Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2400 LA COSTA AVE; ; CB011812; Permit
08*02-2001 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Av Carlsbad, CA 92008 Retaining Wall Permit Permit No:CB011812 Building Inspection Request Line (760) 602-2725 Job Address Permit Type Parcel No Valuation Reference # Project Title 2400 LA COSTA AV CBAD RETAIN j Lot # $18, 11 3 00 Construction Type ZOMORRODIAN RES-POURED IN 0 NEW PLACE-1,150 RETAIN/RESTRAINING WALL- COMPLETE Status Applied Entered By Plan Approved Issued Inspect Area Applicant ZOMORRODIAN KAZEM .STEB 145 VALLECITOS DE ORO SAN MARCOS CA 92064 760971-1900 Owner """-.. ZOMORRODIAN KAZEM -. ,STEB / ' f ^ 145.VAli.ECiTOS.DE ORO SAN MARCOS 'CA 92064' 760971-1900 " '- ISSUED 05/18/2001 MDP 08/02/2001 08/02/2001 08/02/01 0002 01 02 CGP ' 300- 81 / Total Fees $400 64 $9983 Balance Due\ $300 81 Building Permit * . *• Add'l Building Permit Fee Plan Check i f, Vv Add'l Plan Check Fee V Strong Motion Fee Renewal Fee Add'l Renewal Fee Other Building Fee \ Additional Fees TOTAL PERMIT FEES, $16899 , $00ff, I $12000 $1 81 $000 $000 $000 $000 $400 64' Inspector FINAL APPROVAL Date Clearance NOTICE Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the 'Imposition" of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as lees/exactions" You have 90 days from the date this permit was issued to protest imposition of these fees/exactions If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3 32 030 Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capactiy changes, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which.th_e statute ol limitations has previously otherwtseexpired PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1635 Faraday Ave , Carlsbad, CA 92008 a S0< ,,^f,,~Fr~~-~.-,p- ™.,» 1 . M1 . .1' "'T^CT""'*™'™"! FOR OFFICE USE ONLY PLAN CHECK NO m \ ~ \ VI EST VAL ^ _ Plan Ck Deposit _ Validated By Date c_At Address (include Bldg/Suite #) Lo-T / <* /"/a. fo-a Business Name (at this address) 35"Legal Description Lot No Subdivision Name/Number -UnltW "c£'^ Total # of-units •5P 99-33 Assessor s,Parcel # Description ol Work Cl Existing Use Proposed Use SQ FT #of Stones of Bedrooms # of Bathrooms Name Addtess City State/Zip Telephone S ^"tftetfc Fax tt 11^sJ^Tur'nI 1t^Owner^jD Agent for.pwnarj u i itf, tR*.ifkU^JL^j-JTIWU.L ^Jiilu TJ Name Address *^!^CONTliACTOir£c6^ ,1B,J,ij^,^( ,, ^, i wLS^i,^ * , ^-jL^I-i^SUJJi-4 LU^..«*. MJ-tU ^ . (Sec 7031 5 Business and Professions Code Any City or County which requires a permit to construct, alter, improve, demolish or repair any structure, prior to its issuance, also requires the applicant for such permit to file a signed statement that he is licensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractor s License Law [Chapter 9, commending with Section 7000 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code] or that he is exempt therefrom, and the basis for the alleged exemption Any violation of Section 7031 5 by any applicant for a permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars [S500]) Name Slate License * Address City Slate/Zip Telephone # License Class City Business License # Designer Name State License ft Address City State/Zip Telephone ref JiwoRKERS'lcoMpENSATioNr ;^ ^!T;;!-3F fDi STiiJ ! fc'fJCT-Ji!!K7MM r!ME¥sM!i£.'. Tit iEll ^li[lJT^(V . . ( tySffi uiTaTF'if'. Workers Compensation Declaration I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following declarations Q I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self-insure for workers compensation as provided by Section 3700 oi the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued Q I have and will maintain workers compensation, as required by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued My worker's compensation insurance carrier and policy number are Policy No Expiration DateInsurance Company __ _ __ _ (THIS SECTION NEED NOT BE COMPLETED IF THE PERMIT IS FOR ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS [$100) OR LESS) Q CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the Workers' Compensation Laws of California WARNING Failure to secure workers' compensation coverage is unlawful, and shall subject an employer to criminal penalties and civil fines up to one hundred thousand dollars ($100 000), in addition to the cost of compensation damages as provided for in Section 3706 of the Labor code interest and attorney s fees SIGNATURE, __ ^DATE DECL^ hereby affirm that I am exempt from the Contractor s License Law for the following reason [J I, as owner of the property or my employees with wages as their sole compensation will do the work and the structure is not intended or offered for sale (Sec 7044, Business and Professions Code The Contractor s License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who does such work himself or through his own employees, provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale If, however, the building or improvement is sold within one year of completion, the owner-builder will have the burden of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of salel 0 I, as owner of the property am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to construct the project (Sec 7044, Business and Professions Code The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and contracts for such projects with contractors} licensed pursuant to the Contractor s License Law) I arn exempt under Section Business and Professions Code for this reason 1 I personally plan to provide the major labor and materials for construction of the proposed property improvement O YES 0NO 2 (\{hav£ / have not) signed an application for a building permit for the proposed work 3 I have contracted with the following person (firm) to provide the proposed construction (include name / address / phone number / contractors license number) 4 I plan to provide portions of the work, but I have hired the following person to coordinate, supervise and provide the major work (include name / address / phone number / contractors license number) _L£> Q ^ <\ j_ \ &r_ r*^- \. ft ~fd _ 5 I will provide some of the work but I have contracted (hired) the following persons to provide the work indicated (include name / address / phone number / type of work) '_^[& fl-c A^-l// ^-r-tHy ft ^ "* PROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE DATE f, mm niun'DFRMiTCirfwi v, ri,7"""'""V""!'^~'"s'l"'""rT~*"'? ,w""rrr*f'>*»tirm!<ttrwi .raft M™1 "iTfinFsT" ^iT"'?,"uurLL/iivij rcnivu i omuL i 'j ,_•{, ,yT _'i'__ti .]:±___J[__L_I_ *L ' ^5 ! i ' jji^ L?i-2*^jiY , tin* f it :Mi-~''i •*' I Is the applicant or future building occupant required to submit a business plan, acutely hazardous materials registration form OT risk management and prevention program under Sections 25505, 25533 or 25534 of the Presley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act? Q YES Q NO Is the applicant or future building occupant required to obtain a permit from the air pollution control district or air quality management district? Q YES Q NO Is the facility to be constructed within 1,000 feet of the outer boundary of a school site? Q YES Q NO IF ANY OF THE ANSWERS ARE YES, A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MAY NOT BE ISSUED UNLESS THE APPLICANT HAS MET OR IS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT f8^^oNstRucfioN]LENDrNG| AGEMcyjf? ilZjjuT" ^11™ TfTjTT RuWt ''lifTjE ffiWZF?, J'!5T'<fir¥i^r; Pn! iOTTT^D? ?H?TQ(7'::''"/"" f i3 1 hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued (Sec 3097M Civil Code) LENDER'S ADDRESSLENDER'S NAME 9 J*t*! APPLICANT|CERTIFlCATION|lf ,1^111,,'y^^a^jv^i!;.;<'Mvt;^}MSf! jj^j.'^ •• •><»&&, -,$ <s< un&i 'i M!«^r,iw>,raiiiaHh TiMiuiayji.U^W'if.'^jMV, „'& wu,s s' J U^ijP* Sl&'tli^i I certify that I have read the application and state that the above information is correct and that the information on the plans is accurate I agree to comply with all CitV ordinances and State laws relating to building construction I hereby authorize representatives of the CitV of Carlsbad to enter upon the above mentioned property for inspection purposes I ALSO AGREE TO SAVE INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARMLESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AGAINST ALL LIABILITIES JUDGMENTS COSTS AND EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINST SAID CITY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING OF THIS PERMIT OSHA An OSHA permit is required for excavations over 5'0" deep and demolition or construction of structures over 3 stories in height EXPIRATION Every permit issued by the building Official under the provisions of this Code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or work authorized by such permit is not commenced within 180 days fram the date of such permit or if the building or work authorized by such permit is suspended or abandoned at any time after the work is commenced for a period of 180i^ays (Section 10JL4 4 Uniform Building Code) APPLICANT S SIGNATURE _ -, ~~~^_ / ^^^-HT - DATE PINK Finance TTNSCHEDULED BUILDING INSPECTION INSPECTO PERMIT # Cgfl//*/^ PLAN CHECK # JOB ADDRESS. 