The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2515 PIO PICO DR; ; 80-66; PermitCITY OF CARLSBAO—BUILCiING DEPARTMENT APPLICAT,.!ON & PERMIT USE BALL POINT PEN ONLY 1200 ELM AVENUE (714) 438-5525 NO. 41-di I JOB ADDRESS A'V..ST. DATE OFAPpLICATtoN RD J eus. LICENSE PERMIT NUMBER I I I I I I I I 25J46Q OWNER _O.W.R!S,SyE PRIM ONTR CTOR STATE LICENSE OWNER'S MAILING ADDRESS . AWtV c CRACTO'S ADDRESS j CONTR'ACTOR'S PHONE r ASS , .—,OR'S SS PARCEL NO. DESIGNER c3 1 i'3 STATE LICENSEL4 DESCRIPTION OF WORK ,J ()tkj (24'[y• DES I ER 5 ADDRESS DESIGNER.' S PHONE '&& O4S ' o3 CENSUS TRACT GP. LAND USE ZONING RES. UNITS PARKING SPAC sf I # j '.' Not Valid Unless Machine Certified BLDG SQ. FT. BLDG USE GP STANDARD PLAN S A B PL,lO , , . TYP[7NSTJJ occ: LOAD .- . . . . VALUATION: 00 BOILER/COMPRESSOR 3-15 HP QTY. PLUMBING PERMIT AMT. QTY. 'MECHANICAL PERMIT AMT. 7I EACH FIXTURE TRAP ." "-" INSTALL FURN. DUCTS UP TO 100,000 BTU EACH BUILDING SEWER ,..J — OVER 100,000 BTU _L EACH WATER HEATER AND/OR VENT - BOILER/COMPRESSOR UP TO 3 HP EACH 2" GAS SYSTEM 1 TO 4 OUTLETS . EACH GAS SYSTEM 5 OR MORE . BOILER/COMPRESSOR 16-30 HP . EACH INSTAL., ALTER, REPAIR WATER PIPE . VENT FAN SINGLE DUCT & EACH LAWN SPRINKLER SYSTEM . . 'V' MECH EXHAUST - HOOD/DUCTS . . . WATER SOFTNER . RELOCATION OF EA FURNACE/HEATER . BUILDING PERMIT 90 j 3 ijLj'j ISSUOTA L 3_00 Issue 3.00 SIGN PERMIT - PLUMBING CONTRACTOR / TOTAL MECHANICAL PLAN CHECK /d5- I ALLINCLUSIVE PERMIT CONTRACTOR ary. ELECTRICAL PERMIT __ AMT. Q TY. MOBILE HOME PERMIT AMT. TOTAL PLUMBING I4t ELECTRICAL' NEW CONST EA AMP/SWT/BKR fj 4 - J 449. .- AWNING . .. . MECHANICAL I PH .25 3P9' . PORCH , MOBILE HOME I I I EXIST BLDG EA AMP/SWT/BKR . SET-UP . SOLAR 1 I I I 1 PH .25 3 PH , RAMADA, CABANA REMODEL/ALTER PER CIRCUIT . FENCE OVER 6' TEMPPOLE 200AMPS . . TOTAL MOBILE HOME. . , MICO-FILM. 1 I I I OVER 200 AMPS . . TEMP OCCUPANCY (30 DAYS) ' - Issue 2 _00 TOTAL ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR TOTAL FEES PAYABLE I—.. SCHOOL S: I HAVE CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE COMPLETED "APPLICATION AND PERMIT, AND DO 'AN OSHA PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR EXCAVATIONS OVER HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ALL INFORMATION HEREON FURTHER CERTIFY AND AGREE IF A PERMIT IS IS TRUE AND CORRECT AND I ISSUED: TO COMPLY WITH ALL CITY, 5'.O" DEEP AND DEMOLITION OR CONSTRUCTION OF STRUCTURES OVER 3 STORrES IN HEIGHT If COUNTY AND STATE LAWS GOVERNING BUILDING CONSTRUCTION, WHETHER _ _______ __, F -o SPECIFIED HEREIN OR NOT. I,ALSO AGREE TO SAVE INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARM. LESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AGAINST ALL LIABILITIES, JUDGMENTS, COSTS AND ce&__ EXPENSE5HICH M,IY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINST SAID CITY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GFi'1WIGOP THIS PERMIT. APPLICANT'5tGNATURE ___________________________________________________________________________ OWNERO CONTRACTORD JAPPOVED BY AaZA LICENSED CONTRACTORS DECLARATION I hereby affirm that I am licensed under provi- sions of Chapter 9 (commencing With Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Profes- sions Code, and my license Is in full force and ef- fect. OWNER-BUILDER DECLARATION Di hereby affirm that I am exempt from the Con- tractor's License Law for the following reason (Sec. 7031.5 ,Buslness and Professions Code), Any city or county which requires a permit to con- struct, alter, improve, demolish, or repair any Structure, prior to its issuance also requires the applicant for such permit to file a signed state- ment that he is licensed pursuant to the provi- sions of the Contractor's License Law (Chapter 9 confmenclng with Section 7000 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code) or that is ex- empt therefrom and the basis for the alleged ex- emption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by an ap- plicant for a permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars ($500). Dl, as owner of the property, or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work, and the structure is not intended or of- fered for sale (Sec. 7044, Business and Profes- sions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or Improves thereon and who does such work himself or through his own employees, provided that such improvements are not Intended or of- fered for sale. if, however, the building or improve- ment is sold within one year of completion, the owner-builder will have the burden of proving that he did not build or improve for.the purpose of sale). Dl, as owner of the property, am exclusively con- tracting with licensed contractors to construct the project (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not ap- ply to an owner of property t.ho buljdRor proves thereon, and who contraof/r' jects with S Contractor(s)ticenb püua e contractor's License Law), I am exempt under Sec.t'/ . for this reason_______________________________ Date Owr 1¼ WORKERS' COMPENSATION DEARATiON I hereby affirm that i have a certicate of con- sent to self-insure, or a certificate of Workers' Compensation Insurance, or a certified copy thereof (Sec. 3800, Labor Code). POLICY NO. COMPANY DCopy is flied with the city. DCerflfied copy is hereby furnished. CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION FROM WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE (This section ned not be completed If the per. mL...for one hundred dollars ($100) or less). I crtlfy tf.t in the performance of the work for which this permit is Issued, I shall not employ any pero') in any manner so as to become subject to the Workers''ompensation Laws of California. NOTI(;E TO A?PLiCANT; If, after making this Cer-tlfica3 01 Exemption, you should become subject to t" Workers' Compensation provisions of the Labor Code, you must forthwith comply with such provisions or this permit shall be deemed revoked. CONSTRUCTION LENDING AGENCY I hereby affirm that there is a c0n51r,,r'.tinn Ian- p1)APPLICANT TO FILL IN INFOR - MATION WITHIN RED LINES. - .1 -S - I • • • V SITE ADDRESS OWNER PE1TNO . . V • V - V - . . V . - .: ••Vt,S V FILDVSPECTIO VRCORD V ---• . . . . INSPECTION DATE INSPECTOR INSPECTOR S NOTES WOOD FLOOR — FOUNDATIONS FORMS SET BACK .TOILET 0 UNDER FLOOR PLUMBING UNDER FLOOR HEATING . V '. . •V.