HomeMy WebLinkAbout2653 OCEAN ST; ; CB982970; Permitvp l-
B U I L D I N G PERMIT Permit No: CB982970
09/29/98 12:03 Project No: A9803874
Page 1 of 1 Development No:
Job Address: 2653 OCEAN ST Suite:
Permit Type: RETAINING WALL
Parcel No: Lot#:
Valuation: 35,000 Construction Type: NEW
Occupancy Group: Ref erence#: Status: ISSUED
Description: RETAIN WALL 600 SF CITY #222 Applied: 09/03/98
SEA WALL W/CALCS Apr/Issue: 09/29/98
Entered By: JM
Appl/Ownr : MULLEN ED 760 434-2233
2890 PlO PICO
CARLSBAD CA 9200
*** Fees Required *** ----------------------------
Fees: 512.00/
Adjustments:
Total Fees: 512/00
Fee description ----------------------
Building Permit
Plan Check
Strong Motion Fee
* BUILDING TOTAL
Total
Ba
FeeC'o.,llected & Credits
/\N ts: 00
68.00
09/29/4%0 1 02
Ext Data 444.00
---------------
308.00
200.00
4.00
512.00
Fl NAC APPROVAL
INSP.9 V'L_ DATE L±'- -
CLEARANCE____________________
CITY OF CARLSBAD
2075 Las Palmas Dr., Carlsbad, CA 92009 (619) 438-1161
j 0 5 4 FOR OFFICE USE
PERMIT APPLICATION PLAN CHECK NO
CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT EST. VAL.
2075 Las Palmas Dr., Carlsbad CA 92009
Plan Ck. Deposit ,.
(760) 438-1161 Validated By (J
Date_______________
1.._PROJECT.INFORMATION
7 ,S5 '21
Address (include Bldg/Suite #) Business Name (at this address)
L04-'6 16 t 16
jiits Legal Description Lot No. Subdivision Name/Number UniØ9 #o
/ Aceneen,'. P-1 At .'""%. Fvictinn (Jcn," 1 P,flflfl,,P 00
Description of SQ. FT"' f Stories - - 7/ fof Befroóms # of Bathrooms
Name Address State/Zip Telephone
,@ronW1ractor_O -for Contractor 171-6w—ner [71
Name Address City State/Zip Telephone
Nme - Address City State/Zip Telephone #
5E_CONTRACTÔRCOMPANY. NAME
(Sec. 7031.5 Business and Professions Code: Any City or County which requires a permit to construct, alter, improve, demolish or repair any structure, prior to its
issuance, also requires the applicant for such permit to file a signed statement that he is licensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractor's License Law
(Chapter 9, commending with Section 7000 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code] or that he is exempt therefrom, and the basis for the alleged
exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by any applicant for a permit subjeç3,s the,,ppplicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars ($5001).
Name - - - Address City State/Zip _Telephone
State License # .'1'i) '7? .c" License Class [pity Business License #
Designer Name Address City State/Zip Telephone
State License #
16TIT,W0RKERSÔOMPENSATI0N
Workers' Compensation Declaration: I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following declarations:
I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self-insure for workers' compensation as provided by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance
of the work for which this permit is issued.
have and will maintain workers' compensation, as required by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is
issued. My worker's compensation insurance carrier and policy number are:
Insurance Company 5. i—s I—.. Policy No. IM 992 i'9? Expiration Date________________
(THIS SECTION NEED NOT BE COMPLETED IF THE PERMIT IS FOR ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($1001 OR LESS)
CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION: I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as
jto become subject to the Workers' Compensation Laws of California. -
WARNING: FallureA secure workers' compensation coverage Is unlawful, and shell subject an employer to criminal penalties and civil fines up to one hundred
thousand doIlra.Ld0,000), I ddlflon he cost of compensation, damages as provided for in Section 3706 of the Labor code, Interest and attorney's fees.
Ihereby affirn.that lam exempt from the Contractor's License Law for the following reason:
I, as owner of the property or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work and the structure is not intended or offered for sae
(Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who does
such work himself or through his own employees, provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If, however, the building or improvement is
sold within one year of completion, the owner-builder will have the burden of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sale).
0 I, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to construct the project (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The
Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and contracts for such projects with contractor(s) licensed
pursuant to the Contractor's License Law).
I am exempt under Section Business and Professions Code for this reason:
I personally plan to provide the major labor and materials for construction of the proposed property improvement. 0 YES ONO
I (have / have not) signed an application for a building permit for the proposed work.
I have contracted with the following person (firm) to provide the proposed construction (include name / address / phone number I contraêtors license number):
I plan to provide portions of the work, but I have hired the following person to coordinate, supervise and provide the major work (include name / address / phone
number / contractors license number):
I will provide some of the work, but I have contracted (hired) the following persons to provide the work indicated (include name / address / phone number / type
of work): - -
PROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE LDATE ___________________ -
rCOMPLETEYHISSEcTioN FORNON-RESIDENflAL BUILDING PERMITSTONLY -
Is the applicant or future building occupant required to submit a business plan, acutely hazardous materials registration form or risk management and prevention
program under Sections 25505, 25533 or 25534 of the Presley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act? 0 YES 0 NO
Is the applicant or future building occupant required to obtain a permit from the air pollution control distrit or air duality management district? 0 YES 0 NO
Is the facility to be constructed within 1,000 feet of the outer boundary of a school site? 0 YES 0 NO
IF ANY OF THE ANSWERS ARE YES, A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MAY NOT BE ISSUED UNLESS THE APPLICANT HAS MET OR IS MEETING THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT.
181cPNSTRUcTION!.EN!JNG AGENCY
I hereby affirm that there is a constru
V.
ctiyn lending agency for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued (Sec. 3097(i) Civil Code).
LENDER'S NAME jl'/,'' LENDER'S ADDRESS__________________________________________________
19TAPPLICANTCERTIFICATION /
I certify that I have read the application and state that the above information is correct and that the information on the plans is accurate. I agree to comply with all
City ordinances and State laws relating to building construction. I hereby authorize representatives of the City of Carlsbad to enter upon the above mentioned
property for inspection purposes. I ALSO AGREE TO SAVE, INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARMLESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AGAINST ALL LIABILITIES,
JUDGMENTS. COSTS AND EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINST SAID CITY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING OF THIS PERMIT.
OSHA: An OSHA permit is required for excavations over 5'0" deep and demolition or construction of structures over 3 stories in height.
EXPIRATION: Every permit issued by Building Official under the provisions of this Code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or
work authorized by such permit is n t"coTmen ad within 365 days from the date of such permit or if the building or work authorized by such permit is suspended
or abandoned at any time after th or 2mje~O days (Section 106.4.4 Uniform Building Code).
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE
WHITE: File YELLOW: Applicant PINK: Finance
City of Carlsbad Inspection Request LuDr For: 12f'- 1999
Permit# CB982970 Inspector Assignment: PD
Title: RETAIN WALL 600 SF CITY #222
Description: SEAWALL W/CALCS
Type: RETAIN Sub Type:
Job Address: 2653 OCEAN ST
Suite: Lot
Location:
APPLICANT MULLEN ED
Owner: BLAIE, CINDY
Remarks:
Total Time:
Phone: 7604342233
Inspector:
ALE
Requested By: TIM
Entered By: CHRISTINE
CD Description Act Comments
69 Final Masonry
Associated PCRs
Inspection History
Date Description
1/11/1999 12 Steel/Bond Beam
12/30/1998 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers
12/30/1998 12 Steel/Bond Beam
12/22/1998 62 Steel/Bond Beam
12/21/1998 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers
12/21/1998 12 Steel/Bond Beam
12/17/1998, 62 Steel/Bond Beam
12/16/1998 12 Steel/Bond Beam
11/17/1998 12 Steel/Bond Beam
10/30/1998 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers
10/30/1998 12 Steel/Bond Beam
10/29/1998 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers
10/29/1998 12 Steel/Bond Beam
Act lnsp Comments
PA PD STAIR STEEL
AP PD
AP PD
AP PD
NR PD
NR PD
PA PY SOUTH LATERAL FTG/ND PLN
CA PY
PA PD WALL STEEL
AP PD
AP PD
CA PD
CA PD
5 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
T 6280 RIVERDALE STREET, P. 0. Box 600627, SAN DIEGO, CA 92160 (619) 280-4321
Concrete Compressive Strength Test Report
File Number: 9811284
Project Title: Ocean Street Condos
Project Location: 2653 Ocean Street, Caarlsbad
Architect: Cindy Blair Permit No: 982970
Engineer: O'Day Plan File No:
Contractor: Mullen ConstructionlWagner
Location In Structure: Caisson #7 at bottom
Material Supplier: Palomar Transit Mix
Mix Designation: 344002
Admixture(s):
Time In Mixer (Minutes): 70 Slump, Inches: 6-1/4 CC Temp:
Truck Number: 921 Ticket Number: 863808 Air Temp:
Samples Fabricated By: ON Samples Tested By: VB Air Content:
Laboratory Number:
Mark: 20-A
2890 2891 2892 2893
Date Made: 10-20-98
Date Received 10-22-98
Date Tested 10-27-98 11-17-98 11-17-98 Discard
Diameter, Inches 6.00
Area, Square Inches 28.27
Maximum Load, Pounds 92,250 134,500 134,250
Compressive Strength, psi 3,260 4,760 4,750
Age Tested, Days 7 28 28
Required 28 Day Strength, psi 4,000
Unit Weight, pcf I
Specimen sampling, transportation and compressive strength testing were pedorrned by this agency in accordance with the applicable ASTM
standards. This agency makes no other warranties express or implied.
Distribution: Reviewed By:
(2) Mullen Construction
(1) City of Carlsbad
(1) Palomar Transit Mix
George Gavit, RCE
10-20.doc 11/18/98
e SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC. ?
6280 RIVERDALE STREET, P. 0. Box 600627, SAN DIEGO, CA 92160 (619) 280-4321
Concrete Compressive Strength Test Report
File Number: 9811284
Project Title: Ocean Street Condos
Project Location: 2653 Ocean Street, Caarlsbad
Architect: Cindy Blair Permit No: 982970
Engineer: O'Day Plan File No:
Contractor: Mullen Construction/Wagner
Location In Structure: Caisson #1 at top
Material Supplier Palomar Transit Mix
Mix Designation: 344002
Admixture(s):
Time In Mixer (Minutes): 70 Slump, Inches: 9 CC Temp:
Truck Number: 833 Ticket Number: 864383 Air Temp:
Samples Fabricated By: DN Samples Tested By: VB Air Content:
Laboratory Number:
Mark: 22-A
2994 2995 2996 2997
Date Made: 10-22-98
Date Received 10-26-98
Date Tested 10-29-98 11-19-98 11-19-98 Discard
Diameter, Inches 6.00
Area, Square Inches 28.27 -
MaximurñLoàd,Póinds 85,750 141,500 140,500
Compressive Strength, psi 3,030 5,010 4,970
Age Tested, Days 7 28 28
Required 28 Day Strength, psi 4,000
Unit Weight, pcf
Specimen sampling, transportation and compressive strength testing were .performed by this agency in accordance with the applicable ASTM
standards. This agency makes no other warranties express or implied.
Distribution: Reviewed By:
(2) Mullen Construction
(1) City of Carlsbad
(1) Paibri'i'ar'Transit Mix -
George Gavit, RCE #56564
10-22.doc 11/20/98
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
T 6280 RIVERDALE STREET, P. 0. Box 600627, SAN DIEGO, CA 92160 (619) 280-4321
Concrete Compressive Strength Test Report
File Number: 9811284
Project Title: Ocean Street Condos
Project Location: 2653 - 2665 Ocean Street, Caarlsbad
Architect: C. J. Randle Permit No: CB98-2970
Engineer: C. J. Randle Plan File No:
Contractor: Brookhart
Location In Structure: Retaining wall footing at beach wall
Material Supplier: Escondido Ready Mix
Mix Designation: 354P
Admixture(s): Pozz
Time In -Mixer (Minutes): 110 Slump, Inches: 4-1/2 CC Temp:
Truck Number: 525 Ticket Number: 240710 Air Temp.- 0
Samples Fabricated By: SAD Samples Tested By: GG Air Content:
Laboratory Number:
Mark:
3441 3442 3443 3444
Date Made: 10-30-98
Date Received 11-02-98
Date Tested 11-06-98 11-27-98 .. 11-27-98 -Discard
Diameter, Inches 6.00
Area, Sqóare Inches 28.27
Maximum Load, Pounds 68,250 97,500 98,000
Compressive Strength, psi 2,410 3,450 3,470
Age Tested, Days 7 28 28
Required 28 Day Strength, psi 3,000
Unit Weight, pcf
Specimen sampling, transportation and compressive strength testing were performed by this agency in accordance with the applicable ASTM
standards. This agency makes no other warranties express or implied.
Distribution: Reviewed By:
(2) Mullen Construction
(1) City of Carlsbad
(1) Palomar Transit Mix
Gavit, RCE #56564
10-30.doc 12/1/98
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
T 6280 RIVERDALE STREET, P. 0. Box 600627, SAN DIEGO, CA 92160 (619) 280-4321
Concrete Compressive Strength Test Report -Y-D
File Number: 9811284
Project Title: Ocean Street Condos
Project Location: 26530cean Street, Caarlsbad
Architect: C. J. Randle Permit No: CB98-2970
Engineer: C. J. Randle Plan File No:
Contractor: Mullen Construction
Location In Structure: Retaining Wall
Material Supplier: SuperiorReady Mix
Mix Designation: 26P
Admixture(s):
Time In Mixer (Minutes): Slump, Inches: 4 CC Temp:
Truck Number: 388 Ticket Number: 242061 Air Temp:
Samples Fabricated By: JB Samples Tested By: GG Air Content:
Laboratory Number:
Mark:
4609 4610 4611
Date Made: 11-25-98
Date Received 11-27-98
Date Tested 12-02-98 12-23-98 12-23-98
Diameter, Inches 6.00
Area, Square Inches 28.27
Maximum Load, Pounds 107,250 142,000 140,250
Compressive Strength, psi 3,790 5,020 4,960
Age Tested, Days 7 28 28
Required 28 Day Strength, psi 3,000
Unit Weight, pcf
_
Specimen sampling, transportation and compressive strength testing were performed by this agency in accordance with the applicable ASTM
standards. This agency makes no other warranties express or implied.
Distribution:
(2) Mullen Construction
(1) City of Carlsbad
(1) Palomar Transit Mix
Reviewed By:
?9q,
George ,RcE#56564
11-25.doc 1/6/99
5.r4e (?4€I4
FIELD REPORT -FILE NO
280-4321
lZ
, DATE (S)
- ' JOB NAME - ' REPORT NO.
PROJECT ENGINEER FIELD TECHNICIAN
CONTRACTOR - FOREMAN
EQUIPMENT WORKING
TYPE OF COMPACTOR
DATE - :, R E M A-:RK $
6Ase
- -d ' 44L 00 Iss, 0 44 7_, I::'•
p
f
40 Li _
____ h4-J Z tcilat.. -se2PocL )
- -- - - ----.- -.-- - . -.
-DATE
HOURSbHARGED - -
-
- T105
EC-31-98 03:34 AM MULLENCONSTRUCTION 768 434 4817 P.01
MULLEN CONSTRUCTION DATE:
BECAUSE YOU EXPECT THE BEST
Fax Cover Sheet
Pages:
Phone: (
( )'ISO
Company: , &, ' W'Aax:
From:__76-`m' Hc~ealpf Phone: _(60) 434-2233--
P : (7fifl) 44.4217
Company: M!i!1efl Construction
01 Regarding:/t°,t pL15,C/O5 p.4c,,Y
ç fl St.
S s St
P.O. BOX 1480 CARLSBAD, CALU 92009 LIC# 421795
DEC-31-98 03:34 AM MULLENCONSTRUCTION 760 434 4817 P.02
I
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING, INC.
6280 RIVERDALE STREET, P.O. BOX 600627, SAN DIEGO, CA 92160.0627, Phone (619) 2804321, FAX (619) 28047t7
FIELD INSPECTION REPORT FOR: D REINFORCED CONCRETE 0 REINFORCED MASONRY WELDING - 0 FIREPROOFING
P. T. CONCRETE 0 EPDXY ANCHORS C] . S. BOlTING 0
PROJECT TITL ::r' ('ii ()' SCB&T FILE No.
PROJECT LOCATION) PERMIT NOc.J
-p j PLAN FILE No.
ARCHITECT ENCINEE'11J (LI(
GENERAL CONTRACTOR SUBcONTRACTORe )f\_5'
MATERIALCLASSIFICATIONJ
: v. ,'i i. AtJ.'
DATE DESCRIPTION OF WORK INSPECTED
1L3u)
.(y e t'.'( )'\.. '( 'I. (
I \(
•••( (..c
)4/(..J
j:
______ '' •• r -./(
,
Ihar.by:Qyfifythat I hive lnapeclsdth• above reported 'ft. work. 11111989 noted otherwise, the Work Inspected Is to the bait of my Knowledge In compliance with the approved plan., specifications and applicable sections of fits governing building laws.
I . •, _) ((,,(..Le.- _______________________
IN TOP$ SIGNATURE REGISTRATION No.
pj 4/ rT ' 1 .. .1 • —
SUPERlNtENDANT SIGNATURE DATE
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
< >1 6280 RIVERDALE STREET, P.O. Box 600627, SAN DIEGO, CA 92160 (619) 280-4321
Concrete Compressive Strength Test Report
File Number: 9811284
Project Title: Ocean Street Condos
Project Location: 2653 Ocean Street, Caarlsbad
Architect: Cindy Blair Permit No: .982970
Engineer: O'Day Plan File No:
Contractor: Mullen Construction/Wagner
Location In Structure: Bottom of column 15
Material Supplier: Palomar Transit Mix
Mix Designation: 344002
Admixture(s):
Time In Mixer (Minutes): 50 Slump, Inches: 10 CC Temp:
Truck Number: 865 Ticket Number: 862842 Air Temp:
Samples Fabricated By: DN Samples Tested By: VB Air Content:
Laboratory Number:
Mark: 15-A
2618 2619 2620 2621
Date Made: 10-15-98
Date Received 10-16-98
Date Tested 10-22-98 11-12-98 11-12-98 12-10-98
Diameter, Inches 6.00 ..•- - . - --- .
Area, Square Inches 28.27
Maximum Load, Pounds 67,000 118,000 114,750 139,750
Compressive Strength, psi . 2,370 4,000 4,060 4,940
Age Tested, Days 7 28 28 56
Required 28 Day Strength, psi 4,000
Unit Weight, pcf
Specimen sampling, transportation and compressive strength testing were performed by this agency in accordance with the applicable ASTM
standards. This agency makes no other warranties express or implied.
Distribution:
(2) Mullen Construction
(1) City of Carlsbad
(1) Palomar Transit Mix
Reviewed By:
AS
George Gavit, RCE #56564
10-15.doc 12/11/98
$ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
6280 RJVERDALE STREET, P. 0. Box 600627, SAN DIEGO, CA 92160 (619) 280-4321
Concrete Compressive Strength Test Report
File Number: 9811284
Project Title: Ocean Street Condos
Project Location: 2653 Ocean Street.
Architect: Cindy Blair Permit No: 98-2970
Engineer: . C. J. Randle . Plan FileNo:
.
Contractor: Brookhart concrete
Location In Structure: Beach access stair case at top of south wall
Material Supplier: Superior Ready Mix
Mix Designation: 26P
Admixture(s): Pozzutec2O
.
Time In Mixer (Minutes) : Slump, Inches: 3-3/4 CC Tamp: 680
Truck Number 524 Ticket Number: 244234 Air Temp: 700
Samples Fabricated By: ON Samples Tested By: GG Air Content:
Laboratory Number:.
Mark:
6780 6781 6782
Date Made: 01-12-99 . .
Date Received 01-13-99
Date: Tested 01-19-99 02-09-99 . 02-09-99
Diameter, Inches 6100
Area, Square Inches 28.27
Maximum Load, Pounds 82,750 125,750 127,000
Compressive Strength, psi 2,930 4,450 4,490 .
Age Tested, Days 7 28 28
Required 28 Day Strength, psi 3,000
Fracture Type . .
$ *
Specimen compressive strength testing were performed by this agency in accordance with the ASTM C39-96 standard. This agency makes no other
warranties express or implied. .
Legend: Fracture Type - Cone. C; Cone and Split CS; Cone and Shear =CSH; Shear = S; Columnar = CL
Distribution: Reviewed By:
(2) Mullen Construction . . .
(1) City of Carlsbad V
(1) Superior Ready Mix
George Gavit,'RCE #56564
01-12.doc 219/99
$ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESING, INC.
T 6280 RIVERDALE STREET, P. 0. Box 600627, SAN DIEGO, CA92160 (619) 280-4321
Concrete Compressive Strength Test Report
File Number: 9811284
Project Title: Ocean Street Condos
Project Location: 2653 - 55 Ocean Street
Architect: C. J. Randle Permit No: 98-2970
Engineer: C. J. Randle Plan File No:
Contractor Mullen Construction
Location In Structure: Walls - lateral (sea wall)
Material Supplier: Escondido Ready Mix
Mix Designation: 26P
Admixture(s): Pozz
Time In Mixer (Minutes): Slump, Inches: 4-1/4 CC Temp:
Truck Number: 662. Ticket Number: 243830 Air Temp:
Samples Fabricated By: MW Samples Tested By: GG Air Content:
Làboratoiy Number:
Mark:
6346 6347 6348
Date Made: 01705-99
Date Received 01-06-99
Date Tested 01-12-99 02-02-99 02-02-99
Diameter, Inches 6.00
Area, Square Inches 28.27
Maximum Load, Pounds 95,750 128,250 130,000
Compressive Strength; psi 3,390 4,540 4,600
Age Tested, Days 7 28 28
Required 28 Day Strength, psi .
Fracture Type A .
Specimen compressive strength testing were performed by this agency in accordance with the ASTM C39-96 standard. This agency makes no other
warranties express or implied.
Legend: Fracture Type - Cone =C; Cone and Split =CS; Cone and Shear =CSH; Shear = S; Columnar = CL
Distribution: . Reviewed By:
(2) Mullen Construction
(1) City of Carlsbad . . .
