HomeMy WebLinkAbout2262 AVENIDA MAGNIFICA; ; PC2023-0028; PermitBuilding Permit Finaled
Print Date: 07/15/2025
Job Address:
Permit Type:
Parcel #:
Valuation:
Occupancy Group:
#of Dwelling Units:
Bedrooms:
Bathrooms:
Occupant Load:
Code Edition:
Sprinkled:
2262 AVENIDA MAGNIFICA,
BLDG-Plan Check
1672503800
$44,070.00
Plan Check Permit
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-6846
Work Class: Residential
Track#:
Lot#:
Project#: DEV2024-0078
Plan#:
Construction Type:
Orig. Plan Check#:
Plan Check #:
Project Title: VILLA HOMES -ENCROACHMENT FOR DRY UTILITIES
Permit No:
Status:
(city of
Carlsbad
PC2023-0028
Closed -Finaled
Applied: 08/31/2023
Issued: 09/24/2024
Finaled Close Out: 07/15/2025
Final Inspection:
INSPECTOR:
Description: DECRON PROPERTIES: 2 HUD APPROVED MANUFACTURED HOMES (650 SF EACH) TO BE INSTALLED ON PERMANENT
FOUNDATIONS
Applicant:
VILLA HOMES
SEAN ROBERTS
1 LETTERMAN DR, # STE C3500
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94129-1517
(415) 612-1900
FEE
BUILDING PLAN CHECK FEE (manual)
Property Owner:
DP CARLSBAD MAGNI FICA INVESTORS LP DP
AIRPORT HOSPITAL WAY INVESTORS LP
6222 WILSHIRE BLVD, # UNIT 400
LOS ANGELES, CA 90048
BUILDING PLAN REVIEW-MINOR PROJECTS (LDE)
BUILDING PLAN REVIEW -MINOR PROJECTS (PLN)
Total Fees: $1,032.50 Total Payments To Date: $1,032.50
Building Division
Contractor:
NATOMAS LABS INC
1 LETTERMAN DR, # C3500
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94129-2402
(415) 612-1900
Balance Due:
AMOUNT
$721.50
$204.00
$107.00
$0.00
Page 1 of 1
1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad CA 92008-7314 I 442-339-2719 I 760-602-8560 f I www.carlsbadca.gov
Doc1.,1Sign Envelope ID: 51860DCA-B543-4657-9D0D-A225FBBA2C87
{ City of
Carlsbad
RESIDENTIAL
BUILDING PERMIT
APPLICATION
B-1
Plan Check PC202S-6028
Est. Value ;f;:'-JL/, 0 7 0 . 0 0
PC Deposit $7 2, \, ~ b
Date 9 / ~\ / 2.'?. •
Job Address 2262 Avenida Magnifica Carlsbad, CA 92008 Unit: ______ .APN : 1672503700
CT/Project #: __________________ Lot #: ____ Year Built: _________ _
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORK: (2) 650sf HUD approved manufactured homes to be installed on permanent foundations
G] New SF : Living SF, 13oo Deck SF, ____ Patio SF, _____ Garage SF __ _
Is this to create an Accessory Dwelling Unit? (:) Y O N New Fireplace? O YON , if yes how many? ___ _
D Remodel: _____ SF of affected area Is the area a conversion or change of use? 0 YO N
□ Pool/Spa: ____ SF Additional Gas or Electrical Features? _____________ _
0 Solar: ___ KW, ___ Modules, Mounted: 0Roof O Ground, Tilt: 0 YON, RMA: 0 Y O N,
Battery:O YO N, Panel Upgrade: O v ON Electric Met er number: ____________ _
Other:
APPLICANT (PRIMARY CONTACT)
Name: Nitasha Gates -Villa Homes
Address: 1 Letterman Drive C3500
PROPERTY OWNER
Name: Taylor Hansen -Decron Properties Corp
Address: 6222 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 400
City: San Francisco
Phone: 951-303-4117
State:_c_A __ .Zip: 94129 City: Los Angeles State:_c_A __ .Zip: 90048
Phone: 323-556-6600
Email: permitting@villahomes.com Email: permitting@villahomes.com
DESIGN PROFESSIONAL CONTRACTOR OF RECORD
Name:. ____________________ Business Name: Natomas Labs Inc DBA Villa Homes
Address: Address: 1 Letterman Drive C3500
City: _________ state:, ____ Zip:_____ City: San Francisco State: CA Zip:_9_41_2_9 _____ _
Phone: Phone: 951-303-4111
Email: Email: permitting@villahomes.com
Architect State License: ____________ _ CSLB License #:_1_07_7_68_8 _____ Class:_8 _______ _
Carlsbad Business License# (Required): BLOS014185-08-2023
APPLICANT CERT/FICA T/ON: I certify that I have read the application and state that the above information is correct and that the information a/the plans is accurate. I
agree to comply with all City ordinances and State laws relating to building construction.
NAME (PRINT): Nitasha Gates
("": DocuSlgned by:
SIGN.:..: ---J,,L..,7Uf. ......... Fa""~"":U""':""'s""~ ... ss--~----DATE: _s_12_9_;_2_02_3 __ _
1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 Ph: 442-339-2719 Email: Building@carlsbadca.gov
REV. 04122
Docu.Sign Envelope ID: 51860DCA-B543-4657-9D0D-A225FBBA2C87
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:
lherebyaffirmunderpenaltyofperjurythatlamlicensedunderprovisionsofChapter9(commencingwithSection7000)ofDivision3
of the Business and Professions Code, and my license is in fut l force and effect. I also affirm under penalty of perjury one of the
following declarations{CHOOSE ONE):
Di have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self-insure for workers' compensation provided by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for t he performance of the
work which this permit is issued. Policy No. ___________________________________________ _
-OR-
~ I have and will maintain worker's compensation, as required by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued.
My workers' compensation insurance carrier and policy number are: Insurance Company Name: _M_,dw_ .. _1_•_""'_'•_,._,._c_ .. _.,._11y:...c_0_m .. _,, ______________ _
Policy No. BNuw:o,53320 Expiration Date: _0_1m_r2_•2_• ______________ _
-OR-
D Certificate 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: Failure to secure workers compensation coverage 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, IF ANY:
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's Address: ______________________ _
CONTRACTOR CERTIFICATION: The applicant certifies that all documents and plans clearly and accurately show all existing and proposed buildings, structures, access roads, and
utilities/utility easements. All proposed modifications and/or additions are clearly labeled on the site plan. Any potentially existing detail within these plans inconsistent with the site plan are
not approved for construction and may be required to be altered or removed. The city's approval of the application is based on the premise that the submitted documents and plans show
the correct dimensions of; the property, buildings, structures and their setbacks from property lines and from one another; access roads/easements, and utilities. The existing and proposed
use of each building as stated is true and correct; all easements and other encumbrances to development have been accurately shown and labeled as well as all on-site grading/site preparation.
All improvements existing on the property were completed in accordance with all regulations in existence at,ti,e-Umeullllifl,eif t19nstruction, unless otherwise noted.
NAME (PRINT): _N_it_a_s_ha_G_a_te_s ____ SIGNATURE:-:-:~::;:mt'.:mr,-7llffl'4..~~m:-u,--~DATE:_8_1_29_1_20_2_3 __
Note: If the person signing above is an authorized agent for the contractor rovide a letter ofauUforizat1on on ·contractor letterhead.
-OR-
(OPTION B): OWNER-BUILDER DECLARATION:
I hereby affirm that I am exempt from Contractor's License Law for the following reason:
D 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.
7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds 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-
DI, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed 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-
DI am exempt under Business and Professions Code Division 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 the applicable law, Section 7044 of the Business and Professions Code, is available upon request when this application is
submitted or at the following Web site: http:I/www.leginfo.ca.gov/ ca law. html.
OWNER CERTIFICATION: The applicant certifies that all documents and plans clearly and accurately show all existing and proposed buildings, structures, access roads, and utilities/utility
easements. All proposed modifications and/or additions are clearly labeled on the site plan. Any potentially existing detail within these plans inconsistent with the site plan are not approved
for construction and may be required to be altered or removed. The city's approval of the application is based on the premise that the submitted documents and plans show the correct
dimensions of; the property, buildings, structures and their setbacks from property lines and from one another; access roads/easements, and utilities. The existing and proposed use of each
building as stated is true and correct; all easements and other encumbrances to development have been accurately shown and labeled as well as all on-site grading/site preparation. All
improvements existing on the property were completed in accordance with all regulations in existence at the time of their construction, unless otherwise noted.
NAME (PRINT): SIGN: __________ DATE: ______ _
Note: If the erson si nin above is an authorized a ent for the ro ert owner include form B-62 si ned b ro ert owner.
1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 Ph: 442-339-2719 Email: Building@carlsbadca.gov
2
REV. 04/22
DocuSign Envelope ID: 51860DCA-B543-4657-9D0D-A225FBBA2C87
{'cityof
Carlsbad
OWNERS
AUTHORIZED
AGENT FORM
B-62
Development Services
Building Division
1635 Faraday Avenue
442-339-2719
www .carlsbadca.gov
OWNER'SAUTHORIZED AGENT FORM
Only a property owner, contractor or their authorized agent may submit plans and applications for building
permits. To authorize a third-party agent to sign for a building permit, the owner's third party agent must bring
this signed form, which identifies the agent and the owner who s/he is representing, and for what jobs s/he
may obtain permits. The form must be completed in its entirety to be accepted by the City for each separate
permit application.
Note: The following Owner's Authorized Agent form is required to be completed by the
property owner only when designating an agent to apply for a construction permit
on his/her behalf.
AUTHORIZATION OF AGENT TO ACT ON PROPERTY OWNER'S BEHALF
Excluding the Property Owner Acknowledgement, the execution of which I understand is my personal responsibility,
I hereby authorize the following person(s) to act as my agent(s) to apply for, sign, and file the documents necessary
to obtain an Owner-Builder Permit for my project.
(2)650 sf HUD approved ADU Scope of Construction Project (or Description of Work): ___________________ _
2262 Avenida Magnifica Carlsbad, CA 92008 Project Location or Address: ____________________________ _
N itasha Gates 951-303-4117 Name of Authorized Agent: __________________ Tel No. ________ _
1 Letterman Dr C3500 Address of Authorized Agent: ____________________________ _
San Francisco, CA 94129
I declare under penalty of perjury that I am the property owner for the address listed above and I personally filled
out the above information and certify its accuracy.
r:DocuSigned by:
Property Owner's Signature: _ _:~,__t-4,~;iiiAl'~~-~,4'4Qil-l-~cli1~4'4C;4,1 s_Ui\, ____________ Date: _s_1_2_9_;_2_0_2_3 __
1
Docv6ign Envelope ID: 2FD435CC-6AE2-4051-9A96-158DEB97203B
t
Business Name (if applicable):
State Contractor License holder's name:
California State Contractor's License Number:
Business Tax Number:
Business Address:
City, State, Zip:
Phone with area code:
Email Address:
Officers:
Natomas Labs DBA Villa Homes
Sean Roberts
B-1077688
84-3730496
1 Letterman Dr #C3500
San Francisco, CA 94129
415-612-1900
permitting@villahomes.com
Sean Roberts (CEO)
James Connolly (Officer)
Christina Roman (Officer)
Jeremy Pearman (RME)
Authorized Agents
The people below are authorized to act as my agent with full signature authority in the
Jurisdiction's Permitting Process.
Agent's Name Agent's email address Agent's Phone Agent's Signature
Kate Nixa knixa@villahomes.com 323-383-7510 rw:·;:
Riley Van Eyck rveyck@villahomes.com 541 -222-9754 ~:v.:u
Alyson Becerril abecerril@villahomes.com 831 -254-3756 ra;:-~1
Catrina Magana cmagana@villahomes.com 714-262-7512 ,e,;;:-~
Nancy Chant nchant@villahomes.com 707-771 -8811 ,~iw =
Nitasha Gates ngates@villahomes.com 951 -303-411 7 ~
,,.,...,,...,
--'--'~ ..
Travis Wells twells@villahomes.com 619-928-2189 ,;.:-Ms
Lindsey Negro lnegro@villahomes.com 858-815-3503 ru~-:~
I understand that my actions to submit electronic permit applications will serve as my electronic
signature on the application(s) as provided for under California Civil Code 1633.1-1633.17 -
Electronic Transactions.
I hereby affirm that I am licensed under provisions of Chapter 9 (Commencing with Sec. 7000)
of Division 3 of the California Business and Professionals Code, and my licenses are in full force
and effect. I hereby affirm that the intended occupancy for any permit issued WILL NOT use,
Docu6ign Envelope ID: 2FD435CC-6AE2-4051-9A96-158DEB97203B
handle or store any hazardous, or acutely hazardous, materials as referenced in Sections
25505, 25533, and 25534 of the California Health and Safety Code.
I agree to comply with all city and county ordinances and state laws relating to building
construction, and hereby authorize representatives of the Jurisdiction to enter upon any property
for which a permit is issued for inspection purposes.
I certify that no activities related to any issued permit, including storage/use of materials will take
place within the public-right-of-way and dust control measures will be used throughout all
phases of construction.
I agree to maintain a valid Business Tax License with the Jurisdiction for each permit
application.
Under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California I hereby certify that I have read
this document; that the above information is correct; and that I have truthfully affirmed all
applicable declarations contained in this document and agree to the terms and conditions
described therein.
Name: Sean Roberts
Title: CEO
Date: 7/13/2023
Community Development Department -Building Division
1635 Faraday Ave.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Plan Review: Manufactured Homes on Foundation
Address: 2262 A venida Magnifica, Carlsbad CA
Applicant Name: Nitasha Gates App2licant Email: permitting@villahomes.com
OCCUPANCY & BUILDING SUMMARY:
Occupancy Groups:
Occupant Load:
Type of Construction:
Sprinklers:
Stories:
Area of Work (sq. ft.):
R-3
n/a
V-B
No
1
1300 sq. ft.
True North
COMPLIANCE SERVICES
FINAL REVIEW
City Pem1it No: PC2023-0028
True North No.: 23-018-853
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.
I. Drawings: Electronic copy dated November 9, 2023, by Villa Homes.
2. Structural Calculations: Electronic copy dated October 2, 2023, by n/a
3. Geotechnical report: Electronic copy dated October 20, 2023, by NTS Geotechnical.
The plans have been reviewed for coordination with the permit application.
Valuation: Confinned
Scope of Work: See Notes Below
Floor Area: See Notes Below
Notes: Plan show site retaining walls that were not pa1t of the permit application.
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: Richard Moreno -Plans Examiner
True North Compliance Services, Inc.
