Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1264 OAK AVE; ; CB133195; PermitCity of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Av Carlsbad, CA 92008 03-20-2015 Residential Permit Permit No: CB133195 Building Inspection Request Line (760) 602-2725 Job Address: Permit Type: Parcel No: Valuation: Occupancy Group: # Dwelling Units: Bedrooms: 1264 OAK AV CBAD RESDNTL 1561902700 $277,740.00 1 2 Sub Type: SFD Lot#: 0 Constuction Type: SB Reference #: Structure Type: SFD Bathrooms: 2.5 Orig PC#: Status: ISSUED Applied: 12/24/2013 Entered By: RMA Plan Approved: 03/20/2015 Issued: 03/20/2015 Inspect Area: Plan Check #: Project Title: HUTTON RES-DEMO EXISTING 726 SF HOUSE, BUILD NEW 2090 SF HOUSE, 852 SF GAR, 736 SF STORAGE, 61 SF PATIO & 81 SF DECK Applicant: TERRY HUTTON 2961 CAPE COD CIR CARLSBAD CA 92010-6548 760-818-9617 Building Permit Add'I Building Permit Fee Plan Check Add'I Plan Check Fee Plan Check Discount Strong Motion Fee Park in Lieu Fee Park Fee LFM Fee Bridge Fee Other Bridge Fee BTD #2 Fee BTD #3 Fee Renewal Fee Add'I Renewal Fee Other Building Fee HMP Fee Pot. Water Con. Fee Meter Size Add'I Pot. Water Con. Fee Reel. Water Con. Fee Green Bldg Stands (SB1473) Fee Green Bldg Stands Plan Chk Fee Total Fees: Inspector: $1,393.38 $0.00 $975.37 $0.00 $0.00 FS1 $27.77 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $8.00 $0.00 otal Payments to Date: Owner: HUTTON R T&J T 1264 OAK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 Meter Size Add'I Reel. Water Con. Fee Meter Fee SDCWA Fee CFO Payoff Fee PFF (3105540) PFF (4305540) License Tax (3104193) License Tax (4304193) Traffic Impact Fee (3105541) Traffic Impact Fee (4305541) Sidewalk Fee PLUMBING TOTAL ELECTRICAL TOTAL MECHANICAL TOTAL Housing Impact Fee Housing lnLieu Fee Housing Credit Fee Master Drainage Fee Sewer Fee Additional Fees Fire Sprinkler Fees TOTAL PERMIT FEES $13,469.02 Balance Due: Clearance: FS1 $0.00 $317.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,054.87 $4,666.03 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $260.00 $85.00 $76.60 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $867.60 $0.00 ($262.60) $0.00 $13,469.02 $0.00 at approval of your project includes the 'Imp ltion' off es, dedica ions, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as 'fees/exactio s." u have 90 days from the date this permit was issued to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedur se forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance wi Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition. You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity changes, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project. NOR DOES IT APPLY to any X . • h ' . ' I' i ' i I h . 'r City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Av Carlsbad, CA 92008 03-20-2015 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan {SWPPP} Permit Permit No:SW130422 Job Address: Permit Type: Parcel No: Reference #: CB#: Project Title: Applicant: HUTION RT&J T 1264 OAK AV CBAD SW PPP 1561902700 CB133195 HUTION -NEWHOME 1264 OAK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 760 818-9617 Emergency Contact: TERRYHUTION 760 818-9617 SWPPP Plan Check SWPPP Inspections Additional Fees TOTAL PERMIT FEES Lot#: 0 Owner: HUTION RT&J T 1264 OAK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 Status: Applied: Entered By: Issued: Inspect Area: Tier: Priority: ISSUED 12/24/2013 RMA 03/20/2015 2 M $344.00 $839.00 $0.00 $1,183.00 Total Fees: $1,183.00 Total Payments To Date: $1,183.00 Balance Due: FINAL APPROVAL DA"IE]. i Z ,tj]PI lLEARANCE.-#---- SIGNATURE~___,,tt-~---- $0.00 E FOLLOWING APPROVALS REQUIRED PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE: 0 PLANNING 0 ENGINEERING • «~ ~ CITY OF CARLSBAD JOB ADDRESS CT/PROJECT# Building Permit Application 1635 Faraday Ave., carlsbad, CA 92008 Ph: 760-602-27:1.9 Fax: 760-602-8558 email: bulldlng@carlsbadca.gov www.carlsbadca.gov PHASE# # OF UNITS # BEDROOMS # BATHROOMS DBUILDING OARE Plan Check No. Est. Value 0HEALTH 0 HAZMAT/APCD AIR CONDITIONING YES a NoJ(. (Sec. 7031.5 Business and Professions Code: Any City or County which requires a permit to construct, alter, improve, demolish or repair any structure, prior to its issuance. also requires the applicant for such permit to file a signed statement that he is licensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractor's License Law !Chapter 9, commending with Section 7000 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code) or that he Is exem_11t therefrom. and the basis for the alleged exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by any applicant for a permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars ($500)). WORl<ERS" COMPENSATION Workers' Compensation Declaratlon: I hereby affirm under penalty of petjll)' one of the following declarations: D I have and will maintain a c81tificate of consent to self•insure for workers' compensation as provided by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this penn It is issued. D I have and will maintain workers' compensation, as required by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the perfonnance of the work for which this pennlt is issued. My workers' compensation Insurance carrier and policy number are: Insurance Co. Policy No. Expiration Date--------- ~ ~on need not be completed n the pennit is for one hundred dollars ($100) or less. ~ertllicate of Exemption: I certify that in the perfonnance of the work for which this pennlt is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the Workers' Compensation Laws of California. WARNING: Failure to secure workers' compensation coverage Is unlawful, and shall subject an employer to criminal penaltles and civil fines up to one hundred thousand dollars (&100,000), in addition to the cost of compensation, damages as provided for In Section 3706 of the Labor code, Interest and attorney's fees. _,1$ CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE LIAGENT DATE OWNER-BUILDER DECLARATION I hereby afflmr that I am exempt from Conlracfor's Ucense Law for the following reason: wner 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 e 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 ,'however, the building or improvement is sold within one year of completion, the owner-buHder will have the burden of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sale). CJ I, 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 buHds or improves thereon, and contracts for such projects with contractor(s) licensed pursuant to the Contractor's License Law). I am exempt under Section Business and Professions Code for this reason: 1. I personally plan to provide the major labor and materials for construction of the proposed property improvement CJ Yes CJ No 2. I (have I have not) signed an application for a building pemrit for the proposed work. 3. I have contracted with the following person (finn) to provide the proposed construction (include name address I phone I contractors' license numbe~: 4. I plan to provide portions of the work, but I have hired the following person to coordinate, supervise and provide the major work (include name I address I phone I contractors' license number): 5. I will provide some of the work, but I have contracted (hired) the following persons to provide the work Indicated (include name I address I phone I type of work): ~ ,,1$PROP CJ AGENT DATE •• )' COM!"LETE THIS SECTION FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS ONLY Is the applicant or future building occupant required ti submit a business plan, acutely hazardous materials registration form or risk management and prevention program under Sections 25505, 25533 or 25534 of the Presley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act? Cl Yes Cl No Is the applicant or future building occupant required ti obtain a pennit from the air pollution control disbict or air quality management district? Cl Yes Cl No Is the facility to be constructed within 1,000 feet of the ouilr boundsy of a school site? Cl Yes Cl No IF ANY OF THE ANSWERS ARE YES, A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MAY NOT BE ISSUED UNLESS THE APPLICANT HAS MET OR IS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT. I certlfylhatl 1-niacl the applk:atlon and sllllBthattheabolt'e lnbmallon Is conactand that the 1nlonna1lon on the plans lsaccua19. I &g111111D complywHh all Cltvodnances and SlalB laws lllallng1D buldlng consllUcllon. I hereby authorize representative of the City of Can!bad t> ener upon 1he above rnenooned property ilr inspedkJn purposes. I AL.SO AGREE TO SAVE, INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARMLESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AGAINST ALL LIABllTIES, JUDGMENTS, COSTS AND EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINST SAID CITY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING OF THIS PERMIT. OSHA: An OSHA perml is required tir excavations owr 50' deep and demoltion or oonstruclkm of s1ruclures over 3 sillies n heiljlt. EXPIRATION: Ew!y permit issued by 1he &Jikling Olli:ial under the provisklns of 1his Code shall expe by linitalion and become nul and void W 1he buildilg or v.ork au1horized by such permit is not commenced v.ithin 180 days from the dale of such permit or W1he bu · orv.ork such is pended or abandoned at any line afler1he v.ork is oommenoed bra peood of 180 days (Section 106.4.4 Unibrm &Jildilg Code). AS APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE 2- PERMIT INSPECTION HISTORY REPORT (C8133195) Permit Type: BLDG-Residential Application Date: 12/24/2013 Owner: COOWNER T AND J HUTTON Work Class: Single Family Detached Issue Date: 03/20/2015 Subdivision: Status: Closed -Finaled Expiration Date: 05/15/2017 Address: 1264 Oak Av Carlsbad, CA 92008 IVR Number: 697761 Scheduled Actual Inspection Type Inspection No. Inspection Status Primary Inspector Reinspection Complete Date Start Date 11/15/2016 11/15/2016 BLDG-91 001215-2016 Partial Pass Paul York Reinspectlon Incomplete Complaints Inspection Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency No 01/17/2017 01/17/2017 BLDG-Final 009810-2017 Partial Pass Paul York Reinspection Incomplete Inspection Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency No BLDG-Plumbing Final No BLDG-Mechanical Final No BLDG-Structural Final No BLDG-Electrical Final No 02/23/2017 02/23/2017 BLDG-Final 014473-2017 Passed Paul York Complete Inspection Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Yes BLDG-Plumbing Final Yes BLDG-Mechanical Final Yes BLDG-Structural Final Yes BLDG-Electrical Final Yes February 23, 2017 Page 1 of 1 Inspection List Pennit#: CB133195 Type: RESDNTL SFD HUTTON RES-DEMO EXISTING 726 SF HOUSE, BUILD NEW 2090 SF HOU Date Inspection Item lnsp~~!C>r Act Comments 08/08/2016 17 Interior Lath/Drywall PY AP 08/05/2016 18 Exterior Lath/Drywall AEK AP 07/25/2016 84 Rough Combo PY AP 07/18/2016 23 Gas/Test/Repairs PY PA meter to house .. 06/29/2016 13 Shear Panels/HD's PY AP 06/29/2016 15 Roof/Re roof PY AP 06/29/2016 15 Roof/Reroof PY AP 06/27/2016 15 Roof/Reroof PY PA 05/09/2016 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers PY AP 05/06/2016 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers PY co 04/29/2016 21 Underground/Under Floor AEK AP WASTE AT NEW GARAGE 04/13/2016 66 Grout PY AP 03/25/2016 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers PY PA 03/21/2016 21 Underground/Under Floor PY AP 03/16/2016 22 SewerNvater Service PY AP 08/20/2015 92 Compliance Investigation PY AP Friday, February 24, 2017 Page 1 of 1 w.o. "7'1s-_ c DATE :'t-L $ -I '- NAME fl. C11-u mt 1 HOURS __ t_V_L _____ _ Geotechnical • Coastal • Geologic • Environmental FOOTING TRENCH OBSERVATION SUMMARY Client Name: 1-;;n-ru,,J Project Name: 116'-I O~t AVE. Location{fract: _ ...... 1 .... 2 __ · "--6 ...... V __ O-......b ..... ~=--IJ~Vf:--~_. _, ___ c;.....f:c,_, r_l __ : ~ ...... ·;?,"""';;\ "'--l_C-:..A _________ _ u~~~~oo: __ G~A~&~,-6_f __ ~~~c~?~b-,-·----------------- R~~e~~~~e~n~~R~~oo:_~~~/~a~,,~~~~--~u~/~~~~=0~;='-~G~c~z~e~l-,.~i~;--~~~~~C-~-'--~-- hl.~~7 '2 z,210 67 0>c Observation Summary }--.Initials A representative of GeoSoils, Inc. observed onsite soil and footing trench conditions. Soil conditions ZTT;-:-Date in the trench are generally free of loose soil and debris, non-yielding and uniform, and plumb; and ~ are in general conformance with those indicated in the geotechnical report. /"'-1nitials ~Date 1U .A Initials '[JK_Date _£___Initials ~Date A representative of GeoSoils, Inc. observed and reviewed footing excavation depth/width. Footing excavations generally extend to proper depth and bearing strata, and are in general conformance with recommendations of the geotechnical report. A representative of GeoSoils, Inc. reviewed footing setbacks from slope face (if applicable). The setback was in general accordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report. ~ r---( .:Z:: IJ :f I L (/ f ~1 Notes to Superintendent/Foreman • ' C __ L:>hooting excavations should be cleaned of loose debris and thoroughly moistened just prior to placing concrete. 2. Based on expansion potential of underlying soils, presoaking of soil below slabs may be recommended. Consult 3. 4. the geotechnical report for presoaking recommendations. We note that clayey soils may take an extended period of time for such, and the contractor should schedule accordingly. ~e.:.:-c ~-r In the event of a site change subsequent to our footing observation and prior to concrete placement (i.e., heavy rain, etc.), we should be contacted to perform additional site observations and/or testing. This memo does not confirm the minimum footing dimension as required by the project structural engineer's design, if different from the geotechnical report. Notes to Building Inspector Soil compaction test results, as well as depth of fill, relative compaction, bearing values, corrosivity, and soil expansion index test results are contained in the As-Graded Geotechnical or Final Compaction Report provided at the completion of grading. 5741 Palmer Way Carlsbad, CA 92008 1446 E. Chestnut Ave. Santa Ana, CA 92701 g. _ _f_ __ Representative of GeoSoils, Inc. 26590 Madison Ave. Murrieta, CA 92562 PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC. 928 Fort Stockton Drive, Suite 201 San Diego, CA 92103 Tel: 858·605·0937 Fax: 858·605·1414 www.pattersoneng.com Page 1 ofl STRUCTURAL OBSERVATION REPORT FORM Report No. 2013-0126-2 Structural Observation means the visual observation of the structural system, for general conformance to the approved plans and specifications, at significant construction stages and at completion of the system Structural observation does not include or waive the responsibility for the inspections required by Section 108, 1701 or other sections of the code. This report includes all construction work through the 13th day of April, 2016. Project Address: Structural Observer of Record Phone No. of SOR: 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008 (SOR): Curtis Patterson, SE 858.605.0937 Building Permit Professional Lie/Reg. No. of No.: C.61?>31'!5 Observer: SE 5629 OBSERVED STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS AND THEIR CONNECTIONS FOUNDATION WALL FRAMES FLOOR PORTION OBSERVED, IF NOT WHOLE D Footing, Stem Walls 181 Concrete D Steel Moment Frame D Concrete D Mat Foundation D Masonry D Steel Braced Frame D Steel D Caisson, Piles, Grade D Wood D Concrete Moment Frame OWood Beams D Retaining Foundation D Others: D Masonry Wall Frame Others: Hillside Special Anchors D Other D Others: Observations: Horizontal rebar missing in two Cl columns. I declare that the following statements are true to the best of my knowledge: 1. I am the engineer retained by the owner to be in responsible charge for the structural observation in accordance with the requirements of the local building jurisdiction 2. L or another engineer or architect who I have designated and is under my responsible charge, has performed the required site visits at stated construction stage to verify if the structure is in general conformance with approved plans and specifications. 3. All deficiencies which remain to be corrected have been indicated above. J Z&'-1 vAf< Av PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC. 928 Fort Stockton Drive, Suite 201 San Diego, CA 92103 Tel: 858•605·0937 Fax: 858·605·1414 www.pattersoneng.com Page 1 of 1 STRUCTURAL OBSERVATION REPORT FORM Report No. 2013-0126-1 Structural Observation means the visual observation of the structural system, for general conformance to the approved plans and specifications, at significant construction stages and at completion of the system. Structural observation does not include or waive the responsibility for the inspections required by Section 108, 1701 or other sections of the code. This report includes all construction work through the z5t11 day of March. 2016. Project Address: Structural Observer of Record Phone No. of SOR: 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008 {SOR): Curtis Patterson, SE 858.605.0937 Building Permit Professional Lie/Reg. No. of No.: ~b\',~\~'? Observer: SE 5629 OBSERVED STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS AND THEIR CONNECTIONS FOUNDATION WALL FRAMES FLOOR PORTION OBSERVED, IF NOT WHOLE 181 Footing, Stem Walls D Concrete D Steel Moment Frame D Concrete Excavated footings andrebar D Mat Foundation D Masonry D Steel Braced Frame D Steel D Caisson, Piles. Grade D Wood D Concrete Moment Frame DWood Beams D Retaining Foundation D Others: D Masonry Wall Frame Others: Hillside Special Anchors D Other D Others: Observations: Footing excavation and rebar framing for main house foundations were observed. The foundation for the detached garage was not prepared. I declare that the following statements are true to the best of my knowledge: l. I am the engineer retained by the owner to be in responsible charge for the structural observation in accordance with the requirements of the local building jurisdiction. 2. I, or another engineer or architect who I have designated and is under my responsible charge, has performed the required site visits at stated construction stage to verify if the structure is in general conformance with approved plans and specifications. 3. All deficiencies which remain to be corrected have been indicated above. Signature: fo--- Curtis Patterson, SE 5629 Date: 3/28/16 )Ll~ OA-K w.o. 6 Z'tS:-E -S:<- DATE~twJ-17 ,J.6 NAME _g ~Yt!t. ML 1-7 HOURS~a=,a..;:.o'------- Geotechnical • Coastal • Geologic • Environmental FOOTING TRENCH OBSERVATION SUMMARY . .,._ Client Name: ..... H~v ....... ft~o_N ______________ Project Name:--------------- Location/Tract: / 2 I, ':I QA J< A 1(4 , (." ARL S bxi I Unit/Phase/Lot(s): _____________________________ _ :FF Referenced Geotechnical Report(s): G.sI R t;;,f)()B,f .D,.Ated Z -:,-.Z,OJo v(cJ. 6 7'1 S- Observation Summary K,I<, Initials J':(f-16 Date A representative of GeoSoils, Inc. observed onsite soil and footing trench conditions. Soil conditions in the trench are generally free of loose soil and debris, non-yielding and uniform, and plumb; and are in general conformance with those indicated in the geotechnical report. It F-Initials A representative of GeoSoils, Inc. observed and reviewed footing excavation depth/width. Footing excavations generally extend to proper depth and bearing strata, and are in general conformance with recommendations of the geotechnical report. 3-l't·M Date dJ.d_ Initials Date A representative of GeoSoils, Inc. reviewed footing setbacks from slope face (if applicable). The setback was in general accordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report. --- J{Js.._ Initials JJ.t:.11,. Date Notes to Superintendent/Foreman 1. 2. 4. Footing excavations should be cleaned of loose debris and thoroughly moistened just prior to placing concrete. Based on expansion potential of underlying soils, presoaking of soil below slabs may be recommended. Consult the geotechnical report for presoaking recommendations. We note that clayey soils may take an extended period of time for such, and the contractor should schedule accordingly. In the event of a site change subsequent to our footing observation and prior to concrete placement (i.e., heavy rain, etc.), we should be contacted to perform additional site observations and/or testing. This memo does not confirm the minimum footing dimension as required by the project structural engineer's design, if different from the geotechnical report. Notes to Building Inspector Soil compaction test results, as well as depth offill, relative compaction, bearing values, corrosivity, and soil expansion index test results are contained in the As-Graded Geotechnical or Final Compaction Report provided at the completion of grading. 5741 PalmerWay Carlsbad, CA 92008 1446 E. Chestnut Ave. Santa Ana, CA 92701 /1, ~ 1/' Represen~oSoils, Inc. 26590 Madison Ave. Murrieta, CA 92562 I I I I. EsGil Corporation In <Partners/i.ip wit/i. fjo1Jernment for <Buiufin9 Safety DATE: MAR. 10, 2015 JURISDICTION: CARLSBAD PLAN CHECK NO.: 13-3195 PROJECT ADDRESS: 1264 OAK AVENUE PROJECT NAME: SFR FOR HUTTON SET: III Q APPLICANT CJ JURIS. Q PLAN REVIEWER Q FILE D The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes. [8J The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. D The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. D The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. D The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. D The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: WALLY GEER 1575 SPINNAKER DR., #105-b, VENTURA, CA 93001 [8J EsGil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. D EsGil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: WALLY Telephone#: 805-896-8926 Date contacted: (by: ) Email: go2wallyworld@hotmail.com Fax #: Mail Telephone Fax In Person [8J REMARKS: #.1): The applicant to slip sheet Set Ill Plans into Set II Plans at the building department;~: The architectural sheets of plans to be signed by the project architect. By: ALI SADRE, S.E. Enclosures: EsGil Corporation D GA D EJ D MB D PC 3/5 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 + (858) 560-1468 + Fax (858) 560-1576 - EsGil Corporation In <Partners6ip wit6 government for 0uifain9 Safety DATE: FEB.25,2015 JURISDICTION: CARLSBAD PLAN CHECK NO.: 13-3195 PROJECT ADDRESS: 1264 OAK AVENUE PROJECT NAME: SFR FOR HUTTON SET: II CJ APPLICANT ~JURIS. CJ PLAN REVIEWER CJ FILE D The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes. D The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. D The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. C8J The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. PLEASE SEE BELOW D The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. C8J The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: WALLY GEER 1575 SPINNAKER DR., #105-b, VENTURA, CA 93001 D EsGil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. C8J EsGil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: WALLY Telephone#: 805-896-8926 pate col)iacted: 7 fl<_p (bt.4-+ Email: go2wallyworld@hotmail.com Fax #: ~Mail ~elephone Fax In Person C8J REMARKS: Please see attached for remaining items from previous list. By: ALI SADRE, S.E. Enclosures: EsGil Corporation D GA D EJ D MB D PC 2/19 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 + (858) 560-1468 + Fax (858) 560-1576 - CARLSBAD 13-3195 FEB.25,2015 • PLANS 1. Please submit three revised, stamped and signed sets of plans to the City for review and approval. 2. Sheet A2.1 was missing from the submitted package. GENERAL 3. Dimension eave projection(s) on plans, i.e., detail 3/A-2.2. 4. Show locations of permanently wired smoke alarms with battery backup, per Section R314: a. In each bedroom. The CMD, as shown on E-1, is a separate requirement. b. In the hallway leading to the bedrooms. The CMD, as shown on E-1, is not adequate. NOTE: When more than one smoke alarm is required to be installed, the alarm devices shall be interconnected such that the actuation of one alarm will activate all. 5. Glazing in the following locations should be shown on the plans as safety glazing material in accordance with Section R308.4: a. Glazing in the walls/doors surrounding bathtubs and showers where the bottom exposed edge of the glazing is less than 60" above the standing surface. See M. bath & Bath #2. STRUCTURAL 6. Provide a copy of the project soil report. The report shall include foundation design recommendations based on the engineer's findings and shall comply with Section R401.4. City Policy requires a soils report for this project. Please make sure the report information is reflected on Sheet S1 .0. Not provided. 7. Provide a letter from the soils engineer confirming that the foundation/ grading plan and specifications have been reviewed and that it has been determined that the recommendations in the soils report are properly incorporated into the plans. ELECTRICAL 8. The main panel has to be accessible from the outside. What is shown in mech. room is not acceptable on Sheet E-1. The garage main panel is noted as 100- Amps., versus the house panel of 200-Amps., clarify! MECHANICAL 9. Clarify the installation of the PEX tubing for the radiant heating, several conflicting designs are provided. Is there a topping slab? How is the tubing secured in place (method of tying?) • MISCELLANEOUS - CARLSBAD 13-3195 FEB.25,2015 • To speed up the review process, note on this list where each correction item has been addressed on plans. The jurisdiction has contracted with EsGil Corp. at 9320 Chesapeake Drive, #208, S.D., CA 92123; Tel: 858/560-1468, to perform the plan review for your project. If you have any questions regarding these items, please contact ALI SADRE, S.E. at EsGil Corporation. Thank you. - . f DATE: JAN.03,2014 JURISDICTION: CARLSBAD PLAN CHECK NO.: 13-3195 EsGil Corporation In <Partnersliip witli (,011,rnment for <Buitifing Safety SET:I PROJECT ADDRESS: 1264 OAK AVENUE PROJECT NAME: SFR FOR HUTTON g._APPLICANT ~ JURIS. Cl PLAN REVIEWER Cl FILE D The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes. D The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. D The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. C8J The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. D The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. C8J The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: WALLY GEER 1575 SPINNAKER DR., #105-b, VENTURA, CA 93001 D EsGil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. ~ EsGil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: WALLY Telephone #: 805-896-8926 Date contacted:\ f (( (by: '/)A) Email: go2wallyworld@hotmail.com Fax #: V:Mail • Telephone Fax In Person Cl' \ MARKS: By: ALI SADRE, S.E. Enclosures: EsGil Corporation D GA D EJ D MB D PC 12/26 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 + (858) 560-1468 + Fax (858) 560-1576 - ' CARLSBAD 13-3195 /;. . JAN.03,2014 PLAN REVIEW CORRECTION LIST SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS AND DUPLEXES PLAN CHECK NO.: 13-3195 JURISDICTION: CARLSBAD PROJECT ADDRESS: 1264 OAK AVENUE FLOOR AREA: LIVING = 2,090 GARAGE= 852; STORAGE 736 PATIO= 142 REMARKS: DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY JURISDICTION: 12/24 DATE INITIAL PLAN REVIEW COMPLETED: JAN.03,2014 FOREWORD (PLEASE READ): STORIES: TWO HEIGHT: 20' DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY ESGIL CORPORATION: 12/26 PLAN REVIEWER: ALI SADRE, S.E. This plan review is limited to the technical requirements contained in the California version of the International Residential Code, International Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, National Electrical Code and state laws regulating energy conservation, noise attenuation and access for the disabled. This plan review is based on regulations enforced by the Building Department. You may have other corrections based on laws and ordinance by the Planning Department, Engineering Department, Fire Department or other departments. Clearance from those departments may be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Present California law mandates that construction comply with the 2010 edition of the California Code of Regulations (Title 24), which adopts the following model codes: 2009 IRC, 2009 IBC, 2009 UPC, 2009 UMC and 2008 NEC. The above regulations apply, regardless of the code editions adopted by ordinance. The following items listed need clarification, modification or change. All items must be satisfied before the plans will be in conformance with the cited codes and regulations. Per Sec. 105.4 of the 2009 International Building Code, the approval of the plans does not permit the violation of any state, county or city law. To speed up the recheck process. please note on this list (or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed. i.e .• plan sheet number. specification section. etc. Be sure to enclose the marked up list when you submit the revised plans. - ~, CJ\RLSBAD 13-3195 JAN.03,2014 • PLANS 1. 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). For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in one of two ways: 1. Deliver all corrected sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department, 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008, (760) 602-2700. The City will route the plans to EsGil Corporation and the Carlsbad Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. 2. Bring one corrected set of plans and calculations/reports to EsGil Corporation, 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, CA 92123, (858) 560-1468. Deliver all remaining sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department for routing to their Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. NOTE: Plans that are submitted directly to EsGil Corporation only will not be reviewed by the City Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments until review by EsGil Corporation is complete. 2. A reminder that the revised plans & calculations need to be stamped & singed by the project engineer. (California Business and Professions Code). 3. The P/M/E can not be deferred as noted on the cover sheet of plans under scope of work. Revise the plans accordingly. Section R313.2. 4. On the cover sheet of plans, specify any items that will have a deferred submittal (fire sprinklers/alarms, etc.). Additionally, provide the following note on the plans: "Submittal documents for deferred submittal items shall be submitted to the registered design professional in responsible charge, who shall review them and forward them to the building official with a notation indicating that the deferred submittal documents have been reviewed and that they have been found to be in general conformance with the design of the building. The deferred items shall NOT be installed until their design and documents have been approved by the building official." • GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 5. Dimension eave projections into the side yard set-backs on plans. Table R302.1. 6. Show locations of permanently wired smoke alarms with battery backup, per Section R314: a) In the hallway leading to the bedrooms. • NOTE: When more than one smoke alarm is required to be installed, the alarm devices shall be interconnected such that the actuation of one alarm will activate all. 7. Glazing in the following locations should be shown on the plans as safety glazing material in accordance with Section R308.4: a) Glazing in the walls/doors surrounding bathtubs and showers where the bottom exposed edge of the glazing is less than 60" above the standing surface. b) Glazing adjacent to stairways & landings within 36" horizontally of a walking surface when the exposed surface of the glass is less than 60" above the plane of the adjacent walking surface. See storage building. - \ t' C}\RLSBAD 13-3195 JAN.03,2014 • STAIRWAYS AND RAILINGS 8. Provide stairway and landing details. Section R311.7: a) Maximum rise is 7-3/4" and minimum run is 10". b) Minimum headroom is 6'-8". c) Minimum width is 36". d) The greatest riser height within any flight of stairs shall not exceed the smallest by more than 3/8 inch. The greatest tread depth within any flight of stairs shall not exceed the smallest by more than 3/8 inch. 9. A nosing (between%" and 1-Y4") shall be provided on stairways with solid risers. Exception: No nosing is required if the tread depth is at least 11 inches. Section R311.7.4.3. 10. Open risers are only permitted if the opening between treads does not permit the passage of a 4" diameter sphere. Section R311.7.4.3. 11. The walls and soffits of the enclosed usable space under stairs shall be protected on the enclosed side with %-inch gypsum board. Section R302.7. • STRUCTURAL 12. Provide a copy of the project soil report. The report shall include foundation design recommendations based on the engineer's findings and shall comply with Section R401.4. City Policy requires a soils report for this project. Please make sure the report information is reflected on Sheet S1 .0. 13. Note on the foundation plan that "Prior to the contractor requesting a Building Department foundation inspection, the soils engineer shall advise the building official in writing that: a) The building pad was prepared in accordance with the soils report, b) The utility trenches have been properly backfilled and compacted, and c) The foundation excavations, the soils expansive characteristics and bearing capacity conform to the soils report." 14. Provide a letter from the soils engineer confirming that the foundation plan, grading plan and specifications have been reviewed and that it has been determined that the recommendations in the soils report are properly incorporated into the construction documents. 15. Please specify the slab underlayment on the foundation plans. I.e., 4" of sand with visqueen. 16. Note on plans that surface water will drain away from building. The grade shall fall a minimum of 6" within the first 1 O'. Section R401.3. 17. Please provide details & references on the lintel chart for L 1 & L2, Sht. S2 .1, etc. 18. Please provide details & references on the Column Chart (schedule) for C1 & C2, starting on Sheet S2.0. - l .. ·1 ., , C~RLSBAD 13-3195 JAN.03,2014 19. Please provide details & references on the Wall Chart (schedule) for W1 & W2, starting on Sheet S2.0. 20. Please note the maximum span for the deck joists in the CD Chart, starting on Sheet S2.1. 21. Please justify no joist tie reinforcing on the CD Chart on Sheet S2.1. 22. Where is detail 9/S3.1, as referenced on the CD Chart, Sheet S2.3? 23. Clarify Beam Reinforcement, as noted on the CD Chart, Sheet S2.3. No beams here. 24. Ordinary RC Shear Walls are not permitted in High Seismic Zones. ASCE 7-05, Table 12.2-1. 25. Please revise the R, Oo & Cd for the correct lateral system on Sheet S1 .0. Also revise the calculations & structural details accordingly. 26. A Statement of Special Inspections, prepared by the registered design professional in responsible charge, shall be submitted. This statement shall include a complete list of materials and work requiring special inspection, the inspections to be performed and an indication whether the special inspection will be continuous or periodic. Section 1705. 27. Provide the following note on the plans: "The contractor responsible for the construction of the seismic-force-resisting system shall submit a written Statement of Responsibility to the building official prior to the commencement of work on the system." Section 1709. 28. The plans shall indicate that special inspection will be provided for the following work. (CBC Chapter 17 and Section 107 .2) a) Concrete construction. Special inspections and verifications should be provided in accordance with Table 1704.4. b) Epoxy Anchors. Periodic special inspection should be provided for anchors installed in hardened concrete. Table 1704.4. c) Soils. Special inspection should be provided for placement of fill 12 inches or more deep in accordance with Section 1704.7. SOC B -F 29. Collector design forces . Collector elements, splices and their connections to resisting elements should be designed to resist the prescribed forces. They must also have the design strength to resist the special load combinations of Section 12.4.3.2 (Section 12.10.2.1) 30. SPECIAL CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS a) Reinforcement requirements for shear walls. The following requirements of ACI 318- 05 Section 21.7.2 should be met. (Section 1910.1) i) Reinforcement spacing each way should not exceed 18 inches. (ACI 318-05, Section 21.7.2.1) - I . , CA.RLSBAD 13-3195 JAN.03,2014 ii) When the design shear force, Vu, is less than or equal to Ac~, the minimum reinforcement should be permitted to be in accordance with ACI 318-05 Section 14.3. Otherwise, the reinforcement ratio for shear walls should not be less than 0.0025 along the longitudinal and transverse axes. (ACI 318-05, Section 21.6.2.1) iii) At least two curtains of reinforcement should be used in a wall if the in-plane factored shear force assigned to the wall exceeds 2Ac~-(ACI 318-05, Section 21.7.2.2) iv) Continuous reinforcement in shear walls should be anchored or spliced in accordance with the provisions for reinforcement in tension as specified in ACI 318-05, Chapter 12. (ACI 318-05, Section 21.7.2.3) b) Shear strength of shear walls. The shear strength requirements for shear walls set forth in Section 21.7.4 should be met. (ACI 318-05, Section 21.7.4) c) Design for flexural and axial loads. Structural walls and portions of such walls subject to combined flexural and axial loads should be designed in accordance with ACI 318-05 Section 21.7.5. (ACI 318-05, Section 21.7.5) d) Requirement for shear wall boundary elements. The need for special boundary elements at the edges of structural walls should be evaluated in accordance with ACI 318-05, Section 21.7.6.2 or 21.7.6.3. The requirements of 21.7.6.4 and 21.7.6.5 also should be satisfied. (ACI 318-05, Section 21.7.6.1) e) Discontinuous shear walls. Columns supporting discontinuous wall elements should be reinforced in accordance with ACI 318-05, Section 21.4.4.5. (ACI 318-05, Section 21.7.9) • ELECTRICAL 31. Show on the plan the amperage of the electrical service, the location of the service panel and the location of any sub-panels. 32. Per CEC Article 210.11(C)3, note on the plans that bathroom circuiting shall be either: a) A 20 ampere circuit dedicated to each bathroom, or b) At least one 20 ampere circuit supplying only bathroom receptacle outlets. 33. Note on plans that receptacle outlet locations comply with CEC Article 210.52(A). 34. Include the following electrical notes on plans: a) Weather resistant type for receptacles installed in damp or wet locations (outside). b) Arc-fault protection for all outlets (not just receptacles) located in rooms described in NEC 210.12(8): Family, living, bedrooms, dining, halls, etc. c) GFCI protected outlets for locations described in NEC 210.8: Kitchens, garages, bathrooms, outdoors, within 6' of a sink, etc. d) Tamper resistant receptacles for all locations described in 210.52 (i.e., all receptacles in a dwelling). • MECHANICAL 35. Show on the plans the location, type and size (BTU's) of all heating and cooling appliances or systems. 36. Detail the dryer exhaust duct design from the dryer to the exterior. CMC Section 504.3. - I . C4RLSBAD 13-3195 JAN.03,2014 • PLUMBING 37. Show water heater size (1st hour rating), type, and location on plans. 38. Note on the plans that "combustion air for fuel burning water heaters will be provided in accordance with the Plumbing Code". 39. Show the T and P relief valve at the water heater and the discharge pipe size and routing to the exterior. CPC Section 608.3. 40. If an instantaneous water heater is shown on the plans, please include a gas pipe sizing design (isometric or pipe layout) for all gas loads. 41. Dimension on the plans the 30" clear width required for the water closet compartment. CPC 407.5. 42. Provide a note on the plans: The control valves in bathtubs, whirlpool bathtubs, showers and tub-shower combinations must be pressure balanced or thermostatic mixing valves. CPC Section 414.5 and 418.0. 43. Provide on the title sheet of plans the name of the purveyor, the name of the person at the purveyor that provided the static psi, date that the information was provided and the water meter size. City Policy. 44. New residential units must be pre-plumbed for future solar water heating. Note "two roof jacks must be installed" where the water heater is in the one story garage and directly below the most south facing roof (City Ordinance No. 8093). 45. Note "two 3/4" copper pipes must be installed to the most convenient future solar panel location when the water heater is not in a one story garage and is not directly below the most south facing roof. (City Ordinance No. 8093). 46. All piping for present or future solar water heating must be insulated when in areas that are not heated or cooled by mechanical means. (City Policy). • GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS The California Building Standards Commission (BSC) has adopted the Green Building Standards Code which became effective January 1, 2011 and must be enforced by the local building official. The following mandatory requirements for residential construction must be included on your plans. The Green Building Standards apply only to newly constructed buildings throughout California. CGC 101.3 47. Note on the site plan that the site shall be planned and developed to keep surface water away from buildings. Plans shall be provided and approved by the City Engineer that show site grading and provide for storm water retention and drainage during construction. BMP's that are currently enforced by the city engineer must be implemented prior to initial inspection by the building department. CGC 4.106.3. - , C-4,RLSBAD 13-3195 JAN.03,2014 48. Note on plans that a min of 50% of construction waste is to be recycled. CGC 4.408.1. 49. Note on the plans that the builder is to provide an operation manual (containing information for maintaining appliances, etc.) for the owner at the time of final inspection. CGC 4.410.1. 50. Note on the plans that during construction, ends of duct openings are to be sealed, and mechanical equipment is to be covered. CGC 4.504.1. 51. Show on the plans that the gas fireplace(s) shall be direct vent. Woodstove or pellet stoves must be US EPA Phase II rated appliances. CGC 4.503.1. 52. Note on plans that interior moisture control at slab on grade shall be per CGC Section 4.505.2.1, item 3: A 4" thick base of%" or larger clean aggregate shall be provided with a vapor barrier in direct contact with concrete, with a concrete mix design which will address bleeding, shrinkage and curling shall be used. 53. Note on the plans that VOC's must comply with the limitations listed in Section 4.504.3 and Tables 4.504.1, 4.504.2, 4.504.3 and 4.504.5 for: Adhesives, Paints and Coatings, Carpet and Composition Wood Products. CGC 4.504.2. 54. Note on the plans that the moisture content of wood shall not exceed 19% before it is enclosed in construction. The moisture content needs to be certified by one of 3 methods specified. Building materials with visible signs of water damage should not be used in construction. The moisture content must be determined by the contractor by one of the methods listed in CGC Section 4.505.3. 55. Note on the plans that bathroom fans shall be Energy Star rated, vented directly to the outside and controlled by a humidistat. CGC 4.506.1. 56. Note on the plans that if provided, whole house exhaust fans shall have insulated covers or louvers which close when the fan is off. The covers or louvers shall have minimum R4.2 insulation. CGC 5.507.1. 57. Note on the plans that heating and AC shall be sized and selected by ACCA Manual J or ASHRAE handbook or equivalent. The duct sizing shall be sized in accordance with one of the ACCA methods listed in CGC Section 4.507.2. 58. Note on the plans that prior to final approval of the building the licensed contractor, architect or engineer in responsible charge of the overall construction must complete and sign the Green Building Standards Certification form and given to the building department official to be filed with the approved plans. 59. Note on the plans that landscape Irrigation water use shall have weather based controllers. CGC 4.304.1. 60. Provide calculations prepared by a licensed engineer that will show water consumption reduction of 20% below the baseline water consumption listed in Table 4.303.1. In lieu of providing the calculations, imprint on the plans the attached Table 4.303.2 listing fixtures that meet the 20% reduction. CGC 4.303.1. TABLE 4.303.2 FIXTURE FLOW RATES - . CARLSBAD 13-3195 . ' . JAN.03,2014 MAXIMUM FLOW RATE AT?: 20 % FIXTURE TYPE REDUCTION Showerheads 2 gpm@80 psi Lavatory faucets, residential 1.5 gpm @ 60 psi2 Kitchen faucets 1.8 gpm@60 psi Water closets 1.28 gallons/flush1 1. Includes single and dual flush water closets with an effective flush of 1.28 gallons or less. Single flush toilets-The effective flush volume shall not exceed 1.28 gallons (4.8 liters). The effective flush volume is the average flush volume when tested in accordance with ASME Al 12.19.233.2. Dual flush toilets-The effective flush volume shall not exceed 1.28 gallons (4.8 liters). The effective flush volume is defined as the composite, average flush volume of two reduced flushes and one full flush. Flush volumes will be tested in accordance with ASME Al 12.19.2 and ASME Al 12.19.14. 2. Lavatory faucets shall not have a flow rate less than 0.8 gpm at 20 psi. 61. Note on the plans that when a shower is provided with multiple shower heads, the sum of flow to all the heads shall not exceed the 20% reduced limit, or the shower shall be designed so that only one head is on at a time. CGC 4.303.2. • MISCELLANEOUS 62. To speed up the review process, note on this list (or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed, i.e., plan sheet, note or detail number, calculation page, etc. 63. Please indicate here if any changes have been made to the plans that are not a result of corrections from this list. If there are other changes, please briefly describe them and where they are located in the plans. Have changes been made to the plans not resulting from this correction list? Please indicate: Yes a Noa 64. The jurisdiction has contracted with EsGil Corporation located at 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, California 92123; telephone number of 858/560-1468, to perform the plan review for your project. If you have any questions regarding these plan review items, please contact ALI SADRE, S.E. at EsGil Corporation. Thank you. CARLSBAD 13-3195 ... . ' . JAN.03,2014 [DO NOT PAY-THIS IS NOT AN INVOICE] VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURISDICTION: CARLSBAD PREPARED BY: ALI SADRE, S.E. BUILDING ADDRESS: 1264 OAK AVENUE PLAN CHECK NO.: 13-3195 DATE: JAN.03,2014 BUILDING OCCUPANCY: R3/U TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: V-B/SPR. BUILDING AREA Valuation PORTION (Sq.Ft.) Multiplier LIVING 2090 GARAGE 852 STORAGE 736 PATIO COVER 142 Air Conditioning Fire Sprinklers TOTAL VALUE Jurisdiction Code CB By Ordinance Bldg. Permit Fee by Ordinance Plan Check Fee by Ordinance Type of Review: D Repetitive Fee -.J Repeats Comments: Complete Review D Other 0 Hourly EsGil Fee Reg. VALUE ($) Mod. 269,593 $1,362.021 $885.31 j D Structural Only ----IHr.@• $762.731 Sheet 1 of 1 macvalue.doc + ""1' 'l ~. '~ CITY OF CARLSBAD PLAN CHECK REVIEW TRANS MITT AL DATE: 3/20/2015 PROJECT NAME: Hutton residence PLAN CHECK NO: CB133195 SET#: IV ADDRESS: 1264 Oak Av Community & Economic Development Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 www .carlsbadca.gov PROJECT ID: APN: 156-190-27 VALUATION: $269,593 SCOPE OF WORK: Demo existing 726 sf house and build new 2,090 sf single family home with detached garage D This plan check review is complete and has been APPROVED by: LAND DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION A Final Inspection bytheconstructionMgmt&lnspection Division is required Yes This plan check review is NOT COMPLETE. Items missing or incorrect are listed on the attached checklist. Please resubmit amended plans as required. Plan Check Comments have been sent to:go2wallyworld@hotmail.com D Linda Ontiveros 760-602-2773 Linda.Ontiveros@carlsbadca.gov X Jason Geldert 760-602-2758 Remarks: No '/•If~ <,-< '~ CITY OF CARLSBAD PLAN CHECK REVIEW TRANS MITT AL DATE: 03/18/2015 PROJECT NAME: Hutton residence PLAN CHECK NO: CB133195 SET#: 111 ADDRESS: 1264 Oak Av Community & Economic Development Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 www.carlsbadca.gov PROJECT ID: APN: 156-190-27 VALUATION: $269,593 SCOPE OF WORK: Demo existing 726 sf house and build new 2,090 sf single family home with detached garage D This plan check review is complete and has been APPROVED by: LAND DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION A Final Inspection by the Construction Mgmt & Inspection Division is required Yes This plan check review is NOT COMPLETE. Items missing or incorrect are listed on the attached checklist. Please resubmit amended plans as required. Plan Check Comments have been sent to:go2wallyworld@hotmail.com D Linda Ontiveros 760-602-2773 Linda.Ontiveros@carlsbadca.gov X Jason Geldert 760-602-2758 Remarks: *************See attached corrections***************** No Hutton residence PLAN CHECK NO # CB133195 Soils Report Review 1. Please provide a soils report. Site Plan Review 2. Provide a legend for all symbols 3. Show size and location of sewer line in Oak Ave. 4. Show location of sewer lateral, existing and proposed (if to be relocated) 5. Show size and location of water line in Oak Ave. 6. Show size and location of existing and proposed (if to be relocated) water lateral and water meter 7. Show details of Yz street improvements for Oak Ave. 8. Show proper right-of-way alignment and dimensions. 9. Show grade of driveway. 10. Provide driveway section detail. 11. Provide elevations along the right-of-way. 12. Show proposed site elevations. Show all high points. 13. Show proposed building pad elevations. 14. Show proposed floor elevations. 15. Show proposed site grading. Site grades shall be in conformance with Section 1804.3 of the 2013 California Building Code. 16. Please provide a typical building foundation section. The section shall include slab floor, footing, building wall with weep screed, adjacent ground gradient, ground material (i.e. concrete, landscaping etc.) weep screed clearance, etc. If both hardscape and softscape are proposed to be adjacent to the building, please provide two typical sections, one for each ground type. 17. Show location of any drain inlets and indicate top of grate elevations (if any are proposed). Inlets shall be located in landscaped areas. All pervious areas shall drain to an impervious areas prior to inletting into a drain system. 18. Provide a detail of the roof drain outlets (if roof drains are to be installed). 19. Please indicate location and depth of remedial grading (as recommended by the soils engineer). 20. Indicate areas of impervious surfaces (patios, walkways, etc.) and pervious areas (landscaping). 21. Please provide all documents that satisfy a tier 2 SWPPP. Please see attached template. 22. Please provide total impervious surfaces quantities, sq.ft. This includes the buildings and any hardscape. E-36 Page 2 of 2 REV6/01/12 ... . ..... «~ ~ CITY OF PLAN CHECK REVIEW TRANSMITTAL Community & Economic Development Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 www.carlsbadca.gov CARLSBAD DATE: 01/13/2014 PROJECT NAME: Hutton residence PROJECT ID: PLAN CHECK NO: CB133195 SET#: I ADDRESS: 12640akAv APN: 156-190-27 VALUATION: s269,593 SCOPE OF WORK: Demo existing 726 sf house and build new 2,090 sf single family home with detached garage D This plan check review is complete and has been APPROVED by: LAND DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION A Final Inspection by the Construction Mgmt & Inspection Division is required Yes To determine status by one or more of these divisions, please contact 760-602-2719. This plan check review is NOT COMPLETE. Items missing or incorrect are listed on the attached checklist. Please resubmit amended plans as required. Plan Check Comments have been sent to:go2waily·world@hotmail.com Linda Ontiveros 760-602-2773 Linda.Ontiveros@carlsbadca.gov Remarks: No 1-'.,'Jtton •esidence PLAN CHECK NO# CB133195 Please Read Instructions: Outstanding issues are marked with X Items that conform to permit requirements are marked with ./ or have intentionally been left blank. Call out high points and provide contours E-36 1. SITE PLAN Provide a fully dimensioned site plan drawn to scale. Show: North arrow Existing & proposed structures Existing street improvements Property lines (show all dimensions) Easements Right-of-way width & adjacent streets Driveway widths Existing or proposed sewer lateral Existing or proposed water service Submit on signed approved plans: DWG No. Show on site plan: ,.Xl 1 ;, g""} Drainage patterns Building pad surface drainage must maintain a minimum slope of one percent towards an adjoining street or an approved drainage course. ADD THE FOLLOWING NOTE: "Finish grade will provide a minimum positive drainage of 2% to swale 5' away from building". Existing & proposed slopes and topography Size, location, alignment of existing or proposed sewer and water service(s) that serves the project. Each unit requires a separate service; however, second dwelling units and apartment complexes are an exception. Sewer and water laterals should not be located within proposed driveways, per standards. Include on title sheet: Site address Assessor's parcel number Legal description/lot number For commercial/industrial buildings and tenant improvement projects, include: total building square footage with the square footage for each different use, existing sewer permits showing square footage of different uses (manufacturing, warehouse, office, etc.) previously approved. Show all existing use of SF and new proposed use of SF. Example: Tenant improvement for 3500 SF of warehouse to 3500 SF of office. Lot/Map No.: TCT 119*SWLY SO FT OF NELY 754.57 Subdivision/Tract: CARLSBAD LANDS Reference No(s): M1661 (PC RESO #132)_ V 58 Page 2 of 6 REV 6/01/12 • ~· \· Hutton residence PLAN CHECK NO# CB133195 2. DISCRETIONARY APPROVAL COMPLIANCE Project does not comply with the following engineering conditions of approval for project no.: Storm water requirements, refer to item 7 3. DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS Dedication for all street rights-of-way adjacent to the building site and any storm drain or utility easements on the building site is required for all new bu!l~ings and for rE?models with a value at or exceedin~ $ 20,000.00 , pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 18.40.030. For single family residence, easement dedication will be completed by the City of Carlsbad, cost $115.00. Dedication required as follows: @MPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS E-36 All needed public improvements upon and adjacent to the building site must be constructed at time of building construction whenever the value of the construction exceeds $100,000.00, pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 18.40.040. Public improvements required as follows: Construction of the public improvements must be deferred pursuant to Carlsbad · Municipal Code Section 18.40. Please submit a recent property title report or current grant deed on the property and processing fee of $157.00 so we may prepare the necessary Neighborhood Improvement Agreement. This agreement must be signed, notarized and approved by the city prior to issuance of a building permit. Future public improvements required as follows: ***Agreement to be prepared once grand deed or title report are returned*** Neighborhood improvement agreemnt for future Paving, Base, Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter, Underground Utilities, Sewer, Water, Driveway Approach, Design, Plancheck and Inspection Page 3 of 6 REV6/01112 • \ Hutton residence PLAN CHECK NO# CB133195 E-36 5. GRADING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS The conditions that require a grading permit are found in Section 15.16 of the Municipal Code. C]lnadequate information available on site plan to make a determination on grading requirements. Include accurate grading quantities in cubic yards (cut, fill, import, export and remedial). This Information must be Included on the plans. If no grading is proposed write: "NO GRADING" Grading Permit required. NOTE: The grading permit must be issued and rough grading approval obtained prior to issuance of a building permit. Graded Pad Certification required. (Note: Pad certification may be required even if a grading permit is not required.) All reauired documentation must be orovided to your Engineering Construction Inspector The inspector will then provide the engineering counter with a release for the building permit. No grading permit required. Minor Grading Permit required. See attached marked-up submittal checklist for project- specific requirements. 6. MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS LZJRIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT is required to do work in city right-of-way and/or private work adjacent to the public right-of-way. Types of work include, but are not limited to: street improvements, tree trimming, driveway construction, tying into public storm drain, sewer and water utilities. Right-of-way permit required for: Page 4 of 6 REV6/01/12 • ' l Hutton residence PLAN CHECK NO# CB133195 7. STORM WATER Please review storm water forms for an accurate analysis of the Tier level appropriate for this scope of work being proposed. Forms E-32 and E-33 attached for your reference. A Project subject to Priority development (PDP) requirements requires a storm water management plan to be prepared by an engineer. The checklist submitted for this project indicates it is a PDP. See 10, additional comments for more information E-36 Construction Compliance Project Threat Assessment Form complete. Enclosed Project Threat Assessment Form incomplete. Requires Tier 1 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. Please complete attached form and return (SW ) Requires Tier 2 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. Requires submittal of Tier 2 SWPPP, payment of processing fee and review by city. Post-Development (SUSMP) Compliance Storm Water Standards Questionnaire complete. Storm Water Standards Questionnaire incomplete. Please make the corrections, re-sign the questionnaire and resubmit with next submittal. Project is subject to Standard Storm Water Requirements. See city Standard Urban Storm Water Management Plan (SUSMP) for reference. http://www.carlsbadca.gov/business/building/Documents/EnqStandsw-stds-vol4-ch2.pdf Project needs to incorporate low impact development strategies throughout in one or more of the following ways: Rainwater harvesting (rain barrels or cistern) Vegetated Roof Bio-retentions cell/rain garden Pervious pavement/pavers .. Flow-through planter/vegetated or rock drip line Vegetated swales or rock infiltration swales · ' Downspouts disconnect and discharge over landscape Other: Page 5 of 6 REV 6/01/12 • . . Hutton residence PLAN CHECK NO# CB133195 8. WATER METER REVIEW Domestic (potable) Use 9. FEES What size meter is required? Where a residential unit is required to have an automatic fire extinguishing system, the minimum meter size shall be a 1" meter. NOTE: the connection fee, SDCWA system capacity charge and the water treatment capacity charge will be based on the size of the meter necessary to meet the water use requirements. For residential units the minimum size meter shall be 5/8", except where the residential unit is larger than 3,500 square feet or on a lot larger than one quarter (1/4) acre where the meter size shall be%". Required fees have been entered in building permit. Drainage fee applicable Added square feet Added square footage in last two years? Permit No. Permit No. Project built after 1980 Impervious surface > 50% Impact unconstructed facility yes yes yes yes no no no Fire sprinklers required [Jyes no (is addition over 150' from center line) Upgrade yes ,.Jno No fees required 10. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS Forms E-32 and E-33 help determine the appropriate Storm water pollution prevention plan which shall comply with current requirements and provisions· established by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board and City of Carlsbad requirements. Once appropriate Tier level is determined, it must be prepared, submitted and reviewed prior to issuance of the building permit. Form E-34 determines this project is subject to Standard Storm water requirements. The purpose is to demonstrate how this project meets low impact development (LID) approaches to ensure runoff from impervious areas prior to discharge. Since there is an existing impervious structure on the property, please do an analysis of existing impervious area and a ratio to the proposed impervious areas. Be sure to include an analysis of the pervious areas to ensure the compliance with standard LID. Attachments: Engineering Application ./ Storm Water Form Right-of-Way Application/ Info. Reference Documents E-36 Page 6 of 6 REV6/01/12 • *** Fee Calculation Worksheet *** ENGINEERING DIVISION FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES ONLY •*NOT A FINAL ESTIMATE OF FEES** Prepared by: LINDA ONTIVEROS Address: 1264 Oak Av Date: 01/13/14 GEO DAT A: LFMZ: 6 I B& T: Bldg. Permit#: CB13-3195 Fees Update by: Date: Fees Update by: Date: EDU CALCULATIONS: List types and square footages for all uses. Types of Use: SFD Sq. Ft./Units Types of Use: [DEMO CREDIT) Sq.Ft./Units 1.00 Types of Use: Types of Use: Sq.Ft./Units Sq.Ft./Units ADT CALCULATIONS: List types and square footages for all uses. Types of Use: SFD Sq.Ft./Units 1 Types of Use: [DEMO CREDln Sq.Ft./Units Types of Use: Types of Use: FEES REQUIRED: Sq. Ft./Units Sq.Ft./Units EDU's: 1.00 EDU's: 0 EDU's: EDU's: ADT's: 10 ADT's: N/A ADT's: AD T's: Within CFO: (JYES {no bridge & thoroughfare fee in District #1, reduces Traffic Impact Fee) (Z]NO 1. PARK-IN-LIEU FEE:[JNW QUADRANT NE QUADRANT [=]SE QUADRANT :]W QUADRANT ADT'S/UNITS: I X FEE/ADT: I =$ N/A 2.TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE: ADT'S/UNITS: 1x 3. BRIDGE & THOROUGHFARE FEE: (USE SANDAG)ADT'S/UNITS I X 4. FACILITIES MANAGEMENT FEE ADT'S/UNITS: 5. SEWER FEE EDU's BENEFIT AREA: 1x 1x EDU's 6. DRAINAGE FEES: PLDA: IX FEE/ADT: I=$ N/A DIST. #1 DIST.#2 FEE/ADT: I =s o ZONE: FEE/SQ.FT./UNIT: I =s o FEE/EDU: I=$ N/A FEE/EDU: I =s o i ··:HIGH MEDIUM ;--lLOW L-, ,,,-,J FEE/AC: 2169 1 =s 658.68 ACRES: .40 7. POTABLE WATER FEES: ***********UPGRADE REQUIRED*********** UNITS 1 CODE FS1 CONN. FEE METER FEE SDCWA FEE 1511 49 ***This may not represent a comprehensive list of fees due for this project. DIST.#3 TOTAL 1,560 Please contact the Building division at (760) 602·2719 for a complete listing of fees*** • I & ¥ CITY OF STORM WATER COMPLIANCE FORM TIER 1 CONSTRUCTION SWPPP E-29 Development Services Land Development Engineering 1635 Faraday Avenue 760-602-2750 www.carlsbadca.gov CARLSBAD This form is required for all pools, retaining walls or whenever a building footprint is enlarged. STORM WATER COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE ., My project is not in a catego,y of permit types exempt from the Construction SWPPP requirements ., My project is not located inside or within 200 feet of an environmentally sensitive area with a significant potential for contributing pollutants to nearby receiving waters by way of storm water runoff or non-storm water discharge(s). ., My project does not require a grading plan pursuant to the Carlsbad Grading Ordinance (Chapter 15.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code) ., My project wlll not result in 2,500 square feet or more of soils disturbance including any asspciated construction staging, stockpiling, pavement removal, equipment storage, refueling and maintenance areas that meets one or more of the additional following criteria: • located within 200 feet of an environmentally sensitive area or the Pacific Ocean; and/or, • disturbed area is located on a slope with a grade at or exceeding 5 horizontal to 1 vertical; and/or • disturbed area is located along or within -30 feet of a storm drain inlet, an open drainage channel or watercourse; and/or • construction will be initiated during the rainy season or will extend into the rainy season (Oct. 1 through April 30). I CERTIFY TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE THAT ALL OF THE ABOVE CHECKED STATEMENTS ARE TRUE AND CORRECT. I AM SUBMITIING FOR CITY APPROVAL A TIER 1 CONSTRUCTION SWPPP PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CITY STANDARDS. I UNDERSTAND AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I MUST: (1) IMPLEMENT BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS) DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICABLE TO MINIMIZE THE MOBILIZATION OF POLLUTANTS SUCH AS SEDIMENT AND TO MINIMIZE THE EXPOSURE OF STORM WATER TO CONSTRUCTION RELATED POLLUTANTS; AND, (2) ADHERE TO, AND AT ALL TIMES, COMPLY WITH THIS CITY APPROVED TIER 1 CONSTRUCTION SWPPP THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES UNTIL THE CONSTRUCTION WORK IS COMPLETE AND APPROVED BY THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. \~~ DATE E-29 STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION NOTES 1. ALL NECESSARY EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS SHALL BE AVAILABLE ON SITE TO FACILITATE RAPID INSTALLATION OF EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS WHEN RAIN IS EMINENT. 2. THE OWNER/CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTORE ALL EROSION CONTROL DEVICES TO WORKING ORDER TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE CITY ENGINEER AFTER EACH RUN-OFF PRODUCING RAINFALL. 3. THE OWNER/CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL ADDITIONAL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AS MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE CITY ENGINEERING OR BUILDING INSPECTOR DUE TO UNCOMPLETED GRADING OPERATIONS OR UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH MAY ARISE. 4. ALL REMOVABLE PROTECTIVE DEVICES SHALL BE IN PLACE AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY WHEN THE FIVE (5) DAY RAIN PROBABILITY FORECAST EXCEEDS FORTY PERCENT (40%). SILT AND OTHER DEBRIS SHALL BE REMOVED AFTER EACH RAINFALL. 5. ALL GRAVEL BAGS SHALL BE BURLAP TYPE WITH 3/4 INCH MINIMUM AGGREGATE. 6. ADEQUATE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL AND PERIMETER PROTECTION BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE MEASURES MUST BE INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED. SPECIAi, NOTES Page 1 of 3 ~~~~----------Blll!lll!l!llllll!!ll!IIIIJlll!IJ!!!!!~"!"""'_,,...,,,,.,.,..,..,.,..,_,__,."""".'=c PROJECT INFORMATION Site Address: ?::k:,\ ~ ~:( IS'~-~ 7 Assessor's Parcel Number: ,~ \6 -Z 1SW LL~ 'tAA Project Duration \:2.-Months Emergency Contact: Name: T~ H4\w~ 24 hour P~nJ&o -B\13~ l (e .;p.-71P(;)-~ ~a7 Perceived Threat to Storm Water Quality !'[Medium ~owttf-- - lf medium box is checked, must attach a site plan sheet showing proposed work area and location of proposed structural BMPs For City Use Only CITY OF CARLSBAD STANDARD TIER 1 SWPPP Approved By:---------- Date:---------- REV 4/30/10 ------------·~"'~'!-'(,,-w;,,,,,_ Erosion Control Tracking Non-Storm Water Waste Management and Materials BMPs Sediment Control BMPs Control Management BMPs Pollution Control BMPs BMPs C C C c c 0 0 0 -0 'fl 'fl Ol :;::, Cl) -0 Cl) 1a C C C Ill E C E -0 Ill .5 i 0 '5 Ol Q. Ill Cl) C Cl) II) e Ol .. -a; ~ ·e ·5 ~ Ol Ill t, :E Ol -0 Cl) Cl) I!! II) C 'E Ill C ! Best Management Practice C il Q. Cl) C ·e "E ~ ·c CT -~ C 0 Ill aiS :c II) e! III ·a -0~ 0 Cl) C) * w Cl) Ill ~ :l: Ill (BMP) Description , gj ..!,? !~ C I-E Ol Cl) Ol &I C (.) Ol (.) II) -0 -0 qj II) :E .S! II) :l: "i! II) i .!: "i!! C C :l: C 0 :, Cl) II) :::, ~ C: Ill Ill -ow al >, ii C > :::, ~ :E 0 ~ III Ol o:§ ~., Ill : -~ Cl) il Ill 0 .S! 0 g, 0 C Cl) en E Ill ~i Cl) ~j "iii 'a :l: -e I!! .S! Cl) E -" qj .... :::, ..c = II) Ol :c ~i ·c -0 €·!: Cl) u. 0 ~ > !~ -0 e.si :s ~ ·--0 C ! .S! -" :!:! ~ 0 0 8 Q. '5 Cl) C ..c Ill ·5 s 0 C Cl) Ill e! 0 ~ Cl) .c ..c e! Ill .s e s Ol iJS& Ill 0 ~u Ill .s 0 Ill 0 C) :l: WO ci.i en en (.) ii: C) en> en en o.. en..!: :l: 0.. 0..; 0.. :E :E en en. J: (.) . CASQA Designation , r-;-co ~ ..... ..... <? "I" ~ ~ r-;-op 0 ~ N ..... <? r-;-op ..... (}I C') "I" Lt) ~ op I ~ LU ..... 0:: ch ~ I ~ (.) (.) (.) w w w w w w LU en en en :E :E :E :E :E w w w en en en en en en en I- I-z z z z :l: :l: :l: :l: :l: :l: :l: Construction Activity w en Gradina/Soil Disturbance ,,.... X ~ y X Trenching/Excavation X X. )(..._ 7'.. '>( Stockoilina I/._ Drillina/Borina -1,.l~ Concrete/Asphalt Saw 'X.. cuttina Concrete flatwork ')(_ Pavina ~ y; Conduit/Pioe Installation ~ Stucco/Mortar Work ~ X .;c... Waste Disposal • Staging/Lay Down Area Equipment Maintena~ and Fueling -(,...\ Hazardous Subs~ Use/Storage - Dewatering X ~ Site Access Across Dirt Other (list): Instructions: Begin by reviewing the list of construction activities and checking the box to the left of any activity that will occur during the proposed construction. Add any other activity descriptions in the blank activity description boxes provided for that purpose and place a check in the box immediately to the left of the added activity description. For each activity descrribed, pick one or more best management practices (BMPs) from the list located along the top of the fonn. Then place an X in the box at the place where the activity row intersects with the BMP column. Do this for each activity that was checked off and for each of the selected BMPs selected from the list. For Example -If the project includes site access across dirt, then check the box to the left of "Site Access Across Dirt". Then review the list for something that applies such as "Stabilized Construction Ingress/Egress" under Tracking Control. Follow along the "Site Access Across Dirt" row until you get to the "Stabilized Construction Ingress/Egress" column and place an X in the box where the two meet. As another example say the project included a stockpile that you intend to cover with a plastic sheet. Since plastic sheeting is not on the list of BMPs, then write in "Cover with Plastic" in the blank column under the heading Erosion Control BMPs. Then place an X in the box where the "Stockpiling" row intersects the new "Cover with Plastic" column. To learn more about what each BMP description means, you may wish to review the BMP Reference Handout prepared to assist applicants in the selection of appropriate Best Management Practice measures. The reference also explains the California Stonnwater Quality Association (CASQA) designation and how to apply the various selected BMPs to a project. E-29 Page 2 of 3 REV 4/30/10 -~ «~ ~ CITY OF CARLSBAD STORM WATER COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT 8-24 Development Services Building Division 1635 Faraday Avenue 760-602-2719 www .carlsbadca.gov I am applying to the City of Carlsbad for the following type(s) of construction permit: 0 Building Permit O Right-of-Way Permit D My project is categorically EXEMPT from the requirement to prepare a storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) because it only requires issuance of one or more of the following permit types: Patio/Deck Photo Voltaic Re-Roofing Sign Spa-Factory Sprinkler Electrical Fire Additional Fire Alarm Fixed Systems Mechanical Mobile Home Plumbing Water Discharge Project Storm Water Threat Assessment Criteria* t Assessment Criteria My project qualifies as NO THREAT and is exempt from the requirement to prepare a storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) because it meets the 'no threar assessment criteria on the City's Project Threat Assessment Worksheet for Determination of Construction SWPPP Tier Level. My project does not meet any of the High, Moderate or Low Threat criteria described below. Tier 1 -Low Threat Assessment Criteria X My project does not meet any of the Significant or Moderate Threat criteria, is not an exempt permit type (See list above) and the project meets one or more of the following criteria: • Results in some soil disturbance; and/or • Includes outdoor construction activities (such as saw cutting, equipment washing, material stockpiling, vehicle fueling, waste stockpiling). Tier 2 -Moderate Threat Assessment Criteria CJ My project does not meet any of the Significant Threat assessment Criteria described below and meets one or more of the following criteria: • Project requires a grading plan pursuantto the Carlsbad Grading Ordinance (Chapter 15.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code); or, • Project wHI result in 2,500 square feet or more of soils disturbance including any associated construction staging, stockpiling, pavement removal, equipment storage, refueling and maintenance areas and project meets one or more of the additional following criteria: • Located within 200 feet of an environmentally sensitive area or the Pacific Ocean, and/or • Disturbed area is located on a slope with a grade at or exceeding 5 horizontal to 1 vertical, and/or • Disturbed area is located along or within 30 feet of a storm drain inlet an open drainage channel or watercourse, and/or • Construction will be initiated during the rainy season or will extend into the rainy season (Oct. 1 through April 30). Tier 3 -Significant Threat Assessment Criteria Q My project includes clearing, grading or other disturbances to the ground resulting in soil disturbance totaling one or more acres including any associated construction staging, equipment storage, stockpiling, pavement removal, refueling and maintenance areas: and/or CJ My project is part of a phased development plan that will cumulatively result in soil disturbance totaling one or more acres including any associated construction staging, equipment storage, refueling and maintenance areas: or, CJ My project is located inside or within 200 feet of an environmentally sensitive area (see City ESA Proximity map) and has a significant potential for contributing pollutants to nearby receiving waters by way of storm water runoff or non-storm water discharge(s). I certify to the best of my knowledge that the above checked statements are true and correct. I understand and acknowledge that even though this project does not require preparation of a construction SWPP, I must still adhere to, and at all times during construction activities for the permit type(s) check above comply with the storm water best management practices pursuant to Title 15 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code and to City Standards. Project Address: Assessor Parcel No. 'The City Engineer may authorize minor variances from the Storm Water Threat Assessment Criteria in special circumstances where it can be shown that a lesser or higher Construction SWPPP Tier Level is warranted. B-24 ~ A'if= . {5 ~-qD--~1 Tifle: City Concurrence: By: Date: IJ YES IJ NO Page 1 of 1 Rev.03/09 • «~ ~ CITY OF CONSTRUCTION THREAT ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET FOR DETERMINATION OF PROJECT'S PERCEIVED THREAT TO STORM WATER QUALITY E-33 Development Services Land Development Engineering 1635 Faraday Avenue 760-602-2750 www.carlsbadca.gov CARLSBAD Construction Perceived Threat to SWPPPTier Construction Threat Assessment Criteria* Storm Water Level Qualitv Tier 3 -High Construction Threat Assessment Criteria 0 Project site is 50 acres or more and grading will occur during the rainy season CJ Project site is 1 acre or more in size and is located within the Buena Vista or Agua Hedionda Lagoon watershed, inside or within 200 feet of an environmentally sensitive area (ESA) or discharges directly to an ESA High CJ Soil at site is moderately to highly erosive (defined as having a predominance of soils with Tier3 CJ USDA-NRCS Erosion factors kt greater than or equal to 0.4) Site slope is 5 to 1 or steeper CJ Construction is initiated during the rainy season or will extend into the rainy season (Oct. 1 CJ through April 30). Owner/contractor received a Storm Water Notice of Violation within past two years Tier 3 -Medium Construction Threat Assessment Criteria Medium CJ All projects not meeting Tier 3 High Construction Threat Assessment Criteria Tier 2 High Construction Threat Assessment Criteria CJ Project is located within the Buena Vista or Agua Hedionda Lagoon watershed, inside or within 200 feet of an environmentally sensitive area (ESA) or discharges directly to an ESA CJ Soil at site is moderately to highly erosive (defined as having a predominance of soils with USDA-NRCS Erosion factors kt greater than or equal to 0.4) High CJ Site slope is 5 to 1 or steeper Tier2 CJ Construction is initiated during the rainy season or will extend into the rainy season (Oct. 1 through April 30). CJ Owner/contractor received a Storm Water Notice of Violation within past two years CJ Site results in one half acre or more of soil disturbance Tier 2 -Medium Construction Threat Assessment Criteria Medium CJ All projects not meeting Tier 2 High Construction Threat Assessment Criteria Tier 1 -Medium lns12ection Threat Assessment Criteria CJ Project is located within the Buena Vista or Agua Hedionda Lagoon watershed, within or directly adjacent to an environmentally sensitive area (ESA) or discharges directly to an ESA CJ Soil at site is moderately to highly erosive (defined as having a predominance of soils with USDA-NRCS Erosion factors kt greater than or equal to 0.4) Medium CJ Site slope is 5 to 1 or steeper Tier 1 CJ Construction is initiated during the rainy season or will extend into the rainy season (Oct. 1 through April 30). CJ Owner/contractor received a Storm Water Notice of Violation within past two years CJ Site results in one half acre or more of soil disturbance Tier 1 -LQW lns12ection Threat Assessment Criteria Low CJ All projects not meeting Tier 1 Mediun:i Construction Threat Assessment Criteria Exempt -Not Applicable -Exempt *The city engineer may authorize minor variances from the construction threat assessment criteria in special circumstances where it can be shown that a lesser or higher amount of storm water compliance inspection is warranted in the opinion of the city engineer E-33 Page 1 of 1 REV 4/30/10 CARLSBAD STORM WATER STANDARDS QUESTIONNAIRE E-34 Development Services Land Development Engineering 1635 Faraday Avenue 760-602-2750 www.carlsbadca.gov To address post-development pollutants that may be generated from development projects, the City requires that new development and significant redevelopment priority projects incorporate Permanent Storm Water Best Management Practices (BMP's) into the project design per the City's Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan (SUSMP). To view the SUSMP, refer to the Engineering Standards (Volume 4, Chapter 2) at www.carlsbadca.gov/standards. Initially this questionnaire must be completed by the applicant in advance of submitting for a development application (subdivision, discretionary permits and/or construction permits). The results of the questionnaire determine the level of storm water standards that must be applied to a proposed development or redevelopment project. Depending on the outcome, your project will either be subject to 'Standard Stormwater Requirements' or be subject to additional criteria called 'Priority Development Project Requirements'. Many aspects of project site design are dependent upon the storm water standards applied to a project. Your responses to the questionnaire represent an initial assessment of the proposed project conditions and impacts. City staff has responsibility for making the final assessment after submission of the development application. If staff determines that the questionnaire was incorrectly filled out and is subject to more stringent storm water standards than initially assessed by you, this will result in the return of the development application as incomplete. In this case, please make the changes to the questionnaire and resubmit to the City. If you are unsure about the meaning of a question or need help in determining how to respond to one or more of the questions, please seek assistance from Land Development Engineering staff. A separate completed and signed questionnaire must be submitted for each new development application submission. Only one completed and signed questionnaire is required when multiple development applications for the same project are submitted concurrently. In addition to this questionnaire, you must also complete, sign and submit a Project Threat Assessment Form with construction permits for the project. Please start by completing Step 1 and follow the instructions. When completed, sign the form at the end and submit this with your application to the city. To determine if your project is a priority development project, please answer the following questions: 1. Is your project LIMITED TO constructing new or retrofitting paved sidewalks, bicycle lanes or trails that meet the following criteria: (1) Designed and constructed to direct storm water runoff to adjacent vegetated areas, or other non-erodible permeable areas; OR (2) designed and constructed to be hydraulically disconnected from paved streets or roads; OR (3) designed and constructed with permeable pavements or surfaces in accordance with USEPA Green Streets uidance? 2. Is your project LIMITED TO retrofitting or redeveloping existing paved alleys, streets, or roads that are designed and constructed in accordance with the USEPA Green Streets guidance? YES NO If you answered ''yes" to one or more of the above questions, then your project is NOT a priority development project and therefore is NOT subject to the storm water criteria required for priority development projects. Go to step 4, mark the last box stating "my project does not meet PDP requirements" and complete applicant information. If you answered "no" to both questions, then o to Step 2. E-34 Page 1 of 3 Effective 6/27/13 ~ « ~ CITY OF CARLSBAD STORM WATER STANDARDS QUESTIONNAIRE E-34 Development Services Land Development Engineering 1635 Faraday Avenue 760-602-2750 www.carlsbadca.gov To determine if your project is a priority development project, please answer the following questions: 1. Is your project a new development that creates 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surfaces collectively over the entire project site? This includes commercial, industrial, residential, mixed-use, and public deve/o ment ro ·ects on ublic or rivate land. 2. Is your project creating or replacing 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire project site on an existing site of 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface? This includes commercial, industrial, residential, mixed-use, and ublic develo ment ro ·ects on ublic or rivate land. 3. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire project site and supports a restaurant? A restaurant is a facility that sells prepared foods and drinks for consumption, including stationary lunch counters and refreshment stands selling prepared foods and drinks for immediate consum tion. 4. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire project site and supports a hillside development project? A hillside development project includes development on any natural slope that is twenty-five percent or greater. 5. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire project site and supports a parking lot. A parking lot is a land area or facility for the fem orar arkin or stora e of motor vehicles used ersonall for business or for commerce. 6. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire project site and supports a street, road, highway freeway or driveway? A street, road, highway, freeway or driveway is any paved impervious surface used for the transportation of automobiles, trucks, motorc c/es, and other vehicles. 7. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates or replaces 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire site, and discharges directly to an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA)? "Discharging Directly to" includes flow that is conveyed overland a distance of 200 feet or less from the project to the ESA, or conveyed in a pipe or open channel any distance as an isolated flow from the ro ·ect to the ESA i.e. not commin /es with flows from ad"acent lands . * 8. Is your project a new development that supports an automotive repair shop? An automotive repair shop is a facility that is categorized in any one of the following Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes: 5013, 5014, 5541, 7532-7534, or 7536-7539. 9. Is your project a new development that supports a retail gasoline outlet (RGO)? This category includes RGO's that meet the following criteria: (a) 5,000 square feet or more or (b) a project Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 100 or more vehicles er da . 1 O. ls your project a new or redevelopment project that results in the disturbance of one or more acres of land and are expected to generate pollutants post construction? 11. ls your project located within 200 feet of the Pacific Ocean and (1) creates 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surface or (2) increases impervious surface on the property by more than 10%? YES NO If you answered "yes" to one or more of the above questions, you ARE a priority development project and are therefore subject to implementing structural Best Management Practices (BMP's) in addition to implementing Standard Storm Water Requirements such as source control and low impact development BMP's. A Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) must be submitted with your application(s) for development. Go to step 3 for redevelopment projects. For new projects, go to step 4 at the end of this questionnaire, check the "my project meets PDP requirements" box and complete applicant information. If you answered "no" to all of the above questions, you ARE NOT a priority development project and are therefore subject to implementing only Standard Storm Water Requirements such as source control and low impact development BMP's required for all development projects. A Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) is not required with your application(s) for development. Go to step 4 at the end of this questionnaire, check the "my project does not meet PDP requirements" box and complete applicant information. E-34 Page 2 of 3 Effective 6/27/13 ..... ~ ... <( ~ CITY OF CARLSBAD STORM WATER STANDARDS QUESTIONNAIRE E-34 Development Services Land Development Engineering 1635 Faraday Avenue 760-602-2750 www.carlsbadca.gov Does the redevelopment project result in the creation or replacement of impervious surface in an amount of less than 50% of the surface area of the reviousl existin develo ment? --t:?e,. If you answered "yes," the structural BMP's required for Priority Development Projects apply only to the crea 10n or replacement of impervious surface and not the entire development. Go to step 4, check the "my project meets PDP requirements" box and complete applicant information. If you answered "no," the structural BMP's required for Priority Development Projects apply to the entire development. Go to step 4, check the "m ro·ect meets PDP re uirements" box and com lete a licant information. D My project meets PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) requirements and must comply with additional stormwater criteria per the SUSMP and I understand I must prepare a Storm Water Management Plan for submittal at time of application. I understand flow control (hydromodification) requirements may apply to my project. Refer to SUSMP for details. My project does not meet PDP requirements and must only comply with STANDARD STORMWATER REQUIREMENTS per the SUSMP. As part of these requirements, I will incorporate low impact development strategies throughout my project. Accessor's Parcel ~umber(s): --, \ 1::7~ -04.~ .... z, ( Applicant Name: Applicant Title: Applicant Signature: Date: This Box for City Use Only City Concurrence: YES NO By: Date: Project ID: * Environmentally Sensitive Areas include but are not limited to all Clean Water Act Section 303(d) impaired water bodies; areas designated as Areas of Special Biological Significance by the State Water Resources Control Board (Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin ( 1994) and amendments); water bodies designated with the RARE beneficial use by the State Water Resources Control Board (Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (1994) and amendments); areas designated as preserves or their quivalent under the Multi Species Conservation Program within the Cities and County of San Diego; and any other equivalent environmentally sensitive areas which have been identified by the Copermittees. E-34 Page 3 of 3 Effective 6/27/13 ( City of Carlsbad STORM WATER STANDARDS QUESTIONNAIRE E-34 Development Services Land Development Engineering 1635 Faraday Avenue 760-602-2750 www.carlsbadca.gov INSTRUCTIONS: To address post-development pollutants that may be generated from development projects, the City requires that new development and significant redevelopment priority projects incorporate Permanent Storm Water Best Management Practices (BMP's) into the project design per the City's Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan (SUSMP). To view the SUSMP, refer to the Engineering Standards (Volume 4, Chapter 2). Initially this questionnaire must be completed by the applicant in advance of submitting for a development application (subdivision, discretionary permits and/or construction permits). The results of the questionnaire determine the level of storm water standards that must be applied to a proposed development or redevelopment project. Depending on the outcome, your project will either be subject to 'Standard Stormwater Requirements' or be subject to additional criteria called 'Priority Development Project Requirements'. Many aspects of project site design are dependent upon the storm water standards applied to a project. Your responses to the questionnaire represent an initial assessment of the proposed project conditions and impacts. City staff has responsibility for making the final assessment after submission of the development application. If staff determines that the questionnaire was incorrectly filled out and is subject to more stringent storm water standards than initially assessed by you, this will result in the return of the development application as incomplete. In this case, please make the changes to the questionnaire and resubmit to the City. If you are unsure about the meaning of a question or need help in determining how to respond to one or more of the questions, please seek assistance from Land Development Engineering staff. A separate completed and signed questionnaire must be submitted for each new development application submission. Only one completed and signed questionnaire is required when multiple development applications for the same project are submitted concurrently. In addition to this questionnaire, you must also complete, sign and submit a Project Threat Assessment Form with construction permits for the project. Please start by completing Step 1 and follow the instructions. When completed, sign the form at the end and submit this with your application to the city. ,. .. . , •. ; ; ., ! ! ,., ~t •.• •1/$:TER'~1 '.' )S ! ... ,. ,,, ; '." •!> . . , .. .,.. •; •. .. ;, TC) BE'COMPLHET.EifFdR ALt?PROJECTS ;. To determine if your project is a priority development project, please answer the following questions: YES NO 1. Is your project LIMITED TO constructing new or retrofitting paved sidewalks, bicycle lanes or trails that meet the following criteria: ( 1) Designed and constructed to direct storm water runoff to adjacent vegetated areas, or other non-erodible permeable areas; OR (2) designed and constructed to be hydraulically disconnected from "' paved streets or roads; OR (3) designed and constructed with permeable pavements or surfaces in accordance with USEPA Green Streets quidance? 2. Is your project LIMITED TO retrofitting or redeveloping existing paved alleys, streets, or roads that are A designed and constructed in accordance with the USEPA Green Streets guidance? If you answered "yes" to one or more of the above questions, then your project is NOT a priority development project and therefore is NOT subject to the storm water criteria required for priority development projects. Go to step 4, mark the last box stating "my project does not meet PDP requirements" and complete applicant information. If you answered "no" to both questions, then go to Step 2. E-34 Page 1 of 3 Effective 6/27/13 (city of ,arlsbad STORM WATER STANDARDS QUESTIONNAIRE E-34 Development Services Land Development Engineering 1635 Faraday Avenue 760-602-2750 www.carlsbadca.gov To determine if your project is a priority development project, please answer the following questions: 1. Is your project a new development that creates 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surfaces collectively over the entire project site? This includes commercial, industrial, residential, mixed-use, and public develo ment ro ·ects on ublic or rivate land. 2. Is your project creating or replacing 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire project site on an existing site of 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface? This includes commercial, industrial, residential, mixed-use, and ublic develo ment ro ·ects on ublic or riv ate land. 3. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire project site and supports a restaurant? A restaurant is a facility that sells prepared foods and drinks for consumption, including stationary lunch counters and refreshment stands selling prepared foods and drinks for immediate consum tion. 4. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire project site and supports a hillside development project? A hillside development project includes development on any natural slope that is twenty-five percent or greater. 5. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire project site and supports a parking lot. A parking lot is a land area or facility for the tem ora arkin or stora e of motor vehicles used ersonall for business or for commerce. 6. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire project site and supports a street, road, highway freeway or driveway? A street, road, highway, freeway or driveway is any paved impervious surface used for the transportation of automobiles, trucks, motorc cles, and other vehicles. 7. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates or replaces 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire site, and discharges directly to an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA)? "Discharging Directly to" includes flow that is conveyed overland a distance of 200 feet or less from the project to the ESA, or conveyed in a pipe or open channel any distance as an isolated flow from the ro ·ect to the ESA i.e. not com min Jes with flows from ad·acent lands . * 8. Is your project a new development that supports an automotive repair shop? An automotive repair shop is a facility that is categorized in any one of the following Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes: 5013, 5014, 5541, 7532-7534, or 7536-7539. 9. Is your project a new development that supports a retail gasoline outlet (RGO)? This category includes RGO's that meet the following criteria: (a) 5,000 square feet or more or (b) a project Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 100 or more vehicles er da . 1 O. ls your project a new or redevelopment project that results in the disturbance of one or more acres of land and are expected to generate pollutants post construction? 11. ls your project located within 200 feet of the Pacific Ocean and (1) creates 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surface or (2) increases impervious surface on the property by more than 10%? YES NO X If you answered "yes" to one or more of the above questions, you ARE a priority development project and are therefore subject to implementing structural Best Management Practices (BMP's) in addition to implementing Standard Storm Water Requirements such as source control and low impact development BMP's. A Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) must be submitted with your application(s) for development. Go to step 3 for redevelopment projects. For new projects, go to step 4 at the end of this questionnaire, check the "my project meets PDP requirements" box and complete applicant information. If you answered "no" to all of the above questions, you ARE NOT a priority development project and are therefore subject to implementing only Standard Storm Water Requirements such as source control and low impact development BMP's required for all development projects. A Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) is not required with your application(s) for development. Go to step 4 at the end of this questionnaire, check the "my project does not meet PDP requirements" box and complete applicant information. E-34 Page 2 of 3 Effective 6/27/13 ( City of arlsbad STORM WATER STANDARDS QUESTIONNAIRE E-34 Development Services Land Development Engineering 1635 Faraday Avenue 760-602-2750 www.carlsbadca.gov Com lete the uestions below re ardin our redevelo ment ro·ect: YES NO Does the redevelopment project result in the creation or replacement of impervious surface in an amount of less than 50% of the surface area of the reviousl existin develo ment? If you answered "yes," the structural BMP's required for Priority Development Projects apply only to the creation or replacement of impervious surface and not the entire development. Go to step 4, check the "my project meets PDP requirements" box and complete applicant information. If you answered "no," the structural BMP's required for Priority Development Projects apply to the entire development. Go to step 4, check the "m pro·ect meets PDP re uirements" box and com lete a licant information. 0 My project meets PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) requirements and must comply with additional stormwater criteria per the SUSMP and I understand I must prepare a Storm Water Management Plan for submittal at time of application. I understand flow control (hydromodification) requirements may apply to my project. Refer to SUSMP for details. My project does not meet PDP requirements and must only comply with STANDARD STORMWATER REQUIREMENTS per the SUSMP. As part of these requirements, I will incorporate low impact development strategies throughout my project. Applicant Titl~b f¥E Date: ~ /.. / 2,,pl C;:f ,~ This Box for City Use Only City Concurrence: YES NO By: Date: Project ID: * Environmentally Sensitive Areas include but are not limited to all Clean Water Act Section 303(d) impaired water bodies; areas designated as Areas of Special Biological Significance by the State Water Resources Control Board (Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (1994) and amendments); water bodies designated with the RARE beneficial use by the State Water Resources Control Board (Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (1994) and amendments); areas designated as preserves or their quivalent under the Multi Species Conservation Program within the Cities and County of San Diego; and any other equivalent environmentally sensitive areas which have been identified by the Copermittees. E-34 Page 3 of 3 Effective 6/27/13 Tier 2 Construction SWPPP Site Assessment Form . r lb {:3-3lq~ ProJect ID: \...../i ______ ..)_ Project Information: ProjectName: YtiTTal f.go\~ Project Address/Location; (~ ~ .A\lf:$ .. ~~l'J~ ~ • 4~P0!!2 Responsible Parties/Contact Information: Name of Preparer: WA'u.,.::(" 4~ Qualification of Preparer (Registration/Certification):------------ Address: Jt£{b -6Plt\~ t;,J3~ ~ {e:'7-F;'!z City/State/Zip Code: ~µ~ J ~ .lliiif~Z2!2\ Phone Number: ~ -~ -~ NameofOwner/Qwner'sAgen~: ~~T (2E:;~ Address: l ram -SF\~~¥§2: t7f:,.. ~ \e>&-e, I City/State/Zip Code: '@.'\"-tt'ut2b) ~ • c::-:( ~ Phone Number: $Ip~.,. e,:r, • t,4~ Name of Emergency Contact: J~~~L--l:t.U..-1.J~t::i-------- ( during construction) Address: \Z(d-~ A\Jf:!,1 City/State/Zip Code: ~\-.~ a• PhoneNumber: 7/A7-&,\~-Gft,17 Page 1 of 10 Tier 2 Site Assessment Form 3/24/08 .. Site and Construction Activity Description: Construction Start Date: ?:,/ 42./ Ze>/€, r I End Date: J e;:> /Jg/$Dl~ If work begins in rainy season or extends into rainy season, explain how project work can be scheduled can be altered o avoid rainy season impacts or to lessen exposure of site during rainy season: di> ~ :t' a..,l.> ~¥:f:. ~ l~ '1\P 'f/'sl-\-.'o \~~ r\~~ Grading Quantities: Cut: ---=O'--_CY; Fill: (!;) CY; Import: _____ CY; Export: __ 6 ___ CY Any Stockpile Proposed? ':(f:':;; If yes, then estimate quantity: -;r 1'~ CY Estimated duration of stockpile: e:;-·~deMh!'I t".,Al'"-::::, ,1 Soils types: \'\\LOT~ ~a ALk-111.~e;-··~~~c Does site contain a preponderance of soils with USDA-NRCS erosion factor kf greater than or equal to O .4? N,O Is a staging area proposed (yes/no)? Y~ Ifyes,thenwhereisitlocated? ~ ~. ~~r 6? Is concrete washout required (yes/no)? b\P'1: ~lll~ t,d,, ~c,e.t? Where is it located?~ ~, ~1"" t?,•~ Any existing site contamination (yes/no)? t-,to Where is it located? ____ !-\'""".~~~A~-·------------------ Any vehicle storage, maintenance or fueling area proposed (yes/no)? t¥-? Where is it located? ___ ~H.,~_J:,.... ___________________ _ Any de-watering operation proposed (yes/no)? ~ Where is it located? ~ A. Any other special operations proposed thatmay impair water quality (yes/no)? 'HP What and where? __ \:\--'-•_._~--------------------- Page 2 of 10 Tier 2 Site Assessment Form 3/24/08 • Watershed Basin project drains to: D Buena Vista Lagoon ~ Agua Hedionda Lagoon D Encinas Creek D Batiquitos Lagoon D Pacific Ocean Is project drainage tributary to a CW A section 303( d) listed water ~paired for sediment (includes Buena Vista and Agua Hedionda Lagoons) (yes/no): . If yes, describe additional controls that will be used on project site to mitigate for sediment impairments (if any): ~ ... A,, -AbL ~~ ~ ~~rt;s]Z et\. ~r a·, ~ Is project inside or within 200 feet of an Environmentally Sensitive Area (yes/no): ~ If yes, describe additional controls that will be used on project site to mitigate for potential storm water impacts (if any):-------------------------- Are any agency permits required (yes/no)? t,lO Check off permit types required: D Army Corps 404 permit D Regional Board Water Quality 401 Certification D Coastal Commission Certification D U.S. Fish and Wildlife Section 7 D Fish and Game Stream Alteration Agreement D Other list: --------------------------~ Page 3 of 10 Tier 2 Site Assessment Form 3/24/08 • ,. List materials that will be used on construction site and their handling and storage requirements Material Characteristics/Toxici Handlin re uirements If any toxic or hazardous materials are proposed, then a spill prevention plan is required. Is a spill prevention plan required (yes/no)? t'k2 . If yes, attach spill prevention plan. Perceived Threat to Storm Water Quality rating: Using the Construction Threat Assessment Worksheet for determination of the projects Perceived Threat to Storm Water Quality rating (E-33): The Construction Threat to Storm Water Quality rating for this project is: D High ~edium Signature of Plan Preparer: Attachments: 0 Storm Water Compliance Form-Tier 2 0 Spill Prevention Plan 0 Hydrology and/or hydraulic study ~ Solis and/or geotechnical report(s) 0 Other. List: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Page 4 of 10 Date: ~/'4!/2.l?t~ ~\,l~~ ~~ Tier 2 Site Assessment Form 3/24/08 \• BMP Selection: The following tables are provided to help identify and select appropriate site specific BMPs for the proposed project. Review the list of potential site construction activities and site conditions described along the left hand column of each sheet. Then, for each activity or site condition that is included in the proposed project, pick one or more of the BMPs described at the top of the form and place an X(s) in the box(es) that form(s) an intersection between the activity/site condition row and BMP column(s). All structural (physical facility) BMP's should be shown on the site plan in the Construction SWPPP drawing set. Any proposed no-structural BMP should be noted in the Special Notes on the Construction SWPPP drawing set. Page 5 of 10 Tier 2 Site Assessment Form 3/24/08 • • Wind Erosion Control BMPs Erosion BMPs C: II) C: e .... 0 m 0 C: .; II) ~ 0 os .s:: ~ C, "C Cl) Cl) (.) ~ C: C: -C. C, (U (U "C BMP Description 7 C: g :::, C: .s:: ~ :c ~~ "iii II) ·e C: ~ f!? II) C: .:,(. C: 0 C, 0 Cl) '6 0 II) 0 0 C: 0 "iii .5 ~> Cl) 3 ~ 3 -~ (U -~ Cl) "C ~ :g (U.; ~ 0 3 2= g. Cl) ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 .c (U ... 3 II) C: 0 (U E-~ w "C I! e a5 Cl) 0 Cl) Cl)·-i "C .s:: C: 0 Cl) (U = (U .s:: II) 1n "C "C 0 0 t:: ·-.Q C. Cl) .c ~ "C 0 Cl)·->, >, ·o ... Cl) ~ (U I! Cl) 0 ... (U C: ._ X .... u5 .... .... 0 ~ en c.. w ::c ::c en en (.!) WO > en en c.. CASQA .,.... N ('I) "f It) <lj) "' CX) a, 0 .,.... N ('I) .,.... I I I I I I I .,.... .,.... .,.... .,.... I Designation 7 (.) (.) (.) (.) (.) (.) (.) (.) (.) I I I I w w w w w w w w w w (.) (.) (.) (.) 3: w w w w Construction Activity or Site Condition Cleared Areas ~ Flat pad graded areas -~ . -•Graded slope areas Trenching/Excavation )( Stockpiling -F\:::: ---,I• ~ --.... • .. Drilling/Boring ConduiUPipe " Installation Substructure/Pad X Installation Staging Area --H --,.-. • _., Existing onsite vegetated areas ~rain~~flA onto site -• • Drainage flows off of • Fl • ,_ \..c;::, site • _.. I Drainage at top of slope Other (list): Page 6 of 10 Tier 2 Site Assessment Form 3/24/08 ---Dl.li"i!"!!,J'l!'l",if!!i~ .. :::::::.J::·::;:·• . .;;.,cll:,:..;::,..;;•, ilii·~..i····· .. liililiii·---------------------------------- Sediment Control BMPs "O -C: C: (U ... Q) E C) ... -~ -.E C: ... Q) Q) "iii Q. Q) C: ·c:: ... c (U ·a. (U BMP Description ~ (U l!! ID ... ID ~ ID I-E Q) (U C: I-~ C) Q) g ID Q) "iii C: Q) --(U (U iii 0 C: C: 0 0 ID ~--C) ... 0 iii C: Q) Q) ex: en E (U ID O·--~ ts Q) E E ~ Q) Q) 5 ..c ~ §2 E u. 0 ... ~ "O '5 '5 Q) Q) ~~ C: Q) ~ Q) Q) .s::. ..c ... (U .s e .s::. en U:: -en en (.) (!) en> en en en a. (.) CASQA Designation ~ ..... N C") ,. IO «.' r--<X) 0) 0 ..... I I I I I I I ..... ..... w w w w w w w w w I I en en en en en en en en en w w en en Construction Activity Or Site Condition Cleared Areas ~ Flat pad graded areas I~( Graded slope areas -~A. ''." . Trenching/Excavation "" Stockpiling X. Drilling/Boring .. M.,A• ,, - Conduit/Pipe Installation. X. Substructure/Pad Installation -~ Paving ,. Staging Area X Existing onsite vegetated areas - Drainage flow onto site Drainage flows off of site X Drainage at top of slope Other (list): ~e.1:=,, ?-~ 6f ~·l-\\, ~l At:'t?t~\.. l~~~~. Page 7 of 10 Tier 2 Site Assessment Form 3/24/08 • • Tracking Control BMPs C: C: 0 is 0 ·c:; ~ :J :J ... ... i= --II) II) II) II) BMP Description 7 C: II) C: 0 Q) 0 II) (.) ... (.) ~ "'C Cl "i ~ Cl Q) !:!:! w NII) -J:! ;: II) = II) II) .s:::. :.0 ~ ·-"'C ..c tlJ Q) II) s Cl So ... tlJ en c: en o:: g>~ CASQA Designation 7 ..... N ('I) I I I Construction Activity 0:: 0:: 0:: I- I-I- V Site Access point(s) ~ Staging area access point(s) )(. Maintenance access roads to BMPs Other (list): Page 8 of 10 Tier 2 Site Assessment Form 3/24/0S • Non-Storm Water Management BMPs B C: Ill Cl (U C: Cl C: C: ·2: Jg Ill 0 .£ .... Q) ~ Cl (U Q) C: Q) Jg 0 C: Q) ..91 "iii Ill 'fl .... "iii e> :::, ::, f [ (.) u.. :E BMP Description "? (U Ill (U C: ----Ill .... Ill 0 Ill C: -a.. C: 0 .... C: .c: 0 C: C: C: C: Q) .9 C: (.) 0 +a Q) Q) Q) (U 0 Cl 0 Ill 0 E -C: ~ C: -~ i5 (U E E E +a C: 0:: 0 '5 E .g> a. a. a. ~ Cl a. B :; (U ~ c ·5 ·5 ·5 C: ·5 .c: Q) C: .... Q) Cl :.c 0 i 'E C" (U ~ a. ·c: i5 0 C" C" C" a. C: Ill w '5' 1ii 0 (!) 'fl Jg w w w 0 ·c: Q) .... :::, ·2: -0 <( ID Ill Cl -0 ~ Jg Q) f -0 -0 -0 Cl (.) u:: C: C: C: C: C: C: C: C: C: (U C: ~ 0 ·c: (U (U f C: (U (U (U :~ Jg Jg 0 ~ (.) Jg .... 0 Q) Q) Q) Q) iii ;e Cl 0 (.) :0 ~ ~ 0 0 .... (U C: a. .... 0 0 0 0 ·c: a. Jg 0 0 Jg ~ "> E (U ~ ~ :.c :.c :.c ..91 C: C: E E f (U Q) Q) Q) ~ ~ 0 0 (U ~ ~ 0 a.. I-c3 a.. > a: (.) (.) :E CASQA Designation .... N C') "f LO <9 I'--CX) a> 0 .... N C') ~ LO <O I I I I I I I .... .... .... .... .... .... .... "? Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl) I I I I I I I z z z z z z z z z Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl) z z z z z z z Construction Activity & Site Conditions Landscaping & Irrigation u.. r:\ -Drilling/Boring N. A• Concrete/Asphalt '/.... Sawcutting Concrete flatwork )(._ Paving ")(.. Wire, Cable & >< . ~ Connector Installation Site Housekeeping i7't Staging Area 'X Equipment Maintenance )<_ and Fueling Hazardous Substance "" ,,,..., Management Dewatering ~. DI\., Steam crossing Ll l!lo... . Material delivery . 7' Solid waste handling including trash and x.. debris removal Concrete or stucco work ~ Other (list): 1• Tier 2 Site Assessment Form 3/24/08 • Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control BMPs -C: Q) --E C: C: Q) Q) Q) Q) -C) C) E E C: m 0 Q) C: ~ Q) Q) E m -... -C) C: 0 -C: C) Q) ~ Q) -C: Q) m m en -0 C: C) E E C: m Q) C: (.) m m -Q) BMP Description 7 "O Q) Q) ~ ~ C: 1/) C) C: E "O C) m ~ m m C: ~ Q) m m Q) ·5 C: ~ C) C: -m m C: m 1/) en .!! 0 ~ Q) C: 0 ~ ~ "O 1/) +' -~ Q) m +' Q) ~ a. Q) Q) 1/) ~ C: .!! -Q) -~ 1/) m en 1/) 0 :::> 1/) :::, C: ~ ~ ~ Q) -ro ro Q) 0 ·e ! ~ ·c.. ... "O ·c: ·c: a. ... m m "O Q) Q) ~ ~ m -0 ~ m m 0 l'1 C: C: C: ·:5 0 ·c.. 0 0 0 m C" -~ ~ en en en :I: (.) (.) en ::i CASQA Designation 7 0 ..... N C") "'f" I.O t9 ..... co 0) ..... Construction Activity I I I I I I I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ And Site Conditions ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Landscaping & Irrigation -~.A. Drilling/Boring -u,-z::..; Concrete/Asphalt Sawcutting ~ X Concrete flatwork I~ Paving ~ Wire Cable & Connector Installation )i(.. Site Housekeeping x.. Staging Area .