PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
HAMPTON INN
1014 Geronimo Avenue
Parker, Arizona
Prepared For:
Greens Group
14252 Culver Drive, A 358
Irvine, CA 92604
October 22, 2014
Project No.: 14238
Prepared by:
ABI Engineering Consultants, Inc.
1701 E. Edinger Ave., Suite A9
Santa Ana, California 92705
Tel.: (888) 220-5596
Fax: (714) 866-4171
A B I ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC.
1 7 0 1 E . E d i n g e r A v e . , S u i t e A 9 S a n t a A n a , C a l i f o r n i a 9 2 7 0 5
T e l . : ( 8 8 8 ) 2 2 0 - 5 5 9 6 F a x : ( 7 1 4 ) 8 6 6 - 4 1 7 1
O c t o b e r 2 2 , 2 0 1 4 P r o j e c t N o . 1 4 2 3 8
G r e e n s G r o u p 1 4 2 5 2 C u l v e r D r i v e , A 3 5 8 I r v i n e , C A 9 2 6 0 4
A t t e n t i o n : S h a r a d K a d a k i a
S u b j e c t : P r e l i m i n a r y G e o t e c h n i c a l I n v e s t i g a t i o n f o r p r o p o s e d H a m p t o n I n n D e v e l o p m e n t a t 1 1 4 0 G e r o n i m o A v e n u e , P a r k e r , A r i z o n a
D e a r M r . K a d a k i a :
A B I E n g i n e e r i n g C o n s u l t a n t s , I n c . i s p l e a s e d t o p r e s e n t t h i s r e p o r t o f o u r g e o t e c h n i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n f o r t h e p r o p o s e d c o m m e r c i a l d e v e l o p m e n t t o b e c o n s t r u c t e d a t t h e s u b j e c t l o c a t i o n .
T h i s r e p o r t p r e s e n t s a r e v i e w o f t h e p r o j e c t i n f o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d t o u s , a d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e s u r f a c e a n d s u b s u r f a c e c o n d i t i o n s , g e o t e c h n i c a l r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r f o u n d a t i o n d e s i g n a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n , s e i s m i c i n f o r m a t i o n , a n d a s u m m a r y o f e x c a v a t i o n a n d e a r t h w o r k r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r s o i l s e n c o u n t e r e d a t t h e s u b j e c t s i t e . A t t a c h m e n t s t o t h e r e p o r t i n c l u d e a s i t e v i c i n i t y m a p , a s o i l b o r i n g l o c a t i o n p l a n , s o i l b o r i n g l o g s , l a b o r a t o r y t e s t i n g r e s u l t s a n d s e i s m i c a n a l y s e s .
W e a p p r e c i a t e t h i s o p p o r t u n i t y t o p r o v i d e o u r s e r v i c e s a n d l o o k f o r w a r d t o a s s i s t i n g as y o u r g e o t e c h n i c a l c o n s u l t a n t t h r o u g h o u t t h i s p r o j e c t . P l e a s e c o n t a c t u s i f y o u h a v e a n y q u e s t i o n s o r r e q u i r e a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n .
S i n c e r e l y , ABI Engineering Consultants, Inc.
Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
1014 Geronimo Ave., Parker, Arizona
ABI Engineering Consultants, Inc. i October 22, 2014
ABI Project No. 14238
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1
1.1 PURPOSE .............................................................................................................. 1
1.2 SCOPE OF WORK............................................................................................... 1
2 SUBSURFACE AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION ......................................... 2
2.1 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION .................................................................... 2
2.2 GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY TESTING ............................................... 2
3 SITE, GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ............................................. 3
3.1 SITE CONDITIONS AND PROPOSED PROJECT ........................................ 3
3.2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ........................................................................... 3
3.3 GROUNDWATER ................................................................................................ 3
3.4 EXPANSION POTENTIAL OF SOIL ............................................................... 3
3.5 CORROSIVITY .................................................................................................... 3
4 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................ 4
4.1 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................... 4
4.2 GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................... 4
4.2.1 EARTHWORK AND SITE GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS ................. 4
4.2.2 OVER-EXCAVATION FOR BUILDING PAD PREPARATION .................. 5
4.2.3 SELECT FILL MATERIALS ............................................................................. 5
4.2.4 FILL AND COMPACTION ................................................................................ 5
4.2.5 FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................... 5
4.2.6 SLAB-ON-GRADE ............................................................................................... 6
4.2.7 LATERAL RESISTANCE ................................................................................... 6
4.2.8 LATERAL EARTH LOADS ............................................................................... 7
4.2.10 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS .................................................................. 7
4.2.11 CONCRETE .......................................................................................................... 8
4.2.12 ASPHALT CONCRETE (FLEXIBLE) PAVEMENT ...................................... 8
4.2.13 POOL DESIGN ..................................................................................................... 9
4.2.14 SITE GRADING FOR SURFACE DRAINAGE ............................................... 9
5 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS ......................................................................... 10
6 CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND SPECIFICATION REVIEW ................................ 11
7 LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................... 12
FIGURES
Figure 1 – Site Vicinity Map
Figure 2 – Preliminary Site Plan
APPENDICES
Appendix A – Boring Logs
Appendix B – Geotechnical Laboratory Test Results
Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
1014 Geronimo Ave., Parker, Arizona
ABI Engineering Consultants, Inc. 1 October 22, 2014
ABI Project No. 14238
1 INTRODUCTION
ABI Engineering Consultants, Inc. (ABI) completed a preliminary geotechnical investigation for
a commercial development at 1014 Geronimo Avenue in the Town of Parker Arizona. This
report presents results of subsurface and laboratory investigation and presents geotechnical
recommendations for the proposed development. The site location is shown on Figure 1.
