BOTH2017-0005O�i a w VOICE (760) 777-7125
78-495 CALLS TAMPICO 0. D
FAX (760) 777-7011
LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 " ' ' ,l
DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT INSPECTIONS (760) 777-7153
BUILDING PERMIT
Date: 6/5/2018
Permit Type/Subtype:
STRUCTURE OTHER THAN BUILDING/
Owner: ,
Application Number:
BOTH2O17-0005
CITY OF LA QUINTA .
Property Address:
78082 FRANCIS HACK LN
P.0 BOX 1504
APN:
770184011
LA QUINTA, CA 92253
Application Description:
VERIZON / 60' MONOPALM CELL SITE WITH WROUGHT IRON
Property Zoning:
ENCLOSURE
Application Valuation:
$125,000.00 _
Applicant: Contractor:
DAN CONNELL ROLCOM INC
26455 RANCHO PARKSWAY S 240 OTT STREET
LAKE FOREST, CA 92630 JUN ® 5 2018 CORONA, CA 92880
(951)278-1040
C11Y CF LA QUINTA Llc. No.:,879845
DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
------------------------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------
. LICENSED CONTRACTOR'S DECLARATION
I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury that I am licensed under provisions of Chapter 9
(commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code, and
my License is in full force and effect.
License Class: B License No.: 879845
Date: Contra r:
OWNER -BUILDER ECLARATION
I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury that I am exempt from the Contractor's State
license Law for the following reason (Sec. 7031.5, Business and Professions Code: Any
city or county that requires a.permit to construct, alter, improve, demolish, or repair any
structure, prior to its issuance, also requires the applicant for the permit to file a signed
statement that he or she is licensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractor's State
License Law (Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business
and Professions Code) or that he or she 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, Business and Professions Code: The Contractors' State License Law does not
apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who does the work
himself or herself through his or her own employees, provided that the 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
or she did not build or improve for the purpose of sale.).
1, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to
construct the project. (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code; The Contractors' State
License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon,
and who contracts for the projects with a contractor(s) licensed pursuant to the
Contractors' State License Law.).
(_J I am exempt under Sec. B.&P.C. for this reason
Date:
Owner:
CONSTRUCTION LENDING AGENCY
I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury that there is a construction lending agency for
the performance of the work for which this permit is issued (Sec.3097, Civ. C.).
Lender's Name:_
Lender's Address:
WORKER'S COMPENSATION DECLARATION
I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following declarations:
.I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self -insure for workers'
compensation, as provided for by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance
of Xon
rk for which this permit is issued.
I have and will maintain workers' compensation insurance, as required by
Se700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is
issued. My workers' compensation insurance carrier and policy number are:
Carrier: AMGUARD INSURANCE COMPANY Polity Number: ROWC912521
_ 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, and agree that, if l should become subject to the
workers' compensation provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor ode, I shall forthwith
comply with those provisions.
Date: >� Appl' ant:
WARNING: FAILURE TO SECURE WORKERS' MPENSATION COVERAGE IS UNLAWFUL,
AND SHALL SUBJECT AN EMPLOYER TO CRIMINAL'PENALTIES AND CIVIL FINES UP TO
ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($100,000). IN ADDITION TO THE COST OF
COMPENSATION, DAMAGES AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 3706 OF THE LABOR CODE,
INTEREST; AND ATTORNEY'S FEES.
APPLICANT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
IMPORTANT: Application is hereby made to the.Building Official for a permit subject to
the conditions and restrictions set forth on this application.
1. Each person upon whose behalf this application is made, each person at whose
request and for whose benefit work is performed under or pursuant to any permit issued
as a result of this application, the owner, and the applicant, each agrees to, and shall
defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La Quinta, its officers, agents, and
employees for any act or omission related to the workbeing performed under or
following issuance of this permit.
2. Any permit issued as a result of this application becomes null and void if work is not
commenced within 180 days from date of issuance of such permit, or cessation of work
for 180 days will subject permit to cancellation.
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 upon the above -
mentioned property for inspection purposes.
Date: 6edG/ Signature (Applicant or A nt):
INFORMATIONFINANCIAL
DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT
QTY
AMOUNT
ANTENNA, CELL/MOBILE
101-0000-42404
0
$152.00
DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT
CITY
AMOUNT
ANTENNA, CELL/MOBILE PC
101-0000-42600
0
$215.84
Total Paid for ANTENNA: $367.84
DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT h
QTY
AMOUNT
HOURLY CHARGE - CITY BUILDING STAFF
101-0000-42600
0.45
$70.20
DESCRIPTION
:ACCOUNT
QTY
AMOUNT
HOURLY CHARGE - ESGIL.CIVIL ENGINEER
101-0000- .2600
3
$315.00
Total Paid for BLDG CITY STAFF - PER HOUR: $385.20
�. DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT
QTY
AMOUNT
WALL/FENCE - FIRST 100 LF
101-0000 42404
0
$52.01
DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT
QTY
AMOUNT
WALL/FENCE - FIRST 100 LF PC
101-0000-42600
0
$65.02
Total Paid for BLOCK WALL: $117.03
DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT
QTY
AMOUNT
BSAS SB1473 FEE
101-0000-20306
0
$5.00
Total Paid for BUILDING STANDARDS ADMINISTRATION BSA: $5.00
DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT
QTY
AMOUNT
OTHER ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT
101-0000-42403
0
$26.01
DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT
QTY
AMOUNT
OTHER ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT PC
101-0000-42600
0
$26.01
DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT
QTY
AMOUNT
SERVICES
101-0000-42403
0
+ $26.01
DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT
I QTY.
AMOUNT
SERVICES PC
101-0000-42600
0
$13.00
Total'Paid for ELECTRICAL: $91.03
DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT
CITY
AMOUNT
TECHNOLOGY ENHANCEMENT FEE'
502-0000-43611
0
$5.00
Total. Paid for TECHNOLOGY ENHANCEMENT FEE: $5.00
Bin #
Permit #
7 1
o}ee Addres . ��
�,ptJlc��Dr•l Ti1A ►cS
of La Q uin to
01,LBuifding 8F Safety Division
- 78-495 Calle'Tampico
_ r✓�Z;'� l , CA 92253 - (760) 777-701,2
Building Permit Application and Tracking Sheet
' �/1G(S Owner 's Name: ( LA Vl) 1 ✓) fic
A. P. Number: (� f ^ 1
i
Address: %'(6LI 43 (6 1-),(. eA W(1991 C O
Legal Description:
lI.Telephone:
ST, Zip: A 0 L)�o r C -- —(Z 7/� �
t r:1
Co c o
i' i-
� �ntra
(! 7
P V`iG l�l� 00 ~D�.1Address: ct Description:
ity, ST, Z;P:
ele o ne: h
P
y
1
S
%State Lic. # :
Arch.,'Engr., Designer:
City Lie. #-
AO py- Y[JI
\^ � .. Gill. �t$•V
O'V\o'.\ � Jr
Address: SCj
w fo
City, ST, Zip:.
G��+ 2%�t
D Atli( 104 F11.4 (4-�-j
e:
Telephone:
.......................................
................
e• Occupancy: cu an cY
tructi n Type:
ConstructionP
�J�
State Lie.
14 a
clroJ icire one) New A d d n Alter Repair. air Demo
PecttYPe
ff7a of ont , erson:
1
Sq. Ft.:
# Stories:
# Units:
Velcphone # of Contact Person: g�Yj - z— " j�b
'stamated Value of Project:
APPLICANT: DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE,
N
Submittal
Req'd
Rec'd
TRACKING
PERMIT FEES
Plan Sets
Plan Check submitted
Item
Amount
Structural Cafes.
Reviewed, ready for corrections
Plan Check Deposit
Truss Calcs..
Called Contact Person
Plan Check Balance.
Title 24 Calcs.
Plans picked up
Construction '
Flood plain plan
Plans resubmitted
Mechanical
Grading plan
2". Review, ready for corrections/issue
Electrical .
Subcontactor List
Called Contact Person
Plumbing
Grant Deed
Plans picked up
S.M.I:
I-I.O.A. Approval
Plans resubmitted
Grading
IN HOUSE:-
'rd Review, ready for correctionsrssue
Developer Impact Fee
Planning Approval
Called Contact Person
A.T.P.P.
Pub. Wks. Appr
Dale of permit issue
School Fees,
I
Total Permit Fees
RECEIVED
APR 16 2017
CITY OF WLGI13ANE"reless
INTA
April 16, 2o18
City of La Quinta
Design and Development Department
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
RE: Request for Building Plan Check Time Extension - BOTH2O17-0005
Verizon Wireless Telecommunications Facility (MonoPalm),
78-082 Francis Hack Lane, La Quinta, CA 92253
Attn: Burt Hanada, Building Official
On behalf of Verizon Wireless I am requesting a Time Extension to the building permit plan
check review for BOTH2O17-0005 at 78-o82 Francis Hack Lane, La Quinta. The Construction
Documents for the proposed Verizon Wireless cell -site were filed with the City on May 2,
2017, with a plan review extension expiration date of April 27, 2o18.
The plan check corrections from the Building Division and the Planning Division have been
addressed and re -submitted to the City of La Quinta on April 16, 2o18.
Therefore, the additional time is requested to allow adequate time for City approval and
time for the General Contractor to pull the building.
Respectfully suE
/James A. Rogers
Land Use Specia
Smartlink, LLC i
Authorized Agent for Verizon Wireless
Smartlink LLC
18401 Von Karman, Suite 400
Irvine, CA 92612
01%
Building Permit Number: y SOD
.:Project Description: cell phone lower
Exempt:n
(Materials may containhazardous wastes and
are not -subject to recycling provisions)
Construction Debris 'Management Plan
'Pla'h Submittal
Job Site
Owheir's N
Numb&,: Street, or Po
City; State. Postal C
Pivners Phone Nun
Owner's E-Mail Add
Project Managers
Project lVi6nageirs Phone N
Project Mainage?s E-mail Ai
Builder / Contr.
Number, Street or PO
City, state, Postal C
Project Square F
City. Approval By
Date of City Approval
Materials ToBe Disc . a . ride
Product
Trash
Asphalt
Brick/Block
Cardboard , ,
Commingled
Concrete
Drywall
Donated /:Reus6*
*Describe Items
12/13/2017
78082 Francis. Hack Ln
City of L6 Quints
78495- Caille Tampico
La Quinta, CA. 92263
760-777-7131.
c/o: Qvillap-and66la-' Quinta.o
James Rogers
949-295-9031
iames.roQeri(&smakIinkI1p.corn
Sm9rtlink LLC -
18401 Von Karman Ave, #400
Irvine, CA. 92612
Tons
Not recyclable
Recyclable
Recyclable
Recyclable.
Recyclable
Recyclable.
Recyclable
RecyclableRecyclable
Pr.oduct
Masonry (broken)
Plaster
Scrap.Metal
Tile (floor)
Tile (roof)
Wood
Landscape Debris.
Tons
0. . 0
7
I 0-00
0.25
0.00
0.00
o.00
1.75
1.00
UG
0;00
0.00
�0;00
6
0.00
Totals; AeEycle. Projected Diva
I understand it is the prdp6lty pwrier's responsibility ty to submit copies of weight tickets or receipts to the Dlitilct
EnVironniental. Coordinator as these hauls occur..I hereby certify that completion, implemeht6tion*and adherence.of the
Debris Manageme6t Plan (DMP.) for the above named project shall guarantee that at least 6 . 5% of the jobsiteWatte is
diverted from laridfillin.g. The remaining material will be recycled or reused. Fwill divert, f6r're'cy6lln*g or re -use, se', . remaining
-day of the project through the completion of the project in accordance with this plan. This
materials generated frorn'the first nin
OMO + or serving. ls-issuedinthe nameopp re
ftheoro* rty.oWner(s) and shall main their property throughout the construction and/or
demolition project. A contract + ' g. as. agent of:tha owner may obtain a DIVIP for the owner. However, the OMP is still
issued in the name of-thei-roperty owner(s) and*the" owner her retains legal .r6s responsibilityfor ensuring that+ the provisions of the
ere a.e property owfir(S) and general contractor Shall kept
DMP are.adK d t The be Ot informed of the diversion' progress
through
Wy
.
bi-monthly If sel -h, i g,,, fuse material from this project site must be taken to approved recidler or transfer
ml�7
Own 1pr ria rifitendant Date
gr656
EsGil Corporation
In Tartnerskip with Government for Building Safety
DATE: 5/22/2017
JURISDICTION: City of La Quinta
i
PLAN CHECK NO.: BOTH2O17-005 SET: I
PROJECT ADDRESS: 70600 Francis Hack Lane .
❑ APPLICANT
,-d'JORIS. .
❑ PLAN REVIEWER
❑ FILE
PROJECT NAME: Verizon Chihuahua Fritz Burns Park MCE
❑ The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply
with the jurisdiction's codes.
The electrical plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building
codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and.checked by building
department staff.
❑ The plans trans mittdd' herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list
.and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck.
❑ The check list transmitted herewith: is. for yourinformation. The plans are being held at EsGil
Corporation, until corrected plans are submitted for recheck.
d
❑ The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant
contact persona
❑ The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to:
® EsGil. Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed.
❑ EsGil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed.
Person contacted: c-- Telephone #:
Date contacted: -(bo �) Email:
Mail Telephone Fax in Person
REMARKS: 1. This review is.,for structural only. 2. All structural sheets for the pole shall be
signed and sealed .by the engineer:
By: David ,Yao Enclosures:
EsGI :Corporation
El - GA- EJ' ❑ MB ��' ❑ PC 5/15
9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, ♦ San Diego, California 92123 ♦ (858) 560-1468 ♦ Fax (858) 560-1576
r
1
SMARTLINK, LLC
18301 VON KARMAN AVENUE, SUITE 313
IRVINE, CA 92612 ,
RE
OVED
DEC 2 i 2017
COMCI ®F LA QUjjV -
'Prepared By: Miry ���EL®PMENT
TORO INTERNATIONAL
6INDIGO
IRVINE, CA 92618
' (949) 559-1582
September 28, 2015
6 INDIGO lRVINE; Ck*`92618 ' • : TES. (949) 559-1�582`. FAX. (949) ,559=.1583 `,
J
September 28, 2015
TI Project No. 13-106.82
Smartlink, LLC
18301 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 313
Irvine, CA 92612
Attention: Mr. Tom Hanna
Subject: Geotechnical Investigation for Proposed Verizon Wireless Monopalm and
Equipment Slab, Chihuahua Site, 78-082 Francis Hack Lane, La Quinta, California
Toro International (TI) has completed geotechnical investigation for the proposed Verizon Wireless
Monopalm and Equipmerit,Slab, Chihuahua Site, located at 78-082 Francis Hack Lane, La Quinta,
California. This report presents our findings, conclusions and recommendations for construction of
the proposed Verizon Wireless Monopalm and Equipment Slab.
