Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout30577 (199)10 10 10 ICS RICHARD MILLS ASSOCIATES, INC. 9223-C Archibald Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 714) 980-1751 MN f'kINEERING GEOLOGY SECTION GRADING PLAN REVIEW For Lot 65, Tract 30577 Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles and Response to County of Los Angeles Geo I ogic Review Sheet dated Feruary 26, 1981. um CORNER CONSTRUCTION 14763 Proctor Avenue City of Industry, California April 23, 1981 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Response to County Review Sheet Grading Plan Review 2 Illustrations: Geologic Map 1" = 20' Pocket Cross Sections: 1A-lA' (Plate R-1) I" = 20' Following Page 5 IB -IB' (Plate R-2) 11 = 20' Following Page 5 From Referenced Report* Geologic Map - Plates I and 2) 1" 40' Cross Sections A -A' (Plate 3) 1" = 401 3-E1' -B" (Plate 4) Logs for Trenches 1, 2, (Plate 5), and 3 (Plate 6) 1" 5' Referenced Report (riot included) Geotechnical Investigation for the proposed residence at Lot 65, Tract Number 30577, Diamond Bar Area of Los Angeles County, California; by Richard Mills Associates, May 13, 1977. Response to County qic Review Sheet Our responses are in order of remarks 1-3 on the Review Sheet. la. A geologic map based on the latest revised grading plan (dated Dec. 12, 1980) is enclosed. lb. New Geologic Sections 1A-lA' and 1B-IB' based on the revised grading plan have been prepared and are enclosed, Section 1B-I3' includes proposed grading on adjacent lot 66. (See also Conclusions and Recommendations, #5 below). Ic. Evaluate the effect of the proposed development. (See Conclusions and Recorrimendations 1, 2, and 3 below). Id. Clarification of the geologic sections in the above referenced report. Cross Section A-A' was submitted to show the geometrWy ofthe existing old stable landslide on lot 65, and that the stability of the landslide would not be adversely affected by anticipated normal grading for the proposed residence. The depth to the slip, surface of the old slide is estimated at 24-31 feet (see p. 9 of referenced report) . The rriaximum depth of proposed excavations for retaining walls or cut slopes is 9.0+ feet. In our opinion, these excavations will not adversely affect the stability of the old landslide. Cross Sections B--D' -B" (consisting of two cross sections in two difference direct-ions) were submitted primarily to show the natural._ slope stability relations, because a grading plan was not available. The conclusion that the natural slopes are stable (p. 9 of referenced report) is still valid, but Cross Sections B-B'-B" are largely superceeded by attached Cross Sections IA-lA' and IB-IB' that accompany this grading plan review. 1) { gip-14 3 1* U 10 10 10 U 10 I& U 10 The elevations on Cross Sections B -B' -B", and the plotted lengths of A -A' and B' -B" were incorrectly transposed from the working off -ice copies to Plates 2 and 4 in the above referenced report. Corrected Plates2 and 4 are resubmitted with this report. le. Classification of Geologic Terminology The abbreviations (Ss and Sit) representing interbedded sands -tone and siltstone, and (Ss or Sh prtngs) representing inter- bedded sandstone and shale partings have been printed on the graphic logs (attached Plates 5 and 6). The Qal and Col unit (mixture of alluvium and colluvium) is shown on the attached grading plan. It consists of tan clayey silt and brown silty clay where estimated to be thicker than 4.0 feet. If. Compliance with Section 309 See conclusion 8 and 9 below. Grading Plan Review This review is based on the Plot Plan -Grading Plan prepared by John B. Abell, Inc., 5658 E. Beverly Boulevard, Los Angeles, ("'alifornia, Sheet I of 2, dated December 12, 198,0; Scale 1" = 2(l'). Geologic considerations include primarily excavation of a 2:1 cut slope tip to 15± feet high and 180± feet long, a retaining wall excavati on tip to 9 fee t h i gh and 8(l± feet I ong), seepage pi is , and mi nor fill on the northeast side of the proposed residence. 