The proposed development consists of construction of 3-story hotel building with maximum
height of 40 feet. The preliminary site development plan is presented on Figure 2. The building
will be wood-framed structure and be supported on conventional slab-on-grade foundation
system with perimeter footings and isolated interior footings. The total floor area of building is
39,984 square feet which includes 61 guest rooms. The anticipated wall loading is in the order of
1 kip per foot. Other Improvements will consist of a swimming pool, asphalt/concrete pavement
for driveways and parking, hardscape and landscape development.
1.1 Purpose
The purpose of this geotechnical investigation is to understand the subsurface conditions at the
site and to provide geotechnical recommendations for design of proposed construction. The
geotechnical recommendations for earthwork, foundation design, concrete slab-on-grade, asphalt
pavement, and seismic parameters.
1.2 Scope of Work
The scope of work included the following
• Literature and map review of the region and vicinity;
• Review of Site Conditions;
• Subsurface and Geotechnical Laboratory Investigation; and
• Preparation of this Geotechnical Investigation report.
The assessment of general site environmental conditions, the presence or absences of petroleum
impact in the soil, groundwater, or surface water of the site were beyond the scope of this
investigation.
Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
1014 Geronimo Ave., Parker, Arizona
ABI Engineering Consultants, Inc. 2 October 22, 2014
ABI Project No. 14238
2 SUBSURFACE AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION
A subsurface and geotechnical laboratory investigation was performed to assess subsurface
conditions across the site. The subsurface investigation consisted of soil borings, and collection
of soil samples for laboratory testing.
2.1 Subsurface Investigation
The subsurface conditions beneath the site were explored on October 3, 2014 by drilling five (5)
soil borings to depths ranging from 11 to 41 feet below the existing ground surface. The borings
were drilled utilizing 8-inch diameter hollow stem augers. A truck mounted drill rig equipped
with drilling equipment was used. Standard Penetration Test blow counts (SPT-N) were obtained
during drilling at approximately 5-foot intervals. Relatively undisturbed soil samples were
obtained by driving 3.0-inch outer diameter Modified California Sampler lined with 2.4-inch
internal diameter brass rings. Bulk soil samples were collected from drill cuttings. The collected
soil samples were stored in plastic containers or bags to retain the natural moisture content.
After completion of logging and sampling, the boreholes were backfilled with on-site soils.
The soils were visually classified in the field in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification
System (USCS) in accordance with ASTM D2488 standard procedure. The logs of the soil
borings are presented in appendix A. The logs represent our interpretations of the subsurface
conditions based on our field observations, a visual examination of samples, and the indicated
laboratory tests performed on selected samples. The line designating the interface between
various strata on the soil boring log represents the approximate positions of the interface. The
actual transition between strata may be gradual.
Ground water was not encountered in any of the boreholes during boring drilled to the maximum
depth of 41 feet at the site.
2.2 Geotechnical Laboratory Testing
Selected soil samples obtained from the borings were tested for classification and physical
properties. Based on the soil type encountered, relevant tests required to provide the
geotechnical laboratory tests were performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM test
standards. The following tests were performed:
1. In-situ Moisture and Density Test (ASTM D2216),
2. Grain Size Distribution (ASTM D 6913),
3. Direct Shear Test (ASTM D3080),
4. Compaction Test (ASTM D1557), and
5. Corrosion Tests: Resistivity Test and pH (CA 643), Sulfate Content (CA 417), Chloride
Content (CA 422).
The test results are included in Appendix B.
Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
1014 Geronimo Ave., Parker, Arizona
ABI Engineering Consultants, Inc. 3 October 22, 2014
ABI Project No. 14238
3 SITE, GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
3.1 Site Conditions and Proposed Project
The project site is located at south west corner of 11Th Street and Geronimo Avenue in the Town
of Parker, Arizona. The site area is 45,000 square feet. The site is generally rectangular in shape
in a northwest to southeast orientation. The site is bounded by West 11th Street to the north,
Geronimo Ave. to the east, and commercial property to the south and west. The site generally
has flat topography. The approximate elevation of site is 424 feet respect to mean sea level
(Source: google earth). The site is in developed area and consists of 3 single story buildings and
paved parking lots.
The existing buildings and other structures will be demolished. A new 3-story hotel building will
be constructed on the western portion of the site, and eastern portion will have driveway and
parking areas, with landscape improvements. A swimming pool, including a storage area, will be
constructed at southwest corner of the property.
3.2 Subsurface Conditions
The subsurface consists of fine to coarse grained Silty Sand (SM) and Sand (SP) with gravel.
The soils are in dry, and in medium to dense condition to the explored depth of 41 feet.
3.3 Groundwater
Groundwater was not encountered in the boring drilled to maximum depth of 41 feet below the
existing ground surface. Groundwater is not anticipated to adversely impact the proposed
development. However, the depth to groundwater may fluctuate, depending on rainfall and
possible groundwater recharge or pumping activity in the site vicinity.
3.4 Expansion Potential of Soil
The subsurface soil is generally non-plastic granular materials. Based on soil type, the on-site
soil is considered to have low to none expansion potential.
3.5 Corrosivity
Corrosive soils may have an adverse impact on below ground concrete and buried metallic
objects. The corrosion tests performed on representative on-site soil sample of the near surface
soils obtained from the geotechnical exploration:
Table 1: Corrosion Test Results
Test Results
Minimum Resistivity (per CA 532) 7,100 ohm-cm
pH (per CA 643) 8.7
Sulfate Content (per CA 417) 78 ppm
Chloride Content (per CA 422) 218 ppm
Based on corrosion test result, the on-site soil would not be considered corrosive.
Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
1014 Geronimo Ave., Parker, Arizona
ABI Engineering Consultants, Inc. 4 October 22, 2014
ABI Project No. 14238
4 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 CONCLUSIONS
It is our opinion that the proposed development is feasible from geotechnical consideration. The
proposed construction is not expected to adversely impact adjacent structures from a
geotechnical perspective provided recommendations in this report are implemented during
design and construction of the project.
4.2 GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS
4.2.1 Earthwork and Site Grading recommendations
Site Preparation and Grading
Prior to grading operations, all existing buildings, including their foundations should be
completely demolished and removed. All demolition debris and deleterious materials, including
any remaining buried obstructions and underground utilities should be removed. Any
undocumented fill should be removed and stockpiled for reuse. Surface vegetation should be
stripped from areas of proposed construction. After clearing the site, the exposed soils should be
carefully inspected to verify the removal of all unsuitable deposits, including, organic material
consisting of vegetation and roots, top soil and loose or soft soil.
The exposed excavations should be scarified to a depth of at least eight inches, brought to within
than three percent optimum moisture content, and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the
maximum dry density determined by Modified Proctor Compaction Test (ASTM D1557).
The final bottom surface of all excavations should be observed and approved by the project soil
engineer prior to placing any fill and/or structures. Based on these observations, removal of
localized areas deeper than this recommendation may be required during grading. Therefore,
some variations in depth and lateral extent of excavation recommended in this report should be
anticipated.
Temporary Excavation
All excavations shall be made in accordance with the requirement of OSHA and other public
agencies having jurisdiction. Any excavations over 5 feet high shall be sloped back at minimum
gradient of 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) or be shored or braced for safety and should be protected
from erosion during construction.
The contractor is solely responsible for site safety during construction. The contractor should be
aware the excavation height, slope should no case exceed those specified in local, state, and
federal safety regulations.
Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
1014 Geronimo Ave., Parker, Arizona
ABI Engineering Consultants, Inc. 5 October 22, 2014
ABI Project No. 14238
4.2.2 Over-excavation for building pad preparation
Over-excavation and re-compaction below the building footprint is recommended to result in uniform
subgrade conditions below the proposed building. We recommend over-excavation and compaction
of near surface deposits in areas of building pad. We recommend minimum depth of over-
excavation is 5 feet below adjacent grade and the over-excavation should extend a minimum
horizontal distance of 5 feet outside the building footprint. The over-excavation shall be
backfilled using suitable fill materials and compacted to a minimum of 95% of the maximum dry
density determined by Modified Proctor Compaction Test (ASTM D1557).
4.2.3 Select Fill Materials
On-site soils are generally considered to be suitable fill materials provided the soils are free of
deleterious materials and oversized rocks greater than 3-inches. If import material needs to be
utilized, it should be granular and non-expansive soils, and free of deleterious materials and rocks
larger than 3 inches in greatest dimension. Each source of proposed imported fill materials should
be sampled, tested, and approved by project geotechnical engineer prior to delivery to site.
A bulk sample of potential import material, weighing at least 35 pounds, should be submitted to
the Geotechnical Consultant at least 48 hours before fill operations. All proposed import
materials should be approved prior to their placement at the site.
4.2.4 Fill and Compaction
The exposed excavations should be scarified to a depth of at least eight inches, brought to near
optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry
density determined by Modified Proctor Compaction Test (ASTM D1557). Fill should then be
placed on the compacted natural soil in layers not exceeding 8-inches in loose lifts; moisture
conditioned to near optimum moisture content. All structural fill should be compacted to at least
95 percent of the maximum dry density determined by Modified Proctor Compaction Test
(ASTM D1557), and non-structural fill should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the
maximum dry density determined per modified proctor.
The fill surface must be maintained during construction to achieve the recommended compaction.
We recommend that the fill surface be sloped to provide drainage and to prevent water from
ponding on the fill. If precipitation is expected, fill construction should be temporarily halted
and the surface should be rolled with a steel drum or rubber-tire roller to improve surface runoff.
If the surface soils become excessively wet, fill operations should be halted. The fill operations
shall be continued after allowing sufficient time for soils to dry and upon approval by the
Geotechnical Consultant.
4.2.5 Foundation Design Recommendations
The proposed structure can be supported on a shallow foundation system established on
competent native soil or certified compacted fill. The foundation may be conventional slab-on-
grade foundation system with perimeter footings and interior continuous strip footings and/or
Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
1014 Geronimo Ave., Parker, Arizona
ABI Engineering Consultants, Inc. 6 October 22, 2014
ABI Project No. 14238
isolated spread footings. The footings may be designed to impose a net dead plus live load
pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf) when established on competent native soil or
certified compacted fill. The allowable bearing value may also be increased by one-third for
short-term live loads (e.g. seismic and wind loads).
The bottoms of the strip footings should be embedded below the lowest adjacent grade or floor
level to a minimum of 18 inches for interior and 24 inches for exterior footings. The width of
strip footings should be at least 18 inches. Isolated spread footings should have a minimum width
of 24 inches and should extend at least 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade or floor level.
While the actual bearing value of the fill placed at the site will depend on the materials used and
the compaction methods employed, the quoted bearing value will be applicable if acceptable
soils are used and are compacted as recommended in this report.
Steel reinforcement for footing should be designed by the project structural engineer. We
recommend minimum reinforcement shall be 4 #4 bars, 2 at top and 2 at bottom for exterior
footing; and 2 #4 bars, 1 at top and 1 at bottom for interior strip footings.
4.2.6 Slab-On-Grade
Design of the slab-on-grade supported on firm and non-yielding subgrade may be designed based
on a modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pounds per cubic inch. Structural elements such as
thickness, reinforcement, joint spacing should be selected based on the anticipated loading, the
modulus of subgrade reaction, and minimum geotechnical requirements recommended below.
