The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1808 ASTON AVE; ; CB003345; Permit13104553 City of Carlsbad le5 Faraday Av Carlsbad. CA 92008 12/28/2000 Commercialllndustrial Permit Permit No: CB003345 Building Inspection Request Line (760) 602-2725 Job Address: Permit Type: COMMIND Sub Type: INDUST Parcel No: 2121200700 Lot#: 69 Status: ISSUED Valuation: $2,040,288.00 Construction Type: NEW Applied: 09/12/2000 Occupancy Group: 22 Reference #: Entered By: MDP Project Title: ASTON VIEWS PLAZA Plan Approved: 12/28/2000 85,012 SF SHELL Issued: 12/28/2000 Applicant: Owner: EVANS GRANT BTINVLLC 1808 ASTON AV CBAD Inspect Area: TP STE 200 12220 EL CAMINO REAL SAN DIEGO CA 92130 858 793-4777 Tota. Fees: $350,493.22 Total Payments To Date: S3,756.00 Balance DJe: 346.737 22 Building Permit Add'l Building Permit Fee Plan Check Add'l Plan Check Fee Plan Check Discount Strong Motion Fee Park Fee LFM Fee Bridge Fee BTD #2 Fee BTD #3 Fee Renewal Fee Add'l Renewal Fee Other Building Fee Pot. Water Con. Fee Meter Size Add'l Pot. Water Con. Fee Red. Water Con. Fee $5,517.71 $0.00 $3,586.51 $0.00 $0.00 $428.46 $34,004.80 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $15,360.00 $0.00 $0.00 D2 Meter Size Add'l Recl. Water Con. Fee Meter Fee SDCWA Fee CFD Payoff Fee PFF PFF (CFD Fund) License Tax License Tax (CFD Fund) Traffic Impact Fee Traffic Impact (CFD Fund) LFMZ Transportation Fee PLUMBING TOTAL ELECTRICAL TOTAL MECHANICAL TOTAL Master Drainage Fee: Sewer Fee: Redev Parking Fee: TOTAL PERMIT FEES $0.00 $350.00 $9,729.00 $178,746.00 $37,133.24 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $10,200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $371 .OO $3,010.00 $121.50 $0.00 $51,935.00 $0.00 $350,493.22 FINAL APPROVAL lnspecto ,&? . Date: Clearance: NOTICE: Piease take NOTICE that approval of your project incluk the 'Imposition" of fees, dedkations, rewvallons, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as %es/exactins.' You have 90 days from the date this permit was issued to protest imposition of these feesiexactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020ja). 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 foilow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their impition. You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified feesiexactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capactiy changes, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application prmwng or sewice fees in connection with this project. NOR DOES IT APPLY to any feesiexadons of which you have previouslv been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously othelwise expired. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY PERMIT APPLICATION PLAN CHECK NO. 3Sy.5- CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008 EST. VAL. Plan Ck. Deposit Validated By K\pQ Address (include BldglSuite #I Legal Oescription ASOBISM'S Parcel I Business Name 1.1 this address) EN UE AS7Pfi\/Ik5klS % w nap* \IQl 212- 120-01 - co \IAcLMT Phase No. Total X of units No. 4 Subdivision NamelNumber A5fot-J AV Proposed Use . Lot "O'69 . &-L4 Existing Use Cb.KL==.wTi-& OFF \LE X of Bathrooms issumc~, 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 PrOfeSEions Codel 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 dollar5 [550011. tale License # City Business License Designer Name Address City StatelZip Telephone State License # ,. , . Of the work for which this permit is issued. 0 issued. My worker's compensation insurancn carrier and policy number are: I have and will maintain 8 CertificatB of Consent to sdf-insure for workers' compensation as providsd by Section 3700 Of the Labor Code, for the performanc~ I have and will maintain workers' compensation, as required by Section 3700 of the Labor Code. for the performance of the work for which this permit is Insurance Company POIICY NO. Expiration Date ITHIS SECTION NEED NOT BE COMPLETED IF THE PERMIT IS FOR ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS 1$1001 OR LESS) CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION I Cenify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is iswed. I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the Workers' Compensation Laws of California. WARNING: Fallwe to SLICU~ workem' compantatlon coverage is unlllwful. and shall subject on employer to crlmlnal penales and clvll flnss up to one hundred thousand dollars 1$100,0001. In addhion to the Cost of compensation. damages aa provided for in Section 3706 of the Labor code. interest and attorney's fees. SIGNATURE DATE ijjj;;#gG . ,.. , . . ., , hat I am exempt fro 0 I, as owner of the property or my employeeD with wager as their sole compensation, will do the work and the stwcture is not intended or offerad for sale ISec. 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 empioyees. provided that such improvements are not intended or offerad 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 salel. a I, as owner of the property. am excIusiveIv contracting with licensed COntraCtOls to construct the PrOieCt tSec. 7044, Buoineso and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Lsw does not apply to an owner of propmy who builds or improves thereon. and Contracts for such projects with contractorls) licensed pursuant to the Contractor's License Law). 0 1. 2. I am exempt under Section i personally plan to provide the major labor and materials for COnStrUEtion of the proposed property improvement. YES aNO I Ihwe I have not1 Signed an application for a building permit for the proposed work. Business and Professions Code for this reason: 3. I have ontracted wi the following erson Ifirml to provide the proposed CanStrUCtion lincluds name I address I phons number I contractors license number): hmio, &NmeUCIPo,Y- 4. number I contractors license number): 5. I plan to provide portions of the work, but I have hired the following person to coordinate. supervise and provide the major work linclude name I address I phons I will provide some of the work, but I have contracted lhiredl the following persons to provide the work indicated linclude name I address I phons numbsr I type program under Sections 25505, 25533 or 25534 Of the PrerlevTanner Hazardous Substance Account Act? 0 YES NO 1s the applicant or future building occupant required to obtain a permit from the air Pollution Control district or air quality management district7 1s the facility to be COnstrUcted within 1,000 feet of the Outer boundary of a School site? 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 AN0 THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT. 0 YES 0 NO .. ,, I hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued (SBC. 3097111 Civil Code). LENDER'S NAME LENDER'S ADDRESS ~R~~.~~~ . ,, .. I Certify that i haw read the application and state that the above information is Correct and that the information on the plans is accurate. I agree to comply with all City ordinances and State laws relating to building construction. I hereby wthorize representatives of the CitV of Carlsbad to enter upon the above mentioned property for inspection purposes. I ALSO AGREE TO SAVE. INDEMNIFY AN0 KEEP HARMLESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AGAINST ALL LIABILITIES, JUDGMENTS, COSTS AND EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINST SAID CITY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING OF THIS PERMIT. OSHA: An OSHA permit is required for excavation EXPIRATION: Evew permit issued by the bui authorized by such permit is not Cornme at any time aner the woi+ is cornmen APPLICANTS SIGNATURE DATE ep and demolition or construction of structures over 3 stories in height. ifation and become null and void if the building or work work aulhotized by such permit is suspended or abandoned WHITE: File YELLOW. Applicant PINK: Finance Cltv of Carlsbad Final Buillllng lnsnection Dept: Building Engineering Planning CMWD St Lite Plan Check#: Permit #: Project Name: Address: Contact Person: Sewer Dist: c~a03345 ASTON VIEWS PLAZA 85.012 SF SHELL 1808 ASTON AV LANCE Phone: Lot: 7608016260 CA Water Dist: CA Date: Permit Type: Sub Type: 69 07/12/2001 COMMIND INDUST LI) Inspected Date By: Inspected: ~4, Approved: - Disapproved: __ Inspected Date Disapproved: __ By: Inspected: Approved: - Inspected Date Disapproved: __ By: Inspected: Approved: - Comments: .............................. .. ........ .... ......... * ....... .......... ............................................... .... .,.............. ................, I Dept: Building EngAdPPlng Planning CMWD Pian Check#: Permit #: CB003345 Project Name: ASTON VIEWS PLAZA 85.012 SF SHELL Address: 1808 ASTON AV Contact Person: LANCE Phone: 7608016260 Sewer Dist: CA Water Dist: CA St Lite Fire Date: Permit Type: Sub Type: Lot: 69 07/12/2001 COMMIND INDUST .......................................................................................................................................................... Inspected Date By: p? Inspected: 7//s/0 1 Approved: - Disapproved: __ Inspected Date By: Inspected: Approved: - Disapproved: - Inspected Date By: inspected: Approved: - Disapproved: - ........................................................................................................................................................... Comments: City of Carlsbad Bldg For: 08/15/2001 Inspection Request Permit# CEO03345 05/09/2001 05/08/2001 05/08/2001 05/08/2001 05/08/2001 05/07/2001 05/04/2001 05/04/2001 05/04/2001 05/04/2001 05/04/2001 05/03/2001 05/03/2001 05/02/2001 05/02/2001 05/02/2001 05/01/2001 05/01/2001 05/01/2001 04/27/2001 04/27/2001 04/26/2001 04/26/2001 04/26/2001 04/26/2001 04/26/2001 04/26/2001 04/25/2001 04/25/2001 04/25/2001 04/24/2001 04/24/2001 04/23/2001 04/20/2001 04/20/2001 04/20/2001 04/17/2001 04/17/2001 04/17/2001 04/12/2001 04/10/2001 04/06/2001 04/06/2001 04/06/2001 04/04/2001 04/03/2001 03/29/2001 03/29/2001 03/28/2001 03/28/2001 44 RoughlDudDampers 14 FramelSteel/BoltingMlding 17 interior LaWDrywall 34 Rough Electric 44 RoughlDuctslDampers 14 Frame/Steel/Boltinglding 11 FtgIFoundationIPiers 12 SteeWBond Beam 14 Frame/Steel/BoltingMlding 34 Rough Electric 44 Rough/DuctslDampers I1 FtgIFoundationIPiers 14 FramelSteellBoltingiWelding 14 FramelSteeWBoltingMIding 14 Frame/Steel/BoltingMlding 34 Rough Electric 14 Frame/Steel/Boltinglding 17 Interior LaWDrywail 34 Rough Electric 14 FramelSteellBoltinglding 17 Interior Lath/Drywall 14 Frame/Steel/Boltinglding 14 FramelSteellBoltingMeiding 34 Rough Electric 34 Rough Electric 44 Rough/DucWDampers 44 Rough/DucWDampers 14 Frame/Steel/Bolting/lding 17 Interior LathIDrywall 34 Rough Electric 14 Frame/Steel/BoltingMelding 24 Roughfropout 14 Frame/Steel/Bolting/lding 14 Frame/Steel/Bolting/lding 17 Interior Lath/Drywall 34 Rough Electric 14 Frame/Steel/BoitingNlding 16 Insulation 17 Interior Lath/Drywall 14 FramelSteel/BoltingMlding 14 Frame/Steel/BoltingNldlng 12 SteeWBond Beam 14 Frame/SteellBoltingNlding 17 interior LaWDrywall 14 Frame/Steel/BoltingMlding 14 FramelSteeWBoltingIding 15 Rwf/Rerwf 66 Grout 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 15 Rwf/Rerwf AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP NR TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP WC TP CO TP AP TP CO TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP NR TP AP TP NR TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP WC TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP WC TP CO TP Inspector Assignment: TP 2ND FLR ELEV CORR MAiN ENT RADUIS LITE POLE BASE FTNS RESTRMS MAIN ENT. RADIUS WALUCEiL 2ND FLR RESTRM CElL MAIN ENT. RADIUS WALUCEIL 2ND FLR RESTROOM WALLS 2ND FLR CORR 2ND FLR RESTROOM WALLS 2ND FLR CORR TUNNEL, CNTR STR ENCL 1ST FLR REST RM D.W. AREAS 1ST FLR REST RM CElL ELEV LOBBY WALLS, CElL IST FLR REST RM CElL ELEV LOBBY WALLS, CEiL RESTROOM WALLS 1ST FLR TOP 1HR CORR ADJ TO RESTROOMS 1ST FLR REST RM WALLS IST FLR RESTRMS TEST ENT. SOFFITS (3) IST FLR CORR. & STR ENCL ENT SOFFITS (3) STR ENCL CEiL IST FLR CORR 8 STR ENCL. ABOVE STR ENCL CElL IST FLR CORR & STR ENCL 2ND FLR MTL DECK COMP S.O.G. MECH ENCL E. STR. ENCL 2ND FLR MTL DECK 8.5 - 14 LN 2ND FLR MTL DECK A-F.5 LN. MTL DECK ROOF P.G. @ CLMN BASES PERM. WELDS & RAISED ENTRY City of Carlsbad Bldg For: 0811 51200 1 Inspection Request Permit# CB003345 03/27/2001 03/19/2001 03/19/2001 031 5/2001 03/15/2001 o3m9~001 03/09/2001 02/22/2001 02/22/2001 02/09/2001 02/09/2001 02/08/2001 02/07/2001 02/05/2001 02/05/2001 02/02/2001 02/02/2001 02/01/2001 01/30/2001 01/30/2001 01/29/2001 01/26/2001 01/26/2001 01/25/2001 01/25/2001 01/25/2001 01/19/2001 01/19/2001 01/1~2001 01/18/2001 01/18/2001 01 /I 7/2001 01/17/2001 01/12/2001 01/11/2001 01/11/2001 01/10/2001 01/10/2001 01/09/2001 01/09/2001 01/09/2001 01/09/2001 01/09/2001 01/08/2001 01 /05/2001 01/05/2001 01/05/2001 01/04/2001 01/04/2001 01/04/2001 14 Fame/Steel/BoltingMlelding 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 12 Steel/Bond Beam 11 Flg/Foundation/Piers 12 SteeWBond Beam 1 I Ftg/Foundation/Piers 12 Steel/Bond Beam 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 12 SteeilBond Beam 12 SteellBond Beam 21 Undergmund/Under Floor 12 SteeWBond Beam 12 SteeWBond Beam 11 Ftg/Foundation/Pien 12 SteeVBond Beam 11 FtglFoundationlPiars 12 SteellBond Beam 12 SIeeWBond Beam 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 12 SteeWBond Beam 12 SteellBond Beam 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 12 SteellBond Beam 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 12 SteeVBond Beam 12 SteeVBond Beam 22 SewerNVater Service 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 12 Steel/Bond Beam 22 SewerNVater Service 21 Undergmund/Under Floor 22 SewerNVater Service 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 12 SteellBond Beam 21 Undergrwnd/Under Floor 23 GaflestlRepairs I I Flg/Fwndation/Pien 12 SteeVBond Beam 12 SteeVBond Beam 21 Underground/Under Floor 22 SewerNVater Service 14 Frame/Steel/BoltingNVelding 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 12 SteeVBond Beam 21 Underground/Under Floor 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 12 SteeWBond Beam 21 Underground/Under Floor NR TP AP TP AP TP CO TP CO TP wc rp AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP AP TP CO TP WC TP AP TP WC TP CO TP AP TP WC TP AP TP CO TP WC TP CO TP WC TP WC TP PA TP AP TP WC TP WC TP AP TP AP TP AP TP WC TP AP TP WC TP PA TP AP TP WC TP AP TP AP TP AP TP WC TP PA TP AP TP AP TP AP TP NR TP AP TP AP TP AP TP Inspector Assignment: TP P.S. @ STR. FRNT. P.G. @ FULL HT. CLMN P.S. P.S. N/INCL E-6.6. a S.F FTNS @ MECH ENCL PNLS 31N WASTE TO MECH ENCL PNLS PNLS SEE CARD ( 140 a TSH a MECH ENCL PNLS W-I.E-I.NI, 3, 5 PNLS PNLS W 2-8 PNLS N7-10, E2-9. SI .2 PNLS NOT COMP. PNLS PNLS STRM DRM CATCH BASIN TOP SECT. S.O.G. COMPLETE CATCH BASiNS FOR STORM DFWNS RESTRMS S.O.G. QUAD S.O.G. SITE SEWER a TEST G.B. K LN ELEV PIT WALLS SEWER MAIN TO BLDG OK TO COVER, NKEST AA-BB + K LN. CONT a G.B. FTNS G.B. a CONT. FTN a 14 LN.. G.B. 4 LN. G.B. a CONT FTN A+I LN. 6 IN BLDG SEWER . City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request For: 08/15/2001 Permit# CEO03345 Inspector Assignment: TP 01/03/2001 11 FtgIFoundatiodPien AP TP CONT. FTN N + X LN. 01/03/2001 12 Steel/Bond Beam AP TP 01/02/2001 11 FtgIFoundatiodPiers AP TP INTSPRDFTNS 01/02/2001 12 SteeVBond Beam AP TP City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request For: 0811 512001 Permit# CB003345 Title: ASTON VIEWS PLAZA Description: 85,012 SF SHELL Type: COMMIND Sub Type: INDUST Job Address: 1808 ASTON AV Suite: Lot 69 Location: APPLICANT EVANS GRANT Owner: Remarks: Total Time: Inspector Assignment: TP Phone: 7608016260 Inspector: &@ Requested By: LANCE Entered By: CHRISTINE CD Description Act Comments I9 Final Structural r4p 29 Final Plumbing 39 Final Electrical 49 Final Mechanical lnsoection History Date Description Act lnsp Comments 08/09/2001 89 Final Combo CO TP NLBOILERSPECS 08/08/2001 89 Final Combo CO TP 07/12/2001 89 Final Combo PI TP START FINAL WALK THRU 06/12/2001 34 Rough Electric AP TP SUBPNLS 06/12/2001 39 Final Electrical WC TP 05/21/2001 21 Underground/Under Floor WC TP 05/21/2001 23 GasnestlRepairs AP TP EQUPTYARD 05/21/2001 24 Roughflopout AP TP ROOFDRAiNS 05/21/2001 41 Undergmund Ducts WC TP 05/14/2001 14 Frame/Steel/Boltinglding WC GG 05/14/2001 14 Frame/Steel/Bolting/elding WC GG 05/14/2001 17 Interior Lath/Dmll AP GG D.W. NAIL LID @ STAIRS 0511 1/2001 14 Frame/Steel/Boltinglding WC TP 05/11/2001 17 Interior Lath/Drywall AP TP 2NDFLRRESTRMS 05/09/2001 14 Frame/Steel/BoItinqWelding AP TP 2ND FLR LOBBY 8 STR CElL 05/09/2001 34 Rough Electric AP TP #3576 P.001/001 JUN.13'2001 14:26 17607469806 CTE ESCONDIDO June 4.2001 CTE JobNo.10-4505 City Of Carlsbad Building Inspection Deparbnent. 2975 Ias Palm Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: SATISFACTORY COMPJXTION OF WON< REQUlRMG SPEClAL INSPECTION PERFORMED WER PERMJT NO. CB 003345 1808 Astm Avenue To thc best of my knowledge all wm requiring materials sampling. lesting and spec 1 inspection ofreinforced concrete, roofing, field welding and epoxy bolt installation has been completed Ibr the structure constructed under the subject permit and is in conformance with the approved plans and specifidons and the agplicahle workmaoship provisions of the Uniform Building Code. Tom Gaeto SWE of California Regislmtion Number 401 82 Expirntion Date 09/30/02 GEOTECHNJCAI, AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPIZCTION Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. -A 2414 Vineyard Ave c Escondido. CA 92029 Phone (760) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-9806 3 P .e k:sc;lw:b:Rls<;. 1.w v REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458525 Project Name Aston View Corporate Center, Lot 69 Project No 10-4585 Project Address 1808 Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Sub-contractor Engineer Prime Structural __ Engineers Bldg Permit No CB . 3345 Plan File No DSAlOS H P D .Gov'! Contra-? li - Architect Smith Consulting Architects -___-_- .. - -- - . . . - .~ ...... .. ... . ~~ .. Sarnole Grouo Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified Placement Date 02/09/2001 Slump (in.) 4.5 N/A Supplier/Plant -. Palomar Transit Mix Air Temp ('71 62 N/A N/A Mix Number 404008 Mix Temp (OF) 69 Mix Description EL!! Air Content (Oh) N/A N/A Mix Design 4000 .. psi i7.6 MPa Unit Weight (KgIM') 0 N/A Specified Strength 4000 -___ 0 psi 27.6 MPa Dry Weight __ Truck No. 833 Ticket 1: 11 :5482 Age: e4 Min. Samples Made By: Dorrell Duquette Sample Mark: Admixture NIA NIA Gallons of water added at NIA by NIA Specific Location Panei SWZ Special InstructionsiRemarks 1 @ 5. 2 @ 28 ' Yold _. .~____ .- Logged in by: NIA -~ Delivered by NIA Date Rec'd in Lab: 3211512001 . . .. _. . . .- Cement Type II. V ___- ___.-.___.__ ___ __ . .- .- Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 5 25A 02/15/2001 6x121~ 20.27inl 80,045 ibs 2831 psi 19.5MPa C 28 258 03/09/2001 6xl21n 28.27in' 146,270 lbs 517Opsi 35.6MPa C 25 25C 03!09/2QOl 5x!2'n 28.27inz 141,990 lbs 5020psi 34.6MPa C Cone A C0ne:Split B ConeiShear C Shear D Columnar E Sampling and leshng conduc!ed in accordance wilh AS7M Standard designafrons. C31-98. C39-96. C78-94. C138-92. C143-38. C172-97. C231-97. C617-98. ClOi7-98 -- Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: vz mad, Doualass Johnsto: cc: Lusardi Prir-e Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views. City of Carisbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido, CA 92029 Phone (760) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-9806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Samole Grouo # 458526 ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ Project Name Aston View Corporate Center, Lot 69 Project No 10-4585 Project Address 1808 Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Sub-contractor Engineer .~ Prime Structural Engineers Architect Smith Consulting Architects Bldg Permit No CB 3345 Plan File No DSAIOSHPD -- Gov't Contract # .. Sample Group Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Placement Date 02/09/2001 Slump SupplierlPlant Palomar Transit Mix Air Temp Mix Number 404008 Mix Temp Mix Description PUMP Air Content Mix Design 4000 psi 27.6 MPa Unit Weight Specified Strength 4000 psi 27.6 MPa Dry Weight Measured Specified - (in.) N/A N/A (OF) N/A N/A (OF) N/A N/A (%) N/A N/A (KgIM') 0 N/A 0 Truck No. 685 Ticket tk 11 15633 Age: 78 Min. Samples Made By: Dorreli Duquette Sample Mark: Delivered by NIA Date Rec'd in Lab: 0211512001 Logged in by: NIA Admixture NIA Specific Location SET 3 Special InstructionsIRemarks - - NIA Gallons of water added at NIA by NIA Cement Type 11, V - 1 @ 5, 2 @ 28, 1 Hold Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Tv pe 5 26A 02/15/2001 6xI21n 28.27 in' 97,335 Ibs 3440psi 23 7MPa C 28 268 03/09/2001 6x1 2 in 28 27in2 149,900 Ibs 5300~~1 36 5MPa C 28 26C 03/09/2001 6x1 2 in 28 27inz 152,660 Ibs 5400psi 372MPa C Cone A ConelSplit E Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: Sampling and resting conducted in accordance with ASTM Standard designations C31-98. C39-98. C78-94, C138-92, C143-98, C172-97 C231-97, C617-98 C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: 7- 3.' Date:&/& cc: Doualass Johnston. Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido, CA 92029 (760) 746-4955 Fax:(760) 746-9806 k:N1;lv~1~l<lri~;, Ir\('. REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458534 Project Name Aston View Corporate Center, Lot 69 Project No 10-4585 Project Address 1808 Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Sub-contractor Engineer Primmineers Architect Smith Consulting Architects Bldg Permit No CB 3345 Plan File No DSAlOSHPD .- .. - Gov't Contract # ... .. .. SamDle GrouD Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified Placement Date 4/11/01 Slump (in.) 5 NIA SupplierlPlant Palomar Transit Mix Air Temp (DF) 53 N/A Mix Number 523006 Mix Temp (OF) 60 N/A Mix Description 3000 LT.WT. Air Content (%) 3.5 N/A Mix Design 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Unit Weight (Kg/M') 117 N/A Required Strength 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Dly Weight 0 Truck No. 558 Ticket t: 1134839 Age: 66 Min. Samples Made By: Pat Simmons Date Rec'd in Lab 4/12/01 Cement Type n/a Admixture N/A Speclfic Location MEZZ. DECK Special InstructionslRemarks - I__ -. 1@7 - 2@28 - IHOLD Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested TY pe 7 34A 411 8/01 4X8in 12.57inx 58,065 Ibs 462Opsi 31.8MPa c 28 348 5/9/01 4X8in 12.57in' 77,070 Ibs 613Opsi 42.2MPa C 28 34c 5/9/01 4x8 in 12.57in2 73,510 Ibs 585Opsi 40.3MPa c Cone A ConelSplit B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: Sampling and lesting conducfed in accordance with ASTM Standard designations: C31-98, C39-96, C78-94, C138-92, C143-98, C172-97, C231-97. C617-98, C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: 7- Date:5//0(0( cc: Doualass Jo hnsta Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido, CA 92029 (760) 746-4955 Fax:(760) 746-9806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458535 liNGIYCPNlKG. I%('. Project Name Aston View Corporate Center, Lot 69 Project No 10-4585 Project Address .. 1808 Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Sub-contractor Engineer Prime Structural EnEers Architect Smith Consulting Architects Bldg Permit No -. CB 3345 Plan File No DSAIOSHPD Gov't Contract # ..""ll.- ...I._ --..-.,..I ,._. Sample GrouD Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified Placement Date 411 1/01 Slump (in.) 5.5 N/A SupplierIPlant Palomar Transit Mix Air Temp (OF) 60 N/A Mix Number 523006 Mix Temp ('F) 73 N/A Mix Description 3000 PSI LT. WT Air Content (%) N/A N/A Mix Design 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Unit Weight (Kg/M') 0 N/A Required Strength 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Dry Weight 0 Truck No. 059 Ticket II: 1134913 Age: 120 Min. Samples Made By: Pat Simmons Date Rec'd in Lab 4/12/01 Cement Type n/a Admixture N/A Specific Location Special InstructionslRemarks ~ ~ 2ND. FLOOR 7.5 @ K ___.I 1@7 - 26328 - IHOLD -- ~~ Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 7 35A 4/18/01 4x8 in 12.57 in' 49,255 Ibs 392Opsi 27.OMPa c 28 358 5/9/01 4X8in 12.57in' 72,485 ibs 577Opsi 39.8MPa c 28 35c 5/9/01 4X8in 12.57in' 69,170 Ibs 55OOpsi 37.9MPa C Cone A Cone/Split B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: Sampling and testing conducted in accordance with ASTM Standard designations: C31-98. C39-96, C78-94, C138-92, C143-98, C172-97, C231-97, C617-98, C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: A', Date:- cc: Doualass Jo hnston. Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad .. Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido. CA 92029 (760) 746-4955 Fax:(760) 746-9806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458530 E~;l.\EEHI\I.. I\( Project Name Aston .. View Corporate Center, Lot 69 Project No 10-4585 __ Project Address 1808 Aston Avenue .. . Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Sub-contractor Engineer .. Prime ... Structural Engineers Architect Smith Consulting Architects Bldg Permit No CB 3345 Plan File No Gov't Contract # __ DSAIOSHPD Sample Group Data ~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified Placement Date 41410 1 Slump (in.) 4.5 NIA SupplierIPlant Palomar Transit Mix Air Temp (OF) 60 NIA Mix Number 523006 Mix Temp (OF) 70 NIA Mix Description 3000 LT. W. Air Content (Oh) N/A N/A Mix Design 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Unit Weight (KgIM') 0 NIA Required Strength 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Dry Weight 0 TruckNo. 921 Ticket#: 1132712 Age: 100 Min. Samples MadeBy: AI Cacas Date Rec'd in Lab 4/9/01 Cement Type N/A Admixture NIA Specific Location Special InstructionslRemarks 1@7-2@28 - .?HOLD - .. - .. ~__ 2ND DECK @ 1IA . .~ Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 7 30A 411 1/01 4X8in 12.57 in' 44,075 ibs 351Opsi 24.2MPa c 28 308 5/2/01 4x8 in 12.57 in' 71,455 ibs 569Opsi 39.2MPa c 28 30C 5/2/01 4x8 in 12.57in' 71,930 Ibs 572Opsi 39.4MPa c Cone A ConeISplit B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: __ ... SamDBnq and tesbnq conducted ,n accordance with ASTM Standard designations C31-98. C39-96, C78-94, C138-92, C143-98, Cl72-97. C23i-97. C617-98. clOi7-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: yL JeO Date:314/01 cc: Douolass Jo hnston. Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido, CA 92029 (760) 746-4955 Fax(760) 746-9806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST SamDle Grow # 458531 Project Name Aston View Corporate Center, Lot 69 Project No 10-4585 Project Address ~. 1808 Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Sub-Contractor Engineer Prime Structural Engineers Architect Smith Consulting Architects Bldg Permit No CB 3345 Plan File No Gov‘t Contract # . .. - DSAIOSHPD Sample Group Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified SupplierlPlant Palomar Transit Mix Air Temp (OF) 60 I@? Placement Date 4/4/01 Slump (in.) 5 NIA Mix Number 523006 Mix Temp (OF) 72 60 Mix Description 3000 LT. W. Air Content (%) N/A N/A Mix Design 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Unit Weight (KglM’) 0 N/A Required Strength 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Dry Weight 0 Truck No. - 921 Ticket y: 1132824 Age: 85 Min. Samples Made By: AI Cacas Date Rec’d in Lab 4/9/01 Cement Type NIA Admixture NIA Specific Location Special InotructionsIRernarks __ 2ND DECK @ 2lD - 1@7 - 2@28 - ZHOLD ComDression Laboratow Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 7 31A 4/11/01 4X8m 12.57m’ 41,700 IbS 3320psi 22.9MPa c 28 31 B 5/2/01 4x8111 12.57in’ 73,625 Ibs 586Opsi 40.4MPa C 28 31C 5/2/01 4X8in 12.57 in‘ 65,885 ibs 524opsi 36.1 MPa c Cone A ConelSplit B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: __ __ Sampling and tesbng conducred in accordance wrtt ASTM Standard designations C31-98, C39-96, C78-94, C138-92, C143-98. C172-97, C231-97. C617-98 C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: / 76 7 Date:abr cc: Doualass Johnston. Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido. CA 92029 (760) 746-4955 Fax:(760) 746-9806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458532 ES(~lY~lIli~~~. 1\1 Project Name Aston View Corporate Center, Lot 69 Project No 10-4585 Project Address 1808 Aston Avenue .. Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Sub-contractor Engineer __ Prime Structural Engineers Architect Smith Consulting Architects Bldg Permit No CB 3345 Plan File No DSAIOSHPD ___ Gov't Contract # __ Sam& GrOUD Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified Placement Date 4/5/01 Slump (in.) 4.75 NIA SupplierlPlant Palomar Transit Mix Air Temp (OF) 60 NIA Mix Number 523006 Mix Temp (OF) 70 N/A Mix Description 3000 LT. VVT. Air Content (%) N/A NIA Mix Design 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Unit Weight (KgIM') 0 N/A Required Strength 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Dry Weight 0 Truck No. 56 Ticket # 1133159 Age: 70 Min. Samples Made By: Ai Caws Date Rec'd in Lab 4/9/01 Cement Type NIA Admixture NIA Specific Location Special InstructionslRernarks - MEZZ. DECK @ Wt 2 1@7 - 2@28 - ZHOLD ~ Compression Laboratory Data Sample LabNo. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture 7 32A 411 2/01 4x8 in 12 57in' 53,530 Ibs 4260psi 294MPa c Age Tested Type 28 328 5/3/01 4x8 in 12 57 in' 82.325 Ibs 655Opsi 45 1 MPa c 28 32C 5/3/01 4x8 in 12 57in2 80,225 Ibs 638Opsi 44 OMPa C Cone A ConeISplit B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: ~ Samdmo and testmo conducted in accordance with ASTM Standard designations C31-98, C39-96, C78-94, 038-92. C143-98, C172-97, C23i-97, C617-98, C1077-98 Dale:- Reviewed by: p- ~7 Date:- >-I9 10 1 Checked by: cc: Ppualass Jo hnston. Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido. CA 92029 (760) 7464955 Fax (760) 746-9806 c REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458533 LI<.IYCLHII( I\( Project Name __ Aston View Corporate Center, Lot 69 Project No 10-4585 Project Address 1808 Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Sub-Contractor Engineer Prime Structural Engineers Architect Smith Consulting Architects Bldg Permit No CB 3345 Plan File No Gov‘t Contract # - DSAIOSHPD __ - __ ~~ Sample Group Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified Placement Date 4/5/01 Slump (in.) 5 NIA SupplierlPlant Palomar Transit Mix Air Temp (OF) 60 NIA Mix Number 523006 Mix Temp (OF) 70 NIA Mix Description 3000 LT. WT: Air Content (%) NIA NIA Mix Design 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Unit Weight (KgIM’) 0 NIA Required Strength 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Dry Weight 0 Truck No. 561 Ticket #: 1133223 Age: 100 Min. Samples Made By: AI Cacas Date Rec’d in Lab 4/9/01 Cement Type Admixture N/A Specific Location Special InstructionalRemarks - ~__ MEZZ. DECK @ 9/N - . .- 1@7 - 2@28 - 2 HOLD _____-- Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 7 33A 4/12/01 4x8 in 12.57in’ 47,205 Ibs 376Opsi 25.9MPa C 28 338 5/3/01 4x8 in 12.57in’ 71,160 Ibs 566Opsi 39.0MPa C 28 33c 5/3/01 4x8 in 12.57in2 70,005 Ibs 557Opsi 38.4MPa C Cone A ConelSplit B Cone/Shear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: -I Samplrng and testrng conducted in accordance with ASTM Standard desrgnations C31-98. 89-96 C78-94, C138-92, C143-98, C172-97, C231-97. C617-98 C1077-98 7- J7 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: cc: Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views. City of Carlsbad Doualass Johns- Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave fC&, Escondido, CA 92029 - (760) 746-4955 Fax:(760) 746-9806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458529 t:Y<;l~~~l~tll~l,. I\( Project Name - Aston View Corporate Center, Lot 69 Project No 10-4585 Project Address 1808 Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Sub-contractor Engineer Prime Structural Engineers Architect Smith Consulting Architects Bldg Permit No - CB 3345 Plan File No Gov't Contract # .. DSAlOSHPD Sample Group Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified Placement Date 3/13/01 Slump (in.) 3.75 N/A SupplierlPlant Palomar Transit Mix Air Temp (OF) 60 N/A Mix Number 303702 Mix Temp (OF) 60 N/A Mix Description 3800 PSI Air Content (%) N/A N/A Mix Design 3800 psi 26.2 MPa Unit Weight (KgIM') 0 N/A Required Strength 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Dry Weight 0 Truck No. 865 Ticket #: I123350 Age: 65 Min. Samples Made By: Ai Cacas Date Rec'd in Lab 3/15/01 Cement Type NIA Admixture NIA Specific Location POURSTRiP @ AI4 Special InstructionslRemarks __ - 1@7 - 2@28 - IHOLD Compression Laboratoly Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 7 29A 3/20/01 6xl2in 28.27in' 96,465 Ibs 341Opsi 23.5MPa C 28 298 4/10/01 6xl2in 28.27in' 156,825 ibs 555Opsi 38.2MPa C 28 29C 4/10101 6x1 2 in 28.27in2 154,615 ibs 547Opsi 37.7MPa C Cone A ConelSpiit B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: - -I Sampling and testing conducted in accordance with ASTM Standard designations: C31-98. 89-96. C78-94, C138-92, C143-98, C172-97, C231-97, Cb17-98, C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: -rA JF Date:Y//zz/dl cc: Doualass Jo hnston. Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido. CA 92029 (760) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-9806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458528 LI<.IYLLKI\I I\( Project Name Aston View Corporate Center, Lot 69 Project No 10-4585 Project Address - 1808 Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Sub-Contractor Engineer Prime Structural Engineers Architect Smith Consulting Architects Bldg Permit No CB 3345 Plan File No Gov't Contract # DSAlOSHPD SamDle GrouD Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified Placement Date 3/12/01 Slump (in.) 3.5 N/A SupplierlPlant Palomar Transit Mix AirTemp (OF) 60 N/A Mix Number 303702 Mix Temp (OF) 62 N/A Mix Description 3800 PUMP Air Content (%) N/A N/A Mix Design 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Unit Weight (Kg/M') 0 N/A Required Strength 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Dry Weight 0 ~~~~ Truck NO. 59 Ticket # 1123089 Age: 60 Min. Samples Made By: Ai Cacas Date Rec'd in Lab 3/15/01 Cement Type N/A Admixture N/A Specific Location Special InstructionslRemarks - POUR STRIP @ A-I - 1@7 - 2@28 - 1 HOLD Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture 7 28A 3/19/01 6~12in 28.27 in' 92,365 Ibs 327opsi 22.5MPa C 28 288 4/9/01 6xI2in 28.27inl 154,935 Ibs 5460psi 37.6MPa C 28 28C 4/9/01 6xI2in 28.27in2 149,805 Ibs 53OOpsi 36.5MPa C Age Tested Type Cone A ConelSplit B Cone/Shear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: Sampling and testing conducted in accordance with ASTM Standard designations: C31-98, 89-96. C78-94, C138-92, C143-98, C172-97, C231-97, C617-98, ClO77-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: r+ A', Date:&fd' cc: Lusardi Doualass Johnsto n. Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad 4 Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. , ~-.. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido. CA 92029 A n s " -e Phone (760) 7464955 Fax (760) 746-9806 k.w,iYEtKlsl;. IS(. REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458524 Project Name Aston View Corporate Center, Lot 69 Project No 104585 Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Sub-contractor Engineer Prime Structural Engineers Architect Smith Consulting Architects Bldg Permit No C8 3345 Plan File No Gov't Contract # DSNOSHPD Project Address 1808 Aston Avenue .. SamDle GrouD Data ~~ Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified 02/09/2001 Slump (in.) 3 N/A Placement Date SupplierlPlant Palomar Transit Mix Air Temp (OF) 60 NIA Mix Number 404008 Mix Temp (OF) 71 N/A Mix Description PUMP Air Content (%) N/A N/A 4000 psi 27.6 MPa Unit Weight (KgIM') 0 N/A Mix Design - __ Specified Strength 4000 psi 27.6 MPa Dry Weight 0 Truck No. 757 Ticket #: 11 15405 Age: 122 Min. Samples Made By: Dorreil Duquette Sample Mark: Delivered by N/A Date Rec'd in Lab 02/15/2001 Logged in by: N/A Admixture NIA Speciflc Location Panei #53 Special InstructionsiRemarks - N/A Gallons Of water added at NIA by N/A Cement Type II. V __ 1 @ 5. 2 @ 28. 1 Hold CornDression Laboratorv Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 5 24A 02/15/2001 6x12111 28 27 in' 97,545 Ibs 345Opsi 23 8MPa C 29 248 03/09/2001 6x121n 28 27m2 145,885 Ibs 5160psi 35 6MPa C 28 24C 03/09/2001 6xI2in 28 27in' 150 050 Ibs 5310psi 36 6MPa C Cone A Coneispiit E Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: Sampling and testing conducted in accordance with ASTM Standard desrgnations: C31-98, C39-96. C78-94, C138-92, C143-98, C172-97, C231-97, C617-98. ClOi7-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: v& . \V Date:*>/& cc: malass Jo hnstor Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido, CA 92029 -A 3 ~\ f xl;l\&.l:Rl\<;, mr. c- .s Phone (760) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-9806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458503 Project No 10-4585 - Project Name Project Address 1808 Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Engineer Prime Structural Engineers .- Architect Smith Consulting Architects Aston View Corporate Center, Lot 69 I__~___.,I .. .ll . ... _I __I. Sub-Contractor .- Plan File No Bldg Permit No CE 3345 ___ Gov't Contract # -1" DSAIOSHPD II SamDle GrouD Data Measured Specified ._____.I-- Report of Concrete Cylinders (in.) 3-1/4 N/A Placement Date (OF) 75 N/A SuppllerlPlant Mix Number 303702 Mix Temp (OF) 65 N /A Mix Description 3750 Air Content (Oh) NIA N/A psi 25.8 MPa Unit Weight (Kg/M3) 0 N/A Mix Design Specified Strength Truck No. 61 Ticket#: 104131 Age: 45 Min. Samples Made BY: Sample Mark: Admixture NIA NIA Galions of water added at , NIA bYl!L--"," .I- Cement Type -~ Slump Air Temp ..... 1/4/01 Palomar Transit Mix . .I_------ ... .I .--.--".,..I - - 3750 3000 --- psi 20.7 MPa Dry Weight 0 ,".l________ _.."._"_I___ ____ ........ ....... .- - ,II"_ Delivered by NIA Date Rec'd in Lab 115101 Logged in by: N/A ............ .- .... - .... .... ~ - Specific Location - FOOTINGS @ 812-3 . - Special InstructionslRemarks 1 AT 7 DAYS, 2 AT 28 DAYS, 1 HOLD .... Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 7 3A 1/11/01 6xl2in 28.27in' 103,800 Ibs 367Opsi 25.3MPa C 28 38 2/1/01 6~121n 28.27in' 141,300 Ibs 5000psi ' 34.5MPa C 28 3c 2/1/01 6xI2in 28.27in2 157,980 Ibs 5590psi 38.5MPa C Cone A ConelSplit B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: ~ ....... ......--I- ... _I_-.....__ -" . Sampling and testing conducted in accordance with ASTM Standard designations: C31-98, C39-96, C78-94. C138-92, C143-98, C172-97, C231-97. C617-98. C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: Date:- cc: Douqlass Johnston, Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido, CA 92029 Phone (760) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-9806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Samole Grouo # 458504 Project Name ..l_"--lllll Aston View Corporate Center, ............ Lot 69 Project No 10-4585 Project Address .. 1808 Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Engineer ____-.I Prime Structural . Engineers __ Architect .___ Smith Consulting Architects Bldg Permit No ._ll___-.." CB 3345 Plan File No Gov't Contract # .... - Sub-contractor .- __ ................. ......... .... .. DSAIOSHPD "1---1" II Sample Group Data Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified "l_ll_ll___ Report of (in.) 4 N/A Placement Date 1 /4/0 1 70 N/A Supplier/Plant N/A Mix Number 303702 Mix Temp C'F) 65 Mix Description -3750. . ... . Air Content (Oh) N/A N/A Mix Design 3750 psi 25.8 MPa Unit Weight (WM') 0 N/A - Slump AirTemp .................. I_ (OF) _______-___ ....... .- Palomar Transit Mix _l_l -- .,..,______ -~ ................. Specified Strength 3000 psi ....... 20.7 -- MPa Dry Weight ..... 0 ..... .- . .~ ...... ~ Truck No. 11 2 Ticket If: 1104205 Age: 45 Min. Samples Made By: Sample Mark: Admixture NIA Specific Location GRADE BEAM @ 1/A Special InstructionslRemarks Delivered by NIA Date Rec'd in Lab 1/5/01 Logged in by: N/A N/A Gallons of water added at .NIA by N/A ,.,"I_..___- ..... Cement Type _I"__ ,."llllll-l ~ - __ - ... -. - 1 AT 7 DAYS.2 AT 28 DAYS, 1 HOLD _- Comoression Laboratorv Data Sample LabNo. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 7 4A 1/11/01 6xl2in 28.27in' 102,455 Ibs 362Opsi 24.9MPa C 28 48 2/1/01 6xl2in 28.27in' 151,015 Ibs , 534Opsi 36.8MPa C 28 4c 2/1/01 6x1 2 in 28.27in' 148,010 Ibs 524opsi 36.1 MPa C Cone A ConeISplit B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: ............. ............ ......... ..... ~ Sampling and testing conducted in accordance with ASTM Standard designations: C31-98, C39-96. C78-94, C138-92, C143-98, C172-97 C231-97. C.517-98. C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: Date:- cc: Douqlass Johnston, Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido. CA 92029 Phone (760) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-9806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458509 Project Name Aston View Corporate Center, Lot 69 Project No 10-4585 Project Address 1808 Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction ,..___-__.-_.._I "_ .... ...... . .. .... Su b-Contractor . - ....... .. Prime Structural Engineers Architect Smith Consulting Architects Engineer .. Bldg Permit No . CB 3345 .. ___ ___ Plan File No DSAlOSHPD ........ .- ....... .... Gov't Contract I# Sample Group Data Measured Specified ..___~- Report of Concrete .. Cylinders Placement Date SupplierlPlant Mix Number 303702 I" 1/13/01 Slump (in.) 4-3/4 N/A Palornar Transit Mix AirTemp 60 N/A 55 N/A (Oh) N/A N/A psi 25.8 MPa Unit Weight (Kg/M') 0 N/A ............. ......................... (OF) -" ,. ,"__I".- ........I ...... ....... .... (OF) Mix Temp Air Content - - Mix Description ...... 3750. ........ ..... __ 3750 _I Mix Design 0 Specified Strength 3000 ....... psi ....... 20.7 MPa Dry Weight I__ Truck No. 57 Ticket #: 1106105 Age: 60 Min. Samples Made By: AI Cacas Sample Mark: ...... ..... - ........ Delivered by NIA Date Rec'd in Lab 1115101 Logged in by: 5 .. .. .......... Admixture NIA NIA Gallons of water added at -Nc. by NIA . Cement Type .. ._lll." .... _- -- -- Specific Location SLAB AT 812 - Special InstructionslRemarke ...... 1 AT 7 DAYS, 2 AT __ 28 DAYS, 1 HOLD ._ Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture 7 9A 1/22/01 6xI2in 28.27 in' 89,625 Ibs 317Opsi 21.8MPa D 28 96 2/12/01 6xI2in 28.27in' 120,985 Ibs 428Opsi 29.5MPa C 28 9c 2/12/01 6xI2in 28.27in' 125,520 Ibs 444Opsi 30.6MPa C Age Tested Type Cone A ConelSplit B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: ... .- .I.. Sampling and testrng conducted in accordance with ASTM Standard designations: C31-98, C39-96, C78-94, C138-92. C143-98, C172-97. C231-97, C617-98. C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: Date:- cc: Douqlass Johnston, Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Phone (760) 746-4955 .A r T Escondtdo, CA 92029 Fax (760) 746-9806 J b\Ll\bl UI\C* I\( Y REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458510 Project Name Project Address Gen. Contractor Engineer Bldg Permit No Gov't Contract # Project No 10-4585 ~ Aston View Corporate Center, Lot 69 1808 Aston Avenue .... ... ................ l._l.ll .... ........... .._-__I.I-. .. .... _I" Sub-contractor Lusardi Construction - CB 3345 . Prime Structural Engineers I-. - Architect Smith Consulting Architects ",I-.____ ,I Plan File No DSAlOSHPD .- ...... ............... ...... ...... -I lll.ll_lllll.lll. .,II .ll Sample Group Data Measured Specified _I", " Cylinders I Concrete _ll_l_ll"l Report of (in.) 4 N/A Slump Placement Date 01/13/2001 Supplier/Plant (OF) - 60 N/A Air Temp Palomar Transit Mix Mix Number 303702 52 N/A Mix Temp Air Content N/A N/A MPa Unit Weight (KgIM') 0 NIA -- .. ..... "_" _____ -. ___ ^____.. -_ - (OF) ("/) I Mix Description -._.........I 3750 PSI .. .. - Specified Strength ___.__-. 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Dry Weight I___.,. I ., psi 25.8 -- 3750 111 Mix Design ......... ..... ........... 0 Truck No. 552 Ticket It: 1i06120 Age: 65 Min. Samples Made By: AI Cacas Sample Mark: Admixture NIA NIA Gallons of water added at "NIA . by NIA Cement Type Specific Location SLAB AT C13 Special InstructionslRemarks ........ ___ ..... I.,_. .-- Delivered by NIA Date Rec'd in Lab: 0111512OOi Logged in by: 5 .---I__- ......... ................. ...... - I. -. "- ..~ ..... .......... Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 7 10A 01/22/2001 6xl2in 28.27in' 100,120 Ibs 354Opsi 24.4MPa c 28 106 02/12/2001 6x12in 28.27inz 146,655 Ibs 519Opsi 35.8MPa C 28 10c 02/12/2001 6xl2in 28.27in2 131,760 Ibs 466Opsi 32.1 MPa c Cone A ConelSplit B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E . .- Comments: ..."~ .ll"".."" ~231.97, ~617.98. ~1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: Date:- Sampling and testrng conducted ;n accordance with ASTM Standard deslgnations: C31-98, C39-96, C78-94, C138-92, C143-98, C172-97, Doualass Johnsto n. cc: Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave .A 1 W Escondido, CA 92029 ca Phone (760) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-9806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458511 1 \(.i\kl i~l~<,,l\<. Project Name Project Address Gen. Contractor Engineer Bldg Permit No Gov't Contract # -" Aston View "l..". Corporate Center, Lot 69 1808 Aston Avenue Lusardi Construction Prime Structural Engineers Project No 10-4585 _-- .~ .-___.,,.I Sub-Contractor .....-...I .- - ............ Architect Smith Consulting Architects -" .- CB 3345 -.- ..... , , . Plan File No .._I_~ ......... __"" DSAlOSHPD Sample Group Data Concrete Cylinders 1 /13/0 1 Paiomar Transit Mix lll_l.l Report of Slump AirTemp Mix Temp 11"11 ... __" Placement Date SupplierlPlant Mix Number 303702 .......... I.. _I__ .- ....... Air Content Mix Design 3750 psi 25.8 MPa Unit Weight Specified Strength .................. 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Dry Weight Mix Description 3750, PSI .. - ~ .......... Measured Specified 0 ____ _- Truck No. 712 Ticket It: 1106138 Age: 30 Min. Samples Made By: AI Cacas Sample Mark: Admixture NIA Specific Location SLAB El3 Special InstructionslRemarks I.__. .... .- ........ Logged in by: NIA Cement Type - Delivered by NIA Date Rec'd in Lab: 1/15/01 ~. . .. -~ - -- NIA Gallons of water added at . NIA by NIA _.__ - .. ........... .......... ... ..I__-.__ ......... .. ........ Compression Laboratow Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 7 11A 1122lO 1 6xI21n 28 271n' 101,820 Ibs 3600psi 24 8MPa C 28 11B 2/12/01 6xl2in 28 27 In' 137,370 Ibs 4860ps1 33 5MPa C 28 11c 2/12/01 6xI2in 28 27111' 139,430 Ibs 4930ps1 34 OMPa C ~ Cone A Conekiplit B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: ..,._ll-__l._ .. Sampling and testing conducted in accordance with ASTM Slandarddesignations: C31-98, C39-96, C78-94, C138-92, C143-98, C172-97, C231-97, C617-98. C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: Date:- cc: Douqlass Johnston, Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Cailsbad Construction Testing 8, Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Phone (760) 746-4955 .A - Escondido, CA 92029 Fax (760) 746-9806 v= r 0 b\(rl\bl KlWr I\( Y REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458512 Project Name Project Address Gen. Contractor Engineer Bldg Permit No Gov't Contract # ll_l~llll..l... Aston View Corporate Center, Lot 69 .~ Project No 10-4585 ... _-__I . .. ___...__. . 1808 Aston Avenue Lusardi Construction ... . . ........ Architect Smith Consulting Architects CB 3345 Plan File No .. DSAlOSHPD Sub-Contractor - Prime Structural .,., .,. , ,.,,. Engineers ..... ............. ........ ... ~ .... __ .......... _l.l _. Sample Group Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified Placement Date 62 N/A SupplierlPlant Palornar Transit Mix 60 N/A Mix Number 303702 Mix Description 3750 PSI ... ,., --" Air Content (Yo) N/A N/A 3750 psi 25.8 MPa Unit Weight (WM') .. 0 N/A Mix Design (in.) 4-1/4 ____"I~ Slump AirTemp Mix Temp I 01/13/2001 I^__.._" (OF) ................ ...... .- (OF) - ................... . ~- ........... -.-...--I_ 0 Specified Strength I______.____ 3000 psi ...... 20.7 MPa Dry Weight __ Truck No. 758 Ticket #: 1106180 Age: 105 Min. Samples Made By: AI Cacas Sample Mark: Admixture NIA Specific Location SLAB @ IZIL] Special InstructionslRemarks ...... _^_- Delivered by NIA Date Rec'd in Lab: 01/15/2001 Logged in by: N/A by N/A ._" Cement Type I- NIA Gallons of water added at "N/A __ , "..,.. ..... -. ~lll".l ..... ComDression Laboratory Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 7 12A 01/22/2001 6xl2in 28.27in' 89,725 Ibs 317Opsi 21.8MPa C 28 12B 02/12/2001 6xI2in 28.27in2 139,560 Ibs 4940psi 34.OMPa c 28 12c 02/12/2001 6xl2in 28.27in' 125,210 Ibs 443Opsi 30.5MPa C Cone A ConelSplit B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: ""." Sampling and lestmg conducted in accordance with ASTM Standard desjgnafions: C31-98, C39-96, C78-94, C138-92, C143-98, C172-97, C231-97, C617-98. C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: Date:- Doualass Johnston, cc: Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido. CA 92029 .A i $ l~~<;l\~lllls~~, IW. ‘e Phone (760) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-9806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458513 Project Name Aston View Corporate Center, ......... Lot 69 Project No 10-4585 Project Address 1808 Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Sub-Contractor Engineer Bldg Permit No CB 3345 Gov’t Contract # ........... ....... -” ....... llll.~ .......... ~ ... ............ .......... .-..__I ^^ ,,.. ...... .~ _- ........ .- Prime Structural .... Engineers ..... -” Architect Smith Consulting -.. Architects ..--.-.....I... ..________I ............ - ...... ...... ~ Plan File No DSAIOSHPD ~- ............... __ I SamDle Grow Data Concrete Cylinders ......l..l.l--. .... ... Report of Slump Air Temp Mix Temp ....................... ........... .- Placement Date 1/13/01 SupplierlPlant Palomar Transit Mix Mix Number ~ ................. ........... .... - 303702 I .... Air Content psi 25.8 MPa Unit Weight Mix Design 3750 Specified Strength 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Dry Weight Mix Description ....... 3750,PSI ... - ~ ....... ..................... _I____.-____ Measured Specified (in.) 3.75 N/A (OF) 65 NIA (OF) __ 61 N/A (Oh) N/A N/A 0 N/A 0 .... -- ~..- ~- (KdM’) .... -- ~ ~__ Truck No. 61 Ticket#: 1106196 Age: 85 Min. Samples Made By: AI Cacas Sample Mark Admixture NIA N/A Gallons of water added at Nlk- by NIA Cement Type Specific Location SLAB @ 9/L Special InstructionslRemarks ........ Delivered by NIA Date Rec‘d in Lab: 1115/01 Logged in by: N/A . 7 ... ......... ...................... ......... ..._._____- ~. . .~ - ...... .... Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture 7 13A 1 /22/0 1 6xl2in 28.27 in’ 88,215 Ibs 312opsi 21.5MPa c 28 136 2/12/01 6x1 2 in 28.27in’ 136,040 Ibs 481Opsi 33.1 MPa c 28 13C 2/12/01 6xl2in 28.27in’ 144,590 Ibs 512Opsi 35.3MPa C Age Tested Type Cone A ConeiSplit B Coneishear C Shear D Columnar E comments: . .. __. l_l.l __ Sampling and testing conducted In accordance with ASTM Standard designations: C31-98, C39-96. C78-94, Cl38-92, C143-98, C172-97, C231-97, C617-98. C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: Date:- Douqlass Johnston, Lusardi Pnme Structural Smith Consuiting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad cc: Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido. CA 92029 Phone (760) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-9806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST SamDle Grouo # 458516 Project No 10-4585 .. ....... _.^.l-_lll ~ ....... ~ I Project Name Project Address 1808 ~ Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Engineer Prime Structural Engineers ,- Architect Smith Consulting Architects Bldg Permit No .CB 3345 .. Gov't Contract # Aston View Corporate Center, Lot 69 ...... ...... ...... ... ~. ._____-. .. .... .- ...... Sub-Contractor ~11 Plan File No DSAIOSHPD .- ....... -- - .,.. ll___"lll.lll. ,"11 Sample Group Data Report of Concrete __ Cylinders Measured Specified 0111 9/2001 Slump (in.) 4 NIA Placement Date 60 NIA AirTemp SupplierlPlant Paiornar Transit Mix Mix Temp (OF) 59 NIA Mix Number Mix Description 3750 .. Air Content (Oh) N/A NIA Mix Design 3750 psi 25.8 MPa Unitweight (KglMI) - 0 NIA Specified Strength -I _- (OF) ._ .. ...... ...... .... - 303702 -- 3000 psi 20.7 ~ MPa Dry Weight 0 ___- .- Truck No. 958 Ticket #: 1108157 Age: 60 Min. Samples Made By: AI Cacas Sample Mark: ..... ., ......... ____.,..~ Delivered by NIA Date Rec'd in Lab: Logged in by: N/A . l..-.__-l.l. ...... , ,,,, Admixture NIA NIA Gallons of water added at NIA . by N/A Cement Type ... .I- - ......... Specific Location slab @ nl4 Special InstructionslRemarks .....--..,....,I , .... I @ 7 2 @ 28 I hold Comoression Laboratow Data Sample Lab No. Date Age Tested 7 16A 02/06/2001 28 166 02/16/2001 28 16C 02/16/2001 Dimensions 6xl2in 6xl2in 6xl2in meA Cone Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Type 28.27inz 123,760 Ibs 438Opsi 30.2MPa c 28.27in' 117,560 Ibs 416Opsi 28.7MPa C 28.27in' 119,220 Ibs 422opsi 29.1 MPa c lit B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: . ....... ..-______. Sampling and testing conducted in accordance with ASTM Standard desrgnations: C31-98, C39-96, C78-94, C138-92, C143-98, C172-97. C231-97, C617-98. C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: Date:- Doualass Johnston. cc: Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido, CA 92029 Phone (760) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-9806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sarnole GrouD # 458527 Project Name _,_"__-l.._l_l Aston View Corporate Center, ........ Lot 69 ... ....... ~ Project No 10-4585 Project Address 1808 Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Engineer Prime .- Structural Engineers Bldg Permit No ___-_..I..._ CB 3345 ... Plan File No Gov't Contract # ... .......... ..... ............... ..."_____"-. .. ...... Sub-contractor .... .... ........... .... Architect Smith Consulting ... Architects I. .................... ......... DSAIOSHPD Sample Group Data Report of ............... Concrete .. Cylinders Measured Specified Placement Date 01 10912001 Slump (in.) 3.75 N/A (OF) 70 NIA SupplierlPlant N/A Mix Number 303702 Mix Description -. 3750 ..... .. -. - Air Content (Yo) NIA N /A Mix Design 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Unit Weight (Kg/M') 0 N/A - ........... ........ ... -. .. ~" Air Temp Mix Temp Palomar Transit Mix .- -- -- -. .... Specified Strength 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Dry Weight 0 Truck No. 50 Ticket #: 1105302 Age: 60 Min. Samples Made By: Ai Cacas Sample Mark: Admixture NIA Specific Location Grade beam C Special InstructionslRemarks ....... ..... -. ........ .... ........... Delivered by _"" NIA "l_l Date Rec'd in Lab: 0211512001 Logged in by: A ...--___- NIA Gallons of water added at -NlL, by NIA Cement Type ~ - - ..... ......... ____.-I.__ .. - .. -. ..... .......... .- "I 3 @ 35, 1 Hold Cornoression Laboratorv Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 35 27A 02/15/2001 6xl2in 28.27in' 102,710 Ibs 363Opsi 25.OMPa C 35 278 02/15/2001 6xl2in 28.27in' 109,990 Ibs 389Opsi 26.8MPa C 35 27C 02/15/2001 6xl2in 28.27in2 105,140 Ibs 372Opsi 25.6MPa C Cone A ConelSpiit B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: ..I__---.." . ............. Sampling and testing conducted in accordance with ASTM Standard designations: C31-98, C39-96. C78-94, C138-92. C143-98. Cl72-97, C231-97, 6617-98, ClO77-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: Date:- cc: Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Doualass Johnston. . Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido. CA 92029 n, - - c Phcne (760) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-9806 3 kX\.I\, 1 K,\l..l\( REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458521 Project Name Project Address Gen. Contractor Engineer Bldg Permit No Gov't Contract # Project No 10-4585 Aston ..__ View .. Corporate Center, Lot 69 .... ...... -_ 1808 Aston Avenue Lusardi Construction Sub-Contractor Prime Structural . Engineers Architect Smith Consulting Architects CB 3345 -. ". Plan File No ........ -. ...... DSAlOSHPD ___ . ... .. -. __ . . __ -~ -. Sample Group Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified Placement Date 02/05/2001 Slump (in.) 4.5 N/A 65 N/A SupplierlPlant Palomar Transit Mix 404008 Mix Temp (OF) 65 N/A Mix Number Mix Description 4000 PSI __ - Air Content (Oh) N/A N/A 4000 psi 27.6 MPa Unit Weight (Kg/M') 0 N/A Mix Design (OF) - Air Temp ....... .... -. I___- -... .......... ,, , . ..... ....... 0 Specified Strength ........... 4000 psi 27.6 MPa Dry Weight ___ Truck No. ;Z1 Ticket#: 1113563 Age: 50 Min. Samples Made By: AI Cacas Sample Mark: Admixture NIA Specific Location Panel W-7 Special lnstrucrions/Remarks . ..... Delivered by NIA Date Rec'd in Lab: 0211312001 Logged in by: NIA ... - .,. , ,,.... . .- - - Cement Type __ NIA Gallons of water added at N/A by NIA . .- .- __ .... ......... - __.. .. - 1 @ 7. 2 @ 28. 2 Hold Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture 7 21H 02/14/2001 6x121n 28.27in' 102,235 Ibs 3620~~1 249MPa C 28 21 6 0310512001 6xl2,n 28.27in' 140,530 Ibs 4970~~1 34.2MPa C 28 21C 03/05/2001 6x12m 28.27 in' 136.770 Ibs 4840~~1 33 3MPa c Age Tested Type Cone A Conelsplit B Conelshear C Shear 0 Columnar E Comments: . -. ... , __ Sampling and iesimg conducred in accordance with ASTM Standard designations: C31-98, C39-96. C78-94. CI38-92. C143-98, C172-97. CZ31-97 C61?-98 C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: fl? -fl Date:d/o/ cc: Doualass Johnston. Lusardi Pnme Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carisbad ," Construction Testing 8 Engineering, Inc. A 2414 Vineyard Ave z' P Y ~2 Phone (760) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-9806 ,s Escondido. CA 92029 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458522 k.\<,l,k.l KI\C;, I\(. Project Name Aston .. View .... Corporate Center, ...... Lot 69 Project No 10-4585 Project Address 1808 Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor ____-.. Lusardi Construction Sub-Contractor Engineer Prime - Structural Engineers Architect Smith Consulting Architects Bldg Permit No CB ______.. 3345 . -. Plan File No Gov't Contract # . ... ..... . ... - - ....... DSAlOSHPD ... Sample Group Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified Placement Date 02/05/2001 Slump (in.) 5 N/A 65 N/A SupplierlPlanr Mix Number ..... 404008 .. Mix Temp (OF) 65 N/A Mix Description . 4000 PSI -- -. . Air Content (Oh) N/A N/A 0 N/A Mix Design 4000 psi 27.6 MPa Unit Weight (Kg/M') 0 Specified Strength __ (OF) .____ Air Temp - Palomar Transit Mix __ -. MPa Dry Weight -. psi ii.6 __ 4000 .__ Truck No. 863 -, Ticket #: 11 13588 Age: 50 Min. Samples Made By: AI Cacas Sample Mark: Admixture NIA . ...... .- __ N/A Gallons of water added at NIA by NIA ..__ Cement Type Specific Location Panel 'VI-3 Special InstrucrionslRernarks ....... -- . ~ ,- Logged in by: N/A .- ... ___. ... -. ... Delivered by NiA Date Rec'd in Lab: 02/13/2001 - ... .. ... ...... ... 1 @? 7, 2 @ 28 i Hold - .... Compression Laboratorv Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 7 22A 02/14/2001 6x12:~ 28.27 in' 98,310 Ibs 348Opsi 24.0MPa D 28 228 03/05/2001 6~121n 28.27in' 147,420 Ibs 522Opsi 36.0MPa C 28 22C 03/05/2001 6x12'~ 28.27 in* 151,020 Ibs 534Opsi 36.8MPa C Cone A CareISplit B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E .__ ........... ... - Comments: Sampling and resriiig Ccnducred in accordance with AS?,U Standard designations: C31-98, C39-96. C78-94. Cl38-92 Cia-98. C172-97 CZ31-97 c61i-98 C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: /?%- Date:x /fh cc: Doualass Johnsto n, Lusardl Pnre Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. ,. ., 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido, CA 92029 Phone (760) 746-4955 A Fax (760) 746-9806 7 d ~J b~\l.l\l~.l KIW;, I\(. v REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458523 Project Name Aston View . .. . Corporate . Center, Lot 69 .. Project No 10-4585 .- ~ Project Address 1808 Aston Avenue ~ . . .. .. Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Sub-Contractor Engineer Prime ___~~_. Structural Engineers Architect Smith Consulting Architects Bldg Permit No CB 3345 . .. .. . Plan File No Gov't Contract # .. . . .- DSAIOSHPD Sample Grouu Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified Placement Date 02/05/2001 Slump (in.) 4.5 N/A Palomar Trans# Mix .. . Air Temp (OF) 70 N/A SupplierlPlanr 404008 Mix Temp (OF) 65 N/A Mix Number Mix Description -. 4000 ... PSI, - Air Content (Oh) N/A N/A psi 27.6 MPa Unit Weight (Kg/M3) 0 N/A Mix Design __ .. -. . . _I___ _I_ " . .- 4000 -. Specified Strength _. 4000 .. . . .- psi 27.6 MPa Dry Weight 0 Truck No. '921 Ticket !#: 11 13635 Age: 65 Min. Samples Made By: AI Cacas Sample Mark: , .. Delivered by NIA Date Rec'd in Lab 0211312001 Logged in by: N/A Admixture NIA Specific Location Panel N-1 Special InstruciionslRemarks .. - -- Cement Type NIA Gallons of water added at NIA .. . . .__ __ .. . .~ ~. 1 @ 7, 2 @ 28. 2 Hold ... Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab NO. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 7 23k 02/14/2001 6xl2in 28.27inl 104,195 Ibs 369Opst 25.4MPa C 28 238 03/05/2001 6x12111 28.27in' 163,510 Ibs 578Opsi 39.8MPa C 28 23C 03/05/2001 6x1 2 in 28.27in' 171,145 Ibs 6050psi 41.7MPa C Cone A ConelSplit B Conelshear C Shear 0 Columnar E Comments: ... . Sampling and tesrrng conducted !n accordance with ASTM Standard designations: C31-98. C39-96. C78-94. C138-92. C143-98, C172-97, C231-97. C617-98. C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: fl4- -/ Date:- 3 /bi'.l Doualass Jo hnston. cc: Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido. CA 92029 Phoce (760) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-9806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST SamDle GrouD # 458518 Project No 10-4585 Project Name Aston View Corporate Center, .... -. Lot -. 69 . , .. _. .. . ... .............. 'Project Address 1308 Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor Lusardi Constructlor Engineer Pxne Structural Engire5rs ... Architect Smith ConsultingArc2Es ~ . .. Bldg Permit No CE 3345 Gov't Contract # . -. . -- ~ . .____. .- Sub-Contractor ____ .. .- . -. ....... ~- Plan File No DSAIOSHPD .... .." ........ . ........ Sample Group Data Report of Concrete . ._. -. Cylinders .. - 02/02/2001 Slump ___- Placement Date SupplierIPlant Palomar Transit Mix Mix Number Air Content Mix Description psi 276 MPa Unit Weight Mix Design Specified Strength 4000 psi 27.6 MPa Dry Weight ..... ... ..... AirTemp 404008 Mix Temp .. .___-. ..... ..... 7Sk ~- ........... . .- . . 4000 .. -. - Measured Specified (in.) 5 N/A (OF) N/A NIA 59 NIA NIA 0 N/A 0 .......... __~__ ... - ... (OF) lll__ ___ .- (Oh) N/A .... .- - __l"l., jKgIM') ..... .... - ~~~ Truck No. 5e Ticket #: 11 11854 Age: 80 Min. Samples Made By: AI Cacas Sample Mark: Admixture NIA Specific Location oanel e-9 I - .. -I_- Logged in by: 5 -~___ Delivered by NIA Date Rec'd in Lab .............. .~ ..... by NIA Cement Type ....... .- __ N A Gallons of water added at NE-,-. -. .. Special InstructiansiRemarks 1 @ 5 1 @ 7 2 9 28 1 hold ............... __ . . -. -- .. ..... . -. . - - ..... ._ . Comoression LaboratoN Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 7 13A 02/06/2001 6x12111 28.27 in' 104,980 lbs 371Opsi 25.6MPa C i 13E 02/07/2001 6xl21n 28.27 in* 121,425 lbs 43OOpsi 29.6MPa C 28 18C 02/21/2001 6~12in 28.27 in* 147,270 lbs 5210psi 35.9MPa c 28 18D 02/21/2001 6x12;n 28.27 in* 150,220 ibs 5310psi 36.6MPa C Cone A ConelSplit B Conelshear C Shear 0 Columnar E Sampling and tesfins conducted !n accordance with ASTM Standard designations' C31-98, C39-96. C78-94. C138-92. C143-98, C172-97. CZ31-97 C617-98 CT(177-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: 5- Date: z/b/'r cc: Douaiass Johnston. Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views. City of Carlsbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave A ~ Escondido CA 92029 c Phone 1760) 746-4555 Fax (760) 746-9806 ‘r L 2 k\,.l\kl KI\l. l\l REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458508 Project Name Project Address Gen. Contractor Engineer Bldg Permit No Gov’t Contract # .... ... Project No 10-4585 ... ___ .______ .. Aston View Corporate Center. Lot 63 1808 Aston ivenue Lusardi Construction _. .. .- . . - -- - ........ ~- ._____. .~ Sub-contractor ....... ..... ..... ~ Architect Smith ____ Consulting Architects .. Prime Structural Engineers ... ....... .......... .... .... CE 3345 Plan File No DSA/OSHPD ....... ...... ............. . . SamrJle Grow Data Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified Report of . . (in.) 4 N/A 0110812001 Placement Date (OF) 60 N/A SupplierlPlant Palornar Transit Mix 61 N /A Mix Number 303702 (Oh) NIA N/A Mix Description Mix Design 3750 psi 25.8 MPa Unit Weight (KglM’) .I -, 0 N/A -. .- .. ____ Slump Air Temp Mix Temp Air Content ..... .. ......... .. -. ~~ -__ _____ .... ..... (OF) -.__ .......... ..... ___ - __I_...^_ 3750 ...______ . -- Specified Strength .... 3000 - psi 207 .~ MPa Dry Weight ..~. .- 0 Truck No. 356 Ticket # 1105021 Age: 60 Min. Samples Made By: AI Cacas Sample Mark: Admixture NIA Specific Location Special InstructionsIRemarks ... -__ .- ___ Delivered by NIA Date Rec’d in Lab: 0111012001 Logged in by: NIA ... .. ......... I_ -. ___ NIA Gallons of water added at N/A- by NIA ., ,, ,- Cement Type .- __ ..... ... .. ... __.___ FOOTINGS @ AA BBIK -. __ 1 3 7 DAYS, 2 @? 28 DAYS, 1 HOLD ., . - Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab NO. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 7 8A 01/15/2001 6xl2in 28.27in’ 100.200 lbs 3544psi 24.4MPa C 28 88 02/05/2001 6xl2in . 28.27in‘ 144,625 lbs 5120~~1 35.3MPa C 28 8C 02/05/2001 6xl21n 28.27in‘ 142,785 Ibs 5050psi 34.8MPa C Cone A CanelSplit B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E .......... ........ . -. .- Comments: ...... Sampimg and lestmg conducted m accordance with ASTM Standard designations. C31-98. C39-96, C78-94. C138-92, C143-98. 072-97. C231-97, C617-98 C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: /7,&- 3- Date:&[# Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Douolass Jo hnston. cc: Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Esczndido, CA 92029 PFcw (760) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-4806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Samole Grow # 458507 . Project No 10-4&35 Ajton Vi?w Corporate Cm:ei. Lot 6s ..... ...... Project Name Project Address la08 Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Engineer Prime Structural Eng; ,rem Bldg Permit No CB 3345 . Plan File No Gov't Contract # _____.. .. .. ...... __ . . .. . .- Sub-Contractor . . ..... . ... Architect Smith Consulting Architects .- ..... ...... DSAlOSHPD . - ._.-I - ... .. -. .- Sample Group Data Report of Concrete -. Cylinders .- Measured Specified Placement Date 01/06/2001 SupplierlPlant Mix Number Mix Description 3800 PSI, I" RK .,__ - -. Air Content Mix Design 3800 psi 26.2 MPa Unit Weight (Kg/M3) Specified Strength (in.) 4 N/A Palomar Transit Mix Air Temp (OF) 52 NIA 303702 Mix Temp ("F) 64 N/A ("10) N/A N/A 0 N/A 0 _I.-__ Slump ... ,I .- . ... ._ ......... . . . .. ___ . .......... .. ... -- ............. ..... . ___.I psi 20.7 MPa Dry Weight .__ 3000 __ .......... .... Truck No. ;6 Ticket #: 1104721 Age: 75 Min. Samples Made By: Paul Carlton Sample Mark: Admixture NIA Specific Location ELEVATOR PIT FOOTING Special InstructionsiRemarks .. .- ..... -. .- Delivered by NIA Date Rec'd in Lab: 0110812001 Logged in by: NIA .... - ........ ........ - N A Gallons of water added at NE__ by NIA Cement Type - - __ . ..... ...... .. ~- .... . . -. __ .- - .-.___.___.._.- .-._ CornDression LabOratON Data Sample Lab No. Date Age Tested 7 TA 0?/15/2001 28 78 02/05/2001 28 7C 02/05/2001 6x12 n 28.27in' 6~121n 28.27 in' 6x12 n 28 27 in' ne A CmeiSpIit E Cone, Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Type 107,720 Ibs 3810psi 26.3MPa C 158.415 lbs 5600psi 38.6MPa C 147,660 Ibs 5220~~1 36.0MPa C earC ShearD Columnar E Comments: .... . __ ..... .- ..... Sampling and testmg conducted in accordance wrth .ASJM Standard designations C31-98, C39-96. C78-94. C138-92 C143-98. C172-97. ~~31.97. ~617-98 ~1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: Q& x- Qate:di" Doualass Jo hnston. cc: Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, Clty of Carlsbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido CA 92029 A $’ - L Phone (760) 746-4955 Fax 1760) 7464806 ’r - : 6\,,,\, I HI\(. ,\I REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458501 Project Name Project Address Gen. Contractor Engineer Bldg Permit No Gov’t Contract # Asrcn View Corporate Center, Lot 69 Project No 10-4585 1808 Aston Avenue Lusardi Construction Prime . Structural ... - Engineers - .... Architect Smith Consulting Architects CB 3345 .. .- . .......... .___ ... .~__ ..... __ .... .... -. Sub-contractor . - . .- .- ... -- .. .... Plan File No ~- DSA/OSHPD . .- -. . -. . . .- .. .. .- Sample Group Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified 0110312001 Slump (in.) 3-3/4 NIA Placement Date 75 NIA SupplierlPlant Palornar Transit Mix Mix Number 303702 Mix Temp (OF) 67 NIA (%) N/A N/A MPa Unit Weight (Kg/M’) 0 N/A .- -. --- _I__. ........ .... .... (OF) . __ AirTemp __ ... .__ ., . -. .- Mix Description 3750. .._______ .... ..... Specified Strength ...... 3000 .- psi 20.7 ., ,- MPa Dry Weight ..... -. __ Air Content 25.8 .- psi . . , - Mix Design 3750 0 .- Truck No. 57 Ticket #: 1103745 Age: 55 Min. Samples Made By: Sample Mark: Admixture NIA Specific Location Special InstructionsiRemarks .- __ -. Logged in by: 5 .I- Delivered by NIA Date Rec’d in Lab: ..... ......... - -- by N/A Cement Type .- NIA Gallons of water added at ,NIA ... ___ ... ___ GRADE BEAM ALONG NI11-12.5 ._____. ...... 1 @ 7 DAYS. 2 @? 28 DAYS. 1 HOLD ... .. Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 7 1A 01/10/2001 6xl2in 28.27in’ 93,210 Ibs 3700psi 25.5MPa C 28 1B 01/31/2001 6xl2in I 28.27 in‘ 145,775 Ibs 5160psi 35.6MPa C 28 1C 01/31/2001 6xl21n 28.27 in‘ 143,220 lbs 5070psi 34.9MPa C Cone A ConelSplit B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E .... . ... . .. Comments: __ ___ -....- - Sampling and resiing conducied !n accordance with ASTM Siandard designatrons: C31-98. C39-96, C78-94. C138-92. ‘2143-98, C172-97. C231-97. C617-98 C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: ps- T- Date:& h Doualass Jo hnston. Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carisbad cc: Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido, CA 92029 Phcne (760) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-9806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST SamDle Grow # 458506 Project Name Aston View .... Corporate Center, Lot 69 -. Project No 10-4585 Project Address 7808 Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Engineer Prime Structural . Engineers Architect Smith Consulting Architects Bldg Permit No Gov't Contract # __ ........ .. ... - .. ~ __ .. .. ...... Sub-Contractor .- ..... ....... ~.- .- Plan File No - DSAIOSHPD CB ~. 3345 .- .... Sample Group Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Placement Date 01 /05/2001 Slump (in.) Supplier/Plant ............. Palomar Transit Mix .- Air Temp (OF) Mix Number 303702 -. .- Mix Temp (OF) Mix Description ........ 3750 ..... Air Content ("0) . __ psi 25.8 MPa Unit Weight (Kg/M') ... 3750 .",I Mix Design Specified Strength 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Dry Weight ... Measured Specified 4 NIA 65 N/A 65 N/A N/A N/A 0 N/A 0 ~- __ ~- -I___ __I_ _-- __ Truck No. 51 Ticket #: 1104696 Age: 45 Min. Samples Made By: AI Cacas Sample Mark: Admixture NIA Specific Location Special InstructionslRemarks -. . .... -. Delivered by N/A Date Rec'd in Lab: 0110812001 Logged in by: N/A .... ___I_ NIA Gallons of water added at NIA by NIA Cement Type ~ __ - - - .- . .- .~ LINE 14 GRADE BEAM __ Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture 7 6A 01/12/2001 6xI2in 28.27in' 105.685 ibs 3740psi 25.8MPa C 28 6B 02/02/2001 6xl2in 28.27in' 149,210 ibs 5280psi 36.4MPa C 28 6C 02/02/2001 6x12111 28.27in' 140.110 Ibs 496Opsi 34.2MPa C Age Tested Type Cone A ConelSp1,t B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: , .. ..... .- Sampiing and tesring conducted in accordance with ASTM Standard derrgnations: C31-98, C39-96, C78-94, C138-92. C143-98, C172-97, C231-97, C617-98. C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: Q& r-- Date:dafL( cc: Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carisbad Doualass Johnston. Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave A - Escondido CA 92029 c Phone (750) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-9805 *r + z C\l.l\).l KI\(, I\l REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458505 Project Name Project Address Gen. Contractor Engineer Bldg Permit No Gov't Contract # Aston . View .. Corporate Center, ... Lot 59 Project No 10-4585 -. 1808 Aston Avenue Lusardi Construction Sub-Contractor Prime Structural Engineers .- Architect Smith Consulting Architects CB 3345 Plan File No - ... . II ..___ - ...... _____~ .. .- ... ... ___ __.._.___ - .. .. . - __ .. .-. DSAlOSHPD -. Sample Group Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified Placement Date 01/05/2001 Slump (in.) 4-114 N/A N/A Supplier/Plant Palomar Transit Mix Mix Number 303702 Mix Temp (OF) 65 N/A Mix Description 3750 . .- Air Content (Oh) N/A N/A 0 N/A Mix Design 0 Specified Strength Truck No. 373 Ticket #: 1104577 Age: 45 Min. Samples Made By: Alvin Walter Sample Mark: Admixture NIA Specific Location GRA Special InstructionslRemarks - - Air Temp (OF) 65 ..... .. . -. .- - ___- 3750 psi 25.8 MPa Unit Weight (Kg/M') psi 207 MPa Dry Weight 3000 ,I ,, , , ... . __..____ - - .. , . . -. Delivered by NIA Date Rec'd in Lab: 01/08/2001 Logged in by: NIA ... I I- - N/A Galions of water added at )/A by NIA Cement Type ....... .- - 1 @ 7 DAYS, 2 @ 28 DAYS. 1 HOLD .. Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested TY Pe 7 5A 01/12/2001 6~12in 28.27 in' 80,745 Ibs 286Opsi 19.7MPa D 28 58 02/02/2001 6xl2in 28.27in2 148,550 Ibs 526Opsi 36.2MPa C 28 5c 02/02/2001 6xl21n 28.27in' 143,300 Ibs 5070psi 34.9MPa c Cone A ConelSplit E Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: .- - Sampljng and tesring conducted in accordance with ASTM Standard designations: C31-98, C39-96. C78-94. C138-92. C143-98, C172-97. C231-97. C617-98. C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: -F- Date:& k. Doualass Johnston. cc: Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido, CA 92029 Phone (760) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-9806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Samole Grouo # 458502 Project Name Project Address Gen. Contractor Engineer Bldg Permit No Gov't Contract # Project No 10-4585 __ Aston View Corporate Center, Lot 69 1808 Aston Avenue Lusardi Construction Prime Structural . Engineers ... Architect Smith Consulting Architects ... Plan File No CB 3345 ^" .. .... . __ ........ .... ..... __-- ... ~- ~~~~. . -- ... ~- ~- ..... __I-.._ Sub-Contractor .... ...-...I __________. ... -. - __ - DSAlOS H PD .- Sample Group Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified Placement Date 01/03/2001 Slump (in.) 4-1/4 N/A (OF) 70 NIA Air Temp SupplierlPlant Mix Temp (OF) 67 N/A Mix Number 303702 Mix Description 3750 Psi _ - Air Content (%) N/A N/A psi 25.8 MPa Unitweight (Kg/M') __ 0 N/A Mix Design ___ __...__ ........ .... ......... . Palomar Transit Mix .- I_ - _l-l___ -I_ 3750 I-.,II. .- . 0 Specified Strength 3000 . . - psi 20.7 MPa Dry Weight --- Truck No. 56 Ticket If: 1103861 Age: 60 Min. Samples Made By: Sample Mark: Admixture NIA Specific Location Special InstructionslRemarks ..... ..... .