~ Equipment Maintenance and Fuelini> X. Hazardous Substance Management -~ ~ Dewaterina ><.. - Steam crossina -\.l.,A. Material deliverv _x:_ Solid waste handling including trash >< and debris removal Concrete or stucco work V' Temporary porta-potties X Other (list): Page 10 of 10 Tier 2 Site Assessment Form 3/24/08 STORM WATER COMPLIANCE FORM - TIER 2 CONSTRUCTION SWPPP E-30 Development Services Land Development Engineering 1635 Faraday Avenue 760-602-2750 www .carlsbadca.gov I am applying to the City of Carlsbad for one or more of the following type of construction permit(s): 0 Grading Permit KBuilding Permit O Right-of-Way Permit My project does not meet any of the following criteria for a project that poses a significant threat to storm water quality: ./ My project does not include clearing, grading or other ground disturbances resulting in soil disturbance totaling one or more acres including any associated construction staging, equipment storage, stockpiling, pavement removal, refueling and maintenance areas; and, ./ My project is not part of a phased development plan that will cumulatively result in soil disturbance totaling one or more acres including any associated construction staging, equipment storage, stockpiling, pavement removal, refueling and maintenance areas; and, ./ My project is not located inside or within 200 feet of an environmentally sensitive area and will not have a significant potential for contributing pollutants to nearby receiving waters by way of storm water runoff or non-storm water discharge(s). My project requires preparation and approval of a Tier 2 Construction Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) because my project meets one or more of the following criteria demonstrating that the project potentially poses a moderate threat to storm water quality: 0 My project requires a grading plan pursuant to the Carlsbad Grading Ordinance (Chapter 15.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code); and/or, Q My Project will result in 2,500 square feet or more of soils disturbance including any associated construction staging, stockpiling, pavement removal, equipment storage, refueling and maintenat1ce areas and, my project meets one or more of the following additional criteria: ' • Project is located within 200 feet of an environmentally sensitive area or the Pacific Ocean; • Project's disturbed area is located on a slope with a grade at or exceeding 5 horizontal to 1 vertical; • Project's disturbed area is located along or within 30 feet of a storm drain inlet, an open drainage channel or watercourse; and/or • Project will be initiated during the rainy season or will extend into the rainy season (Oct. 1 through April 30). I CERTIFY TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE THAT THE ABOVE CHECKED STATEMENTS ARE TRUE AND CORRECT. I AM SUBMITTING FOR CITY APPROVAL A TIER 2 CONSTRUCTION SWPPP PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CITY STANDARDS. I UNDERSTAND AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I MUST ADHERE TO, AND AT ALL TIMES, COMPLY WITH THE CITY APPROVED TIER 2 CONSTRUCTION SWPPP THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES UNTIL THE CONSTRUCTION WORK IS COMPLETE AND APPROVED BY THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. Assessor's Parcel Numbers: Applicant Title: E-30 Page 1 of 1 REV 07/14 • _ ... _ t--·-----------------------------1 ---------i i • ii ! ! I II I II I I I I i i ,, I I i h Ii; .. I -II ,. I i i I .. b I I I ! = I @ @ ® ® ®® ® ®® ®® ®® @ @ @I i . i !I I i 11 I ! i : 11 I I ----. i • ·-·---· •-I i i . i i ~ Tj I 1,11 ,~ + .. : ~ IH IH i~ i~ I I In ........ i i i i i i ·~ ! i. I Ill II 111 ii r• 111 , .• I I I e ii, all 11 sll •II I I I = ,11 II 1111 ·t!I I II 11 •I ·I II ., II • ! I ;, h 11 I d ii I ii ii II ·~,; I \T El .,.. I .I i , I i i 11 1 I !1 11 . i ii .1 1 H ·ii I i • i i ,,. _ ___.i i JI ___ . ~ ! +1 I i i Ti ~-! I ~ I It : ! II .. ··1 . I 1313 8 13 El [3(313 [3 1111111,'1'1 ·111 q i, , ii I I I ! .11 . 111• I I ildl I 1 · l~~-----'1 i..._. . --·-·---·-·-·-·-·------.J -·-·-·-·-_ ... _ -OAK AVENUE R.O.W. - CIIIYIMll MICICIATD HUTTON RESIDENCE -....... --=· BMPPLAN 12"0fllC:AVENUE CARt.SBAD; CA 92008 • (.i~', ,, ~· ~ CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DIVISION BUILDING PLAN CHECK REVIEW CHECKLIST P-28 DATE: 3-9-15PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ID: Development Services Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue (760) 602-4610 www.carlsbadca.1rnv PLAN CHECK NO: CB 13-3195 SET#: 3 ADDRESS: 1264 Oak Av APN: 156-190-27-00 ~ This plan check review is complete and has been APPROVED by the Planning Division. By: Chris Sexton A Final Inspection by the Planning Division is required D Yes [gj No You may also have corrections from one or more of the divisions listed below. Approval from these divisions may be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Resubmitted plans should include corrections from all divisions. D This plan check review is NOT COMPLETE. Items missing or incorrect are listed on the attached checklist. Please resubmit amended plans as required. Plan Check Comments have been sent to: go2wallyworld@hotmail.com For questions or clarifications on the attached checklist please contact the following reviewer as marked: :PtAN,NING :: c>ia6~ao2~a!lo ~ Chris Sexton D D 760-602-4624 Chris.Sexton@carlsbadca.gov Gina Ruiz 760-602-4675 Gina.Ruiz@carlsbadca.gov Remarks: . ENGINEERJ~G '76(f602~2;7pQ,; · ... D Kathleen Lawrence 760-602-2741 Kathleen.Lawrence@carlsbadca.gov D Linda Ontiveros 760-602-2773 Linda.Ontiveros@carlsbadca.gov D D Greg Ryan 760-602-4663 Gregory.Ryan@carlsbadca.gov D CindyWong 760-602-4662 Cynthia.Wong@carlsbadca.gov D Dominic Fieri 760-602-4664 Dominic.Fieri@carlsbadca.gov REVIEW#: 1 2 3 ~DD ~DD ~DD ~DD igi O D Plan Check No. CB 13-3195 Address 1264 Oak Av Date 3-9-15 Review#~ Planner Chris Sexton Phone (760) 602-4624 APN: 156-190-27-00 Type of Project & Use: demo existing sfr. build new sfr with detached garage Net Project Density:1.21 DU/AC Zoning: R-1 General Plan: RLM Facilities Management Zone: 1 CFO (in/out) #_Date of participation: __ Remaining net dev acres: __ (For non-residential development: Type of land use created by this permit: __ ) Legend: ~ Item Complete Environmental Review Required: D Item Incomplete -Needs your action YES O NO O TYPE DATE OF COMPLETION: Compliance with conditions of approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval: Discretionary Action Required: YES O NO O TYPE __ APPROVAL/RESO. NO. DATE PROJECT NO. OTHER RELATED CASES: Compliance with conditions or approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval: __ Coastal Zone Assessment/Compliance Project site located in Coastal Zone? YES O NO 0 CA Coastal Commission Authority? YES O NO 0 If California Coastal Commission Authority: Contact them at -7575 Metropolitan Drive, Suite 103, San Diego, CA 92108-4402; (619) 767-2370 Determine status (Coastal Permit Required or Exempt): Habitat Management Plan Data Entry Completed? YES D NO D If property has Habitat Type identified in Table 11 of HMP, complete HMP Permit application and assess fees in Permits Plus (A/P/Ds, Activity Maintenance, enter CB#, toolbar, Screens, HMP Fees, Enter Acres of Habitat Type impacted/taken, UPDATE!) lnclusionary Housing Fee required: YES O NO ~ (Effective date of lnclusionary Housing Ordinance -May 21, 1993.) Data Entry Completed? YES O NO 0 (A/P/Ds, Activity Maintenance, enter CB#, toolbar, Screens, Housing Fees, Construct Housing YIN, Enter Fee, UPDATE!) ~ D D Housing Tracking Form (form P-20) completed: YES D NO O NIA D P-28 Page 2 of 3 07/11 • f f l .... lll!ll!ll!a.qii£iiiii•ae.~~=~u~.~\:ll'lffilliDilll'a1illllllillillllWilllllllllllllllli11111111SSF•r•r111111 ............................ ____________ ~~~~~ Site Plan: t8J D 0 t8J O 0 t8J DO 0 0 t8J t8J O 0 0 0[8] 0 0 t8J D IZIO 0 0 t8J Provide a fully dimensional site plan drawn to scale. Show: North arrow, property lines, easements, existing and proposed structures, streets, existing street improvements, right-of- way width, dimensional setbacks and existing topographical lines (including all side and rear yard slopes). Provide legal description of property and assessor's parcel number. City Council Policy 44 -Neighborhood Architectural Design Guidelines 1. Applicability: YES O NO 0 2. Project complies: YES O NOD Zoning: 1. Setbacks: Front: Interior Side: Street Side: Rear: Top of slope: Required 20' Shown 30' Required 5' Shown 7', 15'4" Required __ Shown __ Required 1 O' Shown 208' Required __ Shown __ 2. Accessory structure setbacks: Front: Required 20' Shown 20' Interior Side: Required 5' Shown 16'6", 6' Street Side: Required __ Shown __ Rear: Required 1Q'. Shown 10'+ Structure separation: Required 1Q'. Shown 20' 3. Lot Coverage: 4. Height: Detached garage Required >40% Shown 11.4% Required >24' with> min. 3:12 roof pitch Shown>24' Required >14' with a min. 3:12 roof pitch Shown 1Q'. 5. Parking: Spaces Required g Shown g (breakdown by uses for commercial and industrial projects required) Residential Guest Spaces Required __ Shown __ Additional Comments 1) Per the Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.10.080(A)(1 )(d)(v) accessory buildings shall not exceed one story. The detached garage exceeds one story. 2) Please show the etimeAsion of the structure separation from the e>Eisting single family residence to tho etotaohoa garage on sheet "C 1 ". 3) Please show all lot aimonsions on tho site plan so staff can etotermino setbacks. 4) Please provide the lot coverage as a percentage. 5) Eaoh single family resiaenoe neoets to proviso a t\•.io oar garage with interior etimensions of 20'*20'. Please show these interior dimensions on sl=loot "A 8". 2-19-15 (1) Same comments before in regards to lot coverage and building height. (2) Please show the rear yard setback. The rear yard setback needs to be 20 feet. OK TO ISSUE AND ENTERED APPROVAL INTO COMPUTER Chris Sexton DATE 3-9-15 P-28 Page 3 of 3 07/11 • Project: Hutton Residence 1264 Oak A venue Carlsbad, CA 92008 PE Project#: 2013-0126 Permit#: Plan File#: Requested By: Wally Geer Greymar Associates Regarding: Soils Letter Memorandum, dated 3/3/15 by Geo Soils, Inc. To Whom It May Concern: Patterson Engineering, Inc. 928 Fort Stockton Drive, Suite 201 San Diego, CA 92103 www.pattersoneng.com March 4, 2015 At the request of Mr. Geer, Patterson Engineering has reviewed the above mentioned Memorandum. Based on the request we offer the following explanation. This project was submitted and designed under the 2010 California Building Code (2010 CBC), the seismic design parameters of the 2010 CBC meet or exceed those of the 2013 CBC. The discrepancy between the geotechnical report and the structural notes do not negatively impact the structure. Please do not hesitate to contact our office at 858-605-093 7 with any additional concerns. Regards, Curtis Patterson, SE 5629 J , -. .,.., t t • Geotechnical • Geologic • Coastal • Environmental 5741 Palmer Way • Carlsbad, California 92010 • (760) 438-3155 • FAX (760) 931-0915 • www.geosoilsinc.com DATE: TO: Attn: From: MEMORANDUM March 3, 2015 Mr. Wally Geer Robert G. Crisman, CEG 1934 David W. Skelly, RCE 47857 SUBJECT: Structural Plan Review, Hutton Residence, 1264 Oak Avenue, City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California References: 1. "Structural Plans for: Hutton Residence, 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad, Ca. 92008, Project No. 2013-0126, dated December 12, 2013, latest revision January 16, 2015, by Patterson Engineering. 2. "Geotechnical Evaluation for Proposed Construction at 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92067," W.O. 6745-A-SC, dated July 31, 2014, by GeoSoils, Inc. 3. "California Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Volume 2 of 2, Based on the 2012 International Building Code, 2013 California Historical Building Code, Title 24, Part8; 2013 California Existing Building Code, Title 24, Part 10," 2013 edition, by the California Building Standards Commission. 4. "Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE Standard ASCE/SEI 7-10," dated 2010, by the American Society of Civil Engineers. In accordance with a request from the project architect, the referenced plans (see Reference No. 1) were reviewed for conformance with the intent of the referenced geotechnical report (Reference No. 2). Based on our review, the structural plans/details (Reference No. 1) appear to be in general conformance with the recommendations provided by this office, with the following additional comments and recommendations (see below). 1. Plans indicate that the governing Code, is the 201 o California Building Code. It should be noted that the geotechnical report was prepared in accordance with the 2013 California Building Code (see Reference No. 3). The structural engineer should review for comment and make any revisions, as necessary. Ch/]3 /1 f 2. Values shown in the "ASCE 7-05 Seismic Factor Determination" sub section, presented in the "Structural Design Criteria" section on Sheet S 1.0 of Reference No. 1, are in accordance with the 2013 Edition of the California Building Code, and per the associated ASCE 7-10 document (Reference No. 4). The structural engineer should review for comment and make any necessary revisions. 3. The value of Sms, shown in the Seismic Factor Determination section on sheet S1 .o is indicated as Sms = 1.118. Per Reference No. 2, this value should be Sms = 1.188. Unless specifically superceded herein, the conclusions and recommendations presented in Reference No. 2 remain valid and applicable. The conclusions and recommendations presented herein are professional opinions. These opinions have been derived in accordance with current standards of practice, and no warranty is express or implied. Standards of practice are subject to change with time. GSI assumes no responsibility or liability for work or testing performed by others, or their inaction, or work performed when GSI is not requested to be onsite, to evaluate if our recommendations have been properly implemented. Use of this report constitutes an agreement and consent by the user to all the limitations outlined above, notwithstanding any other agreements that may be in place. In addition, this report may be subject to review by the controlling authorities. Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45.spr.memo W.O. 6745-A-SC March 3, 2015 Page 2 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION FOR PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION AT 1264 OAK AVENUE CARLS~~O <;, 067 W.O. 6745-A-SC JULY 31, 2014 • Geotechnical • Geologic • Coastal • Environmental 5741 Palmer Way •Carlsbad.California 92010 • (760) 438-3155 • FAX (760) 931-0915 • www.geosoilsinc.com July 31, 2014 W .0. 67 45-A-SC Terry and Judy Hutton c/o Greymar Associates 1575 Spinnaker Drive, Suite 105-B Ventura, California 93001 Attention: Mr. Wally Geer Subject: Geotechnical Evaluation for Proposed Construction at 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92067 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Hutton: In accordance with your request and authorization, GeoSoils, Inc. (GSI) is pleased to present the results of our preliminary geotechnical evaluation at the subject site. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the geologic and geotechnical conditions at the site in order to develop preliminary recommendations for site earthwork and the design of foundations, walls, and pavements related to the proposed residential construction at the property. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Based upon our field exploration, geologic, and geotechnical engineering analysis, the proposed development appears feasible from a soils engineering and geologic viewpoint, provided that the recommendations presented in the text of this report are properly incorporated into the design and construction of the project. The most significant elements of our study are summarized below: • • In general, the site may be characterized as a existing, developed site, underlain colluvial soils developed on Quaternary-age, older paralic deposits. Surficial deposits of fill are also present locally. Due to their relatively low density and lack of uniformity, all surficial deposits of fill, colluvium, and near surface, weathered older paralic deposits are considered unsuitable for the support of settlement-sensitive improvements (i.e., residential foundations, concrete slab-on-grade floors, site walls, exterior hardscape, etc.) and/or engineered fill in their existing state. Based on the available data, the thickness of these soils across the site is anticipated to vary between approximately 2 to 2112 feet. However, localized thicker sections of unsuitable soils cannot be precluded, and should be anticipated. Conversely, the underlying unweathered older paralic deposits are generally considered suitable for the support of settlement-sensitive improvements and/or engineered fill. • It should be noted that the 2013 California Building Code ([2013 CBC], California Building Standards Commission [CBSC], 2013) indicates that removals of unsuitable soils be performed across all areas to be graded, under the purview of the grading permit, not just within the influence of the residential structure. Relatively deep removals may also necessitate a special zone of consideration, on perimeter/confining areas. This zone would be approximately equal to the depth of removals, if removals cannot be performed onsite or offsite. Thus, any settlement-sensitive improvements (walls, curbs, flatwork, etc.), constructed within this zone may require deepened foundations, reinforcement, etc., or will retain some potential for settlement and associated distress. This will also require proper disclosure to any owners and all interested/affected parties should this condition exist at the conclusion of grading. • Expansion index (E.I.), and plasticity index (P.I.) testing performed on a representative sample of the onsite soil indicates an E.I. of less than 20 (very low expansive), and non plastic soil conditions. As such, site soils are considered non-detrimentally expansive and no specific foundation design appears necessary to mitigate expansive soil effects on a preliminary basis. Soil expansivity should be re-evaluated at the conclusion of grading and provide updated data for final foundation design. • Our experience in the vicinity indicates that site soils are mildly to moderately alkaline, moderately corrosive to exposed buried metals when saturated, present negligible sulfate exposure to concrete and are below the action level for chloride exposure. Site soils are classified as "Exposure Class C1 ." Corrosion testing at the completion of grading is recommended in order to obtain actual corrosion data specific to design grades. • Neither a regional groundwater table nor perched water was encountered during our subsurface studies to the depth explored. As such, regional groundwater is not anticipated to significantly affect the planned improvements. Perched water may occur in the future along zones of contrasting permeability and/or density. This potential should be disclosed to all interested/affected parties. • Our evaluation indicates there are no known active faults crossing the site and the natural slope upon which the site is located has very low susceptibility to deep-seated landslides. Owing to the depth to groundwater and the dense nature of the terrace (paralic) deposits, the potential for the site to be adversely affected by liquefaction is considered very low. Site soils are considered erosive. Thus, properly designed site drainage is necessary in reducing erosion damage to the planned improvements. Terry and Judy Hutton File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC Page Two • The seismic acceleration values and design parameters provided herein should be considered during the design of the proposed development. The adverse effects of seismic shaking on the structure(s) will likely be wall cracks, some foundation/slab distress, and some seismic settlement. However, it is anticipated that the structure will be repairable in the event of the design seismic event. This potential should be disclosed to any owners and all interested/affected parties. • Additional adverse geologic features that would preclude project feasibility were not encountered, based on the available data. • The recommendations presented in this report should be incorporated into the design and construction considerations of the project. The opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office. David W. Skelly Civil Engineer, RCE 47857 RGC/JPF/DWS/jh Distribution: (3) Addressee (wet signed) Terry and Judy Hutton File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC Page Three TABLE OF CONTENTS SCOPE OF SERVICES ................................................... 1 SITE DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ......................... 1 FIELD STUDIES ......................................................... 3 REGIONAL GEOLOGY ................................................... 3 SITE GEOLOGIC UNITS .................................................. 4 General .......................................................... 4 Undocumented Fill (Not Mapped) ............................... 4 Colluvium (Not Mapped) ....................................... 4 Quaternary Older Paralic Deposits (Map Symbol -Qop2-4) ........... 4 Structural Geology ................................................. 4 GROUNDWATER ........................................................ 4 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS EVALUATION ........................................ 5 Mass Wasting/Landslide Susceptibility ................................. 5 FAULTING AND REGIONAL SEISMICITY ..................................... 5 Regional Faults .................................................... 5 Local Faulting ..................................................... 6 Seismicity ........................................................ 6 Seismic Shaking Parameters ......................................... 7 SECONDARY SEISMIC HAZARDS .......................................... 8 SLOPE STABILITY ....................................................... 8 LABORATORY TESTING .................................................. 8 Classification ...................................................... 8 Expansion Index ................................................... 9 Particle-Size Analysis ............................................... 9 Saturated Resistivity, pH, and Soluble Sulfates, and Chlorides .............. 9 Corrosion Summary .......................................... 9 PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................... 10 EARTHWORK CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS ....................... 12 General ......................................................... 12 Demolition/Grubbing .............................................. 12 Fill Suitability ..................................................... 13 Fill Placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 GeoSoils, Inc. Graded Slopes ................................................... 14 Temporary Slopes ................................................ 14 PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS-FOUNDATIONS ....................... 14 General ......................................................... 14 Preliminary Foundation Design ...................................... 15 PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS ........... 16 Foundation Settlement ............................................. 17 SOIL MOISTURE TRANSMISSION CONSIDERATIONS ........................ 17 WALL DESIGN PARAMETERS ............................................ 19 General ......................................................... 19 Conventional Retaining Walls ....................................... 19 Restrained Walls ............................................ 20 Cantilevered Walls ........................................... 21 Seismic Surcharge ................................................ 21 Retaining Wall Backfill and Drainage .................................. 22 Wall/Retaining Wall Footing Transitions ............................... 26 DRIVEWAY/PARKING, FLATWORK, AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS .............. 26 DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA ............................................... 29 Onsite Storm Water Treatment ...................................... 29 Slope Maintenance and Planting ..................................... 29 Drainage ........................................................ 30 Erosion Control ................................................... 30 Landscape Maintenance ........................................... 31 Gutters and Downspouts ........................................... 31 Subsurface and Surface Water ...................................... 31 Site Improvements ................................................ 32 Tile Flooring ..................................................... 32 Additional Grading ................................................ 32 Footing Trench Excavation ......................................... 32 Trenching/Temporary Construction Backcuts .......................... 33 Utility Trench Backfill .............................................. 33 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATION AND TESTING ........................................................ 34 OTHER DESIGN PROFESSIONALS/CONSULTANTS .......................... 34 PLAN REVIEW ......................................................... 35 LIMITATIONS .......................................................... 36 Terry and Judy Hutton File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. Table of Contents Page ii ···-····--···-·---·------------------------- FIGURES: Figure 1 -Site Location Map ......................................... 2 Detail 1 -Typical Retaining Wall Backfill and Drainage Detail .............. 23 Detail 2 -Retaining Wall Backfill and Subdrain Detail Geotextile Drain ....... 24 Detail 3 -Retaining Wall and Subdrain Detail Clean Sand Backfill ........... 25 ATTACHMENTS: Plate 1 -Geotechnical Map ................................. Rear of Text Appendix A-References ................................... Rear of Text Appendix B -Hand Auger Boring Logs ........................ Rear of Text Appendix C -Seismicity .................................... Rear of Text Appendix D -General Earthwork and Grading Guidelines ......... Rear of Text Terry and Judy Hutton File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. Table of Contents Page iii GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION FOR PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION AT 1264 OAK AVENUE CARLSBAD, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 92067 SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of our services has included the following: 1. Review of readily available published literature, aerial photographs, and maps of the vicinity (see Appendix A), including proprietary in-house geologic/geotechnical reports for other nearby sites. 2. Site reconnaissance mapping and the excavation of three (3) exploratory test borings to evaluate the soil/bedrock profiles, sample representative earth materials, and delineate the horizontal and vertical extent of earth material units (see Appendix B). 3. General areal seismicity evaluation (see Appendix C). 4. Appropriate laboratory testing of relatively undisturbed and representative bulk soil samples collected during our geologic mapping and subsurface exploration program. 5. Analysis of field and laboratory data relative to the proposed development. 6. Appropriate engineering and geologic analyses of data collected, and the preparation of this summary report and accompaniments. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The subject site consists of a relatively flay-lying, rectangular property in the City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California (see Site Location Map, Figure 1). The property is bounded by Oak Avenue on the south, and existing residential property on the remaining sides. The site is currently occupied by two single family residential structures, and some additional storage building(s). The site appears to be at an approximate elevation of 122 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL). Drainage appears to be generally directed offsite to the south, toward the street. Vegetation onsite consists of scattered trees, and other typical residential landscaping. Based on a review of a site plan provided by Greymar Associates (GA, 2014), it is anticipated that the existing structures are to be removed, and the site prepared for the construction of a single family residential structure with a detached garage. Proposed site construction is shown on Plate 1, which uses GA (2014) as a base. GeoSoils, Inc. SITE Base Map: TOPO!@ @2003 National Geographic, U.S.G.S. San Luis Rey Quadrangle, California --San Diego Co., 7.5 Minute, dated 1997, current, 1999. SITE Base Map: Google Maps, Copyright 2014 Google, Map Data Copyright 2014 Google This map is copyrighted by Google 2014. n Is unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any part ttr.reof, whether for personal use or resale, without permission. All rights reserved. N ... w.o . 6745-A-SC SITE LOCATION MAP Figure 1 GSI anticipates thatthe construction would consist of wood frames with typical foundations and slab-on-grade ground floors. Building loads are assumed to be typical for this type of relatively light construction. Sewage disposal is anticipated to be connected into the regional, municipal system. Storm water may be treated onsite prior to its delivery into the municipal system. FIELD STUDIES Site-specific field studies were conducted by GSI during July 2014, and consisted of reconnaissance geologic mapping and the excavation of three (3) exploratory test borings with a hand auger, for an evaluation of near-surface soil and geologic conditions onsite. The test borings were logged by a representative of this office who collected representative bulk and undisturbed soil samples for appropriate laboratory testing. The logs of the test borings are presented in Appendix B. The approximate location of the test borings are presented on the Geotechnical Map (see Plate 1). REGIONAL GEOLOGY The subject property lies within the coastal plain physiographic region of the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of southern California. This region consists of dissected, mesa-like terraces that transition inland to rolling hills. The encompassing Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province is characterized as elongated mountain ranges and valleys that trend northwesterly. This geomorphic province extends from the base of the east-west aligned Santa Monica -San Gabriel Mountains, and continues south into Baja California. The mountain ranges within this province are underlain by basement rocks consisting of pre-Cretaceous metasedimentary rocks, Jurassic metavolcanic rocks, and Cretaceous plutonic (granitic) rocks. In the Southern California region, deposition occurred during the Cretaceous Period and Cenozoic Era in the continental margin of a forearc basin. Sediments, derived from Cretaceous-age plutonic rocks and Jurassic-age volcanic rocks, were deposited during the Tertiary Period (Eocene-age) into the narrow, steep, coastal plain and continental margin of the basin. These rocks have been uplifted, eroded, and deeply incised. During early Pleistocene time, a broad coastal plain was developed from the deposition of marine terrace deposits. During mid to late Pleistocene time, this plain was uplifted, eroded and incised. Alluvial deposits have since filled the lower valleys, and young marine sediments are currently being deposited/eroded within coastal and beach areas. Regional geologic mapping by Kennedy and Tan (2005) indicate the site is underlain by Quaternary-age older paralic deposits (formally known as "terrace deposits"), which is considered bedrock, or formational soil, at the site. Based on our experience in the vicinity, older deposits of Eocene-age sedimentary bedrock likely underlie the site at depth. Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp 12\6700\67 45a. pge GeoSoUs, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 3 SITE GEOLOGIC UNITS General The earth material units that were observed and/or encountered at the subject site consist of surficial deposits of undifferentiated fill/colluvium, overlying Quaternary-age older paralic deposits at shallow depth. A general description of each material type is presented as follows, from youngest to oldest. Undocumented Fill (Not Mapped) A surficial layer of undocumented fill was encountered in the vicinity of an existing driveway/patio slab and is considered to be an underlayment material used in the construction of the hardscape. Where encountered, fill consisted of a dry, loose, gray sand, on the order of one half foot thick. Surficial fills are considered potentially compressible in its existing state. As such, it should not be used for the support of settlement-sensitive improvements and/or any planned fill, unless adequately remediated. Colluvium (Not Mapped) As observed, colluvium occurs at the surface and consists of dark brown to grayish brown, dry, loose, and porous silty sand. Where encountered in our borings, the thickness of these earth materials was on the order of 1 foot thick. All colluvium is prone to settlement under loading and therefore should be removed and reused as properly engineered fill, in areas proposed for settlements-sensitive improvements. Quaternary Older Paralic Deposits (Map Symbol -Qop2-4) Quaternary-age older paralic deposits (terrace deposits) were observed underlying existing fill at depths on the order of 3 feet below existing grades onsite. Where encountered, these sediments generally consisted of moist, medium dense, brown silty sandstone. These deposits are considered to be suitable bearing materials for the support of new fills, or settlement-sensitive improvements. Structural Geology Bedding within older paralic deposits is generally flat lying to gently dipping and should not affect site development. GROUNDWATER GSI did not observe evidence of a regional groundwater table nor perched water within our subsurface explorations. Regional groundwater is estimated to be generally within a few feet of sea level, and is not anticipated to significantly affect proposed site development, Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July31,2014 Page 4 provided that the recommendations contained in this report are properly incorporated into final design and construction. These observations reflect site conditions at the time of our investigation and do not preclude future changes in local groundwater conditions from excessive irrigation, precipitation, or that were not obvious, at the ti me of our investigation. Seeps, springs, or other indications of subsurface water were not noted on the subject property during the time of our field investigation. However, perched water seepage may occur locally (as the result of heavy precipitation and/or irrigation, or damaged wet utilities) along zones of contrasting permeabilities/densities (fill/terrace deposit contacts, sandy/clayey fill lifts, etc.) or along geologic discontinuities. This potential should be anticipated and disclosed to all interested/affected parties. Due to the potential for post-development perched water to manifest near the surface, owing to as-graded permeability/density contrasts, more onerous slab design is necessary for any new slab-on-grade floor (State of California, 2014). Recommendations for reducing the amount of water and/or water vapor through slab-on-grade floors are provided in the "Soil Moisture Considerations" sections of this report. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS EVALUATION Mass Wasting/Landslide Susceptibility Due to the relatively flat lying condition of the site, and the nature of the underlying soils, the site is not considered susceptible to significant mass wasting or landsliding. The onsite soils are, however, considered erosive. Therefore, slopes comprised of these materials may be subject to rilling, gullying, sloughing, and surficial slope failures depending on rainfall severity and surface drainage. However, such risks can be minimized through properly designed and controlled surface drainage. FAULTING AND REGIONAL SEISMICITY Regional Faults Our review indicates that there are no known active faults crossing the project and the site is not within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (Bryant and Hart, 2007). However, the site is situated in an area of active faulting. The Newport-Inglewood -Rose Canyon fault is closest known active fault to the site (located at a distance of approximately 5.6 miles [9.0 kilometers]) and should have the greatest effect on the site in the form of strong ground shaking, should the design earthquake occur. A list and the location of the Newport-Inglewood -Rose Canyon fault and other major faults relative to the site is provided in Appendix C. The possibility of ground acceleration, or shaking at the site, may be considered as approximately similar to the southern California region as a whole. Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc:. W.O. 6745-A-SC July31,2014 Page 5 Local Faulting Although active faults lie within a few miles of the site, no local active faulting was noted in our review, nor observed to specifically transect the site during the field investigation. Additionally, a review of available regional geologic maps does not indicate the presence of local active faults crossing the specific project site. Seismicity It is our understanding that site-specific seismic design criteria from the 2013 California Building Code ((2013 CBC], California Building Standards Commission [CBSC], 2013), are to be utilized for foundation design. Much of the 2013 CBC relies on the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE Standard 7-10). The seismic design parameters provided herein are based on the 2013 CBC. The acceleration-attenuation relation of Bozorgnia, Campbell, and Niazi (1999) has been incorporated into EQFAULT (Blake, 2000a). EQFAULT is a computer program developed by Thomas F. Blake (2000a), which performs deterministic seismic hazard analyses using digitized California faults as earthquake sources. The program estimates the closest distance between each fault and a given site. If a fault is found to be within a user-selected radius, the program estimates peak horizontal ground acceleration that may occur at the site from an upper bound (formerly "maximum credible earthquake"), on that fault. Upper bound refers to the maximum expected ground acceleration produced from a given fault. Site acceleration (g) was computed by one user-selected acceleration-attenuation relation that is contained in EQFAUL T. Based on the EQFAUL T program, a peak horizontal ground acceleration from an upper bound event on the Rose Canyon fault may be on the order of 0.58 g. The computer printouts of pertinent portions of the EQFAUL T program are included within Appendix C. Historical site seismicity was evaluated with the acceleration-attenuation relation of Bozorgnia, Campbell, and Niazi (1999), and the computer program EQSEARCH (Blake, 2000b, updated to June 2013). This program performs a search of the historical earthquake records for magnitude 5.0 to 9.0 seismic events within a 100-kilometer radius, between the years 1800 through June 2013. Based on the selected acceleration-attenuation relationship, a peak horizontal ground acceleration is estimated, which may have affected the site during the specific event listed. Based on the available data and the attenuation relationship used, the estimated maximum (peak) site acceleration during the period 1800 through June 2013 was about 0.24 g. A historic earthquake epicenter map and a seismic recurrence curve are also estimated/generated from the historical data. Computer printouts of the EQSEARCH program are presented in Appendix C. Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W .0. 67 45-A-SC July31,2014 Page 6 Seismic Shaking Parameters Based on the site conditions, the following table summarizes the updated site-specific design criteria obtained from the 2013 CBC (CBSC, 2013), Chapter 16 Structural Design, Section 1613, Earthquake Loads. The computer program "U.S. Seismic Design Maps, provided by the United States Geologic Survey (USGS, 2014) was utilized for design (http://geohazards.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/application.php). The short spectral response utilizes a period of 0.2 seconds. 2013 CBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS • . ... .. '.:;;_•, ,-7 ,, ,,: ' ' PARAMETER VALUE .2Q13.0CBC .· REFERENCE Risk Category II Table 1604.5 Site Class D Section 1613.3.2/ASCE 7-10 (p. 203-205) Spectral Response -(0.2 sec), s. 1.136 Section 1613.3.1 Figure 1613.3.1 (1) Spectral Response -(1 sec), S, 0.436 Section 1613.3.1 Figure 1613.3.1 (2) Site Coefficient, F. 1.046 Table 1613.3.3(1) Site Coefficient, Fv 1.564 Table 1613.3.3(2) Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral 1.188 Section 1613.3.3 Response Acceleration (0.2 sec). SMs (Eqn 16-37) Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral 0.682 Section 1613.3.3 Response Acceleration (1 sec), SM, {Eqn 16-38) 5% Damped Design Spectral Response 0.792 Section 1613.3.4 Acceleration (0.2 sec), S05 (Eqn 16-39) 5% Damped Design Spectral Response 0.455 Section 1613.3.4 Acceleration (1 sec), Sn, (Eqn 16-40) GENERAL SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS PARAMETER VALUE Distance to Seismic Source (Newport-Inglewood [Offshore]) 5.6 mi (9.0 kmj!'> Upper Bound Earthquake (Rose Canyon fault) Mw = 7.2<2> PGAM(3)(4) 0.471g Seismic Design Category<3> D <1> -From Blake (2000a) <2l -Cao, et al. (2003) <3l -ASCE 7 (2010) <4l -Probabilistic Vertical Ground Acceleration may be assumed as about 50% of this value. Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 7 Conformance to the criteria above for seismic design does not constitute any kind of guarantee or assurance that significant structural damage or ground failure will not occur in the event of a large earthquake. The primary goal of seismic design is to protect life, not to eliminate all damage, since such design may be economically prohibitive. Cumulative effects of seismic events are not addressed in the 2013 CBC (CBSC, 2013) and regular maintenance and repair following locally significant seismic events (i.e., Mw5.5) will likely be necessary, as is the case in all of southern California. SECONDARY SEISMIC HAZARDS The following list includes other geologic/seismic related hazards that have been considered during our evaluation of the site. The hazards listed are considered negligible and/or mitigated as a result of site location, soil characteristics, and typical site development procedures: • Liquefaction • Lateral Spreading • Subsidence • Ground Lurching or Shallow Ground Rupture • Tsunami • Seiche SLOPE STABILITY Based on site conditions and planned improvements, significant cut and/or fill slopes are not anticipated. Therefore, no recommendations are deemed necessary. Temporary slopes for construction (i.e., trenching, etc.) are discussed in subsequent sections of our report. LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory tests were performed on representative samples of site earth materials collected during our subsurface exploration in order to evaluate their physical characteristics. Test procedures used and results obtained are presented below. Classification Soils were visually classified with respect to the Unified Soil Classification System (U.S.C.S.) in general accordance with ASTM D 2487 and D 2488. The soil classifications of the onsite soils are provided on the Boring Logs in Appendix B. Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc:. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 8 Expansion Index Tests were performed on a representative soil sample obtained from Test Pit TP-1 (composite sample) to evaluate expansion potential. Testing was performed in general accordance with ASTM D 4829, and indicates a very low expansion potential (Expansion Index [E.I.] = <5), where tested. Particle-Size Analysis A particle-size evaluation was performed on a representative, soil sample obtained from Test Pit TP-1 (composite sample) in general accordance with ASTM D 422-63. The testing was utilized to evaluate the soil classification in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The results of the particle-size evaluation indicate that the tested soil is a silty sand (SM). Results= 0.1% gravel, 74.5% sand, 25.4% silt/clay. Saturated Resistivity, pH, and Soluble Sulfates, and Chlorides GSI conducted sampling of onsite earth materials for general soil corrosivity and soluble sulfates, and chlorides testing. The testing (performed by an outside laboratory) included evaluation of soil pH, soluble sulfates, chlorides, and saturated resistivity. Test results are presented in the following table: SAMPLE LOCATION SATURATED SOLUBlE SOLUBLE AND DEPTH {FT) pH RESISTIVITY SULFATES CHLORIDES (ohm-cm) CpJim> (ppm) I B-1 Composite I 7.96 I 7,300 I 0.0170 I 182 I Corrosion Summary Laboratory testing indicates that tested samples of the onsite soils are mildly alkaline with respect to soil acidity/alkalinity, are corrosive to exposed, buried metals when saturated, present negligible ("not applicable" per ACI 318-08) sulfate exposure to concrete, and although some what elevated, are below the action level for chloride exposure (per State of California Department of Transportation, 2003). Reinforced concrete mix design for foundations, slab-on-grade floors, and pavements should minimally conform to "Exposure Class C1" in Table 4.3.1 of ACI 318-08, as concrete would likely be exposed to moisture. It should be noted that GSI does not consult in the field of corrosion engineering. The client and project architect should agree on the level of corrosion protection required for the project and seek consultation from a qualified corrosion consultant as warranted. Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File :e:\wp 12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 9 PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on our field exploration, laboratory testing, and geotechnical engineering analysis, it is our opinion that the subject site is suitable for the proposed residential development from a geotechnical engineering and geologic viewpoint, provided that the recommendations presented in the following sections are incorporated into the design and construction phases of site development. The primary geotechnical concerns with respect to the proposed development and improvements are: • Earth materials characteristics and depth to competent bearing material. • On-going expansion and corrosion potential of site soils. • Erosiveness of site earth materials. • Potential for perched water during and following site development. • Temporary slope stability. • Regional seismic activity. The recommendations presented herein consider these as well as other aspects of the site. The engineering analyses performed concerning site preparation and the recommendations presented herein have been completed using the information provided and obtained during our field work. In the event that any significant changes are made to proposed site development, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed and the recommendations of this report verified or modified in writing by this office. Foundation design parameters are considered preliminary until the foundation design, layout, and structural loads are provided to this office for review. 1. Soil engineering, observation, and testing services should be provided during grading to aid the contractor in removing unsuitable soils and in his effort to compact the fill. 2. Geologic observations should be performed during any grading and foundation construction to verify and/or further evaluate geologic conditions. Although unlikely, if adverse geologic structures are encountered, supplemental recommendations and earthwork may be warranted. 3. Surficial soils within approximately 2 to 2% feet from surface grades are considered unsuitable for the support of the planned settlement-sensitive improvements (i.e., residential structure, walls, concrete slab-on-grade floors, and exterior pavements, etc.) or new planned fills. Unsuitable soils within the influence of planned settlement-sensitive improvements and/or planned fill should be removed to expose suitable existing fill, or unweathered older paralic deposits and then be reused as properly engineered fill. In order to provide for the uniform support of the structure, a minimum 3-foot thick later of compacted fill is recommended for the support of Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp 12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.0. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 10 structure(s). Based on the recommended removal depths, it may be necessary to undercut the building pad areas in order to achieve the desired minimum fill thickness. Undercutting should be completed for a minimum lateral distance of at least 5 feet beyond the building footprint. 4. Testing performed on a representative sample of the onsite soils indicates very low expansive soil conditions. On a preliminary basis, specific foundation design to resist expansive soil effects is not necessary. However, GSI suggests that the soil moisture within the underlying subgrade is near, or above optimum moisture content prior to the placement of the underlayment sand and vapor retarder. 5. Laboratory testing indicates that site soils are mildly to moderately alkaline and corrosive to exposed buried metals when saturated. Testing also indicates that site soils present negligible ("not applicable" per ACI 318-08) sulfate exposure to concrete and are below the action level for chloride exposure. Site soils are classified as "Exposure Class C1 ." The client and project architect should agree on the level of corrosion protection required for the project and seek consultation from a qualified corrosion consultant as warranted. Additional testing at the completion of remedial grading is recommended in order to verify these assumptions. 6. Site soils are considered erosive. Surface drainage should be designed to eliminate the potential for concentrated flows. Positive surface drainage away from foundations and tops of slopes is recommended. Temporary erosion control measures should be implemented until vegetative covering is well established. The homeowner will need to maintain proper surface drainage over the life of the project. 7. No evidence of a high regional groundwater table nor perched water was observed during our subsurface exploration within the property. However, due to the nature of site earth materials, there is a potential for perched water to occur both during and following site development. This potential should be disclosed to all interested/affected parties. Should perched water conditions be encountered, this office could provide recommendations for mitigation. Typical mitigation includes subdrainage system, cut-off barriers, etc. 8. On a preliminary basis, temporary slopes should be constructed in accordance with CAL-OSHA guidelines for Type "B" soils. All temporary slopes should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant, prior to worker entry. Should adverse conditions be identified, the slope may need to be laid back to a flatter gradient or require the use of shoring. 9. The seismicity-acceleration values provided herein should be considered during the design and construction of the proposed development. Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 11 10. General Earthwork and Grading Guidelines are provided at the end of this report as Appendix D. Specific recommendations are provided below. EARTHWORK CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS General All earthwork should conform to the guidelines presented in the 2013 CBC (CBSC, 2013), the requirements of the City of Carlsbad, and the General Earthwork and Grading Guidelines presented in Appendix D, except where specifically superceded in the text of this report. Prior to earthwork, a GSI representative should be present at the preconstruction meeting to provide additional earthwork guidelines, if needed, and review the earthwork schedule. This office should be notified in advance of any fill placement, supplemental regrading of the site, or backfilling underground utility trenches and retaining walls after rough earthwork has been completed. This includes grading for driveway approaches, driveways, and exterior hardscape. During earthwork construction, all site preparation and the general grading procedures of the contractor should be observed and the fill selectively tested by a representative(s) of GSI. If unusual or unexpected conditions are exposed in the field, they should be reviewed by this office and, if warranted, modified and/or additional recommendations will be offered. All applicable requirements of local and national construction and general industry safety orders, the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA), and the Construction Safety Act should be met. It is the onsite general contractor and individual subcontractors responsibility to provide a save working environment for our field staff who are onsite. GSI does not consult in the area of safety engineering. Demolition/Grubbing 1. Vegetation and any miscellaneous debris should be removed from the areas of proposed grading. 2. Any existing subsurface structures uncovered during the recommended removal should be observed by GSI so that appropriate remedial recommendations can be provided. 3. Cavities or loose soils remaining after demolition and site clearance should be cleaned out and observed by the soil engineer. The cavities should be replaced with fill materials that have been moisture conditioned to at least optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 90 percent of the laboratory standard. 4. Onsite septic systems (if encountered) should be removed in accordance with San Diego County Department of Environmental Health standards/guidelines. Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp 12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 12 Treatment of Existing Ground 1. Removals should consist of all surficial deposits of fill, colluvium, and weathered paralic deposits. Based on our site work, removals depths on the order of 2 to 21/2 feet should be anticipated. These soils may be re-used as fill, provided that the soil is cleaned of any deleterious material and moisture conditioned, and compacted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction per ASTM D 1557. Removals should be completed throughout the entire building area. 2. In addition to removals within the building envelopes, overexcavation/undercutting of the underlying formational soil should be performed in order to provide for at least 3 feet of compacted fill below finish grade. Undercutting should be completed for a minimum lateral distance of at least 5 feet beyond the building footprint. Once removals and overexcavation is completed, the fill should be cleaned of deleterious materials, moisture conditioned, and recompacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction per ASTM D 1557. 