3939 Atlantic Avenue Suite 224, Long Beach, CA 90807
T / 562.733.8030
Transmittal Letter
March 13, 2024
City of Carlsbad
Community Development Department -Building Division
1635 Faraday Ave.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Plan Review: Manufactured Homes on Foundation
Address: 2262 A venida Magnifica, Carlsbad CA
Applicant Name: Nitasha Gates App21icant Email: permitting@villahomes.com
True North
COMPLIANCE SE~VICES
THIRD REVIEW
City Permit No: PC2023-0028
True North No.: 23-018-853
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.
I.
2.
3.
Drawings: Electronic copy dated November 9, 2023, by Villa Homes.
Structural Calculations: Electronic copy dated October 2, 2023, by n/a
Geotechnical report: Electronic copy dated October 20, 2023, by NTS Geotechnical.
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 Wark:
Floor Area:
Confinned
See Notes Below
See Notes Below
Notes: Plan show site retaining walls that were not part of the permit application.
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: Richard Moreno -Plans Examiner
True North Compliance Services, Inc.
3939 Atlantic Avenue Suite 224, Long Beach, CA 90807
T / 562. 733.8030
Manufactured Homes
2262 A venida Magnifica
March 13, 2024
RESUBMTTTAL INSTRUCTIONS:
Plan Review Comments
City of Carlsbad-THIRD REVIEW
City Permit No.: PC2023-0028
True North No.: 23-018-853
Page2
Please do not resubmit plans until all departments have completed their reviews. For status, please
contact building@carlsbadca.gov
Please make all corrections, as requested in the correction list. Submit FOUR new complete sets of
plans for commercial/industrial projects (THREE sets of plans for residential projects). Corrected
sets can be submitted as follows:
Deliver THREE corrected sets of plans and TWO corrected calculations/reports directly to
the City of Carlsbad Building Division, 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008, ( 442) 339-
2719. The city will route the plans to True North, Planning and Land Development
Engineering Departments (if applicable) for continued review.
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 Californ ia 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 & BUil..DING SUMMARY:
Occupancy Groups: R-3
Occupant Load: n/a
Type of Construction: V-B
Sprinklers: No
Stories: I
Area of Work (sq. ft.): 1300 sq. ft.
Manufactured Homes
2262 A venida Magnifica
March 13, 2024
STRUCTURAL COMMENTS:
City of Carlsbad-THIRD REVIEW
City Permit No.: PC2023-0028
True North No.: 23-018-853
Page3
S 1. Provide site retaining wall construction details and calculations. Show wall height provide on site plan.
PC3. Structural calculations were provided. Please verify that the structural calculations are
stamped and signed by the engineer of record.
Tf you have any questions regarding the above comments, please contact Richard Moreno via email
richardm@tncservices.com or telephone (562) 733-8030.
[END]
Transmittal Letter
December 22, 2023
City of Carlsbad
Community Development Department -Building Division
1635 Faraday Ave.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Plan Review: Manufactured Homes on Foundation
Address: 2262 Avenida Magnifica, Carlsbad CA
Applicant Name: Nitasha Gates App21icant Email: pennitting@villahomes.com
True North
COMPLIANCE SERVICES
SECOND REVIEW
City Permit No: PC2023-0028
True North No.: 23-018-853
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 November 9, 2023, by Villa Homes.
2. Geotechnical report: Electronic copy dated October 20, 2023, by NTS Geotechnical.
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 Wark:
Floor Area:
Confirmed
See Notes Below
See Notes Below
Notes: Plan show site retaining walls that were not part of the permit application.
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: Richard Moreno -Plans Examiner
True North Compliance Services, Inc.
3939 Atlantic Avenue Suite 224, Long Beach, CA 90807
T / 562. 733.8030
Manufactured Homes
2262 A venida Magnifica
December 22, 2023
City of Carlsbad-SECOND REVIEW
City Permit No.: PC2023-0028
True North No.: 23-018-853
Page2
Plan Review Comments
RESUBMTTTAL INSTRUCTIONS:
Please do not resubmit plans until all departments have completed their reviews. For status, please
contact building@carlsbadca.gov
Please make all corrections, as requested in the correction list. Submit FOUR new complete sets of
plans for commercial/industrial projects (THREE sets of plans for residential projects). Corrected
sets can be submitted as follows:
Deliver THREE corrected sets of plans and TWO corrected calculations/reports directly to
the City of Carlsbad Building Division, 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008, ( 442) 339-
2719. The city will route the plans to True North, Planning and Land Development
Engineering Departments (if applicable) for continued review.
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., 202 1 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.):
R-3
n/a
V-B
No
I
1300 sq. ft.
Manufactured Homes
2262 Avenida Magnifica
December 22, 2023
ARCHITECTURAL COMMENTS:
City of Carlsbad-SECOND REVIEW
City Permit No.: PC2023-0028
True North No.: 23-018-853
Page]
A I. Please verify that all plan architectural sheets are signed, and all structural plans, detail sheets, and civil
plans are stamped and signed by the engineer of record.
STRUCTURAL COMMENTS:
General:
SI. Provide site retaining wall construction details and calculations. Show wall height provided on the site
plan.
The response was that the retaining walls will be less than 48-inches in height. The note on the civil
site plans the 48-inch exemption. Per CBCl0S.2. please provide calculations for the retaining
walls.
If you have any questions regarding the above comments, please contact Richard Moreno via email
richardm@tncservices.com or telephone (562) 733-8030.
[END)
Transmittal Letter
September 11, 2023
City of Carlsbad
Community Development Department -Building Division
1635 Faraday Ave.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Plan Review: Manufactured Homes on Foundation
Address: 2262 Avenida Magnifica, Carlsbad CA
Applicant Name: Nitasba Gates App2licant Email: perrnitting@villahomes.com
True North
COMPLIANCE SERVIC es
FIRST REVIEW
City Permit No: PC2023-0028
True North No.: 23-018-853
True North Compliance Services, Inc. bas 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.
l. Drawings: Electronic copy dated August 30, 2023, by Villa Homes.
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
See Notes Below
See Notes Below
Notes: Plan show site retaining walls that were not part of the permit application.
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: Richard Moreno -Plans Examiner
True North Compliance Services, Inc.
3939 Atlantic Avenue Suite 224, Long Beach, CA 90807
T / 562. 733.8030
Manufactured Homes
2262 Avenida Magnifica
September 11, 2023
RESUBMJTT AL INSTRUCTIONS:
Plan Review Comments
City of Carlsbad-FIRST REVIEW
City Permit No.: PC2023-0028
True North No.: 23-018-853
Page2
Please do not resubmit plans until all departments have completed their reviews. For status, please
contact building@carlsbadca.gov
Please make all corrections, as requested in the correction list. Submit FOUR new complete sets of
plans for commercial/industrial projects (THREE sets of plans for residential projects). Corrected
sets can be submitted as follows:
Deliver THREE corrected sets of plans and TWO corrected calculations/reports directly to
the City of Carlsbad Building Division, 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008, (442) 339-
2719. The city will route the plans to True North, Planning and Land Development
Engineering Departments (if applicable) for continued review.
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 w ill
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 detai ls, 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: R-3
Occupant Load: n/a
Type of Construction: V-B
Sprinklers: No
Stories: l
Area of Work (sq. ft.): 1300 sq. ft.
Manufactured Homes
2262 A venida Magnifica
Sep tern her 11, 2023
ARCHITECTURAL COMMENTS:
General:
City of Carlsbad-FIRST REVIEW
City Permit No.: PC2023-0028
True North No.: 23-018-853
Page 3
A 1. New construction is proposed at 5 feet or closer to the property line, as such a boundary survey report is
required. A licensed surveyor is required to complete Carlsbad form B-60A and provide it to the Building
Inspector at the foundation inspection.
https://www.carlsbadca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/9666/637859764783800000
Provide the following note on the cover sheet of the plans: A boundary survey report is required for this
project. Concrete placement will not be approved until a boundary survey showing compliance to the
approved plans is provided to the Building Division.
Al. Dimension the fire separation distance from the trash enclosure to the property line. Demonstrate
compliance with the following:
a) CBC Table 705.5 for fire rated exterior walls based on fire separation distance.
b) CBC 705.8 for allowable opening at fire rated exterior walls.
A2. Note the occupancy and construction type of all structures in the same lot as the proposed construction.
A3. Provide parking required and provided to remain for the existing structures.
a) Verify that conditions for 1109A are not affected by the proposed project.
A4. Site plans does not show an assigned parking area. Verify with the city's planning department the number
and location of parking spaces that will be required for each unit. Show location assigned parking spots on
the site plans.
AS. Verify pertaining section of the senate bill 65852.2 that pertains to this project. Subsection (E) does not
exist on the document as noted. Do you mean 65852.2(a)(l )(D)?
ELECTRICAL COMMENTS:
E 1. Provide electrical plan.
a) Provide main and sub-panel electrical service size (amperage) and location on plans. CEC 230. 79
& 240.24.
b) Provide electrical panel schedule and load calculations on plans.
E2. Note conduit type and trenching depth required for electrical conductors under driveways. CEC 300.5
PLUMBING COMMENTS:
P 1. Provide existing plumbing fixture numbers and sewage line diameter on site plans.
STRUCTURAL COMMENTS:
General:
Sl. A soils report is required for all new detached ADUs, and retaining walls required soil investigation.
Submit a soils report and incorporate the recommendations of the report into the design.
S2. Provide site retaining wall construction details and calculations. Show wall height provide on site plan.
Manufactured Homes
2262 Avenida Magnifica
September t 1, 2023
City of Carlsbad-FIRST REVIEW
City Permit No.: PC2023-0028
True North No.: 23-018-853
Page4
If you have any questions regarding the above comments, please contact Richard Moreno via email
richardm@tncservices.com or telephone (562) 733-8030.
[END[
,
To City of Carlsbad,
Please find below responses to the Plan Review Comment Letter. Please note, responses
are shown in red. All revisions to the plan sets have been marked with "cloud" symbols to
indicate where corrections are made.
Owner Last Name: Decron
Address: 2262 Avenida Magnifica, Carlsbad CA
Permit Number: PC2023-0028
Plans Examiner: Richard Moreno -richardm@tncservices.com 562-733-8030
Architectural Comments:
1. A 1. New construction is proposed at 5 feet or closer to the property line, as such a
boundary survey report is required. A licensed surveyor is required to complete Carlsbad
form B-60A and provide it to the Building Inspector at the foundation inspection.
https://www.carlsbadca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/9666/637859764783800000
Response: There is no construction proposed within 5' of the PL. Dimension from the
retaining wall to the PL has been added for clarity. See Note Box on Sheet A 1.1 stating
"NO CONSTRUCTION IS PROPOSED WITHIN 5' OF THE PROPERTY LINE".
2. Provide the following note on the cover sheet of the plans: A boundary survey report is
required for this project. Concrete placement will not be approved until a boundary
survey showing compliance to the approved plans is provided to the Building Division.
Response: General Note# 6 has been added to Sheet AO. Boundary Survey was
previously provided and coordinated into the existing and proposed site plans. See
sheets A 1, A 1.1, V1 , and V2.
3. A 1. Dimension the fire separation distance from the trash enclosure to the property line.
Demonstrate compliance with the following:
a) CBC Table 705.5 for fire rated exterior walls based on fire separation distance.
b) CBC 705.8 for allowable opening at fire rated exterior walls.
Response: The trash enclosure in question has no roof and therefore is classified as a
fence. This fence is constructed of 6' high CMU walls and is non-combustible. CBC
Chapter 705 does not apply to this condition.
4. A2. Note the occupancy and construction type of all structures in the same lot as the
proposed construction.
Response: The existing Occupancy and Construction Type has been added under
Project Data on Sheet AO.
5. A3. Provide parking required and provided to remain for the existing structures.
~
> 1---0
a) Verify that conditions for 1109A are not affected by the proposed project.
Response: N/A The (e) parking has not been affected in this case; however, when
ADUs are created through the conversion of a garage, carport or covered parking
structure, replacement of off-street parking spaces cannot be required by the local
agency. (Gov. Code, § 65852.2, subd. (a)(1 )(D)(xi).)
6. A4. Site plans do not show an assigned parking area. Verify with the city's planning
department the number and location of parking spaces that will be required for each unit.
Show location assigned parking spots on the site plans.
Response: N/A A local agency shall not impose ADU parking standards for any ADUs
located within one-half mile walking distance of public transit, pursuant to Government
Code section 65852.2, subdivisions (d)(1 -5) and U)(10): (1 ). The distance to transit is
noted on AO.
7. A5. Verify pertaining section of the senate bill 65852.2 that pertains to this project.
Subsection (E) does not exist on the document as noted. Do you mean
65852.2(a)(1 )(D)?
Response: Code section has been revised on Sheet AO .
ELECTRICAL COMMENTS:
1. E1 . Provide an electrical plan.
a) Provide main and sub-panel electrical service size (amperage) and location on
plans. CEC 230.79 & 240.24.
b) Provide electrical panel schedule and load calculations on plans.
Response: A new dual meter panel shall be installed on Unit 2, routed directly
from the transformer across the parking lot. Power shall then be routed from the
dual meter panel on Unit 2 to the 150A subpanel on Unit 1. This is now noted on
Sheet A 1.1 at each unit. Electrical load calculations for the proposed ADUs are
now included on new Sheet A4.
2. E2. Note conduit type and trenching depth required for electrical conductors under
driveways. CEC 300.5
Response: The conduit type (2" conduit with 2/OT CU with #4 ground) and trenching
depth (24") are now noted under the electrical utility keynote #3 on Sheet A 1 .1.
PLUMBING COMMENTS:
1. P1 . Provide existing plumbing fixture numbers and sewage line diameter on site plans.
Response: The Size of the existing sewer line (5") is now noted on Sheet A 1.1, and the
existing and proposed plumbing fixture counts are now included on new Sheet A4.
STRUCTURAL COMMENTS:
1. S 1. A soils report is required for all new detached ADUs, and retaining walls required soil
investigation. Submit a soils report and incorporate the recommendations of the report
into the design.
Response: See attached soils report provided by NTS Geotechnical.
2. S2. Provide site retaining wall construction details and calculations. Show wall height
provide on site plan.
Response: Wall Height is noted on Sheet A 1. 1 as less than 48" from bottom of footing to
top of wall. Per Carlsbad Municipal Code Section [A] 105.2, Retaining walls that are not
over 4 feet in height measured from the bottom of the footing to the top of the wall do not
require permitting, unless supporting a surcharge or impounding Class I, II or IIIA liquids.
Details and calculations are not required for items that do not require permits and are
shown for information only.
The retaining wall has been included in civil sheets.
PLANNING COMMENTS:
1. You must first obtain approval of a landscape plan consistent with the city landscape
manual if you are installing or modifying at least 2,500 square feet or more of
landscaping. approval of the landscape plan must be obtained before a building permit
can be issued.
Response: N/A. Landscape plan not required. See revised Sheet A 1.1. Unit 1 has been
moved closer to unit 2. Therefore the modified area is now less than 2,500 SF and is
noted on Sheet A 1 . 1 .
