14057 (SIGN)1
4
P.O. BOX 1504
Building 78-670 Hwy Ill. 78-105 CALLE ESTADO
Address LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253
Owner Be Orly,Stokes DBA Petal Place
Mailing
Address ;
City Zip Tel.
.La Qu.5:nta,. Cti 92253
C"RL,MAb"i-ial Sicrn Co. _ Ina.
r+aaress
46--120 Ct' lhoiln St.'
City
Zip
Tel `
Indio, Ca
92202
347-3566''
State Lica
City
& Classif. - 207136
Lic. # 2.23
_
efgr:, game ---
Designer
Address
Tel.
City
Zip
State
Issued by:
Driveway Enc.
Lic. #
LICENSED CONTRACTOR'S DECLARATION
I,hereby:affirm that I am licensed under provisions of Chapter 9 (commencing with deo
7000) of Division�3 of the Business and Professions Code, and my license is igJUJI,torce-
V i OWNER -BUILDER DECLARATION
I hereby affirm that I am exempt from the Contractor's License Law for the following
reason: (Sec. 7031.5,Business and Professions Code: Any city -or county which requires a
permit to construct, alter, improve, demolish, or repair any structure, prior to its issuance also
requires the applicant for such permit to file a signed statement that he is licensed pursuant to
the provisions "of the Contractor's License Law, Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 7000) of
Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code, or that. he is exempt therefrom, and the basis
for the alleged exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by -'any applicant for a permit
subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars (8500).
❑ I, as owner of the property, or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will
do the work, and the structure is not intended or offered for sale. (Sec. 7044, Buisness and
Professions Code:, The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who
builds or improves thereon and who does such work himself or through his own employees,
provided that' such improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If, however, the building
or improvement is sold within one year or completion, the owner -builder will have the burden
of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sale.)
❑ I, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to con-
struct the project. (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law
does not apply to an owner or property who builds or improves thereon, and who contracts for
such projects with a contractor(s)-licensed pursuant to the Contractor's License Law.) • -
❑ 1 am exempt under Sec. B. & P.C. for this reason
Date Owner
WORKERS' COMPENSATION DECLARATION
I hereby affirm that I have a certificate of consent to self -insure, or a certificate of
Worker's Com ensation Insurance, or a certified copy thereof. (Sec. 3800, Labor Code.)
Policy No. Company
❑ECopy is filed with the city. ❑ Certified copy is hereby furnished.
CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION FROM
WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE
(This section need not be completed if the permit is for one hundred dollars ($100) valuation
or less.)
I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not
employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the Workers' Compensation
Laws of California.
Date Owner
NOTICE TO APPLICANT. If, alter making this Certificate of Exemption you should become
subject to 'the Workers' Compensation provisions of the Labor Code, you must forthwith
comply with such provisions or this permit shall be deemed revoked.
CONSTRUCTION LENDING AGENCY
I hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the
work for which this permit is issued. (Sec. 3097, Civil Code.)
Lender's Name
Lender's Address
This is a building permit when properly filled out, signed and validated, and is subject to
expiration if work thereunder is suspended for 180 days.
I certify that I have read this application and state that the above information is correct.
I agree to comply with all city and county ordinances and state laws relating to building
construction, and hereby authorize representatives of this city to enter the above-.
mentioned property for inspection purposes.
Signature of applicant -Date-
Mailing
ateMailing Address
City, State, Zip
In
BUILDING: TYPE CONST. OCC: GRP.
A.P. Number
Legal Description
Project Description Sign
14057
Sq. Ft. No. No. Dw.
Size Stories - Units
New ❑ Add ❑ Alter ❑ Repair ❑ Demolition ❑
Estimated Valuation
PERMIT
AMOUNT
Plan Chk. Dep.
Plan Chk. Bal.
Const.
30-00
Mech.
Electrical
Plumbing
FINAL DATE
.S.M.I.
Grading
Issued by:
Driveway Enc.
s
Infrastructure
Validated,by:
_---��
Validation:
TOTAL
30.0€
REMARKS
ZONE:
BY:
Minimum Setback Distances:
Front Setback from Center Line
Rear Setback from Rear Prop. Line
Side Street Setback from Center Line
Side Setback from Property Line
FINAL DATE
.� 111, INSPECTOR
Issued by:
Date Permit
s
Validated,by:
_---��
Validation:
CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE
NO. ELECTRICAL FEES
NO. PLUMBING FEES
1ST FL. SQ. FT. ® $
UNITS
COLL. AREA
f } ~
ROUGH PLUMB.
YARD SPKLR SYSTEM
2ND FL. SQ. FT.
HEATING (ROUGH)
STORAGE TANK
FOR. SQ. FT. ®
MOBILEHOME SVC.
BAR SINK
GAR. SQ. FT. ®
POWER OUTLET
I ROOF DRAINS
CARP. SQ. FT.
GAS (ROUGH)
DRAINAGE PIPING
WALL SQ. FT. (off
HEATING (FINAL)
DRINKING FOUNTAIN.
SQ FT ®
GAS (FINAL)
URINAL
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION VALUATION $
WATER PIPING
NOTE: Not to be used as property tax.valuation
WATER HEATER
FLOOR DRAIN
MECHANICAL FEES
FINAL INSP.
WATER SOFTENER
VENT SYSTEM FAN EVAP.COOL HOOD
SIGN
WASHER(AUTO)(DISH)
APPLIANCE DRYER
GRADING
cu. yd.
$ -Plus-x$-=$
GARBAGE DISPOSAL
FURNACE UNIT WALL FLOOR SUSPENDED
LAUNDRYTRAY
AIR HANDLING UNIT CFM
FINAL INSP.
KITCHEN SINK
ABSORPTION SYSTEM B.T.U.
TEMP USE PERMIT SVC
WATER CLOSET'
COMPRESSOR HP
POLE, TEM/PERM
LAVATORY
HEATING SYSTEM FORCED GRAVITY
AMPERES SERV ENT
SHOWER
BOILER B.T.U.
SQ. FT. ® c
BATH TUB
FIRE ZONE ROOFING
SO. FT. ® c
WATER HEATER
MAX. HEATER OUTPUT, B.T.U.
SQ. FT. RESID ® 11/4 c
SEWAGE DISPOSAL
SQ.FT.GAR ® 3/ac
HOUSE SEWER
GAS PIPING
PERMIT FEE
PERMIT FEE
PERMIT FEE
DBL
TOTAL FEES
MICRO FEE
MECH.FEE PL.CK.FEE
CONST. FEE ELECT. FEE
SMI FEE PLUMB. FEE
STRUCTURE PLUMBING ELECTRICAL HEATING & AIR COND. SOLAR
SETBACK
GROUND PLUMBING
UNDERGROUND
A.C. UNIT
COLL. AREA
SLAB GRADE
ROUGH PLUMB.
BONDING
HEATING (ROUGH)
STORAGE TANK
FORMS
SEWER OR SEPTIC TANK
ROUGH WIRING
DUCT WORK
ROCK STORAGE
FOUND. REINF.
GAS (ROUGH)
METER LOOP
HEATING (FINAL)
OTHER APPJEQUIP.
REINF. STEEL
GAS (FINAL)
TEMP. POLE
GROUT
WATER HEATER
SERVICE
FINAL INSP.
BOND BEAM
WATER SYSTEM
GRADING
cu. yd.
$ -Plus-x$-=$
LUMBER GR.
FINAL INS
&'7/
FRAMING
FINAL INSP.
ROOFING
REMARKS:
VENTILATION
FIRE ZONE ROOFING
FIREPLACE
SPARK ARRESTOR
GAR. FIREWALL
LATHING
MESH
INSULATION/SOUND
FINISH GRADING
FINAL INSPECTION
CERT. OCC.
FENCE FINAL
'
INSPECTOR'S SIGNATURESJINITIALS
GARDEN WALL FINAL
TWT 4---4W'Qgifftj
78-495 CALLE TAMPICO LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 - (619) 777-7000
FAX (619) 777-7101
The Postal Place
Ms. Beverly Stokes
78-670 Highway I I 1
La Quinta, CA 92253
Dear Ms. Stokes:
Please accept this letter as authorization to have the handicap designation of the eastern'
most stall in front of your business removed: It may be necessary to re -designate the 'stall
as handicap pending future development.
I hope this will address your concerns. Please feel free to call me if you have any
questions.
Sincerely,
BUILDING & SAFETY DEPARTMENT
Tom Hartung
Building & Safety Director
c: Jerry Herman, Community Development
Don Whelchel, Building & Safety Dept.
TH: es
MAILING ADDRESS - P.O. BOX 1504 - LA OUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 ��
r5..
POSTAL PLACE & Gifts
November 7, 1994
City of La Quinta
Tom Hartung
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Dear Mr. Hartung,
Hi, my name is Beverly Stokes the owner of The Postal Place & Gifts (located in the
Albertson's shopping center) in the City of La Quinta. I am writing this letter in hopes of
solving a problem I have been having since I have been open. In front of my store there
are three parking ,spaces two of which are handicap. My business is a stop and go type
business in which customers- run in to -buy stamps -or mail a package.. At least three to
four times a day customers will park in the handicap space only to unload large boxes to
be shipped, chances are one of them will get ticketed. Since there are only three spaces
available I am asking you, for one of the handicap spaces to be removed (the most eastern
one) and this space to be painted green. By removing this one handicap space it will not
put a burden on the amount of spaces for the handicap since there are several to choose
from, also to the east of my building new construction will be going in soon and there
will be several new spaces available.
Thank You For Your Time,
Beverly Stokes
Owner
CITY OF LA OIJINTA
NOV 0 9. REC'R
BUILDING AND SAFETY
78-670 Highway 111 • La Quinta, CA 92253 • 619 -564 -58551619 -564 -5284 -fax
April 5, 1990 -1- 87-2083-P1
90-04-724
INTRODUCTION
This Geotechnical Engineering Report has been prepared for the
proposed commercial development to be located in La Quinta,
California.
A It is proposed to -construct a large commercial complex on the
approximately sixty (60) acre site.
B. For the large structures throughout the main complex structural
considerations for column loads of up to 100 kips and a maximum
wall loading of 4.0 kips per linear foot were used as a basis for
recommendations as provided herein. These are estimated values
since we did not have foundation plans available at the time of
production of this report.
C. For the smaller satellite structures, structural considerations for building
column loads of up to 30 kips and a maximum wall loading of 2.0
kips per linear foot were used as a basis for recommendations
related to the construction of the residential buildings.
D. All loading is assumed to be dead plus reasonable live load.
E. If the actual loading exceeds the assumed loading the
recommendations provided herein will need to be reevaluated.
The purpose of our services was to evaluate the site soil conditions, and
to provide conclusions and recommendations relative to the site and
the proposed development. The scope of work includes the following:
A A general reconnaissance of the site.
B. Shallow subsurface exploration by drilling limited to the Albertsons
building only.
C. Laboratory testing of selected soil samples obtained from the
exploratory borings drilled for this 'project.
D. Review of selected technical literature pertaining to the site.
E. Evaluation of field and laboratory data relative to soil conditions.
F. Engineering analysis of the data obtained from the exploration and
testing programs.
G. A summary of our findings and recommendations in written report.
BUENA ENGINERS, INC.
April 5, 1990 -2- 137-2083-P1
90-04-724
Contained in This Report Are:
A Discussions on regional and local geologic and soil conditions.
B. Graphic and/or tabulated results of laboratory tests and field
studies.
C. Discussions and recommendations relative to allowable foundation
bearing capacity, recommendations for foundation design,
estimated total and differential settlements, lateral earth pressures
and site grading criteria.
Not Contained In This Report:
A Our scope of services did not include any environmental
assessment -or investigation to determine the presence of
hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, surface water, groundwater
or air,`on, below or around this site.
The site of the proposed sixty (60)- acre commercial development is
located on the north side of Highway 111 between Adams Street and
Washington Street. in La Quinta, California.
A The Whitewater channel forms the north edge of the site.
B. The Washington Street forms the west edge of the site.
C. Highway 111 forms the south edge of the site.
D. The site is presently vacant with the exception of one existing
building along Highway 111 which is unoccupied. The remainder of
the site is covered with scattered desert brush, short grass, weeds
and debris.
E. It is obvious that previous grading has been performed on the site
during the construction of the adjacent storm channel and probably
prior to the construction of the existing building.
F. This investigation also includes a'small two (2) acre site on the north
side of the Whitewater Channel at Adams Street.
Exploratory. borings were drilled for observing the soil profile and
obtaining samples for further analysis.
A Twenty-three (23) borings were drilled for soil profiling and sampling
to a maximum depth of fifty-one (51) feet below the existing ground
surface. Borings were drilled on February 20, March 2, 14 and 24, 1990,
BUENA ENGINERS. INC.
April 5, 1990 -3- B7 -2083-P1
90-04-724
using an eight (8) inch diameter hollow -stem auger powered by a
CME 45-B drilling rig. The approximate boring locations as indicated
on the attached plan in Appendix A, were determined by pacing
and sighting from existing streets and topographic features. The
boring locations should be considered accurate only to the
degree implied by -the method used.
B. Samples were secured within the borings with a two and one-half
(2.5) inch diameter ring sampler (ASTM D 3550, shoe similar to ASTM D
1586). The samples were obtained by driving the sampler with a one.
hundred forty (140) pound hammer, dropping thirty (30) inches. The
number of blows required to drive the sampler one foot was
recorded. Recovered soil samples were sealed in containers and
returned to the laboratory for further classification and testing.
