Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
152 SEQUOIA AVE; ; CBR2016-0478; Permit
CLICity Of Carlsbad Residential Permit Print Date: 05/15/2019 Permit No: CBR2016-0478 Job Address: 152 Sequoia Ave Permit Type: BLDG-Residential Work Class: Single Family Detached Status: Closed - Finaled Parcel No: 2060110800 Lot #: Applied: 12/28/2016 Valuation: $236,435.50 Reference #: DEV2017-0034 Issued: 03/09/2018 Occupancy Group: Construction Type: Permit Finaled: It Dwelling Units: 1 Bathrooms: 2.50 Inspector: AKrog Bedrooms: 2.00 Orig. Plan Check It: Final Plan Check It: Inspection: 5/15/2019 1:37:17PM Project Title: CARR RESIDENCE Description: CARR: NEW SFD // 1,400 SF LIV 1/875 SF DETACHED GARAGE Applicant: Owner: Contractor: MARK MCKINNEY COOWNER CARR ERIC&KIMBERLY GARCILASO CONSTRUCTION 12146 Lomica Dr 159 Sequoia Ave San Diego, CA 92128-2716 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 - 2577 Joann Dr 858-485-8787 Oceanside, CA 92056-3428 760-631-2012 BUILDING PERMIT FEE ($20004.) $1,112.35 BUILDING PLAN CHECK FEE (BLDG) $778.64 ELECTRICAL BLDG RESIDENTIAL NEW/ADDITION/REMODEL $66.00 GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS PLAN CHECK & INSPECTION $166.00 MECHANICAL BLDG RESIDENTIAL NEW/ADDITION/REMODEL $92.00 PLUMBING BLDG RESIDENTIAL NEW/ADDITION/REMODEL $182.00 PUBLIC FACILITIES FEES - outside CFD $3,824.68 SB1473 GREEN BUILDING STATE STANDARDS FEE $10.00 STRONG MOTION-RESIDENTIAL $30.74 SWPPP INSPECTION FEE TIER 1- Medium BLDG $232.00 SWPPP PLAN REVIEW FEE TIER 1- MEDIUM $55.00 WATER METER FEE 1" Displacement $34.00 WATER METER FEE 1° Displacement (P) $20.00 Total Fees: $6,603.41 Total Payments To Date: $6,603.41 Balance Due: $0.00 Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the "Imposition" of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as "fees/exaction.' You have 90 days from the date this permit was issued to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition. You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right 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 fees/exactions of which you have previously been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitation has previously otherwise expired. F' 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 1 760-602-2700 1 760-602-8560 f I www.carlsbadca.gov I p ITHE FOLLOWING APPROVALS REQUIRED PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE: []PLANNING. 0 ENGINEERING 0 BUILDING 0 FIRE 0 HEALTH 0 HAZMATIAPCD Building Permit Application cCity of 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008 Plan Check No.Cgjp/ 041 Est. Value Cceir 1sbtd Ph: 760-602-2719 Fax: 760-602-8558 Plan Ck. Deposit email: buildingcarlsbadca.gov I Date f ol / '/J, Iswppp I www.carlsbadca.gov JOB ADDRESS 152- "3enoe'l VG I SUITE#/SPACE#/UNIT# I APN I '-°' O7 C) CT/PROJECT # LOT # PHASE # It OF UNITS # BEDR BEDROOMS ii I BATHROOMS TENANT BUSINESS NAME CONSTR. TYPE 0CC. GROUP I t— I DESCRIPTION OF WORK: include Square Feet of Affected Area(s) viamo ca)cbr. I,. or"irlir-4tzin CtiilWL1cC. 2. yT O/ct7 -#°cC,C&A4.1r-Pita ' \d, t4oc. EXISTING USE I PROPOSED USE I GARAGE (SF) PATIOS (SF) I DECKS (SF) I FIREPLACE I AIR CONDITIONING I FIRE SPRIN)LERS I cai.- I I kSMC WOE I YES [:]NO YES YESNOD APPLICANT NAME Primary Contact 'cQ 6 PROPERTY OIER 4L._. — ADDRESS L24tp cç r*_ ADDRESS 161 CITY STATE ZIP CITY STATE ZIP PHONE 4c •P) tFAX I PHONE FAX I EMAIL Alt Pik Cd-k EMAIL ________________ DESIGN PROFESSIONAL. bM&E._,_tQC CONTRACTOR BUS. NAME q- •/c (b'i s-/-r 11-i brj ___________________ ADDRESS ADDRESS 7 jpyy CITY STATE ZIP CITY0 ea41 - PHONE FAX F__% 3/7pil PHON 30-6 0 FA663/0/ EMAIL EMAIL / jCfy4 /a57 4 u/niat/- ct?irl L q. I STATE 1C# .TAT C.1 ô I I CITY BUS. VZ3 4714g (Sec. 7051.5 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 exempt 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)). ®aa@w ®ao®i Workers' Compensation Declaration: I hereby affirm under penally of pe4uiy one of the following declarations: i:i I have and will maintain a certificate 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 permit is issued. have and will maintain workers' compensation, as required y Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this nermi issued. My workers' compensation insur ce carrier and policy number are: Insurance Co. _ç7i97 7417/M /&'t c1141/2 Policy No. _!/f (36-4 Expiration Date This section need not be completed if the permit is for one hundred dollars ($100) or less. [J Certificate of Exemption: I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the Workers' Compensation Laws of California. WARNING: Failure to secure workers' co pensation coverage)fi unlawful, and shall subject an employer to criminal penalties and civil fines up to one hundred thousand dollars (&100,000), In addition to the cost of compensation, dam s vided 10 - ectio 706 of the Labor code, interest and attorney's fees. AT CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE 0 AGENT DATE ® thereby affirm that I am exempt f Contractor's 4se Law for the following reason: [] I, as owner of the property or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work and the structure is not intended or offejed for sale (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who does such work himself or through his own employees, provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If, however, the building or improvement is sold within one year of completion, the owner-builder will have the burden of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sate). [J 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 builds or improves thereon, and contracts for such projects with contractor(s) licensed pursuant to the Contractor's License Law). [J I am exempt under Section _____________Business and Professions Code for this reason: I personally plan to provide the major labor and materials for construction of the proposed property improvement. DYes ENo I (have! have not) signed an application for a building permit for the proposed work. I have contracted with the following person (firm) to provide the proposed construction (include name address/phone! contractors' license number): I plan to provide portions of the work, butt have hired the following person to coordinate, supervise and provide the major work (include name! address! phone! contractors' license number): 5.1 will provide some of the work, butt have contracted (hired) the following persons to provide the work indicated (include name/address /phone !type of work): ,.'PROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE []AGENT DATE -- (309)(PaGUG.2003 OWEV090 170w waGo-wapaocRovoiza, owyawaGgovaimovo®Q) Is the applicant or future building occupant required to 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? 0 Yes Cl No Is the applicant or future building occupant required to obtain a permit from the air pollution control district or air quality management district? 0 Yes CI No Is the facility to be constructed within 1,000 feet of the outer boundary of a school site? 0 Yes 0 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. (®U®1) J®D I hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work this permit is issued (Sec. 3097 (i) Civil Code). Lenders Name Lenders Address al[PUNIOGaGou OOO®1 Icerlifythati have mad the application and state thatthe above Information isconsctandthatthe information on the plans isaccurate. I agreeto camp lywith all Cityoiclinanoes and State laws ieIatingtobuiIdingoonstijcdon. I hereby authorize representative of the City of Carlsbad to enter upon the above mentioned property for inspection purposes. I ALSO AGREE TO SAVE, INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARMLESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AGAINST ALL LIABILITIES, JUDGMENTS, COSTS AND EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANYWAY ACCRUE AGAINST SAID CITY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING OF THIS PERMIT. OSHA. M OSHApennt is required for excavations over 50' deep and demolition or construction of structures over stories in height. EXPIRATION: Every permit issued by the BuildingOflalundertheprovisionsofthisCodeshallexpirebylmitatonandbecomenullandvoki If the building or work authorized by such permit isnot commenced within 180 days from the date of such permit or if the building orork authorized by such permit is suspended or abandoned at any time after the work is commenced bra period of 180 days (Section 106.4.4 Uniform Building Code). .APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE \&&ke_. " DATE 1112- 4 STOP: THIS SECTION NOT REQUIRED FOR BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE. Complete the following ONLY if a Certificate of Occupancy will be requested at final inspection. CEnTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY (Commercial Projects Only) Fax (760) 602-8560, Email buiIdingcarIsbadca.aoV or Mail the completed form to City of Carlsbad, Building Division 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. CO#: (Office Use Only) CONTACT NAME . OCCUPANT NAME ADDRESS BUILDING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP CITY STATE ZIP Carlsbad CA PHONE FAX EMAIL OCCUPANT'S BUS. LIC. No. DELIVERY OPTIONS 0 PICKUP. o CONTACT (Listed above) o OCCUPANT (Listed above) CONTRACTOR (On P. 1) ASSOCIATED CB# 0 MAIL TO: o CONTACT (Listed above) o OCCUPANT (Listed above) CONTRACTOR (On P. 1) NO CHANGE IN USE / NO CONSTRUCTION 0 MAIL! FAX TO OTHER: CHANGE OF USE/ NO CONSTRUCTION .APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE rermi lype: oLU¼-reslueflhIaI Application uaie: t,oiuio owner: L.UUVVINN i.irc ERIC&KIMBERLY Work Class: Single Family Detached Issue Date: 03/09/2018 Subdivision: PALISADES Status: Closed - Finaled Expiration Date: 11/12/2019 Address: 152 Sequoia Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008-4057 lVR Number: 1095 Scheduled Date Actual Start Date Inspection Type Inspection No. Inspection Status Primary Inspector Reinspection Complete Checklist Item COMMENTS i, Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Yes BLDG-14 Yes Frame-Steel-Bolting-Welding (Decks) BLDG-24 Rough-Topout - Yes BLDG-34 Rough Electrical Yes BLDG-44 Yes Rough-Ducts-Dampers 10/0112018 1010112018 BLDG-17 Interior 071490.2018 Passed Andy Krogh Complete Lath/Drywall Checklist Item COMMENTS • Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Including gas test Yes - BLDG-18 Exterior 071491-2018 Passed Andy Krogh Complete Lath/Drywall 05/13/2019 05113/2019 BLDG-Final 091582-2019 Failed Andy Krogh Reinspection Complete Inspection Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency See card for corrections No BLDG-Plumbing Final No BLDG-Mechanical Final • • No BLDG-Structural Final No BLDG-Electrical Final No 05/15/2019 05/15/2019 BLDG-Final 091976.2019 Failed Andy Krogh Reinspection Complete Inspection • Checklist item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency See card forcorrections No BLDG-Plumbing Final No BLDG-Mechanical Final No BLDG-Structural Final No BLDG-Electrical Final • No Checklist Item • • COMMENTS / Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency See card for corrections Yes BLDG-Plumbing Final • Yes BLDG-Mechanical Final Yes BLDG-Structural Final Yes BLDG-Electrical Final Yes May 15,2019 • • Page 3of3 Permit Type: BLDG-Residential Application Date: 12/28/2016 Owner: COOWNER CARR ERIC&KIMBERLY Work Class: Single Family Detached Issue Date: 03/09/2018 Subdivision: PALISADES Status: Closed - Finaled Expiration Date: 11/12/2019 Address: 152 Sequoia Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008-4057 IVR Number: 1095 Scheduled Actual Date Start Date Inspection Type Inspection No. Inspection Status Primary Inspector Reinspection Complete BLDG-15 064315-2018 Failed Paul Bumette Reinspection Roof/ReRoof (Patio) Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency . No BLDG-43 Air 064317-2018 Failed Paul Bumette Reinspection Cond./Furnace Set Checklist Item COMMENTS. Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency No BLDG-84 Rough 064316-2018 Failed Paul Bumette Reinspection Combo(14,24,34,44) Checklist Item . COMMENTS . Passed BLDG-Building Deflciercy No BLDG-14 No Frame-Steel-Bolting-Welding (Decks) BLDG-24 Rough-Topout . No BLDG-34 Rough Electrical . No BLDG-44 No Rough-Ducts-Dampers 0712012018 07/2012018 BLDG-15 064501-2018 Partial Pass Michael Collins Reinspection Complete Complete Complete Incomplete Roof/ReRoof (Patio) Checklist Item COMMENTS 7 BLDG-Building Deficiency Sheathing nailing only. See card for truss Yes notes 08/1612018 08/1612018 BLDG-Electric Meter 067232-2018 Passed Andy Krogh Complete Release Checklist Item COMMENTS . Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency TSPB . Yes 08117/2018 08/17/2018 BLDG-13 Shear 067343.2018 Passed Andy Krogh Complete Panels/HD (Ok to wrap) 09119/2018 09119/2018 BLDG-23 070464-2018 . Passed Andy Krogh Complete GaslTestlRepairs BLDG-27 Shower . 070466.2018 Passed Andy Krogh Complete Pan/Tubs BLDG-84 Rough 070465-2018 Passed Andy Krogh Complete Combo(14,24,34,44) May 15,2019 . Page 2of3 Permit Type: BLDG-Residential Application Date: 12/28/2016 Owner: COOWNER CARR ERIC&KIMBERLY Work Class: Single Family Detached Issue Date: 03/09/2018 Subdivision: PALISADES Status: Closed - Finaled Expiration Date: 11/12/2019 Address: 152 Sequoia Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008-4057 IVR Number: 1095 Scheduled Actual Date Start Date Inspection Type Inspection No. Inspection Status Primary Inspector Reinspection Complete 10/1912017 10119/2017 BLDG-SW-Pre-Con 038075.2017 Passed Andy Krogh Complete Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Pending demo and grading completed Yes 03/15/2018 03/15I2018 BLDG-SW-Pre-Con 051771-2018 Passed Andy Krogh Complete Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency With contractor Yes 0411112018 04I11!2018 BLDG-21 054645.2018 Passed Andy Krogh Complete Underground/Underf loor Plumbing BLDG-22 054646-2018 Passed Andy Krogh - Complete Sewer/Water Service BLDG-24 054647-2018 Failed Andy Krogh Reinspection Complete RoughlTopout Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Wong code No 04120/2018 04/20/2018 BLDG-lI 055724-2018 Passed Tim Frazee Complete FoundationlFtg/Pler s(Rebar) Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Yes BLDG-12 Steel/Bond 055640.2018 Passed .. Tim Frazee Complete Beam Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Yes 04125I2018 04/25/2018 BLDG-Il 056054.2018 Passed Andy Krogh -complete Foundatlon/FtglPier s (Rebar) Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Garage SOC Yes BLDG-12 Stóel/Bond 056056-2018 Passed Andy Krogh Complete Beam Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Garage SOC Yes 07/18/2018 07/18/2018 BLDG-13 Shear 064314.2018 Failed Paul Bumette Reinspection Complete Panels/HD (ok to . wrap) Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency No May 15, 2019 Page 1 of 3 CBR20I6-0478 152 SEQUOIA AVE CARR NEW 8F0 111 400 SF LIV 118Th SF DETACHED GARAGE 2060110800 1212812016 CBR20I 6-0478 CITY O cARLSMD Building Division INSPECTION RECORD El INSPECUON RECORD CARD WITH APPROVED PLANS MUST BE KEPT ON THE JOB El CALL BEFORE300 on, FOR NEXT WORK DAY INSPECTION El FOR BUILDING INSPECTION CAW 760-602-2725 OR GO TO: .CarIgbpa gov/Bulfdjng AND CLICK ON Request inspection- DAM NO I YES Required Prior to Requesting Building Final it Checked YES Planning/Landscape 760-944-8463 Allow 4 8 hourS CM&l fEngineering Inspectlons 760-438-3091 Call before 2 pm Fire PreventIon 760-602-4660 Allow 48 hourS 1.56'r. I. b'q7+fl I L)C? Pnrv44.4. __________ Date I Inspector Notes MIA Of Date Date FOUNDATION UNDERGROUND OUFER #34 ROUGH MASONRY ppru - b..,ORD INSPECTION REPORT PROJECT NAME Carr Residence ADDRESS 152 Sequoia Ave. Carlsbad, Ca. ARCHITECT Mark McKinney ENGINEER Buchanan Engineering CONTRACTOR Garcilaso Const. OTHER INSPECTION DATE 08-08-2018 PLAN FILE/OTHER BLDG. PERMIT/OTHER CBR2016-0478 INSPECTION MATERIAL IDENTIFICATION D CONCRETE CONC. MIX NO. & Ib1in2 o REINF. STEEL GROUT MIX NO. & IbAn2 D MASONRY MORTAR TYPE & Ibfun2 o P.T. CONCRETE REINF. STEEL GR./SIZE o FIELD WELDING STRUCTURAL STEEL o SHOP WELDING HIGH-STRENGTH BOLT o BATCH PLANT MASONRY BLOCK o EXP. ANCHOR OTHER I OTHER Shear walls MATERIAL SAMPLING O CONCRETE 0 MORTAR 0 GROUT 0 FIREPROOFING 0 MASONRY BLOCK El REINFORCING STEEL 0 STRUCTURAL STEEL U BOLTS U OTHER INSPECTIONS PERFORMED, MATERIAL IDENTIFICATION, PROGRESS, WORK REJECTED, REMARKS PLEASE NOTE ANY RE-INSPECTION, TESTING, OR OTHER PROJECT ISSUES. I visually inspected the shear walls that require special inspection as noted below. Location: (1)11 '6 Mark 4 shear wall along A line from 1 to 2, and (1)11 '6" Mark 4 wall along E line from 3 to 4. Sheathing: 1/2", category 1, span rating 32/16, OSB. Nails: 2-3/4"x.1 48" (lOd common) collated gun nails. 