2. Please show the front yard setback on the site plans. per government code section
65852, subdivision (e), adus are still required to comply with front yard setback
requirements. please ensure that both adus are located outside of the required front yard
setback.
Response: N/A. The Carlsbad Municipal Code section 21 .38 for PC -Planned
Community Zoning does not specify any front yard setback requirements.
3. Pursuant to section 21.46.130 of the c.m.c fences walls or hedges greater than 42
inches in height are not permitted within the front yard setback. please either remove the
proposed landscaped wall from the front yard setback or ensure that it does not go over
42 inches.
Response: The landscape wall will be less than 42'' in exposed height. This is now
noted in the callout on Sheet A 1.1. Please also see Sheet C7 for retaining wall details.
'
4. Please provide cut-sections of the retaining wall showing the height and its distance to
the road.
Response: See sections included on Sheet C4. Height of the wall will vary -reference
the top-of-wall elevations noted in the Grading Plan on Sheet C4. Section B on Sheet
C4 has been revised to include the edge of the right-of-way.
5. The p-20 housing tracking form is required for all new adus in the city. the form is linked
here:
bttps • //www carlsbadca gov/home/showpu bl isheddocument/462/63784
3419829330000
a. submit the form with the plan check resubmittal or email the completed form to
megan. mcelfish@ca rlsbadca. gov.
Response: See attached P-20 housing tracking form.
6. A notice of restriction (nor) is required for all adus. Once the plan check is in
conformance with all codes and regulations, a nor will be prepared and mailed to the
property owner. the nor is to be notarized and returned to megan mcelfish in the
planning division for final planning approval. the nor will be recorded on the property.
Response: Acknowledged
October 1, 2024
Ms. Tashi Gates
Villa Homes
Attention:
Subject:
Site Address:
Permit No.:
Dear Ms. Gates:
---~
GEOTECHNICAL
City of Carlsbad
Footing Observation
2262 Avenida Magnifica, Carlsbad, California
CBRA2023-0139
Project No.234 77
NTS Geotechnical, Inc. (NTS) has been requested onsite to observe the footing bottoms for the
proposed retaining wall at the subject site. NTS performed observation of the footings on
September 27, 2024 and found the footing bottoms to be in firm and unyielding competent
bearing material. The footings are acceptable to receive rebar and concrete, provided that all
loose material are removed from the bottom of the footings prior to placement of concrete.
Care should be taken to confirm that surface drainage within the project conforms to the
California Building Code and the City of Carlsbad requirements. In addition, we note that
ponding of surface runoff or over-irrigation could result in softening and weakening of subgrades
and should be avoided at all times.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. Should you have any questions
regarding this report or if we can be of further service, please do not hesitate to contact the
undersigned.
Respectfully submitted,
NTS GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
:1/l.a. ~E 317
Principal Engineer
NTS GEOTECHNICAL 5319 UNIVERSITY DR., IRVINE, CA 92612 WWW.NTSGEO.COM
October 20, 2023
Ms. Tashi Gates
Villa Homes
---~
GEOTECHNICAL
1 Letterman Dr., C3500
San Francisco, CA 94129
Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Project No. 23477
Proposed Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Retaining
Wall
2262 Avenida Magnifica, Carlsbad, California
Dear Ms. Gates:
In accordance with your request and authorization, we have completed a preliminary
geotechnical for the design and construction of the proposed ADUs and retaining wall.
We are presenting, herein, our findings and recommendations.
The findings of this study indicate that the project site is suitable for the proposed
development provided the recommendations presented in this report are complied with
and incorporated into the design and construction of the project. Copies of this report
should be forwarded to your other consultants for the project (i .e., Civil Engineer,
Architect, Structural Engineer, etc.) as needed to implement the recommendations
presented.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of seNice on this project. Should you have any
questions regarding this report or if we can be of further seNice, please do not hesitate
to contact the undersigned at (657) 888-4608 or info@ntsgeo.com.
Respectfully submitted,
NTS GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Nadim Sunna, MS, PE, GE 3172
Principal Engineer
5319 UNIVERSITY DR., IRVINE, CA 92612
WWW.NTSGEO.COM
INFO@NTSGEO.COM
657-888-4608
H > f--0
' ---~ GEOTECHNICAL
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 3
SITE DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................................... 3
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY ............................................................................... 3
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ........................................................................................ 5
FIELD EXPLORATION .................................................................................................... 5
GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY TESTING .................................................................. 6
GEOLOGIC FINDINGS ................................................................................................... 6
Regional Geologic Setting ...................................................................................................... 6
Subsurface Materials ............................................................................................................... 6
Groundwater ............................................................................................................................. 7
GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ................................................................................................... 7
Faulting and Seismicity ........................................................................................................... 7
Liquefaction and Seismic Settlement.. .................................................................................. 8
Landslides ................................................................................................................................. 8
Flooding ..................................................................................................................................... 8
Tsunami and Seiches .............................................................................................................. 8
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING FINDINGS ................................................................ 9
Expansive Soil .......................................................................................................................... 9
Soil Corrosion ........................................................................................................................... 9
Excavation Characteristics ................................................................................................... 10
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......... 10
Conclusions ............................................................................................................................. 10
Site Preparation ...................................................................................................................... 11
Grading .................................................................................................................................... 11
Materials for Fill ...................................................................................................................... 12
Compacted Fill ........................................................................................................................ 13
Temporary Excavations ......................................................................................................... 13
Slope Construction ................................................................................................................. 14
Slope Protection ..................................................................................................................... 15
Seismic Design ....................................................................................................................... 15
Shallow Foundation Design and Construction .................................................................. 16
Retaining Wall Design ............................................................................................................ 17
Drainage Control .................................................................................................................... 18
Review, Observation, and Testing ....................................................................................... 19
LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................ 20
REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 22
NTS Project No. 23477 Page 11
--~~
GEOTECHNICAL
Attachment( s): Plate 1 -Location Map
Plate 2 -Geotechnical Map
Plate 3 -Geotechnical Sections
Plate 4 -Slot Cut Analysis
Appendix A -Field Exploration
Appendix B -Geotechnical Laboratory Test Result
NTS Project No. 23477 Page J 2
--~~
GEOTECHNICAL
INTRODUCTION
This report presents results of the preliminary geotechnical study conducted on the
subject site for the proposed development of a new ADUs and retaining wall, located at
2262 Avenida Magnifica, in the City of Carlsbad, California. The general location of the
subject site is indicated on Plate 1 -Location Map.
SITE DESCRIPTION
The project site is currently located at 2262 Avenida Magnifica, in the City of Carlsbad,
California. The nearly rectangular site is currently occupied by existing parking buildings
on the northern side of the property and existing asphalt concrete parking lots on the
southern side of the property. Where the proposed ADUs are planned at the
southwestern corner of the property, exists a slope that ascends to Hosp Way from the
property. The slope is about 10 to 11 feet in height and appears to be a cut slope.
PURPOSEANDSCOPEOFSTUDY
The scope of work performed for this study was designed to determine and evaluate the
surface and subsurface conditions of the subject site with respect to geotechnical
characteristics, including potential geologic hazards that may affect the development of
the site, and to provide geotechnical recommendations and criteria for use in the design
and construction of the proposed development. The scope of work included the
following :
• Review of locally and readily available published soils and geologic reports and
data for the site and surrounding areas (see References section), Google Earth
photographs, flood hazard maps, well data, etc. to ascertain earth material,
geologic, and hydrologic conditions of the area.
• Subsurface exploration by means of hand dug test pits to characterize the earth
materials, geologic, and groundwater conditions that could influence the
proposed development.
• Sampling of on-site earth materials from the exploratory excavations.
• Laboratory testing of selected earth material samples considered representative
of the subsurface conditions to determine the engineering properties and
characteristics.
• Define the general geology of the subject site and evaluate potential geologic
hazards which would influence the proposed site development.
NTS Project No. 23477 Page J 3
' __ .;._~
GEOTECHNICAL
• Determine seismic classification of the site to meet the requirements of the
2022California Building Code (CBC).
• Engineering analysis of field and laboratory data to provide a basis for
geotechnical conclusions and recommendations regarding site grading and
foundation, floor slab, etc. design parameters.
• Preparation of this report to present the preliminary geotechnical conclusions and
recommendations for the proposed site development.
This report presents our preliminary conclusions and/or recommendations regarding:
• Potential geologic hazards (including landslides, seismicity, faulting , liquefaction
potential, etc.)
• General subsurface earth conditions.
• Presence and effect of expansive and compressible earth materials.
• Groundwater conditions within the depth of our subsurface study.
• Excavation characteristics of the on-site earth materials.
• Characteristics and compaction requirements of proposed fill and backfill
materials.
• Recommendations and guide specifications for earthwork.
• Seismic design coefficients for structural design purposes.
• Types and depths of foundations.
• Allowable bearing pressure and lateral resistance for foundations.
• Temporary and permanent cut and fill slope recommendations.
The scope of work performed for this report did not include any testing of earth
materials or groundwater for environmental purposes, an environmental assessment of
the property, or opinions relating to the possibility of surface or subsurface
contamination by hazardous or toxic substances.
This study was prepared for the exclusive use of Villa Homes and their consultants for
specific application to proposed ADUs and retaining wall in accordance with generally
accepted standards of the geotechnical professions and generally accepted
geotechnical (soil and foundation) engineering principles and practices at the time this
NTS Project No. 23477 Page 14
'
' --~~
GEOTECHNICAL
report was prepared. Other warranties, implied or expressed, are not made. Although
reasonable effort has been made to obtain information regarding geotechnical and
subsurface conditions of the site, limitations exist with respect to knowledge of unknown
regional or localized off-site conditions which may have an impact at the site. The
conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are valid as of the date of
this report. However, changes in conditions of a property can occur with passage of
time, whether they are due to natural processes or to works of man on this and/or
adjacent properties.
If conditions are observed or information becomes available during the design and
construction process which are not reflected in this report, NTS, as Geotechnical
Consultant of record for the project, should be notified so that supplemental evaluations
can be performed and conclusions and recommendations presented in this report can
be verified or modified in writing, as necessary. Changes in applicable or appropriate
standards of care in the geotechnical professions occur, whether they result from
legislation or the broadening of knowledge and experience. Accordingly, the
conclusions and recommendations presented in this report may be invalidated, wholly
or in part, by changes outside the influence of the project Geotechnical Consultant
which occur in the future.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
Based upon information presented to this firm by the client, it is our understanding that
the proposed project will consist of installation of two pre-fabricated ADU's at the
subject site. The ADUs are planned to be supported on a perimeter stem wall and jacks
in the middle supporting the floors . Additionally, a retaining wall is planned along the
southern side of the ADU's to retain the descending slope an allow for construction of
level pads.
The above project description and assumptions were used as the basis for the field
exploration, laboratory testing program, the engineering analysis, and the conclusions
and recommendations presented in this report. NTS should be notified if structures,
foundation loads, grading, and/or details other than those represented herein are
proposed for final development of the site so a review can be performed, a
supplemental evaluation made, and revised recommendations submitted, if required .
FIELD EXPLORATION
The field study performed for this report included a visual and geologic reconnaissance
of existing surface conditions of the subject site. A study of the property's subsurface
condition was performed to evaluate underlying earth strata and the presence of
groundwater. Surface and subsurface conditions were explored on October 10, 2023.
NTS Project No. 23477 Page 15
'
' __ .;;..~
GEOTECHNICAL
The subsurface exploration consisted of excavating four (4) exploratory hand dug test
pits on the subject property. The approximate locations of the exploratory excavations
are shown on Plate 2 -Geotechnical Map. The exploratory excavations were observed
and logged by a representative of NTS. Earth materials encountered in the exploratory
excavations were visually described in the field in general accordance with the current
Unified Soils Classification System (USCS), ASTM 02488, visual-manual procedures.
Logs of the test pits are presented in Appendix A -Field Exploration.
Surface reconnaissance of the subject site and surrounding area was performed after
completion of the subsurface exploration. The reconnaissance included mapping
geologic units. The result of the surface geologic reconnaissance is presented on Plate
3 -Geotechnical Sections.
GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory testing was performed on bulk and undisturbed samples collected during our
recent field investigation. Testing was performed on soil and bedrock samples and
included the following tests:
• Moisture and density;
• Direct shear; and
• Corrosion.
Laboratory test results from our investigation are presented in Appendix B of this report.
GEOLOGIC FINDINGS
Regional Geologic Setting
According to geologic maps, the site is underlain by bedrock belonging to the
Santiago Formation (Tsa).
Subsurface Materials
Native Soil (Qs)
Native soil was encountered in all our test pits and ranged from about ½ to 1 foot
in thickness. In general, the native soil consists of brown, moist, medium dense,
silty sands. The fill is considered not suitable for support of new foundation, slab-
on-grade and new fill and we require deepened foundation and structural slabs to
span the fill.
NTS Project No. 23477 Page 16
'
' --~~
GEOTECHNICAL
Bedrock (Tsa)
Bedrock belonging to the Santiago Formation was observed to underlay the
native soil to the total depth of the exploration. In general, the bedrock consists of
tan, moderately to slightly weathered, moderately hard to hard, massive,
sandstone. The bedrock is suitable for new foundation, slab-on-grade and new
fill.
Groundwater
Groundwater was not encountered in the exploratory excavations to the
maximum depth explored of approximately 8 feet below existing ground surface
at the time the field study was performed for this report.
No groundwater data was found during a literature search pertaining to the
subject property. There are no known shallow groundwater bearing soil or rock
formations beneath the subject property. No evidence of onsite springs was
found during the field study. Based on anticipated lot grading and the inferred
groundwater depths, groundwater should not be a factor for project design or
long-term performance.
Surface water was not observed on the subject site at the time the field study
was performed for this report.
Based on results of our subsurface exploration and experience, variations in the
continuity and nature of surface and subsurface conditions should be anticipated.
Due to uncertainty involved in the nature and depositional characteristics of earth
materials at the site, care should be exercised in extrapolating or interpolating
subsurface conditions between and beyond the exploratory excavation locations.
Groundwater conditions may vary across the site due to stratigraphic and
hydrologic conditions and may change over time as a consequence of seasonal
and meteorological fluctuations, or activities by humans at this site and nearby
sites. However, based on the above findings, groundwater is unlikely to impact
the proposed development.
GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
Faulting and Seismicity
The site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, and no
known active faults are shown on the reviewed geologic maps crossing the site,
however, the site is located in the seismically active region of Southern
California. The nearest known active fault is the Newport-Inglewood fault system,
NTS Project No. 23477 Page J 7
'
' --~~
GEOTECHNICAL
which is located approximately 5.9 miles from the site, and capable of generating
a maximum earthquake magnitude of 7.5.
Liquefaction and Seismic Settlement
Liquefaction occurs when the pore pressures generated within a soil mass
approach the effective overburden pressure. Liquefaction of soils may be caused
by cyclic loading such as that imposed by ground shaking during earthquakes.
