Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2283 COSMOS CT; ; CB891142; PermitDECLARATIONS ^LENDERI S WORKER S COMPENSATION OWNER/BUILDER CONTRACTOR5 3 ±illS 5 rthwith compi deemed rev31T3iJO SUOISI?rc1foCnO5CT0"Exemption ;fou shoula|cu3f OTICETO AF'PLICAN1S1s0 1S[ CalifornT^ T5So becomecCT(0to the WE-J 1 certify th1S;5J 3ince of in' f| |a°Z3SQ.1^6 003) rn"5O >o ^m°> SMPTIONriON INSC -n3) 3]iii C1 ^=»'_:SB-oilis S aEl^ss 3-fsi^=f5^^^=0 111.0™™^^— ?a) 0« nr-r^3 1j iI Ms = |1si I*I!|1D!lffi-- i^ n. ^ill =5 — a " — sroS^oo White — Inspector Green — (1) Finance Yellow — Assessor Pink — Applicant Gold — Temporary File - ""' !''"!^ \A ^\^\~ ^ ccO a.0)z LU g LUa. f,ri *- -'•BUILDING ;/j Q CCo 0LUCC o h- Q LUQ_ COz Q LU \L FOUNDATION 'DCIMe/~»n/->r?r-> o-rtrdCOLU0COccOOLL)D.COZ • e ^''''< COz O (-OLUQ. COz _l oLUa. CO Q LUoc D •oLUoc LU Q CO 0< o| gjCLz< Q 00UJLU OCXO / 2o o LU /CL CO Z j LJ J 0 u ] <C 2 GUNITE OR GROUT !t i,,' '\St•' !i »,'-^,It '"'*' % LLJO Q-z ^< ? 1 -^ 1 i°°< 6E o(/) Q. u. LU UJ CCOZ0o _ < CL CC o .j CM D OCCC UJ if) O ^n SUB FRAME D FLOOR D CEILINC_nr SHEATHING D ROOF D SHEAJFRAME 'EXTERIOR LATHD UJ ^ LU uj [7] P: cc "zLLJ ^ozOa. o /-^ (; .''',tt, ,'i ,i f f ,•- Qjj Z 7; UJ Z H - OC_ uJ}Z DO1 O Oz a UJ3 Q UJ Ih- CDz LUa: y5 (/, I *- X OD >-cczo 5 < oUJa.en 'jj o '-0 0 in LU a ;INSULATION_ I oca <>e i < oco ocu z ! V " - ..-PLUMBING 'oo Q. a o0 m Qz DC U JJ a UNDERGROUND H WASTE H WATERCC £ * UJ 1 a D O Q.Ot-TUB AND SHOWER PAN i. _ 1LU 1- 3C3 OC D WATER HEATER n SOLAR WATE1,ELECTRICAL iccLULLLL n Q Z occ0oc LU Q Z 0 r 5 LU LU D ROUGH ELECTRIC ioc D ELECTRIC SERVICE D TEMPORA^ *a BONDING n POOL IZz< 1s 1 i ^, ^ * 4 4- * O Z Q. Q. U.LU OC a " UJ Q. Q a ••• - / ( i i HEAT — AIR COND SYSTEMS '' -i - ,'' ' •, / - J - J'VENTILATING SYSTEMS i( i H j'F J -- £r** ^Oc ^l cc Q.LU ^odec >T CALL FOR FINAL INSPECTION WHtITEMS ABOVE HAVE BEEN• ( zu_PLUMBING !ELECTRICAL 'MCfLJ A MI^A 1» 1 ''• j \ i •' , \ <<< ^ ^~J «=w ^ ^>— —c —— '-*^. Jt ? b -~^ .. — . — -^ 'OZ a 5CQ -- — P QZOo oUJa.,1-' CO -* DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING SERVICES DIVISION 2075 LAS* PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CA 92009-4859 (619)438-1161 MISCELLANEOUS FEE RECEIPT Applicant Please Print And Fill In Shaded Area Only ADDRESS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO PLAN ID NO OWNER ADDRESS CITY /V7/SSsc*r ZIP TEL 8732 08/03/89 0001 01 05 Misc 407,00 VALIDATION AREA CONTRACTOR^^ _ ESTMATED VALUATION f W 1 4*3 & CONTRACTOR'S^ MAILING — ' ADDRESS -J tS/ 7~& CITY PLAN CHECK PPP 001-8100000-8821 IF THE APPLICANT TAKES NO ACTION WITHIN 180 DAYS, PLAN CHECK FEES WILL BE FORFEITED STATE LICENSE NO BUSINESS LICENSE NO LOT(S). LEGAL DESCRIPTION CHECK IF SUBMITTED \gf 2 ENERGY CALCS 2 1987 ENERGY CALCS FOR NON RESIDENTIAL BLDGS DESCRIPTION OF WORK £f 2 STRUCTURAL CALCS D 2 SOILS REPORTS 2 SELF ADDRESSED ENVELOPES DATE GIVEN/ SENT TO APPLICANT nATF CONTACT PERSON C///€/S LA COSTA LETTER ADDRESS SCHOOL FEE FORM ^ P & E CORRECTIONS LIST CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE White File Yellow Applicant Pink Finance Gold - Assessor FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION PLAN CHECK NUMBER 89T1ft2 PROJECT NAME Axlom-Stenton ADDRESS 2283 Cosmos Ct __ DATE 12-5-2 PROJECT NO TYPE OF UNIT CONTACT PERSON . CONTACT TELEPHONE. .UNIT NUMBER NUMBER OF UNITS PHASE NO Gary 431-1273 A88 INSPECTED BY J. INSPECTED BY INSPECTED BY DATE INSPECTED tJ. ~l DATE INSPECTED DATE INSPECTED APPROVED APPROVED APPROVED DISAPPROVED DISAPPROVED DISAPPROVED COMMENTS Rev 1/86 WHITE Suspense BLUE Water District GREEN Engineering CANARY Utilities PINK Planning GOLD Fire FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION PLAN CHECK NUMBER 8*31112 PROJECT NAME AxJom-Steimton ADDRESS DATE 12-5-5 2283 Cossnos Ci PROJECT NO TYPE OF UNIT .UNIT NUMBER Mew Comrci NUMBER OF UNITS PHASE NO CONTACT PERSON CONTACT TELEPHONE. Gary im-1273 Ail Departments INSPECTED BY INSPECTED BY INSPECTED BY DATE INSPECTED DATE INSPECTED DATE INSPECTED DEC 1 4 1989 APPROVED APPROVED APPROVED DISAPPROVED DISAPPROVED DISAPPROVED COMMENTS Engineering Departmsnt (619) 438-3367 =^H@BDWH[J) A DEC 0 8 1989||1 J CAflLSttAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT Rev 1/86 WHITE Suspense BLUE Water District GREEN Engineering CANARY Utilities PINK Planning GOLD Fire FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION 891142PLAN CHECK NUMBER _ PROJECT NAME AxioiTi-Stenton ADDRESS DATE 12-5-89 2283 Cosnos Ct PROJECT NO TYPE OF UNIT UNIT NUMBER New NUMBER OF UNITS PHASE NO CONTACT PERSON. CONTACT TELEPHONE. COMMENTS Gary 431-1273 AH Departments INSPECTED /\ / BY </A^_^ INSPECTED BY INSPECTED BY DATE /<2/)(J#& ^ INSPECTED / //^ / APPROVED ^ DATE INSPECTED APPROVED DATE INSPECTED APPROVED X DISAPPROVED DISAPPROVED DISAPPROVED Rev 1/86 WHITE Suspense BLUE Water District GREEN Engineering CANARY Utilities PINK Planning GOLD Fire CITY OF CARLSBAD INSPECTION REQUEST PERMIT* CB891142 FOR 12/12/89 DESCRIPTION: 10261SF OFFICE 25271 WHSE OFFICE TI ONLY.WAS BUILT AS IND BLDG TYPE: ITI JOB ADDRESS: 2283 COSMOS CT APPLICANT: PISARIK, CHRIS PHONE: CONTRACTOR: PHONE: OWNER: AXIOM/STENTON PARTNERS PHONE: INSPECTOR AREA MC PLANCK# CB891142 OCC GRP CONSTR. TYPE NEW STR: FL: STE: 714 643-5822 714-643-5822 REMARKS: TEL/MH/GARY/431-1273 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: INSPECTOR TOTAL TIME: —RELATED PERMITS—PERMIT# TYPE CB880825 COM CB890354 ELEC SE890115 SWOW CB891862 ELEC STATUS ISSUED ISSUED ISSUED ISSUED CD 19 29 39 49 LVL DESCRIPTION ST Final Structural PL Final Plumbing EL Final Electrical ME Final Mechanical ACT COMMENTS 1 ***** INSPECTION HISTORY ***** DATE DESCRIPTION 120689 Final Combo 120589 Final Combo 120189 Interior Lath/Drywall 120189 Service Change/Upgrade 112889 Rough Combo 112889 Rough Combo 112789 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding 112789 Rough/Topout 112789 Rough Electric 112789 Rough/Ducts/Dampers 110689 Interior Lath/Drywall 110389 Rough/Topout 110189 Rough/Topout 103089 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding 103089 Rough/Topout 103089 Rough Electric 103089 Rough/Ducts/Dampers 102489 Interior Lath/Drywall 102489 Shear Panels/HD's 102489 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding 101989 Shear Panels/HD's 101789 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 100589 Ftg/Foundation/Piers ACT CO CO AP CO AP CO PA PA CO CO PA AP CO CO CO CO NR NR AP AP CO AP CO INSP MFC MPC MFC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC COMMENTS CORR NOT YET DONE SEE LIST DRAFTSTOP SWITCH GEAR 2ND FLOOR 1ST FLOOR SEE LIST 11-28-89 CEILING GRIDS CONDENSATE LINES OFFICES & BATHROOM WALLS WASTE,VENTS & H20 LINES NEEDS RETEST SEE COMMENTS 10-30-89 SEE COMMENTS 10-30-89 SEE COMMENTS 10-30-89 SHEAR PANELS 2ND FLOOR DIAPHRAM MISSING SHEAR CONNECTORS COLUMN BASES CORRECTION NOTICE <- ADDRESS: 2; D APPROVED PLANS SHALL BE ON JOB SITE BUILDING <£ D FOUNDATION D REINFORCING STEEL D MASONRY C§ D GROUT-GUNITE D FLOOR AND CEILING FRAME D SHEATHING << D FRAME D EXTERIOR LATH D INSULATION , (j D INTERIOR LATH OR DRYWALL PLUMBING I D UNDERGROUND PLUMBING D UNDERGROUND WATER D ROUGH PLUMBING D TOP OUT PLUMBING ^ ^^ D SEWER AND PL/CO C£/ £-*&&£- J*{lsZE&& JC&/Z. A/b-Vfe^ /T? D TUB OR SHOWER PAN D GAS TEST D WATER HEATER ELECTRICAL D TEMPORARY SERVICE D ELECTRIC UNDERGROUND D ROUGH ELECTRIC D POOL BONDING D ELECTRIC SERVICE Q UFER GROUND D GFI D SMOKE DETECTOR MISCELLANEOUS D PLENUM AND DUCTS ,, D COMBUSTION AIR >'$ ' | D CONDITIONED AIR SYSTEMS D SOLAR D GRADING D POOL /'-''< D PATIO D SIGN D OTHER CITY OF CARLSBAD INSPECTION REQUEST PERMIT* CB891142 FOR 12/12/89 DESCRIPTION: 10261SF OFFICE 25271 WHSE OFFICE TI ONLY.WAS BUILT AS IND BLDG TYPE: ITI JOB ADDRESS: 2283 COSMOS CT STR: INSPECTOR AREA MC PLANCK# CB891142 OCC GRP CONSTR. TYPE NEW FL: STE: ***** INSPECTION HISTORY ***** DATE DESCRIPTION 100589 Sewer/Water Service ACT INSP AP MFC COMMENTS CITY OF CARLSBAD INSPECTION REQUEST PERMIT# CB891142 FOR 11/27/89 DESCRIPTION: 10261SF OFFICE 25271 WHSE OFFICE TI ONLY.WAS BUILT AS IND BLDG TYPE: ITI JOB ADDRESS: 2283 COSMOS CT APPLICANT: PISARIK, CHRIS PHONE: CONTRACTOR: PHONE: OWNER: AXIOM/STENTON PARTNERS PHONE: STR: FL: 714 643-5822 714-643-5822 INSPECTOR AREA MC PLANCK* CBS91142 OCC GRP CONSTR. TYPE STE: NEW REMARKS: T2/MH/431-1273 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: INSPECTOR TOTAL TIME: —RELATED PERMITS— CD LVL DESCRIPTION 14 24 34 44 PERMIT# TYPE CB880825 COM CB890354 ELEC SE890115 SWOW STATUS ISSUED ISSUED ISSUED ACT COMMENTS ST Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding PL Rough/Topout EL Rough Electric ME Rough/Ducts/Dampers ***** INSPECTION HISTORY ***** DATE DESCRIPTION 110689 Interior Lath/Drywall 110389 Rough/Topout 110189 Rough/Topout 103089 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding 103089 Rough/Topout 103089 Rough Electric 103089 Rough/Ducts/Dampers 102489 Interior Lath/Drywall 102489 Shear Panels/HD's 102489 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding 101989 Shear Panels/HD's 101789 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 100589 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 100589 Sewer/Water Service ACT PA AP CO CO CO CO NR NR AP AP CO AP CO AP INSP MFC MFC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC COMMENTS OFFICES & BATHROOM WALLS WASTE,VENTS & H20 LINES NEEDS RETEST SEE COMMENTS 10-30-89 SEE COMMENTS 10-30-89 SEE COMMENTS 10-30-89 SHEAR PANELS 2ND FLOOR DIAPHRAM MISSING SHEAR CONNECTORS COLUMN BASES CITY OF CARLSBAD INSPECTION REQUEST PERMIT# CB891142 FOR 10/30/89 DESCRIPTION: 10261SF OFFICE 25271 WHSE OFFICE TI ONLY.WAS BUILT AS IND BLDG JOB ADDRESS: 2283 COSMOS CT APPLICANT: PISARIK, CHRIS CONTRACTOR: OWNER: AXIOM/STENTON PARTNERS REMARKS: T3/RS/GARY/431-1273 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: PHONE: PHONE: PHONE: STR: FL: 714 643-5822 714-643-5822 INSPECTOR AREA MC PLANCK# CBS91142 OCC GRP CONSTR. TYPE NEW STE: INSPECTOR TOTAL TIME: CD LVL DESCRIPTION 14 24 34 44 ACT COMMENTS ST Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding PL Rough/Topout EL Rough Electric ME Rough/Ducts/Dampers ***** INSPECTION HISTORY ***** DATE DESCRIPTION 102489 Interior Lath/Drywall 102489 Shear Panels/HD's 102489 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding 101989 Shear Panels/HD's 101789 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 100589 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 100589 Sewer/Water Service ACT INSP NR MFC MFC MPC MPC MPC MPC MPC AP AP CO AP CO AP COMMENTS SHEAR PANELS 2ND FLOOR DIAPHRAM MISSING SHEAR CONNECTORS COLUMN BASES AT" AS —^. / - CITY OF CARLSBAD INSPECTION REQUEST PERMIT* CB891142 FOR 12/06/89 DESCRIPTION: 10261SF OFFICE 25271 WHSE OFFICE TI ONLY.WAS BUILT AS IND BLDG TYPE: ITI JOB ADDRESS: 2283 COSMOS CT APPLICANT: PISARIK, CHRIS PHONE: CONTRACTOR: PHONE: OWNER: AXIOM/STENTON PARTNERS PHONE: INSPECTOR AREA MC PLANCK# CB891142 OCC GRP CONSTR. TYPE NEW STR: FL: STE: 714 643-5822 714-643-5822 REMARKS: T3/MH/GARY/431-1273 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: INSPECTOR A TOTAL TIME: —RELATED PERMITS—PERMIT# TYPE CB880825 COM CB890354 ELEC SE890115 SWOW CB891862 ELEC STATUS ISSUED ISSUED ISSUED ISSUED CD 19 29 39 49 LVL DESCRIPTION ST Final Structural PL Final Plumbing EL Final Electrical ME Final Mechanical ACT COMMENTS ***** INSPECTION HISTORY ***** DATE DESCRIPTION 120189 Interior Lath/Drywall 120189 Service Change/Upgrade 112889 Rough Combo 112889 Rough Combo 112789 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding 112789 Rough/Topout 112789 Rough Electric 112789 Rough/Ducts/Dampers 110689 Interior Lath/Drywall 110389 Rough/Topout 110189 Rough/Topout 103089 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding 103089 Rough/Topout 103089 Rough Electric 103089 Rough/Ducts/Dampers 102489 Interior Lath/Drywall 102489 Shear Panels/HD's 102489 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding 101989 Shear Panels/HD's 101789 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 100589 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 100589 Sewer/Water Service ACT AP CO AP CO PA PA CO CO PA AP CO CO CO CO NR NR AP AP CO AP CO AP INSP MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC COMMENTS DRAFTSTOP SWITCH GEAR 2ND FLOOR 1ST FLOOR SEE LIST 11-28-89 CEILING GRIDS CONDENSATE LINES OFFICES & BATHROOM WALLS WASTE,VENTS & H20 LINES NEEDS RETEST SEE COMMENTS 10-30-89 SEE COMMENTS 10-30-89 SEE COMMENTS 10-30-89 SHEAR PANELS 2ND FLOOR DIAPHRAM MISSING SHEAR CONNECTORS COLUMN BASES CITY OF CARLSBAD INSPECTION REQUEST PERMIT* CB891142 FOR 12/05/89 DESCRIPTION: 10261SF OFFICE 25271 WHSE OFFICE TI ONLY.WAS BUILT AS IND BLDG TYPE: ITI JOB ADDRESS: 2283 COSMOS CT PISARIK, CHRISAPPLICANT: CONTRACTOR: OWNER:AXIOM/STENTON PARTNERS PHONE: PHONE: PHONE: STR: FL: 714 643-5822 714-643-5822 INSPECTOR AREA MC PLANCK# CB891142 OCC GRP CONSTR. TYPE STE: NEW REMARKS: TEL/MH/GARY/431-1273 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: INSPECTOR TOTAL TIME: —RELATED PERMITS— 19 29 39 49 PERMIT# TYPE CB880825 COM CB890354 ELEC SE890115 SWOW CB891862 ELEC CD LVL DESCRIPTION STATUS ISSUED ISSUED ISSUED ISSUED ACT COMMENTS ST Final Structural PL Final Plumbing EL Final Electrical ME Final Mechanical ***** INSPECTION HISTORY ***** DATE DESCRIPTION 120189 Interior Lath/Drywall 120189 Service Change/Upgrade 112889 Rough Combo 112889 Rough Combo 112789 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding 112789 Rough/Topout 112789 Rough Electric 112789 Rough/Ducts/Dampers 110689 Interior Lath/Drywall 110389 Rough/Topout 110189 Rough/Topout 103089 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding 103089 Rough/Topout 103089 Rough Electric 103089 Rough/Ducts/Dampers 102489 Interior Lath/Drywall 102489 Shear Panels/HD's 102489 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding 101989 Shear Panels/HD's 101789 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 100589 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 100589 Sewer/Water Service ACT AP CO AP CO PA PA CO CO PA AP CO CO CO CO NR NR AP AP CO AP CO AP INSP MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC MFC COMMENTS DRAFTSTOP SWITCH GEAR 2ND FLOOR 1ST FLOOR SEE LIST 11-28-89 CEILING GRIDS CONDENSATE LINES OFFICES & BATHROOM WALLS WASTE,VENTS & H20 LINES NEEDS RETEST SEE COMMENTS 10-30-89 SEE COMMENTS 10-30-89 SEE COMMENTS 10-30-89 SHEAR PANELS 2ND FLOOR DIAPHRAM MISSING SHEAR CONNECTORS COLUMN BASES ESGIL CORPORATION 9320 CHESAPEAKE DR., SUITE 2O8 SAN DIEGO, CA 02123 (619)560-1468 DATE: JURISDICTION: GpLC 1 £ PLAN CHECK NO: (JOS \TinjPROJECT ADDRESS: PROJECT NAME ; Pp f k^ T ^ ^ TA L P(./cl 1C a t / fl fl I 1APPLICANT JURISDICTION PLAN CHECKER FILE COPY Dups JDESIGNER I. D The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. mas The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply I™ with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficien- cies identified \Y\ \\\c. rgVYVTfkl beJQMj are resolved and D D checked by building department staff. The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corp. until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. D The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to return to the applicant contact person. || The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: II Esgil staff did not advise the applicant contact person that plan check has been completed. •> the plan check has.vieEsgil staff did advis been completed. Person Telephone I (JY\ REMARKS : By ;y/rfc' f/r,tj ;. -y*Enclosures: ESGIL CORPORATION QGA DAA Dvw QDM ESGIL CORPORATION 932O CHESAPEAKE DR , SUITE 2O8 SAN DIEGO, CA 92123 (619) 56O-1468 DATE : PLAN CHECK NO: 0_,,cir o9" I \ 4- *L. _ SET- Jj. PROJECT ADDRESS: 2/2- fe^ CjT> f .Wl O^ Ct _ PROJECT NAME: Pftf UgP ^ S<3Y\ ?> PlA b JV CCX.J <0>0,S !_JPLAN CHECKER GFILE COPY HUPS 'DESIGNER n , — , | _ | The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficien- cies identified _ 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. I The check list transmitted herewith is for your information ^ The plans are being held at Esgil Corp. until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to return to the applicant contact person. The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: staff did not advise the applicant contact person that plan check has been completed. Esgil staff did advise applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: (*(l4-) (0> Date contacted: REMARKS: Telephone # n'rrirdi \-i-ew<. By : ESGIL CORPORATION GAA Dvw BOM aake all corrections on the original racings and' submit tvo new sets of prints, and \ original planseEs£EaT~ may have been returned to you by the Jurisdiction, to: Esgll Corporation, 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite #208, San Diego, CA 92123, (619) 560-U68. Please cake all corrections on the original tracings and submit two new sets of prints, and any original plan sets that may have been returned to you by the jurisdiction, to: The jurisdiction's building department. Indicate on the Title Sheet of the plans, the name of the legal owner and name of person responsible for the preparation of the plans Section 302(a)7. Each sheet of the plans cost be signed 'by the person responsible for their preparation, even though there are no structural changes. Business and Professions Code. Plans and calculations shall be signed by the California state licensed engineer or architect where there are structural changes to existing buildings or structural additions. Please include the California license number, seal, date of license expiration and date plans are signed. Business and Professions Code. Provide the correct address and suite number of tenant space on the plans. Section 302. Provide a note on the site plan indicatir>g the previous use of the tenant space or building being remodeled. Section 302. When the character of the occupancy or use changes within a building, the building oust be made to comply with current Building Code requirements for the nev occupancy. Please provide complete details to show the building with comply. Section 502. UBC Section 30^ requires the Building Official to determine the total value of all construction work proposed under this permit. The value shall include all finish work, painting* .roofing, electrical, pluabing, heating, air conditioning, elevator, fire extinguishing systeas and any oth«r permanert equipoent. Please provide & signed copy of the designer's or contractor's construction cost estimate of all work proposed. Provide a plot plan showing the distance from the building to the property lines and the location of tenant space (or reaodel) within the building. On the first sheet of the plans indicate: Type of construction of the existing building, present and proposed occupancy classifications of the resodel area and the occupant load of the reaodel areas and the floor where the tenant unproveaent is located. quantities listed in UBC Table 9-A. rovide a statement on the Title Sheet of the lans that this project shall comply with title 24 and i9S5 UBC, UHC and U?C and 1957 're- NEC. Provide a fully dimensioned floor plan showing the size and use of all roots* or areas within the space being improved or altered. Draw the plans to scale and indicate the scale on theplan. Indicate the use of all spaces adjacent to the area being remodeled or improved, Show any existing fire rated area separation walls, occupancy separation walls, deaising walls, shafts or rated corridors. Identify and provide construction details for proposed nev fire rated walls. Specify on the plans the fire ratings of assemblies to protect proposed openings in existuig or nev fire vails. Identify existing walls to be existing walls to reaain and proposed new walls. Identify bearing walls, non-tearing walls, and shear walls. Provide a partitions.sectionShow: view of all new interior (a) Type, size and spacing of studs. Indicate gauge for aetsl studs. Specify nanufacturer and approval nuober or indicate "to b* 1CBO approved". (b) Method of attaching top and bottom plates to structure. (NOTE: Top of partitionoust be secured to roof or floor frasing, unless suspended ceiling has been designed for partition lateral load) (c) Wall sheathing material and details of attachoent (size and spacing of fasteners). (d) Shov height of partition and suspended ceiling, and height fros floor to roof framing or floor framing 5/16/89 s ovide notesand "vail surfaced with * material extending -fir.ish in to show that the toilet rooos are seooth hard non-absorbert \ up the wall. Jj walls five inches surfacing" shall ba provided on the/j from the floor to a height of 4 feet urinals and withiiyi water closet cosupaxtBcnts. Section SXO(b).^f~*"c5 • Noto on the plans: "All interior finishes oust cooply with Chapter 42 of the UBC". Specify "class Tu~ flag* spread rating (Biniaua) for A^_L Ag-^M .'#*r>g-2.f;4-7 Lateral bracing for suspended ceiling oust be provided. (UBC Table 23-J) Where ceiling loads are less than 5 PSF and not supporting interior partitions, ceiling bracing shall be provided by four No. 12 gauge vires secured to the main runner within 2 inches of tne cross runner intersection wid splayed 9Q_ from each other at an angle net exceeding 4$_ from the plane of the ceiling. These horizontal restraint points shall be placed 12 feet o.c. in both directions with the first point within 4 feet of each wall. Attachaent of restraint wires to the structure above shall be adequate for the load imposed In buildings having floors and roofs of wood fraoe construction, other than dwelling or hotel occupancies, draft stop the area between the ceiling and floor above so that no concealed space exceeds 1,000 s.f. and no horizontal dimension exceeds 60 L.F. (if space has sprinklers, then 3,000 s.f. and 100 L.F.)- In buildings having floors and roofs of wood frana construction, other than dwelling or hotel occupancies, draft stop the area between the ceiling a^d roof soove so that no concealed space exceeds 3,000 s.f. and no horizontal dimension exceeds 60 L.F. (if space has sprinklers, then 9,000 S.f. and 100 L.F.). The tenant space and new and/or existing facilities serving the reoodeled area oust be accessible to and functional for the physically disabled. See the attached correction sheet. Title 24, Part 2. The width of the required level area on the side into which doors swvng shall extend 24 inches past the strike edge for exterior doors and 18 inches past the strike edge for interior doors. Section 2-3304, Title 24. Specify lever-type hardware for passage doors on floors accessible to the disabled. Section 2-3304, Title If both sexes will be employed and the nuaber of eeployees exceeds four, provide separate toilet facilities for Den And wooen. If "both saxes will be employed and the total number of employees will not exceed four", and only on* re&troon is provided, note the words \n quctat;on above on the floor plan. Section 705. In Areas where the occupant load exceeds ,, two exits are required. See , TabU 33-A. Provide an exit analysis plan (may be 8 1/2" x 11" or any convenient site). Exits should have a oiniswa separation of one- half the maximum overall diagonal dimension of t>e building or azaa served. Section 3303(c). The aaxiaua number of required exits and their required separation must be s&intained until egress is provided froa the structure Section 3303(a). ROOBS with aore than 10 occupants aay have one e*,it through one adjoining rcoa. Revise exits to comply Section 3303(e). _;it signs are required for exits serving an occupant load exceeding 49. Show all required exit sign locations. Section 33l4(a),/I-3-r/'?- Show that exits are lighted with at least one "oot candle at floor level. Section 3313(a). \js #-?/>~IT<. /&• Show the locations of existing exits from the ' building and show tha path of travel from the remodel area to the existing exits. Note on the plans: "All exits are to be openable froD inside without the use of a key or special knowledge", In lieu of the above, in a Croup B occupancy, you aay note "Provide a sign on or near the exit doors reading THIS DOOR TO RJUUIN UNLOCKED DURING BUSINESS HOURS", Section Exit doors should be a mininun size of 3 feet by 6 feet 8 inches with a ninojzuo door swing of 90 degrees. K&xuaua leaf width is 4 feet. Section 3304(e). Exit doors should swing in the direction of egress when serving an occupant load of 50 or DO re or when serving any hazardous area. Section 3303(b). Applies to door(s) 5/16/89 Regardless of occupant load, a floor or landing not more than 1/2 inch below the threshold is required on each side of an exit door used for disabled access (say b-e 1" maximum where not used for disabled access). Section 3304(h). Doors should not project nore than 7 inches into the required corridor width when fully opened, nor more than one-half of the required corridor width when in any position. Section 3305(d). Revolving, slj.di.ng and overhead doors are not permitted as exit doors if the occupant load exceeds 9 or the exit door serves & hazardous Area. Section If non-rated corridors are used per 1985 UBC, Section S305(g), Exc. 5, provide a reference to the corridors on the floor plan, noting: 1. Corridors are non-rated per 3305{g), Exception 5, 1985 UBC. /• Exit doors from assembly rooms with 50 or more occupants shall not be provided with a latch or lock unless it is panic hardware. Section 3318. Double acting doors are not allowed when serving a tributary occupant load of more than, 100, or when part of a fire assembly, or of smoke and draft control assemblies or when equipped with panic hardware. Section 3304(b). ICorridors must provide continuous protection to the exterior of the building. Interruptions by\ an intervening room is not permitted. Foyers, lobbies or reception rooms constructed as required for corridors are not considered intervening rooms. Section 3305. Corridors and exterior exit balconies 10 or more occupants oust be a minimum inches wide and 7 feet high to the lowest! projection. Section 330S(b). When a corridor or exterior exit balcory accessible to the handicapped, changes elevations shall be tade by means of a ramp. Section 3305(f). when two axits are required, dead end corridorsi <N>' ' ' ' - - - - 20 feetj •£and exit balconies Section 330S(e). are limited to serving 30 ils n and or more ceilings occupants shall of one-hour Corridors greater than So fe'et wide when the occupants have an exit independent from the corridor. Exterior sides of exterior exit balconies. One story buildings housing Group B, Division <» occupancies. Section 3305(g). Section Smoke detection syttoa nutt be litted by the State Fire Marshal1 and be a supervised low voltage system with Combination audible and visual signals with battery backup. Smofce detectors Center. shall be maximum 30' on 4.Combined audible/visual signal device(s) shall be installed just inside of each exit door from t>« corridor, also alllocations in the corridor oust be insight of a signal device. Power supply shall be dedicated branchcircuit. Circuit disconnecting means shall b« accessible only to authorized personnel and shall be clearly marked FIRLALARM CIRCUIT CONTROL. With & lock- On device. 1985 UBC Section 3305(g), Exception 5, cannot be used for non-rated corridors in a fully sprinklered office space if the occupant load in the space exceeds 100. 1985 UBC Section applicable to the , apply to the common corridor where the tributary occupant load appears to exceed 100occupants. 3305{g), Exception 5, is office space but does not When 1985 UBC Section 3305(g), Exception 5, is applied for corridors on one floor, the corridors on the lower level(s) oust be rat«d if these lower corridors serve more than 100 occupants. The tributary load from the upper level(s) shall be the total occupant load fron Jhe above level(s). Clearly show where the non-rated corridor terminates and a rated corridor system -hour 5*rt- rated corridors shall have door openings protected by tight-fitting smoke and draft control assemblies rated 20 minutes, except openings in interior vails o£ exterior exit balconies. Doors shall be maintained self-closing or be automatic-closing by action of a smoke detector per Section J>306(b). Doors shall be gasketed to provide a smoke and draft seal . where the door meets the stop on sides and top. Section J305(h). 5A6/89 rated corridors, lobbies, reception or foyers cross-hatched on the floor plans. Total area of all openings, except doors, in any portion of an interior corridor, shall not exceed 25 percent of the area of the corridor wall of the room whi<-h it is separating from the corridor. Such openings shall be protected by fixed, approved 1/4 inch thick architectural corridor, or exterior exit balcony, showing ai; fire-resistive materials and detail? construction for all floors, walls>all, »ncw>—cw—*^«a*n>*i—•*!—•re*o- oonycrs.—-rzTTvige fire dampers at duce penetrations of fire- rated occupancy and area, separations, shairs and corridor walls. ^nA ceilines. Section 4306(j). ~— If building exceeds two stories, show corridor is separated froa elevator shaft. Sections 3304(g)(h) and 1706(a)(b). (See I.C.B.O. interpretation). Provide evidence o (for restaurants equipment). Health. or for Departoent approval tenants using X-ray Subait plan showing location of all panels. Subait panels schedules. &££6£*t-£. Submit electrical load calculations Indicate existing Bain service size. Indicate existing total main service lort.