Resolution No. 2011-162 (2)OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
4305 Santa Fe Avenue, Vernon, California 90058
Telephone (323) 583-8811 -
October 6, 2011
Mark L. Bricker
CH2MHill Engineers, Inc.
1100 112`h Avenue NE, Suite 400
Bellevue, WA 98004
Re: Task Order No. 2011-4 to the Standard Master Agreement
Dear Mr. Bricker:
Transmitted herewith is a fully executed original Task Order No. 2011-4, approved by City
Council on October 4, 2011, through Resolution No, 2011-162.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call Carlos Fandino at 323/583-8811 ext.
834.
i
ly yours,rLA UClerk
WGY:dj
Enclosure
c: Carlos Fandino
Purchasing Department
Resolution No. 2011-162
Agreement File No. 11-104
E7ccfusivefy industrial
TASK ORDER NO.2011-4
THIS TASK ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO THE STANDARD MASTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN C112M HILL,
INC. AND THE CITY OF VERNON FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DATED FEBRUARY 23, 2009, AS AMENDED
MAY 3, 2011 ("AGREEMENT")
The City of Vernon Renewable Energy Lands Project (VREL), which is incorporated herein by this reference, with
respect to the ("Project") to provide construction services for installation of a new culvert.
Specific Services:
Provide services as described in the attached proposal dated 09/20/201 I, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
Compensation Provisions:
Time and materials basis at rates set forth in the proposal in an amount not to exceed $134,727 unless previously approved by the City
in writing.
Work Schedule:
As set forth in the attached Task Order 20114 proposal, herein incorporated by reference.
The Authorized Representatives designated below are authorized to act with respect to Task Order. Communications
between the parties shall be between parties and their consultants or subcontractors shall be through the Authorized
Representatives:
For C112M HILL Engineers, Inc.
For the Client
Name: Mark L. Bricker and Starr Dehn
Name: Hilario Gonzales, Mayor
Address: 1100 112th Ave. NE, Ste 400
Address: 4305 Santa Fe Avenue,
Bellevue, WA 98004
Vernon, CA 90058
Telephone: 425-233-3294 .
Telephone: 323-583-1811
Except as specifically modified in this Task Order No. 2011-4, all terms and conditions set forth in the Agreement remain in full force
and effect.
This Task Order No. 2611-4 will be effective the date of approval by the City Council.
*cc,Medor CH2M HAccepted for Client by:
k L. Bricker - Name: Hilario Gonzales
Title: Vice President, Environmental Services Title: Mayor
NamSarr n ,
Title: Environmental Services
Willard G. YginaR�uchi, City Clerk
Approved As To Fo m
Name and Title
Michael B. Montgomery, Interim City Attorney
SCONREL_TASKORDER�011-0 08.27-2011.DOCX/111759001 t
COPYRIGHT 2011 BY CH2M HILL, INC. • COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL
Attachments:
Attachment A - Scope of Work
Attachment B - Engineering Construction Cost Estimate
Attachment C - Technical Memorandum Drainage Study for County of Kern Rudnick Road
Culvert Placement Kelso Valley, CA; July 2011
Attachment D - Geotechnical Engineering Investigation, Existing Access Road
(Rudnick Road) City of Vernon (APN: 444-060-03) Onyx Ranch, CA
September 30, 2010
Attachment E - Project Plans for Rudnick Road Culvert Placement, Kelso Valley, CA.
CH2M HILL July 2011
Attachment F - Salem Engineering Group proposal dated August 11, 2011
Attachment G - Schedule
Attachment A
of Work
City of Vernon Renewable Energy Land (VREL)
Culvert Replacement
ATTACHMENT A
Scope of Work
General Scope
The detailed scope of work in this proposal covers the following tasks:
• Project Management
• Work Planning
• Prepare SOW
• Subcontracting
• Construction
Project Management
CH2M HILL Engineers, Inc. (CH2M HILL) will provide project management services for the
duration of the project. Project management services will include tracking and reporting on
construction progress and costs, maintaining project and document controls, subcontract .
management and invoice processing, and financial accounting throughout the duration of
the work.
CH2M HILL will require project safety to comply with federal, state, and local regulations
as well CH2M HILL requirements. The elements of work that will be performed as part of
Project Management includes:
• Construction oversight
• Submittals management
• . Disposal facility transportation records (if required)
• Construction Quality Control (CQC)
• Field records management
• Health and Safety Plan compliance
• Environmental compliance records review
• Subcontractor management
Reporting will be accomplished using the following construction management and project
control templates:
• Quantity tracking
• Action item list
• QC inspection documentation
• Daily records and photo logs
CITY OF VERNON-PROPOSAL
• Schedule summary reports
• Non-conformance and corrective action report, if needed
Work Planning
The work planning effort will include:
• Preparation of a Safety Hazard Analysis
• Preparation of a Construction Quality Checklist
• Coordination for access to the site
• Coordination with the Subcontractor
Prepare Subcontract Scope of Work
CH2M HILL will prepare a detailed SOW and submit to a prequalified Subcontractor that
meets CI-I2M HILL health and safety and insurance requirements.
Site Bid Walk
CH2M HILL will conduct a site bid walk with the bidding Subcontractors and review the
scope of work to obtain a shared vision of the required work activities.
Construction
CH2M HILL has developed Project Plans for the proposed culvert replacement project and
all pertinent design and construction information. Construction will include the following:
Site Preparation
Site preparation activities include the following:
• Install erosion and sediment controls and other temporary environmental controls
o Temporary fence (Type ESA)
o Silt fence
o Fiber rolls
o Temporary check dams
o Clearing and grubbing
• Deploy specific heavy equipment by Subcontractor required to perform the
construction activities
• Identify and clearly mark the work area to prevent storm water run-on or runoff.
Excavation and Install Culvert
Excavation activities will include the following:
• Over excavate the existing area and prepare for installation of the culvert
• Placement of 48-inch corrugated steel culvert
• Stockpile excavated soil out of the wash
• Cut slopes will not exceed 1:1
• Slopes will not exceed 10 vertical feet
Backfill and Compact Excavations
All grading will conform to the Kern County County Building Code and the equivalent City
of Vernon Municipal Codes. Fill will be compacted to the following minimum relative
compaction criteria:
• Backfill will be placed in maximum 12-inch loose lifts and compacted before the next
lift is placed.
• Compaction will be completed using a sheep's foot attachment to the excavating
Equipment and/or sheep foot roll compactor
• Fill Slopes will not exceed 2:1
• Backfill will be from an offsite approved borrow source
• Field Observations, Special Inspection and Testing - this will be completed by Salem
Engineering Group (Attachment G).
o Soil Compaction Testing - Measure the compaction of fill soils for compliance
to recommended minimum percentages in roadways, trenches, and other
backfilled areas utilizing the nuclear gage or tube method of testing. Perform
compaction testing of aggregate base material in paved areas.
o Laboratory Testing - The laboratory -testing program would incorporate
physical tests for the determination of soil moisture, density, and
compressive strength. hi -Situ Moisture and Density tests will likely be
conducted
o Compaction and Special Inspection Reports - At the completion of the
grading operations, a final report will be submitted. The report will
document all our field and laboratory activities, including field observation
and compaction testing. The report would be prepared and signed by a
California Licensed Civil Engineer.
• Site restoration will include:
o Erosion control - hydro seed
o Rock slope protection (Light, Method B)
o Rock slope protection fabric
The Site will be bladed and restored with existing materials such that the finished
topography conforms to the pre -construction topography and the ground surface is clean
and free of debris, is graded to a smooth surface free of depressions ("bird baths'), and
drains to the existing drainage system.
Construction Management
The Construction Manager will supervise and inspect daily field work, and will prepare
daily field reports to document progress made, change conditions, nonconformance work,
and any other issues that impact the project.
Field records will be managed in accordance with the Construction Quality Checklist and
will be used to support the development of other project deliverables. The C112M HILL
Construction Manager's goal is to execute this project in a manner that reduces cost and
schedule by delivering greater performance and efficiencies.
Budget Summary
CH2M HILL's budget estimate for this scope of work is provided in Table 1. CH2M HILL
labor and expense rates have previously been submitted to the City. The proposed budget
will not be exceeded without prior written authorization from the City. In the event that
unanticipated circumstances arise that increase the needed level of effort or require
additional cost, CH2M HILL may require a scope amendment and additional funding.
CH2M HILL may solicit competitive bids for portions of the project that have been
categorized as Construction. Our proposal includes the best -value selections for the
excavation and disposal category. However if a reasonable bid may be obtained by a sole
source selection based on past relationships with CH2M HILL approved subcontractors, this
approach may assist in reducing schedule and project costs.
CH2M HILL has utilized Innovative Construction Solutions (ICS) for dozens of projects
both large and small over the last 5 years and the quality of their work, safety record, and
competitive pricing has resulted in many successful projects. CH2M HILL is considering
utilizing ICS for the Rudnick Road construction.
TABLE
Breakdown of Estimated Time and Materials Budget -Task Order 2011-4
Task
No.
Description
CH2M HILL
Labor
Hours
CH2M HILL
Labor Costs
Subcontracts
and Expenses
Budget
CR
CULVERT
REPLACEMENT
CR.PM
Project Management
48
$6,728
$0
$6,728
CR.PS
Plans/Submittals
40
$6,870
$10
$6,880
CR.FW
Fieldwork
62
$10,800
$110,319
$121,119
TOTAL
160
$24,398
$110,329
$134,727
Project Clarifications and Assumptions
To provide clarity on key aspects and potential risks at the Site, the following clarifications
and exceptions are presented for the proposed work.
• Required fees for the construction grading permit, up to a maximum of $5,000, will
be paid by CH2MHILL as described in Task Order No. 2011-1, previously submitted
to the City for approval on March 21, 2011.
Subcontract services are currently expected not to exceed $109,000.
CH2M HILL will provide one onsite professional- to manage and provide safety and
quality oversight of the work for the duration of construction, which is anticipated
not to exceed 5 days. This professional will provide Construction, Health and Safety,
and Quality Assurance Management for the project. Construction oversight for the
culvert replacement project incorporates CH2M HILL onsite monitoring of
subcontractor activities as described in Task Order No. 2011-1, previously submitted
to the City for approval on March 21, 2011. In addition, as part of this scope of work,
one full-time professional is assumed to be onsite for the first and last day of
construction activities.
Surveying is not included in the scope of work.
• If required, preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be
prepared by others. Pricing for a SWPPP can be provided upon request. Pricing does
include implementation of the Water Pollution Control Program.
• Construction water will be imported from offsite source via use of a highway rated
trucks.
• Excavated soil not reused will be stockpiled onsite out of the wash.
• Offsite disposal of any materials is not included in this proposal. Should disposal of
waste become necessary, CH2M HILL can provide pricing upon request.
• Dust control will only be applied during regular working hours while crews are
onsite.
• Vegetative material removed prior to excavation will be stockpiled onsite for
removal by others if necessary. Pricing for disposal of this material can be included
upon request.
• No treatment of soil or segregating or screening of oversized soil is included.
• No provisions or cost have been included for removing or relocating any fencing.
• It is assumed that access to the site will not be restricted.
• Work will be completed in accordance with the Technical Memorandum Drainage
Study for County of Kern Rudnick Road Culvert Placement Kelso Valley, CA; July
2011 including:
o The culvert is designed to convey the runoff from a 100-year recurrence interval
without overtopping the road and to maintain a headwater elevation for a 10-
year recurrence interval below the top of the pipe in accordance with Kern
County standards.
o The proposed culvert diameter is 48 inches corrugated steel pipe with projecting
end inlet and outlet. Minimum 3-feet of cover shall be maintained over the
culvert. In order to match existing channel invert elevations and road grades the
culvert will have over 3-feet of cover.
o The culvert is designed to provide the necessary hydraulic capacity based on
design flows as summarized above to pass the runoff from a 100-year storm
event without overtopping the road.
o Rock slope protection will be installed at the inlet and outlet of culvert to prevent
localized scouring. The rock slope protection pad will be 6 times the diameter in
length and 3 times the diameter in width. Two additional feet of the length will
overlap the culvert and the top of the pad will match the existing channel grade.
Rock slope protection sizing I based on California Department of Transportation
Highway Design Manual and Shore Protection Manual.
o The contractor is responsible for implementing and maintaining erosion and
sediment control Best Management Practices (BMPs) during construction in
accordance with all local and state agency requirements. The BMPs shall be
constructed and properly maintained at all times until permanent vegetation is
fully established.
• Work will be completed in accordance with the Geotechnical Engineering
Investigation, Existing Access Road (Rudnick Road) City of Vernon (APN: 444-060-
03) Onyx Ranch, CA September 30, 2010, Sections:
o Section 11.2 - Preparation
o Section 11.4 - Slope Construction and Maintenance
o Section 11.5 - Fill Placement and Compaction
o Section 11.6 - Surface Drainage Control
o Section 11.7 - Temporary Excavation Stability
o Section 11.9 - Utility Pipe Bedding and Backfill
• Work will be completed in accordance with the Project Plans for Rudnick Road
Culvert Placement, Kelso Valley, CA. CH2M HILL July 2011
• Salem Engineering Groups Conditions
o Fee Estimate for performing the aforementioned Scope of Services will be. billed
on time and material basis in accordance with the attached fee schedule. A
minimum of 4 hours will be charged per visit, with an increment of 2-hour
blocks thereafter. A maximum 1-hour travel time each way will be charged per
visit.
o Work over 8 hours or on Saturdays will be billed at 1.5 times the rates shown
herein. Work on Sundays will be billed at twice times the rates shown herein.
o Total Estimated Fee for performing the aforementioned Scope of Services is
$3,025.00. This value is not a "Not To Exceed" estimate.
o Since Salem's work is highly dependent upon the contractor and contractor's
performance, and the contract documents require re -tests and re -inspections due
to errors by the general contractor to be paid by the general contractor,
additional inspections due to re -tests and re -inspections would be subject to
reimbursement by the general contractor.
o The above noted fee estimate assumes that the project plans and geotechnical
report have been prepared and reviewed in accordance with CH2MHi11 design
criteria. The hourly rates and unit test cost we propose for this project are
presented above. Our invoices will be submitted on a monthly basis and will be
billed based on the hourly rates and unit test cost presented herein.
Project Schedule
A detailed schedule is included as Attachment H.
Project Team
The following personnel will provide the primary leadership on the project.
Construction Project Manager
The Construction Project Manager (CPM) for the project is Randy Rose. Randy will be
directly responsible for the management of all phases of project. The CPM will provide
overall direction during execution of the project activities. The CPM will also manage
reporting requirements, schedule updates, milestone schedules, etc. The CPM will be
responsible for overall project budget and schedule. Specific duties will include:
• Construction Project Management for the project
• Financial accounting and reporting
• Leadership for the Team
• Safety, quality assurance, and environmental compliance inspections
• Communication with City of Vernon
• Assuring the project is executed in accordance with the Contract, Safety Hazard
Analysis, and Construction Quality Checklist
Task Manager
The Task Manager for the project will be Eric Lothman. Eric will provide coordination with
subcontractors and will provide the daily onsite oversight of the subcontractor while the
construction activities are being performed.
Overall Project Manager
Jessica Kinnahan is the project manager for all tasks related to the Vernon Renewable Land
project and will be involved directly with the Construction Project Manager and the Task
Manager to provide continuity and one point of contact for the project.
Contract Terms
CH2M HILL proposes to perform this work as Task Order No. 20114, on a time -and
materials basis under the contract terms and conditions from the Master Services
Agreement, dated March 4, 2009, as amended in April 2011.
Attachment B
Engineering Construction Cost Estimate
CITY OF VERNOkPROPOSAL
ENGINEER'S CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
KELSO VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
RUDNICK ROAD CULVERT PLACEMENT
ITEM NO.
