0309-151 (CSCS) Precise Grading Plans04/05/2004 00:00 7607795143 JHA ENGINEERING HAUL aj
e
)HA ENGINr.FRING, INCORPORATED
CI V71. R N G, IN V.l`,RI N(: 1)V.SI C: N • 1.AN 1) 1)LANN1.NCi a Sl1RVRYING
E: {N V I R ON MRNI'A1, SI:"KVICI;S
April 5, 2004
City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, Ca. 92253
ATTN: Building and Safety Depattnent
Re: Thai Smile Restaurant; parcel. "B" L.L.A. No. 95-189, S.D.P. 2003.774
Address- Highway 111
Gentlemen,
Thal letter shall serve as. a certification stating that the grading of Raid •.lot has been done in
accor&ni ce with the approved.grading plan,
Our .office conducted.,a field inspection of this site and found that the finish floor elevation' was
constructed to an elevation of 76.50 and the approved clevation for the finis)�.ftoos was 76.50 -This
falls within the tolerance of -standard Trading practice.
The Findings are as stated.
Setbacks
Front 43.00 feet.
Right. 12.13 feet
Left 103:74 feet
Rear. 20.83 feet
pRar•Pss
S cercly, O�N R
q Hacket R.C,:.L:14614 N0. 14674 "'
F_ cp 3/31/05 �nP a-31-05
,JHH /wap CAL%f
xc/file
4.i-!�21 IirAi:QIV RII,1, o ,011•r A • :'ALM fll'Slcx'i•, CA, 7221 I .
(7a�iy 77.o�n5T 1"AX (Ino) 770.5141
Earth Systems
"moi Southwest
June 18, 2003
Desert Cities Development
46-755 Adams Street
La Quinta, California 92253
Attention: , Mr. Dave Smoley
Subject: Sol] Engineering Report Update
with Supplemental Recommendations
7
Project: Thai SmileRestaurant; Pad E2
OneElevenLa Quinta Centre
La Quinta, California
79-811B Country Club Drive
Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201
(760)345-1588
(800)924-7015
FAX (760) 345-7315
File No.: 09225-01
03-06-767
References: 1. Buena Engineers, Inc., Geotechnical Engineering Report, One Eleven La
Quinta Center, La Quinta, California, File No.: 137-2083-P1, Report No.: 90-
04-724, dated April 5, 1990.
2. Buena Engineers, Inc., Report of Testing and Observations During Grading,
111 La Quinta Center, La Quinta, California, File No.: B7 -2083-P3, Report
No.: 92-04-737, dated April 13, 1992.
In, accordance with your request, we have reviewed previously prepared documents associated
with the previously completed rough grading;
resistivity, soluble chloride, and soluble sulfate.
.part,of the existing shopping center development.
Site Grading
and obtained one sample to be tested for pH,
The subject lot was originally mass graded as
Based upon our review of the soil testing at the subject site, performed through April 14, 1998, it
is our opinion that the grading has been performed in general accordance with the original
project plans and above referenced geotechnical engineering report. The subject building pad
area was prepared and compacted as part of the overall mass grading. The existing pad grade of
this lot was moisture conditioned, processed and compacted at the original grade. The intent of
the grading was to densify the soil within the footprint of the proposed building to a depth of 3 to
4 feet below finish pad elevation. Based on our review of the available information it is our
opinion that the subject pad was graded adequately for the proposed use. However, there is
uncertainty that the limits of the previously completed grading completed on a previous building
configuration with respect to the limits of the proposed building. The pad has remained dormant
for over three years since the finish grading therefore some remedial effort is recommended prior
to precise grading and building construction. The surface fill soils have dried out since the time
of the original grading and compaction has likely decreased. Therefore, supplemental testing
and probing of the soils around the perimeter of the proposed restaurant should be performed. If
isolated soft areas are encountered supplemental compaction will be required to densify the soil
JUN 2 4 2003
h
'June 17, 2003 - 2 - File No.: 09225-01
03-06-767
to a depth of at least 2 feet below the bottom of the footing bottoms as outlined below.
Compaction of the bottom of the footing excavations should be verified by testing.