&f Indicate naw additional loads. Indicate wiring method, i.e. I>CC, metal flex Show exit Signs on the electrical lighting plan. Note: Power for exit lights and emergency lighting must conform to the 198S UBC Sections 3313 and 3314. Provide receptacle(s) within 25' of the roof >unted A/C units. UMC Section 509.^,- 4" Provide multiple switch lighting controls per " -, Title 24, 2-5319. ' ' ~ ' S3. Provide an electrical plan for the alarm systea showing compliance with criteria described under earlier correction nunber 50. rovide mechanical ventilation in all rooms capable of supplying a Einiavjs of 5 cubic feet per ainute of outside air with a total circulation of not less Chan 15 cubic feet per muiute per occupant. Section 605 and 705,UBC. provide mechanical plans showing existing and proposed HVXC equipment, ducts and access to equipment. Hflt" £HTS Detail access and working clearances to HVxC Cooling coils or cooling units located in attic or furred space, where deaage may result from condensate overflow, shall be provided with an additional water tight pan of corrosion resistant material to catch overflow if prioary condensate drain becomes clogged. Section 1205, UMC. One-hour corridors shall not be used as an integral part of a duct systea. Ihis includes the space above a dropped ceiling within the one-hour corridor. UMC Section 706(b). rovide gas line plans and calculations, showing pipe ^agjhs^. ^^r ^£J demands. UPC Section 1219. Aj O (^>n S Provide drain, waste and vent plans. Provide water line sizing calculations. UPC Section 1009. Detail how floor drain trap seal is to be maintained. UPC Section 707 (floor drain trap priaing). fShow P & I valve on water heater and detail dram line route from P 4 I valve, to the exterior. UPC Section l007(e)./X£? &*tS - Show l/V per 12" slope on drain and waste lines. UPC Section 407. Provide complete energy design calculations, including all existing design and new energy ""esign for this building. See attached non- residential energy design checklist. 85. For ramodels in an existing conditioned space, show that the remodeled space will use not aore energy than the existing space or show the reaodeled space will confora to latest energy design standards. SHOW V/HICU AC UMIT<> AXE TO B>£ 6/8/89 .) Please see additional corrections or rea&rksthAt follow. ttie Jurisdiction has contracted with EsgilCorporation located at 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, $&n Diego, California 92123; telephone number of 619/56C-1468, to psrforo the plan check for your project. If you have any questions regarding these plan check items, please contact At Esgil Corporation you. gee wfe^f b urcy>.<f t/n nrovAacu/: 60' <Z. 0 ^*0 / /98ft, lie, •* O ESGIL CORPORATION 9320 CHESAPEAKE DR., SUITE 2O8 SAN DIEGO, CA 92123 (619) 56O-1468 DATE :a \?> JURISDICTION: PLAN CHECK NO: PROJECT ADDRESS; PROJECT NAME : d,(X< I . - I I 4*2- SET: H C/t" QAPPLICANT_ _jPLAN CHECKER QFILE COPY QUPS [jDESIGNER 1< C C % OQYl S T LC fc 1 1 (_CCJ I Crll ^ T X . The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficien- cies identified _ are resolved and checked by building department staff. -, The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies J 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. B The plans are being held at Esgil Corp. until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to return to the applicant contact person. The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: Vt'e\o' Esgil staff did not advise the applicanfcontact person that plan check has been completed. s Esgil staff did advise applicant that, the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: Date contacted: | | REMARKS: Telephone By ;GliUACJC ikjU Enclosures: ESGIL CORPORATION cA DAA Dvw 3 DM PLAN CORRECTION SHEET TENANT IMPROVEMENT PLAN CHECK NO.; <B>9 ~ l\4*2- JURISDICTIOH;S OOP. TO: Pner-Va. Rggd COL, OCCUPANCY: PROJECT DATA 6-2. BUILDING USE: TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: ACTUAL AREA; i £i 2. (<Q \ ALLOWABLE AREA: = TSTORIES HEIGHT: SPRINKLERS: OCCUPANT LOAD: REMARKS: Date plans received by jurisdiction. Date plans received by Esgil Corporation- Date initial plan check completed. By Applicant contact person* FOREWORD; PLEASE READ Plan check is limited to 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 andaccess for the handicapped^.^ The plan check is based on regulations enforced by the Building Inspection Department. You may have other corrections based on laws and ordinances enforced by the Planning Department, Engineering Department or other departments. Code sections cited are based on the 1985 UBC. The circled 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 303(c), 1985 Uniform Building Code, the approval of the plans does not permit the violation of any state, county or city law To speed up the recheck process, note on this list (or a copy") where each correction item has been addressed, i e . plan sheet, specification, etc Be sure to enclose the marked up list when you submit the revised plans. NOTE: PAGE NOMBERS ARE NOT IK SEQUENCE AS PAGES HAVING NO ITEMS NEEDING COKRKUaOHS WERE DELETED. LIST NO 90, TENANT IMPROVEMENT WITHOUT SPECIFIC ENERGY ZONE DATA OR POLICY SUPPLEMENTS, 1985 UBC © X X X X X X Please make all corrections on the original tracings and' submit two new sets of prints, and any original plan sets that may have been returned to you by the jurisdiction, to: Esgil Corporation, 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite #208, San Diego, CA 92123, (619) 560-11*68. Please make all corrections on the original tracings and submit two new sets of prints, and any original plan sets that may have been returned to you by the jurisdiction, to: The jurisdiction's building department. Indicate on the Title Sheet of the plans, the name of the legal owner and name of person responsible for the preparation of the plans Section 302(a)7. Each sheet of the plans must be signed by the person responsible for their preparation, even though there are no structural changes Business and Professions Code. Plans and calculations shall be signed by the California state licensed engineer or architect where there are structural changes to existing buildings or structural additions. Please include the California license number, seal, date of license expiration and date plans are signed. Business and Professions Code. Provide the correct address and suite number of tenant space on the plans. Section 302. Provide a note on the site plan indicating the previous use of the tenant space or building being remodeled. Section 302. When the character of the occupancy or use changes within a building, the building must be made to comply with current Building Code requirements for the new occupancy. Please provide complete details to show the building with comply. Section 502. UBC Section 304 requires the Building Official to determine the total value of all construction work proposed under this permit The value shall include all finish work, painting, roofing, electrical, plumbing, heating, air conditioning, elevator, fire extinguishing systems and any other permanent equipment. Please provide a signed copy of the designer's or contractor's construction cost estimate of all work proposed Provide a plot plan showing the distance from the building to the property lines and the location of tenant space (or remodel) within the building. X On the first sheet of the plans indicate: Type of construction of the existing building, present and proposed occupancy classifications of the remodel area and the occupant load of the remodel areas and the floor where the tenant improvement is located. Provide a note on the plans indicating if any hazardous materials will be stored and/or used within the building which exceed the quantities listed in UBC Table 9-A. 13.1 Provide a statement on the Title Sheet of the plans that this project shall comply with Title 24 and 1985 UBC, UMC and UPC and 1987 NEC. X X X Provide a fully dimensioned floor plan showing the size and use of all rooms or areas within the space being improved or altered. Draw the plans to scale and indicate the scale on the plan. Indicate the use of all spaces adjacent to the area being remodeled or improved. Show any existing fire rated area separation walls, occupancy separation walls, demising walls, shafts or rated corridors. Identify and provide construction details for proposed new fire rated walls. Specify on the plans the fire ratings of assemblies to protect proposed openings in existing or new fire walls. Identify existing walls to be removed, existing walls to remain and proposed new walls Identify bearing walls, non-bearing walls, and shear walls. Provide a partitions. section Show. view of all new interior (a) Type, size and spacing of studs. Indicate gauge for metal studs Specify manufacturer and approval number or indicate "to be ICBO approved". (b) Method of attaching top and bottom plates to structure. (NOTE- Top of partition must be secured to roof or floor framing, unless suspended ceiling has been designed for partition lateral load). (c) Wall sheathing material and details of attachment (size and spacing of fasteners) (d) Show height of partition and suspended ceiling, and height from floor to roof framing or floor framing 5/16/89 Provide notes j floor and "wall surfaced with material Similar g to show that the finish in toilet rooms are a smooth hard non-absorbent extending five inches up the wall surfacing shall be provided on the walls from the floor to a height of 4 feet around urinals and within water closet compartments. Section 510(b) Note on the plans: "All interior finishes must comply with Chapter 42 of the UBC". Specify "class "J-Qi- fT""° spread rating (minimum) for flrLL A-e-gAr^ Lateral bracing for suspended ceiling must be provided. (UBC Table 23-J) Where ceiling loads are less than 5 PSF and not supporting interior partitions, ceiling bracing shall be provided by four No 12 gauge wires secured to the main runner within 2 inches of the cross runner intersection and splayed 90_ from each other at an angle not exceeding 45_ from the plane of the ceiling. These horizontal restraint points shall be placed 12 feet o.c. in both directions with the first point within 4 feet of each wall Attachment of restraint wires to the structure above shall be adequate for the load imposed In buildings having floors and roofs of wood frame construction, other than dwelling or hotel occupancies, draft stop the area between the ceiline and floor above so that no concealed space exceeds 1,000 s.f. and no horizontal dimension exceeds 60 L.F. (if space has sprinklers, then 3,000 s.f. and 100 L F.). In buildings having floors and roofs of wood frame construction, other than dwelling or hotel occupancies, draft stop the area between the ceiling and roof above so that no concealed space exceeds 3,000 s.f. and no horizontal dimension exceeds 60 L.F (if space has sprinklers, then 9,000 s.f and 100 L.F.). The tenant space and new and/or existing facilities serving the remodeled area must be accessible to and functional for the physically disabled. See the attached correction sheet Title 24, Part 2 " ' The width of the required level area on the side into which doors swing shall extend 24 inches past the strike edge for exterior doors and 18 inches past the strike edge for interior doors Section 2-3304, Title 24. Specify lever-type hardware for passage doors on floors accessible to the disabled. Section 2-3304, Title 24. If both sexes will be employed and the number of employees exceeds four, provide separate toilet facilities for men and women. If "both sexes will be employed and the total number of employees will not exceed four", and only one restroom is provided, note the words in quotation above on the floor plan Section 705. In areas where the occupant load exceeds , two exits are required. See . Table 33-A. Provide an exit analysis plan (may be 8 1/2" x 11" or any convenient size). Exits should have a minimum separation of one- half the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the building or area served. Section 3303(c). The maximum number of required exits and their required separation must be maintained until egress is provided from the structure. Section 3303(a). Rooms with more than 10 occupants may have one exit through one adjoining room. Revise exits to comply. Section 3303(e) Exit signs are required for exits serving an occupant load exceeding 49. Show all required exit sign locations. Section 3314(a). Show that exits are lighted with at least one foot candle at floor level. Section 3313(a) Show the locations of existing exits from the building and show the path of travel from the remodel area to the existing exits. Note on the plans: "All exits are to be openable from inside without the use of a key or special knowledge". In lieu of the above, in a Group B occupancy, you may note "Provide a sign on or near the exit doors reading THIS DOOR TO REMAIN UNLOCKED DURING BUSINESS HOURS". Section 3304(c). Exit doors should be a minimum size of 3 feet by 6 feet 8 inches with a minimum door swing of 90 degrees. Maximum leaf width is 4 feet Section 3304(e). Exit doors should swing in the direction of egress when serving an occupant load of 50 or more or when serving any hazardous area. Section 3303(b) Applies to door(s) 5/16/89 X X X X X X X Regardless of occupant load, a floor or landing not more than 1/2 inch below the threshold is required on each side of an exit door used for disabled access (may be 1" maximum where not used for disabled access). Section 3304(h). Doors should not project more than 7 inches into the required corridor width when fully opened, nor more than one-half of the required corridor width when in any position. Section 3305(d). Revolving, sliding and overhead doors are not permitted as exit doors if the occupant load exceeds 9 or the exit door serves a hazardous area. Section 3304(g). Exit doors from assembly rooms with 50 or more occupants shall not be provided with a latch or lock unless it is panic hardware. Section 3318. Double acting doors are not allowed when serving a tributary occupant load of more than 100, or when part of a fire assembly, or part of smoke and draft control assemblies or when equipped with panic hardware. Section 3304(b). Corridors must provide continuous protection to the exterior of the building. Interruptions by an intervening room is not permitted. Foyers, lobbies or reception rooms constructed as required for corridors are not considered intervening rooms. Section 3305. Corridors and exterior exit balconies serving 10 or more occupants must be a minimum 44 inches wide and 7 feet high to the lowest projection. Section 3305(b). When a corridor or exterior exit balcony is accessible to the handicapped, changes in elevations shall be made by means of a ramp. Section 3305(f). When two exits are required, dead end corridors and exit balconies are limited to 20 feet. Section 3305(e). X Corridors serving 30 have walls and construction except: or more occupants shall ceilings of one-hour fi£4£- EXIT Co£tf_iDoC_ Corridors greater than 30 fe'et wide when the occupants have an exit independent from the corridor. JG. Exterior sides of exterior exit balconies One story buildings housing Group B, Division 4 occupancies. Section 3305(g) If non-rated corridors are used per 1985 UBC, Section 3305(g), Exc. 5, provide a reference to the corridors on the floor plan, noting: 1.Corridors are non-rated per 3305(g), Exception 5, 1985 UBC. Section Smoke detection system must be listed by the State Fire Marshall and be a supervised low voltage system with combination audible and visual signals with battery backup. 3.Smoke detectors center shall be maximum 30' on 4. Combined audible/visual signal device(s) shall be installed just inside of each exit door from the corridor, also all locations in the corridor must be in sight of a signal device. 5. Power supply shall be dedicated branch circuit. Circuit disconnecting means shall be accessible only to authorized personnel and shall be clearly marked FIRE ALARM CIRCUIT CONTROL, with a lock- on device. 1985 UBC Section 3305(g), Exception 5, cannot be used for non-rated corridors in a fully sprinklered office space if the occupant load in the space exceeds 100. 1985 UBC Section 3305(g), Exception 5, is applicable to the office space but does not apply to the common corridor where the tributary occupant load appears to exceed 100 occupants. When 1985 UBC Section 3305(g), Exception 5, is applied for corridors on one floor, the corridors on the lower level(s) must be rated if these lower corridors serve more than 100 occupants. The tributary load from the upper level(s) shall be the total occupant load from the above level(s). Clearly show where the non-rated corridor system terminates and a rated corridor system commences. One-hour fire-rated corridors shall have door openings protected by tight-fitting smoke and draft control assemblies rated 20 minutes, except openings in interior walls of exterior exit balconies. Doors shall be maintained self-closing or be automatic-closing by action of a smoke detector per Section 4306(b). Doors shall be gasketed to provide a smoke and draft seal where the door meets the stop on sides and top. Section 3305(h). 5/16/89 59 . Show rated corridors, lobbies, reception or foyers cross-hatched on the floor plans Total area of all openings, except doors, in any portion of an interior corridor, shall not exceed 25 percent of the area of the corridor wall of the room which it is separating from the corridor. Such openings shall be protected by fixed, approved 1/4 inch thick wired glass installed in steel frames. Section 3305(h). Provide a complete architectural section of the corridor, or exterior exit balcony, showing all fire-resistive materials and details of construction for all floors, walls, ceiling and all penetrations. Section 3305(g) Show the location of fire dampers. Provide fire dampers at duct penetrations of fire- rated occupancy and area separations, shafts and corridor walls and ceilings. Section 4306(j). If building exceeds two stories, show corridor is separated from elevator shaft. Sections 3304(g)(h) and 1706(a)(b). (See I C.B.O. interpretation). 7s- Provide evidence of Health (for restaurants or for equipment) . Department approval tenants using X-ray ' B 9 pi. Submit plan showing location of all panels. (63^ Submit panels schedules. £>£ff 6 *>s4 f&. Submit electrical load calculations p$. Indicate existing main service size. Indicate existing total main service load. Indicate new additional loads. X Indicate wiring method, i e. EMX, metal flex. Show exit signs on the electrical lighting plan. Note: Power for exit lights and emergency lighting must conform to the 1985 UBC Sections 3313 and 3314. Provide receptacle(s) within 25' of the roof mounted A/C units. UMC Section 509 Provide multiple switch lighting controls per CAC, Title 24, 2-5319 £<£>K/ <JtJI&£/4 ' P/r7T£&J Provide an electrical plan for the alarm system showing compliance with criteria described under earlier correction number 50 83. MECBAHICAL Provide mechanical ventilation in all rooms capable of supplying a minimum of 5 cubic feet per minute of outside air with a total circulation of not less than 15 cubic feet per minute per occupant. Section 605 and 705, UBC. Provide mechanical plans showing existing and proposed HVAC equipment, ducts and access to equipment. Detail access equipment. and working clearances to HVAC Cooling coils or cooling units located in attic or furred space, where damage may result from condensate overflow, shall be provided with an additional water tight pan of corrosion resistant material to catch overflow if primary condensate drain becomes clogged. Section 1205, UMC. One-hour corridors shall not be used as an integral part of a duct system. This includes the space above a dropped ceiling within the one-hour corridor. UMC Section 706(b). FLUMBIHG Provide gas line plans and calculations, showing pipe lengths and gas demands. UPC Section 1219. id. Provide drain, waste and vent plans. Provide water line sizing calculations. UPC Section 1009. Detail how maintained, priming). floor drain trap seal is to be UPC Section 707 (floor drain trap Show P & I valve on water heater and detail drain line route from P & T valve to the exterior. UPC Section 1007 (e). Show 1/4" per 12" slope on drain and waste lines. UPC Section 407. jouaaGY Provide complete energy design calculations, including all existing design and new energy design for this building See attached non- residential energy design checklist. 85. For remodels in an existing conditioned space, show that the remodeled space will use not more energy than the existing space or show the remodeled space will conform to latest energy design standards. r U 6/8/89 Please see that follow additional corrections or remarks 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 check for your project If you have any questions regarding these plan check items, please contact at Esgil Corporation Thank you oo\-)rV| MJCK FboHm/: ai ot W&-2,o-e C.KQUO CLt a V-o a r-f of convl. n-P Ufe-l -to 4 UlR-^ . -Hf\-file ew( o-f O.S (96]o ^A cio (92.)CL f iv)g £o\l reo'C-f structural ? £> u "To Datei Prepared byau VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK D Blag. JDept. Esgil PLAN CHECK NO. ^9 ~ 11 41- BUILDING ADDRESS 0^2- &ib> CoSVYVoS Ot APPLICANT/CONTACT GVYfU 9\SCXO\C PHONE NO . ft I £\ k4?>- S&2/2, BUILDING OCCUPANCY &-2. TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION V- 10 BUILDING PORTION T,X, 5eoo£/i -=^> T/0^6 77 p =$> (/oZblrf x \ * ]6raD6t =^> ([Q^l \ Air Conditioning Commercial Residential Res. or Comm. Fire Sprinklers Total Value Sprl^lc. lerecl BUILDING AREA \O2.k> \ $ -ty&btfito)) - 2.( ~5a:$ x /^<?f J " fe>/j • • *s ^vfaoT J"L,T. \ *n.^ /UA> 49 * "Espf} I DESIGNER PHONE CONTRACTOR VALUATION MULTIPLIER \9, Q.^5 £f£&sr. cetoir) £t-/J~ iii^&fT } ' — i' L 5"? (£*»rc«*ir) @ @ @ PHONE VALUE 191 ^2_^\- A— ==fr ^?""""==^=:7 f^ssis^ 1 1 l97Si^ Building Permit Fee $ Plan Check Fee $ COM HENTS SHEET ( OF ' 12/87 Date: _&ilbfe>S>Jurisdiction Prepared by:eu PLAN CHECK NO.. BUILDING ADDRESS QjL fe"6 APPLICANT/CONTACT BUILDING OCCUPANCY TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION \j- VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE Q Bldg. Dept, D Esgil PHONE N0.(l\4 B"2, krecl DESIGNER PHONE CONTRACTOR PHONE BUILDING PORTION T,X. Air Conditionine Commercial Residential Res. or Comm. Fire Snrinklers Total Value BUILDING AREA \b<L(t>\ VALUATION MULTIPLIER 19.^^5 @ @ 8 VALUE 191^2.4- 1376^4 Building Permit Fee $ Plan Check Fee $ COM ME N TS: SHEET OF 12/87 BUILDING PLANCHECK ENGINEERING CHECKLIST DATE: PLAN CHECK NO. PROJECT ADDRESS: Cosmos Or. O .LEGEND ITEM COMPLETE 'ITEM INCOMPLETE - NEEDS YOUR ACTION N/A - NOT APPLICABLE TV. PROJECT NAME: D D D Y\ I I | _ 1 LEGAL REQUIREMENTS Site Plan 1. Provide a fully dimensioned site plan drawn to scale. Show: north arrow, property lines, easements, existing and proposed structures, streets, existing street improvements, right-of-way width and dimensioned setbacks. 2. Show on site plan: Finish floor elevations, pad elevations, elevations of finish grade adjacent to building, existing topographical lines, existing and proposed slopes, driveway with percent (%) grade and drainage patterns. 3. Provide legal description and Assessors Parcel Number. Discretionary Approval Compliance ty. 4. No discretionary approvals were required. 5.Project complies with all Engineering Conditions of Approval for Project No. _ . 6.Project does not comply with the Conditions of Approval for Project No. following Engineering Conditions complied with by: Date: Field Review 7. Field review completed. No issues raised. 8. Field review completed. The following issues or discrepancies with the site plan were found: A. Site lacks adequate public improvements. B. Existing drainage improvements not shown or in conflict with site plan. C. Site is served by overhead power lines (Future Improvement Agreement required). D. Grading is required to access site, create pad or provide for ultimate street improvement. E. Site_ access visibility problems exist. Provide onsite turnaround or engineered solution to problem. F. Other: Dedication Requirements 9. No dedication required. 10. Dedication required. Please have a registered Civil Engineer or Land Surveyor prepare the appropriate legal description together with an 8-1/2" x 11" plat map and submit with a title report and the required processing fee. All easement documents must be approved and signed by owner(s) prior to issuance of Building Permit. The description of the dedication is as follows: Dedication completed, Date: By: Improvement Requirements 11. 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. 12. Public improvements required. This project requires construction of public improvements pursuant to Section 18.40 of the City Code. Please have a registered Civil Engineer prepare appropriate improvement plans and submit for separate plan check process through the Engineering Department. Improvement plans must be approved, appropriate securities posted and fees paid prior to issuance of permit. The required improvements are: Improvement plans signed, Date: By: 13. Improvements are required. Construction of the public improvements may be deferred in accordance with Section 18.40 of the City Code. Please submit a recent title report on the property so we may prepare the necessary Future Improvement Agreement. The Future Improvement Agreement must be signed, notorized and approved by the City prior to issuance of a Building Permit. Future Improvement Agreement completed, Date: By: Grading Requirements 13a. Inadequate information available on site plan to make a determination on grading requirements. Please provide more detailed proposed and existing elevations and contours. Include accurate estimates of the grading quantities (cut, fill, import, export). *v 14. No grading required as determined by the information provided on the site plan. 15. Grading Permit required. A separate grading plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer must be submitted for separate plan check and approval through the Engineering Department. NOTE: The Grading Permit^ must be issued and grading substantially complete and found acceptable to the City Inspector prior to issuance of Building Permits. Grading Inspector sign off. Date: By: Miscellaneous Permits [/^ 16. Right-of-Way Permit not required. 17. Right-of-Way Permit required. A separate Right-of-Way Permit issued by the Engineering Department is required for the following: 18. Sewer Permit is not required. Dv 19. Sewer Permit is required. A Sewer Permit is required concurrent with Building Permit issuance. The fee required is noted below in the fees section. 20. Industrial Waste Permit is not required. I/V 21. Industrial Waste Permit is required. Applicant must complete Industrial Waste Permit Application Form and submit for City approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. Permits must be issued prior to occupancy. Industrial Waste Permit accepted - Date: By: Fees Required "22. Park-in-Lieu Fee Quadrant: • Fee Per Unit; Total Fee: l\ 23. Traffic Impact Fee Fee Per Unit: " Total JX 24. Bridge and Thoroughfare Fee $Fee Per Unit; Total Fee:'3/£>/ 25. Public Facilities Fee required. 26. 27. 28. Facilities Management Fee Zone* Sewer, Fees Permit No. Fee : f ^f^fpi^^' <s=fl——^Sewer Lateral required: £/ids&&^Z£r Fee: Afc> /&2, C^ Fee: EDU's: 3 &*T ~~-^._ ft REMARKS : ENGINEERING AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE PERMIT Date: 0--QD <$> IB co 10a a a <o is <0 I nan &un nan an an PLANNING CHECKLIST ' Plan Check No. APN- Planner (Name) Type of Project and Use Zone Address Phone 438-1161 Facilities Management Zone Legend Item Complete Item Incomplete - Needs your action 1, 2, 3 Number in circle indicates plancheck number that deficiency was identified Environmental Review Required: YES DATE OF COMPLETION: NO TYPE Compliance with conditions of approval7 If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval Discretionary Action Required: YES APPROVAL/RESO. NO. PROJECT NO. NO DATE: TYPE OTHER RELATED CASES: Compliance with conditions of approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval Landscape:YES NO DATE OF A';?>ROV'L Compliance with conditions of approval' If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval o'aQ rj Coastal. YES NOTf^ DATE OF APPROVAL B£I D D D Compliance with conditions of approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval Site Plan:i 1. Provide a fully dimensioned site plan drawn to scale Show North arrow, property lines, easements, existing and proposed structures, streets, existing street improvements, right-of-way width and dimensioned setbacks. 