We recommend the interior and exterior concrete slabs-on-grade to have a minimum thickness of
4 inches and be reinforced with equivalent to # 4 bars at 18 on-center each way. For interior
slabs, it is recommended that a minimum 4-inch thick base layer of ½-inch or larger clean
aggregate capillary break shall be installed underneath the concrete pavement. This base layer
should be compacted and should exhibit a firm and unyielding condition prior to concrete
placement.
For interior concrete slab, a 10-mil thick polyethylene vapor retarder with joints lapped not less
than 6 inches shall be placed between the base course and the concrete slab. The polyethylene
sheet shall be protected from tears and rupture during the placement of rebar and formwork for
concrete. The concrete slab should be allowed to cure properly before placing vinyl or other
moisture-sensitive floor covering.
4.2.7 Lateral Resistance
Lateral loading in foundation structures and retaining structures should be resisted by passive
resistance of the soils, and by the soil friction. The passive earth pressure for the side of
structures poured against undisturbed soil may be computed as an equivalent fluid pressure of
300 psf per foot of depth, to a maximum earth pressure of 3,500 psf. A coefficient of friction
between soil and concrete of 0.35 may be used with dead load forces. When combining passive
pressure and frictional resistance, the passive pressure component should be reduced by one-
third. It is recommended to ignore the passive pressure of upper 12” inches of soil.
Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
1014 Geronimo Ave., Parker, Arizona
ABI Engineering Consultants, Inc. 7 October 22, 2014
ABI Project No. 14238
4.2.8 Lateral Earth Loads
The lateral earth pressure behind retaining structures depends primarily on the allowable
movement, type of backfill materials, backfill slopes, wall inclination, surcharges, and any
hydrostatic pressures. Lateral earth pressure for level backfill condition may be calculated using
the values presented below in table 2.
We recommend following lateral earth pressure parameters on the assumption that typical
granular compacted fill will be used as structural backfill materials. These values should be
verified once the material has been selected and may be altered based on the gradation of the
actual material to be used for the construction.
At rest pressure and active pressure should be used in the design of non-yielding and yielding
walls respectively.
Table 2: Allowable Lateral Load
Parameter Level Backfill
Active pressure (EFP) 35 psf per foot of depth
At rest pressure (EFP) 55 psf per foot of depth
If a functioning drainage system is not installed, then lateral earth pressures should be
determined using the buoyant weight of the soil and hydrostatic pressures.
4.2.9 Settlement
Provided that structure are founded on compacted fill soils as recommended, we estimate that the
maximum settlement will be less than one inch, and that differential settlements will be less than
1/2 inch within a horizontal distance of 30 feet.
4.2.10 Seismic Design Parameters
Seismically resistant structural design in accordance with local building ordinances should be
followed during the design of all structures. Building Codes have been developed to reduce the
potential for structural damage. However, some level of damage as the result of ground shaking
generated by nearby earthquakes is considered likely in the general area.
Table 3 provides the most recent seismic coefficients and seismic data in accordance with
requirements included in the 2006 International Building Code of Regulations:
Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
1014 Geronimo Ave., Parker, Arizona
ABI Engineering Consultants, Inc. 8 October 22, 2014
ABI Project No. 14238
Table 3: Seismic Coefficients
ITEM VALUE
Site Latitude (Decimal-degrees) 34.141984
Site Longitude (Decimal-degrees) -114.28593
Site Class D
Seismic Design Category D
Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration - Short Period
(0.2 Sec) – SS 0.216
Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration - 1 Second Period – S1 0.144
Short Period Site Coefficient – Fa 1.600
Long Period Site Coefficient – Fv 2.224
Adjusted Spectral Response Acceleration @ 0.2 Sec. Period
(SMS) 0.346
Adjusted Spectral Response Acceleration @ 1 Sec. Period
(SM1) 0.320
Design Spectral Response Acceleration @ 0.2 Sec. Period
(SDS) 0.230
Design Spectral Response Acceleration @ 1 Sec. Period
(SD1) 0.214
4.2.11 Concrete
Based on the result of sulfate test performed previously on on-site soil, soluble sulfates on on-site
soil is 78 ppm which indicates that sulfate attack on buried concrete is anticipated to be
“negligible”. However, concrete should be designed in accordance with the 2006 IBC Section
1904.3 and ACI 318 Section 4.3.
4.2.12 Asphalt Concrete (Flexible) Pavement
The pavement section for proposed development were determined based on an assumed R-value
of 20 for on-site sandy soils.
Table 4: Asphalt Pavement Design
Types of Traffic Traffic
Index
Asphalt Thickness
(in.)
Base Course Thickness
(in.)
Parking Stalls 4 3 5
Drive Areas 5.5 4 7
Base course material shall consist of ¾ inch Aggregate Base, Class 2 material or equivalent and
should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction as compared to the
maximum value obtained from ASTM D1557 test method.
Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
1014 Geronimo Ave., Parker, Arizona
ABI Engineering Consultants, Inc. 9 October 22, 2014
ABI Project No. 14238
4.2.13 Pool Design
The swimming pool walls should be designed for lateral earth pressure recommended in Table 2.
Any surcharge load, if applicable, should be considered in design of the pool walls. Groundwater
is not likely to occur at shallow depth on site. Hydrostatic pressure on pool walls should be
considered in design of pool walls if saturated subsurface condition is expected due to irrigation.
Hydrostatic pressures calculated with the unit weight of water (62.4 pcf) should be added to earth
pressures recommended in Table 2 to obtain the total stresses for design. The worst case loading
condition is when the pool is empty during pool maintenance. A coefficient of friction between
soil and concrete of 0.35 may be used along pool walls to resist buoyancy forces. A design factor
of safety of 2.0 against uplift pressure is recommended.
