Compilation_Addendum_1.pdf

INTENT: IF CERTAIN FEATURES ARE NOT FULLY SHOWN OR

CALLED FOR ON THE DRAWINGS OR SPECIFICATIONS, THEIR

CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE OF THE SAME CHARACTER AS

FOR SIMILAR CONDITIONS THAT ARE CALLED FOR.

FOR DETAILS, LOCATIONS AND NUMBER OF INSERTS,

EMBEDDED ITEMS, EQUIPMENT SUPPORT PADS, EQUIPMENT

ANCHOR BOLTS AND SIMILAR ITEMS, REFER TO

ARCHITECTURAL AND MECHANICAL DRAWINGS.

A. ASTM A992M GRADE 345 FOR ALL WIDE FLANGE STEEL

SHAPES.

B. ASTM A36M GR 250 FOR ALL STRUCTURAL AND

MISCELLANEOUS STEEL CHANNELS, ANGLES, BARS,

PLATES, AND CONNECTIONS UNLESS NOTED

OTHERWISE.

C. ASTM A500M GRADE B Fy = 320MPa FOR ALL

STRUCTURAL TUBING.

D. ASTM A53M, TYPE E OR S, GRADE B Fy = 240MPa FOR

ALL STRUCTURAL PIPE.

E. ASTM A325M TENSION CONTROL BOLTS, UNLESS

SPECIFICALLY NOTED OTHERWISE, WITH SIZES AS

SHOWN ON DRAWINGS. ALL BOLTS SHALL BE

TIGHTENED SO AS TO SHEAR THE SPLINE OFF THE

BOLT. WHERE CLEARANCES DO NOT PERMIT, USE

STANDARD A325M BOLTS, TIGHTENED AND INSPECTED

IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AISC "SPECIFICATION FOR

STRUCTURAL JOINTS USING ASTM A325M OR A490M

BOLTS."

F. ASTM F1554 GRADE 250 FOR ALL ANCHOR RODS

EMBEDDED IN CONCRETE, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE

IN DRAWINGS. PROVIDE FLAT WASHERS BETWEEN ALL

NUTS AND BASE PLATES.

G. ALL WELDING SHALL COMPLY WITH THE LATEST

EDITION OF THE AWS STRUCTURAL WELDING CODE.

ALL REINFORCING STEEL SHALL BE FABRICATED AND

PLACED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE BUILDING CODE

REQUIREMENTS FOR REINFORCED CONCRETE (ACI 318)

AND THE STANDARD MANUAL (ACI 315).

USE ASTM A615M GRADE 420 FOR ALL REINFORCING

STEEL. USE ASTM A185M GRADE 420 FOR ALL WELDED

WIRE FABRIC. PROVIDE IN FLAT SHEETS ONLY.

LAP WIRE FABRIC TWO FULL MESH PANELS AND TIE

SECURELY.

ALL REINFORCEMENT SHALL BE CONTINUOUS. STAGGER

SPLICES WHERE POSSIBLE. LAPS FOR SPLICES SHALL BE

AS INDICATED ON SHEET S501, UNLESS OTHERWISE

SHOWN OR NOTED.

F'c = 30 MPa (NORMAL WEIGHT, AIR ENTRAINED) ALL

EXPOSED CONCRETE FLATWORK AND RETAINING WALLS

F'c = 25 MPa (NORMAL WEIGHT, AIR ENTRAINED) ALL

FOUNDATION CONCRETE (FOOTINGS, TIE BEAMS, STEM

WALLS, GRADE BEAMS)

F'c = 35 MPa (NORMAL WEIGHT) ALL POLISHED SLABS

F'c = 40 MPa AT 28 DAYS FOR NON-SHRINK GROUT FOR

PLACEMENT UNDER COLUMN BASE PLATES. GROUT TO

COMPLY WITH ASTM C1107.

F'c = 35 MPa FOR ALL PRECAST CONCRETE

A SUBSURFACE GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN

PERFORMED BY NICKLAUS ENGINEERING, INC (NEI). A

REPORT OF THIS INVESTIGATION DATED JUNE 26, 2015

AND NUMBERED 015-0098 IS AVAILABLE.

IMPORTANT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONCERNING

SPECIFIC SOIL CONDITIONS IS CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT

AND SHALL BE REVIEWED PRIOR TO START OF

CONSTRUCTION.

THE GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT CONTAINS

SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS CONCERNING CLEARING AND

GRUBBING, SITE, SUBFLOOR AND BEARING SURFACE

PREPARATION, STRUCTURAL FILL REQUIREMENTS, AND

COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS NOT NECESSARILY SHOWN

ON THESE DRAWINGS. REFER ANY CONFLICTS BETWEEN

THESE DRAWINGS AND THE REPORT TO THE

ARCHITECT/CONTRACTING OFFICER'S REPRESENTATIVE

FOR DIRECTION PRIOR TO BEGINNING ANY WORK.

CONTRACTOR SHALL EMPLOY THE SERVICES OF A

REGISTERED, LICENSED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER TO

OBSERVE ALL CONTROLLED EARTHWORK. THE

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER SHALL PROVIDE CONTINUOUS

ON-SITE OBSERVATION BY EXPERIENCED PERSONNEL

DURING CONSTRUCTION OF CONTROLLED EARTHWORK

AND SOIL SPECIAL INSPECTION WORK NOTED ON S002.

NOTIFY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER AT LEAST TWO

WORKING DAYS IN ADVANCE OF ANY FIELD OPERATIONS

OF THE CONTROLLED EARTHWORK. A REPRESENTATIVE

OF THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER SHALL BE PRESENT TO

CONFIRM THE COMPLETE EXCAVATION OF ANY

UNCONTROLLED FILL.

4.80

4.80

3.80

7.2

PER CODE

4.80

1.0

0.25

DEAD LOADS - BUILDING IS DESIGNED FOR THE ACTUAL

IN-PLACE WEIGHTS OF ALL MATERIALS SHOWN ON THE

CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. DEAD LOADS IN ADDITION

TO STRUCTURE SELF WEIGHTS ARE NOTED BELOW.

ADDITIONAL DEAD LOADS INCLUDE ARCHITECTURAL

FINISHES, MECHANICAL & SUSPENDED EQUIPMENT.

DESIGN LOADS:

FIRST FLOOR CORRIDORS

STAIRS

STORAGE AREAS

MEDICAL FILE STORAGE, AREA D

CONCENTRATED FLOOR LOAD

REDUCTION FACTOR, R

MECHANICAL ROOMS

ROOF AREAS A,BC,D & E

ADDITIONAL SUPERIMPOSED LIVE LOADS:

SUSPENDED EQUIPMENT

THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA COVERS THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN

OF THIS BUILDING STRUCTURE.

CODES AND MANUALS - MOST STRINGENT OF:

INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE, 2015 EDITION.

AISC MANUAL OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION, 14th EDITION, LRFD.

STEEL JOIST INSTITUTE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS,

LOAD TABLES AND WEIGHT TABLES FOR STEEL JOISTS

AND JOIST GIRDERS.

AISI COLD FORMED STEEL MANUAL.

ACI BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR REINFORCED

CONCRETE. ACI 318 - 14.

BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR MASONRY

STRUCTURES ACI 530/ASCE5 / TMS 402.

AISC SEISMIC DESIGN MANUAL, AISC 341-10.

1.50

1.05

SEE DRAWINGS OTHER THAN STRUCTURAL FOR KINDS

OF FLOOR FINISH AND THEIR LOCATION, DEPRESSIONS

IN FLOOR SLABS, OPENINGS IN WALLS AND FLOORS

REQUIRED BY ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES, WALKS,

RAMPS, STAIRS, CURBS, ETC.

HOLES AND OPENINGS THROUGH WALLS, BEAMS, AND

FLOORS FOR DUCTS, PIPING AND VENTILATION SHALL

BE CHECKED BY THE CONTRACTOR, WHO SHALL

VERIFY SIZES AND LOCATIONS OF SUCH HOLES OR

OPENINGS WITH THE PLUMBING, HVAC AND ELECTRICAL

DRAWINGS AND THESE SUB-CONTRACTORS.

SEE ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR WALLS NOT

SHOWN ON STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS.