The increase in pore pressure results in a loss of strength, and the soil then can
undergo both horizontal and vertical movements, depending on the site
conditions. Other phenomena associated with soil liquefaction include sand boils,
ground oscillation, and loss of foundation bearing capacity. Liquefaction is
generally known to occur in loose, saturated, relatively clean, fine-grained
cohesionless soils at depths shallower than approximately 50 feet. Factors to
consider in the evaluation of soil liquefaction potential include groundwater
conditions, soil type, grain size distribution, relative density, degree of saturation,
and both the intensity and duration of ground motion.
The site is not located within a zone of required investigation for Liquefaction.
Based on lack of shallow groundwater and the presence of shallow bedrock, it is
our professional opinion that the potential for liquefaction to occur is low.
Landslides
Field reconnaissance did not disclose the presence of older, existing landslides
on or near the subject property. In addition, based on the massive nature of the
underlying bedrock and previous mass grading perform during the original
development of the site, the potential for landslide to impact the proposed
improvement is considered low.
Flooding
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has prepared flood
insurance rate maps (FIRMs) for use in administering the National Flood
Insurance Program. Based on our review of the FEMA flood map, the site is
located in an area identified as Area of Minimal Flood Hazard (Zone X).
Tsunami and Seiches
Tsunamis are waves generated by massive landslides near or under sea water.
The site is not located on any State of California -County of San Diego Tsunami
Inundation Map for Emergency Planning. The potential for the site to be
adversely impacted by earthquake-induced tsunamis is considered to be
negligible because the site is located several miles inland from the Pacific Ocean
shore, at an elevation exceeding the maximum height of potential tsunami
inundation.
NTS Project No. 23477 Page 18
' __ ..;...~
GEOTECHNICAL
Seiches are standing wave oscillations of an enclosed water body after the
orig inal driving force has dissipated. The potential for the site to be adversely
impacted by earthquake-induced seiches is considered to be negligible due to
the lack of any significant enclosed bodies of water located in the vicinity of the
site.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING FINDINGS
Expansive Soil
Based on our evaluation and experience with similar material types, the soils
encountered near the ground surface at the site exhibit a very low to low
expansion potential.
Soil Corrosion
The potential for the on-site materials to corrode buried steel and concrete
improvements was evaluated. Laboratory testing was performed on
representative soil samples to evaluate pH, minimum resistivity, and soluble
chloride and sulfate contents. The results of our corrosivity testing is presented
within Appendix B of this report. General recommendations to address the
corrosion potential of the on-site soils are provided below. Imported fill materials,
if used , should be tested to evaluate whether their corrosion potential is more
severe than those assumed.
Structural Concrete
Laboratory tests indicate that the potential of sulfate attack on concrete in contact
with the on-site soils is "negligible" or "SO" exposure in accordance with ACI 318,
Table 19.3.1.1. Therefore, restriction on the type of cement, water to cement
ratio, and compressive strength is not required.
The aforementioned recommendations in regards to concrete are made from a
soils perspective only. Final concrete mix design is beyond our purview. All
applicable codes , ordinances, regulations, and guidelines should be followed in
regard to the designing a durable concrete with respect to the potential for sulfate
exposure from the on-site soils and/or changes in the environment.
Ferrous Metal
The results of the laboratory chemical tests performed on a sample of soil
collected within the site indicate that the on-site soils are severely corrosive to
ferrous metals. Consequently, metal structures which will be in direct contact
with the soil (i.e., underground metal conduits, pipelines, metal sign posts, etc.)
NTS Project No. 23477 Page 19
' ---~ GEOTECHNICAL
and/or in close proximity to the soil (wrought iron fencing, etc.) may be subject to
corrosion. The use of special coatings or cathodic protection around buried metal
structures has been shown to be beneficial in reducing corrosion potential.
The laboratory testing program performed for this project does not address the
potential for corrosion to copper piping. In this regard , a corrosion engineer
should be consulted to perform more detailed testing and develop appropriate
mitigation measures (if necessary).
The above discussion is provided for general guidance in regards to the
corrosiveness of the on-site soils to typical metal structures used for construction.
Detailed corrosion testing and recommendations for protecting buried ferrous
metal and/or copper elements are beyond our purview. If detailed testing is
required , a corrosion engineer should be consulted to perform the testing and
develop appropriate mitigation measures.
Excavation Characteristics
The native soil materials underlying the site can be excavated with conventional
grading equipment (i.e., backhoes, excavators, or loaders). However, the
bedrock materials may be difficult to drill and excavate and will heavy duty drilling
equipment or jack hammers for excavating the proposed footings.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusions
The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are preliminary
since a final grading plan, the type of structure construction, structural loads, that
will be constructed, etc., were not available and are, in part, based on information
provided to this firm, the results of the field and laboratory data obtained from
four (4) exploratory excavations located on the subject property, experience
gained from work conducted by this firm on projects within the general vicinity of
the subject site, the project description and assumptions presented in the
'Proposed Development' section of this report, engineering analyses, and
professional judgement.
Based on a review of the field and laboratory data and the engineering analysis,
the proposed development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. The
subject property can be developed without adverse impact onto or from adjoining
properties providing the recommendations contained within this report are
adhered to during project design and construction.
NTS Project No. 23477 Page 110
' --~~
GEOTECHNICAL
The field observations indicate that up to 1 feet of material present on the subject
site is native soil material, however, localized areas of deeper fill or native soil
material may be encountered during construction. These materials are
considered loose and compressible and are not considered suitable for the
support of structural fills, foundations, slab-on-grade floor slabs, hardscape,
and/or pavement without removal and replacement as compacted fill.
Based on our field exploration and evaluation, we recommend that the proposed
ADU foundation and retaining wall foundation be embedded into competent
bedrock.
The actual conditions of the near-surface supporting material across the site may
vary. The nature and extent of variations of the surface and subsurface
conditions between the exploratory excavations may not become evident until
construction. If variations of the material become evident during construction of
the proposed development, NTS should be notified so that the project
Geotechnical Consultant can reevaluate the characteristics of the material and
the conclusions and recommendations of this report, and, if needed, revise the
conclusions and recommendations presented herein.
Preliminary recommendations for site grading, foundations, slab support, and
pavement design are presented in the subsequent paragraphs.
Site Preparation
Site preparation should begin with the removal of vegetation and other
deleterious debris from areas to be graded. Tree stumps and roots should be
removed to such a depth that organic material is generally not present. Clearing
and grubbing should extend to the outside edges of the proposed excavation and
fill areas. We recommend that unsuitable materials such as organic matter or
oversized material be selectively removed and disposed offsite. The debris and
unsuitable material generated during clearing and grubbing should be removed
from areas to be graded and disposed at a legal dump site away from the project
area.
Grading
Minimum mandatory removal is not required for the proposed structures
supported by footings embedded into competent bedrock.
Areas that will be deriving support from the underlying soils should have the
existing native soil be removed and the open excavation bottoms observed by
our engineer to verify and document in writing that any undocumented fill and all
colluvial soils are removed prior to refilling with properly tested and documented
NTS Project No. 23477 Page 111
--~~
GEOTECHNICAL
compacted fill. The removed and cleaned soils may be reused as properly
compacted fill.
Further subexcavation may be necessary depending on the conditions of the
underlying soils. The actual depth of removal should be determined at the time
of grading by the project geotechnical engineer/geologist. The determination will
be based on soil conditions exposed within the excavations. At minimum, any
undocumented fill, topsoil or other unsuitable materials should be removed and
replaced as properly compacted fill.
In-place density tests may be taken in the removal bottom areas where
appropriate to provide data to help support and document the
engineer/geologist's decision.
It is imperative that no clearing and/or grading operations be performed without
the presence of a representative of the geotechnical engineer. An on-site, pre-
job meeting with the developer, the contractor and the geotechnical engineer
should occur prior to all grading-related operations. Operations undertaken at
the site without the geotechnical engineer present may result in exclusions of
affected areas from the final compaction report for the project.
Grading of the subject site should be performed, at a minimum, in accordance
with these recommendations and with applicable portions of the CBC. The
following recommendations are presented for your assistance in establishing
proper grading criteria.
Materials for Fill
On-site soils with an organic content of less than 3 percent by volume (or 1
percent by weight) are suitable for use as fill. Soil material to be used as fill
should not contain contaminated materials, rocks, or lumps over 6 inches in
largest dimension, and not more than 40 percent larger than ¾ inch. Utility trench
backfill material should not contain rocks or lumps over 3 inches in largest
dimension. Larger chunks, if generated during excavation, may be broken into
acceptably sized pieces or may be disposed offsite.
Any imported fill material should consist of granular soil having a "low" expansion
potential (that is, expansion index of 20 or less). Import material should also have
low corrosion potential (that is, chloride content less than 500 parts per million
[ppm], soluble sulfate content of less than 0.1 percent, and pH of 5.5 or higher).
Materials to be used as fill should be evaluated by a representative of NTS prior
to importing or filling .
NTS Project No. 23477 Page 112
'
' __ .;...~
GEOTECHNICAL
Compacted Fill
Prior to placement of compacted fill, the contractor should request an evaluation
of the exposed excavation bottom by NTS. Unless otherwise recommended, the
exposed ground surface should then be scarified to a depth of at least 8 inches
and watered or dried, as needed, to achieve generally consistent moisture
contents near optimum moisture content. The scarified materials should then be
compacted to 90 percent relative compaction in accordance with the latest
version of ASTM Test Method D1557.
Compacted fill should be placed in horizontal lifts of approximately 6 to 8 inches
in loose thickness. Prior to compaction, each lift should be watered or dried as
needed to achieve near optimum moisture condition, mixed , and then compacted
by mechanical methods, using sheepsfoot rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired
rollers, or other appropriate compacting rollers, to a relative compaction of 95
percent as evaluated by ASTM D1557. Successive lifts should be treated in a like
manner until the desired finished grades are achieved.
Personnel from NTS should observe the excavations so that any necessary
modifications based on variations in the encountered soil conditions can be
made. All applicable safety requirements and regulations, including CalOSHA
requirements, should be met.
Temporary Excavations
Bedrock
Temporary excavations for retaining walls, footing, and removal and
recompaction are expected. We anticipate that unsurcharged excavations within
the bedrock with vertical side slopes less than 10 feet high will generally be
stable. Vertical excavation over 10 feet height within the bedrock should be
sloped no steeper than an inclination of 1 H: 1 V.
Native Soil
We anticipate that unsurcharged excavations within the artificial fill with vertical
side slopes less than 4 feet high will generally be stable. Vertical excavation over
4 feet high within the artificial fill should be sloped no steeper than an inclination
of 1.5H:1V.
Where sloped excavations are created, the tops of the slopes should be
barricaded so that vehicles and storage loads do not encroach within 10 feet of
the top of the excavated slopes. A greater setback may be necessary when
considering heavy vehicles, such as concrete trucks and cranes. NTS should be
advised of such heavy vehicle loadings so that specific setback requirements can
be established. If the temporary construction slopes are to be maintained during
NTS Project No. 23477 Page 113
--~~
GEOTECHNICAL
the rainy season, berms are recommended to be graded along the tops of the
slopes in order to prevent runoff water from entering the excavation and eroding
the slope faces. Where space for sloped excavations is not available, temporary
shoring may be utilized.
Personnel from NTS should observe the excavation so that any necessary
modifications based on variations in the encountered soil conditions can be
made. All applicable safety requirements and regulations, including CalOSHA
requirements, should be met.
Excavations shall not undermine the existing adjacent building footings or
remove lateral support from adjacent properties. Where space for sloped
excavations is not available, temporary shoring or slot cuts may be utilized.
Recommendations for temporary can be provided upon request. The A-B-C slot
cuts should consist of the following :
o Slot-cut method should not exceed 6 feet in height.
o Slot-cut should proceed with "A-B-C" sequences with a maximum slot
width of 8 feet.
o Once the slot is compacted and backfilled, the contractor may proceed
with the next slot cut.
o Continuous geotechnical observation is required during slot-cut
operations.
Slot cut calculations are presented within the attached Plate 4. The project
structural engineer should verify that the assumed surcharge prior to
construction .
Slope Construction
Slopes should not be steeper than 2(h): 1 (v). Should steeper inclinations of
slopes be required for the project, additional analysis may be warranted. Fill
slopes should be overfilled during construction and then cut back to expose fully
compacted soil. A suitable alternative would be to compact the slopes during
construction and then roll the final slopes to provide dense, erosion-resistant
surfaces.
Where fills are to be placed against existing slopes steeper than 5(h): 1 (v), and
the depth of fill exceeds 5 feet, the existing slopes should be benched into
competent bedrock materials to provide a series of level benches to seat the fill
and to remove potential native soil. The benches should be a minimum of 4 feet
in width, constructed at approximately 4-foot vertical intervals.
In addition, a shear key should be constructed across the toe of fill slopes. The
shear key should be a minimum of 15 feet wide and should penetrate a minimum
of 2 feet beneath the toe of the slope into firm and competent bedrock.
NTS Project No. 23477 Page I 14
----~
GEOTECHNICAL
Slope Protection
Inasmuch as the native materials are susceptible to erosion by wind and running
water, it is our recommendation that the slopes at the project be planted as soon
as possible after completion. The use of succulent ground covers, such as
iceplant or sedum, is not recommended . If watering is necessary to sustain plant
growth on slopes, then the watering operation should be monitored to assure
proper operation of the water system and to prevent over watering.
Measures should be provided to prevent surface water from flowing over slope
faces.
Rodent infestation can also be a serious issue with respect to slope stability.
Rodent tunneling and burrowing alters the strength of the soil and can allow
water to infiltrate the soil, resulting in ultimate slope failure. Rodent burrows can
also provide direct access for surface water to the slope face, causing surficial
slope "blowouts". Although a maintenance issue, we recommend that measures
be taken to prevent rodent infestation in slopes.
Seismic Design
Our recommendations for seismic design parameters have been developed in
accordance with 2022 CBC and ASCE 7-16 (ASCE, 2016) standards. The
applicable site class is C based on the results of our field investigation. The table
presents the seismic design parameters for the site that are obtained from USGS
Design Ground Motions website and are based on the ASCE 7-16 and 2022
California Building Code.