2. Show on Site Plan: Finish floor elevations, elevations of finish grade adjacent to building, existing topographical lines, existing and proposed slopes and driveway. ] 3. Provide legal description of property. ] 4. Provide assessor's parcel number. Zoning: [] n *• Setbacks: Front: Required Shown Int. Side: Required Shown Street Side: Required Shown Rear: Required Shown ] 2. Lot coverage- Required Shown 1 3 Height: Required Shown -pr"T] r-1 4. Parking: Spaces Required Shown Guest Spaces Required Shown Additional comments and remarks have been made on the building plans. These marked-up plans may be picked up at the Building Department. These marked-up plans must be resubmitted with the revised plans for this project. Have plans been marked up7 YES NO D D n Additional Comments OK TO ISSUE ^^^ vv^ DATE 8 PLNCK.FRM 2560 ORION WAY CARLSBAD, CA 92008 TELEPHONE (619) 931-2121 ARCHITECT MAR^IKU Ct ^AMl £X/ OWNFR f^\ /u A tZ *-~v S^&:>~~)-n£> OCCUPANCY "T^CL CONST ^UiSPRINKLERED^ajENANT IMP FIRE DEPARTMENT PLAN CHECK REPORT i ( AT;/',, l <k ADDRESS 3 2^3 ^Lo^-^a C PAGE 1 OF_/_ APPROVED DISAPPROVED PLAN CHECK# -^*^r~~s • A,\flil ADDRESS -Oi<A.,u63t7 f-A PHONE (T?/*/ kS*/?-' 1... ADDRESS PHONE -OTAy TOTAL SO FT STORIES /OiUfc -f Aifc7,i/ APPROVAL OF PLANS IS PREDICATED ON CONFORMING TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS AND/OR MAKING THE FOLLOWING CORRECTIONS X£ 6 9 10 11 12 /J3 f " ^/14 PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND PERMITS Provide one copy of floor plan(s), site plan, sheets Provide two site plans showing the location of all existing fire hydrants within 200 feet of the project Provide specifications for the following Permits are required for the installation of all fire protection systems^sprmklers^stand pipes, dry chemical, halon, CO2, alarms, hydrants) Plan must be approved by the fire departmen"rpfiorto1nstallation The business owner shall complete a building information letter and return it to the fire department . FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS AND EQUIPMENT The following fire protection systems are required ' Automatic fire sprinklers (Design Criteria fi~Dry Chemical, Halon, COz (Location D Stand Pipes (Type __ i\iffl/\ D Fire Alarm (Type/Location Fire Extinguisher Requirements ,sH-One 2A rated ABC extinguisher for each y-^/VTT") sq ft or portion thereof with a travel distance to the nearest1 extinguisher not to exceed 75 feet of travel" D An extinguisher with a minimum rating of _ to be located _ Other 8 Additional fire hydrant(s) shall be provided EXITS Exit doors shall be openable from the inside without the use of a key or any special knowledge or effort A sign stating, " This door to remain unlocked during business hours" shall be placed above the mam exit and doors EXIT signs (6" x 3A" letters) shall be placed over all required exits and directional signs located as necessary to clearly indicate the location of exit doors GENERAL Storage, dispensing or use of any flammable or combustible liquids, flammable liquids, flammable gases and hazardous chemicals shall comply with Uniform Fire Code Buildmg(s) not approved for high piled combustible stock Storage in closely packed piles shall not exceed 15 feet in height, 12 feet on pallets or in racks and 6 feet for tires, plastics and some flammable liquids If high stock pil ing is to be done, comply with Uniform Fire Code, Article 81 Additional Requirements A/,/ <?77>/fA6,<r A^*t,r i7.Tt~-r~ 5 A i / A A//p, /)t\\ A JAi?\ /.t < / .15 Comply with regulations on attached sheet(s) Ran Ex.m,ne, Report mailed to architect Date Met with Attach to Plans KMN STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 854 Town & Country Road Orange, California 92668 (714) 550-0506 SUBJECT.Jn> P RJF.V -l/V _of_ RE. ,1 5fiL FTZ5> 117 ;MN STRU: 54 Town & Country (range, California 92668 Lt I 1 -i ~> EERING (714)550-0506 tHL, GV of_ iitgineer. R.E STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS FOR Andrex Center Remodel Carlsbad. CA DATED:July 27. 1Q»Q PREPARED BY: KMN STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 854 Town & Country Road Orange California 92668 (714)550-0506 EXP. 3/31/92 KMN STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 8.54 Town & Country Road Orange, California 92668 (714) 550-0506 Englnttr. RE UL -0 LU LESS y/ I7«4' KMN STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING C>54 Town A Country Road Orange, California 92668 (714) 550-0506 SUBJECT.p P. G-x ShMt_ Engineer. RE Job n.t. [ I- T f , £- t i I PAGE PROJECT : SUBJECT : DATE : BY SINGLE SPAN BEAM ANALYSIS DESCRIPTION : Left Support Right Support Fixed or Pinned —>[ j— Fixed,Pinned or I I Free j<— Left —> < Center > <— Right >{ j j > X -.Right Cant X : Left Cant < 1 > X : Center Note : Left CANNOT be Pinned with Right Fixed ! FIXITY AT SUPPORTS 0 = FREE 1 = PINNED 2 = FIXED > LEFT SUPPORT -> 1 > RIGHT SUPPORT -> 1 SPAN LENGTHS > CENTER SPAN = 18 ft > RIGHT CANTILEVER = 0 ft > LEFT CANTILEVER = 6 ft CENTER SPAN LOADING > UNIFORM LOADS : Load - #1 = 1.14 klf X § Left= 0 ft X @ Right = 18 ft #2 = 0 " " 0 " " = 0 " #3 = 0 " " 0 " " = 0 " #4 = 0 " " 0 " " = 0 " #5 = 0 " " 0 " " = 0 " > TRAPEZOIDAL LOADS #1: Load @ Left = 0.384 klf Load € Right = 0.96 klf X @ Left = 0 ft X @ Right = 0 ft #2: Load e Left = 0 klf Load @ Right = 0 klf X e Left = 0 ft X e Right = 0 ft LEFT CANTILEVER LOADING Cant. Length = 6 ft > UNIFORM LOADS Load - #1 = 1.14 klf X-Right = 0 ft X-Left = 6 ft Load - #2 = 0 " X-Right = 0 " X-Left = 0 " > POINT LOADS #1= 8.7k X= 6 ft #3= OkX= Oft #2= Ok X= 0" #4= OkX= 0" PROJECT SUBJECT DATE PAGE : *f BY > TRAPEZOIDAL LOADS Load @ Left X @ Left ( X from Left Support ) 0 klf Load e Right 6 ft X @ Right l 0.384 klf 0 ft SUMMARY MOMENTS : Center Span = Dist. from Left = 8 Left Support = 6 Right Support = MAXIMUM MOMENT QUERY DEFLECTIONS > Moment of Inertia > X - § Center Span (3 Rt. Cant. Dist. i Lft. Cant. Dist. SHEARS : Left Support Right Support REACTIONS : Left Support Right Support ^ I fj 3 16.275 ft-k 12.6 ft -75.02 ft-k 0 ft-k 75.024 ft-k ( Positive = Downward ) = 510 inA4 Elastic Modulus 16.7 k 6.1 k 31.1 k 6.1 k 9 ft CONSTANT 0 ft CONSTANT 6 ft CONSTANT 39 Defl -17 Defl, 1157 Defl, QUERY MOMENT ( Enter Location of Desired Moment ) > X - Dist. § Center Span > X - Dist. e Left Cant > X - Dist. § Right Cant 0 ft 0 0 MOMENT MOMENT MOMENT = 29000 ksi .= 0.005 in NA in ,= 0.135 in -75.0 '-k -75.0 '-k NA '-k i JL PAGE : SINGLE S DESCRIPTION : Left Support Fixed or Pinned — >j1i |<— Left -->!<— 1 Note : Left FIXITY AT SUPPORTS > LEFT SUPPORT -> SPAN LENGTHS > CENTER SPAN CENTER SPAN LOADING > UNIFORM LOADS : Load - #1 = 0.2 klf #2 0 " #3 = 0 " #4 0 » #5 - 0 " LEFT CANTILEVER LOADING > UNIFORM LOADS Load - #1 = 0.2 klf Load - #2 = 0 " > POINT LOADS #1 =* 17.4 k X = #2 = Ok X = . PROJECT : SUBJECT : Mfe2-~ DATE : BY : PAN BEAM ANALYSIS Right Support j — Fixed, Pinned or 1 Free - — Center > < — Right >| ! > X : Right Cant *•» ^P • ^^rtM^^T**' *-ente^ CANNOT be Pinned with Right Fixed 1 0 = FREE 1 = PINNED 2 = FIXED 1 > RIGHT SUPPORT -> 1 18 ft > RIGHT CANTILEVER = 0 > LEFT CANTILEVER = 6 X @ Left= 0 ft X @ Right = 18 n 0 " " = 0 ii 0 " " = 0 ii 0 " ii = o it 0 " " 0 Cant. Length = 6 ft X-Right = 0 ft X-Left = 6 X-Right = 0 " X-Left = 0 6 ft #3= OkX= 0 0" #4= 0 k X = 0 ftft ftII II II II ft II ftII PROJECT SUBJECT DATE PAGE BY SUMMARY MOMENTS : Center Span = Dist. from Left = @ Left Support = @ Right Support = MAXIMUM MOMENT QUERY DEFLECTIONS > Moment of Inertia > X - @ Center Span @ Rt. Cant. Dist. @ Lft. Cant. Dist. o ft-k o.o ft -108 ft-k 0 ft-k 108 ft-k SHEARS : Left Support Right Support REACTIONS : Left Support Right Support ( Positive = Downward ) 510 inA4 Elastic Modulus 18.6 k 4.2 k 26.4 k -4.2 k 9 ft CONSTANT 0 ft CONSTANT 6 ft CONSTANT -1915 Defl.= 0 Defl.= 3909 Defl.= = 29000 ksi •0.224 in NA in 0.457 in QUERY MOMENT ( Enter Location of Desired Moment ) > X - Dist. e Center Span > X - Dist. e Left Cant > X - Dist. § Right Cant 0 ft 0 0 MOMENT MOMENT MOMENT -108.0 '-k •108.0 '-k NA '-k l PROJECT SUBJECT DATE PAGE : JJ _ U ft BY SINGLE SPAN BEAM ANALYSIS DESCRIPTION Left Support Fixed or Pinned — > Right Support Fixed, Pinned or Free j<— Left —> < Center > <— Right >| I > X :Right Cant X : Left Cant < J > X : Center Note : Left CANNOT be Pinned with Right Fixed ! FIXITY AT SUPPORTS > LEFT SUPPORT -> SPAN LENGTHS 0 = FREE 1 = PINNED 2 = FIXED 1 > RIGHT SUPPORT -> 1 > CENTER SPAN CENTER SPAN LOADING > UNIFORM LOADS : Load - #1 = 0.64 #2 0 #3 = 0. #4 0 #5 = 0 17.5 ft > RIGHT CANTILEVER > LEFT CANTILEVER klf X 6 Left= 0 ft X @ Right =M it Q ii n = it n n n n n RIGHT CANTILEVER LOADING Cant. > UNIFORM LOADS Load - #1 = 1.254 Load - #2 = 0 SUMMARY MOMENTS : Center Span = Dist. from Left = § Left Support = @ Right Support = MAXIMUM MOMENT klf X-Left 11 X-Left 5.6782 ft-k 4.4 ft 0 ft-k -50.78 ft-k 50.787 ft-k 0 n M = 0 n n 0 n ii = Length = 9 ft 0 ft X-Right = 0 " X-Right = SHEARS : Left Support = Right Support = REACTIONS : Left Support = Right Support = 9 0 17.5 0 0 0 0 9 0 2.7 11.3 2.7 19.8 ft ft ftn n n n ft ii k k k k PAGE PROJECT SUBJECT DATE BY QUERY DEFLECTIONS >Moment of Inertia > S X - @ Center Span Rt. Cant. Dist. Lft. Cant QUERY MOMENT > > > X X X - Dist. @ - Dist. @ - Dist. @ . Dist. ( Center Left Right ( Positive = Downward ) 110 inA = 8. = Enter Span Cant Cant 75 ft 9 ft 0 ft 4 Elastic Modulus CONSTANT CONSTANT CONSTANT -190 1792 0 Defl.= Defl.= Defl.= Location of Desired Moment 0 ft MOMENT 0 MOMENT =0 MOMENT ) = 29000 -0.103 0.971 NA 0.0 NA -50.8 ksi in in in '-k '-k '— k PAGE : °( SINGLE S DESCRIPTION : Left Support Fixed or Pinned — > j i |<~ Left -->!<-• Note : Left FIXITY AT SUPPORTS > LEFT SUPPORT -> SPAN LENGTHS > CENTER SPAN CENTER SPAN LOADING > UNIFORM LOADS : Load - #1 = 1.43 klf #2 0 « #3 0 " #4 0 " #5 = 0 " LEFT CANTILEVER LOADING > UNIFORM LOADS Load - #1 = 1.43 klf Load - #2 = 0 " > POINT LOADS #1 = 2.7 k ' X = #2 = Ok X = PROJECT : SUBJECT : MP5><5 DATE : BY : PAN BEAM ANALYSIS Right Support ! — Fixed, Pinned or i Free i — Center > < — Right > j i | > X : Right Cant CANNOT be Pinned with Right Fixed ! 0 = FREE 1 = PINNED 2 = FIXED 1 > RIGHT SUPPORT -> 1 18 ft > RIGHT CANTILEVER = 0 > LEFT CANTILEVER = 6 X @ Left= 0 ft X @ Right = 18 II Q II II _ Q n 0 " " = 0 n 0 " " = 0 II Q II II — Q Cant. Length = 6 ft X-Right = 0 ft X-Left = 6 X-Right = 0 " X-Left = 0 6 ft #3= OkX= 0 0" #4= OkX= 0 ftft ft II II II II ft II ft II PROJECT SUBJECT DATE PAGE BY SUMMARY MOMENTS : Center Span = Dist. from Left = @ Left Support = @ Right Support = MAXIMUM MOMENT QUERY DEFLECTIONS > Moment of Inertia > X - § Center Span @ Rt. Cant. Dist. e Lft. Cant. Dist. SHEARS : Left Support Right Support REACTIONS : Left Support Right Suj 38.822 ft-k 10.8 ft -41.94 ft-k 0 ft-k ( Positive = Downward ) 510 inA4 Elastic Modulus 9 ft CONSTANT : 1106 Defl, 0 ft CONSTANT : 0 Defl, 6 ft CONSTANT : -527 Defl, 15.2 k 10.5 k 26.5 k 10.5 k QUERY MOMENT ( Enter Location of Desired Moment ) > "X - Dist. § Center Span > * w Dist. § Left Cant . § Right Cant o fto 0 MOMENT MOMENT MOMENT = 29000 ksi = 0.129 in = NA in = -0.062 in -41.9 '-k -41.9 '-k NA '-k KMN STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 854 Town & Country Road Orange, California 92668 (714) 550-0506 £A?K^rtT-l2-ShMt. RE.. Job / in, KMN STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 854 Town & Country Road Orange. California 92666 (714) 550-0506 SUBJECT.p f* g* ^Fvirr P.II - RE.. Job r 7t i ) i ^ P A r «—VA. C APPC-P KMN STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 354 Town & Country Road Orange, California 92668 (714) 550-0506 SUBJECT.SfiMt.12L EnglnMr. RE Job No_ I U^ uj|r -/. ^ •=• -2-1 -5 KMN STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 854 Town & Country Road Orange. California 92668 (714) 550-0506 SUBJECT.Sheet._of_ Enginwr. RE Job No_ tote (8, 6,4. is HP H, - JUIT MMHJIVA i ASSOCIATES COIUSULTIMG STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS IMC. 2101 SO. ATLANTIC BLVD. LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 9OO40 (213) 283-8083*263-0735 JOB # DATE ENGINEER STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS FOR. 1-2 INFORMATION CENTER AJIT S. RANDHAVA, SE2009 KJIMIIAVA S JIXSIQIKTEB COMSUL7INO STDUCTURAL EMCINEERS BMC. 21O1 SO A71^MnCM.VO-LOSAMCEL£S.CAUFOtNlAMO«O (213) 2e3-»C«3«2«3-073S JOB f DATE ENGINEER M ^ ® « • •• • TABLE OF CONTENTS LOADING CRITERIA ROOF FRAMING FLOOR FRAMING COLUrtN J FOUNDATION DESIGN SEISMIC DESIGN PANEL DESIGN MISCELLANEOUS SHEET S Lc \~ici 9^ Q,t h - r^ C^i-C-p,* ^\ ~L,i.-i V* ^ AJIT RAIJDHAVA f. ASSOCIATE; LOADING CRITERIA MJIT UMDUVJI 5 ASSOCIATES CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS INC. 2101 SO. ATLANTIC BlVD. LO8 ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 0OO4O TELEPHONE MO. czis) 2»-«oea. tzia) sea-orsc L-C-! LOADING CRITERIA ROOF PL L.L. W = 3.0 PSF 1.5 PSF 1.0 PSF 2.0 PSF 1.5 PSF 1.0 PSF 10.0 PSF 2.0 PSF 12.0 PSF = 20/16/12 ROOFING PLYWOOD RAFTER PURLINS SPRINKLERS MISC. DL. FOR PURLINS 4- Bfi. 8 MISC. DL. FOR BEAM Add 4- JUIT EAttHAVA fi ASSOCIATES carusuiniuc STRUCTURAL BUGIAIEERS INC. 2101 SO. ATLANTIC BLVD. L.OS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 0OO4O TELEPHONE NO. C2i3> 2«s-»o»a. (213) zes-orse LC-z LOADING CRTTFRTA R.OOR UL W.O 2.5 3.0 3.0 1.5 1.0 3.0 28.0 3.0 PSF PSF PSF PSF PSF PSF PSF PSF PSF ELASTIZEL PLYWOOD JOIST CEILING SPRINKLER MISCELLANEOUS 6YPBOARD L.L. FOR JOIST BEAM 31.0 PSF D-L. FOR BEAM L.L. SOIL 100 PSF REDUCEABLE PSF PSF CONTINUOUS SPREAD -r FANDHAVA ? ASSOCIATES ROOF FRAMING DESIGN AJIT RANDHJIVJI fi ASSOCIATES *— CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS INC. OATe- DCStCM 21O1 SO. ATLANTIC BLVD. LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 8OO40 «M«CT . TELEPHONE NO. (2 is) zea-Qoea. (213) 203-0730 I FLAKJ. LJ - i j 2 «— M = U«E3 X. ^^S^X"7.^»"7 - ^4.T7 «• /I .-7-7 T dJ-«SX J,£ - ^.5»^5 IN 06/04/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES ******************* FRAMING DESIGN ******************* W (DL) = W (LL) = SPACING W (TL)= BENDING 14 psf 20 psf 24" o/c 2 *( 28 + 14 + 40 = 20 ) 68 plf TYP MEMBER fb= 1750 psi fv= 95 psi E= 18OOOOO psi M=W*L=/B , S=M/Fb=12*W*L=V(8*Fb) L==[S*Fb/(1.5*W)] * Fb THE MAXIMUM SPAN CAN BE = 1.25 *1750 = 2187.5 SIZE 2 x 6 L== 6.8906 * 2187.5 /( 1.5 * SIZE 2 :; 8 L== 13.140 * 2187.5 /( 1.5 * SIZE 2 j. 10 L== 21.390 * 2187.5 /( 1.5 * SIZE 2 ;c 14 L=!= 43.890 * 2187.5 /( 1.5 * 68 )= 147.776 L max 68 )= 281.814 L max 68 )= 458.745 L max 68 )= 941.281 L max GOVERN'' = 12.156 ft = 16.787 ft = 21.418 ft = 30.68O ft 06/04/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES *##********#**##*** ROOF FRAMING DESIGN W (DL)= 14 psf ( at office area ) W (LU= 20 psf SPACING @ B'-O" o/c W (TL)= BENDING 8 *( 112 + 14 + 160 = 20 ) 272 plf TVF 4:. PURLIN fb= 1500 psi fv= 95 psi E= 1700000 psi M=W*L=V8 , S=M/Fb=12*W*L=/(8*Fb) L==[S*Fb/(1.5*W)] * Fb THE MAXIMUM SPAN CAN BE = 1.25 *1500 = 1875 SIZE 4 j. 10 L=?= 49.911 * 1875 /( 1.5 * SIZE 4 j: 12 L== 73.828 * 1875 /( 1.5 * SIZE 4 :; 14 L== 102.41 * 1875 /( 1.5 * SIZE 4 :; 16 L== 135.66 * 1875 /( 1.5 272 ) = 229 . "'•72 L max 272 )= 33339.28: L ma: 272 )= 470.640 L max 272 )= 623.444 L ma:; GOVERN1' = 15.145 ft. = 18.419 ft = 21.694 ft = 24.968 ft AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES ******************* ROOF FRAMINE DESIGN TYP 2 1/2 ,. PURLIN W (DL) = W (LL) = 10 psf lo psf SPACING @ B'-O" o/c W (TL) = BENDING 8 *( 112 + 10 128 16 ) + 24O plf fb= 24OO psi fv= 155 psi E= 18000OO psi — 6" main sprinkler 32 plf M=W*L=/<8 , S=M/Fb=12*W*L=/(B*Fb) L==[S*Fb/(1.5*W)] * Fb= 1.25 * 24OO = 3000 THE MAXIMUM SPAN CAN BE SIZE 2.5 ; 18 L=== 129.05 * 30OO /( C"} SIZE 2.5 ;: 19.5 ^^ L== 150.11 * 3000 /( 1.5 * 240 )= 1075.44 L ma;. 1.5 * 240 )= 1250.97 L max ;2.793 ft = 35.369 ft SIZE 2.5 x 21 L== 172.67 * 3000 1.5 * 240 )= 1438.93 L ma;;= 37.933 ft SIZE 2.5 ,; 22.5 L== 196.70 * 3000 /(1.5 * 240 )= 1639.22 L max = 4O.487 ft SIZE L== 2: ,5 x 20 * 24 3OOO /(1.5 * 240 )= 1851.74 L max = 43.031 ft SIZE 2.5 x 25.5 !_== 249.17 * 3000 / (1.5 * 240 )= 2076.41 L max = 45.567 ft SIZE 2.5 Ls= 277.57 27 3000 /(1.5 * 240 j= 2313.14 L max = 48.095 ft SIZE 2.5 x 28.5 L== 307.42 * 3000 /(1.5 * 240 )= 2561.86 L max = 50.614 ft ao 06/04/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES *** SIMPuY SUPPORTED BEAM DESIGN E— . 1J. LENGTH 27.00 ft W = ( 12.00 * 12.00 )+( 24.00 * 12.00 ) DL + ( 12.000 * 12.000 )+(24.000 * 12.000 ) LL 0.432 + 0.432 = 0.864 t If TL M= 1.50 * 0.864 * 27.00 * = 944.8 'H S= 944.78 /( 1.25 * 2.40 )= 314.93 REACTION DL TL USE 5.125 * 21.OOO 3 Q™r 1 1 Z.i. __ __ ___ __• O_* i -L • QO 8cf= 353.98 CAMBER= 1 . 09 •£- O6/04/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES BEAM WITH CAMTILEVEF-: DESIGN B-2 LENGTHLEFT RIGHT McL= ( McL= ( McP= i McR= ( M+= ( Sreqd= (CHECf LEFT -2.48 (CHECK LEFT le= Cs= Fb' = Sreqd= BETWEEN SUPPORTS =48.000 ftCANT. LENGTH = 0.00 ft CANT. LENGTH = 10.5OO ft 0.00 * 0.00 ;+( 0.43 * 0.00 * 0.00 )+( 0.86 * 5.83 * 10.50 )+( 0.43 * 11.66 * 10.50 ) + ( 0.86 * O.B6 * 48.00 =)/B -1/2* ( 206.31 *12/ (1.25 * 2.4) = SHEAR) RIGHT Areqd 18.25 132.74 SLENDERNESS EFFECT) O . OO 0 . 00 2 . 4O 0.0 0.00 ~) /2 = 0.00 DL 0.00 =) /2 = 0.00 TL 10.50 =) /2 = 85.05 DL 10.50 =) /2 = 170.10 TL 0.00 + 85.05 )= 206.31 tl 825.2 USE 5.125 J, 34.500 A= 176.813 Scf= 904.1 S= 101o.67 Camber= 1.45 in RIGHT le= 212.94 Cs= 16.72 Fb'= 2.09 Sreqd= 781.3 06 704 /SB AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES SIMPLY SUPPORTED BEAM DESIGN W = ( 12.00 + ( 12.000 0.288 T"j „__ *"** LENGTH 43.50 ft * 16.00 )+( 6.00 * * 12.000 )+( 6.000 # + 0.216 = 0.504 hlf 16.00 ) 12.000 ) M= 1.50 * 0.504 * 5= 1430.54 /( 1.25 * 43.50 = = 1430.5 2 . 40 ) = 476.85 DL LL TL REACTION DL 6 *-i i ^• 4. TL USE 5.125 Scf= CAMBER= 25.500 510.80 2.73 SIMPLY SUPPORTED BEAM DESIGN ^ B__ yi *T LENGTH 27.00 ft W = ( 24.00 * 12.00 )+( 24. OO * 12.00 ) + ( 24.000 * 12.000 ) +(24.000 * 12.OOO ) + 0.576 = 1.152 I If M= 5= 1.50 * 1.152 * 27.00 = = 1259.7 " I- 1259.71 /( 1.25 * 2 . 40 ) = 419.90 DL LL TL REACTION DL 7• TL •) i=X D • USE 5.125 * 25.500 Scf= CAMBER= 510.80 0.81 (.'6/04/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES **************fc****************^ BEAM WITH CANTILEVER DESIGN B-5 LENGTH BETWEEN SUPPORTS =48.000 ft LEFT CANT. LENGTH = 4.00 ft RIGHT CANT. LENGTH = 10.5OO ft McL= ( McL= ( McR= ( McR= ( M+= ( Sreqd= ( CHECK LEFT 11.83 (CHEQ LEFT le= Cs= Fb' = Sreqd= 6 *-\ J U/• j—O *T 10.96 * 7.78 * 15.55 * 1.15 * 4.00 )+( 0.58 * 4.00 )+( 1.15 * 10.50 )+( 0.58 * 10.50 ) + ( 1.15 * 48.00 = )/8 -1/2* ( 260.24 *12/ (1.25 * 2.4) = SHEAR) RIGHT 23 . 90 SLENDERNESS 81.12 10.97 2.34 217.5 Areqd 173.85 EFFECT) 4.00 =) /2 4.00 =) /2 10.50 =) /2 10.50 =) /2 29.66 + 113.40 1041.0 USE 5.125 A= Scf = s= Camber= RIGHT le= 212.94 Cs= 17.78 Fb'= 2.00 Sreqd= 1086.4 29.66 53 . 06 113.40 226 . 80 ) = 260 . 24 ;: 39 . 000 199.875 1139.7 1299.19 1.09 DL TL DL TL I 1 in 06/04/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES BEAM WITH CANTILEVER DEB IBM B-6 X LENGTH BETWEEN SUPPORTS =48.000 ft LEFT CANT. LENGTH = 10.50 ft RIGHT CANT. LENGTH = 0.000 ft McL= ( McL= ( McR= ( McR= ( M+= ( Sreqd= (CHECl LEFT 24.19 (CHECl LEFT le= Cs= Fb' = Sreqd= 7.78 * 10.50 )+( 0.43 * 15.55 * 10.50 ) + ( 0.86 * 0.00 * O.OO )+( 0.43 * 0.00 * O.OO )+( 0.86 * 0.86 * 48.00 =)/S -1/2* ( 210.92 *12/ (1.25 * 2.4) = SHEAR) RIGHT Areqd 18.14 -2.59 SLENDERNESS EFFECT) 212.94 17. OS 2.06 981.7 10.50 =) /2 = 105.46 DL 10.50 =) /2 = 210.92 TL O.OO =) /2 = 0.00 DL 0.00 =) /2 = 0.00 TL 105.46 H- O.OO )= 196.10 tl 784.4 USE 5.125 x 36.000 A= 184.500 Scf= 979.8 S= 1107.00 Camber= 1 . O6 in RIGHT 1 e= 0 . OO Cs= 0 . 00 Fb = 2.40 Sreqd= 0.0 06/04/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES *#****************^ SIMPLY SUPPORTED BEAM DESIGN W = ( 24.00 * 12.00 )+( 10.00 * 12.00 ) + ( 24.000 * 12.000 )+(10.000 * 12.00O ) 0.408 + 0.408 = 0.816 t If DL LL TL B— "7/ LENGTH 42.00 ft M= 1.50 * 0.816 * 42.00 = = 2159.1 S= 2159.14 /( 1.25 * 2.4O )= 719.71 REACTION DL TL 8.57 17.14 USE 5.125 * Scf= CAMBER= 1.500 761.37 1.78 #########*#*•##*#*#*$*##« SIMPLY SUPPORTED BEAM DESIGN W = (24.00 12.00 ( 10.00 * + ( 24.000 * 12.000 )+(10.000 * 0.408 + 0.408 = 0.816 I- 1 f 12.00 12.000 M= 1.50 * 0.816 * S= 275.40 /( 1.25 * 15.00 = = 275.4 " I- 2.40 )= 91.80 DL LL TL B—.QO LENGTH 15.00 ft REACTION DL " f "">>£,' • \.' O TL 1 *• X j USE 5.125 Scf= CAMBER= 18.000 264.56 0.16 M7. 06/Q4/S8 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES BEAM WITH CANTILEVER DESIGN - B-9 LENGTH BETWEEN SUPPORTS =48.000 ft LEFT CANT. LENGTH = 6.00 ft RIGHT CANT. LENGTH = 2.000 ft McL= ( McL= ( McR= ( McR= ( M+= ( Sreqd= (CHECh LEFT 19.79 8.57 17.14 3 . 06 6.12 0.82 202.16 SHEAR ) RIGHT 5.51 * 6 . 00 * 6 . 00 * 2 . 00 * 2 . 00 * 48.00 #127 (1.25 Areqd 143.91 > + ( 0.41 * ) + ( 0.82 * )+( 0.41 * ) + ( 0 . 82 * =)/8 -1/2* ( =i * ^ 4. ^ —_' *r *~. m T" f 6.00 =) /2 6.00 =) /2 2.00 =) /2 2.00 =) /2 58.75 + 6.94 808 . 7 USE 5.125 A— Scf =s= Camber= 58.75 117.50 6.94 13.87 )= 202.16 ;, 33 . 000 169.125 831 .3 930.19 1.76 DL TL DL TL 1- 1 in (CHECK SLENDERNESS EFFECT) LEFT le= 121.68 Cs= 12.36 Fb'= 2.31 Sreqd= 488.9 RIGHT le= Cs= Fb' = Sreqd= 40 . 56 7.14 2.39 55.7 06/04/BB AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES SIMPLY SUPPORTED BEAM DESIGN . B—'1O LENGTH 27.00 ft W = ( 12.00 * 12.00 )+( 24.00 * 12.00 ) DL + ( 12.000 * 12.000 )+(24.000 * 12.000 ) LL 0.432 + 0.432 = 0.864 [ l-f TL M= 1.50 * 0.864 * 27.00 = = 944.8 "t S= 944.78 /( 1.25 * 2.40 )= 314.93 REACTION DL TL USE 5.125 * 21.0OO 5.83 11.66 Scf= 353.98 CAMBER= 1.09 SIMPLY SUPPORTED BEAM DESIGN B~l 1 LENGTH 24.00 ft W = ( 12.00 * 16.00 )+( 12.00 * 16.00 ) DL + ( 12.000 * 12.000 )+(12.000 * 12.000 ) LL 0.384 + 0.288 = 0.672 |. 1 f TL M= 1.50 * 0.672 * 24.00 = = 580.6 "t S= 580.61 /( 1.25 * 2.40 )= 193.54 REACTION DL TL USE 5.125 * 18.000 4.61 8.O6 Scf= 264.56 CAMBER= 0.96 r.)6/04/Se AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES ************************************* ********************************** SIMPLY SUPPORTED GIRDER DESIGN 1 mal GL= P = RL= M - Sreqd= SELECT Def lee . Def lee . 48.000 ft 24.000 ft 5 . 760 ( DL ) 5.184 5.184 * 124.416 *12 / b h 5.125 25.500 of LL= 1.439 of TL= 3.238 GR= 24 . 000 10.368 (TL) RR= 5.184 24 . 000 (1.25*2.4) Scf Camber 510.799 2.699 in in B-12 LENGTH 48 . 00 ft 124.416 t-ft 497.664 5.125 * 25.50 Scf= 510.80 Camber= 2.70 HjJT RANDhAVA * ASSOCIATES FLOOR FRAMING DESIGN F, 06/04/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES FRAMING DESIGN W (Dl_) = 28 psf W (LL)= 100 psf SPACING e 16" o/c W (TL)= 1.33 *( = 37.24 + BENDING TYP MEMBER fb= 1750 psi fv= 95 psi E= 1800000 psi 28 + 100 ) 133 = 170.24 plf M=W*L=V8 , S=M/Fb=12*W*L=V(8*Fb) L==[S*Fb/(1.5*W)] * Fb= 1.25 * 1750 = 2187.5 THE MAXIMUM SFAN CAN BE SIZE 2 x 8 L== 13.140 * 2187.5 /( 1.5 * 170.24 )= 112.567 L ma:. SIZE 2 x 10 L== 21.390 * 2187.5 /( 1.5 * 170.24 )= 183.239 L ma:: SIZE 2 js 12 L== 31.640 * 2187.5 /( 1.5 * 170.24 )= 271.044 L ma;; SIZE 2 :: 14 L== 43.890 * 2187.5 /( 1.5 * 17O.24 )= 375.981 L max GOVERN1' = 10.609 ft = 13.536 ft = 16.463 ft = 19.390 ft urr UMUUIU i ASMMITES CONSULTING STRUCTURAL BUOMBtt MC. *1O1 SO. ATLANTIC Bi.VO, LOB ANOELE8. CAUFOMNIA MO40 TELEPHONE NO. (218) M9-«OM. (*ia) M»-OT86 DATE.-& TVP u) 771 T71 s -- 06/04/89 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES *##**#*#***#**##**#*#**#*#***##*#*********** SIMPLY SUPPORTED BEAM DESIGN B-. 1JL LENGTH 24.OOO ft W=( 12.00 * 31.OO )+( 2.00 * 31.OO ) DL +( 12.000 * 85.000 ) + ( 2.000 * 85.000 ) LL 0.434 + 1.190 = 1.624 k/1 TL M= 1.50 * 1.624 * 24.00 = =1403.1 "\ S= 1403.14 / 24.00 = 58.46 REACTION DL TL W 18 * 40 5.21 19.49 S= 6B.40 SIMPLY SUPPORTED BEAM DESIGN LENGTH 20.000 ft W=( 12.00 * 31.00 )+( 12.00 * 31.00 ) DL +( 12.000 * 76.000 )+(12.000 * 76.000 ) LL = 0.744 + 1.824 = 2.568 I- /1 TL M= 1.50 * 2.568 * 20.00 = =1540.8 "K S= 1540.80 / 24.00 = 64.20 REACTION DL TL W 18 * 4O 7.44 25.68 S= 68.40 -,JIT FANDHAVA ? AEE.OCIATEE COLUMN ?/ FOOTING DESIGN c. 06/04/86 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES *#******#**#***#**#****##***********+*********** INT. COLUMN & FOOTING DESIGN F1/C1 P= 48.00 * 36.00 *( 12.00 + 12.00 ) * 1 .1 22.81 + 22.81 = 45.62 !• ( 107. increase on tributary area load to account for beam cantilever effect ) >l'=26'-6" USE 8" STD PIPE , W/ 14x14x3/4 BASE PL. 4 - 3/4" A.B. Pu= 1.4 * 22.81 + 1.7 * 22.81 = 70.71 \ 70.71 qu= * 3.00 = 4.650 I sf 45.62 *«******«**« *##**#***#******^ INT. COLUMN & FOOTING DESIGN F2/C2 P= 48.00 * 48.00 #( 12.00 + 12.00 ) fcl.l = 30.41 + 30.41 = 60.83 t ( 107. increase on tributary area load to account for beam cantilever effect ) *1'=26 -6" USE 8" STD PIPE , W/ 14:;14r3/4 BASE PL. 4 - 3/4" A.B. Pu= 1.4 * 30.41 + 1.7 # 30,41 = ^4.28 94.28 qu= * 3.00 = 4.650 ksf 60.83 - - - SY<. TLHS PROFESSIONAL PF-TiGRAn NU. 54 . J F'F V- 3 i 2F.. P J — RECTANGULAR rpf!T[,Mf W '.. 1"! APi'LlEC NOMLNrJ - STRENGTH OCGEPN.1977 AC1 r-1 nL'_ (NFOPnAFION PRESENTED C' -"Ui: PEVLEUf APPROVAL. INTEFPRETAT[ON A»P. HPPl 1CAT 3DN El" A FsFTH 1 : F'F r- CDf" iT- IbHF Ei ^fS FEnf PrG [NPUF VALUEG LOADS (FACTORED) AXIAL (1(3 PS) 'TIP-FT 70.71 0.00 noncur-Yaar-Fi)o.oo FOOTING DIHENSIONS - (FEET) DbPIH l.ENGIII-X UIDFH-Y 1.00 0.00 0.00 COLUMN SCZE - (INCHES LENGTH-X WIDTH-Y -'t .00 L ',.00 STEEL YIELD STRESS-<KS[) 60.00 GOIL PRESCURE (KSF) 4.65 STEEL RATIO RI-IQ (OflZGA-F'C/FY) 0.006 CONCRCFE COMF'RESSIVE GTRENGTH-(KSI; 2.00 OUTPUT OF FINAL RESULTS FOOTING LENGTH WIDTH TYPE GIVEN GIVEN NO NO MINIMUM POO FENG SIZE: CONSIDERING INPUT DIMENSIONS AND HOMENTE LENGTH UCDTH (INCHED 'INCHES) .IA.OO i-'t.OO FINAL FOOTING DIMENSIONS LENGTH -'FT) WIDTH : F H Tii LL^iiESS <FT> 4.00 4.00 1 .00 SOIL PRESSURE (KSF; AT EACH CORNER FROM F AC FOR ED LI" ADS CORNER: 123' ^SEE DATA SHEET) 4.63 <•', .6;4 . 63 PUNCHING SHEAR STRESS VALUES - (PSD p/A + MyCC'J; + PTrL'C/J; - 79.^4 ^ 0.00 -» 0.00 = 79.34 ----LENGTH DIRECTION^™ (K-FT/FT.i ALLOW. SFRESS J-5?. 05 4 .43 STEEL ARFA REfl. <SO.IN./FT.) 0.12o i . L. 1 L t. I . I v J '-' ' '!F.;AN^F[F'F;r [) [•-, rL:/iiii: a - r 1 ,- (..o^ o.ooo i-Ki"ccr rvr: UIPTII KOP r.onftn A!-!.r,vi: - '*_ - i NCI if BEAM E.MLAh 'KJF1^* = I'.-.lt EFFilCTIUi: ULDTM FOF nGilENI /-iHOVE ::- 4C.C [NCHF.C BEAT! GHCAR (i^F'S) r 13.26 ]0r^= - *: 1 L E L tM^EA IXE.D iSn.Ji r. . • ih'-Xffuir riCiriLi-Jr 'f -!-rr 'i-T t - ' ." ., i ju. MN.7E.rir'. 17LCL ''.OOIE^ O.T'j^ t' . "LOx. r-FuEL >200^"V, " ' . „ ',.;-., MDMLN7 TKAMGFLF'RLE' T^i FLL^UFiE (K-FT) 0.0' 0.000 t,/ <i/'jfj -«•• SYSTEMS PROFESSIONAL PPObRAfl NO. 54 . i PE V- 312E1- . F'l - •ECTANUULAR FOOTING U1 TI I ! APPL [ED flOMI-.NTS - ^TRFNGfH DE .> ;.-N . 197 ALL INFQRnATEON PRESENTED C'J i-'O!- R'-.yil£U- .'iPFR AND APPLICATION BY A REIC..] ST LRETD ENGINEER DULY COPYRIGHT PY SYGFEfTo PROFESS [O^AL, 1983. INPUT V-ALUES LOADS ( AXIAL 94.28 H IN] MUM DEPTH 1.00 COLUMN LENGTH-- FACTOF<E.D) MOMENT -X 0.00 FOOTING DIMENSIONS LENGTH-X 0.00 SEZE - ( INCHES) X W1DTH-Y MOMENT -Y <K]p~n ) 0.00 - (FEET) UIDTH-t 0.00 STEEL YDETL D MODIFIED (FACTORED SOIL PRESSURE ( KSF ) 4.65 STEEL PATIO PHO ( OMEGA -F'C. F\ 0.006 CONCRETE COMPRESS H'E ) \j 1-^.00 14.00 60.00 STRENGTH-(KGI 2.00 OUTPUT OF FINAL RESULT! FOOTING LENGTH WIDTH TYPE GIVEN GIVEN 3 NO NO M FOOTING SE/IE; CONSIDERING INPUT DIMENSIONS AND MOMENTS LENGTH WIDTH (INCHES) (INCHES) 1-t.OO 14.00 FINAL TOOTING DIMENSIONS LENGTH (FT; WIDTH ', F T) THICKNESS (FT) 4.75 4.75 1.00 > SOIL PRESSURE (KSF> AT EACH CORNEF FROM FACTORED LOADS CORNER: i :• 3 4 (SEE DATA SHEET) 4.39 /f.39 4.39 /., 39 FUNCHINt SHEAR GTRECS VALUES - (PSD P/A t MX(C/J) (- MY(C/J) = 2.97 -t 0.00 4 0.00 - 313.97 DIRECTION=- = ALLOW. STRESS STEEL AREA REQ, fSQ.lN./FT.) fV. A [ nurc no MEN r i. r ~F r/r r ; fllN.TLMP. FT EEL (.0010; niN.fl.tX. STEEL (200 /I"Y ' f!rJMLf-'RANCF tF<KED PY !' LtXUKF 1HCAF' 'KIP; ^ . 0.00 CNCHET o . 1 93 0.?!i.<V 0./20 0.000 -- = W1D1H LiJRLC1JON=~STEEL AREA F<:E[ r- IN. TEMP. STEEL (.0050) fllri.KLCX. yri£I£L (200/F> T TR'ANGFrRRFL- Hi' FLI-VLil.'F. 'K-FT> EFFECTIVE UCDTH FdP MOMENT ABOVE - 50 BEAf'l SHEAR (KIPS) - 22.33 0.00 ENCHES 0.0»0 06/04/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES ****^INT. COLUMN b FOOTING DESIGN F3/C3 P= 48.OO * 35.00 *( 12.00 + 12.00 ) *1.1 22.18 + 22.18 = 44.35 \ ( 107. increase on tributary area load to account for beam cantilever effect ) Kl '=26'-6'USE 8" STD PIPE , W/ 14xl4«3/4 BASE PL. 4 - 3/4" A.B. PLI= 1.4 * 22.18 + 1.7 * 22.18 = 68.75 \ 68.75 qu= 44.35 :.00 = 4.650 \ sf INT. COLUMN ^ FOOTING DESIGN F4/C4 P= 38.00 * 36.00 *( 12.OO + 12.00 ) * 1.1 18.06 + 18.06 = 36.12 I ( 107. increase on tributary area load to account for beam cantilever effect ) hl'=26'-6"USE 8" STD PIPE , W/ 14;-14;:3/4 BASE PL. 4 - 7/4" A.B. Pu= qu= 1.4 * 18.06 + 1.7 * 18.06 = 55.98 I- 55.98 :.00 = 4.650 ksf -r , - ^-• D « ± A. KF.CTANGULAP FKOGRAfi ND . !L>4 . j PT.V WI1H APPLCEC "IQNF-NTS - STRENGTH 1<?7 r,LL nJFORMriTEQN PRtSENTLL CS !r(Jh kEVEEU* APPROVA AND APPL.1CAT ION DY A KEfjlPT ERF D LNGINETR ONLY c o P r R i (3 H r & Y s . 