HomeMy WebLinkAbout2858_Bentley Wy (2)Hw1incton
elchfked
ineeri , Inc.
March 27, 1996
Mr. Richard Gould
DIAMOND BAR EAST PARTNERS
3480 Torrance Boulevard, Suite 300
Torrance, CA 90503
SUBJECT: Geotechnical Review of Precise Grading Plan for 2858 Bentley Way, Lot 11,
Tract 47851, Crystal Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar, California
HGEI Project No. 91-02-0109A-11
REFERENCES: 1) Precise Grading Plan for the Subject Lot, Dated January 11, 1996,
Prepared by Heiler & Associates, Inc.
2) "Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading for Lots 1-17 and 20-48,
Vesting Tentative Tract 47851, Diamond Bar, California," Dated
October 11, 1994, Prepared by HGEI, Project No. 91-02-0109A.
3) As -Built Rough Grading Plan, Sheets 1 thru 7, Tract 47851,
Revised October 18, 1995, Prepared by Hunsaker & Associates, Inc.
4) "Standard Recommendations for Precise Grading, Slope
Maintenance and Foundation Design for the Subject Tract," Dated
September 20, 1995, Prepared by HGEI, Project No. 91-02-0109A.
5) "Results of Expansion Index and Water -Soluble Sulfate Tests for
Lots in Vesting Tentative Tract 47851, Diamond Bar, CA," Dated
Decembr,r 11, 1995, Prepared by HGCi, Project No. 91-02-0109A.
Dear Mr. Gould:
In response to a request from Mr. Lynn Mutch of Pfeiler & Associates, Inc., we have
reviewed the referenced precise grading plan for Lot 11 of Tract 47851.
f
The referenced plan was reviewed from a geotechnical standpoint for conformance with
our recommendations only. The plan was not reviewed as to the accuracy of dimensions,
measurements, calculations or any non-geotechnical portion of the design.
Based upon our review it appears that the referenced plans are in general conformance_
with our previous recommendations. During this review the following items were noted:
Batavia Business Center, 1938 North Batavia Street, Suite N, Orange, CA 92665 (714) 637-3093 - (800) 924-7645 - FAX (714) 637-3096
DIAMOND EAST PARTNERS
Project No. 91-02-0109A-11
March 27, 1996
Page 2
1. Based upon the comparison of the building pad elevation shown on the plot plan
with the as -graded elevation shown on the rough grading plan it appears that no
significant grading of the building area is planned. The lowering of grades around
the residence is planned to improve drainage and construct the driveway.
2. The graded portion of the descending slope at the rear of the property is part of a
shear key that was constructed in order to increase the stability of the building pad.
3. The building footprint, as shown, does not extend across the foundation setback
line shown on the Geotechnical Plan, Plate A-4 (Ref. 2). As a result, deepened
footings will not be required for the residence.
4. Tests performed following completion of rough grading indicated a medium
expansion potential and moderate water-soluble sulfate concentration for the
surface/near-surface soils as defined by the Uniform Building Code.
5. Foundation and floor slab design criteria for a Type III system presented in Table
A of the rough grading report (Ref. 2) are considered applicable to this lot.
6. Sulfate resistant concrete containing Type V cement is not considered necessary
for this lot (see Ref. 5).
7. The homeowner should be informed that future grading to alter the slopes should
not be performed without review by a geotechnical consultant familiar with rough
grading of the tract. In addition, the homeowner should be informed of the
importance of slope landscaping, maintenance and erosion control and should be
provided with guidelines that were appended to the referenced rough grading report
Appendix C, Ref. 2) and the standard recommendations (Ref. 4).
We trust that this letter/report is adequate for your current needs. If you have any
questions or require further assistance, please call.
Very truly yours,
HARRINGTON GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING, INC.
r }
J. Stanley Schweitzer, P. E.
Senior Geotechnical Engineer,`,
Distribution: Addressee (2)
Pfeiler & Associates, Inc , (3) attn: Lynn Mutch
C:IDOCSOBAR1PLANRVW\LOT11 PRE.GRD
