The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About154 ACACIA AVE; ; CB891024; PermitAlTENTION INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS FILE MAY ALSO RELATE TO THE ADDRESSES OF 150 AND 158 ACACIA AV BUILDING PERMIT Permit No: CB891024 11/07/89 10:03 Project No: A8901737 Paae 1 of 1 Development No: ' Jog Address: 154 ACACIA AV Permit Type: CONDOMINIUMS Parcel No: Str : F1: Ste: 1211 11/07/89 5051 01. 02 C-F'RRT e357 .oc Valuation: 139,518 Construction Type: NEW Ma-37 Occupancy Group: R3 Class Code: Status: ISSUED Description: 1930 SF LIV 464 SF 40 SF DECK Applied : 07/13/89 : (ONE OF THREE CONDOS) 891582 AND 891583 Apr/Issue : 11/07/89 Validated By: CD CONTRACTOR : SEWART, DENNIS 434-3900 4576 CORON *** Fees Required ted & Credits *** "_"""""""""- """"""""- Adjustments: Fees : .oo Total Fees: 1,137.00 8,307.00 Ext fee Data Building Permit 780.00 Plan Check 507.00 Strong Motion Fee 10.00 Enter 'Y' to Autoc 4883.00 Y Enter 'Y' to Autoc 600.00 Y Enter Number of ED .oo or manually enter 1713.00 Enter Park-in-Lieu 786.00 * BUILDING TOTAL 9279.00 Enter "Y" for Plumbing 7.50 Y 35.00 Each Building Sewer 6.50 Each Water Heater and/or Ven 2.50 Gas Piping System ' 2.50 Each Vacuum Breaker > 1.00 2.50 2.50 * PLUMBING TOTAL 57.00 Enter "Y" for Electric Issue Fee > 5.00 Y Three Phase Per AMP > 100.00 .50 50.00 * ELECTRICAL TOTAL ($10 Minimum) 55.00 Enter 'Y' for Mechanical Issue Fee> 15.00 Y Install Furn/Ducts > 1.00 9.00 9.00 Each Susp/Recess/Floor-Mt Heater > 1.00 9.00 9.00 Each Install/Reloc Appliance Vent > 3.00 4.50 13.50 Each Hood/Fireplace > 1.00 6.50 6.50 * MECHANICAL TOTAL 53.00 """"""""- CrrY OF CARLSBAD 2075 Las Palmar Dr., Carlsbad CA , City of tarlsbad Building Department PERMIT APPLICATION 2075 Las Palms Dr.. Carlsbad, CA 92009 wsl w-1161 I. PERMIT Tm 'A. IJm**ERC~ UNEY , FINAL' BUI~ING INSPECTION DEPT: BUILDING ENGINEERING FIRE U/M WATER PERMIT#: CB891024 PLAN CHECK#: CB891024 DATE: 10/31/90 PROJECT NAME: 1930 SF LIV 464 SF 40 SF DECK PERMIT TYPE: CONDO (ONE OF THREE CONDOS) 891582 AND 891583 ADDRESS : CONTACT PERSON/PHONE#: DENNIS/726-4541 SEWER DIST: CA WATER DIST: CA FINAL'BUILbING INSPECTION DEPT: BUILDING ' ENQINEERING FIRE PLANNING U/M WATER PLAN CHECK#: CB891024 DATE: 10/31/90 PROJECT NAME: 1930 SF LIV 464 SF 40 SF DECK PERMIT#: CB891024 PERMIT TYPE: CONDO (ONE OF THREE CONDOS) 891582 AND 891583 ADDRESS: 354 ACACIA AV CONTACT PERSON/PHONE#: DENNIS/726-4541 SEWER DIST: CA WATER DIST: CA INSPECTED DATE BY : 01 INSPECTED: e/?/g@ APPROVED DISAPPROVED - *L INSPECTED DATE BY : INSPECTED: APPROVED - DISAPPROVED - INSPECTED DATE BY: INSPECTED: APPROVED - DISAPPROVED - FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION DEPT: BUILDING ENGINEERING FIRE PLANNING U/M WATER PLAN CHECK#: CB891024 DATE: 10/31/90 PERMIT#: CB891024 PERMIT TYPE: CONDO PROJECT NAME: 1930 SF LIV 464 SF 40 SF DECK (ONE OF THREE CONDOS) 891582 AND 891583 ADDRESS: 154 ACACIA AV CONTACT PERSON/PHONE#: DENNIS/726-4541 SEWER DIST: CA WATER DIST: CA I / . . . . . / -. I FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION DEPT: BUILDING ENGINEERING FIRE PLANNING U/M WATER PLAN CHECK#: CB891024 DATE: 10/31/90 PERMIT#: CB891024 PERMIT TYPE: CONDO PROJECT NAME: 1930 SF LIV 464 SF 40 SF DECK (ONE OF THREE CONDOS) 891582 AND 891583 ADDRESS: 154 ACACIA AV CONTACT PERSON/PHONE#: DENNIS/726-4541 SEWER DIST: CA WATER DIST: CA ............................................ .................................... INSPECTED DATE BY : INSPECTED: NOV. 0 9 1900 - DISAPPROVED - INSPECTED DATE BY : INSPECTED: APPROVED - DISAPPROVED - INSPECTED DATE BY : INSPECTED: APPROVED - DISAPPROVED - . " 04/29/91 INSPECTION HISTORY LISTING FOR PERMIT# CB891024 DATE 11/21/90 11/21/90 11/19/90 11/19/90 11/13/90 11/13/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/01/90 11(01/90 08/27/90 08/27/90 07/23/90 07/23/90 07/17/90 07/17/90 07/17/90 07/17/90 07/12/90 07/12/90 06/08/90 06/11/90 05/31/90 05/23/90 05/23/90 05/21/90 05/21/90 05/21/90 05/17/90 05/17/90 05/11/90 05/11/90 05/08/90 05/08/90 05/01/90 05/01/90 04/17/90 04/17/90 04/17/90 04/17/90 04/17/90 04/17/90 04/16/90 04/16/90 04/16/90 04/13/90 04/13/90 04/13/90 03/08/90 03/08/90 02/22/90 02/22/90 02/13/90 INSPECTION TYPE Final Combo Final Combo Final Combo Final Combo Final Combo Final Combo Final Combo Final Combo Final Combo Final Combo Ftg/Foundation/Piers Ftg/Foundation/Piers Underground/Under Floor Underground/Under Floor Sewer/Water service Sewer/Water service Underground/Conduit-Wir Underground/Conduit-Wir Underground/Conduit-Wir Underground/Conduit-Wir Interior Lath/Drywall Interior Lath/Drywall Frame/Steel/Bolting/Wel Frame/Steel/Bolting/Wel Frame/Steel/Bolting/Wel Frame/Steel/Bolting/Wel Frame/Steel/Bolting/Wel Frame/Steel/Bolting/Wel Interior Lath/Drywall Interior Lath/Drywall Frame/Steel/Bolting/Wel Frame/Steel/Bolting/Wel Frame/Steel/Bolting/Wel Frame/Steel/Bolting/Wel Frame/Steel/Bolting/Wel Frame/Steel/Bolting/Wel Frame/Steel/Bolting/Wel Frame/Steel/Bolting/Wel Rough/Topout Rough/Topout Rough Electric Rough Electric Rough/Topout Frame/Steel/Bolting/Wel Rough Electric Frame/Steel/Bolting/Wel Rough/Topout Rough Electric Frame/Steel/Bolting/Wel Frame/Steel/Bolting/Wel Insulation Insulation Rough/Topout INSP RI PD RI PD RI PD RI PD RI MP RI PD RI PD RI PD RI PD RI PD RI PD RI RI RI PD PD MP RI PD RI PD RI PD RI PD RI PD RI PD RI PD PD PD RI PD RI RI RI PD RI PD RI ACT RI NR RI co RI co RI co RI m RI AP AP RI AP RI RI AP AP RI AP RI RI RI co RI AP NR AP RI RI AP NS RI RI co RI co RI co RI co NR NR NR RI RI RI RI NS AP RI RI .. COMMENTS MH/726/4541 PM PLEASE MH/DENNIS/726-4541 RS/DENNIS/726-4541 MH/DENNIS/726-4541 Tl/MH/DENNIS/726-4541 Tl/MH/ T2/MH/DENNIS/726-4541 WATER SERVICE T3/MH/DENNIS/726-4541 T3/MH/DENNIS/726-4541 T2/MH/DENNIS/726-4541 T2/MH/DENNIS/726-4541 2&3 T3/MH/DENNIS/726-4541 UNITS 2 & 3 Tl/MH/DENNIS/632-6768 T2/MH/DENNIS/726-4541 T3/RS/DENNIS/726-4541 SHEAR OK T3/RS/DENNIS/726-4541 T3/RS/DENNIS/726-4541 Tl/MH Tl/MH Tl/MH T2/MH/ Tl/MH/DENNIS AT ROOF T3/MH/DENNIS/726-4541 HIT <RETURN> TO