The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1923 CALLE BARCELONA; 138; CB080303; Permit03-14-2008 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Av Carlsbad, CA 92008 Commercial/Industrial Permit Permit No Building Inspection Request Line (760) 602-2725 CB080303 1923 CALLE BARCELONA CBAD St 138 Tl Sub Type COMM 2550120400 Lot# 0 Status ISSUED $298,20000 Construction Type NEW Applied 02/19/2008 Reference # Entered By MDP SPEC SUITE - 8520SF-RELOCATE Plan Approved 03/14/2008 STRUCR COLUMNS, DEMO FACADE TO PREPARE FOR Issued 03/14/2008 Inspect Area Plan Check* Owner BORDERS INC <LF> FOURTH QUARTER PROPERTIES XXX L C/O DELOITTE TAX LLP SUITE 1025 PO BOX 131071 625 BROADWAY 92121 CARLSBAD CA 92013 619-232-8424 Job Address Permit Type Parcel No Valuation Occupancy Group Project Title Applicant NADEL ARCHITECTS 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 Reel Water Con Fee $1,264 89 Meter Size $000 Add'l Reel Water Con Fee $82218 Meter Fee $0 00 SDCWA Fee $0 00 CFD Payoff Fee $6262 PFF (3105540) $0 00 PFF (4305540) $000 License Tax (3104193) $0 00 License Tax (4304193) $000 Traffic Impact Fee (3105541) $000 Traffic Impact Fee (4305541) $0 00 PLUMBING TOTAL $0 00 ELECTRICAL TOTAL $0 00 MECHANICAL TOTAL $0 00 Master Drainage Fee Sewer Fee $0 00 Redev Parking Fee $0 00 Additional Fees HMP Fee TOTAL PERMIT FEES $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $20 00 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 99 $2,16969 Total Fees $2,169 69 Total Payments To Date $2,16969 Balance Due ILDING FLANS $000 ui- V IN STORAGE ATTACHED Inspector FINAL AP, P Date NOTICE Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the "Imposition" of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as "fees/exactions" You have 90 days from the date this permit was issued to protest imposition of these feer/exactions If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required 'nformation with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3 32 030 Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review set aside, void, or annul their imposition You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity changes, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has oreviouslv otherwise exoired City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad CA 92008 760 602 2717/2718/2719/2721 Fax 7606028558 Building Permit Application Plan Check No Est Value Plan Ck Deposit Date 1923 Caiie Barcelona . Cr/PROJECT 9 i . . LOT*PHASE*# OF UNITS # BEDROOMS SU I r E#/SPACE#/ UN ITf #138 * BATHROOMS APN 1 \S 255 - 012 -N 04 - 00 TENANT BUSINESS NAME Forum at Carlsbad CONSTR TYPE I occ OHOJP | V-N | M | PARTIAL FRONT FACADE DEMOLITION AND INTERIOR STRUCTURAL COLUMN RELOCATION TO PREPARE SHELL BUILDING FOR NEW TENANT T I SPACE WORK INCLUDES ARCHITECTURAL, STRUCTURAL AND ELECTRICAL FOR PREVIOUS DEMOLITION INFORMATION, REFER TO PERMIT # CB08-0237 DATED 02/06/08 EXISTING USE F Retail ROPOSED USE GARAGE (SF) Retail CONTACT NAME ^^ g^ Qf ^^ Arch|tects "DDRESS 625 Bioadway, Suite San Diego PHONE 619-232-8424 EMAIL hscott@nadelarc com PROPERTY OWNER NAME ... _ ADDRESS CITY San Diego PHONE 619-222-9603 1025 SWECA Z'P92101 ™ 619-232-7179 erpnses > , #202 STATE CA Z'P 92106 ™ 619-222-9607 EMAIL mKuhne!@thornasent com ARCH/DESIGNER NA.ML & ADDRESS NaJe! Architec s STATE JC t PATIOS (SF) DL-CKS (SF) FIREPLACE AIR CONDITIONING FIRE SPRINKLERS YESQK NOfZ) YESn N0[3 YESfZI NO [I] APPLICANT NAME s£im6 ss contsct info ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP i i PHONE FAX i EMAIL CONTRACTOR BUS NAME Summ|t Deve|opment ADDRESS 21^ Ed|nburg Cardiff smECA Z'P 92007 PH°'NE 760-634-1 888 FM 760-634-1 880 EMAIL summi!sd@sbcglobal net ^TE LJC # CLASS . f ITY BUS LIC # i ec 703 1 5 Buuness and Provisions Cod« Any Qty or County which rtqmr« a permit [o comlriKt alter, improve demolish or repair any structure, pnor to ill issuance, also requires the applicant lor sjdi penrauo file a signed statement that he a ensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractors License Law {Chapter 9 commending with Section 7000 of Division J ol the Business and Professions Code} or [hat he is exempt therefrom and the basis for [he alleged exemption Any violation ol ction 7031 S by any applicant for a permit subjects [he applicant to 1 civil penalty ol not more lhan he hundred dollars {UOO}) Workers Compensabon Declaration / hereby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following declarations \ I . have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self insure for workers compensation as provided by Seciion 3700 of he Labor Cede fcr the performance of the work for which this permit is issued ^fll have and wilt maintain workers compensation as required by Section 3700 cf the Labor Code for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued My workers compensation msttrancelcarner and policy number are insurance Co/ Policy No/ I /X I i\l| / ***1 Expiration Daiex 4 /» /fcy-> j This section need not be completed if the permit is for one hundred dollars ($100) or less / v * \ \\J \~ *^ | ^| [~~| Certificate of Exemption I certify :hat in the performance ol the work for which thrfpjpil is issued i shall not employ any person m any manner so as to become subject to the Workers Compensation Laws of I California WARNING Failure to secure workersuiffperijytion coverage is ufMWw and shall subject an employer to criminal penalties and civil fines up to one hundred thousand dollars (&100 000) in i /addition to the cost of compensation dama^B*^^dmor iB^Secton SB^of Ura Labor code interest and attorney s fees ^ CONTRACTOR SIGNATUR^^C^^^^^iK^r// ^ DATE / hereo/ affirm (hat! am exempt from Contractor s Ijcense Law for the following reason [""I i as owner of the property or my employees wlh wages as t^.e;r sole compensation will do the work and the structure is not intended ar offered for sale, (Sec 7044 Busirteas and Professions Code The Conliaclof s License Law floes not apply ;o an owner of property who builds or improves thereon and who does sucn work himself or through his own employees provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale If however the building or improvement is sold within one year of completion the owner builder wiii have the burden of proving that he did not buiid or improve for the purpose of saie) | | I as owner of the property am exclusively contracting w:!h licensed contractors to construct the ptoject (Sec 7044 Business and Professions Code The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who bu;lds or imonDves thereon arxj contracts for such projects with contractors) licensed pursuant to the Contractor's License Law) [~~| I am exempt under Section Business and Professions Code for this reason 1 I personally pi a." to provide the major labor and matenals for construction of Ihe proposed property improvement | [Yes Q]No 2 I (tare / have not) signed an application for a building permit fcr the proposed work 3 I have contracted with -he followng person (firm) to provide the prooosed construction (include name address / phone / contractors license number) 4 I pla.ri to provide portions of the work but I riavc hired the following person to coo.'tiinate supervise and provide the major woik (include name / address / phone / contractors license number) 5 I wi.'l provide some of the work but i have corlractcd (hired) the following persons to provide the work indicated (include name / address / phone / type of work) -^PROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE DATE a Is the applicant or fu^re build:r.g occupant required '.o submit a bjsiness pran acutely hazardous materials reg.stratron form or risk management and prevention program under Sections 25505 25533 or 25534 of the Presley Tanner 1 Jazardous Subslance Account Act7 |~| Yes QNo Is the applicant or future building occupant required to obta'n a permit from the air pollution control district or airtjualily management district' liYes [^"JNo Is She facrl.^ to be constructed wrtnin 1 000 feet of the outer boundary of a school site? QYes [jNo IF ANY OF THE ANSWERS ARE YES A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPAN EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT I hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work this permit is issued (Sec 3097 (i) Civil Code) Lender's Name Lender's Address I certify that (have read the application and statethattfteabove information iscorrectandUiatthe information onthe plans is accurate I agreeto comply with all City ordmanccsandStatelawsrclatingtDbuildingconstnjction I hsreby authorize representative of Ine City of Carlsbad to erto upon the above mentioned property for inspection purpose* I ALSO AGREE TO SAVE INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARMESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD OSHA An OSHA permit is requred for excavations over 5 ff deep and demoliton or constucton of structures over 3 stones in heighl EXPIRATION Every permit issued by the BuiUingOflaalurider the pravisrans of this D)oe shall expinjr^ 180 days from the date of such permit or it the building or work authonzed by such permit is suspended or abandoned at any trre ate the work is commenced fcr a pen^ \l City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request For 05/07/2008 Permit* CB080303 Title SPEC SUITE - 8520SF-RELOCATE Inspector Assignment PY Description STRUCR COLUMNS, DEMO FACADE TO PREPARE FOR T I -INCLUDING ARCHITECTURAL, STRUCTURAL & 1923 CALLE BARCELONA 138 Lot 0 Type Tl Sub Type COMM Job Address Suite Location APPLICANT NADEL ARCHITECTS Owner Remarks Phone 6199942767 Inspector Total Time Requested By MARK Entered By KATHY CD Description Act Comments 14 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding Comments/Notices/Holds Associated PCRs/CVs Original PC# PCR03242 ISSUED BOMBAV, REVISIONS TRACK ATT AC IIMENT PCR03256 ISSUED BOMBAY REV SINGLE TO DOUBLE, DOOR SHEET A02 I Date 04/30/2008 04/24/2008 04/17/2008 04/17/2008 04/15/2008 04/15/2008 04/11/2008 04/10/2008 04/03/2008 04/03/2008 04/02/2008 03/19/2008 08045^PENDING -APPL-E-STORIJ-BLDG 3;RE VJIVALL .SUI'I'ORrTN RESPONSEJIlOJLXLVr.lNO.CONS I'Rl — Inspection History Description 14 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding 14 Frame/Steel/Boltmg/Welding 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 12 Steel/Bond Beam 1 1 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 12 Steel/Bond Beam 1 1 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 12 Steel/Bond Beam 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 12 Steel/Bond Beam 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers Act PA PA AP AP AP AP CA CA AP we CA PA Insp PY PD PY PY PY PY MC PD PY PY PY PY Comments framing of cricket on roof, ok to insulate ceiling BEAM AT FRONT LIGHT POLE FTG column bases PER CONTRACTOR PHONE CALL 2 MOMMENT FROM FTGS 4 COLUMN FTG ^\ °g\f S#vj / \/ \ °f" 23-/ LS ( r& SS~v-( Corporate 2992 E La Palma Avenue, Suite A, Anaheim, CA 92806 Tel (714)632-2999 Fax (714)632-2974 Branch 7313 Carroll Road, Suite G. San Diego, CA 92121 Tel (858)537-3999 Fax (858)537-3990 Branch 14467 Meridian Parkway Bldg 2A, Riverside, CA 92518 Tel (951)653-4999 Fax (951)653-4666 Report of COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH-CONCRETE ASTM C39 CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT 1635 FARADAY AVENUE CARLSBAD. CA 92008 Client APPLE STORE STRUCTURE WORKS Set No 8-00933 File No Permit No Project No • Project Name I962A01 THE FORUM 3-TENANT IMPROVEMENTS 1923 CALLE BARCELONA CARSLBAD, CA Age (Days) 7 28 28 28 H Date Tested 4/23/2008 5/14/2008 5/14/2008 5/14/2008 Nominal Size 6X 12 6X 12 6X 12 6X 12 Actual Area (Sq Inch) 2827 2827 2827 2827 Load (Ibs) 120,590 Strength (psi) 4,260 Type of Fracture Shear Specified Strength 3,000 PSI Sampled By PAT SIMMONS ASTM C172 Date Sampled 4/16/2008 Date Received 4/17/2008 Location COLUMN FOOTING (2ND CONCRETE PLACEMENT TO FINISH FLOOR) A @ 2 Concrete Supplier VULCAN MATERIALS COMPANY Mix No 304591 Ticket No 128834 Water added at Site 5 00 gal By CONTRACTOR Cement Type Mix Time 120 Concrete Temp 62 Ambient Temp 52 "F ASTM C1064 °F ASTM C1064 Slump 400 in ASTM C143 Tested at San Diego Remarks 1 SET OF 4 CONCRETE TEST CYLINDERS Distribution APPLE STORE STRUCTURE WORKS CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT SUMMIT BUILDERS **LAB COPY** Respectfully Submitted, MTGL, Inc Eduardo Dizon, R C E Corporate 2992 E La Palma Avenue, Suite A, Anaheim CA 92806 Tel (714)632-2999 Fax (714)632-2974 Branch 7313 Carroll Road, Suite G, San Diego, CA 92121 Tel (858)537-3999 Fax (858)537-3990 Branch 14467 Meridian Parkway Bldg 2A. Riverside. CA 92518 Tel (951)653-4999 Fax (951)653-4666 Report of COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH-CONCRETE ASTM C39 CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT 1635 FARADAY AVENUE CARLSBAD. CA 92008 Client THOMAS ENTERPRISES Set No 8-00982 File No N/A Permit No N/A Project No 3I15A04 Project Name APPLECORE STRUCTURAL WORK BUILDING B-3 1923 CALLE BARCELONA CARLSBAD, CA * Age (Days) 3 14 28 28 Date Tested 4/24/2008 5/5/2008 5/19/2008 5/19/2008 Nominal Size 6X 12 6X 12 6X 12 6X 12 Actual Area (Sq Inch) 2827 2827 2827 2827 Load (Ibs ) 92.670 Strength (psi) 3.280 Type of Fracture Shear Specified Strength 3.000 PSI Sampled By QUYNHVUONG Location LIGHT POLE FOUNDATION @ FRONT OF STORE Concrete Supplier HANSON AGGREGATES Mix No 4532500 Ticket No 249913 Water added at Site 1000 gal By CONTRACTORS Cement Type II/V Mix Time 52 nun ASTMC172 Date Sampled 4/21/2008 Date Received 4/22/2008 Concrete Temp 65 Ambient Temp "F ASTM C1064 °F ASTM C1064 Slump 400 in ASTM C143 Tested at San Diego Remarks Distribution CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT THOMAS ENTERPRISES **LAB COPY** Respectfully Submitted, MTGL, Inc Eduardo Dizon, R C E Corporate 2992 E La Palma Avenue. Suite A. Anaheim, CA 92806 Tel (714)632-2999 Fax (714)632-2974 Branch 7313 Carroll Road Suite G. San Diego CA V2121 Tel (858)537-3999 Fax (858)537-3990 Branch 14467 Meridian Parkway Bldg 2A, Riverside, CA 92518 Tel (951)653-4999 Fax (951)653-4666 Report of COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH-GROUT ASTM C1019 CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT 1635 FARADAY AVENUE CARLSBAD'. CA 92008 Client APPLE STORE STRUCTURE WORKS Set No 8-00916 File No Permit No Project No Project Name 1962A01 THE FORUM 3-TENANT IMPROVEMENTS CARSLBAD, CA Age (Days) 7 28 28 Date Tested 4/22/2008 5/13/2008 5/13/2008 Nominal Size 2X2X4 2X2X4 2X2X4 Actual Area (Sq Inch) 3 14 3 14 3 14 Load (Ihs) 12.720 Strength (psi) 4.050 Type of Fracture N/A Specified Strength 5.000 PSI Sampled By DAN CASCINO Location BUILDING 3 COLUMN BASE PLATE @ 2 / A Concrete Supplier JOB MIX Mix No. ATLAS 100 Ticket No Water added at Site gal By Cement Type Mix Time 4 mm Remarks ATLAS CONSTRUCTION GROUT MEETS ASTM 1107C GRADE B ASTMC172 Date Sampled 4/15/2008 Date Received 4/16/2008 Concrete Temp 62 Ambient Temp "F ASTM C1064 °F ASTM C1064 Slump in ASTM C143 Tested at San Diego Distribution APPLE STORE STRUCTURE WORKS CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT SUMMIT BUILDERS **LAB COPY** Respectfully Submitted, MTGL, Inc Eduardo Dizon, R C E Corporate 2992 E La Palma Avenue. Suite A, Anaheim CA 92806 Tel (714)632-2999 Fax (714)632-2974 Branch 7313 Carroll Road, Suite G, San Diego. CA 92121 Tel (858)537-3999 Fax (858)537-3990 Branch 14467 Meridian Parkway Bldg 2A. Riverside, CA 92518 Tel (951)653-4999 Fax (951)653-4666 Report of COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH-CONCRETE ASTM C39 CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT 1635 FARADAY AVENUE CARLSBAD. CA 92008 Client JIM BO'S NATURALLY Set No 8-00645 File No Permit No Project No Project Name 1962A01 THE FORUM 3-TENANT IMPROVEMENTS 1923 CALLE BARCELONA CARSLBAD. CA Age (Days) 7 28 28 28 H Date Tested 3/27/2008 4/17/2008 4/17/2008 4/17/2008 Nominal Size 6X 12 6X 12 6X 12 6X 12 Actual Area (Sq Inch) 2827 2827 2827 2827 Load dbs) 81.830 Strength (psi) 2.890 Type of Fracture Cone & Shear Specified Strength 3.000 PSI Sampled By Location COLUMN J FOOTING. LINE 3 1 @G Concrete Supplier SUPERIOR READY MIX Mix No 8258P Ticket No 109523 Water added at Site 500 gal By DRIVER Cement Type Mix Time 70 ASTMC172 Date Sampled 3/20/2008 Date Received 3/21/2008 mm Concrete Temp 70 Ambient Temp 58 "F ASTM C1064 "F ASTM C1064 Slump- 4 50 in ASTM C143 Tested at San Diego Remarks Distribution JIM BO'S NATURALLY CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT **LAB COPY** Respectfully Submitted, MTGL, Inc Eduardo Dizon, R C E Corporate 2992 E La Raima Avenue, Suite A, Anaheim, CA 92806 Tel (714)632-2999 Fax (714)632-2974 Branch 7313 Carroll Road, Suite G, San Diego, CA 92121 Tel (858)537-3999 Fax (858)537-3990 Branch 14467 Meridian Parkway Bldg 2A. Riverside. CA 92518 Tel (951)653-4999 Fax (951)653-4666 Report of COMPRESS1VE STRENGTH-CONCRETE ASTM C39 CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT 1635 FARADAY AVENUE CARLSBAD. CA 92008 Client JIM BO'S NATURALLY Set No 8-00872 File No Permit No Project No Project Name 1962AOI THE FORUM 3-TENANT IMPROVEMENTS -1.923 GALLE- CARSLBAD. CA Age (Days) 11 28 28 28 H Date Tested 4/14/2008 5/1/2008 5/1/2008 5/1/2008 Nominal Size 6X 12 6X 12 6X 12 6X 12 Actual Area (Sq Inch) 2827 2827 2827 2827 Load (Ibs) 143.200 Strength (psi) 5,060 Type of Fracture Shear Specified Strength 3,000 PSI Sampled By PAT SIMMONS Location LINE A @ Z COLUMN FOOTING Concrete Supplier SUPERIOR READY MIX Mix No 8285P Ticket No 824527 Water added at Site gal By Cement Type Mix Time 90 mm ASTMC172 Date Sampled 4/3/2008 Date Received 4/11/2008 Concrete Temp 74 Ambient Temp 70 "F ASTM C1064 "F ASTM C1064 Slump 400 in ASTM C143 Tested at San Diego Remarks I SET OF 4 TEST CYLINDERS Distribution JIM BO'S NATURALLY CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT SUMMIT BUILDERS **LAB COPY** Respectfully Submitted, MTGL, Inc Eduardo Dizon, R C E Corporate 2992 E La Palma Ave Ste A Anaheim. CA 92806 Tel 7146322999 Fax 7146322974 Dispatch 800 491 2990 San Diego/Imperial County 7313 Carrol! Rd Ste G San Diego, CA 92121 Tel 858 537 3999 Fax 858 537 3990 Dispatch 888 844 5060 Inland Empire 14467 Meridian Pkwy, Bldg 2-A Riverside, CA 92518 Tel 951 653 4999 Fax 951 653 4666 Dispatch 800 491 2990 DAILY INSPECTION REPORT DSA/CITY File #. www mtglinc com MTGL Project # . Permit # C V Report #_ Special Inspection Reports must be distributed to the parties listed below within 14 days of the inspection Reports of non-compliant conditions must be distributed immediately Separate reports shall be prepared for each type of special inspection, on a daily basis Each report shall be Qempjeted and signed by the special inspector conducting the inspection DSA/OSHPD APPL # . DSA/LEA# PROJECT NAME DATE ARCHITECT TIME ARRIVED TIME DEPARTED ENGINEER TRAVEL TIME LUNCH TIME SUB CONTRACTOR ADDRESS OF PROJECT TYPE OF INSPECTION D ENGINEERED FILL FOUNDATION BACK FILL D BATCH PLANT G PT CONCRETE n SHOTCRETE D CONCRETE f! MASONRY D HIGH STRENGTH BOLTING D WELDING D SHOP WELD C] FIREPROOFING D ANCHOR/DOWEL D NDE FIELD C NDESHOP CEILING WIRE Da D DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT APPROVED DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE APPROVED PLANS Yd ND SOIL REPORT YD ND SPECS YD ND APPROVED SHOP DRAWING YD NG MATERIALS USED 8Y GONTRACTOFM/NCLUOE RESEARCU.REPSRT NO OR MATERIAL TEST REPORTS)ERIALS USED 8Y GO ft \Q\St CONTRACTORS EQUIPMENT / MANPOWER USED Jffvtpfe? f&^f- ^^ W- <^ff^^- d*4,dw\bt REWORK AS PERCEMT OF ALL WORK TODAY PERCENT PROJECT COMPLETE THE WORK WAS Q WAS NOT D Inspected in accordance with the requirements of the DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents MATERIAL SAMPLING WAS E^AS NOT LJ N/AG Performed in accordance with DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents THE WORK INSPECTED METl^DID NOT MEETG THE requirements of the DSA/OSklPD/PRO/iCCT^p/oved docjjrnent Samples taken Cty>(^ /^T fy Weather /Temp cc Project Architect Structural Engineer DSA Regional Office School District Contractor Building Department Owner Signature of Special Inspector Certification # Verified by Print Name www mtglmc com Corporate 2992 E La Raima Ave Anaheim. CA 92806 Tel 7146322999 Fax 7146322974 Dispatch 800 491 2990 Ste A MTGL Project # _!_L/0 2 / 0 \ Permit* C R f) % Q 3 0 3 Report # ___ PG / . DF i San Diego/Imperial County 7313 Carroll Rd Ste G San Diego, CA 92121 Tel 8585373999 Fax 858 537 3990 Dispatch 8888445060 DAILY INSPECTION REPORT Inland Empire 14467 Meridian Pkwy, Bldg 2-A Riverside, CA92518 Tel 951 653 4999 Fax 951 653 4666 Dispatch 800 491 2990 DSA/CITY File # DSA/OSHPD APPL # DSA/LEA* Special Inspection Reports must be distributed to the parties listed below within 14 days of the inspection Reports ot non-compliant conditions must be distributed immediately Separate reports shall be prepared for each type of special inspection on a daily basis Each report shall be completed and signed by the special inspector conducting the inspection PROJECT NAME ,_. ! ^T i,@ r*r ARCHITECT -j / ^ •'•*-" /' DAIE /j '/ ' / fs c? IIMt ARRIVED ' ^ ^, TIMFDEPARltD „ ENGINEFR ,, A - / ' I'RAVELTIME LUNCH TIMF 'JWOAAA ,M/MrtG&UWfA . MA CONTRACTOR ' * _\ INSPfcCllON ADDRESS !Q 2 '^ TYPE OF INSPECTION _ ENGINEERED FILL l~ FOUNDATION L BACK FILL DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT APPROVED DOCUMENTS _ rf // 5 / _J~ SUBCONTRACTOR / "/I" // /) ' ADDRESS OF PROJECT ., ft ty f> ~ BATCH PLANT L MASONRY 1 FIREPROOFING J CEILING WIRE 1~ PT CONCRETE 1" HIGH STRENGTH BOLTING "ANCHOR/DOWEL J ; : SHOTCRETE [~i WELDING i NDE FIELD ~l ^CONCRETE U SHOP WELD F. NDE SHOP 1 AVAILABLE SOIL REPORT Y .J Nil SPECS Y! i NT; APPROVED PLANS Y J Nil APPROVED SHOP DRAWING Y~ N ' J MATERIALS USED BY CONTRACIOR (INCLUDE RESEARCH REPORT NO OR MATERIAL IEST REPORTS) \/( . xy j0yl //// A y -"' 2,r><i/ 1:\ 9 1 - <v ^/V"' FVf CONTRACTORS EQUIPMENT/ MANPOWER USED •> ; _ ' j i ^Afj\nJ^ •* M/W\A'\ ^ r;i^2A..a7"r?"!— \i\ ''s-^t/^l,^,, - y ^ i AREA fiHIU LINES PIECES INSPECTED \fnAMe^bJll. ±Lfc ^J.iMAM L™$MMsn fa ^^c A&2 a*J) •A r 1 f J- * ' ^l-> i s~ - /" ' r~ /" i -— ''/? /'i /~~ -K /"• _/? //T (Ci j /. ^ .uf/nP ' i>, / (&/<—-, e^ , CT «d ./ ''Jt<(sv\fr9, v \/n.JA 1 1 ( f/ (Jij7=r£tfy_ >r&L<t#\ . 1) 1L*? ^ ^i ' t \/ O/l 1 7 A i'.jt' r j • ~ ' ' ' 71 fl ' J/L "pi 'i -^ /) /Ol ^ l\AJW\lfL <5vJ.«£b/Z ! MxA'byC- -f"UX^- XU^jSfijZ' tspirt f i JM/I1,'~) A-yl JfA'sKf 1 0 ' ' * / " " //)""/' <V " / " "__/"• STRUCTURAL NOTLS DETAlLl'OR'iRFISUSLD - /; " ' ' '^ V. /-, ;- /i // ^ " . j: ; // / . ~ t-ft-(it£//W/W/l ^JJUVKjfio A c^tA^'' 3. / ~ Aj2V4>v^i *Tr> nAA^v (-£^A0y(Jj is* ir.fr jJts^tT\%A \^MDCLf^tL +lo n {Li B Awd r <w£ r^\^-^&A^c^ ni °>.^ REMARKS INCLUDING MEETINGS -( t1 ' t~ III 1 fl A H ? •* ' / P ~> " (f f _/ ' fjAJ^'i \J\/iA&) /W H/s f X jL^li/A "?'//(-,/ " ^O^/n*?/ (^0 '-//VA /FJ/?77V-C s&nfa/T'j >?v\&,&- 1&C&/A&. 1 \ ' ~ r .... . __ ; REWORK AS PERCENT OF ALL WORK TODAY PERCENT PROJECT COMPLETE THE WORK WAS ill WAS NOT u Inspected in accordance with the requirements of the DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents MATERIAL SAMPLING WAST WAS NOT ' N/AH Performed m accordance with DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents THE WORK INSPECTED METH DID NOT MEET L . THE requirements^ the DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents Samples taken Cfa& ±&£ a/ ( L\ Weather _!_Of}-B.A cc Project Architect Structural Engineer DSA Regional Office School District Contractor Building Department Owner v Signature of Special Inspector' T& Print Name Certification* //? *?A Verified by www mtglmc com MTGL Project # . Permit! ( V^_ Corporate 2992 E La Raima Ave Ste A Anaheim. CA 92806 Tel 7146322999 Fax 7146322974 Dispatch 800 491 2990 San Diego/Imperial Count' 7313 Carroll Rd Ste G " San Diego, CA 92121 Tel 8585373999 Fax 858 537 3990 Dispatch 8888445060 Inland Empire 14467 Meridian Pkwy, Bldg 2-A Riverside. CA 92518 Tel 951 653 4999 Fax 951 653 4656 Dispatch 800 491 2990 Report #_„.. __ PG _!_DF_ DAILY INSPECTION REPORT DSA/CITY File # DSA/OSHPDAPPL# DSA/LEA# Special Inspection Reports must be distributed to the parties listed below within 14 days of the inspection Reports of non-compliant conditions must be distributed immediately Separate reports shall be prepared for each type of special inspection on a daily basis Each report shall be compjeted and signed by the special inspector conducting the inspection PROJECT NAME , / T kl. DATE Wo? ARCHITECT TIME ARRIVED TIME DEPARTED ENfilNEER TRAVFl. IIME I.UNCH TIME CONTRACTOR SUBCONTRACTOR INSPECTION ADDRESS ADDRESS OF PROJT-CT TYPE OF INSPECTION H ENGINEERED FILL L1 FOUNDATION ~i BACK FILL D BATCH PLANT L PT CONCRETE !T SHOTCRETE .~i CONCRETE MASONRY _l HIGH STRENGTH BOLTING G WELDING I"' SHOP WELD : ! FIREPROOFING L ANCHOR/DOWEL T NDE FIELD _. NDE SHOP LJ CEILING WIRE DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT APPROVED DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE APPROVED PLANS YU NT SOIL REPORT Yl ! NIT SPECS Y...J ND APPROVED SHOP DRAWING Y._ N .71 MATERIALS USED BY CONTRACTOR (INCLUDE RESEARCH RETORT NO OR MATERIAL TtST REPORTS! H \ CONTRACTORS EOUIPMtNT/MANPOWER USED 2 2 ARFA GRID LINES PIFCtS INSPECTED .-"X. d 2. rJ JL SM*.# STRUCTURAL NOTES DFJAIL OR RFIS USE' ' uvv /- REMARKS INCLUDING MEETINGS * J REWORK AS PERCENT OF ALL WORK TODAY PERCENT PROJECT COMPLETE THE WORK WAS I WAS NOT I Inspected in accordance with the requirements of the DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents MATERIAL SAMPLING WAS^WASNOTL N/Al. Performed in accordance with DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents cc Proiect Architect Contractor Structural Engineer Building Department DSA Regional Office Owner School District THE WORK INSPECTED MET/DID NOT MEET! I THE requirements of the DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT-approved documents Samples taken &»0 Sid Ci1 ( ^ ) !MAQ%., - _i=— • , v ----- f Weather f Temp ' Signature of Special Inspector Print Name Certification # Verified by www mtgHnc.com MTGLProiect# | ^f (0Z ,//) / Permit I C & fl Corporate 2992 E-La Raima A Anaheim, CA 92806 Tel 7146322999 Fax 7146322974 Dispatch 800 491 2990 03/)? Report #_PG.DF 1 San Diego/Imperial 7313 Carroll Rd Ste G Saji Diego, CA 92121 Tel 8585373999 Fax 858 537 3990 Dispatch 8888445060 DAILY INSPECTION REPORT Inland Empire. 14467MeridianPkwy.Bldg 2-A Riverside, CA 92518 Tel 9516534999 Fax 9516534666 Dispatch 8004912990 DSA/CITYRIe#. DSA/OSHPDAPPL#. DSA/LEA# Special Inspection Reports must be distributed to the parties listed below within 14 days of the inspection Reports of non-compliant conditions must be distributed immediately Separate reports shall be prepared for each type of special inspection, on a daily basis Each report shall he completed and signed by the special inspector cocKJuctiBfl the inspection PROJECT 7/U. DATE / ^ ^ TIME DEPARTED' (2$ f/W 1t '• gflfARCHITECTTIME ARRIVED ENGINEER TRAVEL TIME LUNCH TIME /I/A CONTRACTOR .s I SUB CONTRACTOR INSPECTION ADDRESS.2 5 ADDRESS OF PROJECT TYPEOFIN6FECT40N D ENGINEERED FILL D FOUNDATION D BACKFILL D BATCH PLANT DPT CONCRETE D SHOTCRETE E- CONCRETE- D MASONRYD HIGH STRENGTH BOLTINGD WELDINGD SHOP WELD D FIREPROOFING D ANCHOR/DOWEL D NDE FIELD D NDE SHOP D CEILING WIRE D Da DSA/OSHPD/PROJ€CT APPROVED DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE ' ( SOIL REPORT YD ND APPROVED PLANS YD NO SPECS YD ND APPROVED SHOP DRAWING Y D N D V MATERIALS USED BY CONTRACTOR (INCLUDE RESEARCH REPORT NO OR MATERIAL TEST REPORJS) CONTRACTORS EQUIPMENT/ MANPOWER USED OS (XW^ REMARKS, MCUWMSMBIMK* a//WO ~j- M/-0 1^ REWORK AS^gNpiT OF ALL WORK TODAY PERCENT PROJECT COMPLETE THE WORK WASD WXSNOTD Inspected m accordance with the requirements of the DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents MATERIAL SttBUW WASD WAS NOT D N/AD Performed In accordance with DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents cc Project Architect Contractor Structural Engineer Building Department pSA Regional Office Owner School District THE WORK INSPECTED METD DID NOT MEET D THE requirements of the DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents Samples taken . Weather x^i Temp _ <&? SioRature ofSpecial Inspector Print Name CertificatiooJ. Verified by www mtglmc com MTGL Project # Permit #. Corporate 2992 E La Raima Ave" Anaheim, CA 92806 Tel 7146322999 Fax 714 632 2974 Dispatch 800 491 2990 San Diego/Imperial Co 7313 Carroll Rd Ste G Sa^ Diego, CA 92121 Tel 8585373999 Fax-858 537 3990 Dispatch 8888445060 DAILY INSPECTION REPORT Inland Empire 14467 Meridian Pkwy, Bldg 2-A Riverside, CA 92518 Tel 951 653 4999 Fax 951 653 4666 Dispatch 800 491 2990 DSA/CITYFile#. Report #_PG.DF DSA/OSHPDAPPL#. DSA/LEA# Special Inspection Reports must be distributed to the parties listed below within 14 days of the inspection Reports of non-compliant conditions must be distributed immediately Separate reports shall be prepared for each type of special inspection, on a daily basis Each report shall be completed and signed by the special inspector conducting the inspection ARCHITECT TIME ARRIVED -TIME DEPARTED TRAVELTIME LUNCH TIME SUB CONTRACTOR INSPECTION ADDRESS ADDRESS OF PROJECT TYPE OF INSPECTION C ENGINEERED FILL H FOUNDATION LJ BACK FILL LJ BATCH PLANT D PT CONCRETE Li SHOTCRETE D CONCRETE H MASONRY n HIGH STRENGTH BOLTING H WELDING H SHOP WELD LJ FIREPROOFING n ANCHOR/DOWEL LJ NDE FIELD H NDE SHOP LJ CEILING WIRE& I"! DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT APPROVED DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE APPROVED PLANS Y D N n SOIL REPORT YG MID SPECS YD NH APPROVED SHOP DRAWING YU N L, MATERIALS USED BY CONTRACTOR (INCLUDE RESEARCH REPORT NO OR MATERIAL TEST REPORTS) CONTRACTORS EQUIPMENT /MANPOWER USED AREA GRID LINES PIECES INSPECTED STRUCTURAL NOTES DETAIL OR RFIS USED REMARKS INCLUDING MEETINGS REWORK AS PERCENT OF ALL WORK TODAY PERCENT PROJECT COMPLETE THE WORK WA§ja*1?ASNOTn Inspected in accordance with the requirements of the DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents MATERIAL SAMPLING WAS LI WAS NOT D M/AH Performed in accordance with DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents cc Project Architect Contractor Structural Engineer Building Department DSA Regional Office Owner School District THE WORK INSPECTED MBfD NOT MEET C THE requirements of the DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents Samples taken Weather-..S-~-~. -,Temp ""> Signatu.rsJ>f Special Inspector i.