HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix E - Soils EvaluationSAMPSON and ASSOCIATES
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Geotechnical, Structure, Environmental
Project No.: DRB22-00002 February 25, 2022
TO: SUBJECT:
SA Golden Investments Inc. 6226 Cooper Ave
Fontana, California 92336
Preliminary Soils Evaluation, New Proposed 3-story 24 unit apartments
Located at 8155 Banana Ave, City of Fontana, California.
INTRODUCTION: We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. The primary purpose of this study was to evaluate the soils conditions as they impact the proposed development and to provide engineering recommendations. Our study has demonstrated that the proposed development is feasible from soils engineering point of view and that no un- mitigatable conditions h been disclosed by our studies provided that our recommendation provided in this report are
incorporated fully in the design of the project. This report presents the findings of our data review, subsurface exploration, laboratory testing,
engineering analysis and evaluation, and our conclusions and recommendations. If you have any questions regarding this report please do not hesitate to contact this office at your convenience. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project.
P. 0. Box 834, San Dimas, California 91773 Tel.: (909) 522-7067
E-Mail: mohsamiee@msn.com
Project No.: DRB22-00002 February
Index Map
Of
8155 Banana Ave, City
of Fontana, California
Page 2
Project No.: DRB22-00002 February
SCOPE OF STUDY:
The purposes of this study are to identify on-site, near-surface soil conditions that may affect the
proposed developments and provide soils engineering recommendations for site preparation,
temporary excavations, foundation design, slabs-on-grade, and drainage recommendations.
1. Site visit and review of pertinent documents. 2. Drilling, logging, and sampling of (3) exploratory borings to a maximum depth of (5) feet for foundation evaluation.
3. Laboratory testing of selected samples to determine the engineering characteristics of onsite
soils.
4. Engineering analysis of collected data and information obtained from our field study, laboratory testing, and literature review. 5. Development of soils engineering recommendations for site preparation, grading, and
Soils engineering design criteria for building foundations, slab-on grade construction,
underground utility trenches, temporary excavations, retaining walls, and drainage.
6. Preparation of this report presenting our findings, conclusions, and recommendations Including maps and illustrations.
ACCOMPANYING MAPS, ILLUSTRATIONS, and APPENDICES:
Index Map - Page 2 Plate 1 - Approximate Boring Location Map Appendix "A" - References
Appendix "B" - Borings Logs
Appendix "C" - Laboratory Test Results
Appendix - General Earthwork and Grading Specification
Page 3
Project No.: DRB22-00002 February
SITE LOCATION, PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, and CONDITION:
The proposed development consists of new 3-story 24 unit apartments at end of Banana Ave.in
the City of Fontana, County of San Bernardino, California.
The subject site is flat irregular shape lot bounded by Banana Ave. on south and by developed
properties on other sides. Access to the site is available via pd Banana Ave. .
Project is covered with dense dry and green annual weeds, bushes, trees, and scattered trash.
Drainage onsite is uncontrolled by sheet flow appears to be toward east and south.
This office must review the Foundation Plans prior to permit issue. Although building loads were not provided, we would expect the loads to be typical of Multifamily construction. The building will
be supported on shallow continuous footings and slab-on-grade. The remaining of the property will
be landscaped or pd.
SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION:
To evaluate the subsurface condition of the subject sites, three (3) exploratory Borings were drilled
to maximum depths of (5) feet as shown on Plate-1. The excavations were then backfilled. The
borings were logged and sampled. Bulk and relatively undisturbed samples were collected for
proper laboratory testing. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS:
Soil materials encountered in our trenches consisted of top-soils over Alluvium material to a
depth of approximately 4.5 feet below surface. Upper 2 feet consists of very dry, loose, silty
sand, sandy silt, poorly graded with grls and some rocks with roots and minor trash on surface. The soils below 2 feet is loose and dry silty sand, sandy silt with minor roots to depth of
4.5 feet below grade. The soils encountered below approximately 4.5 feet grade consists of
dense brown silty sand, sandy, with rocks, and scattered cobbles. These soils are dense becoming
more dense with depth.
Field observation, probing, and testing of the subsurface material indicates that approximately
upper approximately 4.5+ feet of the onsite soils appears to be loose, dry, and collapsible under proposed structural load. Page 4
Project No.: DRB22-00002 February
GROUND WATER:
No Ground water or any perched ground water was observed at our (4) exploratory trenches onsite
during the course of our investigation. LABORATORY TEST RESULTS:
Laboratory tests were performed to identify the engineering characteristics of the onsite soils with
respect to the proposed development at the site. A description of these test procedures is presented in Appendix "C", along with the results of these tests.
Laboratory testing included in-place moisture/density, maximum dry density/optimum moisture
content, and direct shear.
A summary of the test results is presented below:
Based on our visual inspection and testing, the onsite soils are expected to h a very low potential
for expansion.
Maximum dry density and Optimum moisture of representative onsite native soils is 128 pcf
and 7.5 percent respectively. The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of typical onsite soils are determined by ASTM Test Method D1557.
Shear strength test was performed on representative samples for undisturbed conditions. Direct shear
test results on native soil sample indicates a cohesion and frictional strength of 50 psf and 28
degrees, respectively.
Soluble sulfates test result is included in Appendix “C”, however, soluble sulfate test must be verified after completion of grading.
Page 5
Project No.: DRB22-00002 February
CONCLUSIONS and RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the field, laboratory data, and our analysis, it is our opinion that the proposed
developments are feasible, provided that the recommendations in this report are incorporated fully
in the design and construction stages of the projects.
FAULTING and SEISMICITY:
The Southern California region is considered to be tectonically active because of its historically
high seismic activity. As with most of southern California, the site can be expected to experience
moderate to severe ground shaking during the design life. The effects of seismic shaking can be mitigated through consideration of the parameters and by
design in accordance with the latest Uniform Building Code and the Structural Engineers
Association.
