The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2529 ABEDUL ST; ; CB983383; PermitCity of Carlsbad 02/16/1999 Building Permit Permit No:CB983383 Building Inspection Request Line (760) 438-3101 Job Address: 2529 ABEDUL ST CBAD Permit Type: Parcel No: SFD Sub Type: 21 52602000 Lot#: 85 Status: ISSUED Valuation: Occupancy Group: $304,672.00 Construction Type: VN Reference #: Applied: 10/05/1998 Entered By: RMA Project Title: 3466 SF+682 GAR+248 PAT10+248 SF DECK Apprllssued: 0211 6/1999 Inspect Area: 6451 02/16/49 0001 01 02 Amlicant: C-!'RUT 19390.65 Owner: ELDER, GARY - . . . . . . . 1343 MORNING VIEW DR A432 92026 760 747-21 88 Total Fees: $20,260. e Due: $19,390.65 Description """""""""_ Fee 60.00 63.50 189.00 870.08 530.00 2,400.00 1,338.58 Enter Impact Fee 2,925.00 PUBLIC FACILITIE PLDA C 10.50 10,663.52 PUBLIC IMPROVE 310.00 * ELECTRICAL TOTAL MECHANICAL TOTAL * PLUMBING TOTAL BLDG PLAN CHECK BTD FEES BUILDING PMTS """"""" STRNG MOTION TRAFFIC IMPACT 870.00 30.47 FINAL APPROVAL Inspector: &e Date: 2 -q-" Clearance: NOTICE Please take NOTICE that approval of your pmka includes the'lmpmilon'offees. dedications, reservations. or other exaclions hereafter mllectively follow the pmtest pmcedures set forvl in Government Code SdQn 660qa), and file the pmmt and any Other required infwmation wiih the City Manager for refetred to as Yeedexactans.' Yw have 90 days from the date this permil was issued to pmtest impmibn of these feedexactans. if you pmtest them, you must review. set aside, void, or annul their imposiibn. processing in accordance with Carlsbad Munidpai Code Won 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that pmcedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack. YwareherebyFURTHERNOTiFlEDthatyourlighttoprotestthes~feeJ/exactansWESNOTAPPLYtowaterandsewermnnsction~andrapa~ changes. nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar applimbn pmzssing or sewice feeJ in mnnection with this pmw NOR DOES IT APPLY to any feedexadons of which you have prwiouslv been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limllations has previously otherwise expired. 2075 Las Palmas Dr., Carlsbad, CA 92009 (760) 438-1161 CITY OF CARLSBAD FOR OFFICE USE 0 CITY OF CARL'SBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT 2075 Las Palrnas Dr., Carlsbad CA 92009 70 (760) 438-1161 IS.RitythalIh~w~r..dth.awUwtlmmndNtmthnthem~inraMlmkcarrtmndrml~Momutlmath.dankacnnN. I.pmtomplVwithaII City wdinmms and Stne km ntnlnp to bullding cmtnnim. I h.nbv mmhwlzm property lor inspection pwp0.n. I ALSO AGREE TO SAVE. INDEMNIFY AN0 KEEP "LESS THE ClTY OF CARLSOAD AGAINST AU UAUUTIES. ' nftheCWofCwbbmdtomtnupmthoabowmumomd JUDGMENTS. COSTS AN0 EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE A0IIIY.T MID Cm M CONSEWENCE OF THE ORANTINO OF THIS PERMIT. OSHA: An OSHA permit is Iewind lor eXCeVe1im owl 60' hap and dmmdnion w Emmustim 01 nMYR. ow1 3 nWiu in bight. EXPIRATION: Evny permit Isad by tha Buildlng Ollkbl und.r th. provimh 01 tMo Cod. shmli exph by nmitnh mnd bmmme null and vdd it the building or or abandoned et any time etter the wwk k commn 80 &yt (S.etion 108.4.4 Udlm Buildlw Cod.). work aUthorilad by such mit i. not eommennd within 586 daw lmm tho date of weh wit w H the building 01 work mulh&.d by .uoh wmit is swpad.d APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE 't $8 WHITE Fik YELLOW mum PINK Rme Inspection List Permit# CB983383 Type: SFD 3466 SF42 GAR+248 PAT10+248 SF DECK Date lnepectlon Item Inspector Act Comments ~~~~~ 02/07/2000 89 02/04/2000 89 01/28/2000 89 08/17/1999 22 08/16/1999 22 06/30/1999 18 06/29/1999 18 06/28/1999 17 06/28/1999 18 06/28/1999 23 08/24/1999 16 06/23/1999 16 06/21/1999 18 06/21/1999 84 06/16/1999 17 08/16/1999 18 06/16/1999 84 08/1 4/1999 16 06/14/1999 84 ow1 1/1999 18 OW1 0/1999 16 08/08/1999 13 06/04/1999 13 05/27/1999 13 05/27/1999 14 04/20/1999 15 04/05/1999 14 04/02/1999 14 03/25/1999 32 03/25/1999 34 03/24/1999 34 03/11/1999 81 03/09/1999 1 1 03/08/1999 1 1 03/08/1999 22 03/04/1999 21 03/03/1999 21 03/02/1999 21 Final Combo Final Combo Final Combo SewerMlater Service SewerMlater Service Exterior LatWDrywall Exterior LalhlDrywall Interior LatWDrywall Exterior LatWDrywall GaslTesffRepairs Insulation Insulation Exterior LatWDrywall Rough Combo Interior LalWDrywall Exterior LathlDrywall Rough Combo Exterior LatWDrywall Rough Combo Insulation Insulation Shear PaneWHDs Shear Panels/HDs Shear PaneWHD's FramelSteeVBoltingNeldin Roof/Reroof Frame/SleeVBoltingNeldin Frame/SleeVBollingNeldin Const. Service/Agricultural Rough Electric Rough Electric Underground Combo FtglFoundationlPiers FtglFoundationlPiers SewerMlater Service UndergroundNnder Floor UndergroundNnder Floor UndergroundNnder Floor RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB RB AP CO co AP NR CA AP AP NR AP AP NR wc AP wc wc co wc NR CA PA AP co co co AP AP co AP wc co AP co CA CA AP NR CA SEE BACK OF PERMIT SEE NOTICE A'TTACHED APPRVD 6/29 SEE NOTICE ATTACHED BY GARY PRELIM OK NO PLANS OR PERMIT ON SITE SEE NOTICE A'TTACHED FOR FLOOR NAILING NO APPRVD PLANS ON SITE T.S.P.B. FOR T.S.P.B. PLUS FTGS FOR DECK MISSING 1LI"DEPTH & HOLD DOWNS BY GARY Monday, February04,ZWZ Page 1 of 1 City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request For: 2/7/2000 Permit# C0983383 Inspector Assignment: RB Title: 3466 SF+682 GAR+248 PATIO+248 Description: SF DECK Type:SFD Sub Type: Job Address: 2529 ABEDUL ST Suite: Lot 85 Location: APPLICANT ELDER, GARY Owner: GARY ELDER Remarks: Phone: 760’1472188 Inspector: AD Total Time: Requested By: GARY ELDER Entered By: CHRISTINE CD Description I 19 Final Structural 29 Final Plumbing 39 lectrlcal 49 Final Mechanical Associated PCRq Date 8/17/1999 1/28/2000 8/16/1999 6/30/1999 6/28/1999 6/29/lw9 6/28/1999 6/28/1999 6/24/1999 6/23/1999 6/21/1999 6/21/1999 6/16/1999 6/16/1999 6/16/1999 6/14/1999 Description InsDection History 89 Final Combo 22 Sewerwater Service 22 Sewerwater Service 18 Exterior LaWDrywall 18 Exterior LaWDrywall 17 Interior LathiDrywall 18 Exterior LaWDrywall 23 GawTesVRepairs 16 Insulation 18 Insulation 18 Exterior LaWDrywall 84 Rough Combo 17 Interior LaWDrywall &(Rough Combo 18 Exterior LaWDrywall 18 Exterlor LaWDrywall Act Imp Comments CO RB SEE NOTICE AlTACHED AP RB NR RB CA RB APPRVDW29 AP RB AP RB AP RE NR RB AP RB NR RB WC RB AP RB WC RB WC RB WC RB CO RB SEE NOTICE ATTACHED . C'ity of Carlsbad Bldg For: 2/4/2000 Permit# CB983383 Title: 3466 SF+682 GAR+248 PATl0+248 Description: SF DECK Type: SFD Sub Type: Job Address: 2529 ABEDUL ST Suite: Location: APPLICANT ELDER, GARY Owner: GARY ELDER Remarks: Total Time: CD Description 19 Flnal Structural 29 Final Plumbing 39 Final Electrical 49 Final Mechanical Lot 85 Act Comments Inspection Request Inspector Assignment: RB Phone: 7607472188 Inspector: W Requested By: GARY Entered By: CHRISTINE Associated PCRS JnSDeCtiOn History Date Description Act lnsp Comments 1/28/2000 89 Final Combo CO RB SEE NOTICE ATTACHED 8/17/1999 22 Sewerwater Service AP RB 8/16/1999 22 Sewerwater Service NR RB 6/30/1999 18 Exterior Lath/Drywall CA RB APPRVD6/'29 6/29/1999 18 Exterior LaWDrywall AP RB 6/28/1999 17 Interior Lath/Drywall AP RB 6/28/1999 18 Exterior LaWDlywall NR RB 6/28/1999 23 GasflesWRepalrs AP RB 6/24/1999 16lnsulation AP RB 6/23/1999 16lnsulation NR RB 6/21/1999 18Exterior LaWDlywall WC RB 6/21/1999 &)Rough Combo AP RB 6/16/1999 17 Interlor Lath/Drywall WC RB 6/16/1999 18Exterior LaWDlywail WC RB 6/16/1999 84Rough Combo CO RB SEE NOTICE ATTACHED 6/14/1999 18Exterior Lath/Dlywall WC RB . City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request For: 1 /28/2000 Permit# CB983383 Inspector Assignment: RB Title: 3466 SF+682 GAR+248 PAT10+248 Description: SF DECK Type: SFD Sub Type: Job Address: 2529 ABEDUL ST Suite: Lot 85 Location: APPLICANT ELDER, GARY Owner: GARY ELDER Remarks: Phone: 7605354062 Insoector: KB Total Time: Requested By: GARY Entered By: ROBIN CD DescriDtion Act Comments 19 Final Structural ct9 5&EF ms;2p, I 29 Final Plumbing 39 Final Electrical 49 Final Mechanical Associated PCRS Date 6/17/1999 6/16/1999 6/30/1999 6/29/1999 6/26/1999 6/26/1999 6/26/1999 6/24/1999 6/23/1999 6/21/1999 6/21/1999 6/16/1999 6/16/1999 6/16/1999 6/14/1999 6/14/1999 Description bection History 22 Sewerwater Service AP RB 22 Sewerwater Service NR RE I8 Exterior LaWDrywall CA RB APPRVDW29 18 Exterior LaWDrywall AP RE 17 Interior LaWDrywall AP RB 18 Exterior LaWDrywall NR RB 23 GaNesVRepairs AP RB 16 Insulation AP RB 16 Insulation NR RE 16 Exterior LaWDrywall WC RB 84 Rough Combo AP RE 17 Interior Lath/Drywall WC RB 18Exterior LaWDrywall WC RE 84 Rough Combo CO RB SEE NOTICE ATTACHED 18 Exterior LaWDrywall WC RE 84 Rough Combo NR RE Act lnsp Comments CITY OF CARLSBAD -NOTIC.E . (760) 602-2700 I BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1635 FARADAY AVENUE .a * ir Ai cw OF OAR^ BUILDING WPARTMWT 2075 LAS YLMAS DRIVE - .,. * . CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT' * 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE f t FOR INSPECTION CALL (760) 438-3101. RE-INSPECTION FEE DUE? L? YES FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT PHONE <.., - CODE ENFORCEMEM OFFICER @ ,~. ,.. . r' ?.~ . * * & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. z. h450 Vineyard A$e?ue Suite 102 .ESCONDIqO, OALIFORNIA 92029-1229 ,,' .. r Phone: (760) 743-1214 Fa: (760) 739-0343 TO GAR7 ELOER THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED: FIELD INSPECro~TAFF,GEOLM;ISTIENGINEEWENO.GEOLMjlST RCElGElCEGNUMBER CUEM REPRESENTATIVE v I i -,,:,[A pcT] ,, F y JJ& plan u,-,P. r 7 " "T ARRIVE LEAVE HOURS ON SITE HWRSTRAVEL HOURS I I mTiLr I 7'. 3C) I c; n3 1% REGUUR OVERTIME PHOTOS THIS REPORT DOES NOT RELIEVE THE CONTRACTOR OF HIS RESPONSIBILITY TO BUILD PER THE PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ALL APPLICABLE CODES -_ 1/28/2000 Permit #: CB983383 Penit Type: SFD Pmject Name: 3466 Sub Type: Address: 4 Lot: 85 Contact Person: GARY Phone: 7605354062 Sewer Did: LC Water Dist: CA ...................................................................... .................................................................................... Inspected Date By: Inspected: Approved: - Disapproved: __ Inspected Date By: Inspected: Approved: __ Disapproved: __ inspected Date By: Inspected: Approved: - Disapproved: __ Comments: f CUY rf Crrlsbrd Final Building Inspection Dept: Building Engineering mMWD St Lite Plan Chack %: Pmit #: CB983383 projed Nma: 5466 SF+682 GAR+248 PATiO+248 SF DECK Address: 2529 ABEDUL ST Contact Pewm: GARY Phone: 7805354082 Sewer Dist: LC Water Did: CA F :Ire Da$: permit TV: Sub Type: 85 1/28/2000 SFD By: Inspected: 2 -1 /-do Approved: __ Inspected Date J Disapproved: - Inspected Date By: Inspected: Approved: - Disapproved: - Inspected Date By: Inspected: Approved: ___ Disapproved: - Comments: .. PLANNING DEPARTMENT FINAL INSPECTION CHECKLIST ROUTING 1 Mike Black Date (H3ADMINCOLJNTERWinal Insp Check) 01/19/00 Cl& Mrldl8d Final Building Inspection Dept: Building Engineering CMWD St Lite Man Check #: Permit t: CB983383 PIC+& Name: 3466 SF+682 GAR+248 PAT10+248 SF DECK Address: 2529 ABEDUL ST Con(actPerson: GARY phcne: 7605354082 Sewer Mst: LC Water Mst: CA Lot: Fire Date: 1/28/2000 Pennlt Type: SFD Sub Type: 85 .................... Disapproved: - Inspected: Approved: - Disapproved: - Inspected Date By: Inspected: Approved: - Disapproved: - Comments: - EsGil - Corporation 'DATE: 11 130198 JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: 98-3383 SET XV PROJECT ADDRESS: 2529 Abedul St. PROJECT NAME: ABEDUL STREET LLC "SFD The plans transmitted herewith have been COrre&ted where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. 0 The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. 0 The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. 0 The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. c] The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: 0 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: Bill Bucher Telephone #: In Person Date contacted: (by: 1 Fax #: Mail Telephone Fax In Person 0 REMARKS: By: Bill Elizarraras Enclosures: Esgil Corporation 0 GA 0 MB 0 EJ 0 PC tmsmU.dot EsGil Corporation - - DATE: 11/13/98 JURISDICTION: Carlsbad N REVIEWER PLAN CHECK NO.: 98-3383 0 FILE SET: I1 PROJECT ADDRESS: 2529 Abedul St. PROJECT NAME: ABEDUL STREET LLC "SFD" 0 The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. 0 The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. 0 The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: Gary Elder 1343 Morning Veiw Dr. #432, Escondido, Ca.' 92026 Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed 0 Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. except by Mail. Person contacted: Telephone #: Date contacted: (by: 1 Fax #: Mail Telephone Fax In Person 0 REMARKS: By: Bill Elizarraras Enclosures: Esgil Corporation 0 GA MB EJ 0 PC 1 115198 tmsrntl.dot 9320 Chesapeake Drive. Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 + (619) 560-1468 + Fax (619) 560-1576 Carlsbad 98-3383 I1 11/13/9a RECHECK PLAN CORRECTION LIST PROJECT ADDRESS: 2529 Abedul St. SET: I1 DATE PLAN RECEIVED BY ESGIL CORPORATION: 11/5/98 DATE RECHECK COMPLETED: 11/13/98 FOREWORD (PLEASE READ): This plan review is limited to the technical requirements contained in the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, National Electrical Code and state laws regulating energy conservation, noise attenuation and disabled access. This plan review is based on regulations enforced by the Building Department. You may have other corrections based on laws and ordinances enforced by the Planning Department, Engineering Department or other departments. The following items listed need clarification, modification or change. All items must be satisfied before the plans will be in conformance with the cited codes and regulations. Per Sec. 106.4.3, 1994 Uniform Building Code, the approval of the plans does not permit the violation of any state, county or city law. A. Please make all corrections on the original tracings and submit two new sets of prints to: ESGIL CORPORATION. B. To facilitate rechecking, please identify, next to each item, the sheet of the plans upon which each correction on this sheet has been made and return this sheet with the revised plans. C. The following items have not been resolved from the previous plan reviews. The original correction number has been given for your reference. In case you did not keep a copy of the prior correction list, we have enclosed those pages containing the outstanding corrections. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding these items. D. Please indicate here if any changes have been made to the plans that are not a result of corrections from this list. If there are other changes, please briefly describe them and where they are located on the plans. Have changes been made not resulting from this list? OYes ONo r Xarlsbad 98-3383 11 111 13/98 9 The following corrections were either not properly shown or addressed. The numbering of correction list refers to original deficiency list dated 10113198. PLANS 1. Please make all corrections on the original tracings, as requested in the correction list. Submit three sets of plans for commerciallindustrial projects (two sets of plans for residential projects). For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in one of two ways: 1. Deliver all corrected sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92009, (760) 438- 11 61. The City will route the plans to EsGil Corporation and the Carlsbad Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. 2. Bring one corrected set of plans and calculationsheports to EsGil Corporation, 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, CA 92123, (619) 560-1468. Deliver all remaining sets of plans and calculationslreports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department for routing to their Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. reviewed by the City Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments until review by EsGil Corporation is complete. 2. Plans, specifications and calculations shall be signed and sealed by the California state licensed engineer or architect responsible for their preparation, for plans deviating from conventional wood frame construction. Specify expiration date of license. (California Business and Professions Code). NOTE: Plans that are submitted directly to EsGil Corporation only will not be FIRE PROTECTION 3. Show locations of permanently wired smoke detectors with battery backup: a) Centrally located in corridor or area giving access to sleeping rooms. - NOTE: Detectors shall sound an alarm audible in a sleeping areas of the unit. Section 310.9.1. Down stairs StudylGuest Room. ROOFING 8. Specify on the plans the following information for the roof materiats, per Section 106.3.3: .. b) ICBO approval number, or equal. FOUNDATION REQUIREMENTS 9. The foundation plan does not comply with the soils report recommendations for this project. Please review the report and modify design, notes and details as required to show compliance: See page 9 of soils report. Items B 5 and 6. _Carlsbad 98-3383 I1 111 13/98 FRAMING 13. Show stud size and spacing. Maximum allowable stud heights: Bearing wall: 2 x4 and 2 x 6 max. IO'; Non-bearing: 2 x 4 max. 14',2 x 6 max. 20'. Table 23-1-R-3.'Design stud that exceed these limitations. 15. Specify truss identification numbers on the plans. 19. Provided calculations for lateral loads are incomplete this project . They don't meet the conventional framing requirements see corrections below. Do You Have new Calc's. 20. Show wall bracing. Every exterior wood stud wall and main cross-stud partition shall be braced at each end at least every 25 feet of length. Section 2326.1 1.3 and Table 23-I-W. This applies to both longitudinal and transverse directions. 24. Upper walls must be checked for up lift (OTM) Provide hold downs as needed. 27. Show lateral stability of deck post / columns. Show knee braclng or strap end joist to Dwelling framing. MECHANICAL (UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE) 30. Show the BTU rating, e - 35. Specify on the plans the following information for the fireplace(s), per Section 106.3.3: c) ICBO approval number, or equal. Shown # is not listed. CARLSBAD S.F.D. & DUPLEX SUPPLEMENT 46. New residential units must be pre-plumbed for future solar water heating. Note that two roof jacks must be installed where the water heater is in the one story garage and directly below the most south facing roof (City Ordinance No. 8093). 47. Note that two 3/4" copper pipes must be installed to the most convenient future solar panel location when the water heater is not in a one story garage and is not directly below the most south facing roof. (City Ordinance No. 8093). 48. All piping for present or future solar water heating must be insulated when in areas that are not heated or cooled by mechanical means (city policy). 49. Overflow roof drains shall terminate in an area where they will be readily visible and will not cause damage to the building. If the roof drain terminates through a wall, the overflow drain shall terminate 12" minimum above the roof drain. Policy 84-35. _Carlsbad 98-3383 I1 11/13/98 MISCELLANEOUS 50. Guard railing requirements also apply to deck. Reference to complying detail. 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 0 No 0 The jurisdiction has contracted with Esgil Corporation located at 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, California 92123; telephone number of 619/560-1468, to perform the plan review for your project. If you have any questions regarding these plan review items, please contact Bill Elizarraras at Esgil Corporation. Thank you. EsGil Corporation - - DATE: lo/ 13/98, JURISDICTION: Carlsbad O%%%J!F a PLAN REVIEWER 0 FILE PLAN CHECK NO.: 98-3383 SET I PROJECT ADDRESS: 2529 Abedul St. PROJECT NAME: ABEDUL STREET LLC "SFD" The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. 0 The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. 0 The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. [7 The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: contact person. Gary Elder 1343 Morning View Dr. M32, Escondido, Ca. 92026 0 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: Gary Elder Telephone #: i%W!%?W LJ rm$ * 7 Date con cted: (0 \< (by:/A. ) Fax #: Mail Jephone S, In Person REMARKS: By: Bill Elizarraras Enclosures: Esgil Corporation 17 GA MB 17 EJ PC 10/06/98 ! (msmU.dot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego. California 92123 + (619) 560-1468 + Fax (619) 560-1576 c Carhbad 98-3383 101 13/98 PLAN REVIEW CORRECTION LIST SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS AND DUPLEXES PLAN CHECK NO.: 98-3383 JURISDICTION: Carlsbad I PROJECT ADDRESS: 2529 Abedul St. FLOOR AREA: 3466 sf. Dwelling STORIES: 2 I 682 sf. garage HEIGHT: DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY JURISDICTION: ESGIL CORPORATION: 10/06/98 DATE INITIAL P PLAN REVIEWER: Bill Elizarraras FOREWORD (PLEASE READ): This plan review is limited to the technical requirements contained in the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, National Electrical Code and state laws regulating energy conservation, noise attenuation and access for the disabled. This plan review is based on regulations enforced by the Building Department. You may have other corrections based on laws and ordinance by the Planning Department, Engineering Department, Fire Department or other departments. Clearance from those departments may be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Present California law mandates that residential construction comply with Title 24 and the following model codes:.1994 UBC (effective 12/28/95), 1994 UPC (effective 12/28/95), 1994 UMC (effective 2/23/96) and 1993 NEC (effective 12/28/95). The above regulations apply to residential construction, regardless of the code editions adopted by ordinance. The following items listed need clarification, modification or change. All items must be satisfied before the plans will be in conformance with the cited codes and regulations. Per Sec. 106.4.3, 1994 Uniform Building Code, the approval of the plans does not permit the violation of any state, county or city law. fi correction item has been addressed. Le.. alan sheet number. saeclfication section. etC. Be sure to enclose the marked ua list when vou submit the revised alans. LIST NO. 1. GENERAL SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS AND DUPLEXES WITHOUT SUPPLEMENTS (1994 UBC) r3fom.dot Carlsbad 98-3383 10/13/98 PLANS 1. Please make all corrections on the original tracings, as requested in the correction list. Submit three sets of plans for commercial/industriaI projects (two sets of plans for residential projects). For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in one of two ways: 1. Deliver all corrected sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92009, (760) 438-1 161. The City will route the plans to EsGil Corporation and the Carlsbad Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. 2. Bring one corrected set of plans and calculationslreports to EsGil Corporation, 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, CA 92123, (619) 560-1468. Deliver all remaining sets of plans and calculationslreports 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. 2. Plans, specifications and calculations shall be signed and sealed by the California state licensed engineer or architect responsible for their preparation, for plans deviating from conventional wood frame construction. Specify expiration date of license. (California Business and Professions Code). FIRE PROTECTION 3. Show locations of permanently wired smoke detectors with battery backup: a) inside each bedroom. b) Centrally located in corridor or area giving access to sleeping rooms. c) When sleeping rooms are upstairs, at the upper level in close proximity to the stair. d) In rooms adjacent to hallways serving bedrooms, when such rooms have a ceiling height 24 inches or more above the ceiling height in the hallway. NOTE: Detectors shall sound an alarm audible in sleeping areas of the unit. Section 310.9.1. e GENERAL RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENTS 4. Glazing in the following locations should be of safety glazing material in accordance with Section 2406.4 (see exceptions): a) In bathtubs and showers and in any portion of a building wall enclosing these compartments where the bottom exposed edge of the glazing is less than 60 inches above a standing surface and drain inlet. Bath #2. Carlsbad 98-3383 101 13/98 b) Fixed or operable panels adjacent to a door where the nearest exposed edge of the glazing is within a 24-inch arc of either vertical edge of the door in a closed position and where the bottom exposed edge of the glazing is less than 60 inches above the walking surface. Family room side lites and Mst. Bedroom side lites. STAIRWAYS AND RAILINGS 5. Guardrails (Section 509.1): a) Shall have a height of 36". b) Shall be detailed showing adequacy of connections to resist the horizontal c) Openings between railings shall be less than 4". The triangular openings force prescribed in Table 16-6. formed by the riser, tread and bottom element of a guardrail at a stair shall be less than 6. 6. Handrails: a) Handrails and extensions shall be 34" to 38" above nosing of treads and b) Except for private stairways, at least one rail shall extend 12" beyond top c) All stairs shall have handrails terminating in a newel or safety post. be continuous. and bottom risers. Section 1006.9. 7. The handgrip portion of all handrails shall be not less than 1-114 inches nor more than 2 inches in cross-sectional dimension. Handrails projecting from walls shall have at least 1-1/2 inches between the wall and the handrail. Section 1006.9. ROOFING 8. Specify on the plans the following information for the roof materials, per Section 106.3.3: a) Manufacturer's name. b) Product narnehumber. c) ICBO approval number, or equal. FOUNDATION REQUIREMENTS 9. The foundation plan does not comply with the soils report recommendations for this project. Please review the report and modify design, notes and details as required to show compliance: See page 9 of soils report. 