HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDP 2021-0048; WEINZETTLE-DIETRICH ADU; SOILS TECHNICAL STUDY; 2021-11-22November 22, 2021
Ben Leland
Leland Construction
1421 W Lewis Street
San Diego, California 92103
SUBJECT:
Dear Mr. Leland:
SCOPE
File No. 1106E4-2I
SITE INSPECTION
Proposed Residential Building Site
2644 Jefferson Street
City of Carlsbad
P.O. Box 1195
Lakeside, California
92040
(619) 443-0060
RECEIVf:.tJ
DEC 08 202!
CITY or C ,\' :). '' l;\[_)
PLANNING sl1VISION
In accordance with your request, a Site Inspection has been performed at the subject site. The
purpose of this investigation was to examine existing site conditions and provide engineering
recommendations for the proposed accessory dwelling unit.
If project details vary significantly from those described, Soil Testers should be notified
prior to final submittal for revision and possible revision of the recommendations
presented herein
This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner or the
owner's representative to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein
are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and incorporated into
the plans, and the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry
out such recommendations in the field.
FIELD INSPECTION
In order to accomplish this purpose, a representative of this firm visited the site, reviewed the
toJX)graphy and site conditions and visually and textually classified the surface and near
surface soils. Representative samples of the on-site soils were obtained from a test
1
Leland Construction File No. l 106E4-21 November 22, 2021
exploration approximately 4 feet in depth and tested for density, shear strength and expansive
characteristics.
SITE CONDITIONS
The subject site is located on the east side of Jefferson Street The site is a relatively level
narrow lot with a split level single family residence. Neighboring properties are occupied by
single and multi-family residential structures. Fill materials were encountered to a depth of
approximately 14 inches during the course of this inspection.
SOIL CONDITIONS
Soils encountered in the test explorations were fill soils consisting of firm, brown to light
brovm, dry, fine to medium, silty sands to approximately 14 inches in depth. These surface
soils were underlain with native soils consisting of dense, orange-brown, dty, fine to coarse
silty sands to the bottom of the trench approximately 4 feet in depth. Ground water was not
encountered in the test pit
The soils we encountered were not considered to be detrimentally expansive with respect to
change in volume with change in moisture content.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. A representative sample of the foundation soil was remolded to 90% of maximum
dry density. Based on the following test results, a safe allowable bearing value of
at least 2000 pounds per square foot for 12 inch deep footings may be used in
designing the foundations and slab for the proposed structures. This value may be
increased by one third for wind and/or seismic loading. This value may be
increased by 20 percent for each additional foot of depth and or width to a
maximum of 3 times the designated value.
Maximum Dry Density
Optimum Moisture
Angle of internal friction
Cohesion
Unit weight
Expansion Index
130.1 pcf
9.2%
32°
194 psf
118.2 pcf
21
2. Lateral resistance to horizontal movement may be provided by the soil passive
pressure and friction of concrete to soil. An allowable passive pressure of 250
2
Leland Construction File No. l l06E4-2l November 22, 2021
pounds per square foot per foot of depth may be used. A coefficient of friction of
0.35 is recommended. The soils passive pressure may be increased by 1/3 for wind
and seismic loading.
3. The seismic parameters for the site coordinates 33.1662123°N, 117.348128°W for
assumed Site Class Dare as follows:
• Ss ~ 1.066 g
• s, ~ 0.386 g
Sms = 1.279g
Sm1 = null
s,, ~ 0.853 g
Sd1 = null
4. Footings for the proposed structure must extend through any fill soils a minimum of
12 inches into competent fill soils. Anticipated footing depth is approximately 24 to
30 inches. Footing excavations should be inspected by a representative of this firm
prior to placement of forms and reinforcing steel to ensure proper depth has been
achieved and that all footings are founded a minimum of 12 inches into firm natural
ground. Loose soils should be removed from excavations prior to our inspection.
Tbis foundation depth is based upon the soil values only and does not take into
consideration the structural requirements. The slab preparation in #8 must be adhered
to for proposed slab construction.
5. The property to the east was observed to have large mature trees adjacent to the
property line. The proposed accessory dwelling unit is setback 5 feet from the east
property line. Although roots were not observed in our test pit, they may be
encountered in the footing excavations and under the slab area Roots and organic
material must be removed from the building foundation. It is suggested for the client
to contact an arborist to assure that the trees are not damaged during the construction
process.
6. Conventional spread footings founded a minimum of 12 inches below lowest adjacent
grade and having a width determined by the allowable soil bearing value as detailed
above are recommended for foundation support. Footing widths should be at least 12
inches for continuous footings and 24 inches for square footings due to practical
considerations as well as Building Code requirements. These recommendations are
based entirely upon the soil types and do not take into consideration the requirements
of the proposed structure.
7. Reinforcing in footings should consist of at least one #4 steel bar placed continuously
in the top and bottom of continuous footings regardless of structural requirements.