DISCREPANCIES: COORDINATE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS

WITH OTHER DRAWINGS FOR INDIVIDUAL ITEMS.

DISCREPANCIES UNCOVERED, IF ANY, SHALL BE

REPORTED TO THE ARCHITECT/CONTRACTING

OFFICER'S REPRESENTATIVE BEFORE PROCEEDING

WITH THE WORK.

TYPICAL EDGE OF STRUCTURE / SLAB IS SHOWN ON THE

STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS. CONTRACTOR TO

COORDINATE LOCATIONS, DIMENSIONS AND

ELEVATIONS WITH ARCHITECTURAL EXTERIOR WALL

SECTIONS.

TYPICAL CURB DETAILS ARE SHOWN ON STRUCTURAL

DRAWINGS. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE

LOCATIONS WITH ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS.

DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS FOR THE PURPOSE OF

DETERMINING DIMENSIONS.

ALL DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETERS (mm) UNLESS NOTED

OTHERWISE.

COORDINATION WITH OTHER DRAWINGS:

EXISTING CONDITIONS:

GENERAL CRITERIA:

GENERAL NOTES:

REMOVE ALL MATERIAL THAT WILL INTERFERE WITH NEW

BUILDING FOUNDATIONS AND STRUCTURAL FILL AS PER

GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT'S RECOMMENDATIONS.

STRUCTURAL STABILITY:

A. THE STRUCTURE SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS HAS

BEEN DESIGNED FOR STABILITY UNDER FINAL, FULLY

CONSTRUCTED CONDITIONS.

B. PROVIDE SAFE AND ADEQUATE SHORING FOR ALL

PARTS OF THE STRUCTURE DURING CONSTRUCTION.

C. WHERE BACKFILL IS PLACED AGAINST WALLS, THE

WALLS SHALL BE BRACED OR OTHERWISE

ADEQUATELY SHORED UNTIL PERMANENT BRACING

ELEMENTS OR SLABS HAVE BEEN ERECTED AND HAVE

ATTAINED DESIGN STRENGTH.

MATERIAL CRITERIA

STRUCTURAL STEEL:

STEEL JOISTS:

NO CONSTRUCTION LOADS SHALL BE PLACED ON

UNBRIDGED JOISTS.

WHERE COLUMNS ARE NOT FRAMED IN AT LEAST TWO

DIRECTIONS WITH STRUCTURAL STEEL MEMBERS, JOISTS

AT OR CLOSEST TO COLUMN LINES SHALL BE FIELD

BOLTED TO PROVIDE LATERAL STABILITY DURING

CONSTRUCTION.

PROVIDE BRIDGING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LATEST

EDITION OF SJI STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS.

PLANS SEE DETAIL B3/S507.

PROVIDE 65mm MINIMUM BEARING ON STRUCTURAL STEEL

FOR K-SERIES JOISTS UNLESS GREATER LENGTHS ARE

SHOWN ON DRAWINGS.

IN THE INSTANCE WHERE A SUPPORT BEAM FLANGE IS

NOT WIDE ENOUGH TO ACCOMMODATE PROPER BEARING

FOR TWO JOIST SEATS, STAGGER JOISTS AS REQUIRED

TO ACHIEVE PROPER BEARING.

JOIST SIZES SHOWN ON DRAWINGS ARE BASED ON

UNINFORM GRAVITY LOADS. DESIGN JOISTS FOR UNIFORM

GRAVITY LOADS IN ADDITION TO OTHER LOADS (UPLIFT,

AXIAL LOADS, CONCENTRATED LOADS, MOMENTS, ETC.)

INDICATED ON DRAWINGS.

STEEL DECK:

ALL STEEL DECK SHALL BE FABRICATED AND ERECTED IN

ACCORDANCE WITH THE LATEST STEEL DECK INSTITUTE

SPECIFICATIONS.

SEE PLANS FOR STEEL DECK TYPE, GAGE, FINISH AND

CONNECTIONS.

PROVIDE 38mm MINIMUM BEARING AT ALL STEEL DECK

SUPPORT CONDITIONS.

ALL SPLICES AND LAPS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 50mm AND

SHALL BE CENTERED OVER SUPPORTS.

ALL STEEL DECK SHALL BE CONTINUOUS OVER THREE

SPANS WHEREVER FRAMING ALLOWS. SEE B2/S506 FOR

ADDITIONAL RESTRICITONS.

OPENINGS THROUGH STEEL DECK FLOORS AND ROOFS ON

FRAMING PLANS ARE NOT COMPLETE AS TO NUMBER, SIZE

AND LOCATION. FOR COMPLETE INFORMATION, REFER TO

DRAWINGS OTHER THAN STRUCTURAL.

PROVIDE STANDARD ACCESSORY MATERIALS, INCLUDING

BUT NOT LIMITED TO, CLOSURE STRIPS, POUR STOPS,

GIRDER FILLERS, ETC. ACCORDING TO SDI

RECOMMENDATIONS, TO PROVIDE TIGHT FITTING

CLOSURE AT OPEN ENDS AND SIDES OF DECKING.

AT ENDS OF DECKS OR WHERE CHANGES OF DECK

DIRECTION OCCUR FASTEN TO SUPPORTS AT EACH FLUTE.

PROVIDE ADEQUATE CLOSURES AND FASTENERS TO

SIDES AT 450mm ON CENTER, UNLESS STRICTER

REQUIREMENTS EXIST ON PLANS.

NOTHING WEIGHING MORE THAN 10 kg IS TO BE

SUPPORTED FROM THE METAL ROOF DECK UNLESS

SPECIFICALLY DETAILED IN THESE PLANS.

ITEMS WEIGHING MORE THAN 10 kg SHALL HAVE THEIR

OWN SUPPORT FRAMING OR THEY SHALL BE HUNG

DIRECTLY FROM THE MAIN FRAMING BEAMS. IT SHALL BE

THE RESPONSIBILITY OF EACH TRADE TO DESIGN A

SUPPORT SYSTEM FOR THEIR EQUIPMENT WHICH WILL

CONFORM TO THIS CRITERIA. DESIGN OF HANGERS AND

THEIR ANCHORAGES SHALL BE BY THE GENERAL

CONTRACTOR.

CONCRETE:

ALL CONCRETE WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE LATEST

EDITION OF "SPECIFICATIONS FOR STRUCTURAL

CONCRETE," ACI 301.

ALL CONCRETE SHALL BE REINFORCED UNLESS

SPECIFICALLY NOTED "NOT REINFORCED."

STEM WALLS, GRADE BEAMS, AND RETAINING WALLS

SHALL NOT BE CAST AGAINST EXCAVATED VERTICAL

SIDE SURFACES.

CONTROL JOINTS IN SLABS ON GRADE SHALL BE

APPROVED WHERE NOTED ON PLANS, BUT SHALL NOT

EXCEED 36 TIMES THE MINIMUM SLAB THICKNESS OR 6

METERS.

LIMIT SITE AND RETAINING WALL POURS TO A MAXIMUM OF

12 m BETWEEN CONSTRUCTION JOINTS. CONTROL JOINT

SPACING IN WALLS SHALL NOT EXCEED HALF OF THE

SPACING BETWEEN CONSTRUCTION JOINTS OR 6 m. 13 mm

EXPANSION JOINTS IN RETAINING WALL SHALL BE PLACED

A SPACING NOT EXCEEDING 12 m. COORDINATE

LOCATIONS OF JOINTS WITH ARCHITECTURAL PLANS.

ALL ANCHOR RODS FOR STRUCTURAL COLUMNS MUST BE

SECURELY SUPPORTED IN POSITION PRIOR TO

PLACEMENT OF CONCRETE. INSERTING THESE BOLTS

INTO WET CONCRETE IS NOT ALLOWED UNLESS

SPECIFICALLY NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS OR APPROVED

IN WRITING.

PIPE AND CONDUIT WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO BE INSTALLED

HORIZONTALLY IN SLABS WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL OF THE

ARCHITECT. ALL CONDUIT SHALL BE "SCRATCHED" INTO

GROUND BELOW VAPOR RETARDER.

AT INTERIOR SLABS-ON-GROUND OVER VAPOR RETARDER

USE CONCRETE THAT COMPLIES WITH THE FOLLOWING:

a. W/C=0.45 OR LESS. STRICT ADHERENCE TO THE

SPECIFIED WATER TO CEMENT RATIO IS REQUIRED.

