Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2560 ORION WAY; ; CBC2023-0200; Permit
Building Permit Finaled Commercial Permit Print Date: 07/16/2025 Job Address: 2560 ORION WAY, CARLSBAD, CA 92010-7240 Permit Type: BLDG-Commercial Work Class: Tenant Improvement Parcel #: 2090502600 Track#: Valuation: $366,014.00 Lot#: Occupancy Group: Project#: #of Dwelling Units: Plan#: Bedrooms: Construction Type: Bathrooms: Orig. Plan Check #: Occupa nt Load: Plan Check #: Code Edition: Sprinkled: Project Title: Description: CITY OF CARLSBAD: 6,350 SF OFFICE TO OFFICE RENOVATION Applicant: SILLMAN WRIGHT ARCHITECTS JULIO MEDINA 7515 METROPOLITAN DR SAN DIEGO, CA 92108-4403 (619) 241-2049 FEE BUILDING PLAN CHECK COMM/IND Tl -STRUCTURAL Property Owner: CITY OF CARLSBAD STEVEN STEWART 1635 FARADAY AVE CARLSBAD, CA 92008-7314 (442) 339-2141 SB1473 -GREEN BUILDING STATE STANDARDS FEE STRONG MOTION -COMMERCIAL (SMIP) Total Fees: $3,137.30 Total Payments To Date: $3,137.30 Permit No: Status: (cityof Carlsbad CBC2023-0200 Closed -Finaled Applied: 07/03/2023 Issued: 07/17/2024 Fina led Close Out: 07/16/2025 Final Inspection: 05/19/2025 INSPECTOR: Kersch, Tim Renfro, Chris Balance Due: AMOUNT $1,229.80 $1,892.00 $15.00 $0.50 $0.00 Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the "Imposition" of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as "fees/exaction." You have 90 days from the date this permit was issued to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition. You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right t o protest the specified fees/exactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity changes, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project. NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitation has previously otherwise expired. Building Division Page 1 of 1 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad CA 92008-7314 I 442-339-2719 I 760-602-8560 f I www.carlsbadca.gov ., ( City of Carlsbad COMMERCIAL BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION B-2 Plan Check Lf:lZ.Ql,3-CtJOQ Est. Value ~ I O 14- PC Deposit z:z..q .&b Date /3/2-3 I Job Address 2560 Orion Way. Carlsbad, CA 92010 Tenant Name#: Carlsbad Police+ Fire Headquarters Suite: ____ _,APN: 209--0502-600 lot #: Year Built: 1985 -------------- Year Bullt!_19_8_5 __ Occupancy:_8 __ _ Construction Type!_u-_s __ Fire sprlnklers@Es()No A/C!(l}vEs()No BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORK: Tenant Improvement (Tl), converting three existing conference rooms into dedicated office spaces with private offices, open-<>ffice are11s Imd conf~n~ rooms. New 11rchitectural finishes throughout and electrical and technology upgrades. D Addition/New:. ____________ New SF and Use, __________ New SF and Use ______ SF Deck, SF Patio Cover, SF Other (Specify), ___ _ ~enant Improvement: _6,_350 ____ SF, _____ SF, Existing Use: ASser'nbly I COrlterence Proposed Use: Office Space Existing Use: _______ Proposed Use: ______ _ D Pool/Spa: _____ SF Additional Gas or Electrical Features? ____________ _ D Solar:. ___ KW, ___ Modules, Mounted: ORoof OGround D Reroof: ____________________________________ _ D Plumbing/Mechanical/Electrical Minor mechanical ductwork, electrical upgrades throughout. Oother: ____________________________________ _ APPLICANT (PRIMARY CONTACT) Name: Julio Medina Address· 7515 Metropolitan Or, Suite 400 City· San Diego State:._c_A __ ,Zip: 92108 Phone· (619) 123-5294 Email, Jmedina@sillmanarch.com PROPERTY OWNER Name: City of Carlsbad (Steven Stewart -Facill1les Engineering Division) Address: 1635 Faraday City: Carlsbad State: CA Zip:._9_2ooa ___ _ Phone: (760) 602-7543 Email: Steven.Stewart@car1sbadca.gov DESIGN PROFESSIONAL CONTRACTOR OF RECORD Name: Mar1t Baker Business Name:. ________________ _ Address· 7515 Metropolitan Dr, Suite400 Address: __________________ _ dty· San Diego State;_c_A _ _.Zip; 92108 Clty: _______ .,tate; ___ ZJp: ______ _ Phone: (619)540-0145 Phone: ___________________ _ Email: Mbaker@sillmanarch.com Email: ___________________ _ Architect State Ucense: _e-_1_86_2_7 _________ CSLB license #: _______ Class:. ______ _ Carlsbad Business License# (Required): _______ _ APPUCANT CERT/FICA TION: I certify that I have read the application and state that the above information is correct and that the information on the plans is accurate. I agree to comply with all City ordinances and State laws relating to building construction. NAME (PRINT): Julio Medina SIGN: Julio Medina DATE: 07/03/2023 1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 Ph: 442-339-2719 Fax: 760-602-8558 Email: 8ulldlng@carlsbadca.gov ,, , THIS PAGE REQUIRED AT PERMIT ISSUANCE PLAN CHECK NUMBER: ______ _ A BUILDING PERMIT CAN BE ISSUED TO EITHER A STATE LICENSED CONTRACTOR OR A PROPERTY OWNER. IF THE PERSON SIGNING THIS FORM IS AN AGENT FOR EITHER ENTITY AN AUTHORIZATION FORM OR LETTER IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE. (OPTION A): LICENSED CONTRACTOR DECLARATION: I herebyaf firm under penal tyof perjury that I am licensed under provisions of Chapter 9 ( commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code, and my license is inf ult force and ef feet. I also affirm under penaltyof perjury one of the following declarations(CHOOSE ONE): D1 have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self-Insure for workers' compensation provided by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work which this permit is Issued. Policy No. _____________________________________ _ -OR-01 have and will maintain worl(er's compensation, as required by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the worl( for which this permit is issued. My worker,' compensation insurance carrier and policy number are: lnsuranceCompany Name: ___________________ _ Policy No. __________________________ Expiration Date: ______________ _ -OR- Oeertifiate of Exemption: I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit Is issued, I shall not employ any person In any manner so as to become subject to the workers' compensation Laws of California. WARNING: Fallure to secu,-workers compensation cowrace Is unlawful and shall subject an employer to criminal penalties and civil fines up to $100,000.00, In addition the to the cost of compensation, damages as provided for In Section 3706 of the Labor Code, Interest and attorney's fees. CONSTRUCTION LENDING AGENCY, IFANY: I hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work this permit Is Issued (Sec. 3097 (I) Civil Code). Lender's Name:. ____________________ Lender'sAddress: ___________________ _ CONTRACTOR CERT/FICA TION: I certify that I have read the application and state that the above information is correct and that the information on the plans ts accurate. I agree to comply with all City ordinances and State laws relating to building construction. NAME (PRINT): _________ SIGNATURE: _________ DATE: _____ _ Note: If the person slgnln& above Is an authorized qent for the contractor provide a letter of authorization on contractor letterhead. -OR - (OPTION B): OWNER-BUILDER DECLARATION: I hereby affirm that I om exempt from Contractor's License Low for the following reason: n I, as owner of the property or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work and the structure is not Intended or offered for sale (Sec. ~. Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's license Law does not apply to an owner of property who bullds or Improves thereon, and who does such work himself or through his own employees, provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If, however, the building or Improvement is sold within one year of completion, the owner-builder will have the burden of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sale). -OR- 01, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with llunsed contractors to construct the project (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's license Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or Improves thereon, and contracts for such projects with contractor(s) licensed pursuant to the Contractor's license Law). -OR-□1 am exempt under Business and Professions Code Oilllslon 3, Chapter 9, Article 3 for this reason: AND, D FORM B-61 •owner Builder Acknowledgement and Verification Form• Is required for any permit issued to a property owner. By my signature below I acknowledge that, except for my personal residence in which I must have resided for at least one year prior to completion of the Improvements covered by this permit, I cannot legally sell a structure that I have built as an owner-builder If It has not been constructed In its entirety by licensed contractors./ understand that a copy of theappllcablelaw, Stttion 7044 of the Busln~sand ProftsSfons Code, fs avaflable upon requ~t when this appllcatfon fs submitted or at the following Web site: http: I lwww.legfnfo.ca.gov/ calaw. html. OWNER CERT/FICA TION: I certify that I have read the opplicotfonand state that the above information ts correct and that the Information on the plans ls accurate. /agree to comply with all City ordinances and State laws relating to building construction. NAME {PRINT): SIGN: DATE: ----------------------Note: If the person sl1nln1 above Is an authorized a1ent for the property owner Include form B-62 sl~ by property owner. 1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 Ph: 442-339-2719 Fax: 760-602-8558 Email: BuUdjngl!l>carlsbadca,gov PERMIT INSPECTION HISTORY for (CBC2023-0200) Application Date: 07/03/2023 Owner: CITY OF CARLSBAD Permit Type: BLDG-Commercial Work Class: Tenant Improvement Issue Cate: 07/17/2024 Subdivision: RANCHO AGUA HEDIONDA POR Status: Closed -Finaled Expiration Date: 08/11/2025 IVR Number: 50405 OF Address: 2560 ORION WAY CARLSBAD, CA 92010-7240 Scheduled Actual Inspection Type Inspection No. Inspection Primary Inspector Reinspection Inspection Date Start Date Checklist Item BLDG-Building Deficiency BLDG-14 Frame-Steel-Bolting-Welding (Decks) BLDG-24 Rough-Topout BLDG-34 Rough Electrical BLDG-44 Rough-Ducts-Dampers Status COMMENTS 03/04/2025 03/04/2025 BLDG-Final Inspection 277587-2025 Partial Pass Tim Kersch Checklist Item BLDG-Building Deficiency BLDG-Plumbing Final BLDG-Mechanical Final BLDG-Structural Final BLDG-Electrical Final COMMENTS 1 hour rate fire room. 05/19/2025 05/19/2025 BLDG-Final Inspection 285101-2025 Passed Wednesday, July 16, 2025 Checklist Item BLDG-Building Deficiency BLDG-Plumbing Final BLDG-Mechanical Final BLDG-Structural Final BLDG-Electrical Final COMMENTS 1 hour rate fire room. Tim Kersch Passed Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Relnspectlon Incomplete Passed Yes Yes Yes No Yes Passed Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Complete Page 2 of 2 Building Permit Inspection History Finaled {Cityof Carlsbad PERMIT INSPECTION HISTORY for (CBC2023-0200) Permit Type: BLDG-Commercial Application Date: 07/03/2023 Owner: CITY OF CARLSBAD Work Class: Tenant Improvement Issue Date: 07/17/2024 Subdivision: RANCHO AGUA HEDIONDA POR OF Status: Closed -Finaled Expiration Date: 08/11/2025 Address: 2560 ORION WAY IVR Number: 50405 CARLSBAD, CA 92010-7240 Scheduled Actual Inspection Type Inspection No. Inspection Primary Inspector Reinspection Inspection Date Start Date Status 08/27/2024 08/27/2024 BLDG-SW-Pre-Con 259085-2024 Passed Tim Kersch Complete Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Yes 09/05/2024 09/05/2024 BLDG-44 260014-2024 Passed Tim Kersch Complete Rough/Ducts/Dampers Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Yes 11/15/2024 11/15/2024 BLDG-11 268224-2024 Passed Tim Kersch Complete Foundation/Ftg/Piers {Rebar} Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Yes 12/06/2024 12/06/2024 BLDG-14 270199-2024 Partial Pass Chris Renfro Re inspection Incomplete Frame/Steel/Bolting/We lding (Decks) Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Partial pass. Rough electrical still pending in Yes walls. OK to one side. 12/12/2024 12/12/2024 BLDG-34 Rough 270813-2024 Passed Tim Kersch Complete Electrical Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Yes 02/03/2025 02/03/2025 BLDG-85 T-Bar, Ceiling 275084-2025 Partial Pass Tim Kersch Reinspect ion Incomplete Grids, Overhead Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Yes BLDG-14 Yes Frame-Steel-Bolting-Welding (Decks) BLDG-24 Rough-Topout No BLDG-34 Rough Electrical No BLDG-44 No Rough-Ducts-Dampers 02/11/2025 02/11/2025 BLOG-85 T-Bar, Ceiling 275843-2025 Passed Tim Kersch Complete Grids, Overhead Wednesday, July 16, 2025 Page 1 of 2 True North COMPLI ANCE SERVICES August 7, 2023 City of Carlsbad Community Development Department -Building Division 1635 Faraday Ave. City of Carlsbad -FINAL REVIEW City Permit No: CBC2023-0200 True North No.: 23-018-571 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Plan Review: TI Carlsbad Police and Headquarters Address: 2560 Orion Way Applicant Name: Julio Medina Applicant Email: jmedina@sillmanarch.com OCCUPANCY AND BUILDING SUMMARY: Occupancy Groups: B, S-1 Occupant Load: 58 Type of Construction: Il-B Sprinklers: Yes Stories: 2 Area of Work (sq. ft.): 6,350 sq. ft. The plans have been reviewed for coordination with the permit application. Valuation: Confinned Scope of Work: Confirmed Floor Area: Confirmed Attn: Building & Safety Department, True North Compliance Services, Inc. has completed the final review of the following documents for the project referenced above on behalfof the City of Carlsbad: l. 2. Drawings: One (I) copy dated July 28, 2023, by Sillman Wright. Structural Calculations: One (1) copy dated July 28, 2023, by IDS Group. The 2022 California Building, Mechanical, Plumbing, and Electrical Codes (i.e., 2021 IBC, UMC, UPC, and 2020 NEC, as amended by the State of California), 2022 California Green Building Standards Code, 2022 California Existing Building Code, and 2022 California Energy Code, as applicable, were used as the basis of our review. Please note that our review has been completed and we have no further comments. We have enclosed the above noted documents bearing our review stamps for your use. Please call if you have any questions or ifwe can be of further assistance. Sincerely, True North Compliance Services Review By: Alaa Atassi -Plan Review Engineer True North Compliance Services, Inc. 15375 Barranca Pkwy, Suite A202, Irvine, CA 92618 T / 562.733.8030 Transmittal Letter July 12, 2023 City of Carlsbad Community Development Department -Building Division 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Plan Review: TI Carlsbad Police and Headquarters Address: 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad CA Applicant Name: Julio Medina Applicant Email: jmedina@sillmanarch.com True North COMPLIANCE SERVICl:S FIRST REVIEW City Permit No: CBC2023-0200 True North No.: 23-018-571 True North Compliance Services, Inc. has completed the review of the following documents for the project referenced above on behalf of the City of Carlsbad. Our comments can be found on the attached list. 1. Drawings: Electronic copy dated June 30, 2023, by Sillman Architects. 2. Structural Calculations: Electronic copy dated July 28, 2023, by IDS Group. Attn: Permit Technician, the scope of work on the plans has been reviewed for coordination with the scope of work on the permit application. See below for information if the scope of work on plans differs from the permit application: Valuation: Scope of Work: Floor Area: Confirmed Confirmed Confirmed Our comments follow on the attached list. Please call if you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, True North Compliance Services Review By: Alaa Atassi -Plan Review Engineer True North Compliance Services, Inc. 3939 Atlantic Avenue Suite 224, Long Beach, CA 90807 T / 562.733.8030 TI Carlsbad Police and Fire Headquarters 2560 Orion Way July 12, 2023 Plan Review Comments RESUBMJTT AL INSTRUCTIONS: City of Carlsbad-FIRST REVIEW City Permit No.: CBC2023-0200 True North No.: 23-018-571 Page2 Please do not resubmit plans until all departments have completed their reviews. For status, please go the City of Carlsbad Customer Self Service Portal Civic Access (carlsbadca.gov) and register for an account. This account will offer the applicant access to plan review status, plan review comment files and on-line payment capability: https://eg.carlsbadca.gov/EnerGov Prod/selfservice/CarlsbadCAProd#/home Please utilize the Carlsbad Customer Self Service portal to schedule a time to resubmit. Resubmittals can be made by appointment at https://kiosk.na6.gless.com/kiosk/app/home/92. Note: If this project requires FIRE PREVENTION review, ensure that you follow their specific instructions for resubmittal review. The City will not route plans back to Dennis Grubb & Associates for continued Fire Prevention review. GENERAL INFORMATION: A. The following comments are referred to the 2022 California Building, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical Codes, California Green Building Standards Code, and Energy Code (i.e., 2021 IBC, UMC, UPC, and 2020 NEC, as amended by the State of California). B. There may be other comments generated by the Building Division and/or other City departments that will also require your attention and response. This attached list of comments, then, is only a portion of the plan review. Contact the City for other items. C. Respond in writing to each comment by marking the attached comment list or creating a response letter. Indicate which details, specification, or calculation shows the required information. Your complete and clear responses will expedite the re-check. D. Where applicable, be sure to include the architect and engineer's stamp and signature on all sheets of the drawings and on the coversheets of specifications and calculations per CBPC 5536.1 and CBPC 6735. This item will be verified prior to plan approval. OCCUPANCY & BUILDING SUMMARY: Occupancy Groups: Occupant Load: Type of Construction: Sprinklers: Stories: Area of Work (sq. ft.): B, S-1, 58 II-B Yes 2 6,350 sq. ft. ARCIDTECTURAL COMMENTS: A L. Sheet GOOS: a) Revise the exiting plans to include the entry, hall, and other areas serving the tenant area. Per the definition in Chapter 2 of the CBC of "gross floor area" and "net floor area", unoccupied space TI Carlsbad Police and Fire Headquarters 2560 Orion Way City of Carlsbad-FIRST REVIEW City Permit No.: CBC2023-0200 True North No.: 23-018-571 Page3 July 12, 2023 only applies to areas in Table 1004.5 which have an occupant load based on "net floor area". This project is based on "gross floor area." b) Revise the occupant load calculation of the conference room to use an occupant load factor of 15 per CBC Table 1004.5. c) Exit signs shall be readily visible from any direction of approach and shall be located as necessary to clearly indicate the direction of egress travel per CBC 10 13. Revise the plans to demonstrate compliance. d) A 3ft wide door provides 32" clear width. Revise the exit access door width calculation to specify 32" clear width as the provided. EXIT ACCESS DOORWAYS (1005.3.2 EGRESS WIDTH PER OCCUPANT SERVED) EXIT "A" OCCUPANT LOAD= 13 OCCUPANTS 13 X 0.2 = 2.6" EXIT DOOR REQUIRED; 68" PROVIDED BETWEEN 2 EXIT DOORS EXIT "B" OCCUPANT LOAD = 24 OCCUPANTS 24 X 0.2 = 4.8" EXIT DOOR REQUIR ; 34" PROVIDED EXIT "C" OCCUPANT LOAD= 22 OCCUPANTS 22 X 0.2 = 4.4" EXIT DOOR REQUIR ; 34" PROVIDED A2. Sheet A205: Roof mounted equipment must be screened and roof penetrations should be minimized. City Policy 80-6 A3. Sheet A3 l 0: Where mechanical rooftop equipment are less than l 0 feet from the roof edge, specify parapets to be 42" minimum high. CBC 1015.6 AB01 ex~ 23.701 A4. Specify the class rating of the interior walls, ceiling, floor and etc. finishes in accordance with CBC Table 803.13. AS. Sheet A83 l: Detail shows shim, which may be combustible material. Combustible materials are not permitted in type II construction per CBC 602.2. Please revise or qualify the combustible materials as one of the items specified in CBC 603 .1. TI Carlsbad Police and Fire Headquarters 2560 Orion Way July 12, 2023 ACCESSIBILITY COMMENTS: City of Carlsbad-FIRST REVIEW City Permit No.: CBC2023-0200 True North No.: 23-018-571 Page4 DI. CBC 11 B-202.3 requires that accessibility be provided to the altered spaces. This accessibility shall include the requirements of CBC 11 B-202.4, which entails: a primary entrance, a primary path of travel, sanitary facilities serving the area, a drinking fountain, and signs. Please address the following: a) Show the accessible path of travel from the public way to the area of alteration. b) On the site plan, specify the accessible route to be 5% maximum running slope with 2% maximum cross slope per CBC 11 B-403.3. c) Provide detectable warning where the accessible route crosses or adjoins the vehicular path of travel per CBC 118-247.1.2.5. Provide detectable warning details in accordance with CBC 11 B-705.1. ?J --, 3EV ~ d) Show location and provide details for curb ramps in accordance with CBC l lB-406. e) Provide plans and details for the restrooms serving the area to verify that it meets the requirements of CBC 11B Division 6. f) Provide details and dimensions of accessible parking, accessible aisles, markings, signage, etc., to verify it meets the requirements of CBC l IB Division 5. D2. Provide information for the existing and proposed doors that are within the area of work. a) Confirm the clear width of the doorways are 32" minimum per CBC l lB-404.2.3. A 3 ft wide door provides 32" clear width. b) Door hardware are operable with one hand and do not require tight grasping, pinching, or twisting of the hand. CBC l lB-404.2.7 and l lB-309.4. c) Specify door thresholds, if provided at doorways, to be ½ inch high maximum. Raised thresholds and changes in level at doorways shall comply with CBC Section l lB-302 and l lB-303. CBC l lB-404.2.5. d) Door opening force is 5-pounds maximum for interior and exterior doors per CBC l lB-404.2.9. e) Door opening hardware is mounted 34" to 44" above the finish floor per CBC l lB-404.2. 7. f) Lower 10 inch of the door surface is provided with a smooth surface for the full width of the door, at the push side of the door per CBC 11B-404.2.10. MECHANICAL COMMENTS: No Comments. TI Carlsbad Police and Fire Headquarters 2560 Orion Way July 12, 2023 ELECTRICAL COMMENTS: City of Carlsbad-FIRST REVIEW City Permit No.: CBC2023-0200 True North No.: 23-018-571 Page5 E 1. Note on plans: Per city pol icy, wiring is not permitted on the roof of a building and wiring on the exterior ofa building requires approval by the Building Official. E2. Remove the verbiage "Not For Construction," from the electrical plans and technology plans. REGISTRATION ST.AMF'· PLUMBING COMMENTS: No Comments. GREEN BUILDING COMMENTS: G 1. Climate Action Plan requirements apply to all commercial projects with a valuation of $200,000 or more. City of Carlsbad requires that all projects that qualify for CAP compliance will require a completed Climate Action Plan (CAP) Consistency Checklist (city form B-50) to be completed by the APPLICANT. a) For plans submitted to the City the following Climate Action Plan requirements apply, per Carlsbad ordinance: b) The applicant is to fill out the B-50 CAP Consistency Checklist. The scope of work and project valuation will determine which sections of the CAP are required. c) Plan examiners review the B-50 CAP Consistency Checklist for completion. For example: If new residential construction is the scope of work, CAP sections 2A, 3A, and 4A are required to be filled on the B-50 checklist. G2. Proposed tenant improvement permit valuation is $200,000 or more. As such, the mandatory measures of the 2022 California Green Building Code apply. CGBSC 301.3. Please address the fo llowing: a) Reproduce the nonresidential occupancies application checklist onto the plan sheets. b) Add an additional column to the checklist to indicate where the appropriate requirements are noted within the set of plans. TI Carlsbad Police and Fire Headquarters 2560 Orion Way July 12, 2023 City of Carlsbad-FIRST REVIEW City Permit No.: CBC2023-0200 True North No.: 23-018-571 Page6 c) The Code sections relevant to the additions and alterations shall only apply to the portions of the building being added or altered with the scope of the permit work. ENERGY COMPLIANCE COMMENTS: T l . Provide the requi red signatures on the indoor lighting title 24 energy forms. DOCUMENTATION AUTHOR'S DECLARATION STATEMENT I certify that this Certificate of Compliance documentation is accurate and complete. Ooc11men.1;00,, Mt.or N.lme: oa,r\e,dtk,,, }.uthlr SIV!i(U~: ~) MATTSAMAR r C=p,iny: ~~J. _,\ lo. }._ \._) IMEG Corp 2023-<Jb•L!l Add'"'"' CEA/ HERS CntilicalJon ldcntificotian lfl a11plicable): 13400 SABRE PARKWAY SUTE 255 21648 Clcv/State/Zlp: Phone: SAN DEIGO CA 92128 j858) 271-9808 ' RESPONSIBLE PERSON'S DECLARATION STATEMENT 1 «rtlfy the follawi"I under 1>11r~ltv (If l"l•J1,1ry, lWld9r 1'14 l~WJ (If tt,e Stilt• of c,ldorr ~: 1, nu, loform.illan prO'/ldi'CI on this Certlf1w1t• of Compllame is t,ue iind corre«. l . t ;,m eflillble unct.r PNl!lon 3 of the eusirum ~nd, Prof,ess1or,s Code t<:> .iccept respons>blh.ty for the b11lloi111 du111n or ~Tem 6es11n •dentrhed on mis t.el'litleite of ( l Tho ene<gy f<-~1ur•< ~nd pcrtc,,m.,na-!il"rlfia.tfons, m;itc-,lals, r'O'IIP(Jnrnls, anri manllf;icturr<t dr,,Arci for the bulldlne dc-ilgn or sy!tt'm ckslgn k!C'n1tfrelf oo thl, C of l ltle 24, Part l and I'•~~ of the 0,11!,cmia Cade at Rep,lnor,s. 4. 'Tho bllllcli111 dcslan fcatu~ DI $'f"1Cm dl!:lign l<!alura ldcr,tifavd an lhis Ci:-rtificll1C .of Compli3nr;e are ton$i$~n1 with the Informal ion pr11Vilicd on 01~ applit.lbl~ planl and spedlielrlioo$ submitted 10 the e11lo.ttmtt11 i!Cf!nty lor ~raval with 1111s building permit applieat.lon s. I will "'1>1111! thJI a tomplec,,d Slllfle-d copy al thl> C;:nllir..,te of r.arn.,lloM1Ce th all be m~de DY~ilablewllh tht building permit(,J bJui:d fill the butildin1,, 3nd mJdo, ._, lnl(Jeafon~ I under5Urld 11\at a completed slj:ned co111 ol thlS Certllitate of Compll.i,nce II req.,alred to b~ lrlcludeg wldl 1he_!!_ocumen~lo~e !l!!_llder p,oo,ldes to R6pa<1>ibtc: Dcwgner N,me: <r ~o!ponJiblo: tle,.ts'!ter s~ .... 1?:rc:' ' ) Matt.MSAMAR Compa.,,.: ~ --~ ~ .... . ,, --IMEG 2023-06-28 .-ddrrw °''"'st" 13400 SABRE PARKWAY SUITE 255 21648 City~ut,/Zip: l'hone: SAN DIEGO CA 92128 {858) 271-9808 STRUCTURAL COMMENTS: S 1. Remove the verbiage "Not For Construction," from the structural plans. TI Carlsbad Police and Fire Headquarters 2560 Orion Way July 12, 2023 City of Carlsbad-FffiST REVIEW City Permit No.: CBC2023-0200 True North No.: 23-018-571 Page 7 S2. Revise the structural calculations fo the seismic design criteria to reference the 2022 CBC, and revise the site class to be site class D. Seismic Design Criteria From the geotechnical investigation: 8.2.1 Design of New Structures Design of new structures should be performed in acoordance with the requirements of goveming Jurisdictions and applicable building codes. Table 4 presents the site-specific spectral response acceleration parameters In accordance with the CBC (2019) guiclefines . .