The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2776 GATEWAY RD; ; CB061994; Permit07-13-2006 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Av Carlsbad, CA 92008 Plumbing Permit Permit No CB061994 Building Inspection Request Line (760) 602-2725 Job Address Permit Type Parcel No Reference # Project Title 2776 GATEWAY RD CBAD PLUM 2132630800 Lot# 0 Construction Type NEW BRESSI SPECTRUM-BLOC G-UNDERGR SEWER & ELECT DURING SHELL CONSTRUCTION Status Applied Entered By Plan Approved Issued Inspect Area Applicant BRESSI SPECTRUM LLC C/O KENNETH R SATTERLEE 4350 EXECUTIVE DR #301 SAN DIEGO CA 92121 Owner BRESSI SPECTRUM LLC C/O KENNETH R SATTERLEE 4350 EXECUTIVE DR #301 SAN DIEGO CA 92121 ISSUED 07/13/2006 RMA 07/13/2006 07/13/2006 Plumbing Issue Fee Fixture or Trap Building Sewer Roof Dram Install/Repair Water Line Water Heater and/or Vent Gas Piping System Vacuum Breaker Other Plumbing Fees Master Drainage Fee Sewer Fee Additional Fees 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 $2000 $000 $1500 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $4500 $000 $000 $000 TOTAL PERMIT FEES $8000 Total Fees $80 00 Total Payments To Date $80 00 Balance Due $000 Inspector FINAL A Date -L >VAL 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 *he date this permit was issued to protest imposition of these fees/exactions If you protest them you must follow the protest procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3 32 030 Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review set aside void or annul their imposition You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity changes, nor planning, zoning grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise expired PERMIT APPLICATION \ • • CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY PLAN CHECK NO. EST VAL. Plan Ck. Deposit _ Validated By / Date T Address (include Bldg/Suite Business Name (at this address) Legal Description Lot No Subdivision Name/Number Unit No Phase No Total # of units Assessor's Parcel #Existing Use Proposed Use Address\im^^^M^^^^^t>m City •fpriOwnerj:£.5i: State/Zip Telephone #Fax it Name Address City State/Zip Telephone # Name Address City 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]) Name State License # Address License Class City State/Zip City Business License # Telephone tt Designer Name State License # Address City State/Zip Telephone ^M^:i*:l.;Li^i;i».u^Siii;.i&^L.iii,y;;..i,:i.;: Stikw- ^'iiS-t :U '.1-iLk'JJ* ^;:.-.i-l,,i -sCt i'-i.i^iLs^iaiidi^.sSi.LLi^.iJ;^ Workers' Compensation Declaration I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following declarations O I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self-insure for workers' compensation as provided by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued O I have and will maintain workers' compensation, as required by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued My worker's compensation insurance carrier and policy number are Insurance Company Policy No Expiration Date (THIS SECTION NEED NOT BE COMPLETED IF THE PERMIT IS FOR ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS [$100] OR LESS) Q 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 ($100,000), In addition to the cost of compensation, damages ai provided for in Section 3706 of the Labor code, interest and attorney's fees SIGNATURE DATE ^,^^^^^^I hereby affirm that I am exempt from the Contractor's License Law for the following reason O 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 itfbrk himself or through his own employees, provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale If, however, the building or improvement is soknvithm 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) G) 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 comractor(s) licensed pursuant to the Contractor's License Law) [3 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 Q YES J?fNQ 2 ^tfiavay/ have not) signed an application for a building permit for the proposed work 3 Ijjaye contracted with the following person (firm) to provide the proposed construction (include name / address / phone number / 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 neme / address / phone number / contractors license number) _____ ___ ___ _ 5 I will provide some of the work, but I have contracted/tiered) the following persons to provide the work indicated (include name / address / phone number / type k of work) PROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE 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? Q YES D NO Is the applicant or future building occupant required to obtain a permit from the air pollution control district or air quality management district? Q YES Q NO Is the facility to be constructed within 1,000 feet of the outer boundary of a school site? Q YES Q 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 SSti!$NSTRUf|T^ ...I:.,' 'I/''''':.'','W-•>•'''•':,: • .': " >' ,- i , V ^ , ,: S ^ « ' I :." .? ' f^'! V 7.. j ' V> * ...I. L •*<<.' 'f 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 ADDRESS __^__ '•' '•--« V"'i,-.s48f»..-. •;• ',•"».; iWtiftSS^^itataS^ 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 CitV of Carlsbad to enter upon the above mentioned TSK^c lnsPectlon PurP°ses ' 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 fXmln«i°hN Eh8ry PT" 'SSU8d by the bu"d'ng Offic'al under the Provislons of this Code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or work. * InZ* V« t Permi. 