The URL can be used to link to this page

132 Redding Rd. (TR8638) EDWARD J. HAHAMIAN CIVIL ENGINEER 1211 PARK AVENUE #212 SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95126 (408) 279-2954 April 29, 1997 Building Official City Hall Campbell, CA SUBJECT~ Tract 8638 Pine Village, Redding Road RE~ Final Grading & Drainage The revised grading-drainage plan dated 2-8-96 as stamped, signed and delivered to you recently and the construction staking and verification thereof were performed in person by the under- signed" All grading and drainage is in accordance with of the D.B.C" I hereby state that to the best of my the work within the scope of work was performed in with the above referred to grading-drainage plan follows: Chapter 3317,,5 knowledge accordance except as The storm drain inlets installed in the rear of Lots 1 through 4 and 9 _ through 12 are different than the 18 inch V-64 inlets per above plan. Based on observation by others during 1996-97 storms9 the substituted inlets functioned satis- factorily. Also the revised grading - drainage system was designed to permit the overland release of storm drainage should the storm drain system mal-functions" Flease be advised that I was unable to verify the 6 inch storm drain as specifiedo It is recomoended that private storm drainage easements be written and recorded across the lots referred to since they were not reserved on the recorded Tract Mapo ~ / c::: v~e t/e _c/ rCZ Submitted by: /.--;;::: -- .. : - Ae<j:;/>.p -../.' ~:.. (I::') LEE ..... ..... ..... . . . . . . . . . . . .. , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... ........ .... ...... .... ....... . .. . . .. .. ENGlhtEERS, INC. ~ :1 V IE j!i"; .. ~ ..~ .. 00'- '. "j-51" 1994 ,IVII- . : ~ . . .. o ..' ;;. . . , , . . I +b*'i,d .. .. 'C : :..,.. .' , :..;.. .. C" . . c' i :.., , H+ , .. ,.. h :... ,.. . '.'~ .' . ,., :.... : ., ....., .., ---'~-,"---.-- ., .. : ;. c' :' , . , : ; .., :. ..... 0.. ...,. .. ., ; ,. ..; , .. ;. :... ; ,... .; :.. h .. : . : :.. .. .. : .. -~--.------------.-<.~~ , T ,.. : ; .. ; .. ... .... ...,. ; . .,. c" ,.. ... :..: 0 . e" ..:. ;...; "';" , ;.. :., : . i ..: "Iff :.. : , .. ; ..; ..., ;.... ...,.. ; 'C :1 . ':'" ,..; , : .; ,...... ;.. i.; ,... :...;. ; ..; C" . . : .. . : d , : ., : : , , . ... 1.. : .. , :., : .. h. .. I, ... .. : ; ; : .. ... 'c' : .... .... . . : ... ..,..~. . h . .'. , :..:.. .,.. ; ., : ~-.;.--~ : .; ...: ., .... .., , :.. : ... :...;. . .. .. : :...;.. ., , .. d , .. o . . , , ' : ,,,-'~-~"-........------- : ; I' .... : .. . : Ii ,. : . ; ; ...,. : . : - ----. - 1211 Park Avenue San Jose, CA 95126 (408) 293-3833 ~:d .of. .: ~- : ~.. .:... JOB SHEET NO.___ CALCULATED BY CHECKED BY _ SCALE OF DATE_ DATE - - !m=~utJljJ~~r . ., .. -- 'u' .:..;.., tt . J~~.ur.:tit. ,;:"~;~'~i~r:-;~'T : u___ "_ ..n_,. ___, __ .. 1..-: ._ -i- .J- ,. ,'" ., TT..:"(; :l rFh;t1j "~ 'j;r~~~. ~ :~I ' ~~~k~~~:' :v::' \~\\c ~ . w: l r N.<i.$,\ '.. . :, ':' ~(IN~" " . ~t'f2Ji~' .' 'r;;>>rUF ~ji~'....~.i/f!;fr.rT ,":Qn~t~. c :u .":ut' '~T:' .,\f\by':'" : . ':'~}; -i;t'~;.~: ,u'"c , ~ . ., I.'. : - - - . .. : , , , . , , . : .. :', --~--~....--.---~' . . . . ...:.... . .. : ~ : 'u , :.. : :. n' ...... L....." .. ... , ""; {/zHrjl'95JF[ myel (;\;, I ':tg~,ttJiJ .... yi~ ~-: 8>r~:,u i~........~.[I:.........:.::::.......:.,'f.........1..,.....g.:':.1......'.:....c. d::',. .:.J:........~'::..N...::.... .:::........n:.......:::...~.....:.i......1:... c..... . ; 'j'::t:'::: }'l . '. '. :...:' ., .. ., .... ~ ..: -;. - ,- -. - .;.~. : : , . ' .....'.., , : '.:"::" -~ - ...-~ -~......-.---:--:---.-~ .' .... ......., , , ., ":" . . ~~~~~ --; . .:... ... ~ ..~.. ~. ~--:.-_ _.iu~~_.~_i-~: _:~-~_...:.~ : ' : : : : : : : -~--~~- T: : . :-H-I-Tu , : : : ~::,'i': fJ":::::"';: LEE ..... .......... .... . ......, .... . ....... .... . ....... ..... ......... . . . . . .. . . . . . . -" . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . ENGh ..cERS, INC. 1211 Park Avenue San Jose, CA 95126 (408) 293-3833 JOB SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY ~ , CHECKED B~1 '--' /L; SCALE OF DATE b... ~"Tr:: v i ,. '. :. : :.. " . .. ~7:-: -:~-~TT ;..:.; ~: - I" : l~H#.lr }11JWH'~I~rRfHfJ~1t 1 '~!'~.T.;b~ ~:tk~.l;b_.".:< ~E.iit4\P~'.T'i "1lD,.-i~, .:.I~. .:..:: : : .... '_'\I' .,..,:. .. . . .... .- ~v.'~ed~5~ ..e..d .., : . , ;...j....:....... ...j... .:. ; . ;.i . h; _ ,. ~.. ...i..:ri)II'r hi -8il5'~R-h~'''~'' ~lE!:e::':E:::B:' ,.:jE::::d:';. j~~i~!~l!~Tr;1 Ji.J~k.4rI~4T~tr+ ..' -, ,-... .. ..~ .. ...... -,.. ,.. :. i ..; . .,- ., . ., , . , ,'.. ... ..i. . ' T. I.: , -. . . . ., .. '( ~'.::."; i- :.'.,." .. ". ; '~:$: CL..1~~:.,. :.. ... ... ~J1.lllr:'> n ",' + " ....'(~!:~.~iH4tn~:J . .~. ,: '. :~li~L~~f~:.:.t\?rr:':::i.' ....: .;-...--+--~_-.:.. ~~---i--+- ~_A : .... . : " ... ...;. I.. I. .~, . '. : ..; ..; H--: '+-,~ -+--;-,--+--ri-+i-~-~ '.n'___' : . r:. : I. ".,: :',.. ~:.T.'~~'~:!:: ; . ,;' h' -:: " 'j" ..: (... . ~,~-~~iI- eit~ ~; Y:-~t~ #~)):MI Uffl~' ; '" , " .: ,.:. .. .. .. ... .. ,. ,. .,. I.; .:. .. . !( -r-r,.. : ,.:; :. ; -- : . J: ," --.: -:. -- ~...:. - ,.. -:-- -:. .. . .' !h;d.::.... . O:,I1r'f""'" : :2 I... :. . .....'...;. ... .. ...... ..~ 1fi'1:, .;.:. d -; .;...;. i tt $€i . . 1/ ../ ~ :#4 , : ,;, ';-;-i j..;-:. ,.;:-~': ,:., : "---,-:__:.-,---,--~j~...:- ~~,- -"-, ': : ; : .il..:. ,.. . : : . --'-.'_:--'--'-_:_c_ '--'-.:_ : ".~4L ~f7 ~j !'-;:~ I J I A,I <==J f,:~ ,I I oil j J ' )::':::':::>:',,-/;':>:, '/0-" BSI CONSULTANTS, INC. 16880 West Bernardo Drive San Diego, CA 92127 (619) 451-6100 City of c..~~pb~\) Project -r,. B C.A 3> 4 Gr.~\....."\ ~ ~"""'P ~ 0 \J S(..q ENGINEERING FIRM _L-CL.4t- e. ~ \..... c.c..r.!o PROJECT ENGINEER rf'l ~" K 'I'"' Lc. e. TELEPHONE (40~) c.'?>3- 38,33 Plo..",.) CHECKED BY~-- \(~r- b~ DATE~ v.-\'l 1 \ ( ~ ~ CHECK NO. \ CORRECTIONS -th'-. p\tlt'"\S. \f\}c..r~~c..+.\O.... \;)~ tL & +h'- .5..\-or~ P\~ \~ adminlcorrecta.frm CORRECTIONS (,) s ~o- +\.-.. .",+ ,......A 1:. \ ~ P ro.~ ' \ Co P ro ~ , \ <!. G\v(.. e..JC.1s.lr'''''j ~ f~Qr'V~t.d c..\ c:..vo..t '""'1 I (A) 0." o..Hc..,......o.~\v(.. l'c-,~,\lt. It...~IS~ ep ~ r~..p TC. f>rQ'oJ'I~"9'\i Tc.... c..\t:,.V,,) \o..be..' c::..~\S~\~J 4=. lI:.\e..v, \ r'\ 'P \ 0.. II" V l ~"'" ') 7) ?('"'~""'\~c. S~~<;l<:'\t.'^-t c::.Y.tS.+If'\~ L p-'rQ'st.J ~r-",J.eJ 0.+ -t he. rL +0 ....s. ~ Q-., -+hlL <''It+-Il..-. k c:.~ j ,~,)., ....~ o..."~ e...~l~~,_") ~ pr-o?OSC.~ c\,""o..j'- F~*'-"'''''S t.) ?r<;)...'~... 0.. \ Il.Jc.." ~ ,"" -t""t. ~r..~\,,~ p\4......s ~) LOtbt.1 c;..\l c..~\S..\-\") ~ fC-OP()!""a. \1:c..-\. 8sf....,\o..\,y ~c.. ()<;<;;'~r-h:. -.~pho.\~ J ~~V'\t..C-4..L.. &. \eln~,.c::..o.pc..J. ()..n.A~ 10) L..bQ.\ +he.. +1pC. S. r~+c.."",....,\ '-,\\ ("''lC.IS~\'''') ,... Prof) II) P ro.......' ~ '- o~<;. - 5".l- ~ IS~f'\C.~j ~o r- +h.. e. ~I s+, r-q, 1 Jx p<'""OpOSc..& S;o..<:..\\,~\c..S' lZ-)Shc._ +""c.. pr-Q.pOSc.~ f'/l \-l 1.. \ 0. b\t. \ -t hll.. l3) A~d. rC.n 0..\\ ~\-. ("..d \."'~~ c...Cl--'''''",-S \ '2..../ SD \ n p rQ..c l ,__ oJ \ "" V~ r .\- c... \ c. V Ot ~ I 0,..... ~ +k, ~~("" <;;;'_r~\...."'''- rq""Vtc..W' 0\ '" ~ ("" c.. ~ "" r "" adminicorrccu.fnn o"'C"4t !..4,~' ,I)~~ ... r" U t"" . . .. "- <So .<.. ~. c.' O~CH'\lQ' CITY OF CAMPBELL March 16, 1994 City Clerk's Office RECEIVED MAR 18 1994 Mr. Steve Saray 1475 Weaver Drive San Jose, CA 95125 PUiJL.iL ... Vn,'~ ADMINISTRATION Dear Mr. Saray: At its regular meeting of March 15, 1994, the City Council adopted Resolution 8619 approving the Final Map of Tract 8638, accepting the dedications offered thereon, and authorizing the Mayor to sign the Map and execute an agreement for Street Improvements at 132 Redding Road. The City Council also approved the requirement that you post a refundable cash deposit of $5,000 to cover potential staff costs associated with enforcing the requirement to install street improvements in conjunction with this development. This fee can be paid at the time you pay your encroachment permit fees. Please find enclosed certified copy of Resolution 8619, together with a certified copy of the Street Improvement Agreement. Please do not hesitate to contact this office (866-2117) should you have any questions regarding the City Council's action. Sincerely, CL~ Anne Bybee City Clerk enc. cc: Mike Fuller, Public Works Department 70 North First Street. Campbell, California 95008.1423 . TEL 408.866,2117 . FAX 408.374.6889 . TOD 408.866.2790 CIty of Campbell City Council Report yJ1 / /ct! -1- / ( L~/7 Item: 5 . Category: Consent Calendar Date: March 15, 1994 TITLE: FINAL MAP AND STREET IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, 132 REDDING ROAD, TRACf 8'38 RECOMMENDATIONS 1) Adopt the attached resolution approving the Final Map of Tract 8638, and authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement with Pine Village, IDe., a California Corporation, to install street improvements at 132 Redding Road. 2) Require the applicant of this subdivision map, Steve Saray, to post a refundable cash deposit of $5,000 'to cover potential staff costs associated with enforcing the requirement to install street improvements in conjunction with this development. DISCUSSION On November.2, 1993, the City Council approved a Tentative Subdivision Map (TS 93-04) to create 12 townhome lots on property located at 132 and 146 Redding Road. Redding Road is unimproved in this area, so full street improvements will be installed by the developer in conjunction with this development. The applicant of this subdivision map, Steve Saray, has been involved in the development of many subdivisions in the City of Campbell since approximately 1988. The City has bad numerous problems with satisfactory completion of street improvements associated with these projects. Within the past year, the City has sought assistance from bonding companies for the satisfactory completion of street improvements on projects by this developer on Latimer Avenue, Sunnyoaks Avenue, and Hacienda Avenue. Prior to seeking assistance from the bonding companies, numerous attempts were made to have the applicant repair the deficiencies in the improvements. Many staff hours were spent repeatedly corresponding with the developer, reinspecting work, and seeking relief through bonding companies. Recognizing this pattern of unresponsiveness on the part of this applicant, staff seeks to have the applicant post a refundable cash deposit of $5,000 to cover such staff costs, should they be incurred on this project. This deposit is in addition to the usual fees and deposits associated with this development. Should the development proceed smoothly, the deposit will be refunded to the developer. Staff is satisfied that all conditions of approval of the tentative map have been satisfied or will be satisfied prior to recordation of the map, and the final map is therefore recommended for approval by the City Council. FISCAL IMPACf None. Final Map and Street Improvement Agreement: Page 2 ALTERNATIVE Do not approve the final map. E . V~ Approved by: ~~ PUblic Works Director Approved by:Jj~.~ City M er Attachments: Resolution Agreement Plat File: 1'593-04 h:finmaps(mp )6.0 March 15, 1994 WEST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY SERVING RESIDENTS OF CITY OF CAMPBELL TOWN OF LOS GA TOS CITY OF MONTE SERENO CITY OF SARA TOGA UNINCORPORA TED AREA 100 East Sunnyoaks Avenue Campbell, California 95008 Telephone (408) 378-2407 January 25, 1994 Ms. Joan Bollier Department of Public Works City of Campbell 70 North First street Campbell, CA 95008 RECEIVED JAN 27 1994 RE Tract No. 8638, pine Village Redding Road PUi:>LiC Vi\_,::'S .i\DMI NISTRA no,.,\ Dear Ms. Bollier: This is the district's clearance letter for Tract 8638. This clearance is solely for the recording of the Tract Map. The district has not approved the project's sanitary sewer improvement plans. The sanitary sewer improvement bond and all applicable district fees are still outstanding. A final clearance will be issued after all district requirements are met. Very truly yours, Robert R. Reid District Manager/Engineer .~ onathan K. Lee ssistant civil Engineer (FORMERL Y COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO.4) ..~'r )"~'''<;_!~~~~-~'''''''''o/<~~''f("~~~~~~7~~'!l~ TRACT NUMBER PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT Hl:... JIL Y - YOU leE-re .,"VO County of Santa Clara Current Planning Office 70 W. Hedding St, San Jose, CA 95110 Phone: 299-2454 JAN - 7 1994 1. Location of Tract J3~ 4 '4 G> ~E..PDIN (i " 3. Number of Lots & Units I h~ Ie O. See Instructions Below PUBLIC WOi<.,,:, 2. Proposed Tract Name AT/ON .p, Nt. V/I...t-A (1 r I .r A.)(. · 5. Date of Planning Commission Approval of Tenative Map 11/1/ "l.r 4. Approximate Acreage J.O 6. Owner's Name Pit". f V I C (, /.>. ('1 t:l 1 A} 6, 7. Owner's Address (?Q :3 2<:.>6: ~>~~V b)(J7{) l\c~ 9. Engineer's Address and Phone Number U II fA t.:" t: ~i. 4- J rz... s , J. cIS "J S t ~Jc 8. Engineer's Name Lr:r f,f.)(-1ifv(U'\, iN( "'}>j/j 1 O. Is the Proposed Tract in an incor orated City? es No 13. Remarks: 11. Is the Tract Proposed for Annexation? Yes~) 12. If the answer to 10 or 11 is yes, What City? j'/ ' INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING TRACT NUMBER REQUEST FORM: 1. Existing frontage and intersecting adjacent streets or reference to existing tract limits. 2. If unknown, so state. Name must be provided prior to recordation if name is to be used. 3. Self explanatory. 5. The tract number will be issued only after the Tentative Map has been approved by the Planning Commission. 6. through 12. Self explanatory. 13. For additional comments by private engineer/surveyor. NOTES: 1. Enclose copy of approved Tentative Map. 2. The form shall be filled out and the gold copy retained by the engineer. 3. All other copies must be forwarded to Current Planning Office, 70 W. Hedding St, San Jose 95110 4. Where development involves more than one unit, submit a separate Tract Number Request for each unit 5.. --T.~R'lbQr i5 auto" ,atiGally v'oiel if RQt uied within Qn~ yp.::Jr frnm tl:l~ date ef issue 8ReI request i,l ..ritiRg fer renawaJ.flas-f'let'-been- reGei ved. 6. A request for renewal shall be in writing and shall include the date of the re-approval or extension and the length of time for such extension 7. The assigned/number is not transferable, except upon written re-application. 8. Enclose $..,e/, ISsuance fee. ' . ; il . .,. TRACT NUMBER ASSIGNED: This space for machine valjQ~,t'PfJi ',/:.:;1<" <'J\"~.~ '.J :,,:jV REQUEST COMPLETE BY I DAT~, _ / €f Routing White - Land Development Coordinator Green - Owner's Engineer Canary - Planning Commission Pink - City Engineer Goldenrod - Owner's Engineer (Preliminary Copy) S) 6240 REV 8/88 ".'" MEMORANDUM CITY OF CAMPBELL From: Mike Fuller Land Development Engineer TimJ.Hale~- Associate P{annb': ., J Date: January 31, 1994 To: Subject: Park Dedication/lmpact Fees -- 132 & 146 Redding Road -- ZC 93-03 On December 17, 1993, I sent you a memorandum calculating the Park Impact Fee for the above-referenced townhome project. This calculation credited the anticipated Park Fee with two single-family residences. However, the calculation was done at a density of 6-13 units per gross acre versus less than 6 units per gross unit which is the current density of the properties. This modification results in the following calculation. The total Park Impact Fee for the Project is $84,420. This is based on 12 units at $7,035. The credit for the existing two single-family units on the property is $21,980 resulting in a net Park Impact Dedication Fee of $62,440. Seventy-five percent (75%) of this amount is due at the time of final map recordation or $46,830 and $15,610 is due at the time of building final and/or building occupancy. If you should have any questions regarding the above calculations, please do not hesitate to contact me at (x2144). cc: File Frank Cauthorn, Building Official Steve Piasecki, Community Development Director RESOLUTION NO. 8573 BEING A RESOLUTION OF TIlE CITY COUNCIL OF 1liE CITY OF CAMPBELL, APPROVING A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP, FILE NO. TS 93-04, LANDS OF MR. STEVE SARA Y, ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 132 & 146 REDDING ROAD. After notification and public hearing as specified by law on the application for approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map as referenced in the above heading; as per the application med in the Planning Depanment on July 26, 1993; and, after presentation by the Planning Director, proponents and opponents, the hearing was closed. After due consideration of all evidence presented, the City Council did find as follows with respect to File No. TS 93-04: 1 . The proposed subdivision density of 11 units per gross acres is consistent with the low-medium density residential land use shown on the Land Use Element of the General Plan. 2. An initial study was prepared for this project and no significant environmental impacts were found. Based upon the foregoing findings of fact, the City Counicl funher fmds and concludes that: 1 . The proposed subdivision is consistent with the General PIan. 2. The proposed subdivision does not impair the balance between the housing needs of the region and the public service needs of its residents and available fiscal and environmental resources. 