The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2712 LOKER AV WEST; ; CB052693; PermitCity of Carlsbad 11-16-2005 1635 Faraday Av Carlsbad, CA 92008 Commercial/Industrial Permit Permit No: CB052693 Building Inspection Request Line (760) 602-2725 Job Address: 2712 LOKER AV WEST CBAD Permit Type: COMMIND Sub Type: COMM 0 VN Parcel No: 2090810100 Lot#: Status: Valuation: $1,145,862.00 Construction Type: Applied: Occupancy Group: Reference #: Entered By: Project Title: STAPLES 20,429 SF SHELL AND TENANT IMPROVEMENTS Applicant: MARK BOLEN STE 200 12220 EL CAMINO REAL 92130 858-793-4717 Building Permit Add'l Building Permit Fee Plan Check Add'l Plan Check Fee Plan Check Discount Strong Motion Fee Park Fee LFM Fee Bridge Fee BTD #2 Fee BTD #3 Fee Renewal Fee Add'l Renewal Fee Other Building Fee Pot. Water Con. Fee Meter Size Add'l Pot. Water Con. Fee Reel. Water Con. Fee $3,378.27 $0.00 $2,195.88 $0.00 $0.00 $240.63 $8,171.60 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $6,748.00 D1 $426.00 $0.00 Plan Approved: Issued: Inspect Area: Plan Check#: Owner: FRANZ-LOKER L L C 2710 LOKER AVE W CARLSBAD CA 92008 Meter Size Add'l Reel. Water Con. Fee Meter Fee SDCWA Fee CFD Payoff Fee PFF (31 05540) PFF (4305540) License Tax (3104193) License Tax (4304193) Traffic Impact Fee (3105541) Traffic Impact Fee (4305541) PLUMBING TOTAL ELECTRICAL TOTAL MECHANICAL TOTAL Master Drainage Fee Sewer Fee Redev Parking Fee Additional Fees TOTAL PERMIT FEES PENDING 07/21/2005 KG $0.00 $220.00 $3,938.00 $21,003.05 $20,854.69 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $68,628.00 $0.00 $189.00 $1,210.00 $84.50 $28,011.20 $12,473.65 $0.00 $5,151.06 $182,923.53 Total Fees: $182,923.53 Total Payments To Date: $182,923.53 Balance Due: $0.00 Inspector: ~ B~DING PLANS _IN STORAGE -· _ATTACHED FINAL~~ Date: Clearance: NOTICE: Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the "Imposition" of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as "fees/exactions." You have 90 days from the date this permit was issued to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition. You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity changes, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project. NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which vou have oreviouslv been aiven a NOTICE similar to this or as to which the statute of limitations has oreviouslv otherwise exoired. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY ~O ::rv1rM\Ji"D ·PERMITA~N PLAN CHECK NoC{j) SJ<k tf3 EST. VAL.If¥:~,o·o CJ CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008 Plan Ck. Deposit---~~~~-- Business Name (at this address) 3115 07/21/t)S 02 o;:,'(-6?._\!..,c;. CGP 500~00 Legal Description Lot No. Subdivision Name/Number Unit No. Phase No. Total #of units I U<~? TJ?.k::t:: tJ=:.?4. z..i Assessor's Parcel # Existing Use Proposed Use z.eq --o!!!; t · -o ,. v~r C6>.,t(#l-'C~A(..... (IZE.~{L...- # of Bathrooms Description of Work SQ. FT. #of Stories # of Bedrooms -$~~~/~t:S.~Cf(.~~~~{J, .. C;+, '"'"' ?P,;~ ?f='::; ' . r ' '''••·;~J::.,.?, "' ,.j,G;.:;,; ~M=T&PE~!r~ntrom(~i~ f!L ~fr-~e ~~ ·~~~~ . ?c..s~el~ &.2!v2Mrn ,u~ ~v ;;t: g~;~Q,P~ttUOWfin~i\ ;,,;., ~ -LPt:.lUL, c..4...G Na~e 1 ~·· &}· c;.Oti'tl'{AC.tORlli1CPMPJ!iNV' NAI\IIe':.; :>--:~ ,.,,/ ,,c,•'' ~/:>'' '""'' CA . cr vz::> State/Zip Telephone# (Sec. 7031.5 Business and Professions Code: Any City or County which requires a permit to construct, alter, improve, demolish or repair any structure, prior to its issuance, also requires the applicant for such permit to file a signed statement that he is licensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractor's License Law [Chapter 9, commending with Section 7000 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code] or that he is exempt therefrom, and the basis for the alleged exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by any applicant for a permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars [$500]). Lu .. LA-ote~~ C.o~~• Name Address City State/Zip Telephone # State License # '2-0 -, '1-tO 7 License Class A s.' ,3 City Business License # 2 2 s-g 0 ~ • I Designer Name Address State License# ~/i::!.......! City State/Zip Telephone a,; :},IVP.RKER.~thgO:~P:eKisPitroN~.'""'"'· !1:;:,!:, •v;. Workers' Compensation Declaration: I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following declarations: 0 I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self-insure for workers' compensation as provided by Section 3700 of tho Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued. 0 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 f-.1 {'1. -r. ( )1\lr'Q..,) ,::; !Lc Policy No. l((,'t '39'( (A) (THIS SECTION NEED NOT BE COMPLETED IF THE PERMIT IS FOR ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS [$1001 OR LESS) Expiration Date._.__/ -1-/---L/-1-/'---'o""--"~"'---1 I 0 CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION: I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the Workers' Compensation Laws of California. WARNING: Failure to secure workers' compensation coverage is unlawful, and shall subject an employer to criminal penalties and civil fines up to one hundred thousand dollars ( 00,000), in addition to the cost of compensation, damages as provided for in Section 3706 of the Labor code, intere~and attorney's fees. SIGNATURE DATE / (-{ ~ ~-0 _!> :z~{O\tfNgR·BUlLPEI\''pi;e,rj\RATiQN, . I hereby affirm that I am exempt from the Contractor's License Law for the following reason: 0 I, as owner of the property or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work and the structure is not intended or offered for sale (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who does such work himself or through his own employees, provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If, howEiver, 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). 0 I am exempt under Section ------Business and Professions Code for this reason: 1. I personally plan to provide the major labor and materials for construction of the proposed property improvement. 0 YES 0NO 2. I (have I have not) signed an application for a building permit for the proposed work. 3. I have contracted with the following person (firm) to provide the proposed construction (include name I address I phone number I contractors license number); 4. I plan to provide portions of the work, but I have hired the following person to coordinate, supervise and provide the major work (include name I address 1 phone number I contractors license number): ______________________________________________ _ 5. I will provide some of the work, but I have contracted (hired) the following persons to provide the work indicated (include name I address I phone number 1 type of work):. _______________________________________________________________________ ___ PROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE----------------------- QQI\lipt~'t~t:J:i:lt.S,iSE(!t!(}l'liFtiRJVQf!.:.JJ§S/D'I;N"Q'A4!!,~.1.11JiiOI~!l·;I>,E~fvttTS:;J)i\iLYt!c;··· 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 ~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 19!; NO Is the facility to be constructed within 1,000 feet of the outer boundary of a school site? 0 YES IS!r NO IF ANY OF THE ANSWERS ARE YES, A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MAY NOT BE ISSUED UNLESS THE APPLICANT HAS MET OR IS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT. ~'i:i; .. :''~9~~~fll:io'tr()f:#.£€~Q!NG'~g'f!'fi!c9'''w•<n:ii';'. ,;,. · I hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued (Sec. 3097(i) Civil Code). LENDER'S NAME-------------- '9~}~:Ii;J.\J?,~LlCANJiCERJ'IfitATI.ON:'¥ .':.'· .. ,; ,·:;L•;:,i!,·· I certify that I have read the application and state that the above information is correct and that the information on the plans is accurate. I agree to comply with all City ordinances and State laws relating to building construction. I hereby authorize representatives of the Cit\' of Carlsbad to enter upon the above mentioned property for inspection purposes. I ALSO AGREE TO SAVE, INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARMLESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AGAINST ALL LIABILITIES, JUDGMENTS, COSTS AND EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINST SAID CITY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING OF THIS PERMIT. OSHA: An OSHA permit is required for excavations over 5'0" deep and demolition or construction of structures over 3 stories in height. EXPIRATION: Every permit issued by the building Official under the provisions of this Code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or work authorized by such permit is not commenced within 180 days from the date of such permit or if the building or work authorized by such permit is suspended or abandoned at any time alter the work is commenced a p ·od of days (Section 106.4.4 Uniform Building Code). WHITE: File YELLOW: Applicant PINK: Finance Citv of Carlsbad Final Building Inspection Dept: Building Engineering Planning CMWD Stlitg uate: 04/27/2006 Plan Check#: Permit#: Project Name: Address: Contact Person: Sewer Dist: CB052693 STAPLES 20,429 SF SHELL AND TENANT IMPROVEMENTS 2712 LOKER AV WEST Phone: CA Water Dist: CA Permit Type: COMMIND Sub Type: COMM Lot: 0 ··························································································································································· Inspected ti4Md Date 5/z/&r::. By: Inspected: Approved: g_. Disapproved: __ I 7 Inspected Date By: Inspected: Approved: Disapproved: __ Inspected Date By: Inspected: Approved: Disapproved: __ ........................................................................................................................................................... Comments: _______________________________ _ Citv of Carlsbad Final Building Inspection Dept: Building Engineering 8 CMWD St Lite Fire Plan Check#: Date: 04/27'/2006 Permit#: CB052693 Permit Type: COM MIND Project Name: STAPLES 20,429 SF SHELL AND Sub Type: COMM TENANT IMPROVEMENTS Address: Contact Person: Sewer Dist: 2712 LOKER AV WEST Phone: CA Water Dist: CA Lot: ~;~~. Date (:/f~(p Approved: Inspected: f Inspected Date By: Inspected: Approved: Inspected Date By: Inspected: Approved: 0 Disapproved:~ Disapproved: __ Disapproved:--.- Inspection List Permit#: CB052693 Type: COMMIND COMM Date lnsp«;!ction._!t~rn lnspect()r_ _ f"ct 05/05/2006 89 Final Combo 05/05/2006 89 Final Combo 05/03/2006 19 Final Structural 05/03/2006 29 Final Plumbing 05/03/2006 29 Final Plumbing PC AP 05/03/2006 39 Final Electrical 05/03/2006 39 Final Electrical 05/03/2006 49 Final Mechanical 05/03/2006 49 Final Mechanical 04/13/2006 97 T -24 H-Cap Consultation 03/15/2006 17 Interior Lath/Drywall PC PC PC PC PC PC 03/1 0/2006 16 Insulation PC 03/10/2006 17 Interior Lath/Drywall PC 03/08/2006 23 Gas/TesVRepairs PC 03/08/2006 24 Rough/Topout PC 03/02/2006 14 Frame/Steei/Bolting/Weldin PC 03/02/2006 24 Rough/Topout PC 03/02/2006 34 Rough Electric PC 03/02/2006 44 Rough/Ducts/Dampers PC 02/24/2006 18 Exterior Lath/Drywall PC 02/09/2006 13 Shear Panels/HD's PC 02/09/2006 15 Roof/Reroof PC 02/02/2006 14 Frame/Steei/Bolting/Weldin PC 02/02/2006 15 Roof/Reroof PC 02/02/2006 24 Rough/Topout 02/02/2006 34 Rough Electric 02/02/2006 44 Rough/Ducts/Dampers 01/12/2006 65 Retaining Walls 01/12/2006 66 Grout 01/05/2006 65 Retaining Walls 01/05/2006 66 Grout 12/22/2005 66 Grout 12/16/2005 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 12/16/2005 12 Steel/Bond Beam 12/16/2005 63 Walls 12/15/2005 66 Grout 12/14/2005 65 12/14/2005 66 11 /22/2005 21 11 /22/2005 22 Monday, May 08, 2006 Retaining Walls Grout Underground/Under Floor Sewer/Water Service PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC JM JM JM PC PC PC PC PC Rl PA Rl PA Rl PA Rl PA PA AP AP PA AP we PA AP PA PA AP AP we PA AP NR NR NR we AP we PA PA AP we we PA NR NR AP NR STAPLES 20,429 SF SHELL AND TENANT IMPROVEMENTS Comments ENGR. OK-FIRE OK AM PLEASE OKTO STOCK 1) STRUCTURAL CERT. 2) ENGR. APPRV. HAD SOME QUESTIONS ONE SIDE WALLS WALLS POP OUTS OK TO LATH ROOF FRAMING METAL DECK TOP OUT 4TH LIFT 2ND LIFT OK TO POUR SLAB 1ST LIFT PERIMETER WALLS RESET FOR 12/15/2005 Page 1 of 1 City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request For: 05/05/2006 Permit# CB052693 Title: STAPLES 20,429 SF SHELL AND Description: TENANT IMPROVEMENTS Type: COMMIND Sub Type: COMM Job Address: 2712 LOKERAVWEST Suite: Lot 0 Location: APPLICANT MARK BOLEN Owner: Remarks: AM PLEASE Total Time: Inspector Assignment: PC --- Phone: 7608016258 Inspector: --~+===- Requested By: STEVE Entered By: CW CD Description Act Comment 19 Final Structural fM!_ 29 Final Plumbing 39 Final Electrical 49 Final Mechanical Comments/Notices/Holds Associated PCRs/CVs Original PC# lns12ection Histo!Y Date Description Act lnsp Comments 05/03/2006 19 Final Structural PA PC OKTO STOCK 05/03/2006 29 Final Plumbing PA PC 1) STRUCTURAL CERT. 2) ENGR. APPRV. 05/03/2006 39 Final Electrical PA PC 05/03/2006 49 Final Mechanical PA PC 04/13/2006 97 T -24 H-Cap Consultation PA PC HAD SOME QUESTIONS 03/15/2006 17 Interior Lath/Drywall AP PC 03/10/2006 16 Insulation AP PC 03/10/2006 17 Interior Lath/Drywall PA PC ONE SIDE 03/08/2006 23 Gas/Test/Repairs AP PC 03/08/2006 24 Rough/Topout we PC 03/02/2006 14 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding PA PC WALLS 03/02/2006 24 Rough/Topout AP PC 03/02/2006 34 Rough Electric PA PC WALLS Structural Engineers May8, 2006 Mr. Mark Bolen Smith Constlllting Architects 12220 El Carnino Real, Ste. 200 San Diego, CA 92130 Fax: (858) 793-4787 RE: Loker Business Center (GSSI #5064A) Palomar Oaks North Industrial Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Mr. Bolen, We submit this letter as acknowledgement of completion of construction for above referenced project. To the best of om knowledge, the wm-k performed and materials used are in confo1mance with the approved plans and specifications, and Contractor/Builder has completed or corrected any outstanding items. Note that this statement is based on ongoing contact with contra.ctor throughout construction, but no way relieves Contractor/Builder of responsibility of completing all work in accordance with the approved drawings and specifications, as well as all applicable building codes. Pleas~j contaet us directly with any questions. Sincerely, GSSI Strud:ural Engineers ~-~- Sandia B. Stampfli S.E. cc. Steve Broyles, Lusardi Construction (760-438-3902) 2445 Fifth Avenue. Suite 300. San Diego. California 92;1.01 Tel: (619) 687·3810 Fax~ (619) 587-3814 99v-j lOO/lOO'd vZ9-! vtec-LS9-6t9 S~33NI9N3 ISS9-WOJ~ meg[: ll 900Z-BO-~e~ May. 1. 2006 12:31PM MTGL INC Office Locations Orange County Corporate Branch: 2992 E. La Palma Avenue Suite A Anaheim. CA 92806 Tel: 714.632.2999 Fax: 714.632.2974 Lu Angeles Ventura County 13010 San Fernando Road Unit 1 Sylmar, CA 91342 Tel: 818.833.8100 Fax: 818.833.0085 San Diego Imperial Cnunty 7313 Carroll Road Suite G San Diego. CA 92121 Tel: 858.537.3999 Fax: 858.537.3990 Inland Emplro 14320 Elswotth Street Suite C101 Moreno Valley, CA 92553 Tel: 951.653.4999 FaX: 951.653.4666 Central Dispatch 800.491.2990 www.mtglinc.com FINAL REPORT FOR ngineering Construction Inspection Materials Testing Environmental SPECIAL INSPECTION AND MA TERlAL TESTING Date: May 1, 2006 To: City of Carlsbad Public Works-Engineering 5950 El Camino Real Carlsbad, CA 92008 MTGL Project No: 1446-A03 MTGL Log No; 06-62911 SUBJECT: SATISFACTORY COMPLETION OF WORK REQUIRING SPECIAL INSPECTION AND MATERIAL TESTING. PERMIT NO: CB 052693 PROJECT NAME/ADDRESS: I declare under penalty of perjury that, to the best of my knowledge, the work requiring special inspection, material sampling and testing, for the structure!s constructed under the subject permit is ill conform~nce with the approved plans, the inspection and observation program and other construction documents, and the applicable workmanship provisions of the Uniform Building Code. Executed on: May l, 2006 The work which we provided Special Inspection consisted of : Footing Excavatlolll, Reinforcing Stee~ Structural Concrete, Grout Placement for Masonry, Structural Steel Shop Welding, Structural Steel Field Welding, and Epo:!ty Dowell Bolt. A. If the inspection services were provided by an approved material testing laboratory or special inspection agency: TESTING AGENCY: MTGL, Inc. 7313 Carroll Road, Suite 0 San Diego, CA 92121 RESPONSIBLE MANAGING ENGINEER OF THE TESTING LABORATORY OR SPECIAL INSPECTION AGENCY: NAI\1E (PRINT OR TYPE): Eduardo C. Dizon I MTGL, Inc. State of Califomia Registration Number: C 57217 Expiration Date: 12/31/07 B) If the inspection services were provided by an independent certified special inspector: SPECIAL INSPCETOR'S NAME (PRINT OR TYPE): Registration Number: NA ,.... SIGNATURE w Feb. 14. 2006, 8:17AM MTGL INC 7313 Carroll Road, SuiteG SanDiego, California 92121 Tel; (858)537-3999 Fax: (858)537-3990 Facsimile Transmittal To: PH \ L-I s-revl5 I Date: Firm: C::.. t\'-f I \...vSAtz.t> 1 Time: Fax No.: Pages: "2... (Including cover) No. 2029 P. 1 Feb. 14. 2006 8:17AM MTG L INC lteport or: COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH-GROUT ASTM CJ019 **PROOF LIST''"" CUent: LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION COM'PANY " Set No.: 6-10124 Aee Date Nominal Actual Area (Days) Tested Si2'Al (.Sq. Inch) 7 1/19/2006 3X3X6 9.46 28 2/9/2006 3X3X6 9.86 28 219/2006 3X3X6 9.77 2$H 2/9/2006 3:X3X6 9.00 Specified Strength: 2,000 PSI Sampled By: STEVE KLOPKA Loeation: CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT WALL AT A+ 1 AT TOP OF WALL Concrete SuppUer: SUPERIOR READY MIX Mix No.: 866G TieketNo.: 10387 Water added at Site: 10.00 Cement Ty'pe: WV Remark$: gal. By CONTRACTOR MUTime: 88 Distribution: LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION COMPANY min. CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT. ••LAB COPY""" 2760PSI No. 2029 P. 2 FileNo.: Permit No.: Project No.: l446A03 Project Name: LOKER BUSINESS CENTER Load {lbs.) 20,99() 27,050 27.050 LOKER & PALOMAR. AIRPORT ROAO CARLSBAD, CA Strength Type of (psi) Fracture 2.220 N/A 2,740 N/A 2.770 NIA A Date Sampled: 1112/2006 Date Reeelved: 1/16/2006 Concrete Temp: 73 Ambient Temp: 70 Slump: 10.00 ln •. Tested at: San Diego ., "F 28-day compression test complies with the specified strength. Corporate: Branch: Branch: Branch: 2992 E. La Palma Avenue, Suite A, Anaheim, CA 92806 Tel: (714) 632-2999 Fax: (714) 632-2974 7313 Carroll Road, Suite G, San Diego, CA 92121 Tel: (858) 537-3999 Fax: (858) 537-3990 14320 Elsworth Street, Suite C101, Moreno Valley, CA 92553 Tel: (909) 653-4999 Fax: (909) 653-4666 13010 San Fernando Road, Unit 1, Sylmar, CA 91342 Tel: (818) 833-8100 Fax: (818) 833-0085 Report of: COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH-GROUT ASTM Cl019 * * CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT. 1635 FARADAY AVENUE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 File No.: Permit No.: Project No.: 1446A03 Project Name: LOKER BUSINESS CENTER LOKER & PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD CARLSBAD, CA Client: LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION COMPANY A A Set No.: 6-10124 Age Date Nominal Actual Area Load Strength Type of (Days) Tested Size (Sq. Inch) (lbs.) (psi) Fracture 7 1/19/2006 3X3X6 9.46 20,990 2,220 N/A 28 2/9/2006 3X3X6 9.86 27,050 2,740 N/A 28 2/9/2006 3X3X6 9.77 27,050 2,770 N/A 28 2/9/2006 3X3X6 9.00 ~1'f(6 ,---w~~~fl\1 ~w~~w Specified Strength:~ PSI Sampled By: Date Sampled: 1112/2006 Date Received: 1/16/2006 Location: ~ Concrete Supplier: Mix No.: Ticket No.: Water added at Site: gal. By Cement Type: Mix Time: Remarks: Distribution: LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION COMPANY CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT. **LAB COPY** min. 2760 PSI Concrete Temp: Ambient Temp: Slump: in. Tested at: Respectfully Submitted, MTGL,Inc. Eduardo Dizon, R.C.E. "F "F 28-day compression test does not comply with the specified strength. I ! : DEC-21-2005 WED 03:07PM ENGINSPECTION Uec. ll. lVU' j: lVrM Mllll lNt; FAX:7604384178 No. u'~b P. 001 r. 1 C Corporate: 2992 E. La Palma Av,enue. sv· A, Anaheim, CA 82806 OBra!lch 0 Branch \el: (714) 63~·2999 Fax: (714) 632·2974 7313 C!¥f011 . , Sill" G, San Die9o, CA a2121 Tel: (858)537-3999 Fax: (658) 537·3990 ' 14320 eswOOh Street Suite C 01 Moreno Valle)', CA 92553 Tal: (909) 853-4Mi Fax: (909) ~ ,;_ -i--I :-,~ ~., ~~ ~, WIST .;t.acs·.:.'·~.~i. ·~m·1·1· e ~ns·; .. ~m'·· =+~~t ·;.. I )· . .· ,~, . ti u~a IL&.a ·~:.~ -~~· ;J. .. · ~· .~* 1 To~ Mr_ Pat Kelley Date: Oeqembe 21, 2005 ; The City of ~arlsbad I Time: 3:0~ p.m. Fax No.: 760/438-4178 Original will/be m iled: Yes From: Yvette Cuau$ Re: . i I Loker Busi~ess Center -Masonry lnspeetiol1 Pages: : I Number of ~aget (2} (Including Cover She~) Mr-Kelley, Hete is a letter regarding the masonry inspections at the L ' ' Business ' Center. If you have any questions, pte.e contact Edua~o Dizon_ Thank you. lhls message is intended only for ll'lt liSe o1 tt1t inalVIaual or entl!¥ to which It IS addre lllld ma)' amtail infOrfN!IQII UlllllS flrivi~. oonfillitltlll ant1 tlC8mpt frOJn dlacloaure under appllc:able laWt If the dttr of thl& mneaaete not IN Intended reclplcnt, or the amployee or agent responsible for delivering th• I'I'MWGOt 'to • lnltl'ld$d recipient. you are hereby nolilied 1hat any Clinemination, Clitll'irMton or copying Qf this commun'lc:atiOn:ic> 'ctl1 prohibited. If y011 havt received thle~Wml'l'lunlcadon In error, ple8&a notify ua immediQWIY by telephone snc1 ret thA Ctlglnalto us at the ebova addreu vie the u.s. Postal &ervloe. TIJelll( ~u. DEC-21-2005 WED 03:07PM ENGINSPECTION FAX:7604384178 P. 002 Uec. L1. :lUU' j: lUrM Mllil !N~ No. U?~b ~. L Office Locations Oraaae ta•ntv Corpo11•• ~-: 2992 E. La Palma Avenue Suite A Anaheim, CA !i2ao& Tel: 714.632.2999 Fax; 714.032.2974 LosAnpln Ventura Co11111Y 1301 o san Fernando Road IJnlt 1 Sylmar, CA. 9134~ Ttl: 816.63$.8100 fal(: 818.833.0085 SPDiegD !mllerlal COIRIJ 7313 Carro R Road SllilaG San Oiega, CA 92121 Tet 858.$37,3$99 Fax: Q58.537 .3990 lnlandE&IIIIIra 14320 SISWOI'lll Street Suite C101 Moreno Valley, CA 92553 Tel: 951.653.4999 . Fax: 951.653.4666 Central Dlspatelt 800,491.2990 www.mtglinc.com December 2.1, 200S Mr. Pat Kelley The City of Carls'bad 59SO El Camino Real Carlsbad, CA 92008 G~ technical Engineering C nstruction Inspection l Materials Testing Environmental i ! Reference: Loker Business Center at Loker Palomar Airpo Building Permit No. CB052695 \ Road ! I i Dear Mr. Kelley: This letter is in reference to masonry inspection for the proje¢ isted above. MTGL. lno., is providing only grout pour inspection of the 1 onry walls. We are unable to verify the placement of the reinforcJ stee~ . masonrY 'Ullits. I i . I We are continuing to prOvide an inspection for lll8SOiliYj grod.t ows as requested by the contractor. however we do not ha.ve ditectidn lhe City of Carlsbad approving this change. I Sincerely, MTOL,Inc. ECD:yc I I I EsGil Corporation In (]!artnersliip witli qovernmentforCBui(aing Safety DATE: 10/6/05 JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: 05-2693 PROJECT ADDRESS: 2712 Loker Ave West PROJECT NAME: Building A-Staple SET: II 0 PLAN REVIEWER 0 FILE D The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. D 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. D The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the e!1closed 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. D 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: Mark Bolen 12220 El Camino Real #200 San Diego, CA 92130 D 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 be1en completed. Person contacted: Mark Bolen (v.M.) Telephone#: (858)793-4777 Date ~~~~,~-OS"(by: e>~ Fax#: (858)793-4787 Mail Telephone v Faxv In Person D REMARKS: By: David Yao Enclosures: Esgil Corporation iZ! GA 0 MB 0 EJ 0 PC 9/29 trnsmtl.dot 9320ChesapeakeDrive,Suite208 + SanDiego,Califomia92123 + (858)560-1468 + Fax(858)560-1576 ' City of Carlsbad 05-2693 10/6/05 RECHECK PLAN CORRECTION LIST JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad PROJECT ADDRESS: 2712 Loker Ave West DATE PLAN RECEIVED BY ESGIL CORPORATION: 9/29 REVIEWED BY: David Yao FOREWORD (PLEASE READ): PLAN CHECK NO.: 05-2693 SET: II DATE RECHECK COMPLETED: 10/6/05 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 enfor.ced 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. 1 06.4.3, 1997 Uniform Building Code, the approval of the plans does not permit the violation of any state, county or city law. A. 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. B. The following items have not been resolved from the previous plan reviews. The original correction number has been given for your reference. In case you did not keep a copy of the prior correction list, we have enclosed those pages containing the outstanding corrections. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding these items. C. Please indicate here if any changes have been made to the plans that are not a result of corrections from this list. If there are other changes, please briefly describe them and where they are located on the plans. Have changes been made not resulting from this list? DYes ONo City of Carlsbad 05-2693 10/6/05 Please make all corrections on the original tracings, as requested in the correction list. Submit three sets of plans for commercial/industrial projects (two sets of plans for residential projects). For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in one of two ways: 1. Deliver all corrected sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department, 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008, (760) 602-2700. The City will route the plans to EsGil Corporation and the Carlsbad Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. 2. Bring one corrected set of plans and calculations/reports to EsGil Corporation, 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, CA 92123, (858) 560-1468. Deliver all remaining sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department for routing to their Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. NOTE: Plans that are submitted directly to EsGil Corporation only will not be reviewed by the City Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments until review by EsGil Corporation is complete. 4. City to approve the specfal inspection program. 15. The soil engineer's review letter( dated 9/16/05) shows a) sheet ZAS3.1 detail 16 shall be revise to show the curb extend 12 inches below the aggregate base. B) Sheet A 1.1 notes, structural design criteria: seismic coefficient Ca should equal 0.4 Na, which is 0.40. c) Sheet S1.1, notes, foundations: coefficient of friction should equal 0.35. Please revise the plan accordingly. PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL CORRECTIONS PLAN REVIEWER: Glen Adamek 1. The final set of corrected drawings to be reviewed for signing and sealing just before the permits are to be issued. Each sheet of the plans must be signed by the person responsible for their preparation, before the permits are issued. Business and Professions Code. PLUMBING (2000 UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE) 4. Provide the site plumbing plans showing the sizes and locations of the gas meters and water meter; and the sizes, routes, and slopes of the building sewer, storm drainage system, site gas lines, and site water lines. Sheet P1.0 is still incomplete as a site plumbing plan: A) Sheet P1.0 does not show the location of the water meter and the size of the water line from the water meter to the building. B) Clearly show the required easement for the public water meter and/or public water lines on private property. · City of Carlsbad 05-2693 10/6/05 C) The sheet P1.0 shows the private building sewer to only 5 feet from the building. Please show the private building sewer line from the building to the point of connection to the public sewer system. Show the size and slope of the private building sewer lines and the maximum spacing of required clean outs every 100 feet as per UPC, Section 719.1. D) Show the required easement for any public sewer lines on private property. 