'S n°' comme"(;ed Wlthln 18° dayg from the date °f ^ch permrt or if the building or work authorized by such permit ,s suspended or abandonedat any time after the work is commenced for a penod^fJBO days (Section 106 4 4 Uniform Building Code) ' ^spenaea or aoanaonea LENDER'S NAME MS APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request For 01/04/2007 Permit# CB061994 Title BRESSI SPECTRUM-BLDG G-UNDERGR Description SEWER & ELECT DURING SHELL CONSTRUCTION Inspector Assignment JM 2776 GATEWAY RD Lot Type PLUM Sub Type Job Address Suite Location APPLICANT BRESSI SPECTRUM LLC Owner Remarks Can you final this permit7 Phone Inspector Total Time CD Description 29 Final Plumbing Act Comment Af* Comments/Notices/Holds Requested By CW Entered By CHRISTINE / A Associated PCRs/CVs Original PC# CB054211 Inspection History Date Description Act Insp Comments 08/08/2006 31 Underground/Conduit-Wirmg PA JM NO PULL BOXES SET 08/03/2006 21 Underground/Under Floor AP JM 08/03/2006 22 Sewer/Water Service WC JM 08/02/2006 22 Sewer/Water Service CA JM MIKE Southern California Geotechnical St. Croix Capital 4350 Executive Drive, Suite 301 Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention Mr. Jim Jacob January 18,2006 Project No. 04G243-6 Subject- Reference Response to City of Carlsbad Comments Proposed Business Park Bressi Ranch Lot 40 Planning Area 5 SWC of Palomar Airport Road and Melrose Drive Carlsbad, California 1) Geotechnical Investigation. Proposed Business Park. Bressi Ranch Lot 40. Planning Area 5. SWC of Palomar Airport Road and Melrose Dnve. Carlsbad. California, prepared for St. Croix Capital by Southern California Geotechnical, dated December 28, 2004, SCO Project No 04G243-1 2) Geotechnical Investigation. Proposed Business Park. Bressi Ranch Lot 40. Planning Area 5. SWC of Palomar Airport Road and Melrose Drive. Carlsbad. California, prepared for St Croix Capital by Southern California Geotechnical, dated December 8, 2005, SCG Project No. 04G243-4R Gentlemen' In accordance with the request of Mr Martin Yousif of Partners Engineering, we have prepared this response to recent redlme comments by the city of Carlsbad, provided to us by Partners Engmeenng, pertaining to our referenced reports • The grading plans for the subject site were reviewed from a geotechnical perspective The results of our review of these plans are summarized in our Grading Plan review letter dated January 17, 2006 Grading for the building located in the vicinity of the retention basin the southwest portion of the site is discussed in our above-referenced reports. • Based on conversations with Martin Yousif of Partners Engineering, it is our understanding that the building numbering on the grading plan will be revised to match those indicated in our reference (2) 04G243-4R report 1260 North Hancock Street, Suite 101 • Anaheim, California 92807-1951 • (714) 777-0333 • Fax (714) 777-0398 We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to be of continued service on this project. If there are any questions concerning this matter, please contact our office at your convenience Respectfully Submitted, Southern California fievtecbnical, Inc. Robert G. Trazo, $ Sc , GE 2655 Senior Engineer Distribution- (2) Addressee (2) Partners Engineering, Attn. Martin Yousif eal Proposed Lot 40 Business Park - Carlsbad, CA Project No 04G243-6 Paae2 i.O CONCLUSIONS AMD RECOMMENDATIONS ased on the results of our review, field exploration, laboratory testing and geotechnical nalysis, the proposed development is considered feasible from a geotechnical ndpoint. The recommendations contained in this report should be taken into the ign, construction, and grading considerations. The recommendations are ntingent upon all grading and foundation construction activities being monitored by geotechnical engineer of record. The Grading Guide Specifications, included as pendix D, should be considered part of this report, and should be incorporated into project specifications. The contractor and/or owner of the development should bring to the attention of the geotechnical engineer any conditions that differ from those Hated in this report, or which may be detrimental for the development. Following completion of the recommended grading and foundation construction procedures, the subject site is considered suitable for its intended use. Seismic Design Considerations subject site is located in an area which is subject to strong ground motions due to Jrthquakes. The completion of a site specific seismic hazards analysis is beyond the >pe of services for this geotechnical investigation. However, it should be noted that jmerous faults capable of producing significant ground motions are located near the Jbject site. Due to economic considerations, it is not generally considered reasonable design a structure that is not susceptible to earthquake damage. Therefore, jnificant damage to structures may be unavoidable during large earthquakes. The structures should, however, be designed to resist structural collapse and reby provide reasonable protection from serious injury, catastrophic property age and loss of life. suiting and Seismicitv ^search of available maps indicates that the subject site is not located within an jist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Therefore, the