Darby Estates TR 31087 (Plans 1 & 2) 2013 Codes - Geotechnical InvestigationGEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
TENTATIVE TRACT 31087
DARBY ROAD
BERMUDA DUNES AREA
RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIF.ORNIA
.P
OF LA QUINTA
I BUILDING & SAFETY {KEPT.
APPROVE®
FOR ONSTRU
DA '5 B
"CAP....` Z
-Prepared By-
Sladden Engineering
39-725 Garand Lane, Suite G
Palm Desert, California 92211
(760) 772-3893 RECENEU
jUN 03 2014
GIj'f LA QU1NTA
COMMUNIT` 6EVELOPMENT
Sladden Engineering
Sladden Engineering
6782 Stanton Ave., Suite A,. Buena Park, CA 90621 (714) 523-0952 Fax (714) 523-1369
39-725 Garand Ln., SuiteG, Palm Desert, CA 92211 (760) 772-3893 Fax (760) 772-3895
October 29, 2003
Tahiti Partners II, LLC
5305 East Second Street, Suite 204
Long Beach, California 90803
Attention: Mr. Dan Beal
Project: Tentative Tract 31087
Darby Road
Bermuda Dunes Area .
Riverside County, California
Subject: Geotechnical Investigation
Project No. 544-3455
03-10-700
Presented herewith is the report of our Geotechnical Investigation conducted at the site. of the
proposed approximately 5 acre, residential subdivision to be located on the south side of Darby Road
in the Bermuda Dunes area of Riverside County, California. The investigation was performed in
order to provide recommendations for site preparation and to .assist in foundation design for the
proposed residential structures.
This report presents the results of oQr, Meld investigation and laboratory testing along with
conclusions and recommendations for foundation design and site preparation. This report completes
our original scope of services as understood.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide service to you on this project. If you have any questions
regarding this report, please contact the undersigned
Respectfully submitted, /�oPP
SLADDEN ENGINEERING ,'/�f9s0
m/�
`t No.'C 45389
:r Exp.9/o
Brett L. An er n sT Civ�� \�P chard L. Richins
Principal Engineer \. {r` of `^i;' Sr. Engineering G,e01 gist
SER/pc
Copies: 4/Tahiti Partners II, LLC
2/Feiro Engineering, Inc.
M
i ft'o. 1793
Sladden Engineering
41
` GEOTECHNICALlBVE8TIGATI0N �
�TENTATIVE TRACT 31087
_'_—.^^~.~~ .
� @EfDMlDJADUNES AREA
�
RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
�
October 28.2O08 �
�
.
'TABLE OF CONTENTS�
. ,
INTRODUCTION ........
�
l
. SCOPE OFWORK .....................................................................................................................
l
PROJECT DESCRIPTION --._------------------..--.----.----.
1SUBSURFACE '
CONDITlONG--------.----'..----^---------------
2CONCLUSIONS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS —__------.—._......_------...
2 �
Foundation Design ----'---.--._-------------------_-----.
3
� Settlements .-----------�................................................................................. —'
3
LateralDesign ................. ...................................................................................................
Retaining Walls ........ ... ........ —._------_---.—'------._-----.
4
Ezpmoab/ Soils ....................................................................................................................
4
Concrete.............................. ....... -_-----------------'
4
Soluble 8n]futeu---.--.------------^---------------.
4
Shrinkageand Subsidence .............................. ...................................................................
4
General Site —...----'------..-----.---------'----_--.
5
� l.Clearing and --.-------------------.---------
5
2LPreparation ofBuilding Areas .................................................................................
5
� 3. Preparation oySurfaces toReceive Compacted Fill ................................................
S
4. Placement ufCompacted Fill —.--'---------------------'—
5 .
5iPreparation nf8liband Pavement Areas ...............................................................
G
<l Inspection ............................
6 '
.GENERAL —_—.---_-----..--..t_------------.—.—.—|-----—.
8
`
APPENDIX A' Site Plan and Boring Logs
.
` Field Exploration
APPENIIXB- Laboratory Testing'
Laboratory Test Results �
�
APPENDIX C' 1997\}BCSeismic Design Criteria
'
~a~d~Engin~~~g
October 29, 2003 1 Project No. 544.3455
03-10-700
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our Geotecbnical Investigation performed in order to provide
recommendations for the design and construction of the foundations for the proposed residential
structures. The approximately 5 acre project site is located on the south side of Darby Road in the
Bermuda Dunes area of Riverside County, California. The preliminary plans indicate that the
proposed development will consist of 19 single-family residences and various related site
improvements. The associated site improvements will include paved roadways, concrete driveways,
concrete walkways, various underground utilities, and landscape areas.
