The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTract Map 3883 Lot 494 Final Compacted Fill & Foundation . . Megaland Engineers & Associates , ., : (''''.,/^ ~., /?- -'" -~,-,-j1-" ~-i~- '.. civil engineers · planners · structural · surveyors. soils RECEIVED SEP 0 2 Z005 CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FINAL REPORT OF COMPACTED FILL AND FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS A laJ;'ge, single-family residential building pad area, including access driveway and parking areas, located at 30881 Del Rey Road, Temecula, California Lel!:al Description: Lot 494 of Tract 3883; A.P.N.919-323-005 Site Location: 30881 Del Rey Road Temecula, CA 92591 Owner/Applicant: Glen Boyd 31508 A venida De Reposo Temecula, CA 92591 Job No. CF05-237 August 24, 2005 28441 Rancho California Rd.. Suite. M . Temecula. CA 92590 Phone: (951) 699-4624. Fax: (951) 695-5084. E-mail: megalandengineers@verizon.net . . TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................1 GENERAL SITE PREPARATION .......................................................................1 GENERAL EXCAVATION AND GRADING PROCEDURES.........................2 GENERAL LABORATORY TESTING ...............................................................2 Expansion Test Results................................................................................3 Settlement Criteria.......................................................................................3 FIELD COMPACTION TESTING .......................................................................3 Relative Compaction Test Results..............................................................4 RECOMMENDATIONS AND ADDITIONAL SOIL CRITERIA ....................4 Grading and Compaction Conclusions ......................................................4 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 CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM...................................................8 MAXIMUM DENSITY CURVE............................................................................9 KEYING-BENCHING DET AIL............................................................................I0 PLANS ........................................................................................................ ..Enclosed z.. . . Job No. CF05-237 August 24, 2005 Page 1 FINAL REPORT OF COMPACTED FILL AND FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS A large, single-family residential building pad area, including access driveway and parking areas, located at 30881 Del Rey Road, Temecula, California Lel!:al Description: Lot 494 of Tract 3883; A.P.N.919-323-005 30881 Del Rey Road Temecula, CA 92591 Glen Boyd Site Location: Owner/Applicant: INTRODUCTION At the request of owner Glen Boyd, Megaland Engineers has provided all the field supervision and compaction testing of all fill soil emplacements, and 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 V.B.C., (Appendix, Chapter 33). GENERAL SITE PREPARATION The entire project area involved in the grading operations was stripped of all vegetation and any other materials which could not be used in the fill slope emplacements. The exposed fill soils were thoroughly processed and premixed to optimum moisture conditions prior to their emplacement as compacted fills. ..3 . . Job No. CF05-237 August 24, 2005 Page 2 GENERAL EXCAVATION AND GRADING PROCEDURES The grading equipment used included a D-4 Cat, equipped with ripper teeth and slope blade, and a high pressure fire hose used for water supply. The entire building pad area was over excavated to a minimum depth of 36 inches, down to solid, undisturbed natural formation and the over excavated soils were then pre-mixed to optimum moisture and re-compacted in 6-inch to 8-inch lifts back up to the proposed:pad elevation. A keyway slot was excavated into solid bedrock formation along the toe of the two major fill slope areas. All the grading operations and compaction testing were completed in compliance with the Uniform Building Code, (Appendix Chapter 33). GENERAL LABORATORY 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 of five layers