The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutX2016-4206 - SoilsCOAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 1200 W. Commonwealth Avenue, Fullerton, CA 92833 * Ph: (714) 870-1211 * Fax: (714) 870-1222 * E-mail: coastgeotec@sbeglobal.net e December 18, 2017 Ms. Roberta Feuerstein C/o Harbour Bay Homes Development 1614 Warwick Lane Newport Beach, CA 92660 References: W. 0.507716-05 X2016 - X1206 301 v;a Lido Soul Subject: Rough Grade Compaction Report for Proposed Addition at 301 Via Lido Soud, Newport Beach, California 1. Geotechnical Engineering Investigation of Proposed Addition at 301 Via Lido Soud, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O. 507716-01, dated May 27, 2016. 2. Response to Geotechnical Comments, Proposed Addition at 301 Via Lido Soud, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O. 507716- 02, dated May 4, 2017. 3. Shoring Design, Propsed Addition at 301 Via Lido Soud, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O. 507716-03, dated July 27, 2017. 4. Temporary Shoring Along Property Line, Proposed Addition at 301 Via Lido Soud, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O. 507716-04, dated August 29, 2017. Dear Ms. Feuerstein: Forwarded herewith is the rough grade compaction report for the subject site. Our observations and testing were performed periodically, as requested. The grading operation for the proposed addition consisted of an over -excavation and recompaction, by track rolling, to provide uniformly compacted fill soils for the proposed residential addition area. The grading operation was conducted from December 14, 2017 through December 15, 2017. PLACEMENT OF FILL Compacted fill material was placed to provide adequate support for the proposed residential addition. The over -excavation of the proposed addition area extended into competent native material. The depth of over -excavation was about three to three and a half feet below final grade. The exposed COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ms. Roberta Feuerstein 2 W.O. 507716-05 Rough Grade Compaction Report December 18, 2017 surface was scarified, moisture conditioned, and compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction. Subsequent fills were placed in six to eight inch loose lifts, moisture conditioned as needed, and compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction by track rolling. Limits of grading are shown on the attached Plate 1. Equipment used for the compaction of fill soils consisted of a Kubota SVL 95 rubber track loader. Soils were moisture conditioned with a hose. Earthwork was by Tight Quarters. TESTING Maximum density optimum moisture relationship determinations were performed for each soil type encountered during grading operations. Test results were as follows: Laboratory Standard: (ASTM:D-1557) 4 -inch diameter mold; 1/30 83 volume; 5 layers at 25 blows per layer; 10 lb. hammer dropped 18 inches pp t :gf t;tf F t g Moj ir, ` •T Y 3r _S Yk 3 ssrficatron 41mllm p, IDry Denszty, TbS/fit t„y� . it t,Cla _,.4..... ;NeNiax We s' Tan Brown Slightly Silty, Fine 1 9.0 123.0 to Medium -Grained Sand Compaction tests were performed a minimum of every two feet and/or 500 cubic yards of compacted fill soils placed. These tests were performed in accordance with an ASTM test method. The test results are summarized in Table 1. The approximate test locations are shown on Plate 1. Areas not tested were probed to show adequate compaction. I all]HY- Y INIM The proposed structure will be supported by a conventional foundation system. A conventional foundation system may be designed utilizing spread footings and/or isolated pad footings placed a minimum depth of 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade utilizing an allowable bearing value of 1,500 pounds per square foot. This value is for dead plus live load and may be increased 1/3 for total including seismic and wind loads where allowed by code. The structural engineer's reinforcing requirements should be followed if more stringent. Where isolated pads are utilized, they shall be tied in two directions into adjacent foundations with grade beams. COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ms. Roberta Feuerstein 3 W.O. 507716-05 Rough Grade Compaction Report December 18, 2017 Foundations shall be reinforced with a minimum of four #5 bars, two top and two bottom, The structural engineer's recommendations for reinforcement shall be utilized where more severe. Footing excavations shall be observed by a representative of COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., prior to