SCOPE OF WORK
The purpose of our investigation was to determine .certain engineering characteristics of the near
surface soils on the site in order to develop recommendations for foundation design and site
preparation. Our investigation included field exploration, laboratory testing, engineering analysis
and the preparation of this report. Evaluation of environmental issues or Hazardous wastes was not
within the scope of services provided. Our investigation was performed in accordance with
contemporary geotechnical engineering principles and practice. We make no other warranty, either
express or implied.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The approximately 5 acre project site is located on the south side of Darby Road in the Bermuda
Dunes area of Riverside County, California. The preliminary plans indicate that the project will
include 19 single-family residences. It is our understanding that the proposed residential structures
will be of relatively lightweight wood -frame construction and will be supported by conventional
shallow spread footings and concrete slabs on grade. The associated improvements will include a
paved culdesac, concrete walkways and driveways, landscape areas and various underground
utilities.
The project site is presently vacant and the ground surface is covered with scattered desert brush,
short grass, weeds and: minor debris. The site is relatively level throughout but small sand dunes
provide topographical relief of up to 10 feet. The majority of the properties surrounding the site are
presently vacant but there is a residential tract just southeast of. the site and'a single family
residence just east of the site along Darby Road. There are underground and overhead utilities
along the nearby streets and servicing the nearby residences.
Based upon our' understanding of the proposed construction and our previous experience with
lightweight wood -frame structures, we expect that isolated column loads will be less than 20 kips
and wall loading will be less than to 2.0 kips per linear foot. Grading is expected to include
substantial cuts and fills to match the nearby elevations and to construct level building pads. This
does not include removal and/or recompaction of the loose surface soils the primary foundation
bearing soils within the building areas. If the anticipated foundation loading or site.grading varies
substantially from that assumed the recommendations included in this report should be reevaluated.
Sladden Engineering,
October 29, 2003 -2- Project No. 544-3455
03-10-700
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The site soils were determined to consist primarily of native fine-grained windblown sands. The
native windblown sands were fairly uniform in composition throughout the site and the depth of our
borings. The windblown sands were typically slightly silty containing between 5. and 15 .percent
fines (clay and silt sized particles).
In general, the site soils appear somewhat loose near the surface but sampler penetration resistance
(as measured by field blow counts), indicates that density within the native soils underlying the site
generally increases with depth. The site soils were found to be dry throughout the depth of our
exploratory borings.
Laboratory classification testing indicates that the near surface soils consist primarily'of fine-
grained windblown sands. Expansion 'testing indicates that the surface soils are non -expansive and
fall within the "very low" 'expansion category in accordance with the Uniform Building Code
classification system'. The loose and dry conditions suggest that the near surface soils may be
susceptible to detrimental settlements due to the anticipated foundation loading and the
introduction of water.
Groundwater was not encountered within our.borings. Based upon information provided by the
Myoma Dunes Water Company, groundwater is expected to be in excess of 130 feet below the
existing ground surface in the vicinity of the site. Groundwater should not.be a factor in foundation
design or construction.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based upon our field and laboratory investigation, it is our opinion that the proposed residential
development, is feasible from 'a soil mechanic's perspective provided that the recommendations
included in this report are considered in building foundation design and site preparation. Due to the
somewhat loose and potentially compressible condition of some of the near surface soils, remedial
grading including overexcavation and/or watering and . recompaction is recommended for the
proposed building areas. We recommend that remedial grading within the proposed building areas
include overexcavation and/or extensive site watering and recompaction of the primary foundation
bearing soils in order to provide a uniform mat of compacted soils beneath the building foundations.
Specific recommendations for site preparation are presented in the Site Grading section of this
report.
Groundwater was not encountered within our borings and groundwater is expected to be in excess of
130 feet below the existing ground surface in the vicinity of the site. Due to the depth to
groundwater, specific liquefaction analyses were not performed. . Based upon the depth to
groundwater, the potential for liquefaction and the related surficial affects of liquefaction impacting
the site are considered negligible.
The site is located within an active seismic area of Southern California within approximately 7.9
kilometers of the San Andreas fault system. Strong ground motion resulting from earthquake
activity along the nearby San Andreas or San Jacinto fault systems is likely to impact the site during
the anticipated lifetime of the structures. Structures should be designed.by professionals familiar
with the site's geologic and seismic setting. As a minimum, structure design should conform with
Uniform Building Code (UBC) requirements for .Seismic Zone 4. Pertinent � seismic design
parameters as included within the 1997 UBC are summarized in Appendix C.
Sladden Engineering
October 29, 2003 -3- Project No. 544-3455
03-10-700
Caving did occur within each of our exploratory borings and the surface soils will be susceptible to
caving within deeper excavations. All excavations should be constructed in)accordance with the
normal CalOSHA excavation criteria. On the basis of our observations of the materials encountered,
we anticipate that the subsoils will conform to those described by CalOSHA as Type C. Soil
conditions should be verified during construction by a "Competent person" employed by the
Contractor.
The surface soils encountered during our investigation were found to be non -expansive. Laboratory
testing indicated an Expansion Index of 0 that, corresponds with the "very low" expansion category in
accordance with UBC Standard 18-2. If imported soils are to be used during grading, they should
have an Expansion Index of less than 20.