*~,\r»-» \ Print Name c+i cr->—o- www mtghnc com MTGL Proiect # ^l Permit # Corporate 2992 E La Raima Ave Anaheim. CA 92806 Tel 7146322999 Fax 7146322974 Dispatch 800 491 2990 Ste A San Diego/Imperial Conn 7313 Carroll Rd Ste G San Diego, CA 92121 Tel 8585373999 Fax 858 537 3990 Dispatch 8888445060 DAILY INSPECTION REPORT Inland Empire 14467 Meridian Pkwy.Bldg 2-A Riverside. CA92!>18 Tel 951 653 4999 Fax 951 653 4666 Dispatch 800 491 2990 DSA/CITY File #. Report #_. . _ PG_DF_ DSA/OSHPD APPL #. OSA/LEA# Special Inspection Reports must be distributed to the parties listed below within 14 days of the inspection Reports of non-compliant conditions must be distributed immediately Separate reports shall be prepared for each type of special inspection, on a daily basis Each report shall be completed and signed by the special inspector conducting the inspection PROJLCI NAME DATE TtV£ ARCHITECT TIME ARRIVED TIME DEPARTED ENGINEER TRAVEL TIML LUNCH TIME SUB CONTRACTOR Hl.O>->7 INSPLCriON ADDRESS ADDRESS OF PROJECT TYPE OF INSPECTION D ENGINEERED FILL 3 FOUNDATION .H BACK FILL r. BATCH PLANT I., PT CONCRETE C SHOTCRETE 1 CONCRETE i" MASONRY Li HIGH STRENGTH BOLTING ^ WELDING I . SHOP WELD FIREPROOFING ANCHOR/DOWEL l NDE FIELD NDESHOP CEILIIYG WIRE DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT APPROVED DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE APPROVED PLANS YL7I ND SOIL REPORT YZ N .SPECS YD N~ APPROVED SHOP DRAWING YD ND MATERIALS USFD BY CONTRACTOR (INCLUDE RESEARCH REPORT NO OR MATERIAL TEST REPORTS) \—€.1 MC^j CONTRACTORS EQUIPMENT/ MANPOWER USED AREA GRID LINES PILCES INSPECTED STRUCTURAI. NOTES DETAIL OR RFIS USED A. .:>:>(• cxy g^r\, REMARKS INCLUDING MEETINGS ~ZJfri £> REWORK AS PERCENT OF ALL WORK TODAY PERCENT PROJECT COMPLETE THE WORK WA.S-^WASNOTr, Inspected in accordance with the requirements of the DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents MATERIAL SAMPLING WAST. WAS NOT I I N/AD Performed in accordance with DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents cc Proiect Architect Contractor Structural Engineer Building Department DSA Regional Office Owner School Distnct THE WORK INSPECTED MET^ETJTD NOT MEET D THE requirements of the DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents Samples taken *"»" ^(—- Weather &*<i^-i .Temp Print Name "25%- www mtghnc com Corporate 2992 E La Raima Ave Anaheim, CA 92806 Tel 7146322999 Fax 7146322974 Dispatch 800 491 2990 Permit # San Diego/imperial C 7313 Carroll Rd Ste G San Diego, CA 92121 Tel 8585373999 Fax. 858 537 3990 Dispatch 888 844 5060 DAILY INSPECTION REPORT Inland Empire 14467MeridianPkwy.Bldg 2-A Riverside, CA 92518 Tel 951 653 4999 Fax 951 653 4666 Dispatch 8004912990 DSA/CITYFile#. Report #_PG_DF. DSA/OSHPDAPPL#. DSA/LEA# Special Inspection Reports must be distributed to the parties listed below within 14 days of the inspection Reports of non-compliant conditions must be distributed immediately Separate reports shall be prepared for each type of special inspection, on a daily basis Each report shall be completed and signed by the special inspector conducting the inspection PROJECT NAME C DATE Wo 9 ARCHITECT TIME ARRIVED r). a.TIME DEPARTED ENGINEEI TRAVEL TIME LUNCH TIME SUB CONTRACTOR ADDRESS OF PROJECT TYPE OF INSPECTION D ENGINEERED FILL D FOUNDATION D BACK FILL D BATCH PLANT D PT CONCRETE D SHOTCRETE D CONCRETE D MASONRY D HIGH STRENGTH BOLTING D WELDING D SHOP WELD D FIREPROOFING D ANCHOR/DOWEL D NDE FIELD D NDE SHOP D CEILING WIREaD D DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT APPROVED DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE APPROVED PLANS YD ND SOIL REPORT YD ND SPECS YD ND APPROVED SHOP DRAWING YD ND MATERIALS USED BY CONTRACTOR (INCLUDE RESEARCH REPORT NO OR MATERIAL TEST REPORTS) CONTRACTORS EQUIPMENT/MANPOWER USED 3 2 V (o 1 A a, 1 5 1 2 " '"7-g 1 '- '." .AA LINES PIECES INSPECTED 1*0- LL U'fcA PIEC LL l4ul^£*Zk / ^--' />yy ^^^ STRUCTURAL NOTES DETAIL OR RFIS USED REWORK AS PERCENT OF ALL WORK TODAY PERCENT PROJECT COMPLETE THE WORK WASD WAS NOT D Inspected in accordance with the requirements of the DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents MATERIAL SAMPLING WASD WAS NOT D N/AD Performed in accordance with DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents cc Project Architect Contractor Structural Engineer Building Department DSA Regional Office Owner School District THE WORK INSPECTED METD DID NOT MEET D THE requirements of the DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents Samples taken Weather A Temp of Special Inspector www mtglinc com Corporate 2992 E La Raima Ave Anaheim, CA 92806 Tel 7146322999 Fax 7146322974 Dispatch 800 491 2990 MTGL Project #_ Permit t C ,") /p> 0 fl /) San Diego/Imperial G 7313 Carroll Rd Ste G Sari Diego, CA 92121 Tel 858 537 3999 Eax,858 537 3990 Dispatch 888 844 5060 DAILY INSPECTION REPORT Inland Empire* 14467 Meridian Pkwy.Bldg 2-A Riverside, CA 92518 Tel 951 653 4999 Fax 951 653 4666 Dispatch 8004912990 DSA/CITY File #. Report #.PG.OF DSA/OSHPDAPPL#_ DSA/LEA# Special Inspection Reports must be distributed to the parties listed below within 14 days of the inspection Reports of non-compliant conditions must be distnbuted immediately Separate reports shall be prepared for each type of special inspection, on a daily basis Each report shall be completed and signed by the special inspector conducting the inspection PROJECT NAME DATE ARCHITECT TIME ARRIVED 2 1 2 /ENGINEER TRAVEL TIME LUNCHTIWE fJr CONTRACTOR SUB CONTRACTOR INSPECTION ADDRESS r»ADDRESS OF PROJECT TYPE OF INSPECTION D ENGINEERED FILL D FOUNDATION D BACK FILL D BATCH PLANT D PT CONCRETE D SHOTCRETE 0'CONCRETE < D MASONRY D HIGH STRENGTH BOLTING D WELDING D SHOP WELD D FIREPROOFING D ANCHOR/DOWEL D NDE FIELD D NDE SHOP D CEILING WIRE D D D DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT APPROVED DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE r( APPROVED PLANS YD NCI SOIL REPORT YD ND SPECS YD ND j APPROVED SHOP DRAWING Y D N D MATERIALS USED BY (INCLUDE RESEARCH REPORT NO OR MATERIAL TEST REPORTS) / n coi AREA GRID LINES PIECES INSPECTED STRUCTURAL NOTES DETAIL OR RFIS REMARKS mCLUDIHG MEETHKS (A•' JXA</>'• 'fe£>/f)iss 4U^4 tv\<£•a REWOft ALL WORK TODAYS PERCENT PROJECT COMPLETE THE WORK WASD WAS NOT D Inspected in accordance with the requirements of the DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents MATERIAL SAMPLING WASD WAS NOT D N/AD Performed in accordance with DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents cc Project Architect Contractor Structural Engineer Building Department DSA Regional Office Owner School District THE WORK INSPECTED METD DID NOT MEET D THE requirements of the DSA/OSHPD/PROJECT approved documents Samples taken. Weather (Cyj&A~ ./^ Temp_4 Sign:of£pecial Inspector ' ?/ EsGil Corporation In (Partnership witfi government for (Bui Uing Safety DATE 3/14/O8 Q APPLICANT a JURIS JURISDICTION City of Carlsbad a PLAN REVIEWER a FILE PLAN CHECK NO 08-0303 SET II PROJECT ADDRESS 1923 Calle Barcelona Suite 138 PROJECT NAME Building 3 Facade and Interior Alteration - TI XI 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 XI 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 # Mail Telephone Fax In Person XI REMARKS Applicant to hand carry the plans directly to the City of Carlsbad this does, not assure a permit will be issued the city may have other corrections By Doug Moody Enclosures Esgil Corporation n GA n MB n EJ n PC LOG 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 * San Diego, California 92123 + (858)560-1468 *• Fax (858) 560-1S76 EsGil Corporation In (Partnership with government for (Building Safety DATE 2/29/O8 a APPLICANT JURISDICTION City of Carlsbad a PLAN REVIEWER a FILE PLAN CHECK NO 08-0303 SET I PROJECT ADDRESS 1923 Calle Barcelona Suite 138 PROJECT NAME Building 3 Facade and Interior Alteration - TI 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 X] 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 XJ The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to Nadel Retail Architects / Hanna Scott 625 Broadway Suite 1025, San Diego, CA 92101 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 Hanna Scott Telephone # 619-232-8424 Date contacted3/3/00 (by^^ Fax # 619-232-7179 Mail Telephone y/Fax ./In Person REMARKS By Doug Moody Enclosures Esgil Corporation D GA D MB D EJ D PC 2/22/08 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 *• San Diego, California 92123 + (858)560-1468 + Fax (858) 560-1576 City of Carlsbad O8-0303 2/29/08 PLAN REVIEW CORRECTION LIST TENANT IMPROVEMENTS PLAN CHECK NO 08-03O3 OCCUPANCY M TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION VB ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA SPRINKLERS'? YES REMARKS DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY JURISDICTION 2/19/08 DATE INITIAL PLAN REVIEW COMPLETED 2/29/08 JURISDICTION City of Carlsbad USE Retail ACTUAL AREA 8520 STORIES 1 HEIGHT OCCUPANT LOAD 284 DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY ESGIL CORPORATION 2/22/08 PLAN REVIEWER Doug Moody FOREWORD (PLEASE READ) This plan review is limited to the technical requirements contained in the International Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, National Electrical Code and state laws regulating energy conservation, noise attenuation and 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 2007 CBC, which adopts the 2006 IBC The following items listed need clarification, modification or change All items must be satisfied before the plans will be in conformance with the cited codes and regulations Per Sec 105 4 of the 2006 International Building Code, the approval of the plans does not permit the violation of any state, county or city law To speed up the recheck process, please note on this list (or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed, i.e., plan sheet number, specification section, etc Be sure to enclose the marked up list when you submit the revised plans City of Carlsbad 08-O303 2/29/08 Please make all corrections on the original tracings, as requested in the correction list Submit three sets of plans for commercial/industrial projects (two sets of plans for residential projects) For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in one of two ways 1 Deliver all corrected sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department, 1635 Faraday Ave , Carlsbad, CA 92008, (760) 602-2700 The City will route the plans to EsGil Corporation and the Carlsbad Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments 2 Bring one corrected set of plans and calculations/reports to EsGil Corporation, 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, CA 92123, (858) 560-1468 Deliver all remaining sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department for routing to their Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments NOTE Plans that are submitted directly to EsGil Corporation only will not be reviewed by the City Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments until review by EsGil Corporation is complete 1 Please provide a statement on the Title Sheet of the plans to show compliance with the current Codes, as of the first day of 2008 The following are the conect current Codes a) The 2007 edition of the California Building Code (CBC) adopts the 2006 International Building Code (IBC) and the 2007 California Amendmenls b) The 2007 edition of the California Electrical Code (CEC) adopts the 2005 National Electrical Code (NEC) and the 2007 California Amendments c) The 2007 edition of the California Mechanical Code (CMC) adopts the 2006 Uniform Mechanical Code (UMC) and the 2007 California Amendments d) The 2007 edition of the California Plumbing Code (CPC) adopts the 2006 Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC) and the 2007 California Amendments e) The 2007 edition of the California Fire Code (CFC) adopts the 2000 Uniform Fire Code (UFC) and the 2007 California Amendments f) The 2005 edition of the California Energy Efficiency Standards All sheets of the plans and the first sheet of the calculations are required to be signed by the licensed architect or engineer responsible for the plan preparation Please correct the structural detail for the new footing 2 on sheet S5 the dimensions shown are incorrect Please clarify detail 5 on S5 to indicate the welding for the connection of the new W18x46 to the new TS column On the cover sheet of the plans, specify any items requiring special inspection, in a format similar to that shown below Section 106 3 2 City of Carlsbad 08-03O3 2/29/O8 • 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 REQUIRED-? REMARKS FIELD WELDING 6 When special inspection is required, the architect or engineer of record shall prepare an inspection program which shall be submitted to the building official for approval prior to issuance of the building permit Please review Section 106 3 5 Please complete the attached form 7 Please clarify the plans will a new store front be installed as part of this permit'? If so please provide complete plans and details and energy documentation 8 Please provide the pole light specification will a new light base be installed? Please show the height of the light pole Please provide a design for the new light base 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 Please indicate here if any changes have been made to the plans that are not a result of corrections from this list If there are other changes, please briefly describe them and where they are located in the plans Have changes been made to the plans not resulting from this correction list? Please indicate Yes Q No a The jurisdiction has contracted with Esgil Corporation located at 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, California 92123, telephone number of 858/560-1468, to perform the plan review for your project If you have any questions regarding these plan review items, please contact Doug Moody at Esgil Corporation Thank you City of Carlsbad 08-O303 2/29/08 City of Carlsbad Building Department BUILDING DEPARTMENT NOTICE OF REQUIREMENT FOR SPECIAL INSPECTION Do Not Remove From Plans Plan Check No 08-03O3 Job Address or Legal Description 1923 Calle Barcelona Suite 138 Owner 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/she 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 Inspec tor is required to submit written reports to the City of Carlsbad building department of all work that he/she inspected and approved The final inspection approval will not be given until all Special Inspection 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 (over) m^07/2008 02:15 619-645-4001 MAR-03-zaoe 16:40 ESGIL CORP. NADEL ARCHITECTS INC PAGE 02/02 B6B 660 1576 P.006 City of Carlsbad O8-O303 2/29/O8 SPECIAL INSPECTION PROGRAM ADDRESS OR LEGAL DESCRIPTION:£flJlU- PLAN CHECK NUMBER: 08" 05O3* OWNER'S NAME: 1, as the owner, or agent of the owner (contractors may rjfft employ the special inspector), certify that I, or the architect/engineer of record, will be responsible for employing the special inspectors) as required by Uniform Building Code (UBC) Section 1701 1 for the construction project located at the sits listed above, UBC Section 106.3.6. Sigft«4 1,04 the eftgmecr/archhoct of jecord, certify that Ibavc prepared the following special inspection program as required by UBC Section 106.3.5 fior the construction project located at the site hsted above Signed 1, List of work requiring special Inspection; Soils Compliance Prior to Foundation Inspection , IE) Field Welding Structural Concrete Over 2500 PSt ' Q High Strength Sotting Prestromd Concrete 13 Expansion/Epoxy Anchors Structural Masonry |Zl Sprayed-On Fir 2. Nam«(s) of tndiv{duai(s} or firm(s) responsible for the special inspections listed above: MTL 8, C, 3. Duties of the special inspectors for th» work ll«tecf above; A. C. SpdOtat fnspectore shall check in vu«h tfw City and present <hetr credontjula for approval taterJto beginning uwofK on Ihc job silo TOTAL P.006 City of Carlsbad 08-0303 2/29/08 VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURISDICTION City of Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO 08-0303 PREPARED BY Doug Moody DATE 2/29/08 BUILDING ADDRESS 1923 Calle Barcelona Suite 138 BUILDING OCCUPANCY M TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION VB BUILDING PORTION Tl Air Conditioning Fire Sprinklers TOTAL VALUE Jurisdiction Code AREA I! Valuation (Sq Ft) Multiplier 8520 cb 3437 By Ordinance Reg Mod VALUE ($) 292,832 292,832 $1,24473 Plan Check Fee by Ordinance • ^ 0 Complete ReviewType of Review fl Repetitive Fee ~"^Tj Repeats Comments D Other [—, Hourly Esgil Plan Review Fee Structural Only Hour* $809 07 $697 05 Sheet 1 of 1 macvalue doc PLANNING/ENGINEERING APPROVALS PERMIT NUMBER CB fifiO ADDRESS.CeJLt* DATE RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL ADDITION MINOR (<$10,000.00) ENANT IMPROVEMENT PLAZA CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD COMPANY STORES VILLAGE FAIRE COMPLETE OFFICE BUILDING OTHER. PLANNER ENGINEER DATE DATE / CtxtiUitanm/Plinnng Efifnttrtrg Apprevi PLANNING DEPARTMENT BUILDING PLAN CHECK REVIEW CHECKLIST Plan Check No CBO<0 - 1 Planner Chris Sexton APN Address Phone (760) 602-4624 Ca He, |g-KC('flLV Net Project Density DU/AC CFD (in/out) #_Date of participation Facilities Management Zone _ Remaining net dev acres Circle One (For non-residential development Type of land used created by this permit ) Legend [X] Item Complete QZJjKcm Incomplete - Needs your action Environmental Review Required YES NO DATE OF COMPLETION Compliance with conditions of approval7 If not, state conditions which require action Conditions of Approval Discretionary Action Required APPROVAL'RESO NO PROJECT NO YES NO TYPE DATE OTHER RELATED CASES Compliance with conditions or approval7 If not, state conditions which require action Conditions of Approval D n Coastal Zone Assessment/Compliance Project site located in Coastal Zone7 YES_ CA Coastal Commission Authority7 YES._ NO_ NO California Coastal Commission Authority Contact them at - 7575 Metropolitan Drive, Suite 103, San Diego CA 92108-4402, (619) 767-2370 Determine status (Coastal Permit Required or Exempt) Habitat Management Plan Data Entry Completed7 YES NO If property has Habitat Type identified in Table 11 of HMP, complete HMP Permit application and assess fees in Permits Plus (A/P/Ds, Activity Maintenance, enter CB#, toolbar, Screens, HMP Fees, Enter Acres of Habitat Type impacted/taken, UPDATE') Inclusionary Housing Fee required YES NO W— (Effective date of Inclusionary Housing Ordinance - May 21, 1993 ) Data Entry Completed7 YES _ MO (A/P/Ds, Activity Maintenance, enter CB* toolbar Screens. Housing Fees, Construct Housing Y/N, Enter Fee, UPDATE') H \ADMIN\COUNTER\BldgF!nchkRevChkist Rev 3/C6 » Site Plan DOCl Provide a fully dimensional site plan dravm to scale Show North arrow, property lines, easements, existing and proposed structures streets, existing street improvements, right-of-way width, dimensional setbacks and existing topographical lines (including all side and rear yard slopes) Provide legal description of property and assessor's parcel number Policy 44- Neighborhood Architectural Design Guidelines D D D 1 Applicability YES NO n D D 2 Project complies YES NO Zoning n 1 Setbacks Front Interior Side Street Side Rear Top of slope fj 2 Accessory structure setbacks Front Interior Side Street Side Rear Structure separation I I 3 Lot Coverage Required Required Required Required Required ^ :ks Required Required Required Required Required —? Required Shown ,/ Shown s*^~ Shown ^fff'" Shown Shown Shown , Shown S Shown S Shown /^ Shown Shown 4 Height Required Shown n n Spaces Required Shown5 Parking (breakdown by uses for commercial and industrial projects required) Residential Guest Spaces Required Shown Additional Comments OK TO ISSUE AND ENTERED APPROVAL INTO COMPUTER H ^DMIN'iCOUNTER'B'dgFlfichkRevChXIst Rev 3,06 Carlsbad Fire Department Plan Review Requirements Category TI, COMM Date of Report 02-26-2008 NADEL ARCHITECTS Reviewed by Name Address SUITE 1025 625 BROADWAY SAN DIEGO CA 92121 Permit # CB080303 BLDG. DEPT COPY Job Name SPEC SUITE Job Address 1923 CALLE BARCELONA CBAD St 138 ' •INCOMPLETE Tin i j-.ii.. „]< +,. „<.+ i i ru. QConditioas: Cond CON0002632 ** APPROVED THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR THE PURPOSES OF ISSUEANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT THIS APPROVAL IS SUBJECT TO FIELD INSPECTIONS, ANY REQUIRED TESTS, FIRE DEPARTMENT NOTATIONS, CONDITIONS IN CORRESPONDENCE AND COMPLIANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND REGULATIONS THIS APPROVAL SHALL NOT BE HELD TO PERMIT OR APPROVE ANY VIOLATION OF THE LAW Entry 02/26/2008 By cwong Action MESRI ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL CONSULTING PROJECT: CHANGE TO BUILDING #3. FORUM AT CARLSBAD ROOF LOADS (FLAT) ROOFING 3 0 (NO GRAVEL) PLYWOOD 1 8 RAFTERS 3 0 CLG + INSULATION 3 0 SPRINKLER 2 0 MISC 22 DEAD LOAD LIVE LOAD TOTAL LOAD 150 PSF 200 PSF 35 0 PSF WALL (EXT) 160 PSF BEAMS #1 JOIST & BLOCKING #2 OR if\ WALL (INT ) 100 PSF POSTS # 1 STUDS & PLATES #2 OR # 1 U ON ALL CONCRETE TO BE A MIN OF 3000 PSI AT 28 DAYS STRENGTH (SEE PLANS FOR SPECIAL INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS) Ss=l 225, Fa-= 1 02 Sds = 817 SOIL PRESSURE 2500 psf @ 18" BELOW GRADE WIND CBC2007 EXP B, 70 MPH, 12 PSF BY GEOCONINC ALL MASONRY TO BE, fm= 1500 psi U O N (SEE PLANS FOR SPECIAL INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS, PRISM TESTS ARE REQUIRED WHEN SPECIAL INSPECTION IS SPECIFIED) ALL GLUE-IAMINATED BEAMS ARE 2400F-V4 (SIMPLE SPAN), AND 2400F-V8 (CANTILEVER SPAN) BALCONY LIVE LOAD N/A EXIT/CORRIDOR LIVE LOAD N/A THESE CALCULATIONS ARE NOT VALID OR USABLE WITHOUT THE WET SIGNATURE OF ONE OF THE PRINCIPALS OF THE MESRI ENGINEERING THESE CALCULATIONS ARE ONLY FOR THE ITEMS INCLUDED HEREIN, SPECIFIED BY THE CLIENT AND DO NOT IMPLY APPROVAL OF ANY OTHER PART OF THE STRUCTURE BY THIS OFFICE JOB NO 0804 DATE 02-08-08 DESIGNED BY K.M CHECKED BY .PAGE 1 <•! | 1,4-1 *^, >JK -yo^_\ Sf. . s: ' -f— | r nof\ts/v»\ I) A*. * 2^141 ^£00 A ^ 71 geocoder us a free US geocoder Page 1 of2 Take GIS Into the Field Geocodlnp Web Service Location Hub GeoPDF One of the most comprehensive Parcel level geocodlng available as A new SaaS approach to enabling Connect everyone to geospatial Mobile GIS applications! a Web Service Register Now location Intelligence Learn more data Maps anyone can view, use www Tensing com/MoblleGIS www proxlx com www dmtlspatial com and share www terragotech com geocoder.us (and now also geocoder.net) find the latitude & longitude of any US address - for free sept 17, ZUUT Note: i added nttp //geocoaer us/mooiie ntmi as an ultrahghtweight address lookup Try it on your mobile device Let me know Rich@geocoder us how it works for you Read the NEW Geocoder.US Blog The new Blog is the place to look for what is happening with Geocoder us Recent Blog Entries • How to calculate the distance between two points • Degrees, Minutes, Seconds' Decimal Degrees1' Huh*> • Added display of coordinates in Degree-Minute-Seconds form in demo cgi • How many digits are enough? 382? 38 23? 38 234? How many digits of precision do we need? This material is Open Knowledge "A piece of knowledge is open if you are free to use, reuse, and redistribute it" For details read the latest version of the full definition (sort of like the Make motto 'if you can't open it, you don't own it.') You are free to use the Geocoder US code and the data is free from the US government (if you want to use our servers for commercial purposes please sign up for a commercial account -) Address Latitude Longitude 2200 Calle Barcelona Carlsbad CA 92009 (33 07336,-117 260239) 33 07336 ° N33°4I241" 33 ° 4 4016' (degree mrnrnrnm) -117260239° W 117° 15'36 9" -117° 15 6143'(degree mrnrnrnm) (it can take a bit for the map to load-wait for the red circle to turn green Stay m your happy place x Search for another address: 1923 CALLE BARCELONA, CARLSBAD CA 92C I Submit I httn //Peocoder.us/demo.cei?address=l 923+CALLE+BARCELONA%2C+CARLSBAD+ 2/11/2008 Conterminous 48 States 2005 ASCE 7 Standard Latitude = 33.07336 Longitude = -117 260239 Spectral Response Accelerations Ss and S1 Ss and S1 = Mapped Spectral Acceleration Values Site Class B - Fa = 1 0 ,Fv = 1 0 Data are based on a 0.01 deg grid spacing Period Sa (sec) (g) 02 1.201 (Ss, Site Class B) 10 0 450 (81, Site Class B) Conterminous 48 States 2005 ASCE 7 Standard Latitude = 33 07336 Longitude = -117 260239 Spectral Response Accelerations SMs and SM1 SMs = FaSs and SM1 = FvS1 Site Class D - Fa = 1 02 ,Fv = 1 55 Period Sa (sec) (g) 02 1.225 (SMs, Site Class D) 1 0 0.698 (SM1, Site Class D) Conterminous 48 States 2005 ASCE 7 Standard Latitude = 33 07336 Longitude = -117 260239 SDs = 2/3 x SMs and SD1 = 2/3 x SM1 Site Class D - Fa = 1 02 ,Fv = 1 55 Penod Sa (sec) (g) 0 2 0.817 (SDs, Site Class D) 10 0 466 (SD1, Site Class D) V* * A- £ /^ ,2, <2Jtr>\KwfvOs. V \ LI V n' / Ptfr. (T . <&^.r X % rlf-i/ rl 33?>X 2>lS / J * iT \ \.\1f 7- U 4- A I f^A > V . Jf.i •; | i f > ',<"•.>' i; ."' ;>.< •\t\ 4-C A ^ -o n'.