HomeMy WebLinkAbout06032004 BSC Agenda Item 5 9
o0 '
i•
le00 0
0 'ilip
0 •
-,,,, ..
,,,,,,,,, i
c.-3 .,
,,,,,i gt
gX
, ,,
BSC
Information to be handed
out at the meeting
June 3rd 2004
Rev. 6-2-04 ("clean')
Standard Codes Schedule
Adoption. Subject to the amendments and deletions indicated beneath each code, each of the following codes,
including all of its published appendices and attachments, is adopted,ordained and made a part of the Code of
Ordinances of the City and of each chapter where it is referenced, except as otherwise expressly provided.
Procedure for amendments,etc. The procedure for adopting new codes,updated codes, local amendments and
provisions for administration and enforcement of these codes is as follows: (1)proposal by the building official
or other appropriate City official, (2)referral to the Building&Standards Commission, (3)consideration by the
City Council, after giving required meeting notices, and(4)adoption and publication,as required by Article 11 of
the City Charter.
International Building Code, 2000 Ed., International Code Council,Inc..
1. The administrative officer is the building official. All hearings,variances etc. are handled
by the BSC.
2. All roofs must have Class C or better fire resistance, as determined under Sec. 1505.1.
3. All foundations and structural framing for new buildings with a gross floor area 485
square feet or more must meet the following criteria,as applicable.
a. Engineering. Foundations and structural framing must be constructed in
accordance with complete plans and specifications prepared, signed and sealed by
a licensed or registered professional engineer who is:
(1) employed by a registered engineering firm; and
(2) covered by professional errors and omissions insurance with limits of at
least$500,000 per year, aggregate, ("RLPE").
The plans and specifications must be prepared specifically for the site of the work,
and they must meet criteria as to scope, content and form specified by the building
official.
b. Geotechnical Report. The plans and specifications for each foundation must be
based on a written geotechnical report prepared, signed and sealed by a licensed or
registered geotechnical engineer who is:
(1) employed by a registered engineering firm; and
(2) covered by professional errors and omissions insurance with limits of at
least$500,000 per year, aggregate.
The report must meet all applicable criteria in"Recommended Practice for
Geotechnical Explorations and Reports"published by the Structural Committee of
the Foundation Performance Association, Houston, Texas (Document#FPA-SC-
04-0, Rev#0, 11 April 2001, issued for website publishing), a copy of which is on
file in the City Secretary's office. However,the minimum depth of borings is 20
feet in all cases.
c. Foundation Performance Standard. Each foundation must be designed, installed
and constructed to achieve a soil movement potential of one inch or less,
determined by the estimated depth of the active zone in combination with at least
two of the following methods:
(1) Potential vertical rise(PVR) determined in accordance with Texas
Department of Transportation Method 124-E, dry conditions, as publishing
in and dated
(2) Swell tests performed in accordance with [ASTM Standard/date].
(3) Suction and hydrometer swell tests performed in accordance with [ASTM
Standard/date].
(4) linear shrinkage tests performed in accordance with [ASTM
Standard/date].
d. Foundations, Basic Type. Each foundation must be of an approved basic type.
Approved basic types are listed below. In this list, types of foundations are
defined and described in"Foundation Design Options For Residential and Other
Low-Rise Buildings on Expansive Soils"published by the Structural Committee
of the Foundation Performance Association, Houston, Texas (Document#FPA-
SC-01-X, Rev#X, 1 April 2004,issued for FPA peer review), a copy of which is
on file in the City Secretary's office.
(1) Structural slab with void space and deep foundations.
(2) Structural floor with crawl space and deep foundations.
(3) Stiffened structural slab with deep foundations.
(4) Stiffened non-structural slab with deep foundations.
(5) Grade-supported stiffened structural slab.
(6) Grade-supported stiffened non-structural slab.
(7) Grade-supported non-stiffened slab of uniform thickness (approved for
one-story accessory buildings containing only garage or storage space).
(8) Mixed-depth system for all new building construction.
(9) Mixed-depth system for building additions with deep foundations.
(10) Mixed-depth system for building addition with shallow foundations.
(11) Another type approved by special exception issued by the BSC (see
below).
e. Foundations, Deep Support Components. Deep support components must be of
an approved type. Approved types are listed below. In this list,types of deep
support components are defined and described in"Foundation Design Options For
Residential and Other Low-Rise Buildings on Expansive Soils"published by the
Structural Committee of the Foundation Performance Association,Houston,
Texas (Document#FPA-SC-01-X,Rev#X, 1 April 2004, issued for FPA peer
review), a copy of which is on file in the City Secretary's office.
(1) Drilled and underreamed concrete piers.
(2) Drilled straight-shaft concrete piers.
(3) Auger-cast concrete piles.
(4) Another type approved by special exception issued by the BSC (see
below).
f. Foundations, reinforcement. Reinforcement for each foundation must be of an
approved type. Approved types are listed below. In this list, types of
reinforcement are defined and described in"Foundation Design Options For
Residential and Other Low-Rise Buildings on Expansive Soils"published by the
Structural Committee of the Foundation Performance Association,Houston,
Texas (Document#FPA-SC-01-X,Rev#X, 1 April 2004, issued for FPA peer
review), a copy of which is on file in the City Secretary's office.
(1) Deformed bar reinforcing.
(2) Welded wire fabric reinforcing(approved for one-story accessory
buildings containing only garage or storage space).
(3) Another type approved by special exception issued by the BSC (see
below).
g. Foundations, Observation & Certification. Each foundation must be
professionally observed and must be certified by an RLPE, as more fully
described below:
(1) Observations must:
(i) be performed either by the certifying RLPE or by a person under
that RLPE's direct supervision and control whose professional
qualifications are approved by the RLPE,
(ii) include actual measurement of piers, fill, compaction,
reinforcement,forms,materials,dimensions, structural elements,
stressing, tendons,tensions,attachments, etc.before the work is
covered or concrete is placed,
(iii) be performed continuously during placement of concrete and any
stressing or tensioning operations,and
(iv) be documented in a form and manner approved by the building
official(which may include photographs).
(2) Certifications must:
(i) refer to and be based upon the professional observations required
by this section,
(ii) state that the work complies with the plans and specifications last
approved by the building official(with any field changes that are
ordered by the RLPE and reported to the building official and that
comply with applicable regulations),
(iii) state that the work complies with sound engineering practices,
(iv) comply with criteria as to form and content as may be specified by
the building official,
(v) be signed and sealed by the certifying RLPE,and
(vi) be filed with the Building Official before framing commences atop
the foundation(and before the foundation is otherwise covered).
h. The BSC may issue a special exception from any requirement in
subsection"a"through"g,"above, but only upon a showing that:
(1) the requirement will not affect life safety or the performance of a
structure (for its estimated useful life); or
(2) an alternate requirement to be imposed by the special exception
will provide equal or better protection for life safety and long-term
structural performance.
In connection with any such special exception,the BSC may require that
the applicant provide supporting engineering data and opinion, and the
BSC may impose conditions to carry out the purpose and intent of
applicable regulations.
4. All concrete piers, footings and foundations must be cured for at least 72 hours before any
significant load is placed on them.
5. All walls and ceilings within a R-1,R-2, R-3 and R-4 type occupancy shall be sheathed
with Type X gypsum board at least 5/8-inch(15.9 mm)thick. Exception: Where this
code(IBC)requires otherwise for moisture protection.
6. Delete: Appendices A(Employee Qualifications),B (Board of Appeals)and D (Fire
Districts).
International Energy Conservation Code, as it existed on May 1,2001, International Code
Council,Inc.
1. The administrative officer is the building official. All hearings,variances etc. are handled
by the BSC.
2. In lieu of inspection by City employees,the building official may require a written
certification that a building meets or exceeds minimum requirements,if the certification
is: (i) signed by a code-certified inspector(as defined in Section 388.02, TEX. HEALTH
& SAFETY CODE)not employed by the city, and(ii) accompanied by an approved
inspection checklist,properly completed, signed and dated by the inspector. If the fees of
the code-certified inspector are paid by the City,the amount shall be added to the building
permit fees otherwise payable. With approval from the building official, a permittee may
pay such fees directly to an independent inspection firm. Only code-certified inspectors
may perform inspections and enforce this code in the City.
International Fire Code,2000 Ed.,International Code Council,Inc.
1. The fire official shall be the fire chief or acting fire chief,who may detail other members
of the fire department or the building inspection division to act as inspectors. Chapter 6
of this Code shall apply to enforcement and administration of the fire code in the same
manner as it applies to the building code(except that the fire official shall have the
powers and duties of the building official under such articles).
2. The BSC shall have the same jurisdiction and authority with respect to the fire code as it
has with respect to the building code.
3. The limits of the fire district referred to in Section 902.1.1 are coextensive with the City
limits.
4. Explosives and fireworks, as defined in Chapter 33, are prohibited within the City limits.
5. Notwithstanding Section 2206.7.6 (relating to service stations), "latch-open"type devices
are prohibited.
6. Section 603.8.4 (hours for burning) is amended to read in its entirety as follows: "An
incinerator shall not be used or allowed to remain with any combustion inside it: (i) at any
time from an hour preceding sunset on one day until sunrise the following day; or(ii) at
any time when unattended."
(7) Delete: Appendices FA(Board of Appeals), FE (Hazard Categories),FF (Hazard
Ranking) and FG(Cryogenic Fluids -Weight and Volume Equivalents).
International Fuel Gas Code,2000 Ed.,International Code Council,Inc.
1. The administrative officer is the building official. Chapter 6 of this Code shall apply to
enforcement and administration of this code in the same manner as it applies to the
building code. The BSC shall have the same jurisdiction and authority with respect to
this code as it has with respect to the building code.
2. Delete Sections FG103, FG106 and FG10.
3. Even if permitted by this code, copper tubing shall not be used for the yard service line.
4. Amend Section 311.2 to read in its entirety as follows: "Low pressure(not to exceed 0.5
PSI)gas piping shall withstand a pressure of at least 10 inches of mercury for a period of
time not less than 10 minutes without showing any drop in pressure, except that the
following shall apply in the case of new construction: The newly-constructed system
must withstand a pressure of at least 25 PSI for a period of not less than 10 minutes
without showing any drop in pressure as an initial pressure test, and the system must also
withstand a pressure as a final test. Higher pressure piping must withstand pressure of at
least 10 PSI,but never less than twice the maximum pressure to which the piping will be
subjected in operation, for a period of at least 10 minutes without showing a drop in
pressure, but the higher pressures required for new construction,above, shall be used to
test new construction in lieu of the 10-PSI level prescribed by this sentence."
5. There must be a permanently-installed stairway, either fixed or folding,to serve attic
space where appliances or equipment are located.
6. Even if permitted by this code,undiluted liquefied petroleum gas,or"LPG", shall not be
used at any fixed location in the City. Exception: This does not prohibit the use of such
gas in quantities of 10 gallons or less.
7. Each new or replaced gas meter shall be located on the same building site that it serves.
International Mechanical Code, 2000 Ed.,International Code Council,Inc..
1. The administrative officer is the building official. All hearings,variances etc. are handled
by the BSC.
2. Add to Section M306.3: "There must be a permanently-installed stairway, either fixed or
folding,to serve attic space where appliances or equipment are located."
3. Add to Section M603: "All return air ducts must be installed within 10 inches of the
finished floor in all new residential construction and wherever possible in existing
buildings."
4. Delete: Appendix MB (Recommended Permit Fee Schedule).
International Plumbing Code, 2000 Ed.,International Code Council,Inc.
1. The administrative officer is the building official. Chapter 6 of this Code shall apply to
enforcement and administration of this code in the same manner as it applies to the
building code. The BSC shall have the same jurisdiction and authority with respect to
this code as it has with respect to the building code.
2. Delete: Sections P103,P106 and P109 and Appendices PA(Plumbing Permit Fee
Schedule) and PG(Vacuum Drainage System).
3. Add at the beginning of Section 303.1: "Even if permitted by this code(IPC), ,none of
the following is allowed for use in the City: Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene(ABS)pipe
or fittings,polyethylene pipe or fittings,Type M copper, lead-based pipe, aluminum
DWV pipe or components, or air admittance valves."
4. Even if permitted by this code(IPC), PVC and CPVC type water pipe and fittings are not
allowed for use in the City. Exception: PVC water pipe may be used where permitted by
this code (IPC),but only if: (i) it is installed underground and(ii)all joints are primed and
glued as required by the manufacturer's recommendations (and the primer must be purple
or another distinctive color,except on above-ground pool piping).
5. Even if permitted by this code(IPC),wet venting shall not be allowed except when
authorized by the BSC, as a special exception for hardship and unusual cases.