3 r •: n s F1 R o F E a P i o N A L , 1 9 3 3 . IN IT PPRE ' A I CON INPUT VALUES LOADS (FACTORED) AXIAL flOflENT-y nOPIENT-Y (KIPS) (KIP-FD (K1P-FD 60.7!5 0.00 O.OC niNinun FOOTING DIMENSIONS - (FEED OFFTH LENGTH-) WCDFH-> 1.00 0.00 0.00 'lOLUflN GIZE LE'NGTH-X 14.00 'CNCHESJ WIDTH- 1 '14.00 STEEL YIELD GTRt'J'E-'KSC ) 60.00 MODIFIED(FACTORED) SOIL PRESSURE (KSF) 4.65 STEEL RATIO RHO (OnEGA-F'C.TYi 0.006 CONCRETE COfSPPEGSlVF SrRENGTH-(K'JI > 2 = 00 OUTPUT OF FINAL RE&UL1C FOOTING LENGTH WIDTH TYPE GIVEN GIVEN 3 NO NO PHNICiUfl FOOT TNG SIZE: CONSIDERING INPUT DIMENSIONS AND nCWENTS LENGTH WIDTH UNCHES) UNCMFS) 14 14.00 FINAL FOOTING DIMENSIONS LENGTH (FT) WIDTH (FT) THICKN-SC 'FT) 4.00 4.00 1.00 SOIL PRESSURE (KSF; AT EACH CORNER FROM FACTORED LOADS CORNER: i 2 3 4 (SEE DATA SHEET) 4.51 t.51 4.51 4.51 PUNCHING SHEAR STRESS VALUES - (PSD P/A + nX(C/J) •* MY(C/J) - .34 -t 0.00 -4 0.00 = 77.14 ALLOW. STRESS -LENGTH DIRECTION* —STEEL AREA RED (SQ.1N./FT.> HAX mi JP rior.i>' r < I.-F r/r r - RIN.IENF . STELL '.00 1C) M[N.FI.!£>. G1EEL (200/rY- . (-'I 1 I-'ANCF t. F''f.;LD L1 Y r L : - UF'F ' I'- FT '.^:: .Jiorii ror nofiENf ABOVF: ,HEAFs •* . 31 0 . OO o . 12,5 0.2<^' <•„ 320 0 . 000 c* ---WIMH DIF^ECl ]:i|J--- LI L' EL (.0036) niNJ-LE>;. STEEL i'200/l-Y) PlOJILNI 1RANSFEPRLD L'Y FLEXURE FFFECTIVC WCDFH ^OF1 HOnENT ABOVE - BEAM SHCAR (KIPS) - 12.89 0.00 '',-3.0 TNCHEG £:TLEL MKEA KfcTO, (SO. IN. /FT. >0.123 0.21^ C.i20 0.000 o,BO - 115:10:21 > &fSTFNO PRCIFESC.1LKJAL F'KQGMn Nd. 5*. . L F-'K1 332F..M --- LAr F'.orrNf, WDM APPLIC-T.- fillMENT'j - 'J 1 RE.NG Til DEMON .1977 AC I ALL INFORMATION PRESENTEE 13 TUl r^TVIIU. APPROVAL- IN TERPRE FA T ION AND APPLICATION BY A I'-'f. GIST ERE D ENGINEER ONLY BY GYSTEMS PROFESSIONAL, 3933. INPUT LOADS (FAC'iOF^LD) AXLAL f10ni£NT-X flOflENT-Y (KIPS) fKIP-Fl) (KIP- FT) S5.9B 0.00 0.00 n INI nun FOOTING DIHENGIONS - fFEri) DEPTH LENG1H-X UIDTH-Y 1.00 00 SIZE - (ENCUES' LENGTH-X WIDTH-Y 0.. 00 CTEEL Y]fLL- G TRESS- nOOlFJEDtF ACT ORE D) SOIL PRESSURE (KSF ) 4.65 STEEL F<ATIO RHU (CinCGA-F'Cx-'F^ ) 0.006 CONCRETE .00 14.00 STRENGTH--(I;GC 2., oo OUTPUT OF FINAL RESULTS FOOTING LENGTH WIDTH TYPE GIVEN GIVEN 1 NO NO N FOOTING SIZE: CON&lDLi'lNG INPUT DIHENSION^ AND MOMENTS LENGTH WIDTH (INCHES) (INCHES) l't.00 1^.00 FINAL FOOTING DIMENSIONS LENGTH (FT) WIDTH (FT) THICKNESH (FT) 3.7?. 3.75 1.00 SOIL PRESSURE (KSF; AT EACH CORNER FROM FACTORED CORNER: 3 2 3 4 (SEE DATA SHEET) 4.19 4.19 4„19 4.19 PUNCHING GHEAR STRESS VALUES - (PSD P/A + MX(C/J; •* nY<C/J) - '".51 •* 0.00 < 0.00 = 60.53 ===LENGIH DIRECTCON=-= ALLOW. SIRESS 152.05 STEEL AREA HKQ. ^SO.IN./FT.) PI A x T n 1 1 (i n o PI L N ," , r - F r / ir r - ,5.32 o . o v 4 L-n> n 1 NM E rif . C '( ET.L ' . 00 3 D ) 0 . 2*><> niN.KLZX. GriIEl. ,200/1 Y; 0.^2: Ml 1 RftNSF E PRE L L'.'i F L L XURE ( K- n ' 0 . 00 0 „ 000 r['vic UIDFM FOR n-.in::Nr AHoyi: = ^c.c ENCHEC. AKLA {s'^. [N./FF MOHENT U'-FF/J-T' 3.J2 0.09^ 1. STL EL ^.OOJL i O.I'S*!1 MIN.FLEX. GFEEL <200TYi 0. 320 nOflLNI 1RANSFLRREO BY FLLXURE. a'-F1; 0.00 0.000 E F 1-" E c r i y r; w c D r H r o i; n o n E N r A B o v E - 45.0 INC HE s BEAN SHE AF< iKDPS) = 9.33 06/04788 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES INT. COLUMN & FOOTING DESIBN F5/C5 P= 36.00 * 36.00 *( 12.00 + 12.00 ) #1.1 17.11 + 17.11 = 34.21 I ( 107. increase on tributary area load to account for beam cantilever effect ) l-l'=26'-6" USE 8" STD PIPE , W/ 14x14x3/4 BASE PL. 4 - 3/4" A.B. Pu= 1.4 * 17.11 + 1.7 * 17.11 = 53.03 I 53.03 qu= * 3.00 = 4.650 t sf 34.21 I1.': 10 11*0 -'-" CYST ENS F-F-CIFESSIGNAL F-PciGPAn NO. v,.3 FCFU-sj^B.r-d •>--> I'lIL FANGULAF L":iOrCNfj UH'Th APPLEED flCJFILN FS - STRENGTH DESIGN, J 77V AC I fiLL INI-'GRMAFJON PRESENTED IS ^nf, P1 C •.'IE14 - APPROVAL. CNFERPRZFAT[ON AND AH-'L ] r r'.- i:-f,. DV A r'kGJSTERFD LNG1NEETR ONLY C C» F f RIG H T B Y 3 > S 7 L fl fa P R 0 !r E S S J. 0 N A L , 1983. INPUT YALUEtf LOADS (FACTORED) AXIAL HOMENT-X (KIPS) (KIP-TT) 53.03 O.OC MOflENF-Y a(3P-Fi) 0.00 n i N3 nun F DOT i NG Di MF NS] ONS - •' F E.E.I ) 0 E P r H L E N G T H - X UID F H - Y J.00 0.00 0.00 COLUP1N SJZE LENGTH-X 1A.OO GFI£EL TRESS- (i;S'[) 60.00 SOIL PRESSURE assn STEEL RATIO RHO <OflEr,A* 0.006 CONCKEFE SFRENGTh 2.00 OUTPUT DF FINAL. RESULT fi FOOTING LENGTH WIDTH TYPE GIVEN GIVEN 1 NO NO niNinun iroj:[NG CONS3UER1NG INPUT LildENSlONS AND MOMENTS LENGFH WIDTH 'INCHED x INCHES) .1.M.OO 1^.00 FINAL. FOOTING DIMENSIONS LENGTH fFF) WIDTH <FD THICKNEZSE (IT) 3.^0 3.^0 1«00 SOIL PRESSURE <KSF> AT EACH CORNLR FROM FACTORED LOAD5CORNER: 1254 <SLE DATA SHEET) ~t» 54 *t. 54 -'•: « 54 4 . 5'* PUNCHING CHEAP1 STRESS VALUES - fPSl) P/A + nx<C/J) -f- P1Y(C/J) - 66 -t 0.00 4 0.00 =- 54.66 *=-=LENGTH DIRECTI ON= = - ALLOW. GFRI-ISS 152.05 STEEL AREA REQ, vSO.IN./FT.1 n A x inn n n n n E M r a - F r T r > MN.lLflF1. Pit" EL •• . OO n IN. FLEX. CTFEL (20;< ' Nl TRANSFERRED E > FLEXURE (K~rT' U3DFH I-'fir E.EAfl £.Ht Al' 0.00 0.^20 0.000 =--W3DlH DlRLCl 10N== - - n A x i n 1.1 n n o n E N r < K - F r -• F T > PlIN.lEflF. S1E.LL (.001?) f-i IN . FLEX . J> FEEL < 200/FY > MOC1ENT TRANSFERRED BY FLEXURE » K-F EFFECTIVE WIDTH FUR1 MOflENT ABOVE = BEAM SHEAR fKlPS) = 7.58 0.00 INCHES £7£"EL AREA RED, <sn.IN./FT. i 0 .083 O.l:b9 0.320 0.000 06/04/86 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES COLUMN AND FOOTING DESIGN F6/C6 ff. rf. ^tyi$yf.if.yf.]f.i£ff.jffrif.ff.qfcff%% JT J(c/(t)pij|t)nj|t/|tjjt/it^^j(tj(kj|[^ f soi1=3 t sf Trib. A DEAD L.LIVE L. ROOF ! MEZZ ! LOADING ROOF MEZZ MISC. 576 576 FROM 1 l1 l DEAD 9 17 0 i 16 ! 31 ! L. *-v*-i • -£-*- .86 .00 12 100 LIVE 6. 40. L. 91 17 TOTAL 16 58 0 . 13 . 03 . 00 LL R7. SUM 27.07 47.08 74.15 \ ip COLUMN DESIGN I 1 '= 14.00 ft LOAD= 74.15 [ ip USE W 8 ss 24 W/ 14x14x1 BASE PL. W/ 4 - 3/4" A.B. Pu = 1.40 * 27.07 + 1.70 * 47.08 = 117.94 I- 117.94 qu = * 74.15 3.00 =4.77 ^sf _v -"•* SYSTFMS PROFESSIONAL PROGRAM NU. 54.5 RLV-"Sll'fc . P3 -*- RECFANGULAl* FOOFfMr U[Th APPLiEC "WMI-IN TS - rTRENtiTH DE.C [&N - 1" 7? f.CI !- 6 ALL If'^ORnATCON PRESENTED LG rCJF-1 REVIEW, APPROVAL AND AF'PLICAI JON L'-Y A PlEClCTERED EN01NEEF ONLY COPYRIGHT B> SYGFEnS PRCifESGiONAL, t';?C3. INFER PREFAFION INF-VAI.UK'J LOADS fFACTORED) AXIAL nOflENT-X (KIPS) (K1P-FT) 117.9., 0.00 (KIF'-FT ) 0.00 niNIMUh FOOTING DIHENS1UNS - fFEELT) D E !:' T H L !£ N G T H - X U I D T H - Y 1.00 0.00 0.00 COLUMN GIZE - INCHES; SIEEL LENGTH-X MIDTH-Y YIELD J-t.OO 14.00 60.00 PiODlFlEDfFACTORED) SOIL PRESSURE STEEL RATIO RHO (QMEGA-F'C'FY} O.OOt- CONCRETE COMPRLSC STRENGTH-n.oc OUTPUT OF FINAL RESUIT S FOOTING LENGTH WIDTH TYPE GIVEN GIVEN 1 NO NO MINTflUn FOOTING SfZE: CONSIDERING INPUT DIMENSIONS AND flGPlELNTS LENGTH IJCDFH (INCHES; (INCHES) 14.00 34.00 FINAL FOOTING DIMENSIONS LENGTH (!"F) WIDTH (FD FHICKNESS (FD 5.2=' 5.25 1.00 . SOIL PRESSURE (KGF> AF EACH CORNER FROM FACFORED LOADSORNER; 4. ',9 4.4? 4 (SEE DATA SHEET 4.4{? PUNCHING SHF.AR STRESS VALUES - (PSD P/A + MX^C/J) + MY(C/J) = i7.10 •» 0.00 •» 0.00 - 347.10 ==-LENGTH DIRECTION^-- ALLOW. GFRESS 152.05 STEEL AREA REG (SO.IN./FT.) MOPIENF a;-FF/KF> 0.72 0.260 Pi ] h' „ 1 E..NF „ SI E E L ' . C'U 1 I1 ; 0 . 1'tf^ PUM.FLEX. C;ri£EL C200/ii) 0,320 PIDPH MI TH«;.MSFEF;RI-:D E-.I FLLXLIF-E. U'-FIJ o.oo o.ooo tf- E u c i , r 1-1 F u i", n a n E N r A E o v r: - 5 c> ., >') c N c H ['JF<tLT30N-=--- - LTLCL ARE! A &F (Sn.IN.. FT. ) onENr \K-Fr/rr) e.92 o.,260 STEEL (.0018) 0.2&*? n[H.n_E>. GFCEL <200/FY> C.J2C Pi 0 Plf NT 1 RANSF E RRED E'-Y f' L F XHRE i K- FT) 0.00 0 . 000 EFFECT [VE UIDTI' FOR PIGMENT ABOVE - 50.0 INCHES BEAM SHEAR a(lPS) = 30.89 06/04/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES COLUMN AND FOOTING DESIGN F7/C7 f soil =3 sf ! Tnb. A ! DEAD L. ! LIVE L, ROOF ! MEZZ ! LOADING ROOF MEZZ MISC. 1600 ! 576 ! FROM DEAD 25 17 0 16 31 L. .60 .86 . 00 : 12 ! 100 LIVE L. 19.20 40.17 TOTAL 44 . 80 58 . 03 0 . 00 SUM 43.46 59.37 102.83 LL R7. = 30 COLUMN DESIGN > 1 '= 14.00 ft LOAD= 102.83 I- ip Pu = USE 1.40 161.77 W 8 qu = ------- * 102.83 28 43.46 W/ 14x14x1 BASE PL. W/ 4 - 3/4" A.B. 3.00 = 1.70 4.72 t sf 59.37 = 161.77 \ c '8'J 5* 10:43 -->- FICUTli F'POFELSIDNAI F'F.OGRAn NO. 54.1 REV- 311'f . i j HECTANCULAP FOUTlNr WZTi: APPLIED MOMENTS •- GTRENC7K L-II'J [Or , 1 nCI ALL INFORMATION !: RIIS'IN TED IP rOi:, REVIEW, APPROVAL AND APPLICATION' E.'.i A REGIE! C F'EIL^ ENGINEER ONLY COPYRIGHT BY SYS PEPIS PROFESSIONAL, 1V03. INPUT VALUEC. LOADS (FACTORED) AXIAL MOMENT-X MOMENT-Y UOF'S) (K1P-TT) (K1P-FT) 16i."/""7 O.OG 0.00 MINIMUM FOOTING DIMENSIONS - (FEET) DEPTH LENGTH-X UIDTH-Y 1.00 0.00 0.00 COLUMN £, [ZE - (INCHES) LENbTH-X UIDTH-Y 14.00 1'T.OO S TEEL Mt.Lb STRESS-\KSI> 60.00 flODIFl ED (FACTORED) SOIL PRESSURE (KSF) 4.72 STEEL RATIO RHO <OMEGA*I-T-'F> ) 0.004 CON CRT. "I E COriFRESElVL STRENbIH-(K'3I) P. .00 OUTPUT OF FINAL RESULTS FOOTING LENGTH WIDTH TYPE GIVEN GIVEN 1 NO NO MENIMUM FOOT TNG SIZE: CONSIDERING INPUT DIMENSIONS AND MOMENTS LENGTH UCDTH (INCHES) CINCHES) 14.00 14.00 FINAL FOOTING DIMENSIONS LENGTH cFH WIDTH (FT) THICKNESS (FT; 6.25 6.25 1.37 SOIL PRESSURE (KSF; AT EACH CORNER FROM FACTORED LOADSCORNER: 4.39 .39 3 4 I SEE DATA SHEET) 4.39 4.39 PUNCHING SHEAR STRESS VALUES - (PSD P/A + HX(C/J) f- MY<C/ J i ~ .25 H 0.00 H 0.00 =• 151. 1>6 ALLOW. STKLISS :.05 "-LENGTH DIRECTION—^STEEL AREA REO (SQ.1N./FT.) X i nun PllN.'iLPlF'. SHELL «.OOJP> 0.301- fl EN. FLEX. CITEEI. 200/Rr ' 0.400 l TKANSFFFiPED L'Y F LTXUKF ' V- \ 1 "> 0.00 0.000 'FECFEVE WCDFIi >rur ildMErJr APOVT .AM &HF AF-1 tKlFC) = ^ . TTJ =• - = U'lul H .DIF-:F.L"! ION---- - Ll'CLl nRLA F^F D (F>- .If, ./FF. , n i N . i Efir- . si LETL i . oo j u ) o . ^02 MEN. FLEX. STEEL (IOO/FY' 0.400 flDflENl TRANSFEFiRLD £'•> FLETXUPE (K-F1^ 0.00 0.000 EFFECTIVE WIDTH FOK MOflENT AQO'v1;-! •= 5o.O INCHES BEAM SHEAR (Klf-'S) = 44.22 6 06/04/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES *************************************************** COLUMN AND FOOTING DESIGN *#****#********************** fc*************************************** F8/C8 f soil =3 I- sf Trib. A ! DEAD L. ! LIVE L. ROOF ! 0 ! 16 ! 12 MEZZ ! 500 ! 31 ! 100 LL R7. = 28 LOADING FROM DEAD L. LIVE L. TOTAL ROOF 0.00 0.00 0.00 MEZZ 15.50 36.00 51.50 MISC. 0.00 0.00 SUM 15.50 36.00 51.50 Iip COLUMN DESIGN f 1 ' = 14.00 ft LOAD= 51.50 tip USE T.S. 6x6x3/16 W/ 12;;12::3/4 BASE PL. W/ 4 - 3/4" A.B. Pu = 1.40 * 15.50 + 1.70 * 36.00 = 82.90 I- 82.90 qu = * 3.00 = 4.83 t sf 51.50 >.' 4 U. : 1C ;5 - - - c YSI c rir i -h or E SE* i ONAL PROGRAM NO . 54 . i RE v--3 1 :»n . r- 1 -> •* - RECTANGULAF FQOTINL. W[II! AFPl. TEX MOMENTS - STRENGTH DESIGN, 1977 ACI ALL iNFORPiAri.i.1; PRI:<JI:NTED cs FUF RCVIEU, APPROVAL. INTERPRETATION AND AF'PLICAIION E'-Y A Fi'EP] SI EPL'D L'N'GINELR ONLY COPYRIGHT BY SYSTEMS PROFESS TONAL. Lva3. INPUT VALUES LOADS (FACTORED) AXIAL nOflENT-X (KIPS) fKIP-Fl) 82.90 0.00 FOOllNb D1PIENGJONE DEPTH LENGTH-X 1.00 0.00 COLUPIN S[ZE - J LENP1H-X WIDTH- Y 12.00 12.00 MOMENT-Y (KIF'-FT) 0.00 - ''FLET ) UCDTH-Y 0.00 STEEL YIELD STRESS-CKS! 60,00 riODIFlE"D( FACTORED) SOIL PRESSURE (KSF ) STEEL RATIO RHO (OMEGA-F'C/Ff 0.006 CONCRETE COMPRES&IVL 3TRENGTH-(KSI) 2.00 OUT ran or FINAL RESULTS FOOTING LENGTH WIDTH TYPE GIVEN GIVEN 1 NO NO nCNIMUM FOOTCNG SCJIEJ CONSIDERING INPUT DIMENSIONS AND MOMLN15 LENGTH WIDTH (INCHES) (INCHES; 12.00 12.00 FINAL F DOT 1NG 01 HENS1ONS LENGTH (FD WIDTH (FT) THICKNCSG (FT) 4.50 /,.50 1.00 s® SOIL PRESSURE (KSF, AT EACH COPNFR FROM FACTORED LOADS CORNER; 1234 (SEE DATA SHEET) 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 PUNCHING SHEAF;- STRESS VALUES - <PSI> P/A *- MX(C/J> H- MY(C/J; = .76 -4 0.00 -t 0.00 = 111.7 ALLOW. STRLSS 152.05 =-=LENGl H DIREC TION-=-=STEEL AREA RIIQ iiAxmuPi fiuni£Nr (K-rT-Tn 0.27 o.iao filN.IEPIF1. STEEL i.OO,U» O.r^/ P1IN.FLEX. STEEL (200/, , * O.J20 :1 1KANCF ERRED E'^i F LLXUK'E - F - ! T* 0.00 0.000 ij:','>: u[urn F-UF picmi-:Nr HE-OVE tfi.' rncnEC - - ' blEEL AKEA KED, »SQ.IN./FT.> f; .j.27 0.180 nrN.FLEX. STEEL i 200, r'< > O..J20 MDP1EN1 IkAKSFEF'RED E'Y flLxHRE iK-TT) 0.00 0.000 EFFECTIVE UIDTh FUR PlOMuNr rtDOVE - 48.0 INCHES BEAM SHF.AK (K1FTO =• 19.96 06/04/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES COLUMN AND FOOTING DESIGN F9/C9, F10/C10 f soil =3 tsf Trib. A ! DEAD L. ! LIVE L. ROOF ! 0 ! 16 ! 12 MEZZ ! 200 i 31 ! 100 LL R'/. LOADING FROM DEAD L. LIVE L. TOTAL ROOF O.OO 0.00 0.00 MEZZ 6.20 19.20 25.40 MISC. 0.00 0.00 SUM 6.20 19.20 25.40 lip COLUMN DESIGN \ l'= 14.00 ft LOAD= 25.40 I- ip USE T.S. 4::4;;l/4 W/ 10x10;,3/4 BASE PL. W/ 4 - 3/4" A.B. Pu = 1.40 * 6.20 + 1.70 * 19.20 = 41.32 I 41.32 qu = * 3.00 = 4.88 t sf 25.40 --* E.YOTLTiC. I'hOF ESr.HiNAL PROGRAM NO. L4. 3 RF. V-312D . >'1 - -- ..PilCf ANGULAR FQOTENH WLiH APPLIED PIOHfU TS GIRENGIII D!LGIb!M<r"7 ACI ALL INFORMATION FT^iJL'N 1FJJ C;« mi' REVIEW. APPROVAL AND APPLICATION' [\Y A \rf,] C1F F'E [' L"NG3NEE.R ONLY CUPYRIGHF BY SV'JTtnC PROFEGG [GNAL, 1983. IJTERPPLFftrCON INPUT UALUEL LOADS (FACTOREID) AXIAL nOMENT-X (KIF'S) fKlT-n) 41.32 0.00 PilNJPlUM FOOTING DIME N'S3 ONC DEPTH LENGTH-/ 3.00 0.00 COLUMN SIZE - (INCHES) LENtmi-X WIDTH-Y ^0.00 10.00 OUTPUT OF FINAL RFSULT5 nOClENT-Y (KIP-FT ) 0.00 • fFLET) WIDTH-Y 0.00 STEEL /1ETLD GTRESc.-\ 60.00 riODlFlELMFAfTOKED; SOIL PRESSURE (KSF ) 4.88 STE.LL RATIO RHG (OHEGA-F'C/Ft) 0.006 CONCRETE COPPRESSIVE STRFNGTH--(KSI i 2.00 FOOTING LENGTH WIDTH TYPE GIVEN GIVEN 1 NO NO FOOTCNG SI/IE: CONSIDERING INPUT DIMENSIONS AND MOMENTS LENGTH WIDTH (INCHES^ U.NCHLS) 12.00 12.00 FINAL. FOOTING DIMENSIONS LENGTH (FT) WIDTH (FT) THICKNESS (FT) , < ,, 3.00 2 . 00 1.00 f$-D £&><1X SOIL PRESSURE CKGF* AT EACH CORNER FROM FACTORED LOADS CORNER: i :> 3 4 ->SEE DATA SHEET' 4.80 <, .ao 4.80 4.80 PUNCHING 3HEAR STRESS VALUES - ',PS1) P/A + MX(C/J) f (1Y(C/J'> -•= i3.BO ^ 0.00 ^ 0.00 = L3.80 •== ---LENG TH DIREC TION==-~-== ALLOW. STRESS 1L2.05 STEEL AREA RED, iSCJ.]N./FT . ) fiOMFNf (K-Ff/rr- -.6° niN.TFW. S1FEL '.0030 flCN.FI.EIX. STEEL ^JOO'^V; fl 0 M L N T 1 R A N 5 F C R K E D E' V F L I X U R F - K - FT ) 0 . 0 0 f irvi-. UCDTH rur no^ENT APOVL" 3',.,o FMCII: L. f.M C-liLVil*1 • I ]1-'C>) = = = = UIfHH MF-'ETTlOr^-- - - STEEL (K-Fr/irr, 2.6'? o.. r-.?c. n 1 N . 1 EMF . SI E'LL ( . 00 3 C ) 0 . 1'SS PlIfJ.FLEX. STEEL \20n.TYi 0.320 PiOflENl 1KANSFLf;RED LVi FLrXUFxL (K-F1) 0.00 O.Oi'O L.FFL"CriVE UIDTH FOR OOMENr ABOVE = 3a.O INCHES BE API SHEAR (KJPS) -- 5.74 06/04/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES WALL PANEL FOOTING DESIGN Fl- 12.00 + 12.00 ) 0.15 * 30.00 * ROOF WALL 4.00 * 23. 7.50 / 12.00 1.7 * 1.10 = 93Pu= qu= 1.4 * 65.79 ^S 93.98 66.90 3.00 = 4.21 IWALL PANEL FOOTING DESIGN — — ______ _ — — ___ ——, — — -_ ___ — -_ — CT 1 Z.— — —. f~ JL O P= 10.00 * 16.00 *( 12.00 + 12.00 + 7.50 / 12.00 * 0.15 * 30.00 16.00 ROOF WALL 1.92 45.00 1.92 46.92 + 1.92 = 48.84 TOTAL PLI= qu= 1.4 * 46.92 + 1.7 * 1.92 = 68.95 1- 68.95 48.84 * 3.00 = 4.24 tsf 1 •>•"* SfSTLMO PROFESSIONAL Ph'GbKAM N(J LCrANGULAf FUdflNf W [ F i-! AFT LIED G RFA1-; 32L.PJ. ->-->- I], DrlSIO-N . 3 ?7/ All A;_L INFORnATm,'- PREGErJ f|:;.. ['j mr FEVttEW, APPRO AND APPLICATION PY A Rj-:[.]'IIL PL D ENClNFEF ONLY [NFERPREFA INPUT VALUES LOADS (FACTORED) AXIAL FIOMENT-X iKIPS) (KIP-FT) 68.95 0.00 1.J3 0.00 COLUPIN GUif - (INCHES) LENGTH-> WIDTH-Y MOhENT-Y (KIP-FT) 0.00 R 1 N3 MUM F DOT 1ND D1MEKS1DNL - i F L'ET ) D E!:' T H L E N G T H - X UID T H - Y .7.50 0 . 00 G FEEL YIELD GTRESG-<KS[ 60.00 MODIFIED(FACTORED) SOIL PRESSURE (KSF ) 4.24 STEEL RATIO RHO <C1MEGA*F'C/FY; 0.006 CONCRETE COMPRESS U'F STRENGTH -<KGI) 2.00 OUTPUT OF FINAL RESULTS FOOTING LENGTH WIDTH TYPE GIVEN GTYEN 1 NO NO fl'-IM FOOTING GCZEJ CONSIDERING INPUT DIMENSIONS AND MOMENTS LENGTH WIDTH (1NCHLS) (INCHES) 12.00 12.00 FINAL FOOTING DIMENSIONS LENGTH (FT) WIDTH <FH THICKNESS <FT) 4.50 4.50 1.33 . SOIL PRESSURE (KSF; AT EACH CORNER FROM FACTORED LOADSCORNER:3 3.68 .68 6 •- PUNCHING SHEAR STRESS VALULG - P/A + f1X(C/J) + MY(C/J> = ^4.44 H 0.00 4 0.00 = •===LENGTH DIRECT I ON-™ (PSD 64.44 (SEE DATA ^HEL'T ) ALLOW. STRESS 3 TELL AREA RF.G (&Q.3N./F1.) rmxfpinpi nopit'NT >,:- --FT/FT) e.3'? 0.121 PIIN.UW. STEEL '.OOdO 0.1;.-r.. M1N . I" L E X . ti T E E L ', '2 0 0 / F Y > 0 . 4 7 8 P) 0 Pi F. N1 T R A N S F h F.; R ED E'. i F L L X U R E ' K - F T ) 0.00 0 . 0 0 0 LCfEVE WIDTH 1-f'!1 flOClENi AP-OVL = 5».-j [NCI If I, .API EHLAR O(1PS) = 34.41' CTTLL AREA RFQ, rjociKNi '.K-FT Trs ^,.^° o. L2i '. STEEL '.001C) 0.34L PIN. FLEX. bTEEL >?00/FY) 0.476 ROPILNT TRANSFERREE' F^ FLEXURE fK-Fl) O.:-*'- 0.000 EFFECTIVE WIDTH FOP NOflENT AP-OUE = 54.0 INCHE',5 BEAM SHEAR (KIPS) - 14.42 06/04/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES WALL PANEL FOOTING DESIGN P= 10.00 * 20.00 *( 12.OO + 12.00 ) ROOF + 7.50 / 12.00 * 0.15 * 30.00 * 20.00 WALL 2.4O + 2.40 56.25 58.65 + 2.40 = 61.05 TOTAL Pu= 1.4 * 58.65 + 1.7 * 2.40 = 86.19 I 86.19 qu= * 3.00 = 4.24 I sf 61.05 PANEL FOOTING DESIGN F'-if-'i*_L' P= 10.00 * 26.00 *( 12.00 + 12.00 ) ROOF + 7.50 / 12.00 * 0.15 * 30.00 * 26.00 WALL 3.12 + 3.12 73.13 76.25 + 3.12 = 79.37 TOTAL PLI= 1.4 * 76.25 + 1.7 * 3.12 = 112.05 112.05 qu= # 3.00 = 4.24 t sf 79.37 •* nrL J RECTANGULAR FOOT [NT W[f|; APPLLFL flQMhfiJTb - CJTKENGTH DF'JIGN >• 1977 ALL JNI-ORNATfON PRE'JtNTE.1' rf> "Ul REVIEW, APPROVAL- IN TFRPRE TAI [UN AND APPLICATION EiY A ^F13 ST LRED ENGINEER Ci C n p Y RIG H ! B Y S T S T E r 15 F' R 0 F H S S10 N A L - 1V 8 3 . INPUT VALUEE LOADS (FACTORED) AXIAL (KIPS) ''KIP-FT 86.19 0.00 MOnENT-Y (KIP-n ) 0.00 hINInUfl FOOTING DinLNSlONS - fFE'ET) DEPTH LENGTH-X UIDTH-Y 1 . 33 0 „ C f, 0 . 00 COLUflN SIZE LENC-.TH-X '.50 CINCHES; WIDTH-Y 7.50 3 ! EEL YIELD GFRESG-fK3E) 60.00 nODlFILD (FACTORED) SOIL PRESSURE (KSD SI ELL RATIO RHO (0!'iEGA-F'C/FY) 0.006 CONCRETE COnPRESSlVL STRENGTH- (US I ' 2.00 OUTPUT OF FINAL RESULTS FOOTING LENGTH WIDTH TYPE GCVEN GCVEK 1 NO NO n INI nun FOOTENG CONblOF.RING INFUT D1HF. NS1CJNS AND riOPIENTS LENGTH WIDTH (INCHES ' aNCHEi'S) 12.00 12.00 FINAL FOOTING DIMENSIONS LENGTH (FT^ WIDTH (FT^ THICKNESS (FT' 4 .75 A . 75 1 . 33 SOIL PRESSURE (KSF.) AT EACH CORNER FROn FACTORED LOADS CORNLRs ,10 1 0 . 10 PUNCHING SHE Ah1 GTREGS VALUfG -• (PSI)P/A f nx(c/ji <- nvcc/j) --- .79 * 0.00-f 0.00 =• B1.79 (SE.E DATA 3HLET > ALLOW. STRESS 152.05 ==*LENGTH DIRECTION---STEEL AREA REQ, CS0.1N./H . ) rtiVlMUpi MJI1ENT (K-Fl'FT> 'J.lj 0.15. MK.TE.MI1. C.I ELL UV.-03&/ 0.>^ MIN.fLKX. STELL (200/!-"Y> O.-t^B ! kfiNSF C PRED E'.Y F L F XURE < K- F 1 ' 0 . :>'". 0 . 000 JrECi [ME WIDTH FOP MOMENT ABOVE -- S'J.'t fNCHF.1' h ^hLAFv (K] PC) - 19.3^, =•-= WIDTH DlflECTlDN--- -- - - - C-TLTL AKLA F^h'Q. M A X ] M U M M 0 M i£ N f ( K - F T / lr T > '-'"., 1. -I 0 . 1 5 -» M N . 1 E.MP . SI ELL ', . 0018) 0 .34'.. 'JTEEL (200/FY) 0.478 TRANSFERRED PY FLEXURE (K-F1) O.L>0 0.000 EFFECT CUE WEDTH PdR MOMENT ABOVE - 55.4 [NCHEb1 BEAN SHEAR (KIPS) = 19.34 ft'•fc'f* -•*- SYBTLNf. f'KOFECSlONAL F'RfiuKF.fl Nd., '..4 . 3 RF V-312E:.. F'l RECTANGULAR rOOTENC UHH APPLIED MOMENT': STRENGTH DESIGN. 1'?/ /" ACI ni..L JfJ'-'URMATIGN PRE'oF.NTEL ['> I'OF RCVLEU. APPROUAL» IN FEPPRE TA f [UN AND f.PPLlCAHDN BY F, RIT61 C.I E RE D LNG1NELP ONLY COPYRIGHT B\ Si'-.TEMS PROFCSSIONAL- [fjplli" VALUE: LOADS (FAC10RE.D) AXIAL (KIPS) 'KIP- 112.05 0,00 (KIP- F"T 0.00 FOOTING DIMENSIONS - fFLET) DFFTH LENGTH-X WIDTH-1* 1.33 0.00 0.00 COLUMN SIZE - (INCHES) LfcNGTH-y WIDTH-Y 7.50 7.50 STEEL YIELD 3TRESS-<1,SI 60.00 NODIF 1FD< FACTORED) SOIL PRESSURE (KSF ) 4.24 STEEL F<ATIO RHO <OMEGA*F'C/FY; 0.006 CONCRETE COflPRESSlVE GrRENGrn-(i:si) 2.00 OUTPUT OF F 1NAL FOOTING LENGTH WIDTH TYPE GtVEN GIVEN 1 NO NO MINIMUM FOQ1 ING GT.ZE: CONSIDERING INPUT MHENSIONS AND MOMENTS LENGTH WIDTH (INCHES) (INCHES) 12.00 12.00 FINAL FOOTING DlHENSIONS LENGTH (FT) UCDTH (FT) THICKNESS (FT) , ,, 5.50 5.50 1.33 S^b >&<H SOIL PRESSURE (KCJF> AT EACH CORNER FROM FACTORED LOADS CORNER: 1234 (SEE DATA SHEET) "/ Q O ZOO I O G Z. O O F'UNCHINb (SHEAR STRESS VALUES - (PSD P/A f MX<C/J) + MY(C/JJ - .9-0 4 0.00 4 0.00 = 109.90 ALLOU. STRi-ISS - = -=LENGTH DIRECT [QN=--STEEL AREA RI£Q. ^SO.IN./FT.) n A x i H u n n o n E N r •; h - FT - F r > 11. <"> u 0.21 o niN.TF.riF1. E.TEFL f.OOJt) 0.:<-'ie.. 111M . F L E > . S I E t: I. '' L' 0 0 / F Y ) 0 . <t "7 0 '[ F^ ANSF F. F-'RE D E'. Y F"L L XURL \ H - F 1 ) 0 . 00 0 . 000 «s "[UL" UIDFII i-"Dk riOHENT ABOyZ -- 515.-, [NLH :.HLAF' (KJFS- = l>9.2i. — -WIDTH DmCTlDN-=- iTEi'EL AF'LA Fdfu '&0.1N. 'FT. ' n nont'Nr (i--Fr/rr; 11.00 o.jio STEEL ',.00 ID 0. :•<>*.' STEEL '200/F\; 0.476 r,0 RENT T RANPF t F-'RED EV] F L E XURE < K- F T > 0 . 00 0 . 000 EFFECFCVE WIDTH FOR nOMENT ABOVE = 55. «t INCHES BEAM SHEAR (KIF'S) = 1'9.35 06/04/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES WALL PANEL FOOTING DESIGN P= 24.00 * 22.00 *( 12.00 + 12.00 ) ROOF + 8.50 / 12.00 * 0.15 * 30.00 * 24.00 WALL 6.34 + 6.34 76. 50 82.84 •+• 6.34 = 89.17 TOTAL Pu= 1.4 * 82.84 + 1.7 * 6.34 = 126.74 126.74 qu= * 3.00 = 4.26 t sf 89.17 4/as ---< E."rC.TmS PRdFE SLHiNA! i ROGKAn NO. 54.1 i 'IIV- 31 2E',. F'l - - RECTANGULAR FOOT INC U ,. f I, MPPL [ED flOflEN TS - STRENGTH DESIGN r 19 77 ALL. INFORMATION PRE'.'EN It& [i FOF REVIEW- APPROVAL AND APPLICATION DY A F'EDILT F RED ENGINEER ONLY COPYRlGHi PY KiT/TEHS PROFESS [ONAL - 1982. INTFRPRETAlION JNPUT VALUES LOADS (FACTORED) AXIAL nOMENT-X (KIPS) (KIP--PT) 126.74 0.00 niNinun FOOTING D]MF.NC: DEPTH LENGTH-X 1.33 0.00 CULUP1N SIZE - ( CNCHESJ LENGTH-X WIDTH-Y nOMENT-Yaaf'-n)o. oo WIDTH-Y 0.00 STEEL YIELD S TRESS -<KSn 60.00 riODIFIED( FACTORED) SOIL PRESSURE (KSF > 4.26 STEEL RATIO RHO <OMEGA*F'C/KY> 0.006 CONCRL'T E COPlPRESSIVE STRENGTH-a.'JC; Z.,00 OUT PUT 01- FINAL RESULTS FOOTING LENGTH WIDTH TYPE GIVEN GIVEN 1 NO NO K, FOOTCNG SC2E: CONSIDERING INPUT DIMENSIONS AND MOMENTS LENGTH WIDTH (INCHES' (INCHES) 12.00 12.00 F 1 NAL F H{JT 1 NG D] MENSIONS LENGTH <FH WIDIH (FT) THICKNESS <FT) 5.75 5.75 1.33 I S(fi X I SOIL PRESSURE (KS!-"> AT EACH CORNFR FROM FACTORED LOADS CORNER1; 1 2 3 4 (SEE DATA SHEET) 4.11 4.11 4.11 4.11 PUNCHING SHEAR STRESS VALUES - (PS1) P/A i- HX<C/JJ <• PIY<C, J) - .10 ^ 0.00 + 0.00 = 113.50 ALLOW. STRESS --BLENGT H DIREC T STEEL AREA REG (SQ.IN./M.) nAxiPIijIYI nancNT •' K -rT/FT- 11.8& 0.22<< P11N.TF.P1F1. LTLEL • . 00.1.10 0.3'".. M f N .!-"!.. EX . (.1 T 'r. LL < ?.00/1-' Y ' 0 . /, 7 8 l IkAN&FLF^RED P-Y FLEXUF<E (K-F1) 0.00 0.000 r !£ '2 f C V E WIDTH F 0 R M 0 PI E N T A P. 0 V F. ; S / . i I N C HF API C..HE Ak f K3PS) - 21'. r 3 = =•- WIDTH DIRECT ION=-= - - &TLE.L AKLK F (S0.1N./I-TnAxrnupi PIOPIENT <K-FT/FD it.se 0.22^ M1N.TEP1F1. CTEEL i.OC-H:) 0.3-.L PliN.K! EX. STEEL (200/l'rj O.-t^fi TKANSFEh'REC- BY FLEXURE (K-FT) 0.00 0.000 EFFECTIVE WIDTH FOR PIOPIENT ABOVE = 57.1 INCHES BE API SHEAR (KIF'S) = 32.91 -7 . 06/04/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES WALL PANEL FOOTING DESIGN ###**#**#*******#********#**#**#*********#******** F25 , F2t> ROOF MEZZ WALL Trlb. A ! DEAD L. 1 800 ,' 16 170 ! 30 t Ht. I 9.25 ! 30 LIVE L. 1 *""* 100 L 15 LOADING FROM DEAD L. LIVE L. ROOF 12.8 9.6 MEZZ 5.1 16.728 WALL 52.0312 M I SC . 0 . 0 TOTAL 22 . 4 21.828 52.031 0 . 0 f soil = 3 ^ LL R7. = 1 TOTAL 69.9 +96.3 I- ip Pu = 1.4 * 69.9312 + 142.66 1.7 * 26.328 = 142.661 I- qu = * 96.259 3.00 = 4.446 \sf o/ -4/80 E'Y'.'Tl MS PROFESSIONAL PKOGRAfl HP. '.'4.1 REV-31 2E>. i'1 RE C F A N i D U L AR F 0Cl T ' N r Ul [ r h AFlPL L E P M0,"i E f | T'", - rl T R E N H 11-1 D F. '31G,'<. 1'? 7"/ A C ! ALL INKORriArtON P|.;E'JEN FED 1C FOR REVIEW, AND AFTUtAlKiN' L1^ A F^'fGlBl E RE L- ENGINEEF ^TEflG PROFESSIONAL, 1"Q3. IN TEl-'PkC FA F [UN INPUT VALUES LOADS (FACTORED) AXEAL MOMENT-X (KIPS) (KIP-F1) 142.&6 0.00 nOMENT-Y (KlF'-n ) 0.00 MINIMUM FOOTING DIMENSIONS - (FEED DEPTH LENGTH-X UCDFH-Y 1 . 33 0.00 0 . 00 COLUMN SIZE LENG1H-X 9.25 (INCHES) WIDTH-Y YIELD STRESS-(KSI) 60.00 MODIFIED(FACTORED) SOIL PRESSURE (KSF ) STEEL. RATIO RHO <QMEGA*F'C/TY) 0 . 006 CONCRETE COMPRESS1VE '3TRENGTH-(i;GI ' 2.00 OUTPUT OF FINAL RESULTS FOOTING LENGTH WIDTH TYPE GIVEN GIVEN 3 NO NO MINIMUM FOOTCNG SIZE: CONSIDERING INPUT DIMENSIONS AND MOMENTS LENGTH WCDTH (INCHES) ^INCHES) 12.00 12.00 FINAL FOOTING DIMENSIONS LENGTH (FT) WIDTH (FT; THICKNESS (FH 6.00 6.00 1.33 SOIL PRESSURE (KSF) AT EACH CORNER FROM FACTORED LOADS CORNER:1 4.24 PUNCHING SHEAR STRESS VALUES - (PSD P/A + MX (CAD •< MY(C/J) - IB8.39 -i 0.00 ^ 0.00 » 128.39 DTRECT1QN=-- (SEE DATA GHELT ) ALLOW. STRIISG 152.05 STEEL AREA RED, (SD.1N. 'FT. ) piAXjnur, Moni-iNr nf-\~; rn 1,5.54 0.260 rilN.TL.ri!'* STEEL <.00i&> O.J.V.- fllN.r-'LEV. STEEL , UOu-VYi G.47& riOflLNT IFMNSFLRRED C'^i FLE>UF<E ^K-fl) 0.00 O.OOO WIDTH FtlF MOMENT AL\OU!£ = 5".:!. INCHES E.HF.AP a'lf'S^ - 38.^7 = = -WIDTH [ 3rF:C130N = = = - - - SI ELL AREA -RFC!- <SC. [N./FT. 1 nAxinur IIOPIEN r ' K -r r/r r ) i L . T-4 c . ,:*G fllN.IEMF1. STEEL t.OOJC; G.34<>MIN.FI.EX. sri:;::_ (200/FY) 0.473 TRANSFERRED L'^i F-LLXURE 'K-FT) 0.00 0.000 EFFECTIVE WIDTH FOR fiOPIENr ABOVE •= 57.1 INCHES BEAN SHEAR <K]PS) = 38.47 VL £ 06/04/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES WALL PANEL FOOTING DESIGN F27 ROOF MEZZ WALL Trlb. A ! DEAD L. 1 288 ! 16 240 ! 31 t Ht. I 9 0 1= I -* /'I. -_ D i •-'l--} LIVE L. 12 100 L 24 LOADING FROM DEAD L. LIVE L. TOTAL ROOF 4.6 3.5 8.1 MEZZ 7.44 22.272 29.712 WALL 83.25 83.25 MISC. 0.0 0.0 f soil = 3 \ sf LL R7. = 7, TOTAL 95.3 +25.7 = 121.0 I- ip Pu = 1.4 * 177.15 qu = # 121.02 95.298 +1.7 25.728 = 177.154 i.OO = 4.391 I sf --•• r^c'TEni PROFESSIONAL PROGF^AM NO. 54.1 PFV- 33:•&.r-i PECFANGULAI-1 FdOFCNfj WITH APPLIED MQMrlNTG - STRENGTH DESIGN, 1 F27 •*- -*- -> -4 ->• - ALL INFORM AT I ON PRESENTED IS FOP REVIEW, APPROVAL, INTER PKHFATION AND AF1 PL] CAT ION L'-Y A F^EtDSTERED ENG1NLEP ONLY COPYRIGHT BY StGTEPIS PROFESSIONAL - 1903. INPUT VALUEL LOADS (FACTORED) AXIAL nOHENT-X (KIPS) (KIP-TT^ 177.16 0.00 (K1F-FT) 0.00 FOOTING DIHLNSIONS - (FEED DEPTH LENGTH-X UIDTH-t 1.33 0.00 0.00 COLUMN SIZE LENG1H-X 9.25 (INCHES' WIDTH-^i O nr-7 a *_ v_ STEEL ^ILLD STRESS-<KS 60.00 MODIFIED (FACTORED) SOIL PRESSURE (KCF) 4.39 STEEL RATIO RHO (OMEGA-F'C/F'Y) 0.006 COMPRESS 1VE STRENGTH- <K(II) 2.00 OUTPUT OF FINAL KEGUL1S FOOTING LENGTH WIDTH TYPE GIVEN GIVEN 1 NO NO MINIMUM FOOT TNG GTZE: CONS1 DEFYING INPUT DIMENSIONS AND MOMENTS LENGTH WIDTH (INCHES) I INCHES) 12.00 11.00 FINAL FOOTING DIMENSIONS LENGFH (FT) WIDTH (FT) THICKNESS (FT) 6.75 6.75 1.50 $fl»*i8 SOIL PRESSURE (KSF) AT EACH CORNtR FROM FACTORED LO.'iDS 1 4 .20 4.20 3 4 (SEE DATA GHLTT ) 4.20 4.20 PUNCHING GHLAR B1REGS VALUES • P/A + MX(C/J) + MY(C/J) •= ^25.47 * 0.00-4 0.00 = H DIRECriON==- ) 125.*,: ALLOW. S1UESS 152.05 STEEL ARLA REf! (SH. JN./F T . ) r i'K -Fl/FT • MN.TLflf . FILE I. ' .OOJfJ) Pi 0 n L N 1 F^.NbFtr-'kED ElY FLEXURE G'- F 1) -ECTIYE U1LTII '- Af'i C,lir AK U'] l-'C.,) flGMENTr, -i. 0.00 CNCHE.O 0.000 - - = U1D1 H L' 1RF. L"( 1 ON --- - =• ttlN.TLnF'. LIE EL. PIT N. FLEX. STEEL <.0018) (200/FY) 0 0 PIE Nl 1 R ANSF E F<REU t' Y F L LXURE '- -! "•J. / i. 0.00 EFFECT [WE WIDTH FOR HOf-IENT ABOVE - 63.1 INCHES BLAPI CHEAk (KIF'S) =- 47.93 -ilLF I- AK'LA RED (SO. IN. /FT,, ; on;:R5 0.38C 0.558 0.000 06/04/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES **************** ****#*********************************************** WALL PANEL FOOTING DESIGN ** ******************************** F29 f soil =3 sf ROOF MEZZ Trlb. A ! DEAD L. 312 312 t 7.5 16 31 Ht. 0 LIVE L. 12 100 L 26 LL R7. = 12 LOADING FROM DEAD L. LIVE L. TOTAL ROOF 5.0 3.7 8.7 MEZZ 9.672 27.156 36.828 WALL 73.125 73.125 MISC. O.O 0.0 TOTAL 87.8 + 30.9 = 118.7 kip Pu = 1.4 * 87.789 + 1.7 * 30.900 = 175.435 I- 175.43 qu = * 3.00 = 4.434 I- sf 118.68 c. -> -> - i,Yen E MG PROF E SS] ONAL PROGRAM NO . 54 . J RF V 21 TB . F11 EC F ANGULAR FOOT INC W [ Ti-i APPLIED MOMENT!., - STRENGTH i>Eb [GM - 1 977 ALL [NFORrtATCON PRCGC.1-1 TFD 15 FUR REVIEW. APPROVAL- IN FERPRETA F [OiJ AND APFL] CATION D'i A n'EGlSTFRrD ENGTNEETF; ONL'i COPYRIGHT B1 3V; TCMG PROFESSIONAL. 1983. INPUT VALUES LOADS (FACTORED) AXIAL (KIPS) (KIP-FT) 17D.4o 0.00 Pi I N ]MUM F DOT ING DlMENSIONS DEPTH LENGTH-X COLUflN SIZE LENHTH-X 7.50 0.00 (INCHES) WIDTH-Y ,".50 MOflENT-Y (KIF'-FT) 0.00 WIDTH-1! 0.00 S FEEL YIELD STRESS-(KSI) 60.00 MODIFIED(FACTORED) SOIL PRESSURE (KSF ) 4.43 STEEL RATIO RHO (OMEGA-F'C/FY) 0 . 006 CONCRETE COMPRESS1VE STRENGJH-(KGI) 2.00 OUTPUT OF FINAL RESULTS FOOTING LENGTH WIDTH TYPE GIVEN GIVEN 1 NO NO FOOTCNG SEZE; CONSIDERING INPUT DIMENSIONS AND MOMENTS LENGTH WIDTH (INCHES) (INCHES) 12.00 12.00 FINAL FOOTING DIMENSIONS LENGTH (FT> WIDTH (FT) THICKNESS (FT- 6.75 6.75 1.50 SOIL PRESSURE (KSF; AT EACH CORNER FROM FACTORED LOADS CORNER:1 4.17 2 4.17 3 4 . i 7 •4. 17 PUNCHING SHEAR STRESS VALUES - (PSD P/A n MX(C/J) < f1Y(C/J) - 16.14 -» O.OO-i 0.00 =• 136.J4 (SEE DATA SHEET) ALLOW. STRESS 152.05 -•===-LENG FH DIRECTI ON- =•-STEEL ARFA REP (SO.IN./FT.) MAXIMUM MOMENT <K-FT/FT) fllN.lEMP. STEEL (.0010) MIN.FLEX. STEEL (200/FY) MOMENT TRANSFERRED BY FLEXURE (K-FT ) 13.06 0.00 EFFECTIVE WIDTH FOR MOMENT ABOVE = 61.'t INCHES |AN SHEAR (KIPS) = 49.37 0.2?" 0.388 0.558 0.000 = = = W1D1H DIRECT ION-== MAXIMUM MOMENT (K-FT/FTi niN.TEMP. STEEL (.0018) MtN.KLEX. STEEL (200/FY) OOMEN1 TRANSFERRED BY FLEXURE OC-F 1 ) IfFi-ECrCVE UCDTH FDR MOMENT A ROVE BEAM 3HLAR f'K!PS' - 49.37 13.06 0.00 61.A CNCHE3 STEEL ARLA REQ, <SO.IN./FT.) 0.297 0.338 0.358 0.000 m SOL ATLANTIC M.VO. LOB NO. (ata> an toaa. crt«i >\ jt t / ye-fc 0 -ri - ****- IT RANDHAVA * ASSOCIATES SEISMIC DESIGN AJIT UHHJNM S AKKMTES CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS INC. 2101 SO. ATLANTIC BLVD. LOS ANQELES. CALIFORNIA 0OO4O TELEPHONE NO. (2i3> zea-floss. (213) 263-0735 DATE, S-f !