WATER SHALL NOT BE ADDED TO THE MIX AT TIME OF

PLACEMENT.

b. DO NOT ADD EXTRA WATER. WATER-REDUCING

ADMIXTURES ARE PERMITTED TO ENHANCE

WORKABLILITY.

c. MOIST CURING OF SLABS ON GROUND IS REQUIRED.

SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR MORE INFORMATION.

d. CARE SHALL BE TAKEN TO PREVENT WATER

INTRUSION INTO THE SUBGRADE BOTH PRIOR TO AND

AFTER SLAB POURS.

e. TIMING OF SLAB SAWCUT JOINTS IS CRITICAL TO SLAB

CURING PERFORMANCE. SAWCUT JOINTS FOR

CONTROL JOINTS SHALL BE MADE AT THE EARLIEST

POSSIBLE TIME THAT THE CONCRETE WILL SUPPORT

THE WEIGHT OF EQUIPMENT AND OPERATORS.

f. CONTROL JOINTS IN SLABS ON GRADE SHALL BE

PROVIDED WHERE NOTED ON PLANS, BUT SHALL NOT

EXCEED 36 TIMES THE MINIMUM SLAB THICKNESS OR

4 m MAXIMUM .

g. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL

REQUIREMENTS.

REINFORCING STEEL:

DESIGN CRITERIA:

DESIGN LOADS:

VERTICAL:

LIVE DEAD

kPa kPa kPa kPa kN kPa kPa kPa kPa kPa kPa kPa kN kPa kPa

HORIZONTAL:

WIND DESIGN DATA:

ANALYTIC PROCEDURE:

RISK CATEGORY

BASIC WIND SPEED (3 SEC. GUST)

WIND IMPORTANCE FACTOR, Iw

WIND EXPOSURE CATEGORY

INTERNAL PRESSURE COEFFICIENT

II

51 m/s

1.0

C

±0.18

EQUIVALENT LATERAL FORCE

PROCEDURE (ACSE 7-10)

EARTHQUAKE DESIGN DATA:

ANALYSIS PROCEDURE:

SOIL SITE CLASS

SPECTRAL RESPONSE ACCELERATIONS

SITE COEFFICIENTS

EARTHQUAKE SPECIAL RESPONSE

ACCELERATION PARAMETERS

SEISMIC IMPORTANCE FACTOR, I

SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORY

SEISMIC FORCE-RESISTING SYSTEM:

RESPONSE MODIFICATION COEFFICIENT, R

Vmin.

V

Vmax.

= 0.044SDS IW ≥ 0.01W

= SDS W I/R

= SDI I W/(TR)

Ss =

S1 =

Fa =

Fv =

SMS =

SM1 =

SDS =

SD1 =

D

0.683

0.261

1.254

1.879

0.856

0.490

0.571

0.326

1.0

D

3.25

ORDINARY STEEL

CONCENTRICALLY

BRACED FRAMES

FOUNDATION NOTES:

GENERAL CRITERIA:

BASIS FOR DESIGN:

ALLOWABLE SOIL BEARING PRESSURE FOR FOUNDATIONS

SUPPORTING DEAD AND LIVE LOADS = 120 kPa

ALLOWABLE SOIL BEARING PRESSURE = 160 kPa. FOR

FOUNDATIONS SUPPORTING DEAD, LIVE, AND WIND OR

SEISMIC LOADS.

FIELD OBSERVATION AND TESTING REQUIREMENTS:

MATERIAL LARGER THAN 150mm SHALL NOT BE PLACED

NO BRUSH, SOD, FROZEN MATERIAL OR OTHER

UNSUITABLE MATERIAL SHALL BE PLACED IN THE

STRUCTURAL FILL. MATERIAL SHALL BE PLACED IN

SUCH A MANNER AS TO RESULT IN UNIFORMLY

COMPACTED FILL.

5. SELECT FILL SHALL CONSIST OF GRANULAR SOIL

THAT CONTAINS AT LEAST 40 PERCENT OF MATERIAL,

BY DRY WEIGHT, LESS THAN 1/4 INCH IN SIZE.

SELECT FILL SHALL NOT CONTAIN ROCK OR HARD

LUMPS GREATER THAN 75 MM IN MAXIMUM

DIMENSION. EXPANSION INDEX SHALL BE LESS THAN

20, LL LESS THAN 30, AND PI LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO

15.

COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS:

SUBGRADE SOILS AND STRUCTURAL FILL MATERIALS

SHALL BE COMPACTED TO THE FOLLOWING MINIMUM

PERCENTAGES OF THE ASTM D1557 MAXIMUM DRY

DENSITY AT +/- 2% OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT.

MATERIAL PERCENT COMPACTION

STRUCTURAL FILL

SUBBASE FOR SLAB SUPPORT

MISCELLANEOUS BACKFILL

DESIGN BASE SHEAR: (IBC 2015)

LIGHTGAGE STEEL FRAMING SHALL MEET THE MINIMUM

PROPERTIES AS SHOWN IN THE STEEL STUD SCHEDULE.

ALL TRACK SHALL BE 32MM LEG, 1.088 mm THICK MINIMUM.

TRACK SHALL BE ANCHORED TO SLAB AND STEM WALLS

PER D5/S505, U.N.O. ON PLANS OR SECTION.

CONCRETE CAST AGAINST AND

PERMANENTLY EXPOSED TO EARTH:

CONCRETE EXPOSED TO EARTH

OR WEATHER:

COLUMNS AND BEAMS:

STRUCTURAL SLABS AND WALLS:

SLABS ON METAL DECK:

REINFORCING SHALL NOT BE TACK WELDED OR WELDED

IN ANY MANNER UNLESS SPECIFICALLY DETAILED ON THE

STRUCTURAL PLANS.

MINIMUM CONCRETE PROTECTION FOR REINFORCEMENT

(CLEAR DISTANCE):

75mm

50mm (#19 & LARGER)

40mm (#16 & SMALLER)

40mm

25mm

25mm

TYPICAL REINFORCEMENT UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN:

UP TO 200mm CONCRETE WALLS: #13 @ 200 mm O.C.

EACH WAY AT CENTER OF WALL.

OVER 200mm TO 300mm CONCRETE WALLS: #13 @ 300 mm O.C. EACH WAY, EACH FACE.

OVER 300 mm THICK: #16 @ 300mm O.C. EACH WAY, EACH FACE.

ALL HORIZONTAL REINFORCING IN FOOTINGS, WALLS AND

BEAMS SHALL BE CONTINUOUS AROUND CORNERS OR

HAVE CORNER BARS OF THE SAME SIZE AND SPACING AS

THE HORIZONTAL BARS AND LAP SPLICES PER SCHEDULE.

SIDE WALLS OF EXCAVATION SHALL BE BATTERED A

MINIMUM OF 25mm HORIZONTAL TO 300mm VERTICAL.

THIS CUT SHALL BE ABLE TO REMAIN VERTICAL

WITHOUT ANY SLOUGHAGE.

BOTTOM WIDTH OF EXCAVATIONS SHALL BE 25mm

WIDER AT EACH SIDE THAN IS SHOWN ON DRAWINGS.

IF ANY SANDY OR LOOSE SOIL MATERIALS ARE

ENCOUNTERED, FOOTINGS MAY NOT BE EARTH

FORMED.

ALL REINFORCING STEEL SHALL BE CORRECTLY

ALIGNED AND MAINTAINED, AND SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM

OF 75mm OF CONCRETE COVER WHERE CAST AGAINST

EARTH.

DURING CASTING, ANY SOIL SLOUGHAGE SHALL BE

REMOVED FROM THE WET CONCRETE.

FOOTINGS NOT MEETING THE ABOVE CONDITIONS

SHALL BE REMOVED AND RECAST.

KEEP OPEN EXCAVATIONS AND EXCAVATIONS FOR

FOOTINGS AROUND AND WITHIN BUILDING PERIMETER

DRY. BACKFILL AGAINST FOUNDATIONS AND GRADE

BEAMS AS SOON AS PRACTICAL. PUMP WATER OUT OF

OPEN EXCAVATIONS, IF FLOODED PRIOR TO

BACKFILLING.