6. Amend Section 1101.2 to read in its entirety as follows: "The provisions of this chapter
are applicable to interior leaders,building storm drains,building storm sewers, exterior
conductors, downspouts,roof gutters and other storm drainage fixtures and facilities."
7. Maximum water meter size,unless an RPE can clearly and convincingly demonstrate the
need for a larger meter in a particular case, is: 3/4ths-inch for an irrigation system,or f-
inch for a single-family dwelling.
International Residential Code, as it existed on May 1,2001,International Code Council,
Inc..
1. The administrative officer is the building official. All hearings,variances etc. are handled
by the BSC.
2. This code, in lieu of the other"International Codes," applies to all residential structures in
the City. "Residential"means having the character of a detached one-family or two-
family dwelling that is not more than three stories high with separate means of egress,
including the accessory structures of the dwelling. This code does not apply to: (i) any
dwelling that has a common means of egress, such as a common hallway, or(ii)any
dwelling or structure that has the character of a facility used for accommodation of
transient guests or a structure in which medical,rehabilitative, or assisted living services
are provided in connection with the occupancy of the structure.
3. All amendments and deletions to the other"International Codes"adopted by this
Schedule are also carried forward and adopted as amendments and deletions from the
International Residential Code.
4. Delete: Appendices RAF (Radon Control Methods),RAI(Private Sewage Disposal),and
RAE(Manufactured Housing Used as Dwellings).
5. This code does not apply to installation and maintenance of electrical wiring and related
components. See National Electrical Code,below.
(BOCA)National Building Code, 1996 Ed., Building Officials & Code Administrators
International,Inc.
Only Sections 3108 (Radio And Television Towers)and 3109 (Radio And Television
Antennas),together with any necessary definitions or interpretative aids, are adopted. See
Subchapter G of Chapter 6 of this Code.
National Electrical Code, as it existed on May 1, 2001,National Fire Protection Association,
("NEC").
1. The administrative officer is the building official. All hearings, variances etc. are handled
by the BSC.
2. See Chapter 8 of this Code for various provisions which override or supplement the NEC.
Standard Housing Code, 1997 Ed., Southern Building Code Congress International,Inc.
1. The administrative officer is the building official. All hearings,variances etc. are handled
by the BSC.
Rev. 6-2-04
Standard Codes Schedule
Adoption. Subject to the amendments and deletions indicated beneath each code,each of the following codes,
including all of its published appendices and attachments,is adopted, ordained and made a part of the Code of
Ordinances of the City and of each chapter where it is referenced, except as otherwise expressly provided.
Procedure for amendments,etc. The procedure for adopting new codes, updated codes,local amendments and
provisions for administration and enforcement of these codes is as follows: (1)proposal by the building official
or other appropriate City official, (2)referral to the Building&Standards Commission, (3)consideration by
the City Council,after giving required meeting notices,and(4)adoption and publication,as required by
Article II of the City Charter.
International Building Code,2000 Ed., International Code Council,Inc..
1. The administrative officer is the building official. All hearings,variances etc. are handled by the
BSC.
2. All roofs must have Class C or better fire resistance, as determined under Sec. 1505.1.
3. :. '. ..' :' : :. :: ': . . • . : . • ; - - -- ;
professional engineer("RPE"), and the week shall be.
• I • ; _ . .
lr based on a soils report from a recognized and reputable firm or agency(Exception: no
gross floor area); and •• - . • . • :. .-. •• • - - - - - . :. • . - '; .- • - ••. - . i. : -.. -All foundations and structural framing for new buildings with a gross floor area 485 square feet
or more must meet the following criteria,as applicable.
a. Engineering. Foundations and structural framing must be constructed in accordance
with complete plans and specifications prepared, signed and sealed by a licensed or
registered professional engineer who is:
(1) employed by a registered engineering firm; and
(2) covered by professional errors and omissions insurance with limits of at least
$500,000 per year, aggregate, ("RLPE").
The plans and specifications must be prepared specifically for the site of the work, and
they must meet criteria as to scope, content and form specified by the building official.
b. Geotechnical Report. The plans and specifications for each foundation must be based
on a written geotechnical report prepared, signed and sealed by a licensed or registered
geotechnical engineer who is:
(1) employed by a registered engineering firm; and
(2) covered by professional errors and omissions insurance with limits of at least
$500,000 per year, aggregate.
The report must meet all applicable criteria in"Recommended Practice for
Geotechnical Explorations and Reports"published by the Structural Committee of the
Foundation Performance Association, Houston, Texas (Document#FPA-SC-04-0,
Rev#0, 11 April 2001, issued for website publishing), a copy of which is on file in the
City Secretary's office. However, the minimum depth of borings is 20 feet in all cases.
c. Foundation Performance Standard. Each foundation must be designed, installed and
constructed to achieve a soil movement potential of one inch or less, determined by the
estimated depth of the active zone in combination with at least two of the following
methods:
(1) Potential vertical rise(PVR) determined in accordance with Texas Deparliuent
of Transportation Method 124-E, dry conditions, as publishing in
and dated
(2) Swell tests performed in accordance with [ASTM Standard/date].
(3) Suction and hydrometer swell tests performed in accordance with [ASTM
Standard/date].
(4) linear shrinkage tests performed in accordance with [ASTM Standard/date].
d. Foundations, Basic Type. Each foundation must be of an approved basic type.
Approved basic types are listed below. In this list,types of foundations are defined and
described in"Foundation Design Options For Residential and Other Low-Rise
Buildings on Expansive Soils"published by the Structural Committee of the Foundation
Performance Association, Houston, Texas (Document#FPA-SC-01-X, Rev#X, 1
April 2004, issued for FPA peer review), a copy of which is on file in the City
Secretary's office.
(1) Structural slab with void space and deep foundations.
(2) Structural floor with crawl space and deep foundations.
(3) Stiffened structural slab with deep foundations.
(4) Stiffened non-structural slab with deep foundations.
(5) Grade-supported stiffened structural slab.
(6) Grade-supported stiffened non-structural slab.
(7) Grade-supported non-stiffened slab of uniform thickness(approved for one-
story accessory buildings containing only garage or storage space).
(8) Mixed-depth system for all new building construction.
(9) Mixed-depth system for building additions with deep foundations.
(10) Mixed-depth system for building addition with shallow foundations.
(11) Another type approved by special exception issued by the BSC (see below).
e. Foundations, Deep Support Components. Deep support components must be of an
approved type. Approved types are listed below. In this list, types of deep support
components are defined and described in"Foundation Design Options For Residential
and Other Low-Rise Buildings on Expansive Soils"published by the Structural
Committee of the Foundation Performance Association, Houston, Texas(Document#
FPA-SC-01-X, Rev#X, 1 April 2004, issued for FPA peer review), a copy of which
is on file in the City Secretary's office.
(1) Drilled and underreamed concrete piers.
(2) Drilled straight-shaft concrete piers.
(3) Auger-cast concrete piles.
(4) Another type approved by special exception issued by the BSC (see below).
f. Foundations, reinforcement. Reinforcement for each foundation must be of an
approved type. Approved types are listed below. In this list, types of reinforcement
are defined and described in"Foundation Design Options For Residential and Other
Low-Rise Buildings on Expansive Soils"published by the Structural Committee of the
Foundation Performance Association, Houston, Texas (Document#FPA-SC-01-X,
Rev#X, 1 April 2004, issued for FPA peer review), a copy of which is on file in the
City Secretary's office.
(1) Deformed bar reinforcing.
(2) Welded wire fabric reinforcing(approved for one-story accessory buildings
containing only garage or storage space).
(3) Another type approved by special exception issued by the BSC (see below).
g. Foundations. Observation & Certification. Each foundation must be professionally
observed and must be certified by an RLPE, as more fully described below:
(1) Observations must:
(i) be performed either by the certifying RLPE or by a person under that
RLPE's direct supervision and control whose professional qualifications
are approved by the RLPE,
(ii) include actual measurement of piers, fill,compaction,reinforcement,
forms, materials,dimensions, structural elements, stressing, tendons,
tensions,attachments, etc.before the work is covered or concrete is
placed,
(iii) be performed continuously during placement of concrete and any
stressing or tensioning operations, and
(iv) be documented in a form and manner approved by the building official
(which may include photographs).
(2) Certifications must:
(i) refer to and be based upon the professional observations required by
this section,
(ii) state that the work complies with the plans and specifications last
approved by the building official (with any field changes that are
ordered by the RLPE and reported to the building official and that
comply with applicable regulations),
(iii) state that the work complies with sound engineering practices,
(iv) comply with criteria as to form and content as may be specified by the
building official,
(v) be signed and sealed by the certifying RLPE, and
(vi) be filed with the Building Official before framing commences atop the
foundation(and before the foundation is otherwise covered).
h. The BSC may issue a s l ecial exce.tion from an re s uirement in subsection"a"
through"g,"above,but only upon a showing that:
(1) the requirement will not affect life safety or the performance of a
structure (for its estimated useful life); or
(2) an alternate requirement to be imposed by the special exception will
provide equal or better protection for life safety and long-term
structural performance.
In connection with any such special exception, the BSC may require that the
applicant provide supporting engineering data and opinion, and the BSC may
impose conditions to carry out the purpose and intent of applicable regulations.
4. All concrete piers, footings and foundations must be cured for at least 72 hours before any
significant load is placed on them.
5. All walls and ceilings within a R-1, R-2,R-3 and R-4 type occupancy shall be sheathed with
Type X gypsum board at least 5/8-inch(15.9 mm)thick. Exception: Where this code(IBC)
requires otherwise for moisture protection.
6. Delete: Appendices A(Employee Qualifications),B (Board of Appeals) and D (Fire Districts).
International Energy Conservation Code, as it existed on May 1,2001,International Code
Council,Inc.
1. The administrative officer is the building official. All hearings,variances etc. are handled by the
BSC.
2. In lieu of inspection by City employees, the building official may require a written certification
that a building meets or exceeds minimum requirements,if the certification is: (i)signed by a
code-certified inspector(as defined in Section 388.02, TEX. HEALTH& SAFETY CODE)
not employed by the city, and(ii)accompanied by an approved inspection checklist,properly
completed, signed and dated by the inspector. If the fees of the code-certified inspector are
paid by the City,the amount shall be added to the building permit fees otherwise payable. With
approval from the building official, a permittee may pay such fees directly to an independent
inspection firm. Only code-certified inspectors may perform inspections and enforce this code
in the City.
International Fire Code, 2000 Ed.,International Code Council,Inc.
1. The fire official shall be the fire chief or acting fire chief,who may detail other members of the
fire department or the building inspection division to act as inspectors. Chapter 6 of this Code
shall apply to enforcement and administration of the fire code in the same manner as it applies
to the building code(except that the fire official shall have the powers and duties of the building
official under such articles).
2. The BSC shall have the same jurisdiction and authority with respect to the fire code as it has
with respect to the building code.
3. The limits of the fire district referred to in Section 902.1.1 are coextensive with the City limits.
4. Explosives and fireworks, as defined in Chapter 33, are prohibited within the City limits.
5. Notwithstanding Section 2206.7.6 (relating to service stations), "latch-open"type devices are
prohibited.
6. Section 603.8.4(hours for burning) is amended to read in its entirety as follows: "An incinerator
shall not be used or allowed to remain with any combustion inside it: (i) at any time from an
hour preceding sunset on one day until sunrise the following day; or(ii) at any time when
unattended."
(7) Delete: Appendices FA(Board of Appeals),FE(Hazard Categories), FF(Hazard Ranking)
and FG(Cryogenic Fluids -Weight and Volume Equivalents).
International Fuel Gas Code,2000 Ed., International Code Council,Inc.
1. The administrative officer is the building official. Chapter 6 of this Code shall apply to
enforcement and administration of this code in the same manner as it applies to the building
code. The BSC shall have the same jurisdiction and authority with respect to this code as it has
with respect to the building code.
2. Delete Sections FG103, FG106 and FG10.
3. Even if permitted by this code, copper tubing shall not be used for the yard service line.
4. Amend Section 311.2 to read in its entirety as follows: "Low pressure (not to exceed 0.5 PSI)
gas piping shall withstand a pressure of at least 10 inches of mercury for a period of time not
less than 10 minutes without showing any drop in pressure, except that the following shall apply
in the case of new construction: The newly-constructed system must withstand a pressure of at
least 25 PSI for a period of not less than 10 minutes without showing any drop in pressure as
an initial pressure test, and the system must also withstand a pressure as a final test. Higher
pressure piping must withstand pressure of at least 10 PSI,but never less than twice the
maximum pressure to which the piping will be subjected in operation, for a period of at least 10
minutes without showing a drop in pressure,but the higher pressures required for new
construction, above, shall be used to test new construction in lieu of the 10-PSI level prescribed
by this sentence."