CONTINUE... - _' . '% 04/29/91 INSPECTION HISTORY LISTING FOR PERMIT# CB891024 DATE 02/13/90 12/22/89 12/22/89 12/18/89 12/08/89 12/18/89 12/08/89 12/05/89 12/05/89 12/04/89 12/04/89 11/29/89 11/29/89 11/27/89 11/17/89 11/27/89 11/17/89 INSPECTION TYPE Rough/Topout Frame/Steel/Bolting/Wel Frame/Steel/Bolting/Wel Const. SeNiCe/AgriCUlt Steel/Bond Beam Const. SeNiCe/AgriCUlt Steel/Bond Beam Underground/Under Floor Underground/Under Floor Underground/Under Floor Underground/Under Floor Ftg/Foundation/Piers Grout Ftg/Foundation/Piers Grout Ftg/Foundation/Piers Ftg/Foundation/Piers INSP RI PD RI PD RI PD RI PD RI PD RI PD RI PD RI PD PD ACT RI AP AP RI RI co AP RI AP RI CA RI AP RI RI AP AP COMMENTS T3/MH Tl/MH NO PERMIT T3/MIi/DENNIS/PM OR CALL Tl/MH/DENNY T3/MH/DENNIS AM PLEASE T3/MH T3/MH/TED COLUMN FOOTINGS T3/MH/TED HIT <RETURN> TO CONTINUE... INSPECTION REQUEST CI'f'Y OF ' CARLSBAD PERMIT# CB891024 FOR 11/21/90 DESCRIPTION: 1930 SF LIV 464 SF 40 SF DECK INSPECTOR AREA PD PLANCK# CB891024 (ONE OF THREE CONDOS) 891582 AND 891583 OCC GRP TYPE: CONDO CONSTR. TYPE NEW JOB ADDRESS : 154 ACACIA AV STR: FL: STE : APPLICANT: DENNIS SEWART PHONE: 434 3900 CONTRACTOR: SEWART, DENNIS PHONE: 619-434-3900 OWNER: PHONE : REMARKS: MH/726/4541 PM PLEASE INSPECTOR SPECIAL INSTRUCT: TOTAL TIME : "RELATED PERMITS" PERMIT# TYPE SE890125 ED STATUS ISSUED CD LVL DESCRIPTION ACT COMMENTS 19 ST Final Structural 29 PL Final Plumbing 39 EL Final Electrical 49 ME Final Mechanical " 2! " - " - ***** INSPECTION HISTORY ***** DATE DESCRIPTION ACT INSP COMMENTS 111990 Final Combo 111390 Final Combo CO PD CO PD 110790 Final Combo 110190 Final Combo CO PD NR MP 082790 Ftg/Foundation/Piers AP PD 072390 Underground/Under Floor AP PD 071790 Sewer/Water Service AP PD 071790 Underground/Conduit-Wiring AP PD 071290 Underground/Conduit-Wiring AP PD 061190 Interior Lath/Drywall AP PD 052390 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding CO PD 052190 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding NR PD 052190 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding AP MP 051790 Interior Lath/Drywall AP PD 051190 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding AP PD 050890 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding NS PD 050190 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding CO PD 041790 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding CO PD 041790 Rough/Topout CO PD 041790 Rough Electric CO PD 041690 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding NR PD 041690 Rough/Topout NR PD 041690 Rough Electric NR PD 030890 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding NS PD 022290 Insulation AP PD 021390 Rough/Topout AP PD WATER SERVICE 2&3 UNITS 2 & 3 SHEAR OK AT ROOF INSPECTION REQUEST CIqY OF’ CARLSBAD PERMIT# CB891024 FOR 11/21/90 INSPECTOR AREA PD DESCRIPTION: 1930 SF LIV 464 SF 40 SF DECK PLANCK# CB891024 TYPE: CONDO CONSTR. TYPE NEW JOB ADDRESS : 154 ACACIA AV STR: FL: STE: (ONE OF THREE CONDOS) 891582 AND 891583 OCC GRP ***** INSPECTION HISTORY ***** DATE 122289 121889 120889 120589 120489 112989 112789 111789 DESCRIPTION Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding Const. Service/Agricultural Underground/Under Floor Steel/Bond Beam Underground/Under Floor Ftg/Foundation/Piers Grout Ftg/Foundation/Piers ACT INSP COMMENTS AP PD AP PD CO PD NO PERMIT AP PD AP PD CA PD AP PD AP PD COLUMN FOOTINGS ~,' " .. .. ., . .. . , . . ,. .. .. . ,.. . ,. . . Page - of - Received: DAILY FIELD REPORT LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. BEl 3910 389 White - File Copy Yellou - CLient Copy Pink - ClientlAgencY Copy Gold - Field Copy .I~ ~ I I RALPH C. GRIPPO " 2. L a x.10 Rlc r 3 c " " . . . 4 1"". - . . " "_ 7 r-- . "" .. ;.t ! r-~ " - <. .; 2 ,. . .. : r .. '6 i 9 "" I2 _. . " I -- .. , *IOic VI n L .5 \ L-t \-r L-7 bFI/ ., .G 1 f -/o L.. ~ . .. . . ... , .. " ... . -. .. . , - LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC Geotechnical and Emimnmd Engineering Consultants I PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION, PROPOSED CONDOMINIUM SITE, 154 ACACIA AVENUE, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA ' July 11, 1989 Project No. 8891134-01 Prepared for: Mr. Dennis Sewart Carlsbad, California 92008 3076 Carlsbad Boulevard 5421 MNIDA ENCINAS, SUITEC CARLSBAQ CALlHUlNlA 92008 FAX (619) 931-9326 (619) 931-9953 I EIGHTON AND ASSOCIATE$ INC Geotechdwl and Emironmsnial Engineering Conrultcmtr July 11, 1989 Project No. 8891134-01 I I I To : Mr. Dennis Sewart 3076 Carlsbad Boulevard Carlsbad, California 92008 Subject: Site, 154 Acacia Avenue, Carlsbad, California Prel iminary Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Condominium Introduction In accordance with your request, we have performed a prelirninary'geotechnical constructed on the northerly side of Acacia Avenue in Carlsbad, California investigation of the subject property. The proposed development will be review, field observations, and preliminary conclusions and recommendations (Figure 1). The following report summarizes the results of our literature regarding the proposed development. Accomanvir)(l HaDs. .Fiaures and ADDendices Figure 1 - Site Location Hap - Rear of Text Table 1 - Minimum Foundation and Slab Recommendations for Expansive Soils - Figure 2 - Boring Location Map - Rear of Text Appendix A - References Appendix B - Boring Logs Appendix C - Laboratory Testing Procedures and Laboratory Test Results Appendix D - General Earthwork and Grading Specifications Rear of Text Scooe of Services The scope of our study included: 0 Review of available published and unpublished geologic literature pertaining to the site (Appendix A). 