The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutParcel Map 17288 Parcel 3-4 Soil & Foundation - " . ~ f6-107vlC '7 --:-. 'J _'/ J c- '6 /"- /< _./ ' - " )<1_- OJ] C 0 ,..--- SOIL AND FOUNDATION INVESTIGATION PROPOSED RV AND BOAT SHOWROOM PARCELS 3 AND 4 OF.r.~!lrF,T. lV[llP 17288 FRONT STREET CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA FOR MR. JAN WEILERT PROJECT NO. 96-077.PI DATED NOVEMBER 11. 1996 Lakeshore Engineering ., -- \ -.. \ . . . LAKESHORE Engineering . Consulting Civil Engineering and Geologists November 11, 1996 Project No. 96-077.PI Client: Mr. Jan Weilert RV Centers 28897 Front Street Temecula, CA 92590 (909) 699-7380 Attention: Mr. Jan Weilert Subject: Soil and Foundation Investigation Report Proposed RV and Boat Showroom parcels 3 and 4 of ParcA1 M~p 17288 Temecula, CA A.P.N. 922-110-018 and 019 Gentlemen: INTRODUCTION This report presents the findings and conclusion of a soil and foundation investigation for the proposed development of a 16,800 square foot commercial building to be 10cated on the subject site. The purpose of this investigation was to 1) evaluate the existing foundation and subsurface soil conditions at the site, and 2) provide pertinent recommendations for the proposed development. This investigation included the following scope of work: -, 1) Performed two exploratory trenches within the proposed building pad and one trench in the proposed parking area to determine subsurface conditions and provide soil samples for laboratory testing (Appendix A). 2) Laboratory testing of a representative soil sample to evaluate their engineering properties (Appendix B). 3) Engineering analyses for foundation and necessary earthwork. 4) The preparation of this report. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed development will consist of a (with one and two story sections) commercial building placed at grade located on the northerly half of the lot with associated parking and landscape areas to the south. The property is situated on a relatively level 10t approximately 2 feet berm above Front Street. Grading will be minimal to achieve pad grade. However, rework of substandard foundation soils is anticipated. Construction will be either cement block or concrete tilt-up. Foundation is expected to be of conventional spread footings with slab- on-grade flooring. z;; 31606 Railroad Canyon Road, #201 . Canyon Lake, CA 92587 . (909) 244.2913 . FAX: (909) 244-2987 ,-.. . LOCATION MAP 1 1 l I J I J LAKESHORE. Engineering JAN WEILERT RV FRONT STREET TEMECULA Ploject No: CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS 96-077.PI 0al8 U/U/96 N N.T.S. ~ Agure No: , .'~ J. ! ; ; . , TO'OGRAPHIC MA' N -r:EMECULA I QUADRANG~ CALIFORNIA LAK:ESHORE Enmineerilng A.. JAN WEILERT RV FRONT STREET TEMECULA CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS Project No: 96-077.PI 1.. Date U/U//96 Agure No: .-:::-~ -~ . . November 11, 1996 Project No. 96-077.PI Page Two SITE DESCRIPTION The subject lot is 10cated in the city of Temecula, on the westerly side of Front Street just south of the old town center. It is approximately l/4 mile west of the 15 Freeway. To the north is an RV sales and service center, and to the south is vacant land. To the west is!Murrieta Creek. The lot is relatively level from the street to the creek edge. The surrounding development consist of commercial and office buildings. Most of the buildings are one and two story in height. The subject property iR presF>nting vacant and stockpile with clF>i'l.n fill dirt. The 10t is ele,. ... ~''f trash, debris or stockpile ,,;3,"," hd during our site exploration in August of 1996. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS A total of three exploratory trenches were excavated to a maximum depth of 10 feet. Location of exploratory trenches are shown on the Plot Plan, as figure 3. Based upon our exploratory effort, the 10t is underlain by a uniform layer of Silty SAND, alluvium. Traces of clay seam exist at depths below 6 feet. The upper 3 to 4 feet appears to be fill dirt. The subsoil are damp to moist and relatively dense at depths below 6 feet. Generally, the subsurface soils appears granular and considered low in expansion potential. GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC SETTING The subject property is 10cated in the Temecula Valley in the old town section of temecula, on the east flank of Murrieta Creek. The Temecula Valley is a southern extension of the Temescal -Elsinore Valley, massive low, which is occupied by the Lake Elsinore Fault Zone. The eastern margin is formed by the active Willard Fault Zone. In the Temecula area, itself, 2 additional, active fault lines have been recognized recently, near the west side of the trough, just inward from the Willard Fault Zone. These are the Murrieta Creek Fault, beginning a little over a mile to the north of the site and the Wolf Valley Fault, beginning a little over 1 1/2 miles southeast of the site. The Wildomar, Murrieta Creek, and Wolf Valley faults are Alquist Priolo Zone faults. An additional hazard, which may be partially structural in nature, is the group of cracks, known under the name of Temecula Ground Fissures. These features are well known in the areas of the Murrieta Creek and Wolf Valley faults. The area between, where the site is 10cated is suspect. In this general area, an occurrence of such cracking has been reported near the junction of Felix Valdez Road and Baldary Circle, 3/4-mile north of the site and close to Murrieta Creek. The temecula Ground Fissures are generally believed to originate from strong ~ groundwater pumping in tectonically weakened areas. Lakeshore Engineering . . November 11, 1996 Project No. 96-077.PI Page Three Murrieta Creek impacts the site as a flood hazard and requires special consideration (raised pad elevations) in building plans. This property is seismically sensitive. It is located only 1/2-mile southwest of the Wildomar Fault Zone, the major active strand of the Elsinore Fault System in this area. The system is classed as a 7 1/2 (moment magnitude) possibility by the CDMG (OF 92-1). However, the l'argest historical earthquake was an M6 event in 1910 in the central section. The latest estimates of peak acceleration from maximum credible earthquakes in California at rock and stiff soil sites (CDMG. OF 92-1) provide a deduction for the peak acceleration expectable at the site -- a little over 0.6g. However, the site is not a rock or stiff soil site, bl1t ~lll1.v;il.l. Consequently wave motion and A.T'A>'''V .-:an be expected to be .a. _~: --.:.~d. If the site were rock or ~'~.i. _:-__l, repeatable accelerations could be expected in the neighborhood of 0.4g. But since it is alluvial, the repeatable accelerations could slightly be: higher, as well. Secondary affects of the ground shaking at the site should be considered. Becajlse of site location in a general area of ground f.issure formation, the vibrations expectable at the site provide a potential for the opening of nascent structures below, sympathetically. Another conceivable affect is liquefaction. Groundwater is known in the area at depth of 15 to 20 feet. However, the present of traces of clays and silts in the alluvium soils reduces the probability of the occurrence of liquefaction. , CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION GENERAL From a soil and foundation engineering standpoint, the site will be sui table for the proposed single story commercial building construction, provided the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are incorporated in the design considerations, project plans and specifications. GRADING AND EARTHWORK General Based upon our site observation, it is our understanding that site grading willof the preparation of 1) a level building pad; 2) suitable foundation conditions to support the proposed building structure; 3) adequate surface gradients for control of water runoff; 4) subgrade preparation for asphalt drive and parking stalls and 5) excavation into native soils -and/or compacted fills to accommodate the installation of foundation and utility