It is our opinion from a geotechnical viewpoint that the subject site is suitable for construction of the
proposed Verizon Wireless Monopalm and. Equipment Slab provided our geotechnical
recommendations presented in this report are implemented.
If you have any questions, please let us know. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service.
Sincerely,
TORO INTERNATIONAL oPROFEssIoH�
ao w �
�P Zp cm
r- 1110.2lb'1 A
EXP. 3/31 /19
Hantoro Walujono, GE 21.64
Principal
sl�Fo�Eaan�c�� P
P q"'�oF CAUFo�"
6 IND,IGO ., .-IRVINE,. CA '92618 TEL: (949) :559-1.582 FAX: (949) 559-1583..
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION .....................
1.1 . General.....................................................................................................................1
1.2 Proposed Development ................................... .................... ....................................... 1
1.3 Site Description........................................................................................................I
1.4 Scope of Work.........................................................................................................3
2.0 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING..............................................4
2.1 Field Exploration ........... .................................. .......:.......:........................................ 4
2.2 Laboratory Testing...................................................................................................4
3.0 SITE CONDITIONS............................................................................................................6
3.1 Geology....................................................................................................................6
3.2 Groundwater............................................................................................................6
3.3 General Subsurface Conditions...............................................................................6
4.0 SEISMICITY.......................................................................................................................7
4.1 General.....................................................................................................................7
4.2 Ground Motion........................................................................................................7
4.3 Seismic Design.........................................................................................................8
4.4 'Liquefaction Potential...'...............................................:...........................................8
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS..............................................................9
5.1 General ....................... .......9
5.2 Overexcavations/Removals.....................................................................................9
5.3 Grading and Earthwork............................................................................................9
5.4 Foundation Design Parameters..............................................................................10
5.5 Cement Type.......................................................................................................... I I
5.6 Geotechnical Observation and Testing ...................................... ...11
.........................
6.0 LIMITATIONS..................................................................................................................12
7.0 REFERENCES..................................................................................................................13
0
TORO
INTERNATIONAL
�
'
~
'
^ '
� . .
. ` .
' ^
~ ^.
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT'D)
. , .
.'
. -
.. . `
-__'___-_---~'.~ .
^
Section
. ' Page '
---_--- .=
List of Figures
' . ^
.
.
Figure ' ]. 8b��ouodomYVk�n—______..__'___.__'...._..________,..__.,_.. 2�
Figure 2. Boring Location Map __.____.'.�________,.__�_,_.___._______5
List of Tables
'
. . °
^ .
. .
`
Table l. Summary of Fault Parameters ---------------------..�-----.7 �
`
` ^
. . .
^
' 'APPENDICES,Appendix
'
A - Field
~Exploration
'
Appendix B - Laboratory Test Results
'
. ,
. . .
^
^ .
.
'
^
. , . .
.
,
1.0 INTRODUCTION '
1.1 General
Chihuahua
September 28, 2015
Page: 1
This report presents the results of geotechnical investigation performed by Toro International (TI)
for proposed Verizon Wireless Monopalm and Equipment Slab at Chihuahua Site, located at 78-082
Francis Hack Lane, La Quinta, California. A Site Location Map is presented in Figure 1 showing
the approximate location of the'project site.
The purpose of the geotechnical investigation is to provide geotechnical recommendations for
construction of the Verizon Wireless 'Monopalm and Equipment Slab and its associated site
preparation.
Our geotechnical investigation was 'conducted based on plans issued for 90% Zoning Drawings
(Sheets T-1, LS-1, LS-2 and A-1 through A-5) prepared by Smartlink and dated September 16, 2015.
1.2 Proposed Development
Our understanding ofthe proposed construction is based on the above -mentioned plans. The height
of the proposed monopalm will be about 60 feet above the ground surface. The proposed monopalm
will support a total of twelve antennas with three sectors.
The area of the proposed equipment shelter will be about 60 sgft. The equipment slab -on -grade will
be reinforced and stiffened at its edges. The thickness of the slab will be 6 inches. The estimated
load from the equipment will be about 40 kips.
1.3 Site Description
The proposed site for the Verizon Wireless facility will be located within Francis Burns Community
Park, located at 78-082 Francis Hack Lane, La Quinta, California. The proposed site will be located
within a landscape area of a parking lot for skate -board park. The proposed site is bounded to the
north and east by portions of the parking lots, which in turn is bounded to the north by the skate-
board park, to the west by a grass area and to the south by Francis Hack Lane. The proposed site as
well as the overall site is a relatively flat area.
0
TORO
INTERNATIONAL'
Page: 2
116019-W.. W� 116°18'00" W WGS84 116°17'OO" W
oO
z
� f r' '� ��• ��'n w
O
r
AA
31
J .' .' . f h�"`' j 460
.w.w_• xt (
rg +kk
,
r t'.. o r k> >,�Jnwlc
z
u-
011�,
� R .� `yi•''� '�: ��:`."�t'`+i ''��t;, f � ..l 3 M •:l �:1.�TI0'• .fir
SITE hr; , _ f..
t la Quinta } xv
c
,�, � '^{1 a
�
�'. i. _t. •� 1.
y .., ,� q ,.
_�� _,�[} � S.
rc
IJi
th
_y' i �¢• - 7 �r°.� } ti �� i! -% �,.0 T3.` A
is
created with,, e 12006ii «,�+ nc`
116-V9OW W 116'1900" W WGS84116017.00r W
o s 1 lN
ears
it
I I
+ s e c,<tsarrrs t
TORO INTERNATIONAL
Ceotechnicat Engines
SITE LOCATION MAP
CHIHUAHUA
rPROJECTNO..3-,,6..21 FIGURE 1
4 '
Chihuahua
September 28, 2015
Page:3
1.4 Scope of Work
The scope of work for this geotechnical investigation consisted of the following:
• Review of published reports and geologic maps pertinent to the site
• Field exploration, consisting of drilling and logging one boring to a maximum depth of 51.5
feet
• Laboratory testing of selected soil samples considered representative of the subsurface
conditions to evaluate the pertinent engineering. and physical characteristics of the
representative soils
• Evaluation of the general site geology which could affect the proposed development
• Evaluation of ground shaking potential resulting from seismic events occurring on
significant faults in the area
• Engineering analyses of the collected data to develop geotechnical recommendations for
foundation design of the monopalm, equipment slab, seismic analyses and site preparation
for the proposed concrete slab -on -grade
• Preparation of this report presenting our findings, conclusions, and recommendations.
Chihuahua
September 28, 2015
r
Page: 4
2.0 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING
2.1 Field Exploration
j
The subsurface conditions were explored by drilling one boring. The depth of the boring is limited
to about 51.5 feet below the existing ground surface. The approximate location of the boring is
shown on the Boring Location Map in Figure 2. Details of the field exploration, including the logs
of the boring, are presented in Appendix A.,
2.2 Laboratory Testing
Soil samples considered representative of the subsurface conditions were tested to obtain or derive
relevant physical and engineering soil properties. Laboratory testing included moisture content and
in -situ density, direct shear and sieve analyses.
Moisture content and in -situ density test results are shown in the Borings Log in Appendix A. The
remaining laboratory test results are presented in Appendix Br Descriptions of the test methods are
also included in Appendix B.
0
TORO
0 INTERNATIONAL
Page: 5
3.0 SITE CONDITIONS
3.1 Geology
Chihuahua
September 28, 2015
Page: 6
The subject site is located approximately 67 feet above mean sea level. The site is located within
Alluvium (Rogers, 1992). The alluvial materials are Quaternary in age and the thickness is probably
more than several hundred feet. The alluvial materials consist primarily of a.mixture of silt and
sand.
3.2 Groundwater
Groundwater was not encountered during our field exploration.. The depth of the borehole is about
51.5 feet below the existing ground surface.
3.3 General Subsurface Conditions
In general, the site for the proposed monopalm and equipment slab is underlain by silty sand to sand
and silty sand. The silty sand to sand and silty sand materials are classified as SM-SP and SM,
respectively according to the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS).
The moisture content of the encountered subsurface soil materials at the subject site ranges from 2.2
to 12.1 percent with an average of about 5.3 percent. The consistency of the subsurface materials' is
loose to medium dense. The average equivalent Standard Penetration Test (SPT) blow -counts of the
subsurface materials is about 15 blows -per -foot (bpo.
C
TORO
INTERNATIONAL
r
Chihuahua
September 28, 2015
Page: 7
1
4.0 SEISMICITY
4.1 General
Seismicity is a general term relating to the abrupt release of accumulated strain energy in the rock
materials of.the earth's crust in a given geographical area. The recurrence of accumulation and
subsequent release of strain have resulted in faults and systems of faults. The subject site is in .
seismically active Southern -.California.
4.2 Ground Motion
California Building Code (CBC). The most widely used technique for earthquake -resistant design
applied to low-rise structures is the California Building Code (CBC). The basic formulas used in the
CBC require determination of the site class, which represents the site soil properties at the site of
interest.
The nearest active fault is the San Andreas — Southern Fault, which is approximately 12.9.km away
y (Blake, T. F., 1998). This fault and 'other nearest 7 faults, which could affect the site and -the
proposed development, are listed in the following "Summary of Fault Parameters" as shown in Table
1.
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS
Fault Name
Approximate
Distance
(km)
Source
Type
(A,B,C)
Maximum
Magnitude,
(MW)
Slip Rate
(mm/yr)
Fault Type
(SS,DS,BT)
San Andreas - Southern
12.9
A
7.4
24.00
SS
San Jacinto - Anza
29.8
A
7.2
12.00
SS
San Jacinto — Coyote Creek
30.5
B
6.8
4.00
SS
Burnt Mtn.
31.2
B
6.5
0.60
SS
Eureka Peak
33.1
B
6.5
0.60
SS
Pinto Mountain
51.2
B
7.0
2.50
SS `
San Jacinto-Borre o
53.3
B
6.6
4.00
SS
Emerson So. — Copper Mtn.
55.2
B
6.9
0.60
SS
0
TORO
INTERNATIONAL
y
Chihuahua
September 28, 2615
Page: 8
4.3 Seismic Design
The 2013 CBC seismic zone for use in the seismic design formula is Site Class D.
4.4 Liquefaction Potential
The subsurface soil consists of loose to medium dense . silty sand to sand and silty sand. .
Groundwater was not encountered during our drilling and the depth of the borehole is about.51.5 feet
below the ground surface. Therefore, based on the above -mentioned information, the subsurface soil
at the subject site is not likely to liquefy during an earthquake.
a
6
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 General
Chihuahua
September 28, 2015
Page: 9
Based on the results of our geotechnical investigation, it is our opinion from a geotechnical
viewpoint that the subject site is suitable for development of the proposed monopalm and equipment
slab provided our geotechnical recommendations presented in this report are implemented.
The remainder of this report presents our recommendations in detail: These recommendations are
based on empirical and analytical methods typical of the standard of practice in Southern California.
Other professionals in the design team .may have different concerns depending on their own
discipline and experience. Therefore, our 'recommendations should be considered as minimum and
should be superseded by more restrictive recommendations of other members of the design team or
the governing agencies, if applicable.
5.2 Overexcavation s/Rem ovals
The upper 24 to 36 inches of the subsurface soil materials under the proposed location of the
equipment slab may consist of organics and/or be disturbed. Therefore, we recommend that all
deleterious materials are discarded off site and the upper 36 inches of the subsurface materials be
removed and replaced with compacted fills. Onsite soils may be reused provided all deleterious
materials are removed. The extent of the removal should be within the proposed concrete slab
footprint. The removal bottom and compacted fill should be prepared in accordance with the
recommendations stated in Section 5.3 below. . _
5.3 Grading and Earthwork
General. All earthwork and grading for site development should be accomplished in accordance
with the Standard Guidelines for Grading Projects, Appendix Chapter 33 of the CBC, and
requirements of the regulatory agency. All special site preparation recommendations presented in
the following paragraphs will supersede those in the Standard Guidelines for Grading Projects.
Site Preparation. Vegetation, organic soil, roots and other unsuitable material should be removed
from the building areas. Prior to the placement of fill, the existing ground should be scarified to.a
depth of 6 inches, and recompacted.
Prior to pouring concrete, the subgrade soil for the concrete slab area should be wetted to a_ slightly
higher than the optimum moisture to a depth of 6 inches from the surface.
o
® TORO
a INTERNATIONAL
A
Chihuahua
September 28, 2015
Page: 10
Fill Compaction. All fill and backfill to be placed in association with site development should be
accomplished at slightly over optimum moisture conditions. The minimum relative compaction
recommended for fill is 90 percent relative compaction based on maximum dry density performed in
accordance with ASTM D-1557.
Fill should be compacted by,mechanical means in uniform horizontal loose lifts not exceeding 8
inches in thickness.
Fill Material. The on -site soils can be used for compacted fill. However, during grading operations,
soil types other than those analyzed in the geotechnical reports may be encountered by.the
contractor. The geotechnical consultant should be notified to evaluate the suitability of those soils
for use as fill and as finished grade soils.
Imported fill materials should be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to importing. Soils
exhibiting any expansion potential should not be used as import materials.
Both imported and on -site soils to be used as fill materials should be free of debris, organic and
cobbles over 3 inches in maximum dimension.
Site Drainage. Foundation and slab performance depends greatly on how well runoff waters drain
from the site. This is true both during construction and over the entire life of the structure. The
ground surface around structures should be graded so that water, flows rapidly away from the
structures without ponding.
Utility Trenches. Bedding materials should consist of sand having Sand Equivalent not less than 30,
which may then be jetted. Existing soils may be utilized for trench backfill provided they are free of
organic materials and rocks over 3 inches in dimension.
The backfill should be uniformly compacted to at least 90% relative compaction based on maximum
density performed in accordance with ASTM D-1557.
5.4 Foundation Design Parameters
Monopalm. The proposed monopalm may be founded on caisson that embedded in the ground for a
minimum of 18 feet. However, the encountered subsurface soil and the associated final caisson
depth should be confirmed by the geotechnical engineer during the drilling/excavation of the hole.