(1) Escondido Ready Mix . MCA=,
George Gavit, RCE #56564
01-05.doc 2/2/99
5 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC. QO T 6280 RIVERDALE STREET, P. 0. Box 600627, SAN DIEGo, CA 92160 (619) 280-4321
Concrete Compressive Strength Test Report
File Number: 9811284
Project Title: Ocean Street condos
Project Location: 2653O6ian Street
Architect: Cindy Blair Permit No: 98-2970
Engineer: C. J. Randle Plan File No:
Contractor: Dan Soto Concrete
Location In Structure: Footing at grid line 6: E.5
Material Supplier: Superior Ready Mix
Mix Designation: 665P
Admixture(s): Pozz - .- -
Time In Mixer (Minutes): 65 Slump, Inches: 6-1/2 CC Temp: 670
Truck Number: 673 Ticket Number: 118282 Air Temp: 590
Samples Fabricated By: DN Samples Tested By: GG Air Content:
Laboratory Number:
Mark:
7433 7434 74335
Date Made: 01-29-99
Date Received 01-30-99
Date Tested 02-05-99 02-26-99 02-26-99
Diameter, Inches 6.00
Area, Square Inches 28.27
Maximum Load, Pounds 60,750 96,500 100,750
Compressive Strength, psi 2,150 3,410 3,560
Age Tested, Days 7 28 28
Required 28 Day Strength, psi 3,000
Fracture Type
Specimen compressive strength testing were performed by this agency in accordance with the ASTM C39-96 standard. This agency makes no other
warranties express or implied.
Legend: Fracture Type - Cone C; Cone and Split =CS; Cone and Shear =CSH; Shear = S; Columnar = CL
Distribution: Reviewed By:
(2) Mullen Construction
(1) City of Carlsbad
(1) Superior Ready Mix
George Gavit, RCE #56564
01-29.doc 2126/99
5L SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
6280 RIVERDALE STREET, P. 0. Box 600627, SAN DIEGO, CA 92160 (619) 280-4321
Concrete Compressive Strength Test Report
File Number: 9811284
Project Title: Ocean Street Condos
Project Location: 2653 Ocean Street, Caarlsbad
Architect: Cindy Blair Permit No: 982970
Engineer: O'Day Plan File No:
Contractor: Mullen Construction/Wagner
Location In Structure: Bottom of column 15
Material Supplier: Palomar Transit Mix
Mix Designation: 344002
Admixture(s):
Time In Mixer (Minutes): 50 Slump, Inches: 10 CC Temp:
Truck Number: 865 Ticket Number: 862842 Air Temp:
Samples Fabricated By: ON Samples Tested By: VB Air Content:
Laboratory Number:
Mark: 15-A
2618 2619 2620 2621
Date Made: 10-15-98
Date Received 10-16-98 ., .. -.
Date Tested 10-22-98 11-12-98 11-12-98
Diameter, Inche 6.00
Area, Square Inches 28.27
Maximum Load, Pounds 67,000 118,000 114,750
Compressive Strength, psi 2,370 4,000 4,060
Age Tested, Days 7 28 28
Required 28 Day Strength, psi 4,000
Unit Weight, pcf
Specimen sampling, transportation and compressive strength testing were performed by this agency in accordance with the applicable ASTM
standards. This agency makes no other warranties express or implied.
Distribution:
(2) Mullen Construction
(1) City of Carlsbad
(1) Paloniar Transit Mix
Reviewed By:
RCt
10-15.doc 11/16/98
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
6280 RIVERDALE STREET, P. 0. Box 600627, SAN DIEGO, CA 92160 (619) 280-4321
Concrete Compressive Strength Test Report
File Number: 9811284
Project Title: Ocean Street Condos
Project Location: 26530cean Street, Carlsbad
Architect: C. Blair Permit No: CB98-2970
Engineer: G. O'Day Plan File No:
Contractor: Wagner
Location In Structure: Caisson 6-A
Material Supplier: Palomar Transit Mix
Mix Designation: 344002
Admixture(s):
Time In Mixer (Minutes): 85 Slump, Inches: 7-1/2 CC Temp: 710
Truck Number: 715 Ticket Number: 877639 - Air Temp:- 56°
Samples Fabricated By: ON Samples Tested By: GG Air Content:
Laboratory Number:
Mark:
5588 5589 5590
Date Made: 12-14-98
Date Received 12-15-98
Date Tested 12-21-98 01-11-99 01-11-99
Diameter, Inches 6.00
Area, Square Inches 28.27
Maximum Load, Pounds 69,000 122,250 121,750
Compressive Strength, psi 2,440 4,320 4,310
Age Tested, Days 7 28 28
Required 28 Day Strength, psi 4,000
Unit Weight, pcf
Specimen sampling, transportation and compressive strength testing were performed by this agency in accordance with the applicable ASTM
standards. This agency makes no other warranties express or implied.
Distribution:
(2) Mullen Construction
(1) City of Carlsbad
(1) Palomar Transit Mix
Reviewed By:
)k- I
George RCE
12-14d0c 1/18/99
5 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
6280 RIVERDALE STREET, P. 0. Box 600627, SAN DIEGO, CA 92160 (619) 280-4321
Concrete Compressive Strength Test Report
File Number: 9811284
Project Title: Ocean Street Condos
Project Location: 26530cean Street, Carlsbad
Architect: C. Blair Permit No: CB98-2970
Engineer: G. O'Day Plan File No:
Contractor: Wagner
Location In Structure: Top of caisson 3-A
Material Supplier: Palomar Transit Mix
Mix Designation: 344002
Admixture(s):
Time In Mixer (Minutes): 90 Slump, Inches: 7-1/4 CC Temp: 640
Truck Number: 551 Ticket Number: 877102 Air Temp; 570
Samples Fabricated By: DN Samples Tested By: GG Air Content:
Laboratory Number: .
Mark:
5499 5500 5501
Date Made: 12-11-98
Date Received 12-12-98
Date Tested 12-18-98 1-8-99 1-8-99
Diameter, Inches 6.00
Area, Square I,ches 28.27
Maximum Load, Pounds 77,750 147,250 152,000
Compressive Strength, psi 2,750 5,210 5,380
Age Tested, Days 7 28 28
Required 28 Day Strength, psi 4,000
Unit Weight, pcf
Specimen sampling, transportation and compressive strength testing were performed by this agency in accordance with the applicable ASTM
standards. This agency makes no other warranties express or implied.
Distribution:
(2) Mullen Construction
(1) City of Carlsbad
(1) Palomar Transit Mix
Reviewed By:
George Gavit, RCE #56564
12-11.doc 1/12/99
5 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
6280 RIVERDALE STREET, P. 0. Box 600627, SAN DIEGO, CA 92160 (619) 280-4321
Concrete Compressive Strength Test Report
File Number: 9811284
Project Title: Ocean Street Condos
Project Location: 26530cean Street, Carlsbad
Architect: C. J. Randle Permit No: CB98-2970
Engineer: C. J. Randle Plan File No:
Contractor: Mullen Construction
Location In Structure: Caissons 2-A
Material Supplier: Palomar-Transit Mix
Mix Designation: 344002
Admixture(s):
Time In Mixer (Minutes): 60 Slump, Inches: 0 CC Temp: 690
Truck Number: 552 Ticket Number: 876677 - Air Temp:
Samples Fabricated By: ON Samples Tested By: GG . Air Content:
Laboratory Number:
Mark:
5399 5400 5401
Date Made: 12-10-98
Date Received 12-11-98
Date Tested 12-17-98 1-7-99 1-7-99
Diameter, Inches 6.00
Area, Square Inches 28.27
Maximum Load, Pounds 60,500 86,750 84,750
Compressive Strength, psi 2,140 3,070 3,000
Age Tested, Days 7 28 28
Required 28 Day Strength, psi 4,000
Unit Weight, pcf
Specimen sampling, transportation and compressive strength testing were performed by this agency in accordance with the applicable ASTM
standards. This agency makes no other warranties express or implied.
Distribution: Reviewed
(2) Mullen Construction
(1) City of Carlsbad
(1) Palomar Transit Mix
George Gavit, RCE #56564
12-10.doc 1/12(99
5 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
T 6280 RJVERDALE STREET, P. 0. Box 600627, SAN DIEGO, CA 92160 (619) 280-4321
Concrete Compressive Strength Test Report
File Number: 9811284
Project Title: Ocean Street Condos
Project Location: 2653 Ocean Street, Carlsbad
Architect: C. J. Randle Permit No: CB98-2970
Engineer: C. J. Randle Plan File No:
Contractor: Mullen Construction
Location In Structure: North lateral wall footing
Material Supplier: Superior Ready Mix
Mix Designation: 26P
Admixture(s):
Time In Mixer (Minutes): Slump, Inches: 4 CC Temp:
Truck Number: 414 Ticket Number: 243312 - Air Temp--
Samples Fabricated By: jb Samples Tested By: GG Air Content:
Laboratory Number:
Mark:
6016 6017 6018
Date Made: 12-22-98
Date Received 12-23-98
Date Tested 12-29-98 01-19-99 01-19-99
Diameter, Inches 6.00
Area, Square Inches 28.27
Maximum Load, Pounds 94,750 122,000 123,000
Compressive Strength, psi 3,350 4,320 4,350
Age Tested, Days 7 28 28
Required 28 Day Strength, psi 3,000
Unit Weight, pcf
Specimen sampling, transportation and compressive strength testing were performed by this agency in accordance with the applicable ASTM
standards. This agency makes no other warranties express or implied.
Distribution:
(2) Mullen Construction
(1) City of Carlsbad
(1) Escondido Ready Mix
Reviewed By:
fl"~
George Gavit, RCE #56564
12-22.doc 1121I99
5 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
T 6280 RIVERDALE STREET, P. 0. Box 600627, SAN DIEGO, CA 92160 (619) 280-4321
Concrete Compressive Strength Test Report
File Number: 9811284
Project Title: Ocean Street Condos
Project Location: 2653 - 2665 Ocean Street, Carlsbad
Architect: C. J. Randle Permit No: CB98-2970
Engineer: C. J. Randle Plan File No:
Contractor:
Location In Structure: Footing on left side (south) of sea wall -
Material Supplier: Escondido Ready Mix
Mix Designation: 26P
Admixture(s): Pozz
Time In Mixer (Minutes): 68 Slump, Inches: CC Temp:
Truck Number: 335 Ticket Number: 321643 - Air Temp:- 560
Samples Fabricated By: SAD Samples Tested By: GG Air Content:
Labo ratoiy Number:
Mark:
5965 5966 5967 -
Date Made: 12-18-98
Date Received 12-22-98
Date Tested 12-28-98 01-15-99 01-15-99
Diameter, Inches 6.00
Area, Square Inches 28.27
Maximum Load, Pounds 101,250 117,750 122,500
Compressive Strength, psi 3,580 4,170 4,330
Age Tested, Days 10 28 28
Required 28 Day Strength, psi 3,000
Unit Weight, pcf
Specimen sampling, transportation and compressive strength testing were performed by this agency in accordance with the applicable ASTM
standards. This agency makes no other warranties express or implied.
Distribution:
(2) Mullen Construction
(1) City of Carlsbad
(1) Escondido Ready Mix
Reviewed By:
J-/
George
12-18.doc 1/19/99
Es.Gii Corporation
2n Partnership with government for Building Safety
DATE: SEPT 24, 1998 0 APPLICANT
0 JURIS.
JURISDICTION: CARLSBAD 0 PLAN REVIEWER
0 FILE
PLAN CHECK NO.: 98-2970 SET: II
PROJECT ADDRESS: 2653-2655 OCEAN STREET
PROJECT NAME: RETAINING WALLS
The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply
with the jurisdiction's building codes.
The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes
when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff.
I11 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:
Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed.
Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed.
Person contacted: Telephone #:
Date contacted: (by: ) Fax #:
Mail Telephone Fax In Person
REMARKS:
By: -All Sadre Enclosures:
Esgil Corporation
El GA [:1 CM DEJ El PC LOG trnsmti.dot
9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 • San Diego, California 92123 • (619) 560-1468 • Fax (619) 560-1576
Es-GI-1 Corporation
2n Partnership with government for Bui((ing Safety
DATE: SEPT 14, 1998 O APPLICANT
JURISDICTION: CARLSBAD O PLAN REVIEWER
O FILE
PLAN CHECK NO.: 98-2970 SET:I
PROJECT ADDRESS: 2653-2655 OCEAN STREET
PROJECT NAME: RETAINING WALLS
The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply
with the jurisdiction's building codes.
The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes
when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff.
The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list
and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck.
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:
ED MULLEN C/O MULLEN CONSTRUCTION 2890 PIOPICO, CARLSBAD, CA 92008
Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed.
Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed.
Person contacted: Telephone #:
Date contacted: 9/11-f (by: IX- ) Fax #:
Mail Telephone Fax In Person
REMARKS:
By: Ali Sadre Enclosures:
Esgil Corporation
OGA DCMDEJ 0 P 9/8 tmsmtl.dot
9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 • San Diego, California 92123 • (619) 560-1468 • Fax (619) 560-1576
CARLSBAD 98-2970
SEPT 14, 1998
GENERAL PLAN CORRECTION LIST
[JURISDICTION: CARLSBAD PLAN CHECK NO.: 98-2970
I PROJECT ADDRESS: 2653-2655 OCEAN STREET
DATE PLAN RECEIVED BY DATE REVIEW COMPLETED:'
ESGIL CORPORATION: 9/8 SEPT 14, 1998
REVIEWED BY: All Sadre
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.
Please make all corrections on the original tracings and submit (3) revisedl
signed sets of prints to: The Jurisdiction Building Department.
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.
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 plans. • Have changes been made
not resulting from this list? 0 Yes 0 No
Please note cover sheet this project complies with the 1997 UBC.
Please note the length and average height of retaining walls on the North and
South sides using city standard details. I.e., CMU Wall A: 40' long x 3' avg.
height; CMU Wall B: 65' long x 4' avg. height. Similarly, for the concrete
retaining walls on all North, South and West sides. E.g., Concrete Wall North
Side............; etc.
'-
CARLSBAD 98-2970
SEPT 14, 1998
Please specify the soils classification, bearing values, expansion index, active
and passive pressure values on plans (per soils report).
Please reference concrete wall corner connection detail on sheet I to detail
G/2 jm on the south-west corner.
Please specify the name & information for the individuals or firms performing the
Special Inspections on sheet 1.
Please identify the total length of the Dywidag anchor on A/2 as well as the
length beyond failure plane.
Please indicate the size and spacing of the ties on detail C/2.
Please show how ties and longitudinal reinforcing on C12 are splices at tie back
connections (detail 0/2 with the recess at anchor). E.g., provide a plan view.
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 All Sadre at Esgil
Corporation. Thank you.
CARLSBAD 98-2970
SEPT 14, 1998
VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE
JURISDICTION: CARLSBAD PLAN CHECK NO.: 98-2970
PREPARED BY: All Sadre DATE: SEPT 14, 1998
BUILDING ADDRESS: 2653-2655 OCEAN STREET
BUILDING OCCUPANCY: U2 TYPE. OF CONSTRUCTION: VN
BUILDING PORTION BUILDING AREA
(ft.2)
VALUATION
MULTIPLIER II
VALUE
($)
RETAINING WALLS
Air Conditioning
Fire Sprinklers
TOTAL VALUE 35,000
0 1994 UBC Building Permit Fee 0 Bldg. Permit Fee by ordinance: $ 307.83
1994 UBC Plan Check Fee fl Plan Check Fee by ordinance: $
Type of Review: Z Complete Review Structural Only 0 Hourly
0 Repetitive Fee Applicable
Comments:
0 Other:
Esgil Plan Review Fee: $ 160.07
Sheet I of I
macvatue.doc 5196
of Carlsbad
Cq1
0VL
BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST
RETAINING WALL
BUILDING PLANCHECK NUMBER: CB 2q-70
BUILDING ADDRESS: 2 o 53 Qc..ea., Si.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Retaining Wall
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER:
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
F11 !j :1 Z14117-11 4
The item you have submitted for review has been
approved. The approval is based on plans, information
and/or specifications provided in your submittal;
therefore, any changes to these items after this date,
including field modifications, must be reviewed by this
office to insure continued conformance with applicable
codes. Please review carefully all comments attached,
as failure to comply with instructions in this report can
result in suspension of permit to build.
DENIAL
Please seej attached report of deficiencies
marked wiJ. Mke necessary corrections to
plans or 'etifiètions for compliance with
applicable codes and standards. Submit corrected
plans and/or specifications to this office for review.
By: Date:
By: Date:
By: Date:
ATTACHMENTS
Right-of-Way Permit Application
ENGINEERING DEPT. CONTACT PERSON
NAME: DANNA TRIGS
City of Carlsbad
ADDRESS: 2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92009
PHONE: (760) 438-1161, ext. 4374
%LASPALMASiSYSUBRARYIENGWORDDOCS\cHKLSTIReIaInIng Wall Building Plantheck Cklst Form BEdoc Rev. 0126198
2075 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (760) 438-1161 • FAX (760) 431-5769 is
BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST
RETAINING WALLS
3R0/
lI 0 0 1. Provide a fully dimensioned site plan drawn to scale. Show:
North Arrow D. Easements
Existing & Proposed Structures E. Retaining Wall
(dimensioned from street) (location and height)
Property Lines
0 2. Show on site plan:
Drainage Patterns D(0t 370 -I "N
Existing & Proposed Slopes
Existing Topography
0 3. Include on title sheet:
Site Address
Assessor's Parcel Number
Legal Description
Grading Quantities Cut Fill Import/Export
(Grading Permit and Haul Route Permit may be required)
0 0 0 4. Project does not comply with the following Engineering Conditions of approval
for Project No.
Conditions were complied with by: Date:
MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS
0 0 0 5. A RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT is required to do work in City Right-of-Way
and/or private work adjacent to the public Right-of-Way.
A separate Right-of-Way issued by the Engineering Department is required
for the following:
Please obtain an application for Right-of-Way permit from the Engineering
Department.
Page 1
Wall Builng Planthed, Cklst Form BE.doc Rev. 0128198
Mir4i
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
BUILDING PLAN CHECK REVIEW CHECKLIST
Plan Check No. CB 11 77 0
Planner d & "9 CKt3if94/
Address 2b53J55- -/c7-
Phone (619) 438-1161, extension
Type of Project and Usd -J>'/ e PiJct Density: i
Zoning: - 3 General Plan: Facilities Management Zone: I
CFD (in/n. .t% # Date of participation: Remaining net dev acres: - Circle One
(For non-residential development: Type of land used created by
this permit: A/J /.
Legend: Item Complete Item Incomplete - Needs your action
Environmental Review Required: YES NO TYPE
DATE OF COMPLETION: 1- 7
Compliance with conditions of approval? If not, state conditions which require action.
Conditions of Approval:
Discretionary Action Required: YES NO TYPE jp(
APPROVAL/RESO. NO. L12h3 c. DATE
PROJECT NO. 5pP "q')-l') iItj
OTHER RELATED CASES:
Compliance with conditions or approval? If not, state conditions which require action':
Conditions of Approval: ) L —
/01',, p)
Coastal Zone Assessment/Compliance
Project site located in Coastal Zone? YES NO
CA Coastal Commission Authority? YES v NO * (('f' ,'- ie oq
If California Coastal Commission Authority: Contact them at - 3111 Camino Del Rio North, Suite
200, San Diego CA 92108-1725; (619) 521-8036
Determine status (Coastal PermitjFor Exempt): &
Coastal Permit Determination Form already completed? YES V NO____ If NO. complete Coastal Permit Determination Form now.
Coastal Permit Determination Log #:
Follow-Up Actions:
Stamp Building Plans as "Exempt" or "Coastal Permit Required" (at minimum
Floor Plans).
Complete Coastal Permit Determination Log as needed.
Inclusionary Housing Fee required: YES V NO
(Effective date of Inclusionary Housing Ordinance - May 21, 1993.)
Data Entry Completed? YES / NO
(Enter CB #; UACT; NEXT 12; Construct housing YIN; Enter Fee Amount (See fee schedule for amount); Return)
Site Plan:
E 1. Provide a fully dimensional site plan drawn to scale. Show: North arrow,
property lines, easements, existing and proposed structures, streets, existing
street improvements, right-of-way width, dimensional setbacks and existing
topographical lines.
2. Provide legal description of property and assessor's parcel number.
Zoning:
j' F71- F-1 1. Setbacks:
Front:
Interior Side:
Street Side:
Rear:
Shown
Shown.____________
Shown
Required 9. Shown
Required : Shown
5. Parking: Spaces Required d,1i9 Shown
Guest Spaces Required i9 Shown
LI Additional Comments_____________________________________________________
ron Required
Street Side:
Rear:
______________
OK TO ISSUE AND ENTERED APPROVAL INTO COMPUTER YO&AZ 1 0q3IE g
Required Al) A- Shown
Required il) '9 Shown
Required Al/A Shown
Required 5r((j6h 14 ,v'e Shown
2.Apcsory structure setbacks:
Structure separation:
Required
Required
B1 a3. Lot Coverage:
4. Height:
C. J. Randle, P.E.
5858 Mt. Alifan Drive, Suite 235
San Diego, CA 92111
Telephone (619) 571-6271
Fax (619) 571-3943
August 27, 1998
ESGIL CORPORATION
9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208
San Diego, CA 92123
Attn: Abe Doliente
Subject: Plan Check Corrections; Ocean Street Condominiums, Architect, Cindy Blair
re: 2653-2655 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, CA
Dear Mr. Doliente:
The following is a letter of transmittal which addresses the active pressure used for the design of the
proposed wall at the subject site. Please be advised; the geotechnical engineering company,
Geotechnical Exploration Inc., has been made aware of the specification which I am imposing for the
back fill of this wall. More specifically, this specification requires that it be a granular free draining
material with an internal angle of friction of at least 36° This, in effect, will yield an active pressure
for design between 34 PSF/F and 37P5F1F. The revised calculations reflect 36 PSF/Ft active pressure.
The change, which is required, is reflected within the plans which are submitted herein. In essence,
this change relates only to the increase in the footing size by 1 foot which is now reflected within these
plans.
Also, the plans include a note specifying the minimum type of granular import fill material.
A copy of this is being sent to Mr. Jaime Cerros, P.E., RCE 34422/GE 2007 at Geotechnical
Exploration Inc. This communication with the geotechnical engineer has been verbally confirmed.