ITEM DESCRIPTION
UNIT OF
MEASURE
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
UNIT PRICE
TOTAL
1
TEMPORARY FENCE (TYPE BSA)
LF
40
$10
$400
2
PREPARE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAM
LS
1
$3,500
$3,500
3
SILT PENCE
LF
250
$3
$750
4
FIBERROLLS
LP
230
$5
$1,150
5
TEMPORARY CHECK DAM
LF
60
$10
$600
6
CLEARING AND GRUBBING
IS
1
57,00D
57,000
7
ROADWAY EXCAVATION
CY
no
$30
$21.900
8
IMPORTED BORROW
CY
200
$50
$10,000
9
EROSION CONTROL(HYDROSEED)
SF
86,500
$0.25
$21,625
10
48-INCH CORRUGATED STEEL PIPE
IF
92
Silo
$10,120
11
ROCK SLOPE PROTECTION (LIGHT, METHOD B)
CY
210
$85
$17,850
12
ROCK SLOPE PROTECTION FABRIC
SQPT
2,730
$4
SIo,920
13
MOBILIZATION
LS
1
57,000
$7,000
TOTAL CONTRACT ITEMS.
SUPPLEMENTAL ITEMS OF WORK
PROJECTSUBTOTALMS,2,00
CONTINGENCIPS(10%)PROJECTTOTALFOR BUDGET PURPOSES USE
5112,815
$0
IN PROVIDING OPINIONS OF PROSA546 CONSTRUCTION COST, THE CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THAT THE ENGINEER HAS NO CONTROL
OVER COST OR THE PRICE OF LABOR, EQUIPMENT OR MATERIALS, OR OVER THE CONTRACTOR'S METHOD OF PRICING AND THAT
THE OPINIONS OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTS PROVIDED HEREIN ARE TO BE MADE ON THE BASIS OF THE ENGINEER'S
QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE. THE ENGINEER MAKES NO WARRANTY, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, TO THE ACCURACY OF
SUCH OPINIONS AS COMPARED TO ACTUAL BID OR ACTUAL COSTS.
Attachment C
Technical Memorandum Drainage Study
Technical Memorandum
Drainage Study for
County of Kern
Rudnick Road Culvert Placement
Kelso Valley, CA
July 2011
CH2MHILL
Purpose
The purpose of this technical memorandum (TM) is to summarize the criteria, assumptions,
and calculations for sizing a new culvert where the existing Rudnick Road crosses a natural
drainage channel. The site is located on the northern edge of Assessor's Parcel No. 444-060-
03 controlled by the City of Vernon in the Kelso Valley area of Kern County, California.
The existing unpaved Rudnick Road will be excavated and reconstructed with a new
culvert. Vegetation and growth outside of the roadway consists of sparse trees, brushes and
shrubs.
The calculations presented in this memorandum are based on available survey provided by
Critigen, which includes Lidar taken in May 2009 and field survey taken in June
2011. Horizontal datum is based on NAD 83, Zone 5 and vertical datum is based on NAVD
88.
Drainage Criteria and Assumptions
The culvert is designed to convey the runoff from a 100-year recurrence interval without
overtopping the road and to maintain a headwater elevation for a 10-year recurrence
interval below the top of the pipe in accordance with Kern County standards.
The proposed culvert diameter is 48 inches corrugated steel pipe with projecting end inlet
and outlet. Minimum 3-feet of cover shall be maintained over the culvert. In order to match
existing channel invert elevations and road grades the culvert will have over 3-feet of cover.
Hydrology
Existing topographic information was used to delineate one-118-acre basin whose storm
runoff impacts the proposed access road. Refer to the attached Rudnick Road Drainage
Basin Map. There is an existing low water crossing that will remain in place approximately
400 feet to the west of the proposed culvert location.
In accordance with the Kern County Hydrology Manual, storm water runoff design flows
were estimated using the Rational Method, which calculates peak discharge for basins less
than 640 acres in size.
Refer to the attached hydrology calculations.
Culvert Hydraulics
The culvert is designed to provide the necessary hydraulic capacity based on design flows
as summarized above to pass the runoff from a 100-year storm event without overtopping
the road. Refer to the attached FHWA software version 7.2, HY8 report.
Scour Protection
Rock slope protection will be installed at the inlet and outlet of culvert to prevent localized
scouring. The rock slope protection pad will be 6 times the diameter in length and 3 times
the diameter in width. Two additional feet of the length will overlap the culvert and the top
of the pad will match the existing channel grade. Rock slope protection sizing is based on
California Department of Transportation Highway Design Manual and Shore Protection
Manual.
Temporary Erosion Control
The contractor is responsible for implementing and maintaining erosion and sediment
control Best Management Practices (BMPs) during construction in accordance with all local
and state agency requirements. The BMPs shall be constructed and properly maintained at
all times until permanent vegetation is fully established.
Engineer's Statement
These drainage calculations have been prepared by or under the supervision of the
following registered Civil Engineer. The registered Civil Engineer has reviewed the
technical information contained herein and has judged the engineering data upon which
recommendations, conclusions, and decisions are based.
No. C72091
W: 630.12
7-15-11
Rik
r �k rrk
d YAW,
,
Wr � rl. =70
�'
*s a
'�^
�?� fi
`"
mg
•.ny�y 9.'�"'lg}A/ l
a t �
s�'r
Y U 4 sf t�{F >'q !° ems^
_1k.
S a / b` r r 9 rk a ptttff = z r v V'.1 { rrk / _ ✓' '- �q A
:M�xs%i A'U�.£AY5 °•.�_ _�� /v�:� F2�Yrv'� �b rM1. �l, ,i." �iv'4.�5"!'ii�
�1
lLN'f�11
A 1
yf
i i r Y 9 f r
I i5 0 �,
i y
RUDNICK ROAD
DRAINAGE BASIN MAP
County of Kern
Rudnick Road Culvert Placement
Kelso Valley, CA
Hydrology Calculations
By: L. Alliger
Rational Method Hvdroloov Calculations
1) Refer to Rudnick Road Drainage Basin Map
Length ft Area Acres Elevation Dro Ft
3500 1, 118 240
2) Intensity -Duration Curve
Intensi(in/hr)
Attached Fi ure
2 yr-6hr
1.4
B-10
2 r- 24 hr
2.5
B-21
100 r - 6 hr
3.0
B-43
100 r-24hr
6.0B-54
X1
X2
X3
X4
Project Location (latitude) 350 W-32= 3.30=X5
Sierra Nevada
EgB.8 Y2 = 0.126 +0.561 (X1)(X1/X2)
Y2 = 0.57
Y100= -0.030+0.816(Y2)(X3/)(1)+0.63/X5
Y100= 1.18
See Figure D-310 yr Y10=0.83
8=0.45 Sierra Nevada Mountains
3) See Figure D-1 Tc=21 min
Unveloped with good cover
4) Tc=21 min 10 year
100 year
5) Soil Group T"
Curve Number = 82
Figure C-2
Fp= 0.34
Figure C-5
ap= 1.0
Fm=apFp
Fm= 0.34
6) la=0.2S
8=1000/82-10 =
2.20
la= 0.44
P24 = 1.18
100yr
Y1=(P24-1a)A2/(P24-Ia+S)(P24)
Y1= 0.158
7) Q=CIA
Q10= 51.8 cfs
Q100= 74.2 cfs
1= 1.29 in/hr
1= 1.85 in/hr
- �� 'zxrJN i
3.5
3
Z I 2.5
S
L)
z_
_z
z 2
t^
a
W
c
J
J
w t.5
_z
Q
YZ - U.S-1
1006,6 0.5
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
0.5
D' i I 10
2 S 10 25 50 100
RETURN PERIOD IN YEARS
NOTE,
I. FOR NITENI InATE RETURN PERIODS PLOT 10-YEAH AND LOD-VEAN ONE HOUR VALUES FOOM MAPS,
THEN CONNECT POINTS AND READ VAWE FOR DESIRED RETURN PEROD. /OR EXAMPLE GIVEN NI -TEAR
ONE HOURS O.SS' AND 100-YEAR ONE NDUR • I.DO', 25-YEAR ONE NOUN, 1.19'.
REFEIIENCE'NOAA ATLAS 21 VOLUME =-OAL4ST3 RAINFALL DEPTH VERSUS
KERN COUNTY RETURN PERIOD FOR
HYDROLOGY MANUAL PARTIAL DURATION SERIES
FIGURE D-3
L
1000
1400,
800
700
17500—
c [ 400
350
O
or
300
7c LIMITATIONS#
100 1. M011mum IsngM • 1000 Feet
90 2. M41121mu1n Ursa + 10 Acres
w_
-80
H
Ira
w V
300
Y .
200
SO
40
80
too
nto
K
T�
- 1 1
�,
18 Singie Famlyy
inkn
250
17 (5-7 Du/AC)
«
IS C(a�
S
;
14
200
13
12
«
10
TC
tvoWl
7 12
6
to Z
II
2 12 1
13
O
s t2� 15
,V 17 E
16 i
�c
19
• KEY 2O
t L-H-A-K-Tc o
$ s
25 S
!?! Development
a
150
9
So- ApertmW
«
75- Mobile Home
30
E
65- Condominium
60- Slagle Family-5,000 ft2 Lot
F
7
40-Single family-1/4 Acre Lot
35
20- Single Family-1 Aers Lot
6
10 : Slnole Familv-21/2 Acre Lot
4
KERN COUNTY
HYDROLOGY MANUAL
M
ucyprti�,e
(1) L• 550', H•5.d, K.Segle Fahey (4-7 OU/ACI
Dewlap me n, To■12.6 min.
(2) L• 550', H• 5V, K• Cemmardal
Development, Tca&7 fnh
TIME OF CONCENTRATION
NOMOGRAPH
FOR INITIAL SUBAREA
Figure
Curve(1)Numbers of Hydrologic soil -Cover Complexes For Pervious Areas -AMC II
Quality of
soil axgup
Cover Type (3)
Cover (2)r77
B
D
NATtMAL COVM -
Barren
(Rockland, eroded and graded land)
86
91
94
Chaparral., Broadleaf
Poor
53
70
80
85
(Manzonita, ceanothus and scrub oak)
Fair
40
63
75
81
Good
31
57
71
78
Chaparral, Harxnwloaf
Poor
71
82
88
91
(Chemise and Reiskank)
Fair
55
72
81
86
Grass, Annual or perennial
Pony
68
79
86
89
Fair
49
69
19
84
Good
39
61
74
80
Meadows or Cienagas
Poor
63
77
85
88
(Areas with seasonally high water
Fair
51
70
80
84
table, principal vegataticn is sod
Good
30
58
71
78
forming grass)
Open Brush
Poor
62
76
84
88
(Soft wood shrubs-buckwheat,aage,etc.)
Fair
46
66
77
83
Good
41
63
75
81
Woodland (4)
Poor
45
66
77
83
(Coniferous or broadleaf trees
Fair
36
60
73
79
predominate. Canopy density is at
Good
30
55
70
77
least 50 percent)
Woodland, Grass
Poor
57
73
62
86
(Coniferous or broadleaf trees with
Fair
43
65
7b '82
canopy density from 20 to 50 percent)
URBAN COVERS
Good
32
58
72
79
-
Residential or CoamerciAl Landscaping
Good
39
61
74
80
(Lawns, shrubs, etc.)
Turf
Poor
68
79
86
89
(Irrigated and moved grass)
Fair
49
69
79
84
Good
39
61
74
80
KERN COUNTY
CURVE NUMBERS
FOR
Hydrology Manual
PERVIOUS AREAS
FIGURE C-2 (1 of 2)
HY-8 Culvert Analysis Report
Rudnick Road Culvert
Inlet Elevation (invert): 4252.00 R, Outlet Elevation (invert): 4245.56 It
Culvert Length: 9200 R, Culvert Slope., 0.0700
Culvert Summary Table»»»».»»»•.'»+�.»»»»»•.».»•»'»»»»».»..�»»»»»»..».*
Total
Discharge
ar
(cfs)
Culvert
Discharge
(cfs)
Headwater
Elevation
(fl)
Inlet Control
Depth (fl)
OuBet
Control
Depth fl
P O
Flow
Type
Normal
Depth (fl)
Critical
Depth (it)
Outiel
Depth (fl)
Tailwater
Depth (fl)
Outlet
Velocity
(fl/s)
Tellwater
Velocity
(fus)
51.80
51.80
4255.31
3.313
3.313
1-S1f
1.357
1 2.153
2.153
1.148
7.518
13.107
64.04
54.04
4256.41
3.413
3.413
1-S1f
1.387
1 2.201
2.201
1.166
7.631
13.246
56.28
50.28
4255.51
3.614
3.514
5-S1f
1.418
1 2.249
2.249
1.184
7.739
13.382
58.52
58.52
4255.62
3.815
3.615
5-S1f
IA49
2.297
2.297
1.201
7,841
13.513
60.76
60.76
4255.72
3.718
3.718
5-S1f
IA80
2.345
2.345
1.219
7.938
13.640
63.00
63.00
4255.82
3.822
3.822
5-S1f
1.511
2.393
2.393
1.235
8.030
1 13.764
85.24
85.24
4255.93
3.927
3.927
5-S1f
1.541
2.435
2.435
1.251
8.143
13.085
87.48
87.48
4258.03
4.033
4.033
5-51f
1.572
2.476
2.476
1.267
8.269
14.003
69.72
89,72
425614
4.142
4.142
5-Sif
1.602
2.516
2.516
1.283
8.386
14.118
71.96
71.98
4256.25
4.252
4.252
5-S1f
1.629
2.557
2.557
1.298
8.496
14.230
74.20
74.20
4256.36
4.384
4.384
5-51f
1.656
2.598
2.598
1.313
1 8.603
14.339
Site Data - Culvert 1
Site Data Option: Culvert Invert Data
Inlet Station: 0.00 ft
Inlet Elevation: 4252.00 ft
Outlet Station: 92.00 ft
Outlet Elevation: 4245.56 ft
Number of Barrels: 1
Culvert Data Summary - Culvert 1
Barrel Shape: Circular
Barrel Diameter: 4.00 ft
Barrel Material: Corrugated Steel
Embedment: 0.00 in
Barrel Manning's n: 0.0240
Inlet Type: Conventional
Inlet Edge Condition: Thin Edge Projecting
Inlet Depression: NONE
Tailwater Channel Data - Rudnick
Tailwater Channel Option: Triangular Channel
Side Slope (H:V): 3.00 (_:1)
Channel Slope: 0.0700
Channel Manning's n: 0.0200
Channel Invert Elevation: 4252.00 ft
Roadway Data for Crossing: Rudnick
Roadway Profile Shape: Constant Roadway Elevation
Crest Length: 150.00 ft
Crest Elevation: 4266.00 ft
Roadway Surface: Gravel
Roadway Top Width: 22.00 ft
Attachment D
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation
� ♦. s� 1 I t,T A n >.w ui
1, ., t'
M1;
q,^"�'`�1•,,�
f
�
.
1
p iY
3:
r'
d �
A•
y} ' � � � TI ' �". � }i�, ( • r ri' a$jlt its'{!
tt M N' l f V i j 1 �J1 1} 41
�'n "1 Mr i Ills' tl t� II ,1^M1Sf�t{IY�tI
I J
t ;5 4'?�, yRf r" adta,e
Y/'Y7 "'tda Ira r.��f5��+.�,V�1(•5 t' 1
1 {..A.sH 'Vn IJ,iInR lc7i vV d4y,}' fEr!} ca yf
{
rl`
t
F
I
I ,
I'
Ju Ai+
Idry� /
I
.
y,
1 r It� Idl tYd ,} M1 Iva .I, Ir {
�{ V /� �y 55 1 s
eAsp�Bln. � ��30�
`y+, K f14
��"07
�ie'S�V+I»{i�Sh�31�'A"�S.
s
�P'O�
_
1'M- -t
q
y l F 1 sit, �V�l")ao�(d�-4 f} e
^ !im" d'L � K'kln/'�✓I}1 #i.F ��l1}/�$C1 ri �.M1 ' 'f t I.i
1u?p21 $p�kt��rlq m° wY�i`,h�Y'+
t I rJ
�V 11 ;
v..-
j 19r�1;Il i7 4 t
Engineering Group, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION
EXISTING ACCESS ROAD (RUDNICK ROAD)
CITY OF VERNON (APN: 444-060-03)
ONYX RANCH, CALIFORNIA
PREPARED FOR:
MR. MARC PASQUINI
PASQUINI ENGINEERING
903 " H)' STREET
BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301
Prepared by:
® Engineering Group, Inc.