> °^<fr N st- (O )- co (<>-;- N orw COrw .T (^ •2*' 5 -3 06/08/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES ##*##**)|(#^^ ROOF NAILINB DIAGRAM ANALYSIS ( ZONE 1 ) LOT DIMENSION : DIMENSION AFTER MINUS SKYLIGHT E-W 72.00 ft E-W 60.00 ft N-S 68.00 ft N-S 60.00 ft DL OF ROOF = 16.00 tt/ft* THIC1- NESS OF WALL= 9.25 in TRIB. HEIGHT = 10.00 ft NUMBER OF WALL = 2 ********************^ E-W --------- Wl= 16. OO * 72.00 * 0.186 = 214.3 tt/ft 2 * 10.00 * 115.63 * 0.186 = 430.1 tt/ft ,£,44. 4 tt/ft 644.4 * 68.00 RA =RCL = = 21.91 \ 21.91 VA =VCL = = 365.2 tt/ft 60. OO NAILING DISTANCE REQUIRED ( FOR MAIN DIAPHRAM ) : 365.2 - 820.OO X= ( ) * 34.00 = VOID 365.2 365.2 - 73O.OO x= ( , * 34.00 = VOID 365.2 365.2 - 640.00 X= i ) * 34.00 = VOID 365.2 365.2 - 425.00 X — i — \ -if ™" i f~if~i — t if~i r n—• i^ •••" *™ ™~ •"• ••• *~* *~™ ^~ "™* ~~ ) ^ j -t^- n \j \j — Y \_j j_ JLJ 365.2 36 5.2 - 320.OO X= ( } * 34.00 = 4.20 365.2 *# FOR FINAL NAIL IMG DIAGRAM , REFER TO SUBDIAPHRAM ANALYSIS ALSO 06/O8/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES CHORD FORCE 0.644 * 68.00 = FORCE = = 5.17 k 8.OO * 72.00 1.4 * 5.17 As= ~ — O.1-. 0.9 * 60 USE 06/08/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES ###**##*****#*######***#*## #**#***##**##*^ ROOF NAILING DIAGRAM ANALYSIS ( ZONE 2 ) LOT DIMENSION : DIMENSION AFTER MINUS S> YLIGHT E-W 141.00 ft E-W 120.00 ft N-S 104.00 ft N-S 90. OO ft DL OF ROOF = 12.00 THICKNESS OF WALL= 7.50 in TRIE. HEIGHT = 14.00 ft NUMBER OF WALL = 2 ####^ E-W W2= 12.00 * 141.0O * 0.186 = 314.7 #/ft 2 * 14.00 * 93.75 * 0.186 = 488.3 tt/ft 803.0 tt/ft 803.0 # 1O4.00 RCR=RE4L= = 41.75 41.75 VCR=VE4L= = 348.0 #/ft 120.00 NAILING DISTANCE REOUIRED ( FOR MAIN DIAPHRAM ) : 348.0 - 820.OO x= ( ) * 52.00 = VOID 348.0 348.0 - 730.00 / __ \ It er *~i /~i /~\ _ i I n T T"1.„ ^ —— — — — — — _ — _-—. — — — —— ^ ^ 3*- » U»J — VLJ 1 iJ 348.0 348.0 - 64O.OO X= ( ) * 52.00 = VOID 348.0 348.0 - 425.GO — / _.____._._.„.««.«.„««_«_.„„ ^ & c=/~i /~i/~i — ijnTT^"~ ^ } * \3j-. m L'L' — VLJ I U 348.0 348.0 - 320.00 X= ( ) * 52.00 = 4.18 348.0 ( ** FOR FINAL NAILING DIAGRAM , REFER TO SUBDIAPHRAM ANALYSIS ALSO ) 06/08/88 AJIT RANDHAVA «• ASSOCIATES CHORD FORCE 0.8O3 * 104.00 = FORCE = = 7.70 V 8.00 * 141.00 1.4 * 7.70 ™-_™ —.———.—_—_ « »_ _ r\ i~\— *_' • j^.^ 0.9 * 60 USE 06/08/88 AJIT RANDHAVA ?/ ASSOCIATES g*******************************^ ROOF NAILING DIAGRAM ANALYSIS ( ZONE 3 ) ###########*##*#*###*#*###### LOT DIMENSION : E-W N-S 92.00 ft 58.00 ft DIMENSION AFTER MINUS St YLIGHT E-W 80.00 ft N-S 45.00 ft DL OF ROOF =12.00 #/ft= THIQ NESS OF WALL= 7.50 in TRIE. HEIGHT = 14.00 ft NUMBER OF WALL = 2 ilc***********************^ E-W W3= 12.00 * 92.00 * 0.186 = 205.3 #/ft 2 * 14.00 * 93.75 * 0.186 = 488.3 tt/ft 693.6 #/ft 693.6 * 58.OO RE4R =RG= = 20.11 \ 20.11 VE4R =VG= = 251.4 tt/ft 80.00 NAILING DISTANCE REQUIRED ( FOR MAIN DIAPHRAM ) : 251.4 - 820.00 ) * 29.00 = VOID 251.4 251.4 - 730.00 ) * 29.00 = VOID 251.4 251.4 - 640.00 ) * 29.00 = VOID 251.4 251.4 - 425.00 1 * 29.00 = VOID 251.4 251.4 - 32O.OO 251.4 ( ** FOR FINAL NAILING DIAGRAM , REFER TO SUBDIAPHRAM ANALYSIS ALSO ) 06/08/88 AJIT RANDHAVA b ASSOCIATES CHORD FORCE 0.694 * 58.00 = — _ _— — — *•• •* -» i— —— —— ——— ——————— _ j • 1 / r 8.00 * 92.00 1.4 * 3.17 As= = 0.08 0.9 * 60 USE 2 # JIJIIT UUnUVf i ASM8MTES CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS INC. 2101 SO. ATLANTIC BLVD.. LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 9004O TELEPHONE NO. (213) 26a-«oa3. (213) 203-0735 S- 8 y l-z- x.o,(S4 = 5H ' 5^ 2.^ ft<si.ii»i.^5.-f^u? ,« NJ'~N "Jjf-o 1^i JlJIir MIIIHJIVJI S JUBSnUITES CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS INC. 2101 SO. ATLANTIC BLVD. LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 9OO4O TELEPHONE NO. (213) zea-aoes. (213) 2es-OT3s " OATe -ft*,!* JtU Ue. G of oi- VI! \* AJIT MNIMVA S ASM8IAT1S CONSULTING STRUCTURAL EIUGIMEERS INC. 2101 SO. ATLANTIC BLVD., LOS ANQELE3. CAUFORNIA 9004O TELEPHONE NO. (213) 263-4O83. (213) 293-O735 OAT*. omai*. 4. OK! . -, f>U 1> \ ' ' 3 - a. V M.•* '-- t <a PAT *8 , MJIIT MHNUNIA S ASSMUTES CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS INC. 2101 SO. ATLANTIC BLVD. LOS ANQELES. CALIFORNIA 9004O TELEPHONE NO. (213) 263-9O83. (213) 263-O736 OAT* - \<3 Sut? d>'^ o> -24. r—7-' Sf I £> i < a ^< b ~ 4 06/08/8E AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES ************************************************************************ STRUT DESIGN ( ALONG LINE C ) ****************** LEFT LATERAL FORCE = 21.9 k DIMENSION LENGTH = 120.0 ft ROOF UNIT SHEAR = 0.183 I"/ft TRIB. LENGTH = 120.0 ft TOTAL FORCE IN = 21.9 ^ H STRUT LINE RIGHT 41.8 k 141.0 ft 0.296 I- /ft 120.0 ft 35.5 t 57.4 \ NUMBER OF STRUTS NUMBER OF SHEAR WALLS = STRUT No. 1 *-\ %-» 4 5 LENGTH 48 . 0 48 . 0 24 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 ( k-in ) M @ mid 888 . 0 688 . 0 «-»*"* *-\ (-) 0 . 0 0 . 0 PL 57.4 34.5 11.5 0 . 0 0 . 0 Pm 46.0 23 . 0 5.7 0 . 0 0 . 0 PR 34.5 11.5 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 FOR 5 1/8 ;. MEMBER , BRACE LENGTH Ib = 0.3 *1800000 Fc' = (lb*12/5.125)= 1539.0 8.00 ft o/c Ft = 1100 Ft GOVERN As vU x* TU,to usc- B >|2 06/08/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES **#******#***********#********#***************************************** No. LENGTH 1 , 48 . 0 A req d — TRY A = Scf = 46 . 0 1.1 130.7 M @ mid PL Pm PR 888.0 57.4 46.0 34.5 57.4 1 . 33*1 . 1 5.125 ,c 25.5 130.7 OK111 BRACE & 8' o/c 510.8 888 . 0 2.4 510.8 OK 1.: No. OF 1 1/4" BOLT NEEDED = 57.4 /(1.25*1.33*7.63)= 4.5 No. LENGTH M @ mid PL Pm PR 2 48.0 888.0 34.5 23.0 11.5 34.5 A req ' d = = 23.6 in = 1.33*1.1 TRY 5.125 ;; 25.5 A = 130.7 OK111 BRACE @ 8' o/c Scf= 510.8 23.0 888.0 1.1 2.4 +__,.___„____ _ — f "l D Q /I .1 —r —r— l_' . C3tj*T X • -' _' 130.7 510.8 OM '' No. OF 1 1/4" BOLT NEEDED = 34.5 /(1.25*1.33*7.63)= 2.7 06/08/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES **** No.LENGTH 24 . 0 TRY A = Scf= 5.7 1.1 92.3 M @ mid PL Pm 222.0 11.5 5.7 11.5 — — 7 p T n3 1.33*1.1 5.125 -: 18.0 92.3 DM ' ' 264.6 *"* T"\ /') 2.4 264.6 - PR 0.0 BRACE @ 8' o/c . 4u6 1 . 33 (D No. OF 1 1/4" BOLT NEEDED = 11.5 /(1.25*1.33*7.63)= 0.9 V, JIJIT MHUVA S ftSSMUTES CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS INC. 2101 SO. ATLANTIC BLVD. LOS ANOELES. CALIFORNIA 9O04O TELEPHONE NO. (213) aes-was. «is) 2«3-or38 OATT. - T-l'O 44 S ^ J- \A'-L- •JIT MMNUIWI fi ASSMMTES — CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS INC. OATC- 2101 SO. ATLANTIC BLVD. LO8 ANOELES. CAUFORNIA OOO4O TELEPHONE NO. (213) 263-9O63.(213) 263-O73S ^>_ 77, o*- A -4- 06/08/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES STRUT DESIGN ( ALONG LINE E.4 ) LEFT LATERAL FORCE = 41.8 V RIGHT 20 . 1 \> DIMENSION ROOF UNIT TRIE. TOTAL STRUT NUMBER NUMBER LENGTH SHEAR =141 .0 ft 0 . 296 I / f t LENGTH FORCE IN LINE OF OF 92 27 .0 ft .3 k + 92 0.2 92 20 .0 18 .0 .1 ft \- /ft ft k STRUTS = 3 SHEAR STRUT No. FOR 5 FV ' 1 21 ~^ 4 5 1/8 o LENGTH 20. 48. 24. 0. 0. WALLS = ( k-in M 0 0 0 0 0 x MEMBER 1 ) @ mid PL 154 888 222 0 0 < . 0 47 . 4 . 0 37 . 1 .0 12.4 . 0 0 . 0 . 0 0 . 0 BRACE LENGTH Pm 42 24 6 0 0 Ib *"\ .7 /-> • jL. .0 .0 _ PR 37.1 12.4 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 8 . 00 .3 *1800OOO — 1 ^TQ n ETJ- — i 1 A i 47.4 Ft GOVERN lb*12/5.125) 06/08/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES No. LENBTH M @ mid PL Pm PR 1. 20.0 154.0 47.4 42.2 37.1 47.4 A req'd = = 32.4 in = 1.33*1.1 TRY 5.125 ;; 24.0 A = 123.0 OK111 BRACE @ 8' o/c Scf= 455.5 ^2.2 154.0 1.1 2.4 123.0 455.5 DM ' ' No. OF 1 1/4" BOLT NEEDED - 47.4 /(1.25*1.33*7.63)= 3.7 No. LENGTH M © mid PL Pm PR 2 48.0 888.0 37.1 24.7 12.4 37.1 A req'd = = 25.3 in = 1.33*1.1 TRY 5.125 ;: 24.0 A = 123.0 OM '' BRACE @ 8' o/c Scf= 455.5 24.7 888.0 1.1 2.4 + = 0.995 1 123.0 455.5 Of'1 ' ' No. OF 1 1/4" BOLT NEEDED - 37.1 /(1.25*1.33*7.63)= 2.9 / 06/08/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES ***##************#**********^ No- LENGTH M @ mid PL Pm PR 3 24.0 222.0 12.4 6.2 0.0 12.4 A req'd = = 8.4 in3 1.33*1.1 TRY 5.125 « 18.0 A = 92.3 OK ' ' ' BRACE ti 3' o/c Scf= 264.6 6 'n. ^_ 11J. * -ii "*" — y.411 1.3. 92.3 264.6 DM ' ' No. OF 1 1/4" BOLT NEEDED = 12.4 /(1.25*1.33*7.63)= 1.0 JIJIIT •JUinjlVA S ASSMIATES CONSULTING STRUCTURAL EMGIIUEERS INC. 2101 SO. ATLANTIC BLVD.. LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 8O04O TELEPHONE NO. (213} 2ea-«o83. (213) OATC. ,-vve p. \1& 4-fe - 3- * 'i&XVa- ^/ (7 JUIT MHIUVJI S ASSMUYES CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS INC. 2101 SO. ATLANTIC BLVD.. LOS ANQELES, CALIFORNIA 90O4O TELEPHONE NO. (213) zoa-aoss. (213) 263-0730 OATC. -S-iO ?. -_< •= -2.0 g« \j \ Cv^ « ' Ul * , "^ AJIIT BAMMAVA i ASSOCIATES CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS INC. 2101 SO. ATLANTIC BLVD.. LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90O4O TELEPHONE NO. (213) 2S3-9O83. (213) 263-O736 88- DATE. OKSKZf N //// 44 t 06/08/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES FLOOR NAILING DIAGRAM ANALYSIS #****#*#*#**#*****#*#*«****** LOT DIMENSION 5 E-W N-S 72.00 ft 50.OO ft E-W 72.00 ft N-S 50.OO ft DL OF FLOOR =31.00 psf THICf NESS OF WALL= 9.25 in TRIE. HEIGHT = 12.5O ft NUMBER OF WALL = 2 PARTITION = 20 psf E-W W6= 51.00 * 72.00 * 0.186 = 683.0 #/ft 2 * 12.50 * 115.63 * 0.186 = 537.7 #/ft 1220.6 ft/ft 1220.6 * 50.00 RA =RB5 = = 30.52 \ f-\ 30. 52 VA =VB5 = = 423.8 #/ft 72.00 NAILING DISTANCE REQUIRED ( FOR MAIN DIAPHRAM ) : 423.8 - S2O.OO x= ( ) * 25.00 = VOID 423.8 423.3 - 730.00 X= ( ) * 25.00 = VOID 423. S 423.8 - 640.00 X-^ \ ~-~" ——— — — — —.—— j ^j .^.5 » OO — vQID 423.8 423.3 - 425.00 x= ( } % 25.00 = VOID 423.8 423.8 - 32O.00 X — f __.-.—. — —.___».___™™—. — — ™™ i 4 r~t S f~)t~i — A. 1 *^_ ^ ___ «__».__.».™.™ —™™ ^ ^ u. w1 , V V — JD N JL A. 423.8 06/08/88 AJIT RANDHAVA * ASSOCIATES FLOOR NAILING DIAGRAM ANALYSIS N-S 50.00 ft E-W 72.00 ft LOT DIMENSION : N-S E-W 50.00 ft 72.00 ft DL OF FLOOR =31.00 psf PARTITION = 20 psf THICf NESS OF WALL= 9.25 in TRIE. HEIGHT = 12.50 ft NUMBER OF WALL = 1 N-S W7= 51.00 * 50.00 * 0.186 = 474.3 tt/ft 1 * 12.50 * 115.63 * 0.186 = 268.8 tt/ft 743.1 tt/ft 743.1 * 72.00 C» 1 —C'~* — — __— — — — — — —. — ____.-«. _—— — I~^A ~7*z> \r\ j. — r\ _i — —— —. — — __ — _— „ ^_C3 • / O r "* 26.75 VI =V3 = = 535.1 #/ft 50.00 NAILING DISTANCE REQUIRED ( FOR MAIN DIAPHRAM ) : 535.1 - 820.00 X= ( ) * 36.00 = VOID 535.1 535.1 - 730.OO X= ( ) * 36.00 = VOID 535.1 535.1 - 640.00 £— ( j ^- _i6. OO = VOID 535.1 535.1 - 425.00 £— ( ) ^ _i6. OO — 7. 4O 535.1 535.1 - 320.00 x= ( ) # 36.00 = 14.47 535.1 6/ 7/83 - IS? OJ 6 •-* SYSTEMS PROFESSIONAL STRESS PkOGRAfl NO. 16.1 RfcV-301F.PJ TYPE NUMB TRACE JOCN 1 0 0 HE MR 1 1 3 UN FT HE MB HEMP CONS TABU UNIT LOAD: JOIN FRAME ON LINE B. L PLANE FRAME t NUflB OF JOIN 4 OF SUPP 3> UNIT COOR b * 2 i I NCI 2 $ NUflB UF KIPS FEET LOAD 4 -& 1> NUMB OF LEST PIF.NB MEHB 3 PROP 0 3 0 4 24 14 24*33 INCH PROP PROP PR13 TABLE PRTS FAB! E E 29000. ALL. FORC REAC DCGP F-EET NG 1 DL LOAD 14 1 1 4- _ © 3 KGRC Y -18 4 FORC Y -IS LOADCNG ,2 LL JU3N LOAD J FfJRC f -30 4 FORf Y -30 AD.CNG 3 3EESPHC TIP- LOAD UNIT H£ET 3 FOkC X UNll- UNIT FNCH LOADING ^ [)!._•! COMB I I . ,2 1 - 31. SOLVE PROBLEM LORRFCTLi' CALCIFIED- EXECUTION TO PROCEED. SFRIJ FRAME UN s,, (UN CIS IN CNCHES AND KLPS) .ER f-'KOI-'ERTIES HEPIBER LENGTH X-AXL3 AREAS Y -AXIS 1 168.00 1.3E 1 O.OE 0 2 168.00 1.3E I O.OE 0 3 288.00 1.3F 1 O.OE 0 finflENTS OF INERTIA CONSTANT Z-AXIS X-AX[3 Y-AXTS Z-AXCS E 4.3L 2 ?.-F 4 -t.JJi£ 2 J.9E 4 4.3E 2 2.9E 4 STRU FRAME ON LCNE B.5 (UNI I 3 LOADING MEMBER 1 •> ,5 JOINT ,5 4 IN INCHES AND KCPS) 1 DL FIEMBE.R FORCE'3 JOINT AXIAL FORCE 1 18.000 3 -18.000 2 13.000 M -18.000 3 -0.000 - 0.000 A PPL [ED JO [NT LOADS* FORCE X FORCE f -0.000 -13.000 0.000 -18.000 R E A C T I Q N S . A P P 1 . [ I-I D LOAD JOIN! 1 - sun | FORCE X f GRCE 't 0.000 10. 000 0.000 13.000 0.000 36.000 SHEAR FORCE MOnfc'NT -0.000 -0.00 0.000 -0.00 -o.ooo -o.oo 0.000 -0.00 0.000 0.00 -0.000 0.00 FREE JOINTS flONENl Z 0.00 0.00 G SUPPORT JOINTS flQflFNI Z -0.00 -0.00 w FREL JOINT DISPLACEMENTS JOINT 3 <; X-D[Gi-"_ACEl'1ENT 1 -0 [ -0.0000 -0 -0.0000 -0 SPLACEPH-INr ROTA TUN .0083 0.0000 .OOtK'5 0.0000 STRU FRANE ON LINE B.5 (UNITS LOADING HE TIBER 1 2 3 IN INCHES AND KIPS) 2 LL MEMBER FORCES JOINT AXIAL FORCE 1 30.000 3 -30.000 2 30.000 4 -30.000 3 -0 . 000 i 0 . 000 S SHEAR FORCE HOHENl -0.000 -0.00 0.000 -0.00 -O.OOO -0.00 0.000 -0.00 0.000 0.00 -0.000 0.00 APPLEED JO CNT LOADS, FREE JO [NTS JOINT 3 4 R JOIN! 1 -1 sun pw JO CNF 3 4 FORCE X FORCE Y -0.000 -30.000 0.000 -30.000 IF ACTIONS, A P P !_ C E ID L DAD G 3 U P FORCE X FORCE r 0.000 30.000 0.000 30.000 0.000 60.000 FREE JOIN! DISPLACEMENT X -0 [3PLACEI1ENT Y -DISPLAC -0.0000 -0.0138 -0.0000 -0.0138 MOPIEN1 Z 0.00 0.00 PORT JO [NTS riQfiENT 2 -0 . 0 0 - 0.00 G EilENT ROTATE ON 0.0000 0.0000 S1RU FRAME ON LINE B.5 (UNITS LOADING MEMBER 1 1 3 JOINT 3 4 IN INCHES AND KIPS) 3 St. ISM 1C MEMBF.F FORCES JOINT AXIAL F-ORCE 1 -6.797 3 6.797 2 6.797 4 -6.7*7; 3 -15.000 4 -It. 000 APPLIED JO [NT LOADS, FOKC: X FORCE Y 0.000 0.000 0.000 O.J')0 kEACriuN'S.APPl.LF.D LOAD JOINT 1L T sun FORCE. X FORCE Y -15.000 -0.797 -35.000 6.V97 -30.000 -0.000 SHEAR FORCE MOMENT 15.000 1541.26 -15.000 970.76 15.000 1541.26 -15.000 970.77 6.797 -"78.7V FREE JOINTS MOMENT Z -0.00 0.00 '..! SUPPORT JOINTS MOMENT 7. 1541 .26 1541.26 FREE JOINT DISPLACEMENTS JO [NT 3 4 X - D [ S P L A C E fl E NT Y - D I S P L A C IF 11 E N T R 0 T A T C 0 N 0 . 7973 0 . 0031 - 0 . 0038 0.7973 -0.0031 -0.0038 S1RU FRAME ON LINE B.5 <DNtrs SPADING MEMBER 1 2 JOINT 3 < IN INCHES AND KIPS) 4 DULUSE1SMIC MEMBER FORCES JOIN! AXIAL FORCE 1 41.203 3 -41.203 2 *,<,,. 797 i -54.797 3 -.15.000 4 -15.000 APPLIED JOINT LOADS, FORCE X FORCE Y 0.000 -43.000 0.000 -48.000 REACTIONS r APPL CED LOADS JOIN! 1 ">j_ SUM • FORCE X FORCE i' -tfi.OOO 'tl.20J -15.000 54.7^7 -30.000 96.000 SHEAR FORCE MOMENT 15.000 15tl.26 -15.000 978.76 15.000 1541.26. -15.000 970. 7 / -&. 797 -•?"•}. 7 4, 6.797 -978.77 FREE JOINTS MOMENT Z -0.00 0.00 SUPPORT JOINTS MOMENT Z 1 5 •'« 1 . 2 o IStl.I'o FRLfc. JOINT DISPLACEMENTS JO CNF X-DISPLACEMENT Y -DESPLACEMENT ROTATLON 3 0.7973 -0.03&9 -0.0033 4 0./'?7.5 -0.0252 -0.0033 IIJIT MHHJMM S ASSieiJITES CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS INC. 21O1 SO. ATLANTIC BLVD. LOS ANQELES. CALIFORNIA 9OO4O TELEPHONE NO. (213) 2ea-«o83. (213) 2«a-o73s W * 54- V:-"V - O © f -C v- 4 35. o, L 06/08/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES ********************************************************** COLUMN BASE PLATE DESIGN ( WITH MOMENT) COLUMN SIZE : W 14 x 43 MOMENT=129.00 k-ft Pmax - 54.00 k Pmin = 41. OO k d= 3.00 in fc'- 2.00 ksi fy= 36.00 ksi d'6.00 USE 18 BASE PLATE L= 26.00 - 3.00 = 23.00 e= 13.00 - 3.00 * 10.00 MAX DN : W/ Mu =129.00 * 1.40 = 180.60 Pu - 54.00 * 1.40 - 75.60 a= 4.62 in Cu = 0.85 * 2.00 * 4.62 Tu = Cu - Pu = 141.27 - 75.60 18.00 - 141.27 65.67 k Mu (compr.) = 141.27 * ( 6.00 - 4.6168 /2) =521. 52 "k 521.52 /18.00 28.97 "k/in Mu (ten.)65.67 * ( 6.00 - 3.00 ) =197.02 "k 197.02 / 18.00 - 10.95 "k/in MIN DN : W/ Mu =129.00 * Pu = 41.00 * 1.4O = 180.60 1.40 = 57.40 a= 4.30 in Cu = 0.85 * 2.00 * 4.3O * 18. OO Tu - Cu - Pu = 131.46 - 57. 4O = 74.06 131.46 Mu (compr.)131.46 * (6.0O - 4.296O /2)=5O6.37 "k 506.37 / 18.00 =8.13 "k/in Mu (ten.)74.06 * (6.OO - 3.00 222.18 ) =222.18 "k / 18.00 = 12.34 "k/in PL., W/ Za t= t Mu (max) 28.97 / ( 4.00 * 1.79 in 28.97 "k/in 36.00 = 0.8O 0.80 ) BOLT :W/2 Tua 1 2.00 A325 EACH SIDE Fa= 34.60 l<* 34.60 * 1.70 = 117.64 - 74.06 OK1 ' MIT •JUWUn i ASMOMYES CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS INC. 2101 SO. ATLANTIC BLVD.. LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 9OO4O TELEPHONE NO. (213) 2ea-«o83. (213) 263-0735 DAT*.k-Vk >\e \l \^c-l( (a- AJ1T MHIUVA S ASSmUITES CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS INC. 2101 SO. ATLANTIC BLVD.. LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 9O04O TELEPHONE NO. C2i3> 2«-«os3. (213) 263-OT3& 6 -88 cJr U« © A (? Cvyrui ^ sv^»-il} ^y "/V^P^cVTff^ @ .k1 AJIT RAMDHAVA & ASSOCIATES WALL PANEL DESIGN 06/08/88 A JIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES lie****************************************TILT-UP CONCRETE WALL PANEL DESIGN WALL PANEL HT. = PARAPET HT. - WALL PANEL THK. = CONCRETE fc' REINF'G fy e = 3.5 + RECESS= 0.750 in 26.000 ft 1.500 ft 7.500 in 3.000 ksi 60.000 ksi 7.500 /2= 7.250 in FACTORED LOAD Pl= 12.000 * 10.000 P2= ( 13.000 + 1.500 )* 7.500 / 12 * 150 W » 0.300 * 7.500 /12* 150 PI +P2 = 1.479 klf 0.120 klf ROOF 1.359 klf WALL 0.028 klf WALL Wu 0 0 0 1 .750 .750 .750 .553 * * *klf 1 1 1 .400 .400 .870 * * * 0 1 0 .120 .359 .028 s = = 0 1 0 .126 .427 .039 klf klf klf NOMINAL MOMENT STRENGTH TRY * 5 9 in o/c As= 1.553 / 60.000 T= 0.439 * 60.000 d= 7.500 /2- 0.750 Mn= 26.353 *( 3.OOO 0.9Mn=» 0.900 * 67.71 0.310 *12/ 9.000 26.35 kips, a t c 3.000 in O.S61 / 2 ) 60.94 "k = 0.439 ina = 0.861 in = 1.013 in = 67.71 "k FACTORED ULTIMATE MOMENT Icr=s 9.300 * 0.439 *( 3. OOO - *> 20.285 67.71 * 26.000 = *144.00 9.600 * 3122.0 * 20.285 * 0.039Mu1.500 * 26. OOO 57.295 "I- 1.013 )z+ 12 / 3 * 1.013 10.842 in 0.126 * 7.250 /2+ 1.553 * 10.84 57.295 0.9Mn= 60.94 OK' 06/08/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES CHECK ON DEFLECTION LIMITATION Let limit= O.OO7 * 12 * 26.000 — ^51 OA « i-i— Jtm m JLQ*T 111 fr= 273.86 psi Ig= 12 / 12 * 7.5OO » = 421.9 Mcr=« 273.86 * 421.88 / 3.000 = 38.512 "k 38.512 * 26.000 z *144.00 r\.__ _^^^^^^^_^^^^_^^^_^^ _» _ _— _ — /"i J-*Oi_ Ur — ————— _ ^ B ^.VO9.600 * 3122.0 * 421.9 Ms= 1.500 * 26.000 2 * 0.028 + 0.120 « -«ifi 1.500 * 26.000 32.185 "k Ms= 32.185 « Mcr - 38.512 32.185 - 38.512 0.296 + ---------------- 67.71 - 38.512 -1.99 <X Deflec. limit = 7.250 /2+ 1.479 *.18 Ds Ds OK' * ( 10.842 - 0.296 ) = -1.99 in 2.184 in OK1 ' 06/08/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES jM*********************^ TILT-UP CONCRETE WALL PANEL DESIGN (PILASTER DESIGN) WALL PANEL HT. PARAPET HT. WALL PANEL THK. CONCRETE fc" REINF'G fy e - 3.5 b (effective) = FACTORED LOAD = 26.000 ft - 1.500 ft = 7.500 in = 3.000 ksi * 60.0OO ksi h 7.500 /2= 7.250 in 4t +12 = 42.000 in = 3.5OO ft Pl= 36.000 20.000 * 12.000 - 8.64O klf ROOF P2= ( 13.000 + 1.500 )* 7.500 / 12 * 150 * 3.500 = 4.758 klf WALL W = 0.300 * 7.500 /12* 150 * 3.500 = 0.098 klf WALL PI +P2 -13.398 klf Pul = Pu2= . Wu = f'ul+Pu2 NOMINAL As= 0 0 0 =14 .750 .750 .750 .068 MOMENT 14 1 .068 .164 * 1 * 1 * 1 klf .400 .400 .870 * * * STRENGTH / 60 * 60 .000 .OOO : 8. 4. 0. 640 758 098 TRY 3 . 000 69.87 9. 4. 0. 3 * 0. kips, > 072 996 138 - # 310 a c kl kl kl 5 f f f EF 1 0 0 Mn« 69.867 *( 6.000 0.9Mn= 0.900 * 396.42 0.652 / 2 ) 356.78 "k 1.164 in* 396.42 "k FACTORED ULTIMATE MOMENT Icr= s Dn= Mu= Mu= 9.300 * 1.164 *( 6.000 - 302.8 396.4 * 26.000 = *144.0O 9.600 * 3122.0 * 302.8 1.500 * 26.000 = * 0.138 + 232.7 "I- 232.7 0.9Mn= 356.8 0.767 )a- 4.252 in 9.072 * OK1 3.500 0.767 =» *12 /3 7.250 /2+14.068 * 4.25 06/08/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES CHECK ON DEFLECTION LIMITATION Let limit= 0.007 * 12 * 26.000 2.184 in fr= 273.86 psi Ig= Mcr= 273.86 * 1476.6 / 6.0OO = 67.396 * 26.0OO = *144.0O 9.600 * 3122.0 * 1476.6 * O.O98 + Dr= Ms= Ms= Ds= Ds= 3.500 * 7.50O 67.396 "k 0.148 in 1.500 * 26.000 160.4 "k 8.640 160.4 0 1 AQ• X ^O 1.308 Mcr = 67.396 160.4 - 67.396 — — — —. — .—— — — .———— — —396.4 - 67.396 Deflec. limit = =1476.6 7.250 /2+13.398 * * ( 4.252 - 0.148 ) = 1.3O8 in 2.184 in OK1 HUT MMHJHM i ASSOCIATES COIUSULTINC STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS INC. 2101 SO ATLANTIC BLVD. UJS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90O4O £ 2 I 3 J 263-9083- 283-0735 JOB # DATE ENGINEER STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS FOR BUILDING DEPARTMENT CORRECTIONS ANDREX CENTER BUILDING " D " or AJIT S. RANDHAVA, SE2009 HJIIT MmUVA i USMIJITES CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS INC. °AT'~TTJOCSK«M '- -^^ 2101 30. ATLANTIC BLVD.. LOS ANQELE8. CALIFORNIA 90040 s««eT. TELEPHONE NO. (21 a) 2«a-«oaa. (213) 2*3-0735 BUILDING DEPARTMENT CORRECTIONS ITEM f DESCRIPTION SA. C Ul - (T) 2 HJIT MmUVJI fi ASSMIMTES CONSULTING STRUCTURAL BUGUUEERS INC. a 101 aO. ATCAMTIC IIVO, LO« AMOCUI. CAUPOHNU *0040 BUILDING DEPARTMENT CORRECTIONS ITEM I DESCRIPTION ?>c-i 1 B-< oe/02/as AJIT RANCHAVA & ASSOCIATES ************************************************************************** TILT-UP CONCRETE WALL PANEL DESIGN WALL PANEL HT. = 26.000 ft PARAPET HT. = 1.500 ft WALL PANEL THH". = 9.250 in CONCRETE fc' = 3.000 ksi REINF'G fy = 6O.OOO ksi e = 3.5 + 9.250 72= 8.125 RECESS= 0.750 in in FACTORED LOAD Pl= 12.00O * 11.000 P2= ( 13.000 + 1.500 )* 9.250 / 12 * 150 W = 0.300 * 9.250 /12* 150 PI +P2 - 1.809 I-If 0.132 klf ROOF 1.677 klf WALL 0.035 klf WALL Pul= Pu2= Wu = Pul+Pu2= 0. 0. 0. 1. 750 750 750 899 * * * klf 1 1 1 . 400 . 400 .870 * * * 0 1 0 .132 = .677 = .035 = O 1 0 .139 . 760 . 049 klf 1- If klf NOMINAL MOMENT STRENGTH TRY # 5 12 in o/c As= 1.899 / 60.000 + 0.310 *12/12.000 = 0.342 in* T= 0.342 * 60.000 = 20.50 kips, d= 9.250 72- 0.750 - 3.875 in Mn= 20.499 *( 3.875 - 0.670 / 2 ) 0.9Mn= 0.9OO * 72.57 = 65.31 "k a = 0.670 in c - 0.788 in = 72.57 "k FACTORED ULTIMATE MOMENT Icr= 9.300 * 0.342 *( 3.875 - = 32.234 72.57 * 26.0OO = *144.00 Dn= 9.600 * 3122.0 2.234 Mu= 1.500 * 26.000 = * 0.049 + = 63.778 "V 0.788 )=+ 12 / 3 * 0.788 7.312 in 0.139 * 3.125 72+ 1.899 * 7.31 Mu= 63.778 0.9Mn= 65.31 Of- 08/02/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES Ik******************************************* CHECK ON DEFLECTION LIMITATION Let limit= O.OO7 * 12 * 26.0OO a 2.184 in fr= 273.86 psi Ig= 12 / 12 * 9.250 = - 791.5 Mcr= 273.86 * 791.45 / 3.375 = 55.935 "I, 55.935 * 26.0OO * *144.00 JJP*:= __—....—-»»-—_.—_——._.«._——«_.—_—..-.— s* o • A. _*u in 9.600 * 3122.0 * 791.5 Ms= 1.500 * 26.000 a * 0.035 + 0.132 * 8.125 /2+ 1.809 * 2.18 - 39.659 "k Ms= 39.659 Mcr = 55.935 Oh- ' 1(*********** ******************************************************** CONCLUSION : VERTICAL REINFORCING : USE # 5 @ 12 in 0/C As - 0.0027 Ac CODE REQUIRE 0.0012 OK1' HORIZONTAL REINFORCING : USE # 5 & 15 in 0/C As - O.OO22 Ac CODE REQUIRE O.OO2 OK ' AJIT UBMUUM S HSUIATES CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS INC. _2101 SO. ATLANTIC BLVO.1 LO3 ANQELE8. CALIFORNIA 9OO4O TELEPHONE NO. (213) wa-oosa. (213) aes-oras • OATC. 1" - - \~ ' f I- L V : 'I I f--^ CL. C IIJIT urnnva s ASSMIJITES CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS INC. 2101 30. ATLANTIC BcVD, LO8 ANQELES. CALIFORNIA 90040 TELEPHONE NO. <213> 263-0083. (213) 283-0735 DESIGN. SMcer«. -otf a a 3^ = 60 p-1 I I" 08/02/85 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES *****************************#***************** WALL PANEL WITH 1-OPENINS DESIGN WALL THICKNESS = 9.25 in WALL HEIGHT = 20.50 ft FROM FIN. FLOOR TO LEDGER PARAPET HEIGHT = 0.00 ft fc'= 3.00 I si fy = 60.OO 1-si BOND BEAM DESIGN ====: = =: = =: ===: = 5:=:=: = L= 12.00 ft W sei.= 3.00 * 0.116 * 0.30 = 0.104 \/l W wind= 10.25 * 17.00 * 1.3O * 1.20 = 0.272 k/1 GOVERN Mu = 1.50 * 1.28 * 0.272 * 12.00 = = 74.86 "k TRY 1 # 5 EF , ,~ ,»t T= 60.00 * a= 18.60 / ( 0.9*Mn= 0.90 * 1 * 0.31 = 0.85 * 3.00 * 18.60 * ( 7.75 - 18.60 !- 16.00 ) = 0.46 in 0.46 /2)=125.92 "k 0.9*Mn=125.92 MLI= 74.86 0> OS/02/SB AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES PIER DESIGN ———————— =—jss:s: PIER WIDTH Pl'= 8.50 Pl"= 0.00 Pl= 1.22 P2= 0.98 Plu= 0.75 P2u= 0 . 75 Plu+P2u Vu= 2 . 079 Wu= 0.085 = « # + * * * = k k/ TYP. VERT. RE INF' As eff= 7.48 T= 60 . 00 Mn= 44.68 0.9*Mn= 0.90 Icr= 9.30 12/3 J'-_' _• . 4. rv— . 9.60 Mu= 1 . 50 + 2 . 08 + 1.29 / * a= * ( * * * * * * * * 2.50 12.00 20 . 00 0.00 6 . 00 1.40 1.40 1.29 1 B 2 60 . 00 0 . 74 0.58 7.75 -_• «»s.« • *_ 0.74 2.50 20 . 50 3122 20.50 6.00 8.13 ft * 12.00 = 1.22 k / 20.00 = 0.00 k 1.22 k 5 . 90 k * 1.22 = 1.29 * 5.90 = 6.19 + 6.19 = 7.48 k * 5 EF %$.«. I MSA ofc1 + 2.00 * 0.31 = O.74 44.68 c= 0.69 0.58/2)= 333.2 "I- = 299 . 88 " V * ( 7.75 - 0.69 )=+ * 0.69 3 = 348.69 = * 144.00 — -" — 1 • 7 J» JLfl * 348.69 = * 0.085 / 20.50 * 14.50 * 12.00 /2 + 7.48 * 1.93 = 178.84 "k 0.9*Mn=299.88 Mu= 178.84 OK MMMVA i MSMMV CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS INC. 2101 80. ATLANTIC BH.VO, LOS^NQELES. CALIFORNIA 9004O TELEPHONE NO. (213) 263-9083. (213) 263-O738 JOB* DATE OCSION. TX?-P«\et. 6V f '/ b'-o 1V 08/02/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES ************#***X**#**#****#**#*#^ WALL PANEL WITH 2-OPENING DESIGN WALL THICKNESS = 9.25 in WALL HEIGHT = 25.OO ft FROM FIN. FLOOR TO LEDGER PARAPET HEIGHT = 1.50 ft f c ' = 3.00 ksi fy = 60.00 ksi BOND BEAM DESIGN ( TOP ) L= 18.00 ft W sei.= 2.50 * 0.116 * 0.30 = 0.087 V/l W wind= 5.50 * 17.00 * 1.3O * 1.20 = 0.146 k/1 GOVERN MLI = 1.50 * 1.28 * O.146 * 18.00 = = 90.38 "I TRY 1 tt 5 EF ~TB/ , , /; i- > Of~- ^+*4 ' ' t T= 60.00 * a= 18.6O / ( 0.9*Mn= 0.90 * 0.9*Mn=125.92 1 *0.85 * 18.60 * ( 0.31 3. OO 7.75 Mu= 9O.38 18.60 \ 16.00 ) =0.46 in 0.46 /2)=125.9: ss ss ss ss sz ss ssi sz s; sit ss ss am ss ss zs BOND BEAM DESIGN ( BOTTOM ) L= 18.00 ft W sei.= 5.00 * 0.116 * W wind= 7.00 * 17.00 * Mu = 1. 5O TRY 1 * 1.28 * # 5 EF 0.30 1.30 0.19 0.173 I/I 1.20 = 0.186 k/1 GOVERN ' 18.00 = = 115.0 "I T= a= 60 . 00 18.60 / 0.9*Mn= 0.90 1 * 0.85 * 18.60 * ( 0.31 3. Ou 18.60 [ 16.00 ) = 0.46 0.46 /2) =125. 92 in 0.9*Mn=125.9:Mu= 115.0 08/02/88 MIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES PIER DESIBN ( LEFT ) PIER WIDTH= 3.00 ft Pl'- = Pl" =Pl- P2= Plu= P2u= 12 4 0 18 0 0 O . 00 .46 . 00 .86 .12 .75 .75 * + + + * * ( * Plu+P2u = Vlu= V2u= Wu= 1 *-» 0. TYP. VERT. As eff= T= Mn= 0.9*Mn= Icr= n__ —un— Mu= + ( + 42 60 79 O 9 12 .67 .13 101 y k k/1 12. 14. 0. 0. 145. 1. 1. 23. REINF'G .53 . 00 .73 .90 .30 / 3 583.3 9 0 1 *"*•»*_•-' .60 .75 .67 .05 / * a= * ( * * * * * * •+• * 60. 1. 0. 7. 583 1. 3. 14. 31 14. 2. 8. 00 40 00 00 50 4O 40 05 *-\ 00 r_» _' 87 75 M _' ^.1^1 00 00 •-l^X.J- 00 13 13 * ( 31. 18. 18. + 12. * 4. * 18. + 19. # 5 + 2. 79. 0. 524 * ( 7. * 1. = * 144. * 572 = * 0. ) * 5. /4 + 42. 00 86 86 00 46 55 48 00 73 87 .9 75 02 00 .2 10 00 53 + 100. k 0. y * 12. + 1. 19. 42. EF * 0. c= 1. /2)= 583 "k 1. 3 * 12. * 0. 00 ) 00 k 00 * 0.000 = 18.55 k 70 * 14.40 ) = 23.05 48 53 k %"4- ok' 31 = 1.33 02 .3 "k 02 )s + _ S7'n ^W1 / *• . 4» o / , _YO in 00 96 - 330.8 "k 0.9*Mn= 524.9 Mu= 330.8 MIT UHMUin & USMI1TES CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS INC. 2101 80. ATLANTIC BLVfe. LOS AMOELE8. CALIFORNIA 9004O TELEPHONE NO. (213) zas-aoss. (213) 263-0735 JOB- OATB_ DESIGN - SHEET. . fa>\el 08/02/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES WALL PANEL WITH IT-OPENING DESIGN WALL THICr NESS WALL HEIGHT PARAPET HEIGHT 7.50 in 25.00 ft 1.50 ft FROM FIN. FLOOR TO LEDGER f c = f v •= oo ^ si 00 I- si BOND BEAM DESIGN L-- 3.00 ft W ssi.= 9.00 * W wind= 12.50 * flu = 1 . 50 *. TRY 1 # 5 0.094 # 17.00 * 1 .28 * EF 0.30 = 1.30 * C1.332 * 0.253 I- /I i.20 = 0.332 t/1 GOVERN 3.00 = = 5.71 " i- T-±>0. OO * 18.60 / i 0 .90 * 1 0.85 IS.sO 0.31 3.00 f>. 00 IS.oO i- 16.00 , = 0.46 ,2V O.46 a n =>6.62 "I- s ^6.62 MLI=5.7.1 Or ! OS702788 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES PIER P Pl' = Pl" = Pl = P2= Plu = P2u= DESIGN IER 8 0 1 0 0 o WIDTH = .25 * . oo # .19 + .77 * . 75 # . 75 * Plu+P2u = Vu= Wu= TV P. o . 0 . VERT . 532 1 266 1- 7 1 PEIMF G 6 12 10 0 19 1 1 1 .75 ft . 00 * . 00 7 . 00 = . 50 = . 40 * . 40 * .25 i- 7 * 12 20 1 15 1 15 15 5 .00 = 1.19 k . 00 = 0 . 'JO I .19 I. . 08 t .19 --: 1.25 .08 = 15.84 .84 = 17.08 I T( O'C As eff- 17.08 60.00 •*• ~*. 00 K 0.11 = 2.45 T= 6O.OO * 2.45 = 147.28 d — 0.71 C- Mn= 14^.28 * ^ 3.75 - 0.71 ' 21 =49<=». 30 !1 !• O.9*Mn= 0.. 90 * 499,30 = 449.32 "I- !"• U~ ™ Mu= -i- 9 12 499 9 1 O . 30 — r .80 . 60 . 50 .53 * * * * 6 25 - 25 7 .45 * ( ,,75 t . 00 = X 122 * .00 = * . 00 * O 144 209 0 IS . 7 5 .84 - . 00 .40 .27 . 00 0.34 i2 + - 209.40 7.17 in 25.00 * 12.0O + 1.25 * 7.25 72 + 17.08 * 7.17 = 4O8.28 "I- 0.9*Mn=449.82 Mu= 4O8.28 01- ' ' 08/02/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES BOND BEAN DESIGN L^ 10.00 ft W sei.~ 5.5O # 0.094 * O.30 = 0.155 t/1 W winci= 12.5O # 17.OO * 1.30 * 1.20 = 0.332 i-,'1 GOVERN Mu = 1.5O * 1.28 * u.332 * 10.00 = = ±>3.40 "\ TRY 1 tt 5 EF T= 6O.OO Jf- 1 * 0.31 = 18.au I- a- 18.60 / ( 0.35 *• 3.00 * lo.Ou ) = 0.46 in 1= 0.90 * 18.60 * i 6.00 - 0.46 ' 2 i = 96. o2 " i- 0.9*Mn= 9ej.o2 Mu= e>3.40 Of ' PIEP DESIGN PIEP WIDTH - 3.00 ft Pl'= 3.00 * 12.00 * 12.00 = 1.15 i- Pl"= 0.00 'K I'll. 00 / 20.00 = 0.00 I- Pl= 1.15 + 0.00 = 1.15 I P2= 0.75 * 12.50 = 9.38 !• Plu= 0."5 * 1.40 * 1.15 = 1.21 P2u= >.>.~"5 K 1.40 * 9,78 = 9. B4 Piu-fP2u - 1.21 ->- *.34 = 11.05 I- Vu= 2.113 i WLI= O. 101 (• / I TYP. VEFT. PEINF'G 3 # 5 EF As eff= 11.O5 / 60.uO + 3.OO * 0.31 = 1.L1 "i" — i"*i i~ii" t "1 11 —• •' T) rn a— O.73 c= 0. 3e» Hn= io.Q5 * i o.OO - <".'. 73 / 21=376. 78 "I- lcr== ° 7u <i<~ 1.11 !• ' o. !"iO - 0.8^3 j3 t- 1.2 / 3 * 7,'jO * 0.3o •" = 281.00 37ij.""8 it 25.00 = i1 144.00 T~i.-. .._ _,„ ,„„ __ __ _,_., __ .,.„ „„ .._ •'! ,•", '"^ . __un — •• ~ ~ — - *+ u j i_ .L n f?.6'") J 3122 * 231.00 MLI— t . 5O £ .25 .'"''' "^ ^ 0 . 10 4 2.11 If t. 4. Ot) it 11. <;.j ,' 25.00 X .12, >..«"< ••!- L 21 K 7. '2'5 '2 + Il.u5 * 4.'"*2 - 3OO, 1.O 08/02/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES PIER DESIGN PIER WIDTH = P 1 ' = 9 Pl"= 0 Pt= 1 !—, I— \ ,"} Plu= 0 P2u= <J . 00 * . OO * . 30 + . 