2^ (ft O frff* DESCRIPTION CODE DESCRIPTION ACT COMMENTS ,/"' City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request For "Permit# CB011812 ll"l~Z- Title ZOMORRODIAN RES-POURED IN Inspector Assignment PD Description PLACE-1,150 RETAIN/RESTRAINING WALL- COMPLETE GRADING Type RETAIN Sub Type Job Address 2400 LA COSTA AV Suite Lot 0 Location APPLICANT ZOMORRODIAN KAZEM Owner Remarks Phone 7605058188 Inspector Total Time CD Description 65 Retaining Walls Requested By KOSUM Entered By KAREN Act Comments Associated PCRs Date 09/21/2001 09/17/2001 09/13/2001 09/13/2001 09/10/2001 09/04/2001 09/04/2001 09/04/2001 08/31/2001 08/31/2001 08/31/2001 08/31/2001 Inspection History Description 65 Retaining 63 Walls 21 Undergro' 65 Retaining 63 Wai Is 21 Undergro 61 Footing 62 Steel/Bor 24 Rough/Topout 61 Footing 62 Steel/Bi 63 Walls Walls jnd/Under Floor Walls jnd/Under Floor d Beam pout d Beam Act CO AP AP CO PA PA PA PA CO CO CO CO Insp PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD Comments FORMS INCOMPLETE FTGS FOR WALLS SEE NOTICE ATTACHED BRANCHES WESDT WALL SEE NOTICE ATTACHED City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request For 10/01/2001 Permit# CB011812 Title ZOMORRODIAN RES-POURED IN Inspector Assignment PD Description PLACE-1,150 RETAIN/RESTRAINING WALL- COMPLETE GRADING 2400 LA COSTA AV Lot 0 Type RETAIN Sub Type Job Address Suite Location APPLICANT ZOMORRODIAN KAZEM Owner Remarks Phone 7605058188 Inspector Total Time CD Description 65 Retaining Walls Requested By NA Entered By CHRISTINE Comments Associated PCRs Date 09/21/2001 09/17/2001 09/13/2001 09/13/2001 09/10/2001 09/04/2001 09/04/2001 09/04/2001 08/31/2001 08/31/2001 08/31/2001 08/31/2001 Inspection History Description 65 Retaining 63 Walls 21 Undergro 65 Retaining 63 Walls 21 Undergro 61 Footing 62 Steel/Bor 24 Rough/Tc 61 Footing 62 Steel/Bor 63 Walls Walls jnd/Under Floor Walls jnd/Under Floor d Beam 'pout d Beam Act CO AP AP CO PA PA PA PA CO CO CO CO Insp PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD Comments FORMS INCOMPLETE FTGS FOR WALLS SEE NOTICE ATTACHED BRANCHES WESDT WALL SEE NOTICE ATTACHED **•*• CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT NOTICE DATE LOCATION PERMIT NO 0 *7-/ (760) 602-2700 1635 FARADAY AVENUE TIME FOR INSPECTION CALL (760) 602-2725 RE-INSPECTION FEE DUE? FOR FU^T^EB INFORMATION, CONTACT E-JNSPECTION FEE Dlf/f•;\"lio<*YES PHONE BUILDING INSPECTOR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER ® tr City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request For 09/13/2001 Permit# CB011812 Title ZOMORRODIAN RES-POURED IN Inspector Assignment PD Description PLACE-1,150 RETAIN/RESTRAINING WALL- COMPLETE GRADING 2400 LA COSTA AV Lot 0 Type RETAIN Sub Type Job Address Suite Location APPLICANT ZOMORRODIAN KAZEM Owner Remarks Phone 7604711900X205 Inspector Total Time CD Description 21 Underground/Under Floor 65 Retaining Walls Requested By NA Entered By CHRISTINE Act Comments Associated PCRs Inspection History Date Description 09/10/2001 63 Walls 09/04/2001 21 Underground/Under Floor 09/04/2001 61 Footing 09/04/2001 62 Steel/Bond Beam 08/31/2001 24 Rough/Topout 08/31/2001 61 Footing 08/31/2001 62 Steel/Bond Beam 08/31/2001 63 Walls Act Insp Comments PA PD PA PD BRANCHES PA PD WESDT WALL PA PD CO PD SEE NOTICE ATTACHED CO PD CO PD CO PD NOTICECITY OF CARLSBAD (760) 602-2700 BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1635 FARADAY AVENUE £ PERMIT NO DATE / f J U f _ _ TIME LOCATION f. et 5/Tr FOR INSPECTION CALL (760) 602-2725 RE-INSPECTION FEE DUE'? 'RIN CONTACT ^ ^ ^ c /Oh YES FOR FURTHERINFORMATION, CONTACT/ t It PHONE BUILDING INSPECTOR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER © City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request For 08/31/2001 Permit# CB011812 Inspector Assignment Title ZOMORRODIAN RES-POURED IN Description PLACE-1,150 RETAIN/RESTRAINING WALL- COMPLETE GRADING Type RETAIN Sub Type Phone 7605058188 Job Address 2400 LA COSTA AV Suite Lot 0 Location Inspecto; APPLICANT ZOMORRODIAN KAZEM Owner Remarks WALL DRAIN? RESTRAINING WALL PLUMBING Total Time Requested By NA Entered By CHRISTINE CD Description Act Comments 24 Rough/Topout _£- P 61 Footing _ 62 Steel/Bond Beam 63 Walls Associated PCRs Inspection History Date Description Act Insp Comments CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT DATE NOTICE LOCATION PERMIT NO (760) 602-2700 1635 FARADAY AVENUE TIME /<> DP /<. -To 65 tfiJ FOR INSPECTION CALL (760) 602-2725 RE-INSPECTION FEE DUE? FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT (/0 *- ~ 270 YES PHONE BUILDING INSPECTOR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER NORTy COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC SOIL TESTING & INSPECTION SERVICES Post Office Box 302002, Escondido, CA 92030 / , (760) 480-1116 FIELD DENSITY TESTS Job ASTM D2922 Job NO fo3?B No Hour* Mforrnation To -^ HST IITIST •OtllONTtL LOCATION /b ntTICAL ,IOCITION 7 • OiSTUtE CPM DENSITY CPM tlR GAP CPM " RATIO NET DENSITY Wf ' NftUR MY DENSITY PCf /*»fg % MOISTURI 9 SOIL iO Xo 10 Mt! DENSITY -, REOUIRtD tl COMPACT ION t »*/£• X'I/ 3/Dne -COI t "A r 'JL Z 3.2. APPROVED BY PREFERRED CONSTRUCTION INSPECTIONS, INC. (858) 576-9110 4888 Ronson Court "G" Fax (858) 576-7028 Santiago, Ca. 92111 INSPECTION REPORT JOB NO.: 3099 WORK PERFORMED: REINFORCING STEEL INSPECTION JOB ADDRESS: 2400 LA COSTA BLVD PERMIT NO.: CB011812 PLAN FILE NO.: JOB NAME: ZOMORRODIAN RESIDENCE ARCHITECT: DESCRIBE MATERIAL: ENGINEER: DANIEL COLE REBAR GRADE 60 GENERAL CONTRACTOR: OWNER/BUILDER CONTRACTOR: 9/10 Inspected the reinforcing steel for west wall, 5' height design dated 7/14/01 and 8/04/01 Work observed was in accordance with the approved plans and specifications Arrived on jobsite at 1.15 PMf left at 2:00 PM. INSPECTOR: £^^r ^ DALE REGLI DATE: 9/10/01 CERT. NO.: 0881560-88 PREFERRED CONSTRUCTION INSPECTIONS, INC 4888 RONSON COURT "G" SAN DIEGO, CA 92111 TELEPHONE (858) 576-9110 CERTIFIED INSPECTOR'S WEEKLY REPORT,Lwc-n< f^B COVE ^Y WHICIr!RING WORK PERFORMED H REQUIRED APPROVAL BY THE SPECIAL INSPECTOR OF mo MOJ°B FOR WEEK END"" / / /0/S/Q / OH REINFORCED CONCRETE D STRUCT STEEL ASSEMBLY D SPRAY-APPLIED FIREPROOFING D PRE-STRESSED CONCRETE D REINFORCED GYPSUM D OTHER D REINFORCED MASONRY D DEEP FOUNDATION JOB ADDRESS BULDMQ PEflUrr NUMBER PLAN FILE NUMBER OWNER OR PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT CONSTR MAT! (TYPE GRADE ETC )DESIGN STRENGTH SOURCE OF MFGR ENGINEER DESCRIBE MAT! (MIX DCS ON. RE BAR QHADE * MFQR WELD-ROD, ETC )GENERAL CONTRACTOR CONTR DOING REPORTED WORK *5 LAB RECEIVING 4 TESTING CONSTR MATL SAMPLES 1NSPEC TON DATE ARRtVAL TIMEDEPARTURE TIME DETAILEDREPORT OF WORKINSPECTED LOCATION OF WORK INSPECTED TEST SAMPLES TAKEN WORK REJECTED JOB PROBLEMS PROGRESS. REMARKS ETC MCU>OttNK«UAT1CNMOin-MKXJ*fftOFUATEMALnj«OOflWOmKIWOMefr NO* OFTESTSMUPLEBTAKEN STRUCT COMMtCTKM(VftUUMAOf HI Ktn TCMOUf D| CNCCKCD fTC y*-* cr F •>>- sZ GT & IX 5 <• 2/r e?.•? X y*~ ^ X/-5 X X x X" MSPECTOR ifvwT on TVH> SIGNATURE DATESWNEDX? '3 '& ' CERTFCATE NO MOT* AU. MM40TKM MPOH1* MUST H NKMD »V PPMMV tf TW WK POUOWMa TW MW«CTION D*Tt» CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE To the best of our knowledge, all of the reported work, unless otherwise noted, substantially complies with approved plarr specifications and applicable sections of the building codes This report covers the locations of the work inspected only and does not constitute engineering opin ion or project control PREFERRED COf 4888 RONSON C( SAN DIEGO, CA 9 CERTIFIED INS JSTRUCT1ON INSPECTIONS, INC. )URT "G" 2111 TFI FPHOWF «5R) «?76-9110 JOB NO FOR WEEK / / PECTOR'S WEEKLY REPORT ENOINQ /6/CT/o / fcgCOVE^mNG WORK PERFORMED D REINFORCED CONCRETE D STRUCT STEEL ASSEMBLY D SPRAY-APPLIED FIREPHOOFING W WHICH REQUIRED APPROVAL BY D PRE-STRESSED CONCRETE D REINFORCED GYPSUM DoTHER THE SPECIAL INSPECTOR OF D REINFORCED MASONRY D DEEP FOUNDATION JOB ADDRESS BUILDING PERMIT NUMBER PLAN FIE NUMBER OWNER OR PROJECT NAME / ARCHITECT j?*£\'ty&-'P^ft jQ/jtf s4S* j&/2fSst9J!?SlfCJ? CONSTR MATT. (TYPE GRADE ETC > DESIGN SOURCE OF MFGR ENGINEER STRENGTH __21 J?AS r/£ C JfsLS6sJj/?g:*tffSA/<':r DESCRIBE MAT1 (MIX DESIGN RE BAR GRADE i MFGR , WELD- ROD ETC ) GENERAL CONTRACTOR CONTR DOING REPORTED WORK LAB RECEIVING 4 TESTING CONSTR MATT SAMPLES INSPEC TON DATE K>/> * 1 ARRIVALTIME DEPARTURE TIME //-30 \i,\\i\y ii $$r " DETAILEDREPORT OF LOCATION OF WORK INSPECTED TEST SAMPLES TAKEN WORK REJECTED JOB PROBLEMS PROGRESS. REMARKS ETC WORK MCUCTS NFOI*ilAT)OmaoUT MiOUHtt O>UATEm*L PUCePOB WO«* PMFOHMtO NUUKK. TVK 1 DCMT NOS Of TEST SMTLEB TAKEN STRUCT INSPECTED CCtMfCTICMrMtLDSUAM H.T KXTSTCMOUfOlCMtCKEO ITC ^^^^.-^^ <rrs~ *^Cs*^ C^^y *£»- Srt^SVsw „/ * / * J ,*' /V y^ s~ sS r Jjf^^Q//S tJL>& jrri SO s f* Jjrst-.&^r TrtcSv £*L*f&Srf" rt-u-» . j/rv> >*^y>y j£ y <- ^y ^ ,. .*. , . , NSPECTOR IMNT ONTYN) &m'd ^ ^ -^ JTsff / SIGNATURE * S*.^, S* <S~S. OATf B«NPn/<O / t l&t CERTIFICATE NO <*&&<*•£/) ~AA CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE To the best of our knowledge, all of the reported worfc, unless otherwise noted, substantially complies with approved plan< specifications and applicable sections of the building codes This report covers the locations of the work inspected only and does not constitute engineering opin ion or project control * PREFERRED CONSTRUCTION INSPECTIONS, INC. 4888 RONSON COURT "G" SAN DIEGO, CA 92111 TELEPHONE ICERTIFIED INSPECTOR'S WEEKLY REPORT JOB NO.J /J/! /H/L COVERING WORK PERFORMED WHICH REQUIRED APPROVAL BY THE SPECIAL INSPECTOR OF Q REINFORCED CONCRETE ,,, D STRUCT STEEL ASSEMBLY D SPRAY-APPLIED FIREPROOFING D PRE-STRESSED^CONCRETE" D REINFORCED GYPSUM DOTHER_ D REINFORCED MASONRY D DEEP FOUNDATION JOB ADDRESS V BUILDING PERMIT NUMBER PLAN FILE NUMBER OWNER OR PROJECtNAME ARCHITECT CONSTR MAT1 (TYPE OFUOE ETC)DESIGN fc-a«3FSia?w«t-i*N'*^:'/''' SOURCE OF UraR 'ENGINEER ^ '"/f,//f* * ? f DESCRIBE MATT. (MIX DESIGN HE BAR GRADE i MFGR . WELD-ROO'ETC )GENERAL1 CON TRACTOR CONTR DOING REPORTED WORK .r / LAB RECEIVING 1JESTING CONSTR1MATL SAMPLES INSPEC TON DATE .ARRIVAL TIME DEPARTURETIME DETAILED"^ REPORT OF WORK INSPECTED - .- „ LOCATION OF WORK INSPECTED TEST SAMPL£S(TAKEN WORK REJECTED-JOB PROBLEMS PROGRESS, REMARKS ETC «U«»NW»UTKW»iO<JT-J»KHJWTIoriWTllUkLrK^ Ml*«H.T¥W»"CfWT MOV 0*LTE»T SM*L£> TAKEN STRUCTce»«tCTK»«(v«LOtu*of KT iotTiTO<»ouiorwec«o ere "",,'^~ ' -*V " ) \ \AV. 'X - ,? \\ \x \I \ SCCR.Tl, ,,-^w-t :fcr-t'j^^s*^"-*1* - --=*<-,-•|specif icat ion s_;and_ Ijon pr^RB)jecfcontrol PREFERRED CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION! 4888 RONSON COURT "G" SAN DIEGO, CA 92111 TELEPHONE (858) 57< I CERTIFIED INSPECTOR'S WEEKLY f wi*ttHK3% ra _•MCOVERING WORK PERFORMED L£j H^» i^*" P "i p WHICH REQUIRED APPROVAL BY LJP THE SPECIAL INSPECTOR OF [_] R JOB ADDRESS £'y&& s£ J? {&ST*& /&<C6f6 OWNER OR PROJECT NAME CONSTR MAT! (TYPE GRADE ETC) DESIGNSTRENGTH i, INC. '-91 m JOB NO, g REPORT RWEEK / / IDING O //<•/ / EINFORCED CONCRETE DsTRLKT STEEL ASSEMBLY D SPRAYWVPPLIED FIREPROOFING RE-STRESSED CONCRETE D REINFORCED GYPSUM D OTHER EWFORCED MASONRY D DEEP FOUNDATtON BUILDING PERMIT NUMBER ' ARCHITECT PLAN FILE NUMBER SOURCE OF MFGR ENGINEER DESCRIBE MAT1 (MIX DESIGN RE BAR GRADE * MFGR . WELD-ROD ETC ) "" ' GENERAL CONTRACTOR , CONTR DOING REPORTED WORK LAB RECEIVING ft TESTING CONSTR MATL SAMPLES INSPEC ARRIVAL TON TIME DATE DEPARTURE TIME 9A> J ?