3. Subsequent to the above removals/overexcavation, the exposed bottom should be scarified to a depth of at least 6 to 8 inches, brought to at least optimum moisture content, and recompacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent of the laboratory standard, prior to any fill placement. 4. Existing fill and removed natural ground materials may be reused as compacted fill provided that major concentrations of vegetation and miscellaneous debris are removed from the site, prior to or during fill placement. 5. Localized deeper removals may be necessary due to buried drainage channel meanders or dry porous materials, septic systems, etc. The project soils engineer/geologist should observe all removal areas during the grading. Fill Suitability Existing earth materials onsite should generate relatively fine grained fill material. Provided that the existing foundations have been completely removed prior to site grading, oversize material (i.e., greater than 12 inches in long dimension) is not anticipated. If soil importation is planned, samples of the soil import should be evaluated by this office prior to importing in order to assure compatibility with the onsite site soils and the recommendations presented in this report. Import soils, if used, should be relatively sandy and very low expansive (i.e., expansion index less than 20). Fill Placement 1. Subsequent to ground preparation, fill materials should be brought to at least optimum moisture content, placed in thin 6-to 8-inch lifts, and mechanically Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\6745a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July31,2014 Page 13 compacted to obtain a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent of the laboratory standard. 2. Fill materials should be cleansed of major vegetation and debris prior to placement. 3. Any import materials should be observed and deemed suitable by the soils engineer prior to placement on the site. Foundation designs may be altered if import materials have a greater expansion value than the onsite materials encountered in this investigation. Graded Slopes Significant graded slope are not planned, nor anticipated for this project. Temporary Slopes Temporary slopes for excavations greater than 4 feet, but less than 20 feet in overall height should conform to CAL-OSHA and/or OSHA requirements for Type "B'' soils. Temporary slopes, up to a maximum height of ±20 feet, may be excavated at a 1 :1 (h:v) gradient, or flatter, provided groundwater and/or running sands are not exposed. Construction materials or soil stockpiles should not be placed within 'H' of any temporary slope where 'H' equals the height of the temporary slope. All temporary slopes should be observed by a licensed engineering geologist and/or geotechnical engineer prior to worker entry into the excavation. PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS -FOUNDATIONS General Preliminary recommendations for foundation design and construction are provided in the following sections. These preliminary recommendations have been developed from our understanding of the currently planned site development, site observations, subsurface exploration, laboratory testing, and engineering analyses. Foundation design should be re-evaluated at the conclusion of site grading/remedial earthwork for the as-graded soil conditions. Although not anticipated, revisions to these recommendations may be necessary. In the event that the information concerning the proposed development plan is not correct, or any changes in the design, location or loading conditions of the proposed additions are made, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed and conclusions of this report are modified or approved in writing by this office. The information and recommendations presented in this section are not meant to supercede design by the project structural engineer or civil engineer specializing in Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.0. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 14 structural design. Upon request, GSI could provide additional input/consultation regarding soil parameters, as related to foundation design. Preliminary Foundation Design 1. The foundation systems should be designed and constructed in accordance with guidelines presented in the 2013 CBC. 2. An allowable bearing value of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) may be used for the design of footings that maintain a minimum width of 12 inches and a minimum depth of 12 inches (below the lowest adjacent grade) and are founded entirely into properly compacted, engineered fill. This value may be increased by 20 percentfor each additional 12 inches in footing depth to a maximum value of 2,500 psf. These values may be increased by one-third when considering short duration seismic or wind loads. Isolated pad footings should have a minimum dimension of at least 24 inches square and a minimum embedment of 24 inches below the lowest adjacent grade into properly engineered fill. Foundation embedment depth excludes concrete slabs-on-grade, and/or slab underlayment. Foundations should not simultaneously bear on unweathered paralic deposits and engineered fill. 3. For foundations deriving passive resistance from engineered fill, a passive earth pressure may be computed as an equivalent fluid having a density of 250 pct, with a maximum earth pressure of 2,500 psf. 4. The upper 6 inches of passive pressure should be neglected if not confined by slabs or pavement. 5. For lateral sliding resistance, a 0.30 coefficient of friction may be utilized for a concrete to soil contact when multiplied by the dead load. 6. When combining passive pressure and frictional resistance, the passive pressure component should be reduced by one-third. 7. All footing setbacks from slopes should comply with Figure 1808.7.1 of the 2013 CBC. GSI recommends a minimum horizontal setback distance of 7 feet as measured from the bottom, outboard edge of the footing to the slope face. 8. Footings for structures adjacent to retaining walls should be deepened so as to extend below a 1 :1 projection from the heel of the wall. Alternatively, walls may be designed to accommodate structural loads from buildings or appurtenances as described in the "Retaining Wall" section of this report. Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp 12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 15 PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS The following foundation construction recommendations are presented as a minimum criteria from a soils engineering viewpoint. The following foundation construction recommendations are intended to support planned improvements underlain by at least 7 feet of non-detrimentally expansive soils (i.e., E.I. <21 and Pl < 15). Although not anticipated based on the available data, should foundations be underlain by expansive soils they will require specific design to mitigate expansive soil effects as required in Sections 1808.6.1 or 1808.6.2 of the 2013 CBC. 1. Exterior and interior footings should be founded into engineered fill at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade, and a minimum width of 18 inches, for the planned, two story structure. Isolated, exterior column and panel pads, or wall footings, should be at least 24 inches, square, and founded at a minimum depth of 24 inches into properly engineered fill. All footings should be minimally reinforced with two No. 4 reinforcing bars, one placed near the top and one placed near the bottom of the footing. 2. All interior and exterior column footings, and perimeter wall footings, should be tied together via grade beams in at least one direction. The grade beam should be at least 12 inches square in cross section, and should be provided with a minimum of one No.4 reinforcing bar at the top, and one No.4 reinforcing bar at the bottom of the grade beam. The base of the reinforced grade beam should be at the same elevation as the adjoining footings. 3. A grade beam, reinforced as previously recommended and at least 12 inches square, should be provided across large (garage) entrances. The base of the reinforced grade beam should be at the same elevation as the adjoining footings. 4. A minimum concrete slab-on-grade thickness of 5 inches is recommended. Recommendations for floor slab underlayment are presented in a later section of this report. 5. Concrete slabs should be reinforced with a minimum of No. 3 reinforcement bars placed at 18-inch on centers, in two horizontally perpendicular directions {i.e., long axis and short axis). 6. All slab reinforcement should be supported to ensure proper mid-slab height positioning during placement of the concrete. "Hooking" of reinforcement is not an acceptable method of positioning. 7. Specific slab subgrade pre-soaking is recommended for these soil conditions. Prior to the placement of underlayment sand and vapor retarder, GSI recommends that the slab subgrade materials be moisture conditioned to at least optimum moisture Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W .0. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 16 content to a minimum depth of 12 inches. Slab subgrade pre-soaking should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant within 72 hours of the placement of the underlayment sand and vapor retarder. 8. Soils generated from footing excavations to be used onsite should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent of the laboratory standard (ASTM D 1557), whether the soils are to be placed inside the foundation perimeter or in the yard/right-of-way areas. This material must not alter positive drainage patterns that direct drainage away from the structural areas and toward the street. 9. Reinforced concrete mix design should conform to "Exposure Class C1" in Table 4.3.1 of ACl-318-08 since concrete would likely be exposed to moisture. Foundation Settlement Provided that the earthwork and foundation recommendations in this reported are adhered foundations bearing on engineered fill should be minimally designed to accommodate a differential settlement of %-inch over a 40-foot horizontal span (angular distortion = 1 /640). SOIL MOISTURE TRANSMISSION CONSIDERATIONS GSI has evaluated the potential for vapor or water transmission through the concrete floor slab, in light of typical floor coverings and improvements. Please note that slab moisture emission rates range from about 2 to 27 lbs/ 24 hours/1,000 square feet from a typical slab (Kanare, 2005), while floor covering manufacturers generally recommend about 3 lbs/24 hours as an upper limit. The recommendations in this section are not intended to preclude the transmission of water or vapor through the foundation or slabs. Foundation systems and slabs shall not allow water or water vapor to enter into the structure so as to cause damage to another building component or to limit the installation of the type of flooring materials typically used for the particular application (State of California, 2014). These recommendations may be exceeded or supplemented by a water "proofing" specialist, project architect, or structural consultant. Thus, the client will need to evaluate the following in light of a cost vs. benefit analysis (owner expectations and repairs/replacement), along with disclosure to all interested/affected parties. It should also be noted that vapor transmission will occur in new slab-on-grade floors as a result of chemical reactions taking place within the curing concrete. Vapor transmission through concrete floor slabs as a result of concrete curing has the potential to adversely affect sensitive floor coverings depending on the thickness of the concrete floor slab and the duration of time between the placement of concrete, and the floor covering. It is possible that a slab moisture sealant may be needed prior to the placement of sensitive floor coverings if a thick slab-on-grade floor is used and the time frame between concrete and floor covering placement is relatively short. Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp 12\6700\67 45a. pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 17 Considering the E.I. test results presented herein, and known soil conditions in the region, the anticipated typical water vapor transmission rates, floor coverings, and improvements (to be chosen by the Client and/or project architect) that can tolerate vapor transmission rates without significant distress, the following alternatives are provided: • Concrete slabs should be a minimum of 5 inches thick. • Concrete slab underlayment should consist of a 15-mil vapor retarder, or equivalent, with all laps sealed per the 2013 CBC and the manufacturer's recommendation. The vapor retarder should comply with the ASTM E 17 45 -Class A criteria, and be installed in accordance with ACI 302.1 R-04 and ASTM E 1643. • The 10-to 15-mil vapor retarder (ASTM E 17 45 -Class A) shall be installed per the recommendations of the manufacturer, including all penetrations (i.e., pipe, ducting, rebar, etc.). • Concrete slabs, including the garage areas, shall be underlain by 2 inches of clean, washed sand (SE > 30) above a 15-mil vapor retarder (ASTM E-17 45 -Class A, per Engineering Bulletin 119 [Kanare, 2005)) installed per the recommendations of the manufacturer, including all penetrations (i.e., pipe, ducting, rebar, etc.). The manufacturer shall provide instructions for lap sealing, including minimum width of lap, method of sealing, and either supply or specify suitable products for lap sealing (ASTM E 1745), and per code. ACI 302.1 R-04 (2004) states "If a cushion or sand layer is desired between the vapor retarder and the slab, care must be taken to protect the sand layer from taking on additional water from a source such as rain, curing, cutting, or cleaning. Wet cushion or sand layer has been directly linked in the past to significant lengthening of time required for a slab to reach an acceptable level of dryness for floor covering applications." Therefore, additional observation and/ortesting will be necessary for the cushion or sand layer for moisture content, and relatively uniform thicknesses, prior to the placement of concrete. • The vapor retarder shall be underlain by 2 inches of sand (SE > 30) placed directly on the prepared, moisture conditioned, subgrade and should be sealed to provide a continuous retarder under the entire slab, as discussed above. As discussed previously, GSI indicated this layer of import sand may be eliminated below the vapor retarder, if laboratory testing indicates that the slab subgrade soil have a sand equivalent (SE) of 30 or greater, during site grading. • Concrete should have a maximum water/cement ratio of 0.50. This does not supercede Table 4.3.1 of Chapter 4 of the ACI (2008) for corrosion or other corrosive requirements. Additional concrete mix design recommendations should be provided by the structural consultant and/or waterproofing specialist. Concrete Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 18 • • • finishing and workablity should be addressed by the structural consultant and a waterproofing specialist. Where slab water/cement ratios are as indicated herein, and/or admixtures used, the structural consultant should also make changes to the concrete in the grade beams and footings in kind, so that the concrete used in the foundation and slabs are designed and/or treated for more uniform moisture protection. The owner(s) should be specifically advised which areas are suitable for tile flooring, vinyl flooring, or other types of water/vapor-sensitive flooring and which are not suitable. In all planned floor areas, flooring shall be installed per the manufactures recommendations. Additional recommendations regarding water or vapor transmission should be provided by the architect/structural engineer/slab or foundation designer and should be consistent with the specified floor coverings indicated by the architect. Regardless of the mitigation, some limited moisture/moisture vapor transmission through the slab should be anticipated. Construction crews may require special training for installation of certain product(s), as well as concrete finishing techniques. The use of specialized product(s) should be approved by the slab designer and water-proofing consultant. A technical representative of the flooring contractor should review the slab and moisture retarder plans and provide comment prior to the construction of the foundations or improvements. The vapor retarder contractor should have representatives onsite during the initial installation. WALL DESIGN PARAMETERS General Recommendations for the design and construction of conventional masonry retaining walls are provided herein. Recommendations for specialty walls (i.e., crib, earthstone, geogrid, etc.) can be provided upon request, and would be based on site specific conditions. Conventional Retaining Walls The design parameters provided below assume that either very low expansive soils (typically Class 2 permeable filter material or Class 3 aggregate base) or native onsite materials with an expansion index up to 20 are used to backfill any retaining wall. Please note that the onsite likely do not meet this criteria. The type of backfill (i.e., select or native), should be specified by the wall designer, and clearly shown on the plans. Building walls, below grade, should be water-proofed. Waterproofing should also be provided for site retaining walls in order to reduce the potential for efflorescence staining. Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.0. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 19 Preliminary Retaining Wall Foundation Design Preliminary foundation design for retaining walls should incorporate the following recommendations: Minimum Footing Embedment -18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade (excluding landscape layer [upper 6 inches]). Minimum Footing Width -24 inches Allowable Bearing Pressure -An allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 pct may be used in the preliminary design of retaining wall foundations provided thatthe footing maintains a minimum width of 24 inches and extends at least 18 inches into approved engineered fill overlying dense formational materials. This pressure may be increased by one-third for short-term wind and/or seismic loads. Passive Earth Pressure -A passive earth pressure of 250 pct with a maximum earth pressure of 2,500 psf may be used in the preliminary design of retaining wall foundations provided the foundation is embedded into properly compacted silty to clayey sand fill. Lateral Sliding Resistance -A 0.35 coefficient of friction may be utilized for a concrete to soil contact when multiplied by the dead load. When combining passive pressure and frictional resistance, the passive pressure component should be reduced by one-third. Backfill Soil Density -Soil densities ranging between 11 O pct and 115 pct may be used in the design of retaining wall foundations. This assumes an average engineered fill compaction of at least 90 percent of the laboratory standard (ASTM D 1557). Any retaining wall footings near the perimeter of the site will likely need to be deepened into unweathered very old paralic deposits or unweathered Santiago Formation for adequate vertical and lateral bearing support. All retaining wall footing setbacks from slopes should comply with Figure 1808.7.1 ofthe2013 CBC. GSI recommends a minimum horizontal setback distance of 7 feet as measured from the bottom, outboard edge of the footing to the slope face. Restrained Walls Any retaining walls that will be restrained prior to placing and compacting backfill material or that have re-entrant or male corners, should be designed for an at-rest equivalent fluid pressure (EFP) of 55 pct and 65 pct for select and very low expansive native backfill, respectively. The design should include any applicable surcharge loading. For areas of Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 20 male or re-entrant corners, the restrained wall design should extend a minimum distance of twice the height of the wall (2H) laterally from the corner. Cantilevered Walls The recommendations presented below are for cantilevered retaining walls up to 1 O feet high. Design parameters for walls less than 3 feet in height may be superceded by County of San Diego regional standard design. Active earth pressure may be used for retaining wall design, provided the top of the wall is not restrained from minor deflections. An equivalent fluid pressure approach may be used to compute the horizontal pressure against the wall. Appropriate fluid unit weights are given below for specific slope gradients of the retained material. These do not include other superimposed loading conditions due to traffic, structures, seismic events or adverse geologic conditions. When wall configurations are finalized, the appropriate loading conditions for superimposed loads can be provided upon request. For preliminary planning purposes, the structural consultant/wall designer should incorporate the surcharge of traffic on the back of retaining walls where vehicular traffic could occur within horizontal distance "H" from the back of the retaining wall (where "H" equals the wall height). The traffic surcharge may be taken as 100 psf/ft in the upper 5 feet of backfill for light truck and cars traffic. This does not include the surcharge of parked vehicles which should be evaluated at a higher surcharge to account for the effects of seismic loading. Equivalent fluid pressures for the design of cantilevered retaining walls are provided in the following table: SURFACE SLOPE OF EQUIVALENT EQUIVALENT RETAINED MATERIAL FLUID WEIGHT P.C.F. FLUID.WE.tGHTP.C.F. (HO RIZONTAL:VERTICAL) (SELECT BACKFILL)<2> {NATIVE BACKFILL)(3) I Leve1(1l I 38 I 45 I 2 to 1 55 60 <1l Level backfill behind a retaining wall is defined as compacted earth materials, properly drained, without a slope for a distance of 2H behind the wall, where H is the height of the wall. <2l SE~ 30, P.I. < 15, E.I. < 21, and .s_ 10% passing No. 200 sieve. (3) E.I. == Oto 50, SE > 30, P.I. < 15, E.I. < 21, and < 15% passing No. 200 sieve. Seismic Surcharge For engineered retaining walls with more than 6 feet of retained materials, as measured vertically from the bottom of the wall footing at the heel to daylight , GSI recommends that the walls be evaluated for a seismic surcharge (in general accordance with 2013 CBC requirements). The site walls in this category should maintain an overturning Factor-of-Safety (FOS) of approximately 1.25 when the seismic surcharge (increment), is applied. For restrained walls, the seismic surcharge should be applied as a uniform Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 21 surcharge load from the bottom of the footing (excluding shear keys) to the top of the backfill at the heel of the wall footing. This seismic surcharge pressure (seismic increment) may be taken as 15H where "H" for retained walls is the dimension previously noted as the height of the backfill to the bottom of the footing. The resultant force should be applied at a distance 0.6 H up from the bottom of the footing. For the evaluation of the seismic surcharge, the bearing pressure may exceed the static value by one-third, considering the transient nature of this surcharge. For cantilevered walls, the pressure should be applied as an inverted triangular distribution using 15H. For restrained walls, the pressure should be applied as a rectangular distribution. Please note this is for local wall stability only. The 15H is derived from a Mononobe-Okabe solution for both restrained cantilever walls. This accounts for the increased lateral pressure due to shakedown or movement of the sand fill soil in the zone of influence from the wall or roughly a 45° -ct>/2 plane away from the back of the wall. The 15H seismic surcharge is derived from the formula: Where: H Seismic increment Probabilistic horizontal site acceleration with a percentage of "g" total unit weight (115 to 125 pcf for site soils @ 90% relative compaction). Height of the wall from the bottom of the footing or point of pile fixity. Retaining Wall Backfill and Drainage Positive drainage must be provided behind all retaining walls in the form of gravel wrapped in geofabric and outlets. A backdrain system is considered necessary for retaining walls that are 2 feet or greater in height. Details 1, 2, and 3, present the back. drainage options discussed below. Backdrains should consist of a 4-inch diameter perforated PVC or ABS pipe encased in either Class 2 permeable filter material or %-inch to 1 %-inch gravel wrapped in approved filter fabric (Mirafi 140 or equivalent). For low expansive backfill, the filter material should extend a minimum of 1 horizontal foot behind the base of the walls and upward at least 1 foot. For native backfill that has up to medium expansion potential, continuous Class 2 permeable drain materials should be used behind the wall. This material should be continuous (i.e., full height) behind the wall, and it should be constructed in accordance with the enclosed Detail 1 (Typical Retaining Wall Backfill and Drainage Detail). For limited access and confined areas, (panel) drainage behind the wall may be constructed in accordance with Detail 2 (Retaining Wall Backfill and Subdrain Detail Geotextile Drain). Materials with an E.I. potential of greater than 50 should not be used as backfill for retaining walls. For more onerous expansive situations, backfill and drainage behind the retaining wall should conform with Detail 3 (Retaining Wall And Subdrain Detail Clean Sand Backfill). Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W .0. 67 45-A-SC July31,2014 Page 22 (1) Waterproofing membrane ----, CMU or reinforced-concrete wall Proposed grade t - sloped to drain per precise civil drawings (5) Weep hole ;?~~~~~ Footing and wall design by others---"---~ (1) Waterproofing membrane. (2) Gravel= Clean, crushed, % to 1Y2 inch. Structural footing or settlement-sensitive improvement Provide surf ace drainage via an engineered V-ditch (see civil plans for details) 2=1 (h=v) slope Slope or level (2) Gravel /<' \\ (/ (3) Filter fabri / Native backfill \\V' 1:1 (h=v) or flatter backcut to be properly benched (6) Footing (3) Filter fabric= Mirafi 140N or approved equivalent. (4) Pipe= 4-inch-diameter perforated PVC, Schedule 40, or approved alternative with minimum of 1 percent gradient sloped to suitable, approved outlet point (perforations down). (5) Weep hole= Minimum 2-inch diameter placed at 20-foot centers along the wall and placed 3 inches above finished surf ace. Design civil engineer to provide drainage at toe of wall. No weep holes for below-grade walls. (6) Footing= If bench is created behind the footing greater than the footing width, use level fill or cut natural earth materials. An additional "heel" drain will likely be required by geotechnical consultant. ('"',~; ll,ac. (,_,,,;\ RETAINING WALL DETAIL -ALTERNATIVE A Detail 1 (1) Waterproofing membrane (optional)-~ CMU or reinforced-concrete wall l 6 inches -t (5) Weep hole Proposed grade sloped to drain per precise civil drawings \~\\'§(\~~W>:\~\ Footing and wall design by others----"--~ Structural footing or settlement-sensitive improvement Provide surface drainage via engineered V-ditch (see civil plan details) 2=1 (h=v) slope Slope or level (2) Composite drain (3) Filter f abri ~0\ /\ Native backfill \\V' 1:1 (h=v) or flatter backcut to be properly benched ----( 6) 1 cubic foot of %-inch crushed rock (7) Footing (1) Waterproofing membrane (optional): Liquid boot or approved mastic equivalent. (2) Drain= Miradrain 6000 or J-drain 200 or equivalent for non-waterproofed walls; Mira drain 6200 or J-drain 200 or equivalent for waterproofed walls (all perforations down). (3) Filter fabric: Mirafi 140N or approved equivalent; place fabric flap behind core. (4) Pipe= 4-inch-diameter perforated PVC, Schedule 40, or approved alternative with minimum of 1 percent gradient to proper outlet point (perforations down). (5) Weep hole: Minimum 2-inch diameter placed at 20-foot centers along the wall and placed 3 inches above finished surf ace. Design civil engineer to provide drainage at toe of wall. No weep holes for below-grade walls. (6) Gravel= Clean, crushed, % to 1]1 inch. (7) Footing= If bench is created behind the tooting greater than the footing width, use level fill or cut natural earth materials. An additional "heel" drain will likely be required by geotechnical consultant. RETAINING WALL DETAIL -ALTERNATIVE 8 Detail 2 (1) Waterproofing membrane -- CMU or reinforced-concrete wall Structural footing or settlement-sensitive improvement ~-Provide surface drainage 2=1 (h=v) slope ----=± ±12 inches l (5) Weep hole H [Proposed grade sloped to drain per precise civil drawings ~0~\\):(\\~\/: Footing and wall design by others H/2 minimum Heel I.--.--widt.~h -------- .... 1 I Slope or level (3) Filter fabric (2) Gravel (4) Pipe (7) Footing (1) Waterproofing membrane= Liquid boot or approved masticequivalent. (2) Gravel= Clean, crushed, % to 1~ inch. (3) Filter fabric= Mirafi 140N or approved equivalent. (8) Native backfill (6) Clean sand backfill 1:1 (h=v) or flatter backcut to be properly benched (4) Pipe: 4-inch-diameter perforated PVC, Schedule 40, or approved alternative with minimum of 1 percent gradient to proper outlet point (perforations down). (5) Weep hole= Minimum 2-inch diameter placed at 20-foot centers along the wall and placed 3 inches above finished surface. Design civil engineer to provide drainage at toe of wall. No weep holes for below-grade walls. (6) Clean sand backfill= Must have sand equivalent value (S.E.) of 35 or greater; can be densified by water jetting upon approval by geotechnical engineer. (7) Footing: If bench is created behind the f coting greater than the footing width, use level fill or cut natural earth materials. An additional "heel" drain will likely be required by geotechnical consultant. (8) Native backfill= If El. (21 and S.E. {35 then all sand requirements also may not be required and will be reviewed by the geotechnical consultant. RETAINING WALL DETAIL -ALTERNATIVE C Detail 3 Drain outlets should consist of a 4-inch diameter solid PVC or ABS pipe spaced no greater than ± 100 feet apart, with a minimum of two outlets, one on each end. The use of weep holes, only, in walls higher than 2 feet, is not recommended. The surface of the backfill should be sealed by pavement or the top 18 inches compacted with native soil (E.1. <50). Proper surface drainage should also be provided. For additional mitigation, consideration should be given to applying a water-proof membrane to the back of all retaining structures. The use of a waterstop should be considered for all concrete and masonry joints. Wall/Retaining Wall Footing Transitions Site walls are anticipated to be founded on footings designed in accordance with the recommendations in this report. Although not anticipated, should wall footings transition from cut to fill, the civil designer may specify either: a) A minimum of a 2-foot overexcavation and recompaction of cut materials for a distance of 2H, from the point of transition. b) Increase of the amount of reinforcing steel and wall detailing (i.e., expansion joints or crack control joints) such that a angular distortion of 1 /360 for a distance of 2H on either side of the transition may be accommodated. Expansion joints should be placed no greater than 20 feet on-center, in accordance with the structural engineer's/wall designer's recommendations, regardless of whether or not transition conditions exist. Expansion joints should be sealed with a flexible, non-shrink grout. c) Embed the footings entirely into native formational material (i.e., deepened footings). If transitions from cut to fill transect the wall footing alignment at an angle of less than 45 degrees (plan view), then the designer should follow recommendation "a" (above) and until such transition is between 45 and 90 degrees to the wall alignment. DRIVEWAY/PARKING, FLATWORK, AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS The effects of expansive soils are cumulative, and typically occur over the lifetime of any improvements. On relatively level areas, when the soils are allowed to dry, the dessication and swelling process tends to cause heaving and distress to flatwork and other improvements. The resulting potential for distress to improvements may be reduced, but not totally eliminated. To that end, it is important that the homeowner be aware of this long-term potential for distress. To reduce the likelihood of distress, the following recommendations are presented for all exterior flatwork: 1. The subgrade area for concrete slabs should be compacted to achieve a minimum 90 percent relative compaction (sidewalks, patios), and 95 percent relative Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\6745a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 26 compaction (traffic pavements), and then be presoaked to 2 to 3 percentage points above (or 125 percent of) the soils' optimum moisture content, to a depth of 18 inches below subgrade elevation. If very low expansive soils are present, only optimum moisture content, or greater, is required and specific presoaking is not warranted. The moisture content of the subgrade should be proof tested within 72 hours prior to pouring concrete. 2. Concrete slabs should be cast over a non-yielding surface, consisting of a 4-inch layer of crushed rock, gravel, or clean sand, that should be compacted and level prior to pouring concrete. If very low expansive soils are present, the rock or gravel or sand may be deleted. The layer or subgrade should be wet-down completely prior to pouring concrete, to minimize loss of concrete moisture to the surrounding earth materials. 3. Exterior slabs (sidewalks, patios, etc.) should be a minimum of 4 inches thick. 4. Driveway and parking area slabs and approaches should be at least 6 inches thick. A thickened edge (12 inches) should also be considered adjacent to all landscape areas, to help impede infiltration of landscape water under the slab(s). All pavement construction should minimally be performed in general accordance with industry standards and properly transitioned. 5. Trash truck loading areas should be designed per Carlsbad City standard drawings (City of Carlsbad, 1993). 6. The use of transverse and longitudinal control joints are recommended to help control slab cracking due to concrete shrinkage or expansion. Two ways to mitigate such cracking are: a) add a sufficient amount of reinforcing steel, increasing tensile strength of the slab; and, b) provide an adequate amount of control and/or expansion joints to accommodate anticipated concrete shrinkage and expansion. 7. In order to reduce the potential for unsightly cracks, slabs should be reinforced at mid-height with a minimum of No. 3 bars placed at 18 inches on center, in each direction. If subgrade soils within the top 7 feet from finish grade are very low expansive soils (i.e., E.1. :520), then 6x6-W1 .4xW1 .4 welded-wire mesh may be substituted for the rebar, provided the reinforcement is placed on chairs, at slab mid-height. The exterior slabs should be scored or saw cut, % to 3/s inches deep, often enough so that no section is greater than 10 feet by 10 feet. For sidewalks or narrow slabs, control joints should be provided at intervals of every 6 feet. The slabs should be separated from the foundations and sidewalks with expansion joint filler material. Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 27 8. No traffic should be allowed upon the newly poured concrete slabs until they have been properly cured to within 75 percent of design strength. Concrete compression strength should be a minimum of 2,500 psi for sidewalks and patios, and a minimum 3,250 psi for traffic pavements. 9. Driveways, sidewalks, and patio slabs adjacent to the structure should be separated from the structure with thick expansion joint filler material. In areas directly adjacent to a continuous source of moisture (i.e., irrigation, planters, etc.), all joints should be additionally sealed with flexible mastic. 9. Planters and walls should not be tied to the structure. 10. Overhang structures should be supported on the slabs, or structurally designed with continuous footings tied in at least two directions. If very low expansion soils are present, footings need only be tied in one direction. 11. Any masonry landscape walls that are to be constructed throughout the property should be grouted and articulated in segments no more than 20 feet long. These segments should be keyed or doweled together. 12. Utilities should be enclosed within a closed utilidor (vault) or designed with flexible connections to accommodate differential settlement and expansive soil conditions. 13. Positive site drainage should be maintained at all times. Finish grade on the lot should provide a minimum of 1 to 2 percent fall to the street, as indicated herein. It should be kept in mind that drainage reversals could occur, including post-construction settlement, if relatively flat yard drainage gradients are not periodically maintained by the homeowner. 14. Air conditioning (A/C) units should be supported by slabs that are incorporated into the building foundation or constructed on a rigid slab with flexible couplings for plumbing and electrical lines. A/C waste water lines should be drained to a suitable non-erosive outlet. 15. Shrinkage cracks could become excessive if proper finishing and curing practices are not followed. Finishing and curing practices should be performed per the Portland Cement Association Guidelines. Mix design should incorporate rate of curing for climate and time of year, sulfate content of soils, corrosion potential of soils, and fertilizers used on site. Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp 12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 28 DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA Onsite Storm Water Treatment Based on our evaluation, onsite storm water treatment systems should consider the following: 1. Site soils (i.e., proposed compacted fill) are considered to belong to hydrologic subgroup "D." 2. The presence of the thin surficial fill layer overlying dense formational soil will increase the potential for the development of a perched water table along the fill/formation contact. 3. The will be an increased potential for the adverse performance of structures, should the engineered fills supporting the proposed structures become saturated, due to settlement, or water vapor transmission. 4. Bioretention structures should utilize an impermeable liner, that conforms to the following criteria: • 30-mil polyvinyl chloride (PVC) membrane with Specific Gravity (ASTM D792): 120 (min.); Tensile {ASTM D882): 73 {lb/in-width, min); Elongation at Break {ASTM D882: 380 (%min); Modulus (STM D882): 30 (lb/in-width, min.); and Tear Resistance (ASTM D1004): 30 (lb/in, min). Based on the existing, and potential as-built soil conditions, GSI strongly recommends that any required storm water treatment BMP is provided with impermeable liners, and subdrains should be used along the bottom of bioretention swales/basins located within the influence of planned improvements to direct subsurface water to a suitable outlet. In practice, storm water BMP's are usually initially designed by the project design civil engineer. Selection of methods should include (but should not be limited to) review by licensed professionals including the geotechnical engineer, hydrogeologist, engineering geologist, project civil engineer, landscape architect, environmental professional, and industrial hygienist. Applicable governing agency requirements should be reviewed and included in design considerations. Slope Maintenance and Planting Water has been shown to weaken the inherent strength of all earth materials. Slope stability is significantly reduced by overly wet conditions. Positive surface drainage away from slopes should be maintained and only the amount of irrigation necessary to sustain plant life should be provided for planted slopes. Over-watering should be avoided as it Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\6745a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 29 adversely affects site improvements, and causes perched groundwater conditions. Graded slopes constructed utilizing onsite materials would be erosive. Eroded debris may be minimized and surficial slope stability enhanced by establishing and maintaining a suitable vegetation cover soon after construction. Compaction to the face of fill slopes would tend to minimize short-term erosion until vegetation is established. Plants selected for landscaping should be light weight, deep rooted types that require little water and are capable of surviving the prevailing climate. Jute-type matting or other fibrous covers may aid in allowing the establishment of a sparse plant cover. Utilizing plants other than those recommended above will increase the potential for perched water, staining, mold, etc., to develop. A rodent control program to prevent burrowing should be implemented. Irrigation of natural (ungraded) slope areas is generally not recommended. These recommendations regarding plant type, irrigation practices, and rodent control should be provided to all interested/affected parties. Over-steepening of slopes should be avoided during building construction activities and landscaping. Drainage Adequate surface drainage is a very important factor in reducing the likelihood of adverse performance offoundations, hardscape, and slopes. Surface drainage should be sufficient to mitigate ponding of water anywhere on the property, and especially near structures and tops of slopes. Surface drainage should be carefully taken into consideration during fine grading, landscaping, and building construction. Therefore, care should be taken that future landscaping or construction activities do not create adverse drainage conditions. Positive site drainage within the property should be provided and maintained at all times. Drainage should not flow uncontrolled down any descending slope. Water should be directed away from foundations and tops of slopes, and not allowed to pond and/or seep into the ground. In general, site drainage should conform to Section 1804.3 of the 2013 CBC. Consideration should be given to avoiding construction of planters adjacent to structures (buildings, pools, spas, etc.). Building pad drainage should be directed toward the street or other approved area(s). Although not a geotechnical requirement, roof gutters, down spouts, or other appropriate means may be utilized to control roof drainage. Down spouts, or drainage devices should outlet a minimum of 5 feet from structures or into a subsurface drainage system. Areas of seepage may develop due to irrigation or heavy rainfall, and should be anticipated. Minimizing irrigation will lessen this potential. If areas of seepage develop, recommendations for minimizing this effect could be provided upon request. Erosion Control Cut and fill slopes will be subject to surficial erosion during and after grading. Onsite earth materials have a moderate to high erosion potential. Consideration should be given to providing hay bales and silt fences for the temporary control of surface water, from a geotechnical viewpoint. Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\6745a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 30 Landscape Maintenance Only the amount of irrigation necessary to sustain plant life should be provided. Over-watering the landscape areas will adversely affect proposed site improvements. We would recommend that any proposed open-bottom planters adjacent to proposed structures be eliminated for a minimum distance of 10 feet. As an alternative, closed-bottom type planters could be utilized. An outlet placed in the bottom of the planter, could be installed to direct drainage away from structures or any exterior concrete flatwork. If planters are constructed adjacent to structures, the sides and bottom of the planter should be provided with a moisture barrier to prevent penetration of irrigation water into the subgrade. Provisions should be made to drain the excess irrigation water from the planters without saturating the subgrade below or adjacent to the planters. Graded slope areas should be planted with drought resistant vegetation. Consideration should be given to the type of vegetation chosen and their potential effect upon surface improvements (i.e., some trees will have an effect on concrete flatwork with their extensive root systems). From a geotechnical standpoint leaching is not recommended for establishing landscaping. If the surface soils are processed for the purpose of adding amendments, they should be recompacted to 90 percent minimum relative compaction. Gutters and Downspouts As previously discussed in the drainage section, the installation of gutters and downspouts should be considered to collect roof water that may otherwise infiltrate the soils adjacent to the structures. If utilized, the downspouts should be drained into PVC collector pipes or other non-erosive devices (e.g., paved swales or ditches; below grade, solid tight-lined PVC pipes; etc.), that will carry the water away from the structure, to an appropriate outlet, in accordance with the recommendations of the design civil engineer. Downspouts and gutters are not a requirement; however, from a geotechnical viewpoint, provided that positive drainage is incorporated into project design (as discussed previously). Subsurface and Surface Water Subsurface and surface water are not anticipated to affect site development, provided that the recommendations contained in this report are incorporated into final design and construction and that prudent surface and subsurface drainage practices are incorporated into the construction plans. Perched groundwater conditions along zones of contrasting permeabilities may not be precluded from occurring in the future due to site irrigation, poor drainage conditions, or damaged utilities, and should be anticipated. Should perched groundwater conditions develop, this office could assess the affected area(s) and provide the appropriate recommendations to mitigate the observed groundwater conditions. Groundwater conditions may change with the introduction of irrigation, rainfall, or other factors. Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 31 Site Improvements If in the future, any additional improvements (e.g., pools, spas, etc.) are planned for the site, recommendations concerning the geological or geotechnical aspects of design and construction of said improvements could be provided upon request. Pools and/or spas should not be constructed without specific design and construction recommendations from GSI, and this construction recommendation should be provided to all interested/affected parties. This office should be notified in advance of any fill placement, grading of the site, or trench backfilling after rough grading has been completed. This includes any grading, utility trench and retaining wall backfills, flatwork, etc. Tile Flooring Tile flooring can crack, reflecting cracks in the concrete slab below the tile, although small cracks in a conventional slab may not be significant. Therefore, the designer should consider additional steel reinforcement for concrete slabs-on-grade where tile will be placed. The tile installer should consider installation methods that reduce possible cracking of the tile such as slipsheets. Slipsheets or a vinyl crack isolation membrane (approved by the Tile Council of America/Ceramic Tile Institute) are recommended between tile and concrete slabs on grade. Additional Grading This office should be notified in advance of any fill placement, supplemental regrading of the site, or trench backfilling after rough grading has been completed. This includes completion of grading in the street, driveway approaches, driveways, parking areas, and utility trench and retaining wall backfills. Footing Trench Excavation All footing excavations should be observed by a representative of this firm subsequent to trenching and prior to concrete form and reinforcement placement. The purpose of the observations is to evaluate that the excavations have been made into the recommended bearing material and to the minimum widths and depths recommended for construction. If loose or compressible materials are exposed within the footing excavation, a deeper footing or removal and recompaction of the subgrade materials would be recommended at that time. Footing trench spoil and any excess soils generated from utility trench excavations should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent, if not removed from the site. Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp 12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 32 Trenching/Temporary Construction Backcuts Considering the nature of the onsite earth materials, it should be anticipated that caving or sloughing could be a factor in subsurface excavations and trenching. Shoring or excavating the trench walls/backcuts at the angle of repose (typically 25 to 45 degrees [except as specifically superceded within the text of this report]), should be anticipated. All excavations should be observed by an engineering geologist or soil engineer from GSI, prior to workers entering the excavation or trench, and minimally conform to CAL-OSHA, state, and local safety codes. Should adverse conditions exist, appropriate recommendations would be offered at that time. The above recommendations should be provided to any contractors and/or subcontractors, or homeowners, etc., that may perform such work. Utility Trench Backfill 1. All interior utility trench backfill should be brought to at least 2 percent above optimum moisture content and then compacted to obtain a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent of the laboratory standard. As an alternative for shallow (12-inch to 18-inch) under-slab trenches, sand having a sand equivalent value of 30 or greater may be utilized and jetted or flooded into place. Observation, probing and testing should be provided to evaluate the desired results. 2. Exterior trenches adjacent to, and within areas extending below a 1 :1 plane projected from the outside bottom edge of the footing, and all trenches beneath hardscape features and in slopes, should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the laboratory standard. Sand backfill, unless excavated from the trench, should not be used in these backfill areas. Compaction testing and observations, along with probing, should be accomplished to evaluate the desired results. 3. All trench excavations should conform to CAL-OSHA, state, and local safety codes. 4. Utilities crossing grade beams, perimeter beams, or footings should either pass below the footing or grade beam utilizing a hardened collar or foam spacer, or pass through the footing or grade beam in accordance with the recommendations of the structural engineer. Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.0. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 33 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATION AND TESTING We recommend that observation and/or testing be performed by GSI at each of the following construction stages: • • • • • • • • • • • During grading/recertification . During excavation . During placement of subdrains or other subdrainage devices, prior to placing fill and/or backfill. After excavation of building footings, retaining wall footings, and free standing walls footings, prior to the placement of reinforcing steel or concrete. Prior to pouring any slabs or flatwork, after presoaking/presaturation of building pads and other flatwork subgrade, before the placement of concrete, reinforcing steel, capillary break (i.e., sand, pea-gravel, etc.), or vapor retarders (i.e., visqueen, etc.). During retaining wall subdrain installation, prior to backfill placement. During placement of backfill for area drain, interior plumbing, utility line trenches, and retaining wall backfill. During slope construction/repair . When any unusual soil conditions are encountered during any construction operations, subsequent to the issuance of this report. When any homeowner improvements, such as flatwork, spas, pools, walls, etc., are constructed, prior to construction. A report of geotechnical observation and testing should be provided at the conclusion of each of the above stages, in order to provide concise and clear documentation of site work, and/or to comply with code requirements. OTHER DESIGN PROFESSIONALS/CONSULTANTS The design civil engineer, structural engineer, post-tension designer, architect, landscape architect, wall designer, etc., should review the recommendations provided herein, incorporate those recommendations into all their respective plans, and by explicit Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e :\wp 12\6700\67 45a. pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 34 reference, make this report part of their project plans. This report presents minimum design criteria for the design of slabs, foundations and other elements possibly applicable to the project. These criteria should not be considered as substitutes for actual designs by the structural engineer/designer. Please note that the recommendations contained herein are not intended to preclude the transmission of water or vapor through the slab or foundation. The structural engineer/foundation and/or slab designer should provide recommendations to not allow water or vapor to enter into the structure so as to cause damage to another building component, or so as to limit the installation of the type of flooring materials typically used for the particular application. The structural engineer/designer should analyze actual soil-structure interaction and consider, as needed, bearing, expansive soil influence, and strength, stiffness and deflections in the various slab, foundation, and other elements in order to develop appropriate, design-specific details. As conditions dictate, it is possible that other influences will also have to be considered. The structural engineer/designer should consider all applicable codes and authoritative sources where needed. If analyses by the structural engineer/designer result in less critical details than are provided herein as minimums, the minimums presented herein should be adopted. It is considered likely that some, more restrictive details will be required. If the structural engineer/designer has any questions or requires further assistance, they should not hesitate to call or otherwise transmit their requests to GSI. In order to mitigate potential distress, the foundation and/or improvement's designer should confirm to GSI and the governing agency, in writing, that the proposed foundations and/or improvements can tolerate the amount of differential settlement and/or expansion characteristics and other design criteria specified herein. PLAN REVIEW Final project plans (grading, precise grading, foundation, retaining wall, landscaping, etc.), should be reviewed by this office prior to construction, so that construction is in accordance with the conclusions and recommendations of this report. Based on our review, supplemental recommendations and/or further geotechnical studies may be warranted. Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 35 LIMITATIONS The materials encountered on the project site and utilized for our analysis are believed representative of the area; however, soil and bedrock materials vary in character between excavations and natural outcrops or conditions exposed during mass grading. Site conditions may vary due to seasonal changes or other factors. Inasmuch as our study is based upon our review and engineering analyses and laboratory data, the conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions. These opinions have been derived in accordance with current standards of practice, and no warranty, either express or implied, is given. Standards of practice are subject to change with time. GSI assumes no responsibility or liability for work or testing performed by others, or their inaction; or work performed when GSI is not requested to be onsite, to evaluate if our recommendations have been properly implemented. Use of this report constitutes an agreement and consent by the user to all the limitations outlined above, notwithstanding any other agreements that may be in place. In addition, this report may be subject to review by the controlling authorities. Thus, this report brings to completion our scope of services for this portion of the project. All samples will be disposed of after 30 days, unless specifically requested by the client, in writing. Terry and Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad File:e:\wp12\6700\6745a.pge GeoSoits, Inc. W.O. 6745-A-SC July 31, 2014 Page 36 APPENDIX A REFERENCES GeoSoils, Inc. APPENDIX A REFERENCES ACI Committee 318, 2008, Building code requirements for structural concrete (ACI 318-08) and commentary, dated January. ACI Committee 302, 2004, Guide for concrete floor and slab construction, ACI 302.1 R-04, dated June. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), 1998, Standard practice for installation of water vapor retarder used in contact with earth or granular fill under concrete slabs, Designation: E 1643-98 (Reapproved 2005). __ , 1997, Standard specification for plastic water vapor retarders used in contact with soil or granular fill under concrete slabs, Designation: E 1745-97 (Reapproved 2004). American Society of Civil Engineers, 2010, Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures, ASCE Standard ASCE/SEI 7-10. Blake, Thomas F., 2000a, EQFAUL T, A computer program for the estimation of peak horizontal acceleration from 3-D fault sources; Windows 95/98 version. __ , 2000b, EQSEARCH, A computer program for the estimation of peak horizontal acceleration from California historical earthquake catalogs; Updated to December 2009, Windows 95/98 version. Bozorgnia, Y., Campbell K.W., and Niazi, M., 1999, Vertical ground motion: Characteristics, relationship with horizontal component, and building-code implications; Proceedings of the SMIP99 seminar on utilization of strong-motion data, September 15, Oakland, pp. 23-49. Bryant, W.A., and Hart, E.W., 2007, Fault-rupture hazard zones in California, Alquist-Priolo earthquake fault zoning act with index to earthquake fault zones maps; California Geological Survey, Special Publication 42, interim revision. California Building Standards Commission, 2013, California Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Volume 2 of 2, Based on the 2012 International Building Code, 2013 California Historical Building Code, Title 24, Part 8; 2013 California Existing Building Code, Title 24, Part 10. Cao, T., Bryant, W.A., Rowshandel, B., Branum, D., and Wills, C.J., 2003, The revised 2002 California probabilistic seismic hazard maps, dated June, http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/rghm/psha/fault_parameters/pdf/Documents /2002 CA Hazard Maps.pdf --- GeoSoils, Inc. Carlsbad, City of, 1993, Standards for design and construction of public works improvements in the City of Carlsbad. Greymar Associates, 2014, Site plan, Hutton residence, 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad, Ca. 92008, no Job No., dated April 1. Jennings, C.W., 1994, Fault activity map of California and adjacent areas: California Division of Mines and Geology, Map Sheet No. 6, scale 1 :750,000. Kanare, H.M., 2005, Concrete floors and moisture, Engineering Bulletin 119, Portland Cement Association. Kennedy, M.P., and Tan, SS., 2005, Geologic map of the Oceanside 30' by60' quadrangle, California, regional map series, scale 1: 100,000, California Geologic Survey and United States Geological Survey, www.conservation.ca.gov/ cgs/rghm/rgm/preliminary _geologic_ maps.html Romanoff, M., 1957, Underground corrosion, originally issued April 1. Seed, 2005, Evaluation and mitigation of soil liquefaction hazard "evaluation of field data and procedures for evaluating the risk of triggering (or inception) of liquefaction", in Geotechnical earthquake engineering; short course, San Diego, California, April 8-9. Sowers and Sowers, 1979, Unified soil classification system (After U. S. Waterways Experiment Station and ASTM 02487-667) in Introductory Soil Mechanics, New York. State of California, 2014, Civil Code, Sections 895 et seq. State of California Department of Transportation, Division of Engineering Services, Materials Engineering, and Testing Services, Corrosion Technology Branch, 2003, Corrosion Guidelines, Version 1.0, dated September. Terry and Judy Hutton File:e:\wp12\6700\6745a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. Appendix A Page 2 Tan, S.S., and Giffen, D.G., 1995, Landslide hazards in the northern part of the San Diego Metropolitan area, San Diego County, California, Landslide hazard identification map no. 35, Plate 35G, Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, DMG Open File Report 95-04. United States Geological Survey, 2014 , U.S. Seismic design maps, earthquake hazards program, http://geohazards.usgs.gov/design maps/us/application. php. Version 3.1.0, dated July. Terry and Judy Hutton File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc:. Appendix A Page 3 APPENDIX B HAND AUGER BORING LOGS GeoSoils, Inc. UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM CONSISTENCY OR RELATIVE DENSITY Major Divisions Group Typical Names CRITERIA Symbols GW Well-graded gravels and gravel- sand mixtures, little or no fines Standard Penetration Test Q) C: Ja > Q) ctl Q) Q) > -C. ·u; -ctl Poorly graded gravels and Penetration Q) O O v 0 ~ > "'~ ~ 0 (!) GP gravel-sand mixtures, little or no Resistance N Relative Q) "iii ai O ctl z fines (blows/ft) Density >E.:: 0 ~ 0 ~ § 0 C\J (!)o~-c Silty gravels gravel-sand-silt 0-4 Very loose U) • ~ ctl Q) Q) .c GM = 0 0 0 c: mixtures oz ID U "«j iii-~ (/) C: Loose "O 0 ~ c'.5 3: 4-10 ~ "O Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay ·-Q) GC ~.£ mixtures 10-30 Medium (!) ctl (1) Q) Well-graded sands and gravelly U) ~ 30-50 Dense ~ * SW oio sands, little or no fines 8~ 0 Q) C: U) C: ii'; ctl "O Very dense Ql C > 50 ~ 0 ·--ctl c,j 0 ·-U) 0(1) Poorly graded sands and £ o-u,ID~~ SP Q) -gc.:=o gravelly sands, little or no fines 0 c,j ~ Q) z 2 oo--~rn SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures Q) c,j Q) ~ 0 U) ~ .c U) ~ (J ~ C ~ ~ Clayey sands, sand-clay a. ~ :s: u: SC mixtures Inorganic silts, very fine sands, Standard Penetration Test ML rock flour, silty or clayey fine sands U) Q) ~-'t= ~ Unconfined > 0.§2 Inorganic clays of low to Penetration Compressive Q) -g ~ 0 medium plasticity, gravelly clays, "iii CL Resistance N Strength 0 <U 6-cf sandy clays, silty clays, lean 0 (blows/ft) Consistency (tons/ft") U) C\J ~ ::J g clays '5 . Cl) (/) ~ Organic silts and organic silty <2 Very Soft <0.25 "O U) Q) Q) OL clays of low plasticity C: U) -~ U) 2-4 Soft 0.25-.050 c,j C, 0. Ql Q) Inorganic silts, micaceous or C: 0 MH diatomaceous fine sands or silts, 4-8 Medium 0.50-1.00 u: E U) ?fl-elastic silts >, 0 0 <tS .'t= LO 8-15 Stiff 1.00-2.00 * 0 ~ 1a Inorganic clays of high plasticity, 0 -g~£ CH ID <ll :, ~ fat clays 15-30 Very Stiff 2.00 -4.00 O" Q) ~:J ca ·-Q) (/) ~ >30 Hard >4.00 O> Organic clays of medium to high OH plasticity Highly Organic Soils PT Peat, mucic, and other highly organic soils 3" 3/4" #4 #10 #40 #200 U.S. Standard Sieve Unified Soil Gravel Sand Silt or Clay Classification Cobbles I I I coarse fine coarse medium fine MOISTURE CONDITIONS MATERIAL QUANTITY OTHER SYMBOLS Dry Absence of moisture: dusty, dry to the touch trace 0-5 % C Core Sample Slightly Moist Below optimum moisture content for compaction few 5-10% s SPT Sample Moist Near optimum moisture content little 10-25 % B Bulk Sample Very Moist Above optimum moisture content some 25-45 % .... Groundwater Wet Visible free water; below water table Qp Pocket Penetrometer BASIC LOG FORMAT: Group name, Group symbol, (grain size), color, moisture, consistency or relative density. Additional comments: odor, presence of roots, mica, gypsum, coarse grained particles, etc. EXAMPLE: Sand (SP), fine to medium grained, brown, moist, loose, trace silt, little fine gravel, few cobbles up to 4" in size, some hair roots and rootlets. File:Mar: c;\SoilClassif.wpd PLATE B-1 H· BORING ELEV. DEPTH GROUP NO. (ft.) (ft.) SYMBOL TP-1 124 0-1 SM 1-2% SM 2%-5 SM TP-2 124 0-% SW %-1% SM 1%-2 SM 2-5% SM W.O. 6745-A-SC Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue Logged By: RGC July 8, 2014 LOG OF EXPLORATORY HAND AUGER BORINGS SAMPLE MOISTURE FIELD DRY DEPTH (%) DENSITY DESCRIPTION (ft.) (pcf) COLLUVIUM: SILTY SAND, grayish brown, dry, loose; trace roots, porous. OLDER PARALIC DEPOSITS: SILTY SAND, brown, dry, loose to medium dense; porous, weakly cemented. 2%-3 SILTY SAND, brown to orange brown, damp, medium dense; becomes moist at 3%', moderately cemented. Total Depth = 5' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 7-7-14 FILL: SAND, gray, dry, loose; well graded. COLLUVIUM: SILTY SAND, dark brown, dry, loose; porous. 1112-2 5.1 100 OLDER PARALIC DEPOSITS: SILTY SAND, brown, damp, low to medium dense; few rounded iron oxide nodules, porous, weakly cemented. 3 7.0 106.1 SILTY SAND, brown to orange brown, damp, medium dense; moderately cemented. Total Depth = 51/z' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 7-7-14 PLATE B-2 H· BORING ELEV. DEPTH GROUP NO. (ft.) (ft.) SYMBOL TP-3 124 0-1 SM 1-2V2 SM 2112-3 SM W.O. 6745-A-SC Hutton 1264 Oak Avenue Logged By: RGC July 8, 2014 LOG OF EXPLORATORY HAND AUGER BORINGS SAMPLE MOISTURE FIELD DRY DEPTH (%) DENSITY DESCRIPTION (ft.) (pcf) COLLUVIUM: SILTY SAND, grayish brown, dry loose; porous, few roots. OLDER PARALIC DEPOSITS: SILTY SAND, brown, damp, loose to medium dense; porous, weakly cemented. SIL TY SAND, brown, damp, medium dense; moderately cemented. Total Depth = 3' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 7-7-14 PLATE B-3 APPENDIX C SEISMICITY GeoSoils, Inc. JOB NUMBER: 6745a TEST.OUT *********************** * * * * * EQFAULT version 3.00 * * * * * *********************** DETERMINISTIC ESTIMATION OF PEAK ACCELERATION FROM DIGITIZED FAULTS DATE: 07-31-2014 JOB NAME: Hutton CALCULATION NAME: Test Run Analysis FAULT-DATA-FILE NAME: C:\EQ\EQFAULT\CGSFLTE.DAT SITE COORDINATES: SITE LATITUDE: 33.1640 SITE LONGITUDE: 117.3390 SEARCH RADIUS: 62. 4 mi ATTENUATION RELATION: 11) Bozorgnia Campbell Niazi (1999) Hor.-Pleist. soil-car. UNCERTAINTY (M=Median, S=Sigma): s Number of Sigmas: 1.0 DISTANCE MEASURE: cdist SCOND: l Basement Depth: .01 km Campbell SSR: 0 Campbell SHR: 0 COMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION FAULT-DATA FILE USED: C:\EQ\EQFAULT\CGSFLTE.DAT MINIMUM DEPTH VALUE (km): 3.0 Page 1 W.O. 6745-A-SC PLATE C-1 TEST.OUT EQFAULT SUMMARY DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS Page 1 ESTIMATED MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT ABBREVIATED FAULT NAME APPROXIMATE DISTANCE mi (km) MAXIMUM I EARTHQUAKE I MAG. (Mw) PEAK SITE ACCEL. g EST. SITE INTENSITY MOD.MER(. =----=========================== ============== ========== ========== NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) 5.6( 9.0) 7.1 0.579 x ROSE CANYON 5.9( 9.5) 7.2 0.584 X CORONADO BANK 21.6( 34.7) 7.6 0.268 IX ELSINORE (TEMECULA) 23.7( 38.2) 6.8 0.142 VIII ELSINORE (JULIAN) 24.0( 38.6) 7.1 0.172 VIII ELSINORE (GLEN IVY) 33.2( 53.4) 6.8 0.101 VII SAN JOAQUIN HILLS 35.0( 56.3) 6.6 0.118 VII PALOS VERDES 35.7( 57.5) 7.3 0.132 VIII EARTHQUAKE VALLEY 43.9( 70.6) 6.5 0.061 VI NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (L.A.Basin) 45.7( 73.5) 7.1 0.089 VII SAN JACINTO-ANZA 46.3( 74.5) 7.2 0.094 VII SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY 46.7( 75.2) 6.9 0.075 VII CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) 47.2( 76.0)I 6.7 0.092 VII WHITTIER 51.1( 82.2)1 6.8 0.064 VI SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK 52.2( 84.0)1 6.6 0.055 VI ELSINORE (COYOTE MOUNTAIN) 58.2( 93.6)1 6.8 0.056 VI SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO 59.3( 95.4)1 6.7 0.051 VI PUENTE HILLS BLIND THRUST I 61.0( 98.2)1 7.1 I 0.093 I VII --··················-----··-*·······*·······*··-··-····················**-····· -END OF SEARCH-18 FAULTS FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH RADIUS. THE NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) FAULT IS CLOSEST TO THE SITE. IT IS ABOUT 5.6 MILES (9.0 km) AWAY. LARGEST MAXIMUM-EARTHQUAKE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.5836 g Page 2 W.O. 6745-A-SC PLATE C-2 CALIFORNIA FAULT MAP Hutton 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 -100-1--''-'--'--'----1-J'-'-..J-J..---1-J'---'-...I-L-i--L..-<--J-.L.-1--'-'-...._._-i--'-'-...I-L-l--'--'--'-""-+--'--'-...__._-1-'--'-..L...L-1-'--'--'-'-I -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 W.O. 6745-A-SC PLATE C-3 -0) .__... C 0 +-' ctS ~ 0) -0) () () <( MAXIMUM EARTHQUAKES Hutton 1 .1 .01 .001 .1 1 10 Distance (mi) X X X * X %X X x~ W.O. 6745-A-SC PLATE C-4 ...-. ~ -(]) -0 :J -+-' C 0) ro ~ EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDES & DISTANCES Hutton 7.6 7.5 7.4 7.3 7.2 7.1 7.0 6.9 6.8 6.7 6.6 6.5 . 1 • • • • • • •• 1 10 Distance (mi) • .. - •• • • • W.O. 6745-A-SC PLATE C-5 JOB NUMBER: 6745 TEST.OUT ************************* * * * E Q s E A R C H * * * * version 3.00 * * * ************************* ESTIMATION OF PEAK ACCELERATION FROM CALIFORNIA EARTHQUAKE CATALOGS DATE: 07-31-2014 JOB NAME: hutton EARTHQUAKE-CATALOG-FILE NAME: ALLQUAKE.DAT MAGNITUDE RANGE: MINIMUM MAGNITUDE: 5.00 MAXIMUM MAGNITUDE: 9.00 SITE COORDINATES: SITE LATITUDE: 33.1640 SITE LONGITUDE: 117.3390 SEARCH DATES: START DATE: 1800 END DATE: 2014 SEARCH RADIUS: 62.4 mi 100.4 km ATTENUATION RELATION: 11) Bozorgnia Campbell Niazi (1999) Hor.-Pleist. Soil-car. UNCERTAINTY (M=Median, S=Sigma): s Number of sigmas: 1.0 ASSUMED SOURCE TYPE: 55 [SS=Strike-slip, DS=Reverse-slip, BT=Blind-thrust] SCOND: 1 Depth Source: A Basement Depth: .01 km Campbell ssR: O Campbell SHR: O COMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION MINIMUM DEPTH VALUE (km): 3.0 Page 1 W.O. 6745-A-SC PLATE C-6 TEST.OUT EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS Page 1 I I I FILE! LAT. I LONG. I DATE CODE! NORTH I WEST I I TIME I I I SITE ISITEI APPROX. I (UTC) IDEPTHIQUAKEI ACC. I MM I DISTANCE I HM Seel (km)I MAG. I g IINT. I mi [km] ----+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------DMG 133.00001117.3000 11/22/180012130 o.o 0.01 6.50 0.238 I IX I 11.5( 18.6) MGI l33.0000l117.0000 09/21/18561 730 o.o 0.0 5.00 0.048 I VI I 22.6( 36.4) MGI 132.80001117.1000 05/25/18031 0 0 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.038 I V I 28.7( 46.2) DMG 132.70001117.2000 05/27/1862120 0 0.0 o.o 5.90 0.056 I VI I 33.0( 53.2) PAS 132.97101117.8700 07/13/198611347 8.2 6.0 5.30 0.038 I VI 33.5( 53.9) T-A 132.67001117.1700 12/00/18561 0 0 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.030 I VI 35.5( 57.1) T-A 132.67001117.1700 10/21/18621 0 0 o.o 0.0 5.00 0.030 I VI 35.5( 57.1) T-A 132.67001117.1700 05/24/18651 0 0 o.o 0.0 5.00 0.030 I VI 35.5( 57.1) DMG 133.20001116.7000 01/01/19201 235 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.029 I VI 37.0( 59.6) DMG 133.70001117.4000 05/13/19101 620 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.029 I v 37.2( 59.8) DMG 133.70001117.4000 05/15/191011547 0.0 0.0 6.00 0.053 I VI 37.2( 59.8) DMG 133.70001117.4000 04/11/19101 757 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.029 I V 37.2( 59.8) DMG 133.69901117.5110 05/31/19381 83455.4 10.0 5.50 0.038 I v 38.2( 61.5) DMG 132.80001116.8000 10/23/1894123 3 0.0 o.o 5.70 0.041 I v 40.1( 64.5) MGI 133.2000 116.6000 10/12/192011748 0.0 0.0 5.30 0.030 I V 42.8( 68.8) DMG 133.7100 116.9250 09/23/19631144152.6 16.5 5.00 0.024 I V 44.6( 71.8) DMG 133.7500 117.0000 04/21/19181223225.0 0.0 6.80 0.073 I VII 44.9( 72.3) DMG 133.7500 117.0000106/06/191812232 0.01 0.0 5.00 0.024 I IV 44.9( 72.3) MGI 133.8000 117.6000104/22/191812115 0.01 0.0 5.00 0.023 I IV 46.4( 74.7) DMG 133.5750 117.9830103/11/19331 518 4.01 0.0 5.201 0.026 I v 46.7( 75.2) DMG 133.6170 117.9670 03/11/19331 154 7.81 0.0 6.301 0.049 I VI 47.8( 77.0) DMG 133.8000 117.0000 12/25/189911225 0.01 0.0 6.401 0.052 I VI 48.1( 77.3) DMG 133.6170 118.0170 03/14/1933119 150.0I 0.0 5.101 0.022 I IV 50.1( 80.6) GSP 133.5290 116.5720 06/12/20051154146.51 14.0 5.201 0.023 I IV 50.9( 81.9) DMG 133.9000 117.2000 12/19/18801 0 0 0.01 0.0 6.001 0.038 I V 51.4( 82.8) GSG 133.4200 116.4890 07/07/20101235333.51 14.0I 5.501 0.027 v 52.1( 83.9) PAS 133.5010 116.5130 02/25/19801104738.51 13.61 5.50 0.027 V 53.0( 85.3) GSP 33.50801116.5140 10/31/20011075616.61 15.0I 5.10 0.021 IV 53.2( 85.6) DMG 33.00001116.4330 06/04/194011035 8.31 0.01 5.10 0.021 IV 53.6( 86.3) DMG 33.50001116.5000 09/30/19161 211 0.01 0.01 5.00 0.020 IV 53.7( 86.4) DMG 33.68301118.0500 03/11/19331 658 3.01 0.01 5.50 0.026 V 54.4( 87.6) DMG 33.70001118.0670 03/11/19331 51022.0I 0.01 5.10 0.020 IV 55.9( 90.0) DMG 33.70001118.0670 03/11/19331 85457.0I 0.01 5.10 0.020 IV 55.9( 90.0) DMG 34.00001117.2500 07/23/19231 73026.0I 0.01 6.25 0.039 V 57.9( 93.2) MGI 34.00001117.5000 12/16/1858110 0 0.01 0.01 7.00 0.064 VI 58.5( 94.1) DMG 33.34301116.3460 04/28/19691232042.91 20.01 5.80 0.029 V 58.6( 94.4) DMG 33.75001118.0830 03/11/19331 230 0.01 0.01 5.10 0.019 IV 58.9( 94.8) DMG 33.75001118.0830 03/11/19331 323 0.01 0.01 5.00 0.018 IV 58.9( 94.8) DMG 33.75001118.0830 03/11/19331 910 0.01 0.01 5.10 0.019 IV 58.9( 94.8) DMG l33.7500l118.0830I03/13/1933ll31828.0I 0.01 5.30 0.021 IV 58.9( 94.8) DMG l33.7500l118.0830I03/ll/1933I 2 9 0.01 0.01 5.00 0.018 IV 58.9( 94.8) GSG l33.9530ll17.7610I07/29/2008ll84215.7I 14.0I 5.30 0.021 IV 59.6( 96.0) DMG l33.9500l116.8500I09/28/1946I 719 9.01 0.01 5.00 0.017 IV 61.1( 98.4) Page 2 W.O. 6745-A-SC PLATE C-7 TEST.OUT DMG l33.4000l116.3000I02/09/1890l12 6 0.01 0.01 6.301 0.037 I VI 62.1(100.0) ******************************************************************************* -END OF SEARCH-44 EARTHQUAKES FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH AREA. TIME PERIOD OF SEARCH: LENGTH OF SEARCH TIME: 1800 TO 2014 215 years THE EARTHQUAKE CLOSEST TO THE SITE IS ABOUT 11.5 MILES (18.6 km) AWAY. LARGEST EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDE FOUND IN THE SEARCH RADIUS: 7.0 LARGEST EARTHQUAKE SITE ACCELERATION FROM THIS SEARCH: 0.238 g COEFFICIENTS FOR GUTENBERG & RICHTER RECURRENCE RELATION: a-value= 0.903 b-value= 0.364 beta-value= 0.837 TABLE OF MAGNITUDES AND EXCEEDANCES: Earthquake I Number of Times I cumulative Magnitude I Exceeded I No./ Year -----------+-----------------+------------4.0 I 44 I 0.20465 4.5 I 44 I 0.20465 5.o I 44 I 0.20465 5.5 I 16 I o.07442 6.0 I 9 I 0.04186 6.5 I 3 I 0.01395 7.0 I 1 I 0.00465 Page 3 W.O. 6745-A-SC PLATE C-8 EARTHQUAKE EPICENTER MAP button 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 LEGEND X M=4 100 Q M=5 0 M=6 D M=7 -0 0M=8 -100-J-L--'---'--'-f-'--_._._.....L.-j_._.._.__--'-+....,___,_-'-'-f--'-'--_._._-+--'_._.._.__-f--L--L-1.-l>.....f--l-..__,__--'-l-_._,-'-'-I--...L...J..--'---'-~ -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 W.O. 6745-A-SC PLATE C-9 I,... ro CD >--......... z "-"' Cl} -C CD > w -0 I,... CD .Q E :J z CD -~ -ro :J E E :J 0 EARTHQUAKE RECURRENCE CURVE 100 10 1 .1 .01 .001 hutton ............ .~ .. ... " r-.... -. ,.__ .... ~ ............. .... 1 ~ ........... 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 8.5 9.0 Magnitude (M) W.O. 6745-A-SC PLATE C-10 -z --en -C Q) > w -0 i...... Q) ..0 E :J z Q) .:::: -ro :J E :J 0 Number of Earthquakes (N) Above Magnitude (M) 40 20 10 8 6 4 2 button 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 8.5 9.0 Magnitude (M) W.O. 6745-A-SC PLATE C-11 APPENDIX D GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES GeoSoils, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES General These guidelines present general procedures and requirements for earthwork and grading as shown on the approved grading plans, including preparation of areas to be filled, placement of fill, installation of subdrains, excavations, and appurtenant structures or flatwork. The recommendations contained in the geotechnical report are part of these earthwork and grading guidelines and would supercede the provisions contained hereafter in the case of conflict. Evaluations performed by the consultant during the course of grading may result in new or revised recommendations which could supercede these guidelines or the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report. Generalized details follow this text. The contractor is responsible for the satisfactory completion of all earthwork in accordance with provisions of the project plans and specifications and latest adopted code. In the case of conflict, the most onerous provisions shall prevail. The project geotechnical engineer and engineering geologist (geotechnical consultant), and/or their representatives, should provide observation and testing services, and geotechnical consultation during the duration of the project. EARTHWORK OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING Geotechnical Consultant Prior to the commencement of grading, a qualified geotechnical consultant (soil engineer and engineering geologist) should be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for general conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report(s), the approved grading plans, and applicable grading codes and ordinances. The geotechnical consultant should provide testing and observation so that an evaluation may be made that the work is being accomplished as specified. It is the responsibility of the contractor to assist the consultants and keep them apprised of anticipated work schedules and changes, so that they may schedule their personnel accordingly. All remedial removals, clean-outs, prepared ground to receive fill, key excavations, and subdrain installation should be observed and documented by the geotechnical consultant prior to placing any fill. It is the contractor's responsibility to notify the geotechnical consultant when such areas are ready for observation. Laboratory and Field Tests Maximum dry density tests to determine the degree of compaction should be performed in accordance with American Standard Testing Materials test method ASTM designation D-1557. Random or representative field compaction tests should be performed in GeoSoils, Inc. accordance with test methods ASTM designation D-1556, D-2937 or D-2922, and D-3017, at intervals of approximately ±2 feet of fill height or approximately every 1,000 cubic yards placed. These criteria would vary depending on the soil conditions and the size of the project. The location and frequency of testing would be at the discretion of the geotechnical consultant. Contractor's Responsibility All clearing, site preparation, and earthwork performed on the project should be conducted by the contractor, with observation by a geotechnical consultant, and staged approval by the governing agencies, as applicable. It is the contractor's responsibility to prepare the ground surface to receive the fill, to the satisfaction of the geotechnical consultant, and to place, spread, moisture condition, mix, and compact the fill in accordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. The contractor should also remove all non-earth material considered unsatisfactory by the geotechnical consultant. Notwithstanding the services provided by the geotechnical consultant, it is the sole responsibility of the contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the earthwork in strict accordance with applicable grading guidelines, latest adopted codes or agency ordinances, geotechnical report(s), and approved grading plans. Sufficient watering apparatus and compaction equipment should be provided by the contractor with due consideration for the fill material, rate of placement, and climatic conditions. If, in the opinion of the geotechnical consultant, unsatisfactory conditions such as questionable weather, excessive oversized rock or deleterious material, insufficient support equipment, etc., are resulting in a quality of work that is not acceptable, the consultant will inform the contractor, and the contractor is expected to rectify the conditions, and if necessary, stop work until conditions are satisfactory. During construction, the contractor shall properly grade all surfaces to maintain good drainage and prevent ponding of water. The contractor shall take remedial measures to control surface water and to prevent erosion of graded areas until such time as permanent drainage and erosion control measures have been installed. SITE PREPARATION All major vegetation, including brush, trees, thick grasses, organic debris, and other deleterious material, should be removed and disposed of off-site. These removals must be concluded prior to placing fill. In-place existing fill, soil, alluvium, colluvium, or rock materials, as evaluated by the geotechnical consultant as being unsuitable, should be removed prior to any fill placement. Depending upon the soil conditions, these materials may be reused as compacted fills. Any materials incorporated as part of the compacted fills should be approved by the geotechnical consultant. Any underground structures such as cesspools, cisterns, mining shafts, tunnels, septic tanks, wells, pipelines, or other structures not located prior to grading, are to be removed Terry and Judy Hutton File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. Appendix D Page 2 or treated in a manner recommended by the geotechnical consultant. Soft, dry, spongy, highly fractured, or otherwise unsuitable ground, extending to such a depth that surface processing cannot adequately improve the condition, should be overexcavated down to firm ground and approved by the geotechnical consultant before compaction and filling operations continue. Overexcavated and processed soils, which have been properly mixed and moisture conditioned, should be re-compacted to the minimum relative compaction as specified in these guidelines. Existing ground, which is determined to be satisfactory for support of the fills, should be scarified (ripped) to a minimum depth of 6 to 8 inches, or as directed by the geotechnical consultant. After the scarified ground is brought to optimum moisture content, or greater and mixed, the materials should be compacted as specified herein. If the scarified zone is greater than 6 to 8 inches in depth, it may be necessary to remove the excess and place the material in lifts restricted to about 6 to 8 inches in compacted thickness. Existing ground which is not satisfactory to support compacted fill should be overexcavated as required in the geotechnical report, or by the on-site geotechnical consultant. Scarification, disc harrowing, or other acceptable forms of mixing should continue until the soils are broken down and free of large lumps or clods, until the working surface is reasonably uniform and free from ruts, hollows, hummocks, mounds, or other uneven features, which would inhibit compaction as described previously. Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical [h:v]), the ground should be stepped or benched. The lowest bench, which will act as a key, should be a minimum of 15 feet wide and should be at least 2 feet deep into firm material, and approved by the geotechnical consultant. In fill-over-cut slope conditions, the recommended minimum width of the lowest bench or key is also 15 feet, with the key founded on firm material, as designated by the geotechnical consultant. As a general rule, unless specifically recommended otherwise by the geotechnical consultant, the minimum width of fill keys should be equal to 112 the height of the slope. Standard benching is generally 4 feet (minimum) vertically, exposing firm, acceptable material. Benching may be used to remove unsuitable materials, although it is understood that the vertical height of the bench may exceed 4 feet. Pre-stripping may be considered for unsuitable materials in excess of 4 feet in thickness. All areas to receive fill, including processed areas, removal areas, and the toes of fill benches, should be observed and approved by the geotechnical consultant prior to placement of fill. Fills may then be properly placed and compacted until design grades (elevations) are attained. COMPACTED FILLS Any earth materials imported or excavated on the property may be utilized in the fill provided that each material has been evaluated to be suitable by the geotechnical Terry and Judy Hutton File:e:\wp 12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. Appendix D Page 3 consultant. These materials should be free of roots, tree branches, other organic matter, or other deleterious materials. All unsuitable materials should be removed from the fill as directed by the geotechnical consultant. Soils of poor gradation, undesirable expansion potential, or substandard strength characteristics may be designated by the consultant as unsuitable and may require blending with other soils to serve as a satisfactory fill material. Fill materials derived from benching operations should be dispersed throughout the fill area and blended with other approved material. Benching operations should not result in the benched material being placed only within a single equipment width away from the fill/bedrock contact. Oversized materials defined as rock, or other irreducible materials, with a maximum dimension greater than 12 inches, should not be buried or placed in fills unless the location of materials and disposal methods are specifically approved by the geotechnical consultant. Oversized material should be taken offsite, or placed in accordance with recommendations of the geotechnical consultant in areas designated as suitable for rock disposal. GSI anticipates that soils to be utilized as fill material for the subject project may contain some rock. Appropriately, the need for rock disposal may be necessary during grading operations on the site. From a geotechnical standpoint, the depth of any rocks, rock fills, or rock blankets, should be a sufficient distance from finish grade. This depth is generally the same as any overexcavation due to cut-fill transitions in hard rock areas, and generally facilitates the excavation of structural footings and substructures. Should deeper excavations be proposed (i.e., deepened footings, utility trenching, swimming pools, spas, etc.), the developer may consider increasing the hold-down depth of any rocky fills to be placed, as appropriate. In addition, some agencies/jurisdictions mandate a specific hold-down depth for oversize materials placed in fills. The hold-down depth, and potential to encounter oversize rock, both within fills, and occurring in cut or natural areas, would need to be disclosed to all interested/affected parties. Once approved by the governing agency, the hold-down depth for oversized rock (i.e., greater than 12 inches) in fills on this project is provided as 10 feet, unless specified differently in the text of this report. The governing agency may require that these materials need to be deeper, crushed, or reduced to less than 12 inches in maximum dimension, at their discretion. To facilitate future trenching, rock (or oversized material), should not be placed within the hold-down depth feet from finish grade, the range offoundation excavations, future utilities, or underground construction unless specifically approved by the governing agency, the geotechnical consultant, and/or the developer's representative. If import material is required for grading, representative samples of the materials to be utilized as compacted fill should be analyzed in the laboratory by the geotechnical consultant to evaluate it's physical properties and suitability for use onsite. Such testing should be performed three (3) days prior to importation. If any material other than that previously tested is encountered during grading, an appropriate analysis of this material should be conducted by the geotechnical consultant as soon as possible. Terry and Judy Hutton File:e:\wp 12\6700\67 45a. pge GeoSoils, Inc. Appendix D Page 4 Approved fill material should be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in near horizontal layers, that when compacted, should not exceed about 6 to 8 inches in thickness. The geotechnical consultant may approve thick lifts if testing indicates the grading procedures are such that adequate compaction is being achieved with lifts of greater thickness. Each layer should be spread evenly and blended to attain uniformity of material and moisture suitable for compaction. Fill layers at a moisture content less than optimum should be watered and mixed, and wet fill layers should be aerated by scarification, or should be blended with drier material. Moisture conditioning, blending, and mixing of the fill layer should continue until the fill materials have a uniform moisture content at, or above, optimum moisture. After each layer has been evenly spread, moisture conditioned, and mixed, it should be uniformly compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum density as evaluated by ASTM test designation D-1557, or as otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant. Compaction equipment should be adequately sized and should be specifically designed for soil compaction, or of proven reliability to efficiently achieve the specified degree of compaction. Where tests indicate that the density of any layer of fill, or portion thereof, is below the required relative compaction, or improper moisture is in evidence, the particular layer or portion shall be re-worked until the required density and/or moisture content has been attained. No additional fill shall be placed in an area until the last placed lift of fill has been tested and found to meet the density and moisture requirements, and is approved by the geotechnical consultant. In general, per the latest adopted version of the California Building Code (CBC), fill slopes should be designed and constructed at a gradient of 2:1 (h:v), or flatter. Compaction of slopes should be accomplished by over-building a minimum of 3 feet horizontally, and subsequently trimming back to the design slope configuration. Testing shall be performed as the fill is elevated to evaluate compaction as the fill core is being developed. Special efforts may be necessary to attain the specified compaction in the fill slope zone. Final slope shaping should be performed by trimming and removing loose materials with appropriate equipment. A final evaluation of till slope compaction should be based on observation and/or testing of the finished slope face. Where compacted fill slopes are designed steeper than 2:1 (h:v), prior approval from the governing agency, specific material types, a higher minimum relative compaction, special reinforcement, and special grading procedures will be recommended. If an alternative to over-building and cutting back the compacted fill slopes is selected, then special effort should be made to achieve the required compaction in the outer 10 feet of each lift of fill by undertaking the following: 1. An extra piece of equipment consisting of a heavy, short-shanked sheepsfoot should be used to roll (horizontal) parallel to the slopes continuously as fill is placed. The sheepsfoot roller should also be used to roll perpendicular to the Terry and Judy Hutton File:e:\wp12\6700\6745a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. Appendix D Page 5 slopes, and extend out over the slope to provide adequate compaction to the face of the slope. 2. Loose fill should not be spilled out over the face of the slope as each lift is compacted. Any loose fill spilled over a previously completed slope face should be trimmed off or be subject to re-rolling. 3. Field compaction tests will be made in the outer (horizontal) ±2 to ±8 feet of the slope at appropriate vertical intervals, subsequent to compaction operations. 4. After completion of the slope, the slope face should be shaped with a small tractor and then re-rolled with a sheepsfoot to achieve compaction to near the slope face. Subsequent to testing to evaluate compaction, the slopes should be grid-rolled to achieve compaction to the slope face. Final testing should be used to evaluate compaction after grid rolling. 5. Where testing indicates less than adequate compaction, the contractor will be responsible to rip, water, mix, and recompact the slope material as necessary to achieve compaction. Additional testing should be performed to evaluate compaction. SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION Subdrains should be installed in approved ground in accordance with the approximate alignment and details indicated by the geotechnical consultant. Subdrain locations or materials should not be changed or modified without approval of the geotechnical consultant. The geotechnical consultant may recommend and direct changes in subdrain line, grade, and drain material in the field, pending exposed conditions. The location of constructed subdrains, especially the outlets, should be recorded/surveyed bythe project civil engineer. Drainage at the subdrain outlets should be provided by the project civil engineer: EXCAVATIONS Excavations and cut slopes should be examined during grading by the geotechnical consultant. If directed by the geotechnical consultant, further excavations or overexcavation and refilling of cut areas should be performed, and/or remedial grading of cut slopes should be performed. When fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded, unless otherwise approved, the cut portion of the slope should be observed by the geotechnical consultant prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the slope. The geotechnical consultant should observe all cut slopes, and should be notified by the contractor when excavation of cut slopes commence. Terry and Judy Hutton File: e:\wp 12\6700\67 45a. pge GeoSoils, Inc. Appendix D Page 6 If, during the course of grading, unforeseen adverse or potentially adverse geologic conditions are encountered, the geotechnical consultant should investigate, evaluate, and make appropriate recommendations for mitigation of these conditions. The need for cut slope buttressing or stabilizing should be based on in-grading evaluation by the geotechnical consultant, whether anticipated or not. Unless otherwise specified in geotechnical and geological report(s), no cut slopes should be excavated higher or steeper than that allowed by the ordinances of controlling governmental agencies. Additionally, short-term stability of temporary cut slopes is the contractor's responsibility. Erosion control and drainage devices should be designed by the project civil engineer and should be constructed in compliance with the ordinances of the controlling governmental agencies, and/or in accordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. COMPLETION Observation, testing, and consultation by the geotechnical consultant should be conducted during the grading operations in order to state an opinion that all cut and fill areas are graded in accordance with the approved project specifications. After completion of grading, and after the geotechnical consultant has finished observations of the work, final reports should be submitted, and may be subject to review by the controlling governmental agencies. No further excavation or filling should be undertaken without prior notification of the geotechnical consultant or approved plans. All finished cut and fill slopes should be protected from erosion and/or be planted in accordance with the project specifications and/or as recommended by a landscape architect. Such protection and/or planning should be undertaken as soon as practical after completion of grading. JOB SAFETY General At GSI, getting the job done safely is of primary concern. The following is the company's safety considerations for use by all employees on multi-employer construction sites. On-ground personnel are at highest risk of injury, and possible fatality, on grading and construction projects. GSI recognizes that construction activities will vary on each site, and that site safety is the prime responsibility of the contractor; however, everyone must be safety conscious and responsible at all times. To achieve our goal of avoiding accidents, cooperation between the client, the contractor, and GSI personnel must be maintained. Terry and Judy Hutton File:e:\wp12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. Appendix D Page 7 In an effort to minimize risks associated with geotechnical testing and observation, the following precautions are to be implemented for the safety of field personnel on grading and construction projects: Safety Meetings: GSI field personnel are directed to attend contractor's regularly scheduled and documented safety meetings. Safety Vests: Safety vests are provided for, and are to be worn by GSI personnel, at all times, when they are working in the field. Safety Flags: Two safety flags are provided to GSI field technicians; one is to be affixed to the vehicle when on site, the other is to be placed atop the spoil pile on all test pits. Flashing Lights: All vehicles stationary in the grading area shall use rotating or flashing amber beacons, or strobe lights, on the vehicle during all field testing. While operating a vehicle in the grading area, the emergency flasher on the vehicle shall be activated. In the event that the contractor's representative observes any of our personnel not following the above, we request that it be brought to the attention of our office. Test Pits Location, Orientation, and Clearance The technician is responsible for selecting test pit locations. A primary concern should be the technician's safety. Efforts will be made to coordinate locations with the grading contractor's authorized representative, and to select locations following or behind the established traffic pattern, preferably outside of current traffic. The contractor's authorized representative (supervisor, grade checker, dump man, operator, etc.) should direct excavation of the pit and safety during the test period. Of paramount concern should be the soil technician's safety, and obtaining enough tests to represent the fill. Test pits should be excavated so that the spoil pile is placed away from oncoming traffic, whenever possible. The technician's vehicle is to be placed next to the test pit, opposite the spoil pile. This necessitates the fill be maintained in a driveable condition. Alternatively, the contractor may wish to park a piece of equipment in front of the test holes, particularly in small fill areas or those with limited access. A zone of non-encroachment should be established for all test pits. No grading equipment should enter this zone during the testing procedure. The zone should extend approximately 50 feet outward from the center of the test pit. This zone is established for safety and to avoid excessive ground vibration, which typically decreases test results. When taking slope tests, the technician should park the vehicle directly above or below the test location. If this is not possible, a prominent flag should be placed at the top of the Terry and Judy Hutton File: e:\wp 12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. Appendix D Page 8 slope. The contractor's representative should effectively keep all equipment at a safe operational distance (e.g., 50 feet) away from the slope during this testing. The technician is directed to withdraw from the active portion of the fill as soon as possible following testing. The technician's vehicle should be parked at the perimeter of the fill in a highly visible location, well away from the equipment traffic pattern. The contractor should inform our personnel of all changes to haul roads, cut and fill areas or other factors that may affect site access and site safety. In the event that the technician's safety is jeopardized or compromised as a result of the contractor's failure to comply with any of the above, the technician is required, by company policy, to immediately withdraw and notify his/her supervisor. The grading contractor's representative will be contacted in an effort to affect a solution. However, in the interim, no further testing will be performed until the situation is rectified. Any fill placed can be considered unacceptable and subject to reprocessing, recompaction, or removal. In the event that the soil technician does not comply with the above or other established safety guidelines, we request that the contractor bring this to the technician's attention and notify this office. Effective communication and coordination between the contractor's representative and the soil technician is strongly encouraged in order to implement the above safety plan. Trench and Vertical Excavation It is the contractor's responsibility to provide safe access into trenches where compaction testing is needed. Our personnel are directed not to enter any excavation or vertical cut which: 1) is 5 feet or deeper unless shored or laid back; 2) displays any evidence of instability, has any loose rock or other debris which could fall into the trench; or 3) displays any other evidence of any unsafe conditions regardless of depth. All trench excavations or vertical cuts in excess of 5 feet deep, which any person enters, should be shored or laid back. Trench access should be provided in accordance with Cal/OSHA and/or state and local standards. Our personnel are directed not to enter any trench by being lowered or "riding down" on the equipment. If the contractor fails to provide safe access to trenches for compaction testing, our company policy requires that the soil technician withdraw and notify his/her supervisor. The contractor's representative w:11 be contacted in an effort to affect a solution. All backfill not tested due to safety concerns or other reasons could be subject to reprocessing and/or removal. If GSI personnel become aware of anyone working beneath an unsafe trench wall or vertical excavation, we have a legal obligation to put the contractor and owner/developer on notice to immediately correct the situation. If corrective steps are not taken, GSI then has an obligation to notify Cal/OSHA and/or the proper controlling authorities. Terry and Judy Hutton File: e:\wp 12\6700\67 45a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. Appendix D Page 9 BUILDING ENERGY ANALYSIS REPORT PROJECT: Terry & Judy Hutton 1264 Oak Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 Projecf Designer: Graymar Associates LTD 1579 Spinnaker Dr. Suit 105-B Ventura, CA 93001 805-644-8718 Report Prepared by: Gary Faucette A.V. Energy & Associates 45263 7th Street East #43 Lancaster, CA 93535 661-723-6694 Job Number: AV7781 Date: 12/6/2013 RECEIVED DEC .2 4 2013 CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DIVISION The EnergyPro computer program has been used to perform the calculations summarized in this compliance report. This program has approval and is authorized by the California Energy Commission for use with both the Residential and Nonresidential 2008 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. This program developed by EnergySoft, LLC -www.energysoft.com. EneravPro 5. 1 bv EMrrNSoft User Number: 6055 RunCode: 2013-12-06715:33:39 ID: AV7781 CIJ/J)llf .S - TABLE OF CONTENTS Cover Page Table of Contents Form CF-1R Certificate of Compliance Form MF-1R Mandatory Measures Summary HVAC System Heating and Cooling Loads Summary Room Load Summary Room Heating Peak Loads Room Cooling Peak Loads Form ECON-1 Energy Use and Cost Summary Form ECON-2 Energy Upgrade Recommendations Form UTIL-1 R Utility Incentive Worksheet EnergyPro 5.1 by EnergySoft Job Number: ID: AV7781 User Number: 6055 1 2 3 8 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 • 1 1/I' I ' I ''I 11.·1 ri ' • PERFORMANCE CERTIFICATE: Residential (Part 1 of 5) CF-1R Project Name Building Type liZI Single Family D Addition Alone I Date Terry & Judy Hutton D Multi Family D Existing+ Addition/Alteration 12/612013 Project Address California Energy Climate Zone I Total Cond. Floor Area I Addition I # of ~tories 1264 Oak Ave Garlsbad CA Climate Zone 07 2,050 nla FIELD INSPECTION ENERGY CHECKLIST DYes (Z] No HERS Measures --If Yes, A CF-4R must be provided per Part 2 of 5 of this form. (Z] Yes ONo Special Features --If Yes, see Part 2 of 5 of this form for details. INSULATION Area Special Construction Type Cavity (tr) Features (see Part 2 of 5) Status Slab Unheated Slab-on-Grade None 2,050 Perim=232' New Wall Solid Unit Masonry None 2,046 lnt=R-13.0 New Door Opaque Door None 42 New Roof Wood Framed Attic R-30 2,050 New FENESTRATION U-Exterior Orientation Area(tr) Factor SHGC Overhang Sidefins Shades Status Front(S} 86.0 0.390 0.37 none none Bug Screen New Left(W) 147.0 0.390 0.37 none none Bug Screen New Rear(N) 120.0 0.390 0.37 none none BugScteen New Right(E) 93.0 0.390 0.37 none none Bug Screen New HVAC SYSTEMS Qty. Heatina Min. Eff Cooling Min. Eff Thermostat Status 1 Hydronic Boiler seeDHW No Cooling 13.0SEER Setback New HVAC DISTRIBUTION Duct Location Heating Cooling Duct Location R-Value Status HVACS Ducted Ducted Attic, Roof Ins 8.0 New WATER HEATING Qtv. Type Gallons Min. Eff Distribution Status 1 Instant Gas 0 0.84 Kitr:hen Pipe Ins New 1 Large Gas 50 90.0 % Hydronic New EnerrwPro 5. 1 by EnerwSoft User Number: 6055 RunCode: 2013-12-06T15:33:39 ID:AV7781 Paae3of17 - PERFORMANCE CERTIFICATE: Residential (Part 2 of 5) CF-1R Project Name I Building Type 121 Single Family D Addition Alone I Date Teny & Judy Hutton D Multi Family D Existing+ Addition/ Alteration 1216/2013 SPECIAL FEATURES INSPECTION CHECKLIST The enforcement agency should pay special attention to the items specified in this checklist These items require special written justification and documentation, and special verification to be used with the performance approach. The enforcement agency determines the adequacy of the justification, and may reject a building or design that otherwise complies based on the adequacy of the soecial justification and documentation submitted. The HVAC System American Slandanl does not include a cooling system, field verification is not necessary. The HVAc system Mv'A1.,.:, is a Hydronic system that uses a Dedicat&d Boiler tor Space Heating. System details a,e on Part 5 or me u-1R. This building incorporates an air ,etarding wrap which shall be installed to meet the ,equi,ements of Section 150 (f) of the Standards. HERS REQUIRED VERIFICATION Items in this section require field testing and/or verification by a certified HERS Rater. The inspector must receive a completed CF-4R form for each of the measures listed below for final to be aiven. EnernvPm 5. 1 bv Ene""'Soft User Number: 6055 RunCode: 2013-12-06T15:33:39 ID:AV7781 Paae 4of17 • PERFORMANCE CERTIFICATE: Residential (Part 3 of 5) CF-1R Project Name I Building Type la Single Family CJ Addition Alone l Date Terry & Judy Hutton a Multi Family a Existing+ Addition/Alteration 121612013 ANNUAL ENERGY USE SUMMARY TDV ;:,umaJl(U Proposed Margin (kBtu/ft2-vr) Space Heating 8.12 7.23 0.89 Space Cooling 3.90 4.24 -0.34 Fans 3.01 3.03 -0.02 Domestic Hot Water 17.95 12.82 5.13 Pumos 0.00 0.00 0.00 Totals 32.98" 27.33 5.65 Percent Better Than Standard: 17.1 % BUILDING COMPLIES • NO HERS VERIFICATION REQUIRED Fenestration Building Front Orientation: (S) 1B0d6g Ext. Walls/Roof WaHArea Area Number of Dwelling Units: 1.00 (S) 417 86 Fuel Available at Site: Natura/Gas (W) 850 147 Raised Floor Area: 0 (N) 417 120 Slab on Grade Area: 2,050 (E} 850 93 Average Ceiling Height: 13.0 Roof 2,050 0 Fenestration Average U-Factor: 0.39 TOTAL: 446 Aver:1nA SHGC: 0.37 Fenestration/CFA Ratio: 21.8 % REMARKS STATEMENT Of COMPLIANCE This certificate of compliance lists the building features and specifications needed A.V. fflERGY & ASISOCIADS Callfomia Title 24 to comply with Trtte 24, Parts 1 the Administrative Regulations and Part 6 the Gary Faucette Efficiency Standards of the California Code of Regulations. Energy ContltltMt The documentation author hereby certifies that the documentation is accurate and complete. Documentation Author % »/,, Company AV. Energy & Associates Address 45263 7th Street East #43 Name Ga,y Faucette --~ ?Jr_3 f'.itv/Slate/ZiD Lsncaste,; CA 93535 Phone 681-723-6694 ~· / r -- Date The individual with overall design responsibility hereby certifies that the proposed building <iftsiQn represented in this set of construction documents is consistent with the other compliance tonns and worksheets. with the soecifications. and I with any other calculations submitted with this permit application, and recognizes that compliance using duct design, I duct sealing, verification of refrigerant charge, insulation installation quality, and building envelope sealing require I ;,..,..+,..n-• +-.... +; ... ,. """" ,..,....,.;.,;;,..,..+;,.. ... """"' f;,..1,f. .,,,,....Ii,.. .... +;,.." h,a ..,,..,, ~--.,._.,,,,A UCDO ... ,...,.., ! ................ ~-........................... -~ ........... -............................................................ "' ........ _. .. -,,. ....... -r,r, ._ ..... _. ·-· ...... i Desianer or Owner iner Bu.!=:iness & Professions Gode; I --r. .... ,,,., .. , 4.,.,,,,..~; .. ., I Tn • ! ~--,.,-.-.. -... .,.,... ••••• -. • .... r. .• --·· :-, !:1.•,_, ..... fltt!f!."'tM.~I ?.'! ..... HU /f!"l-M i -· ·--. ·-.. --,. ...... -.~. I \Alyl.::,tdU:ULIIJ .. _., .... ...., "'"'..,..,..,,.., I r'HUfltl IJV..rV"'T"'r"UI I V ua1tt ------- Runr,.de, 2013-12-Dfff15,33,39 ID. AVT!81 . ---~--~--------.--~---- • CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE: Residential (Part 4 of 5) CF-1R Project Name I Building Type 121 Single Family 0 Addition Alone I Date Terry & Judy Hutton D Multi Family D Existing+ Addition/Alteration 12161"2013 OPAQUE SURFACE DETAILS Surface u-Insulation Joint Appendix Tvoe Area Factor cavitv Exterior Frame Interior Frame Azm Tilt Status 4 Location/Comments Slab 2,050 0.730 None 0 180 New 4.4.7-A1 1st fl zone Wall 313 0.086 None 13.0 Wood 180 90 New 4.3.6-05 1st fl zone Door 18 0.500 None 180 90 New 4.5.1-A4 1st fl zone Wall 703 0.086 None 13.0 Wood 270 90 New 4.3.6-05 1st fl zone Wall 297 0.086 None 13.0 Wood 0 90 New 4.3.6-05 1st fl zone Wall 733 0.086 None 13.0 Wood 90 90 New 4.3.6-05 1st fl zone Door 24 0.500 None 90 90 New 4.5.1-A4 1st fl zone Roof 2,050 0.031 R-30 45 0 New 4.2.1-A20 1st fl zone FENESTRATION SURFACE DETAILS ID Tvoe Area U-Factor' SHGC" Azm Status Glazina Tvne Location/Comments 1 Wmdow 86.0 0.390 NFRC 0.37 NFRC 180 New Sierra Pacific Windows & Doors 1st fl zone 2 Wmdow 147.0 0.390 NFRC 0.37 NFRC 270 New Sierra Pacific Windows & Doors 1st fl zone 3 Window 120.0 0.390 NFRC 0.37 NFRC 0 New Sierra Pacific Windows & Doors 1st fl zone 4 Window 93.0 0.390 NFRC 0.37 NFRC 90 New Sierra Pacific Windows & Doors 1st fl zone (1) U-FactorType: 116-A = Default Table from Standards, NFRC = Labeled Value (21 SHGC Tvoe: 116-B-Default Table from Standards NFRC = Labeled Value EXTERIOR SHADING DETAILS Window Overhang Left Fin Riaht Fin ID Exterior Shade Tvoe SHGC Hat Wd Len Hat LExt RExt Dist Len Hot Dist Len Hat 1 Bug Screen 0.76 2 Bug Screen 0.76 3 Bug Screen 0.76 4 Bug Screen 0.76 EnerrwPro 5. 