- - Delivered by NIA Date Rec'd in Lab: Logged in by: NIA . ... ___I_ - Cement Type N/A Gallons of water added at NIA by NIA - ....... - FOOTINGS AT 012. C12 . - -- 1 @ 7 DAYS, 2 @ 28 DAYS ..". ___ Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 7 2A 01/10/2001 6~12in 28.27 in' 93,690 Ibs 331Opsi 22.8MPa c 28 28 01/31/2001 6xI21n 28.27in' 139,830 Ibs 4950psi 34.1 MPa c 28 2C 01/31/2001 6x12in 28.27in2 144.280 ibs 5100~~1 35.lMPa c Cone A ConelSplit B ConelShear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: , ,. ._-I_ Sampling and tesfiiig conducted ,n accordance with ASTM Standard designalions: C31-98. C39-96. C78-94. C138-92. C143-98. C172-97. C231-97, C617-98. C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: fld Date:&(& cc: Lusardi Doualass Johnston. Prime Structural Smith Consuiting Aston Views, City of Carisbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido, CA 92029 Phone (760) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-9806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458519 Project No 10-4585 ....... .. . .- Project Name Aston View Corporate Center, _- .. Lot 69 Project Address 1808 Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction ............. .. ......... ~ . .___ Sub-Contractor . ...... Architect Smith Consulting Architects Engineer Prime Structural .. Engineers .~ __ Bldg Permit No ... CB .- 3345 .... . Plan File No ...... - DSAIOSHPD ...... - -_ Gov't Contract # Samole Grouo Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified Placement Date SupplierlPlant Palomar Transit Mix Mix Number 404008 Slump (in.) 4.5 N/A N/A N/A Air Temp Mix Temp (OF) 59 N/A Air Content (Oh) NIA N/A MPa Unit Weight (Kg/M') 0 N/A .I ,I 01/31/2001 _I-_.. ..... - .. ?F) .. .- - ....... -. - .- -. .- .. ............ Mix Description ..... Specified Strength _________ 4000 psi __ 27.6 MPa Dry Weight __ 7 sk 4000 .- ,,. - Mix Design .... . 0 Truck No. 837 Ticket #: 11 11940 Age: 55 Min. Samples Made By: AI Cacas Sample Mark: Admixture NIA Specific Location panel n-9 . .- __I Delivered by NIA Date Rec'd in Lab Logged in by: A NIA Gallons of water added at .N/A by NIA .- Cement Type ... - ..... Special InstructionslRemarks 1 @ 5 1 @ 7 2 @ 28 .. 1 hold . .... Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 7 19A 02/07/2001 6x1 2 in 28.27 in' 11 1,295 Ibs 394Opsi 27.1MPa c 6x1 2 in 28.27 in' 121,425 Ibs 43OOpsi 29.6MPa C 7 196 02/07/2001 6xl2in 28.27inl 141,785 Ibs 5020psi 34.6MPa C 28 19c 02/21/2001 28 1913 02/21/2001 6xl2in 28.27in' 146,010 ibs 517Opsi 35.6MPa C Cone A ConeiSplit B Coneishear C Shear D Columnar E Samolmo and W$rm conducted in accordance wrth ASTM Standard desiqnatrons C31-98, C39-96 C78-94 C138-92 C143-98 C172-97 _. =.. ~ C231-97 (317-98 C1077-98 Date:- Reviewed by: e -r Date:- Z/Wh Checked by: cc: Douolass Johnston. Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views. City of Carlsbad Construction Testing 8 Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido. CA 92029 A z ~ - ~2 Phone (760) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-9806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458517 C~\(,l\,.., HI\<;. 151 Project Name Aston View Corporate Center. Lot 69 Project No 10-4585 Project Address Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Engineer . Prime .- Structural ....... Engineers ... Architect Smith Consulting Architects Bldg Permit No CB 3345 Gov't Contract # ..____-I_. ___. -- ___. . ........ . ........ ..... 1808 Aston Avenue -.- Sub-Contractor .- - -. . . -. . __ Plan File No - DSA/OSHPD . .- ..... -_ ... ...... . Sample Group Data Report of Concrete I Cylinders Measured Specified Placement Date 01/31/2001 Slump (in.) 3.5 N/A Air Temp (OF) N/A N/A SupplierlPlant Mix Number 404008 Mix Temp (OF) 57 N/A N/A Mix Description --I_ 7 sk -4000 PSI ,- Air Content 0 N/A Mix Design - Palomar Transit Mix ____~~~. -- ("10) N/A __ I_ 4000 psi 27.6 MPa Unit Weight (KgIM') .-........I . .- ....... Specified Strength 4000 __ psi ___ 27.6 MPa Dry Weight 0 ~ ~~~~ ~ ~~~ Truck No. , 558 Ticket #: 11 11832 Age: 45 Min. Samples Made By: AI Cacas Sample Mark: Admixture NIA Specific Location PANEL - S-1 Special InstructionslRemarks - -.__ -. ____ Delivered by NIA Date Rec'd in Lab: - Logged in by: N/A . by NIA Cement Type --__ NIA Gallons of water added at NIA -. - - .... .- ........ ... . 1 @ 5 1 @ 7 2 @ 28 1 hold .. ~~ Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 7 17A 02/06/2001 6~12in 28.271n' 121,095 Ibs 4280psi 29.5MPa C 7 178 02/07/2001 6xI2in 28.27in2 114,150 Ibs 4040psi 27.8MPa c 28 17C 02/21/2001 6~12in 28.27 in' 149,040 Ibs 527Opsi 36.3MPa C 28 17D 02/21/2001 6xl2in 28.27in2 148.050 Ibs 524opsi 36.1 MPa c Cone A ConelSplit B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E SarnpNng and tesfmg conducted in accordance wth ASTM Standard designafrons C31-98 C39-96 C78-94 C138-92 C143-98 C172-97 C231-97 C617-98 C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: p.x 3- Date:&(" cc: Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views. City of Carlsbad Doualass Jo hnston. Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Phone (760) 746-4955 . Escondido. CA 92029 A ~ Fax (760) 746-9806 7 -.. ~a b.\l.I\b.l. KI~\(;. I\( c REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458515 Project No 10-4585 . ..... .. ._I.._____ .- Project Name Project Address 1808 Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Engineer Prime Structural Engineers Bldg Permit No E345 .. Gov't Contract # Aston View Corporate Center. Lot 69 _. .. .. ... Sub-contractor ..... . Architect Smith Consulting Architects . .. .. .~ __ . -- ... -. , . -. - Plan File No DSA/OSHPD ~ ..... -. ........ .... SamDle Grow Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified Slump (in.) 4.25 N/A Placement Date Air Temp (OF) N/A N/A SupplierlPlant Mix Number 303702 Mix Temp (OF) 55 N/A N/A N /A Mix Description 3750 PSI ~. . .. Air Content 0 N/A Mix Design 0 - 01 /I 912001 Palomar Transit Mix -. - ............ ... ... . .. (Oh) __..._I_ psi 20.7 MPa Unit Weight (KglM') ." . .... 3000 I_____ Specified Strength 3000 psi 20.7 MPa Dry Weight - Truck No. 867 Ticket U 1108009 Age: 60 Min. Samples Made By: AI Cacas Sample Mark: Admixture NIA Specific Location SLAB @ 71N Special InstructionslRemarks -. . __ .- . Delivered by N/A Date Rec'd in Lab: 02/05/2000 Logged in by: N/A -. - NIA Gallons of water added at N/A by NlA Cement Type _-.I_ .______ ___ -. . . . . -____ ______ ...... __ ____I.. 3@28 - 1 HOLD Compression Laboratory Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 28 15A 02/16/2001 6~12in 28.27in' 146,430 Ibs 518Opsi 35.7MPa C 28 15B 02/16/2001 6xl2in 28.27inz 151,110 Ibs 535Opsi 36.9MPa C 28 15C 02/16/2001 6xl21n 28.27in' 148,020 Ibs 5240psi 36.1 MPa c Cone A ConelSpiit B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E Comments: .. ......... I~ Sampljng and tesrrng conducted in accordance wrth ASTM Standard designations: C31-98, C39-96. C78-94, C138-92, Cl43-98, C172-97. C231-97 C617-98 C1077-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: 2- 3- Date:* (J Doualass Johnston. cc: Lusardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Construction Testing 8, Engineering, Inc. 2414 Vineyard Ave Escondido. CA 92029 A ~ ‘F - . Phone (760) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-9806 .? b.XC.1,b.I KI\(;,I>C. REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample Group # 458514 Project Name -________ Aston View Corporate Center. .... ____.. Lot 69 Project No 10-4585 Project Address 1808 Aston Avenue Gen. Contractor Lusardi Construction Engineer Prime Structural -. Engineers - - Architect Smith Consulting Architects Bldg Permit No CB 3345 .. ..... . . ~- Sub-contractor I - .. ..... ... Plan File No ____ - Gov’t Contract # - - DSAIOSHPD Sample Group Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified Placement Date 01 /I 9/2001 Slump (in.) 4 N/A .... N/A N/A AirTemp Palomar Transit Mix Supplier/Plant Mix Number ~. 303702 Mix Temp (OF) 555 N/A Mix Description - 3750 .. - - Air Content (Oh) N/A NIA --. . ._ psi 20.7 MPa Unit Weight (Kg/M’) 0 N/A 3000 Mix Design 3000 psi 20.7 Specified Strength (OF) _....___ - - _ ....-,-,.I____ 0 MPa Dry Weight -_____ . __ Truck No. 552 Ticket # 1107908 Age: 60 Min. Samples Made By: AI Cacas Sample Mark: Admixture NIA Specific Location Special InstructionslRemarks .__ ..... - Delivered by NIA Date Rec’d in Lab: 0210512000 Logged in by: NIA - _- ___ NIA Gallons of water added at NIA by NIA Cement Type - -- __-.- SLAB @ 8.5 /K -_ 3028 - 1 HOLD -. Comoression Laboratorv Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested Type 28 14A 02/16/2001 6x12in 28271n‘ 151,370 Ibs 535Opsi 36 9MPa C 28 148 02/16/2001 6x121n 28 27in’ 146,070 Ibs 517Opsi 356MPa C 28 14C 02/16/2001 6xl2in 28 27in2 149,550 Ibs 5290~~1 36 4MPa C Cone A ConeISplit B Conelshear C Shear D Columnar E .. .... ... .,, , .,__I” .- Comments: .- Sampling and resnng conducted m accordance with ASTM Standard desjgnabons C31-98 C39-96 C78-94 C138-92 C143-98 Ci72-97 C231-97 C617-98 CiO77-98 Checked by: Date:- Reviewed by: fl&- -r Date:L /Z&l cc: Doualass Johnston. Lusatdl Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. Escondido. CA 92029 Phone (760) 746-4955 2414 Vineyard Ave Fax (760) 746-9806 REPORT OF COMPRESSION TEST Sample GrouD # 458520 Project Name Project Address Gen. Contractor Engineer Bldg Permit No Gov't Contract # Project No 10-4585 ~. Aston Mew Corporate Center. Lot 69 1808 Aston Avenue Lusardi Construction -. Sub-contractor Prime Structural Engineers CB 3345 __ Plan File No .. __ DSAIOSHPD . -- __ ._ . .. . .. , .,.. I . -- . . -. .. . . . .. - Architect Smith Consulting Architects -. . .~. Sample Group Data Report of Concrete Cylinders Measured Specified Placement Date 1 /31/01 Slump (In.) 4 N/A Air Temp (OF) N/A NIA SupplierlPlant Palomar Transit Mix Mix Number 404008 Mix Temp (OF) 60 N/A Mix Description Air Content (%) N/A NIA psi 27.6 MPa Unit Weight (Kg/M') 0 NIA Mix Design Specified Strength -. .. -- 4000 4000 -. - ___ __ 0 ~- psi 27.6 MPa Dry Weight -. .. .- Truck No. a31 Ticket#: 11 11992 Age: 60 Min. Samples Made By: AI Cacas Sample Mark: Admixture NIA Specific Location panei e-4 Special InstructionslRemarks .- -. ____ ~ Delivered by -. NIA Date Rec'd in Lab: Logged in by: N/A ~. by NIA Cement Type - _____ NIA Gallons of water added at NIA I_- . . . __ .. ..--I_-. ~ ti 1 @ 5 1 @ 7 2 @ 28 I hold ~ ComDression Laboratow Data Sample Lab No. Date Dimensions Test Area Max Load Compressive Strength Fracture Age Tested TY pe 7 20A 217 '0 1 6x1 2 in 28.271n' 99,360 Ibs 352Opsi 24.3MPa C 7 208 2/7.'01 6~12in 28.27 in' 11 3,080 ibs 40OOpsi 27.6MPa C 28 20c 2121.01 6~12in 28.27in' 130.625 Ibs 462Opsi 31.8MPa C 28 20D 2/21 IO1 6xl2in 28.27in' 140,980 Ibs 499opsi 34.4MPa C Cone A ConelSpiit B Conelshear C Shear D ' Columnar E Comments: - ___ Sampling am resting Conductec n accordance with ASTM Standard designations C31-98 C39-96 C78-94 C138-92 C143-98 C172-97 CZ31-97 C6'i-98 C1077-98 Checked by. Date:- Reviewedby: 5- Date:- 2/r.A cc: Doualass Johnston. Ldsardi Prime Structural Smith Consulting Aston Views, City of Carlsbad Material SmDling ( )CONCRETE ( )MORTAR ( )GROUT ( )FIREPROOFING ( )MASONRYBLOCK ( )REBAR ( )STRUCI'URALSTEEL ( )BOLTS NAME: (PRINT) A c GAt-AS SIGNATURE Flu ;- CERTIFICATION NO: 8 g6 3h--? - @ GEOTECHNICAL & CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING 31 INSPECTION 2414 VINEY.4RD ,AVENUE SCITE G ESCOKDIDO. C.A 91014 1'6171 7ib-4915 F.AX ilhOl 746-L)Xl)h T ' A CONSTRUCTION ESTING& ESCONDIDO TRACY *CORON.;\ *OXN.;\RD LANCASTER L PAGE OF - INSPECTION REPORT ENGINEERING, INC. CTEJOB d /@ - %=B5 REPORT d PROJECT NAME: A 5 rM vfee ADDRESS: A57 on/ A dE. INSPECITON MA- IDENIWZCATION ( )CONCRETE CUNC Mv(WSl ( )MASONRY GROW Mv[iWS ( ) P.T. CONC. MORTAR TYPFJPSI T-RRL 5 ZAD ~5, .-, ... ARC L/ ARCHITECT:~/~H~ ENGINEER: &IUME GT@d r.i- - WELD REBARGRADE CONTRACTOR: w!PD / t/JF CW&L ( )SHOPWnDING SI'RSIEEL A e3L ( )PILEDRIVING H.S.BOLT ( )BATCHPLANT MAS.BLOCK INSPECTION DATE: 9-7-0 / PLAY FILE: BLDG PERMIT: OTHER: c A -5 3 45 f bf&. ANCHOR ( )OTHER ELECTRODE E -7O(f3 IVe 23r >Faterial Samoling ( )CONCRETE ( )MORTAR ( iGROUT ( jFIREPROOFlNG i )%l.ASONRYBLOCK ( IREBAR ( ) STRUCTURAL STEEL ( ) BOLTS ChtWhth of Canpwance: All work, untess othwuise noted. complies with the approved plans and specifications and the wifam bvikting C*. NAbfE: (PRINT) AL c&A 5 SIGNATURE a CERTIFICATION NO: o& 3 6517 - @i?g GEOTECHNIChL & COSSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING & IYSPECTION 2411 VINEYARD AVENUE SCITE G ESCONUIUO~ C.4 J?l)?U i;hlll 7&-4955 F-\Y #-hili '4h-U8l)h NAME: (PRINT) /4L *S SIGNATURE &% CERTIFICATION NO: @ $6.3b.L7-%2? 'A c ONSTRUCTION T ESTING €4 E NGINEERING, INC. ESCONDDO TRACY *CORONA *OXNARD OLANCASTER 8 e PAGE -OF - INSPECTION REPORT ENGINEERING. mc. CTE JOB # 10 .-'fG?35 REPORT # .. PROJE(JT NAME: rv VL5W5 ADDRESS: /go e A5mu Ad€ C-hRb:, ARCHITECT: VI r!v LO+., 1' /f" ENGINEER. PA I4 %jcJG7, CONTRACTOR: L 1/%fR INSPECTION DATE: 9 -3 -o/ PLAN FILE: BLDGPERMIT dD 33y-5 OTHER Material Samplisg ( )CONCRETE ( )MORTAR ( )GROUT ( )FIREPROOFING ( )MASONRYBLOCK ( )REBAR ( )STRUClWRALSTEEL ( )BOLTS ONSTRUCTION T ESTING & E NGINEERING, INC. ESCONDIDO TRACY *CORONA *OXNARD *LAYCASTER #&c e PAGE INSPECTION REPORT ENCUiEERING, INC CTE JOB it &) -ifs??Jp- . ~ REPORT d. Material S~IIIOI~B~ ( )CONCRETE ( )MORTAR ( )GROUT ( )FIREPROOFING ( )MASONRYBLOCK ( )REBAR ( )STRUCTURALSTEEL ( )BOLTS 1'"; co && ESCONDIDO TR,\CY *CORONA *OXNARD *LANCASTER OF - .- PAGE INSPECTION REPORT WGINEERING fNC CTE JOB # /Q - Y3-s REPORT # PROJECT NAhfE h5Wd i/ligh/ 5 - ENGINEER p/2/r?lE GT/?L, c7-, CONTRACTOR: Lu'3h f? D f INSPECTION DATE: PLAN FILE: BLDGPERMIT: cp - 3 3ys OTHER: 2 -2s -0 / Material Sampling ( )CONCRETE ( )MORTAR ( IGROUT ( )FIREPROOFING ( )MASON&YBLOCK. ( )REBAR ( )STRUCTURALSTEEL ( )BOLTS UttKHEAJ &L'&/fJ- NAME (PRINT) :4L A LA 3 SIGNATURE el p- CERTIFICATION NO 6' k%, 3 h27-453 Material S~O@ ( )CONCRETE ( )MORTAR ( )GROUT ( )FIREPROOFING ( )MASONRYBLOCK ( )REBAR ( )STRUCTURALSTEEL ( )BOLTS NAMEWPRINT) Z+L SIGNATURE CERTIFICATION NO: Q 436 3 627 - 4 , ti'rnatlonal conference of Building Officials DORRELL P DUQUETTE CERTIFIED SPECIAL INSPECTOR STRUCTURAL STEEL & WELDING 1997 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE International Conference of Building Officials DORRELL P DUQUETTE CERTIFIED REINFORCED CONCRET SPECIAL INSPECTOR AS JOINTLY SPONSORED BY ACI, BOCA, ICBO B SECCl The Individual named hereon is CERTIFIED in tne category snown. having been so certified pursuant to successfu~ completlon of the prescribed wrltten examlnatlon and ACI requiremenn. Expiration date: NO. 087sai7-09 ~~niircation anertr i~mmp~reol knowledge oi coder and standards. A&dle prperipnce rhodld be verified by local jurirdmionr. , . . . . .-. . ~ .~ . EEl Corporation Zn PartnersKip witK ~aurmment far !&&incsafety DATE: November 28,2000 JURISDICTION: Carlsbad 0 PLAN REVIEWER PLAN CHECK NO.: 00-3345 SET: I11 PROJECT ADDRESS: Aston Ave. PROJECT NAME: Aston Views Plaza 0 The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply IXI The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. 0 The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. 0 The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant 0 The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: 0 FILE E% Lot 69 with the jurisdiction's building codes. Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. contact person. IXI Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. 0 Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Fax #: Person contacted: Date contacted: (by: 1 Mail Telephone Fax In Person REMARKS: 1. The loose blue sheets must be slip-sheeted into the final sets. 2. The structural sheets haven't been By: Kurt Culver Enclosures: Esgil Corporation 0 GA 0 MB 0 EJ 0 PC log tmsmtl.dot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 San Diego, California 92123 + (858) 560-1468 + Fax (858) 560-1576 ~ ~~ Em Corporation ~~ Zn Tarmcrship with $oiovcrnmnt for sSui&ngSafety DATE: November 3,2000 JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: 00-3345 0 FILE SET I1 PROJECT ADDRESS: 18 @ Aston Ave. PROJECT NAME: Aston Views Plaza 0 The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. 0 The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. 0 The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant Lot 69 and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. contact person. The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: Smith Consulting 12220 El Camino Real, #200 San Diego 92130 Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. IXI Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: Grant Evans Date contacted:! I /b [LQ (by: hfl Telephone #: (858) 793-4777 Fax #:-4787 Mail delephone Fax w In Person REMARKS: By: Kurt Cplver Enclosures: Esgil Corporation 0 GA MB 0 EJ 0 PC 10/23/00 tmsrntl.dot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 + (858) 560-1468 + Fax (858) 560-1576 JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: 00-3345 PROJECT ADDRESS: 1814 Aston Ave. SET: I1 DATE PLAN RECEIVED BY ESGIL CORPORATION: 10/23/00 November 3,2000 REVIEWED BY: Kurt Culver DATE RECHECK COMPLETED: i Carlsbad 00-3345 November 3, 2000 GENERAL Please make all corrections on the original tracings, as requested in the correction list. Submit three sets of plans for commercialhndustrial projects (two sets of plans for residential projects). For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in one of two ways: 1. Deliver all corrected sets of plans and calculationslreports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department, 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008, (760) 602-2700. The City will route the plans to EsGil Corporation and the Carlsbad Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. 2. Bring one corrected set of plans and calculationslreports 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. PLANS All sheets of the plans are required to be signed by the California licensed architect or engineer responsible for the plan preparation. Please include the California license number, seal, date of license expiration and the date the plans are signed. Business and Professions Code. MANY OF THE SHEETS WERE NOT SIGNED. 4. 10. ADDITIONAL Please obtain a ruling from the building official as to whether the proposed corridor system can be wide open to the future tenant spaces (Le,, can the "future" corridors be constructed in the future, or must they be built now?). + PLUMBING, MECHANICAL AND ENERGY CORRECTIONS + PLAN REVIEWER. GlenAdamek 2. Show the required ceiling rated fire dampers at duct openings in the fire rated ceiling membranes. UBC, Section 713.11 #4. PLUMBING (1997 UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE) 3. Correct the site Building Sewer Plan on sheet PI .I to show the required cleanouts as per UPC, Section 71 9.1. Carlsbad 00-3345 November 3. 2000 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. Correcithe elevator drainage system to provide liquid sensors in the elevator pit sump and the 55 gallon drum receptor to tell operators of the building when liquid is in the elevator pit sump or the 55 gallon drum receptor. Or, detail how system controls are designed to keep the 55 gallon drum from overflowing and obtain written approval from the California department controlling elevators and the county health department for the proposed elevator drainage system. The plans do not show the location of the proposed backflow protection of water connection to fire protection systems as per detailed in detail 3 on sheet PO.1? Fire sprinkler water lines are not shown? UPC, Section 603.4.18. MECHANICAL (1997 UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE) The required smoke and fire dampers for duct openings into the fire rated corridors were removed from the mechanical plans. Please correct. Provide required independent ventilation or air conditioning system of elevator equipment room to prevent the overheating of the electrical equipment. UBC, Section 3005.1. Plans were not corrected. Provide smoke detection in supply air duct of 'air-moving system' for required shut-off for smoke control as per UMC, Section 608 and also see Section 203. Note: the common ceiling plenum space makes all the HVAC units one 'air-moving system'. ENERGY CONSERVATION The light fixtures on the floor plans and the fixture schedule do not match the lighting shown on the LTG-forms. Please correct. The electrical plans and the lighting plans do not show the required lighting in the proposed fire rated corridors at each end of the building at both floor levels. Please correct. Show the daylit areas and required daylit area lighting controls for lighting in daylit areas. Title 24, Part 6, Section 131(c). On the LTG-1 part 2 of 2 form please list the required Mandatory Automatic Controls: A) B) Provide automatic shut-off controls for lighting as per Title 24, Part 6, Section $31 (d). Detail required exterior lighting controls. "Exterior lighting controlled from a lighting panel within the building shall be controlled by a directional photocell or astronomical time switch that automatically turns off exterior lighting when daylight is available." Please correct the LTG-1 forms on sheet El 1. - EsGil - Corporation In Partnership with fjo~ernnunt for guil;iing Safeq DATE: October 2,2000 JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: PROJECT ADDRESS: SET I 0 PLANREVIEWER 0 FILE PROJECT NAME: Aston Views Plaza The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply 0 The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction’s building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. 0 The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list Lot 69 with the jurisdiction’s building codes. 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. 0 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: Smith Consulting 12220 El Camino Real, #200 San Diego 92130 0 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: Grant Evans Date contacted: i O(3 b (by: &) Telephone #: (858) 793-4777 Fax #:-4787 Mail /Telephoned Fax4 In Person 0 REMARKS: By: Kurt Culver Enclosures: Esgil Corporation 0 GA 0 ME 0 EJ 0 PC 9/14/00 tmsrntl.dot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 + (858) 560-1468 + Fax (858) 560-1576 Carlsbad 00-3345 October a, aooo PLAN REVIEW CORRECTION LIST COMMERCIAL OCCUPANCY: B USE: Office Shell TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: V-N ACTUAL AREA: 85,012 ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA: Unlimited STORIES: 2 HEIGHT: -30' SPRINKLERS?: Yes OCCUPANT LOAD: "Shell" DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY JURISDICTION: 9/12/00 ESGIL CORPORATION: 9/14/00 DATE INITIAL PLAN REVIEW PLAN REVIEWER: Kurt Culver DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY FOREWORD (PLEASE READ): This plan review is limited to the technical requirements contained in the Uniform 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 ordinances enforced 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. Code sections cited are based on the 1997 UBC. 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. 106.4.3, 1997 Uniform Building Code, the approval of the plans does not permit the violation of any state, county or city law. To SDeed UP the recheck process, please note on this list (or a CODY) where each Be sure to enclose the marked UD list when you submit the revised Dlans. 9 Carlsbad 00-3345 October 2.2000 GENERAL 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Please make all corrections on the original tracings, as requested in the correction list. Submit three sets of plans for commerciaVindustria1 projects (two sets of plans for residential projects). For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in one of two ways: 1. Deliver all corrected sets of plans and calculationsheports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department, 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008, (760) 602-2700. The City will route the plans to EsGil Corporation and the Carlsbad Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. 2. Bring one corrected set of plans and calculationsheports to EsGil Corporation, 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, CA 92123, (858) 560-1468. Deliver all remaining sets of plans and calculationsheports 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. When special inspection is required, the architect or engineer of record shall prepare an inspection program which shall be submitted to the building official for approval prior to issuance of the building permit. Please review Section 106.35 Please complete the attached form. PLANS The plans are very incomplete. There are empty reference bubbles on virtually every sheet. Please be more thorough next time. All sheets of the plans are required to be signed by the California licensed architect or engineer responsible for the plan preparation. Please include the California license number, seal, date of license expiration and the date the plans are signed. Business and Professions Code. TITLE 24 DISABLED ACCESS Provide notes and details on the plans to show compliance with the enclosed Disabled Access Review List. Disabled access requirements may be more restrictive than the UBC. Carlsbad 00-3345 October 2,2000 FOUNDATION 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Provide a letter from the soils engineer confirming that the foundation plan, grading plan and specifications have been reviewed and that it has been determined that the recommendations in the soil report are properly incorporated into the plans. (required by the soil report). STRUCTURAL Show floor and roof connections to masonry or concrete walls, per Section 1605.2.3: a) Connections shall resist 200 pounds per lineal foot or the actual design load, whichever is greater (using Allowable Stress Design; otherwise, see Section 1612). Where wood diaphragms laterally support concrete or masonry walls, the aspect ratio of subdiaphragms are limited to 2%:1. Section 1633.2.9.4. In Seismic Zones 3 and 4, the value of ap in equation 32-2 shall be 1.5, per Section 1633.2.8.1. In Seismic Zone 4, the value of Fp used in Section 1632.2 shall not be less than 420 plf, per Section 1633.2.8.1. b) c) d) Why aren’t the architectural reveals from sheet A4.2, etc. reflected on the structural plans? Please clarify for me how the schedule at 5/S-1 works. Wall Type 3 appears to have both “e2” rebar and “f‘ rebar, but apparently no “g” rebar on the opposing face. Was this the design intent? ADDITIONAL Please obtain a ruling from the building official as to whether the proposed corridor system can be wide open to the future tenant spaces (Le., can the “future” corridors be constructed in the future, or must they be built now?). Carlsbad 00-3345 October 2,2000 11. 12. 13. To speed up the review process, note on this list (or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed, Le., plan sheet, note or detail number, calculation page, etc. Please indicate here if any changes have been made to the plans that are not a result of corrections from this list. If there are other changes, please briefly describe them and where they are located in the plans. Have changes been made to the plans not resulting from this correction list? Please indicate: 0 Yes Cl No The jurisdiction has contracted with Esgil Corporation located at 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, California 92123; telephone number of 8581560-1468, to perform the plan review for your project. If you have any questions regarding these plan review items, please contact Kurt Culver at Esgil Corporation. Thank you. + PLUMBING, MECHANICAL AND ENERGY CORRECTIONS + PLAN REVIEWER GlenAdamek 1. 2. 3. 4. Each sheet of the plans must be signed by the person responsible for their preparation. Business and Professions Code. The licensed designer must sign each sheet of the plans. Show the required ceiling rated fire dampers at duct openings in the fire rated ceiling membranes. UBC, Section 713.11 #4. PLUMBING (1997 UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE) Complete the site plumbing plans showing the sizes, slopes and required cleanouts for the building sewer and the sizes site water lines. Please show the elevation of the upstream public or private sewer manhole cover. As per UPC, Section 710.0, provide backwater valves on all building drains which serve plumbing fixtures with flood rim elevations below the public or private upstream manhole rim elevations. Only fixtures with flood rim levels below the public upstream manhole rim elevation may flow through a backwater valve. Carlsbad 00-3345 October 2.2000 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. IO. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Correct the water line sizing calculations. The 300 feet used in the water line sizing seems to be too low. The plans show over 400 feet of water line from the water meter to the boiler. Show the required vents to 10 feet above grade for the floor sink and sump pump at the mechanical yard. Detail the limits of the forced sewer line from the mechanical yard connection to the gravity sewer system. Show compliance with UPC, Section 710.0. Show the required check valves, gate valves, access to the pumps & valves, and detail connection to gravity sewer line. Shower control valves must be pressure balance or thermostatic mixing valves. UPC Section 420.0. The Plumbing Fixture Schedule on sheet PO.l calls out the fixture SH-1 to be a wall hung lavatory, not a shower? Correct the elevator drainage system to provide liquid sensors in the elevator pit sump and the 55 gallon drum receptor to tell operators of the building when liquid is in the elevator pit sump or the 55 gallon drum receptor. Detail the backflow protection of water connection to fire protection systems as per UPC, Section 603.4.18. MECHANICAL (1997 UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE) The fire rated corridors are not to be used to convey air to or from rooms. UMC Section 601.1.1. The plans show more exhaust from the restrooms than supply air and the plans show more supply air the fire rated corridor than exhaust air. Please correct. Provide required independent ventilation or air conditioning system of elevator equipment room to prevent the overheating of the electrical equipment. UBC, Section 3005.1. Please correct. Provide smoke detection in supply air duct of ‘air-moving system’ for required shut-off for smoke control as per UMC, Section 608 and also see Section 203. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. Carlsbad 00-3345 October 2,2000 On the mechanical plans clearly show the limits of ceiling space proposed to be used as duct or plenum. Then note the following on the plans: a) All material exposed within the plenum shall have a mold-, humidity-, and erosion-resistant face that meets the requirements of UL 181 as per UMC Section 604.2. All combustible materials exposed within the plenum space must comply with UMC Section 601.3. Flame-spread index of not more than 25 and a smoke-developed rating of not more than 50. Clearly note on the plans: “Product-conveying duct systems shall not extend into or through ducts or plenums as per UMC Section 505.1 .” b) c) ENERGY CONSERVATION The light fixtures on the floor plans and the fixture schedule do not match the lighting shown on the LTG-forms. Please correct. The electrical plans and the lighting plans do not show the required lighting in the proposed tire rated corridors at each end of the building at both floor levels. Please correct. Show the daylit areas and required daylit area lighting controls for lighting in daylit areas. Title 24, Part 6, Section 131(c). On the LTG-1 part 2 of 2 form please list the required Mandatory Automatic Controls: a) Provide automatic shut-off controls for lighting as per Title 24, Part 6, Section 131 (d). b) Detail required exterior lighting controls. “Exterior lighting controlled from a lighting panel within the building shall be controlled by a directional photocell or astronomical time switch that automatically turns off exterior lighting when daylight is available.” Please correct the LTG-1 forms on sheet El I. Note: If you have any questions regarding this plumbing, mechanical and energy plan review list please contact Glen Adamek at (858) 560-1468. To speed the review process, note on this list (or a copy) where the corrected items have been addressed on the plans. Carlsbad 00-3345 October 2,2000 + ELECTRICAL PLAN REVIEW + 1996NEC + PLAN REVIEWER: MORTEZA BEHESHTI 1. Show the available fault current (Isc) from the serving utility co. and at the equipment where Isc exceeds 10,000 amps. 2. Show the ampere interrupting capacity (AIC) ratings of the service and subservice equipment. NEC 110-9,230-65. 3. Show the ground cold water bond. NEC 250-80(a) 4. Specify the dimensions of equipment rated 1200 amps or more. NEC 110-t6(c). 5. Provide the required access and entrance to working space for equipment rated 1200 amps or more and over 6 feet wide. NEC 1 10-1 6(c). 6. Provide GFI protected receptacle(s) within 25 feet of attic HVAC equipment. NEC 210-8(b)2 & 210-63 7. Each commercial building and each commercial occupancy accessible to pedestrians shall be provided with at least one outlet in an accessible location at each entrance to each tenant space for sign or outline lighting system use. NEC 600-5(a) 8. Note the following requirements on the prints for panelboards supplying fire alarm equipment: Lockable cover, identified circuit breaker (red), and a breaker "lock-off" device to be installed. 9. Provide a disconnect for each sign. NEC 600-6 10. Provide GFI protection for receptacle outlets in the elevator pit and the elevator machine rooms. NEC 620-85 Note: If you have any questions regarding this electrical plan review list please contact Mortera Beheshti at (858) 560-1468. To speed the review process, note on this list (or a copy) where the corrected items have been addressed on the plans. Carlsbad 00-3345 October 2,2000 DEPARTMENT OF STATE ARCHITECT NON RESIDENTIAL TITLE 24 DISABLED ACCESS REQUIREMENTS The following disabled access items are taken from the 1998 edition of California Building Code, Title 24. Per Section 101.17.11, all publicly and privately funded public accommodations and commercial facilities shall be accessible to persons with disabilities. NOTE: All Figures and Tables referenced in this checklist are printed in the California Building Code, Title 24. 0 SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS 1. Show that an accessible route of travel is to be provided to all portions of the building, to accessible building entrances and between the buildina and the public way, per Section 11 148.1.2. SHOW ON THE PLANS THE SLOPE OF THIS PATH AT ALL POINTS ALONG IT. e DISABLED ACCESS PARKING SPACES 2. Revise site plan to show that accessible spaces comply with Section 11298.4.1 as follows: a) Single spaces shall be outlined to provide a loading and unloading area on the passenaer side of the vehicle. End Carlsbad 00-3345 October 2,2000 SPECIAL INSP CT ON PROGRAM hMcAr,-, a92008 &-$Ab ADDRESS OR LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PLAN CHECK NUMBER:&- -46 OWNER'S NAME: kN&m I, as the owner, or agent of the owner (contractors may certify that I, or the architecvengineer of record, will be responsible for employing the special inspector(s) as required by Uniform Building Code (UBC) Section 1701 .I for the construction project located at the site listed above. UBC Section 106.3.5. employ the special inspector), Signed I, as the engineedarchitect of record, certify that I have prepared the following special inspection program as required by UBC Section 106.3.5 for the construction project located at the site listed above. ErOMU~S u Sign c- 1. List of work requiring special inspection: Soils Compliance Prior to Foundation inspection Structural Concrete Over 2500 PSI Prestressed Concrete Field Welding High Strength Bolting E ExpansionlEpoxy Anchors 0 Sprayed-On Fireproofing 0 Other 0 Structural Masonry 0 Designer Specified 2. Name@) of individual(s) or firm(s) responsible for the special inspections listed above: tf A. Lblw+h- 1%. % 4 k. B. H6~t~=?-a GN+n&&Q C. 3. Duties of the special inspectors for the work listed above: A. 0. " 4bL@&&%.&SbrT . / 45 I ~~~ Special inspectors shall &e& in with the City and present their credentials for approval beginning wotk on the job Site Carlsbad 00-3345 October 2,2000 VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE vlwl J URl SDl CTl ON : Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: 00-3345 Valuation Reg. VALUE ($) Multiplier Mod. PREPARED BY: Kurt Culver DATE: October 2,2000 Office BUILDING ADDRESS: 1814 Aston Ave. 850121 Air Conditioning Fire Sprinklers TOTAL VALUE 2,040,288 Plan Check Fee by Ordinance v I - Type of Review: I4 Complete ~evie~ S~UC+JJ~~I Only Esgil Plan Review Fee 2,866.50 Comments: Sheet1 of 1 macvalue.doc ~ City of Carlsbad The item you have submitted for review has been approved. The approval is based on plans, information andlor specifications provided in your submittal: therefore any changes to these items afler this date, including field modifications, must be reviewed by this office to insure continued conformance with applicable codes. Please review carefully all comments attached, as failure to comply with instructions in this report can result in suspension of permit to build. 0 A Right-of-way permit is required prior to construction of the following improvements: Please see the attached report of deficiencies Make necessaly corrections to plans or specifica ions for compliance with applicable codes and standards. Submit corrected plans andlor specifications to this office for review. marked wit? Date: -6- 0 0 gee Cmvwtt Date: I%-/dO t+ 130 By: Date: AlTACHMENTS 0 Dedication Application Dedication Checklist Improvement Application 0 Improvement Checklist Future Improvement Agreement 0 Grading Permit Application 0 Grading Submittal Checklist 0 Right-of-way Permit Application 0 Right-of-way Permit Submittal Checklist and Information Sheet 77 ENGINEERING DEPT. CONTACT PERSON Name: TANIYA WADE City of Carlsbad Address: 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008 Phone: (760) 602-2773 CFD INFORMATION Parcel Map No: Lots: (o q Recordation: Carlsbad Tract: LT e5-*84 A4 Sewer Fee Information Sheet ~,,,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~~~arlsbad, CA 92008-731 4 - (760) 602-2720 - FAX (76Q&g-8562 @ 1 BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST SITE PLAN 0 1. Provide a fully dimensioned site plan drawn to scale. Show: ht-of-Way Width &Adjacent Streets widths-Se dW&.Qd @’d;fl proposed water service proposed irrigation service fle0r;v B.c’Existing & Proposed Structures A( North Arrow CtEx’ ting Street Improvements proposed sewe; lateral z%m~ #, g&erty Easements-f;k @ 6 2. Show on site plan: *age Patterns 1. Building pad surface drainage must maintain a minimum slope of one percent towards an adjoining street or an approved drainage course. 