The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1921 CALLE BARCELONA; BLDG 7; CB032288; PermitJob Address: Permit Type: Parcel No: Valuation: Occupancy Group: Project Title: Applicant: BILL KERR SUITE #200 4655 CASS ST 921 09 858-273-4649 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Av Carlsbad, CA 92008 Building Inspection Request Line (760) 602-2725 Commercia 111 ndustrial Perm it Permit No: CB032288 1921 CALLE BARCELONA CBAD COMMIND Sub Type: COMM Lot #: 0 Status: ISSUED $860,400.00 Construction Type: VN Applied: 0811 812003 BUCA DI BEPPO-THE FORUM Plan Approved: 04105/2004 10755SF RESTAURANT BLDG # 7 Issued: 04/05/2004 Reference #: Entered By: SB Inspect Area: Plan Check#: Owner: 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 Recl. Water Con. Fee $2,720.77 $0.00 $1,768.50 $240.00 $0.00 $1 80.68 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 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) PLUMBING TOTAL ELECTRICAL TOTAL MECHANICAL TOTAL Master Drainage Fee Sewer Fee Redev Parking Fee Additional Fees TOTAL PERMIT FEES $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $15,659.28 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $10,755.00 $0.00 $469.00 $1,610.00 $162.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $33,565.73 Total Fees: $33,565.73 Total Payments To Date: $1,800.00 Balance Due: $31,765.73 follow the piotest procedures set forvl in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition. You are hersby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified feeslexactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity changes, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project. NOR DOES IT APPLY to any Wexacticns of which YOU have Dreviouslv been a iven a NOTICE similar to this. or as to which the statute o f limitations has D reviouslv otherwise exDired. I FOR OFFICE USE ONLY PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad CA 92008 ako requirai the applint for such permil b file a signed stdomen( Ih.1 he is li punuatd b (he provisii of the Conindor's Liceme Law [Chapter 9, commending wiih Won 7009 d Division 3 d the Butiness and Plo(esiom Code] or lhst he is exempi Ihere(rom, and (he *is for the alleged exemption. Any violation d Section 7031.5 by fiva hw+md dollan [SSOO]). M c, \Ir LC,r.r c ISU, I/, E% 7 cnL 7 h422 (- let? f cry stamp Tebph # state Lkellee # Designer Name cwv statelzip cltvBusinessucense#fiJ(Ic-R 4T c r32 H* Telephone# ' {C)rttr Ch Worken' Qlmpensaiiion Decionti: I hamby dim under penaltj d pwjury one d iha Idlowing d.clata~om: 0 I haw and will mainiain a CerMiCate of Consent to seW-insum for worken' compensakn as provided by Section 3700 d the Labor Code, lor the performance d the work I haw and will maintain waker'r mmpendion. as mquimd by !%c%on 3700 d iha bbor cod.. for (he perlormance d yle work for which th' pennit is issued. My (<A:/ worker's cornpemdion i PoliiNo.W~~~(CM1~ 3 Expiration Date (THIS SEClWN NEED NOT BE COMPLETED F THE PERMIT IS FOR ONE HUNWEII DOLURS [SlOO] OR LESS) 0 kKxwnesut~btheWak~'Com~nLnndCalilomis. CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTK)N: I mi thal in he perbrmrncs d the work for which this pennit a isued, I shall not empby any person in any manner so as b I hereby &iim that I am exemplfmn Me Conhdds License Law for yleblloving mason: 0 ' , will d the wwk and the struclure is not intended or offered for sale (Sec. 7044, Business aid Ptwhsrbna cod.: Tho Con+.cws L- Law Qes not apply b an omw d pmpody who buildr or improves themon. and who does such work himsell or through his orm .mp(qoer, provid.d ihd such improvomenis am not intended or demd for uk. If. howwar. ihe building or improvement is sold wWin one year d completion. he omr-buldor will haw the burden d prouing tM ha dd not build or improcn for Me pufposo d sale). 0 I, as tmer d the pmporly, am oxduaivdy conlnding wrilh li contndws (0 comtrud the prom (Sec. 7044. Brniness and pmlessions Code: The Conbsc(a<s Liceme Law doa noi apply b an - d pmpefiy who builds or improves thuson. and ca*adr for such pmjecb wiU~ coniradw(s) lied punuant to the Contrador's I, as wnor d (he PIoPerty ormyempbyees with wagm as lhoirsde Lkeme Lavc). 0 ImclmgtundersedDn Businea!3and~*o~Cod.krthisruoon: 1. Iperun;lllypkntoprwideIhe~laborandmagrislrforcons+udiondiha~d~improvement. 0 YES 0 NO 2 3. I (havidhovo not) *nod an .ppliu(ion for a building perm# for the pmpoaed work. I have coninded wiUI Ihe fullowing penon (h) b prwide the proposed mnslruction (induds MM / dbess I phone number / mntracbn license number): 4. 5. J plan to provide portions dlhe uwk, but I have hkad the Wowing pencn bcoordinate. supervise and pmvide he mspruwk (include name/addrers/ phone number/ /onkcbra lhao number): I will prnvkb me dlhework, bul I have mnimded (hired) the fdbwing persons to providehe work indiuled (include name /address / phone number /type dwork): - n. I. I / PROPERm' OWNER SIGNATURE I~ AgL DATE 8/1 ?/6? WHITE: File WOW. Applicann PINK: Finance PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad CA 92008 Page 2 of 2 ~om2~i05.25533or25534d(h.Rerby-TmrorHuwdaPSubst.ncskmuntAcn 0 YES 0 NO btheapplicint orfuture knlbng ocapani mqumd b otbn a purmlbrn thewrpdkrhon control mor alrquaMy managemmt Mnd? bthef.nl~tobe~~l.W0~d(h.h.ou(ubd*~6e? 0 YES 0 NO IF ANY OF THE ANSWERS ARE YES. A FWL CERTFICATE OF OCCUPANCY NAY NOT BE ISSUED UNLESS THE APPUCANT HAS YET OR IS YenNo THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT. I hersby am that Ih.n tsa conrdrudon hndmgagancyfor(h. pwbnnancsd#mnurit brwtnch )la ma mamd (Sac 3097(1) CWII We). 0 YES 0 NO I mttfylhal I haw read the .pphukn and st& But #MI .ban, wrhmuhon ta COIlsd and 1M (ho lnfomubon on the plans LS accurate I agree b comprywth all city Ord~nancm rind sM8 bwa re*lng to building cona@~chon. I herebyauhafuo npresent.lvea dthe Cfiy d Carlsbad to enter upon the abom rnentmd pmpdyfor inspec4cm purposes. I ALSO AGREE TO SAVE. INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARYLESS THE CITY OF CAR- AGAINST ALL UABYITYS, JUDGEMENTS, COSTS AND ILXPENSE11 WHlcn NAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE -81 SAID ClTY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING OF THIS PERMIT. OSHk An OSHA pennil h mqu~d bruuvdwns d5’6daep nd dmnohtm oramshckm drtucbwg om3abma M hmght EXPRAlWI: Every pamil mwd bylr Wng ollicvl underlh. pmiaknu dbb C0dssh.l oxpm byhrm(.lonand become nuH and vold iflhebudding or work auihonzed by such pannll a nd cammulQd -in 180 days hn the date dwd, mor Itho kuldtng or work authonad by such pertnlt ia suspended or abandoned at any tima atter thewwkisc~fcw~ 4.4 Un&m Burlkng code). APPLCANT’S SIGNATURE DATE 4 WH1TE:Fik YELL0w:Apdicant P1NK:Fmnce SHY of CwlsbaII Fhal Building lnsuection Dept: Building E-g Planning CMWD St Lite Pian Check #: Perm it #: Project Name: Address: Contiact Person: Sewer Diet: C6032288 BUCA Di BEPPO-THE-FORUM 10755SF RESTAURANT BLDG # 7 1921 CALLE BARCELONA Phone: Water Disk Lot: Permit Type: COMMIND Sub Type: COMM 0 .......................................................................................................................................................... Date BY:. /- 02 c Inspected: /s/Q 7ky Approved: / Disapproved: Inspected Inspected Date BY: . Inspected: Approved: Disapproved: inspected Date Inspected: Approved: Disapproved: By:. - ............................................................................................................................................................ Comments: * Inspection List Permit#: CB032288 Type: COMMIND COMM BUCA DI BEPPO-THE FORUM 10755SF RESTAURANT BLDG # 7 Date Inspection Item Inspector Act Comments 1211 6/2004 89 1211 6/2004 89 12/08/2004 89 12/08/2004 89 12/07/2004 17 12/07/2004 1 7 12/06/2004 14 12/06/200,4 14 12/06/200 4 1 4 12/06/2004 14 12/03/2004 44 12/03/2004 84 12/02/2004 44 12/01/2004 23 12/01/2004 44 1 1/30/2004 23 11/30/2004 44 1 1/23/2004 a4 1 1/22/2004 1 1 1 1/22/2004 44 11/22/2004 84 1 1 /I 812004 23 1 111 moa4 34 1111 512004 84 1 1 /I 0/20(14 84 11/01/20C4 17 10/29/20C~4 84 10/29/20Q4 84 10/28/20C14 84 10/27/2004 14 10/26/20C14 18 10/25/2004 84 1 0/26/2004 a4 1 012 112004 a4 10/20/20Cl4 14 10/20/20Cl4 84 10/18/2004 43 1011 8/20Cj4 44 1011 5/2004 44 1011 412004 17 1011 4/2004 44 1011 2/2004 14 1011 2/2004 34 Final Combo Final Combo Final Combo Final Combo Interior Lath/Drywall Interior LathIDrywall FramelStee VBoltingMIeldin Frame/SteeVBoltingMIeldin FramelSteeVBoltingMIeldin FramelSteeVBoltingMIeldin Rough/Ducts/Dampers Rough Combo Roug h/Ducts/Dampers Gas/Test/Repairs Roug h/Ducts/Dampers GaflesVRepairs Roug h/Ducts/Dampers Rough Combo FtglFoundationlPiers Roug h/Ducts/Dampers Rough Combo GaflestIRepairs Rough Electric Rough Combo Rough Combo Interior LathIDrywall Rough Combo Rough Combo Rough Combo FramelSteeVBoltingMIeldin Exterior LatWDrywall Rough Combo Rough Combo Rough Combo FramelSteeUBoltingMIeldin Rough Combo AirCondFurnace Set Roug h/Ducts/Dampers Roug h/Ducts/Dampers Interior LathIDrywall Rough/Ducts/Dampers Frame/SteeUBolting/Weldin Rough Electric PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS TP TP PS PS PS PD PD PS PD PS PS PS PS PS PS PD PD PD PS PS PS PS AP RI RI co RI AP PA PA PA PA PA NR PA AP PA PA NR PA wc PA co AP PA PA co AP PA PA co CA NR co AP PA co co PA PA NR AP co AP AP PENDING FIRE APPROVAL 4 PAGES 25 CORRECTIONS GAS METER OK DRYWALL AT CEILING CEILING AT SHAFTS 2ND FLR CEILING 2ND FLR CEILING 2ND FLR CEILING 2ND FLR CEILING SHAFT D.W. 24HR TEST DUCT WRAP FIREMASTER STARTED 24HR TEST T-BAR OK TO WRAP GREASE DUCT ON T-BAR MED PSI TEST MSA & MSB FOR SEO D.W. ABOVE DOME ENTRY SAME AS 10/26/04 T-BAR HARD LID hard lids 1st flr HARD LID 1ST FLR ON T-BAR ON SHAFT WALLS DUCTS OK TO INSULATE D.W. ENTRY AREA ENTRY AREA LID ENTRY AREA LID Monday, December 20,2004 Page 1 of 3 10/0$/2004 14 10/07/2004 34 10/06/2004 17 10/05/2004 17 1 0/04/2004 17 10/01/2004 17 09/28/2004 17 09/28/2004 18 09/28/2004 21 09/28/2004 22 09/27/2004 17 09/27/2004 18 09/27/2004 22 09/24/2004 18 09/23/2004 17 09/23/200*4 22 09/09/200,4 15 09/09/200,4 17 09/09/2004 84 09/08/2004 15 09/08/2004 17 09/01/2004 17 0813 1 12004 1 7 08/30/2004 17 08/27/2004 17 08/25/2004 17 0811 812004 15 0811 612004 15 0811 612004 17 0811 312004 17 0811 112004 17 08/06/2004 34 08/06/2004 84 08/04/2004 13 07/28/2004 24 07/26/2004 24 07/22/20C4 13 07/22/2004 17 07/22/2004 24 07/20/20(314 13 0711 912004 18 0711 a2004 13 07/08/2004 14 07/08/2004 15 07/07/20C14 14 07/07/2004 15 07/01/2004 15 06/30/2004 15 06/25/2004 14 06/25/2004 15 Frame/SteeVBoltingMleldin Rough Electric Interior LathIDtywall Interior LathIDrywall Interior Lath/Dtywall Interior Lath/Drywall Interior LathIDrywall Exterior LatWDrywall UndergroundIUnder Floor Sewerwater Service Interior LathIDtywall Exterior Lath/Drywall Sewerwater Service Exterior Lath/Drywall Interior LathIDrywall Sewerwater Service RoofIReroof Interior LathIDtywall Rough Combo RoofIReroof Interior LatWDrywall Interior LathIDtywall Interior Lath/Drywall Interior LatWDrywall Interior LathIDtywall Interior LathIDrywall RoofIReroof RoofIReroof Interior LathIDrywall Interior LathIDrywall Interior LatMDrywall Rough Electric Rough Combo Shear PaneldHDs Rough/Topout Roug Wopout Shear PanelsIHDs Interior Lath/Drywall Roug h/Topout Shear PanelsIHD's Exterior LatWDrywall Shear PanelsIHDs FramelSteeVBoltingNVeldin RoofIReroof FramelSteeVBoltingNVeldin RoofIReroof RoofIReroof RoofIReroof Frame/SteeVBolting/Weldin RoofIReroof PS PS PS PS PY RB PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PK PK PK PK PK PK RB RB PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PK PK PY PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS co co PA CA CA PA PA PA wc AP PA co AP CA PA PA NR NR AP NS NS PA co co CA PA AP co NR CA co PA PA PA AP co PA wc co PA PA AP co PA CA CA NR CA AP wc 2ND LAYER CEILING 2ND FLR BY BRUCE SEE JOB CARD H20 SERVICE @ COOLERS CEILING GREASE TRAP & SEWER HOOKED 1 ST LAYER & SOME WALLS GREASE INTERCEPTOR NO SUPT ON SITE AT 9:30A ALL OK TO ROCK 2 HVAC MECHANICS ON SITE - THAT IS SHAFTS NO SUPER ON SITE 7 PEOPLE WORKING BYBRUCENOTREADY SHAFTS OK TO TAPE ONLY 2 PEOPLE WORKING TODAY porch area only 7 people working today PORCH AREA PER BRUCE WALLS ONLY INSIDE OF DOUBLE SHEAR EXT. WALLS OK TO DOUBLE SHEAR STAIR AREA EXT DRYWALL FLAT SECTION BY BRUCE 2ND FLR NAILING Monday, December 20,2004 Page 2 of 3 06/2'4/2004 14 0611 7/2004 13 06/08/2004 11 06/07/2004 11 05/27/2004 11 05/26/2004 39 05/24/2004 11 05/20/2004 11 0511 4/2004 31 0511 2/2004 31 05/06/20084 21 Frame/SteeVBoltingNVeldin Shear PanelsIHDs Ftg/Foundation/Piers Ftg/Foundation/Piers Ftg/Foundation/Piers Final Electrical FtgIFoundationlPiers Ftg/Foundation/Piers Underground/Conduit-Wirin UndergroundIConduit-W irin Underground/Under Floor PS PY PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PS PY CA wc AP co AP wc AP co AP PA AP BY BRUCE SLAB PIPES NOT WRAPPED FTG ONLY NO ELEV PIT OR SLAB 6 TOTAL PIER FTG HlLlTE YELLOW NEED SETBACK LETTER CONDUIT ONLY MAIN FEEDERS Monday, Decttmber 20,2004 Page 3 of 3 . City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request For: 12/16/2004 Permit# CB032288 Inspector Assignment: PS Title: BUCA DI BEPPO-THE FORUM Description: 10755SF RESTAURANT BLDG # 7 Type: COMMIND Sub Type: COMM Job Address: 1921 CALLE BARCELONA Suite: Lot 0 Location: APPLICANT BILL KERR Owner: Remarks: Phone: 21 4783201 8 Inspector: Total Time: Requested By: BRUCE CD Description 19 Final Structural Entered By: CHRISTINE 29 Final Plumbing 39 Finial Electrical 49 Final Mechanical G- Associated PCRs/CVs PCR04075 ISSUED PCFIO4138 ISSUED BUCA DI BEPPO - TRUSS PLANS ; REVISION, FLOOR & ROOF BUCA DI BEPPO- REVISIONS OF; MECH DUCT SIZE & LOCATION CHANGE Date 12/08/2004 12/07/2004 12/06/2004 12/06/2004 12/06/2004 12/06/2004 12/03/2004 12/03/2004 12/02/2004 12/01 12004 12/01 12004 11/30/2004 11/30/2004 1 1/23/2004 1 1122/2004 InsDection History Description 89 Final Combo 17 Interior LatWDrywall 14 FramelSteeWBoltingMIelding 14 FramelSteellBoltingMIelding 14 FrarnelSteellBoItingMIelding 14 Frame/Steel/BoltingfWelding 44 RougWDuctsIDampers 84 RoughCornbo 44 RougWDuctsIDarnpers 23 GasTTest/Repairs 44 RoughlDuctslDampers 23 GasTTesVRepairs 44 RoughiDuctdDampers 84 Roughcombo 11 FtgJFoundatiodPiers Act lnsp Comments CO PS 4 PAGES 25 CORRECTIONS GAS METER OK AP PS CEILING AT SHAFTS PA PS 2NDFLRCElLlNG PA PS PA PS PA PS PA PS NR PS PA PS SHAFTD.W. AP PS 24HRTEST PA PS DUCT WRAP FIREMASTER PA PS STARTED 24HR TEST NR PS PA PS T-BAR wc PS City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request For: 12/08/2004 Permit# CB032288 inspector Assignment: PS Title: BUCA DI BEPPO-THE FORUM Description: 10755SF RESTAURANT BLDG # 7 Typt?: COMMIND Sub Type: COMM Job Address: 1921 CALLE BARCELONA Suite: Lot 0 Location: APPLICANT BILL KERR Owner: Remarks: Phone: 21 4783201 8 Inspector: w Total Time: , Requested By: BRUCE % Entered By: CHRISTINE CD Description 19 Final Structural 29 Final Plumbing 39 Final Electrical 49 Final Mechanical _____ Associated PCRsKVs PCFi04075 ISSUED BUCA DI BEPPO - TRUSS PLANS ; REVISION, FLOOR & ROOF PCF104138 ISSUED BUCA DI BEPPO- REVISIONS OF; MECH DUCT SIZE & LOCATION CHANGE Date 12/06/2004 12/06/2004 12/06/2004 12/06/2004 12/03/2004 12/03/2004 12/02/2004 12/01/2004 12/01/2004 1 1/30/2004 1 1/30/2004 1 1 /23/2004 1 1 /22/2004 11/22/2004 11/22/2004 Inspection History Description 14 Frame/SteellBolting/Welding 14 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding 14 Frame/SteeVBolting/Welding 1 4 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding 44 Rough/Ducts/Dampers 84 RoughCombo 44 RougWDuctslDampers 23 GadTesVRepairs 44 RougWDuctslDampers 23 GadTesVRepairs 44 RougtVDuctsIDampers 84 Rough Combo 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 44 RougWDuctsIDampers 84 Rough Combo Act lnsp Comments PA PS 2NDFLRCElLlNG PA PS PA PS PA PS PA PS NR PS PA PS SHAFTD.W. AP PS 24HRTEST PA PS DUCT WRAP FIREMASTER PA PS STARTED 24HR TEST NR PS PA PS T-BAR wc PS PA PS OK TO WRAP GREASE DUCT CO PS ONT-BAR n CITY OF CARLSBAD (760) 602-2700 BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1635 FARADAY AVENUE TIME @ *.L* .4 CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER CITY OF CARLSElAD NOTICE (760) 602-2700 BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1635 FARADAY AVENUE TIME FOR INSPECTION CALL (760) 602-2725. RE-INSPECTION FEE DUE? r7 L YES /-i n PHONE @ CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER 3 .fu I l CITY OF CARLSBAD NOTICE (760) 602-2700 ., 1 BUILDING DEPAfqfMENT i 1635 FARADAY AVENUE PHONE @ CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER CITY OF CARLSBAD NOTICE (760) 602-2700 BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1635 FARADAY AVENUE TIME PERMIT NO. !-- 1 h YES FOR INSPECTION CALL (760) 602-2725. RE-INSPECTION FEE DUE? PHONE @ BUILDING INSPECTOR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request For: 1 1/17/2004 Permit# CB032288 Inspector Assignment: PS Titlie: BUCA DI BEPPO-THE FORUM Description: 10755SF RESTAURANT BLDG # 7 Type: COMMIND Sub Type: COMM Job Address: 1921 CALLE BARCELONA Suile: Lot 0 Location: APPLICANT BILL KERR 0wnt;r: Remarks: SWITCH GEAR AND CEILING INSPECTION Total Time: Phone: 21 4783201 8 Requested By: BRUCE Entered By: CHRISTINE CD Description Act Comment 14 FramelSteeVBoltingMIelding - 34 Rough Electric a rnSAtrn $4 F4Ut 544 Associated PC Rs/CVs PCF(O4075 ISSUED BUCA DI BEPPO - TRUSS PLANS ; REVISION, FLOOR & ROOF PCFI04138 ISSUED BUCA DI BEPPO- REVISIONS OF MECH DUCT SIZE & LOCATION CHANGE Date 1 111 512004 1111012004 11/01/2004 1012912004 1012912004 1012812004 1012712004 lOl2612004 1012612004 10/25/2004 1012112004 1 012OROO4 1012012004 1011 W2004 1011 W2004 1011 512004 1011412004 1011 412004 1011 Z2004 Inspection History Description 84 Rough Combo 84 Rough Combo 17 Interior LatWDrywall 84 Rough Combo 84 Rough Combo 84 Rough Combo 14 FramelSteeUBoltingNVelding 18 Exterior LathlDrywall 84 RoughCombo 84 RoughCombo 84 Rough Combo 14 Frame/Steel/BoltingNVelding 84 Rough Combo 43 AirCondIFumace Set 44 RougWDuctslDampers 44 RougWDuctsIDampers 17 Interior LatWDrywall 44 RougWDuctsIDampers 14 FrameISteellBoltingNVelding Act lnsp Comments PA PS D.W.ABOVEDOME co PS AP PS ENTRY PA PD PA PD CO PS SAMEAS10126/04 CA PD NR PS AP PS hard lids 1st flr PA PS HARDLID 1STFLR CO PS T-BARHARD LID CO PS ONT-BAR CO PS ONSHAFTWALLS PA PD DUCTS OK TO INSULATE PA PD NR PD AP PS D.W.ENTRYAREA co PS AP PS ENTRYAREALID CITY OF CARLSBAD ELECTRIC AND GAS METER CLEARANCE L- 6 a c INTER-DEPARTMENT ADDRESS : /92/ &M-h+v+- S.E.0. Service Equipme@ YES / __ b ** NO - Reason, If Denied: ELECTRIC METER: COMMERCIAL RESIDENCE NEW SERVICE RE LOCATE T.S. P. B . TEMP. P/P TEST METER IRR. PEDESTAL U P-G RADE GAS METER: COMMERCIAL __ RESIDENCE - TEST METER Building Inspector Signature Date Ti me Q&& Ti me JJJfdm Called In By Date Called In To City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request For: 10/25/2004 Permit# CB032288 Title: BUCA DI BEPPO-THE FORUM Description: 10755SF RESTAURANT BLDG # 7 Type: COMMIND Sub Type: COMM Job Address: 1921 CALLE BARCELONA Suite: Lot 0 Location: APPLICANT BILL KERR Owner: Remarks: CEILING GRID Total Time: Inspector Assignment: PS Phone: 21 4783201 8 Inspector: - Requested By: BRUCE Entered BY: CHRISTINE CD Description 14 FramelSteeVBoltingAVelding 24 Rough/Topout 34 Rough Electric 44 RowgWDuctslDampers ~- Associated PCRs/CVs PCR04075 ISSUED PCR04138 ISSUED BUCA DI BEPPO - TRUSS PLANS ; REVISION, FLOOR & ROOF BUCA DI BEPPO- REVISIONS OF MECH DUCT SIZE &LOCATION CHANGE InsDection Historv Date Description Act lnsp Comments 10/21/2004 84 Rough Combo PA PS HARDLIDlSTFLR 10/20/2004 14 FramelSteellBoltingNVelding CO PS ON T-BAR 10/20/2004 84 Rough Combo CO PS ONSHAFTWALLS 10/18/2004 43 AirCond/Furnace Set PA PD DUCTS OK TO INSULATE 10/18/2004 44 Rough/Ducts/Dampers PA PD 10/15/2004 44 Rough/Ducts/Darnpers NR PD 10/14/2004 17 Interior LatNDrywall AP PS D.W.ENTRYAREA 10/12/2004 14 Frame/Steel/Boltin~elding AP PS ENTRY AREA LID 10/12/2004 34 Rough Electric AP PS 10/07/2004 14 Frame/SteeUBoltin@Welding CO PS 10/06/2004 17 Interior LatNDrywall PA PS 2ND LAYER CEILING 2ND FLR 10/05/2004 17 Interior LatNDrywall CA PS BYBRUCE 10/04/2004 17 Interior Lath/Drywall CA PY 10/14/2004 44 RougNDuctdDampers co PS 10/07/2004 34 Rough Electric co PS CRHO ARCHITECTS PAGE 81 - CRHO T&a, CA 92780-3606 714-8324 834 FAX 714-832-1910 - - FAX COVER LETTER OUR FAX NUMBER AT THIS LOCATION IS (714) 832-1910 Deto: October 25,2004 Attentton: Enre T c) ; plrkw ay Construction Ragardtng: Bucadi Bsrpo Clulsbad Transmlt to FAX Number; 760-634-2690 No. of No. of Latest Psroription Copios Dwgs Dam 1 1 10-25-04 ClarificatiOll I 3 ITotal Number of Pages Inoluding this Transmittal i Romarks: B-. We takc no exception to the track light installation as fong as the track is screwed in to the T-bar system and wires are installed as necessary to help support the track lights. .- I. u By: Robert J. Hornacek, Principal City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request For: 05/24/2004 Permit# CB032288 Title: BUCA DI BEPPO-THE FORUM Description: 10755SF RESTAURANT BLDG # 7 Type: COMMIND Sub Type: COMM Job Address: 1921 CALLE BARCELONA Suile: Lot 0 Location: APPLICANT BILL KERR Owner: Remark.s,AM PLWE Total Time: Inspector Assignment: PS Phone: 2147832018 Inspector: % Requested By: BRUCE Entered By: CHRISTINE CD DescriDtion Act Comment 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers ~- Associated PCRsKVs Inspection Historv Date Description Act lnsp Comments 05/20/2004 1 1 Ftg/Foundation/Piers CO PS NEED SETBACK LElTER 05/14/2004 31 UndergroundKonduit-Wiring AP PS CONDUIT ONLY 05/12/2004 31 UndergroundKonduit-Wiring PA PS MAIN FEEDERS 05/06/2004 21 Undergroundunder Floor AP PY PCR04075 PENDING BUCA DI BEPPO -TRUSS PLANS ; REVISION .- l. I' Civil Engineering, Inc. PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING CITY OF CARLSBAD 1635 Faraday Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 Attention: Mr. Paul Smith City Building Inspector The Buca di Beppo at the Pavilion Slab Form Certification Regarding: Reference: Buca di Beppo at the Pavilion Precise Grading Plan Permit No. CB 032288 Dated 4/5/04 Dear Mr. Smith: I hereby certify that the line and grade for the slab forms of the Buca di Beppo building have been completed and are in conformance with the grades shown on the approved plans. Very truly yours, MAYERS & ASSOCIATES CIVIL ENGINEERING, INC. /Qm 8*-vy Dru J. Mayers, RCE 38474 19 Spectrum Pointe Drive, Suite 609 Lake Forest, CA 92630 (949) 599-0870 office. (949) 599-0880 fax ~ I Date: December 2,2004 Office Locations Orange County Corporate Branch: 2992 E. La Palma Averiue Suite A Anaheim, CA 92806 Tel: 714.632.2999 Fax: 71 4.632.2974 Los Angeles Ventura County 1301 0 San Fernando Road Unit 1 Sylmar, CA 91342 Tel: 818.833.8100 Fax: 818.833.0085 San Diego Imperial County 7313 Carroll Road Suite G San Diego, CA 92121 Tel: 858.537.3999 Fax: 858.537.3990 Inland Empire 14320 Elsworth Street Suite GI01 Moreno Valley, CA 92553 Tel: 909.653.4999 Fax: 909.653.4666 Central Dispatch 800.491.2990 www.rntglinc.com Geotechnical Engineering Construction Inspection Materials Tes ting Environmental Project No: 1165-A01 Log NO: 4-1583 FINAL REPORT FOR SPECIAL INSPECTION AND MATERIAL TESTING '0: City of Carlsbad Building Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 UBJECT: SATISFACTORY COMPLETION OF WORK REQU"G SPECIAL INSPECTION AND MATERlAL TESTING. ERMIT NO. CB 032288 (Buca di Beppo) ROJECT ADDRESS: 192 1 Calle Barcelona Carlsbad, California declare under penalty of perjury that, to the best of my knowledge, the work requiring special inspection, material unpling and testing, for the structurds constructed under the subject permit is in conformance with the approved lam, the inspection and observation program and other construction documents, and the applicable workmanship rovisions of the Uniform Building Code. xecuted on: December 2,2004 he work which we provided Special Inspection consisted of: Reinforced Concrete, Structural Steel Field Jelding, Non Shrink Grout and Anchor Epoxy. . If the inspection services were provided by an approved material testing laboratory or special inspection 5ency: ESTING AGENCY: MTGL, Inc. 7313 Carroll Road, Suite G San Diego, CA 92121 ESPONSIBLE MANAGING ENGINEER OF THE TESTING LABORATORY OR SPECIAL INSPECTION GENCY: AME (PRINT OR TYPE): 'ate of California Registration Number: C 57217 Expiration Date: 12/3 1/05 ) If the inspection services were provided by an independent certified special inspector: Eduardo C. Dizon PECIAL INSPCETOR'S NAME (PRINT OR TYPE): EGISTATION NUMBER: EXPIRATION DATE: NA [GNATURE: EsGil Corporation In partnership with Government for @ui&fiing Safety DATE: DEZ. 15, 2003 JURIS D I CTI 0 N : CARLSBAD PLAN CHEiCK NO.: 03-2288 (REV. # 1) SET: I 0 PLAN REVIEWER a FILE PROJECT ADDRESS: 1921 CALLE BARCELONA PROJECT NAME: BUCA DI BEPPO RESTAURANT c.3 0 0 0 0 0 w 0 cxl The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction’s building codes. The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction’s building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and :should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. The applicant’s copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. The applicant’s copy of the check list has been sent to: BILL KERR 4655 CASS STREET, # 200, SAN DIEGO, CA 92109 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: Telephone #: Date contacted: (by: 1 Fax #: REMARKS: Floor plan revisions under this plan change. Mail Telephone Fax In Person By: Ali Sadre Enclosures: 0 GA 0 MB EJ 0 PC 12/09 Esgil Corporation trnsrntl.dot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 4 San Diego, California 92123 + (858) 560-1468 + Fax (858) 560-1576 CARISBAD 03-2288 (REV. # 1) DEC. 3.5, 2003 PALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURIS C) I CTI 0 N : CARLSBAD PLAN CHECK NO.: 03-2288 (REV. # 1) PREPARED BY: Ali Sadre DATE: DEC. 15,2003 BUILDING ADDRESS: 1921 CALLE BARCELONA BUILDING OCCUPANCY: B/A3 TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: VN/SPR. Reg. VALUE ($) Mod. Jurisdiction Code By Ordinance I 1994 UB2 Building Permit Fee Y 1 I 1994 UBC Plan Check Fee Yl I $240.00 I Type of Review: , URqWveFee Repeats L--- 0 Complete Review 0 Structural Only 0 Other Hourly 121 Hours* Esgil Plan Review Fee I $1 92.001 Based on hourly rate Comments: Sheet 1 of 1 macvalue.doc EsGil Corporation In Partnership with Government for Ouiliiing Safety DATE: OCT. 31,2003 JURI SDl CTI ON: CARLSBAD PLAN CHEiCK NO.: 03-2288 SET: I11 PROJECT ADDRESS: 1921 CALLE BARCELONA PROJECT NAME: BUCA DI BEPPO RESTAURANT P PLAN REVIEWER P FILE The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction’s building codes. The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction’s building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. ..