The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2155 SALK AVE; ; CB970365; Permit-s. ***12/15/97 09:48 Page 1 of • 1 Job Address:. 2155 SALK *V Permit Type': INDUSTRIAL BUILDING Parcel No": 212-130-01-00 Valuation: 233,035 B U I L D I:N G P E R M I T Suite: Permit No: CB970365 Project No: A9700507 Development No: Referenced SF BLDG-DRIVING : TAYLOR MADE GOLF ADPl/Ownr : HAMANN CONSTRUCTIONAppl/uwn Nf - iSWtW.QQApplied: 02/26/97 Apr/Issue: 08/21/97 Entered By': RMA 619 440-7424 EL CAJON CA 92020 .**** Fees Required *** "*** Fees: 47,047.00 Adjustments : . • jjO Total Fees: ; 47,047.00 Fee description . • . Building Permit , - , Plan Check . . . , ,• Strong Motion Fee - '• -. •. ' Enter7 "Y" to Autocalc P.F.F. •• > ... Pass-Thru Fees(Y/N) or Waived(W)? > , Pavoff Fee for CFD > < Enter Park Fee (Zone 5,13,16) ^, "* BUILDING TOTAL .-.-'-. Enter #Units .& Code-Potable Water > , - Enter #Units & Code-Reclaim Water.) Enter "Y" for Plumbing Issue Fee > Each Plumbing Fixture or Trap- .> . Each Building Sewer ' >. Each Install/Repair Water Line > * PLUMBING TOTAL Enter "Y" for Electric : Issue Fee > Single Phase Per. AMP > ' * ELECTRICAL TOTAL • , Enter 'Y' for Mechanical Issue tee-> Install Furn/Ducts/Heat Pumps > Each Exhaust Fan " * MECHANICAL TOTAL ' Fees Collected & Total Credits; Total Payments: Balance Due: Units Fee/Unit .9570.00 1694.00 1X 1X • 7 ' 7.00 -• . ; 1 15.00 ' 1 7.00JL. * 400 -25 3 9.00 ' 3 ' • 6, 50 I Cr.edits ' *** , .00 27,847.00 19, 200. 00 Ext fee Data 1109.00 721 . 00 ' 49.00 4241.00 Y 'N 9570 . 00 1694.00 05 17384. 00 • 10200 .00 Dl . 5 19200. 00 T2 •</ 20. 00 Y 49.00 • 15.00 7.00 91 . 00 10. 00 Y 100. 00 110.00 15. 00 Y 27.00 19. 50 62.00 CLEARANCE. CITY OF CARLSBAD 2075 Las Palmas Dr., Carlsbad, CA 92009 (619) 438-1161 PERMIT APPLICATION ~— City of Carlsbad Building Department 2075 Las Palmas Dr.. Carlsbad. CA 92009 (619) 438-1161 1. PERMIT TYPE From List 1 (see back) give code of Permit-Type: For Residential Projects Only: From List 2 (see back) give Code of Structure-Type: Net Loss/Gain of Dwelling Units. PLAN CHECK NO. EST.VAL_ PLANCKDl VALID. BY_ DATE JZZZSZZ 2377 02/06/97 0001 01 02 2. PROJECT INFORMATION 721.00 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Xl55^3r **. )£, INearestlearest Cross Street Building or Suite No. Lot NoT"Subdi -KeNumberLEGAL DESCRIPTION Subdivision Name/Unit No.Phase No. CHECK BELOW IF SUBMIT] D 2 Energy Calcs S^2 Structural Calcs f2 Soils Report D 1 Addressed Envelope ASSESSOR'S PARCEL P. I 2 - | ^-(> DESCRIPTION OF WORK SQ.FT. EXISTING USE PROPOSED USE # OF STORIES # OF BEDROOMS # OF BATHROOMS 3. UUN1AC.1 FtKiiON (it different trom applicant; Oast nanje first) STATE ADDRESS ZIP CODE |Ay\N2A DAY TELEPHONE f LACE 4. APPLICANT DCONTRACTOR UAGU NAME (last name first)^yj flf} CONIRACiOR UO STATE ZIP CODE BlAGtN T FOR OWNhR DAY TELEPHONE 4I^2- "' 5. PROPERTY OW NAME (last name first) CITY STATE ADDRESS 47*5? ^ . ZIP CODE 7^ Q^O DAY TELEPHONE 6. CONTKACTO NAME (last name first) CITY STATE STATE ADDRESS -^ 7$ /,/ £>Kj4pL&~( ZIP CODE 99.02^ DAY TELEPHONE A/8 /OTY BUSINESS LIC. #, AUUIU2iS CITY 7. WO]CO] STATE ZIP CODE DAY TELEPHONE STATE uc- #. Workers Compensation Declaration: I hereby attirm that 1 nave a certificate or consent to selt-msure issued by the Director of Industrial Relations, or a certificate of Workers' Compensation Insurance by an admitted insurer, or an exact copy or duplicate thereof certified by the Director of the insurer thereof filed with the Building Inspection Department (Section 3800, Lab. C). i INSURANCE COMP.]/3 79/03,-? 7 Certificate of Exemption: I certify that in the performance of the workror which this permit is issued, Tsiialtaiot employ atiy person in any manner so as to become subject to the Workers' Compensation Laws of California. BTOWNER-BU Owner-builder Declaration: I hereby attirm that 1 am exempt trom trie Contractors License Law tor 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 contractor(s) licensed pursuant to the Contractor's License Law). D I am exempt under Section Business and Professions Code for this reason: (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, commencing 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]). SIGNATURE DATE COMPLETE THIS SECTION FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS ONLY: 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? D YES D NO Is the applicant or future building occupant required to obtain a permit from the air pollution control district or air quality management district? D YES D NO Is the facility to be constructed within 1,000 feet of the outer boundary of a school site? D YES D NO IF ANY OF THE ANSWERS ARE YES, A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MAY NOT BE ISSUED AFTER JULY 1,1989 UNLESS THE APPLICANT _.IiA^.htgr °R K MEETING "nra RF^umEMFJfrS OF THE OFnCT OF FJ^ERGF^C^ SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT. 9. CONSTRUCTION LENDING AGENCY 1 hereby attirm that there is a construction lending agency tor the performance of the work lor which this permit is issued (Sec 3097(.0 Civil Code). LENDER'S NAME LENDER'S ADDRESS I certify that 1 have read the application and state that the above information is correct. I agree to comply with all City ordinances and State laws relating to building construction. I hereby authorize representatives of the City 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 SATO CTTY 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 abaralpfled^ft any riffle afar the w/9rk is commenced for a period of 180 days (Section 303(d) Uniform Building Code). APPLICANTS SIGNATOREX^^/^V / / DATE: WHITE File YELLOW: Applicant PINK: Finance Inspection List Permit*: CB970365 Type: INDUST Date Inspection Item Inspector Act 9/21/1999 89 6/26/1998 11 6/26/1998 14 3/27/1998 34 3/16/1998 14 3/16/1998 24 3/16/1998 34 3/16/199844 1/12/1998 31 12/30/1997 14 12/30/1997 17 12/30/1997 18 12/30/199724 12/30/1997 34 12/30/199744 12/22/1997 89 12/19/1997 84 11/17/1997 15 11/12/1997 15 11/7/1997 15 10/29/1997 13 9/24/1997 21 9/2/1997 11 9/2/1997 22 8/21/1997 11 8/21/199721 Final Combo Ftg/Foundation/Piers Frame/Steel/Bolting/Weldin Rough Electric Frame/Steel/Bolting/Weldin Rough/Topout Rough Electric Rough/Ducts/Dampers Underground/Conduit-Wirin Frame/Steel/Bolting/Weldin Interior Lath/Drywall Exterior Lath/Drywall Rough/Topout Rough Electric Rough/Ducts/Dampers Final Combo Rough Combo Roof/Reroof , Roof/Reroof Roof/Reroof Shear Panels/HD's Underground/Under Floor Ftg/Foundation/Piers Sewer/Water Service Ftg/Foundation/Piers Underground/Under Floor TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP PK PK TP TP AP AP AP PA PA we AP AP AP CO AP AP we AP we CO NS AP CO NR PA AP PA PA AP AP 4237 SF BLDG-DRIVING TAYLOR MADE GOLF Comments HD ADDED REPORT REC RANGE- OPEN SHR PNL REV RM 103 MAIN SWITCH GEAR, ND SGL T-BAR CEIL CEIL LITES DUCTS UFFER RE-LOC SEE CORR LIST ATTCH WALLS SEE ATTCH LIST TRANS NAILING INCOMP/MIS NO ACCESS TO ROOF TOP OF PNLS TO BE COVERE SITE LITES U/G OK TO POUR SLAB OK TO COVER -NEED TO IE Friday, March 10, 2000 Page 1 of 1 DATE INSPECTOR PERMIT #PLAN CHECK # JOB ADDRESS DESCRIPTION CODE DESCRffTION ACT COMMENTS CITY OF CARLSBAD INSPECTION REQUEST PERMIT* CB970365 FOR 06/26/98 DESCRIPTION: 4237 SF BLDG-DRIVING RANGE- TAYLOR MADE GOLF TYPE: INDUST JOB ADDRESS: 2155 SALK AV APPLICANT: HAMANN CONSTRUCTION PHONE: CONTRACTOR: PHONE: OWNER: PHONE: INSPECTOR AREA TP PLANCK# CB970365 OCC GRP CONSTR. TYPE NEW STE: LOT: 619 440-7424 REMARKS: C/TERRY/740-7479 SPECIAL INSTRUCT: INSPECTOR TOTAL TIME: —RELATED PERMITS—PERMIT* TYPE STATUS SE970059 SWOW ISSUED FS970030 FIXSYS ISSUED AS970188 ASC ISSUED US970014 TU ISSUED CD LVL DESCRIPTION 14 ST Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding M. ACT COMMENTS ***** INSPECTION HISTORY ***** DATE DESCRIPTION 032798 Rough Electric 031698 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding 031698 Rough Electric 031698 Rough/Ducts/Dampers 011298 Underground/Conduit-Wiring 123097 Interior Lath/Drywall 123097 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding 123097 Rough Electric 123097 Exterior Lath/Drywall 122297 Final Combo 121997 Rough Combo 111797 Roof/Reroof 111297 Roof/Reroof 110797 Roof/Reroof 102997 Shear Panels/HD's 092497 Underground/Under Floor 090297 Sewer/Water Service 090297 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 082197 Underground/Under Floor 082197 Ftg/Foundation/Piers ACT PA PA AP AP AP AP CO AP AP CO NS AP CO NR PA AP PA PA AP AP INSP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP PK PK TP TP COMMENTS MAIN SWITCH GEAR, ND SGLN REV T-BAR CEIL CEIL LITES DUCTS UFFER RE-LOC SEE CORR LIST ATTCH WALLS SEE ATTCH LIST TRANS NAILING INCOMP/MISSING NO ACCESS TO ROOF TOP OF PNLS TO BE COVERED SITE LITES U/G OK TO COVER - NEED TO TEST OK TO POUR SLAB 5-08-1998 9: 05AM FROM SMI TH_CONSULT ING-OUT 6194.523907 P. 1 Smith Consulting Architects Architecture and Planning TRANSMITTAL To: 61U- Company: Date: ATTACHED: Project No: 1(0170 Project: No. Copies Date Description 5/fe/IP. TRANSMITTED VIA: jSf FAX (Sheet 1 of _J O Mail Q Messenger O Overnight Delivery D Other ACTION .) FAX No. K7feO-1l6-6'Ql4 D For your approval ,21 For your review and comment pS. As requested n Reviewed as noted O No exceptions taken D Revise / Resubmit REMARKS: Jzlu, AT "Y6U 0ZM*UWA Ur«* TtoZ. ^yt^Lff SjtAt. DISTRIBUTION: SCA Rle With End. C n n n «v. ^n ^l^m^ W/O End. D D D a 5355 Mira Sorren^^ Place • Suite 650-San Diego, California 92121 • (619) 452-3186 • Fax (619) 452-3907 5-08-1993 9:;06AM FROM SMITH_CONSULTING-OUT 6194523907 P.,2 Smfffi Consulting Atchrtects TAYLORMADE GOLF VWCT '^w^Si^ 16170 No. CONSTRUCTION S£T SHEET NUMS£9 A-l S-08-1998 9:06AM FROM SMITH_CONSULTING-QUT 6194523907 P.,3 (JUHHILJUH 100 smrtR iConsuItjng •Arcfiitects: TAYLORMADE GOLF SCALE No. CONSTfiUCTlON S£r SHEET NUMBER A-l 5-08-1998 9:07AM FROM SMITH_CONSULTING-OUT 6194523907 P. A rprpnr Srffiffi :Cx>nsuiting Atcnite.cts: TAYLORMADE GOLF .'05 MUU6JS.- No. CONSTRUCriON SET SHEET NUMBER A-3 5-08-1998 9:07AM FROM SMITH_CONSULTING-OUT SI 94523907 P.,5 <6 STUD NEW MOLDOWN PER PLAN W/ V* THREADED ROD (A30T; W/ SIMPSON 'SET' ADHESIVE CONFORMING TO ICBO «ER-5219 SPECIAL 1NSP. REQ'D TYP. EXIST. 2X6 STUDS « 16" O.G. HD STUD PER PLAN WHERE HD OCCURS EXIST. SHEAR PANE PLAN AND SCHED. WHERE OCCURS \S2 TYP. I ' NOTE: FOR ITEMS NOT NOTED SEE £F \si EXIST. GRADE BM WHERE OCCURS PER PLAN iConsultirrg •Architects TAYLORMADE GOLF No. f- CONSTRUCTION SET SHEET NUMBER 5-08-1998 9--08AM FROM SMITH-CONSULT ING-QUT 619-1523907 P-,6 SmffK Consulting -Architects: TAYLORMADE GOLF No. e_ CONSTRUCT.ON 3£T SHEET NUM8ER 5-08-1998 9:08AM FROM SMITH_COMSULTING-OUT 619^-523907 P. 7 SmitR TAYLORMADE GOLF Atcfiitec.ts ,o»re No. COiNSTRUCTICN SET SHEET NUMBER .^^^^^ —•' -i'-"-'n~'"r.™y Testing Engineers - San Diego, Inc. . 7895 CONVOY CT., SUITE 18 , .-; ••••' , SAN DIEGO, CA 92111 INSPECTION REPORT Page 1 of Project Name Address TESD Project # Sal General / Subcontractor <a g »a-f o/-s S v Building Permit # Plan.File #:•_' 7-6 DSA # Government Contract # OSHPD# Other INSPECTION Concrete Prestress Cone - Masonry • Struct Steel Fireproof™ Pile Drivina Non-Destructive Batch Plant Soils Technician Mechanical Electrical - Bolt Pull-Out • •'•" • Roof i no. :' ' Waterproofing DSA OSHPD 6^ Specialty t~*r>o.>**4 ttaJdny . MAT'L SAMPLING QTY Soil . • Base Subgrade Asphalt Concrete Concrete Cylinders Cone Flex Beams • Reinf.. Steel Tendon (PT Strands) Mortar Samples Grout Samples Masonry Prisms Masonry Block Steel ' H.S. Bolts Fireproofing Roofing Other MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Cone.: Mix #/psi Cone.: Mix #/psi Cone.: Mix #/psi Rinf.: Rebar Rinf.: W.W.F. Rinf.: Tendons Grout: Mix #/psi Mortar: Tvoe/osi Units: Block Units: Block «^**Steel *?% ''A 1 H fc r»« / H.S. Bolts . •' Metal Decking Electrodes Fireproofina "^ Other^inv*. p "ete^v I-' ^*&~T l_? t~ si**. tf *-/tr y INSPECJJON CHECKLIST.. ''^Plans Specifications >** Sizes ^/g " Slump Air Content Temperature Unit Weight Consolidation Electrode Storage Tordue Applied Load (Pounds) Thickness y^ 'c l-f '• ~ ' • i- s s iS^r 'Fmh+JmeiST /&' f^ /Tpev V11 Corrective action required Corrections completed Remarks g / l'lt\e. '^V^'% gKoo.r'<.J<iv.-M- 'i ^Oo >O3 a^>cV<-f Field Representative CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE: To the best of my knowledge, all of the reported work, unle^rotherwise stated, is in conformance with the approved plans and specifications and the workmanship provisions of the applicable code. INSPECTOR'S NAME INSPECTOR'S SIGNATURE 7n-CAnu CERT. NO. DATE CITY OF CARLSBAD INSPECTION REQUEST PERMIT* CB970365 " FOR 12/30/97 DESCRIPTION: 4237 SF BLDG-DRIVING RANGE- TAYLOR MADE GOLF TYPE: INDUST JOB ADDRESS: 2155 SALK AV APPLICANT: HAMANN CONSTRUCTION PHONE: CONTRACTOR: PHONE: OWNER: PHONE: INSPECTOR AREA TP PLANCK# CB970365 OCC GRP CONSTR. TYPE NEW STE: LOT: 619 440-7424 REMARKS: C/ SPECIAL INSTRUCT: INSPECTOR TOTAL TIME: —RELATED PERMITS--PERMIT# SE970059 TYPE SWOW FS970030 FIXSYS AS970188 ASC US970014 TU STATUS ISSUED ISSUED ISSUED ISSUED CD LVL DESCRIPTION 17 14 24 34 44 JJL ST Interior Lath/Drywall ST Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding PL Rough/Topout EL Rough Electric ME Rough/ Ducts/ Dampers ACT COMMENTS 2^ ***** INSPECTION HISTORY ***** DATE DESCRIPTION 122297 Final Combo 121997 Rough Combo 111797 Roof/Reroof 111297 Roof/Reroof 110797 Roof/Reroof 102997 Shear Panels/HD's 092497 Underground/Under Floor 090297 Sewer/Water Service 090297 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 082197 Underground/Under Floor 082197 Ftg/Foundation/Piers ACT CO NS AP CO NR PA AP PA PA AP AP INSP TP TP TP TP TP TP TP PK PK TP TP COMMENTS SEE ATTCH LIST TRANS NAILING INCOMP/MISSING NO ACCESS TO ROOF TOP OF PNLS TO BE COVERED SITE LITES U/G OK TO COVER - NEED TO TEST OK TO POUR SLAB CITY OF CARLSBAD NO. BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT 00528 JOB ADDRESS CENUS TRACT NO.PERMIT NUMBER PLAN FILE NUMBER CONTRACTOR OWNER OR PERMITTEE NAME MAIL ADDRESS FOR D OWNER, OR D CONTRACTOR D VIOLATION READ REVERSE SIDE NOTE: PRESENT THIS NOTICE WHEN MAKING APPLICATION FOR PERMIT D D D NO PERMIT - STOP WORK - REMOVE CONSTRUCTION, OR OBTAIN PERMIT AND MAKE ANY WORK COMPLY WITH BUILDING LAWS. (See comments on reverse side regarding penalty fees). CONSTRUCTION NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPROVED PLANS AND PERMIT - STOP WORK MAKE EXISTING WORK COMPLY WITH APPROVED PLANS AND PERMIT OR REMOVE IT. CALL PLANING DEPARTMENT AT 438-1161, CONCERNING VIOLATION OF ZONING REGULATION LISTED BELOW. STOP WORK - UNTIL AUTHORIZED TO CONTINUE BY THE INSPECTOR. D CONTACT CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER AT 438-1161. O CONTACT INSPECTOR AND ARRANGE FOR APPOINTMENT AT 438-3550. D CORRECTIONS LISTED BELOW MUST BE MADE BEFORE WORK CAN BE APPROVED. O PAY REINSPECTION FEE (See Back); THEN D CALL FOR REINSPECTION AT 438-3101. D CORRECTIONS REQUIRED D PARTIAL APPROVED WORK DESCRIBED BELOW HAS BEEN INSPECTED AND IS APPROVED. THE ACTIONS OR CORRECTIONS INDICATED ABOVE ARE REQUIRED WITHIN,., DAYS. THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE REQUIRES PENALTY FEES WHEN WORK HAS BEEN STARTED WITHOUT PERMIT. NAME'OF'INSPECTOH (PRINT) INSPECTOR'S SIGNATURE IN-13 (Rev. 2/86) OFFICE TEL. NO. 7:00 A.M. TO 8:00 A.M.' 3:00 P.M. TO 4:00 P.M. MONDAY THRU FRIDAY BUILDING ELECTRICAL HEATING PLUMBING REFRIGERATION COMBINATION UNSCHEDULED BUILDING INSPECTION DATE /^/ZzA7 INSPECTOR PERMIT* <?7-?^/r PLAN CHECK* r * ^ JOB ADDRESS . 2 DESCRIPTION TIME ARRIVE: TIME CODE DESCRIPTION ACT COMMENTS CITY OF CARLSBAD NOTICE BUILDING INSPECTION • DEPARTMENT NO.00527 JOB ADDRESS CENUS TRACT NO.PERMIT NUMBER PLAN FILE NUMBER CONTRACTOR OWNER OR PERMITTEE NAME MAIL ADDRESS FOR O OWNER, OR D CONTRACTOR VIOLATION READ D REVERSE D SIDE DNOTE: PRESENT THIS NOTICE WHEN MAKING APPLICATION FOR PERMIT U NO PERMIT - STOP WORK - REMOVE CONSTRUCTION, OR OBTAIN PERMIT AND MAKE ANY WORK COMPLY WITH BUILDING LAWS. (See comments on reverse side regarding penalty fees). CONSTRUCTION NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPROVED PLANS AND PERMIT - STOP WORK MAKE EXISTING WORK COMPLY WITH APPROVED PLANS AND PERMIT OR REMOVE IT. CALL PLANING DEPARTMENT AT 438-1161, CONCERNING VIOLATION OF ZONING REGULATION LISTED BELOW. STOP WORK - UNTIL AUTHORIZED TO CONTINUE BY THE INSPECTOR. D CORRECTIONS REQUIRED D CONTACT CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER AT 438-1161. D CONTACT INSPECTOR AND ARRANGE FOR APPOINTMENT AT 438-3550. D CORRECTIONS LISTED BELOW MUST BE MADE BEFORE WORK CAN BE APPROVED. n PAY REINSPECTION FEE (See Back); THEN D CALL FOR REINSPECTION AT 438-3101. PARTIAL APPROVED D WORK DESCRIBED BELOW HAS BEEN INSPECTED AND IS APPROVED. <r THE ACTIONS OR CORRECTIONS INDICATED ABOVE ARE REQUIRED WITHIN,.. DAYS. THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL COD&REQUIRES PENALTY FEES WHEN WORK HAS BEEN STARTED WITHOUT PERMIT. NAME OF INSPECTOR (PRINT) INSPECTOR'S SIGNATURE IN-13 (Rev. 2/86) OFFICE TEL. NO. 7:00 A.M. TO 8:00 A.M. 3:00 P.M. TO 4:00 P.M. MONDAY THRU FRIDAY BUILDING ELECTRICAL HEATING PLUMBING REFRIGERATION COMBINATION JLSs^fli Testing Engineers - San Diego, Inc. E.t.bll.h«d194« 7895 CONVOY CT., SUITE 18 (619) 715-5800 SAN DIEGO, CA92111 FAX (619) 715-5810.' SANOIEGO FIELD INSPECTION AND TEST REPORTS Date: 07/27/98 Job No: 98-197 Job Name: TAYLOR MADE Address: 2155SalkRoad Carlsbad, CA Plan Number: N/A Permit: 97-0365 Application: N/A Report No: 1854284 ENGINEER: DENNIS E. ZIMMERMAN RCE 26676, GE 928 EXPIRES 03/31/00 Enclosed are field inspection and/or test reports, for the above referenced project, for work performed on 6/25/98. These reports cover the locations of work inspected and/or tested following recognized standards and do not constitute engineering opinion or project control. These reports do not relieve the contractor of his responsibility to build per the plans, specifications and all applicable codes. Should you have any questions regarding these reports, please contact our office at (619) 715-5800. Reports enclosed (1) OVER 50 YEARS OF QUALITY SERVICE HII)Testing Engineers - San Diego, Inc. \/ 7895 CONVOY CT., SUITE 18 SAN DIEGO, CA 92111 INSPECTION REPORT Page_J of Project Name Address ^J^ Sal K Of \3\e*U TESD Project # General / Subcontractor Building Permit* Plan File # (\Jc. I c^n d e. vy ^7^6 DSA# Government Contract # OSHPD # Other INSPECTION Concrete Prestress Cone Masonry Struct Steel Fireproofing Pile Drivina Non-Destructive Batch Plant Soils Technician Mechanical Electrical Bolt Pu!l-Out Roofina Waterproofing DSA OSHPD t^ Specialty e-p<=-*y AftXJior MATL SAMPLING QTY Soil Base Subgrade Asphalt Concrete Concrete Cylinders Cone Flex Beams Reinf. Steel Tendon fPT Strands) Mortar Samples Grout Samples Masonry Prisms Masonry Block Steel H.S. Bolts Fireproofing Rooting Other MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Cone.: Mix #/psi Cone.: Mix #/psi Cone.: Mix #/psi Rinf.: Rebar Rinf.: W.W.F. Rjnf.: Tendons Grout: Mix #/psi Mortar: Type/psi Units: Block Units: Block J^^S?eel ^/^"/>tHLnr.^ H.S. Bolts Metal Decking Electrodes Fireproofina s^ ' Other'5r«v<-p^f,^l ^ f» ~f 7_7 *— ^1^-. i *— te-frfy INSPECJJON CHECKLIST ^^lans Specifications ^ Sizes ^f" Slumo Air Content Temoerature Unit Weight Consolidation Electrode Storage Torque Applied Load (Pounds) Thickness fr £ 1 ^ ftf\lf f^r £ $ t/^. f^sn ly*Jikvit*ST /&' r' tztorv */ t t Corrective action required Corrections completed Remarks ,5 ,.llf\ <^ I'si o f\ 103 j J/7 Field Representative CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE: To the best of my knowledge, all of the reported work, unles^fotherwise stated, is in conformance with the approved plans and specifications and the workmanship provisions of the applicable code. INSPECTOR'S NAME INSPECTOR'S SIGNATURE fl* Cjk ^ ^CERT. NO. DATE EsGil Corporation 'Professional'Stan Review 'Engineers DATE: 7/9/97 a APPLICANT JRIJ JURISDICTION: Carlsbad a PLAN REVIEWER a FILE PLAN CHECK NO.: 97-365 SET: III PROJECT ADDRESS: Salk Ave. PROJECT NAME: Taylor Made Range Building The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. XI 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. I I 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. I | Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: t Telephone #: Date contacted: (by: n / Fax #: Mail Telephone Fax , Infegrson -^ Ixl REMARKS: Applicant to provide special inspection program. Listing on -1078-1. Chain Link Fence on detail 9/AS-2 to be deferred to a future permit by the fencing contractor. By: Mike Kratz Enclosures: , Esgil Corporation D GA D CM D EJ D PC 7/1/97 trnsmtLdot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 * (619)560-1468 * Fax (619) 560-1576 SPECIAL INSPECTION PROGRAM ADDRESS OR LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PLAN CHECK NUMBER: 17 ~02£5? OWNER'S NAME: I, as the owner, or agent of the owner (contractors may not employ the special inspector), certify that I, or the architect/engineer of record, will be responsible for employing the special inspector(s) as required by Uniform Building Code (UBC) Section 1701.1 for the construction project located at the site listed above. UBC Section 106.3.5. Signed I, as the o'nginooBterchitect of record, certify that I have prepared the following special inspection program as required by UBC Section 106.3.5 for the construction project located at the site listed above. Signed 1. List of work requiring special inspection: Soils Compliance Prior to Foundation Inspection Q Field Welding Structural Concrete Over 2500 PSI Q High Strength Bolting Prestressed Concrete | Structural Masonry j Designer Specified j Expansion/Epoxy Anchors Sprayed-On Fireproofing Other 2. Name(s) of individual(s) or firm(s) responsible for the special inspections listed above: A. B. C. 3. Duties of the special inspectors for the work listed above: A. B. C. Special inspectors shall check in with the City and present their credentials for approval prior to beginning work on the job site. EsGil Corporation Professional f[an l(evieiv 'Engineers DATE: 4/11/97 JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: 97-365 SET: II PROJECT ADDRESS: Salk Ave. PROJECT NAME: Taylor Made Range BuUdmg OLD PC 97-229 a APPLICANT a PLAN REVIEWER a FILE The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's *********** codes. The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's AAAAAAAAAA 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. IXI The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. I I The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: Smith Consulting Architects 5355 Mira Sorrento PL, Suite 650, San Diego, CA 92121 Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. XI Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: Smith Consulting Group Telephone #: Date contacted: 4 1?) IT?- (by: k- ) Fax #: 452-3907 Mail Telephone X Fax In Person REMARKS: By: Mike Kratz Esgil Corporation Kl GA D CM D EJ Enclosures: D PC 4/4/97 trnsmtl.dot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 + (619)560-1468 + Fax (619) 560-1576 Carlsbad 97-365 II 4/11/97 RECHECK PLAN CORRECTION LIST JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PROJECT ADDRESS:Salk Ave. DATE PLAN RECEIVED BY ESGIL CORPORATION: 4/4/97 REVIEWED BY: Mike Kratz PLAN CHECK NO.: 97-365 SET: II DATE RECHECK COMPLETED: 4/11/97 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 disabled access. 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 or other departments. 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. A. Please make all corrections on the original tracings and submit two new sets of prints to: Esgil Corp. or to the bldg. dept. of the juris. B. To facilitate rechecking, please identify, next to each item, the sheet of the plans upon which each correction on this sheet has been made and return this sheet with the revised plans. C. The following items have not been resolved from the previous plan reviews. The original correction number has been given for your reference. In case you did not keep a copy of the prior correction list, we have enclosed those pages containing the outstanding corrections. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding these items. D. 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 on the plans. Have changes been made not resulting from this list? QYes a NO Carlsbad 97-365 II 4/11/97 1. Resubmit plans as per the procedure specified on the original checklist. 2. Civil and structural plans to be stamped and signed by their designers as per original correction. 3. Provide on plans details and any required calculations for the 10 ft. tall fences, or specify that a separate permit is required. 12. The architect or structural engineer shall provide a special inspection program as per the original correction prior to permit issuance. 13. Provide a letter from the soils engineer as per the original correction. 