< PROGRAM General Frame Analysis vl.16 PAGE NO 1 ECOM ASSOCIATES, Inc TIME Mon Nov 05 15 05 23 2001 JOB LACOSTA5 RUN 1 NODAL INFORMATION NODE NODAL COORDINATES SUPPORT CONDITIONS NO X Y CODE PX STIFF PY STIFF M STIFF Units Ft Ft K /In K /In K -In /Deg 1 0 000 0 000 2 0.000 17 000 3 16 000 17 000 4 16 000 0 000 ELEMENT INFORMATION ELEM NE PE ELEM BETA PROP NE PE NO NODE NODE LENGTH ANGLE TYPE HINGE HINGE Units Ft Deg 1 1 2 17 000 90.00 1 2 4 3 17 000 90 00 1 323 16.000 0 00 1 PROPERTY INFORMATION PROP SECTION NO NAME MODULUS AREA I DIST Units . K /In 2 In2 In4 Ft 1 TS12X6X1/2 29000 00 16.400 287 000 ELEMENT LOAD INFORMATION LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC DIST PX PY M Description Element List 1 UNIF ROF 3 GLO Units DIST B 0 E 16 Ft .00 00 K 0 0 /Ft 00 00 K -0 -0 /Ft 40 40 Ft- 0 0 K 00 00 /Ft PROGRAM General Frame Analysis vl 16 PAGE NO 2 ECOM ASSOCIATES, Inc TIME • Mon Nov 05 15 05 23 2001 JOB LACOSTA5 RUN 1 NODAL LOAD INFORMATION LOAD LOAD PX PY M CASE TYPE DX DY BETA Units K K Ft-K Ft Ft Deg Description SEISMIC Node List 2,3 1 FORCE 9 00 0 00 0.00 PROGRAM General Frame Analysis vl.16 ECOM ASSOCIATES, Inc JOB LACOSTA5 RUN 1 PAGE NO 3 TIME Mon Nov 05 15 05 23 2001 LOAD COMB NODE NO NODAL DISPLACEMENTS DX DY ROTATION Units : In In Deg LOAD COMBINATIONS COMB 1 1 00 X CASE 1 1 2 3 4 0 0000 1.0796 1 0794 0.0000 0 0000 0.0022 •0 0049 0 0000 0 0000 -0 2001 -0 1531 0 0000 ELEM LOAD NODE NO COMB NO ELEMENT REPORTS SIGN CONVENTION BEAM DESIGNERS AXIAL SHEAR MOMENT MAX MOM/DEFL DIST Units • LOAD COMBINATIONS. COMB 1 1 00 X CASE 1 K K K -Ft K -Ft /In Ft 1 2 4 3 2 3 5 0523 5 0523 -11.4523 -11 4523 -0 4911 -0 4911 8 5089 8.5089 9.4911 9 4911 -5 0523 -11 4523 -84.2015 60.4494 -89 7610 71.5881 60 4494 -71 5881 0 1360 4 79 0 1270 4 46 -0 0776 4 07 NODE NO LOAD COMB REACTIONS PX PY Units K K MOMENT K -Ft 1 4 1 1 8 5089 9 4911 5 0523 -11 4523 -84 2015 -89.7610 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION AND LIQUEFACTION EVALUATION PROPOSED RETAIL DEVELOPMENT The Pavilion at La Costa Carlsbad Tract No. 92-08, Lot 4 Carlsbad, California for Thomas Enterprises, Inc. Southern California Geotechnica! Southern California Geotechnical Thomas Enterprises, Inc 3604 Carleton Street San Diego, California 92106 January 29, 2002 Project No 01G216-4 Attention Mr Mel Kuhnel Vice President, Development Subject Foundation Plan Review Proposed Retail Development The Pavilion at La Costa, Building 3 Carlsbad Tract No 92-08, Lot 4 Carlsbad, California Reference Geotechnical Investigation and Liquefaction Evaluation. Proposed Retail Development. The Pavilion at La Costa. Carlsbad Tract No 92-08. Lot 4. Carlsbad. California, prepared for Thomas Enterprises, Inc. by Southern California Geotechnical, Inc, dated November 8, 2001, SCO Project No 01G216-1 Dear Mr Kuhnel In accordance with the request of Mr Steve Kohn of Nadel Architects, Inc, we have reviewed the foundation plans for the above referenced project These plans have been reviewed for conformance with the conclusions and recommendations contained within the above referenced geotechnical report The plans provided to our office for the purposes of this review are identified as follows • Sheet S-1, General Notes, Building 3, dated December 3, 2001 • Sheet S-2, Typical Details, Building 3, dated December 3, 2001 • Sheet S-5, Foundation Plan, Building 3, dated December 3, 2001 • Sheet S-5A, Foundation Plan, Building 3, dated December 3, 2001 • Sheet S-5B, Foundation Plan, Building 3, dated December 3, 2001 • Sheet S-7, Structural Details, Building 3, dated December 3, 2001 • Sheet S-9, Structural Details, Building 3, dated December 3, 2001. In general, these plans are considered to have been prepared in accordance with the conclusions and recommendations presented in the above referenced geotechnical report Comments generated during our review as well as any exceptions to this conclusion are documented below • The structural engineer has specified that the floor slab reinforcement consist of No 3 bars at 16-mches on-center in both directions. This reinforcement exceeds 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 • Anaheim, California 92807-1951 • (714) 777-0333 • Fax (714) 777-0398 the minimum reinforcement presented in the above referenced geotechnical report and is considered suitable from a geotechnical standpoint • Reinforcement within the perimeter foundations consists of four No 5 bars (2 top and 2 bottom) with the exception of the grade beam footings along Column Lines A and 11, which are reinforced with six No. 7 bars (3 top and 3 bottom) This reinforcement exceeds the geotechnical recommendations and is considered suitable • Detail 3 on Sheet S-7 indicates that all exterior patio slabs will be connected to the building footings using No 4 bars at 24-mches on-center, 18-mches long This detail is considered to satisfy the recommendation presented in Section 6 5 of the geotechnical report Based on our review, the above referenced plans are considered to have been prepared in conformance with the conclusions and recommendations of the geotechnical report It should be noted that this review was limited to the geotechnical aspects of the plans and no representation as to the suitability of the structural design is intended We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to be of continued service on this project We look forward to providing additional consulting services during the course of the project If we may be of any further assistance in any manner, please contact our office Respectfully Submitted, Southern California Geotechnical, Inc. K Mitchell, GE 2364 Principal Engineer Distribution (1) Addressee (1) Mayers and Associates, Attn Dru Mayers (3) Nadel Architects, Inc Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa, Building 3 - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-4 Page 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES 3.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 Site Conditions 4 3.2 Proposed Development 5 3.3 Background and Previous Studies 5 4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 8 4 1 Scope of Exploration/Sampling Methods 8 4 2 Geotechnical Conditions 8 4.3 Geologic Conditions 9 5.0 LABORATORY TESTING 10 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1_3 61 Seismic Design Considerations 13 62 Geotechnical Design Considerations 16 6.3 Site Grading Recommendations 19 6.4 Construction Considerations 21 6 5 Foundation Design and Construction 22 6 6 Floor Slab Design and Construction 23 6 7 Retaining Wall Design and Construction 24 6 8 Exterior Flatwork Design and Construction 26 6 9 Pavement Design Parameters 27 7.0 GENERAL COMMENTS 30 8.0 REFERENCES 31 Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 APPENDICES A Plate 1. Site Location Map Plate 2: Boring Location Plan Plate 3: Site Geologic Map B Boring Logs C Laboratory Test Results D Grading Guide Specifications E UBCSEIS and FRISKSP Output F Liquefaction Analysis Spreadsheets Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Presented below is a brief summary of the conclusions and recommendations of this investigation. Since this summary is not all inclusive, it should be read in complete context with the entire report. Geotechnical Design Considerations • The subsurface profile at the subject site consists of engineered fill soils extending to depths of 8 to 30+ feet These fill soils were placed during recent grading operations, as monitored by Leighton and Associates, and generally consist of medium dense to dense sands and silty sands The fill soils are underlain by medium dense alluvium comprised of silts and sands and/or sandstone of the Torrey Sandstone. We have reviewed the final as-graded report of rough grading prepared for this site by Leighton and Associates • During previous mass grading of the subject site, the previously existing cut/fill transitions were mitigated, by overexcavatmg the cut portions of the site to depths of at least 8 to 10± feet. All fill soils on the site have reportedly been compacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density A large ascending fill slope is located along the south half of the western property line and near the eastern end of the south property line This fill slope was reportedly constructed as a stability fill, not as a buttress fill Based on the geologic conditions reported by Leighton, as well as geotechnical research performed by SCG, no adverse geologic bedding is present in this area. • The proposed development will include segmental retaining walls along the south portion of the west property and along some areas of the south property line A detailed analysis and design of these walls will be presented in an addendum report Subsurface Conditions and Site Preparation • Initial site preparation should consist of removal of the existing vegetation Based on conditions observed at the time of the subsurface exploration, stripping will require removal of the existing grass, weeds and brush These materials should be disposed of off-site • The existing soils within the proposed building area should be overexcavated to a depth of at least 2 feet below existing grade, to remove the existing weathered and softened fill soils • No significant overexcavation is recommended for the proposed parking areas Subgrade preparation in these areas may be limited to scarification to a depth of 10 to 12 inches, moisture conditioning and recompaction. • Once the overexcavation depths have been achieved, the resulting subgrades should be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer to identify any additional soils that should be removed to a level of competent subgrade soils The excavated soils may be replaced as compacted structural fill Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Pagel Building Foundations • Conventional Shallow Foundations supported in existing or newly placed structural fill • 2,500 psf maximum allowable soil bearing pressure • Minimum Reinforcement in Strip Footings' Four No 5 bars (2 top and 2 bottom) additional reinforcement may be necessary for structural considerations Building Floor Slabs • Conventional Slabs-on-Grade, 5-inch minimum thickness • Minimum Reinforcement: No 3 bars at 18-inches on-center, in both directions, additional reinforcement may be necessary for structural considerations Pavements • Asphaltic Concrete (Assumed R=30) • Auto Traffic Only 3 inches asphaltic concrete, 3 inches aggregate base • Auto Drive Lanes 3 inches asphaltic concrete, 6 inches aggregate base • Light Truck Traffic. 31/a inches asphaltic concrete, 7 inches aggregate base • Moderate Truck Traffic 4 inches asphaltic concrete, 10 inches aggregate base • Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) • Less than 4 trucks per day (Tl = 6.0) 5 0 inches Portland Cement Concrete • Less than 14 trucks per day (Tl = 70): 60 inches Portland Cement Concrete • Less than 42 trucks per day (Tl = 80): 70 inches Portland Cement Concrete Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 2 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of services performed for this project was in accordance with our Proposal No. 01P269, dated August 24, 2001 The scope of services included a visual site reconnaissance, subsurface exploration, field and laboratory testing, and geotechnical engineering analysis to provide criteria for preparing the design of the building foundations, building floor slabs, and parking lot pavements along with site preparation recommendations and construction considerations for the proposed development Based on the location of the subject site, this investigation also included a site specific liquefaction evaluation The evaluation of environmental aspects of this site was beyond the scope of services for this geotechnical investigation Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 PageS 3.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 Site Conditions The subject site is located on the south and east sides of Calle Barcelona, approximately 1,000 feet north of Leucadia Boulevard, in Carlsbad, California Calle Barcelona forms a 90 degree curve at the northwestern corner of the site, and bounds the subject site on the west and north sides The site has been identified as Lot 4 of Carlsbad Tract No 92-08 The site is bordered to the south by a wildlife undercrossmg and a drainage easement, with an Expo Design Center located further to the south Calle Barcelona borders the site to the north and west, and a drainage easement borders the site to the east The subject site is approximately 183 acres in size, and is a portion of the La Costa Glen Development in Carlsbad, California The subject site is generally rectangular in shape At the time of the subsurface exploration, the site consisted of a vacant parcel that appears to have been sheet graded to its present topography. Ground surface cover consists of exposed soil with sparse to moderate native grass, weed and brush growth Other than the appearance that the site was previously graded, no evidence of previous development was observed. Topographic data for the project was provided by Mayers and Associates, the project civil engineer This data indicates that site topography generally consists of gently sloping terrain, dropping from southwest to northeast. Site grades within the sheet graded portion of the site range from El. 106± near the southwestern property corner to El 92± at the northeastern corner Large ascending slopes are located along the south portion of the east property line and east portion of the south property line These slopes are up to 30± feet in height and possess inclinations of 2 horizontal to 1 vertical (2h 1v) These ascending slopes are located within the property boundary A descending slope is also located within the property boundary along the east portion of the south property line. This slope possesses an inclination of 2h 1v± and a height of 10 to 15+ feet A descending slope is also located on the easterly adjacent site, bordering most of the eastern property line This slope ranges from 20 to 30± feet in height and possesses an inclination of approximately 2h 1v Other topographic features noted during the site reconnaissance include a desiltmg basin located in the northeastern region of the subject site, descending to El 84 5 This desiltmg basin was dry at the time of the subsurface exploration It should be noted that the topography illustrated on the provided plan, in the vicinity of Building 6, including the area of Boring B-10, does not represent the currently existing site conditions. Apparently, the topographic survey was performed at a time when a Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 4 large stockpile was present in this area of the site This stockpile is no longer present, and site grades in the area of Boring B-6 are consistent with those of the surrounding area 3.2 Proposed Development Preliminary site plans depicting the proposed development have been provided to our office by Mayers and Associates These plans indicate that the proposed development will consist of eight (8) new retail buildings These buildings will range in size from 6,000+ ft2 to 58,523± ft2 These buildings are indicated to be 1 to 2 stories in height One or two of the larger buildings will also include loading dock areas. Although not specified on the site plan, it is assumed that the proposed structures will not include any significant below grade construction. Detailed structural information regarding the new buildings has not been provided However, it is assumed that most of the larger buildings will be of concrete tilt-up or masonry block construction Based on the assumed construction, maximum column and wall loads are expected to be on the order of 75 kips and 5 kips per linear foot, respectively Some of the smaller out buildings may be of wood frame construction, and maximum column and wall loads on the order of 30 kips and 2 kips per linear foot are assumed for these buildings All of the floor slabs are assumed to be subjected to loads of less than 150 psf Preliminary grading information is included on the site plan provided to our office. This plan indicates that grading for the new development will generally require maximum cuts and fills on the order of 1 to 3± feet The plan also indicates that new retaining walls will be located along the south portion of the east property line as well as most of the south property line. These walls will be up to 25± feet in height Consideration has been given to the use of a segmental retaining wall system in these areas This report presents preliminary information for design of conventional retaining walls However, a supplementary report is currently being prepared to address the design of segmental retaining walls The site plan indicates that most of the areas outside of the proposed buildings will be developed with asphaltic concrete pavements Limited areas of these pavements will be subjected to heavy truck traffic 3.3 Background and Previous Studies Prior to preparation of this geotechnical report, we obtained a copy of a previous grading report with coverage of the subject site This report is identified as follows • Final As Graded Report of Rough Grading. Green Valley. CT 92-08 (Proposed La Costa Glen). Carlsbad. California, prepared by Leighton and Associates for Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page5 Continuing Life Communities, LLC, dated January 28, 1999, Leighton Project No 4960134-002 This report presents a summary of observations, field and laboratory test results, and the geotechmcal conditions encountered and created during rough grading of the subject site This grading generally was performed to achieve sheet graded pads as well as the widening of a portion of El Camino Real Rough grading operations for the subject site were performed during the period of August 1998 through January 1999. As stated by Leighton, rough grading operations generally included the removal of potentially compressible soils and undocumented fill soils to a depth of competent material, the preparation of areas to receive fill, placement of new fill soils, the construction of fill slope keys, the excavation of formational material to achieve design grades, overexcavation of transition lots, and subdram placement Prior to grading, the areas of proposed development were reportedly stripped of surface vegetation and organic debris Removals of unsuitable and potentially compressible soil, including undocumented fill, topsoil/colluvium/alluvium, slopewash and weathered formational material were made to a depth of competent material in all areas proposed for new structural fill Removal areas with slopes flatter than 5h'1v or within 1 foot of the encountered water table were scarified to a depth of 12 inches and moisture conditioned as needed, to obtain a near optimum moisture content, and then recompacted at least 90 percent of relative compaction The steeper natural hill sides were benched to expose competent material prior to fill placement The geotechmcal maps included within the Leighton report identified the overexcavation bottom elevations throughout the proposed development Removals of the topsoil/colluvium/alluvium and weathered formational materials were generally on the order of 5 to 10 feet in thickness, as recommended in the original Leighton geotechmcal report. Any existing undocumented fill was removed to a depth of competent formational materials and/or competent engineered fill Prior to construction of new fill soils, including fill over cut slopes, fill slope keys were constructed The keys were excavated at least 5 feet into competent material along the toe of slope, at least 15 feet wide, angled a minimum of 2 percent into slope The locations of the fill slope keys are indicated on the Leighton geotechmcal maps One of these fill slope keys was located along the extreme western end of the south property line as well as along the southern one-half of the western property line The location of this fill slope is indicated on Plate 2 included in Appendix A of this report New fill soils were placed in 6 to 8 inch thick lifts of loose soil, compacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density Due to the presence of a steep alluvium/bedrock transition in many areas of proposed development, an overexcavation was made where the transition was encountered This overexcavation generally consisted of a 10-foot removal and recompaction in order to reduce the effects of differential settlement, due to the differing engineering Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 6 characteristics of the alluvium versus the bedrock Such an excavation was performed in the western region of the subject site, including Buildings 1, 4, 5, 6 and 8 As such, the entire site is generally underlain by at least 8 to 10± feet of compacted structural fill In their report, Leighton presents a preliminary discussion of the liquefaction potential of the on-site soils Leighton indicates that within the western portion of the project, shallow groundwater conditions were not encountered As such, the potential for seismically induced liquefaction in this area of the site was considered to be very low However, the alluvial soils in the eastern portion of the subject site generally were identified to consist of loose, clean, silty fine to medium grained sands with groundwater present at depths of 2 to 10 feet below the previously existing ground surface As a result of their liquefaction analysis, Leighton concludes that no special foundation design considerations are warranted, based on the presence of a layer of surficial compacted fill that will overly the potentially liquefiable soils This recommendation is also made on the basis that the proposed structures will be relatively lightly loaded During the grading operations on the La Costa Glen site, Leighton performed eight (8) expansion index tests, in accordance with UBC Standard 18-2 These tests indicated very low to low expansion potentials. Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page? 4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 4.1 Scope of Exploration/Sampling Methods The subsurface exploration conducted for this project consisted of sixteen (16) borings advanced to depths of 5 to 50± feet below currently existing site grades. The number and approximate locations of the borings were specified by the client These borings were logged during excavation by a member of our staff. The borings were advanced with hollow-stem augers, by a truck-mounted drilling rig Representative bulk and m-situ soil samples were taken during drilling and trenching Relatively undisturbed m-situ samples were taken with a split barrel "California Sampler" containing a series of one inch long, 2 416± inch diameter brass rings This sampling method is described in ASTM Test Method D-3550 In-situ samples were also taken using a 1 4± inch inside diameter split spoon sampler, in general accordance with ASTM D-1586 Both of these samplers are driven into the ground with successive blows of a 140-pound weight falling 30 inches The blow counts obtained during driving are recorded for further analysis Bulk samples were collected in plastic bags to retain their original moisture content The relatively undisturbed ring samples were placed in molded plastic sleeves that were then sealed and transported to our laboratory The approximate locations of the borings are indicated on the Boring Location Plan, included as Plate 2 in Appendix A of this report The Boring Logs, which illustrate the conditions encountered at the boring locations, as well as the results of some of the laboratory testing, are included in Appendix B 4.2 Geotechnical Conditions The soils encountered at and immediately below the existing ground surface at all sixteen boring locations consist of engineered fill soils These fill soils extend to depths of 8 to at least 30+ feet below currently existing site grades The fill soils generally consist of medium dense to dense fine sands and fine to medium sands with trace to some silt, trace to little clay and occasional fine gravel content The fine gravel, where encountered, generally consists of sandstone fragments The fill soils are somewhat variable in composition, and some zones of clayey fine sand and fine sandy clay were encountered at the boring locations The fill soils also contained occasional silt and clay clasts Borings B-1, B-2, B-7, B-11, B-14 and B-16 were terminated within the engineered fill materials at depths ranging from 5 to 30 feet below grade Most of the borings encountered native alluvial soils beneath the engineered fill soils These alluvial materials generally consist of medium dense silty fine to medium sands Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page8 with occasional trace clay content Borings B-6, B-8, B-9, and B-13 were terminated within these alluvial soils at depths of 15 to 40± feet The remaining borings were extended into the formational bedrock that underlies the western portion of this site This bedrock consists of the Torrey Sandstone The sandstone was encountered at Borings B-3, B-4, B-5, B-10, B-12, and B-15 At these boring locations, the sandstone extends to at least the maximum depth explored of 50± feet The Torrey Sandstone generally consists of dense to very dense light brown to white fine grained sandstone with trace silt. Occasional zones of siltstone and sandy siltstone were encountered within the Torrey Sandstone materials Most of the borings did not encounter any free water during drilling, nor was any water observed within the open boreholes immediately after the completion of drilling However, water was measured at a depth of 29 5± feet within Boring B-12, 24 hours after completion of drilling However, this water may represent seepage, since the moisture contents of the Torrey Sandstone between depths of 20 and 50± feet are not indicative of saturated conditions No free water was encountered during or after drilling at any of the other fifteen boring locations. 