Seismic Coefficients Per 2019 CBC Code are as follow:
Site Longitude: W 119.5975
Site Latitude: N 36.25556
Site Class: Fa: 1.0 Fv: null -See Section 11.4.8 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS:
There are some number of factors which affect the liquefaction characteristics of any given sand. It is now recognized that these include: relative density, grain structure or fabric, length of time the sand
is subjected to sustain pressures, the value of the lateral earth pressure, coefficient, and prior seismic
or other shear strains to which the sand may h been subjected. According to our site visit, soil
classification, and, our soils evaluation and laboratory testing for in-place moisture/densities, the onsite soils are primarily dens silty sand/sandy silt. It is our professional opinion that based on the under-laying dense to hard sandy silt/silty sand soils and considering the deep groundwater below
grade, the potential for liquefaction is remote.
Page 6
Project No.: DRB22-00002 February
RECOMMENDATION
General Site Grading:
All grading shall be performed in accordance with the Local Standards and General- Earthwork/Grading Specifications on this report (Appendix ) except as modified in the text of this report.
The following soils engineering recommendations for site preparation, foundation, and slabs-
on-grade should be incorporated into final design and construction stages of the project and should
be in conformance with local governmental regulations contained herein, whichever is more restrictive. All such work and design, and slabs-on-grade should be incorporated into final design and construction practice.
SITE PREPARATION and GRADING:
Removal and Re-Compaction:
Prior to any grading operations, the site must be cleared of all surface and subsurface obstructions including uncertified fill, any existing structure, grass, weeds, large and small tree stumps, debris, trash, and residual topsoil. Any underground obstruction encountered must be located, removed,
and backfilled with clean soils under supervision and testing of the soils engineer.
Based on our site observation, testing, and evaluation, the subsurface material at present condition
(building area) are dry to damp, loose/soft, and compressible within the upper (4.5+) feet below existing grade. Following clearing and stripping, grading of the site shall be initiated by removals of upper 4.5+ feet and scarification of approximate (12) inches within building area and 5 feet beyond
footprints. Bottom of all excavations to receive fill must be inspected by the soils engineer,
scarified 12 inches, moisture-conditioned as-necessary to satisfaction of soils engineer (flooded), and
re-compacted to a minimum 90% of relative dry density under supervision and testing of the soils
engineer.
After removal of deleterious material and debris, the exposed bottom of building area shall be inspected by the soils engineer to verify the above findings. If conditions differs from those
encountered, our conclusions and recommendations may be re-evaluated.
Page 9
Project No.: DRB22-00002 February
PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is our opinion that the proposed 3-story 24 unit apartments Multifamily may be supported on
continuous footings. All footings must be designed by structural engineer founded in native or
approved compacted certified soils provided by the above recommended over-excavation and re-
compaction. No foundation plan was available to us at the time of our investigation, therefore, the proposed
footings shall be designed by the structural engineer and shall be reviewed by this office prior to
construction.
Following parameters are preliminary recommendations in design of foundations and are based on a
low expansion potential.
CONTINUOUS FOOTINGS:
All foundation system for this project must be designed by the structural engineer. Final foundation
design should be reviewed by this office prior to construction.
Following soils parameters may be used in design criteria of the project.
Allowable Bearing Pressure: 1650 psf Approved Fill or Native Coefficient of Friction: 0.28 Approved Fill or Native
Passive Lateral Pressure: 250 pcf Approved Fill or Native
Single-Story:
Footing Depth Min.: 18-Inch Into Approved Bedrock-To Be Designed By The Structural
Engineer- Min 1 #4 rebar @ Top and 1 #4 Rebar @ Bottom Footing Width Min.: 15-Inch- To Be Designed By The Structural Engineer
Two-Story
Footing Depth Min.: 72-Inch Into Approved Bedrock-To Be Designed By The Structural
Engineer- Min 2 #4 rebar @ Top and 2 #4 Rebar @ Bottom
Footing Width Min.: 18-Inch- To Be Designed By The Structural Engineer
The above foundation parameters shall be superseded by more restrictive design requirements from
the architect, structural engineer, and/or governing agency.
For design, resistance to lateral loads can be assumed to be provided by friction along the base of
the foundation and by passive earth pressures on the side of the foundation. An allowable
friction coefficient of 0.28 may be used with the vertical dead loads, and an allowable lateral passive pressure.
The friction value is for the total of dead and frequently applied live loads and may be increased
by one third for short duration loading, which includes the effects of wind or seismic forces.
Resistance to lateral loading may be provided by passive earth pressure within the layer below the base of the excavation. Page 10
Project No.: DRB22-00002 February
RETAINING WALL:
Retaining walls should be designed for the following active lateral soil pressure:
Any additional surcharge pressure behind the wall should be added to these values. If import soil
is used for backfill, other lateral soil pressures may apply and shall be determined by
inspection and/or testing. For lateral restraint, the following soil design parameters may be used
when all the foundation recommendations are followed:
All footings must be embedded in approved soils certified by the soils engineer.
An adequate sub-drain system shall be constructed behind the retaining walls at base to allow
adequate drainage and to prevent building of excessive hydrostatic pressures. Typical sub-drains
may include weep holes with grl pockets, perforated pipes surrounded by filter rock, or other
approved methods. Outlets should pass below the base of the wall at a minimum 2 percent gradient.
Backfill directly behind retaining walls may consist of self compacting 3/4" maximum grl or clean sand water jetted into place to obtain proper compaction. If other types of soil are used for backfill,
mechanical compaction method will be necessary to achieve a relative compaction of at least 90%
of maximum dry density. Backfill directly behind retaining walls shall not be compacted by wheel
track or other rolling method unless the wall is designed for the surcharge loading from the compaction
equipment. Page 11
Equivalent Fluid Pressure: 35 pcf - Level Backfill
45 pcf - 2:1 Sloping Backfill
70 pcf - At Rest
Passive Lateral Pressure (EFP): 250 pcf Coefficient-Of- Friction:0.28
Bearing Pressure: Approved Soils 1850 psf
Lateral Soil pressure increase due to
additional width or depth to Max. 1800 psf : 250 psf/1 foot
Minimum Depth of Footing In Approved Soils: 12 Inches
Project No.: DRB22-00002 February
If grl, clean sand, or other imported granular backfill is used behind the retaining wall, the upper 18
inches of backfill shall consist of typical on-site soil to prevent the influx of surface runoff into the granular backfill and into sub-drain system.