34 * .75 * .75 * Flu+P2u = VI u=- 0. V2u= 2 Wu= 0 . TrP. VEPT. As eff= 15 T= oO Mn= 71 0.9*Mn= 0 I c r- 9 12 394 Dn — <=) Mu= 1 4- 0 + 2 -t- 1.3 634 t .11 t 035 1- PEINF . 54 / . OO * a .34 * . 90 * . 30 * / 3 * .v5 * . oO * . 5O .* .63 * .11 * oOS * •— i 12 0 o 16 1 1 1 /I G 60 1 = 0 ( * 394 1 ^-i 25 -; 25 7 14 7 . 50 . 00 . 00 . 00 . OO . 40 .40 .36 _' . 00 .19 a ?3 . 00 . 75 .19 .50 . 00 122 . 00 . 00 . 00 .25 ft * 12 / 0 1 17 * 1 if 13 -i- 14 tt 5 + T — 71 - 0 355 !f [ ^ * 1 3 * 144 * 27^ = $ C1 * 18 * 11 2 +15. . 'JO - 1 „ 3O 1- . 00 ~ O . OO (• . 30 1- . SL* i . 30 = 1 . 3o .5'..' =- 14.1S" .13 = 15.54 t EF '%^ 0^\ .OO * 0.31 = 1.19 .34 c= 1.10 ,C3 /2 1=394. "5 "i .27 "1- .00 - 1.10 i= + . 10 ^ - 2 "9. -1)0 . 00 . ". 0 .OS .00 / 25.00 * 12.00 .00 / 25.0O If. 12.00 535 ic 4.248" = 344.74 " i- 'j.9*Mn=355.27 Mu= 344.74 Gi- ft JIT BftHHftn i ASSMIATES CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS IMC. 2101 SO. ATLANTIC 8LVD, LOS ANQELES. CALIFORNIA 9004O TELEPHONE NO. (213) aea-eoas. (213) 263-0735 N O o— I Go V/ cs> O8/O2/88 AJIT RANDHAVA & ASSOCIATES ****#***X#***********#*****^ WALL PANEL WITH 2-OPENING DESIGN WALL THICKNESS = WALL HEIGHT PARAPET HEIGHT = fc'= 3.0O J-si fy = 60.00 ksi 7.50 in 5.00 ft 1.50 ft FROM FIN. FLOOR TO LEDGER ==========::===:=== BOND BEAM DESIGN ••.••- •.•.—«•••."~ •»• — ••-•••;•• —— — •— W w 0. L= sei .= wind= Mu = TRY T= a= 9*Mn= 3 9 12 1 60 18 0 .00 ft. oo * .50 * . 50 * 1 # . 00 # .60 / ( . 90 * 0. 17 1 5 0 18 094 .00 .28 1 .85 .60 * * * EF * * * ( 0 1 0. 0 3 6 .30 .30 332 < .31 . 00 .00 as * * fc * — 0.253 k/1 1.20 - 3.OO = = 0.332 5.71 V/\ GOVERN "k i* 18.60 16.00 )0.46 in 0.46 /2)= 96.62 "k i.9*Mn= 96.6:Mu=5.71 /OQCWPROFBH^NC-27405 PUER^RfiAL 9WTC STUMOR Inc. FAX *i (714) 643-5824 FAX COVER LETTER NAMES. FIRM! REFERENCE FAX NUMBER* SEHDERS NAMBt, SENDERS SENDERS REFERENCEI SENDERS PHONE NUMBER! DATBt. TIME) Burrowing Owl (Spent via cunicularfa) TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING THZ8 COVER LETTER ****************************************************************************************************************** TO d F6808£>6T9T8 01 S3Ild3dOdd NOHb WOdd d6f 3 60-93-6 fT bB6T-9S-d3S AS (619) 224-2911 Woodward-Clyde Consultants March 9, 1988 Project No. 87514241-SI02 Ms. Phyllis St. George Andrex Development Company 20101 Hamilton Avenue, Suite 3000 Torrance, California 90502-1319 UPDATE SOIL INVESTIGATION FOR LOTS 4 AND 6 (PADS D AND F) ANDREX AT PALOMAR AIRPORT CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Dear Ms. St. George: Woodward-Clyde Consultants is pleased to provide the accompanying report, which presents the results of our update soil investigation for the project. This study was performed in accordance with our proposal dated February 8, 1988 and your authorization of March 7, 1988. This report presents our conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the project, as well as the results of our field explorations and laboratory tests. If you have any questions or if we can be of further service, please give us a call. Very truly yours, WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS Richard P. While R. E. 21992 REW:al (6) Andrex Development Company Consoling Engineers ana Envircnrnenjgi Stenttsis tt'Ces m Other Pnnc ps: tQ d t-68Q8£t7ST9T8 01 Ti T S3Ild3dOdd WO Kb 2 6G-9S-6 ' WOdd 61?686T-9£:-d3S AS Project No. S751424I-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION 1 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT 2 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS 2 PREVIOUS PRELIMINARY STUDIES 3 SITE CONDITIONS 3 Surface Conditions 3 Subsurface Conditions 4 Natural Formational Soils 4 Groundwater 5 DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5 Soil and Excavation Characteristics 6 Grading 6 Drainage 7 Foundations 8 Settlements 9 Resistance to Lateral Loads 10 Retaining Walls 10 Pavements 10 UNCERTAINTY AND LIMITATIONS 12 Figures 1. Site Plan Appendices A. Field Investigation B. Laboratory Tests C. Guide Specifications for Earthwork 01 H739S S3Iid3dOyd HOIXb NdQS Z 68-93-6 ' 6t»fT 68GI-9Z-d3S Woodward-Clyde Consultants UPDATE SOIL INVESTIGATION FOR LOTS 4 AND 6 (PADS D AND F), ANDREX AT PALOMAR AIRPORT CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION This report presents the results of our update soil investigation at the site of two proposed office buildings. The sites are located south and adjacent to the cul-de-sac of Cosmos Court which leads off Corte de la Pina in Carlsbad, California. This report has been prepared exclusively for used by Andrex Development Company in evaluating the property and project design. This report presents our conclusions and/or recommendations regarding: 0 General subsurface soil conditions; 0 General extent of identified existing fill soils; 0 Conditions of areas to receive fill, 0 Characteristics of proposed fill material; 0 Presence and effect of expansive soils; 0 Groundwater conditions within the depths of our subsurface investigation; 0 Cut and fill slopes; 0 Grading and earthwork; 0 Types and depths of foundations; *%1 /*n*SY»1 A l d fb808£t?6T9T8 01 S3Ild3dOdd WOI\y WOdd 0S t?T 686T-9?-d3S T ' WdOS'Z 69-9E-6 ' 0T0i y3IdCCQ-|3J- XOdBX AS Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Wbodward-Clyde Consultants 0 Allowable soil bearing pressures 0 Settlements; 0 Design pressures for retaining walls; 0 Flexible pavement design; DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT For our study, we have discussed the project with you. We have also been provided with a copy of the original grading plan entitled, "Andrex at Palomar Airport Business Park, Lot 8 of Tract No. 73-49," dated May 5, 1981, prepared by CEP Associates Architects. We under- stand that the proposed project will include regrading the existing split level pads into two large single-level pads. Single- or two^story tilt-up reinforced concrete wall buildings with truss roofs supported on Interior columns are proposed. Paving and landscaping will be provided around the structures. The location and layout of the project are shown on the Site Plan (Figure 1). FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS Our field investigation included making a visual reconnaissance of the existing surface conditions, making eight test pits on February 19, 1988, and obtaining soil samples. The test pits were advanced to depths ranging from 5 to 12 feet. The locations of the test pits are shown on Figure 1. A Key to Logs is presented in Appendix A as Figure A-l. Final logs of the test borings are presented in Appendix A as Figures A-2 through A-9. The descriptions on the logs are based on field logs, sample V.1 /__. .1 J» A S0 d f6808£t?6I9lG 01 SaiiyBdOdd WOIXd WQ^d 0£ PI 686T-92-d3S 69-9H-6 ' 0T0i yaidOOSIHl XOa3X A3 Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants inspection, and laboratory test results. Results of laboratory tests are shown at the corresponding sample locations on the logs and in Appendix B. The field investigation and laboratory testing programs are discussed in Appendices A and B. PREVIOUS PRELIMINARY STUDIES The following preliminary studies have been made on projects which include the subject site. o "Preliminary Engineering Geological and Soil Study - Cabot, Cabot and Forbes Industrial Park, San Diego County, California,ft prepared by Woodward-Gizienski and Associates, dated June 14, 1973. 0 Geotechnical Investigation C. C. and F. Palomar Airport Busi- ness Park, Plan I," prepared by Lowney Kaldeever Associates, dated February 26, 1974. 0 Update Soil and Geologic Investigation for the Proposed Howard Mann-16 Acre Site, Palomar Airport Business Center, Carlsbad, California," prepared by Woodward-Clyde Consultants, dated December 16, 1980. SITE CONDITIONS Surface Conditions The subj'ect lots are graded split level parcels covered by a moderate re- growth of native grasses and weeds. The difference in levels is 3 to 4 feet. The two lots are separated by a cut slope about 8 feet high. Existing cut slopes border the site on the east and south. The cut slopes are 1-1/2 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) in inclination and range from about 15 to 32 feet high. The slopes, apart from minor erosion, appear to be in 9*d W808EWT9T8 01 SBIl^dQdd NOIXd WOdd TS^T 6861-92-cflS 9 *,690t,3 M.299 EW «i T ' NdTS-3 68-93-6 ' 0T0i d3IdOD3n3i XOd3X A9 Project NO. 875i424i-si02 Woodwaitf-Clyde Consultants good condition. It appears that some loose fill soils have been spread over the site; the depth of the fills may be on the order of 3 feet in thickness. Some minor construction debris is scattered over the site. Subsurface Conditions As indicated by the test excavations, the subsurface soils beneath the proposed buildings consist of uncompacted and compacted fill soils under- lain by natural formational soils of Tertiary age, Existing: Fill The fill soils are composed of lean to fat clay soils with some clayey and silty sands. Records on file indicate most of the fills were compacted and placed in 1974. A report of Fill Compaction was prepared by Lowney Kaldeever Associates and is dated October 11, 1974. A later period of grading consisted of recompacting the surface of previously placed soils end minor changes in grade. A report of this grading was prepared by Woodward-Clyde Consultants and Is dated December 17, 1981. Current Fill Conditions The maximum depth of compacted fill in the building areas is from 0 feet, in Pits 2 and 3 to 3 feet in Pit 7. Fill depths may be greater at the northwest corners of the building on Pad F. The soils appeared moist to wet. Natural Formational Soils The natural soil beneath the fill is composed of dense to very hard clayey silt and silty clay similar to the materials of the Del Mar Formation of Tertiary age. Clayey sands are occasionally present. These materials are competent bearing soils, but potentially expansive in nature. r\ 1 / *»v\ t*v 1 A * P6808£>6I9I8 01 SBIldBdQyd WOIXU WOyj IS PI 6S6T-9Z-d3S T ' N=I3S:E 69-93-6 ' 0T0i y3IdOD3n31 XQy3X A3 Project No. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants Groundwater No groundwater was encountered in the test pits at the time of excavation. DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS The discussions, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this report are based on the information provided to us, results of our field and laboratory studies, analyses, and professional judgment. Groundwater No ground water was noted in the test pits at the time of excavation. In addition, no water seeps or marshy areas were noted during our surface reconnaissance of the site. Slopes The stability of the existing cut and fill slopes bordering the site have been addressed in the previous preliminary studies. Our examination of the slopes recently indicate no evidence of instability other than erosion where slopes are not covered with landscaping. Previous analyses and our experience have shown that, typically, cut and fill slopes, such as those composed of the materials present on the site, are grossly stable; nevertheless, there is a finite possibility that such slopes could become unstable. In our opinion, the probability of slopes becoming unstable is low. Slopes, especially those constructed at inclinations steeper than 2:1, are particularly susceptible to shallow sloughing in periods of rainfall, heavy irrigation, and/or upslope surface runoff. Periodic slope maintenance may be required, including rebuilding the outer 1} to 4 feet of the slope. T\ 1 / W*1 «t7 1 A = SB d t?6808£t?6T9TS 01 S3Ild3dOyd UQIXb WOdd ZS fl S86I-9?-d3S t?Ti T ' Wd£S Z 69-98-6 Project NO. 875i42«-sio2 Wtoodwantdyde Consultants Soil and Excavation Characteristics Compacted fills placed with the observation of Woodward-Giaienski and Associates and Woodward-Clyde Consultants have been documented and provided to you, however, we have not observed or tested soil compaction placed with the observation of Lowney Kaldeever Associates and have no knowledge as to its condition except for the report from Lowney Kaldeever Associates; these soils are limited to the northwest corners of the lots primarily in parking areas. The materials at grade are moderately ex- pansive as indicated by the Expansion index tests which yielded indexes of 104 and 156. Special consideration is recommended in designing founda- tions on these soils. The soils on site within the proposed grading depths of 5 feet can be excavated by moderate ripping with heavy-duty excava- ting equipment. The upper 0 to 3 feet of soil on the lot appears to be loose. Grading We recommend that all earthworking at the site be done in accordance with the attached "Guide Specification for Earthwork." The grading at the site should be observed and compacted fills tested by Woodward-Clyde Consul- tants. All grading and foundation plans should be reviewed by WCC. A preconstruction meeting. should be held at the site prior to equipment moving onsite. We recommend that, in general, the upper 3 feet of fill on the lot, wherever not removed by design excavation, be excavated and recompacted in accordance with specifications. We further recommend that the moisture content of this zone of soil be adjusted to at least 3 percent over optimum moisture content before compaction. nl 60 d t-S808£t>6T9T8 01 S3Iid3dOdd WOIXd NOdd £S'l7T 636T-9Z-d3S T ' W=J£S Z 68-9S-6 ' 0TSi a3IdCO3~l31 Project No, 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants In order to more effectively reduce the effects of heaving of the moderate- ly expansive clayey fill, we recommend that in the building area, these soils be excavated to a depth of at least 3 feet and replaced with properly compacted import select soils. The building area is defined as the foot- print of the structure plus a minimum distance of 5 feet outside these limits. Select soil is defined in the attached earthwork specifications. Special foundations are recommended if a select soil "cap" is not provided in the building area. Drainage We recommend that positive measures be taken to properly finish grade the pad so that drainage waters from the pad and adjacent properties are directed off the pad and away from foundations, floor slabs, and slope tops. Even when these measures have been taken, experience has shown that a shallow ground water or surface water condition can and may devel- op m areas where no such water condition existed prior to site develop- ment; this is particularly true where a substantial increase in surface water infiltration results from landscaping Irrigation. To further reduce the possibility of moisture related problems, we recom- mend that all landscaping and irrigation be kept as far away from the building perimeter as possible. Irrigation water, especially close to the building, should be kept to the minimum required level. We recommend that the groundsurface in all areas be graded to slope away from the building foundations and floor slabs and that all runoff water be directed to proper drainage areas and not be allowed to pond. A minimum ground slope of 1 percent is recommended. In order to provide a subsurface barrier to reduce the potential for mois- ture migration, we recommend that the structures be provided with a continuous perimeter concrete footing extending at least 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade. Recommendations for floor slab underlays are provided later in this report. 01 d 1?G8QSZt?6T9T8 01 S3Ild3dOdd WOIXb NOdd ££'t>T 686I-9£-d3S T ' WdbS Z 69-9Z-6 ' STOi y3IdQD3~Hl XOd3X AS Project No, 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants Foundations Foundations for structures founded in a properly compacted select soil may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 3000 psf (total dead plus live load). Foundations should extend a minimum depth of 18 inches below lowest adjacent rough pad grade and be a minimum of 12 inches In width. Steel reinforcing is recommended in all footings (at least one bar top and bottom in continuous wall footings and at least one mat in column footings). Concrete Floor slabs underlain by select soil should be at least 4 inches in thickness and reinforced at the midpoint with steel wire or bars. The actual thickness and reinforcing of floor slabs should be de~ termined by the structural engineer based on design loads. We recommend a plastic vapor barrier and a protective wetted sand layer be placed beneath the slab wherever moisture sensitive floor coverings are to be used. Special foundations are recommended for footings placed in moderately expansive soils. We recommend that all footings be founded 24 inches below lowest adjacent rough pad grade and be reinforced top and bottom with at least #5 steel bars. The concrete slab-on-grade floors should be at least 5 inches thick and reinforced at the mid point with at least #4 steel bars 24 inches on center both ways. We further recommend that #4 steel dowels be placed in the foundation 24 inches on center and bent down and extend into the slab at least 18 inches. The specifics of reinforcement consistent with building design should be determined by the structural engineer. These recommendations are intended only to reduce the effects of heaving; footings founded in expansive soils should be expected to heave. We recommend that all foundations and other structures that cannot with- stand differential movement not be located within 8 feet of the top of a slope. Structures located within this area or on slopes should have their foundation depth extended until the outside bottom edge is at least 8 feet horizontally from the slope face. TT d F6808£f6T9I8 01 S3Ild3dOdd WOIXU NOdd fS frl 686T-9S-d3S TT8'690t73 <-frZ9S £^9 t-Ti. T ' WdSS 3 68-93-6 ' 0T0i y3Id003~Gl XOd3X AS Project No. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Ctyde Consultants Settlements Compacted fills typically increase in moisture and settle sometime during their lifetimes. It is not possible to accurately estimate settlements of fills because environmental conditions within and below the fill usually change with time* The settlements are frequently found to be on the order of 0.2 percent to 0.5 percent of the depth of the fill for nominal moisture in- creases. The lower value of settlement is often typical of more granular (sandy) soils and the upper value is more typical of cohesive (clayey) soils, We estimate that fills and any supported structure will settle on the order of 1/2 to 1 inch over an extended period of time. Differential settlements are expected to be on the order of 25 to 50 percent of the total values. The effect upon specific structures will depend upon structural design of foundations and the design of the structure to accommodate movements. If subsurface moisture (such as increased landscaping irrigation, leaking utilities, or other sources) increases in the future, greater settlements of fills and supported structures should be expected. If these settlements cannot be tolerated, we recommend that any structure on fill be supported on a pier foundation with piers extending through the fill into dense, formational soils. Recommendation for deep foundations can be given in an addendum report upon request. If the settlements can be tolerated, we recommend as a minimum that the foundation system be tied together and stiffened such that the foundation system acts as a unit resisting separation of foundation elements. The surface of trench and retaining wall backfill frequently settles even when placed under optimum conditions. It is recommended that any structure or slab placed over such areas be designed to accommodate these settlements, — 1 /„„„ .1 /i e\ T d t?6B08Ct'6T9T8 01 SBIiaBdOdd WOIXU WQdd S£ t>T 686T-9S-d3S T ' WdSS Z 68-93-6 d ItUUl Project No. 87514241-SI02 WDOdwafd-ClycteConsultants Resistance to Lateral Loads We recommend that passive pressures on footings and shear keys be cal- culated from an equivalent fluid weight of 300 pcf for footings placed in property compacted fill soils. The upper 12 inches of soils not protected by pavement or floor slabs should not be included in the design of passive resistance. This recommendation is based on the assumption that the adjacent ground surface is horizontal for a minimum distance of 10 feet or three tiroes the height of the surface generating passive pressure, which- ever is greater. We recommend that a value of 0.4 be used a$ the allowable coefficient of friction between footings and compacted fill. If both frictional and passive resistance are used in design, the friction coefficient should be reduced to 0.3. Retaining Walls It is anticipated that retaining walls will be limited to retaining dock high fills. If expansive soils are located behind such walls, significant pres- sures may be exerted upon the wall. It is recommended that all retaining walls incorporate a drained granular backfill designed to prevent the development of hydrostatic pressure behind the wall. Retaining walls should be designed for an active force equivalent to retaining a fluid weighing 60 pounds per cubic foot to help reduce the effect of any ex- pansive forces imposed upon walls. Pavements A sample of near surface soil was selected and an R-value determination was made. We understand that moderate truck traffic and light car park- ing will occupy the paved areas. £1 d f6808£l7ST9T8 01 SBIldBdOdd UOIXb WOdd SS t>T S8GI-9Z-d3S £t>9 1?Ti T ' Wd9S Z 6^-9^-6 ' 0T0A y3IdQ33~l31 XOd3X AS RCU BY:XEROX TELECOPIER 7010 , 9-26-89 3 04PM , 1 714 64: .SEP-26-1989 15 04 FROM flXIOM PROPERTIES TO 5824-^ 816194380894 24069,8 9 P 09 Project: Andrex at Palomar Airport Lots 4 and 6 Log of Test Pit No: 2 Date Drilled 2-19-83 Water Depth Not measured Measured -• Type Of Boring- 24" test pit Type of Drill Rig Case 580 Hammer N/A * see Key to Logs, Fig A-1 1 =o 0' 5- ibi 10- 15- ^ 20- M 25- 30 N 3. 2-1 2-2 2-3 <s. f E Material Description Surface Elevation I '//, 'SS,'#,',',',fff%',ff#',',',",',','" Firm to stiff, moist, olive to yellowish brown mottled, fat clay (CH) HIGHLY WEATHERED DELMAR FORMATION Hard, moist, olive to olive brown mottled, lean clay and clayey silt (CL/MH), poorly laminated horizontally, some reddish iron staining, gypsum crystals, occasional zones of remolded clay and omnidirectional shckensided surfaces DELMAR FORMATION Bottom of Hole at 6.5 feet Project NO 8751 4241 -sio2 Woodward-Clyde Consultants^ <•! • M ^^m • * ^•V — ~ - £ a 1|^ i<3 >.*-£• w 730 5 a Q fl> fl) §1 LC.UBC LU=54 Pl=37 Figure. A-3 RCV BY XEROX TELECOPIER 7010 , 9-26-89 3 04PM , .SEP-26-1989 15 03 FROM flXIOM PROPERTIES 1 714 643 5824-s 24069, # 8 TO 816194380894 P 08 Project: Andrex at Palomar Airport Lots 4 and 6 Log of Test Pit No.: 1 Date Drilled 2-19-88 Water Depth Not measured Measured -- Type of Boring 24* test pit Type of Drill Rig. Case 580 Hammer N/A * see Key to Logs, Fig A-1 €r<wQ <>-; 5- 10- 15- 20- 25- 30 ; I BlowsmMaterial Description MoistureContent.%Surface Elevation 1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 z Mi 2 | ; i ii i !| ^ Moist, grayish brown silt and lean clay with fragments of sittstone FILL y Becomes more clayey and increasing moisture below 1 5' Dense, moist, light yellowish brown, silty sand to sandy sitt (SM/ML), occasional rounded gravels DELMAR FORMATION Very stiff, moist, olive to olive brown mottled, fat clay (CH) poorly laminated, abundant gypsum crystals ^^^ DELMAH f-OnMA 1 1UN ^? Bottom of Hole at 8 feet project NO- 8751 4241 -sioa Woodward-Clyde Consultants^ - — - - — * ta - t <f> "y°r i«5,2 GS,PI Figure, A-2 RCU BY XEROX TELECOPIER 7010 , 9-26-89 3 03PM SEP-26-1989 15:03 FROM ftXIOM PROPERTIES 1 714 643 5S2-4-S TO 816194380894 24069, t* 7 P 07 Project: Andrex at Palomar Airport Lots 4 and 6 Date Drilled Water Depth- Type of Boring Type of Drill Rtg -sf "5-i:01a <A *Q. n CO KEY TO LOGS Measured Hammer Material Description MoistureContent,%>.£•-C OT OOga o SI Surface Elevation* ° ' 5- ™ • - 10- 15- 20- 25- 30^ '- - V******•*;•• x 1 m | j i ' !ij M ^^ D15TUR5cO JsAMKLt LwOA I lUN Obtained by collecting the auger cuttings in a plastic bag Rll Sand Clay Silt Silt/Sand Silt/Clay *GS = Gram Size Distribution LC = Laboratory Compaction Test PI = Atterberg Limits Test LL = Liquid Limit UBC « UBC Expansion Index Test ' Project NO 87514241-sioz Woodward-Clyde Consultants ^ - — " - — « - - Figure- A-1 RCU BY XEROX TELECOPIER 7010 , 9-26-89 3 03PM , 1 714 643 5824-* 24069,8 6 SEP-26-1989 15 02 FROM fiXIOM PROPERTIES TO 816194380894 P 06 Project NO. 87514241-S102 Woodward-Clyde Consultants APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION Eight exploratory test pits were advanced at the approximate locations shown on the Site Plan (Figure 1). The drilling was performed on February 19, 1988, under the direction of a geologist from our firm, using a tractor-mounted backhoe. Small plastic bag and large sack samples of subsurface materials were obtained from the pits, sealed to preserve the natural moisture content of the sample, and returned to the laboratory for examination and testing. The locations and elevations of all test pits are approximate and were estimated by reference in the plan provided and plan on file. p2/rpw!4 A-l RCU BY'XEROX TELECOPIER 7010 , 9-26-39 3 02PM £EP-26-1989 15 02 FROM ftXIOM PROPERTIES 1 714 643 5824-s TO 816194380894 24069,8 5 P 05 in Oz O to: o X LU i uia I go oo 1 RCU BY XEROX TELECOPIER 7010 - 9-26-89 3 02PM , 1 714 643 5824-s 24069-8 4 SEP-26-1989 15 01 FROM fiXIOM PROPERTIES TO 8161943S0894 P 04 Project No. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the contractor's operations, and we can not be respon- sible for the safety of personnel other than our own on the site, the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if he considers any of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe. pl/rpw!4 -14- RCU BY XEROX TELECOPIER 7010 , 9-26-89 3 01FM , 1 714 643 58244 24069,8 3 £EP-26-19S9 15g00 FROM ftXIOM PROPERTIES TO 816194380894 P 03 NO. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants intent of the recommendations presented herein has been properly inter- preted and incorporated into the contract documents. We further recom- mend that Wood ward-Clyde Consultants observe the site grading, subgrade preparation under concrete slabs and paved areas, end foundation exca- vations to verify that site conditions are as anticipated or to provide revised recommendations if necessary. If the plans for site development are Changed, or if variations or undesirable geotechnical conditions are encountered during construction, we should be consulted for further recommendations, This report is intended for design purposes only and may not be sufficient to prepare an accurate bid. California, including San Diego, is an area of high seismic risk. It is generally considered economically unfeasible to build a totally earth- quake-resistant project; it is, therefore, possible that a large or nearby earthquake could cause damage at the site. Geotechnical engineering and the geologic sciences are characterized by uncertainty. Professional judgements presented herein are based partly on our understanding of the proposed construction, and partly on our general experience. Our engineering work and judgements rendered meet current professional standards; we do not guarantee the performance of the project in any respect. Inspection services allow the testing of only a small percentage of the fill placed at the site. Contractual arrangements with the grading contractor should contain the provision that he is responsible for excavating, placing, and compacting fill in accordance with project specifications. Inspection by the geotechnical engineer during grading should not relieve the grading contractor of his primary responsibility to perform all work in accordance with the specifications. pl/rpw!4 -13- RCU BY XEROX TELECOPIER 7010 , 9-26-89 3 00PM , 1 714 643 5624-* 24069,8 £ SEP-26-1989 15 00 FROM ft--1 DM PROPERTIES TO 816194380894 P 02 Project NO. S7514241-SI02 Wood ward-Clyde Consultants We recommend that mix designs be made for asphaltic concrete and Portland cement concrete by an engineering company specializing in this type of work, and that the paving operations be inspected by a qualified testing laboratory. We recommend that adequate surface drainage be provided to reduce pond- ing and infiltration of water into the subgrade materials. We suggest that paved areas have a minimum gradient of 1 percent. As much as possible, planter areas next to pavements should be avoided; otherwise, subdrains should be used to drain the planters to appropriate outlets. It is impor- tant to provide adequate drainage to reduce ponding and possible future distress of the pavement section. Class 2 aggregate base should conform to the latest edition of the State of California "Standard Specifications," Section 26.1.02 B. Asphaltic concrete should conform to the Standard Specifications, Section 29-2.01 for the asphalt and Section 39-2.02 (Type B) for the aggregate. The aggregate base material should be placed at a minimum relative compaction of 95 percent. Portland cement concrete should conform to Sections 40 and 90 of the "Standard Specifications" of the State of California. Cement treated base should conform to the City of San Diego standard requirements. We recommend that the upper and lower 6 inches of the subgrade soil in pavement areas be scarified and properly compacted to at least 95 and 90 percent, respectively, of the maximum laboratory dry density prior to placing base material. UNCERTAINTY AND LIMITATIONS We have observed only a very small portion of the pertinent soil and groundwater conditions. The recommendations made herein are based on the assumption that soil conditions do not deviate appreciably from those found during our field investigation. We recommend that Woodward-Clyde Consultants review the foundation and grading plans to verify that the pl/rpw!4 RO,' BY XEROX TELECOPIEP 7010 - 9-26-89 3 00PM , 1 714 647 5824^ 24069,8 1 SEP-26-1989 14 59 FROM ft", I DM PROPERTIES TO 816194380894 P 01 Project No. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants For our calculations, we assumed traffic indices of 4.5 for car parking and traffic and 5.5 for light to medium truck parking end access roads. We also assumed that Class 2 untreated base would be used. The R-value tests were performed by American Engineering Laboratory and the results are attached. The results of the R-value determination re- vealed that near-surface soils are clayey and have low R-values; R-values of 15 and 16 were obtained. For these conditions and the assumption stated above, we give the following design recommendations: Asphalt Class 2 Concrete Untreated T.I. A.C. Base 4.5 3.0 7.5 5.5 4.0 10.5 If selective grading and import material having & minimum R-value of 30 is employed, we recommend that the following pavement sections be used. Asphalt Class 2 Concrete Untreated T^I. A.C. Base 4.5 . 3.0 4.0 5.5 4.0 5.0 We suggest that consideration be given to using concrete pavements in areas where dumpsters will be stored and picked up. Our experience indicates that refuse pickup trucks can shorten the useful life of asphaltic concrete sections. We recommend that in these areas, 6 inches of 3,000 psi Portland cement concrete be used over the prepared eubgrade surface. pl/rpw!4 -11- RCU BY:XEROX TELECOPIER 7010 , 9-26-89 3 05PM , SEP-26-1939 15 05 FROM fl/IOI1 PROPERTIES 1 714 643 5624^ 24069,ttll TO 816194380894 P 11 Project: Andrex at Palomar Airport Lots 4 and 6 Date Drilled 2-19-88 Water Depth Not measured Type of Boring 24" lest pit Type of Drill Rig Case 580 * see Key to Logs. Fig A-1 1= 1o. 1 Blows/ftLog of Test Pit No: 4 Measured •- Hammer N/A Material Description MoistureContent,%£• m *oQ «= O. Q ^ "5o^ Surface Elevation o' 4P ^ f- 10- M 15- 20- 25- 30,; 4-1 4-2 2 I % Moist, olive brown, fat clay to $i't FILL Stiff to hard, moist, olive to olive brown mottled, silty and lean clay (MH/CL), poorly laminated some mottled iron staining DELMAR FORMATION Bottom of Hole at 5 feet project NO- 8751 4241*5102 j Woodward-Clyde Consultants^ - - - ~ mm — - Figure A-5 RCY BY'XEROX TELECOPIER 7010 , 9-26-89 3 05PM , SEP-26-1989 15 04 FROM flXIOM PROPERTIES 1 714 643 5824-> 24069,** 10 TO 816194380894 P 10 Project: Andrex at Paiomar Airport Lots 4 and 6 Log of Test Pit No: 3 Date Drilled 2-19-88 Water Depth Not measured Measured -• Type of Boring. 24" test pit Type of Drill Rig Case 580 Hammer N/A * see Key to Logs, Fig A-1 !c v>0)a. CO i Material Description il*£*'OT "?;Ditt 1! Surface Elevation mr 5- « 10- •k 15- 20- •i 25- 30 : 3-1 3-2 |U 2 1 Stiff, moist, olive, lean clay (CL), poorly laminated, weathered -i DELMAR FORMATION * Becomes hard, less weathered below 1 ', horizontally laminated, abundant gypsum crystals Bottom of Hole at 4 5 feet Project NO 87514241-sioz Wood ward-Clyde Consultants ^ •ta W* •1 ^ mi v^ •, ••• ih — - Figure. A-4 RCU BY XEROX TELECOPIER 7010 , 9-26-69 3 09PM SEP-26-1989 15-09 FROM fi/IOM PROPERTIES 1 714 643 5824-* TO 816194380894 24069,818 P 18 150 140 130 120 no 100 90 80, PLASTICITY CHARACTERISTICS Liquid Limit, % Plasticity Index, % Classification by Unified Soil Classification System \\l\l t\u\uNY DRY LIMIT WEIGHT, pcfZERC — 28C 2 \TT\ \rO\Mo\\ \\\\^ \\\\\ > \ A \\AVAV\ /s Maximum Dry Density, pcf Optimum Moisture Content, % )AI >SG 70S 26C VA\1 V >, V \ > \ ^i 2-2 54 37 O R VOIDS CURVES ;G ISG 50 SG \ V\ L \ \ k \ $ \ \\ \\ \s\?A\\ S\ V\T\ \&25^\ \\\\v\vN\> \VwSx^Co O2-2 ^^ 113.0 ^ 16.5 I MOISTURE CONTENT, %PERCENT PASS100 80 40 20 0 10 COBBLES •M GRAVEL c J_ |i f J J SAND c m i i f i SILT S CLAY , 00 100 10 1.0 01 001 0001 GRAIN SIZE, mm MECHANICAL ANALYSIS DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA Dry Density, pcf Initial Water Content, % Final Water Content, % Apparent Apparent Cohesion, psf Friction Angle, degrees UBC EXPANSION INDEX Initial Dry Density, pcf Initial Water Content, % Final Dry Density, pcf Final Water Content, % Load, psf UBC Expansion Index tK * \k :^^K5vS «x \1 2-2 93 13 85 33 144 156 SAMPLE LOCATION 10 20 30 LABORATORY COMPACTION TEST 40 LABORATORY COMPACTION TEST METHOD ASTM-D 15S7-78A FILL SUITABILITY TESTS AT PALOMAR AIRPORT LOTS 4 AND 6 DRAWN BY: cb I CHECKED BY ff ^PROJECT MO 87514241-SIQ2 I PATE 3-7-S8 | HOURE NO. B-2 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS RCU BY XEROX TELECOPIER 7010 . 9-26-89 3' 09PM , 1 714 643 ^ ^ SEP-26-1989 15 08 FROM OXIOM PROPERTIES TU <-">" £ CO JfLti GRAVEL Coarse Fine SAND Coarse Med i utn Fine SILT and CLAY Mesh Opening - Ins Sieve Sifces Hydrometer Analysis ._ 76 32 I § 2 £ 1 10 16 2030MO 60 80 IM0200100 Oftyv onw 70 g W ^2 a. H- >iO a:LU °~ 1)0 VJw 9rt*v inIU 0 1 |1 t L ^N,sIj 1 X, ^y^ i ^4\ {1 V.•>j\\ \i \i\A"~\\\\ y\|uJ ~* V / V ^y,i i ) V ,~T"} "V ^H.,^ ^^^**~^s-^\\s^^ ""•^"^«^_ T r 0 10 20 30 UOSz ut »- UJ Vw 60^ 70 80 j 100 100 50 10.0 6,0 UO O.I GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 0.05 0.0I 0.005 0.001 SAMPLE O 1-4 CLASSIFICATION AND SYMBOL Clayey sand (SO *LL 31 *PI 12 *LL - Liquid Limit *PI - Plasticity Index GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVES ANDREX AT PALOMAR AIRPORT LOTS 4 AND 6 Oft AWN BY.Cbi CHECKED BY. f^'J PROJECT NO-87514241-SI02 DATE- 3-7-88 | FIGURE NO B-l WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS RCY BY XEROX TELECOPIER 7010 , 9-26-89 3*tl8PH , 1 714 643 58Z4- 24069,816 SEP-26-1989 1507 FROM fl>IOM PROPERTIES TO 8161943S0894 PIG Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTS The materials observed in the test borings were visually classified and evaluated with respect to swelling characteristics. The classifications were substantiated by performing grain size analyses and evaluating plasticity characteristics of samples of the soils. Fill suitability tests, including a compaction test, expansion index tests, and grain size analyses, were performed on samples on the probable fill soils. Swelling characteristics were estimated by performing expansion index tests on recompacted samples. The suitability of soils for use as pavement subgrade was evaluated by performing R-value tests. The grain size distribution curves and plasticity tests are shown on Figure B-l, The results of the expansion index test are reported in Figure B-2. The results of the R-value tests, as submitted to us by Testing Engineers, Inc. are presented in Figure B-3, p2/rpw!4 B-l RCU BY'XEROX TELECOPIER 7010 , 9-26-89 SEP-2S-1989 15 07 FROM fl-'IOM PROPERTIES 1 714 643 5824-^ 24069,815 TO 816194380694 P 15 Project: Andrex at Palomar Airport Lots 4 and 6 Date Drilled 2-19-88 Water Depth Not measured Type of Boring. 24" test pit Type of Drill Rig Case 580 * see Key to Logs, Ftg A-1 — "1Q. CD Log of Test Pit No: 8 Measured - - Hammer N/A Material Description MoistureContent,%*f* *• *<D <3 Surface Elevation °' - 5- - 10- 15- 20- 25~ 30^ 8-1 S-2 S-3 2 2 « Moist, light brown, lean to fat clay with layers of silt FILL "% Less moisture below approximately 2' "1 Some slightly decomposed grass and sticks 7 S'-9' along with rocks to 12" diameter Moist, light brown silt FILL Bottom of Hole at 12 feet Project NO 875i424i-sio2 Woodward-Clyde Consultants 4r - - - - — - — — — - Figure A-9 RCM BY XEROX TELECOPIER 7010 , 9-26-89 3 07PM , £EP-26-1989 15 06 FROM ft-IDM PROPERTIES 1 714 643 5824-? 24069,814 TO 816194380894 P 14 Project: Andrex at Palomar Airport Lots 4 and 6 Log of Test Pit No: 7 Date Drilled 2-19-88 Water Depth Not measured Measured" •- Type of Boring 24" test pit Type of Drill Rig Case 580 Hammer N/A * see Key to Logs, Fig A-1 *-E B.Co>Q </>V 1 J? f 103 Material Description MoistureContent%£* 55 "o0 5 a Q *«J= OT5^ Surface Elevation<r• tn 10- 15- 20- 25- 30 ^ 7-1 7-2 7-3 1_ 1 2 Moist, light brown to olive brown, lean to lat clay and silt FILL Hard, moist, light gray with yellow iron staining, mottled silt (MH), horizontally laminated D^LMAR FORMATION Bottom of Hole at 5 feet - Project NO S7514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants ^ ** *^™ *m h — — - Figure: A-3 RCU BY XEROX TELECOPIER 701O , 9-26-59 1 07PM , £EP-26-1989 IT 06 FROtl ft, I DM PROPERTIES 1 714 642 5824-! 24069,812 TO 816194388894 P 13 Project: Andrex at Palomar Airport Lots 4 and 6 Log of Test Pit No: 6 Date Drilled 2-19-88 Water Depth- Not measured Measured' -• Type Of Boring 24* test pit Type of Drill Rig Case 580 Hammer N/A * see Key to Logs, Fig A-1 m **0 8 1 5- <D Material Description s*2 3 eji" >K fr w'SQ C CL 0 ^ II Surface Elevation 0 v w 5- 10- 15- • 20- m 25- 30^ 6-1 6-2 P* 7777 t% fff: fff. y/s tfffffffff Moi$t, Olive gray to light brown mottled silt . \ FILL S Hard, moist, light gray, lean clay to silt (CL-MH) some reddish brown to yellow iron staining, horizontally laminated DELMAR FORMATION Bottom of Hole at 5 feet Project NO 875U241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants^ •HH ^^ — - UBC LL=42 PI=25 Figure1 A-7 RCU BY XERCU TELECOPIER 7010 , 9-26-89 3 06R1 , €EP-26-1989 1505 FROM H 'ION PROPERTIES I 714 64C 58Z4^> 24069, TO 816194380394 P 12 Project: Andrex at Palomar Airport Lots 4 and 6 Log of Test Pit No: 5 Date Drilled 2-19-88 Water Depth Not measured Measured -- Typeof Boring- 24" test pit Type of Drill Rig. Case 580 Hammer N/A * see Key to Logs, Fig A-1 j£ £-0 $ "o. w <r M 5- 10- • 15- *• ^i 20 - 25- 30^ 5-1 5-2 2 2 Blows/ftMaterial Description MoistureContent,%£* <f> "w0 g a a Surface Elevation y/ff,',','/,'///, I Moist, olive brown, silty fat clay to elastic silt FILL Stiff, moist, olive to olive brown mottled, lean clay to $ilt (CL/ML) weathered, some gypsum crystals --^ DELMAR FORMATION ^*" Hard, moist, otive gray with yellowish iron staining, mottled, lean clay (CL) horizontally laminated DELMAR FORMATION Bottom of Hole at 6 feet Project NO 8751 4241 -sio2 Woodward-Clyde Consultants^ ^ _ - 5? *<« §1 Figure A-6 Project NO. 8751424I-SI02 Woodwaixl-Clyde Consuftairts UPDATE SOIL INVESTIGATION FOR LOTS 4 AND 6 (PADS D AND F) ANDREX AT PALOMAR AIRPORT CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: Andrex Development Company 20101 Hamilton Avenue, Suite 3000 Torrance, California 90502-1319 3467 Kurtz Street San Diego, California 92110 (619)224-2911 Woodward-Clyde Consultants March 9, 1988 Project No. 87514241-SI02 Ms. Phyllis St. George Andrex Development Company 20101 Hamilton Avenue, Suite 3000 Torrance, California 90502-1319 UPDATE SOIL INVESTIGATION FOR LOTS 4 AND 6 (PADS D AND F) ANDREX AT PALOMAR AIRPORT CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Dear Ms. St. George: Woodward-Clyde Consultants is pleased to provide the accompanying report, which presents the results of our update soil investigation for the project. This study was performed in accordance with our proposal dated February 8, 1988 and your authorization of March 7, 1988. This report presents our conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the project, as well as the results of our field explorations and laboratory tests. If you have any questions or if we can be of further service, please give us a call. Very truly yours, WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS Richard P. While R. E. 21992 REW:al (6) Andrex Development Company Consulting Engineers Geologists and Environmental Scientists Offices in Other Principal Cities project NO. 87514241-sm Woodward-ClycteConsuttarts TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION 1 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT 2 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS 2 PREVIOUS PRELIMINARY STUDIES 3 SITE CONDITIONS 3 Surface Conditions 3 Subsurface Conditions 4 Natural Formational Soils 4 Groundwater 5 DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5 Soil and Excavation Characteristics 6 Grading 6 Drainage 7 Foundations 8 Settlements 9 Resistance to Lateral Loads 10 Retaining Walls 10 Pavements 10 UNCERTAINTY AND LIMITATIONS 12 Figures 1. Site Plan Appendices A. Field Investigation B. Laboratory Tests C. Guide Specifications for Earthwork p/rpw!4 Woodward-Clyde Consultants UPDATE SOIL INVESTIGATION FOR LOTS 4 AND 6 (PADS D AND F), ANDREX AT PALOMAR AIRPORT CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION This report presents the results of our update soil investigation at the site of two proposed office buildings. The sites are located south and adjacent to the cul-de-sac of Cosmos Court which leads off Corte de la Pina in Carlsbad, California. This report has been prepared exclusively for used by Andrex Development Company in evaluating the property and project design. This report presents our conclusions and/or recommendations regarding: 0 General subsurface soil conditions; 0 General extent of identified existing fill soils; 0 Conditions of areas to receive fill; 0 Characteristics of proposed fill material; 0 Presence and effect of expansive soils; 0 Groundwater conditions within the depths of our subsurface investigation; 0 Cut and fill slopes; 0 Grading and earthwork; 0 Types and depths of foundations; pl/rpw!4 -1- Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants 0 Allowable soil bearing pressures 0 Settlements; 0 Design pressures for retaining walls; 0 Flexible pavement design; DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT For our study, we have discussed the project with you. We have also been provided with a copy of the original grading plan entitled, "Andrex at Palomar Airport Business Park, Lot 8 of Tract No. 73-49," dated May 5, 1981, prepared by CEP Associates Architects. We under- stand that the proposed project will include regrading the existing split level pads into two large single-level pads. Single- or two-story tilt-up reinforced concrete wall buildings with truss roofs supported on interior columns are proposed. Paving and landscaping will be provided around the structures. The location and layout of the project are shown on the Site Plan (Figure 1). FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS Our field investigation included making a visual reconnaissance of the existing surface conditions, making eight test pits on February 19, 1988, and obtaining soil samples. The test pits were advanced to depths ranging from 5 to 12 feet. The locations of the test pits are shown on Figure 1. A Key to Logs is presented in Appendix A as Figure A-l. Final logs of the test borings are presented in Appendix A as Figures A-2 through A-9. The descriptions on the logs are based on field logs, sample pl/rpw!4 -2- Project No. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants inspection, and laboratory test results. Results of laboratory tests are shown at the corresponding sample locations on the logs and in Appendix B. The field investigation and laboratory testing programs are discussed in Appendices A and B. PREVIOUS PRELIMINARY STUDIES The following preliminary studies have been made on projects which include the subject site. 0 "Preliminary Engineering Geological and Soil Study - Cabot, Cabot and Forbes Industrial Park, San Diego County, California," prepared by Woodward-Gizienski and Associates, dated June 14, 1973. 0 Geotechnical Investigation C. C. and F. Palomar Airport Busi- ness Park, Plan I," prepared by Lowney Kaldeever Associates, dated February 26, 1974. 0 Update Soil and Geologic Investigation for the Proposed Howard Mann-16 Acre Site, Palomar Airport Business Center, Carlsbad, California," prepared by Woodward-Clyde Consultants, dated December 16, 1980. SITE CONDITIONS Surface Conditions The subject lots are graded split level parcels covered by a moderate re- growth of native grasses and weeds. The difference in levels is 3 to 4 feet. The two lots are separated by a cut slope about 8 feet high. Existing cut slopes border the site on the east and south. The cut slopes are 1-1/2 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) in inclination and range from about 15 to 32 feet high. The slopes, apart from minor erosion, appear to be in pl/rpw!4 -3- Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants good condition. It appears that some loose fill soils have been spread over the site; the depth of the fills may be on the order of 3 feet in thickness. Some minor construction debris is scattered over the site. Subsurface Conditions As indicated by the test excavations, the subsurface soils beneath the proposed buildings consist of uncompacted and compacted fill soils under- lain by natural formational soils of Tertiary age. Existing Fill The fill soils are composed of lean to fat clay soils with some clayey and silty sands. Records on file indicate most of the fills were compacted and placed in 1974. A report of Fill Compaction was prepared by Lowney Kaldeever Associates and is dated October 11, 1974. A later period of grading consisted of recompacting the surface of previously placed soils and minor changes in grade. A report of this grading was prepared by Woodward-Clyde Consultants and is dated December 17, 1981. Current Fill Conditions The maximum depth of compacted fill in the building areas is from 0 feet, in Pits 2 and 3 to 3 feet in Pit 7. Fill depths may be greater at the northwest corners of the building on Pad F. The soils appeared moist to wet. Natural Formational Soils The natural soil beneath the fill is composed of dense to very hard clayey silt and silty clay similar to the materials of the Del Mar Formation of Tertiary age. Clayey sands are occasionally present. These materials are competent bearing soils, but potentially expansive in nature. pl/rp\v!4 -4- Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants Groundwater No groundwater was encountered in the test pits at the time of excavation. DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS The discussions, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this report are based on the information provided to us, results of our field and laboratory studies, analyses, and professional judgment. Groundwater No groundwater was noted in the test pits at the time of excavation. In addition, no water seeps or marshy areas were noted during our surface reconnaissance of the site. Slopes The stability of the existing cut and fill slopes bordering the site have been addressed in the previous preliminary studies. Our examination of the slopes recently indicate no evidence of instability other than erosion where slopes are not covered with landscaping. Previous analyses and our experience have shown that, typically, cut and fill slopes, such as those composed of the materials present on the site, are grossly stable; nevertheless, there is a finite possibility that such slopes could become unstable. In our opinion, the probability of slopes becoming unstable is low. Slopes, especially those constructed at inclinations steeper than 2:1, are particularly susceptible to shallow sloughing in periods of rainfall, heavy irrigation, and/or upslope surface runoff. Periodic slope maintenance may be required, including rebuilding the outer li to 4 feet of the slope. pl/rpw!4 -5- Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-ClydeConsultants Soil and Excavation Characteristics Compacted fills placed with the observation of Woodward-GiziensM and Associates and Woodward-Clyde Consultants have been documented and provided to you, however, we have not observed or tested soil compaction placed with the observation of Lowney Kaldeever Associates and have no knowledge as to its condition except for the report from Lowney Kaldeever Associates; these soils are limited to the northwest corners of the lots primarily in parking areas. The materials at grade are moderately ex- pansive as indicated by the Expansion index tests which yielded indexes of 104 and 156. Special consideration is recommended in designing founda- tions on these soils. The soils on site within the proposed grading depths of 5 feet can be excavated by moderate ripping with heavy-duty excava- ting equipment. The upper 0 to 3 feet of soil on the lot appears to be loose. Grading We recommend that all earthworking at the site be done in accordance with the attached "Guide Specification for Earthwork." The grading at the site should be observed and compacted fills tested by Woodward-Clyde Consul- tants. All grading and foundation plans should be reviewed by WCC. A preconstruction meeting. should be held at the site prior to equipment moving onsite. We recommend that, in general, the upper 3 feet of fill on the lot, wherever not removed by design excavation, be excavated and recompacted in accordance with specifications. We further recommend that the moisture content of this zone of soil be adjusted to at least 3 percent over optimum moisture content before compaction. pl/rpw!4 -6- Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants In order to more effectively reduce the effects of heaving of the moderate- ly expansive clayey fill, we recommend that in the building area, these soils be excavated to a depth of at least 3 feet and replaced with properly compacted import select soils. The building area is defined as the foot- print of the structure plus a minimum distance of 5 feet outside these limits. Select soil is defined in the attached earthwork specifications. Special foundations are recommended if a select soil "cap" is not provided in the building area. Drainage We recommend that positive measures be taken to properly finish grade the pad so that drainage waters from the pad and adjacent properties are directed off the pad and away from foundations, floor slabs, and slope tops. Even when these measures have been taken, experience has shown that a shallow ground water or surface water condition can and may devel- op in areas where no such water condition existed prior to site develop- ment; this is particularly true where a substantial increase in surface water infiltration results from landscaping irrigation. To further reduce the possibility of moisture related problems, we recom- mend that all landscaping and irrigation be kept as far away from the building perimeter as possible. Irrigation water, especially close to the building, should be kept to the minimum required level. We recommend that the groundsurface in all areas be graded to slope away from the building foundations and floor slabs and that all runoff water be directed to proper drainage areas and not be allowed to pond. A minimum ground slope of 1 percent is recommended. In order to provide a subsurface barrier to reduce the potential for mois- ture migration, we recommend that the structures be provided with a continuous perimeter concrete footing extending at least 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade. Recommendations for floor slab underlays are provided later in this report. Dl/rowl4 -7- Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants Foundations Foundations for structures founded in a properly compacted select soil may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 3000 psf (total dead plus live load). Foundations should extend a minimum depth of 18 inches below lowest adjacent rough pad grade and be a minimum of 12 inches in width. Steel reinforcing is recommended in all footings (at least one bar top and bottom in continuous wall footings and at least one mat in column footings). Concrete Floor slabs underlain by select soil should be at least 4 inches in thickness and reinforced at the midpoint with steel wire or bars. The actual thickness and reinforcing of floor slabs should be de- termined by the structural engineer based on design loads. We recommend a plastic vapor barrier and a protective wetted sand layer be placed beneath the slab wherever moisture sensitive floor coverings are to be used. Special foundations are recommended for footings placed in moderately expansive soils. We recommend that all footings be founded 24 inches below lowest adjacent rough pad grade and be reinforced top and bottom with at least #5 steel bars. The concrete slab-on-grade floors should be at least 5 inches thick and reinforced at the mid point with at least #4 steel bars 24 inches on center both ways. We further recommend that #4 steel dowels be placed in the foundation 24 inches on center and bent down and extend into the slab at least 18 inches. The specifics of reinforcement consistant -with building design should be determined by the structural engineer. These recommendations are intended only to reduce the effects of heaving; footings founded in expansive soils should be expected to heave. We recommend that all foundations and other structures that cannot with- stand differential movement not be located within 8 feet of the top of a slope. Structures located within this area or on slopes should have their foundation depth extended until the outside bottom edge is at least 8 feet horizontally from the slope face. pl/rpw!4 -8- Project No. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants Settlements Compacted fills typically increase in moisture and settle sometime during their lifetimes. It is not possible to accurately estimate settlements of fills because environmental conditions within and below the fill usually change with time. The settlements are frequently found to be on the order of 0.2 percent to 0.5 percent of the depth of the fill for nominal moisture in- creases. The lower value of settlement is often typical of more granular (sandy) soils and the upper value is more typical of cohesive (clayey) soils. We estimate that fills and any supported structure will settle on the order of 1/2 to 1 inch over an extended period of time. Differential settlements are expected to be on the order of 25 to 50 percent of the total values. The effect upon specific structures will depend upon structural design of foundations and the design of the structure to accommodate movements. If subsurface moisture (such as increased landscaping irrigation, leaking utilities, or other sources) increases in the future, greater settlements of fills and supported structures should be expected. If these settlements cannot be tolerated, we recommend that any structure on fill be supported on a pier foundation with piers extending through the fill into dense, formational soils. Recommendation for deep foundations can be given in an addendum report upon request. If the settlements can be tolerated, we recommend as a minimum that the foundation system be tied together and stiffened such that the foundation system acts as a unit resisting separation of foundation elements. The surface of trench and retaining wall backfill frequently settles even when placed under optimum conditions. It is recommended that any structure or slab placed over such areas be designed to accommodate these settlements. Dl/rmvl4 -9- Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants Resistance to Lateral Loads We recommend that passive pressures on footings and shear keys be cal- culated from an equivalent fluid weight of 300 pcf for footings placed in properly compacted fill soils. The upper 12 inches of soils not protected by pavement or floor slabs should not be included in the design of passive resistance. This recommendation is based on the assumption that the adjacent ground surface is horizontal for a minimum distance of 10 feet or three times the height of the surface generating passive pressure, which- ever is greater. We recommend that a value of 0.4 be used as the allowable coefficient of friction between footings and compacted fill. If both frictional and passive resistance are used in design, the friction coefficient should be reduced to 0.3. Retaining Walls It is anticipated that retaining walls will be limited to retaining dock high fills. If expansive soils are located behind such walls, significant pres- sures may be exerted upon the wall. It is recommended that all retaining walls incorporate a drained granular backfill designed to prevent the development of hydrostatic pressure behind the wall. Retaining walls should be designed for an active force equivalent to retaining a fluid weighing 60 pounds per cubic foot to help reduce the effect of any ex- pansive forces imposed upon walls. Pavements A sample of near surface soil was selected and an R-value determination was made. We understand that moderate truck traffic and light car park- ing will occupy the paved areas. pl/rpw!4 -10- Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants For our calculations, we assumed traffic indices of 4.5 for car parking and traffic and 5.5 for light to medium truck parking and access roads. We also assumed that Class 2 untreated base would be used. The R-value tests were performed by American Engineering Laboratory and the results are attached. The results of the R-value determination re- vealed that near-surface soils are clayey and have low R-values; R-values of 15 and 16 were obtained. For these conditions and the assumption stated above, we give the following design recommendations: Asphalt Class 2 Concrete Untreated T.I. A.C. Base 4.5 3.0 7.5 5.5 4.0 10.5 If selective grading and import material having a minimum R-value of 30 is employed, we recommend that the following pavement sections be used. Asphalt Class 2 Concrete Untreated T.I. A.C. Base 4.5 . 