Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutParcel Map 31639 Parcel 2 Soils Report Chick-fil-a REPORT COVER PAGE Geotechnical Engineering Report __________________________________________________________________________ Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California Temecula, California December 6, 2019 Terracon Project No. CB195144 Prepared for: Chick-fil-A, Inc. Atlanta, Georgia Prepared by: Terracon Consultants, Inc. Colton, California CLEARED BY CITY OF TEMECULA PUBLIC WORKS tricia.ortega 01/04/2022 02/15/2023 02/15/2023 02/15/20 Terracon Consultants, Inc. 1355 E. Cooley Dr. Colton, California 92324 P (909) 824 7311 F (909) 301 6016 terracon.com REPORT COVER LETTER TO SIGN December 6, 2019 Chick-fil-A, Inc. 5200 Buffington Road Atlanta, Georgia 30349 Attn: Mr. Todd Williams P: (404) 765-7802 E: todd.williams@chick-fil-a.com Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California 40531 Margarita Road Temecula, California Terracon Project No. CB195144 Dear Mr. Williams: We have completed the Geotechnical Engineering services for the above referenced project. This study was performed in general a ccordance with Terracon Master Services Task Order dated October 28, 2019. This report presents the findings of the subsurface exploration and provides geotechnical recommendations concerning earthwork and the design and construction of foundations for the proposed project. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions concerning this report or if we may be of further service, please contact us. Sincerely, Terracon Consultants, Inc. Fred Yi, Ph.D., G.E. 2967 F. Fred Buhamdan Senior Geotechnical Engineer Senior Principal National Account Manager: Romeo DeLeon, Senior Principal Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 1 REPORT TOPICS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1 SITE CONDITIONS ......................................................................................................... 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................. 2 GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION ...................................................................... 2 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................................ 3 LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL ........................................................................................ 5 GEOTECHNICAL OVERVIEW ....................................................................................... 5 EARTHWORK................................................................................................................. 6 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS ......................................................................................... 11 CORROSIVITY.............................................................................................................. 13 GENERAL COMMENTS ............................................................................................... 13 FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... 15 Note: This report was originally delivered in a web-based format. Orange Bold text in the report indicates a referenced section heading. The PDF version also includes hyperlinks which direct the reader to that section and clicking on the GeoReport logo will bring you back to this page. For more interactive features, please view your project online at client.terracon.com. ATTACHMENTS SITE LOCATION AND EXPLORATION PLANS EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES EXPLORATION RESULTS SUPPORTING INFORMATION Note: Refer to each individual Attachment for a listing of contents. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 1 INTRODUC TION Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California 40531 Margarita Road Temecula, California Terracon Project No. CB195144 December 6, 2019 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration and Geotechnical Engineering services performed for the proposed Chick-fil-A canopy addition to be located at 40531 Margarita Road in Temecula, California. The purpose of these services is to provide information and Geotechnical Engineering recommendations relative to: ◼ Subsurface soil conditions ◼ Groundwater conditions and historical high groundwater ◼ 2016 California Building Code (CBC) seismic design paramete rs ◼ Foundation design ◼ Subgrade preparation/earthwork The Geotechnical Engineering Scope of Services for this project included the advancement of three test borings to depths ranging from approximately 26-1/2 feet below existing site grades. Maps showing the site and boring locations are shown in the Site Location and Exploration Plan sections, respectively. The results of the laboratory testing performed on soil samples obtained from the site during the field exploration are included on the boring logs in the Exploration Results section. SITE CONDITIONS The following description of site conditions is derived from our site visit in association with the field exploration and our review of publicly ava ilable geologic and topographic maps. Item Description Parcel Information The site is located at 40531 Margarita Road, Temecula, California. The approximate coordinates for the center of the site are 33.5265°N, 117.1497°W (approximate) See Site Location. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California ■ Temecula, California December 6, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. CB195144 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 2 Item Description Existing Improvements The project site is currently occupied by an existing, one-story Chick-fil-A restaurant with an associated parking lot. The parking lot includes asphalt paved parking and concrete paved drive lanes and associated landscape areas. Current Ground Cover Asphalt and concrete pavements Existing Topography The site is relatively flat with an approximate elevation ranging between 1,085 feet and 1,086 feet above mean sea level. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Our understanding of the project conditions is as follows . Some of the parameters listed as assumed are highlighted below in this table. Item Description Project Description The existing one-story Chick-fil-A restaurant will be improved with a canopy addition. Proposed Structure The proposed site development includes a new driveway canopy supported on steel columns to be constructed within the existing restaurant drive thru. Finished Floor Elevation Within ±1 foot from existing ground surface Maximum Loads (Assumed) ◼ Columns: 20 - 40 kips Grading Overexcavation and backfill to bring the site to grade Estimated Start of Construction Unknown GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION We have developed a general characterization of the subsurface conditions based upon our review of the subsurface exploration, laboratory data, geologic setting and our understanding of the project. This characterization, termed GeoModel, forms the basis o f our geotechnical calculations and evaluation of site preparation and foundation options. Conditions encountered at each exploration point are indicated on the individual logs. The individual logs can be found in the Exploration Results section and the GeoModel can be found in the Figures section of this report. As part of our analyses, we identified the following model layers within the subsurface profile. For a more detailed view of the model layer depths at each boring location, refer to the GeoModel. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California ■ Temecula, California December 6, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. CB195144 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 3 Model Layer Layer Name General Description 1 Pavement Concrete or asphalt and aggregate base 2 Silty sand Medium dense to dense Conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring logs shown in the Exploration Results section and are attached to this report. Stratification boundaries on the boring logs represent the approximate location of changes in native soil types; in situ, the transition between materials may be gradual. Groundwater Conditions The boreholes were observed while drilling and after completion for the presence and level of groundwater. Groundwater was not observed in the borings while drilling or for the short duration the borings could remain open. Based on ground water data from a nearby monitoring well, the highest groundwater measurement in the project vicinity is approximately 19 feet bgs.1 Expansive Soils The on-site native soils are generally granular with non-plasticity and are considered non-critically expansive. Hydroconsolidation To evaluate the potential deformation that may be caused by the addition of water to subsurface soils, hydroconsolidation testing was performed on a selected , representative, relatively undisturbed sample. The result is shown in Exploration Results section. The test result indicates very low hydroconsolidation (0 to 0.8%) under a confining pressure of 2,000 psf. Based on our observations and the laboratory test results, the potential of hydrocollapsible of this site is low. SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS The seismic design requirements for buildings and other structures are based on Seismic Design Category. Site Classification is required to determine the Seismic Design Category for a structure. The Site Classification is based on the upper 100 feet of the site profile defined by a weighted average value of either shear wave velocity, standard penetration resistance, or undrained shear strength in accordance with Section 20.4 of ASCE 7 and the International Building Code (IBC). 1 Data collected from a monitoring well at 27560 Jefferson Avenue, Temecula, CA, by R M Environmental, measured on August 10, 2010 (http://www.geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/). Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California ■ Temecula, California December 6, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. CB195144 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 4 Based on the soil properties encountered at the site and as described on the exploration logs and results, it is our professional opinion that the Seismic Site Classification is D. Subsurface explorations at this site were extended to a maximum depth of 26-1/2 feet. The site properties below the boring depth to 100 feet were estimated based on our exper ience and knowledge of geologic conditions of the general area. Additional deeper borings or geophysical testing may be performed to confirm the conditions below the current boring depth. Seismic Design Parameters The general procedure seismic parameters per the ASCE 7-10 (2016 CBC) were determined from the web-based on-line seismic design maps and tools recommended by the USGS (https://hazards.atcouncil.org/) as of 11/4/2019 and are summarized in the following table for reference only. It is the responsibility of structural engineers to verify and confirm these parameters for themselves during their design. Description Value 2016 California Building Code Site Classification (CBC) 1 D 2 Site Latitude 33.5265° Site Longitude -117.1497° Mapped Spectral Acceleration Parameters 3 SS = 1.959 and S1 = 0.797 Site Coefficients 3 Fa = 1.0 and Fv = 1.5 Adjusted Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response Parameters Design Spectral Acceleration Parameters 3 SMS = 1.959 and SM1 = 0.797 Design Spectral Acceleration Parameters 3 SDS = 1.306 and SD1 = 0.797 Geometric Mean Peak Ground Acceleration 3 PGAM=0.797g Mode De-aggregated Magnitude 4 7.7 1. Seismic site classification in general accordance with the 2016 California Building Code, which refers to ASCE 7-10. 2. The 2016 California Building Code uses a site profile extending to a depth of 100 feet for seismic site classification. Borings at this site were extended to a maximum depth of 26-1/2 feet. The site properties below the boring depth to 100 feet were estimated based on our experience and knowledge of geologic conditions of the general area. Additional deeper borings or geophysical testing may be performed to confirm the conditions below the current boring depth. 3. These values were obtained using on-line seismic design maps and tools recommended by the USGS (https://hazards.atcouncil.org/). 4. These values were obtained using on-line Unified Hazard Tool by the USGS (https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/) for return period of 2% in 50 years accessed at 11/4/2019. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California ■ Temecula, California December 6, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. CB195144 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 5 LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL Liquefaction is a process in which strong ground shaking causes saturated soils to lose their strength and behave as a fluid. Ground failure associated with liquefaction can result in severe damage to structures. Soil types susceptible to liquefaction incl ude sand, silty sand, sandy silt and silt, as well as soils having a plasticity index (PI) less than 7 (Boulanger and Idriss, 2006). Loose soils with a PI less than 12 and moisture content greater than 85 percent of the liquid limit are also susceptible to liquefaction (Bray and Sancio, 2006). For sandy soils, the geologic conditions for increased susceptibility to liquefaction are: 1) shallow groundwater (generally less than 50 feet in depth), 2) the presence of unconsolidated sandy alluvium, typically Hol ocene in age, and 3) strong ground shaking. All three of these conditions must be present for liquefaction to occur. The California Geological Survey (CGS) has designated certain areas as potential liquefaction hazard zones. These are areas considered at a risk of liquefaction-related ground failure during a seismic event, based upon mapped surficial deposits and the presence of a relatively shallow water table. Per CGS Murrieta 7.5-minute quadrangle, (https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/), this site is located outside the edge of a mapped Liquefaction Potential Zone. However, based on our understanding of the proposed improvements, the proposed canopy will have no human occupanc y and will represent no to very low impact on human life in case of failure during a seismic event where liquefaction may occur. GEOTECHNICAL OVERVIEW The site appears suitable for the proposed construction based upon geotechnical conditions encountered in the test borings, provided that the recommendations provided in this report are implemented in the design and construction phases of this project. The proposed canopy may be supported by a shallow foundation system supported on engineered fill extending to a minimum depth of 1 foot below the bottom of foundations, or 3 feet below existing grades, whichever is greater. Grading for the proposed canopy should incorporate the limits of the canopy plus a lateral distance of 2 feet beyond the outside edge of perimeter footings, where possible. The recommendations contained in this report are based upon the results of field and laboratory testing (presented in the Exploration Results section), engineering analyses, and our current understanding of the proposed project. The General Comments section provides an understanding of the report limitations. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California ■ Temecula, California December 6, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. CB195144 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 6 EARTHWORK The following recommendations include site preparation, excavation, subgrade preparation and placement of engineered fills on the project. The recommendations presented for design and construction of earth supported elements including foundations and slabs are contingent upon following the recommendations outlined in this section. Earthwork on the project should be observed and evaluated by Terracon. The evaluation of earthwork should include observation and testing of engineered fill, subgrade preparation, foundation bearing soils, and other geo technical conditions exposed during the construction of the project. General Site Grading An on-site, pre-job meeting with the owner, the contractor and the Geotechnical Engineer should occur prior to all grading -related operations. Observation, testing, documentation , and reporting of the grading operation should be performed by the Geotechnical Engineer of Record. A final compaction report should be issued by the Geotechnical Engineer of Record at the completion of the grading operation. Interim reports may be issued according to project requirements. Operations undertaken at the site without the Geotechnical Engineer present may result in exclusions of affected areas from co mpaction reports for the project. Grading of the subject site should be performed, at a minimum, in accordance with these recommendations and with applicable portions of the current version of CBC. The following recommendations are presented for your assistance in establishing proper grading criteria. Site Preparation Strip and remove existing vegetation, debris, pavements, and other deleterious materials from proposed canopy areas. Exposed surfaces should be free of mounds and depressions which could prevent uniform compaction. The site should be initially graded to create a relatively level surface to receive fill and provide for a relatively uniform thickness of fill beneath proposed canopy structure. Although no evidence of fills or underground facilities such as septic tanks, cesspools, basements, and utilities was observed during the site reconnaissance , such features could be encountered during construction. If unexpected fills or underground facilities are encountered, such features should be removed, and the excavation thoroughly cleaned prior to backfill placement and/or construction. Subgrade Preparation The proposed canopy addition may be supported by a shallow foundation system bearing on engineered fill extending to a minimum of 1 foot below the bottom of foundations or 3 feet below Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California ■ Temecula, California December 6, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. CB195144 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 7 existing grade, whichever is greater. The over-excavation bottom should be extended laterally a minimum of 2 feet beyond the outside edge of perimeter footings, where possible. Exposed areas which will receive fill, once properly cleared and benched where necessary, should be scarified to a minimum depth of 10 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted per the compaction requirements in this report. Based upon the subsurface conditions determined from the g eotechnical exploration, subgrade soils exposed during construction are anticipated to be relatively workable. However, the workability of the subgrade may be affected by precipitation, repetitive construction traffic or other factors. If unworkable conditions develop, workability may be improved by scarifying and drying. At the time of our study, moisture contents of the surface and near -surface native soils ranged from about 5 percent to 28 percent. Based on these moisture contents, some moisture conditioning will likely be needed for the project. Excavation It is anticipated that excavations for the proposed construction can be accomplished with conventional earthmoving equipment. The bottom of excavations should be thoroughly cleaned of loose soils and disturbed materials prior to backfill placement and/or construction. If new foundations are constructed adjacent to the existing foundations, there is a risk that the bearing material could become undermined and/or overstressed due to overlapping stresse s. Provisions should be made during construction to prevent undermining or disturbing the soils supporting the existing docks foundations. Excavations should not extend below an imaginary 1H:1V inclined plane projecting below the bottom edge of any adjacen t existing foundations as shown in the figure to the right. Maintaining a sufficient clear distance between new and existing foundations will reduce the potential for increased bearing stresses and additional foundation settlement. Connections between the existing building and the new addition should allow for some differential movement. Individual contractors are responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations. Excavations should be sloped or shored in the interest of safety following local, and federal regulations, including current OSHA excavation and trench s afety standards. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California ■ Temecula, California December 6, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. CB195144 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 8 Fill Material Types All fill materials should be inorganic soils free of vegetation, debris, and fragments larger than 6 inches in size. Pea gravel or other similar non -cementitious, poorly-graded materials should not be used as fill or backfill without the prior approval of the geotechnical engineer. Clean on-site soils or approved imported materials may be used as fill material for the following: ◼ General site grading ◼ Foundation areas ◼ Foundation backfill Import fill, if utilized, should be inorganic, non -expansive granular soils free from rocks or lumps greater than 3 inches in maximum dimension and should meet the following material property requirements. Gradation Percent Passing (ASTM C 136) 3 Inches 100 No. 4 Sieve 50 to 100 No. 200 Sieve 10 to 40 Index Value Liquid Limit 30 (max) Plasticity Index 15 (max) Maximum Expansive Index 1 20 (max) 1. ASTM D 4829. The contractor shall notify the Geotechnical Engineer of import sources sufficiently ahead of their use so that the sources can be observed and approved as to the physical characteristic of the import material. For all import material, the contractor shall also submit current verified reports from a recognized analytical laboratory indicating that the import has a "not applicable" (Class S0) potential for sulfate attack based upon current ACI criteria and is "mildly corrosive" to ferrous metal and copper. The reports shall be accompanied by a written