placement of steel or concrete to verify competent soil conditions. If unacceptable soil conditions are exposed mitigation will be recommended. Regardless of the type of foundation elected, the owner shall recognize and accept that use of existing foundations in conjunction with new structural elements may result in some differential settlement or movement. Possible minor structural and cosmetic cracking between new and existing foundations may develop as subgrade soils adjust to the newly established loads. The risk of cracking shall be considered in choice of floor covering, and appropriate construction methods and care shall be implemented where inflexible and fragile finish surfaces are proposed. Additional loads to existing foundations may induce settlement of the structure and cracking of building materials; underpinning of the structure is recommended to help minimize this type of distress, not eliminate it. FOUNDATIONS -SECONDARY STRUCTURES Property line walls, planter walls, and other incidental foundations may utilize conventional foundation design. Continuous spread footings or isolated pads placed a minimum depth of 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade may utilize an allowable bearing value of 1,500 pounds per square foot. This value is for dead plus live load and may be increased 1/3 for total including seismic and wind loads where allowed by code. Where isolated pads are utilized, they shall be tied in two directions into adjacent foundations with grade beams. Footing excavations shall be observed by a representative of COAST GEOTECHNICAL, Inc., prior to placement of steel or concrete to verify competent soil conditions. If unacceptable soil conditions are exposed mitigation will be recommended. Foundations shall be reinforced with a minimum of four #5 bars, two top and two bottom, The structural engineer's recommendations for reinforcement shall be utilized where more severe. LATERAL DESIGN Lateral restraint at the base of footings and on slabs may be assumed to be the product of the dead load and a coefficient of friction of .35. Passive pressure on the face of footings may also be used to resist lateral forces. A passive pressure of zero at the surface of finished grade, increasing at the rate of 300 pounds per square foot of depth to a maximum value of 3,000 pounds per square foot, may be used for compacted fill at this site. If passive pressure and friction are COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ms. Roberta Feuerstein 4 W.O. 507716-05 Roueh Grade Compaction Report December 18, 2017 combined when evaluating the lateral resistance, then the value of the passive pressure should be limited to 2/3 of the values given above. FLOOR SLABS Slab on grades shall be designed in accordance with CBC codes Site soils are non plastic. Minimum geotechnical recommendations for slab design are five inches actual thickness with #4 bars at 12 inches on center each way. Slabs shall be tied into perimeter foundations with #4 bars at 24 inch centers. Structural design may require additional reinforcement and slab thickness. Subgrade soils shall exhibit a minimum of 90% relative compaction to the depth determined by the geotechnical engineer. The soil should be kept moist prior to casting the slab. However, if the soils at grade become disturbed during construction, they should be brought to approximately optimum moisture content and rolled to a firm, unyielding condition prior to placing concrete. COAST GEOTECHNICAL, Inc. to verify adequacy of subgrade soils prior to placement of capillary break or vapor barrier and sand. Section 4.505.2.1 of the California Green Code requires the use of a capillary break between the slab subgrade and vapor barrier. The capillary break material shall comply with the requirements of the local jurisdiction and shall be a minimum of four inches in thickness. Geotechnically coarse clean sand is acceptable; however, the City of Newport Beach requires the use of four inches of gravel (1/2 -inch or larger clean aggregate). A heavy filter fabric (Mirafi 140N) shall be placed over the gravels prior to placement of the recommended vapor barrier to minimize puncturing of the vapor barrier. Additionally, a vibratory plate should be used over the gravels prior to placement of the recommended filter fabric to • smooth out any sharp protuberances and consolidate the gravels. Slab areas should be underlain by a vapor retarder consisting of an engineered plastic film (as described by ASTM:E-1745). In areas where a moisture sensitive floor covering will be used and/or where moisture infiltration