/5t \ » ^ / •MBBrnr " L^ r tmt'"* DETAILEDREPORT OF LOCATION OF WORK INSPECTED TEST SAMPLES TAKEN WORK REJECTED JOB PROBLEMS PROGRESS. REMARKS ETC WORK WCUIOfSMranuTKMMOUT— M*OtWT*OriUTt<U*LK>«COOAWDI»(fClirOIWEO-NUUU^TVK*X)eNT NOt Of TMT S»UPL« TAKEN STRUCT INSPECTED COMMCTHMrMUlSUAM KT KXT* TCMOUfO) CHICKED fTC J^rx> «w-x£ ** <?"' ^t-svJ*' X ~ _/ «/ / ^^ sTTS** t<-*r-*^f ^ <^r <9 c~ ^*.»i° / y** ' «*<V^o>* J^g s4^S 7~/&~ ^ c^, ^^0 // d> / ^ c9 - -^ ' 0 ) jZ^a-S £*>*- sO^Lt^t ' ^ x^ _ i — ™»-B«^- . *xsfr f* ^ — \ ~ h^ ^ -< 9 ' Pr jmTl.y. 1 1 NSPECTORi»wwTonnFt) S2S? £ & SIGNATURE X^-X st **<*&£ f * ' J?*^/ DATE SIGNED ^ I/O lOt CERTFICATE wf&<3&/f& S? ' ~ && , «7lt:AUMW1KMllWOMT*l«rrMMC«MOIYn«OAVWT>«M«n^^ CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE To the best of our knowledge, all of the reported wonX. unless otherwise noted, substantially complies with approved planf specifications and applicable sections o( the building codes This report covers the locations of the work inspected only and does not constitute engineering opm ion or project control s 11/07/2001 14-17 76S47149S5 PAGE 01 i7^- October 24, Sdfejtet:Report <»f Soil Compaction getainiog Watt Backfill Soils 2400 UsCoSte Avenue we are »endinf herewith results performed oortfltiamgwali battfiil soils at the subject site J ) "Partial Jfccport of Certification of Cempajcted Fi» Ground" prepared by Compaction Engineering, tec dated July 31,2001 2.) "Rstairijiig Wall Design Criteria** prepare^ by ttorth County Compaction Bntfaeevinft tna dated Jury 1 % 2001 of laboratory and compaction tests Test results indicate retaining wall backfill soils were oomp icted to a minimum of ninety percent ($0%)> In addition, subsequent to the placement of retaining wall backfill soils, the tipper twftding pad' elevation is how complete ' ' ' • I [A tabulation of test results »re presented on attached Plate No. Two. Horizontal location of tests are delineated on attached Plate Na One. If you have any questiorts, please do not hesitate to contact i is This opportunity to be of service ii sincenay aptpreoiat*d! -; COMT?AiC*ION ENGINEERING, INC. RonaWK. Adams President RKA^aJ oc: Dale R.Reg Registered Cr* Oeotechnical r f, .' f V 11/07/2001 7604714965 PAGE 02 WORTH COUMTY cowmcnow EnaittEERiHQ, IMC. SOJLTE3T1HG PROPOSED SINGLE FAMIL1T WELIIHG 3&00 LA COStA AVEHUE CARtSBAD, CALIFORSIA APPSOX, SCAL 20' backfilled wit No test requited UPPBX ELEVATIOK COMPLETE TEST LOCATION SKETCH PROJECT No. CK-6398 PLATE No.. OWE 11/07/2061 14.17 7684714965 PAGE 03 TAftiij ATION AFTFST RESULTS T«# <Di "~ 31 W as Homoctil Location 2&1 Sw 32 " PUttt 33 34 *5 i *36 ibn 37 98 U*l OM r•« J ' * **i» • WDl 39 » 40 * 41 - - 42 * Vcfttcid LottXkm .1 ^o " «e.o 61.0 62.0 715 US 735 67,0 6»0 WO «3.5 FWdMobtuto HOryWt " U,f . Dry Density Sol UBCuR 7>] 1 Percent of pt CoapBctfao 1127 ' H 91.9 U.f HO 7 H 90.2 IU 1158 II 94.4 1U 114.9 fl 937 129to« 10.3 14.5 15.3 119.7 m 900 1200 tfl 902 120.2 HI 90.3 1106 n 902 110.7 U 902 U,8 1145 n 933 09.6 65.10RFG OSJ 43 IO/17JD1 * 44 ; * 4* ' *•*EP 46 " r H ', *F *• > 710 tlo «^«h » 1223 m 919 121 7 m 91 i Oft2 1108 rv 94.7 1&2 107.8 IV 92.1 125 10^6 nog iv 945 ™ • »y osu 1109 iv 04747 lASftttti ** *m - »•«.» 4Y y* /^' iWEBnil 75 48 - 75 49 * , - *,' f3 IffRFQTW 14,0 10KFOTW 1U 10RFOTW 12,7 106.7 IV 91 1 1078 IV 92.1 109.7 IV 93.7 o i MAX. DRY DENSITY OPT. MOISTURE (Import) fl«Se T (fcqwrt) n in IV 122.6 133.0 117.0 119 09,2 11.3 PROJECT KO. CE-639* PLATf N0,TWO Corporation=== • Government for ^mCdina Safety r"c- „ ^ DATE 6/8/01 s~\ V v Q APPLICANT C4j£^K r££ / n rW->wx47x^i /f g^ORgp JURISDICTION: Carlsbad ' O~PCANREVIEWER /W$^/ C$$ *-*£- a FILE PLAN CHECK NO . O1-1812 ^ SET II PROJECT ADDRESS 24OO La Costa Ave. ' " PROJECT NAME: Retaining Walls Only for Zomorrdian Residence The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes, ' _ ' ' *• The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck i * The check list transmitted herewith is for your information The plans are being held at^Esgil ;t Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck " . * > The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. > - The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to 1X1 Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted Telephone #: Date contacted. (by ) Fax #. Mail Telephone Fax In Person REMARKS: 1. Provide special inspection program to the building official prior to issuance the building permit See attached fromf^Please attach the retaining wall details to the city II set (a building department) •^•—/7^ ~ By: David Yao Enclosures Esgil Corporation D GA D MB D EJ D PC 6/7 ' trnsmtldot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 + (858)560-1468 4- Fax (858) 560-1576 EsGil Corporation In 3?artnersfiip untfi Qovernmznt for <Buidtwg Safety DATE 5/31/01 JURISDICTION Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO 01-1812 SET I PROJECT ADDRESS 2400 La Costa Ave. PROJECT NAME Retaining Walls (zoMoP-iZ-DMA/ The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck X] The check list transmitted herewith is for your information The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person X] The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to Kazem Zomorrdian 145 Vallecitos De Oro Suite B San Marcos CA 92064 Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed Person contacted Kazem Zomorrdian (v M^ Telephone # (760)9^-1900 Date contacted <D(I/O» (by bv, ) Fax # (760)971-4965 / ua iMail .^Telephone ^^ Fax1^ In Person " REMARKS By David Yao Enclosures. Esgil Corporation D GA D MB D EJ D PC 5/21 trnsmtldot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 + (858)560-1468 4 Fax (858) 560-1576 Carlsbad 01-1812 5/31/01 PLAN REVIEW CORRECTION LIST SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS AND DUPLEXES PLAN CHECK NO O1-1812 JURISDICTION Carlsbad PROJECT ADDRESS 240O La Costa Ave. FLOOR AREA REMARKS DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY JURISDICTION DATE INITIAL PLAN REVIEW COMPLETED 5/31/01 STORIES HEIGHT DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY ESGIL CORPORATION 5/21 PLAN REVIEWER David Yao FOREWORD (PLEASE READ): This plan review is limited to the technical requirements contained in the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, National Electrical Code and state laws regulating energy conservation, noise attenuation and access for the disabled This plan review is based on regulations enforced by the Building Department You may have other corrections based on laws and ordinance by the Planning Department, Engineering Department, Fire Department or other departments Clearance from those departments may be required prior to the issuance of a building permit Present California law mandates that residential construction comply with the 1998 edition of the California Building Code (Title 24), which adopts the following model codes 1997 UBC, 1997 UPC, 1997 UMC and 1996 NEC (all effective 7/1/99) The above regulations apply to residential construction, regardless of the code editions adopted by ordinance The following items listed need clarification, modification or change All items must be satisfied before the plans will be in conformance with the cited codes and regulations Per Sec 106 4 3, 1997 Uniform Building Code, the approval of the plans does not permit the violation of any state, county or city law To speed up the recheck process, please note on this list (or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed, i.e., plan sheet number, specification section, etc. Be sure to enclose the marked up list when you submit the revised plans. Carlsbad O1-1812 5/31/01 • PLANS Please make all corrections on the original tracings, as requested in the correction list Submit three sets of plans for commercial/industrial projects (two sets of plans for residential projects) For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in one of two ways 1 Deliver all corrected sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department, 1635 Faraday Ave , Carlsbad, CA 92008, (760) 602-2700 The City will route the plans to EsGil Corporation and the Carlsbad Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments 2 Bring one corrected set of plans and calculations/reports to EsGil Corporation, 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, CA 92123, (858) 560-1468 Deliver all remaining sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department for routing to their Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments NOTE Plans that are submitted directly to EsGil Corporation only will not be reviewed by the City Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments until review by EsGil Corporation is complete 1 Indicate on the Title Sheet of the plans the name of the legal owner and name of the person responsible for the preparation of the plans Section 106 3 3 2 Plans shall be signed and sealed by the California state licensed engineer or architect responsible for their preparation, for plans deviating from conventional wood frame construction Specify expiration date of license (California Business and Professions Code) 3 Specify on the Title Sheet of the scope of work under this permit application Section 10633 4 Provide a statement on the Title Sheet of the plans stating that this project shall comply with the 1998 edition of the California Building Code (Title 24), which adopts the 1997 UBC 5 On the cover sheet of the plans, specify any items requiring special inspection, in a format similar to that shown below Section 106 3 2 • REQUIRED SPECIAL INSPECTIONS In addition to the regular inspections, the following checked items will also require Special Inspection in accordance with Sec 1701 of the Uniform Building Code ITEM REQUIRED? REMARKS • SOILS COMPLIANCE PRIOR TO FOUNDATION INSPECTION • STRUCTURAL MASONRY • DESIGNER-SPECIFIED OTHER Carlsbad 01-1812 5/31/01 6 When special inspection is required, the architect or engineer of record shall prepare an inspection program which shall be submitted to the building official for approval prior to issuance of the building permit Please review Section 106 3 5 Please complete the attached form 7 Show on the title sheet all structures, pools, walls, etc