with a lO-pound hammer falling 18 inches in a mold of 1/30 cubic foot volume. Soil Tvpe ]: Tan-brown to dark-brown coarse to fine sand and silt with minor clay-size component; SM and SC according to U.S.C.S.; Maximum Density 128.7 p.c.f. @ 10.2% Optimum Moisture. t\ . . Job No. CF05-237 August 24, 2005 Page 3 The results of the expansion tests performed on the remolded samples of the typical backfill 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% 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 I Confming Load 144 p.s.f. Expansion Index 16 % Expansion 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 114 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 I, based on the results oftesting methods (Drive Cylinder Method D2937-71 and/or Sand Cone Method 01556-64). 5' . . Job No. CF05-237 August 24, 2005 Page 4 Relative Compaction Test Results Maximum Density Determination for Soil Type 1-128.7 p.c.f(ii) 10.2% H2O Test Date Soil Elev. Dry Dens. Field Maximum No. Tvpe (ft.) p.c.f. Moist. Density--% S-1 8/12 1 1178 119.6 6.3 93 S-2 8/12 1 1178 118.0 6.8 91 S-3 8/12 1 1178 120.2 7.7 93 S-4 8/12 I 1178 121.7 7.1 93 S-5 8/16 1 1179 118.9 6.9 93 S-6 8/16 1 1180 125.3 6.0 97 S-7 8/16 I 1180 117.7 8.4 91 S-8 8/16 I 1181 119.2 5.9 93 S-9 8/18 I 1181 120.5 5.5 93 S-lO 8/18 I 1181 121.6 5.7 93 S-l1 8/19 I 1180 121.0 6.4 93 * S-12 8/19 I 1181 126.3 6.5 98 *Sand Volume Tests RECOMMENDATIONS AND ADDITIONAL SOIL CRITERIA Gradinl!: and Compaction Conclusions The fill soils used in the grading operations consisted of tan-brown to dark-brown coarse to 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 " . . Job No. CF05-237 August 24, 2005 Page 5 in thin lifts and track rolled in multiple directions until the required 90% relative compaction test results were attained. All grading operations were completed in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, (Appendix, Chapter 33). Approved Allowable Soil Bearinl!: 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 of 30 with 100 p.s.f. available cohesion. Utilizing the Terzaghi Bearing Capacity Equation with a factor of safety of 3.0, the following calculations have been determined: SQuare or Continuous Footings CNc + wDtNq + wBNw 100(23) + 100(1.0)18 + 100(0.5)14 2300 + 1800 + 700 4800 p.s.f. (ultimate) qa = 1600 p.s.f. (allowable for square or continuous footings 12"wide and 12" deep); qa = 1900 p.s.f. (allowable for square or continuous footings 12" wide and 18" deep); qa = 2100 p.s.f. (allowable for square or continuous footings 18" wide and 18" deep); qa = 2300 p.s.f. (allowable for square or continuous footings 24" wide and 18" deep). q = = = NOTE: Allowable soil bearing pressures may be increased by a factor of one-third when considering momentary wind and seismic loadings which are not considered to act simultaneously and is in accordance with the Uniform Building Code. l . . Job No. CF05-237 August 24, 2005 Page 6 Foundation ;Recommendations All of 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 12-inch deep footing and all two-story structures have at least an 18-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. Subl!:rade for Drivewav and Parkin I!: Care should be taken to properly backfill and compact any utility trenches involved in subgrade areas that will be subsequently paved. This can be accomplisheq 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. SUl!:l!:ested Pavement Desil!:n All of the earth materials on the site are high maximum density with excellent bearing values, and R-values would fall in the approximate 60 range, which is excellent support for vehicular wheel loads. If concrete surfacing is desired, a 4-inch thick EO . . Job No. CF05-237 August 24, 2005 Page 7 concrete driveway could be placed directly on the compacted sub grade where the top 6 inches is 95% compaction. If asphaltic concrete is utilized, then we would recommend that a minimum thickness of3 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 typical decomposed. granitic-type soils indicate very low p.p.m. soluble 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 submitted, MEGALAND ENGINEERS & ASSOCIATES f3; -J~ ~ Peter H. Buchanan, Soils Consultant ptB M~gQ.IQnd Engineers & ~ssociates CIVIL ENGINEERS. PLANNERS · ARCHITECTS · SURVEYORS ~l./tJ1 cj:'"~5-'237 .D.4r&: $12.