4.3 Geologic Conditions The general geologic conditions of the subject site were determined by review of available geologic literature. The primary reference applicable to the subject site is the Geologic Maps of the Northwestern Part of San Diego County, California, published by the California Division of Mines and Geology, Department of Conservation, authored by Siang S Tan and Michael P. Kennedy, dated 1996 The map indicates that the subject site is generally underlain by alluvial deposits consisting of unconsolidated silt, clay, sand and gravel These materials are primarily located within the Encmitas Creek drainage course Prior to disturbance as a result of recent grading, Leighton indicated that these soils consisted of medium to dark brown, moist to wet, loose to medium dense, clayey to silty fine sands and fine sandy clays The upper 3 to 5 feet of this unit was typically characterized by abundant organic debris The Torrey Sandstone underlies the western portion of the subject site In some areas, the Torrey Sandstone was encountered beneath the alluvial soils The Torrey Sandstone is Tertiary aged, light brown to white, fine grained silty sandstone Occasional mterbeds of sandy siltstone and clayey sandstone are also present within this unit. Bedding attitudes within the Torrey Sandstone, as mapped by Tan and Kennedy are relatively flat lying, ranging from 5 to 10 degrees, generally dipping to the west Plate 3, enclosed in Appendix A of this report, presents a portion of the referenced geologic map Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 9 5.0 LABORATORY TESTING The soil samples recovered from the subsurface exploration were returned to our laboratory for further testing to determine selected physical and engineering properties of the soils The tests are briefly discussed below It should be noted that the test results are specific to the actual samples tested, and variations could be expected at other locations and depths. Classification All recovered soil samples were classified using the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS), in accordance with ASTM D-2488 Field identifications were then supplemented with additional visual classifications and/or by laboratory testing The USCS classifications are shown on the Boring Logs and are periodically referenced throughout this report In-situ Density and Moisture Content The density has been determined for selected relatively undisturbed ring samples These densities were determined in general accordance with the method presented in ASTM D-2937. The results are recorded as dry unit weight in pounds per cubic foot The moisture contents are determined in accordance with ASTM D-2216, and are expressed as a percentage of the dry weight These test results are presented on the Boring Logs. Consolidation Selected soil samples have been tested to determine their consolidation potential, in accordance with ASTM D-2435 The testing apparatus is designed to accept either natural or remolded samples in a one-inch high ring, approximately 2416 inches in diameter Each sample is then loaded incrementally in a geometric progression and the resulting deflection is recorded at selected time intervals Porous stones are in contact with the top and bottom of the sample to permit the addition or release of pore water The samples are typically inundated with water at an intermediate load to determine their potential for collapse or heave The results of the consolidation testing are plotted on Plates C-1 through C-12 in Appendix C of this report Soluble Sulfates Representative samples of the near-surface soils were submitted to a subcontracted analytical laboratory for determination of soluble sulfate content Soluble sulfates are naturally present in soils, and if the concentration is high enough, can result in degradation of concrete which comes into contact with these soils The results of the Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 10 soluble sulfate testing are presented below, and are discussed further m a subsequent section of this report Sample Identification Soluble Sulfates (%) UBC Classification B-3 @ 0 to 5 feet 0 007 Negligible B-13 @ 0 to 5 feet 0 046 Negligible Expansion Index The expansion potential of the on-site soils was determined in general accordance with Uniform Building Code (UBC) Standard 18-2. The testing apparatus is designed to accept a 4-inch diameter, 1-in high, remolded sample. The sample is initially remolded to 50 ± 1 percent saturation and then loaded with a surcharge equivalent to 144 pounds per square foot The sample is then inundated with water, and allowed to swell against the surcharge The resultant swell or consolidation is recorded after a 24-hour period. The results of the El testing are as follows. Sample Identification Expansion Index Expansive Potential B-3 @ 0 to 5 feet 23 Low B-7 @ 0 to 5 feet 0 Very Low B-15 @ 0 to 5 feet 15 Very Low Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content Representative bulk samples have been tested for their maximum dry density and optimum moisture content The results have been obtained using the Modified Proctor procedure, per ASTM D-1557. These tests are generally used to compare the m-situ densities of undisturbed field samples, and for later compaction testing Additional testing of other soil types or soil mixes may be necessary at a later date. The results of this testing are plotted on Plates C-13 and C-14 in Appendix C of this report Direct Shear A direct shear test was performed on two selected soil samples to determine their shear strength parameters The test was performed in accordance with ASTM D-3080 The testing apparatus is designed to accept either natural or remolded samples in a one- inch high ring, approximately 2 416 inches in diameter. Three samples of the same soil are prepared by remolding them to 90± percent compaction and near optimum moisture Each of the three samples are then loaded with different normal loads and the resulting shear strength is determined for that particular normal load The shearing of the samples is performed at a rate slow enough to permit the dissipation of excess pore water pressure Porous stones are in contact with the top and bottom of the sample to permit the addition or release of pore water The results of the direct shear tests are presented on Plate C-15 and C-16 Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 11 Gram Size Analysis Limited gram size analyses have been performed on several selected samples, in accordance with ASTM D-1140 These samples were washed over a #200 sieve to determine the percentage of fine-grained material m each sample, which is defined as the material which passes the #200 sieve The weight of the portion of the sample retained on each screen is recorded and the percentage finer or coarser of the total weight is calculated The results of these tests are presented on the test boring logs. Southern California Ceotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 12 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the results of our review, field exploration, laboratory testing and geotechnical analysis, the proposed development is considered feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. The recommendations contained in this report should be taken into the design, construction, and grading considerations The recommendations are contingent upon all grading and foundation construction activities being monitored by the geotechnical engineer of record The Grading Guide Specifications, included as Appendix D, should be considered part of this report, and should be incorporated into the project specifications The contractor and/or owner of the development should bring to the attention of the geotechnical engineer any conditions that differ from those stated in this report, or which may be detrimental for the development 6.1 Seismic Design Considerations The subject site is located in an area which is subject to strong ground motions due to earthquakes Numerous faults capable of producing significant ground motions are located near the subject site Due to economic considerations, it is not generally considered reasonable to design a structure that is not susceptible to earthquake damage Therefore, significant damage to structures may be unavoidable during large earthquakes The proposed structure should, however, be designed to resist structural collapse and thereby provide reasonable protection from serious injury, catastrophic property damage and loss of life. Faulting and Seismicitv Research of available maps indicates that the subject site is not located within an Alquist-Pnolo Earthquake Fault Zone Therefore, the possibility of significant fault rupture on the site is considered to be low Seismic Design Parameters The proposed development must be designed in accordance with the requirements of the latest edition of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) The UBC provides procedures for earthquake resistant structural design that include considerations for on-site soil conditions, seismic zoning, occupancy, and the configuration of the structure including the structural system and height. The seismic design parameters presented below are based on the seismic zone, soil profile, and the proximity of known faults with respect to the subject site The 1997 UBC Design Parameters have been generated using UBCSEIS, a computer program published by Thomas F Blake (January 1998) The table below is a compilation of the data provided by UBCSEIS, and represents the largest design values Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 13 presented by each type of fault A copy of the output generated from this program is included in Appendix E of this report A copy of the Design Response Spectrum, as generated by UBCSEIS is also included in Appendix E Based on this output, Ihe following parameters may be utilized for the subject site • Nearest Type A Fault Elsmore-Juhan (41 ± km) • Nearest Type B Fault Rose Canyon (8± km) • Soil Profile Type. SD • Seismic Zone Factor (Z) 0 40 • Seismic Coefficient (Ca) 0 44 • Seismic Coefficient (Cv) 0 69 • Near-Source Factor (Na) 1 0 • Near-Source Factor (Nv) 1 1 The design procedures presented by the Uniform Building Code (UBC) are intended to protect life safety Structures designed using these minimum design procedures may experience significant cosmetic damage and serious economic loss. The use of a significantly higher lateral acceleration (Ca factor) such as 0.7 to 0 8 would be necessary to further reduce the risk of economic loss However, since these values are much higher than those specified by the UBC, owners and structural engineers often regard them as impractical for use in structural design and with respect to the economics of the project Ultimately, the structural engineer and the project owner must determine what level of risk is acceptable and assign appropriate seismic values to be used in the design of the proposed structure Ground Motion Parameters As part of the liquefaction analysis performed for this study, we have generated a site specific peak ground acceleration, as required by CDMG Special Publication 117 This probabilistic analysis was performed using FRISKSP v4.00, a computer program published by Thomas F Blake (2000) FRISKSP estimates probabilistic seismic hazards using three-dimensional faults as earthquake sources The program uses a seismotectonic source model, published by the California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), to estimate seismic hazards at the subject site The program originated from the original FRISK program (McGuire, 1978) published by the United States Geological Survey. FRISKSP generates site specific ground motion data based on generalized soil conditions (soil or bedrock), site location relative to nearby faults, accepted attenuation relationships, and other assumptions made by the geotechnical engineer The attenuation relationships used by FRISKSP include a one standard deviation measure of uncertainty Peak accelerations have been determined for both magnitude weighted and unweighted conditions A magnitude weighting relationship accounts for the fact that earthquakes of lower magnitudes are considered to result in fewer cycles of strong ground motion than those of higher magnitudes The magnitude weighting relationship used in this analysis is described by Idnss (1998) Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 14 The peak ground acceleration at the site was determined using an appropriate attenuation relationship (Campbell, K W , 1997) using parameters for a "deep soil" site, which is considered appropriate for the subject site Appendix E of this report contains the peak acceleration results, in graphical form The graphical output consists of four plots a probability of exceedence plot for 25, 50, 75 and 100 year return periods, and an average return period vs. peak acceleration plot, for both magnitude weighted (M = 7.5) and unweighted analyses The UBC requires that the selected return period should have at least a 10 percent chance of exceedence in 50 years, which is equal to a 475-year return period Based on the plot included in Appendix E, this would be 0 27g for the subject site, weighted to a magnitude 7 5 earthquake Appendix E also contains the tabulated results of the FRISKSP analysis Liquefaction Liquefaction is the loss of the 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 groundwater table elevation, soil type and gram size characteristics, relative density of the soil, initial confining pressure, and intensity and duration of ground shaking The depth within which the occurrence of liquefaction may impact surface improvements is generally identified as the upper 40 feet below the existing ground surface Liquefaction potential is greater in saturated, loose, poorly graded fine sands with a mean (dso) gram size in the range of 0 075 to 0 2 mm (Seed and Idnss, 1971) Clayey (cohesive) soils or soils which possess clay particles (d<0 005mm) in excess of 20 percent (Seed and Idnss, 1982) are generally not considered to be susceptible to liquefaction, nor are those soils which are above the historic static groundwater table The liquefaction analysis was conducted in accordance with the requirements of Special Publication 117 (CDMG, 1997), and currently accepted practice (SCEC, 1997). The liquefaction potential of the subject site was evaluated using the empirical method originally developed by Seed, et al (Seed and Idnss 1971) This method predicts the earthquake-induced liquefaction potential of the site based on a given design earthquake magnitude and peak ground acceleration at the subject site This procedure essentially compares the cyclic resistance ratio (CFR) [the cyclic stress ratio required to induce liquefaction for a cohesionless soil stratum at a given depth] with the earthquake-induced cyclic stress ration (CSR) at that depth from a specified design earthquake (defined by a peak ground surface acceleration and an associated earthquake moment magnitude) The current version of a generally accepted baseline chart (Youd and Idnss, 1997) is used to determine CRR as a function of the corrected SPT N-value (N^eo The factor of safety against liquefaction is defined as CRR/CSR The current version of a generally accepted baseline chart (Youd and Idnss, 1997) is used to determine CRR as a function of the corrected SPT N-value (Ni)6o Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 15 Guidelines to determine the .appropriate factor of safety against liquefaction have been presented as Table 7 1 of the SCEC publication, "Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction in California " This table is reproduced below FACTORS OF SAFETY FOR LIQUEFACTION HAZARD ASSESSMENT Consequence of (Ni)gg (clean sand) Factor of Safety Liquefaction Settlement <=15 11 >=30 1 0 Surface Manifestations <=15 12 >=30 1.0 Lateral Spread <=15 13 >=30 1 0 The liquefaction analysis procedure is tabulated on the spreadsheet form included in Appendix F of this report The liquefaction analysis was performed for Boring B-1, which was drilled to a depth of 50+ feet The liquefaction potential of the site was analyzed utilizing a maximum peak site acceleration of 0 27g for a magnitude 7 5 seismic event The analysis was performed using ground water at 30 feet, which is expected to be representative the average groundwater elevation at the subject site Conclusions and Recommendations The liquefaction analysis, documented m Appendix F of this report, has not identified any potentially liquefiable zones of soil within the subsurface profile at the two analyzed boring locations All of the encountered soils are either above the groundwater table, consist of engineered fill soils, or possess factors-of-safety in excess of 1 2. Therefore, no design considerations related to liquefaction or liquefaction induced settlements are considered warranted 6.2 Geotechnical Design Considerations General The subsurface profile at the subject site generally consists of engineered fill soils extending to depths of 8 to 30± feet, underlain by medium dense alluvial sands and/or dense to very dense sandstone bedrock Previous grading, as monitored by Leighton and Associates, included overexcavation of the previously existing fill/bedrock transitions Therefore, each of the proposed building areas is underlain by at least 8 to 10± feet of recently placed compacted structural fill Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 16 The existing engineered fill soils are considered suitable for support of the foundations and floor slabs of the new structures The suitability of the engineered fill soils is based on data obtained performed from borings performed by Southern California Geotechnical and our review of the previous grading report prepared by Leighton and Associates However, the existing fill soils were placed 2 to 3 years ago Since the time of placement, the surficial fill soils have become softened and weathered Therefore, limited amounts of remedial grading will be necessary to remove and replace these near surface weathered fill soils Significant amounts of remedial grading are not expected to be necessary Grading and Foundation Plan Review As discussed previously, detailed grading or foundation plans are not available at this time Numerous assumptions were made in preparing the preliminary conclusions and recommendations presented below. Once grading and foundation plans have been developed, it is recommended that these documents be provided to our office for review with regard to the assumptions, conclusions and recommendations presented herein Near-Surface Settlements The near surface soils at this site generally consist of engineered fill materials, extending to depths of at least 8 to 10± feet With the exception of the near surface zone of weathered and softened fill materials, representative samples of these soils generally exhibit favorable consolidation characteristics when exposed to moisture infiltration and when exposed to loads in the range of those that will be exerted by the foundations of the new structures. Provided that the recommendations presented in this report are implemented in the design and construction of the proposed development, the post-construction settlements due to the near surface materials are expected to be within the structural tolerances of the proposed buildings Settlement of Existing Fill Soils As discussed above, the proposed development area is underlain by engineered fill soils, extending to depths of 8 to 30± feet These fill soils were monitored during placement and have been certified by Leighton and Associates Based on their composition, these fill soils will be susceptible to only minor amounts of secondary (long-term) consolidation Furthermore, the recently completed grading has removed any sharp transitions between relatively shallow fill soils in the deeper areas of fill, further reducing the potential for differential settlements due to secondary consolidation Based on these considerations, the long-term secondary settlement of the existing fill soils is not considered to be problematic for the proposed structures. Expansive Soils Expansion index testing performed by Southern California Geotechnical as part of this study, as well as testing completed by Leighton and Associates during the previous Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 17 grading, indicates that the on-site soils possess low to very low expansion potentials. Therefore, no design considerations related to expansive soils are considered warranted for this project Shrinkage/Subsidence The proposed development area is entirely underlain by existing structural fill soils Therefore, no significant shrinkage or subsidence is expected to occur during grading operations However, due to local variations in compaction, shrinkage and/or bulking of 0 to 3 percent could occur in some areas Sulfates The results of soluble sulfate testing, as discussed in Section 5 0 of this report, indicate negligible levels of sulfates within the selected soil samples, in accordance with Uniform Building Code (UBC) and Portland Cement Association (PCA) guidelines Therefore, specialized concrete mix designs are not expected to be necessary, with regard to sulfate protection purposes However, the soils present at finished pad grade may vary from those encountered at the boring locations It is therefore recommended that additional soluble sulfate testing be conducted at the completion of rough grading to verify the soluble sulfate concentrations of the soils that are present at pad grade within the building areas Slope Stability The site is bordered on portions of the south and west property lines by an ascending fill slope Leighton indicates that the as-graded slopes are both grossly and surficially stable from a geotechnical standpoint These slopes currently possess inclinations of 2h 1v Descending fill slopes are located along the east property line and portions of the south property line Leighton has also determined these slopes to be grossly and surficially stable New fill slopes constructed with inclinations of 2h 1v or less are expected to possess adequate stability from both a gross and surficial standpoint The Leighton report identifies the location of a stability fill, constructed along the southern half of the west property line and the western end of the south property line The preliminary site plan indicates that some or all of the stability will be removed as part of the proposed grading. Leighton indicates that this fill was constructed as a stability fill, not as a buttress fill No evidence of adverse geologic conditions are mapped on the as-graded geotechnical map included within the Leighton compaction report The stability fill is therefore serving to provide adequate surficial stability for this slope, and/or stability of any alluvium and/or slope wash materials in this area The proposed segmental retaining wall that is proposed to replace the stability fill will provide a similar stabilizing effect and therefore removal of the stability fill is not considered problematic The geologic structure identified by Leighton, as documented Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 18 in the rough grade compaction report indicates that bedding on the site is flat lying to slightly dipping to the southwest With regard to the stability fill, this would represent favorable (into slope) bedding This bedding is consistent with the geology mapped by Tan and Kennedy as referenced in Section 4 3 of this report 6.3 Site Grading Recommendations The grading recommendations presented below are based on the subsurface conditions encountered at the boring locations and our understanding of the proposed development We recommend that all grading activities be completed in accordance with the Grading Guide Specifications included as Appendix D of this report, unless superseded by site-specific recommendations presented below. Site Stripping All surficial vegetation as well as any soils with excessive organic content should be stripped from the site prior to the start of grading operations. Based on conditions observed at the time of the subsurface exploration, removal of moderate grass, weed and shrub growth will be required. No significant topsoil was encountered at the boring locations The actual extent of site stripping should be determined in the field, during grading, by the geotechnical engineer As part of the initial grading operations, remedial grading should be performed within the existing retention/desiltmg basin, located in the northeastern area of the site No standing water was present within the basin at the time of the subsurface exploration, although evidence of previous standing water as well as some silt deposits were observed It is expected that overexcavation to a depth of 2 to 3 feet will be required in this area to reach of level of suitable subgrade soils This overexcavation should be done under the observation of the geotechnical engineer. Treatment of Existing Soils- Building Areas The proposed building areas are generally underlain by existing structural fill soils, extending to depths of 8 to 30± feet Based on the time that has elapsed between the original placement of these fill soils and the present, and the results of the consolidation/collapse testing, some softening and weathering of these materials has occurred It is therefore recommended that the existing fill soils be overexcavated to a depth of at least 2 feet below existing grade, to remove the existing weathered/softened fill soils The areas of overexcavation should extend at least 10 feet beyond the building perimeters If the proposed structures include any exterior columns, such as for a canopy or overhang, the area of overexcavation should also encompass these footings Following completion of the overexcavations, the subgrade soils within the building areas should be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer to verify their suitability to Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 19 serve as the structural fill subgrade, as well as to support the foundation loads of the new structure This evaluation should include proofrolling with a heavy rubber-tired vehicle to identify any soft, loose or otherwise unstable soils that must be removed Some localized areas of deeper excavation may be required if loose, porous, or low density soils are encountered at the bottom of the overexcavation The overexcavation subgrade soils should then be scarified to a depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content, and recompacted Treatment of Existing Soils Parking Areas Subgrade preparation in the remaining new parking areas should initially consist of completion of cuts where required The geotechnical engineer should then evaluate the subgrade to identify any areas of additional unsuitable soils Based on conditions observed at the site at the time of drilling, additional overexcavation is expected to be necessary at isolated locations within the new parking areas The subgrade soils should then be scarified to a depth of 12+ inches, moisture conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum, and recompacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density Fill Placement • Fill soils should be placed in thin (6± inches), near-horizontal lifts, moisture conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content, and compacted • On-site soils may be used for fill provided they are cleaned of any debris to the satisfaction of the geotechnical engineer • All grading and fill placement activities should be completed in accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code and the grading code of the City of Carlsbad. • All fill soils should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density Fill soils should be well mixed. • Compaction tests should be performed periodically by the geotechnical engineer as random verification of compaction and moisture content These tests are intended to aid the contractor. Since the tests are taken at discrete locations and depths, they may not be indicative of the entire fill and therefore should not relieve the contractor of his responsibility to meet the job specifications Imported Structural Fill All imported structural fill should consist of low expansive (El <30), well graded soils possessing at least 10 percent fines (that portion of the sample passing the No 200 sieve) Additional specifications for structural fill are presented in the Grading Guide Specifications, included as Appendix D. Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 20 Utility Trench Backfill In general, all utility trench backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. As an alternative, a clean sand (minimum Sand Equivalent of 30) may be placed within trenches and compacted in place Getting or flooding is not recommended) Compacted trench backfill should conform to the requirements of the local grading code, and more restrictive requirements may be indicated by the City of Carlsbad All utility trench backfills should be witnessed by the geotechnical engineer The trench backfill soils should be compaction tested where possible, probed and visually evaluated elsewhere Utility trenches which parallel a footing, and extending below a 1h 1v plane projected from the outside edge of the footing should be backfilled with structural fill soils, compacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 standard Pea gravel backfill should not be used for these trenches 6.4 Construction Considerations Moisture Sensitive Subqrade Soils Some of the near surface soils possess appreciable silt content and may become unstable if exposed to significant moisture infiltration or disturbance by construction traffic In addition, based on their granular content, some of the on-site soils will also be susceptible to erosion. The site should, therefore, be graded to prevent ponding of surface water and to prevent water from running into excavations Excavation Considerations It is expected that some excavations for this project will encounter predominantly granular soils Such soils will be susceptible to caving Flattened excavation slopes may be sufficient to mitigate caving of shallow excavations, although deeper excavations may require some form of external stabilization such as shoring or bracing All excavation activities on this site should be conducted in accordance with Cal-OSHA regulations Special excavation considerations may be warranted during construction of the segmental retaining walls along the south and east property lines These considerations will be addressed in the subsequent segmental retaining wall design report Groundwater Groundwater was encountered within only one of the borings, at a depth of 30+ feet Based on the elevation of Boring B-12, this would indicate a static groundwater table at Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 21 El 71 ± Based on these conditions, groundwater is not expected to impact the proposed grading or foundation construction activities. 6.5 Foundation Design and Construction Based on the preceding grading recommendations, it is assumed that the building pads will be underlain by existing structural fill soils, placed during mass grading of the subject site, or newly placed structural fill soils used to replace weathered materials or used to raise site grades Based on this subsurface profile, the proposed structures may be supported on conventional shallow foundation systems Foundation Design Parameters New square and rectangular footings may be designed as follows • Maximum, net allowable soil bearing pressure 2,500 Ibs/ft2 • Minimum wall/column footing width 14 inches/24 inches • Minimum longitudinal steel reinforcement within strip footings' Four (4) No. 5 rebars (2 top and 2 bottom) • It is recommended that a grade beam footing be constructed across all exterior doorways This footing should be founded at a depth similar to the adjacent building foundations. Any flatwork adjacent to the exterior doors should be doweled into this grade in a manner determined by the structural engineer • Minimum foundation embedment. 