10. Specify size, I.C.B.O. number and manufacturer of power driven pins. Show spacing. Section 1701.7. This applies to interior partitions on slab. Carlsbad 98-3383 101 13/98 FRAMING 11. Show double top plate with minimum 48" lap splice. Section 2326.1 1.2. 12. Show nailing will be in compliance with Table 23-14. 13. Show stud size and spacing. Maximum allowable stud heights: Bearing wall: 2 x4 and 2 x 6 max. 10'; Non-bearing: 2 x 4 max. 14, 2 x 6 max. 20'. Table 23-1-R-3. Design stud that exceed these limitations. 14. Detail all post-to-beam and post-to-footing connections and reference the detail to the plan. Section 2324. 15. Specify truss identification numbers on the plans. 16. Show clearance between top plate of interior partitions and bottom chord of trusses. (To ensure nonbearing condition between supports as designed). 17. Per UBC Section 2343.6, provide the following note on the plans if trusses are used: "Each truss shall be legibly branded, marked or otherwise have permanently affixed thereto the following information located within 2 feet of the center of the span on the face of the bottom chord: a) Identity of the company manufacturing the truss. b) The design load. c) The spacing of the trusses." 18. Specify all header size for openings over garage left side. Section 2326.11.6. 19. Provided calculations for lateral loads are incomplete this project , They don't meet the conventional framing requirements see corrections below. 20. Show wall bracing. Every exterior.wood stud wall and main cross-stud partition shall be braced at each end at least every 25 feet of length. Section 2326.1 1.3 and Table 23-I-W. 21. In 2-story buildings, shear panels at the first story (at least 48 inches in width) shall be located at each end or as near thereto as possible and comprise at least 25 percent of the linear length of the wall, or provide design. Section 2326.1 1.3 and Table 23-I-W. 22. Show floor to floor shear transfer. 23. Show how shear walls will transfer to roof sheathing at up stairs walls (Required if conventional designed) Both in the longitudinal and transverse directions. 24. Upper walls must be checked for up lift (OTM) Provide hold downs as needed. 25. Show hanger type at floor joist to floor beam connections. Carlsbad 98-3383 10/13/98 26. Show all deck structural details, Including ledger or joist connections to Dwelling. .- - 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Show lateral stability of deck post I columns. Show TJI type on Plans. ( TJI 15 ) Show location of attic access with a minimum size of 22"x30. MECHANICAL (UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE) Show the BTU rating, location and type of all heating and cooling appliances or systems. If located in closet. Note on the plans that the FAU closet or alcove must be 12 inches wider than the furnace or furnaces being installed. UMC Section 315.1. Show minimum 30" deep unobstructed working space in front of furnace. Section 305.2, UMC. If located in attic. Note that passageway to the attic furnace shall be unobstructed and have continuous solid flooring not less than 24 inches wide, not more than 20 feet in length through the attic. Section 319.4, UMC. If located in attic. Show permanent electrical outlet and lighting fixture controlled by a switch for furnace located in attic or undertloor space. Sections 319.6 and 320.1, UMC. Specify on the plans the following information for the fireplace(s), per Section 106.3.3: a) Manufacturer's name. b) Model namehumber. c) ICBO approval number, or equal. d) Show height of chimney above roof per I.C.B.O. approval or Table 31-8. Note on the plans that approved spark arrestors shall be installed on all chimneys. UBC, Section 3102.3.8. Provide dryer vent to outside. The maximum length is 14 feet with two 90-degree elbows. UMC. Section 504.3.2. ELECTRICAL (NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE) Show on the plan the amperage of the electrical service, the location of the service panel and the location of any sub-panels. If service is over 200 amps, submit single line diagram, panel schedule and load calculations. Carlsbad 98-3383 10/13/98 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. Note on the plans that receptacle outlet locations will comply with 1993 NEC Art. 210-52(a). Show on the plans that countertop receptacle outlets comply with 1993 NEC Art. 210-52(~). Show on the plan that ground-fault circuit-interrupter protection complies with 1993 NEC Art. 210-8, which reads as follows: All 125-volt, single-phase, 15- and 20- ampere receptacles installed in bathrooms, garages, basements, outdoors and within 6 feet of a kitchen sink. PLUMBING (UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE) Provide adequate barrier to protect water heater from vehicle damage. An 18 platform for the water heater does not satisfy this requirement. UPC, Section 510.3. Show T and P valve on water heater and show route of discharge line to exterior. UPC, Section 608.5. 0 ENERGY CONSERVATION All energy items shown on the plans must be in agreement with the information shown on the properly completed Form CF-IR. Show Insulation on cross section. Provide fluorescent general lighting (40 lumens per watt minimum) in kitchen@) and bathrooms. 0 CARLSBAD S.F.D. & DUPLEX SUPPLEMENT New residential units must be pre-plumbed for future solar water heating. Note that two roof jacks must be installed where the water heater is in the one story garage and directly below the most south facing roof (City Ordinance No. 8093). Note that two 314" copper pipes must be installed to the most convenient future solar panel location when the water heater is not in a one story garage and is not directly below the most south facing roof. (City Ordinance No. 8093). All piping for present or future solar water heating must be insulated when in areas that are not heated or cooled by mechanical means (city policy). Overflow roof drains shall terminate in an area where they will be readily visible and will not cause damage to the building. If the roof drain terminates through a wall, the overflow drain shall terminate 12" minimum above the roof drain. POliCY 84-35. Carlsbad 98-3383 10/13/98 MISCELLANEOUS 50. Guard railing requirements also apply to deck. 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. 0 Have changes been made to the plans not resulting from this correction list? Please indicate: Yes D No 0 The jurisdiction has contracted with Esgil Corporation located at 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, California 92123; telephone number of 619660-1468, to perform the plan review for your project. If you have any questions regarding these plan review items, please contact Bill Elizarraras at Esgil Corporation. Thank you. Carlsbad 98-3383 101 13/98 VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: 98-3383 PREPARED BY: Bill Elizarraras DATE: 10/13/98 BUILDING ADDRESS: 2529 Abedul St. BUILDING OCCUPANCY: R3/U1 TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: VN TOTAL VALUE 0 1994 UBC Building Permit Fee Bldg. Permit Fee by ordinance: $ 1338.57 1994 UBC Plan Check Fee [XI Plan Check Fee by ordinance: $ 870.07 Type of Review: Complete Review 0 Structural Only 0 Hourly 0 Repetitive Fee Applicable 0 Other: Esgil Plan Review Fee: $ 696.05 Comments: Permit = 70% of 94 UBC EsGil = 52% of Permit. Sheet 1 of 1 macvalue.doc 5196 BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST DATE: /&/&qp PLANCHECK NO.: CB9f33g3 BUILDING ADDRESS: c 5d9 aT!4&&/4w PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 3, &/n -. H&F& $ bxA & & , ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER: c?/s-a~~--~ EST. VALUE: ,q&f, ,47& ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT APPROVAL DENIAL The item you have submitted for review has been approved. The approval is based on plans, attached report of deficiencies information andlor specifications provided in your comoliance with aDDliCable necessary corrections to plans this date, including field modifications, must be submittal: therefore any changes to these items aAer code; and standards. Submit corrected plans andlor reviewed bv this office to insure continued specifications to this office for review. I conformance- with applicable codes. Please review with instructions in this reDort can result in carefully all comments attached, as failure to comply A Right-of-way permit is required prior to construction of the following improvements: By: Date: By: Date: IZATION TO ISSUE BUILDING PER ATTACHMENTS Dedication Application Dedication Checklist Improvement Application Improvement Checklist Future Improvement Agreement Grading Permit Application Grading Submittal Checklist Right-of-way Permit Application and Information Sheet Right-of-way Permit submittal Checklist Sewer Fee Information Sheet ENGINEERING DEPT. CONTACT PERSON Name: Michele Masterson City of Carlsbad Address: 2075 Las Palmas Dr., Carlsbad, CA 92009 Phone: (619)438-1161. ext. 4315 CFD INFORMATION Parcel Map No: Lots: Recordation: Carlsbad Tract: A4 USPAWVSVIBPARY-ENO~~D"SWWM m-u CUI cmm fa ul.~ c R"'y075 Las Palrnas Dr. Carlsbad, CA 92009-4 576 - (61 9) 436-11 61 FAX (61 9) 438-0894 @ - r BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST SITE PLAN $ ;jd.w ?/esse R& r Gd 0 1, Provide a fully dimensioned site plan drawn to scale. Show: )o OL+*ChP 4 S,-CandQrc( GS-15 A. North Arrow D. Property Lines B. Existing & Proposed Structures E. Easements C. Existing Street Improvements F. Right-of-way Width & Adjacent Streets G. Driveway widths 2. Show on site plan: A. Drainage Patterns 1, Building pad surface drainage must maintain a minimum slope of one 2. ADD THE FOLLOWING NOTE: "Finish grade will provide a minimum positive percent towards an adjoining street or an approved drainage course. drainage of 2% to swale 5' away from building." B. Existing & Proposed Slopes and Topography c. PI Qse S~OU CtnrshPd -f/bor e/ec/adr* d ~d 3. Incu q@J"JfT eontltes ee. t' A. Site address B. Assessor's Parcel Number C. Legal Description For commerciallindustrial buildings and tenant improvement projects, include: total building square footage wah the square footage for each different use, existing sewer permits showing square footage of different uses (manufacturing, warehouse, oftice, etc.) previously approved. EXISTING PERMIT NUMBER DESCRIPTION DISCRETIONARY APPROVAL COMPLIANCE 0 0 D 4a. Project does not comply with the following Engineering Conditions of approval for Project No. D D 0 4b. All conditions are in compliance. Date: . BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST ,ST/ ~NW 3Rw DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS Li 0 0 5. Dedication for all street Rights-of-way adjacent to the building site and any storm drain or utility easements on the building site is required for all new buildings and for remodels with a value at or exceeding $ , pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 18.40.030. Dedication required as follows: - Dedication required. Please have a registered Civil Engineer or Land Surveyor and submit with a title report. All easement documents must be approved and prepare the appropriate legal description together with an 8 %” x 11” plat map signed by owner(s) prior to issuance of Building Permit. Attached please find an application form and submittal checklist for the dedication process. Submit the completed application form with the required checklist items and fees to the Engineering Department in person. Applications be accept by mail or fax. Dedication completed by: Date: IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS 0 0 0 6a. All needed public improvements upon and adjacent to the building site must be constructed at time of buildina construction whenever the value of the construction exceeds $ Section 18.40.040. - , pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Public improvements required as follows: Attached please find an application form and submittal checklist for the public improvement requirements. A registered Civil Engineer must prepare the appropriate improvement plans and submit them together with the requirements on the attached checklist to the Engineering Department through a separate plan check process. The completed application form and the requirements on the checklist must be submitted in person. Applications by mail or fax are not accepted. Improvement plans must be approved, appropriate securities posted and fees paid prior to issuance of building permit. Improvement Plans signed by: Date: 0 0 0 6b. Construction of the public improvements may be deferred pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 18.40. Please submit a recent property title report or current grant deed on the property and processing fee of $ so we may prepare the necessary Future Improvement Agreement. This agreement must be signed, notarized and approved by the City prior to issuance of a Building permit. Future public improvements required as follows: BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST 1" 2& 3" 0 0 0 6c. Enclosed please find your Future Improvement Agreement. Please return agreement signed and notarized to the Engineering Department. Future Improvement Agreement completed by: Date: 0 0 0 6d. No Public Improvements required. SPECIAL NOTE: Damaaed or defective imorovements found adiacent to buildina site must be reoaired to the satisfaction gf the Citv lnsoector orior to occuDana. The conditions that invoke the need for a grading permit are found in Section 11.06.030 of the Municipal Code. P 0 0 7a. Inadequate information available on Site Plan to make a determination on grading 0 0 P 7b. Grading Permit required. A separate grading plan prepared by a registered Civil requirements. Include accurate grading quantities (cut, fill import, export). Engineer must be submitted together with the completed application form aooroval obtained orior to issuance of a Buildina Permit. attached. NOTE: The Gradina Permit must be issued and rouah arading Grading Inspector sign off by: Date: 0 7c. Graded Pad Certification required. (Note: Pad certification may be required even if a grading permit is not required.) 