Reinforcing for isolated footings is dictated by the structural requirements. These
recommendations are based upon on the soil type encountered and do not take into
consideration the proposed bearing load.
3
Leland Construction File No. 1106E4-21 November 22, 2021
8. Concrete Slab-On-Grade, SOG, should be designed by the project's structural
engineer based on anticipated loading conditions. We recommend that
conventional reinforced concrete SOG for this project be founded on 4 inches of
Class II Virgin Aggregate Base (with approximately 2% +/-over optimum moisture
content and 90% compaction, relative to the lab maximum dry density, ASTM D
1557), overlying a 12 inch thick zone of adequately placed and compacted
structural fill. A representative of our firm should be contacted during this process
to approve the excavation and test the compaction.
We recommend that a moisture barrier be provided by a membrane, visqueen IO
mils in minimum thickness or equivalent, be placed at top of well compacted Class
II Aggregate Base, then covered with 2 inches of moist clean sand having a
minimum sand equivalent of 30 when tested in accordance with the American
Society of Testing and Materials test method • ASTM D 1555.
Floor slabs, as a minimum, should be 5 inches thick with #4 reinforcing steel at 16"
on-center each way. Reinforcement should be placed at mid-height of the slab. The
final slab thickness and reinforcement should be determined by the structural
design engineer. Control joints should be provided in accordance with the
recommendations of the structural design engineer.
SITE EROSION CONTROL
During the construction, surface water should be controlled via berms, gravel bags and1or
sandbags, silt fence, straw wattles, siltation basins, while maintaining positive surface
grades or other methods to avoid damage to the finish work or adjoining properties. All
site entrances and exits must have coarse gravel or steel shaker plates to minimize offsite
sediment tracking. Best management Practices (BMP's) must be used to protect storm
drains and minimize pollution. The contractor should take measures to prevent erosion of
graded areas until such time as permanent drainage and erosion control measures have
been installed. After completion of grading, all excavated surfaces should exhibit
positive drainage and eliminate areas where water might pond.
SITE AND SURFACE DRAINAGE
Drainage at the site should be directed away from foundations, collected and tight lined to
appropriate discharge points. Consideration may be given to collecting roof drainage by
eave gutters and directing it away from foundations via non-erosive devices. Water, either
natural or from irrigation, should not be permitted to pond, saturate the surface soils or
flow towards the foundation. Landscaping requiring a heavy irrigation schedule should not
be planted adjacent to foundations or paved areas. The type of drainage issues found within
4
Leland Construction File No. I 106E4-21 November 22, 2021
the project and materials specified and used should be determined by the Engineer of
Record.
GROUNDWATER AND SURF ACE WATERS
There was no indication of a near.surface groundwater table within our exploratory trench
or perched groundwater. Although groundwater is not expected to be a significant
constraint to the proposed development, our experience indicates that near~surface
groundwater conditions can develop in areas where no such groundwater conditions
previously existed, especially in areas where a substantial increase in surface water
infiltration results from landscape irrigation or unusually heavy precipitation. It is
anticipated that site development will include appropriate drainage provisions for control
and discharge of surface water runoff. The type of drainage issues found within the project
and materials specified and used should be determined by the Civil Engineer. The type of
plants and soil specified along with proper irrigation used should be determined by the
Landscape Architect.
The following grading specifications should be utilized if grading is proposed.
RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
For
Proposed Residential Building Site
2644 Jefferson Street
City of Carlsbad
GENERAL: Soil Testers and 'Engineer' are synonymous hereinafter and shall be employed
to inspect and test earthwork in accordance with these specifications, the accepted plans, and
the requirements of any jurisdictive governmental agencies. They are to be allowed adequate
access so that the inspections and tests may be perfonned. The Engineer shall be apprised of
schedules and any unforeseen soil conditions.
Substandard conditions or workmanship, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, or
deviation from the lines and grades shown on the plans, etc., shall be cause for the
engineer to either stop construction until the conditions are corrected or recommend
rejection of the work. Refusal to comply with these specifications or the
recommendations and/or interpretations of the engineer will be cause for the engineer
and/or his representative to immediately terminate his services.
A pre-construction meeting or conference with the developer, contractor, civil engineer,
soil engineer, and the agency inspector in attendance should be held at the site prior to
5
Leland Construction File No. I I06E4-21 November 22, 2021
the beginning of the grading operations. Special soil handling requirements can be
discussed at that time.
Grading of the site should commence with the removal of all vegetation and existing
improvements from the area to be graded. Deleterious material and debris such as
broken asphalt and concrete, underground pipe materials, wires, trash, etc. if
encountered, should be exported from the site and should not be mixed with the fill
soils.
Abandoned foundations and buried septic tanks or cisterns (if encountered) should be
removed and the subsequent depressions and /or trenches should be filled with properly
compacted materials as part of the remedial grading.