3. The design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opponunities. 4. No substantial evidence has been presented which shows that the project, as currently presented, and subject to the required conditions, would have a significant adverse impact on the environment. Based upon the above findings, the City Council does hereby approve this map, subject to the following Conditions of Approval attached hereto, as Exhibit A. PASSED AND ADOPTED this ~ day of November, 1993, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Councilmembers: Councilmembers: Councilmembers: Councilmembers: A TrEST: a><<-~~ Anne Bybee, City aerk Burr, Watson, Ashworth, Dougherty, Conant None None None APPROVEDBY: ~u~(l{k--~f Barbara D. Conant, ayor '""E F(\F.~ 1('ING INSTRUMEIllT :s A TnUE ~o OOfti1E::', t::.cpy CF THE QRIGI"iAl. OH FILE IN till!': orFiCE. ArrEST: "~it'E t.y~::E. C!TY CL~K. CITY OF AMPB!::..L. ~;::aA.~ L ..:h" la" C4Jt. BY ~ ~ . ED.....N~1 "- -I li,--'~~il .. ~ . ....-:1 ,. 'r.) ..PO!I1C'" .n . ..PO..... . ~ ~ Ii .. ... :: I It ~ . -.. .. I - I 0 , ~I II ~ I - oJ ~ J 0 ...11 lid' 10' oJ I "'i:II'I"J i I ~:~ 1 : 1~1 '* .. ~11 ! I , ~U I > · . c II rfJI I I :: I pI: J- -.. ~Il '1Inun': ~ 911 . I __._ : :Ill ,.. ,I LlJ "I~~ LJ~ul: I - - -. 9! I = . I , . i I -; Ii 4 IOl , ..-. . I .---. : . .. ~. 0" n f I 2: . . oJ ! .k i ~. I .. $51 I ! ... . ~ . i r oJ_ · b b . . N .. . I . $I : I~ . b. .. .. i i . i , '0 = .)l ... --.-. I :: N-........ I t! . .. !! I ~i . S I I ... . ~ - -. I !' " . .. I . I 91 If i' I c:=:J ; '. r. I sd ... D :0 1- ~ rd, j I If I I~I!J I I I ~ ~ ilio I I " VI~~;'li6 81C1tl I' J jti!!w I Ell I 1".':";1 Jffll' 1.1 'I ; ! ~ i I j Ii i! : : .. .. U : Ii I ~ : ')I! lI3~liilifl!jll I!I I ~II~~ ;'If!f!!I!I!!~ Iii Subject Tentative Map . il - ~:I ~ f I i tfs s W .. I . ~il&l '1. ffi i~ ~ n i ",- t tf U ~ f8' oJ II 1&1 .. . ~ ~ c ....,_ I III ;. . , ,', .\ ".." " . II ' . \ ". , '. ." '. " . \ . '. a. I L-----__rL-. ---~J; : I"il.- -- =- - --t-~-------~-1-aYou --~9NiOaiy--ji"lil " '1 _ ~_ ______f~= V It I . ., .. . I It ORDINANCE NO: lQ92 BEING AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNOL OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL AMENDING THE ZONING MAP FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 132 at 146 REDDING ROAD, AS SHOWN ON TIm ATIACHED EXHIBIT "A". APPUCATION OF MR. STEVE SARA Y. FILE NO. ZA:. 93-03. The City Council of thE: City of Campbell does ordain as follows: SECTION ONE: That the Zoning Map of the City of Campbell is hereby changed and amended by adopting the attached Exhibit "A" entitled Map of Said Property, as per the application of Mr. Steve Saray, on behalf of Sarayco Group, for approval of a Zone Change for property located at 132 &t 146 Redding Road, from R-M-S (Multiple Family Residential) to PD (Planned Development. SECTION TWO: This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following its passage and adoption and shall be published once within fifteen (15) days upon passage and adoption in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Campbell, Council of Santa Oara, State of California. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 16thday of November, 1993, by the follwoing roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers: Conant, Ashworth, Burr, Dougherty, Watson NOES: Councilmembers: None ABSENT: Councilmembers: None ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: None APPROVED: /s/ Jeanette Watson Jeanette Watson, Mayor ArrEST: /s/ Anne Bvbee Anne Bybee, City Clerk T1'I\!t.leNT is'' "",,U!! 'ft4!! pOREQOlNOOC'''';v OF ":"HE OP,1G1NAL AND CORRECT ON f1~ :N ~IS OFF;CE. E "'TV OLEN< CITV :r,EgT' ANNE eV9~ , ~.. ( A, 'PBEU. CALIFORNIA. ),..,,' "1{ \.~ :v.' tr~~u . \~~\~~. - CA EO~\ \ ',._ llt' <v 4. ~~\;~q5. Ai:tachment #4 Zxhibit "A" CONDmONS OF APPROVAL FOR FILE NO. TS 93-04 SITE ADDRESS: 132 AND 146 REDDING ROAD APPLICANT: S. SARA Y PC MEETING DATE: OcrOSER 12, 1992 The applicant is hereby notified, as part of this application, that hel she is required to meet the following conditions in accordance with the Ordinances of the City of Campbell and the State of California. Additionally, the applicant is hereby notified that helshe is required to comply with all applicable Codes or Ordinances of the City of Campbell and the State of California which pertain to this ~eve1opment and are not herein specified. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Sewers: Installation of a sanitary sewerage system to serve all lots within the subdivision in conformance with the proposed plans of the \Vest Valley Sanitation District. Sanitary sewerage service to be provided by said District. 2. Water Service: Installation of a water distribution system to serve all lots within the subdivision in conformance with the plans of the Sail Jose Water Works. Water service to be provided by said water comp~"1Y, Fire hydrants and appurtenances shall be provided and installed at the locations specified by the Fire Chief, Central Fire Department. Fire hydrant maintenance fees shall be paid to City at the rate of $195 pel' fire hydrant. 3. Subdivision Map Act: Compliance with the provisions of Title 20, Subdivisions of the Campbell Municipal Code. Storm Drain Fee: Subdivider to pay Storm Drainage ~ea Fee. $2,025 6. Title Report: Subdivider to furnish copy of Preliminary Title Report. Surety: Subdivider shall install street improvements and post surety to guaranty the work. Grading/Drainage Plan: Provide a grading and drainage plan for review by the City Engineer. 7. 8. Encroachment Permit: Obtain an enaoachment permit and pay fees an deposit for all work in the public right-of-way. 9. Final Map: Process and file a subdivision map. TO: 3372 3521 3521 3521 3372 3373 3373 3373 3373 3372 3372 3372 3372 3372 3370 3380 3395 3510 City Clerk PUBLIC WORKS FILE NO. i3Z. ~ePDI/V(j tzD6 Project Revenue (specify project) Public Works Encroachment Permit Fees: Application Fee Regular ($210) R-1 ($58) Plan Check Deposit Faithful Performance Surety (FPS) Other Cash Deposit Plan Check & Inspection Fee (First $0-$30,000 14%; Next $30,000- $80,000 10%; Amount Greater Than $80,000 7%; $200 min.) Project Plans & Specifications General Conditions, Standard Provisions & Details ($12 or $1 /page) "No Parking" signs ($1 lea. or $25/100) Copies of Engineering Maps & Plans ($.50/sq. ft.) Final Parcel Map Filing Fee ($1 ,000 + $21 /per lot) Final Tract Map Filing Fee ($1 ,300 + $21 /per lot) Lot Line Adjustment Fee/Certificate of Compliance ($500) Vacation of Public Streets and Easements ($525) Assessment Segregation or Reapportionment First Split ($525) Each Additional Lot ($160) Storm Drainage Area Fee per Acre (R-1, $1,875; Multi-Res., $2,060; all other, $2,250) Public Works Special Projects Park Dedication In-lieu Fee Postage ($500) (100% of ENGR. EST) (4% of FPS) ($500 min.) 15:'5"2,. (f!) NAME OF APPLICANT S'\f\.f SAJZc, f ADDRESS III 7) l AK,.C/::'ilr.,IC Df- S' :\ . FOR RECEIVED B -c ~J , l I u.6 CITY CLERK ~ ONLY DATE -JrA - ~ ~ -9 J TOTAL $ /!;SZ.{n' PHONE 4 C'J ~ J )t~ -nO (J c/J ZIP 95' I C'J- CITY OF CAMPBELL 70 NORTH FIRST STREET C AMP BEL L, C A L I FOR N I A 9 5 0 0 8 (408) 866-2100 FAX # (408) 379-2572 Department: Planning December 1, 1993 Mr. Steve Saray Pine Village Inc. 1475 Weaver Drive San Jose, CA 95125 Re: PD 93-02/ ZC 93-03/15 93-04 Dear Mr. Saray: Please be advised that the City Council at its meetings of November 2, 1993, and November 16, 1993, took action to approve your proposed townhome project for 132 & 146 Redding Road. The City Council's action approved a zone change from R-M-S to PD (Planned Development) and a Planned Development Permit and Tentative Subdivision Map to allow the construction of 12 townhomes on the project site. The applicable ordinance and adopted resolutions are enclosed for your records. H you should have any questions regarding the City Council's action, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Sincerel y, ~~ Tim J. Haley Associate Planner cc: ,e .,,,,til.t.,, Frank Mills, Building Division Thomas Von Joo-Tornell, Central Fire District Lee Engineers, Inc. 1211 Park Avenue San Jose, CA 95126 Sanla Clara Valley Waler Dislrid 6 5750 ALMADEN EXPRESSWAY SAN JOSE, CA 95118-3686 TELEPHONE (408) 265-2600 FACSIMILE (408) 266-0271 AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER IlECE'''ED SEP 24: 1993 PUBLIC 4DI14INJst Uk..,.... R.4 TlON September 23, 1993 Mr. Tim Haley Associate Planner City of Campbell 70 North First Street Campbell, CA 95008 Dear Mr. Haley: Subject: Tentative Map for Pine Village Town Houses, City File 93-04, sent to us on September 16. The site would not be subject to flooding from a District facility in the event of a 1 % flood. Proposed land use change would not directly affect any District facility. If site drainage is to be directed into a District facility, detailed plans should be sent for our review and issuance of a permit prior to the start of construction. In accordance with District Ordinance 90-1, the owner should show any existing well(s) on the plans. The well(s) should be properly registered with the District and either maintained or abandoned in accordance with District standards. Property owners or their representative should call Mr. David Zozaya at (408) 927-0710 for information regarding well permits and the registering of, or abandonment of, any wells. Sincerely, Eugene H. Sullivan Supervisor, Permits Section Design Coordination Division cc: L~bliC Works Department {~ity of Campbell Lee Engineers 1211 Park Avenue, Suite 112 San Jose, CA 95126 n \.J recycled paper . ,,: ,.., :.'