+fi UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYST.EM SILTS ANO CLAY.S I........ l_., LEU '.... tot TYPICAL NAMES M~JOR OiVISIONS .... "."".,' .........., ,...,..... .II~ K"It " .. ,..... . . COARSE '''GAAIHtD SOILS. ",-, .... to... _ ............. LMtGC'1 ...... _.100...... ...., GA aVEl' po... lNl to l\ ot _.. fI'tict.. " . LA"Gl~ ..... "'" ...... "... "....' GAAVELs wITH FINES . . ~"'M"'" JIIlItI." tI'_1 ......, .,........ .,..,.... . .....I.~ "'II'~. "'"' . - ,..... S1ttt ........... ,.................... Ilk.......... . a..,., ......~.. .......~........._ "",.",... .... ......-,; ........ ~ ......tr. ......... '''''. .. .,....". " SANDS. .. ...... .... to... ., _-w ".... It SV.u.LI~ tftM ..... ,.......... ".t. . SANDS WITH "iNn ,...,...... ...... tI,_I' . . . ~............ . ......., ...... """ . ." ""'". ...., ....... ........... -,~--. "* ~ .... ~.., '_.'~. ........ ...... .... ,." ...... ........... n..... ....... ...... ,_ .... . ,~tI'" ~I--''"'''' .. .....,..... ...,. .. .. .. .....M'l: ..........,... .....'t't ....... ....., d""'; .." cWrt.. ... "".. rlNE .-GU1NEO . SOILS. I.... WWt SO..... ............SlMl..LD" ........200....... ...., . ~......"......-..,..c .....,c...... ~ . _Mi" . ,. ............. .......,cr'....,... ~..... ........., .. .Ifty .,..Hi, ~...tC Mt": SILTS AND ClAYS tLI..,.' I.....' Gl'u~..i_ ~I .....,.,.n c,.,. .,.,..." ....biltJ. ,.. c",,~ ~It C"-f9 .. -.I...... .. .."" .;.tI.c"" . -.,-tt: ~.."~ . HIGHLl' ORGA~IC SOILS . . . ,... ... ..~":' i..""ty .....ue ":,tt. toUJltOU1. (l,&5S1"U7I0,.,: '"'' .....",,""' (~-!."I';C' ...... ........ ... ....~... '" ,..........I....tfp~.~ \() .p.9 M~galand Engineers & Associates CIVIL ENGINEERS. PLANNERS · ARCHITECTS · SURVEYORS ..J!g1NfJ!. CF'oS" - "2 37 Z>t4r~: 9/24/05"" , ' SOILS :ENGINEERING DATA . Typical fill Materials. MAXIMUM DENSITY CURVE 130 ,. 1_' 5 ; .~. I \ \ , 0 . \", ~C"I .~ \~ \c \ \ ; JU . :l :u. :~ Moi,tvre .Content in Per Cent ~ pry Wtig,ht SOIL Cl~~lf~TION: j ! 12 L 1.2: 1 115 , ~ I 105 no 4" Oio_'~ -ad. 1130 CII. ft..oIVIM S lo,.n U blOWS' per ..r: . lO Ib. IlOlIlI'Mf dropPed I' iftcMI >- Q 100 o OPTIMUM MOISTUIE CONTENT/-In ,., C.nl of Ory W.i~ht /t),Z /Ze.1 MIAXIMUM DIY DENSITY,';' In ~und. 'er Cubic foot r \\ I .- - - ..,-- - - --*:/_ - I _,---- I . !II 1)2-47'03',,! 184.27;/'" .... :, ..../ :I> t'PI I ~ IXI. .1:1> ," , ,.. . lEI i ,D ; ,]> iP; :.. --- --- .~ r ---- ~ , ---- - - '" en o ro ( / !-- (--- \--- 1\ I I I I I I \l- -\ t..-: / / / :> .\ \ ~\r~/ ; / / / / \. WIt ~ ~ ;/ // // )Ii,~ / f/ // /, I\~\ / .J / // // //I\ll _.J / /.P' / /111 / _~_-.J / // // )Ui -- -~---_/ /. / / \'\\ ./ ,-;,,;;;- - - - - - - --'--"- / - " / ,,!!;2~ ___-----/ _~-r'--' I '\;ii;}-- ----~//.// // 1\,\\/ ,~lII"" ,./ / / ~::"2'-------,,/. / / J'.\.\' ~,"ri- --. - - - - - - -p' / '~1iF-M_.J SCE'" - - 7- - L ,~~ ..------/ ..... '/ -.",.' ,- - .:-.-~. - /'./ /' ' ' ._, ' _----./ . / .'i. . 'P'" ,'_' ._.- ./ ' / .111 .. - ~ :~--<!" ~-,,-,....~_._. /~.--" "~ -~ ~' .~ ~ --- /' ..~. 0-- - ~ --- / , Q,- tJl - -. --- --:::> --:~ -- . - --- - - '" .... Co '" ~ r .. . I: ---~.--? -:-- ~ ---- -- :--- ...:--- ~ / ,...// _ _ C;9U -- .-.-- -- r--- I 1-' I I : / ~ :-::~ I"'. ./ - - '\ --,I. --- \~.~ ---- - --c -_.--- - ....L:'~ "<1' l" ." --'r/) _ . 0....,.:>:7,.1"\ _... ......_-l:X -1H'l\M.1'1 (II ",-.;t - .,,~(I)"'- "_ P3!-~CJ ''''''' .~ ~ ~~- ~~t::l:t - t'I ,/---' - ----- "-... ...- - - .- :::i '" '-' .W / --- . - , ~ ~ .. r .r r - ~ .' ....08\ ,vv,-~ d. ~ ",p...-- , ("l ""i1 '--:zi . ~...... aC C.O a> ~.<: ...<{;) . , :....a CD (0- (D"m ,N ~:tJ1 N (JJ Q'~ (:)0 0. "11) ,;;l.'~~' ,a> ,~ a> '" '% ." ~, r /182 ---- ---- ,~, del' "l.'< (D.(Il _!::""" .w lJI.i11 '-. ........... '.~ , """ ......'!""t cC ...... .....<: ...... 'ala> ~'. 0'0 ........... '. -l cC .,,<: ~3(D lit!'! PI / '....... ............. ~ I z o -I ~ CI < fTl AJ fTl X n :J> < :J> -l ~ 2 o ~ ~ :;t>:J> AJr fTlr C::AJ 2fTl t:::l-i fTl::l> AJ...... :z (/);; ... lI!. ." ~ r -~ rCJ "', co .- 'R -- J'I ~ Pl -4 ~:t> -i ....... ..- 1 ... ..... 1