4.2.14 Site Grading for Surface Drainage
We recommend that the building/structures be placed at an elevated gradient within the site and
that provisions for positive surface drainage be incorporated into the site grading plans. The
construction of an elevated building pad may be required for achievement of site drainage.
We recommend ground immediately adjacent to the foundation shall be sloped away from the
building at a slope of not less than 2 percent for a minimum distance of 10 feet measured
perpendicular to the face of the wall. Impervious surfaces within 10 feet of the building
foundation shall be sloped a minimum of 1 percent away from the building. All roofs should be
guttered and discharge away from the structure in non-erosive manner. It is recommended that
trees should not be planted a minimum of one half their anticipated mature height from a footing.
Alternatively, all planters adjacent to footings should be sealed.
Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
1014 Geronimo Ave., Parker, Arizona
ABI Engineering Consultants, Inc. 10 October 22, 2014
ABI Project No. 14238
5 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS
The firm should also be retained to perform on-site construction observations and testing to
ascertain that conditions correspond to the findings and conclusions presented herein and that
construction generally conforms to the recommendations presented herein. If variations in
subsurface soil conditions become evident during construction, the recommendations presented
herein may warrant a revision.
The geotechnical and geological consultants should be called for testing and observations as
indicated in this report and at least for the following:
1. Foundation excavations should be observed by a representative of this firm prior to the
placement of forms, reinforcement or concrete to verify embedment into the required bearing
material.
2. Exposed subgrades in areas to receive fill and in areas where excavation has resulted in the
desired finished subgrade.
3. Suitability of on-site and import soils for fill placement; collect and submit soil samples for
required or recommended laboratory testing where necessary
4. Fill Placement and compaction.
5. Utility trenches backfilling beneath and adjacent to structures.
6. Retaining Structures backfilling.
7. Observation of the sand and vapor barrier placement prior to placement of reinforcement and
concrete.
The governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the project should be notified before
commencement of the grading so that the necessary grading permits can be obtained and
arrangements can be made for required inspection(s). The contractor should be familiar with the
inspection requirements of the reviewing agencies.
Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
1014 Geronimo Ave., Parker, Arizona
ABI Engineering Consultants, Inc. 11 October 22, 2014
ABI Project No. 14238
6 CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND SPECIFICATION REVIEW
We recommend that ABI Engineering Consultants, Inc. be retained to perform a review of the
foundation and earthwork plans and specifications prepared from the recommendations presented
in this report to determine if the plans and specifications are in compliance with the intent of our
recommendations. Our report has been written in a guideline recommendation format and is not
appropriate for use as a specification without being reworded into a specification-type format.
Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
1014 Geronimo Ave., Parker, Arizona
ABI Engineering Consultants, Inc. 12 October 22, 2014
ABI Project No. 14238
7 LIMITATIONS
The recommendations provided in this report are based on our understanding of the proposed
project development at the subject site at 1014 Geronimo Avenue, Parker, Arizona, and on our
interpretation of the data collected. We have made our recommendations based on experience with
similar subsurface conditions under similar building conditions. These recommendations apply to
the project site specifically discussed in this report; therefore, any changes in load conditions or
site grades should be provided to us so that we may review our conclusions and recommendations
and make any necessary modifications.
The recommendations provided in this report are also based upon the assumption that the
necessary geotechnical observations and testing during construction will be performed by qualified
technical representatives. The field observation services are considered a continuation of the
geotechnical investigation and essential to check that the actual soil conditions are as expected.
This also provides for the procedure whereby the client can be advised of unexpected or changed
conditions that would require modifications of our original recommendations. In addition, the
presence of a qualified representative at the site provides the client with an independent
professional opinion regarding the geotechnical related construction procedures. If a separate firm
other than ABI is retained for the geotechnical observation services, our professional responsibility
and liability would be limited to the extent that we would not be the geotechnical engineer of
record.
Our professional services have been performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily
exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical consultants practicing in this or
similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice
included in this report. The report has not been prepared for use by other parties, and may not
contain sufficient information for purposes of other parties or other uses.
Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
1014 Geronimo Ave., Parker, Arizona
ABI Engineering Consultants, Inc. 1 October 22, 2014
ABI Project No. 14238
FIGURES
Western Fark
PROJECT SITE
I
SITE VICINITY MAP
NORTH
PROJECT: HAMPTONINN gygfugggfug FIGURESWE GERONIMO AVENUE AND 11TH STREET CONSUL TANTS, INC.
PARKER, ARIZONA
1701 EAST EDINGER AVENUE, SUITE A9
SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92705
TEL: (888) 220-5596
PROJECT NO: 14238FAX: (714) 866-4171
W. lithSTREET
HAMPTON INN
3 STORIES (40' MAX)61 GUESTROOMS B
3 u
(24K/2KMA/31eDO)38,4. .F. BLDG 30
62 PA KING
45,000 5.F. SITE
d (1.03 ACRES) D s' 10
10
,B',
61'-5" ,12 24 19 6 -7"
1014 GERONIMO AVE
PARKER, AZ 85344
5
J_ AREA
LEGEND:
•B-1 SOIL BORING
LOCATION
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN 150
NOT TO SCALE
PROJECT: HAMPTON INNFIGURESWE GERONIMO AVENUE AND 11TH STREET CONSUL TANTS, INC.
PARKER, ARIZONA
1701 EAST EDINGER AVENUE, SUITE A9 2SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92705
TEL: (888) 220-5596
PROJECT NO: 14238FAX: (714) 866-4171
Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
1014 Geronimo Ave., Parker, Arizona
ABI Engineering Consultants, Inc. 2 October 22, 2014
ABI Project No. 14238
APPENDIX A
BORING LOGS
JCW
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
30
Typ
e
Piezometer Construction Details
(screen, seal, surface completion)
Groundwater Level
and Date Measured
Project Name:
Project Location:
Project Number:
5
Ele
va
tio
n,
fe
et
De
pth
,
fe
et
0
Drill Rig
Type
Drilling
Method
Date
Drilled
Un
ifie
d S
oil
Cla
ssifica
tio
n
Pe
ne
tra
tio
n
Re
sista
nce
,
Blo
ws/6
in
.