.......,:..,-.- .:MORANDUM :'~'.'.."_:'* :'~1 :; 'Yf' ,~. / I l ~\. \" ,J CITY OF CAMPBELL To: Tim Haley Associate Planner Mike Fuller ,;nO ~ Assistant Engineer Date: December 3, 1992 From: \ ~ ~ Subject: ZC 92-04/PD 92-02 132 and 146 Redding Road ---------------------------------------------------------- The Engineering Division has reviewed the referenced application, and our requirements are as follows: 1) Show the distance from the front property line to the roadway centerline on the site plan. 2) Process and file a subdivision map. 3) Pay storm drain area fee of $2,025.38. 4) Submi t three copies of grading and drainage plan for review by the City Engineer. 5) Install street improvements on Redding Road as directed by the City Engineer. 6) Obtain an excavation permit, pay fees, and post surety for all work within the public right-of-way. 7) Pay park dedication in-lieu fee of $52,762.50 at the time of approval of the Subdivision Map. A Park Impact Fee will be assessed at the time of application for building permits. If you have any questions, please call me. 11 - - Geotechnical Investigation Report for Pine Village 12 Unit Town Homes RECEIVED iJAN - 41994 PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISlRA liON .IanualY 3, 1993 ~""fJ"'..' ..., ........ ..." ........ ',", ......... "'" ........ .::..:....................................::-:.............. .' . . . . . . . . . . . .., .......... ..' .......... .", ......... ... ........ LEE ENGINEERS, INC. 1211 Park Avenue San Jose, CA 95126 (408) 293-3833 Pine Village Inc. 150 E. Campbell Avenue Campbell, CA 95008 Subject: Geotechnical Investigation Report Project: Proposed 12 Unit Town Homes on 132 Redding Road Campbell, CA APN: 414-39-001 & 414-39-002 Dear Gentlemen; In response to your authorization, Lee Engineers Inc. has conducted a Soillnvestigation Rep0I1 for the subject site located within the City of Campbell, California. The accompanying report presents the results of our field investigation and literature reviews, as well as our conclusions and recommendations. Our findings indicate that the site is suitable for the proposed development provided that the recommendations in this report are carefully followed and incorporated into the plans and specifications. Should you have any questions concerning our report, please contact our o1lice at your convemence, Very Truly Yours, /}/}1 ~ I?-) ~ .~ Mun Kyu Lee RCE # 25881 Enclosure: Geotechnical Investigation Report '" TABLE OF CONTENTS LETTER OF TRANS MITT AL I. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION 1. Purpose and Scope............................................................................. 1 2. Location and Description of the Site................................................... 1 3. Subsurface Soil Conditions.... .......... ..... ........ ..... ................ .... ... ..... ..... 1 4. Liquefaction Evaluation. ..... ...... ,.... .... ............. .... ... ... .......... ..... ........... 2 5. Regional Geologic and Seismic Conditions......................................... 2 II. DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1. General Suitability ofthe Site............................................................. 3 2. Earthworks.. . . ... .... .... .. .... ... . .. ... . .. ........ .... . . . . ..... . .... ... ...... ......... .. ... . ..... 3 3. Foundations .... ......... ........... ...... ....... ............ ........ .., ....... ...... ... ..... ...... 5 4. Slab-on-Grade concrete.................................................... .................. 6 5. Pavement Area................................................................................... 6 6. Surface Drainage. . .. .. . . .. .... .... . . .... . . . .. . . . . .. ... . . . .. .... . .. ... ... .... .. ....... . . . . ....... 7 7. Post Report Geotechnical Services ..................................................... 7 General Construction Requirements................................................... 7 Limitation and Uniformity of Conditions............................................. 8 III. APPENDIX A Field Investigation........................................................................... 10 Geologic Map (Figure 1)................................................................. 11 Site Plan showing Test Boring Locations (Figure 2) ........................ 12 Logs of Test Borings (Figure 3,4 & 5)........................................... 13 B. Laboratory Investigation.................................................................. 16 Summary of Laboratory Test Results.............................................. 16 C. Recommended Grading Specifications............................................. 17 Guide Specifications for Rock under Floor Slabs .............................20 I. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT 1. Purpose nlld Scope The purpose ofthis investigation, for the proposed two story light fiame wooden structure, ] 2 unit town home structure development on the subject site, was to determine the suitability of the development, and based on the conditions revealed, to provide adequate foundation design criteria and recommendation for the development of the site. The investigation included the following: a. Review of the available geologic data pertinent to the site. b. Surface reconnaissance orthe proposed development area by the soil engineer. c. Exploratory test boring, sampling, and classification of the foundation soils at the properly to such depths as may be significantly influenced by the proposed construction. d. Laboratory testing of the collected soil samples. e. Engineering analysis of the data and formulation of the conclusions and recom- mendations. f. Preparation of this written report. 2. Location and J}escription of the Site The proposed development site is located on the south side of Redding Road in- between Parsons Avenue and Hollinan Lane within the city limits of Campbell, California. The property is topographicaly almost flat with a drainage grade toward south direction. The lot is occupied by two existing, vacant single family residental structures which will be demolished by tltis project. The vegetation on the lot includes two big pine trees and two Italian cyprus trees which may it be trimmed and kept as they grow. Other than those structures and vegetations, there are many disposed appliances, garden debris and a car which may be required to be removed from the site. The location and site description reterred to herein is based on a site reconnaissance by the soil engineer on December 30, 1993. 