They will require a set of these plans for their signature and review; a copy of these plans are being sent
to Geotechnical Exploration Inc.
I wish to thank you for your courtesy; it was a pleasure talking to you again. Should you require any
clarification of this information, please contact the undersigned at the letterhead address.
Sinc
ESSI
C. J. Randle, P.E.
RCE 22096 CA
Civil Engineer
cc: Ms Cindy Blair
Mr. Jamie Cerros
CeL? 172 62-?z
C.J. RANDLE, P.E.
5858 MT. ALIFAN DRIVE, S
SAN DIEGO, CA921)
---if- / 1-98
WALL
. ... '-
D '• F
CAW T1 LV
's q18 2q-75'(E7:2)
/
\:.
•
t.Z." Z.4..S 4- 4ivo
,c
• .:\a tt,4o rpr 10 99
16
I
.fl'j 4605 66L
- nwf/ •• • • •
Vx
•
FoLIID 1
:4)
. A: •
/1 l2i4o—fVc& :
12.,4.oc- 1 174 , 6761 /
Am b Fcc.
As lzx (5 4)
•
• (V) ooss it. .z. a" ,, ,,
cozs-, C7
Pit 04.
CiMO,TI0,4
7 I50 ' 377S 4.0
4* W71c jçr
• t. j
SOIL oq
Oc4 W4LL 9,9*lt 10, I
(%)
v) I
,q/
KS •
••
(f 7 —14 -
1
/
":"• J
I CAW øaO
4?L 2-r 4- QIf
26
cjpg
- i h -tqei4 3ea
S
IE1371 _-
Ade _____
1opJ
L I
Co,Jc. (&D Met
LC.. IDP5F
TL 2SDPS
Vt .?ft2.;2o%(4.t) 2. ?L0".
IZ I i45>V C,'
,4t7.t.7Irzo%sLX 3,5zi
77
A: h5x,00148XIZ'f.D 47.a'
1.7c(2.i.c 110 + tac i.)(3- f) O1/t/34c
& I7 (7O4- 3MIX.)(ZS £,85
441
.00rZ.c',
I. 33 lWiL = 41 p" ]'# 6e.iiT
p.2 7bfr
a. 17 1.i5ZSOa 1•i1L s ('5.. 3i68
8>'.j
78
-7 -i
lOOSZ&I>!?,.f,.J.
l!4i
fZLb$5A., 4i-i —1— ) 3— q E - -r z S.
48+&5e
?Msi p 6Z# 610 FLCTIOs)
1I " , g or .
JCCI
I
5,143 OL 746p 133I't tic.
V'j 1% ac,f5 2
. . .
Of-
C-0 r
TIC IbArv-P. L!cs(2Z79- 14 S7,656 4.
RSt5iMJ pçç • I
L g74s&
M$EO JttItwéSO
.
L-
7 A52 8'
t! G.AQE &SaIPI
-- 1.
5EAtJdu.. C.tLcbA,D J Swr 4
TILE .AL4 r
Foe. Lx qQ bekea 5tbJcTh: ,7 g~i7g i4)
WiNiG Hi&
j.13 D L"
14,w to Dl9.b
010
& ___
. &ZI z.. :1..
st: I.7%3712.
30S '3
7
hosts.
2 OOO
: 8-a a los
V. I.7 ?1Z - 6310
,&.cx 1L%llj tL?C!O$91!17L>V, ôj.
•
: .0031 MhJ
I
[6eij
A5:.0033'h1z.,tO.S' ,44
Pu 17 ?,r1o'z.
62-17
7g sJ
I.004X12.7LI0,9.11.72S&'
)M.i_ CAL[.0 9,AD
6
WiuG WALLS.- FourJOAiO'l If.
I io7. 4iIi
it
WA&L *,9147x 1 90
Sol
t6 I
(% 73
0' 3, 3c'tI.5Q
e. LW- 1.41 G
f Z7qT>s. 4t
SOIL 1o,s 'I
ti3t7ag
H D 1. a L shaped ftg pa pp
velht &a$ddth fbatingvd0factingthickness z soil 500 18 1.17 10.5 2 5.835
Wsoil Wftg his wal Ms soil Ms Rg Sum Ms Sum Ws
2308 164203 ' 3150 1642.83 95815.368 18537.5 113995.55 223178.3
Vo Ma FSOT IS 3u e PIA mis
4898 23133 4.04.41182 3.334323 11.502969 1.415817 2131.3143 1724.144.3
Sall press I-, c_- 7o ae5. 3ci zi .-j2 3?
F,5, SLID ;1J
Nos4'f &i&
92Z:=4.i,
L ±
2 1it 3
- -
E.?4L.4. CA,e.44bD -
W'P44 'JILL çoC Cc,r'Jr.
H D L B L shaped ft; pe pp
Ml7eIght vgak4dth faatlngwidthfaatlngthickness z son 29 ;soo
13 1.17 7.5 2 4.335
Wwall WsoiL Wltg bb wap Ms sail Me ltg Sum ft Sum Ws
2281.5 9051.9 2250 13341775 39239.937 84.37.5 49012.184 13583.4
Va Ma FSOI u 3u e PIA rn/s
3282.5. 15312.5 3.0045771 2A.073254 7.2219762 1.3.426746 1811.12 1945.3058
sos1 cC e3c, ,ç$3 .7(Fcrio.i)
2p/3u _______________
ç4lIE aX5/ a
3781.825 [tawsALlc.!ij
:4174
H : L B I shaped ftg Ps pp
alefht. volkoldth, : roounadthrttngthackness r sail 29 500
1. 2 3.21
mall
:
Mod, : fy15 iall Nu Itq Sum Nk Sum Ws
1755 4483 1575 1026.575 1440833 4134.375 19587.53 7318
Va Ma FSOT u 3u e P!A rws
8352 2.342556 1..4345T79 4.3037337 1.1904221 14.23.1429 20259527
• saWst 3 13L
1244 :. :. jç4. 'i8 = 734 IF
?M5t;(L! 5bOxi.!71,
317 6
14 I.
9450h&ght iJJ9r4dth rootlndthferngthickness x salt 29 i 500
7 3.33 2 2.25
WsaU Wsai 1 4ft Ms wad Ms soil Ms ftg Sum Ms Sum WS
1222.5 1883.2 999 713.8725 3742.2 1883.335 8124.2075 13890.7
Va Mo FSOI u 3u e PA m's
1174.5 T:J31034 0.6641.21 2.0053262 0.9366679 1;6.37h 2097.9401
- • - '-.fI LDI
2p/3u - -
1:880-31863 ,5. )oc__LL 0, 1. 1E4c gj'i
____
REPORT OF SOIL AND LIMITED
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION UPDATE
Palisoul/Blair Duplex
2653 Ocean Street
Carlsbad, California
JOB-NO. 89-5594
27 May 1997
Prepared for:
Mr. and Mrs. Philip R. Palisoul
and
Mr. and Mrs. Martin L. Blair
jr MD A-) jj"6
HAZARDOUS rDlg CID GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC.
U.fl SOIL & FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER
O MATERIALS MANAGEMENT • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY
27 May 1997
Mr. and Mrs. Philip R. Palisoul
Mr. and Mrs. Martin L. Blair
1 500 Quail Street, Suite 510
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Job No. 89-5594
Subject: Report of Soil and Limited Geotechnical Investigation Update
Palisoul/Blair Duplex
2653 Ocean Street
Carlsbad, California
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Palisoul and Blair:
In accordance with your request, Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. has performed an
investigation of the soil and geologic conditions at the subject site. The field work
was performed on March 31, 1997. In addition, we have reviewed our previous
"Report of Oceanographic and Marine Geologic Conditions and Recommendations
for Seawall Design," dated October 4, 1989. This report is included herein as
Appendix D.
Although final plans are not yet available, it is our understanding that the site is
being developed to receive a two-unit residential development with a new seawall
and associated improvements. The structure is to be a maximum of three stories in
height and will be constructed of standard-type building materials utilizing slab-on-
grade and conventional continuous foundations.
Our investigation revealed that the site is underlain by medium dense to dense
terrace and formational materials overlain by approximately 2 to 5 feet of loose
surficial terrace materials, topsoil and some artificial fill. In order to reduce the
effects of potential settlement, we recommend that at least the upper 2 to 5 feet of
surficial soils be removed and recompacted to provide a more uniform, firm soil
base for the proposed structure and improvements. It is our understanding that the.
western portion of the site is to be cut down in preparation for the lower-level living
areas. As such, the loose surface soils should be removed during the excavation
process in these areas. In the seawall location, dense formational material was
encountered at a relatively shallow depth.
7420 TRADE STREET 9 SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92421 • (619) 549-7222 • FAX: (619) 549-1604
2
In our opinion, if the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are
implemented during site preparation, the site will be suited for the proposed
development.
This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Should you have any
questions concerning the following report, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Reference to our Job No. 89-5594 will expedite a response to your inquiries.
Respectfully submitted,
GEOTE NICAL EXPLORATION, INC.
Jaie A. Cerros, P.E.
R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007
Senior .Geotechnical Engineer
J KH/JAC/pj
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
SCOPE OF WORK 1
SITE DESCRIPTION 2
FIELD INVESTIGATION 3
GROUNDWATER 4
LABORATORY TESTS 5
SOIL AND GENERAL GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION 7
GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 8
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14
GRADING NOTES 27
LIMITATIONS 28
FIGURES
I. Plot Plan and Geologic Map
lla-f. Boring and Trench Logs
Ill. Laboratory Test Results
Foundation Requirements Near Slopes
Retaining Wall Waterproofing and Drainage Schematic
VI Regional Fault Map
APPENDICES
Unified Soil Classification System
General Earthwork Specifications
Fault Tables
Report of Oceanographic & Marine Geologic Conditions & Rec. for Seawall
Recommendations for Seawall Design
REPORT OF SOIL AND LIMITED GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION UPDATE
Palisoul/Blair Duplex
2653 Ocean Street
Carlsbad, California
JOB NO. 89-5594
The following report presents the findings and recommendations of Geotechnical
Exploration, Inc. for the subject project.
I. SCOPE OF WORK
It is our understanding, based on communications, with Mr. Philip Palisoul and
review of very preliminary site plans provided by Ms. Cindy Blair, the architect, that
the site is intended for the constructlon of a two-unit residential development with
a new seawall and associated improvements. It is our understanding that the site
will be graded to create a multi-level building pad and recompact the loose surface
soils. Construction is to utilize standard slab-on-grade foundations. With the above
in mind, the scope of work is briefly outlined as follows:
Review the site geology and make note of any faults or significant geologic
features which may affect the development of the site.
Identify and classify the surface and subsurface soils in conformance with
the Unified Soil Classification System (refer to Appendix A).
Recommend site preparation procedures.
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 2
Recommend an allowable bearing pressure for the existing firm soils and
proposed recompacted soils.
Estimate the anticipated settlement of the existing dense soils and any
compacted fills under the anticipated structural loads.
Provide preliminary foundation design information, including active and
passive earth pressures to be utilized in design of any retaining walls and
foundations.
Update our previous "Report of Limited Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed
Seawall," dated October 4, 1989. This report includes a wave run-up
analysis with information regarding the type and configuration of seawall
(attached as Appendix D).
II. SITE DESCRIPTION
The property is known as: Lots 15 and 16, according to Map No. 1221, in the City
of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California. The site, consisting of
approximately 7,000 square feet, is located at 2653 Ocean Street, in the north
Carlsbad beach area, in the City of Carlsbad, California. The property is bordered
on the north and south by developed residential properties, on the east by Ocean
Street, and on the west by the Pacific Ocean.
There were no structures on the site at the time of our field investigation.
Presently, vegetation on the site consists primarily of native weeds, grass,
CAN
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 3
shrubbery and iceplant, with a few palm trees in the eastern portion of the
property:. A limited amount of fill and trash debris was encountered in the western
portion of the site. It appears that this material may have been dumped during
work on the adjacent seawall.
The property slopes gently to moderately down to the west from Ocean Street.
Approximate elevations across the site range from a high of 40 feet above mean
sea level (MSL) near the street, down to 6 feet MSL in the western portion of the
site. Survey information concerning actual elevations across the site was obtained
from a topographic survey map by O'Day Consultants, dated April 1997.
Ill. FIELD INVESTIGATION
Five auger borings and a single backhoe trench were placed on the site in areas
where the structure, a new seawall, and improvements are to be located and where
representative soil conditions were expected. The borings and trench were logged
by our field representative, and samples were taken of the predominant soils
throughout the field operation. Boring and trench logs have been prepared on the
basis of the observations and the results have been summarized on Figure No. II.
The predominant soils have been classified in conformance with the Unified Soil
Classification System (refer to Appendix A).
In-place samples were obtained by driving a 3-inch outside-diameter (O.D.) by 2-
3/8-inch inside-diameter (l.D.) split-tube sampler a distance of 12 inches. Also, the
Standard Penetration Test was performed by using a 140-pound weight falling 30
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 4
inches to drive a 2-inch O.D. by 1-3/8-inch I.D. sampler tube a distance of 12
inches.
The number of blows required to drive the sampler the given distance was recorded
for use in density determination. The following chart provides an in-house
correlation between the number of blows and the relative density of the soil for the
Standard Penetration Test and the 3-inch sampler.
Soil Density
Designation
2-inch;O.D.:
Sampler
Blows/Foot
3-inch O.D.-
Sampler
Blows/Foot
Sand and Silt Very loose 0-4 0-7
Loose 5-10 8-20
Medium 11-30 21-53
Dense 31-50 54-98
Very Dense Over 50 Over 98
Clay Very Soft 0-2 0-2
Soft 3-4 3-4
Firm 5-8 5-9
Stiff 9-15 10-18
Very Stiff 16-30 19-45
Hard 31-60 46-90
Very Hard Over 60 Over 90
IV. GROUNDWATER
No groundwater problems were encountered during the course of our field
investigation and we do not expect significant problems to develop in the future --
if the property is developed as planned and proper drainage is provided. It should
be kept in mind, however, that the proposed grading operations may change
surface drainage patterns and/or reduce permeabilities due to the densification of
CAN
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 5
compacted soils. Changes of surface and subsurface hydrologic conditions, plus
irrigation of landscaping or significant increases in rainfall, may result in the
appearance of surface or near-surface water at locations where none existed
previously.
Positive drainage measures should be constructed to intercept and divert all surface
runoff waters away from the structure and improvements planned for the site. The
damage from such water is expected to be minor and cosmetic in nature, if good
positive drainage is implemented and maintained at the completion of construction.
Corrective action should be taken on a site-specific basis, if and when it becomes
necessary.
V. LABORATORY TESTS
Field and laboratory tests were performed on the soils in order to evaluate their
physical and mechanical properties and their ability to support the proposed
structure and improvements. The following tests were conducted on the sampled
soils:
Moisture/Density Relations (ASTM D1557-91, Method A)
Moisture Content (ASTM D2216-92)
Sampling of Soils (ASTM D1586-84[92] and D1587-83)
Mechanical Analysis (ASTM D422-63[901)
Direct Shear Test (ASTM D3080-90)
Consolidation Test (ASTM D2435-90)
AM
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 6
The relationship between the moisture and density of the soil gives qualitative
information regarding the soil strength characteristics and soil conditions to be
anticipated during any future grading operation.
The mechanical analysis was used to aid in the classification of the soils according
to the Unified Soil Classification System.
A direct shear test was performed on relatively undisturbed sample in order to
evaluate the soil strength and support capacity of the existing dense natural soils.
The shear test was performed with a constant strain rate direct shear machine.
The test specimen was saturated and then sheared under various normal loads
without appreciable drainage of the sample.
A consolidation test was performed on a relatively undisturbed sample in order to
evaluate the soil strength and support capacity of the existing terrace materials.
The specimen was subjected to increased loads and the resulting consolidations
noted. The consolidation test aids in estimating settlement magnitudes of the
terrace materials. Based on the test performed, the existing soils have a low
consolidation potential.
Based on our experience with similar soils, it is our opinion that the on-site soils
have a very low expansion potential, with an expansion index of less than 20.
Based on the above laboratory test data, observations of the primary soil types on
the project, and our previous experience with laboratory testing of similar soils, our
Geotechnical Engineer has assigned conservative values for friction angle,
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 7
coefficient of friction, and cohesion to those properly compacted soils that will
have significant lateral support or bearing functions on the project. These values
are presented in Figure No. Ill and have been utilized in recommending the allowable
bearing value, as well as active and passive earth pressure design criteria for wall
and footing designs in competent native soils or properly compacted fills.
VI. SOIL AND GENERAL GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
Our investigation and review of pertinent geologic maps and reports indicate that
the site is underlain by a limited amount of artificial fill soils, topsoils, and marine-
terrace deposits.
Artificial Fill (Qaf): A limited amount of fill (approximately 2 to 3 feet) was
encountered on the surface in the western portion of the site adjacent to the
seawall on the property to the south. The fill is loose to medium dense and
consists of gray-brown, silty, fine to medium sand with some gravel and concrete
debris. The fills are considered to have a very low expansion potential.
Topsoils: The topsoils encountered at the site consist of loose, dry to damp, red-
brown, silty, fine to medium sand with some roots. These materials range from 1
to 3 feet in thickness and were encountered at the surface of much of the site.
These soils are considered to have a very low expansion potential.
Marine-Terrace Deposits (Qm): The entire site is underlain by Pleistocene-age
marine-terrace deposits. These materials are medium dense to dense and consist of
tan-gray and red-brown, fine- to medium-grained sand and silty sand. These
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 8
materials are poorly to moderately cemented and susceptible to some caving. Due
to the poor cementation in the terrace materials, any temporary slopes should be
cut back to a safe gradient. Some of the terrace materials are relatively low
density, but have a low consolidation potential. The terrace deposits are
considered to have a very low expansion potential.
A review of several geologic maps for this area indicates that the marine-terrace
deposits occur as thin, very gently dipping, mantle-like deposits within 2 to 3 miles
of the coast. One of the older maps (Wilson, 1 972) shows these deposits as part
of the Lindavista Formation. However, a more recent map (Weber, 1 982) includes
these deposits as part of the Bay Point Formation. Review of the Geologic Map of
California, Santa Ana Sheet, 1965, indicates that these deposits are mapped as
Pleistocene Marine and Non-Marine Terrace deposits.
VII. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
A. Faulting and Seismicity
In California, major earthquakes can generally be correlated with movement on
active faults. As defined by the California Division of Mines and Geology (Hart,
E.W., 1980), an "active" fault is one which has had ground surface displacement
within Holocene time (about the last 11,000 years). Additionally, faults along
I which major historical earthquakes have occurred (about the last 210 years in
California) are also considered to be active (Association of Engineering Geologist,
1973). The California Division of Mines and Geology defines a "potentially active"
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page
fault as one which has had ground surface displacement during Quaternary time,
that is, during the last two to three million years (Hart, E.W.., 1980).
For construction projects in California, seismologists and earthquake engineers
estimate earthquake magnitudes for "upper bound earthquake" and "maximum
probable earthquake" to ascertain the seismic risk involved with different faults.
Greensfelder (1 974) defines these as follows: The upper bound earthquake is "the
maximum earthquake that appears to be reasonably capable of occurring under the
condition of the present known geologic framework." While the event is highly
unlikely, it is still a believable event that could occur. The maximum probable
earthquake is "the maximum earthquake that appears to be reasonably expectable
within a 100-year period." This is also regarded as the maximum "design"
earthquake.
An estimation of the peak ground acceleration likely to occur at the project site, by
the known significant local and regional faults within 100 miles of the site, is
included in Table 1 (see Appendix Q. Also a listing of the known historic seismic
events that have occurred within 100 miles of the site at a magnitude of 5.0 or
greater since the year 1800, and the probability of exceeding the experienced
ground accelerations in the future, based upon the historical record, is provided in
Table 2 (see Appendix C).
Faults in the Southern California region that are of particular concern to the subject
site are the nearby Rose Canyon Fault, and the more distant Coronado Bank Fault
and Elsinore Fault (see Figure No. VI-- Regional Fault Map).
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 10
Local Faults
The Rose Canyon Fault, located approximately 4 miles west of the subject site,
trends generally north-south from Oceanside to downtown San Diego, then appears
to head southward into San Diego Bay, through Coronado and offshore. The Rose
Canyon Fault Zone is possibly the southern extension of the active Newport-
Inglewood Fault Zone and is considered to be a complex zone of onshore and
offshore, en echelon strike slip, oblique reverse and oblique normal faults.
Investigative work on faults (believed to be part of the Rose Canyon Fault Zone)
within the downtown area of the City of San Diego and at the SDG&E facility in
Rose Canyon, has encountered offsets of Holocene (geologically recent) sediments
and soils. These findings have been .accepted as confirmed Holocene displacement
on the Rose Canyon Fault and this previously classified "potentially active" fault
has been upgraded to an "active" fault since November 1991 (CDMG - Alquist-
Priolo Special Studies Zones).
Regional Faults
Coronado Bank Fault: The nearest known active fault is the Coronado Bank Fault,
located approximately 19 miles southwest of the site. Evidence for this fault is
based upon geophysical data (acoustic profiles) and the general alignment of
epicenters of recorded seismic activity (Greene, 1979). An earthquake of 5.3
magnitude, recorded on July 13, 1986, is thought to have been centered on this
fault or within the Coronado Bank Fault zone. Although this fault is considered
active, due to the seismicity within the fault zone, it is significantly less active
seismically than the Elsinore Fault (Hileman, 1973). It is postulated that the
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 11
Coronado Bank Fault is capable of generating up to a 6.5-magnitude earthquake
and is of great interest due to its close proximity to the San Diego Greater
Metropolitan area.
Elsinore Fault: The Elsinore Fault is located approximately 26 miles northeast of the
site. The Elsinore Fault extends approximately 200 km (125 miles) from the
Mexican border to the northern end of the Santa Ana Mountains. The Elsinore Fault
zone is a 1- to 4-mile-wide, northwest-southeast-trending zone of discontinuous
and echelon faults extending through portions of Orange, Riverside, San Diego, and
Imperial Counties. Individual faults within the Elsinore Fault Zone range from less
than 1 mile to 16 miles in length. The trend, length and geomorphic expression of
the Elsinore Fault Zone identifies it as being a part of the highly active San Andreas
Fault system.
