The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1935 CAMINO VIDA ROBLE; ; CB973179; PermitBUILDING PERMIT Permit No: CB973179 10/30/98 11:07 Project No: A9701079 Page 1 of 1 Development No: DEV90002 Job Address: 1935 CAMINO VIDA ROBLE Suite: Permit Type: INDUSTRIAL BUILDING Parcel No: 212-092-13-00 Lot#: 49 Valuation: 0 Construction Typer Occupancy Group: Reference*: Stat Description: 38,500 SF SHELL TILT-UP Appli : 2 STORY-REAL PROPERTY SERVICES Apr/Issue: Entered By: RMA Appl/Ownr : RADFORD, MARK 760-432-0348 912 S ANDREASEN DR #103 ESCONDIDO CA 92029 *** Fees Required *** *** Fees Collected & Credits *** Fees: 2,282.00 Adjustments: .00 Total Credits: .00 Total Fees: 2,282.00 Total Payments: 2,282.00 Balance Due: .00 Fee description Units Fee/Unit Ext fee Data Other > 2282.00 2282.00 PLANCK SEWER 01/29/98 13:25 Page 1 of 1 Job Address: 1935 CAMINO VIDA ROBLE Permit Type: SEWER - OFFICE/WAREHOUSE Parcel No: 212-092-13-00 PERMIT Suite: Description: REAL PROPERTY SERVICES : 2 STORY CONCRETE OFFICE BUILDING Permitee: RADFORD, MARK 912 S ANDREASEN DR #103 ESCONDIDO CA 92029 760-432-0348 Permit No: SE980014 Bldg PlanCk#: PIP97003 Status: PENDING Applied: 01/29/98 Apr/Issue: Expired: Prepared By: DR *** Fees Required ******Fees Collected & Credits *** Fees: Adjustments: Total Fees: Fee description 30,028.00 .00 30,028.00 Total Credits: Total Payments: Balance Due: Units Fee/Unit .00 .00 30,028.00 Ext fee Data Enter Office Square Footage > Enter Warehouse Square Footage > Enter EDUs not mentioned above > Total EDUs Sewer Fee Enter Sewer EDUs and Benefit Area > * SEWER TOTAL 25000 4000 1.90 16.58 13.89 .80 1.90 16.59 30028.00 30028.00 NA J PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT 2075 Las Palmas Dr., Carlsbad CA 92009 (760)438-1161 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY PLAN CHECK NO. EST. VAL. Plan Ck. Deposit Address (include Bldg/Suite #)Business Name (at this address) Legal Description Lot No.Subdivision Name/Number Unit No.Phase No.Total # of units Assessor's Parcel #Existing Use Proposed Use Description of Work SQ. FT.#of Stories 1- # of Bedrooms # of Bathrooms Fax* (Sec. 7031.5 Business and Professions Code: Any City or County which requires a permit to construct, alter, improve, demolish or repair any structure, prior to its issuance, also requires the applicant for such permit to file a signed statement that he is licensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractor's License Law [Chapter 9, commending with Section 7000 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code] or that he is exempt therefrom, and the basis for the alleged exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by any applicant for a permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars ($500)). Name State License # Address License Class City State/Zip City Business License # Telephone # Designer Name State License # Address City State/Zip Telephone 1PENSATION Workers' Compensation Declaration: I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following declarations: (~1 I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self-insure for workers' compensation as provided by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued. Q I have and will maintain workers' compensation, as required by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued. My worker's compensation insurance carrier and policy number are: Insurance Company Policy No. Expiration Date (THIS SECTION NEED NOT BE COMPLETED IF THE PERMIT IS FOR ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS [$100] OR LESS) C] CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION: I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the Workers' Compensation Laws of California. WARNING: Failure to secure workers' compensation coverage is unlawful, and shall subject an employer to criminal penalties and civil fines up to one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000), in addition to the cost of compensation, damages as provided for in Section 3706 of the Labor code, interest and attorney's fees. SIGNATURE DATE I hereby affirm that I am exempt from the Contractor's License Law for the following reason: D I, as owner of the property or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work and the structure is not intended or offered for sale (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who does such work himself or through his own employees, provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If, however, the building or improvement is sold within one year of completion, the owner-builder will have the burden of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sale). D I, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to construct the project (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and contracts for such projects with contractors) licensed pursuant to the Contractor's License Law). O I am exempt under Section Business and Professions Code for this reason: 1. I personally plan to provide the major labor and materials for construction of the proposed property improvement. Q YES [UNO 2. I (have / have not) signed an application for a building permit for the proposed work. 3. I have contracted with the following person (firm) to provide the proposed construction (include name / address / phone number / contractors license number): 4. I plan to provide portions of the work, but I have hired the following person to coordinate, supervise and provide the major work (include name / address / phone number / contractors license number): 5. I will provide some of the work, but I have contracted (hired) the following persons to provide the work indicated (include name / address / phone number / type of work): PROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE DATE Is the applicant or future building occupant required to submit a business plan, acutely hazardous materials registration form or risk management and prevention program under Sections 25505, 25533 or 25534 of the Presley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act? Q YES fj NO Is the applicant or future building occupant required to obtain a permit from the air pollution control district,or air quality management district? Q YES Q NO Is the facility to be constructed within 1,000 feet of the outer boundary of a school site? D YES ^Cfl NO IF ANY OF THE ANSWERS ARE YES, A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MAY NOT BE ISSUED I/NLESS THE APPLICANT HAS MET OR IS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT. I hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued (Sec. 3097(i) Civil Code). LENDER'S NAME LENDER'S ADDRESS I certify that I have read the application and state that the above information is correct and that the information on the plans is accurate. I agree to comply with all City ordinances and State laws relating to building construction. I hereby authorize representatives of the CitV of Carlsbad to enter upon the above mentioned property for inspection purposes. I ALSO AGREE TO SAVE, INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARMLESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AGAINST ALL LIABILITIES, JUDGMENTS, COSTS AND EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINST SAID CITY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING OF THIS PERMIT. OSHA: An OSHA permit is required for excavations over 5'0" deep and demolition or construction of structures over 3 stories in height. EXPIRATION: Every permit issued by the Building Official under the provisions of this Code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or work authorized by such permit is not commenced within 365 days from the date of such permit or if the building or work authorized by such permit is suspended or abandoned at anytime after the ifork is commence** for a period of 180 days (Section 106.4.4 Uniform Building Code). APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE Sfsfa/f Sj^~^^/d*J###y/>4^J/7 ) DATE , WHITE: File YELLOW: Applicant PINK: Finance ' City of Carlsbad Building Department DATE: 09/11/98 TO: RADFORD, MARK 912 S ANDREASEN DR #103 ESCONDIDO CA 92029 PLAN CHECK EXPIRATION PC# CB973179 DATE: 10/23/98 ADDRESS: 1935 CAMINO VIDA ROBLE You have applied to have your plans checked on the date shown above, and you have not obtained your building permit. The provisions of Section 304 (d) of the Uniform Building Code state: "Section 304 (d) Expiration of Plan Review Applications for which no permit is issued within one year following the date of application shall expire by limitation, and plans and other data submitted for review may thereafter be returned to the applicant or destroyed by the Building Official. In order to renew action on an application after expiration, the applicant shall resubmit plans and pay a new plan review fee." Please check the appropriate box indicating your choice and return this letter to the BUILDING DEPARTMENT. _ PROJECT ABANDONED. I WILL PICK UP PLANS WITHIN 10 DAYS. _ PROJECT ABANDONED. PLANS MAY BE DESTROYED. If you have any questions, please contact the Building Department at (619) 438-1161 extension 4331. RAENETTE ABBEY Building Department 2O75 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1576 - (760) 438-1161 • FAX (76O) 438-0894 EsGil Corporation ^ProfessionaltPfan 'Bgvie'u) 'Engineers DATE: January 16, 1998 a AEEU£ANT JURISDICTION: Carlsbad Q PLAN REVIEWER Q FILE PLAN CHECK NO.: 97-3179 SET: II PROJECT ADDRESS: 1935 Camino Vida Roble PROJECT NAME: Office Shell Bunding 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: 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: 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 SEE REVISED VALUATION. By: Abe Doliente Enclosures: Esgil Corporation D GA D CM D EJ D PC 1/16/98 trnsmtl.dot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 4- San Diego, California 92123 4 (619)560-1468 + Fax (619) 560-1576 EsGil Corporation (ProfessionalPlan !RcViewt 'Engineers DATE: November 5, 1997 JURISDICTION: Carlsbad Q FILE PLAN CHECK NO.: 97-3179 SET: I PROJECT ADDRESS: 1935 Camino Vida Roble PROJECT NAME: Office Shell Building 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: Mark Radford 912 S. Andreasen, Suite 103, Escondido, CA 92029 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: Abe Doliente Enclosures: Esgil Corporation D GA D CM • EJ D PC 10/29/97 trnsmtl.dot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 4- (619)560-1468 + Fax (619) 560-1576 Carlsbad 97-3179 November 5, 1997 PLAN REVIEW CORRECTION LIST COMMERCIAL PLAN CHECK NO.: 97-3179 JURISDICTION: Carlsbad OCCUPANCY: B USE: Office (Shell) TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: V-N ACTUAL AREA: 38,500 SF ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA: ? STORIES: 2 HEIGHT: SPRINKLERS?: Yes OCCUPANT LOAD: 385 ** REMARKS: ** Occupant load to be checked at T. I. DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY JURISDICTION: ESGIL CORPORATION: 10/29/97 DATE INITIAL PLAN REVIEW PLAN REVIEWER: Abe Doliente COMPLETED: November 5, 1997 FOREWORD (PLEASE READ): This plan review is limited to the technical requirements contained in the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, National Electrical Code and state laws regulating energy conservation, noise attenuation and access for the disabled. This plan review is based on regulations enforced by the Building Department. You may have other corrections based on laws and ordinances enforced by the Planning Department, Engineering Department, Fire Department or other departments. Clearance from those departments may be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Code sections cited are based on the 1994 UBC. The following items listed need clarification, modification or change. All items must be satisfied before the plans will be in conformance with the cited codes and regulations. Per Sec. 106,4.3, 1994 Uniform Building Code, the approval of the plans does not permit the violation of any state, county or city law. To speed up the recheck process, please note on this list (or a 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. LIST NO. 22, GENERAL COMMERCIAL WITHOUT ENERGY OR POLICY SUPPLEMENTS (1994 UBC ) comrorw.dot Carlsbad 97-3179 November 5, 1997 Please make all corrections on the original tracings, as requested in the correction list. Submit three sets of plans for commercial/industrial 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, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92009, (619) 438-1161. 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, (619) 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. All sheets of the plans and the first sheet of the calculations are required to be signed by the California licensed architect or engineer responsible for the plan preparation. Please include the California license number, seal, date of license expiration and the date the plans are signed. Business and Professions Code. 2. Provide a Building Code Data Legend on the Title Sheet. Include the following code information for each building proposed: 4 Occupancy Group * Description of Use 4 Type of Construction * Sprinklers: Yes or No * Stories 4 Height * Floor Area + Justification to exceed allowable area in Table 5-B. (if applicable) 3. Provide a note with the building data legend stating that yards used for area increases shall be permanently maintained. 4. Clearly designate any side yards used to justify increases in allowable area based on Section 505. 5. Clearly dimension building setbacks from property lines, street centerlines, and from all adjacent buildings and structures on the site plan. 6. As shown, the building(s) is/are over area for the Type of Construction shown. Table 5-B. Carlsbad 97-3179 November 5, 1997 7. No single story can exceed the basic area allowed by Table 5-B plus the increases allowed by Section 505. 8. In all occupancies, floors above the first story having 10 or more occupants, shall have not less than two exits. Section 1003.1. 9. In areas where the occupant load exceeds 50, two exits are required, See . Table 10-A. 10. Exits should have a minimum separation of one-half the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the building or area served. Section 1003.3. 11. The maximum number of required exits and their required separation must be maintained until egress is provided from the structure. Section 1003.1. 12. Exit doors should swing in the direction of exit travel when serving any hazardous area or when the area served has an occupant load of 50 or more. Section 1004.2. 13. Note on the plans: "All exits are to be openable from inside without the use of a key or special knowledge." In lieu of the above, in a Group B, F, M or S occupancies, you may note "Provide a sign on or near the exit door, reading THIS DOOR TO REMAIN UNLOCKED DURING BUSINESS HOURS." This signage is only allowed at the main exit. Section 1004.3. 14. Show location of the stairways for the second floor. 15. Enclosed usable space under interior or exterior stairways should be protected on the enclosed side as required for one-hour fire-resistive construction. Show 2 x @ 16" o.c. nailers. Section 1006.12. 16. Exit signs are required whenever two exits are required. Show all required exit sign locations. Section 1013.1. 17. Show two sources of power for the lamps at exit signs. Section 1013.4. 18. Show that exits are lighted with at least one foot candle at floor level. Section 1012.1. 19. Show separate sources of power for exit illumination. (Occupant load exceeds 99). Section 1012.2, 20. Glazing in the following locations should be of safety glazing material in accordance with Section 2406.4 (see exceptions): Carlsbad 97-3179 November 5, 1997 a) Fixed and sliding panels of sliding door assemblies and panels in swinging doors other than wardrobe doors. 21. Note on the plans: "When serving more than 100 sprinkler heads, automatic sprinkler systems shall be supervised by an approved central, proprietary or remote, station service, or shall be provided with a local alarm which will give an audible signal at a constantly attended location." Section 904.3. 22. Provide a letter from the soils engineer confirming that the foundation plan, grading plan and specifications have been reviewed and that it has been determined that the recommendations in the soil report are properly incorporated into the plans. 23. Show the required contraction joints for the slab as required in the soils report. 24. Where flexible diaphragms provide lateral support for walls, the value of Cp for anchorage from UBC Table 16-0 shall be increased 50% for the center one-half of the diaphragm span. See footnote 3 in Table 16-0. 25. 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. 26. On the cover sheet of the plans, specify any items that will have a deferred submittal (roof joists, floor joists, sprinklers, etc.). Additionally, provide the following note on the plans, per Sec. 106.3.4.2: "Submittal documents for deferred submittal items shall be submitted to the architect or engineer of record, who shall review them and forward them to the building official with a notation indicating that the deferred submittal documents have been reviewed and that they have been found to be in general conformance with the design of the building. The deferred submittal items shall NOT be installed until their design and submittal documents have been approved by the building official." • TITLE 24 DISABLED ACCESS 27. Provide notes and details on the plans to show compliance with the enclosed Disabled Access Review List. Disabled access requirements may be more restrictive than the UBC. • ADDITIONAL 28. Complete ands recheck the callouts and cross references to the details. 29. Show RB-12 (5-1/8" X 29-1/2" GLB) as called out on sheets 1 & 11 of the structural calculations. Refer to sheet S-4 of the plans. Carlsbad 97-3179 November 5, 1997 30. Show the required lintel reinforcements as called out on sheet 62 of the structural calculations, or provide a lintel schedule. 31. Show the required footing sizes and reinforcements as called out on the structural calculations. 32. Please see the following corrections for electrical, plumbing, mechanical and energy. 33. 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. 34. 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: Q Yes a No 35. The jurisdiction has contracted with Esgil Corporation located at 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, California 92123; telephone number of 619/560-1468, to perform the plan review for your project. If you have any questions regarding these plan review items, please contact Abe Doliente at Esgil Corporation. Thank you. * ELECTRICAL PLAN REVIEW 4 1993 NEC «• PLAN REVIEW NUMBER: 97-3179 • PLAN REVIEWER: Eric Jensen 1. Please specify the wiring methods that will be used at this facility. Local ordinance restricts the use of armored and NM cable to residential uses only. Clearly specify that AC and NM cable shall not be used as a wiring method. 