5. Sheet P1.0 does not show the location and rim elevations of any manholes. Please show the locations of the upstream manhole on the drawings. Please show the upstream sewer manhole rim elevation. As per UPC, Section 710.1, provide backwater valves on all building drains which serve plumbing fixtures with flood rim elevations below the upstream manhole rim elevations. Only fixtures with flood rim levels below the upstream manhole rim elevation may flow through a backwater valve. MECHANICAL -{2000 UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE) 11. On the drawing clearly note as per the response: "No Class I, II, and/or 111-A flammable and/or combustible liquids are to be used in any amount within the building." UBC Section 1202.2.2. 13. On the mechanical plans clearly show the limits of ceiling space used as duct or plenum. Sheet M-2 still does not show the limits of the proposed ceiling space to be used as a plenum. Please correct. Then address the following: A) Not address on sheet M-1. Clearly note that all material exposed within the plenum complies with UMC Section 604.2. "Materials shall have a mold-, humidity-, and erosion-resistant face that meets the requirements of UL 181." C) Sheet M-2 still does not show the limits of the proposed ceiling space to be used as a plenum. Note: as per the 2000 UMC, Section 504.1 (Code Change) the Environmental exhaust duct systems shall not extend into or through ducts or plenums. (UMC, Section 602.1 does not allow negative pressure ducts in the plenum. UMC, Section 602.1, states: "See Chapter 5 for limitations on environmental air systems exhaust ducts extending into or through ducts or plenums." And: "Exhaust ducts under positive pressure and venting systems shall not extend into or pass through ducts or plenums.") Note: If you have any questions regarding this Plumbing and Mechanical plan review list please contact Glen Adamek at (858) 560-1468. To speed the review process, note on this list (or a copy) where the corrected items have been addressed on the plans. END OF DOCUMENT EsGil Corporation In C!!artnersliip witfi government for (]3ui{aing Safety DATE: 8/5/05 ~-LI~T PJURIS._ -~ JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: 05-2693 SET: I D PLAN REVIEWER D FILE PROJECT ADDRESS: 2712 Loker Ave West PROJECT NAME: Building A-Staple D D D D D 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 build1ing 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: Mark Bolen 12220 El Camino Real #200 San Diego, CA 92130 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. PersonQJ~lrk Bolen {v0 Telephone#: (858)793-4777 Date c . fJ!: (by: \t'l Fax #: (858)793-4787 Mail --=relephone · Fax -----In Person REMARKS: By: David Yao Enclosures: Esgil Corporation IZI GA IZI MB 0 EJ 0 PC 7/25 trnsmtl.dot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 + (858) 560-1468 + Fax (858) 560-1576 City of Carlsbad 05-2693 8/5/05 )PLAN :REVIEW CORRECTION LIST COMMERCIAL PLAN CHECK NO.: 05-2693 JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad OCCUPANCY: M USE: retail TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: V-N ACTUAL AREA: 20000 sf ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA: 24000 sf STORIES: 1 SPRINKLERS?: Y REMARKS: DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY JURISDICTION: DATE INITIAL PLAN REVIEW COMPLETED: 8/5/05 FOREWORD {PLEASE READ): HEIGHT: OCCUPANT LOAD: DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY ESGIL CORPORATION: 7/25 PLAN REVIEWER: David Ya1o This plan review is limited to the technical requirements contained in the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, National Electrical Code and state laws regulating energy conservation, noise attenuation and access for the disabled. This plan review is based on regulations enforced by the Building Department. You may have other corrections based on laws and ordinances enforced by the Planning Department, Engineering Department, Fire Department or other departments. Clearance from those departments may be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Code sections cited are based on the 1997 UBC. 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. 1 06.4.3, 1997 Uniform Building Code, the approval of the plans does not permit the violation of any state, county or city law. To speed up the recheck process, please note on this list (or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed, i.e., plan sheet number, specification section, etc. Be sure to enclose the marked up list when you submit the revised plans. ' City of Carlsbad 05-2693 8/5/05 Please make all corrections on the original tracings, as requested in the correction list. Submit three sets of plans for commercial/industrial projects {two sets of plans for residential projects). For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in one of'tiNoways: 1. Deliver all corrected sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department, 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008, (760) 602- 2700. The City will route the plans to EsGil Corporation and the Carlsbad Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. 2. Bring one corrected set of plans and calculations/reports to EsGil Corporation, 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, CA 92123, {858) 560-1468. Deliver all remaining sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Car1sbad Building Department for routing to their Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. NOTE: Plans that are submitted directly to EsGil Corporation only will not be reviewed by the City Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments until review by EsGil Corporation is complete. • PLANS 1. Show on the Title Sheet all buildings, structures, walls, etc. included under this application. Any portion of the project shown on the site plan that is not included with the building permit application filed should be clearly identified as "not included" on the site plan or Title Sheet. Sec. 1 06.3.3. 2. Provide a statement on the Title Sheet of the plans that this project shall comply with the 2001 edition of the California Building Code {Title 24 ), which adopts the 1997 UBC, 2000 UMC, 2000 UPC and the 1999 NEC. 3. Provide a note on the plans indicating if any hazardous materials will be stored and/or used within the building which exceed the quantities listed in USC Tables 3-D and 3-E. 4. When special inspection is required, the architect or engineer of record shall prepare an inspection program which shall be submitted to the building official for approval prior to issuance of the building permit. Please review Section 1 06.3.5. Please complete the attached form. • SITE PLAN 5. Provide a statement on the site plan stating: "All property lines, easements and buildings, both existing and proposed, are shown on this site plan." 6. Clearly designate on the site plan existing buildings to remain, existing buildings to be demolished, buildings to be constructed under this permit and any proposed future buildings. City of Carlsbad 05-2693 8/5/05 • LOCATION ON PROPERTY 7. When two or more buildings are on the same property, the buildings shall have an assumed property line between them for the purpose of determining the required wall and opening protection and roof cover requirements, per Section 503.1. An exception is provided if the combined area of the buildings is within the limits specified in Section 504 for a single building. If this exception is used, show how the building(s) will comply with Section 503. • EXITS 8. Rooms with 10 or more occupants may have one exit through one adjoining room. Revise exits to comply. Section 1004.2.2.(the occupants(113) at lounge can only through one room than outside or rated corridor?) 9. Revolving, sliding and overhead doors are not permitted as exit doors if the occupant load exceeds 9 or the exit door serves a hazardous area. Horizontal sliding doors complying with USC Standard 7-8 may be used when serving an occupant load of less than 50 in any occupancy other than Group H. Section 1 003.3.1.2. (Provide ICC approval number for the front door to show it complies with the above requirements.) • MISCELLANEOUS LIFE/SAFETY 10. Provide details of restrooms to show compliance with Section 807 regarding floors, walls. 11. Note on the plans that suspended ceilings shall comply with USC Tables 25-A and 16-0. 12. Note on the plans that new water closets and associated flushometer valves, if any, shall use no more than 1.6 gallons per flush and shall meet performance standards established by the American National Standards Institute Standard A 112.19.2. H & S Code, Section 17921.3(b ). 13. Urinals and associated flushometer valves, if any, shall use no more than one gallon per flush and shall meet performance standards established by the American National Standards Institute Standard A 112.19.2. H <~ S Code, Section 17921.3(b). • TITLE 24 DISABLED ACCESS 14. Provide notes and details on the plans to show compliance with the enclosed Disabled Access Review List. Disabled access requirements rnay be more restrictive than the USC. City of Carlsbad 05-2693 8/5/05 • FOUNDATION 15. Provide a letter from the soils engineer confirming that the foundation plan, grading plan and specifications have been reviewed and that it has been determined that the recommendations in the soil report are properly incorporated into the plans (see page 11 of the soil report). 16. Note on plans that surface water will drain away from building and show drainage pattern. Section 1804.7. • STRUCTURAL 17. The continuous footing size for all the walls shall be clearly shown on the plan. 18. Sheet 5 of the calculation shows F4-F9. Are these footings part of this project? Please clarify their location. 19. Provide calculation to justify the construction (beam, column, footing .. etc) for all the trellis around the building. • ADDITIONAL 20. Please refer to the following corrections for mechanical, plumbing, electrical and energy items. 21. To speed up the review process, note on this list (or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed, i.e., plan sheet, note or detail number, calculation page, etc. / 22. Please indicate here if any changes have been made to the plans that are not a result of corrections from this list. If there are other changes, please briefly describe them and where they are located in the plans. Have changes been made to the plans not resulting from this correction list? Please indicate: 0 Yes 0 No 23. The jurisdiction has contracted with Esgil Corporation located at 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, California 92123; telephone number of 858/560-1468, to perform the plan review for your project. If you have any questions regarding these plan review items, please contact David Yao at Esgil Corporation. Thank you. " " City of Carlsbad 05-2693 8/5/05 PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL CORRECTIONS PLAN REVIEWER: Glen Adamek 1. The final set of corrected drawings to be reviewed for signing and sealing just before the permits are to be issued. Each sheet of the plans must be signed by the person responsible for their preparation, before the permits are issued. Business and Professions Code. 2. Correct the statement on the Title Sheet of the plans stating that this project shall comply with the 2001 edition of the California Building Code (Titlle 24 ), which adopts the 1997 UBC, 2000 UMC, 2000 UPC and the 1999 NEG. 3. Provide data on proposed hazardous material to be stored and used. UBC, Section 307 and UFC. a) Clearly show types of hazardous material is being stored or used. Provide a list of the proposed hazardous materials as per the types in UBC, Tables 3-0, and 3-E. Provide the material safety data sheets (MSDS). b) Clearly show the amounts of each type of hazardous material to be stored and in use. c) Clearly show where in the buildings each type of hazardous material is being stored or used. PLUMBING (2000 UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE) 4. Sheet P1.0 is incomplete as a site plumbing plan. Provide the site plumbing plans showing the sizes and locations of the gas meters and water meter; and the sizes, routes, and slopes of the building sewer, storm drainage system, site gas lines, and site water lines. 5. Please show the upstream sewer manhole rim elevation. As per UPC, Section 710.1, provide backwater valves on all building drains which serve plumbing fixtures with flood rim elevations below the upstream manhole rim elevations. Only fixtures with flood rim levels below the upstream manhole rim elevation may flow through a backwater valve. 6. Show the water meter size and location so the water line sizing calculations on sheet P0.1 can be reviewed. Provide compl.ete water line sizing calculations, including the water pressure, pressure losses, water demands, and developed pipe lengths. UPC Section 610.0 and Appendix 'A'. 7. SDG&E to review the proposed Automatic Seismic Shut-Off Valve shown to be installed on the gas company side of the gas meter. 8. All water closet seats, except those within dwelling units, shall be of the open front type as per UPC, Section 409.2.2. City of Carlsbad 05-2693 8/5/05 9. Provide notes or details noting the backflow protection of water connection to fire protection systems will be provided as per UPC, Section 603.4.18 MECHANICAL {2000 UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE) 10. Please correct the note #8 in the Package Rooftop A. C. Unit Schedule on sheet M-1 to clearly show where the required smoke detectors are to be installed. Provide smoke detection in the supply air duct of an "air-moving system" for required shut-off of equipment for smoke control. UMC Section 609.0. An "air- moving system" is a system designed to provide heating, cooling, or ventilation in which one or more air-handling units are used to supply air to a common space or to draw air from a common plenum or space. UMC Section 203.0. 11. In Groups B, F, M, and S Occupancies, or portions thereof, where Class I, II, or 111-A liquids are used (in any amount), mechanical exhaust shall be provided sufficient to produce six air changes per hour. Such mechanical exhaust shall be taken from a point at or near the floor. USC Section 1202.2.2. 12. Detail exhaust ventilation system compliance with UMC Chapters 5 & 6. 13. On the mechanical plans clearly show the limits of ceiling space used as duct or plenum. Then address the following: a) Clearly note that all material exposed within the plenum c:omplies with UMC Section 604.2. "Materials shall have a mold-, humidity-, and erosion-resistant face that meets the requirements of UL 181." b) Clearly note that all combustibles material within the plenum space must comply with UMC Section 601.3. Flame-spread index of not more than 25 and a smoke-developed rating of not more than 50. c) Note: as per the 2000 UMC, Section 504.1 {Code Chang-e) the Environmental exhaust duct systems shall not extend into or through ducts or plenums. (UMC, Section 602.1 does not allow negative pressure ducts in the plenum. UMC, Section 602.1, states: "See Chapter 5 for limitations on environmental air systems e)(haust ducts extending into or through ducts or plenums." And: "Exhaust ducts under positive pressure and venting systems shall not extend into or pass through ducts or plenums.") Note: If you have any questions regarding this Plumbing and Mechanical plan review list please contact Glen Adamek at (858) 560-1468. To speed the revi1ew process, note on this Jist (or a copy) where the corrected items have been addressed on the plans. City of Carlsbad 05-2693 8/5/05 ELECTRICAL AND ENERGY CORRECTIONS PLAN REVIEWER: Morteza Beheshti • ELECTRICAL (2002 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE) 1. Please remove the "Future work" shown on single line sheet. 2. Show or note on the plans the method used to limit fault currents to 10,000 amps or lower on branch circuits. 3. Note on the single line diagram that all service disconnect devices shall be labeled as a "Service Disconnecting Means". NEG 230.70(b) 4. If utilizing a series-rated system, note on plans: "Overcurrent device enclosures will be identified as series-rated and labeled in accordance with INEC 11 0-22" and "The overcurrent devices shall be AIC rated per manufacturers. labeling of the electrical equipment". • ENERGY CONSERVATION 5. The Principal Lighting Designer must sign the imprinted LTG-1 form. 6. The Principal Envelope Designer and the Principal Mechanical Designer must sign the imprinted PERF-1 form. Note: If you have any questions regarding this Electrical or Energy plan review list please contact Morteza Beheshti at {858) 560-1468. To speed the review process, note on this list (or a copy) where the corrected items have been addressed on the plans. DISABLED ACCESS REVIEW LIST DEPARTMENT OF STATE ARCHITECT TITLE 24 • SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS 1. When more than one building or facility is located on a site, accessible routes of travel shall be provided between buildings and accessible site facilities, per Section 11278.1. City of Carlsbad 05-2693 8/5/05 • COUNTERS AND TABLES 2. Where fixed or built-in tables, counters or seats are provided for the public, and in general employee areas, 5% (but never less than one) must be accessible. Section 11228.1. 3. The tops of tables and counters shall be 28" to 34" from the floor. Where a single counter contains more than one transaction station, such as a bank counter with multiple teller window or a retail sales counter with multiple cash register stations, at least 5% (but never less than one of each type of station) shall be located at a section of counter that is at least 36" long and no more than 28" to 34" high. Section 11228.4. • GROUP M OCCUPANCIES 4. Show or note that the proposed general sales, display and office areas are accessible, per Section 11108.1, as follows: a) Work stations are located on accessible levels. b) The customer side of sales or checkout stations are accessible. c) Employee work areas are sized and arranged to provide access to employees in wheelchairs. d) Checkstands shall provide: i) A 36" aisle on the customer side of the checkstand. ii) Where quick checkstands are provided, ~1 shall be accessible. iii) Where regular checkstands are provided, the number of accessible checkstands shall be as follows, per table 118-2: / a) ~1 but ~regular total= 1 accessible. b) ~5 but :43 regular total = 2 accessible. c) ~9 but ~ 5 regular total = 3 accessible. d) >15 regular total= 3, +an additional20%, accessible. e) Accessible checkstands shall provide a clear check-out aisle width of 36" with an adjoining counter ::38" above finished floor. Note that they will always be open and be identified by a sign clearly visible to those in wheelchairs. f) All circulation aisles and pedestrian ways shall be sized according to functional requirements and ~36" in clear width. g) All point-of-sale machines, used by customers for the primary purpose of executing transactions between the business entity and the customer shall comply with Section 11178.7 for ATM and point of sale machines. END OF DOCUMENT City of Carlsbad 05-2693 8/5/05 City of Carlsbad I =I! I I G I I ,f. I •l§ ·iii j I; .t§ •I I BUILDING DEPARTMENT NOTICE OF REQUIREMENT FOR SPECIAL INSPECTION Do Not Remove From Plans Plan Check No. 05-2693 Job Address or Legal Description 2712 Loker Ave West Owner ____________ .Address~--------------- You are hereby notified that in addition to the inspection of construction provided by the Building Department, an approved Registered Special Inspector is required to provide continuous inspection during the performance of the phases of construction indicated on the reverse side of this sheet. The Registered Special Inspector shall be approved by the City of Carlsbad Building Department prior to the issuance of the building permit. Special Inspectors having a current certification from the City of San Diego, Los Angeles, or ICBO are approved as Special Inspectors for the type of construction for which they are certified: The inspections by a Special Inspector do not change the requirements for inspections by personnel of the City of Carlsbad building department. The inspections by a Special Inspector are in addition to the inspections normally required by the County Building Code. The Special Inspector is not authorized to inspect and approve any work other than that for which he/she is specifically assigned to inspect. The Special Inspector is not authorized to accept alternate materials, structural changes, or any requests for plan changes. The Special Inspector is required to submit written reports to the City of Carlsbad building department of all work that he/she inspected and approved. The final inspection approval will not be given until all Special Inspection reports have been received and approved by the City of Carlsbad building department. Please submit the names ofthe inspectors who will perform the special inspections on each of the items indicated on the reverse side of this sheet. (over) La Quinta .... ,. .. """...., 2/10/05 ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRiPTION: ~ ...... L9~~ A'IL Wr.ar.~-- PLAN CHECK NUMBER: ~-5-ZGP:"t"!, OWNER'S NAME: Fc;..Nz.-L!)tc-a.L1 L..~.G. !, as inspection program as I have UBC Section i !lsted above. Signed 1. list of work i D Dwn.o::trt:><:::<::#~tl f :n1:·u~rAtA ~ Structural D Specified or for the 3. Duties the the Inspect the construction of the items indicated above for conformance to the .app.ro.v.ed-d.~g n d rawin§s-aR€1-sraeeifieatieAs. ~·~·-- Furntsttinspection reports-to tile architect·t=·o .. ~BTI1Tamg·Offlclal and 6ffier B. designated persons:-·Arr discrep~frl'clessfialr6eor6ughftolflelil1mediate afteiifiOrlOfffie' contractor for correctiOn. -·""""'""''-''"'''" '""""'""'-·-~- Sp ~----""~~--···«-~""'...,..__,,.,.. __ ~,'""""'""'"'~~-<«NN<'<-~--~-----~'"'''"'"'""''-'"'0'~--"'--~-~'"'""'"'"''""'""'""~-·«<-~-"""'"'"~"'''" _Subm.iLa .. finaLsigned reporlstating ... U:t.e-tl:l9-w.Qfk-FeqtfiRR§··Sf>eeialinspeetion was in conformance to the approved plans specifications and workmanship provisions of the C. B.C. City of Carlsbad 05-2693 8/5/05 \VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: 05-2693 PREPARED BY: David Yao DATE: 8/5/05 BUILDING ADDRESS: 2712 Loker Ave West · BUILDING OCCUPANCY: M TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: VN BUILDING AREA Valuation Reg. VALUE PORTION ( Sq. Ft.) Multiplier Mod. retail 20000 per city Air Conditioning Fire Sprinklers TOTAL VALUE Jurisdiction Code cb By Ordinance Bldg. Permit Fee by Ordinance Plan Check Fee by Ordinance Type of Review: 0 Complete Review D Structural Only D Repetitive Fee 3Repeats Comments: D Other D Hourly I Hour * Esgil Plan Review Fee ($) 1,016,000 1,016,000 $3,116.971 $2,026.031 $1,745.501 Sheet 1 of 1 macvalue.doc DATE: 4J}JJ/(6 PLANCHECK NO.: CB (J5 -CJ/LJC/'3 BUILDING ADDRESS: {j.~ L6l<er ~ ':£:;~ PROJECT DESCRIPTION: rg~ ~ --r'S.c==~LeS) ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 8ox1 ~8 / ~ o( EST. VALUE: ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT APPROVAL DENIAL 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. 0 A Right-of-Way permit is required prior to construction of the following improvements: Please se~· attached report of deficiencies marked wit D. ake necessary corrections to plans or specific ons for compliance with applicable codes and standards. Submit corrected plans and/or specifications to this office for review. By~~ Dare B~~. J;~z___--oate: ' ~/ ' By: Date: . ~ /;Ja-)?s-- ./a/'31/ o-:J FOROFFICIAL USE ONLY ENGINEERING AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE BUILDING PERMIT: By: ATTACHMENTS 0 Dedication Application 0 Dedication Checklist 0 Improvement Application 0 Improvement Checklist 0 Neighborhood Improvement Agreement 0 Grading Permit Application 0 Grading Submittal Checklist 0 Right-of-Way Permit Application 0 Right-of-Way Permit Submittal Checklist and Information Sheet Date: 11/1 W /c:Jy-= • ENGINEERING DEPT. CONTACT PERSON Name: Taniya Barrows City of Carlsbad Address: 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008 Phone: (760) 602-2773 CFD INFORMATION . Parcel Map No: Lots: Recordation: Carlsbad Tract: A-4 F:\BUILDI~'ti~~H~~<f-Kas8~~~venue • Carlsbad, CA 920081-7314 • (760) 602-2720 • FAX (760) 602~5'~'~ (!) BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST 6/ Je ~IOYJ l)\),'LI .tk. C)QC/Aed 0.~ ~ J!Yift~ SITE PLAN -b~~~ <l-,~vv\p~o~-J-~ l0111.5 flti(f-JL ~ 3RD ~/~~ a~~' r;r 1. Provide a fully dimensioned site plan drawn to scale. Show: A. North Arrow F. B. Existing & Proposed Structures G. C. Existing Street Improvements H. D. Property Lines (show all dimensions) I. E. Easements J. Right-of-Way Width & Adjacent Streets Driveway widths Existing or proposed sewer lateral Existing or proposed water service Existing or proposed irrigation service _.../·" [lV".. 2. Show on site plan: A. Drainage Patterns 1. Building pad surface drainage must maintain a minimum slope of one percent towards an adjoining street or an approved drainage course. 2. 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 C. Size, type, location, alignment of existing or proposed sewer and water service {s) that serves the project. Each unit requires a separate service, however, second dwelling units and apartment complexes are an exception. D. Sewer and water laterals should not be located within proposed driveways, per standards. // []l/ 3. Include on title sheet: F:IBUILDING PLANCHECK CKLST FORM.doc A. Site address B. Assessor's Parcel Number C. 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 Show all existing use of SF and new proposed use of SF. Example: Tenant hnprovemeflt for 3500 SF of wareh<iuse to 3500 SF of office. 2 Rev. 7/14/00 BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST 1 sr 2ND 3RD OISCRETIONARY APPROVAL COMPLIANCE D D D A;\S0+0 L/ . ('Xffi d-/--D4) ~~o6-Jil 4a. Project does not comply with the following Engineering Conditions of approval for Project No. uttd;+,(?vR> uJ,'L{ be c.h.e£J<ed OYJ{g, ~ ~if r imr cacAQ.V}1.-£NlA:-. ryftms are . 4b. All conditions are in compliance. Date:----------- DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS 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 $ 15.276 , 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 Y2" 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 IITJ /o\ /[J"/" 6a. All needed public improvements upon and adjacent to the~ building site must be l::/ L/ constructed at time of building construction whenevt3r the value of the construction exceeds $ 76,380 , pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 18.40.040. F:\BUJLDJNG PLANCHECK CKLST FORM.doc Public improvements required as follows: --------------- Attached please find an application form and submittal checklist for the public improvement requirements. A registered Civil Engine~er 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 3 Rev. 7/14/00 D D D D D D D D @B D D D D BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST 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: ____ _ 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$. 360.00 so we may prepare the necessary Neighborhood 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: 6c. Enclosed please find your Neighborhood Improvement Agreement. Please return agreement signed and notarized to the Engineering Department. Neighborhood Improvement Agreement completed by: Date: 6d. No Public Improvements required. SPECIAL NOTE: Damaged or defective improvements found adjacent 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 15.16.060 of the Municipal Code. 7a. Inadequate information available on Site Plan to make a determination on grading requirements. Include accurate grading quantities in cubic: yards (cut, fill import, / ... ·export and remedial). This information must be included on the plans. (]/ 7b. Grading Permit required. A separate grading plan prepared by a registered Civil 'Y~ ltd-CO'-~t+ Engineer must be submitted together with the complt~ted 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: [Y/;c. Partial Site Release from Engineering Inspector. F:\BUILDING PLANCHECK CKLST FORM.doc 4 Rev. 7114/00 D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST 7d. Graded Pad Certification required. (Note: Pad certification may be required even if a grading permit is not required.) 