4" at edge and boundary nailing w/12 field nailing. Note: The following components were checked; framing members for size and grade, shear wall lengths per plan call outs, hold down sizes and fastening, anchor bolts, nailing for size, spacing, edge distances and flush with the surface and A35's/LTP4's for spacing and fastening, CS1 4 straps full length above and below the openings nailed into 4x blocking. ALL COMPONENTS OF THE SHEAR WALLS MEET OR EXCEED PLAN CALLOUTS AND CBC. No discrepancies were observed or noted. All work is subject to City of Carlsbad approval. : VRML Certification of Compliance: All work, unless otherwise noted, complies with applicable codes and the approved plans and specifications. I PRINTED NAME Craig Bechtel ii * CERTIFICATION NO. ICC 5265295 SD-1024 SIGNATURE - £A RECORD COPY ii CIREMELE SURVEYING INC. .164 S. Escondido Blvd, Escondido, CA 92025 •Phone (760)489-2200 • Fax (760)489-2202 March 28, 2018 City of Carlsbad Department of Planning and Land Use Inspection Department Carlsbad, CA * Re: 152 Sequoia Ave. Carlsbad (APN 206-011-08) Dear Sir: On March 28, 2018 Ciremele Surveying field checked the forms for the construction of the house (Project Number DEV20I 7-0034) at the above mentioned property. We found the forms to be in conformance with the setbacks and elevation as shown on the approved Architectural and Site Plan for the site. If you have any questions please call me. Sincerely, C,L cu4 ,ç Chris Ciremele, LS 5267 1(0 No. LS 5267 CALC RECORD .nMa;cos CA 92Oi9 copy DESIGN GROU 7608397302 Date: March 21, 2018 Project Name: Eric an Kimberly Carr OW Address: 15 equoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California Footing Locations: Footings for Proposed New Residence Reference: Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendations. Proposed New Residence to be located at 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California, prepared. by Engineering Design Group, dated August 31, 2016. Observation of Summary: A representative of E.D.G. observed on-site soil conditions. Soil conditions for the RM Initials proposed footings are substantially in conformance with the referenced soils report. A representative of E.D.G. observed and measured footing excavation depth/width for the proposed footings. Footing excavations extend to proper depth and competent RM Initials bearing strata, and are acceptable for new footing. A representative of E.D.G. measured footing setback from slope face. The setback RM Initials was in generally found to be acceptable in consideration of site soil conditions. Notes to SuDenntendent/Foreman Footing excavations should be cleaned of loose debris and thoroughly presoaked just prior to placing concrete. Footings and slab subgrade should be soaked to 2% above optimum prior to the placement of vapor barrier. 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. Representative of DESIGN GROUP Date: March 21, 2018 INSPECTION REPORT PROJECT NAME Carr Residence ADDRESS 152 Sequoia Ave. Carlsbad, Ca. ARCHITECT Mark McKinney ENGINEER Buchanan Engineering CONTRACTOR Garcilaso Const. OTHER INSPECTION DATE 08-08-2018 PLAN FILE/OTHER BLDG. PERMIT/OTHER CBR2016-0478 INSPECTION MATERIAL IDENTIFICATION o CONCRETE CONC. MIX NO. & IbAn2 o REINF. STEEL GROUT MIX NO. & lblin2 o MASONRY MORTAR TYPE & lb/in2 o P.T. CONCRETE REINF. STEEL GR./SIZE o FIELD WELDING STRUCTURAL STEEL o SHOP WELDING HIGH-STRENGTH BOLT o BATCH PLANT MASONRY BLOCK o EXP. ANCHOR OTHER I2J OTHER Shear walls MATERIAL SAMPLING El CONCRETE 0 MORTAR 0 GROUT 0 FIREPROOFING 0 MASONRY BLOCK O REINFORCING STEEL 0 STRUCTURAL STEEL 0 BOLTS 0 OTHER INSPECTIONS PERFORMED, MATERIAL IDENTIFICATION, PROGRESS, WORK REJECTED, REMARKS PLEASE NOTE ANY RE-INSPECTION, TESTING, OR OTHER PROJECT ISSUES. I visually inspected the shear walls that require special inspection as noted below. Location: (1)11 '6 Mark 4 shear wall along A line from 1 to 2, and (1)11 '6" Mark 4 wall along E line from 3 to 4. Sheathing: 1/2, category 1, span rating 32/16, OSB. Nails: 2-3/4"x.148 (lOd common) collated gun nails. 4" at edge and boundary nailing w/12" field nailing. Note: The following components were checked; framing members for size and grade, shear wall lengths per plan call outs, hold down sizes and fastening, anchor bolts, nailing for size, spacing, edge distances and flush with the surface and A35'sJLTP4's for spacing and fastening, CS14 straps full length above and below the openings nailed into 4x blocking. ALL COMPONENTS OF THE SHEAR WALLS MEET OR EXCEED PLAN CALLOUTS AND CBC. No discrepancies were observed or noted. All work is subject to City of Carlsbad approval. Certification of Compliance: All work, unless otherwise noted, complies with applicable codes and the approved plans and specifications. I PRINTED NAME Craig Bechtel CERTIFICATION NO. ICC 5265295 SD-1024 SIGNATURE (,u '&J1i. EsGil Corporation In (Partners Flip wit/i government for (Building Safety DATE: 2/27/2017 JuRISDlCTlONzca*Isbad PLAN CHECK NO.: CBR2016-0478 O APPLICANT - RIS. O PLAN REVIEWER 0 FILE SET: III PROJECT ADDRESS: 152 Sequoia Ave. PROJECT NAME: New Dwelling and Detached Garage The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. 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. Liii The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at EsGil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: Mark McKinney, Architect e-mail 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: Mark McKinn Telephone #: (858) 485-8787 Date contacted : : ) Email: mckinneyarchitect@hotmail.com Mail Telephone Fax n erson LII REMARKS: By: Bert Domingo for CM Enclosures: EsGil Corporation 0 GA 0 EJ 0 MB 0 PC 2/27/2017 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 • San Diego, California 92123 • (858) 560-1468 • Fax(858)560-1576 EsGil Corporation In PartnersIiip with government for thudding Safety DATE: 2/24/2017 U PPLICANT 2'J URIS. JURISDICTION: Carlsbad U PLAN REVIEWER U FILE PLAN CHECK NO.: CBR2016-0478 SET: II PROJECT ADDRESS: 152 Sequoia Ave. PROJECT NAME: New Dwelling and Detached Garage The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes. 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. LI The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at EsGil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. LI The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: Mark McKinney, Architect e-mail 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: Mark McKinney Telephone #: (858) 485-8787 )Date contactedf'4 (by)'l L4- Email: mckinneyarchitect©hotmail.com all '-" tM e ephone' Fax In Person LI REMARK By: Bert Domingo Enclosures: EsGil Corporation U GA 0 EJ 0 MB 0 Pc 2/21/2017 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 • San Diego, California 92123 • (858) 560-1468 • Fax (858) 560-1576 Carlsbad CBR20 16-0478 2/4/2cY17 NOTE: The items listed below are from the previous correction list. These remaining items have not been adequately addressed. The numbers of the items are from the previous check list and may not necessarily be in sequence. The notes in bold font are current. NOTE: 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: 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. Bring TWO 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. All sheets of plans must be signed by the person responsible for their preparation. (California Business and Professions Code). This will be checked on the final. PLUMBING 19. An instantaneous water heater is shown on the plans. Please include a gas pipe sizing design (isometric or pipe layout) for all gas loads. The gas pipe sizing for a tank type water heater shall be based upon a minimum 199,000 Btu gas input rating. Energy Standards 150.0(n). Please submit an isometric or pipe layout for the gas lines. END OF REVIEW 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. 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 Chuck Mendenhall at Esgil Corporation. Thank you. EsGil Corporation In Partners/iip wit/i government for cBui(&ng Safety DATE: 1/13/17 JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: R2016-0478 SET:I PROJECT ADDRESS: 152 Sequoia Ave. PROJECT NAME: New Dwelling and Detached Garage U 3PPLICANT RIS. U PLAN REVIEWER U FILE The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes. 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. The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at EsGil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant. contact person. The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: Mark McKinney, Architect e-mail 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: Yark McKinney Telephone #:(858) 485-8787 Date coltacted: ( (byflC) Email: mckinneyarOhitect©hotmail:corn 41aH '.FeLephoner Fax In Person rflr\J •.. LI REMAR c *S V : By: Chuck Mendenhall Enclosures: EsGil Corporation [:1 GA El EJ El MB El Pc 12130116 . . 9320, Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 • San Diego, California 92123 • (858) 560-1468 • Fax(858)560-f576 Carlsbad R2016-0478 1/13/17 PLAN REVIEW CORRECTION LIST SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS AND DUPLEXES PLAN CHECK NO.: R2016-0478 JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PROJECT ADDRESS: 152 Sequoia Ave. FLOOR AREA: Dwelling= 1400 sf Garage= 875 sf REMARKS: DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY JURISDICTION: DATE INITIAL PLAN REVIEW COMPLETED: 1/13/17 STORIES: one HEIGHT: 16ft approx. per CRC DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY ESGIL CORPORATION: 12/30/16 PLAN REVIEWER: Chuck Mendenhall FOREWORD (PLEASE READ): 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 2013 edition of the California Code of Regulations (Title 24), which adopts the following model codes: 2012 IRC, 2012 IBC, 2012 UPC, 2012 UMC and 2011 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 2012 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. Carlsbad R2016-0478 1/13/17 NOTE: 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: 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. Bring TWO 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. Expand the project data notes found on the cover sheet of the plans to indicate that these buildings must be equipped with automatic fire sprinkler system. 2. All sheets of plans must be signed by the person responsible for their preparation. (California Business and Professions Code). On the cover sheet of the plans, specify any items that will have a deferred submittal (trusses, fire sprinklers/alarms, etc.). Specify on the plans the following information for the fireplace(s): Manufacturer's name/model number and ICC approval number, or equal. Note on the plans that the gas fireplace(s) shall be a direct-vent sealed-combustion type. CGC 4.503.1. As per the soil report the footing width must be 15". Specify the width of the footing in detail 7/S1.1. The roof framing plan on sheet S3.0 shows a 4X4 support post for the 3.5X5.5 LVL header along grid line 4. There is no footing shown on sheet S2.0 for the support of the 4X4 post. . RESIDENTIAL GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS The California Building Standards Commission 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. CGC Section 101.3. The Standards apply to newly constructed residential buildings, along with additions/alterations that increase the building's conditioned area, volume or size. CGC Section 303.1.1. Provide a sheet on the plans labeled "Green Building Code Requirements" and include the following notes as applicable. Storm water drainage/retention during construction. Note on the plans: Projects which disturb less than one acre of soil shall manage storm water drainage during construction by one of the following: A. Retention basins. B. Where storm water is conveyed to a public Carlsbad R2016-0478 1/13/17 drainage system, water shall be filtered by use of a barrier system, wattle or other approved method. CGC 4.106.2. Grading and paving. Note on the plans that site grading or drainage system will manage all surface water flows to keep water from entering buildings (swales, water collection, French drains, etc.). CGC 4.106.3. Exception: Additions not altering the drainage path. Indoor water use. Show compliance with the following table for new/replaced fixtures, per CGC 4.303.1. FIXTURE TYPE MAXIMUM FLOW RATE Water closets 1.28 gallons/flush Showerheads 2 gpm @ 80 psi Lavatory faucets 1.5 gpm @ 60 psi' Kitchen faucets 1.8 gpm @ 60 psi Note on the plans that automatic irrigation system controllers shall comply with the CGC Section 4.304.2 as follows: A. Controllers shall be weather or soil moisture based that automatically adjust irrigation in response to changes in needs as weather conditions change. B. Weather based controllers shall have separate wired or wireless rain sensor which connects or communicates with the controller(s). Soil moisture based controllers are not required to have rain sensors. Recycling. Note on the plans that a minimum of 50% of construction waste is to be recycled. CGC 4.408.1. Recycling. Note on the plans that the contractor shall submit a Construction Waste Management Plan to the jurisdiction agency that regulates waste management, per CGC 4.408.2. Operation and maintenance manual. 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. Pollutant control. 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. Pollutant control. 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. Interior moisture control. 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 in Section 4.505.3. 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 4.505.3. Carlsbad R2016-0478 1/13/17 17. Indoor air quality. 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. 18.. Note on the plans that prior to final inspection the licensed contractor, architect or engineer in responsible charge of the overall construction must provide to the building department official written verification that all applicable provisions from the Green Building Standards Code have been implemented as part of the construction. CGC 102.3. PLUMBING An instantaneous water heater is shown on the plans. Please include a gas pipe sizing design (isometric or pipe layout) for all gas loads. The gas pipe sizing for a tank type water heater shall be based upon a minimum 199,000 Btu gas input rating. Energy Standards 150.0(n). . ENERGY CONSERVATION Residential ventilation requirements: show on the plans the location of the exhaust for whole house ventilation. Provide manufacturers specification for the exhaust fan specifying the sone rating Kitchens require exhaust fans with a minimum 100 cfm ducted to the exterior. Detail compliance by including a complying exhaust fan or a ducted range hood to the exterior. Bathrooms require exhaust fans (minimum 50 cfm) to be ducted to the exterior. A bathroom is defined 'as a room with a bathtub, shower, or spa or some similar source of moisture" Residential bathroom exhaust fans shall be energy star rated and shall be control by a humidistat capable of an adjustment between 50 and 80% humidity. CaiGreen 4.506.1. Exception: Control by a humidistat is not required if the bathroom exhaust fan is also the dwelling whole house ventilation. Mechanical whole house ventilation must be provided. Identify the fan providing the whole house ventilation (complete with CFM) on the floorplans. • All fans installed to meet all of the preceding requirements must be specified at a noise rating of a maximum I "Sone" (for the continuous use calculation) or 3 "Sone" (for the intermittent use calculation). END OF REVIEW 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. 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 Chuck Mendenhall at Esgil Corporation. Thank you. Carlsbad R2016-0478 1/13/17 (DO NOT PAY- THIS IS NOT AN INVOICE] VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: R2016-0478 PREPARED BY: Chuck Mendenhall DATE: 1/13/17 BUILDING ADDRESS: 152 Sequoia Ave. BUILDING OCCUPANCY: R3, U BUILDING PORTION AREA (Sq. Ft.) Valuation Multiplier Reg. Mod. VALUE ($) dwelling 1400 City Est garage 875 City est Air Conditioning Fire Sprinklers TOTAL VALUE . 236,435 Jurisdiction Code 1cb IBy Ordinance Bldg. Permit Fee by Ordinance I $1,112.411 Plan Check Fee by Ordinance 1W I $723. 