The URL can be used to link to this page

BRES2018-0164 Geotechnical ReportRECEIVED C0MM N.fTY DEN OPMENT SLADDEN ENGINEERING y. L.A. /[grange County Indio Beaumont ■Hemet GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED CUSTOM RESIDENCE 48751 SAN LUCAS STREET LA QUINTA COUNTRY CLUB LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA -Prepared By- Sladden Engineering 45090 Golf Center Parkway, Suite F Indio, California 92201 (760) 772-3893 Sladden Engineering www.SladdenEngineering.com Sladden Engineering 45090 Golf Center Parkway, Suite F, Indio, California 92201(760) 863-0713 Fax (760) 863-0847 6782 Stanton Avenue, Suite C, Buena Park, CA 90621 (714) 523-0952 Fax (714) 523-1369 450 Egan Avenue, Beaumont, CA 92223 (951) 845-7743 Fax (951) 845-8863 800 E. Florida Avenue, Hemet, CA 92543 (951) 766-8777 Fax (951) 766-8778 August 27, 2018 Project No. 544-18276 Mr. Joe Birdsell 18-08-423 P.O. Box 630 La Quinta, California 92247 Subject: Geotechnical Investigation Project: Proposed Custom Residence 48751 San Lucas Street La Quinta Country Club La Quinta, California Sladden Engineering is pleased to present the results of the geotechnical investigation performed for the custom residence proposed for the subject site located at 48751 San Lucas Street within the La Quinta Country Club development in the City of La Quinta, California. Our services were completed in accordance with our proposal for geotechnical engineering services dated June 12, 2018 and your signed authorization to proceed with the work dated July 30, 2018. The purpose of our investigation was to explore the subsurface conditions at the site in order to provide recommendations for foundation design and site preparation. Evaluation of environmental issues and hazardous wastes was not included within the scope of services provided. The opinions, recommendations and design criteria presented in this report are based on our field exploration program, laboratory testing and engineering analyses. Based on the results of our investigation, it is our professional opinion that the proposed project should be feasible from a geotechnical perspective provided that the recommendations presented in this report are implemented in design and carried out through construction. We appreciate the opportunity to provide service to you on this project. If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact the undersigned. f: TTHEWJ. COHRT Matthew J. Cohrt ups Principal Geologist u 2634 OF CAG��pR��P SER/ab Copies: 4/Addressee Project Engineer III Brett L. Anderson Principal Engineer ANDERSON No.C45389 Exp.9/30/18 CIVIL lit ENGINEERING OF Sladden Engineering www.SladdenEngineering.com GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED CUSTOM RESIDENCE 48751 SAN LUCAS STREET LA QUINTA COUNTRY CLUB DEVELOPMENT LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA August 27, 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................... 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION....................................................................................................................... 1 SCOPEOF SERVICES............................................................................................................................. 2 SITECONDITIONS................................................................................................................................ 2 GEOLOGICSETTING............................................................................................................................ 3 SUBSURFACECONDITIONS................................................................................................................3 SEISMICITYAND FAULTING.............................................................................................................. 4 CBC DESIGN PARAMETERS................................................................................................................ 5 GEOLOGICHAZARDS.................................................................................. ..... 5 CONCLUSIONS...................................................................................................................................... 7 EARTHWORK AND GRADING.......................................................................................................... 8 Stripping....................................................................................................................................-...... 8 Preparationof Building Areas........................................................................................................ 8 FillPlacement and Compaction..................................................................................................... 8 Shrinkageand Subsidence.............................................................................................................. 9 CONVENTIONAL SHALLOW SPREAD FOOTINGS...................................................................... 9 SLABS-ON-GRADE................................................................................................................................10 CORROSIONSERIES.............................................................................................................................10 UTILITY TRENCH BACKFILL.............................................................................................................11 EXTERIOR CONCRETE FLATWORK.................................................................................................11 DRAINAGE..............................................................................................................................................11 LIMITATIONS.........................................................................................................................................11 ADDITIONALSERVICES......................................................................................................................12 REFERENCES..........................................................................................................................................13 FIGURES - Site Location Map Regional Geologic Map Borehole Location Photograph Subsidence Zone Map APPENDIX A - Field Exploration APPENDIX B - Laboratory Testing APPENDIX C - USGS Seismic Design Map and Report USGS Deaggregation Output Sladden Engineering www.SladdenEngineering.com August 27, 2018 - 1 - Project No. 544-18276 18-08-423 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of the geotechnical investigation performed by Sladden Engineering (Sladden) for the custom residence proposed for the site located at 48751 San Lucas Street within the La Quinta Country Club development in the City of La Quinta, California. The site is located at approximately 33.693797 degrees north latitude and 116.303801 degrees west longitude. The approximate location of the site is indicated on the Site Location Map (Figure 1). Our investigation was conducted in order to evaluate the engineering properties of the subsurface materials, to evaluate their in -situ characteristics, and to provide engineering recommendations and design criteria for site preparation, foundation design and the design of various site improvements. This study also includes a review of published and unpublished geotechnical and geological literature regarding seismicity at and near the subject site. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Based on our preliminary conversations, it is our understanding that the proposed project will consist of constructing a custom residence on the project site. Sladden anticipates that the proposed project will also include concrete flatwork and various associated site improvements. For our analyses we expect that the proposed residence will consist of a relatively lightweight wood -frame structure supported on conventional shallow spread footings and slab on grade foundation system. We anticipate that grading will be limited to minor cuts and fills in order to accomplish the desired pad elevations and provide adequate gradients for site drainage. Upon completion of precise grading plans, Sladden should be retained in order to ensure that the recommendations presented within in this report are incorporated into the design of the proposed project. Structural foundation loads were not available at the time of this report. Based on our experience with relatively lightweight structures, we expect that isolated column loads will be less than 20 kips and continuous wall loads will be less than 2.0 kips per linear foot. If these assumed loads vary significantly from the actual loads, we should be consulted to verify the applicability of the recommendations provided. Sladden Engineering www.SladdenEngineering.com August 27, 2018 -2- Project No. 544-18276 18-08-423 SCOPE OF SERVICES The purpose of our investigation was to determine specific engineering characteristics of the surface and near surface soil in order to develop foundation design criteria and recommendations for site preparation. Exploration of the site was achieved by drilling two (2) exploratory boreholes to depths of approximately 21.5 and 51.5 feet below the existing ground surface (bgs). Specifically, our site characterization consisted of