3. Subsurface Soil Conditions The subsurface Soil generally consists of some tine grain soil mantle and coarse grains of well graded alluvial deposit as deep as reached up to 30 feet. The surface mantle of organic growth soil contains dark brown Sandy CLA Y with silt and gravel. Below this soil layer was a well admixed multiple grain sizes of alluvial deposit. Below 7 feet the layer is cemented hard and dimcult to drill by the rock pit auger. With increasing depth of drilling, the layer of alluvium contains larger grains of cobbles. Thus drilling became harder. The deepest drilling was 30 feet at the test bore hole No.2. During the course of the drilling, the soils encountered were classified in accordance with standard engineering criteria. The field classitication are occasionally modified after the samples have been examined and the test results analysis appears on the Test Boring Logs in Appendix A 4. Liquefaction Evaluation Liquefaction is a phenomenon which involves a liquid-like flow of cohesionless, loose- ly packed and saturated silts or sands. Liquefaction occurs when saturated sediments are subjected to prolonged shaking during an earthquake. The consequences of liquefaction may be diflerential settlement, land sliding and lateral spreading. Minor phenomena, such as development of sand boils, may be associated with liquefaction. The project site is underlain by densely consolidated well grained sedimental alluvium. Furthermore, ground water was not encountered in any of the test borings. Thus, it is concluded that the liquefaction potential at the site is extremely low 5. Regional Geologic and Seismic <':onditiolls The proposed development site is located within the seismically active San Francisco Bay Region. The geology conditions were studied by means of review of the available geologic data and site reconnaissance of the proposed development area. Existing geologic references are revealed the area is a weakly consolidated Quaternary and Tertiary alluvium deposits (as much as 150 feet of depth). The major documented active tault within the vicinity of the site is the San Andreas Fault which is located approximate 6.4 miles to the southwest to the site. And the Hayward Fault is located approximately 11.2 miles to the northeast respectIy. Therefore, the special study zone delineated by the Alquist Priolo Geologic Hazard Act of 1972 is not in the vicinity of the site. However, based on the seismic history of the San Francisco Bay Region, it has been considered probable that a major earthquake will occur within the lifetime of the proposed structure. Accordingly, if such an event occurs, the ground acceleration lasting several tenths of a second will lead to violent shaking at the site. This corresponds to a modified Mercalli Intensity of9 or 10. 2 n. DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1. General Suitability of the Site The site may be developed for the proposed light framed 12 Unit two story Town- Homes, provided the recommendations included in this report are carefully incorporated into the design considerations, project plans and specifications. The site soils are capable of supporting the proposed light framed structure without detrimental settlements. 2.l!.:arthworks a. Site flrel)aratioll and l:learing The site should be cleared of any buried obstruction, debris, primary root systems of any trees, preoccupied structural foundation materials and leachfield remains ifany. Depressions and loose soil zones should be carefully backfilled up to at least final grade with on-site inorganic soil compacted to the requirements given below under Item "d" Compaction. b. Grading i. All grading requirements, in addition to those specifically described herein, must be performed in accordance with the applicable sections of the "Recommended Grading Specifications" which will hereafter be referred to as the specifications. The specifica- tions are presented in the Appendix and set faith the minimum standards necessary to satisfy the other requirements of this report. Without compliance to the specifications, the design criteria presented in tillS report are not valid. ii. All vegetation, debris, rubble and any contaminated or organic topsoil should be removed from all areas to receive fill or structures. The rubble should be disposed of before commencing the grading operation. Organic soil may be stockpiled for later use as landscaped material. Care should be then taken to ensure that root systems of trees are properly removed and that the resulting depressions and loose areas are adequately compacted in compliance with fill compaction standards. If any import fill materials are required, such material must be approved by the Soil Engineer prior to transporting the material to the subject property. iii. All fill placed within the building pads should be compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction as determined by soil conditions in the field. 3 iv. Where fill is to be placed on slopes with inclinations steeper than 3: 1 (horizontal to vertical), particular attention must be given to provide adequate keys. A base key should be excavated at the planned toe of the filL This key should extend the full length orthe fill, be at least equipment width and at least two feet deep into the undisturbed native material, and should be sloped back into the hillside at a gradient not less than two percent. Fill placement should then begin by compacting material meeting the requirements of engineered fill into this key. As the fill placement proceeds uphill, benches should simultaneously be excavated into the sloping hillside to a sufficient depth to reach the underlying native soil. . v. Any fill slopes should be no steeper than 2: 1 (horizontal to vertical). However, cut slopes may be constructed at 1.5: I maximum. It is recommended that after the completion of the slope grading, erosion protection should be provide. It should be also noted that a slop should not be left standing through a rainy season without the erosion control measures having provided. c. Material for Fill All on-site natural soils which are not contaminated with organic materials are suitable for use of fills. In general fill material should not contain larger rock or lumps larger than six inches in dimension. i\ny imported material should be brought to the site and should meet the following requirements: i) Have an R-Value not less than 25; ii) Have a Plasticity Index not higher than 12; iii) Not more than 15% passing the No.200 sieve; iv) No rocks larger than 6 inches in maximum size. d. Compaction All structure fill placed at the site should be compacted to at least 90% relative compaction by mechanical means only as determined by Test Designation D 1557-78. Fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in uncompacted thickness. the subgrade in pavement areas should be compacted to a minimum of 90%. e. Trench Backfill Vertical trench excavations up to 5 feet deep should be capable of standing with minimal bracing for short construction periods. Attention is drawn to the State of California Safety Orders dealing with "Excavations and Trenches." Unless concrete bedding is required around utility pipes, free draining sand should be used as bedding. Sand bedding is defined as material placed in a trench up to 1 foot above the bedding. 4 For the purpose of this section of the report, bedding should be placed so as to achieve an in-place density equivalent to at least 95% of the compaction test maximum based on Test D55 7 -78. No sand for proposed use as bedding may be jetted or ponded into place to aid in achieving the desired degree of relative compaction. Sand for proposed use as bedding should be tested in our laboratory to verifY its suitability. On-site, inorganic soil may be used as utility trench backfill. Special compaction of trench backfill will be necessary and adjacent to all structural fill, building foundations, consrete slabes and asphalt pavement. In these areas, backfill should be conditioned with water to produce a soil water content of about 3 percent above the optimum value and placed in horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches thick (before compaction). f. Construction Inspection All grading, earthwork and subdrain placement should be performed under the observation of the Soil Engineer to assure proper site preparation, selection of satisfactory materials, as well as placement and compaction of the fills. The Soil Engineer should be notified at least two working days prior to any earthworks in order to observe and to coordinate the work with the grading contractor in the field. All earthwork should be performed in accord dance with the recommendations presented in this report. Due to variations in soil conditions encountered during construction and to assure conformance with the plan specifications as originally contemplated, it is advised the engineer intennittently review these aspects, as required, during the earthwork and foundation construction phase. 