Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2909 MANAGUA PL; SFD; CB011006; Permit
II City ófCàrlsbad 1635 FaradáyAv Carlbad, CA 92008 Residential Permit Permit No CB01 1006 Building Inspection Requ'st Line (760) 602-2725 2909 MANAGUA PL CBAD RESDNTL Sub Type: SFD Status: PENDING 2154942300 Lot #: 30 Applied: 03/14/2001 $435,439.00 Construction Type: VN . Entered By: RMA Reference #: Plan Approved: 1 Structure Type: SFD issued: 4 '. Bathrooms: 4 Inspect Area: GALL1HER RES-471 1 SF+800 SF Orig PC#: GARAGE+870 SF DECK . , Plan Check#: 05/15/2001 Job Address: Permit-Type: Parcel No: Valuation: Occupancy Group: # Dwelling Units: Bedrooms: Project Title: Applicant: Owner: GARY DAUGHERTY BODJANAC NIKOLA&OLGA 7017 VIA OSTIONES CARLSBAD CA 92009 760 431-1339 . 2702 LA COSTA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92009 Total Fees: $29,198.09 ' Total Payments To Date: $1,027.94( Balance Dce Due: $28,170.15 Building Permit $1,581.44 Meter Size Add'l Building Permit Fee $0.00 Add'l Red. Water Con. Fee $0.00 Plan Check $1,027.94 Meter Fee $140.00 Add'I Plan Check Fee . $0.00 SDCWA Fee $2,004.00 Plan Check.Discount $0.00 CFD Payoff Fee $0.00 Strong Motion Fee $43.54 PFF $7,924.99 Park in Lieu Fee $0.00 PFF(CFD Fund) $7,315.38 Park Fee ' $0.00 ' License Tax ' $0.00 LFM Fee ' $0.00 License Tax (CFD Fund) ' $0.00 Bridge Fee $530.00 Traffic Impact Fee $432.00 Other Bridge Fee , '$0.00 Traffic impact (CFD Fund) ' $488.00 BTD #2 Fee $0.00 Sidewalk Fee $0.00 BTD #3 Fee '$0.00 PLUMBING TOTAL $252.00 Renewal Fee $0.00 ELECTRICAL TOTAL $60.00 Add'l Renewal Fee $0.00 MECHANICAL TOTAL $83.00 Other Building Fee ' $0.00 ' Housing Impact Fee' $2,925.00 Pot. Water Con. Fee $2,400.00 ' Housing inLieu Fee $0.00 Meter Size ' D5/8 ' Master Drainage Fee: . $31.80 Add'l Pot. Water Con. Fee $0.00 , Sewer Fee: ' $1,959.00 Red. Water Con. Fee ' , $0.00 Additional Fees: ', ' $0.00 TOTAL PERMIT FEES $29,198.09 FINAL APPROVAL Inspec tor Date: '& 'if' Z ' 'Clearance: NOTICE: Please take NOT jç&tt11approval of your project includes the "Imposition' of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as "tees/exactis. 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 procedJts 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 asidevoid, or annul their imposition. 'You are h&eby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and cápactiy changes, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project NOR DOES IT APPLY to any tees/exactions of which you have previously been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has oreviouslv otherwise exoired I City of Carlsbad 1635 FaràdayAv Carlsbd,CA 92008 08-31-2001' .. Residential Permit . Permit No:CB0II006 Building Inspection Request Line (760) 602-2725 Job Address 2909 MANAGUA PL CBAD Perñiit Type: . RESDNTL Sub Type: SFD Status: ISSUED Parcel No: 2154942300 Lot #: 30 Applied: 03/14/2001 Valuation: $435,439.00• Construction Type: VN .