the following tasks: ■ Site reconnaissance to assess the existing surface conditions on and adjacent to the site. ■ Advancing two (2) exploratory boreholes to depths of approximately 21.5 and 51.5 feet bgs in order to characterize the subsurface soil conditions. Representative samples of the soil were classified in the field and retained for laboratory testing and engineering analyses. Performing laboratory testing on selected samples to evaluate their engineering characteristics. ■ Reviewing geologic literature and discussing geologic hazards. ■ Performing engineering analyses to develop recommendations for foundation design and site preparation. ■ The preparation of this report summarizing our work at the site. SITE CONDITIONS The site is located at 48751 San Lucas Street within the La Quinta Country Club development in the City of La Quinta, California. The site is formally identified by the County of Riverside as APN 646-160-006 and occupies approximately 0.34 acres. At the time of our investigation the site was vacant and generally cleared of surface vegetation. Generally, the site is bound by residential properties to the west, north and south and San Lucas Street to the east. Based on our review of the La Quinta 7.5-Minute Quadrangle Map (USGS, 2015), the site is situated at an approximate elevation of 46 feet above mean sea level (MSL). No natural ponding of water or surface seeps were observed at or near the site during our investigation conducted on August 9, 2018. Site drainage appears to be controlled by sheet flow and surface infiltration. Regional drainage is provided by the Whitewater River that is located north of the project site. Sladden Engineering www.SladdenEngineering.com August 27, 2018 - 3 - Project No. 544-18276 18-08-423 GEOLOGIC SETTING The project site is located within the Colorado Desert Physiographic Province (also referred to as the Salton Trough) that is characterized as a northwest -southeast trending structural depression extending from the Gulf of California to the Banning Pass. The Salton Trough is dominated by several northwest trending faults, most notably the San Andreas Fault system. The Salton Trough is bounded by the Santa Rosa — San Jacinto Mountains on the southwest, the San Bernardino Mountains on the north, the Little San Bernardino - Chocolate — Orocopia Mountains on the east, and extends through the Imperial Valley into the Gulf of California on the south. A relatively thick sequence (20,000 feet) of sediment has been deposited in the Coachella Valley portion of the Salton Trough from Miocene to present times. These sediments are predominately terrestrial in nature with some lacustrian (lake) and minor marine deposits. The major contributor of these sediments has been the Colorado River. The mountains surrounding the Coachella Valley are composed primarily of Precambrian metamorphic and Mesozoic "granitic" rock. The Salton Trough is an internally draining area with no readily available outlet to Gulf of California and with portions well below sea level (-253' msl). The region is intermittently blocked from the Gulf of California by the damming effects of the Colorado River delta (current elevation +30'msl). Between about 300AD and 1600 AD (to 1700) the Salton Trough has been inundated by the River's water, forming ancient Lake Cahuilla (max. elevation +58' msl). Since that time the floor of the Trough has been repeatedly flooded with other "fresh" water lakes (1849, 1861, and 1891), the most recent and historically long lived being the current Salton Sea (1905). The sole outlet for these waters is evaporation, leaving behind vast amounts of terrestrial sediment materials and evaporite minerals. The site has been mapped by Rogers (1965) to be immediately underlain by undifferentiated Quaternary - age alluvium (Qal), lake deposits (Ql) and dune sand (Qs). The regional geologic setting for the site vicinity is presented on the Regional Geologic Map (Figure 2). SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The subsurface conditions at the site were investigated by drilling two (2) exploratory boreholes to depths of approximately 21.5 and 51.5 feet bgs. The approximate locations of the boreholes are illustrated on the Borehole Location Photograph (Figure 3). The boreholes were advanced using a truck -mounted Mobile B-61 drill -rig equipped with 8-inch outside diameter hollow stem augers. A representative of Sladden was on -site to log the materials encountered. During our field investigation a thin mantel of fill soil was encountered to a maximum depth of approximately two (2) feet bgs. Underlying the fill soil and extending to the maximum depths explored, native alluvium was encountered. The native soil throughout the site consists primarily of sandy silt (ML) and silty sand (SM). Granular horizons appeared dark brown in in -situ color, medium dense, dry to moist and fine-grained. Cohesive materials appeared dark brown and olive brown in in -situ color, stiff to very stiff, dry to very moist and exhibited low to medium plasticity characteristics. Sladden Engineering www.SladdenEnffineetinir.com August 27, 2018 - 4 - Project No. 544-18276 18-08-423 The final logs represent our interpretation of the contents of the field logs and the results of the laboratory observations and tests of the field samples. The final logs are included in Appendix A of this report. The stratification lines represent the approximate boundaries between soil types although the transitions may be gradual and/or variable across the site. Groundwater was not encountered to a maximum explored depth of 51 feet bgs during our field investigation. It is our opinion that groundwater should not be a factor during construction of the proposed project. SEISMICITY AND FAULTING The southwestern United States is a tectonically active and structurally complex region, dominated by northwest trending dextral faults. The faults of the region are often part of complex fault systems, composed of numerous subparallel faults which splay or step from main fault traces. Strong seismic shaking could be produced by any of these faults during the design life of the proposed project. We consider the most significant geologic hazard to the project to be the potential for moderate to strong seismic shaking that is likely to occur during the design life of the project. The proposed project is located in the highly seismic Southern California region within the influence of several fault systems that are considered to be active or potentially active. An active fault is defined by the State of California as a "sufficiently active and well defined fault" that has exhibited surface displacement within the Holocene epoch (about the last 11,000 years). A potentially active fault is defined by the State as a fault with a history of movement within Pleistocene time (between 11,000 and 1.6 million years ago). As previously stated, the site has been subjected to strong seismic shaking related to active faults that traverse through the region. Some of the more significant seismic events near the subject site within recent times include: M6.0 North Palm Springs (1986), M6.1 Joshua Tree (1992), M7.3 Landers (1992), M6.2 Big Bear (1992) and M7.1 Hector Mine (1999). Table 1 lists the closest known potentially active faults that was generated in part using the EQFAULT computer program (Blake, 2000), as modified using the fault parameters from The Revised 2002 California Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Maps (Cao et al, 2003). This table does not identify the probability of reactivation or the on -site effects from earthquakes occurring on any of the other faults in the region. TABLE 1 CLOSEST KNOWN ACTIVE FAULTS Fault Name Distance (Km) Maximum Event San Andreas - Coachella 11.3 *7.2 San Andreas - Southern 11.3 *7.2 Burnt Mountain 29.0 6.5 San Andreas - San Bernardino 30.4 *7.5 Eureka Peak 30.8 6.4 San Jacinto - Anza 31.8 7.2 * 8.1 for multiple segment rupture Sladden Engineering www.SladdenEngineering.com August 27, 2018 - 5 - Project No. 544-18276 18-08-423 2016 CBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS SIadden has reviewed the 2016 California Building Code (CBC) and summarized the current seismic design parameters for the proposer! structures. The seismic design category for a structure may be determined in accordance with Section 1613 of the 2016 CBC or ASCE7. According to the 2016 CBC, Site Class D may be used to estimate design seismic loading for the proposed structure. The 2016 CSC Seismic Design Parameters are summarized below. The project Design Map Reports are included within Appendix C (USGS, 2018a). Risk Category (Table 1.5-1): I/II/111 Site Class (Table 1613.3.2): D Ss (Figure 1613.3.1):1.500g S1 (Figure 1613.3.1): 0.657g Fa (Table 1613.3.3(1)):1.0 Fv (Table 1613.5.3(2)):1.5 Sms (Equation 16-37 {Fa X Ss)): 1.500g Sm1(Equation 16-38 {Fv X S11): 0.985g SDS (Equation 16-39 12/3 X Sms}):1.000g SD1(Equation 16-40 {2/3 X Sm1}): 0.657g Seismic Design Category: D GEOLOGIC HAZARDS The subject site is located in an active seismic zone and will likely experience strong seismic shaking during the design life of the proposed project. In general, the intensity of ground shaking will depend on several factors including: the distance to the