Caving may occur during drilling due to the relatively dry subsurface soil conditions.
0
TORO
INTERNATIONAL
i
Chihuahua
September 28, 2015
Page:, 11
The recommended design allowable bearing,capacity for the caisson is 3,500 psf at about 18 feet .
below the ground surface and the design lateral equivalent fluid passive earth pressures is 230 pcf .
with a maximum value of 3,450 psf. The design coefficient of friction is 0.30. A one-third increase
in the allowable bearing capacity and lateral passive soil pressures may be used when considering "
wind, seismic or other short-term loadings.
Equipment Slab. The design allowable bearing capacity for the shallow foundation is 1,500 psf ,
provided the minimum depth is 12 inches and the minimum width is 12 inches. The design lateral
equivalent fluid pressure is 300 pcf and the design coefficient of friction is 0.30. However, a 50
percent reduction of either the coefficient of friction or passive pressure should be taken if both
passive pressures and coefficient of friction are combined for lateral resistance. A one-third increase
in the allowable bearing capacity and lateral passive soil pressures may be used when considering
wind, seismic or other short-term loading.
5.5 Cement Type
Based on the type of soils, Type II cement and water -cement ratio of 0.45 or less may be used for
concrete in contact with the on -site soils.
4
5.6 Geotechnical Observation and Testing
It is recommended that geotechnical observations and testing be performed by a representative of
Toro International at the following stages:
• During all grading operations, including fill placement and soil removals, if any
• During drilling/excavation of caisson
• Upon completion of footing bottom excavation and prior to pouring of concrete, if any
• Upon completion of subgrade preparation and prior to pouring_ of concrete for slab ,
• During backfilling of utility trenches
• When any unusual conditions are encountered
The geotechnical engineering firm providing geotechnical observation/testing shall assume the
responsibility of Geotechnical Engineer of Record.
o
TORO
INTERNATIONAL
r
6.0 LIMITATIONS
Chihuahua
September 28, 2015
Page: 12
This report is intended for the use of Smartlink and its client Verizon Wireless for the proposed
Verizon Wireless Monopalm and Equipment Slab at Chihuahua Site, located at 78-082 Francis Hack
Lane, La Quinta, California. This report is based on the project as described and the information
obtained, from the boring and other field investigations at the approximate locations indicated on the
plans. The findings' are based on the results of the field, laboratory, and office investigations
combined with an interpolation and extrapolation of conditions between and beyond the boring
location. The results reflect an interpretation of the direct evidence obtained., The recommendations
presented in this report are based on the assumption that an appropriate level of field review
(observations and tests) will be provided during construction. Toro International should be notified
of any pertinent changes in the project plans or if subsurface conditions are found to vary from those
described herein. Such changes or variations may require a re-evaluation of the recommendations
contained in this report.
The soil samples collected during this investigation are believed representative of the areas sampled.
- However, soil conditions can vary significantly between and away from the locations sampled. As
in most projects, conditions revealed by additional subsurface investigations may be at variance with
preliminary findings. If this occurs, the geotechnical engineer must evaluate the changed condition,
and adjust the conclusions and recommendations provided herein, as necessary.
The data, opinions, and recommendations of this report are applicable to the specific design
element(s) and locations(s) which is (are) the subject of this report. They have no applicability to
any other design elements or to any other locations and any and all subsequent users accept any and +
all liability resulting.from any use or reuse of the data, opinions, and recommendations without the
prior written consent of Toro International.
Toro International has no responsibility for construction means, methods, techniques, sequences, or
procedures, or for safety precautions or programs in connection with the construction, for theacts or
omissions of the contractor, or any other person performing any of the construction, or for the failure
of any of them to carry out the construction in accordance with the Final Construction Drawings and
Specifications.
Services performed by Toro International have been conducted in a manner consistent with that level
of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing in the same
locality under similar conditions. No other representation, express or implied, and no warranty or
guarantee is included or intended.
0
TORO
INTERNATIONAL
Chihuahua
September 28, 2015
Page: 13
7.0 REFERENCES
1. Blake, T. F., 1989,"UBCSEIS", A Computer Program for the Estimation of Uniform
Building Code Coefficients Using 3-D Fault Sources", January 1998
2. Rogers, Thomas H.,1992, "Geologic Map of California, Santa Ana Sheet," Scale 1:250,000.
3. California Building Code (CBC), 2016
0
®' TORO
0 INTERNATIONAL
APPENDIX A -Field Exploration
Subsurface conditions were explored by drilling one boring to a maximum depth of approximately
51.5 feet below the existing grade. The drilled borehole was advanced by an 8-inch-diameter
hollow -stem -flight -auger -drilling rig. The drilled borehole was 'located in the field by tape
measurements from known landmarks. Its location as shown is therefore within the accuracy of such
measurements.
The field explorations were performed under supervision of our engineer who prepared detailed logs
of the boring, classified the soil encountered, and obtained soil samples for laboratory testing.
Relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained by means of driving a 2.5-inch diameter sampler
having a hammer weight and drop of 140 pounds and 30 inches, respectively. Standard Penetration
Tests (SPT) tests were also carried: out at alternating intervals with the drive sampler. The
sampling/SPT interval is about 5 feet. - Small bulk samples obtained from the SPT tests were
collected for further evaluation in the laboratory.
The Boring Logs show the type of sampler, weight and drop of the hammer, number of hammer
blows and soil stratigraphy. The soils were classified based on visual observations during the field
investigation and results of the laboratory testing. Soil classifications were conducted in accordance
with the Unified Soil Classification System.
Note:
The actual subsurface conditions at the exact location may be different from the subsurface
conditions shown in the Boring Logs. The purpose of performing the borehole is for evaluating the
subsurface materials in order to develop geotechnical parameters for the proposed development. In
addition, the type of drill rig, the diameter. of the borehole, etc. employed during geotechnical
exploration are different from the one used during actual construction. Therefore, for the purposes
of drilling for the proposed caisson, contractor should evaluate the site conditions independently and
make their own judgment as far as for determining the amount of time to drill, how to drill, type of
equipment needed including but not limited to drill rig and type of drill bit, employing groundwater
dewatering, usage of casing, mud drilling, etc. and not rely on the information shown in the Boring
Logs.
TORO INTERNATIONAL
GEOTECHNICAI ENGINEERING
Project Name
Project Number,
Equipment
Average Drop
Hole Diameter
Chihuahua
13-106.82,
Hollow Stem Flight Auger
30 inches
8 inches
Site Address
Carrier
Drive Weight
Elevation (ft)
Eng/Geologist
78100 Francs Hack Lane, La Quinta
Verizon
140 lbs
67 (Assumed)
HW
C.
°'
2
a
z
°'
a
A
x
3
o
0.
A
0
"
GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION
57
5200'
47
42;>
?<»>
Q.
Q'
0;>>
€ € >.
3i
B-1
R-1
R-2
S-1
S-2
S-3
16
19
16
8
11
96.7
102.2
6.3
5.5
3.0
6.3
12.1
SM
SM-SP
SM-SP
SM-SP
SM
SM
ALLUVIUM (?)
,
@ 5': Top: Brown fine silty sand, damp, medium dense
Bottom: Brown with black and orange inclusions fine siltv sand to sand.
dry to damn. medium dense
@ 10': Brown with black and orange inclusions fine silty sand to sand, damp,
medium dense
@ 15': Gray with black and white inclusions fine to medium silty sand to sand,
with trace of fine gravel, dry to damn. medium dense
@ 20': Grayish brown very fine silty sand, damp, loose
@ 25': Grayish brown very fine silty sand, damp to moist, medium dense
10
15
20
25
BORING NO. B-1
Sheet 1 of 2
• t
f
TORO INTERNATIONAL
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
Project Name
Chihuahua
Site Address
78100 Franics Hack Lane, La. Quinta
Project Number
13-106.82
Carrier
Verizon
Equipment
Hollow Stem Flight
Auger
Drive Weight
140 lbs
Average Drop
30 inches
Elevation (ft)
67 (Assumed)
Hole Diameter
1
8 inches
Eng/Geologist I
HW
r
°
@
E
o
a
a
3
4.
o
"
GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION
A
w
.a
C7
�
�
•'—
_o
0]
A
�
�
A
S-4
16
2.9
SM-SP
@ 30': Gray with orange, black and white inclusions fine to coarse silty sand
to sand. dry to damn, medium dense
32
35
S-5
18
2.8'
SM-SP
@ 35': same as before
S-6
21
2.5
SM-SP
@ 40': same as before except fine grained
3>
S-7
19
2.2
SM-SP
@ 45': same as before
17
>>><
50
S-8
15
9.6
SM-SP
@ 50': Dark brown fine silty sand to sand, damp to moist, medium dense
Total Depth: 51.5 feet
Groundwater was not Encountered
55
,12
7
60
BORING NO. B-1
Sheet 2 of 2
c
R
r.
r
APPENDIX B - LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES AND RESULTS
Moisture Content and Dry Density
Moisture content was determined for small bulk and relatively undisturbed ring samples. Dry
Density was determined for relatively -undisturbed ring samples only. The test procedure is in
accordance with ASTM 2216-90. The results of moisture content and dry density are presented in
the Boring Logs.
Sieve Analyses
Sieve analyses were performed on granular materials in accordance with ASTM D 422. Graphs
showing relationship of the various sizes of soil particles versus percentage passing are shown in
Figure B-1.
° r
Direct Shear
Direct shear strength tests were performed on a representative, relatively undisturbed sample of the
on -site materials. To simulate possible adverse field conditions, the samples were saturated prior to
shearing. A saturating device was used which permitted the sample to absorb moisture while
preventing volume change. The rate of strain during the direct shear testing was 0.05 in/min. The
test results are presented in Figure B-2.
A
110111111
e
Boring No. Sample No. Sample Depth PercTORO
INTERNATIONAL
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVE
nt Passing
Soil Type
(ft)
No. 200 Sieve
B-1
S-1
15
8.8
SM-SP
5000
4000
a
3000
W
U)
2000
a
=
1000
—
-
0
0 1000
2000 3000 4000 5000
• Peak
NORMAL STRESS (psf)
O
Relaxed
Sample Depth
Boring No.
(ft)
Friction Angle
(degrees)
Cohesion
Condition
(psf)
B-1 5
29
0 Peak
28
0 Relaxed
TORO INTERNATIONAL
dFjoure:
DIRECT
SHEAR TEST
Project Name: Chihuahua
ASTM D3080
Project No.: 13-106.82
0
L74RSOII -CAMOUFLAGE f
1501 ." South Euclid' Avenue
Tucson, AZ 8571.3
4 (520) 294-3900
" www.lar8oncomo.com
DATE: December 20, 2017
PROJECT: VZW Chihuahua,
CITY OF LA QUINTA
LOCATION: 78-082 Francis,Hack Ln.
La Quinta, CA 92253 BUILDING &SAFETY DEPT.
APPROVE® '
ISE JOB NO. ; . 1.1423-R2 FOR: CONSTRUCTION
LARSON JOB NO. D16316
DATE , 09�h BY
DESIGN CRITERIA: f 0 Z.O J — L•�C�S
DESIGN SATISFIES ALL CRITERIA FOR; '
• 2016 CBC, 110 MPH Ultimate Wind Speed, Reducible per 1609.1:1 -
• ANSI/TIA/EIA-222-G-W/ DESIGWWIND SPEED— 85 MPH,(3-SEC), EXPOSURE C
TOPO CLASS 1, STRUCTURE CLASS II, Crest Height = O ft r _
' • SEISMIC DATA: Ss=1.500, Si=0.608, SDs=1.000, SD1=0.608
�. • Site Classification.D
• Seismic'Design Class D, Cs=0.667
• WELDING PER AWS D1.1 LATEST EDITION
MATERIALS:
SOILS Toro.lnternational Job No. 13-106.82', September 28, 2015
TAPERED SHAFT STEEL. - ASTM A572-65 (Fy=65 KSI)
ANCHOR BOLTS - ASTM A61.5-75 (Fy=75 KSI)
' 'BASE PLATE STEEL i —ASTM A36 (Fy=36 KSI).
CONCRETE - F'c = 4000 PSI AT 28 Days a
REINFORCING STEEL - ASTM A615 BARS (Fy=60 KSI) DEFORMED
CONTENTS '
Pole Detail
Foundation Detail
Pole Geometry" " �N0. 71496,
t Calculations - Sheets 1 - 27
sl NIL �Q
grFOF CAl\ER EC' ;1`E I V E [2 )"
O��
DEC ,2 7 2017 APPROVED BY: Glen L. Hunt III, PE
CITYOF LA QUIN` A
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ' �t
HAND HOLES NOT SHOWN
AT TRUE ORIENTATION [Page 1 of 2)
REFERTOSCNEOULE PROJECT INFORMATION
60'-0' AFG r PALM FRONDS
¢ Top Of Fronds SHOWN FOR ILLUSTRATION Date: December 20, 2017
PURPOSE ONLY ISE Job No. 11423 By: AB
Customer: Larson Camouflage
Product: 55'-0" Mono Palm
Site ID: VZW Chihuahua
55'-0' AFG � hotaR-
y Location: 78-082 Francis Hack Ln.
� Top of Pole ✓'� la Quinta, CA 92253
"'-0° AFG _ .. w�"` " DESIGN CRITERION:
Antenna Rad Center
2016 CBC, 110MPH Ultimate Wind Speed -Reducible per 1609. 1.1 -Exception 5
rfj50'-0�" AFG (3) (8°z22') Hand Hole ^" "` -- 4°`"° •" EIAIrIA-222-G (2006) 85 MPH Design Wind Speed (3-Sec Gust)
(y 80°, 200°, 320°) �--- -- �.. EXP C, Topo Class I, Tower Class II
48'-T AFG
Top of Frond Skirt ! POLE SPECIFICATIONS
Section Shape , - 18-Sided
fj�,P� li • PipeTaper ' 0.26141N/FT
Pole Material ASTM A572-65
Base Plate ASTM A36 "
tt i j�sl 1J�/ t { Anchor Bolts 2.25"0 x 84" Long, ASTM A615-75
43' 0 AFG T li, !"i.. " � �) I F b
MWRad Center a 9�Q �N� •�;, . �4, A_ 8 Pole Length Weight Tkns. Lap Splice Diameter
.�I �.
