HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDP 99-18; TALLMAN PROPERTY; RESULTS OF COMPACTION TESTING; 1998-10-14t---+~~ "Sc" IIlItI',merl'lIl, 'e. OIVIL. GEOTEOHNIOAL. & QUALITY ENGINEERING .
FOUNDATION DESIGN' LAND SURVEYING' SOIL TESTING
OONSTRUOTION MANAGEMENT & INSPEOTION
RECEIVED
APR 1 2 2000
CLIENT: TALLMAN
PROJECT: TAL 898
DATE: t4 OCT. 1998
MR. JEFF TALLMAN ENG\NEERING
2946 State Street, Suite G DC.::Op a'&;""'1 PI, '
Carlsbad, CA. 92008 " ~
Subject: Results of Compaction Testing and Inspection far the lot
located at. 2335 Pio Pico Drive, Carlsbad, CA.
(APN: 156-350-08)
Dear Mr. Tallman:
Pursuant to your request, we have completed oUr Inspection
and Compaction Testing of the rough grading operations for the
subject parcel. Locations of our Field Density Tests are shown on
Enclosure (1), and the results of these tests are detailed on
Enclosure (2).
Site preparation, compaction, and testing were accomplished
between August 27 and September 4, 1998. Based 'on our
observations and testing, it is our opinion tha~ the work
performed during that period was in general c6nf~rmance with our
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation dated 27 June 1998 and the
City of Carslbad Grading Ordinance.
On August 27, 1998, grading began on the subject lot with the
contractor removing some trees, the existing doncrete slabs and
retaining walls, and the surface vegetation in the area to be
graded for the driveway and house pad. All debris was removed
from the proposed grading area.
On thi s date, the contractor excavated the 100.se 'surface
soils in the area of the concrete removal along the easterly side
-1-
1611-A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083 • 760-945-3150 iI' FAX: 760-945-4221
~~ "&" IlllflillLaerillfl, Ie.
CIVIL. GEOTECHNICAL, & QUALITY ENGINEERING
FOUNDATION DESIGN' LAND SURVEYING' SOIL TESTING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION
of the lot by removing approximately 2 to 3 fee~ of loose
materials. These soils were stockpiled in the center portion of
the lot. The contractor then replaced and reqoMpacted these
stockpiled soils on the easterly side of the house p~d. Fill
materials consisting of native silty sands were placed in thin
lifts, watered as necessary, and compacted utilizing a T-973
trackloader and a D-4 bulldozer.
Upon reaching the design finished grade, the contractor over-
excavated and recompacted the upper 3 feet of the surface soils
for the house pad to create a uniform fill blanket and to help
eliminate the effects o.f differential settlement.
As indicated by our Compaction Test Results, Enclosure (2),
density tests performed in the fill materials for the driveway,
rear yard, and the main house pad indicated over 90% relative
compaction as compared to ASTM Test Procedure D 1557-91.
In general, the native materials exposed at surface grades
were considered to have a moderate expansion potential according
our test results of our Preliminary Soils·Investigation.
Foundations shall be sized and constructed in accordance with
the recommendations found in the latter part of this report. For
foundation design purposes, an allowable bearing strength of 1450
psf may be utilized for all continuous or spread footings founded
in dense native soils or compacted fill soils c9mpacted to dver
90% relative compaction per ASTM D 1557-91.
It is recommended that the continuous perimeter foundations
and concrete slabs for a light weight, wood framed, stucco type
structure shall be constructed and reinforced in accordance with
'the following minimum design criteria:
-2-
1611-A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083 • 760-945-3150 • FAX: 760-945-4221
f----+-I'~ "&" IllJllilJcc,·ilJ,fI, .c.
CIVIL. GEOTECHNICAL. & OUALITY ENGINEERING
FOUND,mON DESIGN· LAND SURVEYING. SOIL TESTING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION
a. The continuous perimeter foundation$ shall extend a
minimum depth of 24 inches and a minimum width of 15 inches into
firm native or compacted fill soils for a two story structure.
For a single story structure the foundations sh~ll extend a
minimum depth of 18 inches and a minimum width of 12 inches. The
d~pth of the foundations shall be measured from the lowest
adjacent grade. The continuous foundations shall be reinforced
with at least four No. 4 steel bars, two bars shall be placed 3
inches from the top of the foundation and the other bars shall be
placed 3 inches from the bottom. As an alternative to the No.4
rebars, one No. 5 steel rebar top and bottom may be used.
b~ Footings which span from native material to compactSd fill
soils, where applicable, shall be reinforced with an additional
one No. 5 steel bar top and bottom to control potential
differential movement extended 10 feet on either side of the
daylight line.
c. Footings placed on or adjacent to, fill sldpes shall have a
minimum horizontal distance of seven feet (7') from the bottom
edge of the footings to the face of the slope.
d. All interior concrete slabs shall be a minimum of four
inches in thickness and shall be reinforced with a minimum of No.
3 rebars placed at 18 inches on center both ways and placed in the
center of the,slab. The bars shall be bent downward into the
perimeter footings at 18 inches on center to a depth of 3 inches
from the bottom. In order to minimize vapor transmission, ah
impermeable membrane (ie: visqueen) shall be placed over 2 inches
of clean, poorly graded, coarse sand, decomposed granite, or
crushed rock. The membrane shall be covere~ with 2 inches of sahd
to protect it ~uring construction and the sand should be lightly
moistened just prior to placing concrete. All concrete used on
-3-
1611-A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083 • 760-945-3150!'· FAX: 760-945-4221
~ " & "'JJJfJ;JJ~ac";JJfl' "c.