C. Bulk disturbed samples of the soils were obtained from cuttings
developed during excavation of the test borings. The bulk samples
were secured for classification purposes and represent a mixture of
soils within the noted depths.
D. The final logs represent our interpretation of the contents of the field
logs, and the results of the laboratory observations and tests of the
field samples. The final logs are included in the appendix A of this
report. The stratification lines represent the approximate boundaries
between soil types although the transitions may be gradual.
After a visual and tactile classification in the field, samples were returned
to the laboratory, classifications were checked, and a testing program
was established.
A Samples were reviewed along with field logs to determine which
would be further analyzed. Those chosen were considered as
representative of soil which would be exposed and/or used in
grading and those deemed within building influence.
B. In-situ moisture content and unit dry weights for the core samples
were developed in accordance with ASTM D 2937.
C. The relative strength characteristics of the subsurface soils were
determined from the results of direct shear tests. Specimens were
placed in contact with water at least twenty-four (24) hours before
testing, and were then sheared under normal loads ranging from 0.5
to 2.0 kips per square foot in general accordance with ASTM D 3080.
D. Settlement and hydroconsolidation potential was evaluated from
the results of consolidation tests performed in accordance with
ASTM 2435.
BUENA ENGINERS. INC.
April 5, 1990 -4- 137-2083-P1
90-04-724
E. Classification tests consisted of: Expansion Index (UBC Standard No.
29-2), Maximum Density -Optimum Moisture (ASTM D 1557) and
Hydrometer Analysis (California Test Method 203).
F. Refer to Appendix B for tabular and graphic representation of the
test results.
As determined by the borings, site soils were found to consist primarily of
fine silty sands. The boring logs in Appendix A contain a more detailed
description of the soils encountered.
A In-place densities indicate that the soils are of inconsistent density
but generally quite loose with ring densities indicating relative
comp9ction as low as fifty-five (55) percent of maximum density.
B. The upper four (4) to six (b) feet of soils encountered on the
northwest portion of the site were placed as fill materials during
previous grading.
C. The consolidation test data indicates that some of the site soils are
susceptible to large settlements due to hydroconsolidation and
loading. The majority of the highly collapsible soil was encountered
along the wash at depths of fifteen (15) to thirty (30) feet.
D. Clay and silt contents of the majority of the site soils exhibit low
plasticity. Expansion tests indicate soils, to be in the 'very low'
expansion categories in accordance with Table 2 in Appendix B of
this report. Refer to section F of the structures section for specific
explanations and requirements dealing with expansive soil.
E. Soils should be readily cut by normal grading equipment.
Free groundwater was not encountered in any of the borings; however,
local information indicates the groundwater level is in excess of one
hundred (100) feet. Fluctuations in groundwater levels may occur due to
variations in rainfall, temperature and other factors.
The project site is located in the western Coachella Valley near the base
of the Santa Rosa Mountains, north of Indio Mountain. The Coachella
Valley is part of the tectonically active Salton Basin. This basin is a closed,
internally draining trough that has been filled with a complex series of
continental clastic materials during Pleistocene and Holocene time (Van
de Camp, 1973).
BUENA ENGINERS. INC.
April 5, 1990 -5-
87-2083-P1
90-04-724
The San Andreas riff zone dominates the geology of the Coachella
Valley. The Banning and Mission Creek faults, which are parts of the San
Andreas system are responsible for earthquakes recently felt in the
Coachella Valley. Other regional faults that have produced events felt in
the Coachella Valley are the San Jacinto, Imperial and Elsinore faults
(see figures 1 & 2).
Based upon the historical and prehistorical record, the Coachella Valley
segment of the San Andreas fault system is likely to generate a
magnitude seven (7.0) or greater earthquake within the next fifty (50)
years. The potential for a magnitude seven (7.0) earthquake within the
next fifty (50) years is estimated by Seih (1985) as 'High' (50%-90%).
The proposed development is located on the east side of Washington
Street north of Highway 111. This area is south of the Whitewater River
Storm Channel. Lithologic units observed on site include Quaternary
aeolian and alluvial deposited sediments and artificial fills. These units
are described as follows:
Gray brown, unconsolidated sand, silt and gravels. These sediments
have been deposited by fluvial or aeolian processes and areJound at
the base of the granitic rocks.
Generally the same as Qs found throughout the site but mainly in the
storm channel bank area.
The project site is located approximately five and five tenths (5.5) miles
southwest.of the San Andreas fault zone. Figure 3 shows the project site in
relation to the local geology.
Primary seismic geologic hazards that may affect any property in
the seismically active southern California region include ground
rupture and strong ground motion.
1. Fault Rupture:
BUENA ENGINERS. INC.
. t
gyp•
u E4 0111
a a \
a y
y
n
Tvlore Z ��
36•
2 � r•S-
hale hO ,I�C•`%+e l st ero
6ARLOGA +
eo►trt1.t10 ,•
e:►er
Tptt ��1i�7ewebp
)5•
loTtaO
ex ;I
SANTA e,* ��os,e Iy0
, s4y '9FIs
Santa Burow 'eER1rL
VtrtJo Sen SarrorCrV �•enlr-4• p•►*f
+ SITE "'
S.rtp goso bV Santa Cr.t b. R..�rt\ ei �� JJp ptSert
t
•
Santa ,�',�• C ` 'tr •S
• Cotdw� �9 •� s
0 K. '' � Octrt�e B:negt Y,
121• 120• �C entt o 1 1 EI Ct—o- �4 r
v Son 0<po•YD �P�t;t�0
q�S.L ►ks+co► f
1
+ Enienee:
v9• v
0 SO t00 w ••
jwlf
f
�
0 30 100 W ►•o BCt y(e Cold.
118• u7•
1:6• IU'
Ease map of southern California region with major faults
rault Nap Of Southern California
� igere 1
BUENA ENGINEERS, INC.
* From jlileman et al (1973) , DATE: y' %-9d�FILEp�-2oe3—V�
frontisniec�
1927 (6'.
Lone Pine \
° ru/ore
1946 (6.3) . \
j� .. \
1 °Chino Lok
Jokers/ie/d, ! • ;,/
\ 1'
1952 (7.7,6.4,6.1,6.11
/;i:jcve 1947 (6 2: _=••
°.Son!o Morio
IS1616i � °3arslcw`
1925 (631
M
971 (6.4)
, as -ge/ej
1933 (6.3) _
0%
O /00 Miles
O /OJ ZOo Kris.
Earth Quakes of magnitude 5.9 and
greater in the Southern California
Region, 1912 — 1972 (including the
North Palm Springs Earthquake),
From 11ilcman et al (1973)
der
ESE]�
11937(6.
19
*Salter
x.1986 (5.9 .
1948 (6.5)
SITE
/• drowle
968 (6.4) 3orrego r
1942(6.5:• `\ ° 1940;5.7
�
19;5 (6'/4 , 6 :'e -------
-0 Son 0..*e;o
.--0Son0..e90`iAer7ccl; "Mo
- 1934(6.51 ,\ o�.
1_..4(7.1)
1915 (7.1) /
Enseneev 1356(09,6.1,5.3.6.-:) \`?
1954(6.3,60) 1956163-,
Id-Fcsoz-��7'ON 311 ob-6 .•: '._.s"' -
ONI'Sa33NIJN3 VN3f18;•.M�f-•,�•._.'.__�.';-.�'�..-'>.:.=� ... '�;:�:.
'J
Id11;ii!
13385 d111i Y11'/ V1115S
A50-1011) 1g361 Ol I;OI1 :'13,
MIS 133r0Lld 3o dYt'1
,,Sv • ,`1.:JJ _
' � �•: is �•� "��� _.�.. •.. ,� _`�•C �!•.: -
=,ice+. :�'T: '% . ". •i=n °: -�._ l+ ''%'�•��-`s•w;
���..>.i�cyi' � c' :� " d .a �r�`� `.����.it'• •��' ��, �/A�, /a ,y��1 -W-_r ,:• ', �♦''
.. r,.••4 t'`:G K.^., 1~I' :.iiv}i _�=��++�:•�••� .�\-�:�=�stiia.�,�V.\a��4�•� �:
ins
1, �•:_�� *_;,; '��:.= 1;=t= `•' ;�•
i '''��♦ :fiF'e �� as I .�. �. Via' � •L -:,Y �;i' . ��_. V -�,: `s�•L!" i ": ��-:�,t•'Cr'` L
I t`•• � 7�'�7ai.'S .-___�a __l-"S,'._•_•f _�Ii .•- IiS'� �^% _ ':i j"�.�-y-�r„yY' i.:Y �� -��I :���'S.:
.I -��1 :� ♦ __-__ - 'ate-�%•='•�. _ .-.�: - ;�• �•- _- 1. Lh��l' 'i,�`L-
�••� Y YQ 7/Y LN- VY 7\: :71J=9 �: :,'.�:: -�- •_�.• �� y:y f� 1�:'1. t
( ` �-'t � / 1 , I::i. �'l •�\.�- �-'� - ��':Z. i .•../'1�`M lT\��_^.ha�a:�Y `a'•_�;. rc:,l �` J'-�''i:.
_ :� \"\ S:laJalj ♦1•:l f:1 J]e�J`f1 ; `�`: •�;��! i �i.. _�.Q�, - _�••••. .;, _-L:•. .
/I•.\, �\� ' _tel
'7 •-- �� .� I l `�.` ����•'C.1. •.: ,te _.� _• 1 w� ` .5. S 4_a,.'Y'
fes. :' 1.• :I1 _;' .J' _3i e.y _ `]. •a_ 'y,' ::- .i�Y1
i.• ''] �\Y: :' } tom• _ f I — _ r l�.^i'�:�_ 1 f��`'\ c.^
Jl�C,r"'O_ 'I ],. L�rn^_.t".�' � .�-r`' - -` _ -, •i,- ..- '',>' %' %% �;� o �j`
41 N
•�.�;.1t°`•. � ''.�; Sia �,.. -•il ,., l I$ � .� ,- ,�' :1:>~.•,�:, �:., f.t ,� .
.:asp--�.� '� •�� 0' f:'-- ---r%- -.=.•, +-- • J...._�- . �-ti.: `•'<%. '•,�1��"'%;!�'- �•
. - �\ ;-.:iia,, 11. `• :(..... :..� .\•.� ....:.�- �� ;.
April 5, 1990
-g- B7 -2083-P 1
90-04-724
a. The project site is not located in any Alquist-Priolo special
study zones. Nor are any faults mapped through or
adjacent to the project area. At the time of drilling no
surface expression of faulting was observed.
b. Fault rupfure would most likely occur along previously
established traces. However, fault rupture may occur at
other locations not previously mapped.
2. Ground Shaking:
a. Strong ground motion is the seismic hazard most likely to
affect the site during the life of the intended structures.
Using methods developed by Seed and Idriss (1982) and
Ploessel & Slosson (1974), the following table was compiled
for anticipated accelerations which may be experienced
during an earthquake at the project site.
TABLE 1
Estimated
Maximum Maximum Repeatable Approximate
Design Acceleration Acceleration Ground Distance to
Fnrthauake' in Rock in Soil— Accelerations Proiect Site
San Andreas 7.5 .51g .48g .31g 5.7 mi
San Jacinto 6.5 .18g .15g .109 19.5 mi
• Richter Magnitude
•' Deep Cohesionless Soils
b. The project area is mapped in Ground Shaking Zone III C
as designated by the County of Riverside, California.
Ground Shaking Zones are based on distance from
causative faults and soil types.
c. Because of the thick sedimentary layer of soils two
thousand (2000 feet or more) under the site ground
shaking characteristics are expected to include
moderate amplification of all frequencies. Duration of
shaking could be from .(fifteen) 15 to thirty-six (36) seconds.
B. Secondary Seismic Hazards:
Secondary seismic geologic hazards that may affect the project
site area include subsidence, liquefaction, and ground lurching.
1. Subsidence, whether seismically related or not, is considered a
potential hazard in this area. Historic records report significant
episodes of subsidence in the La Quinta area due to seismic
forces and/or heavy rain fall and flooding.
BUENA ENGINERS. INC.
April 5, 1990 -7- 137-2083-P1
90-04-724
2. Liquefaction is the loss of strength of saturated cohesionless soils
generally from seismic shaking. In order for liquefaction to
occur, three principal conditions must be present. First, the soils
must have relative densities below seventy (70) percent;
second, the water table - perched or otherwise - must be within
the upper fifty (50) feet of soils; and third, the soils must have a
predominant grain size range between 0.5 mm and 0.01 mm.
Other criteria that identify susceptibility to liquefaction are a
uniformity coefficient between two (2) and ten (10) and ten (10)
percent passing between .01 mm and .25 mm, (Hunt,
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Manual, McGraw-Hill
Book Co., 1984). When any of these conditions or criteria are
not satisfied, liquefaction is not considered a possibility.
3. No freewater was encountered in our exploratory borings
indicating that liquefaction is unlikely. Also, the project is not
located within the Riverside County Liquefaction Study Zone.
4. Ground lurching is generally associated with fault rupture and
liquefaction. Because of the distance of the project site to the
San Andreas fault system. The possibility of ground lurching
affecting the site is considered low.
5. The probability of other seismic hazards such as tsunamic and
seiches (waves oscillating in an inclosed area) impacting the
site is considered low.
Other geologic hazards that could affect the project site include
landslides, flooding and erosion.
a. Evidence of past landsliding was not observed at the site. The
site is not at the base of any steep hills.
b. Flooding and erosion are always a consideration in arid
regions. On-site, the erosion rate is affected by sparse
vegetation and seasonal rains. The sites proximity to the
Whitewater storm channel may impact the planned
development. The storm channels sides are not protected
form erosion in this area.
c. The Coachella Valley averages four (4) inches of rain per year.