3. Foundation The proposed structure may be supported by conventional perimeter and isolated interior foundation system. Perimeter strip footing and interior spread footings may be utilized for structural support under the following conditions. a. All the loose top soil and building foundation have been removed from the new building pad and brought up to grade with approved material. b. The pad where fill material was compacted to minimum of 90% relative compaction with non-expansive soils under the footings. For one or two story wooden frame structures, the exerior perimeter footings should be continuous and reinforced with a minimum of one No.4 bar in the top and bottom. The foundations shall be founded a minimum of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade, either into finn, natural ground or engineered fill. For the above conditions, an allowable bearing capacity of2,000 psf for the perimeter footings, and 2,4~0 psffor the isolated, interior spread footings may be utilized for dead plus live loads. These values may be increased by one-third to include the short-term latealloading forces. During foundation construction, care should be taken to prevent the evaporation of water from the foundation and floor slab subgrade. Scheduling the construction sequence to minimize the time interval between foundation excavation and concrete placement is important Concrete should be placed only in foundation excavations that have been kept moist and contain no loose soil or debris. 5 4. Slnb-on-grade Concrete Concrete floor slabs should be constructed on compacted soil subgrades prepared as described in the section on site preparation, grading and compaction. To minimize floor dampness, a minimum of 6 inches section of capillary break material covered with a membrane vapor barrier should be placed between the floor slab and the compacted soil subgrade. The capillary break should consist of free draining clean gravel or rock, such as 3/8 inch pea gravel or penneable aggregate complying with Caltrans standard specifications, Section 68 Class A, type B. The membrane vapor barrier should consist of at least 10 mil thick polyethylene or the equivalent. If a protective "cushion" is required on the membrane vapor barrier, we recommend that gravel capillary break material be used instead of sand. Sand has the potential to discharge into the underlying capillary break material through any punctures in the membrane vapor barrier, leaving voids under the floor slabs. Using capillary break material instead of sand as the membrane cushion will eliminate this potential problem. Where floor dampness is not objectionable, concrete slabs may be laid directly on the compacted soil subgrade. 5. Pal'ement Area Near surface clay materials have a low supporting capacity when used as a pavement subgrade. No specific tests were performed to determine the pavement section in proposed driveway areas. However, based on our experience with the soils of the general area, a tentative pavement section is presented herein. When the subgrade is established or when a grading plan is prepared, and accurate pavement section will be given at that time. T.I. R-Value AC (estimated) (inch) 4 7 2.5 5 7 3.0 7 7 3.5 'Yhere TJ.= Traffic Index A C. = Asphaltic Concrete AB.= Aggregate Base, minimum R-Value of78 AS.B. = Aggregate Sub-base min. R-value of 50 compacted to min.95% AB. (inch) 6.0 6.0 6.0 AS.B. (inch) 4.0 9.0 Pavement construction should conform to the requirements of Caltrans Standard Specification, except that compaction requirements for pavement soil subgrade should be based on ASTM Test D 1557-78. Aggregate used for asphalt concrete surfacing should conform to the grading specified in Caltrans Section 39 for 1/2 inch maximum medium grading. 6 If standard llexible pavement is selected for construction, we recommend that curbs and gutters be constructed directly on the compacted soil subgrade rather than on the aggregate base. This will reduce the risk of surface drainage water and landscape water seeping into the aggregate base of the pavement and will thus reduce the risk of pavement distress due to subgrade softening. 6. Surface Drainage Surface drainage gradients should be planned to prevent ponding on pavement and also to direct surface water away from building foundations, slab edges of pavement and toward suitable collection and discharge facilities. Roof drainage systems should be planned to direct rainwater away fiom building foundations. Water seepage or spread of extensive root systems into the soil sub grade of foundations, slabs or pavements could cause differential movements and consequent distress in those structural elements. Landscaping should be planned with consideration for these potential problems. 7. Post-Report Geotechnical Services In addition to reviewing the geotechnical aspects of design and specifications prior to construction, LEE ENGINEERS should be commissioned to provide the following geotechnical services: a. Observe and advise during site stripping and preparation. b. Test and advise on proposed import fill (if needed), prior to delivery on site. c. Observe, test and advise during grading and placement of structural fill. d. Observe, test and advise during foundation and slab-on-grade construction. e. Test proposed capillary break material and advise on suitablility and observe and advise during laying of capillary break and vapor barriers for concrete floor slabs. f Observe, test and advise during utility trench excavation and placement of bedding and backfill. GENERAL CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS I . Planter areas should not be adjacent to the building foundations. Should planters be desired, then these planters should be provided with an effective water-tight barrier at the planters to keep the water from affecting the foundation. 2. The final grade around the buildings should be provided with sufficient gradient away from the foundation to carry water run-off to a proper discharge system. No water should be sHowed to pond adjacent to the foundation. 3.Even though the surface soils on the site are classified as having low expansion potential, continuous roof gutters are suggested. Then, splash blocks must be provided below each downspout and the splash blocks should be sloped away from the buildings to direct water away from the structures. 4.A11 grading and foundation plans should be reviewed by the Soil Engineer prior to construction. 7 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS I. The recommendations of tillS report are basd upon the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate from those disclosed in the test pits and from a reconnaissance of the site. If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during the development of the site, LEE ENGINEERS INC. should be notified so that supplemental recommendations may be given. 2. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his representative, to ensure that information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the Architect and Engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans, and that the necessary steps are taken to see that the Contractor and Subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field. 8 III APPENDLX A Field Investigation Geologic Map (Figure 1) Site Plan (Figure 2) Logs of Test Borings (Figures 3 thru 5) B. Laboratory Investigation Summary of Laboratory Test Results C. Recommeneded Grading Specifications Guide Specifications for Rock under Floor Slab-on Grade A. Field Investigation The field investigation was made on December 30, 1993, and included a visual inspection of the site and drilling of three exploratory borings at the approximate locations shown on Figure No.1 Site Plan. The boring were drilled to a maximum depth of 30 feet below the existing ground surface. The drilling was done with a truck-mounted drilling rig using power-driven 6 inch diameter, continuous flight auger. Visual classification was made from the auger cuttings and the samples in the field. As the drilling proceeded, undisturbed core samples were obtained by means of a three-inch-O.D. modified California split-tube sampler. The samplers were dynam- ically impacted with 140 pound hammer in a free fall of 30 inches into the native soiL The number of blows, converted to standard penetration values to advance the sampler 12 inches were recorded and are shown on "Logs of Test Borings". Classifications made in the field were verified in the laboratory after examination and testing. The stratification of soils, descriptions and location of undisturbed soil samples are shown on Figures No.2 and 4, "Logs of Test Borings". 10 11 ~~r flllO ::lI _II':' . 'J' ~~J)1\~~(o/li E JUI 1 j:' .. . I ;1' Ill' .;" ~." _ \~; Am1- ~ [ i... tllg ~~~;",1i ~!'