Loading...
0105-121 (MISC) Geotechnical Data Reportc. koll t -A S S-OCr[ Ag T E S 91 1� c M,%TC A S' S O C I A T E S. I N C. Bing Yen 8 Associates, Inc. 17701 Mitchell North Irvine. California 92614-6029 www.atc-enviro.com 949.757.1941 March 2, 2001 ATC Project No. 40.75013.0285 Mr. Jason Garland Sprint PCS• 4683 Chabot Drive, Suite 100 Pleasanton:' Califomia 94588 Subject: Geotechnical Data Report Proposed Sprint PCS Communications Facility La Quinta Resort (Cascade No. RV54XC504A) 49499 Eisenhower Drive La Quinta Resort, California Dear Mr. Garland: Bing Yen & Associates, Inc. (BYA), a wholly -owned subsidiary of ATC Associates, Inc: (ATC), is pleased to provide you two (2) copies of a,geotechnical data report for the proposed monopole communications tower to be constructed at the subject site. We understand that the geotechnical data contained herein will be used by a structural engineer to design the monopole foundation. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or if we may be of any additional assistance. We look forward to assisting you during the•construction of the proposed facility. Very truly yours, BING'YEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. A subsidiary of ATC Group Services, Inc. Macan Doroudian, Ph.D. _ Assistant Project Engineer %- Ty OF L.A QVINTA No. G :3 IL,DI;NG & SAFETY DEPT. Osman Pekin, Ph.D., P.E F. Ira• v`'o��;j APPROVED BU Principal Engineer sr 0n111\ OF ^A��F°�• FOR CONSTRUCTION Enclosure BY • DATE cc; N-licli t l Shc\, hridge. i�-1SA .Assc,cMic In,,. Off C.a $� GEOTECHNICAL REPORT SPRINT PCS PROPOSED COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ~ LA QUINTA RESORT (CASCADE NO. RV54XC504A) 49-499 EISENHOWER DRIVE , LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................1 2.0, GENERAL GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC SETTING..................:...............................2 2.1 REGIONAL AND LOCAL GEOLOGIC SETTING:..............::......................................... 2 2.2 SEISMIC HAZARDS.......................:...................................................................:. 2 3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION AND LABORATORY TESTING.........................f..............3 3.1 FIELD INVESTIGATION.......................................................................:................. 3 3.2 LABORATORY TESTING............................................................................._......... 3 4.0 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS................................................................4 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................ ........... 4 5.1 TOWER FOUNDATION ... :.......................................................... ...........................4 5.2 SEISMIC DESIGN 5.3 LIQUEFACTION -POTENTIAL ............................................. :.......... ............. ....:......... 6 5.4 : EQUIPMENT SUPPORT SLAB..............................................:................................. 7 5.5' SOIL CORROSIVITY............................:.................................................................7 5.6 UTILITY TRENCHES............................................................................................ 8 5.7 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS AND FIELD TESTING ....................................•........ 8 6.0 GENERAL CONDITIONS........................................................................................9 ATC Associates, Inc. i Geotechnical Report Irvine, California La Quinta Resort ATC Job No. 40.75013.0285 - Sprint PCS ,,1<arch2. 