earthquake focus, the earthquake magnitude, the response characteristics of the underlying materials, and the quality and type of construction. Geologic hazards and their relationship to the site are discussed below. I. Surface_Rul2ture. Surface rupture is expected to occur along preexisting, known active fault traces. However, surface rupture could potentially splay or step from known active faults or rupture along unidentified traces. Based on our review of Rogers (1965), Jennings (1994), CDOC (2018) and RCPR (2018), known faults are not mapped on or projecting towards the site. No signs of active surface faulting were observed during our review of non -stereo digitized photographs of the site and site vicinity (Google Earth, 2018). Finally, no signs of active surface fault rupture or secondary seismic effects (lateral spreading, lurching etc.) were identified on -site during our field investigation. Therefore, it is our opinion that risks associated with primary surface ground rupture should be considered "low". II. Ground Shaking. The site has been subjected to past ground shaking by faults that traverse through the region. Strong seismic shaking from nearby active faults is expected to produce strong seismic shaking during the design life of the proposed project. A probabilistic approach was employed to the estimate the peak ground acceleration (am.) that could be experienced at the site. Based on the USGS Unified Hazard Tool (USGS, 2018b) and shear wave velocity (Vs30) of 259 m/s, the site could be subjected to ground motions on the order of 0.56g. The peak ground acceleration at the site is judged to have a 475 year return period and a 10 percent chance of exceedance in 50 years. Sladden Engineering www.SladdenEnffineering.com August 27, 2018 - 6 - Project No. 544-18276 18-08-423 III. U Uefactioii. Liquefaction is the process in which loose, saturated granular soil loses strength as a result of cyclic loading. The strength loss is a result of a decrease in granular sand volume and a positive increase in pore pressures. Generally, liquefaction can occur if All of the following conditions apply: liquefaction -susceptible soil, groundwater within a depth of 50 feet or less, and strong seismic shaking. According to the County of Riverside (RCPR, 2018), the site is situated in a "Low" liquefaction potential zone. Based on our review of groundwater levels in the site vicinity (Tyley, 1974), risks associated with liquefactions are considered negligible). IV. Tsunamis and Seiches. Because the site is situated at an inland location, and is not immediately adjacent to any impounded bodies of water, risk associated with tsunamis and seiches are considered negligible. V. Slope Failure Landsliding, Rock Falls. No signs of slope instability in the form of landslides, rock falls, earthflows or slumps were observed at or near the subject site. The site is situated on relatively flat ground and not immediately adjacent to any slopes or hillsides. As such, risks associated with slope instability should be considered negligible. VI. Expansive Soil. Generally, the site soil consists of silty sand (SM) and sandy silt (ML). Based on the results of our laboratory testing (EI=18), the materials underlying the site are considered to have a "very low" expansion potential. However, the expansion potential of the surface soil should be reevaluated after remedial grading. VII. Settlement. Settlement resulting from the anticipated foundation loads should be minimal provided that the recommendations included in this report are considered in foundation design and construction. The estimated ultimate static settlement is calculated to be approximately one -inch when using the recommended bearing pressures. As a practical matter, differential static settlement between footings can be assumed as one-half of the total settlement. VIII. Subsidence. Land subsidence can occur in valleys where aquifer systems have been subjected to extensive groundwater pumping, such that groundwater pumping exceeds groundwater recharge. Generally, pore water reduction can result in a rearrangement of skeletal grains and could result in elastic (recoverable) or inelastic (unrecoverable) deformation of an aquifer system. Sneed and Brandt (USGS, 2014) have reported significant land subsidence measurements within the area of La Quinta as measured between 1995 and 2010. According to the aforementioned authors, the subject site is part of the broader "La Quinta subsidence area". This northwest -southeast trending subsidence zone is generally defined as an elongated subsidence bowl bounded by the westward extension of Avenue 48 to the north, Avenue 60 to the south, the Santa Rosa Mountains to the west and varying streets from Jefferson Street to Monroe Street to the East (Figure 4). Measurements throughout this subsidence zone from June 27, 1995 and September 19, 2010 have indicated subsidence of approximately 0.45 feet. Sladden Engineering www.SladdenEngineering.com August 27, 2018 - 7 - Project No. 544-18276 18-08-423 Although recent investigations have documented significant subsidence within the Coachella Valley area (USGS, 2007), no fissures or other surficial evidence of subsidence were observed at the subject site. With the exception of isolated tension zones typically manifested on the ground surface as fissures and/or ground cracks, subsidence related to groundwater depletion is generally areal in nature with very little differential settlement over short distances such as across individual buildings. The Coachella Valley Water District has publically acknowledged regional subsidence throughout the southern portion of the Coachella Valley and has indicated a commitment to groundwater replenishment programs that are intended to limit future subsidence. At this time, subsidence is considered a regional problem requiring regional mitigation not specific to the project vicinity. D(. Ground Fissures. No surface features indicative of ground fissuring were identified on the site during our field investigation. Accordingly, risks associated with ground fissuring are considered low. X. Debris Flows. Debris flows are viscous flows consisting of poorly sorted mixtures of sediment and water and are generally initiated on slopes steeper than approximately six horizontal to one vertical (6H:1V) (Boggs, 2001). Based on the flat nature of the site and the composition of the surface soil, we judge that risks associated with debris flows should be considered remote. XI. Flooding and Erosion. No signs of flooding or erosion were observed during our field investigation. However, flooding and erosion should be evaluated and mitigated by the project design Civil Engineer. CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of our investigation, it is our professional opinion that the project should be feasible from a geotechnical perspective provided that the recommendations provided in this report are incorporated into design and carried out through construction. The main geotechnical concern is the presence of loose native surface soil throughout the subject site. We recommend that remedial grading within the proposed building areas include over -excavation and re -compaction of the primary foundation bearing soil. Specific recommendations for site preparation are presented in the Earthwork and Grading section of this report. Caving did occur to varying degrees within each of our exploratory bores and the surface soil may be susceptible to caving within deeper excavations. All excavations should be constructed in accordance with the normal CalOSHA excavation criteria. On the basis of our observations of the materials encountered, we anticipate that the subsoil will conform to that described by CalOSHA as Type C. Soil conditions should be verified in the field by a "Competent person" employed by the Contractor. The following recommendations present more detailed design criteria that have been developed on the basis of our field and laboratory investigation. Sladden Engineering www.SladdenEngineering.com August 27, 2018 - 8 - Project No. 544-18276 18-08-423 EARTHWORK AND GRADING All earthwork including excavation, backfill and preparation of the subgrade soil, shoulcl be performed i[I accordance with the geotechnical recommendations presented in this report and portions of the local regulatory requirements, as applicable. All earthwork should be performed under the observation and testing of a qualified soil engineer. The following geotechnical engineering recommendations for the proposed project are based on observations from the field investigation program, laboratory testing and geotechnical engineering analyses. a. Stripping. Areas to be graded should be cleared of any vegetation, associated root systems, and debris. All areas scheduled to receive fill should be cleared of old fill and any irreducible matter. The strippings should be removed off site, or stockpiled for later use in landscape areas. Voids left by obstructions should be properly backfilled in accordance with the compaction recommendations of this report. b. Prei2aration of the Building Areas: All undocumented artificial fill soil should be removed to competent native soil. In order to provide for firm and uniform foundation bearing conditions, the