2. Include the circuiting for the sump pump shown at the truck loading dock. Note: If you have any questions regarding this electrical plan review list please contact the plan reviewer listed above at (619) 560-1468. To speed the review process, note on this list ( or a copy) where the corrected items have been addressed on the plans. Carlsbad 97-3179 November 5, 1997 DEPARTMENT OF STATE ARCHITECT NON RESIDENTIAL TITLE 24 DISABLED ACCESS REQUIREMENTS The following disabled access items are taken from the 1995 edition of California Building Code, Title 24. Per Section 101.17.11, all publicly and privately funded public accommodations and commercial facilities shall be accessible to persons with disabilities as follows: (1) Any building, structure, facility, complex, or improved area, or portions thereof, which are used by the general public. (2) Any sanitary facilities which are made available for the public, clients, or employees in such accommodations or facilities. (3) Any curb or sidewalk intended for public use that is constructed with private funds. NOTE: All Figures and Tables referenced in this checklist are printed in the California Building Code, Title 24. DISABLED ACCESS PARKING SPACES 1. Revise site plan to show compliance with the required number of accessible parking spaces for new facilities, (or at existing facilities where a change of occupancy occurs). Per Table 11B-7 the minimum number of spaces is: a) 1 for each 25 spaces up to 100 total spaces. b) 1 additional space for each 50 spaces for between 101 and 200 total spaces. 2. Revise plans to show that at least one in every 8 accessible spaces are served by an access aisle >96" in width and designated as VAN ACCESSIBLE, per Section 1129B.4.2. All such spaces may be grouped on one level of a parking structure. 3. Show or note on the plans that the accessible parking spaces are to be identified by a reflectorized sign, permanently posted immediately adjacent to and visible from each space, consisting of: a) A profile view of a wheelchair with occupant in white on dark blue background. b) The sign shall >70 in2 in area. c) When in the path of travel, they shall be posted >80" from the bottom of the sign to parking space finished grade. d) Signs may also be centered on the wall of the interior end of the parking space >36" from the parking space finished grade, ground or sidewalk. e) Spaces complying with Section 1129B.4.2 shall have an additional sign "Van-Accessible" mounted below the symbol of accessibility per Section 1129B.5. f) In addition, each accessible space is required to be marked with the international symbol of accessibility. Carlsbad 97-3179 November 5, 1997 4. Show, or note, that an additional sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place at each entrance to off street parking facilities, or immediately adjacent to and visible from each stall or space. The sign shall be >17" x 22" with lettering not £1" in height. Per Section 1129B.5 required wording is as follows. "Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for persons with disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed at or by telephoning ." CURB RAMPS 5. Revise plans to show that curb ramps shall be constructed at each corner of a street intersection or where a pedestrian way crosses a curb, per Section 1127B.5.1. 6. Plans shall show that curb ramps are >48" wide with a slope of £1:12 (8.33%), per Sections 1127B.5.2 and 1127B.5.3. The lower end of each curb ramp shall have a 1/2" lip beveled 45°, per Section 1127B.5.5. 7. Revise plans to show that the landing at the top of the curb shall be level and >48" depth for the entire width of the curb ramp, or the slope of the fanned or flared sides is <1:8 (12.5%), per Section 1127B.5.4. 8. Show or note that the surface of all curb ramps and the flared sides are to be slip resistant, and contrasting from the adjacent sidewalk finish, per Section 1127B.5.6. 9. Provide details or note on the plans that all curb ramps have a grooved border 12" wide at the level surface of the sidewalk along the top and each side approximately 3/4" o.c., per Section 1127B.5.7. 10. Show that detectable warnings, extending the full width and depth of the curb ramp, inside the grooved border are to be installed if the slope is <1:15 (6.66%), per Section 1127B.5.8. These consist of raised truncated domes with a diameter of 0.9" at the base, tapering to 0.45" at the top. Spacing shall be 2.35" o.c. 11. Locate curb ramps to prevent obstruction by blocked cars, per Section 1127B.5.9. WALKS AND SIDEWALKS 12. If any proposed walks slope >1:20 (5%) they must comply with ramp requirements of Section 1007, per Section 1023.3. Revise plans to show or note requirements. Carlsbad 97-3 179 November 5, 1997 13, Walks along an accessible route of travel are required to be >48" minimum in width and have slip resistant surfaces, per Section 1023.1. Revise plans to show compliance. 14. The maximum permitted cross slope shall be <1/£" per ft., per Section 1023.1.3. 15. Show or note that any abrupt level changes will be <Vzl along any accessible route of travel. When changes do occur, they shall be beveled with a slope of <1 :2. Level changes of £%" may be vertical. NOTE: If level changes >Vz\ they must comply with the requirements of curb ramps. 16. If grated openings are to be provided in the path of travel, they are to be limited to <1/£" in the direction of travel, per Section 1023.2. Revise plans to show, or note, compliance. 17. Show that a 36" wide detectable warning material is provided at boundaries between walkways and vehicular ways. Material shall comply with criteria of Section 1024.3, per Section 1024.5. PEDESTRIAN RAMPS 18. Show that any path of travel with a slope ^1:20 (5%) complies with pedestrian ramp requirements, per Sections 1023.3 and 1007.1 a. 19. The allowable slope for an accessible ramp is £1:12 (8.33%), per Section 1007.3a. Revise plans to show the least possible slope is being provided for all ramps. 20. The allowable cross slope at pedestrian ramps shall be <%" per ft (2%), per Section 1007.3.1 a. 21. Show or note that ramp surfaces will be slip resistant. 22. Ramps shall have a minimum width of 48 inches, per Section 1007.2.2a. Where a ramp serves a building having an occupant load of 300 or more, the minimum clear width shall be 60 inches. ENTRANCES AND CIRCULATION 23. Revise plans to show that all entrances, and exterior ground level exits, are accessible, per Section 1001.9.1. 24. Show that an accessible route of travel is to be provided to all portions of the building, to accessible building entrances and between the building and the public way, per Section 1114B. 1.2. Carlsbad 97-3179 November 5, 1997 DOORS 25. Show, or note, that there is a level floor or landing on each side of all doors. The floor or landing is to be <1/£" lower than the doorway threshold, per Section 1004.9.1a. 26. Show or note that all hand-activated door opening hardware meets the following requirements, per Section 1004.3.1; a) Is to be centered >30" but <44" above floor. b) Latching, or locking, doors in a path of travel are operated with a single effort by: i) Lever type hardware. ii) Panic bars. iii) Push-pull activating bars. iv) Or other hardware designed to provide passage without the requirement to grasp the hardware. 27. Revise plans to show that the minimum strike edge distances are provided at the level area on the side to which a door (or a gate) swings, per Section 1004.9.2.3a: a) >24" at exterior conditions. b) >18" at interior conditions. c) >12" on the push side, if the door has both a latch and a closer. 28. Provide a note on the plans that the maximum effort to operate doors, applied at right angles to hinged doors or at center plane at sliding doors, per Section 1004.5,1, will be: a) £8V&# at exterior doors. b) £5# for interior doors. c) ^15# where fire doors are required. 29. Revise plans to show a level area, or landing, per Section 1004.9.2.2a: a) >60" in the direction of door swing. b) >48" in the direction opposite the door swing (or 44" if doors don't have latches or closers). Carlsbad 97-3179 November 5, 1997 SPECIAL HAZARDS 30. Provide details or interior elevations to show that objects projecting from walls with their leading edges comply with Section 1121B. 1: a) >27" but ^80" above finished floor protrude <4" into walks, halls, corridors, passageways or aisles. b) <27" or >80" above finished floor may protrude any amount. c) Freestanding objects mounted on posts or pylons may overhang £12" into the walk, hall, etc. if >27" but ^80" above ground surface or finished floor. 31. Plans show that walk crosses, or adjoins, a vehicular way and walking surfaces are not separated by curbs or other elements. Revise plans to show that the boundary is defined, per Section 1024.5, by a continuous detectable warning which is: a) >36" in width. b) The surface is to consist of raised truncated domes in a staggered pattern with: i) A diameter of nominal 0.9" at the base. ii) Tapering to 0.45" at the top. iii) Height of 0.2". iv) Nominal o.c. spacing of 2.35". STAIRWAYS AND HANDRAILS 32. Revise plans to show that handrails are provided on each side of the stairs, per Section 1006.9.1. 33. Provide sections, details or notes to show that handrails are to be located £34" but <38" above nosing of treads, per Section 1006.9,2.1 a. 34. Show that handrails extend a >12" beyond top nosing, and >12"-plus-tread-width beyond the bottom nosing, per Section 1006.9.2.2a. 35. Per Section 1006.9.2.6a, please provide details, sections or notes to show that handgrip portions of handrails are: a) >1%" and ^1V£" in cross sectional dimension. b) The shape may provide an equivalent gripping surface. c) The handgrip portion shall have a smooth surface, without any sharp corners. Carlsbad 97-3179 November 5, 1997 36. Show or note that interior stair treads are marked at the upper approach and the lower tread of each stair, by a strip of clearly contrasting color, per Section 1006.16.1, as follows: a) At least 2" wide. b) Placed parallel to and not more than 1" from the nose of the step or landing. c) The strip shall be as slip resistant as the other treads of the stair. 37. Note that all tread surfaces comply with Section 1006.16.2.1, as follows: a) Be slip resistant. b) Have smooth, rounded or chamfered exposed edges. c) Have no abrupt edges at the nosing. d) Nosing shall not project >11/£" past the face of the riser above. e) Open risers are not permitted. 38. Show that handrail which project from a wall shall have a space of 1V£" between the wall and the rail. Handrails may be located in a recess (<3" deep) extending >18" above the top of the rail, per Section 1006.9.2.5a. • SANITARY FACILITIES 39. Sanitary facilities are required to be accessible per Section 1115B.1. 40. Where separate nonaccessible facilities are provided for each sex, separate accessible facilities are required to be provided for each sex as well. Where nonaccessible unisex facilities are provided, accessible unisex facilities are required to be provided, per Section 1115B.2. 41. Revise plans to show that passageways leading to sanitary facilities have required clear access widths, per Section 1115B.4. Show that all doorways have: a) >32" clear opening. b) A clear area: i) >60" in the direction of the door swing, ii) >44" away from the direction of door swing. c) All strike edge clearance dimensions are required to be met.(i.e. 18" strike edge distance). Carlsbad 97-3179 November 5, 1997 42. Note that the doorways leading to sanitary facilities shall be identified, per Section 1115B.5, as follows: a) An equilateral triangle %" thick with edges 12" long and a vortex pointing upward at men's rest rooms. b) A circle %" thick, 12" in diameter at women's rest rooms. c) A 12" diameter circle with a triangle superimposed on the circle and within the 12" diameter at unisex rest rooms. d) The required symbols shall be centered on the door at a height of 60". e) Braille signage shall also be located on the wall adjacent to the latch outside of the doorways leading to the sanitary facilities, per Section 1117B.5.9. MULTIPLE ACCOMMODATION SANITARY FACILITIES 43. Show that the accessible rest room is to be provided with either: a) A 60" minimum diameter clear space measured from the floor to a height of 27" b) A clear space 56" x 63" in size. NOTE: Doors other than the door to the accessible toilet compartment in any position may encroach into this space by not more than 12 inches, per Section 1115B.7.1.1. 44. Revise plans to show that at least one water closet fixture, located in a compartment, shall provide the following, per Section 1115B.7.1.2: a) >28" clear space from a fixture (or >32" clear space from a wall) at one side. b) Clear space in front of the water closet shall be: i) >48" if the compartment has a end opening door, ii) >60" is required for side opening doors. c) Grab bars shall not project more than 3" into the clear spaces indicated. 45. Show or note, per Section 1115B.7.1.3 that the doors to the accessible water closet compartment will be equipped with a self closing device with: a) >32" clearance when located at the end of the compartment. b) >34" clearance when located at the side of the compartment. 46. Note that if standard compartment doors are used, that the following will be provided, per Section 1115B.7.1.3: a) >9" clearance for footrests underneath. b) A self closing device. Carlsbad 97-3179 November 5, 1997 If non-standard compartment doors are used, clearance at the strike edge as specified in Section 1004.9.2.2 is required. 47. When more than 6 water closets are provided, show the additional requirements given in Section 1115B.7.1.4. SINGLE ACCOMMODATION FACILITIES 48. Revise plans to show a sufficient space in the toilet room for a wheelchair to enter the room and close the door, per Section 1115B.7.2. The space is required to be: a) >60" diameter. b) A T-shaped space as shown in Figure 11B-12(a) and (b). c) Doors are not permitted to encroach into this space. 49. Show that the water closet is located in a space, per Section 1115B7.2, which provides: a) A minimum side clearance of either: i) >28" from a fixture. ii) >32" from a wall on one side. b) >48" clear space in front of the water closet. RESTROOM FIXTURES AND ACCESSORIES 50. Show, or note, on the plans that the accessible water closets meet the following requirements, California Plumbing Code: a) The seat is to be >17" but ^19" in height. b) The controls are: i) Operable with one hand. ii) Does not require tight grasping, pinching or twisting of the wrist. c) The controls for flush valves shall be: i) Mounted on the side of the toilet area, ii) Be <44" above the floor. d) The force to activate the controls shall be ^5# offeree. Carlsbad 97-3179 November 5, 1997 51. Show, or note, on the plans that accessible urinals meet the following requirements, per Section 1115B.9.4 and California Plumbing Code: a) The rim of at least one urinal shall: i) Project 14" from the wall. ii) Be <17" above the floor. b) The force to activate the flush valve shall be ^5# force. c) The control mechanism is be located <44" above the floor. d) >30" x 48" clear floor space is provided in front of the accessible urinal. 52. Show that accessible lavatories comply with the following, per Sections 1115B.9.1 and California Plumbing Code: a) >30" x 48" clear space is provided in front for forward approach. The clear space may include knee and toe space beneath the fixture. i) >29" high x 30" wide x 8" deep at the top. ii) >9" high x 30" wide and 17" deep at the bottom. iii) The counter top is <34" maximum above the floor. b) Hot water pipes and drain lines are insulated. c) The faucet controls, and operating mechanism are: i) The type which does not require tight grasping, pinching or twisting of the wrist. ii) Has an operating force of <5#. d) If self-closing valves are used, they shall remain open for >10 seconds. 53. Revise plans to show that grab bars comply with the following, per Section 1115B.8: a) Grab bars shall be located on each side or one side and the back of the water closet stall or compartment. b) They shall be securely attached 33" above the floor, and parallel. NOTE: Where a tank-type toilet is used which obstructs placement at 33", the grab bar may be installed as high as 36". c) Grab bars at the side shall be located: i) 15" to 16%" (±1") from the center line of the water closet stool, ii) Be >42" long with the front end positioned 24" in front of the stool, iii) Total length of bars at the back shall be >36". d) The diameter, or width, of the grab bar gripping surface is>1%" but <114", or the shape shall provide an equivalent gripping surface. Carlsbad 97-3179 November 5, 1997 e) If mounted adjacent to a wall, the space between the wall and the grab bar shall be 11/2". f) Be designed to support 250#. 54. Revise plans to show ^40" height for: a) The operable parts of at least 1; i) Paper towel dispenser. ii) Sanitary napkin dispenser. iii) Waste paper disposal. iv) Other similar dispensing and/or disposal fixtures. b) The bottom edge of mirrors. 55. Revise plans to show that the toilet tissue dispensers are located <12" from the front edge of the water closet stool, per Section 1115B.9.3. 56. Revise plans to show, or note, that >1% of lockers provided are accessible, per Sections 1115B.6.4, for either: a) The public. b) Clients. c) Employees. d) Members or participants. e) A path of travel >36" in clear width shall be provided to those lockers. • DRINKING FOUNTAINS 57. Plans shall indicate that the proposed water fountains comply with Section 1117B.1 as either: a) Located completely in an alcove, >32" in width and >18" in depth. b) Positioned to not encroach into accessible pedestrian ways. • TELEPHONES 58. Plans indicate public telephones (or public pay phones) are provided. Revise plans to show, or note compliance with the following, per Section 1117B.2 Carlsbad 97-3179 November 5, 1997 • GENERAL ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS • SIGNAGE 59. Where permanent identification is provided for rooms and spaces, raised letters shall also be provided and shall be accompanied by Braille. Section 11176.5. 