SAMPLES
Nu
mb
er
Logged
By
Drill Bit
Size/Type
Drilling
Contractor
Sampling
Method
Boring Number _____
Sheet 1 of 2
Checked
By
Total Depth
of Borehole
Approximate
Surface Elevation
Hammer
Data
REMARKS
10
15
20
25
Mod. Cal. Ring & SPT
Geomechanics Southwest
10/03/2014
HSA 8" HSA
140LB. 30-inch drop, autotrip
B1@10
SPT
B1@15
RING
B1@20
SPT
B1@25
RING
CME-75
B1@5
RING
B1@0-5
BULK
N/A
35.00FT. BGS
DB
Not Encountered
Gra
ph
ic
Lo
g
HAMPTON INN
PARKER, AZ
14238
B-1
5
9
Silty SAND, brown, moist, medium dense, fine to coarse grained, low plastic
fines.
SM
16
32
22
SAND, light gray, dry, very dense, fine grained.
SP
50-1"
No Recovery, very dense.
SP
8
9
14
SAND, light brown, dry, medium dense, fine to medium grained.
SP
22
18
Silty SAND, brown, moist, dense, fine to medium grained, low plastic fines.
SM
JCW
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
60
Typ
e
Piezometer Construction Details
(screen, seal, surface completion)
Groundwater Level
and Date Measured
35
Ele
va
tio
n,
fe
et
De
pth
,
fe
et
30
Drill Rig
Type
Drilling
Method
Date
Drilled
Un
ifie
d S
oil
Cla
ssifica
tio
n
Pe
ne
tra
tio
n
Re
sista
nce
,
Blo
ws/6
in
.
SAMPLES
Nu
mb
er
Logged
By
Drill Bit
Size/Type
Drilling
Contractor
Sampling
Method
Boring Number _____
Sheet 2 of 2
Checked
By
Total Depth
of Borehole
Approximate
Surface Elevation
Hammer
Data
REMARKS
40
45
50
55
Mod. Cal. Ring & SPT
HSA 8" HSA
140LB. 30-inch drop, autotrip
B1@30
SPT
DB
Gra
ph
ic
Lo
g
B-1
Project Name:
Project Location:
Project Number:
Geomechanics Southwest
10/03/2014
HAMPTON INN
PARKER, AZ
14238
14
18
12
SAND, brown, damp, medium dense to dense, fine to coarse grained, with 1"
rocks.
SP
CME-75 N/A
35.00FT. BGS
Not Encountered
End of boring at 35.0' below ground surface due to refusal. Backfill borehole
with soil cuttings.
JCW
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
30
Typ
e
Piezometer Construction Details
(screen, seal, surface completion)
Groundwater Level
and Date Measured
Project Name:
Project Location:
Project Number:
5
Ele
va
tio
n,
fe
et
De
pth
,
fe
et
0
Drill Rig
Type
Drilling
Method
Date
Drilled
Un
ifie
d S
oil
Cla
ssifica
tio
n
Pe
ne
tra
tio
n
Re
sista
nce
,
Blo
ws/6
in
.
SAMPLES
Nu
mb
er
Logged
By
Drill Bit
Size/Type
Drilling
Contractor
Sampling
Method
Boring Number _____
Sheet 1 of 2
Checked
By
Total Depth
of Borehole
Approximate
Surface Elevation
Hammer
Data
REMARKS
10
15
20
25
Mod. Cal. Ring & SPT
Geomechanics Southwest
10/03/2014
HSA 8" HSA
140LB. 30-inch drop, autotrip
B2@10
RING
B2@15
SPT
B2@20
RING
B2@25
SPT
B2@5
SPT
B2@0-5
BULK
DB
Gra
ph
ic
Lo
g
HAMPTON INN
PARKER, AZ
14238
B-2
6
14
20
Silty SAND, brown, moist, dense, fine grained, low plastic fines.
SM
6
18
10
12
17
4
8
8
10
12
CME-75 N/A
41.00FT. BGS
Not Encountered
At 8.0' with 3/4" to 2" rocks.
SAND, brown, moist, medium dense, fine to coarse grained, with 3/4" to 2"
rocks.
SP
Become light grayish brown, dry, medium dense.
SP
SP
Become fine grained, medium dense.
SP
JCW
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
60
Typ
e
Piezometer Construction Details
(screen, seal, surface completion)
Groundwater Level
and Date Measured
35
Ele
va
tio
n,
fe
et
De
pth
,
fe
et
30
Drill Rig
Type
Drilling
Method
Date
Drilled
Un
ifie
d S
oil
Cla
ssifica
tio
n
Pe
ne
tra
tio
n
Re
sista
nce
,
Blo
ws/6
in
.
SAMPLES
Nu
mb
er
Logged
By
Drill Bit
Size/Type
Drilling
Contractor
Sampling
Method
Boring Number _____
Sheet 2 of 2
Checked
By
Total Depth
of Borehole
Approximate
Surface Elevation
Hammer
Data
REMARKS
40
45
50
55
Mod. Cal. Ring & SPT
HSA 8" HSA
140LB. 30-inch drop, autotrip
B2@40
RING
B2@35
SPT
B2@30
RING
DB
Gra
ph
ic
Lo
g
B-2
Project Name:
Project Location:
Project Number:
Geomechanics Southwest
10/03/2014
HAMPTON INN
PARKER, AZ
14238
10
12
Become brown, medium dense, fine to medium grained.