5. There must be a permanently-installed stairway, either fixed or folding,to serve attic space
where appliances or equipment are located.
6. Even if permitted by this code,undiluted liquefied petroleum gas,or"LPG", shall not be used at
any fixed location in the City. Exception: This does not prohibit the use of such gas in
quantities of 10 gallons or less.
7. Each new or replaced gas meter shall be located on the same building site that it serves.
International Mechanical Code,2000 Ed., International Code Council,Inc..
1. The administrative officer is the building official. All hearings,variances etc. are handled by the
BSC.
2. Add to Section M306.3: "There must be a permanently-installed stairway, either fixed or
folding,to serve attic space where appliances or equipment are located."
3. Add to Section M603: "All return air ducts must be installed within 10 inches of the finished
floor in all new residential construction and wherever possible in existing buildings."
4. Delete: Appendix MB (Recommended Permit Fee Schedule).
International Plumbing Code,2000 Ed., International Code Council,Inc.
1. The administrative officer is the building official. Chapter 6 of this Code shall apply to
enforcement and administration of this code in the same manner as it applies to the building
code. The BSC shall have the same jurisdiction and authority with respect to this code as it has
with respect to the building code.
2. Delete: Sections P103,P106 and P109 and Appendices PA(Plumbing Permit Fee Schedule)
and PG(Vacuum Drainage System).
3. Add at the beginning of Section 303.1: "Even if permitted by this code(IPC), ,none of the
following is allowed for use in the City: Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene(ABS)pipe or fittings,
polyethylene pipe or fittings, Type M copper, lead-based pipe, aluminum DWV pipe or
components, or air admittance valves."
4. Even if permitted by this code(IPC), PVC and CPVC type water pipe and fittings are not
allowed for use in the City. Exception: PVC water pipe may be used where permitted by this
code (IPC),but only if: (i) it is installed underground and(ii) all joints are primed and glued as
required by the manufacturer's recommendations(and the primer must be purple or another
distinctive color, except on above-ground pool piping).
5. Even if permitted by this code(IPC),wet venting shall not be allowed except when authorized
by the BSC, as a special exception for hardship and unusual cases.
6. Amend Section 1101.2 to read in its entirety as follows: "The provisions of this chapter are
applicable to interior leaders,building storm drains, building storm sewers, exterior conductors,
downspouts,roof gutters and other storm drainage fixtures and facilities."
7. Maximum water meter size,unless an RPE can clearly and convincingly demonstrate the need
for a larger meter in a particular case,is: 3/4ths-inch for an irrigation system,or 1-inch for a
single-family dwelling.
International Residential Code, as it existed on May 1,2001, International Code Council,
Inc..
1. The administrative officer is the building official. All hearings,variances etc. are handled by the
BSC.
2. This code, in lieu of the other"International Codes," applies to all residential structures in the
City. "Residential"means having the character of a detached one-family or two-family dwelling
that is not more than three stories high with separate means of egress, including the accessory
structures of the dwelling. This code does not apply to: (i)any dwelling that has a common
means of egress, such as a common hallway,or(ii) any dwelling or structure that has the
character of a facility used for accommodation of transient guests or a structure in which
medical,rehabilitative, or assisted living services are provided in connection with the occupancy
of the structure.
3. All amendments and deletions to the other"International Codes"adopted by this Schedule are
also carried forward and adopted as amendments and deletions from the International
Residential Code.
4. Delete: Appendices RAF (Radon Control Methods), RAI(Private Sewage Disposal), and
RAE (Manufactured Housing Used as Dwellings).
5. This code does not apply to installation and maintenance of electrical wiring and related
components. See National Electrical Code,below.
(BOCA)National Building Code, 1996 Ed.,Building Officials & Code Administrators
International,Inc.
Only Sections 3108 (Radio And Television Towers)and 3109 (Radio And Television
Antennas),together with any necessary definitions or interpretative aids, are adopted. See
Subchapter G of Chapter 6 of this Code.
National Electrical Code, as it existed on May 1,2001, National Fire Protection Association,
("NEC").
1. The administrative officer is the building official. All hearings, variances etc. are handled by the
BSC.
2. See Chapter 8 of this Code for various provisions which override or supplement the NEC.
Standard Housing Code, 1997 Ed., Southern Building Code Congress International,Inc.
1. The administrative officer is the building official. All hearings,variances etc. are handled by the
BSC.
RAU:041$0,1101-400.01,41.14-2e, 2033 E:);.iye Suite 5-0 Carrollton, TX. 7500E;
itirms
Thq: (972) 71 3-9109 Fa (972) 71'3-917'1
ge0 Peering,ccirn
April 26, 2004
Mr. joe Glass
9215
Houston, TX 77055
Re: GeotechnicaliGeophysicai Investigation
Proposed Glass Residence
9221 Elizabeth Road
Houston, Texas 77055
BC' Report No. 04-089
Dear Mr. Glass:
Attached is our geotechnical report for the above referenced project This
project was authorized by you and performed in general accordance with
our or discussions.
Lt has been a pleasure to perform this work for you. If during the course of
this Droject we can be of further assistance, pi-ease do not hesitate to call
BRYANT CONSULTANTS INC.
fa -4-44.voy
4,0
ji0,,P;,iN T. BRYANT it
`t.)7-9A (Is:01(1;3y '.•:0N
John T. Bryant, PhD., P.G_, P.E. Win
President
..;
/ON! :,/,,q
Gehrig,
Staff Engineer
Ron Kelm, P.P.
FOrF. ..,;i-c Engineers, inc.
. . .
GEOTECHNICAL/GEOPHYSICAL INVESTIGATION
at
PROPOSED GLASS RESIDENCE
HOUSTON, TEXAS
Prepared for
Mr. Joe Glass
9215 Hilldale
Houston, TX
by
BRYANT CONSULTANTS, INC.
GEOTECHNICAL AND FORENSIC
ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
CARROLLTON, TX 75006
BCI Report No. 04-089
April 26, 2004
ir.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROJECT INFORMATION 1
SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION 1
FIELD OPERATIONS 1
LABORATORY TESTING 2
EVALUATION OF SITE INFORMATION 3
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 5
ELECTRICAL RESISTIVETY PROFILES 9
ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 12
EARTHWORK GUIDELINES 22
LIMITATIONS AND REPRODUCTIONS 25
FIGURES
GMMIR Profile and Boring Location Plan 1
Tree Survey 2
GIS Map of Site 3
Logs of Boring B-1 4
Logs of Boring B-2 5
Moisture Content Profile 6
Hand Penetrometer Profile 7
Total Soil Suction Profile 8
Liquidity Index Profile 9
Swell Test Results 10
GMMIR Profile R1 11
Photographic Survey of Site 12
Rainfall Data for Houston Hobby 13
E — Log P Curve 14
Boring Log Legend 15
APPENDIX 1 - GUIDELINES FOR THE PLACEMENT OF
CONTROLLED EARTHWORK
GEOTECHNICAL/GEOPHYSICAL INVESTIGATION
for
PROPOSED GLASS RESIDENCE
HOUSTON, TEXAS
A. PROJECT INFORMATION
BCI understands the proposed residence will be located at 9221 Elizabeth Road
in Houston, Texas. It is our understanding the proposed construction will consist
of a multiple story, single family dwelling. Final grades for the proposed residence
were unavailable for our review. However, for this report, we assume that the
proposed pad will be constructed within 18 inches of the existing grades. If cuts
and/or fills exceed this assumption, then BCI should be contacted in order to
determine if the recommendations in this report are still valid.
No specific warranty program or other standards, except acceptable industry
standards, were followed in this investigation.
B. SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION
The purposes of the study are to: 1) explore the general subsurface conditions at
the site, 2) evaluate the pertinent engineering properties of the subsurface
materials, 3) perform one Geo-electrical Moisture Material Imaging and Resistivity
(GMMIR) profile and two geotechnical borings at this site and 4) provide
recommendations and design parameters concerning suitable types of foundation
systems.
C. FIELD OPERATIONS
I. Geotechnical Exploration
Two geotechnical borings were performed on March 17, 2004. The borings were
drilled at the approximate locations shown on Figure 1 — GMMIR Profile and
Boring Location Plan. A continuous flight auger drilling rig was used to advance
the borings to a depth of 25 to 30 feet below grade.
Undisturbed specimens of cohesive soils were obtained at intermittent intervals
with nominal 3-inch diameter thin-walled, seamless tube samplers. Disturbed
Proposed Glass Residence Page 2
samples were also retrieved using augering techniques. These specimens were
extruded in the field, logged, sealed and packaged to help protect them from
disturbance and to help maintain their in-situ moisture content during
transportation to our laboratory.
Figures 4 and 5 present descriptions of the soil properties and Figures 6 to 10
present a summary of the laboratory data.
II. Geophysical Exploration
In conjunction with the geotechnical borings, some additional information
regarding the location of moisture and material differences around the perimeter
of the structure was obtained using the geo-electrical moisture/material imaging
method (GMMIR).
Two geo-electrical (electrical resistivity) profiles were originally performed at the
location of the proposed residence. However, equipment malfunction result in
errant data from one of the profile and therefore will not be included in this report.
Profile R1 was taken across the residential lot to characterize the conditions of the
soils and the resistivity structure beneath the surface as presented on Figure 1.
Measurements of the field resistivity were performed in general accordance with
ASTM G-57 with modifications of the electrode configuration. Figure 11 provides
a depth profile of GMMIR Profile R1 geo-electrical resistivity model.
III. Benchmark Installation
After drilling operations were complete in Boring B-1, BCI installed a benchmark.
The bearing end of the benchmark was approximately 35 feet below grade.
D. LABORATORY TESTING
Samples were examined at our laboratory by the project geotechnical engineer.
Selected samples were subjected to laboratory tests under the supervision of this
engineer. A brief discussion of these results is provided below.
The dry unit weights, moisture contents, liquid and plastic limits of the selected
soil samples were measured. These tests were used to evaluate the potential
BCI Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 3
volume change of the different strata as an indication of the uniformity of the
material and to aid in soil classification.
To provide additional information about the swell characteristics and evaluate
volume change characteristics of these soils (at their in-situ moisture conditions)
total soil suction tests and absorption swell tests were performed on selected
samples of the clay soils. Unconfined compression and hand penetrometer tests
were also performed on selected undisturbed samples of the clay soils. These
tests were performed to evaluate the strength and consistency of these materials.
Consolidation properties of one soil sample were obtained by performing one-
dimensional consolidation tests. A consolidation test was performed on a soil
sample retrieved from Boring B-1 at a depth between six to seven feet below
grade. The void ratio — pressure curve (e log p curve) for this soil sample is
located in Figure 14.
E, EVALUATION OF SITE INFORMATION
Based on information received from Mr. Ron Kelm, P.E. with Forensic Engineers,
Inc., the residential lot is approximately 115 feet wide and 330 feet long. The
residential pad is approximately 80 by 80 feet. The approximate location of the
residential pad with respect to the lot is reproduced in Figures 1 and 2. A rather
large drainage ditch borders the south perimeter of the residential lot. The
proposed foundation system is reportedly to be construction approximately 4 to 5
feet above existing ground level.
I. General Soil/Geologic Conditions
The property is located at 9221 Elizabeth Road in Houston, Texas. Based on the
Geologic Atlas of Texas and our experience in the local vicinity, the site is situated
within the Beaumont Formation. The Beaumont Formation typically consists of
surficial clay and mud of low permeability, high compressibility, high to very high
shrink/swell capacity, low shear strength and high plasticity.
Based upon the USDA Harris County Soil Survey, this site is situated on the
Addicks-Urban land complex. The following information is based upon the USDA
BCI Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 4
Harris County soil survey, and should be considered generally indicative of the
type of soils and the range of engineering properties noted for this area and at this
site, and should be used only as an indicator of the soil properties at this site.
The surface of the Addicks-Urban land complex is plane to slightly convex with 0
to 1 percent slopes. This surface layer of the Addicks soil is friable, black loam
about 11 inches thick. The next layer is friable, dark gray loam approximately 12
inches thick. Friable, dark gray loam with calcium carbonate and yellow to
yellowish brown mottles is typically encountered at depth. This soil is poorly
drained. Surface runoff is slow and permeability is moderate. The available
water capacity is high. It is saturated with water for short periods during the year.