- The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. The alpplicant’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: 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: Telephone #: Date contacted: (by: ) Fax #. REMARKS: Please submit the name & information of the Special Inspection team on attached form and return it to the city for review and approval prior to the permit being issued. Section 106.:3.5. Mail Telephone Fax In Person By: AliSadre Enclosures: 0 GA 0 MB EJ 0 PC 10/28 Esgil Corporation tmsmtl.dot 93:!0 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 4 San Diego, California 92123 + (858) 560-1468 Fax (858) 560-1576 DATE: OCT. 07,2003 JURISDICTION: CARLSBAD PLAN CHECK NO.: 03-2288 EsGil Corporation In Partnership with Government for Buililinfi Safety PROJECT ADDRESS: 1921 CALLE BARCELONA PROJECT NAME: BUCA DI BEPPO RESTAURANT 0 PLAN REVIEWER 0 FILE SET: I1 The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction’s building codes. The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction’s building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. PLEASE SEE BELOW 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: BILL I<ERR 4655 CASS STREET, # 200, SAN DIEGO, CA 92109 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: BILL KERR Date contacted: Y6-9-03 (by: &) REMARKS: Please see attached for remaining items from previous list. Telephone #: 858-273-4649 Fax #: 858-273-4739 Mail /Telephone Faxe In Person By: AliSadre Enclosures: 0 GA 0 MB EJ 0 PC 10/02 Esg il Corporation tmsmtl.dat 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 + (858) 560-1468 + Fax (858) 560-1576 0 GENERAL 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. a. 9. Please make all corrections on the original tracings and submit three revised, stamped & signed sets of prints, to: The Jurisdiction Building Department. PLANS See attached for HC items from previous list. When special inspection is required, the architect or engineer of record shall prepare an inspection program which shall be submitted to building official for approval prior to issuance of the building permit. Complete the attached form. Sec. 106.3.5. FIRE-RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION (Due to Fire Dept. Requiring Sprinklers as well as Rated Const.) Detail how one-hour fire-resistive wall construction is maintained at built-in wall fixtures & behind mailboxes, fire extinguisher cabinets, electric panels exceeding 16-in2, etc. Section 709.7. Detail how fire-resistive wall and ceiling protection will be maintained at all duct penetrations such as at fans, vents, etc. Also detail recessed light fixtures. Sections 709, 71 0. - Fire dampers shall be installed per Section 713.1 1 at all ducted or unducted air openings at penetrations of; show locations on plans: a) b) Shaft enclosures. Ceilings of fire-resistive floor-ceiling assemblies or roof-ceiling assemblies. Smoke dampers shall be installed per Section 713.10 at all ducted or unducted air openings at penetrations of; show locations on plans: c) Shaft enclosures. If smoke dampers are required, the plans shall show the locations of the smoke detectors (installed in accordance with the Fire Code) listed in the options of Section 713.10 of the UBC. Provisions in Chapter 7 require special treatment of penetrations at fire-resistive assemblies. Provide typical details on the plans showinq how the fire-resistive inteqrity will be maintained at the followinq conditions (Include the manufacturers' names and ICBO numbers (or equal) for any sealant): MEMBRANE-PENETRATIONS (through only one side of an assembly): Fire-resistive walls shall have penetrations protected with membrane-penetration fire stops having an F-rating or complying with UBC Standard 7-1, depending on their size and combustibility. Limited steel electrical outlet boxes (not exceeding 16 sq. in., nor more than 100 sq. in. for any 100 sq. ft. of wall) require no protection. Fire-resistive floors or ceilings having penetrations shall comply with Section 71 0. IO. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 0 THROUGH-PENETRATIONS (through the entire assembly): Fire-resistive bearing walls shall have penetrations protected with through-penetration fire stops having an F-rating, T-rating or complying with UBC Standard 7-1, depending on their locations, sizes and combustibility. Fire resistive floorkeiling assemblies shall have penetrations protected with through-penetration fire stops having and F-rating, T-rating or complying with UBC Standard 7-1, depending on their sizes, combustibility and whether the penetrations are in walls above. NOTE: The plans should indicate the various fire-stop ratings required for all penetrations. Provide a note on the plans stating: "Penetrations of fire-resistive walls, floor-- ceilings and roof-ceilings shall be protected as required in UBC Sec. 709 & 710." Structural members such as beams supporting more than one floor or roof must be individually fire protected. (Section 704.2.6). Show UL, or equal, approval # for WF beam fire-proofinq per 1/Al1 .I. Detail all furred ceilings as required in Section 803. Show fire-retardant treated wood where necessary. I.e., Section 1 /AI 1 .I. Where is Sheet A7.1 with section plans as referenced on floor plans? 0 STRUCTURAL (Not done) Specify on the foundation plan or structural specifications sheet the soil classification and the soils expansion index of the foundation. Section 106.3.3. Please note the Ca, Cv, Na, Nv 23 SD soils factors on plans per soils report. Provide a letter from the soils engineer confirming that the foundation plan and specification have been reviewed and that it has been determined that the recommendations in the soil report are properly incorporated into the plans. Note on plans that surface water will drain away from building and show drainage pattern. Section 1804.7. Please revise Soils Type SI as noted on Sheets SI & S3 to Le., SD. Please submit a copy of the soils report for this project to EsGil for review. ADDITIONAL Please see below for remaining P/M/E items. 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. If you have any questions regarding these plan review items, please contact Ali Sadre at 858/560-1468 with Esgil Corporation. Thank you. 0 ELECTRICAL CORRECTIONS PLAN REVIEWER: Eric Jensen ELECTRICAL (1999 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE) 21. Mechanical duct systems are routed directly overhead of several electrical panelboards. This is not permitted via NEC 110-26 (f). Please revise. Ducts still run overhead in the kitchen area. 22. Detail the egress illumination available: 8 % X I? layout not adequate: The illumination levels are not shown throughout the interior exiting system complete to the exterior of the building. a) Provide a photometric layout for the “bugeye” style of light fixture and b) Large areas of the second level appear devoid of any egress illumination. Please address the second floor and how 1 footcandle of egress illumination will be provided in this area. Provide the required illumination past the footprint of the building. c) ENERGY CONSERVATION 23. The corrected, completed and signed ENV-1, LTG-I, and MECH-1 forms must be imprinted on the plans. All Parts of each form. Note: If you have any questions regarding this Electrical plan review list please contact Eric: Jensen 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. DISABLED ACCESS REVIEW LIST DEPARTMENT OF STATE ARCHITECT TITLE 24 The following disabled access items are taken from the 2001 edition of California Building Code, Title 24. Per Section 101.17.1 1, 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. Please reflect the following items on plans; Le., they may be rephrased and imprinted on plans: 0 ACCESSIBLE PARKING 1. The words “NO PARKING” shall be painted on the ground within each 8’ loading and unloading access aisle (in white letters no less than 12 high and located so that it is visible to traffic enforcement officials). Section 11 296.4.2. 0 COUNTERS AND TABLES 2. The tops of tables and counters shall be 28 to 34” from the floor. Where a single counter contains more than one transaction station, at least 5% (but never less than one of each type of station) shall be located at a section of counter that is at least 36 long and no more than 28 to 34” high. Section 1122B.4. Where fixed or built-in tables, counters or seats are provided for the public, and in general employee areas, 5% (but never less than one) must be accessible. Section 1122B.1. BUILDING DEPARTMENT NOTICE OF REQUBT FC@ S PECIU INSPECTIOJ$ Do Not Remove From Plane Plan Check NO. 03-2388 You rue hmby notified that in addition to the inapsction of constructior, provided by the Building Department, an approved Registered Special Inspector is required to provide continuous inspection during the performance of the phases of construction indicated an the revme sida of this sheet. The Registered Special Inspector shall be approved by the City of CarIsbad Building Department prior to the issuance of the building permit. Special Inspectors having a ,;umt certification from the City of San Diego, Loa Angeles, or lCBO are approved as ,Special Inspectors for the type of construction for which they are certified. The inspections by a Specid L?specicir do not change the requirements for inspections by personnel of the City of Carlsbad building department, The inspections by a Special 1irspP;ctor are in addition to the inspection% normally required by the County Building Code. 73% Special Inspector is not authorized to inspect and approve any work other than that fax which heishe ia specifically assigned td inspect. The Special Inspector is not authorized to accept dternate materials, structural changes, or any requests for plan changes. The Special Inspector is required to submit written reports to the City of Carlsbad building department of all work that tdshe inspected and approved. The final inspection approval will not be given until all Special lnspection reports have been received and approved by the City of Carlsbnd building department. Please submit the names of the inspectors who will perform the special insptctions on each of the items indicated on the reverse side of this sheet. SPECIAL lNSPECTlQN PROGRAM ADDRESS OR LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PLAN CHECK NUMBER: 83-2k88 1, as the owner, or aQsnt of the Owner (contractors may mRify that 1, or the architectlsngineer of record, will be responsible for employing me special inspector($) as required by Uniform Building Code (UBC) Section 1701 I 1 for the construction project located at the site listed above. UBC Section 206.33, \ cc\l c brr cc om OWNER'S NAME: BUC* fbhAWf5 2, 1 hC. employ the special h$p€IGtt)r), I, as the engineer/atchitect of record, certify that 1 have prepared the following special by UBC Section 106.3.5 for the. construction project cn*4w.l)*nm M L Mpnatm Cam ction a Flsld Welding Structural Concrete Over 2500 PSI Prestrrrred Concrete a ExprnslonlEpoxy Anchors Structural Masonry 3 Sprayod-On Fireproofing bsskgnsr Specifled a Other a High !Strength Boltlng 2. Name(Is) of individual(s) or flrm(s) responsible for the 6pacial inspectiens listed above: - c. 3. butier of the special inspectors far the work listed above: A. a. A b. _- Spscllll IncJpdCtOrC Shall check in w Lh the City and prreent their credentials lor apDrOret beglnnlng work on ttwpb 81t6 ESGIL CORP. Fax : 18585601576 Ocl 1C 2003 14:04 P. 08 'SPECIAL INSPECTION PROORAM AibDRESS OR LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 159 1 MwWQA, awsmD PLAN CHECK NUMBER m- OWNERS NAME: w& I, as the owner, or agent of the owner (contractors may nat employ the special inspector), mrtlfy that I, or the architectlengineer of record, will be responsible for employing the special inbpeCbr(S) as required by Uniform Bulldlng Code (UBC) Section 4701.1 for the construction project located at the site listed above4 UBC Section 106.3.5. Siigned -.'I-. .. -..I-------..--------.---.- ----* ...--.-I-.---- cord, certify that I have prepared the fa by UBC Section 106.3.5 for the const poction 5 Fleld Welding High Strength Bolting Fi ExponrlonlEpoxy Anchors [7 Sprayed-On Fireproofing c] Other Structural Concrete Over 2500 PSI restressed Concrete ] Structural Magonry E] Designer Specified 2. Name($) of Indlvidurl(s) or firm($) responsible for the speclal inspections listed above: El A. 6, C. 3. Duties of the special inspectors for the work listed above: Smtd lnspeckrs shall chock in with the City and Prewnl thew crsdrntirb for approval be$nning work an tb job rib. EsGil Corporation In Partnership with Government for @uiC&ng Safety ODT 0 JURIS 0 FILE DATE: AUGUST 28,2003 JURIS DI CTlON : CARLSBAD 0 PLAN REVIEWER PLAN CHECK NO.: 03-2288 SET: I PROJECT' ADDRESS: 1921 CALLE BARCELONA PROJECT' NAME: BUCA DI BEPPO RESTAURANT 0 0 0 w 0 w 0 w 0 The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: BILL KERR 4655 CASS STREET, # 200, SAN DIEGO, CA 92109 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: BILL KERR Date contacted: 91 'I 10.3 (by: kc ) RE MARKS : Telephone #: 858-273-4649 Fax #: 858-273-4739 MailL Telephone Fax In Person By: AliSadre Enclosures: Esgil Corporation GA MB EJ 0 PC 811 9 tmsmtl.dot 91\20 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 + (858) 560-1468 + Fax (858) 560-1576 CARLSBAD 03-2288 AUGUST 28,2003 PLAN REVIEW CORRECTION LIST COMMERCIAL PLAN CHECK NO.: 03-2288 JURISDICTION : CARLSBAD OCCUPANCY: A3/B USE: RESTAURANT TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: V-N/SPR. - ACTUAL AREA: 1 1,755 ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA: 6k x I .5(3-60’ yrds.) = 9W flr. x 2 (Str.) = 18k STORIES: 2 HEIGHT: 38’ OCCUPANT LOAD: 310 SPRINKLERS?: Y (FOR ADD. STORY) REMARKS: DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY JURISDICTION: 8/18 DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY ESGIL CORPORATION: 8/19 DATE INITIAL PLAN REVIEW PLAN REVIEWER: Ali Sadre I COMPLETED: AUGUST 28,2003 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 speed up the recheck process, please note on this list (or a copv) where each - correction item has been addressed, i.e., plan sheet number, specification section, etc. - Be sure to enclose the marked UP list when YOU submit the revised plans. GENERAL 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Please make all corrections on the original tracings and submit three new complete sets of prints, to: The Jurisdiction Building Department. 0 PLANS All sheets of the plans and the first sheet of the calculations 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. Any portion of the project shown on the site plan that is not included with the building permit application filed should be clearly identified as "not inctuded" on the site plan or Title Sheet. Sec. 106.3.3. Include the following code information for the proposed building on the Title Sheet: + Occupancv Groue: 6 (0ffice)lAS (Dining, etc.) + Description of Use: Restaurant + Tvpe of Construction: V-N (Ok as noted) + Swinklers: Yes (Ok as noted) + Stories: 2 (Ok as noted) + Heiaht: Accordingly + FloorArea: 1"LeveI = ....; 2"d Level = ....; Total = .... (what is noted does not add up) Provide a note with the building data legend stating that yards used for area increases shall be permanently maintained. Provide a statement on the Title Sheet of the plans that this project shall comply with the 2001 edition of the California Building Code (Title 24), which adopts the 1997 UBC, 2000 UMC, 2000 UPC and the I999 NEC. Revise the data on T1.l accordingly. Provide a legend on floor plans matching the partition details on plans. Identify bearing walls, non-bearing walls, shear walls, full & partial partitions, etc. Where are details 6, 7/A1 .O, etc. as noted on floor plans? Provide a section view of &I new interior partitions. Show: a) b) c) Type, size and spacing of studs. Indicate gauge for metal studs. Specify manufacturer and approval number or indicate "to be ICBO approved". Show shot pins size, embedment, ICBO approval #with spacing on plans. Method of attaching top and bottom plates to structure. (NOTE: Top of partition must be secured to roof or floor framing, unless suspended ceiling has been designed for partition lateral load). Wall sheathing material and details of attachment (size and spacing of fasteners). Show height of partition and suspended ceiling, and height from floor to roof framing or floor framing. d) e) IO. On the cover sheet of the plans, specify any items requiring special inspection, in a format similar to that shown below. REQUIRED SPECIAL INSPECTIONS In addition to the regular inspections, the following checked items will also require Special Inspection in accordance with Sec. 1701 of the Uniform Building Code. ITEM REMARKS: SOILS COMPLIANCE PRIOR TO FOUNDATION INSPECTION STRUCTURAL CONCRETE OVER 2500 PSI - * * FIELD WELDING * EXPANSION/EPOXY ANCHORS * HIGH-STRENGTH BOLTS 11. 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 complete the attached form. Section 106.3.5. 12. On the cover sheet of the plans, specify any items that will have a deferred submittal (Trusses, Stairs, etc.). Additionally, note on the plans, per Sec. 106.3.4.2: “Submittal documents for deferred items shall be submitted to the architect or engineer of record, who shall review them and forward them to the building official with a notation indicating that the deferred documents have been reviewed and that they have been found to be in general conformance with the design of the building. The deferred items shall NOT be installed until their design and submittal documents have been approved by the building official.” 0 SITEPLAN 13. Provide a statement on the site plan stating: “All property lines, easements and buildings, both existing and proposed, are shown on this site plan.” 14. Show on the site plan, or provide the grading plans, showing finish floor elevations, elevations of finish grade adjacent to buildings, drainage patterns and locations and gradients of cut or fill slopes. 15. Show the number of required parking spaces versus that provided & HC spaces. 16. Clearly designate any side yards used to justify increases in allowable area based on Section 505. ELEVATORS 17. Every opening into an elevator shaft enclosure shall be protected by a self- closing fire assembly having a one-hour fire rating in I-hr. shaft. Sec. 71 I .4. 18. Provide notes, details or specifications to show the elevator will comply with UBC Sections 3002-3007 and Title 24. 0 INTERIOR WALL AND CEILING FINISHES 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. Provide a note on the plans or on the finish schedule, stating, "Wall and ceiling materials shall not exceed the flame spread classifications in UBC Table 8-B." 0 GLASS AND GLAZING Specify on the window schedule the glass type and thickness to show compliance with Table 24-A and Graph 24-1. Glazing in the following locations should be of safety glazing material in accordance with Section 2406.4: a) Fixed and sliding panels of sliding door assemblies and panels in swinging panels. Fixed or operable panels adjacent to a door where the nearest exposed edge of the glazing is within a 24-inch arc of either vertical edge of the door in a closed position and where the b) bottom exposed edge of the glazing is less than 60 inches above the walking surface. Individual fixed or operable panels, other than those locations described above, that meet all of the following conditions: i) ii) iii) iv) c) Exposed area of an individual pane is greater than 9 square feet, and: Exposed bottom edge is less than 18 inches above the floor, and: Exposed top edge is greater than 36 inches above the floor, and: One or more walking surfaces are within 36 inches horizontally of the plane of the glazing. ROOFS Note material description & classification on plans. Table 15-A. 0 FIRE EXTINGUISHING Note on the plans: "When serving more than 100 sprinkler heads, automatic sprinkler systems shall be supervised by an approved central, proprietary or remote, station service, or shall be provided with a local alarm which will give an audible signal at a constantly attended location." Section 904.3. 0 MISCELLANEOUS LlFElSAFETY Please complete all blank details, references, key-notes, etc. on plans. Guardrails (Section 509.1): a) b) Shall be detailed showing adequacy of connections to resist the horizontal force c) Shall have a height of 42". prescribed in Table 16-8. Provide details and references on plans. Openings between railings shall be less than 4". Note on plans that suspended ceilings comply with UBC Tables 25-A and 16-0. Show connection details and references on plans for stone veneer per elevation plans. 28. Please verify with the fire department that this project does not have to be one hour rated construction through out as well as having sprinklers. 29. Please show panic hardware for all exit doors as well as any additional doors used for exiting or doors in the path of travel on the door schedule. 0 TITLE 24 DISABLED ACCESS 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43 I Provide notes and details on the plans to show compliance with the enclosed Disabled Access Review List. STRUCTURAL Specify on the foundation plan or structural specifications sheet- the soil classification and the soils expansion index of the foundation. Section 106.3.3. Please note the Ca, Cv, Na, Nv & SD soils factors on plans per soils report. Please submit a copy of the soils report for this project to EsGil for review. Provide a letter from the soils engineer confirming that the foundation plan and specification have been reviewed and that it has been determined that the recommendations in the soil report are properly incorporated into the plans. Note on plans that surface water will drain away from building and show drainage pattern. Section 1804.7. Please complete all blank bubbles, references, key-notes, etc. on structural plans. Please specify the location and weight of all mechanical equipment on plans. Please delete SI as noted on SI & S3 for soils type. Please note where detail 4/S7 is referenced on plans. Please provide the information for the shear plate and the bolts size, number and spacing on 10/S6. Please note where detail 18/S5 is referenced on plans. Please dimension all footings on Sheet S5. Alternatively, make sure they are dimensioned on foundation plans. As shown, many details are not dimensioned at either location. Le., see 3/S5, IO/S5, 16/S5, 18/S5, etc. Show that all collectors and drag connections are designed per Section 1633.2.6. 44. 45. 46. 47. Please show construction details and references for all the canopies on plans. ADDITIONAL Please see below for remaining PlMlE & HC items. To speed up the review process, note on this list (or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed, i.e., plan sheet, note or detail number, calculation page, etc. The jurisdiction has contracted with Esgil Corporation located at 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, California 92123; telephone number of 8581560-1468, to perform the plan review for your project. If you have any questions regarding these plan review items, please contact Ali Sadrh at Esgil Corporation. Thank you. 0 ELECTRICAL CORRECTIONS PLAN REVIEWER: Eric Jensen 0 ELECTRICAL (1999 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE) 48. The licensed designer must sign the approved set of the plans. 49. Mechanical duct systems are routed directly overhead of several electrical panelboards. This is not permitted via NEC 110-26 (f). Please revise. 