200'1 1..0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation performed by Bing Yen & Associates, Inc. (BYA), ' a wholly owned subsidiary' of ATC Associates, Inc. (ATC), for a proposed communications tower to be installed at La Quinta Resort on 49-499 Eisenhower Drive in La Quinta, California. The layout of the proposed facility is shown on the Site Plan, Figure 1. We understand that the communications tower will be a "Monopalm" design consisting`of a 65- foot high steel monopole with artificial branches and trunk -cladding material attached to the pole. The equipment cabinets will be placed on a raised steel platform located about 15 feet northeast of monopole..The.slab will have an overall plan dimension of approximately 13 feet by, 25 feet and will, be located on top of an existing building roof. Underground utilities in trenches are planned. The purpose .of this study was to provide geotechnical data for a structural evaluation of design and stability of the monopole and equipment shelter to be performed under separate contract by others. The scope of our services included the following: ➢ Conducting a seismic hazards screening; ➢ Coordinating site access; ➢ Obtaining utility clearances for drilling; ➢ Performing drilling and sampling at the site; ➢ Performing laboratory testing of representative samples; ➢ Evaluate geotechnical design data; and ➢ Preparation of this data report. This report summarizes our investigation and findings and presents geotechnical data for the - design of this communications facility. The boring log and results of our laboratory testing are contained in the Appendix. ATC Associates, Inc. 1 Geotech nical, Report • Irvine, California La Quinta Resort ATC Job No. 40.75013.0285 Sprint PCS 2.0 'GENERAL -GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC SETTING - 2.1 Regional and Local -Geologic Setting. ,a The site is located• in `the northern terminus., of the Peninsular Ranges Physiographic Province. The Peninsular Ranges Physiographic Province extends from the Lo•s Angeles,•Basin south to the tip of Baja California (Norris and Webb, 1990). This -province is characterized by northwest - trending topographic and geologic structures, including the San Jacinto and San Andreas Fault Zones.,, The.site is located in Coachella Valley, at the base of Sad Jacinto.=The site .is underlain by ancierii'lake Coahuila deposits, which consists of unconsolidated sand, silt, and clays. ' ` The nearest active ' fault to the site is the San Andreas Fault which is located approximately 12 kilometer northeast ofthe site. The ,Coachella Valley segment of'the San -Andreas Fault is characterized by gently curving trace, steep to moderate dips; very low levels of a seismic' creep (Louie and others, 1985), and a_ lack of large earthquakes during the historical -period (Agnew, ; r 1985): 2.2 Seismic Hazards ; This site is located in; one of the most active and potentially dangerous seismic regions of the United States. The site falls within Seismic Zone 4 of the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC). Consequently, a seismic` hazards screening `was performed for ' this site to ,evaluate potential x seismic hazards, The seismic hazards screening consisted of reviewing availablemaps published by the California Division of Mines and., Geology A'(CDMG), - the California Department ' of Transportation (Caltrans), and the 1997 UBC. The site is located in'the USGS.PaIm Springs Quadrangle. The reviewed maps included:, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone maps (CDMG) to evaluate fault rupture -hazard; probabilistic and deterministic .peak horizontal acceleration maps (CDMG. and . Caltrans,' 'respectively) to evaluate ground shaking •hazard; and' the County of Riverside_ Environmental Hazard Map to evaluate zones with a significant potential for liquefaction. The reported probabilistic ground -shaking hazard corresponds to a 475-year annual return period, which is consistent with a UBC design for conventional structures. Active faults within 1.5 km of the site are summarized below: j a y Fault ' Slip Rate (mm/yr) Max. Magnitude UBC Type- Closest Distance (km) San Andreas _ Coachella 25 + 5 7.1 -A, 12 San Andreas — Southern 24 + 6 7.4 ' ..r A 12 ATC Associates, Inc. 2 Geotechnical Report Irvine, California La Quinta Resort, ATC Job 146.'40.75013.0285 Sprint PCS Based on our review of available information, the seismic hazards for this site are summarized as follows: ➢ The site is not within a designated Alquist-Priolo special studies zone. The site is located 12 km southwest of the south branch of the San Andreas Fault, the active fault controlling seismic design. ➢> Probabilistic peak horizontal ground acceleration (475-year event) is between 0.4 and 0.45 g ➢ Deterministic peak horizontal ground acceleration is between 0.4 and 0.5 g. ➢ The site is not located within a mapped liquefaction hazard