2321 PERSEUS COURT
BAKBRSF P-LD, CALIFORNIA 93308
(661) 393-9711
Job No.2-210-00599
September 30, 2010
2321 Perseus Court • B2kers6ek4 CA 93308 • (661) 393.9711 9 Fax (661) 393-9710
Engineering
September 30, 2010
Mr. Marc Pasquini
Pasquini Engineering
903 "H" Street
Bakersfield, CA 93301
RE: Geotechnical Engineering Investigation
Existing Access Road (Rudnick Road)
City of Vernon (APN: 444-060-03)
Onyx Ranch, California
Dcar Mr. Pasquini:
Job No. 2-210-00599
At your request and authorization, SALEM Engineering Group, Inc. (SALEM) has prepared this
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for the site of the Existing Access Road (Rudnick Road) a located in
Onyx Ranch, California.
We appreciate the opportunity to assist you with this project. Should you have questions regarding this report
or need additional information, please contact the undersigned at 661.393.9711.
Respectfully submitted,
S mn
c.
reg
Regional Manager
Distribunon: 4 copies -Addressee
2321 Perseus Court • Bakersfield, CA 93308 • (661) 393-9711 • Pax (661) 393.9710
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ......
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................. 1
3.0 SITE LOCATIONS AND DESCRIPTION ....................................... 2
4.0
GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC CONDITIONS ....................................................
2
5.0
PURPOSE AND SCOPE ................................................................
6.0
FIELD EXPLORATION
7.0
LABORATORY TESTING ........................... .................................
................................... 3
8.0
SOIL AND GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS ................................................................
3
9.0
SOIL LIQUEFACTION AND SEISMIC SETTLEMENT .................................................4
10.0
SLOPE STABILITY
4
11.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................. w ................................
5
11.1 Groundwater Influence on Styucrures/Conattuction ...................................................................
6
11.2 Site Preparation. ....................................................................... .. .....................................
6
11.3 Wet Soil Treatment for Earthwork Construction
6
11.4 Slope Construction and Maintenance .............................................................................
7
11.5 Fill Placement and Compac6on .................................................................................................................
8
11.6 Surface Dtainage Control
8
11.7 Temporary Excavation Stability.................................................................................................................
9
11.8 Retaining Wan Design ........................................................ ............................................
...................... 9
11.9 Utility Pipe Bedding and Nckfilling ........................................................................................
............... I I
11.10 Pavement Design ................................................................... ................................................................
11
12.0 PLAN REVIEW, CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING
.....................12
13.0 CHANGED CONDITIONS .............................................................................................
12
SITEPLAN ................................................................................................................ Figures
IA through ID
FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS ............................................................
Appendix A
GENERAL EARTHWORK/PAVEMENT SPECIFICATIONS .......................................
Appendix B
Engineering Group, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION
EXISTING ACCESS ROAD (RUDNICK ROAD)
CITY OF VERNON (APN: 444-060-03)
ONYX RANCH, CALIFORNIA
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for the site of the Existing
Access Road (Rudnick Road) located in Onyx Ranch, California.
The investigation included a field exploration program of drilling a total of four (4) test borings to depths
ranging from 6 to 10 feet below existing ground surface, the collection of soil samples, and a variety of
laboratory tests to supplement the field data. Discussions regarding site conditions are presented herein,
together with conclusions and recommendations pertaining to site preparation, Engineered Fill, utility trench
backfll, drainage and landscaping, retaining walls, soil liquefaction, slope stability, and pavement design. The
locations of the borings are shown on the Site Plan, Figures IA through 1D. The scope of our services for
this investigation does not include slope stability evaluation beyond the access road area.
The results of the field exploration and laboratory test data are included in Appendix "A". General
Earthwork / Pavement Specifications are presented in Appendix 'B". If conflicts in the text of the report
occur with the specifications in the appendices, the recommendations in the text of the report have
precedence.
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The existing access road is unpaved and approximately 4,370 feet long and 15 to 24 feet wide with cut slope
on one side and fill slope on the other side. The maximum cut slope is approximately 10 feet high with a
slope ratio of 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter. The maximum fill slope is approximately 10 feet high with
a maximum slope ratio of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). We understand that the access road was constructed at
an unknown time and is currently being used to provide access to portions of the land around Weldon Estate
in the area of Monarch Mine. The year of construction, construction methods, and geotechnical
considerations at the time of construction are not known regarding the access road.
The purpose of this investigation is to evaluate the existing subsurface conditions encountered relating to the
construction of cut/fill slopes, structural integrity of the existing slopes and provide slope stability analysis.
The scope of our investigation includes a program of field exploration, laboratory testing, engineering analysis
and preparation of a final report. The scope of our services for this investigation does not include slope
stability evaluation of any slopes beyond the existing access road.
2321 Perseus Court • Bakersfield, CA 93308 9 (661) 393-9711 • Fax (661) 393-9710
3.0 SITE LOCATIONS AND DESCRIPTION
The site is located on the northern edge of Assessors Parcel No. 444-060-05 owned by the City of Vernon in
the Onyx Ranch area of the County of Kern, California. The road is a typical hillside access dirt road wish
minor cuts and fills along the edges of the road. Vegetation growths beyond the roadway consist of sparse
trees, bushes and shrubs. Occasional erosions, washed gullies and shallow slope failures are present along the
slopes.
4.0 GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC CONDITIONS
The existing access road is located in a hilly terrain in Onyx Ranch area of the County of Kern which is a
topographic and structural basin that is bounded on the east by the Sierra Nevada and on the west by the
Coast Ranges. The Sierra Nevada, a fault block dipping gently southwestward, is composed of igneous and
metamorphic rocks of pre -Tertiary age that comprise the basement complex beneath the surficial soil. The
Coast Ranges contain folded and faulted sedimentary rocks of Mesozoic and Cenozoic age, which are similar
to those rocks that underlie the Valley at depth and non -conformably overlie the basement complex; gently
dipping to nearly horizontal sedimentary rocks of Tertiary and Quaternary age overlie the older rocks. These
younger rocks are mostly of continental origin and in the Bakersfield area; they were derived from the Sierra
Nevada. The Coast Ranges evolved ss a result of folding, faulting and accretion of diverse geologic terrains.
They are composed chiefly of sedimentary and metamorphic rocks that are sharply deformed into complex
structures. They are broken by numerous faults, the San Andreas Fault being the most notable feature.
As exposed on the surface and as observed in the exploratory borings, the bedrock consists of generally
massive to poorly bedded sandstone of light -gray to tan, thin bedded, semi -siliceous to clay shale, and fish
scales. Deposits encountered on the subject site during exploratory drilling are discussed in detail in this
report. The area in consideration shows no mapped faults on -site according to maps prepared by the
California Division of Mines and Geology (now known as the California Geologic Survey) and published by
the International Conference of Building Officials (1C130). The project site is not located within a State of
California Earthquake Fault Zone. Soils on site are classified as Site Class C in accordance with Chapter 16
of the California Building Code.
5.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of this investigation is to evaluate the subsurface conditions encountered during Geld
exploration and to provide geotechnical engineering recommendations for site preparation, earthwork
procedures, slope construction, and retaining wall design parameters. The scope of our investigation included
a program of field exploration, laboratory testing, engineering analysis and preparation of this report.
6.0 FIELD EXPLORATION
Our Geld exploration consisted of site surface reconnaissance and subsurface exploration. The exploratory
test borings (B-1 through B-4) were drilled on September 24, 2010 within the existing access road area at the
approximate locations shown on Figures 1A through 1D, Site Plan. The test borings were advanced with a
6%a-inch diameter auger rotated by a truck -mounted CIE-45 drill rig. The test borings were extended to
depths ranging from 6 to 10 feet below the existing grade
Job No. 2-210-00599 2 ® Engineering Group, Inc.
The materials encountered in the test borings were visually classified in the field, and logs were recorded by a
Professional Engineer at that time. Visual classification of the materials encountered in the test borings was
generally made in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D2487). A soil classification
chart and key to sampling is presented on the Unified Soil Classification Chart, in Appendix "A". The logs of
the test borings are presented in Appendix "A".
Subsurface soil samples were obtained by driving a Modified California sampler. Penetration resistance blow
counts were obtained by dropping a 140-pound hammer through a 304nch free fall to drive the sampler to a
maximum depth of 18 inches. The number of blows required to drive the last 12 inches is recorded as
Penetration Resistance (blows/foot) on the logs of borings.
Soil samples were obtained from the test borings at the depths shown on the logs of borings. The samples
were recovered and capped at both ends to preserve the samples at their natural moisture content. At the
completion of drilling and sampling, the test borings were backfdled with drill cuttings.
7.0 LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory tests were performed on selected soil samples to evaluate their physical characteristics and
engineering properties. The laboratory testing program was formulated with emphasis on the evaluation of
natural moisture, density, shear strength, expansion and consolidation potential, and gradation of the
materials encountered.
Details of the laboratory test program and the results of laboratory test are summarized in Appendix "A".
This information, along with the field observations, was used to prepare the final boring logs in Appendix
"A"
9.0 SOIL AND GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS
Based on our findings, the subsurface conditions encountered appear typical of those found in the geologic
region of the site. In general, the soils within the depth of exploration consist of 1 to 2 feet of loose surfiaal
soil underlain by dense soil and sandstone bedrock. Field and laboratory tests suggest that the deeper soil and
bedrocks are moderately strong and slightly compressible. These soils extended to the termination depth of
our borings. For a more detailed description of the materials encountered, the Boring Logs in Appendix "A"
should be consulted.
The sods were classified in the field during the drilling and sampling operations. The stratification lines were
approximated by the field engineer on the basis of observations made at the time of drilling. The actual
boundaries between different soil types may be gradual and soil conditions may vary.
For a more detailed description of the materials encountered, the Boring Logs (Figures A-1 through A-4, in
Appendix "A") should be consulted. The Boring Logs include the soil type, color, moisture content, dry
density, and the applicable Unified Soil Classification System symbol. The locations of the test borings were
determined by measuring from features shown on the Site Plan, provided to us. Hence, accuracy can be
implied only to the degree that this method warrants.
Job No. 2-210.00599 3 ® Engineering Group, Inc.
Test boring locations were checked for the presence of groundwater during and after the drilling operations.
Free groundwater was not encountered during this time of investigation. It should be recognized that water
table elevations may fluctuate with time, being dependent upon seasonal precipitation, irrigation, land use,
and climatic conditions as well as other factors. Therefore, water level obsetvations at the time of the held
investigation may vary from those encountered during the construction phase of the project. The evaluation
of such factors is beyond the scope of this report.
9.0 SOIL LIQUEFACTION AND SEISMIC SETTLEMENT
Soil liquefaction is a state of soil particles suspension caused by a complete loss of strength when the effective
stress drops to zero. Liquefaction normally occurs under saturated conditions in soils such as sand in which
the strength is purely frictional. However, liquefaction has occurred in soils other than clean sand.
Liquefaction usually occurs under vibratory conditions such as those induced by seismic events. To evaluate
the liquefaction potential of the site, the following items were evaluated:
❑ Soil type
❑ Groundwater depth
❑ Relative density
❑ Initial confining pressure
❑ Intensity and duration of groundshaking
The soilbeneath the site consists of dense to very dense sandstone. Groundwater is expected to be at a
depth of greater than 50 feet. The potential for liquefaction is considered to be low based on the relatively
dense materials and the absence of shallow groundwater.
10.0 SLOPE STABILITY
The gross stability analysis was performed using PCSTABLSM, a computer program developed at Purdue
University. A random technique was used to search the critical surface with the lowest safety factor. All
searches were performed using the modified Bishop method.
The slope stability was analyzed based on the typical grade condition for the 1:1 cut slope and 2:1 fill slope.
The shear strength parameters were determined based on the laboratory test results.
For the analyses, an internal friction angle of 33 degrees and a cohesion of 100 psf were used for the fill slope
and an internal friction angle of 30 degrees and a cohesion of 100 psf were used for the fill slope and. The
results of the analyses are attached and the summary of die safety factor is as follows:
Slope Condition PaiciotofSafety
1:1 Cut Slop, 10 feet High 1.55
2:1 Fill Slop, 10 feet High 2.23
The results indicated that the local slopes are stable with a factor of safety greater than I.S. The results of the
slope stability analysis are presented in Appendix "A".
Job No. 2-210-00599 4 ® Engineering Group, Inc.
11.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based upon the data collected during this investigation, and from a georechnical engineering standpoint, it is
our opinion that the site is suitable for the current use provided that the recommendations presented herein
are incorporated into the design and construction (if any).
All grading and earthwork should be done in accordance with the Grading Ordinances of the County of Kern
and the applicable portions of the General Earthwork / Pavement Specifications in Appendix "B", and the
following provisions.
The upper soils have a loose/soft consistency. In their current condition the existing cut/ft0 slopes should
continue perform as intended but may require routine annual maintenance. These soils are disturbed, have
low strength characteristics, and are highly compressible when saturated. Accordingly, it is recommended
that prior to any new construction the upper loose soils be overexcavated and recompacted. This
compaction effort should stabilize the surface soils and locate any unsuitable or pliant areas not found during
our field investigation. Deeper loose soils if encountered during grading should also be overexcavated and
recompacted. The scope of our services for the investigation does not include slope stability evaluation
beyond the roadway (.e. entire hillside).
AU retaining wall foundations should be founded in the undisturbed bedrocks or compacted fill to provide a
uniform support for the retaining wall, if any.
Difficult eacavadon is anticipated for deeper excavation due to the dense bedrock formation. Large
earthmoving equipment or local blasting may be required to achieve the requited depth.
Fill slopes should not be constructed steeper than a gradient of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). Cut slopes should
not be constructed steeper than a gradient of 1:1 (horizontal to vertical). The maximum height of cut and fill
slopes should not exceed 10 feet verticaUy.
To reduce the erosion of graded slopes, it is recommended that all slopes be planted with ground cover
vegetation and deep rooted vegetation as soon as practical. The proper maintenance of proper lot drainage
and vegetation should be performed. Over -irrigation should be prevented. A rodent control program should
be established and maintained.
For slopes steeper than 2:1 (horizontal to vertical), the slope face should be covered with a material which
will retain soil particles and promote vegetative growth, and is then immediately mulched and seeded, Tenser
Erosion Control Mat has been developed for these applications. A thin layer of topsoil on the erosion
control material IayerwiU greatly contribute to seeding success.
Proper maintenance of drainage and vegetation should be performed. Irrigatign of landscaping should be
controlled to maintain a consistent moisture content sufficient to provide healthy plant growth without over
watering.
Positive surface drainage should be provided to direct surface water away from tops of slopes toward suitable
drainage devices.
Job No. 2-210-00599 5 ® Engineering Group, Inc.
The shrinkage of recompacted soil and fill placement is estimated at 5 to 15 percent. This value is an estimate
and may vary significantly depending on several items including sod conditions, compaction effort, weather,
etc. Subsidence, below the Engineered Fill, is anticipated to be less than 0.01 feet, due to the recommended
over -excavation
Detailed geotechnical engineering recommendations are presented in the remaining portions of the text. The
recommendations are based on the properties of the materials identified during our investigation.
11.1 Groundwater Influence on Structures/Construction
Based on our findings and historical records, it is not anticipated that groundwater will rise within the zone of
structural influence or affect the construction for the project. However, if earthwork is performed during or
soon after periods of precipitation, the subgrade sods may become saturated, "pump," or not respond to
densification techniques.
Typical remedial measures include: discing and aerating the soil during dry weather; mixing the soil with dryer
materials; removing and replacing the soil with an approved fill material; or mixing die soil with an approved
lime or cement product. Our rum should be consulted prior to implementing remedial measures to observe
the unstable subgrade conditions and provide appropriate recommendations.
11.2 Site Preparation
General site clearing should include removal of vegetation, organic materials, and existing utilities, structures,
trees and associated root systems, rubble, rubbish, and any loose and/or saturated materials. Site stripping
should extend to a minimum depth of 2 to 4 inches, or until all organics in excess of 3 percent by volume are
removed. Deeper stripping may be required in localized areas. These materials will not be suitable for reuse
as Engineered Fill. However, stripped topsoil may be stockpiled and reused in landscape or non-structural
areas with the approval of the owner and landscaper.
