The URL can be used to link to this page

07-3057 (SFD) Soils Report=Mm MIMI M M M M IMMIM M M M M M IM M och - (1 Q-1 u-i-iin -ta Lua AC -1 ,% t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 COUNTRY CLUB OF THE DESERT P.O. BOA: 980 LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT COUNTRY CLUB OF THE DESERT, PHASE 1 LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA File No.: 07117-10 00-09-772 fl 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Section1 INTRODUCTION......................................:...........................................................1 1.1 Project Description.......................................................................................:............1 1.2 Site Description........................................................................................................1 1.3 Purpose and Scope of Work.....................................................................................2 ' Section 6 LIMITATIONS AND ADDITIONAL SERVICES..........................................20 6.1 Uniformity of Conditions and Limitations.....................:.......................................20 6.2 Additional Services................................................................................................21 REFERENCES...............................................................................................................22 APPENDIX A 1 Site Location Map Boring Location Map Table 1 Fault Parameters 1997 Uniform Building Code Seismic Parameters 2000 International Building Code Seismic Parameters Logs of Borings APPENDIX B Laboratory Test Results EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST Section 2 2.1 2.2 METHODS OF INVESTIGATION.....................................................................4 Field Exploration .................................... Laboratory Testing...................................................................................................5 1 Section3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 DISCUSSION..........................................................................._............................6 Soil Conditions........................................................................................................6 Groundwater.............................................................................._............................6 Geologic Setting.......................................................................................................6 Geologic Hazards......................................................................._............................7 3.4.1 Seismic Hazards............................................................. _ ............................ 7 3.4.2 Secondary Hazards......................................................... _ ............................ 8 3.4.3 Site Acceleration and UBC Seismic Coefficients .......... _ ............................9 12 Section4 CONCLUSIONS......................................................................a..........................11 Excavations and Utility Trenches.........................................................................13 ' Section 6 LIMITATIONS AND ADDITIONAL SERVICES..........................................20 6.1 Uniformity of Conditions and Limitations.....................:.......................................20 6.2 Additional Services................................................................................................21 REFERENCES...............................................................................................................22 APPENDIX A 1 Site Location Map Boring Location Map Table 1 Fault Parameters 1997 Uniform Building Code Seismic Parameters 2000 International Building Code Seismic Parameters Logs of Borings APPENDIX B Laboratory Test Results EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST Section 5 RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................. ............ _.......................... 12 SITE DEVELOPMENT AND GRADING 5.1 ......................................................................12 Site Development - Grading ...................................................... ........................... 12 5.2 Excavations and Utility Trenches.........................................................................13 5.3 Slope Stability of Graded Slopes ............................................... _........................... 14 STRUCTURES....................................................................................._..........................14 5.4 Foundations................................................................................_..........................14 5..5 Slabs-on-Grade......................................................................................................15 5.6 Retaining Walls.........................................................................._..........................16 5.8 Seismic Design Criteria........................................................................................17 5.9 Pavements..............................................................................................................18 ' Section 6 LIMITATIONS AND ADDITIONAL SERVICES..........................................20 6.1 Uniformity of Conditions and Limitations.....................:.......................................20 6.2 Additional Services................................................................................................21 REFERENCES...............................................................................................................22 APPENDIX A 1 Site Location Map Boring Location Map Table 1 Fault Parameters 1997 Uniform Building Code Seismic Parameters 2000 International Building Code Seismic Parameters Logs of Borings APPENDIX B Laboratory Test Results EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST Earth Systems Consultants J100 Southwest 79-s i I Country Club Drive Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 (760)345-1588 ' (800) 924-7015 FAX (760) 345-7315 iSeptember 22, 2000 File No.: 07117-10 00-09-772 Country Club of the Desert P.O. Box 980 La Quinta, California 92253 1 Attention: Ms. Aimee Grana Project: Country Club of the Desert, Phase I La Qum' ta, California ' Subject: GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ' Dear Ms. Grana: We take pleasure to present this Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared for the proposed Phase I of the Country Club of the Desert to be .located between 52nd and 54th Avenues, and Jefferson and Madison Streets in the City of La Quinta, California. This report presents our findings and recommendations for site grading and foundation design, incorporating the tentative information supplied to our office. This report should stand as a whole, and no part of the report should be excerpted or used to the exclusion of any other pErt. ' This report completes our scope of services in accordance with our agreement, dated August 22, 2000. Other services that may be required, such as plan review and grading observation are additional services and will be billed according to the Fee Schedule in effect at the time services are provided. Unless requested in writing, the client is responsible to distribute this report to the appropriate governing agency or other members of the design team. L7 "1 We appreciate the opportunity to provide our professional services. Please contact our office if there are any questions or comments concerning this report or its recommendations. Respectfully submitted, EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS Southwest 4W" C � Shelton L. Stringer GE 2266 SER/sls/dac Distribution: 6/Country Club of the Desert INTA File 2/BD File oQFOFESS/p� SON L. �v G� z cn N0. 2266 m EXP- 6-30-04 �TECHN\�Y\ � FOF CAIIF September 22, 2000 - 1 - File No.: 07117-10 00-09-772 Section I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Project Description This Geotechnical Engineering Report his been prepared for the proposed: Phase I of the Country Club of the Desert to be located between 52nd and 54th Avenues, and 'Jefferson and Madison Streets in the City of La Quinta, California. The project will ultimately consist of three, 18 -hole golf courses with abcut 766 residential units built on prepared pads. A clubhouse with parking facilities, pool, spa and driving range is proposed to be constructed at the northwestern portion of the project site. A maintenance facility will be constructed at the southwest corner of 52nd Avenue to 54th Avenue with three proposed auto or golf cart under crossings. Based on preliminary mass grading plans prepared by Dye Designs of Denver, Colorado, dated May 12, 2000; extensive mass -grading is proposed to construct the golf courses and "super" pads for the residential units. Fills as much as 20 feet are proposed at the ends of cul-de-sacs. Cuts as deep as 20 to 26 feet are proposed to construct several small lakes for the golf courses. Slopes as high as 30 to 32 feet with 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) slopes are proposed_ Overall, in excess of 4,000,000 cubic yards of earthwork is anticipated. IThe proposed clubhouse and residences are assumed to be one-story structures. We anticipate that the proposed structures will be of wood -frame construction and will be supported by conventional shallow continuous or pad footings. Site development will include mass grading, "super" building pad preparation, underground utility installation, Street and parking lot construction, and golf course development. We used 'maximum column loads of 50 kips and a maximum wall loac.ing of 3 kips per linear foot as a basis for the foundation recommendations for residences and the clubhouse. All loading 1 is assumed to be dead plus actual live load. If actual structural loading is to exceed these assumed values, we might need to reevaluate the given recommendations. 1.2 Site Description The entire project site consists of approximately 900 acres of land consisting of most of Section ' 9, and the southern half and the western 80 -acres of the northern half Section 10, Township 6 South, Range 7 East, San Bernardino baseline and meridian (see Figure. 1 in Appendix A). The site is irregular in shape, and generally bounded by Jefferson Street and the Coachella (All American) Canal to the west, Avenue 52 to the north, agricultural properties and Monroe Street to the east and Avenue 54 to the south. The site is a mixture of undeveloped desert land, agricultural land, and ranches. The topography of the site was moderately undulating to flat. Artificial ponds are located in several portions of the site. No other significant surface drainage features were observed. The elevation of the site ranges from approximately 22 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL) to 29 f, -et below MSL. The project site consists primarily of formerly agricultural and undevelcped land associated with EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST September 22, 2000 - 2 - File No.: 07117-10 1 00-09-772 bmzer ranches on the property. The Fowler Packing Ranch and the vinevards on the Majestic 1 Property are the only two areas currently in use for agriculture as of the date of this report. Debris was observed in several portions of the project site. The debris appeared to consist primarily of green waste. Most of the debris appeared to be quite old, except for the material in Ste dry pond in the northeastern portion of the site, or the material actively oeing dumped by Arid ' Zone Farms Nursery in the western portion of the site. The vicinity around the site consists primarily of a mix of undeveloped, residential, and agricultural properties, with the All American Coachella Canal bordering the site to the northwest. Residences were associated with some of the agricultural land. There are underground and overhead utilities near and within the development area. These utility lines include but are not limited to domestic water, electric, sewer, and irrigation lines. Evidence of an underground irrigation distribution system was observed in several portions of the site, including both onsite and regional distribution pipelines. 1.3 Purpose and Scope of Work ' The purpose for our services was to evaluate the site soil conditions and :o provide professional opinions and recommendations regarding the proposed development of -,he site. The scope of ' work included the following: ➢ A general reconnaissance of the site. ➢ Shallow subsurface exploration by drilling 24 exploratory bDrings and four cone penetrometer (CPT) soundings to depths ranging from 31.5 to 50 feet. ➢ Laboratory testing of selected soil samples obtained from the exploratory borings. ' ➢ Review of selected published technical literature pertaining to the site and previous geotechnical reports prepared for prior conceptual developments for the properties conducted by Buena Engineers in 1989 and 1990. ➢ Engineering analysis and evaluation of the acquired data from the exploration and testing programs. ➢ A summary of our findings and recommendations in this written report. This report contains the following: ' ➢ Discussions on subsurface soil and groundwater conditions. :> Discussions on regional and local. geologic conditions. ➢ Discussions on geologic and seismic hazards. ➢ Graphic and tabulated results of laboratory tests and field studies. ➢ Recommendations regarding: • Site development and grading criteria, i• Excavation conditions and buried utility installations, • Structure foundation type and design, • Allowable foundation bearing capacity and expected total and. differential settlements, • Concrete slabs -on -grade, • Lateral earth pressures and coefficients, • Mitigation of the potential corrosivity of. site soils to concrete and steel reinforcement, EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 September 22, 2000 • Seismic design parameters, • Pavement structural sections. -3- File No.: 07117-10 00-09-772 Not Contained In This Report: Although available through Earth Systems Consultants Southwest, the current scope of our services does not include: i- A corrosive study to determine cathodic protection of concrete or buried pipes. r An environmental assessment. Investigation for the presence or absence of wetlands, hazardous o toxic materials in the soil, surface water, groundwater, or air on, below, or adjacent to the, subject property. Separate Phase I and Phase H Environment Site Assessment repo-ts have been prepared by Earth Systems Consultants Southwest in 1998, 1999, and 2000. EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST September 22, 2000 - 4 - File No.: 07117-10 00-09-772 Sectidn 2 rMETHODS OF INVESTIGATION 2.1 Field Exploration 1 'Soil Borings: Twenty-four exploratory borings were drilled to depths of about 31.5 feet below the existing ground surface to observe the soil profile and to obtain samples for laboratory ' testing. The borings were drilled on August .18 and 23, using 8 -inch outside diameter hollow - stem augers, and powered by a Mobile B61 truck -mounted drilling rig. The boring locations are 1 shown on the boring location map, Figure 2, in Appendix A. The locations shown are approximate, established by pacing and sighting from existing topographic: features. ' Samples were obtained within the test borings using a Standard Penetration (SPT) sampler (ASTM D 1586) and a Modified California (MC) ring sampler (ASTM D 3550 with shoe similar to ASTM D 1586). The SPT sampler has a 2 -inch outside diameter and a 1.38 -inch inside ' diameter. The MC sampler has a 3 -inch outside diameter and a 2.37 -inch inside diameter. The samples were obtained by driving the sampler with a 140 -pound downhole hammer dropping 30 inches in general accordance with ASTM D 1586. Recovered soil samples were sealed in containers and returned to the laboratory. Bulk samples were also obtained from auger cuttings, representing a mixture of soils encountered at the depths noted. The final logs of the borings represent our interpretation of the contents sof the field logs and the results of laboratory testing performed on the samples obtained during the subsurface investigation. The final logs are included in Appendix A of this report. The stratification lines represent the approximate boundaries between soil types although the transitions, however, may be gradational. ' CPT Soundings: Subsurface exploration was supplemented on Augus-. 