systems. (p Lakeshore Engineering . . November ll, 1996 Project No. 96-077.PI Page Four REWORK OF EXISTING FOUNDATION SOILS Based on our exploratory trenching and laboratory test resul ts, the upper 6 feet of existing soils are considered relatively 100se and therefore unsuitable for foundation support in its present condition. In that regard, the upper 6 feet of existing soil should be excavated and recompac.ted to provide for a uniform dense layer of foundation bearing soil. The rework of foundation soils should extend 5 horizontal feet beyond the outer footpdr>1:<; nf the building. The rework of fonnrl';lT; nn soils can be achieve J:;~ . ,el __..oval of the upper 5 feet and the "'_ :,~-).. __at-ion of.the lower 12 inches of exposed grade. Reworking of 100se topsoil and recompaction shall include moisture- conditioning as needed to bring the soils to approximately at optimum moisture content levels. All reworked soils and structural fills should be densified to achieve at least 90 percent relative compaction with reference to the laboratory compaction standard. The optimum moisture content and maximum dry density should be determined in the laboratory in accordance with A.S.T.M. Test Designation DI557-78. EXCAVATING AND RIPPABILITY The subsurface soils consist of moderate to dense bedrock layers. Most unit is brittle and can be excavated easily with standard backhoe and dozer equipment. However, based on our experience working in the vicinity, some of the rocks may be very hard, and additional effort with a jack hammering may be required. The walls of temporary construction excavations should stand nearly vertical, provided the total depth does not exceed 5 feet. Shoring of excavation walls or flattening may be required if greater excavation depths are necessary. For deeper cuts, slopes should not be made steeper than 1:1 (H:V). All work associated with trench shoring must conform to the State of California Safety Codes. Native organic free soils may be permitted provided both the. backfill and the native materials have a minimum sand equivalent of 30 and the required relative compaction can be achieved. GRADING CONTROL AIl earthwork including trench backfill should be performed under the observation and testing of the soils consultant or their representative. Sufficient notification prior to stripping and earthwork construction is essential in order that the work be adequately observed and tested. In order for us to provide a written opinion as to the adequacy of the soil compaction and trench backfill, the entire operation, most importantly at the time of trench backfill, should be performed under our observation and testing. Lakeshore Engineering 1 . . November 11, 1996 Project No. 96-077.PI Page Five FOUNDATION DESIGN After the rework of the upper 6 feet of substandard soils, the pad should be considered suitable for support of proposed foundation. The local subgrade soils are granular and considered to be low in expansion potential. FOOTING The proposed residential development may be supported on conventional spread footinn~ ~s~~hlished in recompacted fills. The~~ sprA~n footings may be d..J>li,,__,1 _ a,l allowable bearing value 0.:. 1 '.'L jJ6UI,ds per square foot. This design value may be increase by one third, if the Structural Engineer takes into consideration short duration structural loading conditions, such as induced by wind and/or seismic forces. For footings founded on competent native subgrade, the structural footings should be embedded at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. All spread footings should be at least 12 inches in width and reinforced with at least one no.4 bar top and bottom and consistent with the recommendations of the Structural Engineer. SETTLEMENT Foundation placed on recompacted soils, the total settlement due to structural loads should not be a design factor as they should be less than 3/4 inches. Differential settlement should be within tolerable limi ts . LATERAL CAPACITY For design, resistance to lateral 10ads can be assumed to be