possibility of significant fault ppture on the site is considered to be low. Seismic Design Parameters proposed development must be designed in accordance with the requirements of latest edition of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). The UBC provides procedures earthquake resistant structural design that include considerations for on-site soil onditions, seismic zoning, occupancy, and the configuration of the structure including structural system and height. The seismic design parameters presented below are ased on the seismic zone, soil profile, and the proximity of known faults with respect to te subject site. Proposed Lot 40 Business Park - Carlsbad, CA Project No. 04G243-1 113 The 1997 UBC Design Parameters have been generated using UBCSEIS, a computer >rogram published by Thomas F. Blake (January 1998). The table below is a ampliation of the data provided by UBCSEIS, and represents the largest design values >resented by each type of fault. A copy of the output generated from this program is ncluded in Appendix E of this report. A copy of the Design Response Spectrum, as generated by UBCSEIS is also included in Appendix E. Based on this output, the ollowing parameters may be utilized for the subject site: Nearest Type A Fault: Nearest Type B Fault: Soil Profile Type: Seismic Zone Factor (Z): Seismic Coefficient (Ca): Seismic Coefficient (Cy): Near-Source Factor (Na) Near-Source Factor (Nv) Elsinore-Julian (36 km) Rose Canyon (11 km) SD 0.40 0.44 064 1.0 1.0 "he design procedures presented by the Uniform Building Code (UBC) are intended to Hrotect life safety. Structures designed using these minimum design procedures may ixperience significant cosmetic damage and serious economic loss. The use of more onservative seismic design parameters would provide increased safety and a lower otential for cosmetic damage and economic loss during a large seismic event. Ultimately, the structural engineer and the project owner must determine what level of isk is acceptable and assign appropriate seismic values to be used in the design of the >roposed structure. jguefaction iquefacbon is the loss of strength in generally cohesionless, saturated soils when the ore-water pressure induced in the soil by a seismic event becomes equal to or xceeds the overburden pressure. The primary factors which influence the potential for quefaction include groundwater table elevation, soil type and grain size characteristics, Native density of the soil, initial confining pressure, and intensity and duration of round shaking. The depth within which the occurrence of liquefaction may impact urface improvements is generally identified as the upper 50 feet below the existing round surface. Liquefaction potential is greater in saturated, loose, poorly graded fine ands with a mean (dso) grain size in the range of 0.075 to 0.2 mm (Seed and Idriss, 971). Clayey (cohesive) soils or soils which possess day particles (dO.OOSmm) in xcess of 20 percent (Seed and Idriss, 1982) are generally not considered to be usceptible to liquefaction, nor are those soils which are above the historic static roundwater table. he subsurface conditions encountered at the subject site are not conducive to Refaction. These conditions consist of structural fill soils underlain by high strength Proposed Lot 40 Business Park - Carlsbad, CA Project No 04G243-1 Page 14 ndstone and claystone bedrock, neither of which are susceptible to earthquake- iuced liquefaction. Based on the subsurface conditions, liquefaction is not considered be a significant design concern for this project. I Geotechnical Design Considerations ie subject site is underlain by variable depths of compacted fill soils underlain by ndstone and claystone bedrock. The fill soils, extending to maximum depths of 45 to ± feet within PA-5, generally consist of moderate strength silty to sandy clays, silty nds, clayey sands and sandy silts. Based on the compaction report prepared by ighton and Associates, these fill materials represent compacted structural fills, placed ring recent mass grading operations. Laboratory testing indicates that these materials ssess generally favorable consolidation characteristics. However, the depth of fill ils varies significantly across the site and several cut/fill transitions between the fill id bedrock were created by the mass grading procedures In addition, the proposed ading to establish the new finished floor elevations is expected to result in the Tnation of numerous additional cut/fill transitions. The resultant subsurface profile is pected to provide variable support characteristics for the foundations of the proposed uctures. Based on these considerations, it is recommended that remedial grading be irformed within the new building areas in order to provide a subgrade suitable for pport of the foundations and floor slabs of the new structures. ie primary geotechnical design considerations that will impact the proposed (velopment are the presence of highly differential fill depths within some areas of the e, and the fact that the proposed grading will create cut/fill transitions within most of 3 proposed building areas. These considerations are discussed in detail in the lowing sections of this report. •adinq and Foundation Plan Review ie conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the eliminary plans provided to our office. No grading plans were available