28, 2000, using Fugro, Inc. of Santa_ Fe Springs, California to advance four electric cone penetrometer (CPT) soundings to an approximate depth of 50 feet. The soundings were made at the approximate locations shown on the Site Exploration Plan, Figure 2, in Appendix A. CPT soundings provide a nearly continuous profile of the soil stratigraphy with readings every 5 cm (2 inch) in depth. Direct sampling for visual and physical confirmation of soil properties is generally recommended with CPT exploration in large geographical regions. The author of this ID report has generally confirmed accuracy of CPT interpretations from extensive work at numerous Imperial and Coachella Valley sites. ' The CPT exploration was conducted by hydraulically advancing an instrument 10 cm' conical probe into the ground at a ground rate of 2 cm per second using a 23 -ton truck as a reaction mass. An electronic data acquisition system recorded a nearly continuous log of the resistance of the ' soil against .the cone tip (Qc) and soil friction against the cone sleeve (Fs) as the probe was advanced. Empirical relationships (Robertson and Campanella, 1989) were applied to the data to give a nearly continuous profile of the soil stratigraphy. Interpretation of CPT data provides ' correlations for SPT blow count, phi (0) angle (soil friction angle), ul_imate shear strength (Su) of clays, and soil type. EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST September 22, 2000 -5 - File No.: 07117-10 ' 00-09-772 Interpretive logs of the CPT soundings are presented in Appendix A of this report. The ' stratification lines shown on the subsurface logs represent the approximate boundaries between the various strata. However, the transition from one stratum to another may be gradational. 2.2 Laboratory Testing ' Samples were reviewed along with field logs to select those that would be analyzed further. Those selected for laboratory testing include soils that would be exposed and used during grading, and those deemed to be within the influence of the proposed structure. Test results are 1 presented in graphic and tabular form in Appendix B of this report. The .ests were conducted in general accordance with the procedures of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) or other standardized methods as referenced below. Our testing program consisted of ' the following: r> In-situ Moisture Content and Unit Dry Weight for the ring samples (ASTM D 2937). ' > Maximum density tests were performed to evaluate the moisture -density relationship of typical soils encountered (ASTM D 1557-91). ' ➢ Particle Size Analysis (ASTM D 422) to classify and evaluate soil composition. The gradation characteristics of selected samples were made by hydrometer and sieve analysis procedures. i Consolidation (Collapse Potential) (ASTM D 2435 and D5333) to evaluate the compressibility and hydroconsolidation (collapse) potential of the soil. I ➢ Liquid and Plastic Limits tests to evaluate the plasticity and ex?ansive nature of clayey soils. ' ➢ Chemical Analyses (Soluble Sulfates & Chlorides, pH, and Electrical Resistivity) to evaluate the potential adverse effects of the soil on concrete and steel. 11 EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST 1 September 22, 2000 - 6 - File No.: 07117-10 00-09-772 Section 3 DISCUSSION 1.1 Soil Conditions Me field exploration indicates that site soils consist primarily of an upper layer of silty sand to sandy silt soils (Unified Soil Classification Symbols of SM and ML). These soils are loose to medium dense. At depths greater than 5 feet, layers of clayey silt soils and some layers of sand were encountered. ' The boring and CPT logs provided in Appendix A include more detailed descriptions of the soils encountered. The upper soils are visually classified to be in the very low- expansion category in accordance with Table 18A -I -B of the Uniform Building Code. Clayey s.lt soils are expected to be in the low expansion category. In and climatic regions, granular soils may have a potential to collapse upon wetting. Collapse (hydroconsolidation) may occur when the soluble cements (carbonates) in the soil matrix dissolve, causing the soil to densify from its loose configuration from deFosition. Consolidation ' tests indicate 1 to 3% collapse upon inundation and is considered a slight to moderate site risk. The hydroconsolidation potential is commonly mitigated by recompaction of a zone beneath building pads. The site lies within a recognized blow sand hazard area. Fine particu.ate matter (PMio) can create an air quality hazard if dust is blowing. Watering the surface, planting grass or ' landscaping, or hardscape normally mitigates this hazard. 3.2 Groundwater Free groundwater was not encountered in the borings or CPT soundings during exploration. The depth to groundwater in the area is believed to be about 69 feet based on 1999 water well data ' obtained for the well. near the former Colchest Ranch house from the Coachella Valley Water District. Groundwater levels may fluctuate with, irrigation, drainage, regional pumping from wells, and site grading. The development of perched groundwater is passible over clayey soil ' layers with heavy irrigation. 3.3 Geologic Setting ' Regional Geology: The site lies within the Coachella Valley, apart of the Colorado 'Desert geomorphic province. A significant feature within the Colorado Desert geomorphic province is ' the Salton Trough. The Salton Trough is a large northwest -trending structural depression that extends from San Gorgonio Pass, approximately 180 miles to the Gulf cf California. Much of this depression in the area of the Salton Sea is below sea level. The Coachella Valley forms the northerly portion of the Salton Trough. The Coachella Valley ' contains a thick sequence of sedimentary deposits that are Miocene to recent in age. Mountains surrounding the Coachella Valley include the Little San Bernardino Mouatains on the northeast, foothills of the San Bernardino Mountains on the northwest, and the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains on the southwest. These mountains expose primarily Precam3rian metamorphic and EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST September 22, 2000 - 7 - File No.: 07117-10 00-09-772 Mesozoic granitic rocks. The San Andreas Fault zone within the Coachella Valley consists of ' the Garnet Hill Fault, the Banning Fault, and the Mission Creek Fault :hat traverse along the northeast margin of the valley. ' Local Geology: The project site is located within'the lower portion of the Coachella Valley. The tipper sediments within the lower valley consist of fine to coarse-grained sands with interbedded clays and silts, of aeolian (wind-blown), and alluvial (water -laid) origin. 3.4 Geologic Hazards Geologic hazards that may affect the region include seismic hazards (surface fault rupture, ground shaking, soil liquefaction, and other secondary earthquake -related hazards), slope instability, flooding, ground subsidence, and erosion. A discussion follows on the specific hazards to this site. 3.4.1 Seismic Hazards Seismic Sources: Our research of regional faulting indicates that several active faults or seis � g mic zones lie within 62 miles (100 kilometers) of the project site as shown on Table 1 in Appendix A. The primary seismic hazard to the site is strong groundshaking from earthquakes along the San Andreas and San Jacinto Faults. The Maximum Magnitude Earthquake (MmaX) listed is from published geologic information available for each fault (CDMG, 1996). The Mme corresponds to the maximum earthquake believed to be tectonically possible. ' Surface Fault Rupture: The project site does not lie within a currently delineated State of California, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (Hart, 1994). Well -delineated fault lines cross through this region as shown on California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG) maps (Jennings, 1994). Therefore, active fault rupture is unlikely to occur at the project site. While fault rupture would most likely occur along previously established fault traces, future fault rupture could occur at other locations. ' Historic Seismicity: Six historic seismic events (5.9 M or greater) have significantly affected the Coachella Valley this century. They are as follows: ' Desert Hot Springs Earthquake - On December 4, 1948, a magnitude 6.5 ML (6.OMW) earthquake occurred east of Desert Hot Springs. This event was strongly felt in the Palma Springs area. ' Palm Springs Earthquake - A magnitude 5.9 ML (UMW) earthquake occurred on July 8, 1986 in the Painted Hills causing minor surface creep of the Banning segment of the San Andreas Fault. This event was strongly felt in the Palm Springs area and caused structural damage, as well as injuries. ' Joshua Tree Earthquake - On April 22, 1992, a magnitude 6.1 ML (6.1Mw) earthquake occurred in the mountains 9 miles east of Desert Hot Springs. Structural damage and mirior injuries occurred in the Palm Springs area as a result of this earthquake. ' Landers & Big Bear Earthquakes - Early on June 28, 1992, a magnitude 7.5 Ms (7.3MW) earthquake occurred near Landers, the largest seismic event in Southern California for L0 years. Surface rupture occurred just south of the town of Yucca Valley and extended some 43 mile:. toward Barstow. About ' three hours later, a magnitude 6.6 Ms (6AMw) earthquake occurred near Big Bear Lake. No significant structural damage from these earthquakes was reported in the Pal -.-n Springs area. EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST 1 September 22, 2000 - 8 - File No.: 0 7117- 10 ' 00-09-772 Hector Mine Earthquake - On October 16, 1999, a magnitude 7.1Mw earthquake occurred on the ' Lavic Lake and Bullion Mountain Faults north of 29 Palms. This event while widely felt, no significant structural damage has been reported in the Coachella Valley. ' Seismic Risk: While accurate earthquake predictions are not possible, various agencies have conducted statistical risk analyses. In 1996, the California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG) and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) completed the latest generation of probabilistic seismic hazard maps for use in the 1997 UBC. We have used these maps in our evaluation of the seismic risk at the site... The Working Group of California Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP, 1995) estimated a 22% conditional probability that a magnitude 7 or greater earthquake may occur between 1994 to 2024 along the Coachella segment of the San Andreas Fault. The primary seismic risk at the site is a potential earthquake along the San Andreas Fault. Geologists believe that the San Andreas Fault has characteristic earthquakes that result from ' rapture of each fault segment. The estimated characteristic earthquake is magnitude 7.4 for the Southern Segment of the fault. This segment has the longest elapsed time since rupture than any other portion of the San Andreas Fault. The last rupture occurred about 1690 AD, based on dating by the USGS near Indio (WGCEP, 1995). This segment has also ruptured on about 1020, 1300, and 1450 AD, with an average recurrence interval of about 220 years. The San Andreas fault may rupture in multiple segments producing a higher magnitude earthquake. Recent ' paleoseismic studies suggest that the San Bernardino Mountain Segment to the north and the Coachella Segment may have both ruptured together in 1450 and 1690 AD (WGCEP, 1995). ' 3.4.2 Secondary Hazards Secondary seismic hazards related to ground shaking include soil liquefaction, ground ' deformation, areal subsidence, tsunamis, and seiches. The site is far inland so the hazard from tsunamis is non-existent. At the present time, no water storage reservoirs are located in the immediate vicinity of the site. Therefore, hazards from seiches are considered negligible at this ' time. Soil Liquefaction: Liquefaction is the loss of soil strength from sudden shock (usually ' earthquake shaking), causing the soil to become a fluid mass. In general, for the effects of liquefaction to be manifested at the surface, groundwater levels must be within 50 feet of the ground surface and the soils within the saturated zone must also be susceptible to liquefaction. ' The potential for liquefaction to occur at this site is considered low because the depth of groundwater beneath the site exceeds 50 feet. No free groundwater was encountered in our ' exploratory borings or CPT Soundings. Only the extreme southeastern part of the Phase 1 area lies within the Riverside County liquefaction study zone. ' Ground Deformation and Subsidence: Non -tectonic ground deformation consists of cracking of the ground with little to no displacement. This type of deformation is generally associated with differential shaking of two or more geologic units with differing engineering characteristics. ' Ground deformation may also be caused by liquefaction. As the site is relatively flat with consistent geologic material, and has a low potential for liquefaction, the potential for ground deformation is also considered to be low. EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST September 22, 2000 - 9- File No.: 07117-10 '00-09-772 The potential for seismically induced ground subsidence is considered to be moderate at the site. ' Dry sands tend to settle and densify when subjected to strong earthquake shaking. The amount of subsidence is dependent on relative density of the soil, groundshaking (cyclic shear strain), and earthquake duration (number of strain, cycles). Uncompacted fill areas may be susceptible to ' seismically induced settlement. Slope Instability: The site is currently relatively flat. Mass -grading will -eshape the topography ' so that slopes are as high as 20 to 30 feet with up to 2:1 (horizontal: vertical) inclination will exist. Therefore, potential hazards from slope instability, landslides., or debris flows are I considered negligible to low. Flooding: The project site does not lie within a designated FEMA 100 -year flood plane. The ' project site may be in an area where sheet flooding and erosion (especially on slopes) could occur. Significant grade changes are proposed for the site. Appropriate project design, construction, and maintenance can minimize the site sheet flooding potential. ' 3.4.3 Site Acceleration and UBC Seismic Coefficients ' Site Acceleration: The potential intensity of ground motion may be estimated the horizontal peak ground acceleration (PGA), measured in "g" forces. Included in Table 1 are deterministic estimates of site acceleration from possible earthquakes at nearby faults. Ground motions are ' dependent primarily on the earthquake magnitude and distance to the seis:nogenic (rupture) zone. Accelerations also are dependent upon attenuation by rock and soil deposits, direction of rupture, and type of fault. For these reasons, ground motions may vary considerably in the same general ' area. This variability can be expressed statistically by a standard deviation about a mean relationship. The PGA is an inconsistent scaling factor to compare to the UBC Z facto- and is generally a poor indicator of potential structural damage during an earthquake. Important factors influencing the structural performance are the duration and frequency of strong ground motion, local subsurface ' conditions, soil -structure interaction, and structural details. Because of these factors, an effective peak acceleration (EPA) is used in structural design. ' The following table provides the probabilistic estimate of the PGA and EPA taken from the 1996 CDMG/USGS seismic hazard maps. EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST 11 September 22, 2000 -10- Estimate of PGA and EPA from 1996 CDMG/USGS Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Maps File No.: 07117-10 00-09=772 Risk Equivalent Return Period (years) PGA (g) I Approximate EPA g) Z 10% exceedance in 50 years 475 0.49 0.45 Notes: 1. Based on a soft rock site, SBic and soil amplification factor of 1.0 for So -.1 Profile Type So. 2. Spectral acceleration (SA) at period of 0.3 seconds divided by 2.5 for 50/a damping, as defined by the Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC, 1996). 