071 Type of Review: El Complete Review 0 Structural Only 0 Other DRepetitive Fee Hourly 1 _______ Repeats sGiI Fee Hr. © * I $622.951 Comments: In addition to the above fee, an additional fee of $86 is due (1 hour $86/hr.)for the CalGreen review. Sheet of I macvalue.doc + r Buchanan Engineering, Inc JOB ______________ SHEET NO. e/1Et. OF Structural Engineenng Design 1515 Capitola Road Suite H Santa Cruz, Ca 95062 CALCULATED BY _________ DATE ' 831.476.3145, email: buchengr©icloud.cOm _ c DATE - SCALE lerl - 4'4t1 fO OF G 111A t gap IT = _ - - - - - -•• -:: .1 CBR20I6-0478 - . 152 SEQUOIA AVE cARR. NEWSFDH 1,400 SF L1V11875 SF DETACHED - - - GARAGE 2060110800 - 12/28/2016 ________ --• CBR20I6-0478 Buchanan Engineering, Inc Structural Engineering Design 1515 Capitola Road Suite H Santa Cruz, Ca 95062 831.476.3145, email: buchengr©icloud.com JOB VDt.1Y-t SHEET NO. ___________ OF_______________ fA'1 IV CALCULATED BY __________ DATE Z' CHECKED BY ____________ DATE SCALE - . . - ..6:. . . - - . . ____ ..•" 14W' - - - - - - .: .. . . . ., . .. H - - - ---- I - - - - - I L • : I:.:,.. . . - - - - - -- H • ___ I _., -. T • __________________±i.•. ___1___ _______ •• _.IH ..•, - - - - -. - . ,. .-.- .-I . . - ___ - ••: - . • _• - FTAO.FORCE TRANSFER ARC SHEAR WALL CI P44 BO CRUFROI FRAMING ® TRUSS ENTRY I TRANSFER AROUND I I I COLUMNS ERO I SHEAR WALLOPENING 6 66 Buchanan Engineering, Inc Structural Engineering Design 1515 Capitola Road Suite H Santa Cruz, Ca 95062 831.476.3145, email: buchengricloud.com JOB I ' SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY CHECKED BY SCALE OF DA'M Lo DATE _______________ cpJ24!2d -- -F H \ Li I ov, 6 P P ii Olm I I I Buchanan Engineering, Inc Structural Engineering Design 1515 Capitols Road Suite H Santa Cruz, Ca 95062 831.476.3145, email: bucheng,icloud.com JOB SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY __________ CHECKED BY DATE _______________ SCALE H. I .•.. .: . 1bf-l?tYz- - 2.Occ - - . IL -.. - ' ¶4' 4t51 1. I .- - ..............- I I .. . - -.- F - - -. •i . - ________ - - - iI LO b &M b in b in 0 to b it N N Ix LL I, Cl) II 9•98 Buchanan Engineering, Inc Structural Engineering Design 1515 Capitola Road Suite H Santa Cruz, Ca 95062 831.476.3145, email: buchengi©icloud.com JOB '2.O\ 4 41 SHEET NO. ______________ OF______________ CALCULATED BY ________ DATE V12O t L CHECKED BY _____________ DATE SCALE H ale I = I Z- 40 b Ib 1 rw- o. e3 3 F4717 = i I 0t944 q4Iø IJSGS Design Maps Summary Report User-Specified Input Report Title 2016142 Carr Sat December 17, 2016 01:19:37 UTC Building Code Reference Document ASCE 7-10 Standard (which utilizes USGS hazard data available in 2008) Site Coordinates 33.147450N, 117.34424°W Site Soil Classification Site Class D - "Stiff Soil" Risk Category 1/11/111 USGS-Provided Output S= 1.162g SMS = 1.203g S0 = 0.802g = 0.446 g SM1 = 0.693 g SDI = 0.462 9 For information on how the SS and Si 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. MCER Response Spectrum 1.43 1.30 M OAS 0.39 - F. 0.2G 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.0 0.90 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.0 1.90 2.00 Period, T (sec) Design Response Spectrum 0.50 CP 0.36 0.27 0.19 0.09 .- 0.00 I I I I I I 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.90 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.90 2.00 Period. T (sec) For PGA,,, TL, CRS, and CRI values, please view the detailed reoort. Although this information is a product of the U.S. Geological Survey, we provide no warranty, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy of the data contained therein. This tool is not a substitute for technical subject-matter knowledge. Buchanan Engineering, Inc 1515 Capitola Road Suite H Santa Cruz, CA 95062 831.476.3145 buchengr@idoud.com Project Title: Carr SFD Engineer: Buchanan Project Descr: Single Family Dwelling Project ID: 2016144 L4 20 DEC 2016. 12:34PM . File = ASCE Seismic Base. Shear . . . . ENERcALC, INC. 19832016BUild:6.16.10.31,Ver.616.10.31 House seismic loads Risk Category . . . . . Calculations per ASCE 7-10 Risk Category of Building or Other Structure: "II" : All Buildings and other structures except those listed as category SCE 7-10, Page 2. Table 1.5-1 I, Ill, and IV Seismic Importance Factor = I ASCE 7-10, Page 5, Table 1.5-2 USERDEFINED Wound Motion . . ASCE 7-10 11.4.1 Max. Ground Motions, 5% Damping S = 1.162 g,0.2 see response S1 = 0.4460 g, 1.0 sec response Site Class, Site Coeff. and Design Category Site ClassificatioYD" : Shear Wave Velocity 600 to 1,200 ftlsec = D 4SCE 7-10 Table 20.3-1 Site Coefficients Fa & Fv Fa = 1.04 ASCE 7-10 Table 11.4-1 & 11.4-2 (using straight-line interpolation from table val Fv = 1.55 Maximum Considered Earthquake Accelerat 5MS = Fa * Ss = 1.203 ASCE 7-10 Eq. 11.4-1 SMI = Fv • Si = 0.693 ASCE 7-10 Eq. 11.4-2 Design Spectral Acceleration SDS= 5M8 * 213 = 0.802 ASCE 7-10 Eq. 11.4-3 S01 = *2/3 = 0.462 ASCE 7-10 Eq. 11.4-4 Seismic Design Category = D 7-10 Table 11.6-1 & -2 Resisting System . ASCE 7-10 Table 12.2-1 Basic Seismic Force Resisting System Bearing Wall Systems Light-framed walls sheathed wlwood structural panels rated for shear resistance or steel sheets. Response Modification Coefficient "I = 6.50 Building height Limits: System Overstrength Factor "Wo" = 2.50 Category "A & B" Limit: No Limit Deflection Amplification Factor "Cd" = 4.00 Category "C" Limit: No Limit Category "D" Limit: Limit = 65 NOTE! See ASCE 7-10 for all applicable footnc Category "E" Limit Limit = 65 Category "F" Limit: Limit =65 Lateral Force ProóedUre 4SCE 7-10 Section 12.8.2 Equivalent Lateral Force Procedure The "Equivalent Lateral Force Procedure" is being used according to the orovisions of ASCE 7-10 12.8 Determine Building Period Use ASCE 12.8-7 Structure Type for Building Period CalcuirAll Other Structural Systems Ct "value = 0.020 "hn": Height from base to highest leve 10.0 ft x " value = 0.75 "Ta "Approximate fundemental period using Eq. 12.8-7 : Ta = Ct (hn "x) = 0.112 sec Long-period transition period per ASCE 7-10 Maps 22-12 ->22-16 8.000 sec Building Period "Ta" Calculated from Approximate Method sel.= 0.112 sec "Cs" Response Coefficient .. ASCE 7-10 Section 12.8.1.1 S0s: Short Period Design Spectral Response = 0.802 From Eq. 12.8-2, Preliminary Cs = 0.123 "R": Response Modification Factor = 6.50 From Eq. 12.8-3 & 12.8-4 , Cs need not excee = 0.632 "I": Seismic Importance Factor = I From Eq. 12.8-5 & 12.8-6, Cs not be less than = 0.035 User has selected ASCE 12.8.1.3: Regular structure, Cs: Seismic Response Coefficient = Less than 5 Stories and with T <<= 0.5 sec, SO Ss < 1.5 for Cs calcul Seismic Base Shear Cs = 0,1234 from 12.8.1.1 W (see Sum Wi below) = Seismic Base Shear V = Cs * W = = 0.1234 ASCE 7-10 Section 12.8.1 38.81 K 4.79 k Buchanan Engineering, Inc Project Title: Carr SFD 1515 Caitola Road Suite H Engineer: Buchanan Project ID: 2016144 Santa Cruz, CA 95062 Project Descr: Single Family Dwelling 831.476.3145 buthengr@icloud.com Printed: 20 DEC 2016. 12:34PM ASCE S .Fite elsmlc Base Shear. - ENERALClNC 19832016. Bulld:616.1031,Ver.6.16.10.31 Vertical Distribution of Seismic Forces ASCE 7-10 Section 12.8.3 "k": hx exponent based on Ta = 1.00 Table of building Weights by Floor Level... Level # WI : Weight Hi: Height (Wi * HiAk) Cvx Fx=Cvx * V Sum Story Shear Sum Story Moment 1 38.81 10.00 388.14 1.0000 4.79 4.79 0.00 Sum Wi = 38.81 k Sum Wi * Hi = 388.14 k-ft Total Base Shear = 4.79 k Base Moment = 47.9 k-ft Diaphragm Forces: Seismic Design Category"B" to 'P" ASCE 7-10 12.10.1.1 Level # Wi Fi Sum Fi Sum WI Fpx: Calcd Fpx: Min Fpx: Max Fpx Dsgn. Force 1 38.81 4.79 4.79 38.81 4.79 6.23 12.45 6.23 6.23 Wpx ....................Weight at level of diaphragm and other structure elements attached to it. Fi ......................Design Lateral Force applied at the level. Sum Fl ..................Sum of 'tat. Force" of current level plus all levels above MIN Req'd Force@ Level... 0.20*SDS * I *WPX MAX Req'd Force @ Level... 0.40 * DS * I * Wpx Fpx: Design Force @ Level. Wpx * SUM(x->n) Fi I SUM(x->n) wi, x = Current level, n = Top Level Buchanan Engineering, Inc Structural Engineering Design 1515 Capitola Road Suite H Santa Cruz, Ca 95062 831.476.3145, email: buchengi@icloud.com ORPORMIRIC SHEET NO. CALCULATED - CALCULATED BY CHECKED BY OF DATE DATE SCALE H - - ) IL MA j 4 \-)r1 ''gr ! ..ik.e. l4A(OIfl.\4ø .1 .. - ROOF FRAMING NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY 2x4 FLAT BLOCKING I ii i IJ Il i ii 7 11 II i Ii Ti- I ii II lii - - WINDOW OPENING TYPICAL I it II Iii NAIL WALL SHEATHING TO KING STUD W/lOd ii III I I AT 4" O.C. ii III Ii II ii It ii III II II II It ill It - NAIL WALL SHEATHING ii ii III II - TO KING STUD W/lOd II ii III II II II lii Ii ii II Ii Iii II Ii ii AT 4" O.C. NAIL WALL SHEATHING -. ii ii lit Ii II II Ii lit II II II Ii Ii Iii II Ii ii I II II tli ii II ii II Ii HI - CSI4 STRAP OVER TO 2x4 FLAT BLOCKS W/ II ii Iii II II ,AI SHEATHING NAIL TOSBW/2 10dAT4"O.C. II II ill II II II II III II II 8d NAILS AT 2" O.C. MUD SILL BOLTING NOT —..... ii III 11111 II ill ii It liii ,i 1111111 Ii liii II I Ii till ii 1111111 II liii It SHOWN FOR CLARITY Ii liii I 1111111 ii liii Ii Ii liii II 1111111 Ii 1111 II ii liii 1111111 Ii Jill II III, ii 1111111 II liii II II liii ii 1111111 II liii Ii III - - - -I II II Li .L - - - - - - - - ----- - ------I GENERAL GEOMETRY Code : AWC NDS-12:ASD Total Height :10 Design Method : FTAO Total Length :11.5 Wall Material : DF No. 2 Wall HIW Ratio :0.87 Panel Schedule : 0.469 RS (lOd) Panel ... K :1.00 Optimize HD : Yes HD Manufacturer: SIMPSON HD Eccentricity : 4.813 in - - - MATERIALS ft ft Description Material Size Top P1 DF No.2 2-2X4 Sill OF No.2 2X4 IWall Stud DF No. 2 2X4 Chord DF No. 2 14X4 ( • Company : Buchanan Engineering, Inc Dec 21. 2016 Designer : jb 2:45 PM Job Number : 2016144 Carr Checked By: jb Model Name : Shear Line A Wall Line A (In-Plane) FI%IVFl flPFfl RF1Il TS Shear Panel Shear IUC Shear LC i Hold-down old-down luc Hold-down LC Chord UC Chord LC Stud UC Stud LC RS_15132_lod@40.762 7 (S) HDU2-SDS2.5_D..40.322 17 (S) 0.277 7 (S) NIC NIC DESIGN DETAILS Shear Stiffness Adjustment Factor :1.00 Wall Capacity Adjustment Factor (2w/h): 0.82 WALL DEFLECTIONS WALL RESULTS: Elastic: : .01 in Governing LC : 7 (Seismic) HD: : .025 in Total Shear : 1521.45 lb Shear: : .096 in Max Unit Shear : 287.749 lb/ft Total: :.131 in Shear Ratio : .762 SELECTED SHEAR PANEL RS116132110d@4 Panel Grade : RS Nail Size : lOd Num Sides : One Panel Thick : 0.469in Reqd Pen :1.500 in Over Gyp Brd. : No Reqd. Spacing : 4 in Shear Capacity : 459.996 lb/ft Adjusted Cap : 377.437 IbIft NOTE: AWC NDS-12 defines a lOd nail as being: 3.0" x 0.1480" common, or 3.0" x 0.122" galvanized box RlSA-fl \Iprsinn 14 fl I Pt t ivniijmp 1fl1Rfl1144 RhAr I inp A rd1 Pqnp I Company : Buchanan Engineering, Inc Dec 21, 2016 Designer : jb 2:45 PM Job Number : 2016144 Carr Checked By: jb Model Name : Shear Line A Wall Line A SELECTED HOLD-DOWN: Raised : No AB Diameter : 0.500 in HDU2-SDS2.5_DF-SP Fastener Size Num Fasteners 16d Reqd Chord Thk 8 Reqd Chord Mat Base Capacity CD factor 3.00 in Douglas Fir 1921.875 lb 1.6 CHORDS Max Comp Force: 1435.861 lb Comp Capacity : 5191.016 lb Comp Ratio : .277 Gov Comp LC : 7 Max Tens Force : 968.021 lb Tens Capacity : 16905 lb Tens Ratio : .057 Gov Tens LC : 7 STUDS Required Cap : 0 lb Provided Cap : 0.00 lb Ratio : 0 Governing LC : 0 Gov Region : NIA Spacing :16 in HOLD-DOWNS Required Cap : 990.576 lb Provided Cap : 3075 lb Ratio :.322 Governing LC : 7 CROSS SECTION DETAILI3 Ci Ci g. M~ ARM jr CL, Chord Force = -968.021-lb (LC7)(T) HD Force = 990.576-lb (LC7) Chord Force = 1435.861-lb (1C7)(C) HD Force = 990.576-lb (LC7) RS_15132_10d@4 Rl5A_fl Varinn 14 fl 1 fl Inliim 19fl1Rfl1R144 (rr iIr.iItinns9fl1R144 I inp A rrB Pn 9 LID Company : Buchanan Engineering, Inc Dec 21, 2016 Designer : jb 2:45 PM Job Number : 2016144 Carr Checked By: jb Model Name : Shear Line A Wall Line A: Hi CRITERIA Code : AWC NDS-12: ASD Wall Type : FTAO GEOMETRY Opening Height: 6.5 ft Opening Width : 5.958 ft hlw ratio :1.091 MATERIALS Description Material Size IHeader DF No.2 4X10 Isill DF No.2 2X4 WARNING: No header design for load combinations containing seismic or wind categories. FTAO ® Si S2 / / S3 / // © 60 S5 I S8 S1 (DI S4 07: DESIGN DETAILS OPENING STRAPS Name Location I Direction ] Req'd Cap (lb) Gov LC SI Bottom, Left I Horizontal -331.1 8 S2 jUpper, Left I Horizontal 734.1 8 S3 Upper, Right Horizontal 728.0 7 S4 Bottom, Righ Horizontal 1 7 S5 I Bottom, Left Vertical 1589.1 7 S6 Upper, Left Vertical 286.3 8 S7 Upper, Right I Vertical j258.3 7 S8 Bottom, Right Vertical [1709.9 8 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Block # I Unit Shear (lb/ft) h/w Ratio 1 175.288 0.937 2 233.522 2.437 3 13.849 0.375 4 269.320 0.168 5 131.607 0.348 6 1 287.749 2.261 7 1 89.830 0.870 8 1185.216 1 0.420 RlSA-fl '.Mrinn 14 fl I Pt t VnhIImA 1fl1Rfl1R14h I inp A rdl PrIc! I I I 10 c Company : Buchanan Engineering, Inc Dec 20, 2016 Designer : jb 12:54 PM Job Number : 2016144 Carr Checked By: jb Model Name : Shear Line E Wall Line E (In-Plane) GENERAL GEOMETRY MATERIALS Code -- : AWC NDS-12:ASD Total Height ' :10 ft Design Method : FTAO Total Length :11.503 ft Wall Material : DF No. 2 Wall H/W Ratio : 0.87 Panel Schedule : 0.469 RS (lOd) Panel ... K :1.00 Optimize HD : Yes Description Material Size Top P1 DF No.2 2-2X4 Sill OF No. 2 2X4 Wall Stud OF No.2 2X4 Chord DF No.2 14X4 HO Manufacturer: SIMPSON * HD Eccentricity : 4.8131n 71 MII ('1Dfl Pl II TS Shear Shear Panel IUC Shear LC Hold-down Hold-down UC Hold-down LC 1Chord UC Chord LC Stud UC Stud LC RS_15132...10d@40.763 7 (S) I HDU2-SDS2.5_D.. 0.322 7(S) 10.277 Ii (S) 11NIC NIC DESIGN DETAILS Shear Stiffness Adjustment Factor :1.00 Wall Capacity Adjustment Factor (2w/h): 0.82A— p3j2floJ " I'n WALL DEFLECTIONS WALL RESULTS: Elastic: : .01 in Governing LC : 7 (Seismic) HD: : .025 in Total Shear : 1521.887 lb Shear: : .096 in Max Unit Shear : 287.819 lb/ft Total: :.131 in Shear Ratio : .763 'SELECTED SHEAR PANEL RS1513210d@4 Panel Grade : RS Nail Size Panel Thiók : 0.469 in Reqd Pen Reqd. Spacing - NOTE: AWC NDS-12 defines a lOd nail as being: lOd Num Sides : One 1.500in Over Gyp Brd. No 4 in Shear Capacity : 460.000 IbIft Adjusted Cap : 377.440 IbIft 3.0" x 0.1480" common, or 3.0" x 0.122" galvanized box LI RlSA-fl Vprqinn 14 fl 1 Pt i xvniiirnp 1fl1Rfl1R144 (rr( IruuIitinnfl1R144 Shr I inp. F rrfl PnA I S L-f 3 Company : Buchanan Engineering, Inc Dec 20, 2016 Designer : jb 12:54 PM Job Number : 2016144 Carr Checked By: jb Model Name : Shear Line E Wall Line E SELECTED HOLD-DOWN: Raised : No AB Diameter : 0.500 in CHORDS Max Comp Force: 1435.873 lb Comp Capacity : 5191.016 lb Comp Ratio : .277 Gay Comp LC : 7 Max Tens Force : 967.911 lb Tens Capacity : 16905 lb Tens Ratio : .057 Gov Tens LC : 7 CROSS SECTION DETAILI Ci fly. S bi HDU2-SDS2.5 DF-SP Fastener Size : 16d Reqd Chord Thk: 3.00 in Num Fasteners : 8 Reqd Chord Mat: Douglas Fir Base Capacity : 1921.875 lb CD factor :1.6 STUDS HOLD-DOWNS Required Cap : 0 lb Required Cap : 990.457 lb Provided Cap : 0.00 lb Provided Cap : 3075 lb Ratio : 0 Ratio :.322 Governing LC : 0 Governing LC : 7 Gay Region : NIA Spacing :16 in Chord Force = -967.911-lb (LC7)(T) HD Force = 990.457-lb (LC7) Chord Force = 1435.873-lb (LC7)(C) HD Force = 990.457-lb (LC7) RS_15132_10d@4 RISA-fl Vprinn 14 fl 1 R Vnluim 1fl1Rfl1R1L4 lruiltinnfl1R144 hr I inp F ril1 Pn Company : Buchanan Engineering, Inc Dec 20, 2016 Designer : jb 12:55 PM Job Number : 2016144 Carr Checked By: jb Model Name : Shear Line E Wall Line E: HI CRITERIA Code : AWC NDS-12: ASD Wall Type : FTAO GEOMETRY Opening Height: 6.5 ft Opening Width : 5.961 ft h/w ratio :1.09 MATERIALS Description Material Size Header DF No. 2 4X10 Sill I DF No.2 2X4 WARNING: No header design for load combinations containing seismic or wind categories. FTAO _sj______ 1 S7 ® S2\ / \ \ \/ () / \ , \ S5 ' s8 CI) _J't1 S4 07 DESIGN DETAILS OPENING STRAPS Name Location Direction Req'd Cap (lb) Gov LC SI Bottom, Left Horizontal J_-331.1 8 52 Upper, Left Horizontal j 734.1 8 S3 Upper, Right Horizontal —I 728.0 7 S4 Bottom, Right Horizontal I -345.2 7 S5 Bottom, Left Vertical 1589.2 .7 S6 Upper, Left Vertical . 286.3 8 S7 Upper, Right Vertical I 258.1 7 SB Bottom, Right Vertical 1710.5 8 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Block # Unit Shear (lb/ft) h/w Ratio 1 75.275 0.937 2 233.523 2.437 13 113.819 0.375 4 )- 269.241 &- 0.168 5 131.688 10.348 6 287.819 12.260 7 189.851 10.869 8 - 185.192 10.419 RIA-fl Vprinn 14 fl I R VnItume 1fl1RflIR144 IriiIitinns2fl1R144 .chir I inp F rd1 PnA 1 Buchanan Engineering, Inc JOB _________ - ' Structural Engineering Design SHEEt NO. OF______________ 1515 Capitola Road Suite H Santa Cruz, Ca 95062 CALCULATED BY ________ I _________ DATE CHECKED BY _____________ DATE 831.4 76.3145, email: . 