The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2426 TOWN GARDEN RD; ; CBC2017-0381; Permit(7cityof. Carlsbad Commercial Permit Print Date: 06/05/2019 Permit No: CBC2017-0381 Job Address: 2426 Town Garden Rd Permit Type: BLDG-Commercial Work Class: Tenant Improvement Status: Closed - Finaled Parcel No: 2132601000 Lot #: Applied: 07/19/2017 Valuation: $76,693.00 Reference #: DEV2016-0015 Issued: 04/02/2018 Occupancy Group: Construction Type: Permit Finaled: # Dwelling Units: Bathrooms: . Inspector: AKrog Bedrooms: Orig. Plan Check#: Final Plan Check 4: Inspection: 6/5/2019 11:52:32AM Project Title: VIASAT BRESSI RANCH CAMPUS Description: VIASAT: SITE IMPROVEMENTS AND TRASH ENCLOSURE AROUND BLDGS 14, 15 & P-2 Applicant: Owner: Contractor: ARATI RANGASWAMY VIASAT THE WHITING TURNER CONTRACTING CO 6155 El Camino Real 858-793-4777 CARLSBAD, CA 92009 858-792-0600 BUILDING PERMIT FEE ($2000+) - $525.61 BUILDING PLAN CHECK FEE (BLDG) . $367.93 ELECTRICAL BLDG COMMERCIAL NEW/ADDITION/REMODEL $60.00 FIRES Occupancies < 50,000sq. ft. New $461.00 MECHANICAL BLDG COMMERCIAL NEW/ADDITION/REMODEL - $45.00 5B1473 GREEN BUILDING STATE STANDARDS FEE $4.00 STRONG MOTION-COMMERCIAL $21.47 Total Fees: $1,485.01 Total Payments To Date: $1,485.01 . Balance Due: $0.00 Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the "Imposition" of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as "fees/exaction." You have 90 days from the date this permit was issued to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition. You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity changes, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project. NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitation has previously otherwise expired. 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 1 760-602-2700 1 760-602-8560 f I www.carlsbadca.gov ITHE FOLL9013 APPROVALS REQUIRED PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE: DPLANNING DENGINEERING DBUiLDING EIFIRE DHEALTh DHAZMAT!APCD Building Permit Application Plan Check NoL2BZO I 1.-ODOI cr • of 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008 City Est. Value Ph: 760-602-2719 Fax: 760-602-8558 Cdisbad Plan Ck. Deposit email: building@cailsbadca.gov Date 1- 19 - (1 Iswppp I 42 y.4fl(O.x\www.carlsbadcLgov JOB ADDRESS 5UI1E#/SPAE#/UNITC APN 101011 6ernor-ef-ECRandTown-Garden 213 - 260 - 02 - 09 T/PROJECI C LOT C PHASE C C OF UNITS 1 C BEDROOMS C BAThROOMS I TENANT BUSINESS NAME CONSTR TYPE 0CC. GROUP DESCRIPTION OF WORK: Include Square Feet of Affected Area(s) Site architectural, architectural, structural, and electrical work for Phase 4 site work only. llHI..M A Amili JW trash enclosure. Civil and Landscape dwgs attached for reference only. A rturd lc 0 (AAXAX6V-Y2L U-*131%tL bldc3 rkrrovo-d. 14/1 p - EXISTING USE PROPOSED USE GARAGE (SF) PATIOS IS DECNS(SF) FIREPLACE AIRNDONING F1RESPRiNK1.ERS YESQti. NOl I YES ENO [J YES El NOEl APPUCANT NAME • Arati Rangaswamy u'ROPERTY OWNER NAME ViaSat ADDRESS 13280 Evening Creek Dr. South, Ste. 125 ADDRESS 6155 El Camino Real CITY STATE ZIP San Diego CA 92128 CITY STATE ZIP Carlsbad CA 92009 PHONE FAX PHONE FAX 858.793.4777 760.476.2202 EMAIL aratir@sca.sd.com EMAIL bob.rota@viasat.com DESIGN PROFESSIONAL SCA CONTRACTOR BUS. NAME Whiting-Turner Construction Company ADDRESS ADDRESS 13280 Evening Creek Dr. South, Ste 125 4747 Executive Drive CITY STATE ZIP CITY STATE ZIP San Diego CA 92128 San Diego CA 92121 PHONE FAX PHONE FAX 858.793.4777 858.792.0600 EMAIL EMAIL nick.schmidtwhiting-tumer.com STATE UC. U I C11701 JTATE UC.# \U(YI- I1 CflY 8U5 UC.# k2a -12J3l ec. (U3L uusuness ano iroressions coae: AflY coy or county wnicn 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 fora permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars ($500)). ®ca&r ®o oezi Wodrors' Cempensatlon Declaration: I hereby alfimi widerponahY of perjury one of She (cRowing dedataifons Di have and will maintain a cufficatsofconenttoself.lnsureforwodcers'compensation as provided by Section 3700olthe Labor Code, for the performance the work rwtlich this permit isIssued. Di have and will maintain workers' compensatIon, as required by action 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is Issued. Myworicers' compensation insurance celTier and policy number are: lnwranceCo. _¶C6er, X.IdQMsII COe?f4) PolicyNo. YtC kU1)b1SbIJZ '1 ExpiralionDato M25O _ji / section need not becompleted ifthe permit is for one hundred dollars ($100)orless. CettificateofExemption: lcedify that ln the performance ofthewoikforwhldi this permit lsIssued, I shall not employ any person In any marmer so as to become subject to the Warliers! Compensation Laws of Califemla. 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 (5100,000), In addition to the cost of compensation, damages asp dedi in n 3706 of the Labor code, interest and attorney's feoa. CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE - OAGENT DATE ®oO() () (A(I 0®( l hereby affinn that larn exempt from Conbador'sUcense Law for Me (cloying mason.- ED I. as owner ofthe property ormyemployeeswlth wages as their sale compensation, will do the work and the stiuctureis not Intended or offered for sale (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: TheContrador'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 sate. If, however, the building or improvement is sold within one year ofcompletion, the owner.bullderwill have the burden ofproving that hodid not build or improve for the pwposeof sale). I, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to construct the project (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or Improves thereon, and contracts for such projects with contractor(s) licensed pursuant to the Contractor's License Law). 0 lam exempt under Section Business and Professions Code for this reason: 1.1 personally plan to provide the major labor and materials for construction of the proposed property improvement Dyes [JNo 2.1 (have !have not) signed an application bra building permit for the proposed work. 3.1 have contracted with the following person (firm) to provide the proposed construction (include name address I phone ! cc, (aadors' license numbed: 4.1 plan to provide portions of the worlç but I have hired the following person to coordinate, supervise and provide the major work (Include name l address ! phone lcontractors' license number): 5.1 will provide some of the woric, but I have contracted Qllred) the following persons to provide the work indicated (include name !address! phone! typo of work): PROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE []AGENT DATE Is the applicant or future building occupant required to submit a business plan, acutely hazardous materials registration form or risk management and prevention program under Sections 25505,25533 or 25534 of the Presley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act? Yes I No Is the applicant or future building occupant required to obtain a permit from the air pollution control district or air quality management district? Yes I No Is the facility to be constructed within 1,000 feet of the outer boundary of a school site? Yes / 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. I hereby affirm that there is construction lending agency for the performance of the work this permit is issued (Sec. 3097 (i) Civil Code). Lender's Name Lender's Address WU A WWI Icertifythati have read the application and statethattbeabove information Is correct and thatthe information on the planets accurate. lagree to cemplywith all City ordinances and State laws relallngto building construction. I hereby authorize representative of the City of Carlsbad to enter upon the above mentioned property for inspection purposes. IALSO AGREE TO SAVE, INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARMLESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AGAINST ALL UABILmES, JUDGMENTS, COSTS AND EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINST SAID CITY INCONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING OF THIS PERMIT. OSHA. An OSHA permit is required for excavations over ST deep and demolition or construction of structures over3 stories in height EXPIRATION: Every permit issued bytheBuildingOfficial this Code 180 days fan the date of such permit ulding or 106.4.4 Uniform Building Code). A~APPUCANI SIGNATURE ~& DATE 7-/747 1 14;1;r~-NL U Q U - W- STOP: THIS SECTION NOT REQUIRED FOR BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE, Complete the following ONLY if a Certificate of Occupancy will be requested at final inspection. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY l •Only )J Fax (760) 602-8560, Email buiIdingcarIsbadca.gov or Mail the completed form to City of Carlsbad, Building Division 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. CO#: (Office Use Only) CONTACT NAME OCCUPANT NAME ADDRESS BUILDING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP CITY STATE ZIP Carlsbad CA PHONE FAX EMAIL OCCUPANTS BUS. LIC. No. DEUVERY OPTIONS PICK UP: CONTACT lusted above) OCCUPANT (Listed above) CONTRACTOR (On Pg. 1) MAIL TO: CONTACT (Listed above) OCCUPANT (Listed above) ASSOCIATED CB # CONTRACTOR (On Pg. 1) NO CHANGE IN USE/ NO CONSTRUCTION MAIL! FAX TO OTHER: CHANGE OF USE / NO CONSTRUCTION APPLICANTS SIGNATURE DATE Permit Type: BLDG-Commercial Application Date: 07/19/2017 Owner: VIASAT Work Class: Tenant Improvement Issue Date: 04/02/2018 Subdivision: Status: Closed - Finaled Expiration Date: 10/21/2019 Address: 2426 Town Garden Rd Carlsbad, CA 92009 IVR Number: 5118 Scheduled Actual Date Start Date Inspection Type Inspection No. Inspection Status Primary Inspector Reinspection Complete 04I22I2019 0412212019 BLDG-84 Rough 089435.2019 Passed Andy Krogh Complete Combo(14,24,34,44) Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Yes BLDG-14 Yes Frame-Steel-Bolting-Welding (Decks) BLDG-24 Rough-Topout Yes BLDG-34 Rough Electrical Yes BLDG44 Yes Rough-Ducts-Dampers 0610512019 0610512019 BLDG-Final 093787-2019 Passed Andy Krogh Complete Inspection Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Yes BLDG-Plumbing Final Yes BLDG-Mechanical Final Yes BLDG-Structural Final Yes BLDG-Electrical Final Yes June 06, 2019 - - Page lofi w CHIUSTIAN WHEELER. E N C I N E E It I N C COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS Job Name: \'iasat CWE #: 2170158 Client: Job Address: 2426 Town Garden Rd., Carlsbad CA Permit #: CBC2017 0381 Plan File #: Contractor: Whiting-Turner Architect: SCi Subcontractor: Minegar Contracting - Engineer: Wiseman & Rohy Test Location: B14 CMU Screen Vall Supplier: Superior Req. Strength: 2500 psi Mix #: 867-123 Date Sampled: 02-08-19 Admixture(s): Date Received: 02-11-19 Truck #: 036 Ticket #: 178403 Sampled by: BD Mix Temp: 670 Air Temp: 600 Tested by: NS Slump: 9" % Air: Sample Type: Grout 3" x 3" x 6" Min in Mixer: 45 Wet Unit Wt: Notes: Sample # Date Tested/issued Age (days) Dimensions! Avg. Dia. (in.) Area (sq. in.) Maximum Load (lbs.) Comp. Strength (psi) Fracture Type 2192 02-15-19 7 2.97 x 3.00 8.91 34,680 3,890 4 2193 03-08-19 28 3.01 x 3.00 9.03 52,990 5,870 3 2194 03-08-19 28 3.00 x 3.00 9.00 52,750 5,860 4 u n rupiiny, nenuiiny, runny anu compressive sirengin testing were perormea Dy nn suan wneeier ngineenng in accoraance wan inc appiicaoie AS I M standards. No other warranties, express or implied. Distribution: c_ryan.hatch@viasat.com stephcn.hatch@viasat.com james.mcnally@whiting-tu Tw2 TWOS T6 rner.com ' 1w; Sfu.Iwe5a5po nick.schmidt@whiting-tu °°" "°" rner.com ,, V')d john.connolly©whiting-turncr.com matt.wicdemeier@whiting-turner.com Reviewed by: mikc.pillingwhiting-turner.com City of Carlsbad Supplier Michael B. Wheeler, RCE #45358 3980 Home Avenue • San Diego, CA 92105 • 619-550-1700 • FAX 619-550-1701 w CHRJSTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS Job Name: Viasat Bressi Ranch . CWE #: 2170158 Client: Job Address: 2456 Town Garden Rd., Carlsbad Permit #: CBC2018- Plan File #: 0028/0381 Contractor: Whiting-Turner Architect: Subcontractor: Minegar Engineer: - Culp + Tanner Test Location: HazmatBldg Footing Supplier: Hanson Req. Strength: 4500 psi Mix #: 4533500 Date Sampled: 11-19-18 Admixture(s): - Date Received: 11-20-18 Truck #: 633 Ticket #: 786666 Sampled by: NLS Mix Temp: 840 Air Temp: 720 Tested by: NS Slump: 4" % Air: - Sample Type: Concrete Cylinder 4" x 8" Min in Mixer: 15 Unit Wt: - Notes: Sample # Date Tested/issued Age (days) Dimensions! Avg. Dia. (in.) Area . (5i. in.) Maximum Load (lbs.) Comp. Strength (psi) Fracture Type 0601 11-26-18 7 4.00 12.566 54,680 4,350 4 0602 12-17-18 28 4.00 12.566 82,110 6,530 3 0603 12-17-18 28 4.00 12.566 80,460 6,400 3 0604 12-17-18 28 4.00 12.566 83,190 6,620 6 I no sampling, nanaling, curing ana compressive strengin te other warranties, express or implied. Distribution: c_ryan.hatch@viasat.com stephen.hatch@viasat.com james.mcnally@whiting-turner.com nick.schmidt@whiting-turner.com john.connolly@whiting-turner.com brandon.maddox@whiting-turner.com mike.pilling@whiting-turner.com Caroline.battey@whiting-turner.com Josh.aiar@whiting-turner.com City of Carlsbad Supplier sting we p.egorliea Dy i.nnsnan wneeier trigineering in accoraance WIifl me appticaoie Ab u w sianaaras. No :•flJ fl- Trid T12 . T 4 Kr.trn,e Wda,,gwe Cmi.etwc ffickwillknInel cy1MbpoW . - Reviewed by: Michael B. Wheeler, ACE #45358 3980 Home Avenue • San Diego, CA 92105 • 619-550-1700 • FAX 619-550-1701 w CI-IRiSTIAN WHEELER EN C IN E E R. INC COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS Job Name: Viasat CWE #: 2170158 Job Address: 2456 Town Garden Rd., Carlsbad CA Permit #: CBC20I7 0381 CBC2018 0028 Contractor: Whiting-Turner Architect: SCA Subcontractor: Clcavcngcr Masonry Engineer: Wiseman & Rohy Test Location: Final Lift Flazmat Building Supplier: Superior Req. Strength: 2000 psi Mix # 867-123 Date Sampled: 01-07-19 Admixture(s): Grout Aid Date Received: 01-08-19 Truck #: 571 Sampled by: NLS Mix Temp: Tested by: NS Slump: 8" Sample Type: Grout 3" x 3" x 6" Min in Mixer: 35 Notes: Client: Plan File #: Ticket #: 177411 Air Temp: --- % Air: Wet Unit Wt: Sample # Date Tested/issued Age (days) Dimensions! Avg. Dia. (in.) Area (sq. in.) Maximum Load (lbs.) Comp. Strength (psi) Fracture Type 1494 01-14-19 7 3.09 x 2.94 9.08 31,130 3,430 6 1495 02-04-19 28 3.05 x 3.00 9.15 45,420 4,960 4 1496 02-04-19 28 3.03 x 3.00 9.09 43,920 4,830 4 erqr, r,eu,,, e,,u w,lipicDvC ueiiyuu teuriy were periuriricu vy r..nhibtidn vvneeIer engineenng in eceuruance wan inc appiicaoie MO I M sianoarus. No other warranties, express or implied. li Distribution: c_ryan.hatch@viasat.com D fl stcphcn.hatch@viasat.com TaG2 Twa james.mcnallywhiting-turner.com weo T4 Tip iw6 wiiwhT S,Tw5hiva , b'M i(qdii5inibi nick.schmidt@whiting-turner.com d&W~Z.t- john.connolly t@whiting-turner.com maitwicdcmcicrwhiting.turner.com Reviewed by: mike.pilling@whiting-turner.com City of Carlsbad Supplier Michael B. Wheeler, RCE #45358 3980 Home Avenue • San Diego, CA 92105 • 619-550-1700 • FAX 619-550-1701 Test Location: Haamat Bldg Footing Req. Strength: 4500 psi Date Sampled: 11-19-18 Date Received: 11-20-18 Sampled by: NLS Tested by: NS Sample Type: Concrete Cylinder 4" x 8" Notes: Supplier: Hanson Mix #: 4533500 Admixture(s): - Truck #: 633 Ticket #: 786666 Mix Temp: 840 Air Temp: 720 Slump: 4" % Air: Min in Mixer: 15 Unit Wt: CHRJSTIAN WHEELER. EN C I N E E It ING COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS Job Name: Viasat Bressi Ranch CWE # 2170158 Client: Job Address: 2456 Town Garden Rd., Carlsbad Permit #: CBC2018- Plan File #: - 0028/0381 Contractor: Whiting-Turner Architect: Subcontractor: Minegar Engineer: Culp + Tanner Sample# Date Tested/Issued Age (days) Dimensions! Avg. Dia. (in.) Area (sq. in.) Maximum Load (lbs.) Comp. Strength (psi) Fracture Type 0601 11-26-18 7 4.00 12.566 54,680 4,350 4 0602 12-17-18 28 0603 12-17-18 28 0604 12-17-18 28 I ne seulpilny, nenullrly, cunny snu compressive sirengin testing w eerjormeu oy t.,nnsuan vvneeier tngineenng In accoruance wun me appiicaoie Ab I M smanaaras. NO other warranties, express or implied. [Tj lifil c.ryan.hatch@viasat.com stephen.hatch@viasat.com TP.TP12 %W3 ithwo james.mcnally@whiting-turner.com nick.schmidt@whiting-turner.com john.connolly@whiting-turner.com brandon.maddox@whiting-turner.com Reviewed by: mike.pilling@whiting-twner.com City of Carlsbad Supplier Michael B. Wheeler, RCE #45358 3980 Home Avenue *.San Diego, CA 92105 • 619-550-1700 • FAX 619-550-1701 EsGil Corporation In (Partners flip witfi government for Bui(iing Safety DATE: 12/4/17 JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: CBC2017-0381 APPLICANT *JURIS. ,Ju PLAN REVIEWER U FILE SET: II PROJECT ADDRESS: 2426 Town Garden PROJECT NAME: ViaSat Site Package Ijjjj The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes. The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's 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. Z 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. LI The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: LI 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: Arati Rangaswamy Telephone #: 858-793-4777 ,Date contacted: I L-(4.-- (by: (LEmail: aratir@sca-sd.com Mail -'iclephone Fax In Person LI REMARKS: By: Doug Moody Enclosures: EsGil Corporation 0 GA 0 EJ 0 MB 0 PC 11/28/17 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 • San Diego, California 92123 • (858) 560-1468 • Fax (858) 560-1576 City of Carlsbad CBC2017-0381 12/4/17 Please make all corrections onthe 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: 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. Bring two corrected sets 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. These corrections are in response to items not fully addressed or as the result of information provided, the text in bold print indicates the unresolved issue. Please clarify the scope of work to be performed for this project. The plans contain items that are referenced to the Landscape and Civil plans yet these plans are not part of this set? Please provide complete plans, details and calculations for the scope of work. Please provide the appropriate construction plans and details for this scope of work for review or remove it from this permit. Complete plans and calculations for all Retaining and Screen walls. Provide the listing and installation information for the Shade structures. Ramp and handrail designs. 7. Show on the site plan the complying disabled accessible path of travel from the disabled accessible parking spaces to the primary entrance of the tenant space. Please provide detailed plans of the path of travel, indicate slope and width, any pedestrian ramps, curb ramps, walks, handrails, provide dimensioned parking stall details etc. Several accessible features are noted on the plans such as ramps and handrails yet none on this is shown on the plans? The accessible path of travel shall be shown on the architectural plans and not the Landscape plans that were not included. City of Carlsbad CBC2017-0381 12/4/17 To speed up the review process, note on this list (or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed, i.e., plan sheet, note or detail number, calculation page, etc. Please indicate here if any changes have been made to the plans that are not a result of corrections from this list. If there are other changes, please briefly describe them and where they are located in the plans. Have changes been made to the plans not resulting from this correction list? Please indicate: Yes No U The jurisdiction has contracted with Esgil Corporation located at 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, California 92123; telephone number of 858/560-1468, to perform the plan review for your project. If you have any questions regarding these plan review items, please contact Doug Moody at Esgil Corporation. Thank you. EsGil Corporation In (Partners flip wit/i government for Mudding Safety DATE: 7/31117 U ,PPLICANT JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad U PLAN REVIEWER U FILE PLAN CHECK NO.: CBC2017-0381 SET: I PROJECT ADDRESS: 2426 Town Garden PROJECT NAME: ViaSat Site Package and Hazardous Material Storage Building The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes. The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. . The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified bn the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at EsGil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: EsGil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. EsGil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: Arati Rangaswamy Telephone #: 858-793-4777 pate concted:9#' (by:fl, Email: aratir@sca-sd.com 'Mail .#4eIephone Fax In Person LII REMARKS: By: Doug Moody Enclosures: EsGil Corporation D GA D EJ D MB 0 Pc 7/20/17 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 • San Diego, California 92123 • (858) 560-1468 • Fax (858)560-1576 City of Carlsbad CBC2017-0381 7/31/17 PLAN REVIEW CORRECTION LIST TENANT IMPROVEMENTS PLAN CHECK NO.: CBC2017-0381 OCCUPANCY: H? TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: VB ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA: SPRINKLERS?: Unknown REMARKS: DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY JURISDICTION: 7/19/17 DATE INITIAL PLAN REVIEW COMPLETED: 7/31/17 JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad USE: Storage ACTUAL AREA: 1100sf STORIES: 1 HEIGHT: OCCUPANT LOAD: 5 DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY ESGIL CORPORATION: 7/20/17 PLAN REVIEWER: Doug Moody FOREWORD (PLEASE READ): This plan review is limited to the technical requirements contained in the California version of the International Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, National Electrical Code and state laws regulating energy conservation, noise attenuation and access for the disabled. This plan review is based on regulations enforced by the Building Department. You may have other corrections based. on laws and ordinances enforced by the Planning Department, Engineering Department, Fire Department or other departments. Clearance from those departments may be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Code sections cited are based on the 2016 CBC, which adopts the 2015 IBC. The following items listed need clarification, modification or change. All items must be satisfied before the plans will be in conformance with the cited codes and regulations. Per Sec. 105.4 of the 2015 International Building Code, the approval of the plans does not permit the violation of any state, county or city law. To speed up the recheck process, please note on this list (or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed, i.e., plan sheet number, specification section. etc. Be sure to enclose the marked up list when you submit the revised plans. City of Carlsbad CBC2O17-0381 7/31/17 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: 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. Bring two corrected sets 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. A complete description of the activities and processes that will occur in this tenant space should be provided. A listing of all hazardous materials should be included. The materials listing should be stated in a form that would make classification in Tables 307.1(1) and 307.1(2) possible. The building official requires a technical report to identify and develop methods of protection from hazardous materials. Section 414.1.3. 2. The California Building Coe 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 the designer's or contractor's construction cost estimate of all work proposed. Please clarify the scope of work to be performed for this project. The plans contain items that are referenced to the Landscape and Civil plans yet these plans are not part of this set? Please provide complete plans, details and calculations for the scope of work. Complete plans and calculations for all Retaining and Screen walls. Provide the listing and installation information for the Shade structures. Ramp and handrail designs. 4. On the cover sheet of the plans, specify any items requiring special inspection, in a format similar to that shown below. Section 107.2. REQUIRED SPECIAL INSPECTIONS City of Carlsbad CBC2017-0381 7/31/17 In addition to the regular inspections, the following checked items will also require Special Inspection in accordance with Sec. 1701 of the Uniform Building Code. ITEM REQUIRED? REMARKS FIELD WELDING STRUCTURAL MASONRY Please provide a copy of the City of Carlsbad Special Inspection Agreement Form. Please provide a copy of the Soils Report showing the allowable bearing pressure noted on the Structural plans cover sheet. Advisory Note: When alterations, structural repairs or additions are made to an existing building, that building, or portion of the building affected, is required to comply with all of the following requirements, per Section 11 B-202.4: The area of specific alteration, repair or addition must comply as "new" construction. A primary entrance to the building and the primary path of travel to the altered area, must be shown to comply with all accessibility features. The path of travel shall include the existing parking. Existing toilet and bathing facilities that serve the remodeled area must be shown to comply with all accessibility features. Please address the following comments that are the result of the alterations. Show on the site plan the complying disabled accessible path of travel from the disabled accessible parking spaces to the primary entrance of the tenant space. Please provide detailed plans of the path of travel, indicate slope and width, any pedestrian ramps, curb ramps, walks, handrails, provide dimensioned parking stall details etc. Please clarify the site plan to show all paths of travel proposed (Shade Structures) to be stable, firm and slip resistant Section 11 B-403.2. It is unclear from the plans-if the restrooms servicing the tenant improvement are disabled accessible, please provide a dimensioned restroom plans showing the restroom to be accessible compliant. To speed up the review process, note on this list (or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed, i.e., plan sheet, note or detail number, calculation page, etc. City of Carlsbad CBC2017-0381 7/31/17 Please indicate here if any changes have been made to the plans that are not a result of corrections from this list. If there are other changes, please briefly describe them and where they are located in the plans. Have changes been made to the plans not resulting from this correction list? Please indicate: Yes E3 No E3 The jurisdiction has contracted with Esgil Corporation located at 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, California 92123; telephone number of 858/560-1468, to perform the plan review for your project. If you have any questions regarding these plan review items, please contact Doug Moody at Esgil Corporation. Thank you. City of Carlsbad CBC2017-0381 7/31/17 [DO NOT PAY- THIS IS NOT AN INVOICE] VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: CBC2017-0381 PREPARED BY: Doug Moody DATE: 7/31/17 BUILDING ADDRESS: 2426 Town Garden BUILDING OCCUPANCY: H? BUILDING PORTION AREA (Sq. Ft.) Valuation Multiplier Reg. Mod. VALUE ($) Storage Building 1185 64.72 76,693 Air Conditioning Fire Sprinklers TOTAL VALUE 76,693 Jurisdiction Code Icb Jay Ordinance Bldg. Permit Fee by Ordinance :,W Plan Check Fee by Ordinance Type of Review: E Complete Review 0 Structural Only I $520.711 I $338.461 O Repetitive Fee V Repeats 0 Other Hourly EsGil Fee Hr. @ * I $296.801 Comments: Sheet 1 of I macvalue.doc + oo I CD co1) U- ca u, z (ZD WO 0 LU C1 JJ CII.) 1-0 10 CD CD Co U) CD C4 Oood N co w Oci5 CARLSBAD, CA JULY 17,2017 W + R JOB #17-035.01 A * Q Z ,- - I ca — Iii I.1 (f)C.') _j - 1 • I. LU ell t Ui >. CD 0.5 oc WIS-EMAN+ROHY STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS FOR VIASAT PHASE • 4 SITE - ARCH'L SITE STRUCTURES 991.5 Mira Mesa Blvd. Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92131 TEL. (858) 536-5166 WRENGINEERS.COM FAX. (858) 536-5163 3 (9O)7C1 WISEMAN+ROFIY Structural Engineers PROJECT: VioSatHazmat Design Loads == LOCATION: CaVlsbod, CA. Roof Loads (1 of 1) JOB NO: 17-035.01A Date: 7/17/2017 Typical Flat Roof: Matérial Deck Beams Girders Seismic P0 Roofing 1.0 1.0 1:0 1.0 Reroof. 1.0 1:0 -1.0 1.0 acking Board 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 511 Foam insulatiOn . :4.0 4:0 40 4M 5fl 20 Gage Metal Deck 2.3 23 2.3: 2.3 prinklers 1, 1.5 1 1.5, 1 1.5 1.5 Misc;.M&E 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 Beams ram ram 1.0 TOtal 13.5 13.5 13.5 14.5 psf LiveLoads: (Reducible) 20 psf r 5 \\WRESERVER\Engneeiing\Projects17\1.7-035.0A ViaSat Phase 4 Arch'I Site\Calcs\Building Design Loads.xls WISEMAN±ROHY I SEISMIC BASE SHEAR I PROJECT: ViaSatHazmat' PerASCE7-10 11.4 I LOCATION: Carlsbad, CA _LRUCTURAL ENGINEERS f (2015 1BC12016CBC/ASCE7-10) v3.0 JOB NO: 17-035.01st 7/17/2017 14:04:5 2015 IBC SEISMIC EQUATIONS Base Shear: Occupancy Category = ii 2012 IBC Table 1604.5 (Lii,iii,or iv) Importance Factor (IE) = 1.00 ASCE 7-10 Table 1.5-2 Site Class = D (From Soils Engineer or 'D1 if not known) TL = 8 sec ASCE 7-10 Figure 22-12 Ss 1.052 g - Si= 0.408 g R = 5 ASCE 7-10 Table 12.21 Maximum Height = 17 feet Number of Stories = 1 for Cs: for other: Fa = 1.08 1.08 ASCE 1-010 Table 11.4-1 F= 1.59 ASCE 7-lO Table 11.4-2 SMS 1.135 1.135 ASCE 7-10Eq11.41 SMI 0.650 ASCE7-10Eq11.4-2 S05 0.757 0.757 ASCE 7-10 Eq 11.43 SDI = 0.433 ASCE 7-10 Eq 11.4-4 Short Period Seismic Design Categàry = P ASCE 7-10 Table 1161 I Sec Period Seismic Design Category = D ASCE 7-10 Table 11.6-2 C= 1.4 CT= 0.020 x = 0.75 Ta 0.17 Sec ASCE 7-10 Eq 12.8-7 T5 = - Sec ASCE 7-10 Eq 12.8-8 o 0 Meets: Regular and 5 Stories max? ASCE Section 12.8.1.3 for reduced Ssl........-- Steel Moment Frame O Concrete Moment Frame O Eccentrically Braced Steel Frame ® All Other Structural Systems Notes: Intermediate Precast Shearwalls Use Category: ASCE 7-10 Table 12.8-2 USE T. = .0.17 sec Vu = 0.151 xW (basic) Eq 12.8- Vu= 0.517 xW (Used) Eq 12.8-3 &. Vu = -- xW (Not Used) Eq 12.8-4 & Vu = -- xW (for S1 >= 0.6g only) Eq 12.8- Vu = 0.151 xW (LRFD) F VV/1.4= 0.1081 xW (ASD) Structural Wall Out-Of-Plane and Anchorage Forces: Out-of-Plane Wall Forces (ASCE 7-10 Sect 12.11.1) F= 0.303 x W. (LRFD) F = F/ 1.4 = 0.216 x W (ASD) Anchorage Force for Walls at Flexible & Rigid Diaphragms (ASCE 7-10 Eq 12.11-1) Total Level: Height: Rigid Flexible 20 ft Diaphragm Spans: 40 ft > 100 ft Roof 17 ft. 0.303 0.363 0.424 0.606 5th Floor - - - - - 4th Floor - -. - - - 3rd Floor - - • -. - 2nd Floor - - - - - x W (LRFD) xW (LRFD) xW (LRFD) xW, (LRFD) xW (LRFD) ft ISEMAN+ROHYI N0 LOAD TABLES PROJECT: VIaSatBu5dln014 0 UCTU RAt ENGINE (ASCE 7.10 Chapter 26, Method 2) LOCATION Carlsbad, CA 2015 I8CI20I6CBClA000 7-10 (1 121117) JOB-N0 17-035 711 rn01 WIND LOADS-(LRFD) MWFRS (Any MWFRS Area or-C&C Area> 700 s.f.) (ASCE 7-lOSection 28.2) H<60ft. Figure 28.4-1. Mean Roof Height = 17 ft Roof Slope= 025 :12 Roof Angie = 1.2 degrees GC +1- 0.18 Enclosed Exposure" C Kh= :037 = 1.00 K= 0.85 V= 110 (includes Risk Category) q,, . 000256 K, K, Ka V2 Risk Category" ii (for reference only) q,," 22.95 psf. Load Case A:. Surface: 6c Design Pressure (psf): w/ +GC / pI 1 Windward Wail 0.400 13.31 5.05 2 Windward Roof -0.690 -11.70 -19.96 3 Leeward Roof -0.370 -4.36 -12.62 4 Leeward Wall -0.290 -2.52 -10.79 11 Windward Wail corner. 0.610 18.13 9.87 2E Windward Roof Edge 4.070 -20.42 -28.68 -3E Leeward Roof Edge -0.530 -8.03 --16.29 4E Leeward Wail Corner -0.430 -5.74 -14.00 Load Case B: Surface: GC, Design Pressure (psf): w/ +GC w/-GC' 1 Side Wall (windward) -0.450 -5.20 -14.46 2 Roof (windward) -0690 -11.70 -19.96 3 Roof (Leeward) -0.370 -4.36 :-12.52 4 Side Wall (leeward). -0450 - -6.20 -14.46 5 Windward Wail 0.400 13.31 5.05 6 Leeward Wall -0.290 -2.52 -10.79 1E Side Wail (windward) Corner -0.480 -6.88 -15.15 2E Roof (windward) corner -1.070 -20.42 -28.68 3E Roof (Leeward) Corner -0.530 -8.03 16.29 4E Side Wall (leeward) -0.480 6.88 -15.15 SE. Windward Wall 0.610 18.13 9.87 6E Leeward Wall -0.430 -5.74 -14.00. NOTE: Per ASCE 7-10 Section 28.4.4, minimum wind 1s16 psf over the wail projected-area &8 psf over roof projected area MWFRS Parapets (ASCE 7-10 Section 28.4.2) Parapet K, q(psf) PP (psf) p(psf) Height (ft) (MWFRS) Windward Leeward - 17 0.872 2295 34.42 -22.95 -0.849 22.35 3353 -22.35 0.849 22.35 3333 -22.35 0.849 22.35 3353 -22.35 MWFRS Roof Overhangs (ASCE 7-10 Section .28.4.3) Eave K, q (psf) positive upward pressure Height (ft) (MWFRS) on bottom (psi) (Cp=0.7) .10 . 0.849 22.35 15.65 + typ roof 16 0.860 22.66 15.86 + typ roof \\WRESERVER\Engineering\Projects\17\17-035.01A-ViaSat Phase 4 Archi Site\Calcs\2016 CBC -Wind Tables MWFRS and C&C.xlsx Page IS of 114 Tables:and Figures- IAPMo:uEs••EvaIuaion ReportNo 0217' Expires: '1 1/2Q17 . '• .Issue4.'1"i/2'O1i TABLE 7 ALLOWABLE UNWORM':LOADS (pst FOR VERCOSTEEL DECK.PANELS.WiTKO.UT'CONCRETE FILL 2 . . Uj SPAN(ft.in) . . . .. 4.0" 5.0" 5-6" 6.0 6-6 PLB 36 & HSB-36 and PLBTh & BFORMLOK - Stress' 300 300 220' 141' 'i.16' .98.,. 83' .. :72, .63-,*.'551 A91 43 :39 35, IS 24 . 22 1/240 s.. •.. 182 93 70 54 42 34 28 23 19 16 14 12 9 7 2i T1 Stress 300 300 288 184 152 128 109 94 82 72 64 57 ".'-5V 46 38 32 1 73 1 673, 77773 20 1/240 •.• •. 225 115 86 W. 52 42 34 28 23 20 17 14 11 8 OTãö J W53i15 IT Stress 300 300 300 251 208 -174 -4 Ui 49 128 112 98 87 78 70 63 52 44 xLM 18 1/240: ..& .+. "•15,9. 119 92° 72 .58.. "7- 39 _32:. 27 '' 23: .20' :15 Ii 96 "752 300 .300.300: 300 264 222° 189. '163 142'. T25 .110 99 88 .80 '86 55 16 1/240 4:, ••+ '.4 200 .150 "116.9.1: Z3 .59' 4' 41 34 29 '25. '.19" '14:, IL4 . 65 Stress 300 300 235 150 124 104 89 77 67 59 52 48 42 38 31 26 Li 4T2z 7 oJ824 Lrj 22 1/240; is ".•e '••'+. .+.. Ot.• '4+4 +44' +44' 44• +4+' 49°' '42-'35. '30 21 8 tow f 44 Stress 300 300 296 190 157 132 112 97 84 7L 66 59 53 t37J 39 1/240 •., 444 •.. •+, •,, •,, •.. 44+ .4. 71 59 50 43 37 27 21 Stress 3C0 300 300 265 219 184 157 135 118 103 92 82 73 66 55 46 1/240 ... ..6 •s, •.. .s, •,, ..• •.. 115 94 79 66 56 48 36 28 : Stress: 300- 300 .300 . "300: :271° 228 '194- '167 146- 128: "113 101. '91 '82 68 57 16 11240 ., ••. .ê. ••• ••. •.. ••• ... 143 118 98 Al 70.-60 45 35 .++ . Sfress. 300. 300' 294 '188.... 1551: ill' 96' 73 65 58. 52 '47' 39 • :33' 22 ruo Jj 1/240 •.. •. •e,'. •,, 143 110 86 69 56 46 39 33 28 24 18 14 Stress 300 300 300 237 196 165 140 121 105 93 82 73 66 59 49 41 211, 45 iT] _4rJ 20 1/240 +4+ •4 4+4 229 172 132 104 83 68 56 47 39 33 29 21 17 Q4..t .139'.1 "38 29: 2Z Stress' '3P 300. 300 300 274 230: 16 169 147 .129._115 '102 .92 83-68'- 57 18 " '.1/240 .o.° °+i °.. '228. :175 '138. 1-10. 9D ' 74 62 "52.44 8' "28. 22 Stress 300 300 300 300 300 285 243 209 182 160 142 127 114 103 85 71 16 1/240 ... .++ ... •s-+ 283 218 172 137 112 92 77 65 55 47 35 27 See Page22 -H- WisEMAN+ ROHYStructura! Engineers. PRQJEF: ViaSat Haznat == Beam Embed == LOCATION Carlsbad, CA JOB-NO: 1735.01A Beam Size . Bolt Groub Deoth # # of GrOups Used for Gravity Tension Shear Force Dead Load P= 178i" - LiveLoadP=, 3.52k i : . :. 21 ight=fl Wall Trib Width= -Sels~ic*~acto;_t.",, / LoadCornbos: :: .-........ 120+16L Per Group / iCombined Interaction*I 0 57 I (12+02Sds)D+E PerGroup ... .. . . . . . .1.20k PUT 239k ______________ BEAM TO MASONRY:EMBED PLATE ICombinedlnteractidn I 0.29 See Anchorage Design Printout for Tension and Shear Capacities Embed Plate Thickness Max, PlateNlomentM=: 11.94k-in. Réq'dPlate Thickñésé t 0351n N• ROKY:Structutht EngineerS PROJECT: ViaSatHazrnat =Anchorage..DesIgn == LOCATION: Carlsbad, CA JOB No 17-035.01A ENGTH DESIGN) ,0K5i ;lbrMu = 3 in 0.75jin lb= .. •5 in 0442 INA2 #anchorsmn group n= . 'ianchors Horiz. Anchor. Spacihg,S :[ . in • Vert. Anchor Spacing ,.s I in #rows of anchors 78.5 inA2 . Assumes edge distance >= embedment.If not the case, solve tension area 157.1 inA2 by hand. Vertical Reductiofl 4.1 inA2 Area of Oveilap, Ao = .4.1 inA2 1:29 Theda= 1.29 8 2 lnA2 Area reduct,on= 8.2 lnA2 :146.7 in A2 9.0iñ C! ill dtI2dbñiac) 7.2: in"2 9.:inA2 Ianchors= ArbkorShaftOiameter,.db= ............ Te0n C'qe Area mm edge distance= - \ • nApt= \.,,..rh Area of O Area reduc Effective Ar Shear Cone Area Edge ditance,Ibe= Apv=(i/2:) i(1beA.. NOT USED MasOnry, Breakout :. . . 8an =.4*Apt*(Vrn)0.5 = 252 Kips! .4 Os Bón • :I2.59Kis Steel Bon= n*Ab*F.y = 1060 lips 0.9 -.0an = 95.43 Kios - Eva flBreakot: Bun =4Apv!*'(fm)O.5 9LO4Kips .4 • . Ø•5 4?Bvn.= 4552 Kips Steel Strength.: Bvn= n 46.6*kbl~Fy..= 6162 kips 0119 443,m = 5726 Kips. Masonry CrUshing Bvn = n*IO5O*(flm*A4)A..25=• 22.6 Kips P.S. 4Bvn . 11.45 Kips I ! WISE MAN ± RO HY CMU Slender-Wall Out-of-Plane Design PROJECT: ViaSat Hazmat ENGINEERS _ L..UCTURAL (2016 CBC/ACI 530-13 -9.3.5/ASCE 7-10) ILOCATION: Carlsbad, CA Version 3.00 I JOB NO: 17-035.01A 7/17/2017 16:16:59 INPUT DATA: Bar Size: 5 (0.31 inA2) Additional Mass to Walls = 0.00 psf (stucco, drywall, etc) Bar Spacing: 24 o.c. - CMU Weight= Medium Weight Number of Bars: 1.00 in 2 foot pier (each mat) Steel Area = 0.31 in2 / center pier - f = 60.00 ksi = 2.00 ksi S05 = 0.78 g OSNOSHPD? N (vmi E5 = 29000 ksi nceFactor(l)= 1.00 E= 1800 ksi \7F., 0.40 Sna I W, = 0.304 X Wy, (ASCE 7-10(12.11.1]) Wind = 24.83 psf (LRFD) phi = 0.90 (bending! combined) Height (Span) = 16.00 ft I clear distance to bar = Center I Steel Depth = 3.81 In ® Steel at Center (One Mat of Steel) PANEL DI 7Parape 0 steal at Face arapet Height = 1.00 ft 0 Steel at Face Inside (H) Bars # 4 (H) bars 0 Other(lwoMatsot Steel): d 4.00 In ?ickness = 7.625 in Le'ftOpening Middle Pier (design) Right Opening Thickness = 7k5 inches 7.625 inches 0 inches Weight/sf = 81.e\ psf 81.0 psf 0.0 psf Full Opening / Pier Width = 8 \ feet 2 feet 0 feet 324.0 'f 162.0 p1! 0.0 p11 Solid Panel Above: 8 8 fek feet\ NOT USED 16 0 feet feet Height to top: Opening Opening Ht: 8 feet \ 0 feet Height to btm: 0 feet \ 0 feet Solid Panel Below.1 0 feet \ 0 feet I:, SERVICE LOADING: Eccentric Loads: (Eccètricity = 7.00 in) Concentric Loads: Uniform: P24it: Uniform: Point: Dead Load 135.0 p1! \0.0 lb 0.0 plf 0.0 lb Floor Live Load 0.0 p11 OQ lb 0.0 plf 0.0 lb Root Live Load 200.0 p1! Oft 0.0 p1! 0.0 lb Snow 0.0 pIt 0.0 ls 0.0 p11 0.0 lb LOAD COMBINATIONS: PerASCE 7-10[2.3.2] 0 \ L S E W Combination 1: 1.41) 1.400 Combination 2a: 1.20 + 1.61. + 0.51., 1.200 \1. 0.500 Combination 2b: 1.20 + 1.6L + 0.5S 1.200 \1.600 0.500 Combination 3a: 1.20 + 1.61., + 11L 1.200 boo 1.600 Combination 3b: 1.20 + 1.6S + f,L 1.200 0. 1.600 Combination 3c: 1.20 + 1.61., + 0.5W 1.200 \ 1.800 0.500 Combination 3d: 1.20 + 1.6S + 0.5W 1.200 1.600 0.500 Combination 4a: 1.20+1.OW+ III. +0.51, 1.200 0.500 \0.500 1.000 Combination 4b: 1.20+1.0W+1111.+0.5S 1.200 0.500 \ 0.500 1.000 Combination 5: (1.2 + E,)D + f1L + 1.OE + 0.2S 1.352 0.500 \ 0.200 1.000 Combination 6: 0.90-1.0W 0.900 \ -1.000 Combination 7: 10.9 - E,)D - 1.0E 0.748 -1.000 = 0.5 Live Load Factor (1.0 or 0.5) (ASCE 7-10(2.3.2) ExceptQ 1) E, 0.2SOs 0 = 0.152 x 0 (ASCE 7-10(12.4.2.21) (NoteNtSos < 0.125 then Ey = 0) SUMMARY: Vertical M / phi-Ma Stress Combination 1: 10.1% 8.7% Combination 2a: 14.2% 8.3% Combination 2b: 9.00/0 7.4% Combination 3a: 24.9% 10.1% Combination 3b: 9.00/0 7.4% Combination 3c: 49.1% Combination 3d: 51.80/0 7.4% Combination 4a: 89.9% 8.3% Combination 4b: 87.6% 7.4% Combination 5: 58.3% 8.4% Combination 6: 88.90/0 5.6% Combination 7: 60.7% 4.6% CHECK: OK OK Alternate ASD Load ombinations: Minimum Allow. Ste 0.31X in 20.7% Maximum Allow. Ste 40.2% Sniaz 1.34 As (in) \ 2015 IBC Eq (16-19): 0.09 \6.80/8 2015 IBC Eq (16-21): 0.08 CHECK: OK \ WISEMAN + ROHY Structural Engineers PROJECT: Vialat Ha eat Mason,ylhearwoll OesIn LOCAtION: 4.87 Pier JOB NO: 17-035.011 Date: 7/17/2017 LRFD - Based on 2013 CBC & ACI 530-11 Load Cosev Maximum Reinforcing Check -1.21)42.61t/RLL'+0:5UJRLU 1.00+:75LE:j1'.SZ5E-- ... .• ... - tips (For Max Steel check) M. K-Ft P 100 tips XP-- 10.0 Kips . . . f1:2+0.2(SdallDi-0.5LL+1.OE C 8.3 __in tips E _3•_ty ______ OK H (Ft) 1116.00$l . I No Boundary Element Checks Req'd I 10.9- 0.2(Sdsl10 • lOt .,_ . . P. W2`O-jjj I tips M •74.7 K-Ft L Determine Axial Strength of Wall (Np Moment) Aà = 427.3 A, 1.9 IIn ra 2.2 uin H/r= 87. Js 99 So, P. "4__249.9__INate: Retnt 3d Not tat Confined, so donxn't resist corflp.. NOT USED & PnssiItips when. 0 M4O.C1K-Ft Determine Flexural Strengthof Wall (No Axial) Estimate Initial c Value C=1 10.16 in 0 M,4 ______ ip=_o:o _ic ,u23a;11K-Ft when 0 n -Q.D Kipt Vipsi •-- WAU.ThK,t(i IecNu H 1 cMUlypeu ied1umWaI.t jJ j p WALL WT,Wlpaf) 1.0 Fm (lid) = WLS- fNv Hons. Steel: Ac (1n2) 0.31111111 Vmt. steeI Jambjln')=fI0.62 Ac fini 0.33 1.11 a (in) é24.00 ,. 4. Vertical Bar (To be determined SHEARWALI INTERACTION 250 Determine Flexujal Strength at Balanced Condition 28.1 uIn 200. 0M4 3604IIK-Ft when. 0Pb=I13,4IKip. \ Determine Shear Streeth of Wall - Determine Flexural Strength at,Pu Max= 10.0 tIps 230 rPzj 10.0 lops CA 11.5 in T \.P.d ti. 248.6 KFt C • Req'd 276.2 K-Ft --Pr&d 100 _21.6 lOps Act 530 (1.175.2.6.1.1) 11.7 tIps I 3.7 I 50 1 - VUS 66.2 tips 12,20+1.0EI 11.2041.61.1 0 1 I0.90+1.0El 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 øMn(K-FT) Determine Deflection of Wall C,,= 1350 lid e 0.00 In 1,= 112E+05 ire Aba 0.21 in Cd= 35 No 0.21 in TotalWallShear Strength øVm= 31.8 a Vs = 16.1 Kips\ eVn= 479 OK _tips Boundary Element Checks I_AOS'j.3. PuS 0.10'Agf'm OK a 5.3 'j Mu/Vu94S1.0s'1NG. crna397.4 or VuS3!An"0m= OK Mu/(VuL) 4.3.0= P3G. No 801 L/6OOjCd*As/H)z 24.0 OK_IACt530(3.3.65.3)I 530 (3.3.6.5.4) WISEMAN 4- ROHY Structural Engineers PROJECT: ViaSat Hasmat == Ma500rySjleazwoll Design= LOCATION; 6 Pier JOB NO: 17-035.01j Date; 7/17/2017 LRFD -Based on 2013 CBC & ACI 530-11 WALL N cM' WAU. WT, pr -I (Pt) Vert. Steel: Jamb(in5) Av fin'i= s(in)=_2400 \ R6.00 Vertical'8r Layout NOT USED (To be detem1ir(<ParatelY) SHEARWALL INTERACTION Load Cases: Maximum Reinforcing Check 1'.20'+'1:GLIJRLL4O:SUJRIJ. '' 1.0De .7SLC+:5256 - ' 13.0' Sips (For Max Steel Check) Ma, 96.0, K4t Pa, 33.0 iCips !P 13.0 _Sips 1L2s0.2(Sds)ID'+'O5U.+1.OE C= 8:6... P13.D"ICips Lv M5="___96.0'.KFt ______ OK No_Boundary Element Checks aeli'd 1 f09 - 0.2(505110 +_1.08 P.=[-23.0. tIps M 950 IC-Ft Determine AxialStrength_of Well (No Moment) M87.2 j A. r=in HIr 8 99 So, P 321.4 tNote: Reinf 511 Not Let Confined, 10 dae.sns resist. camp., &0.P 2892 ,1Kips when øM4 '0:0 ',IK4t Determine flexural Strength of Will (NàAxtai) Estimate initial c Value C = 10.16 in. _________ LP-- 0.0 Sips .0 Mn4_218.5kFt when 0 P=_D.0 _SIps I . .. 250 230 150 -.