1 by EnetJ1YSoft User Number: 6055 RunCode: 2013-12-06T15:33:39 ID:AV7781 Paae 6of17 -CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE: Resldentlal Part 5 of 5) CF-1R Project Name Building Type CZI Single Family a Addition Alone Date Teny & Judy Hutton 0 Multi Family a Existing+ Addition/ Alteration 12/612013 BUILDING ZONE INFORMATION Floor Area (tr') Svstem Name Zone Name New Existina Altered Removed Volume Year Built HVACS 1st ff zone 2,050 26,650 Totals 2,050 0 0 0 HVAC SYSTEMS Svstem Name atv. Heatina Tvne Min. Eff. Coolina Tvoe Min. Eff. Thermostat Tvoe Status HVACS 1 Boiler see below No Cooling 13.0SEER S81back New HVAC DISTRIBUTION Duct Ducts Svstem Name Heatina Cooling Duct Location R-Value Tested? Status HVACS Ducted Ducted Attic, Roof Ins 8.0 a New a a a a WATER HEATING SYSTEMS Ext. Rated Tank Energy Standby Tank Input Cap. Factor Loss or lnsul. R- Svstem Name Otv. Tvoe Distribution (Btuh) (gal) or RE Pilot Value Status RinnaiREU-V2520FFUD-1 1 Instant Gas Kitchen Pipe Ins 180,000 0 0.84 nla nla New American Standard Gas 51 1 Large Gas Hydronic Heating 150,000 50 90.0% 0.00% nla New MUL~FAMILYWATER HEATING DETAILS HYDRONIC HEATING SYSTEM PIPING Hot Water Piping Length (ft) C : .Q ~.i "O ::, Pipe Pipe lnsul. "0 UI Control Otv. HP Plenum Outside Buried c( .E Svstem Name Lenath Diameter Thick. a American Standard Gas 50 g 1,170 0.50 0.50 a a a a EnerovPro 5. 1 bv EnemvSoff User Number: 6055 RunCode: 2013-12-06T15:33:39 ID:AV7781 Paoe 7of17 MANDATORY MEASURES SUMMARY: Residential (Page 1 of 3) MF-1R Project Name I Date Terry & Judy Hutton 12161"2013 NOTE: Low-rise residential buildings subject to the Standards must comply with all applicable mandatory measures listed, regardless of the compliance approach used. More stringent energy measures listed on the Certificate of Compliance (CF-1 R, CF-1 R-ADD, or CF-. 1 R-AL T Form) shall supersede the items marked with an asterisk(*) below. This Mandatory Measures Summary shall be incorporated into the permit documents, and the applicable features shall be considered by all parties as minimum component performance specifications whether they are shown elsewhere in the documents or in this summary. Submit all applicable sections of the MF-1 R Form with olans. Bulldlng Envelooe Measures: §116(a)1: Doors and windows between conditioned and unconditioned snaces are manufactured to limit air leakaae. §116(a)4: Fenestration products (except field-fabricated windows) have a label listing the certified U-Factor, certified Solar Heat Gain Coefficient fSHGCt and infiltration that meets the reauirements of &10-111 (a). §117: Exterior doors and windows are weather-striooed; all ioints and oenetrations are caulked and sealed. §118(a): Insulation soecified or installed meets Standards for lnsulatina Material. Indicate tvne and include on CF-6R Form. §11 B(i): The thermal emittance and solar reflectance values of the cool roofing material meets the requirements of §11 B(i) when the installation of a Cool Roof is soecified on the CF-1 R Form. *§150{a): Minimum R-19 insulation in wood-frame ceiling or equivalent U-factor. §150(b): Loose fill insulation shall conform with manufacturer's installed desian labeled A-Value. *§150{c): Minimum R-13 insulation in wood-frame wall or equivalent U-factor. *§150(d): Minimum R-13 insulation in raised wood-frame floor or eauivalent U-factor. &150(f): Air retardina wr::m is tested labeled, and installed accordina to ASTM E1677-95(2000) when soecified on the CF-1 R Form. §150tat Mandatory Vaoor barrier installed in Climate Zones 14 or 16. §150(1): Water absorption rate for slab edge insulation material alone without facings is no greater than 0.3%; water vapor permeance rate is no areater than 2.0 oann/inch and shall be orotected from ohvsical damaae and UV liaht deterioration. Fi . Decorative Gas ADDllances and Gas Loa Measures: §150(e)1A: Masonry or factory-built fireolaces have a closable metal or alass door coverina the entire ooenina of the firebox. § 150(e)1 B: Masonry or factory-built fireplaces have a combustion outside air intake, which is at least six square inches in area and is eauiooed with a with a readilv accessible. ooerable and tiaht-fittina damoer and or a combustion-air control device. §150(e)2: Continuous burning pilot lights and the use of indoor air for cooling a firebox jacket, when that indoor air is vented to the outside of the buildino. are orohibited. Soace Condlttonlna. Water Heatlna and Plumblna Svstem Measures: § 110-§113: HVAC equipment, water heaters, showerheads, faucets and all other regulated appliances are certified by the Energy Commission. §113(c)5: Water heating recirculation loops serving multiple dwelling units and High-Rise residential occupancies meet the air release valve backflow orevention. numn isolation valve, and recirculation looo connection rP.Ouirements of &113(c)5. §115: Continuously burning pilot lights are prohibited for natural gas: fan-type central furnaces, household cooking appliances (appliances with an electrical supply voltage connection with pilot lights that consume less than 150 Btu/hr are exempt), and pool and soa heaters. §150(h): Heatina and/or coolina loads are calculated in accordance with ASHRAE, SMACNA or ACCA. §1 SO(i): Heatina svstems are eauiooed with thermostats that meet the setback reauirements of Section 112(c). §150(j)1A: Storage gas water heaters rated with an Energy Factor no greater than the federal minimal standard are externally wrapped with insulation havina an installed thermal resistance of R-12 or areater. § 150(j)1 B: Unfired storage tanks, such as storage tanks or backup tanks for solar water-heating system, or other indirect hot water tanks have R-12 external insulation or R-16 internal insulation where the internal insulation A-value is indicated on the exterior of the tank. § 150(j)2: First 5 feet of hot and cold water pipes closest to water heater tank, non-recirculating systems, and entire length of recirculatina sections of hot water Dices are insulated oer Standards Table 150-B. §150(j)2: Cooling system piping (suction, chilled water, or brine lines),and piping insulated between heating source and indirect hot water tank shall be insulated to Table 150-B and Eauation 150-A. §150(j)2: Pipe insulation for steam hydronic heating systems or hot water systems >15 psi, meets the requirements of Standards Table 123-A. §150(i)3A: Insulation is orotected from damaae, includina that due to sunliaht, moisture, eauiornent maintenance and wind. §150(j)3A: Insulation for chilled water piping and refrigerant suction lines includes a vapor retardant or is enclosed entirely in conditioned soace. §150(i)4: Solar water-heatina svstems and/or collectors are certified bv the Solar Ratina and Certification Corooration. EnergyPro 5. 1 by EnergySoft User Number: 6055 RunCode: 2013-12-06T15:33:39 ID:AV7781 Page8of17 - MANDATORY MEASURES SUMMARY: Residential (Page 2 of 3) MF-1R Project Name I Date Teny & Judy Hutton 12/612013 §150(m)1: All air-distribution system ducts and plenums installed, are sealed and insulated to meet the requirements of CMC Sections 601, 602, 603, 604, 605 and Standard 6-5; supply-air and return-air ducts and plenums are insulated to a minimum installed level of R- 4.2 or enclosed entirely in conditioned space. Openings shall be sealed with mastic, tape or other duct-closure system that meets the applicable requirements of UL 181, UL 181A, or UL 1818 or aerosol sealant that meets the requirements of UL 723. If mastic or tape is used to seal ooeninas areater than 1/4 inch. the combination of mastic and either mesh or taoe shall be used §150(m)1: Building cavities, support platforms for air handlers, and plenums defined or constructed with materials other than sealed sheet metal, duct board or flexible duct shall not be used for conveying conditioned air. Building cavities and support platforms may contain ducts. Ducts installed in cavities and support platforms shall not be compressed to cause reductions in the cross-sectional area of the ducts. §150(m)2D: Joints and seams of duct systems and their components shall not be sealed with cloth back rubber adhesive duct tapes unless such taoe is used in combination with mastic and draw bands. §150(m)7: Exhaust fan svstems have back draft or automatic damoers. §150(m)8: Gravity ventilating systems serving conditioned space have either automatic or readily accessible, manually operated damoers. §150(m)9: Insulation shall be protected from damage, including that due to sunlight, moisture, equipment maintenance, and wind. Cellular foam insulation shall be protected as above or painted with a coating that is water retardant and provides shielding from solar radiation that can cause dearadation of the material. §150(m)1 O: Flexible ducts cannot have oorous inner cores. §150(0): All dwelling units shall meet the requirements of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 62.2-2007 Ventilation and Acceptable Indoor Air Quality in Low-Rise Residential Buildings. Window operation is not a permissible method of providing the Whole Building Ventilation reauired in Section 4 of that Standard. Pool and Sna Heatlna Svstems and EaulDment Measures: §114(a): Any pool or spa heating system shall be certifiedto·have: a thermal efficiency that complies with the Appliance Efficiency Regulations; an on-off switch mounted outside of the heater; a permanent weatherproof plate or card with operating instructions; and shall not use electric resistance heating or a pilot light. §114(b)1: Any pool or spa heating equipment shall be installed with at least 36" of pipe between filter and heater, or dedicated suction and return lines or built-up connections for future solar heatina. §114(bl2: Outdoor oools or snas that have a heat oumo or aas heater shall have a cover. §114(b)3: Pools shall have directional inlets that adequately mix the pool water, and a time switch that will allow all pumps to be set or programmed to run onlv durina off-oeak electric demand oeriods. §150lo\: Residential oool svstems or eouipment meet the oump sizing, flow rate, pipina, filters, and valve reauirements of §150(0\. Resldentlal L" · ·· Measures: § 150(k) 1 : High efficacy luminaires or LED Light Engine with Integral Heat Sink has an efficacy that is no lower than the efficacies contained in Table 150-C and is not a low efficacy luminaire as soecified by §150(k)2. §150(k)3: The wattaae of oermanently installed luminaires shall be determined as soecified by §130(d). § 150(k)4: Ballasts for fluorescent lamps rated 13 Watts or greater shall be electronic and shall have an output frequency no less than 20 kHz. §150(k)5: Permanently installed night lights and night lights integral to a permanently installed luminaire or exhaust fan shall contain only high efficacy lamps meeting the minimum efficacies contained in Table 150-C and shall not contain a line-voltage socket or line- voltage lamp holder; OR shall be rated to consume no more than five watts of power as determined by §130(d), and shall not contain a medium screw-base socket. §150lkl6: Liahtina inteoral to exhaust fans, in rooms other than kitchens, shall meet the aoolicable reauirements of §150(k). §150lk\7: All switchina devices and controls shall meet the reauirements of §150(k)7. § 150(k)8: A minimum of 50 percent of the total rated wattage of permanently installed lighting in kitchens shall be high efficacy. EXCEPTION: Up to 50 watts for dwelling units less than or equal to 2,500 ft2 or 100 watts for dwelling units larger than 2,500 ft2 may be exempt from the 50% high efficacy requirement when: all low efficacy luminaires in the kitchen are controlled by a manual on occupant sensor, dimmer, energy management system (EMCS), or a multi-scene programmable control system; and all permanently installed luminaries in garages, laundry rooms, closets greater than 70 square feet, and utility rooms are high efficacy and controlled by a manual-on occuoant sensor. §150(k)9: Permanently installed lighting that is internal to cabinets shall use no more than 20 watts of power per linear foot of illuminated cabinet. EnergyPro 5.1 by Ene,vySoft U•r Number: 6055 RunCode: 2013-12-06T15:33:39 ID:AV7781 Psge9of17 MANDATORY MEASURES SUMMARY: Residential (Paae 3 of 3) MF-1R Project Name I Date Terry & Judy Hutton 12/6r2013 §150(k)10: Permanently installed luminaires in bathrooms, attached and detached garages, laundry rooms, closets and utility rooms shall be high efficacy. EXCEPTION 1: Permanently installed low efficacy luminaires shall be allowed provided that they are controlled by a manual-on occupant sensor certified to comply with the applicable requirements of §119. EXCEPTION 2: Permanently installed low efficacy luminaires in closets less than 70 square feet are not required to be controlled by a manual-on occuoancy sensor. §150(k)11: Permanently installed luminaires located in rooms or areas other than in kitchens, bathrooms, garages, laundry rooms, closets, and utility rooms shall be high efficacy luimnaires. EXCEPTION 1 : Permanently installed low efficacy luminaires shall be allowed provided they are controlled by either a dimmer switch that complies with the applicable requirements of §119, or by a manual- on occupant sensor that compties with the applicable requirements of §119. EXCEPTION 2: Lighting in detached storage building less than 1000 souare feet located on a residential site is not reauired to comply with § 150(k) 11. §150(k)12: Luminaires recessed into insulated ceilings shall be listed for zero clearance insulation contact (IC) by Underwriters Laboratories or other nationally recognized testing/rating laboratory; and have a label that certifies the lumiunaire is airtight with air leakage less then 2.0 CFM at 75 Pascals when tested in accordance with ASTM E283; and be sealed with a gasket or caulk between the luminaire housina and ceilina. §150(k)13: Luminaires providing outdoor lighting, including lighting for private patios in low-rise residential buildings with four or more dwelling units, entrances, balconies, and porches, which are permanently mounted to a residential building or to other buildings on the same lot shall be high efficacy. EXCEPTION 1: Permanently installed outdoor low efficacy luminaires shall be allowed provided that they are controlled by a manual on/off switch, a motion sensor not having an override or bypass switch that disables the motion sensor, and one of the following controls: a photocontrol not having an override or bypass switch that disables the photocontrol; OR an astronomical time clock not having an override or bypass switch that disables the astronomical time clock; OR an energy management control system (EMCS) not having an override or bypass switch that allows the luminaire to be always on EXCEPTION 2: Outdoor luminaires used to comply with Exception1 to §150(k)13 may be controlled by a temporary override switch which bypasses the motion sensing function provided that the motion sensor is automatically reactivated within six hours. EXCEPTION 3: Permanently installed luminaires in or around swimming pool, water features, or other location subject to Article 680 of the California Electric Code need not be hiah efficacy luminaires. §150(k)14: Internally illuminated address signs shall comply with Section 148; OR not contain a screw-base socket, and consume no more than five watts of oower as determined accordino to ~130(d). §150(k)15: Lighting for parking lots and carports with a total of for 8 or more vehicles per site shall comply with the applicable requirements in Sections 130, 132, 134, and 147. Lighting for parking garages for 8 or more vehicles shall comply with the applicable reauirements of Sections 130 131. 134 and 146. §150{k)16: Permanently installed lighting in the enclosed, non-dwelling spaces of low-rise residential buildings with four or more dwelling units shall be high efficacy luminaires. EXCEPTION: Permanently installed low efficacy luminaires shall be allowed provided that they are controlled by an occuoant sensor(s) certified to comolv with the aoolicable reauirements of ~119. EnergyPro 5. 1 by EnergySoft User Number: 6055 RunCode: 2013-12-06T15:33:39 ID:AV7781 Page 10of17 HVAC SYSTEM HEATING AND COOLING LOADS SUMMARY Project Name Date Terry & Judy Hutton 12/6/2013 System Name Floor Area HVACS 2,050 ENGINEERING CHECKS SYSTEM LOAD Number of Svstems 1 COIL COOLING PEAK COIL HTG. PEAK Heatina Svstem CFM Sensible Latent CFM Sensible OU1DUt D8I' Svstem 80,000 Total Room Loads 1,020 20,599 1,432 608 24,100 Total OU1DUt (Btuh) 80,000 Return Vented Lighting 0 OulDllf (Bluh/satt) 39.0 Return Air Ducts 658 1,015 Cooling Svstem Return Fan 0 0 Cutout ner Svstem 0 Ventilation 0 0 0 0 0 Total Outnut (Btuh) 0 Supply Fan 744 -744 Total <>utDut (Tons) 0.0 Supply Air Ducts 658 1,015 Total OutDut (Btuh/saftl 0.0 Total OutDut (sqft/Ton) 0.0 TOTAL SYSTEM LOAD 22,658 1,432 25,386 Air System CFM ner Svstem 800 HVAC EQUIPMENT SELECTION Airflow (cfm) 800 American Standard 0 0 70,316 Airflow (cfm/saft\ 0.39 Airflow (cfm/Ton) 0.0 Outside Air (%) 0.0% Total Adjusted System Output 0 0 70,316 Outside Air (elm/soft\ 0.00 (Adjusted for Peak Design conditions) Note: values above alven at ARI conditions TIME OF SYSTEM PEAK Aug3PM I Jan 1 AM HEATING SYSTEM PSYCHROMETRICS Alrstream Temnaratures at Time of Heating Peak) 34°F 67 °F 105°F 106°F ·IJ @ ·~ I ~ --~ I I --i Outside Air ~--Supply Fan Ocfm Heating Coil 105°F 800cfm j ~ • ROOM 67°F 68°F --a I I I ~ ~ I --- COOLING SYSTEM PSYCHROMETICS CAlrstream Temoeratures at Time of Coolina Peak) 83/68°F 76162 °F 55 / 54°F 56/54°F ,fl @ ·~ ~ --I I I ~ -i Outside Air ~ ..- Ocfm Cooling Coil Supply Fan 56/54°F j. 800cfm 46.9% jROOM • I 76/62 °F 75/62 °F -~ I I I ~~ I ~ -- EnergyPro 5. 1 by EnergySoft User Number. 6055 RunCode: 2013-12-06T15:33:39 ID:AV7781 Page 11 of17 ROOM LOAD SUMMARY Project Name Date Terry & Judy Hutton 12161'2013 System Name Floor Area HVACS 2,050 ROOM LOAD SUMMARY ROOM COOLING PEAK COIL COOLING PEAK COIL HTG. PEAK Zone Name Room Name Mult. CFM Sensible Latent CFM Sensible Latent CFM Sensible 1st fl zone 1st fl zone 1 1,020 20,599 1,432 1,020 20,599 1,432 608 24,100 PAGE TOTAL 1,020 20,599 1,432 608 24,100 TOTAL* 1,020 20,599 1,432 608 24,100 * Total includes ventilation load for zonal svstems. EnernvPm 5. 1 bv EnemvSoft User Number: 6055 RunCode: 2013-12-06T15:33:39 ID:AV7781 Paae 12of17 ROOM HEATING PEAK LOADS Project Name I Date Terry & Judy Hutton 1216/2013 ROOM INFORMATION DESIGN CONDITIONS Room Name 1st fl zone Time of Peak Jan 1 AM Floor Area 2,050.0ft2 OUtdoor Dry Bulb Temperature 34°F Indoor Drv Bulb Temoerature 68°F Conduction Area U-Value ~T°F Btu/hr Slab-On-Grade perim = 232.0 X 0.7300 X 34 = 5,758 5• Conctete Wall w/R-13 2,045.6 X 0.0861 X 34 = 5,986 Sierra Paciffc Windows & Doors 446.0 X 0.3900 X 34 = 5,914 WoodDoor 42.4 X 0.5000 X 34 = 721 R-30 Roof Attic 2,050.0 X 0.0310 X 34 = 2,161 X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = X X = Items shown with an asterisk (*) denote conduction through an interior surface to another room Page Total 20,539 Infiltration:[ I 1.001 xi 1.0781 XI 2.osol xi 13.00' XI 0.2191 160] xi 341 = I 3,561 Schedule Air Sensible Area Ceiling Height ACH AT Fraction TOTAL HOURLY HEAT LOSS FOR ROOM 24100 EnergyPro 5. 1 by EnergySoft User Number: 6055 RunCode: 2013-12-06T15:33:39 ID:AV7781 Paae 13of17 RESIDENTIAL ROOM COOLING LOAD SUMMARY Project Name I Date Terry & Judy Hutton 1216/2013 ROOM INFORMATION DESIGN CONDITIONS Room Name 1st fl zone Outdoor Dry Bulb Temperature 830f Floor Area 2,050.0ft2 outdoor Wet Bulb Temperature 68°F Indoor Dry Bulb Temnerature 75°F Outdoor Dally Ranae: 10°F Onaaue Surfaces Orientation Area U-Factor CLTD1 Btu/hr 6" Conct8te Wall w/R-13 (S) 312.6 X 0.0861 X 11.0 = 296 WoodOoor (S) 18.4 X 0.5000 X 11.0 = 101 6" Conct8te Wsll w/R-13 (W) 703.0 X 0.0861 X 18.0 = 1,089 6" Conct8te Wall w/R-13 (N) 297.0 X 0.0861 X 8.0 = 204 6"Concn,te Wallw/R-13 (E) 733.0 X 0.0861 X 18.0 = 1,136 Wood Door (E) 24.0 X 0.5000 X 18.0 = 216 R-30 Roof Attic (NE) 2,050.0 X 0.0310 X 42.0 = 2,669 X X = X X = Page Total 5,711 Items shown with an asterisk (*) denote conduction through an interior surface to another room. 1. Cooling Load Temperature Difference (CLTD) Shaded Unshaded Fenestration Orientation Area GLF Area GLF Btu/hr Front Window (S) 0.0 X 14.3 + 86.0 X 16.0 = 1,378 Left Window (W) 0.0 X 14.3 + 147.0 X 36.3 = 5,332 Rear Window (N) 0.0 X 14.3 + 120.0 X 14.3 = 1,717 Right Window (E) 0.0 X 14.3 + 93.0 X 36.3 = 3,373 X + X = X + X = X + X = X + X = X + X = Page Total 11,800 Internal Gain Btu/hr Occuoants 'B Occupants :I 230 I Btuh/occ. = 920 Eauioment I 1.0 Dwelling Unit = 1,600 1,600 Btu Infiltration: I 1.0781 X I 0.591 XI 112.181 X I 81= 568 Air Sensible CFM ELA ,:\T TOTAL HOURLY SENSIBLE HEAT GAIN FOR ROOM 20,599 Latent Gain Btu/hr Occuoants 14.0 I Occupants xl 200 l Btuh/occ. = 800 Infiltration: I 4,8341 XI 0.591 XI 112.181 X l 0.001991 = 632 Air Sensible CFM ELA t:,.W TOTAL HOURLY LATENT HEAT GAIN FOR ROOM 1.432 EnernuPrn 5. 1 bv E -~ Llssr Number: 6055 R---"-~-. ""'13-12-DBT15;U•'lG ID: AV7781 Paoa 14of17 ENERGY USE AND COST SUMMARY ECON-1 Project Name I Date Terry & Judy Hutton 12/6i2013 Rate: Fuel Tvoe: Electricity STANDARD PROPOSED MARGIN Energy Peak Energy Peak Energy Peak Use Demand Cost Use Demand Cost Use Demand Cost (kWh\ (kW\ ($} (kWh\ (kW\ ($} (kWh\ (kW) ($) Jan 50 2 48 2 3 0 Feb 40 2 38 1 3 0 Mar 28 0 26 0 3 0 Apr 21 1 19 1 2 0 May 9 0 10 0 0 0 Jun 14 3 15 3 ~ -1 0 Jul 92 4 105 4 -13 0 Aua 93 4 102 4 -9 0 Seo 58 3 62 4 -4 0 Oct 51 4 44 4 7 0 Nov 16 0 16 0 0 0 Dec 45 1 44 1 1 0 Year 517 4 527 4 -10 0 ~ lbs/vr lbs/Yr lbs/yr Rate: Fuel Tvoe: Natural Gas STANDARD PROPOSED MARGIN Energy Peak Energy Peak Energy Peak Use Demand Cost Use Demand Cost Use Demand Cost (therms) CkBtu/hr) ($) (therms\ fkBtu/hrl ($) (therms\ fkBtu/hr) ($) Jan 49 54 41 52 8 2 Feb 42 55 34 53 8 2 Mar 36 42 28 40 8 2 Apr 29 44 22 42 7 2 May 21 6 15 5 6 0 Jun 20 6 14 5 6 1 Jul 21 6 15 5 6 1 Aua 20 5 14 5 6 1 Seo 20 5 14 5 6 1 Oct 21 6 14 5 6 1 Nov 26 36 19 34 6 2 Dec 48 52 40 50 8 2 Year 352 55 270 53 82 2 CO:! lbs/vr lbs/yr lbstvr Annual Totals Enerav Demand Cost Cost/soft Virtual Rate Electricity 527 kWh 4kW $ 0 $ 0.00 /soft $ 0.00 /kWh Natura/Gas 270 therms 53 kBtu/hr $ 0 $ 0.00 /!tffft. $ o.oo /therm Total $ 0 $ 0.00 /soft Avoided co.i Emissions: 0 lbs/yr EnergyPro 5. 1 by EnergySoff User Number: 6055 RunCode: 2013--12-lHiT15:33:3 ID:AV7781 Page 15of17 Enerav Upgrade Recommendations ECON-2 Project Name Terry & Judy Hutton Documentation Author A. V. Energy & Associates Project Address 1264 Oak Ave Author Address 45263 7th Street East #43 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Lancaster, CA 93535 Recommended Annual Est. Cost to Savlnas Improvements DescriDtion Savinas Install Site TDV Annual Results EneravCost Electricitv (kWh) Fossil fuel lthenns) End Use Existina Improved Savings Existing Improved Savlnas Exletina Improved Savinas Soace Heatina :w u 93 Soace Cooling ~u iUO u Fans $0 302 a Pumps ~u a a Domestic Hot Water $0 a 177 Indoor Uahtina $0 0 0 Outdoor Liahtina :,;u a a Appliances/Plua Loads $0 0 0 Ancillary $0 0 0 Renewables :,;u a a TOTAL JV 527 270 COz (lbs/vaar) Existina lmoroved Savinas Climate Zone: 7 Electricity a Electric Rate: Fossil Fuel 0 Gas Rate: TOTAL 0 Floor Area: 2,uou Tvoe: Single Family Average Demand (kW) 0.76 TDV Enerav (kBtulft2-vr) L/.:;J::J The estimated operating costs shown in this report are dependent upon many factors. The construction and conservation features of the project clearty are important. Equally important is the thermostat setting. How the thermostat is used, appliance use, and occupant interaction all influence the annual operating cost. The estimates provided in this report are based on typical conditions; your actual usage will vary. EnemvPro 5.1.8.3 bv EnerovSoft User Number: 6055 RunCode: 2013-12-06T15:33:39 ID: AV7781 Paae 16 of17 2013 CAHP UTILITY INCENTIVE WORKSHEET Project Name Terry & Judy Hutton St21· · ""!"'!'~~ ............... ~"!""'!""""""'~~ ....... ~-------------- Space Heating Space Cooling Heat Rejection Indoor Fans Domestic Hot Water Pumps TOTALS: p, 8.12 3.90 0.00 3.01 17.95 0.00 32.981 Standard 7.23 0.89 4.24 -0.34 0.00 0.00 3.03 -0.02 12.82 5.13 0.00 0.00 0.0 Proposed UTIL-1R Margin Standard % Better* ~-5-.6~51 , I 32.981 = 1 11.1 "1 Cool Ing Standard -0.341 , ...._I __ 3.9__.ol = I -8.6" I Incentive Eliglbillty Yes No Owner Incentive (>=15%) 121 CJ NSHP Incentive (>=30%) CJ 121 Conditioned Floor Area= 2,050.0 ff' Number of Bedrooms = Energy Star V3 Target = Single Orientation Margin 3 15% ENERGY COMPONENT Electricity Natural Gas Electricity Natural Gas Electricity Natural Gas kWh therms .--...>:.::..:.:.:h:L.-_, rms kWh therms Space Heating 0.00 104.34 0.00 92.90 0.00 11.44 Space Cooling 209.46 0.00 224.99 0.00 -15.53 0.00 Heat Rejection 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Indoor Fans 307.47 0.00 301.64 0.00 5.83 0.00 Domestic Hot Water 0.00 248.15 0.00 177.18 0.00 70.98 Pumps 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTALS: 516.93 352.49 526.63 270.07 -9.70 82.42 Step ,1 POTENTIAL OWNER INCENTIVE CALCULATION Potential incentives indicated on this report are available only through the California Advanced Homes Program for new construction and are NOT GUARANTEED. Projects must meet all other program requirements to qualify. Potential incentives are subject to program limitations lrl Pacific Gas and ~}:~ Electric Company An /.l)JS()!\' IYILR \ HU)\ ,H" Comp,m~ soq; A~ Sempra Energy utility' n:: IO[om_ % Better than Tltle-24* (from step 2) Electricity (kWh) I 11.1 % .. I --1111)• Electricity (kW) I Natural Gas I 17.1 "1--mil)• 17.1 "1--mil)• Incentive Savings Rate (from Stap 3) Subtotal __ o_.4_91 x I -9.101 = I ($5JI $/kWh kWh ..... _ ....... _ ___ 8....,61 x I o.o I = l._ ___ $....,o! $/kW kW 1.961 XI 82.421 = 1 ___ $_16_21 $/therm therm 2013 Code Preparation = .. I ___ $_.o! NSHP Tier II = l._ __ ...,$_.ol Total = I $153 Incentive rate is capped at the 45% level californ1a ···.. . advanced tiOmesrM - Ccicyof Carlsbad C&RTlflCATIO.N OF SCHOOL FEES PAID B-34 Development Services Bulldlng Department 1635 Faraday Avenue . 760-602-2719 www.carlsbadca.gov This form must be completed by the City, the applicant, and the appropriate school districts and retumed 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 . Building Permit Plan Check Number: Project Address: A.P.N Project Applicant (Owner ~ame): Project Description: HUTTON R§SIQENCE CB133195 . 12640AKAV 156-190-27-00 TERRYHUTION DEMO EXISTING 72§ sf home(bullt in194D's) build new 14 ~ti I ~, ~: i ' !f I": j ~ • ~, .A~ .t ' t ... · ~ . . , Second Dwelling Unit: . Square Feet of Living Area in SOU ~~----~~~~~------------~~~---~~~~~~~---~---~ Residential Additions: Net Square Feet New Area ~-----------''--~~~---~---------------~------------~------------~ Commercial/Industrial: Net Square Feet New Area ~~-------=----~~~~---~------------------------------------------~ City Certification of Applicant Information,~~ Date 02/23/2014 SCHOOL DISTRICTS WITHIN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD [gJ Carlsbad Unified School District O Vista Unified School District D San Marcos Unlfled School District 6225 El Camino Real 1234 Arcadia Drive 2 5 5 Pico Ave Ste . 1 0 0 Carlsbad CA 92009 (760-331-5000) Vista CA 92083 (76()..726-2170) xt San Marcos, CA 92069 (760-290-2649) U Encinitas Union School District 101 South Rancho Santa Fe Rd Encinitas, CA 92024 (76()..944-4300 x1166) 2222 Contact: Nancy Dolce (By Appt. Only) LJ San Dlegufto Union High School District-By Appointment Only 684 Requeza Dr. Encinitas, CA 92024 (760-753-6491 X 5514) 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 executing this declaration is authorized to sign on behalf of the Owner. Signature: 13--34 __ & __ ===~~----Date: 3 l~/2./) 0 ~ Paae 1 of2 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. SCHOOL DISTRICT: 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 TITLE NAME OF SCHOOL DISTRICT DATE PHONE NUMBER c_c_,s~S ~\A,~/\ \ )>.~j:::i:~ CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 6225 EL CAMINO REM. CARLSBAD, CA 92009 3 --d-()~ )S-: B-34 Page 2 of 2 Rev_ 03109 I /J,/44/;3 ~/~~ ~-l!r:i~#--~ j if/IL w.l Jfd,Jf-JMa/1( ~ \j..\3t \ 13 ~--Lo Q..4A 7 '-.. -~ -11 Final Inspection required by: CJ Plan O CM&I O Fire D Dev. I ( i, / 1 y 1:;S <:r 1--L, LL.J'Y\ ENGINEERING \/1311--t <:.-1~ @-,P'-· FIRE Expedite? Y N AFS Checked by: HazMat APCD to!t\.{,IL'-\' ~v),~ ~ 6~,-t'2:.--/~ft<f )1/ID/fy ~¥a! .Jf-f.Rt,,.~-ck..._-°ftJJl.2r/Js F".., '"" '•-<• :~: By . 1--/{q /fj ~ Sf-:t1JL --ft;-Pl~ -t-{:. ~ JT ~& .j ~:z::ltMPCD : : I I"'),~ '*--~u J / ~ School v N c}. ,;).~ '-""' ~ Sewer _ Y N 3(; (t ~ ,-.IJI_ TU [s (:rt 'c_ U I Ir o/f J, {fl r/-,cd) :=,::ection : : 1/I. c, q;~+i'a,0 -1-o Loe {,LI; ~ w Is~ 1 LandUse: Density. lmpArea: FY: Annex: Factor: VI-P !(}.,A,,. +TJ PI~ :,/11(1); 16 MA1 ~ f1h tu. F 3/, ,1, s rlWtt1. !#-J, r-c ~(2r/1s- .3{,11/1~ c..,t.t<a-JY~ _r!-(C. '-21~ ~,dL(~ \~~~~ ~WP tJrw.;v'l ~1~/fh Date CZ:Zw.v= "'"''"-~"-"""'-.,,,~ "" ~~..i; ~ City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Av Carlsbad, CA 92008 06-01-2015 Plan Check Revision Permit No:PCR15039 Building Inspection Request Line (760) 602-2725 Job Address: Permit Type: Parcel No: Valuation: Reference #: PC#: 1264 OAK AV CBAD PCR 1561902700 $0.00 CB133195 Status: Lot#: 0 Applied: Construction Type: 58 Entered By: Plan Approved: Issued: Project Title: HUTTON RES-REVISE WALLS FROM 6"TO 8"WIDE Inspect Area: Applicant: WALLY GEER STE 103 1855 1ST AV SAN DIEGO CA 92101 805 896-8926 Plan Check Revision Fee Fire Expedited Plan Review Additional Fees Total Fees: $435.00 Inspector: Owner: HUTTON R T&J T 1264 OAK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 $435.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total Payments To Date: $435.00 Balance Due: Date: Clearance: ISSUED 05/19/2015 RMA 06/01/2015 06/01/2015 $0.00 NOTICE: Please take NOTI roval of your project includes the "lmpos ion' of fees, edications, eservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as "fees/exactions.' ou h e 90 days from the date this permit was sued to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedures set orth i Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition. ('city of Carlsbad PLAN CHECK REVISION APPLICATION B-15 Development Services Building Division 1635 Faraday Avenue 760-602-2719 www.carlsbadca.gov Plan Check Revision No. f CA/ 7t} J i Original Plan Check No. c:;::;.e, I 7-'3 ( j 5 Project Address I~ ~A¥:-A vet-\Ll.£; Date 13? .. [t;, · Zc:;; l? Contact W._tt\.-\...Y ~ Ph~~'~6 ~~ax ______ _ Email (:,o~~~"f~ t\ptMAlL-.~ Contact Address l~G5 l~r ~-0~ (e>~ City~\.\ t?t~ ZipJ:Zt~l -r1-t\-E1 A~~ ~ ~\~ \ri\'t\.\ G''~. ca.t....l- Genera1scopeotwork C-~,E-~\....\...45~oy..H?.f--. \,l~~"O TP~~ lP £>'' \-v-f: yl.At..l:e, ... is)(r~~ ~t~~ ~\~\ ~ Originau,m~a~d by a!1 arc_!1:ct or ~{1f)i~eer, revisions must~ & stamped by that person. 1. Elements revised;-\ ~~r ~ ~ \...lo-f 6~ . _¢.Plans ~ Calculations D Soils D Energy D Other __________ _ 2. Describe revisions in detail 3. List page(s) where each revision is shown 4. List revised sheets that replace existin sheets 5. Does this revision, in any way, alter the exterior of the project? D Yes ~ No 6. Does this revision add ANY new floor area(s)? D Yes ~ No 7. Does this revision affect any fire related issues? D Yes ~No _ '.\c: 8, Is this a complete set7 0 Yes ~No-~~~~ 'S ..e:S'Signature ___________________________ ~ 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008 ftl: 760-602-2719 Fax: 760-602-8558 Email: building@carlsbadca.gov www.carlsbadca.gov •• EsGil Corporation In qJartners6ip wit6 (]011,mm,nt for <Buifain9 Safety DATE: MAY 26, 2015 CJ APPLICANT CJ JURIS. JURISDICTION: CARLSBAD CJ PLAN REVIEWER CJ FILE PLAN CHECK NO.: 13-3195 (REV. #1) -NEW PCR #15-039 _ SET: I P~,,ECT ADDRESS: 1264 OAK AVENUE PROJECT NAME: SFR FOR HUTTON C8J The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. D The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. D The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. D The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. D The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. D The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: WALLY GEER 1575 SPINNAKER DR., #105-b, VENTURA, CA 93001 ~ EsGil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. D EsGil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: WALLY Telephone#: 805-896-8926 Date contacted: (by: ) Email: go2wallyworld@hotmail.com Fax #: Mail Telephone Fax In Person IZ! REMARKS: The 6" ICF building walls were changed to 8" ICF walls under this permit with no change in the overall building dimensions. [Selected sheets & calc's. were revised & resubmitted]. By: ALI SADRE, S.E. Enclosures: EsGil Corporation D GA D EJ D MB D PC 5/21 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 + (858) 560-1468 + Fax (858) 560-1576 ll -CARLSBAD 13-3195 (REV. #1) -NEW PCR #15-039 MAY 26, 2015 [DO NOT PAY-THIS IS NOT AN INVOICE] VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURISDICTION: CARLSBAD (REV. #1) -NEW PCR #15-039 PREPARED BY: ALI SADRE, S.E. BUILDING ADDRESS: 1264 OAK AVENUE PLAN CHECK NO.: 13-3195 DATE: MAY 26, 2015 BUILDING OCCUPANCY: R3/U TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: V-B/SPR. BUILDING AREA Valuation PORTION ( Sq. Ft.) Multiplier PLAN CHANGE Air Conditioning Fire Sprinklers TOTAL VALUE Jurisdiction Code CB By Ordinance Bldg. Permit Fee by Ordinance • I Plan Check Fee by Ordinance Type of Review: D Complete Review D Repetitive Fee 3 Repeats * Based on hourly rate Comments: o Other Hourly 0 EsGil Fee Reg. VALUE ($) Mod. $435.00! o Structural Only 31 Hrs.@* =====$=11=s=.o:o $348.00! Sheet 1 of 1 <(~\ ~ CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DIVISION BUILDING PLAN CHECK APPROVAL P-29 DATE: 5-21-15 PROJECT NAME:· PROJECT ID: Development Services Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue (760) 602-4610 www.carlsbadca.llov PLAN CHECK NO: PCR 15-39 SET#: 1 ADDRESS: 1264 Oak Av APN: ~ This plan check review is complete and has been APPROVED by the Planning Division. By: Chris Sexton A Final Inspection by the Planning Division is required D Yes ~ No You may also have corrections from one or more of the divisions listed below. Approval from these divisions may be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Resubmitted plans should include corrections from all divisions. D This plan check review is NOT COMPLETE. Items missing or incorrect are listed on the attached checklist. Please resubmit amended plans as required. Plan Check APPROVAL has been sent to: go2wallyworld@hotmall.com For questions or clarifications on the attached checklist please contact the following reviewer as marked: ';P~NtNI' · · ... ·1~';fe10 [8J Chris Sexton 76Q-602-4624 Chris.Sexton@carJsbadca.gov D Gina Ruiz 760-602-4675 Gina.Ruiz@carlsbadca.gov D D Chris Glassen 760-602-2784 Christopher.Glassen@carlsbadca.gov D ValRay Marshall 760-602-2741 ValRay.Marshall@carlsbadca.gov D Linda Ontiveros 760-602-2773 Linda. Ontiveros@carlsbadca.gov D Greg Ryan 760-602-4663 Gregory.Ryan@carlsbadca.gov D Cindy Wong 760-602-4662 Cynthia.Wong@carlsbadca.gov D Dominic Fieri 760-602-4664 Dominic.Fieri@carlsbadca.gov Remarks: exterior dimensions of footprint has not changed GREYMAR ASSOCIATES 1575 Spinnaker Drive, Suite 105-B, Ventura, CA 9300tRECORD COPY City of Carlsbad Planning Department ATTN: Chris Sexton 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA RE: Hutton Residence 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad PERMIT NUMBER: 13-3195 Dear Chris: 5.14.2015 As you are aware, the above referenced job has been permitted. Since pulling the permit, the owner (post permitting) has made a decision to go from ICF walls with a 6" concrete core and CHANGE THE WALLS TO ICF WALLS WITH A 8" CONCRETE CORE. As a result of this change, the additional 2" of exterior wall thickness has been absorbed within the interior of the residence and garage and as a result of that THERE HAS BEEN NO DIMENSIONAL CHANGE TO THE FOOTPRINT OF THE HOUSE AND GARAGE AND THEIR LOCATION ON THE SITE PER THE ORIGINAL APPROVED PERMIT PLANS. Since this change requires additional plan checking by EsGil corporation (your architectural and structural plan checker acting on behalf of the city), copies of the modified architectural and structural plans have been submitted to Esgil. I don't think you will need additional sets of plans of those sheets that have been modified, but if you should, please find enclosed those architectural sheets that reflect the modification to 8" concrete core ICF walls. As always, thank you for your assistance. If I can be of any help in resolving these corrections, please do not hesitate to contact me as follows: email: qo2wallyworld@hotmail.com Cell phone: 805-896-8926 I PCR15039 1264 OAK AV HUTTON RES-REVISE WALLS FROM n" Tn A" w1ni:: 1 5 (q f ( 5 w/ , l11 C/J/J:J19s 7J1:/ Nfr,J-~ fJ:q k) J I ~~ ~C-;t---{l1»11/1p~ to lft/L {;{/, 114 ~ 1,.yf'f~ (;k -t)Ol<L- /VOT n-('~lL1z---Sr., ->fdi/tS #iiI-llJ-fad Jo~ Jk'- ~ ,;f ;c_ 6-f ,({ / :r: £ rn;A ¥ M *''~~~i~~~~~:.~L:~;,~.L.~,;:;~;~.-~~;;~~.~ae~~~e,'.s,,~ ~~c--.,-,,.,··~t, ~«Ls City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Av Carlsbad, CA 92008 02-19-2016 Plan Check Revision Permit No:PCR16004 Building Inspection Request Line (760) 602-2725 Job Address: Permit Type: 1264 OAK AV CBAD PCR Status: Parcel No: 1561902700 Lot#: 0 Applied: Valuation: $0.00 Construction Type: 58 Entered By: Reference #: PC#: Project Title: Applicant: CB133195 HUTTON RES-REVISE STRUCTURAL WALL SYSTEM & ROOF SYSTEM GREYMAR ASSOCIATES STE 103 1855 1 ST STREET SAN DIEGO CA 92101 805 896-8926 Plan Check Revision Fee Fire Expedited Plan Review Additional Fees Plan Approved: Issued: Inspect Area: Owner: HUTTON R T&J T 1264 OAK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 $725.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total Fees: $725.00 Total Payments To Date: $725.00 Balance Due: ISSUED 01/11/2016 RMA 02/19/2016 02/19/2016 Inspector: Date: Clearance: ------ $0.00 NOTICE: Please take NOT1 r:J ~ i:rqect lrdudes the "I "tlorl' r:J ees, dec:I · reservalia,s, a other exadions hereafter oolledlvely referred to as "feeslexadions. You 00 days fran the date ttis pemit v.es issued praest irrpositia, r:J these fees'ex.dicos. If you praest them, you rrust fdlo.vthe praest IJOOlCU1lS set in GM!rrment Olde Section 60020(a}, lni file the praest aid any aher req..ired irtcmaia, v.ith the aty M!mger fa processing in clXXllda 1Ce v.ith cal Mncipal Qxfe Sectiai 3.32.030. Fal1.re to tlrrely fdlo.v tta proceck.r8 v.411 IB" any SlbleqJenl legal a::tiai to atud<. rew;w, set aside, vad, a .nu their irrposition. You ae ~ FlRTH:R NOT1FIED that~ ri!tt to praest the specified feeslexa::tions DOES Nor APR. Y to water aid FBNer oomectia, fees and capacity cha,ges, na plmng, zcnng, gmng a other sinila' applicatia, processing a service fees in cxmeaia, v.ith ttis i:rqect. t-m OOES IT APR. Y to any i · . ' . . 'I . . i . . . ' . {'City of Carlsbad PLAN CHECK REVISION APPLICATION 8-15 Development Services Building Division 1635 Faraday Avenue 760-602-2719 www.carlsbadca.gov Plan Check Revision No. pc~ lbD() LI Project Address r-z~ ~}if-Ave. Original Plan Check NoCJJ / J J / q s- Date \ f,l( z.d4:;7 Contact v,l.AU... '"'( ~~~ Ph~·~·~~ Email G~~~\..<..l(\14 .e:>'fZ-\..\;,C, \ltD TM~ \l..,. ~n Contact Address 1e,G5 f4'f:IT" ~\---5<.J.lT~ lP~ I General Scope of Work Fax Original plans prepared by an architect or engineer, revisions must be signed & stamped by that person. 1 . Elements revised: ~ Plans iz1. calculations O Soils ~nergy D Other 2. 3. 4. Describe revisions in detail List page(s) where List revised sheets each revision is that replace shown existina sheets t .. v,f. \,.lA-vt.., -6"(--eU:="-M ~ · ~'~ AU:~ ~ + ~\bi~~ ~\~ ~ l~ ~fr ~~ f'LN,6 ~~f\~I~ -r~ ~-~\U-l':7 \,-orrc.tc. \v' ~\l-(7pa.i.Mstl~~~ 5. Does this revision, in any way, alter the exterior of the project? D Yes lXI..No 6. Does this revision add ANY new floor area(s)? 0 Yes ~o 7. Does this revision affect any fire related issues? D Yes ~ No 8. ls this a complete set? J&1 Yes O No _ ____--1 ~Signature~~~~~~~~~~~~~~==--+~_!_~~~~~~~~~~- 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008 EsGil Corporation In <Partnersliip witli government for <Bui{aing Safety DATE: FEB. 12, 2016 Cl APPLICANT f;kl1:1RIS. JURISDICTION: CARLSBAD Cl PLAN REVIEWER Cl FILE PLAN CHECK NO.: 13-3195 (REV. #2) -NEW PCR #16-004 _ SET: II PROJECT ADDRESS: 1264 OAK AVENUE PROJECT NAME: SFR FOR HUTTON D The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. [8J The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. D The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. D The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. D The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. D The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: WALLY GEER [8J EsGil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. D EsGil Corporation staff did advise the applicant ttiat the plan check has been completed. Person contactea+-WALL Y Telephone #: 805-896-8926 Date contacted.;..__ (b~ 3) Email: go2wallyworld@hotmail.com ji@ Mail Telephone Fax In Person ~ REMARKS: ro: On detail 7/S4.1, revise .Q14x to W14x, per roof framing plans, on Sht. S2.3; t@: Provide evidence that the engineer-of-record has reviewed the truss calc's. prepared by others & indicate no exceptions are taken (i.e., a "review" stamp , • , on truss calc's., or a letter). CBC, Sec. 107.3.4.1. , ' *[Miscellaneous revisions including raising the ceiling heights, using roof trusses, changing garage framing from ICF to wood frame, etc .. ;· [Updated plans, structural calc's., T-24 calc's., truss package are submitted for review & approval]. By: ALI SADRE, S.E. Enclosures: EsGil Corporation D GA D EJ D MB D PC 2/9 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 + (858) 560-1468 + Fax (858) 560-1576 ...... ~~ ~ GREYMAR ASSOCIATES, Ltd. 1855 1st Avenue, Suite 103 San Diego, CA 92101 T: 805-896-8926 EsGil Corporation ATIN: Ali Sadre, S.E. 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 San Diego, CA 92123 RE: Hutton Residence 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad PERMIT NUMBER: 13-3195 Dear Mr. Sadre: 1.04.2016 You had originally plan checked the above referenced single family residence which is currently permitted and site work is proceeding. This single family residence is of I.C.F. construction and was originally engineered and permitted (with an original plan check submission PRIOR to Jan. 1 2015) with 6" concrete cavity I.C.F. walls and a "Lite Deck" (i.e. poured in place concrete over a foam core insulation system) roof system. After the initial permitting of the project, at the request of the owner, plans were resubmitted for a permit modification to reflect 8" concrete cavity I.C.F. walls and the "Lite Deck" roof system remained. After commencement with site work and final bidding of the project, the owner has made a decision to revert to 6" cavity I.C.F. walls and to eliminate the Lite Deck roof system and construct the roof with conventional wood trusses as well as other changes as follows: CHANGES IN RESIDENCE: 1.) 8" I.C.F. walls are being eliminated and the project is reverting to the 6" cavity walls as originally permitted. 2.) The Lite Deck roof system has been eliminated and the roof system is now a wood truss roof system 3.) In the original permitting of this project, there was no air conditioning (and there continues to be no air conditioning), but when originally permitted the project was to be heated by a in floor slab on grade hydronic heating system which was engineered and approved as a part of the original permit. The owner has also elected to not incorporate the in floor heating and go with a conventional gas fired heating units. 4.) The previously permitted plans had a fireplace in the great room which hs been eliminated. CHANGES IN GARAGE: 1.) The garage has been changed to light framing and the previous I.C.F. framed walls and Lite Deck roof have been changed to conventional light framing Enclosed with this correspondence is a matrix of changes that have happened on each sheet of drawings. With the exception of sheet C-3, changes have taken place on every architectural sheet, therefore all sheets will need to be newly stamped out (as opposed to swapping sheets out from the original permit set). STRUCTURAL CHANGES As a result of the structural changes in both the residence and the free standing garage, all new structural sheets, structural calculations and truss calculations have been submitted with these permit revisions. TITLE 24 As a result of the changes listed herein, new Title 24 documentation has been submitted. When reviewing this, please keep in mind that they do NOT reflect the new CalCerts registration in light of the fact that this is a modification to an existing permit that already existed prior to the CalCerts registration system being in place. A. As always, thank you for your assistance. If I can be of any help in resolving these corrections, please do not hesitate to contact me as follows: email: go2wallyworld@hotmail.com Cell phone: 805-896-8926 Best Regards, Wally Geer " ARCHITECTURAL PLAN CHANGES Sheet Chanaes AG-1 1.) Index of Drawings has been modified to reflect the new structural sheets 2.} The original mechanical sheets have been eliminated from the Index of Drawings and a new sheet "M-1" has been added 3.) a new Wall Leaend has been added to reflect the 6" I.C.F. wall chanae AG-2 1.} Green note "GB-4" has been modified to reflect the new heating system which shall incorporate ducts 2.) The previous note "GB-5" has been eliminated to reflect that fact that there is no fireplace in the residence 3.) The Green Note "GB-9" has been modified to reflect the change in heating system. T-24.1 1.) New Title 24 is shown and submitted with this plan submission to reflect all chanaes documented herein T-24.2 1.} New Title 24 is shown and submitted with this plan submission to reflect all chanaes documented herein C-1 1.} On the original submittal and permit set, a dimension (southwest corner of the main residence} of 15'-6" reflecting the overhang of the entry roof was shown incorrectly. This has been changed to the correct dimension of 14'-4" and does not effect the set back reauirements. C-2 1. }Demolition has been completed and site work is taking place so this demolition plan becomes somewhat academic, but I think it would be good to reincorporated in the newly approved plans. 2.) Section 3/C-2 reflects a typical foundation cross section to document the required excavation and recompaction requested per the soils report. This section has only been modified graphically to reflect the new truss roof (i.e. the Lite Deck Roof has been eliminated) C-3 1.) No chanaes on this sheet, BMPs are currently in place A-1.1 1.} New wall legend has been added to reflect the 6" I.C.F. walls 2.} When you review the structural, you will see that the trusses site on top of the I.C.F. walls. A Wall Height Legend has been added to reflect the wall heights (and the required I.C.F. blocks} that will be required for the new walls. 3.} Fireplace has been eliminated from Great Room 4.) A sliding barn door was added (i.e. Door "W"} to a storage closet in the Kitchen. This is an interior door and the change of a door type does not in any way effect Title 24 documentation. A-1.2 1.} New wall legend has been added to reflect the 6" I.C.F. walls 2.) Fireplace has been eliminated from Great Room A-2.1 1.} Elevations reflect the termination of the I.C.F. walls and the start of the truss roof system A-2.2 1.} Elevations reflect the termination of the I.C.F. walls and the start of the truss roof system f, Sheet Changes A-4 1.) Minor adjustment in parapet height notes to reflect the change to a truss roof. A-5 1.) Door type "W" (an interior sliding door) has been added to the door schedule 2.) There has been NO changes to the window schedule from the currently permitted set of drawinas. A-6 1.) NO exterior dimensions or elevation heights have been modified to reflect garage dimensions, but I.C.F. walls and Lite deck roof have been changed to conventional lumber light framing. Plans and sections have been modified to reflect this. 2.) New Wall Legend has been added A-7 1.) Key Note 3 ahs been modified to reflect that stucco is over light framed wall, NOT I.C.F .. A-8 1.) General note "J" is modified to reflect that fact that the walls are now light framed, NOT I.C.F. D-1 1.) Details were changed to reflect light framing and truss roof D-2 1.) Details were changed to reflect light framing and truss roof E-1 1.) New Wall Legend has been added. E-2 1.) New Wall Legend has been added. M-1 1.) New Mechanical Plan has been added 7 ZJZl&ZW~!~W.U.~--~q·,_ ·---·----------------------~ GREYMAR ASSOCIATES 1575 Spinnaker Drive, Suite 105-B, Ventura, CA 93001 City of Carlsbad Engineering Department ATTN: Linda Ontiveros 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA RE: Hutton Residence 1264 Oak Avenue, Carlsbad PERMIT NUMBER: 13-3195 Dear Linda: 5.14.2015 As you are aware, the above referenced job has been permitted. Since pulling the permit, the owner (post permitting) has made a decision to go from ICF walls with a 6" concrete core and CHANGE THE WALLS TO ICF WALLS WITH A 8" CONCRETE CORE. As a result of this change, the additional 2" of exterior wall thickness has been absorbed within the interior of the residence and garage and as a result of that THERE HAS BEEN NO DIMENSIONAL CHANGE TO THE FOOTPRINT OF THE HOUSE AND GARAGE AND THEIR LOCATION ON THE SITE, NOR HAS ANY ENGINEERING RELATED ISSUES BEEN MODIFED AS A RESULT OF THIS CHANGE. Since this change requires additional plan checking by EsGil corporation (your architectural and structural plan checker acting on behalf of the city), copies of the modified architectural and structural plans have been submitted to Esgil. I don't think you will need additional sets of plans of those sheets that have been modified, but if you should, please find enclosed those architectural sheets that reflect the modification to 8" concrete core ICF watts. As always, thank you for your assistance. If I can be of any help in resolving these corrections, please do not hesitate to contact me as follows: email: go2wallyworld@hotmail.com Cell phone: 805-896-8926 - EsGil Corporation In (l'artnersfaip witfa (io11emment for <Buiti{ing Safety DATE: JAN. 14,2016 JURISDICTION: CARLSBAD CJ APPLICANT ,AJURIS. CJ PLAN REVIEWER CJ FILE PLAN CHECK NO.: 13-3195 (REV. #2) -NEW PCR #16-004 _ SET: I PROJECT ADDRESS: 1264 OAK AVENUE PROJECT NAME: SFR FOR HUTTON D The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. D The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. D The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. [8J The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. D The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. [8J The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: WALLY GEER D EsGil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. ~ EsGil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: WALLY Telephone#: 805-896-8926 £.ate conyicted: 1/14--(bY)"C_l Email: go2wallvworld@hotmail.com \:/Mail ~lephone Fax In Person [8J REMARKS: Miscellaneous revisions including raising the ceiling heights, using roof trusses, changing garage framing from ICF to wood frame, etc. [Updated plans, structural calc's., T-24 calc's., truss package are submitted for review & approval]. By: ALI SADRE, S.E. Enclosures: EsGil Corporation D GA D EJ D MB D PC 1/12 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 + (858) 560-1468 + Fax (858) 560-1576 - CARLSBAD 13-3195 (REV. #2) -NEW PCR #16-004 ,JAN. 14, 2016 GENERAL PLAN CORRECTION LIST JURISDICTION: CARLSBAD (REV. #2) -NEW PCR #16-004 PROJECT ADDRESS: 1264 OAK AVENUE DATE PLAN RECEIVED BY ESGIL CORPORATION: 1/11 REVIEWED BY: ALI SADRE, S.E. FOREWORD (PLEASE READ): PLAN CHECK NO.: 13-3195 DATE REVIEW COMPLETED: JAN. 14,2016 This plan review is limited to the technical requirements contained in the International Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, National Electrical Code and state laws regulating energy conservation, noise attenuation and disabled access. This plan review is based on regulations enforced by the Building Department. You may have other corrections based on laws and ordinances enforced by the Planning Department, Engineering Department or other departments. The following items listed need clarification, modification or change. All items must be satisfied before the plans will be in conformance with the cited codes and regulations. The approval of the plans does not permit the violation of any state, county or city law. • 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). For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in one of two ways: 1. Deliver all corrected sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department, 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008, (760) 602- 2700. The City will route the plans to EsGil Corporation and the Carlsbad Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. 2. Bring one corrected set of plans and calculations/reports to EsGil Corporation, 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, CA 92123, (858) 560-1468. Deliver all remaining sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department for routing to their Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. NOTE: Plans that are submitted directly to EsGil Corporation only will not be reviewed by the City Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments until review by EsGil Corporation is complete. • To facilitate rechecking, please identify, next to each item, the sheet of the plans upon which each correction on this sheet has been made and return this sheet with the revised plans. • Please indicate here if any changes have been made to the plans that are not a result of corrections from this list. If there are other changes, please briefly describe them and where they are located on the plans. Have changes been made not resulting from this list? D Yes D No - CARLSBAD 13-3195 (REV. #2) -NEW PCR #16-004 .. JAN., 14, 2016 • STRUCTURAL 1. The wall references to W1 & W2, in the schedule on Sheets S2.0 & S2.1, are incorrect. 2. The Lintel references, as per schedule, on Sheet S2.1, are incorrect. 3. Please add W14x to the schedule on detail 7/S4.1, as per roof framing plans, on Sheet S2.3. 4. Please note where detail 5/S4.1 is called out on plans. If this is supposed to correspond to detail 9/S4.0, the column sizes, base plates, etc., do not match. 