The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTract Map 3883 Lot 157 Final Compacted Fill & Foundation ~ MEGALAND .---- -." ,W~<<.Ep- .:'-"--~~_: ,-, . . Megaland Engineers & Associates civil engineers · planners · structural · surveyors. soils FINAL REPORT OF COMPACTED FILL AND FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS A lar:ge, single-family residential building pad area, including access driveway and parking area, located on Paseo Cielo and Via Val Verde in the Meadowview Area, Temecula, California Lee:al Description: Lot 157 of 0.79 acres on Tract No. 3883; A.P.N.919-131-001 Site Location: Paseo Cielo and Via Val Verde Temecula, CA 92591 Owner! Applicant: Hans Boers 1723 Vakas Drive EI Cajon, CA 92019 Job No. CF06- 134 July 7, 2006 \ 28441 Rancho California Rd., Suite. M . Temecula, CA 92590 Phone: (951) 699-4624 . Fax: (951) 695-5084. E-mail: megalandenglneers@verizon.net . . TABLE OF CONTENTS VICINITY MAP 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 2-.. rs NOTICETO CONTfMJ:TUK.> l(ISTENCE 'ANO, LOCATlON OF ANY UNOE~NO UTlLlTY PIPES OR STRUCTURES slfiiI.N. ON THESE PLANS VEO BY A SEARCH OF AVAIlABLE RECORf)S. THESE LOCATlONS ARE APPROXIMATE I.f/ALL BE CONflRVEO _ " .._''_ __ _.._ ..,.. ..~,...,.,..nv ."UN'nKO/T "AU or UAnr /AI A"r.AJJffNT ANn/1JR CRADE ~- - ~~. -' -" .- ...;:~ VtI8~.. CF~.../34 ,6A1'1': "71"'/~ MeoLAs' RO .....- PROJECT lOeA'ION WAY ilQ:' .~j~ VICINITY MAP NTS TH(}JjMS (;(/liJC: PAGE 659. (;RIDE B-2; 200.(. EOITlON i. . Job No. CF06-134 July 7, 2006 Page I FINAL REPORT OF COMPACTED FILL AND FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS A large, single-family residential building pad area, including access driveway and parking area, located on Paseo Cielo and Via Val Verde in the Meadowview Area, Temecula, California Lee:al Description: Lot 157 of 0.79 acres on Tract No. 3883; A.P.N.919-131-001 Paseo Cielo and Via Val Verde Temecula, CA 92591 Hans Boers 1723 Vakas Drive EI Cajon, CA 92019 Site Location: Owner/Applicant: INTRODUCTION At the request of owner, Hans Boers, Megaland Engineers has provided all the Held 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 U.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 Jills. ~ . . Job No. CF06-134 July 7, 2006 Page 2 GENERAL EXCA V ATION AND GRADING PROCEDURES The grading equipment used included a D-6 Cat equipped with ripper teeth and slope blade, and a 2500-gallon water truck, used for water supply and compaction wheel rolling. A keyway slot was excavated into solid undisturbed soil formation along the toe of the two major lill slope areas. The lill soils were pre-mixed to optimum moisture and recompacted in 6-inch to 8-inch lifts up to the proposed linal building pad elevation. 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 structurallill soils, as accepted by the Uniform Building Code and the County of Riverside grading ordinances. The maximum density determinations were made in accordance with AS.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 tan brown very coarse to coarse sand and silt with minor clay-size component; SM and SC according to U.S.C.S.; Maximum Density 127.3 p.c.f. @ 9.0% Optimum Moisture. Soil Tvpe 2: Light tan brown medium to line sand and silt with minor clay-size component; SM and SC according to U.S.C.S.; Maximum Density 120.1 p.c.f. @ 12.2% Optimum Moisture. :S :. . Job No. CF06-134 July 7, 2006 Page 3 The results of the expansion tests performed on the remolded samples of the typical backlill 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 Conf'ming Load Expansion Index % Expansion I 144 p.s.f. 13 1.3 2 l44p.s.f. 17 1.7 The typicallill 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 a maximum 40-foot length span will be less than 112 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 I, based on the results oftesting methods (Drive Cylinder Method D2937-71 and/or Sand Cone Method D1556-64). (See Page 4.) G:, '. . Job No. CF06-134 July 7, 2006 Page 4 Relative Compaction Test Results Maximum Densitv Determination for Soil Tvpe 1 - 128.7 p.c.f (tV, 10.0% Opt. Moist. Test Date Soil Elev. Dry Dens. Field Relative No. Tvpe (ft.) p.c.f. Moist. Densitv-% 8-1 5/25 1 1195 117.8 5.3 92 8-2 5/25 I 1196 117.6 5.5 92 8-3 5/25 I 1197 120.5 6.5 95 S-4 5/25 I 1196 119.6 3.8 