included under this application Any portion of the project shown on the site plan that is not included with the building permit application filed should be clearly identified as "not included " Section 106 3 3 (basement?) The retaining wall details shall be on the plan and referenced from the site plan The site plan shows some of the walls per SDRSD The calculation appears to show different Please clarify • FIRE PROTECTION 8 Show locations of permanently wired smoke detectors with battery backup a) Inside each bedroom b) Centrally located in corridor or area giving access to sleeping rooms c) On each story d) In the basement, if part of the dwelling unit e) When sleeping rooms are upstairs, at the upper level in close proximity to the stair f) In rooms adjacent to hallways serving bedrooms, when such rooms have a ceiling height 24 inches or more above the ceiling height in the hallway • NOTE Detectors shall sound an alarm audible in aN sleeping areas of the unit Section 3109 1 9 When the valuation of a room addition or repair exceeds $1,000, or when sleeping rooms are created, smoke detectors shall be provided per the above, except that smoke detectors added at existing construction need only be battery powered Section 310 9 1 2 • GENERAL RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENTS 10 Does basement part of this application'? Any new living spaces'? Proposed basement wall blocks any existing window or door? 11 Show that ceiling height for habitable rooms is a minimum of 7'-6" Section 3106 1 (basement?) • FOUNDATION REQUIREMENTS 12 Provide a copy of the project soil report prepared by a California licensed architect or civil engineer The report shall include foundation design recommendations based on the engineer's findings and shall comply with UBC Section 1804 (include the recommendation for the retaining wall) Carlsbad 01-1812 5/31/01 13 Investigate the potential for seismically induced soil liquefaction and soil instability in Seismic-Zones 3 and 4 This does not apply to detached, single- story dwellings Section 1804 5 14 Note on the plan the soils classification, whether or not the soil is expansive and note the allowable bearing value Section 106 3 3 15 The soils engineer recommended that he/she review the foundation excavations Note on the foundation plan that "Prior to the contractor requesting a Building Department foundation inspection, the soils engineer shall advise the building official in writing that a) The building pad was prepared in accordance with the soils report, b) The utility trenches have been properly backfilled and compacted, and c) The foundation excavations, the soils expansive characteristics and bearing capacity conform to the soils report" 16 Show height of retained earth on all foundation walls Chapter 16 (The site plan appears to show the walls are 3 feet high at west end What is the height of wall at other location1? The calculation provided show much higher walls ) 17 Provide minimum structural specifications on the plans to show that all structural materials will comply with the design calculations and building code requirements Carjsbad 01-1812 5/31701 City of Carlsbad "*''"——' """"" '" mm~~~—^ff ' • '-• "~- " Ir~ • •—Vlfl'^KiEto^VlBW^F^^9nnww<^^BmviB^^KRBaav^B^AM*^b>^^^H^^kife^^^wBui Id i n g D e partme nt BUILDING DEPARTMENT NOTICE OF REQUIREMENT FOR SPECIAL INSPECTION Do Not Remove From Plans Plan Check No 01-1812 Job Address or Legal Description 2400 La Costa Ave. *)Owner ^O >( & * Address You are hereby notified that m addition to the inspection of construction provided by the Building Department, an approved Registered Special Inspector is required to provide continuous inspection dunng the performance of the phases of construction indicated on the reverse side of this sheet ^o The Registered Special Inspector shall be approved by the City of Carlsbad Building Department prior to the issuance of the building permit Special Inspectors having a current certification from the City of San Diego, Los Angeles, orlCBO are approved as Special Inspectors for the type of construction for which they are certified The inspections by a Special Inspector do not change the requirements for inspections by personnel of the City of Carlsbad building department The inspections by a Special Inspector are in addition to the inspections normally required by the County Building , Code The Special Inspector is not authorized to inspect and approve any work other than that for which he/she is specifically assigned to inspect The Special Inspector is not authorized to accept alternate materials, structural changes, or any requests for plan changes The Special Inspector is required to submit wntten reports to the City of Carlsbad building department of all work that he/she inspected and approved The final inspection approval will not be given until all Special Inspection reports have been received and approved by the City of Carlsbad building department Please submit the names of the inspectors who will perform the special inspections on each of the items indicated on the reverse side of this sheet C.A0I If/2. Carlsbad 01-1812 5/31/01 j SPECIAL INSPECTION PROGRAM<r ADDRESS OR LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PLAN CHECK OWNER'S NAME. Z-OH Og|gQD/ I, as the owner, or agent of the owner (contractors may not employ the special inspector), certify that I, or the architect/engineer of record, will be responsible for employing the special inspector(s) as required by Uniform Build^fcfCode (UBC) Section 1701 1 for the construction project located at the site listed above JOBC Section 106 3 5 Signed \, as the engineer/architect of record, certify that I have prepared the following special inspection program as required by UBC Section 106 3 5 for the construction project located at the site listed above ErslnsarVAfchilBCt l& Signatura Kara Sisned 1. List of work requiring special inspection: O Soils Compliance Prior to Foundation Inspection G Structural Concrete Over 2500 PS! PI Prestressed Concrete [xj Structural Masonry fl Designer Specified ** '*- 2. Name(s) of individual(s) or firm{s) responsible for the special inspections listed above: D High Strength Bolting CH Expansion/Epoxy Anchors IZI Sprayed-On Fireproofing D Other B. C. 3 Duties of the special inspectors for the work listed above. B. Special c*= tteos^Ay*eA ^V^^T-^^ fe/\rsit& e^e^a-^^r ial inspectors shall check in witn" the City and present their credentJ3)s for approval pncifjo beginning work on the job sue Carlsbad 01-1812 5/31/01 VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURISDICTION Carlsbad PREPARED BY David Yao BUILDING ADDRESS 2400 La Costa Ave. PLAN CHECK NO 01-1812 DATE 5/31/01 BUILDING OCCUPANCY TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION BUILDING PORTION retaining walls Air Conditioning Fire Sprinklers TOTAL VALUE Jurisdiction Code AREA (Sq Ft) 1150 cb Valuation Multiplier By Ordinance Reg Mod per city VALUE ($) 16,962 16,962 $174.83 Plan Check Fee by Ordinance Type of Review Repetitive Fee Repeats 0 Complete Review Other r-. Hourly Structural Only Hour* Esgil Plan Review Fee $113.64 $9091 Comments Sheet 1 of 1 macvalue doc City of Carlsbad Public Works — Engineering BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST RETAINING WALL BUILDING PLANCHECK NUMBER CB Q // @( % BUILDING ADDRESS O? SfCO t d. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Retaining Wall ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT APPROVAL The item you have submitted for review has been approved The approval is based on plans, information and/or specifications provided in your submittal, therefore, any changes to these items after this date, including field modifications, must be reviewed by this office to insure continued conformance with applicable codes Please review carefully all comments attached, as failure to comply with instructions in this report can result in suspension of permit to build Date // DENIAL Please see ^ne^attached report of deficiencies marked with^S Make necessary corrections to plans or specifications for compliance with applicable codes and standards Submit corrected plans and/or specifications to this office for review ATTACHMENTS Right-of-Way Permit Application ENGINEERING DEPT. CONTACT PERSON NAME JOANNE JUCHNIEWICZ City of Carlsbad ADDRESS 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 PHONE (760) 602-2775 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (76O) 602-2720 • FAX (76O) 6O2-8562 393 Q a Q BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST RETAINING WALLS 1 Provide a fully dimensioned site plan drawn to scale Show A North Arrow D^ Easements B. Existing & Proposed Structures MO Retaining Wall (dimensioned from street) ^— (location and height) C* Property Lines Show on site plan A Drainage Patterns B Existing & Proposed Slopes . * C Existing Topography Include on title sheet A Site Address B Assessor's Parcel Number C Legal Description D Grading Quantities Cut Fill Import/Export (Grading Permit and Haul Route Permit may be required) Q Q 4 Project does not comply with the following Engineering Conditions of approval for Project No Conditions were complied with by Date MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS Q Q Q 5 A RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT is required to do work in City Right-of-Way and/or private work adjacent to the public Right-of-Way A separate Right-of-Way issued by the Engineering Department is required for the following Please obtain an application for Right-of-Way permit from the Engineering Department Page 1 \\LASPALMAS\SYS\LI6RAR¥\ENG\WORD\DOCS\CHKLST\Relain)nQ Wall BjikJino Plancheck Cklst Form JJ doc o PLANNING DEPARTMENT BUILDING PLAN CHECK REVIEW CHECKLIST Plan Check No CB 0 1 1 $ 1 <* Planner Paul Godwin Address < Phone 1WQ La Crti+< 760-602-4625 w- FVt/c APN 3L16H6O01 Type of Project & Use Zoning CFD (in/out) #. Circle One General Plan Net Project Density _ Facilities Management Zone DU/AC Date of participation Remaining net dev acres (For non-residential development Type of land used created by this permit ) Legend:X Item Complete Item Incomplete • Needs your action Environmental Review Required: YES NO X TYPE DATE OF COMPLETION Compliance with