• V oK.TO INSTALL SUB FLOOR SLAB FLOOR UNDER SLAB PLMBING F.00TING.FORMS.SETBACK.TOILET OK TO POUR CONCRETE V . - FRAME ROUGH ELECTRICAL - . S . -- •V ROUGH PLUMBING ___________ V V ROUGH HEATING/VENTILATING FRAME OK • PLACE INSULATION V INSULATION OK • PLACE WALLBOARD - 0 . • WALLBOARD OK. PLACE TAPE ) • EXTERIOR LATH. OK.. PLACE STUCCO FIREPLACE L - ... .-. .. V V V V V. •.. . V V DAMPER & STEEL - -• - . . V V . . V 5 V PLATE TIES/HEIGHT OF CHIMNEY V •• OTHER • •• - S • - - V V V V . -. . . V V TEMP POWER (POLE) -- • V SEWER • 1 V V - V V . GAS TEST SWIM POOL • STEEL BONDING S PRE DECK _s S FENCE PREPLASTER SHOWN •'FRAME - ¶PAN' •1 V V V V . V V BLDG FINAL INSP BY BLDG DEPT OTHER DEPT'S REQ COMPLETED ELECMETE-ERM-TEMP GAS METER-PERM-TEMP •. V :.. V V V V CERTOF OCCUPANCY ISSUED ePROFESSIONAL PEG:STERED INSPECTIONS. INC. PHONE 2920660 7695 convoy court, sa ego. caiforna 92111 A I INSPECTIONS • TESTING • ENGINEERING S - - TEST REPORT JOB NO. 2691 Dental Building ADDRESS 2515 Plo Pico, Carlsbad. CA. PHONE OWNER CONTRACTOR cC. Mike Straub SIB. PID CUE ENGINEER c,Vc ARCHITECT ____________________________________ BLDG. AUTH. INSPECTOR Merle Jones PERMIT NO. PLAN FILE FIELD LOCATION OF SPECIMEN SAMPLE OF: Concrete IN JOB OR STRUCTURE: Stem Walls MX NO. Job Mix Truck MADE BY Merle Jones PROPORTIONS : SLUMP ADMIXTURE DATE MADE 11-21-80 TYPE OF CEMENT DATE RECEIVED 11-24-80 CONC. SUPPLIER Vista Concrete SOURCE OF ROCK TICKET NO. INSPECTOR SIGN Merle Jones LABORATORY TEST DATA ACE TESTFfl SPECIMEN MARKINGS 35219,- 35220 35221 DATE TESTED • 11-28-80 12719-80 Hold AREA — SQ. IN. 28.28 ULTIMATE LOAD - LEIS. 37000 UNITSTRESS — PSI 5 1310 AT SPECIFIED STRENGTH 28 DAYS - PSI • T- 2000 DISTRIBUTION: City of Carlsbad • Mike Straub APL-1TION FOR PERMIT TO CONNECT TO CITY SEWER SYSTEM CITY OF CARLSBAD ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT J BUILDING DEPT. SE 16 729-1181 EXT. 35 ISSUED BY FOR APPLICANT TO FILL IN DATE ISSUED RD 2575 co VALIDATION OWNER . - -)- f')l'/ -: — MAILING ADDRESS -. I CONTRACTOR I 1 I / CONTRACTOR'S ADDRESS r r NEW BUILDING EXISTING BUILDING LEGAL DESCRIPTION A bRH' c 4 LATERAL CHARGE COMPUTATION STANDARD 4" (Max. H. 30', V. 10') OVER 30' H.-@L-FT. OVER 10'V.-@-FT. STANDARD 6" (Max. H. 30', V. 10') OVER 30' H. ______ _______ FT. OVER 10'V. -@- FT. TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST SERVICE CHARGE (REPAVING ETC.) TOTAL LATERAL CHARGE REMARKS: - LINE COST DATA T'NEW BUILDING: Expires with ASSESSMENT DIST. NO. Building Permit or, if none, in 120 days FRONTAGE _______COST PER FT.—TOTAL— EXISTING BUILDING: Expires 120 OTHER crm rintP nf issuance' LATERAL LOCATION "I I CONNECTION FEE NO. UNITS-4 COST PER UNIT J ' TOTAL PUMP STATION FEES NO. UNITS -COST PER UNIT TOTAl TOTAL CHARGES (LATERAL ETC.) '' / 'io Q2-- ST. RAL NO INSTALLATION DATE_ 7A ,tO 2Wif • ;... . c pAOU - - - TY c!7P 7V • - cj<. fl—c4,'A) A7Vf Ac- /r "°'PP jc'A aA, •i-/A IlL £f W <2- , - / y . f•. . . . . . / //Z..- / 7O .• W/A7,o4 L ip%JY L) CAJ /q4) 7_o CO 7/i cc v S3 C J1//er.-1-EAJ/ H A110 /-J ,Lt.. /7 voc'A/$ j• ppJ7P -'-W6 77o' /c OU85 c1- çz .... fr 3 tt- e*c' 6/'AJ-AfE J77 1 C 4 147 c/) q ;.,4,zA-I2_. c-.• .. S Ate-'—i- A7 RC5174. 47-/Z-0 Ec SV cp wi' PZ— /3 //C14 •/'1cc.. V ó/44-' O,c. . :.. S. le A z A, ,c./AL ; c/ i' ' CL }- /óV1P py: . S S 1200 ELM AVENUE TELEPHONE: CARLSBAD CALIFORNIA 92008 L41s / (714) 729-1131 12 - Of Cartbab COMMERCIAL VALUATION CHART USE OF BUILDING BUILDING AREA X (Less Office.Area) OFFICE AREA 2?-JoO iL-J $ • $ I7A.-2D. SPRINKLER SYSTEMS . X $1.25/ sq. ft. = AIR CONDITIONING_. X $2.5/ sq..ft. = $-T PILE FOUNDATION . X $ = PAVING X $ .25/ sq . f1 .•. $ OTAL ............... ... ...... $ _1 k =-2-- PLAN CHECK FEE (65% of Building Permit) . .. . . $_________________ BUILDING PERMIT . . .... . - ..... ' • .. $ MICRO FILM FEE ...................$ TOTAL FEES .................$ Expiration of Plan Check. Applications for v.hich no. permit is issued within ISO days following the date of application shall expire by *NOTE: EACH BUILDING limitation and plans submitted for checking may thereafter be returned to the applicant or destroyed by the Building Official. The Building Official REQUIRES A may extend the time for action by the applicant for a period not exceeding 180 days upon written request by the applicant showing that circumstances SEPARATE beyond the control of the applicant have prevented action from being taken. In order to renew action on an application after expiration, the a p - . PERMIT. plicant shall resubmit plans and pay a new plan-check fee. Reinspection Fee. The fee for each reinspection shah be $10.00. TABLE NO. 3A—BUILDING PERMIT FEES TOTAL VALUATION . . FEE $1.00 to $300.00 ' . $501.00 to $2,000.00 $5.00 for the first $500.00 plus $1.00 for each additional $100.00 or tiort thereof, to and including $2,001.00 to $5.000.00 $20.00 for the first $2,000.00 plus $4.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $25,000.00 $25,001.00 to $50,000.00 $112.00 for the first $25,000.00 plus $3.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $5°,000.0O $50,001.00 to $100,000.00 $187.00 for the first 850,000.00 plus $2.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000.94 $100,001.00 to $500,00000 8287.00 for, the first $100,000.00 plus $ 1.50 for each additional $.l ,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $500,000.00 $500,001.00 and p . W'1.00 'for the first $500,000.00 plus $1.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof -ADDENDUM TO COMMERCIAL PLAN CHECK SHEETS 1. Show electric ground as per City Code Section 18.12.240 Section 250-26(c) amended --. Grounding Separately Derived Alternating-Current Systems. Section-250-26(c) is amended by the addition of the following after the first sentence. "The primary grounding method shall be that which is refer- red to as the "lJffer Ground" consisting of 20 feet or more of #4 reinforcing bar or larger placed 3 inches up from the bottom, of the concrete footingand #4 or larger copper con- ductor wrapped around the rebar to support the copper con- ductor. The conductor may be required to be larger than #4, depending on the conductor size per table. 250-94. Aluminum conductor is prohibited." Water piping to be bonded to the . grounded system. 2. 'Submit duly signed compliance certificate 'and California Energe.des,ign calu1tions. Show ALL hot water lines to be insulated.. Automatic entry doors to be designed as "break-away" doors as per U.B.C. Standard #33-1. . . . 5.' Provide a profile detail' of the entry door and ramps to comply with U.B;C. Sections 3303(h). and 3306. ' • 6. ,,Note on plans:" . . . 'Survey markers to be exposed. Job site to be identified with address. 