All excavations shall be stabilized within 30 days of initial excavation. Water should not be
allowed to pond on top of the excavations nor to flow toward it. No vehicular surcharge shall be
allowed within 3 feet of the top of the cut. Any fill which is placed shall be approved, tested and verified by registered soils engineer.
Footing excavations shall be inspected by soils engineer prior to the placement of reinforcing steel and concrete to ensure that competent bearing materials h been encountered. The exact
required footing depths are not known at this time and will h to be verified by means of a footing
inspection.
It should be noted that a large portion of the anticipated settlement will occur during and soon after
the actual construction of the structure. However, additional differential settlement will occur over a period of time. For footings thus designed and constructed, total and differential settlement
with the above requirements are anticipated to be negligible provided our recommendations are
followed.
Contractors should be informed that the use of heavy compaction equipment in close proximity
to retaining walls can cause excessive wall movement and/or earth pressure in excess of design
values.
For excavations made during dry seasons where rain is not expected, the excavations shall be cut back 1/2:1 (horizontal to vertical). If unseasonal rainfall is encountered excavation shall be cut back
to 3/4:1 (horizontal to vertical) and the open cut shall be adequately protected from saturation or
erosion.
Footings adjacent to a descending slope which is steeper than 3:1 in gradient shall be located a
distance away from the face of the slope as required by Slope Setback Requirements of the latest
Uniform Building Code. Where more restrictive, the safety requirements of OSHA regulations shall be followed.
Page 12
Project No.: DRB22-00002 February
SETBACKS:
All setbacks required by governing agency must be followed. TEMPORARY EXCAVATION:
Temporary construction excavation shall be made vertically without shoring to a depth of about 5 feet below adjacent surrounding grade. For deeper cuts, the slopes should be properly shored or sloped back to at least a 1:1 (horizontal:vertical) ratio or flatter.
SLAB-ON-GRADE:
Concrete floor slabs (if any) should h a minimum thickness of (4) inches and be reinforced with No. 4 bars spaced 18 inches on center, both ways. All slab reinforcement should be supported on chairs
or brick to ensure the desired placement near mid depth placed at mid-height in the slab. If moisture
sensitive floor covering is to be placed, we recommend that a 6-mil visqueen barrier be placed
beneath slabs. A 2-inch sand layer between the slab and barrier is recommended to protect the
barrier and aid in concrete curing. Prior to placing sand and Visqueen, the slab sub-grade shall be moisture-conditioned to a depth of 18 inches to 5 percent above optimum moisture content as approved by the soils engineer.
All slabs intended to carry any concentrated loads should be designed by a structural engineer.
Weakened plane joints shall be provided to reduce the probability of cracks.
Additional or heavier reinforcement shall be necessary for structural considerations as determined
by the project architect or structural engineer.
Final recommendations for slab and foundation shall be made on the basis of observation and testing of
the soils at pad grade upon completion of grading.
Page 13
Project No.: DRB22-00002 February
FILL PLACEMENT and COMPACTION:
The voids generated from removals of any underground obstructions and any utilities may be
backfilled with onsite soils once free of organic material, debris, boulder and rocks larger than 6 inches in size. Bottom of excavation should be inspected by qualified soils engineer, scarified one foot, flooded uniformly, and re-compacted to a minimum 90% of relative dry density.
If the proposed finished grades are established at or above the existing grades, import soils
would be required to accomplish the grading work. All import soils must be granular coarse
material free of organic and rocks larger than 6 inches in diameter and should be approved by soils engineer prior to import.
All fill soils should be placed in layers not exceeding 6 to 8 inches in loose thickness approved by
the soils engineer, and compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry unit weight as
determined by ASTM Designation D1557-91 Compaction Method.
In-Place density tests should be made by the required degree of compaction and the proper moisture content. Where compaction of less than 90 percent is indicated, additional compactive
effort should be made with adjustment of the moisture content or layer thickness, as necessary,
until at least 90 percent compaction is obtained.
SURFACE DRAINAGE:
Surface drainage should be directed away from foundations and slopes toward the streets or
approved drainage devices. Ponding of water adjacent to the foundations and retaining walls must
be avoided. Planters which are located within the residence should be sealed or sloped away from the structure to drain to a safe point of collection. Planters located adjacent to a raised floor structure should be sealed to the depth of the footings. A program for maintenance of drainage devices
should be developed by the owner.
TRENCH BACKFILL:
Trench excavations for utility pipes shall be backfilled with granular soils under the observation of the soils engineer. After the utility pipe has been laid, the space under and around the pipe shall be backfilled with clean, granular soil having a sand equivalent of 30 or greater to a depth of at least
one foot over the top of the pipe before the controlled backfilled is placed. The soils material
approved by the soils engineer shall be moisture - conditioned and mixed, as necessary, prior
to placement in lifts over the sand backfill. The controlled backfill shall be compacted by
mechanical methods to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent of their relative maximum density.
Field density tests and inspection of the backfill procedures shall be made by this firm during
backfilling to ensure that proper moisture content and uniform compaction is being maintained.
Page 14
Project No.: DRB22-00002 February
PRE-JOB CONFERENCE:
It is imperative that no clearing and/or grading operations be performed without the presence of a
representative of this firm. An on-site, pre-job meeting with the inspector, developer, contractor, and the soils engineer should occur prior to all grading related operations.
It would be stressed that operations undertaken at the site without the presence of the soils
engineer may result in exclusions of affected areas from the final compaction report for the project.
OBSERVATION and TESTING:
The recommendations provided in this report are based on preliminary design information and subsurface conditions as interpreted from limited excavations at the site. Our investigation
consisted of a field exploration, laboratory testing of typical soil types, a review of the information
obtained in this exploration and testing phases, and preparation of this report.
The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report h been prepared in accordance
with generally accepted engineering principals and practices, and h incorporated federal, state and local laws, codes, ordinances and regulations which in our professional opinion are applicable
at the time of preparation of this report. The logs show subsurface conditions at the dates and
locations indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and
times. Should soil conditions be encountered during construction that appear different from those
shown in this report, this office shall be notified immediately so that our recommendations may be re-evaluated.