16 Q di -- - - 44 i2WIM, dA 1- ((((4Jb , 3f31// Of C A4Lno p" -. 4LtLY Lie Pri 4L1 V V V - - V V - - - V V1 CBR20I6-0478 - . 152 SEQUOIA AVE V CARR: NEW SFD 111,400SF LIV 11875 SF DETACHED I GARAGE - _________ _________ _________ V• 2060110800 12/2812016 CBR20I6-0478 -- - - - - - - - --- Buchanan Engineering, Inc Structural Engineenng Design 1515 Capitola Road Suite H Santa Cruz, Ca 95062 831.476.3145, email: buchenga'icloud.com JOB SHEET NO. ' CALCULATE) BY I'M_________ CHECKED BY OF DATE DATE SCALE ; oo _ - - - - - -- I I . ... - ..- . .--.. 4x4 POST BELOW 19132" APA RATED STRUCTURAL ROOF SHEATHING APPLY WI STRENGTH DIRECTION PERPENDICULAR TO SUPPORTS SEE A SI.3 PROVIDE PSC PANEL CLIPS T ROOF PANEL EDGES PROVIDE 2x SO AT NAIL ROOF SHEAT RIDGE W/ 8d AT 6" NAIL ROOF SHEAT HIPS WI Sd AT 6' 0 PROVIDE 2x SB AT NAILING TYPICAL I CALIF FRAMING OVER ROOF TRUSS BY TRUSS MANUFACTURER OMIT DBL TO PLATE AT HEADER CGI Buchanan Engineering, Inc Structural Engineering Design 1515 Capitola Road Suite H Santa Cruz, Ca 95062 831.476.3145, email: buchengi©icloud.com JOB gbl I 21 SHEET NO. ______________ OF______________ CALCULATED BY ..? DATE 4 C) CHECKED BY _________ DATE SCALE L - t0.h. ctz I -F H • • . - - - ______ rEjt IM S. 4t2 COMPANY PROJECT Buchanan Engineering, INC 2016144 Can Garage ® 1515 Capitola Read Suite II GHDR1 WoodWorks Santa Cruz, CA 95062 jb SORWAREFOR WOOD 0ESICN (831) 476-3145 GHDR1.WWb Dec. 22, 2016 16:02 Design Check Calculation Sheet WoodWorks Sizer 11.0 Loads: Load Type Distribution Pat- tern Location Eft] Start End Magnitude Start End Unit D Dead Partial UDL 0.00 13.00 180.0 180.0 pif Lr Roof constr. Partial UDL 0.00 13.00 240.0 240.0 plf Pd.]. Dead Point 13.00 1080 lbs P Lr Roof constr. Point 13.00 1440 lbs Self-weight Dead Full UDL 14.1 1 plf Maximum Reactions (lbs) and Bearing Lengths (in): 17.4" Unfactored: Dead 1922 1750 Roof Live 2395 2165 Factored: 4317 3915 Total Bearing: 1.64 1.49 Length Kin reg'd 1.64 1.49 GHDRI Garage door header LVL n-ply, 2.OE, 3100Fb, 3412"x14", 1-ply Supports: All - Lumber Post Column, D.Fir-L No.2 Total length: 18'; volume = 6.1 cu.fL; Lateral support: top= full, bottom= at supports; WARNING: this CUSTOM SIZE is not in the database. Refer to online help. Analysis vs. Allowable Stress and Deflection using NDS 2015: Criterion Analysis Value Design Value Unit Analysis/Design Shear fv = 119 Fv' = 356 psi fv/Fv' = 0.34 Bending(+) ft = 2223 Fb' = 3795 psi fb/Fb' = 0.59 Dead Defl'n 0.34 = L/637 Live Defl'n 0.42 = L/508 0.89 = L/240 in 0.47 Total Defl'n 0.76 = L/282 0.89 = L/240 in 0.85 Design Notes: WoodWorks analysis and design are in accordance with the ICC International Building Code (IBC 2015), the National Design Specification (NDS 2015),. and NDS Design Supplement. Please verify that the default deflection limits are appropriate for your application. SCL-BEAMS (Structural Composite Lumber): the attached SCL selection is for preliminary design only. For final member design contact your local SCL manufacturer. Size factors vary from one manufacturer to another for SCL materials. They can be changed in the database editor. BUILT-UP SCL-BEAMS: contact manufacturer for connection details when loads are not applied equally to all plys. FIRE RATING: Joists, wall studs, and multi-ply members are not rated for fire endurance. COMPANY PROJECT Buchanan Engineering, INC 2016144 Carr Garage ® 1515 Capitola Raod Suite H GHDRI WoodWorks Santa Cruz, CA 95062 jb SOFTWARE FOR WOOD OESGN (831) 476-3145 GHDR2.wwb Dec. 22, 2016 16:07 Design Check Calculation Sheet WoodWorks Sizer 11.0 Loads: Load Type Distribution Pat- tern Location [ft] Start End Magnitude Start End Unit D Dead Partial UDL 6.00 9.00 180.0 180.0 plf Lr Roof constr. Partial UDL 6.00 9.00 240.0 240.0 pif Pdl Dead Point 6.00 1080 lbs P Lr Roof constr. Point 6.00 1440 lbs Self-weight Dead Full UDL 7.3 pif Maximum Reactions (lbs) and Bearing Lengths (in): 9' Unfactored: - Dead 478 1207 Roof Live 594 1566 Factored: 1072 2774 Total Bearing: Length 0.50* 1.06 Min reg'd 0.50* 1.06 *Minimum bearing length setting used: 112" for end supports GHDR2 Garage door header LVL fl-ply, 2.OE, 3100Fb, 34I2"x7-114", I-ply Supports: All All - Lumber Post Column, D.Fir-L No.2 Total length: 9'; volume = 1.6 cu.ft.; Lateral support: top= full, bottom= at supports; WARNING: this CUSTOM SIZE is not in the database. Refer to online help. Analysis vs. Allowable Stress and Deflection using NDS 2015: Criterion Analysis Value Design Value Unit Analysis/Design Shear fv = 147 Fv' = 356 psi fv/Fv' = 0.41 Bending(+) fb = 2457 Fb' = 4150 psi fb/Fb' = 0.59 Dead Defl'n 0.14 = L/764 Live Defl'n 0.18 = L/593 0.30 = L/360 in 0.61 Total Defl'n 0.32 = L/334 0.45 = L/240 in 0.72 Design Notes: WoodWorks analysis and design are in accordance with the ICC International Building Code (IBC 2015), the National Design Specification (NDS 2015), and NDS Design Supplement. Please verify that the default deflection limits are appropriate for your application. SCL-BEAMS (Structural Composite Lumber): the attached SCL selection is for preliminary design only. For final member design contact your local SCL manufacturer. Size factors vary from one manufacturer to another for SCL materials. They can be changed in the database editor. BUILT-UP SCL-BEAMS: contact manufacturer for connection details when loads are not applied equally to all plys. FIRE RATING: Joists, wall studs, and multi-ply members are not rated for fire endurance. r- - - - - - - - - - - - -- ---------------- ---- P44A - P44A I I 5 CONCRETE SLAB - I ON GRADE/-7 I I I I 6" STEM WALL W!15" I CRACK WIDE FOOTING I CONTROL I I JOINTS I I INTERIOR NON - I I i I BEARING WALL I EI1 II I I I STEP CURB AT II I OPENING TYP I I I R 4i4C,&,e piZ DR COMPACTION EQUIREMENTS SEE THE ROJECT GEOTECHNICAL EPORT. 0 Buchanan Engineering, Inc JOB '201t4 1* ?P'ZR SHEET NO. __ OF______________ Structural Engineering Design 1515 Capitols Road Suite H Santa Cruz, Ca 95062 CALCULATED BY qdTb___ DATE 831.476.3145, email: bucheng,©icloud.com CHECKED BY _____________ DATE SCALE ED b b b N N Ic U, cri C.) U) N C 0 .0 U, e CD 0 II .- (0 co tri _0 10 U) 0. 0 H 0 - C UJ 10 (0.0 g Ro 2;5 a- H = 0 (0 0.10 0 0.Ø Z 005 CL Q 0 0 cw CO Coo. (' DD< 0 CY + -.1),.! 0. lb w (0 - 0 iu + 0 e .2 2 0 ° 0 0) .0OOEO 00 ( 0. .2 o.g E E t 1010000) Li. Li.O > CO (0 V $ () (5 d I WoodWorks® ShearwaHs SOFTWARE FOR WOOD DESIGN I WoodWorks® Shearwalis 11.0 2016144 Garage Calculatlons.wsw Dec. 21, 2016 17:13:34 Project Information IiSI IIIrfDIATtr1M Company Project Buchanan Engineering, Inc 2016144 Carr Garage Lateral 1515 Capitola Road Suite ii jb Santa Cruz, CA 95062 (831)-476-3145 Design Code Wind Standard Seismic Standard IBC 2015IAWC SDPWS 2015 ASCE 7-10 Directional (All heights) ASCE 7-10 Load Combinations Building Code Capacity Modification For Design (ASD) For Deflection (Strength) Wind - Seismic 0.70 Seismic 1.00 Seismic 1.00 1.00 Service Conditions and Load Duration Max Shesiwall Offset (RI Duration Temperature Moisture Content Plan Elevation Factor Range Fabrication Service (within story) (between stories) - - 191 dry 10% dry 0.50 - Maximum Height-to-width Ratio Wood panels Fiberboard Lumber Gypsum Wind Seismic Wind Seismic Blocked Unblocked - 3.5 - - - - - Ignore non-wood-panel shear resistance contribution... Collector forces based on... Wind Seismic Hold-downs Applied loads - Never Drag studs Applied loads Shearwail Relative Rigidity: Wall capacity Perforated sheaiwail Co factor SDPWS Equation 4.3-5 Non-identical materials and construction on the shearline: Not allowed Deflection Equation: 3-term from SDPWS 4.2-1 Drift limit for wind design: 1 / 500 story height aner ,.irnnllaflfl.. Wind - - Seismic ASCE 7-10 12.8 Equivalent Lateral Force Procedure Design Wind Speed - Serviceability Wind Speed Exposure - Risk Category Structure Type Building System Category II - All others Regular Bearing Wall Enclosure - Design Category D Mln Wind Loads: Wails - Site Class 0 SI:0. 450g Spectral Response Acceleration Ss: 1. 160g Roofs - Topographic Information (ft] Fundamental Period TUsed E-W N-S 0.128s 0.128s Shape Height Length - - - Site Location: - ApproximateTa Maximum 0.128s 0.128s 0.179s 0.1793 - - Response Factor 6.50 6.50 Case 2 E-W loads NS loads Fa: 1.04 Fv 1.55 Eccentricity Loaded at - 1.. WoodWorks® Shearwalls 11.0 Detailed Load Generation 2016144 Garage Calculations.wsw Dec. 21, 2016 16:44:21 Design Code: IBC 2015/AWC SDPWS 2015 Seismic Load Generation ASCE 7-10 12.8 Equivalent Lateral Force Procedure Site Information: Risk Category II - All others Regular, bearing wall structure Site class D Si = 0.45, (Fv = 1.55) Ss = 1.16, (Fa = 1.04) R and T are shown in base shear table below for each force direction. Seismic Design Category D Ta: Calculated - refer to Equations and Base Shear table below Rd, Ro: Refer to Base Shear table below Legend: V - Total design base shear Ex - Storey shear force, level x Fj - Total force on a building mass element j hn - Height of structure to mid-roof hx - Ceiling height of level x (floor of x+l) W - Total seismic dead load on structure wx - Dead load tributary to story x wj - Dead load of building mass element x T - Fundamental period, of vibration Tmax - Maximumuzu period of vibration Ta - Approximate period of vibration Equations: Fj =Fxwj/wx Tx =CvxV Tx = 0.01 wx V =CsW Cvx = hxk wx / SUM(wx hx'k) k =k(T) Cscalc = Sds Ie/R Csmax = Sdl Ic/(R T) Csmin = max (0.044 le Sds, 0.01) Csmin = 0.5 Si Ie/R (Sds >= 0.6g) Ta = Ct hn(3/4), hn in m Ic = Ie(risk category) Tmax =TaCu Cu = Cu(Sdl) Sds = 2/3 Ta Ss Sdl =2/3FvS1 Ta = Fa(Ss, Site Class) Tv = Fv(S1, Site Class) Design Category SDC (Sds, Sdl, occupancy) User Input and Source: Site Classes A-F Risk Category Si and Ss (mapped*) Ta and Tv for site profile F, maybe E R (also calculated) T (also calculated using Ta) Structure Type (regularity) Cvx - Vertical distribution factor for level x R - Response modification factor le - Seismic importance factor Cu - Coefficient for upper limit on period T Cs - Seismic design coefficient Sds - Design short period spectral acceleration Sdl - Design 1 s spectral response acceleration Ss - Mapped short period spectral acceleration Si - Mapped 1 s spectral response acceleration Ta - Acceleration-based site coefficient Tv - Velocity-based site coefficient 12.8.4.1 Eqn 12.8-11 (Categories B-F) Eqn 1.4-1 (Category A) Eqn 12.8-1 Eqn 12.8-12 Note, 12.8-12 Eqn 12.8-2 Eqn 12.8-3 Eqn 12.8-5 Eqn 12.8-6 Eqn 12.8-7 Table 1.5-2 12.8.2 Table 12.8-1 Eqns 11.4-1,4-3 Eqns 11.4-2,4-4 Table 11.4-1 Table 11.4-2 Tables 11.6-1,6-2 Table 20.3-1 Table 1.5-i Figures 22-1 to 22-14 Site specific study Table 12.2-1 deformational analysis 12.3.2,3; Tables 12.3-1,2 *Ss for Cs is 1.5 for regular structure <= 5 stories, T<= 0.5 (12.8.1.3) Units: ft, lbs Calculation of the total design base shear: le SDC W (lbs) Sds Sdl Cu Tmax Ta k 1.00 D 22178 0.804 0.465 1.400 0.179 0.128 1.000 R T Ss Sds Cscalc Csmax Csmin Cs V (lbs) N-S 6.5 0.128 1.16 0.804 0.124 0.560 0.035 0.124 2744 E-W 6.5 0.128 1.16 0.804 0.124 0.560 0.035 0.124 2744 Ss values shown in "Site Information" and first Sds value shown are used for Seismic Design Category determination are not limited by ASCE 7 12.8.1.3. Ss and Sds values shown for each direction in lower table are for Cs calculation Page 1 Onfactored seismic loads for Level 1 Dir. No. Start End N<->S 1 -2.00 0.00 N<->S 2 0.00 35.00 N<->S 3 0.00 0.00 N<->S 4 35.00 37.00 N<->S 5 35.00 35.00 W<->E 1 -2.00 0.00 W<->E 2 0.00 24.50 W<->E 3 0.00 0.0,0 W<->E 4. 24.50 26.50 W<->E 5 24.50 24.50 Magnitude [lbs, plf] Profile From To Line 28.2 28.2 Line 65.8 65.8 Point 164 164 Line 28.2 28.2 Point 164 164 Line 38.6 38.6 Line 86.6 86.6 Point 234 234 Line 38.6 38.6 Point 234 234 I and may implement 12.8.1.3. Distribution of total design base shear to Levels: Level hx wx hx * wx Cvx Fx (lbs) Vx (lbs) (ft) (lbs) (ft-lbs) N-S E-W N-S 1 9.29 - - 22178 206034 1.00 2744 27442744 2744 Page 2 F-1 I WoodWorks® Shearwalls SOFTWARE FOR WOOD DESIGN 2016144 Garage Calculations.wsw WoodWorks® Shea,walls 11.0 Dec. 21, 2016 16:37:17 22.5' 21.67' 20.83' 20' 19.17' . . . . 1833' Elevation View . . . 17.5' Shearline A, at V = 0 ft, Level 1. . . . . . Flexible Diaphragm Seismic Design. . . . . . 15.83' 960 480 10, - ;:; 7.5' 6.67' 5.83' red 4-plane Fp (p11)4.17' orage: 12.2 2.5' 1.67' 0.83' 0' - _._, . —.w-.,'..,---1 ••27 * $• — 71 . .• .••- - - - 517 - - 392 125 . . . . A-1,1 8.0' A-1.2 18.0' A-13 A.R. 4: io . . A.R. 3.0 . . . A.R. 3.0 Adj 0.67 . . . Adj 0.67 Facto out-c Q . . A-I . . . . . . force Anch Wail: .2.Ov. —3.0'— . —3.0— - 160.1 160.1 r . 1572 +S1572 FS 51972$ -0.83' -1.67 A.R. - Aspect ratio; Adj .Adjustment -2.5' Factored Forces. . . . -3.33' All shearwalls, Design group I: . Vertical Horizontal -4.17' Exterior surface: 15/32" Structural sheathing WI lOd nails @6/12" . Hoiddown force (lbs) - Vs - Shearline force (lbs) - Vs I diaphragm length (pIt) • Compression force (lbs) Shear capacity: 310.0 plf Frame: D.Fir-L @ 16', blocked . . S - Shear overturning (lbs) - V/full height sheathing (pIt) 5.83' - c Critical Segment: A-I,2: D -Dead (lbs) '- Drag strut force (lbs) -6.67' Design shear force: 160.1 pIt Factors: S =0.7 : Combined capacity: 208:7 pIt . . o = 0.6 (tens); 1.0 (camp) ss•r\ Combined: S - D + Ev (tens); S + D + Ev (camp) -833' Unfactored Loads . . . -9.17' ft Dead . Hf Wind uplift . -10' -10.83' -1167' West East F [ WoodWorks® Shearwalls SOFTWARE FOR WOOD DESIGN 2016144 Garage Calculations.wsw . Wood Works® Shearwalis 11.0 Dec. 21, 2016 16:37:17 • . - 22.5' ................... 20.83' 20' . . . . 19.17' . Elevation View . . 18.33' 17.5' . . Shearline B, at V = 24.5 ft, Level 1. . Flexible Diaphragm Seismic Design. . . . . . 18.67' 15.83' 15, 960 10 . 1 ( 8.33' 7.5' 6.67' 5.83' red f.plane Fp (p11)4.17' iorage: 12.2 2.5' 1.67' 0.83' 0' 274 •., - 1 192 16 [7105 . . 51 . . . B-1,1 - 2.5' B-1,2 4.0' —I-1 6-1,3 - AR.30 - . A.R. 0.56 cm A.R. 0.98 Adj 0.67 q Facti . out-c Q . . . force Anch .B1 Wail: ...: . •.,.. '. 1 —3.0'— ___________________ 18.063' E;-•:-7 j:....38' '4 23.3 .1 . 34.9 : ;... . .:j 34.9..... . . . .•', - _r - — - - - _- ..-t. . •• 'C •_.....•• - - r n- r - 229 4229 319 . . 319 . 323 S 323 $ . 1.67 A.R. -Aspect ratio; Adj -Adjustment . . ...... -2.5' Factored Forces. . . . . -3.33* All shearwails, Design group 1: Vertical Horizontal -417 Exteilor surface . . . . . •• . . . . . Hoiddown force (Ibs) — Vs - Shearline force (ibs) 15/32" Structural sheathing W/ lOd nails © 6/12" . ... . Compression force (ibs) - Vs / diaphragm length (pit) . Shear capacity: 310.0 pit Frame: D.Fir-L © 18', blocked . . . . - Shear overturning (Ibs) VI full height sheathing (pit) S -5.83' Critical Segment: B-1,1: . . D - Dead (lbs) . . . e- Drag strut force (Ibs) Design sheer force: 23.3 plf • . . . Factors: S = 0.7 Combined capacity'- 208.7 pit . D = 0.6 (tens); 1.0 (comp) - . -8.33 ¼ Combined: S - D + Ev (tens) S + D + Ev (camp) UflfactOred Loads • -9.17, êil Dead . ft • Wind uplift • -10' West -1.6.83o'o.8.672.53.3a.17' East I WoodWorks® Shearwalls SOFTWARE FOR WOOD DESIGN 2016144 Garage Calculations.wsw Wood Works® Shearwalls 11.0 Dec. 21, 2016 16:37:17 22.5' 21.67' • 20.83' 20' • 19.17' 18.33' Elevation View Shearline 1, at X = 0 ft, Level 1. . 17.5' Flexible Diaphragm Seismic Design. 16.67' 15.83' Ti 161 TT576TT 960 3M IV 9.17' 8.33' 7.5' 6.67 5.83' red 51 f-plane Fp (p104.17' orage: 12.2 2.5' 1.67' 0.83' (280 87 (290 1-1,2 —4.0' -4 1-1.3 AR. 3.1 AR. 150 u A.R. 1.00 Fact( out- force q Anch Wall: 9.0' 64.0 - -; .1 64.0 - - - - -•• Irs 601. is 801 S 593 - - S 593 -1.67' A.R. - Aspect ratio; Adj - Adjustment Factored Forces -3.33' All shearwalls, Design group 1: Vertical Horizontal Exterior surface: 15132" Structural sheathing WI lOd nails © 8/12" Hoiddown force (Ibs) -0- Vs - Shearline force (lbs) -4.17' Shear capacity: 310.0 pit f Compression force (Ibs) - Vs / diaphragm length pl Frame: D.Fir-L @ 16", blocked S - Shear overturning (Ibs) - VI foil height sheathing (plf) -5.83' Critical Segment: 1-1,2: D - Dead (Ibs) - Drag strut force (Ibs) -6.67' Design shear force: 64 pit Factors: $ = 0.7 Combined capacity: 310.0 plf 0 = 0.8 (tens); 1.0 (camp) Combined: S - D + Ev (tens); S + 0 + Ev (comp) -8.33 Unfactored Loads -9.17' 5ft Dead ff5 Wind uplift -10' -10.83' -11.67' South -1.6M.83'0'o.ax.672.53.3X. 17'& 5.83.67Y.58.33.174010.W.672.63.=. 171 615.81111.677M.M. 172120.113.622.23.311. 