Like the other faults in the San Andreas system, the Elsinore Fault is a transverse
fault showing predominantly right-lateral movement. According to Hart, et al.
(1979), this movement averages less than 1 centimeter per year. Along most of its
length, the Elsinore Fault Zone is marked by a bold topographic expression
consisting of linearly aligned ridges, swales and hallows. Faulted Holocene alluvial
deposits (believed to be less than 11,000 years old) found along several segments
of the fault zone suggest that at least part of the zone is currently active.
Although the Elsinore Fault Zone belongs to the San Andreas set of active,
northwest-trending, right-slip faults in the southern California (Crowell, 1962), it
has not been the site of a major earthquake in historic time, other than a 6.0-
magnitude quake near the town of Elsinore in 1910 (Richter, 1958; Toppozada and
VAN
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California
. Page 12
Parke, 1982). However, based on length and evidence of late-Pleistocene or
Holocene displacement, Greensfelder (1974) has estimated. that the Elsinore Fault
Zone is reasonably capable of generating an earthquake with a magnitude as large
as 7.5. Studies and logging of exposures in trenches in Glen Ivy Marsh across the
Glen Ivy North Fault (a strand of the Elsinore Fault Zone between Corona and Lake
Elsinore), suggest a maximum earthquake recurrence interval of 300 years, and
when combined with previous estimates of the long-term horizontal slip rate of 0.8
to 7.0mm/year, suggest typical earthquake magnitudes of 6 to 7 (Rockwell, 1985).
B. Other Geologic Hazards
Ground Rupture: Ground rupture is characterized by bedrock slippage along an
established fault and may result in displacement of the ground surface. For ground
rupture to occur along a fault, an earthquake usually exceeds magnitude 5.0. If a
5.0-magnitude earthquake were to take place on a local fault, an estimated surface-
rupture length 1 mile long could be expected (Greensfelder, 1974). Since there are
no known faults crossing the property, the risk of ground rupture at the site is
considered remote.
Ground Shaking: Structural damage caused by seismically induced ground shaking
is a detrimental effect directly related to faulting and earthquake activity. Ground
shaking is considered to be the greatest seismic hazard in San Diego County. The
intensity of ground shaking is dependent on the magnitude of the earthquake, the
distance and orientation from the earthquake, and the soil and geologic structure
beneath the site. Earthquakes of magnitude 5.5 Richter scale or greater are
generally associated with significant damage. It is our opinion that the most
IBM
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 13
serious damage to the site would be caused by a large earthquake originating on
the nearby active Rose Canyon Fault or one of the major regional active faults.
Although the chance of such an event is low, it could occur within the useful life of
the structures. The ground accelerations that could .be reasonably expected to
occur during a major earthquake on a fault within 100 miles of the site are provided
in Table 1, Appendix C.
Landslides: According to our geologic reconnaissance and a review of the geologic
map (Santa Ana Sheet - 1965) and aerial photographs (4-11-53, AXN-8M-99 and
100), there are no known or suspected ancient landslides located on the site.
Tsunami: The site is located at an elevation between 6 feet above mean sea level
(MSL) and 40 feet MSL immediately east, of the active beach. Based upon
historical information on tsunami activity in Southern California, it is our opinion
that the risk to the site from a tsunami is minimal. In addition, since a vertical
concrete seawall is proposed, adequate protection should be provided.
Liquefaction:• The liquefaction of saturated sands during earthquakes can be a
major cause of damage to buildings. Liquefaction is the process in which soils are
transformed into a dense fluid which will flow as a liquid when unconfined. It
occurs principally in loose, saturated sands and silts when they are shaken by an
earthquake.
On this site, the risk of liquefaction of foundation material due to seismic shaking is
considered to be remote due to the density of the natural-ground material.
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 14
Summary: It is our opinion that a significant geologic hazard does not exist on the
site. No evidence of faulting or landslide activity was encountered during our
investigation of the site. The site is situated in a developed neighborhood of
Carlsbad and in the event that severe earth shaking does occur from major faulting
within the area, compliance with Uniform Building Code requirements for
construction should help reduce structural damage.
VIII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The following conclusions and recommendations are based upon the practical field
investigation conducted by our firm, and resulting laboratory tests, in conjunction
with our knowledge and experience with the soils in this area of the City of
Carlsbad.
Our investigation revealed that the site is underlain by medium dense to dense
terrace and formational materials with approximately 2 to 5 feet of loose surficial
terrace materials, topsoil, and some artificial fill. The loose surface soils will not
provide a stable soil base for the proposed structure and associated improvements.
As such, we recommend that these loose surface soils be removed and
recompacted as part of the site preparation prior to the addition of any proposed fill
and/or structural improvements. It is our understanding that the western portion of
the site will be cut down to create the lower-level living areas. As such, the loose
surface soils should be removed during the excavation process in this area. Due to
the poor cementation in the terrace materials, temporary cut slopes may have to be
laid back to a safe gradient. Some of the deeper terrace materials may have some
low in-place densities and require additional removal during the grading operation.
CAN
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 15
The seawall location was found to be underlain by dense formational materials at a
relatively shallow depth.
A. Preparation of Soils for Site Development
The existing vegetation observed on the site should be removed prior to the
preparation of areas to receive new fill and/or structural improvements. This
includes any roots from trees and shrubbery that might extend under the
proposed structures or improvements. Large roots have been known to
cause significant damage to foundations. All roots over 1/2-inch in diameter
shall be removed from soils to be recompacted.
To provide a uniform soils base for the proposed structures and rigid
improvements (such as the swimming pools, patios, walkways, decking,
driveway, etc.), the existing loose fill and terrace materials across the site,
should be excavated to expose firm native soil, or to a depth approved by the
Field Soils Technician. Any other areas observed to include loose soils during
grading shall be excavated to expose firm native soil. The depth of removal
is expected to be approximately 2 to 3 feet over most of the site and
approximately 5 feet in the eastern portion of the site. The bottom of the
excavation should be scarified to a depth of at least 12 inches, watered to
approximately optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 90
percent of Maximum Dry Density. The excavated loose fill and terrace
materials to be used as fill should be cleaned of any debris and deleterious
materials, watered to approximately optimum moisture content and
compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density, in accordance
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 16
with ASTM Dl 557 standards. Any areas supporting proposed improvements
or retaining structures should be prepared in a like manner. If the grading
results in a transition cut/fill pad, the cut portion shall be undercut at least 3
feet, properly moisture-conditioned and recompacted.
3. No uncontrolled fill soils should remain on the site after completion of any
future site work. In the event that temporary ramps or pads are constructed
of uncontrolled fill soils, the loose fill soils should be removed and/or
recompacted prior to completion of the grading operation.
am Any buried objects, abandoned irrigation lines, subsurface disposal systems,
etc., which might be discovered on the site during grading, should be
removed and properly backfilled with approved on-site or imported fill soils
and compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density.
5. Any backfill soils placed in utility trenches or behind retaining walls which
support structures and other improvements (such as patios, sidewalks,
driveways, pavements, etc.) should be compacted to at least 90 percent of
Maximum Dry Density.
Note: Due to the generally poor cementation of the terrace materials and the
potential for caving, special care should be taken during excavation of utility
trenches and temporary slopes. Depending on the depth and configuration of
proposed temporary slopes, shoring may be required or safe slope shall be
used. As a minimum, Cal-OSHA safety standards shall be followed.
Wl
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 17
Design Parameters for Foundations
The recommended allowable bearing value for design of foundations for the
proposed residential structure is 2,000 pounds per square foot. This load-
bearing value may be utilized in the design of continuous foundations and
spread footings when founded a minimum of 18 inches (for the proposed
structure) into the firm natural ground or properly compacted fill, measured
from the lowest adjacent grade at the time of foundation construction. We
recommend that three-story portions of the structure be founded on at least
24-inch-deep footings. This load-bearing value may be increased one-third
for design loads that include wind or seismic analysis. An increase of 500
psf in the allowable bearing value may be allowed for every 1 foot of
embedment and for every additional 1 foot in width over the minimum
dimensions indicated above, up to a maximum of 5,000 psf.
Our experience indicates that for various reasons, footings and slabs
occasionally crack causing ceramic tiles and other brittle surfaces to become
damaged. Therefore, all footings and slabs should contain at least a nominal
amount of reinforcing steel to reduce the separation of cracks, should they
occur.
7.1 A minimum of steel for continuous footings should include at least
four No. 4 steel bars continuous, with two bars near the bottom of the
footing and two bars near the top. For footings up to 24 inches in
depth, the minimum reinforcement shall consist of four No. 5 bars.
B.
7.
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 18
7.2 Any isolated square footings should contain, as a minimum, a grid of
No. 4 steel bars on 12-inch centers, in both directions, with no less
than three bars each way.
7.3 Floor slabs should be a minimum of at least 4 inches actual thickness
and be reinforced with at least No. 3 steel bars, placed on 18-inch
centers, both ways, placed at midheight in the slab. Slabs should be
underlain by a 2-inch-thick layer of clean sand (S. E. = 30 or greater)
- overlying, a 6-mil visqueen membrane over 2 inches of sand. Slab
subgrade soil should be thoroughly moistened prior to placement of
the vapor barrier and pouring of concrete.
7.4 We recommend the project Civil/Structural Engineer incorporate
isolation joints and sawcuts to at least one-fourth the thickness of any
slab designs. The joints and cuts, if properly placed, should reduce
the potential for and help control slab cracking. However, due to a
number of reasons (such as base preparation, construction techniques,
during procedures, and normal shrinkage of concrete), some cracking
of slabs can be expected. Control joints shall not be spaced farther
than 20 feet if reinforced with the minimum steel reinforcement.
Control joints shall also be provided at re-entrant corners, or additional
diagonally placed steel be provided. All isolation and control joints
shall be sealed with elastomeric joint sealant. They shall be inspected
and maintained at least every 6 months by the property owner.
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 19
NOTE., The project Civil/Structural Engineer shall review• all reinforcing
schedules. The reinforcing minimums recommended herein are not to
be construed as structural designs, but merely as minimum safeguards
to reduce possible crack separations.
Based on our laboratory test results and our experience with the soil types on
the subject site, the soils should experience angular rotation in the magnitude
of less than 1 inch in 25 feet under a structural load of 2,000 pounds per
square foot. The total settlement is anticipated to be on the order of 1 inch.
As a minimum for protection of other on-site improvements, it is recom-
mended that all nonstructural concrete slabs (such as patios, walkways, etc.)
be underlain by at least 2 inches of clean sand and include at least a
minimum of 6 x 6 - 10/10 welded-wire mesh at midheight of the slab and
contain adequate isolation and control joints. The performance of on-site
improvements can be greatly affected by soil base preparation and the
quality of construction. It is therefore important that all improvements are
properly designed and constructed for the existing soil conditions or be built
on properly compacted soil tested by our firm. Any rigid improvements
founded on the existing loose surface soils can be expected to undergo
movement and possible damage and is therefore not recommended.
Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. takes no responsibility for the performance of
the improvements.
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 20
C. Design Parameters for Proposed Seawall and Retaining Walls
Our investigation revealed that at the location of the proposed seawall, the site is
underlain by dense formational materials with a surface layer of beach sand
deposits that typically range from 2 to 5 feet below the existing beach grade. This
loose surface soil will not provide a stable soil base for the proposed seawall. As
such, recommendations have been made to embed the seawall foundation into the
underlying formational materials. We also recommend that the fill/backfill soils
placed behind the seawall and patio/terrace area consist of beach/terrace sand-type
material.
The seawall foundation shall be embedded a minimum of 4 feet into dense
formational material due to concern for potential scouring by storm surf
action. This depth is approximately 3 feet above mean sea level (depending
on the beach sand thickness) and is expected to be approximately 14 feet
below the adjacent western patio/terrace area.
The recommended allowable load-bearing value (at a minimum depth of 4
feet into the dense native materials) is 3,500 pounds per square foot for a
minimum footing width of 4 feet. This load-bearing value may be utilized in
the design of the seawall foundation when founded a minimum of 4 feet into
the firm natural ground, measured from the bottom of the footing to the
lowest adjacent grade at the time of foundation construction. This load-
bearing value may be increased one-third for design loads that include wind
or seismic analysis.
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 21
All other proposed retaining walls to be constructed should be founded on firm
natural ground or properly compacted fills, and should be designed based on the
following soil design parameters:
12. The active earth pressure (to be utilized in the design of the proposed seawall
and other retaining walls, etc.) utilizing the on-site materials as backfill
should be based on an Equivalent Fluid Weight of 38 pounds per cubic foot
(for level backfill only). Any surcharge pressures applied within the potential
failure block shall also be added to the soil lateral pressures.
In the event that a retaining wall is surcharged by sloping backfill, the design
active earth pressure shall be based on the appropriate Equivalent Fluid
Weight presented in the following table:
*To determine design active earth pressure for ratios intermediate to those
presented, interpolate between the stated values.
In the event that a retaining wall is to be designed for a restrained condition,
a uniform pressure equal to 9xH (nine times the total height of retained soil,
considered in pounds per square foot) should be considered as acting
everywhere on the back of the wall in addition to the design Equivalent Fluid
Weight.
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 22
The passive earth pressure of the encountered dense natural-ground soils or
properly compacted fill (to be used for the design of shallow footings) should
be based on an Equivalent Fluid Weight of 300 pounds per cubic foot. The
passive earth pressure should only be considered valid for design if the
ground adjacent to the foundation structure is essentially level for a distance
of at least three times the total depth of the foundation.
A Coefficient of Friction of 0.40 times the dead load may be used between
the bearing soils and concrete wall foundations.
D. Slopes
The existing slopes on the site appear to be relatively stable. However, it is
our opinion that the new cut and fill slopes may be subject to future erosion
and surficial failure if left unprotected.
In order to reduce the risk of future slope stability problems, we recommend
that a program of proper landscaping and maintenance be effected as part of
development of this site.
The soils that occur within 5 feet of the face of fill slopes often possess poor
lateral stability and structures and other improvements (such as walls,
fences, patios, sidewalks, swimming pools, driveways, etc.) that are located
within 5 feet of the edge, of any slopes could suffer differential movement as
a result of the poor lateral stability of these soils.
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 23
Conventional shallow foundations and footings of proposed structures, walls,
etc., when founded 5 feet and farther away from the .top of allowable slopes,
may be of standard design in conformance with the recommended load-
bearing value. If the proposed foundations and footings are located closer
than 5 feet inside the top of allowable slopes; they shall be deepened to 1.5
feet below a line beginning at a point 5 feet horizontally inside the slopes and
projected outward and downward, parallel to the face of the slope (see
Figure No. IV).
17. We anticipate that temporary slopes into the terrace material of
approximately 8 to 10 feet in height may be required during excavation of
the lower-level living areas. Based on the results of our field investigation, it
is our opinion that the following temporary-slope design criteria may be
considered in areas where the excavation slope top will be at least 10 feet
away from any existing structures:
The existing terrace materials may be cut vertical for the lower 5 feet and at
a slope ration of 0.5 horizontal to 1 .0 vertical for the remaining height (for an
unsupported period not to exceed eight weeks). For the basement areas, the
cuts shall be from the heel of the foundation and extend to at least 8 feet at
the ground level. The basement wall backfill shall consist of non-expansive
soil.
Any plans for slopes in excess of the assumed 10-foot maximum must be
presented to our office prior to grading to allow time for review and specific
recommendations, if warranted. Proper drainage away from the excavation
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 24
shall be provided at all times. Soil stockpiles shall not be placed within 6
feet from the top of the cuts.
A representative of Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. must observe any steep
temporary slopes during excavation. In the event that soils and formational
material comprising a slope are not as anticipated, any required slope design
changes would be presented at that time..
Where not superseded by specific recommendations presented in this report,
trenches, excavations and temporary slopes at the subject site shall be
constructed in accordance with Title 8, Construction Safety Orders, issued
by OSHA.
It is recommended that all compacted fill slopes and natural cut slopes be
planted with an erosion resistant plant, in conformance with the
requirements of the City of Carlsbad.
E. Site Drainage Considerations
Adequate measures shall be taken to properly finish-grade the site after the
structures and other improvements are in place. Drainage waters from this
site and adjacent properties are to be directed away from foundations, floor
slabs, footings, and slopes, onto the natural drainage direction for this area
or into properly designed and approved drainage facilities. Roof gutters and
downspouts should be installed on all structures, with runoff directed away
from the foundations via closed drainage lines. Proper subsurface and
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 25
surface drainage will help minimize the potential for waters to seek the level
of the bearing soils under the foundations, footings, and floor slabs. Failure
to observe this recommendation could result in undermining and differential
settlement of the structure or other improvements on the site.
The ground surface adjacent to building foundations shall be sloped at a
gradient of at least 5 percent within 10 feet, draining away from the
foundations.
In addition, appropriate erosion-control measures shall be taken at all time
during construction to prevent surface runoff waters from entering footing
excavations and ponding on finished building pads or running uncontrolled
over the tops of newly constructed cut or fill slopes. Particular care should
be taken to prevent saturation of any temporary construction slopes.
21. Due to the possible buildup of groundwater (derived primarily from rainfall
and irrigation), excess moisture is a common problem in below-grade
structures or behind proposed retaining walls. These problems are generally
in the form of water seepage through slabs and/or walls, mineral staining,
mildew growth and high humidity. In order to minimize the potential for
moisture-related problems to develop at the site, proper ventilation and
waterproofing must be provided for below-ground areas and the backfill side
of all structure retaining walls must be adequately waterproofed and drained.
Should water seeps be observed during grading, additional recommendations
will be provided by our firm, as warranted.
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 26
Proper waterproofing, protection board, subdrains and free-draIning back'wall
material such as gravel or geocomposite (Miradrain 6000 or equivalent) shall
be installed behind all retaining walls on the subject project. Geotechnical
Exploration, Inc. will assume no liability for damage to structures which is
attributable to poor drainage. Subdrain shallbe placed at least 18 inches
below the surface elevation being protected (interior slab).
Planter areas, flower beds, and planter boxes shall be sloped to drain away
from the foundations, footings, and floor slabs. Planter boxes shall be
constructed with a sealed bottom and a subsurface drain, installed in gravel,
with the direction of subsurface and surface flow away from the
foundations, footings, and floor slabs, to an adequate drainage facility. All
landscaped areas shall be provided with proper area drains.
F. General Recommendations
Following placement of any concrete floor slabs, sufficient drying time should
be allowed prior to placement of floor coverings. Premature placement of
floor coverings could result in degradation of adhesive materials and
loosening of the finish-floor materials.
In order to minimize any work delays at the subject site during site
development, this firm should be contacted 24 hours prior to any need for
observation of footing or caisson excavations or field density testing of
compacted fill, soils. If possible, placement of formwork and steel
reinforcement in footing excavations should not occur prior to observation of
ir
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California, Page 27
the excavations; in the event that our observation reveals the need for
deepening or redesigning foundation structures at' any locations, any
formwork or steel reinforcement in the affected footing excavation areas
would have to be removed prior to correction of the observed problem (i.e.,
deepening the footing excavation, recompacting soil in the bottom of the
excavation, etc.).
IX. GRADING NOTES
Any required grading operations shall be performed in accordance with the General
Earthwork Specifications (Appendix B) and the requirements of the City of Carlsbad
Grading Ordinance.
Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. recommends that we be asked to verify the
actual soil conditions revealed during site grading work and footing
excavations to be as anticipated in this "Report of Soil and Limited
Geotechnical Investigation Update." In addition, the compaction of any fill
soils placed during site grading work must be tested by the soil engineer. It
is the responsibility of the grading contractor to comply with the
requirements on the grading or building plans and the local grading ordinance.
It is the responsibility of the owner and/or developer to ensure that the
recommendations summarized in the report are carried out in the field
operations and that our recommendations for design of the project are
incorporated in the building and grading plans. Our firm should review the
grading and foundation plans when they become available.
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 28
27. This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We
do not direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for
the safety of personnel other than our own on the site; the safety of others
is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify the
owner if he considers any of the recommended actions presented herein to
be unsafe.
X. LIMITATIONS
Our conclusions and recommendations have been based on all available data
obtained from our field investigation and laboratory analysis, as well as our
experience with the soils and native materials located in the City of Carlsbad. Of
necessity, we must assume a certain degree of continuity between exploratory
excavations and/or natural exposures. The actual soil conditions between
exploratory excavations may differ. it is, therefore, necessary that all observations,
conclusions, and recommendations be verified at the time grading operations begin
or when footing excavations are placed. In the event discrepancies are noted,
additional recommendations may be issued, if required.
The work performed and recommendations presented herein are the result of an
investigation and analysis which meet the contemporary standard of care in our
profession with the County of San Diego. No warranty is provided.
This report should be considered valid for a period of two (2) years, and is subject
to review by our firm following that time. The firm of Geotechnical Exploration,
Palisoul/Blair Duplex Job No. 89-5594
Carlsbad, California Page 29
Inc. shall not be held responsible for changes to the physical condition of the
property, such as addition of fill soils or changing, drainage patterns, which occur
subsequent to issuance of this report.
Once again, should any questions arise concerning this report, please feel free to
contact the project coordinator. Reference to our Job No. 89-5594 will help to
expedite a reply to your inquiries.
Respectfully submitted,
GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC.
Jiy K. Reiser, Senior Project Geologist
Jaime A. Ce rros, P.
R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
JKH/LDR/JAC/pj
f D. Reed, Riedent/C.E.G. 999
-1i-'
LQ
( No 002007
' T t Exp. 9/30/92
ct 4'
. 1C-l$ ? OF
REFERENCES
JOB NO. 89-5594
12 May 1997
Association of Engineering Geologists, 1973, Geology and Earthquake Hazards,
Planners Guide to the Seismic Safety Element, Southern California Section,
Association of Engineering Geologists, Special Publication, Published July 1973, p.
44.
California Division of Mines and Geology - Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones Map,
November 1, 1991.
Growell, J.C., 1962, Displacement along the San Andreas Fault, California;
Geologic Society of America Special Paper 71, 61 p.
Greene, H.G., 1979, Implication of Fault Patterns in the Inner California Continental
Borderland betwen San Pedro and San Diego, in "Earthquakes and Other Perils, San
Diego Region," P.L. Abbott and W.J.-Elliott, editors.
Greensfelder, R.W., 1974, Maximum Credible Rock Acceleration from Earthquakes
in California; California Division of Mines and Geology, Map Sheet 23.