provided by friction acting at the based of the foundations and by passive earth pressure and may be combine without reduction. If passive earth pressure is used, it is important that backfill should be placed under engineering observation and testing. A coefficient of friction of 0.30 may be used with the dead load forces. An allowable lateral passive earth pressure of 200 pounds per square foot per foot of depth may be used for the sides of footings poured against undisturbed and/or recompacted soils. The lateral bearing values indicated above are for the total of dead and frequently applied live loads. If the normal code requirements are used for seismic design, the values may be increased by 1/3 for short du~ations of the loading which include the effect of wind or seismic forces. RETAINING WALLS The site is relatively level and no retaining structures are proposed at this time. Lakeshore Engineering 2:> November 11, 1996 Froject No. 96-077.PI Page Six . . CONCRETE SLAB - ON - GRADE The subgrade soils are granular and considered to be LOW (E.I. < 50) in expansion potential. The floor slabs may be supported directly on pr0perly prepared subgrade. Presaturation to 120 percent over optimum is'not required. If a floor covering that could be critically affected bymoisture,such as vinyl tile, slabs should be protected by a plastic vapor barrier of six-mil thickness. The sheet should be covered by at least two inches of clean sand to prevent punctures and aid in concrete cure. Based on r~v;~w of the site sales an~ ~~~~cz o~ R.V. anticipated. The following plan, proposed usaqe of tb~ hllilding is In that regard, he<1vy ,hi (1(,_ loadings recommendations are made: for are PR0POSED USAGE RECOMMENDED STRUCTURAL SECTION Office Spaces 4" PCC/2" Sand/Subgrade R.V. Sales and Repair 6" PCC/Subgrade The concretefloor slabs should be reinforced with at least 6" x 6"-#10 /#10 welded wire. mesh or equivalent bar reinforcing and installed at mid-height. The structural engineer and architect should review the slab design for intended usage. DRAINAGE Positive drainage should be provided around the perimeter of all structures to minimize water infiltrating into the underlying soils. Finish subgrade adjacent to exterior footings should be sloped down and away to facilitate surface drainage. All drainage should be directed off-site to the street via non-erosive devices. The homeowner should be made aware of the potential problems which may develop when drainage is altered through construction of retaining walls, patios and pools. Ponded water, leaking irrigation systems, overwatering or other conditions which could lead to ground saturation must be avoided. PAVEMENT DESIGN Representative samples of the superficial soils typical of the sub grade materials wi thin the planned parking areas and driveways should be collected for laboratory "R" resistance value testing near the completion of grading. These tests would determine an R-Value for pavement design. However, for cost estimating purposes, the following guidelines are provided. Lakeshore Engineering q . . November 11, 1996 Project No: 96-077.PI Page Seven LOCATION ASSUMED R-VALUE ASSUMED T.r. RECOMMENDED ASPHALT PAVEMENT SECTIONS Driveways & RV Parking 40* 6.0 3"AC/6" Base/12"Subgrade compacted to 90% Parking Stalls 40 4.0 2 1/2" AC/4" Base/12" Sub. AC - Asphaltic Concrete Base - Class Two Aggregate Base compacted to 95% RC. Sub. - Subgrade compacted to 90% RC. * Typical for Sandy Soils encountered at the site. Pr:;'or::c. ,;-.1. '::_.1g .pavement, the existing g-rad~ _.. ' ..:;e reworked to a depth of l8" and densified to 90% of the maximum method. Aggregate Base should be Class 11 and compacted to at least 95 % relative compaction. Proper drainage of the paved areas should be provided since this will reduce moisture infiltration into the subgrade and increase the life of the paving. No ponding of surface water should be allowed adjacent to the paved areas. GENERAL INFORMATION This report presents recommendations pertaining to the subject site based on the