172325.11111111.627.38.33' North t F~ I WoodWorks® Shearwalls SOFTWARE FOR WOOD DESIGN F' 2016144 Garage Calculatlons.wsw Wood Works@ Shearwails 11.0 Dec. 21,2016 16:37:17 • 22.5' 21.87' 20.83' 20' 19.17' • . . . 18.33' Elevation View . Shearline 2, at X = 35 ft Level 1. 17.5' . Flexiblà Diaphragm Seismic Design. . 16.67' . 15.83' iv 960 608 352 , io ; 9.17' 75' 6.67' 5.83' bred of-plane •5 e Fp (p11)4.17' horage: 1:12.2 2.5' 1.87' 083' I?280 26 II 78. II 3.0' —4-1 2-1,2 —4.0 —4-I 2-1,3 A.R.1.64 D Q Fac A.RO95 ...u, 2-1 . . . . . ou roro An 5.5' Wal 640 t 640 592 S.592 IISS04 S 604 . -1.67' A.R. -Aspect ratio; AdJ - Adjustment -2.5' Factored Forces . . . 333' All shearwails, Design group 1: Vertical Horizontal 15132' Structural sheathing W/ lOd nails @ 6112" Hoiddown farce (Ibs) - Vs - Shearline force (Ibs) -4.17 Shear capacity: 310.0 plf Compression force (Ibs) — Vs / diaphragm length (pit) Frame: D.Fir-L @ 16", blocked S - Shear overturning (Ibs) — •V / full height sheathing (p11) -5.83 Critical Segment: 2-1,2: D Dead (Ibs) . . .- Drag strut force (Ibs) • -6.67' Design shear force: 64 plf . . Factors: S = 0.7 . 5 Combined capacity: 310.0 plf . 0 = 0.8 (tens); 1.0 (camp) - Combined: S - D + Ev (tens); S + 0 + Ev (camp) -8:33 Unfactored Loads . . -9.17' 4 Dead . ftf. Wind uplift . -10' -10.83' .• ... . -11.67' South -1.6XL83'010.8.672.53.3.17'5' -,;- 4 North ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP TIN 2121 Montiel Road, San Marcos, California 92069. (760) 839-7302 • Fax: (760) 480-7477 www.designgroupca.com GEO TECHNICAL INVESTIGATION AND FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS PROPOSED NEW RESIDENCE TO BE LOCATED AT 152 SEQUOIA AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 EDG Project No. 165624-1 August 31, 2016 PREPARED FOR: Eric & Kimberly Carr 159 Sequoia Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 ENGINEERING IMDESIGN GROUP FOR NI cc tcIouciiai 2121 Montiel Road, San Marcos, California 92069. (760) 839-7302 • Fax: (760) 480-7477 • www.designgroupca.com Date: August 31, 2016 To: Eric and Kimberly Carr 159 Sequoia Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: Proposed new residence to be located at 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California. Subject: Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendations Report In accordance with your request and our signed proposal we have provided this geotechnical investigation and foundation recommendations report of the subject site for the proposed new residence. The findings of the investigation, earthwork -ecommendations and foundation design parameters are presented in this report. In general, it is our opinion that the proposed construction, as described herein, is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided the recommendations of this report and generally accepted construction practices are followed. If you have any questions regarding the following report please do not hesitate to contact our office. Sincerely, ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP Erin E. Rist California RCE #65122 Steven Norris California GE#2590 Table of Contents 1.0 SCOPE . 1 2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION......................................................................................................1 3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION .......................................................................................................................1 4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ..............................................................................................................1 5.0 GROUND WATER...............................................................................................................................2 6.0 LIQUEFACTION ...................................................................................................................................3 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................................................4 7.1 GENERAL ......................................................................................................................................4 7.2 EARTHWORK.................................................................................................................................4 7.3 FOUNDATIONS..............................................................................................................................6 7.4 CONCRETE SLABS ON GRADE........................................................................................................7 7.5 RETAINING WALLS.......................................................................................................................10 8.0 SURFACE DRAINAGE........................................................................................................................12 9.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING ...............................................................................13 10.0 MISCELLANEOUS.............................................................................................................................14 FIGURES SiteVicinity Map ..........................................................................................................................Figure No. 1 SiteLocation Map ........................................................................................................................Figure No. 2 SitePlan .......................................................................................................................................Figure No. 3 Test Pit Logs ........................................................................................................................Test Pit Logs 1 - 3 APPENDICES References...................................................................................................................................Appendix A General Earthwork and Grading Specifications............................................................................Appendix B LaboratoryResults ........................................................................................................................Appendix C RetainingWall Drainage Detail .....................................................................................................Appendix D 1.0 SCOPE This report gives our recommendations for the proposed new residence to be constructed at 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California. (See Figure No. 1, "Site Vicinity Map', and Figure No. 2, "Site Location Map"). The scope of our work conducted onsite to date has included a visual reconnaissance of the property and surrounding areas, review of maps, a limited subsurface investigation of the subject property, laboratory tests and preparation of this report presenting our findings, conclusions and recommendations. 2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject property is located at 152 Sequoia Avenue, in the City of Carlsbad, California. For the purposes of this report the lot is assumed to face south. The property is bordered to the north and east by single family homes, to the west by a multi-family residential structure and to the south by Sequoia Avenue. The general topography of the site area consists of coastal foothill terrain. The lot generally descends from north to south. At the time of this report the lot is developed with a single story home, a detached garage and landscape improvements. Based upon our discussion with the project owner and the project architect, and our review of the proposed preliminary site plan, we understand the proposed development will consist of the construction of a new single-story residence, detached garage and typical landscape improvements. 3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION Our field investigation of the property consisted of a site reconnaissance, site field measurements, observation of existing conditions on-site and on adjacent sites and a limited subsurface investigation of soil conditions. Our subsurface investigation consisted of visual observation of three exploratory test pits in the general areas of proposed construction, logging of soil types encountered, and sampling of soils for laboratory testing. The approximate locations of test pits are given in Figure No. 3, "Approximate Test Pit Locations". 4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Fill soil and weathered profiles were encountered to an approximate depth between 3.5-4.5 feet below adjacent grade in our exploratory test pits. Soil types encountered within our test pits are described as Carr Residence Page No. I 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California Job No. 165624-1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECHNICAL, CIVIL, STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS follows: 4.1 Topsoil / Fill / Weathered Topsoil/fill/weathered, unsuitable materials were encountered to a depth of 3.5-4.5 feet below adjacent grade in our test pits. These materials consist of light brown to brown, dry to slightly moist, loose to medium dense, silty sands and sandy silts with roots in the upper up to 12-24 inches. In general, these materials are not considered suitable for the support of structures and structural improvements in their present state, but may be utilized as re-compacted fill if necessary, provided the recommendations of this report are followed. Unsuitable soil materials classify as SW-SM according to the Unified Soil Classification System, and based on visual observation and laboratory results, are considered to possess low to medium potential for expansion. 4.2 Sandstone Sandstone was found to underlie the fill/weathered profiles material within the test pit excavations. The encountered sandstone consists of light brown with traces of reddish brown, slightly moist to moist, dense, sandstone. These materials are considered suitable for the support of structures and structural improvements, provided the recommendations of this report are followed. Sandstone materials classify as SW-SM according to the Unified Soil Classification System, and based on visual observation and our experience, possess a low to medium potential for expansion. Detailed logs of our exploratory test pits, as well as a depiction of the test pit locations, please see Figure No. 3, "Site Plan/Location of Test Pits", and Test Pit Logs Nos. 1-3. 5.0 GROUND WATER Groundwater was not encountered during our limited subsurface investigation. Groundwater is not anticipated to pose a significant constraint to construction, however based upon our experience, perched groundwater conditions can develop where no such condition previously existed. Perched groundwater conditions can develop over time and can have a significant impact. Waterproofing membrane shall be specifically detailed by waterproofing consultant. If groundwater conditions are encountered during site excavations, a slab underdrain system may be required. Bioretention infiltration facilities shall be horizontally offset from any new structures a minimum of 8 horizontal feet and in addition, the bottom of infiltration facilities shall be located within a foot lower of the lowest finish floor grade of any improvement, unless there is sufficient horizontal offset, this is to be Carr Residence Page No. 2 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California Job No. 165624-1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECHNICAL CIVIL, STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS reviewed on a case by case basis. Proper surface drainage and irrigation practices will play a significant role in the future performance of the project. Please note in the "Concrete Slab on Grade" section of this report for specific recommendations regarding water to cement ratio for moisture sensitive areas should be adhered. The project architect and/or waterproofing consultant shall specifically address waterproofing details. 6.0 LIQUEFACTION It is our opinion that the site could be subjected to moderate to severe ground shaking in the event of a major earthquake along any of the faults in the Southern California region. However, the seismic risk at this site is not significantly greater than that of the surrounding developed area. Liquefaction of cohesionless soils can be caused by strong vibratory motion due to earthquakes. Research and historical data indicate that loose, granular soils underlain by a near-surface ground water table are most susceptible to liquefaction, while the stability of most silty sands and clays is not adversely affected by vibratory motion. Because of the dense nature of the soil materials underlying the site and the lack of near surface water, the potential for liquefaction or seismically-induced dynamic settlement at the site is considered low. The effects of seismic shaking can be reduced by adhering to the most recent edition of the Uniform Building Code and current design parameters of the Structural Engineers Association of California. Carr Residence Page No. 3 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California Job No. 165624-1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECHNICAL, CIVIL, STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 GENERAL In general, it is our opinion that the proposed new residence and detached garage, as discussed and described herein, are feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided the recommendations of this report and all applicable codes are followed. We understand the proposed new residence and garage will be constructed with slab-on-grade foundations. We anticipate grading will consist of the removal and recompaction of existing fill and weathered profiles in the area of proposed improvements. Based upon our subsurface investigation we anticipate a limited removal and recompaction in the area of new improvements of approximately 3.5- 4.5 feet below adjacent grade. 7.2 EARTHWORK A removal and recompaction of the upper 3.5-4.5 feet, as measured below existing grade, should be conducted in the area of new structures. Where grading is conducted it should be done in accordance with the recommendations below as well as Appendix B of this report and the standards of county and state agencies, as applicable. 7.2.a. Site Preparation Prior to any grading, the areas of proposed improvements should be cleared of surface and subsurface debris (including organic topsoil, vegetative and construction debris). Removed debris should be properly disposed of off-site prior to the commencement of any fill operations. Holes resulting from the removal of debris, existing structures, or other improvements which extend below the undercut depths noted, should be filled and compacted. 7.2.b. Removals Topsoil, weathered and fill profiles found to mantle the site, approximately upper 3.5-4.5 feet in the area of the proposed new structures, are not suitable for the structural support of buildings or structural improvements in their present state. Grading should consist of the removal of unsuitable soil and scarification of subgrade to a minimum depth of 8-12 inches, moisture conditioning and the recompaction of fill materials, to 90 percent minimum relative compaction, in the area of the proposed slab-on-grade Carr Residence Page No. 4 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California Job No. 165624-1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECHNICAL. CIVIL. STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS foundations. In driveway areas we anticipate a scarification, moisture conditioning and recompaction. Excavated materials are suitable for reuse as fill material during grading provided they are cleaned of debris and oversize material in excess of 6 inches in diameter (oversized material is not anticipated to be of significant concern) and free of contamination. 