-.:~- Table 4 • 2019 California Building Code Seismic Design Criteria Site c;ocrflclonts and Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters Site Class Site Amplification Factor, Fa C C::l♦o. Af¥11f\.liflil"'D♦V"U'\ c:~.,.,,.,. C: S3. On the Hilti calculaitons, revise to identify the edge distance as infinity distance is not applicable. S4. Exterior conditions require stainless steel anchors, while the proposed anchors are carbon steel. Please revise and coordinate with the hilti anchorage report. S5. A geotechnical report was included, while the structw-al plans only show trenching at the foundation level. Please clarify pw-pose of submitting the report as it may not be required for this project. S6. Provide connection detail identigying the welling used between the new beams and existing beams at the new mechanical equipment location. TI Carlsbad Police and Fire Headquarters 2560 Orion Way July 12, 2023 NP~ EQUIPMENT PER MECH. OWGS. S7. Cross reference detail l/S501 into sheet S201 .1. City of Carlsbad-FIRST REVIEW City Permit No.: CBC2023-0200 True North No.: 23-018-571 Page8 If you have any questions regarding the above comments, please contact Alaa Atassi via email alaa@tncservices.com, or telephone (562) 733-8030. IEND) TRANSMITTAL 7515 Metropolitan Drive, Suite 400, San Diego, CA 921~ EC E f 1/ ED Tel: (619) 294-7515 Fax: (619) 294-7592 AUG O 3 2023 To: CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DIV/ ION True North Compliance Services Date: 08.0 .23 Attn: Alaa Atassi Project: Carlsbad Police and Fire Headquarters EOC Wing Tl TRUE NORTH NO.: 23-018-571 Job No: 22013 We are sending you: D Prints D Samples D Specifications D Change Order Copies 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Date 08.03.23 08.03.23 07.28.23 06.04.21 07.28.23 07.28.23 07.03.23 D Presentation Materials D Submittals/Shop Drawings [gl Copy of Letter [gl Drawings Description Carlsbad EOC Tl -Transmittal Via: □Mail D Overnight Delivery D Messenger □Email Carlsbad EOC Tl -Comment Responses Carlsbad EOC Tl -Drawings Carlsbad Police and Fire Headquarters -Drawings for Reference (Permit# G~C-ZO'Z.o-0~'1 ~) Carlsbad EOC Tl -Structural Calculations Carlsbad EOC Tl -Email from Geotech Carlsbad EOC Tl -Climate Action Plan Form Action Code: D For your use D For your action [8J For your approval [gl For your review D As requested Remarks: Julio Medina Project Manager SILLMAN 619. 723.5294 I jmedina@sillmanarch.com CBC2023-0200 2560 ORION WAY CITY OF CARLSBAD: 6,350 SF OFFICE TO OFFICE RENOVATION l=I >-~ 2090502600 8/3/2023 CBC2023-0200 CITY PERMIT NO.: CBC2023-0200 TRUE NORTH NO.: 23-018-571 ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO.: 22013 08.03.2023 PROJECT: Carlsbad Police and Fire Headquarters EOC Wing Tl 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, CA 92010 OWNER/ CLIENT: Steven Stewart, CCM Facilities Engineering Project Manager Public Works, Fleet & Facilities Department 1635 Faraday, Carlsbad, CA 92008 TO: FROM: True North Compliance Services Alaa Atassi Plan Review Engineer alaa@tncservices.com 562.733.8030 SILLMAN 7515 Metropolitan Drive Suite 400, San Diego, CA 92108 Julio Medina jmedina@sillmanarch.com 619.294.7515 Comment Responses ARCHITECTURAL COMMENTS: Al. Sheet GOOS: a) Revise the exiting plans to include the entry, hall, and other areas serving the tenant area. Per the definition in Chapter 2 of the CBC of "gross floor area" and "net floor area", unoccupied space only applies to areas in Table 1004.5 which have an occupant load based on "net floor area". This project is based on "gross floor area." Per our phone call discussion on 07 /20/23, the following spaces have been added to the code analysis on sheet GOOS using an occupant load of 150 gross; Entry 100, Hallway 101, Women E104, Men El0S, Vestibule El 77. b) Revise the occupant load calculation of the conference room to use an occupant load factor of 15 per CBC Table 1004.5. Conference room occupant load factors adjusted to 15. SILLMAN I 7515 Metropolitan Drive I Suite 400 I San Diego CA 92108 I T. 619 294 7515 I WWW.SILLMANARCH.COM c) Exit signs shall be readily visible from any direction of approach and shall be located as necessary to clearly indicate the direction of egress travel per CBC 1013. Revise the plans to demonstrate compliance. Illuminated exit sign symbols added to sheet GOOS. Tactile exit signs added to sheet GOOS. Additional information is available on sheets E202 and A601/A891. d) A 3ft wide door provides 32" clear width. Revise the exit access door width calculation to specify 32" clear width as the provided. The word "CLEAR" has been added to the Exit Access Doorway info. EXIT ACCESS DOORWAYS (1005.3.2 EGRESS WIDTH PER OCCUPANT SERVED) EXIT"A" OCCUPANT LOAD = t3 OCCUPANTS 13 XO 2 =-2 6" EXIT DOOR REQUIRED: 68" PROVIDED BElWEEN 2 EXIT DOORS EXIT "B" OCCUPANT LOAD = 24 OCCUPANTS 24 XO 2 = 4 8" EXIT DOOR REQUIR 34" PROVIDED EXIT "C" OCCUPANT LOAD = 22 OCCUPANTS 22 X 0.2:.: 4.4" EXIT DOOR REQUIR . 34" PROVIDED A2. Sheet A20S : Roof mounted equipment must be screened and roof penetrations should be minimized. City Policy 80-6 Existing roof parapet confirmed to be+/-47" A.F.F. at it's lowest point and +/-SS.S" at it's highest point. This existing parapet height is high enough that it screens the existing and new equipment from view. We have updated the drawings to reflect these existing conditions. Below is an existing photo view of the front entry at this parapet condition, where no rooftop equipment is visible. We have also included a photo of the measurement of the parapet height at the shallowest depth of the wall. SILLMAN I 7515 Metropolitan Orrve I Su te 400 I San D ego CA 92108 I T 619 294 7515 I WWW.SILLMANARCH.COM A3. Sheet A310: Where mechanical rooftop equipment are less than 10 feet from the roof edge, specify parapets to be 42" minimum high. CBC 1015.6 See answer for A2 above. Existing parapet height is compliant, and drawing have been revised. A4. Specify the class rating of the interior walls, ceiling, floor and etc. finishes in accordance with CBC Table 803.13. Note 6 added to Floor Plan Notes on sheet A600 Finish Plan, Schedule, and Legend reads "All interior walls, ceilings, and floor finishes to be class 'A' minimum." SILLMAN I 7515 Metropolitan Drive I Suite 400 I San Otego CA 92108 I T 619 294 7515 I WWW.SILLMANARCH.COM AS. Sheet A831: Detail shows shim, which may be combustible material. Combustible materials are not permitted in type II construction per CBC 602.2. Please revise or qualify the combustible materials as one of the items specified in CBC 603.1. "Non-combustible" added prior to the word shim at all applicable detail locations on A831. ACCESSIBILITY COMMENTS: D1. CBC llB-202.3 requires that accessibility be provided to the altered spaces. This accessibility shall include the requirements of CBC llB-202.4, which entails: a primary entrance, a primary path of travel, sanitary facilities serving the area, a drinking fountain, and signs. Please address the following: a) Show the accessible path of travel from the public way to the area of alteration. Path of travel extended to public way (On Orion Way) on sheet AlO0. b) On the site plan, specify the accessible route to be 5% maximum running slope with 2% maximum cross slope per CBC llB-403.3. Note 5 added to Site Plan Notes on Sheet AlO0. c) Provide detectable warning where the accessible route crosses or adjoins the vehicular path of travel per CBC 118-247.1.2.5. Provide detectable warning details in accordance with CBC 118- 705.1. -- JI:• • e:. I ACCESSIBLE , l } J, Existing to remain truncated domes shown on sheet Al00, see keynote 02.227. d) Show location and provide details for curb ramps in accordance with CBC 118-406. There is no new sitework proposed in the scope of this project. Please see sheets A101 and A102 from the previously approved Carlsbad Police and Fire Headquarters/ EOC WING Renovation Project Construction Change 01 June 04, 2021 set for reference. csc.z.oz.o -a~~s SILLMAN I 7515 Metropolitan Drive I Suite 400 I San Diego CA 92108 I T. 619 294 7515 I WWW.SILLMANARCH.COM e) Provide plans and details for the restrooms serving the area to verify that it meets the requirements of CBC 11B Division 6. There is no new work proposed in the restrooms as part of the scope of this project. Please see sheet A512.1 from the previously approved Carlsbad Police and Fire Headquarters/ EOC WING Renovation Project Construction Change 01 June 04, 2021 set for reference. f) Provide details and dimensions of accessible parking, accessible aisles, markings, signage, etc., to verify it meets the requirements of CBC 11B Division 5. There is no new sitework proposed in the scope of this project. Please see sheets A101 and A102 from the previously approved Carlsbad Police and Fire Headquarters/ EOC WING Renovation Project Construction Change 01 June 04, 2021 set for reference. D2. Provide information for the existing and proposed doors that are within the area of work. a) Confirm the clear width of the doorways are 32" minimum per CBC llB-404.2.3. A 3 ft wide door provides 32" clear width. Note 15 added to Floor Plan Notes on sheet A203 & A203A. b) Door hardware are operable with one hand and do not require tight grasping, pinching, or twisting of the hand. CBC llB-404.2.7 and llB-309.4. Note 6 added to Door General Notes on sheet A700. c) Specify door thresholds, if provided at doorways, to be½ inch high maximum. Raised thresholds and changes in level at doorways shall comply with CBC Section llB-302 and llB-303. CBC llB- 404.2.5. Note 7 added to Door General Notes on sheet A700. Notes also added to threshold/transition details 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, &9/A820. d) Door opening force is 5-pounds maximum for interior and exterior doors per CBC llB-404.2.9. Information added to note 2 in Door General Notes on sheet A700. e) Door opening hardware is mounted 34" to 44" above the finish floor per CBC llB-404.2.7. Note had been provided in detail 3 on sheet A820, General Note F. f) Lower 10 inch of the door surface is provided with a smooth surface for the full width of the door, at the push side of the door per CBC llB-404.2.10. Additional note information added to 3/ A8210 pointing to kick plate. MECHANICAL COMMENTS: No Comments. SILLMAN I 7515 Metropolitan Drive I Suite 400 I San Diego CA 92108 I T· 619 294 7515 I WWW.SILLMANARCH.COM ELECTRICAL COMMENTS: El. Note on plans: Per city policy, wiring is not permitted on the roof of a building and wiring on the exterior of a building requires approval by the Building Official. Technology design will be accomplished in such a way to prevent exposed wiring or cabling. This would require static or flexible conduit runs from a weatherproof NEMA rated junction box to a location on equipment sleds, Dipole antenna, or any other radio/signal interface device. Please also see General Note 3 added to ElO0. E2. Remove the verbiage "Not For Construction," from the electrical plans and technology plans. Noted and corrected . GREEN BUILDING COMMENTS: Gl. Climate Action Plan requirements apply to all commercial projects with a valuation of $200,000 or more. City of Carlsbad requires that all projects that qualify for CAP compliance will require a completed Climate Action Plan (CAP) Consistency Checklist (city form B-50) to be completed by the APPLICANT. a) For plans submitted to the City the following Climate Action Plan requirements apply, per Carlsbad ordinance: This form was completed and provided to the City at the time of submittal. We will resubmit this form. b) The applicant is to fill out the B-50 CAP Consistency Checklist. The scope of work and project valuation will determine which sections of the CAP are required. This form was completed and provided to the City at the time of submittal. We will resubmit this form. c) Plan examiners review the B-50 CAP Consistency Checklist for completion. For example: If new residential construction is the scope of work, CAP sections 2A, 3A, and 4A are required to be filled on the B-50 checklist. This form was completed and provided to the City at the time of submittal. We will resubmit this form. G2. Proposed tenant improvement permit valuation is $200,000 or more. As such, the mandatory measures of the 2022 California Green Building Code apply. CGBSC 301.3. Please address the following: a) Reproduce the nonresidential occupancies application checklist onto the plan sheets. The measures have been added. See new sheets G006, G007, and G008. SILLMAN I 7515 Metropolitan Drive I Suite 400 I Sar Diego CA 92108 I T 619 294 7515 I WWW.SILLMANARCH.COM b) Add an additional column to the checklist to indicate where the appropriate requirements are noted within the set of plans. The measures have been added. See new sh eets G006, G007, and G008. c) The Code sections relevant to the additions and alterations shall only apply to the portions of the building being added or altered with the scope of the permit work. The measures have been added. See new sheets G006, G007, and G008. ENERGY COMPLIANCE COMMENTS: Tl. Provide the required signatures on the indoor lighting title 24 energy forms. Signature has been added. DOCUMENTATION AUTHOR'S DECLARATION STATEMENT I certify that thlJ Certificate of Complianc.e documentation iJ accurate and complete. Docur"'f"nt1-.-., Author Ttf' 'M.TTSAMAR 13400 SABI'[ PARXWAY SUT( 255 C1r,f',tJltn Cl SAN DUGO CA 92U8 RESPONSIBLE PERSON'S DECLARATION STATEMENT <4rttt-, ·ho --« .,ct,,, ~r _. -y ol ,..,...,. WWS.-"-i...., al \t>t• o• taMor~ • I I>• o,!o, '"'•"•Of' p,.,,,c1_,, O'\ u,o t r1,f,u14 of Wn>c>I -.e ~ <.r ,, -<-Of r "'°"" 1858) 271-9808 a,n Ne .,,..., ~ 16(\11 t ol rN ft ,J l"I.-CI ar-, ..,,,,.,, "tl"l1 (t'lft4 ro •<t•rt n1:r;"I"'" ty ffll( 11w"" l"•rg .,.14:,., • ~ °"•"' tdff\•i-wct ..,_ \""111 f•r-1_,,n,-. ,, c rt~•~,._~ .,,. .,,4 Ol'rfarNJ ,. • ~•--• "'•"''"h <"-'nC>O,_,, •NI""" h<t '""' -b <hr bl..lo,rt :I~• or vstr ~I" id<'•trt d an ,t,i, C of Tltl• 1& """ 1 •rd ,.,. , al.,._ c.oi""""' t!f tt.i!u-• n,• b.. d'"I ctn.a,, ,.,tu,...._ or l'f'I d<-\11n Ir .. 11r odM11' r.l o" Iha CM i :~•n al Con,pl.,,,c• •• r "'" ..,-rth ,._ inklM'~l'-'1 nn,,,,lird on c,1tw, Al>C'IOUC!k' pl•m arid \llttlf <•l Offl ..,brf, llt11 to tllr ('llfll, ~-""""-" lot _,a,,..,1,-L I~ • k ldl~g ~ •~...,.. S 1,-,q, ">Ir« IM•"" lj,1,-.wd MC' cod lUIJI' ol lhD C.,t,f """• al c:o,,..,i ""-• ,tu b,. l'\old• ""'"°le• w ll 11-e .,...,_.. ........ f,) -..... lN ~ "~' ·1on,1..,11J>,,,. • ..i,1.:11otornvlf',-<I~< otthl-C!'<tli...i1,o1como1.-. .. 1, '"""'"..ito , tti.. ~-ri:> lte-,p,.;w\~ Oa~. _, ~,TC Man.MSAMAII Add,..,, 13400 SABRE PAAKWAY SUITE 2SS (1ty~ lf'lop SAN DIEGO CA 92128 202)-06 28 "'- 1858) 271-9808 SILLMAN I 7515 Metropolitan Drive I Suite 400 I San Diego CA 92108 I T· 619.294 7515 I WWW.SILLMANARCH.COM STRUCTURAL COMMENTS: Sl. Remove the verbiage "Not For Construction," from the structural plans. Text removed from drawings, see revised structural drawings. S2. Revise the structural calculations for the seismic design criteria to reference the 2022 CBC, and revise the site class to be site class D. Site Class C was determined for this site during a previous project following the site-specific procedure of Chapter 21 of the 2016 edition of ASCE 7. The 2022 edition of the CBC references the same version and sections of ASCE 7 for soil classification and site-specific seismic studies as the 2019 CBC. Therefore, the geotechnical investigation and determination of site class complies with 2022 CBC Section 1803. We have provided an email from the Geotechnical Engineer. Seismic Design Criteria From the geotechnical investigabon: 8.2.1 Design of New s,, pctures Design of new structures should be performed m accordance with the requirements of governing JurlSd1cUons and appltcable building codes. Table 4 presents the S1te-spec1f1c spectral response eccelorabon parameters In accordance with th CBC (2019) guidohncs ---Table 4 • 2019 t;alifornia Building Code Seismic Design Criteria Site 1,;oerflclenta and Spectral Ruponae Accelerallon Parameters &te Class S11 Amphflcation Facto,, Fa 1 CJV1 S3. On the Hilti calculations, revise to identify the edge distance as infinity distance is not applicable. -------- y Hilti anchor calcs updated to include applicable edge distances, see revised calculations package. SILLMAN I 7515 Metropol1ta'l Drive I Suite 400 I San Otego CA 92108 I T 619 294 7515 I WWW.SILLMANARCH.COM S4. Exterior conditions require stainless steel anchors, while the proposed anchors are carbon steel. Please revise and coordinate with the hilti anchorage report. IT rack equipment anchorage is an interior condition and the intent is to use carbon steel anchors. S5. A geotechnical report was included, while the structural plans only show trenching at the foundation level. Please clarify purpose of submitting the report as it may not be required for this project. Geotechnical report was provided as required for justification of site class and seismic design parameters. S6. Provide connection detail identifying the welling used between the new beams and existing beams at the new mechanical equipment location. I I EQUIPMENT PER MECH. DWGS. Detail reference 9/S101 on S204.1 at the new mechanical equipment supports refers to steel beam-to- beam connection to be provided where new beams interface with existing beams. Detail 9/S101 revised to clarify the connection is applicable to existing framing. S7. Cross reference detail 1/S501 into sheet S201.1. Detail reference added to S201.1 equipment callout. SILLMAN I 7515 Metropolitan Drive I Suite 400 I San Diego CA 92108 I T 619 294 7515 I WWW.SILLMANARCH.COM PLANNING COMMENTS: 1. Please provide multiple cross sections for screening material displays to ensure the new rooftop units are screened from all property lines. Please refer to Architectural Comment A2 Response above. Note that only one unit is being added to the roof, and that there is no view of the unit from the Public Right of Way. See the site plan below. New HVAC unit is the red box. The roof the arrow is pointing to has a parapet and screens the existing and new HVAC units from view. See google maps/google earth screen shots attached. JE) PARKING COUNT 2 SlANOARO l ELECTRIC VEHICLE 1 ADA ELECTRIC VEHICLE 1 ADA VAN 2 ADA STANDARD SILLMAN I 7515 Metropolitan Drive I Suite 400 I San □,ego CA 92108 I T 619 294 7515 I WWW.SILLMANARCH.COM SI L L M A N I 75 1 5 Me t r o p o l i t a n Dr i v e I Su i t e 40 0 I Sa n Di e g o CA 92 1 0 8 I T 61 9 29 4 75 1 5 I WW W . S I L L M A N A R C H .CO M SI L L M A N I 75 1 5 Me t r o p o l i t a n Dr i v e I Su i t e 40 0 I Sa n Di e g o CA 92 1 0 8 I T 61 9 29 4 75 1 5 I WW W . S I L L M A N A R C H . C O M SI L L M A N I 75 1 5 Me t r o p o l i t a n Dr i v e I Su i t e 40 0 I Sa n Di e g o CA 92 1 0 8 I T 61 9 29 4 75 1 5 I WW W . S I L L M A N A R C H . C O M Jessica Schwartz From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Hi Jessica, Christina Tretinjak <ctretinjak@ninyoandmoore.com> Thursday, July 27, 2023 12:18 PM Jessica Schwartz Julio Medina; Jeffrey Kent; William Morrison RE: Carlsbad Safety Center I Geotech / Letter Follow up Flagged The 2022 CBC incorporates the same seismic design parameters as the 2019 CBC. Both versions of the CBC which utilize guidelines presented in ASCE 7-16 to evaluate seismic design parameters. Consequently, the site class evaluation, along with the seismic site coefficients provided in our geotechnical evaluation report (dated August 14, 2020) are considered to be applicable to the 2022 CBC.' Thank you, Christina Tretinjak, PG, CEG Senior Project Geologist Ninyo & Moore 858.576.1000 {X11291) MISSION VALLEY I TEMECULA I WWW.SILLMANARCH.COM 1 s er ,a. a11d a, y e~ • an:;m .·ed -N1th Jt are .:onfldent,al and ,ntended so1e1y for Ult:! vse ot the individual or ent,ty to Nhom they are addressed 1 yr;-.; h<1ve rece ved h s erna I n error, please not,fy the sender 1mmed1r1ie1y by email :1nd de,ete lh1s email from your system f you ~r~ "O' •,e n1e!1ded ec p en~ yoo ~re notified that disc os,ng copying. d1srnbul1ng or taking ,1r1y ac-t,on 1n e ance on the contents of this nformnt,on c; strictly proh1b1led From: Julio Medina <jmedina@sillmanarch.com> Sent: Friday, July 21, 2023 10:13 AM To: Christina Tretinjak <ctretinjak@ninyoandmoore.com>; Jeffrey Kent <jkent@ninyoandmoore.com> Cc: Jessica Schwartz <jschwartz@sillmanarch.com> Subject: Carlsbad Safety Center I Geotech / Letter Good morning Christina, Jeff, We're in the plan check process for the remodel of the EOC Wing as part of the existing Carlsbad Safety Center (Police and Fire Headquarters) building. In turn, one of the structural plan review comments is related to the seismic design criteria and the geotechnical site class. We provided the Safety Center geotech report (dated August 14, 2020), prepared by Ninyo and Moore, as justification for using the same seismic design criteria and Site Class C even though the report was conducted for 2019 CBC because nothing about the geotechnical procedures performed has changed between 2019 and 2022 CBC versions. There is also a section in the code that allows the building official to waive geotechnical investigation requirements where enough data is available -see excerpt below. 1803.2 Investigations required. Geotechnical inve ·tiga~ tion hall be condu ted in accordance with Section 1803.3 through 1803.5. Exception: The building official shall be pem1itted to waive the requirement for a geotechnical inve. ligation where ali factory data from adjacent areas i available that demon tralcs an investigation is not nece sary for any of the conditions in Sections 1803.5.1 rhrough 1803.5.6 and Sections 1803.5.10 and 1803.5.11. We will be responding to the comment accordingly, but we think it would be helpful if we could get a letter or statement from Ninyo and Moore stating that their previous site specific investigation meets the requirements of 2022 CBC and that the site coefficients and site class are applicable to 2022 CBC designs. Attached you'll find a copy of the geotech report for ease of reference. Is this something you can assist us with? Thank you, Julio Medina, AIA I PROJECT MANAGER I Assoc1ATE PRINCIPAL SILLMAN jmedina@sillm an arch .com D: 619.723.5294 M ISSION VALLEY I TEMECULA I WWW.SILLMANARCH.COM Upcoming out of office: em" c1 o,,s 1erJ ,',; tr-I :i,e 011f d~11t ,u ,v,d :nit nded o eiy 1or tt'le ust:t. t lhe rd ,., d 11 or of"lt ty o ..vhorn t,ey are -tdrlre ed v1 have ece \le h s ema r, e• -or please notify the ";Prider 1mmed ,11eiy ov em;l• and delete th emn frr-m tour syo;tern a•e ~P e Mo RC f" you re ot fed tn 1! drc:-c os ng copying d tr ttut ru~ or 1,ak ng ar ( ~1 ••o ,,. e arice fJO th~ conlan1s f n nr1 rm<H1on s sir try µrot, b•led 2 STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS FOR CARLSBAD EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER TENANT IMPROVEMENTS 2560 ORION WAY CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92010 DATE SIGNED JULY 28, 2023 BY IDS GROUP 1 PETERS CANYON, SUITE 130 IRVINE, CA 92606 (949) 387-8500 PH JOB No. 22X098.00 Page 2 of 34 AA IDS GROUP Job No.: 22X098.00 Project: Carlsbad Emergency Operations Center I By: MM Chk'd: Date: 06/28/2023 Renovation Subject: Table of Contents Section: Description Scope ............................................................................................................... 3 Seism ic Design Criteria .................................................................................... 3 Non-bearing Partitions ...................................................................................... 4 Equipment Anchorage .................................................................................... 14 Appendix A-Reference Geotechnical Report ............................................... 36 IDS -1 Peters Canyon Road, Suite 130, Irvine, CA 92606 _g_ Tel : 949-387-8500 _g_ Fax: 949-387-0800 Page 3 of 34 AA IDS GROUP Job No.: 22X098.00 INTEGRATED DESIGN SERVICES Project: Carlsbad Emergency Operations Center I By: MM Chk'd: Date: 06/28/2023 Renovation Subject: Introduction and Scope Section: Project Scope The Carlsbad Emergency Operations Center building is a single story steel braced frame building that is currently undergoing structural seismic retrofit as part of a separate project. This project involves interior renovation work for the interior space and does not substantially impact the main structural gravity framing or seismic force resisting system. Nonstructural components, including primarily non-bearing partitions and equipment, are designed for seismic anchorage within the building in accordance with the 2022 CBC and ASCE 7-16. The building is classified as an Essential Services facility. The geotechnical investigation report for the building's retrofit work, which includes site-specific seismic hazard parameters developed in accordance with ASCE 7-16, is used for seismic design parameters for the nonstructural components. Although the retrofit project was developed under CBC 2019, there are no changes in the 2022 CBC that would impact the determination of seismic values used for nonstructural component anchorage. Seismic Design Criteria From the geotechnical investigation: 8.2.1 Design of New Structures Design of new structures should be performed in accordance with the requirements of governing jurisdictions and applicable building codes. Table 4 presents the site-specific spectral response acceleration parameters in accord ance with the CBC (2019) guidelines. Table 4 -2019 California Building Code Seismic Design Criteria . . . Site Class Site Amplification Factor, Fa Site Amplification Factor, F, • • . . . . Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-second Period, Ss Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 1.0-second Period, S1 Site-Specific Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-second Period, SMs Site-Specific Spectral Response Acceleration at 1.0-second Period, s ~M Site-Specific Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-second Period, Sos Site-Specific Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 1.0-second Period, So1 Site Specific Mapped Maximum Considered Earthquake Geometric Mean (MCEG) Peak Ground Acceleration, PGAM C 1.200 1.500 0.947g 0.347g 0.952g 0.416g 0.635g 0.278g 0.452g IDS -1 Peters Canyon Road, Suite 130, Irvine, CA 92606 Q Tel: 949-387-8500 Q Fax: 949-387-0800 Page 4 of 34 -A IDS G ROUP Job No.: 22X098.00 Project: Carlsbad Emergency Operations Center I By: MM Chk'd: Date: 06/28/2023 Renovation Subject: Section: I NON-BEARING PARTITIONS IDS -1 Peters Canyon Road, Suite 130, Irvine, CA 92606 .Q Tel: 949-387-8500 .Q Fax: 949-387-0800 Project Name: EOC Wing Tl -Partition Walls Model: Typical Walls -12ft Roof Gode: 2007 NASPEC w/2010 Supplement [AISI S1 00/S2-1 0] Lateral 0 1-(-----cQ\-----➔) 8.0 ft Lateral Pressure to: Jamb Only Brace Settings Flexural Bracing Component(s) Members(s) (In) Wall Studs 600S162-43(33), Full Single@16 in o/c Jamb Studs 600S162-43(33), Full Back-To-Back Vertical Header 800S162-54(50), Boxed Full Lateral Header 600T150-54(50), Boxed Summary Analysis Results Component(s) Wall Studs Jamb Studs Vertical Header Members(s) 600S162-43(33), Single@16 in o/c 600S162-43(33), Back-To-Back 800S162-54(50), Boxed Full Axial Load (lb) 0.0 228.0 N/A Lateral Header 600T150-54(50), Boxed N/A Summary Design Results 0 Axial Kyly Axial Ktlt (in) (in) None None None None N/A N/A N/A N/A Max. Moment (Ft-Lb) 168.0 588.0 456.0 133.0 Bending +Axial Component(s) Members(s) Deflection Interaction Wall Studs 600S 162-43(33 ), L/3227 0.14 Single@16 in o/c Jamb Studs 600S162-43(33), L/1908 0.35 SIMPSON STRONG-TIE COMPANY INC. Page 5 of 34 Page 1 of 2 Date: 06/28/2023 Simpson Strong-Tie® CFS Designer™ 1.4.2.0 0 ft 4.75 ft 7.25 ft 0 ft Design Loads Wall Lateral Pressure : 7 psf RO Lateral Pressure : Jamb Only Lateral Element Forces multiplied by 1 for strength checks Lateral Forces multiplied by 0. 