- -- - , 100 50 .. -- ..... I1.2D1-i.0EI l2D46LI Cl I 0.9D+1.0E• . 0 100 200 3C0 400 500 600 OMn(K-FT) Determine Deflection of Wall E.= 1350 ksI Ap 0.00 In' 1= 2.378+05 in' e 0.13 in Cd= 5.S 5= O.131n Determine Flexural Strength at Bainced Condition c5=I_37.2 0 531.41K-Ft when 0 p=Ir2o36'._Isips Determine _Shear Streethof Wall \ Determine natural Strength at Pd Max a_13.0 _ICIps: IP=13.0 Sins C( 11.9 in \S4pa =_305.1 K-Ft Req'd 339.0 K-Ft Provd 26.5 SIps AD 530(1.17.3.2.6.1:1) Sips aI 2.8 I vus,i IICiP3 K • dVm= H&M, óVs= øVn= Boundary Element Checks \D 530 (33.6.5.1) I PuSO.10AgFm= OK 0=6 in Mu/(VuL)S1.o N.G.1 On= 3i8 psi of or ________ ox\J AD 530(3.3.65.4) Vu5,3Anf'm= OK . Mu/(VuL) S 3.0= OK No Bound Elements L/600(01AsIH) 50.3 I_OK I_A0530(3.3.6.5.3) Eiposurè= ci R= 08S t 130 K= i4o - Kà= .0.85 ChCck:Cas/ :v= no 3 C( 34Q Case - .q= 00D2561K.lçKV3 .q = fl35 Of CaseA= 26.60 psI 'Wind.Lod :15.96 psf(ASD) MbCQ 1215: ftfl,(MD)• 1226 ft-lb,(ASD). Vertical.Bars= 5' 0,6251fl..dja.. Vertical Bar Spac1ng. 24. iñoc.. :stèèlinenter oratface?. . (C/i:) ......16 d: 3a13 Iff .clCartobar= Center ftlbitFO) :(*Ind Govei hiM= .2490 lb.ft.(LRFD) Note ilcontrollèdby Wind Case Cj*he rèihforclñg rnv beducedawayfrom.the erIdàIthewtll insteel/ft 35) WISEMAN±ROHY FREESTANDING SCREEN WALL DESIGN PROJECT ViaSat Hazmat STRUCTURAL ENGI N EERS January 2014 2012 IBC /2013 CBC LOCATION Carlsbad CA VersIon 1:00 JOB NO. 17 035.01A 711712017 16.24 Allowable 6earing 2500 psi! Rearing with 1/3 Increase = 3325 psf USE 8 lncliCMU wall with #53(v) @ 24 Inches a c at center (d=3 8125 In ). j a 3,wId I 53I foog 1rivese Ftg R DSA/ OSHPD? n (V/N) 4ptaw 4L., 4 e i iji 14' , LongltUdiial Fg Relni 1 17 i 0 MasonryorConcrete? M .(M /C) . NominslThlcknessF 8 In - Actual Thlckes = 7.625 iii WllWeight= 78 psi fi= :20Ô0. Ps t. 60000 psi ;3000: psi(tàotlng) äddid cOnceñtric.vertical load 10 pIf(assurned DL) Seismic Point Load = 10: lb (ASO) . Wind Point Làad = 0 Ib(ASD) Héi&flto pokit lo, âds= 0 ft(aboveground) I 1.001 (1 or 1.5) Søs 0.757 Height ébovègrôund .10.67 ft Length of wall 16.0 ft lèngthairéturii wall = 0.0 .0303 XW'(LRFD) bèpthto T.O.F.= . 1.33 It F= 0216 sW (ASD) FOoting width'=. 3:00 ft Footingihlckness= .: ' . Fp .16.87. psf(ASD) :Fbbtiflj Design: . . . . . WallWágt = 936: . lb M,1470 f6-lb(ASD) Adddfem Load = & lb ,. 1481 f-Ib (ASD). ;S611 ,above foatlng 346 lb Footing.Wélgii 675 . lb Total W.eight= 1957 lb M= 2935 ft-lb, X = (fM MOT)IfPTC (It) e = LIZ x (ft) kern r 1/6 in Kern? q .. (psf) q (psf) Beanng OK? 0.67 .0.83. 0.50. N 1764. 0 :9g• 0.75. ' .0.75 0.50. N .1742 '.0 W+O6DL 0.24. 126 050 N 3281 0 OK Wi.10DL 074 076 050 N 1756 0 OK OSHPD Only: ZOEO,+OØDL Unstable - - NG(>6650) 2.0E0.i1.0 DL: (instable lithe basic Seismic load case Is not in the kern OSHPD & OSA require an additional stability load case yhete thOsèlcrnlc oettuningmbmentisdOubled and compiredio twice allowable bearingpressure.. .. 1=0.9060015mic 4=0.60är.wjnd Seismic:: (AScE;740Section 13.3) .:F=o:4.'ap SDS.Wp))((RpiI: ELp 2.5 r11=- 2.5 C) oII 0 10. ICU V Ii ! (fN\ z V Sc P:~ I- 4W •I I / V _____ /•••_ V ID 36 WISEMAN+ROHY STRUCTURAL ENGiNEERS By DATE______ PROJECT . . SHEET NO. ______ OF - •_i - iouio.J?-o5soiA C. LJt4 L& ø6// 74 6CAJ 8I - aes O O2C (a'X)(O yiio,,z - 2Z 13c 2.' . I. "- •,•---' -! V ___ - = t ac - sou lo 7-00 fot oGL) 1 . - .. :, H WISEMAN+ROHY STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS FOR VIASAT PHASE 4 SITE - ARC HI SITE STRUCTURES IL CARLSBAD, CA JULY 17, 2017 W + R JOB #17-035.01A ,-FESS \ 4341 Exp.12- II I CBC j 03 tj t pr7 9915 Mira Mesa Blvd. Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92131 TEL. (858) 536-5166 WRENGINEERS.COM FAX. (858) 536-5163 WISEMAN+ROHY Structural Engineers PROJECT: ViaSat Hazmot == Design Loads == LOCATION: Carlsbad, CA. Roof Loads (1 of 1) JOB NO: 17-03501A Date: 7/17/207 Typical Flat Roof: Mritprir,l Deck Beams Girders Seismic TPO Roofing - 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Re-roof 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Backing Board . 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 5" FoamInsulation 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.511 20 Gage Metal Deck 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Sprinklers 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Misc,M&E 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 Beams ram ram 1.0 Total 13.5 13.5 13.5 14.5 psf Live Loads: (Reducible) 20 psf \\WRESERVER\EngineeringProjects\I 7\17-035.0 IA ViaSat Phase 4 Arch'l Site\CaIcsBuiIding Design Làads.xls I WISEMAN±ROHY I SEISMIC BASE SHEAR I PROJECT: ViaSatHazmat I I I I ENGINEERS Per ASCE 7-10 11.4 I LOCATION: Carlsbad, CA LRUCTURAL (2015 IBC I2016 CBC!ASCE 7-10) v3.0 I JOB NO: 17-035.01 A 7/17/2017 14:04:551 2015 IBC SEISMIC EQUATIONS Base Shear: Occupancy Category = ii 2012 IBC Table 1604.5 (i.ii,iii.or iv) Importance Factor (IE) = 1.00 ASCE 7-10 Table 1.5-2 Site Class = D (From Soils Engineer or 'D' if not known) TL = 8 sec ASCE 7-10 Figure 22-12 Ss = 1.052 g - Si = 0.408 g o 9 Meets: Regular and 5 Stories max? (ASCE Section 12.8.1.3 For - reduced Ss o Steel Moment Frame o Concrete Moment Frame o Eccentrically Braced Steel Frame () All Other Structural Systems R= 5 ASCE 7-10 Table 12.2-1 Intermediate Precast Shearwalts Maximum Height = 17 feet Number of Stories = 1 for Cs: for other: Fa= 1.08 F= 1.59 S,= 1.135 SM1 = 0.650 S05 = 0.757 501= 0.433 Short Period Seismic Design Category = 1 Sec Period Seismic Design Category = C= 1.4 CT= 0.020 1.08 ASCE 7-010 Table 11.4-1 ASCE 7-10 Table 11.4-2 1.135 ASCE 7-10 Eq 11.4-1 ASCE 7-10 Eq 11.4-2 0.757 ASCE 7-10 Eq 11.4-3 ASCE 7-10 Eq 11.4-4 D ASCE 7-10 Table 11.6-1 D ASCE 7-10 Table 11.6-2 x= 0.75 Use Category: ASCE 7-10 Table 12.8-2 Ta = 0.17 Sec ASCE 7-10 Eq 12.8-7 T. = - Sec ASCE 7-10 Eq 12.8-8 USE T. = 0.17 sec Vu= 0.151 xW (basic) Eq 12.8- Vu = 0.517 xW (Used) Eq 12.8.3& Vu = - xW (Not Used) Eq12.8-4& Vu = - xW (for S1 >= 0.6g only) Eq 12.8- Vu = 0.151 xW (LRFD) I V=V/1.4 = 0.1081 xW (ASD) 77-71 Structural Wall Out-Of-Plane and Anchorage Forces: Out-of-Plane Wall Forces (ASCE 7-10 Sect 12.11.1) F= 0.303 x W (LRFD) F = Fpu /1.4 = 0.216 x W, (ASD) Anchorage Force for Walls at Flexible & Rigid Diaphragms (ASCE 7-10 Eq 12.11-1) Total Level: Height: Rigid Flexible 20 ft Diaphragm Spans: 1 40 ft 1 > 100 ft Roof 17ft 0.303 0.363 0.424 0.606 5th Floor - - - - - 4th Floor - - - - - 3rd Floor - - - - - 2nd Floor - - - - - xW (LRFD) xW (LRFD) xW,, (LRFD) x W (LRFD) x W (LRFD) I WISEMAN±ROHY WINO LOAD TABLES j PROJECT: VlaSat Building 14 U I - TRCTURAL ENGINEERS (ASCE 7-10 Chapter 26, Method 2) LOCATION: Carlsbad, A I l5lBCll6CBClASCE7.1O (1121117) JOB NO: 17.035 7,11120171 WIND LOADS (LRFD) MWFRS (Any MWFRS Area or C&C Area > 700 s.f.) (ASCE 7-10 Section 28.2) Ht <60 ft. Figure 28.4-1 Mean Roof Height = 17 ft Roof Slope = 0.25 :12 Roof Angle = 1.2 degrees GC 1= +1- 0.18 Enclosed Exposure r C = 0.87 K11= 1.00 Kd= 0.85 V = 110 (includes Risk Category) qh = 0.00256 K1 K Kd V Risk Category = II (for reference only) 22.95 psf Load Case A: Surface: GC, Design Pressure (p5: w/ +GC 1 w/ -GC11 1 Windward Wall 0.400 13.31 5.05 2 Windward Roof -0.690 -11.70 -19.96 3 Leeward Roof -0.370 -4.36 -12.62 4 Leeward Wall -0.290 -2.52 -10.79 1E Windward Wall Corner 0.610 18.13 9.87 2E Windward Roof Edge -1.070 -20.42 -28.68 3E Leeward Roof Edge -0.530 -8.03 -16.29 4E Leeward Wall Corner -0.430 -5.74 -14.00 Load Case B: Surface: GC Design Pressure (psf): w/ +GC w/ -GC 1 1 Side Wall (windward) -0.450 -6.20 -14.46 - 2 Roof (windward) -0.690 -11.70 -19.96 3 Roof (Leeward) -0.370 -4.36 -12.62 4 Side Wall (leeward) -0.450 -6.20 -14.46 5 Windward Wall 0.400 13.31 5.05 6 Leeward Wall -0.290 -2.52 -10.79 1E Side Wall (windward) Corner -0.480 -6.88 -15.15 2E Roof (windward) Corner -1.070 -20.42 -28.68 3E Roof (Leeward) Corner -0.530 -8.03 -16.29 4E Side Wall (leeward) -0.480 -6.88 -15.15 SE Windward Wall 0.610 18.13 9.87 6E Leeward Wall -0.430 -5.74 -14.00 NOTE: Per ASCE 7-10 Section 28.4.4, minimum wind is 16 psf over the wall projected area & 8 psf over roof projected area MWFRS Parapets (ASCE 7-10 Section 28.4.2) Parapet K1 q, (psf) p9(psf) pp (psf) Height (ft) (MWFRS) Windward Leeward 17 0.872 22.95 34.42 -22.95 0.849 22.35 33.53 -22.35 0.849 22.35 33.53 -22.35 1 0.849 22.35 1 33.53 -22.35 MWFRS Roof Overhangs (ASCE 7-10 Section 28.4.3) Eave Kz qp (psf) positive upward pressure Height (ft) (MWFRS) on bottom (psf) (Cp=0.7) [ 10 0.849 22.35 15.65 + typ roof L 16 0.860 22.66 15.86 + typ roof WRESERVER\Engineering\Projects\17\17-035.o1A ViaSat Phase 4 Arch'l Site\Calcs\2016 CBC - Wind Tables MWFRS and C&C.xlsx Page 15 of 174 Tables and Figures - IAPMO UES Evaluation Report No. 0217 Expires: 11/2017 Issued: 11/2011 TABLE 7-ALLOWABLE UNIFORM LOADS (psf) FOR VERCO STEEL DECK PANELS WITHOUT CONCRETE FILL' .2.1 Uj z 4 w SPAN (ft-In.) 2'-0' 3'.0" 4'.0" 5'-0 5'.e" 6•.0' 6'-6" 7'.0" 7'4" 8'-0" 8'.6" 9'.0" 9'4" 10'.0" 11'.0" 12'4" U) U PLBTM36 & HS6e.36 and PLB & B FORMLOKTM Stress 300 300 220 141 116 98 83 72 63 55 49 43 39 35 29 24 22 [j60 •.. 287 121 62 47 36 28 23 18 15 13 11 9 S. 6 4 L1240 •.• •.. 182 93 70 54 42 34 28 23 19 16 14 12 9 7 L!180 •.. •.. ••• 124 93 72 56 45 37 30 25 21 18 15 —12----9-1 Stress 300 300 288 184 152 128 109 94 82 7264 57 51 46 38 32 20 1/360 •.. •.. 150 77 58 44 35 28 23 19 16 13 11 10 7 6 ul 1 1)240 •.+ •.. 225 115 86 67 52 42 34 28 23 20 17 14 11 8 1 1)180 ... ... ... 153 115 89 70 56 45 37 31 - 26 22 19 14 11 1 Stress 300 300 300 251 208 174 149 128 112 98 87 78 70 63 52 44 18 1j6o •.. •.. 207 106 79 61 48 39 31 26 22 18 15 13 10 8 ] 1)240 ,,, ••. •.. 159 119 92 72 58 47 39 32 27 23 20 15 11 rul86 ... ,,. •.. 212 159 122 96 77 63 52 43 36 31 26 20 15] Stress 300 300 300 300 264 222 189 163 142 125 110 99 88 80 66 55 16 [!60 .., ... 261 133 100 77 61 49 40 33 27 23 19 17 13 - 10 1 1/240 •.s ... •.• 200 150 116 91 73 59 49 41 34 29 25 19 14 .. •.. ... 267 200 154 121 97 79 65 54 46 39 33 25 191 Stress 300 300 235 150 124 104 89 77 67 59 52 46 42 38 31 26 22 LL!360 •.. •..•.. •.. 122 94 74 59 48 40 33 28 24 _20 15 12 1/240 ... ... ••• ••. ... .•. .•• ... •.. •.. 49 42 35 30 23 18 20 1/360 4.. .. 0,, ... 146 113 89 71 58 48 40 33 28 24 18 141 w 1)240 .. .. ••• ••• ••• ••• ••. .. ••. 71 59 50 43 37 27 21 ca FUio ... .. ••• .• .,. +•• ..• .• ••• .. .•• ••• ••• .,. 37 —278 Stress 300 300 300 265 219 184 157 135 118 103 92 82 73 66 55 46 18 [U0 • ... .. 258 194 149 117 94 76 63 53 44 38 32 24 19 1/240 .. ... ••• ••• .•. .. .. .. 115 94 79 66 56 48 36 28 F 11180 .4• ••• •• ••+ ••• ••• ••• •• •• I4•. , 64 48 37 Stress 300 300 300 300 271 228 194 167 146 128 113 101 91 82 68 57 [u30 ... . .. ... 241 186 146 117 95 78 65 S55 47 40 30 231 1/240 .. .. ••• ••• ••• ••. ••• ... 143 118 98 83 70 60 45 35 1 11180 ,, 44 ••. .• ... .., ,.. ... .•. .•. .. ••. .. 80 60 461 Stress 300 300 294 188 155 131 111 96 84 73 65 58 52 47 39 33 22 1 1/360 ... *## 247 127 95 73 58 46 38 31 26 22 18 16 12 9 ] 1/240 4.. .. ...., 143 110 86 69 56 46 39 33 28 24 18 14 FU .. ... .• ••• .., .. ,. 92 75 62 52 43 37 32 24 18 Stress 300 300 300 237 196 165 140 121 105 93 82 73 66 59 49 41 20 [11360 .. .. 298 152 115 88 69 56 45 37 31 - 26 22 19 14 11 1/240 .. ••• .• 229 172 132 104 83 68 56 47 39 33 29 21 17 Lui8o .. .. .• .. ,e ,, 139 111 90 74 62 52 44 38 29 22 Ix Stress 300 300 300 300 274 230 196 169 147 129 115 102 92 83 68 57 18 [1,360 ... ••. .. 202 152 117 92 74 60 49 41 35 29 25 19 15 ] 1/240 so# s• .• ••. 228 175 138 110 90 74 62 52 44 38 28 22 [11180 .. .. .•• ... .. ... 184 147 120 99 82 69 59 50 38 W] Stress 300 300 300 300 300 285 243 209 182 160 142 127 114 103 85 71 16 [o .. ... ... 251 189 145 114 92 74 61 51 4337 31 24 18] 1/240 .. .. ... .. 283 218 172 137 112 92 77 65 55 47 35 27 1/180 .. ... .•. ., .. .. 229 183 149 123 102 86 73 63 47 36 See Page 22 for footnotes. (continued) : WISEMAN+ROHY STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS BY_______ DATE ______ PROJECT VjArIS*r SHEET NO. OF I JOB NO. 0-0 SS4. oA 2-0 C(3 -2-o?TrrL,- Cfr(PLF NOT USED ie - IfE'4t tL CI (tL - Wt 74519 *--Fr I --- -- (ok '_s k--r—r c.sj--p- • - (sc /rO pc,a_ 0 TLeLL-- I(,( - S( vA6f4I4ø--p'r-t I - J • pO' ' ________ I. I - - - t I H WISEMAN + ROHY Structural Engineers PROJECT: ViaSat Hazmat == Beam Embed == LOCATION: Carlsbad, CA JOB NO: 17-035.01A Beam Size Bolt Group Depth # of Groups (Rows) W12x14 ]------- ------ -----1 8in 2 -1-- # of Groups Used for Gravity Tension= F 1 1 Shear Force Dead Load P=[ 1.78 k Live Load P4 3.52 k Wall Anchoraae I Weight=[7 f f Wall Trib. t Seismic Factor= Wall Trib. Width= OTUSED SDS= 0:757 1 /Y E 2.98 k Load Combos 1.2D+1.6L Per Group Puv 3.88 k Ur 2.91 k 0.57 I ICombined Interaction I 0.2 + 0.2 Sds)D + E Per Group Puv 1.20k UT 2.39 k BEAM TO MASONRY EMBED PLATE ICombined Interaction I 0.29 i See Anchorage Design Printout for Tension and Shear Capacities Embed Plate Thickness * Plate Fy[ 36 ksi I Max Plate Moment Mu= 11.94 k-in Req'd Plate Thickness t= 0.35 in WISEMAN + ROHY Structural Engineers PROJECT: ViaSat Hazmat == Anchorage Design == LOCATION: Carlsbad, CA JOB NO: 17-035.01A MASONRY ANCHORAGE--HEADED ANCHOR BOLTS PER 2011 MSJC 3.1.6 (STRENGTH DESIGN) TYP. JOIST ANCHORAGE - - - 2000 psi --effective embedment, lb = 5j 60 KSI lb MIN= 3 in Diameter, db= 0.75 in lb= 5 in \or 0.442 1NA2 #anchors in group, n = 2anchors Horiz. Anchor Spacing, s = 8 in e Area Vert. Anchor Spacing, s = 8 in mm edge distance= 12! in #rows of anchors = 2 rows (2 max) '\ Apt= PIO*IbA2 = 78.5 in A2 Assumes edge distance ,= embedment.lf not the case, solve tension area nApt= 157.1 inA2 by hand. Horizontal Reduction\ Vertical Reduction Area of Over Section, Ao = 4.1 inA2 Area of Overlap, Ao = 4.1 in A2 '\ Theda= 1.29 Theda= 1.29 Area reduction, Ar ='Ao(n-1)= 8.2 In A2 Area reduction= 8.2 InA2 Effective Area, Apt' = nQt-Ar = 140.7 inA2 Shear Cone Area Edge distance, Ibe = Apv=(1/2) PIO*IbeA2 = Apv' =n*Apv = TENSION CAPACITY 9.0 in (Ibe is limited to 12db max) 2 inA2 9 - -\ NOT USED Masonry Breakout: Ban = 4*Apt'*(flm)AO.S = 25.2 Kips 0.5 4Ban = 12.59 Kips Steel Strength: Ban = n*Ab*Fy = 106.0 Kips 0.9 4Ban = 95.43 Kips SHEAR CAPACITY Masonry Breakout: Bvn = 4*Apvl *(f'm)AOS = 91.04 Kips 0.5 4Bvn = 45.52 Kips Steel Strength: Bvn fl*0.6*Ab*Fy = 63.62 Kips 0.9 4Bvn = 57.26 Kips Masonry Crushing: Bvn = n*1050*(fm*Ab)A.25 22.90 Kips 0.5 4Bvn = 11.45 Kips ITalIow= 4Ban = 12.59 Kips I CMU Slender-Wall Out-of-Plane Design I PROJECT: ViaSat Hazmat WISEMAN ± ROHY1 STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS (2016CBCFACI 530-13-9.3.5/ASCE 7-10) IL0TbO Carlsbad, CA I Version 3.00 JOB NO: 17-035.01A 7/17/2017 16:16:59 INPUT DATA: Bar Size: 5 (0.31 inA2) Additional Mass to Walls = 0.00 psf (stucco, drywall, etc) Bar Spacing: 24° o.c. - CMU Weight= Medium Weight Number of Bars: 1.00 in 2 foot pier (each mat) Steel Area = 0.31 in2! center pier f = 60.00 ksi = 2.00 ksi Sos = 0.76 g DSNOSHPD? N (YIN) Es = 29000 ksi \ Importance Factor (1) 1.00 Em 1800 ksi \ n= 16.11 \F = 0.40 sos I W, = 0.304 x W (ASCE 7-10 [12.11.11) \ Wind = 24.83 psf (LRFD) phi = 0.90 (bending! combined) PANEL DIMENSIONS: Height (Span) = 16.00 ft I clear distance to bar = Center I Steel Depth = 3.81 in ® Steel at Center (One Mat of Steel) \ 0 Steel at Face \arapet Height = 1.00 ft 0 Steel at Face Inside (H) Bars # 4 (H) bars \ 0 Other (Two Mats of Steel): d= 4.00 in Parapet hickness = 7.625 in LekOpening Middle Pier (design) Right Opening Thickness = 7bQ, inches 7.625 inches 0 inches Weight/sf= 81.t\ psi 81.0 psf 0.0 psi Full Opening! Pier Width = 8 \ feet 2 feet 0 feet 324.0 If 162.0 162.0 p11 0.0 p11 Solid Panel Above: 8 8 febt feet \ NOT USED 16 0 feet feet Height to top: Opening Opening Ht: 8 feet \ 0 feet Height to btm: 0 feet \ 0 feet Solid Panel Below: 0 feet \ 0 feet SERVICE LOADING: Eccentric Loads: (Eccthcity = 7.00 in) Concentric Loads: Uniform: Pô(pt: Uniform: Point: Dead Load 135.0 p11 \0.0 lb 0.0 p11 0.0 lb Floor Live Load 0.0 p11 GQ lb 0.0 p11 0.0 lb Roof Live Load 200.0 p11 O.0\b 0.0 p11 0.0 lb Snow 0.0 p11 0.0 l 0.0 p11 0.0 lb LOAD COMBINATIONS: ____ Per ASCE 7-10 [2.3.2] D \ L Lr S E W Combination 1: 1.40 1.400 Combination 2a: 1.213 + 1.61- + 0.51., 1.200 \ 1.600 0.500 Combination 2b: 1.20 + 1.6L + 0.5S 1.200 \1.600 0.500 Combination 3a: 1.20+ 1.6L,+fL 1.200 0O 1.600 Combination 3b: 1.20 + 1.6S + f1L 1.200 0.Q 1.600 Combination 3c: 1.20 + 1.6L, + 0.5W 1.200 \ 1.600 0.500 Combination 3d: 1.20 + 1.6S + 0.5W 1.200 1.600 0.500 Combination 4a: 1.20 + 1.0W + 11L + 0.5L, 1.200 0.500 1.000 Combination 4b: 1.20 + 1.0W + IL + 0.5$ 1.200 0.500 \0.500 0.500 1.000 Combination 5: (1.2 + E)0 + fL + 1.OE + 0.2S 1.352 0.500 0.200 1.000 Combination 6: 0.9D -1.0W 0.900 \ -1.000 Combination 7: 0.9 - EY)0 --1.0E 0.748 -1.000 = 0.5 Live Load Factor (11.0 or 0.5) (ASCE 7-10(2.3.2] ExcepIq 1) = 0.2S05 0 = 0.152 x o (ASCE 7-10[12.4.2.2]) (NoteN(S <= 0.125 then E = 0) SUMMARY: Vertical M / phi-M Stress Combination 1: 10.1% 8.7% Combination 2a: 14.2% 8.3% Combination 2b: 9.0% 7.40/6 Combination 3a: 24.9% 10.1% Combination 3b: 9.0% 7.40/6 Combination 3c: 49.1% 10.1% Combination 3d: 51.8% 7.4% Combination 4a: 89.9% 8.3% Combination 4b: 87.6% 7.40/6 Combination 5: 58.3% 8.40/6 Combination 6: 88.9% 5.6% Combination 7: 60.7% 4.6% CHECK: OK OK Alternate ASD Load mbinations: A. 0.31X1n? Minimum Allow. Ste 20.7% Maximum Allow. Ste 40.2% As nwx 1.34 As (in) \ 2015 IBC Eq (16-19): 0.09 \6.8% 2015 IBC Eq (16-21): 0.08 CHECK: OK LoadCases: Maximum Reinforcing Check - - - L2O+1.6LL/RLL+OSLL/RLL - 1.013+751.1.+.52SE--- -- - -- - P. 10.0 Nips (For Max Steel check) Mu 74.7 KFt P = 10.0 Nips 2P 10.0 Kips fl.2+0.2(Sds)1D+O.SU.+1.OE C= 8.3 in Pea 10.0 Nips _ E 6.33 E Mu =_74.7 KFt OK H (Ft) r No Boundary Element Checks Reqd 10.9 . 0.2(Sds)ID + 1.0E P5 10.0 Nips Mu = 74.7 KFt Determine Axial Strengthof Wall [No Moment) = 427.3 in' A, 1.9 in2 r= 2.2 in H/r 87.2 5 99 SO, PaOF-249-97 Note: Rein? 521 Not Las Confined, so doesn't resist camp. NOT USED &ø pal_.224.9 IKips when 0MJ_0.0 Vpeq - WALL THK, t (NIrotu CMU Type =edhzm Weight WALL WI, W (psf)=I "61.O I'm (ksl)a ________ 1.50 fy(ksl)a_60.00] Horlz. Steel: Av (in 0.31 (in)= 24.00 Vert. Steel: Jamb(in :)a0.62 )a (in )= 0.31 (in)--I 24.00 Vertical Bar L (To be determined WISEMAN + ROHYStlucturol Engineers PROJECT: ViaSat Haznsat Masonry She wwoIl Design = LOCATION: 4.67' Pier JOB NO: 17-035.01i Date: 7/17/2017 LRFD -Based on 2013 CBC & ACI 530-11 Determine Deflection of Wail E,= 1350 ksl Is= 1.12E+05 in1 Cd 3.5 Determine _Flexural Strength of Wall (No _Axial) ad Estimate initial c Value C =in ________1P Nips NiMn l,234.1lKFt when OP,,Nips Determine Flexural Strength atBalanced Condition Cb=I_23.5 un 0 M,_'360.4__IN-Ft when 0 P1,l 137.4lkips DetermineShearStregthof Wall Determine Flexural Strength at Pu Max 10.0 Nips ipl_10.0 Nips c=Ljj.s lin / Mn a 248.6 K-Ft Req d & Mn a_276.2 N-Ft / --Prov'd 1.25 x Vu (M Max Pu) =F 21.6 Nips AC 530 (1.17.3.2.6.1.1) and, 2.5gV= 11.7 Nips Shear Span Ratio, M d l_3.7 I VuS 66.2 Nips / OK / TotalWallShear Strength øVm 31.8 KI øVs 16.1 Kips 150 200 250 300 350 øVn=_47.JKips øMn (K-Fl) '(I Boundary Element Checks I AD 53k(3.3.6.5.1) a= 5.3 n PuS0.10Agf'ma_OK Mu/(VuL)51.o N.G. Cma 3974 p . 4, 0.00 In or OK 1530(3.3.6.5.4) Ajp 0.21 in VuS3'AnVPm= OK A,a 0 in .21 Mu/(VuL)53.0= N.G. No Boundary Eie ntsReq'd L/600(CdAxI) 24.0 OK I AD 530(3.3.6.5.3) I 250 200 150 C 0. S 100 50 I 1.20+1.OEI I1.20+1.6L1 10.90 + 1.OE i. 0 0 50 100 SHEARWALL INTERACTION VEIJdPSI 1 6.0011111111110 - WALL NKt 8 C4U C MediumS WALLW f'm (ksi) = 130 fy (ksi) =1 k& 5(IflJi ie.uu i Vert. Steel: iamb(in)= 0.62 Av 0n21= 0.31 (in)=[ 24.00 H (Ft) =j_16.00 I (Ft) = I 6.00 1 - Verticar Layout NOT USED (To be determi4 separately) SHEARWALL INTERACTION Determine Flexural Strength of Wall (No Axial) Estimate initial c Value C=1 10.16 in !P=_0.0 _Sips gMx 27iK-Ft when OP= 00 Sips Determine Flexural Strength at Balanced Condition 37.2 uin O Mb= 53L4_IS-Ft when 0Pb=I.203.6 Kips Determin a Shear Stregth of Wall Determine Flexural Strength at Pu Max xl 130 I5lps j 3.0 Kips C1 11.9 I" =I 305.1 1K -Ft Reqd xl 3390 1K-Ft ---Prov'd = 26.5 'Sips Aa53o(1.173.3.6.L1) J 1Kips 15.0 \Sp.n =I_2.8 I S1 85.1IXips OK WISEMAN + ROHYStiuciurol Engineers PROJECT: ViaSat Haaniat = Masonry She orwoil Design = LOCATION: 6 Pier JOB NO: 17-035.0lj Date: 7/17/2017 LRFD - Based on 2013 CBC & ACI 530-11 load Cases: MaximumReinforcing Check 1.20 +LGLI./RLL+ 0.SLIJRU. 1.00 + _751.I. 4-.52SE - Pu 2 13.0 Sips (For Max Steel Check) Mu 96.0 K-Ft Pz 13.0 EP 13.0 Sips 11.2+02(SdsllO+0.SLL+1.0E C= 8.6 Pu 13.0 Kips E= 830 _Sips _In E Mu =_. 960K -Ft OK r No Boundary Element Checks Reqd 10.9 - 02(Sds)lD 4 1.06 u 13.0 Sips Mu =j 96.0 K-Ft Determine Axial Strength of Wall (NoMoment) A.= in2 A In' M87.2 r=in H/r =5 99 So, PJ 3214 Note: Reinf StI Not Lat Confined, sodcesn't resist comp. &O P.= KIPS when 0 M,0.0 1K-Ft 250 - .. 200 150 too 50 01 1.20+LOEI 11.20+1.61.1 1050+1.061 • o ioo lao too 400 500 600 0 Mn (K-Fl) Determine Deflection of Wall Ex 1350 ksi &x 0.00 In 2.370405 In 6,= 0.13 in Cd= 3.5 6= 0.13 in gVm= 4X 0- s gVs 2 s Vn= 6 Boundary Element checks ACI5 PuS0.10Agf'm=l_OK ; 1) Mu/(Vu*L)S io4 NG_ or MOK 30(3.3.65.4) VuS3AnIf'm= 3.0= I No BoSF( Elements (J600(Cds/H) 50.3 I_OK I Ad_530 (33553) F,,= 0.303 xW(LRFD) Depth to T.O.F. = 1.33 ft F,,= 0.216 xW(ASD) Footing width = 3.00 ft Footing thickness = 1.5 ft F,, = 16.87 psf (ASD) Footing Design: Wall Welght= 936 lb MOT 1470 ft-lb(ASD) Added Stem Load = 0 lb Mmw,,j = 1481 ft-lb (ASD) Soil above footing = 346 lb Footing Weight = 675 lb Total Weight = 1957 lb M5 = 2935 ft-lb x = (fM5-M01)/fP (ft) e = L/2-x (ft) kern = [/6 In Kern? q,,,,, (psf) q,,, (psf) Bearing OK? EQ+0.9DL: 0.67 0.83 0.50 N 1764 0 OK EQ + 1.0 DL: 0.75 0.75 0.50 N 1742 0 OK W + 0.6 DL: 0.24 1.26 0.50 N 3281 0 OK + 1.0 DL: 0.74 0.76 0.50 N 1756 0 OK SA & OSHPD Only: - 2.OEQ+0.9DL: Unstable - -- •- -- NG(>6650) 2.0 EQ+ 1.0 DL: Unstable .. - - -- - NG (>6650) If the basic Seismic load case is not in the kern, OSHPD & DSA require an additional stability load case where the seismic overturning moment Is doubled and compared to twice allowable bearing pressure. WISEMAN+ROHY FREESTANDING SCREEN WALL DESIGN I PROJECT: ViaSat Hazmat UCTURAL ENGINEERS January 2014 - 2012 IBC/2013 CBC I LOCATION: Carlsbad, CA Version 1.00 I JOB NO: 17-035.01A 7117120171 16:24 Allowable bearing = 2500 psf Bearing with 1/3 Increase o 3325 psf DSA/OSHPD? n (Y/N) Masonry or Concrete? M (M / C) Nominal Thickness = 8 in Actual Thickness = 7.625 in Wall Weight = 78 psf I'm = 2000 psi fy = 60000 psi f'c = 3000 psi (looting) added concentric vertical load = 0 p11 (assumed DL) Seismic Point Load = 0 lb (ASD) Wind Point Load = 0 lb (ASD) Height to point loads = 0 ft (above ground) Height above ground = 10.67 ft Length of wall = 16.0 ft Length of return wall = 0.0 ft USE: 8 inch CMU wall with 115 (v) @ 24 Inches o.c. at center (d=3.8125 In.) with a 3' wide x 1.5' thick footing Transverse Ftg Relnf. 0.56 0WIft - Longitudinal Ftg Reinf.. 1.17 1 in' Wind: (ASCE 7-10 Section 29.4.1 and Figure 29.4-1) Exposure = C s/h = LOO K,= 0.85 B/s = 1.50 + IC,, = 1.00 = 0.85 Check: Case A - V= 110 C1 = 1.40 Case A C1 - Case q= 0.00256 K, K,, K. V2 qh= 22.35 psf Case A 26.60 psf Seismic: (ASCE 7-10 Section 13.3) Fp = ((0.4 ap SDS Wp))/((R,,/I )) (1+2 z/h) a,,= 2.5 rp= 2.5 I P = 1.00 (ioorl.S) Soso 0.757 Wind Load = Wall Design: 15.96 psI (ASD) M,,,,0= 1215 ft-lb(ASD) M+,,,,+.,= 1226 ft-lb (ASD) Vertical Bars = II 5 0.625 In. dia. Vertical Bar Spacing = 24 in. o.c. Steel in center or at face? C (C / F) 0.16 in2 steel/ft d= 3.813 in clear to bar = Center 2043 ft-lb (LRFD) (Wind Goverks) phi-M, = 2490 lb-ft (LRFD) OK Note: If controlled by Wind Case C, the reinforcing may be reduced away from the end of the wall f= 0.90 for seismic I = 0.60 for wind tctet .i(etcenrj oet nsicliruaInwwanusse Einggonb'riLM a e usse Cd" Pivot uescnpuon: Camarçji.te NEW AFVcJ1 I PAW + I I RENSON Creating healthy spaces N.V. IIFN50N &mp.,tStIu4-NN.4 NA. IS I Ft.ndos I0IP 00NhflNU6I,&M 45 06140 W40srn Td 044-02 6500- II.. 0bN-62 6. 09- Date: 23IOI1201 IFormat: A4 Dimensions In mm ISheet: 1/1 1110106615 8poi.Ivd N.V. 1115501 mpl1110tlNl-5a045L wd u09I8Ibl 0N i06*506666J40 1UIIII0110. '2 I . -"- 1'- '9 1-- 4 0 IA H .1 6•-\, 0 um IF . .. I fix - • I •1 2 I L t'J LA LL •= I ..— 5 4 4 ••,•) -..i 1 c. ç ) • - •. . CO V .4 I 141 - C 4 c'a 1 -- LLLO I .1 . ) c. '. .- r• o ,q ç.'' j :• Go ii, Oki I 1-i Ico Q_ . Q. SIC .1, _______ :• _______ 1- Use menu item Settings> Printing & Title Block Title VlaSat Site Retaining Walls Page: 1 to set these five lines of information Job #: Dsgnr: DM Date: 12 JUL 2017 for your program. Description.... RAMP WALL (D+L) This Wail in File: E:\ProJects17\17-035 ViaSat Building 141CaicsSite Waiis.RPX RetalnPro (c) 1987.2017, Build 11.17.11.03 Ucense: KW-06055776 Cantilevered Retaining Wall Code: CBC 2016,ACI 318-.14,ACl 530-13 License To: WISEMAN ROHY STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS Criteria Retained Height = 3.50 ft Wail height above soil = 5.50 ft Slope Behind Wall = 0.00 Height of Soil over Toe = 12.00 in Water height over heel = 0.0 ft Load Factors Building Code CBC 2016,AC( Dead Load 1.200 Live Load 1.600 Earth, H 1.600 Wind.W . 1.000 Seismic, E 1.000 I Soil Data and Lateral Earth Pressure Allow Soil Bearing = 2,500.0 psf Equivalent Fluid Pressure Method At-Rest Heel Pressure = 40.0 psf/ft Passive Pressure = 300.0 psfift Surcharge Loads Surcharge Over Heel = 0.0 psf Used To Resist Sliding & Overturning Soil Density, Heel 110.00 Ptf Soil Density, Toe = 110.00 pal FootlngllSoii Friction = 0.350 Soil height to ignore for passive pressure = 12.00 In Surcharge Over Toe = 0.0 psf Used for Sliding & Overturning Axial Load Applied to Stem Axial Dead Load = 0.0 lbs Axial Load Eccentricity = 0.0 In Axial Live Load = 0.0 lbs a Use menu Item Settings> Printing & Title Block to set these five lines of information for your program. This Wall In File: E:\Projects1717-035 ViaSat Build] RetainPro (c) 1987-2017, Build 11.17.11.03 License KW.06055778 License To: WISEMAN ROHY STRUCTURAL EN( Lateral Load Applied to Stem Title ViaSat Site Retaining Walls Job #: Dsgnr: DM Description.... RAMP WALL (D+L) 14Caics\SIte Wails.RPX ft antilevered Retaining Wall Code: Page: 2 Date: 12 JUL 2017 CBC 2016,ACI 318-14,ACl 530-13 Lateral Load = 18.0 #Ift ... Height toTop = 9.00 ft ...Height to Bottom 3.50 ft Load Type = Wind (W) (Service Level) Wind on Exposed Stem Wind on Exposed Stem = 0.0 psf (Service Level) Adjacent Footing Load Adjacent Footing Load = 0.0 lbs Footing Type Footing Width = 0.00 it Base Above/Below Soil Eccentricity 0.00 in at Back of Wall Wall to Fig CL Dist = 0.00 ft Poisson's Ratio Line Load = 0.0 ft = 0.300 Use mend item Settings> Printing & Title Block toset these five lines of information for your program. This Wail in File: E:ProJects117\17-035 ViaSat RetainPro (c) 1987-2017, Build 11.17.11.03 License: KW-06055776 License To: WISEMAN ROHY STRUCTURA Wall Design Summary Title VlaSal Site Retaining Wails Page: 3 Job #: Dsgnr: DM Date: 12 JUL 2017 Descilption.... RAMP WALL (D+L) I 14CalcsSlte Walis.RPX Cantilevered Retaining Wall Code: CBC 2016,ACI 318-14,ACI 530-13 Stability Ratios Overturning = 1.53 OK Sliding = 2.02 OK Soil Bearing Total Bearing Load = 1,428 lbs ...resultant eco. = 9.99 in Soil Pressure @ Toe 1,752 psf OK Soil Pressure @ Heel = 0 psf OK Allowable = 2,500 psf Soil Pressure Less Than Allowable ACI Factored @ Toe = 2,453 psf ACI Factored @ Heel = 0 psf Footing Shear @ Toe = 1.1 psi OK Footing Shear @ Heel = 3.1 psi OK Allowable = 94.9 psi Sliding Resisting Forces Sliding Forces Vertical Force Force Lateral Forces Soil Over Heel 273.0 lbs * Heel Active Pressure Sloped Soil Over Heel 0.0 Surcharge over Heel Surcharge Over Heel 0.0 Adjacent Footing Adjacent Footing Load 0.0 Surcharge'Over Toe Axial Dead Load on Stem 0.0 Load Q Stem Above Soil Axial Live Load on Stem Omit Added Lateral Load Soil Over Toe 114.7 Seismic Load Surcharge Over Toe 0.0 Seismic-self-weight Stem Weight(s) 525.0 Lateral on Key Earth (M Stem Transitions 0.0 Footing Weight 515.9 Totals = Key Weight 0.0 *Includes water table effect Vert. Component ** 0.0 Total Vertical Loads 1,428.5 lbs Axial live load NOT included in total displayed, or used for overturning or sliding resistance, but Is Included for soil pressure calculations. Sliding Coles Lateral Sliding Force = 550.3 lbs less 100% Passive Force = - 609.4 lbs less 100% Friction Force = - 500.0 lbs Added Force Req'd = 0.0 lbs O ....for 1.5 Stability = 0.0 lbs 01 Vertical component of active lateral soil pressure IS NOT considered in the calculation of soil bearing pressures. / Force 451.3 lbs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 99.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 550.3 lbs Use menu item Settings > Printing & Title Block Title ViaSat Site Retaining Wails . Page.: 4 to set these five lines of information Job #: . Dsgnr:.; DM Date: -12 JUL 2017: for your program. Description.... RAMP WALL(D+L) This Wail in File: E:\Projects17\17-035 ViaSat Building 14\CaicsSIte Walls;RPX RetainPro (c) 1987-2017, Build 11.17.11.03 License: KW-06055776 Cántllevered Retaining Wall Code: CBC 2016,ACi 318-14!ACl 530-13 License To: WISEMAN ROHY STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS Overturning Resisting Moments Resistina Moments Force Distance Moment Soil Over Heel 273.0 lbs 2.40 It 654.2ft-# Sloped Soil Over Heel 0.0 Surcharge Over Heel 0.0 Adjacent Footing Load 0.0 Axial Dead Load on Stem 0.0 Axial Live Load on Stem * 0.0 Soil Over Toe 114.7 0.52 59.8 Surcharge Over Toe 0.0 Stem Weight(s) 525.0 1.54 809.7 Earth © Stem TransItions 0.0 Footing Weight 515.9 1.38 709.6 Key Weight 0.0 2.00 Vert. Component 0.0 Total Vertical Loads 1,428.5 lbs Resisting Moment 2.233.3 ft4 Eccentricity 10.0 in * Axial live load NOT included in total displayed, or used for overturning or sliding resistance, but Is Included for soil pressure calculations. Overturning Overturning Moments Overturning Moments Force Distance Moment Heel Active Pressure 451.3 lbs 1.58 It 714.5 ft-# Surcharge over Heel 0.0 Adjacent Footing 0.0 Surcharge Over Toe 0.0 Load @ Stem Above Soil 0.0 Added Lateral Load 99.0 7.50 742.5 Seismic Load 0.0 SeismIc-Self-weIght 0.0 Totals = 550.3 lbs Overturning Moment 1,457.0 ft-# 0.077 lbs = lbs = 491.0 1,076.1 13,892.6 4.0 94.9 10.19 PSI. = PSI = psf 150.0 = Medium Weight = ASD PSI = 4,000.0 PSI = 60,000.0 S •• Use menu item Settings> Printing & Title Block Title VlaSal Site Retaining Walls Page: 5 to set these five lines of Information Job #: Dsgnr: DM Date: 12 JUL 2017 for your program. Description.... RAMP WALL (D+L) - This Wall In File: E:Projects1 -Al 7-035 ViaSat Building 14CalcsSlte Walls.RPX RetainPro (c) 1987-2017, Build 11.17.11.03 License: KW.06055776 Cantilevered Retaining Wall Code: CBC 2016,ACi 318-14 ACI 530-13 License To: WISEMAN ROHY STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS Stem Design Summary 2nd Bottom Design Height Above Ftg Wall Material Above RI-Itu Design Method Thickness Rebar Size Rebar Spacing Rebar Placed at Design Data fb/FB + fa/Fa Total Force @ Section Service Level Strength Level Moment .... Actual Service Level Strength Lave Moment.....Allowable Shear.....Actual Service Level Strength Leve Shear ..... Allowable Met Rebar Depth 'd' Masonry Data Fm Fs Solid Grouting Modular Ratio 'n' Wail Weight Short Term Factor Equiv. Solid Thick. Masonry Block Type Masonry Design Method Concrete Data ft Fy ft = 3.50 = Fence Stem OK 0.00 Concrete LRFD 12.00 # 5 12.00 Edge p • Use menu item Settings> Printing & Title Block Title VlaSat Site Retaining Walls Page: 6 to set these five lines of Information Job#: Dsgnr: DM Date: 12 JUL 2017 for your program. Description.... RAMP WALL (D+L) This Wall in File: E:\ProJects17\17-O35 ViaSat Building 14Calcs\Site WaIis.RPX RetalnPro (c) 1987-2017, Build 11.17.11.03 License: KW.06055776 Cantilevered Retaining Wall Code: CBC 2016,ACl 318-14,ACI 530-13 License To: WISE MAN ROHY STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS Concrete Stem Rebar Area Details Bottom Stem Vertical Reinforcing As (based on applied moment): 0.0242 In2Ift (4/3) As: 0.0323 1n2/ft 200bd1fy: 200(12)(10.1875)/60000: 0.4075 1n2/ft 0.0018bh: 0.0018(12)(12): 0.2592 1n2/ft Required Area: 0.2592 1n2/ft Provided Area: 0.31 1n2/Ft Maximum Area: 2.2081 in2lft Footing Dimensions & Strengths Horizontal Reinforcing Min Stem T&S Reinf Area 1.008 In2 Min Stem T&S Relnf Area per ft of stem Height: 0.288 in2/ft Horizontal Reinforcing Options: One layer of: Two layers of: #4@ 8.33 In #4@ 16.67 In #5@ 12.92 In #5@ 25,83 In #6@ 18.33 In #6@ 36.67 In Toe Width = 1.04 ft fc = 4,000 psi Heel Width = 1.71 Fy = 60,000 psi Total Footing Width = 2.75 ft Footing Concrete Density = 150.00 pd Footing Thickness = 15.00 In Mm. As % = 0.0018 Key Width = 12.00 in Rebar Cover @Top 3.00 In Key Depth = 0.00 in © Bottom 3.00 In Key Distance from Toe = 1.50 ft Footing Design Results IQft Heel Factored Pressure 2,453 0 psf Mu': Upward = 1,049 0 ft-# Mu': Downward = 194 173 ft-# Mu: Design = 855 173 ft-# Actual 1-Way Shear = 1.07 3.12 psi Allow 1-Way Shear = 50.60 50.60 psi Toe Reinforcing = #5 © 18.00 in Heel Reinfordng = #5 © 18.00 In Key Reinforcing = #5 @0.00 In Other Acceptable Sizes & Spacings Toe: Not req'd: Mu < phi*5*Iambda*sqrt(fc)*Sm Heel: Not req'd: Mu < phI*5*Lambdasqrt(fc)Sm Key: Not req'd: Mu < phI*5*iambda*sqrt(f c)*Sm Min footing T&S reinf Area Min footing T&S relnf Area per ft If one layer of horizontal bars: #4@ 7.41 in #5@ 11.48 In #6@ 16.30 in 0.89 in2 0.32 1n2 /ft If two layers of horizontal bars: #4@ 14.81 In #5@ 22.96 In #6© 32.59 In - •1 Use menu Item Settings > Printing & Title Block Title ViaSat Site Retaining Walls Page: 7 to set these five lines of Information Job #: Dsgnr: DM Date: 12 JUL 2017 for your program. Description.... RAMP WALL (D+L) This Wail In File: E:\ProJects1717-035 ViaSat Building 14Caics\Site Waiis.RPX RetainPro (c) 1987-2e17, Build 11.17.11.03 License: KW-06055776 Cantilevered Retaining Wall Code: CBC 2016,ACl 318-14,ACI 530-13 License To: WISEMAN ROHY STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS Tilt Horizontal Deflection at Top of Wall due to settlement of soil (Deflection due to wail bending not considered) Soil Spring Reaction Modulus 250,0 pd Horizontal Dell © Top of Wail (approximate only) 0.159 In The above calculation is not valid if the heel soil bearing oressure exceeds that of the toe, because the wall would then tend to rotate Into the retained soil. go LU CO? -,. LU cq U LU • O3 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION" VIASAT BRESSI RANCH CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR VIASAT CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA CBC20I7-0381 2426 TOWN GARDEN RD VIASAT: SITE IMPROVEMENTS INLCUDING 1,185 SF HAZ MAT BUILDING & TRASH ENCLOSURE AROUND BLDGS MAY 23, 2016 14, 15&P-2 REVISED JULY 5, 2016 DEV2016-0015 2132601000 PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 11/2812017 CBC20I 7-0381 -- v)( ' rr Kelli A. James RCE 79438 KAJ:SFW:AS:dmc Shawn Foy Weedon GE 2714 No. 79438 GEOCON INC 0 B P0 RAPED GEOTE.CNN,l;C:AL .ENVIRONME.NT.A,L • MATERI: AL. S Project No. G1928-52-01 May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 ViaSat 6155 El Camino Real Carlsbad, California 92009 Attention: Mr. Ryan Hatch Subject: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION VIASAT - BRESSI RANCH CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Dear Mr. Hatch: In accordance with your request and our proposal (LG- 15358) dated September 28, 2015, we herein submit the results of our geotechnical investigation for the subject site. The accompanying report presents the results of our study and conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the geotechnical aspects of proposed development of the site. The site is considered suitable for development provided the recommendations of this report are followed. Should you have questions regarding this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact the undersigned at your convenience. Very truly yours, GEOCON iNCORPORATED 2/Sadr CEG 1778 _-.. NAL AU N SADR CL o 1778 CERTIFIED * ENGINEERING * GEOLOS1 •• (2/del) Addressee (3/del) Smith Consulting Architects Attention: Ms. Arad Rangaswamy 6960 FloñdersDrive 0 Son Diego,. CoIiioñiO 92.1212974 2 lelephofle 858.558:6900 S Fox 858.558&1.59 TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE ........................................................................... .................... . ...................... 1 PREVIOUS SITE DEVELOPMENT .................................................................................................... 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........... . ....................................................................................................... 2 SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS .............................................................................................2 4.1 Previously Placed Fill (Qpcf) .....................................................................................................3 4.2 Santiago Formation (Ts) ............................................................................................................... 3 GROUNDWATER...............................................................................................................................3 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ......................................................................................................................3 6.1 Faulting and Seismicity..............................................................................................................3 6.2 Liquefaction ................................................................................................................................ 5 6.3 Tsunamis and Seiches.................................................................................................................6 6.4 Landslides...................................................................................................................................6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................... . ............................ 7 7.1 General ......................................................................................................................................... 7 7.2 Excavation and Soil Characteristics ...........................................................................................7 7.3 Seismic Design Criteria ....................... ....................................................................................... 9 7.4 Grading .... .................................................................................................................................10 7.5 Settlement Due to Fill Loads....................................................................................................12 7.6 Temporary Excavations, Shoring, and Tiebacks ....................................................................... 13 7.7 Soil Nail Wall ........................................................................................................................... 17 7.8 Conventional Shallow Foundations..........................................................................................18 7.9 Drilled Pier Recommendations.................................................................................................21 7.10 Concrete Slabs-On-Grade .......................................................................................................... 22 7.11 Mat Foundation Recommendations .................................... . ...................................................... 23 7.12 Concrete Flatwork....................................................................................................................24 7.13 Retaining Walls ........................................................................................................................25 7.14 Lateral Loading .................................................................................................................... . ..... 27 7.15 Preliminary Pavement Recommendations................................................................................27 7.16 Site Drainage and Moisture Protection ............................................................................. . ........ 30 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1, Vicinity Map Figure 2, Geologic Map (map pocket) Figure 3, Geologic Cross-Sections A-A' and B-B' (map pocket) Figure 4, Geologic Cross-Sections C-C' and D-D' (map pocket) Figure 5, Fill Thickness Figure 6, Estimated Post-Construction Settlement Figure 7, Lateral Active Pressures for Temporary Shoring Figure 8, Soldier Pile Passive Pressure Distribution Figure 9, Recommended Effective Zone for Tieback Anchors Figure 10, Wall/Column Footing Dimension Detail Figure 11, Allowable End Bearing - Drilled Piers Figure 12, Typical Retaining Wall Drain Detail APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION Figures A-i - A-12, Logs of Exploratory Borings San Diego County, Department of Environmental Health, Geotechnical Boring Construction Permit APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Table B-I, Summary of Laboratory Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content Test Results Table B-H, Summary of Laboratory Resistance Value (R-Value) Test Results Table B-III, Summary of Laboratory Direct Shear Test Results Table B-N, Summary of Laboratory Triaxial Shear Test Results Table B-V, Summary of Laboratory Expansion Index Test Results Table B-VI, Summary of Laboratory Potential of Hydrogen (pH) and Resistivity Test Results Table B-VII, Summary of Laboratory Water-Soluble Sulfate Test Results Table B-Vu, Summary of Laboratory Water-Soluble Chloride Content Test Results Table B-DC, Summary of Hand Penetrometer Test Results Figures B-i - B-7, Consolidation Curves Figures B-8 and B-9, Triaxial Shear Strength Test Results APPENDIX C RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS LIST OF REFERENCES GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION 1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE This report presents the results of our geotechnical study for Lots 1-9 located in the Bressi Ranch Corporate Center in Carlsbad, California (see Vicinity Map, Figure 1). The purpose of this report is to provide information regarding the geologic conditions underlying the site and to provide foundation and retaining wall design recommendations. The scope of the study included a review of: Report - Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Lots 2, 3, and 4, Proposed HCP Bressi Ranch Development, Northwest Corner of Town Garden Road and Alicante Road, Carlsbad, California, prepared byNOVA Services, Inc.,- dated June 17, 2015 (Project No. 2015291). Geotechnical Update Study, Bressi Ranch Industrial Planning Area 2, Carlsbad, California, prepared by Leighton and Associates, Inc., dated April 12, 201 1(Project No. 971009-065). Addendum to the As-Graded Reports, of Mass Grading Concerning the Completion of Settlement Monitoring, Planning Areas PA-1 through PA-5, Bressi Ranch, Carlsbad, California, prepared by Leighton and Associates, Inc., dated October 11, 2004 (Project No. 971009-014). The scope of this investigation also included a review of readily available published and unpublished geologic literature (see List of References), a field investigation, laboratory testing to characterize physical properties of the soil, engineering analyses, and preparation of this report. We performed the field investigation during the period of April 4 through April 7, 2016. The study consisted of drilling 12 small-diameter borings at the approximate locations indicated on the Geologic Map, Figure 2. We located the borings in the field using a measuring tape and/or existing reference points; therefore, actual locations may deviate slightly. Appendix A presents the logs of the exploratory borings and other details of the field investigation. We performed laboratory tests on selected soil samples obtained during the field investigation to evaluate pertinent physical and chemical properties- for engineering analyses and to assist in providing recommendations for site grading and foundation design criteria. Appendix B presents the details of the laboratory tests and a summary of the test results. 