Any excavations that result from clearing operations should be backfdled with Engineered Fig. Our field
staff should be present during site clearing operations to enable us to locate areas where depressions or
disturb soils are present and to Allow our staff to observe and test the backfill as it is placed. If site clearing
and backfilling operations occur without appropriate observation and testing by a qualified geotechnical
consultant, there may be the need to over -excavate the subject area to identify uncontrolled fills prior to mass
grading.
As with site clearing operations, any buried structures encountered during construction should be properly
removed and backfilled The resulting excavations should be backfdled with Engineered Fill.
11.3 Wet Soil Treatment for Earthwork Construction
The upper soils, during wet winter months or due to prolonged watering, may become very moist due to the
Absorption characteristics of the soil. Earthwork operations may encounter very moist unstable soils which
may require removal to a stable bottom. The wet soils may become non conducive to site grading as the
upper soils yield under the weight of the construction equipment. Therefore, mitigation measures should be
performed for stabilization.
Job No. 2-210-00599 6 ® Engineering Group, Inc.
Typical remedial measures include: discing and aerating the soil during dry weather; mixing the soil with dryer
materials; removing and replacing the soil with an approved fill material or placement of crushed rocks or
aggregate base material; or mixing the soil with an approved lime or cement product. Our firm should be
consulted prior to implementing remedial measures to provide appropriate recommendations.
The most common remedial measure of stabilizing the bottom of die excavation due to wet soil condition is
to reduce the moisture of the soil to near the optimum moisture content by having the subgrade soils
scarified and aerated or mixed with drier soils prior to compacting. However, the drying process may require
an extended period of time and delay the construction operation. To expedite the stabilizing process, crushed
rock may be utilized for stabilization provided this method is approved by the owner for the cost purpose.
If the use of crushed rock is considered, it is recommended that the upper soft and wet soils be replaced by 6
to 24 inches of/4-inch to 1-inch crushed rocks. The thickness of the rock layer depends on the severity of
the soil instability. The recommended 6 to 24 inches of crushed rock material will provide a stable platform.
It is further recommended that lighter compaction equipments be utilized for compacting the crushed rock.
A layer of geofrbric is recommended to be placed on top of the compacted crushed rock to minimize
migration of soil particles into the voids of the crushed rock, resulting in soil movement. Although it is not
required, the use of geogrid (eg. Tensar BX 1100 or TX 140) below the crushed rock will enhance stability
and reduce the required thickness of crushed rock necessary for stabilization.
11A Slope Construction and Maintenance
The slopes should be constructed in accordance with the typical figures and details as shown in the General
Earthwork / Pavement Specifications, Appendix "B" (i.e. Stabilization Fill, Buttress Fill, Daylight Shear key,
Shear Key, Fill Slope above Natural Ground, Fill Slope Above Cut Slope, Backdrain, Geofabric Subdrain,
Benching for Compacted Fill, Rock Disposal, Canyon Subdrain and Transition Lot).
Where fill slopes are to be constructed on original ground that slopes steeper than 6:1 (horizontal to vertical),
the ground should be stepped or benched. The benches should be cut into the dense slope as the grading
operations proceed. The first bench (base or key bench) should be at least 15 feet wide. Each bench should
consist of a minimum g feet wide of level terrace, with the rise to the next bench held for 4 feet or less.
All cut and fill slopes should be landscaped immediately with erosion, drought and fire resistant plants
approved for hillsides. Rodent control and slope maintenance should be instituted on all slopes.
To reduce the erosion of graded slopes, it is recommended that all slopes be planted with ground cover
vegetation and deep rooted vegetation as soon as practical.
Proper maintenance of lot drainage and vegetation should be performed. Irrigation of landscaping should be
controlled to maintain a consistent moisture content sufficient to provide healthy plant growth without over
watering. A rodent control program should be established and maintained.
Trenched excavated on a graded slope face for utility or irrigation lines or for any purpose should be
backfilled with compacted fill. The fill should be compacted to at least 92 percent of the maximum dry
density as determined by ASTM D 1557-07.
JohNo. 2-210-OOS99 ® Engineering Group, Inc.
The graded pad should have a gradient of at least 2 percent away from slopes and structures. Soil berms
should be provided at the crests of descending slopes.
11.5 Fill Placement and Compaction
The upper organic -free, on -site, native soils are predominately silty sand. These soils will be suitable for reuse
as non -expansive Engineered Fill, provided they are cleansed of excessive organics, debris and rocks over 3
inches in size.
The preferred materials specified for engineered fill are suitable for most applications with the exception of
exposure to erosion. Project site winterization and protection of exposed soils during the construction phase
should be the sole responsibility of the Contractor, since he has complete control of the project site.
Imported non -expansive non -corrosive fill should consist of a well -graded, slightly cohesive silty fine sand or
sandy silt, with relatively impervious characteristics when compacted. This material should be approved by
the Engineer prior to use and should typically possess the following characteristics:
Maximum Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve
So
Minimum Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve
15
Maximum Particle Size
3 inches
Maximum Plasticity Index
12
Maximum UHC Standard 29-2 Expansion Index
20
Prior to placement of Lill soils, the upper 8 inches of native subgrade soils should be scarified, moisture -
conditioned to near the optimum moisture content, and recompacted to a minimum of 92 percent of the
maximum dry density based on ASTM D1557-07 Test Method.
Fill soils should be placed in lifts approximately 6 inches thick, moisture -conditioned to near the optimum
moisture content (±2%) for granular soils and compacted to achieve at lent 92 percent of the maximum dry
density as determined by ASTM D1557-07. Additional lifts should not be placed if the previous lift did not meet
the required dry density or if soil conditions are not stable.
1L6 Surface Drainage Control
The ground surface should slope away from footings and pavement areas toward appropriate drop inlets or
other surface drainage devices. It is recommended that adjacent exterior grades be sloped a minimum of 2
percent for a minimum distance of 5 feet away from structures. Subgrade soils in pavement areas should be
sloped a minimum of 1 percent and drainage gradients maintained to carry all surface water to collection
facilities and off site. These grades should be maintained for the life of the project. Roof drains should be
installed with appropriate downspout extensions out -falling on splash blocks so as to direct water a minimum
of 5 feet away from the structures or be connected to the storm drain system for die development.
Job No. 2.210-00599 g ® Engineering Group, Inc.
11.7 Temporary Excavation Stability
Temporary excavations planned for the construction may be excavated, according to the accepted engineering
practice following Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards by a contractor
experienced in such work. Open, unbraced excavations in undisturbed soils should be made according to the
table below.
Recommended Excavation Slopes
Depth of Excavation (ft)
Slope (HontiontabVertical)
0-5
1 sa
5-10
2.s:1
If, due to space limitation, excavations near existing structures are performed in a vertical position, braced
shorings or shier may be used for supporting vertical excavations. Therefore, in order to comply with the
local and state safety regulations, a properly designed and installed shoring system would be required to
accomplish planned excavations and installation. A Specialty Shoring Contractor should be responsible for
the design and installation of such a shoring system during consrntetion. Braced shorings should be designed
for a maximum pressure distribution of 30H, (wherr H is The depeb of the exrovarion in feed The foregoing does
not include excess hydrostatic pressure or surcharge loading. Fifty percent of any surcharge load, such as
construction equipment weight, should be added to the lateral load given herein. Equipment traffic should
concurrently be limited to an area at least 5 feet from the shoring face or edge of the slope.
The excavation and shoring recommendations provided herein are based on soil characteristics derived from
the test borings within the area. Variations in soil conditions will likely be encountered during the
excavations. SALEM Engineering Group, Inc. should be afforded the opportunity to provide field review to
evaluate the actual conditions and account for field condition variations not otherwise anticipated in the
preparation of this recommendation. Slope height, slope inclination, or excavation depth should in no case
exceed those specified in local, state, or federal safety regulation, (e.g. OSHA) standards for excavations, 29
CFR part 1926, or Assessors regulations.
11.8 Retaining Wall Design
Retaining wall footings should be founded on fir, natural or compacted materials. The footing should have a
minimum width of 15 inches and extend to a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade.
Footing concrete should be placed into neat excavation. The bottom of footing excavations should be
maintained free of loose and disturbed soil. The footing excavations should not be allowed to dry out any
time prior to pouring concrete. Footings constructed as recommended herein may be designed for the
maximum bearing capacity shown below.
Job No. 2-210-00599 9 ® Engineering Group, Inc.
Load Allowable Loading
Static Load 2,000 psf
Total Load, Including Wind or Seismic Loads 2,660 psf
Active, at -rest and passive unit lateral earth pressures against footings and walls are presented below.
Lateral Pressure
Conditions
Equivalent Fluid Pressure
— Level Backfill pcf
Equivalent Fluid Pressure
— 2:1 Backfill, pcf
Active Pressure, Drained
32
45
At -Rest Pressure, Drained
53
55
Passive Pressure
400
1 250 (sloping down)
Active pressure applies to walls, which are free to rotate. At -rest pressure applies to walls, which are
restrained against rotation- The preceding lateral earth pressures assume sufficient drainage behind retaining
walls to prevent the build-up of hydrostatic pressure. The top one -foot of adjacent subgrade should be
deleted from the passive pressure computation. A coefficient of friction of 0.45 may be used between sod
subgrade and footings.
The foregoing values of lateral earth pressures and frictional coefficients represent ultimate soil values and a
safety factor consistent with the design conditions should be included in their usage. For stability against
lateral sliding, which is resisted solely by the passive pressure, we recommend a minimum safety factor of 1.5.
For stability against lateral sliding, which is resisted by the combined passive and frictional resistance, a
minimum safety factor of 2.0 is recommended. For lateral stability against seismic loading conditions, we
recommend a minimum safety factor of 1.1.
Retaining and/or below grade walls should be drained with either perforated pipe encased in free -draining
gravel or a prefabricated drainage system. The gravel zone should have a minimum width of 12 inches wide
and should extend upward to within 12 inches of the top of the wall. The upper 12 inches of backfill should
consist of native soils, concrete, asphaltic -concrete or other suitable backfill to minimize surface drainage into
the wall drain system. The aggregate should be washed, evenly graded mixture of crushed stone, or crushed
or unanshed gravel, and should conform to ASTM D448, Size 57, with 100 percent passing a 1'/a-inch sieve
and not more than 5 percent passing a No. 4 sieve. Prefabricated drainage systems, such as Miradrain®,
Enkadrain®, or an equivalent substitute, are acceptable alternatives in lieu of gravel provided they are
installed in accordance with the manufacturers' recommendations. If a prefabricated drainage system is
proposed, our firm should review the system for final acceptance prior to installation.
Job No. 2-210.00599 10 ® Engineering Group, Inc.
Drainage pipes should be placed with perforations down and should discharge in a non -erosive manner away
from foundations and other improvements.. The top of the perforated pipe should be placed at or below the
bottom of the adjacent pavements. The pipe should be placed in the center line of the drainage blanket and
should have a minimum diameter of 4 inches. Slots should be no wider than 1/8-inch in diameter, while
perforations should be no more than V.-inch in diameter. If retaining walls are less than 6 feet in height, the
perforated pipe may be omitted in lieu of weep holes on 4 feet maximum spacing.
The weep holes should consist of 4-inch diameter holes (concrete walls) or unmortared head joints (masonry
walls) and placed no higher than 18 inches above the lowest adjacent grade. Two 8-inch square overlapping
patches of geotextile fabric (conforming to Section 88-1.03 of the Ca)T'rans Standard Specifications for "edge
drains") should be affixed to the rear wall opening of each weep hole to retard sod piping.
During grading and backfilling operations adjacent to any walls, heavy equipment should not be allowed to
operate within a lateral distance of 5 feet from the wall, or within a lateral distance equal to the wall height,
whichever is greater, to avoid developing excessive lateral pressures. Within this zone, only hand operated
equipment ("whackers," vibratory plates, or pneumatic compactors) should be used to compact the backfill
sods.
11.9 Utility Pipe Bedding and BackfiUing
Utility trenches should be excavated according to accepted engineering practice following OSFL1
(Occupational Safety and Health Administration) standards by a contractor experienced in such work. The
responsibility for the safety of open trenches should be borne by the contractor. Traffic and vibration
adjacent to trench walls should be minimized; cyclic wetting and drying of excavation side slopes should be
avoided. Depending upon the location and depth of some utility trenches, groundwater flow into open
excavations could be experienced; especially during or following periods of precipitation.
Sandy soil conditions were encountered at the site. These cohesionless soils have a tendency to cave in
trench wall excavations. Shoring or sloping back trench sidewalls may be required within these sandy soils.
Utility trench backO should be compacted to at least 92 percent of maximum density based on ASTM
D1557-07 Test Method. Pipe bedding should be in accordance with pipe manufacturer recommendations.
The contractor is responsible for removing all water -sensitive soils from the trench regardless of the backfdl
location and compaction requirements. The contractor should use appropriate equipment and methods to
avoid damage to the utilities and/or structures during fill placement and compaction.
11.10 Pavement Design
Based on the site soil condition, an R-value of 35 was used for the preliminary flexible asphaltic concrete
pavement design. The R-value should be verified during grading of the pavement areas. The following table
shows the recommended pavement sections for various traffic indices.
The pavement design recommendations provided herein are based on the State of California Department of
Transportation (CALTI ANS) design manual. The asphaltic concrete (flexible pavement) is based on a 20-
year pavement life utilizing 1200 passenger vehicles, 10 single unit tracks, and 2 multi -unit trucks.
Job No. 2-210-00599 11 ® Engineering Group, Inc.
ASPHALTIC CONCRETE
f Vnhirl4 n,.. Aye..),
Traffic Index
Asphaltic Concrete
Class II gregale Base*
Compacted Sub adc'a't'
5.5
3;0"
5.5
12.0"
rtr...... —1. A.-_%
Traffic Index
Asphaltic Concrete
Class 11 Aggregate Base*
I Compacted Sub ade t t
6.5
3.5"
7.5"
Am,.,.�uyA VY,LV VA/.JJM {/lN/V/ larmeloo4
6 92%camynrtion band on ASTM DIII7,07Trn metbod
12.0 PLAN REVIEW, CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING
We recommend that a review of plans and specifications with regard to foundations, and earthwork be
completed by SALEM Engineering Group, Inc. (SALE Y) prior to construction bidding. SALEM should be
present at the site during site preparation to observe site clearing, preparation of exposed surfaces after
clearing, and placement, treatment and compaction of fill material. SALEM's observations should be
supplemented with periodic compaction tests to establish substantial conformance with these
recommendations. Moisture content of the subgrade should be tested immediately prior to concrete
placement.
SALEM should observe foundation excavations prior to placement of reinforcing steel or concrete to assess
whether the actual bearing conditions are compatible with the conditions anticipated during the preparation
of this report. SALEM should also observe placement of foundation concrete.
13.0 CHANGED CONDITIONS
The analyses and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the test
borings drilled at the approximate locations shown on the Site Plan, Figures to through 1D. The report does
not reflect variations which may occur between the test borings. The nature and extent of such variations
may not become evident until construction is initiated. If variations then appear, a re-evaluation of die
recommendations of this report will be necessary after. performing on -site observations during the'excavation
period and noting the characteristics of such variations.
The findings and recommendations presented in this report are valid as of the present and for the proposed
construction. If site conditions change due to natural processes or human intervention on the property or
adjacent to die site, or changes occur in the nature or design of the project, or if there is a substantial time
lapse between the submission of this report and the start of the work at the site, the conclusions and
recommendations contained in our report will not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed by
SALEM and the conclusions of our report are modified or verified in writing.
Job No. 2-210-00599 12 ® Engineering Group, Inc.
The validity of the recommendations contained in this report is also dependent upon an adequate testing and
observations program during the construction phase. Our firm assumes no responsibility for construction
compliance with the design concepts or recommendations unless we have been retained to perform the on -
site testing and review during construction.