The following recommendations present more detailed design criteria that have been developed on
the basis of our field and laboratory investigation.
Foundation Design: The results of our investigation indicate that- either conventional
shallow continuous footings or isolated pad footings that are supported upon properly
recompacted soils may be expected to provide satisfactory support for the proposed
structures. Recompaction should be performed as described in the Site Grading Section of
this report.
Footings should extend at least 12 inches beneath lowest adjacent grade. Isolated square or
rectangular footings at least 2 feet square may be designed using an allowable bearing value
of 1800 pounds per square foot. Continuous footings at least 12 inches wide may be designed
using an allowable bearing value of 1500 pounds per square foot. Allowable increases of 200
psf for each additional 1 foot of width and 250 psf for each additional 6 inches of depth may
be utilized if desired. The maximum allowable bearing pressure should be 2600 psf. The
allowable bearing pressures are for dead and frequently applied live loads and may be
increased by 1/3 to resist wind, seismic or other transient loading.
The recommendations made in the preceding= paragraphs are based on the assumption that
all footings will be supported by properly compacted soil. All grading shall be performed
under the testing and inspection of the Soils Engineer or his representative. Prior to the
placement of concrete, we recommend that the footing excavations be inspected in order to
verify that they extend into compacted soil and are free of loose and disturbed materials.
Settlements: Settlements may result from the anticipated foundation loads. These
estimated ultimate settlements are calculated to be a maximum of 1 inch when using the
recommended bearing values. As a practical matter, differential settlements between
footings can be assumed as one-half of the total settlement.
Lateral Design: Resistance to lateral loads can be provided by a combination of friction
acting at the base of the slabs or foundations and passive earth pressure along the sides of
the foundations. A coefficient of friction of 0.45 between soil and concrete may be used with
dead load forces only. A passive earth pressure of 300 pounds per square foot, per foot of
depth, may be used for the sides of footings that are placed'against properly compacted
native soils.
Sladden Engineering
October 29, 2003 -4- Project No. 544-3455
03-10-700
Passive earth pressure should be ignored within the upper 1 foot except where confined (such
as beneath a floor slab). When used in combination, either the passive, resistance or the
coefficient of friction should be reduced by one-third.
Retaining Walls: Retaining walls may be required to accomplish the proposed construction.
Cantilever retaining walls may be designed using "active" pressures. Active pressures may
.be estimated using an equivalent fluid weight of 35 pcf for native backfill soils with level
free -draining backfill conditions.
For walls that are restrained, "at rest" pressures should be utilized in design. At rest
pressures may be estimated using an equivalent fluid weight of 55 pcf for native- backfill soils
with level free -draining backfill conditions.
Expansive Soils: Due to the prominence of non -expansive soils on the site, special expansive
soil design criteria should not be necessary for the design of foundations and concrete slabs -
on -grade'. Final foundation and slab design criteria should be established by the Structural
Engineer.
Concrete Slabs -on -:Grade: All surfaces to receive concrete slabs -on -grade should be underlain
by recompacted soils as described in the Site Grading Section of this report. Where slabs are
to receive moisture sensitive floor coverings or where dampness of the floor slab is not
desired, we recommend the use of an appropriate vapor barrier. Vapor barriers should be
protected by sand in order to reduce the possibility of puncture and to aid in obtaining
uniform concrete curing.
Reinforcement of slabs -on -grade in order . to resist expansive soil pressures may not be
required however, reinforcement will have a beneficial effect in containing cracking due to
concrete shrinkage. Temperature and shrinkage related cracking should be anticipated in
all concrete slabs -on -grade. Slab reinforcement and the spacing of control joints should be
determined by the Structural Engineer.
Soluble Sulfates: The soluble sulfate concentrations of the surface soils was determined to be
less than 100 parts per million (ppm). This is within the usual allowable limits for the use of
Type II cement and the use of Type V cement or special sulfate .resistant concrete mixes
should not be necessary.
Shrinkage and Subsidence: Volumetric shrinkage of the material that is excavated and
replaced as controlled compacted fill should be anticipated. We estimate that this shrinkage
could vary from 15 to 20 percent. Subsidence of the surfaces that are scarified and
compacted should be between 0.1 and 0.2 tenths of a foot. Shrinkage and subsidence will
vary depending upon the type of equipment used, the moisture content of the soil at the time
of grading and the actual degree of compaction attained.
These values for shrinkage and subsidence are exclusive of losses that will occur due to the
stripping of the organic material from the site, the removal of deleterious materials and the
removal of debris, trees and other subsurface obstructions.
Sladden Engineering
October 29, 2003 .5- Project No. 544-3455
03-10-700
General Site Grading: All grading should be performed in accordance with the grading
ordinance of Riverside County. The following recommendations have been developed on the
basis of our field and laboratory testing:
Clearing and Grubbing: Proper clearing of any existing vegetation, associated root
systems, foundations or slabs, and debris will be very important. All surfaces to
receive compacted fill should be cleared of roots, vegetation, debris, and other
unsuitable materials that should be removed from the site. Soils that are disturbed
due to the removal of the surface vegetation and debris should be replaced as
controlled compacted fill under the direction of the Soils Engineer.