7 Shnw a n nclosure for roof mounted equipment' and show all piping and ducts within the building. S I INTERDEPARTMENTAL INFORMATION SHEET JILDING DEPARTMENT DATER JEW V ED BUILDING ADDRES S: crry OF CARLSBAD. PLANNING DEPARTMENT Building Department ZONE LOT SIZE AL LOT WIDTH____________________ ITS ALLOWED ___UNITS PROVIDED___________________ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ' PAKING SPACES REQUIRED PROVIDED____________________ COVERAGE ALLOWED if_ 7) PROVIDED 4BUILDING HEIGHT ALLOWED PROVIDED- FRONT SETBACK: SIDESETBAcK: REARSEBACK: ALLOWED PROVIDED INTRUSIONS d07I441_ LANDsCAPE.& IRRIGATION PLAN COMMENTS: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTI)ON REQ: .LHO'DL FEES..f /gr PISTRCT: .IMOUNT:... . _L, ADDITIONAL OMMENTS OK TO ISSU': ATE')A/1OOK TO DATE 11/J_J')! ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT . R.O.WFo M/_INDUSTRIAL WASTE .Jj? _IMPROVEMENTS1QCQSTc' SEWER CONNECTION DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS GRADING PERMIT tilA _EASEMENTS k . LEGAL DESCRIPTION ADLf?IONAL COMMENTS y Cup OK TO ISSUE: DATE)OW PWØ'OK TO FINAL DATE I)I9 I IREDEPARTMENT .-),'RINKLING SYSTEM RE PROTECTION EQ'IP1ai7 4LX FIRE ALARMS EXITS / FIRE. HYDRANTS . LOCATION ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OK. TO ISSUL _DATE MAR 27fl OK TO FINAL DATE JATERDEPARTMENT REQUIREMENTS OF APPROPRIATE DISTRICTS MET DATE J. THOMAS WILSON STRUCTURAL ENGINUR* roo' iTw't '/i'h', CQr/Iai Ar:%c914 !af hm 4 44a4) 0 €ettfr 3 £DL-- t•= • 5•47 or ml-rl, . . c-&'i< ••=-. 743 filLil-l'— /—~// I @ - —b -_ja r & •c bow I, z c,,/A " .• 2' / •.• - 01 . ',7 &;''( - ---.--•. 47f & øo 2 - ft- 7 7r 3 90 o" 7 c >/ro)- - cf& /? •, /) £" / 77 .- -__J_ •;= _-_/7%b <,7f '-, k• .r'4-" JTWI I Jo' 4- /1. 0• 8/ fo ? '.c' f o'A~p /O3 c 3 41 4o - 2L , 7"• — . 74 I - - , 2O)C7 2;a It. -- -Jc --. i- °•' 4- 1r '44 s. o — 1 ' Lvr U o — 1 *1 j'c#7/i IAL c;p 7 • ID - •• . • t-3 1' • - '1-) IVfa,%• • 7 ( /Z4.9-7' I•7 3Q' Pt 4 - -•, ,• . -I ] . • r A.7 p. , q• 4-',çi'i'- - .••..•.•.- •• = 1J 90 7o " 1• 1r 7il ___ • IC V .• L oft :1 7,s Via toll iO3.4 1i.ro -.. z j 14: I) ?1 7 c7 I c' rl Ur ±L! .•3 /2..4.' -71 - I 3 3oo0 ,P i 1L.ø t . /..3 4_i, ç, ': . •- itf jI° 4O 7 10 / 0 - i 3 L3-0 7 0 >9 9S,* 7. 0 • ..•-. s 2oa 7 x/ C3 9i-e 7 CO 1/ '7 f ), (i4) 41to 17. 4 : . 3. h.- L 3 I •. 7o7 fr.7 I .I( 1-,= ---------?7 L - 7 ~ 7- ____ •.. •. /1 jfl4iz __ £• -ZfOZ" i2C Vj0 . 5 I 0 • 1 24 JTw 4•S' __ sc33. V • V V L--- V . •V - - 7 • V V • L --' t ,. r g- 7 V - ' /' 9J7C •• V V °L- ,,, 2O . ---ki111. V V '. , • VA= • 4%8 /- V • I- 7rv- •71 10 ,4 .roo' i4r/ 2r7'P7 1e0/ ••' i.•4 ;Its. tcarcef Se,7mrL elf IV-.r ,c,,-! F I—. 4ic7 Al 7, .r Li x _____ <lu-oX. I74, OtI y Y'y II aoa /C#ir, a 7" 7e We r— / 2iL!i L-' ': • * A6 S73 Cla 90-b 272C) /7 ? •/J• GEOTECHNICAL INVEST IGATION MEDICAL DENTAL OFFICE 2515 PlO PICO CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA a PREPARED FOR: Or. Larry Breltbarth• do Roby Blackford 2942 Harding, Suite E Carlsbad, California PREPARED BY: Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc. 6280 Riverdale Street San Diego, California SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTINO, INC. 6280 RIVEROALE ST. SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 92120 • TELE 2804321 • P.O. BOX 20627 SAN DIEGO. CALIF. 92120 74-B31 VELIE WAY PALM DESERT, CALIF. 92260 T E L E 346-1070 6 7 B ENTERPRISE ST. ESCONDIDO, CALIF. 92025 TELE 7464544 September 24, 1980 Dr. Larry Breltbarth SCS&T 13068 do Roby Blackford Report No. 2 2942 Harding, Suite E Carlsbad, California 92008 SUBJECT: Report of Geotechnical Investigation, Medical Dental Office, 2515 Plo Pico, Carlsbad, California. Gentlemen: In accordance with your request, we have completed a geotechnical investi- gation for the proposed project. We are presenting herein our findings and recommendations. The findings of this study indicate that the site is suitable for the proposed development provided the recommendations presented In the attach- ed report are complied with. If you have any questions after reviewing the findings and recommendations contained In the attached report, please do not heistate to contact this E SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, IN C . SCS&T 13068 September 24, 1980 Page 2 b office. This opportunity to be of, professional services is sincerely appreciated. Rspectfully submitted, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING, INC. £ Curtis 0 Burdett, R.G. #3595 / E. N. Ketchum, C.C.E. #26267 0. ENK:CRB:n . cc: (4) Submitted • • (1) SCS&T, Escondido L 0 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS PALE Introduction and Project Description............................... .. .1 Project Scope .................................1 Findings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . ................ . . .2 SiteDescription ....... . ........................ . ......... .. ...... 2 General Geology and Subsurface Conditions... ....................o3 Geologic Setting and Soil Description.. .... .... ... ....... ..3 Groundwater. . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 TectonicSetting ............. . ........... ..... ..... ... ... ...3 Geologic Hazards.... ........ .I..•ø....... . . .. . ... . . . . . . •.. . . . . ...4 Recommendations and Co.nclus1ons . .•. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . so . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .5 Site Preparation .................................................. 5 Construction Debris ................. ••• • ••...• ... .. .. . ... 0 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Areas to be Paved..........................................5 Earthwork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Foundations...'.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . so . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . .. . . .6 0 General. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • • • • .. • . .6 Settlement Characteristics...... . .. . . .. .. . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . Expansive Characteristics... ...... . ... .... ...... ...... ... Pa vement Recommendations...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 * Earth Retaining Structures........ . ........ . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . ....... .7 Allowable Passive Pressure.. ......... ... .. .. ..... .. . .. .. ...7 Active Soil Pressure ...... ................................. 8 Limitations. . . . . . . . . . . . so . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . .8 Review, Observation and Testing...... ....... .... ... .. .... . 1• .. .8 Uniformity of Conditions................. ........................8 Change in Scope... so-s o ....o..........9 Time Limitations................ ...... . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) PAGE Disclaimer of Warranty .......................,..............,.....9 Client's Responsibility ...................... Field Explorations...... •......... •.•........ .....•.. •Sl•l•••••• • • .110. Laboratory ATTACHMENTS Plate 1 Site Vicinity Map Plate 2 Site Configuration and Exploration Locations Plate 3-5 Pit and Trench Logs Plate 6 Direct shear Test Results Maximum Density and Optimum Moisture Content Plate 7 Unified Soil Classification Chart Appendix Recommended Grading Specifications and Special Recommendations I I 0 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION MEDICAL/DENTAL OFFICE 2515 PlO PICO CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical Investigation for the proposed medical/dental offices to be located on the southwest corner of Plo Pico and Las Flores in the City of Carlsbad, California. It is our understanding that a wood-frame, single-story structure that is to have a raised floor system is planned for this site. It is further understood that a minimal amount of grading will be neces- sary to develop the site. This information was obtained from the plans prepared by Roy Blackford. The site configuration and explorations are shown on Plate Number 2. Plate Number 1 provides a site location map. 46 PROJECT SCOPE This investigation consisted of: surface reconnaissance; subsurface explorations; obtaining representative disturbed and undisturbed samples; laboratory testing; analysis of the field and laboratory data; research of available geological literature pertaining to the site; and preparation of this report. Specifically, the analysis of our findings in Intended to: a) Explore the subsurface conditions to the depths influenced by the proposed construction. 46 SCS&T 13068 September 24, 1980 Page 2 12 b) Evaluate, by laboratory tests, the pertinent engineering pro- perties of the various strata which will influence the develop- ment, including their bearing capacities, expansive character- istics, and settlement potential.' Define the general geology at the site.. including possible geologic hazards which could have an effect on the site devel- opment. . Develop soil engineering criteria for site grading. Determine potential construction difficulties and provide' recommendations concerning these problems. Recommend an appropriate foundation system for the type of structures anticipated and developi soil engineering design criteria for the recommended foundation design. Present the findings of our services in .a report which will Include plot plan, exploration logs, summary of laboratory test results, and the appropriate conclusions and recommendations. FINDINGS Site Description The subject site Is a rectangular shaped parcel of land located at the southwest corner of Pio Pico and Las Flores in Carlsbad, California. The property is approximately 21,000 square feet and is bounded by a small vegetable garden and residential homes on the south and west, by Las Flores on the north,, and Pio Pico on the east. A wood-frame house -exists on the northern portion of the site with a swimming pool located south of the house. The area immediately south of the house has approximately 4 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TE9,TINO. INC. SCS&T 13068 September 24, 1980 Page 3 feet of fill with 1.5:1 slopes. Vegetation consist of lawn grass, small trees and shrubs around the, house. The access to utility lines is located along Las Flores and the water lines are along Pio Pico. General Geology and Subsurface Conditions Geologic Setting and Soil Description: The subject site is located in the Coastal Plains Physiographic Province and is underlain by marine and S nonmarine sediments and associated residuum and alluvium. The specific soils conditions encountered in our; explorations were reddish-brown, silty sands which were dense and moist below 18 inches of the existing surface. These soils were generally loose and humid for the upper 18 inches. Groundwater: No groundwater was encountered during our, subsurface explo- rations and we do not anticipate any major groundwater related problems either during or after construction. Tectonic Setting: A review of available geologic maps revealed the sub- ject site to be located approximately 23 miles southwest Elsinore Fault Zone, and approximately 47 miles southwest of the San Jacinto Fault Zone.- These are major, active fault zones that are characteristic of Southern California. In addition, the northern extension -of the Rose Canyon Fault Zone lies approximately 6 miles to the west. The Rose Canyon Fault Zone - is currently classified as potentially active rather than active because of a lack of conclusive evidence that Holocene (most recent 11,000 years) movements have occurred. Several small, Inactive faults have also been mapped within a ten mile radius of the site. No faults have been mapped within, or in the immediate vicinity of, the subject site, and our sub- surface explorations and a surface reconnaissance revealed no evidence of on-site faults SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC. SCS&T 13068 . . September 24, 1980 Page 4 Geologic Hazards The subject site can be considered to be relatively free of geologic hazards. Potential geologic hazards such as. tsunamis, seiches, lique- faction, or landsilding should be considered negligible or nonexistent. The most likely geologic hazard to affect the site is groundshaking as a result of movement along the major, active fault zones mentioned previ- ously. The maximum bedrock accelerations that would be. attributed to a maxithum probable earthquake occurring along the nearest portion of the fault zones that could affect the site are summarized In the following table. • : TABLE - • • . . Maximum Probable Maximum Bedrock Fault Zone Classification Distance Earthquake Acceleration Potentially • • Rose Canyon Active 6 miles 6.0 magnitude 0.35 g. Elsinore Active 23 miles . 