SALEM has prepared this report for the exclusive use of the owner and project design consultants. The
-report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in the area.
No other warranties, either expressed or implied, ate made as to the professional advice provided under the
terms of our agreement and included in this report.
If you have any questions, or if we may be of farther assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at
(909) 980-6455.
Respectfully submitted,
SALEM Engineering Group, Inc.
Clarence Jiang, GE
Senior Geotechnical
RGE 2477
®CaWght SALEM RnpjmaingGm p, Inc.
R. Sammy alem, �WVE, GE, REA
Principal Engineer
RCE 52762 /RGE 2549,4p00�Fk�S§§
No. 2.549
prp. Dec. 31, 2010
Job No.2-210-00599 13 ® Engineering Group, Inc
U
O
p O K
rc
<yY
1- U W
�tmK
W 3 OLL
Z Q J
a U,
w zz�
t z��
to WX=O
q U
LU
YmOLU
2=''yy
(_} 2 W
F< J
LL' a
ju
ago�
m
rc
00 M
a y
V'WO
�u zw
0
Wzou
w 2-
H 0
ZU
(A Ulm O
u
lafm0¢
=UyWgyw
OZ
O��
LU
Qzw
Ol
'S
h
9
c
ZOK
F
OJ
GWU
WaOZ
@$Q wo
4 Za
J W >. C ?y:
W 2Z-
F zu
CIS
J V LL V
umoz
t>zu�
� � J
W
vn
II�5 ,
ti
04
e
�11I I i1
� �'i�ta7
1 k:
� •i C
I
I
�
i
1 1 1
JI
o
y
1 IN
z
a
i
o ci
FEZ
u
`
FUW
1
�\ 1I
< ujo
W�oaz
rc
�rc
1
LL
g a= ' �+a
=v
6
`
U
wy
2z�z
�
11 if
Z O
Vi W Y
�
JULL
i
p
u�OZee
=V�Y
�I' r
11�(
o;m
Wx
�k'
i M11___l1Mk
711r
[2
e:8
11 I II
T
•
T
i
.
T
rn
op
---
----......
--•
---
----
----
-------
-
;
p
+ -
+
;
. ..
i
_i- .--
O
N
CD
0
Cl
O
L0
dp
m
N
a
O
N
V
o`
co
u
M
LL
CUT
°& PCSTABLSM "•
--slope stability Analysis --
Run Date: 10/ 6/ 2010
Run By: C1
Input Data Filename: cut
Output Filename: Cut out
PROBLEM DESCRIPTION Cut Slope
BOUNDARY COORDINATES
5 Top
Boundaries
5 Total
Boundaries
Boundary
X-Left
Y-Left
X-Right
Y-Right
soil Type
No.
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
Below end
1
.00
10.00
40.00
20.00
1
2
40.00
20.00
60.00
30.00
1
3
60.00
30.00
80.00
30.00
1
4
80.00
30.00
90.00
40.00
1
5
90.00
40.00
120.00
50.00
1
ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS
1 Type(s) of Soil
Soil Total Saturated cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez.
Type unit Wt. unit wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant surface
No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No.
1 120.0 120.0 100.0 33.0 .Do .0 1
A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, using A Random
Technique For Generating circular surfaces, Has Been specified.
100 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated.
100 surfaces Initiate From Each of 1 Points Equally spaced
Along The Ground Surface Between x = 90.00 ft.
and X = 80.00 ft.
Each Surface Terminates Between X = 90.00 ft.
and x = 110.00 ft.
unless Further Limitations were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation
At which A Surface Extends is Y = .00 ft.
5.00 ft. Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure Surface.
Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Modified Bishop Method
Failure surface specified By 5 Coordinate Points
Point X-Surf Y-Surf
No. (ft) (ft)
Page 1
CUT
1 $0.00 30.00
2 84.78 31.48
3 89.05 34.07
4 92.S7 37.62
5 94.98 41.66
Circle Center At X Q 76.4 ; v = 50.2 and Radius, 20.5
*** 1.583 ***
page 2
FILL
PCSTABL5M "
--Slope Stability Analysis --
Run Date: 10/ 6/ 2010
Run By: c
Input Data Filename: fill
Output Filename: fill.out
PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
Fill Slope
BOUNDARY COORDINATES
5 Top
Boundaries
5 Total
Boundaries
Boundary
X-Left
Y-Left
X-Right
Y-Right
Soil Type
No.
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
Below Bnd
1
.00
10.00
40.00
20.00
1
2
40.00
20.00
60.00
30.00
1
3
60.00
30.00
80.00
30.00
1
4
80.00
30.00
90.00
40.00
1
5
90.00
40.00
120.00
50.00
1
ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS
1 Type(s) of Soil
Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez.
Type Unit Wt.. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface
No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No.
1 120.0 120.0 100.0 30.0 .00 .0 1
A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, using A Random
Technique For Generating Circular Surfaces, Has Been Specified.
500 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated.
100 Surfaces Initiate From Each of 5 Points Equally spaced
Along The Ground Surface Between X - 37.00 ft.
and X - 40.00 ft.
Each Surface Terminates Between X = 60.00 ft,
and X = 80.00 ft.
Unless Further Limitations Were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation
At Which A Surface Extends Is Y = .00 ft.
5.00 ft. Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure Surface.
• ° Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Modified Bishop Method °
Failure surface Specified By 7 Coordinate Points
Point X-Surf Y=Surf
No. (ft) (ft)
Page 1
1
37.75
2
42.75
3
47.70
4
52.44
5
S6.80
6
60.64
7
63.02
Circle Center At X =
i° 2.226
FILL
19,44
19.21
19.90
21.50
23.93
27.13
30.00
.41. S ; v =
Page 2
46.3 and Radius, 27.1
i. pp vF 7 s,
Y
+i + �11 ySy ����NIt ���a,lf7 n�ry,q�•in ��n ,f/"1 ,, -..+ ti t'r '">� +>>,�V^;+tlfi�l�'!l�`�rL � '.'v ��t�ti tr�j
fV11' n sl��)5/`iy y�/! r'(I1�`v�i4 , til •/\� t \ , i �+I 1,(,
)!�Y+ f An 'J� i e 1 l+nS�L((p>'tixe p�i/ +�L v v `• + , M1,:
A
\ yf f /i uy s '1° fi�l'�'�t 4 ++1f s s u r ( f day{IY ylll
J"2Vi
o { �, 11 .t p l���yj ly>' n}la y A /. - 1 + •_o F, ll )I
ILI4� 1 1 yl 1 ii r
Tf', + f 1 t ziiJ RrSFSi� SC+�rf F�9M. A �i��
7'
'/\ YR sli o ip 1M1} 54 :
,
\
IN >, C s ✓f 5 7y f'�(�e r(rd Qa�� Y;w !(s^: , /16
fi' �,
o f7L+
�n.� � i r r1ta�(n
yp 1,01
v
ssCll 7
°,
_ i : ti} .r 3 ." s1�r �. >• s }'� '' ,': �s 1'�' r i'r Jar.
Nfi ,.,u .A .Ic%�1, .m. �•-0y ��,, i�_,,,� _ r im.ffl t .fun, C,, .. ,4 y,en/ilFrsl'iu {�,-� _.,. IrS9..F,NfSi C.ti..
FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS
1.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION: The Geld investigation consisted of a surface reconnaissance and a
subsurface exploratory program. Exploratory borings were advanced at the site. The boring locations are
shown on the attached site plan.
The soils encountered were logged in the field during the exploration and with supplementary laboratory test
data are described in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System.
Penetration and/or Resistance tests were performed at selected depths. These tests represent the resistance to
driving a 2-and/or 3-inch outside diameter core barrel, respectively, )g inches into the soil. The N-Value
obtained from the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) and/or driving the Modified California Sampler (MCS) was
recorded based on the number of blows required to penetrate the last 12 inches. The driving energy was
provided by a hammer weighing 140 pounds, falling 30 inches. Relatively undisturbed soil samples were
obtained while performing this test. Bag samples of the disturbed soil were obtained from the auger cuttings.
All samples were retumed to our laboratory for evaluation.
2.0 LABORATORY INVESTIGATION: The laboratory investigation was programmed to determine
the physical and mechanical properties of the foundation soil underlying the site. Test results were used as
criteria for detertnining the engineering suitability of the surface and subsurface materials encountered.
In situ moisture content, dry density, consolidation, direct shear, and sieve analysis tests were determined for
the undisnubed samples representative of the subsurface material. These tests, supplemented by visual
observation, comprised the basis for our evaluation of the site material.
The logs of the exploratory borings and laboratory determinations are presented in this Appendix.
Unified Soil Classification System
Major Divisions
Letter
Symbol
Description
5
G W
; ; .,°.�
•�
Well -graded gravels and gravel -sand mixtures,
e
Clean
: :.
little or no fines.
Poorly-graded gravels and gravel -sand mixtures, li
g
Gravels
a C •�avGPor
no fines.
0 Z
Gravels
GMSilty
gravels, gravel -send -silt mixtures.
With Fines
OWell-graded
GCClayey
gravels, gravel -sand -day mixtures.
a
SW
sands and gravelly sands, linle or no
Clean Sands
Y';>'"';
fines.
t, s:
o d
SP
�> ;„
Poorly -graded sands and gravelly sands, little or no
�'
a 5 y
:• .,
SandsWith
SM
Silty sands, sand -silt mixtures
d'
c E
Fines
SC
Clayey sands, sandy -clay mixtures.
£
ML
Inorganic silts, very fine sands, rock flour, silty or
Sills and Clays
clayey fine sands.
CL
o
g E
Liquid Limit less than
inorganic clays o ow tome rum p asttcrly, grave )
m a Y
50010
clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays.
r: rn
OL
' , ' , �'
Organic clays of medium to high plasticity.
m a N
MH
Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fines
a e z
Silts and Clays
sands or silts elastic silts.
CH
Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays.
v 9
Liquid Limit greater than
r
50%
OH
Organic clays of medium to high plasticity.
Highly Organic Soils
PT
Peat, muck, and other highly organic soils.
t'A�'Ibn
Granular Soils
Cohesive Soils
Description - Blows Per Foot (Corrected)
Description - Blows Per Foot (Corrected)
JCS SPT
MCS SPT
Very loose <5 <4
Very soft 4 <2
Loose 5 - 15 4 - 10
Soft 3 - 5 2-4
Medium dense 16 - 40 11 - 30
Firm 6 - 10 5-8
Dense 41 - 65 31- 50
Stiff 11 - 20 9 - 15
Very dense >65 >50
Very Stiff 21 - 40 16 - 30
Hard >40 >30
MCS =Modified California Sampler SPT = Standard Penetration Test Sampler
Project: Onyx Ranch Back Cyn. Area Access Road Project No: 2-21"559
Client: Pasquini Engineering goring No. B-1 Figure No.: A-1
Location: Rudnick Road, Onyx Ranch, CA Logged By: M.A.
Depth to Water> Initial: None At Completion: None
SUBSURFACE PROFILE
SAMPLE
Penetration Test
w
m
c
-,
CL
:,
c
'o
a
Description
e
r
a
t)
`
EL
Em
f V
a
;
m
20 BO 100
m
3
w
Ina
ran
0
Ground Surface
Silty Sand (SM)
j
Loose; moist; black; medium -grained;
1103.4
8.3
MCS
7
drills easily.
I
5
Grades medium dense; dark brown;
I
103.7
8.2
MCS
18
medium to fine-grained: trace of chalk.
Grades very dense; gray -brown;
i
111.1
7.6
MCS
60
10
medium -grained.
End of Borehole
i
i I
i5
i
� •, �
I ' I
20
25
Drill Method: Hollow Stem Auger SALEM Drill Date: 9.24.10
Drill Rig: CME-45 Engineering Group, Inc. Hole Size: 6% Inch
Driller: CVT Sheet: 1 of 1
Project: Onyx Ranch Back Cyn. Area Access Road Project No: 2-210-0559
Client: Pasquini Engineering Boring No, B-2 Figure No.: A-2
Location: Rudnick Road, Onyx Ranch, CA Logged By: M.A.
Depth to Water> Initial: None At Completion: None
SUBSURFACE PROFILE
SAMPLE
Penetration Test
d
„
OL
P
'
o
c
�
Description
m
F7
�
e
4
-�
.t+
c
N
0
20 60 100
oe
h
n
In
3
0
Ground Surface
Silty Sand (SM)
Very dense: damp; dark brown;
102.8
8.7
MCS
78
medium -grained: trace of mica; drills
easily,
Silty Sand (SM)
N/A
4.6
MCS
60
6
Very dense: moist; brown; medium-
grained; drills hard.
I
1
10
,
I
i
N/A
7.4
MCS
60
End of Borehole
j
I r
15
i
20
i
25
Drill Method: Hollow Stem Auger SALEM Drill Date: 9.24.10
Drill Rig: CME-45 Engineering Group, Inc. Hole Size: B'/S inch
Driller: CVT Sheet: 1 of 1
Project: Onyx Ranch Back Cyn. Area Access Road
Client: Pasquini Engineering Boring No. B-3
Location: Rudnick Road, Onyx Ranch, CA
Depth to Water> Initial; None
SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE
iC
Description
Silly Sand (SM)
Very dense; moist; brown; medium•
grained; trace of white chalk; drills
firmly.
Grades medium dense; off-white;
medium to fine-grained; drills firmly.
End of Borehole
c
e
m
r
m
p
c
01
� �
.� m
Q.
m
U
Z �
m
o -
r�
CIA
ad
It 15.01 8.1 1 MCS 85 1
105.7 1 13.5 1 MCS I I 60
NIA 1 6.1 1 MCS 60
Project No: 2-210-0569
Figure No.: A-3
Logged By: M.A.
At Completion: None
Penetration Test
20 60 100 3
Drill Method: Hollow Stem Auger SALEM Drill Date: 9.24.10
Drill Rig: CME-45 Engineering Group, Inc. Hole Size: 6% inch
Driller: C\rr Sheet: 1 of 1
Project: Onyx Ranch Back Cyn. Area Access Road Project No: 2-210-0559
Client: Pasquini Engineering Boring No. B-4 Figure No.: A4
Location: Rudnick Road, Onyx Ranch, CA Logged By: M.A.
Depth to Water> Initial: None At Completion: None
SUBSURFACE PROFILE
SAMPLE
Penetration Test
d
d
e
c
c
c
o
Description
e.
c
m
v
3
a
20,
rn
a
C
H i u
r"n
a
m
zo so too
r
3
0Silty
Ground Surface
Sand (SM)
Dense; moist; brown; medium -grained;
102A
6.5
MCS
65
trace of white chalk; drills firmly.
5Grades
medium dense; drills easily.
104.7
6.2
MCS
26
i
I
i
i
Grades very dense,
110.1
6.7
MCS
80
101
End of Borehole
!
15
20
I
i
I
25
Drill Method: Hollow Stem Auger SALEM Drill Date: 9.24.10
Drill Rig: CME-45 Engineering Group, Inc. Hole Size: 6% inch
Driller: CVT Sheet: 1 of 1
n
co
ILI
-
UJ
cc
U) O
W a
mn
tL �
Z a
0
Q
d
J
N
Z
V
0
N
O
oil
■
MOONS
mmmla
.
i
■
■
■
I'.■■■■■■■■
ire■■■■■■■■
VOLUME CHANGE IN PERCENT
r
V
r
t1
a
m
c
Ll
C
d +-
cm
M
4D
'O a
cm
O
O
a
;�
N
�
N
@1
d
N
c
ri
a
0
yVj
Z
c _Hpp
O ill
a
3
m N
LL. V
C
skim
■H■.W■■m�ww
l
�llI
■iit�a�iu■�i■�u
,
n■H
■■/w®
WH\mHN
—
M
AIN
HW
HH■■W/■HHH�
■
t0 Ln O M N O
SHEAR STRESS, KSF
N
w
N
a
0
I
Va
ii
c
c
0 re
CO
o
c
V
N
�
C
.