Hart, E.W., D.P. Smith and R.B. Saul, 1979, Summary Report: Fault Evaluation
Program, 1978 Area (Peninsular Ranges-Salton Trough Region), Calif. Div. of Mines
and Geology, OFR 79-10 SF, 10.
Hart E.W., 1980, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Calif. Div. of Mines and
Geology, Special Publication 42, Rev. March 1980, p. 25.
Hileman, J.A., C.R. Allen and J.M. Nordquist, 1973, Seismicity of the Southern
California Region, January 1, 1932 to December 31, 1972; Seismological
Laboratory, Cal-Tech, Pasadena, Calif.
Kennedy, M.P., 1975, Geology of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, California;
Bulletin 200, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology, 1975.
McEuen, R.B. and C.J. Pinckney, 1972, Seismic Risk in San Diego; Transactions of
the San Diego Society of Natural History, Vol. 17, No. 4, 19 July 1972.
Richter, C.G., 1958, Elementary Seismology, W.H. Freeman and Company, San
Francisco, Calif.
Page 2
Rockwell, T.K., D.E. Millman, R.S. McElwain, and D.L. Lamar, 1985, Study of
Seismic Activity by Trenching Along the Glen Ivy North Fault, Elsinore Fault Zone,
Southern California: Lamar-Merifield Technical Report 85-1, U.S.G.S. Contract 14-
08-0001-21376, 19 p.
Toppozada, T.R. and D.L. Parke, 1982, Areas Damaged by California Earthquakes,
1900-1949; Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology, Open-file Report 82-17, Sacramento,
Calif.
r
_
QM (
0 L 1-1 B-5
U 0 .0) La
QM
CL
Chain-
Fence 8-4
B-2
QM.
FF Building.
Lu
0
0
j
/
VICINITY MAP
SCALE: 1" = 20'
REFERENCE: THIS PLOT PLAN WAS PREPARED FROM AN EX1S7ING TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY MAP BY ODAY CONSULTANTS
DATED APRIL 1997 AND FROM A GRADING PLAN BY THE LEGEND SAME DATED SEPT 1989 AND FROM ON—SITE FIELD RECONNAISSANCE PERFORMED BY GEl.
T ASSUMED PROPERTY BOUNDARY PLOT PLAN
H II PROPOSED STRUCTURE and 6101061C YAP
EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY (Feet) PAL/SOUL/BLAIR DUPLEX
2653 OCEAN STREET NOTE This Plot Plan is riot to be used for legal
purposes. Locations and dimensions are approxi— APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF CARLSBAD, CA.
FIGURE NUMBER I mate. Actual property dimensions and locations
of utilities may be obtained from the Approved B—i EXPLORATORY BORING
JOB NUMBER 89-5594 Building, Plans or the "As—Built' Grading Plans.
T-1 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
EXPLORATORY TRENCH GEOTECHNICAL
Q m QUATERNARY MARINE—TERRACE DEPOSITS EXPLORATION INC. 5594—P2
EQUIPMENT DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION DATE LOGGED
Portable Auger Drill Ri.g 6" diameter boring 3-31-97
SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH LOGGED BY
± 38' Mean Sea Level
Not encountered JKH
FIELD DESCRIPTION
AND
.
C CLASSIFICATION
DESCRIPTION CL
Ui ca CL AND REMARKS
(Groin size, Density, Moisture, Color) (4 $ I i LLj
U,
SLE 55
SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND rock SM
2 - fragments and roots, poorly
cemented. Dry to damp. Red- 4.5 98.1
brown. 19 3" -
-
/
6
-
TERRACE 34 8 Tr;
- SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, SM
modertely cemented. Dense. 10 Damp. Red-brown. 3.6 107.2
12- TERRACE
-
40+
Bottom of hole @ 11'
14 -
16-
18 -
20
22
' WATER TABLE JOB NAME
Pali-soul/Blair Duplex
LOOSE BAG SAMPLE SITE LOCATION
Iii IN—PLACE SAMPLE 2653 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, California
JOB NUMBER REVIEWED BY LOG No. DRIVE SAMPLE
III SAND CONE/F.D.T.
CON11NUOUS CORE SAMPLE
89-5594
(1ihI
FIGURE NUMBER
I i a
EQUIPMENT DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION DATE LOGGED
Portable Auger Drill Ri-g 6" diameter boring 3-31-97
SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH LOGGED BY
± 38' Mean Sea Level
Not encountered JKH
FIELD DESCRIPTION
AND
CLASSIFICATION .
q- O.U)
., d in
' I&jCfl
CL= DESCRIPTION MO REMARKS CS (Grain size, Density, Moisture, Color) CL
W Iff
Eke
CL
SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND with SM
• some roots and rock fragments.
- Loose to medium dense. Damp to 5.7 112.9
- moist. Red-brown. 17 3"
TERRACE
6
FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, poorly SM 12 cemented. Medium dense. Damp. 8
•
Tan-gray and red-brown.
10- I TERRACE
FINE TO MEDIUM SAND with some SM 4.4 108.7
50 12- rock fragments, moderately
- cemented. Medium dense to dense.
14- Damp. Tan-gray and red-brown.
- TERRACE
16 Bottom of hole @ 11.5'
18-
20
22 -
S7 WATER TABLE JOB NAME
Pali-soul/Blair Duplex
LOOSE BAG SAMPLE SITE LOCATION
Eli IN—PLACE SAMPLE 2653 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, California
DRIVE SAMPLE JOB NUMBER REVIEWED BY LOG No.
[] SAND CONE/F.D.T. 89-5594
B-2 FIGURE NUMBER
CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE I I b
of
EQUIPMENT DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION DATE LOGGED
Portable Auger Drill Ri.g 6" diameter boring 3-31-97
SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH LOGGED BY
± 32' Mean Sea Level Not encountered JKH
-
- FIELD DESCRIPTION
- AND
CLASSIFICATION
_
w L.j CL
-' ij
as Q. + I )- C
DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
(Grain size, Density, Moisture, Color) C63 C13,9
__--
_.r•1_ -- __- ___-
SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND with SM 2 some roots and rock fragments. 8.1 108.8 - Medium dense. Damp. Red-brown.
31 3" 2 TERRACE -
6.?'
FINE TO MEDIUM SAND with some SM 21
rock fragments, poorly cemented.
8 - Medium dense. Damp. Tan-gray
and red-brown.
10
- I TERRACE 5.6 100.5 39
12
- Bottom of hole @ 11.5'
14 -
16 -
18-
20
22
2 WATER TABLE JOB NAME
Pali-soul/Blair Duplex
LOOSE BAG SAMPLE SITE LOCATION
III IN-PLACE SAMPLE 2653 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, California
JOB NUMBER REVIEWED BY LOG No. U DRIVE SAMPLE
SAND CONE/F.D.T.
CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
-
89-5594
1 1c
B-3 FIGURE NUMBER
EQUIPMENT DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION DATE LOGGED
Portable Auger Drill Ri-g 6" diameter boring 3-31-97
SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH LOGGED BY
± 28' Mean Not encountered JKH
FIELD DESCRIPTION
AND
CLASSIFICATION c 2 .,
+
am a. c. DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
(Grain size, Density, Moisture, Color)
-.•- _*.1
SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND with SM
2 - some roots, gravel and concrete
.4••
debris. Loose. Dry. Gray-brown.
\
5.7 104.2 23 3"
4 P: \ FILL
- .yi:4.
SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, SM
moderately cemented. Medium dense.
Damp. Red-brown.
8
- I TERRACE
- 16
FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, poorly SM 10
.. cemented. Medium dense to dense. 4.6 103.3
Damp. Tan-gray and red-brown.
12- TERRACE 50-
Bottom of hole @ 11' 14 -
16-
18-
20
22
WATER TABLE JOB NAME
Pali—soul/Blair Duplex
LOOSE BAG SAMPLE SITE LOCATION
IJJ IN—PLACE SAMPLE 2653 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, California
JOB NUMBER REVIEWED BY LOG No. U DRIVE SAMPLE
] SAND CONE/F.D.T.
CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
89-5594
(1J16
B - 4 FIGURE NUMBER
I I d
EQUIPMENT DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION - DATE LOGGED
Portable Auger Drill Ri-g 6" diameter boring 3-31-97
SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH LOGGED BY
± 28' Mean Sea Level Not encountered JKH
FIELD DESCRIPTION
AND
CLASSIFICATION ' 'a.'
iI
Co RL 3- (A 0. gv
Uj DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
-
Ui Cj (Grain size, Density, Moisture, Color)
:1
::t
.j SILTY FINE TO_MEDIUM SAND with SM
2 - some roots, gravel and concrete
-
Y. debris. Loose. Dry. Gray-brown. 3.0 102.9 12 3"
4i: \ FILL
SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND with som SM 6 - roots and rock fragments. Loose
- to medium dense. Damp. Red-
.*;i brown. 17 8 --
- TERRACE
10-
FINE TO MEDIUM SAND with some rock SM 1.8 105.4 50+
12- fragments, poorly cemented. Dense
Damp to moist. Light gray and
red-brown.
14
16
TERRACE
18
- perched groundwater
Bottom of hole @ 19' 20 —
22 -• Drilling refusal @ 19' on dense
sandstone.
9! WATER TABLE JOB NAME Pali
-soul/Blair Duplex
LOOSE BAG SAMPLE SITE LOCATION
IN—PLACE SAMPLE 2653 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, California
JOB NUMBER REVIEWED BY LOG No. 1 DRIVE SAMPLE
[] SAND CONE/F.D.T. 89-5594 B-5
CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
FIGURE NUMBER
lie (14tj[ 19
EQUIPMENT DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION DATE LOGGED
John Deere Backhoe 2' x 20' x 5' Trench 8/31/89
SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH LOGGED BY
Approximately 5' MSL lApproximately 11' JKH
FIELD DESCRIPTION — AND E CLASSIFICATION
_Uj
' .° _j + •
2
••-• (/ W AND REMARKS cc CL.(Grain
0.DESCRIPTION
size, Density, Moisture, Color) • U, " LIJ CUD CO L Ln
FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, with abundant SP
- cobbles and debris. Loose. Damp.
1 - j Light gray.
-
2:::.
3 - ::2 BEACH SAND
_
• :V. -groundwater 'Taf - SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND, well Sm
- indurated. Dense. Moist. Yellow-
tan. FORMATION
- 5
Bottom of hole @ 5'.
Contact between beach sand and
• formation ranges from 2' near the
- bluff to 5' along the western
property line.
JOB NAME
Paisou1/Blair Duplex
V WATER TABLE SITE LOCATION
LOOSE BAG SAMPLE 2600 Block of Ocean Street, Carlsbad, CA
JOB NUMBER REVIEWED BY LOG No. IN-PLACE SAMPLE
89-5594 T- I FIGURE NUMBER DRIVE SAMPLE
LI SAND CONE/F.D.T. I If
:[iJ ; A on ;1Ui] IU 'Y v1111 L
END
EMILIE I." MUII1 R
1111111111111110 -
E
.i.r4v1
-
iau•uui
u•iauurns.
iuuuusi•aui.
i••i u uui - --
-
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY
ij$;LIJ
(Z •
:_!IIIUINU
ONTENT
W41DY
iI 1
DIRECT SHEAR TEST 1
11
2 3 DATA
APPA NT COHESION (psf) 850
APPARENT FRICTION ANGLE 380
iiIk'
IIuIIIIIIlIiIflhIflhIlIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIII1IIIIii!"!LIIIII1IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
111111111
llllllhllllllllillllhINIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIH
IIIIIIIIItIIIIII1IIIIlLL1UhIIJIIIIUIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIlIUIIIIII1IkUhI}IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIlIIIII IIUUIIIIUIIIItiIIIIII!!iIIIIlIIIIIIUIIIIIIII
__ ____________
I SOIL I SOIL CLASSIFICATION BORIIG TRENCH DEPTH I TYPE No. No.
I i I SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND. Red-brown. B-i 2' I 1 2 I I FINE TO MEDIUM SAND. Light gray & red-brown. B-5 10' I
3
I I I
I SWELL TEST DATA 1
I
2 3
INITIAL DRY DENSITY (pcf)
INITIAL WATER CONTENT (%)
LOAD (psf)
PERCENT SWELL o 0
—RI.. mmon
ii idi "H
'HI HI I
54
SI" SI"
FOUNDATION REQUIREMENTS NEAR SLOPES
PROPOSED STRUCTURE
CONCRETE FLOOR SLAB do
\ - SETBACK -
.5' -
' . a 94 T 4 IV4 P 4 a , eq
,
4p
444% 44P,,
REINFORCEMENT OF C 4 d
FOUNDATIONS AND FLOOR ','. a
SLABS FOLLOWING THE 6 ,
RECOIIUIDATIONS OF THE
- P
ARCHITECT OR STRUCTURAL ENGINEER ' r P a s
44 Pb.
CONCRETE FOUNDATION
.
18' MINIMUM OR AS DEEP AS
REQUIRED FOR LATERAL
STABILITY
TOP OF COMPACTED FILL SLOPE
(Any loose soils on the slope surface
shall not be considered to provide
lateral or vertical strength for the
footing or for slope stability. Needed
depth of igedment shall be measured
from competent soil.)
COMPACTED FILL SLOPE WITH
MAXIMUM INCLINATION AS
PER SOILS REPORT.
TOTAL DEPTH OF FOOTING MEASURED
FROM FINISH SOIL SUB-GRADE
4.. COMPACTED FILL
_J\'s
OUTERMOSTFAC?c, 5'
OF FOOTING
TYPICAL SECTION
(SHOWING PROPOSED FOUNDATION LOCATED WITHIN 5 FEET OF TOP OF SLOPE)
18" FOOTING! 5' SETBACK
TOTAL DEPTH OF FOOTING
1.5:1.0 SLOPE 2.0:1.0 SLOPE
0 58" 48"
51" 42"
42" 36"
34" 30"
26" 24"
51 1 18" 18"
I when applicable
FIGURE NUMBER iv
JOB NUMBER 89-5594
RECOMMENDED RETAINING WALL/EXTERIOR FOOTING SUBDRAIN
Proposed Exterior
Grade
To Drain at A Mm. 5%
Fall Away from Bldg .•.•.•.•.•.•.•.
6' Min. I
: : : : :
..................
................ . . . • . ... . .
..
- Miradrii
Exterior /Retaining \ : Footing/ Wall
Sealant Lower—level
Slab-on-grade \ ..........•.....
Sealant j
_________________
/
AJ
..........
.............. . . . . ..i.
T Between Bottom
12" of Slab and
Pipe Bottom
Properly
Waterproofing Compacted
To lop Of Wall Backfill
Perforated PVC Schedule 40,
4" pipe with 0.5% mm. slope,
with bottom of pipe located 12"
below slab or interior (crawlspace)
around suface elevation, with 1.5
(cu.ft.) of gravel 1M diameter
max, wrapped with -filter cloth
such as Miradrain 6000
Miadrain Cloth
NOT TO SCALE
II NOTE. As on option to Mirodrain 6000, Class II Aggregate Base FIGURE NUMBER V I 3/4" maximum diameter, per Colirans Section 26-1.028 may be
used. with a minimum 12' thickness along the interior face of JOB NUMBER 89_5594 the wail and 2.0 cu.ft./ft of pipe grove! envelope.
_____
I OOTCMNICAJINC. 5594 V EXPL0RATION
EL CE011Rd —
(
us
ANGELES
RIVRSVE'
CH
S
REGIONAL FAULT ~'111 Hk A%k "Bl
COMPILED FROM COMC AND UCSD MAPS
Fault Mop of southern Cofifomia.
io 20 30 40 50 60 miles
U I --
30 60 km
FIGURE NUMBER VI
JOB NUMBER 89-5594
CEOTECHNICAL
EXPLORATION INC.
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX A
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
SOIL DESCRIPTION
COARSE-GRAINED
More than half of material is larger than a No. 200 sieve
GRAVELS, CLEAN GRAVELS
More than half of coarse fraction is larger than GW Well-graded gravels, gravel and sand mix-
No. 4 sieve size, but smaller than 3" tures, little or no fines.
GP Poorly graded gravels, gravel and sand mix-
tures, little or no fines.
GRAVELS WITH FINES
(appreciable amount)
SANDS. CLEAN SANDS
More than half of coarse fraction is smaller than a
No. 4 sieve.
SANDS WITH FINES
(appreciable amount)
GM Silty gravels, poorly graded gravel-sand-silt
mixtures.
GC Clay gravels, poorly graded gravel-sand-silt
mixtures.
SW Well-graded sand, gravelly sands, little or no
no fines.
SP Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or
no fines.
SM Silty sands, poorly graded sand and silty
mixtures.
SC Clayey sands, poorly graded sand and clay
mixtures.
FINE-GRAINED
More than half of material is smaller than a No. 200 sieve
SILTS AND CLAYS
Liquid Limit Less Than 50
Liquid Limit Greater Than 50.
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour,
sandy silt and clayey-silt sand mixtures with
a slight plasticity.
CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity,
gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, clean
clays.
OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low
plasticity.
MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous
fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts.
CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays.
OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity.
PT Peat and other highly organic soils.
APPENDIX B
CA -
APPENDIX B
GENERAL EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS
General
The objective of these specifications is to properly establish procedures for the
clearing and preparation of the existing natural ground or properly compacted fill
to receive new fill; for the selection of the fill material; and for the fill
compaction and testing methods to be used.
Scope of Work
The earthwork includes all the activities and resources provided by the
contractor to construct in a good workmanlike manner all the grades of the filled
areas shown in the plans. The major items of work covered in this section
include all clearing and grubbing, removing and disposing of materials, preparing
areas to be filled, compacting of fill, compacting of backfills, subdrain
installations, and all other work necessary to complete the grading of the filled
areas.
Site Visit and Site Investigation
The contractor shall visit the site and carefully study it, and make all
inspections necessary in order to determine the full extent of the work
required to complete all grading in conformance with the drawings and
specifications. The contractor shall satisfy himself as to the nature,
location, and extent of the work conditions, the conformation and
condition of the existing ground surface; and the type of equipment,
labor, and facilities needed prior to and during prosecution of the work.
The contractor shall satisfy himself as to the character, quality, and
quantity of surface and subsurface materials or obstacles to be
encountered. Any inaccuracies or discrepancies between the actual field
conditions and the drawings, or between the drawings and specifications,
must be brought to the engineer's attention in order to clarify the exact
nature of the work to be performed.
A soils investigation report has been prepared for this project by GEl. It is
available for review and should be used as a reference to the surface and
subsurface soil and bedrock conditions on this project. Any
B2
recommendations made in the report of the soil investigation or
subsequent reports shall become an addendum to these specifications.
Authority of the Soils Engineer and Engineering Geologist
The soils engineer shall be the owner's representative to observe and test the
construction of fills. Excavation and the placing of fill shall be under the
observation of the soils engineer and his/her representative, and he/she shall
give a written opinion regarding conformance with the specifications upon
completion of grading. The soils engineer shall have the authority to cause the
removal and replacement of porous topsoils, uncompacted or improperly
compacted fills, disturbed bedrock materials, and soft alluvium, and shall have
the authority to approve or reject materials proposed for use in the compacted
fill areas.
The soils engineer shall have, in conjunction with the engineering geologist, the
authority to approve the preparation of natural ground and toe-of-fill benches to
receive fill material. The engineering geologist shall have the authority to
evaluate the stability of the existing or proposed slopes, and to evaluate the
necessity of remedial measures. If any unstable condition is being created by
cutting or filling, the engineering geologist and/or soils engineer shall advise the
contractor and owner immediately, and prohibit grading in the affected area until
such time as corrective measures are taken.
The owner shall decide all questions regarding: (1) the interpretation of the
drawings and specifications, (2) the acceptable fulfillment of the contract on the
part of the contractor, and (3) the matter of compensation.
Clearing and Grubbing
Clearing and grubbing shall consist of the removal from all areas to be
graded of all surface trash, abandoned improvements, paving, culverts,
pipe, and vegetation (including - but not limited to - heavy weed growth,
trees, stumps, logs and roots larger than '1-inch in diameter).
All organic and inorganic materials resulting from the clearing and
grubbing operations shall be collected, piled, and disposed of by the
contractor to give the cleared areas a neat and finished appearance.
Burning of combustible materials on-site shall not be permitted unless
allowed by local regulations, and at such times and in such a manner to
B3
prevent the fire from spreading to areas adjoining the property or cleared
area.
3. It is understood that minor amounts of organic materials may remain in
the fill soils due to the near impossibility of complete removal. The
amount remaining, however, must be considered negligible, and in no
case can be allowed to occur in concentrations or total quantities
sufficient to contribute to settlement upon decomposition.
Preparation of Areas to be Filled
After clearing and grubbing, all uncompacted or improperly compacted
fills, soft or loose soils, or unsuitable materials, shall be removed to
expose competent natural ground, undisturbed bedrock, or properly
compacted fell as indicated in the soils investigation report or by our field
representative. Where the unsuitable materials are exposed in final
graded areas, they shall be removed and replaced as compacted fill.
The ground surface exposed after removal of unsuitable soils shall be
scarified to a depth of at least 6 inches, brought to the specified moisture
content, and then the scarified ground compacted to at least the specified
density. Where undisturbed bedrock is exposed at the surface,
scarification and recompaction shall not be required.
All areas to receive compacted fill, including all removal areas and toe-of-
fill benches, shall be observed and approved by the soils engineer and/or
engineering geologist prior to placing compacted fill.
Where fills are made on hillsides or exposed slope areas with gradients
greater than 20 percent, horizontal benches shall be cut into firm,
undisturbed, natural ground in order to provide both lateral and vertical
stability. This is to provide a horizontal base so that each layer is placed
and compacted on a horizontal plane. The initial bench at the toe of the
fill shall be at least 10 feet in width on firm, undisturbed, natural ground
at the elevation of the toe stake placed at the bottom of the design slope.
The engineer shall determine the width and frequency of all succeeding
benches, which will vary with the soil conditions and the steepness of the
slope. Ground slopes flatter than 20 percent (5.0:1.0) shall be benched
when considered necessary by the soils engineer.