7.2.c. Transitions All settlement sensitive improvements should be constructed on a uniform building pad. Removals and undercuts are anticipated at cut-fill transitions. Removals and undercuts should extend a minimum of 5 feet (or to a distance at least equal to depth of fill removals, whichever is greater) beyond the footprint of the proposed structures (including exterior columns) and settlement sensitive improvements. Where this condition cannot be met it should be reviewed by the Engineering Design Group on a case by case basis. Removal depths should be visually verified by a representative of our firm prior to the placement of fill. 7.2.d. Fills All fill in the area of removal and recompaction should be brought to approximately +2% of optimum moisture content and re-compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM D1557). Compacted fills should be cleaned of loose debris and oversize material in excess of 6 inches in diameter, brought to near optimum moisture content, and re-compacted as described above. Fills should generally be placed in lifts not exceeding 6-8 inches in thickness. Import of soil material is not anticipated, however if import material is required, soils should have a very low potential for expansion (Ek20), free of debris and organic matter. Prior to importing soils, they should be visually observed, sampled and tested at the borrow pit area to evaluate soil suitability as fill. 7.2.e. Slopes Where new slopes are constructed permanent slopes may be cut to a face ratio of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). Permanent fill slopes shall be placed at a maximum 2:1 slope face ratio. All temporary cut slopes shall be excavated in accordance with OSHA requirements and shall not undermine adjacent property or structures without proper shoring of excavation and/or structures. Subsequent to grading, planting or other acceptable cover should be provided to increase the stability of slopes, especially during the rainy season (October thru April). Carr Residence Page No. 5 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California Job No. 165624-1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECHNICAL. CIVIL. STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS Z3 FOUNDATIONS The following design parameters may be utilized for new foundations founded on competent material. 7.3.a. Footings bearing uniformly in recompacted fill or competent material may be designed utilizing maximum allowable soils pressure of 2,000 psf. - 7.3.b. Seismic Design Parameters Site Class D Spectral Response Coefficients SMS (g) 1.203 SM1 (g) 0.693 S0s (g) 0.802 Sol (g) 0.462 7.3.c. Bearing values maybe increased by 33% when considering wind, seismic, or other short duration loadings. 7.3.d. The parameters in the table below should be used as a minimum for designing new footing width and depth below lowest adjacent grade into sandstone or recompacted fill material. Footing depths are to be confirmed in the field by a representative of Engineering Design Group prior to the placement of form boards, steel and removal of excavation equipment. No. of Floors Supported Minimum Footing Width *Minimum Footing Depth Below Lowest Adjacent Grade 1 15 inches 18 inches Carr Residence Page No. 6 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California Job No. 165624-1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECHNICAL, CML, STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS No. of Floors Supported Minimum Footing Width *Minimum Footing Depth Below Lowest Adjacent Grade 2 15 inches 18 inches 3 18 inches 24 inches 7.3.e. All footings founded into competent material should be reinforced with a minimum of two #4 bars at the top and two #4 bars at the bottom (3 inches above the ground). For footings over 30 inches in depth, additional reinforcement, and possibly a stemwall system will be necessary, and should be reviewed by project structural engineer prior to construction. 7.3.f. All isolated spread footings should be designed utilizing the above given bearing values and footing depths, and be reinforced with a minimum of #4 bars at 12 inches o.c. in each direction (3 inches above the ground). Isolated spread footings should have a minimum width and depth of 24 inches. 7.3g. For footings adjacent to slopes a minimum of 10 feet (competent, compacted material) and horizontal setback in competent material or properly compacted fill should be maintained. A setback measurement should be taken at the horizontal distance from the bottom of the footing to slope daylight. Where this condition cannot be met it should be brought to the attention of the Engineering Design Group for review. 7.3.h. All excavations should be performed in general accordance with the contents of this report, applicable codes, OSHA requirements and applicable city and/or county standards. 7.31 All foundation subgrade soils and footings shall be pre-moistened to 2% over optimum to a minimum of 18 inches in depth prior to the pouring of concrete. 7.4 CONCRETE SLABS ON GRADE All new concrete slabs-on-grade floors should be placed on competent sandstone material or recompacted fill material. Where new slabs are proposed we recommend the following as the minimum design parameters. Carr Residence Page No. 7 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California Job No. 165624-1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECHNICAL. CIVIL, STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS 7.4.a. Concrete slab on grade of the proposed new residence and garage should have a minimum thickness of 5 inches and should be reinforced with #3 bars at 24 inches o.c. placed at the midpoint of the slab. 7.4.a.i Slump: Between 3 and 4 inches maximum 7.4.a.ii Aggregate Size: 3/4 - 1 inch 7.4.a.iii Moisture Sensitive Areas: (i.e. floors, below grade walls) Maximum Water to cement Ratio - 0.45 maximum Compressive Strength = 4,500 psi minimum (No special inspection required for water to cement ratio purposes, unless otherwise specified by the structural engineer) 7.4.a.iv Moisture retarding additive: in concrete at concrete slab on grade floors and moisture sensitive areas 7.4.a.v Corrosion Potential: Based upon laboratory testing conducted as part of the field investigation onsite soils meet ACI exposure categories SO, Cl. The project structural engineer to note increased concrete protection requirements for corrosive environments, as applicable. As EDG is not an expert in corrosion protection all corrosion recommendations shall be provided by the corrosion consultant. 7.4.a.vi Non-Moisture Sensitive Areas: Compressive Strength = 2,500 psi minimum. 7.4.b. In moisture sensitive areas, the slab concrete should have a minimum water to cement (w/c) ratio of 0.45, generally resulting in a compressive strength of approximately 4,500 psi (No special inspection required for water to cement ratio purposes, unless otherwise specified by the structural engineer) as determined by the w/c ratio. This recommendation is intended to achieve a low permeability concrete. 7.4.c. In areas of level slab on grade floors we recommend a one-inch layer of coarse sand material, Sand Equivalent (S.E.) greater than 50 and washed clean of fine materials, should be placed beneath the slab in moisture sensitive areas, above the vapor barrier. There shall be not greater than an 1/2 inch difference across the sand layer. 7.4.d. In moisture sensitive areas, a vapor barrier layer (15 mil) should be placed below the upper one inch of sand. The vapor barrier shall meet the following minimum requirements: Carr Residence Page No. 8 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California Job No. 165624-1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECHNICAL, CIVIL, STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS 7.4.d.i Permeance of less than 0.01 perm [grains/(ft' hr in/Hg)] as tested in accordance with ASTM E 1745 Section 7.1. 7.4.d.ii Strength per ASTM 1745 Class A. 7.4.d.iii The vapor barrier should extend down the interior edge of the footing excavation a minimum of 6 inches. The vapor barrier should lap a minimum of 8 inches, sealed along all laps with the manufacturer's recommended adhesive. Beneath the vapor barrier a uniform layer of 3 inches of pea gravel is recommended under the slab in order to more uniformly support the slab, help distribute loads to the soils beneath the slab, and act as a capillary break. 7.4.e. The project waterproofing consultant should provide all slab underdrain, slab sealers and various other details, specifications and recommendations (i.e Moiststop and Linkseal) at areas of potential moisture intrusion (i.e. slab penetrations). Engineering Design Group accepts no responsibility for design or quality control of waterproofing elements of the building. 7.4.f. Adequate control joints should be installed to control the unavoidable cracking of concrete that takes place when undergoing its natural shrinkage during curing. The control joints should be well located to direct unavoidable slab cracking to areas that are desirable by the designer. 7.4.g. All required fills used to support slabs, should be placed in accordance with the grading section of this report and the attached Appendix B, and compacted to 90 percent Modified Proctor Density, ASTM D-1557, and as described in the Earthwork section of this report. 7.4.h. All subgrade soils to receive concrete slabs and flatwork are to be pre-soaked to 2 percent over optimum moisture content to a depth of 18 inches. 7.4.i. Exterior concrete flatwork, due to the nature of concrete hydration and minor subgrade soil movement, are subject to normal minor concrete cracking. To minimize expected concrete cracking, the following may be implemented: 7.41i We recommend concrete may be poured with a 10-inch-deep thickened edge. Flatwork adjacent to top of a slope should be constructed with an outside footing to attain a minimum of 7 feet distance to daylight. 7.4.i.ii Concrete slump should not exceed 4 inches. Cart Residence Page No. 9 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California Job No. 165624-1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECHNICAL, CIVIL, STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS 7.4.i.iii Concrete should be poured during "cool" (40 - 65 degrees) weather if possible. If concrete is poured in hotter weather, a set retarding additive should be included in the mix, and the slump kept to a minimum. 7.4.i.iv Concrete subgrade should be pre-soaked prior to the pouring of concrete. The level of pre-soaking should be a minimum of 2% over optimum moisture to a depth of 18 inches. 7.4.i.v Concrete should be constructed with tooled joints creating concrete sections no larger than 225 square feet. For sidewalks, the maximum run between joints should not exceed 5 feet. For rectangular shapes of concrete, the ratio of length to width should generally not exceed 0.6 (i.e., 5 ft. long by 3 ft. wide). Joints should be cut at expected points of concrete shrinkage (such as male corners), with diagonal reinforcement placed in accordance with industry standards. 7.4.i.vi Isolation joints should be installed at exterior concrete where exterior concrete is poured adjacent to existing foundations. 7.4.i.vii Drainage adjacent to concrete flatwork should direct water away from the improvement. Concrete subgrade should be sloped and directed to the collective drainage system, such that water is not trapped below the flatwork. 7.4.i.viii The recommendations set forth herein are intended to reduce cosmetic nuisance cracking. The project concrete contractor is ultimately responsible for concrete quality and performance, and should pursue a cost-benefit analysis of these recommendations, and other options available in the industry, prior to the pouring of concrete. 7.5 RETAINING WALLS New retaining walls up to 6 feet may be designed and constructed in accordance with the following recommendations and minimum design parameters. 7.5.a. Retaining wall footings should be designed in accordance with the allowable bearing criteria given in the "Foundations" section of this report, and should maintain minimum footing depths outlined in "Foundations" section of this report. It is anticipated that all retaining wall footings will be placed on recompacted material. Where cut-fill transitions may occur alternative detailing may be provided by the Engineering Design Group on a case by case basis. Cart Residence Page No. 10 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California Job No. 165624-1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECHNICAL. CIVIL. STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS 7.5.b. In moisture sensitive areas (i.e. interior living space where vapor emission is a concern), in our experience poured in place concrete provides a surface with higher performance-repairability of below grade waterproofing systems. The owner should consider the cost-benefit of utilizing cast in place building retaining walls in lieu of masonry as part of the overall construction of the residence. Waterproofing at any basement floors is recommended in areas of moisture sensitive floor finishes. 7.5.c. Unrestrained cantilever retaining walls should be designed using an active equivalent fluid pressure of 35 pcf. This assumes that granular, free draining material with very low potential for expansion (E.l. <20) will be used for backfill, and that the backfill surface will be level. Where soil with potential for expansion is not low (E.l. >50) a new active fluid pressure will be provided by the project soils engineer. Backfill materials should be considered prior to the design of the retaining walls to ensure accurate detailing. We anticipate onsite material will be utilized as retaining wall backfill. For sloping backfill, the following parameters maybe utilized: Backfill Sloping Condition 2:1 Slope Active Fluid Pressure 50 pcf *Any other surcharge loadings shall be analyzed in addition to the above values. 7.5.d. If the tops of retaining walls are restrained from movement, they should be designed for an uniform at-rest soil pressure of 65 psf. 7.5.e. Retaining walls shall be designed for additional lateral forces due to earthquake, where required by code, utilizing the following design parameters. 75.e.i Yielding Walls = PE= (3/8) kAE (y) H2 - applied at a distance of 0.6 times the height (H) of the wall above the base 7.5.e.ii Horizontal ground acceleration value kH = 0.25g. 7.5.e.iii Where non-yielding retaining walls are proposed, the specific conditions should be brought to the attention of Engineering Design Group for alternative design values. 7.5.e.iv The unit weight of 120 pcf for the onsite soils maybe utilized. Carr Residence Page No. 11 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California Job No. 165624-1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECHNICAL. CIVIL. STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS 7.5.e.v The above design parameters assume unsaturated conditions. Retaining wall designs for sites with a hydrostatic pressure influence (i.e groundwater within depth of retaining wall or waterfront conditions) will require special design considerations and should be brought to the attention of Engineering Design Group. 7.5.f. Passive soil resistance may be calculated using an equivalent fluid pressure of 350 pcf. This value assumes that the soil being utilized to resist passive pressures extends horizontally 2.5 times the height of the passive pressure wedge of the soil. Where the horizontal distance of the available passive pressure wedge is less than 2.5 times the height of the soil, the passive pressure value must be reduced by the percent reduction in available horizontal length. 7.5.g. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 between the soil and concrete footings may be utilized to resist lateral loads in addition to the passive earth pressures above. 7.5.h. All walls shall be provided with adequate back drainage to relieve hydrostatic pressure, and be designed in accordance with the minimum standards contained in the "Retaining Wall Drainage Detail", Appendix D. The waterproofing elements shown on our details are minimums, and are intended to be supplemented by the waterproofing consultant and/or architect. The recommendations should be reviewed in consideration of proposed finishes and usage, especially at any basement levels, performance expectations and budget. If deemed necessary by the project owner, based on the above analysis, and waterproofing systems can be upgraded to include slab under drains and enhanced waterproofing elements. 7.5.i. Retaining wall backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with the "Earthwork" section of this report. Backfill shall consist of soil with a low expansion potential, granular, free draining material. 