60. Provide a note on the plans stating that the signage requirements of Section 1117B.5 will be satisfied. Carlsbad 97-3179 November 5, 1997 VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PREPARED BY: Abe Doliente BUILDING ADDRESS: 1935 Camino Vida Roble BUILDING OCCUPANCY: B PLAN CHECK NO.: 97-3179 DATE: November 5, 1997 TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: V-N BUILDING PORTION Office (shell) Air Conditioning Fire Sprinklers TOTAL VALUE BUILDING AREA I VALUATION (ft.2) | MULTIPLIER 38,500 SF 38,500 SF 55.00 1.70 VALUE ($) 2,117,500 * 65,450 2,182,950X0.80 = 1,746,360 • 1991 UBC Building Permit Fee D Bldg. Permit Fee by ordinance: $5,033.50 • 1991 UBC Plan Check Fee Q Plan Check Fee by ordinance: $ 3,271.78 Type of Review: • Complete Review Q Structural Only [H Hourly n Repetitive Fee Applicable Q Other: Esgil Plan Review Fee: $ 2,617.42 Comments: Building is designed as an office. So, valuation is considered as an office shell. Sheet 1 of 1 macvalue.doc 5196 City of Carlsbad Engineering Department DATE: BUILDING ADDRESS: BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST PLANCHECK NO.: 193 r Cad PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: _3 13,' Oty2 - J3 EST. VALUE: ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT APPROVAL The item you have submitted for review has been approved. The approval is based on plans, information and/or specifications provided in your submittal; therefore any changes to these items after this date, including field modifications, must be reviewed by this office to insure continued conformance with applicable codes. Please review carefully all comments attached, as failure to comply with instructions in this report can result in suspension of permit to build. A Right-of-Way permit is required prior to construction of the following improvements: TDENIAL Please se^lhe] attached report of deficiencies marked with D. Make necessary corrections to plans or specifioatwris for compliance with applicable codes and standards. Submit corrected plans and/or specifications to this office for review. ju ~? By: By: By: Date: Date: Date: By: FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ENGINEERING AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE BUILDING PERMIT: Date: ATTACHMENTS Dedication Application Dedication Checklist Improvement Application Improvement Checklist Future Improvement Agreement Grading Permit Application Grading Submittal Checklist Right-of-Way Permit Application Right-of-Way Permit Submittal Checklist and Information Sheet Sewer Fee Information Sheet ENGINEERING DEPT. CONTACT PERSON Name: David _Rjck City of Carlsbad Address: 2075 Las Palmas Dr., Carlsbad, CA 92009 Phone: (619)438-1161, ext. 4324 CFD INFORMATION Parcel Map No: Lots: Recordation: Carlsbad Tract: A-4 \\L*SPALMAS\SVS^BRARV\ENG\WORD\DOCS\CHKL5-nBuiMirB PUnctiBCk CkIM BPOOD1 Form DR.dnc Rev. 8/3/97 2O75 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1576 • (619) 438-1161 • FAX (619) 438-O894 BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST SITE PLAN oND^ ORD/ Q Q 1. Provide a fully dimensioned site plan drawn to scale. Show: North Arrow ^D. Property Lines y. Existing & Proposed Structures 'E. Easements ;. Existing Street Improvements ^F. Right-of-Way Width & Adjacent Streets •J3. Driveway widths Q Q 2. Show on site plan: o-f IffJ C^JDrainage Patterns j % ^re (f/Building pad surface drainage must maintain a minimum slope of one /atrla^ percent towards an adjoining street or an approved drainage course. -n,e 2. ADD THE FOLLOWING NOTE: "Finish grade will provide a minimum positive pr«p*My . ?lf«*e. drainage of 2% to swale 5' away from building." r ; -h, t*i* B- Existing & Proposed Slopes and Topography Q Q Q 3. Include on title sheet: A. Site address B. Assessor's Parcel Number C. Legal Description For commercial/industrial buildings and tenant improvement projects, include: total building square footage with the square footage for each different use, existing sewer permits showing square footage of different uses (manufacturing, warehouse, office, etc.) previously approved. EXISTING PERMIT NUMBER DESCRIPTION DISCRETIONARY APPROVAL COMPLIANCE Q Q 4a. Project does not comply with the following Engineering Conditions of approval for Project No./lVrr oblb^ /aypvtal of PlP 97-4X oA fr" X All o-f ) Caditi** * 27 C 5V"cV«vV Avfr^ftv^ oLat.*/v ai^A R - Q 4b. All conditions are in compliance. Date: Sail \\LASPALMAS\SYS\LIBRARY\ENG\WORD\DOCS\CHKLS-nBuikHnB PUncheck CkBI BP0001 Form DR.doc Rev. 9/3/97 BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS STV OND/ gRD/ Q U 5. Dedication for all street Rights-of-Way adjacent to the building site and any storm drain or utility easements on the building site is required for all new buildings and for remodels with a value at or exceeding $ , pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 18.40.030. Dedication required as follows: Dedication required. Please have a registered Civil Engineer or Land Surveyor prepare the appropriate legal description together with an 8 Yz" x 11" plat map and submit with a title report. All easement documents must be approved and signed by owner(s) prior to issuance of Building Permit. Attached please find an application form and submittal checklist for the dedication process. Submit the completed application form with the required checklist items and fees to the Engineering Department in person. Applications will not be accept by mail or fax. Dedication completed by: Date: IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS rj 6a. All needed public improvements upon and adjacent to the building site must be constructed at time of building construction whenever the value of the construction exceeds $ , pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 18.40.040. Public improvements required as follows: Attached please find an application form and submittal checklist for the public improvement requirements. A registered Civil Engineer must prepare the appropriate improvement plans and submit them together with the requirements on the attached checklist to the Engineering Department through a separate plan check process. The completed application form and the requirements on the checklist must be submitted in person. Applications by mail or fax are not accepted. Improvement plans must be approved, appropriate securities posted and fees paid prior to issuance of building permit. Improvement Plans signed by: Date: Q Q 6b. Construction of the public improvements may be deferred pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 18.40. Please submit a recent property title report or current grant deed on the property and processing fee of $ so we may prepare the necessary Future Improvement Agreement. This agreement must be signed, notarized and approved by the City prior to issuance of a Building permit. Future public improvements required as follows: \\LASPALMAS\SYS\LIBRAR'lTENG\WORD\DOCS\CHKLST\Buikling PtanchK* CMst BP0001 Fom DR.doc Rev. B/J/97 BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST ist/ ondv* Q Q rj 6c. Enclosed please find your Future Improvement Agreement. Please return agreement signed and notarized to the Engineering Department. Future Improvement Agreement completed by: Date: Q Q Q 6d. No Public Improvements required. SPECIAL NOTE: Damaged or defective improvements found adjacent to building site must be repaired to the satisfaction- of the City Inspector prior to occupancy. GRADING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS The conditions that invoke the need for a grading permit are found in Section 11.06.030 of the Municipal Code. Q Q rj 7a. Inadequate information available on Site Plan to make a determination on grading requirements. Include accurate grading quantities (cut, fill import, export). Write "No Grading" on plot plan if none is required. fj Q Q 7b. Grading Permit required. A separate grading plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer must be submitted together with the completed application form attached. NOTE: The Grading Permit must be issued and rough grading approval obtained prior to issuance of a Building Permit. Grading Inspector sign off by: • Date: Q Q 7c. Graded Pad Certification required. (Note: Pad certification may be required even if a grading permit is not required.) Q rj 7d. No Grading Permit required. Q Q 7e. If grading is not required, write "No Grading" on plot plan. MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS Q a 8. A RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT is required to do work in City Right-of-Way and/or private work adjacent to the public Right-of-Way. Types of work include, but are not limited to: street improvements, tree trimming, driveway construction, tieing into public storm drain, sewer and water utilities. Right-of-Way permit required for: Tj/iv^w^ . fruJT -J- *~*fa i1* b.^ / ) \\LASPALMAS\SYSU.tBRARY^NG\WORDCOCS\CHKLS-nBuiWina Plandieck Cklst BP0001 form DR.doc Reu. 9/3/97 BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST 1sty 2ndy S'*'' Q Q Q 9. A SEWER PERMIT is required concurrent with the building permit issuance. The fee is noted in the fees section on the following page. Q Q Q 10. INDUSTRIAL WASTE PERMIT If your facility is located in the City of Carlsbad sewer service area, you need to contact the Carlsbad Municipal Water District, located at 5950 El Camino Real, Carlsbad, CA 92008. District personnel can provide forms and assistance, and will check to see if your business enterprise is on the EWA Exempt List. You may telephone (760) 438-2722, extension 153, for assistance. Industrial Waste permit accepted by: Date: Q Q 11.NPDES PERMIT Complies with the City's requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge cul fcfeh «~«^ Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The applicant shall provide best Wnte) *r£ management practices to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to 6t- c«~pl<c*tt .^charge to sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading or building permit, whichever occurs first. GKRe<Q 12. Gr Required fees are attached Q No fees required Q 13. Additional Comments: I- \lLASPALMAS\SYS\LIBRARYlENG\WORD\DOCS\CHKLST\BulkllnO Ptancheck CMsl BP0001 Form DR.dOC Rev i/3)97 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FEE CALCULATION WORKSHEET D Estimate based on unconfirmed information from applicant. O Calculation based on building plancheck plan submittal. Address: /^3 3 C<3rt 11 o V/iW^ -&t>U. Bldg. Permit No. C& ??~ 3' ?f Prepared by: ."Q - R*c**— Date: \- l^- ?tt Checked by: Date: EDU CALCULATIONS: List types and square foptages for all uses. Types of Use: T/J. &lA\. Sq. Ft./Units: EDU's:-_ APT CALCULATIONS: List types and square footages for ail uses. Types of Use: £,iJ • W\ . Sq. Ft./Units: ADT's: FEES REQUIRED: , PUBLIC FACILITIF-^EE REQUIRED: B'YES Q NO (See Building Department for amount) WITHIN CFD: B'YES (no bridge & thoroughfare fee, reduced Traffic Impact Fee) D NO . PARK-IN-LIEU FEE PARK AREA: FEE/UNIT: X NO. UNITS: «$. . TRAFFIC IMPACT FEEj*~ •- ^\ , • f~, XADT'-aAJNITS: ? ^ 0 X FEE/APT: 2^2- =$ . BRIDGE AND THOROUGHFARE FEE &ADT's/UNITS: X FEE/ADT: =$ "4. FACILITIES MANAGEMENT FEE ZONE: 5 UNIT/tfOFT): 3ff, ^0(^ X FEE/SQ.FT./UNIT: > VQ = B^5. SEWER FEE PERMIT No. ^^' ^-/H / / ^^ *Wf* 1 ^* i fcxX BENEFIT AREA: /~ DRAINAGE BASIN: EDU's: X FEE/EDU: 6. DRAINAGE FEES PLDA _ : HIGH ' /LOW ACRES: X FEE/AC: =$. . SEWER LATERAL ($2,500) = $. TOTAL OF ABOVE FEES*: $ *NOTE: This calculation sheet is NOT a complete list of all fees which may be due. Dedications and Improvements may also be required with Building Permits. P:\DOCS\MISFORMS\BP0002.FRM REV 01/22/97 ' ^ I ' ' PLANNING DEPARTMENT BUILDING PLAN CHECK REVIEW CHECKLIST Plan Check No Planner APN: <?-O/7v Address . Ltd* Phone (619) 438-1 1 61 , extension Type of Project and Use: Zone: rtVl Facilities Management Zone: CFD (in/out) # Circle One ^ (|f property in, complete SPECIAL TAX CALCULATION WORKSHEET provided by Building Department.) Legend Item Complete Item Incomplete * Needs your action YESEnvironmental Review Required: DATE OF COMPLETION: . NO TYPE Compliance with conditions of approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval ^ Discretionary Action Required: APPROVAL/RESO. NO. PROJECT NO. YES v^NO DATE YPE OTHER RELATED CASES: Compliance with conditions or, approval? Conditions of Approval* not, state conditions which require action.' -*Ji NO Coastal Zone Assessment/Compliance Project site located in Coastal Zone? YES If NO, proceed with checklist; if YES, proceed below. Determine status (Exempt or Coastal Permit Required): If Exempt, proceed with checklist; if Coastal Permit required, hold building permit until Coastal Permit issued. Coastal Permit Determination Form already completed? YES NO If NO, complete Coastal Permit Determination Form now. Coastal Permit Determination Log #: Follow-Up Actions: 1) Stamp Building Plans as "Exempt" or "Coastal Permit Required" {at minimum Floor Plans). 2) Complete Coastal Permit Determination Log as needed. Inclusionary Housing Fee required: YES NO (Effective date of Inclusionary Housing Ordinance - May 21, 1993.) D D Site Plan: 1. Provide a fully dimensional site plan drawn to scale. Show: North arrow, property lines, easements, existing and proposed structures, streets, existing street improvements, right-of-way width, dimensional setbacks and existing topographical lines. 2. Provide legal description of property and assessor's parcel number. Zoning: 1. 2. 3. 4. Setbacks: Front: Int. Side: Street Side: Rear: Lot Coverage: Height: Parking: Guest Required Required Required Required Required Required Spaces Required Spaces Required Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown Additional Comments, OK TO ISSUE AND ENTERED APPROVAL INTO COMPUTER DATE STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS Project: Architect: Engineer: Code: Date: RPS Camino Vida Roble Carlsbad, Ca. Mark Radford Architecture 912 South Andreasen Escondido, Ca. 92029 Schmit Engineering 1965 Rohn Rd. Escondido, Ca. 92025 (760) 743-0592 1994 U.B.C. October 6, 1997 TABLE OF CONTENTS Diagrams 1-2 Bld'g Loads 3 Roof Framing 4-46 Floor Framing .....47-51 Wall Panels 52-62 Columns and Foundations 63-70 Lateral Analysis 71-91 Connections 92-97 SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project Date Sheet No. _L_ Of Subject job NO. SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project._ . By J~ — Date '?/ Sheet No. ^ Of Subject r\ Job NO. SCHMIT ENGINEERING P.C-- /V?v? 77710*1 S STRUCTURAL DESIGN ho /.o 3.S /.O 2.0 /.Q / J5 . O ^- o 1.0 2,0 1 . O .1.0 Project __ Subject Sheet No. ^_ Of _ Job NO. _ ; -o 3-0 1.0 L_L = I OO.Ojps) T SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project 7^By - pate Sheet No. _ Of Subject £OOF _ Job NO. S •» User 3.X&Q, S = , <s > S = G OH 0,07?* SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN ^o)ZSO Project „ By -3""-^ Dote A?? Sheet No. ^ Of Subject Job NO. <2-us^ssr a. A IS "f- //I PL.*- x 82/06/1997 16:3B 6192393317 STANDARD STRUCTURES PAGE 03 I Standard Structures Inc P.O. Box K, Santa Rosa, CA 95402 707/544-2982 Fax: 707/544-2994 )2-06-1997 Project Name: RPS Location: Carlsbad SSI-JOIST CALCULATION 14:20 Project Number Mark Number ssI-Joist Description { l ) 26.0-inch ssl 445R 3P? PB** Top Flange ** Bottom Flange SPF F8 ** Web Material OSB 2400 MSR 2400 MSR Point Loads: Number Loading LL DL TL NONE Uniform Loads: Number LMPSF) DL(PSF) PL(PSF) 1 16.0 15.0 0.0 Design Criteria Span (ft) 35.75 0. C. spacing (in) 96.00 Load Duration Factor 1.25 Repetitive Factor 1.00 Distance from left end TL(PSF) 31.0 Beg 0.0 Triangular Loads: Number BEG-LIi (PLF) BEG-DL (PLF) END-LL (PLF) END-DL(PLF) Beg NONE End 35.8 End Design ssl-Joist (U.L.) Allowable Maximum Bending Moment 39631 < 41624 > Maximum Horizontal Shear 4433 < 4948 > ssl-Joist Deflection : Live Load 0.897 « L / 478 Dead Load.... 0.841 Total Load... 1.739 - L / 247 Cone Load over two joists 0 0 SSI joists are fabricated by Standard Structures Inc. in accordance with ICBO PFC-4325. This analysis is to confirm that the SSI joist noted above is designed and conforms with current Standard Structures specifications and code accepted design properties. The loads, spans and spacings have been provided by others, and have not been reviewed by Standard Structures for adecfuacy. This information should be reviewed by the designer for consistency with the project. @ 031595 ssi Developing Better Ways to Build 82/06/1997 16: 3&6192393317 STANDARD STRUCTURES PAGE 82 IStandard Structures Inc P.O. Box K. Santa Rosa, CA 95402 707/544-2982 Fax: 707/544-2994 )2-06-1997 Project Name: RPS Location: Carlsbad SSI-JOIST CALCULATION 14:25 Project Number Mark Number ssI-Joist Description r«tt!C*«mi ** < 1 ) 20. 0-inch 331 435R ** Top Flange SPF F8 ** Bottom Flange SPF PS ** Web Material OSB 2400 MSR 2400 MSR Point Loads: Number Loading LL DL TL Design Criteria Span (ft) 24.00 0. C. spacing (in) 96.00 Load Duration Factor 1.25 Repetitive Factor i.oo Distance from left end uniform Loads: Number LL (PSF) DL (PSF) PL (PSF) 1 20.0 15. 0 0-0 TL (PSF) 35,0 Beg 0.0 Triangular Loads: Number BEG-LL (PLF) BEQ-DL (PLF) END-LL (PLF) END-DL (PLF) Beg NONE End 24.0 End _•••__ = _ SB MMK_*C mmmmatm »= :s= Maximum Bending Moment ...... Maximum Horizontal Shear. . . . ssI-Joist Deflection : Live Load. . . Dead Load . . . Total Load. . BMB . 0 . 0 . 0 mmitmmmmmmmmx Design (U.L.) . . . 20168 < 3360 < .550 » L / .412 .962 » L / SSI-Joist Allowable 22829 3826 524 300 Cone Load over two joists > 0 > 0 SSI joists are fabricated by Standard Structures Inc. in accordance with ICBO PFC-4325. This analysis is to confirm that the SSI joist loted above is designed and conforms with current Standard Structures specifications and code accepted design properties. The loads, spans and apacings have been provided by others, and have not been reviewed by Standard Structures for adequacy. This information should be reviewed by the designer for consistency with the project. ® 031595 ssi Developing Better Ways to Build TV- SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN A -- <2* Project By _^k^. Date '7 Sheet No, §_ Of Subject £QOF Job NO. _ -- So */ N5.S' TL- CL.- USG f 5' jr V -I X /- ~r~\ r - PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 PAGE NO. 1 SCHMIT ENGINEERING TIME : Tue Feb 18 13:39:27 1997 JOB : RPS JOB NO. : 3 RUN : RB-#1 SPAN INFORMATION SPAN LENGTH SLOPE PROP NO Units : Ft Deg MAIN SPAN 29.50 0.00 2 PROPERTY INFORMATION PROP SECTION NO NAME MODULUS AREA I DIST Units : K /In 2 In2 In4 Ft 2 5.125 X 25.5 GLB 1800.00 130.700 7081.600 ELEMENT LOAD INFORMATION LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC DIST PX PY M Units : Ft K /Ft K /Ft Ft-K /Ft Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 UNIF GLO DIST B 0.00 E 29.50 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 5.50 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 13.50 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 21.50 Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONC GLO DIST B 5.50 0.00 -0.08 0.00 -0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -4.32 -4.32 -4.32 -3.