I , 1 • FROND SKIRT Section (ft.) - (kips) '(in.) (in.) Top (in.) Bot (in:)
41'-T AFG (1) (6°x12') Hand Hole t '� i t1 € ; 111
(Azimuth T.B.D.) 1 f
tw'1•ft. ii�7�'r1 ! j7tk 1 29.00 1.151 0.188 36.00 16.00 23.58
38'-6'AFG Y L1j iJf 1 i �� f �I 1, A ri 'pj}I, 2 28.00 1.468 0.188 22.42 29.74
lFt%'J 1 � 1�: l7 LAe1Et
BOttOm 0f Frond Skits r Base Plate 0.528 2.25 35.75" Square w/ 24" ID
ye v i', ` .SJ� NOTE:
THIS CHART INDICATES RAW STEEL WEIGHTS. FINAL WEIGHTS
Wt• i " : �; • x'C C" ' J '"s �= `: SHALL BE APPROXIMATELY 22% GREATER DUE TO GALVANIZING.
DESIGN LOADS'(Unfactored Base Wind Reactions)
t' Moment = 407.456 Ft -Kips
• --� ` Shear = 8.667 Kips
Axial = 5.88,1 Kips
00
SLIP JOINT CONNECTION
c,) a DESIGN OVERLAP- 36' ±10%
DEFLECTIONS
FAUX BARK: 60 MPH Wind 85 MPH Wind
FULL HEIGHT Elev. (ft.) Lateral (in.) Sway (°) Lateral (in.) Sway (° )
' Top 7.767 1.149 27.918 4.132.
• �- APPURTENANCES
Elevation (ft.) (City) Description'
55 - 50' (81) 10', 9, & T Palm Fronds
48'4" - 38'-6" . (1) 6'0 Frond Skirt
53' (3) 8' T-Arm
53' (12) SBNHH-1 D65B Antenna
- 53' (12) RRU-12 + A2
53' (2) Surge Suppressors
+ 43' (1) 2'O MW Dish
,h 8'-(P' AFG (2) (10'00') Hand Hole
? ,
fry • ' -
T-T AFG 2 (1 WOO') Hand Hole • 2,25' X 35.75' SQUARE B.4SEPLATE
(1 D°,19D°) W/(4)1.25'0 ANCHOR BOLTS ON 35.75' 8.C.
W/mIN.72'CONCRETEEMBEOMENT '
r W/601.T PLATE 8 NUTS AT BOTTOM
Tap of Plate Prepared by: ` : _' ; ! ; r =.:1 ' Prepared for: ; r ,
Finish Gadi - LIWOn°
M ISE Incorporated 4��� CAMOUFLAGE
29.740" Across Flats ' Structural Engineers
1501 South Euclid Avenue
` ♦ 1I P.O. BOX 5W391 fj_<)Tucson, AZ 85713
•1 , - "— NOT TO SCALE I' •t"•�r LPlroA'riezontna 85076
!HONE'hB2-e07;61/rj *IVIIi`1(520)1294-3900
w,ww.larsoncomo.com
I—
(4) 2.25"0 BOLI
ON 3575" E
#5 TIES W/
SEISMIC HOOKS
POLE & BASE PLATE
(PER PLAN)
6" CONDUIT FIT BETWEEN
RIZONTAL & VERTICAL
NFORCING BARS
ANCHOR BOLTS W/
LEVELING NUTS
F.G.
AND NUTS
l' l�(3) 6" CONDUIT
e�
SEPARATE #5 TIES AS
REQUIRED TO FIT CONDUIT,
DO NOT CUT TIES.
I - 54" DIA. ►
(12) #9
VERT REINF
(Page 2 of 21
PROJECT INFORMATION
Date: December 20, 2017
ISE Job No. 11423 By: AB
Customer: Larson Camouflage
Product: 55'-0" Mono Palm
Site ID: VZW Chihuahua
Location: 78.082 Francis Hack Ln
La Quinta, CA 92253
DESIGN CRITERION:
2016 CBC, 110MPH Ultimate Wind Speed -Reducible per 1609.1.1-Exception 5
EIA/TIA-222-G (2006) 85 MPH Design Wind Speed (3-Sec Gust)
EXP C, Topo Class I, Tower Class II
DESIGN LOADS (Unfactored Base Wind Reactions)
Moment = 407.456 Ft -lips
Shear = 8.667 Kips
Axial = 5.881 Kips
NOTES: '
1. SEE• POLE DESIGN PAGE (PAGE 1) FOR POLE,
BASEPLATE, AND ANCHOR BOLT DESIGN DATA.
2. ALL CONCRETE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 4000 PSI AT 28 DAYS.
ALL CONCRETE WORK SHALL CONFORM TO LATEST
EDITION ACI' 318, "BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS
FOR STRUCTURAL CONCRETE". FOUNDATION
CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO ACI 336,
"STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF DRILLED PIERS.
3. REINFORCING STEEL SHALL CONFORM TO:
#5 BARS AND LARGER -. ASTM A-615, GRADE 60
4. FOUNDATION DESIGN PER GEOTECHNICAL REPORT:
PREPARED BY: Toro International
PROJECT NO.: 13-106.82
DATE: September 28, 2015
5. CONTRACTOR SHALL READ THE GEOTECHNICAL
REPORT AND CONSULT WITH GEOTECHNICAL
ENGINEER PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION FOR HAZARDS
AND SPECIAL'CIRCUMSTANCES.
6. ESTIMATED CONCRETE VOLUME: 11.5 CY
7. SPECIAL INSPECTION REQUIRED F'c > 2500 PSI;
CONCRETE, REINFORCING STEEL, ANCHOR BOLTS
8. TYPE II CEMENT W/C < 0.45
NO SCALE
Prepared by:
Preparedlor:
UgRSOK
'
o ISE Incorporated
CAMOUFLAGE
Structural Engineers
1501 South Euclid Avenue
D.O. BOX 5D039
Tucson, AZ 85713
Phoenix, Arizona 85076
PlI E60NO1-8611
(520) 294-3900
NOT TO SCALE
w�w•�rNc•oh
www.lorsoncomo.com
o
N
m
o
o
.S
N
N
r
N
0
0
Q
N
m
�
N
N
9
lV
O
J
m
m°
�
m°
(9
3
55.0 It
26.0 ft
1.0 it
III
DESIGNED APPURTENANCE LOADING
TYPE
ELEVATION
I TYPE
ELEVATION
(31) 10' Palm Fronds
55 - 50
i (4) 96"x12'x9" Panel Antenna
53
(26) 9' Palm Fronds
55 - 50
(4) RRUS72 RRUSA2
53
(24) T Palm Fronds
55 - 50
Surge Suppressor
53
8' T-Arm wl 3' S.O. -
53
8' T-Ann wl 3' S.O.
53
(4) 96"x12W Panel Antenna
53
(4) 96N12W Panel Antenna
53
(4) RRUS12 t RRUSA2
53
(4) RRUS12 4 RRUSA2
53
Surge Suppressor
53
6' dia. Frond Skirt
48.75 - 38.5
8' T-Ann wl 3' S.O.
53
12 ft Standard Dish
43
MATERIAL STRENGTH
GRADE Fy Fu GRADE Fy Fu
A572.65 165 ksi 80 ksi
TOWER DESIGN NOTES
1. Tower is located in Riverside County, California.
2. Tower designed for Exposure C to the TIA-222-G Standard.
3. Tower designed for a 85 mph basic wind in accordance with the TIA-222-G Standard.
4. Deflections are based upon a 60 mph wind.
5. Tower Structure Class II.
6. Topographic Category 1 with Crest Height of 0.000 It
ALL REACTIONS
ARE FACTORED
AXIAL
7K
ARI
MOMENT
661 kip-ft
TORQUE 0 kip-ft
REACTIONS - 85 mph WIND
ISE Incoporated
PO Box 50039
Phoenix, AZ 85076
Phone: (602) 403-8614
FAX: 623 321-1283
eb: ISE No. 11423
Project: 55' Mono Palm
Client. Larson
Drawn by: AB
App'd:
code: TIA-222-G
Date: 11/17/16
scale: NTS
Path:M s wery a« n.n vrwcnn may uun vnva mmn�.
Owg No. E-1
inx rumer,
Job
Page
ISE No. 11423
1 of 8
ISE Incoporated .
Project
Date
PO Box 50039
55' Mono Palm
15:02:54 11 /17/16
Phoenix, AZ85076
Client
Designed by '
Phone: (602) 403-8614
Larson
AB
FAX- (623) 321-1283
Tower Input Data
This tower is designed using the TIA-222-G standard.
The following design criteria apply:
• Tower is located in Riverside County, California.
• Basic wind speed.of 85 mph.
• Structure Class II.
• Exposure Category C.
•'' Topographic Category 1.
• Crest Height 0.000 ft._ .
• Deflections calculated using a wind speed of 60 mph.
• A non -linear (P-delta) analysis was used.
• Pressures are calculated at each section.
• Stress ratio used in pole design is 1.
• Local bending stresses due to climbing loads, feed line supports, and appurtenance mounts are not considered.
:TaperedPole Section Geometry
Pole Grade
Section Elevation
Section
Splice Number Top Bottom Wall Bend
Length
Length of Diameter Diameter Thickness Radius
ft
ft
ft Sides in in in in
Ll 55.000-26.000
29.000
3.000 .18 16.0000 23.5800 0.1875 0.7500
A572-65
(65 ksi)
L2 26.000-1.000
28.000
18 22.4209 29.7395 0.1875 0.7500
A572-65
(65 ksi)
Tapered PolePro ernes
Section Tip Dia.
Area
1: '
r
C
I/C
J
IdQ
w
IV/1
in
in'
in' -
in
in
in'
in'
in'
in
L1 16.2468
9.4104
297.2674
5.6134
8.1280
36.5733
594.9259
4.7061
2.4860
13.259
23.9438
13.9215
962.4442
8.3043
11.9786
80.3467
1926.1548
6.9621
3.8201
20.374
L2 23.5630
13.2316
826.3444
7.8928
11.3898
72.5513
1653.7760
6.6171
3.6161
19.286
30.1983
17.5871
1940.4637
10.4910
15.1077
128.4424
3883.4807
8.7952
4.9041
26.155
Monopole Base Plate Data:
Base Plate Data
Base plate is square
Base plate is grouted
Anchor bolt grade
A615-75
Anchor bolt size
2.2500 in
Number of bolts
4
Embedment length
72.0000 in
f.
4 ksi
Groutspace
3.0000in
Base plate grade
A36
Base plate thickness
2.2500 in
Bolt circle diameter
35.7500 in
Outer diameter
35.7500 in
Inner diameter
24.0000 in
Base plate type
Plain Plate
LM
Mx:TOwer -
Job
ISE No. 11423
Page
2 of 8
I ISE Incoporated
Project
Date
PO Box50039
55' Mono Palm
15:02:54 11/17/16
Phoenix, AZ85076
Client
Designed by
Phone: (602) 403-8614
'
Larson
AB
' FAX: (623) 321-1283
Feed'Line/Linear•Ap urtenances^ Entered As Area i
Description Face
Allow
Component
Placement
Total
CAA,, Weight
or
Shield
Type
Number
_
Leg
ft
ft'/ft kU•
241568 (5/8 C
No
Inside Pole
53.000 - 1.000
12 No Ice
0.000 0.000
SINGLEMODE) `
AVA7-50 (1-5/8 LOW C
No
Inside Pole
43.000 - 1.000
2 No Ice '
0.000 0.001,
DENSI. FOAM)
5
Feed Line/UnearA
urtenances Section.Areas..i
.
Tower Tower
Face
AR
AF
C,,A:,
' CA,
Weight
Section Elevation
In Face
Out Face
ft . -
ft2
f2 .
ft,
f 2
K
LI 55.000-26.000.
A
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
" B
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
'
C
- 0.000 t
'-0.000
0.000
0.000
0.086
L2 26.000-1.000
A '
_ 0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
B
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
r
n nnn
n nnn -
n nnn
n nnn
n noz
`
x:"
Discrete TowerAt 'ads.
-`-
'Description
Weight
Face
'Offset
Offsets:
A-zimuth
Placement
C,,AA
CA14A
or
Type
Harz
Adjustment
Front
Side
r
Leg
Lateral
..
Vert
a
ft
(31) 10' Palm Fronds •
C
None
0.0000
55.000 - 50.000
No Ice 62.000
62.000 '
0.434
(26) 9' Palm Fronds
C
None
0.0000
55.000 - 50.000
No Ice
45.500
45.500
0.312
(24) T Palm Fronds
C
None
0.0000
55.000 - 50.000
No Ice
30.720
30.720
0.240
6dia. Frond Skirt'
sssss
C
None
0.0000
48.750.- 38.500
No Ice
43.000
43.000
0.250
`8' T-Arm w/ 3' S.O.
A
From Leg
3.000
0.0000
53.000
No Ice
2.625
0.984
0.119
0.000.
0.000
(4) 96"x12"x9" Panel Antenna -
A
`, From'Leg
3.500
0.0000
53.000
No Ice
.11.467
9.133
0.040
0.000
`
.; �.
.0.000 •
r
(4) RRUS-12 + RRUS-A2
A -
From Leg =
2.500
0.0000
53.000
No Ice
3.145
1.870
0.075
0.000
0.000
Surge Suppressor
A
From Leg
1.500
0.0600
53.000 •
No Ice
2.514
1.638
0.050
'
0.000
0.000
.
8' T-Arm w/ T S.O.:
B
From Leg
3.000
0.0000
53.000
No Ice
2.625.
0.994
0.119
0.000
0.000
(4) 96"x12"x9" Panel Antenna
B-
From Leg
3.500
0.0000.
53.000 •
No Ice
11.467
9.133.
0.040
0.000
0.000
(4) RRUS-12 + RRUS-A2
B,
From Leg
2.500
0.0000
53.000 •
No Ice
3.145
1.870
0.075
0.000'1.