7 for deflection determination Reactions have been multiplied by 1.00 for opposite load direction for Connection Design Gravity Load at Header: 12 psf Distortion al K-Phi(ib-Distortlonal Interconnection in/in) LM(in) Spacing(in) 0 None N/A 0 None 12 in 0 None N/A 0 None N/A Bottom Top or End Max. Reaction Reaction Shear(lb) (lb) (lb) 56.0 56.0 56.0 196.0 196.0 129.5 228.0 N/A 228.0 66.5 N/A 66.5 Shear Web Design Interaction Stiffners OK 0.04 No Yes 0.21 No Yes www.strongtle.com Project Name: EOC Wing Tl -Partition Walls Model: Typical Walls -12ft Roof Page 6 of 34 Page 2 of 2 Date: 06/28/2023 Code: 2007 NASPEC w/2010 Supplement (AISI S1 00/S2-10) Simpson Strong-Tie® CFS Designer™ 1.4.2.0 Back-To-Back Vertical Header 800S162-54(50), Boxed U6038 Lateral Header 600T150-54(50), Boxed U12676 Simpson Strong-Tie Connectors @ Studs Number Of Connectors Required at each Reaction : 1 Shear Reaction (lb.) R1 R2 Tension (lb) 56.0 Compression (lb) 56.0 Simpson Strong-Tie Connectors@ Jambs Simpson Strong-Tie Connector No Solutions SCB45.5 Number Of Connectors Required at each Reaction : 2 Simpson Shear Tension Compression Strong-Tie Reaction (lb.) {lb) (lb) Connector R1 No Solutions R2 64.8 64.8 SCB45.5 Simpson Strong-Tie Wall Stud Bridging Connectors @ Studs Bracing Design 0.07 0.04 No. of Req'd screws to stud 2 No. of Req'd screws to stud 2 0.05 0.01 No. of Connect Req'd # or Stress 12-14 Ratio Anchors 0.09 2 No. of Connect Req'd # or Stress 12-14 Ratio Anchors 0.11 2 Length Number of LSUBH LSUBH SUBH Span/Cantilever (in.) Braces Pn{lb.) (Min)' (Max)' (Min)' Span Span N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Simpson Strong-Tie Wall Stud Bridging Connectors@ Jambs Span/Cantilever Span Bracing Length (in.) Design Number of Braces Pn{lb.) LSUBH (Min)' LSUBH (Max)' SUBH (Min)' Varies N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Notes: 1) Values in parentheses are stress ratios. 2) Bridging connectors are not designed for back-back,box, or built-up sections. 3) Reference www.strongtie.com for latest load data, important information, and general notes No No Stress Ratio 0.07 Stress Ratio 0.08 SUBH (Max)' N/A SUBH (Max)' N/A 4) CFS Designer will not select bridging connectors unless all flexural and axial bracing settings are the same. 5) If the bracing length is larger than the span length, bridging connectors are not designed. SIMPSON STRONG-TIE COMPANY INC. Yes Yes Design Ok? Yes Design Ok ? Yes MSUBH (Min)' N/A MSUBH (Min)' N/A MSUBH (Max)' N/A MSUBH (Max)' N/A www.strongtie.com Project Name: EOC Wing Tl -Partition Walls Model: 19ft Walls Code: 2007 NASPEC wl2010 Supplement [AISI S100IS2-10) Vertacal 0 (-<---~o>-----4> 0 8.0 ft Lateral Pressure to: Jamb Only Brace Settings Flexural Bracing Axial KyLy Axial KtLt Component(s) Members(s) (In) (in) (in) Wall Studs 600S162-54(50), Full None None Single@16 in o/c Jamb Studs 600S162-54(50), Full None None Back-To-Back Vertical Header 600S 162-54(50), Boxed Full N/A N/A Lateral Header 600T150-54(50), Single Full NIA N/A Summary Analysis Results Axial Max. Load Moment Component(s) Members(s) (lb) (Ft-Lb) Wall Studs 600S162-54(50), 0.0 435.9 Single@16 in o/c Jamb Studs 600S162-54(50), 579.8 1430.5 Back-To-Back Vertical Header 600S162-54(50), Boxed N/A 1159.7 Lateral Header 600T150-54(50), Single NIA 338.2 Summary Design Results Bending +Axial Component(s) Members(s) Deflection Interaction Wall Studs GOOS 162-54(50), U954 0.20 Single@16 in o/c Jamb Studs 600S162-54(50), U680 0.82 SIMPSON STRONG-TIE COMPANY INC. Page 7 of 34 Page 1 of 2 Date: 0612812023 Simpson Strong-Tie® CFS Designer™ 1.4.2.0 0 ft 12.08 ft 7.25 ft 0 ft Design Loads Wall Lateral Pressure : 7 psf RO Lateral Pressure : Jamb Only Lateral Element Forces multiplied by 1 for strength checks Lateral Forces multiplied by 0. 7 for deflection determination Reactions have been multiplied by 1.00 for opposite load direction for Connection Design Gravity Load at Header: 12 psf Distortion al K-Phi(lb• Distortional Interconnection in/in) LM(in) Spacing(in) 0 None NIA 0 None 12in 0 None NIA 0 None NIA Bottom Top or End Max. Reaction Reaction Shear(ib) (lb) (lb) 90.2 90.2 90.2 315.7 315.7 146.6 579.8 NIA 579.8 169.1 NIA 169.1 Shear Web Design Interaction Stiffners OK 0.03 No Yes 0.28 No Yes www.strongtle.com Project Name: EOC Wing Tl -Partition Walls Model: 19ft Walls Page 8 of 34 Page 2 of 2 Date: 0612812023 Code: 2007 NASPEC w/2010 Supplement [AISI S100/S2-1 0] Simpson Strong-Tie® CFS Designer™ 1.4.2.0 Back-To-Back Vertical Header 600S162-54(50), Boxed U1213 U2492 Lateral Header 600T150-54(50), Single Simpson Strong-Tie Connectors@ Studs Number Of Connectors Required at each Reaction : 1 Shear Reaction (lb.) R1 R2 Tension (lb) 90.2 Simpson Compression Strong-Tie (lb) Connector 90.2 No Solutions SCB45.5 Simpson Strong-Tie Connectors(@ Jambs Number Of Connectors Required at each Reaction : 2 Simpson Shear Tension Compression Strong-Tie Reaction (lb.) (lb) (lb) Connector R1 No Solutions R2 73.3 73.3 SCB45.5 Simpson Strong-Tie Wall Stud Bridging Connectors@ Studs Bracing Design 0.23 0.22 No. of Req'd screws to stud 2 No. of Req'd screws to stud 2 0.10 0.06 No. of Connect Req'd # or Stress 12-14 Ratio Anchors 0.12 2 No. of Connect Req'd # or Stress 12-14 Ratio Anchors 0.10 2 Length Number of LSUBH LSUBH SUBH Span/Cantilever (in.) Braces Pn(lb.) (Min)' (Max)' (Min)' Span Span N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Simpson Strong-Tie Wall Stud Bridging Connectors<@ Jambs Bracing Design Span/Cantilever Span Length Number of (in.) Braces Pn(lb.) LSUBH (Min)' LSUBH (Max)' SUBH (Min)' Varies N/A N/A N/A N/A NIA Notes: 1) Values in parentheses are stress ratios. 2) Bridging connectors are not designed for back-back,box, or built-up sections. 3) Reference www.strongtie.com for latest load data, important information, and general notes No No Stress Ratio 0.11 Stress Ratio 0.09 SUBH (Max)' N/A SUBH (Max)' NIA 4) CFS Designer will not select bridging connectors unless all flexural and axial bracing settings are the same. 5) If the bracing length is larger than the span length, bridging connectors are not designed. SIMPSON STRONG-TIE COMPANY INC. Yes Yes Design Ok? Yes Design Ok? Yes MSUBH (Min)' N/A MSUBH (Min)' NIA MSUBH (Max)' N/A MSUBH (Max)' NIA www.strongtie.com Project Name: EOC Wing Tl -Partition Walls Model: Wall Above Storefront Brace -Low Code: 2007 NASPEC w/2010 Supplement [AISI S1 OO/S2-1 O] Section Designation : 4005200-43 Single C Stud INPUT PROPERTIES : Web Height= Top Flange= Bottom Flange = Stiffening Lip = Punchout Width = GENERAL INTERACTION ANALYSIS Axial Inputs and Results 4.0000 in 2.0000 in 2.0000 in 0.6250 in 1.5000 in Input Axial Load (+ Comp, -Tens) = Unbraced Length, KxLx = Unbraced Length, KyLy = Unbraced Length, Ktlt = Allowable Pure Axial Load, Pa = K-phi (distortional) = Oistortional Restraint, Lm = Allowable Distortional Axial Load, Pa = Load Multiplier for Strength Checks= Axial Load Ratio, P/Pa (including load multiplier) = Maximum KUr ratio = Braces for storefront wall at low roof area: Seismic horizontal load = 7psf Roof height = 12ft (low roof area) height of storefront = ~ 7'-3" Height of partition wall above storefront = 4'-9" 7psf x 4ft spacing x (4.75ft + 7.25ft/2) = 235 lbs 2351bs x 1 .41 = 332 lbs -Max brace angle 45 degrees SIMPSON STRONG-TIE COMPANY INC. Page 9 of 34 Page 1 of 1 Date: 06/21/2023 Simpson Strong-Tie® CFS Designer™ 1.4.2.0 Steel Thickness = Inside Corner Radius = Yield Stress, Fy = Fy With Cold-Work, Fya = Punchout Length = 3321b 144in 96in 96in 1736 1b 0 lb-in/in None 59761b 1.0 0.191 126 0.0451 in 0.0712 in 33.0000 ksi 33.0000 ksi 4.0000 in www.strongtie.com Project Name: EOC Wing Tl -Partition Walls Model: Wall Above Storefront Brace -High Page 10 of 34 Page 1 of 1 Date: 06/28/2023 Code: 2007 NASPEC w/201 0 Supplement [AISI S100/S2-1 OJ Simpson Strong-Tie® CFS Designer™ 1.4.2.0 Section Designation : 4005200-43 Single C Stud INPUT PROPERTIES : Web Height= Top Flange= Bottom Flange = Stiffening Lip = Punchout Width = GENERAL INTERACTION ANALYSIS Axial Inputs and Results 4.0000 in 2.0000 in 2.0000 in 0.6250 in 1.5000 in Input Axial Load (+ Comp, -Tens)= Unbraced Length, KxLx = Unbraced Length, KyLy = Unbraced Length, Kilt = Allowable Pure Axial Load, Pa= K-phi (distortional) = Distortional Restraint, Lm = Allowable Distortional Axial Load, Pa = Load Multiplier for Strength Checks = Axial Load Ratio, P/Pa (including load multiplier) = Maximum KUr ratio = Braces for storefront wall at high roof area: Seismic horizontal load = ?psf Roof height = 19.33ft (high roof area) -subtract 12" for typical roof framing --> 18.33ft to top of full height partitions height of storefront= ~ 7'-3" Height of partition wall above storefront = 11 '-1" Steel Thickness = Inside Comer Radius = Yield Stress, Fy = Fy With Cold-Work, Fya = Punchout Length = 396Ib 144in 96in 96in 1736 Ib 0 lb-in/in None 5976Ib 1.0 0.228 126 See sketch on the right for high roof partition framing condition above storefront Storefront point load at tip of studs: 7.17ft x 1/2x7psfx4ft= 100# See Enercalc on next page for analysis of stud forces and reaction load at brace SIMPSON STRONG-TIE COMPANY INC. CLG@ 10'-0" t 2'-10 ELEV. 0.0451 in 0.0712 in 33.0000 ksi 33.0000 ksi 4.0000 in (E) W1 2x HIGH ROOF FRAMING \.CLG@13'-0" ELEV. STUDS ABOVE -STOREFRONT \.ELEV. 7'-2" STOREFRONT www.strongtie.com ••IDSGROUP Project: Carlsbad EOC Wing Tl Subject: Pony Wall Below Storefront Pony wall sketch: ~STOREFRONT ....,.,_ ....... .,__ __ p 3•-0-~PONYWALL FRAMING f Point load (P) at top of pony wall from storefront: 4.17ft X 1 /2 X 7psf X 1 .33ft = 19.5Ib Total seismic base moment at each stud: I By: MM [7psf x 1.33ft x 3ft x 3ft/2] + [19.5Ib x 3ft] = 100 lb-ft= 1,200 lb-in Chk'd: Section: For 6" typical wall thickness, see the following pages for moment clip selection Shear and moment interaction DCR = 48Ib/937Ib + 1,200Ib-in/2,767Ib-in = 0.43 Page 11 of 34 Job No.: 22X098.00 Date: 06/28/2023 Page IDS -1 Peters Canyon Road, Suite 130, Irvine, CA 92606 Q Tel: 949-387-8500 Q Fax: 949-387-0800 94 R I G I D C O N N E C T I O N S Page 12 of 34 Moment connection for knee walls and shear walls to the structure foundation. ClarkDietrich moment clips are high-performance, cost effective solutions for knee wall-to-foundation connections and shear wall-to-foundation connections. These multi- application clips feature a 1/4" thick A36 steel stiffening plate that provides superior design values for maximum performance. The moment clips are designed to resist horizontal, torsional and vertical (uplift) loads. These clips are prepunched with a series of attachment holes for steel framing connections and a 1/2" anchor bolt hole for foundation connections. PRODUCT DIMENSIONS 2 " X 4" X 3-1/2" 2" X 4 " X 5-1/2" 2" X 4" X 7-1/2" 1/4" A36 steel stiffening plate 1-3/4" X 3-3/8" 1-3/4" X 5-3/8" 1-3/4" X 7-3/8" I 314 ~ / ...__ INSTALLATION Secure the Moment Clip to the steel framing member by using #12 screws in the prepunched holes. Number of screws and screw pattern is based on load required to achieve listed capacities. Place 1/4" steel stiffening plate on top of short leg of Moment Clip so anchor holes are aligned. Secure 1/4" steel stiffening plate and Moment Clip to foundation using 1/2" x 2" long Hilti Kwik-Bolt 3 or alternate anchorage calculated to resist the tension load for your specific appl1cat1on. .. MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS Gauge: 14 gauge (68mil) Design Thickness: 0.0713 inches ------3 3/8 5 3/8' 7 3/8 ......._ ---I ---.. I ......... I , Gauge: 12 gauge (97mil) Design Thickness: 0.1017 inches 1/4 • St1ffen1ng Plate Gauge: 10 gauge (118mil) Design Thickness: 0.1242 inches Coating: G90 Yield Strength: 50ksi ASTM: A36, A653, A1003 131i·MIIB'ILMIB► Product Thickness S1:e-(m} Pack•g•ng code Mds (G,ug•l Design th1 knen (1n) Pc'( /Bucket MC683P 68m1I (14ga) 0.0713 2" X 4• X 3-112" 25 MC685P 68mil (14ga) 0.0713 2' X 4" X 5-112 25 MC687P 68mtl (14ga) 0.0713 2" X 4" X 7-1/2" 25 MC973P 97m1I (12ga) 0.1017 2' X 4" X 3-112" 25 MC975P 97mtl (12ga) 0.1017 2" X 4" X 5-1/2" 25 MC977P 97mil (12gaJ 0.1017 2" X 4' X 7-112' 25 MC103P 68m1I (14ga) 0.1242 2' X 4" X 3-112" 25 MC105P 97mil (12ga) 0.1242 2" X 4" X 5-1/2" 25 MC107P 118mll (10ga) 0.1242 2' X 4' X 7-112" 25 ClarkD1etnch Moment Clip ClarkD1etnch Moment Clip w/ St1ffen1ng Plate Pub. No. CD C110Exo'ess 01/23 The technical content of this literature is effective 01/27/23 and supersedes all previous 1nformat1on. clarkdietnch.com Page 13 of 34 R I G I D CO N N EC T I O N S 95 ClarkDietrich Moment Clips Allowable Loads Stud member Fl (Shear), (lbs) F2 (Tension), (lbs) M (Moment), (in-lbs) Rotational stiffness for Product <.ode thickness Stud Fy (k,,) Number of 12 '!oCr~ws to stud 1/2 d,a. anchor to structure wind d.n,ct,on M,I, (Gauge) 12 6 12 (,n-lbslr,dian) 4 6 4 6 12 4 33m,I (20ga) 33 372 506 640 754 1131 2261' 1401 1764 2462' MC683P 43m1I (18ga) 33 554 756 1250 1122 1663' 2736' 2064' 2581' 2561' 2" X 4• X 3-112" 54mII (16ga) 50 1126 1536 2066' 2276' 2736' 2736' 2743' 2743' 2743' 133,000 68m1I (14ga) 68m1I (14ga) 50 1535 2066' 2086' 2736' 2736' 2736' 2756' 2756' 2756' 97mil (12ga) 50 1535 2086' 2086' 2736' 2736' 2736' 2756' 2756' 2756' 33mil (20ga) 33 372 506 640 754 1131 2261' 1401 1764' 2560' MC973P 43mil (16ga) 33 554 756 1250 1122 1663' 3365' 2064' 2655 2862' 2"x4"x3-1/2" 54mil (16ga) 50 1126 1536 2538' 2276' 3417' 4065' 2862' 2662' 2662' 140,100 97m1I (12ga) 68mil (14ga) 50 1535 2094' 2975' 3107' 4181' 4181' 2662' 2862' 2662' 97mil (12ga) 50 1535 2094' 2975' 3107' 4161' 4181' 2862' 2862' 2862' 33mil (20ga) 33 372 506 640 754 1131 2261' 1401 1784' 2609' MC103P 43mil (16ga) 33 554 756 1250 1122 1663' 3365' 2084' 2655 2945' 2" X 4" X 3-1/2' 54m1I (16ga) 50 1126 1536 2536' 2276' 3417' 3828' 2945' 2945' 2945' 143,900 11sm,I (10ga) 68m1I (14ga) 50 1535 2094' 3462' 3107' 3828' 3828' 2945' 2945' 2945' 97mII (12ga) 50 1535 2094' 3462' 3107' 3828' 3828' 2945' 2945' 2945' 33mil (20ga) 33 441 630 1029 754 1131 2261' 1778 2417 3396' MC685P 43mil (16ga) 33 656 937 1531 1122 1683' 2736' 2646 3597' 4993' 2" X 4" X 5-112" 54mil (16ga) 50 1333 1903' 2066' 2278' 2736' 2736' 5307' 5307' 5307' 252,000 68md (14ga) 66mil (14ga) 50 1618' 2066' 2066' 2736' 2736' 2736' 5363' 5363' 5363' 97mil (12ga) 50 1818' 2066' 2066' 2736' 2736' 2736' 5363' 5363' 5363' 33mll 2 a 33 441 630 1029 754 1131 1776 2417 MC975P 33 656 937 1531 1122 1683' 3365' 2646 3597' 5025' 2"x4"x5-1/2' 50 133 1903 2975 2278 3417 4181 5373 5980 596 274,400 97m,I (12ga) 66mil (14ga) 50 1816' 2595' 2975' 3107' 4161' 4181' 5960' 5980' 5980' 97mil (12ga) 50 1618' 2595' 2975' 3107' 4181' 4161' 5980' 5980' 5980' 33mil (20ga) 33 441 630 1029 754 1131 2261' 1778 2417 3396' MC105P 43m1I (16ga) 33 656 937 1531 1122 1683' 3365' 2646 3597' 5053' 2" X 4" X 5-112" 54mil (16ga) 50 1333 1903' 3109' 2276' 3417' 4236' 5373' 6133' 6133' 268,700 11sm,I (10ga) 68mil (14ga) 50 1818' 2595' 3633' 3107' 4236' 4236' 6133' 6133' 6133' 97m,I (12ga) 50 1616' 2595' 3633' 3107' 4236' 4236' 6133' 6133' 6133' MC687P 43m,I (18ga) 33 791 1164 1926' 1122 1683' 2736' 3646 5199' 6903' 54m1I (16ga) 50 1606 2066' 2086' 2276' 2736' 2736' 7403' 7656' 7656' 387,600 2"x4'x7-112" 68m1I (14ga) 50 2086' 2086' 2086' 2736' 2736' 2736' 8186' 8186' 8186' 68m1I ( 14ga) 97m,I (12ga) 50 2066' 2086' 2086' 2736' 2736' 2736' 8186' 8186' 8186' MC977P 43 mil (16ga) 33 791 1164 1928' 1122 1683' 3365' 3646 5199' 6903' 54mll (16ga) 50 1606 2363' 2975' 2278' 3417' 3875' 7403' 8979' 8979' 449,000 2"X4" X 7,1/Z' 68mil (14ga) 50 2190' 2975' 2975' 3107' 3875' 3875' 8979' 6979' 8979' 97m,I (12ga) 97mil (12ga) 50 2190' 2975' 2975' 3107' 3875' 3875' 8979' 8979' 8979' MC107P 43m1I (18ga) 33 791 1164 1928' 1122 1683' 3365' 3646 5199 6903' 54m1I (16ga) 50 1606 2363' 3633' 2278' 3417' 3835' 7403' 9180' 9180' 451.000 2" X 4" X 7-112" 68m1I (14ga) 50 2190' 3223' 3633' 3107' 4236' 4236' 9282 9282' 9282' 118m,I (10ga) 97m1I (12ga) 50 2190' 3223' 3633' 3107' 4236' 4236 9282' 9282 9282" Notes: 1 Cells marked with a 1 " in shear column indicate that the shear capacity 1s limited to 1628 lbs when \.mng l/2' x 2·• Hilti Kw,k Bolts into 3000ps1 concrete 2 Cell~ marked with a 2 ·• u, terts1on column indicate th,H the ten~ton capacity 1s limited to 1509 lbs when usIn 112•· x 2" Hilti Kw1k Bolts into 3000 SI concrete. 3 Cells marked with a 3 •• m the moment column indicate that the moment capacity 1s 1im,ted to 1761 ,n lbs for 3 Series clips, 2767 ,n lbs for 5 Series clips, and 3773 In lbs for 7-Series clips when us,n 1/2" x 2" H1lt1 Kwik Bolts into 3000 SI concrete 4 Capacities listed tn the table/notes assume that no load reductions are required for spacing or edge distance of Kw1k-Bolts. s Capwt,es listed in the table represent the capacity of the clip and the screws to the stud 4 Screw Pattern 6 Screw Pattern Capacit es i;sted 1n notes 1 3 are limits 1f the specified connector to t!-le structure 1s used. Other 1/2'' dia. anchors may be used to achieve the full clip capacity but must be designed separately. 4 ~' 6 Moment capacities listed as Max. load/Factor of Safety Loads must be limited by serviceability load taken as st1ffnes, t,mes the serv1ceab1l1ty limit 1n radians. ClarkD1etnch 7 Stiffne'Ss s the max allowable, clip moment divided by the clip rotation mea.,ured at the max Moment Clip allowable cltp moment. w/ 12 Screw Pattern 8 No stud to track connection 1s rP.quired. Higher loads can be achieved when stud to track is connected. & Anchor Bolt 9 Use cJ J;near interaction equation for connections 1nvolvmg any combmc1t1on of Fl, F2, and M. 10 Allowdblc loads have not been mcredsed for wind, seismic, or other factor::. 11 Tors,onal effects are con,idered on screw group for Fl & F2 (Shear & Ten<ion) allowable loads. 12 Hdt1 1s a registered tradema,k of Hilts Akt,engeseilschaft Corporation. 13 It is the respons·bllity of the designer to properly detail connecttons on the contract drawings clarkdietrich.com The technical content ofth1s literature Is effect,-e 01127/23 and supersedes all previous mformat, ,n Pub. N-> CD Cl,pE,pr "01 2~ Page 14 of 34 •IDS GROUP Job No.: 22X098.00 Project: Carlsbad Emergency Operations Center I By: MM Chk'd: Date: 06/28/2023 Renovation Subject: Section: l EQUIPMENT ANCHORAGE IDS -1 Peters Canyon Road, Suite 130, Irvine, CA 92606 Q Tel: 949-387-8500 Q Fax: 949-387-0800 PRODUCT DATA SHEET Speedy Deployment Customer specified. factory-assembled solution reduces component count. packaging and on-site assembly, saving time and delivery cost Order a cabinet integrated with power. cable and thermal management preinstalled under a unique. pro1ect-spec1fic part number Easy arrachm~nt and posItIornng of accessones allow fo• 1aster deployment and maintenance Optional shock pallet ensures safe delivery of rncked ICT equipment Fast Selection and Customization -Wide range of standard configurations and one-on-one consultation services allow customeIs to create a unique solution that meets their exact requ,rements Future-Proof Strength -Roll formed. tubular and fully welded steel frame architecture supports 5,000 lb 12268 kgI swtIc ~nd 4.000 lb I I814 kg) dynamic loads Integrated Bonding -Doors and panels automa11cally bond tO he frame through door hinges and contact po111ts. el1m1nating the need for attachmg separilte groundmg straps to cabinet components Enhanced Cable Management -Zetahame·s simple and versatile cable management accessories can be used independently or in combinations to accommodate a wide variety of applications Integrated Airflow Management -Seamless ,nteyrat:or' with optional airflow management accessories ensures effective condit1oned/exhaus1 air separation and '11ax·rnum equipment cooling Page 15 of34 Protecting your technology investment. ZetaFrame™ Cabinet A highly engineered data center cabinet solution that delivers fast built-to-order configurability, industry-leading strength and scalability, regardless of the application. Zetaframe Cabinet is a total, turnkey solution that integrates with power, cable and thermal management accessories to support next-generation compute. c®us LISTED • I PATENT I PENDING .. -• ~ ~ ... ......, ....... ~ PRODUCT DATA SHEET DIMENSION TABLES Height Dimensions • in lmml Rack Mount Ov■rall FnmeOnly Fronl Spaces (U) with Casters No Casters Opening 42 79.4 (2016) 77.4 (1965) 73.7 (1873) 45 84.6 (2149) 82.6 (2099) 79.0 (2006) 48 89.9 (2282) 87.9 (2232) 84.2 (2139) 52 96.9 (2460) 94.9 (24101 91.2 (2317) Casters add approximately z· /51 mm) to frame and are factory-installed on the cabinet. Brush-sealed grommets ,n the top panel add approximately 3/8' /9 mm/ to the height of the cabinet. Width Dimensions • in (mm) Nominal Overall Front Rack-Mount Width with Side Panels Opening Width 23.6 (600) 23.6 (600) 19.91506) 191482.6) 27.61700) 27.61700) 23.91607) 191482.6) 29.51750) 29.51750) 25.81655) 191482.6) 31.5 (800) 31.5 1800) 27.81707) 191482.6) Mounting Raif clearance is 17.8" (45Z mm/, mounting hole spacing is 18.3' (465 mm) DIMENSION DRAWINGS OVE~A w•r door~ IQP II I -1 Ov 'RAl W h ~e p1nPIS ")QOR DEPT..; 1 57 40 0 FRAM[ ONLY n" d r5 l 1 oJ 41.4 OOR uEPH< r ··-------······, A A OVE'<A W 111 COd('fS RAM[ ONLY t"Q I').-, p, ' l CASTER HEIGH 2 00 50.8 - - '"' 6 Page 16 of 34 Zeta Frame™ Cabinet Depth Dimensions -in (mm) Nominal Overall Frame Only Maximum Rail Depth with Doors No Doors Depth 31.51800) 34.61879) 31.518001 28.5 (7231 39.411000) 425 (1080) 39.4 (1000) 36.41923) 41.3 (1050) 44.411128) 41.3 (1050) 38.31973) 43.311100) 46.411179) 43.3 (1100) 40.311023) 47.211200) 50.311278) 47.2 (1200) 44.211123) Front Door is approximately 1.6'0 /41 mm) and Rear Door is approximately 1.5'0 /38 mm). Minimum rail depth is l' /178 mm/, each rail is 3.5'0 /89 mm). Raif depth is reduced when vertical accessories are placed in corners. RIGHT SIDE FRONT RA! S BAr K 0 /l, - - .... . -.... . . . --. S (..IONA-A S[ TION B-B OAI! !() RAH 9 '36 6 l Chatsworth Products Page 17 of 34 IDS GROUP BY:MM JOB NO: 22X0H.OO CHKD BY: DATE: 11/20/2023 Nonstructural Seismic Force, ASCE 41-17 & ASCE 7-16 Nonstructural Element Description: Floor Mounted IT Racks Seismic Force Parameters Equipment Category Seismic Force Coefficients: Equipment Information (eismlc Forces: Attachments and Anchors: aP = n. = Sos= Rp = Ip= z= h= F•= Fp.m••= fp,min = Fv = Fe.I W= H= HcG = L= D= :: :1 1.0 2.0 0.635 2.5 1.5 0.0 1.0 0.15 1.52 0.29 0.13 0.29 5,000 96.9 64,6 31.5 23.6 1,429 635 Concrete anchors to ground -6 anchors total. 3 each side Net overturning Moment, Mor= 46,690 Tension per anchor -concrete, Tc= 1,319 Shear per anchor -concrete, Vs= 476 Communication equipment, computers, instrumentation, and controls. ft or ratio ft or ratio •w. •w. •w. •w 1•w: lbs in in in in libs lbs lb-in lb lb component amplification factor ASCE 7-16, TABLE 13.5-1 OR 13.6-1 component overstrength factor ASCE 7-16, TABLE 13.5-1 OR 13.6-1 site specific design spectral response acceleration component response modification factASCE 7-16, TABLE 13.5-1 OR 13.6-1 Importance Factor ASCE 7-16, 13.1.3 height of component anchorage height of structure = 0.4•a• •s,,,:w. •(1+2(z/h))/(R.fl.) ASCE 7-16, EQ. 13.3-1 = 1.6•sos•1:w. ASCE 7-16, EQ. 13.3-2 = o.3•sos•1:w. ASCE 7-16, EQ. 13.3-3 = o.2•5os•w. ASCE 7-1613.3.1.2 I Governing Coefficient Total weight with rack contents Total Height C.G. Height -2/3 overall height assumed Length/Width, largest dimension between anchors Depth, shortest dimension between anchors 1= Horizontal Seismic Force = Vertical Seismic Force =F• *HcG -(0.9•w.-F,)•D/2, LRFD Load Combinations =O•[M0r/(o•2)]. LRFD Load Combinations =O•F .f 4, LRFD Load Combinations ,:,,s., ----------------------------------Hi It i PROFIS Engineering 3.0.86 www.hilti.com Company: Page: Address: Specifier: Phone I Fax: I E-Mail: Design: Concrete -Jun 20, 2023 (1) Date: Fastening point: Specifier's comments: 1 Input data Anchor type and diameter: Item number: Effective embedment depth: Material: Evaluation Service Report: Issued I Valid: Proof: Stand-off installation: Profile: Base material: Installation: Reinforcement: Seismic loads (cat. C, D, E, or F) Geometry [In.] & Loading [lb, In.lb] Kwik Bolt TZ2 -CS 1/2 (2) hnom2 2210254 KB-TZ2 1/2x3 3/4 het.act = 2.000 in., hnom = 2.500 in. Carbon Steel ESR-4266 12/17/2021 I 12/1/2023 Design Method ACI 318-19 / Mech cracked concrete, 2500, fc' = 2,500 psi; h = 4.000 in. hammer drilled hole, Installation condition: Dry tension: not present, shear: not present; no supplemental splitting reinforcement present edge reinforcement: none or < No. 4 bar Tension load: yes (17.10.5.3 (d)) Shear load: yes (17.10.6.3 (c)) 3 I ~ Input data and results must be checked for confomnity with the existing conditions and for plausibility! PROF IS Engineering ( c) 2003-2023 Hilti AG, FL-9494 Schaan Hilti is a registered Trademarl< of Hilti AG, Schaan I a~o IV VI vv 7/25/2023 i = i i S • • ----------------------Hilti PROFIS Engineering 3.0.86 NWW.hilti.com Company: Address: Phone I Fax: I Design: Concrete -Jun 20, 2023 (1) Fastening point: 1.1 Design results Case Description Combination 1 2 Load case/Resulting anchor forces Anchor reactions [lb] Tension force:(+ Tension, -Compression) Anchor Tension force Shear force Shear force x 1 1,319 476 476 max. concrete compressive strain: -[%0] max. concrete compressive stress: -[psi] resulting tension force in (x/y)=(0.000/0.000): 0 [lb] resulting compression force in (x/y)=(0.000/0.000): 0 [lb] 3 Tension load Load Nu• [lb] Steel Strength* 1,319 Pullout Strength* NIA Concrete Breakout Failure•• 1,319 • highest loaded anchor **anchor group (anchors in tension) Page: Specifier: E-Mail: Date: Forces [lb]/ Moments [in.lb] N = 1,319; Vx = 476; Vy= O; Mx = 0; My= 0; M, = 0; Shear force y 0 Capacity ♦ N0 [lb] 8,433 N/A 1,448 Input data and results must be checked for conformity with the existing conditions and for plausibility! PROFIS Engineering ( c ) 2003-2023 Hilti AG, FL-9494 Schaan Hilti is a registered Trademarl< of Hilti AG, Schaen Seismic yes Utilization PN = Nu•/♦ N" 16 N/A 92 2 7/25/2023 Max. Util. Anchor[%] 95 Status OK N/A OK 2 •=iiS•• --------------------------------H ii ti PROFIS Engineering 3.0.86 www.hilti.com Company: Address: Phone I Fax: I Design: Concrete -Jun 20, 2023 (1) Fastening point: 3.1 Steel Strength N88 = ESR value q, Nsa ~ Nua refer to ICC-ES ESR-4266 ACI 318-19 Table 17.5.2 Variables A..N [in.2] 0.10 Calculations N58 [lb] 11,244 Results N .. [lb) 11,244 futa [psi) 114,004 q, atoel 0.750 3.2 Concrete Breakout Failure Neb = (.:;:) lj/ od,N lj/ c,N lj/ cp,N Nb q, Neb ~ Nua q,nonductlle 1.000 ANc see ACI 318-19, Section 17.6.2.1, Fig. R 17.6.2.1 (b) ANc!J = 9 h!i lj/ od,N : 0.7 + 0.3 ( ~-•5~:J S 1.0 lj/ cp,N = MAX(ca,mln, 1.5h•f) S 1.0 cac cac . /7 1.5 Nb = kc A a 'ifc hof Variables h01 [in.) Ca min [in.) lj/ c,N 2.000 8.000 1.000 Calculations ~0 [in.2] ANc!J [in.2 ) 'If ed,N 36.00 36.00 1.000 Results Neb [lb] q, concrete ~ seismic 2,970 0.650 0.750 Page: Specifier: E-Mail: Date: 8,433 1,319 ACI 318-1 9 Eq. (17.6.2.1a) ACI 318-19 Table 17.5.2 ACI 318-19 Eq. (17.6.2.1 .4) ACI 318-19 Eq. (17.6.2.4.1b) ACI 318-19 Eq. (17.6.2.6.1b) ACI 318-19 Eq. (17.6.2.2.1) C80 [in.] kc 5.500 21 lj/ cp,N Nb [lb] 1.000 2,970 q,nonductilo 4> Neb [lb] 1.000 1,448 Input data and results must be checked for conformity with the existing conditions and for plausibility! PROFIS Engineering ( c ) 2003-2023 Hilti AG, FL-9494 Schaan Hilti is a registered Trademark of Hi!U AG, Schaan f0 (psi] 1.000 2,500 1,319 3 7/25/2023 3 i = i i S • • ----------------------Hllti PROFIS Engineering 3.0.86 NWW.hiltl.com Company: Address: Phone I Fax: I Design: Concrete -Jun 20, 2023 (1) Fastening point: 4 Shear load Load Vu• [lb] Steel Strength• 476 Steel failure (with lever arm)* N/A Pryout Strength•• 476 Concrete edge failure in direction x+•• 476 • highest loaded anchor ••anchor group (relevant anchors) 4.1 Steel Strength V aa,eq = ESR value ~ V,teel ~ Vua Variables A.ev [in.2] 0.10 Calculations V5809 [lb] 5,537 Results V .. 