12 inches into suitable structural fill soils, and at least 18 inches below adjacent exterior grade Interior column footings may be placed immediately beneath the floor slab The allowable bearing pressure presented above may be increased by 1/3 when considering short duration wind or seismic loads The minimum steel reinforcement recommended above is based on geotechnical considerations, additional reinforcement may be necessary for structural considerations The actual design of the foundations should be determined by the structural engineer Foundation Construction The foundation subgrade soils should be evaluated at the time of overexcavation, as discussed in Section 6 3 of this report It is further recommended that the foundation subgrade soils be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer immediately prior to steel or concrete placement Within the new building areas, soils suitable for direct foundation support should consist of existing or newly placed structural fill, compacted to at least Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 22 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. Any unsuitable materials should be removed to a depth of suitable bearing compacted structural fill or medium dense to dense relative sands, with the resulting excavations backfilled with compacted fill soils. As an alternative, lean concrete slurry (500 to 1,500 psi) may be used to backfill such isolated overexcavations The foundation subgrade soils should also be properly moisture conditioned to within 2 percent of the Modified Proctor optimum, to a depth of at least 18 inches below bearing grade Since it is typically not feasible to increase the moisture content of the floor slab and foundation subgrade soils once rough grading has been completed, care should be taken to maintain the moisture content of the building pad subgrade soils throughout the construction process Estimated Foundation Settlements Post-construction total and differential movements (settlement and/or heave) of shallow foundations designed and constructed in accordance with the previously presented recommendations are estimated to be less than 1 0 and 0 5 inches, respectively Differential movements are expected to occur over a 30-foot span, thereby resulting m an angular distortion of less than 0 002 inches per inch, which is considered within tolerable limits for the proposed structures, provided that the structural design adequately considers this distortion Lateral Load Resistance 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 The following friction and passive pressure may be used to resist lateral forces • Passive Earth Pressure 350 Ibs/ft3 • Friction Coefficient 0 35 The recommended passive earth pressure and friction include an appropriate factor of safety A one-third increase in these values may be used for short duration wind or seismic loads When combining friction and passive resistance, the passive pressure component should be reduced by one-third These values assume that footings will be poured directly against suitable structural compacted fill The maximum allowable passive pressure is 3,000 Ibs/ft2 6.6 Floor Slab Design and Construction Subgrades which will support new floor slabs should be prepared in accordance with the recommendations contained in the Site Grading Recommendations section of this report Based on the anticipated grading which will occur at this site, the floors of the new structures may be constructed as conventional slabs-on-grade supported on Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 23 existing or newly placed structural fill Based on geotechnical considerations, the floor slabs may be designed as follows • Minimum slab thickness 5 inches • Minimum slab reinforcement No. 3 bars at 18 inches on-center, in both directions The actual floor slab reinforcement should be determined by the structural engineer, based on the imposed loading • Slab underlayment 2 inches of clean sand overlain by a 10-mil vapor barrier, overlain by 2 inches of clean sand Where moisture sensitive floor coverings are not anticipated, the vapor barrier and upper 2-mch layer of sand may be eliminated • Moisture condition the floor slab subgrade soils to within 2 percent of the Modified Proctor optimum moisture content, to a depth of 18 inches • Proper concrete curing techniques should be utilized to reduce the potential for slab curling or the formation of excessive shrinkage cracks. The actual design of the floor slabs should be completed by the structural engineer to verify adequate thickness and reinforcement 6.7 Retaining Wall Design and Construction Although not indicated on the conceptual grading and drainage plan provided to our office, some small retaining walls may be required to facilitate site grades The parameters recommended for use in the design of these walls are presented below These values should not be used for design of segmental retaining walls A site specific segmental retaining wall design will be presented in a subsequent geotechnical report Retaining Wall Design Parameters Based on the soil conditions encountered at the boring locations, the following parameters may be used in the design of new retaining walls for this site We have provided parameters for two different types of wall backfill on-site soils comprised of sands and silty sands as well as imported select granular material These parameters are based on site specific direct shear testing Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 24 RETAINING WALL DESIGN PARAMETERS Design Parameter Internal Friction Angle (<(>) Unit Weight Equivalent Fluid Pressure Active Condition (level backfill) Active Condition (2h-1v backfill) At-Rest Condition (level backfill) Soil Type Imported Aggregate Base 38° 130lbs/ft3 30 Ibs/ft3 44 Ibs/ft3 50 Ibs/ft3 On-Site Sands and Silty Sands 32° 125 Ibs/ft3 38 Ibs/ft3 58 Ibs/ft3 58 Ibs/ft3 Regardless of the backfill type, the walls should be designed using a soil-footing coefficient of friction of 0 35 and an equivalent passive pressure of 350 Ibs/ft3. The structural engineer should incorporate appropriate factors of safety in the design to the retaining walls The active earth pressure may be used for the design of retaining walls that do not directly support structures or support soils that in turn support structures and which will be allowed to deflect The at-rest earth pressure should be used for walls that will not be allowed to deflect such as those which will support foundation bearing soils, or which will support foundation loads directly. Where the soils on the toe side of the retaining wall are not covered by a "hard" surface such as a structure or pavement, the upper 1 foot of soil should be neglected when calculating passive resistance due to the potential for the material to become disturbed or degraded during the life of the structure. Retaining Wall Foundation Design The retaining walls should be supported within existing or newly placed compacted structural fill Foundations to support new retaining walls should be designed in accordance with the general Foundation Design Parameters presented in a previous section of this report Backfill Material It is recommended that a minimum 1 foot thick layer of free-draining granular mateiial (less than 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve) should be placed against the face of the retaining walls This material should be approved by the geotechnical engineer If the layer of free-draining material is not covered by an impermeable surface, such as a Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 25 structure or pavement, a 12-inch thick layer of a low permeability soil should be placed over the backfill to reduce surface water migration to the underlying soils All retaining wall backfill should be placed and compacted under engineering controlled conditions in the necessary layer thicknesses to ensure an m-place density between 90 and 93 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by the Modified Proctor test (ASTM D1557-91) Care should be taken to avoid over-compaction of the soils behind the retaining walls, and the use of heavy compaction equipment should be avoided Subsurface Drainage As previously indicated, the retaining wall design parameters are based upon drained backfill conditions Consequently, some form of permanent drainage system will be necessary in conjunction with the appropriate backfill material. Subsurface drainage may consist of either • A weep hole drainage system typically consisting of a series of 4-inch diameter holes in the wall situated slightly above the ground surface elevation on the exposed side of the wall and at an approximate 8-foot on-center spacing • A 4-inch diameter perforated pipe surrounded by 2 cubic feet of gravel per linear foot of dram placed behind the wall, above the retaining wall footing The gravel layer should be wrapped in a suitable geotextile fabric to reduce the potential for migration of fines The footing dram should be extended to daylight or tied into a storm drainage system 6.8 Exterior Flatwork Design and Construction Subgrades which will support new exterior slabs-on-grade for patios, sidewalks and entries should be prepared in accordance with the recommendations contained in the Grading Recommendations section of this report, as recommended for the parking areas Based on the anticipated grading which will occur at this site, exterior flatwork will be supported by a minimum 1 foot thick layer of compacted structural fill Based on geotechnical considerations, exterior slabs on grade may be designed as follows • Minimum slab thickness 4 inches, 5 inches where subjected to infrequent vehicular traffic • Minimum slab reinforcement Driveway slabs or other flatwork which may be subjected to vehicular traffic should include conventional welded wire mesh (6x6- W1 4xW1 4 WWF) or No 3 bars at 18 inches on center, in both directions Reinforcement in other exterior flatwork is not required, with respect to geotechnical conditions Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 26 • The flatwork at building entry areas should be structurally connected to the grade beam that is recommended to span across the door opening This recommendation is designed to reduce the potential for differential movement at this joint • Moisture condition the flatwork subgrade soils to a moisture content of 2 to 4 percent above optimum, to a depth of at least 12 inches • Proper concrete curing techniques should be utilized to reduce the potential for slab curling or the formation of excessive shrinkage cracks • Control joints should be provided at a maximum spacing of 8 feet on center in two directions for slabs and at 6 feet on center for sidewalks Control joints are intended to direct cracking Minor cracking of exterior concrete slabs on grade should be expected Expansion or felt joints should be used at the interface of exterior slabs on grade and any fixed structures to permit relative movement 6.9 Pavement Design Parameters Site preparation in the pavement area should be completed as previously recommended in the Site Grading Recommendations section of this report The subsequent pavement recommendations assume proper drainage and construction monitoring, and are based on either PCA or CALTRANS design parameters for a twenty (20) year design period. However, these designs also assume a routine pavement maintenance program to obtain the anticipated 20-year pavement service life Pavement Subarades It is anticipated that the new pavements will be supported on existing or newly placed structural fill soils The existing structural fill soils are expected to consist of sands and silty sands These materials are expected to exhibit good pavement support characteristics, with estimated R-values of 30 to 50 Since R-value testing was beyond the scope of services for this project, these materials have been assigned an R-value of 30 At the completion of grading, it is recommended that R-value testing be performed in a representative number of the proposed pavement areas to determine the actual R- value of the as-graded subgrade The R-value test results may indicate higher R-values within the as-graded pavement subgrades, resulting in a thinner pavement section Any fill material imported to the site should have support characteristics equal to or greater than that of the on-site soils and be placed and compacted under engineering controlled conditions. Southern California Geotechnfcal The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 27 Asphaltic Concrete The pavement designs are based on the traffic indices (Tl's) indicated. The client and/or civil engineer should verify that these Tl's are representative of the anticipated traffic volumes. If the client and/or civil engineer determine that the expected traffic volume will exceed those recommended herein, we should be contacted for supplementary recommendations The design traffic indices equate to the following approximate daily traffic volumes over a 20-year design life, assuming 5 operational traffic days per week Traffic Index (Tl) 5.0 60 7.0 80 90 Number of Heavy Trucks Per Day 1 4 14 42 112 For the purposes of the traffic volumes above, a truck is defined as a 5-axle tractor- trailer unit, with one 8-kip axle and two 32-kip tandem axles All of the traffic indices allow for 1000 automobiles per day Presented below are the recommended thicknesses for new flexible pavement structures consisting of asphaltic concrete over a granular base It should be noted that the Tl = 6 0 section only allows for 4 trucks per day. Therefore, all significant heavy truck traffic must be excluded from areas where this thinner pavement section is used, otherwise premature pavement distress may occur ASPHALT PAVEMENTS UNDERLAIN BY ENGINEERED FILL (R = 35) Materials Asphalt Concrete Aggregate Base Aggregate Subbase Compacted Subgrade Thickness (inches) Auto Parking (Tl = 40) 3 3 • 12 Auto Drive Lanes (Tl = 50) 3 6 — 12 Light Truck Traffic (Tl = 60) 35 7 — 12 Heavy Truck Traffic (Tl = 70) 4 10 — 12 The aggregate base course should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the ASTM D- 1557 maximum dry density The asphaltic concrete should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the Marshall maximum density, as determined by ASTM D-2726 Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 28 Portland Cement Concrete The preparation of the subgrade soils within concrete pavement areas should be performed as previously described for proposed asphalt pavement areas The minimum recommended thicknesses for the Portland Cement Concrete pavement sections are as follows • Automobile Parking and Drive Areas 5 inches Portland Cement Concrete over • Light Truck Traffic Areas (Tl = 60) 6 0 inches Portland Cement Concrete • Heavy Truck Traffic Areas (Tl = 70) 7.0 inches Portland Cement Concrete The concrete should have a 28-day compressive strength of at least 3,000 psi. Reinforcing within all pavements should consist of at least heavy welded wire mesh (6x6-W2.9xW2.9 WWF) placed at mid-height in the slab. The maximum joint spacing within all of the PCC pavements is recommended to be equal to or less than 30 times the pavement thickness Southern California Geotechnicai The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 29 7.0 GENERAL COMMENTS This report has been prepared as an instrument of service for use by 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 This report may be provided to the contractor(s) and other design consultants to disclose information relative to the project However, this report is not intended to be utilized as a specification in and of itself, without appropriate interpretation by the project architect, civil engineer, and/or structural engineer The reproduction and distribution of this report must be authorized by the client and Southern California Geotechnical, Inc Furthermore, any reliance on this report by an unauthorized third party is at such party's sole risk, and we accept no responsibility for damage or loss which may occur The analysis of this site was based on a subsurface profile interpolated from limited discrete soil samples. While the materials encountered in the project area are considered to be representative of the total area, some variations should be expected between boring locations and sample depths If the conditions encountered during construction vary significantly from those detailed herein, we should be contacted immediately to determine if the conditions alter the recommendations contained herein. This report has been based on assumed or provided characteristics of the proposed development It is recommended that the owner, client, architect, structural engineer, and civil engineer carefully review these assumptions to ensure that they are consistent with the characteristics of the proposed development If discrepancies exist, they should be brought to our attention to verify that they do not affect the conclusions and recommendations contained herein We also recommend that the project plans and specifications be submitted to our office for review to verify that our recommendations have been correctly interpreted The analysis, conclusions, and recommendations contained within this report have been promulgated in accordance with generally accepted professional geotechnical engineering practice No other warranty is implied or expressed Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 30 8.0 REFERENCES Blake, Thomas F., FRISKSP. A Computer Program for the Probabilistic Estimation of Peak Acceleration and Uniform Hazard Spectra Using 3-D Faults as Earthquake Sources. Version 4 00, 2000 California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), "Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California," State of California, Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 117,1997 Campbell, K W , "Impencal Near-Source Attenuation Relationships for Horizontal and Vertical Components of Peak Ground Acceleration, Peak Ground Velocity, and Pseudo- Absolute Acceleration Response Spectra", Seismoloqical Research Letters. Seismological Society America, Volume 68, Number 1, January/February 1997, pp 154-179 National Research Council (NRC), "Liquefaction of Soils During Earthquakes," Committee on Earthquake Engineering. National Research Council, Washington D. C , Report No CETS-EE-001, 1985 Seed, H B , and Idnss, I M , "Simplified Procedure for Evaluating Soil Liquefaction Potential using field Performance Data," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division. American Society of Civil Engineers, September 1971, pp 1249-1273 Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC), University of Southern California, "Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction m California," Committee formed 1997. Tokimatsu K , and Seed, H B , "Evaluation of Settlements in Sands Due to Earthquake Shaking," Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division. American society of Civil Engineers, Volume 113, No 8, August 1987, pp 861-878 Tokimatsu, K and Yoshimi, Y , "Empirical Correlations of Soil Liquefaction Based on SPT N-value and Fines Content," Seismological Research Letters. Eastern Section Seismological Society Of America, Volume 63, Number 1, p 73 Youd, T L and Idriss, I M (Editors), "Proceedings of the NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils," Salt Lake City, UT, January 5-6 1996, NCEER Technical Report NCEER-97-0022, Buffalo, NY Southern California Geotechnical The Pavilion at La Costa - Carlsbad, CA Project No 01G216-1 Page 31 APPENDIX A SITE LOCATION MAP BORING LOCATION PLAN SITE GEOLOGIC MAP 3ATWUITOS LAGOON 5'.(Sir "'Si? SWfJfcjl'i KWAnrii '"i £ft&fe;£j?':.: MfMg^ BOttE B«f£ZE,UI SITE LOCATION MAP THE PAVILION AT LA COSTA CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA SOURCE SAN DIEGO COUNTY THOMAS GUIDE, 1998 Southern California Geotechnical 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 Anaheim California 92807 Phone (714) 777-0333 Fax (714) 777-0398 SOURCE CDMGOFR 96-02 KENNEDY AND TAN 1996 SITE GEOLOGIC MAP THE PAVILION AT LA COSTA CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA V = 200CT DRAWN RB CHKD GKM SCG PROJECT 01G216-1 PLATE 3 Southern California Geotechnical 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 Anaheim, California 92807 Phone (714) 777-0333 Fax (714) 777-0398 APPENDIX B BORING LOGS BORING LOG LEGEND SAMPLE TYPE GRAPHICAL SYMBOL AUGER CORE GRAB CS NR SPT SH VANE SAMPLE DESCRIPTION SAMPLE COLLECTED FROM AUGER CUTTINGS NO FIELD MEASUREMENTS OF SOIL STRENGTH (DISTURBED) ROCK CORE SAMPLE TYPICALLY TAKEN WITH A DIAMOND-TIPPED CORE BARREL TYPICALLY USED ONLY IN HIGHLY CONSOLIDATED BEDROCK. SOIL SAMPLE TAKEN WITH NO SPECIALIZED EQUIPMENT, SUCH AS FROM A STOCKPILE OR THE GROUND SURFACE (DISTURBED) CALIFORNIA SAMPLER 2-1/2 INCH I D SPLIT BARREL SAMPLER, LINED WITH 1-INCH HIGH BRASS RINGS DRIVEN WITH SPT HAMMER (RELATIVELY UNDISTURBED) NO RECOVERY THE SAMPLING ATTEMPT DID NOT RESULT IN RECOVERY OF ANY SIGNIFICANT SOIL OR ROCK MATERIAL STANDARD PENETRATION TEST SAMPLER IS A1 4 INCH INSIDE DIAMETER SPLIT BARREL, DRIVEN 18 INCHES WITH THE SPT HAMMER (DISTURBED) SHELBY TUBE TAKEN WITH A THIN WALL SAMPLE TUBE PUSHED INTO THE SQIL AND THEN EXTRACTED (UNDISTURBED) VANE SHEAR TEST SOIL STRENGTH OBTAINED USING A 4 BLADED SHEAR DEVICE TYPICALLY USED IN SOFT CLAYS-NO SAMPLE RECOVERED COLUMN DESCRIPTIONS DEPTH- SAMPLE BLOW COUNT: POCKEN PEN• GRAPHIC LOG DRY DENSITY. MOISTURE CONTENT. LIQUID LIMIT- PLASTIC LIMIT PASSING #200 SIEVE- UNCONFINED SHEAR Distance in feet below the ground surface Sample Type as depicted above Number of blows required to advance the sampler 12 inches using a 140 Ib hammer with a 30-inch drop 50/3" indicates penetration refusal (>50 blows) at 3 inches WH indicates that the weight of the hammer was sufficient to push the sampler 6 inches or more Approximate shear strength of a cohesive soil sample as measured by the pocket penetrometer Graphic soil symbol, as depicted on the following page Dry Density of an undisturbed or relatively undisturbed sample Moisture content of a soil sample, expressed as a percentage of the dry weight The moisture content above which a soil behaves as a liquid The moisture content above which a soil behaves as a plastic The percentage of material finer than the #200 standard sieve The shear strength of a cohesive soil sample, as measured in the unconfmed state SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART MAJOR DIVISIONS COARSE GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN 50% OF MATERIAL IS LARGER THAN NO 200 SIEVE SIZE FINE GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN 50% OF MATERIAL IS SMALLER THAN NO 200 SIEVE SIZE GRAVEL AND GRAVELLY SOILS MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTION RETAINED ON NO 4 SIEVE SAND AND SANDY SOILS MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTION PASSING ON NO 4 SIEVE CLEAN GRAVELS (LITTLE OR NO FINES) GRAVELS WITH FINES (APPRECIABLE AMOUNT OF FINES) CLEAN SANDS (LITTLE OR NO FINES) SANDS WITH FINES (APPRECIABLE AMOUNT OF FINES) ^tlf LIQUID LIMIT CLAYS LESS THAN 50 SJtJf LIQUID LIMIT C^?S GREATER THAN 50 HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS SYMBOLS GRAPH | LETTER '•K^idVM GW ,*. ..A. 1\>*3\ rv><J \° cv •C3 C 3 DvP __j O \° "Noill ill •Hl-ilr-ij-:i1 m±tt333:$±s: 0 '/ \* '/ 0 '/ \* '/ GP GM GC SW SP SM SC ML CL OL MH CH OH PT TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND - SILT MIXTURES CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND - CLAY MIXTURES WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES POORLY-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SAND, LITTLE OR NO FINES SILTY SANDS, SAND - SILT MIXTURES CLAYEY SANDS, SAND - CLAY MIXTURES INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR SILTY SOILS INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS NOTE DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-1 I JOB NO 01G216 DRILLING DATE 10/25/01 WATER DEPTH Dry PROJECT La Costa Pavilion DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH None LOCATION Carlsbad, California LOGGED BY Romeo Balbas READING TAKEN at Completion IFIELD RESULTS DEPTH (FEET)0 SAMPLEX X BLOW COUNT46 44 POCKET PEN(TSF)GRAPHIC LOGDESCRIPTION SURFACE ELEVATION 94 feet MSL FILL Light Brown to Brown fine to medium Sand, trace to some Silt, trace Clay, medium dense to dense - damp Bonng Terminated at 5' LABORATORY RESULTS DRY DENSITY(PCF)MOISTURECONTENT (%)8 11 Q§i_i_j PLASTICLIMITPASSING#200 SIEVE (%)UNCONFINEDSHEAR (TSF)COMMENTSm TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-1 Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-2 I JOB NO 01G216 DRILLING DATE 10/25/01 WATER DEPTH Dry I PROJECT La Costa Pavilion DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH None LOCATION Carlsbad, California LOGGED BY Romeo Balbas READING TAKEN at Completion IFIELD RESULTS DEPTH (FEET)r-SAMPLEXI *i BLOW COUNT49 41 POCKET PEN(TSF)GRAPHIC LOG•; DESCRIPTION SURFACE ELEVATION 96 feet MSL FILL Light Brown fine to medium Sand, some Silt, little Clay, loose to medium dense - dry FILL Light Brown to Gray Brown Silty fine to medium Sand, trace Clay, medium dense - moist Bonng Terminated at 5' LABORATORY RESULTS DRY DENSITY(PCF)MOISTURECONTENT (%)9 9 D3i-i-j PLASTICLIMITPASSING#200 SIEVE (%)UNCONFINEDSHEAR (TSF)COMMENTSm TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-2 Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-3 •^^ • i 2 •I so (D § O -Jm1- JOBNO 01G216 DRILLING DATE 10/25/01 WATER DEPTH Dry PROJECT La Costa Pavilion DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH 165' LOCATION Carlsbad, California LOGGED BY Romeo Balbas READING TAKEN at Completion FIELD RESULTS DEPTH (FEET)5 . in on li K < OT M BLOW COUNTS2/10 66 80 49 43 70/10' 50/3"POCKET PEN(TSF)GRAPHIC LOGDESCRIPTION SURFACE ELEVATION 97 feet MSL FILL Light Brawn fine Sand, little medium Sand, little to trace Silt, medium dense - dry to damp FILL Brown to Dark Brown Silty fine Sand, trace Clay, occasional Sandstone fragments, medium dense - moist FILL Brown to Light Brown fine Sand, trace to some Silt, little . Clay, medium dense to dense - moist - occasional Clayey fine Sand clasts at 7 to 8 feet TORREY SANDSTONE FORMATION Light Gray fine grained Sandstone, occasional iron oxide stains, dense to very dense - moist Boring Terminated at 20' LABORATORY RESULTS DRY DENSITY(PCF)93 118 99 110 106 97 MOISTURECONTENT (%)6 11 10 12 10 13 15 Q 5bO2_i _i PLASTICLIMITPASSING#200 SIEVE (%)UNCONFINEDSHEAR (TSF)COMMENTSTEST BORING LOG PLATE B-3 Southern California Geotechnicai BORING NO. B-4 I JOB NO 01G216 DRILLING DATE 10/25/01 WATER DEPTH Dry PROJECT La Costa Pavilion DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH 115' LOCATION Carlsbad, California LOGGED BY Romeo Balbas READING TAKEN at Completion [FIELD RESULTS DEPTH (FEET)5 - Q. co i N .. 