1997 UBC Seismic Coefficients: The Uniform Building Code (UBC) seismic design are based on a Design Basis Earthquake (DBE) that has an earthquake g-ound motion with a 10% probability of occurrence in 50 years. The PGA and EPA estimates given above are ' provided for information on the seismic risk inherent in the UBC design. The following lists the seismic and site coefficients given in Chapter 16 of the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC). ' 1997 UBC Seismic Coefficients for Chapter 16 Seismic Provisions ' Seismic Zone: 4 Reference Figure 16-2 Seismic Zone Factor, Z: 0.4 Table 16-I Soil Profile Type: So Table 16-J ' Seismic Source Type: A Table 16-U Closest Distance to Known Seismic Source: 9.8 km = 6.1 miles (San Andreas Fault) Near Source Factor, Na: 1.01 Table 16-S Near Source Factor, Nv: 1.22 Table 16-T Seismic Coefficient, Ca: 0.44 = 0.44Na Table 16-Q ' Seismic Coefficient, Cv: 0.78 = 0.64Nv Table 16-R Seismic Zoning: The Seismic Safety Element of the 1984 Riverside County General Plan ' establishes groundshaking hazard zones. The majority of the project arra is mapped in Ground Shaking Zone IIB. Ground Shaking Zones are based on distance from causative faults and ' underlying soil types. The site does not lie within the Liquefaction Hazard area established by this Seismic Safety Element. These groundshaking hazard zones are used in deciding suitability of land use. 2000 LBC Seismic Coefficients: For comparative purposes, the newly released 2000 International Building Code (IBC) seismic and site coefficients are given in Appendix A. As of ' the issuance of this report, we are unaware when governing jurisdictions may adopt or modify the 1BC provisions. EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST i . 1 September 22, 2000 - 11 - File No.; 07117-10 00-09-772 Section 4 CONCLUSIONS The following is a summary of our conclusions and professional opinions. based on the data obtained from a review of selected technical literature and the site evaluati Dn. ' The primary geologic hazard relative to site development is severe ground shaking from earthquakes originating on nearby faults. In our opinion, a major seismic event originating on the local segment of the San Andreas Fault zone would be the most likely cause of significant earthquake activity at the site within the estimated design life of the proposed development. The project site is in seismic Zone 4 as defined in the Uniform Building Code. A ' qualified professional who is aware of the site seismic setting should design any permanent structure constructed on the site. ' ➢ Ground subsidence from seismic events or hydroconsolidation is a potential hazard in the Coachella Valley area. Adherence to the following grading and structural ' recommendations should reduce potential settlement problems from seismic forces, heavy rainfall or irrigation, flooding, and the weight of the intended structures. The soils are susceptible to wind and water erosion. Preventative measures to minimize seasonal flooding and erosion should be incorporated into site grading plans. Dust control should also be implemented during construction. ' Other geologic hazards including ground rupture, liquefaction, seismically induced flooding, and landslides are considered low or negligible on this site. ' > The upper soils were found to be relatively loose to medium dense silty sand to sandy silt overlying layers of clayey soils. In our opinion, the soils within building and structural ' areas will require over excavation and recompaction to improve bearing capacity and reduce settlement from static loading. Soils should be readily cut by normal grading equipment. :- Earth Systems Consultants Southwest (ESCSW) should provide geotechnical engineering services during project design, site development, excavation, grading, and foundation ' construction phases of the work. This is to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications, and recommendations, and to allow design changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the stF-rt of construction. ' Plans and specifications should be provided to ESCSWp a a rior to g- ding. Plans should include the grading plans, foundation plans, and foundation details. Preferably, structural ' loads should be shown on the foundation plans. EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST L JI September 22, 2000 - 12 - File No.: 07117-10 ' 00-09-772 Section ' RECOMMENDATIONS SITE DEVELOPMENT AND GRADING Site Development - Grading ' ;l representative of ESCSW should observe site grading and the bottom of excavations prior to placing fill. Local variations in soil conditions. may warrant increasing the depth of recompaction snd over -excavation. rl Clearing and Grubbing: Prior to site grading existing vegetation, trees, large roots, old structure, foundations, uncompacted fill, construction debris, trash, and abandoned underground utilities should be removed from the proposed building, structural, and pavement areas. The surface should be stripped of organic growth and removed from the construction area. Areas disturbed during demolition and clearing should be properly backfilled and compacted as described below. Non-structural (golf course) areas may be used as disposal areas for resulting debris as designated clearly on grading plans and approved by project owner, engineers and governing. jurisdictions. Building Pad Preparation: Because of the non-uniform and under -compacted nature of the site soils, we recommend recompaction of soils in the building and structural areas. The existing surface soils within the building pad and structural areas should be over -excavated to 30 inches below existing grade or a minimum of 24 inches below the footing level (whichever is lower). The over -excavation should extend for 5 feet beyond the outer edge of exterior footings. The bottom of the sub -excavation should be scarified; moisture conditioned, and recompacted to at least 90 % relative compaction (ASTM D 1557) for an additional depth of 12 inches. Moisture penetration to near optimum moisture should extend at least 5 feet below existing grade and be verified by testing. These recommendations are intended to provide a minimum of 48 and 36 inches of moisture conditioned and compacted soil beneath the floor slabs and footings, respectively. Auxiliary Structure Subgrade Preparation: Auxiliary structures such as garden or retaining walls should have the subgrade prepared similar to the building pad preparation recommendation given above. Except the lateral extent of the overexcavation need only to extend 2 feet beyond the face of the footing. Settlement Monitors: In areas where fill depths are greater than 10 feet above existing grade, we recommend the placement of settlement monitors (one for each general area) to monitor the post - grading settlement of the fill and underlying soils. Compression of the deep seated clayey soil may occur after grading, but is expected to stabilize relatively soon thereafter. Monitoring allows the geotechnical engineer to evaluate the movement (if any) and its potential impact on construction. Subarade Preparation: In areas to receive non-structural fill, pavements, or hardscape, the ground surface should be scarified; moisture conditioned, and compacted to at least 90% relative compaction (ASTM D 1557) for a depth of 24 inches below subgrade. Compaction should be verified by testing. EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST September 22, 2000 - 13 - File No.: 07117-10 00-09-772 Engineered Fill Soils: The native sand, silty sand, and sandy silt soil is suitable for use as engineered fill and utility trench backfill. The native soil should be placed in maximum 8 -inch Efts (loose) and compacted to at least 90% relative compaction (AS—_m D 1557) near its optimum moisture content. Compaction_ should be verified by testing. Clayey silt soils where encountered at depths generally below 8 -foot .depth ire less desirable soils nd should not be placed within the upper 3 feet of finished subgrades for building pads or streets. Imported fill soils (if required) should be non -expansive, granular soils meeting the USCS classifications of SM, SP -SM, or SW -SM with a maximum rock size of 3 inches and i to 35% passing the No. 200 sieve. The geotechnical engineer should evaluate the import fill soils before hauling to the site. However, because of the potential variaticns within the borrow source, import soil will not prequalified by ESCSW. The imported fill should be placed in lifts 0o greater than 8 inches in loose thickness and compacted to at least 90% relative compaction 1 (ASTM D 1557) near optimum moisture content. Shrinkage: The shrinkage factor for earthwork is expected to variably range from 5 to 20 percent br the majority of the excavated or scarified soils, but in the clayey soil3 and upper 4 feet of ' some areas it may range from 50°/ . This estimate is based on compa:tive effort to achieve an average relative compaction of about 92% and may vary with contractor methods. Subsidence is estimated to range from 0.1 to 0.3 feet. Losses from site clearing and removal of existing site improvements may affect earthwork quantity calculations and should be considered. Site Draina_g : Positive drainage should be maintained away from the strictures (5% for 5 feet minimum) to prevent ponding and subsequent saturation of the foundation soils. Gutters and downspouts should be considered as a means to convey water away from foundations if adequate ' drainage is not provided. Drainage should be maintained for paved areas. Water should not pond on or near paved areas. 5.2 Excavations and Utility Trenches Excavations should be made in accordance with CalOSHA requirements. Our site exploration ' and knowledge of the general area indicates there is a potential for caving of site excavations (utilities, footings, etc.). Excavations within sandy soil should be kept moist, but not saturated, to reduce the potential of caving or sloughing. Where deep excavations over 4 feet deep are planned, lateral bracing or appropriate cut slopes of 1.5:1 (horizonta=: vertical) should be provided. No surcharge loads from stockpiled soils or construction materials should be allowed within a horizontal distance measured from the top of the excavation slope; equal to the depth of the excavation. ' Utility Trenches: Backfill of utilities within road or public right-of-ways should be placed in conformance with the requirements of the governing agency (water district, public works department, etc.) Utility trench backfill within private property shouldbe placed in conformance with the provisions of this report. In general, service lines extending inside of property may be backfilled with native soils compacted to a minimum of 90°X0 relative compaction. Backfill operations should be observed and tested to monitor compliance with these recommendations. EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST September 22, 2000 -14- File No.: 07117-10 ' 00-09-772 0 Slope Stability of Graded Slopes Unprotected, permanent graded slopes should not be steeper thar.3:1 (iorizontal:vertical) to seduce wind and rain erosion. Protected slopes with ground cover may be as steep as 2:1. Towever, maintenance with motorized equipment may not be possible at this inclination. Fill slopes should be overfilled and trimmed back to competent material. Where slopes heights exceed 20 feet, with 2:1 (horizontal: vertical) slopes, post -construction engineering calculations ' should be performed to evaluate the stability using shear strength values obtained from soils composing the slopes. Erosion control measures should be considered for slopes steeper than 3:1 intil the final ground cover (i.e., grass turf) is established. STRUCTURES ' h our professional opinion, the structure foundation can be supported on shallow foundations bearing on, a zone of properly prepared and compacted soils placed as recommended in Section 5.1. The recommendations that follow are based on very low expansion category soils with the upper 3 feet of subgrade. 5.4 Foundations Footing design of widths, depths, and reinforcing are the responsibility of the Structural Engineer, considering the structural loading and the geotechnical parameters given in this report. a minimum footing depth of 12 inches below lowest adjacent grade should be maintained. A representative of ESCSW should observe foundation excavations prior to placement of reinforcing steel or concrete. Any loose soil or construction debris should be removed from footing excavations prior to placement of concrete. Conventional Spread Foundations: Allowable soil bearing pressures are given below for foundations bearing on recompacted soils as described in Section 5.1. Allowable bearing pressures are net (weight of footing and soil surcharge may be neglected). D Continuous wall foundations, 12 -inch minimum width and 12 inches below grade: 1500 psf for dead plus design live loads Allowable increases of 300 psf per each foot of additional footing width and 300 psf for each additional 0.5 foot of footing depth may be used up to a maximum value of 3000 psf. ➢ Isolated pad foundations, 2 x 2 foot minimum in plan and 18 inches below grade: 2000 psf for dead plus design. live loads Allowable increases of 200 psf per each foot of additional footing width and 400 psf for each additional 0.5 foot of footing depth may be used up to a maximum value of 3000 psf. ' A one-third (1/3) increase in the bearing pressure may be used when _calculating resistance to wind or seismic loads. The allowable bearing values indicated are based on the anticipated maximum loads stated in Section 1.1 of this report. If the anticipated loads exceed these values, the geotechnical engineer must reevaluate the allowable bearing values and the grading requirements. EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST September 22, 2000 -15 - File No.: 07117-10 00-09-772 Minimum reipforcement for continuous wall footings should be two, No. 4 steel reinforcing bars, y placed near t4e top and the bottom of the footing. This reinforcing is not intended to supersede any structural requirements provided by the structural engineer. ' Expected Settlement: Estimated total static settlement, based on footings founded on firm soils as recommended, should be less than 1 inch. Differential settlement between exterior and interior bearing members should be less than 1/2 -inch. Frictional and Lateral Coefficients: Lateral loads may be resisted by soil friction on the base of Foundations and by passive resistance of the soils acting on foundation walls. An allowable Lcoefficient of friction of 0.35 of dead load may be used. An allowable passive equivalent fluid pressure of 250 pcf may also be used. These values include a factor of safety of 1.5. Passive resistance and frictional resistance may be used in combination if the friction coefficient is ' reduced to 0.23 of dead load forces. A one-third (1/3) increase in the passive pressure may be used when calculating resistance to wind or seismic loads. Lateral passive resistance is based on the assumption that any required backfill adjacent to foundations is properly compacted. I 5.5 Slabs -on -Grade SubQrade: Concrete slabs -on -grade and flatwork should be supported by compacted soil placed in accordance with Section 5.1 of this report. Vapor Barrier: In areas of moisture sensitive floor coverings, an appropriate vapor barrier should be installed to reduce moisture transmission from the subgrade soil to the slab. For these areas ' an impermeable membrane (10 -mil moisture barrier) should underlie the floor slabs. The membrane should be covered with 2 inches of sand to help protect it during construction and to aide in concrete curing. The sand should be lightly moistened just prior to placing the concrete. Low -slump concrete should be used to help reduce the potential for concrete shrinkage. The effectiveness of the moisture barrier is dependent upon its quality, method of overlapping, its protection during construction, and the successful sealing of the barrier around utility lines. Slab thickness and reinforcement: Slab thickness and reinforcement of slab -on -grade are contingent on the recommendations of the structural engineer or architect and the expansion index of the supporting soil. Based upon our findings, a modulus of subgrade reaction of - approximately 200 pounds per cubic inch can be used in concrete slab design for the expected very low expansion subgrade.. Concrete slabs and flatwork should be a minimum of 4 inches thick. We suggest that the concrete slabs be reinforced, as specified by the project structural engineer, to resist cracking. Concrete floor slabs may either be monolithically placed with the foundations or doweled after footing placement. The thickness and reinforcing given are not intended to supersede any structural requirements provided by the structural engineer. The project architect or geotechnical engineer should observe all reinforcing steel in slabs during placement of concrete to check for proper location within the slab. Control Joints: Control joints should be provided in all concrete slabs -on -grade at a maximum spacing of 36 times the slab thickness (12 feet maximum on -center, each way) as recommended by American Concrete Institute (ACI) guidelines. All joints should form approximately square EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST t v 1 September 22, 2000 - 16- File No.: 07117-10 00-09-772 patterns to reduce the potential for randomly oriented, contraction cracks. Contraction joints in the slabs should be tooled at the time of the pour or saw cut (1/4 of slab depth) within 8 hours of concrete placement. Construction (cold) joints should consist of thickened butt joints with one- half inch dowels at 18 -inches on center or a thickened keyed joint to resist vertical deflection at the joint. All construction joints in exterior flatwork should be sealed to reduce the potential of moisture or foreign material intrusion. These procedures will reduce the potential for randomly oriented cracks, but may not prevent them from occurring. Curing and Ouality Control: The contractor should take precautions to reduce the potential of curling of slabs in this and desert region using proper batching, placement, and curing methods. Curing is highly effected by temperature, wind, and humidity. Quality control procedures may be used including trial batch mix designs, batch plant inspection, and on-site special inspection and testing. Typically, for this type of construction and using 25007psi concrete, many of these quality control procedures are not required. 