50. Detail the egress illumination available: a) b) Provide a photometric layout for the “bugeye” style of light fixture and Large areas of the second level appear devoid of any egress illumination. Please address the second floor and how I footcandle of egress illumination will be provided in this area. Provide the required illumination past the footprint of the building. c) 51. Specify the wiring methods to be used on the plans. The City of Carlsbad does not allow standard AC or NM cable to be used in commercial applications. Note: If you have any questions regarding this Electrical plan review list please contact Eric Jensen 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. PLUMBING, MECHANICAL AND ENERGY CORRECTIONS PLAN REVIEWER: Glen Adamek 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. Each sheet of the plans must be signed by the person responsible for their preparation, before the permits are issued. Business and Professions Code. The Kitchen Equipment Plans are not signed. Correct the statement on the Title Sheet of the plans stating that this project shall comply with the 2001 edition of the California Building Code (Title 24), which adopts the 1997 UBC, 2000 UMC, 2000 UPC and the 1999 NEC. The City Building Official to review evidence of Health Department approval (for restaurants). Clearly show the required elevator pit drainage system. 0 PLUMBING (2000 UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE) Clearly show the required easements for the public water lines and public sewer lines on private property. On sheet P-I clearly show the slopes of the private building sewer lines on sheet P-I as per UPC, Section 718.1. (1/4 inch per foot?) Correct the water line sizing calculations on sheet P-5: a) b) The 1.7 psi per 100 feet maximum friction loss shown should be 17.0 psi per 100 feet as per the data provided. The GPM values in the pipe sizing table on sheet P-5 are incorrect as per UPC, Chart A-4 using 17.0 psi per 100 feet maximum friction loss and 8 feet per second maximum velocity. Please correct. Show compliance with UPC, Section 610.12: Water piping systems shall be sized for the maximum velocities in copper and copper alloy tube and fitting systems shall be limited to a maximum of eight (8) feet per second in cold water and five (5) feet per second in hot water. c) As per UPC, Section 910.5 vertical waste pipes are not allowed to drain into the combination waste and vent system. Correct the vertical waste lines from the upper floor level lavatories in the womens restroom shown draining into the lower level combinations waste and vent system. Provide separate traps and trap arms for each of the separate lavatories in the restrooms as per UPC, Section 1001.2. Note: the plans show the lavatory drain outlets about 36 inches on center. Clearly show 10 or fewer employees, or provide required separate employees restrooms, and if more than 10 employees separate toilet facilities shall be provided for each sex, as per UPC, Section 41 3.3. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. Detail the backflow protection of water connection to fire protection systems as per UPC, Section 603.4.18. Correct the plumbing drawings to clearly show on the plans compliance with UPC Section 318.0: 318.0 Food Handling Establishments Food or drink shall not be stored, prepared or displayed beneath soil or drain pipes, unless those area are protected against leakage or condensation from such pipes reaching the food or drink as described below. Where building design requires that soil or drain pipes be located over such areas, the installation shall be made with the least possible number of joints and shall be installed so as to connect to the nearest adequately sized vertical stack with a provisions as follows: 318.1 All openings through floors over such areas shall be sealed watertight to the floor construction. 318.2 Floor and shower drains installed above such areas shall be equipped with integral seepage pans. 318.3 All other soil or drain pipes shall be of an approved material as listed in Table 14-1 and Section 701.0. All materials shall conform to established standards. Cleanouts shall be extended through the floor constructions above. 318.4 Soil and drain pipes located above such area shell a standing water test of not less than 25 feet. 318.5 Piping subject to operation at temperatures condensation on the exterior of the pipe shall be thermally be subjected to that will form insulated. 318.6 Where pipes are installed in ceiling shall be of the removable type, or shall be provided with access panels in order to form a ready access for inspection of piping. 318.7 In lieu of the above, any other method may be approved by the Administrative Authority. As per UPC, Section 704.3 the commercial dishwashing machine must be connected directly to the drainage system. A floor drain shall be provided adjacent to the fixture, and the fixture shall be connected on the sewer side of the floor drain trap, provide that no other drainage line is connected between the floor drain waste connection and the fixture drain. The fixture and floor drain shall be trapped and vented as required by this Code. Please correct. The 1% inch gas line to the two Kettles #30 and #31 is undersized for the over 125 foot developed pipe length. UPC, Table 12-3. Please correct Clearly show that a 24 hour recording gage pressure test is required for the proposed gas system. 0 MECHANICAL (2000 UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE) 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. Show the required ceiling rated fire dampers at duct openings in the fire rated ceiling membranes. UBC, Section 713.11 ##4. Plans show a one-hour fire rated lay-in ceiling system over the grease hoods. Show the required fire dampers for the make-up air duct openings in the fire rated ceiling membranes. Show the required draft stops and fire blocking at the mechanical chases through the ceilings and floor of the floor/ceiling system between the first and second floors and at the ceiling of the roof/ceiling system. As per UMC, Section 906.6, return air may not be taken from the kitchen area. Please correct the return air shown in the kitchen. Provide complete kitchen hood plans, details, and calculations 'to show compliance with UMC, Chapter 5, Part II a) Provide construction details of required fire rated grease duct enclosure and hood enclosure. UMC Sections 508.4 & 509.4 Please provide the listing data, ICBO Report for the proposed grease duct wrap system. Note: FireMaster DuctWrap is manufactured by Thermal Ceramics and is no longer a 3M product. 3M does produce a Fire Barrier Duct Wrap for fire rated grease duct enclosures. Please provide the ICBO report for the proposed grease duct enclosure proposed. Detail the kitchen hood exhaust duct discharge clearances as per UMC Section 508.9. Provide grease duct air velocity calculations. Minimum 1,500 fpm and maximum 2,500 fpm. UMC Section 508.6. The sheet M-3 seems to shows a single 32 X 10 inch grease duct for kitchen hood #I branched to two IO X 24 grease ducts (pant legs) to offset through the truss system, then recombined into a single 32 X 10 inch exhaust duct. The velocity in the two IO X 24 grease ducts is too low as per UMC Section 508.6. Please correct. d) Provide the required clearances from unprotected combustible construction of at least 18 inches, as per UMC Section 509.4. Please correct the grease duct above the roof, show the clearances to the parapet wall and the roof. And at hood show how far out, around the grease hood, the fire rated ceiling membrane extends. A complete kitchen hood system plan review will be done when the complete hood system plans, details, and calculations are provided. b) c) e) Clearly show the Classification & amount of each refrigerant used in each refrigeration system to show refrigeration systems comply with UMC Chapter 11. 0 ENERGY CONSERVATION 72. The LTG-1 part 2 of 3 and LTG-1 part 3 of 3 are missing from the package. 73. The LTG-5 forms are required for the room cavity ratios over 3.5. No LTG-5 forms provided. 74. As of June 1, 2001 the new 1998 Energy Standards with the updated modifications (AB-970) must be used (2001 Energy Standards). Provide revised energy design to comply with the 2001 Energy Standards. Please use the new energy forms. 75. On the plans please show the 10,598 square feet of Public Display Area as per the LTG-4 form. 76. Display lighting shall be separately switched on circuits that are 20 amps. or less. Title 24, Part 6, Section 131(e). Show separate wall display and floor display lighting. 77. Provide automatic shut-off controls for lighting as per Title 24, Part 6, Section 131(d). Please list on the LTG-I part 2 of 3 in the Mandatory Automatic Control section. 78. 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 list on the LTG-1 part 2 of 3 in the Mandatory Automatic Control section. 79. Show bi-level lighting controls as per Title 24, Part 6, Section 131(b). 80. Show the daylit areas and required daylit area lighting controls for lighting in daylit areas. Title 24, Part 6, Section 131 (c). 81. The corrected, completed and signed ENV-1, LTG-1, and MECH-1 forms must be imprinted on the plans. 82. The Documentation Author and the Principal Envelope Designer must sign the complete corrected ENV-1 form on sheet M-3. 83. The Documentation Author and the Principal Lighting Designer must sign the complete corrected LTG-1 form on sheet E-12. 84. The Documentation Author and the Principal Mechanical Designer must sign the complete corrected MECH-1 form on sheet M-3. 85. Complete energy plan check will be done when complete corrected energy designs are provided. 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. TITLE 24 The following disabled access items are taken from the 2001 edition of California Building Code, Title 24. Per Section 101.17.1 1, 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. Please reflect the following items on plans; Le., they may be rephrased and imprinted on plans: ACCESSIBLE PARKING 1. The words “NO PARKING” shall be painted on the ground within each 8’ loading and unloading access aisle (in white letters no less than 12 high and located so that it is visible to traffic enforcement officials). Section 1 129B.4.2. CONTROLS AND OPERATING MECHANISMS 2. The highest and lowest operable parts of all controls, dispensers, receptacles and other operable equipment shall be placed within 48 of the floor but not lower than 15” for forward approach (or within 54” but not lower than 9 if side approached). Electrical and communication system receptacles on walls shall be mounted no less than 15” above the floor. Section 11 178.6.3. SIGNAGE 3. Tactile stair level identification signs (complying with Section 11 176.5.1) shall be located at each floor level landing in all enclosed stairways in buildings two or more stories in height to identify the floor level. At the exit discharge level, the sign shall include a raised five-pointed star located to the left of the identifying floor level. Section 1003.3.3.13.1. 4. Fer Section 1003.2.8.6.1, tactile exit signs shall be required at the following locations: a) Wherever basic UBC provisions require exit signs from a room or area to a corridor or hallway. The tactile exit sign shall have the words, “EXIT ROUTE.” b) Each grade-level exit door. The tactile exit sign shall have the word, “EXIT.” c) Each exit door that leads directly to a grade-level exterior exit by means of a stairway or ramp. The tactile exit sign shall have the following words as appropriate: i) ii) Each exit door that leads directly to a grade-level exterior exit by means of an exit enclosure or an exit passageway. The tactile exit sign shall have the words, “EXIT ROUTE.” Each exit door through a horizontal exit. The tactile exit sign shall have the words, “TO EXIT.” “EXIT STAIR DOWN.”; “EXIT RAMP DOWN.” “EXIT STAIR UP.”; “EXIT RAMP UP.” d) e) COUNTERS AND TABLES 5. The tops of tables and counters shall be 28’ to 34” from the floor. Where a single counter contains more than one transaction station, at least 5% (but never less than one of each type of station) shall be located at a section of counter that is at least 36 long and no more than 28 to 34” high. Section 11228.4. Where fixed or built-in tables, counters or seats are provided for the public, and in general employee areas, 5% (but never less than one) must be accessible. Section 11228.1. BUILDING DEPARTMENT NOTICE OF REQUIREMENT FOR SPECIAL INSPECTION Do Not Remove From Plans Plan Check No. 03-2288 Job Address or Legal Description 192 1 CALLE BARCELONA 0wnt:r Address You are hereby notified that in addition to the inspection of construction provided by the Building Department, an approved Registered Special Inspector is required to provide continuous inspection during the performance of the phases of construction indicated on the reverse side of this sheet. The Registered Special Inspector shall be approved by the City of Carlsbad Building Department prior to the issuance of the building permit. Special Inspectors having a current certification from the City of San Diego, Los Angeles, or ICBO are approved as Special Inspectors for the type of construction for which they are certified. The inspections by a Special Inspector do not change the requirements for inspections by personnel of the City of Carlsbad building department. The inspections by a Special Inspector are in addition to the inspections normally required by the County Building Code. The Special Inspector is not authorized to inspect and approve any work other than that for which he/shl= is specifically assigned to inspect. The Special Inspector is not authorized to accept alternate materials, structural changes, or any requests for plan changes. The Special Inspector is required to submit written reports to the City of Carlsbad building department of all work that he/shl= inspected and approved. The final inspection approval will not be given until all Special Inspelztion reports have been received and approved by the City of Carlsbad building department. Please submit the names of the inspectors who will perform the special inspections on each of the items indicated on the reverse side of this sheet. SPECIAL INSPECTION PROGRAM ADDRESS OR LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PLAN CHECK NUMBER: OWNER'S NAME: I, as the owner, or agent of the owner (contractors may not employ the special inspector), certify that I, or the architectlengineer 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. I, as the engineer/architect 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. I. List of work requiring special inspection: Soils Compliance Prior to Foundation Inspection Structural Concrete Over 2500 PSI Prestressed Concrete 0 Structural Masonry Designer Specified 0 Other Field Welding High Strength Bolting Expansion/Epoxy Anchors Sprayed-On Fireproofing 2. Name@) of individual(s) or firm(s) responsible for the special inspections listed above: 3. Duties of the special inspectors for the work listed above: A. 6. C. Special inspectors shall check in with the City and present their credentials for approval prior to beginning work on the job site. w City of Carlsbad BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST DATE: 4- /I-& PLANCHECK NO.: CB 03 -- BUILDING ADDRESS: 1QJI frxlk &CC.!~MW PRO J ECT D ESCR I PTlO N : %Znafl+ ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER: -, -@a -& EST. VALUE: 4 /v ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT APPROVAL DENIAL The item you have submitted for review has been approved. The approval is based on plans, information and/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. Please review carefully all comments attached, as failure to comply with instructions in this report can result in suspensiori 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 marked with 0. Make necessary corrections to plans or specifications for compliance with applicable codes and standards. Submit corrected plans and/or specifications to this office for review. By: Date: Date: 7 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 1 ENGINEERING AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE BUILDING PERMIT: Date: ATTACHMENTS 0 Dedication Application 0 Dedication Checklist 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ENGINEERING DEPT. CONTACT PERSON Name: TANIYA BARROWS City of Carlsbad Improvement Application Address: 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008 Improvement Checklist Future Improvement Agreement Phone: (760) 602-2773 CFD INFORMATION Grading Permit Application Grading Submittal Checklist Parcel Map No: Lots: Recordation: Right-of-way Permit Application Right-of-way Permit Submittal Checklist and Information Sheet Sewer Fee Information Sheet Carlsbad Tract: - 1635 Faraday Avenue - Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 (760) 602-2720 FAX (760) 602-8562 @ Rev. 7l1uoO 1 F:\BUILDING PUNCHHEW CKlST FORM.* I. b SITE PLAN a?oo-/o 39%4 BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST , =?- I. Provide a fully dimensioned site plan drawn to scale. Show: I A. NorthArrow F. Right-of-way Width & Adjacent Streets 8. Existing & Proposed Structures G. Driveway widths C. Existing Street Improvements H. Existing or proposed sewer lateral D. Property Lines I. Existing or proposed water service E. Easements J. Existing or proposed irrigation service p- 0 2. Show on site plan: A. Drainage 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, second dwelling units and apartment complexes are an exception. D. Sewer and water laterals should not be located within proposed driveways, per standards. / / c1 0 3. Include on title sheet: A. Site address B. Assessor’s Parcel Number C. Legal Description For commercial/industriaI 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 Rev. 7/1uW 1. BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST I ST 2ND,3RD 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 [7 0 0 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 $ 15.000 , pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 18.40.030. Dedication required as follows: 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@) 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 will not 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 $ 75.000 I pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 18.40.040. 0 [7 Public improvements required as follows: 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 FWILDING PLAN3iECK u(LsT FORM.doc 3 Rev. 7iluoO BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST I 3RD 1ST 2ND 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 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 $310 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. I Future public improvements required as follows: 0 E] 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 E] 0 6d. No Public Improvements required. SPECIAL NOTE: Damaaed or defective improvements found adiacent to buildinq site must be repaired to the satisfaction of the City Inspector prior to occupancv. GRADING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS The conditions that invoke the need for a grading permit are found in Section 11.06.030 of the Municipal Code. 0 E] /E] 0 7a. Inadequate information available on Site Plan to make a determination on grading requirements. Include accurate grading quantities (cut, fill import, export). 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. The Gradinq Permit must be issued and rouqh qrading NOTE: approval obtained prior to issuance of a Buildinq Permit. Grading Inspector sign off by: if a grading permit is not required.) Date: A] 0 7c. Graded Pad Certification required. (Note: Pad certification may be required even F:WILDING PLAbCHECK CKLST FORM.doc 4 Rev. 7/14KQ BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST I ST 0 0 0 0 0 2NC’ 0 0 0 0 0 CI 7d .No Grading Permit required. 7e. If grading is not required, write “No Grading” on plot plan. MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS 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: 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: 10. NPDES PERMIT Complies with the City’s requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The applicant shall provide best 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. 11. d- equired fees are attached D 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 5/8” service. FWUILDING PLAN‘HECK U(LST FORM.doe 5 Rsv. 7lluOO I BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST 1 ST 2ND 3RD a a 0 I If owner/developer 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 verify 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). 0 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 1.5: meter (estimated 100 gpm) 2. If the improvement plans do not list the irrigation meter and the service/meter 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: 0 Hydraulic grade line 0 Elevation at point of connection (POC) 0 Pressure at POC in pounds per square inch (PSI) 0 Worse case zone (largest, farthest away from valve 0 Total Sprinkler heads listed (with gpm use per head) 0 Include a 10% residual pressure at point of connection 3. In general, all major sloped areas of a subdivision/project 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 6 BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST 1ST 2ND 3RD service boundary, the City intends on switching these irrigation servicedmeters to a new recycled water line in the future. [7 12c. Irrigation Use (where recycled water is available) I. 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. 0 17 0 13. Additional Comments: F:!EUILDING P!AN-%ECK CKLST FORM.& 7 Rev. 7/1lloo ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FEE CALCULATION WORKSHEET Estimate based on unconfirmed information from applicant. Calculation based on building plancheck plan submittal. Address: 1qJ I Cab &z&* Prepared by: % Date: .i"//l/& Checked by: Date: Bldg. Permit No. a 0.3 - gm - EDU CALCULATIONS: List types and square footages for all uses. Types of Use: Sq. Ft./Units: EDU's: Types of Use: Sq. Ft./Units: EDU's: - ADT CALCULATIONS: List types and square footages for all uses. Types of Use: fdA&- Sq. Ft.lUnits: o!Tsf ADT's: 753 Types of Use: Sq. FtNnits: ADT's: FEES REQUIRED: WITHIN CFDrBfVES (no bridge & thoroughfare fee in District #1, reduced Traffic Impact Fee) 0 1. PARK-IN-LIEU FEE PARK AREA & #: FEE/UNIT: X NO. UNITS: w- TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE ADT'slUNITS: 773 X FEE/ADT: @b 0 NO =$ 0 3. BRIDGE AND THOROUGHFARE FEE (DIST. #1 DIST. #2 DIST. #3 ) ADTWUNITS: X FEEIADT: =$ 0 4.. FACILITIES MANAGEMENT FEE ZONE: U N IT/SQ. FT.: X FE E/SQ. FT./U N IT: =$ 0 5.SEWERFEE EDU's: X FEE/EDU: BENEFIT AREA: EDU's: X FEEIEDU: =$ 0 6. SEWER LATERAL ($2,500) =$ 0 7. DRAINAGE FEES PLDA HIGH /LOW - ACRES: X FEE/AC: =$ 0 8. POTABLE WATER FEES UNITS CODE CONNECTION FEE METER FEE SDCWA FEE IRRIGATION F:\FEE CALCULATION WORKSHEET.dcc 1 of2 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. FAFEE CALCULATION WORKSHEET.doc 2of2 Rev. 7/14/00 CITY OF CARLSBAD GRADING INSPECTION CHECKLIST FOR PARTIAL SITE RELEASE I 1st 2nd. J J J J J */ 1/ ,n/Jp J J - L PROJECT IO hbU/ hfl LOTS REQUESTED FOR RELEASE: &G 6 d7 P& J"oa 00 - 10 ~ _GRADING PERMIT NO. 2 0 oc f N/A = NOT APPLICABLE 4 = COMPLETE 0 = INCOMPLETE OR UNACCEPTABLE 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 0. 9. 10. Site access to requested lots adequate and logically grouped. Site erosion control measures adequate. Overall site adequate for health, safety and welfare of public. Letter of request for partial release submiied. 8 K X 11' site plan (attachment) showing requested bts submitted. Compaction report from soils engineer submitted. Engineer of Work certification of work done and pad elevations. Geologic engineets letter if unusual geologic or subsurface conditions exist. Prqed conditions of approval checked for confli. Fire hydrants within 500 feet of building combusbiles and all weather roads access to site. & Partial release of grading for the above stated lots .is approved for the purpose of building pennit issuance. Issuance of building permits is still subject to all normal Cpty requirements required pursuant to the building permit process. a Partial release of the site is denied for the following reasons: Carlsbad Fire Department 032288 1635 Faraday kve. Carlsbad, CA 921008 Fire Prevention (760) 602-4660 Plan Review Requirements Category: Building Plan Date of Report: 12/17/2003 Reviewed by: C' LL.2 UL- Name: Bill Kerr Address: 4655 Cass St. Suite 200 (:ity, State: San Diego CA 92109 Plan Checker: Job #: 032288 Job Name: Buca di Beppo Blda #: CB032288 Job Address: 1921 Calle Barcelona Ste. or Bldg. No. Approved The item you have submitted for review has been approved. The approval is based on plans, information and / 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 cbmply with instructions in this report can result in suspension of permit to construct or install improvements. 