SP
CME-75 N/A
41.00FT. BGS
Not Encountered
38
50
50
SP
14
27
Become dense, at 40.0' with 2" rocks.
End of boring at 41.0' below ground surface due to refusal. Backfill borehole
with soil cuttings.
Become very dense.
SP
JCW
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
30
Typ
e
Piezometer Construction Details
(screen, seal, surface completion)
Groundwater Level
and Date Measured
Project Name:
Project Location:
Project Number:
5
Ele
va
tio
n,
fe
et
De
pth
,
fe
et
0
Drill Rig
Type
Drilling
Method
Date
Drilled
Un
ifie
d S
oil
Cla
ssifica
tio
n
Pe
ne
tra
tio
n
Re
sista
nce
,
Blo
ws/6
in
.
SAMPLES
Nu
mb
er
Logged
By
Drill Bit
Size/Type
Drilling
Contractor
Sampling
Method
Boring Number _____
Sheet 1 of 1
Checked
By
Total Depth
of Borehole
Approximate
Surface Elevation
Hammer
Data
REMARKS
10
15
20
25
Mod. Cal. Ring & SPT
Geomechanics Southwest
10/03/2014
HSA 8" HSA
140LB. 30-inch drop, autotrip
B3@10
SPT
B3@5
RING
B3@0-5
BULK
DB
Gra
ph
ic
Lo
g
HAMPTON INN
PARKER, AZ
14238
B-3
23
20
Silty SAND with 2" rocks, brown, moist, dense, fine to medium grained, low
plastic fines.
SM
CME-75 N/A
11.00FT. BGS
Not Encountered
10
15
50
SAND, light gray, dry, very dense, fine grained.
SP
End of boring at 11.0' below ground surface due to refusal. Backfill borehole
with soil cuttings.
JCW
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
30
Typ
e
Piezometer Construction Details
(screen, seal, surface completion)
Groundwater Level
and Date Measured
Project Name:
Project Location:
Project Number:
5
Ele
va
tio
n,
fe
et
De
pth
,
fe
et
0
Drill Rig
Type
Drilling
Method
Date
Drilled
Un
ifie
d S
oil
Cla
ssifica
tio
n
Pe
ne
tra
tio
n
Re
sista
nce
,
Blo
ws/6
in
.
SAMPLES
Nu
mb
er
Logged
By
Drill Bit
Size/Type
Drilling
Contractor
Sampling
Method
Boring Number _____
Sheet 1 of 1
Checked
By
Total Depth
of Borehole
Approximate
Surface Elevation
Hammer
Data
REMARKS
10
15
20
25
Mod. Cal. Ring & SPT
Geomechanics Southwest
10/03/2014
HSA 8" HSA
140LB. 30-inch drop, autotrip
B4@10
RING
B4@5
SPT
B4@0-5
BULK
DB
Gra
ph
ic
Lo
g
HAMPTON INN
PARKER, AZ
14238
B-4
12
13
10
SAND, light brown, dry, medium dense, fine to medium grained.
SP
CME-75 N/A
11.00FT. BGS
Not Encountered
20
21
SP
End of boring at 11.0' below ground surface due to refusal. Backfill borehole
with soil cuttings.
Become dense.
JCW
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
30
Typ
e
Piezometer Construction Details
(screen, seal, surface completion)
Groundwater Level
and Date Measured
Project Name:
Project Location:
Project Number:
5
Ele
va
tio
n,
fe
et
De
pth
,
fe
et
0
Drill Rig
Type
Drilling
Method
Date
Drilled
Un
ifie
d S
oil
Cla
ssifica
tio
n
Pe
ne
tra
tio
n
Re
sista
nce
,
Blo
ws/6
in
.
SAMPLES
Nu
mb
er
Logged
By
Drill Bit
Size/Type
Drilling
Contractor
Sampling
Method
Boring Number _____
Sheet 1 of 2
Checked
By
Total Depth
of Borehole
Approximate
Surface Elevation
Hammer
Data
REMARKS
10
15
20
25
Mod. Cal. Ring & SPT
Geomechanics Southwest
10/03/2014
HSA 8" HSA
140LB. 30-inch drop, autotrip
B5@10
SPT
B5@15
RING
B5@20
SPT
B5@25
RING
B5@5
RING
B5@0-5
BULK
DB
Gra
ph
ic
Lo
g
HAMPTON INN
PARKER, AZ
14238
B-5
11
22
SAND, light gray, dry, dense, fine to medium grained, with 3/4" to 2" rocks.
SP
8
10
18
SP
11
19
No Recovery, become medium dense to dense.
SP
10
20
18
No Recovery, become dense.
SP
11
16
Become fine grained, medium dense.
SP
CME-75 N/A
41.00FT. BGS
Not Encountered
Become medium dense.
JCW
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
60
Typ
e
Piezometer Construction Details
(screen, seal, surface completion)
Groundwater Level
and Date Measured
35
Ele
va
tio
n,
fe
et
De
pth
,
fe
et
30
Drill Rig
Type
Drilling
Method
Date
Drilled
Un
ifie
d S
oil
Cla
ssifica
tio
n
Pe
ne
tra
tio
n
Re
sista
nce
,
Blo
ws/6
in
.
SAMPLES
Nu
mb
er
Logged
By
Drill Bit
Size/Type
Drilling
Contractor
Sampling
Method
Boring Number _____
Sheet 2 of 2
Checked
By
Total Depth
of Borehole
Approximate
Surface Elevation
Hammer
Data
REMARKS
40
45
50
55
Mod. Cal. Ring & SPT
HSA 8" HSA
140LB. 30-inch drop, autotrip
B5@40
SPT
B5@35
RING
B5@30
SPT
DB
Gra
ph
ic
Lo
g
B-5
Project Name:
Project Location:
Project Number:
Geomechanics Southwest
10/03/2014
HAMPTON INN
PARKER, AZ
14238
11
24
SP
10
20
38
Become light brown, very dense.