0.000
Surge Suppressor
B
From Leg
1.500
0.0000
53.000
No Ice
2.514
1.638
0.050
F
,
tnxT owes
Job
Page
'ISE No. 11423
3 of 8
ISE Incoporated
Project
Date
PO Box 50039
55' Mono Palm
15:02:54 11 /17/16
Phoenix, AZ85076
Client
Designed by
Phone: (602) 403-8614
Larson
AB
FAX: (623) 321-1283
Description Face . Offset Offsets: Azimuth Placement CiA.,' C,A., Weight
or Type Hor_ Adjustment Front Side
Leg Lateral
Vert
f 0 f ft1 ftz K
f
0.000
0.000
8' T-Arm w/ 3'• S.O. C
From Leg
3.000
0.0000 53.000 No Ice 2.625 0.984 0.119
0.000
0.000
(4) 96"xl2"x9" Panel Antenna C
From Leg
4.000
0.0000 53.000 No Ice 11.467 9.133 0.040
0.000
0.000
(4) RRUS-12 + RRUS-A2 C
From Leg
2.500
0.0000 • '' 53.000 No Ice 3.145 1.870 0.075
0.000
0.000
4
Dishes, 4
Description Face
Dish
Offset
Offsets: A=imuth 3 dB
Elevation Outside Aperture Weight
or
Type
Type
Hor= Adjustment Beam
Diameter Area
Leg
Lateral Width
Vert
ft o o
ft ft /� K
2 ft Standard Dish A
Paraboloid w/o
From
1.000 0.0000
43.000 2.000 No Ice 3.142 0.010
Radome
Leg
0.000
0.000
Tower Pressures No Ic h:
CH = 7.100
Section
=
KZ
g: _
AG
F
AF
AR
Ayes
Leg
CAAA
CAAA
Elevation
a
%
In
Out
c
Face
Face
1
ft
Psf
t1
a
t'
t,
t,
t'
Ll
39.574
.1.041
18.29
. 48.564
A
0.000
48.564
48.564
100.00
0.000
0.000
55.000-26.000
6
B
0.000
48.564
100.00
0.000
0.000
C
0.000
48.564
100.00
0.000
0.000
L2
' 12.986
0.85
14.93
56.001
A
0.000
- 56.001
56.001
100.00
0.000
0.000
26.000-1.000
6
B
0.000
56.001
100.00
0.060
0.000
C
0.000
. 56.001
100.00
0.000
0.000
TOwer-Pressure - $:ervlce ,
CH = 1.100
Section
=
KZ
g:
AG
F
AF
AR
A,
Leg
CAAA
CAAA
Elevation
a
%
In
Out
c
Face
Face
t
PSf
t1
a
tZ
f12
t1
LI
39.574
1.041
8.157
48.564
A
0.000
48.564
48.564
100.00
0.000
0.000
55.000-26.000
B
0.000
48.564
] 00.00
0.000
0.000
C
0.000
48.564
100.00
0.000
0.000
L2
12.986
0.85
6.659
56.001
A
0.000
56.001
56.001
100.00
0.000
0.000
26.000-1.000
B
0.000
56.001
-100.00
0.000
0.000
C
0.000
56.001
100.00
0.000
0.000
tnx7o. wer
Job
Page
ISE No. 11423,
4 of 8
ISE Incoporated
Project
Date
PO Box50039
55' Mono Palm
15:02:54 11/17/16
Phoenix, AZ85076
Client
Designed by
Phone: (602) 403-8614-
Larson
AB
FAX (623) 321-1283
xTower Forces,- No Ice -Wind Normal To Face J "
Section
Add
Self
F
e
CF
qz
DF
DR
As
F
tiv
Clrl.
Elevation
Weight
Weight
a
Face
c
psf
t
K
K
e
ft,
K
kl
,L1
0.086
1.151
A
1
0.65
18.29
1
1
48.564
0.635
0.022
C '
55.000-26.000
B
1
0.65
6
1
1
48.564
C
l
0.65
1
1
48.564
L2
0.093
1.468
A
1
0.65
14.93
1
1
56.001
0.598
0.024
C
26.000-1.000
f
B
1
0.65
6
1
1
56.001
C
1
0.65
1
1
56.001
Sum Weight:
0.179
2.619
,
OTM
31.673 ki -ft
1.233
Tower Forces `No Ice Wind 60°To'Face:
Section
Add
Self
F
e
CF
q.
DF
DR
As
F
w
Ctrl.
Elevation
Weight
Weight
a
Face
c
psf
t
K
K
e
K
kl
L1
0.086
1.151
A
1
0.65
18.29
1
1
48.564
0.635
0.022
C
55.000-26.000
-
B
1
0.65
6
1
1
48.564
C
1
0.65
1
1
48.564
L2
.0.093
1.468
A
1
0.65
14.93
1
1
56.001
0.598
0.024
C
26:000-1.000
B
1
0.65
6
1
1
56.001
•
C
A
0.65
1
1
56.001
Sum Weight:
0.179
2.619
OTM
31.673 k.i -ft
1 1.233
y° z Tower Forces NO" 16e" Wind,,90,To Face
Section.
Add
Self
F
e
CF
q:
DF
DR
As
F
tiv
Ctrl.
Elevation
Weight
Weight
a
I
Face
c
psf
t
K
K.
e
ft2
K
k!
Ll
0.086
1.151
A
1
0.65
18.29.
1
1
48.564
0.635
0.022
C
55.000-26.000
B
1
0.65
6
1
1
48.564
C
• 1
0.65
1
1
48.564
L2
0.093
1.468
A
1
0.65
14.93
1
1
56.001
0.598
.0.024
C
26.000-1.000
B
1
0.65
6
l
1
56.001
C
1
0.65
1
1
56.001
Sum Weight:
0.179
2.619
OTM
1 31.673 ki -ft
1 1.233
N.
uTowerforcbs'- Se`r Lice -Wind Normal To Face
Section
Add
Self
F
e
CF
q: '
DF
DR
As
F
tiv
Ctrl.
Elevation
Weight
Weight
a
Face
c
w ...
psf
t
K
K
e
ft2
K
kl
L l
0.086
I A 51
A
1
0.65
8.157
1
1
48.564
0.283
0.010
C
55.000-26.000
B
1
0.65
1
1
48.564
C
1
0.65
-
1
1
48.564
L2
0.093
1.468
A
r 1
0.65
6.659
1
1
56.001
0.267
0.011
C
26.000-1.000
B
1
0.65
1
1
56.001
C
1
0.65
1
1
56.001
Sum Weight:
0.179
2.619
•
OTM
14.121 kip-ft
0.550
Wx7 owep
Job
ISE No. 11423
Page
5 of 8
ISE Incoporated
Project
Date
PO Box 50039
55' Mono Palm
15:02:54 11 /17/16
Phoenix, AZ85076
Client
Designed by
Phone: (602) 403-8614
Larson
AB
FAX.- (623) 321-1283
Tower Forces - Service - Wind 60 To Face
Section
Add
Self
F
e
CF
q:
DF
DR
AE
F
w
Ctrl.
Elevation
Weight
Weight
a
Face
c
psf
t
K
K
e
ft,
K
kJ(
L1
0.086
1.151
A
1
0.65
8.157
1
1
48.564
0.283
0.010
C
55.000-26.000
B
1
0.65
1
1
48.564
C
1
0.65
1
1
48.564
L2
0.093
1.468
A
1
0.65
6.659
1
1
56.001
0.267
0.011
C
26.000-1.000
B
1
0.65
1
1
56.001
C
1
0.65
1
1
56.001
Sum Weight:
0.179
2.619
OTM
14.121
0.550
ki -ft
Tower Forces - Service - Wind 90 To Face
Section
Add
Self
F
e
CF
q:
DF
DR
AE
F
IV
Ctrl.
Elevation
Weight
Weight
a
Face
c
psf
ft
K
K
e
ft,
K
k!
L1
0.086
1.151
A
1
0.65
8.157
1
1
48.564
0.283
0.010
C
55.000-26.000
B
1
0.65
1
1
48.564
C
1
0.65
1
1
48.564
L2
0.093
1.468
A
1
0.65
6.659
l
1
56.001
0.267
0.011
C
26.000-1.000
B
1
0.65
1
1
56.001
C
1
0.65
1
1
56.001
Sum Weight:
0.179
2.619
OTM
14.121
0.550
ki -ft
Force Totals
Load
Vertical
Sum of
Sllm of
Sum of
Sum of
Sum of Torques
Case
Forces
Forces
Forces
Overturning
Overturning
X
Z
Moments, M
Moments, M.
K
K
K
ki - t
ki - t
ki - t
Leg Weight
2.619
Bracing Weight
0.000
Total Member Self -Weight
2.619
-0.033
-0.025
Total Weight
5.881
-0.033
-0.025
Wind 0 deg - No Ice
-0.008
-8.635
-406.180
0.397
-0.272
Wind 90 deg - No Ice
8.580
0.007
0.358
-403.764
0.100
Wind 180 deg - No Ice
0.008
8.667
407.456
-0.448
0.272
Total Weight
5.881
-0.033
-0.025
Wind 0 deg - Service
-0.004
-3.850
-181.102
0.163
-0.121
Wind 90 deg - Service
3.825
0.003
0.141
-180.020
0.045
Wind 180 deg - Service
0.004
3.864
181.634
-0.214
0.121
Comb.
No
Load Combinations
Description
1
Dead Only
2
1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 0 deg - No Ice
3
0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 0 deg - No Ice
4
1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 90 deg - No Ice
5
0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 90 deg - No Ice
6
1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 180 deg - No Ice
WxTower
Job
Page
of
ISE No. 1.1423
6 8
ISE Incoporated
Project -
Date
PO Box50039
55' Mono Palm
15:02:54 11/17/16
Phoenix, AZ85076
Client
Designed by
Phone: (602) 403-8614
Larson
AB
FAX: (623) 321-1283
Comb.
No. ,
7
8
9
10
0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 180 deg - No Ice
Dead+Wind 0 deg - Service
Dead+Wind 90 deg - Service
Dead+Wind 180 deg - Service
Description
,
_
`
'Maximum Member: Forces:
;
Section
Elevation Component
Condition
Gov.
Axial
Major Axis '
Minor Axis
No.
ft Type
;
Load
Moment
Moment
• 4
Comb.
K
kip ft
Mp jt
L1
55 - 26 Pole
Max Tension
5
0.000
0.000
0.000 '
_
Max. Compression
4
-4.401
-282.778
-0.259
_
Max. Mx
4
-4.401
-282.778
-0.259
..
Max. My
6
-4.389
-0.354 •
-284.844
t Max. Vy.
4
12.871
-282.778
-0.259
y
' Max. Vx _
6
13.012
-0.354
-284.844
f
Max. Torque
6
-0.435
L2
26 -'1, Pole
Max Tension
1
0.000
0.000
0.000
_w,
h
Max.'Compression
4
-7.041
-655.412
-0.594 ^
p
Max. Mx
4
-7.041
-655.412
-0.594
s
Max. My t
6
. -7.041
-0.718
-661.408
Max. Vy
4
13.736
-655.412
-0.594
' -
Max. Vx
6
13.876
-0.718
-661.408
Max. Torque
6
-0.434
k
y Maximum
Reactions
'�. _
L
Location. Condition
Gov.
Vertical Horizontal, X Horizontal, Z
Load
K
K
K - -
Comb.
Pole Max. Vert
4
7.057
-13.728
-0.012
Max. H..,
3
5.292
0.013
13.816
Max. H. :
-2
7.057
0.013
13.817
' r Max. M,
2
659.319
0.013
13.817
_
# Max: M.
4'
655.412
-13.728
-0.612 f
Max. Torsion
2
0.433
0.013
13.817
Min. Vert
7
5.292
-0.013
-13.867
Min. H.,
4
7.057
-13.728
-0.012
Min. H.
6 t
7.057
-0.013
-13.868 ,
Min. M,' _
6
-661.408
-0.013
-13.868
Min. M. `-
3 .,
-0.659
0.013
13.816
Min. Torsion
6
-0.433
-0.013
-13.868
Tower Mast ReactionI''Summary
Torque .
Load
Vertical ,.
Shear, ` -
Shear,
Overturning
Overturning
Combination
Moment, M
Moment, M
K
K
K
kip ft
kip ft
kip-ft
Dead Only
5.881
0.000
0.000
-0.033
-0.025
0.000
1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 0 deg - No Ice
7.057
-0.013
-13.817
-659.319
0.653
-0.433
0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 0 deg - No Ice
.5.292
-0.013
-13.816
-656.731
0.659
-0.433
L2 Dead+1.6 Wind 90 deg - No Ice
7.057
13.728
0.012
. 0.594
-655.412
0.160
0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 90 deg - No Ice
5.292
13.728
0.012
0.601
-652.840
0.160
1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 180 deg - No Ice
7.057
0.013
13.868
661.408
-0.718 .
0.433
0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 180 deg - No Ice
5.292
0.013
13.867
658.834 •
-0.707
0.433
To tnxwer
Job
ISE No. 11423
Page
7 of 8
ISE Incoporated
Project
Date
PO Box 50039
55' Mono Palm
15:02:54 11 /17/16
Phoenix, AZ85076
Client
Designed by
Phone: (602)'403-8614
Larson
AB
FAX.- (623) 321c71283
Load
Vertical
Shear, Shear,
Overturning
Overturning
Torque
Combination
Moment, M
Moment, M.
K
K K
kip ft
kip-ft
kip-ft
Dead+Wind 0 deg - Service
5.881
-0.004 -3.850
-183.430
0.165
-0.121
Dead+Wind 90 deg - Service
5.881
3.825 0.003
0.143
-182.336
0.045
Dead+Wind 180 deg - Service
5.881
0.004 3.864
183.968
-0.217
0.121
Maximum Tower Deflections Service Wind'a ;
Section
Elevation
Hors.
Gov.
Tilt Twist
No.
Defection
Load
ft
in
Comb.
° °
L l
55 - 26
7.767
10
1.1489 0.0030
L2
29 - 1
2.281
10
0.7431 0.0009 '
Maximum Tower Deflections - Design Wind k
'Section
Elevation
Harz.
Gov..
Tilt
Twist
No.
Defection
Load
ft
in
Comb.
G
o
Ll
55 - 26
27.918
6
4.1323
0.0106
L2
29 - 1
8.201
6
2.6723
0.0033
Base Plate Design Data -
Plate Number Anchor Bolt Actual Actual Actual Actual Controlling Ratio
Thickness ofAnchor Size Allowable Allowable Allowable Allowable Condition
Bolts Ratio Ratio Ratio Ratio
Bolt
Bolt
Plate Stiffener
Tension
Compression
Stress Stress
in in K
K
ksi ksi
2.2500 4 2.2500 220.251
223.771
22.749 Bolt T 0.98
223.654
371.266
32.400
0.98
0.60
0.70
Compression Checks
Pole Design Data
Section Elevation Size L L Kl/r A P. �P Ratio
No.
P.
ft _ f ft in' K K +P.