primary foundation bearing soil should be overexcavated and recompacted. Overexcavation should extend to a minimum depth of 4 feet below existing grade or 3 feet below the bottom of the footings, whichever is deeper. Once adequate removals have been verified, the exposed native soil should be moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. The previously removed material may then be placed as compacted engineered fill as outlined below. Removals should extend at least 5 feet laterally beyond the footing limits. C. Fill Placement and Compaction: Soil to be used as engineered fill should be free of organic material, debris, and other deleterious substances, and should not contain irreducible matter greater than three inches in maximum dimension. All fill materials should be placed in thin lifts, not exceeding six inches in a loose condition. If import fill is required, the material should be of a low to non -expansive nature and should meet the following criteria: Plastic Index Less than 12 Liquid Limit Less than 35 Percent Soil Passing #200 Sieve Between 15% and 35% Maximum Aggregate Size 3 inches The subgrade and all fill should be compacted with acceptable compaction equipment, to at least 90 percent relative compaction. The bottom of the exposed subgrade should be observed by a representative of Sladden Engineering prior to fill placement. Compaction testing should be performed on all lifts in order to verify proper placement of the fill materials. Table 2 provides a summary of the excavation and compaction recommendations. Sladden Engineering www.SladdenEngineeting.com August 27, 2018 - 9 - Project No. 544-18276 18-08-423 Table 2 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS *Remedial Grading Excavation and recompaction within the building envelope and extending laterally for 5 feet beyond the building limits and to a minimum of 4 feet below existing grade or 3 feet below the bottom of the footings, whichever is deeper Native / Import Engineered Fill Place in thin lifts not exceeding 6 inches in the loose condition and compact to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction within 2 percent of the optimum moisture content. *Actual depth may vary and should be determined by a representative of Sladden Engineering in the field during construction. d. Shrinkage and Subsidence. Volumetric shrinkage of the material that is excavated and replaced as controlled compacted fill should be anticipated. We estimate that this shrinkage should be between 15 and 20 percent. Subsidence of the surfaces that are scarified and compacted should be less than 1 tenth of a foot. This will vary depending upon the type of equipment used, the moisture content of the soil at the time of grading and the actual degree of compaction attained. CONVENTIONAL SHALLOW SPREAD FOOTINGS Conventional spread footings are expected to provide adequate support for the proposed residential structure. All footings should be founded upon properly compacted engineered fill and should have a minimum embedment depth of 12 inches measured from the lowest adjacent finished grade. Continuous and isolated footings should have minimum widths of 12 inches and 24 inches, respectively. Continuous and isolated footings supported upon properly compacted soil may be designed using allowable (net) bearing pressures of 1800 and 2000 pounds per square foot (psf), respectively. Allowable increases of 250 psf for each additional 1 foot in width and 250 psf for each additional 6 inches in depth may be utilized, if desired. The maximum allowable bearing pressure should be 2500 psf. The allowable bearing pressure applies to combined dead and sustained live loads. The allowable bearing pressures may be increased by one-third when considering transient live loads, including seismic and wind forces. Based on the recommended allowable bearing pressures, the total static settlement of the shallow footings is anticipated to be less than one -inch, provided foundation preparations conform to the recommendations described in this report. Static differential settlement is anticipated to be approximately one-half of the total settlement for similarly loaded footings spaced up to approximately 50 feet apart. Lateral load resistance for the spread footings will be developed by passive pressure against the sides of the footings below grade and by friction acting at the base of the footings. An allowable passive pressure of 250 psf per foot of depth may be used for design purposes. An allowable coefficient of friction 0.45 may be used for dead and sustained live loads to compute the frictional resistance of the footing placed directly on compacted fill. Under seismic and wind loading conditions, the passive pressure and frictional resistance may be increased by one-third. Sladden Engineering www.SladdenEnkineerin,v.com August 27, 2018 - 10 - Project No. 544-18276 18-08-423 All footing excavations should be observed by a representative of the project geotechnical consultant to verify adequate embedment depths prior to placement of forms, steel reinforcement or concrete. The excavations should be trimmed neat, level and square. All loose, disturbed, sloughed or moisture - softened soils and/or any construction debris should be removed prior to concrete placement. Excavated soil generated from footing and/or utility trenches should not be stockpiled within the building envelopes or in areas of exterior concrete flatwork. All footings should be reinforced in accordance with the project Structural Engineer's recommendations. SLABS -ON -GRADE In order to provide uniform and adequate support, concrete slabs -on -grade must be placed on properly compacted engineered fill as outlined in the previous sections of this report. The slab subgrades should remain near optimum moisture content and should not be permitted to dry prior to concrete placement. Slab subgrade should be firm and unyielding. Disturbed soil should be removed and replaced with engineered fill soil compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction. Slab thickness and reinforcement should be determined by the Structural Engineer. We recommend a minimum floor slab thickness of 5.0 inches and minimum reinforcement of #4 bars at 24 inches on center in both directions. All slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs to ensure that reinforcement is placed at slab mid -height. Slabs with moisture sensitive surfaces should be underlain with a moisture vapor retarder consisting of a polyvinyl chloride membrane such as 10-mil visqueen, or equivalent. All laps within the membrane should be sealed and at least 2 inches of clean sand should be placed over the membrane to promote uniform curing of the concrete. To reduce the potential for punctures, the membrane should be placed on a pad surface that has been graded smooth without any sharp protrusions. If a smooth surface can not be achieved by grading, consideration should be given to placing a 1-inch thick leveling course of sand across the pad surface prior to placement of the membrane. CORROSION SERIES The soluble sulfate concentrations of the surface soil were determined to be 780 parts per million (ppm). The soil is considered to have a "moderate" corrosion potential with respect to concrete. The use of Type V cement and special sulfate resistant concrete mixes may be necessary. The soluble sulfate content of the surface soil should be reevaluated after grading and appropriate concrete mix designs should be established based upon post -grading test results. The pH level of the surface soil was 9.3. Based on soluble chloride concentration testing (350 ppm) the soil is considered to have a "moderate" corrosion potential with respect to normal grade steel. The minimum resistivity of the surface soil was found to be 560 ohm -cm that suggests the site soil is considered to have a "very severe" corrosion potential with respect to ferrous metal installations. A corrosion expert should be consulted regarding appropriate corrosion protection measures for corrosion sensitive installations. Sladden Engineering www.SladdenEngineering.com August 27, 2018 -11 - Project No. 544-18276 18-08-423 UTILITY TRENCH BACKFILL All utility trench backfill should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Trench backfill materials should be placed in lifts no greater than six inches in a loose condition, moisture conditioned (or air-dried) as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture conditions, and then mechanically compacted in place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. A representative of the project soil engineer should test the backfill to verify adequate compaction. EXTERIOR CONCRETE FLATWORK To minimize cracking of concrete flatwork, the subgrade soil below concrete flatwork areas should first be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. A representative of the project geotechnical consultant should observe and verify the density and moisture content of the soil prior to concrete placement. DRAINAGE All final grades should be provided with positive gradients away from foundations to provide rapid removal of surface water runoff to an adequate discharge point. No water should be allowed to be pond on or immediately adjacent to foundation