0 Review of stereoscopic aerial photographs to assess the general geology of the site. 5421 AMNIDA ENCINAS SUITE C, UUllSBAC! WIFCRNIA 92008 FAX (619) 931-9326 (619) 931-9953 8891134-01 ii I Geologic reconnaissance of the subject property. o Subsurface exploration consisting of the excavation, logging and sampling of three small-diameter hand-auger borings. The logs of the. borings are presented in Appendix B. Laboratory testing of representative bulk samples obtained from our subsurface exploration (Appendix C). Geotechnical evaluation of the data obtained. Preparation of this report presentin our findings, conclusions and recommendations relative to the propose i development. Site Descriotion and ProDosed Construction The subject pro erty is a 165-foot by 80-foot rectan ular-shaped arcel of land located on t R e northerly side of Acacia Avenue in ! arlsbad, Ca f ifornia. Topographically, the site is relatively flat to gently sloping to the west. shed. We understand that these structures are to be razed. Existing structures on the site include a one-story house, a garage, and a will be two-story with slab-on- rade construction. Structural information Construction will consist of three condominiums. The proposed structures was not available at the time of t a is report. However, assumed to be typical for these types of structures. It is ant cipated that building loads are only minor grading will be necessary prior to construction of the condominiums. face Egoloratlon and Laboratorv Testing Our subsurface exploratlon consisted of the excavation of three small- diameter hand-auger borings to a maximum depth of 6 feet. These borings were logged and sampled by a geologist from our firm. Representative bulk samples of the soils encountered were collected for laboratory testing. Logs of the borings are presented in Appendix B. Subsequent to logging and sampling, the borings were backfil1,ed. Laboratory testing was performed on representative samples to evaluate the h sical characteristics of the subsurface soils. A discussion of the faLratory tests performed and a sumnary of the laboratory test results are presented in Appendix C. Moisture and density tests results are provided on the boring logs (Appendix 8). -2- 8891134-01 Based on our subsurface ex loration, analysis of 1953 stereosco ic aerial photographs, and review of geo e echnical literature (Appendix A), t R e entire our borings, these soi s were observe! to predominantly consist of light site is underlain b Pleistocene-a ed terrace deposits. As encountered in brown to red-brown, slightly damp, medium dense, silty sands. The upper fl foot of this material has been disturbed as a result of previous devel opment and 1 andscaping . r Ground water was not encountered in our subsurface borin s to a depth of 6 feet. It must be noted, however, that fluctuations in the 3 eve1 of ground water may occur due to variations in ground surface topography, subsurface stratffication, rainfall, irri ation, and other possible factors which may not have been evident at the t B me of our investigation. - Our review of available geologic literature indicated that there are no known major or active'faults on the site. The Rose Canyon fault zone has been mapped by the California Division of Mines and Geology as being offshore approximately 44 miles west of the site. This fault is presently constdered the site is ground shaking due to a large earthquake on a major active to be potentially active, therefore, the seismic hazard most likely to impact fault located offshore approximately 21 m les west of the site, and the regional fault. The nearest active re ional faults are the Coronado Banks Elsinore fault zone located approximately 23 miles northeast of the site. The maximum anticipated bedrock acceleration on the site is esti.mated to be approximately 0.22 based on a maximum probable earthquake of 7.3 magnitude on the Elsinore Fau 9 t. For design pur oses, two-thirds of the maximum anticipated bedrock acceleration may 1 e assumed for the repeatable ground the Uniform Building Code or state-of-the-art seismic design parameters of acceleration. The effects of seismic shaking may be mitigated by adhering to the Structural Engineers Association of California. 3 l&lwkmQ Liquefaction and dynamic settlement of soils can be caused by strong vibratory motion due to earthquakes. Both research and historical data indicate that loose, saturated granular soils are susceptible to liquefaction and dynamic settlement, while the stability of silty clays and clays is not adversely affected by vibratory motion. Liquefaction is typified by a total to flow as a liquid. This effect may be manifested by excessive settlements loss of shear strength in the affected soil layer, thereby causing the soil and sand boils at the ground surface. The onsite soils, where saturated at depth, are not considered liquefiable due to their dense nature. -3- 8891134-01 Conclusions The results of our investigation indicate that the subsurface conditions are generally favorable for the proposed development. The proposed construction recommendations are incorporated into the fina design and construction of is feasible from a geotechnical stand oint provided the following the project. The following is a summary of the main geotechnical factors which may affect development of the site. 0 Based on laboratory test results and visual classification, the onsite soils have a low ex ansion potential which is favorable for design of foundations and sla 1 s. 0 Active faults are not known to exist on or in the immediate vicinity of the site. 0 The maximum anticipated bedrock'acceleration on the site is anticipated to be approximately 0.229 based on a maximum probable earthquake of Richter Magnitude 7.3 on the active Elsinore Fault zone. Y 0 Ground water was not encountered at the time of our investigation. 