at the time of is report. Once preliminary grading plans become available, it is recommended that 3y be provided to our office for review with regard to the conclusions and commendations presented herein. In addition, a foundation plan was not available at e time of this report. It is recommended that preliminary foundation plans be provided our office once they become available. Depending on the results of our review, some odifications to the recommendations contained in this report may be warranted. fferential Fill Depths Jildings E and F are underlain by significant differential fill depths, due to the eviously completed mass grading. The fill depths within Building E are expected to Proposed Lot 40 Business Park - Carlsbad, CA Project No 04G243-1 Page 15 range from 10± to 45± feet, and the fill depths in the area of Building F are expected to range from 30± to 50± feet These buildings will require special geotechnical design considerations to reduce the potential effects of differential settlements that could be caused by the differential fill depths in this area of the site. These considerations include the use of additional steel reinforcement within the foundations and floor slabs of the affected structures. Settlement The results of the consolidation/collapse testing indicate that the existing fill soils are not subject to significant collapse upon moisture infiltration. In addition, the existing fill soils do not exhibit significant consolidation when exposed to load increases in the range of those that will be imposed by the new foundations. Provided that the recommendations contained within this report are implemented in the structural design and construction of the proposed buildings, the post-construction settlements are expected to be within tolerable limits. Based on our understanding of the proposed development, new fills in the areas of the existing deep fills are expected to be less than 5 or 6± feet, and will not induce significant new settlements. Following completion of the recommended grading, the post-construction static settlements are expected to be within tolerable limits. Settlement of Existing Fill Soils As discussed above, the subject site is underlain by engineered fill soils, extending to depths of up to 45 to 50± feet. These materials represent engineered fill soils, monitored during placement by Leighton. Minor amounts of additional settlement may occur due to secondary consolidation effects. The extent of secondary consolidation is difficult to assess precisely, but may be in the range of 0.1 to 0.3 percent of the fill thickness, thus settlements of 0.6± to 1.8± inches may occur. Based on the differential fill thickness that will exist across some of the building areas, the structural design will need to consider the distortions that could be caused by the consolidation of the fill soils. Cut/Fill Transitions Buildings A, B, C and D are closely underlain by dense bedrock. It is expected that cuts and fills of up to 1 to 3± feet will be necessary within these building areas to achieve the proposed subgrade elevations. Therefore, cut/fill transitions are expected to exist within these building areas after completion of the proposed grading. This cut/fill transition condition at bearing grade raises a potential for additional differential settlement. This report contains recommendations for additional remedial grading within these building Is to remove this cut/fill transition. should be noted that the extent of areas that will require over-excavation to litigate cut/fill transitions will depend upon the final grades that are established Proposed UA 40 Business Part*. - Cartsbad, OA. ProfaAUo 04G2.43-A Page 16 throughout the site. Therefore, the extent of this remedial grading may change, following our review of the preliminary grading plan. Expansion Most of the on-site soils consist of medium expansive soils and bedrock (El = 63). However, isolated areas of highly expansive soils may be present on the site. Based on the presence of expansive soils, special care should be taken to properly moisture condition and maintain adequate moisture content within all subgrade soils as well as newly placed fill soils. The foundation and floor slab design recommendations contained within this report are made in consideration of the expansion index test results. It is expected that significant blending of the on-site soils will occur during precise grading procedures, and that the resulting building pad subgrade soils will possess medium expansion potentials. It is recommended that additional expansion index testing be conducted at the completion of precise grading to verify the expansion potential of the as-graded building pads Shrinkage/Subsidence Based on the results of the laboratory testing, removal and recompaction of the existing near-surface engineered fill soils is estimated to result in average shrinkage or bulking of less than 5 percent. Where the existing bedrock is overexcavated and replaced as structural fill, bulking on the order of 0 to 5 percent is expected. Minor ground subsidence is expected to occur in the soils below the zone of removal due to settlement and machinery working. The subsidence is estimated to be 0.1 feet. These estimates may be used for grading in areas that are underlain by existing engineered fill soils. No significant subsidence will occur in areas that are