LI 55 - 26 (1) TP23.58xl6x0.1875 29.000 0.000 0.0 13.4548 -4.389 948.198 0.005
L2 26 - 1 (2) TP29.7395x22.42090.1875 28.000 0.000 0.0 17.5871 -7.041 1118.080 0.006
'
MxTOWer,
Job
Page
8
ISE No. 11423
.8'of
' ISE Incoptirated _
Project
Date
Po Box 50039
c 55' Mono Palm
15:02:54 11 /17/16
'Phoenix, AZ85076
Client
Designed by
Phone: (602) 403-8614
Larson
AB
FAX.- (623) 321-1283
Pole Bending Design
Data
+L
,
Section.
Elevation
Size
Mx-
¢M,«
Ratio
M
raM,,
Ratio
No.
MY
M.,
• ft
kip-ft
kip ft
OM
kip-lt
la'pfit
raM
LI -
55 - 26 (1)
TP23.58xl6x0.1875
284.845
440.630
0.646
0.000
440.630
0.000
L2
'
26 - 1 (2) TP29.7395M.42090.1875 661.408
1
680.462
0.972
0.000
680.462
0.000
•Y "` x
Shear_Design'Data
.,..r
.Pole
Section
Elevation •
size.
Actual
pV„
Ratio
Actual
OT
Ratio
No.
V.
V
T.
T.
jt
K .
K
V,
kipft
kip-/'
�T
Ll
55 - 26 (1) -
TP23.58xl6x0.1875
13.012
474.099
0.027
0.434
882.333
0.000
L2
26-11 (2)-
TP29.7395M.42090.1875 13.876
559.038
0.025
0.433
1362.592
0.000
.r
r�
:Pole'
Interaction Design
Section
Elevation
Ratio
Ratio
Ratio Ratio Ratio Comb.
Allow.
Criteria
No..
-
P.
M,.
M V. T . Stress Ratio
Stress ,
ft
�P
M
M,,;, - +V„ +T„
Ratio
Ll
55 - 26 (1)
0.005
0.646
0.000 0.027 0.000
""0
0.652
4 8.2
L2
26 - 1 (2)
0.006
0.972
0.000 0.025 " , • 0.000
• 0.979 �
1.000
'
4.8.2 Y..• •
�t
Section Capacity Table
4
Section
Elevation
Component
Size Critical P
aPd1aw
% Pass
No.
f
Type
Element K
K
Capacity Fail
Ll, 55726 Pole TP23.58x16x0.1875 1 -4.389 948.198 65.2 Pass
L2 26 - 1 . Pole TP29.7395x22.420M.1875 2 -7.041 1 118.080 97.9 Pass
Summary
Pole (L2) 97.9 Pass
F Base Plate 98.5 Pass
_ RATING = 98.5 Pass
i
j
Program Version 7.0.7.0 - 7/18/2016 File:M:/ISE Working Directory/Larson/l 1423 VZW Chihuahua (1316316)/11423 VZW Chihuahua.eri
11/17/2016 Design Maps Summary Report
;"aF,USGS Design Maps Summary Report
User -Specified Input
Report Title 11423 VZW Chihuahua
Thu November 17, 2016 22:18:07 UTC
Building Code Reference Document 2012/2015 International Building Code
(which utilizes USGS hazard data available in 2008)
Site Coordinates 33.670860N, 116.30367°W
Site Soil Classification Site Class D - "Stiff Soil"
Risk Category I/II/III
USGS-Provided Output
SS = 1.500 g Sh,s = 1.500 g Sos 1.000 g
S,= 0.608g SM,= 0.912g SO,= 0.608g
For information on how the SS and S1 values above have been calculated from probabilistic (risk -targeted) and
deterministic ground motions in the direction of maximum horizontal response, please return to the application and
select the "2009 NEHRP" building code reference document.
MCER Response Spectrum
1.65
1.50
1.35
1.20
1.05
O, 0.90
rn 0.75
0.60
0.45
0.30
0.15
0.00
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.00 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.20 2:00
Period, T (sec)
Design Response'Spectrum
1.10
0.99
0. 88
0.77
C� 0.66
M 0.55
b.44
0.33
0.22
0.11
0.00
0,00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0,90 1.00 1.20 1.40 .1.60 1.90 2.00
Period, T (sec)
Although this information is a product of the U.S. Geological Survey, we provide no warranty, expressed or implied, as to the
accuracy of the data contained therein. This tool is not a substitute for technical subject -matter knowledge.
http://ehp2-earthquake.wr.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/summary.php'>tem plate=minimal8Jatitude=33.67086070579542&longitude=-116.30367292093813&siteciass... 1 /1
11/17/2016 ' . Design Maps Detailed Report ,
MNSGS
Design Maps Detailed Report +� -
2012/2015 International Building Code (33.670860N, 116.30367°W) `
.Site Class D. — "Stiff Soil", Risk'Category I/II/III
Section 16113.1 Mapped acceleration parameters
Note: Ground motion values provided below are for the direction of maximum horizontal
spectral response acceleration. They have been converted from corresponding geometric
mean ground motions computed by, the-USGS by applying factors of 1.1 (to obtain SS) and,
1.3 (to obtain S,). Maps in the 2012/2015 International Building Code are provided for Site
Class B..Adjustments for other Site Classes are made, as needed, in Section 1613:3;3. f
From Figure 1613.3.1(1) t1I '' • SS = 1.500 g
From Figure 1613.3.1(2) IZI S1 _= 0.608 g
Section 1613.3:2•,= Site class definitions' .
The authority having jurisdiction (riot the USGS), site -specific geotechnical data, and/or the
"default has classified the site as Site Class D, based on the site soil properties in accordance
with Section 161�..
2010 ASCE-7 Standard — Table 20.3-1 '
- SITE CLASS DEFINITIONS
Site Class t' vs N or Non s„ t
A. Hard Rock >' '} _ ': >5,000 ft/s N/A, N/A
B. Rock i T "� .2,500 to 5,000 ft/s N/A N/A
C. Very dense soil and,soft rock 1,200 to 2,500 ft/s >50 - >2,000 psf
D. Stiff Soil 7 600 to 1,200"ft/s •15 to 50 1,000 to 2,000 psf _
E. Soft clay soil `� <600 ft/s <15 <1,000 psf ,
Any profile with more than 10 ft of soil having the
�* .characteristics: '
` Plasticity index PI > 20,
Moisture content w >— 40%,and
,- Undrained shear strength s. < 500 psf
F. Soils requiring site response See Section 20.3.1
_
•analysis in accordance with Section
21.1
s , For SI: 1ft/s = 0.3048 m/s-llb/ft2 = 0.0479 kN/m2
http://ehp2-earthquake.wr.usgs:gov/designmaps/us/report.php>tempiate=minimal&latitude=33.67086070579542&longitude=-116.30367292093813&siteclass=3&.. 1/4 ,
r
11/17/2016 Design Maps Detailed Report
Section 1613.3.3 - Site coefficients and adjusted maximum considered earthquake spectral '
response acceleration parameters
TABLE'1613.3.3(1)
VALUES OF.SITE COEFFICIENT F.-
Site Class Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at Short Period.
Ss :5 0.25 SS =. 0.50 SS = 0,75 Ss = 1.00 SS >_ 1.25+
A 0:8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
B 1.0 1.0• 1.0 1.0 1.0
C 1.2 1.2. 1.1 1.0 1.0
D 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.0
E 2.5 1.7 1.2 0.9 0.9
F See Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7
Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of SS +
For Site Class = D and. S. = 1.500 g, F, = 1.000, ,.
TABLE 1613.3.3(2)
VALUES OF SITE COEFFICIENT F
Site Class Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 1-s Period
'Si _<0.10 S,=0.20 5,=0.30 Si=0.40 S,>_0.50
A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.,8 0:8
B 1.0 .1.0 1.0 1.0 "1.0
C 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4. 1.3
D 2.4 - •2.0 1.8 1.6 1.5
E 3.5 3.2 2.8 2.4 2.4•
F See Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7
r
Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of S,
For Site Class = D and S, = 0.608 g, F� = 1.500,
http://ehp2-earthquake.wr.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/report.php?tem plate=mini m al&latitude=33.67086070579542&longitude=-116.30367292093813&siteclass=X .. 2/4
11/17/2016 Design Maps Detailed Report
Section 1613.3.5 — Determination of seismic design category
TABLE 1613.3.5(1)
SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORY BASED ON SHORT -PERIOD (0.2 second) RESPONSE ACCELERATION
VALUE OF SOS
RISK CATEGORY
I.or II
III
IV
.Sns < 0.167g
A
A
A
0.167g 5 SDI or, 0.33g
B
B f
C '
0.33g <_ SDI < 0.509
C
C
D
0.509 <_ SDI
D
D
D
For Risk Category = I and SDI = 1.000 g, Seismic Design Category = D '
TABLE 1613.3.5(2)
SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORY BASED ON 1-SECOND PERIOD RESPONSE ACCELERATION
VALUE OF SDI
RISK CATEGORY
'
IorI;I
III
IV.
SDI < 0.067g
A .
A
A
0:067g 5 SDI.-5 0.133g'
B ;
B
C
OA33g <_ SDI <:0.20g
C
C
D
0.20g 5 SDI
D'
D
D
,
For Risk Category = I and SDI = 0.608 g, Seismic Design Category = D ,
Note: When S, is greater than or equal to 0.75g, the Seismic Design Category is E for
buildings in Risk Categories I, II, and III, and F for those in Risk Category IV, irrespective of
the above.
Seismic Design Category = "the more severe design category in accordance with
Table.1613.3.5(1) or 1613.3.5(2)" = D
Note: See Section 1613.3.5.1 for alternative approaches to calculating Seismic Design
Category. ,
v
References
1. Figure 1613.3.1(1): http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/IBC-2012-Fig1613p3pl(l.).pdf i
2. Figure 1613.3.1(2): http://earthquako.usgs.govjhazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/IBC-2012-,Figl6l3p3pl(2).pdf
htip://ehp2-earthquake.wr.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/report.php'>template=minimal&latitude=33.67086070579542&longitude=-116.30367292093813&siteciass=3&.. 4/4
ISE Incorporated.
Job: •VZW Chihuahua '
P.O. Box 50039
Project. ISE Job No. 11423
;
Phoenix,'Arizona 85076
Client: Larson -Camouflage
Phone: 602-403-8614 a , ` a
Date: November 22, 2016
f FAX.- 623-321-1283
Designed By: AB
,
SEISMIC CALCULATIONS
•
1
ASCE 7710 Seismic Design Requirements for Non -Building Structures Not Similar to Buildings
•
f
4
REFERENCE'
Risk Category
ASCE 7-10 Table 1.5-1
Importance Factor .•
Y . ,.
r
le - 1 r ' °
•
ASCE 7-10 -Table 1.5-2 ,
r
Site Classification
D
" -
ASCE 7-10 Table 20.3-1
Site Coefficients
' , SS - �. 1.500 • ;°Mapped
Spectral Accelerations: Short Period
-
S1 = 0.608
Mapped Sectral Accelerations: 1 sec Period
Fa = 3. 1.000
Site Coefficient •
ASCE 7-10 Table 11.4-1 -
' • Fv =' 1.500
Site Coefficient
ASCE 7-10 Table 11.4-2 `
' • SMS = 1.500 -,
Max Spectral Accelerations: Short Periods
ASCE 7-10 Eqn. 11.4-1 .
,.
SM1 _ ' `• 0.912
Max Spectral Accelerations: 1sec Period,
ASCE 7-10 Eqn. 11.4-2 -
' Design Spectral Res ponse`Acceleration Parameters
ASCE 7-10 11.4.4
SDS = 1.000 ,5% Damped Spectral Acceleration: Short Period
ASCE 7-10 Eqn. 11.4-3
SDI .= �� , 0.608
5% Damped Spectral Acceleration: 1 sec Period
ASCE 7-10 Eqn. 11.4 4
-
' SDC = D r 'Seismic
Design Category .
ASCE 7-10 Tables 11.6-1 & 11.6-2
�
,, i 4 .'
•`�•-n r ...
if S1>0.75'then E
Equivalent Lateral Force Procedure
T = hn" = .0.398
a ` _ Fundamental Period ' „
ASCE 7-10 Eqn. 12.8-7
.,Ct
Ct = 0.020
Period Parameter
ASCE 7-10 Table 12.8-2
x = a 0.750'.
' Period Parameter
ASCE 7-10 Table 12.8-2
hn = 54.000
Structure Height (ft)
,
• R =. „ + t,+ 1.500
Response Modification Factor
ASCE 7-10 Table 15.4-2 '
diJU- . '- . ; J' 8.000
'' , . Long -Period Transition Period
ASCE 7-10 Figure 22-15 ,
Cs = SDS/[R/1] _ .-0.667
'` Seismic Response Coefficient
ASCE 7-10 Eqn. 12.8-2
where;
Cs > 0.44 SDS[I] = 0.440
Lower Limit
ASCE 7-10 Eqn. 15.4-1
1 Cs > 0.6 S1/[R/1] = 0.324
Lower Limit for S1 > 0.6g
ASCE 7-10 Eqn. 15.4-2
' Cs < SDVT[R/1] = 1.017
Upper Limit for T < TL .
ASCE 7-10 Eqn. 12.8-3
Cs < SDI TL/T2[R/1] = 20.429
Upper Limit for T > TL
ASCE 7-10 Eqn. 12.8-4
Design Value Cs =, 0.667
W = 5.881
Pole Dead Weight + Appurtenances Weight (kips)
V = ,' CSW = 3.921
Equivalent Seismic Base Shear (kips)
ASCE 7-10 Eqn. 12.8-1
r „ Fwind = 13.868
Wind Base Shear (kips) : 1.6W
Lateral Wind Shear > Seismic
Base Shear : Wind Controls Design
ISE Incorporated
Job: VZW Chihuahua
P.O. Box 50039
Project:.ISE Job No. 11423
Phoenix, Arizona 85076
Client: Larson Camouflage
Phone: 602-403-8614
Date: November 22, 2016
FAX.- 623-321=1283
Designed By: AB
a
SEISMIC REACTIONS
_
At Pole Base -
COMPONENT
WEIGHT'
(Pounds)
ELEVATION
CL (Feet)
SEISMIC SHEAR
Cs x Weight (Kips)
SEISMIC BASE
MOMENT (Kip -Ft)
Cs = 0.667
(81) Palm Fronds
986
52.5
0.657
34.510
(3) 8' T-Arm
357
53
0338
12.614
(12) SBNHH-1D65B
487.2
53
0.325
17.214
(12) RRUS-12 + A2
900
' 53
0.600
3.L800
(2) Surge Suppressors
100
.. 53
0.067
3.533
(1) 2' MW Dish
10
._ .- 43
0.007
0.287
6' dia. Frond Skirt
250
43.625
0.167
7.271
Pole Section Ll
1151
40.5
0.767.