7.3 magnitude • 0.22 g. San Jacinto Active • 47 miles 7.8 magnitude 0.13 g. Based on the current fault zone classification and the maximum bedrock 0 accelerations capable of developing, it Is 'recommended that the Elsinore Fault Zone be considered the design earthquake for the subject develop- ment. . . Construction in accordance with the minimum standards of the Uniform Building Code and the governing agencies should minimize potential damage due to seismic activity. SOUTHERN C A L I F D R N I A SOIL AND TESTING. INC. SCS&T 13068 September 24, 1980 Page 5 0 REC0€NDAT IONS AND CONCLUSIONS General Based upon the findings of this study, it is our opinion that with regard to geotechnical aspects, the subject site is suitable for the proposed project provided the recommendations presented in this report are fully complied with. Site Preparation Construction Debris: All construction debris and deleterious material resulting from the demolition of the previously existing structure should be disposed of off-site. General: Due to the variable consistency of the on-site fill and loose upper topsoils, the following recommendations are made for all areas to. receive fill, for areas within 5 feet (measured horizontally) of the building perimeter, and areas to be paved. We recommend that the loose soils be removed to firm natural ground and stockpiled. Firm natural ground is defined as soil which possesses an In-place density equal to or greater than 85% relative compaction. It is anticipated that approxi- mately 12 inches of soil will have to be removed. The stockpiled soils may then be replaced and compacted to at least 90% in 6 to inch lifts. Areas to be Paved: The subgrade soils beneath all areas to be paved should be densified to at least 90% relative compaction -to a depth of at least 12 inches. Any unsuitable or spongy areas should be removed as per 0 recommendations of the soils engineer. Earthwork: All earthwork and grading contemplated for site preparation should be accomplished in accordance with the attached Recommended Grading SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING. INC. SCS&T 13068 September 24, 1980 Page 6 Specifications and Special Provisions. All special site preparation recommendations presented in the sections above will supersede those in the standard -Recommended Grading Specifications. All embankments, struct- ural fill and fill should be compacted to a minimum of 90%. Utility trench backfill within 5 feet of the proposed structures and beneath asphalt pavements should be compacted to a minimum of 90% of its maximum dry density. The maximum dry density of each soil type should be deter- mined in accordance with A.S.T.M. Test Method 1557-70, Method A or C. Foundations General: Conventional spread footings, founded In nonexpansive soil are 40 recommended for .support of the proposed structure. Conventional spread footings should be founded a minimum of 12 inches below the lowest adja- cent finish grade, for the one story structure, and have a minimum width of 12 inches. Spread footings may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2200 pounds per square foot.. All footings, supporting should be reinforced with at least one No. 4 bar placed in the top and bottom. 40 Adjacent footings founded at different bearing levels should be so located that the slope from bearing level to bearing level is flatter than one horizontal to one vertical. - Settlement Characteristics,: The anticipated total and/or differential settlements for the proposed structure may be considered to be within tolerable limits provided the recommendations presented in this report are followed. Expansive Characteristics: The prevailing foundation soils were found to be nondCtrimentally expansive and will not require special consideration and/or design. S SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, -INC. SCS&T 13068 September 24, 1980 Page 7 Pavement Recommendations The design of the pavement section was beyond the scope of this project. However, the following recommendations are submitted as preliminary guide- lines for pavement construction. The subgrade soils to a depth of at least 12 inches should be densified to at least 90%. Paved areas should be protected from moisture migrating under the pavement from adjacent water sources such as planted and grass areas. Saturation of the subbase soils could result in pavement failure. Further, all paving materials and methods of construction should conform with good grading practices and with the minimum requirements of the governing agency. The pavement section in front of trash enclosures should be thickened to reflect the additional loads received due to heavy trucks servicing the area. Subgrade soils beneath this thickened section should be compacted to 95% to a depth of 24 inches. Earth Retaining Structures. Allowable Passive Pressure: The allowable passive pressure for the pre- vailing soil condition is 244 psf. This passive pressure has been computed using a factor of safety of 1.5 and may be increased by one-third for wind and/or seismic loading. The coefficient of friction of concrete to soil may be assumed to be 0.41 for resistance to horizontal movement. When combining frictional and passive resistance, the latter should be reduced by one-third. fl SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC. ~r 4; SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC. 6280 RIVEROALE ST. SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 82120 • TELE 2804321 • P.O. BOX 20627 SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 92120 74 -831 V E L I E WAY PALM DESERT, CALIF. 92260 T E L E 346-1078 670 ENTERPRISE ST. ESCONOIDO, CALIF. 92025 T E L E 746-4544 October 16, 1980 Doctor Larry Breitbarth % Roy Blackford 2942 Harding, Suite "E" Carlsbad, California SCS&T 13068 Report No . 3 SUBJECT: Medical - Dental Office 2515 Pio Pico, Carlsbad, California. - Gentlemen: We have reviewed the plans and specs for this project and found them to incorporate the recommendations contained in our Geotechnical Investigation dated September 24, 1980. If you desire additional information, please do not hesitate to contact this office. This opportunity to be of professional service is appreciated. Respectfully submitted, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING, INC. E. N. Ketchum, R. C. E. 1/26267 ENK:nr cc: (3) Submitted (1) SCS&T, Escondido SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTINO, INC. SCS&T 13068 Septediber 24, 1980 Page 8 Active Soil Pressure: Active soil pressures for the design Of earth retaining structures may bp assumed to be equivalaent to the pressure of fluid. weighing 35 pcf and 45 pcf for unrestrained and restrained retaining walls, respectively. These soil pressures are for no surcharge and for a drained and level backfill condition. If the backfill will not be lövel, or if a surcharge is anticipated, this office should be contacted for the necessary increase in soil pressure. 