2. ADD THE FOLLOWING NOTE: “Finish grade will provide a minimum positive drainage of 2% to swale 5’ away from building.” B; Existing & Proposed Slopes and Topography C: Size, type, location, alignment of existing or proposed sewer and water service (s) that serves the project. Each unit requires a separate service, however, Sewer and water laterals should not be located within proposed driveways, per standards. cond dwelling units and apartment complexes are an exception. o/ 0 0 3. Include on title sheet: Ar Site address E Assessor‘s Parcel Number CLegal Description For commerciaVindustriaI buildings and tenant improvement projects, include: total building square footage with the square footage for each different use, existing sewer permits showing square footage of different uses (manufacturing, warehouse, office, etc.) previously approved. EXISTING PERMIT NUMBER DESCRIPTION 2 RNIII4W 1 ST 0 0 0 0 BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST 2ND 3‘ DISCRETIONARY APPROVAL COMPLIANCE 0 4a. Project does not comply with the following Engineering Conditions of approval for Project No. 0 0 4b. All conditions are in compliance. Date: DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS 5. Dedication for all street Rights-of-way adjacent to the building site and any storm drain or utility easements on the building site is required for all new buildings and for remodels with a value at or exceeding $15.ooo, pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 18.40.030. Dedication required as follows: 0 0 Dedication required. Please have a registered Civil Engineer or Land Surveyor prepare the appropriate legal description together with an 8 %” x 11” plat map and submit with a title report. All easement documents must be approved and signed by owner(s) prior to issuance of Building Permit. Attached please find an application form and submittal checklist for the dedication process. Submit the completed application form with the required checklist items and fees to the Engineering Department in person. Applications wm be accept by mail or fax. Dedication completed by: Date: IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS 6a. All needed public improvements upon and adjacent to the building site must be constructed at time of building construction whenever the value of the construction exceeds $75.ooo, pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 18.40.040. Public improvements required as follows: 0 0 Attached please find an application form and submittal checklist for the public improvement requirements. A registered Civil Engineer must prepare the appropriate improvement plans and submit them together with the requirements on the attached checklist to the Engineering Department through a separate plan check process. The completed application form and the requirements on the BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST 1ST 2ND 3rd checklist must be submitted in person. Applications by mail or fax are not accepted. Improvement plans must be approved, appropriate securities posted and fees paid prior to issuance of building permit. Improvement Plans signed by: Date: 0 0 0 6b. Construction of the public improvements may be deferred pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 18.40. Please submit a recent property title report or current grant deed on the property and processing fee of $280 so we may prepare the necessary Neighborhood Improvement Agreement. This agreement must be signed, notarized and approved by the City prior to issuance of a Building permit. Neighborhood Improvement Agreement will include the following: 0 0 0 6c. Enclosed please find your Neighborhood Improvement Agreement. Please return agreement signed and notarized to the Engineering Department. Neighborhood Improvement Agreement completed by: Date: 0 0 0 6d. No Public Improvements required. SPECIAL NOTE: Damaaed or defective improvements found adiacent to buildina site must be repaired to the satisfaction of the Citv Inspector Drior to occupancy. GRADING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS The conditions that invoke the need for a grading permit are found in Section 11.06.030 of the Municipal Code. 7a. Inadequate information available on Site Plan to make a determination on grading a requirements. Include accurate grading quantities (cut, fill, import, export). 0 0 0 7b. Grading Permit required. A separate grading plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer must be submitted together with the completed application form attached. NOTE: The Gradinq Permit must be issued and rouah aradinq approval obtained prior to issuance of a Buildina Permit. Grading Inspector sign off by: if a grading permit is not required.) Date: 0 0 0 7c. Graded Pad Certification required. (Note: Pad certification may be required even BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST 1ST 2ND 3RD 0 0 0 7d .No Grading Permit required. 0 0 0 7e. If grading is not required, write “No Grading” on plot plan. MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS @) @ 0 8. A RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT is required to do work in City Right-of-way and/or private work adjacent to the public Right-of-way. Types of work include, but are not limited to: street improvements, tree trimming, driveway construction, tying into public storm drain, sewer and water utilities. Right-of-way permit required for: 0 0 9. INDUSTRIAL WASTE PERMIT If your facility is located in the City of Carlsbad sewer service area, you need to contact the Carlsbad Municipal Water District, located at 5950 El Camino Real, Carlsbad, CA 92008. District personnel can provide forms and assistance, and will check to see if your business enterprise is on the EWA Exempt List. You may telephone (760) 438-2722, extension 7153, for assistance. Industrial Waste permit accepted by: Date: / 0 IO. NPDES PERMIT Complies with the City’s requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge management practices to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to discharge to sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading or building permit, whichever occurs first. Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The applicant shall provide best 0 0 11. dRequired fees are attached 0 No fees required WATER METER REVIEW 12a. Domestic (potable) Use Ensure that the meter proposed by the owner/developer is not oversized. Oversized meters are inaccurate during low-flow conditions. If it is oversized, for the life of the meter. the City will not accurately bill the owner for the water used. All single family dwelling units received ”standard” 1” service with 518” service. Rw. 7lI(Mo 5 1ST 2ND 3RD BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST If ownerldeveloper proposes a size other than the “standard, then owner/developer must provide potable water demand calculations, which include total fixture counts and maximum water demand in gallons per minute (gpm). A typical fixture count and water demand worksheet is attached. Once the gpm is provided, check against the “meter sizing schedule” to veriv the anticipated meter size for the unit. Maximum service and meter size is a 2 service with a 2 meter. If a developer is proposing a meter greater than 2. suggest the installation of multiple 2 services as needed to provide the anticipated demand. (manifolds are considered on case by case basis to limit multiple trenching into the street). 12b. Irrigation Use (where recycled water is not available) All irrigation meters must be sized via irrigation calculations (in gpm) prior to approval. The developer must provide these calculations. Please follow these guidelines: 1. If the project is a newer development (newer than 1998). check the recent improvement plans and observe if the new irrigation service is reflected on the improvement sheets. If so, at the water meter station, the demand in gpm may be listed there. Irrigation services are listed with a circled “I”, and potable water is typically a circled “W. The irrigation service should look like: STA 1 +00 Install 2 service and H--- 1.5: meter (estimated 100 gpm) 2. If the improvement plans do not list the irrigation meter and the servicelmeter will be installed via another instrument such as the building plans or grading plans (w/ a right of way permit of course), then the applicant must provide irrigation calculations for estimated worst-case irrigation demand (largest zone with the farthest reach). Typically, Larry Black has already reviewed this if landscape plans have been prepared, but the applicant must provide the calculations to you for your use. Once you have received a good example of irrigation calculations, keep a set for your reference. In general the calculations will include: Hydraulic grade line Elevation at point of connection (POC) Pressure at POC in pounds per square inch (PSI) Worse case zone (largest, farthest away from valve Total Sprinkler heads listed (with gpm use per head) Include a 10% residual pressure at point of connection 3. In general, all major sloped areas of a subdivisionlproject are to be irrigated via separate irrigation meters (unless the project is only SFD with no HOA). As long as the project is located within the City recycled water qST 2ND 3RD BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST service boundary, the City intends on switching these irrigation servicesheters to a new recycled water line in the future. 12c. Irrigation Use (where recycled water Is available) 1. Recycled water meters are sized the same as the irrigation meter above. 2. If a project fronts a street with recycled water, then they should be connecting to this line to irrigate slopes within the development. For subdivisions, this should have been identified, and implemented on the improvement plans. Installing recycled water meters is a benefit for the applicant since they are exempt from paying the San Diego County Water Capacity fees. However, if they front a street which the recycled water is there, but is not live (sometimes they are charged with potable water until recycled water is available), then the applicant must pay the San Diego Water Capacity Charge. If within three years, the recycled water line is charged with recycled water by CMWD, then the applicant can apply for a refund to the San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) for a refund. However, let the applicant know that we cannot guarantee the refund, and they must deal with the SDCWA for this. ~~ll~ofl~n ut ?la0 &ch v-J:* @cLs S& a@m& e fiqroww+ q(auls WEL ~ddcess ali c mmwb FC:~ & 5~~b~i'bJelI. 7 m. mum ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FEE CALCULATION WORKSHEET 0 Estimate based on unconfirmed information from applicant. Calculation based on building plancheck plan submittal. Address: 1614 & 04 K Bldg. Permit No. oa334T Prepared by: Date: /I- 7-d Checked by: Date: EDU CALCULATIONS: List types and square footages for all uses. Types of Use: uw,h.&W Sq. Ft./Units: t$bs: 12 EDU's: 13 Types of Use: Sq. Ft./Units: EDU's: ADT CALCULATIONS: List types and square footages for all uses. Types of Use: [UfiW bU% Sq. FtlUnits: %"i; ADTes: LiaF Types of Use: Sq. Ft./Units: ADT's: FEES REQUIRED: WITHIN CFD: 6s (no bridge & thoroughfare fee in District #1, reduced Traffic Impact Fee) B 1. PARK-IN-LIEU FEE - 0 NO PARK AREA & #: - FEEIUNIT: X NO. UNITS: =$ d TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE ADT'dUNITS: 495 X FEE/ADT: 24 =$ /0/8 O0 ff 3. BRIDGE AND THOROUGHFARE FEE (DIST. #1 - DIST. #2 ~ DIST. #3 - 1 ADT's/UNITS: X FEE/ADT: =$ - UNIT/SQ.FT.: X FEE/SQ.FT./UNIT: #Yo = $ 34! 0 OYI go @. FACILITIES MANAGEMENT FEE ZONE: 3- e5. SEWER FEE EDU's: 7 X FEE/EDU: I qT? - -$ 33303 BENEFIT AREA: F EDU's: 19 X FEEIEDU: 1% =$ IT632 _- 0 6. SEWER LATERAL ($2,500) =$ n 7. DRAINAGEFEES PLDA . : HIGH /LOW - ACRES: X FEE/AC: =$ A. POTABLE WATER FEES UNITS CODE CONNECTION FEE METER FEE SDCWA FEE IRRIGATION 9FdQ - 3.r 341-YL. Rev. 7/14/00 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FEE CALCULATION WORKSHEET 0 9. RECLAIMED WATER FEES UNITS CODE CONNECTION FEE METER FEE TOTAL OF ABOVE FEES+: $ +NOTE: This calculation sheet is NOT a complete list of all fees which may be due. Dedications and Improvements may also be required with Building Permits. 20f2 Rev. 7/14/00 CIVIL ENGINEERING PLANNING / ENVIRONMENTAL LAND SURVEYING December 22,2000 Lusardi construction Company 1570 Linda Vista Drive San Marcos, California 92069-3880 Subject: Rough Grade Pad Certification Reference: Gentlemen: Per a field survey conducted under my supervision and in accordance with the requirements of the building code, we have found that the rough grading for building pad at the above referenced project has been completed in substantial conformance with the approved Grading Plan. This Certification constitutes an expression of our professional opinion regarding the facts contained herein and does not constitute a warranty or guarantee, either expressed or implied. Sincerely, Aston Views Plaza - 1808 Aston Avenue, Carlsbad, Charles W. Stevens Professional Engineer R. C. E. No. 29725 1485 SPRUCE STREET, SUITE H, RIVERSIDE, CA 92507 0 (909) 342-0036 0 FAX (909) 342-0268 17451 RACCOON AVENUE, SUITE 8, ADELANTO, CA 92301 0 (760) 246-3636 *:* FAX (760) 246-5666 November 12.2000 Taniya Wade City of Carlsbad Engineering Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: Dear Taniya, This letter is written to you in response to your building plancheck dated 11-06-00. Our responses are as follows: ITEM NO. ITEM RESPONSE A Shown on plan. B Shown on plan. C Shown on plan. D 1814 Aston Avenue - CB003345 SITE PLAN Per our conversation, stubs are existing and fall within our driveway. Driveway needs to be in its proposed location, no exsiting driveways across the street. GRADING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS Grading quantities shown on sheet C1. NPDES PERMIT Addressed with a note on sheet C 1. 7a' 10 GRADING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS Grading quantities shown on sheet C1. 7a , ADDITIONAL COMMENTS Grading quantities shown on sheet C1. Driveway needs to be in its proposed location, no exsiting driveways across the street. w' 9939 Hikrl Street, Suite 203 San Diego, CA 92131 (858) 695-3344 Fax (858) 695-31 17 A Geotechnics - Incorporated - Principak Anthony F. Belfast Michael P. lmbriglio W. Lee Vanderhunl November 16,2000 Aston Views, LLC 4370 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 655 San Diego, California 92122-1252 Attention: Mr. Mark McLaren Project No. 0599-001-00 Document No. 0- 1200 SUBJECT: UPDATED GRADING PLAN REVIEW Aston Views Plaza, CRC Lot 69 Carlsbad, California References: Geotechnics Incorporated (2000). Updated Geotechnical Recommendations, Aston Views, CRC Lot 69, Carlsbad California, Project No. 0599-001-00, Document No. 0-0468, dated May 1. Partners Planning and Engineering (2000). Grading and Erosion Control Plans for the Aston Views Plaza, Lot 69, Carlsbad Research Center, Carlsbad, California, Plan Sheets C1.0 through C4.0, dated November 13. Gentlemen: This letter confirms that we have reviewed the geotechnical aspects of the referenced grading plans for the proposed Aston Views Plaza at Lot 69 of the Carlsbad Research Center in Carlsbad, California. It is our opinion that the referenced plans adequately incorporate the intent of the referenced geotechnical recommendations. We appreciate this opportunity to be of continued service. Please feel free to contact the ofice with any questions or comments. GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED Matthew A. Fagan, P.E. 57248 Project Engineer Distribution: (4) Addressee, Mr. Mark D. McLaren (FAX: 858-457-4910) (1) PartnersPlanning& Engineering, Mr. Lany Dutton (FAX ONLY: 858-695-3 1 17) 9245 Activity Rd., Ste. 103 * San Diego, California 92126 Phone (858) 536-1000 * Fax (858) 536-8311 NOV-08-2000 WED 11 :29 AN CITY OF CARLSBAD The itw yw havb tubmii for nvierv hu been rppmvsd. The approval Is bssed on plans. infomution andor spsdfiations povided in ybu( aubrniad: thm4on any ctm~~~ ta these kms after Mi6 dae. including fid moMicotionc. must be rcvlewed by #?is offm ta Insure mnlinued conformsnce wim spdiabla codes. RbaW review carsfully an mmmenb attached. as fauura to comply with iurmcbom in this reml can nruk in FAX NO. 760 602 8558 we 888 the atwmd report of d.fifknc*r rnarimdw+tt&,~ mwawa- . loplans or Jpd s for comprianca with applicable We6 and standards. Sub& corfecW pkM &or specifications to this o&e for miw. P. 04 I City of Carlsbad I NOV-08-2000 WED 11 :30 AH CITY OF CARLSBAD /' FAX NO. 760 602 8558 i P, 05 I BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST SITE PLAN 2fQ 0 0 1. Provide a futly dlmensbned site plan drawn to scale. Show: AT North Anow K Rightof-Way Width 8 Adjacent Streets &'Existing 81 Ploposed Structures =Existing Street Improvements DY Properly Lines (& Driveway wldths-545 0- W1;fl k%k kk Existing or propased sewer lateral CYST, kg. Existing or proposed water sewica 2. Show on site plan: Drainage Patterns 1. Building pad sutface drainage must maintain a minimum slope of one percent towards an adjoining street or an approved drainage course. 2. ADD THE FOLLOWING NOTE "Finish grade will provide a minimum positive dralnage of 2% to swale 5' away from building." B: Existing & Proposed Slopes and Topography CC Size, type. location. alignment of existing or proposed sewer and water serVia (s) that wwes the project. Each unit requires a:separatP service, however, seamd dwelling units end apertmsnt complexes am an exception. Sewer and water laterals should not be located within pmposed driveways, per standards. Ar Site address B7 Assassoh Parcel Number CfLegaI Descriptbn For wnnnerciaUindusWl buildings and tenant impnwement p-. include: total building square footage with the square footage for each different use, existing sewer permits showing square footage of different uses (manufacturin9. warehouse, ofRce. efc.) previwsty approved. EXISTING PERMIT NUMBER DESCRIPTION 2 NOV-08-2000 WED 11 : 30 AM CITY OF CARLSBAD 1 I FAX NO. 760 602 8558 P. 06 ..l / BUILDING) PLANCHECK CHECKLIST lW P 3d I / checklist must be submitied in person. Applications by mail or fax are not accepted. Improvement plans must be approved. appropriate securities posted and fees paid prior to issuance of building permit. Improvement Plans signed by: Date: 0 If 6b. Construdion of the public improvements may be deferred pwsuant to Cadsbad Municipal Code Section 18.40. Please submit a recent property title report or current grant deed on the property and processing fee of $m M we may prepare the wassary Neighborhood Improvement Agreement. This agreement must be slgned. notarized and approved by the City prior to issuance of a Building permit. Neighborhood lmprovemsnt Agreement will fndude the following: 0 0 0 Bc. Enclosed please find your Neighborhood Improvement Agreement. please return agmement signed and notarized to the Engineering Department. Neighborhood Improvement Agreement completed by! Date: 0 0 [3 6d.No Public Improvements required. SPECIAL NOTE: Darned or defed iVQ jmorovj s~tisfadi on prthec itv lnsmcto r nrior -. The conditions that invoke the need for a grading permit am found in Section 11.06.030 of the Municipal Code. 7a. Inadequate information available on Site Plan to make a detennination on grading requirements. lndude accurate grading quantities (cut, fil~hnport, export). 7b. Grading Permit required. A separate grading plan prepared by a rsgktered Civil Engineer must be submitted together with the completed appiicatbn form attached. NOTE: The Ora dina Permit must be issued and mggh arad ing amroval obtained oriw to issuance of a Building Permit. ' @ 0 0 0 0 Grading lnspedor sign off by: if a grading permit is not required.) Date: 0 7c. Graded Pad Certification required. (Note: Pad aafmtion may be required even NOV-08-2000 WED 11 : 31 AN CITY OF CARLSBAD 2m 0 0 0 0 P O O n o 0 FAX NO. 760 602 8558 P, 07 BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKUS" 7d .No Grading Permit mquired. 7e. If grading is not required, write 'No Grading' on plot plan. MISCELUN EOUs PERMITS 8. A RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT is required to do work in City Right-of-way and/or private wwk adjacent to the public Right-of-way. Types of work include. but are not limited to: street Improvements. tree trimming. driveway CWrstrUdiOn, tying into public storm drain, sewer and water utilities. Right-of-way permit requited fw: 9. INDUSTRIAL WASTE PERMm If your facility is located in the City of Carlsbad sewer service area, you need to contact the Carlsbad Municipal Water District, located at 5950 El Camino Real, Carlsbad. CA 92008. District personnel can provide forms and assistance, and will check to see if your business enterprise is on the RNA Exempt List. You may telephone (760) 438-2722. extension 7153, for assistam. IndusMal Waste permit accepted by: Date: 10. NPDES MRMm 6w a ;I\ vu Complies with the City's requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The applicant shall provide best management practices to reduce sum pollutants to an acceptable level prior to discharge to sensithe areas. Plans for such impruvements shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading or building permit, whichever OCCUrs first. 0 c1 11. Aequired fess am attached 0 No fees requited 1 Wm 12a. Domestic (potable) Use Ensure that the meter proposed by the owner/developer is not oversized. Oversized meters are inaccurate during low-flow mditions. If it is oversized, for the life of the meter, the City will not accurately bill the owner for the water used. All single family dwelling units recdved "standard" 1' service with 5/8" service. 5 NOV-08-2000 WED 11 : 31 AM CITY OF CARLSBAD FAX NO. 760 602 8558 P. 08 BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST 0 0 12b. Irrigation Use (where mcycled water is not available) All lrrlgatlon motom must be sizsd via irrigation cakulptions (in gpm) prior ta approval. The developer must provide these calculations. Please follow these guidelines: If ownerldeveloper proposes a size other than the "standard", then ownerldevsloper must pmvide potable water dem8nd calculations, which indude total Mum counts and maximum water demand in galbm per minute (gpm). A typical fixture count and water demand worksheet is attached. Once the gprn is provided, check against the 'meter sizing schedule" to verify the anticipated meter sire for ths unit. Maxlmum service and meter size is a 2' service with a 2' meter. If a developer is proposing a meter greater than 2". suggest the installation of multiple 2' senrims as needed to provide the anticipated demand. (manifolds are considered on cass by case basis to limit muitipk trenching into the street). 1. if the project is a newer development (newer than 1998), check the mnt improvement plans and observe if the new imigatkw service is reflected on the lmpnwement sheets. If w, at the water metw station, the demand in gpm may be listed then. Irrigation seMces am listed with a drded "1'. and potable water is typically a cirded W. The'irrigation service should look like: STA 1 +OO Install e2" service and m 1.5: meter (e8tlmrt.d 100 gpm) 2. If the improvement plans do not list the inigatibn meter and the servicehter will be installed via another Instrument such as the building plans of grading plans (Wl 8 right of Way permit of course). then the applicant must provide Irrigation calculations far estimated worst-case irrigation demand (largest zone with the farthest reach). Typically, Lany Black has already nviewed this if landscape plans have been prepared, but the applicant must pmvide the calculations to you for your use. Once you have received a goad example of inlQah cakulations. keep a set for your reference. In general the calculations will indude: HydrauUc grade line Elevation ai point of connection (WC) hsssure at POC in pounds per square inch (PSI) Worse case zone (largest, fa- away from valve Total Sprinkler heads listed (with gpm we per head) w Indude a 10% residual pmssure at point of connection 3. In general, all major sloped areas of a subdivisionlprokct are to be irrigated via separate irrigation meters (unless the project is only SFD wlth M HOA). As long as the pmject is located within the City recycled water NOV-08-2000 WED 11 :32 AM CITY OF CARLSBAD b FAX NO. 760 602 8558 P. 09 BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST 1" P 3- service boundary, the City intends on switching these Irrigation serviceslmeters to a new recycled water line in the future. 12c. lnigatlon Use (where recycled water Is available) r i @ 0 II) 1. RecyM water meter6 are slzed the same as the irrigation meter above. 2. If a pmject fronts a street with mcycJed water, then they should be connecting to this line to irrigate slopes within the development. For subdviqions, this should have been identified, and implemented on the improvement plans. Installing recycled wator mdom is a benefit for the applicant since they are exempt from paying the San Diego County Water Capacity fees. However, if they front a street which the recycled water is there, but is not Iwe (sometimes they are charged with potable water until recycbd water Is availabk), then the applicant must pay the San Diego Water Capac~ty charge. If within three years, the recycled water line is charged with recyded water by CMWD. thsn the applicant can apply for a refund to the San Dlego County Water Authority (SOMA) for a refund. However. let the applicant know that we cannot guarantee the refund, and they must deal with !he SDCWA for this. PLANNING DEPARTMENT BUILDING PLAN CHECK REVIEW CHECKLIST 3 Plan Check No. CB 0033q-5 Address 1 %I Y &s-\oA b. ' Planner Paul Godwin Phone 1760) 602-4625 - 00 3 s D Type of Project & use:Shc\c1t&;IdJ,-, Net Project Density: DU Zoning: C-M General Plan: PT Facilities Management Zone: 5 CFD linlniitl Circle One #-Date of particip:ion: Q 6' Remaining net dev acres: ma3 i(r2 Zhb (For non-residential development: Type of land used created by 00; gz2 this permit: ) ccc Leoend: Item Complete 0 Item Incomplete - Needs your action Environmental Review Required: DATE OF COMPLETION: Compliance with conditions of approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval: YES __ NO x TYPE 0 Discretionary Action Required: YES - NO 2 TYPE APPROVALIRESO. NO. DATE PROJECT NO. OTHER RELATED CASES: Compliance with conditions or approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval: .. Coastal Zone AssessmentlCornpliance Project site located in Coastal Zone? YES - NO- CA Coastal Commission Authority? YES - NO- If California Coastal Commission Authority: Contact them at - 31 11 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 200, San Diego CA 92108-1725; (619) 521-8036 Determine status (Coastal Permit Required or Exempt): Coastal Permit Determination Form already cqmpleted? YES- NO- If NO, complete Coastal Permit D6termiriation Form now.' Coastal Permit Determination tog; #: ., ,,. . . ,. .. .. ,. . , .. Follow-U.p, Actions:. ,. 1) Stamp Building Plans as "Exempt" or "Coastal Permit Required" (at minimum Floor Plans). 2) Complete Coastal Permit Determination Log as needed. H:\ADMIN\COUNTER\BIdgPlnchkRevChklst - lnclusionary Housing Fee required: YES Data Entry Completed? YES (Effective date of Inclusionary Housing Ordinance - May 21, 1993.) - NO - IAIPIDs, Activlty Maintenance. enter CBX. toolbar. Scteens. Housmg Fees, Construct Houslng Y/N. Enter Fee, UPDATEI) Site Plan: 0 0 1. Provide a fully dimensional site plan drawn to scale. Show: North arrow, property lines, easements, existing and proposed structures, streets, existing street improvements. right-of-way width, dimensional setbacks and existing topographical lines. \/ 2. Provide legal description of property and assessor's parcel number. $loo Zoning: 1. Setbacks: Street Side: Rear: I Required 30 Shown %'3Oi Required Shown Required Shown Required IO' Shown (0 ' 0 0 2. Accessory structure setbacks: Front: Required Shown Interior Side: Required Shown Street Side: Required Shown Rear: Required Shown Structure separation: Required Shown 0 0 3. Lot Coverage: Required Shown 0 4. Aeight: Required - 35 Shown d '$f 0 0 5. Parking: Spaces Required 3Y 0 Shown 51 b OK TO ISSUE AND ENTERED APPROVAL INTO H:\ADMIN\COUNTER\BldgPlnchkRevChklst Sm thConsultingArchitects City of Carlsbad Planning Corrections No.1 Page: 01 of 03 Project Name: Project Address: 1814 Aston Ave. Aston Views I Aston Views Corporate Center Carlsbad, Ca. Plan Check Date.: November 3,2000 Re-submittal: November 13,2000 Plan Check No.: 00-3345 Plan Reviewer: Paul Godwin ITEM 1. Correction: ITEM 2. Correction: it220 El Csrnino Real Suite 200 Sa" Diego. U 92130 858,7934777 a5a79~~87 Fax Additional Comments No parking overhang allowed in setbacks. Parking overhang was removed from encroaching over the 30'-0" building setbacks. Refer to sheet AS-1.2 referring the revision. Civil drawings also have been revised. Show indoor/outdoor employee eating area totals. 300 sq. ft. required per every 5000 sq.ft. of building, 60% to be outdoor. The total area of the building project is 85,012 sq.ft. Total required employee eating area is 5,000 sq.ft. I85,OOO sq.ft. = 17. 17 x 300 = 5,100 sq.ft. There are two exterior lunch patios that can be utilized. The area for the lunch patio located on the southwest corner nearest to the building is 1,225 sq.ft. The area for the lunch patio located on the southwest corner across the parking is 1,000 sq.ft. Therefor the total is 2,225 sq.ft. The adjacent city park and recreation area will support the rest of the required lunch area. This park area is located approxamently 500 feet from the southeast corner of the subject property to the entrance of the park. Please see exhibit drawing sheet AS-1.1 which demonstrates the distance to the park area in the vicinity of the site. , Smit hConsu ItingArch itects City of Carlsbad Planning Corrections No.1 Existing Park and Recreation area 500 feet from subject property Page: 02 of 03 v Patio Area ‘A’ 1,225 sq.ft. 7 \ Patio 1,000 Area ‘B’ \ \ sq7 \ \ ITEM 3. Correction: SITE PLAN Show roof mounted equipment screening plan. There will be no large mechanical equipment located on the roof of this roof. All roof top mechanical equipment will be screed by the roof parapet. Only small exhaust and supply fans will be located on the roof. This project consist of a HVAC central plant thus eliminating the need for large HVAC equipment screening. END * SmithConsuitingArchitects City of Carlsbad Planning Corrections No.1 Page: 03 of 03 Any questions or comment please feel free to contact us. Jon Ohlson I Grant Evans Smith Consulting Archlects Pn: asa 793.4777 0 0 City of Carlsbad May 31, 2000 Smith Consulting Architects Attention: -Jon Ohlson Suite 200 12220 El Camino Real San Diego, CA 921 30 SUBJECT: PRE 00-28 - ASTON VIEWS OFFICE BUILDING APN: 212-120-07 A preliminary review of your project was conducted on May 18, 2000. Listed below are the issues raised by staff. Please note that the purpose of a preliminary review is to provide you with direction and comments on the overall concept of your project. The preliminarv review does not represent an in-depth analysis of Your proiect. Additional issues of concern may be raised after Your application is submitted and processed for a more specific and detailed review. Planning 1 . Pedestrian Circulation/Orientation The proposed building and parking area orientation, coupled with the proposed landscaping and hardscape at front entrance to the building, creates a very good entrylurban design statement for the project. To further enhance the project, however, better pedestrian orientation needs to be provided in the final project design. Better pedestrian orientation would be provided by creating paved walkways to building entrances which are separate or distinct from vehicular circulation areas. The focus of pedestrian orientation should be in areas on the site adjacent to high volume building entrances and high turn-over parking areas. For example, in the northeast portion of the site walkways should be provided adjacent to landscaped areas along the NE building elevation and through the landscaped and parking areas in front of, and beyond, the building's main public entrance. A potential scheme of pedestrian circulation, along with other planning staff comments, has been indicated on one of the two red-lined site plans included with this correspondence. To better direct pedestrian circulation and for general pedestrian safety, walkways through the parking area should be created with paving materials which clearly distinguish them as a pedestrian walkway. Enhanced paving materials, similar to those proposed immediately in front of the building, would be acceptable. Similar paving materials should also be provided at the project's driveway at the street to create an enhanced entry to the site. An additional pedestrian link to the proposed 1635 Faraday Avenue - Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 - (760) 602-4600 - FAX (760) 602-8559 @ PRE 00-28 - ASTON May 3 1,2000 Pace 2 employee eating area along the west side of the site should be provided. Also, please show required ADA access to/from the street. 2. Architecture No architectural elevations were provided with the Preliminary Review submittal. To assist in developing the final architectural design, please find the following comments. A sufficient degree of architectural articulation/enhancement appears to be contemplated for the building's main entrance. Additionally, staff appreciates the effort to add visual interest along the building's street side elevation by providing a 15- foot off-set in the building wall. In final architectural design, however, consideration should be given to providing a degree of architectural enhancement, similar to that proposed at the building entrance, on the street side elevation. Consideration should also be given to adding some type of articulation or enhancements, such as building wall offsets, along the long unbroken building walls on either side of the main entrance. Also, please provide architectural elevations for the "cooling tower" and trash enclosure indicated on the site plan. Architecture of the cooling tower and trash enclosure will need to be architecturally compatible with the proposed building. 3. Landscaping The project needs to comply with the City's Landscape Manual. In this regard, several issues exist. The Manual requires 1 tree per every four parking spaces to be located within the interior of the parking area (i.e. excluding perimeter site setback areas). Interior parking lot landscaping needs to be evenly distributed throughout the parking area to assist in parking area shading. In order to achieve the required number and distribution of trees, the guidelines call for the placement of landscape planters in between double rows of parking. Please provide such rows in the final design for the parking area. For perimeter landscaping, the Manual requires 8-feet from the property line (clear of overhangs). The proposed interior and rear landscaped areas comply with this standard. Per the Carlsbad Research Center specific plan, a 30-foot setback is required along the street side of the project, clear of parking overhangs. The project shows 30-feet with an overhang, which will need to be corrected in the final design. For landscape planters interior to the parking area, the dimensional standards identified in Appendix E-1 of the Manual need to be met. A copy of that has been included with this correspondence. For clarification, the minimum dimensions listed in the table indicate the minimum width of the landscaped portion of a given landscape planter (i.e. not the exterior dimension of the planter as measured from exterior curb face to exterior curb face). Also be advised that overhang into landscape areas is not permitted for compact parking stalls. 