16. Note on plans that 1.6 gal. per flush water closets are required as per original correction. • DISABLED ACCESS Curb Ramps: 6. Provide a minimum 48" wide sidewalk around the top of the curb ramp on 5/AS- 2. Also, correctly cross reference to the site plan. If you have any questions regarding these items, please contact Mike Kratz of Esgil Corporation at (619) 560-1468. Thank you. EsGil Corporation (Professional $ Can Review "Engineers DATE: 2/20/97 a APPLICANT JURl; JURISDICTION: Carlsbad a PLAN REVIEWER a FILE PLAN CHECK NO.: 97-0229 SET: I PROJECT ADDRESS: Salk Ave. PROJECT NAME: Taylor Made Range BuUding The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's *********** codes. The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's J-XXAJ-AAAAA codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. [X] The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. I | The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. IXI The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: Smith Consulting Architects 5355 Mira Sorrento PI. Suite 650, San Diego, CA 92121 [Xj 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: 'f : - ^ :\ " '• ;^Vv" '•••'. - / Enclosures: P'~ f!> Esgil Corporation '•:*''' •"",/'.'/;- •''.-..-• •. •'.•••] • . Kl ' GA D CM IE E J D PC !" 2/1 0/97 trnsmtl.dot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 > (619) 560-1468 > Fax (619) 560-1576 Carlsbad 97-O229 2/20/97 PLAN REVIEW CORRECTION LIST COMMERCIAL PLAN CHECK NO.: 97-O229 OCCUPANCY: F-l JURISDICTION: Carlsbad USE: Range Building/Testing TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: V-n spr. ACTUAL AREA: 4,237 ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA: 8,000 SPRINKLERS?: yes REMARKS: DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY JURISDICTION: 2/6/97 DATE INITIAL PLAN REVIEW COMPLETED: 2/20/97 STORIES: 1 HEIGHT: 25ft. OCCUPANT LOAD: 21 DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY ESGIL CORPORATION: 2/10/97 PLAN REVIEWER: Mike Kratz 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. IQ.6'4.3, 1994 Uniform Building Code, the approval of the.plans does not permit the violation of jany 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 (1994UBC) v:' - r • ' .comfofw.dot Carlsbad 97-0229 2/20/97 1 . Please make all corrections on the original tracings, as requested in the correction list. Submit three sets of plans for commercial/industrial projects (two sets of plans for residential projects). For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in one of two ways: 1 . Deliver all corrected sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92009, (619) 438-1 161. 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. PLANS 2. 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. 3. Show on the Title Sheet all buildings, structures, walls, etc. included under this application. Any portion of the project shown on the site plan that is not included with the building permit application filed should be clearly identified as "not included" on the site plan or Title Sheet. Omit fences and amphitheater seating. 4. Indicate on the Title 'Sheet whether or not a grading permit is required for this '- - ' ...... project. — -" -':: -.-'-.. -' •-•. • '" • -.;•'- "": ••'•.-.••' 'r': :'~ '~ ~~ :' '"•'"'' 5. Provide a statement on the Title Sheet of the plans that this project shall comply ...• with Title 2*1 and 1991 UBC.UMC and UPC and 1993 NEC. ; 6. Provide a note on the plans indicating if any hazardous materials will be stored f .and/or used within the building which exceed the quantities listed in UBC Tables ..-.. . . 3-Dand3-E. '•"•-' ". ' '-'' ''.'• V '•••.' .-:;V "'•".• " '':r-'- 7. .Provide a statement on the site plan stating: "All property lines, easements and ,5; buildings, both existing and proposed, are shown on this site plan." Carlsbad 97-0229 2/20/97 • GLASS AND GLAZING 8. Show safety glazing at window 6. This is within 24" of the door swing. Section 2406.4 • FRAMING 9. Provide truss details and truss calculations for this project. Specify on the plans the truss identification numbers. 10. Show 1/2" minimum clearance between top plate of interior partitions and bottom chord of trusses. (To ensure loading will be as designed). 11. Per UBC Section 2343.6, provide the following note on the plans if trusses are used: "Each truss shall be legibly branded, marked or otherwise have permanently affixed thereto the following information located within 2 feet of the center of the span on the face of the bottom chord: a) Identity of the company manufacturing the truss. b) The design load. c) The spacing of the trusses." 12. 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. • FOUNDATION 13. 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. (When required by the soil report). 14. The soils engineer recommended that he/she review the foundation excavations. Note on the foundation plan that "Prior.to the contractor requesting a Building Department foundation inspection, the soils engineer shall advise the building official in writing that: a) The building pad was prepared in accordance with the soils report, b) The utility trenches have been properly backfilled and compacted, and c) The foundation excavations comply with the intent of the soils report."- 15. Show on foundation details 24" minimum depth as per soils report. Carlsbad 97-0229 2/20/97 • MISCELLANEOUS 16. Note on the plans that new water closets and associated flushometer valves, if any, shall use no more than 1.6 gallons per flush and shall meet performance standards established by the American National Standards Institute Standard A112.19.2. H & S Code, Section 17921.3(b). • TITLE 24 DISABLED ACCESS 17. 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 18. 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. 19. 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: a Yes a No 20. 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 Mike Kratz at:;i? Esgil Corporation. Thank you. . Carlsbad 97-O229 2/20/97 * PLUMBING, MECHANICAL AND ENERGY CORRECTIONS 4 JURISDICTION: Carlsbad DATE: 2/20/97 * PLAN REVIEW NUMBER: 97-229 SET: I 4 PLAN REVIEWER: GlenAdamek • PLUMBING (1994 UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE) 21. Correct the water line sizes as per the water line sizing table on sheet P-2. The 1-1/4 inch water main Esgil Corporation undersized from the hose bib to the water closet branch. 22. Detail the platform to support the water heater. 23. Detail required ladder access to water heaters if more than 8 feet above the floor. UPC section 511.2 • ENERGY CONSERVATION 24. The LTG-1 and LTG-2 forms on sheet E-2 shows the conditioned floor area to : be only 926 square feet. The ENV-1 and MECH-1 forms show the conditioned floor area to be 3,215 square feet. The lighting designs do not show the Robot Lab #101, and I.P. Labs # 102 & 103 on the LTG-forms. Please correct. 25. The LTG-1 forms on sheet E-2 must be corrected. Note: If you have any questions regarding this plan review list please contact Glen Adamek 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.-,; n-. Carlsbad 97-0229 2/20/97 4 ELECTRICAL PLAN REVIEW * 1993 NEC • JURISDICTION: Carlsbad DATE: 2/17/97 4 PLAN REVIEW NUMBER: 97-229 * PLAN REVIEWER: Eric Jensen 26. Detail the following City of Carlsbad requirements on the electrical plans: a) The UFER ground itself must be a copper conductor, rebar is only allowed for residential uses up to 200 amperes. b) The use of armored cable, type AC, is restricted in the City of Carlsbad. Confirm with the City that the use of AC is permitted prior to installation of the cable. 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-O229 2/20/97 1. 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. (4) All existing accommodations when alterations, structural repairs or additions are made to such accommodations. NOTE: All Figures and Tables referenced in this checklist are printed in the California Building Code, Title 24. • SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS 1. Clearly show that the site development and grading are designed to provide access to all entrances and exterior ground floor exits, as well as access to normal paths of travel, per Section 1127B.1. Where necessary to provide access, shall incorporate pedestrian ramps, curb ramps, stairways and handrails, etc. Provide a curb ramp at Salk Ave. 2. Verify that there is an accessible path of travel from the main building complex. Show on plans any required upgrades to make the path accessible. 3. Show, or note that at every primary public entrance, and at every major function area along, or leading to, an accessible route of travel, there is to be a sign displaying the international symbol of accessibility. Signs are required to indicate the direction to accessible building entrances and facilities/per Sections 11176,5.7 and 1127B.3.;: • CURB RAMPS 4. 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:: ' '' 5. Plans shall show that curb Vamps are >48" wide with a slope of ^1 :12 (8.33%), );;;: per Sections' 11 27B.5.2 and 1 1278.5.3. The lower end of each curb ramp shall have a V2" lip > beveled 45°, per Section 1127B.5.5. Carlsbad 97-0229 2/2O/97 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. 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. • WALKS AND SIDEWALKS 9. 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. 10. The maximum permitted cross slope shall be <%" per ft., per Section 1023.1.3. 11. Show or note that any abrupt level changes will be <y2" 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. 12. 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. • GENERAL ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS 13. 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. . -..'•; '.;v c) Employees. , , d) Members or participants. ; : , ;>: - ;v> • COUNTERS AND TABLES • ? 4?W 14. Where fixed or built-in tables, counters or seats are provided for.the public, and in general employee areas, 5% (but never less;than one) must be accessible. Section 1122B.1. Counter at Corridor 100. ^ '; - f S : Carlsbad 97-O229 2/20/97 15. The tops of tables and counters shall be 28" to 34" from the floor. Where a single counter contains more than one transaction station, such as a bank counter with multiple teller window or a retail sales counter with multiple cash register stations, at least 5% (but never less than one of each type of station) shall be located at a section of counter that is at least 36" long and no more than 28" to 34" high. Section 1122B.4. Carlsbad 97-O229 2/2O/97 VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PREPARED BY: Mike Kratz BUILDING ADDRESS:Salk Ave. BUILDING OCCUPANCY: F-l PLAN CHECK NO.: 97-0229 DATE: 2/20/97 TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: V-n spr BUILDING PORTION Air Conditioning Fire Sprinklers TOTAL VALUE BUILDING AREA (ft.2) < VALUATION MULTIPLIER Per Applicant VALUE ($) $233,035.00 IEI 1991 UBC Building Permit Fee D Bldg. Permit Fee by ordinance: $ 1,108.50 IKl 1991 UBC Plan Check Fee D Plan Check Fee by ordinance: $ 720.52 Type of Review: [X] Complete Review Q Structural Only Q Hourly 0 Repetitive Fee Applicable n Other: Esgil Plan Review Fee: $576.42 Comments: ; Sheet 1 of 1 :•: <; macvalue.doc 5196 :; * City of Carlsbad Engineering Department DATE: BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST PLANCHECK NO.: CB BUILDING ADDRESS: d } ^ <g PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 4-j 3 JV i \)i ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 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: EST. VALUE: DENIAL Please see the1 attached report of deficiencies marked witfKSCjvlake necessary corrections to plans or specifications for compliance with applicable codes and standards. Submit corrected plans and/or specifications to this office for review. By:Date: 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: Michele Masterson City of Carlsbad Address: 2075 Las Palmas Dr., Carlsbad, CA 92009 Phone: (619)438-1161. ext. 4315 A-4 \\Laspalmas\svs\LIBRARY\ENG\WORD\DOCS\CHKLS-nBulldlnQ PlanchecX Cfclst BP0001 Fomi MM.doc Rev. 1 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1576 • (619) 438-1161 - FAX (619) 438-0894 BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST SITE PLAN 2ND/ oRD/^^ Q Q 1. Provide a fully dimensioned site plan drawn to scale. Show: A. North Arrow D. Property Lines B. Existing & Proposed Structures E. Easements C. Existing Street Improvements F. Right-of-Way Width & Adjacent Streets G. Driveway widths Q 2. Show on site plan:2)5 3- A. Drainage Patterns 1. Building pad surface drainage must maintain a minimum slope of one percent towards an adjoining street or an approved drainage course. 2. ADD THE FOLLOWING NOTE: "Finish grade will provide a minimum positive drainage of 2% to swale 5' away from building." B. Existing & Proposed Slopes and Topography 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 Q 5. Project does not comply with the following Engineering Conditions of approval for Project No. Q Q 6. All conditions are in compliance. Date: \\Laspalmas\sys\lJBRARY\ENG\WORD\DOCS\CHKLST\Building Plancheck Cklst BPOOOI Forni MM doc Rev. 12726/96 BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST * ST/ 2ND/ 3RI Q Q Q DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS 7. 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: Q Q Q Q Q IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS • • ' ' vf" 8a. 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: 8b. 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: \\Laspalma5\sys\LIBRARY\ENG\WORD\DOCS\CHKlSTBuildlng Plancheck Cklsl BP0001 Form MU doc Rev. 12/26/96 '} -•{' BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST 8c. Enclosed please find your Future Improvement Agreement. Please return agreement signed and notarized to the Engineering Department. Future Improvement Agreement completed by: Date; ^^_ 8d. 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. 9a. Inadequate information available on Site Plan to make a determination on grading requirements. Include accurate grading quantities (cut, fill import, export). 9b. 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: 9c. Graded Pad Certification required. (Note: Pad certification may be required even if a grading permit is not required.) 9d. No Grading Permit required. MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS 10. 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: \\l_aspalmas\sys\l_IBRARY\ENG\WORD\DOCS\CHKLST\BuikJing Plancheck Cklsl BP0001 Form MM.doc Rev. 12/26/96 BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST 11. A SEWER PERMIT is required concurrent with the building permit issuance. The U fee is noted in the fees section on the following page. I 12. INDUSTRIAL WASTE PERMIT is required. Applicant must complete Industrial Waste Permit Application Form and submit for City approval prior to issuance of a Permit. Industrial Waste permit accepted by: . Date: 13. NPDES PERMIT Complies with the City's requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The applicant shall provide best management practices to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to discharge to sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading or building permit, whichever occurs first. Q 14. QKRequired fees are attached Q No fees required Q 15. Additional Comments: \\Laspalmas\sys\LIBRARY\ENG\WORD\DOCS\CHKLST\Bullding Plancheck Cklsl BP0001 Form MM.doc Rev. 12/26/96 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FEE CALCULATION WORKSHEET Estimate based on unconfirmed information from applicant. Calculation based on building plancheck plan submittal. Address:Bldg. Permit No .C,6 Prepared by: /T>A ^^N— Date:Checked by:Date: EDU CALCULATIONS: List types and square footages.for all uses. D«- suing . Types of'Use:/fYL/7'fl g^ P/U&. StrrfrTUnits:EDU's n : CX— APT CALCULATIONS: List types and square footages for all uses. Types of Use: '" Sq. Ft. /Units: _ _ ADT's: FEES REQUIRED: WITHIN CFD: IS'YES (no bridge & thoroughfare fee, reduced Traffic Impact Fee)D NO TPARK-IN-LIEU FEE FEE/UNIT: PARK AREA: X NO. UNITS: . TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE ADT's/UNITS:X FEE/APT: =$ = $ . P/4. F RIDGE AND THOROUGHFARE FEE ADT's/UNITS:X FEE/APT:=$ 4. FACILITIES MANAGEMENT FEE '&•'$. UNIT/SQ.FT.:>1 ZONE: X FEE/SQ.FT./UNIT:=$ /I SEWER FEE PERMIT ^ EDU's: BENEFIT AREA: EDU's: ( "6. DRAINAGE FEES ACRES: PLDA X FEE/EDU DRAINAGE BASIN: ^ X FEE/EDU: __: HIGH X FEE/AC: : / )] / U =$ =$ f /LOW . 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\FEECALCULATIONWORKSHEET REV 01/28/97 Decembers, 1996 Hamann Consolidated 475 W. Bradley Avenue El Cajon, CA 92020 PROPOSED MINOR SUBDIVISION NO. 96-09. TAYLOR MADE In our rush to expedite this project we sent the preliminary notice a day ahead of the deadline for inter-office comment. An additional condition has been added regarding the proportionate share of a fully actuated traffic signal. The condition is stated below and will be added to and made a part of the preliminary approval dated Decembers, 1996. ADDITIONAL CONDITION OF APPROVAL #29. The developer shall enter into an agreement with the City to pay a proportionate share of the design and construction of a fully actuated traffic signal at the intersection of College Blvd. and Salk Ave. The proportionate share shall be as determined by the City Engineer. The form and content of the agreement shall be approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation of the parcel Map. The remaining conditions shall be consecutively renumbered following this condition. The developer may request a review of the preliminary decision with the City Engineer in writing within ten (10) days of the date of this letter. Upon such written request the City Engineer shall arrange a time and place with the developer for such review. The City Engineer has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the developer contained in these conditions of approval, and hereby finds, in this case, that the exactions are imposed to mitigate impacts caused by or reasonably related to the project, and the extent and degree of the exaction is in rough proportionality to the impact caused by the project. ROBERT J. WOJCIK Principal Civil Engineer Land Use Review Division c: City Engineer Assistant City Engineer Senior Planner, Adrienne Landers *< IVATt* Carlsbad ,7: , Municipa Water District 5950 El Camino Real, Carlsbad, CA 92008 Engineering: (619) 438-3367 Administration: (619) 438-2722 FAX: 431-1601 March 19, 1997 Mr. Don Mitchell Benyman & Henigar 11590 West Bernardo Court Suite 100 San Diego, California 92127 RE: FINAL/PARCEL MAP FOR TAYLORMADE UNIT #5, Salk Avenue and Taylor Court (C.M. W.D. PROJECT NO. 96-233, MS 94-09, CT 85-24) This letter is provided to document the District's conversation with Spear & Associates on March 19, 1997. The District is agreeable to the processing of the Lot 1 Fire Line looping easement as a condition of the building permit. Therefore, the District will not require the easement to be shown on the Final/Parcel Map. If there are any questions regarding the above comments, please feel free to call me at 438-3367x123. Kelly Weaver, P.E. Associate Engineer cc:File - CMWD 96-244 "Serving Carlsbad lor over 40 years" S,City of Carlsbad Engineering Department December 6,1996 Hamann Consolidated 475 W. Bradley Avenue 0'Cajpn, CA 92020 PROPOSED MINOR SUBDIVISION NO. 96-09. TAYLOR MADE A preliminary decision has been made, pursuant to Section 20.24.120 of the City of Carlsbad Municipal Code, to approve the tentative parcel map of the proposed minor subdivision subject to conditions that follow in this letter. Unless specifically stated in the condition, all of the following conditions, upon the approval of this tentative parcel map, must be met prior to approval of a final parcel map. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. No variance from City standards or code requirements is hereby granted by virtue of this approval. The developer shall comply with all codes and standards in effect at the time of processing this project. 2. The developer shall provide the City with the approved tentative parcel map. The map shall be to scale on a reproducible 24" x 36" xerox mylar or photo mylar. It shall reflect the conditions of approval by the City. The map shall be submitted to the City Engineer, reviewed and signed by the City's project engineer and project planner prior to submittal of the building plans, final map, improvement or grading plans, whichever occurs first. 3. The developer shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents, Officers, and employees from any daim, action or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void or null an approval of the City, the Planning Commission or City Engineer which has been brought against the within the time period provided for by Section 66499.37 of the Subdivision Map Act. 4. The net developable acres shall be shown for each parcel. FEES/AGREEMENTS 5. ; Prior to issuance of a building permit for any buildable lot within the subdivision, the property owner shall pay a one-time special development tax in accordance with City , Council Resolution No. 91-39. 6. The developer shall pay all current fees and deposits required. 2075 Las Paimas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92O09-1576 - (619) 438-1161 • FAX (619) 43B-OB94, ' ' ** -7.1, The owner shall execute a hold harmless agreement for geologic failure. 8. The developer must apply for and obtain a reapportionment of the assessments Imposed on the subject project in accordance with law governing the associated College Blvd. Assessment District or the assessments must be paid in full. The developer shall pay all associated costs of said reapportionment. The application shall be submitted with the application for the parcel map. 9. As required by state law, the subdivider shall submit to the City an application for segregation of assessments along with the appropriate fee. A segregation is not required if the developer pays off the assessment on the subject property prior to the recordation of the final map. In the event a segregation of assessments is not recorded and property is subdivided, the full amount of assessment will appear on the tax bills of each new lot 10. The owner of the subject property shall execute an agreement holding the City harmless regarding drainage across the adjacent property. 11. Prior to approval of any grading or building permits for this project, the owner shall give written consent to the annexation of the area shown within the boundaries of the subdivision into the existing City of Carlsbad Street Lighting and Landscaping District No. 1 on a form provided by the City. GRADING 12. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed construction site within this project, the developer shall submit to and receive approval from the City Engineer for the proposed haul route. The developer shall comply with all conditions and requirements the City Engineer may impose with regards to the hauling operation. 13. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, the developer shall submit proof that a Notice of intention has been submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board. 14. No grading for private improvements shall occur outside the limits of the subdivision Mpless a grading or slope easement or agreement is obtained from the owners of the affected properties and recorded. If the developer is unable to obtain the grading or slope easement, or agreement, no grading permit will be issued. In that case the de'veloper must either amend the tentative map or modify the plans so grading will not occur outside the project site in a manner which substantially conforms to the approved tentative map as determined by the City Engineer and Planning Director, DEDICATIONS4MPROVEMENTS 15. The owner shall make an offer of dedication to the City for all public streets and easements required by these conditions or shown on the tentative map. The offer shall be made by a certificate on the final map for this project. AH land so offered shall be granted to the City free and dear of all liens and encumbrances and without cost to the City. Streets that already public are not required to be rededicated. 