The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTract Map 3929 Lot 30 Final Report of Compacted Fill :. -m..3a.Z.'1 . /II~ $/&tIC'i> LoT" l!o Megaland Engineers & Associates CIVIL ENGINEERS. PLANNERS · ARCHITECTS . SURVEYORS RECEIVED OCT 1 1 2004 CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FINAL REPORT OF COMPACTED FILL AND FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS A lar;ge, single-family residential building pad area, including an access driveway and parking area, located on San Pasqual Road, Temecula, California LC2al Description: Lot No. 30, Tract 3929; A.P.N.921-223-005 Site Location: San Pasqual Road Temecula, CA 92592 Ownerl Applicant: Dan Pike 32088 Gerona Temecula, CA 92592 909 699-9844 909 265-0685 cell Job No. CF04-239 September 12,2004 28481 Rancho California Rd., Suite. 201 . Temecula, CA 92590 \ Phone: (909) 699-4624. Fax: (909) 695-5084 . E-mail: mega@ez2.net '. . TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................1 GENERA.L SITE ;PREP ARATION .......................................................................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 ....................5 Grading and Compaction Conclusions ......................................................5 Approved Allowable Soil Bearing Values..................................................5 Foundation Recommendations ...................................................................6 Utility Trenches ............................................................................................7 Subgrade for Driveway and Parking .........................................................7 Suggested Pavement Design ........................................................................7 Soluble Sulfate Content ...............................................................................8 CLOSURE ................................................................................................................8 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM...................................................9 MAXIMUM DENSITY CURVE............................................................................I0 KEYING-BENCIllNG DETAIL............................................................................ll PLANS ........................................................................................................ ..Enclosed Z-. I. . Job No. CF04-239 September 12, 2004 Page 1 FINAL REPORT OF COMPACTED FILL AND FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS A large, single-family residential building pad area, including an access driveway and parking area, located on San Pasqual Road, Temecula, California Lee:al Description: Lot No. 30, Tract 3929; A.P.N.92l-223-005 San Pasqua! Road Temecula, CA 92592 Dan Pike Site Location: Owner/Applicant: INTRODUCTION At the request of owner, Dan Pike, we have 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). GENERA.L SITE PREPARATION The complete project area involved in the grading operations was watered continuously for six days prior to any grading. The area was then stripped of all vegetation and all other materials which could not be used in the construction of the compacted fills. A keyway slot, 15 feet wide by 3 feet deep, was excavated along the north and west portion of the building pad area. ~ !. . Job No. CF04-239 September 12, 2004 Page 2 ENERA.L EXCA VA TION AND GRADING PROCEDURES The grading equipment used included one D-4 Cat equipped with ripper teeth and slope blade, and a high pressure fire hose used for water. The