B4
Fill arid Backfill Material
Unless otherwise specified, the on-site material obtained from the project
excavations may be used as fill or backfill, provided that all organic material,
rubbish, debris, and other objectionable material contained therein is first
removed. In the event that expansive materials are encountered during
foundation excavations within 3 feet of finished grade and they have not been
properly processed, they shall be entirely removed or thoroughly mixed with
good, granular material before incorporating them in fills. No footing shall be
allowed to bear on soils which, in the opinion of the soils engineer, are
detrimentally expansive -- unless designed for this clayey condition.
However, rocks, boulders, broken Portland cement concrete, and bituminous-
type pavement obtained from the project excavations may be permitted in the
backfill or fill with the following limitations:
1. The maximum dimension of any piece used in the top 10 feet shall be no
larger than 6 inches.
2 Clods or hard lumps of earth of 6 inches in greatest dimension shall be
broken up before compacting the material in fill.
If the fill material originating from the project excavation contains large
rocks, boulders, or hard lumps that cannot be broken readily, pieces
ranging from 6 inches in diameter to 2 feet in maximum dimension may
be used in fills below final subgrade if all pieces are placed in such a
manner (such as windrows) as to eliminate nesting or voids between
them. No rocks over 4 feet will be allowed in the fill.
Pieces larger than 6 inches shall not be placed within 12 inches of any
structure.
Pieces larger than 3 inches shall not be placed within 12 inches of the
subgrade for paving.
Rockfills containing less than 40 percent of soil passing 3/4-inch sieve
may be permitted in designated areas. Specific recommendations shall be
made by the soils engineer and be subject to approval by the city
engineer.
Continuous observation by the soils engineer is required during rock
placement.
B5
Special and/or additional recommendations may be provided in writing by
the soils engineer to modify, clarify, or amplify these specifications.
During grading operations, soil types other than those analyzed in the soil
investigation report may be encountered by the contractor. The soils
engineer shall be consulted to evaluate the suitability of these soils as fill
materials.
Placing and Compacting Fill Material
After preparing the areas to be filled, the approved fill material shall be
placed in approximately horizontal layers, with lift thickness compatible to
the material being placed and the type of equipment being used. Unless
otherwise approved by the soils engineer, each layer spread for
compaction shall not exceed 8 irches of loose thickness. Adequate
drainage of the fill shall be provided at all times during the construction
period.
When the moisture content of the fill material is below that specified by
the engineer, water shall be added to it until the moisture content is as
specified.
When the moisture content of the fill material is above that specified by
the engineer, resulting in inadequate compaction or unstable fill, the fill
material shall be aerated by blading and scarifying or other satisfactory
methods until the moisture content is as specified.
After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly, it shall be
thoroughly compacted to not less than the density set forth in the
specifications. Compaction shall be accomplished with sheepsfoot rollers,
multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or other approved types of
acceptable compaction equipment. Equipment shall be of such design
that it will be able to compact the fill to the specified relative compaction.
Compaction shall cover the entire fill area, and the equipment shall make
sufficient trips to ensure that the desired density has been obtained
throughout the entire fill. At locations where it would be impractical due
to inaccessibility of rolling compacting equipment, fill layers shall be
compacted to the specified requirements by hand-directed compaction
equipment.
When soil types or combination of soil types are encountered which tend
to develop densely packed surfaces as a result of spreading or
compacting operations, the surface of each layer of fill shall be
sufficiently roughened after compaction to ensure bond to the succeeding
layer.
Unless otherwise specified, fill slopes shall not be steeper than 2.0
horizontal to 1.0 vertical. In general, fill slopes shall be finished in
conformance with the lines and grades shown on the plans. The surface
of fill slopes shall be overfilled to a distance from finished slopes such
that it will allow compaction equipment to operate freely within the zone
of the finished slope, and then cut back to the finished grade to expose
the compacted core. Alternate compaction procedures include the
backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers in increments of 3 to 5 feet
in elevation gain. Alternate methods may be used by the contractor, but
they shall be evaluated for approval by the soils engineer.
Unless otherwise specified, all allowed expansive fill material shall be
compacted to a moisture content of approximately 2 to 4 percent above
the optimum moisture content. Nonexpansive fill shall be compacted at
near-optimum moisture content. All fill shall be compacted, unless
otherwise specified, to a relative compaction not less than 95 percent for
fill in the upper 12 inches of subgrades under areas to be paved with
asphalt concrete or Portland concrete, and not less than 90 percent for
other fill. The relative compaction is the ratio of the dry unit weight of
the compacted fill to the laboratory maximum dry unit weight of a sample
of the same soil, obtained in accordance with A.S.T.M. D-1557 test
method.
The observation and periodic testing by the soils engineer are intended to
provide the contractor with an ongoing measure of the quality of the fill
compaction operation. It is th& responsibility of the grading contractor to
utilize this information to establish the degrees of compactive effort
required on the project. More importantly, it is the responsibility of the
grading contractor to ensure that proper compactive effort is applied at all
times during the grading operation, including during the absence of soils
engineering representatives.
Trench Backfill
1. Trench excavations which extend under graded lots, paved areas, areas
under the influence of structural loading, in slopes or close to slope areas,
shall be backfilled under the observations and testing of the soils
engineer. All trenches not falling within the aforementioned locations
B7
shall be backfilled in accordance with the City or County regulating
agency specifications.
Unless otherwise specified, the minimum degree of compaction shall be
90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density.
Any soft, spongy, unstable, or other similar material encountered in the
trench excavation upon which the bedding material or pipe is to be
placed, shall be removed to a depth recommended by the soils engineer
and replaced with bedding materials suitably densified.
Bedding material shall first be placed so that the pipe is supported for the
full length of the barrel with full bearing on the bottom segment. After
the needed testing of the pipe is accomplished, the bedding shall be
completed to at least 1 foot on top of the pipe. The bedding shall be
properly densified before backfill is placed. Bedding thall consist of
granular material with a sand equivalent not less than 30, or other
material approved by the engineer.
No rocks greater than 6 inches in diameter will be allowed in the backfill
placed between 1 foot above the pipe and 1 foot below finished
subgrade. Rocks greater than 2.5 inches in any dimension will not be
allowed in the backfill placed within 1 foot of pavement subgrade.
Material for mechanically compacted backfill shall be placed in lifts of
horizontal layers and properly moistened prior to compaction. In addition,
the layers shall have a thickness compatible with the material being
placed and the type of equipment being used. Each layer shall be evenly
spread, moistened or dried, and then tamped or rolled until the specified
relative compaction has bten attained.
Backfill shall be mechanically compacted by means of tamping rollers,
sheepsfoot rollers, pneumatic tire rollers, vibratory rollers, or other
mechanical tampers. Impact-type pavement breakers (stompers) will not
be permitted over clay, asbestos cement, plastic, cast iron, or
nonreinforced. concrete pipe. Permission to use specific compaction
equipment shall not be construed as guaranteeing or implying that the use
of such equipment will not result in damage to adjacent ground, existing
improvements, or improvements installed under the contract. The
contractor shall make his/her own determination in this regard.
Jetting shall not be permitted as a compaction method unless the soils
engineer allows it in writing.
B8
8. Clean granular material shall not be used as backfill or bedding in trenches
located in slope areas or within a distance of 10 feet of the top of slopes
unless provisions are made for a drainage system to mitigate the potential
buildup of seepage forces into the slope mass.
Observations and Testing
The soils engineers or their representatives shall sufficiently observe and
test the grading operations so that they can state their opinion as to
whether or not the fill was constructed in accordance with the
specifications.
The soils engineers or their representatives shall take sufficient density
tests during the placement of compacted fill. The contractor should
assist the soils engineer and/or his/her representative by digging test pits
for removal determinations and/or for testing compacted fill. In addition,
the contractor should cooperate with the soils engineer by removing or
shutting down equipment from the area being tested.
Fill shall be tested for compliance with the recommended relative
compaction and moisture conditions. Field density testing should be
performed by using approved methods by A.S.T.M., such as A.S.T.M.
Dl 556, D2922, and/or D2937. Tests to evaluate density of compacted
fill should be provided on the basis of not less than one test for each 2-
foot vertical lift of the fill, but not less than one test for each 1,000 cubic
yards of fill placed. Actual test intervals may vary as field conditions
dictate. In fill slopes, approximately half of the tests shall be made at the
fill slope, except that not more than one test needs to be made for each
50 horizontal feet of slope in each 2-foot vertical lift. Actual test
intervals may vary as field conditions dictate.
Fill found not to be in conformance with the grading recommendations
should be removed or otherwise handled as recommended by the soils
engineer.
Site Protection -
It shall be the grading contractor's obligation to take all measures deemed
necessary during grading to maintain adequate safety measures and working
conditions, and to provide erosion-control devices for the protection of
CAN
S9
excavated areas, slope areas, finished work on the site and adjoining properties,
from storm damage and flood hazard originating on the project. It shall be the
contractor's responsibility to maintain slopes in their as-graded form until all
slopes are in satisfactory compliance with the job specifications, all berms and
benches have been properly constructed, and all associated drainage devices
have been installed and meet the requirements of the specifications.
All observations, testing services, and approvals given by the soils engineer
and/or geologist shall not relieve the contractor of his/her responsibilities of
performing the work in accordance with these specifications.
After grading is completed and the soils engineer has finished his/her
observations and/or testing of the work, no further excavation or filling shall be
done except under his/her observations.
Adverse Weather Conditions
Precautions shall be taken by the contractor during the performance of
site clearing, excavations, and grading to protect the worksite from
flooding, ponding, or inundation by poor or improper surface drainage.
Temporary provisions shall be made during the rainy season to adequately
direct surface drainage away from and off the worksite. Where low areas
cannot be avoided, pumps should be kept on hand to continually remove
water during periods of rainfall.
During periods of rainfall, plastic sheeting shall be kept reasonably
accessible to prevent unprotected slopes from becoming saturated.
Where necessary during periods of rainfall, the contractor shall install
checkdams, desilting basins, rip-rap, sandbags, or other devices or
methods necessary to control erosion and provide safe conditions.
During periods of rainfall, the soils engineer should be kept informed by
the contractor as to the nature of remedial or preventative work being
performed (e.g. pumping, placement of sandbags or plastic sheeting,
other labor, dozing, etc.).
Following periods of rainfall, the contractor shall contact the soils
engineer and arrange a walk-over of the site in order to visually assess
rain-related damage. The soils engineer may also recommend excavations
and testing in order to aid in his/her assessments. At the request of the
soils engineer, the contractor shall make excavations in order to evaluate
the extent of rain-related damage.
B1O
Rain-related damage shall be considered to include, but may not be limited
to, erosion, silting, saturation, swelling, structural distress, and other
adverse conditions identified by the soils engineer. Soil adversely
affected shall be classified as Unsuitable Materials, and shall be subject to
overexcavation and replacement with compacted fill or other remedial
grading, as recommended by the soils engineer.
Relatively level areas, where saturated soils and/or erosion gullies exist to
depths of greater than 1.0 foot, shall be overexcavated to unaffected,
competent material. Where less than 1.0 foot in depth, unsuitable
materials may be processed in place to achieve near-optimum moisture
conditions, then thoroughly recompacted in accordance with the
applicable specifications. If the desired results are not achieved, the
affected materials shall be over-excavated, then replaced in accordance
with the applicable specifications.
In slope areas, where saturated soils and/or erosion gullies exist to depths
of greater than 1.0 foot, they shall be overexcavated and replaced as
compacted fill in accordance with the applicable specifications. Where
affected materials exist to depths of 1.0 foot or less below proposed
finished grade, remedial •grading by moisture-conditioning in place,
followed by thorough recompaction in accordance with the applicable
grading guidelines herein presented may be attempted. If materials shall
be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill, it shall be done in
accordance with the slope-repair recommendations herein. As field
conditions dictate, other slope-repair procedures may be recommended by
the soils engineer.
APPENDIX C
TABLE 1
DATE: Monday, May 12, 1997
* *
* E Q F A U L T *
* *
* Ver. 2.00 *
* *
* *
***** * ** ** * ** * **** *** * ** * * * *** *
(Estimation of Peak Horizontal Acceleration
From Digitized California Faults)
SEARCH PERFORMED FOR: JAY
JOB NUMBER: 89-5594
JOB NAME: PALISOUL/BLAIR
SITE COORDINATES:
LATITUDE: 33.16 N
LONGITUDE: 117.35 W
SEARCH RADIUS: 100 ml
ATTENUATION RELATION: 1) Campbell (1991) Horiz. - Deep Soil & Soft Rock
UNCERTAINTY (M=Mean, S=Mean+1-Sigma): M
SCOND: 0
COMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION
FAULT.-DATA FILE USED: CALIFLT.DAT
SOURCE OF DEPTH VALUES (A=Attenuation File, F=Fault Data File): A
-----------------------------
DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS ------------------------------
Page 1
MAX. CREDIBLE EVENT: :MAx. PROBABLE EVENT
APPROX. --------------------H ------------------- ABBREVIATED !DISTANCE MAX. PEAK 1 SITE MAX. PEAK 1 SITE
FAULT NAME 1 mi (km) 1CRED.1 SITE t INTENSIIPROB.1 SITE IINTENS
I --------------------------I ---------I MAG.ACC. •g MM H MAGHACC. gl MM
I I
ANACAPA 1 I--------------------------I
98
I
(158)11 7.001
---------I
-----I I
-----I
------I ------II
0.009:
I
------I ------II
II
III H
-----I I
6.251
-----I
------I I
0.0051 ------I
______
II
:BLUE CUT
I --------------------------I 82 (131): ---------I 7.00
-----I 0.01fl
-------------II
III H 6.25:
-----I 0.006:
------I
______
II ______ I
:BORREGO MTN. (San Jacinto)
I
I --------------------------I
68
I
(109): ---------I
I
6.501 -----I
0.011
I
1 ------I ------II
II
III H
I
6.25:
-----I
I
0.0091 ------I
III
I I
CAMP ROCK - EMERSON 1 I --------------------------I 99
I
(160): ---------I
I
7.50: -----I
I
0.0101 ------I ------II
II
III H
I
6.00:
-----I
I
0.003: ------I
______
I
I I CASA LOMA-CLARK (S.Jacin.) -------------------------- I 47
I
( 76): ----------I
I
7.501 -----I
I
0.040
------I ------II
II
V H
I
7.00:
I
0.029:
------------I
______
V
I I
ICHINO 1 I--------------------------I 45
---------I
I
( 73)11
I
7.001 -----I
I
0.036: ------I ------II
II
V H
I
4.751
-----I
I
0.0081
------I
______
III
I I
CLEGHORN I 77
I
(124)1
I
6.50:
I
0.008:
II
III H
I
6.25:
I
0.0071
______
II I --------------------------I ---------I -----I ------I ------II I I I I I -----I ------I ______ II I I CORONADO BANK 1
I-------------------------- I
21 ( 34)11
---------I
7.00:
-----I
0.089:
------I ------II
VII 6.50:
-----I
0.066: VI
I
COYOTE CREEK (San Jacinto)
I
-------------------------I
52
I
( 84):
---------I
I
7.501
-----I
I
0.0351
------I ------II
II
V
I
6.00:
-----I
------I ______
I
0.012: III
I I
ICUCAMONGA I -------------------------I
70
I
(112)1
---------I
I
7.00:
-----I
I
0.0171
------I ------II
II
IV 11
I
6.751
------I ______ I
0.015: IV
I I 'ELSINORE 1 -------------------------I
24 I ( 39)1 ---------I
I
7.501
-----I
I
0.1001 -------------II
II
VII H
-----I I
6.75:
-----I
------I ______ I
0.063: VI
I
,'GLN.HELEN-LYTLE CR-CLREMNT I--------------------------I
50
I
( 80): ---------I
I
7.50:
-----I
I
0.0371
------I ------II
II
V H
I
7.001
-----I
------I ______ I
0.026: V
I I HELENDALE I
-------------------------I
84
I
(135)1
---------I
I
7.501
-----I
I
0.015: ------I ------I
II
IV H
I
6.251
------I ______ I
0.006 II
I
HOT S-BUCK RDG.(S.Jacinto)
-------------------------I
51
I
( 82):
---------I
I
7.501 -----I
I
0.0361 ------I ------II
II
V H
-----I I
6.251
------I ______ I
0.0151 IV
I
LENWOOD 1 93
I
(iso): I
7.25:
I
0.0101
II
III H
-----I I
6.00:
------I ______ I
0.004: I I-------------------------I ---------I I I -----II ------ ------II II ----- II ------ II ______
'MALIBU COAST : -------------------------I ---------I
92 (148)1 7.50: -----I
0.0141
------I ------II
II
IV H 5.001 -----I
0.0021
------I - ______ I
,MOJAVE RIVER (Ord Mtn.) 1 79
I
(127)1
I
7.001
I
0.014:
II
III 11 1
I
6.251
I
0.0081 II I--------------------------I I I NEWPORT - INGLEWOOD
-------------------------I
38
---------I I ( 61)1 ---------I
-----I I
7.50:
-----I
------I ------II I
0.055: ------I
II
VI
-----I I
6.50:
------I I
0.0291
______
V
- -I
NORTHRIDGE HILLS 1
- ----------------------I ---------
98
I
(158): I
I
6.501
I -----
I
0.0061
I ------
------II II
II H II ------
-----I I
4.00:
I -----
------I I
0.0011
------
______
-
I
OFFSHORE ZONE OF DEFORM. 1 7
I
( 12)l
I
7.501
I
0.3411
II
IX 11
I
6.001
I
0.1601 VIII I --------------------------I ---------I I I -----I I ------I ------II -----I__ -- I ______
'OLD WOMAN SPRINGS 1 91 (146)1 7.001
I
0.0091
II
III H
I
5.751
I
0.0031 I -------------------------I ---------I I -----I ------I ------II I I I II -----I I ------I I ______
I PALOS VERDES HILLS 1
I--------------------------I 38 ( 61)1
---------I
7.001
-----I
0.0401
------I
V H 5.50 0.0151 IV
I PINTO MOUNTAIN - MORONGO 73 I
(118)1
I
7.501 I
0.0191
------II
II
IV H
-----I
I
6.001
_____I ______ I
0.0061 II -------------------------I --------- I I -----I I ------ I ------II I I II -----I ------I I ______
IRAYMOND 78 (126)1 7.50 0.020 IV H
I
5.501 0.0051 11
I_I _p _I _I _Il _I _I _i I I I I I II I I I ROSE CANYON 4 ( 6fl 7.50: 0.472: •X 1 6.251 0.301 11 IX 1 I --------------------------I ---------I -----I ------ I ------ Ii -----I
I ------ I ------I I I I I I I I I
DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS -----------------------------
Page 2
MAX. CREDIBLE EVENT: MAX. PROBABLE EVENT! I APPROX. I -------------------H ------------------- ABBREVIATED 'DISTANCE MAXJ PEAK 11 SITE 11 MAX.: PEAK I SITE I FAULT NAME : ml (km) lCRED.1 SITE 1 INTENS11PROB.1 SITE IINTENSI
I I --------------------------I
I
---------I
MAG.:ACC. gl
-----I ------I ------II
MM H MAG.IACC. gl
-----I
MM I
I I SAN ANDREAS (Mojave) 1
I ---------------------- I
78 I
(126):
---------I
I
8.50:
-----I
I
0.0341
------I ------
V II I
1 8.251
------I ------I I
0.0291 V 1
I SAN ANDREAS (Southern) 1 -------------------------I
68
I
(109)1
---------I
I
8.001
-----I
I
0.0311
------I ------II
V
III
I
-----I
I
H 7.251
-----I
------I I ------I
0.01811 I
IV
I SAND HILLS 1
I-------------------------I
96 I
(155)1
---------I
I
8.001
I
0.0161
----- -I ------II
II
IV H
I
7.001
------I ------I I
0.0081
I
II I
I SAN CLEMENTE
------------------------- I
55
I
( 88)1
I ---------
-----I
I
7.50:
I -----
.1
0.0321
I ------ ------II
II
V
-----I
I
6.25:
I -----
------I ------I I
0.0141 III 1
I I
SAN GABRIEL
I--------------------------I
82
I
(133)1
---------I
I
7.50:
I
0.015:
II
IV I
6.251
-----I
------ I ------
I
0.006:
I
II 1
I ISAN GORGONIO - BANNING 1
-------------------------I
60
I
( 97)1
I ---------
-----I
I
8.00:
I -----
------I I ------II
0.038:
I ------ ------
II
V 11
II
I
7.00:
I -----
------I ------I I
0.0191
I
IV
I SANTA MONICA - HOLLYWOOD 1
-------------------------I
83
I
(134):
---------I
I
7.501
-----I ------I
I
0.018:
Ii
IV H
------II
I
6.001
------ ------
I
0.0061
I
II
I
SIERRA MADRE-SAN FERNANDO 1 -------------------------I
73
I
(117):
---------I
I
7.501
-----I ------I
I
0.0231
II
IV H ------II
-----I
I
6.50:
------I ------I I
0.011:
I
III I
I
SUPERSTITION HLS.(S.Jacjn)1
I--------------------------I
87
I
(141)1
---------I
I
7.001
-----I ------I
I
0.0091
II
III 11
------II
-----I I
5.751
-----I
------I ------I I
0.004:.
I
I I
I SUPERSTITION MTN.(S.Jacln)I
-------------------------I
82 I
(132)1
---------I
I
7.001
-----I ------I
I
0.0111
I
III H
------II
I
6.00:
------I ------I I
0.0051
I
II 1
I
!VERDUGO 1 -------------------------I
80
---------I
I
(129):
-----I
I
7.001
I
0.0131
------I
II
III H ------II
-----I I
4.501
-----I
------I ------I I
0.0021
------I ------I
I
-
I WHITTIER - NORTH ELSINORE 44
I
( 71)1
I
7.501
I
0.0451
II
VI :1
I
6.25:
I
0.0191
I
IV 1 I-------- -- - ---------------I ---------I -----I ------ I ------Ii . I I I I
-----I ------ I ------I II I I I
-END OF SEARCH- 37 FAULTS FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH RADIUS.
HE ROSE CANYON FAULT IS CLOSEST TO THE SITE.
.T IS ABOUT 4.0 MILES AWAY.