5. On detail 5/S4.1, please specify the weld size and clarify 1-7/8" embedment for a 10" AB.! 6. Please note where detail 8/S4.0 is cross referenced on plans. 7. Please specify where detail 4/S4.1 is called out on plans. 8. Details not related to this project may be deleted. 9. Please revise the garage structural calculations to match the framing plans. See RJ-01 running parallel to gridline #2, as opposed to A. 10. Where is the pad footing schedule, as per Sheets S2.0 & S2.2? 11. Please revise the truss calculations to show a framing layout and include different truss types, drag trusses, etc., matching the roof framing plans. See Sheet S2.1. [Truss Types 1, 2, etc. versus A, A 1 & no drag trusses]. 12. Please provide evidence that the engineer-of-record (or architect) has reviewed the truss calculation package prepared by others (i.e., a "review" stamp on the truss calculations or a letter). CBC Section 107.3.4.1. • MISCELLANEOUS 13. A reminder that all non-structural sheets of plans need to be signed by the project drafter as well. 14. The jurisdiction has contracted with EsGil Corporation located at 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, California 92123; telephone number of 858/560-1468, to perform the plan review for your project. If you have any questions regarding these plan review items, please contact ALI SADRE, S.E. at EsGil Corporation. Thank you. - ----lllil!ll!IB•W•&-M~!!ffi-ilmillii=•-=lllillll ................................. _. ______ ~~~~. --li77 CARLSBAD 13-3195 (REV. #2) -NEW PCR #16-004 JAN·. 14, 2016 [DO NOT PAY -THIS IS NOT AN INVOICE] VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURISDICTION: CARLSBAD PLAN CHECK NO.: 13-3195 (REV. #2} -NEW PCR #16-004 PREPARED BY: ALI SADRE, S.E. BUILDING ADDRESS: 1264 OAK AVENUE DATE: JAN. 14, 2016 BUILDING OCCUPANCY: R3/U TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: V-B/SPR. BUILDING AREA Valuation PORTION ( Sq. Ft.) Multiplier PLAN CHANGE Air Conditioning Fire Sprinklers TOTAL VALUE Jurisdiction Code CB By Ordinance ·------·---------·-----3 Bldg. Permit Fee by Ordinance ,.. --~--------------- Plan Check Fee by Ordinance Type of Review: D Complete Review D Repetitive Fee 3 Repeats * Based on hourly rate Comments: o Other 0 ___ H __ o __ u __ rl .... v EsGil Fee Reg. VALUE ($) Mod. s12s.ooj o Structural Only 51 Hrs.@* =====$=11=6=.o:o $580.001 Sheet 1 of 1 - STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS PACKAGE GARAGE CALCULATIONS PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC 4747 MISSION BLVD., SUITE 6 SAN DIEGO, CA 92109 TEL. 858.605.0937 FAX. 858.605.1414 E.info@pattersoneng.com RECEIVED FEBO 4 2Dl6 CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DIVISION HUTTON RESIDENCE 1264 OAK A VE. CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Prepared For: GREYMAR ASSOCIATES 1575 SPINAKER DR. SUITE 105-B VENTURA, CA 93001 Date: February 5, 2016 Project Number: 2013-0126 - PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC. 928 FORT STOCKTON DRIVE, SUITE 201 SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 EsGil Corporation Subject: SFR FOR HUTTON Plan Check No.: 13-3195 (REV. #2) -NEW PCR #16-004 Structural Responses: 1. The detail references for WI and W2 have been updated on Sheets S2.0 and and S2.l. 2. The lintel references on Sheet S2. l have been revised. 3. A W14x has been added to the schedule on Detail 7/S4.1, per the roof framing plans on Sheet S2.3. 4. Detail 5/S4. l has been omitted from the structural plans. 5. Detail 5/S4 .1 has been omitted from the structural plans. 6. Detail 8/S4.0 has been referenced on Grid 1.9 and F of Sheet S2.0. 7. Detail 4/S4. l has been omitted from the structural plans. 8. Details not related to this project have been deleted. 9. The structural framing graphic in the calculations has been provided, with the current framing layout from Sheet S2.3 shown. 10. The pad footing schedule has been shown on Sheets S2.0 and S2.2. 11. The truss framing layout is shown on the plans with the trusses labeled. 12. Truss layout and calculations have been reviewed by a licensed engineer. Regards, Curtis Patterson, S.E. 2of43 - "' ' .! STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS PACKAGE PLAN CHECK RESPONSES PATIERSON ENGINEERING, INC 4747 MISSION BL VD., SUITE 6 SAN DIEGO, CA 92109 TEL. 858.605.0937 FAX. 858.605.1414 E.info@pattersoneng.com HUTION RESIDENCE 1264 OAK A VE. CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Prepared For: GREYMAR ASSOCIATES 1575 SPINAKER DR. SUITE 105-B VENTURA, CA 93001 A PLAN CHECK COMMENTS 1/14/16 ~ Date: February 5, 2016 Project Number: 2013-0126 1 of 5 - Hutton Garage Shear Forces Tributary Load at Line C Governs w2 = 845(18)+120(10)(18) = 36.8 k v2 = 4,200/845 = 5.0 psf wl = 865(20)+120(10)(18) = 38.9 k vl = 4100/865 = 4.7 psf Trib Area Line C = 440 sq ft Ve= 440(5.o+4.7) = 4268 lb ROOF FRAMING PLAN 1/4' = 1'-0' DONOTl!IIW..EPI.NISl'Ofl.CDNnftJC'llON Dlll3a:lrl!I.M.l. c:oteTRJCTION OIIENIIONS MUST IE '-IEflFIEO WITH lHE MCH. PUW9. - 3 of 5 Patterson Engineering 4655 Cass St. Suill 404 San CA 921119 INPUT DATA LATERAL FORCE ON DIAPHRAGM: Vc1a. WIND= 200 pl.for wind, ASD Vc1a. SEISMIC : 2!11 pl,forselsmic, ASD GRAVITY LOADS ON THE ROOF: will.= Cl pl.for dead load WLL = 0 pl.for live load DIMENSIONS: L,. = 5.92 ft , h = 10 ft L = $.ti ft, h,,= 0 ft PANEL GRADE ( 0 or 1) 1 <= Sheathing and Single-Floor INIMUM NOMINAL PANEL THICKNESS 3,18 In COMMON NAIL SIZE ( 0=6d, 1..ad, 2=10d) SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF FRAMING MEMBERS EDGE STUD SECTION 2 pcs, b = SPECIES (1 = DFL 2 = SP) 1 8d 0.5 2 in,h= DOUGLAS FIR-LARCH GRADE ( 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or6) 6 Stud 6 in STORY OPTION ( 1"!1round level, 2=upper level) 1 ground 1eve1 Shear wan PAGE: DESIGN BY: REVIEWBY: h L Lw L ThL. ~· IL.ftn. .~ ..... l.l'L.~1'-'1 .. ~ ftllL.\ICtl"'I. I .... DESIGN SUMMARY BLOCKED 318 SHEATHING WITH 8d COMMON NAILS @4 in O.C. BOUNDARY & ALL EDGES/ 12 in 0.C. FIELD, 518 In DIA. x 10 in LONG ANCHOR BOLTS @ 44 in O.C. (or 112 In DIA. x 10 in LONG ANCHOR BOLTS @ 30 in O.C.) HOLD-DOWN FORCES: TL= 2.33 k , TR= 2.33 k (USE HDU2-1/4x2.5 SIMPSON HOLD-DOWN) DRAG STRUT FORCES: F = 0.00 k EDGE STUD: 2 -2" x 6" DOUGLAS FIR-LARCH Stud, CONTINUOUS FULL HEIGHT. SHEAR WALL DEFLECTION: A = 0.14 in NALYSIS CHECK MAX SHEAR WALL DIMENSION RATIO LIB = 1.7 < --[SatlafactDry] DETERMINE REQUIRED CAPACITY v• = 246 plf, ( Side Diaphragm Required, 11te Max. Nail Spacing = 4 in) THE SHEAR CAPACITIES PER IBC Table 2306.3 / SDPWS-08 Table 4.3A with ASD reduction factor 2.0) Min. Min. Blocked Nal Spacing PanclGwlc Common Pmetntioo Thickness Bowulmy & All Edges Nail (in) (in) 6 I 4 I 3 I 2 Sheathing and Single-Floor 8d 11/2 318 220 I 320 I 410 I 530 Note: 1. The indicated shear numbers have reduced by specific gravity factor per IBC note a. 2. Since the wal is blocked, SDPW-08 Table 4.3.3.2 does not apply. DETERMINE DRAG STRUT FORCE: F • (L-L,.) MAX( v .... Mill• o,,v ... saSMIC) = 0.00 k DETERMINE MAX SPACING OF 518" DIA(or 1/2" DIA)ANCHOR BOLT (NOS 2012, Tab.11E) (0. = ) (Sec. 1633.2.6) 518 in DIA. x 10 in LONG ANCHOR BOLTS@44 In O.C. (or 112 In DIA. x 10in LONG ANCHOR BOLTS@30in O.C.) THE HOLD-DOWN FORCES: v ... W81Sei&mic Overtuming Resisting Sarety Net Uplift Holddown (pl) at mid-story (lbs) Moments (ft-lbs) Moments (ft-lbs) Factors (lbs) SIMPSON SEISMIC 246 95 15037 Left 1402 0.9 T = 2327 ;i,"t R;,.bt 1402 0.9 TD= 2327 ... ~ Left 1402 2/3 T = 1842 a: WIND 200 11840 ~if Right 1402 2/3 TR= 1842 (TL & TR values should inckJde upper level UPLIFT forces if applicable) CHECK MAXIMUM SHEAR WALL DEFLECTION: ( IBC Section 2305.3 / SDPWS--08 4.3.2) 8vbh3 'Vbh hda A= L\11,,,.,.,1< + As,-,+ ANa11 ,1ip+ &1,orr1 •P""' •ip =---+-+0.15hen+--= EAL,. Gt L,. 0.140 in,ASD < 1,,.,..-,ASD • 0.429 In Where: Vt,= 246 plf ,ASD L,. = 6 ft E= 1.7E+06 psi l,SatisfactDry] (ASCE 7-10 12.8.6) A= 16.50 in' h = 10 ft G= 9.0E+04 psi C• = 4 I= 1 t= 0.500 in en= 0.011 In.SD d = . 0.01 in.SD ,(ASCE 7-10 Tab 12.2-1 & Tab 11.5-1) C,.= 1.0 A.= 0.02 h,,. (NDS4.1.4) , (ASCE 7-10Tab 12.12-1) CHECK EDGE STUD CAPACITY Pmax = 1.85 kips, (thiS value should include upper level DOWNWARD loads if applicable) F0 = 850 psi C0 = 1.60 Cp= 0.49 A= 16.5 in2 E= 1400 ksl Cr= 1.10 F.'= 737 psi > f0 = 112 psi [Satlsfac:1Dry] 4of5 (j)~ca-. BC CALC® Design Report 11111 Build 4429 Job Name: Address: City, State, Zip:, Customer: Code reports: ESR-1336 Single 14" BCI® 60-2.0 DF Dry 11 span I No cantilevers I 0/12 slope 16 OCS I Repetitive I Glued & nailed construction File Name: BC Beams.bee Desaiption:Designs\RJ-01 Specifier: Designer: Company: Misc: Joist\RJ-01 December 7, 2015 12:58:00 I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1111111 lcpl 111 l l l l I I I 11 I I I I 1111 21--06-00 BO Total Horizontal Product Length= 21-06-00 Reaction Summary (Down I Uplift) ( 11,a) Bearing Live BO, 2-1/2" 573 / 0 B1,2-1/2" 573/0 Dead 407 /0 407 /0 Snow Live Load Summary Tea Description Load Type Ref. Start End 100% 1 Floor Load 2 Interior Walls -10' ... Unf. Area (lblft'\2} Cone. Lin. (lb/ft} L~ L 10-09-00 21-06-00 40 10-09-00 Controls Summary value % Allowable Dunitlon Case Pos. Moment End Reaction End Shear Total Load Deft. Live Load Deft. Max Deft. Vibration Span I Depth Bearing Supports BO Wall/Plate 81 Wall/Plate Vibration Summary 5, 770 ft-lbs 77.6% 9801bs 72.6% 9631bs 50% U386 (0.659"} 62.1% L/714 (0.357"} 67.3% 0.659" 65.9% 21' 1" 97% 18.2 n/a Dim. (L x W) Value 2-1/2" X 2-5/16" 980 lbs 2-1/2" X 2-5/16" 980 lbs 100% 100% 100% n/a n/a %Allow Support n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a %Allow Member 72.6% 72.6% Subfloor: 23/32" OSB, Glue + Nail Strapping: None Gypsum Ceiling: 5/8" Bracing: None Notes Design meets Code minimum (U240} Totaf load deflection criteria. Design meets User specified (U480} Live load deflection criteria. Design meets arbitrary (1"} Maximum total load deflection criteria. Calculations assume Member is Fully Braced. 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 Wind Dead 20 180 Location 10-09-00 ~ 00-02-08 10-09-00 10-09-00 10-09-00 00-00-00 00-00-00 llatarial Unspecified Unspecified Composite El value based on 23/32" thick OSB sheathing glued and nailed to member. Design based on Dry Service Condition. Deflections less than 1/8" were ignored in the results. Roof live Snow Wind Roof Live 115% 160% 125% Disclosure B1 ocs 16 16 Completeness and aocuracy of input must be verified by anyone who would rely on output as evidence of sultabilily for particular application. Output here based on building code-accepted design properties and analysis methods. Installation of Boise Cascade engineered wood products muat be In accordance with current Installation Guide and applicable building codes. To obtain lnstaHation Gulde or ask questions, please call (800)232.0788 before installation. BC CALC®, BC FRAMER® , AJS™, ALLJOIST®, BC RIM BOARD™, BCI®, BOISE GLULAM™, SIMPLE FRAMING SYSTEM®, VERSA-LAM®, VERSA-RIM PLUS®, VERSA-RIM®, VERSA-STRAND®, VERSA-STUD® are trademarks of Boise Cascade Wood Products L.L.C. 5of5 • .. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIO~S PACKAGE LnPLAN CHANGE PA'ITERSON ENGINEERING, INC 4747 MISSION BLVD., SUITE 6 SAN DIEGO, CA 92109 TEL. 858.605.0937 FAX. 858.605.1414 E. info@pattersoneng.com HUTTON RESIDENCE 1264 OAK A VE. CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Prepared For: GREYMAR ASSOCIATES 1575 SPINAKER DR. SUITE 105-B VENTURA, CA 93001 Date: December 17, 2015 Project Number: 2013-0126 - PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC. 928 FORT STOCKTON DRIVE, SUITE 201 SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. STRUCTURAL BASIS OF DESIGN ................................................................... . 2. LATERAL CALCULATIONS ........................................................................................... . 3. VERTICAL CALCULATIONS .......................................................................................... . 4. FOUNDATION CALCULATIONS .................................................................................... . 2 of27 - PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC. 928 FORT STOCKTON DRIVE, SUITE 201 SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 STRUCTURAL BASIS OF DESIGN 3 of27 - .,£¥Ji4@-J%ft.L~!!:il!B------------------------~ -"57 PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC. 928 FORT STOCKTON DRIVE, SUITE 201 SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 STRUCTURAL BASIS OF DESIGN: This project consists of a single-story ICF residence with trusses. I. CODES The governing building code is the 2013 California Building Code (CBC) as based on the 2012 IBC (ASCE 7-10). Concrete design based on the American Concrete Institute Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-11 ). Masonry design based on TMS 402-11/ACI 530-11/ASCE 5-11 Building Code Requirements and Specification for Masonry Structures (MSJC Code). Steel design based on: AISC Specification for Structural Steel Buildings (AISC 360-10). AISC 341-10 Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. AISI SI00-07/S2-10 North American Specification for the Design of Cold-Formed Steel Structural Members, with Supplement 1, dated 2010 AWS Structural Welding Code ANSI/AWS DI.I and 01.8 (current edition). Wood design based on: AF&PA NDS-2012 National Design Specification (NDS) for Wood Construction-with Commentary and, NDS supplement-Design Values for Wood Construction, 2012 Edition. AF &PA SDPWS-08 Special Design Provisions for Wind and Seismic. 4 of27 - PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC. 928 FORT STOCKTON DR!VE, SUITE 201 SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 DESIGN CRITERIA SUMMARY CONCRETE: f' c = 3000 PSI, SPECIAL INSPECTION (U.O.N.) MASONRY: ASTM C90, f' m = 1500 PSI, SPECIAL INSPECTION REQUIRED (U.O.N.) MORTAR: GROUT: REINFORCING STEEL: ASTM C270, f' c = 1800 PSI, TYPE S ASTM C476, f' c = 2000 PSI ASTM A65 l, Fy = 40 KSI FOR #3 AND SMALLER ASTM A615, Fy = 60 KSI FOR #4 AND LARGER (U.O.N) ASTM A992, Fy = 50 KSI (ALL "W" SHAPES ONLY) STRUCTURAL STEEL: ASTM A36, Fy = 36 KSI (STRUCTURAL PLATES, ANGLES, CHANNELS) ASTM A500, GRADE B, Fy = 35 KSI (STRUCTURAL PIPES) WELDING: E70 -T6 -TYP, FOR STRUCTURAL STEEL E90 SERIES FOR A615 GRADE 60 REINFORCING BARS Shop welding to be in an approved fabricator's shop. Field welding to have continuous special inspection. All welding to be done by certified welders. BOLTS & ASTM Fl554 THREADED ROD: SAWN LUMBER: DOUG FIR LARCH, ALLOWABLE UNIT STRESSES PER 2013 CBC I-JOISTS: BOISE CASCADE -ICC EDR-1336 (BCI MEMBERS) ENGINEERED BOISE CASCADE -ICC ESR-1040 (VERSA-LAM L VL MEMBERS) BEAMS: GLULAMS: DOUGLAS FIR OR DOUGLAS FOR I HEM GRADE 24F-V4 (SIMPLE SPANS) GRADE 24F -V8 (CANTILEVERS) SOIL: CODE MINIMUM 5of27 - DESIGN LOADS ROOF LOADS: PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC 4747 MISSION BLVD., SUITE 6 SAN DIEGO, CA 92109 Roofing ................................................................................................................................... = 6.0 psf Sheathing ................................................................................................................................ = 2.0 psf Roof/Ceiling Framing ............................................................................................................. = 4.0 psf Insulation ................................................................................................................................ = 1.0 psf Ceiling Finish ......................................................................................................................... = 2.0 psf Miscellaneous ........................................................................................................................ = 2.0 psf Total Roof Dead Load ....................................................................................................................... = 17.0 psf Total Roof Live Load ........................................................................................................................ = 20.0 psf Total Roof Load ................................................................................................................................ = 37.0 psf CEILING LOADS: Ceiling Finish ............................................................................................................................. = 3.0 psf Ceiling Framing .......................................................................................................................... = 2.0 psf Total Ceiling Dead Load ..................................................................................................................... = 5.0 psf Total Ceiling Live Load ...................................................................................................................... = 10.0 psf 6of27 EXTERIOR & INTERIOR 8" CONCRETE WALL LOADS: PATIERSON ENGINEERING, INC 4747 MISSION BLVD., SUITE 6 SAN DIEGO, CA 92109 3 Coat Stucco Finish ........................................................................................................ = 9.0 psf ICF Form .......................................................................................................................... = 1.0 psf 6" Concrete Wall. .............................................................................................................. = 75.0 psf Gypsum Board .................................................................................................................. = 3.0 psf Miscellaneous .................................................................................................................. = 2.0 psf Total Exterior Wall Dead Load ................................................................................................... = 90.0 psf INTERIOR WALL LOADS: Gypsum Board ..................................................................................................................... = 3.0 psf Light Gauge Studs .............................................................................................................. = 1.0 psf Gypsum Board .................................................................................................................... = 3.0 psf Miscellaneous .................................................................................................................... = 2.0 psf Total Interior Wall Dead Load ..................................................................................................... = 9.0 psf 7 of27 - Seismic Mass Calculations Single Story Residence Area= DL= Tributary walls Ext Wall Type 1 Area = Ext Wall Type 1 DL = Interior Wall Type 1 Area = Interior Wall Type 1 DL = Glass Area= Glass DL = Interior Wall length = Interior Wall DL = Roof Seismic Mass = 1971 sqft 64 psf 2848 sqft. 90 psf 451 ft 90 psf 589 sqft. 10 psf 2197 ft 9 psf 287 .4305 kips 8 of27 Architect Project: Static Seismic Base Shear Occupancy Category: Site Class: Ss = S,= Fa= Fv = R= I= Lat= Long= Sos = 2/3*FaSs = So, = 2/3*FvS, = I orll 4 1 34.04462 -118.54564 D 1.281 0.483 1.5 0.854 > 0.50g 0.483 > 0.20g ASCE table 1-1 ASCE table 12.2-1 Ordinary Concrete shear walls Importance factor, ASCE table11.5-1 From A (hard) to E (soft) Spectral acceleration for short periods Spectral acceleration for one-second period Site coefficient Table 11.4-1 Site coefficient Table 11.4-2 Seismic design category D Seismic design category D Seismic design category for this structure is: D All other structural systems Structure Type: hn = 14 ft Height of the building Ci= x= Ta= C1(hn)' = Cu= Cu Ta= Tmodel = T= Seismic response coefficient: 0.02 0.75 0.14 sec 1.4 0.20 sec 0.20 sec 0.20 sec Cs= Sos/(R/1) = 0.214 Cs need not exceed following: Cs = So, /[(R/l)T] = 0.596 Cs shall not be taken less than: Cs= 0.010 Eq. 12.8-7 Table 12.8-1 Upper limit of T Actual period from computer model Period used for base shear calculation Eq.12.8-2 Eq. 12.8-3 Eq. 12.8-5 For structures located where S, ? 0.6g, Cs shall not be taken less than: Cs= 0.5S, /(R/1) = N/A Eq. 12.8-6 Cs= 0.214 g V=CsW = 0.214 W Base shear Base Shear -Single Story House 11 /24/20135:00 PM Job# Date: 11/24/2013 Engineer: kfse 9 of27 Appendix for /BC (Independent to main sheet) Vertical Distribution of Seismic Forces W= V= V= Fx = (V) Wxhi I ?wihik T= k= 287.5 kips 0.214 W 61.4 kips 0.30 sec 1.00 Levelx Ax tt2 ROOF 1971 Diaphragm Shear Froces For T < 0.5 sec 4025 100.0% 4025 100% Levelx w .(k) ?w1 (k) F x (k) F x min (k) F xmu (k) ROOF 287.5 287.5 61.4 49.1 98.2 Fpxmin = 0.2·Sos+Wpx Fpxmax = 0.4·Sos+Wpx Base Shear -Single Story House (ASCE 7-05 Eqn. 12.10-1) 11/24/20135:00 PM F X (k) 61.4 10 of27 --------------------------·-· ·---J'!',i!!~ii'ilt-- 12.../t,( -/o I, ji .. 11Jf . .·)r· 1f. ~) -{.'" I . ) (l. i~dJ-.-K. 1)'l~ , . Ct>~r-..c.~22~r.J (!]• .!-..7' "'•f":· .. ·~ r.,. /?I, r-r.,1¥V;;IJ..;.J . .. . @·· L r /ki--J,J Ti' ... 1,;.~"' -c./(/~ .:L-4.lf ( I~ t:11 . J1cAF -#F F""'-"'J. r,;;, I" t::. ,.,,A.~) M;'~ -J.,xC/~~ l]f•? ·~' .. 'Tf,,'4'.,.., -- . .. .. . .. . .. (" . . .. -v / .:-.ft.,.,,,,,;,,_ ,CJ'~.,' .,;v, 1',., Tt> /Jt;,R 6-w.~., "-~ /QJ:, 7 12 of27 Patterson Engineering PROJECT : Hutton -House line F 4655 Cass St Suite 404 CLIENT : San Diego CA 92109 JOB NO. : DATE: Reinforced Concrete Shear Wall Design Based on ACI 318-11 INPUT DATA & DESIGN SUMMARY CONCRETE STRENGTH {ACI 318 5.1.1) REBAR YIELD STRESS f' C fy L 3 60 6.92 ksi ksi ft FACTORED AXIAL LOAD FACTORED MOMENT LOAD FACTORED SHEAR LOAD PAGE: DESIGN BY: REVIEW BY: 27.8 k 152 ft-k 64 k LENGTH OF SHEAR WALL THICKNESS OF WALL 8 in THE WALL DESIGN IS ADEQUATE. WALL DIST. HORIZ. REINF. WALL DIST. VERT. REINF. VERT. REINF. BARS AT END ANALYSIS 1200 1000 800 q, Pn (k) 600 400 200 1 # 1 # 2 # 5 @ 5 @ 5 16 16 in. o.c. in. o.c. T, T,, C, I I~-+-~ I I ! a = P1C I FORCE DIAGRAM i 0 -200 q, Mn (ft-k) ,;s~i C I~.,., CHECK MINIMUM REINFORCEMENT RATIOS AND SPACING (ACI 318-1114.3) (Pt )p,ovd. = 0.0024 (P1 )provd. = 0.0024 > > (Pt )min. = (P1 )min. = CHECK SHEAR CAPACITY (ACI 318-1111.2 & 21.9.4) 0.0020 0.0012 [Satisfactory] [Satisfactory] q,Vn =MIN[q,A,,y(2(fc')°"5 +P1fy),q,8A,,y(fc')°"5] = 101.6 kips where q, 0.60 (conservatively, ACI 318-11 9.3.4 a) Acv= 664 in2 CHECK FLEXURAL & AXIAL CAPACITY THE ALLOWABLE MOMENT AT AN AXIAL LOAD Pu IS GIVEN BY q, Mn = 573 kips. > Mu [Satisfactory] > where q, = Min{0.9, Max[0.65 + (Et -0.002)(250/3) , 0.65]} = 0.900 (ACI 318-11 Fig. R9.3.2) I 8 STRAIN DIAGRAM I a [Satisfactory] 13 of 27 Description: Out of Plane Loads on Line 2 between Lines D and E CadeRete,itn.~ki\: Calculations per ACI 318-11, IBC 2012, CBC 2013, ASCE 7-10 Load Combinations Used: ASCE 7-10 Gen-,raJJttfonnatioa·;,I fc : Concrete 28 day strength = 3.0 ksi E= = 3,122.0 ksi Density = 145.0 pcf ~ = 0.850 fy -Main Rebar = 60.0 ksi E -Main Rebar = 29,000.0 ksi Allow. Reinforcing Limits ASTM A615 Bars Used Min. Reinf. = 1.0% Max. Reinf. = 8.0% Load Combination : ASCE 7-10 Column Cross Section Column Dimensions :12.0in high x 8.0in Wide, Column Edge to Rebar Edge Cover= 2.0in Column Reinforcing :4 -#5 bars@ comers,. 1 -#5 bars left & right between comer bars Appliedloads Column self weight included : 1,546.67 lbs* Dead Load Factor AXIAL LOADS ... Roof Load: Axial Load at 13.50 ft above base, D = 0.4590 k Axial Load at 12.50 ft above base, D = 0.6750 k Axial Load at 9.0 ft above base, D = 0.6750 k BENDING LOADS ... Lat. Uniform Load from 0.0->7.0 ft creating Mx-x, E = 0.2870 k/ft Lat. Uniform Load from 7.0->9.0 ft creating Mx-x, E = 1.722 k/ft Lat. Uniform Load from 9.0->10.50 ft creating Mx-x, E = 0.2870 k/ft Lat. Uniform Load from 10.50->12.50 ft creating Mx-x, E = 1.722 k/ft Lat. Uniform Load from 12.50->16.0 ft creating Mx-x, E = 0.2870 k/ft Overall Column Height = 16.0 ft End Fixity Top & Bottom Pinned Brace condition for deflection (buckling) along columns: X-X (width) axis : Unbraced Length for X-X Axis buckling = 13.5 ft, K = 1.0 Y-Y (depth) axis : Fully braced against buckling along Y-Y Axis y -.s •#s #5 ... .#5 Entered loads are factored per load combinations specified by user. 14 of 27 Description: ,,·/) •·· ,;<'.c,·.-, Load Combination Location of max.above base Maximum Stress Ratio +O. 7292D+1.30E+0.90H 15.893ft Ratio = (Pu"2+Mu"2}".5 I (PhiPn"2+PhiMn"2}".5 Pu = 2.447 k cp • Pn = Mu-x = 34. 908 k-ft cp • Mn-x = Mu-y = 0.0 k-ft cp • Mn-y = Mu Angle= 0.0 deg 0.986: 1 2.435k -35.591 k-ft O.Ok-ft Mu at Angle= 34.908 k-ft cpMn at Angle= 35.402 k-ft Pn & Mn values located at Pu-Mu vector intersection with capacity cuNe Column Capacities ••• Pnmax : Nominal Max. Compressive Axial Capacity 351. 657 k Pnmin: Nominal Min. Tension Axial Capacity -111.60 k cp Pn, max: Usable Compressive Axial Capacity 182.862 k cp Pn, min: Usable Tension Axial Capacity -72.540 k Governing Load Combination Results TTl*-1\Projects\201l\20312$--i\Cillc$\Veiliealll:IU1TOl+:-1;l;Clk; '.\0ENERCALC, liile.1SU.'2015;~,s;t2.9,Mih6.1~~{ Maximum SERVICE Load Reactions •• Top along Y-Y O.Ok Bottom along Y-Y Top along X-X 7.532 k Bottom along X-X Maximum SERVICE Load Deflections ••• Along Y-Y 0.4242 in at 8.268 ft above base for load combination : E Only • 1 .30 Along X-X O.Oin at 0.0ft above base for load combination : General Section Information • cp = 0.650 B = 0.850 p : % Reinforcing 1.938 % Rebar o/; Ok Reinforcing Area 1.860 in"2 Concrete Area 96.0 in"2 0.0 k 5.90 k 0 = 0.80 l:~=~~~~~-:·::·::·: __ :_:·:1:;~;-~-~~,~~::~~-~:: *~n· __ ~--:_:~~.;:;•=x·--~~-~;:;~:f _~~~P~;[d:) __ ~~u _ ~ -~~ U~~~t1 +1.400+1.60H M2,min 15.89 4.70 182.82 1.000 0.38 0.000 0.38 14.74 0.026 +1.200+0.50Lr+1.60L+1.60H M2,min 15.89 4.03 182.82 1.000 0.32 0.000 0.32 14.74 0.022 +1.200+1.60L+0.50S+1.60H M2,min 15.89 4.03 182.82 1.000 0.32 0.000 0.32 14.74 0.022 +1.200+1.60Lr+0.50L+1.60H M2,min 15.89 4.03 182.82 1.000 0.32 0.000 0.32 14.74 0.022 +1.200+1.60Lr+0.50W+1.60H M2,min 15.89 4.03 182.82 1.000 0.32 0.000 0.32 14.74 0.022 +1.20D+0.50L+1.60S+1.60H M2,min 15.89 4.03 182.82 1.000 0.32 0.000 0.32 14.74 0.022 +1.20D+1.60S+0.50W+1.60H M2,min 15.89 4.03 182.82 1.000 0.32 0.000 0.32 14.74 0.022 +1.20D+0.50Lr+0.50L+W+1.60H M2,min 15.89 4.03 182.82 1.000 0.32 0.000 0.32 14.74 0.022 +1.20D+0.50L+0.50S+W+1.60H M2,min 15.89 4.03 182.82 1.000 0.32 0.000 0.32 14.74 0.022 +1.371D+0.50L+0.20S+1.30E+1.f 15.89 4.60 4.17 1.018 35.21 0.000 35.21 35.84 0.982 +0.90D+W+0.90H M2,min 15.89 3.02 182.82 1.000 0.24 0.000 0.24 14.74 0.016 +0.7292D+1.30E+0.90H 15.89 2.45 2.44 1.010 34.91 0.000 34.91 35.40 0.986 Maximum Reactions Load Combination +O..+i +0-+l-+fi +0-+lr-+fi +O+S-+fi +O-t-0. 750Lr-t-O. 750L 4i +O-t-0. 750L-t-O. 750S4i +O-t-0.60W-+fi +0-t-0.910E-+fi +O-t-0. 750Lr-t-O. 750L-t-0.450W..+i +O-t-0. 750L-t-O. 750S-t-0.450W..+i +O-t-0. 750L-t-O. 750S-t-0.6825E..+i -t-0.60D-t-0.60W-t-0.60H -t-0.60D-t-0.910E-t-0.60H DOnly Lr Only LOnly sonly WOnly E Only* 1.30 Reaction along X-X Axis @Base @Top k k k k k k k 4. 130 5.272 k k k 3.097 3.954 k k 4. 130 5.272 k k k k k k 5.900 7.532 k Note: Only non-zero reactions are listed. Reaction along Y • Y Axis Axial Reaction @ Base @ Top @ Base k 3.356 k k 3.356 k k 3.356 k k 3.356 k k 3.356 k k 3.356 k k 3.356 k k 3.356 k k 3.356 k k 3.356k k 3.356 k k 2.013 k k I 2.013 k k 3.356 k k k k k k k k k k k 15 of 27 Description : MmcimumReactiqns '. Load Combination HOnly .Maximum Mpnts : Load Combination +D+H +O+l+H +D+lr+H +D+S+H +O+O. 750Lr+O. 750L +H +D+0.750L+0.750S+H +D+0.60W+H +D+0.910E+H +D+O. 750Lr+O. 750L +0.450W+H +D+O. 750L +O. 750S+0.450W+H +D+O. 750L +O. 750S+0.6825E+H +0.60D+0.60W+0.60H +0.60D-+0.910E+0.60H D Only Lr Only LOnly sonly WOnly E Only* 1.30 HOnly Reaction along X-X Axis @Base @Top Moment About X-X Axis @Base @Top Maximum·Deflections·torfoad Combinations ;·: Load Combination Max. X-X Deflection Distance +D+H 0.0000 in 0.000 ft +D+l+H 0.0000 in 0.000 ft +D+lr+H 0.0000 in 0.000 ft +D+S+H 0.0000 in 0.000 ft +0+0.750Lr+0.750L +H 0.0000 in 0.000 ft +D+0.750L +O. 750S+H 0.0000 in 0.000 ft +D+0.60W+H 0.0000 in 0.000 ft +D+0.910E+H 0.0000 in 0.000 ft +D+0.750Lr+0.750L +0.450W+H 0.0000 in 0.000 ft +D+0.750L +O. 750S+0.450W+H 0.0000 in 0.000 ft +D+O. 750L +O. 750S+0.6825E+H 0.0000 in 0.000 ft +0.600+0.60W+0.60H 0.0000 in 0.000 ft +0.60D+0.910E+0.60H 0.0000 in 0.000 ft DOnly 0.0000 in 0.000 ft Lr Only 0.0000 in 0.000 ft LOnly 0.0000 in 0.000 ft S0nly 0.0000 in 0.000 ft WOnly 0.0000 in 0.000 ft E Only* 1.30 0.0000 in 0.000 ft HOnly 0.0000 in 0.000 ft k k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft . 1,3\20312&-1\calts\Ve!tlCill\HWJ'OIH.,ec& : ·• · · c.·1~c.111il3'2o1s.:Buikll6.1s:1u;:Vei"Jli. is,"12.i: :.· . .. . .. .. . Note: Only non-zero reactions are listed. Reaction along Y-Y Axis Axial Reaction @Base @Top @Base k Note: Only non-zero reactions are listed. MomentAboutY-Y Axis @Base @Top k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft Max. Y-Y Deflection Distance 0.000 in 0.000 ft 0.000 in 0.000 ft 0.000 in 0.000 ft 0.000 in 0.000 ft 0.000 in 0.000 ft 0.000 in 0.000 ft 0.000 in 0.000 ft 0.297 in 8.268 ft 0.000 in 0.000 ft 0.000 in 0.000 ft 0.223 in 8.268 ft 0.000 in 0.000 ft 0.297 in 8.268 ft 0.000 in 0.000 ft 0.000 in 0.000 ft 0.000 in 0.000 ft 0.000 in 0.000 ft 0.000 in 0.000 ft 0.424 in 8.268 ft 0.000 in 0.000 ft 16 of 27 Description: Out of Plane Loads on Line 2 between Lines D and E Sketches}'. Interaction Diagrams Concrete Column P-M Interaction Diagram Phi • Mn @ Alpha (k-ft) 0 LoadComb.:c:+1.400+1.SOH, Alptw= O.Ocleg. {4.70.0.38) 225.0 202.5 22.5 lookilg along X-X Axll Loaking along y.y Axlll Concrete Column P-M Interaction Diagram Phi • Mn @ Alpha (k-ft) Load Comb.: +1.20D+o.50lr+1.60L+1.60H, Alpha= O.Odeg, (4.03, 0.32) 17 of 27 .4 Description: Out of Plane Loads on Line 2 between Lines D and E Concrete Column P-M Interaction Diagram 225.0 ~··----···································-··-·····-··p···h···i·· .. • ..... ·M····-n····®······,Al·····p···h··a--__ < .• k .. -... n ..... > .... --· ............................... ····-----· 90.0 67.5 22.5 225.0 202.5 112.5 90.0 45.0 22.5 Load Comb. : +1.20D+1.60Lr+0.50l+1.60H, Alpha= O.Odeg, (4.03. 0.32) Concrete Column P-M Interaction Diagram Phi • Mn @ Alpha (k-ft) Load Comb.= +1.200+1.60S+0.50W+1.60H, Alpha= 0.0deg, (4.03, 0.32) Concrete Column P-M Interaction Diagram 225.0 ~--·-···-······························ ................. P. __ h __ i .. •. __ M. __ n ·-®·-·Al-····p·h,_a····-···<·,--k· ... " .... > .............. -..... ·······-·······,·······--············ 22.5 .4 Q Load Comb. = +1.200+1.60Lr+0.50W+1.60H, Alpha= O.Odeg, (4.03, 0.32) Concrete Column P-M Interaction Diagram Q Load Comb. = +1.20D+O.S0Lr+0.50L +Wt-1.60H, Alpha= O.Odeg, (4.03, 0.32) 18 of 27 Description : Out of Plane Loads on Line 2 between Lines D and E Concrete Column P-M Interaction Diagram Phi • Mn @ Alpha (k-ft) Q Load Comb. = +1.371 D+0.50L +o.208+1.30E+1.60H, Alphll: O.Odeg, (4.60, 34.57) 90.0 Concrete Column P-M Interaction Diagram Phi • Mn @ Alpha (k-ft) 0 Load Comb. = +o.90D+W+0.90H, Alpha= o.Odeg, (3.02, o.24) 19 of 27 g C D. :c D. .. PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC. 928 FORT STOCKTON DRIVE, SUITE 201 SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 VERTICAL CALCULATIONS 20 of 27 • Description : L 1 •C9L>E:~~~,,(·•· Calculations per ACI 318-11, IBC 2012, ASCE 7-10 Load Combination Set: ASCE 7-10 Material .Properties' fc = 3.0 ksi ch Phi Values fr= fc 112 * 7.50 = 410.792 psi \jl Density = 145.0 pct 131 11, Ltwt Factor = 1.0 Elastic Modulus = 3,122.0 ksi Fy-Stirrups E -Stirrups Flexure: 0.90 Shear: 0.750 = 0.850 40.0ksi = 29,000.0 ksi fy -Main Rebar 60.0 ksi = Stirrup Bar Size# = # 3 E -Main Rebar = 29,000.0 ksi Number of Resisting Legs Per Stirrup = Load Combination ;A.SCE 7-10 ~rossSection&Reinfprcing Details Rectangular Section, Width= 6.0 in, Height= 16.0 in Span #1 Reinforcing .... 2 D 0.2295 L 0.27 6"'wx16"h Span•5.0 ft 128-1\CalC$\FIL/TtOt+-1.EC6 . ·:s.1s.12:9, Ver:6:15.12.f: 1-#5 at 3.0 in from Bottom, from 0.0 to 5.0 ft in this span 1-#5 at 3.0 in from Top, from 0.0 to 5.0 ft in this span Applied Loactsj Beam self weight calculated and added to loads Load for Span Number 1 Service loads entered. Load Factors will be applied for calculations. Uniform Load: D = 0.0170, Lr= 0.020 ksf, Tributary Width= 13.50 ft, (Roof Load) . DESl~N-SUMMAll.Y> : Maximum Bending Stress Ratio = 0.140: 1 Section used for this span Typical Section Mu : Applied 2.573 k-ft Mn* Phi: Allowable 18.374k-ft Load Combination +1.20D+1.60Lr+0.50L+1.60H Location of maximum on span 2.495ft Span # where maximum occurs Span # 1 Vertical ~eac;tions Load Combination Overall MAXimum Overall MINimum -+O+H -+0-+l +H -+0-+lr+H -+O+S+H -+0-+0.750Lr-+O. 750L +H -+0-+0.750L-+0.750S+H -+0-+0.60W+H -+D-+O. 70E+H -+0-+0.750Lr-+O. 750L -+0.450W+H -+D-+O. 750L-+O. 750S-+0.450W+H -+D-+O. 750L -+O. 750$-+0 .5250E +H -+0.60D-+0.60W-+0.60H Support 1 1.490 0.489 0.815 0.815 1.490 0.815 1.322 0.815 0.815 0.815 1.322 0.815 0.815 0.489 Support2 1.490 0.489 0.815 0.815 1.490 0.815 1.322 0.815 0.815 0.815 1.322 0.815 0.815 0.489 Maximum Deflection Max Downward Transient Deflection Max Upward Transient Deflection Max Downward Total Deflection Max Upward Total Deflection Support notation : Far left is #1 0.000 in 0.000 in 0.001 in 0.000 in ~Des_~~ OK ~ _ Ratio = 0 <360 Ratio = 0 <360 , Ratio= 45774 Ratio = 999 <240 21 of 27 • Description : L 1 Vertical~ , " . .:~,·,.c :,,""' ,. .,, .:, .,, , .. Load Combination -+0.600-+0.70E:.0.60H DOnly Lr Only LOnly SOnly WOnly EOnly HOnly Support 1 0.489 0.815 0.675 Support2 0.489 0.815 0.675 s11ear Stiriup ~«1~entsi',i ..... .······ .. , . . Support notation : Far left is #1 Entire Beam Span Length : Vu < PhiVc/2, Req'd Vs = Not Reqd 11.4.6.1, use stirrups spaced at 0.000 in 22 of 27 • Description : .. CODE~~S; Calculations per ACI 318-11, IBC 2012, ASCE 7-10 Load Combination Set: ASCE 7-10 Material Properties .. fc 112 = 3.0 ksi cf> Phi Values fr= fc * 7.50 = 410.792 psi \jl Density = 145.0 pct P1 A LtWt Factor = 1.0 Elastic Modulus = 3,122.0 ksi Fy -Stirrups = E -Stirrups Flexure: 0.90 Shear: 0.750 = 0.850 40.0ksi = 29,000.0 ksi fy -Main Rebar 60.0 ksi Stirrup Bar Size # = # 3 E -Main Rebar = 29,000.0 ksi Number of Resisting Legs Per Stirrup = Load Combination :A.SCE 7-10 ;d ~ro~ $eetio6& Reinforcing J)etalls Rectangular Section, Width= 6.0 in, Height= 16.0 in Span #1 Reinforcing .... 2 DI0.16575\ Lrl0.195\ 6 wx 16 h Span=9.0ft I 61n ~ 1-#6 at 3.0 in from Bottom, from 0.0 to 9.0 ft in this span 1-#6 at 3.0 in from Top, from 0.0 to 9.0 ft in this span Appliectl.oads ' ; . Beam self weight calculated and added to loads Load for Span Number 1 Service loads entered. Load Factors will be applied for calculations. Uniform Load : D = 0.0170, Lr= 0.020 ksf, Tributary Width= 9.750 ft, (Roof Load) DESl91( SUAJlfARYi. Maximum Bending Stress Ratio = 0.258: 1 Section used for this span Typical Section Mu: Applied 6.347k-ft Mn * Phi : Allowable 24.566 k-ft Load Combination +1.20D+1.60Lr+0.50L +1.60H Location of maximum on span 4.492ft Span # where maximum occurs Span # 1 Vertical Reac:tions Load Combination Overall MAXimum Overall MINimum +D-+H +D-+l.-+H +D-+l.r+H +D+S+H +D+0.750Lr+0.750L-+H +D+O. 750L +O. 750S+H +D+0.60W+H +D+O. 70E-+H +D+O. 750Lr+O. 750L +0.450W-+H +D+0.750L +0.750S+0.450W+H +D+O. 750L +O. 750S+0.5250E+H +0.60D+0.60W+0.60H Support 1 2.058 0.709 1.181 1.181 2.058 1.181 1.839 1.181 1.181 1.181 1.839 1.181 1.181 0.709 Support2 2.058 0.709 1.181 1.181 2.058 1.181 1.839 1.181 1.181 1.181 1.839 1.181 1.181 0.709 Maximum Deflection Max Downward Transient Deflection Max Upward Transient Deflection Max Downward Total Deflection Max Upward Total Deflection Support notation : Far left is #1 0.005 in O.OOOin 0.011 in 0.000 in Ratio= Ratio= Ratio= Ratio= 23996 0<360 I 10229 . 999<180 23 of27 Description : L2 Vert!cai ~eactions .. Support notation : Far left is #1 Load Combination Support 1 Support 2 :.0.600+0.70E-+-0.60H 0.709 0.709 D Only 1.181 1.181 Lr Only 0.8n 0.877 LOnly SOnly WOnly EOnly HOnly Shear Stirrqp Requ1remeotf. , , Entire Beam Span LengUl : Vu < PhiVc/2, Req'd Vs = Not Reqd 11.4.6.1, use stirrups spaced at 0.000 in 24 of 27 ________________ .................................................................................. ~-~-·~-~-L.-.~lll!lll!IIII- • PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC. 928 FORT STOCKTON DRIVE, SUITE 201 SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 FOUNDATION CALCULATIONS 25 of 27 - INPUT DATA & DESIGN SUMMARY FOOTING SIZE A 24. in B 24 in C 30 in D 10 in E 6.5 in FOOTING CONCRETE STRENGTH fc' 3 ksi AXIAL DEAD LOAD (per linear foot) PoL 1.69 k/ft AXIAL LIVE LOAD (per linear foot) PLL 0.27 k /ft LATERAL LOAD (O=VIIIND, 1=SEISMIC) 1 Seismic.SD LATERAL LOAD (per linear foot) PLAT 0.37 k /ft, SD (holdown force converted to load per linear foot) SURCHARGE q, 0.1 ksf SOIL WEIGHT w. 0.11 kcf ALLOWABLE SOIL PRESSURE a. 2.5 ksf ANALYSIS DESIGN LOADS(IBC 1605.3.2 &ACI 318 9.2.1) CASE 1: DL+LL p 1.96 k/ft CASE 2: DL + LL + E / 1.4 p 2.22 k I ft CASE 3: 0.9 DL + E / 1.4 p 1.79 k /ft CHECK SOIL BEARING CAPACITY(ACI 318 15.2.2) Service Loads CASE 1 CASE2 p 1.96 2.22 e 3.5 3.5 qs C 0.25 0.25 (0.15-w.) Area 0.22 0.22 l: p 2.4 2.7 e 2.9 3.0 Qrnax 1.54 1.72 Oa 2.50 2.50 Where [Satisfactory] --~-~, for .,, l(kl')(t+ ~) e.-£ qm .. = C 6 2 (kl') or e>~ 3(0.5C-e)' Ji 6 DESIGN FOR FLEXURE (ACI 318 22.5.1) </>M.=MIN(5A<f>.fl:S, 0.85</>ffi) 15.77 ft-kips I ft where 1.0 (ACl3188.6.1) 0.6 (ACI 318 9.3.5) elastic section modulus of section 1152 in3/ ft PAGE: DESIGN BY: REVIEW BY: C ,,__ ___ _ ~ • C #4 Top & Bot. Cont'd, Min. THE FOOTING DESIGN IS ADE QUA TE. 1.2 DL + 1.6 LL 1.2 DL + 1.0 LL+ 1.0 E 0.9DL+1.0E CASE3 1.79 Pu Pu Pu k/ ft 2.46 k/ft 2.67 k/ ft 1.89 k/ft 3.5 in (from center of footinal 0.25 k I ft, (surcharge laad) 0.22 k I ft, (footing increased) 2.3 k I ft 2.9 in 1.42 ksf 2.50 ksf • E......----+---D_....,,.. C 26 of27 (cont'd) • FACTORED SOIL PRESSURE Factored Loads CASE 1 CASE2 CASE3 Pu 2.5 2.7 1.9 k I ft eu 3.5 3.5 3.5 in (from center of fooling) yqs C 0.40 0.40 0.40 k I ft, (factored surcharge load) '!(0.15AC -(0.15-Ws) (C-D) (A-B)] 0.90 0.90 0.68 k / It, (factored footing & backfill loads) I: Pu 3.76 3.97 2.97 k /ft eu 2.5 2.6 2.5 in E 6.5 6.5 6.5 in qu, max 2.27 2.41 1.79 ksf qu, VL 2.27 2.41 1.79 ksf qu,ML 1.94 2.05 1.53 ksf qu,MR 1.43 1.51 1.13 ksf qu.VR 0.92 0.96 0.72 ksf qu, min 0.74 0.77 0.58 ksf Mu,L 0.25 0.27 0.18 ft-k I ft Mu,R 0.32 0.35 0.19 ft-k I ft Vu, L 0.00 0.00 0.00 k/ft Vu,R 0.01 0.02 0.00 k/ft Mu, mar = 0.35 ft-k I ft [Satisfactory) CHECK FLEXURE SHEAR(ACI 318 22.5.4) 4 f'7 I/Wn=3 At/JvfcB 12.62 k/ft where 0.6 (ACI 318 9.3.5) Vu,max = 0.02 k/ft < IP V n [Satisfactory) 27 of 27 STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS PACKAGE GARAGE CALCULATIONS RECEIVED JAN 11 2016 CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DIVISION PAITERSON ENGINEERING, INC 4747 MISSION BLVD., SUITE 6 SAN DIEGO, CA 92109 TEL. 858.605.0937 FAX. 858.605.1414 E.info@pattersoneng.com HUTTON RESIDENCE 1264 OAK A VE. CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Prepared For: GREYMAR ASSOCIATES 1575 SPINAKER DR. SUITE 105-B VENTURA, CA 93001 Date: December 29, 2015 Project Number: 2013-0126 f~ri "olf 1 of 41 J-\ If p .. --I -,.,,_,- PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC. 928 FORT STOCKTON DRIVE, SUITE 201 SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. STRUCTURAL BASIS OF DESIGN .................................................................. .. 2. LATERAL CALCULATIONS ........................................................................................... . 3. VERTICAL CALCULATIONS .......................................................................................... . 4. FOUNDATION CALCULATIONS .................................................................................... . 2 of 41 - PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC. 928 FORT STOCKTON DRIVE, SUITE 201 SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 STRUCTURAL BASIS OF DESIGN 3 of 41 • Ir STRUCTURAL BASIS OF DESIGN: PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC. 928 FORT STOCKTON DRIVE, SUITE 201 SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 This project consists of a single-story garage, that is intended to become a two-story granny flat with a roof deck. I. CODES The governing building code is the 2013 California Building Code (CBC) as based on the 2012 IBC (ASCE 7-10). Concrete design based on the American Concrete Institute Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-11 ). Masonry design based on TMS 402-11/ ACI 530-11/ ASCE 5-11 Building Code Requirements and Specification for Masonry Structures (MSJC Code). Steel design based on: AISC Specification for Structural Steel Buildings (AISC 360-10). AISC 341-10 Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. AISI S100-07/S2-10 North American Specification for the Design of Cold-Formed Steel Structural Members, with Supplement 1, dated 2010 AWS Structural Welding Code ANSI/AWS Dl.1 and Dl.8 (current edition). Wood design based on: AF&PA NDS-2012 National Design Specification (NDS) for Wood Construction-with Commentary and, NDS supplement-Design Values for Wood Construction, 2012 Edition. AF &PA SDPWS-08 Special Design Provisions for Wind and Seismic. 4 of 41 PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC. 928 FORT STOCKTON DRIVE, SUITE 201 SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 DESIGN CRITERIA SUMMARY CONCRETE: f' c = 3000 PSI, SPECIAL INSPECTION (U.O.N.) MASONRY: ASTM C90, f' m = 1500 PSI, SPECIAL INSPECTION REQUIRED (U.O.N.) MORTAR: GROUT: REINFORCING STEEL: ASTM C270, f' c = 1800 PSI, TYPE S ASTM C476, f' c = 2000 PSI ASTM A65 l, Fy = 40 KSI FOR #3 AND SMALLER ASTM A615, Fy = 60 KSI FOR #4 AND LARGER (U.O.N) ASTM A992, Fy = 50 KSI (ALL "W" SHAPES ONLY) STRUCTURAL STEEL: ASTM A36, Fy = 36 KSI (STRUCTURAL PLATES, ANGLES, CHANNELS) ASTM A500, GRADE B, Fy = 35 KSI (STRUCTURAL PIPES) WELDING: E70 -T6 -TYP, FOR STRUCTURAL STEEL E90 SERIES FORA615 GRADE 60 REINFORCING BARS Shop welding to be in an approved fabricator's shop. Field welding to have continuous special inspection. All welding to be done by certified welders. BOLTS & ASTM F1554 THREADED ROD: SAWN LUMBER: DOUG FIR LARCH, ALLOW ABLE UNIT STRESSES PER 2013 CBC I-JOISTS: BOISE CASCADE-ICC EDR-1336 (BCI MEMBERS) ENGINEERED BOISE CASCADE -ICC ESR-1040 (VERSA-LAM L VL MEMBERS) BEAMS: GLULAMS: DOUGLAS FIR OR DOUGLAS FOR I HEM GRADE 24F - V 4 (SIMPLE SPANS) GRADE 24F -V8 (CANTILEVERS) SOIL: CODE MINIMUM 5 of 41 • DESIGN LOADS ROOF LOADS: PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC. 928 FORT STOCKTON DRIVE, SUITE 201 SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 Roofing ................................................................................................................................... = 6.0 psf Sheathing ................................................................................................................................. = 2.0 psf Roof/Ceiling Framing .............................................................................................................. = 4.0 psf Insulation ................................................................................................................................ = 1.0 psf Ceiling Finish .......................................................................................................................... = 2.0 psf Miscellaneous ......................................................................................................................... = 2.0 psf Total Roof Dead Load ........................................................................................................................ = 17.0 psf Total Roof Live Load ......................................................................................................................... = 20.0 psf Total Roof Load ................................................................................................................................. = 37.0 psf FLOOR LOADS: Flooring ................................................................................................................................... = 6.0 psf Sheathing ................................................................................................................................. = 2. 5 psf Framing .................................................................................................................................... = 2.5 psf Ceiling Finish .......................................................................................................................... = 2.5 psf Miscellaneous ......................................................................................................................... = 1.5 psf Total Floor Dead Load ........................................................................................................................ = 15.0 psf Total Floor Live Load ......................................................................................................................... = 40.0 psf Total Floor Load ................................................................................................................................. = 55.0 psf 6 of 41 • PROPOSED DECK LOADS: PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC. 928 FORT STOCKTON ORNE, SUITE 201 SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 Decking ................................................................................................................................... = 10.0 psf Sheathing ................................................................................................................................. = 2.0 psf Deck Framing .......................................................................................................................... = 2.0 psf Insulation ................................................................................................................................ = 1.0 psf Ceiling Finish .......................................................................................................................... = 1.5 psf Miscellaneous ......................................................................................................................... = 1.5 psf Total Deck Dead Load ........................................................................................................................ = 18.0 psf Total Deck Live Load ......................................................................................................................... = 40.0 psf Total Deck Load ................................................................................................................................. = 58.0 psf EXTERIOR WALL LOADS: Studs ......................................................................................................................................... = 1.1 psf Sheathing .................................................................................................................................. = 1.5 psf Gypsum Board .......................................................................................................................... = 2.5 psf Insulation .................................................................................................................................. = 1. 0 psf Finish ........................................................................................................................................ = 10.5 psf Miscellaneous .......................................................................................................................... = 1.4 psf Total Exterior Wall Dead Load ........................................................................................................... = 18. 0 psf 7 of 41 • PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC. 928 FORT STOCKTON DRIVE, SUITE 201 SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 LATERAL CALCULATIONS 8 of 41 "12/412015 Design Maps SLDTimary Report IIIJSGS Design Maps Summary Report User-Specified Input Report Title 1264 Oak Ave, Carlsbad, CA 92008 Fri December 4, 2015 22:48:24 UTC Building Code Reference Document 2012 International Building Code (which utilizes USGS hazard data available in 2008) Site Coordinates 33.16409°N, 117.33931 °W Site Soil Classification Site Class D -"Stiff Soil" Risk Category I/II/III USGS-Provided Output S5 = 1.136 g S1 = 0.436 g SMS = 1.188 g SMl = 0.682 g SDS = 0.792 g SDl = 0.455 g For information on how the SS and 51 values above have been calculated from probabilistic (risk-targeted) and deterministic ground motions in the direction of maximum horizontal response, please return to the application and select the "2009 NEHRP" building code reference document. .... DI -II Ill MCEa Response Spectrum 1.2D l.DB c.,, D.H D.12 D.liD D.411 D.l, D.24 D.12 D. DD +----1,----1---+--t----r--+--+---+--+-----I 0.00 0.20 D.40 o.,D O.ID l.DD 1.2D 1.4D 1.,D l.llD 2.DD Period, T C sec) ai -II Ill 0.111 Design Response Spectrum 0.110 0.12 O.li4 0.51'i 0.411 0.40 0.]2 0.24 0.1, 0.011 0. DD +----t,---+--+----1---t---+--t---+--t----1 o.oo 0.20 o.4D o.,a 0.110 1.00 1.20 1.,0 1.,0 1.110 2.00 Period, T (sec) Although this information is a product of the U.S. Geological Survey, we provide no warranty, expressed or implied, as to the http://ehp1-earthquake.cr.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/summary.php?template=m inimal&latitude=33.164094&1ongitude=-117.339312&siteclass=3&ri59<ij11Vll)'=O... 1/2 ·1214/2015 Search Resuts for Map ASCE 7 Windspeed ASCE 7 Ground Snow Load Related Resources Sponsors About A TC Contact Search Results Query Date: Fri Dec 04 2015 Latitude: 33. 1641 Longitude: -117.3393 ASCE 7-10 Windspeeds (3-sec peak gust in mph*): Risk Category I: 100 Risk Category II: 11 O Risk Category Ill-IV: 115 MRI** 10-Year: 72 MRI** 25-Year: 79 MRI** 50-Year: 85 MRI** 100-Year: 91 ASCE 7-05 Windspeed: 85 (3-sec peak gust in mph) ASCE 7-93 Windspeed: 70 (fastest mile in mph) 'Miles per hour "'Mean Recurrence Interval Users should consul with local building officials to determine if there are community-specific wind speed requirements that govern. l-11 Print your results WINDSPEED WEBSITE DISCLAIMER While the information presented on this website is believed to be correct, ATC and its sponsors and contributors assume no responsibility or liability for its accuracy. The material presented in the windspeed report should not be used or relied upon for any specific application without competent examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability and applicability by engineers or other licensed professionals. ATC does not intend that the use of this information replace the sound judgment of such competent professionals, having experience and knowledge in the field of practice, nor to substitute for the standard of care required of such professionals in interpreting and applying the results of the windspeed report provided by this website. Users of the information from this website assume all liability arising from such use. Use of the output of this website does not imply approval by the governing building code bodies responsible for building code approval and interpretation for the building site described by latitude/longitude location in the windspeed load report. Sponsored by the ATC Endowment Fund • Applied Technology Council • 201 Redwood Shores Parkway, Suite 240 • Redwood City, California 94065 • (650) 595-1542 http://windspeed.atcouncil.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=10&dec=1&1atitude=33.164094&longitude=-117.339312&risk_categJlMi,100&r... 1/1 Two Story Seismic Analysis Based on 2012 IBC I 2013 CBC Determine Base Shear (Derived from ASCE 7 Sec. 12.8 & Supplement 2) V = MAX{ MIN [ S011 / (RT) , Sos I/ R] , MAX(0.044S051, 0.01) , = MAX{ MIN[ 0.38W , 0.12W] , 0.03W , O.OOW} = 0.12 W, (SD) = 0.09 W, (ASD) = 6.59 kips Where Sos= 0. 792 (ASCE 7 Sec 11.4.4) So1 = 0.455 (ASCE 7 Sec 11.4.4) S1 = 0.436 (ASCE 7 Sec 11.4.1) R = 6.5 (ASCE 7 Tab 12.2-1) PAGE: DESIGN BY: REVIEW BY: 0.5S1 I/ R} W I (forAS1 ~ 0.6 g only) I= 1 (2012 IBC Tab 1604.5 & ASCE 7 Tab 11.5-1) Ct= 0.02 (ASCE 7 Tab 12.8-2) hn = 19.0 ft x= 0.75 (ASCE7Tab12.8-2) 0.182 sec, (ASCE 7 Sec 12.8.2.1) Calculate Vertical Distribution of Forces & Allowable Elastic Drift (ASCE 7, Sec 12.8.3 & 12.8.6) k k Level Wx hx hx Wxhx fx, ASD (12.8-11) Roof 36.8 38.9 19 10 19.0 699 4.2 2.4 (0.12Wx) 6xe,allowable, ASD 0.4 2ND Where 75.7 k = 1 k = 0.5 T + 0. 75 k = 2 10.0 389 1088 for T <= 0.5 for T @ (0.5 , 2.5) for T >= 2.5 Calculate Diaphragm Forces (ASCE 7, Sec 12.10.1.1) Level Wx 'l:.Wx fx 'l:.fx Roof 36.8 36.8 4.2 4.2 2ND 38.9 75.7 2.4 6.6 75.7 6.6 Where Fmin = 0.2 Sos I Wx / 1.5, ASD Fmax= 0.4 Sos I Wx / 1.5, ASD ( 0.06 Wx) 0.4 6.6 6xe,allowable, ASD = ~a I/ (1.4 Cd), (ASCE 7 Sec 12.8.6) Cd= 4 ,(ASCE 7 Tab 12.2-1) ~a= 0.02 hsx, (ASCE 7 Tab 12.12-1) fpx, ASD, (12.10-1) 4.2 (0.12Wx) 4.1 ( 0.11 Wx) 11 of 41 Patterson Engineering 4655 Cass Sl Suite 404 PROJECT : ,H~on Garage CLIENT: PAGE: DESIGN BY: San Diego CA 92109 JOB NO.: DATE: REVIEW BY: INPUT DATA Exposure category (B, c or D, ASCE 7-10 26.7.3) B Importance factor (ASCE 7-10 Table 1.5-2) lw = 1.00 for all Category Basic wind speed (ASCE 7-10 26.5.1 or 2012 IBC) V= 110 mph Topographic factor (ASCE 7-10 26.8 & Table 26.8-1) Kzi = 1 Flat ·[ Building height to eave he = 10 ft v1 Building height to ridge h, = 10 ft Building length L = 31 ft Building width B l B = 27 ft Effective area of components (or Solar Panel area) A= 0 ft2 DESIGN SUMMARY Max horizontal force normal to building length, L, face Max horizontal force normal to building length, B, face Max total horizontal torsional load 4.96 kips, SD level (LRFD level), Typ. 4.32 kips Max total u rd force ANALYSIS Velocity pressure qh = 0.00256 Ki, Kzt Kd V2 18.11 ft-kips 13.39 ki s 18.43 psf where: qh = velocity pressure at mean roof height, h. (Eq. 28.3-1 page 298 & Eq. 30.3-1 page 316) Kh = velocity pressure exposure coefficient evaluated at height, h, (Tab. 28.3-1, pg 299) Ko= wind directionality factor. (Tab. 26.6-1, for building, page 250) h = mean roof height 0.70 0.85 10.00 ft < 60 ft, [Satisfactory] < Min (L, B), [Satisfactory) (ASCE 7-10 26.2.1) (ASCE 7-10 26.2.2) Design pressures for MWFRS P = qh [(G Cp1 )-(G Cp; )] where: p = pressure in appropriate zone. (Eq. 28.4-1, page 298). Pmin = 16 psf (ASCE 7-10 28.4.4) G Cp 1 = product of gust effect factor and external pressure coefficient, see table below. (Fig. 28.4-1, page 300 & 301) G CP; = product of gust effect factor and internal pressure coefficient.(Tab. 26.11-1, Enclosed Building, page 258) 0.18 or -0.18 a= width of edge strips, Fig 28.4-1, note 9, page 301, MAX[ MIN(0.1 B, 0.1 L, 0.4h), MIN(0.04B, 0.04L), 3] = 3.00 ft Net Pressures losfl, Basic Load Cases Net Pressures (psf), Torsional Load C ases Roof angle 0 = 0.00 Roof angle 0 = 0.00 Roof an le 0 = 0.00 Surface GCpt Net Pressure with Net Pressure with Surface Net Pressure with 1 0.40 2 -0.69 3 -0.37 4 -0.29 5 6 1E 0.61 2E -1.07 3E -0.53 4E -0.43 SE 6E Lood Cose A (Transverse) Bo sic (+GCp;) (-GCp;) GCpt (+GCp;) 4.05 10.69 -0.45 -11.61 -16.03 -9.40 -0.69 -16.03 -10.14 -3.50 -0.37 -10.14 -8.66 -2.03 -0.45 -11.61 0.40 4.05 -0.29 -8.66 7.93 14.56 -0.48 -12.16 -23.04 -16.40 -1.07 -23.04 -13.09 -6.45 -0.53 -13.09 -11.24 -4.61 -0.48 -12.16 0.61 7.93 -0.43 -11.24 Lood Cose B (Longitudinal) (-GCp;) GCpt (+GCp;) (-GCp;) -4.98 1T 0.40 1.01 2.67 -9.40 2T -0.69 -4.01 -2.35 -3.50 3T -0.37 -2.53 -0.88 -4.98 4T -0.29 -2.17 -0.51 10.69 Roofan le0 = 0.00 -2.03 -5.53 Surface Net Pressure with GCpt (+GCp;) (-GCp;) -16.40 ST 0.40 1.01 2.67 -6.45 6T -0.29 -2.17 -0.51 -5.53 14.56 -4.61 Lood Cose A (Transverse) Lood Case B (Longitudinal) Torsional oad 13 of41 Basic Load Case A Transverse Direction) Basic Load Case B Longitudinal Dlrectlo n) Area Pressure (kl with Surface (n2) (+GCp;) (-GCp;) Surface 1 250 1.01 2.67 2 2 338 -5.41 -3.17 3 3 338 -3.42 -1.18 5 4 250 -2.17 -0.51 6 1E 60 0.48 0.87 2E 2E 81 -1.87 -1.33 3E 3E 81 -1.06 -0.52 5E 4E 60 -0.67 -0.28 6E I Horiz. 