The liquid limits and plasticity indices for this soil group ranges between 2.0-45%
and 5-27%, respectively; the shrink-swell potential for the soil group, therefore, is
low to moderate.
II. Site Grading and Drainage
Based upon visual observations and geotechnical exploration, no significant
amounts of cut or fill were detected at this site at the time of our investigation.
Boring B-2 encountered approximately 6 inches of fill sand. Figure 12 provides
two photographs of general site information. As shown in Figure 12, the
residential property is currently flat with no significant change in topography. For
a more detailed description of the site grades, please refer to a limited topography
map of the site performed by Godinich Surveyor's, LLC.
III. Tree Survey
Numerous mature trees are present within the residential lot. Figure 12 pictures
the approximate size of these trees. Figure 2 -- Tree Survey provides the
approximate location of the documented tree trunks within the residential lot. As
shown in Figure 2, a few trees may be removed during construction of the
residential structure. Figure 3 — GIS Map of Site also provides an aerial view of
the residential lot and house pad. As shown in Figure 3, the tree canopies
generally cover the majority of the residential lot. Also, a pre-existing structure
may have been present during this aerial photograph; however, the structure was
not present during our investigation.
BC! Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 5
IV. Rainfall Data
Figure 13 plots the monthly rainfall totals since 1998 at the National Weather
Service (NWS) Houston/Galveston station located at the Hobby Airport. Monthly
rainfall averages include observation recordings at the Hobby Airport, which is
south of this residential structure. Rainfall totals and averages are based on the
NOAA, NWS Web Site for the Hobby Airport area. Based on Figure 13, monthly
rainfall totals during 1999 and 2001 are most likely considered rainfall extremes.
As shown in Figure 13, yearly rainfall totals in 1999 and 2000 were comparatively
below the yearly average. The majority of 1999 was considerably dry, particularly
during the late summer and fall months, as indicated in Figure 13. A considerable
amount of rainfall was recorded during June 2001 and August 2001. The year
2001 recorded approximately 30 inches of rainfall above the yearly average.
Monthly rainfall totals were below average in January and February 2002.
However, the monthly rainfall totals of 2002 were also well above the average,
particularly for the months of July, August and October. The year 2002 recorded
approximately 8 inches of rainfall above the yearly average. The year 2003
recorded approximately 5 inches of rainfall below the yearly average. However,
during our site investigation, the months of January and February 2004 have been
above the monthly average. Therefore, BCI concludes that our
geotechnical/geophysical investigation in March 2004 was conducted during a
relatively wet climatic period.
F. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The subsurface conditions encountered in the borings are presented in Figures 4
and 5. Descriptions of the various strata and their approximate depths and
thickness are shown in the Logs of Borings. A brief summary of the general
stratigraphy indicated by the borings is given below. Depth refers to depth from
the ground surface existing at the time of this investigation. References to depth
should be made from this datum.
I. Soil Stratigraphy
Based upon site observations and the geotechnical borings, BCI is of the opinion
that observed soil conditions are similar to those identified in the published
geologic and soil information mentioned previously. In addition, Boring B-1
BCI Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 6
encountered sandy fill soils in the upper six inches. The following paragraph
provides a brief summary of the soils encountered within the geotechnical borings.
For a more detailed description of the soils encountered, refer to the attached
boring logs.
The geotechnical borings generally encountered olive black, dark yellowish brown,
to brownish black sandy lean clay to clayey sand. Light olive gray, dark yellowish
brown to brownish gray lean clay with sand to sandy lean clay typically followed.
A grayish orange, pale yellowish brown to yellowish gray lean clay with sand
stratum was encountered next. At approximately 13 feet below grade, yellowish
gray, light gray to grayish orange sandy lean clay was encountered in both
borings. Boring B-2 encountered moderate yellowish brown, yellowish gray to
grayish orange sandy lean clay beginning approximately 21 feet below grade.
II. Water Observations
The borings were advanced using a continuous flight auger. These drilling
procedures allow groundwater seepage to be observed during and after drilling.
Water seepage was observed at approximately 17 and 22 feet below grade during
drilling operations for Borings B-1 and B-2, respectively. The water level
remained constant in Boring B-2 after drilling operations. The bore hole caved in
at 17 feet after drilling operations ceased in Boring B-1. The driller's log for Boring
B-1 described the soil conditions below 20 feet as "flowing sands." The water
levels may fluctuate at this site due to perennial rainfall totals and/or perched
water seepage.
Ill. Analysis of Geotechnical Borings
a. Moisture Content
Moisture content is defined as the ratio of the weight of water to the weight of dry
soil in a given sample volume. Moisture content values are continuously recorded
for every foot of soil. Figure 6 plots the moisture content profile for each
geotechnical boring. As shown in Figure 6, the moisture contents ranged
between 11 and 26 percent.
BC! Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 7
b. Consistency and Strength Tests
BCI performed two test methods to further evaluate the strength and consistency
of the retrieved soil samples. Hand penetrometers are used to measure the
resistance to penetration of a soil. Typical hand penetrometer values range
between 1.0 tons per square foot (tsf) and 4.5 tsf, with 4.5 tsf being the largest
value able to be recorded on instrument. Figure 7 plots the hand penetrometer
values for each geotechnical boring. The other test method is the unconfined
compression test. This test is a special type of unconsolidated-undrained test
commonly used for clayey type soils. Unconfined compressive strength tests
provide a more accurate determination of the soil strength and consistency in
comparison to the hand penetrometer values. The results of both these tests are
located in the boring logs.
The unconfined compressive strength values ranged between 1008 pounds per
square foot (psf) and 4889 psf, indicative of moderate to very stiff soils. The
lowest unconfined compressive strength value (1008 psf) was recorded in Boring
B-1 in the upper one foot. As shown in Figure 4, this soil stratum is classified as
clayey sand. Unconfined compressive strength testing indicates the cohesive
properties of soils; it does not account for the shear strength characteristics of
coarse-grained soils. Therefore, unconfined compressive strength values are
typically lower for soils intermixed with fine-grained (clay, silt) and course-grained
(sand, gravel) particles.
c. Atterberg Limit
Atterberg limits describe the consistency of soils (typically fine-grained soils) with
varying moisture contents. Depending on the moisture content of a particular soil,
the behavior of the soil can be divided into four basic states — solid, semisolid,
plastic and liquid. Atterberg limits can also be important for the classification of a
soil sample. Atterberg limits generally comprise of two tests called the plastic limit
and liquid limit; however, a third test named the shrinkage limit can also be
performed. The moisture content at the point of transition from a semisolid to
plastic state is defined as the plastic limit. The moisture content at the point of
transition from a plastic state to liquid state is defined as the liquid limit.
BCI Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 8
There are several indices that are derived from the Atterberg limits and/or
moisture contents. Two of the more important indices are the plasticity index (PI)
and liquidity index (LI). The plasticity index is the difference between the liquid
and plastic limits. The plasticity index (PI) is the range over which a soil acts in a
plastic state. Geotechnical studies have shown that the more plastic a soil (i.e.,
possessing a higher plasticity), the more compressive and expansive it will act.
The PI values recorded at this site ranged from 9 to 19 percent indicative of low to
moderate plastic soils. However, the moisture content of the soils relative to their
plastic limits also play an important role in determining the volume change
potential at various moisture states. The liquidity index scales the moisture
content of a given soil relative to the Atterberg limits. If the liquidity index is
negative, the soil will behave as a brittle material (solid to semisolid state) and is
generally indicative of drier soil moisture conditions. If the liquidity index is
between 0 and 1, the soil will behave as a plastic material and is generally
indicative of wetter soil moisture conditions. If the liquidity index is greater than 1,
the soil will behave as a liquid. Generally, as the liquidity index increases, the soil
moisture conditions become increasingly wetter.
Figure 9 plots the liquidity index (LI) for each geotechnical boring. Based on
Figure 9, higher LI values were encountered in the upper three feet indicative of
wetter soil moisture conditions in the upper strata. However, drier soil conditions
were encountered between 3 to 7 feet based on lower LI values of -0.2 or lower.
Boring B-2 encountered comparatively the highest LI values at deeper depths
approaching 1.0, which corresponds to the documented water seepage at deeper
depths.
d. Total Soil Suction
Total soil suction refers to the measurement of the free energy state of the pore-
water exerted on the pore-water by the soil matrix. Where moisture content
values describe how much moisture is in the soil, total soil suction describes
where the moisture is going. In unsaturated soil conditions, soil moisture moves
from a location of low suction to areas of high suction, otherwise stated, from a
higher energy location to a lower energy location. Soil suction becomes the
dominant force for soil moisture flow in unsaturated soil conditions and the gravity
force component becomes comparably small.
BCI Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 9
The total soil suction values recorded at this site ranged from 3.36 to 3.68 pF,
which are qualitatively described as low to near equilibrium total soil suction
values. Figure 8 plots the total soil suction values for each geotechnical boring.
Soil moisture tends to migrate from wets soils to dry soils, or from low total soil
suction to areas of high to soil suction. Based on Figure 8, the total soil suction
values are near equal within the upper 15 feet.
e. Free Swell Tests
Absorption free swell tests were also performed on 6 selected samples to
evaluate the swell potential of these soils at their in-situ moisture and suction
states. The swell tests performed on the soil samples at their respective
overburden pressures indicate ranges of swells of -0.29% to 0.30%. The
complete results of these tests are presented in Figure 10. The average swell
value was approximately -0.06 percent, which indicates the lack of soil heave with
the addition of free water.
G. ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY PROFILES
Methods used to analyze and collect the field data, as well as interpretation of
these geo-electrical moisture/material imaging resistivity (GMMIR) profiles is
based upon a patented process, US Patent S/N 6,295,512. All rights reserved.
Resistivity profiling is used throughout the mining, engineering and environmental
fields to evaluate the moisture and material properties of rock materials.
I. Geoelectrical Imaging Assumptions
Two-dimensional subsurface objects are assumed in the inversion process which
implies that the resistivity structure modeled is parallel to the profile and has some
two-dimensional effects perpendicular to the profile. The resistivity technique
allows for some limited "sight" or three-dimensional effects away from the exact
profile line.
The resolution of electrical resistivity methods decreases exponentially with depth.
However, in the shallow subsurface, i.e., in the upper 100 feet of the earth, the
resolution power of the resistivity method is good. Use of resistivity imaging
BC! Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 10
coupled with control information from borings including true resistivity
measurements of the soil samples and the identification of stratigraphic
boundaries and subsurface water seepage from site-specific soil borings greatly
enhance the electrical resistivity tool.
Electrical resistivity methods do not provide information regarding the density of
the soil materials. Instead, they provide indications of the relative ease or
difficulty with which electrical current passes through the soil and rock materials
providing information regarding the moisture and material differences and
resistivity contrasts at a site with depth. The purpose of the electrical resistivity
profiling is to evaluate the variation of the subsurface and surficial expansive clay
soils encountered at this site.
II. Geoelectrical Computer Data Modeling
Two-dimensional computer inversions were performed using a least-squares
approximation to provide the "best fit" between the apparent resistivity field data
and the assumed computer resistivity structure model.
The electrical resistivity scale shown on the profile was truncated at 500 ohm-m to
provide a uniform scale of resistivity values for comparison purposes. Actual
resistivity values of the soils and/or materials in the red areas may be slightly
greater than 500 ohm-m.
Ill. Geophysical Exploration
As shown on Figure 11, the color scales of Profile R1 range from "ice" blue to
brown. The "ice" blue color represents the lowest resistivity values on the order of
1.5 ohm-m or less while the brown color represents the highest measured
resistivity value on the order of 500 ohm-m. For discussion purposes of this
report, BCI has outlined its terminology regarding the classification of the color
scale shown on the resistivity profile:
BCI Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 11
0 to 3.0 ohm-m: extremely low
3.0 to 7.5 ohm-m: low
7.5 to 15 ohm-m: moderately low
15 to 30 ohm-m: moderate
30 to 50 ohm-m: moderately high
50 to 500 ohm-m: high to very high
The following paragraphs summarize the relationship between these resistivity
values (and the subsequent colors) and their respective soil types and moisture
states.
Resistivity values on the order of 3.0 ohm-m or less as shown by "ice" blue colors
are usually indicative of wet to very wet soils with some possible associated water
seepage. Based on the GMMIR profile, no extremely low resistivity values were
encountered at this site.
Relatively low resistivity soils (3.0 to 7.5 ohm-m) were recorded in each of the
GMMIR profiles. Typically, these resistivity values are indicative of high PI clays
and/or a soil regime having high moisture contents in relation to their
corresponding plastic limits. Based on the soil conditions encountered, we are of
the opinion that these low resistivity values are indicative of soils with their
moisture contents above their respective plastic limit values.