2. PREVIOUS SITE DEVELOPMENT The project is located in Bressi Ranch Corporate Center located east of El Camino Real, south of - Gateway Road, west of Alicante Road and north of Town Garden Road in Carlsbad, California (see - 1 . May23,2016. Project No. G1928-52-01 - Revised July 5, 2016 Vicinity Map, Figure 1). According to the referenced reports prepared by Leighton and Associates (2004 and 2011), the mass grading operations for the site were performed between June 2003 and January 2004, resulting in three sheet-graded pads. Leighton and Associates performed testing and observation services during the mass grading operations. The mass grading of the site included removal of undocumented fill, topsoil, colluvium, alluvium, landslide deposits, and weathered formational material, prior to placing new fill. Canyon subdrain systems were installed in the previous drainages. Stability fill keys were constructed for the slopes located to the south. Fills of up to approximately 90 feet were placed, and cuts of up to approximately 15 feet were made during the mass grading operations. 3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The property consists of a previously sheet-graded pad located south of Gateway Road, west of Alicante Road, north of Town Garden Road and east of El Camino Real in the Bressi Ranch area of Carlsbad, California. The subject lots are Lots 2 through 9 of the Bressi Ranch Corporate Center. The property is currently vacant with landscaping around the perimeter of the property and is accessed from an opening in the landscape area at the southwest portion of the property from Town Garden Road. The property slopes gently to existing desilting basins with elevations ranging from approximately 290 feet to 320 feet above mean sea level (MSL). We understand the proposed development includes the construction of 6 commercial buildings (Buildings 12 through 17), a café, conference room and 3 parking structures (P1 through P3) with accommodating underground utilities, landscape and improvements. The locations and descriptions Of the site and proposed improvements are based on a site reconnaissance, a review of the referenced report, and our understanding of project development. If project details vary significantly from those described herein, Geocon Incorporated should be contacted to review and revise this report. 4. SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS During our field investigation, .we encountered one surficial material (consisting of previously placed compacted fill) overlying one geologic formation (consisting of the Santiago Formation). The surficial material and the geologic unit are described herein. The estimated surface and subsurface relationship between the units is depicted on the Geologic Map (Figure 2), and on the Geologic Cross-Sections A-A' through D-D' (Figures 3 and 4). Project No. G1928-52-01 - 2 - May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 4.1 Previously Placed Fill (Qpcf) Previously placed fill exists at grade across the majority of the project site. The fill is associated with the original grading of the site and was observed by Leighton and Associates in 2003 and 2004. The fill consists of silty to clayey sand and sandy silt and clay. The fill was likely derived from previously existing surficial soil and excavations into the Santiago Formation. The fill possesses a "very low" to "high" expansion potential (expansion index of 130 or less). We opine that the previously placed fill is considered suitable for additional fill for structural loads; however, remedial grading of the upper portion of the fill will be required as discussed herein. 4.2 Santiago Formation (Ts) The Eocene-aged Santiago Formation is exposed at grade along the northern edge of the site in portions of proposed Buildings 12, 13 and 17, a small area in the southern portion of Lot 14, and in the eastern portion of the site in the area of proposed Building 16 and the P-2 Parking Structure. The Santiago Formation was encountered in our borings below the previously placed fill across the remainder of the site. The Santiago formation consists primarily of interbedded, yellowish to grayish brown, dense to very dense silty sandstone and hard claystone and siltstone. Due to the presence of cemented zones (concretions), difficulty in excavation within the formational materials should be expected. The Santiago Formation is suitable for the support of proposed structures. 5. GROUNDWATER We encountered seepage just above the Santiago Formation in our Borings B-2 and B-3 at approximately 55 and 49.5 feet belowéxisting grade, respectively. We do not expect groundwater to adversely impact the development of the property. Canyon subdrains were previously constructed throughout the project site, as shown on the Geologic Map, Figure 2. It is not uncommon for groundwater or seepage conditions to develop where none previously existed. Groundwater elevations are dependent on seasonal precipitation, irrigation, land use, among other factors, and vary as a result. Proper surface drainage will be important to future performance of the project. S. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 6.1 Faulting and Seismicity Based on a review of geologic literature and experience with the soil and geologic conditions in the general area, it is our opinion that known active or potentially active faults are not located at the site. An active fault is defined by the California Geological Survey (CGS) as a fault showing evidence for activity within the last 11,000 years. The site is not located within State of California Earthquake Fault Zone. Project No. G1928-52-01 - 3- May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 According to Leighton and Associates (2011), minor inactive faulting was encountered during the mass grading operations for Bressi Ranch, but these minor faults were not thapped. These are near vertical normal inter-formational faults and common in the Santiago Formation. According to the computer program EZ-FRISK (Version 7.65), 9 known active faults are located within a search radius of 50 miles from the property. We used the 2008 USGS fault database that provides several models and combinations of fault data to evaluate the fault information. Based on this database, the nearest known active fault is the Newport-Inglewood (offshore) and Rose Canyon Faults, located approximately 7 miles west of the site and is the dominant source of potential ground motion. Earthquakes that might occur on these fault zones or other faults within the southern California and northern Baja California area are potential generators of significant ground motion at the site. The estimated deterministic maximum earthquake magnitude and peak ground acceleration for the Newport-Inglewood Fault are 7.5 and 0.34g, respectively. Table 6.1.1 lists the estimated maximum earthquake magnitude and peak ground acceleration for the most dominant faults in relationship to the site location. We calculated peak ground acceleration (PGA) using Boore- Atkinson (2008) NGA USGS2008, Campbell-Bozorgnia (2008) NGA USGS, and Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS2008 acceleration-attenuation relationships. TABLE 6.1.1 DETERMINISTIC SPECTRA SITE PARAMETERS Fault Name Distance from Site (miles) Maximum Earthquake Magnitude (Mw) Peak Ground Acceleration Boore- Atkinson 2008(g) Campbell- Bozorgnia 2008(g) Chiou- Youngs 2007(g) Newport-Inglewood 7 7.5 0.30 0.26 0.34 Rose Canyon 7 6.9 0.26 0.25 0.28 Elsinore 21 7.9 0.21 0.14 0.19 Coronado Bank 23 7.4 0.18 0.12 0.14 Palos Verdes Connected 23 7.7 0.20 0.13 0.17 Palos Verdes 39 7.3 0.12 0.08 0.08 Earthquake Valley 40 6.8 0.09 0.06 0.05 San Joaquin Hills 40 7.1 0.11 0.09 0.08 San Jacinto 46 7.9 0.13 0.09 0.11 We used the computer program EZ-FRISK to perform a probabilistic seismic hazard analysis. The computer program EZ-FRISK operates under the assumption that the occurrence rate of earthquakes on each mappable Quaternary fault is proportional to the faults slip rate. The program accounts for fault rupture length as a function of earthquake magnitude, and site acceleration estimates are made 4 May23,2016 Project No. G1928-52-01 -4- Revised July 5, 2016 using the earthquake magnitude and• distance from the site to the rupture zone. The program also accounts for uncertainty in each. of following: (1) earthquake magnitude, (2) rupture length for a given magnitude, (3) location of the rupture zone, (4) maximum possible magnitude of a given earthquake, and (5) acceleration at the site from a given earthquake along each fault. By calculating the expected accelerations from considered earthquake sources, the program calculates the total average annual expected number of occurrences of site acceleration greater than a specified value. We utilized acceleration-attenuation relationships suggested by Boore-Atkinson (2008) NGA USGS, Campbell-Bozorgnia (2008) NGA USGS, and Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS2008 in the analysis. Table 6.1.2 presents the site-specific probabilistic seismic hazard parameters including acceleration-attenuation relationships and the probability of exceedence. TABLE 6.1.2 PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD PARAMETERS Probability of Exceedence Peak Ground Acceleration Boore-Atkinson, 2008 (g) Campbell-Bozorgnia, 2008 (g) . Chiou-Youngs, 2007 (g) 2% in a 50 Year Period 0.47 0.34 0.39 5% in a 50 Year Period 0.35 0.25 0.28 lO%ina50 Year Period 0.27 0.19 0.21 While listing peak accelerations is useful for comparison of potential effects of fault activity in a region, other considerations are important in seismic design, including the frequency and duration of motion and the soil conditions underlying the site. Seismic design of the structures should be evaluated in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC) guidelines currently adopted by the County. of San Diego. 6.2 Liquefaction Liquefaction typically occurs when a site is located in a zone with seismic activity, onsite soil is cohesionless or silt/clay with low plasticity, groundwater is encountered within 50 feet of the surface, and soil relative densities are less than about 70 percent. If the four of the previous criteria are met, a seismic event could result in a rapid pore-water pressure increase from the earthquake-generated ground accelerations. Seismically induced settlement may occur whether the potential for liquefaction exists or not. The potential for liquefaction and seismically induced settlement occurring within the site soil is considered to be very low due to the dense nature of the compacted placed fill and the lack of a permanent groundwater table within 50 feet of the ground surface. Project No. G1928-52-Ol -5- May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 6.3 Tsunamis and Seiches A tsunami is a series of long period waves generated in the ocean by a sudden displacement of large volumes of water. Causes of tsunamis include underwater earthquakes, volcanic, eruptions, or offshore slope failures. The site is approximately 3.5. miles from the Pacific Ocean with finish grades over 280 feet above MSL. Therefore, we consider the risk associated with tsunamis to be negligible. Seiches are standing wave oscillations of an enclosed water body after the original driving force has dissipated. Driving forces are typically caused by seismic ground shaking. The potential of seiches to occur is considered to be very low due to the absence of a nearby inland body of water. 6.4 Landslides Based on the examination of aerial photographs and review of published geologic maps compiled by Kennedy and Tan (2008), it is our opinion that landslides are not present at the property or at a location that could 'impact the subject site. According to Leighton and Associates (2011), several ancient landslides were encountered during the' mass grading of the site, and the landslide deposits were completely removed to competent formational material. Buttresses were also installed to increase the factor of safety for slope stability to at least 1.5 in accordance with the City of Carlsbad. Project No. G1928-52-01 -6- , May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 General 7.1.1 We did not encounter soil or geologic conditions during the site investigation that in our opinion would preclude the development of the property as presently planned, provided the recommendations of this report are followed. 7.1.2 Our field investigation indicates the site is underlain by previously placed compacted fill and dense to very dense Santiago Formation (Ts) which underlies the previously placed fill or exposed in some areas of the site. The previously placed fill and the Santiago Formation are considered suitable for the support of additional compacted fill and structures. 7.1.3 We encountered minor seepage in Borings B72 and B-3 at approximately 55 and 49.5 feet below existing grade, respectively. We do not expect groundwater will be encountered during the construction of the proposed development. However, seepage could be encountered during drilling operations if deep foundations are planned and constructed. 7.1.4 The upper portions of the existing fill should be removed and replaced prior to the construction of the planned improvements. In addition, building pads that expose formational materials should be over-excavated below the planned grades and replaced as properly compacted fill to help mitigate the potential for differential settlement. 7.1.5 With the exception of possible moderate to strong seismic shaking and hydroconsolidation, no significant geologic hazards were observed or are known to exist on the site that would adversely affect the proposed project. 7.1.6 Based on our review of the project plans, we opine the planned development can be constructed in accordance with our recommendations provided herein. We do not expect the planned development will destabilize or result in settlement of adjacent properties. 7.1.7 Surface settlement monuments and additional canyon subdrains will not be required on this project. 7.2 Excavation and Soil Characteristics 7.2.1 Observations and laboratory test results indicate that the prevailing soil conditions within the upper approximately 3 feet of finish grade is considered to be "expansive" (expansion index [El] of greater than 20) as defined by 2013 California Building Code (CBC) Section 1803.5.3. Table 7.2.1 presents soil classifications based on the expansion index. 7 May23,2016 Project No. G1928-52-01 -7- Revised July 5, 2016 Results of the El laboratory tests are presented in Appendix B and indicate that the soil possesses "medium" to "high" expansion potentials (El of 51 to 130). TABLE 7.2.1 EXPANSION CLASSIFICATION BASED ON EXPANSION INDEX Expansion Index (El) Expansion Classification 2010 CBC Expansion Classification 0-20 Very Low Non-Expansive 21-50 Low 1 Expansive Very High 51-90 Medium 91 -130 High Greater Than 130 7.2.2 We performed laboratory tests on samples of the site materials to evaluate the percentage of water-soluble sulfate content. Results from the laboratory water-soluble sulfate content tests are presented in Appendix B and indicate that the on-site materials at the locations tested possess "Moderate" (Si) to "Severe" (S2) sulfate exposure to concrete structures as defined by 2013 CBC Section 1904 and ACI 318-08 Sections 4.2 and 4.3. Table 7.2.2 presents a summary of concrete requirements set forth by 2013 CBC Section 1904 and ACI 318. The presence of water-soluble sulfates is not a visually discernible characteristic; therefore, other soil samples from the site could yield different concentrations. Additionally, over time landscaping activities (i.e., addition of fertilizers and other soil nutrients) may affect the concentration. TABLE 7.2.2 REQUIREMENTS FOR CONCRETE EXPOSED TO SULFATE-CONTAINING SOLUTIONS Water-Soluble Maximum Sulfate Exposure Sulfate Cement Water to Minimum Exposure Class Percent Type Cement Ratio Compressive by Weight by Weight Strength (psi) Not Applicable SO 0.00-0.10 -- -- 2,500 Moderate Si 0.10-0.20 II 0.50 4,000 Severe S2 0.20-2.00 V 0.45 4,500 Very Severe S3 > 2.00 V+Pozzolan or 0.45 4,500 Slag Project No. GI 928-52-01 - 8 - May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 7.2.3 We tested samples for potential of hydrogen (pH) and resistivity laboratory tests to aid in evaluating the corrosion potential to subsurface metal structures. The laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B. 7.2.4 Geocon Incorporated does not practice in the field of corrosion engineering. Therefore, further evaluation by a corrosion engineer may be performed if improvements that could be susceptible to corrosion are planned. 7.3 Seismic Design Criteria 7.3.1 We used the computer program U.S. Seismic Design Maps, provided by the USGS to evaluate the seismic design criteria. Table 7.3.1 summarizes site-specific design criteria 'obtained from the 2013 California Building Code (CBC; Based on the 2012 International Building Code (IBC] and ASCE 7-10), Chapter 16 Structural Design, Section 1613 Earthquake Loads. The short spectral response uses a period of 0.2 second. The building structures and improvements should be designed using a Site Class D. We evaluated the Site Class based on the discussion in Section 1613.3.2 of the 2013 CBC and Table 20.3-1 of ASCE 7-10: The values presented in Table 7.3.1 are for the risk-targeted maximum considered earthquake (MCER). TABLE 7.3.1 2013 CBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS Parameter Value 2013 CBC Reference Site Class D Table 1613.5.2 Fill Thickness, T (feet) T>20 -- Spectral Response - Class B (short), Ss 1.054 g Figure 1613.3.1(1) Spectral Response - Class B (1 sec), Si 0.408 g Figure 1613.3.1(2) Site Coefficient, Fa 1.078 Table 1613.3.3(l) Site Coefficient, F 1.592 Table 1613.3.3(2) Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response Acceleration (short), SMS 1.137 g Section 1613.3.3 (Eqn 16-37) Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response Acceleration (1 sec), SMI 0.650 g Section 1613.3.3 (Eqn 16-38) 5% Damped Design Spectral Response Acceleration (short), 0.758 g Section 1613.3.4 (Eqn 16-39) 5% Damped Design Spectral Response Acceleration (1 sec), SDI 0.433 g Section 1613.3.4 (Eqn 16-40) Project No. G1 928-52-01 _9'_ May 23, 201 Revised July 5, 2016 7.3.2 Table 7.3.2 presents additional seismic design parameters for projects located in Seismic Design Categories of D through F in accordance with ASCE 7-10 for the mapped maximum considered geometric mean (MCE(;). TABLE 7.3.2 2013 CBC SITE ACCELERATION DESIGN PARAMETERS Parameter 0 Value ASCE 7-10 Reference Site Class D Mapped MCEG Peak Ground Acceleration, PGA 0.406 g Figure 22-7 Site Coefficient, FPGA 1.094 Table 11.8-1 Site Class Modified MCE0 Peak Ground Acceleration, FOAM 0.444 g Section 11.8.3 (Eqn 11.8-1) 7.3.3 Conformance to the criteria in Tables 7.3.1 and 7.3.2 for seismic design does not constitute any kind of guarantee or assurance that significant structural -damage or ground failure will not occur if a large earthquake occurs. The primary goal of seismic design is to protect life, not to avoid all damage, since such design may be economically prohibitive. 7.4 Grading 7.4.1 Grading should be performed as discussed herein and in accordance with the attached Recommended Grading Specifications presented in Appendix C. Where the recommendations of this section conflict with Appendix C, the recommendations of.this section take precedence. 7.4.2 Prior to commencing grading, a preconstruction conference should be held at the site with the owner or developer, city inspector, grading contractor, civil engineer, and geotechnical engineer in attendance. Special soil handling and/or the grading plans can be discussed at that time. 7.4.3 Site preparation should begin with removing existing improvements and deleterious material, and vegetation. The depth of removal should be such that material exposed in cut areas or soil to be used as fill are relatively free of organic matter. Material generated during stripping and/or site demolition of the existing utilities and associated structures should be exported from the site and not used as fill unless approved by Geocon Incorporated. Project No. G1928-52-01 . -1.0- May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 7.4.4 Existing underground improvements within the proposed building areas should be removed during grading operations and the resulting excavations properly backfilled in accordance with the procedures described herein. 7.4.5 Earthwork should be observed and fill tested for proper compaction by Geocon Incorporated. 7.4.6 The upper two feet of the existing fill should be removed, moisture conditioned. as necessary, and properly compacted prior to receiving additional fill or structures. We should evaluate in the field, if deeper removals are required due to the presence of dry, soft• or loose soil. This remedial grading should extend laterally at least 2 feet beyond the perimeter of the pavement areas, where possible. 7.4.7 If the planned structures will be founded on a shallow foundation system, the formational materials encountered within the upper 5 feet of proposed finish grade should be undercut and the resulting excavations should be backfihled with properly compacted fill. The undercut can be limited to the upper 2 feet if the structures will be supported on a drilled pier system. The undercut should extend laterally at least 10 feet beyond the limits of the structures. The undercut portion should slope towards the deeper fill areas. 7.4.8 Excavated, on-site soil generally free of deleterious debris can be placed as fill and compacted in layers to the design finish grade elevations. Fill and backfill soil should be placed in horizontal loose layers approximately 6 to 8 inches thick, moisture conditioned as necessary, and compacted to a dry density of at least 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density near to slightly above optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM D 1557. The upper 12 inches of soil beneath pavement areas should be compacted to a dry density of at least 95 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. near to slightly above optimum moisture content shortly before paving operations. 7.4.9 Import fill, if necessary, should consist of granular materials with a "very low" to "low" expansion potential (El less than 50) free of deleterious material or cobbles larger than 6 inches and should be compacted as recommended herein. Geocon Incorporated should be notified of the import soil source and should perform laboratory testing of import soil prior to its arrival at the site to evaluate its suitability as fill material. 7.4.10 Excavation of the existing materials should generally be possible with moderate to heavy effort using conventional, heavy-duty equipment during grading and trenching operations. Heavy effort should be expected with possible refusal in localized areas for excavations Project No. G1928-52-01 - Ii - May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 into strongly cemented Santiago Formation (concretionary beds or lenses). Oversize material may be generated which would require special handling or exportation from the site. Rock breaking equipment may be required where cemented material is encountered during the construction operations. 7.4.11 Subsurface. conditions observed may be extrapolated to reflect general soil and geologic conditions; however, variations in subsurface conditions between exploratory borings should be expected. 7.5 Settlement Due to Fill Loads 7.5 .1 Fill soil, even though properly compacted, may experience significant settlement over the lifetime of the improvements that it supports. The ultimate settlement potential of the fill is a function of the soil classification, placement relative compaction, and subsequent increases in the soil moisture content. 7.5.2 Due to the variable fill thickness, a potential for differential settlement across the proposed buildings exists, and special foundation design criteria, as discussed hereinafter, will be necessary. Based on measured settlement of similar fill depths on this and other sites and the time period since the fill was placed, we estimate that maximum settlement of the compacted fill will be approximately 0.25 percent of the fill thickness for the 2003/2004 compacted fills and 0.4 percent for the proposed compacted fills. Figure 5 presents the approximate fill thickness and Figure 6 presents the estimated fill settlement in the areas of the proposed buildings and improvements. The estimated fill settlement in Figure 6 does not include the estimated settlement due to the foundation loads. 7.5.3 The proposed buildings will be underlain by a maximum thickness of compacted fill on the order of 75 feet. The settlement of compacted fill is expected to continue over a relatively extended time period resulting from both gravity loading and hydrocompression upon wetting from rainfall and/or landscape irrigation. 7.5.4 Table 7.5 presents the estimated total and differential fill thickness and settlements of the building pads using an estimated settlement of 0.25 percent for the 2003/2004 existing fill soils and 0.4 percent for the proposed compacted fill. We assumed that cut portion of the transition pads would be undercut at least 5 feet and replaced with properly compacted fill. These settlement magnitudes should be considered in the design of the foundation system and adjacent flatwork that connects to the buildings. Project No. G1928-52-01 .-12 - May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 TABLE 7.5 EXPECTED DIFFERENTIAL SETTLEMENT OF FILL SOIL Maximum Maximum Estimated Estimated Depth of Fill Fill Total Differential Estimated Building No. Beneath Differential Settlement Settlement Angular Structure (feet) (inches) (inches) Distortion (feet) 12 52 33 1.8 1.2 1/1100 (Western Portion) 12 32 25 1 0.8 1/2100 (Central Portion) 12 14 (Eastern Portion) 11.5 0.5 0.4 1/3600 13 19 19 0.6 0.6 1/1600 14 53 47 1.8 1.5 1/1250 15 61 39 2 1.2 1/1775 16 46 45.5 1.4 1.4 1/420 17 51 51 1.5 1.5 1/900 P1 . 67 57 2 1.7 1/575 P2 42 42 1.3 1.3 1/840 75 40 2.3 1.2 1/1300 Café 61 38 2.1 1.3 1/1000 7.5.5 Highly reinforced shallow foundation systems and slabs-on-grade may be used for support of the buildings;' however, the shallow foundation systems would not eliminate the potential for cosmetic distress related to differential settlement of the underlying fill. Some cosmetic distress should be expected over the life of the structure as a result of long-term differential settlement. The building owner, tenants, and future owners should be made aware that cosmetic distress, including separation of caulking at wall joints, small, non- structural wall panel cracks, and separation of concrete flatwork, is likely to occur. Recommendations for deep foundations can be provided to evaluate the comparative risks and costs upon request. 7.6 V Temporary Excavations, Shoring, and Tiebacks 7.6.1 - The recommendations included herein are provided for stable excavations. It is the responsibility of the contractor to provide a safe excavation during the construction of the proposed project. Project No. G1928-52-01 V -13- May 23,2016 Revised July 5, 2016 7.6.2 Temporary excavations should be made in conformance with OSHA requirements. The previously placed fill should be considered a Type B soil and the Santiago Formation should be considered a Type A soil (Type B soil if seepage or groundwater is encountered) in accordance with OSHA requirements. In general, special shoring requirements may not be necessary if temporary excavations will be less than 4 feet in height. Temporary excavations greater than 4 feet in height, however, should be sloped back at an appropriate inclination. These excavations should not be allowed to become saturated or to dry out. Surcharge loads should not be permitted to a distance equal to the height of the excavation from the top of the excavation. The top of the excavation should be a minimum of 15 feet from the edge of existing improvements. Excavations steeper than those recommended or closer than 15 feet from an existing surface improvement should be shored in accordance with applicable OSHA codes and regulations. 7.6.3 The design of temporary shoring is governed by soil and groundwater conditions, and by the depth and width of the excavated area. Continuous support of the excavation face can be provided by a system of soldier piles/wood lagging or sheet piles. Excavations exceeding 15 feet may require soil nails, tieback anchors, or internal bracing to provide additional wall restraint. 7.6.4 Excavations may be supported by soldier pile/lagging and temporary tieback anchors. The design of temporary shoring is governed by soil and groundwater conditions and by the depth and width of the excavated area. Excavations exceeding 15 feet may require soil nails, tieback anchors, or internal bracing to provide additional wall restraint. 7.6.5 In general, ground conditions are moderately suited for soldier pile and tieback anchor wall construction techniques. However, cemented material may be encountered in the Santiago Formation that would cause difficult drilling operations. Additionally, if loose or cohesionless sands are encountered, some raveling and instability may result along the unsupported portions of excavations. 7.6.6 Temporary shoring with a level backfill should be designed using a lateral pressure envelope acting on the back of the shoring and applying a pressure equal to 25H, 16H, and 20H, for a triangular, rectangular, or trapezoidal distribution, respectively, where H is the height of the shoring in feet (resulting pressure in pounds per square foot) as shown in Figure 7. These pressures assume a shoring height of up to about 25 feet and we should be contacted if deeper excavations are planned. Triangular distribution should be used for cantilevered shoring and, the trapezoidal and rectangular distribution should be used for multi-braced systems such as tieback anchors and rakers. The project shoring engineer should determine the applicable soil distribution for the design of the temporary shoring Project No. G1928-52-01 -14 - May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 system. Additional lateral earth pressure due to the surcharging effects from construction equipment, sloping backfill, planned stockpiles, adjacent structures and/or traffic loads should be considered, where appropriate, during design of the shoring system. 7.6.7 Passive soil pressure resistance for embedded portions of soldier piles can be based upon an equivalent passive soil fluid weight of 350D + 500 where D is the depth of embedment, in feet (resulting in pounds per square foot), as shown on Figure 8. The passive resistance can be assumed to act over a width of three pile diameters. Typically, soldier piles are embedded a minimum of 0.5 times the maximum height of the excavation (this depth is to include footing excavations) if tieback anchors are not employed. The project structural engineer should determine the actual embedment depth. 7.6.8 Drilled shafts for the soldier piles should be observed by Geocon Incorporated prior to the placement of steel reinforcement to check that the exposed soil conditions are similar to those expected and that footing excavations have been extended to the appropriate bearing strata, and design depths. If unexpected soil conditions are encountered, foundation modifications may be required 7.6.9 Lateral movement of shoring is associated with vertical ground settlement outside of the excavation. Therefore, it is essential that the soldier pile and tieback system allow very limited amounts of lateral displacement. Earth pressures acting on a lagging wall can cause movement of the shoring toward the excavation and result in ground subsidence outside of the excavation. Consequently, horizontal movements of the shoring wall should be accurately monitored and recorded during excavation and anchor construction. 7.6.10 Survey points should be established at the top of the pile on at least 20 percent of the soldier piles. An additional point located at an intermediate point between the top of the pile and the base of the excavation should be monitored on at least 20 percent of the piles if tieback anchors will be used. These points should be monitored on a weekly basis during excavation work and on a monthly basis thereafter until the permanent support system is constructed. 7.6.11 The project civil engineer should provide the approximate location, depth, and pipe type of the underground utilities adjacent to the site to the shoring engineer to help select the appropriate shoring type and design. The shoring system should be designed to limit horizontal and vertical soldier pile movement to a maximum of 1 inch and Vz inch, respectively. The amount of horizontal deflection can be assumed to be essentially zero Project No. G1928-52-01 -15- May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 along the Active Zone and Effective Zone boundary. The magnitude of movement for intermediate depths and distances from the shoring wall can be linearly interpolated. 7.6.12 Tieback anchors employed in shoring should be designed such that anchors fully penetrate the Active Zone behind the shoring. The Active Zone can be considered the wedge of soil from the face of the shoring to a plane extending upward from the base of the excavation at a 29-degree angle from vertical, as shown on Figure 9. Normally, tieback anchors are contractor-designed and installed, and there are numerous anchor construction methods available. Relatively non-shrinkage grout should be used for the construction of the tieback anchors. 7.6.13 Experience has shown that the use of pressure grouting during formation of the bonded portion of the anchor will increase the soil-grout bond stress. A pressure grouting tube should be installed during the construction of the tieback. Post grouting should be performed if adequate capacity cannot be obtained by other construction methods. 7.6.14 Anchor capacity is a function of construction method, depth of anchor, batter, diameter of the bonded section, and the length of the bonded section. Anchor capacity should be evaluated using the strength parameters shown in Table 7.6. TABLE 7.6 SOIL STRENGTH PARAMETERS FOR TEMPORARY SHORING Description Cohesion (psf) Friction Angle (degrees) Compacted Fill (Qcf) or 400 29 Previously Placed Fill (Qpcf) Santiago Formation (Ts) 1 500 1 34 7.6.15 Grout should only be placed in the tieback anchor's bonded section prior to testing or the unbonded sections should be protected such that the planned loads are distributed only in the effective zone. Tieback anchors should be proof-tested to at least 130 percent of the anchor's design working load. Following a successful proof test, the tieback anchors should be locked off at 80 to 100 percent of the allowable working load. Tieback anchor test failure criteria should be established in project plans and specifications. The tieback anchor test failure criteria should be based upon a maximum allowable displacement at 130 percent of the anchor's working load (anchor creep) and a maximum residual displacement within the anchor following stressing. Tieback anchor stressing should only be conducted after sufficient hydration has occurred within the grout. Tieback anchors that Project No. G1928-52-01 - 16 - May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 fail to meet project specified test criteria should be replaced, post-grouted or additional anchors should be constructed. 7.6.16 Lagging for soldier pile walls should keep pace with excavation and tieback anchor construction. The excavation should not be advanced deeper than three feet below the bottom of lagging. These unlagged gaps of up to three feet should only be allowed to stand for short periods of time in order to decrease the probability of soil instability and should never be unsupported overnight. Backfihling should be conducted when necessary between the back of lagging and excavation sidewalls to reduce sloughing in this zone and all voids should be filled by the end of each day. Further, the excavation should not be advanced further than four feet below a row of tiebacks prior to those tiebacks being proof tested and locked off. 7.6.17 If tieback anchors are employed, an accurate survey of existing utilities and other underground structures adjacent to the shoring wall should be conducted. The survey should include both locations and depths of existing utilities. Locations of anchors should be adjusted as necessary during the design and construction process to accommodate the existing and proposed utilities. 7.6.18 If a raker system is employed, the rakers should not be inclined steeper than 1:1 (horizontal:vertical) to provide an excavation to the raker foundation system with an inclination less than 1:1. A shallow or deep foundation system can be used for the raker system. We should be contacted to provide recommendations for a raker system, if planned. 7.7 Soil Nail Wall 7.7.1 As an alternative to temporary shoring, a soil nail wall can be used. Soil nail walls consist of installing closely spaced steel bars (nails) into a slope or excavation in a top-down construction sequence. Following installation of a horizontal row of nails drains, waterproofing, and wall reinforcing steel are placed and shotcrete applied to create a final wall. 7.7.2 The soil nail wall should be designed by an engineer familiar with the design of soil nail walls. 7.7.3 In general, ground conditions are moderately suited for soil nail construction techniques. However, gravel and cobble could be encountered within the existing materials that could be difficult to drill. In addition, loose soil or relatively clean sand may be encountered Project No. G1928-52-01 -17- May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 within the materials that may result in some raveling or instability of the unsupported excavation. 7.7.4 A wall drain system should be incorpàrated into the design of the soil nail wall. Corrosion protection should be provided for the nails if the wall will be a permanent structure. 7.7.5 Testing of the soil nails should be performed in accordance with the guidelines of the Federal Highway Administration or similar guidelines. At least two verification tests should be performed to confirm design assumptions for each soil/rock type encountered. Verification tests nails should be sacrificial and should not be used to support the proposed wall. The bond length should be adjusted to allow for pullout testing of the verification nails to evaluate the ultimate bond stress. A minimum of 5 percent of the production nails should also be proof tested. Geocon Incorporated should perform observation of soil nail installation and soil nail testing during the construction operations. 7.7.6 In addition to verification and proof testing, at least two pullout tests should be performed at the discretion of the soil engineer to check the geotechnical design parameters. During testing, the nail should be loaded incrementally until failure of the soil-grout bond or until the stress imposed on the nail reaches 80 percent of the bar yield strength. The bonded length should be confirmed prior to testing. 7.7.7 Table 7.7 presents the soil strength parameters to incorporate in the design of the soil nail walls. TABLE 7.7 SOIL STRENGTH PARAMETERS FOR SOIL NAIL WALLS Description Cohesion Friction Angle Compacted Fill (Qcf) or 400 29 Previously Placed _Fill _(Qpcf) Santiago Formation (Ts) 1 500 1 34 7.8 Conventional Shallow Foundations 7.8.1 The following foundation recommendations herein are based on the assumption that the prevailing soils within 4 feet of finish grade will possess a "very low" to "high" expansion potential (expansion index [El] of 130 or less) and that buildings will be placed on compacted fill and Santiago Formation. Project No. G1928-52-01 -18- May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 7.8.2 The proposed buildings can be supported on a shallow foundation system founded in the compacted fill. Foundations for the structure may consist of continuous strip footings and/or isolated spread footings. Continuous footings should be at least 12 inches wide and extend at least 24 inches below lowest adjacent pad grade. Isolated spread footings should have a minimum width of 2 feet and should also extend at least 24 inches below lowest adjacent pad grade. Figure 10 presents a wall/column footing dimension detail depicting the depth to lowest adjacent grade. 