immediately underlain by sandstone bedrock. [These estimates are based on previous experience and the subsurface conditions ; encountered at the boring locations. The actual amount of subsidence is expected to j be variable and will be dependant on the type of machinery used, repetitions of use, | and dynamic effects, all of which are difficult to assess precisely. I SulfatesI " " I The results of the soluble sulfate testing, as discussed in Section 5.0 of this report, I indicate that the on-site soils possess moderate to severe concentrations of soluble isulfates, with regard to attack of subsurface concrete. Therefore, specialized sulfate iresistant concrete mix designs will be necessary. It is recommended that additional [testing be performed during precise grading. However, based on the results of the ftesting indicating severe sulfate concentrations, with respect to Uniform Building Code [and Portland Cement Association (PCA) guidelines, the UBC requires that all concrete [which will come into contact with these soils incorporate the following characteristics: Proposed Lot 40 Business Park - Carlsbad, CA Project No. 04G243-1 Page 17 • Cement Type: V (Five) • Minimum Compressive Strength (f c): 4,500 psi • Maximum Water/Cement Ratio: 0.45 All structural concrete should meet the requirements of the Uniform Building Code and the American Concrete Institute. Furthermore, any imported fill soils brought to the site should be tested for sulfate content. Setbacks In accordance with Uniform Building Code (UBC) requirements, all footings should maintain a minimum horizontal setback of H/3, where H equals the slope height, measured from the outside face of the footing to any descending slope face. This setback should not be less than 7 feet, nor need it be greater than 40 feet. 6.3 Site Grading Recommendations The grading recommendations presented below are based on the subsurface conditions encountered at the boring locations and our understanding of the proposed development. We recommend that all grading activities be completed in accordance with the Grading Guide Specifications included as Appendix D of this report, unless superseded by site specific recommendations presented below. Site Stripping The grading recommendations presented below are based on the subsurface conditions encountered at the boring locations and our understanding of the proposed development. We recommend that all grading activities be completed in accordance with the Grading Guide Specifications included as Appendix D of this report, unless superseded by site-specific recommendations presented below. Site Stripping and Demolition Initial site preparation should include stripping of any vegetation and organic debris. Based on conditions observed at the time of the subsurface exploration, no significant stripping of vegetation or topsoil is expected to be necessary. However, if vegetation develops subsequent to the date of our reconnaissance, it should be removed off site. p Initial grading operations should also include abandonment of the existing detention basin, located in the southwest corners of the site. Any softened soils, silt deposits, water, or other unsuitable materials should be removed from the detention basin. Removals should extend to a depth of suitable structural compacted fill soils or bedrock. Where the detention basins are located within proposed building areas, the building pad overexcavation recommendations should also be implemented. Proposed Lot 40 Business Park - Carlsbad, CA Project No. 04G243-1 Page 18 Treatment of Existing Soils: Building Pads As discussed above, remedial grading will be necessary in several of the building areas to mitigate potential cut/fill transitions that will exist at or near the proposed foundation bearing grade. Remedial grading should be performed within the areas of Buildings A, B, C, and D to remove and replace a portion of the dense bedrock as engineered fill. The existing bedrock should be overexcavated to provide for a new layer of compacted structural fill, extending to a depth of at least 3 feet below proposed foundation bearing grade, throughout the building areas. Based on conditions encountered at the boring locations, it is expected that such overexcavation will be required throughout Building A, as well as most of Building B. Buildings C and D are partially underlain by fill soils extending to depths of 2 to 6± feet. Depending upon the proposed pad elevations within these buildings, overexcavation may not be required within Buildings C and D. In general, the overexcavations should extend at least 5 feet beyond the building perimeters. If the proposed structures incorporate any exterior columns (such as for a canopy or overhang) the area of overexcavation should also encompass these areas. Within areas of the proposed structures that do not require overexcavation per the recommendations presented above, it is recommended that the existing fills be overexcavated to a depth of at least 1 foot below existing grade, to remove any existing weathered and/or softened fill soils, as well as to prepare the subgrade for new fill placement. Following completion of the overexcavations, the subgrade soils (or bedrock) within the building areas should be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer to verify their suitability to serve as the structural fill subgrade, as well as to support the