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 o PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#1 PAGE NO. 2 TIME : Tue Feb 18 13:39:32 1997 JOB NO. : 3 LOAD CASE ELEMENT LOAD LOAD DIST TYPE SYS SPEC LOAD INFORMATION DIST PX PY M Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONG GLO DIST B 13.50 Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONG GLO DIST B 21.50 0.00 0.00 -3.46 -3.46 0.00 0.00 LOAD COMBSPAN Units : LOAD COMBINATIONS: COMB 1 : 1.00 X CASE 1 COMB 2 : 1.00 X CASE 1 + 1.00 X CASE 2 ELEMENT REPORTS SIGN CONVENTION : BEAM DESIGNERS AXIAL SHEAR MOMENT MAX MOM/DEFL DIST K MAIN SPAN NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS K 8.2092 -7.1108 0.0000 13.8390 11.8610 0.0000 Ft Ft K -Ft 0.0000 0.0000 29.5000 0.0000 0.0000 29.5000 K -Ft /In Ft Ft 68.9736 -0.8138 117.2963 -1.3800 Ft 13.50 14.65 13.50 14.64 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 PAGE NO. 1 SCHMIT ENGINEERING TIME : Tue Feb 18 13:40:13 1997 JOB : RPS JOB NO. : 3 RUN : RB-#1 SPAN INFORMATION SPAN LENGTH SLOPE PROP NO Units : Ft Deg MAIN SPAN 29.50 0.00 2 PROPERTY INFORMATION PROP SECTION NO NAME MODULUS AREA I DIST Units : K /In 2 In2 In4 Ft 2 5.125 X 31.5 GLB 1800.00 161.400 13348.900 ELEMENT LOAD INFORMATION LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC DIST PX PY M Units : Ft K /Ft K /Ft Pt-K /Ft Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 UNIF GLO DIST B 0.00 E 29.50 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 5.50 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 13.50 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 21.50 Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONC GLO DIST B 5.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.08 -0.08 -4.32 -4.32 -4.32 -3.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#1 PAGE NO. 2 TIME : Tue Feb 18 13:40:18 1997 JOB NO. : 3 LOAD CASE LOAD TYPE ELEMENT LOAD DIST SYS SPEC LOAD INFORMATION DIST PX PY M Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONG GLO DIST B 13.50 Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONG GLO DIST B 21.50 0.00 0.00 -3.46 -3.46 0.00 0.00 SPAN LOAD COMB ELEMENT REPORTS SIGN CONVENTION : BEAM DESIGNERS AXIAL SHEAR MOMENT MAX MOM/DEFL DIST Units K LOAD COMBINATIONS: COMB 1 1.00 X CASE 1 COMB 2 : 1.00 X CASE 1 + 1.00 X CASE 2 MAIN SPAN 1 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS: 2 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS: K 8.2092 -7.1108 0.0000 13.8390 11.8610 0.0000 K -Ft Ft Ft 0.0000 0.0000 29.5000 0.0000 0.0000 29.5000 K -Ft /In Ft Ft 68.9736 -0.4317 117.2961 -0.732T Ft 13.50 14.65 13.50 14.64 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 PAGE NO. 1 SCHMIT ENGINEERING TIME : Mon Jan 27 12:49:32 1997 JOB : RPS JOB NO. : 40 RUN : RB-#2 SPAN INFORMATION SPAN LENGTH SLOPE PROP NO Units : Ft Deg MAIN SPAN 29.50 0.00 2 PROPERTY INFORMATION PROP SECTION NO NAME MODULUS AREA I DIST Units : K /In 2 In2 In4 Ft 2 5.125 X 29.5 GLB 1800.00 130.700 7081.600 ELEMENT LOAD INFORMATION LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC DIST PX PY M Units : Ft K /Ft K /Ft Ft-K /Ft Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 UNIF GLO DIST B 0.00 E 29.50 0.00 -0.08 0.00 -0.08 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 5.50 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 13.50 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 21.50 Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONC GLO DIST B 5.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -4.32 -4.32 -4.32 -3.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#2 PAGE NO. 2 TIME : Mon Jan 27 12:49:37 1997 JOB NO. : 40 ELEMENT LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC LOAD INFORMATION DIST PX PY M Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONC GLO DIST B 13.50 Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONC GLO DIST B 21.50 0.00 0.00 -3.46 -3.46 0.00 0.00 SPAN LOAD COMB ELEMENT REPORTS SIGN CONVENTION : BEAM DESIGNERS AXIAL SHEAR MOMENT MAX MOM/DEFL DIST Units : LOAD COMBINATIONS: COMB 1 : 1.00 X CASE 1 COMB 2 : 1.00 X CASE 1 + 1.00 X CASE 2 K MAIN SPAN 1 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS: 2 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS: K 8.2092 -7.1108 0.0000 13.8390 11.8610 0.0000 K -Ft Ft Ft 0.0000 0.0000 29.5000 0.0000 0.0000 29.5000 K -Ft /In Ft Ft 68.9736 -0.8138 117.2963 -1.3800 Ft 13.50 14.65 13.50 14.64 S ft. SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN ± o LL = 23 92 43 it.I Project ___ By -3^!>- Date Subject _ Sheet No, _Of job NO. _ x KJ O CA/T! Cs SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN 5 - Project _.. By _S -^ -Date ^7 Sheet No. tt- Of Subject £.QQr Job NO, _ r r 8' OSC Z^' f-;^ _- areo" £> = ^^«. •= £7L-DL* 5' 8* ^ ?. .s' - PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 PAGE NO. 1 SCHMIT ENGINEERING TIME : Mon Jan 27 12:53:21 1997 JOB : RPS JOB NO. : 41 RUN : RB-#3 SPAN INFORMATION SPAN LENGTH SLOPE PROP NO Units : Ft Deg MAIN SPAN 29.50 0.00 2 PROPERTY INFORMATION PROP SECTION NO NAME MODULUS AREA I DIST Units : K /In 2 In2 In4 Ft 2 5.125 X 25.5 GLB 1800.00 130.700 7081.600 ELEMENT LOAD INFORMATION LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC DIST PX PY M Units : Ft K /Ft K /Ft Ft-K /Ft Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 UNIF GLO DIST B 0.00 E 29.50 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONG GLO DIST B 4.00 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 12.00 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 20.00 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 28.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.08 -0.08 -3.24 -4.32 -4.32 -4.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#3 PAGE NO. 2 TIME : Mon Jan 27 12:53:26 1997 JOB NO. : 41 ELEMENT LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC LOAD INFORMATION DIST PX PY M Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONC GLO DIST B 4.00 Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONC GLO DIST B 12.00 Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONC GLO DIST B 20.00 Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONC GLO DIST B 28.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.60 -3.46 -3.46 -3.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SPAN LOAD COMB ELEMENT REPORTS SIGN CONVENTION : BEAM DESIGNERS AXIAL SHEAR MOMENT MAX MOM/DEFL DIST Units LOAD COMBINATIONS: COMB 1 : 1.00 X CASE K COMB MAIN SPAN 1.00 X CASE 1 1.00 X CASE 2 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS: NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS: K K -Ft 8.1542 10.4058 0.0000 13.7444 17.7956 0.0000 Ft Ft 0.0000 0.0000 29.5000 0.0000 0.0000 29.5000 K -Ft /In Ft Ft 66.1708 -0.8064 112.4529 -1.3668 Ft 12.00 14.77 12.00 14.77 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 PAGE NO. 1 SCHMIT ENGINEERING TIME : Mon Jan 27 13:00:41 1997 JOB : RPS JOB NO. : 42 RUN : RB-#4 SPAN INFORMATION SPAN LENGTH SLOPE PROP NO Units : Ft Deg MAIN SPAN 29.50 0.00 2 PROPERTY INFORMATION PROP SECTION NO NAME MODULUS AREA I DIST Units : K /In 2 In2 In4 Ft 2 5.125 X 22.5 GLB 1800.00 115.300 4864.700 ELEMENT LOAD INFORMATION LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC DIST PX PY M Units : Ft K /Ft K /Ft Ft-K /Ft Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 UNIF GLO DIST B 0.00 E 29.50 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 4.00 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 12.00 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 20.00 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 28.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.06 -0.06 -2.70 -3.60 -3.60 -3.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#4 18 PAGE NO. 2 TIME : Mon Jan 27 13:00:46 1997 JOB NO. : 42 ELEMENT LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC LOAD INFORMATION DIST PX PY M Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONC GLO DIST B 4.00 Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONC GLO DIST B 12.00 Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONC GLO DIST B 20.00 Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONC GLO DIST B 28.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.16 -2.88 -2.88 -2.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ELEMENT REPORTS LOAD SIGN CONVENTION : BEAM DESIGNERS SPAN COMB AXIAL SHEAR MOMENT MAX MOM/DEFL DIST Units : LOAD COMBINATIONS: COMB 1 : 1.00 X CASE 1 K COMB MAIN SPAN 1.00 X CASE 1 1.00 X CASE 2 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS: NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS: K K -Ft 6.6969 -8.5731 0.0000 11.3464 14.7236 0.0000 Ft Ft 0.0000 0.0000 29.5000 0.0000 0.0000 29.5000 K -Ft /in Ft Ft 54.4424 -0.9653 92.9563 -1.6442 Ft 12.00 14.77 12.00 14.77 SCHMIT ENGINEERING A STRUCTURAL DESIGN 33, X 7L* £*_- Project By Crr Dote/?/ Sheet No. 12_ Of Subject /2OQT job NO. _ 7L. -m= S ^ £m^x- H03t f - a ' *f 3100 A 4-' PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 PAGE NO. 1 SCHMIT ENGINEERING TIME : Mon Jan 27 13:03:47 1997 JOB : RPS JOB NO. : 43 RUN : RB-#5 SPAN INFORMATION SPAN LENGTH SLOPE PROP NO Units : Ft Deg MAIN SPAN 29.50 0.00 2 PROPERTY INFORMATION PROP SECTION NO NAME MODULUS AREA I DIST Units : K /In 2 In2 In4 Ft 2 5.125 X 22.5 GLB 1800.00 115.300 4864.700 ELEMENT LOAD INFORMATION LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC DIST PX PY M Units : Ft K /Ft K /Ft Ft-K /Ft Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 UNIF GLO DIST B 0.00 E 29.50 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONG GLO DIST B 5.50 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 13.50 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 21.50 Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONC GLO DIST B 5.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.06 -0.06 -3.60 -3.60 -3.60 -2.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#5 PAGE NO. 2 TIME : Mon Jan 27 13:03:52 1997 JOB NO. : 43 LOAD CASE LOAD TYPE ELEMENT LOAD DIST SYS SPEC LOAD INFORMATION DIST PX PY M Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONC GLO DIST B 13.50 Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONC GLO DIST B 21.50 0.00 0.00 -2.88 -2.88 0.00 0.00 SPAN LOAD COMB ELEMENT REPORTS SIGN CONVENTION : BEAM DESIGNERS AXIAL SHEAR MOMENT MAX MOM/DEFL DIST Units : LOAD COMBINATIONS: COMB 1 : 1.00 X CASE 1 COMB 2 : 1.00 X CASE 1 + 1.00 X CASE 2 K MAIN SPAN 1 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS: 2 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS: K 6.7426 -5.8274 0.0000 11.4287 -9.7813 0.0000 K -Ft Ft Ft 0.0000 0.0000 29.5000 0.0000 0.0000 29.5000 K -Ft /In Ft Ft 56.7580 -0.9743 96.9803 -1.6603 Ft 13.50 14.65 13.50 14.64 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#6 PAGE NO. 1 TIME : Thu Feb 06 15:26:34 1997 JOB NO. : 44 SPAN SPAN INFORMATION LENGTH SLOPE PROP NO Units MAIN SPAN RIGHT CANT Ft 36.00 8.00 Deg 0.00 0.00 PROP NO PROPERTY INFORMATION SECTION NAME MODULUS AREA 2 5.125 X 30.0 GLB 3 5.125 30.0 GLB Units : K /In 2 In2 1800.00 153.800 1800.00 153.800 In4 DIST Ft 11531.300 11531.300 ELEMENT LOAD INFORMATION LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC DIST PX PY M ======= Description Span : 1 MAIN UNIF Description Span : 1 RIGHT UNIF : DL SPAN GLO : DL CANT GLO Units DIST B E DIST B E : 0 36 0 8 Ft .00 .00 .00 .00 K 0. 0. 0. 0. /Ft 00 00 00 00 K -0. -0. -0. -0. /Ft 08 08 08 08 Ft-K 0. 0. 0. 0. /Ft 00 00 00 00 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONG GLO DIST B 8.00 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONG GLO DIST B 16.00 0.00 0.00 -4.32 -4.32 0.00 0.00 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#6 PAGE NO. 2 TIME : Thu Feb 06 15:26:39 1997 JOB NO. : 44 ELEMENT LOAD INFORMATION LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC DIST PX PY M Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONG GLO Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONG GLO Description : DL Span : RIGHT CANT 1 CONC GLO Description : DL Span : RIGHT CANT 1 CONC GLO Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONC GLO Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONC GLO Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONC GLO Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONC GLO Description : LL Span : RIGHT CANT 3 CONC GLO Description : LL Span : RIGHT CANT 3 CONC GLO DIST B 24.00 DIST B 32.00 DIST B 4.00 DIST B 8.00 DIST B 8.00 DIST B 16.00 DIST B 24.00 DIST B 32.00 DIST B 4.00 DIST B 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -4.32 -4.32 -4.32 3.10 -3.46 -3.46 -3.46 -3.46 -3.46 -2.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PROGRAM : Beam Span SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#6 Analysis vl.57 TIME :Thu Feb 06 PAGE NO. 3 15:26:39 1997 JOB NO. : 44 ELEMENT REPORTS LOAD SIGN CONVENTION : BEAM DESIGNERS SPAN COMB AXIAL SHEAR MOMENT MAX MOM/DEFL Units : K K K -Ft K -Ft /In LOAD COMBINATIONS: COMB 1 : 1.00 X CASE 1 COMB 2 : 1.00 X CASE 1 + 1.00 X CASE 2 COMB 3 : 1.00 X CASE 1 + 1.00 X CASE 3 DIST Ft COMB 4 : 1.00 X CASE 1 + 1.00 X CASE 2 + 1.00 X CASE 3 MAIN SPAN 1 NE PE 2 NE PE 3 NE PE 4 NE PE RIGHT CANT 1 NE PE 2 NE PE 3 NE PE 0.0000 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS: 0.0000 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS: 0.0000 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS: 0.0000 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS: 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 7 -12 0 14 -19 0 7 -13 0 13 -20 0 8 0 8 0 13 0 .8800 .2800 .0000 .0311 .9689 .0000 .0200 .1400 .0000 .1711 .8289 .0000 .0600 .0000 .0600 .0000 .6600 .0000 0. -44. Ft 32. 0. -44. Ft 33. 0. -75. Ft 29. 0. -75. Ft 32. -44. 0. -44. 0. -75. 0. 0000 6400 3207 0000 6400 7544 0000 6000 1766 0000 6000 3448 6400 0000 6400 0000 6000 0000 81 -0 Ft 152 -1 Ft 67 -0 Ft 138 -1 Ft 0 0 0 .2800 .8202 .0178 .5987 .5200 .6171 .2578 .3925 .3792 .9391 .0860 16 17 16 17 16 16 16 17 8 8 8 .00 .20 .00 .60 .00 .30 .00 .20 .00 .00 .00 PROGRAM ; Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#6 PAGE NO. 4 TIME : Thu Feb 06 15:26:39 1997 JOB NO. : 44 SPAN ELEMENT REPORTS LOAD SIGN CONVENTION : BEAM DESIGNERS COMB AXIAL SHEAR MOMENT MAX MOM/DEFL DIST NE PE 0.0000 0.0000 13.6600 0.0000 -75.6000 0.0000 0.6459 8.00 SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN /-UJ, ' g' Project By <^- Date Sheet Of Subject £.00. = 7/50 81 9' Job NO. 0-~- it• i I 4' PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#7 PAGE NO. 1 TIME : Tue Feb 18 13:45:54 1997 JOB NO. : 45 SPAN MAIN SPAN RIGHT CANT SPAN INFORMATION LENGTH SLOPE PROP NO Units : Ft 36.00 6.50 Deg 0.00 0.00 PROP NO PROPERTY INFORMATION SECTION NAME MODULUS AREA 2 5.125 X 31.5 GLB 3 5.125 X 31.5 GLB Units : K /In 2 In2 In4 1800.00 161.400 13348.900 1800.00 161.400 13348.900 DIST Ft ELEMENT LOAD INFORMATION LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC DIST PX PY M Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 UNIF GLO Description : DL Span : RIGHT CANT 1 UNIF GLO Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO Units DIST B E DIST B E • 0 36 0 6 Ft .00 .00 .00 .50 K 0. 0. 0. 0. /Ft 00 00 00 00 K -0. -0. -0. -0. /Ft 08 08 08 08 Ft-K 0. 0. 0. 0. 00 00 00 00 DIST B DIST B 0.00 8.00 0.00 0.00 4.32 -4.32 0.00 0.00 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#7 PAGE NO. 2 TIME : Tue Feb 18 13:45:59 1997 JOB NO. : 45 ELEMENT LOAD INFORMATION LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC DIST PX PY M Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO Description : DL Span : RIGHT CANT 1 CONC GLO Description : DL Span : RIGHT CANT 1 CONC GLO Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 3 CONC GLO Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 3 CONC GLO Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 3 CONC GLO Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 3 CONC GLO Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 3 CONC GLO Description : LL Span : RIGHT CANT 4 CONC GLO DIST B 16.00 DIST B 24.00 DIST B 32.00 DIST B 4.00 DIST B 6.50 DIST B 0.00 DIST B 8.00 DIST B 16.00 DIST B 24.00 DIST B 32.00 DIST B 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -4.32 -4.32 -4.32 -4.32 0.00 -8.21 -3.46 -3.46 0.00 -3.46 -3.46 -3.46 0.00 -3.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#7 PAGE NO. 3 TIME : Tue Feb 18 13:45:59 1997 JOB NO. : 45 LOAD CASE ELEMENT LOAD LOAD DIST TYPE SYS SPEC LOAD INFORMATION DIST PX PY M Description : LL Span : RIGHT CANT 4 CONC GLO DIST B 6.50 0.00 -5.63 0.00 SPAN LOAD COMB ELEMENT REPORTS SIGN CONVENTION : BEAM DESIGNERS AXIAL SHEAR MOMENT MAX MOM/DEFL DIST FtUnits : LOAD COMBINATIONS: COMB 1 : 1.00 X CASE 1 COMB 2 : 1.00 X CASE 1 + 1.00 X CASE 3 + 1.00 X CASE 4 COMB 3 : 1.00 X CASE 1 + 1.00 X CASE 3 COMB 4 : 1.00 X CASE 1 + 1.00 X CASE 4 K MAIN SPAN K K -Ft NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS: NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS: NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS: NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS: 11.4307 13.0493 0.0000 19.6408 22.1392 0.0000 21.0418 •20.7382 0.0000 10.0297 •14.4503 0.0000 0.0000 -72.3350 Ft 29.4995 0.0000 -122.7700 Ft 29.4997 0.0000 -72.3350 Ft 32.4882 0.0000 -122.7700 Ft 25.1192 K -Ft /In Ft Ft Ft Ft 68.9715 -0.5514 117.2940 -0.9352 139.7095 -1.2216 46.5559 -0.2785 16.00 16.41 16.00 16.42 16.00 17.25 16.00 13.95 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-tf7 PAGE NO. 4 TIME : Tue Feb 18 13:45:59 1997 JOB NO. : 45 SPAN RIGHT CANT ELEMENT REPORTS LOAD SIGN CONVENTION : BEAM DESIGNERS COMB AXIAL SHEAR MOMENT MAX MOM/DEFL DIST 1 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 2 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 3 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 4 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 13 0 22 0 13 0 22 0 .0500 .0000 .1400 .0000 .0500 .0000 .1400 .0000 -72 0 -122 0 -72 0 -122 0 .3350 .0000 .7700 .0000 .3350 .0000 .7700 .0000 0 0 0 -0 .0894 .1521 .4824 .2409 6 6 6 6 .50 .50 .50 .50 SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project By Date J? Sheet No.32. 8: Subject Job NO. U ^ c,& )$te& * 17 r- VMKS " Lfo' ' - tSG-fO <- 6*$'-J[ V >o T PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#8 PAGE NO. 1 TIME : TU6 Feb 18 13:50:16 1997 JOB NO. : 46 SPAN LEFT CANT MAIN SPAN RIGHT CANT Units SPAN LENGTH Ft 6.50 36.00 6.50 INFORMATION SLOPE PROP NO Deg 0.00 0.00 0.00 PROP NO PROPERTY SECTION NAME MODULUS INFORMATION AREA DIST Units 1 5.125 X 31.5 GLB 2 5.125 X 31.5 GLB 3 5.125 X 31.5 GLB K /In 2 1800.00 1800.00 1800.00 In2 161.400 161.400 161.400 In4 13348.900 13348.900 13348.900 Ft ELEMENT LOAD INFORMATION LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC DIST PX PY M Units : Ft Description : DL Span : LEFT CANT 1 UNIF GLO Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 UNIF GLO Description : DL Span : RIGHT CANT 1 UNIF GLO Description : DL Span : LEFT CANT 1 CONC GLO DIST B E DIST B E DIST B E DIST B 0.00 6.50 0.00 36.00 0.00 6.50 0.00 K /Ft 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 K /Ft Ft-K /Ft -0.08 -0.08 -0.08 -0.08 -0.08 -0.08 -10.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#8 PAGE NO. 2 TIME : Tue Feb 18 13:50:21 1997 JOB NO. : 46 ELEMENT LOAD INFORMATION LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC DIST PX PY M Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO Description -. DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO Description : DL Span : RIGHT CANT 1 CONC GLO Description : DL Span : RIGHT CANT 1 CONC GLO Description : LL Span : LEFT CANT 2 CONC GLO Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 3 CONC GLO Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 3 CONC GLO Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 3 CONC GLO DIST B 0.00 DIST B 8.00 DIST B 16.00 DIST B 24.00 DIST B 32.00 DIST B 4.00 DIST B 6.50 DIST B 0.00 DIST B 0.00 DIST B 8.00 DIST B 16.00 0.00 -4.32 0.00 -4.32 0.00 -4.32 0.00 -4.