09 [lb] 5,537 refer to ICC-ES ESR-4266 ACI 318-19 Table 17.5.2 futa [psi] av,sels 114,004 1.000 ~ steel ~nonduciile 0.650 1.000 ~ V,a,ea [lb] 3,599 Page: Specifier: E-Mail: Date: Capacity ♦ V0 [lb] 3,599 N/A 2,079 1,991 476 Input data and results must be checked for conformity with the existing conditions and for plausibility! PROFIS Engineering ( c ) 2003-2023 Hilti AG, FL-9494 Schaan Hilli is a registered Trademark of Hilti AG. Schaan Utilization 13v = V ua,+ V n 14 N/A 23 24 I Q~'C', I V I VV 4 7/25/2023 Status OK N/A OK OK 4 ,:,,s., Hilti PROFIS Engineering 3.0.86 www.hilti.com Company: Address: Phone I Fax: I Design: Concrete -Jun 20, 2023 (1) Fastening point: 4.2 Pryout Strength V cp = kcp [ (:::) 'V ed,N 'V c,N 'V cp,N Nb ] ,j> vcp ~ vu. ANc see ACI 318-19, Section 17.6.2.1, Fig. R 17.6.2.1(b) ~c0 = 9 h!, 'V ed,N = 0.7 + 0.3 ( 1C_•5~:,) $ 1.0 'V cp,N = MAX (c• min' 1.5h•') S 1.0 Cac Cac _(7' 1.5 Nb = kc ).. a "4fc h81 Variables C8c [in.] 5.500 Calculations ~c[in.2] 36.00 Results Vee [lb] 2,970 h01 [in.] 2.000 kc 21 ANc0 [in.2] 36.00 ~ concrete 0.700 Ca min [in.] 8.000 )..• 1.000 'V ed,N 1.000 4>selsmlc 1.000 Page: Specifier: E-Mail: Date: ACI 318-19 Eq. (17.7.3.1a) ACI 318-19 Table 17.5.2 ACI 318-19 Eq. (17.6.2.1.4) ACI 318-19 Eq. (17.6.2.4.1b) ACI 318-19 Eq. (17.6.2.6.1b) ACI 318-19 Eq. (1 7.6.2.2.1) 'V c,N 1.000 ( [psi] 2,500 'V cp,N Nb [lb] 1.000 2,970 ,j> nondudile ,j> Vco [lb] 1.000 2,079 Input data and results must be checked for conformity with the existing conditions and for plausibility! PROFIS Engineering ( c ) 2003-2023 Hilti AG, FL-9494 Schaan Hilti is a registered Trademari< of Hilti AG, Schaan I a~w LL VI vv 5 7/25/2023 Vua [lb] 476 5 1:11-;;.1 -------------------------------H II ti PROFIS Engineering 3.0.86 NWW.hilti.com Company: Address: Phone I Fax: I Design: Concrete • Jun 20, 2023 (1) Fastening point: 4.3 Concrete edge failure in direction x+ Vcb : (~:) ljl ed,V 'l'e,V 'Vh,V 'Vperellol,V Vb cj, Veb ~ Vu, Ave see ACI 318-19, Section 17.7.2.1, Fig. R 17.7.2.1 (b) Avrl.l = 4.5 c!, ljl od,V : 0.7 + 0.3c .~~.J S 1.0 --RTc; 'V h,V -'V~-h -~ 1.0 • vb = ( 7 (~)° 2 fci:) 1-. ~ c!;5 Variables c,, [in.] 5.333 1.000 Calculations Ave [in.2] 64.00 Results veb [lb] 2,844 Ca2 [in.] 8.000 d1 [in.] 0.500 AvdJ [in.2] 128.00 cj, coocrete 0.700 ljl e,V 1.000 f~ [psi] 2,500 ljl eo,V 1.000 cj,aat,mte 1.000 Page: Specifier: E-Mail: Date: ACI 318-19 Eq. (17.7.2.1a) ACI 318-19 Table 17.5.2 ACI 318-19 Eq. (17.7.2.1.3) ACI 318-19 Eq. (17.7.2.4.1b) ACI 318-19 Eq. (17.7.2.6.1) ACI 318-19 Eq. (17.7.2.2.1a) h8 [in.] 18 [in.] 4.000 2.000 ljl perelltl, V 1.000 'Vh,V Vb [lb] 1.414 4,022 ¢, nonductlle ¢, Veb [lb] 1.000 1,991 5 Combined tension and shear loads, per ACI 318-19 section 17.8 I:; Utilization PN y [%] Status 0.911 0.239 5/3 95 OK Input data and resulls must be checked for conformity with the existing conditions and for plausibiityl PROFIS Engineering ( c) 2003-2023 Hilti AG, FL-9494 Schaan Hilti is a registered Trademark of HilU AG, Schaan V u• [lb] 476 f a~o LV V I vv 6 7/25/2023 6 I Q~O L""t VI UV i : i i S ~ • ----------------------Hilti PROFIS Engineering 3.0.86 www.hilti.com Company: Address: Phone I Fax: I Page: Specifier: E-Mail: 7 Design: Concrete -Jun 20, 2023 (1) Date: 7/25/2023 Fastening point: 6 Warnings The anchor design methods in PROFIS Engineering require rigid anchor plates per current regulations (AS 5216:2021, ETAG 001 /Annex C, EOTA TR029 etc.). This means load re-distribution on the anchors due to elastic deformations of the anchor plate are not considered -the anchor plate is assumed to be sufficiently stiff, in order not to be deformed when subjected to the design loading. PROFIS Engineering calculates the minimum required anchor plate thickness with CBFEM to limit the stress of the anchor plate based on the assumptions explained above. The proof if the rigid anchor plate assumption is valid is not carried out by PROF IS Engineering. Input data and results must be checked for agreement with the existing conditions and for plausibility! Condition A applies where the potential concrete failure surfaces are crossed by supplementary reinforcement proportioned to tie the potential concrete failure prism into the structural member. Condition B applies where such supplementary reinforcement is not provided, or where pullout or pryout strength governs. Refer to the manufacturer's product literature for cleaning and installation instructions. For additional information about ACI 318 strength design provisions, please go to https://submittals.us.hilti.com/PROFISAnchorDesignGuide/ • "An anchor design approach for structures assigned to Seismic Design Category C, D, E or Fis given in ACI 318-19, Chapter 17, Section 17.10.5.3 (a) that requires the governing design strength of an anchor or group of anchors be limited by ductile steel failure. If this is NOT the case, the connection design (tension) shall satisfy the provisions of Section 17.10.5.3 (b), Section 17.10.5.3 (c), or Section 17.10.5.3 (d). The connection design (shear) shall satisfy the provisions of Section 17.10.6.3 (a), Section 17.10.6.3 (b), or Section 17.10.6.3 (c)." • Section 17.10.5.3 (b) / Section 17.10.6.3 (a) require the attachment the anchors are connecting to the structure be designed to undergo ductile yielding at a load level corresponding to anchor forces no greater than the controlling design strength. Section 17.10.5.3 (c) / Section 17.10.6.3 (b) waive the ductility requirements and require the anchors to be designed for the maximum tension I shear that can be transmitted to the anchors by a non-yielding attachment. Section 17.10.5.3 (d) / Section 17.10.6.3 (c) waive the ductility requirements and require the design strength of the anchors to equal or exceed the maximum tension I shear obtained from design load combinations that include E, with E increaser by ro0. • Hilti post-installed anchors shall be installed in accordance with the Hilti Manufacturer's Printed Installation Instructions (MPII). Reference ACI 318-19, Section 26.7. Fastening meets the design criteria! Input data and results must be checked for confom,ity with the existing conditions and for plausibility! PROFIS Engineering ( c) 2003-2023 Him AG, Fl-9494 Schaan Hilti is a registered Trademark of Hnti AG, Schaan 7 •=iiS•• Hilti PROFIS Engineering 3.0.86 NWW.hilti.com Company: Address: Phone I Fax: Design: Fastening point: 7 Installation data Profile: - Hole diameter in the fixture: - Plate thickness (input): - I Concrete -Jun 20, 2023 (1) Drilling method: Hammer drilled Cleaning: Manual cleaning of the drilled hole according to instructions for use is required. Page: Specifier: E-Mail: Date: Anchor type and diameter: Kwik Bolt TZ2 -CS 1 /2 (2) hnom2 Item number: 2210254 KB-TZ2 1/2x3 3/4 Maximum installation torque: 602 in.lb Hole diameter in the base material: 0.500 in. Hole depth in the base material: 2.750 in. Minimum thickness of the base material: 4.000 in. Hilti KB-TZ2 stud anchor with 2.5 in embedment, 1/2 (2) hnom2, Carbon steel, installation per ESR-4266 7.1 Recommended accessories Drilling Cleaning Setting 8 7/25/2023 • Suitable Rotary Hammer • Manual blow-out pump • Torque controlled cordless impact tool • Properly sized drill bit • Torque wrench • Hammer Coordinates Anchor In. Anchor x y c.. c.. c.y c.Y 0.000 0.000 8.000 8.000 8.000 8.000 Input data and results must be checked for conformity with the existing conditions and for plausibility! PROFIS Engineering ( c) 2003-2023 Hllti AG, FL-9494 Schaan Hilti is a registered Trademark of Hilti AG, Schaan 8 I Ot:10 LV VI VV ,:,,s., Hilti PROFIS Engineering 3.0.86 www.hilti.com Company: Address: Phone I Fax: I Page: Specifier: E-Mail: 9 Design: Concrete -Jun 20, 2023 (1) Date: 7/25/2023 Fastening point: 8 Remarks; Your Cooperation Duties Any and all information and data contained in the Software concern solely the use of Hilti products and are based on the principles, formulas and security regulations in accordance with Hilti's technical directions and operating, mounting and assembly instructions, etc., that must be strictly complied with by the user. All figures contained therein are average figures, and therefore use-specific tests are to be conducted prior to using the relevant Hilti product. The results of the calculations carried out by means of the Software are based essentially on the data you put in. Therefore, you bear the sole responsibility for the absence of errors, the completeness and the relevance of the data to be put in by you. Moreover, you bear sole responsibility for having the results of the calculation checked and cleared by an expert, particularly with regard to compliance with applicable norms and permits, prior to using them for your specific facility. The Software serves only as an aid to interpret norms and permits without any guarantee as to the absence of errors, the correctness and the relevance of the results or suitability for a specific application. You must take all necessary and reasonable steps to prevent or limit damage caused by the Software. In particular, you must arrange for the regular backup of programs and data and, if applicable, carry out the updates of the Software offered by Hilti on a regular basis. If you do not use the Auto Update function of the Software, you must ensure that you are using the current and thus up-to-date version of the Software in each case by carrying out manual updates via the Hilti Website. Hilti will not be liable for consequences, such as the recovery of lost or damaged data or programs, arising from a culpable breach of duty by you. Input data and results must be checked for confonnity with the existing conditions and for plausibility! PROFIS Engineering ( c ) 2003-2023 Hilti AG, FL-9494 Schaan Hilti is a registered Trademark of Hllti AG, Schaan 9 D C - q;;i Fl ~ ... B A 2 3 4 34.75 -... _, [ 882.7] 34.00 [ 863.6] ' ~ \ ~ I Iii "~ Ii! 16.00 ,u.vU 0 [ 406.3] 0 0 0 0 MINIMUM UPRIGHT SPACING 0 0 01' /4" 0 0 -, 0 0 ~; " --0 0 \ V 0 2.07 ...:! 0 0 0 0 [ 52.5] 5.00 0 i 0 [ ,81.0] 0 u ii 0 I--0 ¢:::, I Hg I 8( Jt Q)(i.00 0 0 0 M 14.00 ~ 9 ! [ 152.4] [ ◊ ◊ 1.25 _, [ 355.6] :,' 0 :::: [ 31.8] T"'" T"'" • ,-a; ~ :::: \ 0. "' 2.59 .d 0.34 [ 65. 9] ~'-3/4{, [ 8.7] ....! I ) •::.1'-3/8" ,-~ 1.oot ' '-.__ ~ [ 25.4] ~ RAILS CAN BE SLID LEFT OR RIGHT FOR OFFSET ~- .I l.63 [ 41.3] 1. MAXIMUM MOUNTING PATTERN IS 31.25" (794 mm) WITHOUT REVERSING UPRIGHTS 2. MAXIMUM MOUNTING PATTERN IS 34 .6" (879 mm) WITH REVERSING UPRIGHTS 3. FOR RECESSED APPLICATIONS, MINIMUM VERTICAL LIFT FOR HOOK ENGAGEMENT IS .75" (19 mm) 2 3 4 5 . 2.00 [ 50.9] 20.50 [ 520.7] r ] 7.00 ~ • ""':::II-.... -· ........ 6 7 8 t1AB 04/20/2016 -RELEASED ON ECO : 500013505 ~ ::c 2.75 [ 70.0] 12'1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.49 r [ 12.5] 9.84 [250.0] § ..... ..... ... D C I [ 177.8] l 0 0 0 7.00 11 [ 177.8] I II?! = ~ ~ ~ THE INFORMATION AND DESIGNS CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING ARE CONFIDENTIAL AND THE PROPRIETARY PROPERTY OF MILESTONE AV TECHNOLOGIES NEITHER THIS DESIGN NOR ANY INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING MAY BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF MILESTONE AV TECHNOLOGIES. 5 6 9.69 l [ 51 0 00.0] ◊ 0.34 [ 8.7 CAD GENERATED DRAWING. DO NOT MANUALLY UPDATE. DRAWN BY JAB 11/9/2015 ENG APPROVAL MFG APPROVAi QA APPROVAL SHEET l OF 1 SCALE 1:8 7 2X [ 1.48 .44 87.5] [ 37.5] • 6436 CITY WEST PKWY 'b CH I E F EDEN PRAIRIE MN, 5534-4 ~~ PHONE: 86H77-3901 FAX: 877-894-6918 DESCRIPTION LTA 1 U CUSTOMER TECHNICAL DRAWING MODEL NO. LTAlU SIZE OWG. NO. REV, B TECH-000779 00 8 B A PLANAR --® --Planar MGP Complete 136 LED Video Wall Display Planar® MGP Complete TM 136 is a Full HD, 136" LED video wall solution that includes everything an organization needs to deliver large-format beautiful video and imagery, in less time and with less effort. The solution comes with LED display cabinets, cables, spare modules, wall mounts and full-featured video controller all included. The ADA-compliant Planar MGP Complete 136 features front-side installation and serviceability for easier access and installation against the wall. ~ Pixel Pitch 1.56 Display Diagonal 135.5in ---- Display Resolution 1920x1080 Pixel Density 409,6001m2 I 38,o511tt2 Display size 3000 x 1687.5 x 50mm I 118.11 x 66.44 xb .97in -- Power Consumption, Maximum (watts) 2749 Line Voltage 100-240V AC, 50/60Hz I Display Weight 150kg I 330.691bs l Brightness 600 - Contrast Ratio 5000:1 LED Refresh Rate 3840Hz Color Temperature, Adjustable (k) 3,000 -10,000 Video Inputs 1x HDM1, 1x DVI >-- Control USB, Serial, Network Frame Rate 50,60Hz Viewing Angle, Horizontal 160° Viewing Angle, Vertical 140° --- Service Access Front, Rear Environment Indoor - I - Temperature/Humidity (degrees F/C, relative humidity) Storage Temperature/Humidity (degrees F/C, relative humidity) LED Lifetime: Typical Solution Includes 10-80% -30° to 60° C I -22° to 140° F 10-85% 100,000 Video Wall display, Video controller, signal cables, power cables, wall mount, and spare modules _________ _._ __ For more information, please visit www.planar.com Specifications are subject to change without notice. Specification Report Date: 5/22/2023 © Copyright 2023 Planar Systems, Inc. All rights reserved - •· ---or-- -- ,, .·-.r., ~~ .. ...... 1111" d1dqr 1111 rt 1,•( '-,( nh th ,)ppr0x1111,1tcd Or,...,1qn Dirm 11<, lHh dnd ML'.111t1nq Pc11nh for tr1r cr1nf1qLH11d v1clt o Wtlll You 1r1r.,t,)llr1t1nn rn,1y v 1•,; Pit ,ir.,p Ct n,ult 1.mtl1 the 1n .... tsill,1t1cH1 Gtrnh or cont,1( t Pl,Hldr for .idclit 011,il 1nforrn,1t1c111 PLEASE NOT[ ~or opt1m,1I Vlf".'llfl(J til,, dr,w11nq I'> trunc,11,,cl to ,llu\tr,1!1' tll,, c11m,·011,~Ion<.., for tlw outPr 4 coinPr\ of !111<.., 5 X 5 V1dt10 W;ill PIPdS\' ll':i!' tl1ps,r, rllhl':ilHt'lllPnh wh,,11 t.1lcul.1tin9 your 111li'r1c.11 mount1n~l pu1nh .... :::,-................. .... - ·----·• .... DESIGN DRAWING LEGENDS - I • Overall Video Wall Dimensions Recommended Oearances Distance From Edge of the Display to the cenler ol'the Outer Mounting Bracket --Distance from lhe Center of the first Mounting Bracket to the Interior Mounting Bracket Distance from center of Mounbng Bracket to center of Mountma bracket Note This MGP Design Drawing Illustrates the front Mounting D1mens1ons. This diagram represents the approximated Design Dimensions and Mounting Po1nt.s for the configured video wall Your installation may vary Please consult with the Installation Guide or contact Planar for additional informauon. WWW pl,lll,ll corn P,1gp 6 6 .. IDS GROUP PROJECT: Carlsbad EOC Wing Tl SUBJECT: Archltectural Component Anchorage Nonstructural Seismic Force, ASCE 7-16 Nonstructural Element Description: Wall Mounted TVs Seismic Force Parameters Equipment Category Seismic Force Coefficients: aP = o.= Sos= Rp = Ip= z= h= F,= Fp,max = F p,m!n = 1.0 1.5 0.635 1.5 1.5 1.0 ft or ratio 1.0 ft or ratio 0.76 •w, 1.52 •w, 0.29 •w, BY:MM JOB NO: 22X098.00 CHKOBY: DATE: 8/20/2023 Low deformobility materials and attachments (ORC) component amplification factor component overstrength factor short period spectral acceleration ASCE 7-16, TABLE 13.5-1 OR 13.6-1 ASCE 7-16, TABLE 13.5-1 OR 13.6-1 component response modification faciASCE 7-16, TABLE 13.5-1 OR 13.6-1 Importance Factor ASCE 7-16, 13.1.3 height of component anchorage height of structure = 0.4•a, •s05•w0 •(1+2(z/hl)/{R.,/I,) = l .6•s05•I,•w, = 0_3•sos•I, •w, ~---------------'-~-------"----~= o.2•5os•w, ._ ______________ _.=.. _____ .,_-"------'I Governing Coefficient Fv = 0.13 •w Fe.I 1•w: ASCE 7-16, EQ. 13.3-1 ASCE 7-16, EQ. 13.3-2 ASCE 7-16, EQ. 13.3-3 ASCE 7-16 13.3.1.2 Equipment Information W= L= D= e = h = 0.76 350 3.94 6.0 4.0 12.0 lbs in in in in Equipment weight Length/Width, distance between anchor points Depth of equipment CG Distance from anchor points Vertical height between anchor points 1-IS-e-ls_m_l_c_F_o_rc_e_s_: __________ FF•.c..:_..,1~--2_6_7 __ -1-ll_b_s _____ -11= Horizontal Seismic Force 44 lbs = Vertical Seismic Force ._ ______________ _:___._ _____ .,_ _____ __, Anchor Forces: Number of anchors per row, N = 2 Max shear demand per anchors= Max tension demand per anchors= 95 87 lbs lbs =(W + 0.7F.)/2N, ASD Load Combinations =0.7F.,J4N + [(W,+0.7F.J•e/h]/N, ASD Load Combinations ..... ~--' .......... .... ~ ......... _ .......... SHEET METAL SCREW (SMS) ALLOWABLE STREtiGTHS TABLE 1 . SHEET METAL SCREW ALLOWABLE STRENGTHS FOR STEEL TO STEEL CONNECTIONS. f' ASTENER SIZE NO. 14 NO. 12 NO. 10 NO. 8 NO. 6 r, MIL (KSI} {STEEL GA) 0.250 IN 0.216 IN 0.190 IN 0.164 IN 0.138 IN SHEAR TENSION SHEAR TENSION SHEAR TENSION SHEAR TENSION SHEAR TENSION (LB) (LB) (LB) (LB) (LB) (LB) (LB) (LB) (LB) (LB) 50 97 {12) 704 275 525 205 68 {14} 704 275 525 205 405 159 54 {16} 613 261 525 205 405 159 303 118 33 43 {18) 302 144 280 124 263 109 244 94 165 79 33 (20) 177 84 164 72 151 61 !Q!ES; 1. SEE GENERAL NOTES ON ST 1.06 FOR MORE INFORMATION. 2. WHERE ONE OR TWO LAYERS Of' GYP OOARO OCCURS BETWEEN STEEL SURFACES, THE ALLOWABLE VALUES Of' TABLE 2 a: 3 SHALL BE USED. 3. ALLOWABLE STRENGTH VALUES DO NOT ACCOUNT f'OR Ef'f'ECTS FROM PRYING. THE ROP IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE Of' Ttt: PROJECT SHALL PROVIDE ADEQUATE BLOCKING/RESTRAINT TO PREVENT PRYING ACTION. WHERE PRYING OCCURS, THE VALUES AND CONSTRAINTS Of' TABLE 4 SHALL BE USED. TABLE 2 -tiQN-PRYlNG CONQITIQN SHEET METAL SCREW ALLOWABLE STRENGTHS f'OR STEEL TO STEEL CONNECTIONS WITH ONE LAYER Of' 5/8• GYP BOARD BETWEEN STEEL SURFACES. f' ASTENER SIZE NO. 14 NO. 12 NO. 10 NO. 8 NO. 6 r, MIL {KSI) (STEEL GA) 0.250 IN 0.216 IN 0.190 IN 0.164 IN 0.138 IN SHEAR TENSION SHEAR TENSION SHEAR TENSION SHEAR TENSION SHEAR TENSION (LB) (LB) (LB) (LB) (LB) (LB) (LB) (LB) (LB) (LB) 50 97 ( 12) 226 275 180 205 68 (14} 226 275 180 205 140 159 54 (16) 226 261 180 205 140 159 120 118 33 43 ( 18) 226 144 180 124 140 109 120 94 60 79 33 (20) 100 84 80 72 60 61 !Q!ES; 1. SEE GENERAL NOTES ON STl.06 FOR MORE INFORMATION. 2. ALLOWABLE STRENGTH VALUES DO NOT ACCOUNT FOR EFFECTS FROM PRYING. ROP IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE TO PROW)[ ADEQUATE BLOCKING/RESTRAINT TO PREVENT PRYING ACTION. WHERE PRYING OCCURS, THE VALUES AND CONSTRAINTS Of' TABLE 4 SHALL BE USED. Combined shear and tension OCR= (95/226) + (87/261) = 0.75 S£COOII mu: STANDARD PARTITION WALL DETAILS Sl([T mu: CJ'!) 110~ SHEET METAL SCREW ALLOWABLE ST1 .07 STRENGTHS SMMS-e Single VRF Outdoor Unit MCY-MAP0607HS-UL-Heat Pump Submittal Data Job Name Location ' ... ::, ....... '"" .......... TOSHIBA Carrier HP-13 ------------------------------------Tag __________ _ Header Unit Model PERFORMANCE Nominal Cooling Capacity Nominal Heating Capacity Maximum Total Connected Indoor Unit Capacity COOLING EFFICIENCYt SEER2, Ducted FCUs SEER2, Ductless FCUs HEATING EFFICIENCYt HSPF2, Ducted FCUs HSPF2, Ductless FCUs Fan Type (Qty) Airflow Combined System Sound Pressure, Cooling/Heating ELECTRICAL Power Supply Minimum Circuit Amps (MCA) Recommended Fuse Size SMMS-e VRF Heat Pump Features • 3, 4, and 5-ton single-phase modules available • Modules have inverter-driven twin rotary compressor • 591 ft (180 m) actual total system piping (liquid line) • 328 ft (100 m) actual piping length from outdoor unit to furthest fan coil • Up to 330 ft (100 m) control wiring between outdoor units • Up to 6560 ft (2000 m) control wiring between the outdoor units and indoor units MCY-MAP0607HS-UL COMPRESSORS Btu/h 60,000 Type (Number) Btu/h 66,000 Motor Output FAN MOTOR • Operating temperature range Cooling (db): 23 to 122 F (-5 to 50 C) • Heating (wb): -13 to 60 F (-25 to 15.6 C) • Protection: high pressure sensor and switch, low pressure sensor, process controller board fuse, inverter overload protection • 7-year compressor limited warranty, • 5-year parts limited warranty kW Hermetic Twin Rotary (1) 3.75 Up to 135% Motor Type (Steps) Propeller Fan (2) Motor Output kW 0.10 + 0.10 Btu/Wh 18.40 PHYSICAL DATA Btu/Wh 23.10 Pipe Connection Size -Liquid (High Pressure) in. 3/8 (Flare) 9.80 10.60 Propeller (2) CFM 4850 Pipe Connection Size -Gas in. 3/4 (Flare) (Low Pressure) Refrigerant R-410A Factory Chargett lb 14.8 External Finish Munsell 1 Y8.5/0.5 dBA 55.0/58.0 unit vv1am in. ,J::,.tj Unit Height in. 61 .0 V/Ph/Hz 208-230/1 /60 Unit Depth in. 14.6 A 36.3 Unit Net Weight lb 311 A 40 db SEER FCU HSPF wb LEGEND Dry Bulb Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio Fan Coil Unit tRated per AHRI (Air-Conditioning, Heating and Refl'igeration Institute) 210/ 240 Standard. Heating Seasonal Performance Factor Wet Bulb © 2022 Carrier Corporation. All rights reserved. A Carrier Company Cooling: Indoor 80°F (27°C) db/67°F (20°C) wb; Outdoor 95°F (35°C) db Heating: Indoor 70°F (21 °C) db; Outdoor 47°F (8°C) db/43°F (6°C) wb ttAdditional charge required. Edition Date: 11/22 Form No: MCY-MAP0607RS UL 02 Printed in U.S.A. Replaces: MCY-MAP0607HS-UL_0I Manufacturer reserves the right to discontinue, or change at any time, spectflcatlons or designs without notice and without incurring obligations. OU T D O O R UN I T HE A T PU M P MC Y - M A P 0 6 0 7 H S - U L DI M E N S I O N A L DR A W I N G < l u -~ ~E ; g ,._ . . .. , -.. . .6 ' 6.6 ' 5 3' 67 ) (1 6 8 ) (1 3 5 ) 14 . 6 ' (3 7 0) 0. 9 " (2 2 ) \. . - - ~ 1 = 5 . 9 ~ ' '~•0= 3 ) - - - l 0 7' (1 9 ) 17 . 4 ' (4 43) I I :: . .. ; !!. iS . ~L _ _ _ _ _ _ J c = = J _(= = i L _ _ _ _ _ _ J (= = i L _ _ _ _ _ _ J -~ ~ - i I J] l I ii ~ j I. :, , l ( I "' I I I - 2 2' 3 r a (5 5 ) (9 5 ) ~ 24 8' (6 2 9 ' - ) - -- l - 0 9" (2 4 ) 11 1 1 1111 1 1 · I 4,7 " 2 2" (C e n t e r of gr a l > t y ) (l20J (5 6 ) 28 l" (7 1 4 ) •A 28 1' (7 1 5 ) :i ! b i ~i ~ ~- A. ~ ! ? I CER T I F I E D ( , ' ~ . l• • ,c . n , • • t , ,\H , , I I I •' I \ IS i 1 ~~ bf ~ Si i • vi' 1~ ] ·i .S " s _ * =? ~ ~~ H H o 5" (1 3 ) 2 4" (6 0 ) u ~ :J I I .. . ::, .. . . . . I' - ' ' . _ . . . . , t[ ii ~~ g_ :;: I ~ I " "' 5 I!: ) 20 2 2 Ca r r i e r Co r p o r a t i o n . Al l ri g h t s re s e r v e d . A Ca r r i e r Co m p a n y Ed i ti on Da t e : 11 / 2 2 Fo r m No : MC Y - M A P 0 6 0 7 B S UL 02 Pr i n t e d in U. S . A . Re p l a c e s : MC Y - MAP 0 6 0 7 H S - U L _ 0 I Ma n u f a c t u r e r re s e r v e s th e ri g h t to di s c o n t inu e , or ch a n g e at any tim e , ap e c t l l c a t l o n s or de s i g n s wit h o u t no t i c e an d wi t h o u t Incu r r i n g ob l i g a t i o n s . 'l AAIDSGROUP PROJECT: Cartabad EOC Wing 11 BY:MM JOB NO: 22X0H.OO SUBJECT: Archftectul'II Component Anchorage CHKDBY: DATE: "2712023 Nonstructural Seismic Force, ASCE 41-17 & ASCE 7-16 Nonstructural Element Description: Roof Mounted Condensing Unit Sejsmlc Force Parameters Equipment Category Seismic Force Coefficients: Equipment Information Seismic Forces: Attachments and Anchors: Bolts to Base Unistrut Rall F•= fp,mH: Fp,mln = Fv= W= H= Hco = L= D= Net overturning Moment, Mor= Tension per anchor -steel bolts, Ts= Shear per anchor -steel bolts, Vs = Air coolers (fin fans), air-cooled heat exchangers, condensing units, dry coolers, remote radiators and other mechanical components elevated on integral structural steel or sheet metal supports 2.5 1.5 0.635 3.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 0.95 1.52 0.29 0.13 0.95 315 61.0 40.7 24.4 15.9 300 40 10,266 323 75 ft or ratio ft or ratio •w. •w. •w. •w l•w: lbs in in in in llbs lbs lb-in lb lb component amplification factor ASCE 7-16, TABLE 13.S-1 OR 13.6-1 component overstrength factor ASCE 7-16, TABLE 13.5-1 OR 13.6-1 site specific design spectral response acceleration component response modification factor ASCE 7-16, TABLE 13.5-1 OR 13.6-1 Importance Factor ASCE 7-16, 13.1.3 height of component anchorage height of structure = 0.4•a• •sos •w. •(1+2(z/hl)/(R,II.) ASCE 7-16, EQ. 13.3-1 = l.6•s05•1P •wP ASCE 7-16, EQ. 13.3-2 = 0.3•sos•1. •w. ASCE 7-16, EQ. 13.3-3 = o.2•sos•w. ASCE 7-1613.3.1.2 ! Governing Coefficient Total weight with full fuel tank Total Height C.G. Height -2/3 overall height assumed Length/Width, largest dimension between anchors Depth, shortest dimension between anchors 1= Horizontal Seismic Force = Vertical Seismic Force =F, •Hco -(0.9•W,-F,)•D/2, LRFD Load Combinations =[M0,/(D•2)), LRFD Load Combinations =F ,14, LRFD Load Combinations Design Loads: Cllalvltl Alon.bte Nu! Pull-Out RN,11111« TOlqut 3/8"0 unistrut bolt and spring nut: s,u-lllntnglh toa p Fl-Ult CIIIMII Thnad Lba (kN/ u. (kN/ (N-mJ 2500 1 /00 '12!> 9 17 ,. ' 'lO 10 12 2500 , ,00 '1h ,, .. II l/ l 5': •IO n,oo 1500 '100 ~· 11 17 I 15 II I} 66 PIOOO 1000 , !xX) 50 P3000 r.· 13 12 P4400 FUO ,GI f P~52' I -10() 1000 3-'> "'°°° .,.. -1-t 12 ' ,~~ ',() P5600 I 000 Im 19 16 1' ,0 / 4 4 v..