0 I I I Recomnendations -Earthwork Grading and earthwork should be performed in accordance with the following reconmendations and the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications recommendations s all supersede those in Appendix D. included in Ap endix 0. In case of conflict, the following 0- 1 Prior to grading, all areas to receive structural fill or engineered structures should be cleared of surface and subsurface obstructions, vegetation and debris should be .proper1 disposed of off site. Holes including any existing debris, and stripped of vegetation. Removed resulting from removal of buried o r; structions which extend below finished site rades should be replaced with suitable compacted fill material. A17 areas to receive fill should be scarified to a minimum depth of 12 inches, brought to near optimum moisture conditions and recom acted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM Test R ethod D1557-78). -4- 8891134-01 i I I I The onsite materials are expected to be rippable with conventional earthmoving equipment. 0 Jrench Excavation and Backfill Excavation of utility trenches and foundations in the onsite terrace deposits appears to be feasible with heavy-duty backhoe equipment. The onsite soils may be used as trench backfill rovided they are screened of organic matter, rock fra ments greater t an 6 inches in diameter, and debris. Trench back ill should be compacted in uniform lifts (not exceedin 8 inches in thickness) by mechanical means to at least 90 percent re 9 ative compaction (ASTM Test Method D1557-78). ! I: eEil3.S 'The onsite soils are generally suitable for use as compacted fill provided they are free of organic material and debris. All fill soils uniform lifts to at least 90 percent relative compaction ased on should be brought to near-optimum moisture conditions and corn acted In laboratory standard ASTM Test Method 01557-78. The o timum lift thickness required to produce a uniformly compacted fill wil! de end on the ty e and size of compaction equipment used. In genera , fill should e placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness. E E P 0 -n of Davliaht Buildina Pads No building or grading plans were available for our review at the time of this re ort. If daylight (transition cut-fill) buildin pads are proposed, t R e entire cut portion of dayli ht pads s ould be overexcavated to a minimum depth of 3 feet elow finished grade and Detail). Overexcavation of dayli ht pads is recommended in order to replaced with compacted fill (see Appendix D for Transition Lot minimize the potential for different 4 a1 settlements between cut and fill transitions. t3 il " Foundations and slabs should be designed in accordance with structural considerations and the following recommendations. The recommendations assume that the soils encountered within 3 feet of pad grade will have a low potential for expansion. This should be evaluated as necessar during Also refer to moisture conditioning recommendations out T ined in KEY: -5- 8891134-01 .Foundations The proposed one- and/or residential buildings ma be properly compacted fill at depth of 12 and 18 inches, supported on continuous earing in firm, natural soi ! s or res ectively, beneath lowest adjacent finish grade (for low expansive soi ! 5). At this depth, footin s may be designed for an allowable soil bearing value of 2,000 psf. B his value may be increased one-third for loads of short duration, such as wind or seismic forces. Footings should have a minimum width of 12 inches, 15 inches for two-story, and reinforcement consistin of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. We recommend a minimum wid il h of 24 inches for isolated spread footings. oElW2Ih Slabs founded in low expansive soils should have a minimum thickness of 4 inches and be reinforced with a minimum of 6x6-10 10 wlre mesh. Care should be taken by the contractor to insure t g at the wire mesh is placed at slab midhei ht. Slabs should be underlain by a 2-inch layer of clean sand over a !-mil Visqueen moisture barrier. In order to help prevent perforation, we recommend that a 2-inch layer of clean sand be placed beneath the Visqueen. The potential for slab cracking may be reduced by careful control of water/cement ratios. The contractor should take appropriate curing precautions during the pouring of concrete in hot weather to mintmize the cracking of slabs. We recommend that a slipsheet (or equivalent) be utilized if grouted fill, marble tile or other crack sensitive floor coverin is planned directly on concrete slabs. All slab should be designe ! in accordance with structural considerations. 0 meral Earth Pressure and Lateral Resistance for level or sloping backfill are recommended for walls ackfilled with If retaining walls are proposed, the following earth ressure values onsite nonexpansive soils. 1 - i tal!mms Act I ve l&!.e.l 2LulQls 35 65 At-Rest 60 70 Passive 300 150 (S1 opi ng Down) -6- 8891134-01 Unrestrained ( ielding cantilever walls should be desi ned for an active equiva T ent flu I d weight value rovided above. In he design of walls restrained from movement at t e top (nonyielding), such as basement or gara e walls, the at-rest equivalent fluid wei ht value should be used. T t e above values assume nonexpansive back 3 ill and free-draining conditions. Should a slopin backfill other than 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) be designed, or if a 1 ackfill is loaded by an adjacent surcharge load, the equivalent fluid weight values rovided geotechnical engineer. All retaining wall structures should be above should be evaluated on an individual-case basis gy the contained in Ap endix 0. The tota depth of retained earth for design provlded with appropriate draina e. Typical drainage design is of cantilever wa 1s should be the vertical distance below the ground surface measured at the wall face for stem design or measured at the heel of the footing for overturning and sliding calculation. Wall footings should be designed in accordance with structural considerations and the recomnendations above. Wall backfill should be compacted by mechanical methods to at least 90 percent relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D1557-78. Lateral soil resistance developed against lateral structural movement can be obtained from the passive pressure value provided above. Further, for sliding resistance, a friction coefficient of 0.35 may be used at the concrete and soil interface. The passive value may be increased by one-third when considerin loads of short duration including wind or seismic loads. The tota 9 lateral resistance may be taken as the sum of the frictional and passive resistances provided that the passive portion does not exceed two-thirds of the total resistance. c rl 9 ! 