16; -,* Additional drainage easements may be required. Drainage structures shall be provided or installed prior to or concurrent with any grading or building permit as may be required iNby the City Engineer. : 1 * 17. ,"I. plans, specifications and supporting documents for all improvements shall be prepared ,'j to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The developer shall Install, or agree to install 4 -r! and secure with appropriate security as provided by law, improvements shown on the ,J[ tentative parcel map and the following improvements to City Standards to the i{ "satisfaction of the City Engineer. i • Salk Avenue as shown on the tentative Parcel Map. t I Fermi Court as shown on the tentative parcel map. '' Relocation of various utilities as part of the development of this subdivision. El Camino Real along the frontage of this subdivision, including full width landscaped . median and any offsite transitions as required by the City Engineer. A reimbursement ; agreement may be approved for one half of this item to be paid by the developer on the opposite frontage. I Reconstruction of College Blvd. including but not limited to median, asphalt paving, curb, gutter and sidewalk and utility reconstruction or relocation as part of the ; development of this subdivision. Completion of all public improvements to College Blvd., Salk Ave., and El Camino Real along the boundary of this subdivision. Salk Ave. east of Fermi Court may be constructed at a later date or when development occurs adjacent to this project. If the developer chooses to postpone these improvements a separate sheet shall be included in the plans for this project that identifies these improvements. Separate bonds and agreements shall be posted to secure the future obligation. :A list of the above shall be placed on an additional map sheet on the final map per the "provisions of Sections 66434.2 of the Subdivision Map Act Improvements listed above iishafl be constructed within 18 months of approval of the secured improvement :! agreement or such other time as provided in said agreement. 18. '••"'rfjna developer shall vacate that portion of Salk Avenue and Fermi Court as shown on iitfoe tentative map. 19. Direct access rights for all lots abutting El Camino Real and abutting College Blvd. shall be waived on the parcel map. 20. Direct access rights for parcel 1 and parcel 3 abutting Salk Avenue shall be waived on jttte parcel map. Page3 21, The developer shall comply with the City's requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The developer shall provide best management practices as referenced in the "California Storm Water Best Management Practices Handbook" to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to discharge to sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements shall be approved by the City Engineer. Said plans shall. include but not be limited to notifying prospective .owners and tenants of the following: A. All owners and tenants shall coordinate efforts to establish or worK with established disposal programs to remove and properly dispose of toxic and hazardous waste products. B. Toxic chemicals or hydrocarbon compounds such as gasoline, motor oil, antifreeze, solvents, paints, paint thinners, wood preservatives, and other such fluids shall not be discharged into any street, public or private, or into storm drain or storm water conveyance systems. Use and disposal of pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers and other such chemical treatments shall meet Federal, State, County and City requirements as prescribed in their respective containers. C. Best Management Practices shall be used to eliminate or reduce surface pollutants when planning any changes to the landscaping and surface improvements. 22. Notes to the following effect shall be placed on the parcel map as non-mapping data: This project is approved upon the expressed condition that building permits will not be issued for development of the subject property unless the water district serving the development determines that adequate water service and sewer facilities are available at the time of application for such water service and sewer permits will continue to be available until time of occupancy. This note shall be placed on the final map. COPE REMINDER The project is subject to all applicable provisions of local ordinances, including but not limited to theifoIJowing: 23. The tentative parcel map approval shall expire twenty-four (24) months from the date of the letter containing the final decision for tentative parcel map approval. 24. The developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this project to prevent offsite stltation. Planting and erosion control shall be provided in accordance with the Carlsbad Municipal Code and the City Engineer. :^Hlip''- 25. Some improvements shown on the tentative map and/or required by these conditions , are located offsite on property which neither the City nor the owner has sufficient title or : -interest to permit the improvements to be made without acquisition of title or interest. The developer shall conform to Section 20.16.095 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code." 26. The project is approved under the express condition the developer pay the additional ; public facilities fee in accordance with City Council Resolution No. 9169 adopted July ! 28, 1987 and as amended from time to time. The developer further agrees to pay any < -development fees established by the City Council pursuant to Chapter 21.90 of the : Carlsbad Municipal Code. The developer's written agreement to pay said fees is on file with the office of the City Clerk and is incorporated herein by this reference. If the fees are not paid, this application will not be consistent with the General Plan and approval for this projectfihall be void. t>#x> 27. All concrete terrace drains shall be maintained by the homeowner's association (if on commonly owned property) or the individual property owner (if on an individually owned lot). An appropriately worded statement dearly identifying the responsibility shall be placed in the CC&Rs (if maintained by the Association) and on the Final Map. 28. The developer shall provide for sight distance corridors at all street intersections in accordance with Engineering Standards and shall record the following statement on the Final Map (and in the CC&R's). "No structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, sign, or other object over 30 inches ; above the street level may be placed or permitted to encroach within the area identified as a sight distance corridor in accordance with City Standard Public Street-Design Criteria, Section 8.B.3. The underlying property owner shall maintain this condition." SEWER AND WATER DISTRICT 29. The developer shall be responsible for extending and utilizing the existing reclaimed waterline in £1 Camino Real and College Blvd. as part of this project. 30. The entire potable water system, reclaimed water system and sewer system shall be evaluated in detail to insure that adequate capacity, pressure and flow demands can be met 31. The developer shall be responsible for all fees, deposits and charges which will be collected before and/or at the time of issuance of the building permit. The San Diego County Water Authority capacity ch.irge will be collected at the issuance of application for meter installation. 32. Sequentially, the Developers Engineer shall do the following: A. Meet with the City Fire Marshal and establish the fire protection requirements, Also obtain G.P.M. demand for domestic and irrigational needs from parties. PageS B. Prepare a colored reclaimed water use area map and submit to the Planning Department for processing and approval. G Prior to the preparation of sewer, water and reclaimed water improvement plans, : a meeting must be scheduled with the District Engineer for review, comment and approval of the preliminary system layouts and usage's (i.e. - GPM - EDU). The developer may request a review of the preliminary decision with the City Engineer in writing within ten (10) days of the date of this letter Upon such written request the City Engineer shall arrange a time and place with the developer for such review. The CHy Engineer has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the developer contained in these conditions of approval, and hereby finds, in this case, that the exactions are imposed to mitigate impacts caused by or reasonably related to the project, and the extent and degree of the exaction is in rough proportionality to the impact caused by the project. ROBERT J. WO JCIK Principal:Civil Engineer Land Use Review Division c: CHy Engineer Assistant City Engineer Senior Planner, Adrienne Landers Citv of Carlsbad Engineering Department Decembers, 1996 Hamarih Consolidated 475 VV. Bradley Avenue El Cajbn^CA 92020 PROPOSED MINOR SUBDIVISION NO. 96-09. TAYLOR MADE In ourifush to expedite this project we sent the preliminary notice a day ahead of the deadline for (ntis'r^piffice comment. An additional condition has been added regarding the proportionate shareof a fully actuated traffic signal. The condition is stated below and will be added to and made a part of the preliminary approval dated December 6, 1996. ADDfTlONAL CONDITION OF APPROVAL #29; .The developer shall enter into an agreement with the City to pay a proportionate share of the design and construction of a fully actuated traffic signal at the intersection of College Blvd. and Salk Ave. The proportionate share shall be as determined by the City Engineer. The form arid content of the agreement shall be approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation of the parcel Map. The remaining conditions shall be consecutively renumbered following this condition. The developer may request a review of the preliminary decision with the City Engineer in writing within ten (10) days of the date of this letter. Upon such written request the City Engineer shall arrange a time and place with the developer for such review. The City Engineer has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the developer contained in these' conditions of approval, and hereby finds, in this case, that the exactions are imposed to mitigate impacts caused by or reasonably related to the project, and the extent and degree of the exaction is in rough proportionality to the impact caused by the project. ROBERT J. WOJCIK Principal Civil Engineer Land Use Review Division c: City Engineer Assistant City Engineer Senior Planner, Adrienne Landers O75 L/if, Pftlniab Dr. • Carlstiacl, CA O2OO<M 576 - (619) 43K-11R1 - I7 AX (619) 438*0894 i V . • • TOTPL P.08 SAN DIEGO COUNTY ASSESSOR'S UAP i 212 —13 = 400' Omit 07A>f/9l BufSF fnnc2iy-Q20 D D D A/A PLANNING DEPARTMENT BUILDING PLAN CHECK REVIEW CHECKLIST Plan Check NO. CB Planner _ APN: Address Phone (619) 438-1161, extension flsTfll Type of Project and Use: _ Zone: >!b Facilities Managerr?Bnt Zone:' CFD faryout) # / Circle One (|f property in, complete SPECIAL TAX CALCULATION WORKSHEET provided by Building Department.) Legend Item Complete Item Incomplete -Needs your action X Environmental Review Required: YES y NO DATE OF COMPLETION: «£<? 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 NO y TYPE DATE OTHER RELATED CASES: Compliance with conditions or approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval 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. YES NOCoastal Permit Determination Form already completed? 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. D D D D D D Inclusionary Housing Fee required: YES (Effective date of Inclusionary Housing Ordinance - May 21, 1993.) 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. Setbacks: Front: Int. Side: Street Side: Rear: 2. Lot Coverage: 3. Height: 4. Parking: Guest Required "MB Required ___-HHI_ Required -JBh Required flF-* 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 City of Carlsbad 970 28 Fire Department • Burea^ of PYeveritich' FEB 2 6 1997 Plan Review: Requirements Category: Building Plan Check SMITH CONSULTING ARCHITECTS Date of Report: Friday, February 21,1997 Reviewed by: (*.., Contact Name Smith Consulting Arc . Address 5355 Mira Sorrento PI Ste 650 • City, State San Diego CA 92121 - Bldg. Dept, No. CB97-229 Planning No. Job Name Taylor Made/range Job Address 2220 Fermi Ste. or Bldg. No. Approved - The item you have submitted for review has been approved. The approval is : ; •'•••'••• .' based on plans; information and/or specifications provided in your submittal; •therefore any changes to these items after this date, including field modifica- tions, 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 construct or install improvements. Disapproved - Please see the attached report of deficiencies. Please make corrections to plans or specifications necessary to indicate compliance with applicable codes and standards. Submit corrected plans and/or specifications to this office for review. For Fire Department Use Only Review 1st 2nd 3rd ""'" '" •' Other Agency ID"'. CFDJob# 97028 •-: •-•"> " ''' File# '' " """"" " " •' • '' ;- :. •"" : 2560 Orion Way • Carlsbad, California 92008 • (619) 931-2121 Mai—31-97 O9:39 P.O1 PRIME STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS 16980 Via Tazon, Suite 260 San Diego, California 92127 Tel (619) 487-0311 Fax (619) 487-0206 RECEIVED MAR 3 1 1997 SMITH CONSULTING ——ARCHITECTS TELECOPIER TRANSMITTAL Date: Attn: Company: Time: <\ Z>0 *n, From: Subject: Total number of pages (including this cover sheet): Remark:HI ?> sq-is if ?* \ If there are any questions regarding Hie reception of the number of pages fisted above, ^ please call at (619) 487-0311 Ma*--31-97 O9:39 P.O2 PRIME JC STRUCTURAL DAS. - ENGINEERS SHI 19. ftb Afi£,lj. Mar-31-97 O9:39 \ /\ / O//L0&k a x <£$ r ^)MsfcA L- r^vff *H>-O .O ftf- -* t'f- ± P. 03 SHI I 'i b * S&T9***' *&** * 1*1,** Mai—31-97 O9:4O P.O4 S0303/2&/S? POME x»:1k'ST STO>CnJRAL OME SHI ?••* ?^-'.36 "•-'»» SPMi LEiifiTH - a,5C ft C.023 0,032 0.00 5,00 REACTION U; LOAD RISHT C.08* O.OB4 O.C3S 0.09& V issy - 0.180 e 8 0.00 ft fl isas = 0,270 kft ? 3.M ft (El = !<in"2) Defi ii'i 'i (ft) lets] ! ; ,.^LlVt sisspan Actual ; 1,5" x 3.D3 *i503 Djfijr, per 199! SOS UGv-^i si :" I ?~L*?C >'\ STPESSFS (psi ; FV ^ it? TV r Fb! = 2S5E tb = 105B 49 Livs ,Dr = 1.2S, C: = U50 ^Tpetiti^e JES Mesber DEFLECTIONS Urj Total = 0,13 Livs = 0.10 Dees = 0,09 Mar--31-97 O9: 4O P. 05 A PRIME **:&-*?• SIRUCWRALOWfcJ ENGINEERS SHT:^ L42.-l-v SPAN LOfSTH = 11,33 ft iSieple Spar?) LOADS U;/ft i ft) 0.01C POINT LOAD Fd 0,056 .000 U.OO 11.33 .192 2,83 .128 S.fcb ,0£4 S.5C REACTIONS (k! Totii 0,252 3.137 O.-'^i G.lbO 0.477 0.356 fflix -0,477 !: 1.520 Hi ISA"D?f; fin's J C Dead i593C/£! 5.43 17S2?/EI aidspan Eesign per 1931 NDS Douglas Fir-Lire*5 ETREaSES (gsi) Shear g 'd1 : V = 5,4? k « 0.4ft Fv = ii? ?v - Fb' = 2356 'b = 24 Tvts! ^ 0,83 - L / !6C Live * 0.40 = L / 327 3TL TuHAL CjMJ"t NATIONS PRIME 16980 Via Tazon, Suite 260 San Diego, California 92127 . Tel (619) 487-0311 {ftfLl PRIME STRUCTURAL DATE:. ENGINEERS SHT : ff <? •J PRIME JOB: ft STRUCTURAL DATC: ENGINEERS SHT : s!ni2vl50b4l4BTBEAM ANALYSIS PRC6RA?l5SDS¥isCb4i4E SPAN LENSTH = 6.00 ft (Sisple Span) UNIFORM LOADS (k/ft & ft) wd wl ), 1 6 x 3 flsOS Actual : 5,5" x ?.5a Dssion osr 1391 NDS Fv - SOfi fv = 7a /4 I Fb! = 1494 fb = 953 54 I Live LBF = 1.25, Cf = 1.00, Cl = 1, -.J s3B - 6' HDR § KAINT, ROGH 50B06/26/97 9S-570 PRIME JOB:. STRUCTURAL DATE:. ENGINEERS SHT :. slp!2vlsOb4148TBEAH ANALYSIS PR06RAHslp9visOb4148T (6.60)sOplO.OOhi2vOsOb3T SPAN LENGTH = 6.00 ft (Sisple Span) UNIFORH LOADS (k/ft & ft) wd wl U - X2 0.510 0 REACTIONS LOAD Dead Liva Tot-al .400 0. (k) LEFT 1,530 i.200 2,730 00 6.00 ;'V-HT " 1 , L.30 ' 1.200 2.730 HHIHUH FORCES V sax = K siax = DEFLECTIONS 'LOAD Total Live Dead 2.73 k 8 4.10 kft 8 0.00 ft 3.00 ft (El = kin"2) Defl (in) 26536/EI 11664/EI 14872/EI I (ft) 3.00 3.00 iidspan Pos. foment Lu = 6.00 ft Brace Spacing = 6.00 ft Gov. Deflection : Total = L/240 Required El = 88452 kinA2 s3B 6 x 8 flsOB Actual : 5.5' x 7,5" Design per 1991 NDS Douglas Fir-Larch STRESSES ,'Dsi) Shear 8 'd' ; V = 2.16 k 8 3.i3 h Fv = 106 fv = li 74 X Fb' = 1494 fb = 953 £4 I Live LDF = 1.25, Cf = 1.00, Cl = 1.00 DEFLECTIONS (in) (E = 1600 ksi) Total = 0.09 = L / 839 29 I Live = 0.04 = L /1910 19 I Dead =0.05 tf-Swfti /- xdx_:z: 4*0-0 . ? r J PRIME STRUCTURAL DATE ENGINS33S SHT : i '( * y • -J ^ v^- ^ s3B RAFTERS § 24' O.C.50B03/26/97 36-570 PRIME STRUCTURAL DATE ENGINEERS SHT slpl2visOb4148TBEAH ANALYSIS PR06RAH5ip9vlsOb4148T <6.60)sOpi0.00hi2v0sOb3T SPAN LENGTH =6.00 ft (Simple Span) UNIFOfiN LOADS (k/ft & ft) vd wl Li - X2 0.028 0. REACTIONS ( LOAD Dead Live Total 032 0.00 6.00 " LEFT 0.084 0.03S 0.180 RIGHT 0.084 0.036 0.180 HAXIHUH FORCES V ssax = H tax = DEFLECTIONS LOAD Total Live Dead 0..180 k 8 0.270 kft g (El = kin*2) Defl (in) 1750/E1 933/EI 816/EI 0.00 ft 3.00 ft r-(ft) 3.00 3.00 sidspan Actual j 1.5" x 3,5' llsOB Design per 1931 HDS Douglas Fir-Larch STRESSES (psi) _ Shear 8 'd1 : V = 0.16 k-t 0.29 ft Fv = 119 fv = 46 39 I Fb! = 2156 ' fb = 105B 49 Z Live LDF = 1.25, Cf = 1.50 Repetitive Use Hesber i '&-Jl.g:]700 ksi) (JVlS - L i 375 O.lO '= L / 703 0,09 Live Dead s3B PRIMESTRUCTURAL IOATE ENGINEERS SHT : HIP BH sOBOS/26/97 96-570 5lpi2vlsOb4148TBEA(i ANALYSIS PR06RAHslp9vlsOb414BT <6.60)sOplO.OQhl2vOsOb3T SPAN LENGTH = 11.33 ft (Simple Span) 1JNIFORK LOADS (k/ft * ft) yd vl XI 12 0,010 0.000 POINT LOADS (k I: ft) Pd PI 11.33 0,168 0.112 0.056 REACTIONS LOAD Dead L'i ve Total 0.1S2 0.123 0.064 (k) 2.83 5.66 8.50 LEFT 0,253 0.224 0.477 RIGHT 0.197 0.160 0.356 HAXIHUH FORCES V max = 0.477 k 8 0.00 ft H sax = 1.520 kft 1 5.66 ft \ DEFLECTIONS (£1 = kinA2) LOAD Ssfl (in) X'(ft) Total Live Dead 33573/EI 15930/EI 17629/EI 5.51 • 5.49 itidspan s3B Actual : 1.5" x 5.5' SSsOB Design per 1991 NDS Douglas Fir-Larch V = M7 k t-0.46 ft Fv = 119 fv = 86 72 I Ffa' = 2356 fb = 2412 102 I <- Live LDF = 1.25, Cf = 1.30 DEFLECTIONS (in) (E = 1900 ksi) Total = 0,85 = L / 160 Live = 0.40 = L / 337 Dead = 0.45 fl.L- PRIME J03: STRUCTURAL DATE: ENGINEERS SW : \ A r ID /•/ *y 'FA f-* >-.f&£ C< <:u-r * 4*°\^*./c "f P&i> - l-bo* .- {.to'" I • ( ff I ' '' I / "j „,* \..b* \ p.* | PRIME JOB:: STRUCTURAL OWE. ENGINEERS SW:< PRIME JOB:f£52£ STRUCTURAL DATE ENGINEERS SHT: RANGE BLB6 LINE 2 6RADE BEAH ANALYSIS PROGRAM (4.02) Footing LEN8TH ~= 25.50 ft Footing WIDTH = 1.00 ft Footing DEPTH = 2,00 ft OS/26/97 96-570 Cone Height ' Surcharge Footing + Surch UN1FORH LOADS 1 2 0.600 0.600 0.282 0.262 = 0,15 = 0.00 . = 0.30 kef ksf klf \ tk/it & ft) 3 1.040 0,346 XI 0,00 16,25 *~- !; t- 10.25 26.50 POINT LOADS (k^ ft) 1 2 "'" 3 i! 5.30 -5,90 -5.90 5,90 1.76 . 1.76 1.53 1.53 •1,53 1,53 1,80 1.80 5,90 . -5,90 -5.90 5.90 RESULTANTS (k, - CASE 1 0.00 0.00 3.37 2.73 2.73 3.40 0.00 0.00 ft & ksf) 2 0.25. 10.00 0.25 10.25 16.25 18.50 16.50 26.25 3 • Pt 23.61 23.61 34.39 X S.69 16.43 10.81 9 sax 2.35 1.53 2.01 D tin 0.00 0.25 0.58 HAXIHUH FORCES (k, kft) CASE 1 2 V sax 8,^4 11 sax 27.18 ,1 c;n *v2.'30 7.42 15,89 3.95 -.-^ V sax = 8,44 k N max = 27.18 kft K sin = -22.90 kft j RAN6E ELDS LINE 2 8RADE BEAH DESIGN PROSRAH 06/26/37 96-570 PRIMESTRUCTURAL OM& ENGINEERS SHT : (4,02) 'DESIGN DATA f'c = 2.50 ksi fy = 50.00 ksi Load Factor = 1.50 b h d = 12.00 in = 24.00 in = 21.00 in SHEAR BESISN 8.4 k Vn = 14.3 k Vc = 25,2 k Vs = 0.0 i; Av = 0.12 si/ft S eax = 10,50 in Vs = 0...itirr.ucs are optional 1 t 3 Stirrup § 10.5" 1 * IStirrup § 10.5" FLEKURAL 0ESI6N Beta 1 = 0.85 As sin = 0.84 si As sax = 3,37 si !H sax = 27.2 kft H- r,in = Hnt = 45.3 kft Hn- As str = 0,44 53 As str = As = 0.59 si As -22,9 kft -33.2 kft \37 si 0,49 si Bar t 4 f 5 1 6 Bottoi Steel No, Space 2.9 2.0" 1.9 3,0' 1,3 3.0" Top Steel No. Space 2.5 2.0" 1.6 3.0B 1.1 3.0" i 7 1.0 0.8 TSST- STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS 7/f/toA SH-T1 PRIME STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS 16980 Via Tazon, Suite 260 San Diego, California 92127 Tel (619) 487-0311 /I 6- /ft o wo 0,5 PL- ' op 0.5- PL * .0 fff- ' /• & •S .•us &$&c*'. -vVaa SJRUCWRALOttE-i, BJGWffiRSaw 10. SfAt* ? MAit>-nzi*At*C£ (Low* :l» -' If. 9 flf 4. ' set* ' 18.0 fff- K I, X t.O Hf * , lo I? v g.. aa.fVg^'-^'-r'.jSfe-^g^.- :—-i-a: sOB0i/3W31 i. ANALYSIS, PJJ06RAHslp9¥l50b4i48T {6.M)sOplO.OOhl2v050b3I niffiTB (Siiple Span) UNIFQRH LOADS (k/ft & ft) vd ul V sax = 4.55 k § 0.00 ft max = 11.38 tft I 5.00 ft DEFLECTIONS (El = !drr2) LOAD Defl (in) SE (ft) 204750/EI 90000/EI 5.GO 114750/EI nidspan Pos. Hosent Lu = 10.00 ft Brace Spacing = 10.00 ft 6ov. Deflection : Total = L/180 Required El = 307125 kinA2 6 x 12 llsOB Actual : 5.5s x 11.5" Design per 1991 HDS Douglas Fir-larch STRESSES (psi) Shear § 'd! ! V = 1 , Dd ". •;' '-': '?& • t Fv = 106 fv = 87 82 I Fb> = 1664 ft = H2& 6B X LiveLBF^ 3,25, Cf = :.CC, C DEFLECTIONS !in) (£ = 1600 tsi'i Live = 0,08 = L /1487 :6 I """""". ----- -^ _ .7'™."~" . ,m ..,r " " V" . . . —-----^ s3B ;"'; - HDRS:i -'•• sOBOl/30/97 - -•••• sipl2vlsOb414BTBEAH ANALYSIS PRD6RAHslp9vlsOb4I4BT (&.60)sOplO.OOhl2vOsOb3T SPAN LEH6TH = 7.33 ft (Siiple Span) UNIFORH LOADS (k/ft & ft) wri »1 XI - 11 0.480 0.440 0.00 7.33 REACTIONS «k5 LOAD LEFT RIGHT Dead 1.760 i.760 Live 1.613 1.613 Total 3.373 3.373 MAXIHUH FORCES V sax = 3.37 k 6 0.00 it K sax = 6.18 kft i 3.S7 ft DEFLECTIONS (El = kinA2) LOAD Defl (in) I (ft) Total 53855/E1 3,67 Live 28625/EI 3.S7 Dead 3122S/EI iidspan Pos. Hoient Lu = 7.33 ft Brace Spacing = 7.33 ft Sov. Deflection : Total = L/180 Required El = 122435 kinA2 ArtUSi : ~.~'K S 7,^* Design per 1391 NDS Douqlsj "ir-Lar--- (Dili Shear I 'd' : V r ;.go t e o_gp ft Fv = 106 fv = 102 ;6 A BEFlECT:CNS Un.i -.t = 1600 as:) i -' i<rt /-, V SPAN LENGTH = 6.00 ft (Siiple Span) UHIFORH LOADS tk/ft i ft) yd vl 0.318 0.240 REACTIONS (k) LOAD Dead Live Total HAH! HUH FORCES XI 0.00 LEFT 0.954 0.720 1.674 - X2 6.00 RISHT 0.954 0.720 1.674 V tax = 1.67 k i 0.00 ft H sax = 2.51 kft t 3.00 ft BEFLECTIOSS (El = kin*25 LOAD Defl (in) X (ft) Total 16271 ,'E! 3.0Q Live 6998/EI 3.00 Dsad 9273/EI eidspan PCS, «otent Lu = 6.00 ft Brace Spacing = 6.00 ft 6ov. Deflection j Total = L/18C Required El = 4067S kin"2 6 x 6 Actusl : 5,5* x 5.5E Design cer 199S NDS Dougiss Fir-Lsrch STRESSES icsi) Shear § 'd! ; V - i.42 k 4 0.46 ft Fv = 106 fv =70 &6 I Fbf = 1500 fb = 1087 72 I Live L3F = 1.25, Cf = LOO DEFLECTIONS (in) ;E = 1600 ksi) Tr,*S' . '• >', . • ! Tif, -J- •' . .-^O* «.i»J - i. .' v-Hv u.-w n Live = 0.06 = L /1255 1? * Dsad = 0.08 SWWTEN6TH =" 8.00 ff^ (SiipltSpan) IMIFORH LOADS (k/ft i ft) ud ri » - 12 0.246 0.176 0.00 8.00 REACTIONS (k) LOAD LEFT RIGHT Dead Live Total 0.984 0.704 1.668 0.964 0.704 1.888 BAiilHUH FORCES s3B V sax = 1.69 k 8 0.00 ft H fax = 3.38 kft t 4.00 ft DEFLECTIONS (E! = kinA2) LOAD Befl (in) I (ft) Total 38892/EI 4.00 Live 16220/EI 4.00 Dead 22671/E! iidspan Pos. Moient Lu - 8.00 ft Brace Spacing = 8.00 ft Sov. Deflection : Total = L/1SO Required El = 72922 kinA2 E x 6 ilsOB H;. t U £ i ' J i J X v'tJ Cssign p?r 1991 NDS Buuolfis Fir-Lerch ihss? § 'd' : V = 1.4S k i 0.46 ft Fv = 106 fv = 74 70 I fb1 = 150C fb = 1461 97 I i_;ve i.iir - I.iti. tt = l.OO DEFLECTIONS (in) (E = 1600 ksi) T;:?] = o,32 = L / 301 SO ? ' : ..^ . I'l <« _ i •• T.*V« «.-. «s.i¥E - y. i^ = L / ILL o« /. Dead = 0,19 SPAITLEN6TH = 10.00 ft (Siiple Span) UNIFORM LOADS (k/ft t ft) REACTIONS LOAD (k) LEFT RIGHT Dead Live Total HAXIKUt! FORCES 1.650 1,200 2.850 1.650 1,200 2.850 V tax =.,. 2.85 k § 0.00 ft « «ax = 7,12 kft S 5.00 ft DEFLECTIONS (El = fcinA2) LOAD Defi (in) X (ft) Total Live Dead 128250/E! 54000/E! 74->Cfl fCT : TA.IJV/ t.i 5.00 5.00 si c! span Pos. Hownt Lu = 10.00 ft Brace Spacing = 10.00 ft Sov. Deflsctisn : Total = L/180 Required El = 192375 kin"2 - s3B S s 10. tlsOB Actual : 5.5= x 9.5s Design per 19S1 NDS Douglas Fir-Larch STRESSES ;csi) Shear I 'd' : V = 2,40 k i 0.7S :; Fv = 106 fv = £9 65 I Ffa' = 1669 fb = 1033 62 S Live LDr = 1.Z5, if = i.OO, C-1 DEFlECTIONS (:ni (E = l&OO ks:) .(Siiple Span) .-.'.., -.„._,„ — i-~u.-.-, — ,- - unirumi ^.unUd \K/TI «-•!*/,-•-• .••;---- ----- --- . . . . . ....... ..% ... T., ._ — ... r -. ,... — .... ™ — ,.., :. -.'^s--:-.--*'--*. j*ii4-^-*-iA'- j".. -^- •- -;:;' -• »"-•• '*" -.. ^.^ :,.—^: : -.^-^; :;.. fl.318^. „! 0.240 . •-..-• 11 0.00 - -; X2 '" . ~ " '•'.. ' ''.'. "-.""."-."J..-"'.". \'.-.-.-,~' . ,7,i :!,,,.*.'-.. - 3.00- - .: - . •• :• . .::_., :&. , • •' ~ -,.^i '•";.: ::. : "- '•;;•. ' / '• . •- -" - -. : .:i REACTIONS ^ LOAD (k) Live Total KAJUIDB FORCES LEFT 0.477 0.360 0.837 mm :••-- •-. •-— •--••- -- --.••'-• 0.477 0.360 0.837 ¥ tax = 0.837 k I 0.00 ft « §ax = 0.628 kft § 1.50 ft BERECTIDNS (El = kin"2) LOAD Defl (in)K (ft) Total 1017/EI 1.50 Live 437/EI 1.50 Dead 580/EI cidspan Pos. Hoaent Lu = 3.00 ft Actual : 5.5' x 3.5' llsOB Design per 1931 NDS Douslss Fir-Uich STRESSES (psi) Shear 8 'd! : V = 0.67 k 6 0.23 ft Fv = 113 fv = 53 44 I ^' = 170£ fb = 671 39 I Live LDF - 1,25, Cf = 1,30, Cfu = 1.05 PE^LECTIOKS ;:P> (E = 1700 ksij Total = 0,w3 = L /US3 : „„ - A ft' - i f!-!f.C\ •- * * Z V , :• t — L 1 i~ ! --'V '/. "m (tif ft* R.-- tt *^fy f P fff- '.0 UNIFORH LOADS «d 'Ml (k/ft it ft) xi 0.028 0.032 0.00 6.00 REACTIONS (k) LOAD Dead Live Total LEFT 0.084 0.096 O.SSO RI6HT O.OB4 0.096 0.180 HAXIHU11 FORCES V sax = 0.180 k 6 0.00 ft K iax = 0.270 kft i 3.00 ft DEftECTIONS (El = kinA2) LOAD Defl (in?K (ft) Total 1750/EI 3.00 Live 933/EI 3.00 Dead 316/E1 oidspan s3B Actual : 1.5" x 5.51 tlsOB Design per !99J NDS Douglas Fir-Larch STRESSES (psi) Shear V = Fv = Fb' = »d' : 0.55 k I 0.46 ft 119 fv = 28 1869 fb = 42B Live LBF = 1.25, Cf = 1.30 Repetitive Use Heaber DEFLECTIONS (in) (E = 1700 ks Tota3 = 0,05 = I /1455 Live = 0,Q3 = L /272B Deed = 0,02 '^^^^yUfHSSBSS^ifO^'i^inii^'^^f^SSSSSBttii .