assumption that the subsurface conditions do not deviate appreciably from those disclosed by our exploratory trenches. In view of 'the general conditions of the area, the possibility of different 10cal soil conditions cannot be discounted. It is the responsibility of the owner to bring any deviations or unexpected conditions observed during construction to the attention of the consul ting engineer. In this way, any required supplemental recommendations can be made with a minimum of delay to the project. Prior to initiation of grading, a meeting should be arranged by the developer and should be attended by representatives of the governmental agencies, contractors, consultants and the developer. Construction should be inspected at the following stages by the Geotechnical Consultant. o Upon completion of clearing and brushing. o During all rough grading operations including removal of unstable materials, precompaction and filling operations. o During trench backfilling but prior to paving or other construction over backfill. o When any unusual conditions are encountered. We urge that we be retained to review any modified portions of the plans and specifications that pertain to earthwork and foundations to determine whether they are consistent with our recommendations. Lakeshore Engineering \0 . . November 11, 1996 Project No: 96-077.PI Page Eight In addition, Me are available to observe construction, particularly the compaction of structural backfill and preparation of footing foundations, and such other field observations as may be necessary. The findings and recommendations of this report were prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional principles and practice in the field of geotechnical engineering. This warranty is in lieu of all other warranties, either express or implied. We sincerelyappreciate this opportunity to be of service. If you have a(lV t;!n~"i:;ons, or need further assistance, nlA"'>" "<:Intact our office at Yu ;..:::: ".:'..Jj).'~~J:...il!nce a Respectfully submitted, LAKESHORE i F'. ong, RCE.3 exp;j6-30-00 L FY Ify ENCLOSED: PLOT PLAN APPENDIX A - EXPLORATION APPENDIX B - LAB. RESULTS Lakeshore Engineering \\ ). . . APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION Field exploration was performed on the morning of August 12, 1996 using a backhoe (provided by Mike Monteleone Excavating). The soils were continuouSly logged by our field personnel and classified by visual examination in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. To evaluate the compaction characteristics of the fil1 material, field n""n"'i ty tests were performed. Also r",:"TOQOntative bulk samples were (ll';tair.ed and shipped to the labo~aL.:... ~__ ..,olythelene bags. The site was recently visited and found to be stockpile with 3 to 4 feet of fill :dirt over the entire lot. This stockpile dirt will have to be.addressed separately during rough grading operation. . ~, i ; 96-077.PI November 11, .1996 RV Center, Front Street, Temecula Lakeshore Engineering \7/ IjQ . -., P", .....1.: ~ -"r0,- o ~EL k~oVED ill: ~1Oe ,ii! I r. ~. .,,1.- f ,- :,._"""':r-o , I 1- ,t I. ,q I ,/~ L --- Gi . ,-~- 11 ();<l ;<l- "l!' ~ l>() 211 pl~ --{ 3:.. ~() <'" ~~ z.l> ih G II I I / V /1 L___ -'lrl - - ---l -- ~ '--"\' _ --.J ..... .-a- EXPLANA TION '"4" ;:>, Ob'E 30000' I , I , I ! ! , .] I I-- I I +- I I I 1 " , , .~ , ; , :; " I . . . PLOT PLAN lJ CXJsr/ ~""'/::S IOev ." :a o z -t en N -t :u m m I -t -t- __:l5~tT YARD SE I 35 N. !~~~ r~" LtJ .. ~ 1:10'. t'XJSrt/oi.s ""'1Oec t'L LINe: rOse ~~ - fT':Ti i - ~ I 'w 2J !~ :1 ,>" . . "";r;J,., . '!J PI ,~.: I ~ I 1..0 y ~L ti J J ~ I ;ff:J/f ~oe-olJr::; " I.:. ',0 ;:,~ ~ @ s ,/ i;' ~~ ~~ ~ ~$ ~ Jf2~ f I~ .'" ::;y ..... :0 . ~ 'l:: '!' ~ I~ PI - - J T~3 f APPROX. LOCATION OF EXP. TRENCH LAKESHORE :Erlgineering JAN WEILERT RV FRONT STREET TEMECULA \7 '. .. ?m)<>et No: CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS ! 96 - 0 7 7 , PI . .--=--c..::.__".:_._ Dale. Agure No: 11/11/96 3 . . . TRENCH LOG Sudace Elevation: Trench Orientation: Trench Dimensions: 3f,"X :J'X l5 I Groundwater Depth: SAMPLE Logged By: F ...::JDWG- . Trench Date '? -l1..