ARGEST MAXIMUM-CREDIBLE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.472 g
LARGEST MAXIMUM-PROBABLE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.301 g
TABLE 2
DATE: Monday, May 12, 1997
* *
* E Q S E A R C H *
* *
* Ver. 2.00 *
* *
* *
(Estimation of Peak Horizontal Acceleration
From California Earthquake Catalogs)
;EARCH PERFORMED FOR: JAY
JOB NUMBER: 89-5594
OB NAME: PALISOUL/BLAIR
SITE COORDINATES:
LATITUDE: 33.16 N
LONGITUDE: 117.35 W
YPE OF SEARCH: RADIUS
SEARCH RADIUS: 100 ml
EARCH MAGNITUDES: 5.0 TO 9.0
EARCH DATES: 1800 TO 1996
TTENUATION RELATION: 1) Campbell (1991) Horiz. - Deep Soil & Soft Rock
UNCERTAINTY (M=Mean, S=Mean+1-Sigma): M
SCOND: 0
FAULT TYPE ASSUMED (DS=Reverse, SS=Strike-Slip): DS
COMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION
ARTHQUAKE-DATA FILE USED: ALLQUAKE.DAT
IME PERIOD OF EXPOSURE FOR STATISTICAL COMPARISON: 25 years'
SOURCE OF DEPTH VALUES (A=Attenuation File, E=Earthquake Catalog): A
Page
TIME I SITE !SITE! APPROX. FILE! LAT. I LONG. DATE (GMT) 1DEPTH QUAKE 1 ACC. ' MM 1 DISTANCE 2ODE NORTH 1 WEST 1 H M Sec (km)l MAG. 1 g 1INT.1 ml [km] I--- - ------ -- I ----- I I ------ ------- -------- I I -----I I ------- _ ------- _ ---- _----------- )MG 133.0001117.3001 11/22/1800 12130 0.01 3.0' 6.50 1 0.158 IVIIII 11 [ 181 1G1 132.8001117.1001 5/25/1803 1 0 0 0.01 3.01 5.00 1 0.020 1 IV 1 29 [ 46] DMG 134.3701117.6501 12/ 8/1812 115 0 0.01 3.01 7.00 1 0.012 , lIP 85 [ 1371 '1-A 134.000,118.250 9/23/1827 1 0 0 0.01 3.0 5.00 1 0.003 1 I 11 78 [ 1251 GI '34.100118.100 7/11/1855 ' 415 0.01 3.01 6.30 1 0.008 ' III 78 [ 1251 £-A 134.0001118.2501 1/10/1856 0 0 0.01 3.01 5.00 1 0.003 1 I 1 78 [ 125] MGI 133.0001117.0001 9/21/1856 730 0.01 3.01 5.00 1 0.027 1 V 1 23 [ 371 C-A 132.6701117.1701 12/ 0/1856 0 0 0.01 3.01 5.00 1 0.014 , IV 1 35 [ 57 ] AGI 134.0001117.500 11 12/16/1858 11 10 0 0.01 3.0' 7.00 1 0.024 1 IV 1 59 [ 94] T-A ,34.000 118.250: 3/26/1860 , 0 0 0.01 3.01 5.00 1 0.003 1 I 1 78 [ 1251 )MG 32.700 117.200: 5/27/1862 120 o 0.01 3.01 5.90 1 0.029 ' V 1 33 1 53] '-A 132.670 117.170: 10/21/1862 1 0 0 0.01 3.01 5.00 1 0.014 1 IV 1 35 571 T-A '32.670'117.170 5/24/1865 1 0 0 0.01 3.01 5.00 1 0.014 1 IV 1 35 f 571 -A 133.5001115.8201 5/ 0/1868 1 0 0 0.01 3.0' 6.30 1 0.006 1 II , 91 1471 -A 1'32.2501117.5001 1/13/1877 120 0 0.01 3.0 5.00 1 0.005 1 II , 63 1 1021 JJMG 133.9001117.2001 12/19/1880 : 0 0 0.01 3.01 6.00 1 0.015 1 IV 1 52 [ 831 DMG 134.1001116.7001 2/ 7/1889 520 0.01 3.01 5.30 ' 0.004 1 I ' 75 [ 1211 )MG 34.200 117.900 8/28/1889 1 215 0.0' 3.01 5.50 1 0.005 1 II 1 78 [ 1261 JMG 133.400,116.300 2/ 9/1890 112 6 0.0' 3.01 6.30 1 0.013 1 1111 63 [ 1011 DMG 132.7001116.3001 2/24/1892 1 720 0.01 3.01 6.70 1 0.014 1 IV 1 69 [ 1101 )MG 133.2001116.2001 5/28/1892 11115 0.01 3.01 6.30 1 0.012 1 1111 67 [ 107] MG 34.300117.600 7/30/1894 1 512 0.01 3.01 6.00 1 0.006 I II , 80 [ 129] DMG 132.8001116.8001 10/23/1894 123 3 0.01 3.01 5.70 , 0.018 1 IV 1 40 [ 651 )MG 134.2001117.4001 7/22/1899 1 046 0.01 3.01 5.50 ' 0.006 1 II ' 72 [ 1161 MG 34.300 117.500, 7/22/1899 1 2032 0.01 3.01 6.50 ' 0.009 , 1111 79 [ 1271 LMG 133.8001117.0001 12/25/1899 11225 0.01 3.01 6.40 1 0.022 ' IV 1 49 [ 781 MGI ,34.000 118.000 12/25/1903 11745 0.01 3.01 5.00 1 0.004 ' I 1 69 [ 111] IGI 134.100 117.300 7/15/1905 11 2041 0.01 3.01 5.30 1 0.006 1 II 1 65 1051 JGI 134.0001118.300: 9/ 3/1905 540 0.01 3.01 5.30 1 0.004 1 I 1 80 1281 DMG 134.2001117.1001 9/20/1907 154 0.01 3.0' 6.00 1 0.008 1 II 1 73 f 118] MG 133.7001117.40011 4/11/1910 757 0.01 3.0' 5.00 1 0.013 1 1111 37 [ 60] MG 133.7001117.4001 5/13/1910 1 620 0.01 3.01 5.00 , 0.013 1 1111 37 60 DMG 133.7001117.4001 5/15/1910 11547 0.01 3.01 6.00 , 0.025 1 V 1 37 60 MG p33.500 116.500 9/30/1916 ' 211 0.01 3.01 5.00 1 0.007 1 II 1 54 [ 87 MG 133.750 117.000' 4/21/1918 1223225.0, 3.01 6.80 1 0.032 1 V 1 45 [ 73 MGI 133.800 117.600 4/22/1918 12115 0.0' 3.01 5.00 1 0.009 1 III' 46 [ 75 MG 133.750 117.000 6/ 6/1918 12232 0.0' 3.01 5.00 1 0.009 , III 45 [ 731 GI 134.0001118.500 11/19/1918 12018 0.01 3.01 5.00 1 0.002 1 - 88 [ 142 .MG '33.2001116.700 1/ 1/1920 235 0.011 3.01 5.00 1 0.013 11 1111 38 [ 61 MGI 134.0801118.2601 7/16/1920 118 8 0.01 3.01 5.00 1 0.003 1 I 1 82 [ 132] GI 133.2001116.6001 10/12/1920 11748 0.01 3.01 5.30 1 0.012 III 43 [ 701 MG 134.0001117.2501 7/23/1923 1 73026.01 3.01 6.25 1 0.014 IV 1 58 [ 941 DMG 134.0001116.0001 4/ 3/1926 120 8 0.01 3.01 5.50 ' 0.003 1 I 1 97 [ 1561 MG 134.0001118.5001 8/ 4/1927 11224 0.01 3.01 5.00 ' 0.002 1 - ' 88 [ 142] MG 134.0001116.0001 9/ 5/1928 11442 0.01 3.01 5.00 ' 0.002 , - 97 [ 156] 11MG 132.900 115.7001 10/ 2/1928 119 1 0.01 3.01 5.00 1 0.002 1 - 97 [ 1561 MG :34.180,116.9201 1/16/1930 02433.91 3.01 5.20 1 0.004 1 I ' 75 [ 120] MG 134.1801116.9201 1/16/1930 034 3.61 3.01 5.10 1 0.004 1 I 1 75 [ 120] MG 133.950118.6321 8/31/1930 1 04036.01 3.01 5.20 1 0.003 1 - 92 [ 148] DMG 133.6171117.9671 3/11/1933 1 154 7.81 3.01 6.30 1 0.021 1 iv 1 48 [ 771 MG 133.7501118.0831 3/11/1933 1 2 9 0.01 3.01 5.00 1 0.006 1 II 1 59 1 94] MG 133.7501118.0831 3/11/1933 1 230 0.01 3.01 5.10 1 0.006 1 II 1 59 [ 941 DMG 133.7501118.0831 3/11/1933 1 323 0.01 3.01 5.00 1 0.006 1 11 1 59 1 941
)MG :33.700:118.067: 3/11/1933 51022.01 3.01 5.10 1 0.007 1 II 1 56 [ 901
)MG 33.5751117.9831 3/11/1933 1 518 4.01 3.01 5.20 1 0.010 I 1111 46 [ 751
DMG 133.6831118.0501 3/11/1933 658 3.01 3.01 5.50 1 0.010 1 1111 54 [ 871
)MG 133.7001118.0671 3/11/.1933 1 85457.01 3.01 5.10 1 0.007 I II 1 56 [ 90] )MG 133.7501118.0831 3/11/1933 1 910 0.01 3.01 5.10 1 0.006 1 II 1 59 [ 941
page 2
TIME 1 1 SITE SITE
'iLE LAT. 11 LONG. 11 DATE 1 (GMT) 1DEPTHIQUAKE : ACC. 1 MM
ODE I NORTH 11 WEST I,
---- ------ - ------- - I H M Sec (km)l
I
MAG. 1 g
------ __----
IINT.
'MG
I
133.850 118.267
------------
3/11/1933
I -------- - I
11425 0.011
-----
3.0
------I I
5.00 11 0.004 1 I
MG 133.7501118.083 3/13/1933 11 131828.0 3.01 5.30 1 0.007 1 II
iMG '33.617:118.017' 3/14/1933 119 150.01 3.01 5.10 1 0.009 1 III
flMG '33.7831118.133' 10/ 2/1933 ' 91017.6' 3.01 5.40 1 0.007 1 II
MG 32.083:116.667 11/25/1934 818 0.01 3.01 5.00 1 0.003 1 I
JMG '34.100:116.800: 10/24/1935 11448 7.61 3.01 5.10 1 0.004 1 I
DMG 133.4081116.2611 3/25/1937 11649 1.81 3.01 6.00 1 0.010 1 III
'MG 11 33.6991117.5111 5/31/1938 1 83455.41 3.01 5.50 1 0.017 1 IV
MG 32.0001117.500: 5/ 1/1939 11 2353 0.01 3.01 5.00 , 0.003 ' I
DMG 132.0001117.5001 6/24/1939 11627 0.01 3.01 5.00 ' 0.003 1 I
"MG 134.0831 116.3001 5/18/1940 5 358.51 3.01 5.40 ' 0.003 , I
MG 134.0671116.3331 5/18/1940 55120.21 3.01 5.20 I 0.003 1 I
uMG 134.0671116.3331 5/18/1940 72132.71 3.01 5.00 1 0.003 ' I
MG 133.0001116.4331 6/ 4/1940 11035 8.31 3.01 5.10 1 0.007 ' II
MG 133.7831118.2501 11/14/1941 1 84136.31 3.01 5.40 1 0.006 1 II
.'MG 132.9831115.9831 5/23/1942 1154729.01 3.0' 5.00 1 0.003 1 I
DMG 132.9671116.0001 10/21/1942 1162213.01 3.01 6.50 1 0.009 1 III
MG 132.9671116.0001 10/21/1942 1162519.01 3.01 5.00 1 0.003 1 I
MG 132.9671116.0001 10/21/1942 1162654.01 3.01 5.00 1 0.003 1 I DMG ,33.2331115.7171 10/22/1942 1 15038.01 3.01 5.50 1 0.003 1 I
MG 132.9671116.0001 10/22/1942 1181326.0' 3.01 5.00 1 0.003 1 I MG ,34.2671116.967 8/29/1943 1 34513.01 3.01 5.50 1 0.004 1 I
uMG 133.9761116.7211 6/12/1944 1104534.71 3.01 5.10 1 0.005 1 II
MG 133.994 116.712: 6/12/1944 1111636.01 3.01 5.30 1 0.005 1 II KG 133.2171116.13
-
3 8/15/1945 175624.0 3.0' 5.70 0.007 II
.MG :33.0001115.8331 1/ 8/1946 11 185418.01 3.0' 5.40 , 0.003 I DMG 133.950 116.850 9/28/1946 1 719 9.01 3.0' 5.00 1 0.005 1 II MG 134.0171116.5001 7/24/1947 1221046.01 3.01 5.50 , 0.005 1 II KG 134.017 116.500, 7/25/1947 04631.01 3.01 5.00 I 0.003 , I DMG 134.017 116.5001 7/25/1947 61949.01 3.01 5.20 1 0.004 1 I KG 134.017 116.5001 7/26/1947 ' 24941.01 3.01 5.10 1 0.004 1 I KG 132.500 118.5501 2/24/1948 ' 81510.01 3.01 5.30 1 0.004 , I DMG 133.9331116.3831 12/ 4/1948 1234317.01 3.01 6.50 1 0.010 1 1111 MG 132.200 116.550' 11/ 4/1949 1204238.01 3.01 5.70 1 0.005 1 II KG 132.200 116.550 11/ 5/1949 43524.0' 3.01 5.10 1 0.003 1 I 1 MG 132.983 115.733 1/24/1951 717 2.6' 3.0 5.60 1 0.003 I 1 DMG 132.817,118.350 12/26/1951 04654.01 3.01 5.90 1 0.010 1 1111 KG 132.950,115.717 6/14/1953 41729.91 3.01 5.50 1 0.003 ' I KG 133.2831116.1831 3/19/1954 95429.01 3.01 6.20 1 0.010 1 III DMG :33.283,116.183 3/19/1954 95556.01 3.01 5.00 1 0.004 1 I KG 133.2831116.183 3/19/1954 102117.0 3.01 5.50 1 0.006 1 II KG :33.2831116.183 3/23/1954 1 41450.01 3.01 5.10 1 0.005 1 II DMG 133.2161115.808 4/25/1957 1215738.71 3.01 5.20 1 0.003 1 I MG 133.1831115.850 4/25/1957 1222412.01 3.01 5.10 1 0.003 1 I KG 133.2311116.004 5/26/1957 1155933.61 3.01 5.00 , 0.003 1 I MG 133.7101116.9251 9/23/1963 1144152.61 3.01 5.00 ' 0.010 1 III DMG 131.8111117.1311 12/22/1964 1205433.2 3.01 5.60 ' 0.003 1 I KG 133.1901116.1291 4/ 9/1968 22859.11 3.01 6.40 ' 0.011 1 III MG 133.1131116.0371 4/ 9/1968 , 3 353.51 3.01 5.20 1 0.004 1 I DMG 33.3431116.3461 4/28/1969 1232042.91 3.01 5.80 1 0.010 1 TIll
1 APPROX.
DISTANCE
ml [kmj
71 [ 114]
59 [ 94
50 [ 80
62 [ 100
84 [ 136]
72 [ 116]
65 [ 105]
38 [ 62]
81 [ 130]
81 [ 130]
88 [ 141]
86 [ 138]
86 [ 138]
54 [ 87]
67 [ 108]
80 [ 129
79 [ 128]
79 [ 128]
79 128]
94 [ 152]
79 128]
80 f 128]
67 108]
68 1101
70 113]
88 142]
62 [ 99]
77 [ 124]
'i7 [ 124]
77 1 124]
77 [ 124
83 [ 134
77 [ 124
81 [ 130
81 [ 130
94 1 152
63 [ 101
96 [ 154
68 [ 109
68 [ 109
68 [ 109
68 1 109
89 [ 144]
87 [ 140]
78 [ 125]
45 [ 73]
94 [ 151]
71 [ 114]
76 [ 122]
59 [ 951
)MG
)MG
PAS
?AS
'AS
PAS
AS
'AS
'age
134.2701117.5401
:33.0331115.8211
:33.9441118.681:
134.3271116.4451
133.5011116.513:
133.0981115.6321
133.9981116.6061
132.9711117.870:
3
9/12/1970
9/30/1971
1/ 1/1979
3/15/1979
2/25/1980
4/26/1981
7/ 8/1986
7/13/1986
1143053.01
1224611.31
1231438.91
121 716.51
1104738.51
112 928.41
1 92044.51
11347 8.21
3.0'
3.0'
3.0'
3.01
3.01
3.01
3.01
3.01
5.40
5.10
5.00
5.20
5.50
5.70
5.60
5.30
1 0.004
1 0.003
, 0.002
1 0.002
' 0.010
1 0.003
1 0.006
1 0.020
1 I 1
1 -
1 -
1 - ,
1 III,
1 I 1
, II 1
1 IV 1
77
89
94
96
54
99
72
33
[ 125]
[ 143
[ 151
[ 154
[ 86
[ 160
[ 116
[ 53
I TIME ' SITE SITE: APPROX.
7ILEI LAT. I LONG. 1 DATE I (GMT) IDEPTHIQUAKE I ACC. I MM 1 DISTANCE
ODE,NORTH 1 WEST , ------- , -------, ------------I H M Sec (km) MAG. ' g INT.' ml [km] ---
°AS
I I I
134.061:118.0791 10/ 1/1987
i
1144220.0, 3.01 5.90 1 0.007
I
' II 1 75 121]
'AS 134.0731118.098' 10/ 4/1987 1105938.21 3.01 5.30 1 0.004 1 I 1 76 1231
2AS 133.082115.775 11/24/1987 1 15414.5' 3.01 5.80 1 0.004 1 I 1 91 f 1471
PAS 133.0131115.8391 11/24/1987 1131556.51 3.01 6.00 1 0.005 1 II 1 88 142] 'AS 11 33.9191118.6271 1/19/1989 1 65328.81 3.01 5.00 1 0.002 1 - 1 90 1451
SP 11 34.140,1 117.700 1' 2/28/1990 11 234336.61 3.01 5.20 I 0.005 1 II I 71 114]
GSP 134.2621118.0021 6/28/1991 1144354.51 3.01 5.40 , 0.004 1 I 1 85 [ 136]
SP 133.9611116.3181 4/23/1992 1045023.01 3.01 6.10 1 0.007 1 II 1 81 [ 131 ;SN 11 34.2011116.4361 6/28/1992 1115734.11 3.01 7.60 I 0.017 1 IV 1 89 [ 143
GSP :34.139:116.431' 6/28/1992 1123640.61 3.01 5.10 1 0.003 , I 1 86 [ 138
'SP 134.341 1 116.5291 6/28/1992 1124053.5 3.01 5.20 1 0.002 , - 1 94 [ 152 SP '34.1631116.855 6/28/1992 1144321.01 3.01 5.30 1 0.004 1 I 1 75 [ 120
JSN 134.2031116.827' 6/28/1992 1150530.71 3.01 6.70 1 0.011 1 1111 78 [ 126
GSP 134.1081116.4041 6/29/1992 1141338.81 3.01 5.40 1 0.004 1 I 1 85 [ 137 SP '33.8761116.267' 6/29/1992 1 160142.81 3.-01 5.20 1 0.004 I I 1 80 [ 128
SP 34.3321116.462 7/ 1/1992 1074029.9' 3.0 5.40 I 0.003 1 I 1 96 [ 154] GSP 134.2391116.8371 7/ 9/1992 1014357.6' 3.01 5.30 1 0.004 I I 1 80 [ 129
1SP 133.9021116.2841 7/24/1992 1181436.21 3.01 5.00 1 0.003 1 I 1 80 [ 1291
SP 11 34.1951116.86211 8/17/1992 11 204152.11 3.01 5.30 1 0.004 1 I 1 77 [ 1241 GSP 34.064 116.361 9/15/1992 1084711.31 3.01 5.20 1 0.003 1 I 1 84 [ 1361 'SP 134.3401116.9001 11/27/1992 1160057.51 3.01 5.30 1 0.003 1 I 1 85 [ 1381 SP 134.3691116.89
-
7 12/ 4/1992 020857.5 3.01 5.30 ' 0.003 I 1 87 [ 1411 SP :34.029 116.32 8/21/1993 11 014638.41 3.01 5.00 ' 0.003 , I 1 84 [ 1361 GSP 134.2131118.537, 1/17/1994 1123055.41 3.01 6.70 1 0.007 1 II 1 100 [ 1601 SP 134.2311118.4751 3/20/1994 1212012.31 3.01 5.30 1 0.002 1 - 1 98 [ 158] SP 134.2681116.4021 6/16/1994
******************************************************************************
1162427.51 3.01 5.00 1 0.002 I - 1 94 [ 1511
END OF SEARCH- 142 RECORDS FOUND
COMPUTER TIME REQUIRED FOR EARTHQUAKE SEARCH: 0.7 minutes
AXIMUM SITE ACCELERATION DURING TIME PERIOD 1800 TO 1996: 0.158g
MAXIMUM SITE INTENSITY (MM) DURING TIME PERIOD 1800 TO 1996: VIII
AXIMUN MAGNITUDE ENCOUNTERED IN SEARCH: 7.60
EAREST HISTORICAL EARTHQUAKE WAS ABOUT 11 MILES AWAY FROM SITE.