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -4.32 -4.32 0.00 -8.21 -7.39 -3.46 -3.46 -3.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#8 PAGE NO. 3 TIME : Tue Feb 18 13:50:21 1997 JOB NO. : 46 ELEMENT LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC LOAD INFORMATION DIST PX PY M Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 3 CONC GLO DIST B 24.00 Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 3 CONC GLO DIST B 32.00 Description : LL Span : RIGHT CANT 4 CONC GLO DIST B 4.00 Description : LL Span : RIGHT CANT 4 CONC GLO DIST B 6.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.46 -3.46 -3.46 -5.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LOAD SPAN COMB Units : LOAD COMBINATIONS: COMB 1 : 1.00 X CASE 1 COMB 2 : 1.00 X CASE 1 + 1.00 X CASE 2 + 1.00 X CASE 4 COMB 3 : 1.00 X CASE 1 + 1.00 X CASE 3 COMB 4 : 1.00 X CASE 1 + 1.00 X CASE 2 + 1.00 X CASE 3 COMB 5 : 1.00 X CASE 1 + 1.00 X CASE 3 + 1.00 X CASE 4 ELEMENT REPORTS SIGN CONVENTION : BEAM DESIGNERS AXIAL SHEAR MOMENT MAX MOM/DEFL DIST K K K -Ft K -Ft /In Ft COMB 1.00 X CASE 1 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#8 PAGE NO. 4 TIME : Tue Feb 18 13:50:21 1997 JOB NO. : 46 SPAN LOAD COMB ELEMENT REPORTS SIGN CONVENTION : BEAM DESIGNERS AXIAL SHEAR MOMENT MAX MOM/DEFL + 1.00 X CASE 2 + 1.00 X CASE 3 + 1.00 X CASE 4 LEFT CANT MAIN SPAN 1 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 2 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 3 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 4 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 5 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 6 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 1 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS 2 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS 3 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS 4 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS 5 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS 0.0000 -10.9300 0.0000 -18.3200 0.0000 -10.9300 0.0000 •18.3200 0.0000 •10.9300 0.0000 18.3200 13.3572 11.1228 7.9544 13.2906 11.1894 0.0000 22.9683 18.8117 4.6226 24.3026 17.4774 7.2314 21.5674 20.2126 5.1059 0.0000 -69.3550 0.0000 -117.3900 0.0000 -69.3550 0.0000 -117.3900 0.0000 -69.3550 0.0000 -117.3900 -69.3550 -72.3350 Ft 36.0000 -117.3900 -122.7700 Ft 36.0000 -69.3550 -72.3350 Ft 36.0000 -117.3900 -72.3350 Ft 36.0000 -69.3550 -122.7700 Ft 36.0000 Ft Ft Ft Ft Ft -0.1104 -0.5699 0.2730 -0.0451 0.1316 -0.1865 30.4409 -0.1414 -18.6608 0.4323 101.1790 -0.8149 74.4929 -0.5378 78.7634 -0.5236 DIST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.00 18.00 16.00 18.17 16.00 18.04 16.00 19.03 16.00 17.03 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#8 PAGE NO. 5 TIME : Tue Feb 18 13:50:21 1997 JOB NO. : 46 LOAD SPAN COMB ELEMENT REP SIGN CONVENTION AXIAL SHEAR 6 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS RIGHT CANT 1 NE PE 2 NE PE 3 NE PE 4 NE PE 5 NE PE 6 NE PE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 22 -18 : 7 13 0 22 0 13 0 13 0 22 0 22 0 .9017 .8783 .9293 .0500 .0000 .1400 .0000 .0500 .0000 .0500 .0000 .1400 .0000 .1400 .0000 0 R T S : BEAM DESIGNERS MOMENT MAX MOM/DEFL DIST -117 -122 Ft 36 -72 0 -122 0 -72 0 -72 0 -122 0 -122 0 .3900 52.0773 16.00 .7700 -0.2413 18.00 .0000 Ft .3350 .0000 .7700 .0000 .3350 .0000 .3350 .0000 .7700 .0000 .7700 .0000 -0.1051 6.50 -0.5701 6.50 0.2879 6.50 0.1531 6.50 -0.0424 6.50 -0.1771 6.50 SCHMIT ENGINEERING ILG -m - /\ STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project _- ly By T-^ Dntft/^7 Sheet Norl<Z.Of Subject floor job NO. f 05-9/n /ogo "oe PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#9 PAGE NO. 1 TIME : Mon Jan 27 14:04:45 1997 JOB NO. : 47 SPAN SPAN INFORMATION LENGTH SLOPE PROP NO LEFT CANT MAIN SPAN RIGHT CANT Units Ft 6.50 36.00 6.50 Deg 0.00 0.00 0.00 PROP NO PROPERTY SECTION NAME MODULUS INFORMATION AREA DIST Units 1 5.125 X 27.5 GLB 2 5.125 X 27.5 GLB 3 5.125 X 27.5 GLB K /In 2 1800.00 1800.00 1800.00 In2 138.400 138.400 138.400 In4 8406.300 8406.300 8406.300 Ft ELEMENT LOAD INFORMATION LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC DIST PX PY M Units : Ft Description : DL Span : LEFT CANT 1 UNIF GLO Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 UNIF GLO Description : DL Span : RIGHT CANT 1 UNIF GLO Description : DL Span : LEFT CANT 1 CONG GLO DIST B E DIST B E DIST B E DIST B 0.00 6.50 0.00 36.00 0.00 6.50 0.00 K /Ft 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 K /Ft Ft-K /Ft -0.06 -0.06 -0.06 -0.06 -0.06 -0.06 -8.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#9 PAGE NO. 2 TIME : Mon Jan 27 14:04:50 1997 JOB NO. : 47 ELEMENT LOAD INFORMATION LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC DIST PX PY M Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONG GLO DIST B 0.00 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONG GLO DIST B 8.00 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 16.00 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 24.00 Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONC GLO DIST B 32.00 Description : DL Span : RIGHT CANT 1 CONC GLO DIST B 4.00 Description : DL Span : RIGHT CANT 1 CONC GLO DIST B 6.50 Description : LL Span : LEFT CANT 2 CONC GLO DIST B 0.00 Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 3 CONC GLO DIST B 0.00 Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 3 CONC GLO DIST B 8.00 Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 3 CONC GLO DIST B 16.00 0.00 -3.60 0.00 -3.60 0.00 -3.60 0.00 -3.60 0.00 -3.60 0.00 -3.60 0.00 0.00 -6.75 -6.15 0.00 -2.88 0.00 -2.88 0.00 -2.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#9 PAGE NO. 3 TIME : Won Jan 27 14:04:50 1997 JOB NO. : 47 ELEMENT LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC LOAD INFORMATION DIST PX PY M Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 3 CONG GLO DIST B 24.00 Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 3 CONG GLO DIST B 32.00 Description : LL Span : RIGHT CANT 4 CONG GLO DIST B 4.00 Description : LL Span : RIGHT CANT 4 CONG GLO DIST B 6.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.88 -2.88 -2.88 -4.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LOAD COMBSPAN Units : LOAD COMBINATIONS: COMB 1 : 1.00 X CASE 1 COMB 2 : 1.00 X CASE 1 + 1.00 X CASE 2 + 1.00 X CASE 4 COMB 3 : 1.00 X CASE 1 + 1.00 X CASE 3 COMB 4 : 1.00 X CASE 1 + 1.00 X CASE 2 + 1.00 X CASE 3 COMB 5 : 1.00 X CASE 1 + 1.00 X CASE 3 + 1.00 X CASE 4 ELEMENT REPORTS SIGN CONVENTION : BEAM DESIGNERS AXIAL SHEAR MOMENT MAX MOM/DEFL DIST K K K -Ft K -Ft /In Ft COMB 1.00 X CASE 1 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#9 PAGE NO. 4 TIME : Mon Jan 27 14:04:50 1997 JOB NO. : 47 LOAD SPAN COMB + 1.00 + 1.00 + 1.00 LEFT CANT 1 2 3 4 5 6 MAIN SPAN 1 ELEMENT REPORTS SIGN CONVENTION : BEAM DESIGNERS AXIAL SHEAR MOMENT MAX MOM/DEFL DIST X CASE 2 X CASE 3 X CASE 4 NE PE NE PE NE PE NE PE NE PE NE PE NE PE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 INFLECTION PTS: 2 NE PE 0 0 .0000 .0000 INFLECTION PTS: 3 NE PE 0 0 .0000 .0000 INFLECTION PTS: 4 NE PE 0 0 .0000 .0000 INFLECTION PTS: 5 NE PE 0 0 .0000 .0000 INFLECTION PTS: 0 -8 0 -15 0 -8 0 -15 0 -8 0 -15 11 -9 7 10 -9 0 19 -15 4 20 -14 7 17 -16 5 .0000 .9700 .0000 .1200 .0000 .9700 .0000 .1200 .0000 .9700 .0000 .1200 .0104 .1496 .9530 .9558 .2042 .0000 .0104 .5496 .6026 .1208 .4392 .2267 .8454 .7146 .0868 0 -57 0 -97 0 -57 0 -97 0 -57 0 -97 -57 -59 Ft 36 -97 -101 Ft 36 -57 -59 Ft 36 -97 -59 Ft 36 -57 -101 Ft 36 .0000 .0375 .0000 .0125 .0000 .0375 .0000 .0125 .0000 .0375 .0000 .0125 .0375 .5425 .0000 .0125 .4825 .0000 .0375 .5425 .0000 .0125 .5425 .0000 .0375 .4825 .0000 -0 -0 0 -0 0 -0 25 -0 Ft -15 0 Ft 83 -1 Ft 61 -0 Ft 65 -0 Ft .1445 .7516 .3623 .0581 .1755 .2449 .0495 .1842 .7989 .5735 .9297 .0745 .7214 .7084 .2897 .6899 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 18 16 18 16 18 16 19 16 17 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .17 .00 .04 .00 .03 .00 .02 PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#9 PAGE NO. 5 TIME : Mon Jan 27 14:04:50 1997 JOB NO. : 47 LOAD SPAN COMB ELEMENT REP SIGN CONVENTION AXIAL SHEAR 6 NE 0.0000 PE 0.0000 INFLECTION PTS RIGHT CANT 1 NE PE 2 NE PE 3 NE PE 4 NE PE 5 NE PE 6 NE PE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 18 -15 7 10 0 18 0 10 0 10 0 18 0 18 0 .9558 .6042 .9271 .7400 .0000 .3000 .0000 .7400 .0000 .7400 .0000 .3000 .0000 .3000 .0000 0 R T S : BEAM DESIGNERS MOMENT MAX MOM/DEFL DIST -97 -101 Ft 36 -59 0 -101 0 -59 0 -59 0 -101 0 -101 0 .0125 43.0814 16.00 .4825 -0.3167 18.00 ,0000 Ft .5425 .0000 .4825 .0000 .5425 .0000 .5425 .0000 .4825 .0000 .4825 .0000 -0.1377 6.50 -0.7518 6.50 0.3818 6.50 0.2037 6.50 -0.0543 6.50 -0.2324 6.50 SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN O - ,/ f 0.093"* Project - By 3"JS Date ^ Sheet No. £t Of Subject j^03^ Job NO. _ f- / /f CAin 6. SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project By S Date .Sheet No. J:Of Subject £-00^ . . Job NO. _ - 39^0" t sotso - S. A 50 "A ;s" f- s f- SCHMIT ENGINEERING Project STRUCTURAL DESIGN 6 " 5^-40 A By -3~-S Date Subject Sheet No. job NO. 3 /*'f ' L_ if-*' &' s1 s' ^-i _3 ( SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN m Project By >T-S Date • Subject , Sheet No. Of job NO. _ A - 13' pc ps.cS- DP- 5 = ^ -f S 14' it.:STANDARD STRUCTURES PAGE 01 jr Standard Structures Inc. RO. Box K, Santa Rosa, CA 95402 707/644-2982 Fax: 707/544-2994 2-06-1997 Project Name: RPS Location: Carlsbad SSI-JOIST CALCULATION 14:33 Project Number Mark Number ssI-Joist Description ** ( 1 ) 18.0-inch ssl 324 ** Top Flange SPF F8 ** Bottom Flange SPF FS Web Material OSB** 2400 MSR 2400 MSR Design Criteria Span (ft) 18.00 0. C. spacing (in) 19.20 Load Duration Factor 1.00 Repetitive Factor 1.10 Point Loads: Number LL Distance from left NONE Uniform Loads: Number LL(PSF) DL(PSF) PL(PSF) 1 80.0 25.0 20.0 TL(PSF) 125.0 Beg End 0.0 18.0 Triangular Loads:Number BEG-LL(PL?) BEG-DL(PLF) BND-LL(PLF) BND-DL(PLF> Beg NONE find Maximum Bending Moment Maximum Horizontal Shear SSI-Joist Deflection : Live Load .... Dead Load. . . . Total Load . . . Design (U.L.) 8105 1800 0.309 « L / 0.174 0.483 - L / 88 I -Joist Allowable < 9662 < 2136 €99 448 Cone Load over two joists > 8316 > 176B :>SI joists are fabricated by Standard Structures Inc. in accordance with tCBO PFC-4325. This analysis is to confirm that the SSI joist loted above is designed and conforms with current Standard structures specifications and code accepted design properties. The loads, spans and^pacings have been provided by others, and have not bean reviewed by Standard structures for adequacy. This information should be reviewed by the designer for consistency with the project. ® 031595 ssi Developing Better Ways to Build SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project _ . —- By T-^ Date /?/ Sheet No. iZ. Of Subject Job NO. F LO * ± L - f SO ?f * 2 \ a 5 S = 2 U /QX-J-S f f- S - X - 5 1 O 10 ;f-xe€> SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN n ~ so - Project By J~^ Date Sheet No._Of Subject Ftoc*f2_ job NO. _ fja Gooo S r 5-S blji? too* • UJn* ^50 U>0l_^ 3 QQ% UJfcoe 6^0 '^ J / r— 1 ^ 11 7 •/''J- /.' / ) If = 3-5*. U If SCHMIT ENGINEERING Project STRUCTURAL DESIGN By _j"-S Date ^/ Sheet No, ^L Of Subject FLOon- _ Job NQ. _ - -f S - SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project By z/ Date Sheet Of Subject Job NO. O£"s)GA3 : (j± UtfG /Q I i Q " ' F rS — * i f£ -T »•'"• Ht =o. to (JLT/ no ^TT^ LOR OS : UJ s cs >u o/c b * SCHMIT ENGINEERING Project STRUCTURAL DESIGN By J~-S* Date ^2_ Sheet No.-55_ Of Subject P^-Uci^ Job NO. _ o o oo o . BOO = 0.90 - cr =- 6* fc = /f -j J use y" n"t~ PAU<TU SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN t-c.s" • 2. ^ s J- . op m 10 - D- L. *• LAT- .s f iso 601;, /iy n Project By \T-1 Date "/?^ Sheet No.-§t_ Of Subject PA *&^ J Job NO. 3, i&r) O, /• 330/ /n. SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project By JT-S^ Date /?? Sheet No.-^. Of Subject P/WcC -s Job NO, i I <> * SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Ht T = 7 STOW ^ D.L. t- Pa lu. - -6-5' wf . e Project By 3"-^- . Date Subject. Sheet No. L Of job NO, _ p r, '-3,000^5) JOSo) - 3IZS/T ol = Ht- SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project . By 3~;^ Date /Q/ Sheet No. rz_ Of Subject job NO. C- . 4" >n 4 ^ 0-90 - 3, TQ><L SCHMIT ENGINEERING Project STRUCTURAL DESIGN By vj-^ Date' Subject Sheet Of Job NO. ^ 3 Eo fc = S -Tc'r 3000^, p.,-=-60;000pi e ^6. 2s D, L- >• UAT- LOGO'S U i,n no m^- u^n-o-s '. G»V Pai - /oso) = 3 3 ) S 0.75^,7)0.0 f >* A '66-7*3 SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN -my s e = o.s/?4 cr Project **? -By J^ _ Date . Sheet No.-_ Of Subject fyMJ^iU job NO, _ if • t*\ a O- 251-3 <o;<35£? (2, •SS/5/t , O n - 35, 33, oy "~*v SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN (3, - 40 ?f co, ooo L. a rcv^^ Project By Date 2/ Subject Sheet No.^?_ Of job NO. _ Pui-e. rxno-H-t- SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project By <^g- Date '?? Sheet No. &L Of Subject FRti$ ^~ Job NO. _ -ft. * /Y? ***** 6.P. 53, * s 3, n> -/*. SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN + too = A 68/5 Project _ By 3"-S Subject fol Date ^y Sheet of Job NO. _ 3G." •v,*. - -*~ USG - # S -f ^ 80 5/3 55^22) SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN CO L-U Trp, COL.o <L 4-1-2.00* RISC OOC. cou- e ss TTP f = Project By _\PS Date Subject Sheet No. *±. Of Job NO, _ STTD, P/AS P' f' - O /2J f - f s &t*^^ ;o( Use? 3lv<*> ^sno P = Co SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN a \I~F- - q £ 3 10- rz_ * o Project __ -. .._._ __ yo/ SA. By CT-V Date /97 Sheet No.^IL Of Subject CQL^-S job NO. _ - /<?..£ use P/ PG CO ^ -fa sno STTP . Pi PC; co o 3 - //-/•eo co co SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN C. i, P Ht u»f - TT r 'r 50 = Project _ „ By "3"^ Date Subject Sheet No.^LrL Of Job NO, _ HAT r * 0-0070 Mr = ^t 17? -o o.ao 4 C, ;. P couc oou. S f /so SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN J Project By CTS Date /?'/ Sheet No.fet" Of Subject COi^^ job NO. User S'-o"sa x^f SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project By Date /?/ Sheet No. ^_ Of Subject F&J*J£>n HP*) job NO. 6 as 1 fry3 30 X " It1+ z'-o" 6j/ocr r i o CDt . ' " so . <£. T'fT. Cox . CL. =. 5 8 200 £.60. SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project By > Date Sheet No. Of Subject Fcuuwn ^*J Job NO. _ CPU. (g fr, = //- F 32 P?HO o /-C 4- TXP- gX7~- CPU . a //-/«• C* //<, 1 J-C. 9 -a SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project By V-^ • Date Subject LA) £ Sheet No. _ Of Job NO. _ O , O j) - u * \\o(, s) rty SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN b - Tfey d A2.*a . 4. ^ O Project . — __ ___ -T- ]°/ VrtBy J ^ Date /?? Sheet No. Zr_ Of Subject Job NO 3 X 1^ e '.^^7 3^? x . ;-^^' SCHMIT ENGINEERING Project STRUCTURAL DESIGN V LUf . poop /' ' * " X 4 V(By J'^ Date /ZZ_ Sheet No. ZL Of Subject LAK?2/?l_ Job NO, _ C X - /-o c o. to 6-0) 6? ns) -O 1 /, O ** '" " "f " " -7"- / 35<f7/) f- 35 (I) J " J ;/<S /< SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN S772J G-U 770(0 I L&J&-dwt) ^ 6f5 % * O -503O Project By \TS» Date?? Sheet No/J=r Of Subject LtffMrtL Job NO. /= a F--SO 30 ^/35 +73)9 ) o ^ /» " 3 C ;e x-r 0 . 5020 O.f9XO Ce, " S SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project Of 00 0 V~0 " " Z{ ^3 * NO. r-X ^ o —<i> C C? SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project By ^^ Date Subject -J=> yj Sheet No, uL Of job NO. _ £*.x). SO 353 rJr J&L 4 /?-2*e& ss.^ses'_„ (°cv (2. +V e IS, lo' SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN U/Jer //: Project By vT^a Date Subject _J. Sheet No. _ Of Job NO. _ U SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN X' 3 5H6o/;o7 - £.0 . Project _ By "\T^ Date Subject Sheet No.'J±_ Of Job NO. _ 5/1 SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN n • P ^ <© (2 uocr 6-. * 3 &£>% e-o. ^LX e C (t ' Project By -- Date ^s Sheet No. ?¥_ Of Subject L/tK>2/3C job NO. _ c./ioc. -f to 2.3S /=- * s SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN CHO/U9 F - Project __ 4 By ^J7— Date Subject LJ. Sheet No. £_ Of job NO. _ 43 ss /-MS H- A-5 SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN E JL • /=i * 5o<3 Ft* ~ 0-I £ ^ - / U r - 33* Project . ~- ^L Cb>By ^T-S>. Date &7 Sheet No. £Z_ Of Subject 1 f\~&t.ft c_ j0b NO, __ i- x^ OM-v ><!.. ^^x 4' It' 6,' /&' 3'J' , 3^_' I t1 3 ^ y.as- AJO 16 tf ^S /O 3 t S UJA £. 3 SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN e '3 'Q' 3 3; 50 £/ .063 *IOO %, /= = Project By ~3~-^>- Date ?_ Sheet No. ^ Of Subject / A7^7/^^ Job NO. _ 0335 5, 53^}- •y -f U - O . fO(ffooco) SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project By 7^ Date ^>7 SheetNo.^LOf Subject job NO. TYty x it)/ 3 - SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN 7: p =u 10)3 F- Project V '?By T^S> Date '?7 Sheet No. Subject LAram __ Job NO. .5 , s so 7J /a: f-#; O.OOJ3 -ff- r '-> c -bo«' ' ~ so 6)^.<i *. .£,0 j: > 7.5 .»&5f >55« /(-,t ,40'7- >t SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project ____. By 7^ DateZL Sheet No.^_Of Subject LftJCns^— Job NO- T.&. 6 //J f- SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project By 7--^ Date Subject. ^Sheet Of Job NO. «- 7 1. T- ^ /05> f _L •V 7//Q cr )f >UO -= .3©' i r n 71 -h-fe" SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN £ Project By -J"-^- Date ^ Sheet No. ?£. Of Subject Lftmn^ job NO, y SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project By -3"-^ Date sheet Of Subject LfoKrtK I.job NO. a S07<?tlW i- F-v 23 Xo, SCHMIT ENGINEERING Project STRUCTURAL DESIGN 2/ By <T-Su Date '?? Sheet No. °£_ Of Subject ri— Job NO. U5c? f L* ft' *t)ft$ t iso^-^O ^ -sj s<i x, ©s * 4) 95, ^ao * Bm. D.L. -^ ?60S* ^ "O-fcJ 33 SCHMIT ENGINEERING Project STRUCTURAL DESIGN ? By JL^_ Date jlZZ Sheet No.. Of Subject /70?(^ j0b NO. /63 >3, £20 SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN - O = 0.1-0 0 ) (6. 7S) C\ SO) Project By Date Subject a (3 30 >G - /oJL .Sheet No. ±ZOf = Job NO. _ AftC. S O 03 "K SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Z- • .STD yz- SO) £ 30 301 ^S) *- .2400" Project By <r-«s Date ^7 Sheet No. C_ Of Subject Lfnw* i- Job NO. _ x M G so/ p ^ so* /I- i ^s<so 3 - SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project By Date Subject Sheet No.2/_ Of job NO. _ USC C2. SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project ?~By J"-> 'Dote f Sheet No ,~_ Of Subject rQAJ/^crro^ _ Job NO. _ SUE • PuflUtJ 70 •^ (<3t o) - 5-30 y -- ^ TO = £<J?J COL,- i ^ /O^flcaur " C " r Crrr) SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project By - Date ?7 Sheet No. Of Subject .rQ/J/\yrc77P-as _ Job NO. O. FUL.TO J- ./XL // r*°4 A»6 f ;o n-=- i<=s / •?