is not desirable, a vapor barrier with a permeance of less than 0.01perms (consistent with ACI 302.2R-06) such as 15 mil. Stego Wrap Vapor Barrier, or equivalent, should be considered, and a qualified water proofing specialist should be consulted. The vapor barrier should be underlain by the above described capillary break materials and filter cloth. The capillary break materials should be compacted to a uniform condition prior to placement of the recommended filter cloth and vapor barrier. The vapor barrier should be properly lapped and sealed. Since the vapor barrier will prevent moisture from draining from fresh concrete, a better concrete finish can usually be obtained if at least two inches of sand is spread over the vapor barrier prior to placement of concrete. COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ms. Roberta Feuerstein 5 W.O. 507716-05 Rough Grade Compaction Report December 18, 2017 SEISMIC DESIGN Based on the CBC the following seismic design parameters are provided. These seismic design values were determined utilizing latitude 33.614230 and longitude -117.922912 and calculations from the USGS ground motion parameter calculator. A conservative site class D was assigned to site earth materials. • Site Class = D • Mapped 0.2 Second Spectral Response Acceleration, Ss = 1.710g • Mapped One Second Spectral Response Acceleration St = 0.632g • Site Coefficient from Table 1613A.3.3(1), Fa = 1.0 • Site Coefficient from Table 1613A.3.3(2), Fv = 1.5 • Maximum Design Spectral Response Acceleration for short period, SMs = 1.710g • Maximum Design Spectral Response Acceleration for one -second period, Sm, = 0.948g • 5% Design Spectral Response Acceleration for short period, SDs = 1.140g • 5% Design Spectral Response Acceleration for one -second period, SDI = 0.632g UTILITY LINE BACKFILLS All utility line backfills, both interior and exterior, shall be compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction and shall require testing at a maximum of two -foot vertical intervals. I:I\:711-ToL119MAO I&IJW.11 �9 Hardscape and slab subgrade areas shall exhibit a minimum of 90% relative compaction to a depth of at least one foot. Deeper removal and recompaction may be required if unacceptable conditions are encountered. These areas require testing just prior to placing concrete. Hardscape shall be at least four inches thick and reinforced with #3 bars on 18 inch centers both ways. POOL DESIGN Any future pool and spa shall be designed as free standing and supported by compacted fill where stated settlements can be tolerated. Pool walls shall be designed to support the water, having a density of 62.4 pounds per cubic foot without bearing from adjacent soil. The walls should be able to support the adjacent soil when the pool is empty. The earth pressure may be calculated as an equivalent fluid pressure of 60 pounds per cubic foot for level backfill, plus the lateral pressure due to any superimposed surcharge when the pool is empty. Expansion joints shall be placed between the pool and deck. The client is advised that non -conventional swimming pools/spas, with zero or infinity edge construction, are sensitive to settlements, which could cause the pool/spa edge to not function as designed. If this risk is unacceptable to the client then alternate support of the pool/spa with a foundation system that reduces differential settlements should be considered. All pool utility lines shall be backfilled with soils compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction. Where pool lines are sensitive to the use of compaction equipment the trenches shall COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ms. Roberta Feuerstein 6 W.O. 507716-05 Rough Grade Comroaction Rcuort December 18. 2017 be backfilled with one sack slurry. COAST GEOTECHNICAL, Inc. shall verify the backfill of all trenches. Pool decking shall be cast free of the swimming pool structure and access openings. The free space shall be filled with flexible water stop materials. The client is advised that due to the nature of site soils that some horizontal and vertical movement between the pool and pool decking may occur over time. The pool foundation excavation shall be observed and approved by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, Inc. prior to the placement of reinforcement. These recommendations are subject to change based on the review of pool plans. DRAINAGE Positive drainage should be planned for the site. Drainage should be directed away from structures via non -erodible conduits to suitable disposal areas. The structure should utilize roof gutters