.' '.'; ., 1 r~.~ .'), _ ' ~~ =' q~\'t J .~ I'> 'w ~~ .~1IlJ Wh1011 in j I\ljill.l ~!llll . '.' :t:, '~l, ' . , ~ ~~1~li~J . ~ ~ J~~Jt!J~1J~,~JJmill ~l~ ~11l!llw ~j, ,;"[At ~~ @;, >Yt ~ [l)'l'\ ,M, ,~"[tiICL il~'rJlrii(~}g~ ill lll; llIT :::: ~Lt'I,,-r;;nr"'-:t~~~L= 'B<;" 'lJ - \~; >-< . 0,A ~_1 I~~ril lil I u~Wi~21)/IJ~fiil ~ .,~~ T.::J ~ (IW~ jIJ I\~ ,', ;" 111I1U d ~\ 5\ ~ ;;;, \.~ -'}ii~~ ",. >. ;~I:.r ~ 'rlif J /,: x~ ~'n~ 'J ~J, ~{:~I I..try IL l!:id1~;1 J ~\~ ~' l ~\f ..' I\il /f:l~~~ -, ~I\;' J ~ pI]. -~ ~~] If 'iN1o. ~I/FIJH n:;. ~ ~ ~(~~'>)^1, <:110 yjJ'/, I~"'):j", ..~Kl }~, [b " il~ p T 1'_ :;t ~ ,,:% ~ . 1. i ~ '~r.1< 0 t.; '/4. ' ;- ~ a. ~~~~' ~ 1I f ,~ _ ,,/ I; . f., l' I \ - . HI 11it=R SliJI1l} ft-1~~ \\ e 1 ,r"V-' 1\ . ..t. - ". . " "~U -;J}JiL~' 'N! 1 U" v."..:; I J' ,w.r 16,' " . J~,~ 'l J 't.lr~" -l ""r't-:?~.1 ~;.,~\\i 3 ~ i ..' \ " .'. . '';')'?~ 'r~r(~' --;-:'..r\.} '~r;:,< k\;'7r . .'1 r = 11;;' )'J-~:;\Jl '~~~S11~.~J'I}~~~~<7~' "}nJ>~i~\ '\,;3~ ~ "~1l~. ~ :'Cc v:P~- )~. .",~ ~~J 'j- ,} ~ JI.'Jl ~ 'J : I ft \it '1/~ri"')\ le'mm ./- ,a~~,\\ ':1 fi;~Jt; tt ,( !j4~~7J 11 ;i1p., , .~: _ co i~ H~IL{ uf~(l!l/I!!Wl~8~d~ ~~~ ->3J 1'[, J~?v ,).!~\ ~ . <-: :"'-,~1~.. ~i~~"i!J;rr_\ ' ~~ . (ill ' 1II11~1I ~'. ~~ ,~~ ,. f :1' ". ! .,~' ~,<J> ';j~(iJ< ',fl! ,nl'1 ll~ If\ '~~IU\~('?,{ Ii I' ~L ,. p;~~~ ~f;~/ j~~~r\l~~~t . ~.<::"~ ~~ .~~~ ,.~, ;~'[.~~?~~~_V .~ ~l~ffHYiv~~,' '.- .~;~:.~ ~~, ~S:>2fl. \m " i'il ij>I- < To 1.d~1'1~1. 1(.. . ''''I'~ 1- .. -I(~ ":JII":\"\r.'''lr}..1~If]41i, ,,..}::!y, -,".X?>"-")"'''' 'fJl ,~ if:.~~) ~:~0~. ,2::.<;1' >~ '~$jt f;7'1f'.{ J' gJl/ }~~,.'..; .J?,;;(" ;.' , ,~ffl ~~ ~ ":.\,,<,,,\)/0 '. \_,,;-;,;{-f"' 'l1.. I .o..;;;:.v..l . ,~, '.. 'r- ~ ," ""'~~'Y,/,1'-~\' If~' ~,.. j ~ :..~ ..:.I I, ~ l' J" .~~~ "'-.1' ~ '}i::::;~j tll.f'tls --J ~ ;"~~;Z~~[" ;-',- '-"J:..~~'J..I !JjlifrJV~~' Ll" \,. if {':"-.l.,7':'~~?s~. "~A ~.~ .~:- .~:' A -I " ~~"''''O<J.'' -, >..:::, "C;~~"") (,~. '7V"'~'~?1. e:ltf-/~r'-\i(j.l(,~z.;;"'if="(R ~ . \ /.78[..\ ; ~ . -~<. r(',;, ~' ! }01 '-'" 0 : ,';f"->;' '~'~':~;i~~~'/~'~ ..q~~",;? '<'L'~~ 1 " :0. .~' ~l:q> 1.'-;'.1,"'. i! [ ~.,;!1,:,: ;:{:,~';"~~'~'(i ~~'~I-'~ :-:::;"""--;;'"i~ ( ,.1. '-~'.iI;0 ~'~'.;!;.~..J~l1rJ'-''-.~.v<.:n'~;j.I]/,-'-:~I\ ',..., :' ...~"":~....,~\I'" ~L' I '(0 '.I~"'~~'~~~"> j. . J '\.A'~' ;~~~~~~o'l') ~ ,'t~~~~/~\">'G 'I'::" ;.r.'--~\'-J ~,"<~'",;-:i ~c~:, .< ,~~~:,> ~ ~,' ;'(~2~~"~ r~?~''''~;J''!J~~~'ml&*~ ~'I;'=l'" ~1,'''~'~ ~Rr~'~ j.~~q 225:6-;; . ;.~~~':-' ~., ~"f)i)1[;:~c-': '.. _ .;>:.~. 'c.,c, 2i ''::'::;~1 ~/4'r.',.f"'" ~.~. ; ",' /' I .'r'r;~,,'< '. \1 v. ~aitS'''' .':~"\ '-1, 'I:M:;;-,~-':)'--'I'" \-- j T .'f ~/_. ~~ _ J] r';.;;:,l~~__ ~-~(Jf;"\i.'1-" v...' J. /(' Ii?!;..'_-r:..~"'\.i"~-..,-:'..~ / : ~ ) ;9;~~L.:::~ ,\;.) J~"'l ,-" ~':~j;.;,-~-~.~:.~.~~.;.;.:.'-~,~\.. ~':.;.><, ;t,jC':}~'1 ,','0:/fi-' ;,\ j;~, '~T .~_~.8r~~W~~w~oil 'C:.c.,[<-le:l:I.- ~fc"'~Aif. .\: ~~. f'>'.;lf2~' ~\: I) " " .." -' ';\'. :/:~~~;::,~.~~~ ~" '~;,(;/;C:~::{f,.~.s~~.~~X::<~rf") <: )'~.W'> . '~, 1,< ,Il/} S,. ?VLl:"'~:.~~..\,~,-';:;'':''~':'' '1).. ~~"-'- .,..\~..~ ';r.~'.17,:-i (~.,_. ,"" l_ '.. ';'.'_7'." ~' ~ '..'.-~,." ;::::~"-'-:;. l'\\"", <;/ ....,..5-/ .Me 'f ':,'; ~,; ..y....,",.', '.c<-c:!I';" .., ,II" ~_,,'l_t, :~_-.. 1,1 ( ...;-l'~r------ -.,n__~ ~'~"'I ".: I~<'" "i'i"';'" r.'.r:-~'~'l'- ! .~ --.', .1"-,--', ,/,..1/ ) ,~Wr c -<-_.~ ._.;;....~'-'I ~.. ,.,-. l~_'J . "....i. i~::' \ ..;-....', (u.; i,~)\,}\r;-.., ". <;\ 1,elOch.. .' . '. ;,cC ce'V''''''',j.I,' ',! . 'V" ;.;./:,-,000.'.\ '1'/',,';"- '11,1 :{s\:ir',.v!:r:'{;,Z' '?;~~~\. ~~'&;';ciJ~' ~. . d:~~.' C/~;;)Y~~~~'j\',:_ r.~~..~'~~'\\ ~.",,~;if-fl~tl.' ~l'ttJ;~;;.:~:~a~ 1') (,,~.',L::' /I}:I ':::-J\' " t:....-P!J' :,... ..'/ f(, ~', 1(' \\\t.... l~.~~ ,/J'";o--"',,,---:"- ; ~. ,.,'0'>;:" ,. . ') U"'OO(~'} n,t<'!'::l(r">' .", (.f:ilh::o:'~ .:c~".I:.^.,,~. .,/1'-' "'. - -u .' '~"\'l - ",,_r.~,- '~.~_!,', ~~:: ~\f"('~; lY/_ -;- 1'. :,~ ~L'})':)J1"'-'1 ,,:/\-.:\...~,\.I,.r-.....'._:r ':":'~ ~~1~~ .' \ \ ., '~.,_ "l~. ~{.I!~~>>~!l. Base is Roger D. Borcherdt~ James F. Gibbs & Kenneth R. Lajoie SCALE: 1" = 2 mile LEE ENGINEERS, INC. Figure No. 1 Geologic Map c.~. ~,---~-:.-~"..~.'---~--~.A~= I ;='i~-=.-=--:~='~---:==~-=~.t'~-:-.___'-~J~~~-A~-:-h r r ? g ~8 18 0 : ~ H ~ i 1% RED DIN G ROA D ~r _ · i U _ -~-,--~~;~~~J~ ,=~,~~~=~=~___~~n,=,~~~~-:.:~=-~=--=--=!t~- -'----- - ~ -I -- -.'-- ~~;--?i :<<~y ; ~ -....--- .--T't --- "l ~ /n---- .t\' '" JI-=~r=~=-~__'___,_&;~-'~~~;~'~~~~i~~~2~,~,,,i'~!!\.~~~~.\ .. ~ ~~ ~ slV ~~ Ll~ i~~ N69'39'O?-E I 83,~~ _J=/; "69" 39'20"'E~C: 6~,05' ! ;8 ...r'-~,,, f'8' l _ ~ II ".( o"0~? ~ .l : iL~~ ~ ~""< ~ ~~ o~ 8 ,.;I L If ~. '" - ~ ~N TB 1 ':; I c- -', ~J" ~ ~ I . '. ~,.. ,J I g en ') ~ ()J - r r- - -, I 12.00' :o~ N -~ g :1 Ii 8" _ r""" . ~ I' I ~ g: 0 "00;,,,,, _ ~ I J i :1 I~, 1'" - ; ~ ~~ ~~~ L_:lll 'I en I ~ r I I 30. - "Ice - :J'OO" 13 0 '" , R. ::; 1 I r- - - !~ - - - - -, L'~ ---~- "ll:- ----E-I'-f- I : >OOO'~ I L_, ,,01 I ~'''~ '" ~ '" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ i % ~ ~ ~ G ~ J il ~ -- "' Q 5 ~ " ~ '" j ~ ~ " a CI I flJ 9 ~ i E 8 ~ ~ 12 ~. z q q ~. N' 0. :E ~ . o g. ,0' 'f J~ e~ '. co cn L~ ~~ 5 fj 8, / -f ~ -.I en ... ~I , 4l3(j 8395' S 99" ~CfOON W CII, of Compbon ~ r I~~I'''N. L~_I roWNHOlJ5ES % o ~ .q % '" il O. M ~ ~ 8 ; i.I'. '. ; J ~ '" ~ ~ I l. I_~ I ~""_ J~'OO ~ ' N r ) _ lot ~ ~ '~ ..... ~ ,~ il~, cnUl ... ~ ~~:~~, ~I ,0' 112,05' % o ~ -r ~~ g ~m Co"nly of ".!!O' S 89' 36'00. W '" f TOW",,~.~'!I ~ Approx. Test Boring Location LEE ENGINEERS, INC. Figure No. 2 Site Plan LOGGED BY M L DATE DRILLED 12/30/93 13 ~ o (j) 0 .I:: Z~ .n ..!!!..... E ...... o.u 0. >. 0) E c (/) 0 ro ro (/) 1- 2 -1-1 3- 4 - 5 -- 6- - 7"':- - 8- 9 -1-2 -10- -11- - 12- -13- -14- - 15- -16- - 17- -18- -19- - 20 BORING DIAMETER_--6-'.!._____ BORING NO.--L-_ _ c '- .- 0 0 ui .0) ;g o .- "-:0> 0) . MISC. (/)n; on lIlE (/) '-~ D.Q :t:::'T c....; ::J LAB (/)~ ....: e 0) . tic O):t:: at..! .- (/) 5:0 I .... '0 u RESULTS :t::(/) ::J ~ O. C ro 12 10 C ~~ ::> -- m C') a Ql 0 0 n.. ------- w/Sand & CL 16 105 5.4 SOil DESCnlPTION "" Dark Brown Silty CLAY Gravel Dry Color change to Brown increasing Sand & Gravel .: .- Lt. Brown Sandy CLAY w/Silt & Cobble Increasing Cobble size occasinal SM Boulder Hard to drill Boring Terminated @ 20 feet No Water encountered ~ct LEE ENGINEERS, INC. ML 50 116 9.5 FIGURE NO. 3 LOGGED AY ML ~ .cO ..- n. Q) o - 1- - 2- 2-1 - 3- 4- - 20- -21- 2-3 - 22- - 23- - 24- - 25- - 26- - 27- - 28- - 29- - 30- ~ Q) - Q)~.8 Ci +-- E E U >- Cll fij (/) (/) .; . r . p 14 DA TE DRILLED BORING I1IAMETER 6" 1?/3..O..,L93 SOIL DESCRIPTION w/Sand Brown Sandy CLAY w/Silt & Gravel Lt. Brown Sandy CLAY W/SILT & Cobble SM Hard to Drill, No Sample Boring Terminated @30 feet No ground water encountered fL'! ~€& LEE ENGINEERS, INC. FIGURE NO. =~ o .- (/)n; u.u Q):t:: .- (J) :t::(J) c: nt ::J -- o Qui on :t:. (J)+:: ;:0 n 10 ltl (') CL ML ,- . Ql .....1ii ui E .....e ~ .~ o Q) 0_ 30 .G' (J) c....; Q) d () . a C- O BORING NO.~ ~-g :J 1i)c- '0 u ~ ,0 ..::: 0..... MISC. LAB RESULTS 108 8.0 50+ 117 9.8 4"::;:: 50 4 -----.------.----- LOGGED BY ML ~ .c.- ..... n. <II o ~<l>_ <l>~R Ci..... E ETI >. C1l ~ CJ) CJ) -1- -2- 3-1 "i5,' - 3 - - 4 - - 5 -- -6- - 7 - 3-2 [f I~ .)11, v; .. ~ . [) 0< .~ .J ;,li - 8 - -9- -10- . . '. . -11- -12- -13- , 1) " ~: f~ ;i~.. -15- ~ -16- ,~', ~. - 1 7- ~ ~ - 18- ~ ;.. -19- ~ -20- ~ ;(~ - 21- 3-3 ?v 9 - 22- iI"".<- ~~"" - 23- V. .'. ~ - 24- ~ - 25 -14- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JiM . .y 15 DATE ORILLEol:.?/3012_~_ BOniNG OIAMETEn SOIL DESCRIPTION ~. Brown Silty CLAY wi Sand & Gravel Redish Brown Silty CLAY w/Sand Gravel Brown Sandy CLAY w/some Silt & Gravel Gravel size increased to cobble No sample recovered Boring Terminated @25 feet No ground water encountered ~ct LEE ENGINEERS, INC. ~~I FIGURE NO. _ c .- 0 o .- (j)rn U.U <ll :1:: .