- %w<^ r>7'6. , r/'g^ao \ /I •P x ^' ^UJXJ *• to • T fit* SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN e. /£cor - 43-?-; s 4> no- 6. - &&&?& It H jf-L (35210* Project By Date /J Sheet No. Of Subject £o*J^- Job NO. __ ft 1< u>/ocr x rn/O Y>\.<b. SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN ° -7 ' F- r ^ , 7- Project u 7By -S> Date ?7 Sheet No. _ Of Subject CQ&J/O- _ Job NO. _ 3 5300 ' X SWAP- fi'- -^ S D - SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN - £5600* ^ fi - F - e FLCX>-L (2. f = ^ 5 SSQQQ Project By _>E*^-j_ Date Sheet No, _ Of Subject _ rrvOxJ . _ Job NO. ^ f or <3 - -f- ^ ^ sseoo SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project By ^T-^ Date "^7 Sheet NoX/ Of Subject CQAJ/J- j0b NO. TO IB 750 16 = o.as O- = - 3 9- XQ 56 ' I alk o o O £> STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS Project: Architect: Engineer: Code: Date: RPS Camino Vida Roble Carlsbad, Ca. Mark Radford Architecture 912 South Andreasen Escondido, Ca. 92029 Schmit Engineering 1965 Rohn Rd. Escondido, Ca. 92025 (760) 743-0592 1994 U.B.C. October 6, 1997 TABLE OF CONTENTS Diagrams 1-2 Bld'g Loads 3 Roof Framing 4-46v-, Floor Framing 47-51 Wall Panels 52-62 Columns and Foundations 63-70 Lateral Analysis 71-91 Connections 92-97 £>.O. conn.. -..-...-- ?<5 SCHMIT ENGINEERING Project c STRUCTURAL DESIGN By __. Date Sheet No. _ Of Subject CO KJlGcTKjtJS Job NO. _ a Z 3o -• So; /tJ&LG*5>a , G, . C -o U, PROGRAM : Beam Span Analysis vl.57 SCHMIT ENGINEERING JOB : RPS RUN : RB-#2 PAGE NO. 1 TIME : Mon Jan 27 12:49:32 1997 JOB NO. : 40 SPAN SPAN INFORMATION LENGTH SLOPE PROP NO Units : Ft MAIN SPAN 29.50 Deg 0.00 PROP NO PROPERTY SECTION NAME MODULUS 2 5.125 X INFORMATION AREA I Units : K /In 2 In2 In4 GLB 1800.00 130.700 7081.600 DIST Ft ELEMENT LOAD LOAD LOAD DIST CASE TYPE SYS SPEC Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 UNIF GLO DIST Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONG GLO Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONG GLO LOAD INFORMATION DIST PX PY Units : Ft K /Ft K /Ft B E Description : DL Span : MAIN SPAN 1 CONG GLO DIST B Description : LL Span : MAIN SPAN 2 CONG GLO DIST B 0.00 29.50 5.50 DIST B 13.50 DIST B 21.50 5.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.08 -0.08 -4.32 -4.32 -4.32 -3.46 M Ft-K /Ft 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SCHMIT ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Project By Date Subject S U *b - O CO 203 "/ X x - 3;- X -fiS -- Ll Sheet No. ±l£ Of = Job NO. - <g, £ o c_ K VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. Z450 Vineyard Avenue, *102 Job &97-233-P Escondido, California 92029-1229 r, ^ ->o <ftA7 Phone (760) 743-1214December 22, 1997 Fax (m Mr. Arnold Ross Stalk RPS Nevada Elmwood Villas Apartments 401 North 28th Street Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Foundation Plan Review, Proposed Commercial Building, Lot 49. Airoort Business Center. Unit #2. Carlsbad. California We have received and reviewed the project foundation plan and selected excerpt of foundation details for the above referenced commercial construction provided to us by Mark Radford Architecture. Based on our review of drawings made available to us, and from a geotechnical engineering point-of-view, the foundation plan/details are in substantial compliance with our "Site Specific Geotechnical Investigation and Update Rough Grading Compaction Report, Lot 49, Airport Business Center, Unit #2," Job #97-233-P, dated August 29, 1997. The level building pad and foundation construction, however, should be inspected, tested as necessary, and approved by the project geotechnical engineer. The geotechnical engineering construction inspections and test results should be presented in written field and final as-build geotechnical reports. All recommendations should be further field verified, confirmed, or revised if necessary, at that time based on actual as-graded soil properties. The following comments are also appropriate and should be considered and/or incorporated into the final plans where applicable. We recommend providing diagonally placed re-entrant corner reinforcement consisting 2-#3 @ 12" OC (L=5' min.) for all interior slabs at 270°± corners. 2, We recommend depth of saw cut joints not to exceed 1 -inch maximum since center of slab reinforcement will occur 1 ^-inches below thejtop of slab. Deeper saw cuts can damage slab steel reinforcements. 3. In case of presaturation of the slab subgrade use 2 inches of dean sand over 10 mil plastic moisture barrier over 4 inches of %-inch rock under interior slabs. In the event construction begins soon after completion of fine grading operations while the required moisture content (3%-5% above optimum at the depth of 24 inches below slab subgrade) is present, 4 inches of dean sand or wash concrete sand with a 10 mil plastic moisture barrier placed at the mid-height may be considered. Mr Arnold Ross Stalk RPS Nevada Elmwood Villas Apartment December 22, 19§7 Page 2 If you have any questions or need clarification, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Reference to our Job #97-233-P will help to expedite our response to your inquiries. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. Mehdi Shariat RCE#46174 MS/mmd Distribution: Addressee (2) Mark Radford Architecture (fax, 3) mmd\letters\97-233-p.rpr VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC, 2450 Vmtyerd AMWV. »I02, EscomMo. Caljfrmia 92029-1279 • Phmt (760) 743-1214 * F« (760) 7394343' Site Specific Geotechnical Investigation and Update Rough Grading Compaction Report Lot 49, Airport Business Center, Unit #2 Carlsbad, California CM73/7? August 29, 1997 Prepared For: Mr. Arnold Ross Stalk RPS Nevada Elmwood Villas Apartments 401 North 28th Street Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Jbb X97-233-P VINJE & MIDDLETON ENQINEERINQ, INC. Job #97-233-P August 29, 1997 Mr. Arnold Ross Stalk RPS Nevada Elmwood Villas Apartments 401 North 28th Street Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102 Escondido, California 92029-1229 Phone (760) 743-1214 Fax (760) 739-0343 Site Specific Geotechnical Investigation and Update Rough Grading Compaction Report. Lot 49. Airport Business Center. Unit #2. Carlsbad. California Pursuant to your request, Vinje and Middleton Engineering, Inc. has completed the attached site specific geotechnical investigation and update compaction report for the above referenced project site. The following report summarizes the results of our field investigation, including laboratory analyses and conclusions, and provides recommendations for the development as understood. From a geotechnical engineering standpoint, it is our opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed commercial/industrial development provided the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the design and construction of the project. The conclusions and recommendations provided in this study are consistent with the site geotechnical conditions and are intended to aid in preparation of final development plans and allow more accurate estimates of development costs. If you have any questions or need clarification, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Reference to our Job #97-233-P will help to expedite our response to your inquiries. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. RaJpn M. Vinje GE#863 RMV/mmd TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction 1 II. Project Description 1 III. Proposed Development 2 IV. Purpose of Update Study 2 V. Site Investigation 2 VI. Findings . 3 A. Earth Materials 3 B. Geologic Structure - Slopes 3 C. Faults/Seismicity 3 D. Geologic Hazards 5 E. Laboratory Testing/Results 5 VII. Conclusions 7 VIII. Recommendations 8 A. Grading and Earthworks 8 B. Foundations and Slab-On-Grade Floors 9 C. Exterior Concrete Flatwork 11 D. Foundations and Earth Pressures 12 E. Pavement Design 13 F. General Recommendations 13 IX. Limitations 15 TABLES Fault Zones 1 Soil Types 2 Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content 3 In-Place Dry Density and Moisture Content 4 Expansion Index Test 5 Direct Shear Test 6 PLATES Preliminary Grading Plan 1 Test Trench Logs 2-6 Fault - Epicenter Map 7 Typical Retaining Wall Drain Detail 8 Isolation Joints and Re-Entrant Comer Reinforcement 9 Site Specific Geotechnical Investigation and Update Rough Grading Compaction Report Lot 49, Airport Business Center, Unit #2 Carlsbad, California I. INTRODUCTION Submitted herewith please find the following site specific geotechnical investigation and update rough grading report for the above referenced site. The project site is a contoured graded parcel north of Camino Vida Roble in the City of Carlsbad. The site is depicted on a Preliminary Grading Plan attached to this transmittal as Plate 1. The project site was contour graded as a part of a larger development known as Airport Business Center, Unit 2 in 1990. Preliminary surface and subsurface geotechnical investigation and subsequent engineering observations and testing services during grading operations were provided by ICG, Incorporated which resulted in written technical reports. The following reports and plans related to the project site were made available to us and were reviewed in connection with the preparation of this study: 1. "Preliminary Grading Plan for Real Property Services", prepared by Excel Engineering, dated August 12,1997. The grading plan was reproduced and utilized as a basis for the enclosed Geotechnical Map, Plate 1. 2. "Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading. Airport Business Center. Unit 2. Carlsbad. California", prepared by ICG Incorporated, Job No. 05-9065-001-00-01, Log No. 3- 1063, dated April 21, 1993. The above referenced report is on file with our firm and copies can be obtained upon request. //. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Lot 49 is a graded parcel constructed utilizing conventional grading techniques of cutting into natural hillside terrain. Generated soils were placed elsewhere in the subdivision as compacted fill. Graded cut slopes which reach a maximum vertical height of approximately 35 feet ascend at 2 (horizontal) to 1 (vertical) or flatter gradients to developed properties above along the north, west and eastern margins. A graded cut slope descends at nearly 2:1 gradients for maximum vertical height of approximately 11 feet to Camino Vida Roble along the south boundary. VINJE ff MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Esctmdifo, California 92029-1229 • Phone, (760) 743-1214 « Fax (760) 739-0343 SOIL TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS QEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS SITE SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 2 AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER. UNIT 2. CARLSBAD AUGUST 29.1997 Based on our review of the referenced reports the cut slopes to the north, east and west were reconstructed as stability fill slopes to replace weak formational units particularly susceptible to erosion and surficial instability. The reconstructed stability fill slopes were constructed with keys and back drains. Site drainage sheet flows to the southwest. Significant erosional features caused by uncontrolled runoff was not indicated. On-site slopes are planted and performing well. ///. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Details of the proposed construction are not yet developed. Fine grading of the existing rough contour graded surface will be necessary to achieve final design grades. It is anticipated that the proposed buildings consist of concrete tilt-up and/or masonry structures supported on shallow concrete footing and slab-on-grade floor type foundation system. IV. PURPOSE OF UPDATE STUDY The purpose of this update report was to review the referenced reports, plans, maps and documents, and provide update recommendations considering the proposed development and the current standards of practice. In addition to the preparation of this report, the following activities were completed in connection with this update study. 1. A review of the referenced documents and preliminary grading plans and geotechnical reports. 2. A site visit and inspection of the existing surface conditions and geologic mapping. 3. An excavation of 9 exploratory test trenches throughout the site. 4. Additional soil/rock sampling, laboratory testing and analysis of the test results. Based on our observations and review of available documents and plans, site conditions have primarily remained unchanged from a geotechnical engineering view point. V. SITE INVESTIGA TION Site geotechnical conditions were primarily determined from surface observations and excavation of 9 exploratory test trenches utilizing a tractor-mounted backhoe VINJEff MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondida, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760} 739-0343 SOIL TESTING PEBC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS QEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS SITE SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 3 AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER. UNIT 2. CARLSBAD AUGUST 29.1997 at the approximate locations shown on the enclosed Plate 1. The test trenches were entered and logged by our field geologist who also supervised sampling and collection of representative soil samples at selected locations for laboratory testing and analysis. Test trench locations are shown on the enclosed Plate 1. Logs of the exploratory test trenches are included as Plates 2 through 6. VI. FINDINGS A. Earth Materials Test trench excavations generally confirm data reviewed in the referenced reports. Surface areas of the project site are cut surfaces which expose sedimentary bedrock units that are widely exposed in local hillside terrain. Siltstone/shale units predominate with sandstone interbeds. Exposed bedrock at the site occurs in a disturbed and weathered conditions in near-surface exposures which have been designated fill on the enclosed trench logs. Below, exposed bedrock grades to dense and competent. B. Geologic Structure - Slopes Structural bedding conditions in exposed bedrock are poorly developed features which suggest near-horizontal structure. Bedding will not impact project development throughout the level building surface. Reviewed data indicate that project slopes are compacted fill stabilization slopes which were apparently placed in support of weak bedrock materials initially exposed in the slopes. Details of the stabilization fill section are unknown, however, drains have been provided. C. Faults/Seismicitv Faults or significant shear zones are not indicated on or near proximity to the project site. As with most areas of California, the San Diego region lies within a seismically active zone; however, coastal areas of the county are characterized by low levels of seismic activity relative to inland areas to the east. During a 40-year period (1934-1974), 37 earthquakes were recorded in San Diego coastal areas by the California Institute of Technology. None of the recorded events exceeded a Richter magnitude of 3.7, nor did any of the earthquakes generate more than modest ground shaking or significant damages. Most of the recorded events occurred along various offshore faults which characteristically generate modest earthquakes. VlNJEtfMIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escendido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343 SOIL TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS (JEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS SITE SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER. UNIT 2. CARLSBAD PAGE 4 AUGUST 29. 1997 Historically, the most significant earthquake events which affect local areas originate along well known, distant fault zones to the east and the Coronado Bank Fault to the west. Based upon available seismic data, compiled from California Earthquake Catalogs, the most significant historical event in the area of the study site occurred in 1 800 at an estimated distance of 9 miles from the project area. This event, which is thought to have occurred along the Coronado Bank Fault, reached an estimated magnitude of 6.5 with estimated bedrock acceleration values of 0.21 g at the project site. The following list represents the most significant faults which commonly impact the region. Estimated ground acceleration data compiled from Digitized California Faults (Computer Program EQ Fault Ver. 2:01 ) typically associated with the fault is also tabulated. TABLE 1 Elsinore Fault 22 miles 0.088 g San Jacinto Fault 46 miles 0.040 g Coronado Bank Fault 23 miles 0.089 g The location of significant faults and earthquake events relative to the study site are depicted on a Fault - Epicenter Map attached to this report as Plate 7. More recently, the number of seismic events which affect the region appear to have heightened somewhat. Nearly 40 earthquakes of magnitude 3.5 or higher have been recorded in coastal regions between January 1984 and August 1986. Most of the earthquakes are thought to have been generated along offshore faults. For the most part, the recorded events remain moderate shocks which typically resulted in low levels of ground shaking to local areas. A notable exception to this pattern was recorded on July 13, 1986. An earthquake of magnitude 5.3 shook county coastal areas with moderate to locally heavy ground shaking resulting in $700,000 in damages, one death, and injuries to 30 people. The quake occurred along an offshore fault located nearly 30 miles southwest of Oceanside. A series of notable events shook county areas with a (maximum) magnitude 7.4 shock in the early morning of June 28, 1992. These quakes originated along related segments of the San Andreas Fault approximately 90 miles to the north. Locally high levels of ground shaking over an extended period of time resulted; however, significant damages to local structures were not reported. The increase in earthquake frequency in the region remains a subject of speculation among geologists; however, based upon empirical information and the recorded seismic history of county areas, the 1986 and 1992 events are thought to represent the VINJE & MIDDLETON ENQINEERlNtj, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Esamdido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343 SOIL TESTING PERCTEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS QEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS SITE SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER. UNIT^CARLSBAD PAGE 5 AUGUST 29.1997 highest levels of ground shaking which can be expected at the study site as a result of seismic activity. In recent years, the Rose Canyon Fault has received added attention from geologists. The fault is a significant structural feature in metropolitan San Diego which includes a series of parallel breaks trending southward from La Jolla Cove through San Diego Bay toward the Mexican border. Recent trenching along the fault in Rose Canyon indicated that at that location the fault was last active 6,000 to 9,000 years ago. Thus, the fault is classified as "active" by the State of California which defines faults that evidence displacement in the previous 11,000 years as active. More active faults (listed on the preceding page) are considered most likely to impact the region during the lifetime of the project. The faults are periodically active and capable of generating moderate to locally high levels of ground shaking site. Ground separation as a result of seismic activity is not expected at the property. D. Geologic Hazards Geologic hazards are not presently indicated at the project site. Exposed slopes do not indicate gross geologic instability. The most significant geologic hazards at the property will be those associated with ground shaking in the event of a major seismic event. Liquefaction or related ground rupture failures are not anticipated. E. Laboratory Testing/Results Earth deposits encountered in our exploratory excavations were closely examined and sampled for laboratory testing to determine their ability to support the planned structures and improvements. Based upon our test data and field exposures, site soils have been grouped into the following soil types: TABLE 2 soitm* * 1 2 3 "' "*;"'!