7e. No Grading Permit required. 7f. If grading is not required, write "No Grading" on plot plan. MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS 8. A RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT is required to do work in City Right-of-Way 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, tying into public storm drain, sewer and water utilities. Right-of-Way permit required for: 9. 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 7153, for assistance. Industrial Waste permit accepted by: Date: NPDES PERMIT 1 Oa. Storm Water Requirements Applicability Checklist Completed 1 Ob. Priority Determination and Compliance: o Priority Project o Subject to Standard Permanent Storm Water BMPs ~ o Exempt ,P"•'" ~-11.FEES D D D F:\BUILDING PLANCHECK CKLST FORM.doc ~;;:i~ed fees are attached -~~fees required WATER METER REVIEW 12a. Domestic (potable) Use f"eeS w: tl \?e CA~{GulaJe.ol C!)f1~ rvt-eltJ ir-~/arls vr.-e-a~~~ Ensure that the meter proposed by the owner/developer is not oversized. Oversized meters are inaccurate during low-flow conditions. If it is oversized, for the life of the meter, the City will not accurately bill the owner for the water used. • All single family dwelling units received "standard" 1" service with 5/8" service. 5 ~m- D D D F:IBU!LDING PLANCHECK CKLST FORM.doc BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST • If owner/developer proposes a size other than the "standard", then owner/developer must provide potable water demand calculations, which include total fixture counts and maximum water demand in gallons per minute (gpm). A typical fixture count and water demand worksheet is attached. Once the gpm is provided, check against the "meter sizing schedule" to verify the anticipated meter size for the unit. • Maximum service and meter size is a 2" service with a 2" meter. • If a developer is proposing a meter greater than 2", suggest the installation of multiple 2" services as needed to provide the anticipated demand. (manifolds are considered on case by case. basis to limit multiple trenching into the street). 12b. Irrigation Use (where recycled water is not available) All irrigation meters must be sized via irrigation calculations (in gpm) prior to approval. The developer must provide these calculations. Please follow these guidelines: 1. If the project is a newer development (newer than 1 !~98), check the recent improvement plans and observe if the new irrigation service is reflected on the improvement sheets. If so, at the water meter station, tre demand in gpm may be listed there. Irrigation services are listed with a circled "1", and potable water is typically a circled "W'. The irrigation service should look like: STA 1 +00 Install 2" service and 1.5: meter (estimated 100 gpm) 2. If the improvement plans do not list the irrigation meter and the service/meter will be installed via another instrument such as the building plans or grading plans (w/ a right of way permit of course), then the applicant must provide irrigation calculations for estimated worst-case irrigation demand (largest zone with the farthest reach). Typically, Larry Black has already reviewed this if landscape plans have been prepared, but the applicant must provide the calculations to you for your use. Once you have received a good example of irrigation calculations, keep a set for your reference. In general the calculations will include: • Hydraulic grade line • Elevation at point of connection (POC) • Pressure at POC in pounds per square inch (PSI) • Worse case zone (largest, farthest away from valve • Total Sprinkler heads listed (with gprn use per head) • Include a 10% residual pressure at point of connection 3. In general, all major sloped areas of a subdivision/project are to be irrigated via separate irrigation meters (unless the project is only SFD with no HOA). As long as the project is located within the City recycled water 6 Rev. 7/14/00 1sT 2ND 3RD D D D D D D F:\BUILDING PLANCHECK CKLST FORM.doc 12c. BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST service boundary, the City intends on switching these irrigation services/meters to a new recycled water line in the future. Irrigation Use (where recycled water is available) 1. Recycled water meters are sized the same as the irrigation meter above. 2. If a project fronts a street with recycled water, then they should be connecting to this line to irrigate slopes within the development. For subdivisions, this should have been identified, and implemented on the improvement plans. Installing recycled water meters is a benefit for the applicant since they are exempt from paying the San Diego County Water Capacity fees. However, if they front a street which the recycled water is there, but is not live (sometimes they are charged with potable water until recycled water is available), then the applicant must pay the San Diego Water Capacity Charge. If within three years, the recycled water line is charged with recycled water by CMWD, then the applicant can apply for a refund to the San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) for a refund. However, let the applicant know that we cannot guarantee the refund, and they must deal with the SDCWA for this. 13. Additional Comments: 7 Rev. 7/14/00 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FEE CALCULATION WORKSHEET D Estimate based on unconfirmed information from applicant. .sr-/ Calculation based on building plancheck plan sub<mittal. Address: Cl11 ;}-ie?/f-er.Jh.e_, uJ·f~ldg. Permit No. C/:?()5'-~ f..o!J3 Prepared by: =I b Date: I l /c( /C/)" Checked by: Date: ___ _ EDU CALCULATIONS: List types and square footages for all uses. Types of Use: \{P,:Jai; / Sq. Ft./Units: (!O;t,I/JtJ tf EDU's: //. '?6' Types of Use: Sq. Ft./Units: EDU's: ADT CALCULATI S: List types and square footages for all uses. Types of Use: Sq. Ft./Units: ~ L~IIJq{; Types of Use: Sq. Ft./Units: _______ ADT's: FEES REQUIRED: WITHIN CFD~ES (no bridge & thoroughfare fee in District #1, reduced Traffic Impact Fe1a) 0 NO s-1. PARK-IN-LIEU FEE PARK AREA & #: __ _ FEE/UNIT: X NO. UNITS: __ _ f't-2. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE ADT's/UNITS: .!J..LJ6-L X FEE/AD7-1 . ~~. BRIDGE AND THOROUGHFARE FEE (DIST. #1 _._ DIST. #2 __ ADT's/UNITS: __ .-~ f--4. FACILITIES MANAGEMENT FEE UNIT/SQ.FT.: 8.cf1J4 ·At-5. SEWER FEE EDU's: f { · 3 zJ BENEFIT AREA: 6 EDU's: (1·3zJ I:::Al'"EaJ~$L~J)D}---.. X FEE/ADT:_ ZONE: 5 X FEE/SQ. FT./UNIT: m '-/Q X FEE/EDU: q6 X FEE/EDU: utr/ HIGH V /LOW =$ ·-'------ =$_, (ff6. &nf I I DIST.#3 __ ) =$ --· -~~I =$_ 1-rt/. & o =$_ 11.)1-q, =J-e;- 1 =$_ 1 Jq3. 1u ~/'1~/'L-.-·· rt-7. DRAINAGE FEES PLDA 'b -- ACRES: tj. 8.1 X FEE/AC: :f-/ $ f-8. POT ABLE WATER FEES UNITS CODE CONNECTION FEE METER FEE .J_ 1) I i-11-L/ ·d--J-6 1 of 2 F:\FEE CALCULATION WORKSHEET.doc =$_ '30. 4 'Jq.:~to (/ (d'{}. old:) ,':J:;. u(po IRRIGATION Rev. 7/14/00 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 RESOLUTION NO. __ 2_0_05-_226 __ _ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND CONDITIONALLY GRANTING THE APPEAL OF THE CITY ENGINEER'S DENIAL OF, AND APPROVING A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP FOR THE LOKER BUSINESS CENTER CASE NAME: LOKER BUSINESS CENTER CASE NO: MS 04-04 WHEREAS, the City Engineer preliminarily denied Minor Subdivi,sion (MS 04-04) Loker Business Center by letter dated December 23, 2004 finding that: • the tentative map was not in conformance with the approved Site Development 9 Plan (SDP 04-01) and was inconsistent with Title 21, Zoning, of the Carlsbad Municipal Code and that the Tentative Map is not in conformance with the approved Conditional Use Permit 10 (CUP (04-01) and therefore not consistent with Title 21, Zoning, 11 • the proposed traffic signal, which necessitates a new intersection, is not consistent with the Circulation Element of the General Plan, Section 1A in that the proposed traffic signal 12 intersection would have a negative impact on the safe and efficient movement of people and goods within the City and would be in conflict with policies and action plans to implement the 13 California Clean Air Act and would be in conflict with the street classification of prime arterial which prohibits access to adjacent properties unless no other alternative exists,. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 • the proposed traffic signal would likely cause significant environmental impacts in the form of disruption of traffic flow on Palomar Airport Road and increased air pollution, • the proposed intersection and traffic signal was not included in the project description, environmental impact assessment part 1 or part 2 and was, therefore, not analyzed and is not part of the Negative Declaration issued for the project; and WHEREAS, the Tentative Map was finally denied by letter from tht?J City Engineer on January 12, 2005 indicating that the appellant could appeal this matter to the City Council within ten days of that decision; and WHEREAS, the appellant did file a timely appeal with the City Clerk on January 19, 2005, asserting as grounds for the appeal, that the minor subdivision was considered acceptable except for the traffic signal, the City Engineer's denial was improper becausE! appellant's traffic projections indicate that allowing cross-traffic in conjunction with a traffic signal will improve traffic flow now and through build-out of the City, that the disapproval was for off-site improvements which are not typically identified on the site development plan or conditional use permit and that his opinion was that potential environmental impacts resulting from the redE!sign of the existing "T-intersections" to a single cross-intersection and installation of a traffic signal could not be considered significant and would, in fact, improve traffic safety and air quality of the project; and 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WHEREAS, during the environmental impact assessment, which did not include the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Loker Drive and Palomar Airport Road, the impacts were evaluated using the SANDAG 2020 Study; and WHEREAS, after the City Engineer's final denial, the appellant submitted to staff an analysis of the traffic impacts using the 2030 SANDAG traffic report which, in appellant's opinion, concluded the basis for a need for a traffic signal at this location; and WHEREAS, the appellant represented that it would pay for the entire c:ost of the design, installation and construction of the proposed traffic signal and associated roadway improvements; and WHEREAS, the City Council held an appeal hearing at its meeting of February 15, 2005 in accordance with Section 20.24.140 of Title 20 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the report and recommendation by City staff, the documents and evidence submitted by appellant, the memorandum from the City Attorney dated February 15, 2005, and testimony and arguments from others interested in this appeal; and WHEREAS, the City Council, at its meeting of March 1, 2005, remandetd the appeal to the City Engineer to complete the necessary and appropriate environmental impact assessment and to return to Council for action on the appeal; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has completed the necessary and appropriate environmental impact assessment of the addition of a traffic signal at Loker Avenue West and Palomar Airport Road and that impacted intersections are shown to operate at a level of service D or better which is less than significant. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, as follows: A. B. That the above recitations are true and correct. That the Negative Declaration and addendum is adopted and the appeal is granted subject to the condition that the appellant shall pay all costs associate~d with the design, installation and construction of the proposed traffic signal and associated roadway improvements. C. That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, MS 04-04 is 2 approved, subject to the following conditions: 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2 24 1. ;;:: /" t8. K $.""' This approval is contingent upon the Developer complying with all conditions pursuant to CUP 04-01 and SOP 04-01 hereby incorporated by reference. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed construction site within this project, Developer shall apply for and obtain approval from, the City Engineer for the proposed haul route. Prior to issuance of any building permit, Developer shall comply with the requirements of the City's anti-graffiti program for wall treatments if and when such a program is formally established by the City. Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, a reproducible 24" x 36", mylar copy of the tentative map and a digital copy of said map (in AutoCAD format, latest version) reflecting the conditions approved by the final decision making body. The reproducible shall be submitted to the City Engineer, reviewed and, if acceptable, signed by the City's project engineer and project planner prior to submittal of the final map or improvement plans, whichever occurs first. The digital file copy shall be submitted in a format as approved by the City Engineer. Developer shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless the City of Carlsbad, its Council members, agents, officers, and representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claim and costs, including court costs and attorney's fees incurred by the City arising, directly or indirectly, from (a) City's approval and issuance of this tentative parcel map, (b) City's approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary or non-discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein, including an action filed within the time period specified in Government Code Section 66499.37 and (c) Developer's installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby, including without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission by the facility of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions. Developer shall provide to the City Engineer, an acceptable means, CC&Rs and/or other recorded document, for maintaining the private easements within the subdivision and all the private improvements: streets, sidewalks, street lights, and storm drain facilities located therein and to distribute the costs of such maintenance in an equitable manner mong the owners of the properties within the subdivision. Developer shall cause property owner to execute and submit to the City Engineer for recordation the City's standard form Drainage Hold Harmless A~~reement regarding drainage across the adjacent property. '/ JY.J Prior to approval of any grading or building permits for this project, Developer shall cause Owner to give written consent to the City Engineer to the annexation of the area shown within the boundaries of the subdivision into the existing City of Carlsbad Street Lighting and Landscaping District No. 1 and/or to the formation or annexation into an additional 25 ~treet Lighting and Landscaping District. Said written consent shall bE~ on a form provided y the City Engineer. 26 ' ' 27 eveloper shall execute a City standard encroachment agreement for the proposed , employee lunch area improvements within the existing sewer easement. 28 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, - Developer shall submit to the City Engineer proof that a Notice of Intention for the start of work has been submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board. ,,/""' 1 ./. Developer shall submit an analysis of the condition of the existing rip rap at the outfall of the existing storm drain, and provide calculations to the satisfaction of the City Engineer 2 that the existing rip rap will reduce outflow to non-erosive velocities. If existing rip rap is not satisfactory, Developer shall submit a design for adequate velocity reduction to the 3 satisfaction of the City Engineer. 4 j2(/ 5 6 7 8 9 )Y 10 11 12 13 )-5.,,'' 14 No grading for private improvements shall occur outside the limits of this approval unless Developer obtains, records and submits a recorded copy to the City En!~ineer a grading or slope easement or agreement from the owners of the affected properties. If Developer is unable to obtain the grading or slope easement, or agreement, no grading permit will be issued. In that case, Developer must either apply for and obtain an amendment of this approval or modify the plans so grading will not occur outside the project and apply for and obtain a finding of substantial conformance from both the City Engineer and Planning Director. Based upon a review of the proposed grading and the grading quantities shown on the tentative parcel map, a grading permit for this project is required. Developer shall apply for and obtain a grading permit from the City Engineer. Developer shall obtain an easement for reciprocal access across the adjoining property as shown on the tentative parcel map. The easement shall be recorded. Developer shall provide City Engineer with proof of recordation prior to issuance of building permit. Developer shall cause Owner to make an irrevocable offer of dedication to the City and/or other appropriate entities for all public streets and other easements shown on the tentative parcel map. The offer shall be made by a certificate on the parcel map. All land so offered shall be offered free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and without cost. Streets that 15 already public are not required to be rededicated. 16 ;11(/ Additional drainage easements may be required. Developer shall dedicate and provide or 17 -::.•'/ 18 ~ yl.' 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 18. 26 27 28 "~ install drainage structures, as may be required by the City Engineer, prior to or concurrent witfi any grading or building permit. Developer shall execute and record a City standard Subdivision Improvement Agreement to install and secure with appropriate security as provided by law, public improvements shown on the tentative parcel map and the following improvements including, but not limited to sewer, water and fire hydrants, to City Standards to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The improvements are: a) b) c) Public sewer mains and appurtenances. Public water mains and appurtenances. Fully-actuated traffic signal and related street improvements. A list of the above shall be placed on an additional map sheet on the Parcel Map per the provisions of Sections 66434.2 of the Subdivision Map Act. Improvements listed above shall be constructed within 18 months of approval of the subdivision or development improvement agreement or such other time as provided in said agreement. Developer shall provide a bus stop to service this development at locations and with reasonable facilities to the satisfaction of the North County Transit District and the Planning Director. Said facilities, if required, shall be free from advertising and shall include at a minimum include a bench and a pole for the bus stop sign. The facilities shall be designed to enhance or be consistent with basic architectural theme of the project. 1 1 ~-,-·/ Prior to the issuance of grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, Developer / shall submit for City approval a "Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)." 2 The SWPPP shall be in compliance with current requirements and provisions established by the San Diego Region of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board and City 3 of Carlsbad requirements. The SWPPP shall address measures to reduce to the maximum extent practicable storm water pollutant runoff during construction of the project. 4 At a minimum, the SWPPP shall: 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 a} b) c) d) include all content as established by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements; include the receipt of "Notice of Intent" issued by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board; recommend source control and treatment control Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be implemented with this project to avoid contact or filter said pollutants from storm water to the maximum extent practicable before discharging to City right-of-way or natural drainage course; and establish specific procedures for handling spills and routine clean up. Special considerations and effort shall be applied to employee education on the proper procedures for handling clean up and disposal of pollutants. Prior to the issuance of grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, Developer 13 shall submit for City approval a "Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP)." The SWMP shall demonstrate compliance with the City of Carlsbad Standard Urban Stormwater 14 Mitigation Plan (SUSMP), Order 2001-01 issued by the San Diego Reg1ion of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board and City of Carlsbad Municipal Code. The SWMP 15 shall address measures to avoid contact or filter said pollutants from storm water, to the maximum extent practicable, for the post-construction stage of the proJect. At a minimum, 16 the SWMP shall: 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 a} b) c) d) e) f) identify existing and post-development on-site pollutants-of-concern; identify the hydrologic unit this project contributes to and impaired water bodies that could be impacted by this project; recommend source controls and treatment controls that will be implemented with this project to avoid contact or filter said pollutants from storm water to the maximum extent practicable before discharging to City right-of-way; establish specific procedures for handling spills and routine clean up. Special considerations and effort shall be applied to employee education on the proper procedures for handling clean up and disposal of pollutants; ensure long-term maintenance of all post construct BMPs in pe~rpetuity; and identify how post-development runoff rates and velocities from the site will not exceed the pre-development runoff rates and velocities to the maximum extent practicable. Prior to Occupancy, Developer shall install sidewalks along all public: streets abutting the project site in conformance with City of Carlsbad Standards. ~·/ .. Prior to building permit, Developer shall design, apply for and obtain approval of the City Engineer, for the structural section for the access aisles with a traffic index of 5.0 in 2 accordance with City Standards due to truck access through the parking area and/or aisles with an ADT greater than 500. The structural pavement design of the aisle ways shall be 3 submitted together with required A-value soil test information and approved by the City Engineer as part of the building or grading plan review whichever occurs first. 4 Parcel Map Notes Developer shall show on the Parcel Map the net developable acres for e1ach parcel. Note(s) to the following effect(s) shall be placed on the map as non-mapping data: a) All improvements are privately owned and are to be privately maintained with the a exception of the following: 9 10 1) 2) Public potable water mains, and appurtenances. Public sewer mains, and appurtenances. b) Building permits will not be issued for development of the subject property unless 11 the appropriate agency determines that sewer and water facilities are available. 12 Carlsbad Municipal Water District 13 ~/ Prior to approval of improvement plans or final map, Developer shall meet with the Fire Marshal to determine if fire protection measures (fire flows, firEl hydrant locations, building sprinklers) are required to serve the project. Fire hydrants, if proposed, shall be considered public improvements and shall be served by public water mains to the satisfaction of the District Engineer. 14 15 16 17 18 ~ The Developer shall design and construct public facilities within public right-of-way or within minimum 20-feet wide easements granted to the District or the City of Carlsbad. At the discretion of the District Engineer, wider easements may be required for adequate maintenance, access and/or joint utility purposes. .~-Prior to issuance of building permits, Developer shall pay all fees, deposits, and charges 19 for connection to public facilities. Developer shall pay the San Diego County Water 20 21 .~· 22 per: 23 24 25 26 27 28 Authority capacitv charge(s) prior to issuance of Building Permits. The Developer shall prepare a colored recycled water use map and submit this map to the Planning 57 for processing and approval by the District Engineer. The Developer shall design landscape and irrigation plans utilizing recycled water as a source. Said plans shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the District Engineer. The Developer shall install potable water and/or recycled water services and meters at a location approved by the District Engineer. The locations of said services shall be reflected on public improvement plans. The Developer shall install sewer laterals and clean-outs at a location approved by the District Engineer. The locations of sewer laterals shall be reflected on public improvement plans. The Developer shall design and construct public water, sewer, and recycled water facilities substantially as shown on the tentative parcel map to the satisfaction of the District Engineer. Proposed public facilities shall be reflected on public improvement plans. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 " ;/. -:3S-;- ~0~ 87." ~- .38~· The Developer shall provide separate potable water meters for each separately owned parcel. This project is approved upon the express condition that building permits will not be issued for the development of the subject property, unless the District Engineer has determined that adequate water and sewer facilities are available at the time of occupancy. A note to this effect shall be placed on the Final Map, as non-mapping data. Prior to Final Map approval or issuance of building permits, whicheve~ is first, the entire potable water, recycled water, and sewer system shall be evaluated in detail to ensure that adequate capacity, pressure, and flow demands can be met to the satisfaction of the District Engineer. A fire flow system shall be required for this industrial development and it shall be constructed as a looped system. The Developer shall complete the looped water system by tying into the existing waterline system on the adjacent parcel to the north to the satisfaction of the District Engineer. The Developer shall coordinate with the District Engineer regarding the looped system and easements. Prior to Final Map approval, Developer shall install water meters for the project. Developer shall install potable water meters for industrial use and irrigation meter(s) to irrigate the common areas, as required by the District Engineer. The Developer shall submit a detailed potable water study, prepared by a Registered Engineer that identifies the peak demands of the project (including 'fire flow demands). The study shall identify velocity in the main lines, pressure zones, and the required pipe 15 sizes. Said study shall be submitted concurrently with the improvement plans for the project and the study shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the District Engineer. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Code Reminder The project is subject to all applicable provisions of local ordinances, including but not limited to the following: A. B. c. Ill The tentative parcel map shall expire twenty-four {24) months from tlhe date of the letter containing the final decision for tentative parcel map approval. Developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this project to prevent offsite siltation. Planting and erosion control shall be provided in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 15.16 (the Grading Ordinance) to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Some improvements shown on the tentative parcel map · and/or required by these conditions are located offsite on property which neither the City nor the owner has sufficient title or interest to permit the improvements to be made withe>ut acquisition of title or interest. The Developer shall immediately initiate negotiations to aGquire such property. The Developer shall use its best efforts to effectuate negotiated acquisition. If unsuccessful, Developer shall demonstrate to the City Engineer iits best efforts, and comply with the requirements of the Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 20.16.095 to notify and enable the City to successfully acquire said property by condemnation. 2 3 Unless specifically stated in the condition, all of the above conditions must be met prior to approval of a final parcel map. NOTICE Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the "imposition" of fees, dedications, 4 reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as "fees/exactions." 5 You have 90 days from date of approval to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If you 6 protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for 7 processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their 8 imposition. 9 You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified feE~s/exactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor planning, zoning, 10 grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been give1n a NOTICE similar 11 to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise expired. 12 Ill 13 Ill 14 Ill 15 Ill 16 Ill 17 Ill 18 Ill 19 Ill 20 Ill 21 Ill 22 Ill 23 Ill 24 Ill 25 Ill 26 Ill 27 Ill 28 Ill 3. That the Clerk is directed to give notice to the applicant of this action pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code section 1.16.010 specifying time limits for judicial review 2 which states: 3 "NOTICE TO APPLICANT" 4 "The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, which has 5 been made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsbad Munic:ipal Code Chapter 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking judicial 6 review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than the ninetieth day following the date on which this decision becomes final; 7 however, if within ten days after the decision becomes final a request for the record of the proceedings accompanied by the required 8 deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost of preparation of such record, the time within which such petition may be 9 filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth day followin~J the date on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed to the 1 o party, or his attorney of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the record of the proceedings shall be filed with the City 11 Clerk, City of Carlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California 92008." 12 13 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Council 14 held on the ---=19::..:t=h=---day of __ .....:J::..:u::.::l::..~Y ______ , 2005 by the following vote, to wit: 15 AYES: Council Members Lewis, Hall, Kulchin, Packard, Sigafoose 16 17 18 19 CLAUD 20 21 ~ -Cm?n;-nL L.: AINE M. , 1ty Clerk (SEAL) 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NOV-D4-2005 FRI 03:52PM ENGINSPECTION CITY OF CARLSBAD GRADING INSPECTION CHECKUST FOR PARTIAL SITE RELEASE FAX:7604384178 P. 001 PROJECT INSPECTOR: DATE: ~ ~ 8 l ( '2.:..,--os-. 504-..0 PROJECT 10 \J.i.e, C-...~iLGRADING PERMIT N0.~39 LOTS REQUESTED FOR RELEASE: ~s.A'.\&.1:) '"'A''; CJA.Q.t.e.\ 'l-H ~-. \.!;,~~ ~] ·: ~a\I'Ct-t j.. NIA = NOT APPliCABLE -.}=COMPLETE 0 =JI 1st / L _./:_ / / / /. tl/k J D lete 2nd. or unacceptable 1. Site access to requested lots adequate and logically grouped 2. Site erosion control measures adequate. 3. . Overall site adequate for health, safety and welfare of public. 4. Letter from Owner/Dev. requesting partial release of spetciflc lots, pads or bldg. 5. 8~" x 11" site plan (attachment) showing requested lots. submitted. 6. Compaction report from soils engineer submitted. (If soils report lias been submitted with a previous partial release, a letter from soils engineer referencing the soils report and identi'IYfng specific lots for release shall accompany subsequent partial releases). 7 _ E. OW certification of work done with finish pad elevations of specific lots to be released. Letter must state lot (s) is graded to within a tenth (.1) of the approved grading plan. · ' 8. Geologic engineer's letter if unusual geologic or subsurface conditions exist. 9. Fully functional fire hydrants within 500 feet of building combustibles and an all weather roads access to site is required. Partial release of grading for the above stated lots is approved for the purpose of building permit i~uance. Issuance of building permits iS still subject to . .all normal City requirements required pursuant to the building permit process. · · ,Partial release of the site is denied for the following reasons: ' . G;R$-?~ Project Inspector ' : ' ' PLANNING DEPARTMENT BUILDING PLAN CHECK REVIEW CHECKLIST Plan Check No. C£?;05 r%f/:2 Planner Christer Westman APN: cJCfl"0~/ .... 0( . Address &7fft ()>~ /Jm:r Phone (760) 602-4614 iU .!! ., ., Type of Project & Use: f!d'mvYI Net Project Density: DU/AC ~ ~8 ~8 Zonis: Pm General Plan: tpt: Facilities Management Zone: 'b ~ ~ CFD {in/ ut) #_j_Date of participation: 5/7/4f/ Remaining net dev acre7'--: "'-J · e One ' I :>. >->-----;----~-~-----------~-··~--(~or-non~r.esidential-developm~i'lt-:--T-vps-~of-~and-used-createe--by---- c: c "' "' 0:: 0:: 1 1.) ~DO ~DO ?300 this permit: CJrwirvlWeiaJ.. · ) Legend: ~ Item Complete D Item Incomplete-Needs your action Environmental Review Required: YES __ NO __ TYPE V~Qc_ DATE OF COMPLETION: J'Z-/1'? ,to £t Compliance with conditions of approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval: Discretionary Action Required: YES _)5_ NO __ TYPE ~~C-Ot' APPROVAL/RESO. NO. V;FJ?fJ/gpp!J DATE 11{10/o'f PROJECT NO. (AJfa'f't>f!Wf 0'/~/ OTHER RELATED CASES. ______ ~·-------------------------------- Compliance with conditions or approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval: ---------------------------------------------- Coastal Zone Assessment/Compliance Project site located in Coastal Zone? YES CA Coastal Commission Authority? YES NO_)L NO If California Coastal Commission Authority: Contact .them at -3111 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 200, San Diego CA 921 08-1725; (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: 1) Stamp Building Plans as "Exempt" or "Coastal Permit Required" (at minimum Floor Plans). 2) Complete Coastal Permit Determil')ation Log as needed. H:\ADMIN\COUNTER\BidgPinchkRevChklst ~DO ~DO DOD lnclusionary Housing Fee required: YES NO -J-_ (Effective date of lnclusionary Housing Ordinance -May 21, 1993.) Data Entry Completed? YES __ NO __ (A/P/Ds, Activity Maintenance, enter CB#, toolbar, Screens. Housing Fees, Construct Housing YiN. Enter Fee. UPDA TE'• Site Plan: 1. Provide a fully dimensional site p.lan drawn to scale. Show: North arrow, property lines, easements, existing and proposed structures, streets, existing stree1t improvements, righ_t-of-way width, dimensional setbacks and existing topographical lines. 2. Provide legal description of property and assessor's parcel number. ·--.--------~-~"-·------------~--------------------------- Zoning: D D D 1 . Setbacks: Front: Interior Side: Street Side: Rear: Required ------- Required ------- Required ------- Required ------- D D D 2. Accessory structure setbacks: Front: Required ------- ·Interior Side: Required -------Strelet Side: Required ------- Rear: Required ------- Structure separation: Required------- 0 D D 3. Lot Coverage: Required ------ 0 0 D 4. Height: Required ____ _ D D D 5. Parking: Spaces ReqtJired ------ OOo Guest Spaces Required ------ OK TO ISSUE AND ENTERED APPROVAL INTO COMPUTER H:\AOMIN\COUNTER\BidgPinchkRevChklst Shown ------Shown ------Shown ------Shown ------ Shown ------Shown ------Shown ------Shown ------Shown ------ Shown _____ _ Shown------ Shown ------ Shown ------ (t/rci® l>.C, 130".4 $2776., SJU4 !>~0. CA. <?m$~n?& ~K' .• 4.00.'4400 VIV('..i',S:ANJ:)~G May 1212004 Mr. Chri$ter Westman SimiOf PiannM City of Cstl$bad 1e5 Faraday Avenue Cansbad, ~ri"omia Q2000..1314 P. 01 R<;: AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION: CONSISTENCY DETIJ!RMINATION McOLELLAN .. PALOMAR AIRPORT COMPREHENSIVE LAND USe.i PLAN - LOKI;.R BUSINIESS CENTER (2.710 LOKER A VENUti), CITY OF CARLSBAD, PAL..Q4..002, Re6oltJtkm No. 2(JI)4.0C4S Dear Mr. Weltman; This titter it to notify the City Of CariSbad rcttyj Of the May 3, 2004, C(jtnsfstency determination that WM made by tba &m Diego County R$Qional Airport Authority ("Authority,, acting In its Cl!pacity as the San Oietl'D County Airport l.and Use Commisiion r'AlUtnt for' the refer~ prqacl The ALUC has determined that the pr0p0$ed project I$ C:OMidmt . with th~ MoC\eUafr-Palomar Airp<>rt (*Airport") Cornprehenmve Land Use Plan (''CLUP"). A copy of R•dmiQtl 2004 .. 0043, appro\l$d ny til$ ALUC oo May 31 2004, and f"f1em0tiati'Aing the conslst .. t determinatiol'h ls endtlled for your information; As Indicated ln the enclosed resolution end as summarized below. the ALUC made ifs d$tetminathln on the project bmsoo on tile foflowing f4ids and findin~! (1) Th$ proposed project is the development of the Loker Bmsiness. Center as a businut park-onem~d oommeroiai-re\ail project. "' {2) The pro~ prqoot is Ioca~ within thtt a<J..$5 dB CNEL nols~e contours ·fQr McCt•n--Pa1omar Aif'fl()rt. 1M McCktftan .. ftalomar Airport Cl.UP identlfie$ co~cial~it and te$ta!Jrant· USM witnln the 6(}6S dB CNEl oo~U. contours as cbmpslible wtth airport uses* as shown in the MeCI$!Jan .. Palon'Tat Airport Noise/land Use Compatibility Mattix. Therefore, the propo$ad project is caMt~stent wHh tba McCleU1:~n~Patomar Airport CLUP. (3) The proJX1$ed project is I~ oo~id$ the RPZ, but within 1tha FAZ for Mcetenan .. Pa!OJ'ftar Airport; and is coosittent with the restrictions fmpoted on devet~t within the FAZ. TttrNefore, the proposed pr*et it coosistent with 1\e MOCiel!an .. f>al~r Airport ClUP. SAN DlEGO 1 NTERNATtONAL AIRPORT HAV-17-2004 HOM 01:03 PH CTfY OF CARLSBAD FAK HO. 760 602 t!559 P. 02 •""" ,I l"t.. ' ~ ;~~ Mr. Cli:ds,t_. Wfit!l'lan May l2t 2004 Pa~2 (4) Tht& Board a¢tkm is not a "project:• as defined by the Cahfomta Envi~tst Quafi1Y Aet (CEQA) Pub. Res. Code Section 2:10&5. The ALUCs determination that the North County Animal Shetter project is co.nsi•nt with the Airport CLUP II oonslstent With the AlUC Polldn and the State Awcm~uJttc Ad pro\li~ (Cal. Pub. UW. COde §12670..21679.5) was hued on the mem ~nd flnr.lngs·enu~ abtl\te. P!~se contact Ms Uooa Johnson at (619} 400..2463 if you have any t!tJMtlons regardlng the lsrmes a~ in thl$letler. $ PresidentfCEO TF/lW/arw Endosures: Retolutton 2004-()043 cc: Fluyd B~, Airport M!lrti!itJN, McCJelfan -Palomar Airport Peter Drinkwater~ Director. County Airports Lori Ballance, Gittzke Dillon & BaJWnc& lLP Ron Bolyard, Ctltrans-OiVlEOOn of MronautiQS Angela Shafer-Payne, vtce .Pr~ldent, Si'ategic Ptanrdng~ SDCRM Sunil Har~nf Dlredor Aiqlort Sy$tems Planning, SDCRAA Linda Johrn;on, Airport P~r SDCRAA ......... :1M;\ -~. ~ ;",;, '• • • • ReSOUJ110N NO. 20Q4..004S A RE.SOLUTJON OF THE BOARD O'F THE -SAN DIEGO COUNTY REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY DETERMINING THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT (OONDITSONAl USE PERMIT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PlAN FOR THE LOKER BUSINESS CENT~ 2710 LOKER AVENUE, CARLSSAD) IS CONSISTENT WiTH THE MOOLEU.AN,..PALOMAR A1RPORT COMPREHENSiVE lAND USE. PLAN. WHEREAS. the San Diego C-ounty Regional Airport Authority {Airport Jl~Uthority}~ acting m its. capacity as the Attport. land Us• comm.lssion (ALUC) ·for S;an Dkago County~ receiVed ~ from ttte CftN· at Cart~ to aemrrnine the compatibility of a ~~ dev•pment project (Condlformt Use Perml and sue Oevafopmertt Plan far the L'Ok« Suti~ C~~r) io~ In II$ City of c:arm~ wltbin the Airport k'dlueno.e Ares (AlA) for too ~~~ar Airport Comprenenslve Land U$e Plan (ClUP), a~ in April1994; and WHEREAS. the site plans for tM proposed development kldicate 1hat th$ Pf$d ·would involve the dwt:Jtopment of a cnmrrum:isH'dl profeet oons!&ting of three fr~ .. star~dmg bulttinQ$ .• which -would ~fty include a1n ~ supply store. dflces and rtMal ~s1 su«t aa a deli, a speciaft¥ beve~ shop, a restaurant for the l~ indumrta:l ama, and a drive-tbru bflnlq and WHEREAS, the lite plans for tile proposed ~elopm.,nt int.l&cate tbat Ute pro~ pro~ wmid be io~ wUhAn the 60~65 d~t (dB} Community Noise Equivataot Le~ (CNEL.) noi$$ ~ and flight activity #!GOes (FAZa) for Moefettan .. PakJJ'mlf Airport, but outstde the runway protectiOn zones for the Airport; and WHEREASr the Mectellan-.Palomar Airport CLUP allows oornnteroia1,.retaU and restaurrmt tiES Within tb& 00-65 dB ONEl n~ OOrtmut$; Md t' WHEREAS, the ~lafl..Pafornar Airport CLUP indt~ that de'Ndopment within th• FAZ $hould be h$ld free of lnteMive d~opment (bt ·~•. mori9 thM U:>n (10) dwelirtQ units per aae). ~elUding blgn..rin development and atl US&s which tnvol\leltua at$embly uf large groups-,of people (mme than 100); and WHEREAS~ the height of ali struotulll$ must be rev~ by the City of carl$bad to ~sure that they ccmi'Mn with the with Federal Avtatkm Regulations (FJ\R} P~rt 11 Guid$tine&, using the site development ptsn review p~ure. Any ~ found to be an "o~inn" by the Fedentl Avfafton Administratioo (FM) shoutd be detenntr\Gd not to bEt in oonfarmance with the ct.UP; and WHEREAS, tt~• Airport Authority has oonsldared the W'ormatirln ~d by std. Jnckldfng Jnformation in th$. $td report. and other relevant material l'1ag&rding the pmj£d;and . • • • ~~~ion No, 2Q~O~ P~~ds FA& NO. 760 602 8559 P. 04 WHEREAS, the Board .. s provided an opporiunity for the Citv of Garflbad and i~d mambtm of tim publie to present Jntormdon am~. arguments regarding thil f'!1$,ftef, NOW TtiEREFORE BE IT RESOlVEO, that the Airf>t.)tt Authcrity, ~ng as the AlUO for San Diego Oou~~ pursuant to SecUon 21670..3 of the Pubtio Utllitiel Coda, datermines thQt the pro~ project (Loker BusiOU$ ·Center. 2710 t...o~r Avenuer Q.lrl$bad)t as provided by the cttYs project ~:ubmltta•. 'i$ ama~t wiUt lh$ Mc01&11an .. Palomat Airport CLUP band upon the follOWiJ19 ~and ftndmgs: (1) The propO&ad pmJ$d m tbQ dw&lopmem of the Lolmr Busine$$ Center as a busirle$$ pari(..Orien~· Ot)mmeltlktJ..rehlB pm;itfot. (2) led pr~ is kwated Within the oo..aa dB oNa. oois& contours for . mar Airport. The MGCieUan-Patomar Airport CLUP identifi~ Mmrt'l$reiat;.~ w restaurant t.mel within the 6C-65 d8 CNEl noise oonwtU'fl: a oom~tibl$ Y.lith airport uses; as shown In the Mcelelar1..:Patomar Airport NoiH/Lend lhe OOmpatlbifity Matrix. Therefclce. tha propns$d pm]eot is cons•m with tOO Mee~mar Airport CtUP. {3) Tile propo~ pmj~ i$ looaWd o~ the. APZ, but witbin ttu:t F:AZ for MeO!ftllrm-PaJomar All'pmt; and i6 contastent with the re$Mdtons m~ on development within tht'a FAZ. Therefore. the proposed projam is coooi•nt wtth ~ Meelet~tm .. Patomar Aft'port OLtJP. (4} This Board action 1$ not a "proj,ed' tiWi defined by the California Envlroomentaf Quality Act (CEQA) Pub. Res. C(ld$ Saation 2100.5" , '-\ • • • ~~ N<>. 2~..()04$ Fage:SQf3 P. 05 PASSED. ADOPTeD AND APPROVED by the Board of the-San Di$go County Regional Airport Authe»ty at a ~utar meming this Srd day of May, 2004, by the following~: AYES: Soard Memb$rs: rxaver, 5nzunm. Jat.Oba<ln~ JMnson.lynoot Nieto. P$temm1, ~ynoka. s~ NOeS: Board tlsnb&F$: Norte ABSENT: Board M~: ~ . ATTEST: DiR R, CORPORATE SERVICES/ AUTHORfTY OlERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: GENERAL COUNSEL \ ' Carlsbad Fire Department Plan Review Requirements Category: COMMIND , COMM Date ofReport: 10-05-2005 jl /,··/-Reviewed by: _l_j__...__~-1!.~----- Name: Address: Permit #: CB052693 MARK BOLEN STE 200 12220 EL CAMINO REAL SAN DIEGO CA 92130 Job Name: Job Address: STAPLES 20,000 SF SHELL AND 2712 LOKER AV WEST CBAD INCOI\IPLE'FE The item: yeu hfl:¥e submittocl: for re·1iovt is iaeoi'Hf'lete. At this time, this offiee eannot aaeEJ:uatsly eonauet a £€wiew to det8fllline Colllfllianee with the ~¥Plioable eodes and/or standards. ..Please reYiew earsfully a:J:l eoHlHlents attached . ..Please resHbmit the aeeessary plG:H:s andfor speeifieations, with ehaages "eloHaea", to tJ:H.s office tar re¥i9-\¥ G:H:a appFoval. Conditions: Cond: CON0000782 [MET] APPROVED: THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR THE PURPOSES OF ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT. THIS APPROVAL IS SUBJECT TO FIELD INSPECTION AND REQUIRED TEST, NOTATIONS HEREON, CONDITIONS IN CORRESPONDENCE AND CONFORMANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE REGULATIONS. THIS APPROVAL SHALL NOT BE HELD TO PERMIT OR APPROVE THE VIOLATION OF ANY LAW. Entry: 10/05/2005 By: GR Action: AP ' Carlsbad Fire Department Plan Review Requirements Category: COMMIND , COMM ? L _ Date of Report: 08-11-2005 Reviewed by: _ _..4"'--~'--,, --'~'---1'---"---Y-·--- Name: Address: Permit#: CB052693 --.57-A.flf e 5 Job Name: S:r¥!£s 20,000 SF SHELL AND Job Address: 2712 LOKER AV WEST CBAD INCOMPLETE The item you have submitted for review is incomplete. At this time, this office cannot adequately conduct a review to determine compliance with the applicable codes and/or standards. Please review carefully all comments attached. Please resubmit the necessary plans and/or specifications, with changes "clouded", to this office for review and approval. Conditions: Cond: CON0000635. Provide a 'Knox' key-entry method for this project. The fire department will determine the loeation for the key box(es) and/or gate(s). An authorization to order form may be obtained by calling the Fire Prevention Division at 602-4665. CFD SHALL REQUIRE A KNOX KEY BOX AT THE FRONT ENTRANCE AS WELL AS AT THE REAR NEAR THE FIRE RISER ROOM. Cond: CON0000636 Provide portable fire extinguishers. The number and location of fire extinguishers is to be determined by the fire department. APPLICANT MAY WANT TO CONSIDER PLACEMENT OF FIRE EXTINGUISHERS EVERY 75 FEET OF TRAVEL AND/OR EVERY 3000 SQUARE FEET IF IT IS THEIR DESIRE TO PLACE THESE ITEMS IN RECESSED CABINETS. Cond: 'CON0000637 CFD WOULD ASK IF IT IS TO LATE TO PLACE THE ROOF ACCESS LADDER IN THE FIRE RISER ROOM, COULD THIS ITEM BE CHANGED. THE REASON FOR THIS IS IT PROVIDES THE FD ROOF ACCESS WITHOUT HAVING TO ENTER THROUGH THE BUILDING. Entry: 08/11/2005 By: GR Action: AP ~GSSI PROJECT Loker Business Center-Phase I (Bldg. A) Structural Engineers Response to Plan Check Comments (Items numbers correspond to those of the review) • Structural ENGR. S. Stampfli SHEET PC-1 GSSI NO. 5064A DATE 9/19/2005 17. Continuous footing size has been indicated for all walls. See revised plans. 18. Only footing type F4 is being used. Footing reinforcement per plan is 4-#5 each way (> As req' d = 0.56in2). 19. See attached for additional Structural Cal1(ulations, pages PC2-PC3. " tl ~GSSI PROrncr~L~o~k=e~r~B~u=s~in~e~s~s~C~e~n~t=e~r,~C==ar~ls~b~a~d~----~--- Structural Engineers Bldg A ,/ ~~ ~1 t :i f<?.!! ;~fl} ~;v_il :, ...... '~~-~ uHJr1. (~l:, .if> .. .;,.\ ;1_. ". I: •-) o7 . • • • 1 r~ f.o·.· .· rv. ::. ' . I . . 7\ .. ';;_\,:1~-.. , ..... _z .. .., ENGR. SBS .\. ~ : i{V :~ SHEET f2~£_·_··~~~~·-~------ GSSI N0.--'5:....:0:....:6;_;:4-'-A'---- DATE_---+.1,;-;/o_S __ : _..;..._ .: 0 ' ~GSSI PROJECT._L~o~k:.:::e:..:.r-=B::..::u::.:s::.:..:in-=-=e::..::s=-=s:....:C:::..e::.:nc.:.:t:;.::e.:....r,--'C::..;a=r'-'-'ls=-=b=-=a=-=d=---~-~ GSSIN0 .. _5:....::0=--=6'--'4"-A=---- 81dg A ENGR. sss DATE ·tf ils .-----------------------------------------------------,;.,;.,· ~,.._ ... ,.:.;.) .L,.:T177 Structural Engineers ··---~·-··: . . . : . . . i~'-q"~) . : ...... : . ~ro.',t:oi,-· O~f i-· · · ~-~-~L ~ ... ~-: -~--~j ... --~~--t-·-; __ 1:~0 ~ :ltt1 P!iJt ~.~~·- ,, I' t) I. I g . . . . ll_l!t<.: , v·f-Fri ·.• •. !: .:_,\ tJ I, :r<, n: : .· . ;~v i 0 \ i; ~·' :'«-··..-·., .· ...... ' . . ,_c__;__:_ . . . . I h• >tfu!:Jtl : : : '',it; . . : ) . !\' ! . -~11 (\ ,<). tn \i : . ''\' :\~~~)~ GSSI Structural Engineers Calculations for 5064A oker usiness Center Building A Palotnar Oaks North Industrial Carlsbad , CA SMITH CONSULTING ARCHITECTS 12220 El Camino Real, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92130 Phone: 858-793-4777 Fax: 858-793-4787 i:9 G SS I PROJECT Loker Business Center SHEET ______ _ GSSI N0 .. ___ ---"5--'-Q-=-64---"A'---' G.Mifsud ij '1 .. 'l I ~GSSI Structural Engineers SHEET ___ /_; ________ __ PROJECT Loker Business Center GSSI N0. ____ 5_0_6_4_A ENGR.~G=.M:.::i.:.:fs:..::u:..:::d __ SHEET __________ ~_ PRorncr__:L=-o=-k=-=-e=-r~B:_.=u=-=s~in::_::_e=-s=-s.::__C:_e::_:n=-t=e=-r ______ _ GSSI N0. ____ 5_0_6_4..;_A G.Mifsud ,2005 ''?) : _ _,) '_j ~GSSI SHEET_· ____________ _ PROJEcr_k+· o_:_::__k_e_r_B_u_s_i_n_e_s_s_C_e_n_t_e_r ______ _ GSSI N0. ___ --=-5--=-0-=-64-=-A:__: _j Structural Engineers ENGR._G_. ___ M_if_s_ud __ DATE ___ ---''c2=Q=0..::...5 _ ) .d .J '_j l . .J -~ '---'-~ -~__)- .-~ GSSI Structural' Engineers Soil Capacity * Concrete, fc Fleinforcement, fY 2500 psf 3000 psi 60,000 psi * Increase 300 psf for each in width from 2 feet, with 2000 max. Increase width from = Increase Maximun Increase = 6/1)2005 2ft. 300 4000 psf Sheet No. Project: Loker Business Center Project No.: Date: Square Spread Footing Design (1997 UBC) F9 F8 F7 F6 F5 Size, WxB 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 Area, ft"2 81.0 64.0 49.0 36.0 25.0 Footing Thickness, in. 24 24 21 18 16 Soil Bearing Capacity 4000 4000 4000 3700 3400 P, allowable, kips 300 237 183 125 80 Pu, allowable, P*l.55 465 367 284 194 124 Column Size, in. 10 10 10 10 10 Effective Ftg, d, in. 20 20 17 14 12 Soils Pressure, ksf 5.7 5.7 5.8 5.4 -5.0 Shear: Punching shear, kips 429 331 255 172 107 Vu, allowable, kips 447 447 342 250 197 VuOK VuOK VuOK VuOK VuOK Beam shear, kips 13.9 11.0 9.7 7.6 5.4 Vu, allowable, kips 22.3 22.3 19.0 15.6 13.4 VuOK VuOK VuOK VuOK VuOK Bending: Mu, ft-kips 47.8 36.8 27.5 18.0 10.8 Ku, psi 133 102 106 102 83 p 0.0023 0.0017 0.0018 0.0017 0.0014 As, in"2 6.53 4.44 3.42 2.32 1.35 Number of Flebars 13 11 8 7 6 Flebar size #7 #7 #7 #7 #7 As, a9tual, in."2 7.80 6.60 4.80 4.20 3.60 As OK As OK As OK As OK As OK Spread 2500.xls {~ 5064A 6/1/2005 F4 4.0 16.0 16 3100 46 72 10 12 4.5 57 197 VuOK 2.6 13.4 VuOK 5.6 43 0.0007 0.56 7 #5 2.17 As OK __ J ~ GSS I PRomcr Loker Business. Center SHEET _____ _ GSSI NO .. ___ ...c:5c.=-0...:...64_:_A'--2 Structural Engineers DATE ___ _,,=2-=--Q0-=-5=- l _ _j r ~·~ __ j _j _) _j _I GSSI Project: Loker Business Center Structural Engineers Engr: G.M Concrete Retaining Wall Design w/ a Level Backfill Wall Level Backfill ? WallHt., H Upper Wall Height Lower Wall Height Wall slope, 1 in Upper Wall Thickness Lower Wall Thickness Screen wall the Loadng Dock Yes Yes or No 5.0 feet 0.0 feet 5.0 feet 0 inches 8.0 inches 8.0 inches Additionalnaonaent duet to 8 foot high fence above = WallDesign / Monaent@ Wall base 1,500 ft-lbs Mu, base, M*1.7 2,550 ft-lbs Effective depth, dwall 5.0 inches Ku, Mu*12/(phi*bd"2) 113 psi p, pWall 0.0019 As, min @ wall,As Wall 0.15 in"2 per foot Flebar size, W allEle bar #6 "V" rebars As, Wallsteel 0.44 in"2 per foot Vertical reinforenaent 34.2 inches on center Design Parameters Concrete Strength, fc Fleinforcenaent, fY Concrete Wt. Soil wt. qall Active Soil Pressure Surcharge (uniform) Friction Coefficient, u Passive Pressure Lateral Load 250 ft:-lb Height of Lateral Load Footing Footing Width, B Footing Thickness, T Toe Heel Key Depth Key Thickness Key Toe Sheet: r GSSINo. 5064A Date 6/27/2005 3000 psi 60,000 psi 150 pcf 100 pcf 2500 psf 35 pcf 0 plf 0.35 300 pcf 100 lbs 5 feet 4.50 feet 12 inches 1.50 feet 2.3 feet 0.0 feet 0.0 inches 0.00 feet Use 8" concrete block walls w/ Wall Stability Passive Pressure, Pa Overturning, Mot Factor of Safety Upper wall Lower wall Lower wall Soil, S1 Soil, Sz Footing Key 730 plf 2,010 ft-lbs 1.5 0 X 500 X 0 X 1167 X 0 X 675 X 0 X 2,342 #6 vert at 24" o.c. =Mall= 2044 ft-lbs. 1.83 0 1.83 917 2.17 0 3.33 3889 2.17 0 2.25 1519 0.00 0 6,324 ,~l Pa conap., Pa*.30 219 X 4.50 986 7,310 > 3,015 Okay Page 1 --, ,_:j ,_0 ,-1 b_j 1., ) ·~-J GSSI Structural Engineers Check Sliding Pp Pp, Key Sum Moment, Key MuKey, Key effective depth Ku, Mu*l2/(phi*bdA2) p, pKey As, min@ wall,AsKey Rebar size, Key Rebar As, KeySteel Vertical reinforement Project: Loker Business Center 820 > 730 300 1120 > 1095 ft-lbs ft-lbs inches psi in/\2 per foot #4 "K" rebars in/\2 per foot inches on center Engr: G.M Okay, No Key Required Okay Check Soil Bearing Pressure a=(RM-OTM)/Total Wt 1.8 feet q,max 3*a 5.5 >B Check qmax and qmin q,min e q, if3*a<B Footing @ Heel Heel Arm Soil Pressure @ HeelArm q3, Soil Pressure q3 Moment Heel, Mheel Mu, Heel, Mheel*l.7 Effective depth, Footing Ku, Mu*l2/(phi*bdA2) p, pHeel As, min @ wall,AsHeel Rebar size, HeelRebar As, HeelSteel Vertical reinforement 0.4 feet 0.0 feet 531 psf 293 psf 857 ft-1bs 1,199 ft-1bs 9.5 inches 15 psi 0.0002 0.04 in/\2 per foot #4 "H" rebars 0.20 in/\2 64.1 inches on center Footing @ Toe q1, Soil Pressure q1 q2, Soil Pressure q2 Moment Toe, Mtoe Mu, Toe, MuToe Effective depth, Footing Ku, Mu*12/(phi*bdA2) p,pToe As, min@ wall,AsToe Rebar size, ToeRebar As,ToeStee1 Vertical reinforement Page2 Sheet: GSSINo. 5064A Date 6/27/2005 803 psf 238 psf 615 psf 189 psf 806 ft-lbs 1,369 ft-lbs 8.5 inches 21 psi < q,allow < q,allow 0.0004 0.05 in/\2 per foot #4 "T" rebars 0.20 in/\2 50.2 inches o/c ~GSSI SHEET ----------------- PROJECT Loker Business Center GSSI N0 .. ______ 5-=-Q-=-6_4_c_:A_:: Structural Engineers ENGR. G.Mifsud DATE ___ ___,,-=-2_0-=--0-=-5 ~~ ,_,_j ~GSSI SHEET ______ _ PRomcr~L=-o~k-=-e-=-r-=-B::_:u~s::_:i:..::._n::_:e-=s-=s_C--=e-=-n=-=te-=-::_r ______ _ GSSI N0. ____ 5_06_4_.:Ac...:: Structural Engineers EN GR. -----'G=-:·:.:..:M_:_cif:.=s-=ud.:::____ DAT£ ___ __,,_20_0..::....5-=- ,_j · •. J j ) ' ~GSSI SHEET __ / _:.,:__,1"""'---- PROJEcT Loker Business Center G~SI N0., ___ ___:5c__0_6_;_4::_:A Structural Engineers EN GR. G. Mifsud DATE ,2005 ___ ___,_ __ -' . __ j l, __ j ~ G SS I PRomcr Loker Business Center SHEET _____ _ GSSI N0 .. ____ 50.:....6::..._4_.:_:Ac._: Structural Engineers DATE·------'''--2-"--0-=-0-=-5 _j ~ G SS I PRorncr Loker Business Center SHEET ______ _ GSSI N0 .. ___ ~5_.:.Q....c..6_:.4c:.....:A Structural Engineers DATE ___ .....J•=2..:....Q.=.Q5.=.... __ _j '~ -~J ~GSSI SHEET ____________ _ PROJECT Loker Business Center GSSI N0. ____ 5_06_4-"A'--- Structural Engineers J l I ~-' ___ _j 'c___) ---, ' ' '-~J ~GSSI SHEET _ __::"__::; -·'--( ___ _ rRomcT__:L=-o=-k:_::_e=-r~B-=-u:...::s __ i--n_es __ s-'-'-C_e:_::n--=-t:...::e __ r ______ _ GSSI N0 .. ___ :_::5__::_0-=-64--.::A:___:: Structural Engineers -l J _e-J ._j Sheet No. ( GSSI Project: Loker Business Center Project No.: 5064A . Structural Engineers Engr: G. Mifsud Date: 6/1/2005. Parapet ht. = 10.0 Wall ht., h = 21.5 Wall,t = 8 Wall width = 12 t eff = 7.63 eff. depth, d = 3.81 Wall eff. Width = 12 Wall wt. = 92 Fp = ap*Ca*lp*4*Wp/Rp = 0.533 Fp,min=.?