15 a X BLOW COUNT67 47 57 70 57 61 POCKET PEN(TSF)45+ 45+GRAPHIC LOGDESCRIPTION SURFACE ELEVATION 100 feet MSL FILL Light Brown to Light Gray fine Sand, trace Silt, occasional iron oxide staining, dense - damp to moist - weathered Sandstone/Claystone clasts at 3 to 4 feet FILL. Light Gray Brown Silty fine Sand, trace Clay, occasional medium Sand, trace iron oxide staining, dense - moist - some Silty Clay clasts at 7 to 8 feet - TORREY SANDSTONE FORMATION Light Brown fine grained Sandstone, little Silt, occasional Clayey fine Sand clasts, medium dense to dense - damp to moist Bonng Terminated at 15' LABORATORY RESULTS DRY DENSITY(PCF)107 109 104 102 106 MOISTURECONTENT (%)9 12 18 22 14 12 Q 5b SI PLASTICLIMITPASSING#200 SIEVE (%)UNCONFINEDSHEAR (TSF)COMMENTS- TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-4 Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-5 « <5 • 2o to s 0 _i JOB NO 01G216 DRILLING DATE 10/25/01 WATER DEPTH Dry PROJECT La Costa Pavilion DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH 36' LOCATION Carlsbad, California LOGGED BY Romeo Balbas READING TAKEN at Completion FIELD RESULTS DEPTH (FEET)5 - 15 - 20- 25 - 30- LL a <D .. •< >< B ur^ MV ~ uLJ B BLOW COUNT58 58 62 45 42 34 38 56 48 POCKET PEN(TSF)275 GRAPHIC LOG.V. DESCRIPTION SURFACE ELEVATION 99 feet MSL •'. FILL Light Brown to Brown fine to medium Sand, loose to If medium dense - dry to damp FILL. Dark Brown Silty fine Sand, medium dense - damp to moist - Dark Brown fine Sandy Clay to Silty Clay, very stiff - moist at 3 to 4 feet - Brown to Light Brown Silty fine Sand, occasional Clay clasts, medium dense - moist at 5 to 6 feet - Dark Brown fine to medium Sand, trace to some Silt, trace Clay, dense - moist at 7 to 8 feet ALLUVIUM Brown to Light Brown Silty fine Sand, trace medium Sand, medium dense - moist to very moist - trace Clay at 1 9 to 20 feet - Clayey fine Sand at 24 to 25 feet - Clayey fine Sand at 29 to 30 feet - moist at 29 to 30 feet • - Clayey fine Sand - moist to very moist at 34 to 35 feet LABORATORY RESULTS DRY DENSITY(PCF)105 114 106 107 102 104 96 96 111 108 MOISTURECONTENT (%)10 13 17 14 8 13 9 17 15 17 Q 11 PLASTICLIMITPASSING#200 SIEVE (%)22 32 42 29 UNCONFINEDSHEAR (TSF)COMMENTS- TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-5a Southern California Geotechnical mm&^^mmm ^^tjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjK^.vA BORING NO. B-5 JOB NO 01G216 DRILLING DATE 10/25/01 WATER DEPTH Dry PROJECT La Costa Pavilion DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH 36' LOCATION Carlsbad, California LOGGED BY Romeo Balbas READING TAKEN at Completion FIELD RESULTS DEPTH (FEET)40- 4C SAMPLE• X BLOW COUNT„ 50/3"POCKET PEN(TSF)GRAPHIC LOGDESCRIPTION (Continued) ALLUVIUM Brown to Light Brown Silly fine Sand, trace medium Sand, medium dense - moist to very moist - Brown Gray Clayey fine Sand, very stiff - moist to very moist . at 39 to 40 feet TORREY SANDSTONE FORMATION Brown to Gray Brown fine grained Sandstone, slightly Silty, dense to very dense - very moist Bonng Terminated at 45' LABORATORY RESULTS DRY DENSITY(PCF)109 MOISTURECONTENT (%)21 20 o 81_i_i PLASTICLIMITPASSING#200 SIEVE (%)36 UNCONFINEDSHEAR (TSF)COMMENTSTEST BORING LOG PLATE B-5b Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-6 I JOB NO 01G216 DRILLING DATE 10/25/01 WATER DEPTH Dry PROJECT La Costa Pavilion DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH 165' LOCATION Carlsbad, California LOGGED BY Romeo Balbas READING TAKEN at Completion FIELD RESULTS DEPTH (FEET)1U TO • U 1 ^< W H BLOW COUNT54 79/11 42 55 40 52 71 55 POCKET PEN(TSF)GRAPHIC LOG•:•:• DESCRIPTION SURFACE ELEVATION 97 feet MSL •', FILL Light Brown fine to medium Sand, some Gravel, • Asphaltic Concrete fraqments, loose - dry FILL Light Brown to Light Gray Brown Silty fine Sand, medium dense to dense - damp - Dark Brown to Brown fine Sand, little Silt, medium dense to dense - damp at 3 to 4 feet - Dark Brown fine Sand, little Clay, medium dense - damp to moist at 5 to 6 feet - Gray fine to medium Sand, little to trace Silt at 6 to 7 feet - Dark Brown fine to medium Sand, little Clay, occasional Clay clasts, medium dense - moist at 7 to 8 feet - Brown to Dark Brown fine Sand, little Clay, trace fine Gravel, . medium dense -very moist at 9 to 10 feet - Dark Gray Brown fine Sand and occasional fine Gravel, trace Silt, trace Clay, medium dense - moist to very moist at 14 to 15 feet ALLUVIUM Brown fine to medium Sand, dense - moist - trace coarse Sand and fine Gravel at 19 to 20 feet Bonng Terminated at 25' LABORATORY RESULTS DRY DENSITY(PCF)109 107 113 104 103 109 111 103 MOISTURECONTENT (%)10 12 10 9 13 14 5 5 D 5t O5 PLASTICLIMITPASSING#200 SIEVE (%)UNCONFINEDSHEAR (TSF) 'COMMENTS• TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-6 Southern California Geotechnical »«WfflW» .JrtvffflBfflRff . •^'•^nj^^^^^^^^Hv^^*'* BORING NO. B-7 EOGOT 11/8/01 ^^ 'TBL 01G216GPJ SOCKUGJOB NO 01G216 DRILLING DATE 10/26/01 WATER DEPTH Dry PROJECT La Costa Pavilion DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH 22' LOCATION Carlsbad, California LOGGED BY Romeo Balbas READING TAKEN 15 minutes FIELD RESULTS DEPTH (FEET)•in on OC _ on U Q •e. 4 V3 H y^BLOW COUNT70 60 fiO i8/ir 66 37 i?/10' 19/11' 50 POCKET PEN(TSF)GRAPHIC LOGDESCRIPTION SURFACE ELEVATION 97 feet MSL FILL Light Brown fine Sand, trace silt, occasional fine Sandstone fragments, medium dense to dense - moist - occasional Clayey fine Sand clasts, dense - moist at 7 to 8 feet FILL Dark Brown fine Sand, trace to little Silt, little Clay, dense - moist - trace Organics (fine root fibers) at 14 to 15 feet - fine to medium Sand at 20 to 23 feet FILL Dark Brown Silty fine to medium Sand, trace coarse Sand, little Clay, dense - moist - dense - very moist to wet at 29 to 30 feet Boring Terminated at 30' LABORATORY RESULTS DRY DENSITY(PCF)109 108 107 108 111 110 120 109 MOISTURECONTENT (%)11 14 17 11 11 8 6 14 12 O 11 PLASTICLIMITPASSING#200 SIEVE (%)UNCONFINEDSHEAR (TSF)COMMENTS- TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-7 Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-8 JOB NO 01G216 DRILLING DATE 10/26/01 WATER DEPTH Dry PROJECT La Costa Pavilion DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH 26' LOCATION Carlsbad, California LOGGED BY Romeo Balbas READING TAKEN 1 5 Hour FIELD RESULTS DEPTH (FEET)~ 1U I 25 4 30 H SAMPLEH . " . ' R R R R R BLOW COUNTL 49 54 47 40 55 58 64 49 30 POCKET PEN(TSF)GRAPHIC LOGDESCRIPTION SURFACE ELEVATION 98 feet MSL FILL Light Brown to Light Gray to Brown fine Sand, trace Silt, medium dense to dense - damp to moist - occasional Clayey fine Sand clasts - moist at 3 to 4 feet - Dark Brown Clayey fine Sand to fine Sandy Clay - very moist to moist at 5 to 6 feet - Dark Red Brown fine Sand - moist at 7 to 8 feet - Gray Brown Clayey fine sand, occasional Sandstone fragments - moist at 9 to 10 feet - Dark Red Brown Silty fine Sand, medium dense - damp at 14 . to 15 feet - Dark Red Brown Silty fine Sand, trace fine Sandy Clay clasts medium dense - moist at 1 9 to 20 feet - Brown to Black fine to medium Sand, trace Silt, trace . Organics, strong organic odor, dense at 24 to 25 feet ' ALLUVIUM Brown to Dark Brown fine to medium Sand, trace ' to some Silt, medium dense to dense - very moist to wet * LABORATORY RESULTS DRY DENSITY(PCF)108 108 113 103 107 107 111 110 106 MOISTURECONTENT (%)10 14 10 8 11 6 8 9 15 24 0 IS_J_J PLASTICLIMITPASSING#200 SIEVE (%)32 36 UNCONFINEDSHEAR (TSF)COMMENTS- - TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-8a Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-8 JOB NO 01G216 DRILLING DATE 10/26/01 WATER DEPTH Dry PROJECT La Costa Pavilion DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH 26' LOCATION Carlsbad, California LOGGED BY Romeo Balbas READING TAKEN 1 5 Hour FIELD RESULTS DEPTH (FEET)•SAMPLEX BLOW COUNT32 POCKET PEN(TSF)GRAPHIC LOGDESCRIPTION (Continued) ALLUVIUM Brown to Dark Brown fine to medium Sand, trace to some Silt, medium dense to dense - very moist to wet Bonng Terminated at 40' LABORATORY RESULTS DRY DENSITY(PCF)MOISTURECONTENT (%)19 Q 5tO2 _j_i PLASTICLIMITPASSING#200 SIEVE (%)30 UNCONFINEDSHEAR (TSF)COMMENTSTEST BORING LOG PLATE B-8b Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-9 JOB NO 01G216 DRILLING DATE 10/25/01 WATER DEPTH Dry PROJECT La Costa Pavilion DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH 13' LOCATION Carlsbad, California LOGGED BY Romeo Balbas READING TAKEN at Completion FIELD RESULTS DEPTH (FEET)15 SAMPLEM M k BLOW COUNT50/5" f5/10' 77 71 58 48 POCKET PEN(TSF)GRAPHIC LOG~T1 DESCRIPTION SURFACE ELEVATION 101 feet MSL FILL Light Brown fine to medium Sand, some Silt, loose to Amedium dense - dry / FILL Light Brown to Light Gray Brown fine Sand, trace to little Silt, occasional fine Sandstone fragments, dense - damp to moist - trace Clay at 5 to 6 feet - moist - Clayey fine Sand, very moist at 9 to 1 0 feet I ALLUVIUM Red Brown fine to medium Sand, trace Silt, • dense - moist Bonng Terminated at 15' LABORATORY RESULTS DRY DENSITY(PCF)100 100 109 95 106 MOISTURECONTENT (%)10 10 10 14 15 12 O IS PLASTICLIMITPASSING#200 SIEVE (%)UNCONFINEDSHEAR (TSF)COMMENTS\ TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-9 Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-10 I JOB NO 01G216 DRILLING DATE 10/25/01 WATER DEPTH Dry PROJECT La Costa Pavilion DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH 106 feet LOCATION Carlsbad, California LOGGED BY Romeo Balbas READING TAKEN at Completion IFIELD RESULTS DEPTH (FEET)10- 15 SAMPLEB X BLOW COUNT54 27 35 67 81 72 POCKET PEN(TSF)GRAPHIC LOGDESCRIPTION SURFACE ELEVATION 104 feet MSL FILL Light Brown to Brown fine Sand, trace to little Silt, medium dense to dense - damp to moist - trace fine Gravel at 3 to 4 feet - trace fine Gravel, little Silt at 7 to 8 feet TORREY SANDSTONE FORMATION Light Brown to Light Gray Brown fine grained Sandstone, little Silt, very dense - moist to very moist - Light Gray to White, trace Silt at 1 3 to 15 feet Bonng Terminated at 15' LABORATORY RESULTS DRY DENSITY(PCF)109 97 109 108 113 MOISTURECONTENT (%)8 9 10 12 12 19 g PLASTICLIMITPASSING#200 SIEVE (%)UNCONFINEDSHEAR (TSF)COMMENTS- TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-10 Southern California Geotechnicai BORING NO. B-11 JOB NO 01G216 DRILLING DATE 10/26/01 WATER DEPTH Dry PROJECT La Costa Pavilion DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger , CAVE DEPTH None LOCATION Carlsbad, California LOGGED BY Romeo Balbas READING TAKEN at Completion FIELD RESULTS DEPTH (FEET)D SAMPLEX X BLOW COUNT33 82/8" UJ0, o£2£GRAPHIC LOG•• DESCRIPTION SURFACE ELEVATION 106 feet MSL FILL Light Brown fine Sand, loose to medium dense - dry to damp FILL Light Brown fine Sand, little Silt, medium dense to dense - damp to moist Bonng Terminated at 5' LABORATORY RESULTS DRY DENSITY(PCF)MOISTURECONTENT (%)10 10 Q 5b OS _i_i PLASTICLIMITPASSING#200 SIEVE (%)UNCONFINEDSHEAR (TSF)COMMENTSTEST BORING LOG PLATE B-11 Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-12 JOB NO 01G216 DRILLING DATE 10/25/01 WATER DEPTH 295' PROJECT La Costa Pavilion DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH 42 feet LOCATION Carlsbad, California LOGGED BY Romeo Balbas READING TAKEN 24 hours FIELD RESULTS DEPTH (FEET)5 - 10- 15 - 20- 25 on •SAMPLEr ' k . r ' g g g x| X BLOW COUNTJ2/10' 55 46 48 43 76 75 68 50/5" JO/10'POCKET PEN(TSF)GRAPHIC LOG* • • • i • * '• ** * < r * i • • i • * • i DESCRIPTION SURFACE ELEVATION 101 feet MSL ; FILL Light Brown fine to medium Sand, little to some Silt, loose to medium dense - dry - extensive Clay clasts, some Silt, dense - damp to moist at 3 • to 4 feet i " - Brown to Dark Brown fine Sand, trace to little Silt, trace ; medium Sand, dense to very dense -moist at 5 to 12 feet TORREY SANDSTONE FORMATION Light Brown fine grained Sandstone, dense to very dense - moist - extensive Sandstone, Claystone seams at 14 5 to 15 feet - moist to very moist - Gray to Light Gray, trace to some Silt, very dense at 28 to 30 feet - moist - Red Brown fine grained Sandstone at 33 to 35 feet LABORATORY RESULTS DRY DENSITY(PCF)116 106 114 109 106 107 104 MOISTURECONTENT (%)8 13 11 12 9 15 11 17 9 19 Q 51- O2 PLASTICLIMITPASSING#200 SIEVE (%)28 44 UNCONFINEDSHEAR (TSF)COMMENTS- TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-12a Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-12 JOB NO 01G216 DRILLING DATE 10/25/01 WATER DEPTH 295' PROJECT La Costa Pavilion DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH 42 feet LOCATION Carlsbad, California LOGGED BY Romeo Balbas READING TAKEN 24 hours FIELD RESULTS DEPTH (FEET)AK _ 50 ,. .SAMPLEX X X BLOW COUNT60 82/9' 64 POCKET PEN(TSF)45+ 45+GRAPHIC LOGX X ) X X ) V V 1 DESCRIPTION (Continued) TORREY SANDSTONE FORMATION Light Brown fine grained Sandstone, dense to very dense - moist - Light red Brown fine Grained Sandstone at 38 to 40 feet - Red Brown Siltstone, Claystone, dense to very dense at 43 to 45 feet Torrey Sandstone Formation Dark Gray Black weathered Claystone. very dense - moist Bonng Terminated at 50' LABORATORY RESULTS DRY DENSITY(PCF)MOISTURECONTENT (%)21 20 20 0 ^_i_i PLASTICLIMITPASSING#200 SIEVE (%)56 76 89 UNCONFINEDSHEAR (TSF)COMMENTS- TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-12b Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-13 JOB NO 01G216 DRILLING DATE 10/25/01 WATER DEPTH Dry PROJECT La Costa Pavilion DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH 205' LOCATION Carlsbad, California LOGGED BY Romeo Balbas READING TAKEN at Completion FIELD RESULTS DEPTH (FEET)LU Q. 1 lU 15 - 20- *"**T. * a B X BLOW COUNT59 51/10' 85/9" 71 43 24 80 46 POCKET PEN(TSF)GRAPHIC LOG' • , , , DESCRIPTION SURFACE ELEVATION 100 feet MSL FILL Light Brown to Brown fine Sand, trace Silt, trace medium Sand, occasional fine Sandstone fragments, dense - moist - Orange Brown fine Sand, dense at 5 to 6 feet - Dark Brown to Brown fine Sand, trace Silt, little Clay - moist at 9 to 10 feet - Dark Brown Silty fine Sand, little Clay, trace Organics, . medium dense -moist at 14 to 15 feet ; ALLUVIUM Orange Brown fine to medium Sand, dense to very dense - moist Bonng Terminated at 25' LABORATORY RESULTS DRY DENSITY(PCF)96 105 108 107 104 104 108 MOISTURECONTENT (%)7 11 10 8 10 11 6 9 0 li_i_i PLASTICLIMITPASSING#200 SIEVE (%)UNCONFINEDSHEAR (TSF)COMMENTSDisturbed Sample Disturbed Sample TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-13 Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-14 JOB NO 01G216 DRILLING DATE 10/26/01 WATER DEPTH Dry PROJECT La Costa Pavilion DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH 8' LOCATION Carlsbad, California LOGGED BY Romeo Balbas READING TAKEN at Completion FIELD RESULTS DEPTH (FEET)SAMPLEBLOW COUNTII IHI 39 5 - ] 10 • 1 X 45 47 z UJ0. UJ o ^o ^GRAPHIC LOG|j * • • • i • • i • • i DESCRIPTION SURFACE ELEVATION 100 feet MSL | FILL Light Brown to Brown fine to medium Sand, trace silt, medium dense - damp to moist '. - Light Brown fine Sand, medium dense - moist at 5 to 6 feet i - Light Gray Brown fine Sand, occasional Clayey fine Sand • clasts - moist at 9 to 1 0 feet Bonng Terminated at 10' LABORATORY RESULTS DRY DENSITY(PCF)105 104 MOISTURECONTENT (%)8 16 12 Q PLASTICLIMITPASSING#200 SIEVE (%)UNCONFINEDSHEAR (TSF)COMMENTS- TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-14 Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-15 JOB NO 01G216 DRILLING DATE 10/26/01 WATER DEPTH Dry PROJECT La Costa Pavilion DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH 12' LOCATION Carlsbad, California LOGGED BY Romeo Balbas READING TAKEN at Completion FIELD RESULTS DEPTH (FEET)' . on SAMPLEBLOW COUNT360/6" 1 , " H M X 40 35 50 41 72/1 V 50/3"POCKET PEN(TSF)GRAPHIC LOGDESCRIPTION SURFACE ELEVATION 105 feet MSL FILL. Light Brown fine sand, trace Silt, trace medium Sand, occasional Sandstone fragments medium dense to dense - damp to moist - trace Clay - moist at 3 to 4 feet - trace Clay - moist at 5 to 6 feet - Brown to Light Brown, trace Clay - moist at 7 to 10 feet TORREY SANDSTONE FORMATION Light Brown to White fine grained Sandstone, trace Silt, dense to very dense - moist Boring Terminated at 20' LABORATORY RESULTS DRY DENSITY(PCF)106 102 107 98 112 99 MOISTURECONTENT (%)7 10 10 13 9 9 16 Q IS PLASTICLIMITPASSING#200 SIEVE (%)UNCONFINEDSHEAR (TSF)COMMENTS- TEST BORING LOG PLATE B-15 Southern California Geotechnical BORING NO. B-16 I JOB NO 01G216 DRILLING DATE 10/26/01 WATER DEPTH Dry PROJECT La Costa Pavilion DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger CAVE DEPTH None LOCATION Carlsbad, California LOGGED BY Romeo Balbas READING TAKEN at Completion FIELD RESULTS DEPTH (FEET)C SAMPLEX X BLOW COUNT34 32 POCKET PEN(TSF)GRAPHIC LOGDESCRIPTION SURFACE ELEVATION 106 feet MSL FILL Light Brown fine Sand, trace to little Silt, medium dense to dense - damp to moist Bonng Terminated at 5' LABORATORY RESULTS DRY DENSITY(PCF)MOISTURECONTENT (%)9 14 0 5b CCS_i_i PLASTICLIMITPASSING#200 SIEVE (%)UNCONFINEDSHEAR (TSF)COMMENTSTEST BORING LOG PLATE B-16 APPENDIX C LABORATORY TESTING Consolidation/Collapse Test Results w ra•g 'oincoO 10 100 Load (ksf) Classification Light Brown to Light Gray Brown Silty fine Sand Boring Number B-6 Sample Number Depth (ft) 1 to 2 Specimen Diameter (in) 2 4 Specimen Thickness (in) 1 0 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 10 13 1040 1164 082 La Costa Pavilion Carlsbad, California Project No 01G21G PLATE C-1 Southern California Geotechnical 1260 North H.iiicoo.k Street Suite 101 Anaheim California 92807 Phone (714|777-0333 Fax (714)777-0398 Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 14 Load (ksf) Classification Dark Brown to Brown fine Sand, little Silt Boring Number B-6 Sample Number Depth (ft) 3 to 4 Specimen Diameter (in) 2 4 Specimen Thickness (in) 1 0 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 12 11 111 6 1237 045 La Costa Pavilion Cailsbad, California Project No 01G216 PLATE C- 2 Southern California Geotechnical 1260 North Hancock Street Suite 101 Anaheim California 92807 Phone (714)777-0333 Fax (714)777-0398 Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 10 100 Load (ksf) Classification Dark Brown fine Sand, little Clay Boring Number B-6 Sample Number Depth (ft) 5 to 6 Specimen Diameter (in) 2 4 Specimen Thickness (in) 1 0 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 10 10 1164 1286 020 La Costa Pavilion Carlsbad, California Project No 01G216 PLATE C- 3 Southern California Geotechnical 1260 North Hancock Street Suite 101 Anaheim California 92807 Pnono (714) 777-0333 Fax (714) 777-03S8 Consolidation/Collapse Test Results oincoo Load (ksf) Classification Dark Brown fine to medium Sand, little Clay, occasional Clay clasls Boring Number B-6 Sample Number Deplh (ft) 7 to 8 Specimen Diameter (in) 2 4 Specimen Thickness (in) 1 0 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 9 12 1031 1170 1 33 La Costa Pavilion Carlsbad, California Project No 01G216 PLATE C- 4 Southern California Geoteohnical 1260 North Hancock Street Suite 101 Anaheim California 92807 Phono (714)777-0333 Fax (714)777-0393 Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 2 4 g "fo 6 5 •b ;| 8 5o 10 12 14 0 .-r 1 fS 1 '*: * |l I •^ 4 f3 <¥"•^ ii? 1 Load (ksf) Classification FILL Light E3rown to Brown fine Sand, trace to little Silt Boring Number B-10 Sample Number Depth (ft) 1 to 2 Specimen Diameter (in) 2 4 Specimen Thickness (in) 1 0 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 8 12 1092 1193 097 La Costa Pavilion Carlsbad, California Project No 01G216 PLATE C- 5 Southern California Geotechnical 1260 North Hancock Street Suite 101 Anaheim California 92807 Phono (714)777-0333 Fax (714)777-0398 Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 10 100 Load (ksf) Classification FILL Light Brown to Brown fine Sand, trace to little Silt, trace fine Gravel Boring Number B-10 Sample Number Depth (ft) 3 to 4 Specimen Diameter (in) 2 4 Specimen Thickness (in) 1 0 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 9 13 982 1166 273 La Costa Pavilion Carlsbad, California Project No 01G216 PLATE C- 6 Southern California Geotechnical 1260 Nortli Hancock Street Suite 101 Anaheim California 92807 Phone (714) 777-0333 Fax (714) 777-0398 Consolidation/Collapse Test Results c raL_ 1/5 C o to o 5 2 o 0 1 10 100 Load (ksf) Classification FILL Light Brown to Brown fine Sand, trace to little Silt Boring Number B-10 Sample Number Depth (ft) 5 to 6 Specimen Diameter (in) 2 4 Specimen Thickness (in) 1 0 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 10 12 1137 1268 025 La Costa Pavilion Carlsbad, California Project No 01G216 PLATE C-7 Southern California Geotechnical 12(10 North Hancock Struct Suite; 101 Anaheim California 92807 Phono (714)777-0333 F.IX (714)777-0308 Consolidation/Collapse Test Results Ulc.o O 0 1 Load (ksf) Eioring Number B-10 Sample Number Depth (ft) 7 to 8 Specimen Diameter (in) 2 4 Specimen Thickness (in) 1 0 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) Classification FILL Light Brown to Brown fine Sand, trace fine Gravel, little Silt 12 12 1058 121 1 1 30 La Costa Pavilion Carlsbad, California Project No 01G216 PLATE C- 8 Southern California Geotechnical 12CO North Hancock Street, Suite 101 Anaheim California 92807 Phone (714)777-0333 Fax (714)777-0398 Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 14 0 1 Load (ksf) Classification FILL Light Brown fine Sand Boring Number Qample Number Depth (ft) Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) B-12 1 to 2 24 1 0 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 8 11 1175 1278 041 La Costa Pavilion Carlsbad, California Project No 01G21G PLATE C- 9 Southern California Geotechnical 120U North Hancock Street Suite 101 Anaheim California 92807 Phone (714)777-0333 Fax (714)777-0398 L Consolidation/Collapse Test Results co fo TO o V)co Load (ksf) Classification FILL Brown fine to medium Sand, extensive Clay clasts, some Silt Boring Number B-12 Sample Number Depth (ft) 3 to 4 Specimen Diameter (in) 2 4 Specimen Thickness (in) 1 0 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 13 14 101 9 1126 025 La Costa Pavilion Carlsbad, California Project No 01G216 PLATE C-10 Southern California Geotechnical 1260 North Hancock Street Suite 101 Anaheim California 92807 Phono (714)777-0333 Fax (714) 777-039f. Consolidation/Collapse Test Results 0 £ 10 100 Load (ksf) Classification FILL Brown to Dark Brown fine Sand, trace to little Silt, trace medium Sand Boring Number B-12 Sample Number Depth (ft) 5 to 6 Specimen Diameter (in) 2 4 Specimen Thickness (in) 1 0 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 11 12 111 6 1235 083 La Costa Pavilion Carlsbad, California Project No 01G216 PLATE C-11 Southern California Geotechnical ll'CO North Hancock Street Suite 101 Anaheim California 92807 Phone (7141777-0333 Fax (714)777-0398 Consolidation/Collapse Test Results c 2 w co ro o 5incoo ;••&£; *rH-.-iN';':!.t«^^ o 1 100 Load (ksf) Classification FILL Brown to Dark Brown fine Sand, trace to little Silt, trace medium Sand Boring Number B-12 Sample Number Depth (ft) 7 to 8 Specimen Diameter (in) 2 4 Specimen Thickness (in) 1 0 Initial Moisture Content (%) Final Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Percent Collapse (%) 8 13 1039 1125 1 04 La Costa Pavilion Carlsbad, California Project No 01G216 PLATE C-12 Southern California GeotecRinical 12GO North Hancock Street Suite 101 Anaheim, California 92807 Phone (714)777-0333 Fax (714)777-0398 Moisture/Density Relationship ASTMD-1557 132 130 128 126 —. 124 122 fr Q 120 118 - 116 114 112 110 '4*-id. jfft K- .-as '# 1 ^ X Zero Air Voids Curve Specific Gravity = 27 10 12 14 Moisture Content (%) 16 18 20 Soil ID Number Optimum Moisture (%) Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Soil Classification B-11 125 119 Yellow Brown Silty fine Sand (B-11 @0to35') The Pavilion at La Costa Carlsbad, California Project No 01G216 PLATEC-13 Southern California Geotechnical 1260 North Hancock Street, Suitt 101 Anaheim, California 92807 Phone (714)777-0333 Fax (714)777-0398 Moisture/Density Relationship ASTMD-1557 146 144 i/>c 0> cr Q 140 138 136 134 132 128 126 -—• 124 *<- «$> ^ Zero Air Voids Curve Specific Gravity = 27 M !*'.*' 6 8 10 Moisture Content (%) 12 14 16 Soil ID Number Optimum Moisture (%) Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Soil Classification B-12 95 1295 Brown Clayey fine to medium Sand (B-12@5to10') The Pavilion at La Costa Carlsbad, California Project No 01G216 F'LATE C-14 Southern California Geotechnical 1260 North Hancock Street. Sui'e 101 Anaheim California 92807 Phone (7141777-0333 Fax (714)7770398 Direct Shear Test Results 5000 4000 3000 a. inm<D 53b. CD 0) v> 2000 1000 #fi Peak | [•Ultimate j 1000 2000 3000 4000 Normal Stress (psf) 5000 6000 Sample Description B-11 at 0 to 3 5 feet Classification Silty fine to medium Sand Sample Data Remolded Moisture Content Final Moisture Content Remolded Dry Density Percent Compaction Final Dry Density Specimen Diameter (in) Specimen Thickness (in) 13 *** 1071 0 *** 24 1 0 C (psf) Test Results Peak 330 430 Ultimate 330 200 The Pavilion at La Costa Carlsbad, California Project No Project No 01G216 PLATEC-15 Southern California Geotechnicai 1260 North Hancock Street Suite 101 Anaheim California 92807 Phone (714) 777-0333 Fax (714) 777-0 .98 F F F F F S c T C F F 5000 4000 C- 3000a in <r> u.ra 0) w 2000 1000 0 c Remolded IV inal Moistu >emolded D ercent Con inal Dry De pecimen D pecimen T Direct Shear Test Results . •; - __ 1 "" x X ........ <•- .?, $ :.Y' "•;; '-•• '•- ."•>; V :-y •T-- /, ^•7 .•} •: • ?•::• \~ ~~** •:•! i :*• ", ' •-,-. <(., X X .:.:'. ----- ' ,<; ,r ' ,;; %"• •."*' ."•^ ••-;-:. ';;••' ,f f' S3 •;£ 3& ,v; y. X X ^. 'i. ,- ' '. ;. ' \, '&; •X v.- :V-:.'- r-• > *.-, '...'•• r- •',--• A <•• '•"/ •'? 4 ^Vj" >•;'' •"'/- ."> .. • • '; .;" •-; — ,;_ y TV" _ /i-,.. ; : . •" ;•:•• ••'•• £ . X ^x •3 -'.' 7 . X" X- — ..;..:. X • -~r 'Si. 'V-' .-, ; ; 1 ^ . .' -.. s '. .$• '&•• ''•'''•', '-. :< "•~; ,^i;-- ''*';.' ''-.'• y i •'• 1 . '''•? t -;- V. f5 ;•' ' '^ •^ X i-, —*•,-; -/" *• , • i.v _...-: -- ;;. '• _' --'' .'*• X X "»>- ;•-,- .'"•;' ' t T .I.-; ^•',//.f* > X,- <l 5$ ;0";' :'S ,/ '••: -4- '.'V •^" ^- V .-_ JjS ?ll "% .'->• "W 'l'^ ->' •f1 ;-?. '.» •:; _ii- V. " i.1 •'-'•r *; %- •'$• • -*! V ; - -; a .Vi'< H-f •i.'.1 ^.\-. •-*•' :5 .•/•.- •4'- "•••• ."j. ;•.•;• x 'r ' - •V' rf. ':',: ^ '-• >'• -!•' ;. » '< X ^ ^F "'::''- ';:• •' C i-.-*r f'~ _;; v Xr?; ••>; *x „•' T" •f1 :-:v ?& .*~'»$ -.."V; -'•- ~": 0- &.- :^I xX "r tr ,-£, f-J'- ?;:1 '.'j •-'"i ..f. "3:'k. -r ~"7~ "•< X \^> "'•!, --- ".t- • s •-, "; '>'< !:.;; ';'• V - ,: ." ..... •- •'; !=. •.v ""? • ~*'s Vi : ^J, .'Vs/ ,;,,, •i- "-^ •/'- •-V --- '-:'• X "& -.. • ','-* • -," if V » ': i •••; -/ ^,;>.•„ . ': '. .*,-. -*v ..;!? ;-; *'^ •).'• :/.. •'•,:• • -.-; , j, ^ '•I '; ^ ~:'i ' f'v i '•':' :•', >"• •' 'r i-1 i ..- .' vi; V- f* fr..: '•'y ," :''••'. -Xy- •:> V •i;."- f> ••,; i".- . ""f '-':"• ••• . ~',V- '(. . •_J V" ( •r'V .r: ~S" r'.- •-,' •'•' ^_ ----- !i ^ .'-'• ."•* •.^ -•, u i'v. ~ '.-•,•" V '; "• '•i 'i ^ ;..-• •:. ":-• ' ^'. > ' -V| '.'