2. Preparation of Building Area: In order to provide firm and uniform bearing
conditions, we recommend thorough site watering and recompact ion of the near
surface native soils throughout the building and foundation areas. The building
areas should be watered so that near optimum moisture content is attained to a
depth. of at least 3 feet below existing grade or 3 feet below the bottom of the footings,
whichever is deeper. The exposed surface should then be compacted with heavy
equipment so that a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction is attained to a
depth of at least 2 feet below existing grade or 2 feet below the bottom of the footings,
whichever is. deeper. Fil material may then be placed as recommended in Item 4
below. If the recommended depth of compaction cannot be attained in this manner,
overexcavation. may•-be-neeessary.
3.. Preparation. of.Surface&-to_Rer_eiv6. Compacted Fill: Other areas to receive compacted
fill should be brought to near optimum moisture content and compacted to a
minimum`of•90.percent relative compaction.
4. Placement of Compacted Fill: Fill materials consisting of on -site soils or approved
imported granular soils, should be spread in thin lifts, and compacted at near
optimum moisture content to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction.
Imported material shall have an Expansion Index not exceeding 20. The contractor
shall notify the -Soils Engineer at least 48 hours in advance of importing soils in order
to provide sufficient time for the evaluation of proposed import materials.
The contractor shall be responsible for delivering material to the site that complies
with the project specifications. Approval by the Soils Engineer will be based upon
material delivered to the site and not the preliminary evaluation of import sources.
Our observations of the material encountered during our investigation indicate that
compaction will be most readily obtained by means of heavy rubber -wheeled
equipment and/or vibratory compactors. At the time of our investigation, the subsoils
were found to be very dry. A more uniform and near optimum moisture content
should be maintained during recompaction and fill placement.
Sladden Engineering
October 29, 2003 .6- Project No. 544-3455
03-10-700
5. Preparation of Slab and Paving Areas: All surfaces to receive asphalt concrete
paving or concrete slabs -on -grade, should be underlain by a minimum compacted fill
thickness of 12 inches. This may be accomplished by a combination of scarification
and recompaction of the surface soils and placement of the fill material as controlled
compacted fill. Compaction of the slab and pavement areas should be to a minimum
of 90 percent relative compaction.
6. 'Testing and Inspection: During grading tests and' observations should be performed
by the Soils Engineer or his representative in order to verify that the grading is being
performed in accordance with the project specifications. Field density testing shall
be performed in accordance with acceptable ASTM test methods. The minimum
acceptable degree of compaction should be 90 percent'of the maximum dry density as
obtained by the ASTM D1557-91 test method. Where testing indicates insufficient
density, additional compactive effort shall be applied until retesting indicates
satisfactory compaction.
GENERAL
The findings and recommendations presented in this report are based upon an interpolation of the
soil conditions between the exploratory boring locations and extrapolation of these conditions
throughout the proposed building area. Should conditions encountered during grading appear
different than those.indicated in this report, this office should be notified.
This report is considered to be applicable for use by Tahiti Partners II, LLC for the specific site and
project described herein. The use of this report by other parties or for other projects is not
authorized. The recommendations of this report are contingent upon monitoring of the grading
operation by a representative of Sladden Engineering: All recommendations are considered to be
tentative pending our review of the grading operation and additional testing, if indicated. If others
are employed to perform any soil testing, this office should be notified prior to such testing in order
to coordinate any required site visits by our representative and to assure indemnification of Sladden
Engineering.
Our investigation was conducted prior to the completion of plans for the project. We recommend that.
a pre -job conference be held on the'site prior to the initiation of site grading. The purpose of this
meeting will be to assure a complete understanding of the recommendations presented in this report
as they apply to the actual grading performed.
Sladden Engineering
APPENDIX A .
Site Plan
Boring Logs
r
Sladden Engineering
APPENDIX A
FIELD EXPLORATION
For our field. investigation 4 exploratory borings were excavated on September 23, 2003, using a
truck mounted Mobile B-61 drilling rig and hollow -stem augers. The approximate exploratory boring
locations are indicated on the site plan included in this appendix. Boring logs are included in this
appendix.
Representative undisturbed samples were obtained within our borings by driving a thin -walled steel
penetration sampler (California split spoon sampler) or a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler
with a 140 pound hammer dropping approximately 30 inches (ASTM D1586). The number of blows
required to drive the samplers 18 inches was recorded in 6-inch increments and blowcounts are
indicated on the boring logs.
The California samplers are 3.0 inches in diameter, carrying brass sample rings having inner
diameters of 2.5 inches. The standard penetration samplers are 2.0 inches in diameter with an inner
diameter of 1.5 inches. Undisturbed samples were removed from the sampler and placed in moisture
sealed containers in order to preserve the natural soil moisture content. Bulk samples were obtained
from the excavation spoils and samples were then transported to our laboratory for further
observations and testing.