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 / 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 office cannot adequately conduct a review to determine compliance with the applicable codes and / or standards. Please review carefully all comments attached. Please resubmit the necessary plans and / or specifications to this office for review and approval. Review 1 st 2nd 3rd Other Agency ID FD Job # 032288 FD File # Carlsbad Fire Department 032288 1635 $araday’Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Fire Prevention (760) 602-4660 Plan Review Requirements Category: Building Plan Date of Report: 1~!3’2003 Reviewed by: e- bd& Flame: Bill Kerr Address: 4655 Cass St. Suite 200 (:it)/, State: San Diego CA 921 09 Job#: 032288 Plan Checker: Job Name: Buca di Beppo Bldg #: CB032288 Job Address: 1921 Calle Barcelona Ste. or Bldg. No. IX] Approved The item you have submitted for review has been approved. The approval is based on plans, information and / 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 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 / 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 office cannot adequately conduct a review to determine compliance with the applicable codes and / or standards. Please review carefully all comments attached. Please resubmit the necessary plans and / or specifications to this office for review and approval. Review 1 st 2nd 3rd Other Agency ID I I FD Jot)# 032288 FD File # Garbbad Fire Department 032288 1635 Faraday Ave. Fire Prevention Carlsbad, CA 921008 (760) 602-4660 Plan Review Requirements Category: Building Plan Date of Report: ~9/03/2~3 Reviewed by: @. RL2RC-L Name: Bill Kerr Address: 4655 Cass St. Suite 200 City, State: San Diego CA 92109 Plan Checker: Job #: 032288 Job Name: Buca di Beppo Blda #: CB032288 Job Address: 1921 Calle Barcelona Ste. or Bldg. No. 0 Approved The item you have submitted for review has been approved. The approval is based on plans, information and / 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. 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 / 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 / or standards. Please review carefully all comments attached. Please resubmit the necessary plans and / or specifications to this office for review and approval. Review 1 st 2nd 3rd Other Agency ID FD Job k. 032288 FD File # Requ@rnen ts Category: Building Plan 05.32 Additional Requirements or Comments 1. Type of construction is incorrect. Needs to be one hour construction according to section 508 of the California Building Code. 2. Additional exit signs may be required. Locations to be determined in the fire inspector. 3. Provide information on type of hardware used for exit doors not just model numbers. 4. Automatic fire sprinklers and hood extinguishing system will be required and should be submitted under a separate submittal to the fire department. Page 1 09/03/03 PLANNING DEPARTMENT BUILDING PLAN CHECK REVIEW CHECKLIST Plan Check No. Cc3cr>.s22@5 Address u&\ &I \bar&- Planner Christer Westman Phone (760) 602-461 4 APN: J9=7 -01 3- 09 -OD Type of Project & Use: ?mwd. Net Project Density: DUiAC Zoning: General Plan: & Facilities Management Zone: $3 -4- # \ Date of participation: 5!LY,h(p Remaining net dev acres: (For non-residential development: Type of land used created by this permit: e5k nt 1 Leqend: Item Complete 0 Item incomplete - Needs your action Environmental Review Required: DATE OF COMPLETION: YES -NO- TYPE Compliance with conditions of approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval: Discretionary Action Required : YES NO TYPE APPROVAL/RESO. NO. DATE PROJECT NO. OTHER RELATED CASES: Compliance with conditions or approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval: Coastal Zone AssessmentlCompliance Project site located in Coastal Zone? YES\! NO CA Coastal Commission Authority? YES- If California Coastal Commission Authority: Contact them at - 31 11 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 200, San Diego CA 921 08-1 725; (61 9) 521-8036 Determine status (Coastal Permit Required or Exempt): Coastal Permit Determination Form already completed? YES NO If NO, complete Coastal Permit Determination Form now. Coastal Permit Determination Log #: I Foliow-Up Actions: 1) Stamp Building Plans as "Exempt" or "Coastal Permit Required" (at minimum Floor Plans). 2) Complete Coastal Permit Determioation Log as needed. H \ADMIN\COUNTER\BldgPlnchkRevChklst p 17 c3 p 0 11 p 0 CI 0 0 [I 0 0 [I 0 0 [I lnclusionary Housing Fee required: YES - NO )c (Effective date of lnclusionary Housing Ordinance - May 21, 1993.) Data Entry Completed? YES NO IAIPIDs, Activity Maintenance. enter CB#, toolbar, Screens, Housing Fees. Construct Housing YIN. Enter Fee UPDATE', Site Plan: 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. Zoning: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Setbacks : Front: Required Interior Side: Required Street Side: Required Rear: Required Accessory structure setbacks: Front: Required Interior Side: Required Street Side: Required Rear: Required Structure separation: Required Lot Coverage: Required Height: Required Par king : Spaces Required Guest Spaces Required Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown Additional Comments OK TO ISSUE AND ENTERED APPROVAL INTO COMPUTER H:\ADMIN\COUNTER\BIdgPlnchkRevChklst STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS for x .ARCHITECT: C.R.H.O. Architecture Interiors Planning \ \ i \ SHIM JI & LASCOLA structural engineers 23682 birtcher drive lakeforest, ca 92630 (949) 770-9967 (949) 770-9542fk~ /i\ +%/os , 4 0” , c STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS for BUCA DI BEPPO CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA ARCHITECT: C.R.H.O. Architecture Interiors Planning SHIM JI & LASCOLA structural engineers 23682 birtcher drive lake forest, ca 92630 (949) 770-9967 (949) 770-9542 fa JOB,^ 1130 1 SHIMMI & LASCOLA structural engineers 1 1 SHEET N DATE I 1. SHIMAJI dl LASCOLA structural engineers SHEET 2 JOB I 97 UBC WOOD STRESSES D.F. LARCH # 1 WCLIB VISUALLY GRADED DRY USE NORMAL TEMPERATURE EDGEWISE USE DURATION FACTOR = 1 SIZE I E (psi) I Fv (psi) I Fb (psi) I CF I F'b (sinale) I I I I I I 8x24 I 1,600,000 I 85 I 1350 I 0.928 I 1253 94UBC6X.DOC I. SHIMAJI & LASCOLA structural engineers .WEE-& JOB 97 UBC WOOD STRESSES I I D.F. LARCH # 1 VISUALLY GRADED NORMAL TEMPERATURE EDGEWISE USE DURATION FACTOR = 1 DRY USE D.F. LARCH # 2 VISUALLY GRADED DRY USE NORMAL TEMPERATURE EDGEWISE USE DURATION FACTOR = 1 94UBC .DOC 1 I 1. I- , sHr.ur & LASCOLA structural engineers SHEET NO. 4- DATE ii i I Ii ii i i ii . 1, JOB 8!\'3O I - ENGINEER- SHIMAJI & LASCOLA structural engineers SHEETNO. 6 DATE DESIGN OF WSSES -- bOi= .- i OllSO JOB 6, DESIGN OF SHIWZ & LASCOLA structural engineers 6 SHEET NO. DATE I I. - JOB 01\30 , ENGINEER - 1-l !SIGN OF SHIMAJI & LASCOLA structural engineers DATE UL DESIGN OF SHIA4..1& LASCOLA structural engineers SHEET N0.8 DATE . SHIiM4JI & USCOLA structural engineers JOB mot[*- ENGINEER - r' DESIGN OF SHEETNO. 9 DATE -4 ih I’ ,‘ SHIMAJI & LASCOLA JOB . \\w structural engineers ENGINEER - P. DESIGN OF SHEETNO. 10 DATE A‘ R=Go t DESIGN OF SHIMGII & USCOLA structural engineers SHEETNO. 1) DATE L= II'-o ' structural engineers JOB - 01130 ENGINEER - e. SHEET NO. 1 DATE DESIGN OF c- ,E- L= >%&' " I' DESIGN OF smMMl& LASCOLA structural engineers SHEET NO. i.3 DATE -- Ff37 L= I-7'-0" " .' SHIMAJ.. & LASCOLA structural engineers SHEETNO. 14' DATE ENGINEER - (- ~. DESIGN OF -' SHIMAJI& USCOLA structural engineers ' JOB pl! +30 ENGINEER - - SHEET NO. I5 DATE . R= 37 SHIM.. & LASCOLA structural engineers SHEETNO. 16 DATE DESIGN OF ftEAo~ps .* 1 .' SHIMAJI & LASCOLA . structural engineers JOB 0 1 [?Po ENGINEER - DESIGN OF SHEET NO. 1 DATE .' L .. SHIMAJI & LASCOLA structural engineers SHEETNO. 18 DATE .-_ , JOB all3' ENGINEER - r'- SHIM'I & LASCOLA srructural engineers SHEET NO. I 9 DATE DESIGN OF L= 9'-OV JOB 0 ti * ENGINEER - SHIMAJI & LASCOLA structural engineers LO SHEET NO. DATE .I PI JOB 01\30 ENGINEER - ESIGN OF 5WR5 SHIMAJI & LASCOLA structura I engineers SHEET NO. zj DATE -fLD = 74- .JOB ~\130 ENGINEER - DESIGN OF STUDS SHIMA JI & LASCOLA structural engineers SHEET NO. Gp DATE LIW E -- .. I. .I JOB 'd 150 ENGINEER - DESIGNOF WQS. SHIMAJI & LASCOLA structural engineers SHEET NO. ej DATE .. SHIMA JI & LASCOLA structural engineers *r JOB 0'[\$,6 ENGINEER - SHEET NO. 2+ DATE rn 'L5 0 32" .* .I DESIGN OF STAW~ SHIMAJI & LASCOLA structural engineers SHEETNO. 25 DATE SHIMMI & LASCOLA .I 1. structural engineers . JOB 01 I 30 ' ENGINEER ,--. SHEET NO. 2(b DATE I €SIGN OF COLUMNS 2nd FLOOR I z sHrivMr & USCOLA .I , I' structural engineers JOB DCL*?J~ SHEET NO.%? ' ENGINEER - DATE P -1 .I JOB * ENGINEER - I-' I SHIMAJI & LASCOz4A structural engineers SHEET NO.% DATE DESIGN OF cpr3op/ 6. . m1 . JOB ~(130 ' ENGINEER - A I smivA.Jr & LASCOLA structural engineers SHEET NO. 2-9 DATE . JOB 0 1\30 ' ENGINEER - .- SHIMAJI & LASCOLA structural engineers SHEET NO.% DATE DESIGN OF Y &- 97 .. SHZMAJZ & LASCOLA , .- structural engineers .JOB oll310 ENGINEER - SHEETNO. 31 DATE . Page 32 is missing trorn U 4 0 0 4 the original documents SH1MA.L. & LASCOLA .. . .‘ structural engineers . JOB ‘$0 * ENGINEER. ,--. ( SHEETNO. 33 DATE ESlGN OF , . . . . -. ~. & SHIWI & USCOLA .. > .' structural engineers JOB ol\3,0 ENGINEER DESIGN OF KEY. WAN r SHEETNO. 39. DATE I. .. SHIMAJI & LASCOLA structural engineers SHEET JOB SHEAR WALL SCHEDULE (1997 UBC) MARK ALLOW DESCRIPTION PLF ANCHOR BOLTS SILL PLATE NAILING 3/8” CDX PLYWOOD (BLOCK ALL EDGES) w/ 8d COMMON NAILS @ 6‘ EN, 12” FN 16d Q 8” oc OR 20d 9 9” oc 16d @ roc E] 260 5/8” AB @ 4’4” oc 20d @7” oc 16d 3 4”oc OR 2Od @ Yoc 200 5/8 AB @4’-O”oc U2“ CDX PLYWOOD (BLOCK ALL EDGES) w/ 8d COMMON NAILS 6” EN, 12” FN OR la1 1/2” CDX PLYWOOD (BLOCK ALL EDGES) w/ 8d COMMON NAILS @ 4” EN, 12” FN USE 3x STUDS @ ADJOINING PANEL EDGES USE 3x SILL PLATE 5” AB @ 3’4“ oc 112” CDX PLYWOOD (BLOCK ALL EDGES) w/ 8d COMMON NAILS @ 3” EN. 12” FN USE 3~ STUDS @ ADJOINING PANEL EDGES USE 3x SILL PLATE 1/2” STRLJC. I PLYWOOD (BLOCK ALL EDGES) w/ 8d COMMON NAILS @ 3” EN, 12” FN 16d @ 3” oc OR 20d @ 4”oc 5/8” AB @ 2’-8” oc 16d @ 3”oc OR USE 3~ STUDS ADJOINING PANEL EDGES 5/89’ AB a 2’-r oc 20d @ 3 1I2”oc USE 3x SILL PLATE IR” CDX PLYWOOD (BLOCK ALL EDGES) USE 3x STUDS @ ADJOINING PANEL EDGES USE 3x SILL PLATE 1/2” CDX PLWD. BOTH SIDES(BLK ALL EDGES) w/ 8d COMMON NAILS @ 4” EN, 12” FN USE 3x STUDS @ ADJOINING PANEL EDGES USE 3x SILL PLATE i/~& PLWD. BOTH SIDES(BLG ALL EDGES) w/ 8d COMMON NAILS @ 3” EN. 12” FN USE 3x STUDS @ ADJOINING PANEL EDGES USE 3x SILL PLATE 16d @ 2 112”oc 2Od Q 3”oc E] 640 w/ 8d COMMON NAILS @ 2” EN, 12” FN OR 5/8 AB @ 2’-0* oc 16d 9 2” oc OR 20d @ 2 1/2” oc 760 5/8” AB @ 1’4” oc /sT”I: j/y AB g w oc 5/8 Y 7” LAG BOLTS @ 12” oc 488 I %P B] \390 SHEAR WALL NOTES: 1. M imimum edge distance for nailing to members shall be UT’. 2. All l/2” andor 15/32” pltwood shall be 4 ply minimum. 3. Minimum edge distance for nailing to 3X members shall be 1/2”. 4. Approved plate washers, in lieu of cut washers, shall be used for all shear wall sill plate anchor bolts. BOLT SIZE PLATE SIZE Y8’. 114”x 2-1/2” x 2-1/2” 314” 5/16“X 2-3/4” X 2-314‘’ J 5. Bolt holes shall be a minimum of 1/32” to a maximum of 1/16” larger than the bolt diameter. shnvallf.sch zone 1 .I -I SHIMMI & LASCOLA .- ’ JOB, QII30 SHEET NO. 36 ENGINEER - DATE A I r DESIGN OF FW3R SHIMMI & LASCOLA srmcrural engineers / P SHZMAJZ & LASCOLA structural engineers " // LltJ€ I) / SHEETNP. b c SHIMAJI & LASCOLA structural engineers I LINE A / / / structural engineers , JOB a(13' ENGINEER - r- SEEP6 31-64- DESIGN OF c*l~ + -\" I CNE E *" ENGINEER __ smww & LASCOLA structural engineers i , I i i Q / smwMr & USCOLA structural engineers - .* i .. .I . '_ DESIGN OF - LINE 1-51 smwA.J.r & LASCOLA structural engineers ;-"=.-"if .,- i ?. .. e. SHIMAJI & LASCOLA structural engineers , JOB *O(l?@ ENGINEER - *I 0\\30 ' * ~NTEGUF MA575 Roof wt psf seis facto 0.157 Floor wt PSf wall wt PSf partition PSf wt(kips) average ht ht'wt ROOF I 170 I 23.75 I 4049 I 56% FLOOR I 259 I 12.33 I 3197 I 44% TOTAL 430 7246 Roof R R Area x (R.) Area- y (R.) Area"y plus 75.17 72.17 5425 37.58 203872 36.1 195843 minus 44.00 2.00 88 53.17 4679 71.17 6263 minus 20.00 1.00 20 65.17 1303 69.67 1393 minus 14.00 7.33 103 71.5 7337 7 71 8 minus - 29.17 1.92 56 0.96 54 14.59 81 7 total sq.R. 5158 total Area*x 190499 total Area'y 186651 Floor wt 206 36.9 36.2 REDlSTRlBUTED LOAD SEISMIC LOAD kips X Y ROOF I 37.7 I 35.5 I 37.3 FLOOR ] 29.8 I 37.5 1 36.1 ~~~~~~~ Floor ht $&@@&3 2nd floor walls Grid Clarapet ht height length Area x(R.) Area- Y(fl.) Area'y E 35 16.96 31.17 529 15.58 8236 71.67 37888 1 screen/D screed2.1 1.1 A A 4 B.3 5 screed4 D.8 D.9 35 16.96 24.58 417 0.25 104 35 11.25 10.00 113 5 563 35 11.25 10.00 113 30.92 3479 32 13.96 47.59 664 2.17 1442 32 13.96 42.09 588 21.05 12368 29.5 11.46 23.83 273 54 14747 29.5 11.46 14.00 160 67.58 10843 25.25 7.21 7.33 53 71.5 3780 25.25 7.21 54.33 392 74.92 29348 29.5 5.75 55.17 317 67.58 21438 29.5 11.46 20.00 229 65.17 14937 33 14.96 24.00 359 53.17 19090 59.88 47.83 67.17 23.8 0.25 0.25 7.42 15.08 42 42 68.92 69.92 24963 5381 7557 15812 147 68 1 I90 797 16452 13324 15796 251 04 - total sq. R 4206 total Area'x 140374 total Areany 164479 X Y walls 33.4 39.1 1 st floor walls Grid remarks height length Area x(ft.) Area- YW) Area"y E 11.88 31.17 370 15.58 5767 71.67 26528 1 11.88 1.1 5.71 1.5 6.17 1.7 45degrees 6.17 A.5 6.17 2 6.17 A 5.71 A 11.88 4 11.88 8.3 11.88 5 11.88 D.8 11.88 D.9 11.88 24.58 292 0.25 42.09 240 2.17 13 80 5.5 14.85 92 10.5 5.92 36 18.46 5.67 35 21.67 21.92 125 10.96 51.33 61 0 40.25 14.83 176 67.58 7.33 87 71.5 54.33 645 74.92 20 238 65.17 24 285 53.17 73 522 441 961 674 757 1372 24534 11901 6224 48336 1-78 15153 59.88 17478 23.8 5719.9 22.67 1816.9 10.92 999.73 5.92 216.06 2.83 98.924 0.25 31.291 0.25 152.39 7.42 1306.7 15.08 1312.6 42 27097 68.92 16369 69.92 19927 total sq.R. 3311 total Area*x 132193 total Area? 11 9054 A /- .* Job # Date: 11 :42AM, 14 JAN 02 a To,specify your title block on Title : ol\3d Dsgnr: Description : Scope : these five lines, use the SETTINGS selection on the main menu and enter your title block information will be Printed on each Page. Descrip1:ion Roof diaphragm LGeneral Hnforrnation 1 Y-Y Axis Shear 37.70 k Min. X Axis Ecc 5.00 % X Axis Center of Mass 35.50ft X-X Axis Shear 37.70 k Min. Y Axis Ecc 5.00 % Y Axis Center of Mass 37.50 ft ... Shears are applied on each axis separately Max X Dimension 75.17ft Max Y Dimension 72.17ft @iiKiData El Thi? Length Height Wall Xcg Wall Ycg Wall Angle Wall End ft ft ft ft deg CCW Fixity - €1 1 .ooo 16.667 11.417 8.333 71.917 0.0 Fix-Pin 1 .o €2 1 .om 7.750 11.417 29.545 69.920 0.0 Fix-Pin 1 .o E3 1 .000 7.750 11.417 51.295 69.920 0.0 Fix-Pin 1 .o E4 1 .ooo 20.000 11.417 65.167 68.920 0.0 Fix-Pin 1 .o 55 1 .000 44.417 11.417 74.667 35.625 90.0 Fix-Pin 1 .o A6 1 .ooo 45.000 11.417 46.333 0.250 0.0 Fix-Pin 1 .o \,I 7 1 .ooo 8.586 11.417 2.170 43.293 90.0 Fix-Pin 1 .o 18 1 .ooo 24.583 11.417 0.250 59.876 90.0 Fix-Pin 1 .o 1 Calculated Wall Forces I I 1 Label L- 1 2 3 4 -5 6 7 8 Load Location for Maximum Forces XftY 0.000 13.264 0.000 13.264 0.000 13.264 0.000 13.264 -1 7.646 0.000 0.000 13.264 -1 7.646 0.000 -1 7.646 0.000 Direct Shears k Length Width -5.421 0.000 -1.006 0.000 -1.006 0.000 -7.451 0.000 24.855 0.000 -22.816 0.000 1.437 0.000 11.406 0.000 Torsional Shears k Length Width -1.386 0.000 -0.246 0.000 -0.246 -0.000 -1.776 -0.000 -4.384 -0.000 3.653 0.000 0.473 -0.000 3.91 1 -0.000 Final Max. Waltzhear 6.807 f -1.251 E (0.9, -1.251 El P.97 -9.226 E (p.0) 24.855 5 -22.816 4 1.910 \*1 15.317 \ I 49.388R Controlling Eccentricities & Forces from Applied Y-Y Shear Y Distance to Center of Rigidity 27.845ft Xcm + 105*Max-X - X-cr = -1 0.129 ft Torsion = -381.88 k-ft Xcm - .O5*Max-X - X-cr = -17.646 ft Torsion = -665.27 k-ft X Accidental Eccentricity 3.759R Controlling Eccentricities & Forces from Applied X-X Shear Y Accidental Eccentricity 3.609R Ycm + .05*Max-Y - Y-cr = 13.264ft Torsion = 500.04 k-R Ycm - .05*Max-Y - Y-cr = 6.047ft Torsion = 227.96 k-ft 0 1\30 n Wall: 1 at (8.33.71.91) L=16.66, T=I.OO HM1.41 Wall: 2 at (29.54,69.92) L=7.75. T=1.00 Ht=11.41 Wall: 8 at (0.25.59.87) L=24.58, T=l.OO Ht=ll.41 Wall: 7 at (2.17,43.29) L=8.5e, T=1.00 Ht41.41 - Wall: 3 at (51.29 69.92) ~~7.75, T=I.OO Ht=l1.4yVall: 4 at (65.16.68.92) L=20.00. T=l .OO Ht=l 1.41 * Wall: 6 at (46.33,0.25) L=45.00. T=1.00 Ht=11.41 Wall: 5 at (7436,3562) L=44.41. T=1.00 Hk11.41 .* ' To,specify your title block on these five lines, use the SETTINGS selection on the main menu and Title : Dsanr: .\ Description : scope : enter your title block infomation will be printed on each page. Page 1 Rigid Diaphragm Torsional Analysis c:\ameliss\mel iobs\0l130\01130,ecw:Calculat 1 Vcr5.1.2.13-Jun-1SSS.WinjZ (c) lS83-SS ENEIXALC Description Floor diaphragm LGenez information Y-Y Axis Shear 29.80 k Min. X Axis Ecc 5.00 % X Axis Center of Mass 37.50ft X-X Axis Shear 29.80 k Min. Y Axis Ecc 5.00 % Y Axis Center of Mass 36.10ft ... Shezirs are applied on each axis separately Max X Dimension 75.17ft Max Y Dimension 72.17ft LWall Data c Label Thickness Length Height Wall Xcg Wall Ycg Wall Angle Wall End E ft ft ft ft deg CCW Fixity 1 2 4 5 6 8 9 10 1 .ooo 1 .ooo 1 .000 1 .ooo 1 .ooo 2.000 1 .000 1.000 16.667 29.500 15.250 21.920 45.000 24.583 18.920 12.830 12.333 12.333 12.333 12.333 12.333 12.333 12.333 12.333 8.333 40.420 67.542 74.667 46.333 0.250 74.670 23.830 71.917 69.920 68.920 49.457 0.250 59.876 24.287 18.250 0.0 0.0 0.0 90.0 0.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 Fix-Fix Fix-Fix Fix-Fix Fix-Fix Fix-Fix Fix-Fix Fix-Fix Fix-Fix 1.0 '- 1 .o 1 .o 1 .o 1 .o 1 .o 1 .o 1 .o Calculated Wall Forces c I L 1 2 4 5 6 8 9 10 0.000 0.000 0.000 8.950 0.000 1 A33 8.950 1.433 0.908 0.908 0.908 0.000 -6.309 0.000 0.000 0.000 -4.220 -8.458 -3.736 6.461 -13.376 14.817 5.380 3.137 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 -0.054 -0.1 02 -0.043 0.965 -1.383 -0.268 0.803 -0.01 5 0.000 -0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 O.OO0 -0.000 -0.000 F L 1 -4.274 E -8.560 F @*9) -3.780 E(V,fJ) 7.426 5 -14.759A 14.817 I 6.183 5 3.1 37 2 32.308ft Controlling Eccentricities 8 Forces from Applied Y-Y Shear .. Y Distzince to Center of Rigidity 38.800 ft Xcm + :05*Max-X - X-cr = 8.950 ft Torsion = 266.71 k-ft Xcm - .05*Max-X - X-cr = 1.433 ft Torsion = 42.70 k-ft X Accidental Eccentricity 3.759ft Controlling Eccentricities 8 Forces from Applied X-X Shear Y Accidental Eccentricity 3.609 ft Ycm + .05*Max-Y - Y-cr = 0.908ft Torsion = 27.07 k-ft Ycm - .05*Max-Y - Y-cr = -6.309 ft Torsion = -1 88.00 k-ft Wall: I at (8.33,71.91) L=16.66. T=1.00 Ht=l 33 Wall: 2 at (40.42.69.92) L=29.50, T=1.00 Hg12.33 L=15.25, T=1.00 Ht=12.33 % Wall: 41:0.25,59.87) L=24.58,1=2.00 Ht=12.33 Wall: &tl;3.83,18.25) L=12.83, T=1.00 Ht=12.33 5 Wall: /,t (74.66.49.45) L=21.92. T=1.00 Ht=12.33 Wall: &?(74.67.24.28) L=18.92. T=I.OO Ht=12.33 Wall: bat (46.33,0.25) L=45.00, T=1.00 Hk12.33 .. 88 SHIMAJI & LASCOLA structural engineers JOB ' O\\,W ENGINEER - L .I *, ENGINEER - :SIGN OF smmw & LASCOLA structural engineers JOB ' '@1\30 ENGINEER - DESIGN OF SHIMAJI & LASCOLA structural engineers El I_ 630 JOB ENGINEER - SHIMAJI & USCOLA structural engineers SHEET NO. i ISIGNOF ED%- - , 'JOB O\l%* ENGINEER - SHIA4AJ.I & LASCOLA structural engineers SHEETNO. 61 DATE A W DESIGN OF Fla 0 u2- - ENGINEER - SHIMMI & LASCOLA structural engineers DESIGN OF f”tsovL I J SHIMAJI & LASCOLA structural engineers f ENGINEER - DESIGN OF SHEETNO 66 I SHIMGII & LASCOLA structural engineers -8 SH1M"I & LASCOLA srmctud engineers 1, I JOB' d0W SHEET NO. b3- ENGINEER - DATE ,-- i __I__+ Page 66 is missing Worn the original documents SHIn4AJ.I & LASCOLA structural engineers SHEET NO. 6 7 DATE 7 *I ' To gpecify,pur title block on these five lines, use the SETTINGS selection on the main menu and Title : Dsgnr: Description : Date: 10:57AM, 6 DEC 01 enter your title block information scope : will be printed on each page. Description CF15 [General information Calculations are designed to ACI 318-95 and 1997 UBC Requirements Allowable Soil Bearina 2.500.0 DSf Dimensions ... - Shod. Term Increase 1 .ooo Base Pedestal Height 0.000 in Seisrnic Zone 4 Ovefiburden Weight 110.00 psf Live 8 Short Term Combined Pc 2.500.0 psi FY 60,000.0 psi Concrete Weight 150.00 pcf Width along X-X Axis Length along Y-Y Axis 9.000 ft 9.000 ft Footing Thickness 18.00 in Col Dim. Along X-X Axis 5.56 in Col Dim. Along Y-Y Axis 5.56 in Min Steel % 0.0014 Rebar Center To Edge Distance Biaxial Applied Loads 3.00 in 1 Loads b Applied Vertical Load ... Dead Load Live Load Short Term Load Applied Momen ts... IDead Load I-ive Load :Short Term Applied Shears. .. Dead Load Live Load Short Term 26.900 k 28.740 k k Creates Rotation about Y-Y Axis (pressures Q left & right) k-ft k-ft k-ft Creates Rotation about Y-Y Axis (pressures Q left & right) k k k 13.860 in 13.740 in ... ecc along X-X Axis ... ecc along Y-Y Axis Creates Rotation about X-X Axis (pressures Q top & bot) k-ft k-ft k-ft Creates Rotation about X-X Axis (pressures Q top 81 bot) k k k Footing Design OK 9.00ft x 9.00ft Footing, 18.0in Thick, w/ Column Support 5.56 x 5.56in x O.Oin high 9.OOft x 9.OOft Footing, 18.0in Thick, wl Column Suppo DL+LL DL+LL+ST AM Allowable Max Soil Pressure 2,008.4 2,008.4 psf Max Mu 8.065 k-ft per ft "X Eoc, of Resultant 1-Way 17.725 85.000 psi "Y' Ecc, of Resultant X-X Min. Stability Ratio No Overturning 1.500 :1 2-Way 57.025 170.000 psi Y-Y Min. Stability Ratio Allowable 2,500.0 2,500.0 psf Required Steel Area 0.252 in2 per R 9.316 in 9.236 in Shear Stresses .... vu Vn * Phi 9.316 in 9.236 in No Overturning LFooting Design c Shear Forces ACI 9-1 ACI 9-2 ACI 9-3 Vn Phi Two-Way Shear 51.34 psi 57.03 psi 26.92 psi 170.00 psi One-Way Shea rs... Vu (0 Left Vu (0 Right Vu @ Top vu @J Bottom Mu Q Left Mu @ Right Mu Q Top Mu Q Bottom Moments 17.72 psi 13.01 psi 17.64 psi 13.12 psi ACI 9-1 8.04 k-ft 7.87 k-ft 7.89 k-ft 8.06 k-ft 16.1 6 psi 11.35 psi 16.08 psi 1 1.46 psi ACI 9-2 7.01 k-ft 7.16k4 7.19 k-ft 7.03 k-ft 8.86 psi 3.64 psi 8.80 psi 3.71 psi ACI 9-3 2.18 k-ft 3.89 k-ft 3.90 k-ft 2.20 k-ft 85.00 psi 85.00 psi 85.00 psi 85.00 psi Ru I Phi As Rea'd 39.7 psi 0.25 in2 perft 38.8 psi 0.25 in2 perft 39.0 psi 0.25 in2 perft 39.8 psi 0.25 in2 perft To Fpecify; your title block on these five lines, use the SETTINGS selection on the main menu and enter your title block information will be Drimted on each Daae. Title : Dsgnr: Description : Scope : Job# 011% Date: 10:57AM, 6 DEC 01 Description CF15 koil Pressure Summary f Service Load Soil Pressures Bottom- Top-Rig Bottom- TopLef DI. + LL 993.46 2,008.41 DI. + LL + ST 993.46 2,008.41 ACI Eq. 9-1 1,494.33 3,020.97 ACI Eq. 9-2 1,390.85 2,811.77 ACI Eq. 9-3 907.94 1,835.51 Factored Load Soil Pressures 0.00 984.60 psf 0.00 984.60 psf 0.00 1,481 .OO psf 0.00 1,378.44 psf 0.00 899.84 psf (per ACI, applied internally to entered loads) c ACI 9-1 & 9-2 DL 1.400 ACI 9-2 Group Factor 0.750 UBC 1921.2.7 "1.4" Factor 1.400 ACI 9-1 8 9-2 LL 1.700 ACI 9-3 Dead Load Factor 0.900 UBC 1921.2.7 "0.9" Factor 1.400 ACI 9-1 8 9-2 ST 1.700 ACI 9-3 Short Term Factor 1.300 .... seismic = ST : 1.100 .I e ,' . SHIMAJI & USCOLA structural engineers *JOB ' I_.ell30 ENGINEER - DESIGNOF G~AD€ ud SHEET NO.-? 0- .I I ' To gpecify.your title block on these five lines, use the SETTINGS selection on the main menu and Title : &30 Dsanr: 4-1 Job# '-' A Date: 4:24PM. 16 JAN 02 LA] DGcription : ww enter your title block information will be printed on each page. Scope : Page 1 Rev: 51W2 uw KW-0802701.Ver5.1.2.1Uu1~1998.Win32 (c) 1083.09 ENEF CALC Beam On E'astic Foundation c:hmelissabnel iobs\01130\01130.~:Calculat 1 GRID LINE 1 c Description /formation Beam Span 32.583 ft Elastic Modulus 3,122.0 ksi Load Factorina ... Deoth 24.00 in Subgrade Modulus 100.00 DCi Dead Loads 1 .000 ~ -r Width 24.00 in I Gross 27,648.00 in4 Live Loads 1.000 - .~ Beta Left Elid Fixity Free Right End Fixity Free Load C:ombination DL+LL+ST 3.570 ShortTermLoads 1 .om Overall Factor 1.000 Deflections Calc'd using Unfactored Loads Rotations Calc'd usina Unfactored Loads LUniform ILoads c #1 Dead Load 0.908 Wft Live km Short Term w Start X 4.000 ft End X 28.583 ft StZIrt x 0.000 ft End X 32.5833 #2 Dead Load 0.600 k-ft Live k-ft Short Term k-R LPoint Loads ~ i Dead Load #I k #2 k Live Load k k ShortTerm Load 26.39 k -26.39 k/ft Location 4.000 ft 28.583 ft Max Shear 14.99 k at 4.040ft Defl:a 0.095 in Min Shear -14.35 k at 28.672R Defl:b 0.1 59 in R:a 0.00 k R:b 0.00 k Max Moment 29.66 k-ft at 28.543 R Max Defl 0.10in at 0.000R Ma 0.00 k-ft Min Mcment -23.36 k-ft at 4.040 ft Min Defl -0.16 in at 32.583 R Mb 0.00 k-ft Max Rotation 0.00000 rad at 0.000 ft Max SP 2,285.47 psf at 32.583 ft Theta:a -0.00076 rad Min Rotation -0.00085 rad at 5.995 ft Min SP 0.00 psf at 0.000 ft Theta:b -0.00044 rad *. '. SHIMMI & LASCOLA structural engineers . JOB ' 0\1'54 SHEET NO. - ENGINEER- DATE To ?pecit& your title block on these five lines, use the SETTINGS selection on the main menu and enter your title block information will be Drinted on each Daue. Title : Dsgnr: Description : scope : Date: 3:04PM, 6 DEC 01 LGeneral Information Beam Span 29.830 ft Elastic Modulus 3,122.0 ksi Load Factorinq ... Depth 24.00 in Subgrade Modulus 100.00 pci Dead Loads 1 .ooo. Width 24.00 in I Gross 27,648.00 in4 Live Loads 1 .ooo Beta 3.268 Short Term Loads 1 .OD0 Free Overall Factor 1 .ooo Left End Fixity Guided Right End Fixity Load Combination DL+LL+ST Deflections Calc'd using Unfactored Loads Rotations Calc'd using Unfadored Loads Uniform Loads #1 Dead Load 0.600 Wft Live WR Short Term Wft Stiart X 0.000 ft End X 29.830ft #2 Dead Load 0.250 k-ft Live k-ft Short Term Stiirt X 6.000 ft End X I 8.830 R k-ft I Point Loads t Dead Load #I 5.20 k #2 1.09 k #3 7.74 k Live Load 9.28 k 3.82 k 12.26 k Short Term Load 10.05 k/R -10.05 k k Location 6.000 ft ia.am 26.830 ft Max Shear 13.23 k at 26.728~ Defl:a 0.085 in Min Shear -13.64 k at 6.085ft Defl:b 0.105 in 0.00 k Omk I R: a R:b Max Moment 40.83 k-ft at 5.966 R Max Defl 0.00 in at 0.000ft Ma 8.50 k-R Min Moment -48.92 k-ft at 18.853 ft Min Defl -0.11 in at 29.830 ft Mb 0.00 k-ft Max Rotation 0.00031 rad at 9.665 R Max SP 1,518.86 psf at 29.830 R Theta:a 0.00000 rad Min Rotation -0.00050 rad at 26.012 ft Min SP 0.00 psf at 0.000 ft Theta:b -0.00048 rad .. I SHIMNI & LASCOLA .’ I 74 structural engineers ’ JOB “0\\30 SHEET NO. ENGINEER - DATE DESIGN OF L\bE 5 4. ' To,specify your title block on these five lines, use the SETTINGS selection on the main menu and Title : Dsgnr: Description : Date: 4:25PM, 16 JAN 02 L enter your title block information scope : will be printed on each page. Page 1 Rev: 510002 User KW-O602;'01. Ver5.1.2. IWu~lBgS. Win32 (c) 1983-99 ENtiRCALC Beam On E'astic Foundation c:brnelissa\mel jobs\0l130\0113O.ecw:Calculat 1 Description GRID LINE 5 /General Information c Beam Span 54.330 ft Elastic Modulus 3,122.0 ksi Load Factorina ... Depth 24.00 in Subgrade Modulus 100.00 pd Dead Loads 1 .000 Width 24.00 in I Gross 27,648.00 in4 Live Loads 1 .ooo Beta 5.953 ShortTermLoads 1 .om Overall Factor 1 .ooo Left E:nd Fixity Guided Right End Fixity Guided Load {Combination DL+LL+ST Deflections Calc'd using Unfactored Loads Rotations Calc'd using Unfactored Loads I Uniform Loads i #1 Dead Load 1.351 k/ft Live WR Short Term k/ft Start X 0.000 ft End X 54.330 ft mads t Dead Load #1 k #2 9.31 k #3 k #4 k Live Load k 15.70 k k k Short Term Load 19.09kKt 4.68 k 4.85 k -19.26k Location 0.oooft 18.920ft 22.500 ft 44.417ft Max Slbear 13.45 k Min Shear -1 9.09 k Max Moment 67.84 k-ft Min Moment -40.09 k-ft Max R'otation 0.00037 rad Min Rotation 0.00000 rad at 18.907 ft Defl:a at 0.000 ft Defl:b at 0.000 ft Max Defl at 44.333 ft Min Defl at 28.904 ft Max SP at 49.549 ft Min SP 0.124 in R:a 0.011 in R:b 0.00 in at 0.000 ft Ma -0.12 in at 0.000 ft Mb 1,778.59 psf at 0.000 ft Theta:a 0.00 psf at 0.000 ft Theta: b 0.00 k 0.00 k 67.84 k-ft 12.42 k-ft 0.00000 rad 0.00000 rad ,‘ . ’JOB n\[?Q ENGINEER - c SHIMMI& LASCOLA structural engineers .. To specify your title block on these five lines, use the SETTINGS selection on the main menu and enter youir title block information will be Drinted on each Dane. Title : Job#I\30 77 Dsgnr: f Date: 4:25PM, 16 JAN 02 Description : scope : Page I Rev: 510002 user: ~W-oBow)1.vw 5.1.2.134~~1999. Win32 (c) 198399 ENEliCALC Beam On E'astic Foundation c:bmelissahel iobsWll30W1130.~Calculat I Description GRID LINE A LGeneral Information Beam Span 45.000 ft Elastic Modulus 2,850.0 ksi Load Factorina ... Depth 18.00 in Subgrade Modulus 100.00 pci Dead Loads 1.000 Width 18.00 in I Gross 8,748.00 in4 Live Loads 1 .ooo Beta 6.259 ShortTerm Loads 1 .ooo 1 .ooo Betar z- 6 : Semi-infinite Analysis Fixed Left End Fixity Riaht End Fwitv Guided Overall Factor L&d CombinaGon DL+LL+ST Deflections Calc'd using Unfactored Loads Rotations Calc'd using Unfactored Loads LUniform Loads #1 Dead Load 1.736 klft Live kKt Short Term Mt #2 Dead Load 1.020 k-ft Live k-ft Short Term k-ft Start x 0.000 ft End X 45.000 ft Stilrt X 0.000 ft End X 45.000 ft mads b Dead Load #1 11.30k #2 k Live Load 14.54 k k Max Shear 19.73 k Min Shear -17.91 k Max Mloment 18.01 k-ft Min Moment -71.1 1 k-ft Max Rotation 0.00120 rad Min Rotation -0.00096 rad at 0.000 ft Defl:a at 44.818 ft Defl:b at 35.640 ft Max Defl at 0.000 ft Min Defl at 41.220 ft Max SP at 5.760 ft Min SP Short Term Load 27.17Wft -27.17k 0.000 in 0.024 in 0.02 in at 45.000ft -0.14 in at 23.580 ft 2,014.09 psf at 23.580 ft 0.00 psf at 0.000 ft Location 0.000 ft 45.000 ft R:a 72.74 k R:b 0.00 k Ma -71.11 k-ft Mb -48.97 k-ft Theta:a 0.00000 rad Theta:b 0.00000 rad , SHIMAJI & LASCOLA structural engineers SHEETNO. ?a $ DATE A A Pry ' To qpecifyf.your title block on Title : 01130 Job # 79 4' Dsgnr: Description : these five lines, use the SETTINGS sekction on the main menu and will be priinted on each page. , enter your. title block information scope : Page 1 Beam On E'astic Foundation c:bmelissaheljobs\01130\0113O.ecw:Calculat 1 Description GRID LINE D.9 LGeneral Information c Beam Span 21 .ooo ft Elastic Modulus 3,122.0 ksi Load Factorina ... Deoth 24.00 in Subgrade Modulus 100.00 mi Dead Loads 1 .ooo Width 24.00 in I Gross Left End Fixity Guided Right End Fixity Guided Load Combination DL+LL+ST Beta 27,648.00 in4 Live Loads 1 .ooo 2.301 ShortTermLoads 1 .ooo Overall Factor 1 .ooo Deflections Calc'd using Unfactored Loads Rotations Calc'd using Unfactored Loads LUniform ILoads #1 Dead Load 0.859 k/R Live k/ft Short Term Wft Stalrt X 1 .ooo ft End X 21 .000 ft Stalrt X 0.000 ft End X 21.000ft Stairt X 1.000 ft End X 5.750 ft #2 Dead Load 1.260 k-ft Live k-ft Short Term #3 Dead Load km Live 0.872 Wft Short Term k-ft Wft I Point Loads C Dead Load #1 k #2 #3 k k Live Load k k k ShortTerm Load 16.82 Wft -21.97 k 5.15k Location 1.000 ft 21.000 ft 5.750 ft at 0.924 ft Defl:a 0.158 in Max Shear 3.04 k Min Shiear -21.78 k at 20.915 ft Defl:b 0.003 in Max Moment 99.46 k-ft at 1.008 R Max Defl 0.00in at 21.000ft Min Moment -1 34.07 k-ft at 21 .OOO ft Min Defl -0.16 in at 0.000 ft Max Rotation 0.00094 rad at 10.836 ft Max SP 2,278.72 psf at 0.OOO ft Min Rotation 0.00000 rad at 21.000 ft Min SP 0.00psf at 0.000 ft R:a 0.00 k R:b 0.00 k Ma 97.92 k-ft Mb -134.07 k-ft Theta:a 0.00000 rad Theta:b 0.00000 rad To sp??cify your title block on these five lines, use the SETTINGS sdection on the main menu and enter your title block information will be prilnted on each page. P , Title : Dsgnr: Description : scope : Job# 01 1-30 Date: 4:25PM, 16 JAN 02 Page 1 Rev: 510002 Uwrr KW-06027~l1. VerS.11.1U~lBoB. Win32 (c) 1983-99 ENESCALC Beam On E'astic Foundation c:bmelissahel jobs\01130\01130.~Calculat I Description GRID LINE E LGeneral Information Beam Span 25.670 ft Elastic Modulus 3,122.0 ksi Load Factorina ... Depth 24.00 in Subgrade Modulus 100.00 pci Dead Loads 1 .ooo Width 24.00 in I Gross 27,648.00 in4 Live Loads 1.000 Beta 2.813 ShortTermLoads 1 .ooo Guided Overall Factor 1 .ooo Left End Fixity Guided Rmht lInd Fixity L&d Combinaiion DL+LL+ST Deflections Calc'd using Unfactored Loads Rotations Calc'd using Unfactored Loads 1 Uniform Loads C #I Dead Load 1.993 klft Live 1.066 k/ft Short Term Stmt x 0.000 ft End X 25.670ft k/ft point Loads i Dead Load #I k #2 k Live Load k k ShortTerm Load 14.35 Idft -14.35 k Location 0.000 ft 16.420 ft Max Shear Min Shear 7.70 k at 16.429ft Defl:a 0.156 in ,14.35 k at 0.OOOft Defl:b 0.075 in R: a 0.00 k R:b 0.00 k Max Moment 79.38 k-ft at 0.000 ft Max Defl 0.00 in at 0.000 ft Ma 79.38 k-ft Min Moment -40.04 k-ft at 16.429 R Min Defl -0.16 in at O.OO0 R Mb -3.05 k-ft Max RN3tation 0.00048 rad at 8.830 ft Max SP 2,242.98 psf at 0.000 ft Theta:a 0.00000 rad Min Rotation 0.00000 rad at 25.670 ft Min SP 0.00 psf at 0.000 ft Theta:b 0.00000 rad L DESIGN OF sH..ur & USCOU structural engineers h I smiu.r & LASCOLA A structural engineers JOB 8 - \1%0 k ENGINEER - sHEm2f DATE 2- DESIGN OF GILES Atlanta, GA Dallas, TX Los Angeles, CA Madison, WI Milwaukee, WI Washington. D.C. €NGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. ~ GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS CONSULTANTS BUCA, Inc. 1300 Nicollet Mall, Suite 5003 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403 Attention: Ms. Leslie Hanson January 21,2002 Subjict: . Foundation Plan Review Proposed Buca D?-.Beppo Restaurant The Pavilion at La Costa Carlsbad, California Project $lo. 2G-0109010-1 cc 2 3 0% U cz- ' Dear IMs. Hanson: In accordance with the request of Ms. Eva Sloan of CRHO Architects, we have conducted a review of the project foundation plans relative to the recommendations presented in the geotechnical engineering report (Project No. 2G-0109010, October 17, 2001) our firm prepared for the proposed project. The plans provided for our review included the GeneraZ Notes, Foundation PZan and Foundation DetaiL (Sheet S-1 through S-9, Project No. 01 13C dated December 13, 2001) prepared by Shmaji Lascola Structural Engineers. The foundation plan indicates the building will be supported by a shallow spread footing foundation system consisting of continuous strip wall footings with several intermittent column footings. Review of the provided plan indicates the foundation and floor slab have been designed in accordance with the intent of the recommendations of the geotechnical recommendations. Revisions to the foundation plan are not considered warranted with respect to the geotechnical recommendations. However, several minor items were noted that may require further evaluation before finalizing structural drawings: 0 0 The General Notes (Sheet $1) refers to the geotechnical report as Project No. 2G-0109101. However, the actual report is referenced under our Project No. 2G-0109010. The Foundation Plan (Sheet S2) indicates structural landscape planters are planned in the southwestern region of the structure. Details 12 and 16 on Sheet S5 indicate the drainage system consists of weep holes with a moisture barrier applied to the exterior face of the building wall. We recommend that the weep holes be covered with a filtration fabric such as 4875 East LaPalma Avenue Suite 607 Anaheim, CA 92807 714/779-0052 Fax 714/779-0068 E-Mail losangls@giIesengr.com 2 GILES K €NGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Foundation Plan Review Proposed Buca Di Beppo Restaurant Carsbad, California Project No. 2G-0109010-1 Page 2 Mirafi 140N or equivalent to reduce the potential that the weep holes will become clogged. In addition, the building walls are recommended to be damp-proofed. Care should be used to select a proper moisture banier and during installation to protect it from puncture. 0 The design of the elevator pit sidewalls is recommended to be based upon At-Rest earth pressure conditions using an equivalent fluid pressure of 65 psf. The opportunity to be of continued service to you on this project is sincerely appreciated. If you shouLd have any questions regarding this matter or if we may be of further assistance, please feel free to contact our office. Distribution: (1) Addressee (1) CRHO Architects Ms. Eva Sloan Very truly yours, GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. # Alex Shirazi Project Manager bkh E. Haertle, G Project Engineer R.G.E. No. 2352 - .E JH/jh.:main.geo.2G-O109010- 1 GILES €NGINEERING ASSOCIATES. INC. GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENT Co R MATERIALS CONSULTANTS &cfiberT, ?!8m Atlanta, GA Dallas, TX Los Arigeles, CA Madison, WI Milwaukee, WI Washington, D.C. BUCA, INC. 1300 Nicollet Mall, Suite 5003 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403 Attention: Ms. Leslie Hanson Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Buca Di Beppo Restaurant The Pavilion at La Costa Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-dl09010 Dear Ms. Hanson: In accordance with your request and authorization, a Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis has been conducted for the above referenced project. Conclusions and recommendations developed from the exploration and analysis are discussed in the accompanying report. This report was prepared with the assistance of Mr. George Schubert, P.E. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. If we may be of additional assistance, should geotechnical related problems occur or to provide monitoring and testing services during construction, please do not hesitate to call at any time. . Very truly yours, GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. d7 p.sLe Alex Shirazi Geotecf&al Division Manager R.C.E. No. 49720 Distribution: (4) Addressee (1) Ms. Loretta Reeves (1) Mr. Michael Wright. 2G-010!9010 4875 East LaPalrna Avenue Suite 607 Anaheim, CA 92807 71 4m9-0052 Fax 71 4/774-IXXA €-Mail lnsanols6Dnilasnnnr.r~m GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EXF'LORATION AND ANALYSIS PROPOSED BUCA DI BEPPO RESTAURANT THE PAVILLION AT LA COSTA CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 2G-0 1901 0 DescriDtion Paae COVER LETTER ................................................................................................................ I 1 .O EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OUTLINE ......................................................................... 1 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES ................................................................................................. 2 3.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION ......................................................................... 2 3.1 Site Descnption .......................................................................................................... 2 3.2 Proposed Project ........................................................................................................ 2 .. 4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION. ............................................................................... .3 4.1 Subsurface Exploration ............................................................................................. .3 4.2 Subsurface Conditions .............................................................................................. .3 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................ 4 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 Soil Vapor Scan ........................................................................................................ 4 Seismic Design Considerations.. ............................................................................... 4 Site Development Recommendations ...................................................................... .5 Site Construction Considerations.. ............................................................................ 7 Foundation Recommendations.. ............................................................................... .7 Floor Slab Recommendations ................................................................................... 9 Pavement Design Recommendations ...................................................................... 10 .. Appendices: Appendix A: Project Details Appendix B: Figure (1) Test Boring Logs (8) and UBCSEIS Output (2) Appendix C: Field Procedures Appendix D: Laboratory Testing and Soil Classification Appendix E: General Information (Standard Guideline Specifications id Important Information about your Geotechnical Report) OGiles Engineering Associates, Inc. 2001 .' I GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EXPLORATION AND ANALYSIS PROPOSED BUCA DI BEPPO RESTAURANT THE PAVILION AT LA COSTA CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 2G-019010 - 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OUTLINE The executive summary is provided solely for purposes of overview. Any party who relies on this report must read the full report. The executive summary omits a number of details, any one of which could be crucial to the proper application of ths report. Site Development 0 Initial site clearing should consist of stripping off of approximately 2 to 3 inches of topsoil with organic content within the building and parking areas. 0 Dry Weather: No significant additional overexcavation is expected due to subgrade moisture related instability. 0 Wet Weather: Recompaction or undercutting on the order of 6 to 8 inches may be necessary during wet conditions. Excavation difficulty should be expected for excavations due to presence of very dense soils and bedrock. Pre-bid test-pits by the contractors are recommended to evaluate the excavation characteristics of the material. Building Foundation 0 The building is recommended to be supported by conventional shallow depth spread foundations bearing on structural compacted soils replacing the collapsible soil, and designed for a 2,500-psf soil bearing pressure. However, higher bearing capacity could be feasible but not expected to be necessary for the proposed structure. Conventional reinforcing in the strip footings designed by a structural engineer is recommended. If the subgrade varies fkom soil to bedrock, additional reinforcing is recommended in strip footing pad across the soilhedrock transition zone. Soluble Sulfates: Upon completion of testing representative samples from the near surface soils, which may come in contact with structural concrete, an addendum to this report will be issued which presents the results of testing and appropriate recommendations for concrete mix design. Building Floor Slab The floor of the proposed structure may be constructed by the conventional 4-inch thick slab- on-grade on a 4-inch granular base over a properly prepared subgrade. Floor slab reinforcement is recommended to consist at least conventional wiremesh (6x6- W1.4xW1.4 WWF) placed at mid-height in the slab. A GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. <: 4 Proposed Bucca Di Beppo Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-0109010 Page 2 Pavement 0 0 0 0 Asphaltic Concrete: 3 inches in thickness Crushed Aggregate Base Course: 6 inches in drive lanes, 4 inches in parking stall areas. Portland Cement Concrete: 6 inches in thickness underlain by 4 inches of base course in high stress areas such as entrance/exit aprons, and the trash enclosure-loading zone. A drainage blanket may be necessary if bedrock is present at the pavement subgrade. Environment 0 No volatile odors, staining, or vapor levels were detected utilizing a photoionization detector (PID). - 2.01 SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of service$ authorized for this project included a visual site reconnaissance, subsurface exploration, field and laboratory testing, and a geotechnical engineering analysis to provide criteria for preparing the design of the building foundations, building floor slab and pavement. Site preparation recommendations and constructioddesign considerations for the proposed development are also provided. J In addition to the previously described geotechnical services, all below-grade soil samples recovered fiom the field exploration program were subjected to a Limited Volatile Orlpnic Compound Vapor Scan using a Photoionization Detector. The vapor test procedures are des#cribed in Appendix D. Additional environmental aspects of this site were not within the scope of our services. - 3.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 Site Description The proposed site is located at The Pavilion at La Costa, California. At the time of our field exploration, the proposed site was a vacant lot covered with little to no vegetation. The proposed site was relatively flat with less than 2 feet of elevation differential between test boring locations. Vacant lots surrounded the proposed site. 3.2 Proposed Proiect Description A description of the proposed development, including the structural loads and anticipated traf'fic intensity, is presented in Appendix A. Preliminary project information provided by the client did not include a finished floor elevation for the proposed building. We have assumed a finished floor at El. 99.0 feet, referenced to the temporary benchmark indicated on the Test Boring Location Plan, Figure 1, for the geotechnical analysis. Existing site grades at the building / GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Proposed Bucca Di Beppo Csalsbad, California Project No. 2G-0109010 Page 3 teslt boring locations ranged from El 98.1 feet to El. 99.1 feet. Therefore, only minor grading is anticipated to establish the assumed floor elevation, exclusive of site preparation or overexcavation requirements. Site grade should be kept as high as possible to reduce rock excavation. - 4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 4.1 Subsurface Exploration Eight (8) test borings were drilled for this project to depths ranging fiom about 12% to 15 feet below existing grade. The approximate test boring locations are indicated on the Boring Location Plan (Figure 1). The Boring Location Plan, as well as copies of the Test Boring Logs (Records of Subsurface Exploration) are enclosed in Appendix B. Field and laboratory test procedures are enclosed in Appendix C and D, respectively. The terms and symbols used on the Test Boring Logs are defined on the General Notes in Appendix E. 4.2 Subsurface Conditions The subsurface conditions as subsequently described have been simplified somewhat for ease of report interpretation. A more detailed description of the subsurface conditions at the test boring locations are described on the test boring logs enclosed in Appendix B of this report. Approximately 2 to 3 inches of topsoil consisting of orange brown silty fine, trace roots were encountered at the surface of the test borings. The native soils encountered generally consisted of firm to very dense relative density light brown and orange silty fine sand (Sandstone) to at least the maximum depth explored of 15 feet. Soluble Sulfates Representative samples of the near surface soils, which may contact structural concrete, have been submitted to an analytical testing laboratory to determine the concentrations present of water soluble sulfate whch could result in chemical attack of cement. Upon completion of this testing, an addendum to this report will be issued which presents the results of testing and pertinent recommendations for concrete mix design. GEES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. E Proposed Bucca Di Beppo Czu-lsbad, California Project No. 2G-0109010 Page 4 Groundwater Groundwater was not encountered at the test boring locations during drilling. On the basis of the relative moisture contents of the recovered soil samples, the groundwater table was considered to exist at depths in excess of 15 feet below existing grade at the time of field exploration. Fluctuation in the groundwater table may OCCUT on a seasonal basis and shallower perched water conditions may develop depending on precipitation and surface water runoff. - 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Conditions imposed by the proposed development have been evaluated on the basis of Giles assumed floor elevation, engineering characteristics of the subsurface materials ericountered in the borings, and their anticipated behavior both during and after construction. Conclusions and recommendations presented for the design of building foundations, building flc or slab and pavement construction along with site preparation recommendations and construction considerations are discussed in the following sections of this report. General comments and other limitations relative to this report are presented in Appendix E. Development of the proposed site entails soil and foundation oriented consideration with respect to the presence of moisture and disturbance sensitive and excavation difficulties of native so:ils. Recommendations in this report are predicated upon site preparation, foundation, and floor s1a.b and pavement construction observed and tested by a Giles Engineering Associates representative. 5.1 Soil Vapor Scan The recovered soils samples did not exhibit odors and/or discolorations, which would be potentially indicative of volatile organic vapor content. In addition, the results of the vapor scan conducted with a photoionization detector (PID) did not identify detectable concentrations of volatile organic compounds. The vapor test procedures are described in Appendix D. Additional environmental aspects of this site were not within the scope of our services: 5.2 Seismic Desim Considerations FaultindSeismic Design Parameters Research of available maps published by the California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG) indicates that the subject site is not located within an Alquist-Pnolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Determination of the UBC seismic coefficients (1997 edition) was performed by using the “UBCSEIS” (vl .O) software package developed by Thomas Blake, Computer Services and Software. The program uses a digitized fault data file developed by the California Department of @; GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Proposed Bucca Di Beppo C arlsbad, California Project No. 2G-0109010 Page 5 Mines and Geology (CDMG) in conjunction with the longitude and latitude coordinates for the subject site to calculate the closest distance to each fault. The coefficients are then determined in acc:ordance with the procedures described in Section 16 of the UBC based on fault type and site distance. The program output file is included with this report in Appendix B. The results of the analysis yielded the following UBC coefficients: UBC Seismic Coefficients Seismic Zone Factor 0.4 Soil Profile Type SD Na 1 .o Nv 1.1 Ca 0.44 cv 0.69 Ts 0.63 1 To '.. 0.126 1 UBC Seismic Coefficients 3r 0.4 auii riviiic i ypt: SD Na 1 .o Nv 1.1 -^ C--& PI n AA . Liquefaction Potential Liquefaction is the loss of strength in generally cohesionless, saturated soils when the pore-water pressure induced in the soil by a seismic event becomes equal to or exceeds the overburden pressure. The primary factors, which influence the potential for liquefaction, include grclundwater table elevation, soil type and grain size characteristics, and relative density of the soil, initial confining pressure, and intensity and duration of ground shaking. Liquefaction potential is greater in saturated, loose, poorly graded fine sands with a mean (d50) grain size in the range of 0.075 to 0.2 mm (Seed and Idriss, 1971). Soils are generally not considered to be susceptible to liquefaction above the static groundwater table. ! The potential for liquefaction to occur at the proposed site is considered to be very low and not a significant concern for site development. The very low potential is based on the very dense native soils (Sandstone). 