zone. ➢ The site is not located within a mapped landslide hazard zone. 3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION AND LABORATORY TESTING 3.1 Field Investigation A field investigation was conducted at the site on February 23, 2001 to obtain information on the subsurface conditions. The field investigation consisted of drilling a hollow -stem auger boring B-1 at the location of the tower to a depth of 46.5 feet, as shown on the Site Plan, Figure 1. The site plan is based on a proposed site layout drawing by MSA Associates. The field investigation was performed under. the supervision of BYA personnel, who logged the boring and visually classified and collected, samples of the subsurface materials encountered in the boring. The boring was backfilled with cuttings. The boring log is presented in the Appendix. Drive samples were taken at approximately 2-foot intervals above 10 feet in depth and at approximately 5-foot intervals below 10 feet using either a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) .sampler or a 2.4-in6h I.D. ring. sampler driven into the bottom of the borehole using a 140-lb hammer dropped a distance of 30 inches. Relatively undisturbed soil samples were retained in a series of brass rings using the ring sampler. Standard Penetration samples were sealed in the field in plastic bags to preserve the natural moisture content. A bulk sample of the soils was also obtained' for additional classification and laboratory testing. ,3.2 Laboratory Testing Soil samples obtained from the field investigation were brought to the BYA Geotechnical Laboratory. Selected samples were tested to measure physical and engineering properties. Laboratory tests performed included moisture content, dry unit weight, and direct ' shear test. Chemical analyses, including pH, soluble sulfates, and soluble chlorides, were performed by a separate laboratory under contract with BYA. Results of the laboratory tests are summarized on -the log of boring in the Appendix. .y ATC Associates, Inc. 3 Geotechnical Report Irvine, California La Quinta Resort ATC Job No. 40.75013.0285 0 Sprint PCS 4.0 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The site for the proposed communications facility is located at La Quinta Resort on 49-499 Eisenhower Drive in La Quinta, California. The site is located near the center of a resort area. The equipment support will be on a raised steel platform located on top of an existing building roof. The monopalm tower will be located at ground level on the access walkway to the building and about 15 feet south of the vertical projection of the proposed steel platform. The ground surface near the tower is relatively flat, paved with asphalt, and partially landscaped. Existing underground utilities may be present within or near the project site. Based on the subsurface investigation, the site of the proposed tower is underlain by alluvium, consisting of loose to medium dense silty sand and stiff to very stiff clay. Groundwater was not encountered in the boring, which extended to a depth of 46.5 feet. The depth to groundwater level is expected to be greater than 50 feet based on local experience. Minor subsurface seepage could exist during drilling, particularly during periods, of heavy rainfall. The depth to groundwater may fluctuate, depending on rainfall and possible groundwater recharge or pumping activity in the site vicinity. _ 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 Tower Foundation A large -diameter cast -in -drilled hole (CIDH) pile is feasible to support the proposed monopalm. However, based on the available information and our local experience, caving is likely to be expected during drilling, if dry and loose sandy soils are encountered. Casing will be required to maintain an open shaft for bottom clean -out work, inspection, and installation of reinforcing steel and concrete. In order to provide. geotechnical parameters for design, we have assumed the following: • Tower will be placed on cast -in -drilled hole (CIDH) pile • The diameter of the CIDH pile will be 36 inches or greater • The pile foundation will be designed and constructed in accordance with applicable procedures and recommendations established by the Uniform Building Code (UBC), the American Concrete Institute (ACI), and the Association for Drilled Shaft Contractors (ADSC) for end -bearing piles. Based on these assumptions, we recommend the following for axial design assuming end bearing and providing for a minimum factor of safety of 3: ATC Associates, Inc. ' 4 Geotechnical Report Irvine, California La Quinta Resort ATC Job No. 40.75013.0285. Sprint PCS 1 n-C1) :.'