40 LIMITATIONS Review, Observation and Testing The recommendat1j_presented' in this report are contingent upon our review of final plans and specifications. As required by the State of California, Division of Real Estate, the soil engineer and engineering geologist should review and verify the compliance of the final grading plan with this report and with Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code • t is recommended that the soIl and found&tioIL..engineer—be---ce-talned to provide continuous soil engineering services during the earthwork opera- tions. • This is to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifi- cations, or recommendations and to allow design changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to start of construction. Uniformity of Conditions The recommendations and opinions expressed In this report reflect our best estimate of the project requirements based on an evaluation of the subsur- face soil conditions encountered at the subsurface exploration locations and the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate appreciably SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BOIL AND TESTING; INC. SCS&T 13068 September 24, 1980 Page 9 from those encountered. It should be recognized that the performance of the foundations and/or cut and fill slopes may be influenced by undis- closed or unforeseen variations in the soil conditions that may occur in the intermediate and unexplored areas. Any unusual conditions not covered In this report that may be encountered during site development should be brought to the attention of the soils engineer so that he may make modifi- cations if necessary. Change in Scope This office should be advised of any changes in the project scope or proposed site grading so that it may be determined if the recommendations contained herein are valid. This should be verified in writing or modi- fied by a written addendum.. Time Limitations The findings of this report are valid as of this date. Changes in the condition of a property can, however, occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the work of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in the State-of-the-Art and/or Government Codes may occur. Due to such changes, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or in part by changes beyond our control. Therefore, this report should not be relied upon after .,a period of two years without a review by us verifying the validity of the conclusions and recomendations.. Disclaimer of Warranty The client should recognize the inherent risks connected' with the con- struction of improvements to real property. In the performance of our S SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA.SOIL AND TESTING. INC. S SCS&T 13068 September 24, 1980 Page 10 professional services, we comply with the standard of care and skill ordinarily exercised under •similar circumstances by members of our profes- sion practicing in the same or similar localities. Our services are to consist of professional consultation and observation only, and no war- ranty, expresS or implied, is made or intended in connection with the work to be performed by us or by the proposal for consulting or other services or by the furnishing of oral or written reports or findings. Client's Responsibility It is the responsibility of the Dr. Larry Breitbarth, or his represen- tatives to ensure that the Information and recommendations contained herein are brougth. to the attention of the engineer and architect for the project and incorporated into the project's plans and specifications. It is further- his responsibility to take the necessary measures to insure that the contracotr and his subcontractors carry out such recommendations during construction. FIELD EXPLORATIONS Four subsurface explorations were made at the locations Indicated on the attached Plate Number 2 on September 5, 1980. • These explorations con- sisted of trenches dug by means of a backhoe and hand dug pits. The field work was conducted under the observation of our geology personnel. The explorations were carefully logged when made. These logs are presén- ted on the following Plate Numbers 3 and 4. The soils are described in accordance with the Unified Soils Classification System as Illustrated on the attached simplified chart on Plate 7. In addition, a verbal textural description, the wet color, the apparent moisture and the density or consistency are presented. The density of granular material is given as either very loose, loose, medium dense, dense or very dense. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC SCS&T 13068 September 24, 1980 Page 11 Disturbed and undistrubed. samples of typical and representative' soils were obtained and returned to the laboratory for testing. LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with the generally. accepted American Society for Testing and Materials (A.S.T.M.) test methods or suggested procedures. A brief description of the tests performed are presented below: Noisture-Density: Field moisture content and dry density were determined for representative undisturbed samples. This Infor- mation was an aid to classification and permitted recognition of variations in material consistency with depth. The dry unit weight Is determined in pounds per cubic foot, and the field moisture content is determined as a percentage of the soil's dry weight. The results are summarized in the trench logs. Classification: Field classifications were verified in the laboratory by visual examination. The final soil classifi- cations are in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. Direct Shear Tests: Direct shear tests were performed to determine the failure envelope based on yield shear strength. The shear box was designed to accomodate a "sample having a diameter of 2.375 inches or 2.50 'inches and a height of 1.0 inch. Samples were tested at different vertical loads and at saturated moisture content. The shear stress was applied at a constant rate of strain of approximately 0.05 inches per min- ute. The results of these tests are presented on attached Plate Number 6. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC. 577e Vi c/,tJf7i' t14P 5j: f'29oO' . SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA I SOIL &TESTINQ, INC. I Medical/Dental Office, 2515 Plo Pico, SSO RIVEROALE STREET Carlsbad, California SAN DISSO CALIPOmNIA 5S1U0 I JC 9-24-80 13068 1 Plate No. 1 i h I 4 /\ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING, INC. Medical/Dental Office, 2515 Plo Pico, sso mIvuDALU Dynan?Carlsbad, California RAN DIRSO CALIPONIA SUIRD ' JC DATE 92480 Joe r4o. 13068 Plate No. 2 PIT NUMBER ONE DESCRIPTION SM 1 Red-Brown, Dry to Humid, Loose, Silty San - - _J Dense R 114.2 9.2 89.9 BOTTOM PIT NUMBER TWO CLASS DESCRIPTION f :JsM_ Red-Brown, Dry to Humid, Loose, Silty San Dense 2 J BOTTOM LEGEND: Sampl Location Undisturbed Sample' Location V : Natural Dry Density (pcf) M : Natural Moisture Content (% of Y) RC • : Relative Compaction O SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Medical/Dental Office, 2515 Plo Pico, + BOIL & TESTING INC. Carlsbad, California 5550 RIVUSOALS STRUS? SAN 01550. CALIPOANIA SUISO BY JH DATE 9-5-80 JOB NO. 13068 Plate No. 3 11 :1 SM Red-Brown, Dry, Loose, Silty Sand 2_ Moist, Dense [1 118.7 8.4 PIT NUMBER THREE , CLASS DESCRIPTION SM Red-Brown, Humid, Medium Dense, Silty Say (Artificial Fill) 2J BOTTOM PIT NUMBER FOUR , CLASS DESCRIPTION M RC d 97.8 5.9 BOTTOM -. I ]. I SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Medical/Dental Office, 2515 Plo Pico, fr BOIL & TESTING I INC. Carlsbad, California .UO OWNROALE •TflS•T AN DI•OO. C*LIORNIA .aio By JH DATE 9-5-80 J09 P40. 13068 Plate No. 4 SM Reddish Brown, Humid, Medium Dens H Silty Sand 3 . .•.•... 4,. • 5:.:.. D SM Gray, Moist, Medium Dense, Silty 1•• 2: 3 . ... A [I 3and \. I IT TRENCH NUMBER 1 f\ CLASS DFSCPTPTTON AM I-? SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA .St.i SOIL & TESTING INC. Proposed Medical-Dental Building sese •D*LU 5f5UT Pio Pico and Las Flores SAN 0550, CALIFORNIA •.isa Carlsbad, California BY DATE R.R. 10-10-78 JOB No. - 13068 PLATE NO.. DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS LA SAMPLE DESCRIPTION angle of Internal friction (°) cohesion intercept (pet) P i @ 05 - 1 Remolded to 90% 31.5 150 MAXIMUM DENSITY and OPTIMUM MOISTURF, CONTENT ASTM 1557 METHOD A SAMPLE DESCRIPTION maximum density (pct) optimum moisture content (%) P1@O -1. Reddish Brown Silty' _Fine Sand 127.0 9.1 n SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING LA9J INC. easa PIVUaDALS STPSNT SAN 01550, CALI0RNIA IRBIRC 1edica1/Denta1 Office, 2515Plo Pico, Carlsbad BY ENK IDATE 9-24-80 JOB NO. 13068 1 Plate No. 6 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUP SYMBOL TYPICAL NAMES 1. COARSE GRAINED, More than half of material is larger than No. 200 sieve size. GRAVELS CLEAN GRAVELS More than half of coarse fraction is larger than No. 4 sieve size but GRAVELS WITH FINES smaller than 3". (Appreciable amount of fines) GW Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mix- tures, little or no fines. GP Poorly graded gravels, gravel sand mixtures, little or no fines. GM Silty gravels, poorly graded gravel- sand-silt mixtures. CC Clayey gravels, poorly graded gravel- sand, clay mixtures. SANDS More than half of coarse fraction Is smaller than No. 4 sieve size. CLEAN SANDS SANDS WITH FINES (Appreciable amount of fines) SW Well graded sand, gravelly sands, little or no fines. SP Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. SM Silty sands, poorly graded sand and silt mixtures. SC Clayey sands, poorly graded sand and clay mixtures. II FINE GRAINED, More than half of material is smaller than No. 200 sieve size. SILTS AND CLAYS ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, sandy silt or clayey- silt-sand mixtures with slight plasticity Liquid Limit CL Inorganic clays of low to medium less than 50 medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays. OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity. SILTS AND CLAYS MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diato- maceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts. Liquid Limit CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, greater than 50 fat clays. OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat and other highly Organic soils. . SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BOIL & TESTING, INC. swab OlVeNCALE *TORO? SAN oISO. C*IPOmPdIA •uimo Medical/Dental Office, 2515 Plo Pico, Carlsbad, California ENK I WRIC 9-24-80 13068 1 Plate No. 7 Appendix A, Page One September 24, 1980 SCS&T 13068 RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS - GENERAL PROVISIONS GENERAL INTENT The intent of these specifications is to establish procedures for clearing, compacting natural ground, preparing areas to be filled and placing and compacting fill 'soils to the lines and grades shown on the accepted plans. The recommendations contained in the preliminary soil investigation report and/or the attached Special Provisions are a part of the Recommended Grading Specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained' hereinafter in the case of conflict. INSPECTION AND TESTING A qualified soil engineer shall be employed to inspect and test the ea.rthwok in accordance with these specifications. It will be necessary that the soil, engineer or his representa- tive provide adequate inspection so that he may certify that the work was or was not accomplished as specified. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to assist the soil engineer and to keep him appraised of work schedules, changes and new information and data so that he may make these certifications. If, in the opinion of the soil engineer, substandard condi- tions areencountered, such as questionable soil, poor moisture content, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc., he will be empowered to either stop construction until the conditions are remedied or corrected or recommend rejection of the work. Soil tests used to determine the degree of'compaction will be performed in accordance with the following American Appendix A, Page Two September 24, 1980 SCS&T 13068 Society for Testing and Materials test methods: Maximum Density & Optimum Moisture Content - A.S.T.M. D - 1557 - 70. Density of Soil In-Place - A.S.T.M. D - 1556 - 64. PREPARATION OF AREAS TO RECEIVE FILL All vegatation, brush and debris shall be removed, piled and burned or otherwise disposed of. After clearing, the natural ground shall be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, brought to the proper moisture content, compacted and tested for the minimum density specified in the Special Provision8 or the recommendation contained in the preliminary soil investigation report. When the slope of the natural ground receiving fill exceeds 20% (5 horizontal units to 1 vertical unit), the original ground