-v;.:* /vri&*&to: >'. "\ '^/; /' pale pale grey to brown sand with shale,ripped brown to black color si Its tone/shale bedrock (fill) (bedrock) off-white sandstone (bedrock) The following tests were conducted in support of this investigation: 1. Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of Soil Types 1 and 2 were determined VINJE&MIDDLETONENQINEERJNQ, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, Califrmia 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343 SOIL TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS QBOTECHNICAJ, INVESTOJATIONS SITE SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER, UNIT 2, CARLSBAD PAGE 6 AUGUST 29.1997 in accordance with ASTM D-1557-91. The results are presented in Table 3 below. TABLES T-1 r T-3@r/2' 106.7 105.3 20.0 21,4 2. In-Place Dry Density and Moisture Content: In-place dry density and moisture contents of representative soil deposits beneath the site were determined from relatively undisturbed chunk samples using water displacement method. Results are presented in Table 4 below and tabulated on the attached Logs. TABLE 4 T-1 @ 21 Moisture 15.6 114.2 Max. Dry 106.7 100+ 'Designated as relative compaction for structural fills. Required relative compaction for structural fill is 90% or greater. Required relative compaction for pavement sub and base grades is 95% or greater. 3. Expansion Index Test: Two expansion index tests were performed on representative samples of Soil Types 1 and 2 in accordance with the Uniform Building Code Standard 18-2. The test results are presented in Table 5 below: TABLE 5 i t ~/r , / Sample - . location T-1 @ r T-3 @ 1 Yz' ; Soil:;T«» 1 2 Remolded ti>m 17.1 1.7.1 ' Saturation:>& : 50.1 50.8 • Saturated <d - ,,.J%I.,' 23.3 23.6 Expansion Index (El> 104 75 Expansion Potential high medium (a)) • moisture content in percent 4. Direct Shear Test: One direct shear test was performed on a representative sample of Soil Type 1. The prepared specimen was soaked overnight, loaded with normal loads of 1, 2, and 4 kips per square foot respectively, and sheared VINJE ff MIDDLETON ENQINEERINQ, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343 SOIL TESTINQ PERC TEST SOIL 1NVESTIQATIONS (JEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS SITE SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER. UNIT 2. CARLSBAD PAGE 7 AUGUST 29. 1997 to failure in an undrained condition. The test results are presented in Table 6 below. TABLE 6 location ;*«*Cohesfon T-i@r remolded 114.0 36 242 W/. CONCLUSIONS Based upon the foregoing investigation, development of Lot 49 of Airport Business Center substantially as proposed, is feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint. The following geotechnical factors will influence design and construction phases of site development. 1. Upper fills (weathered and disturbed formational rocks) at the project site are not suitable in their present conditions for the support of structures or new graded fills. These deposits should be removed to the underlying undisturbed units and recompacted prior to placing fill, improvements and structures. 2. Groundwater conditions were not encountered during our investigations and are not expected to be a problem in development of the site as planned. 3. Expansive soils (El}20) are present at the project site. Design and construction of the proposed structures and improvements should consider mitigation measures to preclude adverse affects of potentially expansive bearing soils. Appropriate recommendations are provided in the following sections. 4. Existing on-site graded cut and stability fill slopes are performing well. Our observations indicated slope conditions are favorable for the gross stability of the hillside. However, continued maintenance of the on-site slopes is essential in future stability of graded embankments. 5. Liquefaction and seismically induced settlements will not impact the proposed development and structures provided our recommendations for remedial grading and site development are followed. 6. Post construction settlements of the underlying earth deposits are expected to be within the allowable tolerances of the building foundations and floor slab provided our recommendations for site development and grading are implemented. 7. Soil collapse will not be a factor in development of the study site. VINJE # MIDDLETON ENQINEERINQ, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343 SOIL TESTING SOIL INVESTIGATIONS QEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS SITE SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 8 AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER. UNIT 2. CARLSBAD AUGUST 29.1997 VIII. RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are consistent with the project geotechnical conditions and should be incorporated into final plans and implemented during the construction phase. A. Grading and Earthworks Conventional grading techniques may be used in order to achieve final design grades and improve soil conditions beneath the new structures and improvements. All grading and earthworks should be completed in accordance with Appendix Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code, local grading ordinances and the requirements of the following section wherever applicable. 1. Clearing and Grubbing: Surface vegetation and other deleterious materials and debris should be removed from areas to receive fills, structures and improvements. Removals should be inspected and approved by the project geotechnical engineer or his designated field representative prior to grading. 2. Grading: The upper fills (weathered and disturbed formational units) at the site in the areas to receive new fills, structures and improvements should be removed to the underlying unweathered formational units as approved by the project soils engineer and recompacted. Removal depths will vary throughout the site. Based on the subsurface exposures at the test trench locations, removal depths are estimated to be on the order of one foot throughout the site with the bottom of over-excavations ripped-and-recompacted in-place to an additional minimum depth of one foot. Locally deeper removals may be necessary based on the actual field exposures and should be anticipated. 3. Stabilization Fill Slopes: On-site stabilization slopes are performing well. We understand that back drains were installed along the heel of the keyways for the buttress and stability fills at the time of original grading. We could not locate outlet pipes for the installed back drains at the study site at the time of our investigation. All pipe outlets should be located and secured at the time of precise grading. In no case pipe outlets should be allowed to plug or be covered with earth. Outlet pipes should be connected to an approved subsurface drainage system or discharge at an approved location. Location of the backdrain outlet pipes should be shown on the precise grading plans, 4. Cut/Fill Transition: Cut/fill transition should not be allowed under buildings, improvements and the associated structures. The cut portion of the cut/fill transition pads should be undercut to provide a minimum of one foot of compacted fill below the deepest footing and/or finish rough grades underneath the improvements. VINJE # MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343 SOIL TESTING PERCTEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS QEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS SITE SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 9 AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER. UNIT 2. CARLSBAD AUGUST 29. 1997 5. Fill Materials/Compaction: Removed soils are suitable for reuse as compacted site fill. Fill soils should be moisture conditioned to 3% to 5% above optimum moisture content and mechanically compacted in thin, horizontal lifts to at least 90% of the corresponding laboratory maximum density value per ASTM D-1557- 91 unless otherwise specified. 6. Inspections: Site grading operations should be tested and inspected by the project geotechnical engineer or his designated field representative on a continuous basis. Particular attention should be given to over- excavations/removals and fill compaction. Geotechnical engineering observations and testing should be presented in a formal as-graded compaction report at the completion of rough grading. 7. Surface Drainage/Erosion Control: A critical element to the continued stability of the graded building pads and slopes is adequate surface drainage system, and protection of the slope face. This can most effectively be achieved by appropriate vegetation cover and the installation of the following systems: a) Drainage swales should be provided at the top and toe of the slopes per project civil engineer design. b) Building pad and slope surface runoff should be collected and directed to a selected location in a controlled manner. c) The finish slope should be planted soon after completion of grading. Unprotected slope faces will be subject to severe erosion and should not be allowed. Over watering of the slope faces should also not be allowed. Only the amount of water to sustain vegetation life should be provided. B. Foundations and Slab-On-Grade Floors The following recommendations are consistent with highly-expansive bearing soils expected at pad grades. Final foundation and slab design will depend on expansion characteristics of finish grade soils. All foundations and slab recommendations should be confirmed and/or revised as necessary in the site final as-graded compaction report and foundation plan review phase when the scheme of the construction in known. Revised recommendations should be anticipated. 1. The proposed building can be supported on stiff shallow foundations. The shallow foundations should be founded on certified bearing soils. Acceptable foundations may include a system of spread pad and strip footings and slab-on- grade floors. VINJEtfMIDDLETONENQINEERINQ, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343 SOIL TEST7NQ PEBC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS SITE SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 10 AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER. UNITS 2. CARLSBAD AUGUST 29.1997 2. Continuous strip concrete tilt-up or masonry wall foundations should be sized at least 18 inches wide and 24 inches deep. Interior and exterior spread pad footings should be at least 24 inches square and 18 inches deep. Exterior isolated spread pad footings, if any, should be structurally tied to the perimeter strip footings with tie beams. Tie beams should be at least 12 inches wide by 12 inches deep. Footing depths are measured from the lowest finish rough grade not including the sand/gravel underlay beneath the slabs. Exterior continuous strip footings should enclose the entire building perimeter. 3. Interior and exterior continuous strip foundations should be reinforced by at least 4-#5 reinforcing bars. Place 2-#5 bars three inches above the bottom of the footing and 2-#5 bars three inches below the top of the footing. Tie beams should be reinforced with 2-#4 bars top and bottom and #3 ties at 18 inches on center. Reinforcement details for spread pad footings should be provided by the project structural engineer. 4. The slab subgrade and foundation bearing soils should not be allowed to dry prior to pouring the concrete or presaturation will be necessary. In the case of presaturation of the slab subgrade and/or non-monolithic pour (two pour) system, dowel the slab to the footings using #4 reinforcing bars spaced 18 inches on center extending at least 20 inches into the footing and 20 inches into slab. The dowels should be placed mid-height in the slab. Alternate the dowels each way for all interior footings. 5. After the footings are dug and cleaned, place the reinforcing steel and dowels, and pour the footings; 6. This office should be notified to inspect the footings and reinforcing prior to pouring concrete. 7. Once the concrete for the footings has cured and underground utilities tested, place 4 inches of 3/s-inch rock over the slab subgrade. Flood with water to the top of the 3/s-inch rock, and allow the slab subgrade to soak until moisture testing indicates that the required moisture content is present. 8. The required moisture content of the slab subgrade soils is 3% to 5% over the optimum moisture content at a depth of 24 inches below slab subgrade. After the slab subgrade soils have soaked, notify this office and schedule appropriate moisture testing. 9. When the required moisture content has been achieved, place a ten-mil plastic moisture barrier over the 3/e-inch rock, and place 2 inches of clean sand (SE 30 or greater) on top of the plastic. VINJE ff MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, Califrrnia 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • FtiX (760) 739-0343 SOIL TESTINQ PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIQATIONS CEOTECHNICAt INVESTIGATIONS SITE SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 11 AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER. UNITS 2. CARLSBAD AUGUST 29.1997 10. If sufficient moisture is present, flooding will not be required. The dowels may be deleted, and the footings and slab may be poured monolithically. 11. AH interior slabs should be a minimum of 5 inches in thickness reinforced with #4 reinforcing bars spaced 18 inches on center each way placed one and one- half inches below the top of the slab. For interior industrial floor slabs bearing stacking/storing and equipment/machinery loads, the minimum slab design provided herein should be confirmed or revised as required by the project structural engineer considering a soil modules of subgrade reaction of 150 pci and actual slab loading condition. 12. This office should be notified to inspect the sand, slab thickness, and reinforcing prior to concrete pour. 13. Provide contraction joints consisting of sawcuts spaced 10 feet on center each way within 24 hours of concrete pour for all interior slabs. The sawcuts should be a minimum of %-inch in depth and must not exceed 1%-inch in depth or the reinforcing may be damaged. 14. Provide re-entrant corner reinforcement for all interior slabs in general accordance with the enclosed Plate 9. Re-entrant corners will depend on slab geometry and/or interior column locations. C. Exterior Concrete Flatwork 1. All exterior slabs (walkways, patios) should be a minimum of 5 inches in thickness reinforced with 6x6/10x10 welded wire mesh carefully placed one and one-half inches below the top of slab. Use 6 inches clean sand (SE 30 or greater) beneath all slabs. 2. Concrete driveways, parking and trash enclosure slabs on expansive soils for industrial/commercial developments should be a minimum of 5 inches in thickness reinforced with #4 bars at 18 inches on centers in both directions, placed mid-height in the slab. Provide a minimum 6 inches of 95% compacted Caltrans Class II aggregate base over 12 inches of 95% compacted subgrade beneath PCC driveways, parking and trash enclosure slabs. Provide a minimum of 12 inches wide by 12 inches deep thickened slab edge reinforced with minimum 1-#4 continuous bar near the bottom at the trash enclosure opening. 3. Exterior slabs placed against the perimeter footings should be doweled to the footing using #3 reinforcing bars spaced 18 inches on center, extending 20 inches into the slab at mid-height, and into the footing to the elevation of the bottom reinforcing bar{s). VINJEtf MIDDLETONENQINEERINQ, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, ^scondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343 SOIL TESTING PERCTEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS QEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS SITE SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 12 AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER. UNITS 2. CARLSBAD AUGUST 29.1997 4. Provide contraction joints consisting of saw cuts spaced 10 feet (not to exceed 12 feet maximum) on center each way within 24 hours of concrete pour for all exterior slabs. The saw cuts should be a minimum depth of %-inch but must not exceed 1 %-inches deep. 5. All exterior slab designs should be confirmed in the final as-graded compaction report. D. Foundation and Earth Pressures 1. Allowable Foundation and Lateral Pressures a) An allowable foundation pressure of 1,500 pounds per square foot may be utilized for foundations supported on certified foundation soils. This value applies to dead plus live loads and may be increased by one-third for wind and seismic loading. b) An allowable lateral bearing pressure of 100 psf per foot of depth may also be used. The lateral bearing earth pressure may be increased by the amount of the designated value for each additional foot of depth to a maximum of 1500 pounds per square foot. A lateral sliding resistance of 130 psf may also be considered between the bottom of the footing and soils. The lateral sliding resistance may be added to the allowable lateral bearing value provided that in no case the total lateral resistance exceed one-half the dead load. 2. Earth Pressures/Retaining Walls The following earth pressures may be used for preliminary design estimates only and need to be re-evaluated when the characteristics of the backfill soils have been specifically determined. Revised recommendations should be anticipated. - Wet density of compacted backfill soils = 114.0 pcf. - Angle of internal friction for compacted backfill soils = 36 degrees. - Active soil pressure for compacted backfill soils = 31 pcf (EFP), level backfill, cantilever, unrestrained walls. - Active soil pressure for compacted backfill soils = 44 pcf (EFP), 2:1 backfill surface, cantilever, unrestrained walls. - Active soil pressure for compacted backfill soils = 52 pcf (EFP), 114:1 backfill surface, cantilever, unrestrained walls. - At-rest pressure for compacted backfill soils = 48 pcf (EFP), non-yielding, restrained walls. - Passive soil pressure for compacted soils = 400 pcf (EFP), level surface at the toe. VINJE 6f MIDDLETON ENQINEERINQ, ZNC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 * Fox (760) 739-0343 SOIL TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS SITE SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 13 AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER. UNITS 2. CARLSBAD AUGUST 29. 