· 800 500 11 18 17 r I 1 •• 20 12 tiOO :m Ii 6f IJ• . -~-......... , ...... . -~ ..................... .... .A. .A. IDS GROUP Job No.: 22X098.00 Project: Carlsbad Emergency Operations Center I By: MM Chk'd: Date: 06/28/2023 Renovation Subject: Section: REFERENCE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT IDS-1 Peters Canyon Road, Suite 130, Irvine, CA 92606 Q. Tel: 949-387-8500 Q Fax: 949-387-0800 Geotechnical Evaluation Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit 2560 Orion Way Carlsbad, California City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue I Carlsbad, California 92008 August 14, 2020 I Project No. 108715011 Otoltthnlul & Envlronmtnt•I Scltn<u Consult•nto Geotechn ica l Evaluation f~ Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit 2560 Orion Way Carlsbad, California Mr. Steven Stewart City of Carlsbadtt 1635 Faraday Avenue I Carlsbad, California 92008# August 14, 2020 I Project No. 108715011 Christina Tretlnja k, PG 8478, CEG 2660 Senior Project Geologist BRH/CAT/JTK/alf Distribution: (1) Addressee (via e-mail) /fl!Pr Jeffrey T. Kent, PE 2817, GE 66143 Principal Engineer 5710 Ruffin Road I San Diego, California 921?3 I p. 858.576 1000 I www.ninyoandmoore.com CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 1 2 SCOPE OF SERVICES 1 3 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 4 FIELD EXPLORATIONS 2 4.1 Subsurface Evaluation 2 4.2 Laboratory Testing 3 4.3 Geophysical Survey 3 4.3.1 ReMi Survey 3 4.3.1 .1 Field Methods 3 4.3.1.2 Data Processing and Modeling 3 5 GEOLOGIC AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 4 5.1 Regional Geologic Setting 4 5.2 Site Geology 5 5.2.1 Encountered Pavement Sections 5 5.2.2 Fill 5 5.2.3 Lusardi Formation 6 5.3 Groundwater 6 6 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 6 6.1 Faulting and Seismicity 7 6.1.1 Seismic Site Class 7 6.1.2 Strong Ground Motion 8 6.1.3 Surface Ground Rupture 10 6.1.4 Liquefaction and Seismically Induced Settlement 10 6.2 Flooding 10 6.3 Tsunamis 10 6.4 Landsliding and Slope Stability 11 7 CONCLUSIONS 11 8 RECOMMENDATIONS 12 8.1 Earthwork 12 8.1 .1 Pre-Construction Conference 12 8.1 .2 Excavation Characteristics 12 Ninyo & Moore I Cartsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Cartsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 9 10 11 8.1.3 8.1.4 8.1.5 8.1.6 8.1.7 Temporary Excavations Materials for Fill Compacted Fill Pipe Bedding and Modulus of Soil Reaction (E') Pipe Zone Backfill 8.1.8 Utility Trench Zone Backfill Seismic Design Considerations 8.2.1 Design of New Structures 8.2.2 Retrofit of Existing Structures Foundations 8.3.1 Shallow Foundations -Bearing Capacity 8.3.2 Shallow Foundations -Lateral Resistance 8.3.3 Shallow Foundations -Foundation Stiffness Corrosivity Concrete PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION LIMITATIONS REFERENCES TABLES 1 -Summary of Pavement Sections 2 -Principal Active Faults 3 -Historic Earthquakes that Affected the Site 4 -2019 California Building Code Seismic Design Criteria 5-ASCE 41 -17 Seismic Design Criteria BSE-2N Hazard 6 -ASCE 41-17 Seismic Design Criteria BSE-1 N Hazard 7 -ASCE 41-17 Seismic Design Criteria BSE-2E Hazard 8 -ASCE 41 -17 Seismic Design Criteria BSE-1 E Hazard FIGURES 1 -Site Location 2 -Exploration Locations 3 -Fault Locations 4 -Geology 13 13 14 14 15 15 16 16 16 18 18 18 19 20 20 20 21 23 5 7 8 16 17 17 18 18 Ninyo & Moore I Cartsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Cartsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 ii 5 -Geologic Cross Section A-A' 6 -ASCE 7-16 Response Spectra 7 -ASCE 41-17 Site-Specific Response Spectra APPENDICES A-Current and Previous Boring Logs B -Current and Previous Laboratory Testing C -Geophysical Results D -Geotechnical Engineering Calculations Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 iii 1 INTRODUCTION In accordance with your request and authorization, we have performed a geotechnical evaluation for the proposed renovation and seismic retrofit project at the City of Carlsbad's existing Safety Center Building located at 2560 Orion Way in Carlsbad, California (Figure 1 ). The purpose of our geotechnical services was to provide a geotechnical design report with soil and site-specific seismic parameters for the retrofit in accordance with the 2019 California Building Code (CBC), American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 7-16 and ASCE 41-17 standards. This report presents our findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on our subsurface evaluation, laboratory testing, and geotechnical analyses. 2 SCOPE OF SERVICES Our scope of services included the following: • Reviewing background information including available geotechnical reports (including our previous geotechnical report), geologic and topographic maps, fault maps, flood zone maps, groundwater data, and aerial photographs. • Performing a geologic reconnaissance of the site and marking of boring locations for clearance by Underground Service Alert (USA). Additionally, we used a private utility locator service to locate underground utilities near our exploratory borings. • Performing a subsurface exploration consisting of the drilling, logging, and sampling of two exploratory borings with a truck-mounted drill rig. Relatively undisturbed and bulk soil samples were obtained at selected intervals from the borings. The collected samples were transported to our in-house geotechnical laboratory for testing. • Performing a surface geophysical survey including one Refraction Micro-tremor (ReMi) survey to evaluate the change in subsurface shear-wave velocity with respect to depth for the purpose of developing a Site Class for seismic design parameters. • Performing geotechnical laboratory testing to evaluate soil characteristics and design parameters. • Compiling and performing an engineering analysis of the data obtained. Site-specific seismic analyses were performed using the BSE-1E, BSE-1N, BSE-2E, and BSE-1E seismic hazard levels, as defined in ASCE 41-17 and ASCE 7-16. • Preparing this report providing our findings, conclusions, and recommendations for the project renovation and seismic retrofit. 3 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The City of Carlsbad's Safety Center is located at 2560 Orion Way in Carlsbad, California (Figure 1 ). The Safety Center consists of a building complex that includes both one-and two- Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 1 story buildings that house the City of Carlsbad Police Department, Fire Department, and a conference facility. Existing improvements around the building complex include asphalt concrete (AC) paved parking lots, landscaped areas, and concrete hardscape and sidewalks. The Safety Center was originally constructed in the late 1980's. Site elevations range from approximately 365 to 370 feet above mean sea level (MSL). Topographically, the complex is atop a relatively flat mesa bounded by steep slopes that descend towards Los Monos Canyon to the east, north, and southeast. The global project site coordinates are approximately 33.137973°N latitude and 117 .265245°W longitude. We understand that a renovation of the existing structure is planned. From our correspondence with the project architect, we understand that this will include tenant improvements to over 90 percent of the existing building. Due to the site's classification as an Essential Service Facility, a seismic retrofit will be performed as part of the renovation. This report provides geotechnical design parameters and recommendations for the proposed retrofit. Ninyo & Moore previously prepared a geotechnical evaluation report for improvements at the site, including a shade canopy, a covered locker complex, and a site retaining wall (Ninyo & Moore, 2019). The data from our previous evaluation was utilized to inform our current evaluation, where appropriate. 4 FIELD EXPLORATIONS Our field exploration activities included a subsurface exploration program and a geophysical survey. Descriptions of these tasks are provided in the following sections. 4.1 Subsurface Evaluation Our subsurface exploration for this evaluation was conducted on July 8, 2020 and consisted of the drilling, logging, and sampling of two small-diameter exploratory borings (NM-1 and NM-2) to depths of up to approximately 18.8 feet using a truck-mounted drill rig equipped with 6-inch diameter, hollow-stem augers. Prior to drilling, the boring locations were cleared of underground utility conflicts by participating members of USA, as well as by a private utility locator. Ninyo & Moore personnel logged the borings in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) and ASTM International (ASTM) Test Method D 2488 by observing drill cuttings and drive samples. Representative bulk and drive soil samples were collected at selected depths from within the exploratory borings and were transported to our in-house geotechnical laboratory for analysis. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on Figure 2, and the boring logs are presented in Appendix A Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 2 We previously performed three exploratory borings (B-1 through B-3) at the site (Ninyo & Moore, 2019). The locations of the borings are shown on Figure 2 and the logs are presented in Appendix A. 4.2 Laboratory Testing Geotechnical laboratory testing was performed on representative soil samples collected from our subsurface exploration. Testing included an evaluation of shear strength and soil corrosivity. Descriptions of the test methods and the results of the laboratory tests are presented in Appendix B. Additionally, geotechnical laboratory tests were performed on the samples obtained from our previous borings (Ninyo & Moore, 2019), the results of which are presented in Appendix B. 4.3 Geophysical Survey As part of our field exploration, we performed a geophysical Refraction Microtremor (ReMi) sur- vey at the site on July 8, 2020. The purpose of the ReMi survey was to evaluate the subsurface shear-wave velocity profile to a nominal depth of approximately 100 feet at the subject site to evaluate Seismic Site Class in general accordance with the American Society of Civil Engineers, ASCE 7-16 (ASCE, 2017a). 4.3.1 ReMi Survey The ReMi survey utilized the passive seismic method of Microtremor Array Measurements (MAM) and consisted of one linear profiles of seismic data collection. The line was generally oriented north to south and was located adjacent to the parking lot on the east side of the site. The method provided a shear wave velocity model to a depth of approximately 100 feet which was then used to calculate the average shear wave velocity (Vs100) to select the Seismic Site Class. The following sections provide a summary of the methods and analyses used in our study. The seismic model results are provided in Appendix C. 4.3.1 .1 Field Methods A Geode 24-Channel Seismograph was used for MAM surveying, with 4.5 Hertz (Hz) vertical component geophone placement every 4 meters for a total profile length of 92 meters. Approximately 30 records were collected, with a record length of 30 seconds and 2 millisecond sample interval. The field data were digitally recorded in SEG2 format, reviewed in the field for data quality, and saved electronically. 4.3.1.2 Data Processing and Modeling The MAM seismic data were processed using Seislmager/SW Analysis of Surface Waves software. The dispersive characteristics of surface waves are used to evaluate Nlnyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 3 the subsurface velocity at depth. Longer wavelength (longer-period and lower- frequency) surface waves travel deeper and thus contain more information about deeper velocity structure. Shorter wavelength (shorter-period and higher-frequency) surface waves travel shallower and thus contain more information about shallower velocity structure. The dispersion is dependent on the material properties, such as surface wave velocity, relative material densities, and Poisson's ratio. An inversion is performed on the collected passive seismic shear wave records within Seislmager to produce a model of the variation in shear wave velocities with depth. The following data processing flow was used to calculate V s100 for the ReMi line: o Collated records into list file and edited any bad channels or records; o Applied 2D Spatial Auto Correlation (SPAC); using a linear array and 24 geophones at 10 feet spacing; o Phase velocity frequency transformation from 2 to 35 Hz; o Automated velocity picks of raw phase velocity were calculated and updated manually; o Created an initial model and carried out a non-linear Least Squares Method (LSM) inversion to produce a final shear wave velocity model; convergence of the inversion was judged whether the model achieved an RMS <5% within 5-7 iterations; o Calculated V s100 using final shear wave velocity model to be 2,040 feet per second (fps). 5 GEOLOGIC AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Our findings regarding regional and site geology at the subject site are provided in the following sections. 5.1 Regional Geologic Setting The project area is situated in the coastal foothill section of the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province. This geomorphic province encompasses an area that extends approximately 900 miles from the Transverse Ranges and the Los Angeles Basin south to the southern tip of Baja California (Norris and Webb, 1990; Harden, 2004). The province varies in width from approximately 30 to 100 miles. In general, the province consists of rugged mountains underlain by Jurassic metavolcanic and metasedimentary rocks, and Cretaceous igneous rocks of the southern California batholith. The Peninsular Ranges Province is traversed by a group of sub-parallel faults and fault zones trending roughly northwest (Jennings, 2010). Several of these faults are considered to be active. Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 4 The Elsinore, San Jacinto and San Andreas faults are active fault systems located northeast of the project area and the Rose Canyon, Coronado Bank, San Diego Trough, and San Clemente faults are active faults located west of the project area. Major tectonic activity associated with these and other faults within this regional tectonic framework consists primarily of right-lateral, strike-slip movement. The Rose Canyon Fault Zone, the nearest active fault system, has been mapped approximately 7.6 miles west of the project site (Figure 3). Major tectonic activity associated with these and other faults within this regional tectonic framework consists primarily of right-lateral, strike-slip movement. 5.2 Site Geology The site is mapped as being underlain by the Lusardi Formation (Kennedy and Tan, 2007; Figure 4). Geologic units encountered during our subsurface exploration included fill and materials of the Lusardi Formation. Generalized descriptions of the earth units encountered during our subsurface exploration and mapped at the site are provided in the subsequent sections. Additional descriptions of the subsurface units are provided on the boring logs in Appendix A. The geology of the site is shown on Figure 4 and a geologic cross section is shown on Figure 5. 5.2.1 Encountered Pavement Sections AC pavements were encountered in each of the borings performed during our subsurface exploration for this evaluation. The encountered AC pavements measured 3 to 3.5 inches in thickness. Aggregate base materials were encountered underlying the AC in borings NM-1 and NM-2 and ranged in thickness from 4 to 8 inches. Aggregate base was not encountered in boring 8-1 through 8-3. Where encountered, the aggregate base materials generally consisted of brown, moist, medium dense, poorly graded gravel. A summary of the encountered pavement thicknesses is presented in Table 1. Table 1 -Summary of Pavement Sections . Encountered Asphalt Concrete (AC) . Boring Th" k Encountered Aggregate Base Thickness NM-1 NM-2 8-1 8-2 8-3 5.2.2 Fill 1c ness 3½ inches 3inches 3inches 3inches 3inches 4inches 8inches Fill materials were encountered in borings NM-1 , NM-2, and 8-1 underlying the existing pavement section and extending to depths up to approximately 6 feet. Fill materials were Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 5 not encountered in borings B-2 and B-3. As encountered, the fill soils generally consisted of yellowish brown and brown, moist, medium dense, clayey sand. Gravel and cobbles were encountered within the fill materials. Based on our review of background information, we understand that mass grading operations for the Safety Center was completed by 1985 (Testing Engineers, 1987). However, documentation regarding the placement of fill materials was not available for our review. 5.2.3 Lusardi Formation Materials of the Cretaceous-aged Lusardi Formation are mapped at the site (Figure 4, Kennedy and Tan, 2007) and were encountered underlying the fill in borings NM-1 , NM-2, and B-1 and underlying the pavement sections in borings B-2 and B-3. The Lusardi Formation extended to the total depths explored. As encountered, these materials generally consisted of yellowish brown and brown, moist, moderately to strongly cemented, silty sandstone and cobble and boulder conglomerate with a clayey sand matrix. Gravel, cobbles, and possible boulders were encountered in the Lusardi Formation and drilling refusal occurred in borings B-1 and B-3 within the Lusardi Formation at depths of approximately 12.9 feet and 12 feet, respectively. In addition, boulders were observed at the ground surface in the vicinity of the borings. 5.3 Groundwater Groundwater was not encountered in our exploratory borings at the site. Based on review of topographic and geologic data in the site vicinity, groundwater is anticipated at depths greater than 50 feet. However, perched water may be encountered at shallower depths such as the contact between fill and formational materials, as well as within existing utility trench backfill materials, as they tend to act as conduits for perched water. Fluctuations in the level of groundwater may occur due to variations in ground surface topography, subsurface stratification, rainfall, irrigation practices, groundwater pumping, and other factors, which may not have been evident at the time of our field evaluation. 6 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS In general, hazards associated with faulting and seismic activity include strong ground motion, ground rupture, and liquefaction. These considerations and other potential geologic hazards such as flooding, tsunamis, and landsliding are discussed in the following sections. Ninyo & Moore I Cartsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Cartsbad, California I 10871501 1 I August 14, 2020 6 6.1 Faulting and Seismicity Based on our review of the referenced geologic maps and stereoscopic aerial photographs, as well as on our subsurface exploration, the subject site is not underlain by known active or potentially active faults (i.e., faults that exhibit evidence of ground displacement in the last 11 ,000 years and 2,000,000 years, respectively). The site is not located within a state of California Earthquake Fault Zone (EFZ), formerly known as an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone (Hart and Bryant, 2007). However, like the majority of southern California, the site is located in a seismically active area and the potential for strong ground motion is considered significant during the design life of the proposed structures. Figure 3 shows the approximate site location relative to the major faults in the region. The nearest known active fault is the Rose Canyon fault, located approximately 7.6 miles west of the site. Table 2 lists selected principal known active faults that may affect the subject site, the approximate fault to site distance, and the maximum moment magnitude (Mmax) and the fault types provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Maps -Fault Parameters website (USGS, 2020a). Table 2 -Principal Active Faults Approximate Maximum Moment Fault Fault-to-Site Distance Magnitude miles (kilometers)1 (Mmax) Rose Canyon 7.6 (12.3) 6.9 Newport-Inglewood (Offshore Segment) 9.6 (15.5) 7.0 Elsinore (Temecula Segment) 20.4 (32.8) 7.1 Elsinore (Julian Segment) 20.4 (32.8) 7.4 Coronado Bank 23.2 (37.3) 7.4 Elsinore (Glen Ivy Segment) 33.7 (54.2) 6.9 Palos Verdes 39.1 (62.8) 7.3 Earthquake Valley 39.4 (63.5) 6.8 San Joaquin Hills 39.5 (63.6) 7.1 San Jacinto (Anza Segment) 45.4 (73).0 7.3 San Jacinto (San Jacinto Valley Segment) 47.4 (76.3) 7.0 San Jacinto (Coyote Creek Segment) 47.6 (76.6) 7.0 San Jacinto (Clark Segment) 49.8 (80.1) 7.1 Chino 50.7 (81.6) 6.8 Newport-Inglewood (LA Basin Segment) 51 .2 (82.4) 7.2 Whittier 52.8 (85.0) 7.0 Elsinore (Coyote Mountain Segment) 55.0 (88.5) 6.9 San Jacinto (San Bernardino Valley Segment) 60.6 (97.5) 7.1 San Jacinto (Borrego Segment) 61 .6 (99.1) 6.8 San Andreas (Banning/Gamet Hill Segment) 61.8 (99.5) 7.1 6.1.1 Seismic Site Class As previously discussed, we performed a ReMi survey to evaluate the V s100 for the project site in order to select the Seismic Site Class. Shear wave data resolution generally Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 7 decreases with depth , due to the loss of sensitivity of the dispersion curve to changes in shear wave velocity as depth increases. Figures showing our MAM seismic modeling results are provided in Appendix C. The layered model in Appendix C indicates our interpretation of the approximate changes in shear wave velocity vertically with depth across the surveyed location. The results indicate a V s100 value of 2,040 feet per second (fps). Based on comparison of the calculated Vs100 values with ASCE 7-16 Table 20.3-1, the site is considered Seismic Site Class C. 6.1 .2 Strong Ground Motion Based on our review of background information, data pertaining to the historical seismicity of the San Diego area are summarized in Table 3 below. This table presents historic earthquakes within a radius of approximately 62 miles (100 kilometers) of the site with a magnitude 6.0 or greater. Table 3 -Historic Earthquakes that Affected the Site D t M •t d (M) Approximate Epicentral Distance a e agm u e Miles (Kilometers) November 22, 1800 6.3 35.1 (56.4) October 23, 1894 6.1 35.7 (57.4) May 15, 1910 6.0 39.6 (63.7) May 27, 1862 6.2 41.2 (66.3) April 21 , 1918 6.8 45.0 (72.4) December 25, 1899 6.7 48.2 (77.6) March 11 , 1933 6.4 57.5 (92.5) February 9, 1890 6.8 58.6 (94.4) July 23, 1923 6.2 59.6 (95.9) May 28, 1892 6.5 61 .8 (99.4) The 2019 California Building Code (CBC) specifies that the Risk-Targeted, Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) ground motion response accelerations be used to evaluate seismic loads for design of new buildings and other structures. We obtained the site amplification factors and spectral acceleration values for 5 percent damping in accordance with Section 11.4 of ASCE 7-16, using a web-based seismic design tool (SEAOC/OSHPD, 2020). A site-specific ground motion hazard analysis was performed for the project site, in accordance with ASCE 7-16. The site-specific ground motion hazard analysis consisted of the review of available seismologic information for nearby faults and performance of probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) and deterministic seismic hazard analysis (DSHA) to develop acceleration response spectrum (ARS) curves corresponding to the MCER for 5 percent damping. Prior to the site-specific ground motion hazard analysis, we Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 8 obtained the mapped seismic ground motion values and developed the general MCER response spectrum for 5 percent damping in accordance with Section 11 .4 of ASCE 7-16. Based on the results of our ReMi survey, the average shear wave velocity of the upper 100 feet of soil is calculated as 2,040 feet per second (620 meters per second). The depths to Vs = 1,000 m/s and Vs = 2,500 mis were assumed to be 40 meters and 210 meters, respectively (Southern California Earthquake Center [SCEC] Harvard Community Velocity Model Version 11.9.0 Basin Depth). These values were calculated using the Open Seismic Hazard Analysis (OpenSHA} software developed by USGS (USGS, 2020b). The 2014 next generation attenuation (NGA) West-2 relationships were used to evaluate the site-specific ground motions. The NGA relationships that we used for developing the probabilistic and deterministic response spectra are by Chiou and Youngs (2014), Campbell and Bozorgnia (2014), Boore, Stewart, Seyhan, and Atkinson (2014), and Abrahamson, Silva, and Kamai (2014). The OpenSHA software developed by USGS (USGS, 2020b) was used for performing the PSHA. The Calculation of Weighted Average 2014 NGA Models spreadsheet by the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center was used for performing the OSHA (Seyhan, 2014). The PSHA was performed for earthquake hazards having a 2 percent chance of being exceeded in 50 years multiplied by the risk coefficients per ASCE 7-16. The maximum rotated components of ground motions were considered in PSHA with 5 percent damping. For the OSHA, we analyzed accelerations from characteristic earthquakes on active faults within the region using the hazard curves and deaggregation plots from the USGS Unified Hazard Tool application (USGS, 2020a) and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) ARS (Caltrans, 2020) seismic design tool (web-based). A magnitude 7.0 event on the Rose Canyon fault with a rupture distance of 12.3 kilometers from the site was evaluated to be the controlling earthquake. Hence, the deterministic seismic hazard analysis was performed for the site using this event and corrections were made to the spectral accelerations for the 84th percentile of the maximum rotated component of ground motion with 5 percent damping. The site-specific MCER response spectrum was taken as the lesser of the spectral response acceleration at any period from the PSHA and OSHA, and the site-specific general response spectrum was calculated by taking two-thirds of the MCER response spectrum with some conditions in accordance with Section 21 .3 of ASCE 7-16. Figure 6 presents the site-specific MCER response spectrum and the site-specific design response spectrum. The general mapped design response spectrum calculated in accordance with Ninyo & Moore I Cartsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Cartsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 9 Section 11.4 of ASCE 7-16 is also presented on Figure 6 for comparison. The site-specific mapped maximum considered earthquake geometric mean (MCEG) peak ground acceleration, PGAM, was calculated as 0.45g. Appendix D presents our ground motion calculations. The site-specific Maximum Considered Earthquake Geometric Mean (MCEG) peak ground acceleration (PGAM) was calculated as 0.452g. 6.1.3 Surface Ground Rupture Based on our review of the referenced literature and our site reconnaissance, active faults are not known to cross the project vicinity. Therefore, the potential for ground surface rupture due to faulting at the site is considered low. However, lurching or cracking of the ground surface as a result of nearby seismic events is possible. 