conditions of approval9 If not, state conditions which require action Conditions of Approval Discretionary Action Required: YES _ APPROVAL7RESO NO DATE PROJECT NO NO X TYPE OTHER RELATED CASES Compliance with conditions or approval7 If not, state conditions which require action Conditions of Approval \J Coastal Zone Assessment/Compliance Project site located in Coastal Zone9 YES. CA Coastal Commission Authority7 YES. NO NO If California Coastal Commission Authority Contact them at - 7575 Metropolitan Dr, Suite 103, San Diego CA 92108-4402, (619)767-2370 Determine status (Coastal Permit Required or Exempt) Coastal Permit Determination Form already completed? YES NO If NO, complete Coastal Permit Determination Form now Coastal Permit Determination Log # Follow-Up Actions: 1) Stamp Building Plans as "Exempt" or "Coastal Permit Required" (at minimum Floor Plans) 2) Complete Coastal Permit Determination Log as needed H \ADMIN\COUNTER\BldgPlnchkRevChklst ^ JncJusionary Housing Fee required: YES (Effective date of Inclusionary Housing Ordinance - May 21, 1993 ) NO Data Entry Completed'? YES NO (A/P/Ds, Activity Maintenance, enter CB#, toolbar, Screens, Housing Fees, Construct Housing Y/N, Enter Fee, UPDATE1) Site Plan: 1 Provide a fully dimensional site plan drawn to scale Show North arrow, property lines, easements, existing and proposed structures, .streets, existing street improvements, right-of-way width, dimensional setbacks and existing topographical lines - - 2 Provide legal description of property and assessor's parcel number Zoning: 1 Setbacks Front Interior Side Street Side Rear 2 Accessory structure Front Interior Side Street Side Rear Structure separation Required Required Required Required setbacks. Required Required Required Required Required Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown 3 Lot Coverage Required Shown 4 Height Required Shown 5 Parking Spaces Required Guest Spaces Required Additional Comments - No r o Shown Shown OK TO ISSUE AND APPROVAL ENTERED INTO COMPUTER H \ADMlN\COUNTER\BldgPlnchkRevChklst DATE Geotechnical Report Update and Grading Plan Review For 2400 La Costa Ave. Carlsbad, Ca, 92009 March 2,2001 Prepared For Farnaz Mahmoodi 1167 Avenida Sobrma Oceanside, Ca 92009 By LANTEC Engineering Inc. 145 Vallecitos de Oro Suite B San Marcos, CA 92069 Tel 760-471-1900 Fax 760-471-4965 2400 La Costa Ave Page 2 March 2, 2001 March 1,2001 Famaz Mahmoodi 1167 Avenida Sobnna Oceanside CA 92057 GEOTECHNICAL REPORT UPDATE AND GRADING PLAN REVIEW, FOR 2400 LA COSTA AVE CARLSBAD, CA 92009 Pursuant to your request, LANTEC ENGINEERING INC has completed the attached Geotechmcal Report Update and Grading Plan Review for the property located at 2400 La Costa Ave Carlsbad, CA 92009 The attached report is the results of our site inspections, research existing reports and review of pertinent documents, reports and plans This report provides conclusions and recommendations for the grading of the subject property In our opinion from a geotechnical engineering standpoint, the site is suitable for the proposed development provided the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the design and construction of the project The recommendations provided in this icport are consistent with the site geotechnical conditions and are intended to aid in preparation of final development plans If you have any questions or need clarification, please do not hesitate to contact us We appreciate this opportunity to serve you Respectfully submitted, Mohammad K Zomorrodian R C E LANTEC ENGINEERING INC LANTEC Engineering InC 14S Vallecilos de Oro suite B San Marcos, CA 92069 760-471-1900 2400 La Costa Ave Page 3 March 2, 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUBJECTS - PAGE NUMBER SITE INFORMATION 4 HISTORY & INTRODUCTION 4 SCOPE OF UPDATED INVESTIGATION 4 SCOPE OF PROPOSED GRADING 5 EXISTING GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS 5 I SOIL CONDITION 5 II FAULTS 6 TABLE I 6 III GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 7 CONCLUSIONS 7 RECOMMENDATIONS 8 I GRADING 8 II FOOTINGS AND SLABS 11 III FLATWORKS 12 IV SOIL DESIGN DATA 12 V GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS 13 - RESTRICTIONS AND LIMITATIONS 15 APPENDIX MAPS PLATES EXCERPTS FROM ORIGINAL REPORTS L ANTEC Engineering InC 145 VaUecitos d* Oro suite B San Marcos, CA 92069 760-471-1900 CITY OF OCEANSIDE HIGH WAY ,^ CITY OF VISTA NOT TO SCALE CITY OF SAN MARCOS PACIFIC OCEAN | | | Vp PROJECT CITY OF ENCINITAS VICINITY MAP LANTEC Engineering InC 145 \ ailruto» de Oro &uitr B San Marcos, C<\ 92069 760--471-I900 2400 La Costa Ave Page 4 March 2, 2001 GEOTECHNICAL REPORT UPDATE AND GRADING PLAN REVIEW, FOR 2400 LA COSTA AVE. CARLSBAD, CA 92009 SITE INFORMATION SITE ADDRESS: 2400 LA COSTA AVE. CARLSBAD, CA 92009 APN#: 216-160-01 SUBDIVISION: LA COSTA SOUTH UNIT 1 LOT1 THOMAS GUIDE LOCATION: 1147-F1 CITY OF CARLSBAD GRADING #: 393-7A CITY OF CARLSBAD PROJECT #: PD01-03 HISTORY AND INTRODUCTION PER your request Lantec, Inc, has completed the following Geotechnical Update and Grading Plan Review for the above-referenced project The property is a sloping parcel, which was previously studied with respect to geotechmcal conditions as part of La Costa South unit #1 It is outlined in the following reports The referenced report was prepared by Benton Engineering Inc (dated March 8, 68, April 11, and June 23, 1969) and has been reviewed as part of this effort The subject reports were provided for the last plan check and are on file with our firm and copies can be obtained upon request SCOPE OF UPDATED INVESTIGATION The scope and purpose of this update investigation was to review and provide updated recommendations considering the proposed development according to the current standards of practice The above referenced reports on this property as well as the adjacent property to the west were reviewed In addition to the preparation of this report, the following activities were completed in connection with this updated study I- A site visit and inspection of the existing surface conditions II- A detailed review of the referenced geotechmcal reports and grading plan for the subject LANTEC Engineering InC 145 Vallecitos de Oro suite B San Marcos C A 92069 760-471-1900 2400 La Costa Ave Page 5 March 2, 2001 property as well as the property to the west SCOPE OF PROPOSED GRADING Presently, we understand that the property is planned for one single-family home site Grading plans for the work have recently been completed by Lantec Engineering, Inc, and have been reproduced m this report as Plate 1 The plans outline modest cut/fill grading for the construction of one split-level building pad The maximum slope created by the grading will be a 6-foot high 2 1 gradient cut slope The proposed grading concept, as well as buildings/improvements layout and finish elevations, is depicted on the attached Plate 1 Details of the proposed building construction are not completed and not available to us at the time of preparation of this update report It is anticipated, however, that the planned structures will consist of conventional wood frame buildings with exterior stucco supported on a shallow stiff perimeter strip and spread pad concrete footings, and a slab-on-grade floor type foundation system EXISTING GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS 1-Soil condition Based upon our recent site inspection and a review of the above-referenced reports of the subject and the adjacent property, the project site is underlain by shallow topsoil and scattered fill deposits The depth of topsoil is about 2 feet The topsoil consists of moist silty clay with high potential for expansion Weakly cemented, slightly clayey sands that occur in a loose condition near the surface and grade,become denser with depth Some quantities of high to medium expansive soils are reported or indicated at the project site Details of site earth materials are given on test trench logs excavated in connection with the referenced preliminary report The logs are reproduced in this report as Plates 2 II- Faults Faults or significant shear zones are not indicated on or near proximity to the project site As with most areas of California, the San Diego region lies within a seismically active zone, however, "coastal areas of the county are characterized by low levels of seismic activity relative to inland areas to the east During a 40-year penod (1934-1974), 37 earthquakes were recorded in San Diego coastal areas by theCaliforma Institute of Technology None of the recorded events exceeded a Richter magnitude of 3 7, nor did any of the earthquakes generate more than modest LANTEC Engineering InC 145 WIIc.Uos <le Oro suite B San Marcos, CA 92069 760-471-1900 2400 La Costa Ave Page 6 March 2, 2001 ground shaking or significant damages Most of the recorded events occurred along various offshore faults which characteristically generate modest earthquakes Historically, the most significant earthquake events which affect local areas originate along well known, distant fault zones to the east and the Coronado Banks fault to the west Based upon available seismic data, compiled from California Earthquake Catalogs, the most significant historical event in the area of the study site occurred in 1800 at an estimated distance of 4 miles from the project area This event, which is thought to have occurred along an offshore fault, reached an estimated magnitude of 6 5 with estimated bedrock acceleration values of 58 g at the project site The following list represents the most significant faults, which commonly impact the region Estimated ground acceleration data compiled from Digitized California Faults (Computer Program EQ Fault Ver 2 01) typically associated with the fault is also tabulated In recent years, the Rose Canyon Fault has received added attention from geologists Rose canyon could have the potential to generate a maximum credible magnitude earthquake of 6 9 and maximum probable magnitude of 5 7 The fault is a significant structural feature in metropolitan San Diego, which includes a series of parallel, breaks trending southward from La Jolla Cove through San Diego Bay toward the Mexican border TABLE I FAULT NAME/ ZONE ELSINORE FAULT NEWPORT INGLEWOOD CORONADO BANKS