- q (" . Number Equipment: MD~r-.:.LIQ:>lcjb:S. MC.l<J10E... Thillog iI. rlprese"ation OIWt.UrllCl,IOU and oroundwller conditio~ at 1t1t timt.nd platt 01 excavalion, -r -- \ . wtththe paaaged Ikneer ".nyother klcI.lion there may be c:onseQUf:nlial changes in ctlrd"ions s'/U':J s;p,~ - LT. e,i20().)N~ LOCbE. UfPe.l<.. 18" BECJ:>ME:S. l'I4ED. DE:f(Y;E / lRIKlZ.. 0;:: LLA~L SIU SBlI"II\.S ~. L-u.Mf<;. F-/I\)E. To I1A ~C:.. GQJ\r.E. ~A0.0DS., e,ELDME-<;. )\)Er0~E.. B1:1-D00 6' .. ~ NOt0 E)(f'~l \IE _ TOTAl... t>E:l\Tl+ ':J FT. ...-,.,,,,,,,,,",..- 1\..\0 f.+..D ENGDLl)Ji1":PCi'\ . 10,0, E:.UID13\)CE.~f' CAlJl~. ."':.;~;:'.::'-" "T~~ t'6Ao:.FlLLE.U. StLI~ sM:lD - LT 8,MvvW, bf\vIA.p AI ~~ UDSE Ll f'PE.\2.. 24!' l~ eF ~ll...\ c.wsr-~ S~tl\,<;'. VlAOSTL'i rlrJ-e.1D vut.D <;M.DS. bL..-NSf. ill {y~ :$> 1)E:L6.0 L l>>l'PE-iL. "S{"" APP~(, bMtiE.D J = ~ ::l ::l Cl I- 4.2.. 107.0 5 8..0 IIs'S 10 " 15 ,'" 20 1 , .., , Logged By: Date Equipment: Surlace Elevation: Trench:Orientation: Trench' Dimensions: ':Jb' V 11...' X 18' Groundwater Depth: /IJ[)I\Jf':.- .~ -1-b 11--r.L. 3",(,. ~D7-D 5 10 15 20 ~AKiESHORIE Engineering CONSULTING ENGINEERS ANO GEOLOGIST wEST ~w(,. I"f-ID_ s~. ~i. t1An ftQEA. Trench Number T-z.. TDT>'K.. I)EPT-!f _ /2.' NOCAVI~(j, NO/;+z.o Te.6t0C-171 Bf'a.f/LL-. Fig. No '1b-611 JAN WEILERT RV FRONT STREET TEMECULA PROJ. NO. A-I. \~ '- , , . . . TRENCH LOG Logged By: g - I L - Cj L" F. ':i D>J(' . Trench Date Number Equipment: M Dv0,E.U;;Or0f:. ~A Oc../-h:,L . ThllIogI.1 teprIMnlationof subsufllCe, lOiI.ndgroUl\lMller condiUo,. .1 the time and placeo! '.Clwllan, T- ~ wltht... pillage oUlrm or .tlny other IoClltOllll'efe R'IIY be colWequentl.1 changes .In eondKionl, ,J/) = " ~- .0 .u. ,0'_ " " 0) .... :0) ~. ---- LX. l6~w0 _ /)1'\1rL,{P > ~l. VlAOI'--T ~ -; I'VlED ~t0SE. MI'f:tl0 TO '&E.FILL lMGc6 10 c...~E. CRJ1\ltO I ~ ~Llj Q>< Nt, - (;".3. 101'5,0 5 10 LCTAL DE.lJ1bl '2,Y2..Fi. t0D CftVllI."G.> ND H"2D l!i!.Ef\JCb{ ft,~ILLEI::J. 1 1 15 ..,.._,",. 20 ! Surface Elevation: . .j Trench, Orientation: Trench Dimensions: Groundwater Depth: Logged By: Date Equipment: Trench Numbe,/ // 5 / / / 10 15 // 20 LAKJESHORE E~gineering CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGIST .:fA /oJ wrl LEIt.:\ . rRolA.lT 8XREEl'. TE. I'\A E.C1A LA, CA-. Fig. No. A -5, . \-5 PROJ. NO. g",,- 011,p'c .- . . APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING MOISTURE DENSITY Moisture-density information usually provides a gross indication of soil consistency and can delineate local variations at the time of investigation and provide a correlation between soils found on this site. The dry unit weight and field moisture content were determined for selected samples, and the results are shown on the 10g of boring sheets. MAXIMUM DENSITY-OP~JM1~ MOISTURE TESTS } A selected soil samples were tested in the laboratory to determine maximum dry density and optimum moisture content using the A.S.T.M. D1557-78 compaction test method. This test procedure uses 25 blows of a lO-pound hammer falling height of 18 inches on each of five layers to a 1/30 cubic foot cylinder. The results of the tests are presented below: Trench No. Depth Soil Description Maximum Dry Density Optimum Moisture Content ---------------------------------------------------------------- T-l 0-2 ft Sil ty Fine SAND 131. 0 PCF 9.5 % of dry wt. EXPANSION INDEX TEST A representative near surface soil sample was collected in the field and tested in the laboratory in accordance with the A.S.C.E. Expansion Index Test Method as specified by U.B.C. The degree of expansion potential is evaluated from measured soil volume changes obtained during soil moisture alterations. The result of the test is presented below: Trench No. Depth (feet) Soil Description Expansion Index Expansion Potential ------------------------------------------------------------------- T-l 0-:2 ft. Sil ty SAND 22 LOW P.N. 96-077 .PI November 11, 1996 RV .Center \<P Lakeshore Engineering