0 7d.No Grading Permit required. 0 7e.lf grading is not required, write 'No Grading" on plot plan. MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS 8. A RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT is required to do work in City Right-of-way andlor private work adjacent to the public Right-of-way. Types of work include, but are not limited to: street improvements, tree trimming, driveway construction, tieing into public storm drain, sewer and water utilities. Right-of-way permit required for: ~lI &@&&or X, s I (&,'l. vi C-ikC V . 4 BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST 3d' 0 9. A SEWER PERMIT is required concurrent with the building permit issuance. The fee is noted in the fees section on the following page. rl.e~,--a&& S~QY P P. P 10. INDUSTRIAL WASTE PERMIT If your facility is located in the City of Carlsbad sewer service area, you need to contact the Carlsbad Municipal Water District, located at 5950 El Camino Real, Carlsbad, CA 92008. District personnel can provide forms and assistance, and will check to see if your business enterprise is on the EWA Exempt List. You may telephone (760) 438-2722, extension 153, for assistance. Industrial Waste permit accepted by: Date: 0 0 0 11. NPDES PERMIT Complies with the City's requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The applicant shall provide best management practices to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to discharge to sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading or building permit, whichever occurs first. 0 12. 0 Required fees are attached MLQ ~~tvr\ ~ n-F s/ 0 No fees required ~ ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FEE CALCULATION WORKSHEET Estimate based on unconfirmed information from applicant. Calculation based on building plancheck plan submittal. sa9 L&UAL&&& Bldg. Permit No 72? 38-3 Date: v63 /sf Checked by: Date: EDU CALCULATIONS; List types and square footages for all uses. ~ypes of Use: 3 F/3 Sq. FtJUnits: EDU's: I Types of Use: Sq. FtJUnits: EDU's: ADT CALCULATIONS: List types and square footages for ell uses. Types of Use: sfn Sq. Ft./Units: ADT's: I Types of Use: Sq. Ft./Units: ADT's: FEES REQUIRFD: - ., WITHIN CFD: 0 YES (no bridge & thoroughfare fee in District X1, reduced Traffic Impact Fee) # 1. PARK-IN-LIEU FEE PARK AREA & X: / FEENNIT: X NO. UNITS - p. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE ADTWUNITS: I x FEEIADT: e70 =$ &?a &RIDGE AND THOROUGHFARE FEE IDST. Xi- - DIST. X2 - DIST. X3 __ 1 ADT'slUNITS ! X FEE/ADT: S3.R =$ 5r 3 UNIT/SQ.FT.: I X FEE/SQ.FT.NNIT 3 =$A PERMIT No. EDU's: X FEE/EDU: BENEFIT AREA: DRAINAGE BASIN: EDU's: X FEE/EDU: EWER LATERAL I$2,500) 7. DRAINAGE FEES PLDA 0 : HIGH /Low ACRES 30 X FEE/AC Jg =s j/ TOTAL OF ABOVE FEES*: $ *NOTI? This calculation sheet is a complete list of all feea which my be due. Dedications and improvements may also be required with Building Permits. / r PLANNING DEPARTMENT BUILDING PLAN CHECK REVIEW CHECKLIST Plan Check No. CB qbpu I Address YA'S /&'Ad 57: - Planner ." Phone (61 9) 438-1 161, extensiyz? Type of Project & Use: S4b? Net Project Density: DUlAC Zoning: R-r General Plan: RLM Facilities Management Zone: CFD linlnut\ #- Date of participation: Remaining net dev acres:- (For non-residential development: Type of land used created by this permit: 1 APN: 215-d@-LO Circle One Leaend: [XI Item Complete item incomplete - Needs your action 0 Environmental Review Required: YES NO TYPE DATE OF COMPLETION: Compliance with conditions of approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval: - 0 0 Discretionary Action Required: YES NO - TYPE APPROVALIRESO. NO. DATE PROJECT NO. OTHER RELATED CASES: Compliance with conditions or approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval: 0 0 Coastal Zone AssessmentlCompliance Project site located in Coastal Zone? YES - NO/ CA Coastal Commission Authority? YES NO If California Coastal Commission Authority: Contact them at - 3111 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 200. San Diego CA 92108-1725; 1619) 521-8036 Determine status (Coastal Permit Required or Exempt): Coastal Permit Determination Form already completed? YES NO If NO, complete Coastal Permit Determination Form now. Coastal Permit Determination Log #: Follow-Up Actions: 1) Stamp Building Plans as "Exempt" or "Coastal Permit Required" (at minimum Floor Plans). 2) Complete Coastal Permit Determination Log as needed. - - 0 Inclusionary Housing Fee required: YES NO __ (Effective date of Inclusionary Housing Ordinance - May 21. 1943.) Data Entry Completed? YES (Enter CB X; UACT; NEXTlZ; Construct h Amount [See fee schedule for amount): Return1 Site Plan: a 0 0 1. Provide a fully dimensional site plan drawn to scale. Show: North arrow, property lines, easements, existing and proposed structures, streets, existing street improvements, right-of-way width, dimensional setbacks and existing topographical lines. 0 2. Provide legal description of property and assessor's parcel number. Zoning: 0 0 1. Setbacks: - Front: Interior Side: Street Side: Rear: Required 20' Required 3" 3. Required - Required ' t* Shown Shown Shown Shown 0 0 2. Accessory structure setbacks: Front: Shown Interior Side: Shown Street Side: Shown Shown - Shown 0 0 4. Height: Required y 0% Shown Lrfok Required 30' Shown $7 I 0 0 5. Parking: Spaces Required a Shown 3 Guest Spaces Required Shown 0 0 0 Additional Comments OK TO ISSUE AND ENTERED APPROVAL INTO COMPUTER m. STRUCTURAL DESIGN PAUL WLEY. P.E. 34613 JOB NAME: ABEDUL ST. JOB ADDRESS: ABEDUL ST Allowable Stresses: (DOUGLAS FIR-LARCH) Framing (T"4") #2 D.F.-Fb= 875, Fv=95, E=I.Bxl06 #I D.F.-Fb=IOOO, F~95, E=1.7~106 (6%) #I D,F.-Fb=1350, Fv=85, E=1.6x106 SELECT D.F.-Fb=1600, F~85, E=1.6~106 ., , Loads: Exterior Wall - 16.0 #/s.f. Interior Part. - 10.0 #/s.f. Roof D.L. Tile 12.0 #/s.f. Framing - 2.5 #/s.f. Ceil. 2.5 #/s.f. Misc. - 1.0 #/sf. Sht'g. - 2.0 #/Sf. 14.0 #/sf. 30.0 #/s.f. Total Roof L.L. - 16.0 #/S.f. Floor D.L. Sht'g. - 2.5 #/Sf. Framing - 4.8 #/sf. Ceil. - 2.5 #/sf. Misc. - 1.2 #Is.f. 11.0 #s.f. Floor L.L. ~ 40.0 #/s.f. 51.0 #/s.f. Total ZIC 0.4~1.0~2.75 Rw 6 (Z=0.4. 1-1 .O, Cs2.75, Rw=6) Seismic: Zone 4 V = 0.163W Wind: p=CeCqqsl .Ce=0.7 (Exp."B"). Cqz1.3, qs=13, F1.0 p=0.7~1.3x13~1.0= 11.8WS.f. Page 1 . ..~ . . .., . .. . . . ..~ .. . .. . . . .... . . . . - A -- 1x diag. 300 16d85"O.C. 1/2@ 2'0.C. A -- 1/2" drywall A -- 5/8" mall A -- 1/2" drywall A -- S/s" drywall Sd cooler87"o.c. 6d c001em7~o.c. 5d co0ler@4~ O.C. 66 C00ler@4" O.C. 50 57 62 72 16d832"o.c. 1/28 6'o.c. 16d824"O.C. 1/28 6'0.c. 16d@24"0.C. 1/28 6'0.c. 16d82O"O.C. 1/28 6'o.c. A -- 1/2" blk.drywall A -- 5/0" blk.drywall A -- 7/0" stucco 5d co0lem4~ O.C. 75 16d82O"O.C. 1/28 6'o.c. 6d cooler84" o .c. 07 16d810"o.C. 1/28 6'0.c. 16ga. staple~86~ O.C. 180 16d8 9"O.C. 1/28 3'0.C. c-c,c-d str.1 A -- 3/0" plywood ad8 6" O.C. edges 260 200 16d@ 6"o.c. 1/28 2'o.c. A -- 3/0" plywood pL Y -r-mxA PL Ye 444 Y 0d8 4" O.C. edges 300 430 16d8 4"q.c. 1/28 1'0.c. /n, -- 3/8" plywood ad@ 3" O.C. edges 490 550 16d8 3"O.C. 1/2@ 1'O.C. -- 3/0" plywood ad@ 2" O.C. edges 640 730 2-16d8 4"O.C. 1/2810"O.C. JZZ. /P/d ABEDUL ST. 6 Wind. Header pndifion$ && Attributes Actual Critical status Ratio &&g Date: 9/03/96 BeamChek 2.2 I 4x 8 DF-L #2 ‘91 NDS Min Bearing Area R1= 2.9 i+ R2= 2.9 in’ DL Defl 0.06 in Beam Span 6.0 fl Reaction 1 1800 # Reaction 1 LL 792 # Beam Wt per fl 6.1 7 # Reaction 2 1800 # Reaction 2 LL 792 # Beam Weight 37# MadmumV 1800# Max Moment 2701 Y MaxV(Reduced) 1438# TL Max Defl L I 240 TL Actual Defl L I733 ~~ ~ ~ BASE Fb = 875 ADJ Fb = 1422 I LL Max Defl L I380 LL Actual Defl L I >IO00 Section (in’) Shear (In’) TL Defl (in) LL Defl 30.68 25.38 0.10 0.04 22.79 OK 18.16 0.30 OK OK 0.20 OK I 74% 72% 33% 22% I & Fb (psi) [B~SE values 875 95 1.6 625 &&&.!E& CF Sue Factor 1.300 Cd Duration 1.25 1.25 Cr Repetitive Ch Shear Stress Cm Wet Use BeamChek has automatically added the beam self-weight into the calWlatiOnS. UniformTL: 594 =A Uniform LL: 264 Uniform Load A I I I I Rl = 1800 R2 = 1800 SPAN = 6 FT A n Uniform and partial uniform loads are Ibs per lineal fl. ABEDUL ST. 4' Wind. Header Date: 9mm BeamChek 2.2 mQlw Conditions Q& Attributes Actual Critical status Ratio 1 4x8 DF-L#Z BASE Fb 875 ADJ Fb = 1422 '91 NDS ~~ Min Bearing Area Rl= 1.9 in' R2= 1.9 itP DL Defl 0.02 in Beam Span 4.0 ft Reaction 1 1197 # Reaction 1 LL 528 # Beam Wt per ft 4.68 # Reaction 2 11 97 # Reaction 2 LL 528 # Beam Weight l9# MaximumV 1197# Max Moment TL Max Defi 1197% MaxV(Reduced) 923# L1240 n Actual Den LI>~OOO LL Max Defl L I380 LL Actual Defl L I >lo00 Section (in? Shear (in? TL Defl (in) 17.65 LL Defl 19.25 0.04 10.11 0.02 OK 11.68 OK 0.20 0.13 OK 57% OK 61% 22% 15% I I Fb (psi) 1 Base Values Fv (psi) E (psi x mil) 875 95 1.6 625 Fcl (psi) Cd Duration 1.25 Cr Repetitive 1.25 Ch Shear Stress Cm Wet Use BeamChek has automatically added the beam self-weight into the calculations. !dads Uniform TL: 594 = A Uniform LL: 284 Uniform Load A I I I I n n R1 = 1197 SPAN = 4 FT R2 = 1197 Uniform and partial uniform loads are Ibs per lineal R. AEEDUL ST. 8'Wind. Header Date: 9/03/98 BeamChek 2.2 mQk2 ~nditions m4& Actual Criiical status Ratio UYQs I 4x 10 DF-L #2 '91 NDS BASE Fb = 875 ADJ Fb = 1313 I Min Bearing Area R1= 3.9 in* R2= 3.9 in' DL Detl 0.08 in Beam Span 8.0 fl Reaction 1 2407 # Reaction 1 LL 1058 # Beam Wt per fl 7.87 # Reaction 2 2407 # Reaction 2 LL 1056 # Beam Weight 63# MaxirnumV 2407 # Max Moment 4815W MaxV(Reduced) 1944# TL Max Defl L I240 TL Actual Defl LL Max DeR L I360 LL Actual Defl L I =-lo00 LI640 Section (in') Sheaf (in? TL Defl (in) LL DeR 44.02 49.91 32.38 0.15 0.07 24.55 0.40 OK OK OK OK 0.27 88% 76% 37% 25% I Fb (psi) Fv (psi) E (psi x mil) FCL (psi) ~~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~~~ I Base Values 875 95 1.6 625 I Base Adjusted 1313 119 1.6 625 Adiusbnena ~ CF Size Factor 1.200 Cd Duration 1.25 Cr Repetitive 1.25 Ch Shear Stress Cm Wet Use BeamChek has automatically added the beam self-weight into the calculations. UnifonnTL: 594 =A Uniform LL: 264 1 4 Uniform Load A A n Rl = 2407 R2 = 2407 SPAN = 8 FT Uniform and partial uniform loads are Ibs per lineal R. ABEDUL ST. 6' Wind. Header conditions Data Atm&s Actual Critical status Ratio Date: 9/03/96 BeamChek 2.2 1 4x 8 DF-L #2 BASE Fb = 875 ADJ Fb i. 1422 '91 NDS Min Bearing Area R1= 2.9 in' R2= 2.9 in' DL Defl 0.06 in Beam Span 6.0 fl Reaction 1 1600 # Reaction 1 LL 192 # Beam Wt per fl 6.17 # Reaction 2 1600 # Reaction 2 LL 792 # Beam Weight 37# MaximumV 1600 # Max Moment 2701 W Max V (Reduced) 1438 # TL Max Defl L I 240 n Actual Defl L I 733 LL Max Defl LI360 LLActual Defl L/>lOOO Section (in') Shear (in? TL Defl (in) LL Defl 30.66 25.38 0.10 0.04 22.79 16.16 0.30 OK OK OK 0.20 OK 74% 72% 33% 22% Fb (psi) Fv (psi) E (psi x mil) Fcl (psi) I Base Values 875 95 1.6 625 "" Cd Duration 1.25 1.25 Cr Repetitive Ch Shear Stress Cm Wet Use BeamChak has automatically added the beam self-weight into the calcIIlatiOnS. Uniform TL: 594 =A Uniform LL: 264 Uniform Load A I A A R1 = 1600 R2 = 1600 SPAN = 6 FT Uniform and partial uniform loads are Ibs per lineal R. ABEDUL ST. Floor Joists Date: 910- BeamChek 2.2 12x12 DF-L#Z gl6in.o~ BASE Fb = 875 ADJ Fb = 1006 Min Bearing Area RI= 1.0 in' R2= 1.0 in' DL Defl 0.12 in Beam Wt per fl 4.1 # Reaction 2 61 3 # Reaction 2 LL 453 # Beam Weight 70# MaximumV 613 # Max Moment 2605% MaxV (Reduced) 545# TL Max Defl L I 240 TL Actual DeR L 1429 LL Max Defl L I280 U Adual Defl L I581 Condifions Repetitive Use. '91 NDS Q& Beam Span 17.0 fl Reaction 1 613# Reaction 1 LL 453 # kltm!&s 98% 51 % 58% 62% Ratio OK OK OK OK status 31 .ffi 8.61 0.85 0.57 Critical 31.64 16.88 0.48 0.35 Actual Section (in') Shear (in') TL Defl (in) LL DeR Fb (psi) Fv (psi) E (psi x mil) FcL (psi) Base Values 875 95 1.6 625 CF Sue Factor 1.000 Cd Duration I .oo I .OO Cr Repetitive Ch Shear Stress 1.15 Cm Wet Use BeamChek has automatically added the beam self-weight into the calculations. Uniform TL: 68 = A Uniform LL 53 Uniform Load A I I I I R1 = 613 R2=613 SPAN = 17 FT n n Uniform and partial uniform loads are Ibs per lineal fl. a!