elements. In order to reduce water infiltration into the subgrade soil, surface water should be directed away from building foundations to an adequate discharge point. Subgrade drainage should be evaluated upon completion of the precise grading plans and in the field during grading. LIMITATIONS The findings and recommendations presented in this report are based upon an interpolation of the soil conditions between the exploratory bore locations and extrapolation of these conditions throughout the proposed building areas. Should conditions encountered during grading appear different than those indicated in this report, this office should be notified. The use of this report by other parties or for other projects is not authorized. The recommendations of this report are contingent upon monitoring of the grading operation by a representative of Sladden Engineering. All recommendations are considered to be tentative pending our review of the grading operation and additional testing, if indicated. If others are employed to perform any soil testing, this office should be notified prior to such testing in order to coordinate any required site visits by our representative and to assure indemnification of Sladden Engineering. We recommend that a pre -job conference be held on the site prior to the initiation of site grading. The purpose of this meeting will be to assure a complete understanding of the recommendations presented in this report as they apply to the actual grading performed. Sladden Engineering www.SladdenEngineering.com August 27, 2018 - 12 - Project No. 544-18276 18-08-423 ADDITIONAL SERVICES Once completed, final project plans and specifications should be reviewed by use prior to construction to confirm that the full intent of the recommendations presented herein have been applied to design and construction. Following review of plans and specifications, observation should be performed by the Soil Engineer during construction to document that foundation elements are founded on/or penetrate into the recommended soil, and that suitable backfill soil is placed upon competent materials and properly compacted at the recommended moisture content. Tests and observations should be performed during grading by the Soil Engineer or his representative in order to verify that the grading is being performed in accordance with the project specifications. Field density testing shall be performed in accordance with acceptable ASTM test methods. The minimum acceptable degree of compaction should be 90 percent for engineered fil soil and 95 percent for Class II aggregate base as obtained by ASTM Test Method D1557. Where testing indicates insufficient density, additional compactive effort shall be applied until retesting indicates satisfactory compaction. Sladden Engineering www.SladdenEngineeting.com August 27, 2018 - 13 - Project No. 544-18276 18-08-423 REFERENCES Blake, T., 2000, EQFAULT and EQSEARCH, Computer Programs for Deterministic and Probabilistic Prediction of Peak Horizontal Acceleration from Digitized California Faults. Boggs, S. Jr., 2001, "Principles of Sedimentology and Stratigraphy", Prentice Hall, third edition California Building Code (CBC), 2016, California Building Standards Commission. California Department of Conservation (CDOC), 2018, Regulatory Maps; available at: www.quake.ca.gov/gmaps/wh/regulatory maps.htm. Cao T., Bryant, W.A., Rowshandel B., Branum D., Wills C.J., 2003, "The Revised 2002 California Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Maps". GoogleEarth.com, 2018, Vertical Aerial Photograph for the La Quinta area, California, Undated, Variable Scale. Jennings, Charles W. (Compiler), 1994, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas, California Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Data Map No. 6 Riverside County Parcel Report (RCPR), 2018, available at https:Hgis.countyofriverside.us/Html5Viewer/?viewer=MMC_Public Rogers T.H (compiler), Jenkins, O.P (edition), 1965, Geologic Map of California, Santa Ana Sheet, sixth printing 1992, California Division of Mines and Geology, 1: 250,000. Sneed, Michelle, Brandt, J.T., and Solt, Mike, 2014, "Land Subsidence, Groundwater Levels and Geology in the Coachella Valley, California, 1993-2010", United States Geological Survey (USGS), Scientific Investigations Report 2014-5075. Tyley, S.J., 1974, Analog Model Study of the Ground -Water Basin of the Upper Coachella Valley, California, Geological Survey Water -Supply Paper 2027. United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2007,E "Detection and Measurement of Land Subsidence Using Global Positioning System and Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar, Coachella Valley, California, 1996-2005", Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5251. United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2015, La Quinta 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Map, 1:24000. United State Geological Survey (USGS), 2018a, U.S. Seismic Design Maps; available at: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/application.php United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2018b, Unified Hazard Tool; available at: https:Hgeohazards.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/ Sladden Engineering www.SladdenEngineering.com FIGURES SM LOCATION MAP REGIONAL GEOLOGIC MAP BOREHOLE LOCATION PHOTOGRAPH SUBSIDENCE ZONE MAP Sladden Engineering www.SladdenEngineering.com sr •► :' im , 'DESCANSpxLN SITE LOCATION f` •lio s g fl~ g3qm '�'wr "".L k pMAE fx� t i; �A r Oo "wd Ewa u3A"MELOD1A� q z pp i LAGG z - ` r-• ��`,, • .� SPY ;� r VQS�hi4 _ >< qk I f dr �• %*rdL arw �.• tia �y 11 �j /} Source: USG5 20t5 r� 4.• r ; L, w, .p �1NA �: _ ...._ Ili"' - C_ ►.. . t SITE LOCATION MAP FIGURE Project Number: 544-18276 Report Number: 18-08-423 Sladden Engineering Date: August 27, 2018 1.�' t�'': o lAl' n•,r.. =ti x_ r gr' Water Psfn • r+f. f�ra r'*y Y l'v •- �� ='r. �� x4 :. .• `. • ., �' pEC C t .�•��y y `;, _•� psi;; '�' ,� per- f - r-• •-: - --��- it-:—. --• �='= , i i-�:: i � c'SIFri 5 a'lii� 5 .i !7 �a •� _':Y '• •dc�;' aL i r"` ! caua�yp�r., - _ �('n. -11ZLy:••,.•f� ��" ,••' .ti,. ',I Y G i le fT rua4�j var- r. v.er j, rl• l ;riltrrN. i iu:us:.Yra P:rinm '4 I i � "f '�� 1 ' , x. �.w«. -., '� •;Off'' r �� ;y ��'�r e^ , I Q r. :.c• y psz Qg L . L ' FF rn 2i sr rear t :. a?: I:Arc osw. •.. � k its •--; -4 APPROXIMATE .,1 ! . ' SITE ION ay - tit t - � _. •• - -r�'�i',4..i: ur, f ,.- ;r.��•"' G� - �ri�"sr �.. ,• - I, atitC kr �r"•�.l::i: �: €�' �'4�` ;,�:,.. :}•; :{:.: i ::� fir -�t� -.. •-� �� _ - Ii +�� -i- k _ ^r�•�..r,-':.._Y � _ ' _ 'r-!�?'i �1'kCY,...IiiC:{if•!f' 1 _ � , y i c;_� r �•*� ..t � .�� . n F,lli. ,t....�}�_ �'U: �� ,.,� ��. � :�.� •� .F, '. _ ' Ql—(} I �f]6 +sl1r 001 if- ,.- us t �.. ` i•; + hS _ p wet us @F�¢ • _ + •'' JJ eL5i3€�: Yr_7ti ,��1F+L ll�{-` I ;irSF.� �'� �- y.r-� ''•- ,for i)t=i tit. t } � 1 li '�., _.. �,��i.;' r .. •: — t, —.-. �. .I� _�.• r+anx Hunt .i--•' .. .,.,�3 �, `ter; •4�if- '�l' M1� -_ EXPLANATION OF SITE UNITS y'`fia ] L n cis I�7_t TlFy ti'YIS rI �• �J:}+. `off ---•• .-7. •i •��`�1 � � �t ,. r�lFd' i • ' t.Ihavitatai _, - ':`:: :.ul.-';•:�` =,n ��—� ['115li'r'itlfiS.V 1.iISr� til tcrrliti ,[�'•(', i�1 N . - - .aril; ...r;.• r } ! I - Soul �] of l[]t5 .n �� - 1 - " • •� ._.� _ REGIONAL GEOLOGIC MAP FIGURE Pro ect Number: 544-18276 Re art Number: 18-08-423 2 Sladden Engineering Date: August 27, 2018 'Ma BH-2 4 i 13 _ R Mi LEGEND S BH-2 Approximate Borehole Location 00 i 4 - • e 1 a 0 o a a Source: Goo le Earth 2018 BOREHOLE LOCATION PHOTOGRAPH FIGURE Project Number: 544-18276 3 Report Number: 18-08423 Sladden Engineering Date: August 27, 2018 A :ir 40 Y, �.s 10 5nuree: USGS 2Qi4 Sladden Engineerin 116020' 1:1 Subsidence area Consolidated rock at partly consolidated deposits Fault—Said,achefe 001K dashed vahm approximately located; dotted wtare concealed EXPLANATION Geodetic manumePts— FREDA GPS station and iderii`rr SWC ® Destra ed or aharAored GPS statior=.