94 8-5 5/25 I 1200 118.5 3.9 93 8-6 5/30 I 1201 118.7 3.7 93 8-7 5/30 1 1199 117.0 4.8 92 8-8 5/30 I 1200 116.3 4.5 91 * 8-9 6/2 1 1204 114.9 2.7 90 8-10 6/2 2 1178 112.6 8.2 94 8-11 6/2 2 1182 114.1 4.1 95 8-12 6/2 2 1183 112.0 7.9 93 8-13 6/2 2 1186 117.4 8.1 98 8-14 6/2 2 1191 113.5 8.2 94 8-15 6/2 2 1189 114.9 11.9 96 * 8-16 6/2 2 1200 112.1 8.7 93 *8and Volume Tests RECOMMENDATIONS AND ADDITIONAL SOIL CRITERIA Gradine: and Compaction Conclusions The two fill soils used in the grading operations consisted primarily of very coarse to line 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 1 . . Job No. CF06-134 July 7, 2006 Page 5 track rolled in multiple directions until the required 90% relative compaction test results were attained. An area extending five feet beyond the building perimeter was over excavated a minimum 36 inches; these lill soils were then recompacted back up to the proposed building pad elevation. All grading operations were completed in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, (Appendix, Chapter 33). Approved Allowable Soil Bearinl!: 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 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 + wDfNq + 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. ~ '. . Job No. CF06-134 July 7, 2006 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 lield 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 Parkinl!: 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 wheelroIling 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 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 on 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. C\. '. . Job No. CF06-134 July 7, 2006 Page 7 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 lield 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 ()In Art Banan , R.C.E.36117 \() . p,fj Megaland Engineers & Associates CIVIL ENGINEERS -.PLANNERS · ARCHITECTS · SURVEYORS thaI/f)! C,cof&. - /34 .J),4r~.. 7171tPb UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM SIUS .ANO CUYS h.~ I_It ,"cst ... tot . TYPICAL NAMES M~JOA DIVISIONS .... ,....,. ............ ,...'.WItI MI''''''". tin...... I... GIUVELS po,.. """' ilOll> 0# -"-'f. UII"" .... .... ...... .1.... 11"1.. ,..., ........ ............ " ............,.. ~l''''''''. bIN . _ ,.....: CDjllSE "GIIAIHED SOILl t>>-. .... 19'" _ ....-IIf.. L",I ,.. .... JOO ...... I~J. G".&VELs WITH mes ~",M"'" ....... . "'-1 . StItt .......... ......... .....,.. -....... ,a.r., .....~.. ........~ .......~ ",..w-. . ..... ...... ....... ~ .......tJ. ..... ,...,. . .,. . . S.&HOS. . .... ... 110" tI ...."...51 I'WA\'U_ .,.. ._ ..... ..... tt." .....,..-._ . .-.It -." ;.~.. . ,.' """. ..., ...... .......... ..~.... .* . SANDS WITH "iNU ,,1........-- MIL II ,.... ~ ....... .......dIfr "Mt.'w:-' ...,... ...... _.., ,.. .......,....' n... ....... ....... t_ ..... " c~ ..n. ~I"""'~'''. . ....,.... ..,. .. ... .. ....... ......ot, ~ ......" ....... ..... .eye.. ..... n.".. .... ...... . ,INE 'GU'INED SOILS' ,...,. ..... )0"" .-r...." ~Dt ~... 200....,.. N". . o-,..c ..... ,.... ...,.,we ..... ~ .. ... . ......." . ........-c M.,...tn~....,.'" ................... ,.... WMft' " ,..tJ ',..,... ~..uc ~"7 SILTS AND CUYS Il,..... II_I Gl'UTt" ,,,..5Ot .......-~ ,..,.. II "t1" ......Clty. ,.. rlll,t_ O~lt $" .. ,...,~ lot >>l~ ,;....ctf,. . -.,..tt ,..". H1G':lLY ORGAIjIC SOilS """'...."""'-~I'~JC...". 101.1"'0"'" Cl.l.sSI'JCHION': S",.. ,..."".... r~..'..i.,'ct ........ ......... .... .....~l.. '" taM"""l- fi4 "..,..~,. \\ ;/-9 - Megaland Engineers & Associates CIVIL ENGINEERS. PL^NNERS · ^RCHITECT6 · SURVEYORS tJIJINP; . c,cd:> - /3'4 Alre: 7/7 /t:Jb' . SOILS ENGINEERING DATA Typical fill Materials MAXIMUM DENSITY CURVE' Moilh,;r. Con.ent in Per C'nt M pry 'Nti9ht SOfl CLASSifICATION: 130 II ;!125. 'ce12~ f I .llli '110 ).. "1 !105i d10Q, '" ~C'\ . \~ \ METHOD Of COMPACTION: A.S:fM. Standard Telt Metflod 0-15. \ 4" Oio-I" -W. I~ ell. ft. 'fOI..,.... S lO)1f1 25 bl~ ,., lattr. 10 I~ ~_ cUopp.d l' iftCtI.. Q Ot'TlMUM MOISTUlE CONTENT/-'n 'It Ctnt of Dry Weight 1t9.~ MAXIMUM Off OfNS/TY1-/n ~lIndl r" Cubic foqt . IZ~7 T \Z- "tJ;~"i," . -;~~~~;~r}rN,c...'", \ 1--",---- 00':::, . ~ !~.~". \\ i~.. c/ ,: !:::: "" r, - i ~, .. . " . ,.~;~'o .~ '~:''fff(;u:~;- 1J ~ ~ " '.,- l>J