N
N
N
N
N
C
.O
N
m
Z
T
c ~
C O
C
a 41
h
IL
CA
LL
2
In
0
t0 1A Qi N
SHEAR STRESS, KSF
a
C7
a�
Q O
y t�+f
LU
mecca
N C
a
LLI
U)
w
a
v
C
m�,
G
a
>
to'a
to
�+
(�
c
d
N
^p
V
d
a
c
A
z
E
m ai
�
a c
V
m
Tn
a
y
Z
G F-
d
h
am°
r°n
LL 0
�
o
■MMN■R■■■■N■N■�
■N■■■NN
M■■MMENM■■■■�■■■■MR■�■■■N■N
■/■NORM/■■■■�O■■R/■■■
NMN
MONO
■N■■■■N■B�■/■■■■��■■■
■■■■■
■N■■■■N�■■�■■■�■■
■ate■■
IMMUNE
■■■■NERRRM■■■■■■■aE■M
MEMO
MM■MEM■MMM■■
on
MEMO■■■/
■RN■■■►\■■■■■■■■■■f■
OMENS
N■■�■■■R■■■■�■■■■/■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■/MOON■/■■\■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■M■■■//■/MEMO■►�MRAME■
■
■■/■■NNE■■�■■■NOR■R�
I■
■R■■■Q■Ea■NNRMN■NN■�
I■
MOOD/
/NN
R■/M
■
R■■
R■N
■M-
I ■
■N■N■O■N
■aaNNN■■®1®
m H < V) N O
SHEAR STRESS, KSF
u7
a
mI
0
1
I
�
tv �. rur YI r t�7i jpy --6 .
1'i ! ' ^•f f
yriir :I \i
t
I 1
'
1
'. Y f �•
I `�
(".N
1'
45�n of YIT��+ .1
f: 1If
1
( 1
i
1
•
[�i+3 1 I 1 ,Y
�4
1 d
IX:11B.
it r
' J
fi
r
it
\
/
1
i
/
r
}�
r / 3 4
r
.11JI 11t
J
lit
al
l Y /:1+ f Y. l: 1
AEPEWHU
GENERAL EARTHWORK /PAVEMENT SPECIFICATIONS
When the text of the report conflicts with the general specifications in this appendix, the recommendations in
the report have precedence.
1.0 SCOPE OF WORK: These specifications and applicable plans pertain to and include all earthwork
associated with the site rough grading, including, but not limited to, the furnishing of all labor, tools and
equipment necessary for site clearing and grubbing, stripping, preparation of foundation materials for
receiving fill, excavation, processing, placement and compaction of fill and backfill materials to the lines and
grades shown on the project grading plans and disposal of excess materials.
2.0 PERFORMANCE: The Contractor shall be responsible for the satisfactory completion of all
earthworks in accordance with the project plans and specifications. This work shall be inspected and tested
by a representative of SALEM Engineering Group, Incorporated, hereinafter referred to as the Soils Engineer
and/or Testing Agency. Attainment of design grades, when achieved, shall be certified by the project Civil
Engineer. Both the Soils Engineer and the Civil Engineer are the Owner's representatives. Jf the Contractor
should fail to meet the technical or design requirements embodied in this document and on the applicable
plans, he shall make the necessary adjustments until all work is deemed satisfactory as determined by both the
Soils Engineer and the Civil Engineer. No deviation from these specifications shall be made except upon
written approval of the Soils Enginecr, Civil Engineer, or project Architect.
No earthwork shall be performed without the physical presence or approval of the Soils Engineer. The
Contractor shall notify the Soils Engineer at least 2 working days prior to the commencement of any aspect
of the site earthwork.
The Contractor agrees that he shall assume sole and complete responsibility for job site conditions during the
course of construction of this project, including safety of all persons and property; that this requirement shall
apply continuously and not be limited to normal working hours; and that the Contractor shall defend,
indemnify and hold the Owner and the Engineers harmless from any and all liability, real or alleged, in
connection with the performance of work on this project, except for liability arising from the sole negligence
of the Owner or the Engineers.
3.0 TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS: All compacted materials shall be densified to no less that 92
percent of relative compaction based on ASTM D1557 Test Method-07, UBC or CAL.216, as specified in the
technical portion of the Soil Engineer's report. The location and frequency of field density tests shall be as
determined by the Soils Engineer. The results of these tests and compliance with these specifications shall be
the basis upon which satisfactory completion of work will be judged by the Soils Engineer.
4.0 SOILS AND FOUNDATION CONDITIONS: The Contractor is presumed to have visited the
site and to have famihari2ed himself with existing site conditions and the contents of the data presented in the
Geoteehnical Engineering Report.
The Contractor shag make his own interpretation of the data contained in the Geotechnical Engineering
Report and the Contractor shall not be relieved of liability under the Contractor for any loss sustained as a
result of any variance between conditions indicated by or deduced from said report and the actual conditions
encountered during the progress of the work.
5.0 DUST CONTROL.- The work includes dust control as required for the alleviation or prevention of
any dust nuisance on or about the site or the borrow area, or offsite if caused by the Contractor's operation
either during the performance of the earthwork or resulting from the conditions in which the Contractor
leaves the site. The Contractor shall assume all liability, including court costs of codefendants, for all claims
related to dust or wind-blown materials attributable to his work.
Site preparation shall consist of site clearing and grubbing and preparation of foundation materials for
receiving fill.
6.0 CLEARING AND GRUBBING: The Contractor shall accept the site in this present condition
and shall demolish and/or remove from the area of designated project earthwork all structures, both surface
and subsurface, trees, brush, roots, debris, organic matter and all other matter determined by the Soils
Engineer to be deleterious. Such materials shall become the property of the Contractor and shag be removed
from the site.
Tree root systems in proposed building areas should be removed to a minimum depth of 3 feet and to such
an extent which would permit removal of all roots greater than I inch in diameter. Tree roots removed in
parking areas may be "red to the upper 1'/a feet of the ground surface. Backfll or tree root excavation
should not be permitted until all exposed surfaces have been inspected and the Soils Engineer is present for
the proper control of backfill placement and compaction. Burning in areas which are to receive fill materials
shall not be permitted.
7.0 SUBGRADE PREPARATION: Surfaces to receive Engineered Fill, building or slab loads, shall
be prepared as outlined above, scarified to a minimum of 6 inches, moisture -conditioned as necessary, and
recompactel to 92 percent relative compaction.
Loose and areas and/or areas of disturbed soil shall be moisture -conditioned as necessary and recompacted to
92 percent relative compaction. AN ruts, hummocks, or other uneven surface features shall be removed by
surface grading prior to placement of any fill materials. All areas which are to receive fill materials shall be
approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of any of the fill material.
8.0 EXCAVATION: All excavation shall be accomplished to the tolerance normally defined by the
Civil Engineer as shown on the project grading plans. AN over -excavation below the grades specified shag be
bacWilled at the Contractors expense and shall be compacted in accordance with the applicable technical
requirements.
9.0 FILL AND BACKFILL MATERIAL: No material shag be moved or compacted without the
presence of the Soils Engineer. Material from the required site excavation may be utilised for construction
site fills, provided prior approval is given by the Sods Engineer. All materials utilized for constructing site
fills shag be free from vegetation or other deleterious matter as determined by the Soils Engineer.
10.0 PLACEMENT, SPREADING AND COMPACTION: The placement and spreading of
approved fill materials and the processing and compaction of approved fill and native materials shall be the
responsibility of the Contractor. However, compaction of fill materials by flooding, ponding, or jetting shall
not be permitted unless specifically approved by local code, as well as the Soils Engineer. Both cut and all
shag be surface -compacted to the satisfaction of the Soils Engineer prior to final acceptance.
110 SEASONAL LIMITS: No fill material shall be placed, spread, or rolled while it is frozen or
thawing, or during unfavorable wet weather conditions. When the work is interrupted by heavy rains, fill
operations shall not be resumed until the Soils Engineer indicates that the moisture content and density of
previously placed fall is as specified.
12.0 DEFINITIONS - The term "pavement" shag include asphaltic concrete surfacing, untreated
aggregate base, and aggregate subbase. The term "subgrade" is that portion of the area on which surfacing,
base, or subbase is to be placed.
The term "Standard Specifications": hereinafter referred to is the January 1991 Standard Specifications of the
State of California, Department of Transportation, and the "Materials Manual" is the Materials Manual of
Testing and Control Procedures, State of California, Department of Public Works, Division of Highways.
The tam "relative compaction" refers to the field density expressed as a percentage of the maximum
laboratory density as defined in the applicable tests outlined in the Materials Manus).
13.0 SCOPE OF WORK - This portion of the work shall include all labor, materials, tools, and
equipment necessary for, and reasonably incidental to the completion of the pavement shown on die plans
and as herein specified, except work specifically notes as '"Work Not Included."
14.0 PREPARATION OF THE SUBGRADE - The Contractor shall prepare the surface of the
various subgrades receiving subsequent pavement courses to the lines, grades, and dimensions given on the
plans. The upper 12 inches of the soil subgrade beneath the pavement section shall be compacted to a
minimum relative compaction of 92 percent. The finished subgrades shall be tested and approved by the
Soils Engineer prior to the placement of additional pavement courses.
15.0 UNTREATED AGGREGATE BASE - The aggregate base material shall be spread and
compacted on the prepared subgrade in conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the
Plans. The aggregate base material shall conform to the requirements of Section 26 of the Standard
Specifications for Class 11 material, 1'/2 inches maximum size. The aggregate base material shall be
compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95 percent. The aggregate base material shall be spread and
compacted in accordance with Section 26 of the Standard Specifications. The aggregate base material shall be
spread in layers not exceeding 6 inches and each layer of aggregate material course shall be tested and
approved by the Sots Engineer prior to the placement of successive layers.
16.0 AGGREGATE SUBBASE - The aggregate subbase shall be spread and compacted on the prepared
subgrade in conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the plans. The aggregate subbase
material shag conform to the requirements of Section 25 of the Standard Specifications for Class II materiaL
The aggregate subbase material shall be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95 percent, and it
shall be spread and compacted in accordance with Section 25 of the Standard Specifications. Each layer of
aggregate subbase shag be tested and approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of successive
layers.
17.0 ASPHALTIC CONCRETE SURFACING - Asphaltic concrete surfacing shall consist of a
mixtute of mineral aggregate and paving grade asphalt, mixed at a central mixing plant and spread and
compacted on a prepared base in conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the plans. The
viscosity grade of the asphalt shall be AR-4000. The mineral aggregate shag be Type B, 1/a inch maximum
size, medium grading, and shall conform to the requirements set forth in Section 39 of the Standard
Specifications. The drying, propotdoning, and mixing of the materials shall conform to Section 39.
The pitime coat, spreading and compacting equipment, and spreading and compacting the mixture shall
conform to the applicable chapters of Section 39, with the exception that no surface course shall be placed
when the atmospheric temperature is below 50 degrees F. The surfacing shall be rolled with a combination
steel -wheel and pneumatic rollers, as described in Section 39-6. The surface course shall be placed with an
approved self-propelled mechanical spreading and finishing machine.
18.0 FOG SEAL COAT - The fog seal (mixing type asphaltic emulsion) shag conform to and be applied
in accordance with the requirements of Section 37.
WZXa ; llrt ~V G/�Y"= f
UY 1 7 SWE NECi1T, 15' WNW)
TYPICAL STABILIZATION ! SALEM
t
FILL DETAIL ` 9++9—trmu c.our. in.
iyi—anmuary�y� i ¢n p.K GOWryCLT
TYPICAL BUTTRESS FILL I .1 S.ALEMI
DETAIL Lngiurering C.muiq lnc.
MAL LAV/J OF
EXGVAT/ON
20'
Zt!
/EDUIPNLNT
/ / K7DTH
/ IS' N/N/MUM 81S£
gNAVfAI
/ OVERBURDL7V
(CRfLP-PRIDNE,J
unC '
-OWREMMATE
FWiSH :MD
VATE
ACE
MED /
ML /
/
/
7TP/GL B9NCH/NC.
DAYLIGHT SHEAR KEY DETAIL
S.ALEM
Engina ring Gronpp� foe.
NATURAL GROVAD
COMA4CTED !KL
7Y"
GR10WC
1
1.5
BASE WIDTH V' DETERUN O
BY SA2S rAWNEER
TYPICAL SHEAR KEY I1.-; SALEMI
DETAIL Tsngineering Gr6lir, inc.
TOE LK SLOPE
ON GRAO/A
LIMITS Or
FWL fxCAWROW
f1AlAL AgTUA7411
N/N/NU4/�r
OOWALSL£ OEPTR
K
/
/ —
TYPICAL BENCH --►�
W/DIN VARIES
COMPETENT EARTH
AN7ER44L
TYPICAL BEN
IS' N/AVAWN MSC
KEY WIDTH
1N/£RE M7L4?Ai SLOPE /S &I OR LfSZ
mcoww IS Atli NECfSSer hvwi eR, FiLL L4
N07 70 BE PLAC£O ON CONPRE=LE OR
UAWIMfiL£ A6ITERNL
FILL SLOPE ABOVE 11, -1 S,A,LEM
NATURAL GROUND DETAIL i FSnp111-li-gel ull I.e.
4-
J rr 2 N/N/NUN PER
OPEN ORegEO
WC AND SEAL AT CONTACT
2z
F/N/SN SURFACE
CONPA07AM AIL
APPA�C ESpPFa" OR
A -+-I F M/N/NUM APPROVED
(PERFRA71O D
AONMJM 2rNS OO/ N
1 AMA/M T GY2401E
la ountr
BENCH /NMALM
. lVMRO MAIN
nrrAL BENCNNG
DETAIL A -A z-rZVPMWY FILL LEVEL
CMD
AFI
71 • MRWMLAV COVER
VM 4" N/AAMETER
APPROVE0 D IX
SOLID
PIPE
•Atl7E AGGRt�tif 70 NEE7 FOLLOWING
SPEGF/G1T,Y1A5 QQ APPROVED EOLNL:
S/EV£ $/ZF PFRCENwr PAsgNo
Wo
1' 5-10
all
ar
NR ?DD O-.9
BACKDRAIN DETAIL II' SALEM
(G EOFAB R IC ) Gugineering Inc.
3 a j M/AMJM PFR OMe KWT
APPROVED nlWR ROCA'
DBTAL A -A ,/-7FMRDRARY RU UM
12' MWINUM C0KR I OU SOUPIZEr R AFr
SPEC ROCK
AP JrO V'ONNG
710M M DF
SEW
TYPICAL BACKDRAIN DETAIL SAL.EM
R.ngi"mring Gronp, Inc.
�SURFACE OF
RRM EARTH
CYJA/PAL)ED FILL$14D
//J�UNSUMABLE
NFOU BfWCN/NDJ
SEE LIETAQS
01/NLY/Af£ maY4Ro
nnuu
TRENCH DETAIL
6' M/AYMUM LNYRUP
DPTKINAL WDITCH DETAIL -MXIMW 9 IffiaL
MAMM U/ I
SUPAC 3—P FABRIC OR
SUPAC B—P fABRAC OR APPROWD EOUAL
APPROVED EQU44
6` NM/MI/N OVERLAP
M/NIA M 24'
AIWA/UM
AIMIMUM 8 F7J PER UNEAL
FOOT OF APPROVED A4AIN
tr 5
ORNN A64YFRW TO MEET F&LOWLNC
SPE04C47/ON
OR APPROVED EOU41:
ADO MIN/NUN 1" ,PMALMR APPROVED
PLRFORAMI) PIPE WWEN CMDIW /5
SLEW SIZE
PERCEVTAWE PASSING
LESS MW 28
I-I/2"
BB-100
3-40
APPROVED PIPE TO BE SCHEDULE 40
3/4
0-17
V /OE /PS,V�,G) R tow
USN fNG
J/B'
0-7
�_
NOL:200
0—J
GEOFABRIC
SUBDRAIN DETAIL
.� SALEM
Engineering Grmi)q )m
BENCHING FILL OVER NATURAL
SURFACE
EARTH
—
L —
3' MINhWMTOOL
IN70 SLOREfOuLLAYEO 7x
BENCHING FILL OVER CUT
suAr" OF
FARM AW,,
Izv/"N m SLOPE -
UNSUR`�fERW'�4 )YP,CIL
/&V/SH CL/7 SLOPE — r T
— — 70' 7YPX-,M
PER 60/Mim EMG/NL'Fvwxfrr R/NO 6,=mv L£m
MLVMUM /H70 S[OPF)
BENCHING FOR COMPACTED
FILL DETAIL
SALEM
Rniinarin8 Gronp, Inc,
C
FAMAW GRADE
C" AWA FOR-/
fOUHAAMN L/Ml j
-AND SIVAN44 AOOLS
O �
14
, O 73 IO
�WhWMW
1''I;1 if IL.1 VN_�
SLOPE fACE
5' OR BELOW 0E07H -/
Of DEEPEST UOL/7Y 7RVWH
"AfAM
Ili
ROCK DISPOSAL DETAIL I �'
/ /
COMRIc1Eo nu
/// \ / REMOVE UASUMAC
n*rAL BE�H/Mi- MA7ERNL
J
SEE MAU S
NWMGN
TRENCH DETAIL
UliPERrueAndvs0
R AN7ERNL
:OD/NO
11'
N/WMUN
r/LTER MCTMU
70 NEFr FWOJ iNO
SMIr7O.1r/DN OR APPRDYE'O MW:
Ph-RLM B
AppROVfO P/P£ 70 BfyC HfOuLE 40
E
AOLY-WD
rPAO
OR APPROVED
SEW SIZE
POWDMIGY'
E>7WL M/w/,WN CRUS s cm 1000 Pei
r'
1Do
M' DRUM? AD MEET ME FOLLOWWC Q?n Rk
WRE'cr rO FIELD REWEW 94S O ON Ac1UK
314`
50-100
MrEYW OU CONDIAW4 EAcOUVRED oURWO
3186
40-100
OROM.