Our preliminary conclusions and recommendations shall be reviewed and verified during the site
grading, and revised accordingly if exposed condition vary from our preliminary findings and
interpretations.
The engineering consultant shall provide observation and testing during grading of the subject site. The consultant shall prepare a final as-graded report summarizing the conditions countered and
any field modification to the recommendations provided herein. It is recommended that a
representative of this office be present when the excavation is first exposed. Modifications to our
recommendations may be necessary if significant variation in the soil conditions are encountered. It
shall be noted that the recommendations presented herein is for use in design and for cost estimating purposes prior to construction. The contractor is solely responsible for safety during
construction.
This report is issued and made for sole use and benefit of the client, is not transferable and is
valid as of the exploration date. Page 15
Project No.: DRB22-00002 February
ADDITIONAL OBSERVATION and TESTING MUST BE PROVIDED:
* After completion of site clearing, prior to grading.
* During removal of any existing underground obstructions (if any).
* After removal of unsuitable soils for bottom inspection and during placement of any fill
material for laboratory testing of onsite soil, import soils, and compaction testing.
* After footing excavation, prior to placement of steel and pouring concrete. * After pre-saturation of the slab sub-grade prior to placement of sand and Visqueen.
* During any additional fill placement and compaction.
* When any unusual conditions are encountered
Any unusual condition encountered during site development not discussed in this report shall be
brought to our immediate attention.
Page 16
FACPREF.WD
DW
WD
REF.DW
WD REF.DWOWNER:SA GOLDEN INVESTMENT INC. (909) 519-3346SABER AWADewed@sbcglobal.netPROJECT ADDRESS:8155 BANANA AVE. FONTANA, CA 92335ARCHITECT:ANDRESEN ARCHITECTURE INC.17087 ORANGE WAYFONTANA, CA 92335CONTACT:(909) 355-6688doug.andresen@aaifirm.comAPN:023004160ACREAGE:0.87ZONING:ZONING TO BE CHANGE (ROUTE 66 GATEWAY DISTRICT)OCCUPANCY:GROUP R2 CONSTRUCTION:TYPE V-BBUILDING HEIGHT:38'-0" (70 MAX)NUMBER OF STORIES:3-STORIES (5 MAX)FIRE SPRINKLERS:REQUIREDEASEMENTS:NONEPROJECT DESCRIPTION: PROPOSED 3-STORY 24-UNITSGROSS LOT SIZE:38,160 SF (0.87 AC)PROPOSED TWO CARPORTS (SOLAR READY): 3,799 SQ. FT.PROPOSED APARTMENTS BUILDING:10,876 SQ. FT.TOTAL FOOTPRINT PROPOSED 15,863 SQ. FT.TOTAL BUILDINGS COVERAGE:14,662 SF (38.4%) NET LOT SIZE:23,498 SF (100%)HARDSCAPE AREA:19,704 SF (83.8 %)LANDSCAPE AREA: 3,792 SF (16.2 %)MAXIMUM DENSITY:39 UNITS/ ACREMAXIMUM HEIGHT:70'REQUIRED PARKING:PARKING (ROUTE 66 GATEWAY DISTRICT)1 SPACES / 1 BED (6 UNITS X 1) 6 SPACES 1.5 SPACES REQ./ 2+ BED (18 UNITS X 1.5)27 SPACES TOTAL REQUIRED =33 SPACESPARKING REQUIRED:OPEN REGULAR 9' x 19' 8 SPACESOPEN PARALLEL 8' x 22' 6 SPACESONE CARPORT 10' x 20' 19 SPACES TOTAL PROPOSED:33 SPACESPRIVATE OPEN SPACE: 64 SF/ UNIT (8' MIN. DIM.) TOTAL REQUIRED: 1,536 SFPRIVATE OPEN SPACE: VARIES (SEE SITE PLAN)TOTAL PROVIDED: 2,544 SFGAS:SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS CO.(800) 427-2200ELECTRICITY: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON(800) 684-8123 PROJECT SITESIERRA AVE.EXISTING PARKWAY AREA TO REMAINEXISTING SIDEWALK TO REMAIN8151 SIERRA AVE.(NOT A PART)8161 SIERRA AVE.(NOT A PART)8171 SIERRA AVE.(NOT A PART)8'-6"117'-5"9'-0"9'-0"26'-0"21'-0"30'-10"69'-2"65'-0"PROPOSED TRASH ENCLOSURE1252019162'-0"11'-3"30'-10"8'-0"100'-0"9'-2"17'-0"30'-0"10"165.00'135.00'30.00'300.00'297.00'330.00'100.00'162.00'65.00'26333 BEDROOM UNIT1012013012 BEDROOM UNIT1022023022 BEDROOM UNIT1032033033 BEDROOM UNIT1082083081 BEDROOM UNIT1072073073 BEDROOM UNIT105205305PROPOSED CARPORTPROPOSED CARPORTFIRE RISER AND ELECTRICAL ROOMPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPROPOSED 3 STORIES BUILDING WITH 24 APARTMENT UNITS3 BEDROOM UNIT10420430410'-5"1 BEDROOM UNIT1062063062'-10"203'-2"10'-5"113'-7"8'-0"100'-0"26'-2"30'-10"28'-0"88'-0"21'-2"30'-10"162'-0"FUTURE 