Moderately low resistivity values (7.5 to 15 ohm-m) are represented by green
colors. Typically, these values represent a drier clayey soil regime having
moisture contents at or lower than their corresponding plastic limits and/or lower
PI clay materials with concentrations of sand, silt and/or gravel. Based on existing
soil conditions encountered in Borings B-1 and B-2, moderately low resistivity
values represent lower PI clay soils with sand and silt identified as sandy lean clay
in the boring logs.
Moderate resistivity values on the order of 15 to 24 ohm-m are represented by the
yellow and orange colors. Considering the soil conditions at this site, resistivity
values of this magnitude are indicative of more granular-type soils such as clayey
sands.
BCI Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 12
Based on Profile R1, low resistivity values were encountered between moderately
low to moderate resistivity values. These conditions were reflected in the
geotechnical borings. No anomalous subsurface condition(s) are readily apparent
in Profile R1. The moisture and material properties of the soil samples retrieved
from the geotechnical borings does not appear to significantly deviate from the
house pad based on Profile R1.
H. ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
I. Foundation System Options
The active clays encountered at this site are subject to moisture related volume
changes. The soils at this site were relatively dry to moist within the active zone
based upon the March 17, 2004 geotechnical study. The dry state of the
underlying clays could cause some upward movement with the absorption of free
water.
Various types of foundation systems currently are used for support of residential
structures. The three most common types of foundation systems used in the
Houston area are the following:
• Type 1. Pier-and-beam foundations with deep drilled shafts founded below
the zone of seasonal moisture variation and the with the floor system
suspended above grade.
• Type 2. Slab-on-grade foundation systems supported on drilled shaft
extending below the zone of seasonal moisture variation.
• Type 3. Slab-on-grade foundation systems that are supported in the
shallow surface soils.
Further, two perspectives of foundation design are inherent in these foundation
systems. The first perspective, Mode "A", is the design of the slab-on-grade
foundations from a soil-structure interaction standpoint to withstand excessive
deflections, shear and bending moments. The second perspective, Mode `B", is
the design of the interior floor systems and deep pier foundation systems in the
BCI Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 13
case for Type 1 or Type 2 to withstand these shears, moments and deflections. In
each of these designs, compatibility between the interior and exterior cosmetic
finishes and the foundation rigidity or flexibility must be considered.
Obviously, some level of risk is associated with all types of foundation systems
and a zero-risk foundation system does not exist. Further, post-construction
homeowner maintenance of the foundations including, but not limited to
maintenance of positive drainage around the house on all sides and the planting
of vegetation no closer than its mature height to the foundation are essential for
performance of all types of foundations and especially Type 2 and Type 3
foundations in Mode "A" design and in Type 1 foundations in Mode "B" design.
This achievement of site equilibrium is the cornerstone of the PTI design, which
assumes that the slab-on-grade foundation is affected only by climatic changes in
the moisture addition and moisture subtraction in the soil and that the soils have
achieved an equilibrium state with their surrounding climatic conditions.
Each of above referenced systems is considered viable for various site conditions.
In sites with potential near surface ground water or surface water seepage and/or
sites with dry or highly expansive clays and deep fills, the surficial soils must be
treated by replacement with more inert soils, injection with chemicals or water,
and/or possible other drainage considerations before a Type 3 foundation system
would be recommended. If these site conditions are not corrected prior to
construction, then the Type 1 design is considered to be the most positive
foundation option.
Further, even with treatment of the soils, the Type 2 and Type 3 foundations must
still be designed to withstand climatic fluctuations in moisture around the
foundation and some movements are to be expected in these systems. In these
situations, a Type 1 foundation will be the most positive foundation type from a
geo-structural soil-structure interaction perspective (Mode "A"), and the other
systems will inherently have more risk of differential movements due to soil-
structure interactions. In situations were inert or low expansive soils or fills are
present and concerns regarding downward movements or settlements exist, then
the use of a Type 2 foundation may be most appropriate.
BCI Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 14
In BCI's opinion, the selection of the most appropriate foundation system for a
given site is a function of many factors including, but not limited to: 1) the soil and
rock conditions, 2) the climate, 3) the presence of vegetation, 4) the drainage and
site topography, 5) the economics of the market, 6) customer requirements, 7)
city or government requirements, 8) warranty company and mortgage company
requirements and 9) the level of risk acceptable to the owners and developers for
the project.
II. Type 1 Foundation System
BCI understands that a Type 1 design is currently being considered for this site.
In addition, BCI understands that the finish foundation floor will be approximately
4 to 5 feet above current grade elevation to improve drainage conditions and
lower the risk of flooding. All depths documented hereinto in this report are in
reference to the ground elevation at the time of our investigation in March 2004.
From a purely geotechnical soil-structure interaction perspective or Mode "A"
design, Type 1 is the least risky foundation system. However, the Type 1
foundation system is subject to post-construction movement if the drilled piers are
not stable and the wood elements are subject to moisture effects, which can lead
to structural floor support issues unless proper drainage is provided in and around
the crawl space of this system (Mode "B").
The active soils encountered at this site are subject to some moisture related
volume changes. Any shallow or near-surface type of foundation system could be
subject to some differential movements. Foundations for the proposed structures
that are founded below the zone of seasonal moisture variations would be the
most positive means of supporting the proposed structures. The pier-and-beam
foundation system provides a structurally suspended floor slab supported above
grade on drilled shafts extending below the zone of seasonal moisture variation.
Based upon review of the total soil suction laboratory test results and the soil
suction profile (Figure 8), we are of the opinion that a constant total soil suction
value of 3.5 pF at a depth of 12 feet is reasonable for this site. The depth to
constant suction will terminate within a lean clay with sand stratum as described in
Figures 4 and 5.
BCI Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 15
a. Static Pier Analysis
For a Type 1 foundation system, the following information is provided for general
consideration and is accurate for the total boring depth of 35 feet which was
scheduled for this site. The design parameters for proprietary piering systems
and for depths below 35 feet should be further estimated and evaluated by the
design structural engineer.
In general, the total allowable resistance for a cast-in-place piling system is
comprised of both end bearing and side resistance components. Depending upon
the layering and soils present at depth, it is difficult to estimate at what pile
deformation the individual components of end or side resistance will be mobilized.
However, the rule is that some components of both the end bearing and the side
resistance will be mobilized immediately upon loading and deformation. However,
Vesic (1977) reports that it takes substantially less strain or deformation (on the
order of 0.25 to 0.5 inches) to mobilize the side resistance component for piles
regardless of pile size and length in contrast to the end bearing component
mobilization of ultimate point resistance of a pile which requires a displacement on
the order of approximately 10 percent of the pile tip diameter for driven piles and
as much as 30 percent of the pile tip diameter for bored piles.
Coyle and Reese (1966) indicate that in determining the load capacity of a pile,
consideration should be given to the relative deformations between the soil and
the pile as well as the compressibility of the soil pile system. The ultimate skin
friction increments along the pile are not necessarily directly additive, nor is the
ultimate end bearing additive to the ultimate skin friction or side resistance.
Therefore, as a general rule, it is difficult to predict the soil-structure interaction for
drilled piers or piles and a conservative approach should be taken by the design
engineer with end bearing considered as a factor of safety.
Based on the presence of water seepage at depths of approximately 17 to 22 feet
below grade, cast-in-place piers should bear above the documented water table.
Based upon the allowable bearing pressure equation for deep foundations, an
allowable end bearing resistance of 3,500 pounds per square foot (psf) is
calculated for piers bearing in the sandy lean clay stratum between 13 to 21 feet
below grade using a factor of safety of 3.
BC! Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 16
Assuming the piers are bearing approximately 15 feet below grade with an end
bearing pressure of 3,500 psf, based on the consolidation test, the primary
consolidation settlement for these piers would be less than 1-inch. However, if
the water table rises near the surface due to climatic conditions, the estimated
primary consolidation settlement would be on the order of 1-1/4 inches. Based on
soil types and loading conditions, BCI is of the opinion that some of the estimated
consolidation settlement will occur during construction, or shortly thereafter.
Based upon the allowable bearing pressure equation for deep foundations, an
allowable side resistance of 450 psf is recommended for compressive loading and
325 psf is recommended to resist tensile uplift forces (using a factor of safety of 2)
for piers bearing in the yellowish gray sandy lean clay stratum. These side
resistance values should be used below the moisture and movement active zone,
which in this case is estimated at 12 feet below existing grade. Depth of
embedment will be reduced when considering the amount of dead load on the
pier. Some caution should be used in application of dead load to reduce pier
length and we recommend that the structural design engineer provide accurate
estimates and bases for the dead load values used.
Uplift resistance may also be derived from using an underreamed bell, which
should be between 2.5 and 3 times the shaft diameter founded below the zone of
seasonal moisture variation. The pier should be continuously reinforced to resist
the soil-induced uplift loads and any other structural loads influencing the
structure as dictated by the structural design engineer. The actual uplift
resistance of the bell due to cohesive and friction modes of shear failure should
be analyzed by the project structural engineer. Additional construction and design
recommendations should be provided by the proprietary piering system
manufacturer and the design structural engineer.
b. Estimated Soil Induced Uplift Pressures
The active clay soils encountered at this site will induce some upward forces on
piers/piles placed at this site. Based upon our soil property correlations,
assuming that the upper 12 feet of the soils are within the moisture and movement
BCI Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 17
active zone, we estimate that the uplift forces for piers/piles placed at this site will
be approximately 800 psf acting uniformly around the shaft perimeter.
c. Construction Considerations
Concrete used for the shafts should have a slump of six (6) inches plus or minus
one (1) inch and be placed in a manner to avoid striking the reinforcing steel and
walls of the shaft during placement. Complete installation of individual shafts
should be accomplished with an 8-hour period in order to help prevent
deterioration of bearing surfaces. The drilling of individual shafts should be
excavated in a continuous operation and concrete placed as soon as practical
after completion of the drilling. No shaft should be left open for more than eight
hours or overnight. Water seepage was encountered at approximately 17 to 22
feet below grade. The bore hole caved in at 17 and 21 feet below grade after
drilling operations ceased. BCI recommends that the end bearing of the
underreamed piers should be installed above these depths, if seepage does not
allow construction, but not less than 15 feet. Due to the presence of water
seepage, casing of the pier hole should be anticipated. If pier depths are less
than 15 feet from existing grade, then BCI should be contacted to evaluate this
effect on bearing and settlement.
We recommend that the project structural design engineer be retained to observe
and document the drilled shaft construction. The engineer, or his representative,
should document the shaft diameter, depth, cleanliness, and plumbness of the
shaft and the type of bearing material immediately prior to placement of the
concrete. Significant deviations from the specified or anticipated conditions
should be reported to the owner's representative and to the foundation designer.
The drilled shaft excavations should be observed after the bottom of the hole is
leveled, cleared of any mud or extraneous material, and dewatered, if necessary
and immediately before placement of concrete. The pier excavations should be
free of loose soil, ponded water or debris.
If the structural engineer deems necessary, a void box may be installed
underneath the grade beams. Based on the PVM values calculated at this site,
the void box should have a minimum depth of 4 inches.
BCI Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 18
III. Type 2 Foundation System
In situations were inert or low expansive soils or fills are present and concerns
regarding downward movements or settlements exist, then the use of a Type 2
foundation may be most appropriate. Based on the soil conditions encountered at
this site, BCI is of the opinion that a Type 2 foundation system would be a viable
alternative to a Type 1 system. Type 2 foundation systems will allow upward
movement but will help mitigate downward movement if the piers are designed
and founded properly.
Applicable design parameters for a Type 2 foundation system may be found in
the sections labeled Type 1 Foundation System and Type 3 Foundation
System. Inherent risks for slab-on-grade foundation systems are further
discussed in the Foundation System Options section of the report.
IV. Type 3 Foundation System
The performance of these various systems is a function of the materials
supporting them. Obviously, slab-on-grade foundations supported in the
moisture active zone of the soil profile will potentially move differentially and
behave differently than a completely suspend floor slab in Type 1 or by a pier
supported slab as described by Type 2. Type 3 foundations are inherently
subjected to more differential foundation movement; however, proper site
preparation and appropriate structural design of slab-on-grade foundation
systems allows their use in most circumstances.
The owner should realize that a greater risk of movement is associated with a
slab-on-grade foundation system, and some differential movements will occur
through time. Control of these movements is a function of the maintenance of
uniform moisture beneath and around the slab and proper placement of fill
materials. The slab-on-grade design parameters provided in this report are based
upon climatic effects only, and do not include the adverse affects of ponded water,
previous or future trees, fill settlement, and utility line leaks or extreme moisture
fluctuations due to capillary action of subterranean groundwater. Some
differential movement of the slab should be anticipated during the life of the slab
due to equilibration of moisture contents beneath the slab which prevents
evapotranspiration of moisture from the ground.