=, and ider ibiier DUNE* BPS canal statior for or..e or more of Oe GPS sUreeys and identifier CDTDA Cantirdm Gtabe3 i'Wtiof is g System ICG'SI L02 statim and iderti`ief Lcoatans of time -so ri$s irnerpretetiorfs aid identiier SUBSIDENCE ZONE MAP -t Number: rt Number: Date: 544-18276 18-08-423 ,rust 27, 2018 FIGURE L.i APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION Sladden Engineering APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION For our field investigation, two (2) exploratory bores were excavated utilizing a truck -mounted drill rig equipped with 8 inch (O.D.) hollow -stem augers (mobile B-61). Continuous logs of the materials encountered were made by a representative of Sladden Engineering. Materials encountered in the boreholes were classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System which is presented in this appendix. Representative undisturbed samples were obtained within our borings by driving a thin -walled steel penetration sampler (California split spoon sampler) or a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler with a 140 pound automatic -trip hammer dropping approximately 30 inches (ASTM D1586). The number of blows required to drive the samplers 18 inches was recorded in 6-inch increments and blowcounts are indicated on the boring logs. The California samplers are 3.0 inches in diameter, carrying brass sample rings having inner diameters of 2.5 inches. The standard penetration samplers are 2.0 inches in diameter with an inner diameter of 1.5 inches. Undisturbed samples were removed from the sampler and placed in moisture sealed containers in order to preserve the natural soil moisture content. Bulk samples were obtained from the excavation spoils and samples were then transported to our laboratory for further observations and testing. Sladden Engineering 7117117I1 CT/I��ONFM RIMOAYIMR /•Aus UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAJOR DIVISIONS TYPICAL NAMES GW WELL GRADED GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES GRAVELS CLEAN GRAVELS WITH W LITTLE OR NO FINES GP POORLY GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND c MIXTURES z MORE THAN HALF COARSE FRACTION IS GM SILTY GRAVELS, POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL - p LARGER THAN No.4 SIEVE GRAVELS WITH OVER SAND -SILT MIXTURES E+ p� Y SIZE 12% FINES GC CLAYEY GRAVELS, POORLY GRADED GRAVEL- SAND -CLAY MIXTURES w SW WELL GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS co w oSANDS CLEAN SANDS WITH LITTLE OR NO FINES v SP POORLY GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS E" MORE THAN HALF COARSE pp FRACTION IS SMALLER SM SILTY SANDS, POORLY GRADED SAND SILT p THAN No.4 SIEVE SIZE SANDS WITH OVER 12% MIXTURES � FINES SC CLAYEY SANDS, POORLY GRADED SAND -CLAY MIXTURES c INORGANIC SILTS & VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK o ML FLOUR, SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS, OR Z CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY Z SILTS AND CLAYS INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM LIQUID LIMIT LESS THAN 50 CL PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, CLEAN CLAYS aPq OL ORGANIC CLAYS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY C INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR C7 MH DIATOMACIOUS FINE SANDY OR SILTY SOILS, Z ELASTIC SILTS CH INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT w x SILTS AND CLAYS: LIQUID LIMIT GREATER THAN 50 CLAYS E+ W O OH ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS Pt PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS EXPLANATION OF BORE LOG SYMBOLS _California Split -spoon Sample ®Unrecovered Sample []JUStandard Penetration Test Sample Note: The stratification lines on the Groundwater depth borelogs represent the approximate p boundaries between the soil types; the transitions may be gradual. A-1 {�i } SLADDEN ENGINEERING BORE LOG Drill Rig: MobileB-61 Date Drilled: 8/9/2018 Elevation: 46 Ft (MSL) Boring No: BH-1 axi ^C o 00 O UG v a Description a m 'o Q � cn PO rn x o 0 Q (� Sandy Silt (ML); olive brown, slightly moist, low to medium 2 plasticity (Fill). 3/6/6 1 18 82.4 19.6 93.1 Silt w/ Sand (ML); dark brown, very moist, medium stiff, low to medium plasticity (Ql/Qal/Qs). 4 5/8/11 86.6 8.8 96.2 6 Silt (ML); dark brown, slightly moist, stiff, low to medium plasticity (QI/Qal/Qs). a 4/5/7 36.1 1.9 10 Silty Sand (SM); dark brown, dry, medium dense, fine-grained, well- 12 sorted, micaceous (QI/Qal/Qs). 14 8/13/17 17.0 1.6 102.9 16 Silty Sand (SM); dark brown, dry, medium dense, fine-grained, well- :: sorted, micaceous (Ql/Qal/Qs). 18 ' 6/6/7 58.6 9.0 20 Sandy Silt (ML); olive brown, slightly moist, stiff, low to medium 22 plasticity (Ql/Qal/Qs). 24 6/10/14 18.3 3.5 97.2 26 :::Silty Sand (SM); dark brown, dry, medium dense, fine-grained, well-- sorted, micaceous (Ql/Qal/Qs). 28 4/5/8 65.5 13.6 34 Sandy Silt (ML); olive brown, moist stiff, low to medium plasticity 32 w/ clay (QI/Qal/Qs). 34 10/19/23 11.1 2.4 101.8 36 Poorly -Graded Sand w/ Silt (SP-SM); dark brown, dry, medium dense, fine-grained, well -sorted, micaceous (QI/Qal/Qs). 38 8/10/10 16.8 3.8 Silty Sand (SM); dark brown, dry, medium dense, fine-grained, well - sorted, micaceous (QI/Qal/Qs). 44 7/11/21 40.4 12.0 108.1 Silty Sand (SM); dark brown, moist, medium dense, fine-grained, well -sorted, micaceous (Ql/Qal/Qs). r}g - - ,cl; 50 - ` Silty Sand (SM); dark brown, dry, medium dense, fine-grained, well- 10/12/14 20.7 4.2 sorted, micaceous (Ql/Qal/Qs). Completion Notes: PROPOSED CUSTOM RESIDENCE Terminated at - 51.5 Feet bgs. 48751 SAN LUCAS STREET, LA QUINTA No Bedrock Encountered. Project No: 544-18276 No Groundwater or Seepage Encountered. Report No: 18-08-423 Page 1 BORE LOG SLADDEN ENGINEERING Drill Rig: MobileB-61 Date Drilled: 8/9/2018 Elevation: 46 Ft (MSL) Boring No: BH-2 u? o o aj ^ o o a v a).j Description P. U `n CA cn o-oo do w o o A A U Sandy Silt (ML); olive brown, slightly moist, low to medium plasticity (Fill). 2 9/12/12 71.7 3.2 4 6 - Silt w/ Sand (ML); dark brown, dry, very stiff, low to medium plasticity (Ql/Qal/Qs). 8 5/8/13 92.5 2.5 87.4 10 Silt (ML); dark brown, dry, stiff, low to medium plasticity (QI/Qal/Qs)• 12 - 6/7/7 14.5 2.6 14- = = = Silty Sand (SM); dark brown, dry, medium dense, fine-grained, well., sorted, micaceous (Ql/Qal/Qs). 18 - • ' E' E' E' E'' 5/10/13 51.0 6.4 92.6 20- Sandy Silt (ML); olive brown, slightly moist; stiff, low to medium 22 plasticity w/ cla Ql/Qal/Qs). Terminated at -- 21.5 Feet bgs. 24 - No Bedrock Encountered. No Groundwater or Seepage Encountered. 26 - 28 - 30 - 32 i 34 36 - 38 - 40 - 42 - 44 - 46 - 48 - 50 - Completion Notes: PROPOSED CUSTOM RESIDENCE 48751 SAN LUCAS STREET, LA QUINTA Project No: 544-18276 Page 2 Report No: 18-08-423 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Sladden Engineering APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Representative bulk and relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained in the field and returned to our laboratory for additional observations and testing. Laboratory testing was generally performed in two phases. The first phase consisted of testing in order to determine the compaction of the existing natural soil and the general engineering classifications of the soils underlying the site. This testing was performed in order to estimate the engineering characteristics of the soil and to serve as a basis for selecting samples for the second phase of testing. The second phase consisted of soil mechanics testing. This testing including consolidation, shear strength and expansion testing was performed in order to provide a means of developing specific design recommendations based on the mechanical properties of the soil. CLASSIFICATION AND COMPACTION TESTING Unit Weight and Moisture Content Determinations: Each undisturbed sample was weighed and measured in order to determine its unit weight. A small portion of each sample was then subjected to testing in order to determine its moisture content. This was used in order to determine the dry density of the soil in its natural condition. The results of this testing are shown on the Boring Logs. Maximum Density -Optimum Moisture Determinations: Representative soil types were selected for maximum density determinations. This testing was performed in accordance with the ASTM Standard D1557-91, Test Method A. Graphic representations of the results of this testing are presented in this appendix. The maximum densities are compared to the field densities of the soil in order to determine the existing relative compaction to the soil. Classification Testing: Soil samples were selected for classification testing. This testing consists of mechanical grain size analyses. This provides information for developing classifications for the soil in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System which is presented in the preceding appendix. This classification system categorizes the soil into groups having similar engineering characteristics. The results of this testing is very useful in detecting variations in the soil and in selecting samples for further testing. SOIL MECHANIC'S TESTING Expansion Testing: One (1) bulk sample was selected for Expansion testing. Expansion testing was performed in accordance with the UBC Standard 18-2. This testing consists of remolding 4-inch diameter by 1-inch thick test specimens to a moisture content and dry density corresponding to approximately 50 percent saturation. The samples are subjected to a surcharge of 144 pounds per square foot and allowed to reach equilibrium. At that point the specimens are inundated with distilled water. The linear expansion is then measured until complete. Direct Shear Testing: One (1) bulk sample was selected for Direct Shear testing. This test measures the shear strength of the soil under various normal pressures and is used to develop parameters for foundation design and lateral design. Tests were performed using a recompacted test specimen that was saturated prior to tests. Tests were performed using a strain controlled test apparatus with normal pressures ranging from 800 to 2300 pounds per square foot. Sladden Engineering 71771n7 .Q1addvsrF-"o4wPP*4"tr rn*n Consolidation/Hydro-Collapse Testing: Two (2) relatively undisturbed samples were selected for consolidation testing. For this test, a one -inch thick test specimen was subjected to vertical loads varying from 575 psf to 11520 psf applied progressively. The consolidation at each load increment was recorded prior to placement of each