31.077
Pole Section L2
1468
13.5
0.979
13.212
SUM '
5709.21
1 3.806
151.518
Factored Wind Force Reactions at Base of Pole:
M = 661.408
V = 13.868
Check Pole Design for Seismic force by stress ratio check:
P+M+[V+T]' <1.0•,
P+M+[V+T]2= 0.229 <1.0
Pole has adequate capacity for Seismic Base Reactions -
T
r
ISE IncOi-por' 7ted ' . job: VZW Chihuahzza -
P.O. Box 50039 1 ' Project: ISE Job No. 11423 t
Phoenix, Arizona 85076 Client: Larson Camouflage r
'
Phone: 602-403-8614 Date: November 22, 2016
FAX: 623-321-1283 s - Designed By: AB ,
ANCHOR BOLT & BASE PLATE DESIGN
Calculated Wind Force Reactions from Force Totals Table: M = 407.456 k-Ft, V = 8.667 kip,
A = 5.88 kip
_
(Round or Square Plate) . '., ' ',-'. '�• • + ,
,• ;
. _ .
Geometry
`
Plate Square/Round Plate = Square
,
` Plate Width/Diameter: OD = 35.75 inch
'
- Pole Diameter Dp = 29.7395 inch
`Bolt Circle Diameter BC = 35.75 inch
_
•- 4 . l No. Bolts:.. N = . 4
,•
fir,,". ,,'` �.. 2
- . Bolt Moment of Inertia: I =' 639.0313 inch
2 ,
(1/8)(N BC _)
'. Anchor Bolt Diameter: Dbolt = - 2.25 inch,, ,
Nominal Anchor Bolt Area: An = 3.25 inch2
- t
` Materials .
e s -
Anchor Bolt Material: Fu = 100 KSI
A615 GR_ 75
'Base Plate Material: Fy = 36 KSI
A36
Loads ,.:
. ;:'' • Unfactored Base Reactions
M = 407.456 ; Kip -Ft
< <; V = 8.667 - • ' Kips
,
A= 5.881 Kips
,.
Factored Moment: Mu = ' 661.408 Kip -Ft
•1.2D + 1.6W -
. Factored Base Shear: V = 13.868 Kips
1.2D + 1.6W
' Axial Dead Load: A = 7.057 Kips
1.2 DL
Analysis
-ANCHOR BOLTS `
' Anchor Bolt Tension: T = Pu = 220.247 Kips
[(Mu BC/2) / 1] - A/N
.-; •Anchor Bolt Compression` C`= 223.775 Kips
[(Mu BC/2) / 1] + A/N
Anchor Bolt Shear: Vu = 3.467 Kips/bolt
V / N -
t. -,'AB Des i n Strength - R Fu
g g nt = An = 243.750 Kips
0.75 for Ru ture Stren th t
= P 9
., •• ,
•INTERACTION
PER TIA-222-G Section 4.9.9
[P. + V./r1] / �Rnt < 1.0 rl = 0.4 For Detail Type D
. 'Anchor..Bolf Stress'Ratio 10.94 < 1.0 OKII
UN -GROUTED BASEPLATE 1.
`
_
- Plate Bending: Mpb = 672.50 Kip -Inch
Mpb=C(1/2)(BC-Dp) ,
Required Plastic Modulus: Z = 20.76 inch3
Z = Mpb / (0.9)Fy
• • Square Plate Bend Line Length: L = ` 20.82 inch
L=[2'rl(OD) - Dp]
Round Plate BendLineLength: L = .24.56 inch
L = .75BC SIN(360/N)
° Required Plate Thickness: Tpl = " 2.00 inch
Tpl = [4Z/ L]'12
1 • Plate Stress Ratio = 0.79 < 1.0 OKI I
Design Summary ` _
` y(4) 2.25" Diameter A615 GR 75 Bolts on 35.75" BC Diameter
i', _ �2.25" X 35.75" Square A36 Base Plate
ISE Incorporated
Job: vzw Chihuahua
P.O. Box 50039
Project: ISE Job No. 11423
Phoenix, Arizona 85076
Client: Larson Camouflage
Phone: 602-403-8614
Date: November'22, 2016
FAX.- 623-321-1283
Designed By: AB
Pole to Base Weld Connection
i
Flange Ring Assembly ;
Dp =
29.7395 inch
Factored Moment: Mu =
661.408 Kip -Ft Factored Moment
Factored Base Shear: V =
13.868 Kips Factored Shear
3roove Weld Thickness: Twg =
0.1875 inch Groove Thickness
3roove Weld Thickness: Twf =
0.1875 finch Filet Weld Thickness.
Weld Material Yield: Fyw =
' 70 ksi
,Ilowable Weld Force: Fallow =
10.754 kip/inch Fallow = [(.707)Twf + Twg] (.48)Fyw
Weld Force: Fw =
8.569 kip/inch Fw = (3/4)Sgrt [ {Mu/7E(Dp2/4)}2 + {V/nDp}Z ]
Base Weld Stress Ratio =
79:686
DESIGN: APPLY GROOVE
WELD AND APPLY 3/16" FILET CAP WELD TO POLE AT TOP OF PLATE
t
ISE Incorporated , Job: VZW Chihuahua
P.O. Box 50039 Project: ISE Job No. 11423
Phoenix, Arizona 85076 Client: Larson Camouflage -
Phone: 602-463-8614 Date: November 22, 2016
FAX.- 623-321-1283 Designed By: AB -
Anchor'Bolt Development (ACI 318) -
Anchor bolts are mechanically anchored with nuts and load plates at bottom of bolts.
Failure cones emanate at 35 degrees from.top of nut. ,
The failure cones from the bolts overlap and exit the sides of the caisson. • ,
Concrete is assumed to crack and carry no load so, vertical reinforcing steel must be developed to transfer bolt loads. -
%Calculations presented below determine the required length of anchor bolt embedment
and reinforcing development necessary to transfer the design loads. „
Minimum Development Length per ACI 318 12.2,2, Eq 12-1.
l — d f /4f 3/40 / V?.5
where; fy = 60,000psi, f = 4000 psi, and 0, peg,`='1.0, s
ld = 28.46 db For # 9 d z Bar "d 32.02 in.
Anchor Bolts are 2-1/4" X 84" with 72"'Embedment on 35.75" Bolt Circle
Reinforcing Cage Diameter = . 48:00 in.' -
Minimum Required AB'Depth -�..
cover = 3.00'in.
bottom grip = 3.00 in.
'72(Cage-BC) - 6.13 in.
1.;, =1;+ cover +. bottom grip + %(Cage-BC)/tan65 = 40.87 in.
Bolt Embedment Provided = 72.00 in '
Anchor bolts are restrained by fully developed reinforcement satisfying the requirements of 318 Appendix D.
- .. ._ i'• � � , L • i ' . � 1 F. it - _• l
1
ISE Incorporated Job: VZW Chihuahua
P.O. Box 50039 Project: ISE Job No. 11423
.,Phoenix,. Arizona 85076. Client: Larson Camouflage -
Phone.: 602-403-8614 Date: November 22, 2016 t
FAX.- 623-321-1283 Designed By: AB
Rigid Pole Theory Foundation Design -
Calculated -Wind Force Reactions from Force Totals Table: M = 407.456 k-Ft, V = 8;667 kip, A = 5.88 kit,
r
Soils Report:
Toro lnternational Job No. 13-106.82, September 28, 2015 '
Allowable Lateral Bearing = 230psf
Drilled shaft foundation design per "Pole Formula". per
Equation 18-1 of Section 1807.3.2.1 of the IBC 2012.
Per Enercalc Solution for Egn 18-15.875' Embed.Required
EnerCalc Design solution results- (Program Output attached)
Use 54" Diameter x 19'-0" embedded pier with 6" exposure:
Reinforcing: Use (12) - #9 Vertical
Title Block Line 1
Project Title:
You can change this area
Engineer: Project ID:
using the "Settings" menu item
Project Descr:
and then using the "Printing &
Title Block" selection.
Title Block Line 6
Printed: 22 Nov M16, 7:SOAM
Pole FOOtih Embedded;
File=M:UROST2-21Larson110T9PD-1112P0W-E.EC6'`'
g n:Soi�
-
ENERCALC, INC.1983-2016, Build:6.16.10.31, Ver.6.16.10.31
r.rr:,
Description : Depth Calculation
^C_ode References
m
Calculations per IBC 2012 1807.3, CBC 2013, ASCE 7-10
Load Combinations Used: ASCE 7-05
e-n-r-ro-_w_
��Generallnformation
Pole Footing Shape
Circular
Pole Footing Diameter :.......:..
54.0 in
--
Calculate Min. Depth for Allowable Pressures
No Lateral Restraint at Ground Surface
Allow Passive ..................
230.0 pcf
Max Passive ................:..
3,450.0 psf
Controlling Values
Governing. Load Combination: +D+W+H
Lateral Load
8.667 k
Moment
408.970 k-ft
NO Ground Surface Restraint
Pressures at 1/3 Depth
Actual
1,211.65 psf
Allowable i
1,212.55 psf
MiM . nimum R wired Depth.. •
..Sa75
.
Footing Base Area
15.904 ft"2
Maximum Soil Pressure
0.3698 ksf
O
Footing Diameter - 4'-6'
It -
Applied"Goads
Lateral Concentrated Load (k)
Lateral Distributed Loads (klf)
Vertical Load (k)
D: Dead.Load
k
k/ft
5.881 k
Lr : Roof Live
k
k/ft
k
L : Live
k
k/ft
k
S : Snow
k
k/ft
k
W : Wind
8.667 k
k/ft
k
E : Earthquake,
k
k/ft
k
H : Lateral Earth
k
k/ft
k
Load distance above
TOP of Load above ground surface
ground surface
47.187 ft
ft
BOTTOM of Load above ground surface
ft
Load'Combination Results'
„ Forces,@ Ground Surface .Required -Pressure 1l3 Depth Soil Increase
Load Combination Loads - (k) ' Moments -(ft-k) Depth -.(ft) Actual - (psf) , + Allow (psf) Factor,. r.
D Only
0.000
0.000
0.13
0.0
0.0
1.000
+D+L+H
0.000
0.000
0.13
0.0
0.0
1.000
+D+Lr+H
0.000
0.000
0.13
0.0
0.0
1.000
+D+S+H
0.000
0.000
0.13
0.0
0.0
1.000
+D+0.750Lr+0.750L+H
0.000
0.000
0.13
0.0
0.0
1.000
+D+0.750L+0.750S+H
0.000
0.000
0.13
0.0
0.0
1.000
+D+W+H
8.667
408.970
15.88
1,211.6
1,212.6
1.000
+D+0.70E+H
0.000
0.000
0.13
0.0
0.0
1.000
+D+0.750Lr+0.750L+0.750W+H
6.500
306.727
14.38
1,092.3
1,093.1
1.000
Title Block Line 1
Project Title:
You can change this area .
# - -
Engineer:
. , Project ID: „
using the "Settings" menu item
Protect Descr:
and then using the "Printing &
Title Block" selection.
Title Block Line 6
-
- - Printed: 22 Nov 2016, 7:50AM
+
Pole Footing: Embedded 'in Soil
s..
File M:VROST2-21Larson110T9PD-1112POW E E 6 !'
'
,:. x
-
:.. ._
ENERCALC, INC.1983 2016, Build:6:16.10.31, Verc61610.31
• r.FF.
1
Description : Depth Calculation
+D+0.750L+0.750S+0.750W+H
6.500 306.727
14:38
1,092.3 1,093.1 ' _ 1.000
' +D+0.750Lr+0.750L+0.5250E+H
0.000 0.000
0.13
0.0 `• , , •0.0 1.000—
+D+0.750L+0.750S+0.5250E+H ..
0.000 0.000
0.13
, . .-0.0� 1 0.01.000
i .
'
Title Block Line 1 _
Project Title_:
'You can change this area ,
Engineer: Project ID:
using the "Settings" menu item r
Project Descr.
and then using the "Printing &
Title Block" selection. ' ' , •
-
Title Block Line 6
Printed:22 NOV 2016, 7:56AM
Concrete Column
File=M:UROST2-2\Larson\10T9PD-1\12POW�E.EC6'
fNERCALCJNC. 1983-2016, Build:6.16.10.31,'Ver:6.16.10.31
KW�06004631
- Description: - Pier Calculations
Codi_QJenc s_�_
,Calculations per ACI 318-11, IBC 2012, CBC 2013, ASCE 7-10
Load Combinations Used: ASCE.7-05
'
t : General:lnformation ..
fc :Concrete 28 day strength = - 3.0 ksi r
Overall Column Height = 19.50 ft .
E _ = 3.122.6 ksi
End Fixity Top Free, Bottom Fixed
Density =' - ' 150.0 pcf
Brace condition for deflection (buckling) along columns
• Q = 0.850
X-X (width) axis:
fy - Main Rebar r '' = 60.0 ksi "
Fully braced against buckling along X-X Axis
E - Main Rebar _ . 29,000.0 ksi
Y-Y (depth) axis: "
' Allow. Reinforcing Limits ASTMAB15Bars used`
-Fully braced against buckling along Y-Y Axis
Min. Reinf. = 0.50 %
'
Max. Reinf. = 8.0016
Column,Cross Section
Column Dimensions:: 54.0in Diameter, Column Edge to Rebar
y
Edge Cover = 3.Oin
r_o97
_ •#
Column Reinforcing:- 12.0 - #9 bars -
x x
` * j
••as_
l Applied Loads'
Entered loads are factored per load combinations specified by user.
Column self weight included: 46,520.1 Ibs * Dead Load Factor
AXIAL LOADS ...
'
Axial Load at 19.50 ft above base, D = 5.881 k
BENDING LOADS ...
`
Lat. Point Load at 19.50 It creating Mx-x, W = 8.667 k
Moment acting about X-X axis, W = 407.456 k-ft:DESIGN`SUMMARY�"�
Load Combination +0.90D+1.60W+1.60H
Maximum SERVICE Load Reactions . .