and down spouts tied directly to yard drainage. Pipes used for storm/site water drainage should be stout enough to withstand the force of compaction of the soils above. This force can be considerable, causing some weaker pipes to collapse. Drainage pipes shall have a smooth interior. Pipes with a corrugated interior can cause the buildup of deleterious matter, which can impede or block the flow of site waters and, as such, are not recommended. All storm/site water drainage pipes should be in conformance with the requirements of Table 1102.5 of the 2013 California Plumbing Code. Unlined flowerbeds, planters, and lawns should not be constructed against the perimeter of the structure. If such landscaping (against the perimeter of a structure) is planned, it should be properly drained and lined or provided with an underground moisture barrier. Irrigation should be kept to a minimum. The CBC recommends 5% slope away from structures for landscape areas within ten feet of the residence, with 2% slope allowable where justified. Our justification is the use roof drains tied into area drains, the use of area drains, and site grading which will mitigate the potential for moisture problems beneath a slab on grade. Hardscape areas shall be sloped a minimum of 2% where within ten feet of the residence unless allowed otherwise by the building official. Minimum drainage shall be one percent for hardscape areas and two percent for landscape areas for all other areas. POST -GRADING SERVICES During construction of the residence, it is recommended, and at times required by the regulatory agency, the following be observed and/or tested by the geotechnical engineer: • Excavation of foundations • Backfill of interior slab areas • Backfill of interior trenches • Backfill of exterior utility trenches COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ms. Roberta Feuerstein 7 W.O. 507716-05 Rough Grade Compaction Report December 19 017 Hardscape subb ade It is the responsibility of the developer to schedule the required observations and testing. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE I hereby certify that the subject grading was observed by a representative from this office, and the work was done in full compliance with the Grading Ordinance of the City of Newport Beach and in accordance with the best accepted practices of the applicable chapter of the California Building Code. All cuts, fills or processing of original ground under the purview of this report have been completed under the observation of and with selective testing by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. and found to be in compliance with the Grading Code of the City of Newport Beach. The completed work has been observed by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., and is considered adequate for the development. Our findings were made and recommendations prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering practices, and no further warranty is implied nor made. This report is subject to review by the controlling authorities for this project. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. Respectfully submitted: COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ming-Tarng Chen RpFESSI RCE 54011 N0.54011 z)P Exp. 12-31-17 COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ms. Roberta Feuerstein 8 W.O. 507716-05 Rough Grade Compaction Report December 18, 2017 COMPACTION TEST RESULTS TABLE I F.G.: Finish Grade plsjqp --U r.r S6d D aat c -A, NT -51 1 Pad Area 3.03.5 9.0 113.4 1 92.1 12/14/17 2 Pad Area 1.52.0 9.5 112.2 1 91.2 12/14/17 3 Pad Area 3.03.5 9.9 111.8 1 90.9 12/14/17 4 Pad Area 1.52.0 9.4 111.9 1 91.0 12/14/17 5 Pad Area F.G. 9.5 112.1 1 91.1 12/15/17 6 Pad Area F.G. 9.1 111.7 1 90.8 12/15/17 F.G.: Finish Grade COMPACTION TEST LOCATIONS Scale: 1"= 16' ---------- `�I------- ---�— 20'11^ i 3'd" SIDE SIDE SETBA K SETBACK I ' Ipa Y Approximate I a /• Limits of Grading I P POOL xEXISTING RESIDENCE 8E -0l SIOE I\ ST6ACK siEps I W I SPA I O I 6'-11'SIOE O BETBACK i6GPEI Q Approximate o Compaction R S" Test Location t- I 3 CAR GARAGESETBACK 4'-11'SIDE ' FExtE COLE' EPiE ' I / 1 I SOFWAIX ' PROPERTY LINE 64.75' Via Lido Soud Rough Grade Compaction Report Work Order 507716-05 301 Via Lido Soud Newport Beach, California Plate No. 1 COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. COAST GEOTECHNICAL INC.Xa0B6-14,206 .3 01 V;a L;Jo 50 U 1200W. Commonwealth Ave., Fullerton, CA 92833 ■ Ph: (714) 870-1211 ■ Fax: (714)870-1222o Email: coastgeotec@sbcglobal.r INV. Daily Observation Report HRS. W.O. Date Name i Client Address ❑ Footings ❑ Key Way ❑ Grading �❑"Swim Pool ❑ Trench ❑ Other Test No. Location Elev. or Depth Moisture Content % Dry Density p.c.f. % Relative Compaction Test yP Type Soil Type COAST GEOTECHNICAL INC. 1200W. Commonwealth Ave., Fullerton, CA 92833 w Ph: (714)870-1211 m Fax: (714)870-1222o Email: coastgeotec@sbcglobal.net INV Daily Observation Report HRS. Client Address W.O. Date Name ET Footings [:1 Key Way [I Grading El Swim Pool El Trench E! Other Test No. Location Elev. or Depth Moisture Content % Dry Density P.C.f. % Relative compaction Test Type Soil Type "7] Job Progress and Activity: Comments: 1. El Acceptable:El Unacceptable Received By: COAST GEOTECHNICAL INC. 1200W, Commonwealth Ave, Fullerton, CA 92833 z Ph: (714)870-12110 Fax: (714)870-1222o Email: coastgeotec@sbcglobal.net Daily Observation Report W.O. Date Name V" Client f - Address J(,; INV. HRS. I I Q' Footings [I Key Way El Grading El swim Pool [I Trench El Other Test No. Location Elev. or Depth Moisture Content % Dry Density P.C.f. % Relative compaction I Test T ype Soil I Type j Job Progress and Activity: 7- Comments: f'" P, to ( El Acceptable El Unacceptable Page of Received By: BY: zz U OASTGEOTECHurm INC. 1200 W. Commonwealth Ave., Fullerton, CA 92833 - Ph: (714) 870-1211 - Fax: (714) 870-1222 - Email: coastgeotec@sbcglobal.net INV. Daily Observation Report HRS. L.L. M� .e �r A Awfi.Af.,- —to, ___ —1 I Elev. W.O. Dry % Date Test Location or Content Density Relative Test Name No. Depth % Client Compaction Type Type Address 13 -Footings 13 Key Way OQGrading 0 Swim Pool 0 Trench [3 Other L.L. M� .e �r A Awfi.Af.,- —to, ___ —1 I Elev. Moisture Dry % ZT m Test Location or Content Density Relative Test Soil No. Depth % P.C.f. Compaction Type Type Comments: /V z. 7 L.L. M� .e �r A Awfi.Af.,- —to, ___ —1 I if r 12 ZT m k A", 4 k__ Comments: IX P�Abceptable Unacceptable Pager'- of Z� Received By: Gen Contr. (n 1'l i.. a e i Sub-Contr. Report of Special Inspection Project Name & Address VCaacv° T° Wilr, (:rte rd r•6 _, 301 ViA Permit Number Y')o I �, -n c! xol% Inspection Type(s) ax Inspection Date(s) Periodic [ J Continuous Describe Inspection Made, including Locations: PL r -;r . 2('�1 <'irAz [ t�c,ir•�c lnC� ;fn � 0' : ' h(f,Le:F' ".1,In�N41^�EVu4od�rt `"" IIP��(41i l�'l ht I;ASr1�l t'i l� 'kd.� l�(�IS/nU ��rI�F��J r2 Al b' 1").:4+.A 1G.^,( r r List Tests Made: Total Inspection "Time Each Day: List Items Requiring Correction, include uncorrected items previously listed p+� ' i 9 '11 ,J� Comments: gait YO fv fS ftY� � To the best of my knowledge, the work inspected was in accordance with the Building Department approved design drawings, specifications and applicable workmanship provisions of the U.B.C. except as noted above. I Signed: /,��,- (:}„ y1 i Date Print Full Name: Q k ('x)16' d Registration No. FORM S 1.021 90 COAST GEOTECHNICAL INC. 1200 W. Commonwealth Ave., Fullerton, CA 92833 - Ph: (714) 870-1211 - Fax: (714) 870-1222 - Email: coastgeotec@sbcglobal.net INV. Daily Observation Report HRS. W.O. Date Name Client Address b.,"Footings 0 Key Way [3 Grading 0 Swim Pool 0 Trench 0 Other Test No. Location Elev. or Depth Moisture Content % Dry Density P.C.f. % Relative Compaction Test Type Soil Type Job Progress and Activity: A Comments: COAST GEOTECHNICAL INC. 1200 W. Commonwealth Ave., Fullerton, CA 92833 • Ph: (714) 870-1211 • Fax: (714) 870-1222 • Email: coastgeotec@sbcglobal.net Daily Observation Report INS. HRS. W.O. Date Name Client Address ,7w Footings ❑ Key Way ❑ Grading ❑ Swim Pool ❑ Trench ❑ Other Test No. Location Elev. or Depth Moisture Content % Dry Density p.c.f. Relative Compaction Test Type Soil Type L.L. ��..w...w.. w..d A�N..:1..• b Acceptable ❑ I-Inacceptable Received By: e" Page of By. COAST GEOTECHNICAL INC. 1200W. Commonwealth Ave., Fullerton, CA 92833 ■ Ph: (714) 870-1211 ■ Fax: (714) 870-1222 ■ Email: coastgeotec@sbcglobal.net INV. Daily Observation Report HRS. W.O. Date Name Client Address ;t,t �j P ,($ 0 ❑ Footings ❑ Key Way ❑ Grading ❑ Swim Pool ❑ Trench ❑ Other Test No. Location Elev. or Depth Moisture Content % Dry Density p.c.f. % Relative Compaction Test yp Type Soil Type Job Progress and Activity: Comments: COAST GEOTECHNICAL INC. 1200 W. Commonwealth Ave., Fullerton, CA 92833 • Ph: (714) 870-1211 • Fax: (714) 870-1222 • Email: coastgeotec@sbcglobal.net INV. Daily Observation Report HRS. W.O. Date Name Client Address p Footings ❑ Key Way ❑ Grading ❑ Swim Pool ❑ Trench C Other Test No. Location Elev. or Depth Moisture Content % Dry Density y p.c.f. % Relative Compaction Test T e yp Soil T ype t' s� i_ Job Progress and Activity: r Comments: A 4 t' s� i_