2 STORIES BUILDING WITH 10 APARTMENT UNITS2 BEDROOM UNITF113F2131 BEDROOM UNITF114F2142 BEDROOM UNITF111F211FUTURE 10 UNITS (PARKING REQUIRED) (2+ BED / 1.5 SPACES) 4 x 1.5 = 6 SPACES(1 BED / 1 SPACE) 6 x 1 = 6 SPACESTOTAL FUTURE PARKING SPACES = 12 SPACES150 FT FIRE HOSE3426'-0"3'-4"33'-0"21'-0"12'-0"30.00'3.00'1 BEDROOM UNITF112F21289'-0"5'-6"5'-6"1 BEDROOM UNITF115F21530'-0"373843444510'-0"20'-0"22'-0"9'-0"PROPOSED LANDSCAPE19'-0"150 FT FIRE HOSE50'-0"100'-0"100'-0"47'-0"1'-0"(26FT CLR MIN)28'-2"10"WALL LIGHTINGWALL LIGHTINGSTREET LIGHTING POLESTREET LIGHTING POLESTREET LIGHTING POLEWALL LIGHTINGWALL LIGHTINGPROPOSED PARKING LIGHTINGWALL LIGHTINGWALL LIGHTINGWALL LIGHTINGWALL LIGHTINGPROPOSED SECURITY CAMERAS PROPOSED SECURITY CAMERASPROPOSED SECURITY CAMERASPROPOSED SIGN "SECURITY CAMERAS IN USE"30'-0"26'-1"8'-0"/Living Room/Bedroom/Closet/Bath/Dining/Kitchen2640404040402640264010'-6"15'-7"33'-0"8'-0"28'-0"/Kitchen/Dining/Bedroom 2/Bedroom 1/Bath 1/Bath 2/Living Room26405040504026402640264012'-5"15'-7"30'-7"8'-0"37'-0"15'-0"15'-7"/Living Room/Dining/Kitchen/Bath 2/Bath 1/Bedroom 1/Bedroom 2/Bedroom 350402640264050405040264026405040C2020 Doug Andresen, Architect expressly reserves his common law copyright and other property rights in these plans. These plans are not to be reproduced, changed or copied in any form or manner whatsoever, nor are they to be assigned to any third party without first obtaining the express written permission and consent of Douglas Andresen, Architect.LICENSEDARCHITEC T S T AT E OFCALIFORNIADouglasAndrese n C-1450412-31-21RENEWALDATEC:\Users\AbrahamEsquivel\Andresen Architecture Inc\AAI - Access\Projects\4_Projects 2020-2029\2021\21-4187 Banana North Apartments\Revit\21-4187 Banana North Apartments (21).rvt12/23/2021 7:58:56 AMPL1Site PlanProposed 24-Units on 3-Story Bldg. For:SA Golden Investment Inc.16 Aug. 202121-41878155 Banana Ave, Fontana, CA 92335Proposed 24-Units on 3-Story Bldg. For:SA Golden Investment Inc.8155 Banana Ave, Fontana, CA 92335Vicinty Map1" = 20'-0"Site Plan1 22 Dec. 2021 Rev.Area Schedule - 3-Bed ApartmentName AreaLiving3-Bed Apt. 1,256 SFNon-LivingPrivate Open Space 120 SFArea Schedule - 1-Bed ApartmentName AreaLiving1-Bed Apt. 907 SFNon-LivingPrivate Open Space 84 SFArea Schedule - 3 Stories BuildingName AreaThird Floor1-Bed Apt. 1,814 SF2-Bed Apt. 2,097 SF3-Bed Apt. 5,025 SFLiving 8,937 SFHallway 859 SFPrivate OpenSpace848 SFNon-Living 1,707 SFArea Schedule - 3 Stories BuildingName AreaSecond Floor1-Bed Apt. 1,814 SF2-Bed Apt. 2,097 SF3-Bed Apt. 5,025 SFLiving 8,937 SFHallway 859 SFPrivate OpenSpace848 SFNon-Living 1,707 SFArea Schedule - 3 Stories BuildingName AreaFirst Floor1-Bed Apt. 1,814 SF2-Bed Apt. 2,097 SF3-Bed Apt. 5,025 SFLiving 8,937 SFHallway 1,091 SFPrivate OpenSpace848 SFNon-Living 1,939 SFArea Schedule - 2-Bed ApartmentName AreaLiving2-Bed Apt. 1,049 SFNon-LivingPrivate Open Space 100 SF1" = 10'-0"1 Bedroom Unit1" = 10'-0"2 Bedroom Unit1" = 10'-0"3 Bedroom Unit1111111SECURITY FEATURES:A. ON-SITE MANAGERB. PARKING LOT LIGHTING C. 24-HOURS VIDEO SURVEILLANCE 1
Project No.: DRB22-00002 February 25, 2022
A P P E N D I X "A"
R E F E R E N C E S
1. California Division of mine and Geology, 1975, San Andreas Fault In
Southern California.
2. Bolt, B.A., June 1973, Duration of Strong ground motion, Proc. fifth world conference on earthquake engineering, Rome, paper No .292, PP. 1304-1313.
3. Campbell, K.W., and Y. Bozorgia, 1994, “Near-Source Attenuation of Peak Horizontal Acceleration from Worldwide Accelerograms Recorded from 1957 to 1993,” Proceedings of
the 5th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 1994, Chicago, Illinois,
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, V.3, pg. 283-292.
4. Dibblee, T.W., 1989, “Geologic Map of the Los Angeles Quadrangle, Los Angeles
County, California,” map scale 1:72,000.
5. Seed Bolton, Whitman, Robert, 1970, Design of earth retaining structures for dynamic loads: ASCE Specialty Conference, lateral stresses in the ground and design of earth
retaining structures, P. 103-147.