Location of max.above base 19.369ft
Top along Y-Y 0.0 k Bottom along Y-Y 0.0 k
Maximum Stress Ratio • 0.697 : 1'
Top along X-X 8.667 k Bottom along X-X 8.667 k -
Ratio = (Pu12+Mu12)1.5 / (PhiPn^2+PhiMn^2)^.5
Pu = 47.161 k cp * Pn = 72.651 k .
Mu-x = -922 34 k-ft (P * Mn-x = 1.341.87 k-ft
Maximum SERVICE Load Deflections ...
Mu-y = 0.0 k-ft r (P. * Mn-y =0.0 k-ft
Along Y-Y 0.1303 in at 19.50 ft above base
for load combination: +D+W+H
Mu Angle = 180.0 deg �°
Along X-X O.Oin at -0.0ft above base r '
3'
- s Mu at Angle = 922.34 k-ft cpMn'at Angle= .1,322.75 k-ft
for load combination
Pn & Mn values located at Pu-Mu vector intersection with capacity curve
Column Capacities. .. . , 11
General Section Information . N = 0.750 =0.850 , g = 0.850
Pnmax : Nominal Max. Compressive Axial Capacity. 6,529.46 k •
p : % Reinforcing 0.5240 % Rebar %a Ok
`Pnmin : Nominal Min. Tension Axial Capacity -720.0 k'
Reinforcing Area 12.0 in^2
cp Pn, max: Usable Compressive Axial Capacity 4,162.53 k •
Concrete Area 2,290.22 in^2
<p Pn, min : Usable Tension Axial Capacity -540.0 k
J
Title Block Line 1
You can change this area'
using the "Settings" menu item
.and then using the "Printing &
Title Block" selection.
• Project Title: � -
Engineer: ,, Project ID:
Protect Descr:
' Printed: 22 NOV 2016,•,T.56AM '
=
Filet.
:,M:UROST2-21Larson110T9PD-1112POW EEC6
�COIlCr2t@ COIUmn ENERCALC,.INC.1983-2016,Build:6.16.10.31;Ver:6.16.10.31x'
Description : Pier Calculations
t :Governing Load Combcnation Results
z
Goyemm Factored
9
Moment
Dist from Axial Load ze+ Beriding Analysis vk ft
r Load Combiriation €
I` N k {r , �" `,Y zT';x �w r ,
I X X Y Y base ft Put �0 Pn g x :_S x Mux g y gy Muy Alpha (deg)
s> Uttllzatlori
g Mu s rP Mn Ratio
+
+1.40D
19.37 . 73.36 4,162.53
0.000
0.018
+1.20D+0.50Lr+1.60L+1.60H
19.37 62.88 4,162.53
0.000
0.015
+1.20D+1.60L+0.50S+1.60H
19.37 „ 62.88 4,162.53
•'
0.000
0.015
+1.20D+1.60Lr+0.50L -
+ .
19.37 62.88 4,162.53
0.000
0.015
+1.20D+1.60Lr+0.80W
Actual
19.37 62.88 203.80
1.000 461.17
. ' 180.000
461.17 1,513.24 .
0.305
+1.20D+0.50L+1.60S
19.37• 62.88 4,162.53
•
0.000
0.015
+1.20D+1.60S+0.80W
Actual
-19.37. 62.88 203.80
1.000 -461':17
t 180.000
461.17 1,513.24
0.305
+1.20D+0.50Lr+0.50L+1.60W
Actual
19.37-, 62.88 98.55
1.000 .922.34
180.000
922.34 1,360.70
0.678
+1.20D+0.50L+0.50S+1.60W
Actual
19.37, 62.88 98.55.1.000
-922.34
180.000
922.34 1-1360.70
0.678. '
+1.20D+0.50L+0.20S+E ,
19.37- 62.88 4,162.53
_
0,000
0.015
+0.90b+1.60W+1.60H
Actual
19.37- 47.16 72.65
1.000 `-922.34
180.000
922.34 1,322.75
0.697
+0.90D+E+1.60H
19.37• ' 47.16 4,162:53
, .
0.000
0.011
_"i t
�rMaximum :Reactions "
_.
;; < _ _ . < r -
.
Note: Onl non -zero reactions are listed.
Y I
Reaction along X-X Axis
Reaction along Y-Y Axis
Axial Reaction .
Load Combination
@ Base t • -@ Top
@ Base @ Top
@ Base
D Only
k.
k
52.401 k .
+D+L+H _
k
k
52.401 k:,,-
+D+Lr+H
k
k
52.401 k
+D+S+H
k
k
i
52.401 k
+D+0.750Lr+0.750L+H
k '
k
52:401 k
+0+0.750L+0.750S+H
k
k
52.401 k
+D+W+H
k
8.667 ` 8.667 k
52.401 k
+0+0.70E+H
k
k
52.401 k
+M.750Lr+0.750L+0.750W+H
k
6.500 6.500 k
52.401 k
+D+0.750L+0.750S+0.750W+H
k
6.500 6.500 k
52.401 k
+D40.750Lr+0.75OL+0.5250E+H
i k
+ k {
52.401 k
+D+0.750L+0.750S+0.5250E+H,
k
k
52.401 k
D Only
k
k
52.401 k
!
Lr Only
k
k
k
'
L Only
k.
k
k
S Only
k
k
k
W Only
k
8.667 " , 8.667 k
k '
E Only
k
k
k -
-
H Only
k `'
k
k
_
Maximum'Moments
m
Note`. Only non
-zero reactions are listed.
Moment About X-X Axis
Moment About Y-Y Axis
Load Combination ,
@ Base ,@ Top
@ Base
@ Top
D Only
k-ft
k-ft
+D+L+H
k-ft
k-ft
+D+Lr+H . '
k-ft
k-ft .
+D+S+H
k-ft ..
k-ft
"
+0+0.750Lr+0.750L+H
k-ft
k-ft
+D+0.750L40.750S+H
'k-ft
k-ft
+D+W+H "
k-ft
407.456
576.463 k-ft
+D+0.70E+H
k-ft
k-ft
+M.750Lr+0.75OL+0.750W+H
k-ft
305.592
432.347 k-ft
+0+0.750L+0.750S+0.750W+H
k-ft
305.592
432.347 k-ft
+D+0.750Lr+0.750L+0.5250E+H
k-ft .
k-ft
+D+0.750L+0.750S+0.5250E+H
k-ft
'.
k-ft
D Only
k-ft '
k-ft
Lr Only
k-ft • .
k-ft
L Only
k-ft
k-ft
S Only
k-ft
' -
k-ft
W Only
k-ft
407.456
576.463 k-ft
E Only
k-ft
k-ft
H Only
k-ft
k-ft
•
r
j
Title Block Line 1
Project Title:
You can change this area ,,
Engineer:
Project ID:
using the "Settings" menu item
Protect Descr.
and then using the "Printing & '
Title Block" selection..
Title Block Line i) -
-
Printed: 22 NOV 2016, 7:56AM
COnCr@t@.C6:�"1pm11
File=M:11ROST2-21Larson110T9PD-1112POW EEC6'J.;;
ENERCALC, INC. 1983-2016, 86ild:6.16.10.31, Vec6.16.10.31 r
.010. vic
Description : Pier Calculations
'Maximum Deflections forLoad.Combinafions
6
Load Combination
Max. X-X Deflection
Distance
Max. Y-Y Deflection
Distance `
D Only
0.0000 .
in
0.000
ft
0.000
in
. 0.000 . ft
+D+L++i '.
0.0000
. in
0.000
ft
0.000
in
0.000 ft
`+D•Hj+H t ..
0.0000
in
0.000
ft
0.000
in
0.000 ft
+D+S+H +- ♦
0.0000
in .
0.000
ft
0.000
in
•0.000 ft t s
+D+0.750Lr+0.750L+H ' -
0.0000
in
0.000
ft '
0.000
in
0.000 ft
+D+0.750L+0.750S+H
0.0000.
in
0.000
ft
0.000
in
0.000 ft
+D+W+H
0.0000
in
0.000
ft
0.130
in
19.500 .ft
+ +0+0.70E+H
0.0000
in
0.000
ft
0.000
in
0.000 ft ,
+M.750Lr+0.750L+0.750W+H , -
0.0000
in
0.000
ft
0.098
in
19.500 ft '
'+D+0.750L+0.750S+0.750W+H
0.0000
in
0.000
ft
0.098
in
19.500 ft
+M.750Lr+0.750L+0.5250E+H
0.0000
in
0.000
ft
0.000
in
0.000 ft
+0+0.750L+0.750S+0.5250E+H
0.0000
in
0.000
ft j
0.000
in
0.000 ', ft
D Only - , r- ,
0.0000
in
0.000
ft
0.000
in
0.000 ft
Lr Only 3 r
0.0000
in
0.000
ft
0.000
in
0.000 • ft
L Only ; '
0.0000
in
0.000
ft
r 0.000
in
0.000 ft
.,`
S Only
0.0000
in
0.000
ft
0.000
in
0.000 ft
W Only <
0.0000
in
0.000
ft
0.130
in
19.500 ft
E Only
0.0000
in
0.000
ft
0.000
in
0.000 ft
H Only
0.0000 +
in
0.000,
ft
0.000
in
0.000 ft
`tee,
. - l
Title Block Line 1 Project Title:
You can change this area Engineer: Project ID:
using the "Settings" menu item Protect Descr:
and then using the "Printing &
Title Block" selection.
Description : Pier Calculations
Concrete Column P-M Interaction Diagram
4,400.0 PhiMn @ Alpha (k-ft)
3,960 0
t
t
3,520.0
3,080.0
{
ni
2,640 0
t
;
2,2000
c
1,7600
{ #
s:
-
aL
1.320.0
}
880.0
4400
xl
0 Load Come.=-1.400. Alpha- O.OdeO. (73.38. 0.00)
Concrete Column P-M Interaction Diagram
— - - AI h kft
4,400.0
n
@ p a (- )
t
{ }
3,9600
;_....
f
3.520.0
t
9 t
t
3,0800
2,6400
2,200.0
z
Y
Fc
1.7600
'"
3
'4a
1,3200
880.0
Em
))
i
i
fff
.
31
ve T45.:
0 toad Comb.=.1.2OD-1.601-0.505.1.60M, Alpha- O.OdeO. (62.88,
t
Title Block Line 1
Project Title:
You can change this area
Engineer: Project ID:
using the "Settings" menu item
Protect Descr:.
and then using the "Printing &
Title Block" selection.
Title Block Line 6
Printed: 22 NOV 2016, 7:56AM
Concrete Column
File=M:URQST2-21Larson\10T9PD-1112POW-E.EC6
-
ENERCALC, INC. 1983.2016, Build:6.16.10.31, Ver.6.16.10.31
KW06004631
Licensee :,.ISE INC.
Description : Pier Calculations
Concrete Column P-M Interaction Diagram
4,400 0 Phi ' Mn @ Alpha (k-ft)
4,400.0
3,960.0
£
3,960.0
3,520.0
3,520.0
3,0800
w y
i
3.080.0
2.640 0
...:
s t`
2,640.0
2,2000
x
ac
2,200.0
1,7600
a
}
1,760.0
#
1,3200
1,320.0
880 0
880.0
=
, , M
.0 7 7073T 95145.5
0 Load Comb...1.20D.1.60LI.0.6DW. Alpha- 160.0deg, (62.88, 461.17)
Concrete Column P-M Interaction Diagram
4,400.0
PhiMn-@ Alpha .(k-ft) =
4.400.0
t
3,520.0
..:.:.
_;.:
:,`.
3,520.0
3,0800
'i
3.080.0
..
2,6400
)
j�
2,640.0
1,7600
s
a
1,760.0
1,3200
1,320.0
#3 {
880 0
i .
s y
3Y
880.0
440.0
F.
440.0
T 13T276 4T660
52 F45.5
0 L..d
Cemb...1.20D.1.606.0.60W. Alpha. 160.Odeg. (62.85.461.17)
Concrete Column P-M Interaction Diagram
Phi' Mn @ Alpha (k-ft)
0 Load Comb. -.1.20D.0.50L.1.609. Alpha. O.Odeg. (62.88. 0.00)
Concrete Column P-M Interaction Diagram
Phi ' Mn @ Alpha (k-ft)
0 Load Comb. --1.200.0.50Ur .60L.1.60W. Alpha= 160.00eg. (62.66.922.34)
Title Block Line 1
You can change this area
using the "Settings" menu item
and then using the "Printing &
Title Block" selection.
Title Block Line 6
Concrete Column
r.rr.
Description : Pier Calculations
Concrete Column P-M Interaction Diagram
4.400.0
- Phi ' Mn @ Alpha (k-fl)
3.960.0
#
3,5200
#
3,080.0
2,6400
#
s
2,2000
# ) #
c
a
1,7600
£ _£'
a
1,320 0
,.....a.,w...; -_ .c.,..1 ;.....s{,.....,.„.:
f74
8800=
M #w #
440.0
t
2TT,70T3T'99'f=.42;560ve,ts
.:
O Laaac"me.=•1.200.0.50Lw.s0s•I.WVwuaha=le0.aeae,(62.8a.exza4)
Concrete Column P-M Interaction Diagram
4,400.0
PhiMn @ Alpha (k-fl)
3,9600
s
I :
�
3,5200
5
#, '
1
3,080.0
1 � 3
{4
+
i
2,640.0
3
i
2,2000
i {
{ #
j £ .`a
v
v i
k
i
1.760.0
1'
m
t
1,320 0
o
No
# {
µ 3
1
i
aao o
r #
1,4Z2`7T70T.31?JBT7:045.!
O Load Comb. _ •0e0D•1.6M-I.60H. Alpha. 180.0deg, (47.16, 9n.04)
M
Project Title:
Engineer: Project ID:
Protect Descr:
Printed: 22 NOV 2016, 7:56AM
File = M:UROST2.2\Larson\10T9PD-111
32016, f3uild:6.16.10.31, ENERCALC, INC.
Concrete Column P-M Interaction Diagram
4.400.0
Phi ' Mn @ Alpha (k-n)
3,960.0
3
;
3,520.0 _
# }
_
3,080.0 =
;
2,640.0'=
=
'
Y
2,200.0 =
, a
1,760.0
}
w _ _
t
a
1,320.0 i
880.01
z..
3
k Y
440.0
O L4ed C4mE.-•0.900•E•1.60H, Alpha- O.Odeg. (47.16.0.00)
3
I,