&e condifions m Aamb Actual Critical status Ratw ABEDUL ST. Floor Beam (FBI) Date: 9/03/98 BeamChek 2.2 6x 12 DF-L #l BASE Fb 3 1350 ADJ Fb = 1350 I No Splits, '91 NOS din Bearing Area R1= 7.2 in' R2= 7.2 in' DL DM 0.05 in Beam Span 10.5 fl Reaction 1 449Q# Reaction 1 LL 3465 # Beam Wt per fl 15.37 # Reaction 2 4499 # Reaction 2 LL 3485 # Beam Weight 161 # Maximum V 4499 # Max Moment 11809 '# Max V (Reduced) 3877 # n ax Defl LL Max Defl L I 240 TL Actual Defl L I360 LL Adual Defl L1601 L I 780 1 I Section (in3 Shaar (in3 TL Defl (in) LL Defl 121.23 63.25 0.21 0.16 104.97 32.45 0.52 0.35 OK OK OK OK 87% 51% 40% 46% I I Fb (psi) I Base Values J 1350 85 1.6 825 FcL (psi) Cd Duration 1 .oo 1 .00 Cr Repetitive Ch Shear Stress Cm Wet Use BeamChek has automatically added the beam self-weight into the calculations. 2.00 (No Splits) Uniform TL: 842 =A Uniform LL 860 Uniform Load A I I n A R1 = 4499 SPAN = 10.5 FT R2=4499 Uniform and partial uniform loads are Ibs per lineal fl. ABEDUL ST. Floor Beam (FEZ) Date: 9/03/98 BeamChek 2.2 QQ& pnditions - Data Attributes Actual Critical status Ratio &dYf!s I 3-112x 16 2.OE BC VERSA LAM Plus@ Min Bearing Area RI= 9.8 in' R2= 9.8 in' DL Ddi 0.30 in Beam Span 17.5 fl Reaction I 7332 # Reaction I LL 4375 # Beam Wt per ft 14.39 # Reaction 2 7332 # Reaction 2 LL 4375 # Beam Weight 252 # Maximum V 7332 # Max Moment 32075 '# Max V (Reduced) 6214 # TL Max DM L I 240 n Actual DER L1284 LL Max Defl L 1380 LL Actual Defl L I476 Section (in? 149.33 Shear (in3 TL Defl (in) LL Defl 56.00 0.74 0.44 137.04 OK 32.14 0.88 OK 0.58 OK OK 92% 57% 84% 76% Fb (psi) Fv (psi) E (psi x mil) FcL @si) 2900 290 2.0 750 Cd Duration 1 .oo I .oo Cr Repetitive Ch Shear Stress Cm Wet Use BeamChek has automatically added the beam self-weight into the calCUlatiOnS. UniformTL: 824 =A Uniform LL: 500 1 7 Uniform Load A n A R1 = 7332 R2 = 7332 SPAN = 17.5 FT Uniform and partial uniform loads are Ibs par lineal fl. ABEDUL ST. Floor Beam (FB-3) Data: 9IO3198 BeamChek 2.2 I 3”X 11-7& 2.OE BC VERSA LAM PI& I Min Bearing Area Ri= 6.5 it+ R2= 6.5 in’ DL De$ 0.17 in Beam Span 12.5 fl Reaction I 4854s Reaction i LL 2925 # Beam Wt per R 10.88 # Reaction 2 4854 # Reaction 2 LL Beam Weight 2925 # 133 # Maximum V 4854 # Max Moment TL Max Defi 15168 ’# Max V (Reduced) 4085 # L I240 n Adual DER L1344 I LL Max Defl L1380 LLAdualDefl L 1571 Section (in? Shear (in7 TL Defl (in) 82.26 LL Defl 62.69 41.56 0.44 21.13 0.26 0.63 0.42 OK 76% OK 51% OK OK 70% 63% Fb (psi) I Base Values 2900 290 2.0 750 I Fv (psi) E (psi x mil) Fcl (psi) Base Adjusted 2903 290 2.0 750 Adiusbnents CF Size Factor 1.001 Cd Duration 1 .oo Cr Repetitive I .00 Ch Shear Stress Cm Wet Use BeamChek has automatically added the beam self-weight into the calculations. &?a!& UniformlY 766 =A Uniform LL: 468 [ Uniform bed A I n R1= 4854 n R2 = 4854 SPAN = 12.5 FF Uniform and partial uniform loads are Ibs per lineal fl. ABEDUL ST. Floor Beam (FB-4) Date: 9/03/98 BeamChek 2.2 I 5-1h 18 2.OE BC VERSA LAM Pi& Min Bearing Area R1= 14.3 in' R2= 8.5 in* DL Defl 0.47 in Beam Span 21.5 fl Reaction 1 10753 # Reaction 1 LL 5874 # Beam Wt per fl 25.44 # Reaction 2 6396 # Reaction 2 LL 3258 # Beam Weight 547# MaximumV 10753 # Max Moment 83879 'x Max V (Reduced) 10407 # n Defl L I 240 TL Actual Dafl L I243 LL Max Defl L I360 LL Actual DM L I439 Section (in') Shear (in? TL Defl (in) U Dafl 297.00 99.00 1.08 0.59 275.64 53.83 1.08 OK 0.72 OK OK OK Q3% 54% 99% 82% I L Fb (psi) Fv (psi) E (psi x mil) Fcl (psi) I Base Values 2900 290 2.0 750 Base Adjusted 2772 290 2.0 750 Cd Duration 1.00 1 .w Cr Repetitive Ch Shear Stress Cm Wet Use BeamChak has automatically added the beam self-weight into the calWlatiOnS. Adiudmnts CF Sire Factor 0.956 !ads Uniform TL: 205 = A Uniform LL 85 I Point LL Point TL Distance 2925 4375 B = 4854 4.5 C = 7332 8.5 I Uniform Load A Pt loads: I E4 E3 A n R1 = 10753 R2 = 6396 SPAN = 21.5 FT Uniform and partial uniform loads are Ibs per lineal fl. choice Conditions Qat@ A&t/&!!& Actual Critical Status Ratio u.!s ABEDUL ST. Floor Beam (DE-1) Date: 9/03/98 BeamChek 2.2 I 6x 14 DF-LH BASE Fb = 875 ADJ Fb = 864 ~ '91 NDS Min Bearing Area R1= 4.1 in' R2= 4.1 in' DL Defl 0.07 in I Beam Span 16.0 R Reaction 1 2559 # Reaction 1 LL 2040 # Beam Wt per R 18.04 # Reaction 2 2559 # Reaction 2 LL 2040 # Beam Weight 289 # Maximum V 2559 # Max Moment TL Mar Dell 10235 Y Max V (Reduced) 2199 # L I240 TL Actual Defl LL Max DeR L J 598 L I280 LL Actual Defl L I 750 I I Section (in') Shear (in3 TL Defl (in) LL Defl 167.06 74.25 0.32 0.28 142.21 OK 38.80 0.80 OK OK 0.53 OK I 85% 52% 40% 48% 1 Fb (psi) Fv (psi) E (psi x mil) 875 85 1.3 FcL (psi) 625 Cd Duration 1 .oa 1 .oo Cr Repetitive Ch Shear Stress Cm Wet Use BeamChek has automatically added the beam self-weight into the calculations. Uniform TL: 302 =A Uniform LL: 255 Uniform Load A I I A R1 = 2559 n R2 = 2559 SPAN = 16 FT Uniform and partial uniform loads are Ibs per lineal R. ABEDUL ST. choice Conditions m Attributes Actual Critical Status Ratio Values Floor Beam (DE-2) Date: 9/03/98 BeamChek 2.2 I 4x 6 DF-L #Z BASE Fb = 875 AN Fb = 1138 I : '91 NDS Min Bearing Area R1= 1 .l in' R2= 1.1 in' DL Defl 0.04 in Beam Span 8.0 fl Reaction 1 659# Reaction 1 LL Beam Wt per A 4.68 # Reaction 2 540# Beam Weight 37# MaximumV 659 # Reaction 2 LL 540 # 659 # TL Max Defi Max Moment 1317% MaxV(Reduc8d) 583# L I240 n Actual DM LL Max Defl L I492 L I360 LL Actual Defl L I600 Section (in') Shear (in? TL Defi (in) 17.65 LL Defl 19.25 13.90 9.21 0.20 0.40 0.16 0.27 OK OK 79% OK 48% OK 49% 60% Fb (psi) 875 Fv (psi) E (psi x mil) 95 1.6 Fcl. (psi) 625 I Cd Duration 1 .oo 1 .oo Cr Repetitive Ch Shear Stress Cm Wet Use BeamChek has automatically added the beam self-weight into the calculations, UniformTL: 160 =A Uniform LL: 135 I Uniform Load A I I I n n R1 = 659 R2 = 659 SPAN = 8 FT Uniform and partial uniform loads are Ibs per lineal ft Paul Exley Structural Engineer (760) 839-1377 Dear City of Carlsbad, The 18” x 30” void in the shear panel, due to a fireplace flue, does not hinder the, structural integrity of the structure at 2529 Abedul St.. ,~&GK &//&,u‘f &/Rep Furthermore, 2” x 8” joists are structurally permissible at the rear decWpatio. wm /uc..4c Thank You, ,* , .. E.R.1.C TRUSS , PREFABRICATED. BMCING WOOD TRUSSES COMMENTARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS BTRUSSPLATE INSTITUTE. INC.. 1916 I*TnowcTIo* ' FW Ubl A I h . .. i . .. ~ " " ..- . .. . :.. /;:: ' '.../. .. .. , ... .. . .. ;I E YI . ... ID I !:'. 1 : I k. .. q. . \ . , .: . ._ .:.- < 4 +I i 3. . Tel. : (61 9) 288-8787 Fax :(619) 286-8769 Message : li Scott, lere Is how@ read the FAU info on the talc: itandard uniform loading is what ths truss was originally designed to carry..A normal tile ,ad. :-,i Wow that is says BCDL 20.0 ........... that is the pounds per lineal foot that Gary loaded le truss with. (20 pounds per lineal foot) itart 11 SO.. . . .,, ., ..this is where your platform starts, it goes for 8 feet and Inds 19.50.. .......... this is where the platform ends lope this answers ail your questions. dori From : San Dlego County Truss, Inc. )ate : 6/17/99 PaGis) ; 1 To : Scott Lor1 Jolly Redllne Builders . . .. .. 06/17/1999 10: 21 6192868789 SD COUNTY TR-6S PAGE 01/01 CITY OF SAN OIEGO . BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT , CIRCUIT CARD THIS CARD MUST BE FILLED OUT AND AVAILABLE ON THE JOB SITE FOR THE ROUGH INSPECTION. B JOS AOORESS I 1111111 IIIII .NAME OF EACH ROOM WHERE OUTLETS ARC LOCATED. OUTLETS THUS Ltsr OLD AND NE OurLurs ON SAME cIacuIr . MARKING OLD USE CIRCUIT SCACCS ABOVE FOR GENERAL LIGHTING AND SMALL APPLIANCE CIRCUITS ONLV. FILL IN APPLICABLE ITEMS BELOW . USE REMARKS AS NECESSARY TO DESCRIBE WORK. - f3 NAME PLT. AMPS--KW WIRE SIZE CU BRKR AL SIZE SERVICE . FEEDER #2 FEEDER #1 ZOO 205) RANGE OVEN LIO 8 q0 AIC 30 /o 30 DRYER 30 10 30 LO 40 YO - Alc 20 17- DISHWASHER 20 , It, 20 REMARKS: JOURNCVMAN r c PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL ., INVESTIGATION LOT 85, ABEDUL STREET LA COSTA, CALIFORNtA r .. r PREPARED FOR: Mr. Din0 DeLuca DeLuca Investments San Marcos, California 92069 r 1355 Grand Avenue, Suite 100 . P r JOB #97-157b-P .. ,. 1 r VWJE 8 MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, x102 Escondido, California 92029-1229 phone (760) 743-1214 Fax (760) 739-0343 c Job #97-157b-P May 20, 1997. c. ,, .Mr. Din0 Delucz, Deluca Investments 1355 Grand Avenue, Suite' 100 San Marcos, California 92069 c Preliminary Geotechnicallnvestigation, Lat 85. Abedul Street La Costa, California ,I r Pursuant to your request, Vinje and Middleton Engineering, Inc. has completed the attached investigation of soils and geotechnical conditions at the subject site. r c The following report summarizes the results of our field investigation, including laboratory ' analyses and conclusions, and provides recommendations for the development as understood. From a geotechnical engineering,standpoint, it is our opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed residential development provided recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the design and construction of the project. The conclusions and recommendations provided in this study are consistent with the site geotechnical conditions and are intended to aid in the preparation of'the final development plans and allow more accurate estimates of development costs. If you have any questions or heed cl8rifi&ion, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Reference to our'Job #97-157b-P will help to expedite our response to your inquiries. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. .. TABLE OF CONTENTS .. .. 1 . INTRODUCTlON ............................. '. ............... .,. .. 1 111 . SITE 1NVESTiGATlON ...................................... ' ....... 1 IV . FINDINGS ..................................................... '. . 2 A . Site Development .................. : ......................... 2 C Slope Stability - Geologic Structure 2 B Earth Materials .. .,. 2 D . FaulffSeismicity ............................................... 3 E . Geologic Hazards ............................................. 4 F . Laboratory TestinglREsults ............................... ". ... 5 II . SITE DESCRIPTION ............................................... 1 . ................................ . ............ . ............................. V . CONCLUSIONS ................................................. 7 VI . RECOMMENDATIONS~ ........... ......................... .,. .... 7 A . Grading and Earthworks ...................................... 7 1 . Clearing and Grubbing ............................... '. .. 7 2 . RemovalslGrading ..................... .,. ................ 7 3 . Compaction ' ................................. '. ....... .,. 7 4 . Graded Slopes ..................................... , ...... 8 5 . Engineering, 'Inspections ................................. ,8 6 .. ' DrainagelErosion control^ .. ' .............................. 8 B . Foundation and Interior Floor Slabs ............................. 9 C . Exterior Concrete SlabslFIatworks' ............................. 10 D . Foundation and Earth Pressures ............................... 10 E . Pavement Design ..................... '. ..................... 11 6 . General Recommendations ........................... .,. ...... 12 VI1 . LIMITATIONS ............................. !. ..................... 14 .. TABLES ... .. .. .. Fault Zones .. 1 .. ......................................................... SoilTypes .......................................................... 2 Maximum Dry Density'and Optimum Moisture Content ..................... 3 In-Place Dry Density and Moisture Content ................................ 4 DirectShearTest ...................................................... 5 Expansion Test .......................................... :, .............. 6 .. .. PUTES SitePlan ............................................................ 1 Test Trench Logs ....................................................... 2 Geologic Cross-Section ........................... ' .................... 3 Isolation Joints and Re-Entrant Comer Reinforcement ...................... 5 Typical Retaining Wall Drain Detail .......................... , ........... 6 .. Fault-Epicenter Map .................................................... 4 .. .. .... " .. > . .. .. ,, ,, PRELIMINARY GEOTECUNICAL INVESTIGATlonr CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORMA ,, . r- LOT 85, ABEDUL STREET, LA COSTA , ' .. 1. JNTRO ,I 'DUCTION c ,, ,, The property investigated in this work includes a vacant hillside lot.within a,residential tract of La Costa. The lot is a graded parcet which was developed over 20 years ago'during mass grading operations for, the surrounding residential development. Grading records have not been made available for review. r We understand that the lot is now proposed tosupport a single-family residence. Specific plans are unknown; however existing grades will remain the same. The purpose of this study was to determine subsurface conditions beneath the lot and their influence upon the planned development. This report reflects test hole drilling, soil sampling and laboratory herein. P testing work which allowed for construction and development recommendations presented .. 