5.6 Retaining Walls The following table presents lateral earth pressures for use in retaining wall design. The values are given as equivalent fluid pressures without surcharge loads or hydrostatic pressure. Lateral Pressures and Sliding Resistance Granular Backfill Passive Pressure 375 pcf -level ground Active Pressure (cantilever walls) 35 pcf - level ground Able to rotate 0. I% of structure height At -Rest Pressure restrained walls) 55 pcf - level ground Dynamic Lateral Earth Pressure' Acting at mid height of structure, 25H psf Where H is height of backfill in feet Base Lateral Sliding Resistance Dead load x Coefficient of Friction: 0.50 Notes: 1. These values are ultimate values. A factor of safety of 1.5 should be used in stability analysis except for dynamic earth pressure where a factor of safety of 1.2 is acceptable. 2. Dynarnic pressures are based on the Mononobe-Okabe 1929 method, additive to active earth pressure. Walls retaining less than 6 feet of soil need not consider this increased pressure. Upward sloping backfill or surcharge loads from nearby footings can create larger lateral pressures. Should any walls be considered for retaining sloped backfill or placed next to foundations, our office should be contacted for recommended design parameters. Surcharge loads should be considered if they exist within a zone between the face of the wall and a plane projected 45 degrees upward from the base of the wall. The increase in lateral earth pressure should be taken as 35% of the surcharge load within this zone. Retaining walls subjected to traffic loads should include a uniform surcharge load equivalent to at least 2 feet of native soil. Drainage: A backdrain or an equivalent system of backfill drainage should be incorporated into the retaining wall design. Our firm can provide construction details when the specific application is determined. Backfill immediately behind the retaining structure should be a free -draining EARTH. SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST n r t 1 1 t t 1, t 1 'I September 22, 2000 - 17- File No.: 07117-10 00-09-772 granular material. Waterproofing should be according to the Architect's specifications. Water should not be allowed to pond near the top of the wall. To accomplish this, the final backfill ;rade should be such that all water is diverted away from the retaining wall. Backfill Compaction: Compaction on the retained side of the wall within a horizontal distance equal to one wall height should be performed by hand -operated or other 1_ghtweight compaction equipment. This is intended to reduce potential locked -in lateral pressures caused by compaction with heavy grading equipment. Footing Submade Preparation: The subgrade for footings should be prepared according to the auxiliary structure subgrade preparation given in Section 5.1. 5.7 Mitigation of Soil Corrosivity on Concrete Selected chemical analyses for corrosivity were conducted on samples at the low chloride ion concentration. Sulfate ions can attack the cementitious material in concrete, causing weakening Df the cement matrix and eventual deterioration by raveling. Chloride ions can cause corrosion of reinforcing steel. The Uniform Building Code does not require any special provisions for concrete for these low concentrations as tested. However, excavated soils from mass -grading may have higher sulfate and chloride ion concentrations. Additional soil :heroical testing should be conducted on the building pad soils after mass -grading. A minimum concrete cover of three (3) inches should be provided around steel reinforcing or embedded components exposed to native soil or landscape water (to 18 inches above grade). Additionally, the concrete should be thoroughly vibrated during placement. Electrical resistivity testing of the soil suggests that the site soils may present a moderately severe potential for metal loss from electrochemical corrosion processes. Corrosion protection of steel can be achieved by using epoxy corrosion inhibitors, asphalt coatings, cathodic protection, or encapsulating with densely consolidated concrete. A qualified corrosion engineer should be consulted regarding mitigation of the corrosive effects of site soils -on meals. 5.8 Seismic Design Criteria This site is subject to strong ground shaking due to potential faub. movements along the San Andreas and San Jacinto Faults. Engineered design and earthquake -resistant construction increase safety and allow development of seismic areas. The mininzum seismic design should comply with the latest edition of the Uniform Building Code for Seismic Zone 4 using the seismic coefficients given in Section 3.4.3 of this report. The UBC seismic coefficients are based on scientific knowledge, engineering judgment, and compromise. Factors that play an important role in dynamic structural p:rformance are: (1) Effective peak acceleration (EPA), (2) Duration and predominant frequency of strong ground motion, (3) Period of motion of the structure, (4) Soil -structure interaction, EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST September 22, 2000 -18 - File No.: 07117-10 1 00-09-772 (5) Total resistance capacity of the system, 1 (6) Redundancies, (7). Inelastic load -deformation behavior, and (8) Modification of damping and effective period as structures behave inelastically. Factors 5 to 8 are included in the structural ductility factor (R) that is used in deriving a reduced rdlue for design base shear. If further. information on seismic design is needed, a site-specific ' probabilistic seismic analysis should be conducted. i 1 The intent of the UBC lateral force requirements is to provide a structural design that will resist collapse to provide reasonable life safety from a major earthquake, but may experience some structural and nonstructural damage. A fundamental tenet of seismic d --sign is that inelastic yielding is allowed to adapt to the seismic demand on the structure. In other words, damage is allowed. The UBC lateral force requirements should be considered a minimum design. The owner and the designer should evaluate the level of risk and performance that is acceptable. Performance based criteria could be set in the design. The design engineer has the responsibility to interpret and adapt the principles of seismic behavior and design tc each structure using experience and sound judgment. The design engineer should exercise special care so that all components of the design are all fully met with attention to providing a continuous load path. An adequate quality assurance and control program is urged during project construction to verify that the design plans and good construction practices are followed. This is especially important for sites lying close to the major seismic sources. 5.9 Pavements Since no traffic loading were provided by the design engineer or owner, we have assumed traffic loading for comparative evaluation. The design engineer or owner should decide the appropriate traffic conditions for the pavements. Maintenance of proper drainage is necessary to prolong the service life of the pavements. Water should not pond on or near paved areas. The following table provides our recommendations for pavement sections. EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST September 22, 2000 -19- RECOMMENDED PAVEMENTS SECTIONS R -Value Subo-rade Soils - 40 (assumed) File No.: 07117-10 00-09-772 Desien Method — CALTRANS 1995 Traffic Index (Assumed) Pavement Use Flexible Pavements Rigid Pavements Asphaltic Concrete Thickness (Inches) Aggregate Base Thickness (Inches) Portland Cement Concrete (Inches) Aggregate Base Thickness (Inches) 4.0 Auto Parking Areas 2.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 Residential Streets 3.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 6.5 Collector Road 3.5 6.5 --- --- 7.5 Secondary Road 4.5 7.0 --- --- Notes: 1. Asphaltic concrete should be Caltrans, Type B, 1/2 -in. or 3/4 -in. maximum -medium grading and compacted to a minimum of 95% of the 75 -blow Marshall density (ASTM D 1559) or equivalent. 2. Aggregate base should be Caltrans Class 2 (3/4 in. maximum) and compacted to a minimum of 95% of ASTM D1557 maximum dry density near its optimum moisture. 3. All pavements should be placed on 12 inches of moisture -conditioned subgrade, compacted to a minimum of 90% of ASTM D 1557 maximum dry density near its optimum moisture. 4. Portland cement concrete should have a minimum of 3250 psi compressive strength @ 28 days. 5. Equivalent Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Greenbook) may be used instead of Caltrans specifications for asphaltic concrete and aggregate base. EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST September 22, 2000 - 20 - File No.: 07117-10 00-09-772 bection 6 LIMITATIONS AND ADDITIONAL SERVICES 6.1 Uniformity of Conditions and Limitations Dur findings and recommendations in' this report are based on selected points of field c�;ploration, laboratory testing, and our understanding of the proposed prof :ct. Furthermore, our findings and recommendations are based on the assumption that soil conditions do not vary significantly from those found at specific exploratory locations. Variations in soil or groundwater conditions could exist between and beyond the exploration points. The nature and actent of these variations may not become evident until construction. Variations in soil or groundwater may require additional studies, consultation, and possible revisions to our Irecommendations. Findings of this report are valid as of the issued date of the report. However, changes in conditions of a property can occur with passage of time whether they are from natural processes or works of man on this or adjoining properties. In addition, changes in applicable standards occur whether they result from legislation or broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of one year. 1 h the event that any changes in the nature, design, or location of structures are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed and conclusions of this report are modified or verified in writing. This report is issued with the understanding that the owner, or the owner's representative, has the responsibility to bring the information and recommendations contained herein to the attention of the architect and engineers for the project so that they are incorporated into the plans and specifications for the project. The owner, or the owner's representative, also has the responsibility to take the necessary steps to see that the general contractor and all subcontractors follow such recommendations. It is further understood that the owner or the owner's representative is responsible for submittal of this report to the appropriate governing agencies. As the Geotechnical Engineer of Record for this project, Earth Systems Consultants Southwest (ESCSW) has striven to provide our services in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in this locality at this time. No warranty or guarantee is express or implied. This report was prepared for the exclusive use of the Client and the Client s authorized agents. ESCSW should be provided the opportunity for a general review of final design and ' specifications in order that earthwork and foundation recommendat.ons may be properly interpreted and implemented in the design and specifications. If ESCSW is not accorded the 1 privilege of making this recommended review, we can assume no responsibility for misinterpretation of our recommendations. Although available through ESCSW, the current scope of our services does not include an environmental assessment, or investigation for the presence or absence of wetlands, hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, surface water, groundwater or air on, below, of adjacent to the subject property. EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST September 22, 2000 -21- File No.: 07117-10 00-09-772 i L2 Additional Services ■ This report is based on the assumption that an adequate program of client consultation, construction monitoring, and testing will, be performed during the final design and construction ' phases to check compliance with these recommendations. Maintaining ESCSW as the geotechnical consultant from beginning to end of the project will provide continuity of services. Phe geotechnical engineering firm providing tests and observations shall assume the ' responsibility of Geotechnical Engineer of Record. Construction monitoring and testing would be additional services provided by our firm. The ' costs of these services are not included in.our present fee arrangements, but can be obtained from our office. The recommended review, tests, and observations include, but are not necessarily limited to the following: 10 Consultation during the final design stages of the project. • Review of the building and grading plans to observe that recommendations of our report have been properly implemented into the design. ' • Observation and testing during site preparation, grading and placement of engineered fill as required by UBC Sections 1701 and 3317 or local grading ordinances. • Consultation as required during construction. 1 -000- ' Appendices as cited are attached and complete this report. 1 1 EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST September 22, 2000 - 22 - File No.: 07117-10 00-09-772 REFERENCES Abrahamson, N., and Shedlock, K., editors, 1997, Ground motion attenuation relationships: Seismological Research Letters, v..68, no. 1, January 1997 special issue, 256 p. ' Blake, B.F., 1998a, FRISKSP v. 3.01b, A Computer Program for the Probabilistic Estimation of Peak Acceleration and Uniform Hazard Spectra Using 3-D Faults zs Earthquake Sources, Users Manual, 191 p. Blake, B.F., 1998b, Preliminary Fault -Data for EQFAULT and FRISKSP, 71 p. Boore, D.M., Joyner, W.B., and Fumal, T.E., 1993, Estimation of Response Spectra and Peak Accelerations from Western North American Earthquakes: An Interim Report; U.S. 1 Geological Survey Open -File Report 93-509, 15 p. Boore, D.M., Joyner, W.B., and Fumal, T.E., 1994, Estimation of Response Spectra and Peak ' Acceleration from Western North American Earthquakes: An Interim Report, Part 2, U.S. Geological Survey Open -File Report 94-127. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology: Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Special Publication 1.7, and WWW Version. 