subsequent load. Corrosion Series Testing: The soluble sulfate concentrations of the surface soil were determined in accordance with California Test Method Number (CA) 417. The pH and Minimum Resistivity were determined in accordance with CA 643. The soluble chloride concentrations were determined in accordance with CA 422. Sladden Engineering zv7��7a�. SladdvnRn�invvrinv_�nm Sfadden Engineering 450 Egan Avenue, Beaumont CA 92223 (951) 845-7743 Fax (951) 845-8863 Maximum Density/Optimum Moisture ASTM D698/D1557 Project Number: Project Name: Lab ID Number: Sample Location: Description: Maximum Density: Optimum Moisture: 145 140 135 130 w a 125 c A 120 A 115 110 105 100 0 544-18276 48-751 San Lucas Street LN6-18364 BH-1 Bulk 1 @ 0-5' Olive Brown Sandy Silt (ML) 116 pcf 13.5% Sieve Size % Retained 3/4" 3/8" #4 1.7 <----- Zero Air Voids Lines, sg =2.65, 2.70, 2.75 5 10 15 Moisture Content, % August 22, 2018 ASTM D-1557 A Rammer Type: Machine 20 25 Buena Park - Palm Desert 9 Hemet Sladden Engineering 450 Egan Avenue, Beaumont, CA 92223 (951) 845-7743 Fax (951) 845-8863 Job Number: Job Name: Lab ID Number Sample ID: Soil Description: Expansion Index ASTM D 4829 544-18276 48-751 San Lucas Street LN6-18364 BH-1 Bulk 1 @ 0-5' Olive Brown Sandy Silt (ML) Wt of Soil + Ring: 552.3 Weight of Ring: 191.2 Wt of Wet Soil: 361.1 Percent Moisture: 11.5% Sample Height, in 0.95 Wet Density, pcf: 115.6 Dry Denstiy, pcf. 103.6 Saturation: 1 49.6 Expansion Rack # 4 Date/Time 8/21/2018 10:20 AM Initial Reading 0.0000 Final Reading 0.0182 Expansion Index (Final - Initial) x 1000 18 August 22, 2018 Buena Park • Palm Desert • Hemet Job Number: Job Name Lab ID No. Sample ID Classification Sample Type Sladden Engineering 450 Egan Avenue, Beaumont, CA 92223 (951) 845-7743 Fax (951) 845-8863 Direct Shear ASTM D 3080-04 (modified for unconsolidated condition) 544-18276 48-751 San Lucas Street LN6-18364 BH-1 Bulk 1 @ 0-5- Olive Brown Sandy Silt (ML) Remolded @ 90% of Maximum Density August 22, 2018 Initial Dry Density: 104.1 pcf Initial Mosture Content: 13.6 % Peak Friction Angle (0): 29' Cohesion (c): 200 psf Test Results 1 2 3 4 Average Moisture Content, % 22.6 22.6 22.6 22.6 22.6 Saturation, % 98.8 98.8 98.8 98.8 98.8 Normal Stress, kps 0.739 1.479 2.958 5.916 Peak Stress, kps 0.586 1.020 1.912 3.488 • Peak Stress Linear (Peak Stress) 6.0 5.0 a 4.0 3.0 L CC 2.0 1.0 0.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Normal Stress, kps Buena Park - Palm Desert - Hemet Job Number: 544-18276 Job Name: 48-751 San Lucas Street Date: 8/22/2018 Moisture Adjustment Wt of Soil: 1,000 Moist As Is: 14.1 Moist Wanted: ml of Water to Add: 13.5 -5.3 UBC Remolded Shear Weight Max Dry Density: 116.0 Optimum Moisture: 13.5 Wt Soil per Ring, g: 142.5 Sladden Engineering 450 Egan Avenue, Beaumont, CA 92223 (951) 845-7743 Fax (951) 845-8863 Gradation ASTM C117 & C136 Project Number: 544-18276 August 22, 2018 Project Name: 48-751 San Lucas Street Lab ID Number: LN6-18364 Sample ID: BH-1 S-3 @ 10' Soil Classification: SM Sieve Sieve Percent Size, in Size, min Passing 1" 25.4 100.0 3/4" 19.1 100.0 1/2" 12.7 100.0 3/8" 9.53 100.0 #4 4.75 100.0 48 2.36 100.0 #16 1.18 100.0 #3 0 0.60 99.8 #50 0.30 99.3 #100 0.15 81.1 #200 0.074 36.1 11111�■r��111111■r�1111M�i�■IIIII■■■111i1�■■■ ,, III11�■■■IIIII■■■IIIII■ i■IIIII�■■■11111�■■■ I111 �■■■ I I I11�■ ■ ■ I I I11� ■ ■1�11111 �■ ■■ 11111� ■ ■■ IIIII ■■■11111�■ ■IIIi1�■■!�l1111�■■■111 ME= II11�■■■IIIII ■■IIIII■■ 'rlllll�■■■Illll�■■■ II� 1...■IIIII�C.■IIIII ■■�\IIIII■■■11111...■ I11 � 1... ■1I 11...■IIIII ■■■►111111�■ ■■111i1...■ ., 11111�■■■II�11�■■■I1i11�■■■�11111�■■■IIIII■■■ . 1111i�■■■1i111�■■■I illy■■�11111�■■■IIIII■■■ IIIII■■■IIIII■■■I�111�■■■ �1111�■■■11111�■■■ IIII1�■ ■ ■11111 � ■■■ Illl1�■■ ■ �I IIII ■■■I I111�■ ■■ - , , 111i1�■■■11111�■■�IIIII�■■■ILll1�■■■11111�■■■ - i11i1i■■■i11i1l■■■IIIIIo■■■ROME IIIII ■■■ II lilt■■■ II1111■ ■■ I I I I I ■ ■■ ll �11� ■■■I I I11�■ ■■ II IIII■■■ 11111�■ ■ ■ 11111 �■ ■■ Il 11 l�■■■11111�■ ■■ Illll�■■■I1111�■■■11111�■■■11111�■■■IIIII■■■ II111 �■■■ I I I I1�■ ■ ■I I I11� ■ ■■11111 �■ ■ ■I I I III■ ■■ off oil of 11111 �.■■ I I111�■ ■ ■11111� ■ ■■I1111 �■ ■ ■I1111�■ ■ IIIII■�■IIIl1�■■�IIIII��■�IIIII�■■�IIIII�■■ Buena Park • Palm Desert - Hemet Sfadden Engineering 450 Egan Avenue, Beaumont, CA 92223 (951) 845-7743 Fax (951) 845-8863 Gradation ASTM C117 & C136 Project Number: 544-18276 August 22, 2018 Project Name: 48-751 San Lucas Street Lab ID Number: LN6-18364 Sample ID: BH-1 R-4 @ 15' Soil Classification: SM Sieve Sieve Percent Size, in Size, min Passing 111 25.4 100.0 3/4" 19.1 100.0 1/2" 12.7 100.0 3/8" 9.53 100.0 #4 4.75 100.0 #8 2.36 100.0 #16 1.18 100.0 #30 0.60 99.8 #50 0.30 78.0 # 100 0.15 52.6 #200 0.074 17.0 111111■r��11111■�Irl111►1■■■111111■■■f11111■■■ 111111■■ME111111■ ■ 0011111'':■ M111111 ■■ MM111111■■� 111111■■■111111■■■111111N■■111111■■■111111■■■ 111111■ ■ ■III111 ■ ■■ I III I �■ i■f I II11■■■IIII11 ■ ■ 111111■■■111111■■■ 11111■►\■111111■■■f11111■■� 111111■■■11111■■■11111■■■IIII �■■■111111■■■ 111111■■■111111■■■111111■■M11111■■■111111■■■ 11I111■■■111111■■■111111■■1�1111I1■■■11111 ■■■ 111111■■■If 1 1■.■I111I1■■t'SI11111■.■111111■■1. 111111■■■111111■■■III I1■■■�111111■■■111111■■■ 111111■■■111111■■■111111■■�\111111.■■111111■■■ — 111111■■i111I1■■■1I1111■■■11111111■■■11I111■■■ [11111■■■1111I1■■■111111■■■�11111■■■111111■■■ I11111■ ■■111111■■■11 11■ ■■ 111111■ ■■ 111111■ ■■ 111111 ■■1�111111: ■�11 11■■MM1 11111 ■■ MM111111■■ ME 111111■■■If 1111■■■111111■■■111111■■■I11111■■■ 111111■■111111■■MM111111■■■f11111■■ E111111■■ E of fill Buena Park • Palm Desert • Hemet Siadden Engineering 450 Egan Avenue, Beaumont, CA 92223 (951) 845-7743 Fax (951) 845-8863 Gradation ASTM C117 & C136 Project Number: 544-18276 August 22, 2018 Project Name: 48-751 San Lucas Street Lab ID Number: LN6-18364 Sample ID: BH-1 R-8 @ 35' Soil Classification: SP-SM Sieve Sieve Percent Size, in Size, mm Passing lit 25.4 100.0 3/4" 19.1 100.0 1/2" 12.7 100.0 3/8" 9.53 100.0 #4 4.75 100.0 #8 2.36 100.0 #16 1.18 100.0 #30 0.60 99.8 #50 0.30 93.7 #100 0.15 43.2 #200 0.074 11.1 II111\■ �iyllll\■�1■111111�1 ■lllfl�■■■111f11■■■ ,, IIIII\■�■I[[11\■■■IIIf1\i�■I[III�■■■111f11■■■ �IIII\■■■IIIII\■■■�Ilfl\■�1■IIIII■■■IIIII\■■■ . , 1111\■■■IIIII\■■■ IIII\■ll■11I11�■■■IIIII\■■� Illll\■■■IIIII\■■■IIIII\■ll■IIIII■■■II�11\■■ Illli\■■■IIIII\■■■illfl\■�1■IIIII\■ ■I[ 11\ ■■ IIIII...■III1...■iilll.. '■IIIII..■■IIIII.■■■ ., IIIII.■■■III1\■■■IIIIin imIIIII.■■■1111\■■■� �1111...■IIIII\..■IIIII\..l■IIIII\■.■II�1 \■■■ Illl...■II111\..■IIIII\..I.IIIII\■.■IIII\■■■ Illl\■■ lllll\■■■IIIII\■■\IIIII\■■■IIIII\■■■ IIII\■■ Illll\■■■I[III\■■[alllll\■■■IIIII■■ IIIII\■■■IIIII�■■■I 111�■■�\lllll�■■■Illf 11■■� IIIIIi■■■I1111l■■■I[III�■■l\l1111�■■■I[III�■■■ IIIII \■■■IIIII■■■IIIII/■■ �lIII111�■ ■■IIIII\ ■■■ IIIII\■■■�1111\■■■III�1\■■■►1111�■■■IIIII\■■■ IIIII\■■■ f111\■■■III 1\■■■IIIII\■■■IIIII\■■■ IIIII\■■■IIIII\■■■IIIII■■■Il�fi ■.■IIIII\■■■ HI�� = I��i■■CHI ■■�iiiiiill■■miiii�i■■m „,,, fill ,., , „ off Ill Buena Park • Palm Desert • Hemet Sladden Engineering 450 Egan Avenue, Beaumont, CA 92223 (951) 845-7743 Fax (951) 845-8863 One Dimensional Consolidation ASTM D2435 & D5333 Job Number: 544-18276 Job Name: 48-751 San Lucas Street Lab ID Number: LN6-18364 Sample ID: 1311-1 R-2 @ 5' Soil Description: Brown Silt (ML) -3 e -6 -7 -8 -9 -10 0.1 August 22, 2018 Initial Dry Density, pcf 96.2 Initial Moisture, %: 8.8 Initial Void Ratio: 0.734 Specific Gravity: 2.67 % Change in Height vs Normal Presssure Diagram —0 Before Saturation —6 After Saturation 8 Rebound f Hydro Consolidation 1.0 10.0 Normal Load (ksf) 100.0 Buena Park - Palm Desert - Hemet Sladden Engineering 450 Egan Avenue, Beaumont, CA 92223 (951) 845-7743 Fax (951) 845-8863 One Dimensional Consolidation ASTM D2435 & D5333 Job Number: 544-18276 Job Name: 48-751 San Lucas Street Lab ID Number: LN6-18364 Sample ID: BH-2 R-2 @ 10' Soil Description: Dark Brown Silt (ML) August 22, 2018 Initial Dry Density, pcf. 87.9 Initial Moisture, %: 2.5 Initial Void Ratio: 0.897 Specific Gravity: 2.67 Hydrocollapse: 0.4% @ 0.694 ksf % Change in Height vs Normal Presssure Diagram — Before Saturation —A After Saturation 9 Rebound -AN—Hydro Consolidation 1 0 -1 -2 -3 r x -4 e en -5 s U -7 -8 -9 -10 0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0 Normal Load (ksl) Buena Park • Palm Desert • Hemet (W Sladden Engineering 6782 Stanton Ave., Suite C, Buena Park, CA 90621 (714) 523-0952 Fax (714) 523-1369 45090 Golf Center Pkwy, Suite F, Indio, CA 92201 (760) 863-0713 Fax (760) 863-0847 450 Egan Avenue, Beaumont, CA 92223 (951) 845-7743 Fax (951) 845-8863 Date: August 22, 2018 Account No.: 544-18276 Customer: Mr. Joe Birdsell Location: 48-751 San Lucas Street, La Quinta Analytical Report Corrosion Series pH Soluble Sulfates Soluble Chloride per CA 643 per CA 417 per CA 422 ppm ppm 131-1-1 @ 0-5' 9.3 780 350 Min. Resistivity per CA 643 ohm -cm 560 C Rpt 544-18276 082218 APPENDIX C USGS SEISMIC DESIGN MAP AND REPORT USGS DEAGGREGATION OUPUT Sladden Engineering www.SladdenEni7ineerinp,.com 8/27/2018 Design Maps Summary Report ilMSGS Design Maps Summary Report User -Specified Input Report Title 544-18276 Hon August 27, 2018 14:14:14 UTC Building Code Reference Document ASCE 7-10 Standard (which utilizes USGS hazard data available in 2008) Site Coordinates 33.69380N, 116.3038°W Site Soil Classification Site Class D — "Stiff Soil" Risk Category I/II/III Cathedral City Rancho M'Itage ■ In�li. Palm Derr, t �, ,Caachl=li�1 La Quintar Ca Y .0 Fk l USGS-Provided Output Ss = 1.500 g SMs = 1.500 g SDs = 1.000 g Sl = 0.657 g SMl = 0.985 g SDi = 0.657 g 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. 