— ^3£=__;l;' -_~-*-J_-— — - '" '" '•- slpiJtfjisObT "®" SPASLENsfH •-"" " (Siiple UNIFORM LOA ,SL,_ \.. •„_. ,,.:,^.«_. „,:,.. ^jSiv.^r,-,..-; i,-™^..,- . , .-.Svaiytiwrar -0,,^;.::-^;^ '^ Mfl^m* rjSpanfBffSr^S-S jHsfm* = 11.33 ft .... .--.-..•..-- . . - -. -. . -- -•;«;., .. -^ ,?.,«s.i, :<. ...-.- - . Span) DS (k/ft & ft) Hi XI - X2 0.010 0.000 0.00 11.33 POINT LOADS (k * ft) F'd PI X 0.336 0 0.224 0 0.112 0 REACTIONS LOAD .384 2.83 * &Db j*.bb .128 8.50 (k) LEFT RISHT Dead 0.443 0.337 Live 0.448 0.320 Total 0.8S7 0.656 mim FORCES V tax = ,1 tax -- DEFLECTIONS LOAB fJi| Total •^ Live Deed TOTAL Defl L / 180 L / 240 L / 360 LIVE DeH « L / 24ft | L / 350 j L / -30 0.837 k § 0.00 ft 2.873 kft 6 5.6s ft (El = kin"2) Defl (in) X <ft) 63442/EI 5.50 31861/EI 5.49 3155! /E! nidspan El 83993 1S1990 167985 El 5624! 34362 •:2483 riM&QpiabiiiBL^ifB., witfis, whiiMsMrf^z: 6ov. Deflection : Total = L/180 Required El = 83993 kin*2 s36 2 i 12 I2s06 fetual : i.5" s 11.25' Design per 1991 NDS Douglas Fir-Urch STRESSES (psi) Shesr t 'd1 : V = 0.8? k § 0.94 ft 'v = "119 fv = 7S 66 I Fb' = 1C94 fb = 1032 100 I Live LDF = 1.25, Cf * 1.00 SEFLECTIOHS (in) (E = 1600 ksi) Total = 0,22 = L / E,10 29 I Live = 0.11 = L /1215 20 Z Dead = 0.11 s3B 4 x B !2sOB Actual : 3.5' x 7.25' Design per 1991 NDS Sougias Fir-Larch STRESSES (PS!) Shear i 'd' ; V = 0.89 i: e 0,60 ft Fv = 119 fv = 53 44 i -b! = S422 fb = 1127 79 I L;ve LDF = 1,25, Cf = 1,30 REFLECTIONS '.in) (E = 1600 ksi) *ota! = 0.3S = L / 381 4? 5 -ivs = 0,lc = L / 753 32 * spa«ft'^^ ., . v..i,'i*'tm..•.;..,..«••.> -...,^a-..;--•-.•..;-.-£, ~. —^-^.afc-:...;.^^:—--a^—^;'-:.fig.,| V"a-flu/i"-:JM J.I-E— »iCv:-f-\r.-UJu-^ -i^ •<?£ f- •.--•g/ja^-- -^.^..,jy—.—"-^^aS^ssssiSE;ififf!3&^it^fi::r . : r^SSS-SHSC - ,- ._ •'•''• ' ' "' ' •'^''''-'''''''' ' V pn -^ Vftf,-// L' ^ fit If? at 1.5" «/ © © -^•S^jr^aag5&Kb:-^:. -..^-^/^^'•^i" ••^«BBrrt»-*rtrt ""I-^S*^-. :rt(2!*Sr-- $.0 fsfr o? -- I?.D fsf- < ufivs ^ 15.0 f>sf fjf- to IbfD ftf f ^ / ^/i 'A .1 r- !(.>.</ I - _/ -^ - -^ J- _- - - . - ._._ I .__ L-«=^= «•*:. ,-; • - ~, - ,. . „ . - if V f / tjtf I f SHT K '0 K 7 6-6 - y'*.M«AwV*JiWMW»'!3««*%^.^-;S^t:e^^Sei^i^8iS^SV^^\£^''^ -.'*.:•-,* --"- -- W*i^W*^»fe*«*«»S!W PRME* l< ' 'f IX !*ss* ^fc,^w* .*& r* ^ 7.5" & i<- fff* * Tt.W ifH'S3^'JKiiX3>^»,'. LEN8TH = 26.50 ft Footing UIBTH = 1.50 ft Footing DEPTH = 2.00 ft Cone Height - 0.15 kef Surcharge = 0.00 ksf Footing + Surth. = 0.45 klf ^Sfy^S^fisS*sa^':"-^!!mSm^^aS3x: UNIFORH 1 0.600 0.282 0,282 LOADS 2 0.600 0.282 0.282 POINT LOADS (k 1 15.00 -15.00 1.76 2.55 2.55 1.80 2 -15.00 15.00 1.76 2.55 2.55 1.80 RESULTANTS (k, CASE Pi- ll 6 «ax Q lin HAXIflUH CASE V lax H sax fi tin V six H eax H sin ! 26.94 7.37 1.62 0.00 FORCES ii 16.42 0.04 f.f. r i-'ii.ot r ; = 8 (k/ft 1 ft) nj 1.040 0.346 0.346 1 ft) 3 0.00 0.00 3.37 4.55 4.55 3.40 ft & ksf) 2 26.94 15.73 1.06 0.30 (k, kft) 2 13.09 Si -'OH . w i f- f\r--y.Oi M2 k 4.51 kft XI 0.00 18.00 23,75 I 0.25 7.75 0.25 7.75 18.00 18.50 3 38.02 10.90 1.46 0.45 3 5. SB 4.84 -16.46 - U 8.00 20.75 26.53 ,,,_ = -32.54 kft tfi : P (• QTM- 4 .1 I A I //** KsM-=Sfei-~~-^3:-^^ -?B,:-.-.~-,'iiBS*.j..(.,wW3i* ---t^^yie^^^^^^M^^g^i^^-tS^^^^^ -••*&• -, &*•>> ^ - - -/:,-'-^^.- k~ .^:,~u-^-^^..^>^^^^^.*^ if.*%,/f't !$•* K?)pff ,^ > f' J4 * /(f. 0 -f /^f.tf ^j/^ .It 7, /c /-3 tm '* U . v V n i A. JU 1 SYSTEMS •» 619 477 6891»&&•*<? &S*r.-f •V...***i J£#|I8 sssis" r^«rs 8 S * K iiiiliilisi-3!8sil!«is5»r»2?3»j: O -4 tO -t -> r» 9 -O »»• •— n nK- 3-3- § & ? ^at a. o.**t Qlain i^. IV b S ^.o 9 H i 3m i ?s t I * ?? o i t et ^ i !> I ti 5&-» £ t 1 f I*Is V J ? 5i u BttBHtttt s *1 8 ! tftftWftT i* J5=B»«»xo.oi»u.w ii jigi'PS ;iIS* ii IJ°"B«OXX • • I I + 5'iSls >B» O *1*5*xreff 5S ?=??!• «s*8 — S o"o t||H^j?" 4!Hiii! o 3•*fill >oIa ND -» US t?lelfl s l*°..iUUijfc^jr JSfi5||S| Hi'i1^•IK! if fn M CD if o> o < r> o tn2 S S i 2x to o m —•- M- 7T •• (B3 S3 <O 3 CT O >-• - se '01/28/97 18:39 TRUSUWL SYSTEMS '•» 613 477 6891 NO.420P0Q3 « I*** *rifilift! f ?Q 2O rf O 2 o o S 3 * S <O O ? S S 01P> O -J p o o o en 3-3-5' ru £?1 T O T I I T i T T U* I I tll 5 =288 > • • i iii* I|! Iff IR ?f > c_ g < n o wU> 2 » ? > n" at "j <p -i 01S|| aw s U= 3 C- o — cnu 03 n T 4-1-4 01 rura in 61.--28.--97 18:33 iRUSUWL SYSTEMS 619 477 6891 NO.420 P001 o n- o •=T I* a -Oa cor» •— n r> 5 01/28.'9? 18:39 TRl^UlflL SYSTB1S -» 619 4TT 6891 NO.420 P005m&fi=• «*3*on* ••—•»•ff»SS^S?93^. ?t »-»B&0«- w«§*?afrDUsiMraiiss ta a -H oj —t Q ^ C O rr o 3* D CU Of Hi 3" ^ *" 31 5 5«= § & ^ ° .. CA tt a. a. eto — a, s ui pi ai X b b_ b b "-•: "-o'-t) -a MI 1 2 y > r^ n if, tt T A —< O» O)(w at to n rn »* «•»U) —• w ?r ™ « «5 D Cr o ^ S ' * ^C »-»• ^^ ™3 Cl S -- « i •Si8 i s ?o i U < 1 ¥ t fr V 4 rU U)_ i (§>« V •**» u J 0-4-5 'TRUSWflL SYSTEMS •=• 619 477 6991 HO.420 P006a.«afwa»'^«»—fflgSf 8S3n~piifillls*- ""*« 03 K~Q.-~«ro3<0«*Otm xa ^frm O **&»***«&uS. w «--i 3-••"=? »t*c»U9 «l-^rtC* OiT-^tOfcrt::i*iE:«-*>= ^_ c>» • • «^2 3 *r *9««c ^'o5 30 S cn^»£ o P|f o*<•1-j — . i O *• T R <-a iisauji,. _o ^ § 51 5O T rr g n n» 01 O = - " _ o n -- fuA. O • o n o n r»- D PJen S3 0-3-3 S3. O. O) O O O b b T3 U C_ O < S 3 3^ ;. 2. 3 O 10 D n OJ 9T c- . CO •-J ffs!* "^ ** T f9 •>•> O-*-232 ,i T » « Cft Jt UfU • » " ff -tft-r i *st *•; ot a» o » • v T » -3 §1 § »gB ~a ^r-O. a w •?s,g "i a o|si 01X28.'??" "13:39 " TRUSUflL SYSTEMS * 619 477 6891 NO.420 PB87 SYSTEMS eis 477 6891 DBSBlfflB Serving San Diego County For More Than 80 Years TRUSS DIVISION 2740 Tidelands Avenue National City, CA 91950 619-263-6161 Fax 619-477-6891 1-800-DIXIELINE ilent Floor Taylor Made Golf Ranee Building INJ M Dixieline Lumber Englneerefl Wood Products Nttioatl City, CtlUarnit U9SO £740 Odeltad, Anaut. GENERAL NOTES AND INDEX iXntoo m 1 oH CD i 2 T)fla: s Dixieline Lumber Engineered Wood Products 11740 Tidelands Avenue. National City, California 91950 (eta) ees-eiei TAYLOR MADE RANGE BUILDING sh> ia IU b• a n a -H CD -H aC O rr O 2 1 rt- 3 tJ 5at oi o r» »— O O 3 t- 7 7 » O I— O O 3 O -J Toi a. ex c a n en ru A. i-* i-»ui p o A. o o o o •a -a oM w w to i1c_ a < n a en>n T ra a- > n y.1 01 T ID -I 01 WQJ x ca n m 1-1 M-O H>- w ?r •• CD 10 3 O 3to 3 or O ** «•• •< H» v. ^ en g (O^i £ 5™ Ifl g oo *** O ** 2SR! i i 0-4-5 C fv; 21/97 17:46 TRUSWfiL SYSTEMS •> 619 477 6891 NO.092 P002 Ijllf|g;|[tti; •*'Jrs| IIIi *!>leTl« *•* a*fth"fjtf^SfJiflM'mt8lflrr «li 1 » « f ^i OS H «B O -H -4» o o n o ? ?9 Cl *• p> o e> b b S O O • S VX~? ~8X? 1 "^° •* ifJS A O-J 9 ?' •» 17- :i£ 1' ?|S T Siip -181 ^P Hsj Hi ?I 9O85zw—.,2 w S? »• I C P» Vfi•>« IN 3 r•« *» f =i ~ 9 o S-S-SM S.ffl Wflina^r+rfQr+'to-'£riE&"n*c0i-*-i-*'—~fHiHt*"u^iSdaaci 01It tttf IO &•»•"•« 7*n O 3 « Q.M03T3M*i«ZiO?rra>o M>cifi_>a- 35 >-"2l-«>03 on—f»—c a a O.M-OM.sges^gg? S f> 1-4 < O • Vo.oiM-aili« trS 3 SM-IO Ua.c:3e>»ac£no-]3u alf»^r^O3 => • rrrt-O. Ii— a. * ? 51 Ql T rf Ql Ql 0> -I Drr o 2an" M- rr i—i r» O 3 *-•• 3- 3- 10 § ET ° °ot a. a.a. Qln o °b ru o n ru jw •-» K» Ol A. O -tk boob •a -a -aM u> u to O r-l 0 S S 5J "' 01 1 10 —I Ql (0J± x en n m •-• t*IO «- «- *• •• » «a3 O 3 IQ 3 & O H» ID Ol (O Ql ^. tk "ru •OB i r- S,5 , 3-3-5 1 ro•-j^ cj| 0 |e I t 7 A t 7 * t 7 ^ 1 7 «» I 4-1-4 ssst: i 3 90 £ 1 I ilii 5T3 OIDUIIDBIB 5 ffff v- M n IS. •n o 3 8 S" SS3 "> O**jr Is! ! = CO !.o. a> o 3-0 a 01 3T O €• rffrr 01 !-• B. O C w f c9ri*ui*< "j^Pi«<n• °3>,gs.rs.3» "as^'^s^sigolo -noi-g M-acn at «c^-»2 SoT"1 S S^ § 8 ' Sr»If'~o rrrrrnf a rr at 3-1 2Ia.ff5?SI2"! O. I*+ OL Oin (ACDro aiora HI Olr* >-" n a (—3 O HI-H a.atn to -4 Q rr O S3 -a 3 n § a " § i^01 ru u >-» UI UI CJI 4k o o o o is -o -a M U) 01 CO a >• a 1 1s 1 o CO 0 1 o T T S 2 1 i I t i Vfij V T V t 1 J IU =3 0-4-5 i! I B I t:!5t?!?77! saracs S! | jy Wi iiiiiif 5|gg 3^5 i ssps^sss:^ ""'"'"'"'S •PTV Sag. .«»._,« o a™33SZM-S"^n:«l»s2JTJ S" u « Ka 5 >->-» •'a|^«.|i|*S»|8, ssESS-tsis?!ttr»2^ 52fti»J?SS»^aas^^5a"£-»r 0 38885-an-S^-M•i u-nw'M illli*a Oln O)n ID aioro CD g 51 S 51 g"» rt- 9 -a 301 ai mr» >-• o n 2M- 3- 3- £o (— o aa o n ->ai a. a. c ai o ru uien en ui o o o o •a M M •aw UIru to if -}en en CO 01 C*3 O C/3 (B -) 01n m i-« cr o •— ia to 3 •» ' r S CU 1 O O I 2 1 3 r u ^^ 1©O) V CB C«I1 t 0-4-5 tr rr i mil *9 K• «• • IUOB a S* '8?s !!rro SSrn *8-H M™|S3 I CO M» i i"a CO . 21/97 17:47 TRUSUJfiL SYSTEMS -» 619 477 6891 NO.092 P003 §SIB«Iilfilrr'h.•Hij&friii PrM?|i[ 8f «• f- o r- := ain m -H<* o 3 T301 at rf H- O O 2 »* 7 7 Sai—oo.. 3 O T 101 a. a. j- -H Q. gO, P5n M> rf Ola-i o ru o o o ruen A* u» i-» O O A. 0000 n T3 -aM ca u u tnru Jf i?oi i m -H 01 wx M n m •-• t* k* l-<- 7T '• ID U3o •• =« 3 0- O l-» CD •• •< f* >s. T ru •m i r-•v i-» xID >J ! ?s OJLY 1 ** 0 I ?a ••j ru r S Ul Ul ©ofn1-1 £i 2 (II JbUfU • • • a 5 ^.0.3 III IP i 90 • 8 M 0-4-5 C -I • mi C '^21/97 17:47 TRUSWPL SYSTEMS •» 619 477 6891 NO.092 P004 03 '18/97 18:03 TRUSWflL SYSTEMS •> 619 477 6891 NO.976 P006 en 3 en ruru o II 0-4-S 9-1-9 2-8-13 VT7 • -•«»• •• -jvltfl*. « • III 38* Jb 5 o-"at»u-i»>-_m>-M*3Xo«nttC M n n <' 'S f S° ?S° IT * *•* ^ OP TD Qln 10 o r—3 o(/) aico -* o. CD Qlnat r*cr oo i ID ru U)pi tn b b •a M M 5 51 o o-} -)a. a. p> b ai A. b b •a T]en tn a ^ a t—i z o 9 ? SC/l omn> -H 01 01n rn i-1 M-x- •• co ID CJ O H> CD« *: i ^ro » QJ » r~ 3s ~. *^1 0-4-5 4-10-9u> i ruenienio o t f i *„ <XI0 i1 1 I I i SScTeTet' 'OB B 00 Ol W g z i T i i T i i 8= a^iaiijiAtaiu ~ §H § Ka*2.< Qaw3waQj |o :T??| "5 iS5$a §| SssSS •- § 5 o tii 01 ^ ^ w fv "•* as" i «'!?»SiS g>- <t 3 Clss S?f 5i!f§ 0-4-5 ^> 21/97 17:47 TRUSWflL SYSTEMS -» 619 477 6891 MO.092 P005 « g 51 S 51 s 2 sr a ' »-•• r* i—« O Oaw 3-3-ia o t~ a on o -i ~i01 a. a.-* a.mn i-»^^ O)o T O a n M ui o o A o o o o •a nco tn O >• a t—t CD f?0)m i-" t* •• CD IQ uj n ^ -3en •••i r- 0-4-5 s 5-0-5 •a e z••* n ott n«r c « " "'K s s» O O IS oc c • i OxCDC01Glcoo' TD O Om /T~"ffl S^ ss 8 m* r-S? =0?: P°5 r- Z</) m 5* <k *. o* X X 0 M X X o K! A x Kl z o u X o X X £ 3 -» Nl O KJ I*o MU X X K>0 X X ro o U O r °. K) O* X X s* X X K> O N> U fsj O O 1 O M U XX ow X X S" MC- o" toro rou X X X X 00 Ot K> U ». ot K»K» TSW «? S« *• Irt K1IA O O•n^n K» Xc* 15 * S O( M X X 01 K) O)( £j°.ws M X X X Ot *. M O4 PI §3r Mm T3 (A U -o *<! O*m V1 | SETBACK3J 4 S o9 o I •o CDm £ to N O O T > 33 —4 S 33 _T) *—• 3» -srf II? o o O•70 oo OOOJo X 2c:s: gXCDininino'rs o 30>smo >r~ m 3Jm° ~* ®i $O f\ fmm. p ID O O >> O33 r- O m m-< o 1 c Qw ^in 33mO 30Z X 03o mrn5 m ;o o om 1CBO Evaluation Service, Inc. 5360 WORKMAN MILL ROAD • WHITTIER, CALIFORNIA 90601 -2299 A subsidiary corporation of the International Conference of Building Officials EVALUATION REPORT Copyright © 1995 IC8O Evaluation Service, Inc. Report No. 1607 Reissued September1. 1995 Filing Category: FASTENERS—Steel Gusset Plates (066) MODELS TW-20. TW-18.5000 AND RN 5000 SERIES ANOTW-16 TRUSS PLATES TRUSWAL SYSTEMS CORPORATION 1101 NORTH GREAT SOUTHWEST PARKWAY ARLINGTON, TEXAS 76011 I. Subject: Models TW-20, TW-18, 5000 and RN 5000 Series and TW-16 Truss Plates. II. Description: A. General: TrusWal Connectors are formed from hot-dipped galvanized steel conforming to the requirements established for A446 Grade B in U.B.C. Standard 22-1 with a minimum yield strength of 37,000 pounds per square inch, except as noted. B. Models TW-20 and TW-18 Plates: The Models TW-20 and TW-18 (T Series) plates are formed from No. 20 gage steel and No. 18 gage, respec- tively, and contain eight teeth per square inch of plate surface area. The teeth are punched two per hole, .12 inch wide and .41 inch long with a .025-inch crimp along their back. The teeth are punched to a perpendicu- lar position with the original blank and rotated 45 degrees. Each tooth has a 60-degree rake on its extreme end. Tooth holes (per pair of teeth) are spaced .25 inch on center laterally and 1.0 inch longitudinally, uniformly over the entire surface area of the plate with adjacent longitudinal rows staggered .10 inch. C. 5000 and RN 5000 Series: The connector plates are punched from No. 20 or No. 18 gage galvanized sheet steel forming alternating pairs of slightly twisted back-to-back concave nail-type protections along the length of the plate. The projections are approximately */u Inch long, 3I& inch wide and 3/16 inch apart along the length of the plate. Each pair of nails is spaced approximately inch on center across the width of the plate and 3/4 inch on center along the length of the plate, resulting in three pairs of alternating nails per 0.6 square inch of plate. Plates are available in in- crements of .8 inch in width and 3/< inch in length. The RN 5000 Series is identical to the 5000 series except that every third row (with respect to the transverse dimension) of teeth and holes are omitted. 0. TW-16 Plate: The TW-16 truss plate is formed from No. 16 gage A446 Grade A galvanized steel conforming to U.B.C. Standard 22-1. Slots .54 inch in length are punched along the perpendicular axis of the plates with the metal displaced by the slot lanced and formed into two oppo- site-facing teeth protruding at right angles from the parent metal. Each tooth is diagonally cut commencing at two-thirds the height of the tooth, thereby forming a sharp point. Each tooth is .41 inch in length. The teeth are additionally shaped into a slightly twisted, inside (facing the slot cut- out area) concave form. The teeth are .15 inch wide. There are 4.8 teeth per square inch. Connector plates are made available in 1 -inch-wide incre- ments up to 12 inches and lengthwise progressions in multiples of V4 inch. E. One-hour Fire-resistive System: 1. The one-hour floor-ceiling or roof-ceiling fire-resistive system consists of 'Vaj-lnch-thick touch- sanded tongue-and-groove plywood installed perpendicular to the trusses spaced a maximum of 24 inches on center. End joints are to occur at the center of the top chords and are to be staggered 48 inches. The ply- wood is nailed at all supports with a minimum of 6d common nails spaced 6 inches on center. Two layers of V2-inch-thick Gold Bond Fire Shield Type X gypsum wallboard are applied to the bottom chord of the trusses. The base ply is applied perpendicular to the trusses and is attached with 1 Vj-inch Type S drywall screws or 1 7/8-inch 6d cooler, box or wallboard nails spaced a maximum of 24 inches on center. The face pry is applied perpendicular to the trusses with side and bun joints staggered at 24 in- ches on center from the joints of the base ply. The face ply is to be attached with 17/8-inch Type S drywall screws spaced 12 inches on center or 23/8-inch 8d copier, box or wallboard nails spaced 7 inches on center. In addition, 1 Vj-inch Type G drywall screws spaced 12 inches maximum on center are installed 3 inches back from face layer butt joints. Face layer joints and screw or railheads are covered with a joint compound system. 2. The one-hour floor-ceiling or roof-ceiling fire-resistive system con- sists of fy-inch-thick tongue-and-groove plywood with Exterior glue in- stalled perpendicular to tight wood trusses of minimum 2 by 4 construc- tion at 24 inches on center. The chord and web members of the wood trusses are connected with Model 20 (T Series) truss plates formed from No. 20 gage steel and having teeth of 0.41-inch length. The lower chord of the trusses is protected with 5/16-inch-thick U-shaped regular gypsum wallboard strips with the vertical portion extending 1 V2 inches above the top of the chord. Attachment is with No. 14 gage steel staples with7/i e-inch crown and fy-inch legs, applied at 8 inches on center along both legs and the bottom of the U-shaped gypsum wallboard. The suspended ceiling system is a Series 3000, Type XO Roblin Rigidlock ceiling grid sys- tem with inch Gold Bond Fire Shield Solitude ceiling panels on a 2-foot by 4-foot grid. The grid is suspended a minimum of 10 inches below the low- er truss chord with No. 12 gage hangers with three turns at each end. Rat wood blocks 1 V2 inches deep are installed on top of the lower chord at hanger wires to protect the vertical legs of the s/t e-inch gypsum wallboard from damage. The ceiling may contain a 12-inch round air diffuser open- ing at each 100 square feet of ceiling that is protected by a fire damper with No. 14 gage steel blades and Vis-inch asbestos sheet on each face. Two 2-foot by 4-foot recessed light fixtures listed for use in fire-resistive as- semblies and protected above with the 5/a-inch-thick mineral acoustical grid panels may also be installed in each 100 square feet of ceiling. See Figure 1. 3. The assembly includes 2-inch by 4-inch (or 4-inch by 2-inch) paral- lel chord, minimum 10 3/4 inches deep. Truswall SpaceJoist® wood trusses using Truswal metal connector plates with minimum 5/,6-inch- long teeth. When SpaceJoist trusses are used, the continuous portion of the metal web must be at the bottom (chord) of the truss and the break in the web must be at the top (chord). As part of the truss fabrication a factory-installed TrusGard™ (No. 30 gage steel channel) is applied to the bottom chord of the truss. The TrusGard is attached to the bottom chord by metal connector plates pressed through the sides of the steel channel. Splices in the TrusGard must occur at metal connector plate locations and must be lapped a minimum of 6 inches. Splices may occur in the bottom Evaluation reports of 1C BO Evaluation Service. Inc., are issued solely to provide information to Class A members oflCBO. utilizing the code upon which the report is based. Evaluation reports are not to be construed as representing aesthetics or any other attributes not specifically addressed nor as an endorsement or recommen- dation for use of the subject report. This report is based upon independent tests or other technical data submitted by the applicant. The ICSO Evaluation Service. Inc.. technical staff has reviewed the test results and/or other data, but dots not possess test facilities to make an independent verification. There is no warranty by 1C BO Evaluation Service, Inc., express or implied, as to any "Finding" or other matter in the report or as to any product covered by the report. This disclaimer includes, but is not limited to, merchantability. Page 1 of 3 Page 2 of 3 Report No. 1607 chord, provided they are outside the middle third of the truss span. Bottom wood chord splices must be separated by at least two panel points from the steel channel splices. Trusses spaced a maximum of 24 Inches on center. Minimum 23/32-inch tongue-and-groove plywood with exterior glue is installed with the long dimension perpendicular to trusses and end joints staggered at least 4 feet and located on truss chords. The plywood is at- tached to all framing members with minimum 6d ring-shank nails with a spacing complying with Table 23-l-Q of the code. A bead of AFG-01 adhe- sive is applied to the top chord of trusses and in plywood grooves prior to placement. The ceiling consists of one layer of 5/8-inch United States Gypsum Type C gypsum wallboard installed with the long dimension parallel to the span of the trusses. The wallboard is attached directly to the bottom chord of trusses with 15/j-inch-long. Type S. buglehead self-tapping wallboard screws spaced 8 inches on center along all panel edges and Interior sup- ports. All joints must be blocked with minimum 3 '^-inch-wide steel channels or wood blocking. Wallboard joints must be taped and joints and screw heads covered with joint compound. Fertile or vermlculite aggregate or gypsum concrete may be placed on the flooring without affecting the fire-resistive rating. The minimum thick- ness of the concrete should be 3/< inch, and a thin plastic or paper vapor retarder would be placed on the plywood prior to placing the concrete. Forta-Fill (Report No. 4147) and Gyp-Crete (Report No. 3433) may be placed on the flooring without affecting the fire-resistive rating, provided the topping is installed in accordance with their respective evaluation re- ports. Single-layer minimum 23/32-lnch tongue-and-groove structural wood base panel floor sheathing underlayments having at least a floor span rat- ing indicating the panels will span 24 inches may be used as a substitute for !he 23/32-inch plywood specified above. F. Identification: The Models TW-20. TW-18 and TW-16 plates are iden- tified by dimensional characteristics and by a stamping of the .letter "T" superimposed on the letter "W." The No. 20 gage 5000 Series plates are stamped R-5. The No. 18 gage 5000 Series is stamped with R-5G, and the No. 18 gage RN 5000 Series is stamped with RN-5G. III. Evidinea Submitted: Results of load tests, truss details and compu- tations are submitted showing compliance with U.B.C. Standard 22-1. Findings IV. Findings: That the connectors described In Ibis report are alter- nate types of connectors to those specified IB the 1994 UfHona Build- ing Codf*. subject to the following conditions: 1. The allowable loads per square Inch of plate area do not exceed the values Indicated In Table 1. 2. Stresses In the net section of the platea shall not be In excess of values permitted by Chapter 22 of the code. The maximum ten- sile load Is determined by multiplying the efficiency ratio speci- fied In Table 1 times the gross area ol the plate times the steel design stress. 3. The plates shall be installed In pairs on opposite laces ot the members connected and shall not be Installed In locations when knots occur In the connected members. 4. Where a one-hour llra-raslstlve rating Is required, see Evalua- tion Reports Nos. 1352 and 1632, or Item I under Part II, Descrip- tion. . 5. These values are recommended only when plans, trass designs and calculations are submitted and accepted by the building of- ficial showing compliance to the Uniform Building Code and specifying that fabrication Inspection will be provided In accor- dance with Sections 2311.6 and 2343.8 of the code. 6. The allowable loads may be increased lor duration of load in ac- cordance with Section 2304.3.4. 