NTS Project No. 23477 Page I 15
--~~
GEOTECHNICAL
2022 CBC and ASCE 7-16 Seismic Design Parameters
Seismic Item Design 2016 ASCE 7-16 or
Values<a> 2019 CBC Reference
Site Class based on soil profile (ASCE 7-16 Table C ASCE 7-16 Table 20.3-1
20.3-1)
Short Period Spectral Acceleration Ss 1.007 CBC Fiaures 1613.2.1 (1-8)
1-sec. Period Spectral Acceleration S1 0.368 CBC Fiqures 1613.2.1 (1 -8}
Site Coefficient Fa (2019 CBC Table 1613.2.3(1)) 1.2 CBC Table 161 3.2.3 (1)
Site Coefficient Fv (2019 CBC Table 1613.2.3(2)} 1.5 CBC Table 161 3.2.3 (2)
Short Period MCE. Spectral Acceleration SMs SMs= 1.209 CBC Equation 16-36
Fa Ss
1-sec. Period MCE Spectral Acceleration SM1 SM1 = 0.552 CBC Equation 16-37
Fv S1
Short Period Design Spectral Acceleration Sos Sos= 0.806 CBC Equation 16-38
2/3SMs
1-sec. Period Design Spectral Acceleration S01 So1 0.368 CBC Equation 16-39
= 2/3SM1
MCE<bl Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) 0.441 ASCE 7-16 Fiaures 22-9 to 22-13
Site Coefficient FPGA (ASCE 7-16 Table 11 .8-1) 1.2 ASCE 7-16 Table 11.8-1
Modified MCE<bl Peak Ground Acceleration (PGAM) 0.529 ASCE 7-16 Eauation 11.8-1
Seismic Design Category D ASCE 7-16 Tables 11.6.1 and
11.6.2
<a) Design Values Obtained from USGS Earthquake Hazards Program website that are
based on the ASCE-7-16 and 2022 CBC and site coordinates of N33.175831 ° and
W11 7.3296261 °.
(b) MCE: Maximum Considered Earthquake.
It should be recognized that much of southern California is subject to some level
of damaging ground shaking as a result of movement along the major active (and
potentially active) fault zones that characterize this region . Design utilizing the
2022 CBC is not meant to completely protect against damage or loss of function.
Therefore, the preceding parameters should be considered as minimum design
criteria.
Shallow Foundation Design and Construction
As discussed previously, a portion of the new building and retaining wall may be
supported on a shallow foundation system, embedded into competent bedrock.
The shallow foundation system may be sized based on the geotechnical
parameters provided in the table below.
NTS Project No. 23477 Page 116
--~~
GEOTECHNICAL
Shallow Foundation Design Parameters
Bearing Material ■ Competent bedrock
Minimum Footing Size ■ Width: 12 inches
■ Embedment: A minimum of 18 inches into
competent bedrock
■ An allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 psf for
the minimum footing size given above.
■ The above value may be increased by 1/3 for
Allowable Bearing Capacity temporary loads such as wind or earthquake.
■ Total static settlement is estimated to be 1
Settlement inch with differential settlement estimated to
be approximately ½ inch over a span of 30
feet.
Allowable Lateral Passive ■ 300 pcf (equivalent fluid pressure)
Resistance ■ Footings into bedrock
Allowable Coefficient of ■ 0.35
Friction
Retaining Wall Design
We recommend that the new wall be design and constructed in accordance with
the following recommendations:
Foundation Recommendations
Retaining walls foundation may be sized based on the recommendations
presented in "Shallow Foundation Design and Construction" section of this
report.
Lateral Earth Pressure
The values presented below assume surcharge loads are not applied. In
addition, the recommended design lateral earth pressure is calculated assuming
that a drainage system will be installed behind the retaining walls and that
external hydrostatic pressure will not develop. Where adequate drainage is not
provided behind the walls, further evaluation should be conducted by the project
NTS Project No. 23477 Page 117
---~ GEOTECHNICAL
geotechnical engineer and the lateral earth pressures will need to be adjusted
accordingly.
Unrestrained Wall:
Unrestrained Wall:
40 pct for level backfill
60 pct for 2H :1V backfill
The unrestrained values are applicable only when the walls are designed and
constructed as cantilevered walls allowing sufficient wall movement to mobilize
"active" pressure conditions. This wall movement should be less than 0.01 H (H =
height of wall) for the unrestrained values to be applicable.
Vertical surcharge loads within 1: 1 project from the bottom of the wall distributed
over retained soils should be considered as additional uniform horizontal
pressure acting on the wall. All permanent surcharge loading conditions should
be evaluated on a case-by-case basis by NTS.
Drainage
The backdrain system should consist of 4-inch perforated pipe surrounded by at
least one cubic foot of ¾" -1.5" open graded gravel wrapped in Mirafi 140N
fabric or equivalent. The perforated pipe should consist of SDR-35 or Schedule
40 PVC pipe or approved equivalent laid on at least 2 inch of crushed rock with
the perforations laid down. The back drain gradient should not be less than 1
percent. The perforated pipe should outlet into area drains or other suitable outlet
points at runs 200 feet or less, if practical. If the back drains cannot be outleted
by gravity flow, a sump pump system will need to be designed and constructed.
Redundant back-up pumps or components are recommended. Design of the
system is outside of the purview of NTS.
Waterproofing
The back side of the retaining walls should be waterproofed prior to placement of
subdrains or backfill. Waterproofing is outside of our purview and should be
designed by a waterproofing consultant.
Wall Backfill
Backfill behind the wall may consist of onsite material approved by NTS. The
backfill should be moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content and
compacted to achieve at least 90 percent relative compaction in accordance with
ASTM D1557.
Drainage Control
The control of surface water is essential to the satisfactory performance of the
site improvements. Surface water should be controlled so that conditions of
NTS Project No. 23477 Page 118
__ .;...~
GEOTECHNICAL
uniform moisture are maintained beneath the improvements, even during periods
of heavy rainfall. The following recommendations are considered minimal:
• Ponding and areas of low flow gradients should be avoided.
• If bare soil within 5 feet of the structure is not avoidable, then a gradient of
5 percent or more should be provided sloping away from the improvement.
Corresponding paved surfaces should be provided with a gradient of at
least 2 percent.
• The remainder of the unpaved areas should be provided with a drainage
gradient of at least 2 percent.
• Positive drainage devices, such as graded swales, paved ditches, and/or
catch basins should be employed to accumulate and to convey water to
appropriate discharge points.
• Concrete walks and flatwork should not obstruct the free flow of surface
water.
• Brick flatwork should be sealed by mortar or be placed over an
impermeable membrane.
• Area drains should be recessed below grade to allow free flow of water
into the basin.
• Enclosed raised planters should be sealed at the bottom and provided
with an ample flow gradient to a drainage device. Recessed planters and
landscaped areas should be provided with area inlet and subsurface drain
pipes.
• Planters should not be located adjacent to the structures wherever
possible. If planters are to be located adjacent to the structures, the
planters should be positively sealed, should incorporate a subdrain, and
should be provided with free discharge capacity to a drainage device.
• Planting areas at grade should be provided with positive drainage.
Wherever possible, the grade of exposed soil areas should be established
above adjacent paved grades. Drainage devices and curbing should be
provided to prevent runoff from adjacent pavement or walks into planted
areas.
• Gutter and downspout systems should be provided to capture discharge
from roof areas. The accumulated roof water should be conveyed to off-
site disposal areas by a pipe or concrete swale system.
• Landscape watering should be performed judiciously to preclude either
soaking or desiccation of soils. The watering should be such that it just
sustains plant growth without excessive watering. Sprinkler systems
should be checked.
Review, Observation, and Testing
The recommendations presented in this report are contingent upon review of final
plans and specifications for the project by NTS. NTS Geotechnical, Inc. should
NTS Project No. 23477 Page 119
' ---~ GEOTECHNICAL
review and verify in writing the compliance of the final grading plan and the final
foundation plans with the recommendations presented in this report.
It is recommended that NTS be retained to provide Geotechnical Consulting
services during the earthwork operations and foundation installation process.
This is to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications and
recommendations and to allow for design changes in the event that subsurface
conditions differ from those anticipated during our subsurface investigation.
It is the responsibility of the owner and their representative to bring any
deviations or unexpected conditions observed during construction to the attention
of NTS Geotechnical, in order for supplemental recommendations can be made
with a minimum delay to the project. Construction should be observed and/or
testing at the following stages by NTS Geotechnical, Inc.:
• Periodic observation during installation of shallow foundation.
• Periodic observation during installation of drainage behind retaining walls.
• Continuous observation during compaction behind retaining wall.
• When unusual conditions are encountered.
If any of these inspections to verify site geotechnical conditions are not
performed by NTS Geotechnical, liability for the safety and stability of the project
is limited only to the actual portions of the project that is observed and approved
by NTS Geotechnical.
LIMITATIONS
All parties reviewing or utilizing this report should recognize that the findings,
conclusions, and recommendations presented represent the results of our
professional geological and geotechnical engineering efforts and judgments.
Due to the inexact nature of the state of the art of these professions and the
possible occurrence of undetected variables in subsurface conditions, we cannot
guarantee that the conditions actually encountered during grading and site
construction will be identical to those observed, sampled , and interpreted during
our study, or that there are no unknown subsurface conditions which could have
an adverse effect on the use of the property. We have exercised a degree of
care comparable to the standard of practice presently maintained by other
professionals in the fields of geotechnical engineering and engineering geology,
and believe that our findings present a reasonably representative description of
geotechnical conditions and their probable influence on the grading and use of
the property.
Our conclusions and recommendations are based on the assumption that our
firm will act as the geotechnical engineer of record during construction and
grading of the project to observe the actual conditions exposed, to verify our
NTS Project No. 23477 Page 120
' --~~
GEOTECHNICAL
design concepts and the grading contractor's general compliance with the project
geotechnical specifications, and to provide our revised conclusions and
recommendations should subsurface conditions differ significantly from those
used as the basis for our conclusions and recommendations presented in this
report. Since our conclusions and recommendations are based on a limited
amount of current and previous geotechnical exploration and analysis, all parties
should recognize the need for possible revisions to our conclusions and
recommendations during grading of the project.
It should be further noted that the recommendations presented herein are
intended solely to minimize the effects of post-construction soil movements.
Consequently, minor cracking and/or distortion of all on-site improvements
should be anticipated.
This report has not been prepared for the use by other parties or projects other
than those named or described herein. This report may not contain sufficient
information for other parties or other purposes.
NTS Project No. 23477 Page 121
' --~~
GEOTECHNICAL
REFERENCES
American Concrete Institute, 2014, Building Code Requirements for Structural
Concrete (ACI 318-14).
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2017, Minimum Design Loads for
Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE 7-16.
California Building Standards Commission, 2022, California Building Code,
California Code of Regulations Title 24, Volume 2.
Coduto, Donald P., 1994, Foundation Design: Principles and Practices: Prentice-
Hall, Inc, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Naval Facilities Eng ineering Command, 1986, NAVFAC Design Manual.
Tan, S.S., and Kennedy, M.P., Geologic Maps of the Northwestern Part of San
Diego County, California, dated 1996.
United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2008, Unified Hazard Tool, Dynamic:
Conterminous U.S. 2014 (update) (v4.2.0), Retrieved May 14, 2020, from:
https :/ /earthquake. usgs. gov/hazards/interactive/
NTS Project No. 23477 Page 122
...
'
Oceanside Bl
TaUch
SITE LOCATION
>!Junction
SouthOcea
J""" ~
1Carlsbad
0
:::0 a ~
ROBERTSON
RANCH
LOCATION MAP
-~~ Date:
GEOTECHNICAL ._P-ro-Jec-t N-o.-: --2-34-77---t
October 19, 2023 Plate
1
x T<t n ~:u, \
\" \ \ ~·
.. 4; I'S
\711
X ••&.a,
,FS 1•688
I'S •7.18
~
'm~
\
\ X •• ,,. \ , •
·"' \ ~ 1~1l \41_.'J~-
X 1,,39 \ \
\11•~ ~-\
• .,__.. I ._,. -■-.,.,,,,, __ ,,,,, .s,16' ___ ,,, • _,
'\c ., _,\ \
' y ""°~.., '\ -, '~ ,,.~ k . :~'54~. ~~
~ . ~ \
'\
'+ "
.o. ~ •. I~
9'vJt~t,..\.~
... e
*/ -<roe X 1~65
,r
LEGEND
,48.22
' ~ TP-1 ., APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
TEST PIT
\
~ T:
'~\)~~
\'\~\_\'l: ~s-
.,.. [ CP-IIAC '£ CP •1~28
-n--' ..... (1
' ' '
~ .,A .• •
.,A
-~-73 --
X 153.72
\
' ' .... X 154.69 ~ X "M.J1
~ ~ "15,z5 ,,..
SQ '1'\ --~-0 :l: ~~ C
x ~ •-~~~ ~~ ,,..
Qs NATIVE SOIL GEOT
>-< ~ 1160 160 a..
PROPOSED ADU I \ \ (f) I LVIC"TU..lf"' I PROPOSED ADU ---0 I
~
Tsa I 150 150 TP-2
I
i
-~LJ I
Tsa
Tsa Tsa
140 140
130 130
120 120
110 110
10 20 30 40 50 60 10 20 30 40 50
1" = 10'
Gee
SLOT CUT ANALYSIS
rx---1
SLOT CUT
Height of Slot cut, H =
Width of Slot cut, X =
Surcharge, q =
Unit weight of soil, y =
Friction angle of soil, $ =
Cohesion of soil, C =
Angle of Influence, $i =
Length of Failure surface, L =
Depth of Centroid from surface, d =
X-SECTION
6 ft
8 ft
1 kips/ ft
120 pcf
28.9 degree
256 psf
59.5 degree
7.0 ft
2.0 ft
1) FORCES ALONG BEDDING FOR UNIT WIDTH (Base of Wedge)
Area of Failure, A= 10. 6 ft2
Weight, W = 1.3 kips/ ft
W+q = 2.3 kips/ ft
Tangent Force, FT= 2. 0 kips/ ft
Normal Force, FN =
R = FN tan $ + L x C =
1.2 kips/ft
2.4 kips/ ft
2) RESISTING FORCES ALONG SIDES OF WEDGE
Area in X-section, As = 10. 6 ft'
Average lntergranular stress, 1 = 324.5 psf
Rs = 2 ,: As = 6. 9 kips
3) FACTOR OF SAFETY
F. S. = (RX+ Rs)/ (FT X) = 1.68 > 1.25
ANALYSIS OF SLOT CUT
---~
GEOTECHNICAL
DATE: 10/20/23
2262 Avenida Magnifica
Carlsbad, CA
23477 PLATE 4
---~
GEOTECHNICAL
APPENDIX A
Field Exploration
Appendix A
Field Exploration
---~ G EOTECH N ICAL
The subsurface exploration program for the proposed project consisted of advancing
two (2) 4-inch-diameter, hand tool test pits and two (2) hand dug 2 feet by 3 feet test pit.
The test pits were advanced to depths ranging from 3.0 to 8.0 feet below the existing
grade.
The Test Pit Logs are presented as Figures A-2 to A-5. The Test Pit Logs describe the
earth materials encountered, samples obtained, and show the field and laboratory tests
performed. The log also shows the test pit number, drilling date, and the name of the
logger and drilling subcontractor. The test pits were logged by an engineer using the
Unified Soil Classification System. The boundaries between soil types shown on the
logs are approximate because the transition between different soil layers may be
gradual. Drive samples of representative earth materials were obtained from the
borings.