STRUCTURAL FILL SHALL NOT BE PLACED WHEN THE

ATMOSPHERIC TEMPERATURE IS BELOW 2 DEGREES

CELSIUS. WHEN THE TEMPERATURE FALLS BELOW 2

DEGREES, ALL AREAS OF COMPLETED WORK SHALL BE

PROTECTED AGAINST DETRIMENTAL EFFECTS OF

GROUND FREEZING, AND ANY AREAS AFFECTED BY

FREEZING SHALL BE RECONDITIONED AND COMPACTED

IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE ABOVE REQUIREMENTS.

ANY SOILS DISTURBED DUE TO WETTING, DRYING OR

OTHER CAUSES SHALL ALSO BE RECONDITIONED PRIOR

TO PLACEMENT OF ADDITIONAL FILL OR CONSTRUCTION

OF FOUNDATIONS, FLOOR SLABS, OR OTHER

STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS. RECONDITIONING SHALL

INCLUDE SCARIFICATION, MOISTURE CONDITIONING,

AND RECOMPACTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE

REQUIREMENTS PRESENTED IN THESE NOTES.

CLAY SOILS ENCOUNTERED NEAR THE SURFACE

SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM BELOW THE FOUNDATION

PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF ENGINEERED FILL.

FOOTINGS MAY BE CAST DIRECTLY AGAINST THE

VERTICAL SIDES OF THE EXCAVATIONS PROVIDED ALL OF

THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA ARE SATISFIED:

STRUCTURAL FILL REQUIREMENTS:

MATERIAL SHALL COMPLY WITH THE GEOTECHNICAL

RECOMMENDATIONS.

PLACE ALL STRUCTURAL FILL IN APPROXIMATELY

HORIZONTAL LAYERS NOT GREATER THAN 200mm IN

THICKNESS FOR HEAVY EQUIPMENT COMPACTION

MOISTEN TO OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT +/- 3% AND

COMPACT TO DENSITY SPECIFIED IN THESE

REQUIREMENTS.

ALL EARTHWORK & OVER EXCAVATION FOR THE

BUILDING PAD SHALL EXTEND A MINIMUM OF 3 METERS

BEYOND THE PERIMETER FOOTINGS.

MAINTAIN SUBGRADE AND FILL MOISTURE CONTENT

UNTIL FOUNDATIONS ARE PLACED.

DO NOT PLACE FOOTINGS OR SLABS AGAINST

SUBGRADE CONTAINING FREE WATER, FROST, OR ICE.

MAINTAIN PROPER SITE DRAINAGE DURING

CONSTRUCTION TO ENSURE SURFACE RUNOFF AWAY

FROM STRUCTURES AND TO PREVENT PONDING OF

SURFACE RUNOFF NEAR THE STRUCTURES.

IF CONTRACTOR SUPPLIES PLATE BASED ON ENGLISH

THICKNESS THE FOLLOWING COVERSIONS SHALL BE

USED.

5mm = 3/16"

6mm = 1/4"

8mm = 5/16"

10mm = 3/8"

13mm = 1/2"

16mm = 5/8"

19mm = 3/4"

22mm = 7/8"

25mm = 1"

32mm = 1 1/4"

38mm = 1 1/2"

I. WHERE WELD ELECTRODES ARE SUPPLIED BASED ON

ENGLISH SYSTEM OF UNITS, EQUIVALENT SIZES SHALL

BE PER AISC 14TH EDITION TABLE J2.3.

J. ALL FIELD DRILLING SHALL BE DONE WITH A MAG DRILL.

FLAME CUTTING OF HOLES OR ENLARGING OF UNFAIR

HOLES WILL NOT BE PERMITTED.

TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS AND STEEL STUD

SCHEDULE FOR LIGHTGAGE FRAMING ARE SHOWN ON

SHEET S505. REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR

SPECIFIC CONFIGURATION AND DIMENSIONS OF ALL

LIGHTGAGE STEEL FRAMING NOT SHOWN ON THE

STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS.

ALL LIGHTGAGE STEEL FRAMING SHALL CONFORM TO

LATEST EDITION OF AISI "NORTH AMERICAN

SPECIFICATION FOR THE DESIGN OF COLD-FORMED STEEL

STRUCTURAL MEMBERS."

WALLS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH MANUFACTURER'S

STANDARD BRIDGING: (EITHER WELDED 64 X 1.088 mm

THICK STUD OR CLIPPED COLD-ROLLED CHANNEL 38 X

1.366 mm THICK). PROVIDE BRIDGING @ 1200 O.C.

MAXIMUM.

PROVIDE ALL MISCELLANEOUS ACCESSORIES AND

FOLLOW ERECTION PROCEDURES PER MANUFACTURER'S

SPECIFICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.

COLD FORMED STEEL FRAMING (0.835mm THICK AND

HEAVIER):

0.835

1.088

1.366

1.720

2.454

2.997

GAGE

THICKNESS, mm

BAR SUPPORTS AND SPACERS FOR REINFORCING SHALL

BE PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACI 315. CHAIRS

WITH 0.7mm. SAND PLATES OR PRECAST BLOCKS SHALL

BE PROVIDED FOR ALL REINFORCING OF CONCRETE IN

CONTACT WITH GRADE. DECK CHAIRS SHALL BE

PROVIDED FOR ALL WELDED WIRE FABRIC IN SLABS OVER

METAL DECK. REINFORCING SHALL BE SECURELY TIED TO

SUPPORTS.

REFER TO GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR SPECIFIC

RECOMMENDATIONS.

REMOVE ALL TOPSOIL FROM THE CONSTRUCTION AREA.

THIS MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE USED AS FILL MATERIAL,

SPECIFIC SOIL PREPARATION REQUIREMENTS:

CLEARING AND GRUBBING:

SITE AND SUBSURFACE PREPARATION:

OVEREXCAVATE ALL SOILS UNDERLYING FOOTINGS AND

FLOOR SLAB AS NOTED ON S002.

MOISTURE CONDITIONED AND PROOF-ROLL PRIOR TO

COMPACTING NEW FILL.

INSTALL SUITABLE ENGINEERED FILL AND TENSAR TRIAX

TX GOEGRID LAYERS PER GEOTECHNICAL

RECOMMENDATIONS. INSTALL SELECT STRUCTURAL FILL

AT THE TOP 1m OF SOIL PER THE GEOTECHNICAL

RECOMMENDATIONS.

A

BC

D

E

0.176

0.176

0.176

0.176

SEISMIC

RESPONSE

COEFFICENT C

s

DESIGN BASE

SHEAR, kN

SEISMIC COLLECTOR BEAMS ARE REQUIRED WHERE

NOTED ON PLAN. ROOF DECK SHALL BE WELDED TO

COLLECTOR BEAMS AS NOTED ON PLAN. MECHANICAL

PIN ATTACHMENT ANCHORS SHALL NOT BE USED FOR

ATTACHING ROOF DECK TO COLLECTOR BEAMS OR

FRAME BEAMS NEXT TO COLLECTOR BEAMS.

NOTE: BUILDING DESIGNATIONS ARE BETWEEN

EXPANSION JOINTS.

BUILDING

VERTICAL DEFLECTION AND RIGID CLIPS SHALL BE 1.727mm

THICK AND SIMILAR TO HILTI VERTICLIP SLB600 OR 140mm

DIETRICH FASTCLIP. EACH STUD SHALL BE ATTACHED TO

EDGE PLATE OR ANGLE WITH CLIP NOTED UNO. CLIPS

SHALL BE WELDED TO EDGE ANGLE OR BENT EDGE PLATE.

ALL SCREWS USED IN COLD FORMED STEEL CONNECTIONS

SHALL BE A MINIMUM #6 OR WELDED UNO ON PLANS.

ALL 1.366mm AND HEAVIER MEMBERS SHALL BE FORMED

FROM STEEL CORRESPONDING TO WHAT IS LISTED IN THE

AISI "SPECIFICATION FOR THE DESIGN OF COLD-FORMED

STEEL STRUCTURAL MEMBERS", WITH A MINIMUM YIELD

STRENGTH OF 345 MPA UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED

OTHERWISE.

WHERE GAGE MATERIAL IS SUPPLIED FOR COLD FORMED

STEEL FRAMING THE FOLLOWING CONVERSIONS SHALL BE

USED.