14iCIC, Response Spectrum If-�5 I.9? 13 I ,0% � OTS UL") 0.45 r l30 Il,l$ IIJYI Il ll n,1n o1V.l nPl I.P7 1.3l IA I.tA IW ZY10 Period. T (scc) Design Response Spectrum 1.In l l3 IJ» n_II l i,131 q JJfl L).W (.A0 Off, "M 13il I.20 1,4) Iff., IA) :!Ijl Period. T (sec) For PGAM, TL, CRs, and C, values, please view the detailed report. 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. https:nprod0l-earthquake.cr.usgs.gov/designmapsiuslsummary.php?template=minimal&latitude=33.693797&longitude=-116.303801 &sitedass=3&risk... 1 /1 8/27/2018 Design Maps Detailed Report 25USGS Design Maps Detailed Report ASCE 7-10 Standard (33.69380N, 116.3038°W) Site Class D - "Stiff Soil", Risk Category I/II/III Section 11.4.1 — 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 SJ. Maps in the 2010 ASCE-7 Standard are provided for Site Class B. Adjustments for other Site Classes are made, as needed, in Section 11.4.3. From Figure 22-11'] From Figure 22-2123 Section 11.4.2 — Site Class Ss = 1.500 g S,=0.657g The authority having jurisdiction (not 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 Chapter 20. Table 20.3-1 Site Classification Site Class vs N or W.,, s„ A. Hard Rock >5,000 ft/s N/A N/A B. Rock 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 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 z 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 For SI: lft/s = 0.3048 m/s 1lb/ft2 = 0.0479 kN/m2 hfps://prodOl-earthquake.cr usgs.govidesignmapsluslreport.php?template=minimal&latitude=33.693797&longitude=-116.303801 &siteclass=3&Hskest... 1 /6 8/27/2018 Design Maps Detailed Report Section 11.4.3 - Site Coefficients and Risk -Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (�a) Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters Table 11.4-1: Site Coefficient Fa Site Class Mapped MCE R Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter at Short Period Ss <- 0.25 Ss = 0.50 SS = 0.75 SS = 1.00 SS z 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 SS = 1.500 g, Fe = 1.000 Table 11.4-2: Site Coefficient F Site Class Mapped MCE R Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter at 1-s Period Sl <_ 0.10 S, = 0.20 S, = 0.30 S, = 0.40 S1 >: 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 Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of S, For Site Class = D and S, = 0.657 g, F„ = 1.500 https://prod0l -earthquake.cr.usgs.govldesignmapslustreport.php?template=minimal&latitude=33.693797&longitude=-116.303801 &siteclass=3&riskcat... 2/6 8/27/2018 Design Maps Detailed Report Section 11.4.6 — Risk -Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) Response Spectrum The MCER Response Spectrum is determined by multiplying the design response spectrum above by I.S. Say = 1.500 h S" = 0.995 To = 0).131 Tr, = O.657 1.000 Period, T (me) httpsllprodOl -earthquake.cr.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/report.php7template=minimal&latitude=33.693797&longitude=-116.303801 &siteclass=3&riskcat... 4/6 8/27/2018 Design Maps Detailed Report Section 11.8.3 - Additional Geotechnical Investigation Report Requirements for Seismic Design Categories D through F From Figure 22-7 [4) PGA = 0.571 Equation (11.8-1)• PGAM = FpGAPGA = 1.000 x 0.571 = 0.571 g Table 11.8-1: Site Coefficient Fes„ Mapped MCE Geometric Mean Peak Ground Acceleration, PGA Site Class PGA <_ PGA = PGA = PGA = PGA >_ 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 g 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 C 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.2 1.1 E1.0 D 1.6 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 PGA For Site Class = D and PGA = 0.571 g, F11A = 1.000 Section 21.2.1.1 - Method 1 (from Chapter 21 - Site -Specific Ground Motion Procedures for Seismic Design) From Figure 22-17 "' From Figure 22-18 [6� CRS = 1.051 CRl = 1.013 httpsjlprodOl -earthquake.cr.usgs.gov/designmapslus/report.php?template=minimal&latitude=33.693797&longitude=-116.303801 &siteclass=3&riskeat... 5/6 8/27/2018 Design Maps Detailed Report Section 11.6 — Seismic Design Category Table 11.6-1 Seismic Design Category Based on Short Period Response Acceleration Parameter VALUE OF SDI RISK CATEGORY I or II III IV SDI < 0.167g A A A 0.167g 5 Sps < 0.33g B B C 0.33g 5 SDI < 0.509 C C D 0.50g 5 SDI D D D For Risk Category = I and SDI = 1.000 g, Seismic Design Category = D Table 11.6-2 Seismic Design Category Based on 1-S Period Response Acceleration Parameter VALUE OF SDI RISK CATEGORY I or II III IV SDI < 0.067g A A A 0.067g 5 SDI < 0.133g B B C 0.133g 5 SDI < 0.20g C C D 0.20g 5 SDI D D D For Risk Category = I and SDI = 0.657 g, Seismic Design Category = D Note: When SI 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 11.6-1 or 11.6-2" = D Note: See Section 11.6 for alternative approaches to calculating Seismic Design Category. References 1. Figure 22-1: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-1.pdf 2. Figure 22-2: https:Hearthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-2.pdf 3. Figure 22-12: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-12.pdf 4. Figure 22-7: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-7.pdf 5. Figure 22-17: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-17.pdf 6. Figure 22-18: https:Hearthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-18.pdf https:HprodOl-earthquake.cr.usgs.govldesignmaps/uslreport.php?template=minimal&latitude=33.693797&longitude=-116.303801 &siteclass=3&riskcat... 6/6 8/27/2018 Unified Hazard Tool U.S. Geological Survey- Earthquake Hazards Program Unified Hazard Tool Please do not use this tool to obtain ground motion parameter values for the design code reference documents covered by the U.S. Seismic Design Maps web tools (e.g., the International Building Code and the ASCE 7 or 41 Standard). The values returned by the two applications are not identical. Input Edition Dynamic: Conterminous U.S. 2014 (v4.1. Latitude Decimal degrees [33-693797 Longitude Decimal degrees, negative values for western longitudes -116.303801 Site Class 259 m/s (Site class D) 1 Spectral Period Peak ground acceleration Time Horizon Return period in years 475 J https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazardsrinteractive/ 115 8/27/2018 Unified Hazard Tool Hazard Curve Hazard Curves 14�0 W ,C•1 C e I 1e Y U 11i3 0 1e-a le c Ir6 --llmellerlmn475yesn Paakpoandaw{eatlon 1e 7 02sesspectralsmelwdWn 1.0 secs pectral emlerakkm 2.0 sec spectra I amleratim Gc Q 1e-2 let ,Rb Ground Motion (g) Component Curves for Peak ground acceleration 1e-2 1e•1 1ef0 Ground Motion (g) View Raw Data Uniform Hazard Response Spectrum 3.0 � 2S 0 a C lA 0.5 Spectral Period (s): PGA °•O Ground Motion (g):0.5581 Spectral Period (s) https://earthquake.usgs.govlhazards/interactive/ 216 8/27/2018 Unified Hazard Tool Deaggregation Component Total 1 t L 5��i��nCra 8v t flr';'7�� -/ hops:I/earthquake.usgs.govlhazardslinteractivs/ 3/5 Unified Hazard Tool 8/27/2018 Summary statistics fort Deaggregation: Total Deaggregation targets Recovered targets Return period: 475 yrs Return period: 510.74016 yrs Exceedance rate: 0.0021052632 yr' Exceedance rate: 0.0019579427 yr-' PGA ground motion: 0.55805649 g Totals Mean (for all sources) Binned: 100 % r: 14.71 km Residual: 0 % m: 7 Trace: 0.27 % Eo: 0.73 a Mode (largest r-m bin) Mode (largest co bin) r: 11.28 km r: 11.23 km m: 7.34 m: 7.5 Eo: 0.43 a Eo: 0.82 a Contribution: 12.68 % Contribution: 5.26 % Discretization Epsilon keys r: min = 0.0, max=1000.0, A = 20.0 km co: [-- .. -2.5) m: min=4.4,max=9.4,A=0.2 El: [-2.5..-2.0) E: min = -3.0, max = 3.0, A = 0.5 a E2: [-2.0 .. -1.5) E3: [-1.5 .. -1.0) E4: [-1.0 .. -0.5) E5: [-0.5 .. 0.0) E6: [0.0 .. 0.5) E7: [0.5 ..1.0) ES: [1.0 ..1.5) 0: [1.5 .. 2.0) E10: [2.0.. 2.5) Ell: [2.5.. +-] 4/5 httpsl/earthquake.usgs.gov/hazardsrinteractivel 8/27/2018 Unified Hazard Tool Deaggregation Contributors source Set 4 Source UC33brAvg-FM31 San Andreas (Coachella) rev [0) San Jacinto (Anna) rev [5) San Jacinto (Clark) rev [0) UC33brAvg-FM32 San Andreas (Coachella) rev [0) San Jacinto (Anza) rev [51 San Jacinto (Clark) rev [01 UC33brAvg_FM31(opt) PointSourceFinite:-116.304, 33.698 PointSourceFinite:-116.304, 33.698 PointSourceFinite:-116.304, 33.770 UC33brAvg-FM32 (opt) PointSourceFinite:-116.304, 33.698 PointSourceFinite:-116.304, 33.698 Type r m eo [on [at az % System 33.85 11.23 7.61 0.28 116.219'W 33.766'N 44.45 24.46 29.88 7.98 0.87 116.513'W 33.490'N 220.57 2.62 29.83 7.71 1.07 116.496'W 33.479'N 216.82 2.25 System 33.78 11.23 7.61 0.29 116.219'W 33.766'N 44.45 24.36 29.88 7.96 0.88 116.513'W 33.490'N 220.57 2.67 29.83 7.72 1.06 116.496'W 33.479'N 216.82 2.18 Grid 16.19 4.91 5.56 0.61 116.304'W 33.698'N 0.00 2.09 4.91 5.56 0.61 116.304'W 33.698'N 0.00 2.08 9.13 5.84 1.00 116.304'W 33.770'N 0.00 1.00 Grid 16.18 4.91 5.56 0.61 116.304'W 33.698'N 0.00 2.09 4.91 5.56 0.61 116.304'W 33.698'N 0.00 2.08 https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazardsfinteractive/ 5/5