4. Employee Eating Areas The City's Zoning Ordinance requires the provision of employee eating areas for projects. The required area is calculated at the rate of 300 square feet for every 5,000 square feet of building area. Of the total area required, 60% needs to be designed as PRE 00-28 - ASTON vdy May 3 1,2000 Page 3 outdoor space. with 3,100 square feet of that being outdoor area. space. Outdoor space totaling 2,300 square feet is proposed, but no detail is shown. More detailed info. needs to be provided on the outdoor areas to ensure that the project complies with City standards. Show seating, tables, paving materials, shading structures, and any other outdoor eating area components. A flat pad does not constitute an outdoor eating area. In a related matter, the outdoor eating area requirement can be modified to a certain degree if it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that the project is in close and convenient proximity to a park. If you plan to utilize this provision, please provide an exhibit which demonstrates the distance to park area in vicinity of the site. 5. Open Space Easement The westerly, natural open space portion of the site is identified as a sensitive natural habitat area in the City's Draft Habitat Management Plan. An open space easement for habitat preservation purposes over that westerly portion of the site will need to be established, if it has not been done already. Based on the requirement, a total of 5,172 square feet is required, No info. is provided on indoor 6. Other comments e ' Show, and distinguish between, all existing and proposed trees. Show all buildings and structures within 100 feet of the site. Show all rooftop and ground mounted equipment and methods of screening. All equipment needs to screened with materials architecturally compatible with the building or landscaping, as applicable. Enqineerina Y 2. d The driveway approach does not align in accordance to the approved substantial conformance exhibit for Carlsbad Research Center. Please revise accordingly. The storm water exiting the site needs to be filtered for surface pollutants as required per the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Permit held by the City. The preferable method would be to use vegetated swales to filter the water. The vegetation would need to be of a type that tolerates and accepts oils and other particulates commonly found in storm water originating from parking lots. Irrigation lines would need to be installed to ensure plant growth and stability during the summer months. Provide grading quantities. Per Section 15.16.060(8) of the CMC, if the grading: 1) does not adversely affect drainage patterns; 2) complies with all environmental protection procedures of Chapter 19.04 and; (3) conforms to the existing pad, then a grading permit will not be required. Carlsbad Fire Department 003345 1635 Faraday Ave. Fire Prevention Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760) 6024660 Plan Review Requirements Category: Building Plan Date of Report: 1/06/2000 Reviewed by: Name: SMITH CONSULT ARCH Address: 12220 EL CAMINO REAL STE 2GU City, State: SAN DlEGO CA 92130 Plan Checker: Job#: 003345 Job Name: Aston Views Plaza Bldg #: CB003345 Job Address: 1814 Aston Avenue Ste. or Bldg. No. Approved The item you have submitted for review has been approved. The approval is based on plans, information and I or specifications provided in your submittal; therefore any changes to these items after this date, including field modifications, must be reviewed by this office to insure continued conformance with applicable codes and standards. Please review carefully all comments attached as failure to comply with instructions in this report can result in suspension of permit to construct or install improvements. [XI 0 Approved Subject to The item you have submitted for review has been approved subject to the attached conditions. The approval is based on plans, information and/or specifications provided in your submittal. Please review carefully all comments attached, as failure to comply with instructions in this report can result in suspension of permit to construct or install improvements. Please resubmit to this office the necessary plans and I or specifications required to indicate compliance with applicable codes and standards. 0 Incomplete The item you have submitted for review is incomplete. At this time, this oftice cannot adequately conduct a review to determine compliance with the applicable codes and I or standards. Please review carefully all comments attached. Please resubmit the necessary plans and I or specifications to this oftice for review and approval. Review 1st 2nd 3rd Other Agency ID FD Job # 003345 FD File # Carkbad Fire DeDartment 003345 Fire Prevention 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760) 602-4660 Plan Review Requirements Category: Building Plan Date of Report: 09/25/2000 Reviewed by: 0 6. Name: SMITH CONSULT ARCH Address: 12220 EL CAMINO REAL STE 200 City, State: SAN DIEGO CA 92130 Plan Checker: Job#: 003345 Job Name: Aston Views Plaza Blda #: CB003345 Job Address: 1814 Aston Avenue Ste. or Bldg. No. Approved The item you have submitted for review has been approved. The approval is based on plans, information and I or specifications provided in your submittal; therefore any changes to these items after this date, including field modifications, must be reviewed by this office to insure continued conformance with applicable codes and standards. Please review carefully all comments attached as failure to comply with instructions in this report can result in suspension of permit to construct or install improvements. 0 0 Approved Subject to The item you have submitted for review has been approved subject to the attached conditions. The approval is based on plans, information andlor specifications provided in your submittal. Please review carefully all comments attached, as failure to comply with instructions in this report can result in suspension of permit to construct or install improvements. Please resubmit to this office the necessaty plans and I or specifications required to indicate compliance with applicable codes and standards. Incomplete The item you have submitted for review is incomplete. At this time, this office cannot adequately conduct a review to determine compliance with the applicable codes and I or standards. Please review carefully all comments attached. Please resubmit the necessary plans and I or specifications to this office for review and approval. I Review 1st 2nd 3rd Other Agency ID 1 I FD Job# 00335 FD File # I - Requirements Category: Building Plan Requirement: Pending 05.32 Additional Requirements or Comments 1. Elevators must comply with the stretcher requirements of CEC 3003.5a and 3003.6a. The elevator entrance shall have a clear opening not less than 42" wide and 78 high. 2. The minimum design density of the fire sprinkler system shall be .45/3000 for spec building unlet the building is to be used exclusively for office occupancy. I Re@wJmf: Pending 05.34 Smoke Fire Damper requirements Provide information on the plans as to how the smoke fire dampers are to be activated. If they are 1 be activated by single station smoke detectors provide the locations of the detectors on the electric: plans. Also provide the state fire marshals listing sheet and the manufacturers cut sheets on the detector. 1. Smoke damper operation shall be in accordance with CBC Section 713.10 Smoke detectors for damper opealion must be-kpecificarv listed 5 the State Fiie Marshal as a releasing device IPWqtlelectbr-bto be stand alone, the listlng sheet must list this use. Otherwise, the detector mustbe installed in canjunction witb a listed firealarm control panel. Plansand-----.- specifications for the fire alarm system must be submitted and approved prior to Installation. I ! ! I I .I. I . STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS Aston Views Plaza Plan Check Corrections 2K-270 Sheets PC-1 thru PC-6 PRIME STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS 11858 Bernard0 Plaza Court, Suite 105C San Diego, California 92128 Tel (858) 487-031 1 PLAN CHECK CORRECTIONS ASTON VIEWS PLAZA PLAN FILE NO - CARLSBAD 00-3345 ITEM #7 Anchorage forces were calculated when determining the seismic coefficients for the design of the panels. See attached original calculation sheet P-1. The anchorage force at is 8.36Wp (where Wp =weight ofpanel) at the roof and 7.81Wp at the floor. a) Connections were designed to resist 679.3 plf at the roof and 781 plf at the floor which are much greater than the 200 plf minimum force. b) Wood diaphragms were not used in this building. Yet, we still designed the diaphragm using a limiting aspect ratio of 2 %: 1. For example, at the roof, the subdiaphragm size was 8.4 feet by 53.42 feet with an aspect ration of 0.157:l. This is still far less than the limit of 2 %: 1 c) The value for ap used was 1.5. See original calculation sheet P-1 attached. d) Connections were designed to resist 679.3 plf at the roof and 781 plf at the floor which are much greater than the 420 plf minimum force. ITEM #8 As noted in our panel notes on Sheet S-1 1, architectural panels are not shown and refer to the architectural-drawings for location and size. The maximum depth of reveal is %” and has been incorporated in our panel design. See attached original calculations sheet P-3 and P-4. ITEM #9 Panel type 3 should have ‘e2’ and ‘g’ rebar. The rebar size and spacing was located in the wrong column. The reason why there is a ‘e2’ and ‘f rebar is that the location of the centerline of rebar from the interior face is different at panel types with rebar ‘e2’. See updated sheet S-I. -3 . m r :---Roof N r :--2nd Flr r r :--1st Flr WERAL FORCEONELEMENTS OF STRUCTUREEL (SEC. 1632 OF 1997 U.B.C.) I'C Fp= ap Ca IP (1+3'hxlhr)Wp RP hl= 14.00 ft Seismic source type = 2 h2= 15.00 ft (A=l, B=2, C=3) h3= 2.00 ft Closest distance = 9 km ap= 1.00 Ip= 1.00 Roof elev.= 29.00 ft Rp= 3.00 Total wall ht = 31.00 ft Soil Profile Type = Near Source Factor Na= Ca = Fp = Fp = Fp = Fp = Fp = 4 1 .o 0.44 0.147 0.617 0.587 0.359 0.308 (SA=l, SB=2,SC=3,SD=4,SE=5) (When soil properties not known, use Type SD per section 1629.3. Exception) (it Na >1.1. check w/section 1629.4.2 for special condition) '(1+3'hx/hr)Wp 0.7'Ca'lp= 0.308 4*Ca'lp= 1.76 * Wp at top of wall * Wp at hx= hr * Wp at 2nd floor * Wp for hx=O to hx= 10.61667 ft above 1st. Floor Where Wp=weight of wall psf Total Seismic Load= 8.32 Wp above 2nd floor Roof Reaction = 5.17 * Wp 2nd Floor Reaction = Maximum Moment = 12.74 * Wp-ft 3.16 * Wp from above 2nd floor Maximum Moment occurs = 7.65 ft above 2nd floor oad= Q.453 weq= VMax. .. h2."2 =836112&2 ap= 1.5 I for flexible diaphragm I v Total Seismic Load= 4.44 * Wp below 2nd floor 2nd Floor Reaction = 2.27 1st Floor Reaction = 2.16 * Wp Maximum Moment = 7.71 * Wp-fi Maximum Moment occurs = 7.12 fi from base * Wp from below 2nd floor weq= 8'Max. PWW hI"2 =mw ap= 1.5 I I 1 .. ................. ..................... ..... ROOF SUB- DIAPHRAGM ANALYSIS, NORTH /SOUTH DIRKTION. 3 "' .- P % % % 8.4- 6797 25 p\f 8.4' %<a' = 3.14 .... ...................... .......... ir = 5,7 I K 8.4' x 53.42' = 5.71 1.24 k - 'j J ..... . ~~ .. ....... '3 PRECAST CONCRETE WALL DESIGN SEAOC "Green Book" TO iterate P-Delta effects to convergence PCS Considering P-Delta Effects using 1997 UBC Load factors. DESCRIPTION: PIP PANEL EAST DESIGN DATA: PIER A - 2ND TO ROOF 17 ft 94fid Clear Wall Ht = Total wall Ht = Phi= 0.65 Htrrhk Ratio= Seismic Factor= 0.453 in Eccentric Dead Load = Beta1 = 0.85 Eccentric Live Load = Load Eccentricity = Reveal to Bot= ft Shall LL be used with laterial load combination? Y=I,N=O--> Additional lrnDosed Loads; Wall Thk.= 6.5 in Axial Unform DL= 3072 plf Point Lateral Load = Rebar Size # = 4 Axial Uniform LL= 0 plf X-dist. to Bottom = Rebar Spacing= 12 in o.c.Unform Lateral Load = 110.4 plf Seismic=l. Wnd=2--> Depth to steel= 3.625 in X-dist. to Bottom = 9n Rebar @ Reveal= 12 in O.C. X-dist. to top = 17 n d @ Reveal= 2.875 in Seismic=l, Wnd=2--> 1 Steel @ ea. face= 1 (1 for single layer, 2 for double layers) 6.25 in 0 08 oft 1 DESIGN SUMMARY: Seismic Seismic @ Reveal Wind Wind @ Reveal Mn x Phi = 49,527 38,500 in# 47,430 36,708 in# Mu = 28,616 31,952 in# 9.131 9,021 in# OVERSTRESS= 0.0 0.0 % 0.0 0.0 % Max. delection= 0.07 0.16 in 0.03 0.03 in Hts/deR.= 2,506 1,111 6,084 5,536 Provide Add'l # 4 @ 0 O.C. at Reveal LATERAL LOADINGS fU=l.32D + 0.55L + 1.lE)) for seismic load combination. U=0.75(1.4D+1.7L+1.7W) for Wind Load Combination. Wall wt. = 81.3 psf Wind Loadx 1.275= 23.7 Seismic Service= 26.3 psf Factored Seismic = 40.5 u 'b PRECAST CONCRETE WALL DESIGN Considering P-Delta Effects using 1997 UBC Load factors. SEAOC "Green Book" TO iterate P-Delta effects to convergence DESCRIPTION: TYP PANEL EAST PIER A - 2ND TO ROOF VERTICAL Loading P axial = 374 P wall = 3,679 PIA= 52.00 Pu-Axial= 494 Pu-Wall= 4,657 Pu-Total= 5,350 ANA1 YSIS: As(eff)=[Pu:tot + (As'Fy)]/Fy = ' a'=(As'Fy+Pu)/(0.8Sfc*l2) = Phi =0.9 - 2'Pu/(fc'Ag)= Mn=As(eVv(d-a/Z)= 'c'='a'/Beta = Mu= Phi'Mn= E=57000'(fc)"0.5= n=29000/Ec= Fr=5'(f c)"0.5= Gross section modulus= Mcr (cracked Moment Cap.)= I gross = I cracked = VERTICAL @Reveal Loading @Reveal 374 3,722 59.40 494 4.913 5,407 - At Reveal 0.289 0.290 0.567 0.569 0.667 0.669 0.85 0.85 57,976 45,093 49,527 38,500 3.1E+06 3.lE+06 9.29 9.29 273.9 273.9 64.5 66.1 23,141 18,109 274.6 247.2 24.7 22.2 374 374 plf 3795 3722 plf 53.50 59.40 psi O.O4'Pc= 120.00 psi 393 393 plf 3985 3908 plf 4378 4301 plf 0.273 0.535 0.630 0.86 54.986 47,430 3.1E+06 9.29 273.9 84.5 23,141 274.6 23.7 At Reveal 0.272 0.533 0.627 0.86 42,523 36,708 3.1E+06 9.29 273.9 66.1 18,109 247.2 21.4 inA2/ft in in in# in# psi psi in"3 in# in"4 in"4 3 Smit hConsu It TRANSMITTAL ~ To Lance Rieman Company Lusardi Construction 1570 Linda Vista Drive San Marws CA 92069-3880 ATTACHED: No Copies Oate Description ngArch itects Date: 2/27/01 Project No 00174.s Project Aston Views Lol-69 CRC 1 2/26/01 Response to RFI * 9 -- TRANSMITWD VIA: ACTION [E3 FAX (Sheet 1 of 3) Fax No 760 918 9AO8 0 Fer your approval 0 Mail 0 For pur review and wmment 0 Messenger 0 Asrequested 0 Overnighl Delivery ISI For your use 1 files 0 Other Revcewed as noted 0 No exceptions taken 0 Revise I Resubmit REMARKS: DISTRIBUTION: SCA File With End. WIO End. 0 0 Ryan Meagher 760.744.9064 B 0 rn 0 0 0 BY: Jon Ohlson A P.02 P.02 9 -. RFI NO. LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION CO. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION PROJECT: - ASTON VIEWS PLAZA P SUBJECT: QUESTIONS DRAWlNGiSPEClFlCATlON: SECTlONlDETAlL NUMBER: RFI NO.: 2 POTENTIAL IMPACT: ( ) Schedule ( ) Labor ( ] Material ( 1 Nolmpd ( )mer Respnse requested by: ASAP (Dilte] 9 A8 1 DETAILS 2.7. AND 15 SHOWS 244 MITRED EDGES INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR OF CONC WALLS. CAN INTERIOR OF THESE WALLS HAVE 1R" RAD EDGE INSTEAD? -@A-c a ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ 10. 5-2 WkAT IS THE FOOTING SIZE AT PANEL S-lA? 11.7/SD4 CAN WE POUR THE CONC. SLAB FIRST, MONOLITHIC WITH THE FOOTING, AND THEN 12. ON Al.l AND A1.2 THE CUT OF 81A5.2 IS GIVEN AT A&4 AND KB14 LINES, SHOULDN'T THAT THE 6 C.I.P. OVER THAT? BE ZA5.27 Originilmr me RICW RESPONSE: RECEIVED BY CONTRACTOR: <i""4..,. - TRANSMITTAL -- Dare I211 8!00 I I! -L:mpan'I Lusardi Construction Projec: No. 00174,s Mart Anaerson, Sandra A, Griggs .- __ 1570 imda \/isla Drive Projec:: Asrori Views Sal1 Mxcos CA 92069-3880 Lst-69 CRC - - .- . -- - ATTACHED: %-, :><,pies Jare L'ercripliori 1211 8/CC 3Fi $2 ~ ~ - - - . IJ TRANSMITTED VIA: ACTION !I GM (Sheet 1 or 7) - Fax No. 750.744 9064 5 for your approval '7 Mail G For your review and cornrnenr 'A Messenger AS reques:ed 0 Overnight Delivery @ For your use / files ,- Other 0 Reviewed as noted Revise i Resubmit No exceptions taken REMARKS: PIE~s~ foward Io Lance .. . - ... . DISTRIBUTION: "ith Encl WIO Encl SCA File rn I - n - ___ - BY Jon 8. Ohlson .- 4 r; \\I EQ. Aston View8 Plwa L RFI #2 Resnnnses 1, See attached clarification lix pmel E-9 and ncw detail 7/SD1 I. Panel rctum and detail are shown. 2. Panel can be split into 3 panels. Verify with arch for exact localion ofpilncljoints. Also, provide 145 chord bar near top of pilnel with chord bar splice per dctail USD3 3. Response per arch. 4. Ycs, cold joint is allowed. 5. Slab shall be solid to the cdge ofthe blockout similar 10 detail 14/SD1. Extcnd sand and visquecn to the coliunn blockout. 6. See clarification of detail 8/SD3 attached. 7. Yes. 8. Response per arch. 9. Kesponsc per arch. IO. The footing width is 2'-6". See detail 91SDI for depth and reinl'orcement. 1 1. Yes, provided that there is a 2x4 continuous shcar key a! the bottom of the wall at the top of the slab. 12. Response per arch. i i ThORV BAqS, NUKEER 4 51ZE PER PANE- E)IE# SPACE BARS i" SLR M!k. // / PLAN / -- P/ I u V WHERE TWO LAYEX5 SF VERI. REiN?. 3CCUR 1 "ER PhEL ELEVATION. COT 3UT FORTlCh CJF INTE.R;OR LAYER AYE PROVIDE CLAS4 E LA? SPLICE TYP. ,' ELEVATION -- __ ~ ,---------- - ---- '+la 4 "r-4 I lr: J L w6z:eo oo-oz-aaa e0-d I LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION CO. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION PROJECT: - ASTON VIEWS PLAZA SUBJECT STR FIXES DRAWING/SPECIFICATION SECTION/OElAIL NUMBER RFI NO.: 4 POTENTIAL IMPACT ( ) Schedule ( ) Labor ( ) Matenal ( ) Nolmpad ( ) Gther Response requested by ASAP (Date) TO PRIME STR. ENGINEERS ATTN CHUNG SONG FROM LANCE RIEMAN BLDG 8 ROOM #: SCHEDULE ACTIVITY #: ~ -. 2 WE HAVE A HOLD DOWN THAT DOESNT LINE UP IN PANELE-8,CAN.- - . . . . - .. . . . .. .. ._ - - . .. . . YOUPLEASE PRO~~% ~ 4 FIK~L~SESEE AFAC~D-DRAWING. .- - 3 WHAT IS THE MAX. DISTANCE AN ANCHOR BOLT CAN BE FROM THE END OF A LEDGER? IF WE HAVE A SITUATION WHERE THE BOLT IS FARTHER THAN THIS MAX. DISTANCE CAN WE HAVE AN EPOXY DETAIL? iRE ARE 2 COLUMNS AT THE ELEVATOR WALLS THAT WERE IE WRONG LOCATION. CAN WE HAVE A NEW DETAIL TO EPOXY SOME ALL THREAD INTO THE WALL? Onginator RESPONSE: Firm or Corporation Authorized SiiMture Date RECEIVED BY CONTRACTOR: Signature Date CCNC. COVER 3X5X%X2,-3'-- AT C CF PIER L1II 4-4s.. UlLTI KB-ll E' 6C. AT EA..SG CF L CCX=C~lNG TO ICBC FR-4621 iLY lX4X%XI'-3' L.(/ 4-5/.'a UlLTI rCB-11 * 6' O.C. AT EA2G CF L CGN~CR1IW TO - IC60 SR-462- t'AlNTAlU I' CLR 73 FAN% ?EXW EX'STG GRAPE BEAK PES PLAN 1 ZUE3ULE 6 G GRADE SM 4 blkT' THK PANEL ' ABOVE ' I 1 I i P.C. PANE- PES PLAN 4 ELEV. *4 DAL5 X 2'-6" Q 7" C C. AKU3RED TO PANEL Mi 'SET' EPOXY CWCF?'NS TO '-0 ' ER-Xl9 EX15T'G CCNC. 414. SPECAIL INSP. EQ'D t? ..~ .. i.r;$:i,7::! * ..... .......... ..... ---i PROVIDE j' MI\.- , CONC. WVER L5X5X%X4'-3'- AT 6 OF PIER W/ l-W+ 4lLTi KB-ll 4 8 O.C. AT EA.LEG CF L CONFOrnl% 'a ICBO -9-4621 - LLY ?x4x3,bx3--,' W/ 6-Sb"b MILT1 -.:I e 8' O.C. AT ELLEG M L CCNFGB?ING TC ICBO FR-4627 ;?A.lrlTL\>N il CLR 10 JAkE- ~~ EXIST G GWZE 9ZAT PER ! FLAP4 I XUECULE QGGRADEB~ , I I 1 6):. T6 PANEL ABOVE d- * H Li OL -. PRlME STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS 11858 Bemardo Plaza Court, Suite lox: San dig^, Callfomia 92128 Tel(858) 487431 1 Fax (858) 487-0206 Oats: February 9,2001 Time: 1230 P.M. Attention: Jon Ohlson Company: SCA From: Debbie Kang SubjjcC Aston Vmws Total number of pages (including thb cover sheet): 6 Measage: Response to RFI #4 from Lusardi i C.C. Lance @ Lusardi If them are any questiom regarding the reception of the number of pages liited above, please call at (858) 4874311 L-- NOYE: FOR ;:EM5 'iCS NOTED SEE @ PROV!DE 3' WM. CQ\lt. COVER I i AOLDDCWN FER FAXEL ELEV PROV DE 3' WM CQ\C COVER I AOLDDCWN FER FAXEL ELEV w FIELD VERIFY I EXACT LccArm il GRADF @ PANEL E-8 == 1. GRADE BEAK R3NF NOT Rl -4 SUOWN FOR CLARITY 2 FOR IFPIS NO- VOTED. SEE I @a sx - tPD-Zl-UJ 10:>4A Fob-20-01 02:56P 1Usardi const co' LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION CO. R€W€ST FOR JUFOWAnoN PROJECT: .__ ASTW v#w9 PtlllA 7609 189408 P.03 P.02 ro WTH MPSSULTINQ ARCH ATTN JON %SON FROM __ &E RKIMN --- owl- Mar-09-01 ll:37A lusardi const ea* 7609189406 P.02 , .. , LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION CO. REQUEST FOR INf ORHA TloN PROJECT: - ASTON VIEWS PLnzA 11 . .. . .. . . - RFI NO : TO AnN CHUNG SQNG PRIM STRUCTURAL €NO. ..-. - I ...-.- I DAP 031optQ1 REOUEST 1 PUEL siA ON me RIGHT WE WE ONLY WAVE 2 oowas OUT OF mE PANEL INTO M POW mtlp AND MERE ARE suPmsm TO BE 4 IS TH~S OK? i 2.MRE SHCUW 8E 6 2 BAR OObVELS OUT OF THE FOOTING AT PhNEL €4 Pv WE MIDDLE LEO. Bur THERE ARE ONLY 2. IS THIS OK OR 00 WE NEEO A FIX? J ON tne em SCM OF KS THERE SHOULD PE s WELS IN THE sua TO LUTW PW DOWELS. WE ONLV 2. IS 7WS Cn7 site nECElVED 0V CONTRACTOR __c_ -&& Aimd vrm COR MISING SLAB OWLS AT PANEL N-5 C5E -4 CNLS MAT3 SPCCIN 3'-0 FSUR STRIP TT'P. 4 -. -~ -. POR MISSING PANEL DIlrLS AT PANEL+ ,~ .4 DWLS PER PANE- ELEV. OWL INTO PANEL Wi SET' CDUE5lVE CG\FOWl\iG TO ICBO ER-5213 SPECIAL INSF. flIN L'C €?BED. ___. ,- -. I A; PANEL CKL5 IAL 1N5P. REQ'C CCNC. SLAB CK GRADE PER PLAN P. P.C. PANEL PER .-... .-._'' PLAN 6 ELEV. FOR MISING PTG OULS - AT PANEL E-4 .-- USE '4 CWL5 MATCU SPACING W/ PANEL CWLS TYP. DNL Ih-0 GG dITU 4ET' ADUESIVE COhFOWlNG TO ICBO ER-5213 SPECIAL iN5P. REQ'D I 1. ,+,.A I KOE; FOR iFW5 NOT NOTEC, I 69 2 -.A- I c FTG. GR. SM i - --- 4ND PANEL --- I A7 3'-b" POUR 5TRIF cm FIX =OR "llS5iNG PANEL, s~A5, d FCOTiNO DNLS .. sx EO'd W9O:OI KO-ZI-JEW A Geotechnics - Incorporated - Principals: Anthony F. Belfast Michael P. Imbriglio W. Lee Vanderhurst June 8.2001 Aston Views, LLC 4370 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 655 San Diego, California 92122-1252 Project No. 0599-001-01 Document No. 1-0578 Attention: Mr. Mark D. McLaren SUBJECT: AS-GRADED GEOTECHNICAL REPORT Aston Views Plaza, CRC Lot 69 Carlsbad, California Gentlemen: This report summarizes the results ofthe testing and observation servicesperformed by Geotechnics Incorporated during earthwork construction for the Aston Views Plaza located at Lot 69 of the Carlsbad Research Center in Carlsbad, California. The general contractor for this project was Lusardi Construction. Grading was conducted primarily by TNT Grading. Underground improvements were constructed by Pacific Coast Plumbing, Bade Construction, Garrett Electric and Irriscape. Lime stabilization was performed by Lee Stabilization. The asphalt concrete pavements were placed by Nicholas Grant Construction. Our geotechnical services were performed between December 18,2000 and May 23,2001. 1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES This report and the associated geotechnical services were performed in accordance with the provisionsof our Proposal No. 0-292, dated November 28,2000. Field personnel were provided in order to test and observe earthwork, fill placement, utility trench backfill, lime stabilization operations, and the construction of pavements. These observations and tests assisted us in developing professional opinions regarding whether or not earthwork was conducted in accordance 9245 Activity Rd., Ste. 103 * San Diego, California 92126 Phone (858) 536-1000 - Fax (858) 536-8311 Aston Views, LLC June 8,ZOOl Project No. 0599-001-01 Document No. 1-0578 Page 2 with the geotechnical aspects of the project specifications and geotechnical recommendations. Our services did not include supervision or direction of the actual work ofthe contractor, his employees, or agents. Our services did include the following. Observation and testing of the remedial earthwork conducted for the building pad area, as well as general earthwork to attain design grades. Observation of the grading operations in order to determine whether fill, utility trench backfill, sidewalk and pavement subgrade, and asphalt concrete was compacted in accordance with the geotechnical recommendations. Observation and testing of lime stabilizationoperations to determine if they were conducted in accordancewith our geotechnical recommendations. Testing included laboratory lime mix designs and R-value tests, and field measurements of pH, gradation, and treatment depth. Performing field and laboratory tests on fill, trench backfill, lime stabilized subgrade, and asphalt concrete to support geotechnical recommendations and conclusions. Preparation of daily field reports summarizing the day's activity with regard to earthwork, and documenting hours spent in the field by our technicians. Preparation of this report which summarizes our observations of site preparation, field and laboratory test results, fill placement, and the compaction operations. 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION The subject site consists of Lot 69 of the Carlsbad Research Center. The site is located west of Aston Avenue in the City of Carlsbad, California. The northeastern edge of the site is bordered by a developed commercial lot which is approximately at the same grade as the site. The northwest, west, and southwest portions of the site consist of a terraced, 2: 1 (horizontal:vertical) fill slope, which descends approximately 70 feet to the natural terrain below. The southeast portion of the site is bordered by an undeveloped lot at approximately the same grade. The site was originally graded in the late 1980's as reported in the referenced report (SDGC, 1988). Prior to rough grading, the site contained a westerly trending canyon which was reportedly stripped of alluvium and colluvium prior to fill placement. The layout of the site is shown on the As-Graded Geotechnical Map, Plate 1. Geotechnics Incorporated Aston Views. LLC June 8.2001 Project No. 0599-001-01 Document No. 1-0578 3.0 EARTHWORK OPERATIONS General earthwork operations consisted of cut and fill grading in order to create a level building pad area and attain design grades throughout the site. Remedial earthwork was also conducted in order to moisture treat the upper four feet of soil beneath the structure. Improvement operations included the backfill of utility trenches, the preparation and compaction of lime stabilized curb and gutter, sidewalk, and pavementsubgrade,and the placement and compactionof asphalt concrete pavements. Specific aspects regarding the earthwork construction are presented in greater detail below. 3.1 Fill Soils The various materials used as fill are described in Figure B-1 of the appendix. The maximum densities and optimum moisture contents of the soils were determined in the laboratory in general accordance with ASTM D1557-91 (Modified Proctor). The on-site fill soils generally consisted of sandy clays (CL and CH). 3.2 Fill Placement Grading of the site was performed using typical mass grading techniques with heavy earth- moving equipment. Prior to placing new fill in improvement areas, the site was cleared of vegetation and debris. Surficial soils were excavated to expose firm soils, and then replaced as compacted fill. Fill soils were generally brought to slightly above optimum moisture content prior to compaction. The equipment used for compaction included various scrapers, loaders, dozers, blades, sheepsfoot wheel compactors, rollers, and water trucks and hoses. In-place moisture and density tests were made in general accordance with ASTM D 2922-91 and D 3017-88 (Nuclear Gauge Methods). The results of these tests are given in the figures of Appendix C. The actual test locations are shown on the As-Graded Geotechnical Map, Plate 1. The locations and elevations indicated for the tests are based on field survey stakes and estimates from the grading plan topography, and should only be considered rough estimates. The estimated locations and elevations should not be utilized for the purpose of preparing cross sections showing test locations, or in any case, for the purpose of after-the- fact evaluating of the sequence of fill placement. Geotechnics Incorporated Asfon Views. LLC Project No. 0599-001-01 lune 8.2001 Document No. 1-0578 Pase 4 3.3 Buildinn Pad Area Remedial earthwork within the building pad area consisted of the excavation, moisture conditioning, and compaction of the moderately to highly expansive soils within four feet of finish pad grade, as recommended in Section 7.3.4b ofthe referenced report (Geotechnics, 1998). The moisture treatment included the area within five feet of the building pad perimeter. The excavation bottom was also scarified approximately 12 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted. Moisture conditioning consisted of adding sufficient water to the expansive soil to bring the moisture content of the compacted fill up to at least 5 percentage points above optimum moisture determined in general accordance with ASTM test method D 1557. In order to further reduce swell pressures, the moisture conditioned soil was compacted to at least 87 percent relative compaction (rather than the customary 90 percent minimum relative compaction). The intent ofthe remedial grading recommendationsfor the building pad area was to create a very moist, moderately dense fill with a greatly reduced potential for expansion. The remedial grading will work in conjunction with deepened footings and a perimeter slab subdrain to reduce lateral moisture migration. A heavily reinforced, thickenedconcrete slab- on-grade will be used to reduce the potential for crackingand distress due to the remaining expansion potential within the moisture treated fill. 3.3 Utility Trenches A variety of utilities were constructed at the site including electric, plumbing, reclaimed water, storm drain, sanitary sewer, and water. In general, utility trenches were excavated and the utilities were constructed. The stockpiled materials were then moisture conditioned and replaced in relatively thin compacted lifts with the available equipment. The utilities in the pavement areas were laid prior to lime treatment of the subgrade. The equipment used for compaction consisted of various loaders, dozers, backhoes and trackhoes with compaction wheel attachments, hand operated compactors, and water trucks and hoses. Geotechnics Incorporated Aston Views, LLC Project No. 0599-001-01 June 8.2001 Document No. 1-0578 Page 5 3.4 Lime Stabilization In order to reduce the potential for distress due to the expansive nature of the site soils, and increase the performance of these soils under loading, lime stabilized materials were placed beneath pavements, curbs and gutter, and sidewalks. Our previous testing of lime stabilized soils from the Carlsbad Research Center indicates that these materials have a low expansion potential based on UBC criteria. In general, 12 inches of lime stabilized soils were placed beneath curbs, gutters, and parking areas, 14 inches were placed beneath driveways, and 24 inches were placed beneath sidewalks and decorative concrete pavements. Prior to commencing lime stabilization, a mix design was conducted on selected samples of the pavement area materials in general accordance with the Eades and Grim procedure (ASTM C977 and D6276). The mix design test results are presented in Figures B-3.1 and B-3.2. Relevant pH measurements indicated that a 6 percent mixture of soil and dry- hydrated lime would be adequate to stabilize the site soils, reduce the expansion potential, and increase the bearing capacity under loading. In order to quantify the increased performance of the treated materials in pavement areas, R-value tests were conducted on lime stabilized samples in general accordance with CTM 301. The test results are shown in Figure B-2. Soluble sulfate tests were conducted to aid in developing lime application guidelines. These test results are also summarized in Figure B-2. Additional details regarding lime stabilization tests can be found in the referenced report (Geotechnics, 2001 b). Lime was applied using a hydrated slurry that was spread uniformly over the exposed soil. A rotary mixer then pulverized, blended, and mixed the treated soil to a depth of 12 or 14 inches. Mixing was terminated when gradation analysis indicated that 100 percent of the soil-lime-water mixture passed a 1-inch sieve, and 60 percent passed the %-inch sieve. Standard phenolphthaleinand pH tests were conducted periodically in order to determine that adequate lime was applied in the field for stabilization. After mellowing for approximately 1 week, the lime-treated soil was compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum density throughout the site. In areas where more than 14 inches of material was needed, stockpiled lime treated soils were placed to attain design subgrade thickness. The equipment used for the lime stabilization operations included a Porta-Batch lime slaker, a lime distribution truck, a CMI RS-5OOB rotary mixer, and a 25 ton sheepsfoot wheel compactor. Geotechnics Incorporated Aston Views, LLC lune 8,2001 Project No. 0599-001-01 Document No. 1-0578 Paee 6 After the lime stabilized soils were compacted, the curb and gutters were formed and constructed directly over the treated materials. Several weeks passed prior to placing the asphalt concrete pavements. In order to reduce the potential for shrinkage cracking, the lime stabilized subgrade was wetted with a water truck several times per day during this period. Field moisture tests were conducted to aid in determining the frequency ofwatering required to maintain the lime stabilized subgrade at above optimum moisture content. The field moisture tests are summarized in Figures B-5.1 through B-5.3, and presented graphically with respect to time in Figure B-5.4. The test results suggest that although the moisture content in the lime stabilized subgrade did drop over time, the moisture content was maintained at over optimum on average in general accordance with our geotechnical recommendations. At the request of the stabilization contractor, laboratory tests were also conducted to confirm that the nuclear density gauges were not providing erroneous moisture contents on the lime stabilized soil. These test results are also presented in Figures B-5.1 through B-5.3. Although the laboratory and field moisture contents did vary by about 1 percent on average, it is our opinion that the variance is not significant due to the relative accuracy of the individual test methods. 3.5 Pavements Asphalt concrete was placed directly over lime stabilized soils in the pavement areas. For design, R-value tests were conducted on representative samples ofthe lime treated soil. The test results are shown in Figure B-2, and indicated that the lime treated soil has an R-value in excess of 51 (additional strength is anticipated with time due to curing). Based on the lime treated R-values, pavement design was conducted in general accordance with the Caltrans design procedure (Topic 608.4). The resulting pavements consisted of 4 inches of asphalt concrete immediately overlying 12 to 14 inches of lime stabilized soil. The equipment used for the paving operations included various loaders, asphalt pulverizers, vibratory rollers and plates, drum rollers, and asphalt laydown machines. At the request of the project architect, a variety of conformance tests were conducted on the asphalt including extraction and gradation, Hveem and maximum theoretical densities, and stabilometer. The asphalt conformance results are shown in Figures B-4.1 and B-4.2. Geotechnics Incorporated Aston Views, LLC lune 8; 2001 Project No. 0599-001-01 Documrnt No. 1.0578 Page 7 4.0 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION AND CONCLUSIONS Foundation excavations were observed on December 26,29 and 30,2000 as well as January 2 and 5, 2001. Excavations exposed firm moisture treated fill materials. Footings were excavated a minimum of approximately 30 inches below lowest adjacent soil grade, and met or exceeded the minimum geotechnical width requirement of 12 inches. The moisture treated foundation bearing soils were considered to have a medium potential for expansion, and to be suitable for support of the recommended foundations and slabs. As discussed previously, fill was placed within the upper four feet of the building pad subgrade elevations using a compaction criteria of 87 percent of the maximum density (Geotechnics, 2000h). This fill was placed at a moisture content which was at least five percentage points above optimum moisture. The intent of this recommendation was to reduce the potential for expansive soil heave in the building area. It is our opinion that the fill within the upper four feet of the building pad subgrade elevations was placed in substantial accordance with our geotechnical recommendations. In our opinion, grading and compaction of the site was performed in general accordance with the intent ofthe project geotechnical recommendations,projectspecifications, and with the geotechnical requirements ofthe City of Carlsbad. Based upon our observationsand testing, it is our professional opinion that fill and trench backfill materials outside the building pad area were placed in substantial accordance with the compaction criteria of 90 percent ofthe maximum density based on tests made in general accordance with ASTM D1557-91. Lime treated asphalt concrete pavement subgrade was placed in substantial accordance with the compaction criteria of 95 percent ofthe maximum density. Asphalt concrete was placed in substantial accordance with the compaction criteria of 95 percent of the Hveem density determined in general accordance with ASTM 1562. The conclusions and recommendations contained herein are based on our observations and testing performed between December 18,2000 and May 23,2001. No representations are made as to the quality and extent of materials not observed. Geotechnics Incorporated Aston Views, LLC Project No. 0599-001-01 lune 8,2001 Document No. 1-0578 Pay 8 5.0 LIMITATIONS Our services were performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable soils engineers and geologists practicing in this or similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice included in this report. The samples taken and used for testing, the observations made, and the in-place field testing performed are believed representative of the project. However, soil 3nd geologic conditions can vary significantly between tested or observed locations. The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of three years. GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED Matthew A. Fagan, P.E. y7248 Project Engineer Anthony m F. Belfast, P.E. 40333 Principal Engineer Distribution: (4) Addressee, Mr. Mark D. McLaren (2) Smith Consulting Architects, Mr. Jon Ohlson Geotechnics Incorporated APPENDIX A REFERENCES American Society for Testing and Materials (2000). Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Section 4, Construction, Volume 04.08 Soil and Rock (I); Volume 04.09 Soil and Rock (II); Geosynthetics, ASTM, West Conshohocken, PA, 1624 p., 1228 p. Geotechnics Incorporated( 1998). Report of Geotechnical Investigation, Carlsbad Research Center, Lor 69, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 0477-001-00, Document No. 8-0366, June 3. Geotechnics Incorporated (2000a). Updated Geotechnical Recommendations, Aston Views, CRC Lot 69, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 0599-001-00, Document No. 0-0468, May 1. Geotechnics Incorporated (2000b). 