ROOF SNOW LOAD:

GROUND SNOW LOAD, Pg

FLAT ROOF SNOW LOAD, Pf

SNOW EXPOSURE FACTOR, Ce

SNOW IMPORTANCE FACTOR, I

THERMAL FACTOR, Ct

ROOF SUPPORTED MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT:

AC-1

AC-2

AC-3

AC-4

AC-LN

AC-LS

WHP8

AC-5

DEAD, kN DEAD, kN

1.0

1.0

1.0 kPa kPa

ONE MOISTURE-DENSITY CURVE FOR EACH TYPE OF

MATERIAL USED, AS INDICATED BY SIEVE ANALYSIS AND

PLASTICITY INDEX.

THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER SHALL SUBMIT THE

RESULTS OF ALL REQUIRED TESTS TO THE

ARCHITECT/CONTRACTING OFFICER'S REPRESENTATIVE

WITHIN 2 WORKING DAYS AFTER THE TEST.

ONE FIELD DENSITY TEST PER EACH 420 SQUARE METERS

OF STRUCTURAL FILL PLACED IN EACH HORIZONTAL

LAYER OF STRUCTURAL FILL, WITH A MINIMUM OF 3 TESTS.

GENERAL:

CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT TECHNICAL LITERATURE

FOR PROPOSED ANCHORING SYSTEM TO ARCHITECT

FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.

ANCHORING SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED IN STRICT

ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURER'S GUIDELINES FOR

INSTALLATION AND CURRENT ICC-ES REPORT

REQUIREMENTS.

ALL POST-INSTALLED ANCHORS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM

13 DIAMETER UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE ON THE

PLANS.

INSTALLATION DEPTHS SHOWN IN THESE PLANS ARE

THE MINIMUM EMBEDMENT DEPTHS. CONTRACTOR

SHALL SUPPLY ANCHORS WITH ADDITIONAL LENGTH TO

ENSURE THAT PROPER INSTALLATION OF ATTACHING

EQUIPMENT CAN BE MADE.

POST-INSTALLED ANCHORS SHALL ONLY BE USED

WHERE SPECIFIED ON THE DRAWINGS.

CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN APPROVAL FROM THE

ARCHITECT PRIOR TO USING POST-INSTALLED ANCHORS

FOR MISSING OR MISPLACED CAST-IN-PLACE ANCHORS.

CARE SHALL BE GIVEN TO AVOID CONFLICTS WITH

EXISTING REBAR. HOLES SHALL BE DRILLED AND

CLEANED PER THE MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS.

ANCHORS SHALL BE INSTALLED PER THE

MANUFACTURER'S INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS AT NOT

LESS THAN MINIMUM EDGE DISTANCES, EMBEDMENT,

AND / OR SPACING INDICATED IN THE MANUFACTURER'S

LITERATURE AND ICC-ES REPORT.

ANCHORS SHALL BE EMBEDDED IN THE APPROPRIATE

SUBSTRATE WITH THE EMBEDMENT INDICATED ON THE

DRAWINGS.

SUBSTITUTION REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTS OTHER THAN

THOSE LISTED BELOW SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE

ARCHITECT WITH CALCULATIONS THAT ARE PREPARED

AND SEALED BY A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER LICENSED

IN THE JURISDICTION SHOWING THAT THE SUBSTITUTED

PRODUCT WILL ACHIEVE AN EQUIVALENT CAPACITY

USING THE APPROPRIATE DESIGN PROCEDURE

REQUIRED BY THE BUILDING CODE AND SHALL BE

ACCOMPIANIED BY A CURRENT

ICC-ES REPORT

SUBSTANTIATING SUITABILITY.

POST INSTALLED ANCHORS:

CONCRETE:

ALL SCREW TYPE ANCHORS SHALL BE POWERS WEDGE

BOLT +, HILTI KWIK HUS-EZ OR SIMPSON TITEN-HD

INSTALLED INTO CURED CONCRETE.

ALL EXPANSION ANCHORS SHALL BE HILTI KWIK BOLT

TZ, SIMPSON STRONG BOLT 2 OR POWERS

POWER-STUDS+SD2 UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE ON

PLANS. EXPANSION ANCHORS SHALL BE INSTALLED

INTO CURED CONCRETE.

ALL ADHESIVE OR EPOXY GROUTED ANCHORS SHALL BE

HILTI HIT RE-500-SD, POWERS PE1000+ OR SIMPSON

SET-XP.

MASONRY:

ALL SCREW TYPE ANCHORS SHALL BE POWERS WEDGE

BOLT +, HILTI KWIK HUS-EZ OR SIMPSON TITEN-HD

INSTALLED INTO SOLID GROUTED AND CURED CMU AND

NOT INTO MORTAR JOINTS.

ALL EXPANSION ANCHORS SHALL BE HILTI KWIK BOLT 3,

SIMPSON STRONG BOLT 2 OR POWERS

POWER-STUDS+SD1 UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE ON

PLANS. EXPANSION ANCHORS SHALL BE INSTALLED

INTO SOLID GROUTED AND CURED CMU.

ALL ADHESIVE OR EPOXY GROUTED ANCHORS SHALL BE

HILTI HIT HY 70, POWERS PURE 110+ OR SIMPSON SET

INTO SOLID GROUTED AND CURED CMU. ANCHORS FOR

HOLLOW MASONRY SHALL BE HILTI HIT HY 70, POWERS

PURE 110+ OR SIMPSON SET WITH ADHESIVE

ANCHORING SCREEN.

ONE FIELD DENSITY TEST PER EACH 420 SQUARE

METERS OF COMPACTED SUBGRADE PRIOR TO PLACING

STRUCTURAL FILL OR FLOOR SLAB CONSTRUCTION

WITH A MINIMUM OF 3 TESTS.

TESTS OF MATERIALS SHALL BE MADE AT THE FOLLOWING

RATES, UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY GEOTECHNICAL

EGINEER:

A. STEEL JOISTS AND JOIST GIRDERS SHALL BE

MANUFACTURED BY A MEMBER OF THE STEEL JOIST

INSTITUTE.

B. STEEL JOISTS AND JOIST GIRDERS SHALL BE DESIGNED,

FABRICATED AND ERECTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE

LATEST STEEL JOIST INSTITUTE SPECIFICATIONS AND

OSHA REGULATIONS.

1.5

CONCENTRATED ROOF LOAD

kN kN

REINFORCED CONCRETE MASONRY:

BASIS FOR DESIGN: ALL MASONRY UNITS SHALL BE TYPE I

WITH A MINIMUM COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 15 MPa

(NET AREA). F'm = 10.3 MPa.

MORTAR SHALL BE TYPE S. GROUT - F'c = 13.8 MPa.

CELLS CONTAINING REBAR SHALL BE GROUTED SOLID

FROM THE BOTTOM TO THE TOP OF THE WALL IN

ACCORDANCE WITH THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE.

ALL VERTICAL REBAR SHALL BE IN PLACE AND SECURED

WITH REBAR POSITIONERS PRIOR TO GROUTING.

UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, MASONRY CELLS SHALL BE

GROUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LOW-LIFT METHOD

AS DESCRIBED IN THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE.

(MAXIMUM 1.2 METER LIFTS)

ALL CELLS BELOW GRADE SHALL BE GROUTED SOLID UP

TO GRADE.

LAP ALL REBAR 48 BAR DIAMETERS OR 600mm MINIMUM

UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.

LAP ALL JOINT REINFORCEMENT 75 WIRE DIAMETERS.

ALL HORIZONTAL REINFORCING IN BOND BEAMS SHALL BE

CONTINUOUS AROUND CORNERS OR HAVE CORNER BARS

OF THE SAME SIZE AND A LAP OF 48 BAR DIAMETER OR

600mm MINIMUM. VERTICAL REBAR SHALL CONTINUE

THROUGH BOND BEAMS. IF BOND BEAMS AT

INTERSECTING WALLS MEET AT DIFFERENT ELEVATIONS,

EXTEND BOND BEAMS AROUND INTERSECTING CORNER

TO FIRST INTERIOR REINFORCED CELL, BUT NOT LESS

THAN 1.2 METERS.