FAULT ZONE ROSE CANYON FAULT ZONE DISTANCE FROM SUBJECT SITE 25 12 20 55 MAXIMUM PROBABLE ACCELERATION 062 104 0076 0 179 The location of significant faults and earthquake events relative to the study site are depicted on a Fault - Epicenter Map attached to this report as Plate 4 More active faults (listed on the preceding page) are considered most likely to impact the region during the lifetime of the project The faults are periodically active and capable of generating moderate to locally high levels of ground shaking at the site LANTEC Engineering InC US Vallmtos de Oro suite B San Marcos, CA 92069 760-471-1900 2400 La Costa Ave Page? March 2, 2001 Hi-Geologic Hazards Geologic hazards are not presently indicated at the project site Significant slopes are not present nor will project grading create them The most significant geologic hazards at the property will be those associated with ground shaking In the event of a major seismic event liquefaction or related ground rupture failures are not anticipated CONCLUSIONS Based upon our recent site inspections and review of referenced geotechmcal reports, site geotechmcal conditions have primarily remained unchanged Existing site fills and topsoil are loose to soft, sandy to clayey deposits that are not suitable in their present condition for the support of new structures or graded fills The upper fills and topsoil should be over-excavated from areas planned to receive fills, improvements and structures, and selectively placed as compacted fill within the deeper portions of the planned fill section at a minimum depth of 3 feet below rough finish grades Recommended removal depths are given in the following sections Expansive soils are present at the project site These include topsoil deposits, which can easily be buried m deeper site fills, and/or thoroughly mixed with onsite non-expansive soils to manufacture a very low to low expansive fill soil mixture Finish grade soils at final building pad levels, however, should be tested at the completion of rough grading to confirm expansion characteristics of the foundation bearing soils which will govern final foundations and slab design Expansive soils will require special design, which typically includes deeper foundations and thicker slab-on-grade floors, if they occur at finish grade levels Based upon the anticipated grading scheme (which treats or removes the highly expansive soil) recommendations provided in this report, finish grade soils are expected to consist of clayey sandy deposits (SC/SM) with low expansion potential (EI<51) Actual classification and expansion characteristic of finish grade soil mix can only be provided in the final as-graded compaction report Groundwater may impact deeper removals and earthworks operations in local areas Adequate site surface and subsurface drainage control is a critical factor in the future stability of the developed properties Subsurface drains and perimeter sub drains may be necessary for protecting the structures and improvements from groundwater which is suspected from the up L ANTEC Engineering InC 145 Vallccitos de Oro suite B San Marcos, CA 92069 760-471-1900 2400 La Costa Ave PageS March 2, 2001 slope properties surface runoff The proposed grading scheme at the site will construct cut/fill transition pads with the daylight line transecting the building surfaces The cut portion of the transition pads should be undercut as recommended m the following sections Liquefaction and seismically induced settlements will not be factors in the development of the proposed structures and improvements, provided our soil treatment recommendations are implemented during the grading operations Post construction settlements after building construction are not expected to be a factor in the development of the project site, provided our site improvements and foundation recommendations are implemented during the construction phase of the project Soil collapse will not be a factor in development of the study site, provided our recommendations for site development are followed RECOMMENDATIONS Geotechmcal conditions at the property predominantly remain the same as previously reported, and construction recommendations previously given remain valid except where superseded herein Recommendations given below are also consistent with the current grading plan, (see Plate 1) and should be implemented during final design and construction phase I-Grading Cut/fill grading techniques may be used m order to achieve final design grades and improve soil conditions beneath the new structures and improvements AH grading and earthworks should be completed in accordance with Appendix Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code, City of Carlsbad Grading Ordinances, Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction and the requirements of the following sections wherever applicable 1. Cleaning and Grubbing: Surface vegetation, debris and other deleterious Materials should be removed from the site Removals should be inspected and approved by the project geotechmcal engineer or his designated field representative prior to grading 2. Removals and Over-Excavation: The most effective soil improvement method to mitigate the upper loose fills/topsoil and LANTEC Engineering InC US ValleiUos de Oro suite B San Marcos. C' 492069 760-471-1900 2400 La Costa Ave Page 9 March 2, 2001 unstable earth deposits will utilize removal and re compaction using conventional grading techniques Site fills/topsoil and weathered terrace deposits should be removed to the underlying competent units and placed back as properly compacted fill The project soils engineer or his designated representative in the field based on the actual subsurface exposures should give removal depths Subsurface exploratory trench excavations developed during the original soil investigation indicates removal depths on the order of 1 to 3 feet are anticipated Deeper removals may be necessary based on the actual field exposures and should be anticipated All ground receiving fill should be prepared as directed in field by the project soils engineer or his designated representative 3. Dewatering: Local Dewatering may be required to complete grading and achieve bottom of over- excavation elevations Any Dewatering technique, which could effectively remove the water from the areas under grading construction, may be acceptable provided prior approval is obtained from the project soils engineer Additional dewatenng recommendations will be given at the site based on actual exposures, as it becomes necessary 4 Select Grading: Potentially expansive soils at the site (El>21) should be selectively buried in deeper fills, and the non-expansive sandy soils if generated from the excavations of onsite placed near finish pad grade levels As an alternative, minor quantities of potentially expansive soils at the site may be thoroughly mixed with the non-expansive soils to manufacture a very low to low expansive fill mixture If select grading techniques are used non-expansive bearing soils below rough pad grades should be a minimum of 3 feet thick or extend to a minimum of 1- foot below the deepest footing, whichever is more In the driveway, entrance roadway and improvement areas plus 3 feet, there should also be a minimum of 1-foot of compacted non- expansive capping soils below rough finish Subgrade 5. Cut/Fill Transition: Cut/fill transition should not be allowed under buildings, improvements, and the associated structures The building area plus 5 feet of the cut ground, should be undercut to provide a minimum of 3 feet of compacted fill below the rough finish grades, or 1-foot below the deepest footing, whichever is more There should also be at least 1-foot of compacted fill below rough finish Subgrade underneath all onsite improvements 6. Graded Slopes: Permanent project slopes should be designed for 2 1 gradients maximum Graded slopes constructed at 2 1 gradients maximum will be grossly stable with respect to deep seated and surface failures for the maximum design heights indicated on the project plans LANTEC Engineering InC 14S \aUecilosdeOro suite BSan Marcos, C'A 92069 760-471-1900 2400 La Costa Ave Page 10 March 2, 2001 Fill slopes should be compacted to 90% (minimum) of the laboratory standard out to the slope face Overbuilding and cutting back to the compacted core or backrolhng at a minimum of 3 foot vertical increments and "track-walking" at the completion of grading is recommended for site fill slope construction Geotechmcal engineer inspections and testing will be necessary to confirm adequate compaction levels within the fill slope face Over cutting of the proposed graded cut slopes may result in costly repairs and should be avoided The project geotechmcal consultant should inspect cut slopes at the time of excavations to confirm geologic structure and slope stability 7. Fill Materials and Compaction: Over-excavated soils may be reused as onsite compacted fills provided all debris and trash are selectively removed from the top soil Trash, debris and unsuitable materials as determined by the project soil engineer shall not be allowed within onsite fills Site fills should be adequately processed, moisture conditioned to near optimum levels, thoroughly mixed, placed in thin uniform horizontal lifts and mechanically compacted to a minimum of 90% of the corresponding laboratory maximum dry density (ASTM D-l 557- 91) unless otherwise specified Removal soils are expected to be wet and require spreading and aerating prior to placement 8. Subsurface Drainage System: Subsurface drainage system consisting of a minimum 4"-diameter, Schedule 40 (SDR 35) perforated pipe surrounded m a minimum of 4 cubic feet of Vt-mch crushed rocks wrapped in filter fabric, (Minfi 140 N or equivalent) or CALTRANS Class 2 permeable aggregate may be required at the location(s) established in the field by the project soils engineer and should be anticipated Filter fabric can be eliminated if Caltrans Class 2 permeable material is used The invert of the subdram pipe should be established at elevations to ensure positive drainage into an approved drainage facility 9. Surface Drainage/Erosion Control: A critical element to the continued stability of the graded building pads and