stateme nt from the contractor that the laboratory test results are representative of all import material that will be brought to the job. Fill Compaction Requirements Engineered fill should be placed and compacted in horizontal lifts, using equipment and procedures that will produce recommended moisture contents and densities throughout the lift. Fill lifts should not exceed 10 inches loose thickness. Recommended compaction and moisture content criteria for engineered fill materials are as follows: Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California ■ Temecula, California December 6, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. CB195144 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 9 Material Type and Location Per the Modified Proctor Test (ASTM D 1557) Minimum Compaction Requirement (%) Range of Moisture Contents for Compaction Above Optimum Minimum Maximum On-site soils and low volume change imported fill: Beneath foundations: 90 0% +3% Fill greater than 5 feet in depth: 95 0% +3% Miscellaneous backfill: 90 0% +3% Utility Trenches 1: 90 0% +3% Bottom of excavation receiving fill: 90 0% +3% 1. Upper 12 inches should be compacted to 95% within structural areas. Utility Trenches It is anticipated that the on-site soils and fill materials will provide suitable support for underground utilities and piping that may be installed. Any soft and/or unsuitable material encountered at the bottom of excavations should be removed and be rep laced with an adequate bedding material. A non-expansive granular material with a sand equivalent greater than 30 should be used for bedding and shading of utilities, unless permitted by the utility manufacturer. On-site materials are considered suitable f or backfill of utility and pipe trenches from one foot above the top of the pipe to the final ground surface, provided the material is free of organic matter and deleterious substances. Trench backfill should be mechanically placed and compacted as discussed earlier in this report. Compaction of initial lifts should be accomplished with hand -operated tampers or other lightweight compactors. Where trenches are placed beneath slabs or footings, the backfill should satisfy the gradation and expansion index re quirements of engineered fill discussed in this report. Flooding or jetting for placement and compaction of backfill is not recommended. Grading and Drainage Positive drainage should be provided during construction and maintained throughout the life of the development. Infiltration of water into utility trenches or foundation excavations should be prevented during construction. Planters and other surface features which could retain water in areas adjacent to the building should be sealed or eliminated. In a reas where sidewalks or paving do not immediately adjoin the structure, we recommend that protective slopes be provided with a minimum grade of approximately 5 percent for at least 10 feet from perimeter walls. Backfill Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California ■ Temecula, California December 6, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. CB195144 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 10 against footings, exterior walls, and in utility and sprinkler line trenches should be well compacted and free of all construction debris to reduce the possibility of moisture infiltration. We recommend a minimum horizontal setback distance of 10 feet from the perimeter of any building and the high-water elevation of the nearest storm-water retention basin. Roof drainage should discharge into splash blocks or extensions when the ground surface beneath such features is not protected by exterior slabs or paving. Sprinkler systems and landscaped irrigation should not be installed within 5 feet of foundation walls. Earthwork Construction Considerations Shallow excavations for the proposed structure are anticipated to be accomplished with conventional construction equipment. Upon completi on of filling and grading, care should be taken to maintain the subgrade water content prior to construction of foundations. Construction traffic over the completed subgrades should be avoided. The site should also be graded to prevent ponding of surface water on the prepared subgrades or in excavations. Water collecting over or adjacent to construction areas should be removed. If the subgrade freezes, desiccates, saturates, or is disturbed, the affected material should be removed, or the materials should b e scarified, moisture conditioned, and recompacted prior to foundation construction. As a minimum, excavations should be performed in accordance with OSHA 29 CFR, Part 1926, Subpart P, “Excavations” and its appendices, and in accordance with any applicable local, and/or state regulations. Construction site safety is the sole responsibility of the contractor who controls the means, methods, and sequencing of construction operations. Under no circumstances shall the information provided herein be interprete d to mean Terracon is assuming responsibility for construction site safety, or the contractor's activities; such responsibility shall neither be implied nor inferred. Construction Observation and Testing The earthwork efforts should be monitored under the direction of the Geotechnical Engineer. Monitoring should include documentation of adequate removal of vegetation and topsoil, proof rolling, and mitigation of areas delineated by the proof roll to require mitigation. Each lift of compacted fill should be tested, evaluated, and reworked, as necessary, until approved by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to placement of additional lifts. Each lift of fill should be tested for density and water content at a frequency of at least one test for every 2,500 squar e feet of compacted fill in the building areas and 5,000 square feet in pavement areas. One density and water content test should be performed for every 50 linear feet of compacted utility trench backfill. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California ■ Temecula, California December 6, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. CB195144 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 11 In areas of foundation excavations, the bearing subgrade should be evaluated under the direction of the Geotechnical Engineer. If unanticipated conditions are encountered, the Geotechnical Engineer should prescribe mitigation options. In addition to the documentation of the essential parameters necessa ry for construction, the continuation of the Geotechnical Engineer into the construction phase of the project provides the continuity to maintain the Geotechnical Engineer’s evaluation of subsurface conditions, including assessing variations and associated design changes. SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS If the site has been prepared in accordance with the requirements noted in Earthwork, the following design parameters are applicable for shallow foundations. Design Parameters – Compressive Loads Item Description Net Allowable Bearing pressure 1, 2 1,500 psf Required Bearing Stratum 3 Engineered fill extending to a minimum depth of 1 foot below bottom of footings or 3 feet below existing site grades, whichever is greater. Minimum Foundation Dimensions 18 inches (columns or continuous) Minimum Footing Depth 12 inches below finish grade Ultimate Passive Resistance 4 (equivalent fluid pressures) 360 psf/ft Ultimate Coefficient of Sliding Friction 5 0.40 Estimated Total Settlement from Structural Loads 2 Less than about 1 inch Estimated Differential Settlement 2, 6 About 1/2 of total settlement 1. The maximum net allowable bearing pressure is the pressure in excess of the minimum surrounding overburden pressure at the footing base elevation. An appropriate factor of safety has been applied. Values assume that exterior grades are no steeper than 20% within 10 feet of structure. 