A California modified sampler was used to obtain drive samples of the soil encountered.
This sampler consists of a 3-inch outside diameter (O.D .), 2.4-inch inside diameter (I.D.)
split barrel shaft that was driven a total of 6-inches into the soil at the bottom of the
boring by a safety hammer. The soil was retained in brass rings for laboratory testing.
Additional soil from each drive remaining in the cutting shoe was usually discarded after
visually classifying the soil.
Upon completion of the test pits, the pits were backfilled with soil from the cuttings.
NTS Project No. 23477 Page 1
Project: 2262 Avenida Magnifica ~ Key to Log of Boring
P . t Lo at·on· 2262 Avenida Magnlfica, roJeC C I • Carlsbad GEOTECHNICAL Sheet 1 of 1
Project Number: 23411
~ 'tl C: ~ a. "' iii 0 E
-~
·u; Q) c _g>
Q) a. Cl ~ ~ a, a:: ~ 0 C:
~ f-Cl ...J 0
Q) .!: ~ iii 0 (.) ·c
.J:: ci a. u; ·c: i: i ::> a. E E ~ ~ a. i !
Q)
0 "' en "'0 "' en 1i :ii: ~ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION ~ ~ REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS (!) 0
~ ~
L1J .£ w L1J w
COLUMN DESCRIPTIONS
1.§J llJ w ~
z ~ IT] Depth (feet): Depth in feet below the ground surface. (§] MATERIAL DESCRIPTION: Description of material encountered.
g [l] Sample Type: Type of soil sample collected at the depth interval May include consistency, moisture, color, and other descriptive
~ shown. text. [1l Sampling Resistance, blows/ft: Number of blows to advance driven [I] Water Content,%: Water content of the soil sample, expressed as ! sampler one foot (or distance shown) beyond seating interval percentage of dry weight of sample.
g using the hammer identified on the boring log. I!] Dry Unit Weight, pcf: Dry weight per unit volume of soil sample ~ [ii Material Type: Type of material encountered. measured in laboratory, in pounds per cubic foot.
~ [ID Graphic Log: Graphic depiction of the subsurface material I]] REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS: Comments and observations
~ encountered. regarding drilling or sampling made by driller or field personnel. r FIELD AND LABO RA TORY TEST ABBREVIATIONS
"' CHEM: Chemical tests to assess corrosivity ! COMP: Compaction test i CONS: One-dimensional consolidation test
:i: LL: Liquid Limit, percent
~ i MATERIAL GRAPHIC SYMBOLS
] ~ Sandstone
t,;~ ii ~ TYPICAL SAMPLER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS :;,
~ ~ Auger sampler ~ 11 I ~ Bulk Sample
i ~I 3-inch-OD California wl
~ ~ brass rings
i 0..
rn CME Sampler
rn Grab Sample
12.5-inch-OD Modified
California wl brass liners
Pl: Plasticity Index, percent
SA: Sieve analysis
OS: Direct Shear
El: Expansion Index
WA: Wash sieve (percent passing No. 200 Sieve)
□fl Poorly graded SAND with Silt (SP-SM)
OTHER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS
~ Pitcher Sample --¥ Water level (at time of drilling, ATD)
~ Water level (after waiting, AW) ~ 2-inch-OD unlined split
~ spoon(SPT) 1 r\ij Shelby Tube (Thin-walled, _
Minor change in material properties within a
stratum
~ fixed head)
-lnferred/gradalional contact between strata
-?-Queried contact between strata
"' GENERAL NOTES ii E 1: Soil classifications are based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive, and actual l~hologic changes may be ~ gradual. Field descriptions may have been modified to reflect results of lab tests.
al 2: Descriptions on these logs apply only at the specific boring locations and at the time the borings were advanced. They are not warranted to be representative
2 of subsurface conditions at other locations or times.
~ <( u z :i: u w ti w (!)
rn 1-z
-~ 0 ~ 0 ~
~ ~ :,: ;1 0----------------------------------------------------~ Figure A-1
a:
~ E g
0
1 :'.l 5 z :i: u w .... 0 w (.?
en .... z
~ ~ 0 ~
1 ;I
Project: 2262 Avenida Magnifica ~ P . t L t· 2262 Avenida Magnifica, rOJeC OCa Jon: Carlsbad GEOTECHNICAL
Project Number: 23411
Date(s) 10/10/2023 Drilled Logged By CAC
Drilling Drill Bit 4.,
Method Hand Tools SizerType
Drill Rig Hand Tools Drilling .
Type Contractor Juan Garcia
Groundwater Level N
and Date Measured ot Encountered Sampling M d'f" d C l'f • Method(s) o 1 1e a I orn1a
Borehole . Backfill Native
8 C
<O iii
Q) "iii Q) ~ a:::
~ I-C)
~ § !E .s:: a. ,,, a. E E 3: Q) <O <O 0 0 (/) (/) 7i
0
5
10
Q) a. ~ ro j
<O :E
C) 0 ...J
0 :.c a. <O c!i
Location 22412 Sentar Road, Woodland Hills
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
NATIVE SOIL (Qs):
SAND SIL TY SAND, fine to coarse-grained. some organics,
dark brown
BEDROCK (Tsa): SANTIAGO FORMATION
SANDSTONE, fine to coarse-grained, massive, moderately
hard, slightly weathered, orange linear features, crumbly,
light gray to tan
moist
some clay, dark brown to brown
moist
Total Depth = 8.0 feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled with native
Log of Boring TP-1
Sheet 1 of 1
Checked By NS
Total Depth
of Borehole B.O feet
Approximate
Surface Elevation N/ A
Hammer N/A
Data
11
7
·2
:J t REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS
102
118
15....1........1. __ _._ __ _.__.__ _____________________ __,.___..___....._ ___________ _,
i..i ____________________________________________________ J
Figure A-2
"' ii E ~
al ~ ~ ~ z I u ~ w (.?
(/) ,.... z
~ ,§
~ ~ ~ ~ 5: :2
Project: 2262 Avenida Magnifica ~ P . t L t· 2262 Avenlda Magnlfica, roJeC OCa 10n: Carlsbad GEOTECHNICAL Project Number: 23477
Date(s) 10/10/2023 Dnlled Logged By CAC
Drilling Drill Bit 4.,
Method Hand Tools Size/Type
TDrill Rig Hand Tools Drilling .
ype Contractor Juan Garcia
Groundwater Level
and Date Measured Not Encountered Sampling M d·t· d C 1·t • Method(s) o 1 1e a I orma
Borehole .
Backfill Native
~ C: "' iii
Ql ·;;;
Ql ~ a. 0:::
~ f-Cl
_g/ .!: ¢:
.s:: a. u5 0. E E ~ Ql "' "' 0 0 Cl) Cl) J5
0
5
10
Cl 0 ...J u :E a. ~ (!)
Location 22412 Sentar Road, Woodland Hills
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
NATIVE SOIL (Qs):
SAND SILTY SAND, fine to coarse-grained, some organics,
dark brown
BEDROCK (Tsa): SANTIAGO FORMATION
SANDSTONE, fine to coarse-grained, massive, moderately
hard , slightly weathered, orange linear features, crumbly,
light gray to tan
moist
brown
very moist
Total Depth = 7.5 feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled with native
Log of Boring TP-2
Sheet 1 of 1
Checked By NS
Total Depth 7 5 f t
of Borehole • ee
Approximate N/A
Surface Elevation
Hammer N/A
Data
9
't3 a.
"i:
::::i
~ REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS
106
14 119
15-'---'--....I....--..L.--'------------------------'----'--....1....-----------_...J
c:;..._ ___________________________________________________ ..,
Figure A-3
Project: 2262 Avenida Magnifica
P . t L t' 2262 Avenida Magnifica, roJeC OCa IOn: Carlsbad
Project Number: 23411
Date(s) 10/10/2023 Drilled
Drilling Method Hand Tools
---~
GEOTECHNICAL
Log of Boring TP-3
Sheet 1 of 1
Logged By CAC Checked By NS
Drill Bit 2 3 T ts Pit Total Depth 4 S f t
Size/Type x e of Borehole • ee
-Drill Rig Drilling . Approximate ~ Type Hand Tools Contractor Juan Garcia Surface Elevation NIA
"' Groundwater Level N E d Sampling M d'f' d C l'f • Hammer N/A
*l-=-an~d:...D=.a::.;t.:.e~M:..:e.:.as:..:u:...re:..:d:..___o_t_n_c_o_u_n_te_r_e ____ +M:.:.:..:.et:...h.:.od:..:(c:,s):...__0_1_1e __ a_1_o_r_n_1a ______ ....1..D=-a:...t=-a----------------l
j :~~~~~le Native Location 22412 Sentar Road, Woodland Hills
~----...--.---....... --....... --.------------------------r--...,....-....... -------------,,----z ;;
.E g
g
a. ...
8 ...J
g
6 a,
~ ~
1 ! " a:: ~ :f
" C: .. J
..
5i J
al I! ~ <( u z J: u w ti w (.!)
(/) ... z
" .~ 0 " ~ .. ~ 3l ;i
'fil' ~
.I:: a.
J I-
G) C. E
2i" C (1l ui ·;;;
G)
0::
Cl ~ !:: a. 1/)
G) a. Cl ~ 0 ...J
cii 0
j :.c a. ~~ (1l (1l ~ en en .o ~ (!) ~ !~! ~ ~ ! i I ~ I MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
SP-SM : ~ SP..SM ~
Sandston< ][ r!
Sandston,
5-
10-
NATIVE SOIL (Qs):
SAND SIL TY SAND, fine to coarse-grained, some organics,
brown /
damp
BEDROCK (Tsa): SANTIAGO FORMATION
SANDSTONE, fine to coarse-grained, massive, moderately -
hard, slightly weathered, crumbly, tan
moist, orange to brown
Total Depth = 4.5 feet
'-Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled with native
..
..
.....
-
-
-
-
-
0
't?-a.
"i :E Cl 2 ~ C 0 (.) ~ ~ 2 ::>
(1l ~ REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS 3: 0
6 81
9 98
15.....L--L--...L.---L--.I......----------------------'----'---'--------------'
u'-___________________________________________________ ....,
Figure A-4
' Project: 2262 Avenida Magnifica
P . t L t· 2262 Avenlda Magnifica, roJec oca 10n: Carlsbad ---~ GEOTECHNICAL
Log of Boring TP-4
Sheet 1 of 1
Project Number: 23411
Date(s) 10/10/2023 Drilled Logged By CAC Checked By NS
MDreiltlhinogd Hand Tools Drill Bit 2x3 Tets Pit Total Depth 3 0 feet Size/Type of Borehole •
£ Drill Rig Hand Tools Drilling J G . Approximate N/A
;;;,i-:,.Ty!..!.p::e:__ ______________ -+.:.C.:.on:..::t:.:ra:.:ct=o.:..r _u_a_n_a_r_c_ia _________ +-S.:.u:...rf:..::a:.:c.:..e.:.E:..::le.:..va.:..t;..:io.:..n ___________ -1
a, Groundwater Level Sampling M d'f' d C l'f • Hammer ., and Date Measured Not Encountered Method(s) o 1 1e a I orrna Data NIA J :~~:~~le Native Location 22412 Sentar Road, Woodland Hills
"',-----,.---.....---.....--"T""----------------------..--....--.....-------------.----' ~ g
.,
.~ 0 ~ ~
I ill ::2
fi C <II '1ii
-~
'iii Q) ~ IX
~ I-Cl
Q) :§ E ,,:; 0. a."' ii E E 3: Q) <II <II 0 0 (/) (/) J5
0
-
5-
-
10-
Q) a. ~
ni j
<II :E
g,
...J
(.) :2 a. ~ (.!) MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
SP-SM • NATIVE SOIL (Qs):
SP-SM 7 SAND SIL TY SAND, fine to coarse-grained, some organics,
1::--,-,--i~~•~'l-brown
'3andstonE[lj ~ \ moist /
~ BEDROCK (Tsa): SANTIAGO FORMATION
~ C
'i 2 C 0
t)
~ 2 ~
7
t,andslane ~ SANDSTONE, fine to coarse-grained, massive, moderately I hard, slightly weathered, crumbly, tan 9
'\. moist /
Total Depth = 3.0 feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled with native
-
-
-
._
'o a.
:E Cl ~
~ :::::,
~ REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS 0
85
110
15-'---'--...J.... __ ..J...._.,__ ______________________ ..__ _ _._ _ _,_ ___________ __,
'-'"-----------------------------------------------------' Figure A-5
---~
GEOTECHNICAL
APPENDIX B
Laboratory Testing Data
---~
GEOTECHNICAL
Appendix B
Geotechnical Laboratory Testing
Laboratory Moisture Content and Density Tests
The moisture content and dry densities of selected driven samples obtained from the
exploratory boring was evaluated in general accordance with the latest version of ASTM
D 2937. The test results are presented on the log of the exploratory boring in Appendix
A.
Direct Shear Tests
Direct shear tests were performed on selected remolded and relatively undisturbed soil
samples in general accordance with ASTM D 3080 to evaluate the shear strength
characteristics of the materials. The samples were inundated during shearing to represent
adverse field conditions. Direct shear test results are attached to this Appendix B.
Corrosion Suite
The corrosion potential of typical on-site materials under long-term contact with both
metal and concrete was determined by chemical and electrical resistance tests. The
soluble sulfate test for potential concrete corrosion was performed in general
accordance with ASTM D4327. The test results are attached to this Appendix B.
Boring Depth pH As-ls-Soil Minimum Chloride Sulfate
No. (feet) Resistivity Soil (ppm) (ppm)
(ohm-cm) Resistivity
(ohm-cm)
TP-3 4.0 6.93 3,600 680 200 550
NTS Project No. 23477 Page 1
• October 18, 2023
Project 234 77
Page 4
Pllfe: S-1
Direct Shear Test Diagram (D-3080) P.N. 23477
-LI. Cl)
C. -,n ,n
Cl,) ... -Cl) ... ca Cl,) .c Cl)
2000
1500
1000
Sample
Deacrlntlon
Bedrock
Soll Dry Density (PCF)
Soll Moisture Contant (%)
Soll Saturation(%)
Sample
Identification
TP-1 @ 2.0'
102
23
98.1
Teat Sample Number of
Twe TeatStata Panea
Ultimate Saturated 1
Shear S th Values:
Phi (Degreee) 28.1
Cohesion PSF 466.3
0 ..,_ ____ ,._ ____ ,._ ____ ...,. ____ ...,. ____ ...,. ____ .,.
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Normal Stress (PSF)
' October I 8, 2023 Page 5
, Proj ect 23477
PLATE: i-2
Direct Shear Test Diagram (D-3080) P.N. 23477 I
Sample Sample T•t Sample Number of
Descrlntlon Identification Tys,e Test State p .....