*Ca*lp*Wp = 0.280 Fp,avg. = 0.407 wu = 37.4 eccen., e = 6.0 Vert. reinf. = #5 Rebar spacing = 16 As, rebar = 0.31 As, per foot = 0.23 Steel ratio, p = 0.0051 Pb = 0.0107 0.5*Pb = 0.0053 pb<0.5Pb Steel ratio OK! fm = 1.5 fy = 60.0 Roof DL = 310.0 CONCRETE BLOCK WALL DESIGN (Slender Wall Design, 2001 CBC) Typical Block Wall w/ Joist Load -Along Grids 1 & 6 ft. Seismic Source Type = ft. ... Dist. to Seicmic Source = in. Na = in. in. wu h Soil Profile Type = in. Seismic Zone = in. Seismic Coeff, Ca = psf Importance Factor, lp = *Wp ap = *Wp Rp = *Wp psf Wall anchorage force = in. =1.5*Ca*lp*4*Wp/Hp/1.4 Pu, total = 2.4 kips Check Deflection Limitation: 6 = 0.80 1st Iteration in. Ase = 0.27 inA2 def. s(allow.) = in/\2 a = 1.07 in. fr, 4*sqrt(fm) = in/\2 c = 1.26 in. lg = 6Mn = 42.9 in-k Mer = lcr = 53.8 in/\4 defl. cracked = deflection = 0.0 in. Mu, bending = 25.9 in-k M, bending = ksi Mu, P-delta = 1.1 in-k M, P-delta = ksi Mu, P-defl. = 0.0 in-k M, P-defl. = psf Mu, total = 27.1 in-k Ms, total = A 10 km 1.0 Sc Zone_4 0.40 1.00 1.0 3.0 0.571 53 1.81 155 443 18.0 0.00 18.1 1.1 0.0 19.2 Roof LL = 540.0 psf Therefore, use equation 11-12 Roof Trib. Width = 1.0 ft. Pu, roof, DL = 0.37 kips Iterations Iterations Pu, roof, LL = 0.00 kips deflection, s Mu, total deflection, s Ms, total Pu, wall = 2.0 kips 2 1.29 30.2 in-k 2 0.39 20.1 Es, steel = 29000 klin/\2 3 1.64 31.0 in-k 3 0.49 20.3 Em, mas. = 1125 klin/\2 4 1.74 31.3 in-k 4 0.52 20.4 n = E5/Em = 25.8 5 1.77 31.3 in-k 5 0.52 20.4 42.9 > 31.3 in-k deflection s = 0.52 ab = 1.59 in. oMn > Mu, Wall O.K. Deflection limitation is O.K. pb = 10.4 kips Pw = 1.7 kips Wall thicknes~ 8 inches (~ Pf = 0.9 kips Vert. reinf. = #5@ 16 in. ole .. Pw + Pf = 2.6 kips Horiz. reinf. = #4@24"o.c. .04*fm*A9 = 5.49 kips Pw +Pf < .04*fm*Ag. Axial load OK! Note: wt of the block wall includes 10 psf for furred wall & stucco Loker A w CL reinforcing at joist (Grid 1 & 6).xls *Wp psf in. (0.007*h) psi in./\4 in.-k in. in-k in-k in-k in-k >Mer in-k in-k in-k in-k <all. def., 1 Sheet No. l GSSI Project: Loker Business Center Project No.: 5064A . Structural Engineers Parapet ht. = 10.0 Wall ht., h = 21.5 Wall, t = 8 Wall width = 12 t eff = 7.63 eff. depth, d = 3.81 Wall eff. Width = 12 Wallwt. = 92 Fp = ap*Ca*lp*4 "Wp/Rp = 0.533 Fp,min=.7*Ca*lp*Wp = 0.280 Fp,avg. = 0.407 wu = 37.4 eccen., e = 6.0 Vert. reinf. = #6 Rebar spacing = 24 As, rebar = 0.44 As, per foot = 0.22 Steel ratio, p = 0.0048 Pb = 0.0107 0.5*Pb = 0.0053 pb<0.5Pb Steel ratio OK! fm = 1.5 fy = 60.0 RoofDL = 310.0 Engr: G. Mifsud Date: CONCRETE BLOCK WALL DESIGN (Slender Wall Design, 2001 CBC) Typical Block Wall w/ Joist Load -Along Grids 1 & 6 ft. Seismic Source Type = ft. Dist. to Seicmic Source = in. Na = in. in. wu h Soil Profile Type = in. Seismic Zone = in. Seismic Coeff, Ca = psf Importance Factor, Jp = *Wp aP = *Wp Rp = *Wp psf Wall anchorage force = in. =1.5*Ca*lp*4*Wp/Rp/1.4 Pu, total = 2.4 kips Check Deflection Limitation: 6 = 0.80 1st Iteration in. Ase = 0.26 in"2 def. s(allow.) = in"2 a = 1.02 in. fr, 4*sqrt(fm) = in"2 c = 1.20 in. Jg = 6Mn = 41.3 in-k Mer = lcr = 52.7 in"4 defl. cracked = deflection = 0.0 in. Mu, bending= 25.9 in-k M, bending = ksi Mu, P-delta = 1.1 in-k M, P-delta = ksi Mu, P-defl. = 0.0 in-k M, P-defl. = psf Mu, total = 27.1 in-k Ms, total = 6/1/2005. A 10 km 1.0 Sc Zone_4 0.40 1.00 1.0 3.0 0.571 *Wp 53 psf 1.81 in. (0.007*h) 155 psi 443 in."4 18.0 in.-k 0.00 in. 18.1 in-k 1.1 in-k 0.0 in-k 19.2 in-k >Mer Roof LL = 540.0 psf Therefore, use equation 11-12 Roof Trib. Width = 1.0 ft. Pu, roof, DL = 0.37 kips Iterations Iterations Pu, roof, LL = 0.00 kips deflection, s Mu, total deflection, s Ms, total Pu, wall = 2.0 kips 2 1.31 30.2 in-k 2 0.39 20.1 in-k Es, steel = 29000 k!in"2 3 1.68 31.1 in-k 3 0.49 20.3 in-k Em, mas. = 1125 klin"2 4 1.78 31.4 in-k 4 0.52 20.4 in-k n = E5/Em = 25.8 5 1.81 31.4 in-k 5 0.53 20.4 in-k 41.3 > 31.4 in-k deflection s = 0.53 <all. def., C ab = 1.59 in. oMn > Mu, Wall O.K. Deflection limitation is O.K. pb = 11.2 kips Pw = 1.7 kips Wall thicknesl 8 inches Pf = 0.9 kips Vert. reinf. = #6@ 24 in. ole Pw + Pt = 2.6 kips Horiz. reinf, = #4@24"o.c. .04*fm*A9 = 5.49 kips Pw +Pf < .04*fm*Ag. Axial load OK! Note: wt of the block wall includes 10 psf for furred wall & stucco Loker A w CL reinforcing at joist (Grid 1 & 6).xls ~ ~ ll ~ GSSI Sheet No. Project: Loker Business Center Project No.: 5064A Structural Engineers Engr: G. Mifsud Date: 6/8/2005. CONCRETE BLOCK WALL DESIGN (Slender Wall Design, 2001 CBC) Parapet ht. Wall ht., h Wall, t Wall width = 5.0 ft. = 21.5 ft. = 8 in. = t eff = 12 in. 7.63 in. 3.81 in. 12 in. 92 psf eff. depth, d = Wall eff. Width = Wall wt. = Fp = ap*Ca*lp*4'Wp/Rp = 0.533 *Wp Fp,min=.7*Ca*lp*Wp = 0.280 *Wp Fp,avg. = 0.407 *Wp wu eccen., e Vert. reinf. Rebar spacing As, rebar As, per foot Steel ratio, p Pb 0.5*Pb = 37.4 psf = 6.0 in. = #5 = 16 in. = 0.0051 = 0.0107 = 0.0053 p<0.5Pb Steel ratio OK! fm fy RoofDL Roof LL = 1.5 ksi = 60.0 = 1330.0 = 1330.0 ksi psf psf Roof Trib. Width = 1.0 ft. = = Typical Block Wall w/ Girder Load -Along Grids B&F wu Pu, total 6 Ase a c 6Mn lcr h = 3.2 kips = 0.80 = 1.12 in. = 1.31 in. = 44.5 in-k deflection = 0.0 in. Mu, bending= 25.9 in-k Mu, P-delta = 4.8 in-k Mu, P-defl. = 0.0 in-k Mu, total = 30.7 in-k Iterations deflection, s Seismic Source Type = Dist. to Seicmic Source = Na = A 10 km 1.0 Soil Profile Type Seismic Zone Seismic Coeff, Ca Importance Factor, lp ap = Sc = Zone_4 = 0.40 = 1.00 = Rp = Wall anchorage force = =1.5*Ca*lp*4*Wp/Rp/1.4 Check Deflection Limitation: 1 st Iteration def. s(allow.) = fr, 4*sqrt(fm) = lg = Mer defl. cracked M, bending M, P-delta M, P-defl. Ms, total = = = = = = 1.0 3.0 0.571 *Wp 53 psf 1.81 in. (0.007*h) 155 psi 443 in.A4 18.0 in.-k 0.00 in. 18.1 in-k 4.6 in-k 0.0 in-k 22.7 in-k > Mer Therefore, use equation 11-12 Iterations deflection, s Pu, roof, DL Pu, roof, LL Pu, wall = 1.60 kips 0.00 kips 1.6 kips 2 1.68 Mu, total 36.0 in-k 37.9 in-k 2 3 4 5 0.78 1.04 1.13 1.16 Ms, total 25.0 in-k 25.8 in-k 26.1 in-k 26.2 in-k Es, steel Em, mas. n = E5/Em = 29000 k/in/\2 3 = 1125 k/in/\2 4 = 25.8 5 2.27 2.48 38.5 in-k 2.55 38.8 in-k deflection s = = 1.59 in. 10.4 kips 1.3 kips 2.7 kips 4.0 kips 44.5 > 38.8 in-k oMn > Mu, Wall O.K. Deflection limitation is O.K. = = Wall thicknes: 8 inches = Vert. reinf. = #5@ 16 in.o/c i = Horiz. reinf. = #4@ 24"o.c. .04*fm*A9 = 5.49 kips Pw +Pf < .04*fm*Ag. Axial load OK! Note: wt of the block wall includes 1 0 psf for furred wall & stucco Loker A w CL reinforcing at Girder (Grid B & F).xls ! t' i' 1.16 <all.def.,O.~ Sheet No. GSSI Project Loker Business Center Project No.: 5064A . Structural Engineers Engr: G. Mifsud Date: 6/8/2005. CONCRETE BLOCK WALL DESIGN (Slender Wall Design, 2001 CBC) Typical Block Wall w/ Girder Load -Along Grids B&F Parapet ht. Wall ht., h Wall, t Wall width = 5.0 ft. = 21.5 ft. = 8 in. = teff = eff. depth, d = Wall eff. Width = Wall wt. = 12 in. 7.63 in. 3.81 in. 12 in. 92 psf Fp =ap*Ca*lp*4"Wp/Rp = 0.533 *Wp Fp,min=.7*Ca*lp*Wp = Fp,avg. = wu = . eccen., e = 0.280 *Wp 0.407 *Wp 37.4 psf 6.0 in . Vert. reinf. = # 6 Rebar spacing = 24 in. As, rebar = 0.44 inA2 As, per foot Steel ratio, p = 0.0048 Pb = 0.0107 0.5*Pb = 0.0053 p<0.5Pb Steel ratio OK! fm = 1.5 ksi fy = 60.0 ksi Roof DL = 1330.0 psf Roof LL = 1330.0 psf Roof Trib. Width = 1.0 ft. wu h Pu, total = 3.2 kips 6 = 0.80 Ase = 0.27 inA2 a = 1.07 in. c = 1.26 in. 6Mn = 42.9 in-k lcr = 53.8 inA4 deflection = Mu, bending= Mu, P-delta = Mu, P-defJ. = 0.0 in. 25.9 in-k 4.8 in-k 0.0 in-k Mu, total = 30.7 in-k Pu, roof, DL Pu, roof, LL = 1.60 kips Iterations Pu, wall Es, steel Em, mas. n = EsfEm = 0.00 kips deflection, s = 1.6 kips 2 1.71 = 29000 k/inA2 3 2.32 = 1125 klinA2 4 2.54 Mu, total 36.1 in-k 38.0 in-k 38.7 in-k = = = 25.8 5 2.62 39.0 in-k 42.9 > 39.0 in-k pMn > Mu, Wall O.K. Seismic Source Type = Dist. to Seicmic Source = Na = A 10 km 1.0 Soil Profile Type Seismic Zone Seismic Coeff, Ca Importance Factor, lp aP = Sc = Zone_4 = 0.40 = 1.00 = 1.0 Rp = 3.0 Wall anchorage force =1.5*Ca*lp*4*Wp/Rp/1.4 = 0.571 *Wp Check Deflection Limitation: 1st Iteration def. s(allow.) = fr, 4*sqrt(fm) = lg = Mer = deft. cracked = M, bending = M, P-delta = M, P-defl. = Ms, total = Therefore, use equation 11-12 53 psf 1.81 in. (0.007*h) 155 psi 443 in.A4 18.0 in.-k 0.00 in. 18.1 in-k 4.6 in-k 0.0 in-k 22.7 in-k > Mer Iterations deflection, s Ms, total 25.1 in-k 25.9 in-k 26.2 in-k 26.2 in-k 2 3 4 5 deflection s 0.79 1.06 1.15 1.18 = Deflection limitation is O.K. 1.18 <all. def., 0. = 1.59 in. 11.2 kips 1.3 kips 2.7 kips 4.0 kips Wall thicknes1 Vert. reinf. = 8 inches = # 6 @ 24 in. ole = Horiz. reinf. = #4@ 24"o.c. .04*fm*A9 = 5.49 kips Pw +Pf < .04*fm*Ag. Axial load OK! Note: wt of the block wall includes 1 0 psf for furred wall & stucco Loker A w CL reinforcing at Girder (Grid B & F).xls Sheet GSSI Project: Loker Business Center GSSI No. 5064A. Structural Engineers Engr: G.Mifsud Date: 7/13/2005. Overturning of Roof Mounted Mechanical Equipment Vp=ap*Ca*lp*4/Rp/1.4* weight OTM = Vp*h/2 + Vv*wt*w/2 Vv=Vp/3 RM = Wt*w/2* .85 ap = 2.5 Ca = 0.40 lp = 1.00 Rp= 3.0 UBC or DSA UBC Unit Size, feet weight, Vp Vv OTM RM Uplift, lbs width length heigh lbs ft-lbs ft-lbs RTU-1 4.8 8.3 4.2 1,600 1,524 -3,200 3,264 No uplift RTU-2 4.8 8.3 4.2 1,600 1,524 -3,200 3,264 No uplift RTU-3 4.8 8.3 4.2 1,600 1,524 -3,200 3,264 No uplift RTU-4 4.8 8.3 4.2 1,600 1,524 -3,200 3,264 No uplift RTU-5 4.5 5.0 4.0 500 476 -952 95,6 No uplift RTU-6 3.8 7.2 3.3 800 762 -1,257 1,27'5 No uplift RTU-7 3.8 7.2 3.0 800 762 -1,143 1,292 No uplift ----- - - --- --- -- --- -- ----- -- --- ----- GSSI Structural Engineers LOKER BUSINE,SS. P'ARK 5 064A STANDARD LOAD TABLE FOR OPEN WEB STEEL JOISTS, K ... SERIES Based on a Maximum Allowable Tensile Stress of 30 ksi Adopted by the Steel Joist Institute November 4, 1985; Revised to May 1 , 2000 -Effective August 1 , 2002 The black figures in the following table give the TOTAL safe uniformly distributed load-carrying capacities, in pounds per linear foot, of K-Series Steel Joists. The weight of DEAD loads, including the joists, must be deducted to· determine the LIVE load-carrying capacities of the joists. Sloped par- allel-chord joists shall use span as defined by the length along the slope. The figures shown in RED in this load table are the LIVE loads per linear foot of joist which will produce an approxi- mate deflection of 1/360 of the span. LIVE loads which will produce a deflection of 1/240 of the span may be obtained by multiplying the figures in RED by 1.5. In no case shall the TOTAL load capacity of the joists be exceeded. The approximate joist weights per linear foot shown in these tables do not include accessories. The approximate moment of inertia of the joist, in inches4 is; lj = 26.767(WLL)(L3)(10-6), where WLL = RED figure in the Coad Table and L =(Span-.33) in feet. For the proper handling of concentrated and/or varying loads, see Section 5.5 in the Recommended Code of Stan- dard Practice for Steel Joists and Joist Girders. Where the joist span exceeds the unshaded area of the load table, the row of bridging nearest the mid-span shall be diagonal bridging with bolted connections at the chords and intersections. STANDARD LOAD TABLE/OPEN WEB STEEL JOISTS, K-SERIES Based on a Maximum Allowable Tensile Stress of 30 ksi 8 550 10 I. a: ii '-tic IC I! II I I I I 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ,,. 30 ' 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 STANDARD LOAD TABLE/OPEN WEB STEEL JOISTS, K-SERIES Based on a Maximum Allowable Tensile Stress of 30 ksi 18K3 18K4 18K5 18K6 18K7 18K9 18K10 20K3 20K4 20K5 20K6 20K7 20K9 20K10 22K4 22K5 22K6 22K7 22K9 22K10 22K11 550 550 550 550 550 550 550 550 132 11 DESIGN GUIDE WEIGHT TABLE FOR JOIST GIRDERS U. S. CUSTOMARY Based on an allowable tensile stress of 30ksi Joist Girder weights between the heavy black and blue lines have 7 1/2 inch bearing depths. Joist Girder weights to the right of the heavy blue line have 10 inch bearing depths. Check with Vulcraft for material availablity. s: NUCCR VULCRAFT-GROUP 3-42 Fy = 46 ksi 6 283 7 275 8 268 9 259 10 251 c ~ 11 >. 12. Cl 13 '5 14 1/) .2 . 15 i . ._ .16 &t •:t; l1; .. . :·m ·.la :·o. .. I/) •19 ., ! 20 i ~ 2'1 ~ 22 -24 -.E 26 = 28 Cl c 30 .!! Q) -~ 31 58 li 32 55 m 34 49 36 37 38 39 A (in. ) 11.40 I(in.4) 54.1 r(in.) s} Bending factor a/106 COLUMNS Square structural tubing Allowable concentric loads in kips 23·t 257·· 201 171 140 107 200 . 251 196 167 137 105 19:3 244 191 163 133 102 1815 2.37 186 158 130 99 17B 229 180 154 ·126 96 16!~ . 93 160 90 15•1 87 14•1 83 131 80 121) 76 109 .!2 9.7 68 87 64 .71S 60 70 71 56 64 65 51 58 55 43 49 47 36 41 40 31 36 35 27 54 45 39 33 26 51 42 37 31 24 45 37 33 27 21 8.36 27.0 1.80 182 159 153 148 142 135 129 122 115 107 99 90 82 73 65 59 54 49 41 35 30 26 6.58 22.8 1.86 0.539 0.773 0.722 3.54 4.03 3.39 AMERICAN INsTITUTE or STEEL CoNSTRUCTION 155 136 131 127 122 116 111 105 99 93 86 79 72 64 58 52 47 43 36 31 27 23 5.61 20.1 1.89 0.699 2.99 I ' t l ] I I I I I I I I GEOCON INCORPORATED Project No. 07192-22-01 December 17, 2003 Franz-Loker LLC % O'Day Consultants 2710 Loker Avenue West, Suite 100 Carlsbad, Califomia 92008 Attention: Mr. Pat O'Day Subject: CARLSBAD OAKS WEST GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS LOKER AVENUE AND PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Gentlemen: In accordance with your authorization aDd our Proposal No. LG-03538 dated October 23, 2003, we herein submit the results of our geotechnical investigation for the subject site. The accompanying report presents the results of the study with our conclusions and recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of project development. In our opinion, the site can be developed as proposed provided the recommendations eontained in this report are followed. Should you have any questions regarding this repmi, or if we may be of fmiher service, please contact the undersigned at your convenience. Very truly yours, GEOCON INCORPORATED Kem1eth E. C x RCE 6580 - ( 6/del) Addressee . 6960 Flanders Drive Ill!! San Diego, California 92121-297 4 Ill Telephone (858) 558-6900 IIi! Fax ( 858) 558-6159 ~ ~ ' I I 'I! )I ,·I · .. I· 'I· . I I I I • 6.1 6.1.1 6.1.2 6.1.3 6.1.4 6.2 6.2.1 6.2.2 6.2.3 6.3 6.3.1 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General No soil or geologic conditions were encountered during this investigation that, in our opinion, would preclude the continued development of the property as presently planned, provided the recommendations of this report are followed. The site is underlain by previously placed fill and the Santiago Formation: The fill material generally ranges in thickness to a maximum of 18 feet and will require remedial grading in the form of a partial removal and recompaction. Groundwater was not encountered in any of the borings and is not expected to significantly affect the proposed development. Following remedial grading, the proposed commercial structures can be supported on a conventional footing foundation system in properly compacted fill or fommtional material. Soil and Excavation Characteristics The in situ soils can be excavated with moderate to heavy effort using conventional heavy-duty grading equipment. Cemented zones are common in the Santiago Formation and, if encountered, may require a very heavy effort to excavate. Cemented zones may also generate oversized material requiring special handling and placement procedures. It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that all excavations and trenches are properly shored and maintained in accordance with applicable OSHA rules and regulations in order to maintain safety and the stability of adjacent existing improvements. The majority of soil encountered during the investigation are considered to have .e. "medium" to "high" expansion potential (Expansion Index [EI] between 50 and 130) as defined by Uniform Building Code (UBC) Table No. 18-I-B . Grading All grading should be perfonned in ·accordance with the Recommended Grading Specifications contained in Appendix C. Where the recommendations of Appendix C conflict with this report, the recommendations of this report take precedence. Project No. 07192-22cOI - 5 -December 17, 2003 ~ ~-~ ll: llj I ~ ' ~ I ]'I -~~ ~I ~I ~ I II J I I 6.3.2 6.3.3 6.3.4 6.3.5 6.3.6 6.3.7 6.3.8 6.3.9 Prior to commencing grading, a preconstruction conference should be held at the site with the owner or developer, grading contractor, civil engineer, and geotechnical engineer in attendance. Special soil handling procedures and/or the grading plans can be discussed at that time. Site preparation should begin with the removal of all deleterious material and vegetation. The depth of removal should be such that material exposed in cut areas and the soil to be used as fill is relatively free of organic matter and conshuction debris. De:bris generated during stripping and/or site demolition should be exported from the site. The upper four feet of existing fill soils in proposed paved or building areas should be removed and replaced with properly compacted fill. That portion of the abandoned sewer line backfill that is deeper than four feet and with a 1.5:1 plane extending down and out from the perimeter of a proposed building should also be removed and replaced with properly compacted fill. Where buildings are planned on a cut fill transition, the formational material should be removed to a depth of 4 feet below the proposed finish grade. Where practical, removals should extend at least 5 feet beyond the building footprint. Prior to placing fill, the ground surface should be scarified to a depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction in accordance with ASTM D1557-00. Existing fill soils and excavated soils of the Santiago Fom1ation are suitable for re-use as fill provided they are free of vegetation, debris and other deleterious material. Fill layers should be no thicker than will allow for adequate bonding and compaction. All fill, including backfill and scarified ground surfaces, should be compacted to at least 90-percent of maximum dry density at near optimum moisture content, as detenn:ined in accordance with ASTM Test Procedure D 1557-00. Rocks greater than 6 inches in maximum dimension should not be placed within 3 feet of finish grade in building pad areas or street subgrade. Rock fragments greater than 12 inches in maximum dimension should not be placed within 5 feet of finish grade or 3 feet of the deepest utility. Project No. 07192-22-01 -6-December 17, 2003 j ' , ~·· I I~ -~ ' I I I I ,I I I I I I . - 6.4 Seismic Design Criteria 6.4.1 The following table summarizes site-specific seismic design criteria obtained from the 2000 California Building Code (CBC). The values listed on Table 6.4 are for the Julian segment of the Elsinore Fault (located approximately 22 miles west of the site), which is identified as a Type A fault and the Rose Canyon Fault, which is identified as a Type B fault. TABLE 6.4 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS Parameter Design Value UBC Reference Seismic Zone Factor, Z 0.40 Table 16-I Soil Profile Type Sc Table 16-J Seismic Coefficient, Ca 0.40 Table 16-Q Seismic Coefficient, Cv 0.56 Table 16-R Near-Source Factor, Na 1.0 Table 16-S Near-Source Factor, Nv 1.0 Table 16-T Seismic Source AlB Table 16-U 6.5 Foundations 6.5.1 The project is suitable for the use of continuous strip footings, isolated spread footings or appropriate combinations thereof, provided the preceding grading recommendations are followed. 6.5.2 The following recommendations are for one-to three-story structures and assume that the grading will be perfom1ed as recommended in this report. Continuous footings should be at least 12 inches wide and should extend at least 24 inches below lowest adjacent pad grade and be founded on properly compacted fill or fim1 formational soil. Isolated spread footings should be at least 2 feet wide, extend a minimum of 24 inches below lowest adjacent pad grade, and be founded on properly compacted fill or fim1 formational soil. If soils with an Expansion Index greater than 90 are encountered on a building pad, perimeter footings should be deepened to 30 inches below lowest adjacent pad grade. A typical footing dimension detail is presented on Figure 4. Minimum reinforcement for continuous footings should consist of four No. 5 steel reinforcing bars placed horizontally in the footings, two near the top and two· near the bottom. Recommendations for reinforcement of isolated spread footings should be provided by the project structural engineer. -7-December 17, 2003 j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j I j ~ ~·· ~' .J I I -~ ~ ., t: I I~ ,~ )' ~. ' • 6.5.3 6.5.4 6.5.5 6.5.6 6.5.7 6.6 6.6.1 6.6.2 The foundation dimensions and concrete reinforcement recommended above are based on soil characteristics only and are not intended to be used in lieu of those necessary to satisfy structural loading. Actual reinforcement of the foundations should be designed by the project structural engineer. The recommended allowable bearing capacity for foundations designed as recommended above is 2,500 pounds per square foot for foundations in properly compacted fill material or firm formational material. The soil bearing pressure may be increased by 300 psf and 500 psf for each additional foot of foundation width and depth, respectively, up to a maximum allowable soil bearing pressure of 4,000 psf. The recommended allowable bearing capacity is for dead plus live loads and may be increased by one-third when considering transient loads due to wind or seismic forces. Foundation excavations should be observed by a representative of Geocon Inc. prior to placing reinforcing steel to verify that the exposed soil conditions are similar to those anticipated. Where buildings or other improvements are planned near the top of a slope steeper than 3:1 (horizontal:vertical), special foundations and/or design considerations are recommended to mitigate lateral soil movement. Building footings should be deepened suc:h that the bottom outside edge of the footing is at least 7 feet horizontally from the face of the slope. No special subgrade presaturation is deemed necessary prior to placing concrete, however, the exposed foundation and slab subgrade soils should be moistened as necessary to maintain a moist soil condition as would be expected in any such concrete placement. Concrete Slabs-on-Grade Concrete slabs-on-grade not subjected to vehicular traffic should be at least 6 inches thick. Minimum slab reinforcement should consist of No. 3 steel reinforcing bars placed 18 inches on center in both horizontal directions and positioned near the slab midpoint. The concrete slabs-on-grade should be underlain by at least 4 inches of clean sand (Sand Equivalent greater than 30) and, where moisture-sensitive floor coverings are planned, a visqueen moisture barrier placed at the midpoint of the sand cushion should also be provided. Exterior slabs should be provided with crack-control joints spaced at intervals no greater than 10 feet. Joints should be constructed using sawcuts or other methods as soon as practical following concrete placement. Crack-control joints should extend a minimum Project No. 07192-22-01 -8 -December 1 7, 2003 p ~· ~ I I ~ II ' I I I I I I I. . I I I I depth of one-fourth the slab thickness. Construction joints should be designed by the project structural engineer. 6.6.3 Exte1ior concrete flatwork should be thickened at the edge (shovel footing), to reduce the potential for moisture migration underneath the slab. 6.6.4 The recommendations of this report are intended to reduce the potential for cracking of slabs due to expansive soils and differential settleme11t of fills of v~r:ying thickness. However, even with the incorporation of the recommendations pn~sented herein, foundations, stucco walls and slabs-on-grade placed on such soil conditions may exhibit some cracking due to soil movement and/or shrinkage. The occurrence of concrete shrinkage cracks is independent of the supporting soil characteristics. 1beir occurrence may be reduced and/or controlled by limiting the slump of the concrete, proper concrete placement and curing, and by the placement of crack-control joints at p1eriodic intervals, particularly where re-entrant slab corners occur. 6. 7 Lateral Loads 6. 7.1 For resistance to lateral loads, an allowable passive earth pressure equivalent to a fluid with a density of 300 pcf is recommended for footings or shear keys poured neat against properly compacted granular fill soils or undisturbed natural soils. The allowable passive pressure assumes a horizontal surface extending at least 5 feet or three times the surface generating the passive pressure, whichever is greater. The upper 12 inches of material not protected by floor slabs or pavement should not be included in the design for lateral resistance. An allowable friction coefficient of 0.35 may be used for resistance to slidtng between soil and concrete. This friction coefficient may be combined with the allowable passive earth pressure when detern1ining resistance to lateral loads. 6.8 Preliminary Pavement Design 6.8.1 Our preliminary pavement design is based on an assumed Resistance Value (R-Value) of 5. Final pavement sections should be designed according to the subgrade R-Value following final grading. It is understood that flexible pavement sections will be utilized. 6.8.2 The flexible pavement sections were evaluated in general conformance with the CaEfomia Department of Transportation (Caltrans) method of flexible pavement design. Recom- mendations for flexible pavement sections are presented on Table 6.8. . "-/\'"71 0')_7?-01 -9-December 17, 2003 j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j I j Staples Fault current Study DATE: 9 13 5 TIME: 6 42 AM STPLS2 ALL INFORMATION PRESENTED IS FOR REVIEW, APPROVAL INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION BY A REGISTERED ENGINEER ONLY BUSSPOWER THREE PHASE FAULT ANALYSIS PROGRAM VERSION 1.0 COPYRIGHT SKM SYSTEMS ANALYSIS, INC. 1983, 1986 DISTRIBUTED EXCLUSIVELY BY BUSSMANN, COOPER INDUSTRIES 1DATE: 9 13 5 TIME: 6 42 AM Staples Fault current Study C 0 N T R I B U T I 0 N D A T A PAGE 2 ===================================================================:=========== CONTRIBUTION VOLTAGE L-L SYMMETRICAL DUTY GEN/MOTORS FROM NAME NO NAME KVA AMPS X/R HP/KVA Xd" =============================================================================== SDG&E 999 SDG&E 480. 24942. 30000. 30.0 POS SEQUENCE IMPEDANCE .00134 + J .04007 PER UNIT 1DATE: 9 13 5. TIME: 6 42 AM PAGE 3 Staples Fault current study F E E D E R D A T A =============================================================================== FEEDER FROM FEEDER TO QTY VOLTS LENGTH FEEDER DESCRIPTION NO NAME NO NAME /PH L-L FEET SIZE TYPE DUCT INSUL ============================================================================== 1 MSA 2 MDP 2 480. 50. 350 c M THWN POS SEQ Z .0378 + J .0491 OHMS/MFT .00410 + J .OOS33 PER UNIT 1 MSA 3 HPHA 1 480. 10. 2 c M THWN POS SEQ Z .2020 + J .0585 OHMS/MFT .00877 + J .00254 PER UNIT 1 MSA 999 SDG&E 1 480. 75. 750 c M THWN POS SEQ Z .0216 + J .0445 OHMS/MFT .00703 + J .01449 PER UNIT 2 MDP 7 PANEL L 1 480. 5. 2/0 c 1\11 THWN POS SEQ Z .1020 + J .0533 OHMS/MFT .00221 + J .00116 PER UNIT 2 MDP 8 P1 PRI 1 480. 5. 4/0 c 1M THWN POS SEQ Z .0640 + J .0497 OHMS/MFT .00139 + J .00108 PER UNIT 3 HPHA 4 HPLA PRI 1 480. 10. 10 c 1M THWN POS SEQ Z 1.1800 + J .0854 OHMS/MFT .05122 + J .00371 PER UNIT 5 HPLA SEC 6 HPLA 1 208. 5. 6 c M THWN POS SEQ Z .5100 + J .0685 OHMS/MFT .05894 + J .00792 PER UNIT Page 1 STPLS2 9 P1 SEC 10 P1 1 208. 5. 1/0 c M THWN POS SEQ Z .1280 + J :0540 OHMS/MFT .01479 + J .00624 PER UNIT 9 P1 SEC 11 P2 1 208. 10. 250 c M THWN POS SEQ Z .0552 + J .0495 OHMS/MFT .01276 + J .01144 PER UNIT 11 P2 12 P3 1 208. 10. 250 c M THWN POS SEQ Z .0552 + J .0495 OHMS/MFT .01276 + J .01144 PER UNIT 12 P3 13 P4 1 208. 150. 3/0 c M THWN POS SEQ Z .0805 + J .0519 OHMS/MFT .27910 + J .17994 PER UNIT 13 P4 14 P5 1 208. 5. 6 c M THWN POS SEQ Z .5100 + J .0685 OHMS/MFT .05894 + J .00792 PER UNIT 1DATE: 9 13 5 TIME: 6 42 AM PAGE 4 staples Fault current study T RAN S F 0 R M E R DATA ===================================================================:=========== PRIMARY RECORD VOLTS PRI * SECONDARY RECORD VOLTS SEC NOMINAL NO NAME CONN L-L FLA NO NAME \ CONN L-L FL.A KVA =================================================~============================= 4 HPLA PRI D 480. 18. 5 HPLA SEC YG 208. 42. 