1997 UBC Seismic Parameters, Aston Views, CRC Lot 69, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 0599-001-00, Document No. 0-0634, dated June 15. Geotechnics Incorporated (2000~). Supplementaiy Foundation Recommendations, Aston Views, CRC Lot 69, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 0599-001 -00, Document 0-0902, August 29. Geotechnics Incorporated (2000d). Foundation andGrading PlanReview, Aston Views Plaza, CRC Lor 69, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 0599-001-00, Document 0-0968, September 15. Geotechnics Incorporated (2000e). Updated Grading Plan Review, Aston Views Plaza, CRC Lot 69, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 0599-001-00, Document 0-1200, November 16. Geotechnics Incorporated (2000f). Proposal For Geotechnical Services, Testing and Observation ofEarthwork Construction, Aston Views Plaza, CRC Lot 69, Carlsbad, California, Proposal No. 0-292, Document No. 0-1232, dated November 28. Geotechnicshcorporated (2000g). Slab-on-Grade Reinforcement, Aston Views Plaza, CRC Lot 69, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 0599-001-00, Document 0-1288, December 8. Geotechnics Incorporated (2000h). Interim Report of Site Preparation and Compaction, Aston Views Plaza, CRC Lot 69, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 0599-001-01, Document No. 0-1353. dated December 29. Geotechnics Incorporated (2001a). Thrust Block Design Parameters, Aston Views Plaza, CRC Lot 69, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 0599-001-01, Document 1-01 14, January 30. Geotechnics Incorporated (2001b). Overview of Pavement Alternatives, Aston Views Plaza, CRC Lot 69, Carlsbad, Calgornia, Project No. 0599-001-01, Document 1-0165, February 22. Geotechnics Incorporated (2001~). Response to Request for Information, Aston Views Plaza, CRC Lot 69, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 0599-001-01, Document 1-0318, March 12. Geotechnics Incorporated APPENDIX A REFERENCES (Continued) Geotechnics Incorporated (200 Id). Concrete Mix Design Comments, Aston Views Plaza, CRC Lot 69, Carlsbad, Callfornia, Project No. 0599-001-01, Document 1-0333, March 14. Geotechnics Incorporated (2001 e). Lime Stabilization Preconstruction Summary, Aston Views Plaza, CRCLot 69, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 0599-001-01, Document No. 1-0343, dated March 19. Geotechnics Incorporated (2001 f). Review ofModifed Curb and Gutter Details, Aston Views Plaza, CRC Lot 69, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 0599-001-01, Document 1-0353, March21. Geotechnicshcorporated (2001 9). Asphalt Concrete Conformance Test Results, Aston ViewsPlaza, CRC Lot 69, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 0599-001-01, Document 1-0555, May 15. Partners Planning and Engineering (2000). Grading and Erosion Control Plans for the Aston Views Plaza, Lot 69, Carlsbad Research Center, Carlsbad, California, Plan Sheets C1 .O through C4.0, dated November 13. Prime Structural Engineers (2000). Foundation Plans and Details for the Aston Views Plaza, Lot 69, CarlsbadResearchCenter, Carlsbad, California, Plan Sheets S-1, S-2, S-11, S-12, SD-1, SD-4, SD-7, SD-IO, dated September 7. San Diego Geotechnical Consultants, Inc. (1988). As Graded Geotechnical Report, Carlsbad Lots 76 through 91, 108, and 109, Carlsbad Research Center, Phase III, IV and Calijbrnia, Job No. 05-2863-006-00-10, April 1, 1988. San Diego Geotechnical Consultants, Inc. (1984). As Graded Geotechnical Report, Carlsbad Research Center, Phase IIandIII, Carlsbad Tract No. 81-10, Carlsbad California, Job No. SD1162-10, September 10, 1984. Geotechnics Incorporated APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Selected samples of soils encountered were tested using test methods of the American Society for Testing and Materials, or other generally accepted standards. Laboratory testing was conducted in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in same locality. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the correctness or serviceability of the test results or the conclusions derived from these tests. Where a specific laboratory test method has been referenced, such as ASTM, Caltrans, or AASHTO, the reference applies only to the specified laboratory test method and not to associated referenced test method(s) or practices, and the test method referenced has been used only as a guidance document for the general performance of the test and not as a “Test Standard.” A brief description of the tests performed follows: Classification: Soils were classified visually according to the Unified Soil Classification System. Visual classification was supplemented by laboratory testing of selected samples. Maximum Densitv Ootimum Moisture: Themaximumdensity and optimummoisture for selected soil samples were determined in general accordance with test method ASTM D1557-91, modified Proctor. The test results are summarized in Figure B-1. Hveem Density: The Hveem density of a selected asphalt concrete samples was determined in general accordance with test method ASTM D1562. These results are also summarized in Figure B-1. They are reported in the maximum density column of the table for convenience. R-value: Lime stabilized R-value tests were performed on selected samples in general accordance with California Test Method 301. Approximately 8000g (dry weight) of each sample was mixed with a approximately 6 percent hydrated lime slurry by weight. The mixtures were air cooled, pass through a No. 4 sieve, and allowed to mellow for 24 hours prior to compaction. The test results are summarized in Figure B-2. Sulfate Content: To assess the potential for reactivity with lime, selected soil samples were tested for water soluble sulfate. The water soluble sulfate was extracted from the soil under vacuum using a 1O:l (water to dry soil) dilution ratio (or additionally diluted and then corrected back to a 1O:l equivalent). The extracted solution was then tested for water soluble sulfate in general accordance with ASTM D516. The test results are presented in terms of percentage by weight in Figure B-2. Geotechnics Incorporated APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING (Continued) Mix Desim: The percentage dry-hydrated lime required for soil stabilization was determined for each of the soils using the procedures presented in ASTM C977 and D6276, with the minor modifications described below. The pH measurements were made with a low-sodiumglasselectrode standardized to pH 12.45 with acommercially available buffer. Approximately 1 OOg of soil and 500 ml of water was used for each sample. The test results are presented in Figures B-3.1 and B-3.2. Asohalt Conformance Tests: Various conformance tests were conducted on asphalt samples, including extraction and gradation (ASTM D1272), maximum theoretical density (ASTM D2041), and stabilometer (ASTM D1560). The results are presented in Figures B-4.land B-4.2. Moisture Content: The moisture content ofthe lime stabilized subgrade was monitored daily during the period of time between subgrade compaction and placement of the asphalt concrete. Field moisture testing was supplemented using laboratory moisture testing of selected samples in general accordancewith ASTM D2216. The test results are presented in Figures B-5.1 through B-5.3. The temporal variation in field moisture content is presented graphically in Figure B-5.4. Geotechnics Incorporated MAXIMUM DENSITY/ OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT (ASTM D1557-91) Sample 1 2 3 Description Olive brown sandy lean clay (CL). Olive brown sandy fat clay (CH). Olive brown lean clay with sand (CLl 4 5 6 7 Olive brown lean clay with 6% lime slurry @ 24 hours. Olive brown lean clay with 6% lime sluny @ 48 hours. Olive brown lean clay with 6% lime slurry @ 72 hours. Olive brown lean clay with 6% lime slurry @ 1 month. Maximum Density AC-1 AC-2 [PCF j 110 Type 111, Class B3, %"maximum asphalt concrete (AC). Type 111, Class C2, %" maximum asphalt concrete (AC). 109 110% 100% 101% 101 101% 144.3 145.3 Optimun Moisture [%I 16% 18% 17 .. 25 22 23% 21 NIA NIA Project No. 0599-001-01 - - Geotechnics Laboratory Test Results Document No. 1-0578 -1 n co r p or at e d Figure B-1 R-VALUE TEST RESULTS (CTM 301) WATER SOLUBLE SULFATE [Yo] 0.00 to 0.10 0.10 to 0.20 0.20 to 2.00 Over 2.00 11 SAMPLE 11 DESCRIPTION SULFATE EXPOSURE Negligible Moderate Severe Very Severe IrlLsandy lean clay (CL) with 6% lime. 11 57 to62 11 1) 51 to 57 11 RV-2 11 Brown sandy lean clay (cL) with 6% lime. s-5 (S-1) S-6 (S-2) SOLUBLE SULFATE TEST RESULTS (ASTM D516) DESCRIPTION Gray brown sandy fat clay (CH). Gray brown sandy fat clay (CH). Grav brown sandv fat clav (CH). Gray brown sandy fat clay (CH). Gray brown sandy fat clay (CH) with 6% lime. Gray brown sandy fat clay (CH) with 6% lime. UBC TABLE NO. 19-A-4, CLASSIFICATION OF SOLUBLE SULFATE Project No. 0599-001-01 - Geotechnics Laboratory Test Results Document No. 1-0578 --In c o r p or at e d Figure B-2 STANDARD METHOD FOR DETERMINING STABILIZATION ABILITY OF LIME (ASTM D6276) HYDRATED SAMPLE INFORMATION QUICKLIME pH Sample Number: MD-1 Date Tested: 1/31/01 Description: Gray brown sandy fat clay (CH) 4.0 TEST DATA 3.1 I 12.36 5.0 LIME [%I 12.06 3.0 2.3 12.27 3.8 I 12.43 TESTRESULTS (Percent Lime Required for Soil Stabilization) 13 12 Ip 11 10 V 0.0 1 .o 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 DRY-HYDRATED LIME ["/.I Project No. 0599-001-01 Document No. 1-0578 FIGURE 8-3.1 MIX DESIGN RESULTS Geotechnics -.In c or p or at e d - STANDARD METHOD FOR DETERMINING STABILIZATION ABILITY OF LIME (ASTM D6276) SAMPLE INFORMATION Sample Number: MD-2 Date Tested: 1/30/01 Description: Gray brown sandy fat clay (CH) TEST DATA TESTRESULTS (Percent Lime Required for Soil Stabilization) HYDRATED LIME: 6.0 [%] QUICKLIME: E 4.6 [%] 13 12 Ip 11 10 0.0 1 .o 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 DRY-HYDRATED LIME [%] Project No. 0599-001-01 Document No. 1-0578 FIGURE 8-3.2 MIX DESIGN RESULTS Geotechnics /-.I n c or p o 1- at e d - 7 0 U C m t- J I u) a n a k VI, 00000000000 ornwr-ambm~- 7 )q6!a~ Aq iau! j tuaaiad a 0 .-- 0 -E .- E i7j 0 0 7 I -I - 5 a n a I v) k VI .\ 0 Project No. 0599-001-01 - Geotechnics MOISTURE TEST RESULTS Document No. 1-0578 --I n c o rp o rat e d FIGURE 8-51 - SG-I 4/17/01 28 6 SG-2 SG-3 SG-4 SG-5 SG-6 SG-7 SG-8 SG-9 SG-10 SG-11 SG-12 SG-13 SG-14 SG-15 SG-16 SG-17 SG-18 SG-19 SG-20 SG-21 SG-22 SG-23 SG-24 SG-25 SG-26 SG-27 SG-28 SG-29 SG-30 SG-31 SG-32 SG-33 SG-34 SG-35 SG-36 SG-37 SG-38 SG-39 SG-40 SG-41 SG-42 SG-43 SG-44 SG-45 SG-46 SG-47 SG-48 SG-49 SG-50 SG-51 4/17/01 4/17/01 4/17/01 4/17/01 4/17/01 411 7/01 4/17/01 4/17/01 4/17/01 411 7/01 4/17/01 4/17/01 4/17/01 4/18/01 4/18/01 4/18/01 4/18/01 4/18/01 411 8/01 411 8/01 411 8/01 4/18/01 4/18/01 4/18/01 4/18/01 4/19/01 4/19/01 4/19/01 4/19/01 411 9/01 411 9/01 4/19/01 4/19/01 4/19/01 4/19/01 4/19/01 4/19/01 4/19/01 4/19/01 4/19/01 4/19/01 411 9/01 4/19/01 4/19/01 4/19/01 4/19/01 4/19/01 411 9/01 4/19/01 4/19/01 26.8 31 .O 30.7 30.2 32.0 26.0 27.1 30.5 29.4 31 .I 30.3 28.6 24.4 31.3 30.2 25.7 24.0 25.0 27.7 21.3 21.4 32.2 29.3 31 .O 32.0 22.7 29.5 28.4 29.2 26.4 27.1 29.0 27.7 28.8 26.2 28.0 24.1 27.8 27.8 26.5 25.6 26.0 30.5 28.2 26.4 30.6 28.2 23.6 25.9 25.6 33.1 30.5 -1.8 -1.0 Project No. 0599-001-01 Document No. 1-0578 FIGURE 8-5.2 MOISTURE TEST RESULTS Geotechnics - --I n c or p o r a t e d - SG-52 4/19/01 28 4 SG-53 SG-54 SG-55 SG-56 SG-57 SG-58 SG-59 SG-60 SG-61 SG-62 SG-63 SG-64 SG-65 SG-66 SG-67 SG-68 MC-1 MC-2 MC-3 MC-4 MC-5 MC-6 MC-7 MC-8 MC-9 MC-10 MC-11 MC-12 MC-13 MC-14 MC-15 MC-16 MC-17 MC-18 MC-19 MC-20 MC-21 MC-22 MC-23 MC-24 MC-25 MC-26 MC-27 MC-28 MC-29 MC-30 MC-31 MC-32 MC-33 MC-34 4/19/01 4/19/01 411 9/01 411 9/01 4/19/01 4/20/01 4/20/01 4/20/01 4/20/01 4/20/01 4/20/01 4/20/01 4/20/01 4/20/01 4/20/01 4/20/01 4/23/01 4/23/01 4/23/01 4/23/01 4/24/01 4/24/01 4/24/01 4/24/01 4/24/01 4/25/01 4/25/01 4/25/01 4/25/01 4/25/01 4/26/01 4/26/01 4/26/01 4/26/01 4/26/01 4/27/01 4/27/01 4/27/01 4/27/01 4/27/01 4/30/01 4/30/01 4/30/01 4/30/01 4/30/01 5/1/01 5/1/01 5/1/01 5/1/01 5/1/01 32.1 27.5 27.3 23.6 25.3 24.5 25.1 25.0 27.0 26.2 24.1 26.9 27.2 28.2 25.5 25.1 21.3 25.9 24.9 21.4 23.2 26.2 27.5 27.5 21.2 27.0 24.5 31.2 26.1 22.2 25.3 23.6 27.8 26.5 24.0 26.6 23.2 25.5 25.1 29.0 21.7 21.6 23.4 22.5 22.5 24.4 24.3 25.6 24.5 22.4 23.9 22.0 22.4 23.2 26.5 24.7 24.9 21.5 27.3 22.4 22.3 23.1 22.8 24.1 -2.6 3.9 0.8 3.0 0.5 -0.2 0.4 2.1 -0.7 0.8 -0.6 -1.5 1.6 0.2 Project No. 0599-001-01 Document No. 1-0578 MOISTURE TEST RESULTS Geotechnics - -.In c o rp o r a t e d FIGURE 8-53 MC-35 5/3/01 27 0 24 R 27 MC-36 MC-37 MC-38 MC-39 MC-40 MC-41 MC-42 MC-43 MC-44 5/3/01 5/3/01 5/3/01 5/3/01 5/4/01 5/4/01 5/4/01 51410 1 5/4/01 Average: 23.5 25.8 21.4 19.2 22.5 26.8 22.9 20.4 21.2 - ~ 23.4 0.1 18.7 3.8 25.0 1.8 24.3 I 23.5 I 0.9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - I - - - - - 35.0 *:* :* :* : 30.0 ** - ** s 8 u) : ** C C 0 C *: 0 C $ *: iz i* .- ** *** A - 25.0 € *** ** : : ** 20.0 4/28/01 5/5/01 4/21/01 Test Date 411 410 1 Project No. 0599-001 -01 Document No. 1-0578 Figure B-5.4 TEMPORAL MOISTURE VARIATION Geotechnics ,--I n c o r p o r a t e d - APPENDIX C FIELD TEST RESULTS The results ofthe field density tests takenforthis project are showninFiguresC-1 throughC-7. The elevations and locations of the field tests were determined by hand level and pacing relative to field staking done by others. The tests are plotted on the As-Graded Geotechnical Map, Plate 1. The precision of the field density test and the maximum dry density test is not exact and variations should be expected. For example, the American Society for Testing and Materials has recently researched the precision of ASTM Method D1557 and found the accuracy of the maximum dry density to be plus or minus 4 percent of the mean value and the optimum moisture content to be accurate to plus or minus 15 percent ofthe mean value; the Society specifically states the "acceptable range of test results expressed as a percent of mean value" is the range stated above. In effect, an indicated relative compaction of 90 percent has an acceptable range of 86.6 to 92.8 percent based on the maximum dry density determination. The precision of the field density test ASTM D1556 has not yet been determined by the American Society for Testing and Materials; however, it must be recognized that it also is subject to variations in accuracy. The following abbreviations were used in the Figures of Appendix C. AC = Asphaltic Concrete EP = Elevator Pit ET = Electric Trench IP = Interior Plumbing FG = Finish Grade NU = Nuclear Guage RW = Reclaimed Water SD = Storm Drain SG = SubGrade SS = Sanitary Sewer W =Water Main WL = Water Lateral Geotechnics Incorporated Project No. 0599-001-01 Document No. 1-0578 DENSITY TEST RESULTS Geotechnics -.Incorporated - - FIGURE C-1 3 4 I 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 - - 10 - 12/19/00 12/19/00 12/19/00 12/19/00 12/19/00 12/19/00 12/19/00 12/19/00 12/19/00 12/20/00 12/20/00 12/20/00 12/20/00 12/20/00 12/20/00 12/20/00 12/20/00 12/20/00 12/20/00 12/20/00 12/20/00 12/20/00 12/20/00 12/20/00 12/20/00 12/20/00 12/20/00 12/21/00 12/21/00 12/21/00 12/21 100 12/21/00 12/21/00 12/21/00 12/21/00 12/21 100 12/21/00 12/22/00 12/22/00 12/22/00 12/22/00 12/22/00 12/22/00 12/22/00 12/22/00 12/22/00 12/22/00 12/22/00 12/22/00 12/22/00 256 256 256 256 256 257 257 258 258 256 256 256 256 257 257 258 258 259 259 256 256 256 256 257 257 260 260 259 259 258 258 260 260 259 259 260 260 256 256 256 256 257 257 257 257 253 254 253 254 255 Soil Max. Dry Type Density 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 109.0 109.0 109.0 109.0 109.0 110.0 109.0 109.0 110.0 109.0 109.0 110.0 110.0 109.0 110.0 109.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 109.0 109.0 109.0 109.0 109.0 109.0 109.0 109.0 109.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 Moisture Content ["/I 21.8 23.9 22.4 22.4 22.8 23.3 21.7 23.0 21.5 24.7 26.1 24.7 24.0 25.6 21.8 24.8 26.4 22.3 24.7 23.5 21.8 21.8 23.4 22.5 25.8 22.7 23.1 23.1 24.7 23.6 25.0 23.6 24.4 23.8 24.7 21.1 24.0 19.3 19.7 20.8 17.1 19.0 23.6 19.9 18.8 23.5 23.0 22.9 22.3 24.8 Field Density [PCfl 97.2 95.8 103.9 97.0 100.6 97.6 98.0 96.1 100.4 97.4 94.5 97.7 99.4 94.8 100.7 96.2 94.9 101.0 98.1 98.3 97.1 98.9 97.5 100.0 96.2 100.6 96.9 98.9 98.5 97.8 95.3 96.6 95.1 99.5 95.9 97.8 96.3 98.6 99.3 99.3 102.6 103.6 96.1 98.9 102.2 97.3 96.6 99.7 95.3 94.5 Compaction Compaction Number Method [%I 88 87 94 88 91 89 89 87 91 89 87 90 91 87 92 88 87 92 90 90 88 90 89 91 88 91 88 90 90 90 87 89 87 91 88 90 88 90 90 90 93 94 87 90 93 88 88 91 87 86 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 67 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 87 87 87 87 87 NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU 44 NU NU NU NU NU NU NU 51 NU Project No. 0599-001-01 Document No. 1-0578 FIGURE C-2 DENSITY TEST RESULTS Geotechnics - -J n c or p o r a t e d Soil Type 51 12/22/00 52 12/22/00 53 12/22/00 54 12/22/00 55 12/22/00 56 12/26/00 57 12/26/00 58 12/26/00 59 12/26/00 AC-1 5/7/01 AC-2 5/7/01 AC-3 5/7/01 AC-4 5/7/01 AC-5 5/7/01 AC-6 5/7/01 AC-7 5/7/01 AC-8 5/7/01 AC-9 5/7/01 AC-10 5/7/01 AC-11 5/7/01 AC-12 5/7/01 AC-13 5/7/01 AC-14 5/7/01 AC-15 5/7/01 AC-16 5/7/01 AC-17 5/7/01 AC-18 5/7/01 AC-19 5/7/01 AC-20 5/7/01 AC-21 5/7/01 AC-22 5/7/01 AC-23 5/7/01 AC-24 5/7/01 AC-25 5/7/01 AC-26 5/7/01 AC-27 5/7/01 AC-28 5/7/01 AC-29 5/7/01 AC-30 5/7/01 AC-31 5/7/01 AC-32 5/7/01 AC-33 5/7/01 AC-34 5/7/01 AC-35 5/7/01 AC-36 5/7/01 AC-37 5/7/01 AC-38 5/7/01 AC-39 5/7/01 AC-40 5/7/01 Max. Dry Moisture Field Relative Required Retest Test Density Content Density Compaction Compaction Number Method 256 257 255 256 257 257 257 258 259 FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG 1 110.0 1 110.0 1 110.0 1 110.0 1 110.0 1 110.0 1 110.0 1 110.0 1 110.0 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 23.7 22.0 22.7 22.2 21.8 18.0 16.7 18.6 17.7 N/A NIA N/A N/A N/A NIA N/A N/A N/A N/A NIA N/A N/A NIA NIA N/A N/A N/A N/A NIA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NIA N/A N/A N/A N/A NIA NIA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 97.7 95.4 98.4 100.2 101.2 98.5 100.3 99.3 99.5 144.0 141.2 140.4 141.6 139.6 141.2 142.0 139.5 142.7 142.9 143.8 140.1 143.0 141.5 140.8 143.3 140.8 139.4 140.4 142.3 140.0 140.8 143.8 139.5 140.3 140.0 142.8 143.3 143.6 139.7 142.1 140.5 140.8 141.8 140.0 142.1 143.3 140.6 143.4 140.1 89 87 89 91 92 90 91 90 90 100 98 97 98 97 98 98 97 99 99 100 97 99 98 98 99 98 97 97 99 97 98 100 97 97 97 99 99 100 97 98 97 98 98 97 98 99 97 99 97 87 NU 87 NU 87 NU 87 NU 87 NU 90 NU 90 NU 90 NU 90 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU 95 NU Soil Type AC-~I 51aioi ~c-44 51aioi ~c-45 51aioi ~c-46 51aioi ~c-47 51aioi ~c-48 51aioi Ac-49 51aioi ~c-52 5iaioi AC-53 51aioi ~c-56 51aioi AC-57 5iaioi AC-59 51aioi AC-42 5/8/01 AC-43 5/8/01 AC-50 5/8/01 AC-51 5/8/01 AC-54 5/8/01 AC-55 5/8/01 AC-58 5/8/01 AC-60 5/8/01 AC-61 5/8/01 AC-62 5/8/01 AC-64 5/8/01 AC-65 5/8/01 AC-66 5/8/01 AC-67 5/8/01 AC-68 5/8/01 ~c-63 51aioi Ac-69 5iaioi AC-70 51aioi AC-73 51aioi AC-75 51aioi ~c-78 siaioi AC-79 51aioi AC-82 51aioi AC-83 5/a/oi AC-85 51aioi ~c-87 51aioi Ac-88 51aioi Ac-90 51aioi AC-71 5/8/01 AC-72 5/8/01 AC-74 5/8/01 AC-76 5/8/01 AC-77 5/8/01 AC-a0 5/8/01 AC-81 5/8/01 AC-a4 5/8/01 AC-86 5/8/01 AC-a9 5/8/01 Max. Dry Moisture Field Relative Required Retest Test Density Content Density Compaction Compaction Number Method [PCfl [“/I [PCfl [%I [%I FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG FG AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-I 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-1 144.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 AC-2 145.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NIA N/A NIA N/A N/A N/A N/A NIA N/A N/A NIA N/A N/A N/A NIA NIA N/A N/A NIA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 143.4 99 142.2 99 141.8 98 140.8 98 141.7 98 140.7 98 141.5 98 141.a 9a 142.0 9a 142.1 9a 141.7 9a 140.6 97 144.5 100 143.3 99 140.6 97 140.5 97 141.7 98 139.4 96 141.0 97 139.9 96 139.8 96 139.9 96 139.8 96 141.3 97 141.2 97 139.5 96 140.3 97 139.4 96 139.9 96 139.1 96 139.2 96 139.4 96 141.0 97 139.5 96 140.8 97 140.1 96 141.5 97 139.4 96 139.1 96 140.5 97 138.8 96 140.9 97 140.3 97 139.2 96 140.3 97 139.1 96 141.6 97 139.9 96 140.4 97 141.2 97 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU Geotechnics -.-In c o rp o r a t e d - Moisture Content [%I Project No. 0599-001-01 Document No. 1-0578 FIGURE C-4 DENSITY TEST RESULTS Field Relative Required Retest Test Density Compaction Compaction Number Method [PCfl [%I [%I Test No. - 4c-91 4C-92 4c-93 40-94 40-95 AC-96 - B-1 8-2 B-3 B-4 8-5 B-6 8-7 - EP-1 EP-2 EP-3 EP-4 EP-5 EP-6 ET-1 ET-2 ET-3 ET4 ET-5 ET4 ET-7 ET-8 ET-9 ET-10 ET-1 1 - ET-12 ET-1 3 ET-14 ET-1 5 ET-16 ET-1 7 ET-18 ET-19 - c IP-1 c IP-2 IP-3 IP-4 IP-5 RW-1 RW-2 - L 5/8/01 5/8/01 5/8/01 5/8/01 5/8/01 5/8/01 4/30/01 4/30/01 4/30/01 4/30/01 5/9/01 5/9/01 5/9/01 1/10/01 111 0101 111 5/01 1/15/01 1/15/01 1/15/01 11810 1 1/8/01 1/8/01 3/23/01 3/23/01 3/23/01 3/23/01 3/23/01 3/23/01 3/23/01 3/23/01 3/26/01 3/26/01 3/26/01 3/26/01 3/27/01 3/27/01 3/27/01 3/27/01 1/9/01 1/9/01 1/17/01 1/17/01 111 7/01 4/2/01 4/2/01 FG FG FG FG FG FG FBG FBG FBG FBG FBG FBG FBG 255 256 257 258 259 259 258 257 258 257 257 257 257 257 257 257 257 257 257 255 255 258 258 254 254 259 259 259 259 259 255 256 AC-2 AC-2 AC-2 AC-2 AC-2 AC-2 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 Max. Do Density [PCfl - 145.3 N/A 145.3 N/A 145.3 NIA 145.3 N/A 145.3 N/A 145.3 N/A 135.0 8.0 135.0 6.5 135.0 8.8 135.0 8.6 135.0 6.7 135.0 6.7 135.0 8.5 109.0 26.4 109.0 23.0 109.0 19.4 109.0 22.7 109.0 23.2 109.0 23.1 109.0 14.6 109.0 19.0 109.0 20.1 110.5 22.9 110.5 22.8 110.5 21.3 110.5 21.6 110.5 19.3 110.5 21.3 110.5 19.2 110.5 17.9 110.5 15.2 110.5 16.9 110.5 19.0 110.5 20.2 110.5 16.9 110.5 16.7 110.5 21.7 110.5 19.3 110.5 18.3 110.5 19.8 109.0 20.2 109.0 19.2 109.0 20.5 110.5 17.0 110.5 17.8 141.8 142.0 139.9 139.8 140.2 139.8 132.7 130.7 129.8 128.1 128.7 128.2 128.0 97.7 98.3 99.5 98.7 100.5 98.4 94.2 98.6 100.1 101.8 99.0 103.4 103.6 102.2 100.1 100.4 102.5 102.4 99.0 100.9 103.1 104.1 104.5 103.5 105.2 102.6 101.1 101.3 99.5 98.7 99.9 100.8 98 98 96 96 96 96 98 97 96 95 95 95 95 90 90 91 91 92 90 86 90 92 92 90 94 94 92 91 91 93 93 90 91 93 94 95 94 95 93 91 93 91 91 90 91 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU ET-3 NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU Project No. 0599-001-01 Geotechnics DENSITY TEST RESULTS Document No. 1-0578 - FIGURE C-5 --In c or p o r a t e d Soil Max. Dry Moisture Field Relative Required Type Density Content Density Compaction Compaction [PCfl [%I [PCfl ["/I [%I Elevationi Station [fil Retest Test Number Method RW-3 4/2/01 SD-1 1/10/01 SD-2 1/10/01 50-3 1/10/01 SD-4 1/10/01 SD-5 1/10/01 SD-6 1/10/01 SO-7 1/18/01 SD-8 1/18/01 SD-9 1/18/01 so-IO 1/19/01 SD-11 1/19/01 SD-12 1/19/01 SD-13 1/19/01 SD-14 1/19/01 SD-15 1/19/01 SD-16 1/19/01 SD-17 1/19/01 SD-18 1/19/01 SD-19 1/26/01 SG-I 4/17/01 SG-2 4/17/01 SG-3 4/17/01 SG-4 4/17/01 SG-5 4/17/01 SG-6 4/17/01 SG-7 4/17/01 SG-8 4/17/01 SG-9 4/17/01 SG-IO 4/17/01 SG-11 4/17/01 SG12 4/17/01 SG-13 4/17/01 SG-14 4/17/01 SG-15 4/18/01 SG-16 4/18/01 SG-17 4/18/01 SG-18 4/18/01 SG-19 4/18/01 SG-20 4/18/01 SG-21 4/18/01 SG-22 4/18/01 SG-23 4/18/01 SG-24 4/18/01 SG-25 4/18/01 SG-26 4/18/01 SG-27 4/19/01 SG-28 4/19/01 256 3 252 3 254 3 251 3 254 3 252 3 255 3 254 3 252 3 252 3 253 3 252 3 255 3 255 3 249 3 250 3 251 3 253 3 253 3 252 3 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 4 SG 5 SG 5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 100.5 101.5 101.5 21.3 22.9 17.2 19.2 19.7 20.1 19.7 20.3 17.7 21.4 22.4 21.3 21.3 21.2 17.0 21.1 19.6 20.1 19.7 18.6 28.6 26.8 31.0 30.7 30.2 32.0 26.0 27.1 30.5 29.4 31.1 30.3 28.6 24.4 31.3 30.2 25.7 24.0 25.0 27.7 21.3 21.4 32.2 29.3 31.0 32.0 22.7 29.5 100.6 103.0 102.7 99.2 100.2 100.5 99.9 99.1 102.5 102.0 101.5 103.1 96.2 99.2 107.2 103.1 101.2 104.7 101.7 104.3 89.9 92.7 90.7 90.7 89.2 89.9 93.3 96.0 89.5 90.7 90.4 91.8 89.8 96.6 87.9 91.8 92.4 94.2 95.4 94.9 102.6 100.1 88.2 93.4 90.4 88.4 98.4 90.2 91 93 93 90 91 91 90 90 93 92 92 93 87 90 97 93 92 95 92 94 89 92 90 90 89 89 93 96 89 90 90 91 89 96 87 91 92 94 95 94 loo+ 100 88 93 90 88 97 89 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 SD-13 SG-35 SG-35 SG-35 SG-35 SG-36 SG-36 SG-68 SG-67 SG-67 SG-35 SG-35 SG-68 SG-36 SG-36 SG-32 SG-32 SG-52 SG-55 SG-55 SG-55 SG-55 SG-55 SG-55 SG-39 NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU Project No. 0599-001-01 Document No. 1-0578 FIGURE C-6 DENSITY TEST RESULTS Geotechnics -J n c or p or at e d - Aax. Dry Density [PCfl Test No. Moisture Field Relative Required Content Density Compaction Compaction [%I [PCfl [%I [%I Test Date Retest Number Elevation/ Soil St;;;n 1 Type Test Method SG-29 4/19/01 SG SG-30 4/19/01 SG SG-31 4/19/01 SG SG-32 4/19/01 SG SG-33 4/19/01 SG SG-34 4/19/01 SG SG35 4/19/01 SG SG-36 411 9/01 SG SG-37 4/19/01 SG SG-38 4/19/01 SG SG-39 4/19/01 SG SG-40 4/19/01 SG SG-41 4/19/01 SG SG-42 4/19/01 SG SG-43 4/19/01 SG SG-44 4/19/01 SG SG-45 4/19/01 SG SG-46 4/19/01 SG SG-47 4/19/01 SG SG-48 4/19/01 SG SG-49 4/19/01 SG SG-50 4/19/01 SG SG-51 4/19/01 SG SG-52 4/19/01 SG SG-53 4/19/01 SG SG-54 4/19/01 SG SG55 4/19/01 SG SG-56 4/19/01 SG SG-57 4/19/01 SG SG-58 4/20/01 SG SG-59 4/20/01 SG SG-60 4/20/01 SG SG-61 4/20/01 SG SG-62 4R0101 SG SG-63 4/20/01 SG SG-64 4/20/01 SG SG-65 4/20/01 SG SG-66 4/20/01 SG SG-67 4/20/01 SG SG68 4/20/01 SG SG-69 4/27/01 SG SS-1 1/5/01 259 ss-2 1/5/01 258 ss-3 1/5/01 259 SS-4 1/6/01 257 SS-5 1/6/01 257 SS-6 1/6/01 257 SS-7 1/6/01 255 SS-8 1/6/01 256 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 101.5 101.5 101.5 101.5 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 116.5 110.0 110.0 110.0 109.0 109.0 109.0 109.0 109.0 28.4 90.8 89 29.2 90.3 89 26.4 91.6 90 27.1 91.2 90 29.0 95.4 95 27.7 94.6 95 28.8 95.0 95 26.2 96.8 97 28.0 94.8 95 24.1 98.9 99 27.8 97.8 98 27.8 95.8 96 26.5 96.2 96 25.6 98.5 99 26.0 95.1 95 30.5 95.1 95 28.2 95.4 95 26.4 98.3 98 30.6 91.7 92 28.2 93.1 93 23.6 98.8 99 25.9 95.5 96 25.6 95.5 96 28.4 95.3 95 32.1 90.1 90 27.5 95.6 96 27.3 95.1 95 23.6 99.5 100 25.3 95.5 96 24.5 95.5 96 25.1 96.3 96 25.0 95.4 95 27.0 96.5 97 26.2 95.5 96 24.1 96.5 97 26.9 94.8 95 27.2 95.9 96 28.2 95.9 96 25.5 94.5 95 25.1 95.9 96 15.4 116.7 100 21.3 99.2 26.3 95.6 19.0 96.8 23.7 96.5 26.4 91.7 24.8 97.1 23.3 96.0 25.9 92.1 90 87 88 89 84 89 88 84 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 SG-40 SG36 SG37 SG-38 SG-50 SG-51 SG-62 SS-6 ss-9 NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU Project No. 0599-001-01 - DENSITY TEST RESULTS Document No. 1-0578 --In c or p o r a t e d FIGURE C-7 Geotechnics 1%1 Test NO. SS-9 1/6/01 SS-10 1/6/01 ss-11 1/8/01 ss-12 1/8/01 59-13 1/8/01 SS-14 1/9/01 ss-15 1/9/01 SS-16 1/9/01 SS-17 1/9/01 ss-18 1/9/01 ss-19 1/9/01 ss-20 1/10/01 ss-21 1/10/01 55-22 1/10/01 SS-23 2/12/01 SS-24 2/12/01 Test Elevation/ Soil Max. Dry Moisture Field Date Station Type Density Content Density [nl [PCfl [%I [PCfl SW-1 5/18/01 SW-2 5/18/01 SW-3 5/18/01 SW-4 5/18/01 SW-5 5/21/01 SW-6 5/21/01 sw-7 5/22/01 SW-8 5/22/01 sw-9 5/23/01 sw-10 5/23/01 sw-I 1 5/23/01 sw-12 5/23/01 sw-13 5/23/01 SW-14 6/1/01 SW-15 6/1/01 w-I 1/24/01 w-2 1/24/01 w-3 1/24/01 w-4 1/24/01 w-5 1/24/01 W-6 1/25/01 w-7 1/25/01 w-8 1/25/01 w-9 1/25/01 W-10 1/26/01 W-11 1/26/01 w-12 1130101 W-13 1/31/01 W-14 1/31/01 W-I5 1/31/01 W-16 2/1/01 w-17 2/2/01 255 256 256 256 256 258 261 261 260 260 260 256 261 255 255 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 101.5 29.1 84.8 101.5 25.3 95.6 101.5 29.0 92.1 101.5 25.4 94.0 101.5 24.6 98.1 101.5 26.8 94.2 101.5 22.4 92.5 101.5 20.8 94.8 101.5 26.6 95.1 101.5 25.1 98.0 101.5 24.3 96.2 101.5 25.5 94.9 101.5 22.6 93.5 101.5 17.1 97.4 101.5 18.3 99.6 256 3 110.5 20.9 257 3 110.5 23.4 255 3 110.5 20.9 256 3 110.5 20.2 254 3 110.5 17.6 258 3 110.5 22.4 258 3 110.5 18.9 258 3 110.5 20.6 258 3 110.5 19.9 258 3 110.5 21.2 259 3 110.5 18.7 255 3 110.5 23.9 255 3 110.5 22.2 254 3 110.5 18.9 256 3 110.5 17.1 256 3 110.5 18.3 252 3 110.5 19.0 99.0 98.9 100.5 99.7 103.6 99.9 101.8 101.6 101.6 101.4 102.0 97.4 100.3 100.2 102.9 100.8 102.1 89 89 90 95 85 91 91 87 93 90 93 92 96 91 79 93 84 94 91 93 97 93 91 93 94 97 95 93 92 96 98 90 90 91 90 94 90 92 92 92 92 92 88 91 91 93 91 92 87 87 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 ss-20 SS-17 SS-24 SW-14 W-13 NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU Project No. 0599-001-01 Document No. 1-0578 FIGURE C-8 DENSITY TEST RESULTS Geotechnics - --In c or p o r a t e d W-18 2/2/01 W-19 2/2/01 W-20 2/2/01 W-21 2/5/01 W-22 2/5/01 W-23 2/5/01 W-24 2/6/01 W-25 2/6/01 W-26 2/6/01 W-27 2/7/01 W-28 2/7/01 W-29 2/7/01 W-30 2/7/01 W-31 2/9/01 W-32 2/9/01 W-33 2/9/01 W-34 2/9/01 W-35 2/9/01 WL-1 3/21/01 WL-2 3/21/01 WL-3 3/21/01 253 3 254 3 254 3 253 3 255 3 256 3 255 3 255 3 257 3 257 3 258 3 257 3 258 3 257 3 256 3 256 3 258 3 257 3 257 3 257 3 257 3 Field 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 110.5 17.7 106.7 20.6 106.6 17.3 100.5 19.9 105.7 27.3 96.6 22.9 94.4 20.0 104.7 23.1 100.8 21.9 106.6 19.1 99.1 26.7 96.4 20.4 101.2 19.7 99.2 20.4 99.6 28.4 86.6 20.5 100.2 15.6 107.6 21.5 100.2 17.5 104.4 22.2 100.7 20.0 101.9 Relative 1 Required I Retest r T~I Cornpaction Compaction Number Method 97 90 96 90 91 90 96 90 87 90 85 90 95 90 91 90 96 90 90 90 87 90 92 90 90 90 90 90 78 90 91 90 97 90 91 90 94 90 91 90 92 90 W-24 W-25 W-30 W-33 NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU NU Geotechn'ics - Incorporated - Principals: Anthony E Belfast Michael P. Imhriglio W. Lee Vanderhnrst December 29,2000 Aston Views, LLC 4370 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 655 San Diego, California 92122-1252 Attention: Mr. Mark McLaren Project No. 0599-001-01 Document No. 0-1353 SUBJECT: INTERIM REPORT OF SITE PREPARATION AND COMPACTION Aston Views Plaza, CRC Lot 69 Carlsbad, California References: Geotechnics Incorporated (2000). Updated Geotechnical Recommendations, Aston Views, CRCLot 69, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 0599-001-00, Document No. 0-0468, dated May 1. Geotechnics Incorporated (1998). Report of Geotechnical Investigation. Carlsbad Research Center, Lot 69, Carlsbad California; Project No. 0477-001-00, Document No. 8-0366, dated June 3. Gentlemen: In accordance with the request of Lusardi Construction, we have prepared this report summarizing site preparation and compaction operations to date within the building pad area of the subject site. Remedial earthwork within the building pad area consisted ofthe excavation, moisture conditioning, and compaction of moderately to highly expansive soils within four feet of finish pad grade, as recommended in Section 7.3.4b of the referenced report (Geotechnics, 1998). The moisture treatment included the area within five feet of the building pad perimeter. The excavation bottom was also scarified approximately 12 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted. Moisture conditioning consisted of adding sufficient water to the expansive soil to bring the moisture content of the compacted fill up to at least 5 percentage points above optimum moisture determined in general accordance with ASTM test method D15.57. In order to mher reduce swell pressures, the moisture conditioned soil was compacted to at least 87 percent relative compaction (rather than the customary 90 percent relative compaction). 9245 Activity Rd., Ste. 103 San Diego, California 92126 Phone (858) 536-1000 Fax (858) 536-8311 Aston Views, LLC Project No. 0599-001-00 December 29,2000 Document No. 0-1353 Page 2 The intent of the remedial grading recommendations was to create a very moist, moderately dense fill that will have a greatly reduced potential for expansion. The remedial grading will work in conjunction with deepened footings to reduce lateral moisture migration, and a heavily reinforced, thickened concrete slab-on-grade will be used to reduce the potential for cracking and distress due to the remaining expansion potential within the moisture treated fill. We have also recommended that the foundations and slabs be constructed relatively rapidly to reduce moisture loss, and that the moisture content of the compacted fill be maintained by periodic wetting until the slab is placed. In our opinion, site preparation and compaction for the building pad area has been performed in general accordance with the intent of the project geotechnical recommendations, and with the geotechnical requirements of the City of Carlsbad. Compaction tests to date indicate that structural fill within the building pad area has been placed at a density of at least 87 percent of the maximum as determined by ASTM D1557. The conclusions contained herein are based on our observations and testing performed between December 18 and 22,2000. No representations are made as to the quality and extent of materials not observed. A compaction report providing greater detail on our testing and observations services will be mailed to you when our services are completed. We appreciate this opportunity to be of continued professional service. Please feel free to call the office with any questions or comments regarding this correspondence. GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED F. Belfast, P.E. 40333 Project Engineer Principal Engineer Distribution: (4) Addressee, Mr. Mark D. McLaren (FAX: 858-457-4910) (2) Lusardi Construction, Mr. Lance Rieman (Messenger) Geotechnics Incorporated Geotechnics - Incorporated - Principals : Anthony F. Belfast Michael P. lmbriglio W. Lee Vanderhurst May 1,2000 Aston Views, LLC 4370 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 655 San Diego, California 92122-1252 Attention: Mr. Mark McLaren Project No. 0599-001-00 Document No. 0-0468 SUBJECT: UPDATED GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS Aston Views, CRC Lot 69 Carlsbad, California Reference: Geotechnics Incorporated (1 998). Report of Geotechnical Investigation, Carlsbad \\ Research Center, Lot 69, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 0477-001 -00, Document No. 8-0366, dated June 3. Gentlemen: In accordance with your request, we are providing herein updated geotechnical recommendations for construction of the Aston Views project in Lot 69 of the Carlsbad Research Center in Carlsbad, California. The site consists of a sheet graded pad, as described in the referenced geotechnical report which was conducted for the previous owner (Geotechnics, 1998). Updated recommendations for specific aspects of the project are presented herein, based on the issues raised in our project team meeting on April 28, 2000. In general, the recommendations and conclusions contained in the referenced report remain applicable for the proposed development. However, where differences are noted, the specific recommendations presented herein supercede those provided previously. The proposed development is now anticipated to consist of an 86,200 f12 tilt-up concrete office building with associated exterior flatwork, parking and driveway areas. It is our understanding that the moisture treatment alternative presented in Section 7.3.4b of the referenced report will be used to reduce the potential for heave of the proposed building foundations and slabs. Lime stabilization of the expansive soils beneath exterior flatwork and pavement areas is also being considered. 9245 Activity Rd., Ste. 103 * San Diego, California 92126 Phone (858) 536-1000 * Fax (858) 536-8311 Project No. 0599-001-00 Aston Views, LLC May 1,2000 Document No. 0-0468 Page 2 4 FOUNDATIONS The foundation recommendations contained herein are considered generally consistentwith methods used in southern California. These recommendations should not be considered to preclude more restrictive criteria of governing agencies or the structural engineer. The following recommendations assume that moisture treatment of the upper four feet of soil beneath the building slab will be used to reduce the potential for differential heave of the structure. Foundation design should be performed by the project structural engineer, incorporating the following parameters. Allowable Soil Bearing: Minimum Footing Width: Minimum Footing Depth: Minimum Reinforcement: Subgrade Modulus: Slabs-on-Grade: 2,500 lbs/ftz (one-third increase for wind or seismic) 12 inches 30 inches below lowest adjacent soil grade. (2) No. 5 bars, top and bottom, in continuous footings. 