Native TP-3 <@ 0.5' Ultimate Saturated 1
Soll Ory Density (PCF) 91 Shear Strenath Valua:
Soll Moisture Contant (%) 30.5 Phi (Oegr ... ) I 28.9
Soll Saturation f%) 98.9 Cohesion (PSF) 256.0
2000
-u.
(/)
Q. -1/) 1500 1/)
Q)
'--(/)
'-CV Q) .c (/)
1000
0 -t-____ ..,__ ____ ..,__ ____ ...,.. ____ ..,.. ____ .....,. ____ _.
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Normal Stress (PSF)
--~
ENGINEERING
RETAINING WALL
CALCULATIONS
2262 Avenida Magnifica
Carlsbad, CA
NTS PROJECT NO. 23477
MARCH 13, 2024
PC2023-0028
CITY ffe
2262 AVENIDA MAGNIFICA
DECRON PROPERTIES: 2 HUD APPROVED
MANUFACTURED HOMES (650 SF EACH) TO BE
INSTALLED ON PERMANENT FOUNDATIONS
1672503800
4/19/2024
PC2023-0028
Project Title:
Engineer:
Project ID:
Project Descr:
CARLSBAD -VILLA HOMES
NS
23477
Cantilevered Retaining Wall Project File: 23477 _6 ft retain wall calcs_backup_ 1.ec6
UC#: KW-06019160, Build:20.23.10.02
DESCRIPTION: 2-4 ft RETAINING WALL
NTS ENGINEERING
Code Reference.
Calculations per IBC 2018 1807.3, CBC 2019, ASCE 7-16
Criteria
Retained Height
Wall height above soil
Slope Behind Wall
Height of Soil over Toe
Water table above
bottom of footing
Surcharge Loads
3.50 ft
0.50 ft
2.00
6.00 in
0.0 ft
Surcharge Over Heel 0.0 psf
Used To Resist Sliding & Overturning
Surcharge Over Toe 0.0
Used for Sliding & Overturning
Axial Load Applied to Stem
Axial Dead Load
Axial Live Load
Axial Load Eccentricity
0.0 lbs
0.0 lbs
0.0 in
Soil Data
Allow Soil Bearing = 2,500.0 psf
Equivalent Fluid Pressure Method
Active Heel Pressure = 60.0 psf/ft
=
Passive Pressure = 300. 0 psf/ft
Soil Density, Heel = 110.00 pct
Soil Density, Toe = 110.00 pct
FootingllSoil Friction 0.400
Soil height to ignore
for passive pressure = 12.00 in
Lateral Load Applied to Stem
Lateral Load
... Height to Top
... Height to Bottom
Load Type
Wind on Exposed Stem =
(Strength Level)
0.0 #/ft
0.00 ft
0.00 ft
Wind (W)
(Service Level)
0.0 psf
(c) ENERCALC INC 1983-2023
. .
Adjacent Footing Load
Adjacent Footing Load = 0.0 lbs
Footing Width 0.00 ft
Eccentricity o.oo in
Wall to Fig CL Dist 0.00 ft
Footing Type Spread Fooling
Base Above/Below Soil 0.0 ft at Back of Wall =
Poisson's Ratio 0.300
Cantilevered Retaining Wall
UC#: KW-06019160, Build:20.23.10.02
DESCRIPTION: 2-4 ft RETAINING WALL
Project Title:
Engineer:
Project ID:
Project Descr:
CARLSBAD -VILLA HOMES
NS
23477
Project File: 23477 _6 ft retain wall calcs_backup_ 1.ec:6
NTS ENGINEERING (c) ENERCALC INC 1983-2023
Design Summary Stem Construction Bottom
Stem OK
Design Height Above Ftg ft= 0.00
Wall Stability Ratios Wall Material Above "Ht" = Masonry
Overturning 1.78 OK Design Method ASD SD SD
Sliding 1.75 OK Thickness 8.00
Global Stability 1.52 Rebar Size = # 4
Rebar Spacing = 16 00
Total Bearing Load = 894 lbs Rebar Placed at Edge
... resultant ecc. = 10.32 in Design Data
Eccentricity outside middle third fb/FB + fa/Fa 0.359
Soil Pressure @ Toe 669 psf OK Total Force@ Section
Soil Pressure @ Heel 0 psf OK Service Level lbs= 367.5
Allowable 2,500 psf Strength Level lbs=
Soil Pressure Less Than Allowable Moment....Actual
ACI Factored @ Toe = 937 psf Service Level ft-#= 428.8
ACI Factored @ Heel O psf Strength Level ft-#=
Footing Shear@ Toe 5.7 psi OK Moment. .... Allowable 1,193.2 Footing Shear@ Heel 1.9 psi OK Shear ..... Actual Allowable 82.2 psi Service Level psi= 4.0
Sliding Cales Strength Level psi=
Lateral Sliding Force = 653.3 lbs Shear ..... Allowable psi= 43.6
less 100% Passive Force 787.5 lbs Anet (Masonry) in2 = 91.50
less 100% Friction Force --357.6 lbs Wall Weight psi= 0.0
Added Force Req'd 0.0 lbs OK Rebar Depth 'd' in= 5.25
.... for 1.5 Stability 0.0 lbs OK
Masonry Data
Vertical component of active lateral soil pressure IS NOT fm psi= 1,500
considered in the calculation of soil bearing pressures. Fs psi= 20,000
Solid Grouting Yes
Load Factors Modular Ratio 'n' = 21.48
Building Code Equiv. Solid Thick. in= 7.63
Dead Load 1.200 Masonry Block Type =
Live Load 1.600 Masonry Design Method ASD
Earth,H 1.600 Concrete Data
Wind,W 1,600 fc psi=
Seismic, E 1.000 Fy psi=
Cantilevered Retaining Wall
LIC# : KW-06019160, Build:20.23.10.02
DESCRIPTION: 2-4 ft RETAINING WALL
Footing Data
Toe Width
Heel Width
Total Footing Width
Footing Thickness
2.50 ft
1.00
3.50
12.00 in
Key Width = 8.00 in
Key Depth = 12.00 in
Key Distance from Toe = 2.50 ft
fc = 3,000 psi Fy = 60,000 psi
Footing Concrete Density = 150.00 pcf
Min. As % = 0.0018
Cover@ Top 2.00 @ Btm.= 3.00 in
Project Title:
Engineer:
Project ID:
Project Descr:
CARLSBAD -VILLA HOMES
NS
23477
Project File: 23477 _6 ft retain wall calcs_backup_ 1.ec6
NTS ENGINEERING
Footing Design Results
~ !:1tt!
Factored Pressure 937 O psf
Mu': Upward 2,015 0 ft-#
Mu' : Downward = 871 73 ft-#
Mu: Design = 1,144 OK 73 ft-#
phiMn 10,188 11 ,388 ft-#
Actual 1-Way Shear 5.65 1.91 psi
Allow 1-Way Shear 82.16 82.16 psi
Toe Reinforcing = #4 @9.00 in
Heel Reinforcing = #4@ 9.00 in
Key Reinforcing None Spec'd
Footing Torsion, Tu 0.00 ft-lbs
Footing Allow. Torsion , phi Tu 0.00 ft-lbs
If torsion exceeds allowable, provide
supplemental design for footing torsion.
Other Acceptable Sizes & Spacings
(c) ENERCALC INC 1983-2023
OK
Toe: #4@ 9.25 in, #5@ 14.35 in, #6@ 20.37 in, #7@ 27.77 in, #8@ 36.57 in, #9@
46.29 in, #10@ 58.79 in
Heel: #4@ 9.25 in, #5@ 14.35 in, #6@ 20.37 in, #7@ 27.77 in, #8@ 36.57 in, #9@
46.29 in, #10@ 58.79 in
Key: phiMn = phi•5•Iambda•sqrt(fc)*Sm
Min footing T&S reinf Area
Min footing T&S reinf Area per foot
If one layer of horizontal bars·
#4@ 9.26 in
#5@ 14.35 in
#6@20.37 in
0.91 in2
0.26 in2 tit
If two layers of horizontal bars·
#4@ 18.52 in
#5@28.70 in
#6@ 40.74 in
Project Title:
Engineer:
Project ID:
Project Descr:
CARLSBAD -VILLA HOMES
NS
23477
Cantilevered Retaining Wall Project File: 23477 _6 ft retain wall calcs_backup_ 1.ec6
UC#: KW-06019160, Build:20.23.10.02
DESCRIPTION: 2-4 ft RETAINING WALL
NTS ENGINEERING
Summary of Overturning & Resisting Forces & Moments
..... OVERTURNING .....
Force Distance Moment
Item lbs ft ft-#
HL Act Pres (ab water tbl) 653.3 1.56 1,016.3 Soil Over HL (ab. water tbl)
HL Act Pres (be water tbl) Soil Over HL (bel. water tbl)
Hydrostatic Force Water Table
Buoyant Force Sloped Soil Over Heel
Surcharge over Heel Surcharge Over Heel =
Surcharge Over Toe Adjacent Footing Load =
Adjacent Footing Load = Axial Dead Load on Stem=
Added Lateral Load • Axial Live Load on Stem =
Load @ Stem Above Soil Soil Over Toe =
= Surcharge Over Toe =
Stem Weight(s) =
Total 653.3 O.T.M. 1,016.3
Earth @ Stem Transitions=
Footing Weight
Key Weight
Resisting/Overturning Ratio = 1.78 Vert. Component =
Vertical Loads used for Soil Pressure = 893.9 lbs Total=
(c) ENERCALC INC 1983-2023
. .... RESISTING .....
Force Distance Moment
lbs ft ft-#
128.3 3.33 427.8
3.33 427.8
3.1 3.39 10.4
137.5 1.25 171.9
525.0 1.75 918.8
100.0 2.83 283.3
893.9 lbs R.M.= 1,812.1
• Axial live load NOT included in total displayed, or used for overturning
Vertical component of active lateral soil pressure IS NOT considered in
the calculation of Sliding Resistance.
Vertical component of active lateral soil pressure IS NOT considered in
the calculation of Overturning Resistance.
Tilt
resistance, but is included for soil pressure calculation.
Horizontal Deflection at Top of Wall due to settlement of soil
(Deflection due to wall bending not considered)
Soil Spring Reaction Modulus
Horizontal Defl@ Top of Wall (approximate only)
250.0 pci
0.021 in
The above calculation Is not valid if the heel soil bearing pressure exceeds that of the toe
because the wall would then tend to rotate into the retained soil
Project Title:
Engineer:
Project ID:
Project Descr:
CARLSBAD -VILLA HOMES
NS
23477
Cantilevered Retaining Wall Project File: 23477 _6 ft retain wall calcs_backup_ 1.ec:6
UC#: KW-06019160, Build:20.23.10.02
DESCRIPTION: 2-4 ft RETAINING WALL
Rebar Lap & Embedment Lengths Information
Stem Design Segment: Bottom
Stem Design Height: 0.00 ft above top of footing
Calculated Rebar Stress, fs = 7186.73 psi
NTS ENGINEERING
Lap Splice length for #4 bar specified in this stem design segment (25.4.2 .3a) =
Development length for #4 bar specified in this stem design segment =
Hooked embedment length into footing for #4 bar specified in this stem design segment =
As Provided =
As Required =
(c) ENERCALC INC 1983-2023
20.00 in
12.00 in
6.00 in
0.1500 in2/ft
0.0546 in2/ft
'
Cantilevered Retaining Wall
UC#: KW-06019160, Build:20.23. 10.02
DESCRIPTION: 2-4 ft RETAINING WALL
8" w/ #4@ 16"
Solid Grout
6"-'-------------
#4@9in
@ Toe
#4@9"
@Heel
-
-
Project Title:
Engineer:
Project ID:
Project Descr:
CARLSBAD -VILLA HOMES
NS
23477
Project File: 23477 _6 ft retain wall calcs_backup_ 1.ec:6
NTS ENGINEERING (c) ENERCALC INC 1983-2023
2
Cle r Cover : 2.125
3'-8" 3'-6" 4'-0"
•
-
2'-6" 8" 4"
2'-6" 1'-0"
3'-6" -
Cantilevered Retaining Wall
LIC#: KW-06019160, Build:20.23.10.02
DESCRIPTION: 2-4 ft RETAINING WALL
Pp• 787.50# LJ
'lii a. CX) M a;
<O <O
2'-8"
Project Title:
Engineer:
Project ID:
Project Descr:
CARLSBAD -VILLA HOMES
NS
23477
Project File: 23477 _6 ft retain wall calcs_backup_ 1.ec6
NTS ENGINEERING (c) ENERCALC INC 1983-2023
2
653#
■ Lateral earth pressure due to the soil BELOW water table
Project Title:
Engineer:
Project ID:
Project Descr:
CARLSBAD -VILLA HOMES
NS
23477
Cantilevered Retaining Wall Project File: 23477 _6 ft retain wall calcs_backup_ 1.ec6
UC#: KW-06019160, Build:20.23.10.02
DESCRIPTION: 6-FT RETAINING WALL
NTS ENGINEERING
Code Reference.