11. SKE. LYESCRIPVON j~ c Site conditions, are depicted on a Site Plan attached to this report as Plate 1. Lot 85 is a' ' ' ' ." graded parcel'characterized by a level building surface near the grade of Abedul Street oh the west side. The rear of the pad is terminated by a graded slope which descends approximately 36 feet onto Alga 'Road below. A paved drainage ditch is provided within the upper slope as shown on Plate 1. Smaller side yard slopes 'mark the north and south bqundaries. Slope gradients are 1% :1 (horizontal to vertical). Surface,areas of ttie lot are mantled by a liiht cover of native grasses. Heavier plants are ., ' . supported on the rear slope. ., r r Site drainage 'sheetflows.over the pad surface .toward the'front street. A graded be* is ,. present along the upper edge of the'rear. slope. Excessive erosion resulting :from concentrated runoff was not in evidence. c IN. SlTF INVFSTlGATlON' , , ., .. Geotechnical, cohditions',at Lcit -85 were chiefly determined from geOl&c rnapping'.of ,' ' '' existing surface exposures and the excavation'of two test borings by a truck-mounted drill. The borings were entered and down-hole logged by our project geologist who also retained shown,on Plate 1. Logs of the borings are attached to this report as Plate 2. ,- bulk and relatively undisturbed soillrock samples for laboratory testing. Boring locations are IV. .,. ,. , ,, .< ., . ,, . ~ ,.. ,. ., .. .. ,. ,. ,, PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 2 LOT 85. ABEDUL STREET. LA COSTA. CALIFORNIA MAY 20.1997 ,, FllvDlNGS ,I Grading or development records for Lot 85 have not been made adailable fbr review. However, field data indicates that the site was created prior to 1977 by cut-fill grading of local hillside terrain. Test borings encountered fill soils'directly beneath the lot surface extending to recorded depths of 14 to 18% feet. The fill was placed over natural bedrock materials which underlie local hillside terrain in order to achieve exciting surface grades. Bedrock materials are exposed in graded cuts within the lower rear slope above Alga Road. The indicated subsurface conditions at the property are depicted on Geologic Cross-Section ~. '. . ' ' Y-Y' attached to this report as Plate 3. 8. 'Earth Materials .. ., ,. Surface~terrain at the study site are underlain by fill soils placed over the natural' hillside during site development. The fill consists chiefly of fine sandy soils which includes bedrockfragments. Upper'fills typically grade to dark colored clay-rich soils at depth, These are likely original topsoil deposits which were excavated from elsewhere and placed directly upon lower bedrock materials as the initial lifts of fill. In-place topsoil or organic debris was not in evidence beneath the study site. Underlying bedrock materiels consist chiefly of siltstone-sandstone'units which ', typically occur in a hard and blocky condition. Expbsures were' developed within the test borings and noted in surface outcrops within the lower slope above.Alga Road., .. . ,. ,. ., , ,. '2 Sloae Stabi1it.v.- Geoloaic S+cture , ,. . I ; , .. The shall slide side-yard slope below the nom perirneth of Lot 85 is locally over steepened by erosion. Elsewhere on the lot, graded slopes appear unaffected and have performed well since construction. Gross geologic failures of 'local hillside slopes afe often cbntrolled by ', '. unsupported geologic structure. Bedrock exposures at thesite indicate poorly .developed structure with nearly flat-lying relationships between rock types. Adverse structural conditions were not appqrent~in site exposures. .. .. PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION. .. PAGE 3 MAY 20.1997 7 LOT 85, ABEDUL STREET. LA COSTA. CALIFORNIA D. FaultslSeismicity ,. .. ,, Faults or significant shear zones are not indicated on or near proximity to the project site. As with mosf areas of California, .the San Diego region lies within a seismically ' ' active zone; however,; coastal areas of the county are characterized by low levels of.seismic activity relative to inland areas to the east. During a 40-year period (1934-1974), 37 earthquakes were recorded in San Diego coastal areas by the r California Institute Of Technology. None of the recorded events exceeded a Richter magnitude of 3.7, nor did any of the earthquakes generate more than modest ground shaking or,significant damages. Most of the recorded events occurred along various offshore faults which characteristically generate modest earthquake$. Historically, the mdst significant' earthquake events which ,affect' local areas. . ' originate along well known, distant fault zones to the east and the Coronado Bank fault to the west. Based upon availqble,seismic data, compiled from California Earthquake Catalogs, the most significant historical event in the area of the study site occUrred.in 1800 at an estimated, distance of 8 miles from the project area. This event, which is thought to have occurred along an off-shore fault, reached an estimated, magnitude' of 6.5 with estimated bedrock acceleration values of 0.329 at the project site. The following list'represents the most significant faults which commonly impact the region. Estimated ground acceleration data compiled from Digitized California Faults (Computer Program EQ Fault Ver. 2:Ol) typically associated with the fault is also tabulated. c 1. c r r Elsinore Fault 0.14 g - 23 miles Coronado Bank F,ault ' 48 miles San Jacinto Fault " ' 0.12 g 23 miles , ,0.03 g c The location of significant faults and earthquake evenis relative to the,study site are depicted on a Fault - Epicenter Map attached to this report as Plate 4: More recently, the number of seismic events which affect the region appears to have heightened somewhat. Nearly 40 earthquakes of magnitude 3.5 or higher have been recorded in coastal regions between January, 1984 and August, 1986. ' Most of the earthquakes are thought to have been generated along ,, ,, c,. ., PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 4 P LOT 85. ABEDUL STREET. LA COSTA. CALIFORNIA MAY 20,1997 offshore faults. For the most part, the recorded events remain moderate shocks which typically resulted in low levels of ground shaking to local areas. A notable exception to this pattern was recorded on July 13, 1986. An earthquake of magnitude 5.3 shook County coastal areas with moderate to locally heavy ground shaking resulting in $700,000 in damages, one,death, and injuries to thirty people. The quake occurred along an offshore fault located nearly 30 miles ssuthwest of Oceanside. A seriesof notable events shook County areas with a (maximum) magnitude'7.4 , ' ' r shock in the early morning of June 28, 1992. These quakes orfginated along related segments of the San Andreas Fault approximately 90 miles to the north. Locally high levels of ground shaking over an extended period of time resulted; however, significant damages 'to local structures were not reported. The incfease in earthquake frequency in the region remains a subject of speculation seismic history of county areas, the 1986 and 1992 events are thought to represent the highest. levels of ground shaking which can be expected at the study site as'a result of seismic activity. ~. ., ,, r among geologists; however, based upon empirical information and the-recorded c .' ' In recent years, the Rose Canyon .Fault has redeived added attention~from geologists. The fault is'a significant stnictural featur6 in metropolitan San Diego which includes a series of parallel breaks trending southward from La,Jolla Cove through San Diego Bay toward the Mexican border. Recent trenching along the fault in Rose Canyon indicated that at that location of fault was last active 6,000 to 9,000 years ago. Thus, the fault is classified, as "active" by the State of California which defines faults that evidence displacement in the previous 11,000 years as active. More'active faults (listed on the preceding pabe) are considered most libly to" impact the region during the lifetime of the project. The faults are periodically , - shaking at the site. Ground separation as a result of seismic activity is not expected at the property. r , P active and capable of generating moderate to locally high levels of ground ,, L E. :Geoloaic Hazards ;. 'c ., , ,. Geologic hazards are notpresently'indicated Ft thb project site. Surrounding slopes do not indicate gross geologic instability. The most.significant geologic hazards at the property will be those associated with,ground shaking in the event of a major seismic event. Liquefaction or related ground rupture failures are not f anticipated. '. ,, PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL (NVESTIGATION ' ' PAGE 5 LOT 85. ABEDUL STREET. LA COSTA. CALIFORNIA MAY 20.1997 F. Laboratorv Testina/Results Earth deposits encountered in our test'botings were.closely examined and sampled for laboratory testing to determine their ability to support the planned structures and improvements. Based upon ow test data and field exposures, site soils have been grouped into the following soil types: 1 tanhrown to grey/off-whle silt-sand mixture with bedrock fragments (fill) 2 dark grey to brown sandy clay to clayey sand (IiII) 3 redlpale brown to tan/grey siltstondclaystone (bedrock) I' ' . ,. PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 6, 1 'Designated as relative tompaction for structural fills. Required relative compaction for'structwal WI is 90% or greater. Required relative compaction for pavement sub and base grades is 95% or greater. 3. Diiect Shear Tesf: One direct shear tSst was performed on a representative sample of Soil Type 1. The. prepared specimen was soaked overnight, loaded with normal ', loads of 1, ,2, and 4 Kips per square foot reSpectively, and sheared to failure in an undrained condition. The result is presented below in Table 5: ,, c ?- P, ,- . 1 " , : , , ,. PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL I~IVESTIGATION PAGE 7 LOT,85. ABEDUL STREET; LA COSTA. CALIFORNIA MAY 20.1997 V. CONCLUSIONS Based upon the foregoing'investigation, development of Lot 85'foi residential purposes is feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint. The lot is directly underlain by fill soils which generally occur in a loose condition near the surface. The small side yard slope below the north property boundary is impacted by erosion which can be repaired.during surface regrading recommended below. Underlying bedrock units are dense, stabte deposits which will provide good support for site fills and future improvements. Site fill soils (near the surface) are sandy, non-expansive soils which can be suitably densified in connection with site development. ill. RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are consistent with project geotechnical conditions and ' ' ' should be incorporated into final plans and implemented during the construction phase: ., .. . ,, ., .. ,, .. .. A. Gradina and Earthworks ,, Conventional grading techniques may be used in order. to achieve final .design grades and improve soil conditions beneath the new structures and improvements. All grading and earthworks should be completed in accordance with Appendix Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code, local grading ordinances and-.the requirements of the following section wherever applicable. 1. Clearing end Grubbing: Surface vegetation'and ,other deleterious materiais' and debris should be removed from areas t0 receive fills, structures and improvements. Removals should be' inspected and.approved by the project geotechnical engineer or his designated field representative prior to grading. ., 2. RemdvaldGrading: Upper fill soils at the site occur in a loose and disturbed condition. The soil should be removed to a depth of 4 feet below existing grades (or to bedrock) and recompacted as recommended below. 3. Compaction; Removed~koils are suitable for reuse as compacted site filll'Fitf ' ' ' soils 'should be moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture level and ,mechanical,ly compacted in thin, '.horizontal. lifts to at least 90% of the corresponding laboratory-maximum density value per ASTM D-1557-91 unless otherwise specified. , .~ ., ., .,, , ., ,. . .. ,~ , ,, .. ,, . ,, , . .~ c r ,. .. ,. ,. .. PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE'8 LOT 85. ABEDUL STREET. LA COSTA. CALIFORNIA ' MAY 20.1997 4. Graded Slopes: The large graded slope which descends from the rear of the lot onto Alga Road has performed well and no remedial action is presently recommended. The concrete drainage Swale should be kept clean of debris. The side yard slopebelow the north property boundary has experienced surface failures in local areas due to erosion and should be repaired during the remedial grading operations, Affected slopes, loose fills and failure scraps should be removed to competent bedrock and reconstructed to existing gradients. A lower keyway should be established at the toe of the slope. The extent of slope'repairs and removal depths should be determined by the project soils engineer in the field based upq actual exposures. Reconstructed sloped should tie compacted to a~minimum 90% out to the slope face. Overbuilding and cutting back to the compacted co,re or backrolling at' minimum four, 3 feet vertical increments is recommended. Reconstructed slopes will be grossly stable with respect to deep seated and surface failures at maximum 1%:1 gradients to the indicated vertical height. Special geotechnical engineering inspection ahd certification will be required for all slopes steeper than 2:l and'the reconstruction of the on-site slopes. .. 