100 lbslin’ Slabs should be at least 6 inches thick, with at least No. 3 bars on 12-inch centers, each way. Lateral Resistance Lateral loads against structures may be resisted by friction between the bottoms of footings and slabs and the supporting soil, as well as passive pressure from the portion of vertical foundation members embedded into compacted fill or formational material. A coefficient of friction of 0.25, and a passive pressure of 250 psf per foot of depth is recommended. Settlement The proposed structure will be underlain by between approximately 20 and 95 feet of fill. We estimate that the structure may experience up to 2% inches of total settlement, and up to 1% inches of differential settlement. The maximum differential settlement will likely occur between the center of the building and the northern edge, across a length of roughly 200 feet. The settlement will likely manifest as a sagging of the central portion, with less settlement on both the northern and eastern edges of the structure. If such settlement is not tolerable, then additional recommendations for deep foundations may be provided. Geotechnics Incorporated Aston Views, LLC May 1,2000 Project No. 0599-001-00 Document No. 0-0468 Foundation Setbacks As a minimum, the foundations for all structures should be setback from descending slopes at least 10 feet. The setback should be measured horizontally from the outside bottom edge of the footing to the slope face. The horizontal setback can be reduced by deepening the foundation to achieve the recommended setback distance projected from the footing bottom to the face of the slope. It should be recognized that the outer few feet of all slopes are susceptible to gradual down- slopemovements due to slope creep. This will affect hardscape such as concrete slabs. We recommend that settlement sensitive structures including concrete slabs not be constructed within 5 feet of the perimeter slope tops. Our review of the Preliminary Site Plan indicates that a lunch patio is proposed at the top of the western slope. If concrete flatwork is used for the lunch patio, we recommend that the slabs be constructed with a continuous 12-inch wide, 30-inch deep foundation around the northern, western and southern edges of the patio. The foundation should be reinforced with two No. 4 bars at both top and bottom. As an alternative to reinforced concrete flatwork, paver blocks may be used for the patio area without a perimeter foundation, assuming that the potential for differential movement and expansion of paver joints is deemed tolerable. CONCRETE SLABS In the referenced document, we noted that the most commonly used moisture protection in southern California consists of two inches of clean sand covered by 'visqueen' plastic sheeting, with an additional two inches of sand placed over the top. It has been our experience that such systems will transmit from approximately 6 to 12 pounds of moisture per 1000 square feet per day. This may be excessive for some applications. If more protection is needed, we recommend that the slab be constructeddirectly on 6 inches of minus 3/4-inch crushed rock (not aggregate base). In our opinion, the open graded crushed rock provides more of a capillary break than the sand and visqueen system. With this alternative, no plastic sheeting is used as a vapor barrier. Instead, we recommend that a dense, less permeable concrete be used for the slab, with a water to cement ratio no greater than 0.5. Geotechnics Incorporated Aston Views, LLC May I, 2000 Project No. 0599-001-00 Document No. 0-0468 Page 4 Exterior Slabs As discussed in the referenced report, exterior slabs constructed directly on the expansive soils may experience differential heave of 1 inch or more. In order to reduce the potential for differential heave, the upper 24 inches of slab subgrade may be lime stabilized. If lime stabilization is used in this zone, the previously recommended slab thickness may be reduced to 5 inches, and the slab reinforcement may be reduced to 6x6 W2.9/W2.9 Welded Wire Fabric placed at mid height of the section. Crack control joints should still be used on a maximum spacing of five feet for sidewalks, and 10 feet each way for slabs. Note that reinforcement should be continuous through cold joints constructed in the slabs. LIME STABILIZATION Lime stabilization of the proposed pavement and flatwork areas would reduce the potential for distress to these improvements due to the highly expansi.ve nature of the site soils. For the proposed development, we anticipate that the building areas would first be moisture treated and the foundations and slabs constructed. The improvement areas would then be fine graded, and utilities placed at least 12 inches below the proposed treatment depth. Lime stabilization would be conducted for the upper 12 inches of pavement subgrade, and for the subgrade soils in the upper 24 inches of critical exterior flatwork areas. Critical areas may include any flatwork that is adjacent to the proposed structure, the lunch patio, decorative concrete pavements, the trash truck apron, and the area beneath the proposed cooling tower slab. Note that the 12-inch deep lime stabilization zone should be extended at least 12 inches beyond curb and gutter areas along the perimeter of the site. Specific recommendations and constructionspecifications for lime stabilization of the site soils may be provided upon request. These recommendations should be based on at least two mix designs conducted on the site soils in general accordance with ASTM C977. Lime stabilizedR-Value testing should be conducted to determine an appropriate pavement design. However, for preliminary planning purposes, it has been our experience that lime stabilized commercial pavements usually consist of 3 to 4 inches of asphalt concrete placed directly on lime stabilized soil that is compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. Four inches of asphalt is typically used in truck access drives, while three inches of asphalt may be appropriate for passenger car parking areas. Lime stabilized expansion index testing may be conducted to provide an estimate of the reduction in heave potential in flatwork areas. Please note that testing may take up to 30 days to complete. Geotechnics Incorporated Project No. 0599-001-00 Aston Views, LLC May 1,2000 Document No. 0-0468 Page 5 0 LIMITATIONS The recommendations in this letter were provided using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical consultants practicing in this or similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional opinions included in this report. We appreciate this opportunity to be of professional service. Please call at your convenience if you should have any questions or comments regarding the recommendations contained in this letter. GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED Matthew A. Fagan, P.E. 57248 Project Engineer Principal Engineer Distribution: (2) Addressee, Mr. Mark D. McLaren (FAX: 858-457-4910) (4) Smith Consulting Architects, Mr. Jon Ohlson (Include Doc. No. 8-0366) (1) Lusardi Construction, Mr. Jeff Jenco (FAX ONLY: 760-744-9064) Geotechnics Incorporated Geotechnics Incorporated - Principals: Anthony F. Belfast Michael P. Imhriglio W. Lee Vanderhurst June 3,1998 T & B Planning Consultants, Inc. 3242 Halladay Street, Suite 100 Santa Ana, California 92705 Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. 8-0366 Attention: Mr. James Greco SUBJECT: REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Carlsbad Research Center, Lot 69 Carlsbad, California Gentlemen: \ The following report presents the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of our geotechnical *\ ,, Y u investigation of the subject site. It is our understanding that the development is to consist of the construction of two single-story, tilt-up concrete industrial buildings along with loading areas and associated parking. In general, our findings indicate that the subject site is underlain by relatively deep fill materials that are considered suitable to support the proposed structures, providing that the recommendedsite preparation is performed, and that moderate settlement is deemed tolerable. There were no unusual or special conditions apparent in our investigation which would preclude development as planned. c 1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF WORK c The purpose of ow investigation was to evaluate the existing geotechnical conditions at the site as they relate to the proposed improvements, and to make recommendations regarding site preparation and grading, design ofthe proposed foundations, retaining walls, and slabs, and the construction of pavements. The recommendations contained herein are based on a surface reconnaissance, subsurface exploration, laboratory testing, and professional experience in the general site area. Design values may include presumptive parameters based on professional judgement. Our scope of work was limited to: 9245 Activity Rd., Ste. 103 * Sun Diego, California 92126 Phone (858) 536-1000 * Fax (858) 536-8311 T & B Planning Consultants, Inc. June 3. 1998 Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. 8-0366 1.1 Review of available literature related to general geologic conditions. 1.2 A visual reconnaissance and subsurface exploration of the site consisting of the drilling of four borings with a truck mounted drill rig, using an eight-inch diameter hollow stem flight auger. Bulk, disturbed, and relatively undisturbed samples were collected. 1.3 Laboratory testing of selected samples collected during the subsurface exploration. Testing assisted us in characterizing soil behavior, and assessing pertinent soil properties. 1.4 Assessment of general seismic conditions and geologic hazards affecting the area, and their likely impact on the project. 1.5 Engineering analysis for the development of recommendations for site preparation, earthwork construction, foundation design, on-grade slabs, site drainage, earth retaining structures, slope stability, and pavement design. 1.6 Preparation of this report summarizing our findings, conclusions and recommendations. 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION The subject site, consisting of Lot 69 of the Carlsbad Research Center, is located west of Aston Avenue as shown in the Site Location Map, Figure 1. The northeastern edge of the site is bordered by a developed commercial lot which is approximately at the same grade as the site. The northwest, west, and southwest portions of the site consist of a terraced, 2:l (horizonta1:vertical) fill slope, which descends approximately 70 feet to the natural terrain below. Two series of brow ditches channel slope runoff south along the slope to an appropriate drainage structure. The natural slope descends, at an irregular gradient, from the toe of the fill slope another 100 feet down to the terminus of Faraday Avenue in the canyon below. The southeast portion of the site is bordered by an undeveloped lot at approximately the same grade. Access to the site is provided by Aston Avenue. Elevations ofthe existing building pad area are between approximately 253 and 260 feet above mean sea level. Drainage is directed by sheet flow to a desiltation basin in the northeast comer of the site. During the time of this investigation, the northem half of the pad had been tilled to control weed growth, whereas the remaining portion was covered with a relatively thick growth of tall weeds and grasses. A well landscaped irregularly sloping area separates the building pad from Aston Avenue. The approximate layout of the site is shown in the Site Plan, Figure 2. Geotechnics Incorporated ocation of exploratory boring iatural topography T & B Planning Consultants, he. June 3, 1998 Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. 8-0366 3.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT It is our understanding that the development is to consist of the construction of two single-story industrial and/or ofice buildings along with loading areas and associated parking and drives. Details of the proposed construction were not known at the time of this investigation. However, we anticipate that the structures will be constructed using tilt-up concrete panels with a panelized roofing system. Preliminary development plans indicate that only minor grading will be conducted at the site, consisting of cuts and fills of less than three feet. The approximate locations of the proposed structures are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. 4.0 GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The Carlsbad Research Center is located within the coastal plain section of the Peninsular Range Geomorphic Province of California. The coastal plain is characterized by subdued landforms underlain by sedimentary formations. Within the Carlsbad Research Center, one may encounter Jurassic age volcanic rock as well as a variety of Cretaceous and Eocene age claystones, siltstones and sandstones. Our subsurface investigation and literature review indicates that the subject site is underlain at depth by the Jurassic age Santiago Peak Volcanics, covered with a variable depth of compacted fill. The approximate locations of the exploratory borings made for our investigation are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. Logs of the explorations are given in the figures of Appendix B. The specific units encountered in our investigation are discussed below. 4.1 Santiago Peak Volcanics (JsD) Although not directly observed in the subsurface exploration, a review of the as-graded geotechnical report for the subject site indicates that Santiago Peak Volcanics underlie the entire site at depth. Santiago Peak Volcanks, as observed elsewhere at the Carlsbad Research Center, typically consist of a mildly metamorphosed, metavolcanic rock. The rock is often highly jointed, with clay filled joints which may contain water. The rock is characterized by a very high strength, and very low compressibility. Geotechnics Incorporated T & B Planning Consultants, Inc. June 3, 1998 Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. 8-0366 Page 4 4.2 Prior to mass grading of the research center, the subject site consisted of a westerly sloping hillside with one re-entrant canyon which drained to the west. During mass grading operations, the alluvium, colluvium, and the topsoil deposits that covered the site were excavated and replaced as compacted fill. Materials generated from cuts in sedimentary formationsoutside of the subject site were also placed as fill. The Site Plan, Figure 2, shows the approximate natural, or pre-graded topography of the site, as well as the approximate existing grades. Note that the depth of fill throughout the site may be estimated by subtracting the natural elevation from the existing elevation shown in Figure 2, and adding 5 to 10 feet in order to account for remedial removals. Our subsurface investigation and literature review indicates that fill underlies all of the proposed building pad area, with a depth ranging from a minimum of approximately 15 feet in the northeast and southeast portions of the pad, to a maximum of approximately 100 feet in the southwest central portion of the pad. The surfcial fill appears to have been derived from the Point Loma and Santiago Formations. Fill material observed in the subsurface exploration ranged from a sandy lean clay (CL), to a fat clay (CH). The fill was typically of moderate plasticity, moist, hard, and contained little or no vegetative debris. The fill varied in color from brown, to olive gray, to dark olive, depending upon the source material. 4.3 Groundwater No seepage or groundwater was observed in OUT investigation. However, changes in rainfall or site drainage could produce seepage or locally perched groundwater conditions within the soil underlying the site. It should be recognizedthat excessive irrigation on the project site could also cause perched groundwater conditions to develop at some future date. This typically occurs at underlying contacts with less permeable materials, such as lifts of high plasticity clays within the fill. Since the prediction of the location of such conditions is not possible, they are typically mitigated if and when they occur. - Geotechnics Incorporated T & B Planning Consultants, Inc. June 3.1998 Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. 8-0366 Page 5 5.0 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS The subject site is not located within an area previously known for significant geologic hazards. Potential seismic hazards at the site are anticipated to be the result of ground shaking from distant active faults. The nearest known active fault is within the Rose Canyon fault zone, located approximately 5% miles to the west of the site. 5.1 Ground Rupture Evidence of active faulting at the site was not found. Accordingly, ground rupture is not considered to be a significant hazard at the site. 5.2 Seismicitv Active faults within 100 !an of the site are shown in the Fault Location Map, Figure 3. Table 1 presents the estimated peak ground accelerations for the site from regionally active faults based on the distance between the site and the active fault, the published maximum credible and probable event associated with each fault, and published distance attenuation curves. In our opinion, the most significant credible seismic event with respect to the subject site would be a 7.0 magnitude event on the Rose Canyon fault zone, which would result in an estimated peak ground acceleration of 0.36g. For non-critical structures, the most significant probable seismic event would be a magnitude 6.4 event on the Rose Canyon fault zone resulting in an estimated peak ground acceleration of 0.30g. Design of structures should comply with the requirements of the governing jurisdictions, building codes and standard practices of the Association of Structural Engineers of California. 5.3 Liauefaction Liquefiable soil typically consists of cohesionless sands and silts that are loose to medium dense, and saturated. To liquefy, these soils must be subjected to a ground shaking of sufficient magnitude and duration. Given the relatively dense and clayey nature of the subsurface materials, and the absence of a groundwater table, the potential for liquefaction is considered to be negligible. Geotechnics Incorporated 7 5 ic r r r .D r FAULT LOCATION MAP Carlsbad Research Center, Lot 69 T 8 B Planning Consultants, Inc. Geotechnics - -1 n c o rp or at e d I I I Modified from Anderson, Rockwell, Agnew, 1989 Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. EO366 FIGURE 3 I - r - c T & B Planning Consultants, Inc. Project No. 0447-001-00 June 3,1996 Document No. 8-0366 Page 6 5.4 Landslides and Lateral Soreads Evidence of ancient landslides at the site was not found. Recommendations are provided in the following sections of the report which will help to reduce the potential for future slope instabilities. These recommendations focus on imgation control, and landscape planting. 5.5 Tsunamis. Seiches. Earthauake Induced FloodinP The distance between the subject site and the coast, and the sites elevation above sea level, preclude damage due to seismically induced waves (tsunamis). Nearby bodies of water of significant size were not noted during this investigation, and accordingly,earthquakeinduced flooding is not anticipated to be a potential hazard. Geotechnies Incorporated T Br B Planning Consultants, Inc. lune 3, 1998 Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. 8-0366 Page 7 6.0 CONCLUSIONS No geotechnical conditions were apparent during the investigation which would preclude the proposed commercial development. However, some factors exist which require consideration. There are no known active faults underlying the project site. The most likely seismic hazards at the site would be associatedwith significant ground shaking from an event centered within the nearby Rose Canyon Fault Zone. Evidence of existing slope instabilities, or landslides, was not encountered during this investigation. Our analysis indicates that the existing slopes on site are stable with regard to deep seated failure. However, surface water flow and/or seepage will increase the potential for surficial slope failures and erosion. Therefore, measures shouldbe implemented in order to improve and maintain the surficial stability of the site slopes. The on-site fill soils consist of moderately to highly expansive clays. Expansive materials within building and slab subgrade may cause differential movement and cracking if appropriate measures are not employed. Alternative recommendations are provided in this report to mitigate the hazards associated with the expansive materials. . The site contains relatively deep fill within the proposed building areas. Building A will be underlain by between approximately 35 and 50 feet of compacted fill, whereas Building B will be underlain by between approximately 30 and 95 feet of fill. It has our experience that even well documented compacted fills may undergohydrocompression due to the self weight of the fill, and the infiltration of irrigation water after site development. The magnitude of hydrocompression is typically proportional to the fill depth at a given location. Consequently, differential settlement may occur across the length of the proposed structures. We estimate that Building A may experience up to % inch of differential settlement, whereas Building B may experience up to 1 %inches differential settlement. Such settlement may be tolerable for these commercial structures. However, if the risks associated with this settlement are deemed intolerable, then deep foundations, grade beams, and structural slabs may be used to eliminate the potential for such distress. The sdicial 24 inches of fill throughout the site has been tilled to control weed growth. This material is considered to be compressible, and should be removed and re-compacted throughout the building and improvement areas. Geotecbnics Incorporated T & B Planning Consultants, Inc. June 3,1998 Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. 8-0366 7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS The remainder of this report presents recommendations regarding earthwork construction and foundation design. These recommendations are based on empirical and analytical methods typical of the standard of practice in southern California. If these recommendations appear not to cover any specific feature of the project, please contact our office for additions or revisions. 7.1 Plan Review We recommend that foundation and grading plans be reviewed by Geotechnics Incorporated prior to plan finalization in order to evaluate conformance with the intent of the recommendations contained within this report. 7.2 Excavation and Grading Observation Foundation excavations and site grading excavations should be observed by Geotechnics Incorporated. Geotechnics Incorporated should provide observation and testing services continuously during grading. Such observations are considered essential to identify field conditions that differ from those anticipated by the preliminary investigation, to adjust designs to actual field conditions, and to determine that the grading is accomplished in general accordance with the recommendations of this report. Recommendations presented in this report are contingent upon Geotechnics Incorporated performing such services. Our personnel should perform sufficient testing of fill during grading to support our professional opinion as to compliance with compaction recommendations. 7.3 Earthwork Grading and earthwork should be conducted in accordance with tk Grading Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad and Appendix Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code. The following recommendations are provided regarding specific aspects of the proposed earthwork construction. These recommendations should be considered subject to revision based on field conditions observed by the geotechnical consultant. 7 Geotechnics Incorporated 7 T 8r B Planning Consultants, Inc. June 3, 1998 Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. 8-0366 7.3.1 General: Site preparation should include the removal of deleterious materials, existing structures or other improvements from areas to be subjected to fill or structural loads. Deleterious materials include vegetation, trash, construction debris, and rock fragments with greatest dimensions in excess of 6 inches. Existing subsurface utilities that are to be abandoned should be removed and the trenches backfilled and compacted as described in Section 7.4. 7.3.2 Desiltation Basin: A temporary desiltation basin was installed during rough grading of the subject site in the northeast comer of the pad. Soft sediments which have accumulated within the basin should be removed to a depth where competent fill material is encountered. The excavation should then be brought to finish grade with fill compacted fill in accordance with Section 7.4. 7.3.3 Imurovement Areas: The upper 24 inches of surfcial soils within the building pad area is considered compressible. Consequently, in all areas of planned improvements, including pavements and exterior flatwork, the surficiall2 inches of soil should be excavated and stockpiled. The exposed subgrade should then be scarified 12 inches, moistened, and compacted to 90 percent relative compaction. The stockpiled soil that is freed of deleterious materials should then be replaced as a compacted fill to the proposed subgrade elevations in accordance with Section 7.4. 7.3.4 Building Areas: In order to decrease the potential for differential heave of slabs and foundations due to the highly expansive nature of the on-site soil, we recommend that in all areas of planned structures, including at least five feet outside of the building perimeters, surficial soil within four feet of finish grade be excavated and replaced in accordance with one ofthe recommendations discussedbelow. Note that theserecommendations are given in order of increasing risk of cosmetic distress to the proposedstructures, such as cracking of slabs and stucco, and racking of doors. a. Replace the soil within four feet of the building pad subgrade elevations with material which has a low potential for expansion. This may consist of imported nonexpansive soil, or lime-treated on-site soils. Our experience indicates that lime treatment of the site soils will require between 5 and 6 percent hydrated lime slurry by weight. The actual percentage should be based on a laboratory mix design conducted by the geotechnical consultant in accordance with ASTM C970. Geotechnics Incorporated T & B Planning Consultants, Inc June 3, 1998 Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. 8-0366 b. Thoroughly mix the excavated soil to provide uniform expansion potential. Place the soil within the upper four feet of building pad subgrade at a moisture content that is at least five percentage points above optimum moisture based on ASTM D1557. Because of the benefits related to a decreased expansion potential, the minimum required compaction is 87 percent of the maximum density within the moisture treated zone. The moisture content in the treated zone should be maintained by periodic wetting until immediately prior to placing the foundations and slabs. However, repeated cycles of wetting and drying may reduce the relative compaction in expansive fill. The geotechnical consultant should retest compaction at slab subgrade elevations immediately prior to excavation of foundations, in order to determine if excavation and recompaction of the surficial portions of the fill will be necessary. In general, if more than 30 days elapses between preparation of the slab subgrade and placing of the concrete for the slabs, additional earthwork should be anticipated. The depth and extent of removal and recompaction should be based on the conditions observed in the field by the geotechnical consultant. 7.3.5 Temuorarv Excavations: Temporary excavations should conform with Cal- OSHA guidelines. Temporary excavations in fill should be inclined no steeper than 1 :1 for heights up to 10 feet. Temporary excavations that encounter seepage or other potentially adverse conditions should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant on a case-by-case basis during grading. Remedial measures may include shoring, or reducing slope inclinations. 7.4 Fill Comuaction All fill and backfill to be placed in association with site development should be accom- plished at slightly over optimum moisture conditions and using equipment that is capable of producing auniformly compactedproduct. The minimumrelative Compaction recommended for fill is 90 percent of maximum density based on ASTM D1557-91, except as modified in previous and subsequent paragraphs. Sufficient observationand testing should be performed by Geotechnics Incorporated so that an opinion can be rendered as to the compaction achieved. Geotecbnics Incorporated T & B Planning Consultants, Inc. lune 3, 1998 Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. 8-0366 Page I1 Imported fill sources, if needed, should be observed prior to hauling onto the site to determine the suitability for use. Representative samples of imported materials and on site soils should be tested by Geotecbnics in order to evaluate their appropriate engineering properties for the planned use. Imported fill soils should have an expansion index of no more than 50 based on UBC Test Method 18-2 or ASTM D4829. During grading operations, soil types other than those analyzed in the geotechnical reports may be encountered by the contractor. Geotechnics should be notified to evaluate the suit- ability of these soils for use as fill and as finish grade soils. 7.5 SloDes As discussed previously, a variable slope exists on the western portion of the site, with an inclination no steeper than 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). Previous analysis has indicatedthat this slope is stable with regard to deep seated failure with a factor of safety greater than 1.5, which is the generally accepted safety factor. However, the potential for surficial slope failure will be increased by saturation of the slope face and the resulting seepage forces. Surficial slope stability may be enhanced by providing proper site drainage. The site should be graded so that water f+om the surrounding areas is not able to flow over the top of slopes. Diversion structuresshould be provided where necessary. Surface runoff should be confined to gunite-lined swales or other appropriate devices to reduce the potential for erosion. It is recommended that slopes be planted with vegetation that will increase their stability. Ice plant is generally not recommended. We recommend that vegetation include woody plants, along with ground cover. All plants should be adapted for growth in semi-arid climates with little or no irrigation. A landscape architect should be consulted in order to develop a specific planting palate suitable for slope stabilization. 7.6 Surface Drainage Foundation and slab performance depends greatly on how well the runoff waters drain from the site. This is true both during construction and over the entire life of the structure. The ground surface around structures should be graded so that water flows rapidly away from the structures without ponding. The surface gradient needed to achieve this depends on the prevailing landscape. In general, we recommend that pavement and lawn areas within five feet of buildings slope away at gradients of at least two percent. Densely vegetated areas should have minimum gradients of at least five percent away from buildings in the first five Geoteehnica Incorporated T & B Planning Consultants, Inc. lune 3. 1998 - Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. 8-0366 feet. Densely vegetated areas are considered those in which the planting type and spacing is such that the flow of water is impeded. Planters should be built so that water from them will not seep into the foundation, slab, or pavement areas. Roof drainage should be channeled by pipe to storm drains, or discharge at least 10 feet from building lines. Site irrigation should be limited to the minimum necessary to sustain landscaping plants. Should excessive irrigation, surface water intrusion, water line breaks, or unusually high rainfall occur, saturated zones or "perched" groundwater may develop in the underlying soils. 7.7 Foundation Recommendations These recommendations are considered generally consistent with methods typically used in southern California. Other alternatives may be available. The foundation recommendations herein should not be considered to preclude more restrictive criteria of governing agencies or by the structural engineer. The design of the foundation system should be performed by the project structural engineer, incorporating the geotecbnical parameters described in the following sections. 7.7.1 Building A (Non-exuansive Cau): The following recommendations assume that the proposed Building A will be underlain entirely by a non-expansive fill cap as recommended in Section 7.3.4a. Allowable Soil Bearing: 2,500 lbs/ft2 (allow a one-third increase for short-term wind or seismic loads) Minimum Footing Width: 12 inches Minimum Footing Depth: Minimum Reinforcement: 18 inches below lowest adjacent soil grade Two No. 4 bars, top and bottom, continuous footings. Geotechnics Incorporated T & B Planning Consultants, Inc. June 3,1998 Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. 8-0366 7.7.2 Building A (Moisture Treatment): The following recommendations assume that the proposed Building A will be underlain by moisture treated on-site soils prepared as recommended in Section 7.3.4b. Allowable Soil Bearing: 2,500 lbs/ftz (allow a one-third increase for short-term wind or seismic loads) Minimum Footing Width: 12 inches Minimum Footing Depth: Minimum Reinforcement: 30 inches below lowest adjacent soil grade TWONO. 5 bars, top and bottom, continuous footings. 7.7.3 Building B~on-exDansiveCau): The following recommendations assume that the proposed Building B will be underlain entirely by a non-expansive fill cap as recommended in Section 7.3.4a. Allowable Soil Bearing: 2,500 lbdft’ (allow aone-third increase for short-term wind or seismic loads) Minimum Footing Width: 12 inches Minimum Footing Depth: 24 inches below lowest adjacent soil grade Minimum Reinforcement: TwoNo. 5 bars, top and bottom, continuous footings. 7.7.4 Building B (Moisture Treatment): The following recommendations assume that the proposed Building A will be underlain by moisture treated on-site soils prepared as recommended in Section 7.3.4b. Allowable Soil Bearing: 2,500 lbdff (allow a one-third increase for short-term wind or seismic loads) Minimum Footing Width: 12 inches Minimum Footing Depth: Minimum Reinforcement: 30 inches below lowest adjacent soil gade Two No. 5 bars, top and bottom, continuous footings. Geotechnia Incorporated T & B Planning Consultants, Inc, lune 3, 1998 Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. 8-0366 7.7.5 Lateral Loads: Lateral loads against structures may be resisted by friction betweenthe bottoms of footings and slabs and the supporting soil, as well as passive pressure from the portion of vertical foundation members embedded into compacted fill. A coefficient of friction of 0.25, and a passive pressure of 250 lb/ft3 is recommended. 7.7.6 Settlement: The site contains relatively deep fill within the proposed building areas. It has our experience that even well documented compacted fills may undergo hydrocompression due to the self weight of the fill, and the infiltration of irrigation water after site development. The magnitude of hydrocompression is typically proportional to the fill depth at a given location. Consequently, differential settlement is anticipated across the proposed structures after the site is developed. The settlement estimates presented below may be tolerable for the proposed commercial structures. However, if the risks associated with the estimated settlements are deemed intolerable, then deep foundations, grade beams, and structural slabs may be used to reduce or eliminate the settlement potential. Additional recommendations for deep foundations will be provided upon request. Building A will be underlain by between approximately 35 and 50 feet of compacted fill. We estimate that Building A may experience a total settlement of approximately 1 inch, and a maximum differential settlement of approximately ?4 inch. The maximum differential settlement will likely occur across the short length of the structure (1 10 feet). The building will essentially tilt in a relatively uniform manner to the southwest. Building B will be underlain by between approximately 30 and 95 feet of fill. We estimate that Building B may experience up to 2% inches of total settlement, and up to 1 !4 inches of differential settlement. The maximum differential settlement will likely occur between the center of the building and the southern edge, across a length of roughly 90 feet. The settlement in BuildingB will likely manifest as a sagging of the central portion, with less settlement on both the northern and southern edges of the structure. Geotecbnics Incorporated 7 T & B Planning Consultants, Inc. lune 3, 1998 Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. 8-0366 7.8 On-Grade Slabs Building slabs should be supported by compacted fill prepared as recommended under Section 7.3.4. Slabs should be designed for the anticipated loading, using soil parameters which reflect the actual subgrade conditions. For slabs constructed on a non-expansive cap as recommended in Section 7.3.4a, a modulus of subgrade reaction of 250 kips/@ may be used. Such slabs should be at least 6 inches in thickness, and be reinforced with at least No. 3 bars on 18-inch centers, each way. For slabs founded on moisture treated on-site clays as recommended in Section 7.3.4b, a modulus of subgrade reaction of 100 kips/ft' should be used. These slabs should be at least 6 inches in thickness, and be reinforcedwith at least No. 3 bars on 12-inch centers, each way. 7.8.1 Moisture Protection for Slabs: Concrete slabs constructed on soil ultimately cause the moisture content to rise in the underlying soil. This results fiom continued capillary rise and the termination of normal evapotranspiration. Because normal concrete is permeable, the moisture will eventually penetrate the slab. Excessive moisture may cause mildewed carpets, lifting or discoloration of floor tile, or similar problems. The amount of moisture transmitted through the slab can be controlled by the use of various moisture barriers. To decrease the likelihood of problems related to damp slabs, suitable moisture protection measures should be used where moisturesensitive floor coverings or other factors warrant. The most commonly used moisture protection in Southern California consists of about two inches of clean sand covered by 'visqueen' plastic sheeting. In addition, two inches of sand are placed over the plastic to decrease concrete curing problems associated with placing concrete directly on an impermeable membrane. It has been our experiencethat such systems will transmit from approximately 6 to 12 pounds of moisture per 1000 square feet per day. The project architect should review these estimated transmission rates, since these values may be excessive for some applications. If more protection is needed, Geotechnics should be contacted for additional recommendations. - Geotechnics Incorporated T & B Planning Consultants, Inc lune 3, 1998 Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. 8-0366 7.8.2 Exterior Slabs: Exterior slabs constructed directly on the expansive soils will likely experience some movement and cracking. One inch of differentialmovement is not considered unusual, and more is possible. If such movement is deemed unacceptable, then differential movement and cracking may be decreased by replacing the surficial3 feet ofexpansive subgrade with nonexpansive or lime-treated on site soil. Reinforcement and control joints will further reduce the cracking and movement potential. Differential movement between buildings and exterior slabs, or between sidewalks and curbs may be decreased by dowelling the slab into the foundation or curb. Exterior slabs should be at least 5% inches thick, and should be reinforced with at least #3 rebars on 24 inch centers, each way. Crack control joints should be placed on at least 10 foot centers, each way, for slabs, and on 5 foot centers for sidewalks. 