3.0 4.0 5.5 4.0 5.0 We suggest that consideration be given to using concrete pavements in areas where dumpsters will be stored and picked up. Our experience indicates that refuse pickup trucks can shorten the useful life of asphaltic concrete sections. We recommend that in these areas, 6 inches of 3,000 psi Portland cement concrete be used over the prepared subgrade surface. pl/rpw!4 -11- Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants We recommend that mix designs be made for asphaltic concrete and Portland cement concrete by an engineering company specializing in this type of work, and that the paving operations be inspected by a qualified testing laboratory. We recommend that adequate surface drainage be provided to reduce pond- ing and infiltration of water into the subgrade materials. We suggest that paved areas have a minimum gradient of 1 percent. As much as possible, planter areas next to pavements should be avoided; otherwise, subdrains should be used to drain the planters to appropriate outlets. It is impor- tant to provide adequate drainage to reduce ponding and possible future distress of the pavement section. Class 2 aggregate base should conform to the latest edition of the State of California "Standard Specifications," Section 26.1.02 B. Asphaltic concrete should conform to the Standard Specifications, Section 29-2.01 for the asphalt and Section 39-2.02 (Type B) for the aggregate. The aggregate base material should be placed at a minimum relative compaction of 95 percent. Portland cement concrete should conform to Sections 40 and 90 of the "Standard Specifications" of the State of California. Cement treated base should conform to the City of San Diego standard requirements. We recommend that the upper and lower 6 inches of the subgrade soil in pavement areas be scarified and properly compacted to at least 95 and 90 percent, respectively, of the maximum laboratory dry density prior to placing base material. UNCERTAINTY AND LIMITATIONS We have observed only a very small portion of the pertinent soil and groundwater conditions. The recommendations made herein are based on the assumption that soil conditions do not deviate appreciably from those found during our field investigation. We recommend that Woodward-Clyde Consultants review the foundation and grading plans to verify that the Dl/rowl4 -12- Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants intent of the recommendations presented herein has been properly inter- preted and incorporated into the contract documents. We further recom- mend that Woodward-Clyde Consultants observe the site grading, subgrade preparation under concrete slabs and paved areas, and foundation exca- vations to verify that site conditions are as anticipated or to provide revised recommendations if necessary. If the plans for site development are changed, or if variations or undesirable geotechnical conditions are encountered during construction, we should be consulted for further recommendations. This report is intended for design purposes only and may not be sufficient to prepare an accurate bid. California, including San Diego, is an area of high seismic risk. It is generally considered economically unfeasible to build a totally earth- quake-resistant project; it is, therefore, possible that a large or nearby earthquake could cause damage at the site. Geotechnical engineering and the geologic sciences are characterized by uncertainty. Professional judgements presented herein are based partly on our understanding of the proposed construction, and partly on our general experience. Our engineering work and judgements rendered meet current professional standards; we do not guarantee the performance of the project in any respect. Inspection services allow the testing of only a small percentage of the fill placed at the site. Contractual arrangements with the grading contractor should contain the provision that he is responsible for excavating, placing, and compacting fill in accordance with project specifications. Inspection by the geotechnical engineer during grading should not relieve the grading contractor of his primary responsibility to perform all work in accordance with the specifications. Dl/rnwl4 -13- Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the contractor's operations, and we can not be respon- sible for the safety of personnel other than our own on the site; the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if he considers any of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe. pl/rpw!4 -14- San Diego, California 92110 (619)2242911 o , CO fN ~l 8LL JU 8to ujcaC3&.o to•oc o CO <u B <N B < I EL _1 Q !I11 | * H O I(j | I ...J co +J (0uo ro§ Xo o.d10 ^ w oQJ D. s«y 0 Oz O-J UJ< to:in < §< 0. J-< x 01czaz Consulting Engineers Geologists and Environmental Scientists Offices m Other Principal Cit'es Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Wood ward- Clyde Consultants APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION Eight exploratory test pits were advanced at the approximate locations shown on the Site Plan (Figure 1). The drilling was performed on February 19, 1988, under the direction of a geologist from our firm, using a tractor-mounted backhoe. Small plastic bag and large sack samples of subsurface materials were obtained from the pits, sealed to preserve the natural moisture content of the sample, and returned to the laboratory for examination and testing. The locations and elevations of all test pits are approximate and were estimated by reference in the plan provided and plan on file. o2/rmv14 A-l Project: Andrex at Palomar Airport Lots 4 and 6 Date Drilled Water Depth Type of Boring Type of Drill Rig Q. ±i0 Q Q. CO CO Blows/ftKEY TO LOGS Measured Hammer Material Description MoistureContent,%!>. — "-£• <n or\ c Q <D 0 1! Surface Elevation 5- 10- 15- 20- 25- 30 ; % |j1 1i \ 'f"s DISTURBED SAMrLb LOCATION Obtained by collecting the auger cuttings in a plastic bag Fill Sand Clay Silt Silt/Sand Silt/Clay *GS = Gram Size Distribution LC = Laboratory Compaction Test PI = Atterberg Limits Test LL = Liquid Limit UBC = UBC Expansion Index Test Project NO 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants ^ - — - Figure A-1 Project: Andrex at Palomar Airport Lots 4 and 6 Log of Test Pit No.: 1 Date Drilled 2-19-88 Water Depth Not measured Measured -- Type of Boring 24" test pit Type of Drill Rig Case 580 Hammer N/A * see Key to Logs, Fig A-1 f*Q CO CD "5. COCO Blows/ftMaterial Description MoistureContent,%s* Q C Q. 0 <5 ^2sa o) 6,2 Surface Elevation (T 5- 10- 15- 20- 25- 30^ 1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 z 1_ 2 ^ Moist, grayish brown silt and lean clay with fragments of siltstone FILL jf Becomes more clayey and increasing moisture below 1 5' Dense, moist, light yellowish brown, silty sand to sandy silt (SM/ML), occasional rounded gravels DELMAR FORMATION Very stiff, moist, olive to olive brown mottled, fat clay (CH) poorly laminated, abundant gypsum crystals !^^^ DELMAR FORMATION ^^^ Bottom of Hole at 8 feet Project NO 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants ^ - — - - — — — - GS.PI Figure A-2 Project: Andrex at Palomar Airport Lots 4 and 6 Log of Test Pit No: 2 Date Drilled 2-19-88 Water Depth Not measured Measured -- Type of Boring 24" test pit Type of Drill Rig Case 580 Hammer N/A * see Key to Logs. Fig A-1 j£ Q.C: <Do en0> Q. W Blows/ftMaterial Description MoistureContent,%3K £•"5 "5 Q S a 0 a> *<"^ s0,2 Surface Elevation o" 5- 10- 15- 20- 25- 30^ 2-1 2-2 2-3 4/_ 2. i \ \ f//f/fsf ff ff ff ff ff ff f Firm to stiff, moist, olive to yellowish brown mottled, fat clay (CH) HIGHLY WEATHERED DELMAR FORMATION Hard, moist, olive to olive brown mottled, lean clay and clayey silt (CL/MH), poorly laminated horizontally, some reddish iron staining, gypsum crystals, occasional zones of remolded clay and omni-directional slickensided surfaces DELMAR FORMATION Bottom of Hole at 6 5 feet Project NO 8751 4241 -sio2 Woodward-Clyde Consultants^ - ~ — — — — - LC.UBC LL=54 Pl=37 Figure A-3 Project: Andrex at Palomar Airport Lots 4 and 6 Log of Test Pit No: 3 Date Drilled 2-1 9-88 Water Depth Not measured Measured - - Type of Boring 24" test pit Type of Drill Rig Case 580 Hammer N/A * see Key to Logs, Fig A-1 -C~Q-c; *Q <r>as Q. n»V) 3.m Material Description £ *•" liasO o20 £• S-5Q g a-Q o v> £ w 6.= Surface Elevation<r Ml • • 5- i- 10- 15- w 20- 25- 30 ; 3-1 3-2 1_ 2 IStiff, moist, olive, lean clay (CL), poorly laminated, weathered -i DELMAR FORMATION * Becomes hard, less weathered below V, horizontally laminated, abundant gypsum crystals Bottom of Hole at 4 5 feet Project NO 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants^ - - — — — — - Figure A-4 Project: Andrex at Palomar Airport Lots 4 and 6 Log of Test Pit No: 4 Date Drilled 2-19-88 Type of Boring 24" test pit * see Key to Logs, Fig A-1 Water Depth Not measured Type of Drill Rig Case 580 Measured - - Hammer N/A to "~Q 8 Q. (0 CO «; om Material Description | c" 11* >; £* co "oO C Q.<D Q ^ * o I Surface Elevation 0 10- 15- 20- 25- 30^ 4-1 4-2 7 L %/f Project No 87514241 -SI02 Moist, olive brown, fat clay to silt FILL Stiff to hard, moist, olive to olive brown mottled, silty and lean clay (MH/CL), poorly laminated some mottled iron staining DELMAR FORMATION Bottom of Hole at 5 feet Woodward-Clyde Consultants ^ — — - Figure A-5 Project: Andrex at Palomar Airport Lots 4 and 6 Log of Test Pit No: 5 Date Drilled 2-19-88 Water Depth Not measured Measured -- Type of Boring 24" test pit Type of Drill Rig Case 580 Hammer N/A * see Key to Logs, Fig A-1 .cQ-.J:0»Q COo Q. CO CO Blows/ftMaterial Description cj> ^r 11* IS &m 0Q g o-o « £•£ <"6,2 Surface Elevation 0 5- 10- 15- 20- 25- 30^ 5-1 5-2 2 ^ '//,'//,ttt 1 Moist, olive brown, silty fat clay to elastic silt FILL Stiff, moist, olive to olive brown mottled, lean clay to silt (CL/ML) weathered, some gypsum crystals -»^ DELMAR FORMATION ^^ Hard, moist, olive gray with yellowish iron staining, mottled, lean clay (CL) horizontally laminated DELMAR FORMATION Bottom of Hole at 6 feet - Project NO 8751 4241 -sio2 Woodward-Clyde Consultants^ — - Figure A-6 Project: Andrex at Palomar Airport Lots 4 and 6 Log of Test Pit No: 6 Date Drilled 2-1 9-88 Water Depth Not measured Measured - - Type of Boring 24" test pit Type of Drill Rig Case 580 Hammer N/A * see Key to Logs, Fig A-1 1*0 <nCDO. a Blows/ftMaterial Description MoistureContent,%>.£•-c to o <0O 5 *w •C to 5^ Surface Elevation 0 10- 15- 20- 25- 6-1 6-2 '-11 II Moist, olive gray to light brown mottled silt , X^ FILL / Hard, moist, light gray, lean clay to silt (CL-MH) some reddish brown to yellow iron staining, horizontally laminated DELMAR FORMATION Bottom of Hole at 5 feet - projectNo 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants ^ - - _ — — — — UBC LL-42 PU25 Figure A-7 Project: Andrex at Palomar Airport Lots 4 and 6 Log of Test Pit No: 7 Date Drilled 2-19-88 Water Depth Not measured Measured -- Type of Boring 24" test pit Type of Drill Rig Case 580 Hammer N/A * see Key to Logs, Fig A-1 £ Q S3 Q. CO Blows/ftMaterial Description MoistureContent,%s*»; t <DQ . *o <o £ v> Surface Elevation 0 _ 10- 15- 20- 25- 7-1 7-2 7-3 7 z 2 Moist, light brown to olive brown, lean to fat clay and silt FILL Hard, moist, light gray with yellow iron staining, mottled silt (MH), horizontally laminated DELMAR FORMATION Bottom of Hole at 5 feet - FrojectNo 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants ^ - - - — — — — Figure A-8 Project: Andrex at Palomar Airport Lots 4 and 6 Log of Test Pit No: 8 Date Drilled 2-19-88 Water Depth Not measured Measured -- Type of Boring 24" test pit Type of Drill Rig Case 580 Hammer N/A * see Key to Logs, Fig A-1 .cf <B *~Q Q. to CO Blows/ftMaterial Description MoistureContent,%2* m "oQ C fi Q 5 *«> £ «> Surface Elevation o" - 5- - 10- 15- 20- 25- 30 ; 8-1 8-2 8-3 2 j Moist, light brown, lean to fat clay with layers of silt FILL y Less moisture below approximately 2' ~i Some slightly decomposed grass and sticks 7 5'-9' along with rocks to 12" diameter Moist, light brown silt FILL Bottom of Hole at 12 feet - Project NO 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants ^ - — - — - — — — - Figure A-9 Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTS The materials observed in the test borings were visually classified and evaluated with respect to swelling characteristics. The classifications were substantiated by performing grain size analyses and evaluating plasticity characteristics of samples of the soils. Fill suitability tests, including a compaction test, expansion index tests, and grain size analyses, were performed on samples on the probable fill soils. Swelling characteristics were estimated by performing expansion index tests on recompacted samples. The suitability of soils for use as pavement subgrade was evaluated by performing R-value tests. The grain size distribution curves and plasticity tests are shown on Figure B-l. The results of the expansion index test are reported in Figure B-2. The results of the R-value tests, as submitted to us by Testing Engineers, Inc. are presented in Figure B-3. o2/rowl4 B-l COBBLES Mes GRAVEL Coarse | Fine i Opening - Ins SAND Coarse Medium | Fine Sieve Sizes SILT and CLAY Hydrometer Analysis 100 90 80 70 76 32 lu 2 10 16 20 30 MO 60 80 110200 en CO 50 occ. UJa. MO 20 10 1 .1 1 o 1^v S- ^ I j^A \\. I. \•< Xy^^4\ \ \\ 1 \V\\\\Ztf_I\ \^11G)\\\(v J "V^~*\_ ^^x^ ^^^, "^^_/"^.) "•v^ "^•^^ "T 0 10 20 30 MOSz tt UJw06 UJo 60 £ 70 80 ) 90 too 100 50 10.0 5»0 |00 O.I 0.05 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 0.01 0.005 0.001 SAMPLE O 1-4 CLASSIFICATION AND SYMBOL Clayey sand (SC) *LL 31 *PI 12 *LL - Liquid Limit *PI - Plasticity Index GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVES ANDREX AT PALOMAR AIRPORT LOTS 4 AND 6 DRAWN BY cb| CHECKEOBY /^'-j PROJECTN087514241-SI02 | PATE 3-7-88 | FIGURE NO B-l WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS -GS-76 PLASTICITY CHARACTERISTICS Liquid Limit, % Plasticity Index, % Classification by Unified Soil Classification System 2-2 54 37 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 ZERO AIR VOIDS CURVES 2 80 SG 270SG 260SG 250SG Maximum Dry Density, pcf Optimum Moisture Content, % \\ \\ \\ A\ 2-2 113.0 16.5 \V A AA | MOISTURE CONTENT, % COBBLES GRAVEL c | f SAND c| ml f SILT & CLAY 100 i-80 < 60 l- w 40O<r S 20 1000 100 10 10 01 001 0001 GRAIN SIZE, mm MECHANICAL ANALYSIS DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA Dry Density, pcf Initial Water Content, % Final Water Content, % Apparent Cohesion, psf Apparent Friction Angle, degrees UBC EXPANSION INDEX Initial Dry Density, pcf Initial Water Content, % Final Dry Density, pcf Final Water Content, % Load, psf UBC Expansion Index 2-2 98 13 85 33 144 156 10 20 30 LABORATORY COMPACTION TEST \v^ NX SAMPLE LOCATION 40 LABORATORY COMPACTION TEST METHOD ASTM-D 1557-78A FILL SUITABILITY TESTS ANDHEX AT PALOMAR AIRPORT LOTS 4 AND 6 DRAWN BY | CHECKEDBY / ,V| PROJECT NO 87514241-SI02 I DATE: 3-7-88 | FIGURENO;B-2 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS Sample Number 2-2 6-1 Initial Dry Dens i ty pcf 98 102 Water Content /' 13 12 Saturation "Ih 49 51 Final - Dry Dens i ty pcf 85 93 Water Content % 33 28 Saturation % 92 93 Pressure psf 144 144 Expansion 156 104 UBC EXPANSION INDEX TEST ANDREX AT PALOMAR AIRPORT LOTS 4 AND 6 cb | CHICKED iY \'< {•* | PROJECT HO 87514241-SI02 j DATE 3-7-88 ] HOUREMO B-3 WOODWARD-CLYDE COKSULTANT* Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants APPENDIX C GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS FOR EARTHWORK ANDREX - LOTS 4 AND 6 NOTE: These specifications are provided as a guide for preparation of the final grading specifications for the project,, which with the plans constitute the project documents. These guide specifications are not intended for use as final grading specifications. 1. GENERAL 1.1 The work of the Contractor covered by these specifications consists of furnishing labor and equipment and performing all operations necessary to remove deleterious and undesirable materials from areas of grading, to properly prepare areas to receive fill, and to excavate and fill to the lines and grades shown on the plans or as directed in writing by the Owner. 1.2 The Contractor shall perform the work in strict accordance with these specifications and the Contractor shall be responsible for the quality of the finished product notwithstanding the fact that the earthwork may be observed and tests made by a Geotechnical Engineer. Deviations from these specifications will be permitted only upon written authorization from the Owner. 1.3 The data contained in the soil report and in any following addenda indicating subsurface conditions is not intended as representations or warranties of the accuracy or continuity of subsurface conditions between soils borings. It shall be ex- pressly understood that the interpretations or conclusions drawn from such data are the responsibility of the Contractor. 2. DEFINITIONS 2.1 Contractor shall mean the contractor performing the earthwork. 2.2 Owner shall mean the owner of the property or the party on whose behalf the earthwork is being performed and who has contracted with the Contractor to have the earthwork performed. 2.3 Civil Engineer Architect shall mean the engineer as architect who has prepared the grading plans and who is the Owner's re- presentative concerning the configuration, quantities and dimensions of the earthwork and who usually sets basic sur- veying data at the site for the Contractor's conformance. n2/rnw14 C-l Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants 2.4 Geotechnical Engineer shall mean a licensed civil engineer authorized to use the title "Geotechnical Engineer" in accordance with Section 6736.1, Chapter 7, Division 3, State of California Business and Professions Code. The Geotechnical Engineer shall be responsible for having representatives on site to observe and test the Contractor's work for conformance with these specifi- cations . 2.5 Green Book shall mean the most recent edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, prepared by the Joint Cooperative Committee of the Southern California Chapter, American Public Works Association, and Southern California Districts, Associated Contractors of California. 2.6 Standard Special Provisions shall mean the most recent edition of the Standard Special Provisions, prepared by County of San Diego, Department of Public Works. 3. OBSERVING AND TESTING 3.1 The Geotechnical Engineer shall be the Owner's representative to observe and make tests during the foundation preparation, filling, and compacting operations. 3.2 The Geotechnical Engineer shall make field density tests in the compacted fill to provide a basis for expressing an opinion as to whether the fill material has been compacted to at least the minimum relative compaction specified. The basis for this opinion shall be that no tests in compacted or recompacted areas indicate a relative compaction of less than that specified. Density tests shall be made in the compacted material below any disturbed surface. When these tests indicate that the density of any layer of fill, or portion thereof, is below the specified density, the particular layer or area represented by the test shall be reworked until the specified density has been achieved. 3.3 Testing shall conform to the foUowing standards as pertinent: ° ASTM D2922-81, "Density of Soil and Soil-Aggregate in place by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth)" ° ASTM D3017-78, "Moisture Content of Soil and Soil-Aggregate in place by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth)" ° ASTM D1556-82, "Density of Soil in place by the Sand-ConeMethod" ° ASTM D1557-78, "Moisture-Density Relations of Soils and Soil-Aggregate Mixture Using a 10-lb. Hammer and 18-inch Drops," Methods A, B, and C. p2/rpw!4 C-2 Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants 0 AASHTO T 224-67 (1982), "Correction for Coarse Particles in the Soil Compaction Test" (modified for coarse particles larger than 3/4-inch). 4. CLEARING AND PREPARING AREAS TO BE FILLED 4.1 Clearing and grubbing shall be in accordance with Section 300-1 of the Green Book and, in addition, all trees, brush, grass, and other objectionable material shall be collected from areas to receive fill and disposed of off-site prior to the commencement of any earth moving so as to leave the areas that have been cleared with a neat and finished appearance free from debris. 4.2 All loose or porous soils shall be removed or compacted as specified for fill. The depth of removal and recompaction shall be approved in the field by the Geotechnical Engineer. Prior to placing fill, the surface to be filled shall be free from uneven features that would tend to prevent uniform compaction by the equipment to be used. It shall then be plowed or scarified to a depth as required and in no case less than a minimum depth of 6 inches. 4.3 After the foundation for the fill has been cleared, plowed or scarified, it shall be disked or bladed by the Contractor until it is uniform and free from large clods, brought to the specified moisture content, and compacted as specified for fill. 5. SUBGRADE PREPARATION IN PAVEMENT AREAS 5.1 Subgrade preparation shall be in accordance with Section 301-1 of the Green Book, except that relative compaction of subgrade shall be in accordance with Section 12 of these specifications. Scarification and recompaction requirements may be waived by the Geotechnical Engineer in subgrade areas with naturally cemented formational soils. 5.2 All areas to be paved shall be proofrolled in accordance with Section 301-1.3 of the Standard Special Provisions. 6. MATERIALS - GENERAL FILL 6.1 Materials for compacted fill shall contain no rocks or hard lumps greater than 6 inches in maximum dimension and shall contain at least 40% of material smaller than 1/4 inch in size. Material of a perishable, spongy, or otherwise improper nature shall not be used in fills. 6.2 Select soil, to be used at finish grade to the depths and at the locations specified on the grading plans, shall consist of material that contains no rocks or hard lumps greater than 6 inches in maximum dimension and that has an Expansion Index of 30 or less when tested in accordance with UBC Standard 29-2. p2/rpw!4 C-3 Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Woodward-Clyde Consultants 6.3 Samples of materials to be used for fill shall be tested in the laboratory by the Geotechnical Engineer in order to evaluate the maximum density, optimum moisture content, classification of the soil, and expansion index, as required. 6.4 During earthwork operations, soil types other than those analyzed in the report of the soil investigation may be en- countered by the Contractor. The Geotechnical Engineer shall be consulted to determine the suitability of these soils. 7. MATERIALS - PAVEMENT SUBGRADE 7.1 Pavement subgrsde shall be defined as the top 12 inches of soil, excluding aggregate base, in areas to be paved with asphalt concrete or Portland cement concrete. 7.2 Materials for pavement subgrade shall contain no rocks or hard lumps greater than 6 inches in maximum dimension, and shall contain at least 40 percent of material smaller than 1/4 inch in size. Material of a perishable, spongy or otherwise improper nature shall not be used in fills. 8. MATERIALS - TRENCH BACKFILL 8.1 Trench backfill materials above pipe bedding shall be in accordance with Section 306-1.3 of the Green Book. 8.2 As an alternative, cement slurry may be used to backfill trenches. The slurry shall have a minimum cement content of two sacks per cubic yard within the building limits and zone of influence of foundations and other settlement-sensitive structures. A minimum one sack per cubic yard slurry shall be used elsewhere. 9. MATERIALS - WALL BACKFILL 9.1 Wall backfill materials shall be in accordance with Section 300-3.5 of the Green Book. 10. COMPACTION EQUIPMENT 10.1 Compaction shall be accomplished by sheepsfoot rollers, vibratory rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or other types of compaction equipment made specifically for the purpose of com- pacting soils. Equipment shall be of such a design that it will be capable of compacting the fill to the specified density at the specified moisture content. p2/rpw!4 C-4 Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Vlfoodward-ClydeConsultants 11. PLACING, SPREADING, AND COMPACTING GENERAL FILL MATERIAL 11.1 After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted by the Contractor to a relative compaction that is indicated by test to be not less than 90 percent. Relative compaction is defined as the ratio (expressed in percent) of the in-place dry density of the compacted fill divided by the maximum laboratory dry density evaluated in accordance with the ASTM D1557-78. Unless otherwise specified, fill material shall be compacted by the Contractor while at a moisture content at or above the optimum moisture content determined in accordance with the above test method. 11.2 The fill material shall be placed by the Contractor in layers that, when compacted, shall not exceed 6 inches. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during the spreading to obtain uniformity of moisture and material in each layer. The entire fill shall be constructed as a unit, in nearly level lifts starting up from the lowest area to receive fill. Compaction shall be continuous over the entire area, and the equipment shall make sufficient uniform trips so that the desired density has been obtained throughout the entire fill. 11.3 When the moisture content of the fill material is below that specified by the Geotechnical Engineer, water shall be added by the Contractor until the moisture content is as specified. 11.4 When the moisture content of the fill material is above that specified by the Geotechnical Engineer or too wet to achieve proper compaction, the fill material shall be aerated by the Contractor by blading, mixing, or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is as required to permit compaction. 11.5 Properly compacted fill shall extend to the design surface of fill slopes. The surface of fill slopes shall be compacted in accordance with Section 11.1 of these specifications. 12. PLACING, SPREADING, AND COMPACTING PAVEMENT SUBGRADE 12.1 Subgrade materials shall be placed, spread, and compacted in accordance with Section 11 of these specifications, except that the top 6 inches of subgrade material shall be compacted to a relative compaction that is indicated by test to be not less than 95 percent. 13. PLACING AND COMPACTING TRENCH BACKFILL 13.1 Backfilling and compacting shall be in accordance with Section 306-1.3 of the Green Book, except that jetting or flooding shall not be allowed and that all backfill shall be compacted to a relative compaction that is indicated by test to be not less than 90 percent. p2/rpw!4 C-5 Project NO. 87514241-SI02 Woodwattl-Clyde Consultants 13.2 All trenches 5 feet or more in depth shall be sloped or shored in accordance with OSHA safety requirements. Trenches less than 5 feet in depth shall also be so guarded when examination in- dicates hazardous ground movement may be expected. 13.3 No compaction testing shall be required for portions of trenches backfilled with cement slurry. 14. PLACING AND COMPACTING WALL BACKFILL 14.1 Backfilling and compacting shall be in accordance with Section 300-3.5 of the Green Book, except that jetting or flooding shall not be allowed. 14.2 The Contractor shall be responsible for using equipment capable of compacting the backfill to the specified relative compaction without damaging adjacent walls or other existing improvements. 15. PROTECTION OF WORK 15.1 During construction, the Contractor shall properly grade all excavated surfaces to provide positive drainage and prevent ponding of water. When earthwork operations are interrupted, the Contractor shall reestablish specified compaction to the depth necessary before placing new fill. The contractor shall control surface water to avoid damage to adjoining properties or to finished work on the site. The Contractor shall take remedial measures to prevent erosion of freshly graded areas and until such time as permanent drainage and erosion control features have been installed. 15.2 After completion of the earthwork and when the Geotechnical Engineer has finished observation of the work, no further ex- cavation or filling shall be done except under the observation of the Geotechnical Engineer. p2/rpw!4 C-6 -Ti «**F-lrHi woH ou.Sg LliiilMMoocc:f ^J^ClV <T-<^V v I*^ " * ^1^%)Xxi « 1 Ift ? ^ Mi 4 A M <~•2 4 ^ \r aCXW ^ H-^co u \ X Ul CO CO