5.3 Site Development Recommendations The recommendations for site development as subsequently described are based upon the conditions encountered at the test boring locations. Bids for site preparation should be based upon the time of year in which site development is planned. c/ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. %? Proposed Bucca Di Beppo Carlsbad, California . Project No. 2G-0109010 Page 6 Site stripping Preparation of the site will initially require stripping existing vegetation and soil with significant organic content as well as any other associated soils with deleterious material content. Approximately 2 to 3 inches of topsoil was present at the surface of test borings. Deeper topsoil maybe present between or beyond test boring locations. A Giles representative should determine the actual removal of near surface soils based on subgrade material and stability. Dry Weather Construction If site preparation and grading activities are conducted during dry, fair weather conditions, no significant additional overexcavation or undercutting is expected to be necessary due to unstable soil conditiom, provided construction traffic does not disturb the soil. '. Wet Weather Construction Some subgrade stability problems should be expected during wet weather due to the near surface moisture and disturbance sensitive soils. In the event subgrade stability problems are encountered, recompaction is not achievable due to wet conditions, additional undercutting to depths of 6 to 8 inches and processing of the subgrade to dry the soils followed by proper recompaction to a similar depth should be expected to be necessary to achieve a stable subgrade. Additional subgrade stabilization measures such as the placement of a crushed stone working mat: may be required depending upon the severity of the subgrade instability. Followed by proper conipaction. The estimated depth of overexcavation is based upon the moisture sensitivity of the soils and the anticipated effect of wet weather grading. If undercutting is necessary, it should be confirmed through continuous observation and testing by Giles Engineering personnel. 1 Reuse of On-site Soil On-site soil may be reused as structural compacted fill within the proposed building and pavement areas provided they do not contain excessive quantities of organics, oversized materials or other deleterious materials. Difficulties in recompacting the sandy soils with low fines content are not expected. However, adding water to the soils may be needed prior to conipaction as structural fill material. Subgrade Protection The near surface soils are moisture and disturbance sensitive and are also susceptible to erosion in the presence of flowing water. Unstable soil conditions may develop if the soils are exposed to moisture increases or are disturbed (rutted) by construction traffic or exposed to the fi-ee flow of water. The site should be graded to prevent water fkom ponding within construction / GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Proposed Bucca Di Beppo Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-0109010 Page 7 areas and/or flowing into excavations. Accumulated water must be removed immediately along with any unstable soil. Foundation concrete should be placed and excavations backfilled as soon as possible to protect the bearing grade. The degree of subgrade instability and associated remedial construction is dependent, in part, upon precautions taken by the contractor to protect the: subgrade during site development. 5.4 Construction Considerations Soil Excavation Excavations for footings and shallow utilities are not expected encounter bank stability problems due to the presence of fine content in the granular soils. Shallow excavations may be adequately sloped for bank stability while deeper excavations or excavations in areas where adequate back sloping cannot be performed may require some form of external support such as shoring or bracing. Deeper'excavations may require some form of external support such as shoring or bracing. Excavation difficulties should also be expected due to the presence of very dense soils and shallow bedrock, special excavation methods may be necessary. Pre-bin test pits are recommended to be performed by the contractors to evaluate excavation characteristics. Test pit:; should be backfilled with structural. compacted fill. All excavations should be performed in act-ordance with Cal OSHA guidelines, which is the contractor's responsibility. J Construction Dewatering The groundwater table at the time of the exploration was considered to have existed below a depth of 15 feet. However, the site may be susceptible to the development of shallower perched water conditions where water accumulates within the granular soils underlain by less permeable soil. In the event that shallow perched water is encountered, filter sump pumps placed within pits in the bottoms of excavations are expected to be the most feasible method of construction dewatering. 5.5 Foundation Recommendations Vertical Load Capacity The proposed structure is recommended to be supported by a conventional shallow foundation system bearing within suitable natural soil or structural compacted fill. The foundation system may consist of either independently poured spread footings or monolithically pocred foundation and floor slab thereby using a turned-down construction technique. Foundations should be founded at least 1 foot into suitable bearing newly placed structural compacted fill. Foundations are recommended to be designed for a maximum, net, allowable soil-bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot @so. However, higher bearing capacity GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. -1 1 . Proposed Bucca Di Beppo Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-0109010 Page 8 could be feasible but not foundation widths for walls considerations. expected to be necessary for the proposed structure. Minimum and columns should be 12 and 18 inches, respectively, for bearing Footinp Reinforcement Conventional steel reinforcing within continuous wall and column pad footings is acceptable for geotechnical considerations. Additional reinforcement is recommended across soilhedrock transition zones due to potential increased differential settlement The actual design of foundations should be performed by a qualified structural engineer to ensure proper proportioning and reinforcing. Lateral Load Resistance i Lateral load resistance will be developed by a combination of friction acting at the base of foundations and slabs and the passive earth pressure developed by footings below grade. Passive pressure and friction may be used in combination, without reduction, in determining the total resistance to lateral loads. A one-third increase in the passive value may be used for short duration wind or seismic loads. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 may be used with dead load forces for footings placed on existing soiVor non-expansive structural compacted fill. An allowable passive earth pressure of 250 psf per foot of footing depth below the lowest adjacent grade (pcQ may be used for the sides of footings placed against existing soil or properly compacted structural fill. The maximum recommended allowable passive pressure is 2,000 psf. Bearing Material Criteria Existing soil suitable for structural fill subgrade and indirect foundation support should exhibit at least a firm relative density (average corrected N-value of at least 10) for non-cohesive soil for the recommended 2,500 psf bearing capacity. For design and construction estimating purposes, suitable bearing soils were encountered at about 1 foot below existing grade at the building test boring locations. Structural fill placed and compacted under engineering controlled co.nditions is also considered to be suitable for direct foundation support if placed on a suitable bearing natural soil subgrade. Evaluation of the foundation bearing soils is recommended to be performed by a Giles representative at the time of construction prior to placement of reinforcing steel. Evaluation of bearing soils should extend to 4 feet or two footing widths below bearing grade, to a depth of at least 2 feet below the overexcavation subgrade, whichever is greater, or as provided by the geotechnical engineer. Alteration in the depth of evaluation may be at the discretion of @C GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. '1 Proposed Bucca Di Beppo Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-0109010 Page 9 the geotechnical engineer. Evaluation should consist of appropriate bearing capacity testing such as Dynamic Cone Penetrometer testing or other suitable testing techniques depending upon soil type. If unsuitable bearing soils are encountered, they should be compacted in-place, if feasible, or excavated to a suitable bearing soil subgrade and to a lateral extent as defined by Item No. 3 of the enclosed Guide Specifications, with the excavation backfilled with structural compacted fill to develop a uniform bearing grade. Foundation Settlement The Uniform Building Code (UBC) requires a minimum 12-inch foundation embedment depth. However, it is recommended that perimeter foundations extend at least 12 inches below the adjacent exterior grade for bearing capacity purposes and to provide increased moisture pbtection of the bearing soils. All footings must be protected against weather and water damage during and after construction;?and must be supported within suitable bearing materials. . Estimated Foundation Distortion Post-construction total and differential settlement of a shallow foundation system designed and constructed in accordance with the recommendations provided in this report are estimated to be less than 1.0 and 0.5 inches, respectively. The estimated differential movement is anticipated to result in an angular distortion of 0.0021 inches per inch on the basis of a minimum clear span of 20 feet. The maximum estimated total and differential movement is considered within tolerable limits for the proposed structure, provided that the structural design adequately considers this estimated distortion. i 5.6 Floor Slab Recommendations . Subgrade The floor slab subgrade is recommended be prepared in accordance with the recommendations presented in the Site Development Recommendations section of this report. Tllis includes the recommended removal of the existing collapsible soils and replacement with structural compaceted fill. Foundation, utility trenches and other below-slab excavations are recommended to be backfilled with structural compacted fill. Desim The floor of the proposed structure may be constructed as a slab-on-grade supported on a properly prepared subgrade consisting of suitable bearing newly placed structural compacted fill. If desired, the floor slab may be poured monolithically with perimeter foundations where the foundations consist of thickened sections thereby using a "turned-down" construction technique. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, MC. w Proposed Bucca Di Beppo Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-0109010 Page 10 A synthetic sheet should be placed below the floor slab to serve as a vapor barrier to protect moisture sensitive floor coverings (i.e. tile, etc.). If materials in contact with the synthetic sheet contain sharp, angular particles, a cusluon layer of sand approximately 2 inches thick or a geotextile should be provided to protect it from puncture. An additional layer of sand may be provided between the slab and the vapor barrier to promote proper curing of the concrete. In addition, the vapor barrier sheets should be evaluated for holes and/or punctures prior to placement and the edges overlapped and taped. Proper curing techniques are recommended to reduce the potential for extensive shrinkage cracking and slab curling. A qualified structural engineer should perform the actual design of the slab to ensure proper thickness and reinforcing. A minimum 4- inch thlck concrete slab is considered to be suitable for the proposed site. A 4- inch thick layer of compacted iiee-draining coarse granular material should underlie the sIZt11. Reinforcement of the slab is recommended to consist of at least a conventional were fabric (6x6-W1.4xW1.4 WWF) plagd at mid-height in the slab. Estimated Distortion With proper site preparation and construction observation and testing, the post- construction total and differential settlement of an isolated monolithic floor slab, constructed as recommended are estimated to be less than 0.5 and 0.3 inches, respectively. The estimated difl'erential movement is anticipated to occw across the sfiort dimension of the structure and is expected to be withm tolerable levels. If the slab is poured monolithically with perimeter foundation, the total and differential settlement of the floor slab are estimated to be the same as those of the footings 5.7 Pavement Recommendations Pavement Subgrade Following completion of the recommended subgrade preparation procedures, the pavement subgrade soils are anticipated to consist of silty sands. The anticipated subgrade soils are classified as good subgrade based on the Unified Soil Classification System designation of SM/SP. Soils of this type are anticipated to exhibit an R-value in the range of 30 to 50 when properly prepared. A specific R-value of 30 has been assumed for the pavement design. It should be, however, be recognized that the City of Carlsbad may require R-value testing to verify the use of the following design. To use this R-value, all fill added to the pavement subgrade must have pavement support characteristics at least equivalent to the existing soils, and must be placed and compacted in accordance with the project specifications. If bedrock is present at the pavement subgrade, a drainage blanket is recommended to prevent entrapment of water in the granular base course. We should review the final grading plan to determine if a A GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. (iT Proposed Bucca Di Beppo Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-0109010 Page 11 Materials - Asphaltic Concrete - Surface Course (b) Asphaltic Concrete - Binder Course (b) Crushed Aggregate Base Course grsiinge blanket is necessary. Thickness (inches) CALTRANS Parking Drive Specifications Stalls Lanes (TI4.0) (TI=5.0) 1 1 Section 39, (a) 2 2 Section 39, (a) 4 6 Section 26, Class I1 (R-value at least 78) Asp halt Pavements Pavement recommendations are based upon CALTRANS design parameters for a twenty- year design life and assume proper drainage and construction observation and testing. It is, therefore, recommended that the geotechnical engineer observes and test subgrade preparation, and that the subgrade be evaluated immediately before pavement construction. Pavement rehabilitation at 8-to 9-year intervals should be expected to achieve a twenty-year service life. (& GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Proposed Bucca Di Beppo Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-0109010 Page 12 Concrete Pavements Considering the higher pavement stress in the drive-thru lane, entrance/exit aprons, and the trash enclosure-loading zone, a 6-inch thick, properly reinforced concrete pavements recommended. The pavement may be underlain by a 4-inch compacted coarse granular base placed on a properly prepared subgrade to serve as a leveling mat for construction. Minimum reinforcement within concrete pavements is recommended to consist of heavy welded wire mesh (6x6 W2.9xW2.9 WWM). Load transfer reinforcing will be required at construction joints perpendicular to traffic flow if construction joints are not properly keyed. Materials and construction procedures for concrete pavements should be in accordance with Section 40 of the CAL,TRANS Standard Specifications. General Considerations Pavement recommendations assume proper drainage and construction observe, and are based on traffic loads as indicated in Appendix A. Pavement designs are based on either PCA or CALTRANS design parameters for twenty (20) year design period. However, these designs are also based on a routine pavement maintenance program and significant asphaltic concrete pavement rehabilitation after about 8 to 10 years, in order to obtain the anticipated 20-year pavement service life. (&; GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. APPENDIX A -\. PROJECT DETAILS 1 The information enclosed herein provides a brief description of assumed project details. If, however, the actual details are different than the assumed details, GiZes must be notified, since changes andor additions to the geotechnical recommendations may be necessary. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. {rn PROPOSED BUCA DI BEPPO RESTAURANT CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PROJECT DETAILS Building The proposed structure is assumed to consist of a one-story wood frame or masonry structure with no basement and a wood truss roof system supported by exterior andor interior bearing walls and possibly isolated columns. The building is about 4900 square feet in building area. The maximum combined dead and live loads supported by the bearing walls and columns is assumed to be 2,000 pounds per linear foot (plf) and 30,000 pounds, respectively. The live load supported by the floor slab is assumed to be a maximum of 100 pounds per square foot (psf). Pavement i The maximum daily traffic volume used for design of the drive lanes and parking stall areas of the’pavement section approximately corresponds to a Traffic Index (TI) of 4.0 and 5.0 for the parking stall and drive lane areas, respectively. The pavement sections are based on a 20-year design life. G6 GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 ? .. : '" APPENDIX B FIGURES AND TEST BORING LOGS The Boring Location Plan contained herein was prepared based upon information supplied by GiZes' client, or others, along with GiZes' field measurements and observations. The diagram is presented for conceptual purposes only and is intended to assist the reader in report interpretation. The Test Boring Logs and related information enclosed herein depict the subsurface (soil and water) conditions encountered at the specific boring locations on the date that the exploration was performed. Subsurface conditions may differ between boring locations and within areas of the site that were not explored with test brings. The subsurface conditions may also change at the boring locations over the passage of time. GLES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. w Figure : 1 Boring Location Plan Proposed Buca Di Beppo Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-0109010 Note: Dimensions indicate approximate method of locating test borings?lin the field with respect to curb. Drawing provided by client GK GlLES \/ €NGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 1 pp BORING rdo. & LOCATION: 1 NE Building --- ___ SURFACE: ELEVATION: 98.3 COMPLETION DATE: 912 710 1 FIELD REPRESENTATIVE: Scott Watson - - - - - - - - - - - - - ____-------- PROJECT: PROJECT LOCATION: Proposed Buca di Beppo ....................... The Pavilion at La Cosa ~GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Milwaukee Los Angeles Madison Dallas Atlanta Carlsbad, California ....................... GILES PROJECT NUMBER: Proiect No. 2G-0109010 I Washington, D.C. MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Topsoil: +I- 2 inches; Orange Brown Silty fine Sand, trace roots - Damp - Light Brown Tan Silty fine Sand (Sandstone) - - Damp to Moist - - - - - - - - - i - - Boring Terminated @ 15' Feet Sample Below I No. & 1 fq '39 5 6-CS 014-lli +-A=- W 11 11 (%) - 19 28 15 8 PID BDL BDL - BDL BDL BDL BDL - NOTES Dd = 121 pcf Dd = 108 pcf Dd = 98 pcf Dd = 115 pcf 81 7 I WATER OBSERVATION DATA I REMARKS DURING DRILLING: None CS - California Sampler N-Value does not directly correspond with Standard Penetration Test (SPT) N-Value. N-Value increased due to presence of Sandstone. 3 1. WAT'ER LEVEL AFTER HOURS: Changes in strata indicated by the lines are ap roximate boundary between soil types. The actual transition may be gradual and may vary considerably between , borings. Location of Test Bonng is shown on &e Boring Location Plan. -4 I RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROJECT: PROJECT LOCATION: 2 SE Building Proposed Buca di Beppo _____-__ 9/27/01 Carlsbad, California ..................................... Scott Watson GILES PROJECT NUMBER: Project No. 2G-0109010 '7 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Topsoil: +/- 3 inches; . Orange Brown Silty fine - roots - Damp Liaht Brown Tan Siltv fine Sand (Sandstonel - Damp to Moist 1 .' 1-Terminated @ 15' N Feet Sample Below No. & Surface Type 1-AU *42 2-SS '41 - - - 3-SS 16 5 4-ss 12 - - - 5-SS 25 10 - m- - - 6-SS OI5-lli rlr GILES EN GI NEE RING ASSOCIATES, INC. Milwaukee Los Angeles Madison Dallas Atlanta Washing ton, D.C. - PI D BDL BDL - BDL BDL BDL BDL - NOTES WATER OBSERVATION DATA 8 _I I REMARKS ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING: None N-Value increased due to presence of Sandstone. REMOVAL: None AFTER REMOVAL: 12 AFTER HOURS: HOURS: Changes in qtrata Indicated by the lines are ap roximate boundary between soil types. The actual transition may be gradual and may vary considerably between borings. LoEation of Test Boring is shown on &e Boring Location Plan. RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION BORING NO. & LOCATION: PROJECT: SURFACE ELEVATION, PROJECT LOCATION: ASSOCIATES, INC. COMPLETION DATE: 912710 I Carlsbad, California Milwaukee Los Angeles FIELD REPRESENTATIVE: Madison Dallas Atlanta 3 SW Building Proposed Buca di Beppo ________- 98.5 The Pavilion at La Cosa GI LES ENGINEERING :Scott Watson GILES PROJECT NUMBER: Project No. 2G-0109010 Washington, D.C. MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Topsoil: +/- 2 inches; Orange Brown Silty fine - Sand, trace roots - Damp - Light Brown Tan Silty fine Sand (Sandstone) - - Damp to Moist 1 - - - - - - - - - 5 - - Boring Terminated @ 15’ 2fl 6-CS 17 213 ‘5015 - W 3 10 (%I - 14 11 16 10 - - PID BDL BDL - BDL BDL BDL BDL - NOTES Dd=114pcf Dd = 116 pd Dd = 114 pcf Dd = 109 pd ii ii WATER OBSERVATION DATA REMARKS Standard Penetration Test (SPT) N-Value. N-Value increased due to presence of Sandstone. DURING DRILLING: None CS - California Sampler N-Value does not directly correspond with AFTER REMOVAL: 11 AFTER HOURS: HOURS: Changes In strata indicated by the lines are ap roximate boundary between soil types. The actual transltion may be gradual and may vary considerably between borings. Location of Test Boring is shown on tRe Boring Location Plan. I 1 RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION I pp BORING hO. & LOCATION: 4 NW Building PROJECT: Proposed Buca di Beppo GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Milwaukee Los Angeles i Madison Dallas Atlanta The Pavilion at La Cosa Carlsbad, California 99.1 9/27/0 1 _____________ ....................... COMPLETION DATE: FIELD REPRESENTATIVE: _____--_-_--_ ....................... WATER OBSERVATION DATA - WATER ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING: None WATER LEVEL AFTER REMOVAL: None CAVE DEPTH AFTER REMOVAL: 11 WATER LEVEL AFTER HOURS: CAVE DEPTH AFTER HOURS: - REMARKS N-Value increased due to presence of Sandstone. MATERIAL DESCRIPTION -,Topsoil: +/- 2 inches; Orange Brown Silty fine \Sand, trace roots - Damp - - Light Brown Tan Silty fine Sand (Sandstone) - - Damp io Moist Boring Terminated @ 15’ 10 .... 18 22 PID BDL BDL - BDL BDL BDL BDL - . NOTES iangc ringz I ~ECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION WATER OBSERVATION DATA V WATER ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING: None - 1-0. & LOCATION: I PROJECT: REMARKS N-Value increased due to presence of Sandstone. Proposed Buca di Beppo t SURFACE ELEVATION: t PROJECT LOCATION- 5 Parking Lot _____- ----- --_-___ __-_____---_--- The Pavilion at La Cosa + 99.2 c COMPLET ON DATE: _____----___ ....................... Carlsbad, California t 912710 1 ______----__ ....................... t FIELD REPRESENTATIVE: I Scott Watson I GILES PROJECT NUMBER: Proiect No. 2G-0109010 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Topsoil: +/- 2 inches; Orange Brown Silty fine - Sand, trace roots - Damp - Light Bi-own and Orange Silty fine Sand - (Sandstone) - Damp to Moist 1 - - - - - - - - r Prminated @ 12.5' '40 I 5 Fl 21 23 1 lorn I I .