7.9 Exoansive Soils The soils observedduring our investigation consisted primarily of moderate to high plasticity clays (CL to CH). Laboratory testing of representative samples indicates that the site soils have a moderate to high expansion potential, based on Uniform Building Code criteria. Figure C-4 in the appendix summarizes the expansion test results. 7.10 Reactive Soils In order to assess the reactivity of the site soils with metal pipe, the pH and resistivity of a selected soil sample was determined. In order to assess the potential for sulfate attack, the sulfate content of a selected soil sample was determined. The results of these laboratory tests are shown in Figure C-4. Based on the results of the sulfate content tests and Table 19-A-4 of the 1997 UBC, we recommend that Type I1 cement be used for all concrete which will be in contact with soil, including all foundations and slabs. Furthermore, based on the requirements of the 1997 UBC, all concrete in contact with soil should have a maximum water to cement ratio of 0.50, and a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 4,000 psi. Geotechnics Incorporated T & B Planning Consultants, Inc. Project No. 0447-001-00 June 3,1998 Document No. 8-0366 Page 17 7.1 1 Earth-Retaining Structures Backfilling retaining walls with highly expansive soil can increase lateral pressures well beyond normal active or at-restpressures. We recommend that retaining walls be backfilled with soil having and expansive index of 20 or less. The backfill area should include the zone defined by a 1 : 1 sloping plane, back from the base of the wall. Retaining wall backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction, based on ASTM D1557-91. Backfill should not be placed until walls have achieved adequate structural strength. Heavy compaction equipment which could cause distress to walls should not be used. Cantilever retaining walls should be designed for an active earth pressure approximated by an equivalent fluid pressure of 35 lbs/ft3. The active pressure should be used for walls &e to yield at the top at least 0.2 percent of the wall height. For walls restrained so that such movement is not permitted, an equivalent fluid pressure of 55 lbs/fP should be used, based on at-rest soil oonditions with level backfill. The above pressures do not consider any surcharge loads or hydrostatic pressures. If these are applicable, they will increase the lateral pressures on the wall and we should be contacted for additional recommendations. Walls should contain an adequate subdrain to eliminate any hydrostatic forces. The recommended wall drain details are presented in Figure 4. 7.12 Pavements Alternatives are provided below for using either asphalt or portland cement concrete pavements. In general, the upper 12 inches of asphalt concrete pavement subgrade should be scarified, brought to about optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557. Any base or subbase materials used in association with asphalt concrete pavements should also be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum density as determined by ASTM D1557. For portland cement concrete pavements, the minimum recommended compaction is 90 percent of the maximum density. Subgrade preparation should be conducted immediately prior to the placement of the pavement section. Base should conform to Standard Specifications for Public Works Consfruction, crushed aggregate base, crushed miscellaneous base, or processed miscellaneous base. Geotefhnics Incorporated DAMP-PROOFING OR WATER- PROOFING AS REQUIRED ROCK AND FABRIC ALTERNATIVE .... (MIFAFI 140NL. SUPAC 4NP. OR APPROVED SIMILAR) PROOFING AS REQUIRED &INCH DIAM. ADS OR PV PERFORATED PIPE GEOCOMPOSITE PANEL DRAIN 1 CU. FT. PER LINEAL FOOT OF PANEL DRAIN ALTERNATIVE MINUS 3/4-INCH CRUSHED ROCK ENVELOPED IN FILTER FABRIC. '.. ' 44NCH DIAM. ADS OR W PERFORATED PIPE - Geotechnics - -Inc*rporated NOTES I) Perforated pipe should outlet through a solid pipe to a free gravity outfall. Perforated pipe and outlet pipe should have a fall of at least 1%. 2) As an alternative to the perforated pipe and outlet, weep holes may be included in the bottom of the wall. Weepholes should be at least 2 inches in diameter, and be spaced no greater than 8 feet. 3) Filter fabric should consist of Mirafi INN, Supac 5NP. hoc0 4599, or similar approved fabric. Filter fabric should be overlapped at least 6-inches. 4) Geocomposite panel drain should consist of Mlradrain 6000, J-DRain 400, Supac DS-15, or approved similar product. 5) Drain installation should be obswved by the geotechnical consultant prior to backfilling. WALL DRAIN DETAIL Carlsbad Research Center, Lot 69 TB B Planning Consultants, Inc. Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. 8-0366 FIGURE 4 T & B Planning Consultants, Inc. Project No. 0447-001-00 June 3,1998 Document No. 8-0366 Page 18 TRAFFIC INDEX 4.5 6.0 4.5 7.12.1 Asphalt Concrete: Two tr&ic types are assumed: areas of light traffic and passenger car parking (Traf€ic Index = 4.5), and access drives and truck routes (Traffic Index = 6.0). The project civil engineer should review these values to determine if they are appropriate. Laboratory R-value tests conducted on a representative sample of the on-site soils, and our previous experience in the site vicinity, indicate that an R-value of 5 should be used for pavement design. Based on the assumed Traffic Index, and the R-value determined in the laboratory, the following pavement sections are recommended in accordance with the CALTRANS design method. Note that ifthe subbase alternative is to be used, the subbase should have a minimum R-value of 50. ASPHALT AGGREGATE SUB-BASE CONCRETE BASE (R-VALUE > 50) 3 inches 8 inches , None 4 inches 12 inches None 3 inches 4 inches 12 inches 6.0 4 inches 4 inches 12 inches As an alternative to using aggregate base, the on-site soils may be lime treated in the pavement areas in order to improve their strength. Based on our previous experience with lime-treatment of similar soils in the research center, we anticipate that lime- stabilized on-site soils would have an R-value of 65 or more. Consequently, asphalt concrete pavements could be constructed directly on the lime treated subgrade. For preliminary design and estimationpurposes, we have found that typical sections for the parking and driveway areas would consist of 3 inches and 4 inches of asphalt concrete, placed directly on 12 inches of lime treated subgrade, respectively. Additional recommendationsfor construction of pavements on lime-treated soils may be provided upon request. These recommendations would be based on an appropriate mix-design and lime treated R-value conducted on representative samples of the on-site soils. Geotechnics Incorporated i- c T & B Planning Consultants, Inc. June 3,1998 Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. 8-0366 7.12.2 Portland Cement Concrete: Concrete pavement design was conducted in accordance with the simplified design procedure ofthe Portlandcement Association. This methodology is based on a 20 year design life. For design, it was assumed that aggregate interlock joints will be used for load transfer across control joints. Furthermore, the portland cement concrete was assumed to have a minimum 28 day flexural strength of 600 psi. Laboratory R-value tests conducted on a representative sample ofthe subgrade soils indicate that these materials will provide "low" subgrade support (corresponding to a modulus of subgrade reaction less than 120 pci). Based on these assumptions, we recommend that the pavement section consist of 6 inches of oortland cement concrete over native suberade. Crack control joints should be placed on at least 10 foot centers, each way. Concentrated truck traffic areas, such as trash truck aprons and loading dock areas, should be reinforced with at least number 4 bars on 18-inch centers, each way. 8.0 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION This investigation was performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical consultants practicing in this or similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional opinions included in this report. The samples taken and used for testing and the observations made are believed representative of the project site; however, soil and geologic conditions can vary significantly between borings. findings. If this occurs, the changed conditions must be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant and additional recommendations made, if warranted. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the necessary designconsultants for the project and incorporated into the plans, and the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractors carry out such recommendations in the field. Geotecbnies Incorporated T & B Planning Consultants, Inc. June 3, 1998 Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. 8-0366 The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the condition of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether due to natural processes or the work of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate. standards ofpractice may occur fiom legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside OUT control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of three years. *** GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED Anthony F. Belfast, P.E. C 40333 Principal Y Matthew A. Fagan, P.E. Project Engineer Geotecbaics Incorporated APPENDIX A REFERENCES American Society for Testing and Materials (1995). Annual Book OfASTMStandards, Section 4, Construction, Volume 04.08 Soil and Rock; Dimension Stone; Geognthetics, ASTM, Philadelphia, PA, 981 p. Anderson, J. G. , Rockwell, T. K., Agnew, D. C. (1989). Past and Possible Future Earthquakes of Significance to the Sun Diego Region, Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 5, No. 2. pp 299-335. Bowles, J. E. (1996). Foundation Analysis and Design, 5th ed.: New York, McGraw Hill, 1175 p. California Division of Mines and Geology (1975). Recommended Guidelines for Determining the Maximum Credible and the Maximum Probable Earthquakes, California Division of Mines and Geology Notes, Number 43. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (1992). Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act of 1972: California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42 International Conference of Building Officials (1997). Uniform Building Code (with California Amendments) Title 23. Geotechnics Incorporated (1 994). As-Graded Geotechnical Report, Unit 5, Carlsbad Research Center,Carlsbad, California, Project No. 0017-001-01, April 29, 1994. Geotechnics Incorporated (1 998). Proposal For GeotechnicalServices, Geotechnical Investigation for Foundation Recommendations, CarlsbadResearch Center, Lot 69, Carlsbad California, Proposal No. 8-104, May 4. Jennings, C. W. (1994). Fault Activity Map of California and adjacent areas with Locations and Ages of Recent Eruptions, California Division of Mines and Geology, California, Geologic Data Map Series, Map No. 6. Kennedy, M. P., and Peterson, G. L. (1975). Geology ofSan Diego Metropolitan Area, California: Calfornia Division of Mines and Geology Bulletin 200,56 p. Geotechnica Incorporated APPENDIX A REFERENCES (Continued) Mualchin, L. and Jones, A.L. (1992). Peak Accelerationsfrom Maximum Credible Earthquakes in California (Rock and StrffSoil Sites): California Division of Mines and Geology, Open File Report 92-1 San Diego Geotechnical Consultants, Inc. (1988). As Graded Geotechnical Report, Carlsbad Research Center, Phase 111, IV and K Lots 76 through 91, 108, and 109, Carlsbad California, Job No. 05-2863-006-00-10, April 1, 1988. San Diego Geotechnical Consultants, Inc. (1984). As Graded Geotechnical Report, Carlsbad Research Center, Phase IIandlII, Carlsbad Tract No. 81-10, Carlsbad California; Job No. SD1162-10, September 10, 1984. Trieman, J. A. (1984). The Rose Canyon Fault Zone --A Review andAnalysis, CalifomiaDivision of Mines and Geology unpublished report, 106 p. Wesnousky, S. G. (1986). Earthquakes, Quaternary Faults, and Seismic Hazard in California: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 91, no. B12, p. 12587-12631. Geotechnics Incorporated r ! r APPENDIX B FIELD EXPLORATION Field exploration consisted of avisual reconnaissance of the site, and the drilling of four exploratory borings with a truck-mounted, hollow stem, continuous flight drill rig on May 19,1998. The borings were 8 inches in diameter, and were drilled to a maximum depth of 14 feet. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. Logs describing the subsurface conditions encountered are presented on the following Figures B-1 through B-4. Disturbed samples were collected using a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler (2-inch outside diameter). SPT samples were sealed in plastic bags, labeled, and returned to the laboratory for testing. Relatively undisturbed samples were collected using a 3-inch outside diameter, ring lined sampler (modified California sampler). Ring samples were sealed in plastic bags, placed in rigid plastic containers, labeled, and returned to the laboratory for testing. The drive weight for both the SPT and the ring samples was a 140-pound hammer with a free fall of 30 inches. For each sample, we recorded the number of blows needed to drive the sampler 6,12, and 18 inches. The number of blows needed to drive the final 12 inches is shown on the attached logs under "blows per ft." Bulk samples are indicated on the boring logs with shading, whereas SPT samples are indicated with vertical lines, and ring samples with horizontal lines. Boring locations were established in the field by pacing and by estimation using the plans provided. The locations shown should not be considered more accurate than is implied by the method of measurement used. The lines designating the interface between soil units on the test pit logs are determined by interpolation and are therefore approximations. The transition between the materials may be abrupt or gradual. Further, soil conditions at locations between the borings may be substantially different from those at the specific locations explored. It should be noted that the passage of time can result in changes in the soil conditions reported in our logs. Geotechnics Incorporated LOG OF EXPLORATION BORING NO. 1 -0 dt - - F E & Y 0 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 - 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 zu - led b IAF Date: 511 9/98 Elevation I Inch Hollow Stem Flight Auger DESCRIPTION :ILL: - Dark olive and brown fat clay (CH), high plasticity, moist, hard. :ontains few subrounded cobbles to 5 inches in diameter. iame. Several gypsum crystals observed Total depth = 10 Feet Refusal @ 10 Feet No Groundwater, No Caving Backfilled 5/19/98 ~ROJECT NO. 0477-001-00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED 258 LAB TESTS iradation lydmrneter .Uerberg H 8 Resistivity Mate Content xpansion lemolded Shear Init Weight loislure Content ~~ ~ FIGURE: B-1 LOG OF EXPLORATION BORING NO. 2 .O Re - - - - U k! 2 5 L - 1 2 3 4 - 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 - 12 13 14 I5 6 I7 8 9 10 Date: 511 9/98 I Inch Hollow Stem Flight Auger Elevation DESCRIPTION U& Olive gray lean clay (CL), moderate plasticity, very moist, hard, )live gray sandy clay (CL), fine grained sands, moderate plastidy clays, ioist, hard. Contains lifts of olive fat clay (CH). ame. Total depth = 11% Feet No Groundwater, No Caving Backfilled 5/19/98 260 LAB TESTS 3radation ixpansion :ree Swell ROJECT NO. 0477-001-00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE: 8-2 LOG OF EXPLORATION BORING NO. 3 Logged by MAF MI - - n Y 0 1 2 3 4 - 5 6 7 8 - 9 10 11 12 13 14 - 15 16 17 18 19 20 I U J L i U 3 f i I i 0 I Date: 511 sisa Inch Hollow Stem Flight Auger Elevation DESCRIPTION U: Olive gray sandy lean clay (CL), fine to medium grained sands, ioderate plasticity clays, moist, hard. ight olive sandy clay (CL), fine grained sands, moderate plasticity clays, ?ry moist, firm. live gray sandy clay (CL), fine grained sands, moderate plasticty clays, loist. hard. Total depth = 14 Feet Refusal @ 14 Feet No Groundwater, No Caving Backfilled 5/19/98 257 LAB TESTS ;radation lydrometer itterberg ixpansion lnit Weight loisture Content 'ROJECT NO. 0477401-00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE: E3 LOG OF EXPLORATION BORING NO. 4 .ogged by MAF Date: 511 9/98 ill€ - - E L Y 0 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 - 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ~ Inch Hollow Stem Flight Auger Elevation DESCRIPTION 'ILL: - Brown sandy clay (CL), fine sands, moderate plasticity, moist, harc :ontains some angular gravel to 3 inches in diameter. Total depth = 6% Feet No Groundwater, No Caving Backfilled 5/19/98 255 LAB TESTS -Value 'ROJECT NO. 0477-OOI-OO GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE: 8-4 APPENDIX C LABORATORY TESTING Representative samples of soils were tested using methods of the American Society for Testing and Materials, or other generally accepted standards. A brief description of the tests performed follows: Classification: Soils were classified visually according to the Unified Soil Classification System. Visual classification was supplemented by laboratory testing of selected samples and classification in accordance with ASTM D2487. The classifications are shown on the Boring Logs. In-Situ MoisturelDensity: The in-place moisture content and dry unit weight of selected samples was determined using relatively undisturbed samples from the liner rings of a 2.5 inch ID Modified California sampler. The dry unit weight and moisture content are shown on the Boring Logs. Particle Size Analvsis: Particle size analyses were performed in accordance with ASTM D422. The grain size distribution was used to determine presumptive strength parameters and foundation design criteria. The results are given in Figures C-1 through C-3. Atterbere Limits: ASTM D4318-84 was used to determine the liquid limit, plastic limit, and plasticity index of selected fine-grained samples. The results are given in Figures C-1 and C-3. Sulfate Content: To assess the potential for reactivity with concrete, a representative sample was tested for water-soluble sulfate using Caltrans 417 (Part I). The results are given in Figure 12-4. pH and Resistivity: To assess the potential for reactivity with metal pipe, a representative sample was tested for pH and resistivity using Caltrans method 643. The results are shown in Figure C-4. Expansion Index: The expansion potential of selected soils was characterized by using the test method ASTM D 4829. Figure C-4 provides the results of the tests. Direct Shear Test: The shear strength of the foundation area soils was assessedthrough direct shear tests performed in accordance with ASTM D3080. The sample was remolded at a moisture content and density to approximate the remedial grading conditions. The results are shown in Figure C-5. Free Swell Test In order to evaluate the swell behavior of the site soils, a consolidation test was conducted in accordance with ASTM D2435. The sample was given a nominal seating load, saturated, and allowed to swell freely prior to loading. The results are summarized in Figure C-6. R-value: An R-value test was performed on representative pavement area materials in accordance with ASTM D 2844-89. The results are discussed in the test of this report. Geotecbnics Incorporated r r SAMPLE PH RESISTIVITY BI @, 1'-4' 8.3 490 OHM-CM EXPANSION TEST RESULTS (ASTM D 4829) SAMPLE EXPANSION INDEX Bl@l'-4' B2 @ 1' - 4' B3@1'-4' SULFATE CONTENT 400 - 800 P.P.M. UBC TABLE NO. 29-C, CLASSIFICATION OF EXPANSIVE SOIL EXPANSION INDEX 0-20 21-50 51-90 91-130 Above 130 POTENTIAL EXPANSION Very low Low Medium High Very high - Geotechnics - I at e d Laboratory Test Results Carlsbad Research Center, Lot 69 T & B Planning Consultants, Inc. Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. 8-0366 Figure C-4 3000 2500 2000 1500 - Geotechnics =J 11 corporate d 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 NORMAL STRESS [PSFJ DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Carlsbad Research Center, Lot 69 Project No. 0447-001-00 Document No. 8-0366 T & B Planning Consultants FIGURE C-5 SAMPLE: B1 @ 1'-4 PEAK ULTIMATE I 1l; Dark olive fat clay (CH). IN-SITU AS-TESTED STRAIN RATE: I 0.0050 INlMlN I (Sample was consolidated and drained) -1 .W% O.W% 1 .W% - & *E tj 2.W% $ E CI E a2 n 3.00% 4.W% 5.W% - Geotechnics -Incorporated 10.0 Consolidation Test Results Carlsbad Research Canter, Lot 69 T & B planning Consultants, inc. Project No. 0447-001 -00 Document No. 8-0366 Figure C-6 100.0 1wo.o Stress [pa 62aV-6‘ Water added to sample after seating at 45 PSF INITIAL FINAL SAMPLE HEIGHT [IN] DRY DENSITY [PCF] SPECIFIC GRAVITY VOID RATIO WATER CONTENT [%I DEGREE OF SATURATION (“h] 1ooao.o DEC-05-2000 TUE 10:52 AN CITY OF CARLSBAD FAX NO. 760 602 8558 NON-RESIDENTIAL CERTIFICATE: Non-Residential Land Owner, please read this option carefully and be sure you thoroughly understand the options before signing. The option you chose will affect your payment of the developed Special Tax assessed on your property. This option is available only at the time of the first building permit issuance. Property owner signature is required before a building permit will be issued. Your SigMtUre is confirming the accuracy of all information shown. Carlrbad, California 9200 Zip Code City. State Zip Code City. State ‘LILL- \LO-O-b~ Assessor’s Parcel Number or APN and Lo1 Number if not yet subdivided by County Assessor. otz ZPK Building Permit NumbeKs) As cited by Ordinance No. NS-IS5 and adopted by the City of Carlsbd, California, the City is authorized to levy a Special Tax in Community Facilities Disrricc No. 1. All non-residential propeq. upon the issuance of a building permit, shall have the option to (I) pay the SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT TAX ONE- TIME or (2) WWMC the ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX - DEVELOPED PROPERTY for a period not to exceed twenty-five (25) years. Plcaw indicate your choice by initialing the appropriate line below: OPTION (I): I elect to pay the SPECIAL TA - E-TIME now. as a one-time payment . Amount of One-Ti S ccisl Tax: S , 1 Y6 .& . Owncr’s initials ww OPTION (2): 1 elect to pay the SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT TAX ANNUALLY for a perid not to exceed twenty-five (25) years. Maximum AMUd Special Tax: S . Owner’s Initials .D 1 DO HEREBY CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PEWURY THAT THE UNDERSIGNED 1s THE PROPERTY OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THAT I UNDERSTAND AND WILL PLY WI H THE PROVISIONS AS STATED ABOVE. ypAI reqLL= Mk.&cdR T1/’ I, Title su: u4 8. 5 4 signature of hopcny OwnU The City of Carisbad has not independently verified the information shown above. ThereforC, W OCCW no responsibility as to the accuracy or completeness of this information. P. 03 . DEC-05-2000 TUE 10:53 AM CITY OF CARLSBAD FAX NO. 760 602 8558 P. 04 - City of Carlsbad CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE PAYMW T OF SCHOOL FEES OR OTHER MITIGATION This form must be completed by the City, Ihe applicant, and the appropriate school districts and returned to lke Ci prior to issuing a building permit. The City will not iSSUe any building permil without a completed school fee form. Project Name: Building Permit Plan Check Number: Project Address: A.P.N.: Project Applicant (Owner Name); Project Description: Building Type: Residential: Second Dwelling Unit: Residential Additions: Number of New Dwellina Units Square Feet of Living Area in New Dwelling Spuare Feet of Living Area in SDU Net Square Feet New Area 6C. O~L Commercialllndustrial: Square Feet Floor Area City Certification of Applicant Information: Date: q/ua 1- Catlsbad Unified School Diskic~ 801 Pine Avc. Cdhd CA 92009 (729-92911 Encinitos Union School District 101 South Iolncho Sam Fc Rd Enciuim, CA 92024 (944d300) Sm Marcos Unified School Dicbict 215 Mala Way Sm Mare-, CA 92069 (736-2200) san Dieguito U!aiOn High School lhtsXl 710 EncinitDs Blvd. Ensinit.a, CA 92024 (753-6491) Cemncstion of ApplicanVOwners. Ths person axocUtmg this declaratlon CavnerJ ceertiRe6 under penalty of p.fluw thst (I) the Information pmvidmd above is mmcl and We 10 the best of me Owner's knowledge. and ht th, Owner vril( nie an mnmfed ceMcatmn of payment and pay the additional fee H Owner requests an inCreere lo #le number of dweulng unb or square footage after the building perm11 is issued or I( the Initial determlnatin of units or *quem footage is found to b IncoW, and that (2) the Owner is the ownerldovebper of the above described projecl(s). or that the wmn exewting UIii declaratkm Is authorhed 10 sign Dew I*!L!m - 008-7314 (760) 602-2700 FAX (760) 602-8560 @ .. .. '. r' .. DEC-05-2000 TUE 10:53 AM CITY OF CARLSBAD FAX NO. 760 602 8558 P. 05 SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL FEE CERTIFICATION (To be completed by the school district(6)) ~......,...........,...tt.f.t..~*..*....**......**..b..~*..**....~*...**...*......*.......*..**...*... THIS FORM INDICATES THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROJECT HAVE BEEN OR WlLL BE SATISFIED. . SCHOOL DISTRICT. The undersigned, being duly authorized by the applicable School District, certifies that the developer, builder. or owner has satisfied the obligation for school facilities. This is to certify that the applicant listed on page 1 has paid all amounts or completed other applicable school mitigation determined by the School District. The City may issue building permits for this project. SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED SCHOOL DISTRICT OFFICIAL TITI C /A.vknFfomm /v lllCL NAME OF SCHOOL DISTRICT DATE PHONE NUMBER ICBO Evaluation Service, Inc. 5360 WORKMAN MILL ROAD WHITTIER, CALIFORNIA 90601-2299 A subsidiary corporation ofthe International Conference of Building Officials EVALUATION REPORT Copyright @ 1999 ICE0 Evaluation Service. InC. FA-323 Reissued April 1, 1999 Filing Category: FABRICATORS OF PREFABRICATED BUILDINGS AND COMPONENTS (064) FABRICATOR OF STRUCTURAL STEEL ASSEMBLIES 3.0 EVIDENCE SUBMITTED M. W. REID WELDING, INC., dba SOUTH BAY WELDING 1805 CLEVELAND AVENUE NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA 91950 1.0 SUBJECT Fabricator of Structural Steel Assemblies 2.0 DESCRIPTION 2.1 General: This report recognizes the qualifications of M. W. Reid Weld- ing, Inc.. dba South Bay Welding, for fabricating structural steel assemblies under Section 1701.7 of the Uniform Build- ing CodeTu. This report recognizes the fabricator’s quality system manual and recognizes the existence ofa contractual agreement for, at a minimum, quarterly unannounced piant inspections by a quality control agency accredited by ICBO ES. The structural steel assemblies are fabricated using gas- metal arc welding. shielded-metal arc welding, gas-tungsten arc welding and flux-cored arc welding, and related proce- dures as delineated in the fabricator’s approved quality con- trol manual. Periodic plant inspections are conducted by Kleinfelder. Inc. (An-558). to monitor the quality system and fabrication processes of the fabricator. 2.2 Identlflcatlon: Each fabricated assembly is marked with a job number and piece mark keyed to the fabrication and erection drawings. A qLality system manLai complying with the ICE0 ES Accep- tanceCr.teriaforQual ty Contro.Manda s (ACIO). The manL- al contains ‘nformation oetail ng personnel qLa .f.cations. genera fabricat‘on plant operal.ons. we o ng PrOceoJres. qdal ty control proceodres lor the faci ily. an0 qdal ty contro proceodres ut .!zed by the qLality control agency OLT ng p ant inspect ons. 4.0 FINDINGS That the M. W. Reid Welding. Inc.. dba South Bay Weld- ing, fabrlcatlon plants, located at 1805 Cleveland Ave- nue, In National City. Californla, and 781 O’Connor Street, in El Cajon, Callfornla. are recognized as approved fabri- cators of structural steel asremblles under Section 202 of the 1997 Uniform Building CodeTu, subject to the fol- lowing conditions: 4.1 Recognltlon under this report is limited to the tab- ricatlon processes and procedures only. Thls re- pori does not cover the product, or the deslgn or performance characteristics of the tabrlcated producl. Quality control lnspectlons are provided by Kleln- felder, Inc. (An-558). 4.2 Thls report 1s subject to re-examination in two years. 0411 012001 Job Address: Permit Type: Parcel No: Valuation: Reference #: Project Title: City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Av Carlsbad, CA 92008 Plan Check Revision Permit No:PCRO1068 Building Inspection Request Line (760) 602-2725 1808 ASTON AV CBAD PCR Status: ISSUED Lot #: 0 Applied: 03/23/2001 $0.00 Construction Type: NEW Entered By: JM CEO03345 Plan Approved: 04/05/2001 Issued: 04/10/2001 ASTON VIEWS-REVISED TITLE 24 lnsoect Area: BUILDING SHELL Applicant: OHLSON JON Owner: 6215 04/10/01 w 01 02 COP 109.00 200 12220 EL CAMINO REAL SAN DIEGO CA 92130 858-793-4777 Total Fees: $109.00 Total Payments To Date: $0.00 Balance Due: $109.00 Plan Check Revision Fee Additional Fees $109.00 $0.00 FINAL APPROVAL Inspector: Date: Clearance: NOTICE: Piease take NOTlCE that approval of your project includes the 'imwiton" of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as 'fees/exadimns.' You have 90 days from the date this permh was issued to protest imposition of these feeslexactions. if you protest them, you must follow the protest procedures set folfh in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for pracessing in amrdance whh 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 impxiSon. You are hereby FURTHER NOTlFlED that your mht to protest the specified feeslexactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capactiy changes, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application pmiq or service fees in connection with this proMt. NOR DOES IT APPLY to any feeslexactions of which YOU have previously been given a NOTlCE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise expired. PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008 EST. VAL. Plan Ck. Deposi Validated By Date L A/ Address (include BidglSuite XI Business Name iat this address) Legal Description Lot No. Subdivision NamalNumbar Unit NO. Phase NO. Told X of units r . , ., Name Address City StatelZip Telephone X issuance, dso requires the applicant for such permit to file I) signed statement that he is licensed pur6umf 10 the provisions of the Contractor's License Law [Chapter 9, cammsnding with Section 7000 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Codel 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 mora than five hundred dollars 1150011. Name Address City StatslZip Telephone X State License X License Class City Business License X Designer Name Address City St at el Zip Telephone State Licsnsa Q of the work for which this permit is issued. 0 issued. My worker's compensation insurance Carrier and pdlcy number are: Insurence Company Poiicy No. Expiration Date (THIS SECTiON NEED NOT BE COMPLETED IF THE PERMiT IS FOR ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS 1$(001 OR LESS1 0 CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION: I certify that in the performance of the work for which this Permit is iswed, i shall not employ any person in any manner IO LIS to become subject to the Workers' Compensation Laws of Caiifomia. WARNING: Fallur. to UEYM work-' compensation covmge Is unlawful. aM .ham subJect an empbvI to crimlrul penalties end dvII Rnes up to one hundrad thousand dolus i$lOO.OOO). In addltion to the con of mmpensath. damago. 01 pmvidsd far in Saction 3706 of uul Labor &, intaran and anomy's fees. SIGNATURE DATE I hereby affirm that I am exempt from the Contractor's License Law for the following reason: I have and will maintain a certificate of consant to self-insure for workers' compensation as provided by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance I have and will maintain workers' compensation. 111 required by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is 0 I. 8s owner of the property or my employeus with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work and the structure is not intended or Offered for sale ISec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply 10 an owner of Property who builds or improves thereon. and who doer such work himrslf or through his own employees, provided that such improvements are not intended or Offernd fM sale. If. however, the building or improvement io 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 sals). I, as owner of the property, am exdudvdv contracting with licensed ~~ntra~t~rs 10 constRIc1 thu project (Sac. 7044. Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon. and contrt,cts for such projects with ~ontract~risl licensed pursuant to the Contractor's License LawI. 0 I am exempt under Section Business and Professions Code for this reason: 1. 2. 3. 4. I pefsonally ~lan to provide the major labor and materials for Construction of the proposed property improvement. YES ON0 I ihave I have not) signed an application for a building Pnrmit for thO prdpased work. i have contrwted with tha following person ifirm) to provide the proposed Construction iinclude name I address I phons number I contractors license number]: I plan to Provide portions of the work. but I have hired the following person to coordinate. SuPerVIse and provide the major work linctude name I address I phone number I Contractors license numbarl: ~ ~ ~ ~~~ 5. of work): I will provide some of the work, but I ham contracted lhiradl the following persons to provide the work indicated iinclude name I address I phone number I type PROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE DATE is the applicant or future building occ~pmt required to submit II business plan, acutely hazardous materials rogirtration form or risk management and prevention Program under S%lions 25505. 25533 or 25534 Of the Rerley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Accaunt Act7 0 YES NO is the applicant or future building oceupant required to obtain a permit from the air pollution Control district or air quality management district? 0 YES 0 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 APPUCANT HAS MET OR IS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT. jl , . i hereby affirm that there io a construction lending agency for the performance of the work for which this Permit is issued (Sec. 3097iil Civil Code). LENDER'S NAME LENDER'S ADDRESS I certify that I have read the application and state that the above information is ~orrtlct and that the information on the plant is ICCU~B~O. I agree to comply With all City ordinances nnd State laws relating to building construction. I hereby authorize IePresentatives of the CitV of Csrlsbad to enter upon the above mentioned property for inspection purposes. JUDGMENTS, COSTS AND EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINST SAID CITY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GMNTING OF THIS PERMIT. OSHA An OSHA permit is required for excavations over 5'0' deep and demolition or construction Of StrUctUreS over 3 stories in height. EXPIRATION: Every pemlt issued by the building Official under the provisions of this Code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if me building or work authorized by such permit is not commenced within 180 days from the dale of such pemR or if the building or wok authorized by such permit is suspended or abandoned at any time alter the work is i ALSO AGREE TO SAVE, INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARMLESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAO AGAINST ALL LtABtLITiES. on 106.4.4 Uniform Building Code). ;MPPPLICANT'S SIPNATURE DATE 3 ' 23.01 WHITE Fila YELLOW Applicant PINK: Finance Em Corporation In Partnership with Government for Building Safety CkkV DATE: April 2,2001 JURIS D I CTI 0 N : Carlsbad 0 PLAN REVIEWER 0 FILE PLAN CHECK NO.: 00-3345 REV (PCR01-68) SET: I PROJECT ADDRESS: 1808 Aston Ave. PROJECT NAME: Aston Views 0 The documentation transmitted herewith has been corrected where necessary and substantially IXI The documentation transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building Energy Revision complies with the jurisdiction's building codes. codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. 0 The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list 0 The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil 0 The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant 0 The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. contact person. [XI Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. 0 Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: Telephone #: Date contacted: (by: ) Fax #: REMARKS: The corresponding energy forms on the plans should be revised to reflect these new sheets. Mail Telephone Fax In Person By: Kurt Culver Enclosures: Esgil Corporation 0 GA 0 MB 0 EJ 0 PC 3/26/01 trnsmtl.dot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 + (858) 560-1468 + Fax (858) 560-1576 L ,' Carlsbad 00-3345 REV (PCRO1-68) April 2, 2001 VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: 00-3345 REV (PCR01-68) PREPARED BY: Kurt Culver BUILDING ADDRESS: 1808 Aston Ave. DATE: April 2, 2001 BUILDING OCCUPANCY: TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: Type of Review: D Complete Rewew G Structural Only n Repetitive Fee Repeats T * Based on hourly rate n Other @ Hourly 171 Hour(s)* i Esgil Plan Review Fee $87.151 Comments: Review revised energy calculation: Esgil fee = 1 hr. @ $87.15/hr. Sheet1 of 1 macvalue.doc Bunding Permit X PERFORMANCE WCUMENTATlONlKlTHOR STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE I This Certificate of compliance lists the building features and performance specifications need to comply with Title 24, Parts 1 DATE SALST~FA~ Indicate location on plans of Note Block for Mandatory Measures 3 - 15-01 quired on p/ans for all submittals. Part 2 ed for a// submittals; choose appropriate Nonresidential Com,Mance kmr ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ I ENV-2: Used for a// submittals; choose appropriate veision depending on mefhod of4n+iE %nm sp" ENV-3: Optional. Use if defau/t U-values are not used. Choose appfopriate version%r aSSe&j-Va!@@ %a/cu/ated. I GP bV ,afi+