7.5.j. Retaining walls should be braced and monitored during compaction. If this cannot be accomplished, the compactive effort should be included as a surcharge load when designing the wall. 8.0 SURFACE DRAINAGE Adequate drainage precautions at this site are imperative and will play a critical role on the future performance of the proposed improvements. Under no circumstances should water be allowed to pond against or adjacent to tops of slopes and/or foundation walls. Carr Residence Page No. 12 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California Job No. 165624-1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECHNICAL. CIVIL. STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS The ground surface surrounding proposed improvements should be relatively impervious in nature, and slope to drain away from the structure in all directions, with a minimum slope of 2% for a horizontal distance of 7 feet (where possible). Area drains or surface swales should then be provided in low spots to accommodate runoff and avoid any ponding of water. Any french drains, backdrains and/or slab underdrains shall not be tied to surface area drain systems. Roof gutters and downspouts shall be installed on the new and existing structures and tightlined to the area drain system. All drains should be kept clean and unclogged, including gutters and downspouts. Area drains should be kept free of debris to allow for proper drainage. Over watering can adversely affect site improvements and cause perched groundwater conditions. Irrigation should be limited to only the amount necessary to sustain plant life. Low flow irrigation devices as well as automatic rain shut-off devices should be installed to reduce over watering. Irrigation practices and maintenance of irrigation and drainage systems are an important component to the performance of onsite improvements. During periods of heavy rain, the performance of all drainage systems should be inspected. Problems such as gullying or ponding should be corrected as soon as possible. Any leakage from sources such as water lines should also be repaired as soon as possible. In addition, irrigation of planter areas, lawns, or other vegetation, located adjacent to the foundation or exterior flat work improvements should be strictly controlled or avoided. 9.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING The recommendations provided in this report are based on subsurface conditions disclosed by the investigation and our general experience in the project area. Interpolated subsurface conditions should be verified in the field during construction. The following items shall be conducted prior/during construction by a representative of Engineering Design Group in order to verify compliance with the geotechnical and civil engineering recommendations provided herein, as applicable. The project structural and geotechnical engineers may upgrade any condition as deemed necessary during the development of the proposed improvement(s). 9.1 Review of final approved grading and structural plans prior to the start of work for compliance with geotechnical recommendations. 9.2 Attendance of a pre-grade/construction meeting prior to the start of work. 9.3 Observation of subgrade and excavation bottoms. Carr Residence - Page No. 13 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California Job No. 165624-1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECHNICAL, CIVIL STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS 9.4 Testing of any fill placed, including retaining wall backfill and utility trenches. 9.5 Observation of footing excavations prior to steel placement and removal of excavation equipment. - 9.6 Field observation of any "field change" condition involving soils. 9.7 Walk through of final drainage detailing prior to final approval. The project soils engineer may at their discretion deepen footings or locally recommend additional steel reinforcement to upgrade any condition as deemed necessary during site observations. Engineering Design Group shall, prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy, issue in writing that the above inspections have been conducted by a representative of their firm, and the design considerations of the project soils report have been met. The field inspection protocol specified herein is considered the minimum necessary for Engineering Design Group to have exercised "due diligence" in the soils engineering design aspect of this building. Engineering Design Group assumes no liability for structures constructed utilizing this report not meeting this protocol. Before commencement of grading the Engineering Design Group will require a separate contract for quality control observation and testing. Engineering Design Group requires a minimum of 48 hours notice to mobilize onsite for field observation and testing.- 10.0 MISCELLANEOUS It must be noted that no structure or slab should be expected to remain totally free of cracks and minor signs of cosmetic distress. The flexible nature of wood and steel structures allows them to respond to movements resulting from minor unavoidable settlement of fill or natural soils, the swelling of clay soils, or the motions induced from seismic activity. All of the above can induce movement that frequently results in cosmetic cracking of brittle wall surfaces, such as stucco or interior plaster or interior brittle slab finishes. Data for this report was derived from surface and subsurface observations at the site, knowledge of local conditions. The recommendations in this report are based on our experience in conjunction with the limited soils exposed at this site. We believe that this information gives an acceptable degree of reliability for anticipating the behavior of the proposed improvement; however, our recommendations are professional opinions and cannot control nature, nor can they assure the soils profiles beneath or adjacent to those observed. Therefore, no warranties of the accuracy of these recommendations, beyond the limits of the obtained data, is herein expressed or implied. This report is based on the investigation at Carr Residence Page No. 14 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California Job No. 165624-1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECHNICAL. CML, STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS the described site and on the specific anticipated construction as stated herein. If either of these conditions is changed, the results would also most likely change. Man-made or natural changes in the conditions of a property can occur over a period of time. In addition, changes in requirements due to state of the art knowledge and/or legislation are rapidly occurring. As a result, the findings of this report may become invalid due to these changes. Therefore, this report for the specific site, is subject to review and not considered valid after a period of one year, or if conditions as stated above are altered. It is the responsibility of the owner or his/her. representative to ensure that the information in this report be incorporated into the plans and/or specifications and construction of the project. It is advisable that a contractor familiar with construction details typically used to deal with the local subsoil and seismic conditions be retained to build the structure. If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we can be of further service, please do not hesitate to contact us. We hope the report provides you with necessary information to continue with the development of the project. Carr Residence Page No. 15 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California Job No. 165624-1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECHNICAL, CIVIL. STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS FIGURES ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GUICCft'1IC*t. Oft& IPWCTURAL, CctWflr. rrni r,c%ntItuL. r.nMwnrA,.t cnpItur.Trn.I U31-11-111 U 2121 Montiel Road. San Marcos, California 92069 - (760) 839-7302- Fax: (700) 480-7477 . www.desigrigroupca.eorn 4. __ >r zt 10Y 4\t • .•c. •l3•••.- •- Ile Site Location - - Project: Carr Residence FIGURE 1 Address: 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California EDG Project No: 165624-1 Vicinity Map ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP Ga,ECHwICL. UV. & MRIPCTU&*L cc.r..utWii FOO RSDDIVIALA cfluii &r.t&,. cn,miur.Tin& 2121 Montiol Road. San Marcos. California 92069 - (760) 839-7302 • Fax: (760) 480-7477 - www.desioncirouica.orri i — -4 : . . . o o I -I' — . 3 I. vi I I Lr lb r . J4k. \\ .—=T.-_L__ ...: --all :" — — Not to Scale:] Project: Carr Residence FIGURE 3 Address: 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California EDG Project No: 165624-1 Site Plan and Approximate Location of Test Pits Project Name: Carr Residence TEST PIT LOG NO. I EDG Project Number: 1656241 Location: See Test Pit Locations Map (Figure 3) Sheet I of I Date(s) Excavated: July 15th, 2016 Total Depth: 4' Groundwater Level: Not encountered Logged By: ER/AB Approx. Surface Elev. FG - Approx. 59 Backfilled (date) Same day Excavation Method: Hand dug Soil Type Depth Material Description and Notes UCSC Sample TOPSOIL FILL, WEATHERED 'A 0— 3.5' Light brown, dry, loose to medium dense, silty sands and sandy silts. Roots SW-SM in upper 12". Transitions to brown, moist, medium dense, silty sands. SANDSTONE B '' Light brown, moist, dense, slightly silty sandstone. SW-SM GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION: FG -4 -5 -6 -7 -8 -9 Project Name: Carr Residence TEST PIT LOG NO. 2 EDG Project Number: 1656241 Location: See Test Pit Locations Map (Figure 3) Sheet I of I Date(s) Excavated: July 2016 Total Depth: ' Groundwater Level: Not encountered Logged By: ER/AB -7 Approx. Surface Elev. FG Approx. 58.5 Backfilled (date) Same day Excavation Method: Hand dug Soil Type Depth Material Description and Notes UCSC Sample TOPSOIL, FILL, WEATHERED A 0 - 4.5' Light brown, dry to slightly moist, loose to medium dense, silty sands and SWSM sandy silts. Roots in upper 24". SANDSTONE B ' Light brown w/traces of reddish brown, moist, dense, slightly silty sandstone. SW-SM GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION: FG -6 />> -7 . -8 -9 Project Name: Carr Residence . TEST PIT LOG NO. 3 EDG Project Number: 1656241 Location: See Test Pit Locations Map (Figure 3) Sheet I of I Date(s) Excavated: July l5th, 2016 Total Depth: 4.5' Groundwater Level: Not encountered Logged By: ER/AB Approx. Surface Elev. FG -Approx. 58 Backfilled (date) Same day Excavation Method: Hand dug Soil Type Depth Material Description and Notes UCSC Sample TOPSOIL, FILL, WEATHERED A u-4 Light brown, dry, loose to medium dense, silty sands and sandy silts. Roots SW-SM in upper 24". SANDSTONE B 4' 4.5' Light brown, dry, dense, slightly silty sandstone. . SWSM GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION: FG -1 - -2 I •••• APPENDIX A REFERENCES California Geological Survey, Probabilistic Seismic Hazards Mapping Ground Motion Page. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Special Publication 42, Revised 2007. Day, Robert W. 1999. Geotechnical and Foundation Engineering Design and Construction. McGraw Hill. Greensfelder, R.W., 1974 Maximum Credible Rock Acceleration from Earthquakes in California Division of Mines and Geology, Map Sheet 23. Kennedy, Michael P. and Tan Siang S., Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30'x60' Quadrangle. Dated 2002. Lee, L.J., 1977, Potential foundation problems associated with earthquakes in San Diego, in Abbott, P.L. and Victoria, J.K., eds. Geologic Hazards in San Diego, Earthquakes, Landslides, and Floods: San Diego Society of Natural History John Porter Dexter Memorial Publication. McKinney, Mark Architect, Plans for Carr Residence, Dated April 9, 2016. Ploessel, M.R. and Slossan, J.E., 1974 Repeatable High Ground Acceleration from Earthquakes: California Geology, Vol. 27, No. 9, P. 195-199. State of California, Fault Map of California, Map No. 1, Dated 1975. State of California, Geologic Map of California, Map No. 1, Dated 1977. Structural Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) Seismology Committee, Macroseminar Presentation on Seismically Induced Earth Pressure, June 8, 2006. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1985, Coast of California Storm and Tidal Waves Study, Shoreline Movement Data Report, Portuguese Point to Mexican Border, dated December U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1985, Coast of California Storm and Tidal Waves Study, Coastal Cliff Sediments, San Diego Region (CCSTWS 87-2), dated June. USGS Earthquake Hazards Program, US Seismic Design Maps Web Page. is. Van Dorn, W.G., 1979 Theoretical aspects of tsunamis along the San Diego coastline, in Abbott, P.L. and Elliott, W.J., Earthquakes and Other Perils: Geological Society of America field trip guidebook. 16. Various Aerial Photographs. APPENDIX B General Earthwork and Grading Specifications 1.0 General Intent These specifications are presented as general procedures and recommendations for grading and earthwork to be utilized in conjunction with the approved grading plans. These general earthwork and grading specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report and shall be superseded by the recommendations in the geotechnical report in the case of conflict. Evaluations performed by the consultant during the course of grading may result in new recommendations which could supersede these specifications or the recommendations of the geotechnical report. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to read and understand these specifications, as well as the geotechnical report and approved grading plans. 2.0 Earthwork Observation and Testing Prior to commencement of grading, a qualified geotechnical consultant should be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report and these specifications. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to assist the consultant and keep him apprised of work schedules and changes, at least 24 hours in advance, so that he may schedule his personnel accordingly. No grading operations should be performed without the knowledge of the geotechnical consultant. The contractor shall not assume that the geotechnical consultant is aware of all grading operations. It shall be the sole responsibility of the contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the work in accordance with the applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, recommendations in the geotechnical report and the approved grading plans not withstanding the testing and observation of the geotechnical consultant If, in the opinion of the consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable soil, poor moisture condition, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than recommended in the geotechnical report and the specifications, the consultant will be empowered to reject the work and recommend that construction be stopped until the conditions are rectified. Maximum dry density tests used to evaluate the degree of compaction shouls be performed in general accordance with the latest version of the American Society for Testing and Materials test method ASTM D1557. 3.0 Preparations of Areas to be Filled 3.1 Clearing and Grubbing: Sufficient brush, vegetation, roots and all other deleterious material should be removed or properly disposed of in a method acceptable to the owner, design engineer, governing agencies and the geotechnical consultant. The geotechnical consultant should evaluate the extent of these removals depending on specific site conditions. In general, no more than 1 percent (by volume) of the fill material should consist of these materials and nesting of these materials should not be allowed. 3.2 Processing: The existing ground which has been evaluated by the geotechnical consultant to be satisfactory for support of fill, should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground which is not satisfactory should be overexcavated as specified in the following section. Scarification should continue until the soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and until the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features which would inhibit uniform compaction. 3.3 Overexcavation: Soft, dry, organic-rich, 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 competent ground, as evaluated by the geotechnical consultant. For purposes of determining quantities of materials overexcavated, a licensed land surveyor I civil engineer should be utilized. 3.4 Moisture Conditioning: Overexcavated and processed soils should be watered, dried back, blended and / or mixed, as necessary to attain a uniform moisture content near optimum. 