PROVIDE STANDARD TRUSS TYPE JOINT REINFORCING @

400 mm O.C. (ALTERNATE COURSES) UNLESS NOTED

OTHERWISE. USE PREFABRICATED CORNERS AND TEES

AT ALL WALL CORNERS AND INTERSECTIONS

RESPECTIVELY.

ALL CMU SHALL BE REINFORCED UNLESS SPECIFICALLY

NOTED "NOT REINFORCED."

TYPICAL REINFORCEMENT UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN:

150mm CMU WALLS: #13 @ 200mm O.C. VERTICAL

200mm CMU WALLS: #13 @ 400mm O.C. VERTICAL

300mm CMU WALLS: #16 @ 400mm O.C. VERTICAL

TYPICAL DETAIL SECTIONS AND SCHEDULES ARE SHOWN

ON SHEETS S501 THROUGH S508 AND APPLY TO ALL

CONSTRUCTION EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN DIFFERENTLY ON

THE PLANS AND DETAILS.

SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS:

A. SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL INCLUDE ITEMS REQUIRED BY

THE SPECIFICATION AND THE FOLLOWING, AS

APPLICABLE:

a. DESIGNATION OF THE MEMBERS AND

CONNECTIONS THAT ARE PART OF THE SEISMIC

LATERAL RESISTING SYSTEM (SLRS).

b. CONNECTION MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS.

c. WELDING REQUIREMENTS AS SPECIFIED IN

APPENDIX W, SECTION W2.2.

B. ERECTION DRAWINGS SHALL INCLUDE ITEMS

REQUIRED BY THE SPECIFICATION AND THE

FOLLOWING, AS APPLICABLE:

a. DESIGNATION OF THE MEMBERS AND

CONNECTIONS THAT ARE PART OF THE SEISMIC

LATERAL RESISTING SYSTEM (SLRS).

b. FIELD CONNECTION MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS

AND SIZES.

c. LOCATIONS OF PRETENSIONED BOLTS.

d. FIELD WELDING REQUIREMENTS AS SPECIFIED IN

APPENDIX W, SECTION W2.3.

FOR CONCENTRATED LOADS NOT SHOWN ON FRAMING

MILS

VAPOR RETARDER:

A. PLACE VAPOR RETARDER DIRECTLY BENEATH INTERIOR

SLABS-ON-GRADE, BETWEEN SLAB AND BASE.

B. LAP AND SEAL ALL EDGES, PUNCTURES, AND

PENETRATIONS.

C. MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM E1745 WITH A

WATER VAPOR PERMEANCE LESS THAN 0.030 PERMS.

D. BASIS OF DESIGN: STEGO WRAP, 15 MIL MINIMUM.

E. SEE DETAIL A4/S502 FOR TYPICAL VAPOR RETARDER

SYSTEM.

F. SEE SPECIFICATIONS AND MANUFACTURER'S

INSTRUCTIONS FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.

BASIS FOR DESIGN, STRENGTH AT 28 DAYS:

K. STRUCTURAL STEEL TO BE FABRICATED AND ERECTED IN

ACCORDANCE WITH LATEST OSHA REGULATIONS.

L. SPLICING OF STRUCTURAL STEEL MEMBERS IS PROHIBITED

WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL OF THE ARCHITECT /

CONTRACTING OFFICER.

M. CONFORM TO THE AISC CODE OF STANDARD PRACTICE

FOR ERECTION TOLERANCES. FIELD MODIFICATION TO

STRUCTURAL STEEL IS PROHIBITED WITHOUT PRIOR

APPROVAL FROM THE ARCHITECT.

N. REFER TO SPECIFICATION 05 12 00 FOR LIMITS AND

REQUIREMENTS OF ARCHITECTURALLY EXPOSED

STRUCTURAL STEEL (AESS).

ALL 1.088mm AND LIGHTER MEMBERS SHALL BE FORMED

FROM STEEL CORRESPONDING TO WHAT IS LISTED IN THE

AISI "SPECIFICATION FOR THE DESIGN OF COLD-FORMED

STEEL STRUCTURAL MEMBERS", WITH A MINIMUM YIELD

STRENGTH OF 225 MPA UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED

OTHERWISE.

ALL STUD SIZES SHOWN IN MILLIMETERS (MM).

F'c = 25 MPa (NORMAL WEIGHT) ALL OTHER CONCRETE

EXPANSION INDEX SHALL BE LESS THAN 50 FOR

STRUCTURAL FILL.

S001

GENERAL

STRUCTURAL

NOTES

11.13.15 ADDENDUM 001

REV

ISSUE: 10.15.15 - SUBMITTAL 3

PROJECT NO: 08-0110.001

CAD DWG FILE: 08-0110-S001.dwg

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

SHEET TITLE

DATE DESCRIPTION

CONSULTANTS

U. S. DEPARTMENT

OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

E

21 3 4 5 6

D

C

B

A

D

C

B

A

21 3 4 5 6

10/15/15

From: Antonio Alvarez <aalvarez@NEIAW.COM>

Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 5:03 PM

To: Chuck Hanson

Subject: Fort Yuma Health Care Center (NEI Job No. 015-0098)

Hello Mr. Hanson, I am sending you this e-mail in regards to the above referenced project. Please note, that our

Revised Geotechnical Report signed on 6/26/15, under section 8.4 Fills Materials, included a typo. The second paragraph under the aforementioned section currently reads "Engineered Fill should consist of native or import soil that has a plasticity index less than 50 and does not contain quantities of oversize material that could make compaction difficult." It should read

"Engineered Fill should consist of native or import soil that has an expansion index less than 50 and does not contain quantities of oversize material that could make compaction difficult."

Thanks, Antonio Alvarez, PE

Nicklaus Engineering, Inc.

June 2015

REVISED GEOTECHNICAL REPORT

Prepa red for:

DEKKER/PERICH/SABATINI

7601 JEFFERSON NE, SUITE 100

ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87109

Prepared by: .'

NICKLAUS ENGINEERING, INC.

1851 W. 24TH STREET, SUITE 101

YUMA, AZ 85364

Nicklaus Engineering, Inc. 1851 W. 24th Street, Yuma, AZ 85364 I Ph: 928.344.8374 I Fax: 928.726.6994

Fort Yuma Health Care Center Geotechnical Report (Draft) NEI Job No. 015‐0098

June 25, 2015

Dekker/Perich/Sabatini 7601 Jefferson NE, Suite 100 Albuquerque, NM 87109

Attention: Mr. Chuck Hanson, P.E.

Reference: Fort Yuma Health Care Center – Geotechnical Investigation NEI Job No. 015‐0098

Dear Mr. Hanson, Please accept this report as a revision to our report dated June 23, 2015 of the same title.

As discussed in our proposal dated May 11, 2015, we reviewed the original geotechnical investigation report titled, “Soils Investigation for Fort Yuma Health Care Center in Imperial County, California,” dated April 2008. Based on our review of the April 2008 report and our proposal, please accept the following report as an updated report to the aforementioned geotechnical investigation. The 2008 report is considered preliminary for purposes of this updated report, and its field and laboratory results are used as a reference.

In order to evaluate the proposed site layout and the revised building code, NEI performed additional field explorations and laboratory testing as part of the updated geotechnical investigation; which included mud rotary drilling within the proposed building limits and testing below the groundwater table. The engineering analyses in this report includes an evaluation of the site liquefaction potential and possible site improvement recommendations, including geotechnical engineering conclusions and recommendations for both design and construction.

It is our recommendation that a copy of this report be given to the Structural Engineer and Earthwork Contractor.

Sincerely, Nicklaus Engineering, Inc.

Antonio Alvarez, P.E.