If initial testing indicates that regarding of the site is necessary then the pad should be prepared
by removing organic growth from the pad surface. The pad should then be over -excavated to a
depth of 2 feet below the bottom of the deepest footing, scarified an additional 12 -inches,
moisture conditioned and recompacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction. Due to
granular nature of the site soils it may be possible to moisture condition the upper 3 feet of soil
and obtain compaction by using heavy equipment and compacting from the surface. If this
method of compaction is used, test holes should be excavated to verify moisture penetration and
the effects of the compactive effort. If it is found that either the desired moisture penetration or
compaction cannot be achieved by this method, the soils will require over excavation and
recompaction. If the current pad elevation is to be altered from its current elevation, fills should
be compacted as recommended in the referenced soil engineering report. If the pad is to be
lowered in elevation, the depth of moisture conditioning may need to be increased. Additionally,
depending upon the depth of cut (if any), additional over -excavation and compaction may be
required.
Mitigation of Soil Corrosivity
One sample of the upper 12 inches of existing fill soil from each lot was obtained and tested for
pH, resistivity, soluble chloride, and soluble sulfate (results attached). This type of testing serves
as an indicator as to the potential adverse effects of reinforcing steel, concrete, and buried pipes.
The existing fill soils were found to have very severe sulfate ion concentration (3,975 ppm) and
moderate chloride ion concentrations (10,400 ppm). Sulfate ions can attack the cementitious
material in concrete, causing weakening of the cement matrix and eventual deterioration by
raveling. Chloride ions can cause corrosion of reinforcing steel. The Uniform Building Code
requires for moderate sulfate conditions that Type V Portland Cement be used with a maximum
water cement ratio of 0.45 using 4,500 psi concrete mix (UBC Table 19-A-4).
A minimum concrete cover of 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 (35 ohm -cm) of the soil suggests that the site soils may present a
very severe corrosion 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. We
understand that there will not be any buried metal pipes in direct contact with the soil. We
further understand that buried pipes will consist of plastic PVC or will be bituminous dipped,
wrapped, or encased in PVC sleeves. Therefore, for the above stated conditions, it is our opinion
that a specific corrosion analysis is not warranted since buried metal pipes will not be in direct
contact with the soil. The contractor should exercise care during installation so not to nick the
protective coating around any metal pipes.
EARTH SYSTEMS SOUTHWEST
JUN 2 4 2003
June 17, 2003 - 3 - File No.: 09225-01
03-06-767
Concrete Slabs -on -Grade
Subgrade: Concrete slabs -on -grade and flatwork should be supported by compacted soil as
discussed above and in the referenced geotechnical engineering report.
Vapor Retarder: In areas of moisture sensitive floor coverings, an appropriate vapor retarder
should be installed in order to reduce the potential for moisture transmission from the subgrade
soil to the slab. The effectiveness of the moisture retarder is dependent upon the quality of the
product, methodology/quality of the overlaps, protection of the retarder during construction, and
the successful sealing off of the barrier around utility lines. We recommend that an impermeable
membrane (6 -mil plastic) 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 2 inches
of sand is not intended to increase the thickness specified by the project architect or structural
engineer. Rather the moisture retarder may be placed such that about 2 inches of sand is
provided above and 2 inches of sand below the moisture retarder. The sand should be lightly
moistened just prior to placing the concrete. Low -slump concrete should be used to help
minimize shrinkage.
Slab thickness and reinforcement: Slab thickness and reinforcement of slab -on -grade are
contingent upon the structural engineer or architect's recommendations 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.
Concrete slabs and flatwork should be a minimum of 4 inches thick (actual, not nominal).
Concrete floor slabs may either be monolithically placed with the foundations or doweled after
footing placement. However, the design engineer/architect should consider the potential adverse
effects of temperature changes when providing recommendations for concrete slabs as well as
the effects of a free floating slab versus slabs tied to the adjacent footings. The project architect
or geotechnical engineer should continually observe all reinforcing steel in slabs during
placement of concrete to check for proper location within the slabs and/or footings. .
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
patterns to reduce 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 either be thickened butt joints with one-half inch
dowels at 24 -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 prevent moisture or foreign
material intrusion. Precautions should be taken to prevent curling of slabs in this and desert
region during the curing process. The contractor should take precautionary measures to ensure
proper batching of the concrete, proper placement (without effecting the maximum water/cement
ratio), proper finishing, and proper curing. These procedures will reduce the potential for
randomly oriented cracks, however, may not eliminate them from occurring.