shall be stepped or benched. Benches shall be cut to a firm competent soil condition.. The lower bench shall be at least 10 feet wide and all other benches at least 6 feet wide. The horizontal portion of each bench shall be compacted prior to receiving fill as specified herein before for c6mpacted natural ground. Ground slopes flatter than 20% shall be benched when considered necessary by the soil engineer. FILL MATERIAL Materials placed in the fill shall be approved by the soil engineer and shall be free of vegetable matter and other deleterious substances. Granular soil shall contain sufficient fine material to fill the voids. The definition and disposition of oversized rocks, expansive and/or detrimental soils are covered in the Special Provisions. Expansive soils, soils of poor gradation or strength characteristics may be thoroughly 71 Appendix A, Page Three September 24, 1980 SCS&T. 13068 mixed with other soils to provide satisfactory fill material, but only with the explicit consent of the soil engineer. PLACING AND COMPACTION OF FILL Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in layers not to exceed 6 inches in compacted thickness. Each layer shall have a uniform moisture content in the range that will allow the compaction effort to be efficiently applied to achieve the specified degree of compaction. Each layer shall be uniformly compacted to a minimum specified density with adequately sized equipment, either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability. The minimum degree of compaction to be achieved is specified in either the Special Provisions or the recommendations contained in the prelimimary soil investigation report. Field tests and inspections to check the degree of compaction of the fill will be taken by the soil engineer or his representative. The location and frequency of the tests shall be at the soil engineer's discretion. In general, the density tests will be made at an interval not exceeding 2 feet in vertical rise and/or 500 cubic yards of embankment. I SEASON LIMITS Fill shall not be placed during unfavorable weather conditions. When work is interrupted by heavy rain, filling operations shall not be resumed until the proper moisture content and density of the fill has been achieved. Damage resulting from weather shall be repaired before acceptance of work. I. 0 Appendix A, Page Four September 24, 1980 SCS&T 13068 RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS SPECIAL PROVISIONS The minimum degree of compaction to be obtained in compacting natural ground, in the compacted fill, and in the compacted backfill shailbe 90 percent. Detrimentally expansive soil is defined as soil which will swell more than 3 percent against a pressure of 150 pounds per square foot from a condition of 90 percent of maximum dry density and optimum moisture content to saturation. Oversized fill material is defined as rocks or lumps Over 6 inches in diameter. At least 40 percent of the fill soils shall pass through a No. 4 U.S. Standard Sieve. Transition Lots: Where transitions between cut and fill S occur within the proposed building pad, the cut portion should be undercut a minimum of one foot below the base of the proposed footings and recompacted as structural backfill. S SOUTHtRN CALIFDRNIA S0IL AND T E S T I N D , I N C . NON, JUN 4, 1990, 2:22 PM ******************************************************************************** *MODE:F ACTION:L * * * S PFF INQUIRY SCREEN '*5 * *01 PFF : 85-78 *02 NAME BREITBARTH, LARY & NANCY *Q3 PROJECT - MS-705 *04 RECORD # 85-375403 *05 RECORD DATE 10/09/85 *O6 RELEASE '# - *07 *08 RELEASE DATE RELEASE *09 156120-63 /17/ old PARCEL # -46 LOGON ID: VIEW.PERNITS PORT ID: 57 GROUP: PUB QUICK506C L2 PFFINQ(89/09/05) QDESIGN506C.HP2392 (c) COGNOS INCORPORATED. 7/25/90 Helen I haven't the faintest idea, but I was quite positive about it, and you initialled it 3 days later. I could guess: As you remember, in those days PFF was paid in my.-ways. Perhaps on a miscellaneous receipt? P erhaps it was paid along with something say "part of MS 705". I went thru the file, as you did, and could find /thing. Hope some of the above helps you. You might recheck MS 705. I can't find any reference to it in the parcel book. Y 7-25-90 Carter, Do you recall why you. said no P F F w a s r e q u i r e d on this permit??? It is part of MS-705 Should have paid 2% PFF required a t t h a t t i m e . Please advise. Thank you. Helen II. A . •1 I J•.j e'.. • ,.fl ....# J. ,!/, :, I I I 'I I , girl I 4 .D0cUMENTATION FORM - BUILDING LIGHTING COMPLIANCE - t 2,I . Q L- PtT A Project TidK:: Ti4 Location- Project Architect Form 5 Documented by Date' Checked by Date________ Room Room RCA Task Areas Note Sq. Ft. No. Sq. Ft. Total Watts Allotted Design No. So. Ft Appl. /0c c. 0cc. (Task Sq. Ft. /Sq. Ft. Watts Watts I WAITft4I IM T s 1-300 I?4 i' 7' 7'; - J° T*4 __•I. - .-- ' '2 Ib. - 4- L-A I4 "4Te 'iz; !3.a _75. 79 to 1::e4 '29 l • ' 5-i- ' o '7 Ill ____ • tJ'i'4 1' ' 4 I.• 9l ' - '?' c~ ___I_° . fl 72. M' 4t79 ___ tJOi'J I_'i-i IS' 40 Th2AT)4 R- I I 1'7 7 4 , 4 9':x;' __ ___ - ________ __ ___ '• ___ .4o i. ____ ___ t+ Tft1. I 7'Z. 17S I 4b • Ic'JT I '7-1 1.5 4a - I I 71 fl ___ • ___ 17 COMC -FAt.-LW#c'i • 74 t.7 9W ____ I ___ Page Total DOCUMENTATION FORM BULDING LIGHTING COMPLIANCE Project rid"ft7 f IT TE1 Location 15; va,Ad7 CA1 Project Architect P'r 2-''2-- Form 5 Documented by Date________ Checked by Date_________ Room Room RCR Task Areas Note Sq. Ft. No. No. So. Ft. Appl. /0c c. 0cc. Sq. Ft. Total Watts Allotted Design (Task Sc. Ft. /So. Ft. Watts Watts M - -1., [ - --_---- _ L _ 104-q 7c70 Page Total PAUL S. SWIRS1Y WILLIAM N. SAUER, JR. A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION LAW OFFICES OF SWIRSKY & SAUER AN ASSOCIATION INCLUDING A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 2745 JEFFERSON STREET CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 TELEPHONE I7I4 729-1197 January 4, 1980 City of Carlsbad Director of Planning Carlsbad, California Dear Sir: .• . ..'. I am the owner of the property located at 1277 Las Flores in Carlsbad. It is my understanding that Dr. Breitbarth wishes to develop the pro- perty immediately to the east of my property. Dr. Breitbarth has furnished. me with a site plan and has advised me that there will' be nograding of any consequence and that the drainage pattern will remain the same as a result of the proposed development. I have no objection to his planned development as proposed. Very truly yours, - %fLU WILLIAT1J. SAUE JR. WNS : bcs