6. Terzaghi, K. (1943), Theoretical Soil Mechanics, J. Wiley and sons, Inc. New York.
A-1
A P P E N D I X "B"
SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMBOLS TYPICAL
COARSE GRAINED SOILS
GRL AND GRLLY SOILS
MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTION RETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE
CLEAN GRLS
(LITTLE OR NO FINES) GRLS WITH FINES
(APPRECIABLE AMOUNT OF FINES)
GRAPH LETTER GW
GP
GM
GC
DESCRIPTIONS
WELL-GRADED GRLS, GRL - SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES POORLY-GRADED GRLS, GRL - SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES
SILTY GRLS, GRL - SAND - SILT MIXTURES CLAYEY GRLS, GRL - SAND - CLAY MIXTURES
MORE THAN 50% OF MATERIAL IS LARGER THAN NO. 200 SIEVE SIZE FINE GRAINED SOILS
MORE THAN 50% OF MATERIAL IS SMALLER THAN NO. 200 SIEVE SIZE
SAND AND SANDY SOILS MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTION PASSING ON NO. 4 SIEVE SILTS AND CLAYS
SILTS AND CLAYS
CLEAN SANDS
(LITTLE OR NO FINES) SANDS WITH FINES
(APPRECIABLE AMOUNT OF FINES) LIQUID LIMIT LESS THAN 50 LIQUID LIMIT GREATER THAN 50
WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRLLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES
POORLY-GRADED SANDS, SP GRLLY SAND, LITTLE OR NO FINES
SILTY SANDS, SAND - SILT MIXTURES
CLAYEY SANDS, SAND - CLAY MIXTURES INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY
INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRLLY CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY
INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR MH DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR SILTY SOILS INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS
S
S
S
M
C
O
C
O
NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS
P
P ro j e ct N o . : 2 1 - 1 53s
Project: s. ou1NcE AVE
SAMPSON and ASSOCIATES
BORING LOG B-1
Sheet 1 of 1
Date __ 1_1 /_1_s/_2_02_1 _
EQUIPMENT: _Ba_ck_h_oe ___ _ Elevation Top of Hole See Plate 1
Q) +-' 0 0 Q) +-' .D c:i >, +-' 0 ,.,...__ E +-' C z 0 u (f) � � >, c,-.... u 1-- � (fl Q) '+-mu OJ u ,.,...__ o_ +-' Q_ 0 Q_ Q) � (f) W0 u E '---' '- '---' �� 0 ..c >, :::i u =:i 0 '-(fl 0 (f) 0 ·-0 � 2 (/) o-
� --5.5
@ 2'-4' SM s-0 DISTURBED 7.5
@ 4'
SM
1 o-
15-
20-
25-
30-
U)
U) 0-6"I
I-
:;;! 6"-4' >
4'-5'
5'-
�
0
Geotechnical Description
Sampled By MS/TS
Logged By MS
DRY WEEDS MIXED WITH SANDY
SILT/SILTY SAND WITH TRASH,
LOOSE, DRY.
SILTY SAND TO SANDY SILT, LOOSE TO DENSE, DRY TO MOD MOIST, BROWN TO LIGHT, VERY FINE, TRACE OF CLAY,
BECOMES MORE DENSE, ORANGE BROWN, WELL GRADED, MOIST WITH DEPTH.
VERY DENSE TO HARD.
VERY DENSE TO HARD, DIFFICULT TO EXCAVATE.
YELOOWISH BROWN, DENSE. WELL GRADED.
TOTAL DEPTH = 5 FEET
NO GROUND WATER
NO CAVING
INDICATE BULK SAMPLE COLLECTED
INDICATE UNDISTURBED SAMPLE COLLECTED
P ro j e ct N o . : 21 -1 6£s
project: S. QUINCE AVE
SAMPSON and ASSOCIATES
BORING LOG
B-2
Sheet 1 of 1
Date __ 1-'-1 /_1-'-s/_20_2_1 _
EQUIPMENT: _Bo_ck_h_oe ___ _ Elevation Top of Hole See Plote 1
(\) +-' c c 0 0 (\) -+-' _o ci >, +-' 0 ,.,......._ E +-' c z 0 u . ::r:: U1 ~ V'. >, c ,,......_ u f-~ (/) (\) '+-U1 u CL ..,...... (\) u ,,..--....
Cl.. 0 Cl.. (\)~ U1 • w0 u E '-' .._...__,, .s2 U'! 0 _c >, :J u~ Cl.. 0 L +-' ...__,,
(/) 0 U1 0 0 ·-L 0 (.'.) L (/)
o-
SM
5 -
SM
10-
15-
20-
25-
JO-
(/)
-' 6
(/) 0-6" I a.. 0 I-
;;;! 6"-4' > =i -' -' <(
4'-5'
5'-
[]
8
Geotechnicol Description
Sampled By MS/TS
Logged By MS
DRY WEEDS MIXED WITH SANDY
SILT/SILTY SAND WITH TRASH,
LOOSE, DRY.
SILTY SAND TO SANDY SILT,
LOOSE TO DENSE, DRY TO
MOD MOIST, BROWN TO LIGHT,
VER Y FINE, TRACE OF CLAY,
BECOMES MORE DENSE,
ORANGE BROWN, WELL GRADED,
MOIST WITH DEPTH.
VERY DENSE TO HARD.
VERY DENSE TO HARD,
DIFFICULT TO EXCAVATE.
YELOOWISH BROWN, DENSE.
WELL GRADED .
TOTAL DEPTH = 5 FEET
NO GROUND WATER
NO CAVING
INDICATE BULK SAMPLE COLLECTED
INDICATE UNDISTURBED SAMPLE COLLECTED
Project No.: 21-16Js
Project: s. ou1NcE AVE
SAMPSON and ASSOCIATES
BORING LOG B-3 Sheet 1 of 1
DO te __ 1----'-1 /_1----'-s/_2_02_1 _
EQ U Ip M ENT: _Ba_ck_h_oe ___ _ Elevation Top of Hole see Plate 1
(I.)
0 .D ci E >, 1------:--(/) (].J o_ +-' W0 u E0 .c 0 (/) 0 \_ c..'.) o-
s-
10-
1 s-
25-
30-
+-'
(I.) >, +-'
+-' C U1 0 c� u (].J 0 Q_ ([)� ..__,, .._..__,, c :::l +-'
0 U1
0 2
0 --+-' o ,,.....__u �if! U1 u U1 .
.2 if! u :::i ..__,, -
0 (f)
SM
SM
Geotechnicol Description
Sampled By MS/TS
Logged By MS
0-6"DRY WEEDS MIXED WITH SANDY
SILT/SILTY SAND WITH TRASH, I-
LOOSE, DRY.
:.:!6"-4'>SILTY SAND TO SANDY SILT,LOOSE TO DENSE, DRY TOMOD MOIST, BROWN TO LIGHT,VERY FINE, TRACE OF CLAY,
4'-5' BECOMES MORE DENSE, ORANGE BROWN, WELL GRADED, MOIST WITH DEPTH.
VERY DENSE TO HARD.
5'-VERY DENSE TO HARD, DIFFICULT TO EXCAVATE.
YELOOWISH BROWN, DENSE. WELL GRADED.
TOTAL DEPTH = 5 FEET
NO GROUND WATER
NO CAVING
� INDICATE BULK SAMPLE COLLECTED
0 INDICATE UNDISTURBED SAMPLE COLLECTED
SAMPLING PROCEDURES
Undisturbed Samples: Samples of the subsurface materials were obtained from the exploratory borings and/or trenches
in a relatively undisturbed condition. The depth at which each "undisturbed" sample was
obtained is shown on the boring and/or trench logs.