Calculations per IBC 2018 1807.3, CBC 2019, ASCE 7-16
Criteria
Retained Height
Wall height above soil
Slope Behind Wall
Height of Soil over Toe
Water table above
bottom of footing
Surcharge Loads
5.50 ft
0.50 ft
2.00
6.00 in
0.0 ft
Surcharge Over Heel = 0.0 psf
Used To Resist Sliding & Overturning
Surcharge Over Toe = 0.0
Used for Sliding & Overturning
Axial Load Applied to Stem
Axial Dead Load =
Axial Live Load
Axial Load Eccentricity =
0.0 lbs
0.0 lbs
0.0 in
Soil Data
Allow Soil Bearing = 2,500.0 psf
Equivalent Fluid Pressure Method
Active Heel Pressure 60.0 psf/ft
Passive Pressure
Soil Density, Heel
Soil Density, Toe
FootingllSoil Friction
Soil height to ignore
for passive pressure
300. o psf/ft
120.00 pct
120.00 pct
= 0.400
= 12.00 in
Lateral Load Applied to Stem
Lateral Load
... Height to Top
... Height to Bottom
Load Type
0.0 #/ft
0.00 ft
0.00 ft
= Wind (W)
(Service Level)
Wind on Exposed Stem =
(Strength Level)
0.0 psf
(c) ENERCALC INC 1983-2023
Adjacent Footing Load
Adjacent Footing Load
Footing Width
Eccentricity
Wall to Ftg CL Dist
Footing Type
Base Above/Below Soil
at Back of Wall
Poisson's Ratio
0.0 lbs
= 0.00 ft
0.00 in
0.00 ft
Spread Footing
0.0 ft
0.300
Cantilevered Retaining Wall
UC#: KW-06019160, Build:20.23.10.02
DESCRIPTION: 6-FT RETAINING WALL
Project Title:
Engineer:
Project ID:
Project Descr:
CARLSBAD -VILLA HOMES
NS
23477
Project File: 23477 _6 ft retain wall calcs_backup_ 1.ec6
NTS ENGINEERING (c) ENERCALC INC 1983-2023
Design Summary Stem Construction Bottom
Stem OK Design Height Above Fig ft= 0.00
Wall Stability Ratios Wall Material Above "Ht" Masonry
Overturning 1.63 OK Design Method ASD SD SD
Sliding 1.54 OK Thickness 8.00
Global Stability 1.32 Rebar Size = # 5
Rebar Spacing = 16.00
Total Bearing Load 2,131 lbs Rebar Placed at Edge
... resultant ecc. = 15.56 in Design Data
Eccentricity outside middle third fb/FB + fa/Fa 0.917
Soil Pressure @ Toe 1,181 psf OK Total Force@ Section
Soil Pressure @ Heel 0 psf OK Service Level lbs= 907.5
Allowable = 2,500 psf Strength Level lbs=
Soil Pressure Less Than Allowable Moment.. .. Actual
ACI Factored@ Toe = 1,653 psf Service Level ft-#= 1,663.8
ACI Factored @ Heel O psf Strength Level ft-#=
Footing Shear @ Toe 9.8 psi OK Moment. .... Allowable 1,812.8 Footing Shear @ Heel 4.9 psi OK
Allowable 82.2 psi Shear ..... Actual
Service Level psi= 9.9
Sliding Cales Strength Level psi=
Lateral Sliding Force 1,650.2 lbs Shear ..... Allowable psi= 43.6
less 100% Passive Force -1,687.5 lbs Anet (Masonry) in2= 91.50
less 100% Friction Force --852.3 lbs Wall Weight psf= 0.0
Added Force Req'd 0.0 lbs OK Rebar Depth 'd' in= 5.25
... .for 1.5 Stability = 0.0 lbs OK
Masonry Data
Vertical component of active lateral soil pressure IS NOT fm psi = 1,500
considered in the calculation of soil bearing pressures. Fs psi= 20,000
Solid Grouting Yes
Load Factors Modular Ratio 'n' 21.48
Building Code Equiv. Solid Thick. in= 7.63
Dead Load 1.200 Masonry Block Type
Live Load 1.600 Masonry Design Method ASD
Earth,H 1.600 Concrete Data
Wind,W 1.600 fc psi =
Seismic, E 1.000 Fy psi =
'
Cantilevered Retaining Wall
UC#: KW-06019160, Build:20.23.10.02
DESCRIPTION: 6-FT RETAINING WALL
Footing Data
Toe Width
Heel Width
Total Footing Width
Footing Thickness
Key Width
Key Depth
Key Distance from Toe
3.50 ft
1.50
5.00
18.00 in
12.00 in
18.00 in
3.25 ft
fc = 3,000 psi Fy = 60,000 psi
150.00 pcf
0.0018
Footing Concrete Density
Min.As%
Cover@Top 2.00 @ Btm.= 3.00 in
Project Title:
Engineer:
Project ID:
Project Descr:
CARLSBAD -VILLA HOMES
NS
23477
Project File: 23477 _6 ft retain wall calcs_backup_ 1.ec6
NTS ENGINEERING
Footing Design Results
~ .!::!«!
Factored Pressure 1,653 O psf
Mu': Upward 6,853 0 ft-#
Mu' : Downward = 2,294 534 ft-#
Mu: Design 4,558 OK 534 ft-#
phiMn 25,030 26,800 ft-#
Actual 1-Way Shear 9.77 4.89 psi
Allow 1-Way Shear = 82.16 82.16psi
Toe Reinforcing #5@9.57 in
Heel Reinforcing #5 @9.56 in
Key Reinforcing # 5@ 14.00 in
Footing Torsion, Tu = 0.00 ft-lbs
Footing Allow. Torsion, phi Tu = 0.00 ft-lbs
If torsion exceeds allowable, provide
supplemental design for footing torsion.
Other Acceptable Sizes & Spacings
(c) ENERCALC INC 1983-2023
OK
Toe: #4@ 6.17 in, #5@ 9.56 in, #6@ 13.58 in, #7@ 18.51 in, #8@ 24.38 in, #9@
30.86 in, #10@39.19 in
Heel: #4@ 6.17 in, #5@ 9.56 in, #6@ 13.58 in, #7@ 18.51 in, #8@24.38 in, #9@
30.86 in, #10@39.19 in
Key: #4@ 9.25 in, #5@ 14.35 in, #6@ 18 in, #7@ 18
Min footing T&S reinf Area
Min footing T&S reinf Area per foot
If one layer of horizontal bars·
#4@ 6.17 in
#5@ 9.57 in
#6@ 13.58 in
1.94 in2
0.39 in2 !ft
If two layers of horizontal bars·
#4@ 12.35 in
#5@ 19.14 in
#6@27.16 in
'
Project Title:
Engineer:
Project ID:
Project Descr:
CARLSBAD -VILLA HOMES
NS
23477
Cantilevered Retaining Wall Project File: 23477 _6 ft retain wall calcs_backup_ 1.ec6
UC#: KW-06019160, Build:20.23.10.02
DESCRIPTION: 6-FT RETAINING WALL
NTS ENGINEERING
Summary of Overturning & Resisting Forces & Moments
..... OVERTURNING .....
Force Distance Moment
Item lbs ft ft-#
HL Act Pres (ab water tbl) 1,650.2 2.47 4,079.7 Soil Over HL (ab. water tbl)
HL Act Pres (be water tbl) Soil Over HL (bel. water tbl)
Hydrostatic Force Water Table
Buoyant Force Sloped Soil Over Heel =
Surcharge over Heel Surcharge Over Heel
Surcharge Over Toe Adjacent Footing Load
Adjacent Footing Load Axial Dead Load on Stem =
Added Lateral Load • Axial Live Load on Stem
Load @ Stem Above Soil Soil Over Toe
Surcharge Over Toe =
Stem Weight(s) =
Total 1,650.2 O.T.M. 4,079.7
Earth @ Stem Transitions=
= Footing Weight
Key Weight =
Resisting/Overturning Ratio 1.63 Vert. Component =
Vertical Loads used for Soil Pressure = 2,130.8 lbs Total=
(c) ENERCALC INC 1983-2023
. .... RESISTING .....
Force Distance Moment
lbs ft ft-#
550.0 4.58 2,520.8
4.58 2,520.8
20.8 4.72 98.4
210.0 1.75 367.5
1,125.0 2.50 2,812.5
225.0 3.75 843.8
2,130.8 lbs R.M.= 6,643.0
• Axial live load NOT included in total displayed, or used for overturning
resistance, but is included for soil pressure calculation.
Vertical component of active lateral soil pressure IS NOT considered in
the calculation of Sliding Resistance.
Vertical component of active lateral soil pressure IS NOT considered in
the calculation of Overturning Resistance.
Tilt
Horizontal Deflection at Top of Wall due to settlement of soil
(Deflection due to wall bending not considered)
Soil Spring Reaction Modulus
Horizontal Defl @ Top of Wall (approximate only)
250.0 pci
0.039 in
The above calcuIat1on Is not valid if the heel soII bearing pressure exceeds that of the toe,
because the wall would then tend to rotate into the retained soil
Project Title:
Engineer:
Project ID:
Project Descr:
CARLSBAD -VILLA HOMES
NS
23477
Cantilevered Retaining Wall Project File: 23477 _6 ft retain wall calcs_backup_ 1.ec6
UC#: KW-06019160, Build:20.23.10.02
DESCRIPTION: 6-FT RETAINING WALL
Rebar Lap & Embedment Lengths Information
stem Design Segment· Bottom
Stem Design Height: 0.00 ft above top of footing
Calculated Rebar Stress, fs = 18355.44 psi
NTS ENGINEERING
Lap Splice length for #5 bar specified in this stem design segment (25.4.2.3a) =
Development length for #5 bar specified in this stem design segment =
Hooked embedment length into footing for #5 bar specified in this stem design segment=
As Provided =
As Required =
(c) ENERCALC INC 1983-2023
34.42 in
34.42 in
6.3g in
0.2325 in2/ft
0.2141 in2/ft
Cantilevered Retaining Wall
LIC#: KW-06019160, Build:20.23.10.02
DESCRIPTION: 6-FT RETAINING WALL
8" w/#5@ 16"
Solid Grout
6"-'------------
#5@9.568in
@Toe
#5@14in
@ Center On Key
#5@9.56"
@Heel
Project Title:
Engineer:
Project ID:
Project Descr:
CARLSBAD -VILLA HOMES
NS
23477
Project File: 23477 _6 ft retain wall calcs_backup_ 1.ec6
NTS ENGINEERING
•
3'-3" ·-o· 9• i.--------~
3'-6"
5'-0"
(c) ENERCALC INC 1983-2023
2
5q,ar Cover : 2.062 ' 6'-0"
5'-6"
1'-6" ____L
1'-6"
3"
'
Cantilevered Retaining Wall
UC#: KW-06019160, Build:20.23.10.02
DESCRIPTION: 6-FT RETAINING WALL
e,,. 1687.50# LJ
3'-7"
Project Title:
Engineer:
Project ID:
Project Descr:
CARLSBAD -VILLA HOMES
NS
23477
Project File: 23477 _6 ft retain wall calcs_backup_ 1.ec6
NTS ENGINEERING (c) ENERCALC INC 1983-2023
1650#
■ Lateral earth pressure due to the soil BELOW water table
( City of
Carlsbad
CERTIFICATION OF SCHOOL FEES PAID
This form must be completed by the City, the applicant, and the appropriate school districts and returned to the City
prior to issuing a building permit. The City will not issue any building permit without a completed school fee form.
Project# & Name: DEV2024-0078, VILLA HOMES
Permit #: PC2023-0028 -------------------
Project Address: 2262 AVENI DA MAGNI FICA
Assessor's Parcel #: 1672503800 -------------------
Project Applicant: DP CARLSBAD MAGNIFICA INVESTORS LP
(Owner Name)
Residential Square Feet:
New/Additions: -------------------
Second Dwelling Unit: 2_X...,,(6_5_0_S.c..-F),_A_D_U_s __________ _
Commercial Square Feet:
New/Additions: -------------------
City Certification: City of Carlsbad Building Division Date: 09/25/2024
Certification of Applicant/Owners. The person executing this declaration ("Owner")
certifies under penalty of perjury that ( 1) the information provided above is correct and true
to the best of the Owner's knowledge, and that the Owner will file an amended
certification of payment and pay the additional fee if Owner requests an increase in the
number of dwelling units or square footage after the building permit is issued or if the
initial determination of units or square footage is found to be incorrect, and that (2) the
Owner is the owner/developer of the above described project(s), or that the person
~ Carlsbad Unified School District
6225 El Camino Real
Carlsbad CA 92009
Phone: (760) 331-5000
D Encinitas Union School District
101 South Rancho Santa Fe Rd
Encinitas, CA 92024
Phone: (760) 944-4300 x1166
D San Dieguito Union H.S. District
684 Requeza Dr.
Encinitas, CA 92024
Phone: (760) 753-6491 Ext 5514
(By Appt. Only)
D San Marcos Unified Sch. District
255 Pico Ave Ste. 100
San Marcos, CA 92069
Phone: (760) 290-2649
Contact: Katherine Marcelja
(By Appt.only)
D Vista Unified School District
1234 Arcadia Drive
Vista CA 92083
Phone: (760) 726-2170 x2222
SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL FEE CERTIFICATION
(To be completed by the school district(s})
THIS FORM INDICATES THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE PROJECT HAVE BEEN OR WILL BE SATISFIED.
The undersigned, being duly authorized by the applicable School District, certifies that the developer, builder, or
owner has satisfied the obligation for school facilities. This is to certify that the applicant listed on page 1 has
paid all amounts or completed other applicable school mitigation determined by the School District. The City may
issue building permits for this project.
Signature of Authorized School District Official:''.)<'-, n 1 __..,,~~v:v:-,. C' J_~.,,__[ ;j)..J)_
( 1·· , ( I.. t. l--fl \. ~r-<',...co A) .
Title: ~ \ti \A(' C , \f,-\.__r,;y,( N'/V'\..?5:::-Date: C[ ~ 8--(,.. -;➔l /
CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
Name of School District: 6225 EL CAMINO REAL Phone:1 ltc\ 3 3 / -S-< .cZ>
COMMUNITY DEVELOP~~B~Ofs~~~f~f Division
1635 Faraday Ave I Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 I 442-339-2719 I building@carlsbadca.gov I www.carlsbadca gov
Doc~ign Envelope ID: 51860DCA-B543-4657-9D0D-A225FBBA2C87
{ City of
Carlsbad
REQUEST FOR
ADDRESSING
B-42
Development Services
Building Division
1635 FaradayAvenue
442-339-2719
www .ca rlsbadca .gov
As part of the development process, each proposed structure or condominium unit will receive an
individual address. New developments with two or more structures or condominium units are
required to submit a request for addressing to the building division. Building permits cannot be
issued without assigned addresses. Allow two weeks for processing of new addresses. Applicant
will be notified upon completion.
The following items must be submitted to the building division:
1. This application form;
2. Vicinity Map;
3. Copy of approved map (if applicable);
4. Copy of Tentative Assessment Parcel Number Request from County of San Diego;
5. Copy of street name approval from the Planning Division ;
6. Site plan including street names, lot numbers, driveway approaches and footprint of
structure(s) (full size and 11 x17);
7. For multiple unit or multiple building projects, a breakdown of each unit or building, lot
and use is required. Provide the information as shown on either Table 1 or Table 2 of
this application as applicable.
PROJECT NAME
Decron Reserve Carlsbad
CT/PROJECT II II OF UNITS
565 2
APPLICANT NAME (Primary Contact)
Nitasha Gates
ADDRESS
2262 Avenida Magnifica
CITY STATE ZIP
Carlsbad CA 92008
PHONE FAX
951-303-4117
EMAIL
permitting@villahomes.com
Docu~ign Envelope ID: 51860DCA-B543-4657-9D0D-A225FBBA2C87
/
TABLE 1: Multi-Unit Buildings
Tentative Assessment Building Parcel Number Floor Unit Use
000-000-000-00 1 1 1 Commercial Retail
000-000-000-00 1 1 2 Res1dent1al Condo
TABLE 2: Single Family Dwellings or Multiple Commercial/Industrial Buildings
Tentative Assessment Lot Unit Use Parcel Number
000-000-000-00 1 1 Stngle Family Dwelltng
000-000-000-00 1 2 Second Dwelltng Unit
156-080-15-00 1 1 ADU
156-080-1 5-00 1 2 ADU
Page 2 of 2 Rev. 04/22