7. This report establishes design values only and specific trusses must be Individually designed In accordance win recognized engineering principles. This report Is subject to re-examination In two years. TABLE 1—ALLOWABLE LOADS IN POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH OF PLATE CONTACT AREA1 TYPE OF PLATE TW-20 and TW- 18 5000 Series RN5000 TW-16 HEM-FIR Direction of Low! with RMD*CI to KM Length of Pl«i» 0-W4S' 167 177 118 167 44*10*0* 139 133 89 116 SOUTHERN PING Mractfon ol Load Witt) RoMDtCt tO IIM UngtttotftM* 0*10 41* 183 211 140 178 • 44MOW 151 143 95 132 DOUGLAS Rfl Direction al Load wftn Rccptct to tfM UngotrfPtou «*to 41* 179 203 135 181 44* lo «0* 146 139 93 134 SPRUCE-PINE-FIR Direction of LlMd wtth fl**p*ct le UM UflfltttOfPIMl 0*to4S* 140 152 101 150 44'lofO* 122 129 86 99 EFFICIENCY RATIO•(PERCENT* DtocltonolUad Wfttt ReMDalCt lO ttivt UngmolPIM 0* 51 57* 71 62 »o* 47 36 36 26 1 Loads shown are for hero-fir minimum specific gravity 0.43. southern pine minimum specific gravity 0.55, Douglas fir minimum specific gravity 0.50, and spruce-pine- fir minimum specific gravity 0.42, Efficiency ratio is limited to plates with widths of 2.4 inches and larger. Page 3 of 3 Report No. 1607 H" FIRE SHIELD SOLITUDE PANELS 6d NAILS 2 AT EACH SIDE PANEL 4 AT TOP PANEL PANEL SIZES ENDS-4*' x TO' x 23% SIDES-W X 7W x 47% FIGURF 1 BRACING WOOD TRUSSES: COMMENTARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS © TRUSS PLATE INSTITUTE, INC., isre INTRODUCTION In recognition ol the inherent safety of • properly braced roof system, tht apparent lack ol knowledge of how, when, and whtrt to mtt*ll adequate bracing, and in the interest of public safety, tht Truss Plate Institute. Inc., in consultation with its Component Menufecturarj Council membership, has undertaken the preparation of these recom- mendations. Substantial concentrated study and deliberative review by the TPI Technical Advisory Committee (comprising a membership of the chief structural engineers of member plate manufacturing companies, repre- sentatives of the academic community, and independent consulting engineers) have been devoted to this effort. Consultation with the TPI Component Manufacturers Council has resulted fn bringing practical field handling and erection problems into e sharper focus. Inclusion of the tentative recommendations for on-*ite handling and erection procedures is one direct result of the consultations. It is planned to study further and enlarge upon these tentative recommendations. While the recommendations for bracing contained herein are technically sound, it is not intended that they be considered the only method for bracing a roof system. Neither should these recommenda- tions be interpreted as superior to or a standard that would necessarily be preferred in lieu of an architect's or engineer's design for bracing for a particular roof system. These recommendations for bracing wood trusses originate from the collective experience of leading technical personnel in the wood truss industry, but must, due to the nature of responsibilities involved, be presented only as a guidt for the use of a qualified building designer, builder, or trection contractor. Thus, the Truss Plate Institute expressly disclaims any responsibility for demages arising from the use, applica- tion, or reliance on the recommendations and information contained herein by building designers or by erection contractors. The design of wood trusses in accordance with TPI design criteria However carefully wood trusses are designed end fabricated, all this is at stake in the final erection and bracing of a roof or floor system. It is at this critical stage of construction that many of the really significant design assumptions are either fulfilled or ignored. If ignored, the consequences may result in a collapse of the structure, which at best is a substantial loss of time and materials, and which at worst could result in a toss of life. The Truss Plate Institute "Design Specification! for Light Metal Plate Connected Wood Trusses" are recommended for the design of individual wood trusaes as structural components only. Lateral bracing, as may be required by design to reduce buckling length of individual truss members. Is a part of the wood truss design end is the only brecing that will be specified on the truss design drawings. Lateral bracing Is to be supplied In the slie specified and installed et the location specified on the truss design drawings by the builder or erection contractor. The building designer or inspector must ascertain that the specified lateral bracing is properly installed and that this bracing is sufficiently anchored or restrained by diagonal bracing to Special design requirements, such as wind bracing, portal bracing, seismic bracing, diaphragms, shaar walls, or other load transfer elements and their connections to the wood trusses must be considered separately by the building designer. He shall determine sire, location, and method of connections for diagonal bracing as needed to resist these forces. Diagonal or cross bracing is recommended in the plane formed by the top chords, in the plane formed by the bottom chords and perpendicular to the truss web members, as needed for the overall stability of the entire structure. Truss bracing and connection details should be shown on the building designer's framing plan as part of the design drawings. Bracing materials are not usually furnished as part of the wood truss package, and should be provided by the builder or erection contractor. The builder or erection contractor is responsible for proper wood truss handling and for proper temporary bracing. He must assure that the wood trusses are not structurally damaged during araction and that they are maintained in alignment before, during, and after installation. Temporary or erection bracing may follow, but not necessarily be limited to. the building designer's framing plan. It is recommended that erection bracing be applied as each truss is placed in position. 2 1. Truss members are initially straight, uniform in cross section, and uniform in design properties. 2. Trusses are plane structural components, installed vertically, braced to prevent lateral movement, and parallel to each other et the design spacing. 3. Truss members are pinned at joints for determination of axial forces only. 4. There is continuity of chord members at joints for determina- tion of moment stresses. 5. Compression members are laterally restrained at specific loca- tions or intervals. 0. Superimposed dead or live loads act vertically, wind loads are applied normal to the plane of the top chord, and concentrated loads are applied at a point. 7. In addition to the lateral bracing specified by the truss designer, the building designer will specify sufficient bracing at right angles to the plane of the truss to hold every truss member in the position assumed for it in design. 8. The building designer (not the truss designer) will specify sufficient bracing and connections to withstand lateral loading of the antira structure. The theory of bracing is to apply sufficient support at right angles to the plane of the truss to hold every truss member in the position assumed for it in design. This theory must be applied at three stages. STAGE ONE: During Building Design and Truss Design individual truss members are checked for buckling, and lateral bracing is specified as required for each trust member. The building denoner mutt specify how this lateral bracing is to be anchored or restrained to prevent lateral movement should all truss members, so braced, tend to buckle together as shown in Figure 1 (b). This may be accomplished by: 1. Anchorage to solid end walls (Figure Net-). 2. Diagonal bracing in the plane of web members (Figure Kdlr. 3. Other means as determined by the building designer. Figure 1<a> Figure 1(b) It is recommended that diagonal bracing (minimum 2-inch thick nominal lumber) be installed at approximately a 45 degree angle to the lateral brace. Diagonal bracing should be attached to the opposite side of the same member requiring lateral bracing. This bracing may be continuous or intermittent at the building designer's option; however, it is recommended that intermittent spacing not exceed 20 feet, or twice the horizontal run of the diagonal bracing. Figure 1(e) Figure Kdl into Mli4 .nd ntfrt p/tvtnlin, STAGE TWO: During Truss Erection the builder or erection contractor must take adequate precautions to assure that the wood^ trusses are not structurally damaged. Proper rigging, including the use of spreader bars and multiple pick-up points, where required, is necessary to prevent damage during handling; tentative recommendations are presented in the Appendix hereto. It is most important to brace the first truss at the end of the building securely. All other trusses are tied to the first truss, thus the Figure 2(al Figure 2lb) bracing system depends to a great extent on how well the first truss is braced. One satisfactory method is for the first truss top chord to be braced to a stake driven into the ground and securely anchored. The (round brace itself should be supported as shown in Figure 2 or it is apt to buckle. Additional ground braces, in the opposite direction, inside the building are also recommended. The ground braces should be located directly in line with all rows of top chord continuous literal bracing. Otherwise, the top chord of the first truss cm bend sideweys and allow tht trusses to shift. This shift, however slight, puts a tremendous strain on all connections of the bracing system, i.e., the weight of tht trusses would then be added to any wind force or construction load such as bundles of plywood or roof shingles tending to tip the trusses over. All nailing of bracing should be done so that if the trusses should tend to buckle or tip, the nails will be touted leterelly, not in withdrawel. It is not recommended to nail scabs «o the end of the building to bract the first truss. These scabs on break off or pull out, thus allowing a tout collapse. As trusses era set in place, the builder or erection contractor must apply sufficient temporary bracing to hold the trusses plumb, in alignment and in a safe condition until tht permanent bracing, decking, and/or sheathing can be Installed. Temporary bracing should be not less thin 2x4 dimension lumber and should be as long as practical for handling. The use of short spacer pieces of (umber between adjacent trusses, is nor rtcommfndtd, unless used temporarily In preparation for immtdiete installetion of longer continuous bracing (8-fttt minimum length). Temporary bracing lumber should be nailed with two double heeded 16d mils it every intersection with the braced member. Prt-nstmbly of groups of trusses, on tht ground, kite structurally braced units which art then lifted into place as tssembliei is en acceptable alternate to tht one-at-e-tlme method. i trusses should be maintained is bracing Is rOoM practice of removing brecing to adjust Exact spacing bttwtti Installed to evok) the h.. _ spacing « sheathing is applied. This act of "adjusti"! spacing" can cause trusses to topple it I key connection Is removed at the wrong time. Truss bracing must be applied to three planes of reference In tht roof system to Insure stability: I. Top chord (sheathing) plane. ? web member plane or vertical plane perpendicular to trusses, and 3. bottom chon) (ceiling) plane. t. Top Chord Plane. Most Important to the builder or erection contractor is bracing in the plane of the top chord Truss top chords are susceptible to lateral buckling before they ere bread or sheethtd. It is recommended that continuous lateral bracing be installed within 6 inches of the ridge line or center line and at approximately 8 feet to 10 feet intervels between the ridge line of sloped trusaes or center line of flat trusses and the eaves. For double member trusses this spacing between laterals may be increased to 12 feet to 14 feet. Diagonals, located between the lateral bracing and set at approximetely 45 degree angles, form the triengles required for stebility in the plane of the top chord. NOTE : Long spans or heavy loads may require closer spacing between leteral bracing and closer intervals between diagonals. Figure 3<e) illustrates temporary bracing in the pl»«> of the top chord for gable trusses. If possible, the continuous leterel bracing for the top chord should be placed on the underside of the top chord so that it will not have to be removed as the plywood decking is applied. The trusses ere then held securely even during the decking process. It is equally important for the builder or erection contractor to install brecing in the plane of the top chord for tlet roof or floor trusses. The use of e similer bracing pattern is recommended for all flat trusses. Particular attention is directed to bracing at the end of flat trusses as shown in Figure 3(b). 2, Web Member Plant. It is eho necessary to install temporery brecing in the plane of the web members. This bracing is usually v unfit mtmbti Ifuu 11 t/J inch ihichntiil • for douMt mtmew IruH 13 inch Ihekntul - LMIttd* within e inchM el f 4e* lint Figure 3lb) Figure 3(t| Installed at the seme location! specified on the architectural plan for permanent brecing, and may become part of tht ptlinentnt bracing. It is recommended that diagonal bracing be added at etch web member requiring continuous lateral bracing. If none is specified, it is recommended that it be placed at no greater thin 18 feet intervals •long the truss length for roof trusses and S feet intervals for floor trusses. It is not generally necessary for diagonal bracing to run continu- ously lor the full length of the building but it is recommended that the spicing between sets of diagonal bracing not exceed 20 feet, or twice the horitontal run of the diagonal bracing. Rows of 2«6 strong-becki may also be used to brae* floor tmeses where diagonal bracing is impractical. Figure 4la) illustrates dUgonil bracing In the plane of the web members: Figure 4lb) illustrates the lateral movement that may occur if lateral bracing Is used without diagonal bracing. 3. Bottom Chord Plant. In order to hold proper spacing on the bottom chord, temporary brecing is recommended in the plene of the bottom chord. Continuous literal bracing at no greater than B feet to 10 feet on centers along the truss length is recommended full length of the building, nailed to the top of the bottom chord. Diagonal brecing Figur* 4fa) Figure 4(b) between laterals placed at approximately 45 degrees ii recommended tor stability of the bottom chord. Diagonal bracing in the plane of the bottom chord is generelly not required throughout the length of the building, but it is recommended that it be located at least at each end of the building. In most cases, temporary bracing in the plane of the bottom chord is installed at the location! specified on the architectural plan for permanent bracing, and is. therefore, left in place as permanent bracing. Figure 5 illustrates bracing in the plane of the bottom chord. Full bundles of pfywood should not be placed on trusses. This construction load should be limited to 8 sheets of plywood on any pair of trusses and should be located adjacent to the supports. No excess concentration of any construction materials (such as gravel or shingles) Figures should be placed on the trusses in any one area; they should be spread out evenly over a large area so as to avoid overloading any one truss. All mechanical equipment should be located only on the trusses specifically designed to wpport it. It should not be dropped or even set temporarily in any other area unless the trusses ere adequately shored. All floor trusses should be adequately shored if pallets of masonry materials are to be stored temporarily until the next higher walls are finished. STAGE THREE: Permanent Bracing is designed and ipecilied by the architect or engineer lor the structural safety of the building. It is the responsibility of the building designer to indicate si«. location, and attachments lor all permanent bracing as required by design analysis. In general, it is desirable to design and locate all bracing so that it may work together with other structural parts of the building (such as shear walls, portal frames, bearing walls, columns, beams, etc.) to achieve total structural integrity. 11 (^w 1 1 1 1 1 E l 777)1 1 11 1 \^ 1 11 11 14 i / 7 SS/A \ 1 // / / 1 1Lj. I . / • — t * » I Top clank cm buckli <t**pi|« frequent p Figure 6(e) Permanent bracing muit provide sufficient support *t right •ngtat to tht plarw of the truss to hold every truss member in the petition assumed for it in design. In addition, permanent bracing must be designed to resist lateral forces imposed on the completed building by wind or seismic forces. Permanent bracing m»v be wbdtvVded into three logical compo- nents: 1. Top Chord Plane. This bracing is designed to resist lateral movement of the lop chord. If plywood floor or roof sheathing is properly applied with staggered joints end adequate nailing, a continu- ous diaphragm action is developed and additional bracing in the- plane is generally not required. Some metal roofing materials may be depended upon to act as • diaphragm when properly lipped and nailed. Selection and use of these materials is at the discretion of the building designer. 12 Figure cMb) If purlins are used, speced not to exceed the buckling length of the top chord, and adequately attached to the top chord, it is recom- mended that diagonal bracing be applied tc the underside of the top chord to prevent leteral shifting of the purlins. Figure 6(a) i Hurt rates the necessity for applying diagonal bracing in the plane ol the top chord despite the use of closely spaced purlins. It is recommended that this diagonal bracing, as shown in Figure 64b), be installed on both sides of the ridge line in all end bays. If the building exceeds 60 feet in length, this bracing should be repeated at intervals no greater than 20 feet. 2. Web Member Plane. The purpose of this bracing is to hold the trusses in a vertical position and to maintain the design spacing. In addition, this lateral bracing may be required to shorten the buckling length of a web member. As described earlier in the discussion of building design and truss design (STAGE ONE), diagonal bracing or end anchorage is essential to stabitiie the lateral bracing. Diagonal bracing in the plane ol the web members is also used to distribute unequal loading to adjacent trusses and to spread lateral forces to diaphragms or shear watls. Spacing of rows of diagonal bracing in the plane of the webs is a matter of judgment to be mede by the building designer, and will depend upon the truss span, truss configura- tion, type of building, and the loading. Generally, for roof trusses, the spacing ranges from 12 feet to 16 feet depending upon how it reletes to the bracing in the plane of the top chord. For floor trusses the cross bracing should be approximately 8 feet on centers. Lateral 2x6 strong-backs may also be used for some floor systems. Figure 1 and Figure 4 illustrate bracing in the plane of the webs. 3. Bottom Chord Plane. This bracing is required to maintain the truss design spacing and to provide lateral support to the bottom chord to resist buckling forces in the event of reverse! of stress due to wind uplift or unequal roof or floor loadings. For multiple bearing trusses or cantilever conditions, portions of the bottom chord become compression members and should be braced laterally to resist buckling in the same manner as the top chord of simple span trusses. Bracing in the plane of the bottom chord is also designed to transfer lateril forces due to wind or seismic loads into tide watls. shear walls or other resisting structural elements. Diagonals between continuous latent bracing serve to stabilize the bottom chord. It is recommended that one complete bay of diagonal bracing be installed at each end of any building, and additional such bays be located at specified intervals not to exceed 20 feet. Figure 5 illustrates the use of bracing in the plane of the bottom chord. These recommendations for bracing wood trusses have been derived from the collective experience of leading technical personnel in the wood truss industry but must, due to the nature of responsibilities involved, be presented only as • gukft for the use of a qualified building designer, builder, or erection contractor. APPENDIX It is intended that this appendix contain only tentative recom mendations that may be used as i guide for on site handling and erection until a more complete statement can be prepared. There may be some instances in which additional precautions will be necessary. UNLOADING, If possible, trusses shall be unloaded on relatively smooth ground. They shall not be unloaded on rough terrain that would cause undue lateral strain that might result in distortion of truss joints. Dumping of trusses is an acceptable practice provided that the trusses are not damaged or excessively stressed in the act of dumping, The builder shall provide protection from damage that may be caused by on site construction activity. STORAGE. Care shall be taken so as not to allow excessive bending of trusses or to allow tipping or toppling while the trusses are banded or when the banding is removed. If trusses fabricated with lire retardam treated wood must be stored prior to erection, they should be stored in a vertical position to prevent water containing chemicals leached from the wood from standing on the plates. A further precaution may be taken by providing a cover for the trusses that wilt prevent moisture from coming in direct contact with the trusses and which can be ventilated to prevent condensation. ERECTING TRUSSES. The truss erector or builder shall take the necessary precautions to insure that handling end erection procedures do not reduce the load-carrying capacity of the truss. Trusses shall be installed plumb, at specified spacing and in-plane (i.e., trusses wilt be property aligned). Figure AQ) A suggested procedure for lifting trusses is HHiftrated in Figure A(l) if the truss span does not exceed 30 feet. FigurtAtt) far truss spins bttWMn 30 tot tnd SO fttt < tuqgnud lifting procedure Is shown in Figun AI2). It should tot noted thtt thi linn from tht ends of thi sprndtr b*r "tot-in." If thnt Hnti ihould "tot-out," thty will ttnd to Mutt buckling of tht truss. For lifting trutm with spans in extra of 60 f«tt. it il rtcom thtt a strong-tuck bt imd n illuttrittd in Figurt AI3). Thf strong-tuck ihould bt ituchtd to tht top chord tnd wtb members at intervals of approximately 10 Ittt. Further, the strong-backs should be >t or tbovt tht mid-htight of thi truss so is to prtvtnt overturning. Tht slrong-b*ck un bt of Iny mtteritl with sufficient strength to sitely or", tht wtight of tht truss ind sufficient rigidity to adequately resist binding of the truss. Geotechnics Incorporated April 17, 1997 Principals: Anthony F. Belfast Michael P. Imbriglio W. Lee Vanderhurst Hamann Construction 475 West Bradley Avenue El Cajon, California 92020 Attention:Mr. Jeff Hamann Project No.0273-005-01 Document No. 7-0234 SUBJECT: REVIEW OF RANGE BUILDING FOUNDATION PLANS Taylor Made Golf Facility References: (1) Smith Consulting Architects, 1997, Foundation Plan, Taylor Made Golf Company Inc., Range Building, Carlsbad Research Center, Carlsbad, California: 7 Sheets, Bid Set dated March 31, Job No 96170. (2) Geotechnics Incorporated, 1996, Geotechnical Investigation, Taylor Made Golf Facility, Carlsbad, California: Project No. 0273-005-00, dated November 8. (3) Geotechnics Incorporated, 1997, Review of Grading Plans, .Taylor Made Golf Facility, Lots 76 through 81, Carlsbad Tract No. 85-24, Unit No. 5: Project No. 0273-005-00, dated January 8. Dear Mr. Hamann: As requested by Mr. Ned Haskell of Smith Consulting Architects, we have reviewed the geotechnical aspects of the referenced foundation plans (Reference 1). In our opinion, the plans adequately incorporate the recommendations of referenced geotechnical report (Reference 2). We appreciate this opportunity to provide professional services. Please do not hesitate to contact us if there are any questions. GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED Anthony F. Belfast, P.E. 40333 Principal Distribution: (2) Addressee (1) Mr. Ned Haskell, Smith Consulting Architects 9951 Business Park Ave., Ste. B • San Diego California • 92131 Phone (619) 536-1000 • Fax (619) 536-8311 Geotechnics Incorporated February 26,1997 Principals: Anthony F. Belfast Michael P. Imbriglio W. Lee Vanderhurst Hamann Construction 475 West Bradley Avenue El Cajon, California 92020 Attention: SUBJECT: References: Mr. Jeff Hamann Project No.0273-005-01 Document No. 7-0132 REVIEW OF GRADING PLANS AND FOUNDATION PLANS Taylor Made Golf Facility (1) Smith Consulting Architects, 1997, Foundation Plan, Taylor Made Golf Company Inc., Shell Building, Carlsbad Research Center, Carlsbad, California: 15 Sheets, Stamped February 25, no Job No. (2) Geotechnics Incorporated, 1996, Geotechnical Investigation, Taylor Made Golf Facility, Carlsbad, California: Project No. 0273-005-00, dated November 8. (3) Geotechnics Incorporated, 1997, Review of Grading Plans, Taylor Made Golf Facility, Lots 76 through 81, Carlsbad Tract No. 85-24, Unit No. 5: Project No. 0273- 005-00, dated January 8. Dear Mr. Hamann: As requested by Mr. Ralph Martin of Smith Consulting Architects, we have reviewed the geotechnical aspects of the referenced foundation plans (Reference 1). In our opinion, the plans adequately incorporate the recommendations of referenced geotechnical report (Reference 2). As previously indicated (Reference 3), it is also our opinion that the grading plans adequately incorporate the recommendations of referenced geotechnical report. We appreciate this opportunity to provide professional services. Please do not hesitate to contact us if there are any questions. GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED Anthony F. Belfast, P.E. 40333 Principal Distribution: (2) Addressee (1) Mr. Ralph Martin, Smith Consulting Architects 9951 Business Park Ave., Ste. B • San Diego California Phone (619) 536-1000 • Fax (619) 536-8311 92131 1 i S i— >i i i i i i i f f i i ii **• i i i... I ^^^Geo technics ^^•^^ Incorporated Principals: Anthony F. Belfast Michael P. Imbriglio W. Lee Vanderhurst GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TAYLOR MADE GOLF FACILITY CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA prepared for: Hamann Construction 475 West Bradley Avenue El Cajon, California 92020 by GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED Project No. 0273-005-00 Document No. 6-0710 Novembers, 1996 Phone (619) 536-1000 • Fax (619) 536-8311 (jy\i6i 1 .t S 1 ••1 i i i i i i i•i i i i i i i I •^^Geo technics ••^^ Incorporated GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TAYLOR MADE GOLF FACILITY CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA prepared for: Hamann Construction 475 West Bradley Avenue El Cajon, California 92020 by GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED Project No. 0273-005-00 Document No. 6-0710 Novembers, 1996 Phone (619) 536-1000 • Fax (619) 536-8311 Principals: Anthony P. Belfast Michael P. Imbriglio W. Lee Vanderhurst 1 i 1" i 1" I~ | ._ i I i • • 1 1 i ^^^^^5 e o t e c h n i c s Novembers, 1996 Hamann Construction 475 West Bradley Avenue El Cajon, California 92020 Attention: Mr. Jeff Hamann SUBJECT: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Taylor Made Golf Facility Carlsbad, California Dear Mr. Hamann: Principals: Anthony F. Belfast Michael P. Imbriglio W. Lee Vanderhurst Project No. 0273-005-00 Document No. 6-0710 In accordance with your request, we have completed a geotechnical investigation for the proposed commercial development in the Carlsbad Research Center that will include a facility for Taylor Made Golf. In general summary, the proposed improvements are feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. Our conclusions and recommendations earthwork construction, design of foundations, slabs, retaining walls, presented in the attached report. We appreciate this opportunity to provide professional services. If comments regarding this report or the services provided, please do Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED C^^-S- ^ Anthony F. Belfast, P.E. Principal DR/WLV/AFB Distribution:(5) Addressee Phone (619) 536-1000 • Fax (619) 536-8311 regarding site conditions, and pavement sections are you have any questions or not hesitate to contact us. i i i i i i i i i 1 f i i i i i i i i GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TAYLOR MADE GOLF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES 1 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 2 4.0 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS 2 5.0 GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3 5.1 Point Loma Formation 3 5.2 Topsoil/Colluvium 4 5.3 Fill 4 6.0 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 5 6.1 Seismicity 5 6.2 Ground Rupture 6 6.3 Liquefaction 6 6.4 Landslides and Lateral Spreads 7 6.5 Tsunamis, Seiches, Earthquake Induced Flooding 7 7.0 CONCLUSIONS 8 8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 10 8.1 Plan Review 10 8.2 Excavation and Grading Observation 10 8.3 Site Preparation 10 8.3.1 General 11 8.3.2 Improvement Areas 11 8.3.3 Building Areas 11 8.3.4 Temporary Excavations 12 8.4 Fill Compaction 12 8.5 Slopes 13 8.6 Surface Drainage 14 8.7 Foundation Recommendations 14 8.7.1 Shallow Foundations 15 8.7.2 Deep Foundations (Drilled Piers) 15 8.7.3 Lateral Loads 16 8.7.4 Settlement 16 8.7.5 Slope Setback 16 Ceotechnics Incorporated _ 1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TAYLOR MADE GOLF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 8.8 On-Grade Slabs ............................................. 