2. Values provided are for maximum loads noted in Project Description. 3. Unsuitable or soft soils should be over-excavated and replaced per the recommendations presented in the Earthwork. 4. Use of passive earth pressures require the sides of the excavation for the spread footing foundation to be nearly vertical and the concrete placed neat against these vertical faces or that the footing forms be removed and compacted structural fill be placed against the vertical footing face. A factor of safety of 2.0 is recommended. 5. Can be used to compute sliding resistance where foundations are placed on suitable soil/materials. Should be neglected for foundations subject to net uplift conditions. A factor of safety of 1.5 is recommended. 6. Differential settlements are as measured over a span of 50 feet. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California ■ Temecula, California December 6, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. CB195144 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 12 Shallow Foundations Designed for Uplift Conditions Reinforced concrete footings or dead -man foundations, cast against undisturbed subsoils, are recommended for resistance to uplift. Footings may be designed using the cone method. The equation for determining the ultimate uplift capacity as a function of footing dimension, foundation depth, and soil weight is: 𝑇𝑢=0.63 ∙𝛾∙𝐷2 ∙(𝐵+𝐿)+𝑊 Where: Variable Description Unit Tu Ultimate uplift capacity lbs.  Unit weight of soil1 pcf D Depth to base of footing/dead-man foundation below final grade ft B Width of footing/dead-man foundation ft L Length of footing/dead-man foundation ft W Weight of footing/dead-man + weight of soil directly over the top of the footing/block lbs. Notes: 1A unit weight () of 120 pcf is recommended for soil (either undisturbed or compacted backfill) at this site. The design uplift resistance should be calculated by dividing the ultimate resistance obtained from the equation above by an appropriate factor of safety. A factor of safety of at least 2 is recommended for live uplift loads in the analysis. Foundations should be reinforced as necessary to reduce the potent ial for distress caused by differential foundation movement. The use of joints at openings or other discontinuities in masonry walls is recommended. Foundation excavations should be observed by the geotechnical engineer. If the soil conditions encountered differ significantly from those presented in this report, supplemental recommendations will be required . Construction Adjacent to Existing Building Differential settlement between the additions and the existing building is expected to approach the magnitude of the total settlement of the addition. Expansion joints should be provided between the existing building and the proposed addition to accommodate differential movements between the two structures. So that minor deflections in alignment do not result in breakage or distress, underground piping between the two structures should be designed with flexible couplings, and utility knockouts in foundation walls should be oversized. Care should be taken during excavation adjacent to existing foundations to avoid disturbing existing foundation bearing soils. New footings should bear at or near the bearing elevation of immediately adjacent existing foundations. Depending upon their locations and current loads on the existing footings, footings for the new addition could cause settlement of adjacent walls. To reduce this concern and risk, Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California ■ Temecula, California December 6, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. CB195144 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 13 clear distances at least equal to the new footing widths should be maintained between the addition’s footings and footings supporting the existing building. We understand existing foundations may support additional load from the walls of the new additions. It is possible additional loads on the existing foundations could cause other building settlements to occur. Where increases in loading are planned, the structural capacit y of existing foundations should be evaluated by a licensed structural engineer. Foundation Construction Considerations As noted in Earthwork, the footing excavations should be evaluated under the direction of the Geotechnical Engineer. The base of all foundation excavations should be free of water and loose soil, prior to placing concrete. Concrete should be placed soon after excavating to reduce bearing soil disturbance. Care should be taken to prevent wetting or drying of the bearing materials during construction. Excessively wet or dry material or any loose/disturbed material in the bottom of the footing excavations should be removed/reconditioned before foundation concrete is placed. CORROSIVITY The table below lists the re sults of laboratory soluble sulfate, soluble chloride, electrical resistivity, and pH testing. The values may be used to estimate potential corrosive characteristics of the on - site soils with respect to contact with the various underground materials that will be used for project construction. Corrosivity Test Results Summary Boring Sample Depth (feet) Soil Description Soluble Sulfate (mg/kg) Soluble Chloride (mg/kg) Electrical Resistivity (Ω-cm) pH B-3 0.6 – 5.0 Silty sand 118 75 3,880 7.69 Results of soluble sulfate testing indicate samples of the on -site soils tested possess negligible sulfate concentrations when classified in accordance with Table 19.3.1.1 of the ACI Design Manual. GENERAL COMMENTS Our analysis and opinions are based upon our understanding of the project, the geotechnical conditions in the area, and the data obtained from our site exploration. Natural variations will occur between exploration point locations or due to the modifying effec ts of construction or weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction. Terracon should be retained as the Geotechnical Engineer, where noted in this report, to provide observation and testing services during pertinent construction phases. If variations appear, we Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California ■ Temecula, California December 6, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. CB195144 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 14 can provide further evaluation and supplemental recommendations. If variations are noted in the absence of our observation and testing services on -site, we should be immediately notified so that we can provide evaluation and supplemen tal recommendations. Our Scope of Services does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken. Our services and any correspondence or collaboration through this system are intended for the sole benefit and exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed and are accomplished in accordance with generally accepted Geotechnical Engineering practices with no third-party beneficiaries intended. Any third-party access to services or correspondence is solely for information purposes to support the services provided by Terracon to our client. Reliance upon the services and any work product is limited to our client, and is not intended for third parties. Any use or reliance of the provided information by third parties is done solely at their own risk. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made. Site characteristics as provided are for design purposes and not to estimate excavation cost. Any use of our report in that regard is done at the sole risk of the excavating cost estimator as there may be variations on the site that are not apparent in the data that could significantly impact excavation cost. Any parties charged with estimating excavation costs should seek their own site characterization for specific purposes to obtain the specific level of detail necessary for costing. Site safety and cost estimating, including excavation support and dewatering requirements/design, are the responsibility of others. If changes in the nature, design, or location of the project are planned, our conclusions and recommendations shall not be considered valid unless we review the changes and either verify or modify our conclusions in writing. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable FIGURES Contents: GeoModel 1,060 1,065 1,070 1,075 1,080 1,085 EL E V A T I O N ( M S L ) ( f e e t ) Proposed Chick-fil-A - Temecula, California Temecula, CA Terracon Project No. CB195144 Layering shown on this figure has been developed by the geotechnical engineer for purposes of modeling the subsurface conditions as required for the subsequent geotechnical engineering for this project. Numbers adjacent to soil column indicate depth below ground surface. NOTES: NB-1 NB-2 NB-3 GEOMODEL This is not a cross section. This is intended to display the Geotechnical Model only. See individual logs for more detailed conditions. LEGEND Asphalt Silty Sand Sandy Silt Concrete Model Layer General DescriptionLayer Name Concrete or asphalt and aggregate base1 Medium dense to dense2 Pavement Silty sand 0.375 26.5 1 2 0.46 26.5 1 2 0.58 26.5 1 2 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable ATTACHMENTS Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California ■ Temecula, California December 6, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. CB195144 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable SITE LOCATION AND EXPLORATION PLANS Contents: Site Location Plan Exploration Plan Note: All attachments are one page unless noted above. SITE LOCATION Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California ■ Temecula, California December 6, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. CB195144 SITE LOCA TION DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES MAP PROVIDED BY MICROSOFT BING MAPS EXPLORATION PLAN Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California ■ Temecula, California December 6, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. CB195144 EXPLORATION P LAN DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES MAP PROVIDED BY MICROSOFT BING MAPS Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California ■ Temecula, California December 6, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. CB195144 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES 1 of 2 EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES Field Exploration Number of Borings Boring Depth (feet) Location 3 26-1/2 Proposed addition area Boring Layout and Elevations: Unless otherwise noted, Terracon personnel provided the boring layout. Coordinates were obtained with a handheld GPS unit (estimated horizontal accuracy of about ±10 feet) and approximate elevations were obtained by interpolation from the Google Earth. If elevations and a more precise boring layout are desired, we recommend borings be surveyed following completion of fieldwork. Subsurface Exploration Procedures: We advanced the borings with a truck-mounted drill rig using hollow-stem augers to the planned depths, or practical refusal. Both a standard penetration test (SPT) sampler (2-inch outer diameter and 1-3/8-inch inner diameter) and a modified California ring-lined sampler (3-1/4-inch outer diameter and 2-3/8-inch inner diameter) were utilized in the split-barrel sampling procedure. The penetration resistance was recorded on the boring logs as the number of hammer blows used to advance the sampler in 6 -inch increments (or less if noted). The samplers were driven with an automatic hammer that drops a 140 -pound weight 30 inches for each blow. After the required seating, samplers were advanced up to 18 inches, providing up to three sets of blowcounts at each sampling interval. The sampling depths, penetration distances, and other sampling information are recorded on the field boring logs. The recorded blows are raw numbers without any corrections for hammer type (automatic vs. manual cathead) or sampler size (ring sampler vs. SPT sampler). Relatively undisturbed and bulk samples of the soils encountered were placed in sealed containers and returned to the laboratory for testing and evaluation. In addition, we observed and recorded groundwater levels during drilling and sampling. Our exploration team prepared field boring logs as part of standard drilling operations including sampling depths, penetration distances, and other relevant sampling information. Field logs include visual classifications of materials encountered during drilling, and our interpretation of subsurface conditions between samples. Final boring logs, prepared from field logs, represent the Geotechnical Engineer's interpretation and include modifications based on observations and laboratory tests. Laboratory Testing The project engineer reviewed the field data and assigned laboratory tests to understand the engineering properties of the various soil strata, as necessary, for this project. Procedural standards noted below are for reference to methodology in general. In some cases, variations to methods were applied because of local practice or professional judgment. Standards noted below Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California ■ Temecula, California December 6, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. CB195144 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES 2 of 2 include reference to other, related standards. Such references are not necessarily applicable to describe the specific test performed. ◼ ASTM D2216 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil by Mass ◼ ASTM D7263 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Density (Unit Weight) of Soil Specimens ◼ ASTM D4318 Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils, if needed ◼ ASTM D6913 Standard Test Methods for Particle -Size Distribution (Gradation) of Soils Using Sieve Analysis ◼ ASTM D4546 Standard Test Methods for One -Dimensional Swell or Collapse of Soils ◼ Soil Resistivity and Chemical Analysis per ASTM G187, ASTM D6919, ASTM D4327, and APHA 2320-B, etc. The laboratory testing program often included examination of soil samples by an engineer. B ased on the material’s texture and plasticity, we described and classified the soil samples in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. EXPLORATION RESULTS Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California ■ Temecula, California December 6, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. CB195144 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES 3 of 1 EXPLORATION RESULTS Contents: Boring Logs (NB-1 through NB-3) Grain Size Distribution Atterberg Limits Hydroconsolidation Corrosivity Note: All attachments are one page unless noted above. 