7.8.3 Continuous footings should be reinforced with four 'No. 5 steel reinforcing bars placed horizontally in the footings, two near the top and two near the bottom. Steel reinforcement for the spread footings should be designed by the project structural engineer. In addition, footings should be• deepened such that the bottom outside edge, of the footing is at least 7 feet horizontally from the face of slopes. 7.8.4 The recommended allowable bearing capacity for foundations with minimum dimensions described herein is 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf) and 4,000 psf for foundations bearing in compacted fill and formational materials, respectively. The allowable soil bearing pressure may be increased by an additional 500 psf for each additional foot of depth and width, to a maximum allowable bearing capacity of 4,000 psf and 6,000 psf for foundations bearing in compacted fill and formational materials, respectively. The values presented herein are for dead plus live loads and may be increased by one-third when considering transient loads due to wind or seismic forces. \ 7.8.5 We estimate the total settlements due to footing loads in compacted fill to be about V2 inch and 1 inch based on a 5-foot-square footing and a 10-foot-square footing, respectively. We estimate the total settlements due to footing loads in formational materials to be about Y2 inch and 1 inch based on a 4-foot-square footing and an 8-foot-square footing, respectively. Differential settlements based on the foundations loads should be V2 inch in 40 feet. In addition, the buildings should be designed for the potential settlement due to fill loading as shown on Figure 6, Estimated Settlements Map. 7.8.6 Isolated footings, if present, should have the minimum embedment depth and width recommended for conventional foundations. The use of isolated footings, which .re located beyond the perimeter of the building and support structural elements connected to the building, are not recommended. Where this condition cannot be avoided, the isolated footings should be connected to the building foundation system with grade beams. Project No. G1928-52-01 _19 - May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 7.8.7 Consideration should be given to using interior stiffening beams and connecting isolated footings and/or increasing the slab thickness. In addition, consideration should be given to connecting patio slabs, which exceed 5 feet in width, to the building foundation to reduce the potential for future separation to occur. 7.8.8 Foundation excavations should be observed by the geotechnical engineer (a representative of Geocon Incorporated) prior to the placement of reinforcing steel to check that the exposed soil conditions are similar to those expected and that they have been extended to the appropriate bearing strata. If unexpected soil conditions are encountered, foundation modifications may be required. 7.8.9 Special subgrade presaturation is not deemed necessary prior to. placing concrete; however, the exposed foundation and slab subgrade soil should be moisturized to maintain a moist condition as would be expected in any such concrete placement. 7.8.10 Where buildings or other improvements are planned near the top of a slope steeper than 3:1 (horizontal:vertical), special foundations and/or design considerations are recommended due to the tendency for lateral soil movement to occur. - For fill slopes less than 20 feet high, building footings should be deepened such that the bottom outside edge of the footing is at least 7 feet horizontally from the face of the slope. When located next to a descending 3:1 (honzontal:vertical) fill slope or steeper, the foundations should be extended to a depth where the minimum horizontal distance is equal to H/3 (where H equals the vertical distance from the top of the fill slope to the base of the fill soil) with a minimum of 7 feet but need not exceed 40 feet. The horizontal distance is measured from the outer, deepest edge of the footing to the face of the slope. An acceptable alternative to deepening the footings would be the use of a post-tensioned slab and foundation system or increased footing and slab reinforcement. Specific design parameters or recommendations for either of these alternatives can be provided once the building location and fill slope geometry have been determined. Although other improvements, which are relatively rigid or brittle, such as concrete flatwork or masonry walls, may experience some distress if located near the top of a slope, it is generally not economical to mitigate this potential. It may be possible, however, to incorporate design measures that would permit some lateral soil movement without causing extensive distress. Geocon Incorporated should be consulted for specific recommendations. Project No. G1928-52-01 -20 - May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 7.8.11 The foundation and concrete slab-on-grade recommendations are based on soil support characteristics only. The project structural engineer should evaluate the structural requirements of the concrete slabs for supporting expected loads. 7.8.12 Geocon Incorporated should be consulted to provide additional design parameters as required by the structural engineer. 7.8.13 Foundation excavations should be observed by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon Incorporated) prior to the placement of reinforcing steel and concrete to observe that the exposed soil conditions are consistent with those expected and have been extended to appropriate bearing strata. If expected soil conditions are encountered, foundation modifications may be required. 7.9 Drilled Pier Recommendations 7.9.1 Drilled piers can be used to transfer load to the formational materials and reduce differential settlement within a building. 7.9.2 Piers can be designed to develop support by end bearing within the formational materials and skin friction within the formational materials and portions of the fill soil. Calculated allowable end bearing axial pile capacities for 2-foot, 2.5-foot, 3-foot, and 4-foot diameter drilled piers based on depth of embedment into the Santiago Formation are presented on Figure 11. An allowable skin friction resistance of 500 psf can be used for the portion of the drilled pier embedded in the fill and Santiago Formation. These allowable values possess a factor of safety of at least 2 and 2.5 for skin friction and end bearing, respectively. We estimate the settlement of the drilled piers will be approximately Y2 inch. 7.9.3 The diameter of the piers should be a minimum of 2 feet. The design length of the drilled piers should be determined by the designer based on the elevation of the pile cap or grade beam, the required capacity obtained from Figure 1.1, the Geologic Map, and Geologic Cross-Sections presented herein. It is difficult to evaluate the exact length of the proposed drilled piers due to the variable thickness of the existing fill; therefore, some variation should be expected during drilling operations. 7.9.4 The piers should be embedded into the formational materials at least 5 feet and at a ufflcient depth to develop the required capacity. The drilled piers should be constructed with a minimum length of 10 feet. Piers should be spaced at least three-pile diameters, center-to-center. If they are spaced closer than this, the efficiency of the group will be less than 100 percent. Project No. G1928-52-01 -21- May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 7.9.5 Because a significant portion of the pier capacity will be developed by end bearing, the bottom of the borehole should be cleaned of all loose cuttings prior to the placement of steel and concrete. Experience indicates that backspinning the auger does not remove loose material and a flat cleanout plate or hand cleaning is necessary. Concrete should be placed within the pier excavation as soon as possible after the auger/cleanout plate is withdrawn to reduce the potential for discontinuities or caving. Pier sidewall instability may randomly occur if loose or cohesionless soil is encountered. We expect localized seepage may be encountered during the drilling operations and casing may be required to maintain the integrity of the pier excavation, particularly if seepage or sidewall instability is encountered. The fill and the formational materials contain gravel, cobble and some boulders. The formational materials may possess very dense and cemented zones, and difficult drilling conditions during excavations for the piers should be anticipated. The drilled piers should be designed to avoid the existing canyon subdrain, if possible, and sewer utilities located beneath the planned structures. 7.9.6 In general, ground conditions are moderately suited for drilled pier construction techniques. However, gravel, cobble, and oversized material may be encountered in the formational materials that could be difficult to drill. Additionally, if cohesionless sands are encountered, some raveling may result along the unsupported portions of excavations. Seepage, if encountered during the drilling operations, may cause caving. 7.10 Concrete Slabs-On-Grade 7.10.1 The following foundation recommendations herein are based on the assumption that the prevailing soils within 4 feet of finish grade will possess a "very low" to "high" expansion potential (expansion index [El] of 130 or less) and that buildings will be placed on compacted fill and Santiago Formation. 7.10.2 Concrete floor slabs should possess a thickness of at least 5 inches and reinforced with No. 4 steel reinforcing bars at 18 inches on center in both horizontal directions. The concrete slab-on-grade recommendations are based on soil support characteristics only. The project structural engineer should evaluate the structural requirements of the concrete slab for supporting equipment and storage loads. A thicker concrete slab may be required for heavier loading conditions. To reduce the effects of differential settlement of the foundation system, thickened slabs and/or an increase in steel reinforcement can provide a benefit to reduce concrete cracking. 7.10.3 Slabs that may receive moisture-sensitive floor coverings or may be used to store moisture- sensitive materials should be underlain by a vapor retarder; The vapor retarder design should Project No. G1928-52-01 -22 - - May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 be consistent with the guidelines presented in the American Concrete Institute's (ACI) Guide for Concrete Slabs that Receive Moisture-Sensitive Flooring Materials (ACI 302.2R-06). In addition, the membrane should be installed in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations and ASTM requirements and installed in a manner that prevents puncture. The vapor retarder used should be specified by the project architect or developer based on the type of floor covering that will be installed and if the structure will possess a humidity controlled environment. 7.10.4 The bedding sand thickness should be determined by the project foundation engineer, architect, and/or developer. It is common to have 3 to 4 inches of sand for in the southern California region. However, we should be contacted to provide recommendations if the bedding sand is thicker than 6 inches. The foundation design engineer should provide appropriate concrete mix design criteria and curing measures to assure proper curing of the slab by reducing the potential for rapid moisture loss and subsequent cracking and/or slab curl. We suggest that the foundation design engineer present the concrete mix design and proper curing methods on the foundation plans. It is critical that .the foundation contractor understands and follows the recommendations presented on the foundation plans. 7.10.5 Concrete slabs should be provided with adequate construction joints and/or expansion joints to control unsightly shrinkage cracking. The design of joints should consider criteria of the American Concrete Institute when establishing crack-control spacing. Additional steel reinforcing, concrete admixtures and/or closer crack control joint spacing should be considered where concrete-exposed concrete finished floors are planned. 7.10.6 The recommendations of this report are intended to reduce the potential for cracking of slabs due to expansive soil (if present), differential settlement of existing soil or soil with varying thicknesses. However, even with the incorporation of the recommendations presented herein, foundations, stucco walls, and slabs-on-grade placed on such conditions may still exhibit some cracking due to soil movement and/or shrinkage. The occurrence of concrete shrinkage cracks is independent of the supporting soil characteristics. Their occurrence may be reduced and/or controlled by limiting the slump of the concrete, proper concrete placement and curing, and by the placement of crack control joints at periodic intervals, in particular, where re-entrant slab corners occur. 7.11 Mat Foundation Recommendations , 7.11.1 A reinforced concrete mat slab foundation may be used to help mitigate settlements of the underlying soil. A mat foundation consists of a thick rigid concrete mat that allows the Project No. G1928-52-01 -23- May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 entire footprint of the structure to carry building loads. In addition, the mat can tolerate significantly greater differential movements such as those associated with very large loads. 7.11.2 The modulus of subgrade reaction for design of the mat can range from 125 to 175 pounds per cubic inch (pci) for the Santiago Formation. The modulus of subgrade reaction can range from 75 to 125 pci for the compacted fill. These values should be modified using standard equation for foundation geometry, as determined by the structural engineer. 7.11.3 We expect the mat foundation would have total and differential settlements are estimated to be 1 inch based on a mat foundation pressure of 1,000 psf under static foundation loads. 7.12 Concrete Flatwork 7.12.1 Exterior concrete flatwork not subject to vehicular, traffic should be constructed in. accordance with the recommendations herein. Slab nanels should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and, when in excess of 8 feet square, should be reinforced with 4 x 4— W4.0/W4.0 (4 x 4 - 4/4) welded wire mesh or No. 4 reinforcing, bars spaced at least 18 inches center-to-center in both directions to reduce the potential for cracking. In addition, concrete flatwork should be provided with crack control joints to reduce and/or control shrinkage cracking. Crack control spacing should be determined by the project structural engineer based upon the slab thickness and intended usage. Criteria of the American Concrete Institute (ACI) should be taken into consideration when establihing crack control spacing. Subgrade soil for exterior slabs not subjected to vehicle loads should be compacted in accordance with criteria presented in the grading section prior to concrete placement. Subgrade soil should be properly compacted and the moisture content of subgrade soil should be checked prior to placing concrete. 7.12.2 Even with the incorporation of the recommendations within this report, the exterior concrete flatwork has a likelihood of experiencing some uplift due to expansive soil beneath grade; therefore, the steel reinforcement should overlap continuously in flatwork to reduce the potential for vertical offsets within flatwork. Additionally, flatwork should be structurally connected to the curbs, where possible, to reduce the potential for offsets between the curbs and the flatwork. 7.12.3 Where exterior flatwork abuts the structure at entrant or exit points, the exterior slab should be dowelled into the structure's foundation stemwall. This recommendation is intended to reduce the potential for differential elevations that could result from differential settlement or minor heave of the flatwork. Dowelling details should be designed by the project structural engineer. Project No. G1928-52-01 -24- May 23,2016 Revised July 5, 2016 7.12.4 The recommendations presented herein are intended to reduce the potential for cracking of slabs and foundations as a result of differential movement. However, even .with the incorporation of the recommendations presented herein, foundations and slabs-on-grade will still crack. The occurrence of concrete shrinkage cracks is independent of the soil supporting characteristics. Their occurrence may be reduced and/or controlled by limiting the slump of the concrete, the use of crack control joints and proper concrete placement an d curing. Literature provided by the Portland Concrete Association (PCA) and American Concrete Institute (ACI) present recommendations for proper concrete mix, construction, and curing practices, and should be incorporated into project construction. 7.13 Retaining Walls 7.13.1 Retaining walls not restrained at the top and having a level backfill surface should be designed for an active soil pressure equivalent to the pressure exerted by a fluid density of 40 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). Where the backfill will be inclined at 2:1 (horizóntal:vertical), we recommend an active soil pressure of 55 pcf. Soil with an expansion index (El) of greater than 90 should not be used as backfill material behind retaining walls. 7.13.2 Unrestrained walls are those that are allowed to rotate more than 0.001H (where H equals the height of the retaining portion of the wall) at the top of the wall. Where walls are restrained from movement at the top (at-rest condition), an additional uniform pressure of 7H psf should be added to the active soil pressure for walls 8 feet or less. For walls greater than 8 feet tall, an additional uniform pressure of 13H .psf should be applied to the wall starting at 8 feet from the base of the wall. For retaining walls subject to vehicular loads within a horizontal distance equal to two-thirds the wall height, a surcharge equivalent to 2 feet of fill soil should be added. 7.13.3 Drainage openings through the base of the wall (weep holes) should-not be used where the seepage could be a nuisance or otherwise adversely affect the property adjacent to the base of the wall. The recommendations herein assume a properly compacted granular (El of 50 or less) free-draining backfill material with no hydrostatic forces or imposed surcharge load. Figure 12 presents a typical retaining wall drainage detail. If conditions different than those described are expected, or if specific drainage details are desired, Geocon Incorporated should be contacted for additional recommendations. 7.13.4 The structural engineer should determine the seismic design category for the project in accordance with Section 1613 of the CBC. If the project possesses a seismic design category of D, E, or F, retaining walls that support more than 6 feet of backfill should be Project No. G1928-52-01 - 25- May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 designed with seismic lateral pressure in accordance with Section 18.3.5.12 of the 2013 CBC. The seismic load is dependent on the retained height where H is the height of the wall, in feet, and the calculated loads result in pounds per square foot (psf) exerted at the base of the wall and zero at the top of the wall. A seismic load of 21H should be used for design. We used the peak ground acceleration adjusted for Site Class effects, PGAM, of 0.44g calculated from ASCE 7-10 Section 11.8.3 and applied a pseudo-static coefficient • of 0.3. 7.13.5 The retaining walls may be designed using either the active and restrained (at-rest) loading condition or the active and seismic loading condition as suggested by the structural engineer. Typically, it appears the design of the restrained condition for retaining wall loading may be adequate for the seismic design of the retaining walls. However, the active earth pressure combined with the seismic design load should be reviewed and also considered in the design of the retaining walls. 7.13.6 In general, wall foundations having a minimum depth and width of 1 foot may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. The proximity of the foundation to the top of a slope steeper than 3:1 could impact the allowable soil bearing pressure. Therefore, retaining wall foundations should be deepened such that the bottom outside edge of the footing is at least 7 feet horizontally from the face of the slope. 7.13.7 The recommendations presented herein are generally applicable to the design of rigid concrete or masonry retaining walls having a maximum height of 20 feet. In the event that walls higher than 20 feet or other types of walls (such as mechanically stabilized earth [MSE] walls, soil nail walls, or soldier pile walls) are planned, Geocon Incorporated should be consulted for additional recommendations. 7.13.8 Unrestrained walls will move laterally when backfilled and loading is applied. The amount of lateral deflection is dependent on the wall height, the type of soil used for backfill, and loads acting on the wall. The retaining walls and improvements above the retaining walls should be designed to incorporate an appropriate amount of lateral deflection as determined by the structural engineer. 7.13.9 Soil contemplated for use as retaining wall backfill, including import materials, should be identified in the field prior to backfill. At that time, Geocon Incorporated should obtain samples for laboratory testing to evaluate its suitability. Modified lateral earth press ires may be necessary if the backfill soil does not meet the required expansion index or shear strength. City or regional standard wall designs, if used, are based on a specific active Project No. G1928-52-01 -26- May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 lateral earth pressure and/or soil friction angle. In this regard, on-site soil to be used as backfill may or may not meet the values for standard wall designs. Geocon Incorporated should be consulted to assess the suitability of the on-site soil for use as wall backfill if standard wall designs will be used. 7.14 Lateral Loading 7.14.1 To resist lateral loads, a passive pressure exerted by an equivalent fluid density of 300 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) should be used for the design of footings or shear keys. The allowable passive pressure assumes a horizontal surface extending at least 5 feet, or three times the surface generating the passive pressure, whichever is greater. The upper 12 inches of material in areas not protected by floor slabs or pavement should not be included in design for passive resistance. 7.14.2 If friction is to be used to resist lateral loads, an allowable coefficient of friction between soil and concrete of 0.35 should be used for design. The friction coefficient may be reduced depending on the vapor barrier or waterproofing material used for construction in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations. 7.14.3 The passive and frictional resistant loads can be combined for design purposes. The lateral passive pressures may be increased by one-third when considering transient loads due to wind or seismic forces. 7.15 Preliminary Pavement Recommendations 7.15.1 We calculated the flexible pavement sections in general conformance with the Caltrans Method of Flexible Pavement Design (Highway Design Manual, Section, 608.4) using an estimated Traffic Index (TI) of 5.0, 5.5, 6.0, and 7.0 for parking stalls, driveways, medium truck traffic areas, and heavy truck traffic areas, respectively. The project civil engineer and owner should review the pavement designations to determine appropriate locations for pavement thickness. The final pavement sections for the parking lot should be based on the R-Value of the subgrade soil encountered at final subgrade elevation. Based on our laboratory test results, we have assumed an R-Value of 8 and 78 for the subgrade soil and base materials, respectively, for the purposes of this preliminary analysis. Table 7.15.1 presents the preliminary flexible pavement sections. Project No. G1928-52-01 -27 - May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 TABLE 7.15.1 PRELIMINARY FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT SECTION Assumed Assumed Asphalt Class 2 Location Traffic Subgrade Concrete Aggregate Index RValue (inches) Base (inches) Parking stalls for automobiles and light-duty vehicles 5.0 8 4.0 7 Driveways for automobiles and light-duty vehicles 5 8 4.0 9 Medium truck traffic areas 6.0 8 4.0 11 Driveways for heavy truck traffic 7.0 8 4.0 15 7.15.2 Prior to placing base materials, the upper 12 inches of the subgrade soil should be scarified, moisture conditioned as necessary, and recompacted to a dry density of at least 95 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density near to slightly above optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM D 1557. Similarly, the base material should be compacted to a dry density of at least 95 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density near to slightly above optimum moisture content. Asphalt concrete should be compacted to a density of at least 95 percent of the laboratory Hveem density in accordance with ASTM D 2726. 7.15.3 Base materials should conform to Section 26-1.028 of the Standard Specflcations for The State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) with a 3/4-inch maximum size aggregate. The asphalt concrete should conform to Section 203-6 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Greenbook). 7.15.4 The base thickness can be reduced if a reinforcement geogrid is used during the installation of the pavement. Geocon should be contact for additional recommendations, if required. 7.15.5 A rigid Portland Cement concrete (PCC) pavement section should be placed in driveway entrance aprons, trash bin loading/storage areas and loading dock areas. The concrete pad for trash truck areas should be large enough such that the truck wheels will be positioned on the concrete during loading. We calculated the rigid pavement section in general conformance with the procedure recommended by the American .Concrete Institute report ACI 330R-08 Guide for Design and Construction of Concrete Parking Lots using the parameters presented in Table 7.15.2. Project No. G1928-52-01 -28- May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 TABLE 7.15.2 RIGID PAVEMENT DESIGN PARAMETERS Design Parameter Design Value Modulus of subgrade reaction, k 50 pci Modulus of rupture for concrete, MR 500 psi Traffic Category, TC A and C Average daily truck traffic, ADTT 10 and 100 7.15.6 Based on the criteria presented herein, the PCC pavement sections should have a minimum thickness as presented in Table 7.15.3. TABLE 7.15.3 RIGID PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS Location Portland Cement Concrete (inches) Automobile Parking Areas (TC=A) 6.0 Heavy Truck and Fire Lane Areas (TC=C) 7.5 7.15.7 The PCC pavement should be placed over subgrade soil that is compacted to a dry density of at least 95 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density near to slightly above optimum moisture content. This pavement section is based on a minimum concrete compressive strength of approximately 3,000 psi (pounds per square inch). 7.15.8 A thickened edge or integral curb should be constructed on the outside of concrete slabs subjected to wheel loads. The thickened edge should be 1.2 times the slab thickness or a minimum thickness of 2 inches, whichever results in a thicker edge, and, taper back to the recommended slab thickness 4 feet behind the face of the slab (e.g., a 7.5-inch-thick slab would have a 9.5-inch-thick edge). Reinforcing steel will not be necessary within the concrete for geotechnical purposes with the possible exception of dowels at construction joints as discussed herein. 7.15.9 To control the location and spread of concrete shrinkage cracks, crack-control joints (weakened plane joints) should be included in the design of the concrete pavement slab. Crack-control joints should not exceed 30 times the slab thickness with a maximum spacing of 15 feet for slabs 6 inches and thicker and should be sealed with an appropriate sealant to prevent the migration of water through the control joint to the subgrade materials. The depth of the crack-control joints should be determined by the referenced I Project No. G1928-52-01 -29- May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 AC! report. The depth of the crack-control joints should be at least ¼ of the slab thickness when using a conventional saw, or at least 1 inch when using early-entry saws on slabs 9 inches or less in thickness, as determined by the referenced AC! report discussed in the pavement section herein. Cuts at least ¼ inch wide are required for sealed joints, and a Va-inch-wide cut is commonly recommended. A narrow joint width of 1/10 to V8 inch wide is common for unsealed joints. 7.15.10 To provide load transfer between adjacent pavement slab sections, a butt-type construction joint should be constructed. The butt-type joint should be thickened by at least 20 percent at the edge and taper back at least 4 feet from the face of the slab. As an alternative to the butt-type construction joint, dowelling can be used between construction joints for pavements of 7 inches or thicker. As discussed in the referenced ACI guide, dowels should consist of smooth, 1-inch-diameter reinforcing steel 14 inches long embedded a minimum of 6 inches into the slab on either side of the construction joint. Dowels should be located at the midpoint of the slab, spaced at 12 inches on center and lubricated to allow joint movement while still transferring loads. In addition, tie bars should be installed at the as recommended in Section 3.8.3 of the referenced AC! guide. The structural engineer should provide other alternative recommendations for load transfer. 7.15.11 Concrete curb/gutter should be placed on soil subgrade compacted to a dry density of at least 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density near to slightly above, optimum moisture content. Cross-gutters should be placed on subgrade soil compacted to a dry density of at least 95 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density near to slightly above optimum moisture content. Base materials should not be placed below the curb/gutter, cross-gutters, or sidewalk so water is not able to migrate from the adjacent parkways to the pavement sections. Where flatwork is-located directly adjacent to the curb/gutter, the concrete flatwork should be structurally connected to the curbs to help reduce the potential for offsets between the curbs and the flatwork. 7.16 Site Drainage and Moisture Protection 7.16.1 Adequate site drainage is critical to reduce the potential for differential soil movement, erosion and subsurface seepage. Under no circumstances should water be allowed to pond adjacent to footings. The site should be graded and maintained such that surface drainage is directed away from structures in accordance with 2013 CBC 18043 or other applicable standards. In addition, surface drainage should be directed away from the top of slopes into swales or other controlled drainage devices. Roof and pavement drainage should be directed into conduits that carry runoff away from the proposed structure. Project No. G1928-52-01 -30- May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 7.16.2 In the case of basement walls or building walls retaining landscaping areas, a water- proofing system should be used on the wall and joints, and a Miradrain drainage panel (or similar) should be placed over the waterproofing. The project architect or civil engineer should provide detailed specifications on the plans for all waterproofing and drainage. 7.16.3 Underground utilities should be leak free. Utility and irritation lines should be checked periodically for leaks for early detection of water infiltration and detected leaks should be repaired promptly. Detrimental soil movement could occur if water is allowed to infiltrate the soil for a prolonged period of time. 7.16.4 Landscaping planters adjacent to paved areas are not recommended due to the potential for surface or irrigation water to infiltrate the pavement's subgrade and base course. Area drains to collect excess irrigation water and transmit it to drainage structures or impervious above-grade planter boxes can be used. In addition, where landscaping is planned adjacent to the pavement, construction of a cutoff wall along the edge of the pavement that extends at least 6 inches below the bottom of the base material should be considered. 7.16.5 If detention basins, bioswales, retention basins, water infiltration, low impact development (LID), or storm water management devices are being considered, Geocon Incorporated should be notified to provide recommendations pertaining to the geotechnical aspects of possible impacts and design. Distress may be caused to planned improvements and properties located hydrologically downstream. The distress depends on the amount of water to be detained, its residence time, soil permeability, and other factors. Downstream properties may be subjected to seeps, springs, slope instability, raised groundwater, movement of foundations and slabs, or other impacts as a result of water infiltration. We have not performed a hydrogeology study at the site; however, some of the onsite materials are not considered conducive to water infiltration devices due to the dense nature of the compacted fill and the existing geologic conditions. 7.16.6 If not properly constructed, there is a potential for distress to improvements and properties located hydrologically down gradient or adjacent to these devices. Factors such as the amount of water to be detained, its residence time, and soil permeability have an important effect on seepage transmission and the potential adverse impacts that may occur if the storm water management features are not properly designed and constructed. We have not performed a hydrogeological study at the site. If infiltration of storm water runoff occurs, downstream properties may be subjected to seeps, springs, slope instability, raised groundwater, movement of foundations and slabs, or other undesirable impacts as a result of water infiltration. Project No. G1928-52-01 -31 - May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 7.16.7 Underground utilities should not be placed across infiltration systems. Where this condition cannot be avoided, the ingress and egress portions of utility trench crossing the infiltration systems should be provided with cut-off-walls to prevent water from entering the, utility trenches and impacting down gradient improvements. 7.16.8 The degree of soil' compaction or in-situ density has a significant impact on soil permeability. Based on our experience and other studies we performed, we have found that an increase in compaction results in a decrease in soil permeability. We recommend that additional permeability testing be performed throughout the limits of each infiltration system to establish the soil hydraulic conductivity trend after completion of grading and construction of site improvements. 7.16.9 The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Services, possesses general information regarding the existing soil conditions for areas within the United States. The USDA website also provides the Hydrologic Soil Group. Table 7.16.1 presents the descriptions of the hydrologic soil groups. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (AID, BID, or CID), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. TABLE 7.16.1 HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP DEFINITIONS Soil Group Soil Group Definition Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. A . These Consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist B chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils D that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. 7.16.10 The property is covered with man-made fill and should be classified as Hydrologic Soil Group D. Based on the USDA website, the soils underlying the fill are classified as Project No. G1928-52-Ol -32- . . May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 Hydrologic Soil Group D. Natural Resources Conservation Services possess general information regarding the existing soil conditions for areas within the United States. In addition, the USDA website also provides an estimated saturated hydraulic conductivity for the existing soil. Table 7.16.2 presents the information from-the USDA website. TABLE 7.16.2 USDA WEB SOIL SURVEY - HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP Map Unit Approximate Hydrologic kSAT of Most Map Unit Name Symbol Percentage Soil Group. Limiting Layer of Property (inches/hour) Altamont clay, AtC 28.5 D 0.06 to 0.20 5 to_9 percent _slopes Altamont clay, AtE 18.3 D 0.06 to 0.20 15 to_30_ percent _slopes Altamont clay, AtE2 40.9 D 0.06 to 0.20 5 to 9 percent slopes, eroded Gaviota fine sandy loam, AsE 1.8 D 1.98 to 5.95 9 to 30 percent slopes Las fibres loamy fine sand, LeC 10.4 D 0.0 to 0.06 2 to 9_ percent _slopes Project No. G1 928-52-01 -33- May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS Recommendations of this report pertain only to .the site investigated and are based upon the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate from those disclosed in the investigation. If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during construction, or if the proposed construction will differ from that anticipated herein, Geocon Incorporated should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be given. The evaluation or identification of the potential presence of hazardous or corrosive materials was not part of the scope of services provided by Geocon Incorporated. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans, and the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field. The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they are due to natural processes or the works of man. on this or adjacent properties. hi addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of three years. The firm that performed the geotechnical investigation for the project should be retained to' provide testing and observation services during construction to provide continuity of geotechnical interpretation and to check that the recommendations presented for geotechnical aspects of site development are incorporated during site grading, construction of improvements, and excavation of foundations. If another geotechnical firm is selected to perform the testing and observation services during construction operations, that firm should prepare a letter indicating their intent to assume the responsibilities of project geotechnical engineer of record. A copy of the letter should be provided to the regulatory agency for their records. In addition, that firm should provide revised recommendations concerning the geotechnical aspects of. the proposed development, or a written acknowledgement of their concurrence with the recommendations presented in our report. They should also perform additional analyses deemed necessary to assume the role of Geotechnical Engineer of Record. May 23, 2016 Project No. G1928-52-01 Revised July 5, 2016 1 - Av - - * tSI1iF' - - W S .. :cT (D MQ 3,— "W 912 4 LL: •1 V lr p;3 ' r I it ft fxZ THE GEOGF.APHIC.L INFORMATION MADE AVAILABLE FOR DISPLAY WAS PROVIDED BY GOOGLE EARTH. SUBJECT TO A LICENSIIG AGREEMENT. THE INFORMATION IS FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY; T IS NOT INTENDED FOR CLIENTS USE OR RELIANCE AND SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED BY CLIENT. CLIENT SHALL NDE7NIFY, DEFEND AND -IOLD HARMLESS GEOCON FROM ANY LIABILITY INCURRED AS A RESULT OF SUCH JSE OR RELIANCE BY CLIENT. NO SCALE VICINITY MAP GEOCON INCORPORATED GEOTECHNICAL• ENVIRONMENTAL MATERIALS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE-SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121-2974 PHONE 85E 553-6900 - FAX 858 558.6159 AS / RA DSK/GTYPD VIASAT BRESSI RANCH CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA I DATE 05-23-2016 I REV2SED 07-05.20161 PROJECT NO. G1928 -52-01 FIG. 1 Plott.d:0710512016 1:12PM I By.ONATHAN WILMINS I FL. ocadon:YlPROJECTSG1928-52.01 VlaSatlDETAILSG1928-52-01 vldnityMap.dwg 0' 80' 160' 240' 320' SCALE l 80' GEOCON LEGEND 812___POLIOCMiONOFSOiP3 --- APPROXL~~OF~SUSOItMN /l .,__JJPROZLOCTlQiiOFGtD.OGlCONTCT ci 3__.JRO,LOCM1Eii0CIEC10GiCCR0S4ECTIO,. GEOLOGIC MAP VIASAT - BRESSI RANCH CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 1=.n.211 • GEOCON 1 8O IKCOflPO8*TSD • '°'" G1928-52-01 GIOTEOA4CAI• ENVDONAE4TM MMEEAIS ISHM naAuA4 -DAIM3iD5 I OF 1 320- a, z 2280- I- w w 240- -320 a, z -280 2 -240 200_.1_200 0 40 60 . 120 160 200 240 280 320 380 400 440 480 520 560 600 640 680 720 760 800 825 DISTANCE (FEET) . . . . . . GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTION A-A' - SCALE:? 40 (Veit = Horlz.) . . . 1ciiZ;;311 xi -1; Li J' I ' $ '9•i 4i ILL 'o* 1 -- - - r - - -- 17 -' ---- - --- --- -: t1 4jT1 C- N33W I! a, 36 360- F 13FRC60SE0)—' ML ME L __ 1- LW GATEWAY0Z1_________I—'_•: ___'_.-1 -=- -__.4 3tt=4i _ ba 20 _________ 280 __•E:iI 14 a --- T'-----..- ....-i--..e-- -,-a-a'--i ,-i-,'-a-l- Ti , ti-'i- 4'-a-- '7. tja-'-- ' _•,,. i4- ...-,-,,4. 4,474.—,.144r -m.-!=-, T"r'. ..e--4--a -t--T T -".i47, 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 . 320 360 400 440 480 520 560 600 640 680 720 760 680 63 20 z 280 2 LLI 240 205 DISTANCE (FEET) GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTION B-B' SCALE:? = 40' (Veil. = Norlz.) - GEOCON LEGEND . - RACEDOOMCTED . . - . . Ts ) . - . . . 'mcr. GEOLOGIC CROSS - SE . - - VIASAT BRESSI RANCH - . CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA GEOCON. 1• _40 tflflhpOlt*.flO .qeerfl c0000lwlcll• EIIIIiONMiHTAI MAlSINIS G SHEET 1 I.. 0) z. 0 Us : g pa ED GA 280 RWOAD- 240 Is I 19 0 40 80 120 160 200 .240 280 320 380 400 440 480 520 56DI, 600 640 680 720 760 78 320 —j (0 I 240 200 DISTANCE (FEET) GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTION C-C' SCALE: V = 40 (Vest. = HodL) 360 -320 2802 w 240 0200 GEOCON LEGEND QpCf__PeIoJE.YrcoDcP.mTDnu. --- APPIMLOCATMOFBO~ GEOLOC DISTANCE (FEET) GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTION D-D' ,SCALE: 14U(VesLHodz.) I 200 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 300 400 440 480 520 06052 .•—•—' \\. i IN —•.•-- •__-•--\ I 0' 80' 160' 240' 320' SCALE l 80' • GEOCON LEGEND - Qaf • ___APROLLOCAUO,.OFGEOLOGlCcO,.,CT -3— --E.-rD.!~TEDFULTMWGW-EMnMAWOPRMVM(MftdI FILL THICKNESS VIASAT - BRESSI RANCH SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA GEOCON • DATE 5..1S1 1 8E IREVISEDO. 