17 8.8.1 Moisture Protection for Slabs ............................. 17 8.8.2 Exterior Slabs ........................................ 18 8.10 Reactive Soils ............................................. 18 8.11 Earth-Retaining Structures .................................... 18 • 8.12 Preliminary Pavement Section .................................. 19 9.0 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION .................................... 20 " APPENDICES I REFERENCES ............................................... Appendix A SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION ................................... Appendix B g LABORATORY TESTING ....................................... Appendix C i i i i i i i i i Geotechnics Incorporated I I I i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TAYLOR MADE GOLF FACILITY CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation for the proposed commercial development in lots 76 through 81 of the Carlsbad Research Center in Carlsbad, California. The approximate location of the site is presented on the Site Location Map, Figure 1. The purpose of this investigation was to provide recommendations for excavation and grading as well as geotechnical design parameters for foundations, slabs, retaining walls, and pavements. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on our field exploration, laboratory testing, our experience with similar soils and geologic conditions in the area, and a review of the proposed development. 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES This investigation was conducted in accordance with the authorization of Mr. Jeff Hamann of Hamann Construction. The scope of services provided during this investigation were consistent with those outlined in our Proposal No. 6-191 dated September 12, 1996. In order to evaluate potential geotechnical impacts to the proposed development, and to provide geotechnical design criteria and recommendations, the following services were performed: • Review of published maps and literature, grading plans, aerial photographs, and geotechnical reports regarding geologic conditions and past earthwork at the site. Geologic reconnaissance of the subject site. Subsurface exploration consisting of 12 test pit excavations using a John Deere 710 backhoe mounted with a 24-inch wide bucket. The test pits ranged in depth from 3 to 12 feet. Each test pit was logged and then backfilled upon completion. Samples representative of on-site materials were collected for laboratory testing. The approximate test pit locations are shown on the Geotechnical Site Plan, Plate 1. Laboratory analysis of selected soil samples retrieved during the subsurface exploration. The testing included gradation, Atterberg limits, maximum density/optimum moisture content, expansion index, shear strength, corrosivity, and R-value. Analysis of potential geologic hazards and seismicity. Engineering analysis of the site conditions with regards to settlement potential, expansion potential, bearing capacities, lateral earth pressures, and pavement section design. Geotechnics Incorporated COa:LU 2 CD O 05a: <u. o *- I! i I I i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 November 8, 1996 Document No. 6-0710 Page No. 2 Preparation of this report presenting the results of our subsurface exploration and laboratory testing, our conclusions regarding the geotechnical aspects of the proposed development, and recommendations regarding earthwork construction (including remedial grading if appropriate), foundation design, slab design, parameters for earth retaining structures, and parameters for pavement section design. 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION The project site is located in Phase V of the Carlsbad Research Center, southeast of the intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real in Carlsbad, California. The subject lots, Lots 76 through 81, are contiguous and encompass roughly 50 acres. Each lot is a relatively level pad previously rough-graded in 1988 under the observation and testing of San Diego Geotechnical Consultants (1988). Small slopes, generally less than 10 feet high, separate the lots. Graded slopes, generally to heights less than 35 feet, border the western and northern sides of the property. Natural slopes ascend to the east and south for the remainder of the property. Existing elevations at the site range from approximately 110 feet above mean sea level (MSL) at the intersection between El Camino Real and College Boulevard, to approximately 250 feet MSL on top of the natural slopes along the southern side. The site originally consisted of rolling hills and drainage canyons. The primary feature was Letterbox Canyon, which crossed the site from the southeast to the northwest. Grading of the site included infilling of the canyons to build the rough-graded pads. Existing improvements include a landscape strip between the streets and the lots. The lots were graded to drain into an on-site storm drain system, and were tilled to control weeds. Small trees exist where an intermittent creek follows the east side of the site. 4.0 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS The proposed development, based on the Preliminary Grading Plan prepared by Spear & Associates, Inc. (undated), consists of re-grading the site to produce a cul-de-sac in the central portion of the site, and the construction of a pad for the Taylor Made Golf facility. The proposed pad will be located in the west-central portion of the site. A planned finish floor elevation of 152 feet MSL will require excavating the southern portion of the building pad and filling the northern Geotechnics Incorporated i i i i **-* f i f i i i i f i i i i i i Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 November 8, 1996 Document No. 6-0710 Page No. 3 portion. The existing pad site is presently underlain in part by formational material and in part by the documented fill. Existing fill depths within the proposed building pad area are up to approximately 40 feet. The structure will likely be founded on conventional spread footings with a slab-on-grade floor. Some retaining walls will be constructed as part of truck loading docks. Other improvements include parking areas and driveways, a testing range and testing range structure, and re-grading of the areas north and south of the proposed Taylor Made Golf facility. Some grading of the site will be necessary to construct a level pad for the proposed structure. Excavations at the site are anticipated to be generally 25 feet or less in depth. Added fill depths will be generally less than 15 feet. New slopes will be constructed between the new pads and roadways, and at the southern end of the site to provide a flatter area for the testing range. Fill slopes less than 15 feet high will be constructed between the improvements. The cut slope in the southern end of the site will be up to approximately 55 feet high. 5.0 GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The site is located within the coastal plain of the Peninsular Range Geomorphic Province. The coastal plain consists typically of subdued landforms underlain by sedimentary formations. As observed during this investigation, the subject site is underlain by a Cretaceous-age sedimentary formation known as the Point Loma Formation, and by fill soils primarily derived from excavations in the Point Loma Formation. Undifferentiated topsoil and/or colluvium covers the natural slopes at the site. Surficial slope failures were also observed in areas not previously graded. The approximate distribution of the materials at existing grade, except for topsoil, are shown on the Geotechnical Site Plan, Plate 1. Generalized descriptions of the materials encountered on site are as follow: 5.1 Point Loma Formation The Point Loma Formation likely underlies the entire site at depth, but was exposed at existing grade in the natural slopes along eastern and southern sides of the site, and in portions of the rough-graded pads along the western site boundary . As observed in the test pit excavations, the Point Loma Formation consisted generally of olive brown, interbedded clayey and sandy siltstone. In general, the siltstone was weakly to moderately indurated, although beds of strongly indurated siltstone were encountered. The siltstone was typically fractured at tightly spaced intervals with caliche and down slope Geotechnics Incorporated I i i i i i i i i i i i f i i i i i i Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 November 8, 1996 Document No. 6-0710 Page No. 4 creep observed in the natural slopes. Fossil bi-valves were observed in several excavations. Excavations conducted in the siltstone were, in general, easily conducted by the backhoe used for the test pits. A strongly indurated layer, approximately 6 inches thick, was encountered in one of the excavations; however, the hoe excavated the material without significant effort. Based on our past experience, the siltstone typically exhibits moderate expansion potential. 5.2 Topsoil/CoHuvium Topsoil and/or colluvium was encountered on the natural slopes. As observed in the test pits, the topsoil consisted of brown to olive brown, silty clay that exhibited high plasticity. The clay was generally dry to moist, and soft with some porosity. The topsoil/colluvium was generally less than 3 feet thick as encountered in the test pits; however, thicker accumulations may exist. Expansion index testing conducted on one sample of the topsoil indicated a moderate potential for expansion. 5.3 FNI As previously indicated, fill soils were placed at the site to infill Letterbox Canyon during the original development of Phase V of the Carlsbad Research Center. The fill was placed under the observation of, and tested by, San Diego Geotechnical Consultants (1988). As observed in the test pit excavations, the fill consisted in general of pale olive gray and brown, clayey silt and silty clay with some sand. Lifts of reddish gray and blue gray fill were also encountered, but were not typical. The fill was generally moist and firm except for the material near surface which was typically dry and soft to firm. Clasts of siltstone, generally less than 6 inches in dimension, were common. The fill was generally free of organic material; however, one piece of wood was encountered in test pit TP-2. Expansion index testing conducted on one sample of the fill indicated a medium potential for expansion. It has been our experience in the vicinity of the subject site that highly expansive material may also be found in the fill. This same sample exhibited a pH of 8.4, and a resistivity of 800 ohm-cm. Geotechnics Incorporated i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 November 8, 1996 Document No. 6-0710 Page No. 5 5.4 Groundwater A standing groundwater table was not encountered in any of the excavations conducted during this investigation. In general, the soil and formational materials encountered were dry at the surface, grading to moist at a relatively shallow depth. Seepage was encountered near the surface in test pit TP-7, which was conducted in the shallow drainage along the east side of the site. Groundwater levels may be expected to fluctuate during periods of heavy precipitation or in response to local irrigation practices. 6.0 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS The subject site is not located within an area previously known for significant geologic hazards. Evidence of ancient landslides or active faulting was not encountered during this investigation. Surficial slope failures were observed in portions of the site not previously graded. Seismic hazards at the site are anticipated to be caused by ground shaking during seismic events on distant active faults. The nearest know active fault is the offshore portion of the Rose Canyon fault zone located approximately 5 miles west of the site. 6.1 Seismicitv Table 1 shows the approximate distance between the subject site and active faults within 60 miles of the site, and the predicted seismicity based on the maximum probable event for each fault. In our opinion, the most significant probable seismic event with respect to the subject site would be a 6.5 magnitude event on the Rose Canyon fault zone, which would result in an estimated peak ground acceleration of 0.34g. The seismicity of the site should be considered during the design of structures in addition to complying with the requirements of the governing jurisdictions, building codes and standard practices of the Association of Structural Engineers of California. Geotechnics Incorporated I I i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i Hamann Construction Novembers, 1996 Project No. 0273-005-00 Document No. 6-0710 Page No. 6 TABLE 1 PREDICTED SEISMICITY Taylor Made Golf Facility FAULT Agua Blanca-Coronado Bank Rose Canyon San Clemente San Diego Trough San Jacinto Whittier-Elsinore DISTANCE TO SITE (miles) 22 5 57 32 46 22 MAXIMUM PROBABLE EVENT MOMENT1 MAGNITUDE M0 7.1 6.5 6.6 6.1 6.4 7.0 PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION2 9 0.14 0.34 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.14 REPEATABLE HIGH GROUND ACCELERATION3 9 0.14 0.22 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.14 1. Magnitudes after Bonilla, 1979; Greensfelder, 1974; Wesnousky, 1986; and Anderson et al. (1989). 2. Peak horizontal accelerations from Mualchin and Jones (1992). 3. Ploessel and Slosson, 1974. 6.2 Ground Rupture Evidence of active faulting at the site was not found. Accordingly, ground rupture is not considered to be a significant hazard at the site. 6.3 Liquefaction Liquefiable soil typically consists of cohesionless sands and silts that are loose to medium dense, and saturated. To liquefy, these soils must be subjected to a ground shaking of sufficient magnitude and duration. Given the relatively dense and clayey nature of the Geotechnics Incorporated I I i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 November 8, 1996 Document No. 6-0710 Page No. 7 subsurface materials and the absence of a water table, the potential for liquefaction to occur is considered remote. 6.4 Landslides and Lateral Spreads Evidence of ancient landslides at the site was not found. The existing fill slopes and cut slopes at the sites are considered grossly stable; however, the existing natural slopes contained areas of surficial slope failures. The failures are anticipated to be generally less than 5 feet deep. Recommendations for improving the stability of the natural slopes are included in this report. 6.5 Tsunamis. Seiches. Earthquake Induced Flooding The distance between the subject site and the coast, and the sites elevation above sea level, preclude damage due to seismically induced waves (tsunamis). Nearby bodies of water of significant size were not observed during this investigation, and accordingly, flooding associated with seiches is not anticipated to be a potential hazard. Geotechnics Incorporated I i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 November 8, 1996 Document No. 6-0710 Page No. 8 7.0 CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of this investigation, it is our opinion that the proposed improvements are feasible from a geotechnical standpoint provided the following recommendations and appropriate construction practices are followed. No geotechnical conditions were encountered that would preclude the proposed construction. However, some geotechnical constraints exist which require special design consideration in order to decrease the likelihood of distress to the proposed facilities. The on-site soils include both medium dense fill, and very dense Point Loma Formation. . The preliminary grading plans indicate that the southern portion of the building will be underlain by formational materials, whereas the remainder will be underlain by fill soils up to approximately 50 feet in depth. Transitions from fill to formational materials below foundations and slabs are not recommended due to the different settlement characteristics of the materials, and the resulting potential for differential movements. Recommendations are provided which will reduce the potential for distress to the proposed facilities from differential settlement. • The site contains deep fill. It has our experience that even well documented compacted fills may undergo hydrocompression as a result of the infiltration of water from various sources. We estimate that approximately % inch to 1 % inch settlement may occur across a 50 foot portion of the proposed structure. If differential settlement of this magnitude is tolerable for the proposed structure, then conventional shallow foundations may be used. However, if the risk associated with moderate settlement is deemed unacceptable, then other options should be employed such as the use of deep foundations. • Our analysis indicates that the existing site slopes are stable with regard to deep-seated failure. However, surficial slope failures were observed in portions of the site not previously graded. In addition, the formational materials underlying the natural slopes showed evidence of slope creep (the gradual downslope movement of the near-surface materials as a result of wetting and drying, biologic forces and gravity). While it is not possible to completely eliminate these effects, recommendations are provided in the following sections which should help to reduce the potential for such behavior. Geotechnics Incorporated i i i i I i f i 1 § i i I i i i i i i Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 November 8, 1996 Document No. 6-0710 Page No. 9 There are no known active faults underlying the project site. The most likely seismic hazards that may occur at the site would be associated with significant ground shaking. Much of the site has been tilled to control weed growth. Consequently, the upper 1 to 2 feet of the near surface soils should be considered compressible. We recommend that minimum site preparation should be performed to remove and compact these materials. In general, excavations at the site should be achievable using standard heavy earthmoving equipment in good-working order with experienced operators. However, excavations in the Point Loma Formation may encounter strongly indurated material that will require extra ripping effort. Such excavations may generate concretions of oversized material that will require extra effort to crush or bury. The on-site fill and formational materials are in general suitable for re-use in compacted fills. Laboratory testing on representative samples indicates that the on-site soil generally exhibits a moderate expansion potential. However, highly expansive material may also exist at the site. We recommend that finish grade soil be sampled and tested for expansion potential in order to confirm that the finish grade conditions are as anticipated. Geotechnics Incorporated i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 November 8, 1996 Document No. 6-0710 Page No. 10 8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS The remainder of this report presents recommendations regarding earthwork construction and foundation design. These recommendations are based on empirical and analytical methods typical of the standard of practice in southern California. If these recommendations appear not to cover any specific feature of the project, please contact our office for additions or revisions to the recommendations. 8.1 Plan Review We recommend that foundation and grading plans be reviewed by Geotechnics Incorporated prior to plan finalization to evaluate conformance with the intent of the recommendations of this report. Significant changes in the location of the proposed structure may require additional geotechnical evaluation. 8.2 Excavation and Grading Observation Foundation excavations and site grading excavations should be observed by Geotechnics Incorporated. Geotechnics Incorporated should provide observation and testing services continuously during grading. Such observations are considered essential to identify field conditions that differ from those anticipated by the preliminary investigation, to adjust designs to actual field conditions, and to determine that the grading is accomplished in general accordance with the recommendations of this report. Recommendations presented in this report are contingent upon Geotechnics Incorporated performing such services. Our personnel should perform sufficient testing of fill during grading to support our professional opinion as to compliance with compaction recommendations. 8.3 Site Preparation Grading and earthwork should be conducted in accordance with the Grading Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad and Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code. The following recommendations are provided regarding aspects of the proposed earthwork construction. Geotechnics Incorporated i i i f i i i i i i f i i i i i i i Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 November 8, 1996 Document No. 6-0710 Page No. 11 These recommendations should be considered subject to revision based on field conditions observed by the geotechnical consultant. 8.3.1 General: General site preparation should include the removal of deleterious materials, existing structures or other improvements from areas to be subjected to fill or structural loads. Deleterious materials includes vegetation, trash, construction debris, and rock fragments with greatest dimensions in excess of 6 inches. Existing subsurface utilities that are to be abandoned should be removed and the trenches backfilled and compacted as described in Section 8.4. 8.3.2 Improvement Areas: Much of the site has been tilled to control weed growth. The upper 1 to 2 feet of the near surface soils should be considered compressible. Consequently, in all areas of planned improvements, including pavements and exterior flatwork, loose surficial soil should be excavated to expose firm material. In the areas of the site not previously graded, surficial slope failure debris should be removed to expose competent material. The bottom of the excavation should be observed by the geotechnical consultant. The removed soil that is free of deleterious material should then be replaced in accordance with Section 8.4 as a uniformly compacted fill to the proposed subgrade elevations. 