slopes is an adequate surface drainage system and protection of the slope face Appropriate vegetation cover and the installation of the following systems can most effectively achieve this: a- Specifications be approved by the project soils engineer b- Keyway/bottom of over-excavation be inspected after the natural ground or bedrock is exposed and prepared to receive fill, but before fill is placed L ANTEC Engineering InC 145 Vallento* de Oro suite B San Marcos, C'A 92069 760-471-1900 2400 La Costa Ave Page 11 March 2, 2001 II-Footings and Slab The following preliminary recommendations are consistent with low expansive (El less than 51) foundation bearing soil and fill differential thickness of less than 10 feet Final foundation and slab design will depend on expansion characteristics of finish grade soils as well as fill soils differential thickness depending on the actual removal depths Final designs should be confirmed and/or revised as necessary in the rough grading compaction report based onsite as- graded geotechmca! conditions and actual testing of the foundation bearing earth materials Additional specific recommendations may also be necessary and should be given at the time of the plan review when final civil and structural/architectural drawings are available 1 Continuous wood stud bearing wall foundations should be sized 12 inches wide by ISmches deep for single-story buildings and 15 inches wide by 18 inches deep for two-story buildings Isolated pad footings should be 24 inches square and 12 inches deep Footing depths are measured from the lowest adjacent ground surface, not including the sand underlay beneath the floor slabs Exterior continuous footings should enclose the entire building perimeter 2 Continuous interior and exterior foundations should be reinforced by 4-#4 reinforcing bars Place 2#4 bars 3 inches above the bottom of the footing and 2-#4 bars 3 inches below the top of the footing Reinforcement details for isolated pad footings should be provided by the project architect/structural engineer 3 All interior slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches in thickness reinforced with #3 reinforcing bars spaced 18 inches on center each way, placed mid-height in the slab Slabs should be underlain by 4 inches of clean sand (SE 30 or greater) which is provided with a six-mil plastic moisture barrier placed mid-height m the sand 4 Slab Subgrade soils should be tested for proper moisture and a minimum of 90% compaction levels, and approved by the project geotechnical consultant within 72 hours prior to the concrete pour 5 Interior slabs should be provided with sawcut contraction joints spaced 10 feet on center each way within 24 hours after the pour The sawcuts should be a minimum depth of 3/4- inch, but shall not exceed 1 % inches deep 6 Provide re-entrant corner reinforcement for all interior slabs Re-entrant corners will depend on slab geometry and/or interior column locations The attached Plate 3 may be used as a general guideline —- LANTEC Engineering InC 145 Valleeitos de Oro suite B San Marcos, CA 92069 760-471-1900 2400 La Costa Ave Page 12 March 2, 2001 III- Flatworks 1 All exterior slabs (walkways, and patios) should be a minimum of 4 inches in thickness and reinforced with 6x6/10x10 welded wire mesh placed at mid-height in the slab 2 PCC driveways and parking should be a minimum of 4 inches in thickness and reinforced with #3 reinforcing bars spaced 18 inches on center each way placed at mid-height in the slab Subgrade soils beneath the PCC driveways and parking should be compacted to a minimum of 95% of the corresponding maximum dry density within the upper 6 inches 3 Subgrade (and basegrade) soils should be tested for proper moisture and a minimum of 95% compaction levels, and approved by the project geotechmcal consultant within 72 hours prior to the concrete pour 4 Provide weakened joints consisting of sawcuts spaced 10 feet on center (not to exceed 12 feet maximum) each way within 24 hours of concrete pour The Sawcuts should be a minimum depth of 3A-mch, but shall not exceed 1% inches deep maximum 5 All exterior slab designs should be confirmed in the final as graded compaction report VI- Soil Design Data The following soil design parameters are based on the tested representative samples of onsite earth deposits anticipated to occur at finish grade levels All parameters should be re-evaluated when the characteristics of the final as-graded soils have been specifically determined 1 Design active soil pressure for retaining structures = 40 pcf (EFP), level backfill, cantilever, unrestrained walls 2 Design active soil pressure for retaining structures ~ 50 pcf (EFP), 2 1 sloping backfill, cantilever, unrestrained walls 3 Design passive soil resistance for retaining structures = 300 pcf (EFP), level surface at the toe 4 Design coefficient of friction of concrete on soils - 0 40 5 Allowable foundation pressure for onsite compacted fill = 2000 psf L ANTEC Engineering InC 145 Vallriihw de Oro suite B Sun Marios, C'A 92069 760-471-1900 2400 La Costa Ave Page 13 March 2, 2001 6 Allowable lateral bearing pressure (all structures except retaining walls) for onsite compacted fill = 200 psf/ft 7 Because large movements must take place before maximum passive resistance can be developed, a minimum safety factor of two should be considered for sliding stability where structures and improvements are planned on top of the wall 8 When combining passive pressure and factional resistance, the passive component should be reduced by one-third 9 The allowable foundation pressures provided herein apply to dead plus live loads and may be increased by one-third for wind and seismic loading 10 The allowable lateral bearing earth pressure may be increased by the amount of the designated value for each additional foot of depth to a maximum ofl,500 pounds per square foot V- General Recommendations 1 The minimum foundation design and steel reinforcement provided herein is based on soil characteristics only and is not intended to be in lieu of reinforcement necessary for structural considerations All recommendations should be evaluated and confirmed by the project architect/structural engineer 2 Footings located on or adjacent to the top of slopes should be extended to a sufficient depth to provide a minimum horizontal distance of 7 feet or one-third of the slope height i whichever is greater (need not exceed 40 feet maximum) between the bottom edge of the footing and face of slope This requirement applies to all improvements and structures ' including fences, posts pools, spas, etc Concrete and AC improvements should be provided with a thickened edge to satisfy this requirement 3 Expansive clayey soils should not be used for back filling of any retaining structure All retaining walls should be provided with a 1 1 wedge of granular, compacted backfill measured from the base of the wall footing to the finish surface Retaining walls should be provided with a back drainage in general accordance with the attached Plate 5 4 All underground utility trenches should be mechanically compacted to a minimum of 90% of the maximum dry density of the soil unless otherwise specified by the respective agencies Care should be taken not to crush the utilities or pipes during the compaction of the soil Non-expansive, granular backfill soils should be used LANTEC Engineering InC 145 Vallccitos de Oro suite B ,San Marcos, C A 92069 760-471-1900 2400 La Costa Ave Page 14 March 2, 2001 5 Site drainage over the finished pad surface should flow away from structures on to the street in a positive manner Care should be taken during the construction, improvement, and fine grading phases, not to disrupt the designed drainage patterns Rooflmes of the buildings should be provided with roof gutters Roof water should be collected and directed away from the building and structures to a suitable location Considerations should be given by the project architect to adequately damp proof7waterproof the basement walls/foundations and provide the planter areas adjacent to the foundations with an impermeable liner and a sub dram system 6 Final grading and foundation plans should reflect preliminary recommendations given in this report and should be reviewed by this office prior to grading More specific recommendations should be provided when final drawings are available 7 All foundation trenches should be inspected to assure an adequate footing embedment and confirm competent bearing soils Foundation and slab reinforcements should also be inspected and approved by the project geotechmcal consultant 8 The amount of shrinkage and related cracks that occur in the concrete slab-on-grades, flatworks and driveways, depends on many factors, the most important of which is the amount of water in a concrete mix The purpose of the slab reinforcement is to keep normal concrete shrinkage cracks closed tightly Reducing the amount of water in the mix can minimize the amount of concrete shrinkage To keep shnnkage to a minimum, the following should be considered a- Use the stiffest mix that can be handled and consolidated satisfactorily b- Use the largest maximum size of aggregate that is practicall (for example, concrete made with 3/4-mch maximum size aggregate usually requires about 40 Ibs more (nearly 5 gal) water per cubic yard than concrete with 1-mch aggregate) c- Cure the concrete as long as practical The amount of slab reinforcement provided for conventional slab-on-grade construction considers that good quality concrete material, proportioning, craftsmanship, and control tests where appropriate and applicable, are provided 9 A preconstruction meeting between representatives of this office and the property owner or planner, the grading contractor/builder, and the city inspector, is recommended in order to discuss grading/construction details associated with site development L ANTEC Engineering InC 145 Valleutos de Oro suite B San Marcos, CA 92069 760-471-1900 2400 La Costa Ave Page 15 March 2, 2001 RESTRICTIONS AND LIMITATIONS The conclusions and recommendations provided herein have been based on review of the available data obtained from pertinent reports and plans, available subsurface exploratory excavations as well as our experience with