Nd 4
25-40
LEMN OF RUN APE 044MVER
Ho. Jo
5-15
UPPER 500' 4'
ND. 50
0-7
AW 1000' S.
Atl. 200
0-3
- > ISM' S.
TYPICAL CANYON SUBDRAIN
DETAIL
cur for
7OPSO2. CO 4MVM AND —'
-' ` y WFAD/ERED GEOR Y
� � !/NW£17l/£RE77 B£AQOClC
CUrIM LOr (7RAASVWV)
i
i
i
UNWLrA7HERED L#OR"
70P SOIL
COUJAO /M AND
OWWRM
BEDROCK
TRANSITION LOT DETAIL
— &WUNO
5•
F..57]
ORACINA(
� i � i ORDUND
AHD
Rfae4 E YA7F
Attachment E
Project Plans for Rudnick Road Culvert Placement
V 'AMWA OSl3N
NONtl3A i AUD
avow Nomm
�ww
,�w,.or�3ffi
loll �Y ll 70 PIII
wIfi. p Ig »e ask k
agg boll v 9
} I
19
It
Z
w
W
LLQ0
D� Z�W
oLL au J a
�avZ0
CL
O
L)
I ` '
1
Y
{�y 3331338330
S31ONW83N30 ONV
dVW NOLLV00I'31111
°111HWZHO
=0
�I
N
VO'A31WA M3N
NONM3A 3O AOO
OVOH NOINOM
alp
NVId ONIOVND I AVMOVO'd
l+n
'IIIHWZH9
�I�
WA3IWA=3N
NONtl3A d0 ALO
Ntlld lOU1NOO NOISOU3
OtlOU NOINOf1U
yn
'IIIHWZHD
tl 'AMWA OS13M
NONU3 40AU3
NVId lOU1NO0 NOISOU3
WOU NOINOOU
'^^°m•�
'IIIHWZHO
VO'A3lNA OSl3N
NONa AdO MIO Ntlld 10a NOO NOISOH3
OVOY NOINONtl
oa 'IIIHWZHD
�a aueonmmam
WABl AMIV
Ntlld lONINOO NOISON3
GO HN INGM
OVON N�INOf1Y ya � R i�
'�IIHWZH�
'i/
1
u( ,
A@
\\\�X\
\
\
\o
1 '
Iv
1 "
\1
1
v
/
1
1
�1
4
/
�yp�
P9 i,
!p3
vety
1
i
iVA
l� \ 1 li ill I III
i
i
/ �..
�y \ �• v v ' 1 III' �, �' � � � /
qvv�, .'1
I� E CH2MHILL.
Ip(( q
SM 5 RUONICROAD €°1
a & Y EROSION CONTROL
V
PLAN NEIL50 VAILEY,oCA 1eN°°" ov rrm
t
ud...poi.e..�.�..w�o.....,....w.na..m,.�n<..na ....... e.....i.....�.�.
m
q
1-
lil
1
Ig
8a
1
rI
�,
i
1
I
1
�I�
�
I
I 11
I
i
CH2MHILL. w^u^p
tlO' RUDNICK ROAD
EROSION CONTROL PLAN CRY OF VERNON
KELSO VALLEY, CA
toi gyilp " l'I'm €lliAll "s €f,10
01 1118191x191 ° 0
1,14 ' 1
���� � ��k�5• a 5O� s pgpg � � � 6 § e-��5
bgsS k K �3ca § a e e$
I'" � € k ' 1
8 In k 1
IN
II 1112p a
m \ R§3 &# A 3 d°IDY"yg gg
_\ 9$d Bo "lad i
€
§§ °
o
£ ¢€� 8
3
F eE RE y AllB€ o
6 RR 33 m
g N
gs
AR
0 I
O
co
� I n I
z m I J�5k9 mz
egg p
m
vir
I
' I
I I
9 '
y fMN
b
I € CH2MHILL.RUDNICK ROM
CITY OF VERNON
S EROSION CONTROL DETAILS xo. wee ,.e,neex ,p,9
€ • p � ¢ KELSO VALLEY, CA
ae..a-5---- r..woea.rw,.raw mv.mmunr¢mnin n.u... .mweiu.awn�uw.m
Attachment F
Salem Enizineerina G
SALEM
engineering group, Inc.
August 11, 2011
Mr. Christopher S. Benson
CH2MHiil
222 E. Carrillo Street, Suite 207
Santa Barbara, California 93101
Proposal No. P2-611-0658
Phone: (916) 286.0280
Email: Chris.Benson@CH2M.com
Subject Proposal and Estimate of Fees
Construction Testing & Inspection Services
Proposed Rudnick Road Culvert Placement
Kelso Valley, California
Dear Mr. Benson:
Salem Engineering Group, Inc. (SALEM) is pleased to submit this Cost Estimate to perform Construction
Testing and Inspection for above-teferenced site.
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The site is located on the northern edge of Assessors Parcel No. 444-060-03 owned by the City of Vernon. The
access road measures approximately 4,370 feet. It is understood that the access road was constructed at an
unknown time and is currently being used. It is further understood that the road is used to provide access to
portions of land around the Weldon Estate in the area of Monarch Mine.
2.0 PURPOSE
The purpose of the Construction Testing and Inspection is to confirm that the proposed access road is
constructed in accordance with the Geotechnical Engineering Investigation (By: CH21\dHill, dated: July 2011)
approved plans and specifications.
3.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES
Services to be provided in conjunction with the Construction Testing and Inspection would include field
observation/testing, soil and laboratory testing. We understand that the required tests and inspections during
grading operations include engineer fill observations and compaction testing, pavement area subgrade and
aggregate base compaction tests, and trench backfill compaction tests.
4055 West Shaw Avenue, Suite 110 • Fresno, CA 93722 • (559) 271-9700 • Fax (559) 275-0827
2321 Perseus Court • Bakersfield, CA 93308 • (661) 393-9711 • Fax (661) 393-9710
11650 Mission Park Dr., Suite 108 • Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 • (909) 980-6455 • Fax (909) 980-6435
3850 North Wilcox Road, Suite F 0 Stockton, CA 95215 9 (209) 931-2226 9 Fax (209) 931-2227
Proposal P2-611-1102
August 11, 2011
3.1 Field Observations, Special Inspection and Testing
Soil Compaction Testing
Measure the compaction of fill soils for compliance to recommended minimum percentages in roadways,
trenches, and other backfilled areas utilizing the nuclear gage or tube method of testing. Perform compaction
testing of aggregate base material in paved areas.
3.2 Laboratory Testing
The laboratory -testing program would incorporate physical tests for the determination of soil moisture, density,
and compressive strength. The following tests would likely be conducted:
In -Situ Moisture and Density
3.3 Compaction and Special Inspection Reports
At the completion of the grading operations, a final report will be submitted. The report will document all our
field and laboratory activities, including field observation and compaction testing. The report would be prepared
and signed by a California Licensed Civil Engineer.
4.0 SCHEDULE AND FEES
4.1 Schedule
Compaction reports will be submitted at the completion of grading activities. Progress reports will be submitted
on a monthly basis.
4.2 Fees
Our Fee Estimate for performing the aforementioned Scope of Services will be billed on time and material basis
in accordance with the attached fee schedule. A minimum of 4 hours will be charged per visit, with an increment
of 2-hour blocks thereafter. A maximum 1-hour travel time each way will be charged per visit. Work over 8
hours or on Saturdays will be billed at 1.5 times the rates shown herein. Work on Sundays will be billed at twice
times the rates shown herein.
Out Total Estimated Fee for performing the aforementioned Scope of Services is $3,025.00. This value is not a
"Not To Exceed" estimate. Since out work is highly dependent upon the contractor and contractor's
performance, and the contract documents requite to -tests and te-inspections due to errors by the general
contractor to be paid by the general contractor, additional inspections due to re -tests and re -inspections would
be subject to reimbursement by the general contractor. The above noted fee estimate assumes that the project
plans and geotechnical report have been prepared and reviewed in accordance with CH2MHill design criteria.
The hourly rates and unit test cost we propose for this project are presented above. Our invoices will be
submitted on a monthly basis and will be billed based on the hourly rates and unit test cost presented herein.
5.0 QUALIFICATION
SALEM Engineering Group, Inc. is a multidiscipline consulting firm providing services in Geotechnical
Engineeting, Construction Inspection and Material Testing. Our staff has the experience and ability to efficiently
address a wide range of geotechnical problems, define their nature and significance, and develop cost-effective
solutions or -responses. The combination of high qualifications and low overhead allows SALEM to offer you
and your client's unparalleled service. SALEM performs field inspections, field and laboratory testing of soil and
other construction materials using experienced technicians who are certified in various grades and disciplines.
S]
Proposal P2-611-1102
August 11, 2011
Out services axe offered throughout California to a wide range of industries, commercial firms, farthing
operations, government agencies, research facilities, consultants, insurance companies, law firms, and others.
Salem Engineering Group is an engineering firm with extraordinary determination to provide superior customer
service. We specialize in geotechnical engineering, environmental engineering, and construction testing and
inspection services. We have full capabilities to perform virtually all aspects of geotechnical engineering services,
including initial soils and foundation investigations, geologic/seismic hazards studies, and environmental site
assessments. Our staff has extensive experience in the design and implementation of cost-effective solutions.
Laboratories for testing of construction materials such as soils, concrete, aggregates, bituminous products,
masonry, steel and many others are maintained to complement the Special Inspection staff. We also provide
forensic and structural engineering evaluation projects, including damage cause and effect, structural evaluation
due to pipe damage, strength evaluation of historical buildings, and evaluation of structural integrity.
We appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal for your consideration and look forward to working with
you on this project. Should you have questions regarding this proposal, please contact the undersigned at (661)
393-9711.
Respectfully submitted,
SALEM Engineering Group, Inc.
r;,1
G alkex
Testing &Inspections Manager
N3
SALEM
engineering group, inc.
To: Mr. Christopher S. Benson
CH2MHi(l
222 E. Carillo Street, Suite 207
Santa Barbara, California 93101
(916)286-0280
Cost Estimate
Date: August 11, 2011
Estimate No.: P2-611-1102
1.0
Earthwork and Observations
30.0 $69.00
$2,070.00
2.0
Maximum Density Curve
3.0 $145.00
$435.00
3.0
Engineering Review
4.0 $85.00
$340.00
3.1
Administration
4.0 $45.00
$180.00
"
Total Estimated Cost:
$3,025.00
Our invoices will be submitted on a monthly basis and will be billed on a time -and -materials bass in accordance with the referenced cost
estimate. Work performed on Weekends or Holidays will be billed at 1.5 and 2.0 times the rates respectively shown herein. A minimum of 2
hours will be charged for all call -out testing
Estimate Prepared by ,
This estimate estimate is for the services outlined above, subject to SALEM Engineering Group, Inc. terms and conditions, or as agreed by both parties.
Minimum hourly charges apply to all testing and inspection services.
To accept this estimate, sign here and return:
2321 Perseus Court Bakersfield, CA 93308, (661) 393-9711 (661) 393-9710 fax
Attachment G
Schedule
LL
F-
3
o�
�N
LL
F
3
q
N
-
E N C
E E c
LL
3
^F
N
i N N
a a
Qyy�
v
fl N
E
LD
a
_01
�, a
o -vl !e! 3 a io .a m �1. f3 $ 3
c r
o E
W m
m
A: aO o 0.0
ep
N izssd
g q T W A N
c
a:giq q q a!q a q,a y a
O
�
N
� m a
i N y
� a
ial� c 6
P c 17 0 - c W m K
3I
CVD Iap �,.tl u v
�C q p W
W
m
L° CSC d
ti O
a
Ti o Ei z
I
^'
z
(L alv).n M oo :oaE d
v'
C N
o
TJ 1E
0
N Ely
i-
Q q
LLo
T-
LL
F-
3
N
T
N
y
LL
H
N
3
C
� �
E E ' a
y�
LL
f
3
iy
E
m
� 1p tY
3
�N
LL
F'
3
�
.n O
rN
w LL
N
LL
f
N
_3
�F
�N
O
��
�
dm
J
O ..
3
F
o2
y
LL
F-
M
�
y
LL
m
�
F
E E c
3
0
N
�
J
N
LL
f
>
N�
E
w
c
0 15
w
Vl
-
LL
=
F
Z
_
M
C
_
y
N
N
3
N
C
�
N
N
N
L
u
O�
w
d�
ao
3
Oy
co
LL
~ 1
F
N
�
Om
m
EE E
f'
O
W �
N
C
y
LL
i
F I
mN
10
vo E w
rn
� in a
LL
-
f
-
LL
y
�
w
f N LL
H
,42
,)Co
N
41
LL
F
N �
O�
3
v�
N�
ao
RECEIVED
SEP 2 6 2011
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
STAFF REPORT
LIGHT & POWER
RECEIVED
SEP 12 2011
CITY ADMINISTRATION
DATE: September 22, 2011 ��—
T0: Honorable Mayor and City Council
/l� Z'
FROM: Carlos Fandino Jr., Director of Light & Power UP
RE: CH2MHILL Engineers, Inc. Task Order No. 2011-4 Pursuant to the
Standard Master Service Agreement (MSA) Approved by Resolution No.
9866 and as Amended by Resolution No. 2011-71 and 2011-89
The Department of Light & Power would like to continue with CH2MHILL Engineers, Inc.
to provide support for construction activities along Rudnick Road located on City of
Vernon controlled lands in southeastern Kern County, California. These activities are
necessary to comply with Kern County requirements related to the pending enforcement
case for unpermitted road grading, previously installed by others in 2006. Additional
Scope of Work is described in more detail in the attached proposal dated September
20, 2011. The total cost for Task Order No. 2011-4 is in the amount not -to -exceed
$134,727.00. This amount will not be exceeded without prior written authorization from
the City.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached Task Order No. 2011-4
With CH2MHILL Engineers, Inc. at the October 4, 2011 City Council meeting for the
amount not -to -exceed $134,727.00.
Fiscal Impacfi
It is anticipated that the total cost of CH2MHILL Engineer's consulting services will not
exceed $ 134,727.
CF: jv
Attachment
INTER -DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 23, 2011
TO: Carlos Fandino, Director of Light & Power
FROM Michael B. Montgomery, Interim City Attorne e
RE: CH2MHill Engineers, Inc.
Task Order No. 2011-4
I have received and reviewed the memorandum dated September 20,
2011, and the attachments thereto.
Task Order No. 2011-4 is approved as to form.