6.1.4 Liquefaction and Seismically Induced Settlement Liquefaction of cohesionless soils can be caused by strong vibratory motion due to earthquakes. Research and historical data indicate that loose granular soils and non-plastic silts that are saturated by a relatively shallow ground water table are susceptible to liquefaction. Based on the relatively dense nature of the encountered subsurface materials and the anticipated depth to groundwater, liquefaction and seismically induced settlement are not design considerations. 6.2 Flooding Based on review of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Mapping Information Platform website (2020), the site is mapped as being within "Area of Minimal Flood Hazard - Zone X", which includes areas assigned to be outside of the 500-year flood zone. The site is also not located within a mapped dam inundation area (CDWR, 2020). Based on this review and our reconnaissance, the potential for significant flooding and dam inundation at the site are not design considerations. 6.3 Tsunamis Tsunamis are long wavelength seismic sea waves (long compared to the ocean depth) generated by sudden movements of the ocean bottom during submarine earthquakes, landslides, or volcanic activity. Seiches are similar oscillating waves on inland or enclosed bodies of water. Based on the location and elevation of the site, the potential for a tsunami or seiche to affect the site is not a design consideration. Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 1 O 6.4 Landsliding and Slope Stability Landslides are not mapped at the site (Kennedy and Tan, 2007; Tan and Giffen, 1995) and our subsurface exploration did not indicate landslide-related features as underlying the project site. However, due to the proximity of the structure to the slope on the southeast side, we have performed a slope stability analysis to evaluate the long-term global stability of the slope. A two- dimensional stability analysis program, SLOPE/W (GeoStudio, 2020), was used for this purpose. The slope stability analysis was performed along cross-section A-A'. A horizontal acceleration coefficient of 0.11g was used to evaluate the pseudo-static stability, in accordance with the guidelines presented in CGS Special Publication 117A (CGS, 2008). The design factors of safety under static and pseudo-static loading conditions were greater than 1.5 and 1.15, respectively, in accordance with CGS Special Publication 117 A. The global slope stability analyses are presented in Appendix D. Accordingly, it is our opinion that slope instability is not a design consideration for this project. 7 CONCLUSIONS Based on our background review, subsurface and geotechnical laboratory evaluation, the following conclusions were made: • The site is underlain by fill soils and materials of the Lusardi Formation. The fill materials and Lusardi Formation contained gravel and cobbles. Possible boulders are also present in the Lusardi Formation. • The onsite materials are generally considered suitable for reuse provided that they are processed in accordance with the recommendations herein. The contractor should be prepared to remove/screen oversize materials and moisture condition the materials prior to reuse as engineered fill. • Excavations within the fill materials are generally considered feasible with heavy-duty earthmoving equipment in good working order. However, the contractor should anticipate encountering gravel and cobbles which may require heavy ripping and additional efforts. • Drilling refusal was encountered in borings B-1 and B-3 within materials of the Lusardi Formation. Difficult drilling and/or excavating should be anticipated within the Lusardi Formation due to the presence of cobbles and boulders, and the potential for strongly cemented zones and/or concretions. Such conditions may require the use of heavy ripping, rock breaking, and/or core barrels. The contractor should be prepared for these conditions. • Groundwater was not encountered during our subsurface exploration. However, seepage and/or perched conditions should be anticipated. • The site is not located within a State of California Earthquake Fault Zone (formerly Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone). Based on our review of published geologic maps and aerial photographs, no known active or potentially active faults underlie the site. The potential for surface fault rupture at the site is considered to be low. Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 11 8 RECOMMENDATIONS Based on our understanding of the project, the following recommendations are provided for the seismic retrofit at the site. The proposed site improvements should be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the applicable governing agencies. 8.1 Earthwork Earthwork at the site should be performed in accordance with the requirements of applicable governing agencies, and the recommendations presented in the following sections. Ninyo & Moore should be contacted for questions regarding the recommendations or guidelines presented herein. 8.1.1 Pre-Construction Conference We recommend that a pre-construction conference be held. The owner and/or their representative, the governing agencies' representatives, the civil engineer, Ninyo & Moore, and the contractor should be in attendance to discuss the work plan, project schedule, and project requirements. 8.1.2 Excavation Characteristics The results of our subsurface exploration indicate that the site is underlain by a thin layer of fill material that is in turn underlain by Lusardi Formation. The fill should be generally excavatable with heavy-duty earth moving equipment in good working condition. However, zones containing gravel, cobbles, and boulders may be encountered and additional efforts including heavy ripping should be anticipated. Drilling refusal was encountered in borings B-1 and B-3 within materials of the Lusardi Formation. Excavations extending into materials of the Lusardi Formation will encounter very difficult excavation conditions, and the contractor should be prepared to utilize heavy ripping, rock breaking, and coring for drilling operations. Drilling of holes within the Lusardi Formation can also be expected to be difficult and the use of specialized equipment may be needed to advance to design depths, such methods may include core barrels or the drilling of pilot holes. Excavations (including utility trenches) extending into portions of the fill and Lusardi Formation will generate oversize material and additional processing and handling of these materials, including screening or rock picking should be anticipated. Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 12 8.1.3 Temporary Excavations For temporary excavations, we recommend that the following Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) soil classifications be used: Fill Lusardi Formation Type C Type B Upon making the excavations, the soil classifications and excavation performance should be evaluated in the field by the geotechnical consultant in accordance with the OSHA regulations. Temporary excavations should be constructed in accordance with OSHA recommendations. For trenches or other excavations, OSHA requirements regarding personnel safety should be met using appropriate shoring (including trench boxes) or by laying back the slopes to no steeper than 1.5: 1 (horizontal to vertical) in fill and 1: 1 for materials of the Lusardi Formation. Temporary excavations that encounter seepage may be shored or stabilized by placing sandbags or gravel along the base of the seepage zone. Excavations encountering seepage should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. On-site safety of personnel is the responsibility of the contractor. 8.1.4 Materials for Fill In general, the existing onsite materials are considered suitable for reuse as fill , provided that the oversize materials (i.e., materials with dimensions in excess of those outlined herein) are removed from the soil mass prior to reuse. Fill material should be free of trash, debris or other deleterious materials. Additional processing and handling of materials including screening and/or rock picking should be anticipated. Engineered fill soils should possess an organic content of less than approximately 3 percent by volume (or 1 percent by weight). In general, engineered fill material should not contain rocks or lumps over approximately 3 inches in diameter, and not more than approximately 30 percent larger than ¾ inch. Imported fill material, if used, should generally be granular soils with a low expansion potential (i.e., an expansion index [El] of 50 or less evaluated in accordance ASTM D 4829). Import fill material should not contain rocks or lumps over approximately 3 inches in diameter, and not more than approximately 30 percent larger than ¾ inch. Import material should also be non-corrosive in accordance with the California amended (Caltrans, 2019) MSHTO (2017) corrosion criteria. Non-corrosive soils are soils that possess an electrical resistivity more than 1,100 ohm-centimeter (ohm-cm), a chloride content less than Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 13 500 parts per million (ppm), less than 0.15 percent sulfates, and a pH more than 5.5. Ninyo & Moore should evaluate materials for use as fill prior to filling or importing. 8.1.5 Compacted Fill Prior to placement of compacted fill the contractor should request an evaluation of the exposed ground surface by Ninyo & Moore. Unless otherwise recommended, the exposed ground surface should then be scarified to a depth of approximately 8 inches and watered or dried, as needed, to achieve generally consistent moisture contents at or slightly above the laboratory optimum. The scarified materials should then be compacted to 90 percent relative compaction in accordance with ASTM D 1557. The evaluation of compaction by the geotechnical consultant should not be considered to preclude any requirements for observation or approval by governing agencies. It is the contractor's responsibility to notify the geotechnical consultant and the appropriate governing agency when project areas are ready for observation, and to provide reasonable time for that review. Fill materials should be moisture conditioned to generally at or slightly above the laboratory optimum moisture content prior to placement. The optimum moisture content will vary with material type and other factors. Moisture conditioning of fill soils should be generally consistent within the soil mass. Prior to placement of additional compacted fill material following a delay in the grading operations, the exposed surface of previously compacted fill should be prepared to receive fill. Preparation may include scarification, moisture conditioning, and recompaction. Compacted fill should be placed in horizontal lifts of approximately 8 inches in loose thickness. Prior to compaction, each lift should be watered or dried as needed to achieve generally above at or slightly above optimum moisture content, mixed, and then compacted by mechanical methods to a relative compaction of 90 percent as evaluated by ASTM D 1557. The upper 12 inches of subgrade for areas that will be subject to vehicle loading should be compacted by mechanical methods to 95 percent as evaluated by ASTM D 1557. Successive lifts should be treated in a like manner until the desired finished grades are achieved. 8.1 .6 Pipe Bedding and Modulus of Soil Reaction (E') We recommend that new pipelines, where constructed in an open excavation, be supported on 6 or more inches of granular bedding material. Granular pipe bedding should be provided to distribute vertical loads around the pipe. Bedding material and compaction Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 14 requirements should be in accordance with this report. Pipe bedding typically consists of graded aggregate with a coefficient of uniformity of three or greater. The modulus of soil reaction (E') is used to characterize the stiffness of soil backfill placed at the sides of buried flexible pipes for the purpose of evaluating deflection caused by the weight of the backfill over the pipe (Hartley and Duncan, 1987). A soil reaction modulus of 1,500 pounds per square inch (psi) may be used for an excavation depth of up to approximately 5 feet when backfilled with granular soil compacted to a relative compaction of 90 percent as evaluated by the ASTM D 1557. A soil reaction modulus of 2,000 psi may be used for trenches deeper than 5 feet. 8.1.7 Pipe Zone Backfill The pipe zone backfill should from the top of the pipe bedding material and extend to 1 foot or more above the top of the pipe in accordance with the recent edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction ("Greenbook"). Pipe zone backfill should have a Sand Equivalent (SE) of 30 or greater, and be placed around the sides and top of the pipe. Special care should be taken not to allow voids beneath and around the pipe. Compaction of the pipe zone backfill should proceed up both sides of the pipe. It has been our experience that the voids within a crushed rock material are sufficiently large to allow fines to migrate into the voids, thereby creating the potential for sinkholes and depressions to develop at the ground surface. If open-graded gravel is utilized as pipe zone backfill, this material should be separated from the adjacent trench sidewalls and overlying trench backfill with a geosynthetic filter fabric. 8.1.8 Utility Trench Zone Backfill Trench zone backfill material should be generally free of trash, debris, roots, vegetation, or deleterious materials. Trench zone backfill should generally be free of rocks or hard lumps of material in excess of 3 inches in diameter. Rocks or hard lumps larger than about 3 inches in diameter should be broken into smaller pieces or should be removed from the site. On-site trench excavations may generate cobbles larger than 3 inches in diameter. Oversize materials should be separated from material to be used as trench backfill. Moisture conditioning (including drying and/or mixing) of existing on-site materials is anticipated if reused as trench backfill. As noted earlier, imported fill material should generally be granular soils with a very low to low expansion potential (i.e., an expansion index [El] of 50 or less). Imported fill should also Nlnyo & Moore I Car1sbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 15 be non-corrosive in accordance with the California amended (Caltrans, 2019) AASHTO (2017) corrosion criteria. To reduce the potential of importing contaminated materials to the site, prior to delivery, soil materials obtained from off-site sources should be sampled and tested in accordance with standard practice (Department of Toxic Substances Control [DTSC], 2001 ). Soils that exhibit a known risk to human health, the environment, or both, should not be imported to the site. Materials for use as fill should be evaluated by Ninyo & Moore's representative prior to filling or importing. 8.2 Seismic Design Considerations The following sections provide seismic design parameters for new and existing structures. 8.2.1 Design of New Structures Design of new structures should be performed in accordance with the requirements of governing jurisdictions and applicable building codes. Table 4 presents the site-specific spectral response acceleration parameters in accordance with the CBC (2019) guidelines. Table 4-2019 California Building Code Seismic Design Criteria .. Site Class Site Amplification Factor, Fa Site Amplification Factor, Fv • • Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-second Period, Ss Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 1.0-second Period, S1 Site-Specific Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-second Period, SMs Site-Specific Spectral Response Acceleration at 1.0-second Period, SM1 Site-Specific Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-second Period, Sos Site-Specific Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 1.0-second Period, So1 Site Specific Mapped Maximum Considered Earthquake Geometric Mean (MCEG) Peak Ground Acceleration, PGAM 8.2.2 Retrofit of Existing Structures Value C 1.200 1.500 0.947g 0.347g 0.952g 0.416g 0.635g 0.278g 0.452g For the proposed seismic retrofit of the existing Safety Center building, we performed an evaluation of site-specific seismic ground motions for the project in general accordance with Section 2.4.2 of ASCE 41-17. Accordingly, our seismic evaluation included development of 5 percent damped site-specific target response spectra for the BSE-2N (MCER), BSE-1 N (two thirds of BSE-2N), BSE-2E (5 percenU50-year probability of exceedance), and BSE-1 E (20 percenU50-year probability of exceedance) seismic hazard levels. Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 16 The BSE-2N seismic hazard level is consistent with the MCER ground motion from ASCE 7-16 and the BSE-1N seismic hazard level is two-thirds of the BSE-2N seismic hazard level. In order to develop the response spectra for the BSE-2E seismic hazard level, the smaller of the probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for earthquake hazards having a 5 percent probability of being exceeded in 50 years and the BSE-2N Seismic Hazard Level was selected. In order to develop the response spectra for the BSE-1 E seismic hazard level, the smaller of the probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for earthquake hazards having a 20 percent probability of being exceeded in 50 years and the BSE-1 N Seismic Hazard Level was selected. The response spectra were developed considering an effective viscous damping ratio of 5 percent of critical damping and rotating the maximum components of the ground motions. The 2014 NGA West-2 relationships described previously were used to evaluate the site-specific ground motions and the OpenSHA software was used for performing the OSHA. The target response spectra for the BSE-2E and BSE-1E seismic hazard levels were not taken as less than 80 percent of the spectral amplitudes of the general response spectra in accordance with ASCE 41-17, Section 2.4.1. The general and site-specific spectral response acceleration parameters for the BSE-2N, BSE-1N, BSE-2E, and BSE-1 E seismic hazard levels are presented in Tables 5 through 8 below and the response spectra are presented in Figure 7. Table 5-ASCE 41-17 Seismic Desi n Criteria BSE-2N Hazard .. Site Class Site Coefficient, Fa Site Coefficient, Fv I • .. .. . . Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-second Period, Ss Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 1.0-second Period, S1 Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-second Period Adjusted for Site Class, Sxs Spectral Response Acceleration at 1.0-second Period Adjusted for Site Class, Sx1 Site-Specific Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-second Period, Sxs Site-Specific Spectral Response Acceleration at 1.0-second Period, Sx1 Table 6-ASCE 41-17 Seismic Design Criteria BSE-1 N Hazard I • I I Site Class Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-second Period Adjusted for Site Class, Sxs Spectral Response Acceleration at 1.0-second Period Adjusted for Site Class, Sx1 Site-Specific Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-second Period, Sxs Site-Specific Spectral Response Acceleration at 1.0-second Period, Sx1 C 1.200 1.500 0.947g 0.347g 1.136 g 0.521 g 0.952 g 0.416 g C 0.758 g 0.347 g 0.635 g 0.278 g Ninyo & Moore I Car1sbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Car1sbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 17 Table 7 -ASCE 41-17 Seismic Design Criteria BSE-2E Hazard ' Site Coefficients and Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters Site Class Site Coefficient, Fa Site Coefficient, Fv Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-second Period, Ss Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 1.0-second Period, S1 Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-second Period Adjusted for Site Class, Sxs Spectral Response Acceleration at 1.0-second Period Adjusted for Site Class, Sx1 Site-Specific Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-second Period, Sxs Site-Specific Spectral Response Acceleration at 1.0-second Period, Sx1 Table 8 -ASCE 41-17 Seismic Design Criteria BSE-1 E Hazard Site Coefficients and Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters Site Class Site Coefficient, Fa Site Coefficient, Fv Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-second Period, Ss Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 1.0-second Period, S1 Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-second Period Adjusted for Site Class, Sxs Spectral Response Acceleration at 1.0-second Period Adjusted for Site Class, Sx1 Site-Specific Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-second Period, Sxs Site-Specific Spectral Response Acceleration at 1.0-second Period, Sx1 8.3 Foundations Values C 1.214 1.500 0.715g 0.260 g 0.868 g 0.390 g 0.750 g 0.312 g Values C 1.300 1.500 0.348 g 0.129 g 0.452 g 0.194 g 0.394 g 0.155 g Based on our understanding of the project and the encountered subsurface conditions, we provide the following recommendations for assessment of existing shallow foundations. 8.3.1 Shallow Foundations -Bearing Capacity Shallow, spread, or continuous footings supported on competent formational materials at that are 1-foot wide and embedded a depth of 1-foot may be considered to have a net allowable bearing capacity of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf). The allowable bearing capacity may be increased by 250 psf for each additional foot of foundation depth or width up to a value of 4,000 psf. These allowable bearing capacities may be increased by one- third when considering loads of short duration such as wind or seismic forces. 8.3.2 Shallow Foundations -Lateral Resistance For resistance of footings to lateral loads, supported on competent formational material, we recommend an allowable passive pressure of 350 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) be used with a maximum value of up to 3,500 psf. This value assumes that the ground is horizontal for a distance of 10 feet, or three times the height generating the passive pressure, whichever is greater. For frictional resistance to lateral loads, we recommend a coefficient of friction of 0.4 be used between formational material and concrete. The allowable lateral resistance Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 18 can be taken as the sum of the frictional resistance and passive resistance. The passive resistance may be increased by one-third when considering loads of short duration such as wind or seismic forces. We recommend that the upper 1 foot of soil not protected by pavement or a concrete slab be neglected when calculating passive resistance. 8.3.3 Shallow Foundations -Foundation Stiffness The dynamic stiffness or the spring constant of a structural foundation depends on the nature and deformability of the supporting soils, the geometry and inertia of the foundation and superstructure, and the nature of the dynamic excitation. Dynamic stiffness values are useful in the evaluation of soil-structure interaction of embedded structures under dynamic loads. Since soil deformation and structural response are different in vertical and lateral directions under a given load cycle, the stiffness values are also different in these directions. The depth and dimension of the footings have not been confirmed at this time. The dynamic vertical (Kzt) and lateral (Kxt and Kyt) stiffness values in the vertical (i.e., z) and two horizontal directions (i.e., x and y, respectively) are, therefore, presented below as functions of depth, width, length, and shear modulus. Kz, = Kzs[1 + 0.05{(0/8) + 1.3(O/L)}].[1 + 0.2{(0/8) + (D/L)}0•7], (pounds per foot) Kxt = Kxs[1 + 0.15(0/8)°-5].[1 + 0.52{O2(28 + 2L)/(8L 2)}0•4], (pounds per foot) Kyt = Kys[1 + 0.15(0/8)°-5].[1 + 0.52{O2(28 + 2L)/(8L 2)}°-4], (pounds per foot) Where, Kzs = 1.1GL + 2.4GL0•258°·75, (pounds per foot) Kxs = 1.0GL + 0.3G8 + 1.5GL0•158°·85, (pounds per foot) Kys = 1.2GL + 1.5GL0•158°·85, (pounds per foot) D = depth of footing below the finish grade (feet) 2B = width of footing (feet) 2L = length of footing (feet) G = low-strain shear modulus of foundation soils (psf) Based on an estimated an average shear wave velocity of 2,040 feet per second (fps) for the site, we estimate a low-strain shear modulus, G, of 7,500,000 psf or 7,500 kips per square foot (ksf) for the foundation soils, using a Factor of Safety of 2. It should be noted that the x-direction considered in developing the stiffness equations corresponds to the long direction (i.e., parallel to the longer side of the footing), the y-direction corresponds to the short direction (i.e., parallel to the shorter side of the footing), and the z-direction corresponds to the vertical direction (i.e., perpendicular to the plane of the footing bottom surface). Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 19 8.4 Corrosivity Laboratory testing was performed on a representative sample of the on-site earth materials to evaluate pH and electrical resistivity, as well as chloride and sulfate contents. The pH and electrical resistivity tests were performed in accordance with California Test {CT) 643 and the sulfate and chloride content tests were performed in accordance with CT 417 and CT 422, respectively. These laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B. The results of the corrosivity testing for this and our previous evaluation (Ninyo & Moore, 2019) indicated electrical resistivities ranging from 950 to 2,200 ohm-cm, soil pH values ranging from 6.5 to 7.0, chloride contents ranging from 35 to 410 parts per million (ppm), and sulfate contents ranging from 0.004 to 0.021 percent (i.e., 40 to 210 ppm). Based on the California amended (Caltrans, 2019) AASHTO (2017) corrosion criteria, a project site is classified as corrosive if one or more of the following conditions exist for the representative soil samples retrieved from the site: chloride concentration of 500 ppm or greater, soluble sulfate concentration of 1,500 ppm or greater, an electrical resistivity of 1,100 ohm-cm or less, and/or a pH 5.5 or less. Based on the results of the corrosivity testing at the site, the site soils are considered to be corrosive. 8.5 Concrete Concrete in contact with soil or water that contains high concentrations of water-soluble sulfates can be subject to premature chemical and/or physical deterioration. As stated previously, the soil samples tested indicated water-soluble sulfate contents of 0.004 to 0.021 percent by weight (i.e., about 40 to 210 ppm). Based on the American Concrete Institute {ACI) 318 criteria, the site soils would correspond to exposure class SO. For this exposure class, ACI 318 recommends that normal weight concrete in contact with soil possess a compressive strength of 2,500 pounds per square inch (psi) or more. Furthermore, due to the potential for variability of site soils, we also recommend that normal weight concrete in contact with soil use Type II, IIN, or V cement. 