$d 015-1 I2 GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Milwaukee Los Angeles Madison Dallas Atlanta Washington, D.C. W 3 7 13 12 6 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL - WATER LEVEL AFTER REMOVAL: None CAVE DEPTH AFTER REMOVAL: 6 WATER LEVEL AFTER HOURS: $1 I CAVE DEPTH AFTER HOURS: Changes In strata indicated by the lines are ap roximate boundaly between sol1 types. The actual transition may be gradual and may vary considerably between borings. Location of Test Boring la shown on tRe Boring Location Plan. I OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION I PROJECT: Proposed Buca di Bewo PROJECT LOCATION? t 6 Parking Lot __---- --_-- -----__ ___--__ ------- SURFACE ELEVATION: t The Pavilion at La Cosa t 99.1 _______--_-_ ....................... COMPLET'ION DATE: t I Scott Watson I GILES PROJECT NUMBER: Proiect No. 2G-0109010 GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Milwaukee Los Angeles Madison Dallas Atlanta Washington, D.C. I II MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Topsoil: +I- 2 inches; Orange Brown Silty fine - Sand, trace roots - Damp - Light Brown Tan Silty fine Sand (Sandstone) - - Damp to Moist 1 - I - - - - - - - \ Boring Terminated @ 12.5' i Feet Sample Below I No. & I N '(1 *41 '30 I I ~~ ~~ WATER OBSERVATION DATA ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING: None LEVEL AFTER REMOVAL: None AFTER REMOVAL: 7 AFTER HOURS: $1 - I CAVE DEPTH AFTER HOURS: , borings. Loc.ation of Test Boring is shown on t!e Boring Location Pian. Changes In strata indicated by the lines are ap roximate boundary between soil type - W (%I - 4 2 12 12 12 15 - PID BDL BDL - BDL BDL BDL BDL NOTES REMARKS N-Value increased due to presence of Sandstone. . The actual transition may be gradual and may vary considerably between w eE(30RD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION BORING NO. & LOCATION: PROJECT: 7 Parking Lot Proposed Buca di Beppo ______- SURFACE ELEVATION: PROJECT LOCATION- COMPLETION DATE: ASSOCIATES, INC. 912710 1 Carlsbad, California Milwaukee Los Angeles FIELD REPRESENTATIVE: Madison Dallas Atlanta 97.9 The Pavilion at La Cosa GILES ENGINEERING Washington, D.C. Scott Watson GILES PROJECT NUMBER: Proiect No. 2G-0109010 MATE RIAL D ESCRl PTI 0 N TToDsoil: +I- 2 inches: Oranae Brown Siltv fine \Sand, trace roots - Damp - I - Light Brown Tan Silty fine Sand (Sandstone) - - Damp 'to Moist c Boring Terminated @ 12.5' 10 w I - W 2 8 ("/.I - 7 12 10 12 - PID - BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL - NOTES ~~~ ~ WATER OBSERVATION DATA WATER LEVEL AFTER HOURS: REMARKS * N-Value increased due to presence of Sandstone. m I CAVE DEPTH AFTER HOURS: ianges in strata indicated by the lines are ap roximate boundary between roil types. The actual transition may be gradual and may vary considerably between wings. Location of Test Boring is shown on tge Boring Locatlon Plan. - I RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION ImFIO. 8 LOCATION: I PROJECT: Proposed Buca di Beppo PROJECT LOCATION: t 8 Parking Lot _____-- ----_ ....................... SURFACE ELEVATION: The Pavilion at La Cosa t 97.3 _________-__ ....................... t COMPLETION DATE: 9/27/01 Carlsbad, California Scott Watson GILES PROJECT NUMBER: Project No. 2G-0109010 r ? a 8 I- n D: 0 V d 0 W z i 6 (3 Z 4 8 w 0 U $ 2 m 3 v) MATERIAL DESCRIPTION -,Topsoil: +/- 2 inches; Orange Brown Silty fine ' \Sand, trace roots - Damp ' Liaht Brown Tan Silty fine Sand (Sandstone] - - ' Damp ,to Moist \ Boring Terminated @ 12.5' GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Milwaukee Los Angeles Madison Dallas Atlanta Washington, D.C. - W 5 11 (%I - 12 10 12 10 - PID BDL BDL - BDL BDL BDL BDL NOTES ~~ WATER OBSERVATION DATA REMARKS None N-Value increased due to presence of Sandstone. CAVE DEPTH AFTER REMOVAL: 7 WATER LEVEL AFTER HOURS: anges in strata indicated by the lines are ap roximate boundary between soil types. The actual transition may be gradual and may vary considsrably between rings. Loc.ition of lest Bonng is shown on &e Boring Location Plan. ....................... * * * UBCSEIS * * Version 1.00 * * * * * ....................... COMPUTATION OF 1997 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS JOB NUMBER: 2G-0109010 JOB NAME: Proposed Bucca Di Beppo Calle Barcelona, Building 7 Carsbad, California FAULT-DATA-FILE NAME: CDYGUBCR.DAT SITE COORDINATES : SITE LATITUDE: 33.0683- SITE LONGITUDE: 117.2633 UBC SEISMIC ZONE: 0.4 UBC SOIL PROFILE TYPE: SD NEAREST TYPE A FAULT: NAME: ELSINORE-JULIAN DISTANCE: 41.4 km NEAREST TYPE B FAULT: NAME: ROSE CANYON DISTANCE: 7.9 km SELECTED UBC SEISMIC COEFFICIENTS: Na: 1.0 Nv: 1.1 Ca: 0.44 Cv: 0.69 rs: 0.631 ro: 0.126 DATE: 10-16-2001 , .................................................................... * CAUTION: The digitized data points used to model faults are * * limited in number and have been digitized from small- * * scale maps (e.g., 1:750,000 scale). Consequently, * * the estimated fault-site-distances may be in error by * * several kilometers. Therefore, it is important that * * the distances be carefully checked for accuracy and * * adjusted as needed, before they are used in design. * .................................................................... ABBREVIATED FAULT NAME _________----_-------------------. _________------------------------. ROSE CANYON NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Off shore) CORONADO BANK ELS INORE-JULIAN ELS INORE-TEMECULA ELSINORE-GLEN IVY EARTHQUAKE VALLEY PALOS VERDES SAN JACINTO-ANZA SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK ELSINORE -COYOTE MOUNTAIN NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (L.A.Ba;sin) CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinbre) ELS INORE - WHITTIER SAN JACINTO - BORREGO SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO SAN ANDREAS - Southern PINTO MOUNTAIN SAN JOSE CUCAMONGA SUPERSTITION MTN. (San Jacinto) SIEELRA MADRE (Central 1 BURNT MTN. ELMORE RANCH NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (West) EURIKA PEAK SUPERSTITION HILLS (San Jacinto) CLEGHORN ELSINORE -LAGUNA SALADA NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East) SAN ANDREAS - 1857 Rupture RAYElOND CLAMSHELL- SAWPIT VERIIUGO LANI)ERS BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE HOLLYWOOD HELIENDALE - S. LOCKHARDT LENl7OOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN SPRGS SANTA MONICA EMERSON SO. - COPPER MTN. JOHNS ON VALLEY (Northern) IMPERIAL MALIBU COAST SIEERA MADRE (San Fernando) APPROX . DISTANCE (km) ------- - - - - - - - - - 7.9 18.3 31.9 41.4 41.5 64.4 64.8 67.2 78.2 81.4 82.6 84.8 85.7 87.8 94.1 100.7 105.5 110.4 121.0 121.1 125.0 125.3 125.4 127.8 131.4 131.7 132.2 133.0 134.1 134.3 137.8 140.4 140.4 140.7 144.4 145.1 147.6 148.3 149.4 154.5 155.2 157.3 158.4 158.8 159.5 165.3 SOURCE TYPE (A,B,C) B B B A B B B B A B B B B B B B B A B B A B B B B B B B B B B A B B B B B B B B B B B A B B ------- -_____- MAX. MAG. (Mw) ------ ------ 6.9 6.9 7.4 7.1 6.8 6.8 6.5 7.1 7.2 6.9 6.8 6.8 6.9 6.7 6.8 6.6 6.7 7.4 7.0 6.5 7.0 6.6 7.0 6.5 6.6 7.0 6.5 6.6 6.5 7.0 6.7 7.8 6.5 6.5 6.7 7.3 6.5 6.5 7.1 7.3 6.6 6.9 6.7 7.0 6.7 6.7 SLIP (mm/yr) RATE --------- - - - - - - - - - 1.50 1.50 3.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 3.00 12.00 12.00 4.00 4.00 1.00 1.00 2.50 4.00 12.00 24.00 2.50 0.50 5.00 5.00 3.00 0.60 1.00 1.00 0.60 4.00 3.00 3.50 0.50 34.00 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.60%. 1-00 25.00 0.60 0.60 1.00 0.60 0.60 20.00 0.30 2.00 FAULT TYPE (SS , DS, BT) ss ss ss ss ss ss ss ss ss ss ss ss ss DS ss ss ss ss ss DS DS ss DS ss ss DS ss ss ss ss DS ss DS DS DS ss DS ss ss ss DS ss ss ss DS DS ---------- -_____---_ , APPENDIX C FIELD PROCEDURES The field operations were conducted in general accordance with the procedures rrxommended by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) designation D 420 entitled "Standard Guide for Sampling Soil and Rock" and/or other relevant specifications. Soil samples were preserved and transported to Gila' laboratory in general accordance with the procedures recommended by ASTM designation D 4220 entitled "Standard Practice for Preserving and Transporting Soil Samples." Brief descriptions of the sampling, testing and field procedures commonly performed by GiZes are provided herein. .; .I . .; .. 1 GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. ~ ..... ..-.__._I ___ ~. . I __ -I i 5 ,. :: 3 Test Boring: Elevations The ground surface elevations reported on the Test Boring Logs are referenced to the assumed benchmark shown on the Boring Location Plan (Figure 1). Unless otherwise noted, the elevations were determined with a conventional hand-level and are accurate to within about 1 foot. Test Borinp Locations The test borings were located on-site based on the existing site features and/or apparent property lines. Dimensions illustrating the approximate boring locations are reported on the Boring Location Plan (Figure 1). Water Level Measurement 'A I The water levels reported on the Test Boring Logs represent the depth of "free" water encountered during drilling andor after the drilling tools were removed from the borehole. Water levels measured within a granular (sand and gravel) soil profile are typically indicative of the water table elevation. It is usually not possible to accurately identify the water table elevation within cohesive (clayey) soils, since the rate of seepage is slow. The water table elevation within cohesive soils must therefore be determined over a period of time with groundwater observation wells. It must be recognized that the water table may fluctuate seasonally and during periods of heavy precipitation. Depending on the subsurface conditions, water may also become perched above the water table, especially during wet periods. Borehole Backfilling Procedures Each borehole was backfilled upon completion of the field operations. If potential contamination was encountered, andor if required by state or local regulations, boreholes were backfilled with an "impervious" material (such as bentonite slurry). Borings that penetrated pavements, sidewalks, etc. were "capped" with Portland Cement concrete, asphaltic concrete, or a similar surface material. It must, however, be recognized that the backfill material may settle, and the surface cap may subside, over a period of time. Further backfilling and/or re-surfacing by Giles' client or the property owner may be required. GILES ENGMERING ASSOCIATES, INC. w ~- __ -. .. . . . . . . . . I . -. . FIELD SAMPLING AND TESTING PROCEDURES Auger Sampline (AQ i Soil samples are removed from the auger flights as an auger is withdrawn above the ground surface. Such samples are used to determine general soil types and idenw approximate soil stratifications. Auger samples are highly disturbed and are therefore not typically used for geotechnical strength testing. A split-barrel sampler with a 2-inch outside diameter is driven into the subsoil with a 140-pound hammer, free-falling a vertical distance of 30 inches. The summation of hammer-blows required to drive the sampler the final 12 inches of an 18-inch sample interval is defined as the "Standard Penetration Resistance" or "N-value. " The N-value is representative of the soils' resistance to penetration. The N-value is therefore an index of the relative density of &anular soils and the comparative consistency of cohesive soils. A soil sample is collected from each SFT interval. - T- T D- 7 A relatively undisturbed soil sample is collected by hydraulically advancing a thin- walled Shelby Tube sampler into a soil mass. Shelby Tubes have a sharp cutting edge and are commonly 2 to 5 inches in diameter. Unless otherwise noted, Giles uses 3-inchdiameter tubes. A relatively large volume of soil is collected with a shovel or other manually- operated tool. The sample is typically tramported to GiZes' materials laboratory in a sealed bag or bucket. < -A MT This test is conducted by driving a 1.5-inchdiameter cone into the subsoil using a 15-pound steel ring (hammer), free-falling a vertical distance of 20 inches. The number of hammer-blows required to drive the cone 1% inches is an indication of the soil strength and density, and is defined as "N. " The Dynamic Cone Penetration test is commonly conducted in hand auger borings, test pits and within excavated trenches. - Continued - 3 .. i i GILES ENGINJZERING ASSOClATES, INC. ! i Rimy-Lined Barrel Sampling - (ASTM D 3550) In this procedure, a ring-lined barrel sampler is used to collect soil samples for classification This method provides samples that fit directly into laboratory test and laboratory testing. insbwnents without additional handling/disturbance . Sampling and Testing Procedures The field testing and sampling operations were conducted in general accordance with the procedures recommended by the American Society for Testing and Mater ids (ASTM) andor other relevant specifications. Results of the field testing (i.e. N-values) are reported on the Test Boring Logs. Explanations of the terms and symbols shown on the logs are provided on the appendix enclosure entitled "General Nqtes. I' ? APPENDIX D LABORATORY TESTING AND CLASSIFICATION The laboratory testing was conducted under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer in general accordance with the procedures recommended by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and/or other relevant specifications. Brief descriptions of laboratory tests commonly performed by Giles are provided herein. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. @$ I 1 i : Photoionization Detector (PID) In this procedure, soil samples are "scanned" in Giles' analytical laboratory using a Photoionization Detector (PID). The instrument is equipped with an 11.7 eV lamp calibrated to a Benzene Standard and is capable of detecting a minute concentration of certain Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) vapors, such as those commonly associated with petroleum products and some solvents. Results of the PID analysis are expressed in HNu (manufacturer's) units rather than actual concentration. Moisture Content (w) (ASTM D 2216) Moisture content is defined as the ratio of the weight of water contained within a soil sample to the weight of the dry solids within the sample. Moisture content is expressed as a percentage. ; AT 2 An axial load is applied at a uniform rate to a cylindrical soil sample. The unconfined compressive strength is the maximum stress obtained or the stress when 15% axial strain is reached, whichever occurs first. Calibrated Penetrometer Resistance (aD1 The small, cylindrical tip of a hand-held penetrometer is pressed into a soil sample to a prescribed depth to measure the soils capacity to resist penetration. This test is used to evaluate unconfined compressive strength. Vane-Shear Strength (as\ The blades of a vane are inserted into the flat surface of a soil sample and the vane is rotated until Mure occurs. The maximum shear resistance measured immediately prior to failure is taken as the vane-shear strength. D2 74: e The Loss&-Ignition (L.O.I.) test is used to determine the organic content of a soil sample. This procedure is conducted by heating a dry soil sample to 440°C in order to bum- off or "ash" organic matter present within the sample. The L.O.I. value is the ratio of the weight lost due to ignition compared to the initial weight of the dry sample. L.O.I. is expressed as a percentage. (,&, GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 3 1 1 s .I Particle Size Distribution (ASTM D42 1. D 422 . andD 1 140 This test is performed to determine the distribution of specific particle sizes (diameters) within a soil sample. The distribution of coarse-grained soil particles (sand and gravel) is determined from a "sieve analysis," which is conducted by passing the sample through a series of nested sieves. The distribution of fine-grained soil particles (silt and clay) is determined from a "hydrometer analysis," which is based on the sedimentation of particles suspended in water. Consolidation Test (ASTM D 2435) In this procedure, a series of cumulative vertical loads are applied to a small, lateral ly confined soil sample. During each load increment, vertical compression (consolidation) of the sample is measured over a period of time. Results of this test are used to estimate settlement and time rah of settlement. Classification of Samp le s ' Each soil sample was visually-manually classified, based on texture and plasticity, in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D-2488-75). The classifications are reported on the Test Boring Logs. Laboratory Testing The laboratory testing operations were conducted in general accordance with the procedures recommended by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and/or other relevant specifications. Results of the laboratory tests are provided on the Test Boring Logs or other appendix enclosures. Explanation of the terms and symbols used on the logs is provided on the appendix enclosure entitled "General Notes. " (&, GEES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. i i 1 , California Bearin? Ratio (CBR) Test ASTM D-1833 The CBR test is used for evaluation of a soil subgrade for pavement design, The test consists of measuring the force required for a 3-square-inch cylindrical piston to penetrate 0.1 or 0.2 inches into a compacted soil sample. The result is expressed as a percent of force required to penetrate a standard compacted crushed stone. Unless a CBR test has been specifically requested by the client or heavy traffic loads are expected, the CBR is estimated from published charts, based on soil classification and strength characteristics. A typical correlation chart is indicated below. 1 i i J GEES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, WC. w '. APPENDIX E GENERAL INFORMATION nn GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. w GENERAL COW NTS 1 \ The soil samples obtained during the subsurface exploration will be retained for a period of thirty days. If no instructions are received, they will be disposed of at that time. This report has been prepared exclusively for the client in order to aid in the evaluation of this property and to assist the architects and engineers in the design and preparation of the project plans and specifications. Copies of this report may be provided to contractor(s), with contract documents, to disclose information relative to this project. The report, however, has not been prepared to serve as the plans and specifications for actual construction without the appropriate interpretation by the project architect, structural engineer, and/or civil engineer. Reproduction and distribution of this report must be authorized by the clientiand Giles. This report has been based on assumed conditiondcharacteristics of the proposed development where specific information was not available. It is recommended that the architect, civil engineer and structural engineer along with any other design professionals involved in this project carefully relriew these assumptions to ensure they are consistent with the actual planned development. When hiscrepancies exist, they should be brought to our attention to ensure they do not affect the conclusions and recommendations provided herein. The project plans and specifications may also be submitted to Giles for review to ensure that the geotechnical related conclusions and recommendations provided herein have been correctly interpreted. The analysis of this site was based on a subsoil profile interpolated fiom a limited subsurface exploration. Ifthe actual conditions encountered during construction vary from those indicated by the borings, Giles must be contacted immediately to determine if the conditions alter the recommendations contained herein. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report have been promulgated in accordance with generally accepted professional engineeringpractices in the field of geotechnical engineering. No other warranty is either expressed or implied. GEES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. (5 t GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS FOR SUBGRADE AND PREPARATION FOR FILL, FOUNDATION, FLOOR SLAB AND PAVEMENT SUPPORT; AND SELECTION, PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION OF 3i'ILL SOILS USING MODIFIED PROCTOR PROCEDURES Construction monitoring and testing of subgrades and grades for fill, foundation, floor slab and pavement; and fill selection, placement and compaction shall be performed by an experienced soils engineer andor his representatives. 2. 3. ! , 4. I I 6. i i 7. All compacted till, subgrades, and grades shall be (a) underlain by suitable bearing material, (b) fiee of a11 organic fiozen, or other deleterious material, and (c) observed, tested and approved by qualified engineering personnel representing an experienced sails engineer. Preparation of subgrades after stripping vegetation, organic or other unsuitable materials shall consist of (a) pmhlling tcl detect soft, wet, yielding soils or other unstable materials that must be undercut, @) scarifying top 6 to 8 inches, (c) moisture conditioning the soils as required, and (d) recompaction to same minimum in-situ density required for similar material indicated under Item 5. Note: Compaction requirements for pavement subgrade are higher than other areas. Weather and construction equipment may damage compacted fill surface and reworking and retesting may be necessary for proper performance. hi overexcavation and fill areas, the compacted fill must extend (a) a minimum 1 foot lateral distance beyond the exterior edge of the foundation at bearing grade or pavement at subgrade and down to compacted fill subgrade on a maximum 0.5("):1 (v) slope, 0)) 1 foot above footing grade outside the building, and (c) to floor subgrade inside the building. Fill shall be placed and compacted on a 50: 1 (V) slope or must be stepped or benched as required to flatten if not specifically approved by qualified personnel under the direction of an experienced soils engineer. The compactedfill materials shall be fiee of deleterious, organic, or frozen matte-, shall contain no chemicals that may result in the niaterial being classified as "contaminated", and shall be lowexpansive with a maximum Liquid Limit (ASTM D-423) and Plasticity hidex (ASTM D-424) of 30 and 15, respectively, unless specifically tested and found to have low expansive properties and approved by an experienced soils engineer. The top 12 inches of compacted fill should have a maximum 3 inch particle diameter and all underlying compacted fill a m&um 6 inch diameter unless specifically approved by an experienced soils engineer. All fill niaterial must be tested and approved under the direction of an experienced soils engineer prior to placement. If the fill is to provide non-hst susceptible characteristics, .it must be classified as a clean GW, GP, SW or SP per Unified Soils Classification System (.4STM D-2487). For structural fill depths less than 20 feet, the density of the structural compacted fill and scarified subgrade and grades shall not be less than 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by Modified Proctor (ASTh4 D- 1557) with the exception of the top 12 inches of pavement subgrade which shall have a minimum in-situ density of 95 percent of maximum dry density, or 5 percent higher than underlying structural fill materials. Where the structural fill depth is greater than 20 feet, the portion below 20 feet should have aminimum in-place density of 95 percent of its maximum dry density or 5 percent higher than the top 20 feet. Cohesive soils shd not vary by more than - 1 to +3 percent moisture content and granular soil *3 percent fiom the optimum when placed and compacted or recompacted, unless specifically recommendedapproved by the soils engineer observing the placement and compaction. Cohesive soils with moderate to high expansion potentials (PPl.5) should, however, be placed, compacted and nnaintained prior to cmsttut~oi~ .,: a 3*1 percent moisture content above optimum moisture content to limit future heave. Fill shall be placed m layers with a maximum loose thickness of 8 inches for foundations and 10 inches for floor slabs and pavements, unless specifically approved by the soils engineer taking into consideration the type of materials and compaction equipment being used. The campaction equipment should consist of suitable mechanical equipment specifically designed for soil compaction. Bulldozers ct similar tracked vehicles are typically not suitable for compaction. Excavation, fig, subgrade grade preparation shall be performed in a manner and sequence that will provide drainage at all times end proper umlml of erosion. Precipitation, springs, and seepage water encountered shall be pumped or drained to provide a suitable ~vorking platform. Springs or water seepage encountered during graddfoundation construction must be called to the soils engineer's attention immediately for possible construction procedure revision or inclusion of an underdrain system. Non-mtural fill adjacent to st~~~tural fill should typically be placed in unison to provide lateral support. Backfill along walls must IK placed and compacted with care to ensure excessive unbalanced lateral pressures do not develop. The type of fill material placed adjacent to below grade walls (i.e. basement walls and retaining walls) must be properly tested and approved by an experienced mils engineer with consideration for the lateral pressure used in the wall design. 8. "herever, in the opinion of the soils engineer or the Owner's Representatives, an unstable condition is being created either by cutting or filling, the work should not proceed into that area until an appropriate geotechnical exploration and analysis has been 11erfomed and the grading plan revised, if found necessary. GEES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. !K j .3 dS: 8 O a 2 z zo U 8 0 a e > & 0 0 a G > W a B z * 0 z I 8 0 a e > UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM. (ASTM D-2487) Typical Name Wellqraded gravels, gravel-sand mix- tures. little or no fines lGW I tures. little or no fines Clayey gravels, gravel.sand4ay mix- lures - .. SW .