15.0 POS SEQ Z 2. 2190 + J 3. 3270 PERCENT 1. 47933 + J 2. 21800 PER UNIT 8 P1 PRI D 480. 180. 9 P1 SEC YG 208. 416. 150.0 POS SEQ Z 2.2190 + J 3.3270 PERCENT .14793 + J .22180 PER UNIT 1DATE: 9 13 5 TIME: 6 42 AM PAGE 5 Staples Fault current study T H R E E P H A S E F A U L T R E P 0 R T =============================================================================== 1 MSA FAULT: 21792. RMS SYM AMPS, 18118. KVA X/R: 6. 520 VOLTAGE: 480. IMPEDANCE TO GND= .00193 + J .01257 OHMS CONTRIBUTIONS: 999 SDG&E 21792. AMPS X/R: 6.521 2 MDP FAULT: 19664. RMS SYM AMPS, 16348. KVA X/R: 4.803 VOLTAGE: 480. IMPEDANCE TO GND= .00287 + J .01380 OHMS CONTRIBUTIONS: 1 MSA 19664. AMPS X/R: 4.803 3 HPHA FAULT: 20177. RMS SYM AMPS, 16775. KVA X/R: 3. 332 VOLTAGE: 480. IMPEDANCE TO GND= .00395 + J .01315 OHMS CONTRIBUTIONS: 1 MSA. 20177. AMPS X/R: 3.332 4 HPLA PRI FAULT: 13148. RMS SYM AMPS, 10931. KVA X/R: .890 VOLTAGE: 480. IMPEDANCE TO GND= .01575 + J .01401 OHMS CONTRIBUTIONS: 3 HPHA 13148. AMPS· X/R: .890 5 HPLA SEC FAULT: 1008. RMS SYM AMPS, 363. KVA X/R: 1.472 VOLTAGE: 208. IMPEDANCE TO GND= .06696 + J .09859 OHMS CONTRIBUTIONS: 4 HPLA PRI 1008. AMPS X/R: 1.472 6 HPLA FAULT: 993. RMS SYM AMPS, 358. KVA X/R: 1.423 VOLTAGE: 208. IMPEDANCE TO GND= .06951 + J .09893 OHMS CONTRIBUTIONS: 5 HPLA SEC 993. AMPS X/R: 1.423 7 PANEL L FAULT: 19158. RMS SYM AMPS, 15928. KVA X/R: 4.158. VOLTAGE: 480. IMPEDANCE TO GND= .00338 + J .01406 OHMS CONTRIBUTIONS: 2 MDP 19158. AMPS X/R: 4.158 Page 2 " I ' STPLS2 8 P1 PRI FAULT: 19239. RMS SYM AMPS, 15995. KVA X/R: 4.399 VOLTAGE: 480. IMPEDANCE TO GND= .00319 + J .01405 OHMS CONTRIBUTIONS: 2 MDP 19239. AMPS X/R: 4.399 9 P1 SEC FAULT: 8520. RMS SYM AMPS, 3070. KVA X/R: 1.748 VOLTAGE: 208. IMPEDANCE TO GND= .00700 + J .01223 OHMS CONTRIBUTIONS: 8 P1 PRI 8520. AMPS X/R: 1.748 10 P1 FAULT: 8196. RMS SYM AMPS, 2953. KVA X/R: 1.637 VOLTAGE: 208. IMPEDANCE TO GND= .00764 + J .01250 OHMS CONTRIBUTIONS: 9 P1 SEC 8196. AMPS X/R: 1.637 11 P2 FAULT: 8114. RMS SYM AMPS, 2923. KVA X/R: 1.686 VOLTAGE: 208. IMPEDANCE TO GND= .00755 + J .01273 OHMS CONTRIBUTIONS: 9 P1 SEC 8114. AMPS X/R: 1.686 12 P3 FAULT: 7743. RMS SYM AMPS, 2790. KVA X/R: · 1.632 VOLTAGE: 208. IMPEDANCE TO GND= .00810 + J .01322 OHMS CONTRIBUTIONS: 11 P2 7743. AMPS X/R: 1.632 .. 13 P4 FAULT: 4123. RMS SYM AMPS, \ 1485. KVA X/R: 1.041 VOLTAGE: 208. IMPEDANCE TO GND~ .02018 + J .02101 OHMS CONTRIBUTIONS: 12 P3 4123. AMPS X/R: 1.041 1DATE: 9 13 5 TIME: 6 42 AM PAGE 6 staples Fault current Study T H R E E P H A S E F A U L T R E P 0 R T =============================================================================== 14 P5 FAULT: 3851. VOLTAGE: 208. CONTRIBUTIONS: 999 SDG&E FAULT: 30000. VOLTAGE: 480: CONTRIBUTIONS: 1DATE: 9 13 5 TIME: 6 42 AM staples Fault current study FA U L T S T U D Y BUS RECORD VOLTAGE NO NAME L-L 1 MSA 480. 2 MDP 480. 3 HPHA 480. 4 HPLA PRI 480. 5 HPLA SEC 208. 6 HPLA 208. 7 PANEL L 480. 8 P1 PRI 480. 9 P1 SEC 208. 10 P1 208. 11 P2 208. 12 P3 208. 13 P4 208. 14 P5 208. RMS SYM AMPS, IMPEDANCE TO GND= 13 P4 1387. KVA .02273 + J 3851. AMPS RMS SYM AMPS, 24942. KVA IMPEDANCE TO GND= .00031 + J SDG&E 30000. AMPS S U M M A R Y AVAILABLE RMS DUTIES 3 PHASE MOMENTARY 21792. 28935. 19664. 24407. 20177. 23037. 13148. 13160. 1008. 1022. 993. 1005. 19158. 23000. 19239. 23401. 8520. 8751. 8196. 8370. 8114. 8307. 7743. 7906. 4123. 4132. 3851. 3856. Page 3 X/R: .939 .02135 OHMS X/R: .939 X/R: 29.999 .. 009 2 3 OHMS X/R: 30.000 PAGE 7 999 SDG&E 480. STPLS2 30000. 15 BUSES, 15 BRANCHES, 1 CONTRIBUTIONS *** SHORT CIRCUIT STUDY COMPLETE *** Page 4 48578. GEOCON INCORPORATED . Project No. 07192-22-01 September 16, 2005 Franz-Loker LLC % O'Day Consultants 2710 Loker Avenue West, Suite 100 Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Mr. Pat O'Day c, ~~ 0 WI f~ f-:G~'rECHNICAL CONSULTANTS ,.~~~ ...... ~c~~~ • ~ ' [.,. .. -·~ .... ;_;:.•·~;~~h:~ ij,·~G ......... --·~--'"''-';_rli_T_EC_T_S___ "~-..J Subject: LOKER BUSINESS CENTER (CARLSBAD OAKS WEST) LOKER A VENUE AND PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA STRUCTURAL AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN REVIEW Gentlemen: In accordance with a request from Mr. Mark Bolen of Smith Consulting Architects, Geocon Incorporated has performed a review of the project structural and improvement plans for Phase I (Staples) and Phase II. The plans were reviewed for conformance with the re:commendations contained in the project geotechnical investigation report entitled Geotechnical Investigation, j::: Carlsbad Oaks West, Loker Avenue and Palomar Airport Road, Carlsbad, California, prepared by .·. GeoconJncorporated, dated December 17, 2003. The reviewed structural and improvement plans are entitled Shell/Tenant Improvements For: Staples, Loker Business Center, Phase I, Carlsbad, F California92008Lot I of Palomar Oaks North Industrial prepared by Smith Consulting Architects, f-. dated· July 18, 2005 and Shell Improvemer!fs For: Loker Business Center, Phase II, Carlsbad, l · \ · Califomia 92008 Lot I of Palomar Oaks North-Industrial prepared by Smith Consulting Architects,. \....) dated July 18, 2005. . · Our review. was limited ·to items rel~ed only to geotechnical aspects of the structural and improvement plans. Based upon our review, it is the opinion of Geocon Incorporate:d that the plans · have been prepared in substantial conformance with the recommendations presented in the project geotechnical report with the following comments: Phase I (Staples), Sheet AS3.1, Detail 16: Where typical concrete curb wili be adjacent to landscaping, the curb should extend 12 inches below the aggregate base to provide a cutoff to moisture migration into pavement subgrade soils. Phase I (Staples), Sheet Sl.l, Notes, Structural Design Criteria: Seismic Coefficient Ca should equal 0.4 Na, which is 0.40. Phase I (Staples), Sheet Sl.l, Notes, Foundations: Coefficient of Friction should equal 0.35 as stated in Section 6.7.1 ofthe soils report. 6960 Flanders Drive San Diego, California 92121-297 4 • Telephone (858) 558-6900 • Fax ( 858) 558-6159 Phase IT, Sheet AS3.1, Detail16: Where typical concrete curb will be adjacent to landscaping, the curb should extend 12 inches below the aggregate base to provide a cutoff to moisture migration into pavement subgrade soils. · · Phase IT, Sheet S1.1, Notes, Structural Design Criteria: Seismic Coefficient Ca should equal 0.4 Na, which is 0.40. Phase II, Sheet S1.1, Notes, Foundations: Coefficient of Friction should equal 0.35 as stated in Section 6.7.1 of the soils report. Should you have any questions regarding this letter, or if we may be of further service,. please contact the undersigned at your convenience. · Very truly yours, GEOCON INC9RPORA TED ~·. Joseph J. Vettel GE 2401 JN:dmc (2) Addressee (1) Smith Consulting Architects Attention: Mr. Mark Bolen Project No. 07192-22-01 -2-September 16, 2005 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION CARLSBAD OAKS WEST LOKER AVENUE AND PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR FRANZ-LOKER LLC o/o O'DAY CONSULTANTS CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA ,?" GEOCON INCORPORATED Project No. 07192-22-01 December 17, 2003 Franz-Loker LLC % O'Day Consultants 2710 Loker Avenue West, Suite 100 Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Mr. Pat O'Day Subject: CARLSBAD OAKS WEST GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS LOKER AVENUE AND PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Gentlemen: In accordance with your authmization and our Proposal No. LG-03538 dated October 23, 2003, we herein submit the results of our geotechnical investigation for the subject site. The accompanying report presents the results of the study \Vith our conclusions and recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of project development. In our opinion, the site can be developed as proposed provided the recommendations contained in this report are followed. Should you have any questions regarding this repmi, or if we may be of frniher service, please contact the undersigned at your convenience. Very 1Tuly yours, GEOCON INCORPORATED (6/del) Addressee 6960 Flanders Drive iii San Diego, California 921 21-297 4 l!ill Telephone (858) 558-6900 Ill Fax ( 858) 558-6159 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE ................................................................................................................. 1 2. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................... 1 3. SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ........................................................................................ 2 3.1 Previously Placed Fill (Qpf) .................................................................................................. 2 3.2 Santiago Formation (Tsa) ....................................................................................................... 2 4. GROUNDWATER .......................................................................................................................... 2 5. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ................................................................................................................. 3 5.1 Faulting and Seismicity ......................................................................................................... 3 5 .2 Liquefaction .......................................................................................................................... 4 5.3 Landslides ............................................................................................................................. 4 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................... 5 6.1 General .................................................................................................................................. 5 6.2 Soil and Excavation Characteristics ...................................................................................... 5 6.3 Grading .................................................................................................................................. 5 6.4 Seismic Design Criteria ......................................................................................................... 7 6.5 Foundations ........................................................................................................................... 7 6.6 Concrete Slabs-on-Grade ....................................................................................................... 8 6.7 Lateral Loads .......................................................................................................................... 9 6.8 Preliminary Pavement Design ................................................................................................ 9 6.9 Site Drainage and Moisture Protection ............................................................................... 10 6.10 Foundation and Grading Plan Review ................................................................................ 11 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS 11i\PS AND ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1, Vicinity Map Figure 2, Geologic Map Figure 3, Cross-section A-A' Figure 4, Cross-section B-B' Figure 5, Wall/Column Footing Dimension Detail APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION Figures A-1-A-5, Logs of Borings APPENDIXB LABORATORY TESTING Table B-I, Summary of Laboratory Direct Shear Test Results Table B-II, Summary of Laboratory Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content Test Results Table B-Ill, Summary of Laboratory Expansion Index Test Results Figures B-1 -B-4, Consolidation Curve APPENDIXC RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS LIST OF REFERENCES GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION 1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation for the proposed Carlsbad Oaks West project located east of the McClellan Palomar Airport in Carlsbad, California (see Vicinity Map, Figure 1). The purpose of the study was to investigate the soil and geologic conditions at the site and to identify geotechnical constraints (if any) that may impact the proposed development. This report provides recommendations pertinent to the geotechnical engineering aspects of developing the property as proposed. The scope of the investigation included a review of aerial photographs and readily available published and unpublished geologic literature (see List of References). The scope also included a field investigation, laboratory testing to characterize physical properties of the soil, engineering analyses, and preparation of this report. The field investigation was perfonned on November 13, 2003, and consisted of drilling five small-diameter borings at the locations indicated on the Geologic Map, Figure 2. Logs of the exploratory borings and other details of the field investigation are presented in Appendix A. Laboratory tests were perfonned on selected soil samples obtained during the field investigation to evaluate pertinent physical characteristics of the soil. Details of the laboratory tests and a summary of the test results are presented in Appendix B. The recommendations presented herein are based on analysis of the data obtained from the exploratory borings, laboratory test results, and our experience with similar soil and geologic conditions. The Site Development Plan for Carlsbad Oaks West, prepared by O'Day Consultants, dated October 2003, was used as the basis for this study. 2. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The approximately 4Yz acre, rectangular-shaped site consists of a previously graded vacant lot. A three-story office building occupies the adjacent lot to the north; land adjacent to the west boundary is undeveloped. According to the Site Development Plan, .a 25-foot-wide sewer easement exists along the west boundary of the lot. Previous grading has created a 2: 1 fill slope along the northern portion of the west boundary and 2:1 cut slopes along the east and southeast property margins. Project No. 07192-22-01 - 1 -December 17, 2003 We understand that a commercial development consisting of three buildings and associated paved parking is planned for the site. Grading for thv building pads and parking lots is expected to consist of cuts and fills ofless than 5 feet deep. The existing sewer line in the northwest comer of the lot will be relocated closer to the west property boundary. The locations and descriptions of the site and proposed development are based on a site reconnaissance and discussions with project consultants. If project details vary significantly from those described, Geocon should be consulted to provide additional recommendations and/or analyses. 3. SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS Based on the field investigation and review of the literature, the geologic units underlying the site consist of previously placed fill and the Santiago Formation. The approximate location and extent of each geologic unit is depicted on the Geologic Map, Figure 2 and the Geologic Cross-Sections, Figures 3 and 4. Each unit is described below. 3.1 Previously Placed Fill (Qpf) Previously placed fill was observed in Boring B4 and generally consisted of very stiff sandy clay and clayey sand. The fill soils were tested and observed by San Diego Soils Engineering Incorporated and are discussed in their report entitled: As-Graded Geotechnical Report for the Carlsbad Oaks Business Center, dated November 17, 1986. Geologic Cross-Sections A-A' and B-B' (Figures 3 and 4) show our interpretation of fill thickness within the existing pad area. The compacted fill is considered suitable for receiving additional fill or structures following partial removal and recompaction. 3.2 Santiago Formation (Tsa) Santiago Formation was encountered at the surface in Borings Bl, B2, B3, and B5 and beneath the fill in Boring B4. Where observed, the Santiago Formation consists of very stiff to hard siltstone, stiff to hard claystone, and very dense silty very fine sand. Cemented sandstone was also encountered in Borings B2, B3 and B5. 4. GROUNDWATER Groundwater was not encountered within the upper 20 feet of the existing building pad area. Groundwater is not expected to affect project development as presently proposed; however, it is not uncommon for groundwater or seepage conditions to develop where none previously existed. Proper surface drainage of irrigation and rainwater will be critical to future performance of the project. Project No. 07192-22-01 -2-December 17, 2003 5. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 5.1 Faulting and Seismicity Based on the field reconnaissance and a review of aerial photographs and published geologic maps, the site is not located on any known active or potentially active fault trace as defined by the California Geologic Survey (CGS). The closest lrnown active faults and associated maximum earthquake magnitudes are indicated on Table 5.1. In order to estimate the distance oflrnown faults to the site, the computer program EQFAULT (Blake, 1989, updated 2000) was utilized. The program calculates the distance from the site within a specified search radius to lrnown "active" California faults that have been digitized in an earthquake catalog. Associated peak site accelerations based on attenuation relationships of Sadigh, et al., (1997) are also presented on Table 5.1. TABLE 5.1 DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS FOR SELECTED FAULTS Fault Distance From Maximum Peak Site Site (miles) Earthquake Magnitude Acceleration (g) Rose Canyon Fault Zone 7 6.9 0.28 N ewp01i-Inglewood (Offshore) 10 6.9 0.23 Elsinore-Julian 22 7.1 0.13 Elsinore-Temecula 22 6.8 0.11 Coronado Bank 23 7.4 0.15 Elsinore-Glen Ivy 36 6.8 0.06 Earthquake Valley 40 6.5 0.04 Palos Verdes 41 7.1 0.07 San Jacinto-Anza 45 7.2 0.06 San Jacinto-San Jacinto Valley 47 6.9 0.05 San Jacinto-Coyote Creek 49 6.8 0.04 The results of the deterministic analysis indicate that the Rose Canyon Fault Zone is the closest source for potential ground motion occurring at the site. The Rose Canyon Fault Zone is located approximately 7 miles west of the site. The Rose Canyon Fault Zone is postulated as having the potential to generate a Maximum Earthquake Magnitude of 6.9. The "maximum earthquake magnitude" is defined as the maximum earthquake that appears capable of occurring under the presently known tectonic framework (California Division of Mines and Geology Notes, Number 43). It is our opinion that the site could be subjected to moderate to severe ground shaking in the event of an earthquake along any of the faults listed on Table 5.1 or other faults in the southern Project No. 07192-22-01 -3-December 17, 2003 California/northern Baja California region. However, we do not consider the site to possess any greater risk than that of the surrounding developments. While listing maximum earthquake magnitudes is useful for comparison of potential effects of fault activity in a region, other considerations are important in seismic design, including the frequency and duration of motion and the soil conditions underlying the site. We recommend that seismic design of the structures be performed in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC) guidelines and/or those currently adopted by the City of Carlsbad. 5.2 Liquefaction The potential for liquefaction during a strong earthquake is limited to relatively clean,. sandy soils that are in a loose, unconsolidated condition and are located below the water table. Due to the lack of near-surface groundwater table and the underlying very dense formational soils, the potential for liquefaction is considered very low. 5.3 Landslides No evidence of landsliding was observed at the site during the site reconnaissance nor during our review of historic aerial photographs of the site. We consider the potential for landslide hazard to be low for the subject property. Project No. 07192-22-01 -4-December 17, 2003 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 General 6.1.1 No soil or geologic conditions were encountered during this investigation that, in our opinion, would preclude the continued development of the property as presently planned, provided the recommendations of this report are followed. 6.1.2 The site is underlain by previously placed fill and the Santiago Formation. The fill material generally ranges in thickness to a maximum of 18 feet and will require remedial grading in the form of a partial removal and recompaction. 6.1.3 Groundwater was not encountered in any of the borings and is not expected to significantly affect the proposed development. 6.1.4 Following remedial grading, the proposed commercial structures can be supported on a conventional footing foundation system in properly compacted fill or formational material. 6.2 Soil and Excavation Characteristics 6.2.1 The in situ soils can be excavated with moderate to heavy effort using conventional heavy-duty grading equipment. Cemented zones are common in the Santiago Formation and, if encountered, may require a very heavy effort to excavate. Cemented zones may also generate oversized material requiring special handling and placement procedures. 6.2.2 It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that all excavations and trenches are properly shored and maintained in accordance with applicable OSHA rules and regulations in order to maintain safety and the stability of adjacent existing improvements. 6.2.3 The majority of soil encountered during the investigation are considered to have a "medium" to "high" expansion potential (Expansion fudex [EI] between 50 and 130) as defined by Uniform Building Code (UBC) Table No. 18-I-B. 6.3 Grading 6.3 .1 All grading should be performed in accordance with the Recommended Grading Specifications contained in Appendix C. Where the recommendations of Appendix C conflict with this report, the recommendations of this report take precedence. Project No. 07192-22-01 -5-December 17, 2003 6.3 .2 Prior to commencing grading, a preconstruction conference should be held at the site with the owner or developer, grading c,ontractor, civil engineer, and geotechnical engineer in attendance. Special soil handling procedures and/or the grading plans can be discussed at that time. 6.3.3 Site preparation should begin with the removal of all deleterious material and vegetation. The depth of removal should be such that material exposed in cut areas and the soil to be used as fill is relatively free of organic matter and construction debris. Debris generated during stripping and/or site demolition should be exported from the site. 6.3 .4 The upper four feet of existing fill soils in proposed paved or building areas should be removed and replaced with properly compacted fill. That portion of the abandoned sewer line backfill that is deeper than four feet and with a 1.5: 1 plane extending down and out from the perimeter of a proposed building should also be removed and replaced with properly compacted fill. 6.3.5 Where buildings are planned on a cut fill transition, the formational material should be removed to a depth of 4 feet below the proposed finish grade. 6.3.6 Where practical, removals should extend at least 5 feet beyond the building footprint. 6.3.7 Prior to placing fill, the ground surface should be scarified to a depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction in accordance with ASTM Dl557-00. 6.3 .8 Existing fill soils and excavated soils of the Santiago Formation are suitable for re-use as fill provided they are free of vegetation, debris and other deleterious material. Fill layers should be no thicker than will allow for adequate bonding and compaction. All fill, including backfill and scarified ground surfaces, should be compacted to at least 90-percent of maximum dry density at near optimum moisture content, as determined in accordance with ASTM Test Procedure D 1557-00. 6.3.9 Rocks greater than 6 inches in maximum dimension should not be placed within 3 feet of finish grade in building pad areas or street sub grade. Rock fragments greater than 12 inches in maximum dimension should not be placed within 5 feet of finish grade or 3 feet of the deepest utility. Project No. 07192-22-01 -6-December 17, 2003 6.4 Seismic Design Criteria 6.4.1 The following table summarizes site-specific seismic design criteria obtained from the 2000 California Building Code (CBC). TI1e values listed on Table 6.4 are for the Julian segment of the Elsinore Fault (located approximately 22 miles west of the site), which is identified as a Type A fault and the Rose Canyon Fault, which is identified as a Type B fault. TABLE 6.4 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS Parameter Design Value UBC Reference Seismic Zone Factor, Z 0.40 Table 16-I Soil Profile Type Sc Table 16-J Seismic Coefficient, Ca 0.40 Tabie 16-Q Seismic Coefficient, Cv 0.56 Table 16-R Near-Source Factor, Na 1.0 Table 16-S Near-Source Factor, Nv 1.0 Table 16-T Seismic Source AlB Table 16-U 6.5 Foundations 6.5.1 The project is suitable for the use of continuous strip footings, isolated spread footings or appropriate combinations thereof, provided the preceding grading recommendations are followed. 6.5.2 The following recommendations are for one-to three-story structures and assume that the grading will be performed as recommended in this report. Continuous footings should be at least 12 inches wide and should extend at least 24 inches below lowest adjacent pad grade and be founded on properly compacted fill or firm formational soil. Isolated spread footings should be at least 2 feet wide, extend a minimum of 24 inches below lowest adjacent pad grade, and be founded on properly compacted fill or firm fonnational soil. If soils with an Expansion Index greater than 90 are encountered on a building pad, perimeter footings should be deepened to 30 inches below lowest adjacent pad grade. A typical footing dimension detail is presented on Figure 4. Minimum reinforcement for continuous footings should consist of four No. 5 steel reinforcing bars placed horizontally in the footings, two near the top and two near the bottom. Recommendations for reinforcement of isolated spread footings should be provided by the project structural engineer. Project No. 07192-22-01 -7-December 17, 2003 6.5.3 The foundation dimensions and concrete reinforcement recommended above are based on soil characteristics only and are not.intended to be used in lieu of those necessary to satisfy structural loading. Actual reinforcement of the foundations should be designed by the project structural engineer. 6.5 .4 The recommended allowable bearing capacity for foundations designed as recommended above is 2,500 pounds per square foot for foundations in properly compacted fill material or firm formational material. The soil bearing pressure may be increased by 300 psf and 500 psf for each additional foot of foundation width and depth, respectively, up to a maximum allowable soil bearing pressure of 4,000 psf. The recommended allowable bearing capacity is for dead plus live loads and may be increased by one-third when considering transient loads due to wind or seismic forces. 6.5.5 Foundation excavations should be observed by a representative of Geocon me. prior to placing reinforcing steel to verify that the exposed soil conditions are similar to those anticipated. 6.5 .6 Where buildings or other improvements are planned near the top of a slope steeper than 3: 1 (horizontal:vertical), special foundations and/or design considerations are recommended to mitigate lateral soil movement. Building footings should be deepened such that the bottom outside edge of the footing is at least 7 feet horizontally from the face of the slope. 6.5.7 No special subgrade presaturation is deemed necessary prior to placing concrete, however, the exposed foundation and slab subgrade soils should be moistened as necessary to maintain a moist soil condition as would be expected in any such concrete placement. 