9 PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on analysis of observed conditions in widely spaced exploratory excavations. If conditions are found to vary from those described in this report, Ninyo & Moore should be notified, and additional recommendations will be provided upon request. Ninyo & Moore should review the final project drawings and specifications prior to the commencement of construction. Ninyo & Moore should perform the needed observation and testing services during construction operations. Ninyo & Moore I Cartsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Cartsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 20 The recommendations provided in this report are based on the assumption that Ninyo & Moore will provide geotechnical observation and testing services during construction. In the event that it is decided not to utilize the services of Ninyo & Moore during construction, we request that the selected consultant provide the client with a letter (with a copy to Ninyo & Moore) indicating that they fully understand Ninyo & Moore's recommendations, and that they are in full agreement with the design parameters and recommendations contained in this report. Construction of proposed improvements should be performed by qualified subcontractors utilizing appropriate techniques and construction materials. 10 LIMITATIONS The field evaluation, laboratory testing, and geotechnical analyses presented in this geotechnical report have been conducted in general accordance with current practice and the standard of care exercised by geotechnical consultants performing similar tasks in the project area. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made regarding the conclusions, recommendations, and opinions presented in this report. There is no evaluation detailed enough to reveal every subsurface condition. Variations may exist and conditions not observed or described in this report may be encountered during construction. Uncertainties relative to subsurface conditions can be reduced through additional subsurface exploration. Additional subsurface evaluation will be performed upon request. This document is intended to be used only in its entirety. No portion of the document, by itself, is designed to completely represent any aspect of the project described herein. Ninyo & Moore should be contacted if the reader requires additional information or has questions regarding the content, interpretations presented, or completeness of this document. This report is intended for design purposes only. It does not provide sufficient data to prepare an accurate bid by contractors. It is suggested that the bidders and their geotechnical consultant perform an independent evaluation of the subsurface conditions in the project areas. The independent evaluations may include, but not be limited to, review of other geotechnical reports prepared for the adjacent areas, site reconnaissance, and additional exploration and laboratory testing. Our conclusions, recommendations, and opinions are based on an analysis of the observed site conditions. If geotechnical conditions different from those described in this report are encountered, our office should be notified, and additional recommendations, if warranted, will be provided upon request. It should be understood that the conditions of a site could change with time as a result of natural processes or the activities of man at the subject site or nearby sites. Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 21 In addition, changes to the applicable laws, regulations, codes, and standards of practice may occur due to government action or the broadening of knowledge. The findings of this report may, therefore, be invalidated over time, in part or in whole, by changes over which Ninyo & Moore has no control. This report is intended exclusively for use by the client. Any use or reuse of the findings, conclusions, and/or recommendations of this report by parties other than the client is undertaken at said parties' sole risk. Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 22 11 REFERENCES Abrahamson, N.A., Silva, W.J. and Kamai , R., 2014, Summary of the ASK14 Ground Motion Relation for Active Crustal Regions, Earthquake Spectra: Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 1025-1055, dated August. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 2017, AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 8th Edition : dated September. American Concrete Institute (ACI), 2019, ACI 318 Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2017a, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE 7-16. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2017b, Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings, ASCE Standard 41-17. Boore, D.M., Stewart, J.P., Seyhan, E., and Atkinson, G.M., 2014, NGA-West2 Equations for Predicting PGA, PGV, and 5% Damped PSA for Shallow Crustal Earthquakes, Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 1057-1085, dated August. Building News, 2018, "Greenbook," Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction: BNI Publications. California Building Standards Commission, 2019, California Building Code (CBC), Title 24, Part 2, Volumes 1 and 2. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2019, California Amendments to the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (2017 Eighth Edition): dated April. California Department of Transportation, 2020, ARS Online Web Tool, version 2.3.09, http:// http://dap3.dot.ca.gov/ARS _ Online/. California Department of Water Resources (CDWR), 2020, Division of Safety of Dams (DSOD), California Dam Breach Inundation Maps, https://fmds.water.ca.gov/maps/damim/: accessed in July. California Geological Survey (CGS), 2008, Special Publication 117 A: Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California. Campbell, K.W., and Bozorgnia, Y., 2014, NGA-West Ground Motion Model for the Average Horizontal Components of PGA, PGV, and 5% Damped Linear Acceleration Response Spectra, Earthquake Spectra Volume 30, Issue 3, pp. 1087-1115, dated August. Chiou, B. S.-J., and Youngs, R.R., 2014, Update of the Chiou and Youngs NGA Mod~I for the Average Horizontal Component of Peak Ground Motion and Response Spectra, Earthquake Spectra, August 2014, Vol. 30, No. 3, dated August. GeoStudio, 2020, SLOPE/W, Version 10.2.2.20559. Geotracker website, 2020, www.geotracker.waterboards,ca.gov: accessed in June. Google Earth, 2020, http://earth.google.com: accessed June. Harden, D.R., 2004, California Geology-2nd ed.: Prentice Hall, Inc. Ninyo & Moore I Car1sbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Car1sbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 23 Hart, E.W., and Bryant, W.A., 2007, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with Index to Earthquake Fault Zones Maps: California Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey, Special Publication 42, with Supplement 1 added in 2012, Supplement 2 added in 2014, Supplement 3 added in 2015, and Supplement 4 added in 2016. Hartley, J.D., and Duncan, J.M., 1987, E' and Its Variation With Depth: American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), Journal of Transportation Engineering , Vol. 113, No. 5: dated September. Historic Aerials website, 2020, www.historicaerials.com: accessed in June. Jennings, C.W., 2010, Fault Activity Map of California: California Geological Survey, California Geologic Data Map Series, Map No. 6, Scale 1: 750,000. Kennedy, M.P., and Tan , S.S., 2007, Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30' x 60' Quadrangle, California, Scale 1: 100,000. Ninyo & Moore, In-House Proprietary Information. Ninyo & Moore, 2019, Geotechnical Evaluation , Safety Center Renovation, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 108715003: dated August 16. Ninyo & Moore, 2020, Proposal for Geotechnical and Environmental Consulting Services, Safety Center Renovation and Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, San Diego, California, Project No. 108715000: dated April 24. Norris, R. M. and Webb, R. W., 1990, Geology of California, Second Edition: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Runhau Associates, 1985, City of Carlsbad Public Safety & Service Center, Carlsbad, California, Bid Set. Seyhan, E, 2014, Weighted Average 2014 NGA West-2 GMPE, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center. Structural Engineering Association of California (SEAOC), Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD), 2020, U.S. Seismic Design Maps website, https://seismicmaps.org/: accessed in July. Tan, S.S. and Giffen, D.G., 1995, Landslide Hazards in the Northern Part of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, California, DMG Open-File Report 95-04, Scale 1 :24,000. Testing Engineers, 1987, Geotechnical Investigation, Carlsbad Safety Center, Phase Ill, Carlsbad, California: dated February 17. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 1953, Aerial Photograph, Flight AXN-8M, Numbers -70, and -71 , Flown April 14, Scale 1 :20,000. United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, 1989, Engineering Geology Field Manual. United States Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2020, FEMA Mapping Information Platform, World Wide Web, https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/wps/portal/: accessed in July. United States Geological Survey (USGS), 1948, San Luis Rey Quadrangle, 7.5-Minute Series Topographic Map, Scale 1 :24,000. Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 24 United States Geological Survey (USGS), 1997, San Luis Rey Quadrangle, 7.5-Minute Series Topographic Map, Scale 1 :24,000. United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2018, San Luis Rey Quadrangle, 7.5-Minute Series Topographic Map, Scale 1 :24,000. United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2020a, National Seismic Hazard Maps -Fault Parameters, World Wide Web, http://earthquake.usgs.gov/cfusion/hazfaults 2008 search/query main.cfm/. United States Geological Survey and Southern California Earthquake Center, 2020b, Open Seismic Hazard Analysis, http://www.opensha.org/. United States Geological Survey, 2020c, Unified Hazard Tool; https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/. Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 25 Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 .. G•otechn1c1I & Environm•ntal Sc1•ncas Consult•nt1 ,.1111• SITE c'o .. u ""' ,.,.,,o FaraCIIV A ~ ... (e.,. ,i; I" j, {f;, MAP INDEX San Diego County _ili FEET SOURCE ESRI WORLD TOflO 2020 -W-a ~ ~~~'liiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii1iiii,s~oo~~~~~~3~,ooo FIGURE 1 SITE LOCATION CARLSBAD SAFETY CENTER SEISMIC RETROFIT 2560 ORION WAY, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 108715011 I 8/20 ('. • ~ -· o\ B-1 -Z. TD=~2.9 ~· ~, I -~ • ( /. l/ \.... ./ ,.. / NM-2 TD=18.8 ~ 8 -3 '·v• BORING (NINYO & MOORE, 2020) TD=TOTAL DEPTH IN FEET TD=12.0 1'h_ BORING (NINYO & MOORE, 2019) W TD=TOTAL DEPTH IN FEET t----t ReMi SURVEY LINE SITE BOUNDARY A A' l__J CROSS SECTION TE l K (, NS AND LOCATIONS ARE A>'P>!OXIMA PACIF CARC Gtolechmcal & Environmonlal Sc11ncts Consullan11 B-2 TD=15.9 -$l • B-3 1'h_ / T0=12.0 o/• • -2 / 18.8 ♦ ./ Su R1.,f S G (,( LI; EART '1 202~ FEET EXPLORATION LOCATIONS CARLSBAD SAFETY CENTER SEISMIC RETROFIT 2560 ORION WAY, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 108715011 I 8/20 CALIFORNIA □ , • ny ' Cou ' • ~-----....l -• . --;- San Bernardino County LEGEND _____________________ _ ~__::....;;._...:.:; ____ __,; ___ ..;.... __ :i,,.._ ___ ~ ~ 0:, CALIFORNIA FAULT ACTIVITY ---HISTORICALLY ACTIVE ---HOLOCENEACTIVE ___ LATE QUATERNARY (POTENTIALLY ACTIVE) ___ QUATERNARY (POTENTIALLY ACTIVE) ---STATE/COUNTY BOUNDARY ~ NO.,.E OIREC IONS, OlMLNSIONS ANO LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE M Geotechnlcal & Environmental Sciences Consultants SOURCE' US GEOLOGICAL SURVEY AND CALIFORNIAGt:OLOGICAl SURVEY 2006 QUATERNARY FAULT AND FOLD DATABASE FOR THE UNITED STA S MILES 30 60 FIGURE 3 FAULT LOCATIONS CARLSBAD SAFETY CENTER SEISMIC RETROFIT 2560 ORION WAY, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 105115011 I 8/20 0 .,., ARuvlal flood-p!OJn deposrts (late ~i -Young afftMal ~in depos.1ts i~ne and tale Pleistocene) Very old paraloc <lepc)&•ts ondtvided (moddle 10 earty Ple<S1000"") Sanuago Formation (middle Eocene) Pomt Loma Formation (UPl)ef Cretaceou5J Lusardi FormabO<l (Upper CretateOUs) Tonal ie, un<!Mded (mld-C,etaceouo) 70 F•un So,1(1 ...-nere IK,IC,U(■l&l'\t IOc;a1Ni ,;tnhecl -"_... ~ IOCated donld wher• ooooeaMd u • upltWowr blodl O • doWFTttvowr'I blodr; ,._,-ow ~ "u"1l»f ,na.eate dotllC'MOl"l~at9'1"dlooffdpi.,. !=:tfl«~ AN1 r,,,p f'A bfid5 Landaitdt • Arrows. noIC.;i1t8 poocil)illt d ntc:oon of mo\emttn1 Quened wnertl l!'"lti:stence IS QOe'lillOnllble FEET ~ NOTE DIRECTIONS DIMENSIONS AND LOCATION SARE APPROXIMATE I SOURCE KE to.NE DY MP TAN 2007 GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE OCEANSIDE 30X60-MINUTE QUADRANGLE CALIFORNIA 0 1,500 3,000 Geottchnical & Environmental Sciences Consultants FIGURE 4 GEOLOGY CARLSBAD SAFETY CENTER SEISMIC RETROFIT 2560 ORION WAY, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 10811so11 I 8120 A A' 600 600 B-1 (PROJECTED 70' SAFETY CENTER NORTHEASl) BUILDING NM-2 (PROJECTED 40' SOT l) :::; :::; 400 400 (/) (/) ::i: ::i: ,-.: ,-.: ID=14.5' ID=12.9' w w w w ID=18.8' ~ ~ z z 0 0 i== i== ~ <( > 200 200 w w ..J ..J w w Kl oL-------------------------------'-0 CD ~ i ~ (J) u ~ .... cc ~ LEGEND NM-2 BORING l TD=TOTAL DEPTH IN FEET ID=18.8' ~ LUSARDI FORMATION NOTE DIMENSIONS DIRECTIONS AND LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE "'i-"""'~~ Geotechnlcal & Environmental Sciences Consultants FEET 0 200 400 FIGURE 5 GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION A-A' CARLSBAD SAFETY CENTER SEISMIC RETROFIT 2560 ORION WAY, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA • -5011 I 8/20 C C SllE-SPECIFIC SllE-SPECIFIC SllE-SPECIFIC SllE-SPECIFIC PERIOD MCER RESPONSE DESIGN RESPONSE PERIOD MCER RESPONSE DESIGN RESPONSE (seconds) SPECTRUM SPECTRUM (seconds) SPECTRUM SPECTRUM Sa (g) Sa (g) Sa (g) Sa (g) 0.010 0.450 0.300 0.500 0.833 0.555 0.020 0.483 0.322 0.750 0.555 0.370 0.030 0.542 0.362 1.000 0.416 0.278 0.050 0.661 0.441 1.500 0.278 0.185 0.075 0.858 0.572 2.000 0.208 0.139 0.100 0.990 0.660 3.000 0.139 0.093 0.150 1.088 0.725 4.000 0.104 0.069 0.200 1.058 0.705 5.000 0.083 0.056 0.250 0.976 0.650 7.500 0.056 0.037 0.300 0.909 0.606 10.000 0.033 0.022 0.400 0.909 0.606 lsl2li = 0.635 !:! ls121 = 0.278 9 lsM~ = 0.952 !l lsM1 = 0.416 !l I P~= 0.452 !l I 1.5 I I --M•~•d o..ign MCE 111R•o,.. Sp•~ --St.Spedft: DH91 Reap<nse Sp«:tru,, ----• SI.Spectft: MC~ R ...,0,.. Spec nm § !'l ., 1.0 en , ' z· I ,, s I ' ~ I \ w \\ ..J w 0 0 < ..J i 0.5 ~ w Cl. ~ en ~--..... ----------------- 0.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PERIOD, T (seconds) NOTES: 1 The probabilistic ground motion spectral response accelerations are based on the risk-targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) ha\lng a 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years in the maximum direction using the Chiou & Youngs (2014), Campbell & Bozorgnia (2014), Boore et al. (2014), and Abrahamson et al. (2014) attenuation relationships and the risk coefficients. 2 The deterministic ground motion spectral response accelerations are for the 84th percentile of the geometric mean '8lues in the maximum direction using the Chiou & Youngs (2014), Campbell & Bozorgnia (2014), 6001'8 et al. (2014), and Abrahamson et al. (2014) attenuation relationships for deep soil sites considering a Mw 7.0 ewnt on the Rose Canyon fault zone located 12.3 kilometers from the site. It conforms with the lower bound limit per ASCE 7-16 Section 21.2.2. 3 The Site-Specific MCER Response Spectrum is the lesser of spectral ordinates of deterministic and probabilistic accelerations at each period per ASCE 7-16 Section 21.2.3. The Site-Specific Design Response Spectrum conforms with lower bound limit per ASCE 7-16 Section 21.3. 4 The Mapped Design MCERResponse Spectrum is computed from mapped spectral ordinates modified for Site Class C (wry dense soil and soft rock profile) per ASCE 7-16 Section 11.4. It is presented for the sake of comparison. •. "r' ' . 11:.. 01ot.echnlc1I & Envlronm■ntal Scl•noH Consuttanu Copy of ASCE 41-17 FIGURE 6 ASCE 7-16 RESPONSE SPECTRA CARLSBAD SAFETY CENTER SEISMC RETROFIT 2560 ORION WAY, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 1.50 r. 1.00 § \_ "' U) z· 0 \ ~ w \ 1 ...J w l) l) <( l '\ ...J ~ I-l) 0.50 w 0.. U) I ~ ) i l, "~ \ "-~ -~ '\ \' r'\. \ ~ ~ "6.. ' ..... ", " .. ::::: ..... - 0.00 0 Geotechnical & Environmental Sciences Consultants ...... --::--, ~ -....., - 2 3 4 5 PERIOD, T (seconds) 6 I I I I I I I -BSE-2N -BSE-1N -BSE-2E -ssE-1E 7 8 9 10 FIGURE 7 ASCE 41-17 SITE-SPECIFIC RESPONSE SPECTRA CARLSBAD SAFETY CENTER SEISMIC RETROFIT 2560 ORION WAY, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 10511so11 I 8120 APPENDIX A Current and Previous Boring Logs Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 APPENDIX A CURRENT AND PREVIOUS BORING LOGS Field Procedure for the Collection of Disturbed Samples Disturbed soil samples were obtained in the field using the following method. Bulk Samples Bulk samples of representative earth materials were obtained from the exploratory borings. The samples were bagged and transported to the laboratory for testing. The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Sampler Disturbed drive samples of earth materials were obtained by means of a Standard Penetration Test sampler. The sampler is composed of a split barrel with an external diameter of 2 inches and an unlined internal diameter of 1-3/8 inches. The sampler was driven into the ground 12 to 18 inches with a 140-pound hammer free-falling from a height of 30 inches in general accordance with ASTM D 1586. The blow counts were recorded for every 6 inches of penetration; the blow counts reported on the logs are those for the last 12 inches of penetration. Soil samples were observed and removed from the sampler, bagged, sealed and transported to the laboratory for testing. Field Procedure for the Collection of Relatively Undisturbed Samples Relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained in the field using the following method. The Modified Split-Barrel Drive Sampler The sampler, with an external diameter of 3 inches, was lined with 1-inch long, thin brass rings with inside diameters of approximately 2.4 inches. The sample barrel was driven into the ground with the weight of a hammer in general accordance with ASTM D 3550. The driving weight was permitted to fall freely. The approximate length of the fall, the weight of the hammer, and the number of blows per foot of driving are presented on the boring logs as an index to the relative resistance of the materials sampled. The samples were removed from the sample barrel in the brass rings, sealed, and transported to the laboratory for testing. Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 iil ...J a.. 'a; ~ ~ <( en ::c: I-0 -:l!: lii ::, > al ·c: 0 10 20 30 I-0 0 u. --en 3: 0 ...J al 50/5" 50/4" 33 50/5" 50/5" G:' ~ 0 z e:.. 0 e.., ~ . ~ ...J w 0 < en er:: al 0 • :::, ci5 -0 ~ u. . I-z -en en w >-en . 6 0 en en:::, ~ ~ >-er:: 0 0 DATE DRILLED 7/08/20 BORING NO. NM-1 GROUND ELEVATION 364' ± (MSL) SHEET OF METHOD OF DRILLING 6" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger (Pacific Drilling) DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto-Trip) DROP 30" SAMPLED BY BRH/ZH LOGGED BY BRH/ZH REVIEWED BY ZH DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION ASPHALT CONCRETE: roximatel 3.5 inches thick. GGREGATE BASE: rown moist medium dense oorl FILL: Yellowish brown, moist, medium dense, clayey medium to coarse SAND; trace cobbles. 2.5': Cobble. LUSARDI FORMATION: Yellowish brown, moist, strongly-cemented, cobble and boulder CONGLOMERATE; with , clayey sand matrix. @ 7': Seepage. @ 8': Boulder. @ 9': Possible boulder; difficult drilling. @ 12': Possible boulder; difficult drilling. ota ept = 4.5 eet. Groundwater not encountered. Seepage encountered at approximately 7 feet during drilling. Backfilled and patched with Aquaphalt shortly after drilling on 7/08/20. Note: Groundwater may rise to a level higher than that measured in borehole due to relatively slow rate of seepage in clay and several other factors as discussed in the report Please refer to the report for groundwater monitoring recommendations. The ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretatiom of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing construction bids and design documents. FIGURE A- CARLSBAD SAFETY CENTER SEISMIC RETROFI 2560 ORION WAY, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNI, w _, c.. ~ ~ <( I-(/) 0 ~ 0 LL I -(/) I-~ c.. w ,:,,t.c 0 0 -~ _, :::i ·c co coo 50/3" 10 50/3" 50/4" 50/4" 20 30 u:- ~ () e:. ~ ~ w 0:: :::> en I-z (/) w 6 0 ~ >-0:: 0 _, 0 co ~ >-(/) . •l I·= Ii::: =m :ii ~ I z 0 i= . <( (/) () . -0 LL • -(/) (/) . (/) :::> ~ () DATE DRILLED 7/08/20 BORING NO. NM-2 GROUND ELEVATION 364' ± (MSL) SHEET OF METHOD OF DRILLING 6" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger (Pacific Drilling) DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto-Trip) DROP 30" SAMPLED BY BRH/ZH LOGGED BY BRH/ZH REVIEWED BY ZH DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION ASPHALT CONCRETE: roximatel 3 inches thick. FILL: ellowish brown moist medium dense cla e medium to coarse SAND . LUSARDI FORMATION: Brown to yellowish brown, moist, moderately-to strongly-cemented, cobble and boulder CONGLOMERATE in a clayey sand matrix. @ 1.5': Possible boulder. @ 6': Possible boulder. @8': Yellowish brown. Possible boulder. ota ept = . eet. Groundwater not encountered. Backfilled and patched with Aquaphalt shortly after drilling on 7/08/20. ~ Groundwater, though not encountered at the time of drilling, may rise to a higher level due to seasonal variations in precipitation and several other factors as discussed in the report. The ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretatiom of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing construction bids and design documents. FIGURE A- CARLSBAD SAFETY CENTER SEISMIC RETROFI 2560 ORION WAY, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNI, Previous Boring Logs Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 w ..J a.. L2 :::E ~ (.) z ~ <( I-e::. 0 Cl) 0 ~ ~ . 0 ~ ..J ~ w 0 <( Cl) u. 0:: (.) . ---OJ I Cl) ::::i ci.i -(.) :::E u. . I-~ I-z -Cl) a.. Cl) w >-Cl) • LJ.J =!: 53 0 0 0 Cl) Cl) :::, 0 &l •i; ..J ~ (lJ :::E >-0 0:: (.) 0 SC 5 68/8" 9.9 109.3 10 50/3" 50/4" 15 DATE DRILLED 7/19/19 BORING NO . B-1 GROUND ELEVATION 370' ± (MSL) SHEET OF METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger (CME-95) (Baja Exploration) DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto-Trip) DROP 30" SAMPLED BY NMM LOGGED BY NMM REVIEWED BY CAT DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION ASPHALT CONCRETE: Approximately 3 inches thick over 8 inches base material. FILL: Brown, moist, medium dense, clayey fine to coarse SAND; few gravel; scattered cobbles. Cobbles; scattered zones of sandy clay. LUSARDI FORMATION: Yellowish brown to brown, moist, moderately cemented, silty fine-to medium-grained SANDSTONE. Weathered granitic rock/boulder. Grinding on rock. otal Depth = 2. eet. e usa Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled and capped with black-dyed concrete shortly after drilling on 7/19/19. Note: Groundwater, though not encountered at the time of drilling, may rise to a higher level due to seasonal variations in precipitation and several other factors as discussed in the report. The ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretatiom of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing construction bids and design documents. FIGURE A- SAFETY CENTER RENOVATIOI 2560 ORION WAY, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNI, w ...J a.. u:-~ -(.) z -5 ~ e:, 0 Q) Cl) ~ i= . ...J ~ 0 w ~ 0 c( Cl) u.. a:: al (.) . :r: U) ::, U) -(.) :E u.. . I-~ I-z -Cl) a.. Cl) w >-Cl) • .:it:. C: 0 0 0 Cl) Cl) ::, -~ ...J ~ ] ·c al ~ 1r: 0 (.) 0 5 50/5" 11 .5 117.6 10 50/5" 15 50/5" JVlngo& ,v\Oore DATE DRILLED 7/19/19 BORING NO. 8-2 GROUND ELEVATION 365' ± (MSL) SHEET 1 OF METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger (CME-95) (Baja Exploration) DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto-Trip) DROP 30" SAMPLED BY NMM LOGGED BY NMM REVIEWED BY CAT DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION ASPHALT CONCRETE: Approximately 3 inches thick over 9 inches base material. LUSARDI FORMATION: Brown and yellowish brown, moist, moderately to strongly cemented, silty fine-to medium grained SANDSTONE; trace gravel; scattered layers of brown sandy claystone. Yellowish brown; fine-grained. @ 13.5': Grinding on cobble. @ 15': Weathered granitic rock/boulder.; ota ept = . eet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled and capped with black-dyed concrete shortly after drilling on 7 /19/19. Note: Groundwater, though not encountered at the time of drilling, may rise to a higher level due to seasonal variations in precipitation and several other factors as discussed in the report. The ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretations of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing construction bids and design documents. FIGURE A- SAFETY CENTER RENOVATIOI 2560 ORION WAY, CARLSBAD, CALI FORNI, w ...J Q. U:-::iE (.) z -<( f-~ e:, 0 al en 0 ~ ~ . ~ 0 w ~ ...J < en LL 0:: 0 (.) . :r: en ::::, u5 al -(.) ::iE IL • f-s: f-z >--en Q. en w en . w -"c 0 0 0 en en ::::, Cl -(l) ...J ::s ~ ·E: al ::iE >-0 0:: (.) 