- In U- ._ or no fines .o 2 - 8 22 little or no fines Wellqraded sands, gravelly sands, little - .E c 5s. " 4 "p t .E -I -a* 2 5 SP Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, d ! Silty sands. sand-silt mixtures U SC Clayev sands. sandday mixtures d Inorganic silts and very fine sands. 5: ML rock flour, silty or clayey fine sands. -4 or clayey silts with slight plasticity zs Inorganic clays of low to medium e: CL plasticity. gravellv clays. sandy clays. ;E silty clays. lean clays Gp OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of 2; c gr -- J 2 0 low plasticitv - 0 Inorganic silts. micaceous 01 dietoma. ceous fine sandy or siltv soi1s.elast~c SI1 ts Inorganic clays of high plasticity. fat clays CH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts I I Pt I Peat and other highly organic sod! Laborarory Classification Criteria 9, - (030)' z 0 5 I R % C, = 9 greater than 4; C, = - between 1 and 3 DI 0 DIO 060 L - 4 m J 0 Not meeting all gradation reauirements for GW 8 W c between 4 and 7 are border- line cases requiring use of line or P.I. less than 4 line with P.I. greater than 7 greater than 6; C, * - (0301' bet&n 1 and 3 40x 060 Not meeting all gradation reauirements for SW -e5 !!e= E I s above "A" Limits Dlorting In hatched Plasticity Chart Liquid limil 'Division of GM and SM groups into subdivisions of a and u are for folds ana airfiJlds only Subdivision is based on Atterberg limits; suffix e uswi when 'Borderlinm classitications. u~d for soils Po-sing charJcCteristics of two grouDs. are dcrlgnared by COmbinatiOns of group rvmbols. or example: L.L. is 28 or less and the P.I. is6 or less; the suffix u used when L.L. is greater than 28. GW-GC, Well-grJded gravel-sand mixture with clay binder. (&0 GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. GENERAL NOTES II S'PLE IDENTIFICATION All samples are visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D-2487-75 or D-2488-75) DESCRIPTIKE TERM (% BY DRY WEIGRT) Trace: 1-10% Boulders: 8 in and larger Little: 1 1-20% Cobbles: 3int08in Some: 21-35% Gravel coarse - %to 3 in AndAdjective 36-50% PARTICLE SIZE (DLQMETER) fine - No. 4 (4.76 mm) to % in coarse - No. 4 (4.76 mm) to No. 10 (2.0 mm) medium - No. 10 (2.0 mm) to No. 40 (0.42 mm) fine - No. 40 (0.42 mm) to No. 200 (0.074 mm) No. 200 (0.074 mm) and smaller (Non-plastic) No. 200 (0.074 mm) and smaller (Plastic) Sand: Silt: Clay: SOIL PROPERTYSYMBOLS Dd: Dry Density (pco SS: Split-Spoon LL: Liquid Limit, percent ST Shelby Tube - 3" O.D. (except where noted) PL: Plastic Limit, percent CS: 3" O.D. California Ring Sampler PI: Plasticity Index (LL-PL) DC: Dynamic Cone Penetrometer per ASTM LOI: Loss on Ignition, percent Special Technical Publication No. 399 Gs: Specific Gravity AU: Augersample K. Coefficient of Permeability DB: DiamondBit w: Moisture content, percent CB: Carbide Bit qp: Calibrated Penetrometer WS: Wash Sample qs: Vane-Shear Strength, tsf BS: BulkSample qu: Unconfined Compressive Strength, tsf Note: Depth intervals for sampling shown on Record of qc: Static Cone Penetrometer Resistance PID: DRILLRVG AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS Resistance, tsf J FU3: Rock-Roller Bit Subsurface Exploration are not indicative of sample recovery, but position where sampling initiated Carrelated to Unconfined Compressive Strength, tsf Results of vapor analysis conducted on representative samples utilizing a Photoionization Detector calihated to a benzene standard. Results expressed in "U-units (BDL=Below Detection Limits) Penetration Resistance per 6 inch interval, or fraction thereof, for a standard 2 inch O.D. (1% inch I.D.) split spoon sampler driven with a 140 pound weight free-falling 30 inches. Performed in general accordance with Standard Penetration Test Specifications (ASTM D-1586). N in blows per foot equals sum of N values where plus sign is shown Fenetration Resistance per 1% inches of Dynamic Cone Penetrometer. Approximately equivalent to Standard Penetration Test N-Value in blows per foot. E'enetration Resistance per 6 inch interval, or fraction thereoc for California Ring Sampler driven with a 140 pound weight fies- falling 30 inches per ASTM D-3550. Not equivalent to Standard Penetration Test N-Value. N: Nc: Nr: COHESIKE (CLAYEY) SOILS i 1 COMPARATIVE BLOWS PER CONSISTENCY FOOT (N) very Soft 0-2 Soft 3-4 Medium Stiff 5-8 Very Stiff 16-30 1 i 1 i Stiff 9-15 Hard 31+ ! .. .- DEGREE OF PLASTICI" PI SOIL STRENGTH CHARACTERISTICS NON-COHESIkE (GRQNULAR) SOILS UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (TSF) 0-0.25 0.25-0.50 0.50-1 .OO 1 .oo-2.00 2.00-4.00 4.0W RELATIVE DENSITY Very Loose Loose Firm Dense Very Dense DEGREE OF EXPANSIVE POTENTIAL PI None to Slight 0-4 Low Slight 5-10 Medium Medium 11-30 High High to Very High 31+ 0-15 15-25 25+ BLOWS PER FOOT 0 0-4 5-10 11-30 31-50 51+ GLES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report Subsurface problems are a principal cause of construction delays, cost overrum, claims and disputes. The follo whg infomation is provided to he/p you manage your risks, Geotethnical Services Are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects Geotecjinical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs of their clients. A geatechnical engineering study conducted for a civil-ltngineer moy not fulfill the needs of a construction controdor or evltn another civil engineer. Becau:e each geotechnical engineering study is unique, eoch geotechnicdl engineering report is unique, prepared solelyfor the client. /Yo one exceptyou should rely an your geotechnical engineering report without 'first conferring with the gectechnical engineer who prepared it. Andno one - not even you - !hould apply the report for any purpose or project except the one ari!linally contemplated. A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Based on A Unique Set of Project-Specific Factors Geotechnical engineers consider a number of unique, project-specific factors when establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors include: the client's goals, objectives, and risk manogement preferences; the general nature of the structure involved, its size, and configuration; the locaiion of the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site imwovements, such os access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless the geotechnical engineer who conducted the study specifically indicates otherwise, do not rely on o geotecbiiico/ engineering report that was: Not prepared for you, Not prepared for your project, Not prepared for the specific site explored, or Completed before important project changes were made. Typical dianges that can erode the reliability of an existing geotech- nicol engjneering report include those that affect: The function of the proposed structure, as when it's changed from a parking garage to an office building, or from o light industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse, Elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the proiiosed structure, Composition of the design team, or Projsd ownership. As a general rule, a/woys inform your geotechnicol engineer of project changes - even minor ones - and request an assessment of their impact. Geotecbnical engineers connot occept responsibikity or liability for problems thot occur because their reports do not consider developments of which they were not informed Subsurface Conditions Can Change A geotechnical engineering report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study was performed. Do not re& on a geoterhnicd engineering report whose odequacy moy hove been off ected by: the passage of time; by man-made events, such as construction on or odjacent to the site; or by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations. Always contact the geotethnical engineer before opplying the report to determine if it is still reliable. A minor amount of additional testing or analysis could prevent major problems. Most G eo t ec h n ic u I Fin di n g s Are Pro fessi o n a I Opinions Site exploration identifies subsurfoce conditions only at those points where subsurfoce tests are conducted or samples are taken. Geotechnical engineers review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional judgement to render on opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual subsurface conditions may differ - sometimes significantly - from those indicated in your report. Retaining the geotechnical engineer who developed your report to provide Construction observations is the most effective method of managing The risks associoted with unanticipated conditions. A Report's Recommendations Are Not Final Do not overrely on the construction recommendations included in your report. nose recornmendotions ore not hl, because geotechnical engineers develop them principally from judgement and opinion. Geotechnical engineers con finalize their recornmendotions only by observing actual subsurfoce conditions revealed during construction. The geotechnicul engineer who developed your report cannot assume responsibikty or Labiky for the report S recommendutions if tbat engineer does no t perform construction observotion. 1 A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Subject To Misinterpretation Other design team members' misinterpretation of geatechnical enginiwing reports has resulted in costly problems. Lower that risk by hoving your geatechnical engineer confer with appropriate members of the design team ofter submitting the report. Also retain your ptechnical engineer to review pertinent elements of the design team's plans and specifications. Contractors can olsa misinterpret o geotechnical engineering report. Reduce that risk by having your geotechnical engineer participate in prebid and preconstruction conferences, ond by providing construction observations. Do Not Redraw the Engineer's Logs Geotechnical engineers prepare final boring and testing logs based upon their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or omissions, the logs included in a geotechnical engineering report should never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but recognize thot seporoting logs from the report can ele vote risk. '. Give Contractors a Complete Report and G u i d 11 n ce Some, owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make contractors liable far unanticipated subsurface condhions by limiting what they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems, give contractors the complete geotechnical engineering report, but preface it with a clearly written letter of transmittal. In that letl'er, advise contractors that the report was not prepared for Rely on Your Geotechnical Engineer for Additional Assistance Membership in ASFE exposes geatechnical engineers to a wide array of risk management techniques that can be of genuine benefit to everyone involved with a construction project. Confer with an ASFE- member geotechnical engineer far more information. purposes of bid development and that the report's occurocy is limited; encourage them to confer with the geotechnical engineer who prepared the report (a modest fee may be required) and/or to conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they need or prefer. A prebid conference con also be valuable. Be sure rontroctm hove suffirient time to perform additional study. Only then might you be in a position to give contractors the best ASFE information available to you, while requiring them to ot least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions. Read Responsibility Provisions Closely Same clients, design professionals, and contractors do not recognize that geotechnical engineering is for less exact than other engineering disciplines. This lack of understanding has created unrealistic expectations that hove led to disappointments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce such risks, geotechnical engineers commonly include a variety of explanatory provisions in their reports. Sometimes labeled "limitations," mony of these provisions indicate where geatechnical engineers' responsibilities begin and end, to help others recognize their own responsibilities and risks. Reod these provisions dose@. Ask questions. Your geotethnical engineer should respond fully and frankly. Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform o geoenviranmento/ study differ significantly from those used to perform a geoterbnirol study. For that reason, o geatechnical engineering report does not usually relate any geaenvironmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants. Unonticipoted environmentol problems have led to numerous project failures. If you have not yet obtained your awn geaenvironmental information, ask your geotechnical cansultont far risk management guidance. Do not re& on on environmentolreport prepored far someone else. 881 1 Colesville Road/Suite G106, Silver Spring, MD 20910 Telephone: 301/565-2733 Facsimile: 301/589-2017 e-rnail: info@hsfe.orq www.asfe.org Copyright 1998 by ASFE, Inr. Unless ASFE grants written permission to do so, duplication of this document by any means whatsoever is expressly prohibited. Re-tire of the wording in this document, in whale or in part, also is expressly prohibited, and may be done only with the express permission of ASFE or for purposes of review or scholarly research. llGER06983.5M 2' . 03/09/2004 10: 27 8655256772 ._.- -. OFFICEMAX0358 PAGE 02 NON-RESDENTLAL CERTIFICATE: Non-Residential Land Owner, please read this option carefully and be sure you thoroughly understand the options before signing. The option you chose wilf Sect 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 befare a building permit will be issued. Your signature is confirming the accuracy of ail information shown. F.../Ti( Q& rC Lu-y~' 4c bdSLL7 9k4' 1421 GXIIC bmdona Name of Owner Tclephond Address Project Address 4&\ . Gi, ' .,. 4arlsbad+Calhmia - 9200 City. State Zip Code City, State Zip C& rclutq- qz-ov io-(- y nk C\YY UT= ~S6AQ Awssor's Parcel Number ot AeN and Lot Number if: not yet subdivided by County Assessor. 03 * 2288 Bullding Pennit Number(s) As cited by Ordinance No- NJS455 and adopted by the City of Carlsbad, California the dity is authorized to levy a Special Tax in Community Facilities District No. 1. A.U non-residential prapeity. upon the i$smct of a building permit, shall: have the option to (1) pay the SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT TAX UNE-TME or (2) amme the ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX - DEVf3LOPJD PROPERTY for a period iiot to exceed twenty-five (25) years. Please indicate your elmice by initialing the appropriate line below: OPTION (1). I elect to pay the SPECIAL TAX - ONE-TIME now, as a ooedme payment . Amount of One-Time Special Tax: $ . Owner's Initials OPTION (2): I elect to,pay the SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT TAX ANNUALLY br a period not to exceed twenty-five (25) years. Maximum Annual,-$pecial Tax: $ . Owner's Initials I DO HEREBY CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY THAT THE WERSIQNED I$ THE PRO€"Y OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THAT I UNDERSTAND GND WILL COMPLY WITH THE PROVISIONS AS STATED ABOVE. --9=--- 0 3,/ K/ * Y Date sMCf€, wwv Print Name The City of Catlsbad has not independently verified thc information shown above. Therefore, we accept no xesponsibility as to the accuracy or completeness of this i&rmation. Appendix A - Page 3 -- City of Carlsbad CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE PAYMENT OF SCHOOL FEES OR OTHER MITIGATION This form must be completed by the City, the applicant, and the appropriate school districts and returned to the City prior to issuing a building permit. The City will not issue any building permit without a completed school fee form. Project Name: Building Permit Plan Check Number: Project Address : A.P.N.: Project Applicant (Owner Name): Project Description: Building Type: Residential: Second Dwelling Unit: Residential Additions: CommercialA nd ustrial: City Certification of Applicant information: I Number of New Dwel.lu~g \ Jnits Square Feet of Living Area in New Dwelling Square Feet of Living Area in SDU Net Square Feet New Area n I I f 25-f Square Feet Floor Area rlLL Date: \xbl \ a SCHOOL DISTRICTS WITHIN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD Carlsbad Unified School District 6225 El Camino Real San Marcos Unified School District 2 15 Mata Way Carlsbad CA 92009 (33 1-5000) Encinitas Union School District 101 South Rancho Santa Fe Rd Encinitas, CA 92024 (944-4300) 7 10 Encinitas Blvd. Certification of ApplicantlOwners. The person executing this declaration ("Owner") certifies under penalty of perjury that (1) the information provided above is correct and true to the best of the Owner's knowledge, and that the Owner will file an amended certification of payment and pay the additional fee if Owner requests an increase in the number pf dwelling units or square footage after the building permit is issued or if the initial determination of units or square footage is found to be incorrect, and that (2) the Owner is the owner/developer of the above described project@), or that the person executing this declaration is authorizec to sign on behalf of the Owner. Signature: Date: 1635 Faraday Avenue - Carlsbad. CA 92008-731 4 (760) 602-2700 Revired 4/2Tlflil Building Counter (760) 602-2719 - FAX (760) 602-8558 SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL FEE CERTIFICATION (To be completed by the school district(s)) ................................................................................................... THIIS FORM INDICATES T DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS FOR THE WILL BE SATISFIED. SCHOOL DISTRICT: The undersigned, being duly authorized by the applicable School District, certifies that the developer, builder, or owner has satisfied the obligation for school facilities. This is to certify that the applicant listed on page 1 has paid all amounts or completed other applicable school mitigation determined by the School District. The City may issue building permits for this project. SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED SCHOOL DI STRl CT OFF1 Cl AL TITLE Eric J. Hall Asst. Superintendent, Business - UhWd fjw NAME ]OF SCHOOL DISTRICT DIsnacr DATE PHONE NUMBER Revised 4/20/00 . ... 1) c SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL FEE CERTIFICATION (To be completed by the school district(s)) ................................................................................................... THIS FORM INDICATES THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROJECT HAVE BEEN OR WILL BE SATISFIED. SCHOOL DISTRICT: The undersigned, being duly authorized by the applicable School District, certifies that the developer, builder, or owner has satisfied the obligation for school facilities. This is to certify that the applicant listed on page 1 has paid all amounts or completed other applicable school mitigation determined by the School District. The City may issue building permits for this project. SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED SCHOOL DISTRICT 0 F F IC I AL TITLE NAME OF SCHOOL DISTRICT DATE PHONE NUMBER Revised 4/20/00 c -- City of Carlsbad CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE PAYMENT OF SCHOOL FEES OR OTHER MITIGATION This form must be completed by the City, the applicant, and the appropriate school districts and returned to the City prior to issuing a building permit. The City will not issue any building permit without a completed school fee form. n Project IName: Building Permit Plan Check Number: Project ,4ddress: A. P. N. : Project bppl icant (Owner Name): Project Description: Building Type: Residenl tial: Second Dwelling Unit: Residential Additions: Number of New DweUmg hits Square Feet of Living Area in New Dwelling Square Feet of Living Area in SDU Net Square Feet New Area Commeircial/l ndustrial: City Certification of Applicant Information: n Square Feet Floor Area fh 3 Date: \xbl a V \ SCHOOL DISTRICTS WITHIN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD Carlsbad Unified School District 6225 El Camino Real cw (331-- Encinitas Union School District 101 South Rancho Santa Fe Rd San Marcos Unified School District 2 15 Mata Way San Marcos, CA 92069 (736-2200) San Dieguito Union High School District 7 10 Encinitas Blvd. Encinitas, CA 92024 (753-6491) 86 $yP (5ncin.i tas, Certificatlcm of ApplicantlOw erson executing this declaration ("Owner) certifies under penalty of perjury that (1) the informatian provided above is correct and true to the best of the Owner's knowledge, and that the Owner will file an amended certiticatbn of payment and pay the additional fee if Owner requests an increase in the number of dwelling units or square footage aRer the building permit is issued or if the initial determination of units or square footage is found to be incorrect, and that (2) the Owner is the owner/developer of the above described project(s), or that the person executing this declaration is authorized to sign on behalf of the Owner. Signature Date: \ @ 1635 Faraday Avenue - Cerlsbad, CA 92008-731 4 - (760) 602-2700 Revired 4/211/0(7 Building Counter - (760) 602-2719 FAX (760) 602-8558 LEUCADIA WASTEWATER DISTRICT APPLICATION FOR SEWER SERVICE The application must be signed by the owner (or his representative) of the property to be served. The total charges must be paid to the District at the time the application is submitted. APPLICANT MUST SUBMIT EVIDENCE OF BUILDING PERMIT WITHIN 60 DAYS. FAILURE TO MAKE SUCH SUBMITTAL WILL RESULT IN AUTOMATIC CANCELLATION OF THE SEWER PERMIT. THE SEWER CONNECTION FEE LESS A $50 ADMINISTRATIVE FEE WILL BE REFUNDED. A six-month construction period shall be provided and sewer service charges for the balance of the fiscal year shall be collected at the time of application for sewer permits. Sewer service charges for subsequent fiscal years shall be collected on the tax roll in same manner as property taxes. If the six-month construction period extends into the subsequent fiscal year, a prorated sewer service charge for that fiscal year shall be collected on the tax roll in the same manner as property taxes. There will be no additional fee or refund if service actually commences on a different date. The prorated sewer service charge shall not be required in those applications for sewer permits for subdivisions. Such applicants shall be required to notify the District, on forms provided by the District, of escrow closing on individual properties within the subdivision. Sewer service charges shall commence upon close of escrow and will be the responsibility of the buyer. If a. service lateral is required, it must be installed by the ownerlapplicant in conformance with the specifications, rules and regulations of the District and subject to inspection by the District. A DISTRICT INSPECTOR MUST BE ON THE SCENE AT THE TIME OF CONNECTION. The service lateral is that part of the sewer system that extends from the main collection line in the street (or easement) to the point in the street (at or near the applicant’s property line) where the service lateral is connected to the applicant’s building sewer. The applicant is also responsible for the construction, at the applicant’s expense, of the building of sewer from the applicant’s plumbing to the point in the street (or easement) where a connection is made to the service lateral and for construction, maintenance and connection of the service lateral to the main line. IT MUST BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED BY THE DISTRICT BEFORE THE SEWER SYSTEM MAY BE USED BY THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT OR HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE MUST NOTIFY THE DISTRICT AT THE TIME INSPECTION IS DESIRED. ANY CONNECTION MADE TO THE SERVICE LATERAL OR COLLECTION LINE WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL AND INSPEECTION BY THE DISTRICT WILL BE CONSIDERED INVALID AND WILL NOT BE ACKNOWLEDGED. ALL SUCH CONNECTIONS MUST BE MADE WITH AN LWD INSPECTOR AT THE SCENE AT THE TIME OF CONNECTION. IF, FOR ANY REASON, A CONNECTION IS IMPROPERLY MADE, IT SHALL BE THE THE CONNECTION SO THAT AN INSPECTION MAY BE MADE AND THE APPLICANT AT THE APPLICANT’S EXPENSE SHALL MAKE: ANY CORRECTIONS OR ALTERATIONS REQUIRED BY LWD. IN THE EVENT THAT THE APPLICANT, FOR ANY REASON, FAILS TO TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION, THE DISTRICT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO DIG UP AND INSPECT THE CONNECTION AND MAKE ANY CORRECTIONS NECESSARY, AT THE APPLICANT’S EXPENSE: OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO DISCONNECT SERVICE. ANY COSTS INCURRED BY LWD IN TAKING SUCH CORRECTIVE ACTION SHALL BE BILLED TO THE APPLICANT AND MAY BE RECORDED AS A LIEN AGAINST THE APPLICANT’S PROPERTY E:QUAL IN PROlRlTY TO A TAX LIEN. RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT, AT THE APPLICANT’S EXPENSE, TO DIG UP OR OTHERWISE RE-EXPOSE 1300 Nicollet Mall OWNER’S NP,ME Fourth Quarter Prop. MAILING ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER 858 273-4649 Minn. MN. 55403 SERVICE ADDRESS 1971 Cnll~ krrp1gTLa TRACT NAMEJNO. LOT # CONNECTION FEE: $ 165,900.00 ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NO. 255-0120400 PRORATED SEWER SERV. FEE $ 0 TOTAL $ 165,900.00 TYPOBUILDING #/UNITS 42 PAID BY: -O%ASH &HECK # 292760 ’ The undersigned hereby agrees that the above information given is correct and agrees to the conditions as stated. 4/5/04 FR SUP-022798 Date Redd by Account No. &- Owner’s Signahlre