The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutParcel Map 15977 Parcel 1 Final Compaction & Foundation B&FSOILS \' /.<I,e... $/~Ifd!'O . ~ ; ,'Ji' . PRELIMINARY SOILS INVESTIGATION & COMPACTION TESTING PERCOLATION REPORlS 31174R1VERTONLANE-TE:ME;CULA,CA92591 PHONE (909) 699-1 .499 RECEIVED SEP 1 2 2002 CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FINAL REPORT OF COMPACTED FlU. AND FOIJNDA nON RECOMMENDA nONS A large, single-family residential building pad, located on the south side of Pauba Road, Temecula, California Legal Description: Parcell, Parcel Map 15977; AP,N. 945-090-010 . Site Location: Parcell is located on the south side ofPaubaRoad in Temecula, CA 92590 Owner/Applicant: Tim & Pam Egan 41543 Zinfandel Ave. Temecula, Ca 92590 Job No. CF02-141 September 6, 2002 .' \ . . . TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................1 GENERAL SITE PREPARA nON .....................................................................1 GENERAL EXCA VA TION AND GRADING PROCEDURES ........................2 GENERALLABORA TORY TESTING.............................................................2 Expansion Test Results .............................................................................3 Settlement Criteria ...................................................................................3 FIELD COMPACTION TESTING................................................_...................3 Relative Compaction Test Results............................................................4 RECOMMENDA nONS AND ADDmONAL SOIL CRITERIA....................5 Grading and Compaction Conclusions ....................................................5 Approved Allowable Soil Bearing Values ................................................5 Foundation Recommendations.................................................................6 Utility Trenches ........................................................................................6 Subgrade for Driveway and Parking .......................................................6 . Suggested Pavement Design .....................................................................6 Soluble Sulfate Content ............................................................................7 CLOSURE............................................................................................................7 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICA nON SYSTEM .................................................8 MAXIMUM DENSITY CURVE.........................................................................9 KEYING-BENCHING DETAIL.........................................................................I0 PLANS .......................................................................................................Enclosed B&FSOILS '2- . . . Job No. CF02-141 September 6, 2002 Page 1 FINAL REPORT OF COMPACTED FIlL AND FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS A large, single-family residential building pad, located on Vista Del Bosque, La Cresta area of Murrieta, California Legal Description: Parcell, Parcel Map 15977; AP.N. 945-090-010 Site Location: Parcell is located on the south side ofPauba Road in Temecula, CA 92590. Owner/Applicant: Tim & Pam Egan INTRODUCTION At the request of grading contractor Tim Egan and grading contractor John Peorn B & F Soils has provided all the field supervision and compaction testing of all fill soil ~----- emplacements, aiid all the required laboratory analysis necessary to control all of the grading operations. This soils engineering work has been conducted in complete accordance with currently accepted engineering techniques as set forth by the U.B.C., (Appendix, Chapter 33). GENERAL SITE PREPARATION The complete project area involved in the grading operations was watered thoroughly using a high pressure oscillating-type sprinkler. A large keyway slot was excavated along the toe of a large fill slope on the eastern part of the building pad area. All fill soils were properly processed and pre-mixed to optimum moisture prior to emplacement as compacted fill. B&FSOILS .3 . . . Job No. CF02-141 September 6, 2002 Page 2 GENERA I, F:XCA VA nON AND GRADING PROCEDURES The grading ,equipment used included one D-7 Cat with ripper teeth and slope blade, a large rubber-tired loader used for transporting fill and wheel-rolling compaction, a large excavator and a high-pressure fire hose used to maintain optimum moisture conditions, and a 2500 gallon water truck used for additional water and wheel rolling compaction. The properly prepared and pre-Il'ixed fill soils were then emplaced in 6-inch to S-inch lifts using repeated wheel rolling in multiple directions until all relative compaction test results equaled or exceeded the minimum 90% compaction value. All the grading operations and compaction testing were completed in compliance with the Uniform Building Code, (Appendix Chapter 33). GENERAL T,ABORATORY TESTING Maximum density determinations were made on the typical structural fill soils, as accepted by the Uniform Building Code and the County of Riverside grading ordinances. The maximum density determinations were made in accordance with A.S.T .M. D1557- 70T, modified to use.25 blows on each offive layers with a 10-pound hammer falling IS inches in a mold of 1/30 cubic foot volume. Soil Type 1: Tan-brown coarse to fine sand and silt with some clay; SM and SC according to U.S.C.S.; Maximum Density 128.1 p.c.f.. @6.8% Optimum Moisture. The results of the expansion tests performed on the remolded samples of the typical backfili soils are as follows. The samples were compacted to over 90% relative compaction and set up to be equal to 50% saturation, and then measured to full 100% B 8< FSOILS 4 . Job No. CF02-141 September 6, 2002 Page 3 saturation after a period of several days and until no further expansion occurred in a 24-hour period in accordance with Table 29-C of the Uniform Building Code. Expansion -Test Results Soil Type Confining Load Expansion Index % Expansion 1 144 p.s.f 16 1.6 The typical fill soils involved in the grading process are essentially non-expansive and as such will not require any special foundation design. Settlement Criteria The total settlement calculated to occur over the proposed project will be less than . 1/2 inch and the differential settlement total will be 1/4 inch. FIELD COMPACTION TESTING The results of relative compaction testing throughout the building pad area were in all instances at least 90% of the maximum soil density values obtained for Soil Type A, based on the results of testing methods (Drive Cylinder Method D2937-71 and/or Sand Cone Method D 1556-64). (See Chart Below.) Relative Compaction Test Results Test Date Soil Elev. Dry Dens. Field Maximum No Type (ft ) pcf Moist Density--% S-l 8/26 1 1236 117.2 5.6 91 S-2 8/26 I 1237 116.3 5.5 91 S-3 8/26 I 1243 115.6 3.8 90 . S-4 8/26 I 1240 119.6 6.2 93 B&FSOILS 5 . Job No. CF02-141 September 6, 2002 Page 4 Test Date Soil Elev. Dry Dens. Field Maximum No .Typ'l (ft ) pcf Moist Density--% S-5 8/26 1 1241 122.3 5.3 95 S-6 - -8/26 - - 1 ._- . .. 1242 118.7 6.1 93 S-7 8/28 I 1243 124.8 6.2 97 S-8 8/28 I 1245 119.5 6.8 93 S-9 8/28 1 1247 116.7 4.7 91 S-1O 8/28 I 1241 115.7 5.9 90 S-l1 8/30 1 1244 123.3 6.3 95 S-12 8/30 I 1246 119.6 5.8 93 S-13 8/30 I 1249 120.5 6.7 94 S-14 8/30 I 1251 119.8 6.3 93 . 8-15 9/2 1 1250 123.9 7.0 97 8-16 9/2 1 1252 118.7 6.5 93 S-17 9/2 1 1253 117.3 4.4 91 S-18 9/5 1249 116.6 5.4 91 *8-19 9/5 I 1254 118.0 5.5 ,9.:3 *8-20 9/5 1 1252 121.1 6.0 94 * Sand Volume Tests RECOMMENDATIONS AND ADDITIONAL SOIL CRITERIA Grading and Compaction Conclusions The fill soils used in the grading operations consisted of tan-brown coarse to fine sand and silt with minor clay-size component. These fill soils were thoroughly processed and pre-mixed to optimum moisture and were then emplaced in thin lifts and wheelrolled in multiple directions until the requited 90% relative compaction test results were attained. . B&FSOILS (p . Job No. CF02-141 September 6, 2002 Page 5 An area extending 5 feet beyond the southern perimeter of the barn building WliS , overexcavated 3 feet and recompacted to minimize the amount of differential settlement. All grading operations were completed in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, (Appendix, Chapter 33). Approved Allowahle Soil Bearing Values The results oflaboratory analysis and direct shear testing, utilizing a controlled rate of strain. 