5. Engineehng Inspections: All grading operations including removals, suitability of earth deposits used as compacted fill, and compaction procedures should be continuously inspected and tested by,the project geotechnical consultant and presented in the final, as-graded compaction report. Testing af fill will assist the contractor to achieve proper moisture and compaction levels. Particular-attention should be given to removal operations, keyway construction and compaction procedures. The nature of finished subgrade soils should also be confirmed in the final compaction report at the completion of grading. 6.' DrainageErosion Control: A critical element to the continued stability of the graded building pads and siopes is an adequate surface drainage system;and protection of the slope face. This can most effectively be achieved by appropriate vegetation cover and the installation of the following drainage control facilities: * Drainage swa'les should be provided at the"top-and toe of the slopes per " , * Building .pad and slope surface runoff should be collected and directed to a .. ,, , project civil engineer design. selected location in a controlled manner. c r c r ., .. PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAC INYESTIGATION PAGE 9 LOT 85, ABEDUL STREET. LA COSTA. CALIFORNIA MAY 20.1997 The finish slope ,should be planted soon after completion of grading,. Unprotected slope faces will be subject to severe erosion and should not be allowed. Over watering of the slope faces should also not be allowed. Only the amount of water to sustain vegetation life should be provided. 6. Foundations and Intedor FCoor Slabs I, The following recommendations are based on bearing soils with low expansion characteristics (expansion potential 52%) as indicated 'by laboratory testing of the selected samples. All foundations and slab recommendations should be confirmed andlor revised in the final as-graded compaction report based on actual testing of the finish grade earth materials. 7. The proposed building can be supported on stiff shallow foundations. The shallow foundations should be founded on properly compacted non-expansive fill. Acceptable fouhdations'should include a system of spread pad and strip footings and a slab-on-grade floor that is poured monolithically with the footings. ' ' " 2. Continuous strip foundations should 'be sized at least 12 inches wide by 12 inches deep for single story and 15 inches wide by 18 inches deep for two story structures. Spread pad footings should be at least 24 inches square and 12 , ' inches deep. All depths.are measured from the lowest finish rough grade not including the recommehded. sand underlay beneath the slabs: ., 3. Continuous strip foundations should be reinforced with'minimum 44.4 reinforcing bars.' Place 2- #4 bars three inches above the bottom of the footing and 244 bars three inches below the top of the footing. Reinforcement for the spread pad footings should be designed by the project structural engineer. , , 4. .All interior slabs should be a minimum offour inches in thickness and reinforced with #3 bars spaced 18 inches on center each way placed mid-height in the slab. ' , Slabs should be underlain with four inches of clean sand (SE 30 or greater). Place a six mil plastic moisture barrier mid-height in the clean sand., 5. Provide contraction joints consisting of sawcuts spaced 10 feet on center each way within 24 hours of concrete pour for all'interior slabs. The sawcuts should be a minimum of three-quarters inch to maximum one and one-quarter inches in depth or the reinforcing may be damaged. .. 6,. Provide~re-entrant corner -.reinforcement for ,811 interior slabs. Reentrant ' . comers will depend on slab geometry andlor interior column locations: Enclosed Plate 5 may be used as a general guideline. .. c PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION LOT 85. ABEDUL STREET. LA COSTA. CALIFORNIA' MAY 20.1997' ,, , ,. PAGE IO C. Exterior Concrete SlabdFlafworks 7. All'exterior slabs (walkways, and patios) should'be a minimum of four'inches in thickness reinforced with 6x6/10x10 welded wire mesh placed at mid-height of the slab. 2. 'PCC driveways and pat'king.should be a minimum of five inches in thickness and ', reinforced'with #3 reinforcing bars spaced 18 inches on center each way, placed at mid-height of the slab. Subgrade soils beneath the PCC driveways and parking should be compacted to a minimum of '95% of the corresponding. , maximum dry density within the upper one foot. 3. Provide weak joints consisting of sawcuts spaced 10 feet on enter (not to' exceed 12 feet maximum) each way within 24 hours of concrete pour. The sawcuts should be a minimum'depth of three-quarters inch but should not, exceed one and one-quarter i.nches deep. '4. All,exterior slab designs should be'mfirmed in'the final as-graded compadtion :. report.. 5.''' Exterior slabs place against the perimeter footings should be doweled to the footings using #3 bars at 18 ,inches on centers. D. Foundation and Earth 'Pressures ., 1. Allowable Foundation and.Lateral Pressures* , An allowable foulldation pressure of'2,OOO pounds per square foot may be utilized for non-expansive compacted fill. The allowable foundation pressure provided herein applies to dead plus live loads and may be increased by one- third,for wind and seismic loading. .. * An allowable lateral bearing pressure of 200 pounds per square foot per foot of depth may also be used. The lateral bearing earth pressure may be increased by the amount of the designated value for each additional foot of depth to a maximum of 1,500 pounds per square foot. A lateral sliding, resistance of 130 psf may also be considered between the bottom of the footing and soils. The lateral stiding resistance may be added to the allowable lateral bearing value provided that in no 'mse. the total lateral resistance exceed one-half the dead load. ,. ., . ,. ,, , '. PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE I1 '. - LOT 85. ABEDUL STREET. LA COSTA. CALIFORNIA MAY 20.1997 2. Earth Pressures- ., ., The following earth pressures may be used for preliminary design estimates Only , 1 and need to be re-evaluated when the characteristics of the backfill soils have been specifically determined, Revised recommendations shoutd be anticipated. r- r- * Wet deniity'~of,compacted backfillkoils = 121.4 pcf. Angle of internal friction for compacted backfill soils = 33 degrees. * Active soil pressure for compacted backfill soils = 36 pcf (EFP), level backfill, Active soil pressure for compacted backfill soils = 46 pcf (EFP), 2:l sloping * At-rest'pressure for compacted backfill soils = 55 pcf (EFP), non-yielding, cantilever, unrestrained walls. backfill, cantilever, unrestrained walls; restrained walls. the toe. c Passive soil pressure for compacted soils = 41 I pcf (EFP), level surface at * Design coefficient of friction for concrete on compacted sqil = 0:40. * Allowable foundation pressure = 2,000 psf. * Because large movements muSt take place. before 'maximh passive resistance can be developed, a minimum safety factor of two should be considered for sliding stabiky. ". c ., * When combining passive pressure and frictional resistance, the passive component should be reduced by one-third. The allowable foundation pressure provided heiein was determined fsr footings having a minimum width of 12 inches embedded in-a minimum depth of 12'inches into the'bedrock. This value may be increased per Uniform Building Code for additional widths and depths if needed (Table 18-I-A, Footnote 2). ,', E. Pwement~ Desiuq m ., ,, Specific pavement designs $n best be provided at the completion of rough'grading' ' ' ' based on R-value tesfs.of the actual finish subgrade soils; however, the following structural sectiotls may be considered for cost estimating purposes only. i. A minimum sectiOn of 3 inches of asphalt'bn 4 inches of Caltrans class II base 'may be used. Base materials should be compacted to a minimum of 95% of the maximum dry density. PRELIMINARY GEOkHNfCAL lN$ESflGATION PAGE 12 LOT 85. ABEDUL STREET. LA COSTA. CALIFORNIA MAY 20.1997 2. Subgrade soils beneath the asphalt roadway, parking and driveways should be compacted to a minimum of 95% of the corresponding maximum dry density within the upper 1 foot. Sub and base grade soils should be tested for proper moisture and minimum 95% compaction levels and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to the placement of the base or asphalt layers. F. General Recommendations .. I, , ,, ,, I. 2. 5. 4. 5. The rninimum'foundation design and steel reinforcement provided herein is based on so'il characteristics only and is not intended to be in lieu of reinforcement necessaryfor structural considerations. All recommendations should be evaluated and confirmed by the project architectlstructwal engineer. ,, Footings located on or adjacent to the top of slopes should be extended to a sufficient depth to provide a minimum horizontal distance of 7 feet or one-third of the slope height, whichever is,greater (need not exceed 40 feet maximum) between the bottom edge of the footing and face of slope. Reinforcement for deepened footings should be provided by the project structural engineer and detailed on the approved foundation plans. The: specified set back requirement applies to all improvements including fen&, slabs, etc. Expansive iayey soils should not be used for backfilling Of, any retaining ' ' structure. All retaining,walls should be provided with a 1:l wedge of gtAnular, compacted backfill measured from the base of the wall footing to the finished surface. Retaining walls should be provided with a back drainage in general accordance with the attached Plate 6 The homeowner should be advised that planting large trees behind.aby retaining wall will adversely affect the wall performance and should be seriously avoided. All underground utility trenches should be compacted to a minimum of 90% of the maximum dry density ,of the soil unless othennn'se specified by the respective .agencies. Care should be taken not to crush the utilities or pipes during the compaction of the soil. Non-expansive, granular backfill'soils should be used. ,, ',. 'Site drainage over the finished pad surface should flow away from structures onto the street in a positive manner. Cafe should be taken during the construction, improvement, and fine grading phases not to disrupt the designed drainage patterns. Rooflines of the buildings should be provided with roof gutters. Roof water should be collected and directed away from the building and stmctures to a suitable location. Considerations should be given by the project , .. , ., .. .. PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION .~, . PAGE.13, LOT 85, ABEDUL STREET. LA COSTA. CALIFORNIA MAY 20.1997 architect to adequately damp proofinghater proofing the basement wallsfloundations and provide the planter areas adjacent to the foundations with an impermeable liner and a subdrainage system. 6. Final plans should reflect preliminary recommendations given in this report and should , be reviewed by this office prior to grading. -More specific recommendations should be provided when final ' grading and architecturallstructura'l drawings are available. 7. All foundation trenches should be inspeizted to'assure adequate footing embedment and confirm competent bearing soils. Foundation and slab reinforcements should also be inspected and approved by the project geotechnical consultant. 8. ' The amount of shrinkage and related'mcks that,occurs in thk concrete slab-on-. "' grades, flatworks and driveways depends on many factors, the'most important of which is the amount of water in a concrete mix. The purpose of the slab reinforcement is to keep normal concrete shrinkage cracks closed tightly. The amount of concrete,shrinkage can be minimized by reducing the amount of water in the mix. To keep shrinkage to a minimum, the followiflg should be congidered: ' ' Use the stiffest mix that can be handled and consolidated satisfaAoily. ' .' \' * Use the largest maximum size 'of aggregate that is practical, (for example, concrete made with 3h inch maximum site aggregate usually requires about 40 Ibs more (nearly 5 gal.) water per cubic yard than concrete with 1 inch , ., ', ,, ', , ,. aggregate). ,, * Cure the concrete as long as.practical. I . , ,. The amount of slabreinforcement provided for conventional slab-&-grade . . ' ' construction considers that good quality concrete materials, propoflioning, craftsmanship, and control tests where appropriate and applicable are' provided. '. 