3 We are not aware if retaining structures are proposed at the site. If proposed, all retaining structures should be provided with appropriate Typical drainage design is attached in Appendix. D. Wall backfi 1 should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent .of the soils maximum dry density based on ASTM Test Method 01557-78. drainaye- - urface Drainaae and Erosion Surface draina e should be controlled at all times. The subject structures shoul! have appropriate drai.nage systems to collect roof water away from the structures toward the street or suitable drainage runoff. Positive surface drainage should be provided to direct surface facilities. Positive drainage may be accomplished by providing a minimum 2 ercent radient from the structures. Planters should not be desi ned ow gra 1 e adjacent to structures unless provisions for drainage suc il as catch basins and pipe drains are made. In general, ponding of water should be avoided adjacent to the structures. be! -7- .. 8891134-01 slopes, we recommend berms and/or swales be provided along the top of the In order to help reduce the potential for excessive erosion of graded slopes and lot drainage directed such that surface runoff on the slope faces is minimized. Protective measures to mitigate excessive site erosion durin construction should also be implemented in accordance with the latest Ci 7 y grading ordinances. - The recomnendations rovided in this report are based on subsurface conditions disclosed E y our subsurface exploration. The interpolated representative from Leighton and Associates. All foundat on excavations and subsurface conditions should be field checked durin construction by a grading operations should be observed by a representative of this firm so that construction is performed in accordance with the recommendations of this report. Final grading plans should be reviewed by this office prior to construction. If you have any questions regarding our report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. 3 Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATFS, INC. Michael R. Stewart, CEG 1349 (Exp. 6/30/90) Chief Engineering Geologist - -" Stan Helenschmidt, GE 2064 (Exp. 6/30/92) Chief Engineer/Manager WM/MRS/SRH/bje Distribution: (3) Addressee -8- SITE LOCATION MAP SEW ART I ACACIA . CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Flnure 1 1 I Qt 8 8-3 H' Qt .. 1 8-2 I HOUSE ' Qt - ACACIA AVENUE 8891134-01 APPENDIX A REFERENCES . .. I I I 1. Abbott, P.L., ed., 1985, On the Manner of Deposition of the Eocene Strata in Northern San Diego County; San Diego Association of Geologists Fieldtrip Guidebook. 2. Kennedy, M.P., and Peterson, G.L., 1975, Geology of the San Diego Metropolitan Area; California Division of Mines and Geology, Bulletin 200. 3. Lelghton and Associates, Inc., Unpublished, In-House Data. 4. , 1983, Seismic Safety Study for the City of San Diego. 5. Yeber, F.H. Jr., 1982, Recent Slo e Failures, Ancient Landslides, and Related Geology of the Nort R -Central Coastal Area, San Diego Open-File Report 82-12LA. County, California; California Division of Mines and Geology, A-1 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION . LOGGED BY RFWrn ?' SAMPLED BY RFWW TOPSOIL: . -dim to dark brown, dry, slightly dense, fine- to - medfucgrained, silty sand; abundant roots I " Medium brown. sliahtlv dam. dense. fine-' to medium- H TERRACE DEPOSIT: I @ 3' Medim brown. slightly damp. dense. ffne- to medium- grained, silty said; ?ew bots grained. silty sand; becomes mre dense at 5.5 feet H I Total Depth - 6 Feet No Ground Water Encountered No Caving IBackfilled 6/30/89 DAT- DRILL HOLE No. 6- 1 DRILLING Co. tilA TYPE OF RIG Hand Awr HOLE DIAMETER in. DRIVE WEIGHT NIA PROJECT Swart/Acaci.s SHEETAOF- PROJECT NO. 8891134-01 xisting DROP L IN. >LEkadeREFa OR DATUI LEIGH1 A indicates drive sample @ indicates bulk sample H il ... GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG DAT- DRILL HOLE No. 8-2 SHEET~OF- DRILLING Co N/A TYPE OF RIG Hand Awr PROJECT Sewart/Acaci.a PROJECT NO. 8891134-01 HOLE DIAMETER^ I OH1 DROP nlA IN. GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION LOGOED BY RFR/Yn I SAMPLED BY RFWSH mdiun to dark brown. dry. nediwn dense, fine- to - TOPSOIL: medium-grained sand; abundant Mots , n TERRACE DEPOSITS: 4' Light to red-brown. slightly damp, dense, fine- to coarse-grained sand; few roots to 2.5 feet H Total Depth = 6 Feet No Ground Uater Encountered NO Caving Backfilled 6/30/89 - - A Indicates drive sample @ indicates bulk simple GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG DAT- DRILL HOLE No. 8-3 PROJECT Sewart/Acacl,a DRILLING to I/* TYPE OF RIG Hand Au~er HOLE DIAMETER In. DRIVE WEIGHT N/A SHEETLOFA PROJECT NO. 8891134-01 xistlng DROP IN. )LELadeREF. OR DATUM MIA LEIOHTON & 1 GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION II LOGGED BY SAMPLED BY TOPSOIL: =diu. to dark brown, dry, slightly dense. fine- to medium-grained sand; abundant roots TERRACE DEPOSIT: ?d 4" Tan to medium bm, dry to sltghtly damp, medium dense, fine- to medlmgrained sand; very friable Total Depth = 6 Feet No Ground Uater Encountered No Caving Backfilled 6130189 indlcstes drive sample @ indicates bulk samples H I 9SSOCIATES 8891134-01 APPENDIX C LING AND LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES AND LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Disturbed Samolef: Bulk samples of representative materials were obtained from the borings, bagged, and transported to our laboratory for testing. LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURU Maximum Densitv Tests: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of typical materials were determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557-78. The results of these tests are presented in the