_.._'001 AXIAL'LOADING Depth Range (ft.) Allowable End Bearing Pressure, qa (psf) 0-5* - 5 — 18 1,000 + 100D** 18 — 22 2250 22 — 32 1,500 + 125D, 32 — 43 2750 43 - 46, 2,000 + 125D < 7,000 * Embedded length of CIDH pile should be at least 5 times diameter. ** D Depth (ft) from final grade to bottom of pile.. Based on these additional assumptions:` The pile -is not located within three pile diameters of a descending slope or top of a retaining wall • Lateral design is based on live loading (maximum of wind or seismic) • Liquefaction, significant pore `pressures, or significant loss of soil strength does not occur as a consequence of live loading ATC Associates, Inc. 5 Geotechnical Report Irvine; California La Quinta Resort ATC Job No. 40.15013.0285 Sprint PCS \larch We recommend the following for lateral design: LATERAL LOADING Depth of Soil Type Unit Weight, y Internal Cohesion, c Passive Layer (pcf) Friction, � (psf) Pressure (ft.) (degrees) EFP ' (pcf/ft)** 0-5* - 105 - - - 5 —18 Silty Sand ' 110 31 675 18 — 22 Clay 115 - 1,000 425 22� — 32 Silty Sand 115 32 - 750 32 — 43 Clay 115 - 1,250 _ 350 43 = 46 Silty Sand 115 32 - 750 * The lateral resistance in the upper 5 feet should be ignored for lateral resistance. * * Up to a maximum passive pressure of 10 times EFP. t 5.2 Seismic Design Seismic design parameters were determined in accordance with the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC). As previously mentioned, the site is within Seismic Zone 4 of the UBC. Accordingly, the Seismic Zone Factor is 0.40 (Table 16-I), and the Soil Profile Type is SD (Table 164). Based on the UBC and the proximity ofithe San Andreas Fault (southern segment), which lies about 12 km northeast of the site with an MCE of 7.4, the site is subject .to a Seismic Source Type A (Table 16-U). Based on the soil profile and seismic source type, we have determined the following seismic factors and coefficients according to the 1997 UBC: ATC Associates, Inc. 6 Geotechnical Report Irvine, California La Quinta Resort ATC Job No. 40.75013.0285 L ? � � • • 1. Sprint PCS Near -source Factor Na 1.0 Near -source Factor N, 1.1 Seismic Coefficient Ca 0.44 Na = 0.44 Seismic Coefficient C, 0.64'N, = 0.71 For the given near -source factor Na of 1.0, .the vertical ground'acceleration can be assumed to be 2/3 of the horizontal ground acceleration in accordance with the 1997 UBC. 5.3 Liquefaction Potential r Liquefaction is a mode of ground failure that results from the generation of high pore, water pressures during earthquake ground shaking,- causing, loss of shear strength. Liquefaction is, r typically a hazard where loose sandy soils exist below groundwater. The site is not located within a liquefaction zone defined by the County of Riverside. -Environmental Hazard Map. The site generally is underlain by loose to medium dense silty sand and stiff to verystiff clay. , Groundwater was not encountered,in the boring, which extended to a depth of 46. feet below grade, and it, is'expected to be at greater depths. Accordingly, we consider •the potential for liquefaction at the site to be low. 5.4 Equipment Support Slab Since', the proposed equipment support structure is `to be mounted on an existing structure, there are no foundation preparation recommendations from a geotechnical point of view. 'However, the project structural engineer should verify the effect of the proposed addition on the existing ' building foundations with respect to its original geotechnical report,, if 'available. Foundation' pressures with the static and seismic increases due to this addition` should. not -exceed the allowable recommended bearing pressures for the existing building. 