< ,civIL. GEOTECHNICAL. & QUALITY ENGINEERING
.': FOUNDA T/ON DESIGN' LAND SURVEYING' SOIL TESTING
,.',''' ',' CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION
this project shall have a minimum compressive strehgth of 2500 psi
unless otherwise increased on the Building Plans.
These foundation recommendations are minimum design
requirements for the finish grade soil conditions; however, actual
foundations shall be designed by the Structural Engineer for the
expected live and dead loads, and for wind and seismic loads.
Findings of this Report are valid as of this date; however,
changes in conditions of a property can occur with passage of
time, whether they be due to natural process or works ~f man on
this or adjacent prope~ties. In addition, changes in applicable
or app~opriate standards occur whether they result from
legislation or broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, findings of
this Report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes
outside our control. Therefore, this Report is subject to review
and should not be relied upon after a period of one year.
In the event that any changes in the natur~, design, or
location of buildings are planned, the conclusions and
recommendations contained in this Report shall not be considered
valid unless the changes are reviewed and the conclusions of this
Report are modified or verified in writing.
This Report is issued with the understanding that it is the
responsibility of the owner or of his representative to ensure
that the information and recommendations contained herein are
called to the attention of the project Archit~ct and ~nsineer and
are incorporated into the plans. Further, the necessary steps
shall be taken to ensure that the contractor and subcontractors
carry out such recommendations in the field.
-4-
1611-A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083 • 760-945-3150 • FAX: 760-945-4221
I---+-jl~ " &." 'll1f1illccrillfl,4t.C.
civiL. GEOTECHNICAL. & QUALITY ENGINEERING
FOUNDATION DESIGN' LAND SURVEYING. SOIL TESTING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION
It is recommended that the Soil Engineer be provided the
opportunity for a general review of th~ final design plans and
specifications for this project in order that the recommendations
of this report may be properly interpreted and implemented in the
design .. It is also recommended that the Soil Engineer be provided
the opportunity to verify the foundation and slab construction in
the field prior to placing concrete. (If the Soil Engineer is not
accorded the privilege of making these reviews, he Can assume no
responsibility for misinterpretation of his recommendations),
The Soil Engineer has prepared this Report for the exclusive
use of the client and ~uthorized agents. This Aeport has been
prepared in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation
engineering practices. No other warranties, either expressed or
implied, are made as to the professional advice provided under the
terms of this agreement, and included in the Report.
B & B Engineering Inc. and Associate$ appreciate thii
opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions
regarding this project, please do not hesitate to contact us.
-5-
Sincerely,
~~~~ ~~~~r C. Beard RCE RGE
Chief Engineer
1611-A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083 • 760-945-3150 • FAX: 760-945-4221
p~/vATe
• HAP No.
\
11.. 0 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF FIELD ·DENSITY TESTS
P LOT
OWNER : MIL. :JSl==F-r~J./l
LOCATION: Z?"3~ PID PICO 1)1'2-,
CArUsf3·M C.4,
A.P. N.: /5~ -360 .... 0$
PROJECT: TAt... 898 DATE: OC;T,98
P LAN
11 .. ~III!JII!I!llct;rill!I' illt~.
CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL. & QUALITY ENGINEERS
• STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING. LAND SURVEYING
• PERCOLA TION & SOIL TESTING
• CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION
ENCLOSURE (1)
Test Test
No. Date
Test
Location
~ 11 .. ~III!JiJ!lillccrill_illc-
,.' ' CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL. & OUALITY ENGINEERS
,.::" • STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING. LAND SURVEYING
,..,'" .! • PERCOLA TlON <I SOIL TESTING
• CONSTRUCTION MANAGeMeNT & INSPECTION
ProJECT: 74t 898
Test Soil Dry Density, pcf Moi.sture, %
El/Depth Type Field Maxi~um, Field O~t.,
Relative Retest
Compaction No.
I--l----l-----.----!""'-.--.. _---------.-.. -----.----t--.-... ---1--------1------
~-I---+---------·----f----I----I---,--f------.. -------, ----'-!-.----.J.----
I----+---+--------I-----I-----l-----~-.. ----t_,-.. "'---... -..... -....... -----.----1----.-. -"-
1---1----+-------. -------.-..... ---. "-,, ..... -------""'''-'''--.... ,-" ....... -... -........ --" ... -,--"", .... -........ --... -..... ..
1---1---------.... ---... ------.. -.-,--I~------'''-'--'''' '---...... --.... " '''''' -'---'-' -... ,_ ..... -.. _ .. ' .... ---.,
l--I----+--------1l.---I---.f-.----f--------.-,---.-~-----'---I----'--
~_+---~--------j~----r--·r----r-------·---·~---~+---~-r~------
.1---1----1----------_____ ---"-----' .. -.--."-.---" ... ----. _______ ----:_, ____ .. __ f_~--..... "
I----+-__ + _____ ._. __ ----.-.-~ ___ ._f_.-----f__.--'--.-----I---.--~----.
COMPACTION CURVE DATA
OPTIMUM MAXIMUM DRY
MOISTURE % DENSITY (pef) SOIL TYPE AND DESCRIPTION
'-___________ , _____ .-, _________ • ___ 1 ______ /----,. _____ ' __ ·_·
L-----------------~------------------~-------~-----------..
COMPACT/O;V TEST DATA ENCLOSURE (2)
!
I
..
., ..
.... -, . ':!
. , ,
,
!