test data. Sxoansion Index Test: The expansion potential of a selected material was were remolded at near-optimum moisture content to 90 percent relative -Expansion Index Test, U.B.C. Standard No. 29-2. Specimens compaction under a given compactive energy to approximately 50 percent saturation. The pre ared specimens (4-inch diameter by I-inch length) were loaded to an equiva Y ent 144 psf surcharge and inundated with tap water until volumetric e uilibrium was reached. The results of this test are presented in the test i ata. All references to the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) imply the latest standards. c-1 MAXIMUM DENSITY TEST RESULTS SolL TYPE OR LOCATION SQL DESCRIPTION - OPTIMUM MAXIMUM ENSITYIPCF) B-1; 1 @ 1 to 2' Red-brown, silty, fine- to medium- 9.5 grained sand 122.5 EXPANSION 1.NDEX TEST RESULTS SAMPLE LOCATION COYPDCTED COMPACTED DRY MOISTURE (%) DENSITY (PCF) MOISTURE(%) SWELL(%) INDEX CLASSIFICATlOh FINAL VOLUMETRIC EXPANSION EXPMSIVE -1; 1 e 1 to 2' 10.2 109.4 14.9 0.0 . 0 Very Low '' Projrct No: 8891134-01 .~. Leighton & Associates Platr No: c-2 APFTNDIX D GENERAL EARTH" AMI 6WIN6 SPECIFICATIOWS 8891134-01 1.0 -era1 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 rading geotechnical report and shall be superseded by the reconmendations in specifications are a part of the recommendations contained fn the the geotechnical report in the case of conflict. Evaluations erformed by the consultant during the course of grading may resu ! t in new responsibility of the contractor to read and understand these s ecifications as well as the geotechnical report and approved grading p ! ans. '1 a, " recommendations which could supersede these specifications or the - .. recommendations of the geotechnical report. It shall be the -1 11 2.0 Earthwork Observation and Testinq I I I, .._~. .~~ Prior to the ' commencement of consultant should be employed $rading, or the purpose a of observing earthwork qualified geotechnical procedures and testing the fills for conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report and these specifications. It shall be the responsibility of the cohtractor 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 geotechnica! report and the approved rading plans not withstanding the applicable rading codes and agency ordinances, recommendations in the testing and observation of the geotec a nical 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 until the conditions are rectified. Maximum dry density tests used to evaluate the degree of compaction should be performed in general accordance with the latest version of the American Society for testing and Materials test method ASTM 01557. rn adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the work in accordance with ":I I empowered to reject the work and recomnend that construction be stopped D-1 8891134-01 GENERAL EARTHYOW( AND GRADING SPECIFICATIM Kontinuedl .. I 3.0 Preoaration of Areas to be Filled 3.1 Clearina and Grubbing: Sufficient brush, vegetation, roots, and disposed of in a method acceptable to the owner, design engineer, all other deleterious material should be removed or properly governing agencies and the geotechnical consultant. The geotechnical consultant should evaluate the extent of these more than 1 percent (by vo ume) of the fill material should consist removals depending on s ecific site conditions. In general, .no of these materials and nesting of these materials should not be a1 1 owed. ! 3.2 l%&it%!al consultant to be satisfactory for support of fill should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existin; ground which is not satisfactory should be overexcavated as until the soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or specified in the following section. Scarification should continue clods and until the workin surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features w a ich would inhibit uniform compaction. S : The existing ground which has been evaluated b the 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/civil engineer should be utilized. 3.4 Boisture Conditioninq: 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 Recomoaction: . 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. D-2 . .. 8891134-01 AM) GRADING SPECIFICATIONS fbntinuedl 7 , ... L ., ~~ J , I I I 3.6 Benching: Where fills are to be laced on ground with slopes steeper than 5:l (horizontal to vertica P ), 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 consultant. Ground sloping flatter than 5:) should be benched or into competent material as evaluated by the geotechnical otherwise overexcavated when recommended by the geotechnical consultant . 3.7 Eked are:;!’r%$ areas, and toe-of-fill benches, should be uation of * All areas to receive fill, including 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 other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material. placed as recommended by the geotechnical consultant or mixed with 4.2 Oversize: Oversize material, defined as rock or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 6 inches, should not disposal methods are specifically recommended by the geotechnical be buried or placed in fills, unless the location, materials, and nesting of oversize material does not occur, and such that the consultant. Oversize disposal operations should be such that densiffed fill. Oversize materials should not be placed within oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or utilities or underground construction, ,or within 15 feet 10 feet vertically of finish grade, within 2 feet of future horizontally of slope faces, in accordance with the attached detail. 4.3 Imoort: If importing of fill material is required for gradjng, the import material should meet the requirements of Section 4.1. Sufficient time should be give to allow the geotechnical consultant to observe (and test, if necessary) the proposed import materials. D-3 8891134-01 §ENERAL EARTHYOW( AM) 6RADIffi SPECIFICATIONS (Continued1 I I 5.0 Fill Placement and CQmDaction 5.1 ill Lifts: Fill material should be placed in areas prepared and lreviously evaluated to receive fill, in near-horizontal layers approximately 6 inches in compacted thickness. Each layer should material and moisture throughou . be spread evenly and thorou hly mixed to attain uniformity of ? 