6.6 Concrete Slabs-on-Grade 6.6.1 Concrete slabs-on-grade not subjected to vehicular traffic should be at least 6 inches thick. Minimum slab reinforcement should consist of No.3 steel reinforcing bars placed 18 inches on center in both horizontal directions and positioned near the slab midpoint. The concrete slabs-on-grade should be underlain by at least 4 inches of clean sand (Sand Equivalent greater than 30) and, where moisture-sensitive floor coverings are planned, a visqueen moisture barrier placed at the midpoint of the sand cushion should also be provided. 6.6.2 Exterior slabs should be provided with crack-control joints spaced at intervals no greater than 10 feet. Joints should be constructed using sawcuts or other methods as soon as practical following concrete placement. Crack-control jo~nts should extend a minimum Project No. 07192-22-01 -8-December 17, 2003 depth of one-fourth the slab thickness. Construction joints should be designed by the project structural engineer. 6.6.3 Exterior concrete flatwork should be thickened at the edge (shovel footing), to reduce the potential for moisture migration underneath the slab. 6.6.4 The recommendations of this report are intended to reduce the potential for cracking of slabs due to expansive soils and differential settleme;nt of fills of varying thickness. However, even with the incorporation of the recommendations presented herein, foundations, stucco walls and slabs-on-grade placed on such soil conditions may exhibit some cracking due to soil movement and/or shrinkage. The occurrence of concrete shrinkage cracks is independent of the supporting soil characteristics. Their occurrence may be reduced and/or controlled by limiting the slump of the concrete, proper concrete placement and curing, and by the placement of crack-control joints at periodic intervals, particularly where re-entrant slab corners occur. 6.7 Lateral Loads 6. 7.1 For resistance to lateral loads, an allowable passive earth pressure equivalent to a fluid with a density of 300 pcf is recommended for footings or shear keys poured neat against properly compacted granular fill soils or undisturbed natural soils. The allowable passive pressure assumes a horizontal surface extending at least 5 feet or three times the surface generating the passive pressure, whichever is greater. The upper 12 inches of material not protected by floor slabs or pavement should not be included in the design for lateral resistance. An allowable friction coefficient of0.35 may be used for resistance to sliding between soil and concrete. This friction coefficient may be combined with the allowable passive earth pressure when determining resistance to lateral loads. 6.8 Preliminary Pavement Design 6.8.1 Our preliminary pavement design is based on an assumed Resistance Value (R-Value) of 5. Final pavement sections should be designed according to. the subgrade R-Value fo.llowing final grading. It is understood that flexible pavement sections will be utilized. 6.8.2 The flexible pavement sections were evaluated in general conformance with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) metho.d of flexible pavement design. Recom- mendations for flexible pavement sections are presented on Table 6.8. Project No. 07192-22-01 -9-December 17, 2003 TABLE 6.8 PRELIMINARY FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT SECTIONS Traffic Index Asphalt Class 2 Proposed Utilization R-Value Aggregate Base (TI) (inches) (inches) Auto Parking Stalls 5 4.5 3.0 8.0 Auto Driveways 5 5.5 3.0 12.0 Fire Lanes/Heavy Trucks 5 7.0 4.0 15.5 6.8.3 Pavement subgrade soils should be scarified, moisture conditioned, and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction as determined by ASTM D 15:57-00 to a depth of 12 inches. Class 2 base course material should be moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction as determined by ASTM D 1557-00. 6.8.4 Asphaltic concrete should confonn to Section 39-2 of the Standard Specifications of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Class 2 base material should conform to Section 26-1.02B of the Standard Specification of California Department of Transportation. 6.8.5 The performance of pavements is highly dependent upon providing positive surface drainage away from the edge of pavements. Ponding of water on or adjacent to the pavement will likely result in saturation of the subgrade materials and subsequent pavement distress. If planter islands are planned, the perimeter curb should extend at least 12 inches below the bottom of the Class 2 aggregate base. 6.9 Site Drainage and Moisture Protection 6.9 .1 Adequate drainage is critical to reduce the potential for differential soil movement, erosion and subsurface seepage. Under no circumstances should water be allowed to pond adjacent to footings or pavement. The site should be graded and maintained such that surface drainage is directed away from structures and the top of slopes into swales or other controlled drainage devices. Roof and pavement drainage should be directed into conduits that carry runoff away from the proposed improvements. 6.9.2 Landscaping planters adjacent to paved areas are not recommended due to the potential for surface or irrigation water 'to infiltrate the pavement's subgrade and base course. We recommend that subdrains to collect excess irrigation water and transmit it to drainage structures or impervious above-grade planter boxes be used, In addition, where landscaping Project No. 07192-22-01 -10-December 17, 2003 6.10 6.10.1 is planned adjacent to the pavement, we recommend construction of a cutoff wall along the edge of the pavement that extends a,t least 12 inches below the bottom of the base material. Foundation and Grading Plan Review Geocon Incorporated should review the foundation and grading plans for the project prior to final design submittal to determine whether additional analysis and/or recommendations are required. Project No. 07192-22-01 -11-December 17, 2003 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS 1. The recommendations of this report pertain only to the site investigated and are based upon the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate from those disclosed in the investigation. If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during construction, or if the proposed construction will differ from that anticipated herein, Geocon Incorporated should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be given. The evaluation or identification of the potential presence of hazardous or corrosive materials was not part of the scope of services provided by Geocon Incorporated. 2. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner or his representative to ensure that the infom1ation and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans, and that the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field. 3. The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they are due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this repmi may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of three years. Project No. 07192-22-01 December 17,2003 / I / \ COSMOS a // / / \ I \\ 10 \ SOURCE: 2002 THOMAS BROTHERS MAP · ·SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ., I / ! f t---....... ···-~ .. ,t. .... ,.-"'',/' ··~- I I ··-.I SEE \o/ H2 1 PASEO ALMIAR Z PAS£0 CAMAS 3 PASEO GRAN1ll 4 PAS£0 ENS!LU\R 5 PAS£0 PICAOO . 6 RANCHO POSTA 7 PASEO VALLE 8 RANCHO BRIDA 9 PASEo· SALINERO \ --~---'· ,..._ .. ""' ... _y---··--.. ---- ,.:..-~" J 1 .... -.,.., ' ,.. ~-----.. .::::..-:..:_·~.::.;:..-:;:;::.• ~...,:-r-·· ,...... ....... - ~.:..----·"· ... -·-[ \ \ REPRODUCED WITH PERMISSION GRANTED BY THOMAS BORTHERS MAPS. t N lCM 2CT THIS MAP IS COPYRIGHT BY THOMAS BROS. MAPS. IT IS UNLAWFUL TO COPY OR REPRODUCE ALL OR ANY PART THEREOF, WHETHER FOR PERSONAL USE OR RESALE, WITHOUT PERMISSION. NO SCALE GEOCQN, INCORPORATED GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE-SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121 -2974 PHONE 858 558-6900 • FAX 858 558-6159 KC/RA DSKIEOOOO VICINITY N\AP CARlSBAD OAKS VVEST CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA DATE 12-17-2003 PROJECT NO. 07192-22-01 FIG.1 ' '' I r jJ'' _/I ___ .//"' ~ i: I / /'/ E:/2003m92_KC1.DWG/aml 25' ., " ' ' h ', •' I I I I Q t'7· '· ··:·· I. ••• ~ p "{ 7·. :·:; ~ \ • ' ., ' • • ~1\--\ . I ----J \ ' ' 't· ----·· Btf)G. ~ r· ~ VV \£.'. F. I ~_,. .1\A \• • f c \ I \ I \ I ~ SCALE: 1" = 60' CARLSBAD OAKS WEST CARLSBAD I CALIFORNIA LEGEND Qpf ........ PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL Tsa ........ SANTIAGO FORMATION (Dotted Where Buried) ,-...... ._/ ..•..... APPROX. LOCATION OF GEOLOGIC CONTACT (Interred from San Diego County Topographic Survey, Sheet No. 350 ... 1689) B-5,..., <::. ........ APPROX. LOCATION OF GEOTECHNICAL BORING GEOLOGIC MAP GEOCON INCORPORATED • GEOTEOINICAL CONSULTANTS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE· SAN DIEGO, CAUFORNIA 92121· 297 4 PHONE 858 558-6900-FAX 858 558-6159 PROJECT NO. 07192-22-01 FIGURE 2 DATE 12-17-2003 ,. '' A 480- . 420- -B-2 B-3 8-4 .- 360-~. .. ---?---.,. ~?--~ ==---?-Qpt L ___ r ___ • ~ ~ ~ - 300-r--------.---· I n -----.--~-I I I I I • I I I 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTION .A-A' SCAlE : 1 • = 60' (HORIZ. = VERT.) C:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\DRAFTING 4\KC\RA\07192\DWG. A' .-480 1- l-420 l--360 1- L....3QO CARlSBAD OAKS WEST CARlSBAD, CAliFORNIA GEOCONLEGEND ·Qpf ........ PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL Tsa ........ sANTIAGo FORMATION ;-" ?._/ ........ APPROX. LOCATION OF GEOLOGIC CONTACT (Queried Where Uncertain) GEOCON INCORPORATED 0 GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE-SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121 -2974 PHONE 858 558-6900-FAX 858 558-6159 PROJECT NO. 07192-22-01 FIGURE3 DATE 12-17-2003 '' B 480- . 420- . B-5 B-3 '9Jf B~1 360-! Tsa l ~;;-'-?--r ---l Tsa . 300-I I I I I ,- 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 GEOLOGIC CROSS -SECTION B-B' SCALE : 1" = 60' (HORIZ. =VERT.) C:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\DRAFTING 4\KC\RA\07192\DWG. B' .-480 l-420 1- 1-360 ..... 300 CARlSBAD OAKS WEST CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA GEOCON LEGEND Qpf ........ PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL T n""' ~AMTIAr.:!n cncUATIQM I .;::)0 ooonooo""r-\1 .. I IT""'\--I -· 'UWirl 1 1 1 ~ F? _/ ........ APPROX. LOCATION OF GEOLOGIC CONTACT (Queried Where Uncertain) GEOCON INCORPORATED 0 GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE-SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121 -2974 PHONE 858 558-6900 -FAX 858 558-6159 PROJECT NO. 07192 -22 -01 FIGURE4 DATE 12-17-2003 ,, ' WALL FOOTING VIS QUEEN COLUMN FOOTING CONCRETE SLAB * ~r.: t-o. ow oo .... CONCRETE SLAB VIS QUEEN *' ~ F= 1-c. 0 w 00 u. \. FOOTING .WIDTH* * g:c i= 1-. ofu oo u. * ...... SEE REPORT FOR FOUNDATION WIDTH AND DEPTH RECOMMENDATION NO SCALE WALL COLUMN FOOTING DETAIL GEOCON INCORPORATED GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE-SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121-2974 PH.ONE 858 558-6900-FAX 858 558.-6159 . KC I KC I I CARLSBAD ·OAKS WEST CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA DATE 12-17-2003 I PROJECT NO. 07192-22-01 I FIG .. 5 . . . ' APPENDIX APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION The field investigation was performed on November 13, 2003, and consisted of a site reconnaissance and drilling five small-diameter borings. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on the Geologic Map, Figure 2. The borings were drilled using an Ingersoll-Rand A300 truck-mounted drill rig equipped with an 8- inch-diameter hollow-stem auger. Relatively undisturbed samples were obtained by driving a 3-inch 0. D. split-tube sampler 12 inches into the undisturbed soil mass with blows from a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The split-tube sampler was equipped with l-inch-high by 2%-inch- diameter brass rings to facilitate sample removal and testing. The soils encountered in the borings were visually examined, classified and logged in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D-2488 Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Method). Logs depicting the soil and geologic conditions encountered and the depths at which samples were obtained are presented as Figures A-1 through A-5. Project No. 07192-22-01 -A-1-December 17, 2003 ' ' , 'PROJECT NO 07192-22-01 DEPTH IN FEET 1-0 2 - - 4 - - 6 - - 8 - - 10 - ~ 12 - '-14 1- - - 16 - - 18 - SAMPLE NO. Bl-1 Bl-2 Bl-3 BI-4 • Bl-5 II -R1.,<; 0:: >-UJ C) 1- 0 ~ SOIL ...J 0 0 CLASS :c z 1-::J (USCS) ::; 0 0:: C) BORING B 1 ELEV. (MSL.) 373 --=-=----- EQUIPMENT DATE COMPLETED 11-13-2003 IRA-300 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SANTIAGO FORMATION Very stiff, damp, olive-green, SILTSTONE ML ::f:-::t:f---1--.-SM--+---Very de;s;, d~p-;-p-;;i;!iee; :-ycll;w-;-sil~ ~ry ffu;SANDsTONE ---- . . 1--1-----1-----------------------------------Hard, damp, olive -green, SILTSTONE ML ~ --1---C-L-1-~ ~ ~t~~ ~= ~i~ ~~~b~~~ ~~ ~:0~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ·~ ~ ~ CL Hard, damp, yellow -brown, CLAYSTONE -Sample disturbed BORING TERMINATED AT 19.5 FEET No groundwater encountered Hole filled with cuttings mixed with 1 sack cement -33 1- 1- ~ C/5--:--zu. UJ' 0~ >-!?::.. 0:: 0 1----1----50/6" 103.4 1----1----- 1- 1- 1-50/6" 108.2 1- 1----1---- 1- 1----1----- I- 1-50/3" 1- 1- I-<;()/,<;" 11()? ~ w* 0::~ ::JI-1-z (f)LJ.J -1-oz 20 (.) 13.8 13.7 101 Figure A-1, 07192-22-01.GPJ Log of Boring B 1, Page 1 of 1 SAMPLE SYMBOLS D ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ~ ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE (] ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST liiJ ... CHUNK SAMPLE .... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) ,!: ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. . ' , PROJECT NO 07192-22-01 DEPTH IN FEET 0 - - 2 - 1-4 f-6 - !-8 - !-- 1-10 - -- 1-12 - '-- ~ 14 - f;-16 - - 1-18 - 1-- -20 SAMPLE NO. B2-1 B2-2 B2-3 B2-4 B2-5 B2-6 >-0 0 ....J 0 :c !-::; 0::: LU !-~ SOIL 0 CLASS z ::l (USGS) 0 0::: 0 ML ML BORING B 2 ELEV. (MSL.) _....::3....::77 ___ DATE COMPLETED EQUIPMENT IR A-300 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SANTIAGO FORMATION Hard, damp, olive -green, SILTSTONE -6 inch layer of cemented sandstone at 5.5 feet -Becomes mottled olive -green and tan at 10 feet BORING TERMINATED AT 20 FEET No groundwater encountered 11-13-2003 Hole filled witl1 cuttings mixed witl1 portland cement - -64 109.0 18.4 - 1- 50/5" 103.2 16.5 1- 1- 1- 1- -89 - ----f---- !----1---- 1- 1-62 107.7 17.5 53 103.4 22.0 Figure A-2t 07192-22-0i.GPJ Log of Boring B 2, Page 1 of 1 SAMPLE SYMBOLS D ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ~ ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE (] ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST liiiJ ... CHUNK SAMPLE .... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) _'f ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. '' , 'PROJECT NO 07192-22-01 0::: BORING B 3 Zw~ ~ w~ >-UJ Qo...,: 1-DEPTH (!) ~ 1-~1,!:: Cll--:-o:::~ 0 SOIL ZLL. ::::JI- IN SAMPLE ....J ~~-~ ~ci J-Z 0 0 CLASS ELEV. (MSL.) 373 DATE COMPLETED 11-13-2003 Cf)Ul NO. ::c z IJ:i~o >-e:. -I-FEET ::::J (USGS) z·Cil ....J oz 1-0::: 20 ::::i 0 wWm 0::: EQUIPMENT IRA-300 c.O:::~ 0 (.) (!) MATERIAL DESCRIPTION !-0 SANTIAGO FORMATION !--Hard, damp, olive-green, SILTSTONE; with trace offme sand !-B3-1 I-2 -I-B3-2 59 106.5 14.5 I--I- I-4 -I- f----B3-3 67 112.2 13.6 f--6 -- -- ML 8 ---Becomes tan at 8 feet -i- !--10 -I I c... B3-4 83/10" 110.3 15.6 f---L - 4 inch layer of cemented sandstone at 11 feet 1-12 - I f-- -i- 14 -I I I-I -I 1--No recovery 84/11" 1--16 -1- !---1- !--18 -• f r!----------------------------------1---------- SM Very dense, damp, tan-brown, Silty SANDSTONE with mica !---"R1-Il : :t: j: :~: 1-<;(1/<;" ... BORING TERMINATED AT 19.5 FEET No groundwater encountered Hole filled with cuttings mixed with portland cement Figure A-3, 07192-22-01.GPJ Log of Boring B 3,. Page 1 of 1 SAMPLE SYMBOLS 0 ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ~ ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE (] ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST iJ ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) _J. ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. \ ·PROJECT NO 07192-22-01 0::: BORING 8 4 Zw~ ~ w* >-w Qor-: DEPTH (9 ~ ~Zb!:: U5--:-0:::~ SOIL ::JI-SAMPLE 0 s ~~ ZLL. 1-z IN ....J ~~ 0 0 CLASS ELEV. (MSL.) 3.68 DATE COMPLETED 11-13-2003 cnw NO. z tliS!1o >-e:.. -I-FEET :r: ::J (USCS) zcn....J oz 1-wWc:J 0:: ::2:0 :J 0 0::: EQUIPMENT IR A-300 a..C::~ 0 t) (9 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION i-0 .I I-~ _.,_ -. FILL ,_ l·l-f Dense, damp, pale tan, Silty, fme to coarse SAND i- B4-1 SM i-2 ---1 ·1:-t· i-B4-2 52 103.4 14.3 r;)_j 1- ,., 1----1----------------------------------------- t0 Very stiff, damp, brown, Sandy CLAY and Clayey SAND 1-4 -1- -v;: 120.0 B4-3 ~ 41 14.0 1-6 -- -i- 8 -~ - -1-CL-SC ,_ 10 -,_ B4-4 ~~ 47 117.7 11.1 -i- i--12 -1- 1--~ i- ,__ 14 -1- --,__ B4-5 ~~ 30 104.2 15.9 1-16 -1- ;.... -1- ~ 18 - 'Jl l:ltf ML SANTIAGO FORMATION - -Hard, damp, orange-tan, Sandy SILTSTONE; trace of mica 1-B4-6 92/10" 120.3 8.5 BORING TERMINATED AT 19.8 FEET No groundwater encountered Hole filled with cuttings mixed with portland cement Figure A-4, 07192-Z2-01.GPJ Log of Boring B 4, Page 1 of 1 SAMPLE SYMBOLS D ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ~ ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE (] ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST liiJ ... CHUNK SAMPLE •... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) y_ ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. ' ' I 'PROJECT NO 07192-22-01 DEPTH IN SAMPLE FEET NO. r-0 ,__ B5-l 1-2 -B5-2 I- I-4 ,.._ B5-3 r-6 - i-- ,.._ 8 - 1-- i-10 -B5-4 f-- f-12 - I-- f-14 - f-- B5-5 I-16 - - f-18 - r--B5-6 1:!: >-UJ C) 1- 0 ~ SOIL -' 0 Cl CLASS J: z !:: ::::> (USCS) -' 0 1:!: C) BORING B 5 ELEV. (MSL.) -~3;;_74=-----DATE COMPLETED EQUIPMENT 11-13-2003 IR A-300 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION ::f . ;.;t: : :t :J::f: . l· ... : :f . '• 't' ::t .J.:f: SM 1" ::t ''t tf: : :t 1" : :f ... .. t . • ,. i- SANTIAGO FORMATION Medium dense, damp, pale tan and yellow, Silty, very fine SANDSTONJE -t-----1------------------------------------ -Becomes dense at 5 feet Hard, damp, pale tan and yellow, SILTSTONJE; some mica ML -I 1-----------------------------------f----CH Stiff to very stiff, damp, orange-brown, CLAYSTONJE •••• ,f-----------------------------------i----for ' ' ' r-!-'=" ~= = ___ ~IT ~~e_,_d_illTI.J!,...fel!lte!.lt&.d..§~@~TQ:t:i_E _____________ __. i-__ _ II Hard, damp, pale tan and yellow, SILTSTONJE; some mica '- ! I ML ... .1~.·.1•• •• : •• 1-+-S-M-+------------------------------·---r > Very dense, damp, tan, Silty, very fine SANDSTONJE BORING TERMINATED AT 19.8 FEET No groundwater encountered Hole filled with cuttings mixed with cement ,.._ 59 I- i- f- i----92/10" 103.3 --- 111.6 w~ 1:!:~ ::::>1-t-Z C/)UJ -1-0z :20 C) 20.5 ---16.3 Figure A-5, 07192-22-01.GPJ Log of Boring B 5, Page 1 of 1 SAMPLE SYMBOLS 0 ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ~ ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE IJ ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST liiJ .. , CHUNK SAMPLE .... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) ,Y .. WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. .. APPEN[)IX ' ' ·APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with generally accepted test methods of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) or other suggested procedures. Selected soil samples were tested for their in-place dry density and moisture content, maximum dry densi~y and optimum moisture content, expansion potential, consolidation, and shear strength characteristics. The results of our laboratory tests are presented in Tables B-I through B-Ill and Figures B-1 and B-4. The results of in-place dry density and moisture content test results are presented on the boring logs, Figures A-1 though A-5. Sample No. B3-1 * B4-2 TABLE B-1 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS ASTM D 3080 Dry Density Moisture Content Unit Cohesion Angle of Shear (pet) (%) (psf) Resistance (degrees) 105.9 14.4 690 9 103.4 14.3 635 32 * Sample remolded to approximately 90 percent relative compaction. Sample No. B3-1 TABLE B-11 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY AND OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT TEST RESULTS ASTM D 1557 Description Maximum Dry Optimum Moisture Density (pcf) Content (% dry wt.) Olive-green Silt with trace of fine sand 117.6 14.3 Project No. 07192-22-01 -B-1 -December 17, 2003 TABLE B-Ill SUMMARY OF LABORATORY EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS ASTM D 4829 Moisture Content Dry Density Expansion Sample No. (pet) Index Before Test (%) After Test (%) . B2-1 14.0 35.0 96.2 116 B4-1 13.6 26.1 101.2 60 B5-l 12.4 26.6 103.3 76 Project No. 07192-22-01 -B-2-December 17,2003 ' ' PROJECT NO. 07192-22-01 SAMPLE NO. 83-2 -10 -8 -6 I -4 z 0 -2 ~ I I -r-~~ Cl ' ::::i 0 ~ (/) z 0 0 -r---r---'\ I (.) -I 1-~ z -r---L w i r....... (.) 2 ~ a:: I ----rl-~I I w ...__ \ a. I I r-- 4 ! I I I I I 6 I I . 8 I I I I 10 0.1 1 10 1 0 APPLIED PRESSURE (ksf) I I Initial Dry Density (pet) 106.5 Initial Saturation (%) 68.9 Initial Water Content (%) 14.5 Sample Saturated at (ksf) .5 CONSOLIDATION CURVE CARLSBAD OAKS WEST CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 07192-22·01.GPJ Figure B-2 ' ' PROJECT NO. 07192-22-01 SAMPLE NO. 82-2 -10 -8 -6 -4 ~ --~--r..~ z 0 -2 ~ -..., ~ 0 ._ r-.. :J :---..... r-~ "" 0 U) ~ z 0 0 ~ ........... r-. r-..~'-I (.) ~ 1-~ z r ~ w '-..... (.) 2 I ' c:: w l I I I 0.. I I I I I I I 4' I I I ! I I I ! I I I 6 ! I 8 I I I 10 i 0.1 1 lu 100 APPLIED PRESSURE (ksf) Initial Dry Density (pcf} 109.0 Initial Saturation (%) 93.3 Initial Water Content(%) 18.4 Sample Saturated at (ksf} .5 CONSOLIDATION CURVE CARLSBAD OAKS WEST CARLSBAD I CALIFORNIA 07192·22·01.GPJ Figure 8-1 PROJECT NO. 07192-22-01 SAMPLE NO. 84-3 -10 -8 ' -6 -4 z ....... ~--.. 0 -2 ~ I--~~ Cl :J 0 CJ) z 0 ""' 0 ---r--I" .......... (.) J--1'-r-..1--I'-1-r--~ z ~ w (.) r-... c::: 2 ~ I I w I ~ a. ~l I . I I I 4 -I I I 6 I I I I I I 8 10 I 0.1 1 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE (ksf) Initial Dry Density (pcf) 120.0 Initial Saturation(%) 97.3 Initial Water Content(%) 14.0 Sample Saturated at (ksf) .5 CONSOLIDATION CURVE CARLSBAD OAKS WEST CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 07192-22-01.GPJ Figure 8-3 PROJECT NO. 07192-22-01 SAMPLE NO. 85-2 -10 I -81 -6 -4 z 0 -2 ~ Cl :J 0 en z 0 0 ---r---I I I () 1"-r-., M-n I 1--I ~~ ' z II w ! () ~ 0:: 2' w "I I e-m -........ ~~, I I 0. r-r---__ I I ' --~ 4 I I ! I . I I I I 6 I ' II 8 I I 10 0.1 1 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE (ksf) Initial Dry Density {pcf) 109.4 Initial Saturation (%) 82.7 Initial Water Content {%) 16.1 Sample Saturated at {ksf) .5 CONSOLIDATION CURVE CARLSBAD OAKS WEST CARLSBAD I CALIFORNIA 07192·22·01.GPJ Figure B-4 . ' ' APPENDIX APPENDIX C RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR CARLSBAD OAKS WEST LOKER AVENUE AND PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 07192-22-01 RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS 1. GENERAL 1.1. These Recommended Grading Specifications shall be used in conjunction with the Geotechnical Report for the project prepared by Geocon fucorporated. The recom- mendations contained in the text of the Geotechnical Report are a part of the earthwork and grading specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case of conflict. 1.2. Prior to the commencement of grading, a geotechnical consultant (Consultant) shall be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for substantial conformance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Report and these specifications. It will be necessary that the Consultant provide adequate testing and observation services so that he may determine that, in his opinion, the work was performed in substantial conformance with these specifications. It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to assist the Consultant and keep him apprised of work schedules and changes so that personnel may be scheduled accordingly. 1.3. . It shall be the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the work in accordance with applicable grading codes or agency ordinances, these specifications and the approved grading plans. If, in the opinion of the Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions such as questionable soil materials, poor moisture condition, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, and so f01ih, result in a quality of work not in confom1ance with these specifications, the Consultant will be empowered to reject the work and reconunend to the Owner that construction be stopped until the unacceptable conditions are corrected. 2. DEFINITIONS 2.1. Owner shall refer to the owner of the property or the entity on whose behalf the grading work is being performed and who has contracted with the Contractor to have grading performed. 2.2. Contractor shall refer to the Contractor performing the site grading work. 2.3. Civil Engineer or Engineer of Work shall refer to the California licensed Civil Engineer or consulting firm responsible for preparation of the grading plans, surveying and verifying as-graded topography. GI rev. 07/02 2.4. Consultant shall refer to the soil engineering and engineering geology consulting firm retained to provide geotechnical services for the project. 2.5. Soil Engineer shall refer to a California licensed Civil Engineer retained by the Owner, who is experienced in the practice of geotechnical engineering. The Soil Engineer shall be responsible for having qualified representatives on-site to observe and test the Contractor's work for conformance with these specifications. 2.6. Engineering Geologist shall refer to a California licensed Engineering Gc:ologist retained by the Owner to provide geologic observations and recommendations during. the site grading. 2.7. Geotechnical Report shall refer to a soil report (including all addenda) which may include a geologic reconnaissance or geologic investigation that was prepared specifically for the development of the project for which these Recommended Grading Specifications are intended to apply. 3. MATERIALS 3 .1. Materials for compacted fill shall consist of any soil excavated from the cut areas or imported to the site that, in the opinion of the Consultant, is suitable for use in construction of fills. In general, fill materials can be classified as soil fills, soil-rock fills or rock fills, as defined below. 3 .1.1. Soil fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps greater than 12 inches in maximum dimension and containing at least 40 percent by weight of material smaller than 3/4 inch in size. 3 .1.2. Soil-rock fills are defmed as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps larger than 4 feet in maximum dimension and containing a sufficient matrix of soil fill to allow for proper compaction of soil fill around the rock fragments or hard lumps as specified in Paragraph 6.2. Oversize rock is defined as materiall greater than 12 inches. 3.1.3. Rock fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps Iarger than 3 feet in maximum dimension and containing little or no fines. Fines are defmed as material smaller than 3/4 inch in maximum dimension. The quantity of fines shall be less than approximately 20 percent of the rock fill quantity. GI rev. 07/02 3.2. Material of a perishable, spongy, or otherwise unsuitable nature as determined by the Consultant shall not be used in fills. 