The sampler used to obtain "undisturbed" samples is generally a split-barrel sampler, or a thin-
wall sampler (Shelby tube).
The split-core barrel drive sampler:
The sampler, with an external diameter of 3.0 inches, is lined with 1-inch long thin brass rings
with an inside diameter of 2.41 inches. The sample barrel is driven into the ground with an
effective weight of the Kelly bar of the boring machine. The Kelly bar is permitted to free-fall. The approximate length of the fall, the weight of the bar, and the number of blows per foot of
driving are noted and recorded on the boring logs. Blow counts h been noted in the log of
borings as an index to the relative resistance of the sampled materials. The samples are removed
from the sample barrel in the brass rings, sealed, and transported to the laboratory for testing.
Shelby Tube: The tube, with an external diameter of 3.0 inches and a length of 2 to 3 feet, is a seamless thin-
walled steel tube commonly known as a Shelby tube and has a beveled butting edge at the lower
end. The tube is connected to the drill rod and pushed by a static force into the bottom of the
hole. When the tube is almost full (avoid over-penetration), it is withdrawn from the hole,
removed from the drill rod, sealed at both ends with paraffin, and carefully shipped to the laboratory for testing.
The Standard Penetration Test Spoon:
The spoon is driven into the ground for 18 inches with a 140-pound hammer free-falling from a
height of 30 inches. The blow counts are recorded for every 6 inches of penetration. (The
reported blow counts are the blow counts for the last 12 inches of penetration.) The soil samples
are examined and carefully removed from the spoon, bagged, and sealed and transported to the laboratory for testing. Disturbed Samples: Bulk samples of representative materials were also obtained from the borings and/or trenches,
bagged and transported to the laboratory for testing.
A P P E N D I X "C"
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY/OPTIMUM MOISTURE TEST RESULTS ******************************************************************************
Soil Type or Location Soil Description Optimum Moisture Max. Dry Density
(%) (Pcf)
B-1 Silty Sand/Sandy Silt 7.5 127.0 at 2’-4’
EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS ****************************************************************************** Soil Type Expansion Index Potential Expansion or Location
B-1 7 Very Low @ 2’-4’
Soluble Sulfate ****************************************************************************** Soil Type Soil Sulfate . or Location Description % By Weight
B-1 Silty Sand/Sandy Silt 0.0880
@ 2’-4’
LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES
Moisture and Density Tests: Moisture content and dry density determinations were performed on relatively undisturbed samples obtained from the test borings and/or trenches. The results of these tests are presented in the boring and/or trench logs. Where applicable, only moisture content was determined from
“undisturbed” or disturbed samples.
Classification Tests: Typical materials were subjected to mechanical grain-size analysis by wet sieving from U.S. Standard brass screens (ASTM D422). Hydrometer analyses were performed where appreciable quantities of fines were encountered. The data was evaluated in determining the classification of the materials. The grain-size distribution curves are presented in the test data and the Unified Soil Classification is presented in both the test data and the boring and/or trench logs.
Atterberg Limits: The Atterberg Limits were determined in accordance with ASTM D423 and ASTM
D472 for engineering classification of the fine-grained materials.
Direct Shear Tests: Direct Shear Tests were performed on selected remolded and/or undisturbed samples which were socked for a minimum of 72 hours under a surcharge equal to the applied normal force during testing. After transfer of the sample to the shear box, and reloading the sample, pore pressures set up in the sample due to the transfer were allowed to dissipate for a period of approximately 1 hour prior to
application of shearing force. The samples were tested under various normal loads, a different specimen
being used for each normal load. The samples were sheared in a motor-driven, strain-controlled, direct
shear testing apparatus at a strain rate of 0.05 inches per minute. After a trl of 0.300 inches of the direct shear machine, the motor was stopped and the sample was allowed to “relax” and “peak” shear values were recorded. It is anticipated that, in a majority of samples tested, the 15 minutes relaxing of the sample is sufficient to allow dissipation of pore pressures set up in the samples due to application of shearing force. The relaxed values are therefore, judged to be a good estimation of effective strength parameters.
The test results were plotted on the “Direct Shear Summary”.
For residual direct shear test, the samples were sheared, as described in the preceding paragraph, with the
rate of shearing of 0.001 inches per minutes. The upper portion of the specimen was pulled back to the
original position and the shearing process was repeated until no further decrease in shear strength was observed with contid shearing (at least three times re-sheared). There are two methods to obtain the shear values: (a) the shearing process was repeated for each normal load applied and the shear value for each normal load was recorded. One or more than one specimen can be used in this method; (b) only one specimen was needed, and a very high normal load (approximately 9000 psf) was applied from the
beginning of the shearing process. After the equilibrium state was reached (after “relaxed”, the shear value
for that normal load was recorded. The normal loads were then reduced gradually without shearing the
sample (the motor was stopped). The shear values were recorded for different normal loads after they were reduced and the sample was “relaxed”.
Maximum Density Test: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of typical materials were determined in accordance with ASTM D1557-91 (five layers). The results of these tests are presented in the test data. Expansion Index Tests: The expansion potential of selected materials was evaluated by the Expansion
Index Test, U.B.C. Standard No. 29-2. Specimens are molded under a given compactive energy to
approximately the optimum moisture and approximately 50% saturation or approximately 90% relative compaction. The prepared 1-inch thick by 4-inch diameter specimens are loaded to an equivalent 144 psf surcharge and are inundated with tap water until volumetric equilibrium is reached. The results of these tests are presented in the test data.
Consolidation Tests: Consolidation tests were performed on selected, relatively undisturbed samples
recovered from the sampler. Samples were placed in a consolidometer and loads were applied in geometric progression. The percent consolidation for each load cycle was recorded as the ratio of the amount of vertical compression to the original 1-inch height. The consolidation pressure curves are presented in the test data. Where applicable, time-rates of consolidation were also recorded. A plot of these rates can be used to estimate time of consolidation.