1997 - Design coefficient of friction for concrete on compacted soil = 0.35. - Allowable foundation pressure = 1,500 psf. Notes: - Because large movements must take place before maximum passive resistance can be developed, a minimum safety factor of two should be considered for sliding stability. - When combining passive pressure and frictional resistance, the passive component should be reduced by one-third. - The allowable foundation pressure provided herein was determined for footings having a minimum width of 12 inches embedded a minimum depth of 12 inches into the certified foundation soils. This value may be increased per Uniform Building Code for additional depths if needed (Table 18-l-A, Footnote 2). E. Pavement Design Specific pavement designs can best be provided at the completion of rough grading based on R-Value tests of the actual finish subgrade soils; however, the following structural sections may be considered for cost estimating purposes only (not for construction). 1. A minimum section of 4 inches asphalt on 12 inches Caltrans Class II aggregate base may be considered (collector, Tl=6.0). Base materials should be compacted to a minimum of 95% of the maximum dry density. 2. Subgrade soils beneath the asphalt roadway, parking and driveways should be compacted to a minimum of 95% of the corresponding maximum dry density within the upper one foot. Sub and base grade soils should be tested for proper moisture and minimum 95% compaction levels and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to the placement of the base or asphalt layers. F. General Recommendations 1. The minimum foundation design and steel reinforcement provided herein typical based on soil characteristics and are not intended to be in lieu of reinforcement necessary for structural considerations. All recommendations should be further evaluated in the site specific study for each individual lot and confirmed by the project architect/structural engineer. VINJE # MIDDLETON ENQINEERINQ, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343 SOILTESTINQ PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIQATIONS QEOTECHNICALINVESTIQATIONS SITE SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 14 AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER. UNITS 2. CARLSBAD AUGUST 29. 1997 2. Footings located on or adjacent to the top of slopes should be extended to a sufficient depth to provide a minimum horizontal distance of seven feet or one- third of the slope height, whichever is greater (need not exceed 40 feet maximum) between the bottom edge of the footing and face of slope. Reinforcement for deepened footings should be provided by the project structural engineer and detailed on the approved foundation plans. 3. Expansive clayey soils should not be used for backfilling of any retaining structure. All retaining walls should be provided with a 1:1 wedge of granular, compacted backfill measured from the base of the wall footing to the finished surface. Retaining walls should be provided with a back drainage in general accordance with the attached Plate 8. 4. All underground utility trenches should be compacted to a minimum of 90% of the maximum dry density of the soil unless otherwise specified by the respective agencies. Care should be taken not to crush the utilities or pipes during the compaction of the soil. Non-expansive, granular backfill soils should be used. 5. Site drainage over the finished pad surface should flow away from structures onto the street in a positive manner. Care should be taken during the construction, improvement, and fine grading phases not to disrupt the designed drainage patterns. Roof lines of the buildings should be provided with roof gutters. Roof water should be collected and directed away from the building and structures to a suitable location. Considerations should be given by the project architect to adequately damp proof/water proof the basement walls/foundations and provide the planter areas adjacent to the foundations with an impermeable liner and a subdrainage system. 6. Final plans should reflect preliminary recommendations given in this report and should be reviewed by this office prior to grading. More specific recommendations should be provided when final grading and architectural/structural drawings are available. 7. All foundation trenches should be inspected to assure adequate footing embedment and confirm competent bearing soils. Foundation and slab reinforcements should also be inspected and approved by the project geotechnical consultant. 8. The amount of shrinkage and related cracks that occurs in the concrete slab-on- grades, flatworks and driveways depend on many factors, the most important of which is the amount of water in the concrete mix. The purpose of the slab reinforcement is to keep normal concrete shrinkage cracks closed tightly. The amount of concrete shrinkage can be minimized by reducing the amount of water in the mix. To keep shrinkage to a minimum, the following should be considered: VINJE # MIDDI^TON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fox (760) 739-0343 SOIL TEST1NQ PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS SITE SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 15 AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER. UNITS 2. CARLSBAD AUGUST 29. 1997 * Use the stiffest mix that can be handled and consolidated satisfactorily. * Use the largest maximum size of aggregate that is practical. For example, concrete made with 3/e inch maximum size aggregate usually requires about 40 Ibs more (nearly 5 gal.) water per cubic yard than concrete with one inch aggregate. * Cure the concrete as long as practical. The amount of slab reinforcement provided for conventional slab-qn-grade construction considers that good quality concrete materials, proportioning, craftsmanship, and control tests where appropriate and applicable are provided. 9. A preconstruction meeting between representatives of this office and the property owner or planner, as well as the grading contractor/builder, is recommended in order to discuss grading/construction details associated with site development. IX. LIMITATIONS The conclusions and recommendations provided herein have been based on all available data obtained from research and review of pertinent geotechnical reports and plans, current exploratory excavations as well as our experience with the soils and formational materials located in the general area. The materials encountered on.the project site and utilized in our laboratory testing are believed representative of the total area; however, earth materials may vary in characteristics between excavations. Of necessity we must assume a certain degree of continuity between exploratory excavations and/or natural exposures. It is necessary, therefore, that all observations, conclusions, and recommendations be verified during the grading operation. In the event discrepancies are noted, we should be contacted immediately so that an inspection can be made and additional recommendations issued if required. The recommendations made in this report are applicable to the site at the time this report was prepared. It is the responsibility of the owner/developer to insure that these recommendations are carried out in the field. It is almost impossible to predict with certainty the future performance of a property. The future behavior of the site is also dependent on numerous unpredictable variables, such as earthquakes, rainfall, and on-site drainage patterns. The firm of VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. shall not be held responsible for changes to the physical conditions of the property such as addition of fill soils, added cut slopes, or changing drainage patterns which occur without our inspection or control. VINJE # MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343 SOIL TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS SITE SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 16 AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER. UNITS 2. CARLSBAD AUGUST 29.1997 The property owner(s) should be aware of the development of cracks in all concrete surfaces such as floor slabs and exterior stucco associated with normal concrete shrinkage during the curing process. These features depend chiefly upon the condition of concrete and weather conditions at the time of construction and do not reflect detrimental ground movement. Hairline stucco cracks will often develop at window/door corners, and floor surface cracks up to Vfa-inch wide in 20 feet may develop as a result of normal concrete shrinkage (according to the American Concrete Institute). This report should be considered valid for a period of one year and is subject to review by our firm following that time. If significant modifications are made to your tentative development plan, especially with respect to the height and location of cut and fill slopes, this report must be presented to us for review and possible revision. Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc. warrants that this report has been prepared within the limits prescribed by our client with the usual thoroughness and competence of the engineering profession. No other warranty or representation, either expressed or implied, is included or intended. V/NJE # MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343 SOILTESTINQ PERCTEST SOU, INVESTIGATIONS QEOTECHWCAL INVESTIGATIONS SITE SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER. UNITS 2. CARLSBAD PAGE 17 AUGUST 29.1997 Once again, should any questions arise concerning this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Reference to our Job #97-233-P will help to expedite our response to your inquiries. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. Ralph M. Vinje GE #863 Dennis Middleton CEG #980 lehdi Shariat RCE#46174 RMV/DM/MS/mmd Distribution: Addressee (2) Mark Radford Architecture, Attn: Mr. Mark Radford (3) sms\wpdocs\97-233-p.upd mmd\prelim\97-233-p.upd VINJE # MIDDLETON ENQINEERINQ, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, Coli/brnia 92029-1229 * Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fox (760) 739-0343 SOIL TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS Date: 8/13/97 Logged by: DM DEPTH (t) _ _ - - 5 - -10- -15- SAMPLE • ^ <\ T-1 DESCRIPTION FILL: Sand with shale. Pale grey-brown. (Ripped bedrock.) Dry to moist, loose. ST-1 BEDROCK: Siltstone. Black color. Flat-lying. Cemented firm to friable. ST-2 End trench at 4'. MOISTURE(%) 15.6 DRY DENSITY (pcf) 114.2 RELATIVE COMPACTION (%) 100+ Date: 8/13/97 Logged by: DM DEPTH («) - - 5 - -10- -15--"'ii ii.n.» VIN, E Offi SAMPLE • ^"\ ^11 ' as IE & MIC 2450 Vir iscondi* ce 760-7 T-2 DESCRIPTION FILL: Sitetone fragments (ripped bedrock). Pale brown. Loose. ST-1 BEDROCK: Siltstone/shale. Pale brown with rust stains. Flat-lying. Firm. From 2', color is black. ST-2 End trench at 3'. MOISTURE (%) DRY DENSITY (pcf) RELATIVE COMPACTION (%> »DLETON ENGINEERING, INC TEST TRENCH LOGS leyard Avenue. Suite 1oz do California 92029-1229 LOT 49 - AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER '43-1214 Fax 760-739-0343 PROJECT NO. 97-233-P PLATE 2 V Sand Cone Test • Bulk Sample Q Chunk Sample O Driven Rings Date: 8/13/97 Logged by: DM DEPTH (ft) -, - 5 - -10- -15- SAMPLE V \ T-3 DESCRIPTION FILL: Fine grained sand-siltstone fragments. Pale brown. (Ripped , bedrock.} Sliahtlv moist, loose. ST-1 BEDROCK: Sitetone/shale. Pale brown grading to dark grey with rust color. Flat- Ivina. Cemented firm. ST-2 End trench at 3'. MOISTURE{%) DRY DENSITY (pcf) RELATIVE COMPACTION <%) Date: 8/13/97 Logged by: DM DEPTH <«) - - 5 - -10- -15- SAMPLE Q^- VINJE & MIC 2450 Vii Escondh Office 760-7 T-4 DESCRIPTION FILL: Fractured and ripped siltstone. Pale brown. Loose. ST-1 BEDROCK: Siltstone/shale. Pale brown to dark grey. Moderately fractured to 2', dense and massive below. Bedding is horizontal. ST-2 End trench at 4'. MOISTURE (%) 20.4 DRY DENSITY (pcf) 103.6 Ll— "'•• " ' — RELATIVE COMPACTION (%) 98.4 •rtW^^^^^^^^^^H^VW JDLETON ENGINEERING, INC . : tlSf TREKCH iOC^S ITc^n^Q^^ LOT 49 - AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER '43-1214 Fax 760-739-0343 PROJECT NO. 97-233-P PLATE 3 T Sand Cone Test • Bulk Sample Q Chunk Sample O Driven Rings Date: 8/13/97 Logged by: DM DEPTH (ft) . - - 5 - -10- -15- S AMPLE • """• ^^ \ T-5 DESCRIPTION FILL Fine grained sand with siltstone/shale. Pale brown. Ripped bedrock. Sfehtiy moist, loose. ST-1 BEDROCK: Shale. Brown to dark grey. Rust colored stains. Cemented firm. ST-2 End trench at 3 %'. MOISTURE (%} DRY DENSITY (pcO RELATIVE COMPACTION M Date: 8/13/97 DEPTH (ft) - - 5 - -10- -15- SAMPLE • 1 — Logged by: DM T-6 DESCRIPTION BEDROCK: Sandstone. Off-white. Pine grained. Ripped loose in upper 6", friable below. Gypsum deposits. ST-3 Siltstone. Dark grey. Cemented firm. Horizontal contact above. ST-2 End trench at 3 V£'. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102 Escondido, California 92029-1229 Office 760-743-1214 Fax 760-739-0343 T Sand Cone Test • Bulk Sample tesn MOISTURE <%) •RBiCHJL DRY DENSITY (pcf) RELATIVE COMPACTION (%» OGS LOT 49 - AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER PROJECT NO. 97-233-P PLATE 4 Q Chunk Sample O Driven Rings Date: 8/13/97 Logged by: DM DEPTH (ft) - - 5 - -10- -15- SAMPLE • T-7 DESCRIPTION BEDROCK: Shale. Pale grey-brown with rust stains. Thinly bedded with horizontal structure. Ripped and heavily fractured in upper 12", more firm below. ST-2 End trench at 4'. MOISTURE (%) DRY DENSITY (pcf) RELATIVE COMPACTION (%) Date: 8/13/97 DEPTH («) - - 5 - -10- -15-1 vr'na SAMPLE ^ SSS^^^= Logged by: DM T-8 DESCRIPTION FILL: Fine sand with shale fragments. Pale brown. Dry, loose. ST-1 BEDROCK: Siltstone/shale. Grey color with rust stains. Moderately fractured to massive and blocky. Firm. ST-2 End trench at 4'. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102 Escondido, California 92029-1229 Office 760-743-1214 Fax 760-739-0343 T Sand Cone Test • Bulk Sample MOISTURE (%) DRY DENSITY (pcf) TE§f TOEN£HL$G3 RELATIVE COMPACTION (%) LOT 49 - AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER PROJECT NO. 97-233-P PLATE 5 Q Chunk Sample O Driven Rings Date: 8/13/97 Logged by: DM DEPTH (ft) - - 5 - -10- -15- S AMPLE • T-9 DESCRIPTION BEDROCK: Shale. Pale brown with rust stains. Thinly bedded (horizontal). Moderately fractured grading to more blocky with depth. ST-2 End trench at 3 V4'. MOISTURE (%) DRY DENSITY (pcf) RELATIVE COMPACTION (%) Date: DEPTH («) - SAMPLE Logged by: DESCRIPTION VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102 Escondido, California 92029-1229 Office 760-743-1214 Fax 760-739-0343 T Sand Cone Test • Bulk Sample MOISTURE(%) DRY DENSITY (pcf) RELATIVE COMPACTION (%) TiSfTRE^LO^S LOT 49 - AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER PROJECT NO. 97-233-P PLATE 6 Q Chunk Sample O Driven Rings ^ V) y \M i. V* ..1 . -.-1*TT^'"*" ^il**"^/ ^—-r''-^fcll. -i _ •^fSfes*5^^^^5^K*= ^C*-^J -ff1^" "~"—TV^*---"^ "* "* "^ ^^ '?'" J^C', /X^ / "H*^.^J,^— -— *• Ot**-^ -jJ^tr-*- .M * V *-. . ••rtfc-. j_t-^-^ .v«' -^ -/A X-j *^i_j,— TL-^ O N 30 20 10 30 MILES FAULT - EPICENTER MAP SAN DIEGO COUNTY REGION INDICATED EARTHQUAKE EVENTS THROUGH 75 YEAR PERIOD (1900-1974) Map data is compiled from various sources including California Division of Mines and Geology, California Institude of Technology and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Map is reproduced from California Division of Mines and Geology, "Earthquake Epicenter Map of California; Map Sheet 39." Earthquake Magnitude . 4.0 TO 4.9 O 5.0 TO 5.9 (D 6.0 TO 6.9 PROJECT: 97-233-P 7.0 TO 7.9 Fault Airport Business Center PLATE NO. 7 TYPICAL RETAINING WALL DRAIN DETAIL Waterproofing Perforated drain pipe .drainage ' Granular, non-expansive ' • backfill. Compacted. •' > **,V •",'—\V. ""»*' " 1 , m »•*• .*• ****** , 'V Filter Material. Crushed rock (wrapped in filter fabric) or Class 2 Permeable Material (see specifications below) v footing ^' ;/o ^ Competent, approved soils or bedrock CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS: SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL US. STANDARD SIEVE SIZEr 3/4 3/8 No. 4 No. 8 No. 30 No. 50 No. 200 Sand % PASSING 100 90-100 40-100 •25-40 18-33 5-15 0.7 0.3 Equivalent > 75 1. Provide granular, non-expansive backfill soil in 1:1 gradient wedge behind wall. Compact backfill to minimum 90% of laboratory standard. 2. Provide back drainage for wall to prevent build-up of hydrostatic pressures. Use drainage openings along base of wall or back drain system as outlined below. 3. Backdrain should consist of 4" diameter PVC pipe (Schedule 40 or equivalent) with perforations down. Drain to suitable outlet at minimum 1%. Provide %" - 1Vi" crushed gravel filter wrapped in filter fabric (Mirafi 140N or equivalent). Delete filter fabric wrap if Caltrans Class 2 permeable material is used. Compact Class 2 material to minimum 90% of laboratory standard. 4. Seal back of wall with waterproofing in accordance with architect's specifications. 5. Provide positive drainage to disallow ponding of water above wall. Lined drainage ditch to minimum 2% flow away from wall is recommended. * Use 1% cubic foot per foot with granular backfill soil and 4 cubic foot per foot if expansive backfill soil is used. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. PLATE 8 ISOLATION JOINTS AND RE-ENTRANT CORNER REINFORCEMENT Typical - no scale CONTRACTION JOINTS RE-ENTRANT CORNER—* REINFORCEMENT NO. 4 BARS PLACED 1.5* BELOW TOP OF SLAB I RE-ENTRANT CORNER CRACK NOTES: 1. Isolation joints around the columns should be either circular as shown in (a) or diamond shaped as shown in (b). If no isolation joints are used around columns, or if the corners of the isolation joints do not meet the contraction joints, radial cracking as shown in (c)may occur (reference ACI). 2. In order to control cracking at the re-entrant corners (±270° corners), provide reinforcement as shown in (c). 3. Re-entrant corner reinforcement shown herein is provided as a general guideline only and is subject to verification and changes by the project architect and/or structural engineer based upon slab geometry, location, and other engineering and construction factors. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. PLATE 9