EARTH SYSTEMS SOUTHWEST JUN 2 4 2003
June 17, 2003 4 - File No.: 09225-01
03-06-767
Seismic Design
At a minimum, design of onsite structures should conform to the latest editions of the Uniform
Building Code, or City/County codes, whichever is most restrictive. It should be noted that
building codes are generally intended to protect human safety and prevent structural collapse.
They are not necessarily intended to prevent structural damage or preserve functionality after a
large earthquake. Therefore, more stringent seismic design should be considered if a particular
level of structural performance is desirable after a large earthquake. That design should be based
on a site and project specific seismicity analysis.
The following are updated 1997 UBC seismic design values.
R Pf -rPn rP
Seismic Zone:
Seismic Zone Factor, Z:
Soil Profile Type:
Seismic Source Type:
Closest Distance Known to Seismic Source:
Near Source Factor Na:
Near Source Factor, Nv:
' Seismic Coefficient, Ca:
Seismic Coefficient, Cv:
4
Figure 16-2
0.4
Table 16-I
Sp
Table 16-S
A
Table 16-U
9.0 km
= 5.6 miles (San Andreas Fault -
Q EXP. 03/31/05
Southern)
1.04
Table 16-S
1.28
Table 16-T
0.46
=0.44Na Table 16-Q
0.82
=0.64Nv Table 16-R
Except as mentioned above, it is our opinion that the referenced documents are applicable to the
proposed development. We make no representation as to the accuracy of the dimensions,
measurements, calculations, or any portion of the design.
Should you have any questions concerning our addendum report please give us a call and we will
be pleased to assist you.
Sincerely,
EARTH SYS EST
Pp�G S.
I
G ( 2
(s l8•� z
(� �
CE 38234 m
Craig S. Hil
Q EXP. 03/31/05
CE 38234
sl CMIL
1 r�OF
CA<.1�OP
Distribution:
4/D es Development
1/RC File
2/BD File
EARTH SYSTEMS SOUTHWEST JUN 2 4 ZOOS
I
File No.: 09225-01 June 4, 2003
SOIL CHEMICAL ANALYSES
Job Name: Thai Smile Restaurant PadE2
Job No.: 09225-01
Sample ID: Pad 8
Sample Depth, feet: 0-1'
pH: 7.25
Resistivity (ohm -cm): 35
(saturated soil )
Chloride (Cl), ppm: 10,400
Sulfate (SO4), ppm: 3,975
Note: Tests performed by Subcontract Laboratory:
ISurabian Ag Laboratory and Consultants, Inc.
79-607 Country Club Drive.
Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 Tel: (760) 772-7995
General Guidelines for Soil Corrosivitv
Chemical Agent
Amount in Soil
Degree of Corrosivity
Soluble
0 -1000 ppm
Low
Sulfates
1000 - 2000 ppm
Moderate
2000 - 5000 ppm
Severe
> 5000 ppm
Very Severe
Resistivity
1-1000 ohm -cm
Very Severe
1000-2000 ohm -cm
Severe
2000-10,000 ohm -cm
Moderate
10,000+ ohm -cm
Low
EARTH SYSTEMS SOUTHWEST
JUN 2 4 2003
CONCORDE CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
ENGINEEERING & CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
3505 CAMINO DEL RIO SOUTH, # 350
SAN DIEGO, CA 92108
PH: (619) 516-3377 FAX: (619) 516-3388
MEMORANDUM/FAX COVER SHEET
TO: FROM:
ERIC FRENZEL KRIPA
COMPANY: DATE:
12/17/03
FAX NUMBER: TOTAL NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER:
1
PHONE NUMBER: SENDER'S REFERENCE NUMBER:
YOUR REFERENCE NUMBER:
RE: PC # 0309-151 THAI SMILE
X URGENT X FOR REVIEW X PLEASE COMMENT X PLEASE REPLY ❑ PLEASE RECYCLE
notes/Comments
ERIC:
THIS NOTE IS TO CONFIRM THAT WE HAVE REVIEWED THE TRUSS LAYOUT AND FIND
THEM CONSISTENT WITH CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND DESIGN INTENT
PLEASE CALL IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS
REGARDS
KRIPANARAYANAN
fpr
�a