9. A preconstruction meeting between represdntatives of this office and.th@ property owner or planner, as well as the grading contractor/builder, is recommended in order to discuss gradinglconstruction details associated with site development. ., , ,. ,. .. ', , c ,. ,. . ,. PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTiGATION I i PAGE 14 P LOT 85. ABEDUL STREET. LA COSTA, CALIFORNIA , . MAY 20.1997 , Wl. LIMITATIONS The conclusions and recwrimendations provided-herein have been based on all availatile data obtained from research and review of pertinent geotechnical reports and plans, exploratory excavations as well as our experience with the soils and formational materials located in the general area, The materials encountered on the pfoject site and utilized in our laboratory testing are believed representative of the total area; however, earth materials may vary in characteristics between excavations. ,. r r Of necessity we must assume a certain degree of continuity between exploratory excavations andlor natural exposures. It is necessary, therefore, that all observations, conclusions, and recommendations be verified during the grading,operation. In the event discrepancies are noted, we'should be contacted immediately so that an inspection can be made and additional recommendations issued if required. ,, The redommendations made in this report are applicable to the site at'the time this report was prepared. It is the responsibility of the ovherldeveloper to insure that these recommendations are carried out in the field. c ,, r It is almost imposs/ble to predict with certainty the future ,performance of a property. The future behavior of the site is also dep,endent on numerous unpredictable variables, such as earthquakes, rainfall, and on-site drainage patterns. The firm of VlNJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. shall not be held'responsible for 'I changes to the physical conditions of the property such as addition of fill soils, added cut slopes, or changing drainage patterns which occur without our inspection or control. The property owner($) should be^ aware of the development of cracks i,n all concrete surfaces such as floor slabs and exterior stucco. associated with normal con,crete shrinkage during the curing process. These features depend chiefly upon the condition of concrete and weather conditions at the time of construction and do not reflect detrimental ground movement. Hairline stucco cracks will oflen develop at windowldoor corners, and floor surface cracks up to %-inch wide in 20 feet may develop as a result of normal concrete shrinkage (according to the American Concrete Institute). .. , .. r I r r ' ' This report should be considered,valid for a period of one year, and is subject to review by^ . ' ' 'our firm following that time. If significant modifications are made to your tentative development plan, especially with respect to the,height and location of cut and fill slopes, this report must be presented to us for review and possible revision. P Vinje & Middleton Engineering,, Inc. warrants kat this report has been 'prepared within the limits prescribed .by our client with the usual thoroughness'and competence of the engineering profession. No other warranty or representation, either. expressed or implied, is included or intended. .. WE BMIDDLETON ENQINEERWQ, RVC. 2450Vi;d &&e, rlcn, Escmdido, Cd&imia'92029:122~ . phar. (760) 743.1214 '. F& (760) 7&4343 ' SOIL mmG PERC TEST sou nrvasnOmoNs GEDTECHNICAL&QATIW. P ., .. PRELtMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTlGAwON PAGE 15 LOT 85, ABEDUL STREET, LA COSTA, CALIFORNIA MAY 20.1997 ' ., c c c r ., ,, c attachments: Plat& 1 "6 f ', i:SITE PLAN ,-. . Lot 85,Abedut St.; La Costa, City of Carlsbad 8 LOCATION OF TEST ~RNG , I. NOTE; MAP IS PREPARED FdoM PHYSICAL MEASUREMEWTS c TAKEN ON SITE. NOT A SURVEYED MAP. Plate 1 Scale: 1'=30' .. , 97-1 57b-P r P c P P Date: 4-1 5-97 Logged by: DM 0 Silfy sand with scattered bedrock fragments. Tan gmy to bro'wn. Dfy and loose in upper 2; moist and loose below.' Fm 8; soil is wet. Remains loose. ST-I contacts above and below. Moist firin. Clayey sand. Dark grey. Organic odor, (no debris.)'Horizontal ST-2 -10- 0 Bedrock: " Siltstone. Brown. Massive, blocky. ST-3 /End boring at 15'. 16.9 14.6 107.4 116.1 90.8 98.1 41 Si97 Logged by: DM 0 Silty fine sand with scattered bedrock fragment. Includes 5% ~ hard mks to 8" diameter. Tan, grey-brown. Diy and loose in upper2; mist below. ST-I Clayey sand, Dark grey to dark brown. Moist, stiff. Horizontal uppirand lower contacts. ST-2 ,, 18.0 109.9 ,) Siltstone. Tan color. Hard, ftictured and blocky. (Unable to ,, 0 \ chive samNe). ST-3. 17.9 100.7 92.9 82.1 GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTION Plate 3 .. Lot 85, Abedul St. La Costa ., .. , LBEDUL ST. .". I. - .10 BEDROCK .~, .. .. . .. ~. "30 ,. ,. Scale: 1'=30' .. r. 97-257b-P r- FAULT .-. EPICENTER MAP SAN DEW COUNTY REGION ' ' INDICATED EARTHQUAKE EVENTS THROUGH '75 YEAR PERIOD (1900-1974) ... " .... .... 4.0 'TO 4.9' 0 ...-....... 50 TO 5.9 ,. '8 ..........- 6.0 TO 6.9 PROJECT: .......... 7.0 TO 7.9 97- 157b.P . ---__.... Fault PLATE NO. , 4 JSOLATION JOINTS AND RE-ENTRANT CORNER WINFORCEMENT 1 Typicat - no scale RE-ENTRAFIT CORNER CRACK ,REINFORCEMENT RE-'ENTRANT CORNER NO. 4 BARS PLACED 1.5" BELOW TOP OF SLAB ,NOTES: ., 1: Isolation joints around the columnS should be ether circular as shown in (a)'or diamond shaped as shown in (b). If no isolation joints are used around columns, or if the corners of the isolation joints do not meet the contraction joints, radial cracking as shown in (c)may occur (reference ACI). 2. In order to contlol cracking at the reentrant corners (*2T0° corners), provide reinforcement as shown in (c). 3. Reentrant cbrner reinforcement shown herein is provided as a general guideline only and is subject to verificatioh ,, and changes by the project architect andlor structural engineer based upon slab geometry, location, and other engineering and construction factors. c TYPICAL RETAJNING WALL DRAIN DETAIL' CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS: L 1. Provide granular, non-expansive backfill soil in 1:l gradient wedge behind wall. Compact backMl to minimum 90% of laboratory standard. 2. Provide back drainage for wall to prevent build-up of hydrostatic pressures. Use drainage openings along base of wall or back drain system as outlined below. 3. Backdrain should consist of 4" diameter PVC pipe (Schedule 40 or equivalent),with perforations down. Drain to Fitable O~uWet at minimum 1%. Provide %' - 1%" crushed gravel filterwrapped in filter fabric (Mirari 140N or equivalent). Delete filter fabric wrap if Caltrans Class 2 permeable material is used. Compact Class 2 material to minimum 90% of laboratory standard. 4. Seal back of wall with waterproofing in accordance with architect's speciri&tions. 5. Provide positive drainage to disallow ponding of water above wall. tined drainage ditch to minimum 2% flow away from wall is recommended. ' Use 1 % cubic foot per foot with granular .backfill soil and 4 cubic foot per foot if eXpansive backfill soil is usad: VlNjE & MIDDLETON'ENGINEERING, INC. : .. PLAE. 6 ' ., .. ,, .. ~, , r: x This form must be completed by the City and the appropriate school districts and returned to the City prior to issuing a building permit. The City will not issue any building permit without a completed school fee form. Project Name: Building Permit Plan Check Number: m9g3 3g'X A.P.N. : Project Applicant (Owner'(s') Name@) Project Description: Residential: Second Dwelling Unit: r of New DwelhgLJnits 2 Square Feet of Living Area in New Dwelling 2 & 6 Square Feet of Living Area in SDU A ,I& Res. Additions: Comerc.1 Ind.: City Certification: Net Square Feet New Area ,. &/k Square Feet Floor Area A(/@ Y Carlsbad Unified School District 801 Pine Ave. Encinitas Union School District San Dieguito Union High School District 101 South Ranch Santa Fe Rd 710 Encinitas Blvd. Encinitas. CA 92024 (944-4300) Encinitas. CA 92024 (753-6491) Certification of Applicant /Owners. The person executing this declaration COwnef) certifies under penalty of perjury that (1) the information pmvided is correct and true to the best of the Ownets knowledge and that the Owner will file an amended footage after the building permit is issued or ff the initial determination of units or square footage is found to be incorrect, certification of payment and pay the additional fee if Owner requests an increase in the number of dwelling units or square and that (2) the Owner is the owner/ developer of the above described pmject(s). or that the person executing this declaration is authorized to sign on behalf of the Owner. Signature: Date: 2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 (760) 430-1161 - FAX (760) 430-0094 *.". , .~ +- LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT APPLIGATION FOR SEWER SERVICE The application must be signed by the owner(or his representative) of the property to be served The total charges must be paid to the District at the time the application is submitted APPLICANT MUST SUBMIT EVIDENCE OF BUILDING PERMIT WITHIN 60 DAYS. FAILURE TO MAKE SUCH SUBMIlTAL WILL RESULT IN AUTOMATIC CANCELLATION OF THE SEWER PERMIT. THE SEWER CONNECTION FEE LESS A $50 ADMINISTRATIVE FEE WILL BE REFUNDED. A six-month construction period shall be provided and sewer service charges for the balance of the fiscal year shall be collected at the time of application for sewer permits Sewer service charges for subsequent fiscal years shall be collected on the tax roll in same manner as property taxes If the six-month construction period extendsintothesubsequentfiscalyear,aproratedsewerservicechargeforthatfiscalyearshallbecollectedon thetaxrollinthesamemanneraspropertytaxesThefullsewersewicechargesforallsubsequentyearsshallbe collected on the tax roll in the same manner as property taxes There will be no additional fee or refund if service actually commences on a different date. subdivisions Such applicantsshall be required tonotifythe District, onformsprovided bythe District, of escrow The prorated sewer service charge shall not be required in those application for sewer permits for closing on individual properties within the subdivision. Sewer service charges shall commence upon close of escrow and will be the responsibility of the buyer. If a service lateral is required, it must be installed by the owner/applicant in conformance wlth A DISTRICT INSPECTOR MUST BE ON THE SCENE ATTHE TIME OF CONNECTION. the specifications, rules and regulations of the District and subject to inspection by the District. The service lateral is that part of the sewer system that extends from the main collection line in the street (or easement) to the polnt in the street (at or near the applicanfs property line) where the service lateral is connected to the applicant's building sewer. The applicant is also responsible for the construction, at the easement) where aconnection is made to theservice lateral and for construction, maintenance and connection applicanrs expense, of the building of sewer from the applicant's plumbing to the point in the street (or of the service lateral to the main line. IT MUST BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED BY THE DISTRICT BEFORE THE SEWER SYSTEM MAY BE DISTRICT AT THE TIME INSPECTION IS DESIRED. ANY CONNECTiON MADE TO THE SERViCE LATERAL USED BY THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT, OR HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE MUST NOTIFY THE OR COLLECTION LINE WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL AND INSPECTION BY THE DISTRICT WILL BE CON- SIDERED INVALID AND WILL NOT BE ACKNOWLEDGED. ALL SUCH CONNECTIONS MUST BE MADE WITH AN LCWD lNSPECTORATTHESCENEATTHETlMEOFCONNECTION.IF, FORANYREASON,ACON- APPLICANTS EXPENSE, TO DIG UP OR OTHERWISE RE-EXPOSE THE CONNECTION SO THAT AN NECTION IS IMPROPERLY MADE, IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT, AT THE INSPECTION MAY BE MADE AND THE APPLICANT AT THE APPLICANTS EXPENSE SHALL MAKE ANY CORRECTIONS OR ALTERATiONS REQUIRED BY LCWD. IN THE EVENT THAT THE APPLICANT, FOR ANY REASON, FAILS TO TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION, THE DISTRICT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO DIG UP AND INSPECT THE CONNECTION AND MAKE ANY CORRECTIONS NECESSARY, AT THE APPLICANTS TAKING SUCH CORRECTIVE ACTION SHALL BE BILLED TOTHE APPLICANTAND MAY BE RECORDED AS EXPENSE OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO DISCONNECT SERVICE ANY COSTS INCURRED BY LCWD IN A LIEN AGAINST THE APPLICANTS PROPERTY EQUAL IN PRIORITY TO A TAX LIEN. OWNER'SNAME GARY ELDER - ELDER DEV. MAILINGADDRESS 1343 MORNING VIEW Dr. #432 PHONE NUMBER 760 747-2108 ESCONDIDO, CA 92026 SERVICEADDRESS 2529 ABEDUL ST. CARLSBAD TRACT NAMUNO. LOT# 85 CONNECTION FEE: 3,256.00 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 215-260-20 PRORATEDSEWERSERV. FEEL TOTAL $ 3,256.00 TYPVBUILDINGSFD #/UNITS 1 PAID BY: 0 CASH El CHECKa073 condition9 as stated The undersigned hereby agrees that the above information given is correct and agrees to the 1 1/7/99 TLM 21476 Date Rec'd by Account NO; I Ref: 156 SPERMlTl