1 Envicom, Riverside County, 1976, Seismic Safety Element. Ellsworth, W.L., 1990, "Earthquake History, 1769-1989 in: The San Andreas Fault System, California: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1515, 283 p. Hart, E.W., and 1994 rev., Fault -Rupture Hazard Zones in California: California Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42, 34 p.. international Conference of Building Officials, 1997, Uniform Building Code, 1997 Edition. ' International Conference of Building Officials, 2000, International Building Code, 2000 Edition. Jennings, C.W, 1994, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas: California Division of Mines and Geology, Geological Data Map No. 6, scale 1:750,000. Joyner, W.B., and Boore, D.M., 1994, Prediction of Ground Motion in North America, in Proceedings of ATC -35 Seminar on New Developments in Earthquake Ground Motion Estimation and Implications for Engineering Design Practice, Applied Technology Council, 1994. Petersen, M.D., Bryant, W.A., Cramer, C.H., Cao, T., Reichle, M.S., Frankel, A.D., Leinkaemper, J.J., McCrory, P.A., and Schwarz, D.P., 1996, Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State of California: California Division of Mines and Geology Open -File Report 96-08, '59 p Proctor, Richard J. (1968), Geology of the Desert Hot Springs - Uppes Coachella Valley Area, California Division of Mines and Geology, DMG Special Report 94. EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST September 22, 2000 -23- File No.: 07117-10 00-09-772 Riverside County (1984), Seismic Safety Element of the Riverside County General Plan, Amended. IRogers, T.H., 1966, Geologic Map of California - Santa Ana Sheet, California Division of Mines .and Geology Regional Map Series, scale 1:250,000. Seed, H.B. and Idriss, I.M., 1982, Ground Motions and Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes. ' Sieh, K., Stuiver, M., and Brillinger, D., 1989, A More Precise Chronology of Earthquakes Produced by the San Andreas Fault. in Southern California: Journal of Geophysical Research,'Vol. 94, No. B1; January 10, 1989, pp..603-623. 1 Sieh, Kerry, 1985, Earthquake Potentials Along The San Andreas Fault, Minutes of The National Earthquake Prediction Evaluation Council, March 29-30, 1985, USGS Open File Report 1 85-507. Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC), 1996, Recommended Lateral Force ' Requirements and Commentary. 7okimatsu, K, and Seed, H.B., 1987, Evaluation of Settlements in Sands Due To Earthquake Shaking, ASCE, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 113, No. 8, August 1987. Van de Kamp, P.C., 1973, Holocene Continental Sedimentation in the Salton Basin, California: A Reconnaissance, Geological Society of America, Vol. 84, March 1973. Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, 1995, Seismic Hazards in Southern iCalifornia: Probable. Earthquakes, 1994-2024: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 85, No. 2, pp. 379-439. ' Wallace, R. E., 1990, The San Andreas Fault System, California: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1515, 283 p. d EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST APPENDIX A Site Location Maps Boring Location Map Table 1 Fault Parameters ' 1997 Uniform Building Code Seismic Parameters 2000. International Building Code Seismic Parameters Logs of Borings 1 . a l � 9c•�' 'iw O. Reference: La Quinta & Indio USGS Topographic Quadrangles Maps Figure 1 - Site Location Project Name: Country Club of the Desert Project No.: 07117-10 N Scale: 1” = 2,000' %kII Earth Systems Consultants 0 2,000 4,000 '�� Southwest 52nd Avenue LEGEND ® Approximate Boring or CPT Location Scale- 1" = 800 feet 0 800 1:600 54th Avenue Figure 2 - Exploration Locations Project Name: Country Club of the Desert Project No.: 07117-10 & Nix% Earth Systems Consultants Southwest --,1314 --B %i B9. -137 B8 5 LEGEND ® Approximate Boring or CPT Location Scale- 1" = 800 feet 0 800 1:600 54th Avenue Figure 2 - Exploration Locations Project Name: Country Club of the Desert Project No.: 07117-10 & Nix% Earth Systems Consultants Southwest CounC TYClub of the Desert 07117-10 ' Table 1 Fault Parameters & Deterministic Estimates of Mean Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) Fault Nane or SeiSnnictone Distance from Site (mi) (km) Fault Type UBC Maximum Magnitude Mmax (Mw) Avg Slip Rate (mmlyr) Avg Return Period (yrs) Faul: Length (km_ Date of Last Rupture (year) Largest Historic Event >53M (year) Mean Site PGA (g) Reference Notes: (1) (2) (3) (4) (2) (2) (2) l5) (6) San A_ndeas - Coachella Valley 6.1 9.8 SS A 7.1 25 220 95 c. 1690 0.36 San P ndeas - Southern (C V +S B M) 6.1 9.8 SS A 7.4 24 220 20" c. 1690 0.41 San A►ndeas - Mission Crk. Branch 7.8 12.6 SS A 7.1 25 220 95 6.5 1948 0.31 San andeas - Banning Branch 7.8 12.6 SS A 7.1 10 220 98- 6.2 1986 0.31 San J aceto (Hot Spgs - Buck Ridge) 16 26 SS C 6.5 2 354 70 6.3 1937 0.12 Blue Cut 16 26 SS C 6.8 1 760 30 - 0.14 San J aceto -Anza 20 33 SS A 7.2 12 250 90 1918 6.8 1918 0.15 Burnt Mountain 20 33 SS B 6.4 0.6 5000 20 1992 7.3 1992 0.09 San J acilto - Coyote Creek 21 34 SS B 6.8 4 175 40 1968 6.5 1968 0.11 Eureka Peak 21 34 SS B 6.4 0.6 5000 15 1992 6.1 1992 0.09 San P.ndeas - San Bernardino Mtn. 22 35 SS A 7.3 24' 433 10' 1812 7.0 -1812 0.15 Morongo 32 51 SS C 6.5 0.6 1170 23 5.5 1947 0.06 San J aceto - Borrego Mountain 33 53 SS B 6.6 4 175 29 1942 0.06 Pinto Mountain 33 53 SS B 7.0 2.5 500 72 -.6.5 0.08 Emerson So. - Copper Mtn. 34 54 SS B 6.9 0.6 5000 54 - 0.07 Pisga ti -Bullion Mtn. -Mesquite Lk 35 57 SS B 7.0 0.6 5000 8E 1999 7.1 1999 0.07 Landers 25 57 SS B 7.3 0.6 5000 8: 1992 7.3 1992 0.09 San J aceto -San Jacinto Valley 39 62 SS B 6.9 12 83 4� 6.8 1899 0.06 Brawl ey Seismic Zone 39 62 SS B 6.4 25 24 42. 5.9 1981 0.05 Earthquake Valley 39 62 SS B 6.5 2 351 2C 0.05 Elsinore- Julian 43 70 SS A 7.1 5 340 75 0.66 JohnsonValley (Northern) 46 74 SS B 6.7 0.6 5000 36; - 0.05 Elmore Ranch 47 75 SS B 6.6 1 225 29 1987 5.9 1987 0.04 North Frontal Fault Zone (East) 47 75 DS B 6.7 0.5 1730 27 0.05 Calico -Hidalgo 47 76 SS B 7.1 0.6 5000 95 0.06 Elsinore • Temecula 48 78 SS B 6.8 5 240 42 0.05 Eisinore•Coyote Mountain 49 79 SS B 6.8 4 625 38 0.05 San Jacinto - Superstition Mountain 51 81, SS B 6.6 5 500 23 c. 1440 - 0.04 San J acinto - Superstition Hills 51 83 SS B 6.6 4 250 22 1987 6.5 1987 0.04 Lenwood-Lockhart-Old Woman Spas 52 84 SS B 7.3 0.6 5000 1439 0.06 North Frontal Fault Zone (West) 59 95 DS B 7.0 1 1310 50 0.05 Helendale - S. Lockhardt 60 96 SS B 7.1 0.6 5000 97 0.04 San Jacinto -San Bernardino 61 99 SS B 6.7 12 100 3a 6.0 1923 0.03 ' rvu"es. 1. Jennings (1994) and CDMG (1996) 2. CDMG & USGS (1996), SS = Strike -Slip, DS = Dip Slip 3. ICBG (1997), where Type A faults: Mmax > 7 and slip rate >5 mm/yr &Type C faults: Mmax <6.5 and slip rate < 2 mm/yr ' 4. CDMG (1996) based on Wells & Coppersmith (1994), Mw = moment magnitude 5. Modiried from Ellsworth Catalog (1990) in USGS Professional Paper 1515 6. The estimates of the mean Site PGA are based on the following attenuation relationships: Average of: (1) 1997 Boore, Joyner & Fumal: (2) 1997 Sadigh et al; (3) 1997 Campbell ' (mean plus sigma values are about 1.6 times higher) Based on Site Coordinates: 33.671 N Latitude, 116.252 W Longtude and Site Soil Type D IEARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Project Name: Country Club of the Desert File No.: 07117-10 1997 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE (UBC) SEISMIC PARAMETERS EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST 1997 UBC Equivalent Static Response Spectrum Reference Seismic Zone: Sa (g) 4 Figure 16-2 Seismic Zone Factor: Z 0.4 Table 16-I Soil Profile Type: S D Table 16-J Seismic Source Type: A Table 16-U Closest Distance to Known Seismic Source: 1.0 9.8 km = 6.1 miles Near Source Factor: Na 1.01 Table 16-S Near Source Factor: Nv 1.22 Table 16-T Seismic Coefficient: Ca 0.44 = 0.44Na Table 16-Q Seismic Coefficient:: Cv 0.78 = 0.64Nv Table 16-R Closest Signficant Seismic Fault Source: San Andreas - Southern (C V +S B M) To: 0.14 sec Ts: 0.80 0.70 sec Seismic Importance Factor, I: 1.00 Table 16-K EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST 1997 UBC Equivalent Static Response Spectrum Period T (sec) Sa (g) 0.00 0.45 1.2 0.05 0.68 0.14 1.11 1.0 0.20 1.11 ^ 0.30 1.11 0.70 1.11 0.8 i 0.80 0.97 o 0.90 0.86 1.00 0.78 0.6 1.10 0.71 U ' ' ' ' + ` 1.20 0.65 Q i 1.30 0.60 0.4 1.40 0.56 U a 1.50 1.60 0.52 0.49 co 0.2 1.70 0.46 1.80 0.43 0.0 1.90 0.41 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.00 0.39 Period (sec) EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST Project Name: Country Club of the Desert File No.: 0.00 07117-10 0.05 2000 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE (IBC) SEISMIC PARAMETERS Seismic Category 0.20 D Table 1613.3(1) Site Class 0.60 D Table 1615.1.1 Latitude: 0.80 33.671 N 0.90 Longitude: 1.00 -116.252 W 1.10 M2�' um Considered Earthquake (MCE) Ground Motion 0.50 Short Period Spectral Reponse Ss 1.50 g Figure1615(3) 1 second Spectral Response S1 0.60 g Figure1615(4) Site Coefficient Fa 1.00 Table 1615.1.2(1) Site Coefficient F,,_ 1.50 Table 1615.1.2(2) 2.20 SMS 1.50 g = Fa*Ss SMI 0.90 g = F„*SI D e6gn Earthquake Ground Motion Short Period Spectral Reponse SDS 1.00 g = 2/3*SMs 1 -second Spectral Response SDI 0.60 g = 2/3*SMI To 0.12 sec = 0.2*SDI/SDS Ts 0.60 sec = SDI/SDs Seismic Importance Factor IE 1.00 Table 1604.5 2000 IBC Equivalent Elastic Static Response Spectrum 1.2 1.0 ca 0 0.8 a� 0.6 Q 0.4 a CL V) 0.0 ` ' ' ' ' 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0! Period (sec) EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST Period Sa T (sec) (g) 0.00 0.40 0.05 0.65 0.12 1.00 0.20 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.60 1.00 0.70 0.86 0.80 0.75 0.90 -0.67 1.00 0.60 1.10 0.55 1.20 0.50 1.30 0.46 1.40 0.43 1.50 0.40 1.60 0.38 1.70 0.35 .1.80 0.33 1.90 0.32 2.00 0.30 2.20 0.27 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Earth Systems Consultants Southwest 79-81 B Country Club Drivc, Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 F-- u I • rnonc t iour w-usa r— k760) 345.7315 Sorin No: B1 i Drilling Date: August 18, 2000 ro Pject lame: Country Club of the Desert I Drilling Method: 8" Hollow Stem Auger Pnject Number: 07117-10 Drill Type: Mobile C t Baring Location: See Figure 2 r I Logged By: Clifford W. Batten ^ Sample Type Penetration ry f,' Description of Units Page—� A Resistance r r^ U u C in c Note: The stratification lines shown represent the 1 F Uo (Blows/6") i r = �` 'o a approximate boundary between soil and/or -rock types Graphic Trend ML i i I � I o . U and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count Dry Density F-- u I • 4.2 ML i 10,10,10 ! I 193.4 I 5,5,10 , i . i l i 85.6 r I,. 10 SM L 4,5,6 .;i:; 93.2 i ML � I Ilii 15 I I 5,10,10 Iiil ! 77.7 r I I I i ,�► 20 i r 1 i l l 7,10,12 lllil� 1111!! 86.8 r II �• I !11!11 , I 2s 1 i L � i— 30 F r 1 I� 3 5 L 40 I I 45 1 Sn SANDY SILT: brown; medium dense, dry to damp, with nunor fine grained sand I • 2.1 i 8.4 i • 1 I SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to 1.5 medium grained, subround clasts I SANDY SILT: brown, medium dense, damp, laminated, with minor fine grained sand i 5.7 i I II I I i TOTAL DEPTH: 21.5 feet No Groundwater or Bedrock Encounte-ed I • 4.2 i I TOTAL DEPTH: 21.5 feet No Groundwater or Bedrock Encounte-ed 0)) �,1 Earth Systems Consultants '' Southwest 79-81113 Country Club Drive. Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 Phone (760) 3.15-1538 FAX (760) 345-7315 Boring No: B2 I Drilling Date: Augus: IS, 2000 Prgect Name: Country Club of the Desert Drilling Method: 8" .Hollow Stem Auger Pr ectNumber: 07117-10 Drill Type: Mobile 61 Baing Location: See Figure 2 Logged By: Clifford W. Batten i Sample TypePenetration _ 4 o Description of Units Page 1 of 1 Resistance o '� u u U v = Note: The stratification lines shown reres,:nt the P U `� � -- .N o approximate boundary between soil and/or rock types Graphic Trend 0 @ vEGi o (Blows/6°) rn C I iV ` and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count Dry Density G I 9,10,10 8,11,12 5,5,5 NIL ' I SANDY SILT: brown, medium dense, dry to damp, ' I laminated, with minor fine grained sand 95.9 2.6 1 I 84.4 14.3 90.4 I SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to medium grained, subround clasts 11 1.3 1� ML SANDY SILT: brown, medium dense, dryto damp, I i laminated, with minor fine grained sand 81.2 12.9 I 83.3. 14.6 I I I I I I 1 I 1 , 1 I I TOTAL DEPTH: 21.5 feet i No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered I I i Earth Systems Consultants Southwest 20 25 r F 30 40 L L 45 r F •— 50 5,6,6 I I I i I I 7,S,1 l I I i 5,7,9 I 10,12.20 I 1 i I 9,10,10 I I � i I I I . •.I� :• ... :: I i 90.4 i 14.1 i i 79-81 IB County Club Drive. Bermuda Dunes. CA 92201 95.9 2.4 I• Phone (760) 345-1588 FAX(760)345-7315 I 1%rino, No: B3 . �.I.1 Drilling Date: August 18, 2000 PWject lame: Country Club of the Desert j93.2 I j 1 I Drilling Method: S" Hollow Stem Auger . I i 96.9 Prject Number: 07117-10 Drill Type: Mobile 61 BQing Location: See Figure 2 Logged By: Clifford W. Batten I ^ Sample Type Penetration I o Description of Units Page 1 of 1 — Resistance u E U cCl u U . ' _; c 'o Note: The stratification lints shown represent the (Blows/6") >. °= approximate bounds between soil and/or rock PP boundary types Graphic Trend 0 m v� o I g U I and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count Dry Density Q r :I SM j SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to j I medium grained, subround clasts { 5,5,5 L 1 91.1 i 0.8 • i 1 • 8,12,12 :j :i•1 ,j•, •I 96.0 � 1.6 I i i ! ! I' i ( ML I SANDY SILT: brown, medium dense, moist, i 10 laminated, with minor fine grained sand I i F , 4,4,7 82.0 9.6 I j I SM I I SILTY SAND: brown, ddd1 1 , medium tory, 4,4,10 �•:i:;�:� ' fine to medium grained, subround to subangular II ! • L I I , I I ':�� 184.8 6.8 clasts l , 20 25 r F 30 40 L L 45 r F •— 50 5,6,6 I I I i I I 7,S,1 l I I i 5,7,9 I 10,12.20 I 1 i I 9,10,10 I I � i I I I . •.I� :• ... :: I i 90.4 i 14.1 i i 95.9 2.4 I• I•i I � . �.I.1 j2.9 j93.2 I j 1 { I i 96.9 i 1.9 I ML i i + SANDY SILT: brown,mediuun dense damp, i laminated, with minorftne grained sand 92.1 4.3 I, I I i TOTAL DEPTH: 41.5 feet j i No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered . Earth Systems Consultants Southwest 794,I1B Country Club D.-,.B,—.d. Duncs. CA 92201 Phone (760) 345.1588 FAX (760) 345-7315 ]bring No: B4 I Drilling Date: Augt.st 18, 2000 Poject Name: Country Club of the Desert Drilling Method: 8' Hollow Stem Auger Poject Number: 07117-10 Drill Type: Mobile 61 Bring Location: See Figure 2 Logged By: Clifford W. Batten Sample IPa e I of 1 Type Penetration I c C I` o Description of Units c Resistance ' I V u �_ - Note: The stratification lines shown represent the F o E � !Cr P boundary types Graphic Trend 0 — i approximate bounda between soil and/c r rock 1 © a. i (Blows/6") to I I 0 I U I and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count Dry Density I I 1 I sM ! SILTY SAND: brown medium der_se dry, I •:I•::.; Ifine to J I medium grained, subround clasts I , 7,7,11 : 189.5 i 1.2 I • • 9,9,9 199.1 11.2 i 1 • I I is I FE 20 L i— 25 L 30 35 L , I 1 40 L 45 i 4,5,6 I� 3,4,6 6,8,8 � I 8,10,15 t 14,16,20 :iA t1j , MUCL I CLAYEY SILT: brown, stiff, mois•., laminated, with (, I ' I I minor clay nodules 1rf 177.0 ! 15.3 � s I I SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to ' ' 79.1 1 5.1 I medium grained, subround clasts I I 1 I MUCL ! I i ! I MUCL I SANDY CLAYEY SILT: brown, stiff, moist, laminated, low plasticity 173.5 115.4 1 i • , I ML I I 1 I CLAYEY SILT: brown, very stiff, moist, medium I plasticity, with minor silty sand lenses i I I I SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry., fine to medium grained, subround clasts 1 • 1 I IJ SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to j medium grained, subround clasts, with minor silt j I and clay nodules j ' I i l i SANDY SILT: brown, medium dense, dry, ! laminated, with minor. fine grainer sand and clay , i I TOTAL DEPTH: 41.5 feet j No Groundwatc� or Bedrock Encountered i i Earth Systems Consultants Southwest 79-8 1B Country Club Drive, Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 Eoring Nject Nan Paject Nu Boring Loc Sam Typ tz0 L F L 5 Ir 10 r I 15 L '75 L1 30 1 L 35 IRV 11 r L 45 L Phone (7ov) 34z,-i53s FAX (760) 345-7315 No' B6 Drilling Date: August 18, 2000 e: Country. Club of the Desert Drilling Method: 8" Hollow Stem Auger tuber: 07117-10 Drill Type: Mobile 6l ation: See Figure 2 Logged By: Clifforc W. Batten p sm 3,4,5 4,5,6 7,9,11 5,13,10 J. 68 11 SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to medium grained, subangular clasts 88.4TO.4 I . 88.0 10.8 91.2 10.9 91.9 1 1.5 96.8 2.6 I with silt lenses TOTAL DEPTH: 21.5 feet No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered le e Penetration lPage I or I Description of Un--ts Fie I or 17 6.; Resistance — 0 -0 E V) U Note: The stratification lines shown represent the U >' 0 approximate boundary between soil and/o- rock types Graphic Trend 0 (Blows/6") Gn 2 U a and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count Dry Density sm 3,4,5 4,5,6 7,9,11 5,13,10 J. 68 11 SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to medium grained, subangular clasts 88.4TO.4 I . 