Vice President

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. GENERAL

1.2. PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

2. FIELD INVESTIGATION

3. LABORATORY TESTING

4. GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS

4.1. GEOLOGIC SETTING

4.2. SEISMIC SETTING

5. SURFACE CONDITIONS

6. SUBSURFACE CONDTIONS

7. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS

7.1. FAULT GROUND RUPTURE

7.2. STRONG GROUND SHAKING

7.3. LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL

7.3.1. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

7.3.2. EVALUATION RESULTS

7.3.3. LIQUEFACTION IMPACTS

7.4. EXPANSIVE SOIL

7.5. FLOODING

7.6. HYDROCONSOLIDATION

7.7. OTHER GEOLOGIC HAZARDS

8. ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1. EARTHWORK

8.2. SITE CLEARING AND DEMOLITION

8.3. REMEDIAL GRADING AND SITE PREPARATION

8.3.1. UNIFORM BUILDING/PAVEMENT SUPPORT

8.3.2. LIQUEFACTION EFFECTS

8.4. FILL MATERIALS

8.5. FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION

8.6. SUBDRAINS

8.7. SURFACE DRAINAGE

8.8. CBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS

8.9. SOIL LIQUEFACTION/GROUND IMPROVEMENT

8.9.1. REDUCTION OF SOIL LIQUEFACTION SURFACE EFFECTS

NEI Job No. 015-0098

+t

8.10. SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS

8.11. DEEP FOUNDATIONS

8.12. MAT FOUNDATIONS

8.13. ALLOWABLE LATERAL RESISTANCE

8.14. CONCRETE SLABS AND HARDSCAPE

8.15. UTILITY TRENCHES

8.16. PAVEMENTS

8.17. CORROSION POTENTIAL

8.18. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

9. RISK, LIMITATIONS AND OTHER CONSiDERATIONS

REFERENCES

ATIACHMENTS

BORING PLATES:

PLATE A - VICINITY MAP

PLATE B - LOCATION MAP

PLATE C - BORING LOCATION MAP

BORING LOGS

KEY TO SYMBOLS

LABORATORY REPORTS:

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION REPORTS

ATIERBERG LIMITS REPORTS

STANDARD PROCTOR / MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP REPORT

R-VALUE REPORT

LAB SUMMARY

SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

------------------------------- Page 2 j;.

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. GENERAL

Contained within this report are the results of our geotechnical study for the Fort Yuma Health Care

Center project in Winterhaven, California. The purpose of our study was to investigate the underlying soil conditions at the site and provide engineering recommendations for foundations, earthwork, asphaltic concrete pavement and other related activities. Our field efforts included exploratory borings at select locations within the proposed building footprint. The exploratory borings were conducted to acquire information on the subsurface conditions. Field data collected, along with laboratory test results, were analyzed to develop design recommendations for the project.

1.2. PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

The Fort Yuma Health Care Center will be located in Winterhaven, California on an approximately 13 acre site. The site is bordered to the north by Highway S24 (Picacho Road), to the south and west by

Agnes Road and to the east by Quechan Drive. Proposed construction will consist of an approximately 70,000 square foot, single story, steel frame building with additional improvements including an asphaltic concrete paved parking area along with associated utilities.

2. FIELD INVESTIGATION

A total of three (3) test borings were advanced across the proposed site for this update. Two (2) hollow stem auger borings were advanced to fifteen and a half (15½) feet below ground surface and one (1) mud rotary boring was advanced to fifty‐one and a half (51½) feet below ground surface. All boreholes were advanced utilizing a truck mounted Diedrich D‐50 drill rig. Standard penetration tests were made at selected intervals employing a Modified California Sampler which was driven by a free‐fall 140‐pound hammer with a fall distance of thirty (30) inches. The number of blows required to advance the sampler twelve (12) inches, after initial six (6) inch seating, was noted and was designated as the standard penetration value. The standard penetration value at each borehole location is shown on the attached detailed boring logs.

TABLE 1: SCHEDULE OF BOREHOLES

LOCATION

DESIGNATION

BOREHOLE

NUMBER

BOREHOLE

DEPTH (FT)

Fort Yuma Health Care Center

BH‐1 15½

BH‐2 15½

BH‐3 51½

3. LABORATORY TESTING

Samples were recovered from a Modified California Sampler for laboratory analysis as described in

Section 2 of this report. Dry preparation of soil samples were conducted in accordance with ASTM D421.

The laboratory testing program consisted of the following:

TABLE 2: SCHEDULE OF LABORATORY TESTS

TEST NUMBER OF TESTS ASTM STANDARD

Particle Size Analysis 19 ASTM D422

Atterberg Limits 19 ASTM D4318

Moisture Content of Soil 19 ASTM D2216

Standard Proctor 1 ASTM D698 pH 1 Caltrans Method 643

Soluble Sulfates & Chlorides 1 Caltrans Method 417 & 422

R‐Value 1 ASTM D2844 / CAL 301

Soil classification was conducted in accordance with ASTM D2487.

4. GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS

4.1. Geologic Setting

The project site is situated in the Lower Colorado River geographic sub‐region within the Sonoran

Desert of the Basin and Range geomorphic province. This province is characterized by broad desert alluvial basins separated by barren rugged mountains [Radtke, 1988]. Landforms within the southern portion of this subregion are dominated by the fluvial geomorphology of the Colorado River drainage.

The Project area is situated on a relatively flat, fluvial terraced surface at an approximate elevation of 130 feet, Mean Sea Level (MSL) underlain by several thousand feet of alluvial, fluvial, and sedimentary deposits [Eberley et al., 1978].

4.2. Seismic Setting

The tectonic setting of the Winterhaven, California area is influenced by the transition zone between the crustal spreading centers in the Gulf and the right‐lateral transform boundary between the North

American and Pacific Plates. Although the San Andreas Fault zone is the primary element in this transform boundary, the total plate motion is distributed across a broad zone of deformation that extends from the San Andreas Fault on the east to offshore faults to the west. Primary seismic sources in the vicinity are the right slip faults associated with the transform boundary that include the San Andreas, San Jacinto, and Elsinore fault systems. Within the Salton Trough to the west of the site, the Imperial, Cerro Prieto, and Brawley faults represent relatively short but active seismic components of the San Andreas Fault system. Other distant active faults include the San Miguel, and the Calabasas faults in northwestern Baja California, and the extensional faults of the Basin and

Range province to the northeast.

The closest active fault (exhibiting evidence of displacement in the last 11,000 years) to the site is the Imperial fault which exhibited surface rupture most recently during seismic events in 1940 (M

6.9) and 1979 (M 6.4) [SCEC, 2014]. The Imperial fault is mapped approximately 40 miles (64 km) west‐southwest of the site [Jennings, 1994]. The nearest potentially active fault (exhibiting evidence of displacement between 11,000 and 1.6 million years) is the Algodones fault zone, approximately

7.5 miles (12 km) southwest of the site [Scarborough et al., 1986]. The Algonones fault zone is comprised of a series of two northwest‐southeast trending Quaternary‐age faults that exhibit a northeast dip‐slip component. The fault zone is predominantly concealed by windblown sand and young alluvial deposits but exhibits displacement of alluvial material with the latest Pleistocene

(11,000 to 30,000 years).

5. SURFACE CONDITIONS

The site was most recently used as a tribal mobile home park and is currently vacant. The approximately

13‐acre site is relatively flat and is sparsely vegetated. See attached photos for general surface conditions at time of drilling operations.

6. SUBSURFACE CONDTIONS

The site is underlain by recent alluvium. These deposits, as encountered during part of the 2008 field investigation, as well as, the current field investigation, generally consist of interbedded silts, lean clays, silty sands, and poorly graded sands (Unified Soil Classification System [USCS] classification ML, CL, SM, and SP, respectively). Raw sampler blow counts for SPT and split‐spoon samplers ranged from 2 to 52 in the current and previous 2008 field investigations for the project. Groundwater was encountered between 13 and 15 feet below the existing ground surface during these field investigations.

7. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS

The conclusions and discussions below are based on the current and 2008 field explorations performed for this project, laboratory testing, and geologic interpretation of the site‐specific subsurface information.

7.1. Fault Ground Rupture

The potential for fault surface rupture is generally considered to be significant along “active” faults and to a lesser degree along “potentially active” faults. A review of published geologic maps indicates that there are no known (mapped) active or potentially active faults which project toward, across, or are located within the immediate vicinity of the project Site. Furthermore, the site is not within an Alquist‐Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone as delineated by the State of California. Therefore, it is our opinion that the potential for fault surface rupture at the project site is low.

7.2. Strong Ground Shaking

The project site is situated within a seismically‐active region and will likely experience moderate to severe ground shaking in response to a large magnitude earthquake occurring on a local or more distant active fault during the expected lifespan of the project. As a result, seismically‐induced ground shaking in response to an earthquake occurring on a nearby active fault, such as the Imperial

Fault, or a regional fault, such as the San Andreas fault zone, is considered to be the major geologic hazard affecting the project. Site‐specific seismic design recommendations are presented in later sections of this report.