Sladden Engineering
G
✓� 4'
t l.�ir
J
10
42nd
AVENUE
.
� z
Z X
DARE; r` hD
Q
SITE
FRED
WARING-
DRIVE
MILES
AVENUE
u-
111
(n
ct
�—
rA. rf, HW Y
III
VICINITY -MAP
NO SCALE
7
sm _
'v�•v,v ya �f \ � '
3 vet
wee•:a•oly _ Irs.m'
�roa•ru'IT'r
1 �
\Y nB
♦ 6
I II o
nr
Ib.eY.�_--�I
A; I I I1
1 \
__—iu�io_---LI I Is_--!YBi r-•—
'E" F
1 � �
r
or C. .. ....
DARBY ROAD
ON
North Approximate,Boring Locations
Proposed Residential Development
Bermuda Dunes area / Riverside County., California
Date: 9-23-03 Borine No.
4 Job No.: 544-3455
a
3
,o
0
DESCRIPTION
q
o;
REMARKS
4044
o
U
pq
o
v�
� .°,
c
o U
°
Sand: Grey brown,
SP/SM
-
slightly silty, fine grained
s
3/4/6
---
0
---
8% passing #200
10
7/8/10
"
"
---
---
---
No recovery
15
8/13/14
0
---
11 % passing #200
_
Standard Penetration
m
Total Depth=1,6.5'
No Bedrock
-
Sample
No Groundwater
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Note: The stratification lines
represent the approximate
55
boundaries between the soil types;
the transitions may be gradual
APPENDIX B
Laboratory Testing
Laboratory Test Results
Sladden Engineering
FROM SLADDEN-BEAUMONT (THU)MAR 3 2005 14:25/ST,14:25/No.6800824602 P 1
ANAHEIM TEST LABORATORY
3008 S. ORANGE AVENUE..
SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92707 7
PHONE (714) 549-7267
TO: SLADDEN ENGINEERING:
114 S. CALIFORNIA AVE.
BEAUMONT, CA.• 92223 DATE: 2/22/05
PO.N6. Chain of Custody
ATTN : BRETT / DAVE Shipper No.
Lob, No, A- 6 6 0 2
Speciticotion,
Material; SOIL.
PROJECT: #522-3455
LOT.#57
ANALYTICAL.REPORT
SOLUBLE SULFATES
per CA. .417
1,070 ppm
F004 f2
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTING
Representative bulk and relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained in the field and returned
to our laboratory for additional observations and testing. Laboratory testing was generally
performed in two phases. The first phase consisted of testing in order to determine the compaction of
the existing natural soil and the general engineering classifications of the soils underlying the site.
This testing was performed in order to estimate the engineering .characteristics of the soil and to
serve as a basis for selecting samples for the second phase of testing. The second phase consisted of
soil mechanics testing. This testing including consolidation, shear strength and expansion testing
was performed in order to provide a means.of developing specific design recommendations based on
the mechanical properties of the soil.
CLASSIFICATION AND -COMPACTION TESTING
Unit Weight and Moisture Content Determinations: Each undisturbed sample was weighed and
measured in order to determine its unit weight. A small portion of each sample was then subjected
to testing in order to determine its moisture content. This was used in order to determine the dry
density of the soil in its natural condition. The results of this testing are shown on the Boring Logs.
Maximum Density -Optimum Moisture Determinations: Representative soil types were selected for
maximum density determinations. This testing was performed in accordance with the ASTM
Standard D1567-91, Test Method A. The results of this testing are presented graphically in this
appendix. The maximum densities are compared to the field densities of the soil in order to
determine the existing relative compaction to the soil. This is shown on the Boring Logs, and is
useful in estimating the strength and compressibility of the soil.
Classification Testing: Soil samples were selected for classification testing. This testing consists of
mechanical grain size analyses and Atterberg Limits determinations. These provide information for
developing classifications for the soil in accordance with the Unified Classification System. This
classification system' categorizes the soil into, groups having similar engineering characteristics. The
results of this testing are very useful in detecting variations in the soils and in selecting samples for
further testing.
SOIL MECHANIC'S TESTING
Direct Shear Testing: One bulk sample was selected for Direct Shear Testing. This testing
measures the shear strength of the soil under various normal pressures and is used in developing
parameters for foundation design and lateral design. Testing was performed using recompacted test
specimens, which were saturated prior to testing. Testing was performed using a strain controlled
test apparatus with normal pressures ranging from 800 to 2300 pounds per square foot.
Expansion Testing: One bulk sample was selected for Expansion testing. Expansion testing was
performed in accordance with, the UBC Standard 18-2. This testing consists of remolding. 4-inch
diameter by 1-inch thick test specimens to a moisture- content and dry density corresponding to
approximately 50 percent saturation. The samples are subjected to a surcharge of 144 pounds per
square foot and allowed to reach equilibrium. At that point the specimens are inundated with
distilled water. The linear expansion is then measured until complete.