88.0 10.8 91.2 10.9 91.9 1 1.5 96.8 2.6 I with silt lenses TOTAL DEPTH: 21.5 feet No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered Qi tEarth Systems Consultants Q Southwest 79-811B County Club Drive, Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 �+ - '^^t/OU) 3•IS-131 Burins No: B5 i Drilling Date: August 18, 2000 Nject Dame: Country Club of the Desert Drilling Method: 8"' Hollow Stem Auger eject Number: 07117-10 Drill Type: Mobile 51 Ening Location: See Figure 2 Logged By: Clifforc W. Batten Sample Pa e t of 1 ^ Type Penetration I I e Description of Units u o � i Resistance N i v G I �. �_ Note: The stratification lines shown represent the L Y v •c -- approximate boundary between soil and/or rock types Graphic Trend u. c p (Blows/6") N = I Z c and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count C m ti g i U Dry Dcnsit u 1 4,4,4 I 5 5,5,7 87.1 1 1.0 86.1 1 1.2 SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to medium grained, subround to subangular clasts 1� II I, i • 89.6 10.9 i i I I I ! 85.3 i 1.3 I 1 I • 85.1 1.5 i I i I I TOTAL DEPTH: 21.5 feet No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered • • ' CEarth Systems Consultants I Drilling Date: August 18, 2000 l"Ject lame: Country Club of the Desert Southwest 79-8. IB Country Club Drive. Bermuda Dunes. CA 92201 ' Drilling Method: 8" Hollow Stem Auger ?4ject Number: 07117-10 Phone (760) 345.1588 FAX (760) 345 7315 brie- No: B7 I Drilling Date: August 18, 2000 l"Ject lame: Country Club of the Desert Drilling Method: 8" Hollow Stem Auger ?4ject Number: 07117-10 5,5,6 1 i � Drill Type: Mobile 51 Boring Location: See Figure 2 r 1 10 6,6,7 Logged By: Clifford W. Batten ^ Sample Type Penetration � 15 � I u o Description of Units 1 of 1 EE s Resistance o t' rn U c u = c Note: The stratification lines shown represent the c Y u p (Blows/6") aE, rn = o =: approximate boundary between soil and/or rock types Graphic. Trend h z I Q V'' I and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count pry Density 20 1 r rL 25 L 30 r C 35 i i 1 L L40 F �— 45 r 1 r - i I en 5,6,7 6,7,8 6,9,10 SM I I SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to medium grained, subangular clasts 95.2 10.7 95.4 ; 1.2 87.8 12.1 95.2 1.3 TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered I I I1 I i � I l e 3,4,6 5,5,6 1 i � r 1 10 6,6,7 i I L � 15 � I 8,8,10 20 1 r rL 25 L 30 r C 35 i i 1 L L40 F �— 45 r 1 r - i I en 5,6,7 6,7,8 6,9,10 SM I I SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to medium grained, subangular clasts 95.2 10.7 95.4 ; 1.2 87.8 12.1 95.2 1.3 TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered I I I1 I i � ' Earth Systems Consultants �.� Southwest r 79-8: 18 County Club Drive, Bermuda Dunes, CA 93201 v F 1 r —s i I IS !i L 1L L 20 1 � i i I 25 r 30 r j— 35 r 40 I i 1 I i_ 1 45 I r I L cn SM SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to I. I medium grained, fossiliforus, subangular clasts 4,4,4 87.9 0.7 -- k100)345-7315 Boring No: B8 4,5,6 Drilling Date: August 18, 2000 I'ii Nject tame: Country Club of the Desert Drilling Method: 8' Hollow Stem Auger Paject Number: 07117-10 6,7,8 Drill Type: Mobile 61 Baring Location: See Figure 2 7,9,11 Logged By: Clifford W. Batten i ^ Sample Type Penetration! t e Description of Un :ts Pa e I of 1 8 1 ci I Resistance E U 0 H Note: The stratification lines shown repre::ent the I n I T (BIows/6 ) = l::�: o -- 0 approximate boundary between soil and/o- rock types Graphic Trend C. n m h I I Q and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count Dry Densi h' v F 1 r —s i I IS !i L 1L L 20 1 � i i I 25 r 30 r j— 35 r 40 I i 1 I i_ 1 45 I r I L cn SM SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to I. I medium grained, fossiliforus, subangular clasts 4,4,4 87.9 0.7 90'2 1 2.5 I SANDY SILT: brown, medium dense, dry I� SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to 90.7 t.7 medium grained, subangular clasts 91.0 1 1.1 No Groundwater or Bedrock Encounte ed 4,5,6 I'ii ML If�II I, sM 6,7,8 7,9,11 i 1 4,4,5 .• it i 3,4,6 I: I n l::�: 1 5 6 6. I�:I�:I•l 90'2 1 2.5 I SANDY SILT: brown, medium dense, dry I� SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to 90.7 t.7 medium grained, subangular clasts 91.0 1 1.1 No Groundwater or Bedrock Encounte ed Earth Systems Consultants Southwest 20 L 25 I r F 30 35 i { 40 r r 45 L ! I'a j MUCL 4,6,6 4,4,5 5,5,7 CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, moist, low 10I 1 plasticity, with minor silt i I �I ! SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to i medium grained, subangular clasts I i� �t it CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, Ttoist, low j plasticity I • TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered 79.8 1 B County Club Drive, Bermuda Dunes. CA 92201 Phone (760) 345-1588 FAX (760) 345-7315 aria- No: B9 Drilling Date: August 18, 2000 15nject 1?ame: Country Club of the Desert Drilling Method: 8" Hollow Stem Auger Project Number: 07117-10 Drill Type: Mobile 51 Being Location: See Figure 2 Logged By: Clifforc W. Batten ^ Sample Type Penetration B o I Description Of Units Page 1 of 1 r '- Resistance 0 rn U c u n ., c Note: The stratification lines shown represent the c . v 1 F- o (Blows/6") E = A •-� o ' o` approximate boundary between soil and/or rock types Graphic Trend p rn o i M U and the transition ma y be gradational. Blow Count Dry Density O' SM SILTY SAND: brown, loose to med_um dense, dry I ! to damp, fine to medium.grained, fossiliforus to five ' 1l 3,3,4 74.2 1.5 feet, subround to subangular clasts� 'r S 6,8,10 ■ '' ' "; I:' ::I: I 91.4 6.1 ' • • l i II I ' L I r i 10 ■ 5,5,10 ') 90.3 2.4 ! • .I • t � li I r ..�.• .1 I I I li � � i 15 5.8,8 187.7 12.6 i 20 L 25 I r F 30 35 i { 40 r r 45 L ! I'a j MUCL 4,6,6 4,4,5 5,5,7 CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, moist, low 10I 1 plasticity, with minor silt i I �I ! SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to i medium grained, subangular clasts I i� �t it CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, Ttoist, low j plasticity I • TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered DorN, No:'B10 Earth Systems Consultants 7949 1B County Club DHvc, Bermuda Dunes. CA 92201 Southwest DorN, No:'B10 Drilling Date: August 18, 2000 Project 1`Tame: Country Club of the Desert I Drilling Method: 8' Hollow Stem Auger Project Number: 07117-10 Drill Type: Mobile.61 Boring Location: See Figure 2 I Logged By: Clifford W. Batten Sample ^ Type Penetration a Description of Units Page 1 of 1 S. t= A c Resistance ° C^ 'O I U ! >, i - e C v v B c 'o Note: The stratification lines shown represent the approximate boundary between Graphic 1 F ! (Blows/6")I L soil and/os rock types Trend �u ED h f I i p U and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count Dry Density n r 5 r r F 10 1L I L L 1s L i i i 20 ! r L 25 1 L I !— 30 r L� 35 40 r 45 I ! I L t— 5 n 4,5,5 5,6,7 6,8,8 6,8,9 4,6,8 5,7,7 5,7,9 72.2 1 1.2 92.7 11.6 91.7 13.0 87.3 12.7 SILTY SAND: brown, loose to mecium dense, dry, fine to medium grained, subround ciasts i ! i No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered j Earth Systems Consultants ^� Southwest 79.8 IB Country Club Drive. Bemwda Dunes. CA 92201 Phone (760) 355-1588 FAX (76o) 1.114 ]bring No: B11 i Drilling Date: August 18, 2000 Poject Name: Country Club of the Desert Drilling Method: 8" Hollow Stem Auger Project Number: 07117-10 Drill Type: Mobile 6l Poring Location: See Figure 2 Logged By: Clifforc W. Batten Sample Type Penetration '' u o Description of Units Page 1 of 1 L o rn e C v ResistanceU = Note: The stratification lines shown represent the L 1 v T 'o °= approximate boundary between soil and/o- rock types. Graphic Trend r _ r- o (Blows/6") i_ o and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count pry Density 0 m vi I a U U' ! L F r_ S I F L I Io L If L 20 0 L i 25 i I 30 IF !— 3S SM 5,8,8 •: •:I•� 8,12,12 : I: i t1 5,8,8 ML 4,4,7 5,5,5 5,5,7 7,11,10 i MUCL SILTY SAND: brown, medium deme, dry, fine to ; 1! I Medium grained, subround clasts r 0.5 I i 95.5 10.7 • • jii 1 �! r 91.6 1.2 i ILII I j i ! SANDY SILT: brown, medium dense, dry, minor j clay nodules i 1 I ' i I i I I CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, moist, low plasticity ! i j I ii I TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet I I i li iI ; No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered I! i ! j i I ! i Earth Systems Consultants Southwest 1 79.8. IB Country Club Drivr, Bermuda Dove,. CA 93201 Dl.....- - - -- • •�-� t iou� 345-7315 BorinNo: B12 I Drilling Date: August 18, 2000 Project Name: Country Club of the Desert I Drilling Method: 8" Hollow Stem. Auger Project Number: 07117-10 I Drill Type: Mobile 61 Boring Location: See Figure 2 I Logged By: Clifford W. Batten ,. Sample Type penetration i —'' B o Description of Units Page 1 of i C7 " re.ent the sistance E ReV W � I N= Note: The stratification lines shown rcP oT I o = approximate boundary between soil and/o- rock types Graphic Trend O m P- I (Blows/6")I Q I < V I and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count Dry Density n i r ' S F to r rL 15 r I 20 I I i 25 r I 30 l 35 L 1� i ' L 40 i t" L ' 45 l i I� Ir r 9,10,10 7,8,8 5,6,9 6,6,8 SM I i 93.0 10.4 SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to medium grained, subround clasts iI• 1 I 97.2 0.7 I • i ,,I 1 �•i 92.2 , 1.2 1 • :;. I I I ;ll ML i I SANDY SILT: brown, medium der:se, dry, minor cls i 1 nodules ; II;+ Illi t i 1 I i 1 lii I I � I1 I i MUCL CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, moist, low I plasticity I I i TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet I No Groundwater or Bedrock Encounered i i i i , Earth Systems Consultants Southwest 79-81-3 Country Club Drive, Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 1 rLU SM i SILTY SAND: brown, loose to medium dense, dry, r fine to medium grained, subround clasts II II 2,3,3 76.2 0.8 5,8,8 90.8 1.2 j 10 4,4,4 4,5,5 MLJCL 1 SANDY CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, moist, ' 20 i , El 5,5,5 low plasticity ji SM SILTY SAND: brown, medium deRse, dry, fine to medium grained, subround clasts ,6,6 L L MLJCL l SANDY CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, moist, 30 L 6.918 i I 1 low plasticity L TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet 40 No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered 45 ' Earth Systems Consultants Southwest 79-81:1 B County Club Drive, Bermudi DuneCA 92201 s, Df,..,,. /lAn' 1.a BDrina No: B14 Drilling Date: Augus: 18, 2000 Poject lame: Country Club of the Desert Drilling Method: 8" Hollow Stem Auger Pmject Number: 07117-10 Drill Type: Mobile 51 Bring Location: See Figure 2 Logged By: Clifford: W. Batten ^ Sample Type Penetration I —'' I �, Pae 1 of 1 Description of Units g r — Resistance I s U cc 5� 1 Note: The stratification lines shown represent the o (Blows/6) rn En E �`� 75 o I approximate boundary between soil and/or rock types Graphic Trend M h i I Q U I and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count Dry Density SM 4,4,4 I 75.1 6,7.8 i' i"i 86.8 1 ' L i0 3,2,2 r 15 , ! a4,6,7 L - (;1 MULL I E— 20 I y1 ' 5,6,7 1 L L SM 25 6,6,5 1 i r ; MUCL 1 30 6,7,9 a. I ' L 35 it 1r ! I I , F � I 40 L � i I I 1 i I ! i 45 � 1 L i I I i 10.7 1 1.4 SILTY SAND: brown, loose to medium dense, dry, I +! fine to medium grained, subround clasts • I 1 � I i• j I 1 I II li �i jl ;i SANT DY CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, moist, I ! low plasticity ! i• II SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to ; medium grained, subround clasts I I (► CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, moist, low plasticity j I 1 ;• 1 1 ! ; TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet i ( No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered i I ' Earth Systems Consultants Southwest 1 79.9 IB Country Club Drive. Bermuda Dunes. CA 92201 Phone (7601 aa;.i can ce v .,� .... _ Boring No: B15 ! Drilling Date: August 18, 2000 hjectName: Country Club of the Desert Drilling Method: 8" Hollow Stem Auger Fbiect Number. 07117-10 Drill Type: Mobile 61 Ehting Location: See Figure 2 I Logged By: Clifforc W. Batten ^ Sample Type penetration ^ Description of Units Page 1 of 1 c .m u I o Resistance I� U U E c a, � CL a r: N= 'o �' Note: The stratification lines shown re re_ent the p e" (Blows/6") = 7 co' approximate boundary between soil and/o- rock types Graphic Trend I m N 01 i 0 ! and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count Dry Density sm r , 5,5,4 98.1 I 5 5,5 I• i•' .{{ 81.3 MUCL 10 4,5,6 sM 1 6,6,7 i•:�•.�•1 I 6,5,6 � 25 5,5,5 30 L. 6,7,7 ....I'� 35 I I ! L40 C 45 j 1 r � r SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to medium grained, subround clasts o: I ;• II 3.2 i • I I' � I CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, -hoist, low j plasticity, with sand i �1 SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to medium grained, subround to subangular clasts I j 1 I II I• I ' i TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet I 1 j No Groundwater or Bedrock Encount_red ! ' Earth Systems Consultants Southwest 79.8116 Country Club Drive, Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 Phone (760) 345-1588 FAX r- lorint, No: B16 Drilling Date: August 18, 2000 0) 345-7315 fioject ii Country Club of the Desert Drilling Method: 8" Hollow Stem Auger Floject Number: 07117-10 Drill Type: Mobile 61 Bring Location: See Figure 2 Logged By: Clifford W. Batten ^ Sample Type Penetration `�." Description of Unitspage 1 of 1 I Resistance v E E rn e C Q n = Note: The stratification lines shown represent the I: 1 o (Blows/6") V)I C Z' o approximate boundary between soil and/or rock types Graphic Trend C o. p rn I i n o U and the transition tray be gradational. Blow Count Dry Density sna SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to :� :� I medium grained, subround clasts ! 4,5,6 I I 86.4 0.3 I • . I • 1 ! I / S i 5.6,5 1 ..I , 72.6 7 II I:1 I2 I ji i ML I SANDY SILT: dark brown, loose, dry, I 10 I I I 1 1 4,4,4 I ! SM i SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to medium grained, subround to subangular clasts 16,7,8 ! ! I I • I'.I I I I i; I I.• j.i 1 , 1 ;; I I I iI 20 5,6,7 I .! .!: ! i ! • i 1! I � � �•'I:�I:; ! l i 111 'I ! i �S I I I I• :I• ,' � � II i i ! 8,9,10 I::I' I;i i • l r 30 I I 17.7,7 .'!!ia j I i it :i'1 I I — 35 I i I 1 it I ; II !I 1: ;TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet ;I 40 i I i � � i ! � � No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered it 1 I I I I I I I I I I II 45 1 j I j I II i ! I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Earth Systems Consultants Southwest 79.811 B Country Club Drive. Bermuda Dune;, CA 92201 BDrina No • B 17 Drilling Date: August 23, 2000 Abject lame: Country Club of the Desert Drilling Method: 8" Hollow Stem Auger Abject Number: 07117-10 Drill Type: Mobile 51 Baring Location: See Figure 2 Logged By: Clifford W. Batten ^ Sample Type Penetration I ^' ` e of 1 Description of Units EEED c Resistance I G En U a 51 � E Note: The stratification lines shown represent the 1 o I (Blows/6") I o = approximate boundary between soil and/or rock types Graphic Trend �• m y �; p I I z U and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count Dry Density F u r L L 5 - 10 - l5 20 25 30 - 35 I SM 6;5,10 i I IIII 1 ML I 7,10,10 III I� 1 S, -,m P -SM I 1 i 6,7,10 .: s TI 4,4,4 i I I I•.;�:I�; i 5.5,6 I.:I.' -'• I j 'lll ML ! 4,7,7 i III. illy i L I ! � I — 40 1 15,6,7 i SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to 1 medium grained, subround 'lasts 90.1 10.4 I I SANDY SILT: brown, medium dense, dry, minor 1 87.1 3.1 laminations II i SAND: brown, medium dense, damp, fine to coarse I , grained, with silt layers 103.3 5.3 I I I I 1 II ! SILTY SAND: brown medium denser � fine to I ; medium grained, subround to subangular',lasts li i, ; SANDY SILT: brown, medium dense, dry j i I 11 I I: I i i I I i TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet f No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered ' Earth Systems Consultants Southwest 79-811B Counay Club Drive, Bem,uda Dunes, CA 92201 Phone (760) 345-1588 FAX (760) 345•'315 Borina No: B18 I Drilling Date: August 23, 2000 Prgect i�ame: Country Club of the Desert I Drilling Method: 8" _follow Stem Auger Plect Number: 07117-10 Drill Type: Mobile E 1 Boing Location: See Figure 2 I' Logged By: Clifford W. Batten ^ Sample TypPenetration IBI Description of Units page 1 of 1 v s A I Resistance , U rn �c �_ H c 'o Note: The stratification lines shown represent the n' U m CL I I > (Blows/6"); _ v =, U ` approximate boundary between soil and/or rock types Graphic Trend and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count Dry Density F— 25 I i r i SM L ! 