SP
9
50-5"
Become light gray, very dense.
SP
End of boring at 41.0' below ground surface due to refusal. Backfill borehole
with soil cuttings.
CME-75 N/A
41.00FT. BGS
Not Encountered
Become dense.
Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
1014 Geronimo Ave., Parker, Arizona
ABI Engineering Consultants, Inc. 3 October 22, 2014
ABI Project No. 14238
APPENDIX B
GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Tested By DS
Date 10/14/2014
Checked By DB
Date Sampled : 10/3/2014 Date 10/20/2014
Date Received : 10/3/2014
Boring Sample No.Depth
(ft.)Moisture Content (%)
Dry Density (pcf)
B-1 B1@5 5 5.9 85.7
B-1 B1@25 25 3.6 107.3
B-2 B2@10 14 27.2 82.2
B-2 B2@20 20 2.8 95.4
B-2 B2@30 30 4.2 97.4
B-2 B2@40 40 7.7 111.4
B-3 B3@5 5 7.7 118.1
B-4 B4@10 10 6.3 87.3
B-5 B5@5 5 1.0 136.5
B-5 B5@25 25 1.8 97.6
B-5 B5@35 35 2.6 95.3
PROJECT:
PROJECT NO : 14238
MOISTURE AND DENSITY TEST RESULTS
DATE
10/20/2014
HAMPTON INN
PARKER, AZ
FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE
Depth
(ft.)% Gravel % Sand % Fines
0- 5' 7 8120' 21.4 64.4
Depth
(ft.)D10 D30 D60 Cu
0- 5' N/A N/A N/A N/A
20' N/A N/A N/A N/A
PROJECT:
Cc
N/A
B-1 N/A
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORTASTM D6913
B-1
B-1
SANDGRAVEL
COARSE
Silty SAND (SM)
with some gravelSand (SP)
SILT AND CLAY
Boring No. Description
10/20/2014
HAMPTON INN
PARKER, AZ
12
14.2
PROJECT NO.: 14238
DATE
B-1
Boring No.
1/2"3/8" 4 10 20 40 60 100 2003/4"
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.0010.010.1110100
PER
CEN
T FI
NER
GRAIN SIZE-mm
B-1@0-5
B-1@20
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE
Depth
(ft.)% Gravel % Sand % Fines
0- 5' 18 5710' 46.1 41.7
Depth
(ft.)D10 D30 D60 Cu
0- 5' N/A N/A N/A N/A
10' N/A N/A N/A N/A
PROJECT:
DATEHAMPTON INN
PARKER, AZ 10/20/2014PROJECT NO.: 14238
Boring No.Cc
B-5 N/A
B-5 N/A
25
B-5 Silty Sand (SM) 12.2
B-5 Sandy SILT(ML)
Boring No. Description
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORTASTM D6913
GRAVEL SANDSILT AND CLAY
COARSE
1/2"3/8" 4 10 20 40 60 100 2003/4"
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.0010.010.1110100
PER
CEN
T FI
NER
GRAIN SIZE-mm
B-5@0-5
B-5@10
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
Boring No.: B2 Tested By: DS Date:
Sample No.: B2@0-5 Depth: 0-5' Checked By: DB Date:
Soil Description: Light gray silty SANd with gravel (SM)
Date Sampled: 10/3/2014
Date Received: 10/3/2014 Method "B"
Curve No.: A
TEST RESULTS
MAXIMUM DENSITY = 130.5 pcf
OPTIMUM MOISTURE = 7.0 %
PROJECT:
COMPACTION TEST REPORTASTM D1557
10/14/2014
10/20/2014
DATE:HAMPTON INN
PARKER, AZ10/20/2014
PROJECT NO.: 14238
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Dry
Den
sit
y, p
cf
Water Content, %
COMPACTION CURVE
COMPACTION CURVE
ZAV Line for S.G.=2.70
ZAV Line for S.G.=2.65
ZAV Line for S.G.=2.80
Boring No.: B5 Tested By: DS Date:
Sample No.: B5@0-5 Depth: 0-5' Checked By: DB Date:
Soil Description: Light gray silty SANd with gravel (SM)
Date Sampled: 10/3/2014
Date Received: 10/3/2014 Method "B"
Curve No.: A
TEST RESULTS
MAXIMUM DENSITY = 128.5 pcf
OPTIMUM MOISTURE = 8.5 %
PROJECT:
COMPACTION TEST REPORTASTM D1557
10/14/2014
10/20/2014
DATE:
10/20/2014PROJECT NO.: 14238
HAMPTON INN
PARKER, AZ
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Dry
Den
sit
y, p
cf
Water Content, %
COMPACTION CURVE
COMPACTION CURVE
ZAV Line for S.G.=2.70
ZAV Line for S.G.=2.65
ZAV Line for S.G.=2.80
ANAHEIM TEST LAB, INC 3008 ORANGE AVENUE
SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92707 PHONE (714) 549-7267
ABI Engineering DATE: 10/10/14 1701 E. Edinger Ave. Santa Ana, CA 92705 P.O. NO. Verbal LAB NO. B-7686 SPECIFICATION: CA-417/422/643 Attn: Daya MATERIAL: Soil Project #: 14238 Hampton Inn Parker B-2 @ 0-5’
ANALYTICAL REPORT
CORROSION SERIES SUMMARY OF DATA
pH SOLUBLE SULFATES SOLUBLE CHLORIDES MIN. RESISTIVITY per CA. 417 per CA. 422 per CA. 643 ppm ppm ohm-cm 8.7 78 218 7,100 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
________________________________ WES BRIDGER CHEMIST