3.3. Materials used for fill, either imported or on-site, shall not contain hazardous materials as defmed by the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 30, Articles 9 and 1 0; 40CFR; and any other applicable local, state or federal laws. The Consultant shall not be responsible for the identification or analysis of the potential presem~e of hazardous materials. However, if observations, odors or soil discoloration cause Consultant to suspect the presence of hazardous materials, the Consultant may request from the Owner the termination of grading operations within the affected area. Prior to resuming grading operations, the Owner shall provide a written report to the Consultant indicating that the suspected materials are not hazardous as defined by applicable laws and regulations. 3.4. The outer 15 feet of soil-rock fill slopes, measured horizontally, should be composed of properly compacted soil fill materials approved by the Consultant. Rock fill may extend to the slope face, provided that the slope is not steeper than 2:1 (hmizontal:vertical) and a soil layer no thicker than 12 inches is track-walked onto the face for landscaping purposes. This procedure may be utilized, provided it is acceptable to the governing agency, Owner and Consultant. 3 .5. Representative samples of soil materials to be used for fill shall be tested in the laboratory by the Consultant to determine the maximum density, optimum moisture content, and, where appropriate, shear strength, expansion, and gradation characteristics of the soil. 3.6. During grading, soil or groundwater conditions other than those identified in the Geotechnical Report may be encountered by the Contractor. The Consultant shall be notified immediately to evaluate the significan~e of the unanticipated condition 4. CLEARING AND PREPARING AREAS TO BE FILLED 4.1. Areas to be excavated and filled shall be cleared and grubbed. Clearing shall consist of complete removal above the ground surface of trees, stumps, brush, vegetation, man-made structures and similar debris. Grubbing shall consist of removal of stumps, roots, buried logs and other unsuitable material and shall be performed in areas to be graded. Roots and other projections exceeding 1-1/2 inches in diameter shall be removed to a depth of 3 feet below the surface of the ground. Borrow areas shall be grubbed to the extent necessary to provide suitable fill materials. GI rev. 07/02 4.2. Any asphalt pavement material removed during clearing operations should be properly disposed at an approved off-site facility. Concrete fragments which are free of reinforcing steel may be placed in fills, provided they are placed in accordance with Section 6.2 or 6.3 of this document. 4.3. After clearing and grubbing of organic matter or other unsuitable material, loose or porous soils shall be removed to the depth recommended in the Geotechnical Report. The depth of removal and compaction shall be observed and approved by a representative of the Consultant. The exposed surface shall then be plowed or scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches and until the surface is free from uneven features that would tend to prevent unifonn compaction by the equipment to be used. 4.4. Where the slope ratio of the original ground is steeper than 6:1 (horizontal:vertical), or where recommended by the Consultant, the original ground should be benched in accordance with the following illustration. TYPICAL BENCHING DETAIL Finish Grade Remove All Unsuitable Material As Recommended By Soil Engineer DETAIL NOTES: Original Ground 2 ~1 /Finish Slope Surface Slope To Be Such That -L_ _ _.::::::::~~~ Sloughing Or Sliding ~~~~~ _____ .__ Does Not Occur Varies I L_ __ _:::::k~::::::::::=--;;;;;;-"T I See ~~te 1 No Scale (1) Key width "B" should be a minimum of 10 feet wide, or sufficiently wide to permit complete coverage with the compaction equipment used. The base of the key should be graded horizontal, or inclined slightly into the natural slope. (2) The outside of the bottom key should be below the topsoil or unsuitable surficial material and at least 2 feet into dense formational material. Where hard rock is exposed in the bottom of the key, the depth and configuration of the key may be modified as approved by the Consultant. GI rev. 07/02 4.5. After areas to receive fill have been cleared, plowed or scarified, the surface should be disced or bladed by the Contractor until it is uniform: and free from large clods. The area should then be moisture conditioned to achieve the proper moisture content, and compacted as recommended in Section 6.0 of these specifications. 5. COMPACTION EQUIPMENT 5 .1. Compaction of soil or soil-rock fill shall be accomplished by sheepsfoot or segmented-steel wheeled rollers, vibratory rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or other types of acceptable compaction equipment. Equipment shall be of such a design that it will be capable of compacting the soil or soil-rock fill to the specified relative compaction at the specified moisture content. 5 .2. Compaction of rock fills shall be performed in accordance with Section 6.3. 6. PLACING, SPREADING AND COMPACTION OF FILL MATERIAL 6.1. Soil fill, as defined in Paragraph 3 .1.1, shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with the following recommendations: 6.1.1. Soil fill shall be placed by the Contractor in layers that, when compacted, should generally not exceed 8 inches. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during spreading to obtain uniformity of material and moisture in each layer. The entire fill shall be constructed as a unit in nearly level lifts. Rock materials greater than 12 inches in maximum dimension shall be placed in accordance with Section 6.2 or 6.3 of these specifications. 6.1.2. In general, the soil fill shall be compacted at a moisture content at or above the optimum moisture content as detem1ined by ASTM D1557-00. 6.1.3. When the moisture content of soil fill is below that specified by the Consultant, water shall be added by the Contractor until the moisture content is in the range specified. 6.1.4. When the moisture content of the soil fill is above the range specified by the Consultant or too wet to achieve proper compaction, the soil fill shall be aerated by the Contractor by blading/mixing, or other satisfactory methods tmtil the moisture content is within the range specified. GI rev. 07/02 6.1.5. After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted by the Contractor to a relative compaction of at least 90 percent. Relative compaction is defined as the ratio (expressed in percent) of the in-place dry density of the compacted fill to the maximum laboratory dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM D1557-00. Compaction shall be continuous over the entire area, and compaction equipment shall make sufficiertt passes so that the specified minimum relative compaction has been achieved throughout the entire fill. 6.1.6. Soils having an Expansion Index of greater than 50 may be used in fills if placed at least 3 feet below fmish pad grade and should be compacted at a moisture content generally 2 to 4 percent greater than the optimum moisture content for the material. 6.1. 7. Properly compacted soil fill shall extend to the design surface of fill slopes. To achieve proper compaction, it is recommended that fill slopes be over-built by at least 3 feet and then cut to the design grade. This procedure is considered preferable to track-walking of slopes, as described in the following paragraph. 6.1.8. As an alternative to over-building of slopes, slope faces may be back-rolled with a heavy-duty loaded sheepsfoot or vibratory roller at maximum 4-foot fill height intervals. Upon completion, slopes should then be track-walked with a D-8 dozer or similar equipment, such that a dozer track covers all slope surfaces at least twice. 6.2. Soil-rock fill, as defined in Paragraph 3 .1.2, shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with the following recommendations: 6.2.1. Rocks larger than 12 inches but less than 4 feet in maximum dimension may be incorporated into the compacted soil fill, but shall be limited to the area measured 15 feet minimum horizontally from the slope face and 5 feet below finish grade or 3 feet below the deepest utility, whichever is deeper. 6.2.2. Rocks or rock fragments up to 4 feet in maximum dimension may either be individually placed or placed in windrows. Under certain conditions, rocks or rock fragments up to 10 feet in maximum dimension may be placed using similar methods. The acceptability of placing rock materials greater than 4 feet in maximum dimension shall be evaluated during grading as specific cases arise and shall be approved by the Consultant prior to placement. GI rev. 07/02 6.2.3. For individual placement, sufficient space shall be provided between rocks to allow for passage of compaction equipment. 6.2.4. For windrow placement, the rocks should be placed in trenches excavated in properly compacted soil fill. Trenches should be approximately 5 feet wide and 4 feet deep in maximum dimension. The voids around and beneath rocks should be filled with approved granular soil having a Sand Equivalent of 30 or greater and should be compacted by flooding. Windrows may also be placed utilizing an "open-face" method in lieu of the trench procedure, however, this method should first be approved by the Consultant. 6.2.5. Windrows should generally be parallel to each other and may be placed either parallel to or perpendicular to the face of the slope depending on the site geometry. The minimum horizontal spacing for windrows shall be 12 feet center-to-center with a 5-foot stagger or offset from lower courses to next overlying course. The minimum vertical spacing between windrow courses shall be 2 feet from the top of a lower windrow to the bottom of the next higher windrow. 6.2.6. All rock placement, fill placement and flooding of approved granular soil in the windrows must be continuously observed by the Consultant or his representative. 6.3. Rock fills, as defined in Section 3 .1.3 ., shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with the following recommendations: 6.3.1. The base of the rock fill shall be placed on a sloping surface (minimum slope of 2 percent, maximum slope of 5 percent). The surface shall slope toward suitable subdrainage outlet facilities. The rock fills shall be provided with subdrains during construction so that a hydrostatic pressure buildup does not develop. The subdrains shall be permanently connected to controlled drainage facilities to control post-- construction infiltration of water. 6.3.2. Rock fills shall be placed in lifts not exceeding 3 feet. Placement shall be by rock trucks traversing previously placed lifts and dumping at the edge of the currently placed lift. Spreading of the rock fill shall be by dozer to facilitate seating of the rock. The rock fill shall be watered heavily during placement Watering shall consist of water trucks traversing in front of the current rock lift face and spraying water continuously during rock placement. Compaction equipment with compactive energy comparable to or greater than' that of a 20-ton steel vibratory roller or other compaction equipment providing suitable energy to achieve the required compaction or deflection as recommended in Paragraph 6.3.3 shall be GI rev. 07/02 utilized. The number of passes to be made will be determined as described in Paragraph 6.3.3. Once a rock fill lift has been covered with soil fill, no additional rock fill lifts will be permitted over the soil fill. 6.3.3. Plate bearing tests, in accordance with ASTM D1196-93, may be performed in both the compacted soil fill and in the rock fill to aid in determining the number of passes of the compaction equipment to be performed. If performed, a minimum of three plate bearing tests shall be performed in the properly compacted soil fill (minimum relative compaction of 90 percent). Plate bearing testc; shall then be performed on areas of rock fill having two passes, four passes and six passes of the compaction equipment, respectively. The number of passes requir,ed for the rock fill shall be determined by comparing the results of the plate bearing tests for the soil fill and the rock fill and by evaluating the deflection variation with number of passes. The required number of passes of the compaction equipment will be performed as necessary until the plate bearing deflections are equal to or less than that determined for the properly compacted soil fill. In no case will the required number of passes be less than two. 6.3 .4. A representative of the Consultant shall be present during rock fill operations to verifY that the minimum number of "passes" have been obtained, that water is being properly applied and that specified procedures are being followed. The actual number of plate bearing tests will be determined by the Consultant during grading. In general, at least one test should be performed for each approximately 5,000 to 10,000 cubic yards of rock fill placed. 6.3.5. Test pits shall be excavated by the Contractor so that the Consultant can state that, in his opinion, sufficient water is present and that voids between large rocks are properly filled with smaller rock material. In-place density testing will not be required in the rock fills. 6.3 .6. To reduce the potential for "piping" of fines into the rock fill from overlying soil fill material, a 2-foot layer of graded filter material shall be placed above the uppermost lift of rock fill. The need to place graded filter material below the rock should be determined by the Consultant prior to commencing grading. The gradation of the graded filter material will be determined at the time the rock fill is being excavated. Materials typical of the rock fill should be submitted to the Consultant in a timely manner, to allow design of the graded filter prior to the commencement of rock fill placement. GI rev. 07/02 6.3.7. All rock fill placement shall be continuously observed during placement by representatives of the Consultant. 7. OBSERVATION AND TESTING 7 .1. The Consultant shall be the Owners representative to observe and perform tests during clearing, grubbing, filling and compaction operations. In general, no more than 2 feet in vertical elevation of soil or soil-rock fill shall be placed without at least one field density test being performed within that interval. In addition, a minimum of one field density test shall be performed for every 2,000 cubic yards of soil or soil-rock fill placed and compacted. 7 .2. The Consultant shall perform random field density tests of the compacted soil or soil-rock fill to provide a basis for expressing an opinion as to whether the fill material is compacted as specified. Density tests shall be performed in the compacted materials below any disturbed surface. When these tests indicate that the density of any layer of fill or portion thereof is below that specified, the particular layer or areas represented by the test shall be reworked until the specified density has been achieved. 7.3. During placement of rock fill, the Consultant shall verify that the minimum number of passes have been obtained per the criteria discussed in Section 6.3.3. The Consultant shall request the excavation of observation pits and may perform plate bearing tests on the placed rock fills. The observation pits will be excavated to provide a basis for expressing an opinion as to whether the rock fill is properly seated and sufficient moisture has been applied to the material. If performed, plate bearing tests will be performed randomly on the surface of the most-recently placed lift. Plate bearing tests will be perfonned to provide a basis for expressing an opinion as to whether the rock fill is adequately seated. The maximum deflection in the rock fill determined in Section 6.3.3 shall be less than the maximum deflection of the properly compacted soil fill. When any of the above criteria indicate that a layer of rock fill or any portion thereof is below that specified, the affected layer or area shall be reworked until the rock fill has been adequately seated and sufficient moisture applied. 7 .4. A settlement monitoring program designed by the Consultant may be conducted in areas of rock fill placement. The specific design of the monitoring program shall be as recommended in the Conclusions and Recommendations section of the project Geotechnical Report or in the final report of testing and observation services performed during grading. GI rev. 07/02 7.5. The Consultant shall observe the placement of subdrains, to verify that the drainage devices have been placed and constructed in substantial conformance with project specifications. 7.6. Testing procedures shall conform to the following Standards as appropriate: 7 .6.1. Soil and Soil-Rock Fills: 7.6.1.1. Field Density Test, ASTM D1556-00, Density of Soil 111-Place By the Sand-Cone Method. 7 .6.1.2. Field Density Test, Nuclear Method, ASTM D2922-96, Density of Soil and Soil-Aggregate In-Place by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth). 7.6.1.3. Laboratory Compaction Test, ASTM D1557-00, Moisture-Density Relations of Soils and Soil-Aggregate Mixtures Using 1 0-Pound Hammer and 18-Inch Drop. 7.6.1.4. Expansion fu.dex Test, ASTM D4829-95, Expansion Index Test. 7 .6.2. Rock Fills 7.6.2.1. Field Plate Bearing Test, ASTM D1196-93 (Reapproved 1997) Standard Method for Nonreparative Static Plate Load Tests of Soils and Flexible Pavement Components, For Use in Evaluation and Design. of Airport and Highway Pavements. 8. PROTECTION OF WORK 8. 1. During construction, the Contractor shall properly grade all excavated surfaces to provide positive drainage and prevent ponding of water. Drainage of surface water shall be controlled to avoid damage to adjoining properties or to fmished work on the site. The Contractor shall take remedial measures to prevent erosion of freshly graded areas until such time as pennanent drainage and erosion control features have been installed. Areas subjected to erosion or sedimentation shall be properly prepared in accordance with the Specifications prior to placing additional fill or structures. 8.2. After completion of grading as observed and tested by the Consultant, no further excavation or filling shall be conducted except in conjunction with the services of the Consultant. GI rev. 07/02 9. CERTIFICATIONS AND FINAL REPORTS 9 .1. Upon completion of the work, Contractor shall furnish Owner a certification by the Civil Engineer stating that the lots and/or building pads are graded to within 0.1 foot vertically of elevations shown on the grading plan and that all tops and toes of slopes are within 0.5 foot horizontally of the positions shown on the grading plans. After installation of a section of subdrain, the project Civil Engineer should survey its location and prepare an as-built plan of the subdrain location. The project Civil Engineer should verify the proper outlet for the subdrains and the Contractor should ensure that the drain system is free of obstructions. 9.2. The Owner is responsible for fmnishing a final as-graded soil and geologic report satisfactory to the appropriate governing or accepting agencies. The as-graded repmt should be prepared and signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer experienced in geotechnical engineering and by a California Certified Engineering Geol<'>gist, indicating that the geotechnical aspects of the grading were performed in substantial conformance with the Specifications o:r approved changes to the Specifications. GI rev. 07/02 LIST OF REFERENCES 1. 1953 Stereoscopic Aerial Photographs of the site and surrounding areas (AXN-8M-70 and 71). 2. Blake, Thomas F., EQFAULT, A Computer Program for the Deterministic Prediction of Peak Horizontal Acceleration from Digitized California Faults, Users Manual, 1989a, p. 79 (Revised 1993), program revised 2000. 3. Geotechnical Investigation, Carlsbad Oaks Business Park Lot 2, prepared by Geocon Incorporated, dated November 15, 2000. 4. Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, California Division ofMines and Geology (CDMG) Special Publication 117, adopted March 13, 1997. 5. Preliminwy Geotechnical Investigation McMahan Headquarters, Carlsbad Oaks Business Park Lot 2, prepared by San Diego Geotechnical Consultants Inc., dated August 7, 1987. 6. Tan, S. S. and M.P. Kennedy, 1996, Geologic map of the Oceanside, San Luis Rey and San Marcos 7.5' quadrangles, Plate 1, San Diego County, California, Califomia Division of Mines and Geology, Open-File Report 96-0,. 1:24,000. 7. U.S. Geological Survey, 1967, San Luis Rey, California 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Map, 1968. 8. Unpublished maps and reports on file at Geocon Incorporated. Project No. 07192-22-01 December 17, 2003 ~·~--------------------------------------------------------------------~ TITLE 24 REPORT Title 24 Report for: Staples Loker Business Center Lot 1 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Project Designer: Industrial Commerctol Systems, Inc. . .. 1165Joshuo Way .. · Vista, CR 92081 .. ··· '· CA Ucense 1449671 •.; ' Report Prepared By: Steve Balderrama Stueven Engineering Consultants 326 Kalmia Street Escondido, CA 92025 (760) 735-8577 Job Number: Date: 7/5/2005 The EnergyPro computer program has been used to perform the calculations summarized in this compliance report This program has approval and is authorized by the California Energy Commission for use with both the Residential and Nonresidential 2001 Building Energy E · ·ency Standards. This program developed by EnergySoft, LLC (415) 897- EnergyPro 3.1 By EnergySoft Job Number: I:I!IIGIIII.i•i§.fhili.i§hl City of Carlsbad CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE PAYMENT OF SCHOOL FEES OR OTHER MITIGATION This form must be completed by the City, the applicant, and the appropriate school districts and returned to the City prior to issuing a building permit. The City will not issue any building permit without a completed school fee form. Project Name: S 1~ \0 Building Permit r n n-. ~· 7_ (;; ~ Plan Check Number: '-' b \;..,..~ Project Address: A.P.N.: Project Applicant (Owner Name): Project Description: Building Type: Residential: Second Dwelling Unit: Residential Additions: Commercial/Industrial: City Certification of Applicant Information: (!) \ ~0 Number of New Dwelling Units Square Feet of Living Area in New Dwelling Square Feet of Living Area in SOU Net Square Feet New Area Square Feet Floor Area Date: San Dieguito Union High School District 710 Encinitas Blvd. Encinitas, CA 92024 (753-6491) Certification of ApplicanUOwners. The person executing this declaration ("Owner") certifies under penalty o,f perjury that (1) the information provided above is correct and true to the best of the Owner's knowledge, and that the Owner will file an amended certification of payment and pay the additional fee if Owner requests an increase in the number of dwelling units or square footage after the building permit is issued or if the initial determination of units or square footage is found to be incorrect, and that (2) the Owner is the owner/developer of the above described project(s), or that the person executing this declaration is authorized to sign on behalf of the Owner. Signature: Revised 4/20/00 Date: 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-2700 Building Counter • (760) 602-2719 • FAX (760) 602-8558 SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL FEE CERTIFICATION (To be completed by the school district(s)) *************************************************************************************************** THIS FORM INDICATES THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROJECT HAVE BEEN OR WILL BE SATISFIED. SCHOOL DISTRICT: The undersigned, being duly authorized by the applicable School District, certifies that the developer, builder, or owner has satisfied the obligation for school facilities. This is to certify that the applicant listed on page 1 has paid all amounts or completed other applicable school mitigation determined by the School District. The City may issue building permits for this project. SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED SCHOOL DISTRICT OFFICIAL TITLE NAME OF SCHOOL DISTRICT DATE PHONE NUMBER Revised 4/20/00 CARLSBAD UNifiED SCHOOL DISTRICT 6225 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD, CA 92009 \cj o\/Ltrn \o.zr \ t a 1 ·~ S &cARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT D JEFFERSON ELEMENTARY D AVIARA OAKS ELEMENTARY D CARLSBAD HIGH SCHOOL D MAGNOLIA ELEMENTARY D AVIARA OAKS MIDDLE SCHOOL Receipt No. ·-D CARLSBAD VILLAGE ACADEMY D CALAVERA HILLS SCHOOL D PACIFIC RIM D VALLEY MIDDLE SCHOOL D KEl.LEY SCHOOL D CAI.AVERA HILLS MIDDLE SCHOOL 19086 0 BUENA VISTA SCHOOL D HOPE SCHOOL D OTHER ----- RECEIVED FROM• Lu &:~• cAl G~cfi .:Jft Co . DATE II \1v\6 (If Applicable) P~~T Of ;< J \d.. L() t:Q C · ( r W-t'J-\--rwN:\f: ~oq -o ~ \ -o \ -<Ja E't\YM_E;f'.!I£QB; l\CCQ\.ll':IIJ'-I_I,Jfyl.l;l_Efi AMOUNT &hoo\ :fC-cs ·. .!_ _____ _,_ U 1 1354. '-JY $ --------------------------------------------· !__ __________ __ $ $ RECEIVED BY:~ CASH __ CHECK# Lo5~/\ TOTAL $ ~~(B54 • rJ I . LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION CO. 1570 LINDA VIStA DRIVE 760-744-3133 SAN MARCOS, CA 92078 2827 Bldg Permit FOR~-------------------------------------- n•oooooo b 58 qu• •: ~ 2 2 2 3 sa 2 ··= 6589 90-3582/1222 4618 DATE _ _.N:u.ol.liY:.s;ea~mu.bu;e....,r_·__.lJ.L6.._, _..20~.~.:0~o~.'.,_5 _ $ 7, 35'1. 44 --··-------------------:.;;.. ,-.'-~·"·----·---···----~ ,"' --~-·------------"'--'··---=.,.~~v-,.~~-~,.-o·'"·······-~:~~~=~j!t~~~Alft~~~-~~~-ii~~ ..-ftft'L .. i'lil .. ~-~-~---~--~----~--~~~~jji;-@!1~~-~- NOY-16-2005 09:33 AM SMITH CONSULTING 858 793 4787 NOV~16-2005 WED 07:31 AM CITY OF CARSLBAD FAX NO. 760 602 BbbH I r, u~ I Community Facilities·JI>istrict No. 1 I NON-RESIDENTIAL CERTIFICATEJ Non-Residential iand Owner, · . I . . please nmd this option carefully an~ be sure you ttaor9ughly undersliillld the options_ before · signing. The option you chose wlll affect your pa~ent of the developed Spec1al Tax assessed on your property. This option is· available ;· nly at the time of the fU'St building permit issuance. Property owner signature is requir d before a· building pennit will· be issued. Your signature is confirming the accuracy of II infonnation shown. · ;::&11.) z-L-t7/<£ & t'-L-c . ! Sf-2 t;P ~ .f1CJ I Name of Owner Telephone ?:?#lf bft.../SP-4 /Itt, Stt:z]o I 1... L \,(..,_ ~-~~+ Address . £ lJ-(~b ~ C14::-: tJZI Z:.3 City, Stat~~ 7 Zip Code 9200 Zip Code . J\SS~ssor':a Parcel ~umbet;. ~r ~N and Lot N~cr if not y~t .su,dj~ided by County Assessor. ' 0~ '-. ' Buil.ding JP'crmit Nurnber(li) As cited by Ordinance No. NS·ISS and adoptc:d by me City of arlsbad, California, th6 City. is iluthorized . to levy a Special Tax. in Community faeililios Dislrict No. l AU non-reaidcnd.al propetty, upon the issWU~ce l)fa wilding permit. shall hqvc tbc option to (1) p~y th SPECIAL DBVSLOPMEN'r T'AX ONE- TIME or (Z) assume the .ANN(JAL SPSCI!J. TAX -DBVB · PED PROPERTY for a period nqt to exceed twency-ftve (25) years. Plea:u; indicate your choice by ini "oliiJB the appropriate line below: . I Ol-TION (I); l elect to pay the Sl'BCIAL TAX· ,ONE-1'IM ~wr"9!il a one-time pay:mt;nt. A.mount of O=;t; Speci~ Tax: $ .. ·· . . Owuer's loiuaJs OPTION (2): I elect to PllY the SPECIAL DEVELOPMB TAX ANNUALLY fot a pcuiod not to exceed twenty-five (25} yc::ars. · 'Maximum Annual Special 'tax: $ Z.. f\ «> ,.S\ . ow+er·s Initials------ I DO. H:ERBBY CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PER14' THAT TilE UNDERSIGNED IS THB PROPERTY OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY A THAT I UNDERSTAND AND WILL COMPLY WITH niB PROVISIONS AS STATED ABOV,e. · I 1 ~ -·I· m~"lni3Cf72--Sigrutturo~~ Title ! e /11, /} j) /-1} 1 1 I I /; ;;--/4~· Print Na1me . Date > ' The Cit)r ~~ CaThibad hils no I independently Vi:rified the infomwtiJn sh~;~wn above. ~ere:tore, we accepr no responSibility 1\$ to Ute a~carooy or completeness oftlUs infomUiti+n . ._,; •• u,, FY ,FO<to< ~ 'U_ \....,81 ·X 1qu"e Ft. 'lo,'j·.l. ~ • 2.. l,llo:o!., <> r Received Nov-16-2005 09:45am From-858 793 4787 To-O'DAY CONSULTANTS Page 002 P.02