2) P-1 43 10 10 10 10 U 19 10 19 U 10 10 Conclusions and Recommendations: I. Cut Slopes: The proposed 2:1 cut is expected to be locally 0 unstable with adverse apparent dips varying from 7 to 230 Therefore, lateral support in the form of an equipment width (12' approximately) stabilization blanket is recommended for this slope. 2. ,R.e,.t a i r.i i a W_a-41 J s : The retaining wall in the garage Ariveway area (80± feet long and 8± feet high) may require a bedding plane surcharge load equivalent to approximately 25 degrees. We recommend that the actual bedding plane Surcharge, load be determined during in -grading inspections and incorporated at that time into the retaining wall design. 3. SAY epa_9_t._Fj_t§_.- Two pits are located 60± feet away from and below any proposed Cut',. Assuming normal percolation in conjunct -ion with the require- ment that percolation is prohibited in the upper 10 feet of each pit, seepage problems on site or off site are not anticipated, 4. Fill: Only minor fills are indicated on the plans. These should be constructed according to the grading recommendations of the referenced report (Mills 5-13-77). 5. Relation to adjacent lots: The proposed design includes rM large cuts or fills, and no seepage pits near the eastern property line. Thus the proposed grading will not adversely affect existing development on Lot 64. 3) P-143 The 15± feet high cut slope along the west property line stabilized as recommended will not adversely affect the proposed grading on lot 66. 6. Drainaqe: A concrete swale has been designed to intercept the slopewash from the ypslope area west of the proposed construc- tion site. 7. The Conclusions and Recommendations of our above referenced report remain as stated with the exception of 2c. It is super- ceeded by #1 and #2 of this report regarding cuts or retaining walls. 8. The proposed construction is considered safe from hazards of landslides, settlement, or slippage; and will not adversely affect the geologic stability of adjacent lots provided the recommendations in this and the above referenced report are followed. 9. The proposed construction is located on an old mapped landslide, but appears geologically safe because: 1) The landslide has a safety factor of 1.5 according to the geologist of previous record (See Ref. A, p. 5 in our above referenced report) . 2) Proposed grading to maximum depths of 9± feet is not ex- pected to intercept the old landslide slip surface at estimated depths of 24-31 feet. 4) P-143 1* 10 C] 10 10 10 I* U I* I* U 10. The Grading Plan is approved subject to the recornt,,iendaticans so= Respectfully submitted, RTICHARD MILLS ASSOCIATES L. J. Herber R.G. #3642 Richard B. Mills President CEG #114 5) P-143 0 El I* m N w n r- cuN _, VI lf7 Cl.+.> 0CEJ J -Y ro II Mr C .ya a. O? C W b w aro V lb ft. aJ J-% ^ro N a > C71 0 a CC5 c c a 4- "CT N 4dJ M a 4 u5 N 4i7 tNUy a r%• 5,,, a 0 N n= °v v ro o c3 c cr 0 6. J 0 4- 0 LT Lo a tl) N N I V • prn u. Yu 0) 0764- to .ac > a cw 1tenOrs au cN 'rocw 41 a + 4-' O s a w + - a ae ar res Ya .c .c — a a .a -r + p N CI" T y co N r CV d Irl M1(w. 4 Cl: 1 0 CC'S w-. i d 7 0vi a c +a 1 O I CS., M I cwl N " 41 ko CL C7 N a. CT: Y a. a ca 00 , ..y. W 10 I f I m/i c c ro41 Mb / v W w C" F rai 0- CD C7 C.i C7 tO1YY 11YYeYYV pXM51p*!MI'YiN NY'VYp/Nrt "Y1YA 4N!'SVMS NIV2d1 nM 1p'pMY NtlYI NNLLIVYOY>........... 