All fill and backfill soils should be placed in horizontal loose layers approximately 8
inches thick, moisture conditioned to a water content of one to three percent above
optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction, as
determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557-00.
The excavation bottom should then be scarified to a depth of approximately 6 to 8
inches, moisture-conditioned to 1 to 3 percent above optimum moisture content, and re-
compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent in accordance with ASTM
D 1557-00. Excavated sandy or clayey soils should then be uniformly moisture
conditioned at above optimum moisture content, placed in 8-inch-thick loose layers and
compacted to a relative compaction of at least 90 percent.
Import fill soil, if required, should consist of granular materials with low expansion
potential (El less than 50 or stated by the soil engineer) and should be compacted as
indicated herein. Soil Testers should be notified of the import source and should
perform laboratory testing of the soil prior to its arrival at the site to determine its
suitability as fill material.
Deviations from the recommendations of the Soil Report, from the plans, or from these
Specifications must be approved in writing by the owner and the contractor and
endorsed by the engineer.
SOIL TEST METHODS:
Maximum Density & Opt Moisture
Density of Soil In-Place
Soil Expansion
Shear Strength
Gradation & Grain Size
--ASTM D!557-70
--ASTM Dl556, D2922 and D3017
--UBC STANDARD 29-2
--ASTM D3080-72
--ASTM DI 140-71
6
Leland Construction File No. I 106E4-21 November 22, 2021
--ASTM D2325-68 Capillary Moisture Tension
Organic Content --% Weight loss after heating for 24 hours
at 300° F and after deducting soil moisture.
LIMITING SOIL CONDITIONS:
Minimum Compaction
Expansive Soils
Insufficient fines
Oversized Particles
90% for 'disturbed' soils. (Existing fill,
newly placed fill, plowed ground, etc.)
84% for natural, undisturbed soils.
95% for pavement subgrade within 2' of
finish grade and pavement base course.
Expansion index exceeding 20
Less than 40% passing the #4 sieve.
Rocks over 10" in diameter.
PREPARATION OF AREAS TO RECEIVE FILL:
Brush, trash, debris and detrimental soils shall be cleared from the areas to receive fill.
Detrimental soils shall be removed to finn competent soil. Slopes exceeding 20% should be
stepped uphill with benches IO' or greater in width. Scarify area to receive fill to 6" depth and
compact.
FILL MA TE RIAL shall not contain insufficient fines, oversized particles, or excessive
organics. On-site disposition of oversized rock or expansive soils is to be at the written
direction of the Engineer. Select fill shall be as specified by the engineer. All fills shall be
compacted and tested.
SUBDRAINS shall be installed if required by and as directed by and detailed by the engineer
and shall be left operable and unobstructed. They shall consist of 3" plastic perforated pipe set
in a minimum cover of 4" of filter rock in a 'vee' ditch to intercept and drain free ground from
the mass fills. Perforated pipe shall be schedule 40, Poly-Vinyl-Chloride or Acrylonitrile
Butadienne Styrene plastic. Rock filter material shall confonn to the following gradation:
Sieve siz.e: 3/4"
%Passing: 90-100
#4
25-50
#30
5-20
#200
0-7
Subdrains shall be set at a minimum gradient of 0.2% to drain by gravity. Drains found
inoperable shall be excavated and replaced.
CAPPING EXPANSIVE SOILS: If capping expansive soils with non-expansive soil to
mitigate the expansive potential is used, the cap should be compacted, non-expansive, select
soil placed for a minimum thickness 3' over the expansive soil and for a minimum distance of
8' beyond the exterior perimeter of the structure. Special precautions should be taken to
ensure that the non-expansive soil remains uncontaminated and the minimum thickness and
7
Leland Construction File No. 1106E4-2 I November 22, 2021
dimensions around the structure are maintained. The expansive soils underlying the cap of
non--expansive cap should be pre-saturated to a depth of 3' to obtain a degree saturation
exceeding 90% before any construction supported by the compacted cap.
The non-expansive soil comprising the cap should conform to the following:
Minimum Compaction
Maximum Expansion Index
Minimum Angle of Internal Friction
Cohesion Intercept
90%
30
33 Deg
100 psf
UNFORESEEN CONDITIONS: Soil Testers assume no responsibility for conditions,
which differ from those, described in the applicable current reports and documents for this
property. Upon termination of the engineer's services for any reason, his fees up to the time of
termination become due and payable. If it is necessary for the engineer to issue an
unfavorable report concerning the work that he has been hired to test and inspect, the engineer
shall not be held liable for any damages that might result from his 'unfavorable report'.
If we can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office. This
opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated.
Respectfully submitted,
Chin C. Chen, RPE C34442
CCC/mlj
8
,ROFEs
CH!f\l
-..:: ~ -;t..
CJ ,, "' u.i Noc z-a:: • 034442 2 * E:-.p_ ... 3d_ fl;
IVtL
CAuro