05-ma INCORPOILATD GlO1EOlNCL PDWCTIIft - 52 - 01 - oRncw,t.sulNWCNt92m.ms SHEET 1 OF • 1 o 80' 160 240' 320' SCALE 1- 80' GEOCON LEGEND ____1___ DLLtEIENT MID IMDTOT*LGEIIEIT) I, ! --_-- - c- - .0- 05 10 I I k, SH - / - •.., .L •i' 7; Ij / L17 - _9)i _. k25 SOLDIER PILE OR WALLSYSTEM 25 H psi '-16H psi - -20 H psi H (Fe) OR 0.6 H(ft.) OR EXCAVATION __________ ______ - BOTTOM\ (A) (B) (C) - (A) ...... TRIANGULAR DISTRIBUTION - (B)......RECTANGULAR DISTRIBUTION - (C) ...... TRAPEZOIDAL DISTRIBUTION NO SCALE LATERAL ACTIVE PRESSURES FOR TEMPORARY SHORING GOC:N INCORPORATED Jr GEOTECHNICAL 0 ENVIRONMENTAL U MATERIALS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE - SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121-2974 PHONE 858 558-6900 - FAX 858 558-6159 AS / RA I I DSKIG1YPD VIASAT BRESSI RANCH CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA ''' - __- " W I PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 I FIG. 7 I REVISED 07-05-20161 IROJcT9Ii42A.2.Oi VlSnt%fl TAttSUnInI Atl F,r Vn11r1 EIln ItAPW1fldw H(ft) EXCAVATION BOTrOM. 500 psf A%4c. / 350D psf D(ft) / -I 500+350D psf I- GROUTED SOLDIER PILE NO SCALE SOLDIER PILE PASSIVE PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION GEOCON (4 IN COR P0 RATED GEOTECHNICAL• ENVIRONMENTAL. MATERIALS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE - SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121- 2974 PHONE 858 558-6900 - FAX 858 558-6159 AS! RA DSKIGTYPD VIASAT BRESSI RANCH CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA I IJ,•I UUlO I REVISED O -0'7'--0'5-"20161 07-05- - 20161 PROJECT NO. G1928 -52-01 I FIG. 8 Plolted:0710512016 1:15PM I ByJONATHAN WILKINS I File LocatIonY:1PR0J5CTS1G1928-52-01 VIaSatiDETAILSiGrouted Soldier Pile Passive Pressure (RGSPPDS).dwg ESTIMATED V MAXIMUM HORIZONTAL MOVEMENT\ EXISTING GROUND SURFACE SOLDIER PILE / . k. / I --.ESTIMATED 112 "MAXIMUM I VERTICAL MOVEMENT / / ACTIVE / ZONE / I TIEBACK /V ANCHOR / 290 / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / EFFECTIVE ZONE NOTE: NO ESTIMATED MOVEMENT AT EFFECTIVE ZONE NO SCALE I RECOMMENDED EFFECTIVE ZONE FOR TIEBACK ANCHORS I INC 0 RP0RATD GEOTECHNICALU ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE - SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121-2974 PHONE 858 558-6900 - FAX 858 558-6159 AS/RA DSKIGTYPD Plottet071O5l2016 1:14PM I By:JONATHAN WILKINS II VIASAT BRESSI RANCH CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA I '-"c U LUIU ' PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 REVISED 07-05-20161 FIG. 9 He ocaIY:PROJECTSG1928-52-01 VaSetDETAILSIEffecIIve Zone For Tieback Ancflols (REZTA6).dw SAND AND VAPOR CONCRETE SLAB .......... \4 _/ PAD GRADE RETARDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACI .•.. ........ .• .4 .. Lu 8 I " X v WIDTH .:. .:4: _________ SAND AND VAPOR ACCORDANCE WITH I' RETARDERIN LL ... . FOOTING WIDTH *....SEE REPORT FOR FOUNDATION WIDTH AND DEPTH RECOMMENDATION NO SCALE I WALL / COLUMN FOOTING DIMENSION DETAIL . I PEP-11000N INCORPORATED f' GEOTECHNICAL• ENVIRONMENTAL U MATERIALS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE - SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121-2974 PHONE 858 558-6900 - FAX 858 558-6159 AS / RA DSKIGTYPD VIASAT BRESSI RANCH CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA I IJfrI ISE tJD 07-,)-UIO -05-2016 I REV 1 PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 FIG. 10 Plotted:0710512016 1:19PM I By.JONATHAN WILKINS I File i.05a110nY:tPR0JECTStG1928-52.01 VIaSatDETAILStWaII.Coiumn Footing Dimension Detail (COLFOOT2).dwg Allowable End Bearing Capacity, Kips 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 0 .r. —.2-Foot Dia. 10 - --- 2.5-Foot Dia. 3-Foot Dia. —-4-FootDia. 20 30 1 CL co 40 50 E 70 GEOCON (4 INC.ORPOBATED GEOTECHNJCAL CONSULTANTS 6960 'FLANDERS DRIVE- SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA-12121:.2974 PHONE 858. 559-69W'-:FAX :858 5584159 KJ/KJ I ALLOWABLE END BEARING - DRILLED PIERS VIASAT - BRESSI RANCH CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA DATE 7-5-2016 PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 IFIG. 11 CONCRETE BROWDITCH PROPOSED - RETAINING WALL WATER PROOFING PER ARCHITECT 213H — GROUND SURFACE — GROUND SURFACE TEMPORARY BACKCUT PER OSHA MIRAFI 140N FILTER FABRIC (OR EQUIVALENT) OPEN GRADED 1" MAX. AGGREGATE 4 DIA. PERFORATED SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE EXTENDED TO APPROVED OUTLET iT CONCRETE ROUND SURFACE BROWDITCH RETAINING - 1 WALL - WATER PROOFING I PER ARCHITECT DRAINAGE PANEL - ...- (MIRADRAIN 6000 OR EQUIVALENT) 213H - - iT I 314 CRUSHED ROCK - (1 CU.FTJFT.) #( FILTER FABRIC PROPOSED — ENVELOPE MIRAFI 140N OR — EQUIVALENT FOOTING7 '......... 4• DIA. SCHEDULE 40 PERFORATED PVC PIPE OR TOTAL DRAIN EXTENDED TO APPROVED OUTLET NOTE: DRAIN SHOULD BE UNIFORMLY SLOPED TO GRAVITY OUTLET. OR TO A SUMP WHERE WATER CAN BE REMOVED BY PUMPING CONCRETE BROWDITCH] GROUND SURFACE RETAINING — WALL -1 WATER PROOFING ARCHITECT 212 H .- DRAINAGE PANEL (MIRADRAIN 6000 OR EQUIVALENT) 4 DIA. SCHEDULE 40 PROPOSED PERFORATED PVC PIPE OR TOTAL DRAIN EXTENDED TO -j--- — APPROVED OUTLET F00T1NG1 NO SCALE I I TYPICAL RETAINING WALL DRAIN DETAIL I GEOCUNT 'C4 iN•COap.nAT:ED: GEOTECHNICAL S ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE - SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121- 2974 PHONE 858 558-6900 - FAX 858 558-6159 AS/RA • DSK/G1YPD VIASAT BRESSI RANCH CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA IDATE 05-23-2016 I REVISED 07-05-20161 PROJECT NO. G1928 -52-01 I FIG. 12 Plotted:0710512016 1:17PM I ByJONATHAN WILKINS I File LocaiIon:Y:PROJECTSG1928-52.01 VIaSatlDETAILS\Typlcal Retaining Wail Drainage DeIafl (RWDO7A).dwg E Z ~ VA, dw. APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION We performed the field investigation during the period of April 4 through 7, 2016. Our subsurface exploration consisted. of drilling 12 small-diameter exploratory borings to a maximum depth 'of approximately 66.5 feet using a truck-mounted drill rig with a 6- to 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger. The approximate locations, of the exploratory borings are shown on the Geologic Map, Figure 2. Boring logs, and an explanation of the geologic units encountered are presented on Figures A-i through A-12. We located the borings in the field using existing reference points; therefore, actual locations may deviate slightly. We obtained soil samples during our subsurface exploration in the borings using either a California sampler or a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler. Both samplers are composed of steel and are driven to obtain relatively undisturbed samples. The California sampler has an inside diameter of 2.5 inches and an outside diameter of 3 inches. Up to 18 rings are placed inside the sampler that is 2.4 inches in diameter and 1 inch in height. The SPT sampler has an 'inside diameter of 1.5 inches and an outside diameter of 2 inches. We obtained ring samples at appropriate intervals in moisture-tight containers and transported to the laboratory for testing. The type of sample is noted on the exploratory boring logs. The samplers were driven 12 inches and 18 inches for California sampler and SPT sampler, respectively. The sampler is connected to A rods and driven into the bottom of the excavation using a 140-pound hammer with a 30-inch drop. Blow counts are recorded for every 6 inches the sampler is driven. The penetration resistances shown on the boring logs are shown in terms of blows per foot. The values indicated on the boring logs are the sum of the last 12 inches of the sampler. If the sampler was not driven for 12 inches, an approximate vlue is calculated in term of blows per foot or the final 6-inch interval is reported.' These values, are not to be taken as N-values as adjustments have not been applied. We estimated elevations shown on the boring logs from a topographic map. Each excavation was backfilled as noted on the boring logs. The, soil encountered in the borings were visually examined, classified, and logged in general accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure D 2488). The logs depict the soil and geologic conditions observed and the depth at which samples were obtained. The County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health issued a Monitoring Well and Boring Construction and Deconstruction Permit for the exploratory excavations, and the Permit is shown after the figures in this appendix. May 23, 2016 Project No. G1928-52-01 Revised July 5, 2016 PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 DEPTH FEET SAMPLEIN 0 SOIL CLASS 0 20 BORING ELEV.(MSL.)317 DATECOMPLETED O4.4-2O16 EQUIPMENT MARL M-5 BY: L RODRIGUEZ O. 2 IL - u. 0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION - 0 - 131-1 .. — SC/CL PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL (Qpcf) - Medium dense, moist, olive brown, Clayey, fine to coarse SAND to Sandy - 2 - .,./d. CLAY - BI -2 / Few to little chunks of silty sand - 22 1 8 •i 10 BI-3 -Becomes wet, trace shell fragments 18 107.4 18.7 . :'/: (P•P• 4.5+tst) 12 • 14 BI-4 -Few to little layers/chunks of yellowish to grayish fine sand and gray silt 21 16 :i::::H 20 B1-5 (p.p.4.5+tsf) . 23 98.8 30.7 22 - /: 24 - - -. ---- ---------------------------------- B1- /::. CL Stiff; wet, dark olive brown, Sandy CLAY; trace to few chunks silt and sand 34 26 28 - 30 B17, (pp.4.5+tsf) 27 99.2 24.7 32 34 Figure A-I, Log of Boring B I, Page lof2 SAMPLE SYMBOLS 0 ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL II ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST U ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE •.. CHUNK SAMPLE • •.. WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GE000N PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 BORING B I DEPTH IN SAMPLE 8 -J < SOIL z <o) (0 FEET NO. z ELEV. (MSL.)317' DATE COMPLETED 04.04.2016 Uj 20 - EQUIPMENT MARL M-5 BY: L RODRIGUEZ III - MATERIAL DESCRIPTION - - B1-8 - 39 36 - - 38 - :-- 40 Bl 9 C 15.3 clay and sand - 42 :: (p.p. 45+tsf) - .44. - 46 BI-10 - SM SANTIAGO FORMATION (Ts) 84/9" :••' Very dense, damp, gray to yellowish brown, Silty, fme SANDSTONE; weakly cemented; laminated with magnesium --- - - - 48 50 BI-11 j:.. 85/9' BORING TERMINATED AT 50.75 FEET No groundwater encountered Backfilled with 10.0 fil bentonite grout slurry 1-igure A-i, Log of Boring B 1,Page2of2 0 ... SAMPLE SYMBOLS SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL Ii ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) 19 DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE .... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GE000N PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 DEPTH FEET SAMPLE NO. >. .j cc < 0 SOIL Cl-ASS BORINGB2 ELEV. (MSL.)308' DATE COMPLETED 04-05-2016 EQUIPMENT MARL M-5 BY: L RODRIGUEZ ZW — Z ! <U) UJ Q U) ZIJ- 0 IX 0 20 0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 B2-1 9 - SM PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL (Qpcl) Medium dense, damp, yellowish to grayish brown, Silty, fine to medium 2 -i: SAND; trace gravel; trace organics - B2-2 -Becomes wet, trace to little layers/chunks dark olive brown, sandy clay - 25 '122.9 12.6 6 8 10 B2-3 :' CL Stiff, moist, dark olive brown, Sandy CLAY; trace gravel 12 - .:•. 14 - B2-4 :':I : SM/ML Medium dense, damp, gray, Silty, fine SAND to Sandy SILT; trace shell 33 119.1 6.4 - 16 - -I-:1::Ffragments --29 - - (1).p.4.0tst) - -18- - 20 B2-5 SM Medium dense, moist, yellowish to grayish brown, Silty, fine SAND; trace 30 121.0 11.0 shell fragments - -22- 24 - - B2-6 :-..:-i1 - 41 26 • .-•4- :1'.j.:.:: - - 28 - 30 B2-7 -Trace gravel 44 109.6 16.5 (p.p. 4.5+tst) - 32 - .:.-:I: . -. - 34 _._ :LJ: Figure A-2, Log of Boring B 2, Page 1 of 2 SAMPLE SYMBOLS 0 ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL I] ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I .:. DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) 19 DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. - GE000N PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 >. BORING B2 DEPTH SAMPLE ,... < SOIL IZi: - W FEET ELEV. (MSL.)308' DATE COMPLETED 04.4)5-2016 uj it 20 EQUIPMENT MARL M-5 BY: L RODRIGUEZ 0 0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION - - B2-8 - Sc Medium dense, moist, yellowish to grayish brown, Clayey, fine SAND 40 36 V - - -38- - . - 40 - B2-9 - - - - SM Medium dense, moist, yellowish to grayish brown, Silty, fine SAND 39 110.3 12.1 - - (p.p. 4.5+tsf) -42- F.1.IJE:1. - ---------------------- 44 - 132-10 :jJ:j:. -Becomesdamp 49 -46- 48 - 50 - B2-11 :j' -Becomes very dense, wet, fine content decreases; little to some shell 85/11" 114.2 17.4 fragments; trace clay - - 52 (pp.4.5+tsf) 54 - - - 132-12 : SM Slight seepage 72 - 56 - SANTIAGO FORMATION (Ts) - Very dense, wet, grayish to yellowish brown, Silty, fine SANDSTONE; :.-•:: weakly cemented 58 - - 60 - -_ 132-13 ::F: •• -_ 50 ___ BORING TERMINATED AT 61.5 FEET Slight seepage encountered at 55 feet Backfilled with 12.1 ft3 bentonite grout slurry Figure A-2, Log of Boring B 2, Page 2 of 2 0 ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL I] ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST U ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) SAMPLE SYMBOLS 19 DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GEOCON PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 DEPTH IN FEET NO < 0 o SOIL CLASS BORING ELEV. (MSL.)296' DATE COMPLETED 04.07-2016 EQUIPMENT MARL M-5 BY: B. KUNA 2 Li. Q. (I) CO MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 - B3-1 :9 - SM PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL (Qpcf) - - -2- Medium dense, damp, yellowish brown, Silty, fine SAND - : 4 B3-2 :,?j7 SM-SC Medium dense, moist, mottled yellowish brown and white, mixed with gray 31 112.6 15.2 6 Sandy CLAY 8/ B3-3 :•': 24 113.8 15.0 12 14 / B3-4 , • Sc Medium dense, moist, dark brown, Clayey, fine SAND 27 16 18 :: B3-5 -. -E-- ------- - 30. 1 24 -. - • B3-6 SCSM Medium dense, wet, dark brown mixed with gray, Clayey SAND and 22 112.0 15.4 26 - .)/ yellowish brown, Silty, fine SAND, mottled yellowish brown and white - - - -/: (p.p. 4.5+tsf) 28 - 30 - 837 CL Swet,darkbrown,SiliyLAY —2 32 34 Figure A-3, Log of Boring B 3, Page 1 of 2 0 ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) SAMPLE SYMBOLS DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GE000N PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 ly BORING B3 DEPTH >- 0 0 < SOIL 2 U. CO wa.. It IN FEET SAMPLE 0 NO.LU CLASS ' ELEV. (MSL.)296 DATE COMPLETED 04-07-2016 << woo ZU- a 0 Ix e 20 EQUIPMENT MARL M-5 BY: B. KUNA 0 0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION B3-8 P7 - -Becomes dark grayish-brown 28 105.3 21.9 36 - - (p.p.3.otsf) - 38 - - 40 - - - B3-9 -Same 25 104.7 20.9 (p.p.1.5tst) - 42 - 44 00 00 - - B3-10 00 -Same . 35 - 46 00 - 00 (p.p.4.Otst) 1 48 i j4' V light seepage - 50 - B3-11 SANTIAGO FORMATION (Ts) 70 . Very stiff, moist, interbedded layers of brown, yellowish brown and gray, - 52 SILTSTONE with gypsum crystals - -Perched groundwater at 49.5 feet - 54 B3-12 :.::: --- BORING TERMINATED AT 56 FEET Slight seepage encountered at 49.5 feet -. Backfilled with 11 ft3 bentonite grout slurry ---- Figure A-3, Log of Boring B 3, Page 2 of 2 0 ... SAMPLE SYMBOLS SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL IJ ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED To BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GE000N PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 BORING B 4 DEPTH < SOIL P z << co - ZL1 IN FEET SAMPLE NO. CLASS ELEV. (MSL.)294' DATE COMPLETED 04-06-2016 1 o W In IX 20 EQUIPMENT MARL M-5 BY: B. KUNA IL a MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 84-1 :jT - SM PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL (Qpcf) • Dense, damp, yellowish brown, Silty, fine SAND; some dark brown, sandy - 2 clay chunks; mottled yellowish gray - • E1 - B4-2 ::I.1: -Becomes moist - 35 102.8 . 12i - 6 (p.p.4.5+tsf) - 8 10 - B4-3 -. SM Medium dense, moist, mottled live-brown, yellow and gray, Silty, fine 20 1073 123 SAND - -12- (p.p.4.5+tst) - - - - 14 - B44 SM SANTIAGO FORMATION (Ts) 60 16 - Very dense, moist, gray mottled with yellowish brown, Silty, fine SAND - -18- - 20 -B4-5 -Becomes dark yellowish brown - 52 BORING TERMINATED AT 21.5 FEET No groundwater encountered Figure A-4, Log of Boring B 4, Page 1 of i 0 ... SAMPLE SYMBOLS SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL I] ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST U ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE CHUNK SAMPLE ...WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GE000N PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 BORING B5 z DEPTH < SOIL I Z U) IZ FEET SAMPLE NO. . CLASS ELEV. (MSL.)318' DATE COMPLETED 04.04-2016 <O) ZLI. 2 . o Z 111 111 20 EQUIPMENT MARL M-5 BY: L RODRIGUEZ °- _____ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION ____ 0 -. - B54 - SM PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL (Qpcl) Medium dense, damp to moist, light yellowish to grayish brown, Silty, fine to - 2 - medium SAND; trace chunks of gray silt B5-2 :-f•.:•J:• 33 6 10 12 B5-3 - 27 116.1 17.5 :. -14.- B5-4 : CL/SC Stiff, moist, olive brown, Sandy CLAY to Clayey, fine to medium SAND 21 116.4 13.5 16 (pp.4.5-I-tsf) - 18 - -• :-.-- - 20 - B5-5 —SM Mediumdense, mot, fight t t 34 SAND 22 24- N - - 26 B5-6 -Becomes coarser grained; trace to few chunks of olive brown sandy clay 27 121.3 10.4 - . (p.p.4.5+tsf) - -28 - - - o B5-7 -Trace gravel-sized rock fragments - 41 32 - .. 34 - 1-Igure A-b, Log of Boring B 5, Page 1 of 2 SAMPLE SYMBOLS 0 ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL I] ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST .. DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) I I DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE I NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GEOCON PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 BORING B5 DEPTH 8 < SOIL I- Z it SAMPLEIN NO. 0 CLASS ELEV. (MSL.)318 DATE COMPLETED O44.2O16 FEET EQUIPMENT MARL M-5 BY: L RODRIGUEZ Q- MATERIAL DESCRIPTION - B5-8 - (p.p.4.5+tsf) 41 106.9 19.3 -36 :.i:: 1 138 40 . 1 B5-9 CL Stiff, moist, yellowish to grayish brown, Sandy CLAY; trace rock fragments; 24. - - . trace to few chunks of silt; trace wood debris - 42 - :•.:-- . . - .44. - B5-10 (p.p.4.5+tsf) 23 105.1 20.5 46 . 48 :..: 50 B5-11 -Trace wood debris . . 30 52 54 :). 56 58 60 - B5-12 ::YP. - SC SANTIAGO FORMATION (rs) Very dense, damp, brown, Clayey, fine to medium SANDSTONE; yellowish 92/9" - - - 62 - weakly cemented; trace magnesium -64- .?'. - - B5-13 (•4• --- ML SM/ - - -------- Very dense, damp, Silty, fine SANDSTONE to Sandy SILTSTONE, 87/11 - 66,- moderately cemented; micaceous . - BORING TERMINATED AT 66.5 FEET No groundwater encountered Backfihled with 13.1 M. bentonite grout slurry Figure A-5, Log of Boring B 5, Page 2 of 2 El ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL I] ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) SAMPLE SYMBOLS 19 DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GE000N PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 Of BORING B 6 Zw DEPTH SOIL I- Z U. Cl) FEET SA NO. 0 MPLE CLASS ELEV. (MSL.)310' DATE COMPLETED 04-05-2016 0 EQUIPMENT MARL M-5 BY: L RODRIGUEZ 0. 0 C.) MATERIAL DESCRIPTION - 0 - B6-I F9 - SM PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL (Qpcf) I - - Medium dense, damp, light yellowish brown to olive brown, Silty, fine to - 2 - J. medium SAND; trace clay - - - - B6-2 :p 34 - 6 - - 8 - - 10 B6-3 :/j CL Stiff, moist, olive dark brown, Sandy CLAY - 22 108.6 18.7 (p.p. 4.5+tsf) SM SANTIAGO FORMATION (Ts) - - 12 - - . Very dense, damp, yellowish to grayish brown, Silty, fine SANDSTONE; - :- weakly cemented - 14 B6-4 81/11" - 16 - • BORING TERMINATED AT 16 FEET No groundwater encountered Figure A-6, Log of Boring B 6, Page 1 of I 0 ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL - II ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) SAMPLE SYMBOLS 11 DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GE000N 0 PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 IX BORING DEPTH SAMPLE > < SOIL I— Z M ° -LL IN FEET NO. j 0 CLASS ELEV. (MSL.)302' DATE COMPLETED 04.06-2016 (0 0 111 0 .UJI Uj Co 20 EQUIPMENT MARL M-5 BY: B. KUNA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 B7-1 :f9: - SM PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL (Qpcf). • . j..i.• Medium dense, moist, yellowish brown, Silty, fme SAND; some small chunks 2 of green mottled white and yellowish brown siltstone, :l•H:::. . 6 B7-2 .. (p.p.4.5+tsf) 27 106.6 8.8 :.J• ____ __________________________________ ___ ___ ___ SM SANTIAGO FORMATION(Ts) 10 B7-3 Dense, moist, very light yellowish gray, Silty, fine SAND . 45 14 B74 iii: 35 16 BORING TERMINATED AT 16.5 FEET No groundwater encountered Figure A-7, Log of Boring B 7, Page 1 of I SAMPLE SYMBOLS 0 ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL E ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST U ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) IM DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE •.. CHUNK SAMPLE •.. WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GE000N PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 of BORINGB8 DEPTH >W < SOIL OQI. I- z Cl) IN FEET SAMPLE C CLASS ELEV. (MSL.)291' DATE COMPLETED 04.07-2016 LU Cl)III 0 W uj Co Ix o. - EQUIPMENT MARL M-5 BY: B. KUNA - MATERIAL DESCRIPTION - - - B8-J - SM PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL (Qpl) Medium dense, damp, yellowish brown, Silty, fine SAND mixed with brown - 2 - . and gray CLAY - B8-2 . (p.p.4.5+tsf) 33 106.0 11.3 6 .0 -.10 B8-3 -Becomes moist, increase in clay content - 28 12 : 14- - 16- B8-4 :: /:. CL Medium dense, moist, dark brown, Sandy CLAY 30 - 18 / 20 - - • B8-5 -: CL-SM Medium dense, moist, dark brown and gray, Sandy, CLAY with gray Silty 32 110.0 17.4 SAND - 22 - . (p.p: 4.5+tsf) - 24 - - - B84 -. -Gravel-size cemented material disturbed sample - 50/3" 26 - 28 - - 30 - 4. J - CL-SM SANTIAGO FORMATION (Ts) 19 - - B8-7 - 32 - Stiff, moist, brownish-yellow and orange, Silty CLAY interbedded with gray Silty, fine SAND; crystals of gypsum -34- Figure A-8, . G1928.52.01.GPJ Log of Boring B 8, Page 1 of 2 SAMPLE SYMBOLS D ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) 11 DISTURBED OR SAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE . ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GE000N PRflJFCT N0 1928-52-01 • BORINGB8 . DEPTH > I- < SOIL OOI_ Z lk <<0) - ° ZLL Ix IN SAMPLE NO. "'00 ELEV. (MSL.)291' DATE COMPLETED 04-07-2016 FEET LU EQUIPMENT MARL M-5 BY: B. KUNA 0.0 • MATERIAL DESCRIPTION B8-8 SM Dense, damp, brown, orange, gray and yellowish brown, Silty SAND 46 36 BORING TERMINATED AT 36.5 FEET No groundwater encountered Backfllled with 7.2 ft' bentonite grout slurry Figure A-8, Log of Boring B 8, Page 2 of 2 0 ... SAMPLE SYMBOLS SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL I) ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST U ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE • ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GEOCON PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 BORING B 9 0DEPTH I— SOIL (.) LU at SAMPLE NO. CLASS ELEV. (MSL.)303 DATE COMPLETED 04-05-2016 FEET 0 EQUIPMENT MARL M-5 BY: L RODRIGUEZ 0 0 • MATERIAL DESCRIPTION B9-1 - SM PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL (Qpf) Medium dense, moist, yellowish to grayish brown, Silty, fine to medium - 2 ..1f:L SAND; little chunks olive brown clay - - 1319-2 - -. SM/MI.. - - Medium dense, most, yellowish to grayish brown, Silty, fine SAND to Sandy 32 103.8 19.0 1 6 1 SELT (p.p4.5+tsf) 10 B93 - SANTIAGO FORMATION (Ts) . 86/11" . :••J•:: . Very dense, damp, light grayish to yellowish brown, Silty, fine - 12 • SANDSTONE; weakly cemented - . 1 14 . . 139-4 :::•• 52 16 :::: BORING TERMINATED AT 16.5 FEET No groundwater encountered Figure A-9, Log of Boring B 9, Page 1 of I SAMPLE SYMBOLS 0 ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL.. I] ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) 11 DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE •.. WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GE000N PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 BORING BIO w-.- It w DEPTH 0 < SOIL Z Li. cO it IN FEET SA NO. 0 LE CLASS ELEV. (MSL.)304 DATE COMPLETED 04.05-2016 0 20 EQUIPMENT MARL M-5 BY: L RODRIGUEZ Q- ____ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 1310-1 :r9 - SM/ML PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL (QpI) Medium dense, damp, grayish to yellowish brown, Silty, fine SAND to Sandy - - 2 SILT 4 B10-2 X -Partially disturbed sample - 32 111.0 15.7 - 6 - :.:.I.. - (p.p. 4.5+tsf) - 10 B10-3 :'.1.:: - SM SANTIAGO FORMATION (Ts) 72 - Very dense, damp, light grayish brown, to yellowish brown, Silty, fine - 12 - SANDSTONE; weakly cemented 14 - - B10-4 ::: 70 - 16 - BORING TERMINATED AT 16.5 FEET No groundwater encountered Figure A-lU, Log of Boring B 10, Page 1 of I D ... SAMPLE SYMBOLS SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL I] ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST U ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GE000N PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 BORING DEPTH > 8 I— < SOIL OI. Z IN oET CI.ASS ELEV. (MSL.)304 DATE COMPLETED 04-06-2016 16- 0 0 EQUIPMENT MARL M-5 BY: B. KUNA 0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION - - 0 B11-1 SM PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL (Qpf) - - Medium dense, moist, yellowish brown, Silty, fme SAND; mottled white and - 2 - :.hi.i yellowishbrown - - .4. - - 6 - BI 1-2 (p.p.4.Stsf - 24 105.5 19.7 10 B11-3 7 SM-CL Mixed with dark brown CLAY 35 114.9 12.1 (p.p. 4.5+tst) 12 riw - - 1311-4 35 - 16 - -SM r Dens;yellowishbrown,moist,Silty,fmetomecliumSAND - - i (p.p. 4.5+tsf -18- - 20 - B11-5 SC Dediim dense, moist,daik brown and olive-brown, Clayey to Silty, fine 22 1143 bA SAND - 22 - .2/ed (p.p.4.5+tsf) - - - 24 - - - • AX - - 26 - B11-6 28 i 28 1 30 - B11-7 ---- SM Stiff, moist, dark brown to olive brown, Sandy CLAY mixed With fight 31 110.3 14.7 -. grayish to yellowish brown Silty SAND - - ---------------------------------- - 32 34 Figure A-1 1, G1928•52•01:GPJ Log of Boring B II, Page 1 of 2 SAMPLE SYMBOLS SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL I] .. STANDARD PENETRATION TEST U .. DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) - ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GEOCON PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 BORING DEPTH >- 8 < SOIL 0 1 Z << (0 ZLL FEET SAMPLE NO. -J CI.ASS ELEV. (MSL.)304 DATE COMPLETED 04.06-2016 0 w III CO . 20 EQUIPMENT MARL M-5 BY: B. KUNA °. MATERIAL DESCRIPTION - B118 . - (p.p.4.5+tsf) 33 - 36 38 - .••• - 40 - B11-9 CL Becomes stiff, moist, olive brown, Silty CLAY 106.2 19.9 - - Bll-10 (p.p.4.5+ts - -42- 44 -33 Bit-li CL SANTIAGO FORMATION (Ts) - 50 - 46 - - Hard, moist gray and brown, laminated CLAYSTONE -. 48 - - 50 - BORING TERMINATED AT 50 FEET No groundwater encountered Backfilled with 9.8 ft' bentonite grout slurry Figure A-1 1, . Log of Boring B 11, Page 2 of 2. 0 ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL I] ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST U ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) SAMPLE SYMBOLS DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED-TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GE000N PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 BORING B12 ZLU.. DEPTH >- >. SOILSAMPLE 1 i-IN Oo,.. Z - (I) FEET 0 CLASS ELEV. (MSL.)305' DATE COMPLETED 04-06-2016 Ix EQUIPMENT MARL M-5 BY: B. KUNA °- MATERIAL DESCRIPTION B12-I T : - SM PREVIOUSLY PLACE FILL (Qpl) - - Medium dense, damp, yellowish-brown Silty, fine SAND with chunks of - 2 - olive-brown Sandy CLAY CL Very stiff, damp, dark brown to olive brown, fine Sandy CLAY - - (p.p.4.5+tsf) - - B12-2 ::,<:,: - 38 120.3 8.7 -6- -8- 812-3 : SM Becomes medium dense, moist, dark yellowish-brown, Silty fine SAND, 28 - . mottled orange and light grayish-brown 12 14 B124 ?- CL-SM Becomes stiff, moist, olive-brown CLAY interbedded with light 22 111.4 14.3 - 16 - - grayish-brown, Silty SAND, mottled orange (p.p. 4.5+tsf) 01 18 - SM SANTIAGO FORMATION (Is) - 14- Very dense, damp, gray, Silty, fine SAND, mottled yellow 20 812-5 :.t:}. 76 BORING TERMINATED AT 21 FEET No groundwater encountered Figure A-12, Log of Boring B 12, Page,1 of SAMPLE SYMBOLS 0 ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL I] ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST U ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE .. WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GEOCON I PERMIT # LMWP-002206 A.P.N. # 213-260-02,-03, - I 06,09 EST# NONE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH LAND AND WATER QUALITY DIVISION MONITORING WELL PROGRAM GEOTECHNICAL BORING CONSTRUCTION PERMIT SITE NAME: TOWN GARDEN AND ALICANTE PROPERTY SITE ADDRESS: PARCELS AT TOWN GARDEN RD. AND ALICANTE RD., CARLSBAD, CA 92009 PERMIT FOR: 6 GEOTECHNICAL BORINGS PERMIT APPROVAL DATE: 03/17/2016 PERMIT EXPIRES ON: 07/15/2016 RESPONSIBLE PARTY: SMITH CONSULTING ARCHITECTS-ARATI RANGASWAMY PERMIT CONDITIONS: All borings must be sealed from the bottom of the boring to the ground surface with an approved sealing material specified in California Well Standards Bulletin 74-90, Part Ill, Section 19.0. prill cuttings are not ancceitibje filiiiãtöiiäI,. All borings must be properly destroyed within 24 hours of drilling. Placement of any sealing material at a depth greater than 30 feet must be done using the tremie method. This work is not connected to any known unauthorized release of hazardous substances. Any contamination found in the course of drilling and sampling must be reported to DEH. All water and soil resulting from the activities covered by this permit must be managed, stored and disposed of as specified in the SAM Manual in Section 5, II, D-4. (ht.tp://www.sdcounty.ca;gov/deh/lwq/sam/manual quidelines.html) In addition, drill cuttings must be properly handled and disposed in compliance with the Stormwater Best Management Practices of the local jurisdiction. Within 60 days of completing work, submit a well/boring construction report, including all well and/or boring logs and laboratory data to the Well Permit Desk. This report must include all items required by the SAM Manual, Section 5, Pages 6 & 7. This office must be given 48-hour notice of any drilling activity on this site and advanced notification of drilling cancellation. Please contact the Well Permit Desk at (858) 505-6688. Veronica Tavizon H ---'--- APPROVED BY: ' DATE: 03/17/21 VERONICA TAVIZON APPENDIX APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING A laboratory test program is designed for each project-to evaluate the physical and mechanical properties of - the materials encountered at the site. We performed the laboratory tests in accordance with the current versions of the generally accepted test methods of the American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) or other suggested procedures. We tested selected soil samples for their maximum dry density and optimum moisture content, resistance value (R-Value), shear strength, expansion index, pH and resistivity, water- soluble sulfate characteristics, water-soluble chloride ion content, unconfmed compressive strength, consolidation characteristics and triaxial shear strength. The results of our laboratory tests are presented on Tables B-I through B-DC and Figures B-i through B-9. In addition, the in-place dry density and moisture content results are presented on the boring logs in Appendix A. TABLE B-I SUMMARY OF LABORATORY MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY AND OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT TEST RESULTS ASTM 01557 Maximum Optimum Sample No. Description Dry Density Moisture Content (Geologic Unit) (pcf) (% dry wt.) BI-1 Olive brown, Clayey fine to coarse SAND 123.4 12.0 B6-1 Light yellowish brown to olive brown, Silty fine to 122.3 11.9 medium SAND; trace clay Bli-lO Olive brown, Silty CLAY 119.7 12.7 TABLE B-li SUMMARY OF LABORATORY RESISTANCE VALUE (R-VALUE) TEST RESULTS ASTM D 2844 Sample No. - R-Value B5-1 8 Project No. G1928-52-01 -B-1 - May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 TABLE B-Ill SUMMARY OF LABORATORY DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS ASTM D 3080 Sample No. Dr) Density (pcf) Moisture Content (%) Peak [Ultimate'] Cohesion (ts1) Peak [Ultimate'] Angle of Shear Resistance (degrees) Initial Final 132-2 122.9 12.6 15.6 1,600 [1,200] 35 [34] 82-5 121.0 11.0 14.2 600 [300] 37 [37] 134-3 107.7 12.7 20.5 500 [490] 26 [24] 135-3 116.1 17.5 18.6 1,200 [1,380] 29 [23] 'Ultimate at end of test at 0.2 inch deflection TABLE B-IV SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TRIAXIAL SHEAR TEST RESULTS CONSOLIDATED-UNDRAINED ASTM D 4767 Total Stress Initial Dry. Initial Moisture Young's Modulus, Angle of Sample No. Density (pci) Content (%) Unit Cohesion Shear Resistance E (ksf) (psi) (degrees) B34 115.0 15.2 3,000 16 2,025 B84 106.6 17.1 3,200 18 1,780 TABLE B-V SUMMARY OF LABORATORY EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS ASTM D 4829 Pad Nos. Sample No. Moisture Content (%) Dry Density (PC) Expansion Index Test Expansion Classification 2013 CBC Soil Expansion Classification Before Test After 15 131-1 1 11.5 25.9 103.6 86 Medium Expansive 13 136-1 10.8 24.6 105.0 73 1 Medium J Expansive 12 B12-1 11.7 27.6 101.4 95 1 High I Expansive Project No. G1928-52-01 - B-2 - May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 TABLE B-VI SUMMARY OF LABORATORY POTENTIAL OF HYDROGEN (PH) AND RESISTIVITY TEST RESULTS CALIFORNIA TEST NO. 643 Sample No. Minimum Resistivity (ohm-centimeters) BI-1 7.8 410 136-1 . 8.0 530 TABLE B-Vu SUMMARY OF LABORATORY WATER-SOLUBLE SULFATE TEST RESULTS CALIFORNIA TEST 417 Sample No. Water-Soluble Sulfate Sulfate Severity Sulfate Class B1-1 0.344 Severe 52 136-1 0.138 Moderate SI B12-1 0.104 Moderate Si TABLE B-VIII SUMMARY OF LABORATORY WATER-SOLUBLE CHLORIDE ION TEST RESULTS CALIFORNIA TEST NO. T 291 Sample No. Chloride Ion Content (%) BI-1 0.075 B6-1 0.065 Project No. G1928-52-01 - B-3 - May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 TABLE B-IX SUMMARY OF HAND PENETROMETER TEST RESULTS ASTM D 1558 Sample No. Depth (feet) Geologic Unit Hand Penetrometer Reading, Unconfined Compression Strength (tsl) Estimated Undrained Shear Strength (ksf) B1-3 10 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B1-5 20 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B1-7 30 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B1-9 40 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B24 15 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B2-7 30 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B2-9 40 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B2-1 1 50 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B3-3 10 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B3-6 25 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B3-8 35 Qpcf 3.0 3.0 B3-9 40 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B3-10 45 Qpcf 4.0 4.0 B4-2 S Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B4-3 10 Qpcf . 45 4.5 B54 15 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B5-6 25 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B5-8 35 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B5-10 45 Qpcf 4.0 4.0 B6-3 10 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B7-2 5 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B8-2 5 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B8-5 20 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B9-2 5 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B10-2 5 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B11-2 5 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 13II-3 10 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B114 15 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B11.6 25 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 1311-7 30 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B11-9 40 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B12-2 5 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 B12-4 15 Qpcf 4.5 4.5 Project No. G1928-52-01 - 134 - May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 SAMPLE NO. B3-2 —6 —4 —c ---- 2 ----- --- 0 U) z 0 0 z 4 w 0 w a. 10 12 ___ ___ ___ 0.1 1 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE (ksf) Initial Dry Density (pcf) 112.6 Initial Saturation (%) 85 Initial Water Content (%) 15.2 Sample Saturated at (ksf) 0.5 CONSOLIDATION CURVE VIASAT BRESSI RANCH CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 31928.52.01.GPJ • Figure B-I GEOCON PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 SAMPLE NO. 83-8 —6 -t c -. -- - -- _- --- -. _- --- -" z 0 2 Lu Lu 8 10 --- --- ____ -- ----- ____ - 12 ____ ____ 0.1 1 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE (ksf) Initial Dry Density (pcf) 105.3 Initial Saturation (%) 100+ Initial Water Content 1 21.9 Sample Saturated at (ksf) J 2.0 CONSOLIDATION CURVE VIASAT BRESSI RANCH CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA .5201.GPJ Figure B-2 GE000N PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 SAMPLE NO. B4-2 -6 -- -4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - F 12 _ Ir 10 0.1 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE (ksf) Initial Dry Density (pcO 102.8 Initial Saturation (%) 52.6 Initial Water Content (%) 12.2 Sample Saturated at (ksf) .5 CONSOLIDATION CURVE VIASAT BRESSI RANCH CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 928-52-01.GPJ Figure B-3 GE000N ROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 SAMPLE NO. B5-4 -6 —2 0. ro 10 12 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE (ksf) Initial Dry Density (pcf) 116.4 Initial Saturation (%) 84.2 Initial Water Content (%) 13.5 Sample Saturated at (ksf) 2.0 CONSOLIDATION CURVE : VIASAT BRESSI RANCH CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Figure B-4 GEOCON PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 SAMPLE NO. B8-2 -6 —4 . -2 a .------- I: 10 1 .1 - --- ____ -- - -- 10 - --- •_100 APPLIED PRESSURE (ksf) Initial Dry Density (pcf) 106.0 Initial Saturation (%) 53.2 Initial Water Content (%) 11.3 Sample Saturated at (ksf) 1.0 CONSOLIDATION CURVE VIASAT BRESSI RANCH CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 01928-52-01.GPJ . Figure B-5 GEOCON PROJECT NO. G192852-01 SAMPLE NO. B11-2 -6 —4 —2 o •-__--.- .-.----------- 2 ----- --- o Cl) z 0 C.) I- z t w 0 It 0. C 10 12 0.1 1 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE (ksf) Initial Dry Density (pcf) 105.5 Initial Saturation (%) 91.4 Initial Water Content (%) 19.7 Sample Saturated at (ksf) 1.0 CONSOLIDATION CURVE VIASAT BRESSI RANCH CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 'Figure B-6 GE000N PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 SAMPLE NO. B11-5 -6 -4 -2 z Q 2_---- __ e -- 10 12 0.1 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE (ksf) Initial Dry Density (pcf) 114.7 Initial Saturation (%) !2~ Initial Water Content (%) 10.4 Sample Saturated at (ksf) CONSOLIDATION CURVE VIASAT BRESSI RANCH CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA G1928-52-01.GPJ - Figure B-7 GEOCON Failure Photo . ... MOHR'S CIRCLES . • 13.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 8.0 : 6.0 _________ 5.0 4.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 . 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 Normal Sttess (ksl) . . . . . STRESS-STRAIN . . 18000 . V 16000 14000 12000 U) 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 I'D 12 14 is is . . Strain, . Test Results . V. degrees . . 18.2 c,psf . . . . . 3200 Sample Description Sample Number . 138-4 Sample Depth (feet) . . . 15 • Material Description . . . Mottled White and Olive SILT Initial COnditions at Start of Stage . Sample ID (psf), minor-principal stress 2000 4000 8000 Height (inch) . . 4.820 4.741 4.592 Diameter (inch) • . . 2.423 2.443 2.461 Moisture Content (%) . . 17.1 17.1 17.1 Dry Density (pcf) . . . .106.6 106.6 106.6 Saturation (%) V V 79•5 79•5 79.5 Shear. Test Conditions • V Strain Rate (%/min) ,. . V V 0.2925 0.2867 0.2969 V Major Principal Stress at Failure (psf) V V . 12520 16630 24100 V Strain at failure (%) • . V . 2.49 4.10 13.27 V Deviator Stress and Fail (psf) V -10530 12630 16110 Geocon Incorporated • Triaxial Shear Strength - UU Test (staged) 6960 Flanders Drive V Project: ViaSat V V V V San Diego, California 92121 V Location: V V V GEOCON Telephone (858) 558-6900 Number G1928-52-01 CONGVI1'ANT$:7NC. V V Fax:,(858) 558-6159 V FIgure: B-8 V Failure Photo MOHR'S CIRCLES 12.0 . 11.0 10.0 9.0 _ 6.0 5.0 7.0 0.01 3.0 ... •'. . 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 Normal Stress (O . . . . . .—: STRESS-STRAIN 16000 14000 c~ 12000- 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 12 1 16 Strain, % Test Results . . . , degrees . 15.8 C, psf . . . 3000 Sample Description Sample Number . . . 133-4 Sample Depth (feet) . . . 15 Material Description . . Dark brown and yellowish brown Sandy lean CLAY Initial Conditions at Start of Stage. Sample ID (psf), minor principal stress. . . 2000 4000 8000 Height (inch) . . 4.820 4.776 4.710 Diameter (inch) . . . . . 2.417 2.428 2.434 Moisture Content (%) . . 15.2 15.2 15.2 Dry Density (pcf). 115.0 115.0 115.0 Saturation (%) . . . . . 88.1 88.1, 88:1 Shear Test Conditions Strain Rate (%/min) . . 0.2915 0.2858 0.2996 Major. Principal Stress at Failure (psf) 11300 14020 '21540 Strain at failure (%) . . 1.66 2.06 15.07. Deviator Stress and Fail (psf) . 9300 10030 13550 Geocon Incorporated Triaxial Shear Strength - UU Test (staged) 6960 Flanders Drive Project: ViaSat 'WI San Diego, California 92121 Location: . GEOCON Telephone (858) 558-6900 Number G1928-52-01 CoNsULTaNTS:;INQ.Fax: (858) 558-6159 a Figure: B-9 . . lwn APPENDIX C RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION VIASAT - BRESSI RANCH CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. G1928-52-01 RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS 1. GENERAL 1.11 These Recommended Grading Specifications shall be used in conjunction with the Geotechnical Report for the project prepared by Geocon. The recommendations contained in the text of the Geotechnical Report are a part of the earthwork and grading specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case of conflict. 