foundation loads of the new structure. This evaluation should include proofrolling with a heavy rubber-tired vehicle to identify any soft, loose or otherwise unstable soils that must be removed. Some localized areas of deeper excavation may be required if loose, porous, or low density soils are encountered at the bottom of the overexcavation. The exposed subgrade soils should then be scarified to a depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned to 2 to 4 percent above optimum moisture content, and recompacted. Treatment of Existing Soils: Retaining Walls and Site Walls The existing soils within the areas of any proposed retaining walls underlain by less than 2 feet of existing engineered fill soils should be overexcavated to a depth of 2 feet below foundation bearing grade and replaced as compacted structural fill, as discussed above for the proposed building pad. Subgrade soils in areas of non-retaining site walls should be overexcavated to a depth of 1 foot below proposed bearing grade, if not underlain by at lest 1 foot of existing engineered fill soils. In both cases, the overexcavation subgrade soils should be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer prior to scarifying, moisture conditioning and recompacting the upper 12 inches of exposed Proposed Lot 40 Business Park - Carlsbad, CA Project No 04G243-1 Page 19 subgrade soils. In areas where unsuitable fill soils are encountered at foundation subgrade level, additional overexcavation or deepened footings will be necessary. The previously excavated soils may then be replaced as compacted structural fill. Treatment of Existing Soils: Parking Areas Overexcavation of the existing fill soils in the new parking areas is generally not considered warranted, with the exception of any areas where lower strength soils are identified by the geotechnical engineer during grading. Subgrade preparation in the remaining new parking areas should initially consist of completion of cuts where required. The geotechnical engineer should then evaluate the subgrade to identify any areas of unsuitable soils. Based on conditions observed at the site at the time of drilling, no significant overexcavation is expected to be necessary within the new parking areas. The subgrade soils should then be scarified to a depth of 12± inches, moisture conditioned to 2 to 4± percent above optimum, and recompacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density Depending upon the actual finished grades, which have not yet been established, portions of the parking lot subgrades may be immediately underlain by bedrock. These materials may be used for direct pavement subgrade support. However, the owner and/or developer of the project should understand that minor amounts of reflective cracking and/or minor differential movements should be expected to occur near the location of the transitions between these bedrock matenals and the adjacent engineered fill. If such cracking or minor differential movements within the pavements is not considered acceptable, additional overexcavation should be performed within the cut portions of the parking areas. Placement Fill soils should be placed in thin (6± inches), near-honzontal lifts, moisture conditioned to 2 to 4 percent above optimum moisture content, and compacted. On-site soils may be used for fill provided they are cleaned of any debris or oversized materials to the satisfaction of the geotechnical engineer. All grading and fill placement activities should be completed in accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code and the grading code of the City of Carlsbad. All fill soils should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. Fill soils should be well mixed. Compaction tests should be performed periodically by the geotechnical engineer as random verification of compaction and moisture content. These tests are intended to aid the contractor. Since the tests are taken at discrete locations and depths, they may not be indicative of the entire fill and therefore should not relieve the contractor of his responsibility to meet the job specifications. Proposed Lot 40 Business Park - Carlsbad, CA Project No. 04G243-1 Page 20 5 I -IK t •'3v'* III i *•'* :' -'I i Imported Structural Fill All imported structural fill should consist of low expansive (El < 30), well graded soils possessing at least 10 percent fines (that portion of the sample passing the No. 200 sieve). Additional specifications for structural fill are presented in the Grading Guide i j Specifications, included as Appendix D. j • Utility Trench Backfill I :v In general, all utility trench backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the ] ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. As an alternative, a clean sand (minimum Sand [ ] Equivalent of 30) may be placed within trenches and flooded in place. Compacted trench backfill should conform to the requirements of the local grading code, and more restrictive requirements may be indicated by the City of Carlsbad. Materials used to backfill trenches should consist of well graded granular soils with a maximum particle size of 3 inches. All utility trench backfills should be witnessed by the geotechnical engineer. The trench backfill soils should be compaction tested where possible; probed and visually evaluated elsewhere. Utility trenches which parallel a footing, and extending below a 1h:1v plane projected from the outside edge of the footing should be backfilled with structural fill soils, compacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 standard. Sand or pea gravel backfill, unless it is similar to the native soils, should not be used for these trenches. 