Sladden Engineering
Maximum Density/Optimum Moisture
ASTM D698/D1557
Project Number: 544-3455 October 29, 2003
Project Name: Darby Rd. ASTM D-1557 A
Lab ID Number: Rammer Type: Machine
Sample Location: Bulk.3 @ 0-5'
_Description: Sand
Maximum Density: 108 pcf
Optimum Moisture 13%
Sieve Size % Retained
3/4"
3/8"
#4 p
lay
140
135
130
u
a' 125
d
A 120
A
115
110
105
100
0
Max Density
=MMMM=MM=—\\w
5 10 15 20 25
Moisture.Content, %
Sladden Engineering Revised 12/03/02
Gradation
ASTM C117 & C136
Project Number:
544-3455
October 29, 2003
Project Name:
Darby Rd.
Sample ID:
Boring 1 @ 5'
Sieve
Sieve
Percent
Size, in
Size, mm
Passing
1 "
25.4
L09
3/4"
19.1
100 ,
1 /2"
12.7
100
3/8"
9.53
100
#4
4.75
100
#8
2.36
100
#16
1.18
100
#30
0.60
96
#50
0.30
62
#100
0.15
29
#200
0.074
7
100
90
80
70
cn 60
2 ' 50
a
40
30
20
10
0
100.0 10.0 1.0 0.1 0.0
Sieve Size, mm
0.0
Gradation Sladden Engineering
Revised 11/20/02
r
Gradation
ASTM C117 & C136
Project Number:
544-3455 .
October 29, 2003
Project Name:
Darby Rd.
Sample ID:
Bulk 3 @ 0-5'
Sieve
Sieve
.Percent
Size, in
Size, mm ,
Passing
l
25.4
100
3/4"
19.1
100
1 /2"
12.7
100
3/8"
9.53
100
#4
435
100
#8
2.36
100
#16
1.18
100
#30
0.60
94
#50
0.30
74
# 100
0.15
49 `
#200
0.074
16
" IIIII■I�rr�111111■�Irlli:ll�■■■IIIII■■■11111�■■■
IIIII■■■IIIII■■■Ills► �■■■11111�■■ ■IIIII■■■
' IIIII■■■IIIII■■■IIIII\■■■IIIII■■■11111�■■■
, IIIII■■■IIIII■■■IIIII\\■■IIIII■■■IIIII■■■
IIIII■■■Illlle■■■Illlli\1■■IIIII■■■11111�■■
IIIII■■■IIIII■■■IIIII�i►i■11111�■■■IIIII■■■
IIIII■■■IIIII■■■IIIII■\\■IIIII■■■IIIII■■■
IIIII■■■II111�■■■IIIII■■■IIIII■■■IIIII■■■
= �' IIIII■■■IIIII■■■IIIII■■�IIIII�■■■11111�■■■
IIIII■■■IIIII■■■IIIII■■\�IIIII�■■■11111�■■■
11111�■■■IIIII■■■IIIII■■�i11111,■■■11111�■■■
"- , , illll�■■®IIIII■■■IIIII■■s\IIIII■■■IIIII■■■
IIIII■■■11111�■■■IIIII■■�111111s■■■11111�■■■
IIIII■■■IIIII■■■IIIII■■�IIIIio■■■11111�■■■
IIIII■■■IIIII■■■IIIII•■■■►VIII�■■■IIIII■■■
IIIII■■■IIIIIo■■■IIIII■■■I►�111�■■■IIIII■■■
IIIII■■■II III■■■IIIII■■■Il��l1�■■■IIIII■■■
IIIII■■■IIIII■■■IIIII■■■IIIIi�■■■IIIII■■■
IIIII■■■IIIII■■■11111�■■■11111�■■■IIIII■■®
IIIIlO■■■IIIII■■■IIIII■■■11111�■■■IIIII■■®
Gradation
Sladden Engineering
Revised 11/20/02
Expansion Index
ASTM D 48291UBC 29-2
Job Number: 544-3455 Date: 10/29/03
Job Name: Darby Rd. Tech: Jake
Lab ID:
Sample ID: Bulls 3 @ 0-5'
Soil Description: Sand
Wt of Soil + Ring:
565.0
Weight of Ring:
179.0
Wt of Wet Soil:
386.0'
Percent Moisture:
11%
Wet. Density, pcf: 117.0
Dry Densiiy, pcf. 105.4
Saturation: 49.6
Expansion Rack #
Date/Time
10/29/03
9:00 a.m-.