--"' r" ' 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Normal Stress (psf) Sample Description B-12 at 5 to 10 feet Classification Clayey fine to medium Sand Sample Data Test Results oisture Content re Content ry Density ipaction nsity ameter (in) nckness (in) 10 *** 1166 0 *** 24 1 0 C (psf) he Pavilion at La Costa )arlsbad, California 'reject No Project No 01G21G >LATEC-16 Peak 330 425 — -T- •'• i I • Peak ' • Ultimate i GOOD ' j Ultimate 330 200 Southern California Geotechnical 1260 North Hancock Street Suite 101 Aria icini Califorilij 92807 Phone (714)777-0333 Fax (714)777-3398 APPENDIX D GRADING GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS Grading Guide Specifications Page 1 GRADING GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS These grading guide specifications are intended to provide typical procedures for grading operations. They are intended to supplement the recommendations contained in the geotechnical investigation report for this project Should the recommendations in the geotechnical investigation report conflict with the grading guide specifications, the more site specific recommendations in the geotechnical investigation report will govern General • The Earthwork Contractor is responsible for the satisfactory completion of all earthwork in accordance with the plans and geotechnical reports, and in accordance with city, county, and Uniform Building Codes • The Geotechnical Engineer is the representative of the Owner/Builder for the purpose of implementing the report recommendations and guidelines These duties are not intended to relieve the Earthwork Contractor of any responsibility to perform in a workman-like manner, nor is the Geotechnical Engineer to direct the grading equipment or personnel employed by the Contractor • The Earthwork Contractor is required to notify the Geotechnical Engineer of the anticipated work and schedule so that testing and inspections can be provided If necessary, work may be stopped and redone if personnel have not been scheduled in advance • The Earthwork Contractor is required to have suitable and sufficient equipment on the job- site to process, moisture condition, mix and compact the amount of fill being placed to the specified compaction In addition, suitable support equipment should be available to conform with recommendations and guidelines in this report • Canyon cleanouts, overexcavation areas, processed ground to receive fill, key excavations, subdrams and benches should be observed by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to placement of any fill It is the Earthwork Contractor's responsibility to notify the Geotechnical Engineer of areas that are ready for inspection • Excavation, filling, and subgrade preparation should be performed in a manner and sequence that will provide drainage at all times and proper control of erosion Precipitation, springs, and seepage water encountered shall be pumped or drained to provide a suitable working surface The Geotechnical Engineer must be informed of springs or water seepage encountered during grading or foundation construction for possible revision to the recommended construction procedures and/or installation of subdrams Site Preparation • The Earthwork Contractor is responsible for all clearing, grubbing, stripping and site preparation for the project in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Engineer • If any materials or areas are encountered by the Earthwork Contractor which are suspected of having toxic or environmentally sensitive contamination, the Geotechnical Engineer and Owner/Builder should be notified immediately • Major vegetation should be stripped and disposed of off-site This includes trees, brush, heavy grasses and any materials considered unsuitable by the Geotechnical Engineer Grading Guide Specifications Page 2 • Underground structures such as basements, cesspools or septic disposal systems, mining shafts, tunnels, wells and pipelines should be removed under the inspection of the Geotechnical Engineer and recommendations provided by the Geotechnical Engineer and/or city, county or state agencies If such structures are known or found, the Geotechnical Engineer should be notified as soon as possible so that recommendations can be formulated • Any topsoil, slopewash, colluvium, alluvium and rock materials which are considered unsuitable by the Geotechnical Engineer should be removed prior to fill placement • Remaining voids created during site clearing caused by removal of trees, foundations basements, irrigation facilities, etc , should be excavated and filled with compacted fill • Subsequent to clearing and removals, areas to receive fill should be scarified to a depth of 10 to 12 inches, moisture conditioned and compacted • The moisture condition of the processed ground should be at or slightly above the optimum moisture content as determined by the Geotechnical Engineer Depending upon field conditions, this may require air drying or watering together with mixing and/or discing Compacted Fills • Soil materials imported to or excavated on the property may be utilized in the fill, provided each material has been determined to be suitable in the opinion of the Geotechnical Engineer Unless otherwise approved by the Geotechnical Engineer, all fill materials shall be free of deleterious, organic, or frozen matter, shall contain no chemicals that may result in the material being classified as "contaminated," and shall be low to non-expansive with a maximum expansion index (El) of 50 The top 12 inches of the compacted fill should have a maximum particle size of 3 inches, and all underlying compacted fill material a maximum 6- mch particle size, except as noted below • All soils should be evaluated and tested by the Geotechnical Engineer Materials with high expansion potential, low strength, poor gradation or containing organic materials may require removal from the site or selective placement and/or mixing to the satisfaction of the Geotechnical Engineer • Rock fragments or rocks greater than 6 inches should be taken off-site or placed in accordance with recommendations and in areas designated as suitable by the Geotechnical Engineer Acceptable methods typically include windrows Oversize materials should not be placed within the range of excavation for foundations, utilities, or pools to facilitate excavations Rock placement should be kept away from slopes (minimum distance 15 feet) to facilitate compaction near the slope • Fill materials approved by the Geotechnical Engineer should be placed in areas previously prepared to receive fill and in evenly placed, near horizontal layers at about 6 to 8 inches in loose thickness, or as otherwise determined by the Geotechnical Engineer • Each layer should be moisture conditioned to optimum moisture content, or slightly above, as directed by the Geotechnical Engineer After proper mixing and/or drying, to evenly distribute the moisture, the layers should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density in compliance with ASTM D-1557 unless otherwise indicated • Density and moisture content testing should be performed by the Geotechnical Engineer at random intervals and locations as determined by the Geotechnical Engineer These tests are intended as an aid to the Earthwork Contractor, so he can evaluate his workmanship, Grading Guide Specifications Page 3 equipment effectiveness and site conditions The Earthwork Contractor is responsible for compaction as required by the Geotechnical Report(s) and governmental agencies • After compacted fills have been tested and approved by the geotechnical engineer, the contractor should moisture condition the soils as necessary to maintain the compacted moisture content Compacted fill soils that are allowed to become overly dry or desiccated may require removal and/or scarification, moisture conditioning and replacement Soils with medium to high expansion indices are especially susceptible to desiccation Sandy soils that are allowed to dry can also lose density • Fill areas unused for a period of time may require moisture conditioning, processing and recompaction prior to the start of additional filling The Earthwork Contractor should notify the Geotechnical Engineer of his intent so that an evaluation can be made • Fill placed on ground sloping at a 5-to-1 inclination (honzontal-to-vertical) or steeper should be benched into bedrock or other suitable materials, as directed by the Geotechnical Engineer Typical details of benching are illustrated on Plates G-2, G-4, and G-5 • Cut/fill transition lots should have the cut portion overexcavated to a depth of at least 3 feet and rebuilt with fill (see Plate G-1), as determined by the Geotechnical Engineer • All cut lots should be inspected by the Geotechnical Engineer for fracturing and other bedrock conditions If necessary, the pads should be overexcavated to a depth of 3 feet and rebuilt with a uniform, more cohesive soil type to impede moisture penetration • Cut portions of pad areas above buttresses or stabilizations should be overexcavated to a depth of 3 feet and rebuilt with uniform, more cohesive compacted fill to impede moisture penetration • Non-structural fill adjacent to structural fill should typically be placed in unison to provide lateral support Backfill along walls must be placed and compacted with care to ensure that excessive unbalanced lateral pressures do not develop The type of fill material placed adjacent to below grade walls must be properly tested and approved by the Geotechnical Engineer with consideration of the lateral earth pressure used in the design Foundations • The foundation influence zone is defined as extending one foot horizontally from the outside edge of a footing, and then proceeding downward at a 7* horizontal to 1 vertical (051) inclination • Where overexcavation beneath a footing subgrade is necessary, it should be conducted so as to encompass the entire foundation influence zone, as described above • Compacted fill adjacent to exterior footings should extend at least 12 inches above foundation bearing grade Compacted fill within the interior of structures should extend to the floor subgrade elevation Fill Slopes • The placement and compaction of fill described above applies to all fill slopes Slope compaction should be accomplished by overfilling the slope, adequately compacting the fill in even layers, including the overfilled zone and cutting the slope back to expose the compacted core • Slope compaction may also be achieved by backrollmg the slope adequately every 2 to 4 vertical feet during the filling process as well as requiring the earth moving and compaction equipment to work close to the top of the slope Upon completion of slope construction, the Grading Guide Specifications Page 4 slope face should be compacted with a sheepsfoot connected to a sideboom and then grid rolled This method of slope compaction should only be used if approved by the Geotechnical Engineer • Sandy soils lacking in adequate cohesion may be unstable for a finished slope condition and therefore should not be placed within 15 horizontal feet of the slope face • All fill slopes should be keyed into bedrock or other suitable material Fill keys should be at least 15 feet wide and inclined at 2 percent into the slope For slopes higher than 30 feet, the fill key width should be equal to one-half the height of the slope (see Plate G-5) • All fill keys should be cleared of loose slough material prior to geotechnical inspection and should be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer and governmental agencies prior to filling • The cut portion of fill over cut slopes should be made first and inspected by the Geotechnical Engineer for possible stabilization requirements The fill portion should be adequately keyed through all surficial soils and into bedrock or suitable material Soils should be removed from the transition zone between the cut and fill portions (see Plate G-2) Cut Slopes Subdrains All cut slopes should be inspected by the Geotechnical Engineer to determine the need for stabilization The Earthwork Contractor should notify the Geotechnical Engineer when slope cutting is in progress at intervals of 10 vertical feet Failure to notify may result in a delay in recommendations Cut slopes exposing loose, cohesionless sands should be reported to the Geotechnical Engineer for possible stabilization recommendations All stabilization excavations should be cleared of loose slough material prior to geotechnical inspection Stakes should be provided by the Civil Engineer to verify the location and dimensions of the key A typical stabilization fill detail is shown on Plate G-5 Stabilization key excavations should be provided with subdrams Typical subdram details are shown on Plates G-6 Subdrains may be required in canyons and swales where fill placement is proposed Typical subdram details for canyons are shown on Plate G-3 Subdrains should be installed after approval of removals and before filling, as determined by the Soils Engineer Plastic pipe may be used for subdrams provided it is Schedule 40 or SDR 35 or equivalent Pipe should be protected against breakage, typically by placement in a square-cut (backhoe) trench or as recommended by the manufacturer Filter material for subdrams should conform to CALTRANS Specification 68-1 025 or as approved by the Geotechnical Engineer for the specific site conditions Clean %-mch crushed rock may be used provided it is wrapped in an acceptable filter cloth and approved by the Geotechnical Engineer Pipe diameters should be 6 inches for runs up to 500 feet and 8 inches for the downstream continuations of longer runs Four-inch diameter pipe may be used in buttress and stabilization fills CUT LOT OVEREXCAVATE AND RECOMPACT COMPETENT MATERIAL ACCEPTABLE *0 THE SOIL ENGINEER r MIN*—13'MIN CUT FILL LOT (TRANSITION) JMIN- -J COMPETENT MATERIAL ACCEPTABLE TO THE SOIL ENGINEER DEEPER OVEREXCAVATION MAY BE RECOMMENDED BY THE SOIL ENGINEER IN STEEP TRANSITIONS TRANSITION LOT DETAIL PLATE G-1 Southern California Geoteohnical CUT/FILL CONTACT SHOWN ON GRADING PLAN COMPACTED FILL CUT/FILL CONTACT TO BE SHOWN ON "AS-BUILT" NATURAL GRADE BEDROCK OR APPROVED COMPETENT MATERIAL MINIMUM HEIGHT OF BENCHES IS 4 FEET OR AS RECOM MENDED BY THE SOIL ENGI- NEER MINIMUM 1' TILT BACK OR 2% SLOPE (WHICHEVER IS GREATER) CUT SLOPE TO BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF FILL KEYWAY IN COMPETENT MAT- ERIAL MINIMUM WIDTH OF 15FEET OR AS RECOMMENDED BY THE SOIL ENGINEER FILL ABOVE CUT SLOPE DETAIL PLATE G-2 Southern California Geotechnical \ • . . • " ! • » .» ' '.'.V • •. • • • • • . * CLEANOUT EXCAVATION MINUS 1" CRUSHED ROCK COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY FILTER FABRIC, OR CLASS II PERMEABLE MATERIAL 6" DIAMETER PERFORATED PIPE - MINIMUM 1% SLOPE PIPE MATERIAL ADS (CORRUGATED POLETHYLENE TRANS ITE UNDERDRAIN PVC OR ABS: SDR 35 SDR 21 DEPTH OF FILL OVER SUBDRAIN 8 20 35 100 SCHEMATIC ONLY NOT TO SCALE CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAIL PLATE G-3 Southern California Geotechnical OVERFILL REQUIREMENTS PER PLATE NO 4 COMPETENT MATERIAL- COMPACTED FILL TOE OF SLOPE SHOWN ON GRADING PLAN PROJECT SLOPE GRADIENT (1-1 MAX) BACKCUT-VARIES 41 MIN 2' MINIMUM KEY DEPTH PLACE COMPACTED BACKFILL TO ORIG- INAL GRADE MINIMUM HEIGHT OF BENCHES IS 4 FEET OR AS RECOM- MENDED BY THE SOIL ENGI- NEER MINIMUM f TILT BACK OR 2% SLOPE (WHICHEVER IS GREATER) KEYWAY IN COMPETENT MAT- ERIAL MINIMUM WIDTH OF 15 FEET OR AS RECOMMENDED BY THE SOIL ENGINEER. KEYWAY MAY NOT BE REQUIRED IF FILL SLOPE IS LESS THAN 5' IN HEIGHT AS RECOMMENDED BY THE SOIL ENGINEER. NOTE. BENCHING SHALL BE REQUIRED WHEN NATURAL SLOPES ARE EQUAL TO OR STEEPER THAN 5 1 OR WHEN RECOMMENDED BY THE SOIL ENGINEER FILL ABOVE NATURAL SLOPE DETAIL PLATE G-4 Southern California Geotechnical 15' Minimum 31 TYPICAL BLANKET FILL IF RECOMMENDED BY THE SOIL ENGINEER COMPACTED FILL FACE OF FINISHED SLOPE COMPETENT MATERIAL ACCEPTABLE TO THE SOIL ENGINEER ' ' -.!W,W ' - MINIMUM HEIGHT OF BENCHES is 4 FEET OR AS RECOM- MENDED BY THE SOIL ENGI- NEER "T MINIMUM 1 TILT BACK OR 2 PERCENT (%} SLOPE (WHICHEVER IS GREATER) 15' Minimum or % Slope Height STABILIZATION FILL DETAIL PLATE G-5 Southern California Geotechnical DESIGN FINISH SLOPE OUTLETS TO BE SPACED AT 100' MAXIMUM INTER- VALS EXTEND 12 INCHES' BEYOND FACE OF SLOPE AT TIME OF ROUGH GRAD- ING CONSTRUCTION BUTTRESS OR SIDEHILL- FILL BLANKET FILL IF RECOMMENDED BY SOIL ENGI- NEER 2' CLEAR FILTER MATERIAL" TO MEET FOLLOWING SPECIFI- CATION OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT (CONFORMS TO EMA STD PLAN 323) SIEVE SIZE PERCENTAGE PASSING 1" 100 3/4" 90-100 3/8" 40-100 NO 4 25-40 NO 8 18-33 NO 30 5-15 NO 50 0-7 NO 200 0-3 OUTLET PIPE TO BE CON- NECTED TO SUBDRAIN PIPE WITH TEE OR ELBOW 4-INCH DIAMETER NON-PERFORATED OUTLET PIPE TO BE LOCATED IN FIELD BY THE SOIL ENGINEER "GRAVEL" TO MEET FOLLOWING SPECIFICATION OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT SIEVE SIZE PERCENTAGE PASSING .NOTES 1 TRENCH FOR OUTLET PIPES TO BE BACKFILLED WITH ON-SITE SOIL 1W 100 NO. 4 50 NO 200 8 SAND EQUIVALENT - MINIMUM OF 50 ' FILTER MATERIAL - MINIMUM OF FIVE CUBIC FEET PER FOOT OF PIPE. SEE ABOVE FOR FILTER MATERIAL SPECIFI- CATION. ALTERNATIVE IN UEU OF FILTER MAT- ERIAL FIVE CUBIC FEET OF GRAVEL PER FOOT OF PIPE MAY BE ENCASED IN FILTER FABRIC SEE ABOVE FOR GRAVEL SPECIFICATION FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE MIRAFI 140 OR EQUIVALENT FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE LAPPED A MINIMUM OF 12 INCHES ION ALLJOINTS MINIMUM 4-INCH DIAMETER PVC SCH 40 OR ABS CLASS SDR 35 WITH A CRUSHING STRENGTH OF AT LEASE 1.000 POUNDS. WITH A MINIMUM OF 8 UNIFORMLY SPACED PERFORATIONS PER FOOT OF PIPE INSTALLED WITH PERFORATIONS ON BOTTOM OF PIPE PROVIDE CAP AT UPSTREAM END OF PIPE SLOPE AT 2 PERCENT TO OUTLET PIPE STABILIZATION FILL SUBDRAINS PLATE G-6 Southern California Geotechnical APPENDIX E UBCSEIS AND FRISKSP COMPUTER PROGRAM OUTPUT *********************** * * * UBCSEIS * * * * Version 1 03 * * * *********************** COMPUTATION OF 1997 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS JOB NUMBER- 01G216 DATE: 10-26-2001 JOB NAME- The Pavilion LC FAULT-DATA-FILE NAME. CDMGUBCR DAT SITE COORDINATES SITE LATITUDE 33 0710 SITE LONGITUDE: 117.2642 UBC SEISMIC ZONE 0.4 UBC SOIL PROFILE TYPE SD NEAREST TYPE A FAULT: NAME ELSINORE-JULIAN DISTANCE 41 3 km NEAREST TYPE B FAULT NAME ROSE CANYON DISTANCE- 8 0 km NEAREST TYPE C FAULT: NAME. DISTANCE 99999.0 km SELECTED UBC SEISMIC COEFFICIENTS Na 10 Nv 11 Ca 0 44 Cv 0 69 Ts- 0.628 To 0 126 * 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 * SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS Page 1 ABBREVIATED FAULT NAME ROSE CANYON NEWPORT -INGLE WOOD (Offshore) 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 ELS INORE -COYOTE MOUNTAIN NEWPORT -INGLEWOOD (L A. Basin) CHINO- CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) ELSINORE-WHITTIER SAN JACINTO - BORREGO SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO SAN ANDREAS - Southern PINTO MOUNTAIN SAN JOSE CUCAMONGA SIERRA MADRE (Central) SUPERSTITION MTN (San Jacinto) BURNT MTN. NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (West) ELMORE RANCH EUREKA PEAK SUPERSTITION HILLS (San Jacinto) CLEGHORN ELS INORE -LACUNA SALADA NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East) SAN ANDREAS - 1857 Rupture RAYMOND CLAMSHELL - S AWP I T VERDUGO LANDERS HOLLYWOOD BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE HELENDALE - S. LOCKHARDT LENWOOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN SPRGS SANTA MONICA EMERSON So - COPPER MTN JOHNSON VALLEY (Northern) IMPERIAL MALIBU COAST SIERRA MADRE (San Fernando) APPROX DISTANCE (km) 8 0 18 0 32 1 41.3 41.3 64.1 64 8 67.0 78.0 81 1 82 5 84 9 85.5 87 5 93.7 100 7 105 2 110.2 120 8 120.8 124.7 125 1 125 4 127.6 131.4 131 5 132 0 133 1 133 8 134 4 137 5 140 0 140 1 140.4 144.1 144.9 147 3 148 3 149 1 154.2 154.9 157.1 158 2 158 9 159 2 165.0 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 7 0 6 6 6 5 7 0 6 6 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 RATE (mm/yr) 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 3.00 5 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 DS SS SS DS SS SS SS SS SS DS SS DS DS DS SS DS SS SS SS DS SS SS SS DS DS SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS Page 2 ABBREVIATED FAULT NAME PISGAH-BULLION MTN -MESQUITE LK ANACAPA-DUME SAN GABRIEL CALICO - HIDALGO SANTA SUSANA HOLSER SIMI- SANTA ROSA OAK RIDGE (Onshore) GRAVEL HILLS - HARPER LAKE SAN CAYETANO BLACKWATER VENTURA - PITAS POINT SANTA YNEZ (East) SANTA CRUZ ISLAND M RIDGE -ARROYO PARIDA- SANTA ANA RED MOUNTAIN GARLOCK (West) PLEITO THRUST BIG PINE GARLOCK (East) SANTA ROSA ISLAND WHITE WOLF SANTA YNEZ (West) So. SIERRA NEVADA OWL LAKE PANAMINT VALLEY LITTLE LAKE TANK CANYON DEATH VALLEY (South) LOS ALAMOS -W BASELINE LIONS HEAD DEATH VALLEY (Graben) SAN LUIS RANGE (S Margin) SAN JUAN CASMALIA (Orcutt Frontal Fault) OWENS VALLEY LOS OSOS HOSGRI HUNTER MTN - SALINE VALLEY DEATH VALLEY (Northern) INDEPENDENCE RINCONADA BIRCH CREEK SAN ANDREAS (Creeping) WHITE MOUNTAINS DEEP SPRINGS APPROX DISTANCE (km) 166 6 167 6 167 9 170 9 180.5 189 4 197 0 197 8 202.9 206.2 218 4 225 1 226 0 233.3 235.8 239.1 242.0 247.6 253 4 256 1 268 0 268 0 270 9 280.4 284.2 284.5 284 6 285.8 292 4 313 1 330 7 334 5 340 4 341 2 348 8 353 3 370 5 376 4 379 1 388.2 389 2 391 5 445 6 447 8 450 0 468.4 SOURCE TYPE (A,B,C) B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B A B B A B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B A B B B B B B MAX. MAG. (Mw) 7.1 7 3 7 0 7.1 6.6 6 5 6 7 6.9 6 9 6.8 6.9 6 8 7.0 6.8 6.7 6 8 7 1 6.8 6 7 7.3 6.9 7.2 6 9 7 1 6.5 7 2 6.7 6 5 6.9 6.8 6.6 6 9 7 0 7.0 6.5 7 6 6 8 7 3 7.0 7 2 6 9 7.3 6 5 5 0 7.1 6.6 SLIP RATE (mm/yr) 0.60 3.00 1.00 0 60 5.00 0 40 1.00 4 00 0.60 6.00 0 60 1 00 2 00 1 00 0.40 2.00 6 00 2 00 0 80 7.00 1.00 2 00 2 00 0 10 2.00 2 50 0 70 1 00 4 00 0.70 0 02 4 00 0 20 1 00 0.25 1 50 0 50 2 50 2.50 5.00 0 20 1 00 0 70 34.00 1 00 0 80 FAULT TYPE (SS,DS,BT) SS DS SS SS DS DS DS DS SS DS SS DS SS DS DS DS SS DS SS SS DS DS SS DS SS SS SS DS SS DS DS DS DS SS DS SS DS SS SS SS DS SS DS SS SS DS SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS Page 3 ABBREVIATED FAULT NAME ================================== DEATH VALLEY {N of Cucamongo) ROUND VALLEY (E of S N Mtns ) FISH SLOUGH HILTON CREEK HARTLEY SPRINGS ORTIGALITA CALAVERAS (So of Calaveras Res) MONTEREY BAY - TULARCITOS PALO COLORADO - SUR QUIEN SABE MONO LAKE ZAYANTE - VERGELES SAN ANDREAS (1906) SARGENT ROBINSON CREEK SAN GREGORIO GREENVILLE MONTE VISTA - SHANNON HAYWARD (SE Extension) ANTELOPE VALLEY HAYWARD (Total Length) CALAVERAS (No. of Calaveras Res) GENOA CONCORD - GREEN VALLEY RODGERS CREEK WEST NAPA POINT REYES HUNTING CREEK - BERRYESSA MAACAMA (South) COLLAYOMI BARTLETT SPRINGS MAACAMA (Central) MAACAMA (North) ROUND VALLEY (N. S F Bay) BATTLE CREEK LAKE MOUNTAIN GARBERVI LLE - BRI CELAND MENDOCINO FAULT ZONE LITTLE SALMON (Onshore) MAD RIVER CASCADIA SUBDUCTION ZONE McKINLEYVILLE TRINIDAD FICKLE HILL TABLE BLUFF LITTLE SALMON (Offshore) | APPROX DISTANCE (km) 473 2 480.8 488.5 506.9 531 3 532.2 537 8 540.4 541.4 551 0 567 3 569 6 574 8 574.9 598.6 615 8 624.6 625 0 625 1 639 0 644 8 644 8 664 4 692 5 731 3 732 2 750 2 754 6 794 1 811.0 814 4 835 7 895.2 901 4 924 6 959 8 977 0 1033.3 1039.9 1042 7 1047.0 1053 1 1054 6 1055 1 1060.5 1073.9 SOURCE TYPE (A,B,C) A B B B B B B B B B B B A B B A B B B B A B B B A B B B B B A A A B B B B A A B A B B B B B MAX MAG (Mw) 7 0 6 8 6 6 6 7 6 6 6.9 6 2 7 1 7 0 6.5 6.6 6 8 7 9 6.8 6 5 7.3 6 9 6 5 6 5 6 7 7 1 6 8 6 9 6 9 7 0 6 5 6 8 6 9 6 9 6 5 7 1 7 1 7 1 6 8 6.5 6 7 6 9 7.4 7 0 7 1 8.3 7 0 7 3 6 9 7 0 7.1 | SLIP j RATE | (mm/yr) | ========= 5 00 1.00 0.20 2 50 0 50 1 00 15.00 0 50 3 00 1 00 2 50 0.10 24 00 3 00 0 50 5 00 2 00 0 40 3 00 0.80 9 00 6 00 1.00 6 00 9 00 1 00 0 30 6 00 9 00 0 60 6 00 9 00 9 00 6 00 0.50 6 00 9 00 35.00 5 00 0 70 35 00 0.60 2 50 0.60 0 60 1 00 FAULT TYPE (SS,DS,BT) SS DS DS DS DS SS SS DS SS SS DS SS SS SS DS SS SS DS SS DS SS SS DS SS SS SS DS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS DS SS SS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS Page 4 ABBREVIATED FAULT NAME APPROX |SOURCE | MAX. | DISTANCE! TYPE j MAG j (km) |(A,B,C)| (Mw) j SLIP | FAULT RATE j TYPE (mm/yr) |(SS,DS,BT) BIG LAGOON - BALD MTN.FLT ZONE j 1091 5 I B j 7 3 j 0.50 j DS •^^ §sy w Hfc ^ 0|V hH W s i—l ?C W § U o << !> ^ ^ P4QS;OS^ 2- W N fc O 1-7 PQ S ^ '""^ 0_iL^ r; ^\ i iy Vi V \\ » y N\s i y v t \\\ 1 1 s N S \ V " t — — — — — — — — — o LO LO CNJ v- O 'TT ^^^^^^ C LO *03 1^ *-• 0 ° 0 Oo ^^ LO o" LO^* w CSJ O or^ 0 LH>O 0 0 0 0n 3 ° ° ° ° °W ^ 0 0 0 0 T-3 U o o o T- i| 0 0 T-^ o T- (sjA) pou9d PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE CAMP. & BOZ. (1997 Rev.) AL (UNWEIGHTED) CO 0oc CO T5 0 0o X LLI 100 90 0 75 yrs 100 yrs 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 Acceleration (g) 1.50 >•• 3 r i O HH H w W ffihJ 0wuu w PH N O PQ o LO inCN o _ 9 a 0oo o< IT) U O O O O O O O O Oo ooooo oooo ooo oo 10 Csj o o C) (SJA) PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE CAMP. & BOZ. (1997 Rev.) AL (WEIGHTED M=7.5) ^ 0s- > 03 O DL 0oc 03 0 0o X LU 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 75 yrs 100 yrs 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 Acceleration (g) FRISKSP - IBM- PC VERSION Modified from *FRISK* (McGuire 1978) To Perform Probabilistic Earthquake Hazard Analyses Using Multiple Forms of Ground-Motion-Attenuation Relations Modifications by Thomas P Blake - 1986-2000 - VERSION 4 00 (Visual Fortran) TITLE Pavilion at La Costa IPR FILE 0 I PLOT 0 SITE CONDITION 0 00 BASEMENT DEPTH (km) 5 00 RHGA FACTOR RHGA DIST (km) 1 000 0 000 NFLT NS1TE NPROB NATT LCD 15 ATT C14 1 0 0000 ATI' ICHK 1 ATT C14 2 0 0000 ATT ICHX 2 ATT C14 3 0 0000 ATT ICHK 3 ATT C14 4 0 0000 ATT ICHK 4 ATT C14 5 0 0000 ATT ICHK 5 ATT C14 e 0 0000 1 Cl -3 5120 C15 0 0000 Cl -3 5120 CIS 0 0000 Cl -3 5120 CIS 0 0000 Cl -3 5120 CIS 0 0000 Cl -3 5120 CIS 0 0000 Cl -3 5120 261 C2 0 9040 C16 0 0000 C2 0 9040 C16 0 0000 C2 0 9040 C16 0 0000 C2 0 9040 C16 0 0000 C2 0 9040 C16 0 0000 C2 0 9040 C3 -1 3280 C17 0 0000 C3 -1 3280 C17 0 0000 C3 -1 3280 C17 0 0000 C3 -1 3280 C17 0 0000 C3 -1 3280 C17 0 0000 C3 -1 3280 C4 0 1490 CIS 0 0000 C4 0 1490 C18 0 0000 C4 0 1490 C18 0 0000 C4 0 1490 CIS 0 0000 C4 0 1490 CIS 0 0000 C4 0 1490 C5 0 6470 C19 0 0000 0 C5 0 6470 C19 0 0000 0 C5 0 6470 C19 0 0000 0 C5 0 6470 C19 0 0000 0 C5 0 6470 C19 0 0000 0 C5 0 6470 C6 0 0000 C20 0000 0 C6 1 0000 C20 0000 0 C6 0 0000 C20 0000 0 C6 1 0000 C20 0000 0 C6 1 0000 C20 0000 0 C6 1 0000 C7 0 0000 C21 0000 0 C7 0 0000 C21 oooo o C7 0 0000 C21 0000 0 C7 0 0000 C21 0000 0 C7 0 0000 C21 0000 0 C7 0 0000 C8 0 0000 0 C22 0000 0 0000 C8 0 0000 0 C22 0000 0 0000 C8 0 0000 0 C22 0000 0 0000 C8 0 0000 0 C22 0000 0 0000 C8 0 0000 0 C22 0000 0 0000 C8 0 0000 0 C9 0000 0 C23 0 0000 C9 0000 0 C23 0 0000 C9 0000 0 C23 0 0000 C9 0000 0 C23 0 0000 C9 0000 0 C23 0 0000 C9 0000 0 CIO 0000 PER 3 0000 CIO 0000 PER 3 0000 CIO 0000 PER 3 0000 CIO 0000 PER 3 0000 CIO 0000 PER 3 0000 CIO 0000 Cll 0 0000 DSMIN 1 0000 Cll 0 0000 DSMIN 1 0000 Cll 0 0000 DSMIN 1 0000 Cll 0 0000 DSMIN 1 0000 Cll 0 0000 DSMIN 1 0000 Cll 0 0000 C12 0 0000 SIGA 37 C12 0 0000 SIGA 37 C12 0 0000 SIGA 37 C12 0 0000 SIGA 37 C12 0 0000 SIGA 37 C12 0 0000 C13 0 0000 IRELAF 0 C13 0 0000 IRELAF 0 C13 0 0000 IRELAF 0 C13 0 0000 IRELAF 0 C13 0 0000 IRELAF 0 C13 0 0000 P ATT CIS C16 C17 CIS C19 C20 C21 C22 C23 PER DSMIN SIGA IRELAF ICHK 6 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 3 0000 1 0000 37 0 PROBLEM DATA CAMP & BOZ (1997 Rev ) AL 1 AMPLITUDES 15 0 100 0 200 0 300 0 400 0 500 0 600 0 700 0 800 0 900 1 000 1 100 1 200 1 300 1 400 1 500 MAGNITUDE WEIGHTING FACTORS MWF 0 MWF MAGNITUDE 0 00 CAMP & BOZ (1997 Rev ) AL 2 AMPLITUDESi 15 0 100 0 200 0 300 0 400 0 500 0 600 0 700 0 800 0 900 1 000 1 100 1 200 1 300 1 400 1 500 MAGNITUDE WEIGHTING FACTORS MWF 3 MWF MAGNITUDE 7 50 RISKS SPECIFIED 5 0 010000 0 005000 0 002105 0 001000 0 000500 SITE COORDINATES. 1 -117 2642 33 0710 FAULT INFORMATION FAULT 1 FAULT NAME ROSE CANYON NFP NRL ATTENUATION CODES 8 10 13 AMMIN AMSTEP IRATE RATE BETA ECTR ECDP COEF 5 000 0 1000 1 1 5000 2 072 2 700 2 000 1 000 NMAX AMMAX PMAX 1 6 90 1 00 drachar ampchar dmpchar 0 50 6 40 1 00 Slip Rate ( 1 5000 mm/yr) converted to Activity Rate Input Shear Modulus - dyne/cm**2 0 330E+12 Input Fault Area - cm**2 0 715E+13 LOG10[Mo(m)l - (1 50)m + (16 05) IMAX AMMAX PMAX ARATE . EX-RATE + CH-RATE 1 6 9000 1 0000 0 00856 0 00579 0 00277 IND_RL 2 RUPTURE AREA VS MAGNITUDE A_RA B_RA SIG_RA -3 490 FAULT SEGMENT COORDINATES 1 -117 1325 32 7074 2 -117 1876 32 7642 3 -117 2226 32 8277 4 -117 2610 32 8577 5 -117 3078 32 9646 6 -117 3178 33 0080 7 -117 3763 33 0848 8 -117 4247 33 1299 NDP 2 ORIGINAL FAULT CROSS SECTION 1 0 0000 0 0000 2 0 0000 13 0000 Computed Total Fault Area = 0 72E+03 FAULT 2 FAULT NAME NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) NFP NRL ATTENUATION CODES 6 10 13 AMMIN AMSTEP IRATE RATE BETA ECTR ECDP COEF 5 000 0 1000 1 1 5000 2 072 3 300 2 000 1 000 NMAX AMMAX PMAX 1 6 90 1 00 dmchar ampchar dmpchar 0 SO 6 40 1 00 Slip Rate ( 1 5000 mm/yr) Converted to Activity Rate Input Shear Modulus - dyne/cm**2 0 330E+12 Input Fault Area - cm**2 0 853E+13 LOGlOlMo(m)] = (1 50)m + (16 05) IMAX AMMAX PMAX ARATB = EX-RATB + CH-RATE 1 6 9000 1 0000 0 01027 0 00695 0 00333 IND RL ~ 2 RUPTURE AREA VS MAGNITUDE A_RA B_RA SIG_RA -3 490 FAULT SEGMENT COORDINATES 1 -117 9146 33 5910 2 -117 7989 33 5080 3 -117 6882 33 4024 4 -117 5473 33 2515 5 -117 4870 33 2163 6 -117 4291 33 1559 KDP 2 ORIGINAL FAULT CROSS SECTION 1 0 0000 0 0000 2 0 0000 13 0000 Computed Total Fault Area = 0 87E+03 FAULT 3 FAULT NAME CORONADO BANK NFP NRL ATTENUATION CODES 6 10 13 AMMIN AMSTBP IRATE RATE BETA ECTR ECDP COEF 5 000 0 1000 1 3 0000 2 072 9 200 2 000 1 000 UMAX AMMAX PMAX 1 7 40 1 00 dmchar ampchar dmpchar 0 50 6 90 1 00 Slip Rate ( 3 0000 mm/yr) Converted to Activity Rate Input Shear Modulus - dyne/cm**2 0 330E+12 Input Fault Area - cm**2 0 241E*14 LOG10(Ho(m)] = (1 50)m + (16 05) IMAX AMMAX PMAX ARATE = EX-RATE + CH-RATE 1 7 4000 1 0000 0 02361 0 02029 0 00332 IND RL 2 RUPTURE AREA VS MAGNITUDE A_RA B_RA SIG_RA -3 490 FAULT SEGMENT COORDINATES 1 -117 9274 33 2685 2 -117 6067 32 9479 3 -117 5199 32 8778 4 -117 2527 32 4669 5 -117 2380 32 4460 6 -116 8350 31 8900 NDP 2 ORIGINAL FAULT CROSS SECTION 1 0 0000 0 0000 2 0 0000 13 0000 Computed Total Fault Area = 0 24E+04 FAULT 4 FAULT NAME.