6.4 Construction Considerations Moisture Sensitive Subarade Soils I Some of the near surface soils possess appreciable silt and day content and will [| become unstable if exposed to significant moisture infiltration or disturbance by construction traffic. In addition, based on their granular content, the on-site soils will also be susceptible to erosion. The site should, therefore, be graded to prevent ponding of surface water and to prevent water from running into excavations. Excavation Considerations Based on conditions encountered at the boring locations, the bedrock that underlies the subject site possesses a dense to very dense relative density, but is somewhat friable. It is expected that it will be feasible to utilize conventional grading equipment within the depths that were explored by the borings. However, some difficulty may be encountered during excavation, possibly requiring large single shank-equipped bulldozers, excavators, etc. The grading contractor should verify the need for special excavation equipment prior to bidding the project. Proposed Lot 40 Business Park - Carlsbad, CA Project No 04G243-1 Page 21 II Based on the presence of predominantly granular soils throughout the development ° \ I area, minor to moderate caving of shallow excavations may to occur Flattened j \ excavation slopes may be sufficient to mitigate caving of shallow excavations, although : I deeper excavations may require some form of external stabilization such as shoring or bracing. Temporary excavation slopes should be no steeper than 1h:1v. All excavation activities on this site should be conducted in accordance with Cal-OSHA regulations. Expansive Soils As previously discussed the on site soils have been determined to possess a medium to high expansion potential. It is recommended that the highly expansive soils be blended with less expansive soils to create structural fills with a low to medium expansive potential (El <90), or removed and placed in non structural areas. Therefore, care should be given to proper moisture conditioning of all building pad subgrade soils to a moisture content of 2 to 4 percent above the Modified Proctor optimum during site grading. Ail imported fill soils should have low to medium expansive characteristics. In addition to adequately moisture conditioning the subgrade soils and fill soils during grading, special care must be taken to maintain the moisture content of these soils at 2 to 4 percent above the Modified Proctor optimum. This will require the contractor to frequently moisture condition these soils throughout the grading process, unless grading occurs during a period of relatively wet weather. Groundwater Free water was not encountered within the depths explored by the bonngs drilled for this project. These borings extended to a maximum depth of 20± feet below existing grade. Based on this information, groundwater is not expected to impact the proposed grading or foundation construction activities. 6.5 Foundation Design and Construction Based on the preceding preliminary grading recommendations, it is assumed that the new building pads will be immediately underlain by existing or newly placed structural fill soils extending to depths of at least 3± feet below foundation bearing grade. Based on ; i this subsurface profile, the proposed structures may be supported on conventional shallow foundation systems. Foundation Design Parameters New square and rectangular footings may be designed as follows: • Maximum, net allowable soil bearing pressure: 2,500 Ibs/ft2. The allowable bearing pressure may be increased by 1/3 when considering short duration wind or seismic loads. Proposed Lot 40 Business Park- Carlsbad, CA Project No 04G243-1 Page 22 • Minimum wall/column footing width: 14 inches/24 inches • Minimum longitudinal steel reinforcement within strip footings: Four (4) No 5 rebars (2 top and 2 bottom), due to medium expansive potential of near surface soils • Due to highly differential fill depths in the eastern area of the site, strip footings within Buildings E and F are recommended to be reinforced with six (6) No. 5 rebars (3 top and 3 bottom): • Minimum foundation embedment* 12 inches into suitable structural fill soils, and at least 18 inches below adjacent exterior grade. Interior column footings may be placed immediately beneath the floor slab. • It is recommended that the perimeter foundations be continuous across ail exterior doorways. Flatwork adjacent to exterior doors should be doweled into the perimeter foundations in a manner determined by the structural engineer. The minimum steel reinforcement recommended above is based on geotechnical considerations. Additional reinforcement may be necessary for structural considerations. The actual design of the foundations should be determined by the structural engineer. Foundation Construction The foundation subgrade soils should be evaluated at the time of overexcavation, as discussed in Section 6.3 of this report. It is further recommended that the foundation subgrade soils be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer immediately prior