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 ioisture-conditioned, and mixed, it should be uniformly compacted omoactlon of Fill: After each layer has been evenly spread, to not 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 uniformity of compaction. proven reliability, to efficiently achieve the specified degree and 5.4 fill Slopes: Compatting 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 corn letion of gradin , the. relative compaction of the fill out to the s ! ope face should e at least 90 percent. 5.5 omaction Testinq: Field tests of the moisture content and degree geotec nical consultant. The location and frequency of tests if com action of the fill soils should be performed by the should be at the consultant’s discretion based on field conditions 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, on slope faces, as a guideline approximately one test should be taken for each 5,000 square feet of slope face and/or each 10 feet of vertical height of slope. R D-4 8891134-01 6.0 Subdrain installation Subdrain systems, if recommended should be installed in areas previously evaluated for suitability by the qeotechnical consultant, to conform to the approximate alignment and detarls shown on the plans or herein. The recommended by the geotechnical consultant. The consultant, however, subdrain location or materials should not be changed or modified unless may recommend changes in subdrain line or grade de ending on conditions encountered. All subdrains should be surveyed 1 y a 1 icensed land surveyor/civil en ineer for line and grade after installation. Sufficient time sha 8 1 be allowed for the surveys, prior to conmencement of filling over the subdrains. 7.0 Excavation Excavations and cut slopes should be evaluated by a representative of the eotechnical consultant (as necessary) durin grading. If directed by a he geotechnical consultant, further excavat 9 on, overexcavation, and refilling of cut areas and/or remedial grading of cut slopes (i.e., stability fills or slope buttresses) may be recmended. 8.0 Quantity Determination grading and/or determining the limits of overexcavation, a licensed lan For purposes of determining quantities of materials excavated durin surveyor/civil engineer should be utilized. % D- 5 STABILITY FILL / BUTTRESS DETAIL OUTLLT PIPES 30' YAX. O.C. VERTICALLY 1:l OR FLATTER SEE SUBDRAIN TRENCI LOWEBT, SUBDRAIN SHOULD BE SITUATED AS LOW AS POSSIBLE TO ALLOW SUITABLE OUTLET NOM-PERFORA 18' YIN. T-CONNECTION DETAIL 1 ~~ SEE 1-CONNECTION DETAIL OVERLAP\ f, 6. WIN. S14m-1-112* CLEAN QRAVEL iWELOPE (YIRAFI 14011 OR APPROVED ~OUIVAL€N~* BEDDINO )TED SUBORAIN TRENCH DETAIL *.IF CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERYEABLE MATERIAL IS UBED IN PLACE OF 314"1-112* QRAVEL. FILTER FABRIC NAY BE DELETED SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL U.S. Standard Sfeve Slrc X Passing 1" 3/4- 100 90-100 318" 40-100 No. 4 25-40 No. 8 ia-33 No. 30 No. 50 0-7 No. 200 0-3 Sand.€quivalent>75 5-15 CT 1 TO 1 LINE TOE OF PETENT MATER1 OROUNDSURFACE DEPTH BENCH FILL- - . PLACBMENT) . ..".. .- . ." PROSCT 1 TO 1 LINE mou TOE 7REMOVE UN4WIABI.E 'MATERIAL SIDE HILL STABILITY FILL DETAIL NOTE: Subdrain detail8 and key width recommendation8 to be provided bared on expo8ed 8ub8urface condition8 TRANSITION LOT DETAILS CONSULTANT CUT LOT EXISTING COMPETENT BEDROCK OR MATERIAL EVALUATED /BY THE QEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT *NOTE Deeper or Interally more extenrive overexcivation and rrcompaction may be recommended by the geotechnlcal . consultant bared on actual field condltlonr encountered and locatlonr of plOpO8ed lmprovementr KEY AND BENCHING DETAILS CT 1 TO 1 LINE TOE OF ELOPE PETENT MATER1 ”“””_ OROUNDWRFACE DEPTH BENCH (KEY) FILL-OVER-CUT SLOPE (TO BE EXCAVATED PRlOR TO FILL . PLACEMENT) CUT-OVERFlLL SLOPE PROJECT 1 TO 1 LIME FROM TOE Of &OPE TO SIDE HILL STABILITY FILL DETAIL NOTE: Subdrain detail8 and key width recommendation8 to be provided bared on exposed 8Ub8UrfaCO condition8 TRANSITION LOT DETAILS CUT-FILL LOT EXlSTlNQ QROUND SURFACE I OVEREXCAVATE AND RECOMPACT COMPETENT BEDROCK ) fl BY THE QEOTEC.HNlCAL OR MATERIAL EVALUATED CONSULTANT COMPETENT BEDROCK OR MATERIAL EVALUATED /BY THE QEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT *NOTE Deeper or laterally more exten8lvs overexcivatlon and consultant bmed on actual field condltlon8 encountered recompaction may be recommended by the gootechnical. and Iocatlons of proposed Improvements CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAIL$ / SEE BELOW TRENCH SUBDRAIN TRENCH DETAILS FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE MIN. OVERLAP PERFORATED IF CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEAI MATERIAL IS USED IN PLACE Op MAY 88 DELETED PIPE , , 314C1-112* ORAVEL. FILTER FA# DETAIL OF CANYON SUERRAIN TERMINAL DESHIN FINISH A- SUBDRAIN PERFORATED 0' # MIN. PIPE SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS CUSS 2 PERMEABLE WTERIAL US. Standard Sieve Sfze X Passfng 3/49 1" 100 90-100 3/8" No. 4 40-100 25-40 No. 8 18-33 No. 50 No. 30 5-15 No. 200 0-3 Sand Equivalent>75 0-7 Subdrm ohpuld bo c~notr~ctod only on tompotont matorla1 a0 ovaluatod by tho gootochnlcol C~~uItont. ROCK DISPOSAL DETAIL rlNl8H ORADE OVERSUE WUOROW """""""_ """"""" """"A""-._ - """"""" """""""_ TVPiCAL PROFILE ALON@ WINDROW I) Rock with maximum dimbnsions greater than 6 inches should not be used withln 10 feet vertkally of.flnlsh grade (or 2 feet below depth of lowest utility whichctver h greater), and 15 feet horizontally of slope faces. !) Rocks with maximum dimensions grsatctr than 4 feet should not be uliked in 1111.. ))-Rock placement, flooding of granular soit, and flil placement 8houid be Ob8tarVed by thl geotechnlcal consuftant. i) Mulmun @lie and spacing of windrow8 should be in accordance with the above detail! Wldth of windrow should not exceed 4 feet. Windrows should be staggered VOrtiCaly (as depicted). i) Rock rhould be placed In excavamd trenches. Granular soil (S.E. greater than or equal to 90) should be flooded in the windrow to cgmpietely fill voids around and beneath rocks. RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL SOIL BACKFILL. COMPACTED TO 80 PERCENT RELATIVE COMPACTION* RETAlNUlQ WALL 4 PER ARCHITECT'S WALL'WATERPROOFINO SPECIFICATIONS "O.7 I I ,4..