3.5 Recompaction: Overexcavated and processed soils which have been properly mixed, screened of deleterious material and moisture-conditioned should be recompacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent or as otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant. 3.6 Benching: Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical), the ground should be stepped or benched. The lowest bench should be a minimum of 15 feet wide, at least 2 feet into competent material as evaluated by the geotechnical consultant. Other benches should be excavated into competent material as evaluated by the geotechnical consultant. Ground sloping flatter than 5:1 should be benched or otherwise overexcavated when recommended by the geotechnical consultant. 3.7 Evaluation of Fill Areas: All areas to receive fill, including processed areas, removal areas and toe-of-fill benches, should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant prior to fill placement. 4.0 Fill Material 4.1 General: Material to be placed as fill should be sufficiently free of organic matter and other deleterious substances, and should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant prior to placement. Soils of poor gradation, expansion, or strength characteristics should be placed as recommended by the geotechnical consultant or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material. 4.2 Oversize: Oversize material, defined as rock or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension of greater than 6 inches, should not be buried or placed in fills, unless the location, materials and disposal methods are specifically recommended by the geotechnical consultant. Oversize disposal operations should be such that nesting of oversize material does not occur, and such that the oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material should not be placed within 10 feet vertically of finish grade, within 2 feet of future utilities or underground construction, or within 15 feet horizontally of slope faces, in accordance with the attached detail. 4.3 Import: If importing of fill material is required for grading, the import material should meet the requirements of Section 4.1. Sufficient time should be given to allow the geotechnical consultant to observe (and test, if necessary) the proposed import materials. 5.0 Fill Placement and Compaction 5.1 Fill Lifts: Fill material should be placed in areas prepared and previously evaluated to receive fill, in near-horizontal layers approximately 6 inches in compacted thickness. Each layer should be spread evenly and thoroughly mixed to attain uniformity of material and moisture throughout. 5.2 Moisture Conditioning: Fill soils should be watered, dried-back, blended and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a uniform moisture content near optimum. 5.3 Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been evenly spread, moisture-conditioned and mixed, it should be uniformly compacted to no less than 90 percent of maximum dry density (unless otherwise specified). Compaction equipment should be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability, to efficiently achieve the specified degree and uniformity of compaction. 5.4 Fill Slopes: Compacting of slopes should be accomplished in addition to normal compacting procedures, by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at increments of 3 to 4 feet in fill elevation gain, or by other methods producing satisfactory results. At the completion of grading, the relative compaction of fill out to the slope face would be at least 90 percent. 5.5 Compaction Testing: Field tests of the moisture content and degree of compaction of the fill soils should be performed at the consultant's discretion based on file dconditions encountered. In general, the tests should be taken at approximate intervals of 2 feet in vertical rise and/or 1,000 cubic yards of compacted fill soils. In addition to, on slope faces, as a guideline approximately one test should be taken for every 5,000 square feet of slope face and/or each 10 feet of vertical height of slope. 6.0 Subdrain Installation Subdrain systems, if recommended, should be installed in areas previously evaluated for suitability by the geotechnical consultant, to conform to the approximate alignment and details shown on the plans or herein. The subdrain location or materials should not be changed or modified unless recommended by the geotechnical consultant. The consultant however, may recommend changes in subdrain line or grade depending on conditions encountered. All subdrains should be surveyed by a licensed land surveyor / civil engineer for line and grade after installation. Sufficient time shall be allowed for the survey, prior to commencement of filling over the subdrains. 7.0 Excavation Excavations and cut slopes should be evaluated by a representative of the geotechnical consultant (as necessary) during grading. If directed by the geotechnical consultant, further excavation, overexcavation and refilling of cut areas and/or remedial grading of cut slopes (i.e. stability fills or slope buttresses) may be recommended. 8.0 Quantity Determination For purposes of determining quantities of materials excavated during grading and/or determining the limits of overexcavation, a licensed land surveyor / civil engineer should biutilized. SIDE HILL STABILITY FILL DETAIL FINISHED SLOPE FACE PROJECT I TO I LINE FROM TOP OF SLOPE TO OUTSIDE EDGE OF KEY OVERBURDEN OR UNSUITABLE MATERIAL... 2 r-15-MIN. MIN. LOWEST KEY BENCH DEPTH (KEY) EXISTING GROUND SURFACE 0-11, loll 0 .. FINISHED CUT PAD —101 IMPA IW,I II (I IIIr,4 II PAD OVEREXCAVATION DEPTH WIAI AND RECOMPACTION MAY BE RECOMMENDED BY THE f GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT BENCH BASSO ON ACTUAL FIELD - CONO$1IONS-ENCOUMTERED. -. .....—COMPETENT BEDROCK OR . MATERIAL AS EVALUATED A ( BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT NOTE: Subdrain details and itey width recommendations to be provided based on exposed subsurface conditions 1IV.L30 HON 0N10038 NlP .$' 1411V so 3dld 031VOdH3d t 1L 0..' NIVI NtYI8flS CJ.NTtYAlnD3 03AObddY do NOV I IdVIJIPO 3dO13M13 - nev - r '3dld fcaLvOds3d-NoN 1 0., CN91 $1Fç$1C) 3AVD NV3O 114 W3AO NI .9 tY.L3O -goal 001 10 iq$dep fill Wflwlx,W joi peon eq p;noqs tZ sios'oo goal* .s..i9C 10 111$d•P 1111 WflWIXCW joi peen eq pjnolc 95 59I 1.113 quejoAlnbe peAoJddl JO (3Ad) epJ0l43 lIilAhI0d 'S8V) •UDJlS eue,pvlflB ClpJ$ UOI&J3V eq pinolle edAl ulwjpqng-BdA.L NIVO9flB petilseul eq pinoll, .did po5eaolJedueu jusginsuoD 1801U4098096 eUS £q p.puewwoo.J euoeo iv pesDfdeP St UMOP .uollejoljod 4jlm p.jtssui eq pinow. *di d U;1Jpqn1RNOU.v1V.L8NI NlYO8n8 ,UO!$,puon P01, tie pe.tq suvsln.u0 IS,Ut45e4009 eqs Aq p.Dueqo eq Aiw u1eJpqflS put ccojlgnq 10 gUOjqU9wlp Vfli3V su1101$J0dOJ luMSiOeb ces '.UOI.UeWlP Seejung ao :Jopi SL<3ueArb3 PUPS C-0 0O ON L-0 OS 0N si_s OC 0N C-8t 8 -ON 0t?S D 0N 0010V 001-06 001 Ut bussed % azs aAaiS p1PpU13S •S•fl 1V131YW 318Y3W3d Z SSV13 5NV1W3 VOJ SWOLLV1ID3dS 031J.3130 38 AVVI 3l8Y4 HBJlld '13AVD .3/Il-.P18 dO 33Vd NI 038fl SI lVlU3lVn 318V3N3d 3 88V10 CNVW11V0 all 1Iv.L30 NOLLOBNNOO—J. NIVI .91 SNVd DNIOVDNO 0310N SVI I4.LOIM A3)I J 3dld .Lr1.LflO dY3cg4J 3d1d 301$ I43V3 O3LVO3_ WIN .01 .L3LLflO 3BY.LlflS MOTIY 0.1. 31818$0d Sy moi sy asj.vru,c 38 0flOHB NlVO8flS .L83MO lVL30 H3N3L NtV0BflS 338 H 3N38 311Y1d WO i:u .LrI3 )IDVL.__ ~AIIVDILMBA 30 xvr4 .08 / AVJNOZIOH 00 XVV .001 / 13d1d OaLVOd3dNDN 0 .P ..-' 83d1d 131iflO 1,viEa ssuiina / iiia A.Lfl19YiS KEY AND BENCHING DETAILS FILL SLOPE PROJECT I TO I LINE FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO COMPETENT MATERIAL EXISTING GROUND SURFACE *11 REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL BENCH 2' M'1N4"-15' MIN._-u.I KEY LOWEST DEPTH BENCH (KEY) FILL—OVER—CUT SLOPE EXISTING GROUND SURFACE BENCH REMOVE LOWEST UNSUITABLE MIN. BENCH MATERIAL KEY (KEY) DEPTH CUT SLOPE (TO BE EXCAVATED PRIOR TO Flu. PLACEMENT) EXISTING GROUND CUT—OVER—FILL SLOPE PROJECT I TO I LINE FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO COMPETENT MATERIAL -REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL ENCH 2' MIN.' KEY. DEPTH NOTE: Back drain may be recommended by the geotechnical consultant based on actual field conditions encountered. Bench dimension recommendations may also be altered based on field conditions encountered. (TO BE EXCAVATED 4tW CUT SLOPE PRIOR TO FILL j . PLACEMENT) ROCK DISPOSAL DETAIL FINISH GRADE SLOPE FACE—..... --------------- ------------------- OVERSIZE WINDROW GRANULAR SOIL (S.E.30) TO BE - DENSIFIED IN PLACE BY FLOODING DETAIL TYPICAL PROFILE ALONG WINDROW Rock with maximum dimensions greater than 6 inches should not be used within 10 feet vertically of finish grade (or 2 feet below depth of lowest utility whichever is greater). and 15 feet horizontally of slope faces. Rocks with maximum dimensions greater than 4 feet should not be utilized in fills. Rock placement, flooding of granular soil, and fill placement should be observed by the geotechnical consultant. Maximum size and spacing of windrows should be in accordance with the above details Width of windrow should not exceed 4 feet. Windrows should be staggered vertically (as depicted). Rock should be placed in excavated trenches. Granular soil (S.E. greater than or equal to 30) should be flooded in the windrow to completely fill voids around and beneath rocks. APPENDIX C ENGINEERING g DESIGN GROUP GIO1ECN1At.CML.SIRUCtuR4. 68CH1TICfl1AtCOHSJUIl1S FOR OLSSEIiTIAL 8 CO8(OCIAL CORSIOUCIIOH 2121 Montiel Road, San Marcos, California 92069 • (760) 839-7302 • Fax: (760) 480-7477 • www.designgroupca.com LABORATORY RESULTS Method Cal-Trans Analyte Result Reporting Limit Units Dilution Method SULFATE 116.2 n/a ppm 1 CT 417 CHLORIDE 40.3 n/a ppm 1 CT 422 p.H. 6.58 n/a pH units 1 CT 643 RESISTIVITY 6080 n/a ohms.com 1 1 CT 643 ND=None detected - us/cm = micro Siemens per centimeter - ppm-parts per million (10,000ppm=1% by weight) Carr Residence 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carlsbad, California Job No. 165624-1 ENGINEERJNGDESIGNGROUP GEOTECHNICAL, CIVIL, STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS APPENDIX D ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP 2121 MONT1EL ROAD PHONE: (760) 839-7302 SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA 92069 FAX: (760) 480-7477 MINIMUM RETAINING WALL WATERPROOFING & DRAINAGE DETAIL (NOT TO SCALE) _______________________ THIS DETAIL REPREJ7S THE MINIMUM WAIL DRAINAGE AND WATERPROOFING APPUCATION TO SA1IY THE STRUCTURAL DE4 INTENT OF THE RETAINING WALL THE ARCHITECT OR DESIGNER OF RECORD FOR THE PRG.ECT SHALL RE RESPONSIBLE r1z () 3IN FOR THEJESON AND 'EOFICA71ON OF THE WATERPROOFING ASSEMB () FOAM UV PROTECTION Bo. PER MANUFACTURER'S S'EOF?CATION WATERPROOFING INSTALLED PER .. () MANUFACTURER'S g'EaF7cA17oNs & EXTEND BEHIND BACKER BOARD. INSTALLED PER ©BAa(DRAIN, I MANUFACTURER'S WEF7CA1IOHS OWN WATERPROOFTN& - ANY PENETRATIONS OF WATERPROOFING SMALL BE NOUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE WATERPROOFING / CONSULTANT/IIANUFACTURER IN _____ CONC OR 0111 ADVANCE AND BEALED PER RET WALL PER MANUFACTURERS SPEaRCARONS. PLAN & DETAILS TERWNAITON BAR PER MANUFACTURER'S WEOFTCATTONS () FILTER FABRIC WI 6" MIN LAP H)VROIITE WATER- (13 3/4" ORA%V. (I g / FT) STS AT CD- INTS PER MFR () 4" VIA PERFORATED DRAIN LINE ($01 40 OR INSTALLATION INSTRUC7ICWS EQUIV.) PERFORATIONS ORIENTED O0IW4 IX MINIMUM ORADIENT ID SUITABLE CUTLET - '\ EXACT PIPE LOCATIC*4 TO RE DETERMINED BY SITE CONSTRAINTS BLAB & VAPOR BARRIER PER PLAN j 4" TALL CONOREIE CANT 0 FIG / WALL DETAILS CONNECTION (UNDER WATERPROOFING). SLOPE J ID BACK EDGE OF FOOTING ®COMPACTED BAONFTLL 909 MIN R0..A1M COMPACTTCW IN ALL OTHER AREAS U.0.N. 6" MAX UFT& ONLY IJrMThEIGIT HAND-OPERATED EQUIPMENT SHALL RE UBED IW1HIN 3 FEET OF THE BACK FACE OF WALL. CSP ROUGHNESS OF WALL SHALL COMPLY WIN WATERPROOFING MANUFACTURER'S WEOFIcATYcW& city Of Carlsbad Community & Economic Development CERTIFICATION OF SCHOOL FEES PAID RECEIVED JAN 03 2017 CITY OF CARLSBAD This form must be cothpleted by the City, the applicant, and the appropriate school Sol 49ftValw8ft City prior to issuing a building permit. The City will not issue any building permit without a completed school fee form Project No. & Name: Plan Check No.: CBR2016-0478 Project Address: 152 SEQUOIA AVE Assessor's Parcel No.: 2060110800 Project Applicant: COO WN ER CARR ERIC&KIMBERLY (Owner Name) Residential Square Feet: New/Additions: 1,400 Second Dwelling Unit: Commercial Square Feet: New/Additions: City Certification: City of Carlsbad Building Division Date: 12/28/2016 Certification of Applicant/Owners. The person executing this declaration (Owner") certifies under penalty of peilury 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. RI CarlSbad Unified School District 6225 El Camino Real Carlsbad CA 92009 Phone: (760) 331-5000 Encinitas Union School District 101 South Rancho Santa Fe Rd Encinitas, CA 92024 Phone: (760) 944-4300 x1166 San Dieguito Union H.S. District 684 Requeza Dr. Encinitas, CA 92024 Phone: (760) 753-6491 Ext 5514 (By Appt. Only) San Marcos Unified Sch. District 255 Pico Ave Ste. 100 San Marcos, CA 92069 Phone: (760)290-2649 Contact: Nancy Dolce (By Appt.only) Vista Unified School District 1234 Arcadia Drive Vista CA 92083 Phone: (760) 726-2170 x2222 SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL FEE CERTIFICATION (To be completed by the school district(s)) THIS FORM INDICATES THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROJECT HAVE BEEN OR WILL BE SATISFIED. The undersigned, being duly authorized by the applicable School District, certifies that the developer, builder, or owner has satisfied the obligation for school facilities. This is to certify that the applicant listed on page 1 has paid all amounts or completed other applicable school mitigation determined by the School District. The City may issue building permits for this project. Signature of Authorized School District Official: (., Title: [ -J-ç-ft--'4'\"* . Date: 1 -3 -) 'Ti Name of School District: CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Phone: r1 (ô C) 33 6225 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD, CA 92009 Building Division 1635 Faraday Avenue I Carlsbad, CA 92008 1 760-602-2719,1 760-602-8558 fax building@carlsbadca.gov RealQuest.com ® - Report PFF Q)rcj,cj QCCkUCk\Oy'\ Page 1 of 1 Property Detail Report For Property Located At: cOreogc 152 SEQUOIA AVE, CARLSBAD, CA 92008.4057 RealQuest Professional Owner Information Owner Name: CARR ERIC & KIMBERLY Mailing Address: 159 SEQUOIA AVE. CARLSBAD CA 92008-4058 COIl Vesting Codes: MW!! JT Location Information Legal Description: LOT 8 BILK H TR 1747 County: SAN DIEGO, CA APN: 206-011-08-00 Census Tract! Block: 180.0012 Alternate APN: Township-Range-Sect: Subdivision: PALISADES Legal Book/Page: 206-01 Map Reference: 13-F5! Legal Lot 8 Tract #: 1747 Legal Block: H School District: CARLSBAD Market Area: School District Name: Neighbor Code: Munic/Township: Owner Transfer Information Recording/Sale Date: 0211712016! 02116/2016 Deed Type: GRANT DEED Sale Price: 1st Mtg Document #: Document #: 67529 Last Market Sale Information Recording/Sale Date: 1211911972! 1st Mtg Amount/Type: Sale Price: $25,000 1st Mtg Int. Rate/Type: Sale Type: FULL 1st Mtg Document #: Document #: 336296 2nd Mtg Amount/Type: Deed Type: DEED (REG) 2nd Mtg Int. Rate/Type: Transfer Document #: Price Per SqFt: $27.87 New Construction: Multi/Split Sale: Title Company: Lender: Seller Name: Prior Sale Information Prior Rec/Sale Date: / Prior Lender: Prior Sale Price: Prior 1st Mtg Amt/Type: Prior Doc Number: Prior 1st Mtg Rate/Type: Prior Deed Type: Property C acteristi Gross Area: 897 Parking Type: GARAGE Construction: Living Area: 897 Garage Area: Heat Type: Tot Adj Area: Garage Capacity: 2 Exterior wall: Above Grade: Parking Spaces: 2 Porch Type: Total Rooms: Basement Area: Patio Type: Bedrooms: 2 Finish Bsmnt Area: Pool: Bath(F/H): I/ Basement Type: Air Cond: Year Built! Eff: /1951 Roof Type: Style: Fireplace: / Foundation: Quality: # of Stories: Roof Material: Condition: Other Improvements: Site Information Zoning: R2 Acres: 0.14 County Use: I FAMILY RESIDENCE (211) Lot Area: 6,185 Lot Width/Depth: x State Use: Land Use: SFR Res/Comm Units: 1/ Water Type: Site Influence: Sewer Type: Tax Information Total Value: $1,071,000 Assessed Year: 2017 Property Tax: $11,647.46 Land Value: $1,020,000 Improved %: 5% Tax Area: 09000 Improvement Value: $51,000 Tax Year: 2017 Tax Exemption: Total Taxable Value: $1,071,000 p ciu Qc +) LJ. tLQ 382q I L9(6 http://proclassic.realquest.com/jsp/report.j sp?&client&actionconfirm&typegetreport... . 02/08/2018