1.2 Prior to the commencement of grading, a geotechnical consultant (Consultant) shall be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for substantial conformance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Report and these specifications. The Consultant should provide adequate testing and observation services so that they may assess whether, in their opinion, the work was performed in substantial conformance with these specifications. It shall be the responsibility of the. Contractor to assist the Consultant and keep them apprised of work schedules and changes so that personnel may be scheduled accordingly. 1.3 It shall be the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the work in accordance with applicable grading codes or agency ordinances, these specifications and the approved grading plans. If, in the opinion of the Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions such as questionable soil materials, poor moisture condition, inadequate compaction, and/or adverse weather result in a quality of work not in conformance with these specifications, the Consultant will be empowered to reject the work and recommend to the Owner that grading be stopped until the unacceptable conditions are corrected. 2. DEFINITIONS 2.1 Owner shall refer to the owner of the property or the entity on whose behalf the grading work is being performed and who has contracted with the Contractor to have grading performed. 2.2 Contractor shall refer to the Contractor performing the site grading work. 2.3 . Civil Engineer or Engineer of Work shall refer to the California licensed Civil Engineer or consulting firm responsible for preparation of the grading plans, surveying and verifying as-graded topography. 2.4 Consultant shall refer to the soil engineering and engineering geology consulting finn retained to provide geotechnical services for the project. GI rev. 07/2015 2.5 Soil Engineer shall refer to a California licensed Civil Engineer retained by the Owner, who is experienced in the practice of geotechnical engineering. The Soil Engineer shall be responsible for having qualified representatives on-site to observe and test the Contractor's work for conformance with these specifications. 2.6 Engineering Geologist shall refer to a California licensed Engineering Geologist retained by the Owner to provide geologic observations and recommendations during the site grading. 2.7 Geotechnical Report shall refer to a soil report (including all addenda) which may include a geologic reconnaissance or geologic investigation that was prepared specifically for the development of the project for which these Recommended Grading Specifications are intended to apply. 3. MATERIALS 3.1 Materials for compacted fill shall consist of any soil excavated from the cut areas or imported to the site that, in the opinion of the Consultant, is suitable for use in construction of fills. In general, fill materials can be classified as soil fills, soil-rock fills or rock fills, as defined below. 3.1.1 Soil fills are defined as. fills containing no rocks or hard lumps greater than 12 inches in maximum dimension and containing at least 40 percent by weight of material smaller than 3/4 inch in size. 3.1.2 Soil-rock fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps larger than 4 feet in maximum dimension and containing a sufficient matrix of soil fill to allow for proper compaction of soil fill around the rock fragments or hard lumps as specified in Paragraph 6.2. Oversize rock is defined as material greater than 12 inches. 3.1.3 Rock fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps larger than 3 feet in maximum dimension and containing little or no fines. Fines are defined as material smaller than 3/4 inch in maximum dimension. The quantity of fines shall be less than approximately20 percent of the rock fill quantity. 3.2 Material of a perishable, spongy, or otherwise unsuitable nature as determined by the Consultant shall not be used in fills. 3.3 Materials used for fill, either imported or on-site, shall not contain hazardous materials as defined by the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division4, Chapter 30, Articles 9 GI rev. 07/2015 and 10; 40CFR; and any other applicable local, state or federal laws. The Consultant shall not be responsible for the identification or analysis of the potential presence of hazardous materials. However, if observations, odors or soil discoloration cause Consultant to suspect the presence of hazardous materials, the Consultant may request from the Owner the termination of grading operations within the affected area. Prior to resuming grading operations, the Owner shall provide a written report to the Consultant indicating that the suspected materials are not hazardous as defined by applicable laws and regulations. 3.4 The outer 15 feet of soil-rock fill slopes, measured horizontally, should be composed of properly compacted soil fill materials approved by the Consultant. Rock fill may extend to the slope face, provided that the slope is not steeper than 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) and a soil layer no thicker than 12 inches is track-walked onto the face for landscaping puTposes. This procedure may be utilized provided it is acceptable to the governing agency, Owner and Consultant. 3.5 Samples of soil materials to be used for fill should be tested, in the laboratory by the Consultant to determine the maximum density, optimum moisture content, and, where appropriate, shear strength, expansion, and gradation characteristics of the soil. 3.6 During grading, soil or groundwater conditions other than those identified in the Geotechnical Report may be encountered by the Contractor. The Consultant shall be notified immediately to evaluate the significance of the unanticipated condition. 4. CLEARING AND PREPARING AREAS TO BE FILLED 4.1 Areas to be excavated and filled shall be cleared and grubbed. Clearing shall consist of complete removal above the ground surface of trees, stumps, brush, vegetation, man-made structures, and similar debris. Grubbing shall consist of removal of stumps, roots, buried logs and other unsuitable material and shall be performed in areas to be graded. Roots and other projections exceeding 1 V2 inches in diameter shall be removed to a depth of 3 feet below the surface of the ground. Borrow areas shall be grubbed to the extent necessary to provide suitable fill materials. 4.2 Asphalt pavement material removed during clearing operations should be properly disposed at an approved off-site facility or in an acceptable area of the project evaluated by Geocon and the property owner. Concrete 'fragments that are free of reinforcing steel may be placed in fills, provided they are placed in accordance with Section 6.2 or 6.3 of this document. GI rev. 07/2015 4.3 After clearing and grubbing of organic matter and other unsuitable material, loose or porous soils shall be removed to the depth recommended in the Geotechnical Report. The depth of removal and compaction should be observed and approved by a representative of the Consultant. The exposed surface shall then be plowed or scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches and until the surface is free from uneven fetures that would tend to prevent uniform compaction by the equipment to be used. 4.4 Where the slope ratio of the original ground is steeper than 5:1 (horizontal:vertical), or where recommended by' the Consultant, the original ground should be benched in accordance with the following illustration. TYPICAL BENCHING DETAIL Finish Ground Finish Slope Surface Remove All Unsuitable Material As Recommended By Slope To Be Such That Consultant . Sloughing OrShding I Does Not Occur Varies I I ,See Note 1, - See Note 2 No Scale DETAIL NOTES: (I) Key width "B" should be a minimum of 10 feet, or sufficiently wide to permit complete coverage with the compaction equipment used. The base of the key should be graded horizontal, or inclined slightly into the natural slope. (2) The outside of the key should be below the topsoil or unsuitable surficial material and at least 2 feet into dense formational material. Where hard rock is exposed in the bottom of the key, the depth and configuration of the key may be modified as. approved by the Consultant. 4.5 After areas to receive fill have been cleared and scarified, the surface should be moisture conditioned to achieve the proper moisture content, and compacted as recommended in Section 6 of these specifications. GI rev. 07/2015 5. COMPACTION EQUIPMENT 5.1 Compaction of soil or soil-rock fill shall be accomplished by sheepsfoot or segmented-steel wheeled rollers, vibratory rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or other types of acceptable compaction equipment. Equipment shall be of such a design that it will be capable of compacting the soil or soil-rock fill to the specified relative compaction at the specified moisture content. 5.2 Compaction of rock fills shall be performed in accordance with Section 6.3. 6. PLACING, SPREADING AND COMPACTION OF FILL MATERIAL 6.1 Soil fill, as defined in Paragraph 3.1.1, shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with the following recommendations: 6.1.1 Soil fill shall be placed by the, Contractor in layers that, when compacted, should generally not exceed 8 inches. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during spreading to obtain uniformity of material and moisture in each layer. The entire fill shall be constructed as a unit in nearly level lifts. Rock materials greater than 12 inches in maximum dimension shall be placed in accordance with Section 6.2 or 6.3 of these specifications. 6.1.2 In general, the soil fill shall be compacted at a moisture content at or above the optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM D 1557. 6.1.3 When the moisture content of soil fill is below that specified by the Consultant, water shall be added by the Contractor until the moisture content is in the range specified. 6.1.4 When the moisture content of the soil fill is above the range specified by the Consultant or too wet to achieve proper compaction, the soil fill shall be aerated by the Contractor by blading/mixing, or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is within the range specified. 6.1.5 After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted by the Contractor to a relative compaction of at least 90 percent. Relative compaction is defined as the ratio (expressed in percent) of the in-place dry density of the compacted fill to the maximum laboratory dry density as • determined in accordance with ASTM D 1557. Compaction shall be continuous over the entire area, and compaction equipment shall make sufficient passes so that the specified minimum relative compaction has been achieved throughout the entire fill. GI rev. 07/2015 6.1.6 Where practical, soils having an Expansion Index greater than 50 should be placed at least 3 feet below finish pad grade and should be compacted at a moisture content generally 2 to 4 percent greater than the optimum moisture content for the material. 6. Li Properly compacted soil fill shall extend to the design surface of fill slopes. To achieve proper compaction, it is recommended that fill slopes be over-built by at least 3 feet and then cut to the design grade. This procedure is considered preferable to track-walking of slopes, as described in the following paragraph. 6.1.8 As an alternative to over-building of slopes, slope faces may be back-rolled with a heavy-duty loaded sheepsfoot or vibratory roller at maximum 4-foot fill height intervals. Upon completion, slopes should then be track-walked with a D-8 dozer or similar equipment, such that a doier track covers all slope surfaces at least twice. 6.2 Soil-rock fill, as defined in Paragraph 3.1.2, shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with the following recommendations: 6.2.1 Rocks larger than 12 inches but less than 4 feet in maximum dimension may be incorporated into the compacted soil fill, but shall be limited to the area measured 15 feet minimum horizontally from the slope face and 5 feet below finish grade or 3 feet below the deepest Utility, whichever is deeper. 6.2.2 Rocks or rock fragments up to 4 feet in maximum -dimension may either be individually placed or placed in windrows. Under certain conditions, rocks or rock fragments up to 10 feet in maximum dimension may be placed using similar. methods. The acceptability of placing rock materials greater than 4 feet in maximum dimension shall be evaluated during grading as specific cases arise and shall be approved by the Consultant prior to placement. 6.2.3 For individual placement, sufficfient space shall be provided between rocks to allow for passage of compaction equipment. 6.2.4 For windrow placement, the rocks should be placed in trenches excavated in properly compacted soil fill. Trenches should be approximately 5 feet wide and 4 feet 'deep in maximum dimension. The voids around and beneath rocks should be filled with approved granular soil having a Sand Equivalent of 30 or greater and should be compacted by flooding. Windrows may also be placed utilizing an "open-face" method in lieu of the trench procedure, however, this method should first be approved by the Consultant. GI rev. 07/2015 6.2.5 Windrows should generally be parallel to each other and may be placed either parallel to or perpendicular to the face of the slope depending on the site geometry. The minimum horizontal spacing for windrows shall be 12 feet center-to-center with a 5-foot stagger or offset from lower courses to next overlying course. The minimum vertical spacing between windrow courses shall be 2 feet from the top of a lower windrow to the bottom of the next higher windrow. 6.2.6. Rock placement, fill, placement and flooding of approved granular soil in the windrows should be continuously observed by the Consultant. 6.3 Rock fills, as defined in Section 3.1.3, shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with the following recommendations: 6.3.1 The base of the rock fill shall be placed on a sloping surface (minimum slope of 2 percent). The surface shall slope toward suitable subdrainage outlet facilities. The rock fills shall be provided with subdrains during construction so that a hydrostatic pressure buildup does not develop. The subdrains shall be permanently connected to controlled drainage facilities to control post-construction infiltration of water. 6.3.2 Rock fills shall be placed in lifts not exceeding 3 feet. Placement shall be by rock trucks traversing previously placed lifts and dumping at the edge of the currently placed lift. Spreading of the rock fill shall be by dozer to facilitate seating of the rock. The rock fill shall be watered heavily during placement. Watering shall consist of water trucks traversing in front of the current rock lift face and spraying water continuously during rock , placement. Compaction' equipment with compactive energy comparable to or greater than that of a 20-ton steel vibratory roller or other compaction equipment providing suitable energy to achieve the required compaction or deflection as recommended in Paragraph 6.3.3 shall be utilized. The number of passes to be made should be determined as described in Paragraph 6.3.3. Once a rock fill lift has been covered with soil fill, no additional rock'fill lifts will be permitted over the soil fill: 6.3.3 Plate bearing tests, in accordance with ASTM D 1196, may be performed in both the compacted soil fill and in the rock fill to aid in determining the required minimum number of passes of the compaction equipment. If performed, a minimum of three plate bearing tests should be performed in the properly compacted soil fill (minimum relative compaction of 90 percent). Plate bearing tests shall then be performed on areas of rock fill having two passes, four passes and six passes of the compaction equipment, respectively. The number of passes required for the rock fill shall be determined by comparing the results of the plate bearing tests for the soil fill and the rock fill and by evaluating the deflection GI rev. 07/2015 variation with number of passes. The required number of passes of the compaction equipment will be performed as necessary until the plate bearing deflections are equal to or less than that determined for the properly compacted soil fill. In no case will the required number of passes be less than two. 6.3.4 A representative of the Consultant should be present during rock fill operations to observe that the minimum number of "passes" have been obtained, that water is being properly applied and that specified procedures are being followed. The actual number of plate bearing tests will be determined by the Consultant during grading. 6.3.5 Test pits shall be excavated by the Contractor so that the Consultant can state that, in their opinion, sufficient water is present and that voids between large rocks are properly filled with smaller rock material. In-place density testing will not be required in the rock fills. 6.3.6 To reduce the potential for "piping" of fines into the rock fill from overlying soil fill material, a 2-foot layer of graded filter material shall be placed above the uppermost lift of rock fill. The need to place graded filter material below the rock should be determined by the Consultant prior to commencing grading. The gradation of the graded filter material will be determined at the time the rock fill is being excavated. Materials typical of the rock fill should be submitted to the Consultant in a timely manner, to allow design of the graded filter prior to the commencement of rock fill placement. 6.3.7 Rock fill placement should be continuously observed during placement by the Consultant. 7. SUBDRAINS 7.1 The geologic units on the site may have permeability characteristics and/or fracture systems that could be susceptible under certain conditions to seepage. The use of canyon subdrains may be necessary to mitigate the potential for adverse impacts associated with seepage conditions. Canyon subdrains with lengths in excess of 500 feet or extensions of existing offsite subdrains should use 8-inch-diameter pipes. Canyon subdrains less than 500 feet in length should use 6-inch-diameter pipes. 0! rev. 07/2015 TYPICAL CANYON DRAIN DETAIL NA11JRAL ORJND ALLUVIUM AND 0LLLMUM RB.IOVAL BEDROCK SEE DEAL BELOW NO7E FINALOFPPEATOUTLET SHALL BE N0".PERFCPA1ED. 6 CIA. PERFORMED SDRMN PIPE a CUBIC FEElS FOOT OF OPEN GRADED GRAVEL SLRROUNDEDBY MSPAR 14MC (OREQUfl FILTERFABRIC - NOTES 1......B4NCH DIAMETER. SCHEDULE 80 PVC PERFORATED PIPE FOR FILLS IN EXCESS OF 100.FEEI IN DEPTH ORA PIPE LENGTH OF LONGER THAN 500 FEET. 2.....6.INCHDIAMETER. SCHEDULE 40 PVC PERFORATED PIPE FOR FILLS LESS THAN 100FEET IN DEPTH OR PIPE LENGTH SHORTER THAN 500 FEET. No SCALE 7.2 Slope drains within stability fill keyways should use 4-inch-diameter (or lager) pipes. GI rev. 07/2015 TYPICAL STABILITY FILL DETAIL Iff FORMATIOMAL MATERIAl. 1....ECCAVA1E EAEKCUTAT 1;1 INEUN1I0N (UNLESS OWERWER NO1EO. SE OF SThBIL TY FILl. TO BE3 FEET PIED FORMATIONAL MATERIAL. SLOPING A MINIMUM S% KID &OPE. 3....STABJU1Y FILL TO BE COMPOSED OF PROPERLY COMPACTED GRANULAR SOIL. 4.....C111MNEY DRAINS TO BE APED PREFABRJCATED CHIMNEY DR*JN PNSS.S (MPADRAN G20SH OR Ea'.JIVALENfl SPACED APPROXIMATELY 20 FEET CENTER TO CENTER AND FEer WIDE. CLOSER SPACING MAY BE REQUIRED IF SEEPAGE IS ENCOUNTERED. B.....FE.TER MATERIN..TO BEEN-IICH. OPEN-GRADED CRUSHED ROCK ENCLOSED IN APPROVED FLIER FAaNIc:(MIRAH 140141C). e..COuEcTSH PIPE TO BE-INCH MINEAUM DIAMETER PERFORATED. ThICIC-WAUSD PVC SCHECI&E4DOR EQUIVALENT. AND MOPED TO DRAIN AT 1 PERCENT MINIMUM TO APPROVED OUTLET. No SCALE 7.3 The actual subdrain locations will be evaluated in the field during the remedial grading operations. Additional drains may be necessary depending on the conditions observed and the requirements of the local regulatory agencies. Appropriate subdrain outlets should be evaluated prior to finalizing 40-scale grading plans. 7.4 Rock fill or soil-rock fill areas may require subdrains along their down-slope perimeters to mitigate the potential for buildup of water from -construction or landscape irrigation. The subdrains should be at least 6-inch-diameter pipes encapsulated in gravel and filter fabric. Rock fill drains should be constructed using the same requirements as canyon subdrains. GI rev. 07/2015 7.5 Prior to outletting, the final 20-foot segment of a subdrain that will not be extended during future development should consist of non-perforated drainpipe. At the non-perforated/ perforated interface, a seepage cutoff wall should be constructed on the downslope side of the pipe. TYPICAL CUT OFF WALL DETAIL FRONT VIEW NO SCALE SIDE VIEW —r cuT.opWAU. !i. I rwN(rVP SOUD5UODRAPE IP RATEDSUMM &O' rIIt&(rP NO SCALE 7.6 Subdrains that discharge into a natural drainage course or open space area should be provided with a permanent headwall structure. GI rev. 07/2015 TYPICAL HEADWALL DETAIL FRONT VIEW NO SCALE SiDE\ NOTE HEADWALL SHOULD OUTLE1AT TOE OF Flu. SLOPE OR INTO CONTROLLED SURFACE DRPJNAGE NO SCALE. 7.7 The final grading plans should show the location of the proposed subdrains. After completion of remedial excavations and subdrain installation, the project civil engineer should survey the drain locations and prepare an "as-built" map showing the drain locations. The final outlet and connection locations should be determined during grading operations. Subdrains that will be extended on adjacent projects after grading can be placed on formational material and a vertical riser should be placed at the end of the subdrain. The grading contractor should consider videoing the subdrains shortly after burial to check proper installation and functionality. The contractor is responsible for the performance of the drains. GI rev. 07/2015 8. OBSERVATION AND TESTING 8.1 The Consultant shall be the Owner's representative to observe and perform tests during clearing, grubbing, filling, and compaction operations. In general, no more than 2 feet in vertical elevation of soil or soil-rock fill should be placed without at least one field density test being performed withinthat interval. In addition, a minimum of one field density test should be performed for every 2,000 cubic yards of soil or soil-rock fill placed and compacted. 8.2 The Consultant should perform a sufficient distribution of field density tests of the compacted soil or soil-rock fill to provide a basis for expressing an opinion whether the fill material is compacted as specified. Density tests shall be performed in the compacted materials below any disturbed surface. When these tests indicate that the density of any layer of fill or portion thereof is below that specified, the particular layer or areas represented by the test shall be reworked until the specified density has been achieved. 8.3 During placement of rock fill, the Consultant should observe that the minimum number of passes have been obtained per the criteria discussed in Section 6.3.3. The Consultant should request the excavation of observation pits and may perform plate bearing tests on the placed rock fills. The observation pits will be excavated to provide a basis for expressing an opinion as to whether the rock fill is properly seated and sufficient moisture has been applied to the material. When observations indicate that a layer of rock fill or any portion thereof is below that specified, the affected layer or area shall be reworked until the rock fill has been adequately seated and sufficient moisture applied. 8.4 A settlement monitoring program designed by the Consultant may be conducted in areas of rock fill placement. The specific design of the monitoring program shall be as recommended in the Conclusions and Recommendations section of the project Geotechnical Report or in the final report of testing and observation services performed during grading. 8.5 We should observe the placement of subdrains, to check that the drainage devices have been placed and constructed in substantial conformance with project specifications. 8.6 Testing procedures shall conform to the following Standards as appropriate: 8.6.1 Soil and. Soil-Rock Fills: 8.6.1.1 Field Density Test, ASTM D 1556, Density of Soil In-Place By the Sand-Cone Method M rev. 07/2015 8.6.1.2 Field Density Test, Nuclear Method, ASTM D 6938, Density of Soil and Soil-Aggregate In-Place by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth). 8.6.1.3 Laboratory Compaction Test, ASTM D 1557, Moisture-Density Relations of Soils and Soil-Aggregate Mixtures Using 10-Pound Hammer and 18-Inch Drop. 8.6.1.4. Expansion Index Test, ASTM D 4829, Expansion Index Test. 9. PROTECTION OF WORK 9.1 During construction, the Contractor shall properly grade all excavated surfaces to provide positive drainage and prevent ponding of water. Drainage of surface water shall be controlled 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 until such time as permanent drainage and erosion control features have been installed. Areas subjected to erosion or sedimentation shall be properly prepared in accordance with the Specifications prior to placing additional fill or structures. 9.2 After completion .of grading as observed and tested by the Consultant, no further excavation or filling shall be conducted except in conjunction with the services of the Consultant. 10. CERTIFICATIONS AND FINAL REPORTS 10.1 Upon completion of the work, Contractor shall furnish Owner a certification by the Civil Engineer stating that the lots and/or building pads are graded to within 0.1 foot vertically of elevations shown on the grading plan and that all tops and toes of slopes are within 0.5 foot horizontally of the positions shown on the grading plans. After installation of a section of subdrain, the project Civil Engineer should survey its location and prepare an as-built plan of the subdrain location. The project Civil Engineer should verify the proper outlet for the subdrains and the Contractor should ensure that the drain system is free of obstructions. 10.2 The Owner is responsible for furnishing a final as-graded soil and geologic report satisfactory to the appropriate governing or accepting agencies. The as-graded report should be prepared and signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer experienced in geotechnical engineering and by a California Certified Engineering Geologist, indicating that the geotechnical aspects of the grading were performed in substantial conformance with the Specifications or approved changes to the Specifications. GI rev. 07/2015 LIST OF REFERENCES 2013 California Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, based on the 2012 International Building Code, prepared by California Building Standards Commission, dated July, 2013. ACI 318-11, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary, prepared by the American Concrete Institute, dated August, 2011. ACI 330-08, Guide for the Design and Construction of Concrete Parking Lots, prepared by the American Concrete Institute, dated June 2008. Anderson, J. G., T. K. Rockwell, and D. C. Agnew, Past and Possible Future Earthquakes of Significance to the San Diego Region: Earthauake Spectra. 1989, v. 5, no. 2, p. 299-333. ASCE 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, Second Printing, April 6, 2011. Boore, D. M., and G. M Atkinson (2008), Ground-Motion Prediction for the Average Horizontal Component of PGA, PGV, and 5%-Damped PSA at Spectral Periods Between 0.01 and 10.0 S, Earthquake Spectra, Volume 24, Issue 1, pp. 99-138, February 2008. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessmentfor the State of California, Open File Report 96-08, 1996. California Emergency Management Agency, California Geological Survey, University of Southern California (2009). Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning, State of California, County of San Diego, Point Loma Triangle, Scale 1:24,000, dated June 1. Campbell, K. W., and Y. Bozorgnia, NGA Ground Motion Model for the Geometric Mean Horizontal Component of PGA, PGV, PGD and 5% Damped Linear Elastic Response Spectra for Periods Ranging from 0.01 to 10 s, Preprint of version submitted for publication in the NGA Special Volume of Earthquake Spectra, Volume 24, Issue 1, pages 139-171, February 2008. Chiou, Brian S. J., and Robert R. Youngs, A NGA Model for the Average Horizontal Component of Peak Ground Motion and Response Spectra, preprint for article to be published in NGA Special Edition for Earthquake Spectra, Spring 2008. County of San Diego, San Diego County Multi Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan, San Diego, California -Final Draft, July, 2010. Jennings, C. W., 1994, California Division of Mines and Geology, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas, California Geologic Data Map Series Map No. 6. Kennedy, M. P., and S. S. Tan, 2008, Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30 'x60' Quadrangle, California, USGS Regional Geologic Map Series, Map No. 2, Scale 1:100,000. Legg M. R., J. C. Borrero, and C. E. Synolakis (2002), Evaluation of Tsunami Risk to Southern California Coastal Cities, 2002 NEHRP Professional Fellowship Report, dated January. May 23, 2016 Project No. G1928-52-01 Revised July 5, 2016 LIST OF REFERENCES (Concluded) 15 Leighton and Associates, Inc. (2004). Addendum to the As-Graded Reports of Mass Grading Concerning the Completion of Settlement Monitoring, Planning Areas PA-1 through PA-5, Bressi Ranch, Carlsbad, California, dated October 11 (Project No. 971009-014). Leighton and Associates, Inc., (2011). Geotechnical Update Study, Bressi Ranch Industrial Planning Area 2, Carlsbad, California, dated April 12 (Project No. 971009-065). NOVA Services, Inc. (2015), Report - Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Lots 2, 3, and 4, Proposed HCP Bressi Ranch Development, Northwest Corner of Town Garden Road and Alicante Road, Carlsbad, California, dated June 17 (Project No. 2015291). Risk Engineering, EZ-FRISK, 2012. Unpublished Geotechnical Reports and Information, Geocon Incorporated. United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service, Web Soil Survey, http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. USGS computer program, Seismic Hazard Curves and Uniform Hazard Response Spectra, http://earthguake.usgs.gov/research/hazmaps/design/. Project No. G1928-52-Ol May 23, 2016 Revised July 5, 2016 (èjtY of C arlsbad Print Date: 06/07/2019 Permit No: PREV2018-0095 2426 Town Garden Rd BLDG-Permit Revision 2132601000 $ 0.00 Job Address: Permit Type: Parcel No: Valuation: Occupancy Group: # Dwelling Units: Bedrooms: Project Title: Description: Work Class: Residential Permit Revisi Status: Closed - Finaled Lot#: Applied: 04/06/2018 Reference #: DEV2016-0015 Issued: 04/25/2018 Construction Type Permit 06/07/2019 Finaled: Bathrooms: Inspector: Orig. Plan Check #: CBC2017-0381 Final Plan Check #: Inspection: VIASAT BRESSI RANCH CAMPUS VIASAT: ADD CANOPY AND CMU SCREEN WALL /I EV CHARGERS Applicant: Owner: Contractor: ARATI RANGASWAMY VIASAT . THE WHITING TURNER CONTRACTING CO 6155 El Camino Real 858-793-4777 CARLSBAD, CA 92009 858-792-0600 FEE AMOUNT MANUAL BUILDING PLAN CHECK FEE $262.50 Total Fees: $ 262.50 Total Payments To Date: $ 262.50 Balance Due: $0.00 Building Division 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad CA 92008-7314 1 760-602-2700 1 760-602-8560 f I www.carlsbadca.gov PLAN CHECK REVISION OR Development Services critY of DEFERRED SUBMITTAL Building Division Carlsbad APPLICATION 1635 Faraday Avenue 760-602-2719 B-I 5 www.carlsbadca.gov Original Plan Check Number CBC20I7-0381 Plan Revision Number PRE.'J2O1 8' OMS Project Address 2426 TOWN GARDEN ROAD - INTERSECTION OF TOWN GARDEN ROAD AND EL CAMINO REAL General Scope of Revision/Deferred Submittal: ADDED UTILITY YARD CANOPY & FOOTING DETAILS FOR CMU SCREEN WALL THAT SURROUNDS SERVICE YARD 2 CONTACT INFORMATION: Name_ARATI RANGASWAMY Phone 858-793-4777 Fax 858-7934787 Address 13280 EVENING CREEK DRIVE SOUTH, SUITE 125 city SAN DIEGO Zip 92128 Email Address aratir@ScSd.COrn Original plans prepared by an architect or engineer, revisions must be signed & stamped by that person I . Elements revised: Plans Calculations 0 Soils 0 Energy 0 Other 2. Describe revisions in detail 3. List page(s) where each revision is shown ADDED LOCATION OF UTILITY YARD CANOPY AS-101 ADDED LOCATION OF UTILITY YARD CANOPY AS-103 ADDED FLOOR & ROOF PLANS, ELEVATIONS, SECTIONS, AND DETAILS OF UTILITY YARD CANOPY AS-501 ADDED CMU SCREEN WALL FOOTING DETAILS AND UTILITY YARD CANOPY DETAILS S1.1 ADDED FOUNDATION & FRAMING PLAN & DETAILS FOR UTILITY YARD CANOPY S2.0 AOOED ovTL1 401.P C*M'j 4& AOD IC11 £5.6401 C0'Att41A4_ArSE,G*_ib Does this revision, in any way, alter the exterior of the project? DYes JZ No Does this revision add ANY new floor area(s)? 1 Yes Does this revision affect any fire related issues? 0 Yes 101 Is this a complete 'et? 0 €Signature 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008 :760-602-2719 Ex www.carlsbadca.gov Date S/Ib//6 558 Email: building@carlsbadca.gov EsGil A SAFEbuiLt'Company DATE: 4117/2018 U APPLICANT U JURIS. JURISDICTION: cARLSBAD- PLAN CHECK #.: 018-0095(CBC2017-0381.REV) SET: I PROJECT ADDRESS: 2426 TOWN GARDEN ROAD PROJECT NAME: VIASAT FOR BRESSI RANCH The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdictions building codes. The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be .corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at EsGil until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: EsGil staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. EsGil staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: Telephone #: Date contacted: Mail Telephone LII REMARKS: (by: ) Email: Fax In Person By: Bert Domingo Enclosures: EsGil 4/10/2018 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 • San Diego, California 92123 • (858) 560-1468 • Fax(858)560-1576 (DO NOT PAY— THIS IS NOT AN INVOICE] VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURISDICTION: CARLSBAD PLAN CHECK #.: CBC2018- 0095(CBC20 17-0381. REV) PREPARED BY: Bert Domingo DATE: 4/17/2018 BUILDING ADDRESS: 2426 TOWN GARDEN ROAD BUILDING OCCUPANCY: U BUILDING PORTION AREA (Sq. Ft.) Valuation Multiplier Reg. Mod. VALUE ($) Air Conditioning Fire Sprinklers TOTAL VALUE Jurisdiction Code 1CB IBY Ordinance 1997 UBC Building Permit Fee v 1997 UBC Plan Check Fee V Type of Review: Repetitive Fee I Repeats * Based on hourly rate IJ Complete Review El Other. El Hourly EsGil Fee El Structural Only 2.5 Hrs.@* $105.00 I $262.501 Comments: In addition to the above fee, an additional fee of $ is_due_( hour for the CalGreenrev!ew. Sheet 1 of 1 J WISEMAN+ROF-I STRUCTURAL ENGINEE AEFCelVell APR Clry 0620,8 or S 8ujLCARLs. * STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS FOR VIASAT BUILDING 14- UTILITY YARD CARLSBAD, CA FEBRUARY 12,2018 W + R J0I...#17-035.01A E ExP.241.Jcf il 1* 9915 Mira Mesa Blvd. Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92131 TEL. (858) 536-5166 WRENGINEERS.COM pitan(l if 018 LN2 TANK FOUNDATION - WISEMAN+ROHY STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS I . .. .. . . - I rtc ' U ': 'r fl 1, (I ;;; -•;- ! —( NJ Ll C H .. .k :...4+ ..,.. if Ael 'I Ti N : I • . I . ... co -SHALL BE COMMUNICATED TO SCA PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OF THE FOUNDATION PAD. I 112412018 11,1211 ____ WEIGHTS _AND _SHIPPING _DATA MODEL- Vs-9000 VS-1I000 VS-13000 VS-15000 PSIG 175 250 400 500 175 250 400 500 175 250 400 1 500 175 250 400 500 borg 12.07 17.24 27.58 34.41 12.01 11.24 21.58 34.47 12.01 11.24 27.58 34.41 12.07 11.24 21.58 34.47 WEIGHT POUNDS 29.400 32,300 38.900 45,100 35,200 38.700 46,100 52.400 41,100 45.700 55.100 59,700 48,000 52,600 63,400 70.400 EMPTY KILOGRAMS 13,364 14,682 17,645 20,451 16,000 11.591 21,183 23.768 18.955 20,773 24,993 21,019 21.818 23,909 28,758 31,933 POUNDS 111,400 120.300 127,000 133,200 142.700 146,100 154.100 159,800 169.800 173.900 183.200 181,800 195.800 200.400 211,100 215.600 OXYGEN KILOGRAMS 53,364 54,682 51.606 60,419 64,864 1 66.409 69,899 72,484 1 71,182 19.045 83.098 85.185 89,000 1 91,091 95.753 1 959.031 WEIGHT NITROGEN POUNDS 91.700 _9.4,690 101,300 107,500 111,300 114,800 122.800 158,500 132,400 136.400 145.800 150.400 152,700 157,200 168.000 113.200 FULL KILOGRAMS 41,682 43,000 15,949 48,761 50.591 52,182 55.101 58.281 60,182 62,000 66,134 68,220 69.409 71,455 16.204 710.432 ARGON POUNDS 136.800 139,800 146,400 152,600 166,400 169,900 177,900 183,500 198,100 202.100 211.500 216,100 228.400 233.000 243,700 247,700 KILOGRAMS 62.182 63.545 66,406 69,218 15,636 11,227 80.694 83.234 90,045 91.864 95,935 i 98,021 103.818 105,909 110.540 1,101,824 SHIPPiNG INCHES CL t W f H)l 348 x 114.2 x 114.2 1 407 t 114.2 x 114.2 466 x 114.2 x 114.2 525 x 114.2 x 114.2 IMENSI0NSMM'S CL • W ' H)l 8,840 x 2,901 x 2.901 10.338 s 2,901 x 2,901 1 11,837 x 2,901 x 2.901 13,335 x 2,901 x 2,901 I CAPACITIES I I INNER VESSEL. DESIGN DATA MAWP' PSIG 1 115 I 250 I 400 1 500 I borg 1 - 2.07 1 17.24 I 27.58 1 34.47 DESIGN PRESSURE PSIG 1 213.5 1 288.5 I 438.5 1 579.5 I I borci 1 - 4.72 1 19.89 I 30.23 1 39.95 I 4 DIM A FOOT PAD 1-3/4 [44] THIC 9000111000/13000 SCALE I/IS TIP 3 PLACES 19 (4831 k- a 8-112±1/16 (216±11 MATERIAL OF CONSTRUCTION: I SA240 304 STAINLESS STEEL OUTER VESSEL DATA CODE COMPUANCE IFULL VACUUM PER CGA-341 DESIGN °F -20° TO 300° TEMPERATURE °C -29° TO 149° MATERIAL OF CONSTRUCTION: I A36 CARBON STEEL INSULATiON TYPE: I VACUUM AND MULTILAYER INSULATION EVACUATION CONNECTION: 3-112" PUMPOUT PORT VACUUM GAUGE CONNECTION: HASTINGS DVR6 BUILDING CODE- DESIGNED FOR CURRENT BUILDING CODE SEE CHART POLICY *NP-I80 Per the LN2vandYes. the tank 1a rated et250ps0g. The Liquid will be aimed atlower pressure because o?the pressure building and pressure relief safely ratings as this Is the proper set-up for liquid use. But for stniuml engineering use the full weight with the tank rating at 250 psig. I G I 21460 I ADD DIM PG 2 I jso 11116118 I £ I - I ADDED SOOPSI INFO I JBR 1 11124/14 IAPPROVED' DATE I 0 I 14219 I UPDATED WEIGHTS I J 110,20/09 11IWAIM.EM.EllIM Io°' .IJCII0/07/081 C I 14121 I CIIG FOOT PAD DETAILS I JJC 16/17109 1 SEE B.O.M. UNLESS 1160: 0111.110122108 A I 13909 I CKG INK 156 FOOT PAD I JJC I 1109/09 OTHERWISE STATED I: JKI,O/I3/08 REVI (CR NO I DESCRIPTION BY I DATE VI60T US AT at0R1TITS004 I81. RCIID/08/08 AT C l PARTS IA WARTS I fli.. K.1111-10/15108 Disstui & Stsge. New Prague Oparetirars 0, Dmevatica Experience Perfonrrajice.e THE MATERIALS AND INFORMATION. INCLUDING T60IOHLESS OIIIEMISE SPECIFIER lITLEO&D VS-9000 THRU 15000 SS COLD rRIHCIPLES OF DESIGN CONTAINED IN THIS IN Slam ARE ID ODES. IS THE (XCLUSIYE PROPERTY OFCHART INC., AN Nis: STRETCH I75/250/400/500PSI IS CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY INFoHHATION.IFfI± 118 THIS INFORMATION HAY JOT BE REPRODUCED. COPIED, OR LOA ED, IN PART 0910 WHOLE. lws ± I' Nt C-14190888 JRev 6 IS THE INFORMATION TO BE RELATED TO AM psonlR PLACE DECIMALS ± 05 I PAST I 51511 9116001 CHART'S PRIOR WRITTEN COIISEOT. II PLACE DECIHALS ± 05 1/5:1' I '" 14190888 1 OF 2 4-314 (1211 5-I/8 (1301- 18 (451] 02-I [ 5443 ] TIP 4 PLACES 5-114 (1331- 5-5/8 (143)-, 19 [483] 02_I18,!/8 [54] TIP 4 PLACES 1-3/4±1/I6 1191±11 FOOT PAD 2 (51] THO 15000 SCALE IllS TIP 3 PLACES 111 145 TANK HEIGHT MODEL DIM AREF 216:1: 11 VS-9000 348 (8840] VS-1 1000 407 [10338] VS-13000 466 [11837] p 1-3/4±1/IS [197±1] VS 5000 525 [13335] CG HEIGHT MODEL I DIM "W REF VS-90001 192 148661 VS-11000 221 56151 VS-13000 251 1636TF VS-15000 280 171171 SCALE NA 29-15 PER LN2 VENDOR: I suggest we use an anchor bolt template for the actual tank that Is ordered when pouring the pad. Jso. the San= drawing does not show the vacuum jacketed withdrawal valve. This Is an Important when It comes to laying out the vacuum piping. I can work with Cqrowodw or CHART an this detail? OVAHIAG i..I AMER -i4190888 4-114 11081 4-114 (lOB] 52-7/I6 1I3321 TYP LIFT - .---c-rr- ----.... BOLTING PATTERN SHOWN ON THIS SHEET AND TANK 00 INFORMATION INDICATED ON SHEET I SHALL BE THE BASIS OF DESIGN. / I ANY CHANGES SHALL BE COMMUNICATED TO THE SCA PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OF THE I FOUNDATION PAD. I 1/24/2018 I - 18-Il/IS -- 14 741 TYP 26-1/16 (6611 / TYP /0;i ri inn 36-9/16 (9 40-13/19 I DtIJJS AT CHAMMUMMM APPROVEDI DATE LPARTS AT alARTPAWi11 ' JJC I 0/01/OHs flistrItutton & Storage. NOW plaque Opwatiora Innovatioa Es wience. Perforiiesca° MATERIALS ADD INFORMATION. INCLUDING THE IIDLESS OTOERSISE SPECIFIED TITLE 0&D VS-9000 TH RU 15000 SS (010 I1CIPIIS OF DESIGN CONTAINED IN THIS PRINT, DIREIISIODS AM IN INCHES. THE EXCLUSIVE PROPERTY OF CHART INC.. AND IOIIRIRC($: STRETCH I 75/250/400/500PS I CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. 10)5 INFORMATION NAT tot RE R(PGODDCED. FRACTIONS III PIED, Oil LOANED. IN PART 02 IN IlIOLE, NOD ANUS A- C-14190888 Rev 6 TIE INFOlIlAT IOU TO BE RELATED TO ANY PANTY 2 PLACE DECIMALS ± III MU PAST WITHOUT CHARTS PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT. 3 PLACE RECIIIALS ± 08 I/5:I ees 14190888 I 2 OF 2 I IRISA ANEMITSCMEK COMPANY Company Designer : Feb 8, 2018 Job Number 3:43 PM Checked By____ Model Name : ViaSat LN2 Tank Concrete Properties law P Ikfl (Z rkfl IIi, Th,n Allz flArlci+.,llhh f',,tI,fl I ,. Q4--Pr I Conc3000NW 3156 1372 .15 .6 .084 3 1 60 60 2• .Conc3500t1W. .3409 1482. .1.5 .6 .084 35 I . 60 3 Conc4000NW 3644 1584 .15 .6 .084 4 1 60 60 Con63000LW 2085 907. . .15 . .6 . . .064. . .'3 .75 60 . 60 5 Conc3500LW 2252 979 .15 .6 .064 3.5 .75 60 60 _L Con.c4000LW 2408 104: .15.H .6 .064 4• .75.60.1--760 . General Design Parameters Label Max Bendlnn Chk MaxShearChk Top Coverlini Bottom Corfln1 F-1 I Typical I I I I 1.5 I 3 Slab Rebar Parameters Label Top Bar Bottom ... Max Top Bar ..Min Top Bur.. Max Bat Bar ...Mln Bot Bar ... Spacing Incrementlini Reber Options I I I Typical I #8 I #8 I 18 I 3 I 18 I 3 I 2 I Optimize Soil Properties Label Overburderfksfl Passive[k] Friction Coefficient Gross/Net F-1 I Footing 1 .1 I 0 .3 I Gross Soil Definitions Label Suborade Moduiusllb/in"31 Allowable 8earinnlksfl Depth Properties Default? FT I Default I 100 I 4 None I Yes Point Loads and Moments (Cat 1: DL) Latl flirHnn IAnf,,rrk k..ftl N5 Y 32 _a N6 V 32 _L N7 V 32 - Point Loads and Moments (Cat 26: ELX) IhI IlrrtInn IA,,nIh,,1flt It-01 N7 Y 41.7 _2._ MS. .. .. . 