(MINJ DIAMETER PERFORATED 'PVC PIPE (SC- 40 OR ORIENTED DOWN AS DEPCnD EQUIVALENT) WITH PERFORATIONS MINIMUM 1 PERCENT QRADIENT TO SUITABLE OUTLET ___~ SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS CUSS 2 PERMEABLE MTERIAL U.S. Standard Sieve Size II Passinq 314" 3n' 90-100 no. 4 40- 100 25-40 no. a 18-33 no. 30 Ib. 50 0-7 5-15 Ilo. 200 0-3 Sand Equivalcnt>'lS 1. 100 \ COMPETENT BEDROCK OR MATERIAL CON3ULTANT AS EVALUATED BY THE QEOTECHNICAL *BASED ON ASTM DlSS7 IF GALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE 'MATERIAL (SEE ORADATION TO LEFT) IS USED IN PLACE OF 314°-1-112~ QRAVEL. FILTER FABRIC MAY BE DELETED. CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEAU MATERIAL SHOULD BE COMPACTED TO 80 PERCENT RELATIVE COMPACTION NOT TO SCALE CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING SERVICES DIVISION 2075 LAS PALMAS CARLSBAD, CA 92009 (619) 438-1161 &y - 1582- CITY OF CARLSBAD Plan Check ~o.W-/583 This form shall be used to determine the amount of school fees for a project and to verify that the project applicant has complied with the school fee requirements. No building permits for the projects shall be issued unhl the certification is signed by the appropriate school district and returned to the City of Carlsbad Building Department. SCHOOL DISTRICT: Carlsbad Unified San Marcos Unified 6350 Yarrow Drive Ste. A Carlsbad, CA 92009 (438-5710) 270 West San Marcos Blvd. San Marcos, CA 92069 (744-4776) - Encinitas Union Elementary - San Dleguito Union High School Encinitas, CA 92024 (944-4306) 189 Union Street 710 Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, CA 92024 (753-6491) Project Address: /so f /54 f /sa AC!HC/A 5/ RESIDENTIAC: SQ. FT. of living area 6,770 Number of dwelling units .. SQ. FT. of covered area SQ. FT. of garage area / S?Z T COMMERCIAL/ INDUSTRIAL: Prepared By $) ,[x* AREA Date ;/& """"""" ""_ """~""""_"""""""""""~""""""""""""""- FEE CERTIFICATION (To be completed by the School District) - Applicant has complied with fee requirement under Government Code 53080 - Project is subject to an existing fee agreement - Project is exempt from Government Code 53080 - Final Map approval and construction started before September 1, 1986. (other school feemid) " Other ~., - Residential Fee Levied $&O ba ed on 9,d 3 a-w a ,?IO sq. ft.@ SI. TL AB 2926 and SB 201 fees are capped at $1.56 per square foot for residential. AB 2926 is capped at.8.26 per square foot for commerciallindustrial. 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAO, CA 92009.4859 (818) 438.1181 TELEPHONE Citp of Carlsbab January 27, 1989 BUILDING DEPARTMENT San Diego Cas & Electric North Coast District Office Planning Department 5315 Avenida Encinas Carlsbad, CA 92008 ELECTRIC METER AND/OR SERVICE ACACIA Removal of electric meter number 56803 , located at 154 ACACAI AVE. is requested for the following reason(s1: 1. a Wiring found defective and dangerous to life andlor property, requlring immediate removal of the meter. Municipal Code Section 18.12.040 2. - Wiring found defective and dangerous to life andlor property. 3. - Wiring damaged by fire and found defective and dangerous to life andlor Municipal Code Section 18.12.040 property, requiring immediate removal of the meter. Municipal Code Section 18.12.040 4. Premises vacant and meter not in use. 5. Removal of the electric service is requested. You are further requested not to restore electric service to the above address unless so authorized, in writing, by this department. MARTIN m”Kb ORENYA Director (Building Official) M0:hmj C: Building Permit File‘ - Principal Building Inspector City Manager CERTIFIED January 26, 1989 Ronald E. Ley Kathleen A. Ley 2211 E. Washington Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90021 154 ACACIA AVENUE, APN: 204-233-07 abandoned, open and being utilized by transients to sleep, eat and live in. It has come to our attention that the above-referenced property is vacant, Evidence of this, as well as complaints from the surrounding neighborhood have come to our attention. The property is an attractive nuisance to the neighborhood. An inspection was performed by this office on January 25, 1989, and photographs of the property and the three structures were taken at that time. Enclosed are copies of these photographs. The property was posted "unsafe for human habitation" under Section 203 of the Uniform Building Code on January 26, 1989. At that time this office closed all doors going into the main structure on the property, however, the need to ~ecure all structures on the property is necessary that time. and should be done immediately. All junk and debris should also be removed at the assessor rolls, to contact this office by February 16, 1989 to informally It will be necessary for you, the last listed owner of the property as shown on discuss the future of this property. If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please contact the undersigned at 438-1161. p ICHAEL A. HARRINGTON Code Enforcement Officer City Manager City Attorney Pol ice Department Principal Building Inspector Building Permit File 2075 Las Palmas Drive-Carlsbad. California 92009-4859-(619) 438-1 161 DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING SERVICES DIVISION 2075 US PALMAS DRIVE (619) 438-1161 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-4859 MISCELLANEOUS FEE RECEIPT White. Flle Yellow. Applicant Plnk . Finance Gold - Assessor