7,11,11 89.0 ML S I , 9,11,12 !I 87.1 L I ! SP -SM 1 L 10 115.7 I 7,9,11 I.'...1 , i UCL 3,4,6 r i ll; f i X1.1 4,5,5 6,7,8 6,6,7 SILTY SAND: brown, medium dens.=, dry, fine to medium grained, subround clasts • SANDY SILT: brown, medium dense, dry, minor 2.3 1 laminations ,SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to coarse grained, round clasts; with silt 1.4 � CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, Moist, low f I plasticity, with minor sand i • i i I I I ! SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to j medium grained, subround clasts I i I I I i i i I i TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet I I I I I I No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered i i i i I I I i I L I I' 20 i I L i 1 l l F— 25 I �I r i r 30 F ' r I I ! 35 I j i I r I ! ! — 40 i i r i I i i !_1 I I 45 I I I ! I L �I i UCL 3,4,6 r i ll; f i X1.1 4,5,5 6,7,8 6,6,7 SILTY SAND: brown, medium dens.=, dry, fine to medium grained, subround clasts • SANDY SILT: brown, medium dense, dry, minor 2.3 1 laminations ,SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to coarse grained, round clasts; with silt 1.4 � CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, Moist, low f I plasticity, with minor sand i • i i I I I ! SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to j medium grained, subround clasts I i I I I i i i I i TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet I I I I I I No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered i i i i I I I i I ' Earth Systems Consultants Southwest 79-81 B Country Club Drivc, Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 rnunetIOU) 345-1588 FAQ (760) 345-7315 R�riaNo: B19 i Drilling Date: August 23, 2000 Pmject Name: Country Club of the Desert I Drilling Method: 8" -1ollow Stem Auger Pmject Number: 07117-10 I Drill Type: Mobile E l Boring Location: See Figure 2 Logged By: Clifford W. Batten Sample Type Penetration o Description of Units Page 1 of 1 N ; Resistance U d U h. c Note: The stratification lines shown represent the c u T N 5 approximate boundary between soil and/or rock types Gra m . p (Blows/6") I = i' I o• I and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count Dry Density phic Trend V) U I r 5 C ' 10 ' 1 15 r I-- '20 I j— 25 ' r I r 30 I I 1 I 35 L 1 r r ' ' 40 L 1 f 45 ML I 5,8,10 li 89.0 1.0 3 `I MUCL 6,9,8 '1 1 183.4 4.0 6,6,7 '".�'+ 182.1 18.2 I'•;'•! SM i I'•I'•i't I 4,4,5 r.i•.f•; i j � i:�l:'I•i I i I MUCL 3,4,4 i'• II 1 , •I I 6,9,10 1 I ; 1 i i SANDY SILT: brown, medium dense, dry, laminatet • CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, damp to wet, clay I nodules I' 11 .i i; SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to medium grained, subround clasts ! 1 i I ' CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, hoist, low plasticity i 't I 1 TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered. ' Earth Systems Consultants Southwest 79-8 !E Country Club Drive, Bermuda Duncs, CA 92201 Phone nem u;_icss r , Bo'rin N0: B20 - `-`k -W l4J-73IJ Drilling Date: Augue,t 23, 2000 Project Name: Country Club of the Desert Drilling Method: 8" Hollow Stem Auger Project Number: 07117-10 Drill Type: Mobile 61 Boring Location: See Figure 2 Logged By: Clifforc W. Batten ^ Sample Type Penetration �' o Description Of UIl.'tS. Page 1 of I s aI Resistance E U u c _ u Note: T'ne stratification lines shown repre: ent the (Blows/6") > � —� o,� 20 approximate boundary between soil and/o rock types Graphic Trend G o 2, { and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count Dry Density i 10 l5 1 r I '— 20 i F L ! i Ii F L 30 � I r� I I ' I 35 I I r L 40 1 i 1 45 1 i 1 i i 11 4,6,7 5,5,7 7,8,9 j 5,5,6 4,5,6 6,7,8 9,10,11 ML 85.1 4.1 i 82.3 2.6 MUCL 83.9 19.5 MUCL � I 41 {� ML SANDY SILT: brown, medium dense, dry to damp �II I i� i CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, wet, low to medium plasticity I �i i j SANDY CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, moist, low plasticity ' I i SANDY SILT: light brown, medit--m dense, dry, laminated � � I � I i i TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered i Earth Systems Consultants Southwest 79 -EI IB Country ED.,•c, gecmuda Dunes. CA 92201 rnonc t IDU) 345-1588 FA -N (760) 345-7315 Boring No: B21 Drilling Date: Augttst 23, 2000 Project Tame: Country Club of the Desert I Drilling Method: 8' Hollow Stem Auger Project Number: 07117-10 Drill Type: Mobile 61 Boring Location: See Figure 2 I Logged By: Clifford W. Batten Sample Type PenetrationN o Description of Units page 1 of I v 191 Resistance E U v L, = Note: The stratification lines shown represent the En Q- 1 , —� o.— approximate boundary between soil and/or rock types Graphic Trend � o (Blows/6") 6n� g � p m U and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count pry Density - 0' - 5 10 IS I 20 ML 4,61'6 111, 62.6 14.0 5,6,8 6,10,10 I 5,5,5 4,4,4 4,4,5 6,7,8 ! 3.5 SILT: light brown, loose to mediurr dense, damp, laminated CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, very :,tiff, wet, clay I I nodules 20.0 I • ! SANDY SILT: light brown, medium dense, dry, laminated, with sand i !• I ! II � I SANDY CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, moist, ! medium plasticity, with sand ! i I• CTT.T'Y CAT.TTI• t,r,,.,,.. ...va:,._..t„___ �_. �-- -- 1 I I I i TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet i � I No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered I i i I! I! 87.4 MUCL 11 ' 83.3 II) ML I I I I.! it I MUCL CL '(t i i y SM Al ! I ! 3.5 SILT: light brown, loose to mediurr dense, damp, laminated CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, very :,tiff, wet, clay I I nodules 20.0 I • ! SANDY SILT: light brown, medium dense, dry, laminated, with sand i !• I ! II � I SANDY CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, moist, ! medium plasticity, with sand ! i I• CTT.T'Y CAT.TTI• t,r,,.,,.. ...va:,._..t„___ �_. �-- -- 1 I I I i TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet i � I No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered I i i I! I! Earth Systems Consultants .� Southwest 79-31 1B Country Club Drive, Bermuda paves, C 992201 rnonetio0)345-1588 FAX(760)345-7315 BoriIIg No: B22 Drilling Date: August 23, 2000 ProjectName: Country Club of the Desert Drilling Method: E" Hollow Stem Auger Project Number: 07117-10 Drill Type: Mobile 61 Boring Location: See Figure 2 Logged By: Clifford W. Batten Sample Type Penetration N ` v ; Description of Units Page I of I U u C ! Note: The stratification lines shown repr-sent the L Resistance r v ,� v P' a o E approximate boundary between soil and/or rock types Gra v a o (Blows/6") > °o and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count Trend M En U y Dry Density n. 4,5,6 5 15,5,5 M I, L 1546 25 I I I r L— 30 L !_ r ; L 35 I i I- 40 ! L t— 45 i 8,8,15 6,8,8 i SILT: light brown, loose to medium dense, dry, laminated I 64.0 3.6 I • 88.5 104.3 ! SILTY SAND: brown, medium de-tse, dry, fine to 1.8 medium grained j ! SAND: brown, medium dense, dry,, fine to coarse ill grained, subround clasts, with clayey silt layers 4.1 I I II � SANDY SILT: light brown, medium dense, dry, . I r laminated, with sand ! i SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to `i i medium grained ; ! i !• r i i� � I 1 ! TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet I i I I No Groundwater or Bedrock Encourdered I ' � � 1 ` 1 i i Earth Systems Consultants Southwest 79-5 IB Counm, Club Drive. Bermuda Dunes. CA 9220) I I 1 _5 1. L 10 � 15 I L 20 1 . I i 25 C 30 35 iF i 40 F i F � 45 I I r f cn ML ! SANDY SILT: light brown, loose tc medium dense, dry, laminated, with sand 5,5,5 66.8' 2.6 I (♦ 5,8,8 i l l i i i 85.2 14.3 i I SP -SM 7,8,7 SM 4,5,5 3,4,4 i • �.1 j SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to coarse grained; with silt 109.1 1.4 I' CL 2,3,4 I 2,2,3 li it R i SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to ii medium grained , I� I. II !I SANDY CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity I I I I I TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet No Groundwater or Bedrock Encount=ered • t "ou) 345-7315 bring No: B23 Poject lame: Country Club of the Desert ! I Drilling Date: August 23, 2000 Drilling Method: 8" Hollow Stem Auger Poject Number: 07117-10 Drill Type: Mobile 61 - Bring Location: See Figure 2 Logged By: Clifforc W. Batten I ^ Sample Type Penetration I _ e Description of UnitsPage 1 of 1 1 `- Resistance I E U u C B " Iu Note: The stratification lines shown rc resent the P u 1 F o (Blows/6") >, N 0 Q ,Ln , e approximate boundary between soil and/o- rock types Graphic Trend o N I I Q .c U and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count pry Density I I 1 _5 1. L 10 � 15 I L 20 1 . I i 25 C 30 35 iF i 40 F i F � 45 I I r f cn ML ! SANDY SILT: light brown, loose tc medium dense, dry, laminated, with sand 5,5,5 66.8' 2.6 I (♦ 5,8,8 i l l i i i 85.2 14.3 i I SP -SM 7,8,7 SM 4,5,5 3,4,4 i • �.1 j SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to coarse grained; with silt 109.1 1.4 I' CL 2,3,4 I 2,2,3 li it R i SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to ii medium grained , I� I. II !I SANDY CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity I I I I I TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet No Groundwater or Bedrock Encount=ered • 79-3 1 B Country Club Drive, Bermuda Dunes., 0, Earth Systems Consultants Southwest - ' 7 �10V)J43-7315 %ring No: B24 SILT: brown, loose to medium dense, dry to damp, r. hject Dame: Country Club of the Desert Drilling Date: August 23, 2000 Poject Number: 07117-10 �.:. SM 71.9 Brring Location: See Figure 2 Drilling Method: 8" Hollow Stem Auger • Sample i:'i:';.' Type Penetration i 1 85.7 Resistance U E • (Blows/6") F 79-3 1 B Country Club Drive, Bermuda Dunes., 0, SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to medium grained TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered O - ' 7 �10V)J43-7315 SILT: brown, loose to medium dense, dry to damp, r. I Drilling Date: August 23, 2000 4,5,5 ■ �.:. SM 71.9 3.3 Drilling Method: 8" Hollow Stem Auger • i:'i:';.' Drill Type: Mobile 61 i 1 85.7 2.1 • Logged By: Cliffdrc W. Batten F i Description of Units Page I of I , i 10 A 1 7,8,8 C' Li 12.9 Note: The stratification lines shown represent the . 4,4,4 MUCL approximate boundary between soil and/o- rock types Graphic Trend 20 5,6,6 U and the transition may be gradational. Blow Count Dry Density SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to medium grained TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered O SILT: brown, loose to medium dense, dry to damp, r. I 4,5,5 ■ �.:. SM 71.9 3.3 laminated • i:'i:';.' 4,4,5 i 1 85.7 2.1 • i F i F SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to I medium grained , i 10 A 1 7,8,8 sm 100.2 12.9 . 4,4,4 MUCL CLAYEY SILT: dark brown, stiff, moist, low plasticity, 20 5,6,6 0 SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to medium grained TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered r. I �.:. SM t 15 I i:'i:';.' L 4,5,6 i F 30 El 4.4,5 A 1 . 35 F 40 L r 45 SILTY SAND: brown, medium dense, dry, fine to medium grained TOTAL DEPTH: 31.5 feet No Groundwater or Bedrock Encountered Earth Systems Consultants ga 6 1 —- out west ' P w LL Q CPT Sounding : CPT -1 Cone Penetrometer: FUGRO, Inc. Project Name: Country Club of the Desert Truck Mounted Electric Cone Project No.: 07117-10 with- 23 -ton reaction weight Location: See Site Exploration Plan Date: 8/2E•/2000 Friction Ratio (%} Tip Resistance, Qc (tst Interpreted Soil Stratigraphy 0 (Robertson & Campanella, 1989) Density/Consistency . g 6 4 2 0 100 200 30 400 1 ' Silty Sand to Sandy Silt very dense J ,Sand to Silty Sand very dense Sand to Silty Sand very dense Sand to Silty Sand very dense • , _ _ Sand to Silty Sand very dense i Sand to Silty Sand dense- Sand very dense Sand to Silty Sand very dense ! I _ Sand to Silty Sand dense ! l Sand to Silty Sand dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense j Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Sandy Silt to Clayey Silt medium dense 1 Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Sand to Silty Sand medium dense Sand to Silty Sand medium dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense t Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Sandy Silt to Clayey Silt medium dense Sandy Silt to Clayey Silt medium dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense I Sand to Silty Sand medium dense i Sand to Silty Sand medium dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense r- Sandy Silt to Clayey Silt medium dense Silty Clay to Clay very stiff . Sandy Silt to Clayey Silt medium dense i Sandy Silt to Clayey Silt medium dense ! Sandy Silt to Clayey Silt medium dense Sand medium dense i Sand to Silty Sand medium dense _ Sand to Silty Sand medium dense ! Sand to Silty Sand medium dense i I Sand to Silty Sand medium dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense '. Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense i I Sand dense Sand to Silty Sand medium dense I j Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense i Sand to Silty Sand medium dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Sand to Silty Sand dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Sand to Silty Sand medium dense Sand medium dense —'— Sand medium dense Sand to Silty Sand medium dense j , , - 5 - _ I I 10 I � 15 ; 20 I i 25 _ , ! 30 ! 35 40 45 i 50 End of Sounding @ 50.1 feet ' ! I i rth Systems Consultants ' t out west 1Project P LU �=' SPT Sounding : CPT -2 Cone Penetrometer: FUGRO, Inc. Project Name: Country Club of the Desert Truk Mounted Electric Cone No.: 07117-10 witl- 23 -ton reaction weight Location: See Site Exploration Plan Date: 8/28/2000 WInterpreted Soil Stratigraphy Friction Ratio (%) Tip Resistance, Qc (tsf � Robertson & Campanella, 1989) Density/Consistency g 6 4 2 0 100 200 300 400 nd to iltyand very dense i I 1 Sand very dense I I ! Sand to Silty Sand very dense I I Sand to Silty Sand very dense i I 5 : Sand to Silty Sand very dense j Silty Sand to Sandy Silt dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense I Sand to Silty Sand dense 10 Sand to Silty Sand medium dense i i Sand to Silty Sand dense ' Sand to Silty Sand dense Sand to Silty Sand dense Sand to Silty Sand medium dense Sand to Silty Sand medium dense 15 Sand to SiltySand medium dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense F I Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Sand to Silty Sand medium dense I Sand to Silty Sand medium dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense I I I '20 Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt dense ! Sand to Silty Sand dense 25 Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense I i Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Sandy Silt to Clayey Silt medium dense Clayey Silt to Silty Clay hard — 30 Clayey Silt to Silty Clay hard i Sandy Silt to Clayey Silt medium dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense ; I Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Overconsolidated Soil medium dense I I I ' 35 Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense I ; Sandy Silt to Clayey Silt medium dense ± Clayey Silt to Silty Clay hard 4 Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense I j' ' Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense ! ! 