When large amounts of rain occur suddenly, the surface
alluvium becomes saturated and prevents further infiltration of
the rains. The result is surface runoff and sheet flow drainage on
slopes toward gullies and washes.
d. Generally, erosion in the desert can be reduced by minimizing
soil disturbances and diverting seasonal runoff from areas of
high potential erosion.
BUENA ENGINERS. INC.
April 5, 1990 -8- 87-2083-P1
90-04-724
•� •► :�: •uu ►b- 1IM
Based on a review of selected technical literature and the site
investigation, it is our opinion that the site is suitable for the intended
development provided it is designed around the noted geologic
hazards. The following is a summary of our conclusions and professional
opinions based on the data obtained.
A The primary geologic hazard relative to site development is severe
ground shaking from earthquakes originating on nearby faults. The
site is located in Southern California which is an active seismic area.
In our opinion, a major seismic event originating on either the San
Andreas or San Jacinto fault zones would be the most likely cause of
significant earthquake activity at the site within the estimated design
life of. the proposed development.
B. Subsidence, whether seismically related or not, is considered a
potential hazard. Adherence to the grading recommendations
contained in this report is necessary to limit differential settlements
and subsidence.
C. Areas of aeolian and alluvial soils may be susceptible to fluvial or
aeolian erosion processes. Preventative measures to minimize
seasonal flooding should be incorporated into site grading plans.
Disturbances of native ground cover should be minimized.
D. Due to the sites location directly adjacent to the Whitewater storm
channel and the unprotected condition of the storm channel walls,
erosion of said walls may impact site development. A licensed civil
engineer should be consulted regarding this concern.
E. Other hazards including liquefaction, lurching, seiching and tsunamis
are considered low to negligible.
F. It is our opinion that the site soils will not provide uniform or adequate
support for the proposed structures without the recommended
sitework. Due to varying soil conditions, the recommended site
preparation will vary throughout the site. In general, we
recommend that structures be. -supported by recompacted soil
mats to provide more uniform and firm bearing support. Additional
site work is recommended along the Whitewater Channel due to
the susceptibility to hydroconsolidation of the deeper soils.
G. The project site is in seismic Zone 4 as defined in Section 2312 (d) 2, of
the Uniform Building Code. It is recommended that any permanent
structure be designed according to the current additions of the
Uniform Building Code and Standards.
H. it is further recommended that cny permanent structure constructed
on the site be designed to accommodate expected repeatable
ground accelerations resulting from the predicted maximum
probable earthquake as stated in Table 1.
RIIFNA FNrINFR.i. INC.
April 5, 1990 -9- 87-2083-P1
90-04-724
I. Adherence to the following grading recommendations should limit
potential settlement problems due to seismic forces, heavy rainfall,
flooding and the weight of the intended structure.
J. It is recommended that Buena Engineers, Inc. be retained to
provide continuous Geotechnical Engineering services during site
development and grading, and foundation construction phases of
the work to observe compliance with the design concepts,
specifications and recommendations, and to allow design
changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those
anticipated prior to the start of construction.
K. Plans and specifications should be provided to Buena Engineers,
Inc. prior to grading. Plans should include the grading plans,
foundation plans, and foundation details. Preferably, structural loads
should be shown on the foundation plans.
As discussed the site soils are composed primarily of previously placed fill
material and native soils which were found to be quite dry with
inconsistent and generally low densities. The consolidation testing
indicates that much of the underlying native soil is susceptible to large
settlements due to the introduction of water and the additional loading
of structures. The magnitude and inconsistent nature of the potential
settlement along the Whitewater Channel is in our opinion unacceptable
for structural support. Limiting the potential settlement in this area is the
primary concern in site development. There are several alternatives for
site preparation of the northern portion of the site which should be
examined considering both cost and effectiveness. .
A Site Development - Main Comblex
As previously mentioned, the site conditions vary greatly,
unfortunately the most severe conditions occur along the northern
edge of the site where the main shopping complex is proposed.
The following alternatives are presented for preparation of the
building areas along the Whitewater Channel.
1. Pile or drilled pier foundations extending through collapsible
soils into firm native soils could provide adequate support for
the proposed structures. The primary problem with the use of
Pile or pier foundations is the potential settlement of auxiliary
structures such as retaining wails, sidewalks, etc. This problem
must be addressed. If specific building locations and loading
becomes available, pile or pier design can be provided.
BUENA ENGINERS, INC.
April 5, 1990 -10- 87-2083-P1
90-04-724
2.
3.
9
5.
Complete removal of the collapsible material is perhaps the
most effective method of site preparation. However, with the
worst conditions encountered at depths of fifteen (15) to thirty
(30) feet, removal would involve extensive grading which could
be cost prohibitive.
The structure could be supported by normal spread footings
provided a recompacted soil mat of substantial thickness,
(approximated ten (10) feet) be constructed beneath the
footings. This option also involves extensive grading.
The use of large mat foundations is also a viable alternative
and would require significantly less recompaction, probably in
the range of five (5) feet thick. A primary consideration with mat
foundations is substantial cost associated with structural design
and construction.
Perhaps the most economical solution is a combination of
recompaction, saturation and preconsolidation. Initially a
recompacted soil mat probably about five (5) feet thick should
be constructed. Water induction points can then be drilled for
saturation of the deeper soils. Providing surcharge loads would
increase the effectiveness of the saturation and consolidation.
Adequate monitoring and follow-up testing is imperative in
determining preconsolidation effectiveness prior to
construction.
a. Water induction can be performed by drilling into the
problem layers and filling the borings with water for a
period of time in order to induce .hydroconsoliclation.
b. The induction borings will be necessary in areas where dry
collapsible layers were encountered, generally throughout
the northern portion of the site.
c. The depth and spacing of induction borings will vary with
the soils encountered and the time allotted. The necessary
spacing and depths will vary throughout the site.
d. The effectiveness of the water induction system should be
monitored during the watering process and adequate
moisture should be verified.
e. Because many of the site soils are very silty we
recommend that the building pads be graded prior to
water induction to avoid potential problems with
overexcavation.
6. The given alternatives are presented generally and more
specific information can be provided when potential design
configurations become available. The project civil engineer,
architect and potential contractors should be consulted
throughout site development.
PlIGNA FNr:INFRC Mr.
April 5, 1990 -11- B7 -2083-P1
90-04-724
As previously discussed, the soil conditions encountered throughout
the southern portion of the site were not as severe as along the
wash and normal grading should be adequate for structure support.
Site grading should be visually checked by Buena Engineers, Inc.,
or their representative prior to placement of fill. Local variations in
soil conditions may warrant increasing the depth of recompaction
and/or excavation.
1. Prior to site grading any existing structures, stumps, roots,
foundations, pavements, leachfields, uncompacted fill and
trash piles, any abandoned underground utilities should be
removed from the proposed building and paving areas. The
top surface should be stripped of all organic growth and
noncomplying fill which along with other debris, should be
removed from the site.
2. Depressions resulting from these removals should have debris
and loose soil removed and be filled with suitable fill soils
adequately compacted. No compacted fill should be
placed unless the underlying soil has been observed by Buena
Engineers, Inc.
3. In order to help minimize potential settlement problems
associated with structures supported on a non-uniform thickness
of compacted fill, Buena Engineers, Inc. should be consulted
for site grading recommendations relative to backfilling large
and/or deep depressions resulting from removal under item 1
above. In general, all proposed construction should be
supported by a uniform thickness of compacted soils.
4. Due to widely varying soil conditions, the necessary grading will
vary from the southeast to the southwest portions of the site.
Due to the granular nature of the site soils throughout the
southeastern portion of the site, it is expected that compaction
may be obtained to a depth of three (3) to four (4) feet by
heavily watering and compacting from the surface. Because
the soils throughout the southwestern portion of the site are very
silty near the surface, removal and recompaction is
recommended.
5. Building areas throughout•. the southeastern portion of the site
should be moistened to at or above optimum moisture to a
depth of four (4) feet below original grade or the bottom of the
footings, whichever is deeper. The surface should be
compacted so that a minimum of ninety (90) percent of
maximum density is obtained to a depth of three (3) feet
below. original grade or the bottom of the footings, whichever is
deeper if applicable, fill material should be placed in thin layers
at near optimum moisture and compacted to a minimum of
BUENA ENGINERS. INC.
April 5, 1990 -12- B7 -2083-P1
90-04-724
C.
ninety (90) percent of maximum density.
least three (3) feet of soil compacted to
(90) percent of maximum density com
beneath the footings and to have
moisture penetration. Compaction is
testing.
The intent is to have at
a minimum of ninety
pose the building pad
an additional foot of
to be confirmed by
6. These grading requirements apply to building areas and at
least five (5) feet beyond building limits.
7. Auxiliary structures including freestanding or retaining walls shall
have the existing soils beneath the structure processed as per
items six (6), seven (7) and eight (8) above. The grading
requirements apply to three (3) feet beyond the face of the
walls. If plans for auxiliary structures and walls are provided for
our review, these recommendations may be revised.
8. It is anticipated that during grading a loss of approximately one
tenth (.1) of a foot due to stripping, and a shrinkage factor of
about ten (10) to twenty (20) percent for the upper five (5) feet
of soil, may be used for quantity calculations. This is based on
compactive effort needed to produce an average degree
of compaction of approximately ninety-three (93) to ninety-four
(94) percent and may vary depending on contractor methods.
Subsidence is estimated between two-tenths (2) to three -tenths
(.3) of a foot.
Site Development - General
1. The following 'general' recommendations listed in this nd B above, section
are in addition to those listed In Sections
2. Any rocks larger than eight (8) inches in greatest dimension,
should be removed from fill or backfill material.
3. Import soil used to raise site grades should be equal toor
better than on-site soil in strength, expansion, and
compressibility characteristics. Import soil may be prequalified
by Buena Engineers, Inc. Comments on the characteristics of
import will be given after the material is on the project, either in-
place or in stockpiles of adequate quantity to complete the
project.
4. Areas around the structures should be graded so that drainage
is positive and away from the structures. Gutters and down
spouts should be considered as a way to convey water out of
the foundation area. Water should riot be allowed to pond on
or near pavement sections.
5. Added moisture within previously compacted fill could result in a
number of reactions at the surface depending upon the
amount of moisture increase, the in-place density of the soil, in -
BUENA ENGINERS. INC.
April 5, 1990 -13- B7 -2083-P1
90-04-724
situ moisture content and soil type. Although the soil could in
reality be expanding, collapsing, moving laterally due to the
phenomenon 'creep', the result is usually movement and will
most likely manifest itself visually in structural slabs and street
areas as cracks, (horizontal, lateral and vertical displacement).
b. The apparent cure .to the problem is to not introduce excess
moisture into fill material once in place. To help minimize
increased moisture into the fill material, site drainage and
landscape is critical. Site drainage should be in the form of roof
gutter, concrete brow ditcher, ribbon gutters and gutters, storm
drain and other drainage devices. Landscaping should be
such that water is not allowed to pond. Additionally, care
should be taken so as not to over water landscaped areas.
7. The Recommended Grading Specifications included in
'Appendix C are general guidelines only and should not be
included directly into project specifications without first
incorporating the site specific recommendations contained in
the Site Development section of this report. Chapter 70 of the
Uniform Building Code contains specific considerations for
grading and is considered a part of these General Guidelines.
8.. It is recommended that Buena Engineers, Inc., be retained, to
provide soil engineering services during construction of the
grading, excavation, and foundation phases of the work. This is
to observe compliance with the design concepts,
specifications or recommendations and to allow design
changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from
those anticipated prior to start of construction.
C. Excavations
1. All excavations should be I
applicable regulations. Fror
knowledge of the general area,
construction problems involving
excavations (i.e. utilities, etc.)
encountered, lateral bracing or
be provided.
rade in accordance with
i our site exploration and
we feel there is a potential for
caving of relatively deep site
Where such situations are
appropriate cut slopes should
2. No surcharge loads should be allowed within a horizontal
distance measured from the top of the excavation slope,
equal to the depth of the excavation.
D. Traffic Areas
1. Curbs and streets should be provided with two (2) feet of
subgrade compacted to ninety (90) percent of maximum
density.
2. On-site parking should be provided with two (2) feet of
subgrade compacted to ninety (90) percent of maximum
density.
BUENA ENGINERS. INC.
April 5, 1990 -14- B7 -2083-P1
90-04-724
3. Final preparation of subgrade will depend on paving section
designs.
4. Sidewalks should be provided with one (1) foot of subgrade
compacted to ninety (90) percent of maximum density.
E. Utility Trenches
1. Backfill of utilities within road right-of-way should be placed in
strict conformance with the requirements of the governing
agency (Water District, Road Department, etc.).
2. Utility trench backfill within private property should be placed in
strict conformance with the provisions of this report relating to
minimum compaction standards. In general, service lines
extending inside of property may be backfilled with native soils
compacted to a minimum of ninety (90) percent of maximum
density.
3. Backfill operations should be observed and tested by Buena
Engineers, Inc., to monitor compliance with these
recommendations.
Based upon the results of this evaluation, it is our opinion that structure
foundation can be supported by compacted soils placed as
recommended above. The recommendations that follow are based
on 'very low' expansion category soils.
it is anticipated that foundations will be placed on firm. compacted
soils .as recommended elsewhere in this report. The
recommendations that follow are based on .'very low' expansion
category soils.