5.5 Soil Corrosiviity The results of pH, soluble chloride, and soluble sulfate laboratory; tests on a sample of the near surface soils -is reported in the Appendix and summairized in the following table: ATC Associates, Inc. 7 Geotechnical Report Irvine, California La Quinta Resort ATC Job No. 40.75013.0285 *' r Sprint PCS , \9<:irci� ?001 Soil Test Test Results Corrosion Potential, Soluble Sulfate Low sulfate attack on (per CA 417) 82 ppm concrete Soluble Chloride 10 ppm Low to Moderate corrosivity (per CA 422) on buried metals Moderate alkaline effect PH 8 8 anticipated The test results generally indicate that chemical 'attack of the soils on structural components such �. as buried concrete and metal is anticipated to be low. As a minimum, buried metal piping should be protected with suitable coatings, wrappings, or seals. Concrete should be designed in, accordance with the 1997 UBC, Table 19-A-5. Type I or II Portland cement may be used for concrete exposed to the subsurface soils. A corrosion consultant should be retained if a more . detailed evaluation or a protection system is desired. 5.6 Utility Trenches It is anticipated that the on -site soils will provide suitable support for underground utilities and piping that may be installed. • Any soft and/or unstable material encountered • at the bottom of excavations for such facilities should be removed and be replaced with an adequate bedding material. The on -site soils, if free of any particles greater than. 3 inches,' maybe used for bedding or shading of utilities and piping. A non -expansive granular material with a sand equivalent greater than 30 also may be imported for this purpose. The on -site soils are suitable for backfill of utility and pipe trenches from one foot above the top of the pipe to the final ground surface, provided the material is free of organic matter and deleterious substances, and non granular expansive soils. Trench backfill should.be mechanically placed and compacted in thin lifts to at least 90 percent of. the maximum drydensity as determined -by ASTM Test Method D1557. Flooding or jetting, for placement and compaction of backfill is not recommended. 5.7 Recommendations for Construction Observations and Field Testing , All grading and site preparation should be observed by experienced personnel reporting to the project Geotechnical Engineer. Field monitoring services are an essential continuation of our prior studies to confirm and correlate the findings and our prior recommendations with the actual subsurface conditions exposed during construction, and to confirm that'suitable fill soils are placed and properly compacted. We recommend that BYA be present to observe and provide testing during the following construction activities: ATC Associates, Inc. - 8 Geotechnical Report Irvine, California r La Quinta Resort ATC Job No. 40.75013.0285 a Sprint PCS \•arch ➢ Site excavations " ➢ Preparation of subgrades for foundations and pavements ➢ Placement of all fill; backfill, and any pavement structural sections ' Observations of drilled pier and footing excavations ., ➢ .Backfilling of utility trenches 6.0 GENERAL CONDITIONS ' This report presents geotechnical data recommended for the proposed development as presented to _'BYA. These parameters are based on the assumption that the subsurface conditions do not deviate appreciably, from -those discovered during our geotechnical investigation and the design provided to" us is representative of the system to be built. The possibility of different conditions cannot be discounted. It is the responsibility of the Owner to bring to the attention 'of the Geotechnical Engineer any deviations in plans or ~ unexpected conditions observed during construction. In the event of changes to the foundation design, BYA, should be retained to -review the new design. In this way, any required supplemental recommendations can be made in a timely manner. ; _.Although BYA has endeavored to characterize the surface and subsurface conditions at the site,,, BYA is not responsible' for potential problems associated with constructing pier . foundations including hole stability and dewaterihi. Constructing the.pile foundations under the given site and'subsurface conditions is the,responsibility of the contractor. Professional- judgments` presented' in this report are based `on evaluations of the information available, on BYA's understanding of foundation design, and BMA's general experience in the field of geotechnical'engineering. BYA does not guarantee, the interpretations made, only that the 'engineering work and judgment rendered meet the standard of care of the geotechnical profession at this time. 4.. ATC Associates, Inc. 9 Geotechnical Report Irvine, California ' La Quinta Resort ATC Job No. 40.75013.0285 a, ' Y.y170,pC' v-nnar AVENIDA FERNANDO :vraz3zi pi g I u' � m e.611TJy" 1@93.3)v — I X-161,99 I r 1 _O O znnl' z.var _ I I Il Q I > Si I > I C 3 TRACT i m . NO.' 28545-3 "' 1 z M.H. 269/1-6I w . " - .