- (I) :t::(I) C l\l ::>- o oui ,g~ (I).;:: So ..Q 10 m co, '- . <II ~1il UlE .... e I .... ::J ~ o Ql 0_ 10 40 6" ,G' (I) c.:......; Q) () o 0, C- O 127 7.6 BORING NO. 3 CL ML ~-g j tic '0 n '<= ,0 ..::: 0..... MISC, LAO RESULTS 107 11 --'~----- 5 ------'--------_.._-------._._--._-~._-- B. Laboratory Investigation The laboratory testing program was directed towards providing sufficient information for determining the engineering characteristics of the site soil. Tests were done so that the recommendations outlined in this report could be formulated. In order to determine the consistency and moisture variation throughout the explored soil profile, to estimate the compressibility of the underlying soils, and to assess the degree of compaction of the soils, moisture content and dry density tests were performed on representative undisturbed soil samples. The strength parameters of the foundation soils were determined by field penetration resistance. The expansion characteristics of the near-surface soils were evaluated by means of Atterberg Limit Test. TABLE: Sample No. I-I 1-2 2-1 2-2 3-1 3-2 Summary of Laboratory Test Results Depth Dry Moisture Density Content (pet) (%) 104.9 5.4 115.8 9.5 108.0 8.0 117.1 9.8 107.2 11.0 126.6 7.6 (Gravel encountered in sample) (n) 1.5-3.0 6.0-7.5 2.0-3.5 10.0-11.5 1.0-2.5 8.0-9.5 Atterberg Limit. Test Liquid Plasticity Limit Index (PI less than 5) 16 C. Recommended Grading Specifications 1.1 General Descrilltion ] . ] 1 These specifications have been prepared for the grading and site improvement of proposed 12 unit two story Town Homes structure on the subject site located within the city limits of Campbell, California. The Soil Engineer should be consulted prior to any site work connected with site improvement to ensure compliance with these specifications. 1.12 The Soil Engineer should be notified at least two working days prior to commencement of any site clearing or grading operations on the property, in order to ensure proper stripping of surface conta-minated material, and to coordinate the work with the grading contractor in the field. 1. 13 This item shall consist of all clearing and! or grabbing, preparation of land to be filled, filling of the land, spreading, compaction and control of the fill, and all subsidiary work necessary to complete the grading of the filled areas to conform with the lines, grades and slopes shown on the accepted plans. The Soil Engineer is not responsible for determining line, grade, elevations that will be responsible for these items of work. 1. 14 Contents of these specifications shall be integrated into the Soil Report of which they are a part, and therefore, shall not be used as a self-contained document. 2.1 Tests 2.11 The standard test used to define maximum densities of all compaction work shall be the ASTM Test Procedure D 1557-78. All density shall be expressed as relative compaction, in tenns of the maximum dry density obtained in the laboratory by the forgoing standard procedure. 3.1 Clearing, Grubbing and Prepnring Areas to be Filled 3. 11 All trees, roots, debris, vagetable matter and organic top soil shall be removed from any area which is to support a structure. The depth of organic top soil to be removed will be determined in the field by the Soil Engineer, but in general will bary from one to two inches. 3.12 All soil deemed soft or unsuitable by the Soil Engineer shall be removed, such as soil around septic tanks, septic leach fields, old uncompacted fill, or saturated soil. 3.13 All underground structures shall be removed from the site such as old foundations, abandoned pipe lines, and irrigation pipe lines. 3.14 After the foundation for the structural pads and all areas to receive fill have been cleared, stripped and scarified, they shall be disked or bladed until they are uniform and free from large clods, moisture conditioned and compacted to a relative compaction of not less than 90%. This shall include all cut area, as well as areas to be filled. 17 4.1 Materials 4. 11 Materials existing on the site are suitable for use as compacted engineered fill after removal of all organic material therefrom. 4.12 Should import material be required, it must be approved by the Soil Engineer prior to its being transported to the project, and must meet the following requirements: 1. Plasticity index 12 or less. 2. R-Value 25 or greater. 3. Free of all rocks with diameters greater than 6 inches. 4. 15% or less passing the No.200 sieve. 5.1 PlaciDe_ SoreadiDe ails) comoactiue 5.11 The fill materials shall be placed in layers which when compacted shall not exceed six inches in compacted thickness. Each layer shall be spread evenly, and shall be thoroughly blade-mixed during the spreading to ensure unifonnity of material in each layer. 5.12 Compaction shall be sheepsfoot rollers, multiple pneumatic-tired rollers or other types of acceptable compacting rollers. Rollers shall be of such design that they will be able to compact the fill to the specified density. Rolling shall be accomplished while the fill material is within the specified moisture content range. The rolling of each layer shall be continuous over its entire area, and the roller shall make sufficient trips to ensure that the required density has been obtained. 5.13 After each layer has been placed, mixed and spread evenly, it shall be compacted to a relative compaction of not less than 90%. 5. 14 Field density tests shall be made in each compacted layer by the Soil Engineer in accordance with ASTM Test Procedure D 1557-78. When sheepsfoot rollers are used for compaction, the density tests shall be taken in the compacted material below the surface disturbed by the roller. When these tests indicate that the density of any layer of fill, or portion thereof, shall be reworked until the required compaction has been obtained. 5. 15 No soil shall be placed or compacted during periods of rain, nor on ground which is not drained of all free water. Soil which has been soaked and wetted by rain or any other cause shall not be compacted until completely drained, and until the moisture content is within the limits described or approved by the Soil Engineer. Prior approval by the Soil Engineer shall be obtained before continuing the grading operations after any intenuption in those operations because of the occurence of any condition mentioned in this paragraph. 18 6.1 Trench Backfill 6.11 Trench backfill should be compacted to the same relative compaction as the fill. 6.12 Where any opening is made under or through the perimeter foundations, for such items as utility lines and trenches, the openings must be resealed so that they are water-tight to prevent the possible entrance entrance of outside irrigation or rain water into the underneath portion of the structures. The utility trenches extending under the perimeter foundations and concrete slab-on-grade floors shall be back-filled with native soils and compacted to 90% relative compaction. 7.1 Subsurface Line Removal 7. 11 The methods of removal will be designated by the Soil Engineer in the field, and shall be dependent upon the depth and location of the line. 7.12 Remove the pipe, and fill and compact the soil in the trench according to the applicable portions of Sections 5.1 and 6.1. 7.13 The pipe shall be crushed in the trench. The trench shall then be filled and compacted according to the applicable portions of Sections 5.1 and 6.1. 7.14 Cap the ends of the line with concrete to prevent entrance of water. The length of cap shall not be less than five feet. The concrete mix shall have a minimum shrickage. 8.1 Unusual Conditions 8.11 In the event that any unusual conditions not covered by the special provisions are encountered during the grading operations the Soil Engineer shall be immediately notified for directions. 19 GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROCK UNDER FLOOR SLAB-ON-GRADE 2.1 Definition 2.11 Grade gravel, crushed rock or washed pea gravel, with clean sand, for use under interior concrete slab-on-grade shall consist of a minimum thickness of mineral aggregate placed in accordance with these specifications, and in conformity with the dimensions shown on the plans. The minimum thickness is specified in the accompanying report. 2.2 Material 2.21 The mineral aggregate shall consist of broken stone, crushed or uncrushed gravel, clean sand, quarry waste, or a combination thereof. The aggregate shall be free from abode, vegetable matter, loam volcanic tuff and other deleterious substances. It shall be of such quality that the absorption of water in a saturated dry condition does not exceed 3% of the oven dry weight of the sample. Washed pea gravel shall consist totally of uncrushed gravel. 2.3 Grading 2.31 The mineral aggregate shall be of such size that the percentage composition by dry weight, as determined by laboratory sieves (US sieves), will conform to the following gradation: SIEVE SIZE PERCENTAGE PASSING SIEVE 3/4" No.4 No.8 No. 200 100 20-30 2-4 0-2 2.4 Placing 2.41 Subgrade upon which base rock, combined conrete aggregate, or pea gravel is to be placed shall be prepared as required by the "Recommended Grading Specification" section of this soil report. 20