7.3. Liquefaction Potential

Seismically‐induced liquefaction is a phenomenon in which saturated soils lose a significant portion of their strength and acquire some mobility from seismic shaking or other large cyclic loading. The material types considered most susceptible to liquefaction are granular and low‐plasticity fine grained soils which are saturated and loose to medium dense. A rapid increase in groundwater pressures (excess pore water pressures) causes the loss of soil strength.

Manifestations of soil liquefaction can include sand boils, surface settlements and tilting in level ground, lateral spreading, and global instability (flow slides) in areas of sloping ground. The impact of liquefaction on structures can include loss of bearing capacity, drag loads on deep foundations, liquefaction‐induced total and differential settlement, and increased lateral and uplift pressures on buried structures.

A summary of the liquefaction potential evaluation methodology, evaluation results, and potential impacts to the project are presented in the following subsections.

7.3.1. Evaluation Methodology

For the current study, a detailed evaluation of soil liquefaction potential was performed using the available SPT blow count data, considering the corrections for the split‐spoon sampler blow count data. Liquefaction potential was evaluated using the Idriss‐Boulanger methodology [Idriss‐

Boulanger, 2008].

The procedure for evaluating liquefaction potential is empirical and is based on data and observations at sites that have and have not liquefied during an earthquake. The capacity of the soil to resist liquefaction is expressed as the cyclic resistance ratio. The seismic demand is a function of the anticipated peak ground acceleration (PGA) at the site generated by the design earthquake and is termed the cyclic stress ratio. Materials are considered potentially liquefiable if the factor of safety against liquefaction, calculated as the cyclic resistance ratio divided by the cyclic stress ratio, is less than 1.0. Estimates of the liquefaction‐induced settlements were calculated using the Zhang methodology [Zhang et al., 2002].

The values of PGA (expressed as units of gravity [g]) and earthquake magnitude used in the liquefaction evaluation are 0.24g (from the California Building Code) and M6.9 (from the previous maximum magnitude event described above), respectively. The evaluation assumes a high groundwater level of 14 feet bgs.

7.3.2. Evaluation Results

The results of the liquefaction analyses indicate that the subsurface soils at a depth between approximately 30 to 40 feet below the existing ground surface have the potential for liquefaction based on analyses performed for the subsurface information from Boring #3. These analyses also indicate that the total liquefaction‐induced settlements could be as much as 3 inches. Differential settlements at the ground surface may be on the order of half that amount.

7.3.3. Liquefaction Impacts

Liquefaction potential will impact the site design, and may impact the site after development.

Liquefaction would most likely be manifested at this site as local ground subsidence, settlement, and localized reduction in shear strength at depth.

The potential for lateral spreading at the site is considered to be low as (i) the site is relatively level; (ii) the potentially liquefiable lenses are located at depth; and (iii) a free face and/or steep slopes are not present in the immediate site vicinity.

7.4. Expansive Soil

Soils with some expansion potential are suspected in the near surface of the site. Based on the plasticity characteristics of the near surface soils encountered (typically indicating low plasticity silt, lean clay, and silty sands), the near surface soils are considered to have a low to medium potential for expansion.

7.5. Flooding

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) presents the flood hazard potential in the vicinity of the site as part of their Flood Insurance Rate Maps. FEMA Map No. 04027C1530F, dated

15 January 2014 [FEMA, 2015], indicates that the subject area is located in a flood hazard zone defined as “0.2% annual chance flood hazard”. Based on our review of the FEMA mapping, the geologic setting, the potential for flooding at the site during the design life of the structure is low.

7.6. Hydroconsolidation

Hydroconsolidation is the collapse and compaction of silty to sandy soil having a low bulk density that has been deposited under saturated conditions, but has remained unsaturated since deposition.

Given the location and subsurface conditions observed at the site, when combined with the engineering recommendation provided for site earthwork activities, the potential for hydroconsolidation is considered to be very low.

7.7. Other Geologic Hazards

Other potential geologic hazards evaluated which could possibly affect the site include slope instability, floods, seiches, and tsunamis. The site is relatively flat, and new slopes, if proposed at the site, will be engineered slopes designed at stable inclinations. Therefore, slope instability is not considered a hazard. Tsunamis are seismically‐induced waves generated by sudden movements of the ocean bottom during submarine earthquakes, landslides or volcanic activity. Seiches are similarly generated but are oscillating waves within bodies of water such as reservoirs, lakes or bays. The site is not located near the ocean. Based on the physiographic setting of this site, the distance to the ocean or other large water bodies, and the elevation of the site, it is our opinion that the potential for flooding from seismically‐induced seiches and tsunamis is very low.

8. ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS

The conclusions and design recommendations presented herein for the design of the proposed Fort

Yuma Health Care Center are based on our current understanding of the proposed project, review of the

2008 investigation for the project, and results of the current field investigation, laboratory testing, engineering and geologic analyses, and professional judgment. In our opinion, the site is suitable for the construction of the project, provided the recommendations of this report are incorporated into design and construction.

8.1. Earthwork

Site earthwork will generally consist of demolition of existing site features, site grading and engineered fill placement to construct a relatively level building pad, foundation excavations, and backfill of utility trenches. Engineered fill is defined as fill meeting the material, placement, and compaction recommendations presented in this report. Earthwork should be performed in accordance with the recommendations of this report, the Standard Specifications for Public Works

Construction “Greenbook” [2015], and California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal

OSHA) safety requirements. A preconstruction meeting should be held at the site with owner, the contractor, civil engineer, and geotechnical engineer in attendance.

8.2. Site Clearing and Demolition

Existing utilities should be properly terminated and removed completely from the proposed development area. General debris, construction debris, and vegetative matter in the project area should be cleared and properly disposed off‐site. Due to the previous site uses, this site may have septic tanks, leach lines, cesspools, and other unseen obstacles. All unsuitable material should be removed from the site and disposed of properly.

8.3. Remedial Grading and Site Preparation

Based on the explorations performed for this project, the site is underlain by loose sands and soft silts and clays with some loose sand layers. These materials are conventionally considered unsuitable soils as compacted for bearing and should be overexcavated and recompacted (if suitable fill material) prior to site development. Remedial site grading should be performed to provide uniform support of the proposed building structures. In addition, remedial site grading may be performed to reduce the effects of soil liquefaction at the ground surface. Remedial grading recommendations are provided below.

8.3.1. Uniform Building/Pavement Support

To provide uniform support for the new building structures supported on shallow foundations, we recommend that the upper three feet of soil (from the lowest of existing or final grade) be overexcavated and recompacted (if suitable for fill material) prior to building foundation excavation. The upper three feet of soil beneath the footprint of new building structures should be backfilled with non‐expansive select soil. On‐site soils may not be suitable for select soil, and import soils may be required. Foundation design parameters and estimated settlements for shallow foundations provided in subsequent sections of this report incorporate this remedial grading recommendation.

Areas to be overexcavated and recompacted should extend a minimum of ten feet beyond the footprint of the foundations laterally in each direction. If variable depths of remedial grading are needed, areas of deeper remedial grading should transition to areas of shallower remedial grading to reduce the potential contrast in stiffness between materials. Specific guidelines for such transitions should be determined in the field during grading operations by a representative of the geotechnical engineer.

We recommend that in areas to receive pavement and hardscaping, the upper 1 foot of soil should be overexcavated and recompacted (if suitable for select fill material). Similarly, if buildings are to be supported on deep foundations, we recommend that the upper 1 foot of soil beneath the building footprint be overexcavated and recompacted.

Loose or soft soil, or soil disturbed by demolition activities within the proposed grading area, as identified by the geotechnical engineer during grading and foundation excavation, should be excavated or scarified as required, moisture conditioned, and then recompacted before placing additional fill or preparing subgrade. Soil containing organic or other deleterious matter, if encountered, should be removed from the site and properly disposed. Areas to receive new fill, including areas of overexcavation and recompaction, should be proof rolled and moisture conditioned prior to compacting new fill.

8.3.2. Liquefaction Effects

To provide a reduction in the effects of liquefaction‐induced settlement at the ground…