0 50/3" 10 50/2" 15 DATE DRILLED 7/19/19 BORING NO. 8-3 GROUND ELEVATION 365' ± ~Msq SHEET OF 1 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger (CME-95) (Baja Exploration) DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto-Trip) DROP 30" SAMPLED BY NMM LOGGED BY NMM REVIEWED BY CAT DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION ASPHALT CONCRETE: Approximately 3 inches thick over 8 inches base material. LUSARDI FORMATION: Yellowish brown, moist, moderately cemented, silty fine-to coarse-grained SANDSTONE; few gravel; trace cobbles. Brown to yellowish brown, silty fine-to medium-grained; scattered cobbles; possible boulders. Grinding on rock from approximately 11 to 12 feet; granitic rock/boulder. ota ept = eet. Re usa Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled and capped with black-dyed concrete shortly after drilling on 7/19/19. Note: Groundwater, though not encountered at the time of drilling, may rise to a higher level due to seasonal variations in precipitation and several other factors as discussed in the report. The ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretations of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing construction bids and design documents. FIGURE A- SAFETY CENTER RENOVATIOI 2560 ORION WAY, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNI, APPENDIX B Current and Previous Laboratory Testing Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 APPENDIX B CURRENT AND PREVIOUS LABORATORY TESTING Classification Soils were visually and texturally classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) in general accordance with ASTM D 2488. Soil classifications are indicated on the logs of the exploratory borings in Appendix A In-Place Moisture and Density Tests The moisture content and dry density of relatively undisturbed samples obtained from the exploratory borings were evaluated in general accordance with ASTM D 2937. The test results are presented on the logs of the exploratory borings in Appendix A Direct Shear Test A direct shear test was performed on a relatively undisturbed sample in general accordance with ASTM D 3080 to evaluate the shear strength characteristics of selected materials. The sample was inundated during shearing to represent adverse field conditions. The results are shown on Figure B-1. Soil Corrosivity Tests Soil pH, and minimum resistivity tests were performed on a representative sample in general accordance with CT 643. The sulfate and chloride contents of the selected sample were evaluated in general accordance with CT 417 and 422, respectively. The results of the tests are presented on Figure B-2. Ninyo & Moore I Car1sbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Car1sbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 7000 6000 ~ / 5000 u:-en e:.. 4000 en en w iv / / I/ V' ~ , ~ V / ~ V . ~ / 0:: I-en 0:: 3000 ~ I en 2000 / ~ / ~ ~ i, 7 O.J ~/ ~~ , V , / ~ • 1000 / I/ I V J V i, • / , i, 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 NORMAL STRESS (PSF) Description .-··•·· •· •·· . .. . ... . . Friction Angle (degrees) Soil Type CONGLOMERATE _.....,__ NM-2 CONGLOMERATE --X--NM-2 5.0-6.3 Peak 5.0-6.3 Ultimate PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 3080 Gtoltchnical I Envlronmont.1 ScitncM c ...... - 108715011_DIRECT SHEAR B-2 @ 5.0-6.25 520 150 38 37 Formation Formation FIGURE B-1 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS CARLSBAD SAFETY CENTER SEISMIC RETROFIT 2560 ORION WAY, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 10671501 1 I 6/20 SAMPLE LOCATION NM-2 ' SAMPLE DEPTH (ft) 1.0-5.0 ■ 7.0 RESISTIVITY 1 johm-cm) 950 PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 643 PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 417 3 PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 422 }(in90&¥0ol"e --& £-Sc-Co,,wHanto 108715011_CORROSIVITY 8-2@ 1.~5.0 SULFATE CONTENT 2 --210 0.021 CHLORIDE CONTENT 3 (ppm) 410 FIGURE B-2 CORROSIVITY TEST RESULTS CARLSBAD SAFETY CENTER SEISMIC RETROFIT 2560 ORION WAY, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 10511 so11 I 8/20 Previous Laboratory Testing Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 APPENDIX B CURRENT AND PREVIOUS LABORATORY TESTING Classification Soils were visually and texturally classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) in general accordance with ASTM D 2488. Soil classifications are indicated on the logs of the exploratory borings in Appendix A. In-Place Moisture and Density Tests The moisture content and dry density of relatively undisturbed samples obtained from the exploratory borings were evaluated in general accordance with ASTM D 2937. The test results are presented on the logs of the exploratory borings in Appendix A. Gradation Analysis A gradation analysis test was performed on a selected representative soil sample in general accordance with ASTM D 422. The grain-size distribution curve is shown on Figure B-1. These test results were utilized in evaluating the soil classifications in accordance with the USCS. Direct Shear Test A direct shear test was performed on a relatively undisturbed sample in general accordance with ASTM D 3080 to evaluate the shear strength characteristics of selected materials. The sample was inundated during shearing to represent adverse field conditions. The results are shown on Figure B-2. Expansion Index Test The expansion index of a selected material was evaluated in general accordance with ASTM D 4829. The specimen was molded under a specified compactive energy at approximately 50 percent saturation. The prepared 1-inch thick by 4-inch diameter specimen was loaded with a surcharge of 144 psf and inundated with tap water. Readings of volumetric swell were made for a period of 24 hours. The result of the testing is presented on Figure B-3. Soil Corrosivity Tests Soil pH, and minimum resistivity tests were performed on a representative sample in general accordance with CT 643. The sulfate and chloride contents of the selected sample were evaluated in general accordance with CT 417 and 422, respectively. The results of the tests are presented on Figure B-4. Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 GRAVEL SAND FINES Coarse Fine Coars Medium Fine SILT CLAY U.S. STANDARD SIEVE HYDROMETER NUMBERS 3" 2' 1½· 1· ¾. ½.¾. ' 8 18 30 50 100 200 100,0 :'" 90,0 \. "" 80.0 \ \ 70,0 I-J: Q LIJ 60,0 3'; >-It ID 50,0 a:: \ LIJ z u:: 40.0 ' I-z \ LIJ (.) 30.0 ,, a:: LIJ \J. C. 20.0 !" 10.0 ' 0.0 100 10 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS • B-3 1.5-5.0 14 SM PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 422 Geotechnlcal & Envlronmontal Sclonw Con,uNanta 108715003_SIEVE w No 8 8-3 0 1.5-5.0,lllax FIGURE B-1 GRADATION TEST RESULTS SAFETY CENTER RENOVATION 2560 ORION WAY, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 108715003 18/19 u:- (/) a.. -(/) (/) w a::: I-(/) a::: ~ I (/) 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 ~ V' ~ '/ .. ~ V. .. V ,. ~ ~ ~ I/ " / :, /f l/' 0 1000 2000 3000 NORMALSTRESS(PS~ / / ~' /; ?' ~ ~ J' / 4000 5000 Description .-··•·· --•·· . "' . .. . . Friction Angle (degrees) Soil Type Silty SANDSTONE ----B-1 5.0-6.2 Peak Silty SANDSTONE --X --B-1 5.0-6.2 Ultimate PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 3080 -& lnvfn>nmental Sciences Consullln1a 108715003_DIRECT SHEAR B-1 @5.0-6.2.xlsx 0 0 43 41 Formation Formation DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS SAFETY CENTER RENOVATION 2560 ORION WAY, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 108715003 I 8/19 ---CL-- B-1 1.0-5.0 7.5 PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH G1ot1chnlcal & Environmental Sciences Consultants 108715003_EXPANSION • SO 8-1@ 1.0-5.0.>dtx COMPACTED DRY DENSITY c 120.9 .. A 15.9 0 UBC STANDARD 18·2 VOLUMETRIC SWELL in -.. . . . 0.006 6 Very Low 0 ASTM D4829 FIGURE 8-3 EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS SAFETY CENTER RENOVATION 2560 ORION WAY, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 10871500318/19 SAMPLE LOCATION B-1 SAMPLE DEPTH (ft) 1.0-5.0 ■ 6.5 RESISTIVITY 1 (ohm-cm) 2,200 PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 643 PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 417 • PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 422 108715003_CORROSIVITY 8-1 GI 1.0-5.0.'41.X SULFATE CONTENT 2 --40 0.004 CHLORIDE CONTENT 3 (ppm) 35 FIGURE 8-4 CORROSIVITY TEST RESULTS SAFETY CENTER RENOVATION 2560 ORION WAY, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 1087150031 8/H Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 0 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 -70 -80 -90 -100 ~ .._ '5 & ~ 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 I l I I I I I j I I - Velocity -vs 100'=2,040 ft/s - Shear-Wave Velocity, /tis APPENDIX D Geotechnical Engineering Calculations Ninyo & Moore I Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California I 108715011 I August 14, 2020 Carlsbad Safety Center Seismic Retrofit Static Slope Stability Color N.,,. ■ Lusanli Forrretion Model Unltw.lght (pcf) Mohr-Coulomb 130 CohMlon' Phi' (1 (pat} 150 37 Phl-8 (1 0 2.222 .-- BEARING CAPACITY OF SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Terzaghi and Vesic Methods August 7, 2020 Date Identification 108715011 Carlsbad Safety Center Input Units of Measurement Foundation Information Shape B= L= D= Soil Information c= phi= gamma= Dw= Factor of Safety F= E SI or E SQ SQ, Cl, CO, or RE 1 ft 1 ft 1 ft O lb/ftA2 37 deg 120 lb/ft"3 100 ft 3 Copyright 2000 by Donald P. Coduto Results Ninyo and Moore/Bearing Capacity of Square Footing_ 1 ft deep x1 ft wide Terzaghi Bearing Capacity q ult= 9,727 lb/ft"2 q a = 3,242 lb/ft"2 Allowable Column Load P= 3k Vesic 13,573 lb/ft"2 4,524 lb/ftA2 5k BEARING CAPACITY OF SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Terzaghi and Vesic Methods August7,2020 Date Identification 108715011 Carlsbad Safety Center Input Units of Measurement Foundation Information Shape B= L= D= Soil Information c= phi= gamma= Dw= Factor of Safety F= E SI or E SQ SQ, Cl, CO, or RE 2 ft 2 ft 1 ft 0 lb/ft'\2 37 deg 120 lb/ft/\3 100 ft 3 Copyright 2000 by Donald P. Coduto Results Ninyc;' ~ Moore/Bearing Capacity of Square Footing_ 1 ft deep x 2 ft wide Terzaghi Bearing Capacity q ult = 12,998 lb/ft/\2 q a= 4,333 lb/ft"2 Allowable Column Load P = 17 k Vesic 14,876 lb/ft"2 4,959 lb/ft"2 20 k BEARING CAPACITY OF SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Terzaghi and Vesic Methods August?,2020 Date Identification 108715011 Carlsbad Safety Center Input Units of Measurement Foundation Information Shape B= L= D= Soil Information c= phi = gamma= Dw= Factor of Safety F= E SI or E SQ SQ, Cl, CO, or RE 1 ft 1 ft 2 ft 0 lb/ft"2 37 deg 120 lb/ft"3 100 ft 3 Copyright 2000 by Donald P. Coduto Results Ninyo and Moore/Bearing Capacity of Square Footing_2 ft deep x 1 ft wide Terzaghi Bearing Capacity q ult= 16,183 lb/ft"2 q a = 5,394 lb/ft"2 Allowable Column Load P = 5 k Vesic 25,225 lb/ft"2 8,408 lb/ft"2 8k BEARING CAPACITY OF SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Terzaghi and Vesic Methods August7,2020 Date Identification 108715011 Carlsbad Safety Center Input Units of Measurement Foundation Information Shape B= L= D= Soil Information c= phi= gamma= Dw= Factor of Safety F= E SI or E CO SQ, Cl, CO, or RE 2 ft 100 ft 2 ft 0 lb/ftA2 37 deg 120 lb/ftA3 100 ft 3 Copyright 2000 by Donald P. Coduto Results Ninyc ~ Moore/Bearing Capacity of Continuous Footing_2 ft deep x 2 ft wide Terzaghi Bearing Capacity q ult = 21 ,089 lbfftA2 q a= 7,030 lbfftA2 Allowable Wall Load P/b = 14 k/ft Vesic 20,705 lb/ftA2 6,902 lb/ftA2 14 k/ft BEARING CAPACITY OF SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Terzaghi and Vesic Methods August7,2020 Date Identification 108715011 Carlsbad Safety Center Input Units of Measurement Foundation Information Shape B= L= D= Soil Information c= phi= gamma= Ow= Factor of Safety F= E SI or E CO SQ, Cl, CO, or RE 1 ft 100 ft 1 ft 0 lb/ftA2 37 deg 120 lb/ft"3 100 ft 3 Copyright 2000 by Donald P. Coduto Results Ninyo and Moore/Bearing Capacity of Continuous Footing_ 1 ft deep x1 ft wide Terzaghi Bearing Capacity q ult = 10,545 lb/ftA2 q a= 3,515 lb/ftA2 Allowable Wall Load P/b = 4 k/ft Vesic 10,353 lb/ft"2 3,451 lb/ft"2 3 k/ft BEARING CAPACITY OF SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Terzaghi and Vesic Methods August 7, 2020 Date Identification 108715011 Carlsbad Safety Center Input Units of Measurement Foundation Information Shape B= L= D= Soil Information c= phi= gamma= Dw= Factor of Safety F= E SI or E CO SQ, Cl, CO, or RE 2 ft 100 ft 1 ft 0 lb/ftA2 37 deg 120 lb/ftA3 100 ft 3 Copyright 2000 by Donald P. Coduto Results Moore/Bearing Capacity of Continuous Footing_ 1 ft deep x 2 ft wide Terzaghi Bearing Capacity q ult= 14,633 lb/ftA2 q a = 4,878 lb/ftA2 Allowable Wall Load P/b= 10 k/ft Vesic 13,709 lb/ftA2 4,570 lb/ftA2 9 k/ft BEARING CAPACITY OF SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Terzaghi and Vesic Methods August?,2020 Date Identification 108715011 Carlsbad Safety Center Input Units of Measurement Foundation Information Shape B= L= D= Soil Information c= phi= gamma= Ow= Factor of Safety F= E SI or E CO SQ, Cl, CO, or RE 1 ft 100 ft 2 ft 0 lb/ft"2 37 deg 120 lb/ft"3 100 ft 3 Copyright 2000 by Donald P. Coduto Results Ninyo and Moore/Bearing Capacity of Continuous Footing_2 ft deep x 1 ft wide Terzaghi Bearing Capacity q ult= 17,000 lb/ftA2 q a = 5,667 lb/ftA2 Allowable Wall Load P/b = 6 k/ft Vesic 16,997 lb/ftA2 5,666 lb/ft"2 6 k/ft BEARING CAPACITY OF SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Terzaghi and Vesic Methods August7,2020 Date Identification 108715011 Carlsbad Safety Center Input Units of Measurement Foundation Information Shape B= L= D= Soil Information c= phi= gamma = Dw= Factor of Safety F= E SI or E SQ SQ, Cl, CO, or RE 2 ft 2 ft 2 ft 0 lb/ft"2 37 deg 120 lb/ft"3 100 ft 3 Copyright 2000 by Donald P. Coduto Results Ninyc ~ Moore/Bearing Capacity of Square Footing_2 ft deep x 2 ft wide Terzaghi Bearing Capacity q ult = 19,454 lb/ft"2 q a = 6,485 lb/ft"2 Allowable Column Load P = 26 k Vesic 27, 145 lb/ft"2 9,048 lb/ft"2 36 k 108715011 Carlsbad Safety Center ASCE 41-17 Site Specific Response Spectra BSE-2N Site-Specific Response Spectrum BSE-lN Site-Specific Response Spectrum Period (sec) Sa (g) Period (sec) Sa (g) 0.010 0.450 0.010 0.300 0.020 0.483 0.020 0.322 0.030 0.542 0.030 0.362 0.050 0.661 0.050 0.441 0.075 0.858 0.075 0.572 0.100 0.990 0.100 0.660 0.150 1.088 0.150 0.725 0.200 1.058 0.200 0.705 0.250 0.976 0.250 0.650 0.300 0.909 0.300 0.606 0.400 0.909 0.400 0.606 0.500 0.833 0.500 0.555 0.750 0.555 0.750 0.370 1.000 0.416 1.000 0.278 1.500 0.278 1.500 0.185 2.000 0.208 2.000 0.139 3.000 0.139 3.000 0.093 4.000 0.104 4.000 0.069 5.000 0.083 5.000 0.056 7.500 0.056 7.500 0.037 10.000 0.033 10.000 0.022 BSE-2E Site-Specific Response Spectrum BSE-lE Site-Specific Response Spectrum Period (sec) Sa (g) Period (sec) Sa (g) 0.010 0.360 0.010 0.194 0.020 0.370 0.020 0.196 0.030 0.416 0.030 0.220 0.050 0.519 0.050 0.274 0.075 0.678 0.075 0.356 0.100 0.780 0.100 0.410 0.150 0.859 0.150 0.451 0.200 0.834 0.200 0.437 0.250 0.768 0.250 0.406 0.300 0.704 0.300 0.373 0.400 0.693 0.400 0.361 0.500 0.693 0.500 0.361 0.750 0.415 0.750 0.206 1.000 0.311 1.000 0.155 1.500 0.208 1.500 0.103 2.000 0.156 2.000 0.077 3.000 0.104 3.000 0.052 4.000 0.078 4.000 0.039 5.000 0.062 5.000 0.031 7.500 0.042 7.500 0.021 10.000 0.025 10.000 0.012 C_cicyof Carlsbad CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST B-50 Development Servi ces Building Division 1635 Faraday Avenue 442-339-2719 www.carlsbadca.gov PURPOSE This checklist is intended to help building permit applicants identify which Climate Action Plan (CAP) ordinance requirements apply to their project. This completed checklist (8-50) and summary (8-55) must be included with the building permit application. The Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) can be referenced during completion of this document. A NOTE: The following type of permits are not required to fill out this form ♦ Patio I + Decks I + PME (w/o panel upgrade) I ♦ Pool The 8-50 checklist was originally developed several years ago to support implementation of the CAP. Recent updates to the California Building Standards Code have imposed newer performance standards on building permit applications. Therefore, the applicant is advised to review all applicable code sections and apply the maximum performance standard, which may exceed the CAP consistency checklist requirements Consultation with a certified Energy Consultant is encouraged to assist in filling out this document. Appropriate certification includes, but is not limited to: Licensed, practicing Architect, Engineer, or Contractor familiar with Energy compliance, IECC/HERS Compliance Specialist, ICC GB Energy Code Specialist, RESNET HERS rater certified, certified ICC Residential Energy Inspector/Plans Examiner, ICC Commercial Energy Inspector and/or Plans Examiner, ICC CALgreen Inspector/Plans Examiner, or Green Building Residential Plan Examiner. If an item in the checklist Is deemed to be not applicable to a project, or is less than the minimum required by ordinance, check NIA and provide an explanation or code section describing the exception. The project plans must show all details as stated in the applicable Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) and/or Energy Code and Green Code sections. Project Name/Building Pennit No.: Carlsbad Safety Center Renovation BP No.: Date: 07 /03/23 PropertyAddress/APN: 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, CA 92010 / APN: 209-0502-600 AppllcantName/Co.: Julio Medina/ SILLMAN ApplicantAddress: 7515 Metropolitan Or., San Diego, CA 92108, Suite 400 Contact Phone: (619) 723-5294 Contact Email: Jmedina@sillmanarch.com Contact infonnalion of person completing this checklist (if different than above): Name: Company nari'le/add~: Contact Phone: Contact Email: Use the table below to determine which sections of the Ordinance checklist are applicable to your project. For alterations and additions to existing buildings, attach a Permit Valuation breakdown on a separate sheet. For purposes of determining valuation, the amount should be upon either the actual contract price for the work to be permitted or shall be determined with the use of the current "ICC Building Valuation Data• as published by the International Code Council, whichever is higher (refer to Section 18.04.035 of the CMC). Building Permit Valuation (BPV) $ breakdown...;.$_3.:...,5_O_O..:..,O_O_O _____ _ □ Residential D New construction 'lA*, 3A*, 4A* *lndudes detached, newly constructed ADU D Additions and alterations: D BPV < $60,000 NIA All residential additions and alterations D BPV 2: $60,000 1A.4A 1-2 family dwellings and townhouses with attached garages D 8ectrical service panel upgrade my only. *Multi-family dwellings only where interior finishes are D BPV 2: $200,000 1A,4A* removed and significant site work and upgrades to structural and mechanical, electrical, and/or plumbing systems are prooosed 2B* *Multi-family dwellings only where 2:$1,000,000 8PV AND BPV ~ $1,000,000 affecting 2:75% existing floor area ~. Ii NonNllldenllll and ~ D New construction 18, 2B, 3B, 4B and 5 ■ Alterations: D BPV 2: $200,000 or additions 2: 1B, 5 1,000 SQuare feet • BPV2: $1,000,000 18,2B, 5 Building alterations of:?! 75% existing gross floor area 2: 2,000 SQ. ft. new roof addition 28,5 1 B also applies if BPV 2: $200,000 Instructions: 1. Choose first between residential or non-residential based on the type of project being submitted. 2. Next chose between new construction or addition/alteration for residential or non-residential. 3. The columns to the right of your selection will detennine which sections of the CAP program are applicable to your project. 4. Appropriate details must be induded on the plans for selections made. EXAMPLE: I Scope of work includes a new, 2 story, single family residential structure. The selections would be: Residential and New construction in the table above. For a 2-story structure, CAP sections 2A, 3A and 4A would be applicable. (Solar PV, water heating, EV charging) The• indicates that new detached ADU's are included. EXAMPLE: Scope of work includes a tenant improvement (i.e., alterations) valued at over one million dollars. The selections would be: Non-residential and Alteration BPV 2: $1,000,000. CAP sections 1 B, 28 and 5 would be applicable to this project. (Energy efficiency, Solar PV and Transportation Demand Management (TOM)*) It may be necessary to supplement the completed checklist with supporting materials, calculations or certifications, to demonstrate full compliance with CAP ordinance requirements. For example, projects that propose or require a performance approach to comply with energy-related measures will need to attach to this checklist separate calculations and documentation as specified by the ordinances. e Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) and Section 150.2 of the CEC for more information. Appropriate e plans according to selections chosen in the design. A. □ Resldentla ltlon or alteration ~ $60,000 building permit valuation. Details of selectl~~le1n below must be placed on the plans referencing CMC 18.30. D N/A ________ _ D Exception: Homeenergyscore ?7 (attach certification) Year Built Multi.family Requirements D Beb'e1978 D 1978 and later D Between1978-1991 D 1992 and later Select one option: D Duct sealin D Attic insulation D Duct sea Select one D Li hti 8. 0 New Nonresldentlal construction (Including additions over 1,000sf), new hoteUmotel construction AND alterations ~ $200,000 building permit valuation. See Section 18.21.050 of the CMC and CALGreen Appendix A5. At least one measure from each applicable building component required. 0 NIA _______ _ A5.203.1.1 Choose one: ~ Outdoor lighting D Restaurant service water heating (Section 140.5 of the CEC) D Warehouse dock seal doors D Daylight design PAFs D Exhaust air heat recovery A5.203.1 .2.1 Choose one: l!!I .95 Energy budget (Projects with indoor lighting OR mechanical) D .90 Energy budget (Projects with indoor lighting AND mechanica) As.211.1-l!!I On-site renewable energy: AS.211.3" D Green power. (If offered by local utility provider, 50% minimum renewable sources) AS.212.1 D Elevators and escciat01S:(Project with more 1han one elevator or bW escalators) AS.213.1 D Steelframi,v. (Providedetaffsonplansforoptions 1-4chosen) * High-rise residential buildings are 4 or more stories. 0 N/A _______ _ 0 N/A _______ _ 0 N/A Existing on-site renewable energy 0 N/A 0 N/A 0 N~-------- •• For alteration~ $1,000,000BPV and affecting> 75%exlsting gross floor area, OR alterations that add 2,000 square feet of new roof addition: comply with Section 18.030.040 of the CMC (section 28 below) Instead. 2. Photovoltaic Systems Residential new construction. Refer to Section 150.1 (c)14 of the CEC for single-family requirements and Section d) of the CEC for multi-family requirements. If project Includes installation of an electric heat pump water heater uant to CAP section 3 below (residential water heating), increase system size by .3kWdc if PV offset option is sele Floor Plan ID (use additional sheets if necessary) Calculated kWdc* Exception D Total System Size: kWdc = (CFAx.572) / 1,000 + (1 .15 x #d.u.) 'Formula calculation where CFA = conditional floor area, #du= number of dwellings per plan type If proposed system size is less than calculated size, please explain. B. Ii] Nonresidential, hotel/motel and multifamily additions, alterations and repairs of these projects i!:$1,000,000 BPV AND affecting i!:75% existing floor area, OR addition that increases roof area by i!:2,000 square feet. Please refer to Section 18.30.040 and 18.30.070 of the CMC when completing this section. Choose one of the following methods: (Gross floor area or Time-Dependent Valuation method) □ Gross Floor Area (GFA)Method GFA: _s,_3s_o _____ _ Min.System Size: 5 kWd I!!!! If< 1 O,OOOs.f. Enter: 5 kWdc □ If~ 1 O,OOOs.f. calculate: 15 kWdc x (GFA/10,000) ** **Round building size factor to nearest tenth, and round system size to nearest whole number. □ Time-Dependent Valuation Method C. 0 Annual TDV Energy use:*** ______ x .80= Min. system size: _____ _;kWdc *** Attach calculation documentation using modeling software approved by the California Energy Commission. * All newly constructed non residential, hotel/motel and highrise multifamily buildings that are required by CEC section 140.10(a)to have a PV system shall also have a battery storage system meeting CEC section 140.10(b). Non residential, hoteVmotel and multifamily additions, alterations or repairs that b'igger solar due to the Carlsbad Climate Action Plan will NOT require battery storage. Battery storage is required when triggered by CEC section 140.10(a) and/or 170.2(9). 5 5. II) Transportation Demand Management {TOM): Nonresldentlal ONLY An approved Transportation Demand Management (TOM) Plan is required for all nonresidential projects that meet a threshold of employee-generated ADT. City staff will use the table below based on your submitted plans to determine whether your permit requires a TOM plan. If TOM Is applicable to your permit, staff will contact the applicantto develop a site-specific TOM plan based on the permit details. Acknowtedgment: Employee ADT Estimation for Various Commercial Uses Office (all)z 20 Restaurant 11 Retaib 8 Industrial 4 Manufacturing 4 Warehousing 4 1 Unless otherwise noted, rates estimated from ITE Trip Generation Manual, 1<JhEdition 13 11 4.5 3.5 3 1 2 Fot ~II office uses, use SAN DAG fate of 20 ADT/1,000 sf to calculate employee ADT 3 Retail uses include shopping center, variety store, supermarket, gyms, pharmacy, etc. Other commercial uses may be subject to spec/al consideration Sample calculations· Office: 20,450 sf 1. 20,450 sf/ 1000 x 20 = 409 Employee ADT Retail: 9,334 sf 1. First 1,000 sf= 8 ADT 2. 9,334 sf -1,000 sf= 8,334 sf 3. (8,334 sf/ 1,000 x 4.5) + 8 = 46 Employee ADT I acknowledge that the plans submitted may be subject to the City of Carlsbad's Transportation Demand Management Ordinance. I agree to be contacted should my permit require a TDM plan and understand that an approved TDM plan is a condition of permit issuance. Applicant Signature: Julio Medina Name: Julio Medina Date: 07/03/2023 Phone No.: (619)723-5294 {"Cityof Carlsbad CAP Building Plan Template B-55 Development Services Building Division 1635 Faraday Avenue 760-602-2719 www.carlsbadca.gov CLIMATE ACTION PLAN (CAP) COMPLIANCE The following summarizes project compliance with the applicable Climate Action Plan ordinances of the Carlsbad Municipal Code and California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen), current version. The following certificate shall be lnduded on the plans for an building permits that ar:, required to comply with the CAP measures: 1. ENERGY EFFICIENCY APPLICABLE: □YES □ NO Complies with CMC 18.30.060 or 18.21.050 OYes ON/A Existing Structure, year built: _,_ ... _____ .., Prepared Energy Audit? Qes ONo Energy Score: _____ _ Efficiency Measures included in scope: 2. PHOTOVOLTAICSYSTEMAPPUCABLE: DYES ONO 3. 4. 5. Complies with CMC section 18.30.040 and 2022 California Energy Code section 150.1(c)14 D Yes DtA 84 Size of PV system (kWdc): Sizing PV by load calculations D Yes ll]No If by Load Calculations: Total calculated electrical load: 80%ofload; Exception Requested B Yes Exception Approved Yes ALTERNATIVE WATER HEATING SYSTEM APPLICABLE: □ YES lll)NO Complies with CMC sections 18.30.020 18.20.030 and/or 18.30.050? Alternative Source: o Electric o Passive Solar Exception Requested Exception Approved ELECTRIC VEHICLE (EV) CHARGING APPLICABLE: Oves 0No □Yes □ No Dru li)NO Complies section with CMC 18.21.030? Panel Upgrade? 0Yes ON/A D Yes ONo Required ~ Total EV Parking Spaces: No. of EV Capable Spaces: No, of EV Ready Spaces; No. of EV Installed Spaces: Hardship Requested Hardship Approved TRAFFIC DEMAND MANAGEMENT APPLICABLE: Compliant? Tn~A Oor\l'\rt nn filo ,.uith rih1? 0No □No ll]YES □NO OvesONo r--iv~ ,--,Nn