the soils and formational materials located in the general area The materials encountered on the project site and utilized in laboratory testing are believed representative of the total area, however, earth materials may vary in characteristics between excavations Of necessity we must assume a certain degree of continuity between exploratory excavations and/or natural exposures It is necessary, therefore, that all observations, conclusions, and recommendations be verified during the grading operation In the event discrepancies are noted, we should be contacted immediately so that an inspection can be made and additional recommendations issued if required The recommendations made in this report are applicable to the site at the time this report was prepared It is the responsibility of the owner/developer to ensure that these recommendations are carried out in the field It is almost impossible to predict with certainty the future performance of a property The future behavior of the site is also dependent on numerous unpredictable variables, such as earthquakes, rainfall, and on-site drainage patterns The firm of LANTEC ENGINEERING, INC shall not be held responsible for changes to the physical conditions of the property such as addition of fill soils, added cut slopes, or changing drainage patterns which occur without our inspection or control The property owner(s) should be aware that the development of cracks in all concrete surfaces such as floor slabs and exterior stucco are associated with normal concrete Shrinkage during the curing process These features depend chiefly upon the condition of Concrete and weather conditions at the time of construction and do not reflect detrimental ground movement Hairline stucco cracks will often develop at window/door corners, and Floor surface cracks up to 1/8 -inch wide m 20 feet may develop as a result of normal concrete shrinkage (according to the American Concrete Institute) This report should be considered valid for a period of one year and is subject to review by our firm following that time If significant modifications are made to your tentative development plan, especially with respect to the height and location of cut and fill slopes, this report must be LANTEC Engineering InC US VaUeutos Ae Oro suite BSan Marcos, CA 92069 760-471-1900 2400 La Costa Ave Page 16 March 2, 2001 presented to us for review and possible revision LANTEC Engineering, Inc warrants that this report has been prepared within the limits prescribed by our client with the usual thoroughness and competence of the engineering profession No other warranty or representation, either expressed or implied, is included or intended We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you LANTEC ENGINEERING, INC. Kazem Zomorrodian R.C.E. LANTEC Engineering InC U5 V«U«-itos de Oro suite B San Marios, CA 92069 760-47J-190G •£ 3 O o z <a O z *• tua. y.UJ O E ~ o*> ~" •^B I 2 *— 3 — < 4- T 5 SAMPLENUMBER-fe •^ •r TV AM* •^•W -V- ? j*> ^ mi^^f . M| , 7 nf • -i.il | 1 . M i 0 »y*-/.V! I Q • g 2—-t \ x ~~la R 4~t{ 1 ! ^~1 1LL 6— ? f '-&> ^• T ^I • •• f^l • '3\ • •^ia ^ ^ ^~ • '"• PROJECT r Gro E \Soffl Gra 2 Moi " V«r: ver ^^^^^^^^ Gra; Somi SUMMARY SHEET PIT NO. 1 ELEVATION .62*0' * y-brown. Moist, Loose, e Root*, Recent Alluvium y-black, Very Moijt, Soft, st, Firm Below 1.2 Feet, i Firm at 4.0 Feet CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND SILTY CLAY PIT NO. 2 ELEVATION 88.0' K-black, Moi*t, Soft, 9 Roots Light Gray-brown, Very Moist, Soft, Scattered Chunks of Gray Silty Clay i Light Brown, Moist, Firm Light FINE SANDY CLAY SILTY FINE SAND / PIT NO. 3 ELEVATION 34.0' Brown, Moist, Loose ^rown, Very Moist, Soft Brown, Very Moist, Loose, Scattered Gravel and Pea Gravel at 3.0 Feet, 20-30% Pea Gravel and Gravel Below 4.0 Feet Dork Brown, Very Moist, Medium Firm, Very Firm Below 7.0 Feet Jrown Aa * NO , Very Moist, Vary Firm SILTY FINE SAND; SILTY CLAY j CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND FINE SANDY CLAY (Merges } SILTY CLAY / o _• ^ 7^ ^> _•5 *fco FIEIDMOISTURE15.1 • £ £ K 2 d 1 ° "»s e a 2 102.1 SHE Aft 1RESISTANCEviDC/en KY 1PERCENTOMPACTIONIu 86.7 17.2 12.6I 92.0 89.5 76.5 74.4 • 14.0 15.1 14.7 1 100.7 05.3 10.7 78.7 82.4 - Indicates location of in-place field density test * Indicates loose bag sample - The elevations shown for the exploration pits were determined by interpolating between the contours shown on the grading plans prepared by Mclntire & Qutros, Inc. Plate Z \ DRAWING NOPTMTOM CMrMKtrrn'*"- i.«- ISOLATION JOINTS AND RE-ENTRANT CORNER REINFORCEMENT Typical - no scale ISOLATION JOINTS CONTRACTION JOINTS (c) ' RE-ENTRANT CORNER-—* REINFORCEMENT NO 4 BARS PLACED 1 5" BELOW TOP OF SLAB RE-ENTRANT CORNER CRACK NOTES: 1 Isolation joints around the columns should be either circular as shown in (a) or diamond shaped as shown in (b) If no isolation joints are used around columns, or if the corners of the isolation joints do not meet the contraction joints, radial cracking as shown in (c)may occur (reference ACI) 2 In order to control cracking at the re-entrant corners (±270° corners), provide reinforcement as shown in (c) 3 Re-entrant corner reinforcement shown herein is provided as a general guideline only and is subject to verification and changes by the project architect and/or structural engineer based upon slab geometry, location, and other engineering and construction factors LANTEC ENGINEERING INC.Plate 3 30 MILES FAULT - EPICENTER MAP SAN DIEGO COUNTY REGION INDICATED EARTHQUAKE EVENTS THROUGH 75 YEAR PERIOD (1900-1974) Map data is compiled from various sources including California Division of Mines and Geology, California InstiCude of Technology and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Map is reproduced from California Division of Mines and Geology, "Earthquake Epicenter Map of California; Map Sheet 39." Earthquake Magnitude . 4.0 TO 4.9 O _ 5.0 TO 5.9 O 6.0 TO 6.9 .70 TO 79 LANTEC ENGINEERING INC.Plate 4 RETAINING WALL DRAIN DETAIL Typical - no scale Granular, non-expansive backfill Compacted Waterproofing Perforated dram pipe drainage Filter Material Crushed rock (wrapped in filter fabric) or Class 2 Permeable Material (see specifications below) Competent, approved soils or bedrock SPECIFICATIONS FORCALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL (68-1.026) U^. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE % PASSING 1" 3/4 3/8 No 4 No. 8 No. 30 No, 50 No, 200 100 90-100 40-100 25-40 18-33 5-15 0-7 0-3 Sand Equivalent > 75 CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS: 1 Provide granular, non-expansive backfill soil in 1 1 gradient wedge behind wall Compact backfill to minimum 90% of laboratory standard 2 Provide back drainage for wall to prevent build-up of hydrostatic pressures Use drainage openings along base of wall or back drain system as outlined below 3 Backdram should consist of 4" diameter PVC pipe (Schedule 40 or equivalent) with perforations down Dram to suitable outlet at minimum 1% Provide W - V/4" crushed gravel filter wrapped in filter fabric (Mirafi 140N or equivalent) Delete filter fabric wrap if Caltrans Class 2 permeable matenal is used Compact Class 2 material to minimum 90% of laboratory standard 4 Seal back of wall with waterproofing in accordance with architect's specifications 5 Provide positive drainage to disallow ponding of water above wall Lined drainage ditch to ' minimum 2% flow away from wall is recommended * Use 1K cubic foot per foot with granular backfill soil and 4 cubic foot per foot if expansive backfill soil is used LANTEC ENGINEERING INC.Plate 5 07/11/2001 0923 - 7604714965 07/11/2801 97:81 760741G5&8 NORTH coariTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, IMC, lantec NO CO COMPACTION ENG PAGE 3/3 PAGE 02 Project No. CE-6398 Page 2 All walls should be provided with drams Drams should consist of 4 inch perforated pipe surrounded with crushed rock, placed at a minimum of 1 cubic foot per lineal foot, and have a minimum fall of one percent (1%) (or per structural engineer), An allowable soil bearing pressure of 2000 pounds per square foot may be utilized. This bearing value was calculated on a footing 12 inches in width and founded a minimum 12 inches into firm native ground and/or compacted fill. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated Respectfully submitted, North County COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC Ronald K Adams President Dale R. Re, Registered Ci Geotechnical RKA-paj cc; (4) submitted 07/11/2001 0922 7604714965 07/U/2*081 87- 01 7607416568 lantec NO CO COMPACTION ENG PAGE 2/3 PAGE 01 MORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC July 10,2001 Project No CE-6398 ^ Lantec Engineering, Jnc 145 Vallecitos de Oro Ste B San Marcos, CA 92069 Subject: Retaining Wall Design Criteria Proposed Single Family Dwelling 2400 La Costa Avenue Carlsbad, California Dear Gentlemen In response to your request, we are sending herein retaining wall design criteria for the subject property. Design cntena is based upon a Direct Shear result with an angle of internal friction of 27 degrees and a cohesion intercept of 170 psf For static conditions the prevailing soils wilt have an allowable equivalent passive fluid pressure of 295 psf, increasing 295 psf per foot of depth Allowable pressures assume walls are backfilled with non-expansive sand a distance behind the wall equivalent to two-thirds of retained height Allowable active pressures may be assumed to be equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing 42 pcf for unrestrained walls, These values assume a vertical, smooth wall, and a level, drained backfill. Should these conditions not be met, we should be contacted for new values. Allowable active pressures for restrained walls may be assumed to be equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing 42 pcf, plus an additional uniform lateral pressure of 8H pcf. H*- height of retained soils above top of wall footing in vertical feet Allowable active pressure for walls with inclinations of 2 I sloping surcharge may be assumed to be equivalent to a pressure of fluid weighing 60 pcf. The coefficient of friction of concrete to soil may be assumes to be 34 for resistance to horizontal movement * ESCQNPIPO. CA FAX