fill soils were thoroughly pre-mixed to optimum moisture and processed during the overexcavation operation and the keyway slot installation. All fill areas tested to 90% or better relative density test results, and all grading operations and compaction testing were completed in compliance with the Uniform Building Code, (Appendix Chapter 33). GENERA.L 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 10-pound hammer falling 18 inches in a mold of 1/30 cubic foot volume. Soil Tvpe 1: Dark to tan-brown coarse to fine sand and silt with occasional small rock fragments; SM and SC according to U.S.C.S.; Maximum Density 126.9:p.c.f. @ 10.3% Optimum Moisture. 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. -5 . . Job No. CF04-239 September 12, 2004 Page 3 Expansion Test Results Soil Type I Confining Load Expansion Index % Expansion 144 p.s.f. 15 1.5 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 oftesting methods (Drive Cylinder Method D2937-71 and/or Sand Cone Method D1556-64). (See Page 4.) tp . . Job No. CF04-239 September 12, 2004 Relative Compaction Test Results Test Date Soil Elev. Dry Dens. Field Maximum No. Tvpe (ft.) p.c.f. Moist. Densitv-% S-l 9/8 I 1186 125.1 6.5 98 S-2 9/8 I 1187 117.3 6.3 92 S-3 9/8 1 1191 114.6 5.2 90 S-4 9/8 I 1187 118.9 5.7 94 S-5 9/8 I 1189 123.9 5.9 98 S-6 9/8 1 1188 120.3 4.9 95 S-7 9/9 I 1187 114.0 4.3 90 S-8 9/9 1 1187 116.3 5.1 92 S-9 9/9 I 1191 117.7 5.5 92 S-IO 9/10 1 1192 116.5 7.4 92 S-lI 9/10 1 1179 117.8 6.4 92 S-12 9/10 I 1182 118.0 6.6 93 S-B 9/11 1 1196 115.3 7.4 90 S-14 9/11 1 1194 117.5 7.0 92 S-15 9/11 I 1196 117.3 7.1 92 S-16 9/12 1 1194 114.8 7.7 90 * S-17 9112 I 1198 115.5 6.3 92 * S-18 9/12 1 1197 116.2 5.1 92 *Sand Volume Tests Page 4 1 . . Job No. CF04-239 September 12, 2004 Page 5 RECOMMENDATIONS AND ADDITIONAL SOIL CRITERIA Gradine and Compaction Conclusions The fill soils used in the grading operations consisted of tan to dark brown coarse to fine sand and silt with some rock fragments. These fill soils were thoroughly processed and pre-mixed to optimum moisture and were then emplaced in thin lifts and track rolled in multiple directions until the required 90% relative compaction test results were attained. The complete building pad area was overexcavated 4 to 5 feet below the existing natural grade, and into the natural undisturbed hard-packed bedrock formation. The premixed fill soils were recompacted in place in minimum 6-inch to 8-inch lifts under constant track rolling until relative compaction test results of 90% or better were attained. All grading operations were completed in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, (Appendix, Chapter 33). Annroved Allowable Soil Bearine Values The results of laboratory analysis and direct shear testing, utilizing a controlled rate of strain .050 inch per minute under varying normal loads, has produced test results indicating aniangle 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: 8 . . Job No. CF04-239 September 12, 2004 Page 6 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) 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); qa = 2300 p.s.f. (allowable for square or continuous footings 24" wide and 18" deep). 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. 