Soluble Sulfates: The soluble sulfate contents of selected samples were determined by the California Materials Method No. 417. “R”-Value: The resistance “R”-Value was determined by the California Materials Method No. 301 for base, sub-base, and basement soils. Three samples were prepared and exudation pressure and “R”-Value determined on each one. The graphically determined “R”-Value at exudation pressure of 300 psi is reported.
Triaxial Compression Tests: Triaxial compression tests were performed on selected remolded and/or undisturbed samples according to ASTM 2166 (Unconfined) and ASTM 2850 (Confined).
A P P E N D I X
GENERAL EARTHWORK and GRADING SPECIFICATIONS:
1.0 General Intent
These specifications present general procedures and requirements for grading and earthwork as shown on the approved grading plans, including preparation of areas to be filled, placement of fill, installation of
sub-drains, and excavations. The recommendations contained in the geotechnical report are a part of the
earthwork and grading specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in case of
conflict Evaluations performed by the consultant during the course of grading may result in new recommendations which could supersede these specifications or the recommendations of the geotechnical report.
2.0 Earthwork Observation and Testing
Prior to the commencement of grading, a qualified geotechnical consultant (soils engineer and engineering geologist, and their representatives) shall be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report and these specifications. It will be necessary that the consultant provide adequate testing and observation so that he may determine that the work was accomplished as specified. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to assist the consultant and keep him apprised of work schedules and change so that he may schedule his
personnel accordingly.
It shall be the sole responsibility of the contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the work in accordance with applicable grading codes or agency ordinances, these specifications and the approved grading plans. If, in the opinion of the consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as questionable soil, poor moisture condition, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifications, the consultant will be empowered to reject the work and recommend that construction be stopped until the conditions are
rectified.
Maximum dry density tests used to determine the degree of compaction will be performed in accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials test method ASTM D1557-91. 3.0 Preparation of Areas to be Filled
3.1 Clearing and Grubbing: All brush, vegetation, and debris shall be removed or piled and otherwise disposed of. 3.2 Processing:
The existing ground which is determined to be satisfactory for support of fill shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground which is not satisfactory shall
be over-excavated as specified in the following section. Scarification shall conti until the
soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and until the working surface is reasonably uniform and free of uneven features which would inhibit uniform compaction.
3.3 Over-excavation:
Soft, dry, spongy, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground, extending to such a
depth that surface processing cannot be adequately improve the condition, shall be over- excavated down to firm ground and approved by the consultant. 3.4 Moisture Conditioning: Over-excavated and processed soils shall be watered, dried-back, blended, and/or mixed,
as required to attain a uniform moisture content near optimum.
3.5 Recompaction: Overexcavated and processed soils which h been properly mixed and moisture- conditioned shall be recompacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent.
3.6 Benching: Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical
units), the ground shall be steeped or benched. The lowest bench shall be a minimum of
15 feet wide, shall be at least 2 feet deep, shall expose firm material, and shall be
approved by the consultant. Other benches shall be excavated in firm material for a minimum width of 4 feet. Ground sloping flatter than 5:1 shall be benched or otherwise over-excavated when considered necessary by the consultant. 3.7 Approval:
All areas to receive fill, including processed areas, removal areas and toe-of-fill benches
shall be approved by the consultant prior to fill placement.
4.0 Fill Material
4.1 General: Material to be placed as fill shall be free of organic matter and other deleterious
substances, and shall be approved by the consultant. Soils of poor graduation, expansion,
or strength characteristics shall be placed in areas designated by the consultant or shall be
mixed with other soils to serve as satisfactory fill material.
4.2 Oversize: Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 12 inches, shall not be buried or placed in fills, unless the location,
materials, and disposal methods are specifically approved by the consultant. Oversize
disposal operations shall be such that nesting of oversize material is completely
surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 feet vertically of finish grade or within the range of future utilities or underground construction, unless specifically approved by the consultant.
4.3 Import:
If importing of fill material is required for grading, the import material shall meet the
requirements of Section 4.1.
5.0 Fill Placement and Compaction
5.1 Fill Lifts: Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 6 inches in compacted thickness. The consultant may approve
thicker lifts if testing indicates the grading procedures are such that adequate compaction
is being achieved with lifts of greater thickness. Each layer shall be spread evenly and
shall be thoroughly mixed during spreading to attain uniformity of material and moisture in each layer. 5.2 Fill Moisture:
Fill layers at a moisture content less than optimum shall be watered and mixed, and wet
fill layers shall be aerated by scarification or shall be blended with drier material.
Moisture-conditioning and mixing of fill layers shall conti until the fill material is at a uniform moisture content at or near optimum. 5.3 Compaction of Fill:
After each layer has been evenly spread, moisture-conditioned, and mixed, it shall be
uniformly compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum dry density. Compaction
equipment shall be adequately sized and shall be either specifically designed for soil
compaction or of proven reliability, to efficiently achieve degree of compaction.
5.4 Fill Slopes: Compacting of slopes shall be accomplished, in addition to normal compacting procedures, by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at frequent increments of 2 to
3 feet in fill elevation gain, or by other methods producing satisfactory results. At the
completion of grading, the relative compaction of the slope out to the slope face shall be at
least 90 percent. 5.5 Compaction Testing:
Field tests to check the fill moisture and degree of compaction will be performed by the
consultant. The location and frequency of tests shall be at the consultant’s discretion. In
general, the tests will be taken at an interval not exceeding 2 feet in vertical rise and/or 1,000 cubic yards of embankment.
6.0 Subdrain Installation
Subdrain systems, if required, shall be installed in approved ground to conform to the approximate
alignment and details shown on the plans or herein. The subdrain location or materials shall not be changed or modified without the approval of the consultant. The consultant, however, may recommend and upon approval, direct changes in subdrain line, grade or material. All subdrains should be surveyed for line and grade after installation and sufficient time shall be allowed for the surveys, prior to commencement of filling over the subdrains.
7.0 Excavation Excavations and cut slopes will be examined during grading. If directed by the consultant, further excavation or over-excavation and refilling of cut areas shall be performed, and/or remedial
grading of cut slopes shall be performed. Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded, unless
otherwise approved, the cut portion of the slope shall be made and approved by the consultant
prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the slope.