�I LOT 30 GrophicSoalz Ill lm ' I La L•1�2.W . pPp I Iw - ]bLBT ax Y89'322$Y 1 ey ul .B9'S�32'v• � s MB9'S�4v u 1-' . Q^�'IR IODG �■ IOW p e I I la,. ' EI IOOW<BS Im�tBT �` _ _wB93X)9�v_ _ wlm, I aaaG ,Bq.yf.Qy OOO'. ]I�aG -WWWV nw mvi am . L 1• -LEGEND NUMBER AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BORINGS APPROXIMATE SCALE: 1•INCH 300 FEET Figure 1 Bing Yen & Associates, Inc. PROJECT IRMNE, CALIFORNIA Sprint-PCS ` SITE: La Quinta Resort SITE PLAN A wholly -owned subsidiary of La Quinta, CA ATC Assocldtes Inc. CASCADE No.: RV54JCC504A ATC Job No.: 40.75013.0285 Environmental & Geotechnical Consultants A Project: Sprint PCS - La Quinta Resort •Project Location: 49-499 Eisenhower, La Quinta Project Number: 40.7563.0285 Key to Log of Boring Sheet 1 of 1 p �a.. SAMPLES 01 J _ O C .o •�- vw.O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION o 'C a 0' .y > m co OTHER TESTS AND o c. �.. ar Ea' -tO LA" 3 L n w y O H :' .� rn u N REMARKS u.lw 02 T 7 H z C7 N n.o m C O U t O O 2U Z'd 03: N O o-z 1111:1 Fil N F±1 a Fil F- ® 01011, 12 COLUMN- DESCRIPTIONS 1❑ Elevation: Elevation in feet referenced to mean sea level (MSL) or site datum. �2 Depth: Depth in feet below the ground surface. �3 Sample Tyne: Type of soil sample collected at depth interval shown; sampler symbols are explained below. ® Samnle Number: Sample identification number, "[NR]" after number indicates no sample recovery. Blows / 6 in_: Number of blows to advance driven sampler each 6-inch drive interval, or distance noted, using a 1404b hammer with a 30-inch drop (unless otherwise noted). © Gra hin c Loa: Graphic depiction of subsurface material encountered; typical symbols are explained below. TYPICAL MATERIAL GRAPHIC SYMBOLS Well -graded SAND (SW) Poorly graded SAND (SP) Silty SAND (SM) Clayey SAND (SC) GRAVEL (GP/GW) SANDSTONE TYPICAL SAMPLER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS Californiaodified California ia (ring -lined) a (brass tube -lined) Standard Penetration Test Shelby Tube (SPT) split spoon Bulk sample ® Grab sample OTHER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS �Z First water encountered at time of drilling and sampling (ATD) 1 Static water level measured at specified time after drilling Change in material properties within a lithologic stratum — — — Inferred contact between soil strata or gradational lithologic change BING YEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnica/ & Environmental Consu/tan F7 Unified Soil Classification: Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) code [or geologic unit) for associated stratum. ® Material Descrintion: � Description of material encountered; may include color, moisture, grain size, and density/consistency. �9 Moisture Content: Moisture content of sample; as percentage of dry weight of soil, measured in lab according to ASTM D2216. —6 DEy Unit Weight: Dry unit weight of soil sample, in pounds per cubic foot, measured in lab according to ASTM D2937. t 11 Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve: Percent of soil by weight finer than the No. 200 sieve according to ASTM D422. 