BCI Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 19
The effects of the trees or ponding water near the foundation may be modeled, if
they are considered as higher risk possible conditions. Every effort should be
made by the structural design engineer and homeowner to discuss these issues
and develop appropriate remedial schemes to address them prior to construction.
If these adverse effects are considered to be likely based upon the final house
placement location, grading issues and tree/vegetation issues, then BCI can help
model their effects, if any. Please notify us in writing if these adverse effects are
to be considered in our analysis and recommendations.
If the differential movements and total movements outlined in this report are not
acceptable, or if concerns over external environmental effects from trees, utility
line leaks, fill settlement or groundwater fluctuations are considered a large
concern, then we recommend using a Type 1 or Type 2 foundation system.
a. Estimated Potential Vertical Movements
The soils present at this site consist predominantly of lean clays with low to
moderate movement potential. In general, the clays were dry to moist at the time
of the field investigation and will possibly experience volume changes with
fluctuations in their moisture content.
The lightly loaded interior floor slab placed on-grade will be subject to potential
movement as a result of moisture induced volume changes in the surficial clays.
Potential Vertical Movement (PVM) calculations for various soil profiles at the site
were performed using the Texas Highway Department's Method (TxDOT) TEX
124-E, soil suction testing and our engineering judgment and are summarized in
Table 1.
The PVM values presented below do not include the effects of differential
movements from uncontrolled water sources such as poor drainage, utility line
leaks or migration of subsurface water from off site locations. These movements
are total vertical movements and do not consider differential swell between any
two points on the ground surface. The potential vertical movement (PVM) values
provided above are based upon the soil stratigraphy found in the boring logs. If
final grades are changed ± 18 inches, then BCI should be notified in writing so
BCI Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 20
that we can review the effects of these grading changes upon the PVM values
and other geotechnical issues.
A reinforced (conventional rebar or post-tensioned) monolithic, slab-on-grade
foundation system will need proper design and construction to resist and/or
tolerate the moisture induced movements of the clays without inducing
unacceptable distress in the foundation or superstructure.
On the basis of laboratory tests and estimates of PVM, we recommend that the
potential vertical movements (PVM) as outlined in Table 1 are used for slab
design calculations at this site without any soil modification considering the cut
and fill operations do not differ more than ± 18 inches from the available
preliminary grading plans. These movements are total vertical movements and do
not consider differential swell between any two points on the ground surface. If
fills of more than 18 inches are contemplated with imported fills or with fills of
higher plasticity indices than on-site soils samples in Borings B-1 and B-2, then
BCI should be notified in writing so we can evaluate the impact of these fills, if
any.
b. Post-Tensioning Slab Design Parameters
Design criteria for a slab designed in accordance with the Post-Tensioning
Institute's (PTI) slab-on-grade design method have been developed. The PTI
computer program (VOLFLO) was used to derive the PTI differential movements
(ym). We recommend that the structural engineer consider the limitations of the
VOLFLO program by noting that the PTI VOLFLO algorithm provides minimum
design parameters for slab-on-grade foundation system design. The structural
engineer's judgment and experience should also be used to design the slab-on-
grade system to account for variations in conditions affecting ym and em values
including review of the final grading plans to allow for construction over deep cut
and fill sections where some settlements may occur.
The edge moisture variation distances (em) for center lift and edge lift conditions
were derived based on an Thornthwaite Index of +15 for the project site using the
criteria provided in the PTI manual and other, more conservative methodologies.
BCI Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 21
The edge moisture variation distances provided below in Table 1 are based upon
the PTI manual minimum guidelines.
The PTI design parameters provided below are applicable if adverse site
conditions have been corrected and soil moisture conditions are controlled by the
climate alone (i.e., not improper drainage, unforeseen subsurface seepage,
placement of uncontrolled or deep fills, vegetation influence or water leaks). The
performance of slab and movement magnitudes can be significantly influenced by
landscaping maintenance, water line leaks, and trees present before and after
construction.
The Post-Tensioning Institute (PTI) method incorporates numerous design
assumptions associated with the derivation of required variables needed to
determine the soil design criteria. The PTI design also assumes that the site
possesses positive drainage directed away from the structure and that the slab
perimeter moisture regime will be uniformly maintained during the useful life-cycle
of the post-tensioned slab.
Table 1. Recommended PVM and PTI Slab Design Parameters
Boring Center Lift Condition Edge Lift Condition
PVM from Edge Moisture Estimated Edge Moisture Estimated
TxDOT Variation Differential Variation Differential
Dry Distance em, ft Movement ym, in Distance em, ft Movement ym, in
B-1 and B-2 1-1/2* 4.6 1.5 5.2 1.0
"on the order of
Exterior grade and interior stiffener beams may be proportioned using an
allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) for beams
placed in undisturbed natural soils. Exterior grade and interior stiffener beams
may be proportioned using an allowable soil bearing pressure of 1,500 pounds
per square foot (psf) for beams placed in properly compacted and monitored fill.
We recommend that a field quality assurance soil testing laboratory/inspector
observe the grade beam excavations prior to placing concrete. The foundation
BC! Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 22
bearing area should be level or suitably benched. It should be free of loose soil,
ponded water and debris prior to the inspection.
The PTI design parameters provided in Table 1 are based upon climatic
fluctuations in the moisture conditions around the slab. More severe conditions
such as ponded water standing around the slab and/or the presence of vegetation
planted near the perimeter of the foundation are not considered in the above
design parameters. Movement magnitudes approaching the PVM values in Table
1 are possible if severe drainage conditions, ponded water, or plumbing leaks are
occur. As a result, the above PTI design parameters are contingent upon positive
drainage and vegetation planted at least the mature height of the vegetation away
from the slab perimeter and properly compacted fills placed beneath and around
the slab perimeter.
I. EARTHWORK GUIDELINES
I. Site Grading
Any future cut and fill operations should be supervised by a qualified testing
laboratory. A set of general guidelines for additions! earthwork required at this
site are provided in Appendix 1 — Guidelines for the Placement of Controlled
Earthwork of this report.
Deep fill sections, other than minor fills produced during slab leveling of less than
6 inches, that will support the grade beams, should extend a minimum of 3 feet
beyond the building line and then slope to natural grade on as fiat a slope as
practical or the fill section should be retained by a properly designed retaining
wall. Generally, a maximum slope of 4 horizontal to 1 vertical is recommended.
BCI should be contacted to provide additional recommendations if any slopes
greater than 4 horizontal to 1 vertical or over 4 feet are planned within the project
site so that slope stability analyses can be performed, if deemed necessary based
upon the project specifics and upon written notification of the project structural
engineer after final grading and design have been performed.
If soft or compressible zones are identified during site grading and construction, or
if obvious uncontrolled fill materials are noted between the boring locations within
BCI Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 23
the building pad areas, then these areas should be over-excavated and replaced
with properly compacted on-site fill or select fill.
II. Surface Drainage
Proper consideration to surface drainage is essential to the performance of a
monolithic slab-on-grade. The overall grading must provide for positive drainage
away from the structure.
All grades must be adjusted to provide positive drainage away from the structure.
As a minimum, all grades and swales shall be constructed to meet FHA minimum
standards. It is recommended that slopes of about 2 to 3 percent be maintained a
reasonable distance away from the perimeter of the structures to ensure that
positive drainage is provided around the structures. The drainage swales and
grades should be maintained for the life of the structure by the homeowner.
Water permitted to pond next to the structures can result in soil movements that
exceed those indicated in this report. Roof drains should divert water well away
from the structure.
Sidewalks and other concrete flatwork may also be subject to movement. Flat
grades should be avoided particularly adjacent to the slab-on-grade foundation.
Areas around sidewalks or drives should be graded to prevent trapping and
holding water adjacent to these facilities or the residential foundation systems.
III. Compaction Recommendations
Compaction requirements for the various material types may be summarized in
Table 2.
BC! Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 24
Table 2. Compaction Recommendations for Various Materials
Material Type Areas for Use Compaction to Recommended
ASTM D698 at (x) of Thickness
Optimum Moisture (in)
as required
Imported Fill Building Pad 95% at (0 to +5)%* for grade
modification
as required for
On-site Fill Outside Building 95% at (-2 to +3)% grade
_ Pad modification
In-situ Soil Beneath all fill 95% at (0 to +5)% 6 inches
Subgrade and pavements minimum
*/f fill depths exceeds three feet in depth underneath the building pad, BCI recommends a
minimum compaction effort of 98% of the maximum dry density according to ASTM D-698.
BCI Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 25
J. LIMITATIONS AND REPRODUCTIONS
This geotechnical/geophysical Report is based on information supplied by the owner and/or others, and a visual survey of
the elements exposed to Bryant Consultants, Inc. at the time of the field investigation. Bryant Consultants, Inc. will not be
responsible for 1) knowledge of subsurface conditions substantially away from the borings and profiles 2) knowledge of
cracks, or differential displacements that have occurred in a floor slab or flatwork without removing the floor covering and
3) any other element such as joists or beams and other structural members that are not readily visible by us. The boring
and GMMIR profile locations were approximately determined by tape measurements from existing physical features. The
locations and elevations of the borings should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the methods used.
Geophysical inverse methods are subject to errors and interpretation away from the profile line. Environmental errors may
result in in-exact data which will provide some variation in the theoretical resistivity models after inversions of the same
data sets. Non-uniqueness of the inverted data also may produce similar resistivity structure models using different raw
data sets. Use of resistivity coupled with control information from borings including true resistivity measurements of the soil
samples, identification of stratigraphic boundaries and the presence of groundwater greatly enhance the electrical
resistivity tool.
The conclusions and visual observations of this report are based in part upon the data obtained in the borings and upon
the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate from those observed. Any latent distress in areas not exposed
cannot be anticipated without further destructive and/or intrusive testing. Unanticipated soil conditions are commonly
encountered and cannot be fully determined by soil samples, test borings, or test pits. BCI further assumes that the
conclusions drawn from this information are based in part on information gathered by others. Fluctuations in the level of
the groundwater may occur due to variations in rainfall, temperatures, and other factors not present at the time the
measurements were made. Samples obtained during the field operations will be retained 30 days after the issue date on
the report. After this period, we will discard the samples unless otherwise notified by the owner in writing before the end of
this period.
The observations, discussions, recommendations and conclusions in this report are based solely on the geotechnical and
geophysical explorations. If any additional information becomes available, then BCI reserves the right to evaluate the
impact of this information on our opinions and conclusions and to revise our opinions and conclusions if necessary and
warranted after review of the new information. The observed conditions are subject to change with the passage of time.
This report does not constitute a guarantee or warranty as to future life, performance, need for repair or suitability for any
other purpose at this site but as an evaluation only and that design and implementation of any repairs are responsibilities of
others. Silence in this report regarding any environmental issues should not be a tacit assumption that the potential for
environmental issues does not exist. Any environmental evaluation or investigation was beyond the scope of this report
and should be performed by others, if warranted. This investigation was performed by Bryant Consultants, Inc. and the
engineer in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently
practicing in the same locality under similar conditions.
Unless otherwise indicated, this geotechnical report was prepared exclusively for Mr. Steve Glass. and expressly for
purposes indicated by for Mr. Steve Glass. Permission for use by any other persons for any purpose, or by Mr. Steve
Glass for a different purpose must be provided by Bryant Consultants, Inc. in writing.
Any use made of this investigation and/or the conclusions and recommendations contained herein and any reliance
thereon shall be specifically subject to the following limitation of liability: In recognition of the relative risk and benefits of
the project to user and BCI, the risks have been allocated such that user agrees, to the fullest extent permitted by law, to
limit the liability of BCI to user for any and all claims, losses, costs, damages of any nature whatsoever or claims expenses
from any cause or causes, including attorney's fees and costs and expert witness fees and costs, so that the total
aggregate liability of the BCI to user shall not exceed five thousand dollars ($2_500.00) unless otherwise specifically agreed
in writing. It is intended that this limitation apply to any and all liability or causes of action however alleged or arising,
unless otherwise prohibited by law. For the purpose of this provision, BCI shall include the officers, directors,
shareholders, partners, agents, servants and employees of BCI. This limitation is applicable to BCI's negligence or other
fault in whole or in part.