417 N5 V -83.4 - Point Loads and Moments (Cat 28: ELZi Lahpl flIrcIInn RAi2evnihiewif fr.ftl ir N6 V -._-- . N.7 : . • Y . • : •..44•7: . _L N5 V 41.7 Load Combinations Label S... ServiceA... SF Cat --- FRn..CaL..Fen..at ... Far- .M. Fan Cat Psir (t Fin (,at P ('at Pie. rat ra. ('+ ,. =EMNMMMMfflMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM .1Efl . MMMMMMMMMM RiSAFoundation Version 10.0.1 [C:\Usersldmaestas\Desktop\LN2 Tanik.fnd] Page 1 D es : Feb 8, 2018 IIIRISA Job Number Company : 343 PM Checked By_____ ANEMEISCHEK COMPANY Model Name : ViaSat LN2 Tank Load Combinations (Continued) Label S... SeMceA... SF N" II4I___ Envelope Slab Soil Pressures (By Combination) Label UC LC Soil Pressurelksfl Allowable Bearinalksfl Point I I I SI I .589 I 13 2.357 4 I N2 I Design Strips Label Reber Annie from P1... No. of Desian Cuts Deslan Rule I DSI 0 25 Typical 2 . . QS-2 . 90. . 25 . . . Typical Strip Reinforcing Label UC Ton LC Too Bars Governin... UC Bat LC Rot Bars!.. .overnIn... UC Shaar LC (nvarntn I DSI 1 0 1 N/A I NA .077 3 #8@141n DSI-XI 1 .047 1 3 DSI-X5 2 DS2 '..038 1 3: 48@1.61fl I DS2Xi8 ;02. 1 .3. 1 !!816ln DSZ-X23 . .Q59 . . 3 . 0S2-X22 RlSAFoundation Version 10.0.1 [G:\Users\dmaestas\DesktoplLN2 Tanik.fnd] Page 2 Detail Graphic + ROHY STRUCTURAL ENOINEERS By DM DATE PROJECT ViaSat LN2 Tank Anchorage SHEET NO. - OF_______ JOB NO.17-035 TensionAnchorage Check Anchors Nu= 29.90k (Ea. Anchor) d= 1.50in Anet 1.405InA2 F= 58ks1 Grade= 36 4= 0.75 F' 4000psl 4 Anchors total @ base plate 4N= 61.13k Okay USE: 1.501n F1554A.B. Grade 36 Check Development Bar Bar Size: #4 Ab= 0.200inA2 db= 0.50in F= 60ksi Bend Dia= 3.00m n= NJ[4FY(2Ab)) = 6.64 USE: 7 #4 Bars TOTAL Development Length edh— 0.70db*1(0.02*Fy)NrJ = 6.64in Min= 8.00in USE: fdh= 8.00in Embedment Length C= 2" dr + db dh + 1/2 Bend Diam. = 12.00m USE: 12.00in Embedment J Minimum Footing Thickness t= 2 + 2db + 3" dr + 2" dr = 22.00in I USE: 22.00m Thick Footing--] Pullout Capacity +NP=8*A5RG*fIC Washer Size: 2.5 Inches Square = 75.3k _ www.hiltl.us Profis Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 1 Specifier: Project: ViaSat LN2 Tank Address: Sub-Project I Pos. No.: Phone I Fax: I Date: 2/9/2018 E-Mail: Specifier's comments: I Input data Anchor type and diameter Heavy Hex Head ASTM F 1554 OR. 361 112 Effective embedment depth: h f = 19.000 In. Material: ASTM F 1554 Proof Design method AC1 318-14! CiP Stand-off Installation: eb = 0.000 In. (no stand-off); t = 0.500 In. Anchor plate: k xi, x t = 14.000 In. x 14.000 In. x 0.500 In.; (Recommended plate thickness: not calculated Profile: no profile Base material: cracked concrete, 4000, f1' = 4000 psi; h = 30.000 in. ReInforcement: tension: condition A. shear: condition B; anchor reinforcement tension edge reinforcement: none or < No.4 bar Seismic loads (cat. C, D, E, or F) Tension load: yes (17.2.3.4.3(d)) Shear load: yes (17.2.3.5.3 (c)) Geometry (In.] & Loading [lb. In.Ib] z IT Input data and results must be checked for agreement with the existing conditions and for pimmibllllyl PROFIS Anchor ( c) 2003-2009 HIM AG. FL-9494 Schoen Hilt Is a registered Trademark of 11111 AG. 8diaen _ www.hlftl.us Profis Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 2 Specifier Project: ViaSat LN2 Tank Address: Sub-Project I Poe. No.: Phone I Fax: I Date: 219/2018 E-Mail: 2 Load case/Resulting anchor forces Load case: Design loads Anchor reactions lib] Tension force: (+Tension, -Compression) Anchor Tension force Shear force Shear force x Shear force y 1 29900 6000 0 6000 2 29900 6000 0 6000 3 29900 6000 0 6000 4 29900 6000 0 6000 max. concrete compressive strain: - max. concrete compressive stress; - (psi] resulting tension force in (xly)—(0.00010.000): 119600 (Ib) resulting compression force In (xly)=(0.000I0.000): 0 (Ibj 3 Tension load AY 03 04 Tension 01 02 Load Nan [lb] Capacity 4) N0 (Ib] Utilization AN NJ4) No Status Steel Strength* 29900 61335 49 OK Pullout Strength* 29900 62382 58 OK Concrete Breakout Strength" N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Side-Face Blowout, direction -- WA WA N/A NIA anchor having the highest loading "anchor group (anchors In tension) Tension Anchor Reinforcement has been seiectedl 3.1 Steel Strength Nan = AwN fut ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.12) 4) NkNUS ACI 318-14 Table 17.3.1.1 Variables Aan,N (In.2] lute [psi] 1.41 58000 Calculations Nan (!b] 81780 Results Nan [lb] $Stew Na [ibi N55 [lb] 81780 0.750 61335 29900 3.2 Pullout Strength NpN = W , N, ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.3.1) N, = 8 A1 ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.3.4) 4) NIN k N, ACI 318-14 Table 17.3.1.1 Variables [in.2] . f [psi] 1.000 3.12 1.000 4000 Calculations N,jlb] 99776 Results Npi jib] 4) concrete 4) seismic 0 nonduco. 0 N55 jib] Nue [lb] 99776 0.700 • 0.750 1.000 52382 29900 Input data and results must be checked for agreement with the wdalfng conditions and for plauslbilltyl PROFIS Anchor (c) 2003-2009 Hilt AG FL-949 Schaan Hilt Is a registered Tmderra,k of Hilt AG. Schaan EThJ www.hlltl.us Profis Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 3 Specifier: Project; VIaSat LN2 Tank Address: Sub-Project I Pos. No.: Phone I Fax: I Date: . 21912018 E-Mail: 4 Shear load Load V (ib] CapacIty V [Ib] UtilizatIon VJ4) V Status Steel Strength' 6000 31894 19 OK Steel failure (with lever arm)' N/A Pryout Strength" 24000 Concrete edge failure in direction N/A * anchor having the highest loading' "anchor group (relevant anchors) 4.1 Steel Strength Va = 0.6 A,v fUw ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.5.1.2b) 4) V.W a VU. ACI 318-14 Table 17.3.1.1 N/A N/A N/A 250187 10 OK N/A NIA N/A Variables A35,v On.1 f (psi] 1.41 58000 Calculations V (lb] 49068 Results Vss (Ib] 4)inew $ V5 (Ibi V Libj 49068 0.650 31894 6000 4.2 Pryout Strength V. = k p w ad.N w Nb] ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.5.3.1 b) $ V 2! V ACI 318-14 Table 17.3.1.1 Ada see ACI 318-14, Section 17.4.2.1, Fig. R 17.4.2.1(b) =gh2 of ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.42.1 c) V CON = + 2e ' .0 ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.42.4) ' 3hF ed.N = 0.7 + 0.3 (4J!L) 1.0 ACI 318.14 Eq. (17.4.2.5b) V q.N = MAX(25stti. :!. aul 1) :91.0 ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.7b) coc Nb 16 0 °h ACI 3I8-14 Eq. (17.4.2.2b) Variables ko he 11n.1 °O1.N [in.] 9N (in.] ; [In.] 2 19.000 0.000 0.000 'V eN Cc [In.] k0 x a 4 (psi] 1.000 - 16 1.000 4000 Calculations AN. [in.2] ANoo (in.2] 'V eai.N V eth.N 'V ed,N 'V —.M Nb (ib] 4241.13 3249.00 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 136901 Results Vcpo (Ib] $ corlarote 4 G.WMIG Muhms. 4) Vcm (Ib] Vua (ib] 357410 0.700 1.000 1.000 250187 24000 5 Combined tension and shear loads PV Utilization INV (%] Status 0.571 0.188 513 46 OK PNv =A + Input data and msulis must be thanked for agreement with the existing conditions and for plausibillyl PROMS Anchor (c)2003-2009 Hill AG, Ft.41494 Sctraan 111111 is aisgistored Trademark of Hilti AG. Schaan www.hiitLus Profis Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 4 Specifier. Project: ViaSat LN2 Tank Address: Sub-Project I Poe. No.: Phone I Fax: I Date: 219/2018 E-Mail: 6 Warnings The anchor design methods In PROFIS Anchor require rigid anchor plates per current regulations (ETAG 001!Annex C, EOTA 1R029, etc.). This means load re-distribution on the anchors due to elastic deformations of the anchor plate are not considered - the anchor plate Is assumed to be sufficiently stiff, In order not to be deformed when subjected to the design loading. PROFIS Anchor calculates the minimum required anchor plate thickness with FEM to limit the stress of the anchor plate based on the assumptions explained above. The proof If the rigid base plate assumption Is valid Is not carried out by PROFIS Anchor. Input data and results must be checked for agreement with the existing conditions and for plausibility! Condition A applies when supplementary reinforcement Is used. The CD factor Is Increased for non-steel Design Strengths except Pullout Strength and Pryout strength. Condition B applies when supplementary reinforcement Is not used and for Pullout Strength and Pryout. Strength. Refer to your local standard. Checking the transfer of loads Into the base material and the shear resistance are required in accordance with ACI 318 or the relevant standardl An anchor design approach for structures assigned to Seismic Design Category C, D. E or F is given In ACI 318-14, Chapter 17, Section 17.2.3.4.3 (a) that requires the governing design strength of an anchor or group of anchors be limited by ductile steel failure, if this is NOT the case, the connection design (tension) shall satisfy the provisions of Section 17.2.3.4.3 (b), Section 17.2.3.4.3 (c). or Section 17.2.3.4.3 (d). The connection design (shear) shall satisfy the provisions of Section 17.2.3.5.3(a), Section 17.2.3.5.3(b). or Section 17.2.3.5.3(c). Section 17.2.3.4.3(b)! Section 17.2.3.5.3 (a) require the attachment the anchors are connecting to the structure be designed to undergo ductile yielding at a load level corresponding to anchor forces no greater than the controlling design strength. Section 17.2.3.4.3(c)! Section 17.2.3.5.3(b) waive the ductility requirements and require the anchors to be designed for the maximum tension! shear that can be transmitted to the anchors by a non-yielding attachment. Sect!on 17.2.3.4.3 (d) I Section 17.2.3.5.3 (C) waive the ductility requirements and require the design strength of the anchors to equal or exceed the maximum tension / shear obtained from design load combinations that Include E, with E increased by oi'. The design of Anchor Reinforcement Is beyond the scope of PROFIS Anchor. Refer to ACI 318-14, Section 17.4,2,9 for information about Anchor Reinforcement. Anchor Reinforcement has been selected as a design option, calculations should be compared with PROFIS Anchor calculations. Fastening meets the design criteria! Ipput data and resutLa neat be thanked for agreement with the existing conduces and for plauslbllltyl PROFIS Mthor (c) 2003-2009 Huh AG, p.9494 Schoen Hilt ha a registered Trademark of Hilt AG, Schraan ILJ www.hlltius Profis Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 5 Specifier ProJeèt: ViaSat 1N2 Tank Address: Sub-Project I Poe. No.: Phone I Fax: I Date: 219/2018 E-Mail: 7 Installation data Anchor plate, steel: - Anchor type and diameter Heavy Hex Head ASTM F 1554 GR. 36 1 1/2 Profile: no profile Installation torque: - Hole diameter In the fixture: d1 1.563 In. Hole diameter In the base material: - In. Plate thickness (Input): 0.500 In. Hole depth In the base material: 19.000 In. Recommended plate thickness: not calculated Minimum thickness of the base material: 20.500 in. Drilling method; - Cleaning: No cleaning of the drilled hole Is required Coordinates Anchor In. Anchor x y c., c,5 c c 1 -4.250 -3.875 2 4.250 -3.875 3 -4.250 3.875 4 4.250 3.875 Input data and results must be checked ray agreement with the existing conditions and for plauslbilltyl PROFIS Anchor (c) 2003-2009 Hill AG, FL-9494 Schoan HIM be registered Tradomwli cIHIJIl AG. Schasn LI!J www.hlltl.us Profis Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 6 Specifier: Project: ViaSat LN2 Tank Address: Sub-Project I Pos. No.: Phone I Fax: I Data. 219/2018 E-Mail: B Remarks; Your Cooperation Duties Any and all information and data contained in the Software concern solely the use of Hull products and are based on the principles, formulas and security regulations In accordance with Hiltl's technical directions and operating, mounting and assembly instructions, etc., that must be strictly complied with by the user. All figures contained therein are average figures, and therefore use-specIfic tests are to be conducted prior to using the relevant Hilti product. The results of the calculations carried out by means of the Software are based essentially on the data you put in. Therefore, you bear the sole responsibility for the absence of errors, the completeness and the relevance of the data to be put in by you. Moreover you bear sole responsibility for having the results of the calculation checked and cleared by an expert, particularly with regard to compliance with applicable norms and permits, prior to using them for your specific facility. The Software serves only as an aid to interpret norms and permits without any guarantee as to the absence of errors, the correctness and the relevance of the results or suitability for a specific application. You must take all necessary and reasonable steps to prevent or limit damage caused by the Software. in particular, you must arrange for the regular backup of programs and data and, If applicable, carry out the updates of the Software offered by Huh on a regular basis. if you do not use the AutoUpdate function of the Software, you must ensure that you are using the current and thus up-to-date version of the Software In each case by carrying out manual updates via the Huh Website. Hilti will not be liable for consequences, such as the recovery of lost or damaged data or programs, arising from a culpable breach of duty by you. Input data and results must be checked for agreement with the exMng condlllons and for piousibflhtyl PROFIS Aechor (0) 2003-2009 HIS AG, FL-9494 Schaan HBO Is a registered Tredewaik of HIM AO, Schaan UTILITY YARD CANOPY DESIGN WISEMAN+ROHY STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS I. W+R Structural SK-1 DM ViaSat B14 Utility Canopy Feb 12, 2018 at 10:38 AM B14 Utility Canopy.r3d Designer : DM 10:39 AM 111RISA Job Company : W+RStructurai EngIneers Feb 12.2018 Number : Checked By:_____ ANEMETSCH5CCOMV4Y Model Name : ViaSat 1314 Utility Canopy (Global) Model Settings Display Sections for Member Calcs 5 Max Internal Sections fort Member.'Calcs;. 97 Include Shear Deformation? Yes ncrease Nailing Capacitvfor Wind?.: ..• Yes . . I nclude Warping? Yes Trans Load Btwn Intersecting Wood Wall.? Yes* . Area Load Mesh (lnA2) 144 Merge Tolerance (In) •. .. •:.• .12 .. •. P-Delta Analysis Tolerance 0.50% Include P-Delta for Walls? . Yes Automatically Iterate Stiffness for Walls? Yes Max Iterations for Wail Stiffness .. . 3 . :. •:. Gravity Acceleration (ft/secA2) 32.2 Wall MeshSJze .(lri. . . :. •.. 24 •. •. - .: . igensolution Convergence Tol. (1.E-) 4 Vertical Axis.. •.• :. . . . . fl-:: .... ..: . Global Member Orientation Plane XZ aticSolver. .. 1 .. . - .:. . •..: SpirCe AcceFerted Dynamic Solver Accelerated Solver Hot Rolled Steel Code AISC 14th(360-10): LRFD AdruststIffAess? . .. . : . : No. .:. :. RlSAConnection Code AISC 14th360-10): ASD Côl:d Formed Steel Code . AIS1 S1.0-'I2: ASD•. .. Wood Code AWC NDS-1 5:ASD Wood Temperature .: : - : '.:. <lOOF . Concrete Code ACI 318-14 Masoñ'ryCode.. ... ..... :. . ACt 530-13: ASD : Aluminum Code AAADMI-15: ASD - Building AlS(; 14th(360-10): ASLJ Number of Shear Regions 4 RegicnSpácing .lncrement.(iñ): . . . ... 4 .. . '. .. Biaxial Column Method Exact Integration Parnre Beta Factor (PCA).......:' Concrete Stress Block Rectangular Use Cracked Sections?. : .: Yes . . Use Cracked Sections Slab? No Bad Framing Warnings? Unused Force Warnings? Yes Min. i Bar Diám. Spacing? :. .. . No . . Concrete Rebar Set I REBAR_ SET _ASTMA6I 5 Min.% Steel for Columii. :: : 1. : Max % Steel for Column 18 RISA-31D Version 16.0.1 [E:\...1717-035.01A ViaSat Phase 4 Arch'I SiteCalcs\B14 Utility Canopy.r3d] Pagel Company W+R Structural Engineers IIIRISA Designer : DM Feb 12.2018 Job Number : AM ANEMETSCIIEKCOMPN4Y Model Name ViaSat B14 Utility Canopy Checked By:.._.... (Global) Model Settings, Continued Seismic Code ASCE 7-10 Seismic Base Elevation (ft : .. . Not Entered. Add Base Weight? Yes ct:x. . .02. .. CtZ .02 TX (sec) .: : Not Entered T Z (sec) Not Entered R . . . . ... . 3-- R Z 3 CtExp.X . . . :. : . 75 . . Ct Exp. Z .75 Dl... OS I TL (sec) 5 Risk Cat.: . . . ... .. .. . .ir•fl . . . Drift Cat : Other Z• ....... ..•. ........ . X FdZ 4 14 RhdZ: 11 Rho - Hot Rolled Steel Properties Iak.1 C fl1 i rI.ii td,, Tk...... I4 re.,VLIt %/b.I.jrl...11 15.. - I - - -- A992 -----I 29000 - - -. - _11154 - --- 1 .3 .65 -.----------- .49 50 1.1 65 _1.1...._ 2.-A36Gr..36 .29oo: 11t54 .3 . .65 : A9. 36 1.5...58_:-1;2. 1.. A572 Gr.50 29000 11154 .3 .65 .49 50 1.1 65 _1J_ _.L. A500 Gr B RND 29000 _11154 3 65 527 42 1 4 58 1 3 _&. A500Gr.B Rect 1 29000 _11154 .3 .65 .527 46 1.4 58 13 6 . A53Gr.B• ±29000 11154. $.;3 : .65 . 4.49 ..•35 .. 12 _L. A1085 29000 11154 .3 .65 .49 50 :46.60 1.4 65 1.3 Hot Rolled Steel Section Sets I kI Trn, .-n I .4 D..I A r..J1 I.... r.-Al I__ - .L Column HSS6x6x4 - Column - SguareTube500 -- .---- --- Gr.B Rest ---. Typical 5.24 5.24 28.6 28.6 45.6 2 Beams .HSS8x4x4. Beam Tube 500 Gr.B Rect Tvnical .5:24 14.4 42.5 35.3 i.... Girders HSS8x6x4 Beam Tube 500 Gr.B Rect Typical 6.17 36.4 56.6 70.3 Hot Rolled Steel Design Parameters I kI I ...4hrfb1 16-U1 I EU-w.itii1r-- ' IIUEli rii --___-- - -- -,,-i Iri [l RISA-313 Version 16.0.1 [E:...\17\I7-035.01AViaSat Phase 4 Arch'l SiteCalcs\B14 Utility Canopy.r3d] Page 2 Designer : DM 10:39 AM IIIRISA Company : W+R Structural Engineers Feb 12, 2018 Job Number : Checked By:_____ ANEME1$CHO(COMPN(Y Model Name : ViaSat B14 Utility Canopy Joint Coordinates and Temperatures Label X Ifti Y 1111 Z Ifti Tema FR 0et2th From Dien... NI 0 0 0 0 . _2_.'..N2 17 0 f 0 . . _. N3 0 0 14.5 0 4 . N4. IT ... 0 . .. 145 o: 5 N5 0 10 0 0 N6 : AT : 0. : 0.. : : a N7 0 10 14.5 0 8 .; :.N8:. . 17 -... . •. .14.5 0: . : . N9 -1.5 10 0 :NIO . .... 0 10 18.5 .. ... 10 . .. 0. .... . ii. Nil -1.5 10 14.5 0 12 N12 185 10 145 0 ii N13 . . -1.5 10 16.5 0 iL: . ..N14• . 48.5.. . . 10.:.. 16.5 . :0 j. N15 -1.5 10 7.25 0 N16 A 185 10 725 0 Member Area Loads (BLC I : Dead) Joint A Joint 13 Joint C Joint D Direction Distribution Magnitude[psf] NO I N13 I N14 I NIO I Y I A-B I -8 Member Area Loads (BLC 2: Roof Live) Joint A Joint B Joint C Joint D Direction Distribution Magnitude[psfJ lit N9 I N13 I N14 I N10 I V I A-B I -20 Member Area Loads (BLC 3: EQ) Joint A Joint B Joint C Joint D Direction Distribution Macnitudelosfi Iii N9 I N13 I N14 I N10 I Z I A-B I 4 Basic Load Cases BLC Description Cateaory )tGravitv Y Gravity Z Gravity Joint Point Distributed Area(Me... Surface(P I Dead . DL 2 Roof Live 3 EQ EL I I 4 BLC 'I Traflslent Area. . None 4 5 BLC 3 Transient Area, None 4 Load Combinations Descriotion SoP... S... BLC Fact..BLC Fact..BLC Fact..BLC Fact.RLC Fact..RLC Fct..RLC Fet..HLC Ft..RLC Ft.Rti Fnf M 10ft—MMIMM . MnMM"M===M=MOM=M RISA-3D Version 16.0.1 [E:\...I7\17-035.01A ViaSat Phase 4 Arch'I SiteCalcs\B14 Utility Canopy.r3d] Page 3 Designer : DM 10:39 AM I IRISA Company : W+R Structural Engineers Feb 12, 2018 Job Number : Checked By:_____ ANEMETSCHEKCOMPAN Model Name : ViaSat B14 Utility Canopy Enveloøe Joint Reactions Il,+ V 11,1 I f' V r1II • i' 7 nu I r' RAy fl, Al I,' IAV ri, C41 1 0 ia-, VL. &I N3 max 0 .7-1 1.247 1 -.668 1 -6.136 1.. .035 1. 0 1.. .th1n 0 j 1.247 1 -.668. 1 -6.136 i: .035 1 0 NI 0 1 .894 1 -.667 1 -6.114 1 .009 0 .i 4 ... min- 0-' 7 .894: 1-.667 1 -6.114 7 .009 1 .0 7 N2 max 0 1 .894 1 -.667 1 -6.114 1... -.009 1 0 .7- 6 1 jfl 0 .7- 894 .L -667 1 -6114 1 -009 .7- 0 1 N4 max 0 11 1.247 .7- -.668 1 -6.136 .7- -.035 1 0 1 8 mb 7' 1.247 .. 7 : _-.668 7 -6.136 7 :035 7 .0... 7 N6 max 0 1 0 1 0 1 01 0 1 0 j m1n.._0 _: :0 0 .7 7.:.ff... 7_ 0. 1. ji. N13 max 0 1 0 .i 0 -7- 0 1 0 .Z I .1.2. . ..0:. .:70 I.10 . fl. N15 max 0 .7- 0 1 0 .7- 0 1 0 1 0 j :_0.1 O:.:V..07 Q 7 j N12 max 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1.. 0 1. 0 .7- 4 .. ..::.o.:;:.7..o..L 17 Totals: max 0 7 .:7.0. 4.283 7 -2.669 7 18 ....i.1 . - Envelope Joint Displacements AnInt V fini I f V Ilni I t, 7 flnl I (' V If, V D.s+..Hnn II' 7 D..4..4.... I I f' 1.... NI max 0 7 01. 0I07 7 0 L7 2 'min .7 0 ....___ N2 rfl 0 . j_ 0 1. 0 j. 0 .1 0 0 L .7 :0 .7 0 7OLo . . i_ 5 N3 max 0 .7-. .0 L 0 1 0 L 0 i _0 .L. . . 0 1.. p•• :..0•.. . 1• :.O N4 max .7-.0 7- 0 1 0 1 0 1- 0 7_ 8•rrn07.07•.0 . 0...7-...0. ...707 9 N5 rnç 0 1 0 .7- .417 L 0 7 -2.499e-05 7 -2.555e-04 7 10 jyno..q p:.•.47. L.0.. -2:4a.o57-2.555e-o4.7 II N6 0 1 0 7 .417 .7- 0 .1.. 2.499e-05 1. 2.555e-04 ..L. . . ... .. . o: :. :: .417: .7- . 0. 7: 2.499e-05 1. 2.5556-04 .L 13 N7 0 1. 0 .L .419 7 -8.271e-04 -9.98e-05 -3.094e-05 7 14. : :• I. 0 . '7_ 419 7 8.27e-04 -.98e05 1. -3.094e-0S 7 15 NB max 0 1 0 1.. .419 7- -8.271e-04 7 9.98e-05 I 3.094e-05 1. _IL Max lii ••• :. 7- 0 . .7-. .419 7 -8.27te-04 .L9.98è-05 .L3,094e-051 IL. N9 0 1 .003 1. .418 L 0 1.L 0 1 1 0 1 _________ mlii 0 1 003 .7- 418 1.. 0 .7 - 0 1 0 1 NIO 0 1. .003 L .418 1 0 ..L 0 1 0 1 .20 : :0 . 7-._.003.'1_ .418 1 7 :TO :7 .0 21 NIl max 0 .1..1 -.002 .7-. .418 7 -8.271e-04 7 0 7 0 1. 22, minF 0 1.. --.002 1... 418 7 -8271 e.04 7 0 1.. 0 1 23 N12 maxI 0 7 -.002 7 .418 7 -8.271e-04 7 0 7 0 7 0 .1.. -002 L1 418 7- 8271e-04 7- 0 7 0 1 25 NI 3 max 0 j_ .017 1 .418 .7- 0 .7- 0 1 0 1 26 mhn.0 5 L.o171..4l87 ..o7.o.7 7- N14 max 0 j.. .017 .7- 27 .418 7 0 7 .0 1 0 1 '28 m1n0.:.L:017 ..418 ..L L0 I 29 N15 max 0 ..L -.055 1 .418 7 -2.546e-06 7 0 .7- 0 1 30 munO 7 -0557 .4.18 L -2.46e-06I 0.. .1 0 ..z t. N16 max 0 1 j. -.055 1 .418 .7- -2.546e-06 .1 0 1 0 1 rn . '.p 7 -.0551 .418 7 -2.548e-0S,7 ...0..7- 0. 7 RISA-3D Version 16.0.1 [E:\...\17\17-035.OIA ViaSat Phase 4 Arch'l SiteCalcs\B14 Utility Canopy.r3d] Page 4 Company : W+R Structural Engineers Feb 12, 2018 RISJ. Designer : DM 10:39 AM Job Number : Checked By_ ANEMETSCHEKCOMNY Model Name ViaSat B14 Utility Canopy Envelope AISC 14th(360-10): LRFD Steel Code Checks Mn,k f,.1 f'k,.I, I .rce1 I 1' Ok..,. I ....rsn ri , ..i*.... n.i ...L:*I..i Il_I t*iá... .j.*.i_ - FSL I MI HSS6x6x4 161 0 7 1 .011 0z71816582169363864 1.38.64 1 H1:1b M2. HSS6X6x4 .161 Z. Oii L.. . 1 181.658 216.936 38.64 38.64 1 Hi-lb 3 M3 HSS6x6x4 .162 ..Q. 7 .012 0 z 181.658 216.936 38.64 38.64 1 HI- lb 4 M4. HSS6x6x4 .162 Q.... Z .012 0 , . • 181.658 216.936 38.64 38.64 1 HI- lb .. M5 HSS8x6x4 .021 l.A Z .006 1.458 z 7,167.436 255.438 45.18 58.305 1... HI-lb ._ M6 HSS8x6x4 028 t4 7 009 '1458 j 13245 255 438 45 18 .58..305 2-11-11-115 1 7 M7 HSS8x4x4 .050 t2 t9 7 .005 14.438 7 156.719 216.936 26.719 45.885 1 HI-lb T M8 HSS8x4x4 050 7219 7 005 14,438 y L 156 719 216 936 26.71G 45885 1... HI-lb 9 M9 HSS8x4x4 .118 10 7 .008 _Q z 7 134.543 216.936 26.719 45.885 1... HI-lb .10 MW. HSS8x4x4 .049 jQ 7 _.004 . .. .. Z. 134.543 216.936 26:719 45.885 1. H1-1b b - •• • RISA-313 Version 16.0.1 (E:...\17\17-035.01A ViaSat Phase 4 Arch'l SiteCalcs\Bl4 Utility Canopy.r3d] Page 5 6)1eR-c r,2e\) 4 .r 125 Ro,ulbfor.0 B. ø,,ngth Re,I,n and Mmort UnIto em kind k4( W+R Structural Engineers 1!1 ViaSat B14 Utility Canopy SK-2 Feb 12,2018 at 10:39 AM B14 Utility Canopy.r3d www.hlitl.us Prof Is Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 1 Specifier: DM Project: B14 Utility Canopy Address: Sub-Project I Pos. No.: Cast-In Anchorage Phone I Fax Date: 2/1212018 E-Mail: Specifier's comments: I Input data Anchor type and dIameter. Effective embedment depth: Material: Proof: Stand-off Installation: Anchor plate: Profile: Base material: Reinforcement: Seismic loads (cat. C, D, E, or F) Geometry [in.] & Loading [lb ft.Ib] Hex Head ASTM F 1554 GR. 36518 h0f = 8.000 In. ASTMFI5S4 Design method ACI 318-14/CiP = 0.000 In. (no stand-off); t = 0.500 In. lx k x t = 14.000 in. x 14.000 in. x 0.500 In.; (Recommended plate thickness: not calculated Square HSS (AISC); (Lx W xl) = 6.000 In. x 6.000 in. x 0.250 In. cracked concrete, 4000, f©' = 4000 psi; h = 12.000 in. tension: condition B, shear: condition B; edge reinforcement: none or < No. 4 bar Tension load: yes (17.2.3.4.3 (d)) Shear load: yes (17.2.3.5.3 (c)) 15 I Input data and results mat be checked for agreement with the existing conditions and for plauslbtltyl PROMS Anchor (0)2003-2009 HUll AG, FL-9494 Schaan HUll Is a registered Trademark of HUH AG. Schaan www.hllti.us Company: W+R Structural Engineers Specifier: DM Address: Phone I Fax: I E-Mail: Page: Project: Sub-Project I Pos. No.: Date: I= I m-m @3 Prof Is Anchor 2.7.5 2 B14 Utility Canopy Cast-In Anchorage 2/12/2018 2 Load case/Resulting anchor forces Load case: Design loads Anchor reactions [lb] Tension force: (+Tension, -Compression) Anchor Tension force Shear lbrce Shear force x Shear force y 1 3680 203 203 0 2 0 203 203 0 3 3680 203 203 0 4 0 203 203 0 max. concrete compressive strain: 0.12 L%e] max. concrete compressive stress: 541 IpsU resulting tension force in (xJy(-5.000I0.000): 7360 FIb] resulting compression force In (y)=(6.275I0.000): 8230 [lb] 3 Tension load Load N11 [lb] Capacity N Fib] Utilization PN = NUJ+ N Status Steel Strength 3680 9831 38 OK Pullout Strength* 3680 7627 49 OK Concrete Breakout Strength" 7360 25545 Concrete Side-Face Blowout, direction" N/A N/A *anchor having the highest loading "anchor group (anchors in tension) 3.1 Steel Strength Nw = Avo.N ful, AC1318-14Eq,(17.4.1.2) $ NkN 3 ACl318-14 Table 17.3.1.1 Variables A60,N Vfl.1 L [psi] 0.23 58000 Calculations N [lb] 13108 Results N [lb] $atew 0 N (Ib] Nsu [1b] 13108 0.750 9831 3680 29 OK N/A N/A 3.2 Pullout Strength Np N =8Ab $ NPN Variables ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.3.1) ACt 318-14 Eq. (17.4.3.4) ACi 318-14 Table 17.3.1.1 Abe On.1 ). lc [psi] 1.000 0.45 1.000 4000 Calculations No FIb] 14528 Results N FIb] $ concrete seismic $ 4, Np, FIb] Nua [ib] 14528 0.700 0.750 1.000 7627 3680 Input data and results must be checked for agreement with the existing conditions and for plauslbllltyl PROFIS Anchor (0)2003-2009 Hull AG, PL-9494 Schaan Hull Is a registered Trademark of Mliii AG. Sthasn www.hlltLus Profis Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 3 Specifier DM Project: B14 Utility Canopy Address: Sub-Project I Pos. No.: Cast-In Anchorage Phone I Fax: Date: 2/12/2015 E-Mail: 3.3 Concrete Breakout Strength Ncbg = (E.)q, f4 '31 ed,N'3I c4 '31 cp.N Nb ANca ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.1b) 4, Na, ZN 0 ACI 318-14 Table 17.3.1.1 A, see ACI 318-14, Section 17.4.2.1, Fig. R 17.4.2.1(b) =9 4 ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.1c) V ec,N = ( + 1.0 ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.4) 3h,,I '3' od,N = 0.7 + 0.3 () :S 1.0 ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.5b) P cp,N = MAX( 1I 14tit):9 1.0 ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.7b) Nb = kc X ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.2a) Variables her [in.] e0 [in.] 0G2,N [In.] Camin (lfl.] ,l o.N 8.000 0.000 0.000 16.000 1.000 ces [in,] Ic0 t [psi] - 24 1.000 4000 Calculations 2 AN. [In.2 I A,0 [Ifl.] 131 ecl.N V ed,N Y ed,N 141 rei Nb ON816.00 576.00 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 34346 Results Nthg [lb] 4, concrete $ aelomic nondupfle 4, N W [II'] Nua [Jb] 48657 0.700 0.750 1.000 25545 7360 Input data and results must be checked rw agreement with the existing conditions and for plausibliltyl PROMS Anchor(a) 2003-2009 Hithi AG, FL-9494 Schean HUll Is a registered Trademark of Hill AG, Schaun ft! www.hiltLus Profis Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 4 Specifier. DM Project B14 Utility Canopy Address: Sub-Project I Poe. No.: Cast-In Anchorage Phone I Fax: I Date: 2/12/2018 E-Mail: 4 Shear load Load Vu, jib] Capacity 0 V [lb] Utilization Pv = VJ4 V Status Steel Strength* 203 5112 4 OK Steel failure (viith lever arm) N/A N/A N/A N/A Pryout Strength 810 96503 1 OK Concrete edge failure In direction x+ 810 14705 6 OK * anchor having the highest loading "anchor group (relevant anchors) 4.1 Steel Strength Vsa = ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.5.1.2b) $ V 01 ? Vua ACI 318-14 Table 17.3.1.1 Variables A.v [In.2] tuta (psi] 0.23 58000 Calculations V. 7865 Results V FIb] 0 aleal V85 (Ib] V,., Pb] 7885 0.650 5112 203 4.2 Pryout Strength V. = k8 [(a) V ec.N V ed,N V c.N V cp.N Nb] ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.5,3.1b) 4' VcP9 V. ACI 318-14 Table 17.3.1.1 AN. see ACI 318-14, Section 17.4.2.1, Fig. R 17.4.2.1(b) Am = 9 h, ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.1c) j1 = (+ ) :9 1.0 ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.4) 3h0 / '1 ed.N = 0.7 + 0.3 (!i) !g 1.0 ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.5b) V q.N = rv1x(2ra. 1!2!)A 1.0 ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.7b) Nb = k0 'd? h 5 ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.2a) Variables kcp her [inj e iN [in.] e,N (in.] c, [in.] 2 8.000 0.000 0.000 16.000 V C5 (In.] K0 f (psi] 1.000 - 24 1.000 4000 Calculations AN. (lfl.2] A450 [ifl.2] V coiN V ec2,N V attN V q.N Nb (Ib] 1156.00 576.00 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 34346 Results Vqg [lb] 4, c00ete 4' seisnito $ nonductde $ Vspe Fib] V. [Ib] 137861 0.700 1.000 1.000 96503 810 Input data and results must be checked for agreement with the exist ng conditions and for pfau8lbiillyl PROFIS Anchor ( c) 2003-2009 Hull AG. FL-9494 Schean HUll Is a registered Trademark of HUB AG, Schaen www.hiltl.us Profis Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 5 Specifier DM Project: B14 Utility Canopy Address: Sub-Project I Pos. No.: Cast-In Anchorage Phone I Fax: Date: 2/12/2018 E-Mail: 4.3 Concrete edge failure In direction x+ Vch9 = W IAVG eV W GO 'V o,V V h.V *II paraiiet,V Vb + V 9k V,8 Av0 see ACI 318-14, Section 17.5.2.1, Fig. R 17.5,2.1(b) Av50 = 4.5c 1 3c., ) w.v 'v.v =O.7+0.3(j.-)~1.0 'i'h.V _\/1.0 - ,\ Vb (7 I , e . 02 - 'j;J ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.5.2.1b) ACI 318-14 Table 17.3.1.1 ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.5.2.10) ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.5.2.5) ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.5.2.6b) ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.5.2.8) ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.5.2.28) Variables 081 (in.] 082 [In.] ew [in.] 'Vv he Llnj 10.667 16.000 0.000 1.000 12.000 l [In.] d0 (in.] Ic [psi] vparaoei,i 5.000 1.000 0.625 4000 1.000 Calculations Av. (in.2] Av.0 (in.2] V CO.V i1 ed.V w h1v Vb Vb] 504.00 512.00 1.000 1.000 1.155 18481 Results Vcg (Ib] cuncreto + seismic + nonducille V.bg (Ib] V. Vb] 21007 0.700 1.000 1.000 14705 810 5 Combined tension and shear loads Utilization PN,V [%] Status 0.482 0.055 5/3 31 OK PNV = A + A <= I Input data and results must be checked for agreement with the eidsllng conditions and br plauslbliltyl PROFIS Anchor (0)2003-2009 HUt! AG. FL-9494 Schaan Hilti is a registered Trademark of Hilt! AG. Schaan www.hiltLus Profis Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 6 Specifier DM Project: B14 Utility Canopy Address: Sub-Project I Pos. No.: Cast-in Anchorage Phone I Fax: I Date: 2/12/2018 E-Mail: 6 Warnings The anchor design methods In PROFIS Anchor require rigid anchor plates per current regulations (ETAG 001/Annex C. EOTA TR029, etc.). This means load re-distribution on the anchors due to elastic deformations of the anchor plate are not considered - the anther plate is assumed to be sufficiently stiff, in order not to be deformed when subjected to the design loading. PROFIS Anchor calculates the minimum required anchor plate thickness with FEM to limit the stress of the anchor plate based on the assumptions explained above. The proof if the rigid base plate assumption Is valid Is not carried out by PROFIS Anchor. input data and results must be checked for agreement with the existing conditions and for plausibility! Condition A applies when supplementary reinforcement is used. The V factor is Increased for non-steel Design Strengths except Pullout Strength and Pryout strength. Condition B applies when supplementary reinforcement Is not used and for Pullout Strength and Pryout Strength. Refer to your local standard. Checking the transfer of loads Into the base material and the shear resistance are required in accordance with ACi 318 or the relevant standardi An anchor design approach for structures assigned to Seismic Design Category C, D. E or F is given in AOl 318-14, Chapter 17, Section 17.2.3.4.3 (a) that requires the governing design strength of an anchor or group of anchors be limited by ductile steel failure. If this is NOT the case, the connection design (tension) shall satisfy the provisions of Section 17.2.3.4.3 (b),Section 17.2.3.4.3 (c), or Section 17.2.3.4.3 (d). The connection design (shear) shall satisfy the provisions of Section 17.2.3.5.3 (a), Section 17.2.3.5.3 (b), or Section 17.2.3.5.3(c). Section 17.2.3.4.3(b) / Section 17.2.3.5.3 (a) require the attachment the anchors are connecting to the structure be designed to undergo ductile yielding at a load level corresponding to anchor forces no greater than the controlling design strength. Section 17.2.3.4.3 (C) I Section 17.2.3.5.3 (b) waive the ductility requirements and require the anchors to be designed for the maximum tension / shear that can be transmitted to the anchors by a non-yielding attachment Section 17.2.3.4.3 (d) / Section 17.2.3.5.3 (c) waive the ductility requirements and require the design strength of the anchors to equal or exceed the maximum tension I shear obtained from design load combinations that include E, with E increased by s. Fastening meets the design criteria! Input data and results must be chocked for agreement with the existing conditions and for plausibliltyl PROFIS Anchor( c ) 2003-200911811 AG, FL-9494 Schean HUll Is a registered Trademark of 111111 AG. Schean www.hlltl.us Profis Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 7 Specifier: DM Project: B14 Utility Canopy Address: Sub-Project I P05. No.: Cast-In Anchorage Phone I Fax: I Date: 2/12/2018 E-Mail: 7 Installation data Anchor plate, steel: - Profile: Square HSS (AISC); 6.000 x 6.000 x 0.250 In. Hole diameter In the fixture: d1 = 0.688 In. Plate thickness (input): 0.500 In. Recommended plate thickness: not calculated Drilling method: - Cleaning: No cleaning of the drilled hole Is required Anchor type and diameter: Hex Head ASTM F 1554 GR. 365/8 Installation torque: - Hole diameter In the base material: - In. Hole depth In the base material: 8.000 In. Minimum thickness of the base material: 8.922 In. Coordinates Anchor In. Anchor x y c. C+X c. c, 1 -5.000 -5.000 16.000 26.000 16.000 26.000 2 5.000 -5.000 26.000 16.000 16.000 26.000 3 -5.000 5.000 16.000 26.000 26.000 16.000 4 5.000 5.000 26.000 16.000 26.000 16.000 Input data and results must be checked for agreement with the existing conditions and for plouslbiiityl PROMS Anchor ( c ) 2003-2009 HUll AG, FL-9494 Sthaan Hilti Is a registered Trademark of Hull AG. Sctiaan www.hllti.us Profis Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 8 Specifier DM Project: B14 Utility Canopy Address: Sub-Project I Poe. No.; Cast-in Anchorage Phone I Fax: I Date: 2/1212018 E-Mail: 8 Remarks; Your Cooperation Duties Any and all Information and data contained in the Software concern solely the use of Hilti products and are based on the principles, formulae and security regulations in accordance with Hilti's technical directions and operating, mounting and assembly instructions, etc., that must be strictly compiled with by the user. All figures contained therein are average figures, and therefore use-specific tests are to be conducted prior to using the relevant Hilti product. The results of the calculations carried out by means of the Software are based essentially on the data you put In. Therefore, you bear the sole responsibility for the absence of errors, the completeness and the relevance of the data to be put in by you. Moreover, you bear sole responsibility for having the results of the calculation checked and cleared by an expert, particularly with regard to compliance with applicable norms and permits, prior to using them for your specific facility. The Software serves only as an aid to interpret norms and permits without any guarantee as to the absence of errors, the correctness and the relevance of the results or suitability for a specific application. You must take all necessary and reasonable steps to prevent or limit damage caused by the Software. In particular, you must arrange for the regular backup of programs and data and, if applicable, carry out the updates of the Software offered by Hilti on a regular basis. If you do not use the Autoupdate function of the Software, you must ensure that you are using the current and thus up-to-date version of the Software in each case by carrying out manual updates via the Hilti Website. Hilti will not be liable for consequences, such as the recovery of lost or damaged data or programs, arising from a culpable breach of duty by you. Input data and results must be checked for agreement with the existing conditions and for pleusibiflyl PROFIS Anchor (0)2003-2009 Hiitl AG, FL-9494 Schaan Hilfi Is registered Trademark of HIM AG, $chaan Iti www.hiitl.us Profis Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 1 Specifier: DM Project B14 Utility Canopy Address: Sub-Project I Pos. No.: Phone I Fax: Date: 2/11/2018 E-Mail: SpecIfier's comments: linput data Anchor type and diameter: Effective embedment depth: Material: Evaluation Service Report Issued I Valid: Proof: Stand-off Installation: Anchor plate: Profile: Base material: Installation: Reinforcement: Seismic loads (cat. C. 0, E, or F) Geometry [ml & Loading [lb, ftlb] ii. • . ;, HIT-RE 500 V3 + HAS-E B7 5/8 heiac = 12.000 in. (ha1. = - In.) ASTM A 193 Grade B7 ESR-3814 1/i/201711/l/2019 Design method ACI 318-14/ Chem eb = 0.000 In. (no stand-off); t = 0.500 In. lx lx t = 9.000 in. x 14.000 in. x 0.500 In.; (Recommended plate thickness: not calculated Square HSS (AlSC); (Lx W x T) = 6.000 In. x 6.000 In. x 0.250 in. cracked concrete, 4000, V= 4000 psi; h = 38.000 In., Temp. short/long: 32/32 °F hammer drilled hole, Installation condition: Dry tension: condition B. shear: condition B; no supplemental splitting reinforcement present edge reinforcement: none or < No.4 bar Tension load: yes (17.2.3.4.3 (d)) Shear load: yes (17.2.3.5.3 (c)) Input data and results must be checked for agreement with the existing conditions and for plausibliltyt PROFIS Anchor (c) 2003-20091910 AG. FL-9494 Scheen Huh Is a registered Trademsyti of Hilti AG. Schaan Load case: Design loads Anchor reactions [lb] Tension force: (+Tensiori, -Compression) Anchor Tension force Shear force Shear force x Shear force y 6411 203 203 0 2 450 203 203 D 3 6411 203 203 0 4 450 203 203 0 max. concrete compressive strain: 0.30 [%°] max. concrete compressive stress: 1284 [psi] resulting tension force In (xly)=(-2.172/0.000): 13720 Pb] resulting compression force in (x/y)—(3.959/0.000): 14590 Pb] [M I EL-M www.hiltLus Profis Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 2 Specifier: DM Project: B14 Utility Canopy Address: Sub-Project I Pos. No.: Phone I Fax: I Date: 2/11/2018 E-Mail: 2 Load case/Resulting anchor forces 3 Tension load Load N, fib] Capacity 4 N (lb] Utilization PN =NUJ$ N Status Steel Strengths 6411 21187 31 OK Bond Strength** 13720 14244 97 OK Sustained Tension Load Bond Strength* N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Breakout Strength 13720 13868 99 OK anchor having the highest loading "anchor group (anchors In tension) 3.1 Steel Strength N0 = ESR value refer to ICC-ES ESR-3614 4i Nria ?Nua AC1318-l4 Table l7.3.1.1 Variables A., [In.'] tuta tpsi] 0.23 125000 Calculations N55 fib] 28250 Results Nee fib] steel ifi N. (lb] N 0 fib] 28250 0.750 21187 6411 Input data and results must be checked(of agreement with the existing conditions and for plausiblutyl PROFIS Anchor( c ) 2003.2009 HE AG, FL-9494 Schaan Mliii Is a registered Trademark of HIS AG, Schaen ETPI1 www.hlltLus Profis Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 3 Specifier: DM Project B14 Utility Canopy Address: Sub-Project I Pos. No.: Phone I Fax: I Date: 2/11/2018 E-Mail: 3.2 Bond Strength Nag AND ANO W aci,Na W oc2.Wa IV cd,Na V cp,Na Ni,a + N 9 ~-, Nua AN, =see ACI 318-14, Section 17.4.5.1. Fig. R 17.4.5.1(b) ANO =(2cNO)2 cN =.10daI 11-01 t'ec.Na 'CNO V edNa = 0.7 + 0,3 (se!c' :91.0 CNaI cpia = MAX(. coo Coo) A 1.0 Nb8 ak,o'c4Nses'7da'her Variables ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.5.1.b) ACI 318-14 Table 17.3.1.1 ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.5.1 c) ACI 31 8-14 Eq. (17.4.5.1 d) ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.5.3) ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.5.4b) ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.5.5b) ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.5.2) (pal] d0 [in.] h f on.] c8, [in.] 2486 0.625 12.000 3.500 1352 e1,N (in.] e zN on.] Cac Un.] 2. • UN,sols 2.172 0.000 22.787 1.000 0.950 Calculations c, [In.] Am. (in.21 ANao (In.2] V edNa 9.353 512.46 349.88 0.812 V edNa V eo2.Na '4' cNa Nb UbJ 0.812 1.000 1.000 30264 Results. N05 (Ib] 4 bad 4' seismic 4' ncructiis 4' Nag [1b] Nua [Ibi 29218 0.650 0.750 1.000 14244 -1-3720 Input data and results must be cliedced for agreement with the existing conditions and for plausiblttyl PROFlSMthor (c) 2003-2009 IllitI AG, FL-9494 Schoan HIM Is registered Trademark of Hill AO, Schaan ir www.hlitius Profis Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 4 Specifier: DM Project: B14 Utility Canopy Address: Sub-Project I Pos. No.: Phone I Fax: • I Date: 2/11/2018 E-Mail: 3.3 Concrete Breakout Strength Ng = (9) / (I ed,N 0 i Nb ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.1b) + Ncg Nua • ACI 318-14 Table 17.3.1.1 A+b see ACI 318-14, Section 17.4.2.1, Fig. R 17.4.2.1(b) =9h ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.1c) 41 ec.N = ( +!tj!i~ 1.0 ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.4) ' 3h81! i' Od.N = 0.7 + 0.3 (f.:1) 1.0 ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.5b) MAX( ca a iJ!)!9 1.0 ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.7b) Nb = k0 . 'Fe.ho f ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.2a) Variables hof Iln.J e0• tin.] e02.N [In.) Ca,nijr [In.] 141 c.H 12.000 2.172 0.000 3.500 1.000 c. On.) k0 7L, fpslj 22.787 17 1.000 4000 Calculations AN. [In.2] ANO [In.) V eal.N 41 oc2.N V ed.N 41 Nb [lb] 1219.00 1296.00 0.892 1.000 0.758 1.000 44694 Results New [Ib] + concrete + seismic 4)nomwecre $ Neirq [Ib] N. I1b] 28446 0.650 0.750 1.000 13868 13720 Input data and results must be checked for agreement with the existing conditions and for plausiblityl PROFIS Mchor( c) 2003-2009 Huh AG. FL-9494 Schaan HIM lea registered Trademark of HIM AG. Schaan cir www.hlltl.us Profis Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 5 Specifier DM Project: B14 utility Canopy Address: Sub-Project I Pos. No.: Phone I Fax: I Date: 2/11/2018 E-Mail: 4 Shear load Load Vua fib] Capacity 4 V, Pb] Utilization Pv = VUJ$ V Status Steel Strength 203 11017 2 OK Steel failure (with lever arm)* N/A N/A N/A N/A Pryout Strength (Concrete Breakout 810 44831 2 OK Strength controls)" Concrete edge failure In direction x+" 810 4747 18 OK anchor having the highest loading "anchor group (relevant anchors) 4.1 Steel Strength V, ,.,q ESR value refer to ICC-ES ESR-3814 4 Vswel 2: VLM ACI 318-14 Table 17.3.1.1 Variables A50.v fin.1 f (pall 0.23 125000 Calculations V,05 fib] 16950 Results V 01 [ib] $wool 4 V fib] V [lb] 16950 0.650 11017 203 4.2 Ps'yout Strength (Concrete Breakout Strength controls) vp =k ANco [()Wea NW eti.NW c.NW cp.r,iNb] $ V59 2! Vua AN, see ACI 318-14, Section 17.4.2.1, Fig. R 17.4.2.1(b) A mwco = eIef = IlocJ4 (1 1 3 he I %V =0.7+0.3 ()~i.o cp,t.l = MAX(!. 