Initial Reading
0.500
Final Reading
0.500
Expansion Index
(Final - Initial) x 1000
t
0
El Sladden Engineering Revised 12/10/02
APPENDIX C
1997 UBC Seismic Design Criteria
r
Sladden Engineering
October 29, 2003 -12- Project No. 544-3455
03-10-700
1997 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE SEISMIC DESIGN INFORMATION
The International Conference of Building Officials 1997 Uniform Building Code contains substantial
revisions and additions to -the earthquake engineering section in Chapter 16. Concepts contained in
the code that will be relevant to construction ofthe proposed structures'are summarized below.
Ground shaking is expected to be the primary.hazard most likely to affect the site, based upon
proximity to significant faults capable of generating large earthquakes. Major fault zones considered
to be most likely to create strong ground shaking at the site are listed below.
Fault Zone
Approximate Distance
From Site •
Fault Type
(1997 UBC)
San Andreas
7.9 km
A
San Jacinto
35.7 km
A
Based on our field observations and understanding of local geologic conditions, the soil profile type
judged applicable to this site is SD, generally described as stiff or dense soil. The site is located
within UBC Seismic Zone 4. The following table presents additional coefficients and factors relevant
to seismic mitigation for new construction upon adoption of the 1997 code.
Near -Source
Near -Source
Seismic
Seismic
Seismic
Acceleration
Velocity
Coefficient
Coefficient
Source
Factor; N,
Factor, Ny
Ca
Cv
San Andreas
1.1
1.4
0.44Na
0.64Nv
San Jacinto
- 1.0
1.0
0.44Na
0.64Nv
Sladden Engineering
1 '
* E Q F A U L T
* Version 3.00
DETERMINISTIC ESTIMATION OF
PEAK ACCELERATION FROM DIGITIZED FAULTS
JOB NUMBER:
DATE: 10-20-2003
JOB NAME: Darby Road & Washington Street
La Quinta, California
CALCULATION NAME: Test Run Analysis
FAULT -DATA -FILE NAME: CDMGFLTE.DAT
SITE COORDINATES:
SITE LATITUDE: 33.7333
SITE LONGITUDE: 116.3008
SEARCH RADIUS: 100 mi
ATTENUATION RELATION: 5) Boore et al. (1997) Horiz. - SOIL (310)
UNCERTAINTY (M=Median, S=Sigma): M Number of Sigmas: 0.0
DISTANCE MEASURE: cd_2drp
SCOND: 0
Basement Depth: 5.00 km Campbell SSR: Campbell SHR:
COMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION
FAULT -DATA FILE USED: CDMGFLTE.DAT
MINIMUM DEPTH VALUE (km): 0.0
---------------
EQFAULT SUMMARY
---------------
------------------------------
DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS
------------------------------
Page 1
---------------------------------------------
(ESTIMATED
---------------
MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT
I
APPROXIMATE I
-------------------
ABBREVIATED I
DISTANCE I
MAXIMUM I
PEAK
JEST. SITE
FAULT NAME I
mi
(km) .JEARTHQUAKEI
SITE
JINTENSITY
I
.1
MAG.(Mw) I
ACCEL. g
JMOD.MERC.
SAN ANDREAS - Coachella 1
4.9(
7.9)1
7.1 - 1,
0.391
1 X
SAN ANDREAS - Southern 1
4.9(
7.9)1
7.4 1
0.458
1 X
BURNT MTN. 1
15.3(
24.6)1
6.4 1
0.128
1 VIII
EUREKA PEAK I
16.3(
26.2)1
6.4 1
0,.122
1. VII
SAN ANDREAS - San Bernardino 1
16.6(
26.7)1
7.3 1
0.194
1 VIII
SAN JACINTO-ANZA 1
22.2(
35.7)1
7.2 1
0.148
1 VIII
SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK 1
.22,.5(
36.2)I
6.8 1
0.118
1 "VII
PINTO MOUNTAIN 1
28.0(
45.0)1
7.0 1
0.111
I VII
EMERSON So. - COPPER MTN. 1
30.1(,
48.4)1
6.9 1
0.100
1 VII
LANDERS 1
30'.4(
49.0)1
7.3 1
0-.122
I. VII
PISGAH-BULLION MTN.-MESQUITE LK 1
32.7(
52.6)1
7.1 1
0.104
1. VII
NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East) 1
35.2(
5'6.7)1
6.7 1
0.097
1 VII
SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY 1
35.4(
57.0)1
6.9 1
0.088
1 VII
SAN JACINTO - BORREGO 1
37.3(
60.1)1
6.6 1
0:072
1 VI
JOHNSON VALLEY (Northern) 1
41.3(
66.4)1
6.7 1
0.070
1 VI
EARTHQUAKE VALLEY 1
41.4(
66.6)1
6.5 1
0.063
1 VI
CALICO - HIDALGO 1
43.2(
69.5)1
7.1 1
0.084
1 VI•I
BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE 1
43.3(
69.7)1
6.4 1
0.058
1 VI
ELSINORE-JULIAN j
94.4(
71.4)1.