The reproduction of this report, or any part thereof, supplied to persons other than the owner, should indicate that this
study was made for foundation design purposes only and that verification of the subsurface conditions for purposes of
determining difficulty of excavation, traffic ability, etc., are responsibilities of others. Slope stability analyses are beyond
BCI Project 04-089
Proposed Glass Residence Page 26
the scope of this project. These services may be performed at an additional cost upon your written request. Should you
have any questions pertaining to any aspect of this report, or if we can be of further assistance to you, please do not
hesitate to call on us.
801 Project 04-089
_5_
r
Elizabeth Road
S
oi
ill Lot 6
R1 1 ,
Lot 4 Lot 5 Lot 7 Lot 8 0
0
B-2 i CC
,_ I
C)
0 Q
S
S
a
a
a
S
Drainage Ditch
NORTH
GMMIR Profile and Boring Location Plan
Note: Boring and GMMIR Profile locations are approximate. SCALE. —70
Bryant Consultants,Inc.
13 2033 Chenault Dr. figure 1
Suite 150 project. 9221 Elizabeth Road
Carrollton,Texas 75001 job no. 04-089
R Y A N T Ph. (972)713-9109 Houston, Texas
FAX(972)713-9171 by SMA insp. 3/17/04
w
lizabeth Road
0
Lots
Lot 4 Lot 5 Lot 7 Lot 8 0
0
0
•
0
9
• „,
•
•
R
•
Drainage Ditch
NORTH
Tree Survey
Note: Tree locations are approximate. SCALE: 1 =70'
Bryant Consultants,Inc.
2033 Chenault Dr. figure 2
Suite 150 project. 9221 Elizabeth Road
Carrollton,Texas 75001 job no. 04-089
R Y A N T Ph. (972)713-9109 Houston, Texas
FAX(972)713-9171 by SMA insp. 5/17/04
vawidsv
i
I I.
1. •
, =
^ -
..,..
"'1.7,h;i , •,4=,
.. , . ,
,..
r, , • .•
• .
?'1
d
,.
.,`:,
.3e ... ,
„..
,- ' : . • - f . ,-.`, .*.
- .
r-.,' "
'
-,..-- .; . '' - -1-—4^.-,'• '.^_=.; 7.! ' ' • 1 11,"'' ' '-, ; 4.P. 1,1""--..".,hf''.'''';'''''''..
.4';. . :, v-. _ ...:::.. ...;.-P...• ,...:::!,. . „ .:,,,.
,.. ,- -, ,:-..- - - t,' ,,,5.4, -,, ,' , 4, ,' .-, ',-...,• . ',,- -
,
at. _
...
' "c 1'1 ..4■.
,.
CI .• '''' L, r.,......tr - _, lf....ft.,,,f,:z.:4' ":.S;i^: A":. ,,h
'' ..' Alt ■....',,''P'..11:,5,, 41..4-t-':.,
i..■•• .'..'.' '‘-'4 v..,"^--- 7.. -:---::-.- —
,s,,' % 1.' ,..
i
,- , ..
`—., ,- ..x.,.:-.,
- 444:,..^.^. .4,, :_.4. „_4..:, -.- , 4 ,,,-
- -- -
'
''','-'"c.-.1 . - 44 ■ ■ '- . .:4.:'4-
- ,
. -
>, . .
,...:.,,: ,,4^^^ ^,-;;^ ..-
':".-.':'$:, il, "t, '',..=' -'1',. -'■,1 .
.;••:.•:7A,t, .:••. 4 , ,, I
. 4. ' . - ' '''
'41:::".=.1‘.•.:.•1;■•',• '. ...% • ''''''`
,1.••.:r.:.i,., '•..i.fi: 'PI•I'.t
..t ',.
,' .: '• ,i "slr"144e.`
.,'"' '. c -. ^`,.'" • ,
. -
. ,
. '
... ,
, .
- . .
' I .
1 '1
Legend
- smcDsiii ----mtmmon Feet -----------.
0 50 100 200 , Harris County Soil Survey
Ak - Addicks-Urban land complex
Figure 3 - GIS Map of Site
i
! 1
---]
Bryant Consultants, Inc. LOG OF BORING 8-1
Dallas, TX
Residence at Dale Drilled 3/17/2094 "N,ii.Standard Penetration Test
9221 Elizabeth Road Ground Elevarion .Existing Grade -T.Modified Cone Penetration Test
_ Houston,Texas 77055 Cas:rtg To NA
BC1-0'4-089 Drilling Method Cora Flight Auger
Joe Glass
, , ..........
-1-1---r-
, -+-7-
-7., ...... . ..0 .o 12
.,.,.. ...... .....„, - ,.... ......-
d., • , ,- 1,.: 2;',.. Ci ........
.0 = 'E.' ..,... ''''''' ""'" tr., 0 '5 ''•" 3: P 0
E I 0 .rz q•• iii,.6 i‘< - i-- 1.1i-- - 4= 0 —
0 o A./ <-2
i
Depth 8 al LI P. i-= -5 z 2> c., C
:
DESCRIPTION
• E -,,..,
r.;0 (11 .... 2 0 25 CT It a.
...____
0
Stiff Olive Black,Brownish Black to Dusky 17 106 30 16 14 48 3,45 1.0 18,8 1008 113.P
..I- Yellowish Brown CLAYEY SAND with occasional
2 •.,..- -. ,,iron are nodules and roots. 1 2,5
18 • 108 35 16 19 78.4 17,3 3,50 225 2610 1 15.0
3 :„ii,:iit i.. Very Stiff Dark Yellowish Brown,Brownish Gray
A -;,-.:,..•::::: to Dark Yellowish Brown LEAN CLAY with sand, 16 -i 3,75 12.6
' Oitlit A
occasional iron ore nodules,black inclusions and 13 30 1,8 12 146 4.5+
5 04 kroots.
47-1 13 4,5+
6 itit4
• Stiff to Hard Pale Yellowish Brown,Yellowish Gray
7,40.4
to Dark Yellowish Brown LEAN CLAY with sand, 17 3.36 1,25 12.2
,„..•-.4.ifg occasional to few calcareous&iron ore nodules 20 1101 1,25 1943 15,0
8' 10 and black inclusions.
itli*l 18 29 16 13 74.0 18,1 3,50 2.5 9.6
9 i taiit 21 1.0
I1 12:r/
h. 13'77/1 Hard Yellowish Gray,Pinkish Gray to Grayish
. .,, i
• 1417 mg Orange SANDY LEAN CLAY occasional iron ore 15 118 33 16 17 88.8 18.8 3451 4.5+ 12.6 3992 15.0
t /5---,•,- i Wit nodules and iron staining. ' I
/
Ii
$ 16 y
,
A
▪; '17-,./ ' i
Pr I '
-7,-; ,i 1 1
18 64 1,s. '
t, .4
n• 19 .0.16i,t iiis
,t.c? 20 141 .11.11 " 16 115 , 1 i
168 43+ 10,7 1689 10.8
Driller log described stratum as Flowmg Sand . I 1 •
1
Recovery of soil sample not possible.
il .4-1
--i 22- I 1
1 I
til 1 ,
i I 1
24 s ,,___,,I i
- I 1*N=13
- X11 i I
i,i .>5_../ ...–......
.=P -- -1
1 !
21-'- 1
"X
T-1 ol.
,...,
"I 29--f I
.:....i 30
la 31-1
if
1" '2.--i
a: '- i
0 33-1 1
1
! I 1
i 1 i
s-- —4
•-..----,-----..--..---,-- —
I I
.
!;-.. -I Borino Scneduled to and 1 erminated at 35 Feet.
.
36---1
Note:Water seepage encountered at 17 feet dunno
371 drilling operations. Bore hole caved 10 at 17 feet
Figure 4
I :
---. _ .................... ___...... .„-
—..........,...„ ,.....,..... . — -, ....„...
.1
Bryant Consultants, Inc. LOG OF BORING B-2
i Dallas, TX
I,
1 i
. ..._
Residerice at + Date Drilled ,3/1712904 •N.Stamford Penetration Test
9221 Elizabeth Road Ground Eievation ,Existing Grade -I.Modifier.,Cone Penetration Test
L. Houston,Texas 77055 riesng To NA
I i BC1-04.089 Driiiing method Cont.Flight Auger
I Joe Glass i
r I I i
1
-,,r,
0
re I 2".` g c„ 0 0
--c,"
01
- 3:',,.,,,,,,,, "6
t. .:,s,
,4 i 0 0 .,..j
et 1 t.' . g. 73
DESCRIPTION R zs--' ::::1 —I :.— c:A an
i
'0 'L'.. 0- 12 m co o o
I Lo co .'-';'. L.J-0 I L o.. 2 _ 0,.. i- — o) u_
. 5 a I °Li..1 0_
1 1,-•:, ' Grayish Orange SAND(FILL).
1,75 1750
Very Stiff Dark Yellowish Brown,Brownish Gray 21: 1(14 32 1 15 17 68 48
3, 2.5 11.8
2- iiii to Dark Yellowish Brown SANDY LEAN CLAY with
3 ,4 . \occasional iron ore nodules and rootlets,
Stiff Light Olive Gray.Yellowish 15
Very Stiff to Hard Mohr Olive ray.Yellowish Gray
15 115 2.75
34 18 18 66.5 18.0 3,46 4.5+ 12.9 3459 6.0
,to Pale Yellowish Brown SANDY LEAN CLAY with 11 1 ,4.25
;r0
occasional iron ore nodules and black inclusions. if 12 25 i 15 10 69,3 16.4 3,4914,5+
g
, 6.k•'
' '410,„ Stiff to Hard Yellowish Gray,Light Olive Gray to 14 1175 16.6
" 7 ;,,Af..:- Grayish Orange SANDY LEAN CLAY with
I '
,411 -Orange 1 °
, 8 Xit.-1 tOccasional to few ca careous&iron ore nodules 17 3,47 3.0
land black inclusions. / 18 114 1 779 19.7 2.25 107 2879 14.9
Very Stiff Grayish Orange,Light Gray to Dark 17 34 17 17 3A61 2.5 1
Yellowish Orange LEAN CLAY with sand, I 1
ti 11_ ,,,t,-;,,,, 1 occasional iron ore nodules and iron staining.
,/
:21 12 , !
1 i
1 1 i
i
t.I
"/ Stiff I
1 Stiff to Very Stiff Yellowish Gray,Light Gray to 1 I
1
-4-i 1 4 y 1111 1 Grayish Orange SANDY LEAN CLAY with 19 114 1 1348 1.5 7,9 1199 14.9
t i 15--i t 11111. 'occasional iron ore nodules and iron staining. I
, 1
i , 1
$
7 /1
is 1 --t,.., 3 1 I
1 , , 1 /71
th 18---v 1
E 19-4 ;mai
/ i
i 1
19 112 28 17 I 11 54, 3434.251 11.7 3297 1 9,5
at V
16 - ii
'7 -:-.?„.,„.-,.-' ---- I I 1 1
,
a` Moderate Yellowish Brown,Yellowish Gray to
A
1 Grayish Orange SANDY LEAN CLAY with i I
I,
Occasional iron ore nodules arid iron staining 1 i
egir,t. f\---71, ..,,_,,..,
`---P!.. it i , IN—,.-U
26 28 19 1 9 63 I
gi25 ',- ' ' '
2 6 and _
Boring Scheduled to and Terminated at 25 reet,
I
27 1
.,-....-I i Note:- Seepage water encountered at 22 feet
during drilling_ Water level was approximately 22
feet after 2 hours arid boring caved at 21 feet at
„
i
_-_-
i ,--- completion.
711
V .
,c4 i -1
....4.1 ,r)__
5 .-,..
-J
..
33-1
',,1
II
41
35-'
;7 i 36---'
F.igiare 5 i
•
•
F.....„. ...�........-..... «. ...-..- .�.. ..�. - Q
, co
J
co
i N
1 — co
N
ga
a N
cn
j N
(J N
0 1
4.__
0 — Q
L N
a
C CO
2
C
0
L N- N t
CO CC1 Q
o
o
f - -- - -- — n
1
CO - N
2
L
I A .