40 Sand to Silty Sand medium dense 1 Sand to Silty Sand dense i Sand devise Sand to Silty Sand dense Sand dense 45 to Silty Sand dense 'Sand Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Sand to Silty Sand medium dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Sand dense 50 — -- — End of Sounding @ 49.8 feet I I ; Earth Systems Consultants C ' ,•�, - out west NOT Sounding : CPT -3 Cone Penetrometer: FUGRO, Inc. Fu -;:j LL Protect Name: Country Club of the Desert Truck Mounted Electric Cone Project No.: 07117-10 with'23-ton reaction weight Location: See Site Exploration Plan Date: 8/2a12000 IL U.1 Interpreted Soil Stratigraphy Friction Ratio (%) Tip Resistance, Qc (tso Robertson & Campanella, 1989) Density/Consistency 8 6 4 2 0 100 200 300 400 Sa rid very dense .Sty Sand to Sandy Silt very dense i'it Sand to Silty Sand very dense I Sand to Silty Sand very dense i 5 Sand to Silty Sand very dense i Sty Sand to Sandy Silt very dense Sand to Silty Sand dense- Sand ense Sand very dense i Sand very dense ! Sand kilo dense i 1 ' 1 'Sandy ' ' 10 ry' Sand very dense Sand very dense Sty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Sty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense I i Sandy Silt to Clayey Silt loose Sandy Silt to Clayey Silt loose l ! Sandy Silt to Clayey Silt loose j i — Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Sandy Silt to Clayey Silt loose Gay stiff Clay firm i I Gay stiff I Clayey Silt to Silty Clay very stiff ! ' Silt to Clayey Silt medium dense, ! Clayey Silt to Silty Clay very stiff I ! Clayey Silt to Silty Clay very stiff Sandy Silt to Clayey Silt loose Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense ! j Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense l ! Sand to Silty Sand medium dense i Sand to Silty Sand medium dense I Sand to Silty.Sand medium dense I i Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense— Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense I Sand to Silty Sand medium dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Sand to Silty Sand medium dense Clayey Silt to Silty Clay very stiff Clayey Silt to Silty Clay very stiff ' Sandy Silt to Clayey Silt loose ! , Clayey Silt to Silty Clay very stiff j Clay very stiff Silty Clay to Clay very stiff Silty Clay to Clay very stiff Clayey Silt to Silty Clay very stiff Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense i Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Sand to Silty Sand medium dense ' i i I I End of Soundinq (a, 50.2 feet 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 i APPENDIX B Laboratory Test Results Earth Systems Consultants ' Southwest ' P CPT Sounding :CPT-4 Cone Penetrometer: FUGRO, Inc. LU Project Name: Country Club of the Desert Truck Mounted Electric Cone U. Project No.: 07117-10 wit -n 23 -ton reaction weight = Location: See Site Exploration Plan Date: 8/28/2000 d W Interpreted Soil Stratigraphy Friction Ratio (%) Tip Resistance, Qc (tsfa D 8 6 4 2 0 inn Inn 1— 400 (Robertson & Campanella, 1989) Density/Consistency 1 1 ' ' ' ' 'Silty ' ' ' ' Sand to S ilty Sand very dense Sand very dense Sand to Silty Sand very dense ! Sand to Silty Sand very dense Sand to Silty Sand very.dense Sand to Silty Sand very dense Sand to Silty Sand very dense I j Sand to Silty Sand very dense Sand to Silty Sand dense Sand very dense j Sand very dense j Sand very dense I I I Sand dense Sand to Silty Sand medium dense , I Sand to Silty Sand medium dense Sand dense Sand dense I i Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense I Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Sandy Silt to Clayey. Silt medium dense Silty Clay to Clay very stiff Silty Clay to Clay very stiff Sandy Silt to Clayev Silt loose Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense ' i I Silty Sand to Sandy Silt loose Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense i Sand to Silty Sand medium dense Sand to Silty Sand medium dense Sand dense r i Sand dense Sand medium dense Sand medium dense I Sand dense ; Sand dense ! Sand dense _ Sand dense i Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense Sandy Silt to Clayey Silt medium dense Sand to Silty Sand medium dense ! I Sand to Silty Sand medium dense ! ; Silty Clay to Clay very stiff _ Clay very stiff I Clayey Silt to Silty Clay very stiff Clay very stiff �— Clay very stiff Silty Clay to Clay very stiff i Silty Sand to Sandy Silt loose Silty Sand to Sandy Silt medium dense i i I of Sounding @ 49.9 feet i 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 REnd 400 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 File No.: 07117-10 S 1ptember 22, 2000 UNIT DENSITIES AND MOISTURE CON'TEN'T ASTM D2937'&, D2216 Job Name: Country Club of the Desert B5 2 Unit Moisture USCS Sample Depth Dry Content Group Location (feet) Density (pco (%) S•nnbol B5 2 87.1 1.0 SM B5 5 86.1 1.2 SM B5 10 89.6 0.9 SM B5 15 85.3 1.3 SM B5 20 85.1 1.5 SM B6 2 88.4 0.4 SM B6 5 88.0 0.8 SM B6 10 91.2 0.9 SM B6 15 91.9 1.5 SM B6 20 96.8 2.6 SM B7 2 95.2 0.7 SM B7 5 95.4 1.2 SM B7 10 87.8 2.1 SM B7 15 95.2 1.3 SM B8 2 87.9 0.7 SM B8 5 90.2. 2.5 ML B8 10 90.7 1.7 SM B8 1.5 91.0 1.1 SM B9 2 74.2 1.5 SM B9 5 91.4 6.1 SM B9 10 90.3 2.4 SM B9 15 87.7 2.6 SM BIO 2 72.2 1.2 SM B10 5 92.7 1.6 SNI B10 10 91.7 3.0 SM File No.: 07117-10 September 22, 2000 LMT DENSITIES. AND MOISTURE CONTENT ASTM D2937 & D2216 Job Name: Country Club of the Desert Bi 2 Unit Moisture USCS Sample Depth Dry Content Croup Location (feet) Density (pcf (%) Symbol Bi 2 93.4 2.1 SM B1 5 85.6 8.4 ML' B1 10 93.2 1.5 SM Bi 15 77.7 5.7 ML Bi 20 86.8 4.2 ML B2 2 95.9 2.6 ML B2 5 84.4 4.3 ML B2 10 90.4 1.3 SM B2 15 81.2 2.9 ML B2 20 83.3 4.6 ML B3 2 91.1 0.8 SM B3 5 96.0 1.6 SM B3 10 82.0 9.6 ML B3 15 84.8 6.8 SM B3 20 90.4 4.1 SM B3 25 95.9 2.4 SM B3 30 93.2 2.9 SM B3 35 96.9 1.5 SM B3 40 92.1 4.3 ML B4 2 89.5 1.2 ML B4 5 99.1 1.2 SM B4 10 77.0 15.3 IAL/CL 134 15 79.1 5.1 SNI B4 20 73.5 15.4 ML/CL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 File No.: 07117-10 September 22, 2000 UNIT DENSITIES AND MOISTURE CONTENT .STM D2937 & D2216 Job Name: Country Club of the Desert B10 15 Unit Moisture USCS Sample Depth Dry Content Troup Location (feet) Density (pcfl (%) Symbol B10 15 87.3 2.7 SM B11 2 --- 0.5 SM B11 5 95.5 0.7 SM B11 10 91.6 1.2 SM B12 2 93.0 0.4 SM B 12 5 97.2 0.7 SM B12 10 92.2 1.2 SM B13 2 76.2 0.8 SM B13 5 90.8 1.2 SM B 14 2 75.1 0.7 SM B14 5 86.8 1.4 SM B15 2 98.1 0.2 SM B15 5 81.3 3.2 SM B16 2 86.4 0.3 SM B 16 5 72.6 2.7 SM B17 2 90.1 0.4 SM B17 5 87.1 3.1 ML B17 10 103.3 5.3 SP -SM .1 B18 2 89.0 1.1 SM 'B18 5 87.1 2.8 ML B18 10 115.7 1.4 ;SP -SM ' B 19 2 89.0 1.0 SM B 19 5 83.4 4.0 ML/CL B 19 10 82.1 18.2 ML/CL .1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 : File No.: 07117-10 ,eptember 22', 2000 UNIT DENSITIES AND MOISTURE CONTENT ASTM D2937 & D2216 Job Name: Country Club of the Desert B20 2 Unit Moisture JSCS Sample Depth Dry Content Jroup Location (feet) I Density (pcf) I (%) Symbol B20 2 .85.1 4.1 ML B20 5 82.3 2.6 ML B20 10 83.9 19.5 ML/CL B21 2 62.6 4.0 ML B21 5 87.4 3.5 ML B21 10 83.3 20.0 '-\4L/CL B22 2 64.0 3.6 ML B22 5 88.5 1.8 SM B22 10 104.3 4.1 SP -SM B23 2 66.8 2.6 ML B23 5 85.2 4.3 ML B23 10 109.1 1.4 SP -SM B24 2 71.9 3.3 ML B24 5 8.5.7 2.1 ML B24 10 100.2 2.9 SM File No.: 07117-10 IMM01101 September 22, 2000 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS ASTM D-422 Job Name: Country Club of the Desert Sample ID: B1 @ 0-5 Feet Description: Sandy Silt (ML) Sieve Percent I Size Passing 1-1/2" 100 I 1" 100 3/4" 100 1/2" 100 3/8" 100 #4 100 #8 100 #16 100 % Gravel: 0 #30 99 % Sand: 45 #50 96 % Silt: 47 #100 80 % Clay (3 micron): 8 4200 55 (Clay content by short hydrometer method) 100 90 80 70 * 60 cc s0 40 30 20 10 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Particle Size ( mm) EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST IMM01101 OUSE I I mm 0 01111INIUM11ININ 111111INIMUNE 1110 1111111 MIEN 111IME MM MUNN 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Particle Size ( mm) EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 File No.: 07117-10 September 22, 2000 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS ASTM D-422 Job Name: Country Club of the Desert NERO Sample ID: B5 @ 5 Feet Description: Silty Sand: Fine (SM) Sieve Percent" Size Passing mm 1-1/2" 100 1" 100 3/4" 100 1/2" 100 3/8" 100 #4 100 #8 100 416 100 % Gravel: 0 #30 100 % Sand: 76 #50 94 % Silt: 20 #100 62 % Clay (3 micron): 4 4200 24 (Clay content by short hydrometer method) 100 90 80 70 4 60 S0 Qj 40 30 20 10 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Particle Size ( mm) EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST NERO mm oil I ION INN NI I mom RE 1111RME, is 0 INN 11111 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Particle Size ( mm) EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST File No.: 07117-10 Fu, September 22, 2000 PAR'T'ICLE SIZE ANALYSIS ASTM D422 Job Name: Country Club of the Desert Sample ID: B6 @ 20 Feet � �imm' Description: Silty Sand: Fine w/ Silt Lenses (SM) ILI Sieve Size % Passing By Hydrometer Method: 3" 100 Particle Size % Passing 2" 100 59 Micron 20 1-1/2" 100 23 Micron 11 1 " 100 13 Micron 9 3/4" 100 7 Micron 8 1/2" 100 5 Micron 6 3/8" 100 3.3 Micron 6 #4 100 2.7 Micron 5 #8 100 1.4 Micron 1 #16 100 #30 100 % Gravel: 0 450 97 % Sand: 75 #100 67 % Silt: 20 #200 25 % Clay (3 micron): 5 100 90 80 70 60 0 50 40 30 20 10 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 Particle Size (mm) EARTH SYSTEMS CONULTANTS SOUTHWEST u.Uv i Fu, mim � �imm' ILI I M1 MEN Noun oil I im Mw 111111111 Im 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 Particle Size (mm) EARTH SYSTEMS CONULTANTS SOUTHWEST u.Uv i File No.: 07117-10 I:eptember 22, 2000 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS ASTM D-422 Job Name: Country Club of the Desert Sample ID: B7 @ 0-5 Feet Description: Silty Sand: Fine (SM) Sieve Percent Size Passing 1-1/2" 100 1" 100 3/4" 100 1/2" 100 3/8" 100 #4 100 #8 100 #16 100 % Gravel: 0 #30 99 % Sand: 76 #50 90 % Silt: 19 #100 58 % Clay (3 micron): 5 4200 24 (Clay content by short hydrometer method) 100 90 80 70 0 60 s0 c 40 30 20 10 0 100 10 1 0.1 Particle Size ( mcn) EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST 0.01 U.UU 1 1111NEN pNE-EM Him mokill =I 11� E M IN 111111=01 I 11111MI�Nmlam� minim 11M 100 10 1 0.1 Particle Size ( mcn) EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST 0.01 U.UU 1 File No.: 07117-10 September 22, 2000 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS ASTM D-422 Job Name: Country Club of the Desert Sample ID: B16 @ 10 Feet Description: Sandy Silt (M:L) Sieve Size % Passing By Hydrometer Method: 3" 100 '. Particle Size % Passing 2" 100 49 Micron 46 1-1/2" 100 22 Micron 19 1 " 100 13 Micron 11 3/4" 100 7 Micron 7 1/2" 100 S Micron 7 3/8" 100 3.4 Micron S #4 100 2.7 Micron 4 #8 100 1.4 Micron l #16 100 430 100 % Gravel: #50 100 % Sand: �A #100 97 % Silt: "2 #200 76 % Clay (3 micron): 4 go mt =NMI 1110011 mulmol mmo IMIN 11 M NEIR � t EARTH SYSTEMS CONULTANTS SOUTHWEST File No.: 07117-10 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS September 22, 2000 ASTM D-422 Job Name: Country Club of the Desert Sample ID: B19 @ 5 Feet Description: Clayey Silt (CL/ML), with sand Sieve Size % Passing By Hydrometer Method: 3" 100 Particle Size % Passing 2" 100 42 Micron 81 1-1/2" 100 19 Micron 50 1" 100 12 Micron 39 3/4" 100 6 Micron 27 1/2" 100 4 Micron 23 3/8" 100 3.2 Micron 19 #4 100 2.6 Micron 17 #8 100 1.4 Micron 6 #16 99 930 99 % Gravel: 0 #50 99 % Sand: 15 #100 97 % Silt: 68 #200 85 % Clay (3 micron): 17 FARTT4 gVCTPkfQ r-nxrTTT TA ATTe ells rrwilm-c—r File No.: 07117-10 S:ptember 22, 2000 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS ASTM D-422 Job Name: Country Club of the Desert Sample ID: B20 @ 15 Feet Description: Clayey Silt (CL/ML) Sieve Size % Passing By Hydrometer MetEod: 3" 100 Particle Size % Passing 2" 100 42 Micron a3 1-1/2" 100 16 Micron 75 1" 100 10 Micron 62 3/4" 100 6 Micron 46 1/2" 100 4 Micron 38 3/8" 100 3.0 Micron 32 #4 100 2.5 Micron 29 48 100 1.3 Micron to #16 100 #30 99 % Gravel: 0 #50 99 % Sand: 10 #100 96 % Silt: 61 9200 90 % Clay (2 micron): 29 100 90 80 70 60 00 A 50 e 40 30 ; 20 I I 10 0 100 10 I 0.1 0-.01 0.001 Particle Size (mm) EARTH SYSTF.MC r^nmT Tr Te NTc cnt TTT4WPgT File No.: 07117-10 September 22, 2000 CONSOLIDATION TEST ASTM D 2435-90 & D5333 Country Club of the Desert Initial Dry Density: 88.2 pcf B6 @ 20 Feet Initial Moisture, %: 0.4% Silty Sand: F w/ Silt Lenses (SM) Specific Gravity (assumed): 2.67 Ring Sample Initial Void Ratio: 0.890 Hydrocollapse: 2.6% @ 2.0 ksf 2 1 0 % Change in Height vs Normal Presssure Diagram O Before Saturation —Hydrocollapse ■ After Saturation——RPhnund Trend 0.1 1.0 Vertical Effective Stress, ksf EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST 10.0 e — J 0.1 1.0 Vertical Effective Stress, ksf EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST 10.0 File No.: 07117-10 Se-otember 22, 2000 CONSOLIDATION TEST ASTM D 2435-90 & D5333 Country Club of the Desert B19 @ 5 Feet Clayey Silt (MUCL) Ring Sample 2 1 0 -2 on -3 Z -4 -5 U -6 o. -7 -8 -9 -10 -11 -12 Initial Dry Densi-.y: 79.3 pcf Initial Moisture, %: 4.0% Specific Gravity (assumed): 2.67 Initial Void Ratio: 1.102 Hydrocollapse: 2.5% @, 2.0 ksf % Chancre in Height vs Normal Presssure Diagram 23 t2 * Before Saturation Hydrocollapse * After Saturation PAhnund -Trend �o �u MEW IMMOO ---ME= OMEM ON 1OM1== NONSION10 - OMEN MON I O=�= MON SIME W ISOM MEN11MION=1 MON MON M=5M1M= 'ONNO MO= OMNI 0.1 1.0 Vertical Effective Stress, ksf EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST 10.0 File No.: 07117-10 September 22, 2000 CONSOLIDATION TEST ASTMD 2435-90 -&-D5333 Country Club of the Desert B20 @ 10 Feet Clayey Silt (CUML) Ring Sample I 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 no r- -5 U -6 -7 -8 -9 -10 -11 -12 Initial Dry Density: 74.6 pef Initial Moisture, %: 19.5% Specific Gravity (assumed): 2.67 Initial Void Ratio: 1.233 Hydrocollapse:' 0.9% @ 2.0 ksf % Change in Height vs Normal Presssure Diagram b b Im * Before Saturation —Hydrocollap-se * After Saturation ---*—Rp.hnund —Trend 0.1 1.0 Vertical Effective Stress, ksf EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST 10.0 MEMO-- 0 MOMMOO MEM IN 1001 ENMOO- OM ISSIONIES OMEN - -MUKEN ON MOOMIMMIMM -NIOO ON MEOM N - DION ON OMEN 0.1 1.0 Vertical Effective Stress, ksf EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST 10.0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 File No.: 07117-10 Se-)tember 22, 2000 ONSOLIDATION TEST ASTM D 2435-90 & D5333 Country Club of the Desert B24 @ 5 Feet Silty Sand: F w/ Silt Lenses Ring Sample 2 1 0 -1 -2 mon -3 e -4 on -5 L U -6 a, u �+ -7 0. -8 -9 -10 -1l -l2 Initial Dry Densiy: 85.3 pcf Initial Moisture, Geo: 2.1% Specific Gravity (assumed): 2.67 Initial Void Rat.o: 0.955 Hydrocollapse: 1.8% @ 2.0 ksf % Change in Height vs Normal Presssure Diagram O Before Saturation --Hydrocollapse ■ After Saturation--RPhnund Trend 0.1 1.0 Vertical Effective Stress, ksf EARTH SYSTEMS C'C Nsi [T.TANTS SOUTHWEST N7 10.0 1 1 1 J 1 1 1 1 File No.: 07117-10 September 22, 2000 PLASTICITY INDEX ASTM D-4318 Job Name: Country Club of the Desert Sample ID: B20 @ 15 Feet Soil Description: Clayey Silt (CL/ML) DATA SUMMARY TEST RESULTS Number of Blows: 32 28 22 LIQUID -LD-41T 40 Water Content, % 39.0 39.4 40.5 PLASTIC LIMIT 27 Plastic Limit: 26.7 27.5 PLASTICITY INDEX 13 Flow Index 41.0 o 40.5 e 40.0 U 39.5 L w 3 39.0 38.5 10 Number of Blows 100 Plasticity Chart 70 60 d 50 I I 40 C H CL a 20 10 MH i � 0 '. ML 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 S0 100 Liquid Limit EARTH SYSTEMS CONST 1T.TANTS SOUTHWEST 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 File No.: 07117-10 September 22, 2000 MAXIMUM DENSITY / OPTIMUM MOISTURE ASTM D 1557-91 (Modified) Job Name: Country Club of the Desert Procedure Used: A Sample ID: B5 @ 5 Feet Prep. Method: Moist Location: Native Rammer Type: Mechanical Description: Silty Sand: Gray Bro,- .yvm; Fine (SM) Sieve Size % Retained Maximum Density: 105.5 pcf 3/4't 0.0 Optimum Moisture: 15.5% 3/8" 0.0 94 0.0. 140 135 130 125 110 105 100 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Moisture Content, percent. 3 P A RTR qVqT;:Xf'Z e-nxrcr rT -r A xrrcz czr)f ITT4WP(ZT File No.: 07117-10 Se -Member 22, 2000 MAXIMUM DENSITY / OPTIMUM MOISTURE ASTM E 1557-91 (Modified) Job Name: Country Club of the Desert Procedure Used: A SampleiD: B7 @ 0-5 Feet Prep. Method: Moist Location: Native Rammer Type: Mechanical Description: Silty Sand: Gray Brown; Fine (SM) Sieve Size % Retained Maximum Density: 106 pcf 3/4" 00 Optimum Moisture: 15.5% 3/8" 0.0 #4 0.0 140 135 130 125 110 105 100 + 0 KII EMS 5 10 15 20 Moisture Content, percent EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS SOUTHWEST 25 30 SOIL & PLANT LABORATORY and CONSULTANTS, Inc. 79-607 Country Club Drive Suite 7 Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 760-772-7995 SOIL ANALYSIS for: Earth Systems Consultants Southwest report date: 9-8-00 inv./lab#: 489 No. Description Sat.% pH Ohms -cm. ppm --------------- Res NO3N POOP meq/L ppm ------------ K Ca + Mg Na Cl mg/Kg SO4 07866-01 Country Club of the Desert B2 @ 0-2' 8.4 2350 34 20 B6 C 0-2' 8.3 1700 72 40 B9 @ 0-2' 8.2 950 86 123 B11 @ 0-2' 8.4 1850 40 58