to steel or concrete placement. Soils suitable for direct foundation support should consist of newly placed structural fill, compacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. Any unsuitable bearing materials should be removed to a depth of suitable bearing compacted structural fill, with the resulting excavations backfilled with compacted fill soils. As an alternative, lean concrete slurry (500 to 1,500 psi) may be used to backfill such isolated overexcavations. The foundation subgrade soils should also be property moisture conditioned to 2 to 4 percent above the Modified Proctor optimum, to a depth of at least 12 inches below bearing grade Estimated Foundation Settlements | The proposed structures will experience settlements due to two primary factors: 1) the I elastic settlements caused by deformation of the existing structural fill soils due to the j loads imposed by the new foundations; and 2) long term settlement of the existing | structural fill soils under their own weight. The total and differential settlements induced ; by the foundation loads of the new structures are estimated to be less than 1 0 and 0.5 I Proposed Lot 40 Business Park - Carlsbad, CA Project No 04G243-1 Page 23 :hes, respectively, for shallow foundations designed and constructed in accordance h the recommendations provided in this report. The differential movements are pected to occur over a 30-foot span, thereby resulting in an angular distortion of less in 0.002 inches per inch. discussed in Section 6.2 of this report, the long term settlements associated with the atively deep existing fill soils could be on the order of 0.1 to 0.3 percent of the fill pth. On a preliminary basis, there may be up to 35± feet of differential fill depth ross Building Pads E and F. This could result in differential settlements on the order 0.4 to 1.3± inches. However, these differential settlements will occur over a fences of 100± feet, causing angular distortions on the order of % inch in 50 feet, ch angular distortions are considered to be within the structural tolerances of the >posed buildings. teral Load Resistance teral load resistance will be developed by a combination of friction acting at the base foundations and slabs and the passive earth pressure developed by footings below ide. The following friction and passive pressure may be used to resist lateral forces. • Passive Earth Pressure: 250 Ibs/ft3 • Fnction Coefficient: 0.25 ese are allowable values, and include a factor of safety. When combining friction and jsive resistance, the passive pressure component should be reduced by one-third, ese values assume that footings will be poured directly against suitable compacted jctural fill. The maximum allowable passive pressure is 2500 Ibs/ft2. * Floor Slab Design and Construction bgrades which will support new floor slabs should be prepared in accordance with recommendations contained in the Site Grading Recommendations section of this ort. Based on the anticipated grading which will occur at this site, the floors of the v structures may be constructed as conventional slabson-grade supported on newly ced structural fill. Based on geotechnical considerations, the floor slabs may be signed as follows. Minimum slab thickness* 5 inches Minimum slab reinforcement: directions. No. 3 bars at 18-inches on-center, in both Due to the highly differential fill depths in the western area of the site, floor slab reinforcement within Buildings E and F is recommended to consist of No. 4 bars at 18 inches on-center, in both directions. Proposed Lot 40 Business Park - Carlsbad, CA Project No 04G243-1 Page 24 • Slab underlayment 10-mil vapor barrier, overlain by 2 inches of clean sand. Where moisture sensitive floor coverings are not anticipated, the vapor barrier and 2-inch layer of sand may be eliminated. • Moisture condition the floor slab subgrade soils to 2 to 4 percent above optimum moisture content, to a depth of 12 inches. • Proper concrete curing techniques should be utilized to reduce the potential for slab curling or the formation of excessive shrinkage cracks. 7 Retaining Wall Design Recommendations is expected that some small retaining walls may be required to facilitate the new site •ades. The parameters recommended for use in the design of these walls are resented below. etainina Wall Design Parameters ased on the soil conditions encountered at the bonng locations, the following arameters may be used in the design of new retaining walls for this site. We have rovided parameters for two different types of wall backfill: on-site sandy clays and layey sands, and imported select granular material. In order to use the design arameters for the imported select fill, this material must.be placed within the entire ctive failure wedge. This wedge is defined as extending from the base of the retaining rail upwards at a 59 degree angle of inclination. RETAINING WALL DESIGN PARAMETERS Design Parameter Internal Friction Angle ($) Unit Weight Equivalent Fluid Pressure: Active Condition (level backfill) Active Condition (2h:1v backfill) At-Rest Condition (level backfill) Soil Type Imported Aggregate Base 38° 130 Ibs/ft3 31 Ibs/ft3 44 Ibs/ft3 48 Ibs/ft3 On-Site Soils 28° 125 Ibs/ft3 45 Ibs/ft3 79 Ibs/ft3 66 Ibs/ft3 Regardless of the backfill type, the walls should be designed using a soil-footing Proposed Lot 40 Business Park - Carlsbad, CA PmJectNo. 04G243-1 Page 25