8.3.3 Building Areas: Two geotechnical conditions exist in the building areas which should be mitigated: cut/fill transitions, and moderately expansive subgrade. Structures should not straddle cut/fill transitions. We recommend that the cut portion of the main building pad be over-excavated to an elevation of 10 feet below proposed finish grade elevation. In other words, a compacted fill mat should be constructed to a depth of 10 feet below proposed slab subgrade elevations. Similarly, for the proposed testing range building, we recommend an over- excavation depth of 3 feet. Note that the overexcavation envelope should extend a minimum of 5 feet beyond the proposed building areas. The over-excavated portion of the pads should then be brought back to finish grade with compacted fill as discussed in Section 8.4. As an alternative to over-excavation for the cut/fill transitions, the structures may be founded entirely on formational material using deepened footings and drilled piers as discussed in Section 8.7.2. In order to decrease differential heave of slabs and foundations due to the moderately expansive nature of the on-site soil, we recommend that in all areas Geotechnics Incorporated I I I i i i i i i i f i i i i i i i i Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 November 8, 1996 Document No. 6-0710 Page No. 12 of planned structures, including at least five feet outside of the building perimeters, surficial soil be excavated to a minimum depth of three feet, and replaced in accordance with one of the recommendations discussed below. The following recommendations are given in order of increasing risk. a. Replace the soil within three feet of the building pad subgrade with material with a low potential for expansion. This may consist of imported soil, or lime-treated, on-site soils. Lime treatment generally requires from 3 to 6 percent hydrated lime uniformly mixed in the soil. The actual percentage required should be based on laboratory testing of the on-site soils. b. Place the soil within the upper three feet of building pad subgrade at a moisture content that is at least five percentage points above optimum moisture based on ASTM D1557. Because of the difficulty in compacting wet clays and the possible benefit of decreased expansion potential, the minimum compaction considered necessary is 87 percent of ASTM D1557 maximum density. 8.3.4 Temporary Excavations Temporary excavations, such as those which will be required for the utility trenches and the remedial grading operations, should conform with Cal-OSHA guidelines. Temporary excavations in fill and formational materials should be inclined no steeper than 1:1 for heights up to 10 feet. Temporary excavations that encounter seepage or other potentially adverse conditions should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant on a case-by-case basis during grading. Remedial measures may include shoring, or reducing the inclination of the temporary slope. 8.4 Fill Compaction All fill and backfill to be placed in association with site development should be accom- plished at slightly over optimum moisture conditions and using equipment that is capable of producing a uniformly compacted product. The minimum relative compaction recommended for fill is 90 percent of maximum density based on ASTM D1557-91. Sufficient observation and testing should be performed by Geotechnics Incorporated so that an opinion can be rendered as to the compaction achieved. ^_^__^_________ Geotechnics Incorporated I i i i f i i i i i i i i i i i i i i Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 November 8, 1996 Document No. 6-0710 Page No. 13 Imported fill sources, if needed, should be observed prior to hauling onto the site to determine the suitability for use. Representative samples of imported materials and on site soils should be tested by Geotechnics in order to evaluate their appropriate engineering properties for the planned use. Imported fill soils should have an expansion index of no more than 20 based on UBC Test Method 29-2 or ASTM D4829. During grading operations, soil types other than those analyzed in the geotechnical reports may be encountered by the contractor. Geotechnics should be notified to evaluate the suitability of these soils for use as fill and as finish grade soils. 8.5 Slopes Based on our understanding of the project, cut slopes up to approximately 55 feet high, and fill slopes up to approximately 15 feet high are to be constructed as part of the improvements. In general, slopes should be inclined no steeper than 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). Fill slopes should be constructed entirely over prepared surfaces. Where the existing bedrock or fill surface slopes greater than 5:1 (horizontal:vertical), it should be benched to produce a level area to receive the fill. Benches should be wide enough to provide complete coverage by the compaction equipment. Stabilization fills should be constructed in all cut slopes for which groundwater seepage is anticipated, or wherever highly weathered or otherwise unstable soil is encountered in the cut. The configuration and lateral extent of any necessary stability fills should be determined by the geotechnical consultant based on the conditions revealed by the grading operations. Typical stabilization fill details are given in Figure 2, Stabilization Fills. Both the existing and proposed slopes may be susceptible to surficial failures. The surficia! slope stability may be enhanced by providing proper site drainage. The site should be graded so that water from the surrounding areas is not able to flow over the top of the slope. Diversion structures should be provided where necessary. Surface runoff should be confined to gunite-lined swales or other appropriate devices to reduce the potential for erosion. It is recommended that slopes be planted with vegetation that will increase their stability. Ice plant is generally not recommended. We recommend that vegetation include woody plants, along with ground cover. All plants should be adapted for growth in semi-arid climates with little or no irrigation. A landscape architect should be consulted in order to develop a specific planting palate suitable for slope stabilization. Geotechnics Incorporated 6 INCHES SOIL COVER MINIMUM RECONSTRUCTED SLOPE COMPOSITE PANEL DRAIN (FABRIC SIDE FACING SEEPAGE) 4 INCH DIAMETER PERFORATED PVC PIPE WITH 3/4 INCH GRAVEL WRAPPED IN PANEL DRAIN t 2 FEET MINIMUM I COMPACTED SOIL BACKFILL KEYWAY BOTTOM MINUS 3/4 INCH CRUSHED ROCK (1 CUBIC FOOT PER LINEAL FOOT) IMPERMEABLE CLAYSTONE BED 2 INCHES OF CRUSHED ROCK BELOW PERFORATED PIPE CONSTRUCTION NOTES 1) The drainage panels should consist of prefabricated geocomposite drain such as Miradrain 6000, Tensar DC1200, and JDrain 300 or 400. 2) Splices in panels should be as recommended by the manufacturer. Interlocking type panels should be overlapped at least 6 inches. Non-interlocking type should overlap at least 12 inches. 3) Subdrains should outlet by a solid 6 inch PVC pipe to a storm drain system or suitable surface outlet. Perforated pipe and outlet pipe should have a fall of at least 2 percent. 4) The number and location of drainage panels will be determined by the geotechnical consultant, based on the conditions observed during site grading. Geotechnics Incorporated STABILIZATION FILLS Taylor Made Golf Facilities Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 Document No. 6-0710 FIGURE 2 I I I I i i i i i i f i f i i i i i i Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 November 8, 1996 Document No. 6-0710 Page No. 14 All slopes are subject to some creep, whether the slopes are natural or man-made. Slope creep is the very slow, down-slope movement of the near surface soil along the slope face. The degree and depth of the movement is influenced by soil type and the moisture conditions. This movement is typical in slopes and is not considered a hazard. However, it may affect structures built on or near the slope face. We recommend that settlement- sensitive improvements not be located within 5 feet of the top of the slope unless specific evaluation of the condition is conducted by the geotechnical consultant. 8.6 Surface Drainage Foundation and slab performance depends greatly on how well the runoff waters drain from the site. This is true both during construction and over the entire life of the structure. The ground surface around structures should be graded so that water flows rapidly away from the structures without ponding. The surface gradient needed to achieve this depends on the prevailing landscape. In general, we recommend that pavement and lawn areas within five feet of buildings slope away at gradients of at least two percent. Densely vegetated areas should have minimum gradients of at least five percent away from buildings in the first five feet. Densely vegetated areas are considered those in which the planting type and spacing is such that the flow of water is impeded. Planters should be built so that water from them will not seep into the foundation, slab, or pavement areas. Roof drainage should be channeled by pipe to storm drains, or discharge at least 10 feet from building lines. Site irrigation should be limited to the minimum necessary to sustain landscaping plants. Should excessive irrigation, surface water intrusion, water line breaks, or unusually high rainfall occur, saturated zones or "perched" groundwater may develop in the underlying soils. 8.7 Foundation Recommendations These recommendations are considered generally consistent with methods typically used in southern California. Other alternatives may be available. The foundation recommendations herein should not be considered to preclude more restrictive criteria of governing agencies or by the structural engineer. The design of the foundation system should be performed by the project structural engineer, incorporating the geotechnical parameters described in the following sections. Geotechnics Incorporated I I I I i i i i i i i -~*~* i i i i i i i Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 November 8, 1996 Document No. 6-0710 Page No. 15 8.7.1 Shallow Foundations: The following recommendations assume that the building area will be underlain entirely by compacted fill as recommended in Section 8.3.3, and that the subgrade materials exhibit a low potential for expansion. Allowable Soil Bearing: 2,500 Ibs/ft2 (allow a one-third increase for short- term wind or seismic loads) Minimum Footing Width: 12 inches Minimum Footing Depth: 24 inches below lowest adjacent soil grade Minimum Reinforcement: Two No. 4 bars at both top and bottom in continuous footings. 8.7.2 Deep Foundations (Drilled Piers): As an alternative to over-excavating the cut portion of the building pad area, deep foundations may be used to support the proposed facilities. In the building pad areas currently underlain directly by Point Loma Formation, deepened footings similar to the shallow foundations discussed in Section 8.7.1 would be used, the only difference being that they would be deepened through the 3 foot non-expansive soil cap recommended in Section 8.3.3. This would result in a minimum footing depth of 36 inches. For the areas of the building pad which are currently underlain by fill, we recommend that deep foundations consist of drilled piers embedded into the Point Loma Formation. Piers should be spanned with grade beams designed by the project structural engineer. A structural slab should also be designed to span the areas underlain by fill. The design of drilled piers may be based on the following parameters. Allowable End Bearing: 10,000 psf for piers founded greater than 5 feet below lowest adjacent soil grade. Allow a one-third increase for short-term wind or seismic loads. Minimum Diameter: 24 inches. Minimum Embedment: 2 feet into formational material. Reinforcement: As designed by structural engineer. Ceotcchnics Incorporated I -—^I I I I I I I I i i i i i i i i i i Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 November 8, 1996 Document No. 6-0710 Page No. 16 Clean-out: Unless provisions are made to hand-clean excavations, all pier excavations should be cleaned of all loose soil with suitable boring tools. Observation: The drilling of all piers should be continuously observed by Geotechnics Incorporated to determine that bearing conditions are as anticipated and that pier excavations are made in accordance with project specifications. 8.7.3 Lateral Loads: Lateral loads against structures may be resisted by friction between the bottoms of footings, piers and slabs and the supporting soil. A coefficient of friction of 0.25 is recommended. Alternatively, a passive pressure of 250 Ibs/ft3 is recommended for the portion of vertical foundation members embedded into compacted fill. If friction and passive pressure are combined, the passive pressure value should be reduced by one-third. 8.7.4 Settlement: Compacted fills may experience hydro-compression settlement due to infiltration of rain or irrigation water into the fill. This, and the expected fill surcharge and foundation loads, may result in a differential settlement of approximately % inch to 1% inch between the existing cut/fill transition and the deepest fills underlying the proposed structure (approximately 50 feet from the transition). If this differential settlement is tolerable for the proposed structure, then conventional shallow foundations may be used. However, if the risk associated with the estimated settlement is deemed unacceptable, then deep foundations should be used. If deep foundations are used, less than % inch of settlement is anticipated at the pier locations. The slab would still be susceptible to settlement, and would therefore need to be designed to span the fill between grade beams and piers. This condition should be reviewed by the project structural engineer. 8.7.5 Slope Setback: The foundations for the proposed structures should be setback from the slope a minimum horizontal distance of 8 feet. The setback should be measured horizontally from the outside bottom edge of the footing to the slope face. The horizontal setback can be reduced by deepening the foundation in order to achieve the required setback distance projected from the footing bottom to the face of the slope. It should be recognized that the outer few feet of all slopes are susceptible to gradual down-slope movements due to slope creep. This Geotechnics Incorporated I I i i i i i i i i i i I i i i i i i Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 November 8, 1996 Document No. 6-0710 Page No. 17 will affect hardscape such as concrete slabs. We recommend that settlement sensitive hardscape not be constructed within 5 feet of the top of slopes. 8.8 On-Grade Slabs Building slabs should be supported by compacted fill prepared as recommended under Section 8.3.4. Slabs should be designed for the anticipated loading. If an elastic design is used, a modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 kips/ft3 should be suitable. As a minimum, slabs should be at least 6 inches in thickness and be reinforced with at least No. 3 bars on 18-inch centers, each way. 8.8.1 Moisture Protection for Slabs Concrete slabs constructed on soil ultimately cause the moisture content to rise in the underlying soil. This results from continued capillary rise and the termination of normal evapotranspiration. Because normal concrete is permeable, the moisture will eventually penetrate the slab unless some protection is provided. To decrease the likelihood of problems related to damp slabs, suitable moisture protection measures should be used where moisture sensitive floor coverings or other factors warrant. A commonly used moisture protection consists of about 4 inches of clean sand covered by 'visqueen' plastic sheeting. In addition, 2 inches of sand are placed over the plastic to decrease concrete curing problems associated with placing concrete directly on an impermeable membrane. However, it has been our experience that such systems will transmit from approximately 6 to 12 pounds of moisture per 1000 square feet per day. This may be excessive for some applications. If more protection is needed, we recommend that the slab be underlain by at least 6 inches of minus 3/4-inch crushed rock, with no plastic membrane. In addition, it is recommended that a low water-cement ratio (0.5 maximum) be used for concrete, and that the slab be moist-cured for at least five days in accordance with methods recommended by the American Concrete Institute. On-site quality control should be used to confirm the design conditions. Geotechnics Incorporated I I H. I I I I i i i •*"^ i f i i i i I i Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 November 8, 1996 Document No. 6-0710 Page No. 18 8.8.2 Exterior Slabs Exterior slabs and sidewalks should be at least 5 inches thick and should be reinforced with at least #3 rebars on 24 inch centers, each way (or alternatively 6" x 6"-W2.9 x W2.9 WWF). Crack control joints should be placed on at least 10 foot centers, each way, for slabs, and on 5 foot centers for sidewalks. Differential movement between buildings and exterior slabs, or between sidewalks and curbs may be decreased by dowelling the slab into the foundation or curb. 8.9 Expansive Soils The soils observed during our investigation consisted primarily of high plasticity silts and clays. Laboratory testing of representative samples indicates that the site soils have a moderate expansion potential, based on Uniform Building Code criteria. Figure C-4 in the appendix summarizes the expansion test results. 8.10 Reactive Soils The results of the laboratory testing for pH and resistivity are presented in Figure C-4 of Appendix C. Based on our experience in the area, the sulfate content of the on-site soil would indicate that Type II cement should be used in all concrete which will be in contact with soil. 8.11 Earth-Retaining Structures Backfilling retaining walls with highly expansive soil can increase lateral pressures well beyond normal active or at-rest pressures. We recommend that retaining walls be backfilled with soil having and expansive index of 20 or less. The backfill area should include the zone defined by a 1:1 sloping plane, back from the base of the wall. Cantilever retaining walls should be designed for an active earth pressure approximated by an equivalent fluid pressure of 35 Ibs/ft3. The active pressure should be used for walls free to yield at the top at least 0.2 percent of the wall height. For walls restrained so that such movement is not permitted, an equivalent fluid pressure of 55 Ibs/ft3 should be used, based on at-rest soil conditions with level backfill. The above pressures do not consider any surcharge loads or hydrostatic pressures. If these are applicable, they will increase Geotechnics Incorporated Hamann Construction November 8, 1996 Project No. 0273-005-00 Document No. 6-0710 Page No. 19 I I I I i i i i i -!••** I I I I I I I I the lateral pressures on the wall and we should be contacted for additional recommendations. Walls should contain an adequate subdrain to eliminate any hydrostatic forces. The recommended wall drain details are given in Figure 3, Retaining Wall Drains. Retaining wall backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction, based on ASTM D1557-91. Backfill should not be placed until walls have achieved adequate structural strength. Heavy compaction equipment which could cause distress to walls should not be used. 8.12 Preliminary Pavement Section Two traffic types are assumed: areas of light traffic and passenger car parking (Traffic Index = 4.5), and access drives and truck routes (Traffic Index = 6.0). The project civil engineer should review these values to determine if they are appropriate. A laboratory R-Value test was conducted on a representative sample of the on-site soils. This test indicated that an R-Value of 19 may be used for an estimate of the soil conditions controlling pavement design. Based on the assumed Traffic Index, and the R-Value determined in the laboratory, the following preliminary pavement sections are recommended in accordance with the CALTRANS design method. These recommendations should be considered subject to revision based on the final pavement subgrade conditions resulting from the grading operations. DESIGN SECTION TRAFFIC INDEX 4.5 6.0 ASPHALT CONCRETE 3 inches 4 inches AGGREGATE BASE 6 inches 9 inches Concentrated truck traffic areas, such as trash truck aprons, should consist of six inches of Portland cement concrete over native subgrade. Concrete should be reinforced with at least number 4 bars on 24-inch centers, each way. As an alternative to asphalt concrete, portland cement concrete may also be used for the driveways and parking Ceotechnics Incorporated DAMP-PROOFING OR WATER-PROOFING AS REQUIRED PANEL DRAIN: MIRADRAIN 6000, MIRADRAIN 6200, TENSARDC1100, JDRAIN 100, OR APPROVED SIMILAR. CONSTRUCTION SLOPE MINUS 3/4-INCH CRUSHED ROCK, ENVELOPED IN FILTER FABRIC (MIFAFI140N, SUPAC 4NP, OR APPROVED SIMILAR) 1 CUBIC FOOT PER LINEAR FOOT 4-INCH DIAM. ADS OR PVC PERFORATED PIPE COMPACTED BACKFILL- • -~r I!1 — iHI •.:"- I! I TO AVOID UNDERMINING FOOTING, DRAIN EXCAVATION SHOULD NOT EXTEND BELOW THIS PLANE NOTES 1) Subdrain perforated pipe should have a fall of at least 1.5%. Perforated pipe should outlet to a solid pipe carrying the drainage to a free gravity outfall. Slope of outlet pipe should be at least 1%. 2) Panel drain should be glued or nailed to the wall and spliced in accordance with the manufacturers recommendations. Fabric side of panel should face the backfill soil. 3) Drain installation should be observed by the geotechnical consultant prior to backfilling. r Geotechnics Incorporated RETAINING WALL DRAIN Taylor Made Golf Facilities Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 Document No. 6-0710 FIGURE 3 I —"•*I I i i i i —«%i i i i i i i i i i i I Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 November 8, 1996 Document No. 6-0710 Page No. 20 areas. Concrete drives and parking areas should consist of 6 inches of Portland cement concrete over native subgrade. Reinforcement and control joints will reduce cracking and movement potential. As a minimal recommendation, concrete drives and parking areas should be reinforced with at least #3 rebars on 24 inch centers, each way (or alternatively 6" x 6"-W2.9 x W2.9 WWF). Crack control joints should be placed on at least 10 foot centers, each way. The upper 12 inches of the pavement subgrade should be scarified, brought to about optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95% of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557. Aggregate base should conform to Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, crushed aggregate base, crushed miscellaneous base, or processed miscellaneous base. 9.0 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION This investigation was performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical consultants practicing in this or similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional opinions included in this report. The samples taken and used for testing and the observations made are believed representative of the project site; however, soil and geologic conditions can vary significantly between borings. As in most projects, conditions revealed by excavation may be at variance with preliminary findings. If this occurs, the changed conditions must be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant and additional recommendations made, if warranted. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the necessary design consultants for the project and incorporated into the plans, and the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractors carry out such recommenda- tions in the field. Geotechnics Incorporated Hamann Construction November 8. 