10 10 10 10 I* is I* U I* KI U FILL j_._1_ Compacted fill placed under the supervision of the geologist of previous record. I a I C_l Tan clayey silt and brown silty clay to greater than 4.0 feet in depth. Partially colluvial and alluvial in origin. Ss+Sl-'t —Interbedded sandstone and siltstone of the Puente formation (Sequel member). Contacts, inferred and approximately located. Bedding Attitude. Bedding Attitude; generalized. Syncline axis. Test pit locations. Location of Cross -Sections. Data from Geologist of previous record Reference A & B) 7 L Bedding Attitude. 4 Synclinal axis. Anticlinal axis. 7 P-//' Attitude of slide plane with depth below surface long arrow indicates plunge direction of slicks). 7, Attitude of shear plane. f-+-Buried limit of old landslide. Boring Locations (off-site). 077 Job No. P-143 wv VT_M w.. _ .. PLO ALAN Scale: 1" m°° 40" Oal+Col o . 9 6 kk 77 e , Z I / 05 I Ss t Fill 104) 0 kk Ile Ar' 0 Fill 14- AGLI=S NLS ` DRIVE Richard Mills Associates, Inc. Job No. P-14:1 PLATE 2 10 0 0 0 0 co 1-7 0 0 0 0 C-) 0 T- C") co Job No. P-143 CDJ, 4-J y Y D cy a) (U Y PCS cu t kc) y C. 4-) 4-) 4- 4 4t1 V) 0 W 4-) 0 C) ftl C"') —i It 4 T- C") co Job No. P-143 CDJ, 4-J D a) (U PCS 4-1 4-3 4- ea V) 0 W 0. 4 IN 6 0 V) t C 4--) -0 0 CYD S-1 4-- 0) 0 CO V) C) X 0 u M— r"a1 U V 4. V) LO a9 r rX V) 0 4J 4-) (M 1) 0 W 5-- u V) 4-) V) 0 co v 0 0 Id, q) T- C") co Job No. P-143 CDJ, PLATE 3 4-J D a) (U X.: 4-1 4-3 4- ea t C 4--) -0 0 CYD S-1 4-- 0) 0 CO V) C) X 0 u M— r"a1 U 4. V) a9 r CJ V) 0 4-) (M 1) 0 W 5-- u V) 4-3 M V) 0 co v 0 0 Id, q) E erj 0 0 4-- u 3) X (TI r_ V) 0 0 C. a) I V S- 0 kiJ ft$ 0 4-) 0 4-) 4J A 0 4- 00 u C: 0 0 ct 0 0 4- -,- C: -,-- F: 4- 4-) S- Lr) MJ 4-J c", 3 C.) a9 411 0 (n 0 V) I V) Tj Cl. U U eF) 4-) 0 I Ul a) 1 cu 0) D U klo 'V t 7c Tj 0 n > CU I q) V f+- .,.- 0 0 4-5 T-1 C v--- 0 4-1 V C•") Ira a) V) CL 0 C, 0-C w r- D" V +J ets CU 0 L. r — d a) 0 0 i CX Z11 C% J V) Cyl C. 0 0 < V) Cl 4-5 (V C.) ro -e^. r V) V) (D I I f 0 4-J CO r... V) Cy PLATE 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LO k.0 I'D 2n a 03 0 Vill C) C) C) Job No. P-143 a C.0 r. C LU A I V) V) CD Richard Mills Associates, Inc. PLATE 4 V) C) Ce LIJ DIC A_ C.) VII N CD 49 1,71 Ci 4J Q) d cz ml L E 0 Aj eo CS W pyo Job No. P-143 a C.0 r. C LU A I V) V) CD Richard Mills Associates, Inc. PLATE 4 N I ow 11I 5' 0 TRENCH NO. I lot,/ 0XZQA1, tv4,V 7W 0.0° - 0.,g Brown, porous, very fine sandy silt with trace of clay (—S.L.-ID 0.8'- 2.5 Brown, moderately plastic silty clay 2) M"- 4.5 Tan to brown clayey silt 0 4.5 8.0 Bedrock of interbedded soft brown siltstone and soft fine to medium sandstone. 0 N50W ilk 5k TRENCH NO. 2 443W S I t I&S L-- 7 /V 6r2 00:5 J-- 0.0 1.0 Silt; similar to Trench No. 1, 0.0 0.3 0 1,x.1' 3.5 Clay; similar to Trench No. 1, 0A 2.5 3.5 7.0 Bedrock, interbedded silt tone and sandstone. 0 Job No. P-143 Richard Mills Associates, Inc. 0 PLATE N12E ill = 511 TRENCH NO. 3 71P WIdAq 0.0'- 0.8' Similar to Trench No. 1, 0.0 - 0.8; bUt withIlargerpercentsand. t 0.8 - 2.0' Red clayey sand similar to Trench No. 1, 0.8 - 2.5 2.0'- 7.0" Bedrock, Interbedded sandstone and sandy shale. I* 1* I El Job No. P--143 10 1 @ r PL r g k- h ,R N Abu; 711 Io— ry tIP619Pr , a 9PI1601-0fil"`A4MlPUjf0A;Fe) APPU04 401iow« W1 Mpml rl d&P 711, au, p w....w..„....„,..w„.. u-.»i.-„.,,. ,w.. .i w «www we,.w«w .w,. m,. ....a...w..,.:« R,nri w rxmmm.+....,. Yli) hJ V'kb ..... a u s A ae q a 4 w, a s a s lel w w v m r g, I• i Al w, r k r n v'4 rw_ @ r PL r g k- h ,R N Abu; 711 ry IRI u3 r + r ° w „"t 5+.! i f I ' .I : 4,fi .v fA, Y ,.s 4 Y Y Y4 / * I 4.^ b 1 u? Y l i,f i i'J9. f / V"' brV ,ryJ, y+, , i+uf a F F / 4 / V m` N r`6 '"ya” r Y d' n, W, - v y ,v 7 rf n , rf l r % r 1 "r^t"'»J a o+ 1 Y r „ roo Ag TOO,!, vp d a 1 r k 4! v r vj s f a If I' M F "' a•= F f a rf of to" r I GLl I I w