1. Table 2 gives specific recommendations for width, depth and
reinforcing. Other structural consideration may be more
stringent and would govern in any case. A minimum footing
depth of twelve (12) inches below lowest adjacent finish grade
for one (1) story structures and eighteen (18) inches for two (2)
story structures should be maintained.
2. Conventional Foundations:
Estimated bearing values are given below for foundations on
recompacted soils, assuming import fill (if required) to be equal
to or better than site soils:
BUENA ENGINERS. INC.
April 5, 1990 -15- 87-2083-P1
90-04-724
a. Continuous foundations of one (1) foot wide and twelve
(12) inches below grade:
i. 1400 psf for dead plus reasonable live loads.
ii. 1850 psf for wind and seismic considerations.
b. Isolated pad foundations 2'x 2' and bottomed twelve (12)
inches below grade:
i. 1600 psf for dead plus reasonable live loads.
ii. 2150 psf for wind and seismic considerations.
3. Allowable increases of 200 psf per one (1) foot of additional
footing width and 300 psf for each additional six (6) inches of
footing depth may be used. The maximum allowable bearing
will be 2500 pcf. The allowable bearing values indicated have
been determined using a safety factor of three (3) and are
based upon anticipated maximum loads Indicated in the
introduction section of this report. If the indicated loading is
exceeded then the allowable bearing values and the
Goading Requirements must be reevaluated by the soils
engineer.
4. Although footing reinforcement may not be required per Table
2; one (1) number four (#4) rebar at top and bottom of footings
should be considered to reduce the potential for cracking due
to temperature and shrinkage stresses and in order to span
surface imperfections. Other requirements that. are more
stringent due to structural loads will govern.
5. Soils beneath footings and slabs should be premoistened prior
to placing concrete.
6. Lateral loads may be resisted by soil friction on floor slabs and
foundations and by passive resistance of the soils acting on
foundation stem walls. Lateral capacity is based partially on
the assumption that any required backfill adjacent to
foundations and grade beams is properly compacted.
7. Foundation excavations should be visually observed by the soil
engineer during excavation and prior to placement of
reinforcing steel or concrete. Local variations in conditions may
warrant deepening of footings.
8. Allowable bearing values are net (weight of footing and soil
surcharge may be neglected) and are applicable for dead
plus reasonable live loads.
•• pTi••-
Concrete slabs -on -grade should be supported by
compacted structural fill placed in accordance with
applicable sections of this report.
BUENA ENGINERS. INC.
April 5, 1990 -16- B7 -2083-P1
90-04-724
2. In areas of moisture sensitive floor coverings, an appropriate
vapor barrier should be installed in order to minimize vapor
transmission from the subgrade soil to the slab. We would
suggest that the floor slabs be underlain by a four (4) inch thick
layer of gravel or by an impermeable membrane as a
capillary break. A suggested gradation for the gravel layer
would be as follows:
Sieve Size Percent Passing
3/4"
90-100
No. 4
0-10
No. 100
0-3
If a membrane is used, a low -slump concrete should be used
to help minimize shrinkage., The membrane should be
covered with two (2) inches of sand to help protect it during
construction. The sand should be lighthly moistened just prior to
placing the concrete. Concrete slabs should be allowed to
cure thoroughly before placing moisture sensitive floor
covering.
3. Reinforcement of slab -on -grade is contingent upon the
structural engineers recommendations and the expansion
index of the supporting soil. Since the mixing of fill soil with native
soil could change the expansion index, additional tests should
be conducted during rough grading to determine the
expansion index of the subgrade soil. Also, due to the high
temperature differential endemic Jo desert areas, large
concrete slabs on grade are susceptible to tension cracks. As
a minimum, we suggest that all interior concrete slabs -on -grade
be reinforced with 6' x b' / #10 x #10 welded wire fabric.
Additional reinforcement due to the expansion index of the site
soil should be provided as recommended in section F below.
Additional reinforcement may also be required by the structural
engineer.
4. It is recommended that the proposed perimeter slabs
(sidewalks, patios, etc.) be designed relatively independent of
foundation stems (free-floating) to help mitigate cracking due
to foundation settlement and/or expansion.
C. Settlement Considerations
1. The estimated settlement based on site preparation selected
can be estimated when specific information becomes
available.
BUENA ENGINERS. INC.
April 5, 1990 -17- 87-2083-P1
90-04-724
D. Frictional and Lateral Coefficients
1. Resistance to lateral loading may be provided by friction
acting on the base of foundations, a coefficient of friction of .49
may be used for dead load forces.
2. Passive resistance acting on the sides of foundation stems 300
pcf of equivalent fluid weight, may be included for resistance to
lateral loads. The value doe not include a factor of safety.
3. A one-third (1/3) increase in the quoted passive value may be
used for wind or seismic loads.
4. Passive resistance of soils against grade beams and the
frictional resistance between the floor slabs and the supporting
soils may be combined in determining the total lateral
resistance, however the friction factor should be reduced to .33
of dead load forces.
5. For retaining walls backfilled with compacted native soil, it is
recommended that an equivalent fluid pressure of thirty-five
(35) pcf be used for well drained level backfill conditions. The
pressure will increase significantly with sloping backfill.
Slope stability calculations were not performed for specific slopes. If
slopes exceed five (5) feet, engineering calculations should be
performed to substantiate the stability of slopes steeper than 2 to 1.
Fill slopes should be overfilled and trimmed back to competent
material.
The design of foundations should be based on the weighted
expansion index (UBC.Standard No. 29-2) of the soil. As stated in the
soil properties section, the expansion index of the majority of the on-
site soils are in the 'very low' (0-20) classification. However, during
site preparation, if the soil is thoroughly mixed and additional fill is
added, the expansion index may change. Therefore, the
expansion index should be evaluated after the site preparation has
been completed, and the final foundation design adjusted
accordingly.
woe •so -� -
This report is based on the assumption that an adequate program
of client consultation, construction monitoring and testing will be
performed during the final design and construction phases to check
compliance with these recommendations. Maintaining Buena
Engineers, Inc., as the soil engineering firm from beginning to end of
the project will help assure continuity of services. Construction
BUENA ENGINERS, INC.
April 5, 1990 -18- 87-2083-P 1
90-04-724
monitoring and testing would be additional services provided by
our firm. The costs of these services are not included in our present
fee arrangements. The recommended tests and observations
include, but are not necessarily limited to the following:
Consultation during the final design stages of the project.
2. Review of the building plans to observe that recommendations
of our report have been properly implemented into the design.
3. Observation and testing during site preparation, grading and
placement of engineered fill.
4. Consultation as required during construction.
The analysis and recommendations submitted in this report are based in
part upon the data obtained from the twenty-three (23) borings
performed on the site. The nature and extent of variations between the
borings may not become evident until construction. If variations then
appear evident, it will be necessary to reevaluate the
recommendations of this report.
Findings of this report are valid as of this date. However, changes in
conditions of a property can occur with passage of time whether they
be due to natural processes or works of man on this or adjacent
properties. In addition, changes in applicable, or appropriate standards
occur whether they result from legislation or broadening of knowledge.
Accordingly, findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially
by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review
and should not be relied upon after a period of eighteen (18) months.
In the event that any changes in the nature, design or location of the
building are planned, the conclusions and recommendations
contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless the changes
are reviewed and conclusions of this report modified or verified in writing.
This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the
owner, or of his representative, to insure that the information and
recommendations contained herein are called to the attention of the
architect and engineers for the project and are incorporated into the
plans and specifications for the project. It is also the owners responsibility,
or his representative, to insure that the necessary steps are taken to see
that the general contractor and all subcontractors carry out such
recommendations in the field. It is further understood that the owner or his
representative is responsible for submittal of this report to the appropriate
governing agencies.
BUENA ENGINERS. INC.
April 5, 1990
-19-
B7-2083-P1
90-04-724
Buena Engineers, Inc., has prepared this report for the exclusive use of
the client and authorized agents. This report has been prepared in
accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering
practices. No other warranties, either expressed or implied, are made as
the professional advice provided under the terms of this agreement,
and included in the report.
- It is recommended that Buena Engineers, Inc., be provided the
opportunity for a general review of final design and specifications in
order that earthwork and foundation recommendations may be
property interpreted and implemented in the design and specifications.
If Buena Engineers, Inc., is not accorded the privilege of making this
recommendedreview, we can assume no responsibility for
misinterpretation of our recommendations.
Our scope of services did not include any environmental assessment or
investigation to determine the presence of hazardous or toxic materials
in the soil, surface water, groundwater or air, on, below or around this site.
Prior to purchase or development of this site, we suggest that an
environmental assessment be conducted. which addresses
environmental concerns.
END OF TEXT
Appendices
BUENA ENGINERS, INC.
April 5, 1990 -20- B7 -2083 -Pt
90-04-724
1. Envicom, Riverside County, 1976, Seismic Safety Element.
2. Krinitzsky, E.L., Chang, F.K., Magnitude -Related Earthquake Ground
Motions, Bulletin of the Association of Engineering Geologists Vol. XXV,
No. 4, 1988, Pgs. 399-423.
3. Greensfelder, Roger W., 1974, Maximum Credible Rock
Accelerations from Earthquakes in California, CDMG Map Sheet 23.
4. Ploessel, M. R. and Slosson, J. E., 'Repeatable High Ground
Accelerations from Earthquakes', 1974 California Geology, Vol. 27,
No. 9, P,gs. 195-199.
5. Seed, H. B. and Idriss, I. M., 1982, Ground Motions and Soil
Liquefaction During Earthquakes.
6. Seih, Kerry, 1985, 'Earthquake Potentials Along The San Andreas
Fault', Minutes of The National Earthquake Prediction Evaluation
Council, March 29-30,19850 USGS Open File Report 85-507.
BUENA ENGINERS. INC.
SNI 'SU3NIJN3 VN3ne
St?0008 jO S501
dnW 4UPIn puo 91!S
V XIdN3ddd
o�
n
a
y
g
N
0
i
n
Albertsons Market Complex
Date: 02/28/90 Location: Per Plan BORING
NO. I File No. B7 -2083-P1
0
C
> .0
-6
-0
0
—0
3:
DESCRIPTION
REMARKS0
CL
E
>%
U
00
cc E
0
C0
(n
*0
oil
0
A 1 Grey brown very fine to
SP
Scattered thin silt layers up
9
fine sand
to I thick
5
10
92.4
0.6
87
0
12
A2: Brown slightly clayey
SM
86.7
1.8
75
Interbedded silt layers up
to 2' thick, 10 15'
silty very fine to fine
sand
is
27
20
50
A3: Brown clayey very silty
SM
25
39
very fine sand
Scattered thin silt layers
throughout
30
V V
V
97.0
1 1.3
82
V
32
Relatively undisturbed
Total Depth = 31'
ring sample
No Free Water
No Bedrock
35
No recovery
40
Note:
45
The stratification lines
represent the approximate
boundaries between the
soil types, the transiziciis
may be gradual.
5-0
Albertsons Market Complex
Location: Per Plan BORING NO. 4
CL 3 > > .2
DESCRIPTION o 0� E
D a o o U
A3: Brown clayey very
silty very fine sand
A 1 : Grey brown very fine
to fine sand
A2: Brown slightly clayey
silty very fine to fine
sand
File No. B7 -2083-P1 ��
REMARKS
11 Closely interbedded B1 layers
SM 93.7 1.5 79 throughout
E _T;7
SM
Closely interbedded B1 layers
7 - 15'
96.0 1 1.3 1 90 11
Scattered thin silty layers (A2)
15 - 25' _
92.7 1 1.2 1 87
88.8 11.8 1 - - - 11 131 layer 6" thick
Note:
The stratification lines
represent the approximate
boundaries between the
soil types; the transitions
may be gradual.
A4: Grey brown fine to SP
medium sand with Trace gravel
trace coarse sand
- Relatively undisturbed Total Depth = 46'
ring sample No Free Water
® No recovery No Bedrock
Albertsons Market Complex
Date: 02/28/90 Location: Per Plan BORING
NO. 5 File No. B7 -2083-P1
n
3
>
C
>.2
t,2
.0
m
DESCRIPTION
~
o
o
m 0.
REMARKS
CL
0 c
E
Oc
V
o
C0
--
j a
2
o
O: E
a U
0
A 1 :Grey brown very fine
SP
to fine sand
103.0
1.1
89
-
45
-
Scattered thin silt layers
-
throughout
5
10
A2: Brown slightly clayey
SM
'
silty very fine to fine
sand
10
9
86.0
0.9
---
Silt layer 2' thick
150
1 7
100.2
1.0
9 4
A3 layer 3' thick
A 1 :Grey brown very fine
SP
to fine sand
_
20
21
25
30
100.5
0.8
95
A3 layer 6' thick
.
A 4: Grey brown fine to
Sp
30
medium sand with
36
trace coarse sand
35
A3: Brown clayey very
SM
_
45
silty very fine sand
87.4
27.1
.
"
C11: Brown slightly sandy
CL
4 0
_
27
silty. clay
86.8
8.9
---
_
A3: Brown clayey very
SM
C1 layer 6' thick.
silty very fine sand
45
26
Relatively undisturbed
Total Depth = 46'
.
_
ring sample
No Free Water
-
® No recovery
No Bedrock
50
30A2: Brown slightly clayey
50/10" silty very fine to fine
sand
•i•
35 37
40 47
45
25
50
A 1 :Grey brown very fine
to fine sand
® Relatively undisturbed
ring sample
® No recovery
SM
SP
92.1 1 1.5 1 87
Note:
The stratification lines
represent the approximate
boundaries between the
soil types; the transitions
may be gradual.