NUMBER.OF YEARS REPRESENTED BY SEARCH: 197 years
RESULTS OF PROBABILITY ANALYSES -------------------------------
'IME PERIOD OF SEARCH: 1800 TO 1996
LENGTH OF SEARCH TIME: 197 years
ATTENUATION RELATION: 1) Campbell (1991) Horiz. - Deep Soil & Soft Rock ** TIME PERIOD OF EXPOSURE FOR PROBABILITY: 25 years
PROBABILITY OF• EXCEEDANCE FOR ACCELERATION -----------------------------------------
:No.OF: AVE. 1RECURR.1 COMPUTED PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE ACCITIMESIOCCURINTERVI in. I in I in I in I in I in I in g 1EXCED1
____I ----- -
11/yr , years 10.5 yrl 1 yrl 10 yrl 50 yrl 75 yr100 yr yr ------ I _ -------- ------ - ------ I ------ I I------ I I ------ ______ ______ I
(l.01 311 I I I I I 0.157' 6.3550.07570.145610.792710.999611..000011.0000,09804
.021 81 0.0411 24.625 0.0201 0.039810.333810.868710.952410.9828'0.6377 -.03 11 21 0.0101 98.50010.0051 1 0.010110.096510.398110.533010.637710.2242
0.041 11 0.0051197.000,0.0025 0.005fl0.0495 0.224210.3166 0.3981 0.1192
.051 11 0.0051197.00010.002510-005110.049510.224210.316610.398110.1192
.0611 11 0.005' 197.0000.002510.005110.0495 0.224210.3166 0.398fl0.1192
0.0711 fl o.00s'197.000:o.0025:o.00sl 0.0495 0.22420.3166 0.398110.1192 .081 11 0.005 197.000'0.002510.0051 0.04950.2242,0.3166,0.398110.1192 .091 11 0.005 197.0000.002510.0051,O.04950.224210.3166,O.398110.1192
L,.101 11 0.005 197.000 0.002510.0051 1 0.049510.2242 0.316610.398110.1192 fl.11 11 0.005 197.000 0.002510.0051 '0.049510.2242'0.316610.398110.1192
.1211 110.005197.0000.002510.00510.0495:0.22420.316610.3981:0.1192
.131 1:0.005197.0000.0025:0.00510.0495:0.2242:0.3166:0.3981:0.1192
3.141 11 0.005, 197.000 '0.0025:0.0051 0.0495:0.2242:0.3166:0.3981:0.1192 .151 11 0.005, 197.000'0.0O250.0051 0.0495:0.2242:0.3166:0.3981:0.1192
ROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE FOR MAGNITUDE ---------------------------------------
INO -.OFI AVE. IRECURR.1 • COMPUTED PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE
tIAG. TIMES'OCCUR.'INTERV.: in in in in in in I in 1 EXCED1 11/yr ' years 10.5 yrI 1 yrl 10 yr 50 yrl 75 yrlOO yr*** yr
-----------------------I ------I ------I -------------I ------I ------I ______ I I I I I •I I j.001 1421 0.7211 1.38710.302610.513610.999311.000011.000011.000011.0000
5.5011 501 0.2541 3.940 0.119210.224210.921011.00001 1.000011.000010.9982 L00, 271 0.137 7.29610.066210.128110.746010.998911.000011-000010.9675
111 0.0561 17.909:0.027510.054310.427910.938710.984810.996210.7524
7.00' 31 0.0151 65.667 0.007610.0151:0. 141310.533010.680910.781910.3166 .50 11 fl 0.0051197.000 0.002510.005110.049510.2242{o.316610.398110. 1192
GUTENBERG & RICHTER RECURRENCE RELATIONSHIP:
a-value= 3.431
b-value= 0.721
beta-value= 1.660
APPENDIX D,
rEAgio GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC.
SOIL & FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY
12 May 1997
Mr. and Mrs. Philip R. Palisoul
Mr. and Mrs. Martin L. Blair
1 500 Quail Street, Suite #510
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Job No. 89-5594
Subject: Evaluation of Oceanographic and Marine Geologic Conditions on North
Carlsbad Beach and Recommendations for Seawall Design - Update
Palisoul/Blair Duplex
2653 Ocean Street
Carlsbad, California
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Palisoul and Blair:
As part of the "Report of Soil and Limited Geo technical Investigation Update, we
have reviewed our previous "Report of Oceanographic and Marine Geologic
Conditions and Recommendations for Seawall Design" dated October 4, 1989.
This report is included herein as Appendix D, and should be adhered to during the
proposed development.
Although development plans are not yet completed, it is our understanding that a
moderate height, vertical concrete seawall is proposed. In accordance with the
recommendations included in our original report, the seawall is to be approximately
10-feet-high at its western extent (to 1.7 feet above mean sea level MSL). The wall
foundation should be cut at least 4 feet into the dense formational materials. Wing
walls should be constructed as needed.
It should be noted that a new vertical concrete seawall has recently been
constructed on Lots 17 and 18 immediately to the south. The proposed seawall
design (and proposed wing walls) should take into consideration the adjacent wall.
The adjacent lots to the north remain the same.
7420 TRADE STREET • SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121 9 (619) 549-7222 • FAX: (619) 549-1604
Page 2
Should you have any additional questions concerning this matter, please contact
our office.
Sincerely,
GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC.
Leslie D. Reed, C.E.G. 999
President
Jaime A. Cerros, P.E.
R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
,1 '.k'- '•'
-,
' No. 01Y2007 I; i' r
• Lisp.
LD R/JAC/klh
BUILDING PERMIT PCRN0: PCR98186
10/22/98 15:14 Project No: A9803874
Page 1 of I Development No:
Job Address: 2653 OCEAN -ST Suite:
Permit Type: PLAN CHECK REVISION
Parcel No: Lot#:
Valuation: 0. Construction Type: NEW
Occupancy Group: Ref erence#: CB982970 Status: ISSUED
Description: CHANGE CONSTRUCTION ON RETAIN Applied: 10/05/98
WALL-ORIG PERMIT CB982970 Apr/Issue: 10/22/98
Entered By: RMA
Appl/Ownr : MULLEN ED 760 434-2233
2890. PlO PICO
CARLSBAD CA 92008
*** Fees Required ***
---------------------------
Fees: 2100
Adjustments: / .op'
Total Fees: ft18.00) TotalPJ
/
--- ----------- ----
Plan Check Revision Fêe /
_.••7
AA
Collected & Credits
C-PRMT 218.00
.00
.00
218.00
)/Unt Ext fee Data
) \ 218.00
A
FINAL APPROVAL
INSP. DATE -
CLEARANCE
_
CITY OF CARLSBAD
2075 Las Palmas Dr., Carlsbad, CA 92009 (619) 438-1161
PERMIT APPLICATION PLAN CHECK NO.___________
FOR OFFICE USE
I
EST. VAL.
2075 Las Palmas Dr., Carlsbad CA 92009
CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT
Plan Ck. Deposit
Validated By (760) 438-1161
Date (/21(IQ2/
1 PROJECT INFORMATION -
I
a63 C)cci$'f
Address linciude BldglSuite I) Business Name (at this address)
Legal Description Lot No. Subdivision Name/Number Unit No. Phase No. Total S of units
eONTActptRSONllf di n.rentfta,nsppucant) . ...
/M_/*h1Le0,, _X&90 iP'0 5oi/e /034 arA/6aJC43q--;3:
Name Address City State/Zip Telephone # Fax S
APPLICANT 0 Contractor 0 Agent ór Co,eco - Do FO Aj ibvnã .43 14 L..Jj
/7
Name . Address City State/Zip Telephone S
PROPERTYOWNER
Name Address City State/Zip Telephone S
.5. CONTRACTOR • COMPANY NAM....... .............................
(Sec. 7031.5 Business and Professions Code: Any City or County which requires a permit to construct, alter, improve, demolish or repair any structure, prior to its
issuance, also requires the applicant for such permit to file a signed statement that he is licensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractor's License Law
(Chapter 9, commending witli Section 7000 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code) or that he is exempt therefrom, and the basis for the alleged
exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by any applicant t a permit subjects the applicant toe civil penalty of not ,ore then five hundred dollars ($50011. M4/eot _Coi 2'?O_i,___/03A (2f. /o edC,4 Z.13
Name Address City State/Zip Telephones
State License S License Cuss City Business License
Designer Name Address City State/Zip Telephone
State License S
B. WORKERS' COMPENSATION . . . ..•-. .. ., ..: ........
Workers' Compensation Declaration: I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following declarations:
I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self-insure for workers' compensation as provided by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance
of the work ,for which this permit is issued.
I have and will maintain workers' compensation, as required by Section 3700 of the Labor code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is
issued. My worker's compensation insurance carrier and policy number are:
Insurance Company . Policy No. Expiration Date___________________
(THIS SECTION NEED NOT BE COMPLETED IF THE PERMIT IS FOR ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS 151001 OR LESS)
CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION: I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the Workers' Compensation Laws of California.
WARNING: Failure to secure workers' compensation coverage Is unlawful, and shall sub.ct an employer to criminal Penalties and civil fines up to ens hundred thousand dollars ($100,000), In addition to the cost of compensation, damages as provided for In Section 3706 of the Labor cods, interest and attorney's fees.
SIGNATURE DATE
7. OWNER-BUILDER DECLARATION •.•
,. ... .. • .......... . .....
I hereby affirm that I am exempt from the Contractor's License Law for the following reason:
I. as owner of the property or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work and the structure Is not intended or offered for eeIe
(Sec. 7044. Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who does
such work himself or through his own employees, provided that such improvements are not Intended or offered for sale. If, however, the building or Improvement is
sold within one year of completion, the owner-builder will have the burden of proving that he did not build or Improve for the purpose of sate). o I. as owner of the property, urn exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to construct the project (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and contracts for such projects with contractor(s) licensed pursuant to the Contractor's License Law).
o I am exempt under Section Business and Professions Code for this reason:
I personally plan to provide the major labor and materials for construction of the proposed property Improvement. (3 YES ONO
I (have I have not) signed an application for a building permit for the proposed work.
I have contracted with the following person (firm) to provide the proposed construction (Include name I address / phone number I contractors license number):
I plan to provide portions of the work, but I have hired the following person to coordinate, supervise and provide the major work (include name I address I phone number / contractors license number):
I will provide some of the work, but I have contracted (hired) the following persons to provide the work indicated (Include name I address / phone number / type of work):
PROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE DATE
coMps THIS SECTION FOR NON.AWDV7Z4L.BUILDING PEA TB:ONLV !'.............
Is the applicant or future building occupant required to submit a business plan, acutely hazardous materials registration form or risk management and prevention
program under Sections 25505. 25533 or 25534 of the Presley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act? 0 YES 0 NO
Is the applicant or future building occupant required to obtain a permit from the air pollution control district or air quality management district? 0 YES 0 NO
Is the facility to be constructed within 1,000 feet of the outer boundary of a school site? 0 YES 0 NO
IF ANY OF THE ANSWERS ARE YES. A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MAY NOT BE ISSUED UNLESS THE APPLICANT HAS MET OR IS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT.
:8. CONSTRUCTION LENDING AGEIIã ' .... •• :........
I hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued (Sec. 30970) Civil Cods).
LENDER'S NAME LENDER'S ADDRESS____________________________________
9. APPLICANT CERTIFICATION -7 '" -vr rico F.
I certify that I have read the application and state that the above information is correct and that the information on the plans is accurate. I agree to comply with all
City ordinances and State laws relating to building construction. I hereby authorize representatives of the Cite of Carlsbad to enter upon the above mentioned property for inspection purposes. I ALSO AGREE TO SAVE, INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARMLESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AGAINST ALL LIABILITIES. JUDGMENTS, COSTS AND EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINST SAID CITY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING OF THIS PERMIT.
OSHA: An OSHA permit is required for excavations over 5'0 deep and demolition or construction of structures over 3 stories in height.
EXPIRATION: Every permit issued by the Building Official under the provisions of this Code shell expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or
work authorized by such permit is noMcommenced within 36 ays from the date of such permit or If the building or work authorized by such permit is suspended
or abandoned at any time after tbi6rk is commenced f ~riod 0 days (Section 106.4.4 Uniform Building Code).
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE (O,j ___ DATE 9 '
WHITE: File YELLOW: Applicant PINK: Finance
EsGil Corporation
In Partnership with government for Building Safety
DATE: OCT. 14, 1998
JURISDICTION: CARLSBAD
PLAN CHECK NO.: 98-2970 REV. # 1 (PCR 98-186)
PROJECT ADDRESS: 2653 OCEAN STREET
PROJECT NAME: SHORING
SET:I
J 2
JURI
ANT
O
EVIEWER
O FILE
El The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply
with the jurisdiction's building codes.
The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes
when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff.
The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list
and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck.
fl The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil
Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck.
LI The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant
contact person.
LI The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to:
Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed.
fl Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed.
Person contacted:
iagging
hone #:
Date contacted: (by: ) Fax #:
Mail Telephone Fax In Person
REMARKS: Please note on plans the wo should be directly behind the shotcrete wall. This is
not correctly depicted on site plan (right side) and detail IIES2. Specify all shotcrete work requires
special inspection & testing per UBC, Sec)I'ons 1922.10 & 11. Specify driving solder beams to adequate
depths require approval by the projects ils engineer. Note 2" separation for lap slices with 12" laps in
shotcrete walls. Change masonry wall la/e1 on 3IESI to shotcrete. Also all pencilled-in changes on plans
will have to be made in ink.
By: All Sadre Enclosures:
Esgil Corporation
0 GA MB 0 EJ J Pc 10/6 tmsmtLdot
9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 • San Diego, California 92123 • (619) 560-1468 • Fax (619) 560-1576
VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE
JURISDICTION: CARLSBAD PLAN CHECK NO.: CB98-2970 REV.
PCR98-186
PREPARED BY: SADRE DATE: 10/14
BUILDING ADDRESS: 2653 OCEAN ST. BUILDING OCCUPANCY: R3
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: VN
[BUILDING PORTION BUILDING AREA VALUATION . VALUE
I (sq. ft.) MULTIPLIER ($)
SHORING I 2.5 hours I 87.15/HR. 1217.88' ESGIL FEE
Air Conditioning
Fire Sprinklers
TOTAL VALUE
UBC Building Permit Fee: $
UBC Plan Check Fee: $ 272.34 CITY FEE
Comments:
Sheet I of I
valuefee.dot
AMENEW4 lk
F
,k
27- 5Mc. IUI
M Engineers, Inc.
I- -
August 10, 1998
Dr. Jack Philips
2645 Carlsbad Boulevard
Carlsbad, CA 92008
STRUCTURAL • GEOTECHNICAL • ARCHITECTURAL
Buildings- Commercial, Industrial, Residential. Bridges
Damage Investigation • Expert Witness • Foundations . Piers and Docks
Post-Tensioned Structures • Shoring • Water & Air Pollution Control Structures
AUG 2 4
Seawall at 2653-2655 Ocean Street. Carlsbad. California
Dear Dr. Philips:
By your request, I have reviewed the conceptual layout of the seawall shown on the Site
Plan / Project Data of your northern neighbor at 2653-2655 Ocean Street. The Site Plan /
Project Data, revised on 3/27/98, was prepared by Cindy Blair, Architect.
The site plan shows that your neighbor's planned seawall would form an 120 degree
angle with respect to your seawall. The angular geometry of the seawall, can be
conducive to undermining the foundation at the north corner of your seawall. The angular
seawall can also alter the sand transport pattern causing local sand depletion or
accumulation. Both undermining and sand transport problems should be studied by your
neighbor's coastal engineer.
Sincerely yours,
TA
Tshien Ma, CE, SE
1~v
1
0. W
a. V~l v ,
AJ'
Tel: (714) 361-0618 Fax: (714) 361.0754 Tel: (619) 535-4849 Fax: (619) 535-4890 226 Avenida del Mar. San Clemente, CA 92672 4660 La Jove Village Drive. Suite 500. San Diego. CA 92122
Citv of Carlsbad
-01 Engineering Department
BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST )%J. 96-/&G
DATE: OICI PLANCHECK NO.: GB Q2.9 7
BUILDING ADDRESS: 2-c,3 2CP5c 0 c-e- -
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: EST. VALUE:
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
4
APPROVAL
The item you have submitted for review has been
approved. The approval is based on plans,
information and/or specifications provided in your
submittal; therefore any changes to these items after
this date, including field modifications, must be
reviewed by this office to insure continued
conformance with applicable codes. Please review
carefully all comments attached, as failure to comply
with instructions in this report can result in
suspension of permit to build.
A Right-of-Way permit is required prior to
construction of the following improvements:
DENIAL
Please se ttached report of deficiencies
marked ith 0. Mak necessary corrections to plans
or speci r compliance with applicable
codes and standards. Submit corrected plans and/or
specifications to this office for review.
By: Date:
By: Date:
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
ENGINEERING AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE BUILDING PERMIT:
By: Date:
ATTACHMENTS
Dedication Application
Dedication Checklist
Improvement Application
Improvement Checklist
Future Improvement Agreement
Grading Permit Application
Grading Submittal Checklist
Right-of-Way Permit Application
ENGINEERING DEPT. CONTACT PERSON
Name: Danna Trigs
City of Carlsbad
Address: 2075 Las Palmas Dr., Carlsbad, CA 92009
Phone: (619)438-1161, ext. 4374
CFD INFORMATION
Parcel Map No:
Lots:
Recordation:
Right-of-Way Permit Submittal Checklist Carlsbad Tract: and Information Sheet
Sewer Fee Information Sheet A-4
CA 92009-1576 • (760) 438-1161 • FAX (760) 969
BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST
SITE PLAN
1ST/ 2NDI 3R0/
U U U 1. Provide a fully dimensioned site plan drawn to scale. Show:
North Arrow D. Property Lines
Existing & Proposed Structures E. Easements
Existing Street Improvements F. Right-of-Way Width & Adjacent Streets
G. Driveway widths
U U U 2. Show on site plan:
A. Drainage Patterns
Building pad surface drainage must maintain a minimum slope of one
percent towards an adjoining street or an approved drainage course.
ADD THE FOLLOWING NOTE: Finish grade will provide a minimum positive
drainage of 2% to swale 5' away from building."
B. Existing & Proposed Slopes and Topography
U U U 3. Include on title sheet:
Site address
Assessor's Parcel Number
Legal Description
For commercial/industrial buildings and tenant improvement projects, include:
total building square footage with the square footage for each different use,
existing sewer permits showing square footage of different uses (manufacturing,
warehouse, office, etc.) previously approved.
EXISTING PERMIT NUMBER DESCRIPTION
DISCRETIONARY APPROVAL COMPLIANCE
U U U 4a. Project does not comply with the following Engineering Conditions of approval for
ProjectNo.________________________________________________
U U U 4b. All conditions are in compliance. Date:
H:WO000CStCHKLsT80,j ing Planclieck Cklst OP0001 Fern, DT.dac 2 Rev. 12126106
BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST
DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS 1STI 2ND/ 3RD/
U U U 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
prepare the appropriate legal description together with an 8 W' x 11" plat map
and submit with a title report. All easement documents must be approved and
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 will not be accept by mail or fax.
Dedication completed by: Date:
IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS
U U 6a. All needed public improvements upon and adjacent to the building site must be
constructed at time of building construction whenever the value of the
construction exceeds $ , pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code
Section 18.40.040.
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:
U U 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:
H:WORDDOCSCHKLSnBuicing Plantheck Mist BP000I Fern, DT.doc 3 Rev. 12120196
BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST
St.! nd/ 3rdl
U U U 6c. Enclosed please find your Future Improvement Agreement. Please return
agreement signed and notarized to the Engineering Department.
Future Improvement Agreement completed by:
Date:
U U U 6d. No Public Improvements required. SPECIAL NOTE: Damaged or defective
improvements found adiacent to building site must be repaired to the satisfaction
of the City Inspector prior to occupancy.
GRADING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
The conditions that invoke the need for a grading permit are found in Section
11.06.030 of the Municipal Code.
U U U 7a. Inadequate information available on Site Plan to make a determination on grading
requirements. Include accurate grading quantities (cut, fill import, export). Write
"No Grading" on plot plan if none is required.
U U U 7b. Grading Permit required. A separate grading plan prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer must be submitted together with the completed application form
attached. NOTE: The Grading Permit must be issued and rough grading
approval obtained prior to issuance of a Building Permit.
Grading Inspector sign off by: Date:
U U U 7c. Graded Pad Certification required. (Note: Pad certification may be required even
if a grading permit is not required.)
U U U 7d.No Grading Permit required.
U U U 7e.lf grading is not required, write "No Grading" on plot plan.
MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS
U U U 8. A RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT is required to do work in City Right-of-Way and/or
private work adjacent to the public Right-of-Way. 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:
H:WORDDOCSCHKLSTBuilding Plancheck Clilsi SP000I Form DT.doc 4 Rev. 1212WS6
e
I
- BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST
stv, 2nd/ 3rd/
U U U 9. A SEWER PERMIT is required concurrent with the building permit issuance. The
fee is noted in the fees section on the following page.
U U 0 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:
U U U 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.
12. U Required fees are attached
U No fees required
M
HAWORMOCSCHKLMSuilding Planthecic Cklst BP000I Fern, DT.doc 5 Rev. 12126196
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
09,
.0
Is a,
C.)
C (V 0-
FNIFE-111-01
BUILDING PLAN CHECK REVIEW CHECKLIST
Plan Check No. c' C / , Address - f ä5 6'd 11 5:?c
Planner (-j.'<'(i 4'f4/ Phone (619) 438-1161, extension L/4ri/
APN:
Type of Project & Use: L/_ Net Project Density:DU/AC
Zoning: General Plan: Facilities Management Zone:
CFD (in/out) #Date of participation: Remaining net dev acres:______ Circle One
(For non-residential development: Type of land used created by
this permit:
Legend: M Item Complete (a Item Incomplete - Needs your action
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
a,
'V
10
Discretionary Action Required:
APPROVAL/RESO. NO.
YES NO TYPE
DATE
PROJECT NO.
OTHER RELATED CASES:
Compliance with conditions or approval? If not, state conditions which require action.
Conditions of Approval:.___________________________________________________
E fl Coastal Zone Assessment/Compliance
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; (619) 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:
Stamp Building Plans as "Exempt" or "Coastal Permit Required" (at minimum
Floor Plans).
Complete Coastal Permit Determination Log as needed.
D D 0 Inclusionary Housing Fee required: YES NO
(Effective date of Inclusionary Housing Ordinance - May 21, 1993.)
Data Entry Completed? YES NO
___ (Enter CB #; UACT; NEXT 12; Construct housing YIN; Enter Fee Amount (See fee schedule for amount); Return)
Site Plan:
0 El Li 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.
EJ Provide legal description of property and assessor's parcel number.
Zoning: -
fl J Setbacks:
Front: Required Shown Interior Side: Required Shown
Street Side: Required Shown
Rear: Required Shown
Li 0 0 Accessory structure setbacks:
Front: Required Shown
Interior Side: Required Shown Street Side: Required Shown
Rear: Required Shown
Structure separation: Required Shown
fl Lot Coverage: Required Shown
LI El Height: Required Shown
0 0 0 Parking: Spaces Required Shown
Guest Spaces Required Shown
0 0 LI Additional Comments_____________________________________________________
OK TO ISSUE AND ENTERED APPROVAL INTO COMPUTER DATE