- ELSIMORE-JULIAN NFP NRL ATTENUATION CODES: AMMIN AMSTEP IRATE RATE BETA ECTR ECDP COEF 5 000 0 1000 1 S 0000 2 072 3 700 2 000 1 000 UMAX AMHAX PMAX 1 7 10 1 00 dmchar ampchar dmpchar 0 50 6 60 1 00 Slip Rate ( 5 0000 iran/yr) Converted to Activity Ratet Input Shear Modulus - dyne/cm**2 0 330E+12 Input Fault Area - cm**2 0 113E+14 LOGIC[Ho(m)] = (1 50)m + (16 OS) IMAX AMMAX PMAX ARATE = EX-RATE * CH-RATE 1 7 1000 1 0000 0 03091 0 02359 0 00732 IND_RL 2 RUPTURE AREA VS MAGNITUDE A_RA B_RA SIG_HA -3 490 0 910 0 240 FAULT SEGMENT COORDINATES 1 -117 0130 33 3770 2 -116 3620 32 9650 NDP 2 ORIGINAL FAULT CROSS SECTION 1 0 0000 0 0000 2 0 0000 15 0000 Computed Total Fault Area = 0 11E+04 FAULT 5 FAULT NAME: ELSINORB-TBMECULA NFP NRL ATTENUATION CODES 2 10 13 AMMIN AMSTEP IRATE RATE BETA ECTR ECDP COEF 5 000 0 1000 1 5 0000 2 072 2 100 2 000 1 000 UMAX AMMAX PMAX 1 6 80 1 00 dmchar ampchar dmpchar 0 50 6 30 1 00 Slip Rate ( 5 0000 mm/yr) Converted to Activity Rate Input Shear Modulus - dyne/cm**2 0 330E+12 Input Fault Area - cm**2 0 630E+13 LOGlOIMo(m)] = (1 50)m + (16 05) IMAX AMMAX PMAX ARATE = EX-RATE + CH-RATE 1 6 8000 1 0000 0 03076 0 01926 0 01150 IND_RL 2 RUPTURE AREA VS MAGNITUDE A_RA B_RA SIG_RA -3 490 0 910 0 240 FAULT SEGMENT COORDINATES 1 -117 3480 33 6430 2 -117 0130 33 3770 NDP 2 ORIGINAL FAULT CROSS SECTION 1 0 0000 0 0000 2 0 0000 15 0000 Computed Total Fault Area = 0 65E+03 FAULT 6 FAULT NAME ELSINORE-GLEN IVY NFP NRL ATTENUATION CODES 2 10 13 AMMIN AMSTEP IRATE RATE BETA ECTR ECDP COEF 5 000 0 1000 1 5 0000 2 072 1 900 2 000 1 000 UMAX AMMAX PMAX 1 6 80 1 00 dmchar ampchar dmpchar 0 SO 6 30 1 00 Slip Rate ( 5 0000 mm/yr) Converted to Activity Ratet Input Shear Modulus - dyne/cm**2 0 330E+12 Input Fault Area - cm**2 0 570E+13 LOG10[Mo(m)J - (1 50)m + (16 05) IMAX AMHAX PMAX ARATE - EX-RATE + CH-RATE i e eooo i oooo o 02793 o 01743 o 01040 IND_RL 2 RUPTURE AREA VS MAGNITUDE A_RA B_RA SIG_RA -3 490 FAULT SEGMENT COORDINATES 1 -117 6370 33 8540 2 -117 3480 33 6430 HDP 2 ORIGINAL FAULT CROSS SECTION 1 0 0000 0 0000 2 0 0000 15 0000 Computed Total Fault Area = 0 54E+03 FAULT 7 FAULT NAMEi EARTHQUAKE VALLEY NPP NR2, ATTENUATION CODES.- 3 10 13 AMMIN AMSTEP IRATE RATE BETA ECTR ECDP COEP 5 000 0 1000 1 2 0000 2 072 1 000 2 000 1 000 UMAX AMMAX PMAX 1 6 SO 1 00 dmchar ampchar dmpchar 0 50 6 00 1 00 Slip Rate ( 2 0000 mm/yr) Converted to Activity Rate Input Shear Modulus - dyne/cm**2 0 330E+12 Input Fault Area - cm"2 0 300E*13 LOG10[Mo(m)l = (1 50)m + (16 05) IMAX AMMAX PMAX ARATE - EX-RATE * CH-RATE 1 6 5000 1 0000 0 01138 0 00521 0 00617 IND_RL 2 RUPTURE AREA VS MAGNITUDE A_RA B_RA SIG_RA -3 490 FAULT SEGMENT COORDINATES 1 -116 4107 33 0761 2 -116 4970 33 1113 3 -116 5815 33 1817 NDP 2 ORIGINAL FAULT CROSS SECTION 1 0 0000 0 0000 2 0 0000 15 0000 Computed Total Fault Area = 0 30E+03 FAULT 8 FAULT NAME. PALOS VERDES NFP HRL ATTENUATION CODES 4 10 13 AMMIN AMSTEP IRATE RATE BETA ECTR ECDP COEF 5 000 0 1000 1 3 0000 2 030 4 600 2 000 1 000 UMAX AHMAX PMAX 1 7 10 1 00 dmchar ampchar dmpchar 0 SO 6 60 1 00 Slip Rate ( 3 0000 mm/yr) Converted to Activity Rate: Input Shear Modulus - dyne/cm**2 0 330E+12 Input Fault Area - cm**2 0 125E+14 LOGlOlMo(m)] = (1 50)m + (16 OS) IMAX AMMAX PMAX ARATE = EX-RATE + CH-RATE 1 7 1000 1 0000 0 02038 0 01553 0 004B5 INO RL ~ 2 RUPTURE AREA VS MAGNITUDE A_RA B_RA SIO_RA -3 490 0 910 0 240 FAULT SEGMENT COORDINATES 1 -117 9388 33 2825 2 -118 1977 33 6571 3 -118 2758 33 7560 4 -118 5568 33 9720 NDP 2 ORIGINAL FAULT CROSS SECTION 1 0 0000 0 0000 2 0 0000 13 0000 Computed Total Fault Area = 0 13K+04 FAULT 9 FAULT NAME SAN JACINTO-ANZA NFP NRL ATTENUATION CODES: 3 10 13 AMMIN AMSTEP IRATE RATE BETA ECTR ECDP COEF 5 000 0 1000 1 12 0000 2 072 4 500 2 000 1 000 UMAX AMMAX PMAX 1 7 20 1 00 dmchar ampchar dmpchar 0 50 6 70 1 00 Slip Rate ( 12 0000 mm/yr) Converted to Activity Rates Input Shear Modulus - dyne/cm**2 0 330E+12 Input Fault Area - cm**2 0 162E+14 LOGlOIMo(m)] - (1 50)111 + (16 05) IMAX AMMAX PMAX ARATE - EX-RATE + CH-RATE 1 7 2000 1 0000 0 06901 0 07119 0 01782 IND_RL 2 RUPTURE AREA VS MAGNITUDE A_RA B_RA SIG_RA -3 490 FAULT SEGMENT COORDINATES 1 -116 9170 33 7400 2 -116 5333 33 4750 3 -116 1220 33 2630 NDP 2 ORIGINAL FAULT CROSS SECTION 1 0 0000 0 0000 2 0 0000 IB 0000 Computed Total Fault Area = 0 16E+04 FAULT 10 FAULT NAME SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY NFP NRL ATTENUATION CODES 3 10 13 AMMIN AMSTEP IRATE RATE BETA ECTR ECDP COEF 5 000 0 1000 1 12 0000 2 072 2 100 2 000 1 000 UMAX AMMAX PMAX " 1 6 90 1 00 dmchar ampchar dmpchar 0 50 6 40 1 00 Slip Rate ( 12 0000 iron/yr) Converted to Activity Ratei Input Shear Modulus - dyne/cm**2 0 330E+12 Input Fault Area - cm**2 0 756E*13 LOG10 [Mo(ra) J = (1 50)111 + (If OS) IMAX AMMAX PMAX ARATE = EX-RATE + CH-RATE 1 6 9000 1 0000 0 07241 0 04897 0 02344 IND_RL 2 RUPTURE AREA VS MAGNITUDE A_RA B_RA SIG_RA -3 490 FAULT SEGMENT COORDINATES 1 -117 2370 34 0170 2 -117 2333 34 0167 3 -116 9170 33 7400 NDP 2 ORIGINAL FAULT CROSS SECTION 1 0 0000 0 0000 2 0 0000 18 0000 Computed Total Fault Area =. 0 77E+03 FAULT 11 FAULT KAME SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK NFP NRL ATTENUATION CODES t 2 10 13 AMMIN AMSTEP IRATE RATE BETA ECTR ECDP COEF 5 000 0 1000 1 4 0000 2 072 2 000 2 000 1 000 UMAX AMMAX PMAX 1 6 80 1 00 dmchar ampchar dmpchar 0 50 6 30 1 00 Slip Rate { 4 0000 mm/yr) Converted to Activity Ratet Input Shear Modulus - dyne/cm**2 0 330E+12 Input Fault Area - cm**2 0 600E+13 LOG10[Mo(ro)l = (1 50)11 + (16 05) IMAX AMMAX PMAX ARATE - EX-RATE f CH-RATE 1 6 8000 1 0000 0 02343 0 01468 0 00876 IND_RL 2 RUPTURE AREA VS MAGNITUDE A__RA B_RA SIG_RA -3 490 FAULT SEGMENT COORDINATES 1 -116 5080 33 4570 2 -116 1940 33 2000 NDP 2 ORIGINAL FAULT CROSS SECTION 1 0 0000 0 0000 2 0 0000 15 0000 Computed Total Fault Area = 0 61E+03 FAULT 12 FAULT NAME ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN NPP NRL ATTENUATION CODES 2 10 13 AMMIN AMSTEP IRATE RATE BETA ECTR 5 000 0 1000 1 4 0000 2 072 1 900 UMAX AMMAX PMAX 1 6 80 1 00 ECDP COEP 2 000 1 000 dmchar ampchar dmpchar 0 50 6 30 1 00 Slip Rate ( 4 0000 iran/yr) Converted to Activity Ratet Input Shear Modulus - dyne/cm**2 0 330E+12 Input Fault Area - cm**2 0 570E*13 LOG10[Mo(m)] » (1 S0)m + (16 05) IMAX AHMAX PMAX ARATE = EX-RATE t CH-RATE 1 6 8000 1 0000 0 02226 0 01394 0 00832 IND_RL 2 RUPTURE AREA VS MAGNITUDE A_RA FAULT SEGMENT COORDINATES 1 -116 3620 32 9650 2 -116 0060 32 7790 NDP 2 ORIGINAL FAULT CROSS SECTION 1 0 0000 0 0000 2 0 0000 15 0000 Computed Total Fault Area = 0 59E+03 SIG RA -3 490 FAULT 13 FAULT NAME, NEWPORT-1NGLEWOOD (L A Basin) NPP 5 NRL 10 ATTENUATION CODES 13 AMMIN 5 000 AMSTEP 0 1000 IRATE 1 RATE 1 0000 BETA 2 072 ECTR 3 200 ECDP 2 000 COEF 1 000 NMAX AMMAX PMAX 1 6 90 1 00 dmchar ampchar dmpchar 0 50 6 40 1 00 Slip Rate ( 1 0000 mm/yr) Converted to Activity Rate Input Shear Modulus - dyne/cm**2 0 330E+12 Input Fault Area - cm**2 0 832E+13 LOGlOIMo(m)] =. (1 50)m * (16 05) IMAX AMMAX PMAX ARATE = EX-RATE + CH-RATE 1 6 9000 1 0000 0 00664 0 00449 0 00215 IND_RL 2 RUPTURE AREA VS MAGNITUDE A_RA FAULT SEGMENT COORDINATES 1 -118 3723 34 0337 2 -118 1862 33 8073 3 -118 1510 33 7822 4 -118 1208 33 7746 5 -117 9246 33 6061 NDP 2 ORIGINAL FAULT CROSS SECTION 1 0 0000 0 0000 2 0 0000 13 0000 Computed Total Fault Area - 0 63E+03 SIG RA -3 490 FAULT 14 FAULT NAME: CHINO-CENTRAL AVE (Elsinore) NFP NRL ATTENUATION CODES; 2 10 24 AMMIN AMSTEP IRATE RATE BETA ECTR ECDP COEF 5 000 0 1000 1 1 0000 2 072 1 400 2 000 1 000 UMAX AHHAX PMAX 1 6 70 1 00 dmchar ampchar dmpchar 0 50 6 20 1 00 Slip Rate { 1 0000 unn/yr) Converted to Activity Rate: Input Shear Modulus - dyne/cm**2 0 330E+12 Input Fault Area - cm**2 0 476E+13 LOGlOIMolm)) = (1 50)m + (16 05) IMAX AMMAX PMAX ARATE = EX-RATS + CH-RATE 1 6 7000 1 0000 0 00574 0 00329 0 00245 IND RL ~ 2 RUPTURE AREA VS MAGNITUDE A_RA B_RA SIG_RA -3 490 FAULT SEGMENT COORDINATES 1 -117 7455 34 0332 2 -117 5682 33 8275 NDP 2 ORIGINAL FAULT CROSS SECTION 1 0 0000 0 0000 2 7 2000 15 4000 Computed Total Fault Area » 0 48E+03 FAULT 15 FAULT NAME WHITTIER NFP NRL ATTENUATION CODES 2 10 13 AMMIN AMSTEP IRATE RATE BETA ECTR ECDP COEF 5 000 0 1000 1 2 5000 2 072 1 800 2 000 1 000 UMAX AMMAX PMAX 1 6 80 1 00 dmchar ampchar dn^char 0 50 6 30 1 00 Slip Rate ( 2 5000 mm/yr) Converted to Activity Rate. Input Shear Modulus - dyne/cm**2 0 330E+12 Input Fault Area - cm**2 0 555E+13 LOG10fMo(m)J = (1 50)0 -I- (16 05) IMAX AMMAX PMAX ARATE a EX-RATE + CH-RATE 1 6 8000 1 0000 0 01355 0 00848 0 OOS06 IND_RL 2 RUPTURE AREA VS MAGNITUDE A_RA B_RA SIG_RA -3 490 0 910 FAULT SEGMENT COORDINATES 1 -118 0180 33 9860 2 -117 6370 33 8540 NDP 2 ORIGINAL FAULT CROSS SECTION 1 0 0000 0 0000 2 0 0000 15 0000 Computed Total Fault Area = 0 58E+03 SITE 1 COORDINATES -117 2642 33 0710 CAMP & BOZ (1997 Rev ) AL 1 AMPLITUDES (g) LN (AMPLITUDE) : FAULT 1 E(NO/YR) FAULT 2 EINO/YR) FAULT 3 EINO/YR) FAULT 4 EINO/YR) FAULT 5 EINO/YR) FAULT 6 EINO/YR) FAULT 7 EINO/YH) FAULT 8 EINO/YR) FAULT 9 EINO/YR) FAULT 10 E(NO/YH) FAULT 11 E(NO/YR) FAULT 12 E(NO/YR) FAULT 13 EINO/YR) FAULT 14 EINO/YR) FAULT 15 EINO/YR) TOTAL E (NO/YR) TOTAL RISK AMPLITUDES (g) . LN (AMPLITUDE) FAULT 1 EINO/YR) FAULT 2 E(HO/YR) FAULT 3 EINO/YR) FAULT 4 EINO/YR) FAULT 5 EINO/YR) FAULT 6 EINO/YR) FAULT 7 EINO/YR) FAULT 8 EINO/YR) FAULT 9 E(NO/YR) FAULT 10 E1NO/YR) FAULT 11 E(NO/YR) FAULT 12 EINO/YR) FAULT 13 EINO/YR) FAULT 14 EINO/YR) FAULT IS EINO/YR) TOTAL E (NO/YR) TOTAL RISK SPECIFIED RISKS: ESTIMATED LN AMP ESTIMATED AMP (g) i CAMP & BOZ (1997 Rev ) AMPLITUDES (g) : LN (AMPLITUDE) : FAULT 1 EINO/YR) FAULT 2 EINO/YR) FAULT 3 EINO/YR) FAULT 4 EINO/YR) FAULT 5 EINO/YR) FAULT 6 E (NO/YR) FAULT 7 EINO/YR) FAULT 8 EINO/YR) FAULT 9 EINO/YR) FAULT 10 EINO/YR) FAULT 11 EINO/YR) FAULT 12 EINO/YR) FAULT 13 E (NO/YR) FAULT 14 EINO/YR) FAULT 15 EINO/YR) TOTAL EINO/YR) TOTAL RISK AMPLITUDES (g) i LN (AMPLITUDE) < FAULT 1 EINO/YR) FAULT 2 EINO/YR) FAULT 3 EINO/YR) FAULT 4 E (NO/YR) FAULT 5 E (NO/YR) FAULT 6 E (NO/YR) FAULT 7 EINO/YR) FAULT 8 EINO/YR) FAULT 9 EINO/YR) FAULT 10 EINO/YR) FAULT 11 E (NO/YR) FAULT 12 EINO/YR) FAULT 13 EINO/YR) FAULT 14 EINO/YR) FAULT 15 EINO/YR) TOTAL E(NO/YR) TOTAL RISK SPECIFIED RISKS ESTIMATED LN AMP ESTIMATED AMP (g) 0 1000E+000 2000E+000 3000E+000 4000E+000 5000E+000 6000E+000 7000E-tOOO 8000E+000 9000E+000 1000E+01 -2 30 -1 61 -1 20 -0 92 -0 69 -0 51 -0 36 -0 22 -0 11 0 00 0 5344E-020 3236E-020 1870E-020 9861E-030 4847E-030 2294E-030 1071E-030 4994E-040 2349E-040 1119E-04 0 2226E-020 6450E-030 1698E-030 4364E-040 1155E-040 3219E-050 9501E-060 29S9E-060 9792E-070 3398E-07 0 2956E-020 9092E-030 2236E-030 5310E-040 1317E-040 34B5E-OSO 9889E-060 2999E-060 9672E-070 3301E-07 0 3172E-020 4480E-030 7175E-040 1377E-040 3100E-050 7979E-060 2295E-060 7243E-070 2475E-070 9052E-08 0 3121E-020 3267E-030 4597E-040 8347E-OSO 1845E-050 4753E-060 1384E-060 4454E-070 1558E-070 5851E-08 0 5255E-030 2201E-040 1835E-050 2347E-060 4011E-070 8466E-080 2098E-080 5903E-090 1835E-090 6123E-10 0 1294E-030 3353E-050 20S1E-060 2107E-070 3016E-080 5493E-090 1197E-090 2933B-100 7427E-110 1563E-11 0 2953E-030 1654E-040 1692E-050 2529E-060 4903E-070 1150E-070 3121E-080 9512E-090 3186E-090 1153E-09 0 1667E-020 9346E-040 9274E-050 1342E-050 2522E-060 5751E-070 1522E-070 4532E-080 1487E-080 5282E-09 0 5785E-030 1649E-040 1079E-050 1155E-060 1716B-070 3224E-080 7224E-090 1833E-090 5021E-100 1321E-10 0 1460E-030 3429E-050 1987E-060 1947E-070 2697E-080 4780E-090 1011E-090 2385B-100 5593E-110 6281E-12 0 9063E-040 1854E-050 9947E-070 9245E-080 1230E-080 2106E-090 4276E-100 9276B-110 1622E-110 OOOOE+00 0 2473E-040 5646E-060 3271E-070 3224E-080 4498E-090 B021E-100 1707E-100 4055E-110 9428E-120 1714E-12 0 1547E-040 2395E-060 1079E-070 8829E-090 1061E-090 1645E-100 2822E-110 3227E-120 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 3355E-040 5434E-060 2519E-070 2105E-080 2572E-090 4054E-100 7268E-110 1016E-110 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 2032E-010 5723E-020 239SE-020 1107E-020 5147E-030 2375B-030 1094B-030 506SE-040 2373E-040 1127E-04 0 2012E-010 5707E-020 2393E-020 1106E-020 5146E-030 2375E-030 1094E-030 5066E-040 2373E-040 1127E-04 0 IIOOE+OIO 1200E+010 1300E+010 1400E+010 1500E+01 0 10 0 18 0 26 0 34 0 41 0 5414E-050 2664B-050 1333E-050 6789E-060 3516E-06 0 1236B-070 46S4E-080 1855B-080 7609E-090 3229E-09 0 1186E-070 4465E-080 17S5E-080 7172E-090 3038E-09 0 3513E-080 1436E-080 6148E-090 2741E-090 1267E-09 0 2335E-080 9820E-090 4325E-090 1983E-090 9390E-10 0 2126E-100 7209E-110 2062E-110 3493E-120 OOOOE+00 0 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 4446E-100 1802E-100 7499E-110 3151E-110 1286E-11 0 1987E-090 7771E-100 3225B-100 1297E-100 4395E-11 0 2316E-110 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 OOOOEtOOO OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 5445E-050 2676E-050 1338E-050 6809E-060 3524E-06 0 5445E-050 2676E-050 1338E-050 6809E-060 3524E-06 0 010000 0 005000 0 002105 0 001000 0 000500 -1 918 -1 548 -1 156 -0 887 -0 686 0 14690 0 21272 0 31469 0 41196 0 50340 AL 2 0 1000E+000 2000E+000 3000E+000 4000E+000 5000E+000 6000E+000 7000E+000 8000E+000 9000E+000 1000E+01 -2 30 -1 61 -1 20 -0 92 -0 69 -0 51 -0 36 -0 22 -0 11 0 00 0 4067E-020 2214E-020 1109E-020 4869E-030 1998E-030 8026E-040 3234E-040 1323E-040 5534E-050 2370E-05 0 1554E-020 3446E-030 6S21E-040 1374E-040 2964E-050 6938E-060 1760E-060 4812E-070 1409E-070 4388E-08 0 2462E-020 7118E-030 16D1E-030 3532E-040 8229E-050 2064E-050 5579E-060 1619E-060 5011E-070 1645E-07 0 2188E-020 2417E-030 3227E-040 5385E-050 1083E-050 2533E-060 6703E-070 1966E-070 6284E-080 2164E-08 0 1639E-020 1161E-030 1257E-040 1878E-050 3552E-060 8035E-070 2093E-070 6107E-080 195BE-080 6792E-09 0 2153E-030 6248E-050 4168E-060 4541E-070 6846E-080 1303E-080 2949E-090 7598E-100 2126E-100 5988E-11 0 3066E-040 4604E-060 2039E-070 1647E-080 1955E-090 2995E-100 5051E-110 4050E-120 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 1767E-030 8075E-050 7280E-060 9931B-070 1792E-070 3961E-080 1022E-080 2980E-090 9578E-100 3328E-10 0 1079E-020 5109E-040 4580E-050 6166E-060 1096E-060 2388E-070 6079E-080 1750E-080 5564E-090 1915E-09 0 2417E-030 4989E-050 2689E-060 2507E-070 3341E-080 5718E-090 1166E-090 25B1E-100 4941E-110 OOOOE+00 0 5097E-040 818SE-060 3780E-070 3148E-080 3833E-090 6006E-100 1085E-100 1669E-110 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 3066E-040 4307E-060 1844E-070 1457E-080 1700E-090 2536E-100 405BE-110 3136E-120 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 9905E-050 164BE-060 7B84E-OBO 6769E-090 8460E-100 1363E-100 2531E-110 4616E-120 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 4096E-050 4085E-070 1416E-OBO 9581E-100 9613E-110 1019E-110 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 1063E-040 1177E-060 4347E-080 30B2E-090 3259E-100 4182E-110 1826E-120 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 1376E-010 3700E-020 1389E-020 5440E-030 2126E-030 8338E-040 3317E-040 1347E-040 5607E-050 2394E-05 0 1366E-010 3693E-020 1388E-020 5439E-030 2126E-030 833BE-040 3317E-040 1347E-040 5607E-050 2394E-05 0 1100E+010 1200E+010 1300E+010 1400E+010 1500E+01 0 10 0 18 0 26 0 34 0 41 0 1041E-050 4686E-060 2161E-060 1020E-060 4918E-07 0 1446E-OBO 5011E-090 1819E-090 6B83E-100 2678E-10 0 5698E-OBO 2071E-080 7869E-090 3111E-090 1275E-09 0 7941E-090 3081E-090 1255E-090 5328E-100 2315E-10 0 2518E-090 9846E-100 397SE-100 1634E-100 5565E-11 0 1462E-110 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOEtOOO OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 1219E-100 4693E-110 1721E-110 6019E-120 1694E-12 0 7005E-100 2613E-100 8566E-110 3433E-110 OOOOE+00 0 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOEtOOO OOOOE+00 0 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 OOOOE+000 OOOOE+000 OOOOEtOOO OOOOE+000 OOOOE+00 0 1049E-050 4716E-060 2172E-060 1024E-OGO 4937B-07 0 1049E-050 4716E-060 2172E-060 1024E-060 4937E-07 0 010000 0 005000 0 002105 0 001000 0 000500 -2 137 -1 770 -1 377 -1 103 -0 896 0 11799 0 17035 0 25244 0 33176 0 40B07 CLOSEST DISTANCES BETWEEN SITE AND FAULT RUPTURES FAULT NAME CD 1DRP CD 2DRP CDIST CLODIS CD EPI CD HYPO 1 ROSE CANYON 2 NEWPORT- INGLEWOOD (Offshore) 3 CORONADO BANK 4 ELSINORE-JULIAN S ELSINORE-TEMECULA 6 ELS INORE -GLEN IVY 7 EARTHQUAKE VALLEY 8 PALOS VERDES 9 SAN JACINTO-ANZA 10 SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY 11 SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK 12 ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN 13 NEWPORT- INGLEWOOD (L A Basin) 14 CHINO-CENTRAL AVE (Elsinore) IS WHITTIER 8 0 18 0 32 1 41 3 41 3 64 1 64 8 67 1 78 0 81 1 82 S 84 9 85 6 88 8 93 7 8 0 18 0 32 1 41 3 41 3 64 1 64 8 67 1 78 0 81 1 82 5 84 9 85 6 86 9 93 7 8 5 18 3 32 2 41 4 41 4 64 2 64 9 67 2 78 0 81 2 82 6 84 9 85 7 88 1 93 8 8 0 18 0 32 1 41 3 41 3 64 1 64 8 67 1 78 0 81 1 82 5 84 9 85 6 88 1 93 7 8 0 19 1 32 1 41 3 41 5 64 9 65 4 68 0 78 0 81 5 82 8 85 9 86 7 88 1 94 5 8 1 km 19 1 km 32 3 km 41 3 km 41 5 km 64 9 km 65 4 km 68 0 km 78 0 km 81 6 km 82 8 km 85 9 km 86 7 km 89 1 km 94 5 km EXPLANATION CD 1DRP = Closest distance to projection of rupture area along fault trace CD~2DRP = Closest distance to surface projection of the rupture area CDIST a closest distance to seismogenic rupture CLODIS <• Closest distance to subsurface rupture CD_EPI - Closest epicentral distance CD_HYPO = Closest hypocentral distance APPENDIX F LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS SPECIFICATIONS z zo 1at a 111 (D ro c c *; O) O) £ co co a. 0) (D 0) Q Q Q 1 (0 — '"ro cg raQ. <f O ^j- 03 CO 03 O 1 CD T~ OJ O o ^v O c i_ O CD CD -= JD ra§l Z -I Z fe -G o o o CD CD 0 £ S'S'S'? Q_ CL CL 111 D) O CO Factor of SafetyCylclic Stress RatioInduced by DesignEarthquake Cylclic Stress Ratio to Cause Liquefaction (M=7 5) Cylclic Stress Ratio to Cause Liquefaction (M=7 5) Stress Reduction Coefficient (rd) Effective Overburden Stress (a,1) (psf) Overburden Stress I'SOCS I'60 Rod Length Correction Depth to Midpoint (ft) HI LJJ fe 88? ? CO.c O)c (D o 0. CD CO £ S .» COCO «= £ § in cr *1oc Assumedo 2° P. CO tomatic hammer to standEnergy Correction for N90 of aul"o. 0 r\i d Whitman, 1986, CN = (:Overburden Correction, Lao ani1 c E o V U Rod Length Correction for Samc id length, and overburdeN-value corrected for energy, reIriss, 1997) Allows use of base curve, Fig 2 (Youd and Idriss,u ent per Eq 5 (Youd andN-value corrected for fines cont•esults as Fig 40 of Seed and Idriss, ASCE, September 1971Idriss, 1997), gives samec CO •O I CM cr111 T3 CO Js U COo t)eocs Curve also presented as Fig 7 1 (SCEC, 1997) INDElz and Idriss, 1997) usmg(lPer Figure 2, base curve (Youdatio required to induce liquefaction is indetermmant The layeio:e, and the Cyclic Stressvertical portion of the base curvctore (Fig 12, Youd and Idriss (1997) and Fig 7 2, SCEC (199^J?ting using revised Idriss iCorrected for Magnitude Weighi_* o i t-- O) r— b- 0) i <Si a.Per Seed and Idriss, ASCE, SeCD T- CM CO .2<D 1 | « "(0 •s w CO «^. O) Oco ,_ O CM O CO O £^ca in o m o m o ^— CO T— CO T- CO II II II II II II V A V A V A g> g O w W O1° g I 8 1w •DCO£o.w zo zoI UJ a co wo O to_i "co co _^ CO Q. ^0 •o CO .0 CO co O T— CO ^~ ^^o o ^— O c: i_o a) CD -i= X5 E g E CO o 3 Z °Z CD o tj o o CD CD CD = 222n n n in D) C Om Factor of SafetyCylclic Stress RatioInduced by DesignEarthquake Cylclic Stress Ratio to Cause Liquefaction (M=7 5) Cylclic Stress Ratio to Cause Liquefaction (M=7 5) Stress Reduction Coefficient (rd) Effective Overburden Stress (ao') (psf) Overburden Stress Rod Length Correction Depth to Midpoint (ft) LII a)S f a> £ S Ia. J Assumedto •2 CO T3 C. 2co o for N90 of automatic hammer iEnergy Correctiono Q. «•_ 2 o Ci- ii d ction, Lao and Whitman, 1986Overburden Corre£ Q.stion for Samples <10 m in deRod Length Correic CD •E 1 (D for energy, rod length, and ovN-value corrected997) Allows use of base curve. Fig 2 (Youd and Idriss, 1997)<0~at 2 T>c CO T3 for fines content per Eq 5 (YcN-value correctedas Fig 40 of Seed and Idriss, ASCE, September 1971CO£ CO CO CO 0>> 5> 1 iTJ TJ Cco TJ CM Calculated by EqCurve also presented as Fig 7 1 (SCEC, 1997) INDET indicates that theCOoJl Z ? CO3 p" 1 U) COc2 T3 Cco •o 3 O CD 3 O Per Figure 2, basequired to induce liquefaction is indetermmant The layer is non-liquefiableSCO DC COI CO :he base curve, and the Cyclicvertical portion of 1Fig 12, Youd and Idriss (1997) and Fig 7 2, SCEC (1997))£2 I U) COc 2 •n nitude Weighting using reviseiCorrected for Mag* CO * o in CO o i t»is, ASCE, September 1971Per Seed and Idris i t5 •S CD lr a~ £<2 roe w CO 8" _*i15 -^ (/) o co o I,s s^ w 0 c"*""* ni>* <u isS-s g 2l | °> c D) o 1 « I f >§ i • in o in o m o *— CO V" CO v- CO II II II II II IIV A V A V A < o CDo> o aLU <S O 0 Q. I (D E<uCO s CO "O H ™>s i. i w 5 B c? City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Av Carlsbad, CA 92008 06-23-2008 Plan Check Revision Permit No PCR08045 Building Inspection Request Line (760) 602-2725 Job Address 1923 CALLE BARCELONA CBAD St 138 Permit Type PCR Status PENDING Parcel No 2550120400 Lot# 0 Applied 05/06/2008 Valuation $0 00 Construction Type NEW Entered By RMA Reference # Plan Approved PC # CB080303 Issued Project Title APPLE STORE-BLDG 3-REVISE Inspect Area CURTAIN WALL SUPPORT DUE TO EXISTING CONSTRUCTION Applicant Owner BRAD MURRAY BORDERS INC <LF> FOURTH QUARTER PROPERTIES XXX L C/0 DELOITTE TAX LLP PO BOX 131071 PO BOX 1131 92007 CARLSBAD CA 92013 619520-6308 Plan Check Revision Fee $12000 Additional Fees SO 00 Total Fees $12000 Total Payments To Date $000 Balance Due $12000 FINAL APPROVAL Inspector — Date — Clearance NOTICE Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the "Imposition" of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as "fees/exactions" You have 90 days from the date this permit was issued to protest imposition of these fees/exactions If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3 32 030 Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity changes, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise expired City of Carlsbad Building Department Plan Check Revision No Project Address /ff25> Cities Contact Original Plan Check No ? 0 Fax APN Business at this address TV- G. • General Scope of Work- Original plans prepared by an architect or engineer, revisions must be signed & stamped by that person 1 Elements revised Plans Calculations So/Is Q Energy Other 2 Describe revisions in detail ^Uufcrr**^ i^A-n St. <•>*«- , tfV TO v*U torkwLr S^ i*^r^£ P**WWL* tfc y n »*.L« 3 List page(s) where each revision is shown 4 List revised sheets that replace existing sheets 5 Does this revision, in any way, alter the exterior of the project? Q Yes @ No O Does this revision add ANY new floor area(s)? Q Yes R3 No 7 Does this revision affect any fire related issues? Q Yes ^ No 8 Is this a complete set that replaces the original permitted set? O Yes @ No 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008 Phone 760-602-2717/2718/2719/7541 Fax 760-602-8558 0 eo i^ vA D \ LJ.Oh-LLJ D_ < ,0 EsGil Corporation In Partnership with government for (BuiUing Safety DATE 6/20/08 a APPLICANT JURISDICTION City of Carlsbad a PLAN REVIEWER a FILE PLAN CHECK NO O8-O3O3 PCR08-045 SET II PROJECT ADDRESS 1923 Calle Barcelona Suite 138 PROJECT NAME Building 3 Facade Revision - TI XI 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 X3 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 # Mail Telephone Fax In Person REMARKS By Doug Moody Enclosures Esgil Corporation D GA D MB D EJ D PC 6/13/08 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 * San Diego, California 92123 + (858)560-1468 4 Fax (858) 560-1576 EsGil Corporation In Partnership with (government for (RuiCcCing Safety DATE 5/14/08 JURISDICTION City of Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO 08-0303 PCR08-O45 SET I PROJECT ADDRESS 1923 Calle Barcelona Suite 138 PROJECT NAME Building 3 Facade Revision - TI APPLICANT CTPLAN REVIEWER a 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 X] 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 X] The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to Brad Murry P O Box 1131, Cardiff, CA 92007 Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed XI Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed Person contacted Brad Murry Telephone # 619-520-6308 Date contacted s/rv'of (by r^4 Fax # (7C<0 ^3^ /££O Mail Telephone ^ Fax--' In Person REMARKS By Doug Moody Enclosures Esgil Corporation D GA D MB D EJ D PC 5/8/08 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego California 92123 *• (858)560-1468 + Fax (858) 560-1576 City of Carlsbad 08-O3O3 PCRO8-O45 5/14/08 PLAN REVIEW CORRECTION LIST TENANT IMPROVEMENTS PLAN CHECK NO 08-O3O3 PCRO8-O45 JURISDICTION City of Carlsbad OCCUPANCY M USE Retail TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION VB ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA SPRINKLERS'? YES REMARKS DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY JURISDICTION 2/19/08 DATE INITIAL PLAN REVIEW COMPLETED 5/14/O8 ACTUAL AREA 8520 STORIES 1 HEIGHT OCCUPANT LOAD 284 DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY ESGIL CORPORATION 5/8/08 PLAN REVIEWER Doug Moody FOREWORD (PLEASE READ) This plan review is limited to the technical requirements contained in the International Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, National Electrical Code and state laws regulating energy conservation, noise attenuation and 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 2007 CBC, which adopts the 2006 IBC The following items listed need clarification, modification or change All items must be satisfied before the plans will be in conformance with the cited codes and regulations Per Sec 105 4 of the 2006 Internationa! Building Code, the approval of the plans does not permit the violation of any state, county or city law To speed up the recheck process, please note on this list (or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed, i e . plan sheet number, specification section, etc Be sure to enclose the marked up list when you submit the revised plans City of Carlsbad 08-03O3 PCR08-045 5/14/08 Please make all corrections on the original tracings, as requested in the correction list Submit three sets of plans for commercial/industrial projects (two sets of plans for residential projects) For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in one of two ways 1 Deliver all corrected sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department, 1635 Faraday Ave , Carlsbad, CA 92008, (760) 602-2700 The City will route the plans to EsGil Corporation and the Carlsbad Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments 2 Bring one corrected set of plans and calculations/reports to EsGil Corporation, 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, CA 92123, (858) 560-1468 Deliver all remaining sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department for routing to their Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments NOTE Plans that are submitted directly to EsGil Corporation only will not be reviewed by the City Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments until review by EsGil Corporation is complete 1 Please clarify the revision'? Is the detail provided intended to replace detail 4 on sheet S5? If so why is the detail missing most of the information now shown in details 4 on S5? Please complete the new detail to show all of the pertinent information Section A1061 1 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 Please indicate here if any changes have been made to the plans that are not a result of corrections from this list If there are other changes, please briefly describe them and where they are located in the plans Have changes been made to the plans not resulting from this correction list? Please indicate Yes Q No a The jurisdiction has contracted with Esgil Corporation located at 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, California 92123, telephone number of 858/560-1468, to perform the plan review for your project If you have any questions regarding these plan review items, please contact Doug Moody at Esgil Corporation Thank you City of Carlsbad O8-0303 PCR08-045 5/14/08 VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURISDICTION City of Carlsbad O45 PLAN CHECK NO O8-O3O3 PCR08- PREPARED BY Doug Moody DATE 5/14/08 BUILDING ADDRESS 1923 Calle Barcelona Suite 138 BUILDING OCCUPANCY M TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION VB BUILDING PORTION Revision Air Conditioning Fire Sprinklers TOTAL VALUE Jurisdiction Code AREA ( Sq Ft ) cb Valuation Multiplier By Ordinance Reg Mod VALUE ($) Plan Check Fee by Ordinance ^ ! Type of Review Q Complete Review $12000 |~~l Repetitive Fee I Repeats ^^ I * Based on hourly rate Comments D Other r—| Hourly Esgil Plan Review Fee Structural Only Hour* $9600 Sheet 1 of 1 macvalue doc m§7]mDODCDOJ;omO)m OlCOSOm