Total Depth = 46'
No Free Water
No Bedrock
Albertsons
Market Complex
Date: 03/02/90
Location: Per Plan
BORING
NO. 6
File No. 137-2083-P1 "
C
> .2
o
3
o
Q E
REMARKS
CL
0'c
E
to
DESCRIPTION
0
0
0
38
Al : Grey brown very fine
SP
97.7
1.4
92
131 layer 2" thick
-
to fine sand
Thin interbedded Bt layers
5
throughout
32
1 0
17
B1: Brown clayey silt
ML
76.8
5.3
---
V
Closely interbedded Bt layers
15
V1
1
A2t Brown slightly clayey
SM
throughout
silty very fine to fine
_
sand
-
20
24
A 1 : Grey brown very fine
SP
to fine sand
25
36
Thin interbedded 131 layers
_
throughout
30A2: Brown slightly clayey
50/10" silty very fine to fine
sand
•i•
35 37
40 47
45
25
50
A 1 :Grey brown very fine
to fine sand
® Relatively undisturbed
ring sample
® No recovery
SM
SP
92.1 1 1.5 1 87
Note:
The stratification lines
represent the approximate
boundaries between the
soil types; the transitions
may be gradual.
Total Depth = 46'
No Free Water
No Bedrock
Albertsons Market Complex
Date: 03/02/90 Location: Per Plan BORING
NO. 7 File No. B7 -2083-P1
a
3
>
>c
t
M
my
DESCRIPTION
~
o
.5
m a
REMARKS
m e
p-
%
to
U
o
D
o
N
..
d
2.
Q E
1 U
D.o
10
11
0
A I: Grey brown very fine
SP
_
to fine sand
A2: Brown slightly clayey
SM
100.9
5.7
83
Interbedded B1 layers
•
50/1 1
•
silty very fine to fine
throughout
-
sand
95.2
0.5
87
Scattered thin B1 layers
5
30
_
Al : Grey brown very fine
Sp
throughout
to fine sand
10
7
_
A2: Brown slightly clayey
SM
_
silty very fine to fine
_
sand
67.9
5.0
---
15
9
Scattered thin A2 layers -
throughout
20
22
131: Brown clayey silt
ML
100.9
5.7
83
25
32
100.9
5.7
83
A2: Brown slightly clayey
SM
30
36
silty very fine to fine
97.0
0.7
89
Closely interbedded 81 layers
-
sand
81: Brown clayey silt
ML
_
35
-
45
Scattered A4 layers
•
Al : Grey brown very fine
SP
Note:
to fine sand
40,
The stratification .lines
-
50/9 '
represent the approximate
-
boundaries between the
-
soil types; the transitions
-
may be gradual.
45
50/9'
- Relatively undisturbed
Total Depth = 46'
ring sample
No Free Water
-
® No recovery
No Bedrock
50
11
Albertsons Market Complex
Date: 03/02/90 Location: Per Plan BORING
NO. 8 File No. 137 -2083 -PI
CL
-=
(D C
>
Q
0
.0
-
DESCRIPTION
C3
0
Cd
Cd CL
REMARKS
'R
0 C
CL -.7-
0
E
5.
Cn
0
L)
0
U)
C
2
-
X E
0
*0
D
1-0
A3: Brown clayey very
SM
Fill material
0
silty very fine sand
V
25
915.6
8.0
80
V
A2:
SM
A 1 Grey brown very fine
SP
5
30
-
to fine sand
10
10
A2: Brown slightly clayey
Sm
---
1.3
.. .
131 layer 6' thick
silty very fine to fine
Closely interbedded B1 layers
sand
throughout
1-5
V
5
13
88.2
2.0
76
20
Al Grey brown very fine
I SP 182.1
1.4
77
A3 layers throughout
12
to fine sand
Thin interbedded BI layers
4
25
13
A3: Brown clayey very
sm
throughout
silty very fine sand
30
25
-
Scattered A3 layers throughout
A 1 Grey brown very fine
Sp,
•
to fine sand
35
50/9'
Total Depth = 41'
No Free Water
7X,
Cl: Brown slightly sandy
.
No Bedrock
4 0
silty clay
81.8
14-9
50/90
Relatively undisturbed
ring sample
Note:
45
The stratification lines
No recovery
represent the approximate
boundaries between the
soil types; the transitions
-
may be gradual.
5 0
_. Albertsons Market Complex
.
Date: 03/14/90 Location: Per Plan BORING
NO. 9 File No. B7 -2083-P1
_
w
m
a
3
>_ .`s
am
°
am
DESCRIPTION
f
REMARKS
c
Cn
U
°
.0
U)a
o
cc
10-0 U
0
Bt layer 2" thick on surface
103.0
0.9
97
B1 layer 1/2" thick
E12
.-
A 1 : Grey brown very fine to
SP
517
fine sand
61 layer 2" thick
10
17
15
31
A2: Brown slightly clayey
SM
Thin interbedded 131 layers
_
silty very fine to fine
15 - 20'
-
20
29
sand
91.7
1.5
79
- Relatively undisturbed
Total Depth 21'
'
ring sample
No Free Water
-
No Bedrock
25
'
No recovery
30
35
40
_
Note:
45
The stratification lines
_
represent the approximate
_
boundaries between the
_
soil types; the transitions
_
may be gradual.
50
Albertsons Market Complex
1 5
Date: 02/28/90 Location: Per Plan BORING
NO. 11 File No. B7 -2083-P1
-=
m
a
3
>
mo
> ._
m
o
m
DESCRIPTION
2 a
m
REARKS
CL
>.
o
U
o
o
...�y
QB
p-
(n
Ca
o
o U
0
-
A 1 : Grey brown very fine
SP
Thin interbedded B1 layers
to fine sand
up to 1/2' thick
_
14
5
A3: Brown clayey very
SM
95.2
0.5
87
B1 layers throughout
_
21
silty very fine sand
Thin 81 layers throughout
A2: Brown slightly clayey
SM
silty very fine to fine
10
30
sand
100.9
5.7
83
50/11, Al : Grey brown very fine SP
... to fine sand
A4: Grey brown fine to
medium sand with
trace coarse sand
- Relatively undisturbed
ring sample
No recovery
SP
100.9 15.7 183 II
Widely scattered thin B1 layers
15-20'
Total Depth = 31'
No Free Water
No Bedrock
Note:
The stratification lines
represent the approximate
boundaries between the
soil types: the transitions
may be gradual.
Albertsons Market Complex
Date: 02/28/90 Location: Per Plan BORING
NO. 13 File No. B7.2083 -P1
_
_
_
a
>
C
m
> .o
m
s
m
1
3
DESCRIPTION
��'
o
o
m a
REMARKS
CL e
>.
0
U
00
.. "
"a
Cr E
0 _.
rn
(n
j
o
o U
0
A2: Brown slightly clayey
SM
50/9"
silty very fine to fine
sand
5
37
101.4
1.9
88
B1 layer 2" thick
1 0
10
Al :Grey brown very fine
SP
Scattered B1 layers throughout
to fine sand
1 5
21
92.3
1.7
87
20
27
-
A3: Brown clayey very
SM
B1 layer 2" thick
-
silty very fine sand
25
23
Interbedded 61 layers
-
throughout
A 1 :Grey brown very fine
SP
'
to fine sand
30
43
'
Relatively undisturbed
Total Depth = 31'
'
ring sample
No Free Water
-
No Bedrock
35
-
No recovery
40
_
Note:
45
The stratification lines
_
represent the approximate
boundaries between the
_
soil types; the transitions
may be gradual.
50
Albertsons Market Complex
Date: 02/28/90 Location: Per Plan BORING NO. 14 File No. B7 -2083-P1
_
ma
3
>
> .o
a
E
o
o
DESCRIPTION
o
0
REMARKS
CD
o
N
j a
o
-6 E
o 0
0
B 1: Brown clayey silt
ML
50/8'
98.0 4.4 82
Thin interbedded B1 layers
23
9 81
throughout
-
A2: Brown slightly clayey
SM
silty very fine to fine
sand
10
18
91.4 1.1 79
_
Interbedded B1 layers 12 - 17'
15
23
95.3 0.9 90
-
A 1 :Grey brown very fine
SP
-
to fine sand
20
38
-
Scattered A2 layers 20 - 25'
25
30
- Relatively undisturbed
Total Depth = 26'
ring sample
No Free Water
-
No Bedrock
30
-
® No recovery
35
40
-
Note:
45
The stratification lines
-
represent the approximate
boundaries between the
soil types: the transitions
may be gradual.
50
Date: 03/22/90
t(D0 m 3
CL c >• U
p - rn
0
50/11
5 33
10 7
15 7
20 25
25 38
30 25
35
40
45
50
Albertsons Market Complex
Location: Per Plan BORING NO. 15
CL 3 > > .2
DESCRIPTION oLa D2 Cc E
0
U)C a o o U.
A2: Brown slightly clayey Stet
silty very fine to fine11
sand 120.0 4.6 100
A 1 :Grey brown very fine SP
to fine sand
File No. B7 -2083-P1
REMARKS
107.9 13.5 1 100 11 Thin B1 layer
65.1 1 3.6 1 61 11 B1 layer 3" thick
A3: Brown clayey verySM Interbedded clay layers
silty very fine sand 89 7 1.8 76 throughout
Al : Grey brown very fine SP
to fine sand 11
Relatively undisturbed
ring sample
No recovery
Total Depth = 31'
No Free Water
No Bedrock
Note:
The stratification lines
represent the approximate
boundaries between the
soil types; the transitions
may be gradual.
Albertsons
Market Complex
BORING
NO.
16
Date: 03/22/90 Location: Per Plan
2.4
80
1 7
> 2
m.0 m N DESCRIPTION
o
E
0
E
ri
O oCD
7 fn U
0
N
a
o
o U
-0
"
SM
SM
0 A2: Brown slightly clayey
' silty very fine to fine
silty very fine sand
" 50/10sand
112.8
9.3
97
SP
50/10"
5 A 1 : Grey brown very fine
31
- to fine sand
B1: Brown clayey silt
ML
A4: Grey brown fine to
SP
File No. 87-2083-P1
REMARKS
B1 layers throughout
10 21 87.2 2.6 82 II closely interbedded 81 .
layers 10 - 17'
A I: Grey brown very fine I SP
15
to fine sand
85.2
2.4
80
1 7
20
33
"
A3: Brown clayey very
SM
'
silty very fine sand
25
50/10"
A4: Grey brown fine to
SP
"
medium sand with
trace coarse sand
30
25
35
50/11'
"
A 1 :Grey brown very fine
SP
"
to fine sand
40
35
45
W..
50
- Relatively undisturbed
ring sample
® No recovery
so
Scattered thin B1 layers
Scattered thin clay layers
throughout
Note:
The stratification lines
represent the approximate
boundaries between the
soil types; the transitions
may be gradual.
Total Depth = 46'
No Free Water
No Bedrock
Albertsons Market Complex
Date: 03/23/90 Location: Per Plan BORING
NO. 19 File No. B7-2083-131
'
3
m
c
> .s
E
o
o
DESCRIPTION
o
f
REMARKS
CL
Q c
N
U2
.0
o
N
U
0
A2: Brown slightly clayey
SM
"
silty very fine to fine
-
50/8'
sand
117.1
5.3
100
A 1 : Grey brown very fine
SP
5
46
to fine sand
110.3
3.3
100
A3: Brown clayey very
SM
-
silty very fine sand
1 0
8
A I: Grey brown very fine
SP
- - -
3.7
---
--
to fine sand
to
-
A2: Brown slightly clayey
SMClosely
interbedded clay
1 5
10
silty very fine to fine
92.5
6.2
80
layers
.sand
20
23
- - -
3.2
---
Obvious voids
131: Brown clayey silt
ML
.
A3 layer 1' thick
25
24
86.2
7.0
- - -
-
A 4: Grey brown tine to
SP
30
42
medium sand with
-
trace coarse sand
35
- Relatively undisturbed
Total Depth - 35'
-
ring sample
No Free Water
-
No Bedrock
40
® No recovery
Note:
45
The stratification lines
.
represent the approximate
boundaries between the
soil types; the transitions
may be gradual.
5o
Albertsons Market Complex
Date: 03/23/90 Location: Per Plan BORING
NO. 21 File No. B7 -2083-P1
CL
>
C
> c
m
m
DESCRIPTION
o
0
a
REMARKS
CL
U
c
o
E
0
A 1 : Grey brown very fine
SP
"
240
to fine sand
5
33
100.7
0.8
95
A2 bottom 6'
Closely interbedded silt
-
layers 10 - 15'
_
A2: Brown slightly clayey
SM
10
silty very fine to fine
22
sand
-
A
15
50/8"
B1 layer 3" thick
20
42
76.3
9.4
---
---
-
B1: Brown clayey silt
ML
25
50/10"
86.2
10.4
---
30
85.6
7.0
---
Thin A4 layers
24
-
A2: Brown slightly clayey
sM
-
silty very fine to fine
35
50/11,
sand
98.1
2.4
85
131 layer 2" thick
_
444
A4: Grey brown fine to
SP
medium sand with
40
trace coarse sand
40
-
Relatively undisturbed
Total Depth = 41'
-
ring sample
No Free Water
No Bedrock
45
No recovery
Note: The stratification
-
lines represent the
"
approximate boundaries
between the soil types; the
transitions may be gradual.