1996 Project No. 0273-005-00 Document No. 6-0710 Page No. 21 i f i i i i i i I The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the condition of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether due to natural processes or the work of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards of practice may occur from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of three years. *** GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED Anthony F. Belfast, P.E. C 40333 Principal W. Lee Vanderhurst, C.E.G. 1125 Principal Geotechnics Incorporated i i "•"*\ I I I I APPENDIX A REFERENCES • American Society for Testing and Materials, 1992, Annual Book of ASTM Standards: ASTM, Philadelphia, PA, Volume 04.08 Soil and Rock; Dimension Stone; Geosynthetics, Section 4, Construction, 1296 p. Anderson, J. G., Rockwell, T. K., Agnew, D. C. 1989, Past and Possible Future Earthquakes of Significance to the San Diego Region: Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 5, No. 2. pp 299-335. Bonilla, M.G., 1970, Surface Faulting and Related Effects in Wiegal, R.L., editor, earthquake „ Engineering: Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall, p. 47-74. | California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, 1975, Recommended _ Guidelines for Determining the Maximum Credible and the Maximum Probable • Earthquakes: California Division of Mines and Geology Notes, Number 43. California Department of Conservation, 1992, Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist- I" Priolo Special Studies Zone Act of 1972: California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42. II Geotechnics Incorporated, 1996, Proposal for Geotechnical Investigion, Taylor Made Golf Facility, • Carlsbad, California: Proposal No. 6-191, dated September 12. - International Conference of Building Officials, 1991, Uniform Building Code (with California • Amendments) Title 23. Jennings, C. W. 1994, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas with Locations and I Ages of Recent Volcanic Eruptions: California Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Data Map Series, Map No. 6. I Mualchin, L, and Jones, A.L., 1992, Peak Accelerations from Maximum Credible Earthquakes in California (Rock and Stiff-Soils Sites): California Division of Mines and Geology, Open- File Report, 92-1. • San Diego Geotechnical Consultants, Inc., 1988, As-Graded Geotechnical Report, Carlsbad Research Center, Phases III, IV, and V (Lots 76 through 91, 108 and 109), Carlsbad, • California: Job No. 05-2863-006-00-10, dated April 1. Spear & Associates, Inc., undated, Preliminary Grading Plan for Taylor Made Golf: 50 Scale. I United States Department of Agriculture, 1953, Aerial Photographs: Flight No. AXN-8M-70 and 71, dated April 11, Scale 1:20,000. I Wesnousky, S. G., 1986, Earthquakes, Quaternary Faults, and Seismic Hazard in California: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 91, no. B12, p. 12587-12631. Geotechnics Incorporated I •r I I i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i APPENDIX B SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Field exploration consisted of excavating 12 test pits. The test pits were excavated using a John Deere 710, rubber-tired backhoe mounted with a 24-inch wide bucket. Bulk samples were collected for laboratory testing. The maximum depth of exploration was 12 feet. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on the Geotechnical Site Plan, Plate 1. Logs describing the subsurface conditions encountered are presented on the following Figures B-1 through B-6. The test pits were located by visually estimating and pacing distances from landmarks shown on the Site Plan. The locations shown should not be considered more accurate than is implied by the method of measurement used and the scale of the map. The lines designating the interface between differing soil materials on the logs may be abrupt or gradational. Further, soil conditions at locations between the excavations may be substantially different from those at the specific locations explored. It should be recognized that the passage of time can result in changes in the soil conditions reported in our logs. Geotechnics Incorporated LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-1 Logged by: OR Method of Excavation: 710 backhoe with 24" bucket Date: 10/25/96 Elevation: 171'MSL DEPTH DESCRIPTION 1tt. 2ft. 3ft. 4ft. 5ft. 6ft. 7ft. 8ft. 9ft. 10ft. 11ft. 12ft. 13ft. POINT LOMA FORMATION: Sandy siltstone, olive gray, low to moderate plasticity, moist, moderately indurated, tightly spaced caliche-filled fractures: N5W/80W and N55E/70E, fossil bi-valves. (sample) Total depth: 4 feet No groundwater encountered Backfilled: 10/25/96 LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-2 Logged by: DR Date: 10/25/96 Method of Excavation: 710 backhoe with 24" bucket Elevation: 186' MSL DEPTH 1ft. 2ft. 3ft. 4ft. 5ft. 6ft. 7ft. 8ft. 9ft. 10ft. 11ft. 12ft. 13ft. DESCRIPTION FILL: Clayey silt (MH), pale olive gray, moderate to high plasticity, moist, firm to hard, clasts of siltstone up to 4 inches in dimension, (sample) Moist to wet. Portion of wood fence post. lotal depth: 12 feet Backfilled: 10/25/96 No groundwater encountered JOB NO. 0273-005-00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE: B-1 LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-3 Logged by: DR Date: Method of Excavation: 710 backhoe with 24" bucket Elevation DEPTH 1ft. 2ft. 3ft. 4ft. 5ft. 6ft. 7ft. 8ft. 9ft. 10ft. 11ft. 12ft. 13ft. 10/25/96 : 188'MSL DESCRIPTION TOPSOIL: Silty clay (CH), brown, high plasticity, dry to moist, soft, porous, (sample) POINT LOMA FORMATION: Clayey siltstone. orangish olive brown, moderate to high plasticity. wet, very weakly indurated, tightly fractured with some caliche (slope creep), (sample) Moderately indurated, tightly fractured, fossil bi-valves. moist to lotal depth: 12 teet Backfilled: 10/25/96 No groundwater encountered LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-4 Logged by: DR Date: 10/25/96 Method of Excavation: 71 0 backhoe with 24" bucket Elevation: 2 1 5' MSL DEPTH 1ft. 2ft. 3ft. 4ft. 5ft. 6ft. 7ft. 8ft. 9ft. 10ft. 11ft. 12ft. 13ft. DESCRIPTION TOPSOIL: Silty clay (CH). gray brown, high plasticity, dry to moist, soft, porous. POINT LOMA FORMATION: Clayey siltstone. olive brown, moderate to high plasticity, moist, weakly indurated, tightly fractured with caliche stringers. Moderately indurated, tightly fractured. Total depth: 9 feet No groundwater encountered Backfilled: 10/25/96 JOB NO. 0273-005-00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE: B-2 LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-5 Logged by: DR Date: 10/25/96 Method of Excavation: 710 backhoe with 24" bucket Elevation: 168' MSL DEPTH m. 2ft. 3ft. 4ft. 5ft. 6ft. 7ft. 8ft. 9ft. 10ft. 11ft. 12ft. 13ft. DESCRIPTION TOPSOIL: Silty clav (CH). olive brown, hiah plasticity, dry to moist, soft, porous. POINT LOMA FORMATION: Sandy indurated, abundant shell fossils and siltstone, yellow gray, low plasticity, dry to moist, very strongly caliche. Clayey siltstone, olive brown, moderate to high plasticity, moist, moderately indurated, tightly fractured with caliche stringers (slope creep). Total depth. 10 feet No groundwater encountered Backfilled: 10/25/96 LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-6 Logged by: DR Date: 10/25/96 Method of Excavation: 710 backhoe with 24" bucket Elevation: 165' MSL DEPTH 1ft. 2ft. 3ft. Aft. 5ft. 6ft. 7ft. 8ft. 9ft. 10ft. 11ft. 12ft. 13ft. DESCRIPTION TOPSOIL: Silrvclav(C H), brown and olive brown, high plasticity, dry, soft, porous. Orange brown, soft to firm. POINT LOMA FORMATION: Clayey siltstone. olive and oranqe brown, moderate to high plasticity. dry to moist, very weakly indurated, tightly fractured. Weakly to moderately indurated. Total depth: 10 feet No groundwater encountered Backfilled: 10/25/96 JOB NO. 0273-005-00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE: B-3 LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-7 Logged by: DR Date: 10/25/96 Method of Excavation: 710 backhoe with 24" bucket Elevation: 1 70' MSL DEPTH 1ft. 2ft. 3ft. 4ft. 5ft. 6ft. 7ft. 8ft. 9ft. 10ft. 11ft. 12ft. 13ft. DESCRIPTION FILL: Silly clav (CH). orange brown, olive, pale reddish qrav. hiqh plasticity, saturated, soft, seepage through upper 1 foot, clasts of siltstone. Moist, soft to firm. POINT LOMA FORMATION: Clayey siltstone. olive, highly plastic, moist, weakly indurated. Total depth: 12 teet Backfilled: 10/25/96 Seepage observed at surface. LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-8 Logged by: DR Date: 10/25/96 Method of Excavation: 710 backhoe with 24" bucket Elevation: 162' MSL DEPTH 1ft. 2ft. 3ft. 4ft. 5ft. 6ft. 7ft. 8ft. 9ft. 10ft. 11ft. 12ft. 13ft. DESCRIPTION TOPSOIL: Silty clay (CH). brown, high plasticity, dry. soft, porous. POINT LOMA FORMATION: Clayey siltstone. olive, moderate to high plasticity, moist, weakly indurated. tightly fractured (slope creep). Total depth: 8 feet No groundwater encountered Backfilled: 10/25/96 JOB NO. 0273-005-00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE: B-4 LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-9 Logged by: DR Date: 10/25/96 Method of Excavation: 710 backhoe with 24" bucket Elevation: 1 58' MSL DEPTH 1ft. 2ft. 3ft. 4ft. 5ft. 6ft. 7ft. 8ft. 9ft. 10ft. 11ft. 12ft. 13ft. DESCRIPTION FILL: Clayey silt (MH). olive brown, high plasticity, dry to moist, soft to firm. Moist, firm, clasts of siltstone. Reddish gray and blue gray. POINT LOMA FORMATION: Clayey siltstone. olive, hiah plasticity, moist, moderately indurated. lotal depth: 12 feet Backfilled: 10/25/96 No groundwater encountered LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-10 Logged by: DR Date: 10/25/96 Method of Excavation: 710 backhoe with 24" bucket Elevation: 160' MSL DEPTH 1ft. 2ft. 3ft. 4ft. 5ft. 6ft. 7ft. 8ft. 9ft. 10ft. 11ft. 12ft. 13ft. DESCRIPTION POINT LOMA FORMATION: Sandy siltstone. dark gray and orange brown, moderate plasticity. dry to moist, moderately indurated, fractured. Total depth: 3 feet No groundwater encountered Backfilled: 10/25/96 JOB NO. 0273-005-00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE: B-5 LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-11 Logged by: DR Method of Excavation: 710 backhoe with 24" bucket DEPTH 1ft. 2ft. 3ft. 4ft. 5ft. 6ft. 7ft. 8ft. 9ft. 10ft. 11ft. 12ft. 13ft. Date: 10/25/96 Elevation: 144' MS L DESCRIPTION POINT LOMA FORMATION: Clayey siltstone, olive brown, moderate to high plasticity, dry to moist, weakly to moderately indurated, moderately fractured. Total depth: 4-'/i feet No groundwater encountered Backfilled: 10/25/96 LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-12 Logged by: DR Method of Excavation: 710 backhoe with 24" bucket DEPTH 1ft. 2ft. 3ft. 4ft. 5ft. 6ft. 7ft. 8ft. 9ft. 10ft. 11ft. 12ft. 13ft. Date: 10/25/96 Elevation: 140' MSL DESCRIPTION FILL: Clayey silt (MH), brown and olive brown, hiqh plasticity, dry to moist, soft to firm. Moist to wet, firm. Reddish gray and blue gray. Total depth: 8 feet No groundwater encountered Backfilled: 10/25/96 JOB NO. 0273-005-00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE: B-6 I I I I i i i l i i i i I i i i i i i APPENDIX C LABORATORY TESTING Selected representative samples of soils encountered were tested using test methods of the American Society for Testing and Materials, or other generally accepted standards. A brief description of the tests performed follows: Classification: Soils were classified visually according to the Unified Soil Classification System. Visual classification was supplemented by laboratory testing of selected samples and clas- sification in accordance with ASTM D2487. Particle Size Analysis: Particle size analyses were performed in accordance with ASTM D422. The results are given on Figures C-1 and C-2. Atterberg Limits: ASTM D4318-84 was used to determine the liquid limit, plastic limit, and plasticity index of selected fine-grained samples. The results are given in Figures C-1 and C-2. Direct Shear: The shear strength of a remolded sample of soil was assessed through a direct shear test performed in accordance with ASTM D3080. The results are presented in Figure C-3. Maximum Density/Optimum Moisture: The maximum density and optimum moisture content for a representative soil sample was determined by using test method ASTM D1557-91, modified Proctor. The test results are summarized on Figure C-4. Expansion Index: The expansion potential of selected soils was characterized by using the test method ASTM D4829. The results are presented on Figure C-4. R-Value: R-Value testing was performed on representative pavement area materials in accordance with ASTM D2844-89. The results are presented in Figure C-4. pH and Resistivity: To assess their potential for reactivity with metal pipe, representative samples were tested for pH and resistivity using the Caltrans method 643. The results are presented in Figure C-4. Geotechnics Incorporated dro8 v> V).stat € o6q o Grain Size in MiSILT ANDCLAYtuz u. 2 5m UJwce< o Ul in Ul COARSQ < _j GRAVEATTERBERG IMS m ^;CJ MLIQUID LIMIT:PLASTIC LIMIT:LASTICITY INDEX:0. I w P 1 O Ul w 3 , o O <o P g i t CO Z UJ 3 0 AMPLEw il of zui o flQ r~ •=> o *• 0 Z -1 .ORATIOSAMPLEQ. XUl O O i-<o<*>2o ~o g*- 3tS o0) O• 5 u. 1 - O £ c I I O | ooq 6 a> N c 25 oo 8 OOpQQQQOOOOJ CD SILT ANDCLAYUJz LL 2 Q 2 01w K 0 ILIz u. HI | COARSoz%GRAVEL</>ATTERBERG LINS 2 8LIQUID LIMIT:PLASTIC LIMIT:ASTICITY INDEX:_ia. o o o < < w 3 ui i i 13 a SAMPLE(0 *^ Q. • 1- fc> of z N NUMBELOCATIOEXPLORATIOSAMPLE§ 28*-tS<D O3Oila>u cau. s i o 5- J •0 (U 4-» 01 M O 2500 IT g 2000 eg 1500 co 1000 tt CO 500 ,;.»»/BBBBB BBBBl IBEBBB DBBBB BBBBBj IBBBB IBBBB... ••• IBB ••I 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 STRAIN [%] 2500 9000 IT CO a. 1*500 CO CO Ul uS 100° CO 500 n C) ULTIMATE SHEAR?] PEAJ< SHEAF* I 500 1000 1500 NORMAL STRESS [PSF] 2000 2500 PEAK ULTIMATE FRICTION ANGLE: COHESION: DRY DENSITY: MOISTURE CONTENT: 36 DEGREES 600 PSF 35 DEGREES 520 PSF 94.3 PCF 21.6% SAMPLE: TP2 @ 0' -1' Consolidated, Drained Geotechnics ^Incorporated DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Taylor Made Golf Facility Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 Document No. 6-0710 FIGURE C-3 MAXIMUM DENSITY/OPTIMUM MOISTURE TEST RESULTS (ASTM D1557-91) SAMPLE TP-2 @ 0 to 1 ft. MAXIMUM DENSITY (PCF) 106.0 MOISTURE CONTENT (%) 19.0 EXPANSION TEST RESULTS (ASTM D4829) SAMPLE TP-2 @ 0 to 1 ft. TP-3 @ 0 to 1 ft. EXPANSION INDEX 61 80 EXPANSION POTENTIAL Medium Medium UBC TABLE NO. 29-C, CLASSIFICATION OF EXPANSIVE SOIL EXPANSION INDEX 0-20 21-50 51-90 91-130 Above 130 POTENTIAL EXPANSION Very low Low Medium High Very high R-VALUE TEST RESULTS (ASTM D2844-89) SAMPLE TP-3 @ 4 to 5 ft. R-VALUE 19 pH, AND RESISTIVITY TEST RESULTS (CALTRANS Method and 643) SAMPLE TP-2 @ 0 to 1 ft. pH 8.4 RESISTIVITY 800 ohm-cm Geotechnics Incorporated Laboratory Test Results Taylor Made Golf Facility Hamann Construction Project No. 0273-005-00 Document No. 6-0710 Figure C-4 NON-RESIDENTIAL CERTIFICATE: Non-Residential Land Owner, please read this option carefully and be sure you throughly understand the options before signing. The option you choose will affect your payment of the developed Special Tax assessed on your property. This option is available only at the time of the first building permit issuance. Property owner signature is required before a building permit will be issued. Your signature is confirming the accuracy of all parcel and ownership information shown. i Name of Owner Telephone Address EL Project Address Carlsbad CA 9200^? City State Zip Code City State Zip Code 3J3.-L3/V / Assessor's Parcel Number, or APN and Lot Number if not yet subdivided. Building Permit Number As crted by Ordinance No. NS-155 and adopted by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, the City is authorized to levy a special Tax in Community Facilities district No. 1. All non-residential property, upon the issuance of the first building permit, shall have the option to (1) pay the SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT TAX ONE- TIME or (2) assume the ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX - DEVELOPED PROPERTY for a period not to exceed twenty- five (25) years. Please indicate your choice by initialing the appropriate line below: OPTION (1): I elect to pay the SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT TAX ONE-TIME now, as a one-time payment. Amount ioS One-Time Special Tax: $ if £7O. . Owner's Initials JI&. OPTION (2): I elect to pay the SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT TAX ANNUALLY for a pegod not to exceed twenty-five (25) years. Maximum Annual Special Tax: $ f, 1*2.£- . Owner Initials . I DO HEREBY CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY THAT THE UNDERSIGNED IS THE PROPERTY OWNER QPTHE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THAT I UNDERSTAND AND WILL COMPLY WITH THE PROVISIOTitS-A&STATED ABOVE. Title Print Name Date The City of Carlsbad has not independently verified the information shown above. Therefore, we accept no responsibility as to the accuracy or completeness of this information. NON-RESIDENTIAL CERTIFICATE Materials SAN DIEGO REGIONAL HAZARDOUS MATERIALS QUESTIONNAIRE Management Division C«»ITT M 111 OHIO Business Name Contact Person Telephone emu Mailing Address City 24*71 CGUfc State CA Zip Plan File* Site Address City State Cfr Zip Plan File* PART I: FIRE DEPARTMENT - HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT DIVISION: OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION Indicate by circling the item, whether your business will use, process, or store any of the following hazardous materials. If any of the items are circled, applicant must contact the Fire Protection Agency with jurisdiction prior to plan submittal. 1. Explosive or Blasting Agents 4. Rammable Solids 2. Compressed Gases • 5. Organic Peroxides 3. Flammable or Combustible Liquids 6. Oxidizers 7. Pyrophorics 10. Cryogenics 8. Unstable Reactives 11. Highly Toxic or Toxic Materials 9. Water Reactive* 1 2. Radioactives 1 3. Corrosives 14. Other Health Hazards PART II: COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO HEALTH DEPARTMENT • HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT DIVISION: CONTINGENCY PLAN REVIEW: If the answer to any of the questions is yes, applicant must contact the County of San Diego Hazardous Materials Management Division, 1 255 Imperial Avenue, 3rd Floor, San Diego, CA 92186-5261. Telephone (619) 338-2222 prior to the issuance of a building permit. • .. •• FEES MAY BE REQUIRED Is your business listed on the reverse side of this form? Will your business dispose of Hazardous Substances or Medical Waste in any amount? Will your business store or handle Hazardous Substances in quantities equal to or greater than 55 gallons, 500 pounds, 200 cubic feet or carcinogens/reproductive toxins in any quantity? Will your business use an existing or install an underground storage tank? Will your business store or handle Acutely Hazardous Materials? OFFICE USE ONLY [ [ RMPP Exempt Date Initials P] RMPP Required Date Initials rn RMPP Completed Date PART III: SAN DIEGO COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT If the answer to any of the questions is yes, applicant must contact the Air Pollution Control District, 9150 Chesapeake Drive, San Diego, CA 92121. Telephone (619) 694-3307 prior to the issuance of a building permit. V. ) YES NO V^ 1 • I I p?^ Will the intended occupant install or use any of the equipment listed on the Listing of Air Pollution Control District Permit Categories, on the reverse side of this form? 2. |—| I—I (ANSWER ONLY IF QUESTION 1 IS YES.) Will the subject facility b« located within 1,000 feet of the outer boundary of a school (K through 1 2) as listed in the current Directory of School and CommunJty Collage Districts, published by the San Diego County Office of Education and the current California Private School Directory, compiled in accordance with provisions of Education Code Section 33190? Briefly describe ~~~~—^^———««•••«___^_^^____^^__^^^_____ Name of Owner or Authorized Agent: Signature of Owner 'or Authorized Agent: I declare under penalty of perjury that to the best of my knowledge and belief the responses made herein are true and correct. _ ._ _ Date: _ _ Do not write below this line FIRE DEPARTMENT OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION:. BY:Date: EXEMPT FHOM PERMIT REQUIREMENTS COUNTY-HMMD APCD APPROVED FOR BUILDING PERMIT BUT NOT OCCUPANCY COUNTY-HMMD APCD APPROVED FOR OCCUPANCY COUNTY-HMMD APCD Environmental Health Service* DHS:HM-9171 (6/92) County of Sin Diego Department of Health Service.-. 01/16/99 15:28 FAX 619 676 3685 SDFA ilOOl SPECIAL DISTRICT FINANCING & ADMINISTRATION 333 SOUTH JUNIPER, SUITE 208 ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92125 TEL: (760) 233-2630 FAX: (760) 233-2361 FACSIMILE COVER SHEET Date: —Pages: | IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THE PAGES, PLEASE PHONE (819) 676-3684 AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. CITY OF CARLSBAD - COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 1 SPECIAL TAX CALCULATION WORKSHEET FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF NON-RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY •• PLEASE PRINT •* ONE PER EACH BUILDING PERMIT "* BUILDING INITIALS: _ PLANNING INITIALS: DRAFT: ENGINEERING INITIALS: FINANCE INITIALS: FINAL: REQUIRED INFORMATION: BUILDING: A) PLAN CHECK NUMBER AND/OR BUILDING PERMIT NUMBER: B) PROPERTY OWNER(S) AS LISTED ON TITLE: C) ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER (S) OR APN AND LOT NO'S FROM RECORDED FINAL MAP: Oi/«A.-/3G-OI.0j.03~. 0 t O) DESCRIPTION OF WORK: PLANNING: E) DATE OF INITIAL PARTICIPATION F) GENERAL PLAN DESIG N ATIO N(S) IN CFD: 6/7/f/ : (BOXES PROVIDE FOR THREE DIFFERENT USES, EXPAND AS REQUIRED.) Fi> ® P'^P F2) •©F3) G) NET DEVELOPABLE ACREAGE THAT WILL REMAIN BY GENERAL PLAN USE AFTER THE STRUCTURE(S) IS BUILT: G1) & \((X'\VS, H) TYPE OF LAND USE CREATED BY HI) Q.t>m rr* p<2_c./A- C/x*ui /2>Uf^>l '/d£TSS -P& S, (<i_ -Z..7-S ftP G2) G .° AC THE ISSUANCE OF THE BUILDING PERMIT: 3>u.STK-f *M.H2) AC G3) AC (FROM SPECIAL TAX TABLE) H3) EN 1) J) K) GINGERING: SQUARE FEET OF BUILDING PER USE INDICATED IN (H) ABOVE: / 11) SOFT I2> 13) SQF1 SOFT MPROVEMENT AREA (CHECK ONE): WITHIN THE BTD - IMPROVEMENT AREA I ( ) OUTSIDE THE BTO - I MPROVEM ENT AREA II ( ) LEGAL DESCRIPTION: (REQUIRED ONLY WHEN G ABOVE IS ZERO(O).) PARCEL / LOT (CIRCLE ONE) OF PARCEL MAP IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY RECORDER ON . N . (IF THE ABOVE IS NOT ADEQUATE A FULL LEGAL DESCRIPTION MUST BE ATTACHED.) BUILDING: FINANCIAL PORTION TO BE FILLED OUT BY MIKE PETERSON OR FAX TO BARBARA HALE 296-3783 Flf. L) M) ANCE: SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT TAX - ONE-TIME. RATE PER SQUARE FOOT:(FROM SPECIAL TAX TABLE.) L1) L2) S $ L3) $ SPECIAL TAX - ONE-TIME (I x L): M1) M2) $ $ M3) $ OBLIGATION FOR UPCOMING YEAR: IF THE PARCEL IS ISSUED A BUILDING PERMIT BETWEEN MARCH 2ND AND JUNE 30TH. AN OBLIGATION FOR THE UPCOMING YEAR IS CREATED AND WILL BE LEVIED IN THE FOLLOWING FISCAL YEAR. TOTAL PAYOFF OPTION 1: ||SUM OF <M> ABOVE. THE SPECIAL TAX LIEN ON THIS PROPERTY. WHEN CHOSING OPTION 1, WILL BE RELEASED WHEN ALL OUTSTANDING OBLIGATIONS HAVE BEEN PAID IN FULL. IF THERE IS A OBLIGATION FOR UPCOMING YEAR. UNDEVELOPED SPECIAL TAX WILL BE LEVIED IN THE UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR, AFTER PAYMENT OF WHICH THE WILL BE RELEASED. IF THERE IS ONLY THE CURRENT YEAR'S OBLIGATION OUTSTANDING. THE LIEN IS RELEASED WHEN BOTH INSTALLMENTS HAVE BEEN PAID. DISTRIBUTION OF PAYOFF: ACCOUNT NO. 430-810- 1340-8032 OPTION 1: 9 THE LIEN PASS THRU OPTION 2: : : |SUM OF (M) ABOVE TIMES 13.31%. THEAMOUNTSHOWNISTHE MAXIMUM ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX LEVIED FOR A PERIOD OF TWENTY-FIVE (25) YEARS. IF THERE IS AN OBLIGATION FOR THE UNPCOMING YEAR, THE UPCOMING YEAR'S TAXES WILL REFLECT THE OBLIGATION OF UNDEVELOPED LAND TAX. THE TWENTY-FIVE YEAR ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX WOULD BEGIN IN THE FOLLOWING FISCAL YEAR.OPTION 2: S BUILDING: pi) TRANSFER THE ABOVE AMOUNTS ONTO THE NO N - RESIDENTIAL CERTIFICATE AND OBTAIN THE SIGNATURE OF THE PROPERTY II OWNER BEFORE ISSUING A BUILDING PERMIT. DISTRIBUTION: A COPY OF: FINAL CALCULATION SHEET, BUILDING PERMIT, AND SIGNED CERTIFICATE A COPY OF: FINAL CALCULATION SHEET, BUILDING PERMIT. AND SIGNED CERTIFICATE A COPY OF: FINAL CALCULATION SHEET, AND SIGNED CERTIFICATE ALL ORIVGINALS CFD NO. 1 INCOMING BOX FINANCE (HELGA) PROPERTY OWNER BUILDING PERMIT FILE FEBRUARY 10, 1994 VALID UNTIL Plan Check No. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE CITY OF CARLSBAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 2075 LAS PALMAS DR., CARLSBAD, CA 92009 (619)438-1161 TKis form shall be used to determine the amount of school fees for a project and to verify that the project applicant has complied with the school fee requirements. No building permits for the projects shall be issued until the certification is signed by the appropriate school district and returned to the City of Carlsbad Building Department. SCHOOL DISTRICT: Carlsbad Unified 801 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92009 (434-0661) Encinitas Union 101 South Rancho Santa Fe Rd. Encinitas CA 92024 (944-4300) Project Applicant: Project Address: RESIDENTIAL: COMMER Prepared San Marcos Unified 1290 West San Marcos Blvd. San Marcos CA 92024 (744-4776) San Dieguito Union High School 710 Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas CA 92024 (753-6491) /rt> SQ. FT. of living area SQ. FT. of covered area uSTRIAL: SQ./7VAREA number of dwelling units SQ. FT. of garage area Date TEE CERTIFICATION (To be completed by the School District) Applicant has complied with fee requirement under Government Code 53080 Project is subject to an existing fee agreement Project is exempt from Government Code 53080 Final Map approval and construction started before September 1, 1986. (other school fees paid) Other Residential Fee Levied: $based on Comm/lndust Fee Levied: $ 1 3*71, /D based on__f/_37 sq. ft. @ sq. ft. @ School District Official Title Date