Please note due to the urgency, as advised by outside consultant, an
exception is being made and this matter will be placed on the
October 4thCity Council meeting. In the future please allow
sufficient time for review and approval by the City Attorney's
office.
Thank you.
CH2M HILL
6 Hutton Centre Drive
Suite 700
CH2M H ILL
Santa Ana. CA
92707
Tel 714.435.2000
Fax 714A35.2050
August 19, 204 (Revised September 20, 2011)
Carlos Fandino
Director of Light and Power
City of Vernon
4305-S. Santa Fe Ave
Vernon,'CA 90058
Subject: Task Order 2011-4, Rudnick Road Culvert Installation Project,
Kelso Valley, California
Dear Carlos:
-CH2M-HILL Engineers, Inc. (CH2M HILL) is pleased to submit this proposal to the City of
Vernon (City) for construction activities along Rudnick Road located on City of Vernon
controlled lands in southeastern Kern County, approximately 17 miles north of Mojave,
California. These activities are necessary to comply with Kern County requirements related to
the pending enforcement case for unpermitted road grading, previously installed by others. The
attached Scope of Work describes the proposed activities including project management, work
planning, preparation of subcontract scope -of work, site bid walk, and construction.
CH2M HILL proposes to perform this work as Task Order No. 2011-4, on a time and materials
basis under the contract terms and conditions from the Master Services Agreement, dated
March 4, 2009 and as amended in April 2011.
If you have any questions, please contact Jessica Kinnahan at (805) 680-5032.
Sincerely,
CH2M HILL Engineers, Inc.
X-oa- Y?W--Zs
Mark Bricker
Vice President
Environmental Services
CITY OF VERNON—PROPOSAL
Starr J. Dehn, P.E.
Vice President
Environmental Services
Jessica Kinnahan
Project Manager
Environmental Services
CITY OF VERNON
Light & Power Department
Contract Change Order No. 1 Supplement No. 1 Page 1 of 2
CONSULTANT: CH2MHILL Engineers, Inc. — Agreement Approved by the Resolution No.2011-
162 Date 10-04-11
TO: CH2MHILL Engineers, Inc. (Consultant and/or Vendor)
Dept 925
Denver, CO 80271-0925
REQUESTED BY: City of Vernon -You are hereby authorized to make the herein described changes, or do the
following described work not included in the original agreement.
ADDITIONAL SCOPE OF WORK AND/OR ADJUSTMENTS IN COMPENSATION AS IDENTIFIED BELOW:
The Light & Power Department have been utilizing the services of CH2MHILL Engineers, Inc. to provide support
for the culvert construction activities along Rudnick Road located on City of Vernon controlled lands in
southeastern Kern County, California. The proposed estimated budget to complete the culvert project is in the
amount of $134,727.
Due to the field conditions (rain occurred during the work and caused some delay), coordination for final sign off
with Kern County and the remote nature of the site, it took 12 days of field work instead of 5 days that was
proposed. The additional seven days of field work resulted in the cost overrun of $15,542.96. The final total cost
is $ 150,269.96.
Total amount of this requested Change Order not to exceed: $15,542.96
Except as specifically modified herein, all terms and conditions of the original Agreement remain in full force and
effect, and apply to the additional compensation as if said compensation was originally included in the Agreement
Base Amount of Contract:
Approved:
ATTI
By:
Date:
RLOS FANDINO ., Director, Light & Power
late: 1 L24:-- Y
Page 2 of 2
We, the undersigned Consultant/Vendor, have given careful consideration to the change proposed and hereby agree. If this Change
Order is approved we will continue to provide the necessary support services with additional compensation NOT to exceed the amount
written above.
Accepted: CH2MHILL Engineers, Inc. (Consultant/Vendor) Date:
By: �L� V r ' �. Title:
CC: Javier Valdez
Document Control
DUPLICATE JOB CARD
GRADING PERMIT
KERN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING, SURVEYING & PERMIT SERVICES
BUILDING INSPECTION DIVISION
2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 570 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301-2370
Telephone: (661) 862-8681 Website: http://www.co.kern.ca.us/bid Email: permitsonline@co.kern.ca.us
Project Address:
99999 BACK CANYON RD TEHA
PERMIT NO:
K201100850
Project Parcel:
444-060-032
Application Date:
March 0l, 2011
Inspector Area:
43
Permit Issued Date:
April 19, 2011
Subtype:
COMGRD
Permit Status:
ISSUED
Project Description:
ENGINEERED GRADING - 3880 CY - FOR RANCH ACCESS ROAD/ADD-ON ISSUED FOR
REVISED PLANS
11/11 JCO
Zoning:
A
Zone Map:
-
School District:
094-022 : Mojave Unified
Tract -Phase:
- Lot: Parcel Map:
Parcel #:
Census Tract:
ATN-Book/Page/Lot:
44406003003
Owner.........: VERNON CITY OF
Address....: 4305 SANTA FE AV VERNON CA 90058
Phone:
Contraclor ..:
License No:
Address....:
Phone:
Archiiecl......:
Address....:
Phone:
Engineer......: BENSON CHRISTOPHER
Address....;
Phone:
Census Code: 750 -G
Total Area:
0
Total Value:
$0.00
Activity Code: GONZALESS
Activity Date:
November l 1, 2011
Occupancy
Type
Factor Sq-Feet Valuation
• Totals...
$0.00*
PERMIT FEES
Application Fee $23.00
Plan Check Fee
$32.00
Microfilm Fee
$20.00
Administration Fee $25.50
Site Plan Review Fee
$35.00
Other Grading Fee
$189.50
Grading Permit Fee $157.50
Habitat Conservation
$0.00
Permit Adjustment Fee
$0.00
Total Fees:
$482.50
Total Payments:
$482.50
Balance Due:
$0.00
n COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF BAKERSFIELD AREA INSPECTION,,
1 ( ENGINEERING, SURVEYING & PERMITSERVICES INSPECTION RECORD REQUESTS ONLY (661) 862-8681
c` BUILDING INSPECTION DIVISION 7:30 a.m. — 5:00 p.m.
'� -' CHARLES LACKEY, P.E., DIRECTOR POST CARD AT JOBSITE (8:00 a.m. cutoff for same day inspections. Inspections requested after
0
8:00 a.m. will be conducted on the next business day)
Inspection Date Inspector ENGINEERING, SURVEYING & PERMrr SERVICES
Fire Dept./SRA i BUILDING INSPECTION DIVISION
DO NOT PROCEED UNTIL ABOVE AS BEEN AP ROVED Main Office 2700 M Street, Suite 570, Bakersfield, CA 93301-2370
Grading Phone (661) 862-8650 Office Hours 7:30 - 5:00
GROUND Set Backs
WORK Underground Elec. - Frazier Park Office - Fire Station Ph. OFFICES) 6245-1221 Office Him 7:00-9:00 T, Th, F
Underground Plb, Lake Isabella Office-7050 Lake Isabella Blvd Ph. (760) 549-2061 Office HIM 7:00-12:00/1:00-4:00
Underground Mach. Mojave Office -2300 Hwy 58 Ph. (661) 824-7090 Office Firs 7:00-9:00 M, W, F
Ridgecrest 0f0ce -100 W. California Ph. (760) 499-5071 Office Hrs 7:30-5:30 M, T, W, Th
Address VerNcatlon Taft Office - 315 Lincoln Street Ph. (661) 763-8590 Office Mrs 7:00-9:00 M & W
COVER NO WORK UNTIL ABOVE HAS BEEN SIGNED Tehachapi Office -125 East `F Street Ph. (661)822-6329Office Him 7:00-11:301I2:305:00
Slab Mesh MANUFACTURED HOMES
FOUNDATION Slab Membrane Inspection Date Inspector
Rebar for Grounding Marriage Line
Reinforcing Steel Electrical Continuity
PLACE NO CONCRETE FOR FLOOR UNTIL ABOVE HAS BEEN SIGNED Piers -
BUILDING
PLUMBING
MECHANICAL
ELECTRICAL
(SPINE)
I
Rough Plumbing
Rough Mechanical
Shear
Shower Pan
Roof Sheathing
Structural
COVER NO WORK UNTIL THE ABOVE HAS BEEN SIGNED
STUCCO
PLASTER
WALLBOARD
&CEILING
Interior Lathing
Exterior Lathing/ Skin
Dry Wall
Exterior Membrane
Wall/Ceiling Insulation
Attic Ventilation
T-Bar
Gas Pressure
Foundation / Tie Downs
I DO NOT PLASTER OR APPLY SIDING UNTIL THE ABOVE HAS BEEN SIGNED I Inspection I Date I Inspector I
SEWEAGE
First Inspection
Underground Elec.
DISPOSAL
Sewer Line
Underground Gas
DRYSEWER
Septic Tank
PRE -FINAL APPROVALS
WETSEWER
Seepage Pit
Memos
SEPTIC SYS
Leach Field
Health Department
COVER NO WORK UNTIL ABOVE HAS BEEN SIGNED
Road Department
Wall Relnforcli
Bond Beam
MASONRY
AND
list Grout Lift
CONCRETE
2nd Grout Lift
WALLS
COVER NO WORK UNTIL ABOVE NAB BEEN SIGNED
Location
Steel & Bonding
Conduit Under Deck
Recirculation Piping
SWIMMING POOL Electrical Wlring
Gas Line Under Deck
Fencing & Gates
C.U.P. Require
P.D. Requlrem
Gas Release
Elect. Release
Gas Pressure Te;
Electrical Final
Plumbing Final
Mechanical Final
FINAL Structural Final
Energy Final
Insulation
NO WORK UNTIL ABOVE HAS BEEN SIGNED
n 7675 mo r91rn
Job
ENGINEERING. SURVEYING AND
PERMIT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CHARLES LACKEY, P.E., DIRECTOR
2700 M STREET, SUITE 570
BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301-2370
Phone: (661) 862-5100 Fax: (661) 862-5101
E-nmil: esps@co.kern.ca.ms
Website: w .eo.kem.ea.ma/ess
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AGENCY
Engineering, Smveymlland Permit Services Department
Planning and Community Development Department
Roads Department
ENGINEERED GRADING INSPECTION REPORT
�7, 9997YB•4
Permit No. Z ° // 000 So Job Address r � I �/iC - I�q� C+ , R°%A f+r I
> �,� 1
ROUGH GRADING INSPECTION
Owner C• 0/ ✓ran on `%PS-JS.,
Y'ooS-B
SOIIS ENGINEER:
All earthen fills were placed upon properly prepared base material, benched when: required and compacted in accordance with the
approved grading plan, soils report and applicable provisions of the Kern County Grading Code. Based on field observations and
testing, the site has been adequately prepared for its intended use as affected by soils factors. A qualified civil engineer may certify.
Tract Grading Completed Yes No N/A FSSILot No. Certified 1YI0 6 0 0 3 00 3
QQOFp�
Soils Engineer A'D ., a ti�Z '� ,'j� TER, Reg. No. 2 % t�
M
Signature ( 1(J�/�i 1 No.2709 Date J2/ 1 I 1 t,
EV, 0 3 3
CIVIL ENGINEER: '�FOF C' -
The rough grading work has been substantially completed iil Eiccotdartce withthe approved plans. The site has been graded to
approximated rough grade elevations and temporary erosions and sedimentation control have been installed.
Ai.r b.r bars° yy06003003
Civil Engineer C 0 �'1 Lot No. Certified
Signature
FINAL GRADING INSPECTION
CHMSTOPHER S Reg. No. (0 /o / 0 7
RfNSON JJ
e.._ No 6�107 Date I V7,!/
CIVIL ENGINEER- ""EM510'
The grading work has been satisfactorily completed in accordance withthe approved plans and applicableprovisions ofthe Kern County
Grading Code. All required drainage improvements, final drainage slopes and permanent erosion control devices have been installed.
Adequate provisions have been made for the drainage of surface waters away from the building site(s).
Tract Grading Completed 62No N/A Lot No. Certified 11Y 0 l0 00 3 o 0 3
Civil Engineer C`"*$Xe4e CHRISTOPHER)ofthe
Reg.No- (6/07
/J Bk'1SON
Signature t %` ExpN .6 " /LDate /Z�7 1/
IVI
This form must contain both the signature and professl mp Engineer. By stamping and signing this form the
Engineer certifies all referenced codes, requirements and standards have been complied with and that this form has not
been modified.
G:\ESPS Forms and Bases\- BID\FORMS\20t l Update\Engineered Gmding tmpectim Repoet Rev l0-I Ldw
County Surveyor -Building Inspection - Drainage-Doodplain - Special Districts - Code Compliance
TTY Relay- 1-900-735-2929
2321
us Court
J1
SALEM Bakersfield,CA
661) 9 9711
engineering group, Inc. fax (661) 393-9710
December 1, 2011
Mt. Chris Benson
City of Vernon c/o CH2M Hill
2485 Natomas Park Drive, Suite 600
Sacramento, California 95833-2937
RE: Report of Grading Activities
City of Vernon- Rudnick Road Construction
Rudnick Road
Vernon, California
Dear Mr. Benson:
Project No. 2-611-0953
At your request and authorization, SALEM Engineering Group, Inc. (SALElvI), has prepared this
Compaction Testing Report for the grading activities located at the above -referenced site.
A representative of Salem Engineering Group, Inc., conducted compaction testing for the subject project
between November 30, 2011 and December 1, 2011. A total of fourteen (14) in -place density tests were
conducted. The individual test data are summarized in the attached Table_ The depth and frequency of
testing was directed at providing a preliminary evaluation of the backfill compaction. The in -place density and
moisture tests were performed using a nuclear density gauge in accordance with ASTM Test Methods D2922
and D3017. The locations were determined by pacing and steel tape and should be considered accurate to
within 0.5 and 5 feet in vertical and lateral dimension, respectively.
Based on the results of the in -place density tests, it is concluded that the soil within the culvert has been
prepared in accordance with the Geotechnical Engineering Report (No. 2-210-0599 dated on
September 30, 2010). The subject site and soils conditions have been adequately prepared to support the
proposed stmcture(s).
Should you have questions regarding this report or need additional information, please contact the
undersigned at (661) 393-9711.
Respectfully subxaitte
M E e ' ,Group, Inc.
;I
t
r
xe �lkex
Regional Manager
t-v/aai.t
(2erro—fE, GE
Senior Engineer
RGE No. 2709
No. 2709 1
Exp. 09 3013 /I*
SALEM
23rsPerseus Court
Bakersfield, CA 933D$
(661)393-9711
englne"ering group, Inc, fax (661) 393-9710
CERTIFICATE
Engineered Grading Inspection
CITY OF VERNON- RUDNICB ROAD CONSTRUCTION
Rudnick Road
Vernon, California
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT SALEM ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. HAS PF. ro%v'tfED EARTHwoRK
OBSERVATIONS AND COMPACTION TESTING AT THE ABOVE: REFERENCED SLOE. Tim EARTHWORK
OBSERVATIONS AND COMPACTION TESTING WAS LIMITED TO
THE CULVERT AREA
TO THE BEST OF OUR KNOLEDGF, BASED UPON OUR OBSERVATION AND TESTING, rr IS OUR OPINION
THAT THE INSPECTION WORK WAS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVED PLANS,
SPECIFICATIONS, AND THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE. BASED ON OUR OBSERVATIONS, IT IS
CONCLUDED T14AT THE CULVERT IS CONSIDERED SUITABLE. FOR SUPPORT .AS IT IS INTENDED. FURTHER,
IT IS CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS ARE CONSIDERED SUITABLE FOR THE.
INTENDED USE.
Respectfully submitted,
SALEM Engineering Group, Inc.
Adam Terronez, PE, GE
Senior Engineer
RGE No. 2709
L V •° 9
° p
M z Z° o_
z z°
o= n ^
N Z
n o
c c
'C
jcy y d
V V l V
tj C
q
O
'L
C
"t3 f/1
Q
O.'
aw'a"aa"a"aa"aa"a"a
aaa"a
°
s e e s
u
0
1
a
:uo
rn
O O O
— — — — —
_
Q
EY.
U. 2J
•�. Ly d cam.
IL.L� � - - ^i _i ... .: � s
a
V
z