4.33 4.33 Vert. -11.76 -6.21 I Min. wind Horiz. 4.96 4.96 Min. wind 28.4.4 Vert. -13.39 -13.39 28.4.4 Torsional Load Case A (Transverse Direction) Area Pressure (kl with Torsion (ft-kl Surface (112) (+GCp;) (-GCp 1) (+GCp;) 1 95 0.39 1.02 2 2 128 -2.06 -1.21 0 3 128 -1.30 -0.45 0 4 95 -0.82 -0.19 5 1E 60 0.48 0.87 6 2E 81 -1.87 -1.33 0 3E 81 -1.06 -0.52 0 4E 60 -0.67 -0.28 8 1T 155 0.16 0.41 -1 2T 209 -0.84 -0.49 0 3T 209 -0.53 -0.18 0 4T 155 -0.34 -0.08 -3 Total Horiz. Torsional Load, Mr 18 Design pressures for components and cladding p = qh[ (G Cp) • (G Cp;)] (-GCp;) 6 0 0 1 11 0 0 3 -3 0 0 -1 18 where: p = pressure on component. (Eq. 30.4-1, pg 318) Pmin = 16.00 psf (ASCE 7-10 30.2.2) G Cp = external pressure coefficient. see table below. (ASCE 7-10 30.4.2) Com. Effective Area (tr) 0 Comp. & Cladding Pressure (psf) Zone 1 GC, -GC, 0.30 -1.00 16.00 Zone2 GC, -GC, 0.30 -1.80 Area Pressure (kl with (fl') (+GCp1) (-GCp;) 338 -5.41 -3.17 338 -3.42 -1.18 210 0.85 2.24 210 -1.82 -0.43 81 -1.87 -1.33 81 -1.06 -0.52 60 0.48 0.87 60 -0.67 -0.28 Horiz. 3.82 3.82 Vert. -9.03 -3.76 Horiz. 4.32 4.32 Vert. -13.39 -13.39 Torsional Load Case B (Longitudinal Direction) Area Pressure kl with Surface (fl') (+GCp 1) (-GCp;) 2 338 -5.41 -3.17 3 338 -3.42 -1.18 5 75 0.30 0.80 6 75 -0.65 -0.15 2E 81 -1.87 -1.33 3E 81 -1.06 -0.52 5E 60 0.48 0.87 6E 60 -0.67 -0.28 5T 135 0.14 o .. 36 6T 135 -0.29 -0.07 Total Horiz. Torsional Load, Mr Walls ~t-~--l..-(! I I I I 21 --12 : ] 1 : I I "1~2--2-13 Raef e.,. Torsion (fl-kl (+GCp 1) (-GCp;) 0 0 2 3 0 0 6 8 -1 -2 15.9 0 0 4 1 0 0 10 3 -2 0 15.9 3t-~~.!~-,3 I I I I I I I I 2 I -lc-.a NI.-12 :i:u:1: I I I I 3~:z133~-IJ Roof e,,. Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 6 GC, • GC, GC, • GC, GC, • GC, 0.30 -2.80 0.90 -0.99 0.90 -1.26 (Walls reduced 1 O %, Fig. 6-11A note 5.) 19.91 Note: If the effective area is roof Solar Panel area, the only zone 1, 2 , or 3 apply. 14 of 41 Hutton Garage Shear Forces Tributary Load at Line C Governs w2 = 845(18)+120(10)(18) = 36.8 k v2 = 4,200/845 = 5.0 psf wl = 865(20)+120(10)(18) = 38.9 k vl = 4100/865 = 4.7 psf Trib Area Line C = 440 sq ft Ve= 440(5.0+4.7) = 4268 lb I .x6 POST t.\ J f ,,_ I ~t.\ ~ ITTnT 1618 1-1171 rrr-r::~'~r~ ~,,,F~l--i,-0 2x BLKG@ 48" O,C, TYP. I ro·"" ' J I I ________('";;\2 !,n Mu, s;m .;;_, ~ ;!I ~, ~ i ~I i3 I ~11 11 I I 11 I ID ~ ~ ii ©-! ---© TYP. f--i cb 15 of 41 Patterson Engineering PROJECT: Hutton Garage PAGE: 4655 Cass SL Suite 404 CLIENT: Une 1 DESIGN BY: San Diego CA 92109 JOB NO.: : : • ·. DATE: REVIEW BY: ! Shear Wall Design Based on 2012 IBC / 2013 CBC I NOS 2012 ~ L ~ INPUT DATA 1 1 LATERAL FORCE ON DIAPHRAGM: Vdia, W1ND = 200 plf,tor wind, ASD w vdia, SEISMIC = 217 plf,tor seismic, ASD I I I I I I I I I I I I GRAVITY LOADS ON THE ROOF: WoL = 128 plf,for dead load --', WLL: 0 plf,for live load v .. hp ---------------------------- DIMENSIONS: I..,.= 19.67 ft. h = 10 ft -F L = 19.67 ft, hp= 0 ft PANEL GRADE ( 0 or 1) = 1 <= Sheathing and Single-Floor h MINIMUM NOMINAL PANEL THICKNESS = 3/8 in COMMON NAIL SIZE ( 0=6d, 1=8d, 2=10d) 1 8d SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF FRAMING MEMBERS 0.5 --', EDGE STUD SECTION 2 pcs, b = 2 in, h = 6 in ------------------v. SPECIES (1 = DFL, 2 = SP) 1 DOUGLAS FIR-LARCH Tt T, GRADE ( 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or6) 6 Stud STORY OPTION ( 1=ground level, 2=upperlevel) 1 ground level shear wall L Lw l Th._ ~nL.l"'\n •• ~._,_ 1.1a..,;11u1• •~ l"'\IJ'-'-lt,"" 1 '-• DESIGN SUMMARY BLOCKED 3/8 SHEATHING \NITH 8d COMMON NAILS @ 6 in O.C. BOUNDARY & ALL EDGES/ 12 in O.C. FIELD, 5/8 in DIA. x 10 in LONG ANCHOR BOLTS@ 48 in O.C. (or 1/2 in DIA. x 10 in LONG ANCHOR BOLTS@ 34 in O.C.) HOLD-DOWN FORCES: TL= 0.64 k, TR= 0.64 k (USE HDU2-1/4x2.5 SIMPSON HOLD-DOWN) DRAG STRUT FORCES: F= 0.00 k EDGE STUD: 2 -2" x 6" DOUGLAS FIR-LARCH Stud, CONTINUOUS FULL HEIGHT. SHEAR WALL DEFLECTION: 11 = 0.16 in ANALYSIS CHECK MAX SHEAR WALL DIMENSION RATIO LIB= 0.5 < ,~!I-. ~.. I · "-i: [Satisfactory] DETERMINE REQUIRED CAPACITY v. = 217 pit, ( 1 Side Diaphragm Required, the Max. Nail Spacing = 6 in) THE SHEAR CAPACITIES PER IBC Table 2306.3 / SDPWS-08 Table 4.3A with ASD reduction factor 2.0) Min. Min. Blocked Nail Spacing Panel Grade Common Penetration Thickness Bounda,y & All Edges Nail (in) (in) 6 4 I 3 2 Sheathing and Single-Floor 8d 1 1/2 3/8 220 320 I 410 530 Note: 1. The indicated shear numbers have reduced by specific gravity factor per IBC note a. 2. Since the wall is blocked, SDPW-08 Table 4.3.3.2 does not apply. DETERMINE DRAG STRUT FORCE: F = (L-1..,.) MAX( Voia. WIND• novdia, SEISMIC) = 0.00 k (no = 1 ) (Sec. 1633.2.6) DETERMINE MAX SPACING OF 5/8" DIA (or 1/2" DIA) ANCHOR BOLT (NDS 2012, Tab.11E) 5/8 in DIA. x 10 in LONG ANCHOR BOLTS@ 48 in O.C. (or 1/2 in DIA. x 10 in LONG ANCHOR BOLTS@ 34 in O.C.) THE HOLD-DOWN FORCES: vdia Wall Seismic Overturning Resisting Safety Net Uplift Holddown (plf) at mid-story (lbs) Moments (ft-lbs) Moments (ft-lbs) Factors (lbs) SIMPSON SEISMIC 217 315 44258 Left 40239 0.9 T, = 409 ':, Right 40239 0.9 TR= 409 ~.{}· Left 40239 2/3 TL= 636 n: \NIND 200 39340 Q-:J Right 40239 2/3 TR= 636 ~ (TL & TR values should include upper level UPLIFT forces if applicable) CHECK MAXIMUM SHEAR WALL DEFLECTION: ( IBC Section 2305.3 I SDPWS-08 4.3.2) 8vbh3 Vbh hda Ll = dBendmg + ds1,ea,+ dNai/ slip+ dCho,r/ splice slip =---+--+0.75hen+--= 0.161 in,ASD < EALw Gt Lw 6xe,allowable, ASD = 0.429 in Where: v. = 217 plf ,ASD L.,= 20 ft E= 1.7E+06 psi [Satisfactory] (ASCE 7-10 12.8.6) A= 16.50 in" h = 10 ft G= 9.0E+04 psi Cd= 4 I= 1 t= 0.500 in e = n 0.020 in, SD da = 0.01 in, SD ,(ASCE 7-10 Tab 12.2-1 & Tab 11.5-1) CM= 1.0 11. = 0.02 hsx (NDS4.1.4) , (ASCE 7-10 Tab 12.12-1) CHECK EDGE STUD CAPACITY Pmax= 2.86 kips, (this value should include upper level DOWNWARD loads if applicable) Fe= 850 psi Co= 1.60 Cp= 0.49 A= 16.5 in2 E= 1400 ksi CF= 1.10 F.' = 737 psi > fc = 174 psi [Satisfactory] 16 of 41 T -ftfiY( 'iil Patterson Engineering PROJECT: Hutton Garage PAGE: 4655 Cass St Suite 404 CLIENT: Line 3 DESIGN BY: <: San Diego CA 92109 JOB NO.: DATE: ' ' REVIEW BY: ' \ Shear Wall Design Based on 2012 IBC I 2013 CBC I NOS 2012 I, L ,. INPUT DATA ·1 ·1 LATERAL FORCE ON DIAPHRAGM: Vdia, WIND = 200 plf,for wind, ASD w Vdia, SEISMIC = 204 plf,for seismic, ASD I I I I I I I I I I I I GRAVITY LOADS ON THE ROOF: WoL = 128 plf,for dead load ---', WLL = 0 plf,for live load v .. hp ------------------._.....-. -----, DIMENSIONS: Lw= 7.42 ft. h = 10 ft -F L = 7.42 ft. h = p 0 ft PANEL GRADE ( 0 or 1) = 1 <= Sheathing and Single-Floor h MINIMUM NOMINAL PANEL THICKNESS = 3/8 in COMMON NAIL SIZE ( 0=6d, 1=8d, 2=10d) 1 8d SPECIFIC .. GRAVITY OF FRAMING MEMBERS 0.5 -->, EDGE STUD SECTION 2 pcs, b = 2 in, h = 6 in ------------------v. SPECIES (1 = DFL, 2 = SP) 1 DOUGLAS FIR-LARCH l T, GRADE ( 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or6) 6 Stud STORY OPTION ( 1=ground level, 2=upper level) 1 ground level shear wall l Lw L Th1.. ~nl.J'\" ww~L.L. LIL.~IU'l't •~ N.UL.\tCi.,"' 1 &. .. DESIGN SUMMARY BLOCKED 3/8 SHEATHING 'MTH 8d COMMON NAILS @ 6 in O.C. BOUNDARY & ALL EDGES/ 12 in 0.C. FIELD, 5/8 in DIA. x 10 in LONG ANCHOR BOLTS@ 48 in O.C. (or 1/2 in DIA. x 10 in LONG ANCHOR BOLTS@ 36 in 0.C.) HOLD-DOWN FORCES: TL= 1.49 k, TR= 1.49 k (USE HDU2-1/4x2.5 SIMPSON HOLD-DOWN) DRAG STRUT FORCES: F= 0.00 k EDGE STUD: 2 -2" x 6" DOUGLAS FIR-LARCH Stud, CONTINUOUS FULL HEIGHT. SHEAR WALL DEFLECTION: ,i = 0.16 in ANALYSIS CHECK MAX SHEAR WALL DIMENSION RATIO LIB= 1.3 '"lllll' < ;I; ,,,,., · :c~, [Satisfactory] A.s41' • ' DETERMINE REQUIRED CAPACITY vb= 204 plf, ( 1 Side Diaphragm Required, the Max. Nail Spacing = 6 in) THE SHEAR CAPACITIES PER IBC Table 2306.3 / SDPWS-08 Table 4.3A with ASD reduction factor 2.0) Min. Min. Blocked Nail Spacing Panel Grade Common Penetration Thickness Bowulmy & All Edges Nail (in) (in) 6 4 I 3 2 Sheathing and Single-Floor 8d 1 1/2 3/8 220 320 I 410 I 530 Note: 1. The indicated shear numbers have reduced by specific gravity factor per IBC note a. 2. Since the wall is blocked, SDPW-08 Table 4.3.3.2 does not apply. DETERMINE DRAG STRUT FORCE: F = (L-lw) MAX( Vo;a, WIND• Oovdia, SEISMIC) = 0.00 k (Oo = 1 ) (Sec. 1633.2.6) DETERMINE MAX SPACING OF 5/8" DIA (or 1/2" DIA) ANCHOR BOLT (NDS 2012, Tab.11E) 5/8 in DIA. x 10 in LONG ANCHOR BOLTS@ 48 in O.C. (or 1/2 in DIA. x 10 in LONG ANCHOR BOLTS@ 36 in O.C.) THE HOLD-DOWN FORCES: Vdia Wall Seismic Overtuming Resisting Safety Net Uplift Holddown (plf) at mid-story (lbs) Moments (ft-lbs) Moments (ft-lbs) Factors (lbs) SIMPSON SEISMIC 204 119 15730 Left 5726 0.9 T,= 1425 ~ Ri1tht 5726 0.9 TR= 1425 ..... ~~- Left 5726 2/3 TL= 1486 a: 'MND 200 14840 {;).::, Right 5726 2/3 TR= 1486 ~ (TL & TR values should include upper level UPLIFT forces if applicable) CHECK MAXIMUM SHEAR WALL DEFLECTION: ( IBC Section 2305.3 I SDPWS-08 4.3.2) 8vbh3 Vbh hda d = dBending + ds1,ea,.+ dNail st;p+ dchoni splice slip =---+--+0.75hen+--= 0.157 in,ASD < EALw Gt Lw 6xe,allowable, ASD = 0.429 in Where: vb= 204 plf, ASD Lw= 7 ft E= 1.7E+06 psi [Satisfactory] (ASCE 7-10 12.8.6) A= 16.50 in" h = 10 ft G= 9.0E+04 psi c.= 4 I= 1 t= 0.500 in en= O.Q18 in, SD d. = 0.01 in, SD ,(ASCE 7-10 Tab 12.2-1 & Tab 11.5-1) CM= 1.0 ii.= 0.02 hsx (NDS4.1.4) , (ASCE 7-10 Tab 12.12-1) CHECK EDGE STUD CAPACITY Pmax= 1.93 kips, (this value should include upper level DOWNWARD loads if applicable) Fe= 850 psi Co= 1.60 Cp= 0.49 A= 16.5 in2 E= 1400 ksi CF= 1.10 F.° = 737 psi > fc = 117 psi [Satisfactory) 17 of 41 Patterson Engineering PROJECT: Hutton Garage PAGE: 4655 Cass St Suite 404 CLIENT: line A ·/ L DESIGN BY: San Dieao CA 92109 JOB NO.: ,'·",· DATE: REVIEW BY: ., ShearWaU Design Based on 2012 IBC / 2013 CBC /NOS 2012 " L I, INPUT DATA 1 1 LATERAL FORCE ON DIAPHRAGM: Vdia, WIND= 200 pit.for wind, ASD w Vdia, SEISMIC = 246 pit.for seismic, ASD I l I I I I I I I I I I GRAVITY LOADS ON THE ROOF: WoL: 128 pit.for dead load --'1< WLL = 0 plt,for live load -----------~ -------------~~ DIMENSIONS: I..,,= 5.92 ft ' h = 10 ft -F L = 5.92 ft' hp= 0 ft PANEL GRADE ( 0 or 1) = 1 <= Sheathing and Single-Floor h MINIMUM NOMINAL PANEL THICKNESS = 3/8 in COMMON NAIL SIZE ( 0=6d, 1=8d, 2=10d) 1 Bd SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF FRAMING MEMBERS 0.5 --'1< EDGE STUD SECTION 2 pcs,b = 2 in I h = 6 in -------------------V, SPECIES (1 = DFL, 2 = SP) 1 DOUGLAS FIR-LARCH T, IT, GRADE ( 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or6) 6 Stud STORY OPTION ( 1 =ground level, 2=upper level) 1 ground level shear wall l Lw L Tha.. ~n'-""" ••""'._._ LIL..~•'-'•' •~ l"ILll-'-11.,"", a... DESIGN SUMMARY BLOCKED 3/8 SHEATHING WITH Bd COMMON NAILS @ 4 in O.C. BOUNDARY & ALL EDGES/ 12 in O.C. FIELD, 5/8 in DIA. x 10 in LONG ANCHOR BOLTS@ 44 in O.C. (or 1/2 in DIA. x 10 in LONG ANCHOR BOLTS@ 30 in O.C.) HOLD-DOWN FORCES: TL= 1.99 k ' TR= 1.99 k (USE HDU2-1/4x2.5 SIMPSON HOLD-DOWN) DRAG STRUT FORCES: F= 0.00 k EDGE STUD: 2 -2" x 6" DOUGLAS FIR-LARCH Stud, CONTINUOUS FULL HEIGHT. SHEAR WALL DEFLECTION: I!, = 0.14 in ANALYSIS CHECK MAX SHEAR WALL DIMENSION RATIO LIB= 1.7 < [Satisfactory] DETERMINE REQUIRED CAPACITY v. = 246 pit, ( 1 Side Diaphragm Required, the Max. Nail Spacing = 4 in) THE SHEAR CAPACITIES PER IBC Table 2306.3 I SDPWS-08 Table 4.3A with ASD reduction factor 2.0) Min. Min. Blocked Nail Spacing Panel Grade Common Penetration Thickness Boundmy & All Edges Nail (in) (in) 6 4 I 3 I 2 Sheathing and Single-Floor 8d 1 1/2 3/8 220 320 I 410 I 530 Note: 1. The indicated shear numbers have reduced by specific gravity factor per IBC note a. 2. Since the wall is blocked, SDPW-08 Table 4.3.3.2 does not apply. DETERMINE DRAG STRUT FORCE: F = (L-1..,,) MAX( vdia. WIND• n.vdia, SEISMIC) = 0.00 k (no = 1 ) (Sec. 1633.2.6) DETERMINE MAX SPACING OF 5/8" DIA (or 1/2" DIA) ANCHOR BOLT (NOS 2012, Tab.11 E) 5/8 in DIA. x 10 in LONG ANCHOR BOLTS@ 44 in O.C. (or 1/2 in DIA. x 10 in LONG ANCHOR BOLTS@ 30 in O.C.) THE HOLD-DOWN FORCES: Vd1a Wall Seismic Overturning Resisting Safety Net Uplift Holddown (plf) at mid-story (lbs) Moments (ft-lbs) Moments (ft-lbs) Factors (lbs) SIMPSON SEISMIC 246 95 15037 Left 3645 0.9 T, = 1986 ~ Right 3645 0.9 TR= 1986 ~~- Left 3645 2/3 TL= 1590 n: WIND 200 11840 Q~ Ri1>ht 3645 2/3 TR= 1590 ~ (TL & TR values should include upper level UPLIFT forces if applicable) CHECK MAXIMUM SHEAR WALL DEFLECTION: ( IBC Section 2305.3 / SDPWS-08 4.3.2) 8vbh3 Vbh hd0 Ll = LlBentitng + Lls1,ea,.+ LlNa;J slip+ Llc1,orr1 splice sJ,p =---+--+0.75hen+--= 0.140 in,ASD < EALw Gt Lw S.e,allowable, ASD = 0.429 in Where: v. = 246 pit, ASD I..,,= 6 ft E= 1.7E+06 psi [Satisfactory] (ASCE 7-10 12.8.6) A= 16.50 in.! h = 10 ft G= 9.0E+04 psi c.= 4 I= 1 t= 0.500 in e = n 0.011 in, SD d. = 0.01 in, SD ,(ASCE 7-10 Tab 12.2-1 & Tab 11.5-1) CM= 1.0 I!, = . 0.02 h,x (NOS 4.1.4) , (ASCE 7-10 Tab 12.12-1) CHECK EDGE STUD CAPACITY Pmax= 2.10 kips, (this value should include upper level DOWNWARD loads if applicable) F. = 850 psi Co= 1.60 c.= 0.49 A= 16.5 in2 E= 1400 ksi c,= 1.10 F.° = 737 psi > fc = 128 psi [Satisfactory] 18 of 41 PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC. 928 FORT STOCKTON DRIVE, SUITE 201 SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 VERTICAL CALCULATIONS 19 of 41 Description : FB-01 c,orif~~~1*@Ihi;~::; -\:,, · Calculations per AISC 360-10, IBC 2012, ASCE 7-10 Load Combination Set: IBC 2012 ·. Materialf>rQ~~'i'.~-f{,-· Analysis Method : Allowable Strength Design Beam Bracing : Beam is Fully Braced against lateral-torsional buckling Bending Axis : Major Axis Bending Load Combination !BC 2012 Fy : Steel Yield : E: Modulus: W14x53 50.0 ksi 29,000.0 ksi Pl0·09f 0·181 Applied Loads , Service loads entered. Load Factors will be applied for calculations. Beam self weight calculated and added to loading Load for Span Number 1 Uniform Load: D = 0.020, L = 0.040 ksf, Extent= 0.0 --» 17.750 ft, Tributary Width= 9.0 ft, (Floor Load) Uniform Load : D = 0.020, L = 0.040 ksf, Extent= 17.750 --» 27 .0 ft, Tributary Width = 4.50 ft, (Deck Load) Point Load : D = 0.760, L = 1.620 k@ 17.750 ft, (FB-03) Design OK i_pt!!~!u!U::~t Stress R~tio -=----'---C·--0-.273: 1 -Maximum Shear Stress Ra-~tio-=--·------------------------·-···-----0-.0-82 : __ 1 _ ........ ·-·-. I Section used for this span W14x53 Section used for this span W14x53 Ma : Applied 59.395 k-ft Va : Applied 8.393 k Mn I Omega: Allowable 217.315 k-ft Vn/Omega: Allowable 102.860 k Load Combination +D+L +H Load Combination +D+L +H Location of maximum on span 14.117ft Location of maximum on span 0.000 ft Span # where maximum occurs Span # 1 Span # where maximum occurs Span # 1 Maximum Deflection Max Downward Transient Deflection Max Upward Transient Deflection Max Downward Total Deflection Max Upward Total Deflection Vertical Reactions Load Combination Overall MAXimum Overall MINimum ·+{).+H +D-+l-+H +D-+lr-+H +D+S+H +D+0.750Lr+0.750L+H +D+0.750L +0.750S-+H +D+0.60W-+H +D+O. 70E-+H +D+O. 750Lr+O. 750L +0.450W+H +D+0.750L +O. 750S+0.450W+H +D+0.750L +O. 750S+0.5250E+H +0.60D+0.60W+0.60H +0.60D+0.70E+0.60H DOnly Lr Only LOnly SOnly WOnly EOnly Support 1 8.393 1.958 3.263 8.393 3.263 3.263 7.111 7.111 3.263 3.263 7.111 7.111 7.111 1.958 1.958 3.263 5.130 Support2 7.500 1.773 2.955 7.500 2.955 2.955 6.364 6.364 2.955 2.955 6.364 6.364 6.364 1.773 1.773 2.955 4.545 0.303 in Ratio = 0.000 in Ratio = 0 .494 in Ratio = 0.000 in Ratio = 1,067 0 <360 656 0 <240 Support notation : Far left is #1 Values in KIPS 20 of 41 Description : FB-02 . P<JDE~fi::f> Calculations per NDS 2012, IBC 2012, CBC 2013, ASCE 7-10 Load Combination Set : IBC 2012 Material Properties Analysis Method : Allowable Stress Design Load Combination 2BC 2012 Fb-Tension Fb-Compr Fe-Prll 3100psi 3100psi 3000psi E: Modulus of Elasticity Fe -Perp Fv Wood Species : Boise Cascade Wood Grade : Versa Lam 3100 Ft Beam Bracing : Beam is Fully Braced against lateral-torsion buckling 5.25x14 Span = 18.50 ft 750psi 285psi 2100psi Ebend-xx 2000 ksi Eminbend -xx 530120482 ksi Density 41.75pcf Service loads entered. Load Factors will be applied for calculations. Beam self weight calculated and added to loads Uniform Load : D = 0.020, L = 0.040 ksf, Tributary Width = 9.0 ft, (Floor Load) Point Load: D = 0.1980, L = 0.440 k@ 17.50 ft, (Stair Load) Uniform Load : D = 0.020, L = 0.040 ksf, Extent= 11.0 --» 18.50 ft, Tributary Width= 2.0 ft, (Floor Load) DESI SU -. ··. RY• ,-------~-.. -~-~-------------~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Design OK i Maximum Bending Stress Ratio -Section used for this span fb: Actual FB : Allowable Load Combination Location of maximum on span Span # where maximum occurs Maximum Deflection Max Downward Transient Deflection Max Upward Transient Deflection Max Downward Total Deflection Max Upward Total Deflection Load Combination Overall MAXimum Overall MINimum +D+H +D+L+H +D+Lr-+H +D+S-+H +D-+0.750Lr-+0.750L+H +D-+0.750L-+0.750S+H +D-+0.60W-+H +D-+O. 70E+H 5.409 1.160 1.934 5.409 1.934 1.934 4.540 4.540 1.934 1.934 = = = 0.598 1 5.25x14 1,823.57psi 3,047.36psi +D+L+H 9.655ft Span# 1 0.435 in 0.000 in 0.676 in 0.000 in Support2 6.513 1.373 2.289 6.513 2.289 2.289 5.457 5.457 2.289 2.289 Maximum Shear Stress Ratio Section used for this span fv: Actual Ratio= Ratio= Ratio= Ratio= Fv : Allowable Load Combination Location of maximum on span Span # where maximum occurs 509 0 <360 328 0 <240 Support notation : Far left is #1 = = Values in KIPS 0.365: 1 5.25x14 103.94 psi 285.00 psi +D+L+H 17.352 ft Span# 1 21 of 41 Description: VirflcatJJ@jtlinsG; Load Combination +D+0.750Lr-+-0.750L-+-0.450W+H +D+O. 750L +O. 750S+0.450W+H +D+0.750L +0.750S+0.5250E+H +0.60D+0.60W+0.60H +0.60D+0.70E+0.60H D0nly Lr Only LOnly SOnly WOnly EOnly HOnly Support 1 4.540 4.540 4.540 1.160 1.160 1.934 3.475 Support2 5.457 5.457 5.457 1.373 1.373 2.289 4.225 Support notation : Far left is #1 Values in KIPS 22 of41 Description : FB-03 CODE~~~$\ Calculations per NDS 2012, IBC 2012, CBC 2013, ASCE 7-10 Load Combination Set : IBC 2012 Material Properties Analysis Method : Allowable Stress Design Load Combination IBC 2012 Fb-Tension Fb-Compr Fe-Prll 3,100.0psi 3,100.0psi 3,000.0psi E : Modulus of Elasticity Fe-Perp Fv Wood Species : Boise Cascade Wood Grade : Versa Lam 3100 Ft Beam Bracing : Beam is Fully Braced against lateral-torsion buckling 3.5x14 750.0psi 285.0psi 2,100.0psi Ebend-xx 2,000.0ksi Eminbend-xx 1,036.83ksi Density 41.750pcf 0(0.38) 3.5x14 Applied L91~> · Service loads entered. Load Factors will be applied for calculations. Beam self weight calculated and added to loads Load for Span Number 1 Uniform Load : D = 0.020, L = 0.040 ksf, Tributary Width = 9.0 ft, (Floor Load) Load for Span Number 2 Uniform Load : D = 0.020, L = 0.040 , Tributary Width = 1.0 ft, (Floor Load) Point Load : D = 0.380 k@ 2.50 ft, (Guard Rail) . ,....DESIGN SUIIMARY .. 'Maximum Bending Stress Ratio Section used for this span = 0.175 1 3.5x14 534.78psi 3,047.36psi +D+L +H, LL Comb Run (L *) Maximum Shear Stress Ratio fb: Actual FB : Allowable Load Combination Location of maximum on span Span # where maximum occurs Maximum Deflection Max Downward Transient Deflection Max Upward Transient Deflection Max Downward Total Deflection Max Upward Total Deflection Load Combination Overall MAXimum Overall MINimum +O..+i +0-1{. +H, LL Comb Run (*L) +0-1{. +H, LL Comb Run (L *) +0-1{. +H, LL Comb Run (LL) +0-1{.r..+i, LL Comb Run (*L) +0-1{.r..+i, LL Comb Run (L j 2.376 -0.014 0.756 0.743 2.376 2.363 0.756 0.756 = 4.274ft Span# 1 0.033 in Ratio = -0.030 in Ratio= 0.046 in Ratio = -0.035 in Ratio = Section used for this span fv: Actual Fv : Allowable Load Combination Location of maximum on span Span# where maximum occurs 3223 2032 2359 1734 Support notation : Far left is #1 Support2 3.191 0.114 1.457 1.571 3.077 3.191 1.457 1.457 Support3 = 0.213 : 1 3.5x14 = 60.75 psi 285.00 psi +D+L +H, LL Comb Run (LL) = 7.844 ft = Span#1 Values in KIPS 23 of 41 Description : Load Combination Support 1 +D+lr-+H, LL Comb Run (LL) 0.756 +D+S-+H 0.756 +D-+0.750Lr-+0.750L-+H, LL Comb Run(* 0.746 +D-+0.750Lr-+0.750L-+H, LL Comb Run (L 1.971 +D-+0.750Lr-+0.750L-+H, LL Comb Run (L 1.961 +D-+0.750L-+0.750S-+H, LL Comb Run (*L 0.746 +D-+0.750L-+0.750S+H, LL Comb Run (L* 1.971 +D-+0.750L-+0.750S-+H, LL Comb Run (LL 1.961 +D-+0.60W.+H 0. 756 +D-+0.70E+H 0.756 +D-+0.750Lr-+0.750L-+0.450W-+H, LL Com 0.746 +D-+0.750Lr-+0.750L-+0.450W-+H, LL Com 1.971 +D-+0.750Lr-+0.750L-+0.450W-+H, LL Com 1.961 +D-+0.750L-+0.750S-+0.450W-+H, LL Coml0.746 +D-+0.750L-+0.750S-+0.450W+H, LL Coml 1.971 +D-+0.750L-+0.750S-+0.450W-+H, LL Coml 1.961 +D-+0.750L-+0.750S-+0.5250E-+H, LL Com 0.746 +D-+0.750L-+0.750S-+0.5250E-+H, LL Com 1.971 +D-+O. 750L-+O. 750S-+0.5250E-+H, LL Com 1.961 -+0.60D-+0.60W-+0.60H 0.454 -+0.60D-+0.70E-+0.60H 0.454 D Only 0.756 Lr Only, LL Comb Run (*L) Lr Only, LL Comb Run (L *) Lr Only, LL Comb Run (LL) L Only, LL Comb Run (*L) L Only, LL Comb Run (L*) L Only, LL Comb Run (LL) SOnly WOnly EOnly HOnly -0.014 1.620 1.606 Support2 1.457 1.457 1.542 2.672 2.757 1.542 2.672 2.757 1.457 1.457 1.542 2.672 2.757 1.542 2.672 2.757 1.542 2.672 2.757 0.874 0.874 1.457 0.114 1.620 1.734 Support 3 Support notation : Far left is #1 Values in KIPS 24 of 41 Description: t;,~~:>,;~f,f1~~,, .\ Calculations per NDS 2012, IBC 2012, CBC 2013, ASCE 7-10 Load Combination Set : IBC 2012 Material Properties Analysis Method : Allowable Stress Design Load Combination IBC 2012 Fb -Tension Fb-Compr Fe -Prll 1,350.0psi 1,350.0psi 925.0psi 625.0psi 170.0psi 675.0psi E : Modulus of Elasticity Ebend-xx 1,600.0ksi Eminbend -xx 580.0ksi Wood Species : Douglas Fir -Larch Wood Grade : No.1 Fe-Perp Fv Ft Beam Bracing : Completely Unbraced Density 31.20pcf + • + + • + + • 6x12 Applied ~adsHt Service loads entered. Load Factors will be applied for calculations. Beam self weight calculated and added to loads Uniform Load : D = 0.0180, L = 0.040 , Tributary Width= 1.0 ft, (Deck Load) Uniform Load: D = 0.0180 ksf, Tributary Width= 14.0 ft, (Wall Above) Uniform Load : D = 0.020, L = 0.040 ksf, Tributary Width= 4.50 ft, (Floor Load) DESIGNSUMMARY .;. .· ·><. r----·--··-----~·--47,""--'' ·--~--..._.,._ • ...,... __ _ i Maximum Bending Stress Ratio · Section used for this span fb: Actual FB : Allowable Load Combination Location of maximum on span Span # where maximum occurs Maximum Deflection Max Downward Transient Deflection Max Upward Transient Deflection Max Downward Total Deflection Max Upward Total Deflection Verticat.Reactions••··· = = Load Combination Support 1 Overall MAXimum 2.969 Overall MINimum 1.100 +D+H 1.869 +04.+H 2.969 +04.r+H 1.869 +D+S-+f-1 1.869 +0-+0.750Lr-+O. 750L +H 2.694 +D-+0.750L-+0.750S-+f-l 2.694 +0-+0.60W-+f-l 1.869 +0-+0.70E+H 1.869 Support2 2.969 1.100 1.869 2.969 1.869 1.869 2.694 2.694 1.869 1.869 0.547: 1 6x12 734.61 psi 1,343.51 psi +D+L+H 5.000ft Span# 1 Maximum Shear Stress Ratio Section used for this span fv: Actual 0.045 in Ratio = 0.000 in Ratio= 0.120 in Ratio= 0.000 in Ratio= Fv : Allowable Load Combination Location of maximum on span Span # where maximum occurs 2688 0 <360 996 0 <240 Support notation : Far left is #1 = Values in KIPS Design OK 0.336: 1 6x12 57.04 psi 170.00 psi +D+L+H 0.000ft Span# 1 25 of 41 Description: HDR-01 :t.Vefflii:Jlijij~iiir~$; Load Combination ·+{}+0. 750Lr:.0. 750L -+0.450W.+H -+0-+0.750L-+0.750S-+0.450W-+H -+0-+0.750L-+0.750S-+0.5250E-+H -+0.600-+0.60W-+0.60H -+0.600-+0.70E-+0.60H DOnly Lr Only L Only SOnly WOnly EOnly HOnly Support 1 2.694 2.694 2.694 1.121 1.121 1.869 1.100 Support2 2.694 2.694 2.694 1.121 1.121 1.869 1.100 Support notation : Far left is #1 Values in KIPS 26 of 41 i Description: HDR-02 CODE.~$~~:.,;;.t·•.·.;, ... Calculations per NOS 2012, IBC 2012, CBC 2013, ASCE 7-10 Load Combination Set : IBC 2012 Material Properties Analysis Method : Allowable Stress Design Load Combination lBC 2012 Wood Species : Boise Cascade Wood Grade : Versa Lam 3100 Beam Bracing : Completely Unbraced Fb-Tension Fb-Compr Fc-Prll Fe -Perp Fv Ft 3,100.0psi 3,100.0psi 3,000.0psi 750.0psi 285.0psi 2,100.0 psi E: Modulus of Elasticity Ebend-xx 2,000.0ksi Eminbend-xx 1,036.83ksi Density 41.750pcf . ····-··-·····-·--·---··-···-··--····-···········--··-··-······-·············-···--------···--·-----·--·---·------···---------------·--·-------------------·---------·--------·----··---.-.-------------.-.-----------···-----·---.----··----. ' • • ' D{0.252) • P(l 4flr1.73) • • ' • D(0.018iL(0.04) • 1 t 5.25x1125 Span= 10.0ft Applied(oads Service loads entered. Load Factors will be applied for calculations. Beam self weight calculated and added to loads Load for Span Number 1 Uniform Load : D = 0.0180, L = 0.040 k/ft, Extent= 0.0 --» 4.50 ft, Tributary Width= 1.0 ft, (Deck Load) Uniform Load: D = 0.0180 ksf, Extent= 0.0-» 4.50 ft, Tributary Width= 14.0 ft, (Wall Above) Uniform Load: D = 0.020, L = 0.040 ksf, Extent= 4.50 -» 10.0 ft, Tributary Width= 6.50 ft, (Floor Load) Point Load : D = 1.460, L = 1.730 k@4.50 ft, (FB-03) DESIGN SUMMARY Maximum Bending Stress Ratio = Section used for this span fb: Actual = FB : Allowable Load Combination Location of maximum on span = Span # where maximum occurs Maximum Deflection Max Downward Transient Deflection Max Upward Transient Deflection Max Downward Total Deflection Max Upward Total Deflection · Vertical Reactions Load Combination Support 1 Overall MAXimum Overall MINimum -+0-+H -+04..-+H -+D-+lr-+H -+D+S-+H -+D-+0.750Lr-+0.750L-+H -+0-+0.750L-+0.750S+H 3.511 1.216 2027 3.511 2.027 2.027 3.140 3.140 -~·············-··--·-······--· ····················--··-·····-·--···················· --·-··-·············--------········-·-0.439 1 5.25x11.25 1,350.77psi 3,078.77psi Support2 3.390 0.921 1.534 3.390 1.534 1.534 2.926 2.926 +D+L+H 4.489ft Span# 1 0.080 in 0.000 in 0.159 in 0.000 in Maximum Shear Stress Ratio Section used for this span fv: Actual Fv : Allowable Load Combination Location of maximum on span Span # where maximum occurs Ratio= 1500 Ratio= 0 <360 Ratio= 753 Ratio= 0 <240 Support notation : Far left is #1 = = = = Values in KIPS Design OK 0.286: 1 5.25x11.25 81.59 psi 285.00 psi +D+L+H 0.000ft Span# 1 27 of 41 Description : Load Combination -+D+0.60W+H -+D+0.70E+H -+D+0.750Lr+0.750L+0.450W-+H -+D+0.750L +O. 750S+0.450W+H -+D+0.750L +0. 750S+0.5250E-+H +0.60D+0.60W+0.60H +0.60D+0.70E+0.60H D0nly Lr Only LOnly $Only WOnly EOnly HOnly Support 1 2.027 2.027 3.140 3.140 3.140 1.216 1.216 2.027 1.484 Support2 1.534 1.534 2.926 2.926 2.926 0.921 0.921 1.534 1.856 Support notation : Far left is #1 Values in KIPS Description : Calculations per NOS 2012, IBC 2012, CBC 2013, ASCE 7-10 Load Combination Set : IBC 2012 Material Properties Analysis Method : Allowable Stress Design Load Combination IBC 2012 Fb-Tension Fb-Compr Fe-Prll 3,100.0psi 3,100.0psi 3,000.0psi E: Modulus of Elasticity Wood Species : Boise Cascade Wood Grade : Versa Lam 3100 Fe-Perp Fv Ft Beam Bracing : Completely Unbraced -f i D(Of5~(:!.:!9) If-~) D(0.25,L(0.56l I -f i ii ! 5.25x9.25 Span= 3.50ft 750.0psi 285.0psi 2,100.0psi T T l Ebend-xx 2,000.0 ksi Eminbend -xx 1,036.83ksi Density 41.750pcf App•ec1 ~oadsi Service loads entered. Load Factors will be applied for calculations. Beam self weight calculated and added to loads Uniform Load : D = 0.0180, L = 0.040 ksf, Tributary Width= 14.0 ft, (Deck Load) Uniform Load : D = 0.0180 ksf, Tributary Width= 14.0 ft, (Wall Above) Point Load : D = 2.290, L = 4.220 k@ 2.50 ft, (FB-02) ;~DE~lfSUAtlAAF{Y ~~--~----------------·--·············---------------- I Maximum Bending Stress Ratio 0.31Q 1 I Section used for this span 5.25x9.25 ! fb: Actual = 959.77psi Maximum Shear Stress Ratio Section used for this span fv: Actual i FB: Allowable = 3,094.38psi Load Combination +D+L +H Location of maximum on span 2.491 ft Span # where maximum occurs Span # 1 Maximum Deflection Max Downward Transient Deflection Max Upward Transient Deflection Max Downward Total Deflection Max Upward Total Deflection 0.010 in Ratio= 0.000 in Ratio= 0.017 in Ratio= 0.000 in Ratio= ! ___ ······-··--·-·-····-··-··--··--······--··-----···········-··- Fv : Allowable Load Combination Location of maximum on span Span # where maximum occurs 4184 0 <360 2541 0 <240 Vertic:a(Reactirms . Support notation : Far left is #1 Load Combination Overall MAXimum Overall MINimum +0-+H +0-+l-+H +0-+lr-+H +O+S-+H +0-+0.750Lr-+0.750L-+H +0-+0.750L-+O. 750S-+H +0-+0.60W-++i +0-+0. 70E-+H Support 1 3.747 0.937 1.561 3.747 1.561 1.561 3.200 3.200 1.561 1.561 Support2 6.537 1.525 2.542 6.537 2.542 2.542 5.538 5.538 2.542 2.542 = = Values in KIPS Design OK 0.619 : 1 5.25x9.25 176.38 psi 285.00 psi +D+L+H 2.734ft Span# 1 29 of 41 Description : HDR-03 Vetti~'.~~ons: Load Combination +D..0.750Lr+0.750L +0.450W4i +0..0.750L..0.750S..0.450W4i +D..0.750L ..0. 750S..0.5250E4i ..0.60D..0.60W..0.60H ..0.60D..0.70E..0.60H D0nly Lr Only LOnly SOnly WOnly EOnly HOnly Support 1 3.200 3.200 3.200 0.937 0.937 1.561 2186 Support2 5.538 5.538 5.538 1.525 1.525 2.542 3.994 Support notation : Far left is #1 Values in KIPS 30 of 41 Calculations per NDS 2012, IBC 2012, CBC 2013, ASCE 7-10 Load Combination Set: IBC 2012 Material Properties Analysis Method : Allowable Stress Design Load Combination IBC 2012 Fb-Tension Fb-Compr Fe-Prll 1,350.0 psi 1,350.0 psi 925.0psi 625.0psi 170.0psi 675.0psi E : Modulus of Elasticity Ebend-xx 1,600.0ksi Eminbend-xx 580.0ksi Wood Species : Douglas Fir -Larch Wood Grade : No.1 Fe-Perp Fv Beam Bracing : Completely Unbraced Ft Density 31.20pcf • • • t 6x8 Applifld:~adS;lH%!i· Service loads entered. Load Factors will be applied for calculations. Beam self weight calculated and added to loads Uniform Load: D = 0.0180, L = 0.040 ksf, Tributary Width= 14.0 ft, (Deck Load) Uniform Load : D = 0.0180 ksf, Tributary Width= 14.0 ft, (Wall Above) ;,,JiE~~,?;£i}~i~:.·•.•:>"•i.:~5:~:!L.:::,; ____ ··-······--· --·------········ I Maximum Bending Stress Ratio = 0.418 1 I Section used for this span 6x8 Maximum Shear Stress Ratio I I lb: Actual = 563.78psi · FB: Allowable 1,348.31 psi Load Combination +D+L +H Location of maximum on span = 2.125ft Span # where maximum occurs Span # 1 Maximum Deflection Max Downward Transient Deflection Max Upward Transient Deflection Max Downward Total Deflection Max Upward Total Deflection 0.013 in Ratio= 0.000 in Ratio= 0.026 in Ratio = 0.000 in Ratio = Section used for this span fv: Actual Fv : Allowable Load Combination Location of maximum on span Span # where maximum occurs 3815 0 <360 1991 0 <240 \lerticalReactions Support notation : Far left is #1 Load Combination Overall MAXimum Overall MINimum +D..+l +D-+l..+l +D-+lr..+l +D+S+H +D-+0.750Lr-+O. 750L ..+l +D-+0.750L-+0.750S+H +D-+0.60W..+l +D-+0.70E..+l +D-+0.750Lr-+0.750L-+0.450W..+l Support 1 2.280 0.654 1.090 2.280 1.090 1.090 1.982 1.982 1.090 1.090 1.982 Support2 2.280 0.654 1.090 2.280 1.090 1.090 1.982 1.982 1.090 1.090 1.982 Design OK = 0.345: 1 6x8 = 58.70 psi 170.00 psi +D+L+H = 0.000ft Span# 1 Values in KIPS 31 of 41 .Vedi~.J~gnj;f~i,•· Load Combination ·+{}+0.750L +0.750S+0.450W-+H ·+{}+0.750L-+0.750S-+0.5250E-+H -+0.60D-+0.60W-+0.60H -+0.60D-+0.70E-+0.60H DOnly Lr Only LOnly s Only WOnly EOnly HOnly ,:,,:~" "°< Support 1 1.982 1.982 0.654 0.654 1.090 1.190 Support2 1.982 1.982 0.654 0.654 1.090 1.190 Support notation : Far left is #1 Values in KIPS 32 of 41 Description : Post@FB-01 .. ··CrJdt·~ Calculations per AISC 360-10, IBC 2012, CBC 2013, ASCE 7-10 Load Combinations Used: IBC 2012 ·· oenera1tinfoimafioii•:;1;:~!jilM········? Steel Section Name : Analysis Method : Steel Stress Grade Fy : Steel Yield E : Elastic Bending Modulus Load Combination : HSS3-1/2x3-1/2x1/4 Allowable Strength 46.0 ksi 29,000.0 ksi IBC 2012 Column self weight included : 56.1 O lbs* Dead Load Factor AXIAL LOADS ... FB-01: Axial Load at 10.0 ft, D = 5.080, L = 7.790 k DESIGN $UIIMARY.< .• ·••. Bending & Shear Check Results PASS Max. Axial+Bending Stress Ratio = Load Combination Location of max.above base At maximum location values are ... Pa:Axial Pn I Omega : Allowable Ma-x : Applied Mn-x I Omega : Allowable Ma-y : Applied Mn-y I Omega : Allowable PASS Maximum Shear Stress Ratio = Load Combination Location of max.above base At maximum location values are ... Va:Applied Vn I Omega : Allowable SteefSection .Piopertles : HSS3-1/2x3-1/2x1/4 Depth Width Wall Thick Area Weight Veg = 3.500 in 3.500 in 0.134 in 1.540 inA2 5.610 pit 0.000 in I xx Sxx Rxx zx I yy Syy Ryy Overall Column Height 10.0 ft Top & Bottom Fixity Top & Bottom Pinned Brace condition for deflection (buckling) along columns : X-X (width) axis : Unbraced Length for X-X Axis buckling= 10.0 ft, K = 1.0 Y-Y (depth) axis: Unbraced Length for Y-Y Axis buckling= 10.0 ft, K = 1.0 Service loads entered. Load Factors will be applied for calculations. 0.5106 : 1 +D+L+H 0.0 ft Maximum SERVICE Load Reactions .. Top along X-X Bottom along X-X Top along Y-Y Bottom along Y-Y 12.926 k 25.318 k 0.0 k-ft 4.430 k-ft 0.0 k-ft 4.430 k-ft Maximum SERVICE Load Deflections ... 0.0 : 1 0.0 ft 0.0 k 0.0 k Along Y-Y 0.0 in at for load combination : Along X-X 0.0 in at for load combination : 2.90 in"4 1.66 inA3 1.370 in 1.930 jnA3 2.900 in"4 C 1.660 inA3 1.370 in 0.0 k 0.0 k O.Ok 0.0 k 0.0ft above base 0.0ft above base 4.580 in"4 2.650 inA3 33 of 41 Description: Post@FB-01 C: Load 1 0 ll) ..; 3.50in X Loads are total entered value. = 0 ci I 12.8TI* Arrows do not reflect absolute direction. 34 of 41 PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC. 928 FORT STOCKTON DRIVE, SUITE 201 SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 FOUNDATION CALCULATIONS 35 of 41 Patterson Engineering PROJECT: 4655 Cass St Suite 404 CLIENT: San Diego CA 92109 JOB NO.: Pad Footin Desi n Based on ACI 318-11 INPUT DATA COLUMN WIDTH C1 COLUMN DEPTH Ci BASE PLATE WIDTH b, BASE PLATE DEPTH b, FOOTING CONCRETE STRENGTH f' C REBAR YIELD STRESS fy AXIAL DEAD LOAD Pol AXIAL LIVE LOAD PLL LATERAL LOAD (O=WIND, 1=SEISMIC) SEISMIC AXIAL LOAD PLAT SURCHARGE q, SOIL \II/EIGHT w. FOOTING EMBEDMENT DEPTH Dt FOOTING THICKNESS T ALLOW SOIL PRESSURE a. FOOTING WIDTH B FOOTING LENGTH L BOTIOM REINFORCING # THE PAD DESIGN IS ADEQUATE. ANALYSIS DESIGN LOADS (IBC 1605.3.2 &ACI 318 9.2.1) CASE 1: DL+ LL P CASE2: CASE3: DL+ LL+ E/ 1.4 0.9 DL + E / 1.4 p p 3.5 in 3.5 in 3.5 in· 3.5 in 2.5 ksi 'so ksi 0 k 5.75 k Seismic,SD 0 k,SD 0 ksf 0.11 kcf 1.5 ft 18 in 1.5 ksf 2 ft 2. ft 5 6 kips 6 kips o kips DESIGN SUMMARY FOOTING WIDTH FOOTING LENGTH FOOTING THICKNESS LONGITUDINAL REINF. TRANSVERSE REINF. 1.2 DL + 1.6 LL 1.2 DL + 1.0 LL+ 1.0 E 0.9DL+1.0E 3 3 { CD CASE3 B L T # # CHECK SOIL BEARING CAPACITY (ACI 318 15.2.2) p qMAX=-+qs+(0.15-ws)T = BL CASE 1 1.50 ksf, CASE2 1.50 ksf, 0.06 ksf < kQa, [Satisfactory] where k = 1 for gravity loads, 4/3 for lateral loads. DESIGN FOR FLEXURE (ACI 318 15.4.2, 10.2, 10.3.5, 10.5.4, 7.12.2, 12.2, & 12.5) PuAx 0.85/Jtf~ Eu f y Eu+Et 0.85f~ I-I Mu , ) 0.383bd2f C p=~~-"--'-~~~~~ fy LONGITUDINAL TRANSVERSE d 14.69 14.38 b 24 24 q u,max 2.30 2.30 Mu 1.68 1.68 p 0.000 0.000 Pmin 0.000 0.000 As 0.03 0.03 ReqD 1 # 5 1 # 5 Max. Spacing 18 in o.c. 18 ino.c. PAGE: DESIGN BY: REVIEW BY: Pu Pu Pu 2.00 ft 2.00 ft 18 in 5 @ 9 5 @ 9 r ~<>°)- '<-s C' {Dl ~ L 9 kips 6 kips o kips ino.c. ino.c. USE 3 # 5 t6l 9 in o.c. 3 # 5 t6l 9 in o.c. Pmax 0.013 0.013 Check Pprod < Pmax [Satisfactory] [Satisfactory) 36 of 41 3 CHECK FLEXURE SHEAR (ACI 318 9.3.2.3, 15.5.2, 11.1.3.1, & 11.2) ¢V n = 2¢bd./7c ............................. 'P ..... rNn Check Vu< ,PVn LONGITUDINAL -1.70 0.75 26.4 [Satisfactory] CHECK PUNCHING SHEAR(ACI 31815.5.2, 11.11.1.2, 11.11.6, & 13.5.3.2) 157.21 kips where 0.75 (ACI 318 9.3.2.3) ,p ~. bo Ap y ratio of long side to short side of concentrated load Cj + ~ + b1 + b2 + 4d 72.1 in bod 1048.1 in2 MIN(2 , 4 / ~c, 40 d Ibo) 2.0 V =P [1-..!..(b1+c1+d)(b,+c2+d)]= u u,max BL 2 2 4.0074 kips TRANSVERSE -1.58 ................................. 0.75 25.9 [Satisfactory) 1.00 < ; V n (cont'd) [Satisfactory] 37 of 41 • Patterson Engineering PROJECT : F-2.5 4655 Cass St. Suite 404 CLIENT : San Diego CA 92109 JOB NO. : INPUT DATA COLUMN WIDTH c, COLUMN DEPTH C:z BASE PLATE WIDTH b, BASE PLATE DEPTH ~ FOOTING CONCRETE STRENGTH fc' REBAR YIELD STRESS fy AXIAL DEAD LOAD PoL AXIAL LIVE LOAD PLL LATERAL LOAD (O=WIND, 1=SEISMIC) SEISMIC AXIAL LOAD PLAT SURCHARGE q. SOIL WEIGHT Ws FOOTING EMBEDMENT DEPTH D, FOOTING THICKNESS T ALLOW SOIL PRESSURE a. FOOTING WIDTH B FOOTING LENGTH L BOTIOM REINFORCING # THE PAD DESIGN IS ADEQUATE. ANALYSIS DESIGN LOADS (IBC 1605.3.2 &ACI 318 9.2.1) CASE 1: DL+LL P CASE2: DL+LL+E/1.4 P CASE 3: 0.9 DL + E / 1.4 p CHECK SOIL BEARING CAPACITY(ACI 31815.2.2) p qMAX =-+q 8 +(0.15-ws)T = BL 3.5 in 3.5 in 3.5 in 3.5 in u; ksi 60 ,. ksi 0 k 9 k 1 Seismic,SD 0 k,SD 0: ksf 0.11 • •. kcf 1.5 ft 18 in 1.5 ksf 2.5 ft 2.5. ft 5 9 kips 9 kips O kips CASE 1 1.50 ksf, DESIGN SUMMARY FOOTING WIDTH FOOTING LENGTH FOOTING THICKNESS LONGITUDINAL REINF. TRANSVERSE REINF. 1.2 DL + 1.6 LL 1.2 DL + 1.0 LL+ 1.0 E 0.9DL+1.0E 3 3 { CD CASE2 1.50 ksf, CASE3 0.06 ksf < kQa, [Satisfactory] where k = 1 for gravity loads, 4/3 for lateral loads. DESIGN FOR FLEXURE (ACI 318 15.4.2, 10.2, 10.3.5, 10.5.4, 7.12.2, 12.2, & 12.5) 0.85f~(l-I Mu . 0.383bd2f C p=~~-'----'-~~~~c....<. fy 0.85/jJ~ Eu PuAx= fy Eu+Et LONGITUDINAL TRANSVERSE d 14.69 14.38 b 30 30 q u,max 2.30 2.30 Mu 3.51 3.51 0 0.000 0.000 Pmin 0.000 0.000 As 0.07 0.07 ReqD 1 # 5 1 # 5 Max. Spacing 18 in o.c. 18 in o.c. B L T # # PAGE: DESIGN BY: REVIEW BY: Pu Pu Pu 5 5 2.50 ft 2.50 ft 18 in @ 12 @ 12 r c1 L 14 kips 9 kips o kips in o.c. ino.c. USE 3 # 5 @ 12 in o.c. 3 # 5 @ 12ino.c. Pmax 0.013 0.013 Check Pprod < Pmax [Satisfactory] [Satisfactory] 38 of 41 • CHECK FLEXURE SHEAR (ACI 318 9.3.2.3, 15.5.2, 11.1.3.1, & 11.2) <pV n = 1<pbd..fl:: Vu ...... «I>. tNn Check Vu< ¢Nn LONGITUDINAL -0.69 ........ 0.75 33.0 [Satisfactory] CHECK PUNCHING SHEAR(ACI 318 15.5.2, 11.11.1.2, 11.11.6, & 13.5.3.2) ¢JV n =(2+ y)¢.f7::Ap 157.21 kips where 0.75 (ACI 318 9.3.2.3) ......................... TRANSVERSE -0.54 . .............................. . 0.75 32.3 [Satisfactory] cj, ~. bo Ap y ratio of long side to short side of concentrated load 1.00 c1+C2+b1+b2+4d 72.1 in bod 1048.1 in2 MIN(2 , 4 / ~c, 40 d Ibo) 2.0 v =P [1-...!_(b,+c,+d)(b2+c2+d)]= u u,max BL 2 2 9.1984 kips < ; V n (cont'd) [Satisfactory) 39 of 41 ..... 11111m.~~~--liilllill .................................................................. __ __ • Patterson Engineering PROJECT: F-3.5 4655 Cass St Suite 404 CLIENT: San Diego CA 92109 JOB NO.: Pad Footin Desi n Based on ACI 318-11 INPUT DATA DESIGN SUMMARY COLUMN WIDTH c., 3.5 in FOOTING WIDTH B COLUMN DEPTH ~ 3;5 in FOOTING LENGTH L BASE PLATE WIDTH b1 3.5 in FOOTING THICKNESS T BASE PLATE DEPTH b, 3.5 in LONGITUDINAL REINF. 4 # FOOTING CONCRETE STRENGTH fc' 2.5 ksi TRANSVERSE REINF. 4 # REBAR YIELD STRESS fy AXIAL DEAD LOAD PoL AXIAL LIVE LOAD PLL LATERAL LOAD (O=WIND, 1=SEISMIC) SEISMIC AXIAL LOAD PLAT SURCHARGE q. SOIL WEIGHT w. FOOTING EMBEDMENT DEPTH D1 FOOTING THICKNESS T ALLOW SOIL PRESSURE a. FOOTING WIDTH B FOOTING LENGTH L BOTIOM REINFORCING # THE PAD DESIGN IS ADEQUATE. ANALYSIS DESIGN LOADS (IBC 1605.3.2 & ACI 318 9.2.1) CASE1: DL+LL P CASE2: CASE 3: DL+LL+E/1.4 0.9 DL + E / 1.4 p p CHECK SOIL BEARING CAPACITY (ACI 318 15.2.2) p qMAX=-+q5 +(0.15-w5)T = BL 60 ksi 0 k 17.6 k 1 Seismic.SD cl k, SD 0 ksf 0.11 kcf 1.5 ft 18 in 1.5 ksf 3.5 fl 3.5 fl 5 18 kips 18 kips o kips CASE1 1.50 ksf, 1.2 DL + 1.6 LL 1.2 DL + 1.0 LL+ 1.0 E 0.9 DL+ 1.0 E { co CASE2 1.50 ksf, CASE3 0.06 ksf [Satisfactory] where k = 1 for gravity loads, 4/3 for lateral loads. DESIGN FOR FLEXURE (ACI 31815.4.2, 10.2, 10.3.5, 10.5.4, 7.12.2, 12.2, & 12.5) 0.85f~(l-I Mu . ) 0.383bJ2f C p=~~-'--'-~~~~'-'- fy 0.85{3J~ Eu p,_IAX= f y Eu+Et LONGITUDINAL TRANSVERSE d 14.69 14.38 b 42 42 q u,max 2.30 2.30 Mu 10.35 10.35 0 0.000 0.000 Pmin 0.000 0.000 As 0.21 0.21 ReqD 1 # 5 1 # 5 Max. Soacing 18 in o.c. 18 in o.c. PAGE: DESIGN BY: REVIEW BY: Pu Pu Pu 3.50 fl 3.50 fl 18 in 5 @ 12 5 @ 12 r 0 .;;:."'~ ~I 'iii "' "l..::; 0::: C' fD ~ L 28 kips 18 kips o kips ino.c. ino.c. USE 4 # 5 t!i! 12 in o.c. 4 # 5 t!i! 12 in o.c. Pmax 0.013 0.013 Check Pprod < Pmax [Satisfactory) [Satisfactory] 40 of 41 3 " CHECK FLEXURE SHEAR (ACI 318 9.3.2.3, 15.5.2, 11.1.3.1, & 11.2) ¢V n = 2¢bd../7c ............ ~ ..... q,Vn Check Vu< q,Vn LONGITUDINAL 3.06 0.75 46.3 [Satisfactory] CHECK PUNCHING SHEAR(ACI 31815.5.2, 11.11.1.2, 11.11.6, & 13.5.3.2) ¢Wn=(2+y)¢,.[l;Ap 157.21 kips where q, 0.75 (ACI 318 9.3.2.3) ~. ratio of long side to short side of concentrated load bo C1 + C2 + b1 + b2 + 4d 72.1 in Ap bod 1048.1 in2 y MIN(2, 41 ~c, 40 d Ibo) 2.0 V =P [1-.-!..(b,+c,+d)(b2+c2+d)]= u u,max BL 2 2 22.97 kips ........................... TRANSVERSE 3.27 0.75 .. ······· :,fs':3 [Satisfactory] 1.00 < ; V n (cont'd) [Satisfactory] 41 of 41 RAMONA LUMBER COMPANY INC. P.O. BOX 1560 RAMONA CA, 92065 PH: 760-789-1080 FAX: 780-789-4958 RAMONA LOCATION 425 MAPLE STREET RAMONA CA 92065 RALPH@RAMONALUMBER COM STACEY@RAMONALUMBER.COM TRUSS ENGINEERING JOB# 11214 NAME: HUTTON TERRY & JUDY DATE 1 /29/16 COVERSHEET PATTERSON ENGINEERING, INC. D STROCT.!¥PACT O REV1SEAN0 fOft.DGONL't' RESUBMIT REVIEW 1$ ONLY FOR GEMEftA1. CONFORMANCE WTH OESIGH CONCEPT AND CONTRACT REQUIREMEH"TS CONTRACTOR lS RESPONSIBl.E FOR COMPl.WfCE WITH CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, DIMENSIONS, QUAHTtTIE.$, FIT MO COOROINATION WTH OTHER WORK. REVIEW DOES NOT AUTHORIZE S1JBSmUTIONS, EXCLUSIONS MD Llt,,IITATJOHS TO CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS UNLESS SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED IN WRITING B'f ntE COtfTR.ACTOR AND ACKNcw..EDGED BY TI1E ARCHITECT BY: CURTIS PATTERSON, SE5629 DATE: 02/03/2016 fCR I G-0</ l~l3 .. 31Ci ~ - --~~~~~~-,-~~~~~~~~~ ~----" ' I I T I I I § ~ t § C C --1·-1- • 5, I I I I ' I I 1 •°"""""1ao,,,puy-1nc.- l~ ~~~ -~ •• , ~· PROJECi'nn.e: -.,, JOU11214 HUTTON ~I A . , Ramona Lumber Company, lllo . ..._ aiuvEiifiiii:AriilN:"···· MVf80I.I: , P.O. Box 1560 • Ramona, CA 92065 CARLSBAD,CA l2GOII 22774'-1' .......... , ..... (7<i0)789-1080/FAX78M958 All ..... IN flllllllltrofl'IAIIONA LUIIIIER CO,INC.. All ........ 111111...i'IOltl I nol_...,. IIJ IIAIIONA LIMEII CO,IIIC- I 11111 L1111Bll mana:IO!IS TC: 2::1t DP 110'3. 3C: ht DJ' 110':'I. IBBS; 2Zt DP ITMID; 2d DP' S9 A TC LMERAL S'OPPOr. C:11' 12•oc. uOII. 3C LaT1RA1, s"UPPOJ": c:• 12•oc. umr, m[m ~1 0 0 , ' .... ....... 0 ... o-oS-06 6-ll 8-09-03 !USS SPU 211• 8.!J• LGAD DVIA?IOS DCIEASI • 1. 25 .&PlCED 24 .o• O.C. LOJOUG LL( 20.fll+DL( 10.0l oi TOP CHORD., n:, :Ji B~!'ttll l"HOID "' '!OTAL LOAl> • U.Q PSI' 5-G PS1' lS.Q PSP LlllIDO STOIACll DOBS IDT APPLY DUE '1C TB SPATIAL UQUIIDlft8 a. CIC .JOU SO!' IBIWG M'?. ~ C301D ClmCKID fCll lat:SP L'IYB LOID. TOP HD BOnoN CEOID LIVE !.OM)$ Act' --:!OllOJUIITLT. 6-1~ 9·02·11 27-08 JOB NAME: HUTTON TERRY & JUDY -AD3 Truss: ADJ DBS. BY, BS DATE: 1/27/2016 SEQ., 6357839 TRANS ID: 433742 1111111111 6-11 'Ihle ~ -red -_.tar i,,puo l>Y .._._ .... CBC20U/UC2112 111Z llltllU. l'OI.OS 411./QDI/C:C-1.00 l· 2•( ·SH) CID 1• 1•(·2S7t) J150 l· '•l 0) D ·,. 4•( ·JH) '92 2-Jz(-201"} 2H 1-f•t-1",l 3211 1-1•( -119) 60 I-U .. !•21H} 59' 3-4•(-2411) llO t-11=(-21U) Ult. '1-:i:11:(-1122) 314. :.o-S.( •115) U 4.-S•( -SU! 4§1 2-Is( -21,) 71S 5-11•( DJ 0 B!ll:WG i.GCAT:OIIS c•-0.1• 21'· 1.0• 1-J• t -n•> s11 l· 9&( ·100) , .. r.u: aft Nu: 1lOD BR.G IIIQOUID liG ARD. 3DC!IOII IDCTIOlll SIIE SQ.II. ISPBCIISi -140/ 941'¥ -UH/ JIOU l.!501 1.51 DP ( S::!Si -1!9/ Hl"I •3103/ JIIOII J.so• 1.s1 Dr c us, vaanw llll'l.lttI08 Ullffl, LL-L/20, TL•L/CIO XU LL Din.• -t.lH' s 11 1-1c.1• AllOIN!d .. 1.154" NU. TL Clllf Dl3L ... -o.ua• • u•-ic.1• lllo.-etl. 1.10,• :1 -0.54 ax au. LL tiBrL ... a.on• • 27'· 2 . .s• JIU. 30llll, t!. DUL• 0.112• I 21•-2.s• @, z, llOUO Li& ™ tm. I ,tnd.: 115 lllp., ll•15ft, !CDL-C.C,ICDL=l.O, I.SCI '1-10, lU lei.pt•:, lllclo1e4, C&t.2. !xp.~. .-n&tDirl, load ch:nticm hctOX'*l.,, !Jld.. wrticalle) are npoaH t.o wine., Tr.u• de&iped for v1nd loads in tn plu,• of the u...1 nly. ~ ... ~~q: ... ~,~,~e~,?o.~,~1~il:~:a~.~!1~c~ei-,~i~1"'41 6-11 8-09-03 o-cs-oe ]! m 0 ' .... 11111 LlllllliR SPBCIPICA'.!IOU TC: 2x4 DP llUTR BC, 2lt• DP tllHII DBS: lx4 DP BT&D; 2%4 DP n .l; 2dDPSS8 re Ll?Blll, SIJPJOH .cs u•oc. tJOR. BC LA"i'DAL SUPPM.T <= u•oc. DOB. ... 0 .., ... .. .., 0 .., 0-05·08 6·11 8-09-03 ·n TRUSS SP» 291-2.0111 LO.ID DUU'f!OW !IODSI • 1.25 SPACJD u.o• o.e. UW>IIIG LL( 20.0)+DL{ 10.0) cm TOP CB01J)"' DLOJIIOffllllCl!OllD• -i,QID. 30.0 HF 5.0 PSF 35.0 PSP LilllDD STOUaK DOIS .a'l' APPL? DUI TO TD IPA'l'UL ltlQfJIUIID'ft or CBC 2011 IDT UlllCI D1'. 9MTOII CIIOID CDCUD JOR lOPSF LIB LOAD. 'rOP DD IOTTOll arolD LIVI. LOADS ACT --cmoJUIJITLT. 6-11 12 -o.so 9·02·11 JOB NAME: HUTTON TERRY & JUDY -AlD Truss: AlD DBS. BY: AM DATE: 2/3/2016 SEQ. : 6360724 TRANS ID: 433901 1111111111 'rbi• -ip ~ frca OOllplter i~ by --RT C!IC2Dl3/I1IC2ll2 IWt -l'ORCIS 4WJt/-/Cq•l. DD 1-2•1 -U4l "2 ,_ 7•1-2l75l 3141 1-S•( DI t 3· t-{-1453) Ill 2-,.1-12n1 1n ,_ 1-1-21«1 u,o 1-,.1 -1n1 '° •· ••t -uu ,ss l-••I -H21 115 I-9-(-37121 180, 6-2•1-17351 HI ,-t• I •llOI l26 BIARIW LOCJ.T!OU o•-o.o• 201-2.0• 2-7•( -sn) 751 4•10•( o) a ,_ lm:{-1017) 101] --lal[mDU IDtTIOU IDCffOII -33D/ llff •JIOG/ 3HU -U•/ Ul'f ·3100/ llODR 11G UVV!UD PG llBl SIU SQ.Ill. (SPBCIBS) s. sa• 1. z, 1).1' f 625) 5.501 1.21 DP ( 625) nntCU. DIPLRr10II LllllTB: LL"'L/140, TL=J./llD IIII LL DUia. o.on•, 111-10.1• A.Uond:. o."1· 11A1. t'L C1D1 »-IL• -0.1011 a 9'· 2.7• Allowed• 1.283• 6·04 Scale: CL328!1 DI IIOIUI. liL Dl1'L • O.M11 • 0'-s.s• llll DD. n. Din.. -e.oco• • o•-s.s• @-u. 2t noa.oo w diiift 1.oib. I Wind.: 115 -.pll, lla:15ft, TCDL-C.O,tmL-l.O, &SCI '1·10, (All bigllto). bel.oN4. C.0.2, bp,C. IIUU(Ditl. lo&a -1 ... f-...-1.,. IDd. nrt.lcal(a) an upa.ml to wind. Tn>Oo -tt-1 for wind lO&do ia tile plue of the trus O.Dl.y. 1-08-11 ·@--a-1 :-,,-,-,-.1-,-llt-,-,.-.-,-w-,-.-.-"J ... 0 ... • 11111 LUIIUI SDCtflc&':lOU TC: Jst DP 11'B':'I. 3C: Js' DP 11':ll':'R HBS: 2X6 DP STMD; hf DP SB A 'l'C !.At'IIAL JUPPCr." cs 12•()1!. tdl. 3C LAflUL .BVJPOr.' c• l210C. ?roll. 0-05-08 6-11 8-0,-03 nuss SPU 211-t.!J• LOlD DIJIUI(W 11ltUABI • 1.25 IIICID 2.4.01 O.C. LQl;)DIG LL( 20.0)-tDL( 10.1) oa 'fDI CII08D = U:. M BMTCII CHORD :. fOTlt LOlD • ll.O PU' s.a PSF JS,O l'S1' LIMITBO S'I"QUU DOIS IDT UFLT DUI TD TBI SPA.Till UQOIIBmTS or C!C 201) ·~ UDG ., . .cfl'<II ~ cncub POI. UFSP Ll'R LMD. ffl:P DD BOTTOII crcao LIVI LQIDS ACT --eollCUDIIITlil. + L&tenlly bnce: ~o n,cf dia:phnp. 6-11 27-0i JOB NAME: HUTTON TERRY & JUDY -AD2 Truss: AD2 DBS. BY: BS DATB, 1/27/2016 SEQ.: 6357838 TRANS ID: 433742 1111111111 -t...._ ___ ...................... ..... ..................... _ 2.2aC ................... _ ............... +. a.~....., ................ ....... --~~-....... ~ ...... --.~ ....................... d .. b.MMQ ....... 4. No._ ... .,...10.., ................. lndnt. ,...... .. ~ ............. .,,'-II~ .... .......................... s.ca..-Tn11•-------.............. ............................... .,_........ L'NI~-~ ..... ._ ....... _....., 1PIIWr'CAlnBCSl. ...... d9Ndl ........... lllml ..... MIT•USA.~T .. -.1.a.1~ Thi• deaign prepared from CQIIPlWZ' iJ:IPU,t by --llT CBC2CU/aoeu --rca<:3S -/-/c.,.i.oo 1-2:( -397) 3'4 1-1•(-11") 3135 1-, ... , 0) 0 -,_ , .. , -2'11l 511 2-la(•20'Jtj 2H ·-I=-( •J.ttl 2111 1 ... 1.: •lH) 50 4-10:s.{-2119) 322 1-4•{-:Hll} J.30 t-lt•l-1504.) )!J'1S 7 .. ~-{-1U2l .16$ 10• Sa( -115) U 4-iw( -HS) 345 2-19{ -1'2} 602 S·ll•{ 0) U Bill:"" LOCAT:OU 0'· ,.~· 2'P· &.011 I• l•( •'JH) &M 3-!: ( -'25l 52! Ill ¥UT !Ill .... l&M."TIQ5S RUCH OBS -140/ MlV -2900/ a•• ·llt/ MlY ·2JOO/ 2Jt• BIG UO!JIR!!l nG Pll SUE .SQ.U. IS?IClU) 1.so• .Lst ;)f t nsl 1.st• l.51 i>P t us; Vll.tlOL il:DtBCftOI'. 1-DITI, LlPL/24.0, TL=L/llO Jill LL DIJ'L • -I.HI' I ll:'-10.1• .lllowd • 1.354• JU.I. n. CRUP --~. -o.ne• 1 11•-1s.1• Ulcwed. 1.1os• "" -C.51 IIU 30IU.I. LL Dl,n, = O.!J54• a 27•• 2 • .S.• 1111 3CII.II, TL DUL• O.Hs• I 21•-:..s.• JC@. 2~ nH.H t.14 gzm-c i.bib. I •:.ad: 115 spla, 'balSft, TCDLa&.D.ICD~3.0, A.SCI. 7-10, (Ll Baig:llu:, lllelONll, eat.2, lzp.C, NIIPUtDir!. load duntlcm feetor-1. , .. Ind verth•lla) are upost4 tc wi.Jl6. tr.u• dui,-1 far riD4 loado in tba plane of tb tn.u a:Uy. a-0,-01 "'@=-""a"t .... ,...,t"'e,...,a .... ""'•"": ... •"'c"', l'"."'s!'""Li=, .. , ... i@"' 6-11 o-os-oe • 11111 LlDIHJl SPICIPitr.lOU TC: hf DP 11':r.'I 3C~ 2Zt DP 11.r.J. JIID6: 2fl DP ITUD: h6DFSSA TC !.I.TD&L IUPPOr.:' 0 12•oc. tlOS. 3c I.U11Ait ml'Or.' c:• 12 •oc. UOI'. 11-2 .5x6 M-lxlO 0-05-08 6-ll 9-09-0l ':"RUSS SPU' 2'1'-l,Q• LOAD DUU.TIOX IIICRIASI • l • .2S SPAcCJ at.o• O.C. (.QllllllG Ll.{ :20.0)+l\L( 10.0) OS ?OP CEOID • DL 09 -QaOIID • TDD.It LQID ; 30,0 P8F S.O PSF 35.o PSF LIXITID S'l'OIMI tKlEl BOI APPLY DUI TO 1'3K SPIT:AL l!QDIREIIBJTS o, cac 2013 :IOT HIIIG 1111'. BO":"TOll CIIOJtD CEictE:l FOR lGHP I.IVE LOA:!. TO~ MD BOflllM CIIOC LIV& LOADS ACT ltOR-COIICtJIRDTI.Y. 6-ll M-3x6 M-Sx6(S) M-5x6 (S) 9-02-11 27-08 JOB NAME: HUTTON TERRY & JUDY -ADl Truss: ADl DES. BY, BS DATE, 1/27/20'1.6 SEQ.: 6357837 TRANS ID: 433742 1111111111 6-11 12 -o.se scale: o.2n1 Thia d.eaigo. ~ed fxcm C011pUtw input by ,._._..., @Im. 2: HH.oi tis mare LOAD· I liad: 115 mpl, h-15ft, fC)I.a,.O,latL.J .0, A.SCI 1-10, (A:.l Bai9ata;, ID.eland., C.t.2, Bxp.C, llfflStDirl, l01d hnt!.on factor•l.6, iA4 w-rtical Ca) u~ qpoae4 to •inc. Tr.ia• deligud for wiad. loa41 Ul tbe plan• af tha t.na• O:Uy. r ie:Trllu Lilp nidiea coituiiioiti I IIUriag nll for atU• QUI UOI, @1 fsi: ifC:1.ii ic:!.U iiBt.si} 6-11 11-2.Sx6 N-3:tlO 8-09-03 0-05-08 11111 l.UIIUI. SPBCIPl(:rIOD TC: ZXf DP 11'-'B":'R 3C: 2S4, DP lllr.l JDS: n, DP STUD r 2a, DP SS A; h6DJ'SSB re LlTBllL sonor. <• u•oc. t?OS. 3C :i,.I.TED.L IUPPOS':' 0 12•oc. 'JOit, m 0 . m ';' 0-05-08 6-11 8-09-QJ TaUU SPIii 21l'-2.0• LOAC DVRATiaf IICUU! • 1. 25 SPA.CID 2t.o• O.C. LCAl)JJI& X.:.( 20. D)+:CL( 10.1) C9' TOP C5IOltD "' DL .. -etlOID • TOUJ. LCllD • 31.0 "' s.o "' 35.0 ps, LIX!TID 1'!03AGI DOES SO'l' UPLY DOE tO TD SPA'fllL REQD1lllllll'8 OF CBC lfl:3 WOT BlllliG IIIT. BOffOM CIIORO C81CDD ft>I lCPSI' LJVS LOAD. TOI .IIID IOTTOll Cll>D Llv.? LOW ACT .aa-COKUUIITL!. 6-11 JOB NAME: HUTTON TERRY & JUDY -Al Truss: Al DBS. BY, BS DAT!!: l/2!1/2016 SEQ.: 6358933 TRANS ID: 433796 1111111111 1.2 -c.so Thie ci..iF _..i baa -ter 1-t by ..-..-n CJIC20ll/IIIC20l2 --roACIS fll/GD•/.,..1, tC l• 2:( -121; '6 ,_ 1•(-lH) 1151 1-S•t 0) t 3 ..... t-JUI l" 2-l=l-124.7] l"ll 'J• l:(•1751 1243 l• hi -17?) H , .. tat •lJ) U'? 3-t.•l •H2? 71 I• l•(•Slt} ,11 , .. la(-lU:) 17"1 !I• hl•'lOO) 84 --LOCUrotrS 01-c.c• 20•. 1.c• ... ....., IDCTIOU -:OS/ HOV -H/ ,11., 2• 7• I -36} 297 4•1C. ( Ol 0 , .. 1.t -us> aas Nil IIOU wm ... -HO/ coq -COO/ UGH BIG llQUIUD IIHI AUA SI:11 S(..11. (S,SC!IS) s.so• 1.11 n, ( 121: s.so• 1.01 DP l usi VIITICAL 'Dll'UCttOl' Lill'.fflt LI.-t./240. TL.-LlllO UI LL DIFL ...... .,. I 91-l . .,. Allond .. D.Jn• NU. TL CSIBP DIPL • -0.101• a t•. 2,11 Allowed• 1.2931 Scale: 0.3311 MX IOllll. W. Da'L • 0.1)1'1 I 201-t.2• 1111 IIOltII. tL DUL • fl.0211 I 20'• C.J• pm. 1~ 166 .ci @ siilife LbiS. I lin4.: US IP-, )t.lSft. tcDL-',0,acI)L•l .O, AS~ 7-la:, (A:.l Baigllt.•!. lllc:1-14. tat.2, bp.C, IIIPl!(Dirl, la&d. hn.tioa factOX•l,&,. !nd ftl'tial 11) •re qpc1ed tu wine., 'fru• tu::ltpO for wind. loadll ia tbe plll'lt of the tn11 o:ll.y. m@iu.~~1:s1:..-,~tne~:i~.~1r1~a~c~:5~.r.i,,...,,wii,,,...,<~.,,~cl .. ! 1-08·11 11111 Lmt1D 9.ftC'liIOCIOIJS TC: 2fl DP 110":'I. 3C: 2d DP 11"8':I •BBS: 2:x6 DP STMD; 2dD1SSA TC r.Af2RAL IIJPPt>F-' cs 12•oc. um, 3C LltERAL Svt»or.' <• 12•oc, UCII. 0·05-0B 6-11 B-09-03 lllfSI SIU 211-1.9• LDI.D DUU?ICJI lllCIUSK .. 1.zs snc:zn 24 .a• c.c. LOAJIIG LL( 2C.tl+DLC l0.01 01 TOP CBDQ • D'.. O> B~!'l'QI QIOl!I • TOTll L.QAD " 31.QPBI' S.O P8F lS. Q PSF LINIDI) STOlltll DOSS IOT lPfLY !>QI 'fO TRI SPATIAL UQUtllDftS OF CBC 2013 Ir.ff IRIIIG Ill?. -C30ID CIIJICUD J0a lOPD Lffl r.ol!>. !OP MD IJOtTQlll CEOID LIVI taADS &CT --:CJIICUDIITLY. -Lat:erally brace to ::vaf diaph."91'. ,-02-11 27-08 JOB NAME: HUTTON TERRY & JUDY A Truss, A DBS. BY, BS DATE, 1/27/2016 SBQ., 6357834 TRANS ID, 433742 1111111111 6-11 Thie clNiF prepared fl'CGI -ur inpu: by __ ..,, C9<2DU/DC20U --!O&CJIS 48/0DF/~1.IO 1-2•( -110) H 1· I• (·25') 1'735 1-ht O} 0 J• 4• ( D} f.21 2-l•l-207&) 21, •-:J-{-111) 2615 t. 'J•t -110} 60 t-lDa(-2111) l!:17 3-•=t-2411) 331 9-U•(-325} 21'1!1 7-2•{•1122) 265 U-S•( -185) U t-S=( •115, 54. 2--I=( •12) 562 5-11•( 0) 0 BUR:IIG LOCA.T:on 01-G.0• 21•-I.Q• DI VDT DI.CTI OH -10/ H11' -lll/ MlV I• l• ( -125) IU 3-t-t •24.2) JC Rll11DU RIACTIOD -,IO/ UOE -HD/ HOil U.G llQIJIUD BIG Allll s•u s.a.n. canc11s: 3.50' 1.51 DP ( 625! l.SO• 1.Sl DP ( ,25l ftl!tCAL 'DUL.c!'IDll tnffli LL-L/2U, TL•L/110 JIU. Lt. DE?!.• -t,1'6' & 13'· 111.l' Allowed .. l.l56' JIU :r. CllQP OE?L • -1.JH• I 131-l0:.1• Allowed• 1.1:15~ :2 -c.sa ax :IOI.ti. LL nn .. n.cu• a 21•-2.s• W 301.ll, !'!. l>IPL • C. 0'14' I 211-2.5• fo'sn. 2: fdi.co@ sk!sii!C ™· I lilld, 115 opb, balSft, !CllW.O.BCl>Lal.G, Uri 7-10, (&:1 lleiP,.u:, Baclotled, Cat.l, bp.C, JllftS(t:h-), loa4 ffl&t.iCIID f•ctoi-=l. fi, Ind. YUtin.l (a} ai:a .:ir;paHd to wine., Tr.u• a .. 1gHc1 fCT wind loade bl the plane of the tnas o:ily. lNa'",=,X.-.C'"S!"","'t"'i:,-,""6 .""t..-! ~J"'C-., f"'.T5G.-Ow"19':-:,Tf -,, t171il 6-11 8-09-03 0-05-08 .. 0 . ~ ... ·" .. ="-'·"~· .;_,,..,;.;..;.....,,......,. ........ ---------------- WEST COAST LUMBERINSPBCilONBUREAU. Oeoembar 22, 2015 8taoe)t lludae Ramoaa Lumber Co., lac. P0Box1560 bnoaa. CA 92065 Sentvlaemml: ~nalumber.com To Whom It May Collcem: Ramona Lumber Co., Inc., with &cilitia located It 425 Maple S1rNt, Ramona, Califomia 9206S la a tmDber in pod ICllldiDg ofWs Cout Lumbar lalpecdoG :em. fbr 1ru11 mamdlioture 111d bu beer! liuoe OGlober 21 2012. Ma memb•, Rlmona Trull Co., Jno., ii Jkenllll by WCLIB to stamp h'UIIOI wl1h the approved quality IDldt of WCUB. We,t. Cout Lumber lnapeolion Bureau it ICCl'editecl for tbe certiftCllt1cm of motel plate connectecl wood 1IUIIOII by Ibo Illter.nltionll Accn:litldion Stmoo, mootpOfltlld (IAS) of Whmler, catibnla. Our lAS report number ii AA67S. TIie WCLIB Qulity Auditins 1na cerdftcation program is conduoted In IOCOfdeace wlth ANSJll'PI 1, "Natloul Dellp Standard for Mllllll Plate Comiected Wood Truu Coaatruodon." If YoU have Ill)' quesUona regarding this, please COldlat me. Thank you. SIIMl«ely, Suet Rombl8'l' Diroalur of Quality Scrvtc:csa oc : Tim Matbewl Da'veStmn ~ .... ~PLA~,.,._l:a.n.1s.daalc PortlllDd 503.639~1 • FAX 503.684.8928 • Granta PIiia 541.471, 1610 •WA 253.830.2401 •So.CA 714,425.0148 6980 S.W. V111111 Street, Tiprd Oreaon 97223 • Malliog Addrwa : P.O. Box 23145 • Pa:t1and • 0n,gon 97281-3145 I ~ ll! IPPl ......... tla .. l f 111 I l I ~ ,-!=.r----1111llllll•....,u -1111'1111 & .,. I,• I.- ............. -. .. ,,,,.,,.. .. .•. .., .... ---- , .... l ... , .... l -' . ~-' ... . . .. . . .., ... . €!t~;r; •.1;;:;I:.~ ·--· ._.,#!'_ .. ..,• J:-~~:.~,_;i~-.!·--:~~'._:.· a'.=..= • ..._ ... = • /)?s~-Clllili•••• I ...... 7 f .. _. o,r•l!L,... --.... ..,..,,1111•·• --....... • • • -, . •• \ 7 ~ s i ~ ........ -r- i ~ r~ b