050 inch per minute under varying normal loads, has produced test results indicating an angle of internal friction of30 with 100 p.s.f available cohesion. Utilizing the Terzaghi Bearing Capacity Equation with a factor of safety of3.0, the following calculations have been determined: . Square or Continuous Footings q = CNc + wDfNq + wBNw 100(23) + 100(1.0)18 + 100(0.5)14 = 2300 + 1800 + 700 = 4800 p.s.f (ultimate) NOTE: q. = 1600 p.s.f (allowable for square or continuous footings 12" wide and 12" deep); q. = 1900 p.s.f (allowable for square or continuous footings 12" wide and 18" deep); q. = 2100 p.s.f (allowable for square or continuous footings 18" wide and 18" deep); q. = 2300 p.s.f (allowable for square or continuous footings 24" wide , and 18" deep). Allowable soil bearing pressures may be increased by a factor of one-third when considering momentary wind and seismic 100idings which are not considered to act simultaneously and is in accordance with the Unifonn Building Code. . B&FSOILS 1 . . . Job No. CF02-132 August 13, 2002 Page 6 Foundation :Recommendations Allor the footing trenches should be excavated into well compacted, non-expansive equigranular soils. For adequate support we recommend that all single-story structures have a minimum I2-inch deep footing and all two-story structures have at least an IS-inch deep footing. All continuous bearing footings should be reinforced with not less than one #4 steel bar in the top and one #4 steel bar in the bottom. We also strongly recommend that a field inspection of the footing trenches be made prior to concrete emplacement. Utility Trenches All plumbing, utility and other trenches beneath the concrete slab should be properly restored to minimum 90% compaction value comparable to the remaining building pad. Subgrade for Driveway and Parking Care should be taken to properly backfill and compact any utility trenches involved in subgrade areas that will be subsequently paved. This can be accomplished by moistening the native soils and wheelrolling or mechanically tamping them so that the utility trench and surrounding subgrade has approximately the same compaction, which should be 90% or better. Suggested Pavement Design All of the earth materials on the site are high maximum density with excellent bearing values, and R-values would fa!! in t!:e approxiwllte 60 range, whi"h is excellent support for vehicular wheel loads. If concrete surfacing is desired, a 4-inch thick concrete B&FSOILS ~ . . . Job No. CF02-132 August 13,2002 Page 7 driveway could be placed directly on the compacted subgrade where the top 6 inches is 95% compaction. If aspJ:1~tic concrete is utilized, t~en we would recomm~d l.l1at a minimum thickness of 3 inches of A.C. be placed over 4 inches of Class II rock base, which is compacted to minimum 95%. Asphaltic concrete could be placed directly on the subgrade, which should be compacted to a minimum 95% also. Soluble Sulfate Content Numerous laboratory test results for the soluble sulfate content in soils in the La Cresta area indicate 0 to minimal p.p.m. sulfate content, thus permitting the use of Type II cement with a minimum compressive strength of2500 pounds per square inch. CLOSURE All the soils engineering work, including the field inspections, supervision and laboratory analysis, and all the grading and compaction operations have been undertaken in complete compliance with and according to the Uniform Building Code and all city and other local codes and requirements. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service and remain available to answer any questions or provide any additional information. Respectfully submi B & F SOILS Peter H. Buchanan, Soils Consultant <;!t sSe FSOILS '\ . COARSE . .GRAINED SOILS . (wor. ..... ~O, 01 ............ L.&ItGER "*' NcI. ZOO ..... I.'