50
Albertsons Market Complex
Date: 03/23/90 Location: Per Plan BORING
NO. 22 File No. B7 -2083-P1
_
a
>
> 0
t m
.0
o 3
DESCRIPTION
H
a
N
0
� U
E
REMARKS
a
C
E
N
V o
N
--
j a
o
- U
0
A2: Brown slightly clayey
SM
'
silty very fine to. fine
_
29
sand
5
26
A 1 : Grey brown very fine
SP
99.0
2.8
93
Thin silt layer
_
to fine sand
1 0
32
86.1
6.6
- - •
Thin Al layers
-
B1: Brown clayey silt
ML
1 5
18
67.9
7.9
...
A3 layer 2" thick
-
B1 layer 4" thick
20
18
-
A2: Brown slightly clayey
SM
Closely interbedded silt layers
•
silty very fine to fine
20 - 25'
-
sand
25
50
30
50/11'
'
- Relatively undisturbed
Total Depth 31'
'
ring sample
No Free Water
-
No Bedrock
35
-
No recovery
40
-
Note:
45
The stratification lines
_
represent the approximate
boundaries between the
_
soil types; the transitions
_
may be gradual.
50
Albertsons Market Complex
Date: 03/23/90 Location: Per Plan BORING
NO. 23 File No. B7 -2083-P1
.:
3
m
m c
o
s m°
�
m
3
~
o"
m a
REMARKS
m C
�.
cna
0
U
o
i
o
QE
o U
0
.
.. -
1.5
- _ _
Interbedded silt layers up to
22
1/2' thick throughout 0 - 10'
A 1 : Grey brown very fine
SP
5
14
to fine sand
10
18
Micaceous
1542
106.1
2.4
100
- Relatively undisturbed
Total Depth - 16' _
ring sample
No Free Water
-
No Bedrock
20
® No recovery
25
30
35
40
_
Note:
45
The stratification lines
represent the approximate
-
boundaries between tha
soil types; the transitions
may be gradual.
50
Z
n
N
C
3
o D
0 -v
Q' O Z
(D v_
N N X
� vo
cD
N
C
C
N
April 5, 1990 B-1 137-2083-P1
90-04-724
BORING/DEPTH 1@ 0-5' 1@ 8-13' 4@ 0-5' 3@ 0-2' 6@10' 19@15'
M CL
USCS
SID. SM SM SP L
SOIL DESIGNATION Al A2 A3 A4 131
C1
MAXIMUM
DENSITY (pct 106.3 115.7 118.8 105.7 ---
OPTIMUM MOISTURE (%) 14.4 11.7 11.9 14.7 ---
ANGLE OF INT. FRIC. 32.40 31.40 31.50 35.80 ---
---
_COHESION
(psf) 100 160 175 60 ---
---
EXPANSION
INDEX 0 0 4 --- ---
7 -
-GRAIN
GRAIN SIZE
'DISTRIBUTION (�)
GRAVEL
0.0 0.0 0.1 1.2 0.0
0.0
SAND
90.3 74.5 45.3 95.4 1.9,
10.4
SILT
7.0 1.7.3 36.0. 1.7 61.9
19.7
CLAY
2.7. 8.2 18.6 1.7 36.2
69.9
SOIL
DESCRIPTIONS:
Al: Grey brown very fine to fine sand (SP)
A2: Brown slightly clayey silty very fine to fine sand (SM)
A3: -Brown clayey very silty very fine sand (SM)
A4: Grey brown fine to medium sand with trace' coarse sand.
(SP)
131; Brown clayey.silt (ML)
Cl: Brown slightly sandy silty clay (CL)
BUENA ENGINERS, INC.
April 5, 1990
B-2
B7 -2083-P1
IN-PLACE DENSITIES
90-04-724
RELATIVE
BORIN &_DEPTH
1@ 5.0
DRY DENSITY %
92.4
MOISTURE
0.6
COMPACTION
87%
10.0
86.7
1.8
75%
30.0
97.0
1.3
82%
2@ 5.0
86.8
1.2
82%
15.0
---
2.2
---
3@ 2.0
93.1
6.4
88%
10.0
90.5
7.1
78%
15.0
93.6
8.7
81%
4@ 2.0 ',
93.7
1.5
79%
15.0
96.0
1.3
90%
20.0
92.7
1.2
87%
30.0
88.8
1.8
---
5@2.0
103.0
1.1
89% -
10.0
15.0
86.0
100.2
0.9
1.0
5.0
100.5
0.8
95%
35.0
99.5
1.4
84%
40.0
87.4
27.1
---
45.0
86.8
8.9
---
6@ 2.0
97.7
1.4
92%
10.0
76.8
5.3
45.0
92.1
1.5
87%
7@2.0
110.4
1.6
95%
5.0
94.1
2.4
89%
15.0
65.8
6.0
55%
20.0
68.4
4.8
58%
25.0
83.5
7.3
70%
30.0
95.1
3.5
82%
8@2.0
95.6
8.0
80%
10.0
15.0
---
88.2
1:3
2.0
---
76%
20.0
82.1
1.4
77%
40.0
81.8
14.9
---
BUENA ENGINERS. INC.
April 5, 1990
B-3
B7 -2083-P1
90-04-724
BORING, & DEPTH
IN-PLACE DENSITIES
DRY DENSITY %
MOISTURE
RELATIVE
COMPACTION
9@2.0
103.0
0.9
97%
20.0
91.7
1.5
79%
11 @5.0
98.1
13.0
83%
10.0
97.7
7.3
84%
20.0
96.8
0.8
91%
12@2.0
---
2.9
---
5.0
89.0
5.0
75%
10.0
94.7
1.0
89%
15.0:
89.9
1.4
85%
13@5.0
101.4
1.9
88%
15.0
92.3
1.7
87%
14@2.0
-98.0
4.4
82% -
. 5.0
94.1
1.9
81%
10.0
91.4
1.1
79%
15.0
95.3
0.9
90%
15@2.0
120.0
4.6
100%
5.0
107.9
3.5
100%
15.0
65.1
3.6
61%
20.0
89.7
1:8
76%
16@2.0
112.8
9.3
97%
10.0
87.2
2.6 -
82%
15.0
85.2
2.4
80%
17@2'.0
106.9
10.5
92%
5.0
85.9
8.3
72%
10.0
90.9
4.8
77%
20.0
99.9
1.0
95%
18@10.0
80.5
1.4
76%
20.0
75.7-
7.1
---
19@2.0
117.1
5.3
100%
5.0
110.3
3.3
100%
10.0
---
3.7
---
15.0
92.5
6.2
80%
20.0
---
3.2
---
25.0
86.2
7.0
---
BUENA ENGINERS, INC.
April 5, 1990 B-4 B7 -2083-P1
90-04-724
20@5.0
15.0
20.0
21 @5.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
22@5.0
10.0
15.0
23@2.0
15.0
98.7
2.4
85%
61.0
11.7
---
88.4
2.9
83%
100.7
0.8
95%
76.3
9.4
---
86.2
10.4
---
85.6
7.0
---
98.1
2.4
85%
99.0
2.8
93%
81.6
6.6
---
67.9
7.9
---
---
1.5
---
106.1
2.4
100%
a11CMA r_wnl r_QQ IN(:
0
B7 -2083-P1
MOISTURE CONTENT IN PERCENT OF DRY WEIGHT
108
106
104
12 14 16
METHOD OF COMPACTION
ASTM D-1557-78, METHOD A or C
SOIL TYPE MAXIMUM DENSITY OPTIMUM MOISTURE
Al 106.3pcf 14.4%
Boring 1 @ 0-5'
MAXIMUM DENSITY - OPTIMUM MOISTURE CURVES
B7 -2083-P1
MOISTURE CONTENT IN PERCENT OF DRY WEIGHT
f -
O
O
LL
U
m 116
U
Q
W
CL
a)
G 114
z
n
O
CL _
z
}
F- 112
z
W
0
}
2
O
10 12 14
METHOD OF COMPACTION
ASTM D-1557-78, METHOD A or C
SOIL TYPE MAXIMUM DENSITY OPTIMUM MOISTURE
A2 115.7 pcf 11.7%
Boring 1 @ 8-13'
MAXIMUM DENSITY - OPTIMUM MOISTURE CURVES
B7 -2083-P1
MOISTURE CONTENT IN PERCENT OF DRY WEIGHT
f -
O
O
U.
U
_ m
U
Q
W
CL
�} o
z
m
O.
CL
z
}
z
W
D
O
10 12 1.4
METHOD OF COMPACTION
ASTM D-1557-78, METHOD A or C
SOIL TYPE MAXIMUM DENSITY
A3 118.8 pcf
8 o r i n g 4 @ 0-5'
120
118
116
OPTIMUM MOISTURE
MAXIMUM DENSITY - OPTIMUM MOISTURE CGURVES
B7 -2083-P1
MOISTURE CONTENT IN PERCENT OF DRY WEIGHT
f-
0
0
U.0
m 106
U
Q
W
CL
a�
104
z
m
0
CL _
z
}
�- 102
07
z
W
O
}
2
O
12 14 16
METHOD OF COMPACTION
ASTM D-1557-78, METHOD A or C
SOIL TYPE MAXIMUM DENSITY OPTIMUM MOISTURE
A4 105.7 pef 14.7%
Boring 3 @ 0-2'
MAXIMUM DENSITY — OPTIMUM MOISTURE CURVES
87-2083-P1
4.0
C4 3.5
O
0 3.0
CL 2.5
Y
2.0
W
1.5
C7
Z 1.0 -
Q
=
0.5-
0 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
NORMAL LOAD . (KIPS / FOOT )
DIRECT SHEAR DATA
SSI type: e�
Bo -ring and depth: 1 @ 0-5
Angle of internal friction: 32.4°
Cohesion: 100 DO
Samples remolded to 90% of maximum density
D Samples relatively undisturbed
4.
t.LT.
I�
a 3.
H
O
0 3.
a, 2.
Y
v
2.
w
cc 1.
N
. C'3
Z 1.
cc
Q
W 0
B7 -2083-P9
5
0-
5-
0-
5-
0-
5 50505
0 0.5 1.0. 1.5 2.0 2.5 :s.0 s.a +.0
NORMAL LOAD - (KIPS / FOOT )
DIRECT SHEAR DATA
Soil type: A
Bdring and depth:
Angle of internal friction: 31.4°
Cohesion: 160 psf
Samples
remolded
to 90% of maximum density
❑
Samples
relatively
undisturbed
M
10.
B7 -2083-P1
0 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
NORMAL LOAD. (KIPS / FOOT )
DIRECT SHEAR DATA
Steil type: A3
BDring and depth: '4 @ 0-5'
Angle of internal friction: 31.5
Cohesion: 175
0 Samples remolded to 90% of maximum density
❑ Samples relatively undisturbed
C14
3.5
F-
0
0
3.0
CL
2..,
Y
2.(
w
1.;
N
(:3
Z_
1.(
0=
Q
=
0.
N
10.
B7 -2083-P1
0 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
NORMAL LOAD. (KIPS / FOOT )
DIRECT SHEAR DATA
Steil type: A3
BDring and depth: '4 @ 0-5'
Angle of internal friction: 31.5
Cohesion: 175
0 Samples remolded to 90% of maximum density
❑ Samples relatively undisturbed
TABLE NO. 2
MINIMUM FOUNDATION REQUIREMENTS*
(1) (10)
Footings for slab & Raised Floor Systems (2) (5) (10)
Concrete Slabs
3 12' Minimum Thickness
y
All Perimeter
Interior footings
Premoistening control
Weighted
Expansion
P
N
m
H
H
m
t
m
Footin s
(6)
for slab and
raised floors (6)
for soils under footings.
Piers under
Index
`
Reinforcement
Reinforcement
Total
piers and slabs
raised floors
for
(4)
thickness
(5) (6)
g
continuous
of sand
oE
g
Depth below natural
footings
Inches
surface of ground
(3) (8)
and finish grade
INCHES
Moistening of ground
Piers allowed
0-20
1
6
12
6
12
12
None
6X6-
2
prior to
for single
g
voiy low
2
8
15
7
18
18
Required
10/10
placing concrete
floor loads only
(Non-
3
10
18
8
24
24
WWF
recommended
expansive)
21-50
1
6
12
6
15
12
144 top
6X6-
12o% of optimum moisture
Piers allowed
Law
2
8
15
7
18
18
and bottom
10/10
4
content to a depth of 21'
below lowest adjacent grade.
for single
floor bads only
3
10
18
8
24
24
WWF
Testing Required
6X6-
1
6
12
6
21
12
144 top
6/6 WWF
130% of optimum moisture
Piers not
and bottom
or #3 bars
4
content to a depth of 27"
allowed
Mud um
3
0
15
8
24
24
@ 24" e.w.
below lowest adjacent grade.
#3 bars @24' in exterior footing
Testing Required
and bent 3' into slab 9
6X5-
1
6
12
6
27
12
145 top
6/6 WWF
140% of optimum moisture
91-130
2
8
12
8
27
18
and bottom
or #3 bars
4
content to a depth of 33"
Piers not
I Igh
3
10
15
8
27
24
24" e.w.
below lowest adjacent grade.
allowed
#3 bars @ 24' in exterior footing
Testing Required
and bent Tinto slab 9
Above 130
SPECIAL DESIGN BY LICENSED ENGINEER/ARCHITECT O1/09/90/SSS
Wiy High
-
'Rufur to next page for footnotes. (1) through (10)
•• •Leib EMIR
Premoistening is required where specified in Table 2 in order to
achieve... maximum and uniform expansion of soils prior to
construction and thus limit structural distress caused by uneven
expansion and shrinkage. Other systems which do not include
premoistening may be approved by the Building Official when such
alternatives are shown to provide equivalent safeguards against
adverse effects of expansive soils.