7.1 1
0.082
1 VII
LENWOOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN SPRGSI
47.0(
75.6)1
7.3 1
0.087
1 VII
NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (West) 1
47.3(
76.2)1
7.0 1
0.090
1 VII
ELSINORE-TEMECULA 1
47.8(
76.9)1
6.8 1
0.066
I VI
ELMORE RANCH 1
50.8(
81.7)1
6.6 1
0.057
I VI
ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN 1
53.2(
85.6)1
6.8, I
0.061
1 VI
HELENDALE --S. LOCKHARDT I
54.9.(
88.3)1
7.1 1
0.070
I VI
SUPERSTITION MTN. (San Jacinto) 1
55.6(
89.5)1
6.6 I
'0.053 1
VI
SUPERSTITION HILLS (San Jacinto)1
56.4(
90.8)1
6.6 1
0.052 1
VI
SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO 1
57.2(
92.1)1
6.7 I
0..055 1
VI
ELSINORE-GLEN IVY 1
60.5(
97.4)1
6.6 1
0.055 1
VI
CLEGHORN 1
64.3(
103.5)1
6.5 1
0.045 1
VI
IMPERIAL 1
70.6(
113.6)1
7.0 1
' 0.054 1
VI
CUCAMONGA 1
72.2(
116.2)1
7.0 1
0.065 1
VI
CHINO -CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) 1
73.1(
117.7)1
6.7 1
0.055 1
VI
LAGUNA SALADA 1
73.7(
118.6)1
7.0 1 -
0.053• 1
VI
NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) 1.
76.1(
122.5)1
6.9 1
0.0491
VI
ROSE CANYON I
76.3(
122.8)1
6.9 1
0.049 1
VI
WHITTIER I
7,7.2(
124.3)1
6.8 1
0.046 1
VI
SAN ANDREAS - Mojave 1
81.1(
130.5)1
1.1 1.
0.052 1
VI
SAN ANDREAS,- 1857 Rupture 1
81.1(
130.5)1
7.8 1
0.075 i
VII
SAN JOSE 1
84.1(
135.3)1
6.5 1
0.044 1
VI
-----------------------------
DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS
Page 2
I
(ESTIMATED
MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT
I
APPROXIMATE
I
-------------------------------
ABBREVIATED I
DISTANCE I
MAXIMUM I
PEAK
JEST. SITE
FAULT NAME I
mi
(km) 1EARTHQUAKEI
SITE
(INTENSITY
MAG.(Mw) I
ACCEL. g
IMOD.MERC.
GRAVEL HILLS - HARPER LAKE 1
86.3(
138.9)1
6.9 1
0.044
1 VI
SIERRA MADRE 1
86.9(
139.9)1
7.0 1
0.056
1 VI
ELYSIAN PARK THRUST 1
89.4(
143.8).1
6.7 1
•0..047
1 VI
CORONADO BANK 1
91.7(
147.5)1
7.4 1
0.055
1 VI
NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (L.A.Basin) 1
93.7(
150.8)r1
6.9 1
0.041
V
CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT 1
95.4(
153.6)1
6.5 1
_1
0.040
1 V
COMPTON THRUST 1
96.3(
154.9)1
6.8 1
0.047
1 VI
BLACKWATER ►
98.2(
158.1)1
6.9 1
0.040
1 V
PALOS VERDES- 1
99.2(
159.6)1
7.1 1
0.044
1 VI
-END OF SEARCH- 49 FAULTS FOUND
WITHIN
THE SPECIFIED SEARCH RADIUS.
THE SAN ANDREAS - Coachella FAULT IS CLOSEST TO THE SITE
IT IS ABOUT 4.9 MILES (7.9 km) AWAY.
LARGEST MAXIMUM -EARTHQUAKE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.4575 g
r
t
CALIFORNIA FAULT MAP
1100 Darby Road & Washington Street / La Quinta
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100 ��3tiO SITE
o � b
0 \
-100 °
-400 -300 -200 -.100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
STRIKE -SLIP FAULTS
5) Boore et al. (1997) Horiz. SOIL (310)
M=5 M=6 M-=7 ' M=8
1
o � .1
cu
a�
a�
U
U
n
.001
1 10 100
Distance [adist] (km)
C
DIP -SLIP FAULTS
5) Boore et al. (1997) Horiz. - SOIL (310)
M=5 M=6 'M=7 M=8
.001.
1 10 100,
Distance [adist] (km)
i
41
4
BLIND"THRUST FAULTS
5) Boore et al. (1997) Horiz. - SOIL (310)
M=5 M=6 M=7 M=R
o
.1
c�
a�
a�
U
. U
Q
.01
.001
1
10 100
Distance [adist] (km)
1
MAXIMUM EARTHQUAKES
Darby Road & Washington Street / La Quinta
1
C
0
.1
c�
L
U
C)
Q
.01
.001
.1 1 10. 100
Distance (mi)
A
EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDES & DISTANCES
Darby Road & Washington Street / La Qu'inta
7.75
7.50
7.25
a)
4-a
�E 7.00
-6.75
6.50
10
Distance.(mi)
100