12 Other Tests and Remarks: Comments and observations regarding drilling or sampling made by driller or field personnel. Other lab tests are indicated using abbreviations explained below.. ® Lean CLAY (CL) SILT (ML) ® Fat CLAY (CH) ® Elastic SILT (MH) ED SILTSTONE • a CLAYSTONE OTHER'LABORATORY TEST ABBREVIATIONS AL Atterberg Limits test (ASTM D4318) + COMP Compaction test by modified effort (ASTM D1557) CONS One-dimensional consolidation test (ASTM D2435) DS Direct shear test (ASTM D3080) El Expansion Index test (ASTM D4829), index at 50% saturation HD Hydrometer analysis (ASTM D422), %<5 microns LL Liquid Limit from Atterberg Limits test PI Plasticity Index from Atterberg Limits test SA Sieve analysis (ASTM D422), %< #200 sieve SE Sand equivalent test for fines contamination (ASTM D2419) Uc Unconfined compressive strength test (ASTM D2166) ' WA Wash analysis (ASTM D422); %< #200 sieve Soil classifications are based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive; field descriptions may have been modified to reflect lab test results. Descriptions on these logs apply only at the specific boring locations and at the time the borings were advanced; they are not warranted to be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations or times. Figure A-1 Project: Sprint PCS - La Quinta Resort Log Of Boring B=1 Project Location: 49-499 Eisenhower, La Quinta Project Number: - 40.75013.0285 ' :. r Sheet 1 of 2 Date(s) , Drilled 2/23/01'_ Logged By D. Bernier Checked,. By M. Doroudian Drilling Method Hollow -Stem Auger Drill Bit 8-inch-OD auger bit Size(Type Total Depth 46.5 feet of Borehole - Drill Rig CME 75 ' Type Drilling j,E.T..Drilling Contractor Approximate 154 feet MSL Surface Elevation Groundwater Level Not encountered ATD and Date Measured Sampling SPT, California (ring), bulk Method Hammer Power winch; Data 140 Ibs / 30-inch drop Borehole Drill cuttings to ground surface Backfill Comments Power winch hammer used because auto -trip hammer was broken. r SAMPLES ' O1 0•, O7 0 __ C C 0.io o .' - o `N m �. OTHER o v cc r >.. °� c m m� o `" �'rn �w MATERIAL DESCRIPTION S .: - C' a `n o TESTS AND m m y iu w w a� ''E � d T H o t n e y o °r 3 N :' •o 5 rn . N `m REMARKS W O >a h z m y aIxm C9 c m �U�? o iU r'io 03 d az 0 3 inches asphalt over 6 inches base Hand auger to 5 ft. SM + SK-1 Silty SAND, brown, moist, loose, fine-grained [QUATERNARY LAKE DEPOSITS and ALLUVIUM] Corrosivity Tests on SK-1: pH=8.8 « Sulfates=82 ppm , Chlorides=<10 ppm 150 . 5 R2 2 3 11 101 DS: c=0.57 ksf, phi=35° Becomes medium dense SPT-3 5 7 145 10 10 R-4 6, 21 4 111 140 ' 15 SPT-5 4 , 6 y' a ___ CL _____________________________ Lean'CLAY, brown, moist, still 1.35 20 R-6 6 9 ' 17 34 88 • SM Silty SAND, pale brown, moist, medium dense to dense, fine-grained 130 ' r.., 25 - SPT-7 9 17 18 '. SM Silty SAND with clay, brown moist, medium dense, 125 fine-grained n• 30 BING YEN & ASSOCIATES, I6E i t lC INC. It t Figure A-2 ec mca nv ro"men a onsu an s Project:. Sprint PCS - La Quinta Resort Log of Boring B-1 Project'Location: ' 49-499 Eisenhower, La Quinta ,Project Number: 40.75013.0285 ? Sheet 2 of .2, SAMPLES cn p• o •0 - 5 •,9 -.., o` ,� 61 m OTHER c y c CID w _ o' �'m .MATERIAL DESCRIPTION .- n ° TESTS AND a� a� m a� m, m y 3 n ,�' y' o y �' 5 o, a) N REMARKS di 04? r = H z a0iaNio dtYm f0 C9 c�0� 5UC9 oo �U Z� o� `)0 ,az 0 30 R_8 12 SM Silty SAND with clay, brown, moist, medium dense, , 13 fine-grained (continued) k90 `17 30.' r I CL Lean CLAY, pale brown, moist, stiff to very stiff - 120 -• 35 SPT-9 4 { s 4 15 40 R-10 7 r 8 15 ; SM Silty SAND with clay, brown moist, medium dense i 110 fine-grained 4$ SPT-11 5 6 10 Bottom of boring at 45.5 feet .R 105 50 ' 100 55 . V g$ +. s ..60 -90 ' 65 x BING YEN 8{ ASSOCIATES, INC: ,- 'Figure A-2 , I 3.0 x I w a Y 2.0 v) cn V) w Ld ch 0� V ~' w w H 1.0 � J H H H Q J L WIN 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0 0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 Normal Stress, ksf 1 2 3 WATER CONTENT, % 10.4 10.8 10.8 Q DRY DENSITY, pcf 101.1 100.7 100.7 H SATURATION, % 42.2 43.6 43.6 Z VOID RATIO 0.661 0.667 0.667 H DIAMETER, in 2.420 2.420 2.420 HEIGHT, in 2.000 2.000 2.000 WATER CONTENT, % 18.8 18.8 18.8 f- DRY DENSITY, pcf 102.9 103.8 105.0 U) w SATURATION, % 80.0 81.8 84.4 H H VOID RATIO 0.632 0.618 0.599 Q DIAMETER, in 2.420 2.420 2.420 HEIGHT, in 1.964 1.941 1.918 NORMAL STRESS, ksf 1.000 2.000 3.000 FAILURE STRESS, ksf 1.302 1.924 2.705 0 0.15 0.30 0.45 0.60 DISPLACEMENT, in 0.250 0.275 0.300 Horiz. Di-spl., in ULTIMATE STRESS, ksf 0.701 1.262 1.863 DISPLACEMENT, in 0.500 0.500 0.500 Strain rate, in/min 0.00750.00750.0075 SAMPLE TYPE: Undisturbed DESCRIPTION: Grayish Brown Silty SAND (SM) SPECIFIC GRAVITY= 2.69 REMARKS: CLIENT: PROJECT: Sprint -La Quinto Resort SAMPLE LOCATION: B-1 ® 5.0-6.5 Ft. PROJ. NO.: 4-0.75013.0285 DATE: 2-28-2001 DIRECT SHEAR TEST REPORT BING YEN AND ASSOCIATES