12-20-25 9-13-24 8-20-30 6-22-34 6-11-12 N=23 11-14-20 N=34 5-7-13 N=20 23 36 5 17 7 10 114 109 100 121 ASPHALT, 4.5" thick SILTY SAND (SM), fine to coarse grained, light brown, trace gravel to 1" SILTY SAND (SM), fine to medium grained, light brown SANDY SILT (ML), fine grained, brown Boring Terminated at 26.5 Feet 0.4 5.0 25.0 26.5 1085.5 1081 1061 1059.5 Hammer Type: Automatic Hammer Weight/ Drop Distance/ Sasmpler Diameter/35 lbs./ 30 in./ 3.25 in. O.D. Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. TH I S B O R I N G L O G I S N O T V A L I D I F S E P A R A T E D F R O M O R I G I N A L R E P O R T . G E O S M A R T L O G - N O W E L L C B 1 9 5 1 4 4 P R O P O S E D C H I C K - F I . G P J T E R R A C O N _ D A T A T E M P L A T E . G D T 1 2 / 6 / 1 9 WA T E R L E V E L OB S E R V A T I O N S DE P T H ( F t . ) 5 10 15 20 25 FI E L D T E S T RE S U L T S PE R C E N T F I N E S WA T E R CO N T E N T ( % ) DR Y U N I T WE I G H T ( p c f ) LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 33.5266° Longitude: -117.1498° GR A P H I C L O G MO D E L L A Y E R DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) Surface Elev.: 1086 (Ft.) Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method: 8" Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with Auger Cuttings Surface capped with asphalt Notes: Project No.: CB195144 Drill Rig: Limited Access Rig BORING LOG NO. NB-1 Chick-fil-A, Inc.CLIENT: Atlanta, GA Driller: Cal Pac Drilling Boring Completed: 11-17-2019 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A - Temecula, California See Exploration and Testing Procedures for a description of field and laboratory procedures used and additional data (If any). See Supporting Information for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. 40531 Margarita Road Temecula, CA SITE: Boring Started: 11-17-2019 1355 E Cooley Dr, Ste C Colton, CA Groundwater not encountered WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS 1 2 SA M P L E T Y P E 7-20-34 10-21-28 13-16-30 7-25-37 7-12-14 N=26 10-10-13 N=23 8-10-14 N=24 22 5 15 17 15 109 139 105 119 CONCRETE, 5" thick SILTY SAND, fine to coarse grained, light brown SANDY SILT (ML), fine grained, brown Boring Terminated at 26.5 Feet 0.5 25.0 26.5 1084.5 1060 1058.5 Hammer Type: Automatic Hammer Weight/ Drop Distance/ Sasmpler Diameter/35 lbs./ 30 in./ 3.25 in. O.D. Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. TH I S B O R I N G L O G I S N O T V A L I D I F S E P A R A T E D F R O M O R I G I N A L R E P O R T . G E O S M A R T L O G - N O W E L L C B 1 9 5 1 4 4 P R O P O S E D C H I C K - F I . G P J T E R R A C O N _ D A T A T E M P L A T E . G D T 1 2 / 6 / 1 9 WA T E R L E V E L OB S E R V A T I O N S DE P T H ( F t . ) 5 10 15 20 25 FI E L D T E S T RE S U L T S PE R C E N T F I N E S WA T E R CO N T E N T ( % ) DR Y U N I T WE I G H T ( p c f ) LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 33.5265° Longitude: -117.1498° GR A P H I C L O G MO D E L L A Y E R DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) Surface Elev.: 1085 (Ft.) Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method: 8" Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with Auger Cuttings Surface capped with concrete Notes: Project No.: CB195144 Drill Rig: Limited Access Rig BORING LOG NO. NB-2 Chick-fil-A, Inc.CLIENT: Atlanta, GA Driller: Cal Pac Drilling Boring Completed: 11-17-2019 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A - Temecula, California See Exploration and Testing Procedures for a description of field and laboratory procedures used and additional data (If any). See Supporting Information for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. 40531 Margarita Road Temecula, CA SITE: Boring Started: 11-17-2019 1355 E Cooley Dr, Ste C Colton, CA Groundwater not encountered WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS 1 2 SA M P L E T Y P E 9-15-22 9-15-30 10-17-24 11-23-39 7-12-16 N=28 6-10-15 N=25 8-11-17 N=28 27 10 8 17 13 113 111 109 117 CONCRETE, 7" thick SILTY SAND (SM), fine to coarse grained, brown Boring Terminated at 26.5 Feet 0.6 26.5 1084.5 1058.5 Hammer Type: Automatic Hammer Weight/ Drop Distance/ Sasmpler Diameter/35 lbs./ 30 in./ 3.25 in. O.D. Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. TH I S B O R I N G L O G I S N O T V A L I D I F S E P A R A T E D F R O M O R I G I N A L R E P O R T . G E O S M A R T L O G - N O W E L L C B 1 9 5 1 4 4 P R O P O S E D C H I C K - F I . G P J T E R R A C O N _ D A T A T E M P L A T E . G D T 1 2 / 6 / 1 9 WA T E R L E V E L OB S E R V A T I O N S DE P T H ( F t . ) 5 10 15 20 25 FI E L D T E S T RE S U L T S PE R C E N T F I N E S WA T E R CO N T E N T ( % ) DR Y U N I T WE I G H T ( p c f ) LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 33.5264° Longitude: -117.1497° GR A P H I C L O G MO D E L L A Y E R DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) Surface Elev.: 1085 (Ft.) Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method: 8" Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with Auger Cuttings Surface capped with concrete Notes: Project No.: CB195144 Drill Rig: Limited Access Rig BORING LOG NO. NB-3 Chick-fil-A, Inc.CLIENT: Atlanta, GA Driller: Cal Pac Drilling Boring Completed: 11-17-2019 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A - Temecula, California See Exploration and Testing Procedures for a description of field and laboratory procedures used and additional data (If any). See Supporting Information for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. 40531 Margarita Road Temecula, CA SITE: Boring Started: 11-17-2019 1355 E Cooley Dr, Ste C Colton, CA Groundwater not encountered WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS 1 2 SA M P L E T Y P E Project: Location: Job Number:Engineer:Exhibit: CONSOLIDATION TESTS (ASTM D2435/4546) Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California 40531 Margarita Road, Temecula, California CB195144 LabSuite© Version 4.0.4.18. Developed by Fred Yi, PhD, PE, GE Copyright© 2002 - 2019 GeoAdvanced. All rights reserved _Commercial Copy Prepared at 12/2/2019 1:06:26 PM J: \ 2 0 1 9 \ C B 1 9 5 1 4 4 \ W o r k i n g F i l e s \ L a b o r a t o r y - F i e l d D a t a - B o r i n g L o g s \ L a b S u i t e _ C B 1 9 5 1 4 4 . c s v 100 1000 10000 Normal Stress (psf) 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Co n s o l i d a t i o n S t r a i n ( % ) Boring No.Depth (ft)USCS Classification γd (pcf)w (%)HCS (%) Pc'Cc 1+e0 Cr 1+e0 PE' 1 5 (SM) Silty sand 108.2 5.5 0.8 2070 3.632 0.400 Water added at 2,000 psf Project Number: Service Date: Report Date: Task: Client Date Received: 3A B-3 0.6-5.0 7.69 118 75 525 6984 3880 Analyzed By: CHEMICAL LABORATORY TEST REPORT Trisha Campo pH Analysis, ASTM G 51 Water Soluble Sulfate (SO4), ASTM C 1580 (mg/kg) Chlorides, ASTM D 512, (mg/kg) Total Salts, AWWA 2540, (mg/kg) Resistivity (As-Received), ASTM G 57, (ohm-cm) Resistivity (Saturated), ASTM G 57, (ohm-cm) Chick-fil-A, Inc.Proposed Chick-fil-A 11/27/19 750 Pilot Road, Suite F Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 (702) 597-9393 Temecula, CA Project Atlanta, GA Lab No.: 19-1313 Sample Number Sample Location Sample Depth (ft.) The tests were performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM, AASHTO, or DOT test methods. This report is exclusively for the use of the client indicated above and shall not be reproduced except in full without the written consent of our company. Test results transmitted herein are only applicable to the actual samples tested at the location(s) referenced and are not necessarily indicative of the properties of other apparently similar or identical materials. CB195144 Terracon (CB)Sample Submitted By:11/21/2019 Results of Corrosion Analysis Chemist 11/25/19 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Canopy addition - CFA 01509 Temecula, California ■ Temecula, California December 6, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. CB195144 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable SUPPORTING INFORMATION Contents: General Notes Unified Soil Classification System Note: All attachments are one page unless noted above. November 27, 2019 Terracon Project No. CB195144 Proposed Chick-fil-A - Temecula, California Temecula, CA 0.25 to 0.50 > 4.00 2.00 to 4.00 1.00 to 2.00 0.50 to 1.00 less than 0.25 Unconfined Compressive Strength Qu, (tsf) Auger Cuttings Modified California Ring Sampler Standard Penetration Test N (HP) (T) (DCP) UC (PID) (OVA) Standard Penetration Test Resistance (Blows/Ft.) Hand Penetrometer Torvane Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Unconfined Compressive Strength Photo-Ionization Detector Organic Vapor Analyzer SAMPLING WATER LEVEL FIELD TESTS Soil classification as noted on the soil boring logs is based Unified Soil Classification System. Where sufficient laboratory data exist to classify the soils consistent with ASTM D2487 "Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes" this procedure is used. ASTM D2488 "Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure)" is also used to classify the soils, particularly where insufficient laboratory data exist to classify the soils in accordance with ASTM D2487. In addition to USCS classification, coarse grained soils are classified on the basis of their in-place relative density, and fine-grained soils are classified on the basis of their consistency. See "Strength Terms" table below for details. The ASTM standards noted above are for reference to methodology in general. In some cases, variations to methods are applied as a result of local practice or professional judgment. DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION Exploration point locations as shown on the Exploration Plan and as noted on the soil boring logs in the form of Latitude and Longitude are approximate. See Exploration and Testing Procedures in the report for the methods used to locate the exploration points for this project. Surface elevation data annotated with +/- indicates that no actual topographical survey was conducted to confirm the surface elevation. Instead, the surface elevation was approximately determined from topographic maps of the area. LOCATION AND ELEVATION NOTES The soil boring logs contained within this document are intended for application to the project as described in this document. Use of these soil boring logs for any other purpose may not be appropriate. GENERAL NOTES DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS RELEVANCE OF SOIL BORING LOG Water levels indicated on the soil boring logs are the levels measured in the borehole at the times indicated. Groundwater level variations will occur over time. In low permeability soils, accurate determination of groundwater levels is not possible with short term water level observations. Water Initially Encountered Water Level After a Specified Period of Time Water Level After a Specified Period of Time Cave In Encountered STRENGTH TERMS Standard Penetration or N-Value Blows/Ft. Descriptive Term (Density) Hard 15 - 30Very Stiff> 50Very Dense 8 - 15Stiff30 - 50Dense 4 - 8Medium Stiff10 - 29Medium Dense 2 - 4Soft4 - 9Loose 0 - 1Very Soft0 - 3Very Loose (50% or more passing the No. 200 sieve.) Consistency determined by laboratory shear strength testing, field visual-manual procedures or standard penetration resistance > 30 Descriptive Term (Consistency) Standard Penetration or N-Value Blows/Ft. (More than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve.) Density determined by Standard Penetration Resistance CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILSRELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable UNIFIED SOI L CLASSI FICATI ON SYSTEM Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests A Soil Classification Group Symbol Group Name B Coarse-Grained Soils: More than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve Gravels: More than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve Clean Gravels: Less than 5% fines C Cu  4 and 1  Cc  3 E GW Well-graded gravel F Cu  4 and/or [Cc<1 or Cc>3.0] E GP Poorly graded gravel F Gravels with Fines: More than 12% fines C Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel F, G, H Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel F, G, H Sands: 50% or more of coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve Clean Sands: Less than 5% fines D Cu  6 and 1  Cc  3 E SW Well-graded sand I Cu  6 and/or [Cc<1 or Cc>3.0] E SP Poorly graded sand I Sands with Fines: More than 12% fines D Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand G, H, I Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand G, H, I Fine-Grained Soils: 50% or more passes the No. 200 sieve Silts and Clays: Liquid limit less than 50 Inorganic: PI  7 and plots on or above “A” line J CL Lean clay K, L, M PI  4 or plots below “A” line J ML Silt K, L, M Organic: Liquid limit - oven dried  0.75 OL Organic clay K, L, M, N Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K, L, M, O Silts and Clays: Liquid limit 50 or more Inorganic: PI plots on or above “A” line CH Fat clay K, L, M PI plots below “A” line MH Elastic Silt K, L, M Organic: Liquid limit - oven dried  0.75 OH Organic clay K, L, M, P Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K, L, M, Q Highly organic soils: Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat A Based on the material passing the 3-inch (75-mm) sieve. B If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add “with cobbles or boulders, or both” to group name. C Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW -GM well-graded gravel with silt, GW -GC well-graded gravel with clay, GP-GM poorly graded gravel with silt, GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay. D Sands with 5 to 12% fines requir e dual symbols: SW -SM well-graded sand with silt, SW -SC well-graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay. E Cu = D60/D10 Cc = 6010 2 30 DxD )(D F If soil contains  15% sand, add “with sand” to group name. G If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM. H If fines are organic, add “with organic fines” to group name. I If soil contains  15% gravel, add “with gravel” to group name. J If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay. K If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add “with sand” or “with gravel,” whichever is predominant. L If soil contains  30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add “sandy” to group name. M If soil contains  30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add “gravelly” to group name. N PI  4 and plots on or above “A” line. O PI  4 or plots below “A” line. P PI plots on or above “A” line. Q PI plots below “A” line.