._
i
a)
I
i
N
I 1
I Q
Q Lf) O in Q In Q
CO N N , N-
% luewoo aanispoAi
1
• i
I 00
N
I
9
i
CO
1 N
N
I N
N
CO
CD O
Li= 1 N
C- m m _� - CO
I � I
1 a
c
N
1
O
c
LL �
€
I
t
CO
A
2
4
- N
I
__ I I - 1 O
O In O If) O O O to O In C)
L6 4 't7' CO CO N N e--- O O
1S4 `aa1.OWO,i4eUOd pueH
i
M
ICO
N
1
s
Co
N
N
_ N
N
co O
N N I____ cis 0:5µ- i
IN Ili
2 N CO
gr-
c
1 f 1 IIM
1
O
1.1 , .4_
I
F i I
iii,,H) _ co
I
I
, 1pppr cc,
I t
j - N
i
-
t
I
O
O d) co N- co 10 co N r O
d' Cl) CO CO Cl i c- CO CO Cl) Cl) Cl)
Ad `uo!1anS I!0S Ielol
i
C
w CC
N
1
I co
iN
P N
I
1111111h. N
N1
EWE N
N
1
O 11 I CO
I T-
a.
i
C
a.,
1: :
>.% 1 Q
.- I-- 'MI ,,
o
_I 1 — — N
r
1.1). L___
0) 1
11- - CO
I 110 - CC)
; joiiiiiko
I Orj.° - N
f i
I
1 I I , I I 1 O
O CO CO 'ct N O N d" (0 CO O
e- O O O O O O O O O �-
I I I I I
XapuI ATIP!nb!1
FIGURE 10. SWELL TEST RESULTS
BCI Project Number 04-089
PRE-SWELL FINAL PERCENT
BORING DEPTH ATTERBERG LIMITS MOISTURE MOISTURE LOAD VERTICAL
NUMBER _ (ft) LL PL f PI CONTENT CONTENT (psf) SWELL
B-1 4.-5 30 18 12 12.9 13.7 562.5 0.10
B-1 8.-9 29 16 13 17.2 17.7 1062.5 -0.29
B-1 14-15 33 16 17 15.1 16.0 1812.5 -0.15
B-2 3.-4 34 _ 18 16 14.9 15.9 437.5 0.30
B-2 5.-6 25 15 10 11.7 12.5 687.5 -0.20
B-2 9.-10 34 17 17 16.9 17.4 1187.5 -0.10
Average -0.06
Min -0.29
Max 0.30
Std. Dev. 0.22
PROCEDURE
1. SAMPLE PLACED IN CONFINING RING, DESIGN LOAD (INCLUDING OVERBURDEN) APPLIED, FREE WATER WITE
SURFACTANT MADE AVAILABLE, AND SAMPLE ALLOWED TO SWELL COMPLETELY.
2. LOAD REMOVED AND FINAL MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINED.
I !
ii
i
Figure 11. GMMIR Profiles, Proposed Glass Residence
DGI Project 04-089
Survey Date: 3/17/04
500.0
200.0
150.0
100.0
'2 50.0
39.0
`® �
Y
i
1— 33.0
-2— ��' _ 30.0 Id
-3
_ '27.0 Z'
. .�24.0
Q
c] 5_ ! i j 1 8.0 it
ti
i i 15.0
-6--
— 12.0
4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 9.0
a>
Profile R1. East to West direction across the Lot. 7.5 w
6.0
4.5
3.0
2.3
1.5
0.0
Notes: 1. Data at lower corners is interpolated.
2. Structure,Boring and Vegetation positions are approximate.
3. Patent Process,All Rights Reserved.
US Patent S/N 6,295,512.
L 1 . • Y
... ,...., „, ,...4'. . . ',, .#7'- ,,,,y. 1,l �
li t i r 9 •
ee d
,°t Ftf It v s ` z t, r , '1 h A 1t Y � „, ' t ,�4 r-;..ry i y ]
t S 1 ., �- 6 4 1 d 8 Ctt ,y3 1'.
„ t•,j 'I0, 4;- jk 0.` ti 7 ;tV-2,..,":,-;: L . :-•
4
4
i 1 1 ,� C.. Nth !/.r �ti,° � '•:•.:•.. "' .•
vp A.�. .- +.'Y.,'..'. 1, ^i 3"l_ •r. --. yam., 1"r•, _--,,4,--7.0,-,.., /•'`i° ws.'Z`r' •_ ,
1 r -� .� ,.,,i ',.. . x lam' ' ^v'.` y--'' .''J' ' +Fro; ..•
. , ,..., —...,,.. • • . t `. 2 i , : , K' i' 'S.q r�, .4 x . ro i-1' , -4- te : �w 3nn f' x . `t x +K ' > h d 1 .a� �, a '' :,a �..in s "
_ ras see .a ,. ra-y:":-' a. . }' ,..' ': . ..;
r 6 A � • sh ...I.e.-rrx w= .4••". »
• s
View of residential lot viewing towards the N direction.
ra'y .7ti` 7.77 74 'u ik t a r 1 • V '' F '' aa1' . 7.• ▪ K'.,X ' ,4+-'fS- YF t i "v • 7 � s�
E "3 i` T -a -44 ....-o-..<t:` + : ut g }y qf'. c.." ^rn
ir 4... . '''''k- ' ' :'1;0,, '-'-''.. =IL e•. '',.4 - _,. ,'-`,"It-r-i,-. '....' '-, -E'i' i;,` . -‘ 4-f-'41 1'It 1 .;'-- ."- - -E. '1,,, • ' ' i‘i."--F7 _I-"--T.
« ""+ rI.lbi i ', 1 t . ;,t j e. .A". c
J • b ,
1,,..,,, ,.,..,,,,,L,,.,,:_, ..v:,_. 7.:, -._.,,. .3- , ,..,...i.s.1; ;5i1,1.....:1•.,..1: --,, ,, - .i..,:,,,,...f.:,,,,:,7;•?i:::::"=,-;, -"::-:,:,, ,1 ....,.."'.":::':,,:..-iiia .2-1.1t,,,***.ki,ic, ,
rte
� •-te "•+% .....'......e.‘ .•^ r., 3.`�e s$''''' f, .1.4, x- ' ,k Y °•7• r _.. ...,..,,, ' 6 ' 4• j- ', 3:::,...„.. .• x t, 'n t-1 t ,.x ..y n„
a n . ''. .' e ' , " "." ,' ,c:,�.s' -• :""2-
, tr..-. ':1443 �t.a. ,..-.. --3,,„,-,. ,.---
_ , '". r ax x+. ,p . ;' •• - fix, , ;' e� ra " ,.', ` l7-kr' ; ? � .4.;, :4x --,4..,„.2.,"..., . r-Y ( ,
4 r ; ~ " `fi °° "`i` x -^ °
r ,t'-.- , p y.2;.r ` : r . i , ? — '�`.i. -,,- a° �.�. ; . z ' ,'�� �-; �„ y ,.*4,15-10�. ��;p'°scAs,.. • 1¢•Vi`' 1,12 a � "&; :,'- '•.:'.'''' 'fi� °t k 3"x '4.y s 4.0I..s•, ''- . �-, { j 20:4* y ' Y: fm 4 :y
hi a.- t--- �- milW -e..�'a' .4.. mat' 73a .,3�.,� ....:t-. ,.'+.: _- , . ....-. .. ._ .4 __. :ris.�.r4.». .� . .,�~ _,:::,_,2. . ,
View of the approximate location of the residential house pad.
Figure 12: Photographic Survey of Proposed Glass Residence
CD
CD
d CO N r c 0 CO
000000) 6) Cl.)
r,-._____ ERWIMI 00 Q
oo00000) > ..:
N N N N N r- Q
11 : i
AON
!
o 1.00
L
a i
1 Ides
_ 6ny
O -
N ,
o
I -
,
i
as
+r 1
k - aunt
CU
CI
it / - ic e w
re
1 Ws
, adV
M
N
L s (s;,,;
= aeW
a)
gad
uer
o LO o LCD o
N N r- T-
(u!) lleju!ej
O
O
1 r—
I
1
I I
II
ti I
O
1 I ■
CD
I
,
•
ICD
L.
4—0 £� U)
0 pi-.1,..4s r r a �vp � e€rte 1
c� i z a
Q
I 0
Oz
,t
W 4 l , , j
S / hem I t
•
0
i
L
,
i
1
, ,
1
° oO ° O° ° ° O p
,1-
V
co
� 10 p
Lo
O p (NJ
N
O p O O
O
01re�j P!0A
APPENDIX 1 - GUIDELINES FOR THE PLACEMENT
OF CONTROLLED EARTHWORK
at
GLASS RESIDENCE
HOUSTON, TEXAS
PREPARATION OF SITE
This item shall consist of guidelines for the preparation of the site for construction
operations by the removal and disposal of all obstructions that would impede the
steady and continual progression of work at this site as described in the following
paragraphs.
Such obstructions shall be considered to include all abandoned structures,
foundations, water wells, septic tanks, fences and all other trash and debris that
have been placed on the site.
It is the intent of this guideline to provide for the removal and disposal of all
obstructions not specifically provided for elsewhere by the plans and guidelines.
CLEARING OF AREAS TO BE FILLED
All trees, stumps, brush, roots, vegetation, rubbish and other objectionable matter
shall be removed and acceptably disposed of.
Any depressions or low areas resulting from the removal of the above items or
any soft spots encountered during the site preparation should be backfilled with
approved material and compacted in accordance with the grading
recommendations given below. All these roots of the removed trees should be
removed in the building pad are to a depth of at least 2 feet below final beam
depth.
All vegetation shall be stripped from proposed fill areas and exposed soil surfaces
shall be scarified to a depth of at least 6 inches. If fill must be constructed where
the slope of the existing ground exceeds 4H:1 V, the existing ground surface
should be benched with a series of horizontal terraces prior to fill placement. The
benches should extend through any uncontrolled fills, or loose surface materials
into hard natural ground. The fill should be placed and compacted with the
compaction equipment working perpendicular to the fall line of the slope. Filling
should start at the lowest portion of the slope and progress upward.
Appendix I Page 2
It is the intent of this guideline to provide a loose surface with no uneven features
which would tend to prevent or impend uniform compaction by the equipment to
be used.
COMPACTING AREAS TO BE FILLED
After the foundation subgrade for the fill has been cleared and scarified, it shall be
disked or bladed until it is uniform and free from large clods, brought to the proper
moisture content, and compacted to not less than 95 percent of maximum dry
density according to ASTM D-698 and as specified for on-site fill in Table 2.
FILL MATERIALS
Materials for fill shall consist of soils confined with the limits of the proposed
development area, or imported soil similar to those present in the area. The soil
shall be free from vegetation, roots, trash and other deleterious matter.
Any imported fill materials should have a liquid limit less than 35%, plasticity index
less than 18%, and percent clay less than 30%. Where fill materials contain rock
fragments, the maximum size acceptable shall be four (4) inches. No rocks will
be permitted within twelve (12) inches of the finished grade. It is the intent of this
guideline that the rock fragments be mixed with sufficient soil binder and smaller
rock fragments to allow for proper compaction and to prevent voids in the fill. If
off-site borrow materials are used, we recommend that these materials are similar
to those present in this area.
DEPTH AND MIXING OF FILL LAYERS
The fill materials should be placed in level, uniform layers which, when
compacted, shall have a moisture and density conforming to the stipulations
called for herein. Each layer shall be thoroughly mixed during the spreading to
insure the uniformity of each layer. The normal compacted layer thickness shall
not exceed nine (9) inches.
MOISTURE CONTENT
Prior to and in conjunction with the compaction operations, the moisture content of
each layer and the subgrade shall be adjusted to be not less than the optimum
determined by ASTM D-698. Where significant rock size particles (4 inch
Appendix I Page 3
maximum size) exist in the fill, some deviation from the recommended moisture
contents may be allowed by the field quality assurance soil testing
laboratory/inspector.
The graded building pads should be kept moist and not allowed to dry below the
optimum moisture according to ASTM D 698 during the intervening period
between the completion of the pad and the construction of the concrete slabs-on-
grades.
AMOUNT OF COMPACTION
After each lift (layer) has been properly placed, mixed and spread, it shall be
thoroughly compacted to not less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density as
determined by ASTM D-698.
In any area where fill heights exceed three (3) feet, compaction of layers below
this depth shall be to a minimum density of ninety-five (98) percent of maximum
dry Proctor density as determined by ASTM D-698.
COMPACTION OF FILL LAYERS
Compaction equipment shall be of such design it will be able to compact the fill to
the specified density. Compaction of each layer shall be continuous over its entire
area.
SUPERVISION AND DENSITY TESTS
All fill shall be placed under the supervision of qualified technicians working under
the direction of the project geotechnical engineer.
Field density and moisture content determinations shall be made on each lift of fill
with the number of tests on each lift to be determined by the field technician and
the field quality assurance soil testing laboratory/inspector.
Low fills, less than three (3) feet, may be controlled with periodic visits to the site
to perform tests on each lift of fill. Deeper fill sections will require full time
supervision.
Appendix I
Page 4
REPORT
Upon completion of the various fill sections, the project soils engineer shall
provide copies of all field tests and a statement that the fill was placed in general
agreement with the guidelines.