1.5h01\ Ca5 i;j~10 Nb =k1?h ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.5.3.1 b) ACI 318-14 Table 17.3.1.1 ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.1c) ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.4) ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.42.5b) ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.42.7b) ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.4.2.2a) Variables ko h51 [in.] e0jJ4 [in.] 0o2,N [in.] [in.] 2 12.000 0.000 0.000 3.500 coo [In.] k0 f [psi] 1.000 22.787 17 1.000 4000 Calculations AN. fjn.2] A&0 [In.2] 1l ecl.N l ec2.N V ed.N '4" .N Nb fib] 1219.00 1296.00 1.000 1.000 0.758 1.000 44694 Results Vcm fib] 4concrete sawric 0 nmwudb Vcp [ib] Vu,, fib] 63759 0.700 1.000 1.000 44631 810 Input data and results must be checked for agreement with the existing condItions and for plausiblblyl PROMS Anchor (c) 2003.2009 Hull AG, FL-9494 Schaan HIM Is a registered Trademark of HIM AG. Schaan 15IJ www.hlitl.us Prof is Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 6 Specifier: DM Project: B14 Utility Canopy Address: Sub-Project I Poe. No.: Phone I Fax: I Date: 2/11/2018 E-Mail: 4.3 Concrete edge failure In direction x+ v Avco + VCbgVuO Av see ACI 318-14, Section 17.5.2.1, Fig. R 17.5.2.1(b) Avg = 4.5c 1 Wec.v 'V ed.V = 0.7 + 0.3(j4_.) !S 1.0 1.5 =4'i.o he Vb =(7 (ti.)°)Rcf Variables ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.5.2.1 b) ACI 318-14 Table 17.3.1.1 ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.5.2.1c) ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.5.2.5) ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.5.2.6b) ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.5.2.8) ACI 318-14 Eq. (17.5.2.2a) [in.I Ca2 [In.] Oy [In.] 1, c.V ha On.] 3.500 - 0.000 1.000 36.000 I [in.] a d0 [In.] I. [psi] VPeSIIBLV 5.000 1.000 0.625 4000 1.000 Calculations Av. [In.2] Av.0 [In.2] 'V soY V eV V h.V Vb [lb] 107.63 55.13 1.000 1.000 1.000 3474 Results V [lb] $cancrele $ nanductile + Vctg [Ib] Vu. [lb] 6782 0.700 1.000 1.000 4747 810 5 Combined tension and shear loads PN Pv C Utilization pNv [/6] Status 0.989 0.171 1.000 97 OK NV = (PNI3V)'1.2 <° I Input data and results must be chocked for agreement with the existing conditions and for plausibliltyT PROFIS Anchor (c) 2003-2009 HIM AG. FL-9494 Schaari Hill Is a registered Tredemark of Hill AG. Schaan w.hl1U.us Profis Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 7 Specifier: DM Project B14 Utility Canopy Address: Sub-Project I Poe. No.: Phone I Fax: I Date: 2/11/2018 E-Mail: 6 Warnings The anchor design methods in PROMS Anchor require rigid anchor plates per current regulations (ETAG 001/Annex C, EOTA TR029, etc.). This means load re-distribution on the anchors due to elastic deformations of the anchor plate are not considered - the anchor plate Is assumed to be sufficiently stiff, In order not to be deformed when subjected to the design loading. PROMS Anchor calculates the minimum required anchor plate thickness with FEM to limit the stress of the anchor plate based on the assumptions explained above. The proof if the rigid base plate assumption Is valid Is not carried out by PROMS Anchor. Input data and results must be checked for agreement with the existing conditions and for plausibility! Condition A applies when supplementary reinforcement Is used. The (1) factor is increased for non-steel Design Strengths except Pullout Strength and Pryout strength. Condition B applies when supplementary reinforcement is not used and for Pullout Strength and Pryout Strength. Refer to your local standard. Design Strengths of adhesive anchor systems are influenced by the cleaning method. Refer to the INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE given in the Evaluation Service Report for cleaning and installation instructions Checking the transfer of loads into the base material and the shear resistance are required in accordance with ACi 318 or the relevant standard! An anchor design approach for structures assigned to Seismic Design Category C. D. E or F is given in ACi 318-14, Chapter 17, Section 17.2.3.4.3(a) that requires the governing design strength of an anchor or group of anchors be limited by ductile steel failure. If this is NOT the case, the connection design (tension) shall satisfy the provisions of Section 17.2.3.4.3(b), Section 17.2.3.4.3(c), or Section 17.2.3.4.3 (d). The connection design (shear) shall satisfy the provisions of Section 172.3.5.3 (a), Section 17.2.3.5.3(b), or Section 17.2.3.5.3(c). Section 17.2.3.4.3 (b) I Section 17.2.3.5.3(a) require the attachment the anchors are connecting to the structure be designed to undergo ductile yielding at a load level corresponding to anchor forces no greater than the controlling design strength. Section 17.2.3.4.3(c)! Section 17.2.3.5.3 (b) waive the ductility requirements and require the anchors to be designed for the maximum tension! shear that can be transmitted to the anchors by a non-yielding attachment, Section 17.2.3.4.3 (d) / Section 17.2.3.5.3 (C) waive the ductility requirements and require the design strength of the anchors to equal or exceed the maximum tension I shear obtained from design load combinations that include E, with E increased by (On. Installation of Hilti adhesive anchor systems shall be performed by personnel trained to install Hilti adhesive anchors. Reference ACi 318-14, Section 17.8.1. Fastening meets the design criteria! Input data and results must be checked for agreement with the e,dsUng conditions and for plausibilityl PROFIS Anchcr( c) 2003-2009 HIM AG, FL-9494 Schaan HIS Is a registered Trademark of Huh AG, Schaan www.hlltI.us Profis Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 8 Specifier: DM Project: B14 Utility Canopy Address: Sub-Project I Poe. No.: Phonel Fax: I Date: 211112018 E-Mail: 7 Installation data Anchor plate, steel: - Anchor type and diameter: HIT-RE 500 V3 + HAS-E B7 5/8 Profile: Square HSS (AISC); 6.000 x 6.000 x 0.250 In. Installation torque: 60.000 ft.lb Hole diameter In the fixture: d, = 0.888 in, Hole diameter In the base material: 0.750 In. Plate thickness (input): 0.500 in. Hole depth in the base material: 12.000 In. Recommended plate thickness: not calculated Minimum thickness of the base material: 13.500 In. Drilling method: Hammer drilled Cleaning: Compressed air cleaning of the drilled hole according to Instructions for use is required 7.1 Recommended accessories Drilling Cleaning Setting Suitable Rotary Hammer • Compressed air with required accessories • Dispenser including cassette and mixer Properly sized drill bit to blow from the bottom of the hole • Torque wrench Proper diameter wire brush Coordinates Anchor in. Anchor x y C C+X C., C, 1 -2.500 -5.000 28.000 8.500 - - 2 2.500 -5.000 33.000 3.500 - - 3 -2.500 5.000 28.000 8.500 - - 4 2.500 5.000 33.000 3.500 - - Input data and results must be checked for agreement with the existing conditions and ror plausibuityl PROMS Anchor (c) 2003-2009 HUll AG, FL-9494 Schaan HUll Is a registered Trademark of HIS AG, Schaan www.hlltius Profis Anchor 2.7.5 Company: W+R Structural Engineers Page: 9 Specifier: DM Project: B14 Utility Canopy Address: Sub-Project I Pos. No.: Phone I Fax: I Date: 2/11/2018 E-Mail: 8 Remarks; Your Cooperation Duties Any and all Information and data contained In the Software concern solely the use of HiltI products and are based on the principles, formulas and security regulations in accordance with Hilti's technical directions and operating, mounting and assembly instructions, etc., that must be strictly compiled with by the user. All figures contained therein are average figures, and therefore use-specific tests are to be conducted prior to using the relevant Hilti product. The results of the calculations carried out by means of the Software are based essentially on the data you put in. Therefore, you bear the sole responsibility for the absence of errors, the completeness and the relevance of the data to be put in by you. Moreover, you bear sole responsibility for having the results of the calculation checked and cleared by an expert, particularly with regard to compliance with applicable norms and permits, prior to using them for your specific facility. The Software serves only as an aid to Interpret norms and permits without any guarantee as to the absence of errors, the correctness and the relevance of the results or suitability for a specific application. You must take all necessary and reasonable steps to prevent or limit damage caused by the Software. In particular, you must arrange for the regular backup of programs and data and, if applicable, carry out the updates of the Software offered by Hilti on a regular basis. If you do not use the AutoUpdate function of the Software, you must ensure that you are using the current and thus up-to-date version of the Software In each case by carrying out manual updates via the Hiitl Webslte. Hilti will not be liable for consequences, such as the recovery of lost or damaged data or programs, arising from a culpable breach of duty by you. Input data and results must be checked for agreement with the existing conditions and for plausibliltyl PROFIS Anchor ( c ) 2003-2009 Hiltl AG, FL-9494 Scliaan MIS a registered Trademark of HIS AG, Schaan Ccity of Carlsbad Print Date: 06/07/2019 Job Address: 2426 Town Garden Rd Permit Type: BLDG-Permit Revision Work Class: Residential Permit Revisi Parcel No: 2132601000 Lot #: Valuation: $0.00 Reference #: DEV2016-0015 Occupancy Group: Construction Type # Dwelling Units: Bathrooms: Bedrooms: Orig. Plan Check #: CBC2017-0381 Plan Check #: Project Title: VIASAT BRESSI RANCH CAMPUS Description: VIASAT: REVISED UTILITY YARD CANOPY & FOOTING DETAILS Permit No: PREV2018-0127 Status: Closed - Finaled Applied: .05/11/2018 Issued: 12/20/2018 Permit 06/07/2019 Inspector: Final Inspection: Applicant: Owner: Contractor: ARATI RANGASWAMY VIASAT THE WHITING TURNER CONTRACTING CO 6155 El Camino Real 858-793-4777 CARLSBAD, CA 92009 858-792-0600 FEE . AMOUNT FIRE Expedited Plan Review Per Hour - Office Hours . $132.00 MANUAL BUILDING PLAN CHECK FEE $196.88 Total Fees: $ 328.88 Total Payments To Date : $ 328.88 Balance Due: $0.00 Building Division 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad CA 92008-7314 1 760-602-2700 I 760-602-8560 f I www.carlsbadca.gov PLAN CHECK REVISION OR Development Serviies cr Clety of DEFERRED SUBMITTAL Building Division Carlsbad APPLICATION 1635 Faraday Avenue 760-602-2719 B-I 5 www.carlsbadca.gov CBC20I7-0381 Original Plan Check Number PREV20I8-0095 Plan Revision Number c2/ Project Address 2426 TOWN GARDEN ROAD - INTERSECTION OF TOWN GARDEN ROAD AND EL CAMINO REAL General Scope of Revision/Deferred Submittal: REVISED UTILITY YARD CANOPY & FOOTING DETAILS TO INCLUDE (3) CONDENSOR UNITS ON THE CANOPY ROOF & COOLING UNIT UNDER CANOPY. CONTACT INFORMATION: Name_ARATI RANGASWAMY Phone 858-793-4777 Fax 858-7934787 Address 13280 EVENING CREEK DRIVE SOUTH, SUITE 125 City SAN DIEGO Zip 92128 Email Address aratir@sca-sd.com Original plans prepared by an architect or engineer, revisions must be signed & stamped by that person. I . Elements revised: Plans 9 Calculations 0 Soils 0 Energy 0 Other 2. Describe revisions in detail 3. List page(s) where each revision is shown UPDATED FLOOR & ROOF PLANS, ELEVATIONS, SECTIONS, AND DETAILS OF UTILITY YARD CANOPY TO INCLUDE (3) CONDENSOR UNITS ON ROOF & (1) COOLING UNIT UNDER CANOPY AS-501 UPDATED FOUNDATION & FRAMING PLAN & DETAILS FOR UTILITY YARD CANOPY S2.0 ADDED SHEET FOR NEW UTILITY YARD PARAPET & CONDENSING UNIT DETAILS S2.1 Does this revision, in any way, alter the exterior of the project? 0 Yes No Does this revision add ANY new floor area(s)? EJ Yes Does this revision affect any fire related issues? 0 Yes Is this a complete 'Signature D&s) No Date OSirIIa(K' 1635 Faraday AvenuàrIsbadfCA IDW M. 760-602- 2719 E 760-602-8558 Email: building@carlsbadca.gov t J www.carlsbadca.gov EsGil A SAFEbuilf Company DATE: 5/2312018 U APPLICANT JURISDICTION LS CARBAD -) /311 ' JURIS. PLAN CHECK #.: CBPREV2018-0127REV2(CBC2017-0381.REV) SET: I PROJECT ADDRESS: 2426 TOWN GARDEN ROAD PROJECT NAME: VIASAT FOR BREssI RANCH 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 codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. El 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 until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. Lii The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: EsGil staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. LI EsGil staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: 10 Date contacted: (by:._.J') Mail Telephone Fax In Person LII REMARKS: Telephone #: Email: By: Bert Domingo Enclosures: EsGil 4/10/2018 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 • San Diego, California 92123 • (858) 560-1468 • Fax (858) 560-1576 [DO NOT PAY— THIS IS NOT AN INVOICE] VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURISDICTION: CARLSBAD PLAN CHECK #.: CBPREV2018- 0127REV2(CBC2017-0381.REV) PREPARED BY: Bert Domingo DATE: 5/23/2018 BUILDING ADDRESS: 2426 TOWN GARDEN ROAD BUILDING OCCUPANCY: U BUILDING PORTION AREA (Sq. Ft.) Valuation Multiplier Reg. Mod. VALUE ($) Air Conditioning Fire Sprinklers TOTAL VALUE Jurisdiction Code ICB jBy Ordinance 1997 UBC Building Permit Fee 1997 UBC Plan Check Fee Type of Review: El Complete Review 0 Repetitive Fee El Other I Am Repeats ____ou____ y EsGil Fee * Based on hourly rate 0 Structural Only 1.5 Hrs.@* $105.00 I_$157.501 Comments: In addition to the above of$ is due- hour @ $ /hr.) for the CalGreen review. Sheet 1 of 1 ED WISEMAN 1RUCTURAL ENGINEERoG0%\1tSt SUPPLEMENTAL CALCULATIONS FOR VIASAT PHASE 4 SITE - ARCH'L SITE STRUCTURES - DELTA 4 CARLSBAD, CA MAY 9, 2018 W + R JOB #17-035.01A I'afl 0351 U ENp12-3 9915 Mira Mesa Blvd. Suite 200 13 TEL (858) 536-5166 WRENGINEERS.COM ' 858) 5365163 '1SEMAN+ROHY f WIND LOAD TABLES PROJECT: vlaSatBulldlngl4 RUCTURAL ENGINEERS _ Mg (ASCE 7-10 Chapter 30, 1) LOCATION: Carlsbad. CA 20I5I80I2I16CBCIASCE7-10(II2III7) I JOBNO: 17-035 519120 WIND LOADS ILRFD Components & Cladding: Parapets Top of Parapet= 13 ft Parapet Height = 4 ft Roof Slope = 0.25 :12 Roof Angie = 1.2 degrees Exposure= C Kh= 0.85 Kn = 1.00 Kd= 0.85 V= 110.00 Risk Category = I! qh= 0.00256igICK.jV2 1 q = 22.35 psf ASCE 7-10 Section 30.9: Ht <60 ft. Walls - figure 30.4-1 Area <700 square feet CASE A: Positive Wail Load to Front Side (Figure 6-11A) Negative Edge or Corner to Back Side (Figure 6-11B) CASE B: Positive Wall Load to Back Side (Figure 6-1A) Negative Wail Load to Front Side (Figure 6-1A) NOTE: Gc,1 will cancel out and In not considered for both of these cases. CASE A: (Windward) Area Not at corner zone At corner zone sq. ft. + Wall (4) Roof Up (2 Total + Wall (5) Roof Up (3 Total 10 20.12 -40.23 60.35 20.12 -40.23 60.35 20 19.05 -35.52 54.57 19.05 -35.52 54.57 30 18.42 -32.77 51.19 18.42 -32.77 51.19 40 17.98 -30.81 48.79 17.98 -30.81 48.79-- 50 17.63 -29.30 46.93 17.63 -29.30 46.93 60 17.35 -28.06 45.41 17.35 -28.06 45.41 70 17.11 -27.01 44.12 17.11 -27.01 44.12 80 16.91 -26.10 43.01 16.91 -26.10 43.01 90 16.73 -25.30 42.03 16.73 -25.30 42.03 100 16.56 -24.59 41.15 16.56 -24.59 41.15 150 15.94 -24.59 40.52 15.94 -24.59 40.52 200 15.49 -24.59 40.08 15.49 -24.59 40.08 250 15.15 -24.59 39.74 15.15 -24.59 39.74 300 14.87 -24.59 39.45 14.87 -24.59 39.45 400 14.42 -24.59 39.01 14.42 -24.59 39.01 500 14.08 -24.59 1 38.67 1 14.08 -24.59 1 38.67 -4 L" 5 C- S, 0 Ips F CASE B: (Leeward) Area Not at corner (zone 4) At corner (zone 5) sq. ft + Wail (4) -Wall (4) Total + Wall (5) - Wall (5) Total 10 20.12 -22.13 -42.24 20.12 -28.16 48.28 20 19.05 -21.06 40.10 19.05 -26.02 -45.07 30 18.42 -20.43 -38.85 18.42 -24.77 -43.19 40 17.98 -19.99 -37.96 17.98 -23.88 -41.86 50 17.63 -19.64 -37.28 17.63 -23.20 -40.83 60 17.35 -19.36 -36.71 17.35 -22.63 -39,98 70 17.11 -19.12 -36.24 17.11 -22.16 -39.27 80 16.91 -18.92 -35.83 16.91 -21.75 -38.65 90 16.73 -18.74 -35.46 16.73 -21.38 -38.11 100 16.56 -18.57 -35.14 16.56 -21.06 -37.62 150 15.94 -17.95 -33.89 15.94 -19.81 -35.74 200 15.49 -17.51 -33.00 15.49 -8.92 -34.41 250 15.15 -17.16 -32.31 15.15 -18.23 -33.38 300 14.87 -16.88 -31.75 14.87 -17.67 -32.53 400 14.42 -16.44 -30.86 14.42 -16.78 -31.20 500 14.08 -16.09 -30.17 1 14.08 -16.09 1 -30.17 Designer : DM 9:03 AM 111RIAft Company : W+R Structural Engineers May 9, 2018 Job Number : Checked By _____ AHEMEiSHEICOMPAWY Model Name ViaSat 1314 Utility Canopy (Global) Model Settings * Display Sections for Member Calcs 5 Max Internal. Sections. for Member Caics :97. . •. Include Shear Deformation? Yes ñ&éase Nailing Capacity for Wind?. Yes .. . .. Include Warping? Yes Trans Load Btv(injntersecting Wood Wall? Yes :. Area Load Mesh (in '2) 144 Merge Tólerahøe (in) . .. . . .12. .. : P-Delta Analysis Tolerance 0.50% nclude P-Dèltafor.Wails? . . Yes Automatically Iterate Stiffness for Walls? Yes Max iterátions.for Wall Stiffness. ... 1....... Gravity Acceleration (ft/sec"2) . 32.2 Wall Mesh Size (in)............... ... .24:. . . . :.. .. . Figensolution Convergence Tol. ME-) 4 Vertiôäl Axi . :, ., . •.. .::. . Y. Global Member Orientation Plane XZ Static Solver Sparse Ace1erated Dynamic Solver Accelerated Solver Hot Rolled Steel Code AISC l4th(360-10): LRFD Ad! st.Stlffrtës?. : .. . ... .No..:.. RiSAConnection Code AISC l4th(360-10): ASD cold'Fdrrned StéelCode . .... . ... .... .AIsrs:ogf 2 ASD'.:. Wood Code AWC NDS-1 5: ASD Wôod.empatUre• . . .:.j oOF: ::. . :• Concrete Code ACI 318-14 Masonry.Codé ..: ::: :• ........ . :Cl:53i.3: ASD. .: Aluminum Code AA ADMI-15: ASD - Building AlSG 14th(360-10): ASD Number of Shear Regions 4 RégioA .. ...' .• ::: Biaxial Column Method Exact Integration ParhieBeta.Factor(PcA);..:. :..: : 65 •.•. Concrete Stress Block Rectangular Use CrackedSections? :. . . : yes:..:;.; :• . . Use Cracked Sections Slab? No Bad Framing Warnings? ...NO,.'.*... . . Unused Force Warnings? Yes MIri I Bar Diani. Spacing?: . : . : Concrete Rebar Set REBAR SET ASTMA6I5 Min %:Steelfor.Column Max % Steel for Column 8 RlSA-30 Version 16.0.3 [E:\...\1 717-035.01A ViaSat Phase 4 Arch'l Site\CalcstB14 Utility Canopy.r3d] Page l Company : W+R Structural Engineers May 9, 2018 ARISA Designer : DM 9:03 AM Job Number : Checked By._ AN$CCPAWV Model Name : ViaSat B14 Utility Canopy (Global) Model Settings. _Continued Seismic Code ASCE 7-10 Seismic Base Elevation (ft). . Not Entered .... Add Base Weight? Yes CfX. '.. . .. .. '' .02'. . . . CtZ .02 TX (sec. '. . . . ' Not Entered T Z (sec) Not Entered RX.. . . . - . : :' ,' 3'..: R 3 CtExpX' , :'.. , . : "75' ;: . .. Ct Exp.Z .75 Dl I DS I TL(sec) 5 Risk Cat:. Drift Cat Other )mZ I )mX d.- Z:'. - 4 d 4 Rho I , . - Hot Rolled Steel Properties I chol fl,c,fl n fl,øfl Mu Thrn, ItI nI4..fl61ftA1 V1L.l1I.I1 D.. r..n..zI .L. A992 29000 11154 .3 .65 .49 50 1.1 65 1.1 2 A36. Gr 36 29000 11154 .3 65 49 36 t5 58 1 2 ...3. A572Gr.50 29000 11154 .3 .65 .49 50 . 1.1 . 65 1.1 ...L. A500GiBRND 290O0 11154 3 65 527 42 14 58 13 .... A500 Gr.B Rect 29000 11154 .3 .65 .527 46 1.4 58 1.3 A53GrB 29000 11154 3 65 49 35 1.113 60 1 2 _L. A1085 29000 11154 .3 .65 .49 50 1.4 65 1.3 - Hot Rolled Steel Section Sets I kI Qk.us T.... {..... I I..ê r.....b.... n.. A r..j1 l._. ,i...A, • I - - Column --r- HSS6x6x4 'Jr Column r SauareTube ...---. .-. A500 Gr.B R... TvicaI 5.24 28.6 Ia 28.6 U 45.6 Béàms HSS8x4x4 ' Beam' ' .Thb A500 'Gr.B R.. :•Tjl .5:24 . :14.4 35.3;.'.. 3 Girders HSS8x6x4 Beam Tube A500 Gr.B R... TvDicaI .• ..'ri 6.17 36.4 56.6 70.3 A.... '_'Parapet '' . 'HSS3x3x3 'Column' Sguàrétube A5OO'GrBR..: Typical: 'I ;89 . .46 ' 246 4:o3 ..... Mech'l HSS6x2x3 Beam Tube A500 Gr.B R... TypJL 2.58 1.8 10.5 1 5.24 Hot Rolled Steel Design Parameters I , I I 6....ft41 I 1....rz., I I I ..._..... i. -. . . - - - - -. ,. - , ... - .- - . - - -'- ••' tI "Off Mm RISA-313 Version 16.0.3 [EA ... \17\17-035.OIA ViaSat Phase 4 Arch'l Slte\Calcs\B14 Utility Canopy.r3d] Page 2 Designer : DM May 9, 2018 IIIRISA Company : W+R Structural Engineers Job Number : 9:03 AM ANEMETSCHE)CcOINY Model Name : ViaSat 814 Utility Canopy Checked By: Hot Rolled Steel Design Parameters (Continued) LabRi ShanR LnnthFft1 LbiFft1 Lh7rft1 I nnmn tnnrffl I nnmn hnffftl I t,irs,ii I(w I(,7 r.h r.int'thn .110.1 M10 Beams:... F. :j . :.• Lbyy - . . .lt. Mill Parapet 5 . Lateral .1 M12 Parapet . _5 . .. ....' . ... . . . . .. . . . . .. Lateral 13 M13 Parapet 5 Lateral L14 M14 Parapet 5 . . .. . . . : .: .. Lateral 15 M15 Parapet 5 Lateral j .M16 .Parapet: .5. . .. . . .. . . . . . . . .. .. IL M17 Parapet 5 Lateral .j& M18 . Paraøet 5 .. . ... . . .. . .. . : . Lateral 19 M19 Parapet 5 Lateral M20 Parapet ____ ..' :. .. . .. .. ... .. : . LAtera 21 M21 Parapet 7.25 . . .Lateral '22: . M22 :• Paràpei" .: 9.25!. ': .. : . 77 .. . . ::. . . . : ' . . Latera 23 M23 Parapet 6.667 . . Lateral .M24 Pár$t6667 ......::J :c . . . . .. .Latera . :: Lathrè 25 M25 Parapet 6.667 ..Lateral ...'M26 . Pàrapèt. : .5.5 . :'f'. :.:: .: : :1:...•.•: :. . : :.: ::..: : ./. 27 M27 Parapet 3.75 . Lateral .M28. .P•.t .... . •. :. . ..___.. .. ••...:. 2.. M29 Parapet 4.125 . Lateral Pdra___ :.•. ii- M31 Parapet 2 . .. ra Lateral Lb :•.:. ,.. ... ___ ___ ___ - Joint Coordinates and Temperatures Label X mi V rftI 7 rm Thvnn rn rfo,.h Iri,yi - __________________________ NI .--. 0 ... 0 ,.j 0 .-"•.J 0 ---. .j.7 .:::.:. : Or . :. N3 0 0 14.5 0 4 N4 17 0 145 5 N5 0 10 0 0 6. 10 ...... .L N7 0 10 14.5 0 8 :. :.' .. .: .j7::: . 10 : 14.6- : :... . :•..' 1... N9 -1.5 10 0 0 I.Q NW 185 10 0.- 11 . Nil -1.5 . 10 14.5 0 12 . N12. : 18.5 10 14.5 N13 -1.5 10 16.5 0 jj . . NIA .. ... .. . 185...:.. :..•.'10 . . 15 2:...N2...:.•.•::. N15 -1.5 10 7.25 0 15 N16. . :5 .10' 7.25: IL N17 -1.5 15 0 0 N18 : •. 135 15 . a :. 19 N19 -1.5 15 7.25 0 N20 . •: j •5. . 15 _20'__________ . 725 0 21 N21 -1.5 15 16.5 .N22 :*185:. H5 .i6:5. N23 5.166667 10 16.5 0 .N24 14.833333: . 10 . 16..5 . :• 25 N25 18.5 10 II 0 N26. .. ::'185 . . .. . 4.125 . . . . N27 5.166667 15 16.5 0 .28::N28 . 1t833333 15 . . 165 0 •. N29 18.5 15 11 ___________ RISA-31D Version 16.0.3 [E:\. ..\1 7\17-035.01 A ViaSat Phase 4 Arch'l Site\Calcs\B14 Utility Canopy.r3d] Page 3 Designer : DM 9:03 AM IIIRISA Company : W+R Structural Engineers May 9, 2018 Job Number : Checked By:_____ ANEMETSCHEKCOWWIY Model Name : ViaSat B14 Utility Canopy Joint Coordinates and Temperatures (Continued) I sthI Y rftl V rfn 7 rcn Thm, ri .30 . . . 'N30 .: .18.5 15 . 4.125. •. ••. . 0 . 31 N31 11.833333 10 14.5 0 32 .. N32. :. .• 5.166667;.10 145 0'- .33 N33 3.5 10 14.5 0 34 .. •• . N34 . 1 10.. . . 7.25 Member Area Loads (BLC 1: Dead) Joint A Joint B Joint C Joint D Direction Distribution Maanituderpsg N9 I N13 I N14 I NIO I Y I A-B I -8 Member Area Loads (BLC 2: Roof Live) Joint A Joint B Joint C Joint D Direction Distribution •Magnitudelosfl Iii N9 I N13 I N14 I N10 I Y IA-B I -20 Member Area Loads (BLC 3: EQ) Joint A Joint B Joint C Joint D Direction Distribution Maonitudefpsfl I I I N9 I N13 I N14 I NIO I Z I A-B I 4 Member Area Loads MCC Wind) Joint A Joint B Joint C Joint D Direction Distribution Magnitude[psfl N21 I N13 I N14 I N22 I Z IA-B I 50 Member Distributed Loads (BLC 3: EQ) Member Label Direction Start Magnitude[klftF.psfj End Magnitude[kl ... Start Locationlft.%J End Locatlonfft.%1 I I I M5 I Z I .032 I .032 I 0 I 0 Member Distributed Loads (BLC 5: BLC I Transient Area Loads) Mmhor I cKof flIr,.Hrn Q+rn4 Mn,,nI+..lfl,Ie+ C ....cl C.,,1 e...41 ......4I......FfI Oil _i I --- &r--ra nil I - --- -- M5 - V .•_____._•- -.029 -..- -.028 ___________________ 0 2 M5 V 028 -028 . 2 4 .L. M5 V -.028 -.028 4 8 A... M5 Y -028 -029 6 8 1.. M5 Y -.029 -.029 8 10 M5 •• y... . : -.029 •.: . : -.029 . .• . 10 ••. 1 7 MS Y -.029 --.029 12 14 .... .•5 . . ..• '. . . 9 .:: . ._-.03 . .14: . .16 M5 V -.03 -.03 16 18 M5 V -03 -03 18 20 it. M6 V -.026 -.037 0 2 037 -.038 . .2. :4. 13 M6 V -.038 -.034 4 6 M6 V -034 -038 6 8 IL M6 Y -.038 -.041 8 10 IL : M6 ••. Y. •• •. •• . -.041 •.. .: -.041 10. . 12 IL M6 V 4.041 -.031 12 14 .M6. •.... • .. : -.031: . • • : .14 : 16 19 M6 V -.031 -.041 16 18 "20 • M6 • '4(. . • •• ...p4f. . : •.•. . -.041 18 • 20 21 M9 V -.062 -.062 0 2 fl:. • M9 • • y : o6z : • .. . • -.062 •. 2 . .. 4 23 1 M9 V -.062 -.052 4 6 U-4 1m •YM9: .Y. o52:..-.05. 6 _____ RISA-31D Version 16.0.3 [E:...17\17-035.01A ViaSat Phase 4 Arch'i Site\Calcs\814 Utility Canopy.r3d] Page 4 Designer : DM 9:03 AM IIIRISA Job Company : W+R Structural Engineers May 9, 2018 Number : Checked By:_____ ANEMEISCHEK COMPANY Model Name ViaSat 814 Utility Canopy Member Distributed Loads (BLC 5: BLC I Transient Area Loads) (Continued) Memher IshAI flIrntInn Start Mrinih IrlAfleIft F nfI Pnd MnnIfi irfld Sr+ I er.Hnnff+ O/1 r-nd I n.Iinnrf+ 01-1 25 1 M9 1 Y -.05 -.059 8 10 M9 V 7059 -061 10 12 27 M9 V -.061 -.06 12 14 28 : . :.• M9 .'. Y . 06 :. . -:058 . 14 •. 29 M9 V -.058 -.058 16 18 :30 ... Mg . . -.058. '•. :. ...-.-.059 .18.,. .20 31 MIO V -.008 -.008 0 2.222 Mb Y - 008 .-.008.'- .2.222 -. 4.444 33 M10 V -.008 -.008 4.444 6.667 34'MIO" :• y : . . . .... .-.00a 6.667' 8.889 - 35 MIO V -.008 -.008 8.889 11.111 ....: . : .-.008 .::• : -• -.00a. . j3 333 37 MID V -.008 -.009 13.333 15.556 Mb Y -M09 -009 . 11.111.. 15556 17778 39 MID Y -.009 -.006 17.778 20 - Member Distributed Loads (BLC 6: BLC 2 Transient Area Loads) MQmhOr I ahal flIr,'+irin iri,if -fl =nA RAn.,+ ,A,.I,i Cf..+ I 0121 c.I I Oil - I _____________________________ M5 - -- - - V - .. -.072 -. --r------L --- --.071 ______•_••••_ 0 2 MS V -071 3 M5 V -.07 . -.071 4 6 - -. 6 8 M5 V -.072 -.073 8 10 M5 V - 073 - 073 10 12 M5 V -.073 -.074 12 14 LAL:.MS .•..: . .:.y ...:.: ...Gy . _.9_ M5 Y -.074 -.074 16 18 j.Q. MS -074 -074 18 20 11 1 6 V -.064 -.094 0 2 -094 -094 2 4 M6 V -.094 -.086 4 6 14. M6 V -08 -096 6 8 15 M6 Y -.096 -.102 8 10 ifl.. M6 V 7102 -103 AD '12 17 M6 V -.103 -.077 12 14 M6 V -077 -077 14 16 ii M6 V -.077 -.103 16 18 M6 . .•.. : : .y:. :. 103 .• . ..103.. . . 18...: ...20 21 M9 V -.155 -.155 0 2 .22.. M9 -155 2 4 23 M9 V -.155 -.13 4 6 :M9 . .yY• ..::Th:. .._6....:.:: 25 M9 Y -.125 -.148 8 10 ___________ ______ __________________ ________ ________ 12-•.. 27 M9 Y -.151 -.15 12 14 .26.. M9 V -15 -146 14 16 .29.. M9 V -.146 -.144 16 18 80 M9. . :• 149 18 jj. MIO V -.02 -.02 0 2.222 32 : :MiO :• Y .. . :. -.02:. . : . 2.222 . . .4.444 j . M Y -.02 -.02 4.444 6.667 MIO Y .:.•.14a;-•: -02 -02 6.667 8889 35 MIO Y -.02 -.02 8.889 11.111 36 MIO -02 -02 11111 13333 37 MIO Y -.02 -.023 13.333 15.556 38 : . Mib .. . y .. -.023 : . . . -.023 15.56 ;. 17:778 RISA-31D Version 16.0.3 [EA ... \17\17-035.OIA ViaSat Phase 4 Arch'l Site\Caics\B14 Utility Canopy.r3d] Page 5 Designer : DM 9:03 AM IIIRISA Job Company : W+R Structural Engineers May 9, 2018 Number : Checked By:_____ ANEMETSCHEKCOMFNY Model Name : ViaSat B14 Utility Canopy Member Distributed Loads (BLC 6: BLC 2 Transient Area Loads) (Continued) Member Label Direction Start Magnitude[k/ft,F.psfl End Maonitudelk/... Start Locatlonift.%1 End Locatlonlft.%1 I 39 I MID I Y I -.023 I -.015 I 17.778 I 20 Member Distributed Loads (BLC 7: BLC 3 Transient Area Loads) Mmhr I nhI flIror9frn SfrI Mnni$i ir1flilft V rfl =nX AAi.vii+iiIfI,I QI# I ,,..&!,.nrc 0L1 C.of I --- 4.,...f4 01_1 1- M5 .. •M5 . Z 0I4 .014. . 2: M5 Z .014 .014 4 6 zr .;..o14:.. ... oi: 6 .•••••:..': 8 MS Z .014 .015 8 10 A....M5:. .6::M5 . •..:. Z .015 .. .. 015 M5 Z .015 .015 12 14 ff. :.14 ......... ________ 9 M5 Z .015 .015 16 18 i.Q M5 Z 015 015 18 2b 11 M6 Z .013 .019 0 2 31 M6 Z 019 019 2 4 M6 Z .019 .017 4 6 j4 M6 Z 017 019 6 8 IL M6 Z .()9 .. .02 8 10 j....:M6. :. .: .02 . i a : .. iL M6 Z .021 .015 12 14 ii M6 Z 15%'01.5 14 16 19 M6 Z .015 .021 16 . 18 29.. MG Z 021 021 18 20 .21 M9 Z . .031 .031 0 . 2 22. M9 031 031 2 4 23 M9 Z .031 .026 4 . 6 028 025 . 6 8 ..25 M9 Z .025 .03 8 10 M9 Z 03 03 t0 1 .27 M9 Z .03 . .03 12 14 28 M9 Z 03 029 14 16 .29... M9 Z .029 .029 . 16 18 30 M9 Z-.;029:':03 18 20 ii.. MID Z .004 .004 0 2.222 32 MID Z 004 -004 4.2222 4444 33 M10 .Z .004 .004 4.444 6.667 -34 .MIO ... . Z... . : . .004. . .004 .. . 6.667: ...8.889 35 MIO Z .004 .004 8.889 11.111 MID ... ::I3333: 37 MID Z .004 .005 13.333 . 15.556 MID Z 005 005 .004_ii.iii::. 15556 17778 MID Z .005 .003 17.778 1 20 -Member Distributed Loads (BL C 8: BLC 4Transient AreaLoads) Mmhr I ohl flIrc'flnn I4 I&iinII. tdcfl,IF+ ..,f1 M.A IA.,,.n+. ,,i.ri,, ee..4 I II,...rl Oil I -------rg at _j... M1O . .Z. .125 .125 .• 4.514e-8 ..flS4 _#rnIlluIUt._IUJ 20 .2..... . _M23. -- . __.Z.. .:: _._.125 .125. .3.819ê-8•• _ M24 .125 .125 0 ..66e7. 6.667 M25 . Z. .._ ..;125:_:_. .125___.. .7.292e-8. 6667 RiSA-3D Version 16.0.3 [EA ... \1 7\I7-035.01A ViaSat Phase 4 Arch'i Site\Calcs\BI 4 Utility Canopy.r3d] Page 6 Company : W+R Structural Engineers IIIRISA Designer : DM May 9, 2018 9:03 AM Job Number : ANEMTSCHEKCOMPANY Model Name : ViaSat B14 Utility Canopy Checked By:_____ Basic Load Cases I ( fl.4.,+,n V V 7 1.1..4 0,d.,4 4.41....4...1 A....lIA. I Dead DL Roof the RILL . . •. ..:. .. . . .. 3 EQ EL _4_ Y",'Wind .. WL •••• . _____ :. . . I• 5 BLC I Transient Area.. None 39 _____ 6 BLC 2 Transient Area None 39 7 BLC 3 Transient Area.. None 39 _•. BUC 4 Transient Area.. No • . • .. . . . . . • .• . . 4 .. • ..______ Load Combinations EU 'IiTt1Th __ iiiiirnnm l:Is[I NR_lI.II1 EnveIoe Joint Reactions InInt V I I1 I t V fl,1 I ( 7 11,1 I 1' RAV n. 441 i,' RM# Fl. Al • s i, n :i I fs mrriii ___ ____ • __ ____ __ _mEri __ • __ ___ *_fl • fl_ ___ _flt1_ I • _________ • 1J ___ • _flfl • ________ _J-_- ______ RISA-30 Version 16.0.3 [EA-A17\17-035.01A ViaSat Phase 4 Arch'l Site\Calcs\B14 Utility Canopy.r3d] Page 7 Company : W+R Structural Engineers May 9, 2018 I - I RISA Designer : DM 9:03 AM Job Number : Checked By:_____ ANEMETSCHEK COMPANY Model Name : ViaSat B14 Utility Canopy Envelope Joint Disniacements Joint X flnl LC V fini LC Z lini IC X Rotation - IC V Rotation . LC 7 Rotation F I C NI max 1 ü 11 o bib if 0 11 0 0.7 0.fl N2 max 0 it 0 ía 0 ii 0 it. 0 L 0 j.... _i_ mm 0 0 0 0 0 jj. 0 N3 max 0 L 0 .L 0 j.. 0 it 0 0 11 _L ml!] 0 it 0 .9_ 0 .1 0 0 11 0 i N4 max 0 0 i_ 0 j.. 0 it 0 jj Oil mm 0 0 0 j 0 L 0 . 0 L N5 0 ii. 0 L .84 ii 2.044e-03 i I.462e-03 II -1.515e-04 7 10 j 0 - 003 ..L 0 -1 916e 05 5 -4 012e-04 7 -1 007e-03 9 Ji. N6 max 0 0 .841 ,jj. 0 ia 3.301 e-04 7 1.062e-03 9 -12 mm 0 . -.003., 5 0 5 0 5 -1 471e-03 "I .A86-04 .1.. 13 N7 max 0 7 -.001 7 .932 11 -9.616e-04 7 -1.456e-07 5 1.381 e-04 13 -.4-7086-113'....g -3 482e-03 if -8 852e-04 15 N8 max 0 j... -.001 L .939 II -8.687e-04 3.766e-03 11 7.584e-04 5 TI.- 004 9 0 T -4 asle-03 9_ -2 845e-07 5 -z 996e-04 N9 17 - max 0 fl... .012 . .87 11 2.224e-03 13 0 9 -1.489e-07 7 0 '5 -2O86e-05 5 0 7 -4.749a-07 T 19 NIO max 0 .013 9 .871 II 3.334e-04 13 0 5 -7.097e-07 7 0 .........5:.05 ;8263e.061 0 -2 334e 06 j 21 Nil max 0 7 .006 . .87 11 -9.698e-04 1.. -2.26e-07 7 -3.426e-06 '7 776--;-4 738e-03 9 -6 838e-Q7 9 -1 084e-05 T 2.. N12 0 .004 . .871 11 -8.606e-04 .L. 6.265e-07 5 0 7 miii 0 ii -01 .i. :24': 0 . -4 337e-)3 9_ 2.1J56&.07. j. 0 1.9- 25 N13 max 0 7 .116 ..L .87 11 0 j . 0 5 -4.371e-06 7 .9.. 019 i. 0 1. 0 ..& 0 5 -1 382e-05 9 ..27 N14 0 , .104 5 .871 11 9.489e-03 13 0 5 -1.419e-06 7 015 .L 0 -9.063eO5 0 5 -4 554eCJ6 9 29 N15 0 jj -.069 1.. .87 .11 1.76e-04 13 1.68e-07 5 0 7 30 ij 0 f: - 297 , 0 5 -1061e 04 .L. 5 354e-08 .ia 0 9 31 N16 max 0 11 -.061 7 .871 11 1.808e-04 13 -6.026e-08 7 -6.402e-07 7 - miii 0 1. - 269 .L 0 5 -9 522e Q5 5 -t 81 'Ie-07 9 -2 107e-06 9 33 N17 max 0 9 .012 9 1.135 11 5.528e-0 13 0 9 -7.153e-07 7 mm 0 1. 001 .L - 002 5 -5 183e-05 0 7 -2 279e-06 J_ 35 N18 max 0 9 .013 9 1 1.134 Ill 6.441e-03 13 0 5 -8.379e-07 7 .rnhn 0 7 002 .1..A -`.607, 5 -1.6930L0.41".5 :6%-2 752e-06 9 37 N19 max 0 1 -.069 L1 1.136 ii. 6.527e-03 12. 1.68e-07 5 -2.018e-06 7 38 miii 0 1.7 -.997'.:.1. - 02 ...& -1 003e-05 516.354-081-13 -6421e-06 9 39 N20 max 0 1 -.061 ..L. 1.135 .11 6.517e-03 13 -6.026e-08 1 7 -1.443e-06 7 40 j min. 0 .1. - 269 .L. - 007 5 -1 346e-04 5 -1 .8.11 e-07 9 4717e-06 9 41 N21 max .002 9 .116 5 1.136 11 8.581e-03 13 0 5 -9.601e-08 7 jn - ... 7 .ff'f8 --'7 . .:ob2 --6.08e-05 -- 5 -3.037e-05 _. 43 N22 max .001 1. .104 ...1 1.137 11 4.49e-03 113 0 5 -9.364e-06 7 44 0 _Z 015 .L - 007 J_ -1 327e-04 0 j -3 008e-05 T 45 N23 max 0 7 -.052 7 1.144 11 1.132e-02 12 -2,023e-07 5 -4.948e-04 7 - . . iflifl 1 -.0 '- _9_ - -.083 : 12 -:10-.-F 5 -3.4086-05 5 2.045e-03. -1;383e-03- 9 47 N24 max 0 5 -.053 1 1.156 11 1.428e-02 12 1.905e-03 it 1.297e-03 5 .43..:... :.mlfl -.0. -j -.086- i - -0-.- 5 -6.403e-055-2631•&0T 5..4.661e-047 49 N25 max 0 .1 -.041 1 .1 .871 11 -7.316e-04 7 -2.882e-08 7 1 -4.706e-07 7 mm 0 -175 1 0 5 -354803 & -1_18e-07 9 -1-'55&-0 9 51 N26 max 0 .11 -.046 1. .871 11 3.191e-03 9. 0 7 -6.905e-07 7 52 0 7 -205 L 0 . 7 074e-04 j. 0 11.-.2 271 e-06 9 53 N27 max .002 1.1 -.052 1. 2.446 11 2.489e-02 12 -2.023e-07 5 6.418e-04 5 nun 0 1. -083 12.. -003 5v -5-119e-05 5 .-2.045e-03 it 1-2.3066-041 7 55 N28 - --.-Max.._ .001 9 -.053 1 71 2.558 Ill 12.531e-02 12 1.905e-03111 1-2.39ge-041 7 56 ---.-_.-_. _- mm _.'0 i. '486: 1 11 --.004 : 5__1 -7.768e?05 _5 e-07- _-2.631 _5 f -6.69e-04. 9 RISA-30 Version 16.0.3 [E:...17\17-035.01A ViaSat Phase 4 Arch'l Site\Calcs\B14 Utility Canopy.r3d] Pap -8 - i- .111RISA Company : W+R Structural Engineers May 9, 2018 Designer : .DM Job Number : 9:03 AM ANEMETSCHE(COMR4NY Model Name : ViaSat B14 Utility Canopy Checked Br_____ Envelope Joint Displacements (Continued) V fl...1 I V.' %/ r...1 I f' 7 k.I I ' w I •_._.I__ I - - L - - N29 max -_-- 0 . -.041 7 1.135 11 7.444e-03 11 -2.882e-08 7 -2.924e-06 7 • .0: ..L. -:175. .00i .1.26e -03.i -1.18e-079-9.515e-.069 ...L N30 max 0 .1. -.046 1. 1.135 11 a_ 6.135e-03 13 0 7 -1.005e-06 7 60 ..mm .0 . -.205 5 -.007 5 -1J1Ie..03 5 .0 11. -3.295e-06 9 ..L N31 r 0 A. -.003 j. 1.155 -8.97e-04 7 2.29e-03 12 1.077e-03 A. 62. Tmin 0 ii -08 5 0 5 -4 471 e-03 9 -2 631e-075-1-.462e-04_13. 63 N32 max 1 0 5 1 -.006 13 1.144 11 -9.334e-04 7 -2.066e-07 5 -1.003e-04 13 4.mm 0 11 - 084 0 5 -4 604e-03 9 -2 486e-03 TI -1027e 03 T 65 N33 max 0 ..L -.004 fl 1.083 11 -9.425e-04 7 -1.864e-07 5 -1.313e-04 13 66 mm 0 ii -06 A. 0 5 -4 637e-03 9 -3311 e-03 11 -1 365e 03 5 ..L N34 max 0 11 -.207 1... 1.083 1111. 1.772e-04 13 -8.091e-08 5 -1.709e-03 7 . .mla•. 0. .:: 5 . -.992•. A. .:: 0_. FS _ 1,34e-04 5 2345e-03 .jj.-8.737-o3 15.. Envelope AISC 14jjf360-10): LRFD Steel Code Checks . I Ml HSS6x6x4 .317 ...Q.. 11 0 z 11181.658 216.936 38.64 38.64 11.. -lb j... M2 z 1 1181 658 216 936 3864 3864 t - 3 M3 HSS6X6X4 .358 _L. 11 0 11181.658 216.936 38.64 38.64 1.. -1b ...4_ M4 .355 .... '1 060 11181 658 216936 3864 3&64 = .'lb .. M5 HSS8x6x4 .075 10 1 9 47.. 185. 1 167.436 255.438 45.18 58.305 t -1b 8 M6 146 122 11 Q4. y 9 13245 255438 4518 83O5 -lb 7 M7 H x4x4 .248 7.391 9 .026 14.4.. 9 156.719 216.936 26.719 45.885 1.. -1b : MB 276 7391 9 025 i. y 9 156119 216936;-26 -.l 79 45885 f - 9 M9 HSS8x4x4 .386 l.9. 9 41 20 134.543 216.936 26.719 45.885 1.. -1b jQ -MID", 128 9583 11 J 20 1 134543218936 26719458851 -j 11 M11 IHSS3x3x3 .139 ....Q..1 12 0 z 7 64..962 78.246 16.796 6.796 1.. -lb 12 M12HSS344. 187 . 11 012 0 z 11 492 79.46 6196.: 6796 - 13 M13 HSS3x3x3 .097 ..L 12 .006 0 izl364.96278.246 6.796 6.796 1.. -lb 1.4.. MI4 185 12 012 0 z 2 64Q 246 6796 6796 15 M15 HSS3x3x3 .178 _Q.. 13 .m.Qil ..Q....z 1364.962 7846 6.796 6.796 1..,H1 -1b i: M16 S3x3 291 _P_ 11 ...Q_ I £' Th246 6796 6796 17 M17 HSS3x3x3 .547 ..Q.1 1 .039 0 z 12 64.962 78.246 6.796 6.796 1..,H1 -1b ii Ml 8 509 . 11 .039: ..Q. M...9 Th.24 6-796' -.6'..7.96: 19. M19 HSS3x3x3 .270 0 1 11 .017 0 z I 962 78.246 6.796 6.796 1.41-11 -lb 2Q M20 152 Q 13 .Qifl . 3 64.962:78-.2461 6796 6798 11ii ZL M21 .009 12 .j t2 y 9 2.L9 7l4 6.796 6.796 .. HI-lb 22 M22 x3x3 016 4. ..JL .1.QP. .JL y 941.39 Z&24 6796 6796 HI-lb 23 M23 HSS3x3x3 .109 333 _1 1.... JZ ..L 21 724 6.796 6.796 .. Hl-lb 24... M24 HSS3x3x3 109 3.,3M: _1 1.... .. . i 21 78.24 6 796 6396 1 fliTb 25 M25 HSS3x3x3 .109 3.333 ._11 ..iQ. Z I 4 6.796 6.796 .. Hilb .2L M26 HSS3x3x3 011 215 11 .QQj y Z.47 78.246 6 798 6 796 Eli-lb 27 M27 HSS3x3x3 .007 .87 12 .mQQj 3.75 70.471 74 6.796 6.796 .. HI-lb 2& M28 HSS3x3x3 004 1,2....IQQi ....Q.. y 9 72i1 7814 &796 6796 Hi-lb 29 M29 HSS3x3x3 .004 .06 12 Qj ...Q.. 9 39 78246 6.796 8.796 .. HI-lb Q. M30 HSS3x3x3 011 ..j.. 12 017 Q y 2 781 6 6 796 6 796 ... HI-lb 31 M31 HSS3x3x3 .010 1 12 .014 0 Y-112176.951 7824 6.796 6.796 .. HI-lb M32. HSS6x23. .. .055 . 3.65 • .11. 9L2 y 9 j45 106:812 6.698 15801 . Hi-lb RISA-313 Version 16.0.3 [E:\. ..17\17-035.01 A ViaSat Phase 4 Arch'l Site\Calcs\314 Utility Canopy.r3d] Page 9 Footing Elevation C en C N Company : W+R Structural Engineers May 9, 2018 Designer : DM Job Number: Footing I - R3D_N2 Checked By:_____ Sketch IV IT DL- IC 4ft Details A tx B #5@10 in 71 z II I I I IIj_ #5@10 in DL- 11 4 f x Dir. Steel: 1.53 in (5 #5) z Dir. Steel: 1.53 In (5 #5) Bottom Rebar Plan RiSAFoundation Version 10.0.3 [E:\...\ ... ... \ ... \B14 Utility Canopy.r3d] Page 1 Company : W+R Structural Engineers May 9, 2018 Desigher : DM Job Number: Footing I - R3D_N2 Checked By:_____ 4 ft x Dir. Steel: 0 in (0 #5) z Dir. Steel: 0 In (0 #5) Top Rebar Plan Geometry, Materials and Criteria Length :4 ft eX :0 in Gross Allow. Beating :3333 psf (gross) Steel fy :60 ksi Width :4 ft eZ :0 In Concrete Weight :.146 k1ftas3 Minimum Steel :.0018 Thickness :15 in pX :12 In Concrete f'c :4 ksl Maximum Steel :.0076 Height :0 in pZ :12 in Design Code :AC1318-14 Rot. Angle :0 deg Footing Top Bar Cover :2 in Overturning I Sliding SF :1 Phi for Flexure :0.9 Footing Bottom Bar Cover :3 In Coefficient of Friction :0.3 Phi for Shear :0.75 Pedestal Longitudinal Bar Cover :1.5 In Passive Resistance of Soil :0 k Phi for Bearing :0.65 Loads P (kl Vx (kl Vz (k) Mv (kff\ M7 (k..fl\ flt,rFi, trr1ri (rf 1.334 -.07 J-1.458 13.624 1.429 1 - I --d — I IS D — I- DL EL RLL RlSAFoundation Version 10.0.3 Utility Canopy.r3d] I Page 2 Company : W+R Structural Engineers May 9, 2018 Designer : DM Job Number: Footing I - R3D_N2 Checked By:_____ Soil Bearing Description Categories and Factors Service I DL+1 LL+1 HL 3333 264.763 (A) .079 IBC 16-5 1 DL+.43EL+.SLL+1 LLS+1.. 3333 1665.988_(B) .5 IBC 16-7 (b) .9DLf.43EL+.9HL 3333 1 2584.679 (B) 1 .775 A B 0 D C Al B 0 D C I DLi1 LL+1 HL QA: 264.763 psf QB: 264.725 psf QC: 264.725 psf QD: 264.763 psi NAZ:3.346e+5 In NAX:-1 In I DL+.43EL+.5.. QA: 0 psf QB: 1665.988 psf QC: 1665.988 psf QD: 0 psf NAZ:15.147 in NAX:-1 in .9DL+.43EL+.. QA: 0 psf QB: 2584.679 psf QC: 2584.679 psf QD: opsf NAZ: 8.78 in NAX:-1 in Footing Flexure Design (Bottom Bars) As-mm x-dir (Top Flexure): 1.296 InA2 As-mm z-dir (Top Flexure): 1.296 in'2 As-mm x-dir (Bat Flexure): 1.296 InA2 As-mm z-dir (Bot Flexure): 1.296 inA2 Mu-xx Mu-xx Description Categories and Factors UC Max (k-ft) As-mm x-dlr (1 & 8): 1.296 In'2 As-mm z-dir (1 & S): 1.296 in"2 z-Dir As z-Dir As x-Dir As x-Dir As Required Provided Mu-zz Mu-zz Required Provided (inA2) (102) UC Max (k-ft) (inA2) (inAI Strength 1.2DL+1.6LL+1 .6HL .00588 .45 .009 1.534 .00588 .45 .009 1:534 IBC 16-1 1.4DL .00686 .53 .01 1.534 .00686 .53 .01 1.534 IBC 16-2 (a.. 1.2DL+1.6LL+1.6LL.. .00851 .65 .013 1.534 .00851 .65 .013 1.534 BC 16-2 (b.. 1.2DL+1.6LL+1.6LL.. .00588 .45 .009 1.534 .00588 .45 .009 1.534 IBC 16-2(c.. 1.2DL+1.6LL+1.6LL.. .00588 .45 .009 1.534 .00588 .45 .009 1.534 IBC 16-3(a.. 1.2DL+1.GRLL+1.6H.. .01428 1.09 .021 1.534 1 .01428 1.09 .021 1.534 IBC 16-3 (c.. 1.2DL+1.6SL+I.6SL. .00588 .45 .009 1 1.534 .00588 .45 .009 1.534 IBC 16-3 (e.. 1.2DL+1.6RL+1.6HL. .00588 .45 .009 1.534 1 .00588 1 45 .009 1.534 Footing Flexure Design (Top Bars) and Factors Mu-xx (k-fl) z Dir As (in2) Mu-zz (k-it) x Dir As rice,Service) I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 ection Along xx and zz= 21.377k-ft,21.377k-ft Per Chaoter 22 of ACl 318. RiSAFoundation Version 10.0.3 Utility Canopy.r3d] Page 3 Gross Allow.(psf) Max Bearing (psi) Max/Allowable Ratio Company : W+R Structural Engineers May 9, 2018 Designer : DM Job Number: Footing I - R3D_N2 Checked By:_____ Footing Shear Check Two Way (Punching) Vc: 269.062 k One Way (x Dir. Cut) Vc 69.064 It One Way (z Dir. Cut) Vc: 69.064 k Punching x Dir. Cut z Dir. Cut flasnrintinn Cstarinrips and Fantarn ViAl Vii/oA/n Vi Al Vii!oAIr /ii1k\ %fiilrAli' Strength 1.2DL+1.6LL+1.6HL 1.221 .006 .221 .004 .221 .004 IBC 16-1 1.4DL 1.425 .007 .258 .005 .258 .005 IBC 16-2 (a) 1.2DL+1.6LL+1.6LLS+1.6H.. 1.767 .009 .32 .006 .32 .006 IBC 16-2 (b) 1.2DL'1.6LL+1.6LLS+1.6H.. 1.221 .006 .221 .004 .221 .004 IBC 16-2 (c) 1.2DL+1.6LL+1.6LLS+1.6H.. 1.221 .006 .221 .004 .221 .004 IBC 16-3 (a) 1.2DL+1.6RLL+1.6HL+.5L.. 2.966 .015 .537 .01 .537 .01 IBC 16-3(c) 1.2DL+1 .GSL+1.6SLN+1.6H.. 1.221 .006 .221 .004 .221 .004 IBC 16-3(e) 1.2DL+1.6RL+1.6HL+.5LL.. 1.221 .006 .221 .004 .221 .004 Concrete Bearing Check (Vertical Loads Only) Bearing Be: 979.2 k Descriotion Catecjories and Factors Bearina Ru (k) Rearina Ru/oIRc Strength 1.2DL+1 .6LL+1 .6HL 1.601 - .003 IBC 16-1 1.4DL 1.868 .003 IBC 16-2 (a) 1.2DL+1.6LL+1 .6LLS+1.6H.. 2.316 .004 IBC 16-2 (b) 1.2DL+1.6LL+1 .6LLS+1.6H.. 1.601 .003 IBC 16-2 (c) I 1.2DL+1.6LL+1 .6LLS+1.6H.. 1.601 .003 IBC 16-3 (a) I 1.2DL+1.6RLL+1.6HL+.5L.. 3.888 .006 IBC 16-3(c) I 1.2DL+1.6SL+1.6SLN+1.6H.. 1.601 .003 IBC 16-3 (e) I 1.2DL+1.6RL+1.6HL+.5LL.. 1.601 .003 Overturning Check (Service) Descriotion Cateaonas and Factors Mo-xx (k-ft) Ms-xx (k-ft Mn-z (k-ft) Ms-72 (k-ft) OF-v flSF,, Service I DL+i LL+1 HL 0 8.472 0 - 8.472 1 NA NA IBC 16-5 IDL+.43EL+.5LL+.. 6.702 8.472 .06 8.472 11.264 141.169 IBC 16-7 (b) .9DL+43EL+.9H.. 6.702 7.625 1 .06 1 7.625 11.138 127.052 Mo-xx: Governing Overturning Moment about AD or BC Ms-xx: Governing Stablizing Moment about AD or BC OSF-xx: Ratio of Ms-xx to Mo-xx Sliding Check (Service) Descriotion Cateciories and Factors Va-xx (kI Vr-xx (k Vs-77 (k Vr-77 (k R-y. R-,v Service IDL+ILL+IHL 0 1.271 0 1.271 NA I NA IBC 16-5 IDL+.43EL+.5LL+.. 0 1.262 .627 1.262 1 -WA-F2.012 IBC 16-7 (b) .9DL+.43EL+.9H.. 1 0 1.135 .627 1.135 NA 11.809 Va-xx: Applied Lateral Force to Cause Sliding Along xx Axis Vr-xx: Resisting Lateral Force Against Sliding Along xx Axis SR-xx: Ratio of Vr-xx to Va-xx RlSAFoundation Version 10.0.3 [E:\...\...\ ... ... \B14 Utility Canopy.r3d] Page 4