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. ~ . . Job No. CF04-239 September 12, 2004 Page 7 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. Suh!!:rade for Drivewav and Parkin!!: 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. Su!!:!!:ested Pavement Desil!:l1 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 concrete driveway could be placed directly on the compacted subgrade where the top 6 inches is 95% compaction. If asphaltic concrete is utilized, then we would recommend that 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. \0 . . Job No. CF04-239 September 12, 2004 Page 8 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 W!J~ t;k~ R.C.E.36117 Peter H. Buchanan, Soils Consultant \\ ~s NC:C..c. . . '. CO.lRSE "'GRA'IIf:D SQILS. ',,,,,,,. -19"''' """""'.. L>>tGr1t IfiIIfl 11II.200...... ....1 r'N[ ''GIlA'1 N[O SOILS' I.... ... 50........ """""..... SM&I..L0t . """"... 200...... ..,., - -239 'B6FSoILS: .o.4r"e: 91/~/t!J4 ,$.lHOS ..... .....:to,'" ..,.. ".,.. It '''.LL('' "*' .... .......... tfn" TYPIC4L NAMES "'~JOR DIVISIONS ell AN GA'-VELS ILln~ ir .. ,.... ) .", ...... .......... ,..... ~..... "'f......". lin.. " .. 'Nt. . "-~ ......" .......... . ~............ ....,".... ...... . .. ,....; GRAVELS IMro (lWo 19" .,. _Mfftict_.,. LA"GE.. .... "'" ...... "- ....1.' GRAVEls WITH FINES 'f~............... ..,-. $;ftr. ,..,....", ................. ......,..,. . 0.,., .......~. ........~.,~.ctlIr ...,....... .... ....... ...;. ..........,. ..... .....,. . .,.... '. . . """"'......,..... . ....,..,,, ......... ""It .. ....... M, ....... ........tt ............ , $.ANDS WITH "iNES r"~.... ...... .,.... a.,.y ..... .....eIIrr "--..... SI,LTS AND CLAYS f....... 1_" If 51 ..... '0' ~ ....h ........".... ........1"10 n.... ,.,.,.. ..... '.... ...... .. ~ ..," ~1"''''' .....IID~. . --,..lC cteyt .. .. .. .....W'IIl ......01'. .......... ~. --..y 0."., ...., ""'. ...... t..... . a.,..c "'b ~ ....... ..., u.re .. .... . ......c.., ~ ...... "".n.............. ~__. ........., . ...., '''t",'~''IIC .....: SILTS 'AND CLAYS (I....., hMo. GltUTt..,,*,, 50) ..........~ u.,. .,....._ ....bel..,.'.. ,..,t. O'1'W!IC eN", .. ~....... .. ..~ .....,1'..1 . '..,...1lC "'". . HIGHL" ORGAI1IC SOILS ..... .... "h-:, """"'1 ..........c ...... aOu~o.."y' CLASSI"C.l'OJirllS: ,..... ........"'" "C~_''';.'~n ....... ........ .. ."~.... .,. .,-......... elf .,.. :~.. I ,,,.r ~. CLAY UNIFIED P A' R T , C L'[ 5"'0 s 'z E L I M ITS "..vtL ,... IU.., co.eus lOUlOI"S ...... ....co h: , ,<< V I: I I r I: SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM ....,....,". . ,.. """'''' _I' CI,,.r"toIMll'l S,.""". Cor" 01 (,..,1,.,,,,,, U 5 A,."., hC"ft+C:., .....,....,,~ No .).J'7 ...... .'. ""MI'!. ",) lllt'.I'" ..'11. 'MOl .. '* \Z- . . Megaland Engineers & Associates CIVIL ENGINEERS. PLANNERS · ARCHITECTS · SURVEYORS .PJBlltJ:. c P~4 - '2-39 . ZMr&: SOILS ENGINE:ERING DATA' . . Typical fill Materials. lMAXIMUM DENSITY CURVE ,1 :a 'd L 120 G! J U5 oS .110 ,~ ;. :c :c! 105 Moistvre '(OAtentin Ptr Cent ~ Pry Weig,ht 130 . \ .,r , '" / ~. ~ '\.1\ ~C'\ .~ \~ \- \ \ .1 ) 0 ,U . :0 125 >.. .. :0 100 I' -< #'2,0 . 'SOIL CLASSIfICATION Soil, TYDe end OeKriD'ion. _ T;t,A/ 8R~N 7lJ Ll~R~ BRoWi<.! Co/lR$E" r&//-Ve S/lNi?FS/.lrlfl/ #;I</a!? c'uv s/~ C~'#R!JNENT.~ ~H IS~4<<t:JP.R/,l,t;'?O US<:!S METHOO Of COMPACTION A$TM Sl~ndcird lest Method O'U 4. Ojo_'~ mold; 1130 (1/ ft 'fOl_ 5 10)'91'1 25 1Il0w1 Pflloytl. . 10 lb hO_ cUopp.d " itlch.. o IOPTlMUM MOIS.TUU CONTENT, '1'1 Pe, C.n. of' Ofy W.ight /0-3 , ~ MAXIMUM :0tY DENSITY, In ~vnds '.r Cubic foot /:2r;,,9 ~ \7 Sr~ / ~ I 'nl~ ~. "\. IV ."" J t'~t I "- 'I.'" " J ",\ r};,-Lf.. : / " / . i ..::il - / Jh, / i'~ "- '" . ...'\ , , . . ............ JtJ1t; ....... 6\ ."J ~ /1 PIt ?I//j (f- t - 1 !.~ '\. i!J&I/ -5 ~ 1/ '--'; . -- 0811 --' -.......--.. - ~, , ~ -L~/Ra ..r - NVc; 1\;1 nO 5 \jd ----- '..