2 Underfloor access crawl holes shall be provided with curbs
extending not less than six (6) inches above adjacent grade to
prevent surface water from entering the foundation area.
3. Reinforcement for continuous foundations shall be placed not less
than three (3) inches above the bottom of the footings and not less
than three (3) inches below the top of the stem.
4. Reinforcement shall be placed at mid -depth of slab.
a After premoistening, the specified moisture content of soils shall be
maintained until concrete is placed. Required moisture content
shall be verified by an approved testing laboratory not more than
twenty-four (24) hours prior to placement of concrete.
6. Crawl spaces under raised floors need not be premoistened
except under interior footings. Interior footings which are not
enclosed by a continuous perimeter foundation system or
equivalent concrete or masonry moisture barrier complying with
UBC Section 2907 (b) shall be designed and constructed as
specified for -perimeter footings in Table 2..
7. A grade beam not less than twelve (12) inches by twelve (12) inches
in cross section, reinforced as specified for continuous foundations in
Table 2 shall be provided at garage door openings.
8. Foundation stem walls which exceed a height of three (3) times the
stem thickness above lowest adjacent grade shall be reinforced in
accordance with Sections 2418 and 2614 in the UBC or as required
by engineering design, whichever is more restrictive.
9. Bent reinforcing bars between exterior footing and slab shall be
omitted when floor is designed as an independent, 'floating' slab.
10. Fireplace footings shall be reinforced with a horizontal grid located
three (3) inches above the bottom of the footing and consisting of
not less than number four (#4) bars at twelve (12) inches on center
each way. Vertical chimney reinforcing bars shall be hooked under
the grid.
BUENA ENGINERS, INC.
APPENDIX C
Standard Grading Specifications
BUENA ENGINERS, INC.
C-1
- STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
PROJECT: ONE ELEVEN LAQUINTA CENTER
CLIENT: TRANSPACIFIC DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
1. These Standard Grading Specifications have been prepared for
the exclusive use of our client for specific application to referenced
project in accordance with generally accepted soil and
foundation engineering practices. No other warranty, expressed or
implied, is made.
2. These specifications shall be integrated with the Engineering Report
of which they are a part. Should conflicting statements be found
between these standard specifications and the itemized
recommendations contained in the main body of the engineering
report, the latter shall govern.
3. Buena Engineers, Inc., referred to as the soil engineer, should be
retained to provide continuous soil engineering services during
construction of the grading, excavation and foundation phases of
the work. This is to observe compliance with the design concepts,
specifications or recommendations and to allow design changes in
the event that subsurface conditions differ -from that anticipated prior
to start of construction.
4. The presence of our field representative will be for the purpose of
providing observation and field testing. Our work does not include
supervision or direction of the actual work of the contractor, his
employees or agents. The contractor for this project should be so
advised. The contractor should also be informed that neither the
presence of our field representative nor the observation and testing
by our firm shall excuse him in any way from defects discovered in
his work. It is understood that our firm will not be responsible for job or
site safety on this project. Job and site safety will be the sole
responsibility of the contractor.
5. If the contractor encounters subsurface conditions at the site that (a)
are materially different from those indicated in the contract plans or
in specifications, or (b) could not have been reasonably
anticipated as inherent in the work of the character provided in the
contract, the contractor shall immediately notify the owner verbally
and in writing within 24 hours. This notification shall be a condition
precedent before any negotiations for 'chan,.,ed or differing site
conditions' can proceed. If the owner determines that conditions
do materially so differ and cause an increase or decrease in the
BUENA ENGINERS, INC.
C-2
contractor's cost of, or the time required for, performance of any
part of the work under this contract, then negotiations shall
commence between owner and contractor to provide equitable
adjustment to owner or contractor resulting therefrom.
b. Whenever the words 'supervision', 'inspection', or 'control' appear
they shall mean periodic observation of the work and the taking of
soil tests as deemed necessary by the soil engineer for substantial
compliance with plans, specifications and design concepts.
7. These specifications shall consist of clearing and grubbing,
preparation of land to be filled, filling of the land, spreading,
compaction and control of the fill, and subsidiary work necessary to
complete the grading of the filled areas to conform with the lines,
grades and slopes as shown on the accepted plans.
8. The standard test used to define minimum densities of compaction
work shall be the ASTM Test Procedure D 1557. Densities shall be
expressed as a relative compaction in terms of the maximum
density obtained in the laboratory by the foregoing standard
procedure.
9. Field density tests will be performed by the soil engineer during
grading operations. At least one (1) test shall be made for each five
hundred (500) cubic yards or fraction thereof placed with a
minimum of two (2) tests per layer in isolated areas. Where
sheepsfoot rollers are used, the soil may be disturbed to a depth of
several inches. Density tests shall be taken in compacted material
below the disturbed surface. When these tests indicate that the
density of any layer of fill or portion thereof is below the required
density, the particular layer or portion shall be reworked until the
required density has been obtained.
10. Earth -moving and working operations shall be controlled to prevent
water from running into excavated areas. Excess water shall be
promptly removed and the site kept dry. Fill material shall not be
placed, spread or rolled during unfavorable weather conditions.
When the work is interrupted by heavy rain, fill operations shall not be
resumed until field tests by the soil engineer indicate that the
moisture content and density of the fill are as previously specified.
11. Compaction shall be by sheepsfoot rollers, vibrating sheepsfoot
rollers, multiple -wheel pneumatic -tired rollers or other types of
acceptable compacting rollers. Rollers shall be of such design that
they will be able to compact the fill to the specified density. Rolling
shall be accomplished while the fill material is within the specified
moisture content range. Rolling of each layer shall be continuous
over its entire area and the roller shall make sufficient trips to insure
that the required density has been obtained.
12. Existing structures, foundations, trash, debris, loose fill, trees (not
included in landscaping), roots, tree remains and other rubbish shall
be removed, piled or burned or otherwise disposed of so as to
BUENA ENGINERS. INC.
14
C-3
leave the areas that have been disturbed with a neat and finished
appearance free from debris. No burning shall be permitted in the
area to be filled.
13. When f[H material includes rock, large rocks will not be allowed to
nest a6d"voids must be carefully filled with small stones or earth and
properly compacted. Rock larger than eight (8) inches in diameter
will not be permitted in the compacted fill without review as to
location by the soil engineer.
14. Organic matter shall be removed from the surface upon which the
fill, foundations or pavement sections are to be placed. The surface
shall then be plowed or scarified to a depth of at least eight (8)
inches and until the surface is free from ruts, hummocks or other
uneven features which would tend to prevent uniform compaction
by the equipment to be used. Specific recommendations
pertaining to stripping and minimum depth of recompaction of
native soils are presented in the main body of the soil report.
15. Native soil free from organic material and other deleterious material
may be used as compacted fill; however, during grading
operations the soil engineer will re-examine the native soils for
organic content.
16. Imported material should, be tested and reviewed by Buena
Engineers, Inc., before being brought to the site. The materials used
shall be free from organic matter and other deleterious material.
17. Where fills are made on hillsides or exposed slope areas, greater
than ten (10) percent, horizontal benches shall be cut into firm
undisturbed natural ground to provide a horizontal base so that
each layer is placed and compacted on a horizontal plane. The
initial bench at the toe of the fill shall be at least ten (10) feet in width
on firm, undisturbed natural ground at the elevation of the toe stake
placed at the natural angle of repose or design slope. The width
and frequency of succeeding benches will vary with the soil
conditions and the steepness of slope.
18. The selected fill material shall be placed in layers which, when
compacted, shall not exceed six. (6) inches in thickness. Layers shall
be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly blade -mixed during
spreading. After each layer has been placed, mixed and spread
evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted to a relative compaction
of not less than ninety (90) percent. The fill operation shall be
continued in six (6) inch compacted layers, as specified above, until
the fill has been brought to the finished slopes and graded as shown
on the accepted plans.
19. When the moisture content of the fill material is not sufficient to
achieve required compaction, -vcter shall be adder: until the soil:,
attain a moisture content so that thorough bonding is achieved
BUENA ENGINERS. INC.
C.
during the compacting process. When the moisture content of the fill
material is excessive, the fill material shall be aerated by blading or
other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is reduced to
an acceptable content to achieve proper compaction.
20. Existing'Ieptic tanks and other underground storage tanks must be
removed from the site prior to commencement of building, grading
or fill operations. Underground tanks, including connecting drain
fields and other lines, must be totally removed and the resulting
depressions properly reconstructed and filled. Depressions left from
tree removal shall also be properly filled and compacted.
21. The methods for removal of subsurface irrigation and utility lines will
depend on the depth and location of the line. One of the following
methods may be used: 1) Remove the pipe and compact the soil
in the trench according to the applicable portions of these grading
recommendations, 2) The pipe shall be crushed in the trench. The
trench shall then be filled and compacted according to the
applicable portions of these grading specifications, 3) Cap the
ends of the line with concrete to mitigate entrance of water. The
length of the cap shall not be less than five (5) feet. The concrete
mix shall have a minimum shrinkage.
22. Abandoned water wells on the site shall be capped according to
the requirements of the appropriate regulatory agency. The
strength of the cap shall be at least equal to the adjacent soils. The
final elevation of the top of the well casing must be a minimum of
thirty-six (36) inches below adjacent grade prior to grading or fill
operations. Structure foundations should not be placed over the
capped well.
BUENA ENGINERS. INC.
F 1
RECEIVED
' 4.90
ME a OF Buena Engineers, Inc. MAY 19
AN fMfll lrMM INQ CCYGANr
r�cVE.OFk1F.�VT DEPARTMENT
79-811B COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE - BERMUDA DUNES, CALIFORNIA 92201 PHONE (619) 345-1588 FAX (619)W-7315
May 10, 1990 B7 -2083-P1
90-05-785
Transpacific Development Company
2377 Crenshaw Boulevard
Torrance, California 90501-3325
Attention: Keith Holmes
Project: 111 La Quinta Center
La Quinta, California
Ref: Geotechnical Engineering Report by Buena Engineers, Inc.
dated April 5, 1990; Report No. 90-04-724
This letter is concerning the additional two and six tenths (2.6) acre site to the north of.
the Whitewater Channel and the channel crossing along Adams street. The site plan
for this portion of the project was inadvertently omitted from the referenced report. The
plan is attached with the approximate boring locations indicated. The corresponding
boring logs are included in the referenced report.
If there are any questions concerning this letter or the referenced report please contact
the undersigned. I apologize for any inconvenience.
Respectfully submitted,
BUENA ENGINEERS, INC
E
E
F.�,���
Copies:
4 - Transpacific Development Company
1 - VTA file
1 - PS File
BERMUDA DUNES BEAUMONT BAKERSFIELD LANCASTER VENTURA
1619134& 1588 (714) 845.9883 ( 805) 327-5150 (805) 948-7538 (805) 642-6727
* APPROX1,7g7r ,13° 4/4/6 Le e.Ine4) S
ADD/no tJ4 f- 2-4 16AC 517v- W
ltXiiy�!✓� f�1L GA4fw)R c ROSS I J 6
LAO u ►.rr4 C-4.
Buena Engineers, Inc.
DATE: S' -/O -90 1 FILE N0.:137 -2 -O83 -PI
Jy f,
P.O. BOX 1504
Building 78-672 Hwy 11178-105 CALLE ESTADO
Address LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253
Owner
CArl E S Jr.
Mailing 12{}ci BUILDING: TYPE CONST._
N. rb�ax Slued.
Address JZa
�
City aaki�lrn, CA Zip 92803 Tel.
kC,onuaclor - I
Qc Sign, Ino.
Address .
1345 S. Allec St.
�,A!thaheim, CA Zip 92805 T014) 520-9144
State'Lic. City
& Classif. C-45 654230 Lic. #
Arch., Engr.,
Designer Dale V, Myhra
Address Tel '
.2080 S. Grand Arte. 1010241-0116
City zip_State
.Santa AAL k X"705 le Lic, # C -x2091.2
tt L �CENSED CONTRACTOR'S DECLARATION
I herebyy�aft f that L,am(licensed undelnprovisions,ofthapter 9 (commencing with Section
71100) ob0i%Ion 3�df the Business andfProfessid'ns Code„andxmy license,is in full force and
C — OWNER -BUILDER DECLARATION
I hereby affirm that I am exempt from the Contractor's License Law for the following
reason: (Sec. 7031.5,Business and Professions Code: Any city or county which requires a
permit to construct, alter, improve, demolish, or repair any structure, prior to Its issuance also
requires the applicant for such permit to rile a signed statement that he is licensed pursuant to
the provisions of the Contractor's License Law, Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 7000) of
Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code,` or that. he is exempt therefrom, and the basis
for'the alleged exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by 'any applicant for a permit
subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars ($500).
❑ I, as owner of the property, or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will
do the work, and the structure is not intended or offered for sale. (Sec. 7044, Buisness and
Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner or property who
builds or improves thereon and who does such work himself or through his own employees,
provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If, however, the building
or Improvement is sold within one year of completion, the owner -builder will have the burden
of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sale.)
0 I, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to con-
struct the project. (Sec, 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law
does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who contracts for
such projects with a contractor(s) licensed pursuant to the Contractor's License. Law.)
O 1 am exempt under Sec. B. & P.C. for this reason
Date Owner
WORKERS' COMPENSATION DECLARATION
I hereby affirm that I have a certificate of consent to self -insure, or a certificate of
Worker's Compensation Insurance, or a certified copy thereof. (Sec. 3800, Labor Code.)