.) . FiNE GRAINED SOILS t...... ......,0... of ....,...O' .. SMALLD' . "*" NO 20CI It'" I'") MAJOR DIVISIONS GRAVELS (Wert ...... ~... of _.. frw:t..... L.....GER ..... ..... o No. 4 I.'" IIN) SANDS ---"'...!" coona ft.... .. S"ALL.E" ,... "'- No. . ..... I,n J . B&FSOILS GROUP SYMBQ..S m.. CLEAN !.~ GRAVELS .. (l,.ln.. . .. 'iMll ~.: ~~~ . --:-: GFlAVELs WITH FINES~ (.....ec.... ....,. "'-1 .~~r~i,~, CLEAN SANDS ,;.~.~: CLift'. ., ... r...) .:::. ~. .... =~:~I:; Slot SANDS '. WITH FINESm (.IlCI'<<I.... ..... sc " "...1 . SI lTS AND CLAYS (l~ h"," LESS ,... SO) ~ SILTS AND CLAYS (L..lld II_I GIt(AT[R iNft 50) ~CH [lOH -= ~ p, ;:;;; HIGHlY..ORGANIC SOilS IOU...D....,. CLASSI'tCATIONS: SILT 0lIt CLAY . Page €I TYPICAL NAMES GW W~I....... ........ .....,..... ltl'I"""", litt.....'_. C l E S I Z E GP ......, .............. ... ............ ....t"""". h...e .. .. r..... '....0 ,... ".. GM StH, ....... ................... ......... GC a.,.., .CIge".......I........-..M'.,..... sw ..., .......- ,.... ......., .....11"1. . .. ,..... SP 1IlMI't, ......., __. .....u,....... Itn_ . .. r.... ,..., ..... ...,-.," fR.lfur.. C..,.,. .... -...d.c..... "',.,..,., Ml ........ic "I" ... ......, t.... ..... I"ICl r....... .".,'., .'" ,... ...... .. c..yey I.UI ....tl....., ,...hCdy., .....tC eieyl of ... to ......- ...."CI". .....11' d.."...-.ty ct_". III" ctey.. a... cley.. CL OL o.v-.e ..I" ..... .....-.c .tI., e..,. " ... ...IClty . hIM 1.1"',..ue ..III. ""el"~ 01 'I~"" ..... ..,., " III.., ....... eteMtlC IIlttl. . ~Ie c"".f f\lffll P~O"ICI".tlf C..,.. OrtonIC c.." of 'Nehy",,", 10 "tfI' ......'c"'. .......'c ""I. ..... .. ""et' "'''''I, OI.......C 10111. 5"'1 DO....".... C""KU"'IhC. 'tf. ,.. ....-., .... .....,...... '" ClltllitN"onI of ._ .,.....11. UNIFIED L I M ITS P'VEL COIIIUS lOU\.DIIIIS PAR T -.. ,.. S I Z I 11IO.200 1IC140 11110 1ilO.4 .. u. S. ..S'....D....O Sllvl IIZ"", SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM "f...,,"~. r,. Um'''' S.I CI..llhca'lOn S,.""". Cor.. 01 ("","..", U S Ar"" Tetttufttl W"'*"o'UNm No 3-]'7 VOl I. "orcn.I'~3 111I"'1", '''11, rHOI \0 . - 8 ~ " .- ~ :) u ~ l. .. ~ c l .:JOB 1'10: C,.c'i!/2 "'/~/ p. Y MAXIMUM DENSITY CURVE O,4rE: 9/b/O.z. . CCllr~lL::J Moisture Content in Per Cent of Dry Weight. 130 LOCATION' ao.i"9 No. Depth, in lee. 125 \ 120 ~~ ~ \ 115 OPTIMUM MOISTUIE CONTENT, III p'., Cell' of Dry Weight MAXIMUM DIY DENSITY. In Povndt ,., Cubic Foot 6.B /'2&./ SOil CLASSlflCATIQN Spil Type oncl Desc,iption - METHOD Of COMPACTION ASTM SlondolCl Tel' Method 0'1557.70 dUJ'4~..-:u~BY: 8.r,t:::'S{)/LS a rE' 8/-'0/0'2- :7DS ~c: c.c"2-/+f . A' c;...... -w, lno cv. " -'- 5 Ie,... 25 - ..', ....,. III .. -. ....-4 II ..._. \\ B lie F SOILS ,P' /0 J;,!, No C~()2-141 9/~/o2. . SIDE HILL CUT PAD DETAIL . - ...- ...- - - /" /" - ". /" ". OVER EXCAVATE ./ P CT. -- ..... II .1 AND R ECOM AF L) -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-.....:.- ~. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. (REPLACEMENT IL ---- 1-_-_-_-_--,.--- _-:..-_-.- ----~ '" Pod overexcavoticn and recomocction OVERBURDEN - ---=--t=~::~~~t:.y:--- . sholl be performed if determin~d to OR UNSUITABLE -----.----X- ----,?--- be necesscry by the geotechnicol MA TER tAL ---------- --:.=: > consul.ont ---- -~-- L-6ENCHING ' . I ---~--- _ _ _ ,- _ : - _-'I ='5 ---,--- ,~ j - NATURAL", ...-- GROUND >"" - - - - "... "... "... "... /" ". ". FINISHED CUT PAD UNWEATHERED BEDROCK OR or- MATERIAL APPROVED BY r THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT I SUB DRAIN AND KEY WIDTH REQUIREMENTS DETERMINED BASED ON EXPOSED SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AND THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN . \2. K ~~ ~~ ~~ g ~ N ~ ...... ~ I . ";1 \ ; ~<::c..> \ Ii 1:"- (20.4%) ')// i --.11 -1___/;--__ , , /1 EXIST. 2:1 SLOPE \ \ . ~ "" ) ~ .~ / "- .-/ . t ""- -- , / ~~ N N lHlH Nu.. Nt--J "" 0_UJ. I I i \ \ \ I ! I I :r:- 1: .:t- ! . '~ c), ,t' ~ it>:! ~ .s C""'-< ~. ~ ~ ~ !'> R. "0 g tx:J ~ ~ / ~ co t. ' :;- - ~~. C")'''''-' ;r ~ ro _'" "i l}l ~ fn !'> Vj I I I I ! I I I ! ! ""'- ! ! I I ! I l;/ ,P I r I -- I I i I ....... ,1 lj > 1j :r:: -; :J CJ:l () >- r-' trj 1 I 1