperforated pipe. • SUBDRAIN TYPE - Subdrain type shall be ASTM D2751, SDR 23.5 or ASTM D1527, Schedule 40 Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) or ASTM D3034 SDR 23.5 or ASTM D1785, Schedule 40 Polyvinal Chloride Plastic (PVC) pipe or approved equivalant.