Policy No. _r .Company
0c66p filed with the city. ❑ Certified copy is hereby furnished.
CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION FROM
WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE
(This section need not be completed if the permit is for one hundred dollars ($100) valuation
or less.)
I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not
employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the Workers' Compensation
Laws of California.
Date Owner
NOTICE TO APPLICANT: If, after making this Certificate of Exemption you should become
subject to the Workers' Compensation provisions or the Labor Code, you must forthwith
comply with such provisions or this permit shall be deemed revoked.
CONSTRUCTION LENDING AGENCY
I hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the
work for which this permit is issued. (Sec. 3097, Civil Code.)
Lender's Name
Lender's Address
This is a building permit when properly filled out, signed and validated, and is subject to
expiration if work thereunder is suspended for 180 days.
I certify that I have read this application and state that the above information is correct.
I agree to comply with all city and county ordinances and state laws relating to building
construction, and hereby authorize representatives -of this city to enter the above-.
mentioned property for inspection purposes.
Signature of applicant Date
Mailing Address
City, State, Zip
P. Number
al Description
No. 12484
-OCC. GRP.
Project Description sian ,
ZONE: BY:
Minimum Setback Distances:
Front Setback from Center Line
Rear Setback from Rear Prop. Line
Side Street Setback from Center Line
)
-*t ty Line
r"I
FINAL DATE A NSZOR
Validati
e
Sq. Ft.
Size
No. No.-Dw.
Stories Units
New ❑ Add ❑
Alter ❑ Repair ❑ Demolition ❑
Estimated Valuation
x 10 s 000.()0
PERMIT
AMOUNT
Plan Chk. Dep.
Plan Chk. Bal.
Const.
Mech..
Electrical
Plumbing
S.M.I.
Grading
Driveway Enc.
Infrastructure
TOTAL
x •
REMARKS
ZONE: BY:
Minimum Setback Distances:
Front Setback from Center Line
Rear Setback from Rear Prop. Line
Side Street Setback from Center Line
)
-*t ty Line
r"I
FINAL DATE A NSZOR
Validati
e
CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE
NO. ELECTRICAL FEES
NO. PLUMBING FEES
IST FL. SQ. FT. ® $
UNITS
COLL. AREA
2ND FL. SQ. FT.
ROUGH PLUMB.
YARD SPKLR SYSTEM
POR. SQ. FT. ®
MOB]LEHOME SVC.
BAR SINK
GAR. SQ. FT. ®
POWER OUTLET
ROOF DRAINS
CAR P. SQ. FT. ®
DUCT WORK
DRAINAGE PIPING
WALL SQ. FT.
GAS (ROUGH)
DRINKING FOUNTAIN
SQ. FT. ®
HEATING (FINAL)
URINAL
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION VALUATION is
GAS (FINAL)
WATER PIPING
NOTE: Not to be used as property tax valuation
FLOOR DRAIN
MECHANICAL FEES
WATER HEATER
WATER SOFTENER
VENT SYSTEM FAN EVAP.000L HOOD
SIGN
WASHER(AUTO)(DISH)
APPLIANCE DRYER
WATER SYSTEM
GARBAGE DISPOSAL
FURNACE UNIT WALL FLOOR SUSPENDED
GRADING
cu. yd.
$ plus x$
LAUNDRYTRAY
AIR HANDLING UNIT CFM
KITCHEN SINK
ABSORPTION SYSTEM B.T.U.
TEMP USE PERMIT SVC
WATER CLOSET'
COMPRESSOR HP
POLE,TEMIPERM
LAVATORY
HEATING SYSTEM FORCED GRAVITY
AMPERES SERV ENT
SHOWER
BOILER B.T.U.
SO. FT. ® c
BATH TUB
SQ. FT. ® c
WATER HEATER
MAX. HEATER OUTPUT, B.T.U.
SQ. FT. RESID ® 1+/4 c
SEWAGE DISPOSAL
SQ.FT.GAR ® 3/ac
HOUSE SEWER
SPARK ARRESTOR
GAS PIPING
PERMIT FEE
PERMIT FEE
PERMIT FEE
DBL
TOTAL FEES
MICRO FEE
MECH.FEE PL.CK.FEE
CONST. FEE ELECT. FEE
SMI FEE PLUMB. FEE
STRUCTURE PLUMBING ELECTRICAL HEATING & AIR COND. SOLAR
SETBACK
GROUND PLUMBING
UNDERGROUND
A.C. UNIT
COLL. AREA
SLAB GRADE
ROUGH PLUMB.
BONDING
HEATING (ROUGH)
STORAGE TANK
FORMS
SEWER OR SEPTIC TANK
ROUGH WIRING
DUCT WORK
ROCK STORAGE
FOUND. REINF.
GAS (ROUGH)
METER LOOP
HEATING (FINAL)
OTHER APPJEQUIP.
REINF. STEEL
GAS (FINAL)
TEMP. POLE
GROUT
WATER HEATER
SERVICE
FINAL INSP.
BOND BEAM
WATER SYSTEM
GRADING
cu. yd.
$ plus x$
_$
LUMBER GR.
AL INSP. �-
FRAMING
FINAL INSP.
ROOFING
REMARKS:
VENTILATION
FIRE ZONE ROOFING
FIREPLACE
SPARK ARRESTOR
GAR. FIREWALL
LATHING
MESH
INSULATION/SOUND
FINISH GRADING
NSPECTION / /O—
NAL INSPECTION//—/V,—?q
f ---R _ -
CERT.
CERT. OCC.
FENCE FINAL
INSPECTOR'S SIGNATURESIINITIALS
GARDEN WALL FINAL
PAGE: 1 of 3
COAST SIGN, INC. PROJECT: CARL'S JR.
1345 SOUTH ALLEC STREET SUBJECT: LA QUINTA, CA
ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SIGN STRUCTURAL CALCS.
BY: DVM DATE: 10-18-93
... a i'•. );t~.t;`��.. =
ft
_'• �'"r��"'',_ '11••3. •. •-r..•�.,.
, � L
ELEVATION
JOB -NO. CSD -158
DOUBLE COLUMN
MOM.'K --1_21-
UBC 2702-4 Fb = 36 K/SQ. IN.
S = M/Fb WHERE Fb = 0.6 * Fy
S = 0.418.* M (INCL 1.33 WIND)
S = 0.51 IN"3
USING 3 x 3 x 3/16 TUBE STEEL
--------------------------------
S = 1.7'ATN "3 > 0.51
0. K.
WT. OF SIGN = 625 LBS
AXIAL STRESS IS NEGLIGIBLE
Y,
VcoII :•
3 12
Exp. 12-31•%
r�
P.O.#
FAX FROM
DEREK
LEWIS
AREA -- MENU BOARD
WIND
UBC -'91
80 MPH,EXP. C
A = 4.17' * 7.58' = 31.6
S.F. (BOARD)
UBC -2311
p=Cq*Ce*Qs*I
I=1.0
A = 1.0' * 4.0' = 4.0 S.F. (COVER)
Qs =
16.4 Cq
=
1.4
25.94
LBS/S.F.
@ 20'
Ce= 1.13
24.34
LBS/S.F.
< 15'
Ce= 1.06
S.F.
LBS
FT.
FT. LBS
AREA
;PRESS;
X -DIST
; MOM -XX
--------------------------------
31.6
769
3.09
2376
4.0
97
0.50
49
•: �r`' ' :
0.0
0
0.00
0
M:;1 ...3t :
0.0
0
0.00
0
TOTAL
866
2.80
2425
( AVE . )
... a i'•. );t~.t;`��.. =
ft
_'• �'"r��"'',_ '11••3. •. •-r..•�.,.
, � L
ELEVATION
JOB -NO. CSD -158
DOUBLE COLUMN
MOM.'K --1_21-
UBC 2702-4 Fb = 36 K/SQ. IN.
S = M/Fb WHERE Fb = 0.6 * Fy
S = 0.418.* M (INCL 1.33 WIND)
S = 0.51 IN"3
USING 3 x 3 x 3/16 TUBE STEEL
--------------------------------
S = 1.7'ATN "3 > 0.51
0. K.
WT. OF SIGN = 625 LBS
AXIAL STRESS IS NEGLIGIBLE
Y,
VcoII :•
3 12
Exp. 12-31•%
r�
-
PAGE: 2 of 3
.COAST SIGN, INC.
PROJECT: CARL'S JR.
1345 SOUTH ALLEC STREET
SUBJECT: LA QUINTA, CA
ANAHEIM, CA 92805
SIGN STRUCTURAL CALCS.
BY: DVM DATE: 10-18-93
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.O.# FAX FROM DEREK LEWIS
SPLICE @ 1 +/- UP FROM GRADE
S.F. LBS Fl. FT. LBS
AREA ;PRESS; X -DIST ; MOM -XX
31.6 591 2.09 1235
0.0 0 0.00 0
--
0.0 0 0.00 0
TOTAL 591 2.09 1235
?aC2ytY4C
(AVE.)
IR°`''
SIGN.
DOUBLE COLUMN
MOM.'K 0.62
BASE PLATE AND BOLTS
DIST BETWEEN BOLTS = 4"
LEVER ARM 4.0"
rm
BOLTS TENSION 2 EACH
4"iZLieL?fT
= M/L.A.*2 EA. 77.2
a
USE 1/2" BOLTS 4 PER PLATE.
3x��t�llt�
S,a- PLATE 6"X6"X1/4'
'n+OE t Tom.
WELD C2X2X1/4 CHANNEL TO BASE_
PLATE USE 3/16" FILLET WELDS
pL'AT�
ATre 14
S = 0.418 *M 0.26
USE 2"X 2" X 1/4" SPEC. C.
OR C3X4.1 STD. CHANNEL.
vW T
22
bm tu2
1
OF fA1.�F��� ..
COAST SIGN, INC.
1345 SOUTH ALLEC STREE
ANAHEIM,
CA 92805
DoUGLI
DESIGN OF EMI
---
DESCRIPTION >>
18" DIA.
-----------------------
ALLOW PASSIVE psi
---------
133
MAX PASSIVE psf
1,500
LOAD DURATION FACTOR
2
POINT LOAD lbs
433
LOAD Ht. ft
2.80
DIST. LOAD #/ft
0
START HT. ft
0
END HT. ft
0
WIDTH/DIAMETER in
18��
CIRCULAR ? y/n
Y
RESTRAINED ? y/n
N
------ SUMMARY -------
----------
Moments @ Surface:
0.00
Point Load ft-#
1,212
Uniform Load ft-#
0
... Total Moment ft-#
1,212
Total Lateral Load #
433
--- NON -RESTRAINED ----
---------
Min. Re 'd Embedment
I q11
'
A(1+(1+4.36h /A)-.5)/2
3
A=2.34P/(S 1 b) ft
3.72
0f- Pry
Press @ 1/3 Embed.:
0
Actual psf
331
Allowable psf
330
----- RESTRAINED ------
0
Min. Req'd Embedment
0
(4.25 P h/S3 b)".5 ft
0.00
` Pressure @ Bottom
Actual psf
0
Allowable psf
0
'* Surface Restraint
Force lbs
0
PAGE: 3 of 3
PROJECT: CARL'S JR.
T SUBJECT: LA QUINTA, CA
SIGN STRUCTURAL CALCS.
BY: DVM DATE: 10-18-93
P.O.# FAX FROM DEREK LEWIS
C�LVM/�J
C
EDDED POLE FOOTINGS
- ---------- wsr
W
---------;---------;--------- Nc,.10
133 133 133 c E=p.12-
1,500 1,500 1,500 zdl CFV
2 2 2 9j�@F�
0 0 0
0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Y Y N
N N ----N
CoLuu%N
0 0 0
0 0 0 its tMpx .
SLOPE
10
. oanw
rrci.
0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
-----------
RESULTS ---------
IV
m
MIN.
z000rsl
.'
/I
Co1iC7.ElE
, 1� � t
r
1' I
0.00
0.00
0.00
'C\.R
0
0
0
0
0
0
SEE
CALo S
Pmlk WIDTL►
Pop. Dims.
T`(���Al. I:MgEDD4D PoLF
0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
F
•
78-495 CALLE TAMPICO — LA QUINTA, .
October 8, 1993
Mr. Derek Lewis
+ Coast Sign, Inc.
1345 S. Allec Street
Anaheim, CA 92805
CALIFORNIA 92253 - (619) 777-7000
FAX (619) 777-7101
SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY SIGN APPLICATION - CARL'S JR. (CUP 92-004)
Dear Mr. Lewis:
Thank you for submitting your preliminary sign application information to our
department.
We have reviewed your request to install eight on-site signs for the under
construction Carl's Jr. restaurant on Highway 111. The proposed signs are
consistent with the City Council's acceptance of Conditional Use Permit 92-004 on
January 19, 1993. However, the maximum height of the directional signs shall be 36 -
inches and the Happy Star logo should be removed from Sign "C" because there is
not enough space for it on the building facia.
A copy of our Sign Application is attached. Please complete and return it to our
department, along with three sets of your final sign package for our approval once
it is avaliable . The final plans submitted to us shall be signed and' approved by
Transpacific Development Company.
Once we have approved your plans it is your responsibility to apply to the Building
and Safety Department for a building permit to install the permanent signs. They
can be reached by calling 619-777-7012.
If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned.
Very truly_ye�rs,
ENINGMA
EVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
SDELL
PLANNER
GT: cs
Attachment
11�
cc:__Building & S� _ a_ fety Department
MAILING ADDRESS - P-0 BOX -1504 - LA OUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253
LTRGT .023