- ... Entered By: RMA Occupancy Group: - ' Reference #: -. - Plan Approved: 08/31/2001 # Dwelling Units: 1 Structure Type: ' SFD •Issued: 08/31/2001 * Bedrooms: 4 Bathrooms: 4 Inspect Area: -.Project Title: GALLI HER RES47111SF-1-800 SF Orig PC#: GARAGE+870 SF DECK Plan Check# pplicant . ;cARY DAUGHERTY.. BODJANAC NlKOLA&OLGA13 9/31/01 0002 01 02 423 LANDMARK ST - COP 2817015 : SAN MARCOS CA 92069-8112. / CARLSBAD CA 920.09 . 760 431-1339 .• Total Fees. $29,198.09 Total Payrhents-To Date: $1,027.94 \.'alance Due: $28,170.15 ....• .• I L\ ;\ (V \ .4 Building Permit / / / $1,581.44 Meter Size \ AddI Building Permit Fe.e / $0.00Add'! ReclWater Cdt. Fee \ $0.00 Plan Check L_:- / $140.00 Addl Plan Check Fee (:g $0.00 SDCWA Fee ,- $2,004.00 Plan Check Discount j. $0.00 Payoff Fee /J/ $0.00 •. .:: -Strong Motion Fe f ,IPEF ,/' /- j ' $7,924.99 : Park in Lieu Fee $0.00 '( P/F (CFD Fund)\ç 7 $7315.38 Park Fee $0.OP. % Liense.Taf''\)y/ . I $0.00 LFM Fee $0 00 License Tax (CFDFund) / $0.00 Bridge Fee' \ •$530.00 % Traffic Impact / •. /$432.00 Other Bridge Fee •\ \ $0.00 Trffic Impact (CFD Fund) / $488.00 - BTD #2 Fee \ $000 SidiaIk Fee $0.00 BTD #3 Fee \$0.00 INCORP4UMB1NG TOTAL / $252.00 .Renewal-Fee . \ •\) $000 iELECTRICALZOTAL V $60.00 AddI Renewal Fee • \ $O.00-.....MECHANICAL TOTAL / $83.00 Other. Building Fee \ $0.00, Housing)mpact Eee\ / $2,925.00 Pot. Water Con. Fee 1$2j400.00f Housing lnLieu Fee / . $0.00 Meter Size . D5/8 twe ter,DrainageFee / $31.80 AddI Pot. Water Con. Fee $0.00 rFed : ,..-' $1,959.00 Red. Water Con. Fee $0.00 Additional Fees,.- - . $0.00 .------TOTAL-PERMIT FEES . $29,198:09 SI - . S , . •• . . 1'• . . • . •.• .4. .• . . -- . - . .-.- ¼. . • . • .5 . ..• 4 .., . . . • 'sI. . 4 4. . -. . . . • ¼,. FOR OFFICE USE Or I , APPLICATION PLAN CHECK NO IV 'CITY OF,,CARC8bAb,~~bOILDING-,DEP.AkT~'M'~N FdaAeadCA92008 Vandated By______________ Date____ 1/ '7'/i2 ( Zing Address (includ dgl uite #) . - , Business Name (at this address) Legal Description Lot No Subdivision Name/Number Ftal #ofjunits - ' ''- - As essor s Parcel # Existing Use I Proposed Use I Lce. l'c'e 47U - Description of Wo?J -.J SQ FT #of Stories # of Be ooms J 1 # of Bathrooms - 1c'/hfr/ : r fl T __4444IXo (,4 2'DA 7Z7 -,0,72 - 1Name . / / ) -' Addres 3 zPC Tr'eph rr . LIqA_NT or,Ebw , Zent for Oo r , 0 (- 1I Name - 7' / Address""-- - - City . Stt Zip Ce eh ne# PROPERTY 0W L . 7 -- -iC 7OT' -V CL Name Address ,, -. - . --- A dress-- . City State Zip Telepijone #' , . --- . - . Q77 (Sec 703.1'.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 jequires the applicant for such -permit-to file a signed statement that-he' licnsed -pursuant to the provisinsof the Contractor-s License- Law [Chapter 9 commending with Section 7000 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code] orr that he is exempt therefrom and the basis for the alleged exemption.rAny violation of-Section 7031:5 by any applicant for a permit subjects the applicant'to a civil penalty, of not more than five hundreddollars ($5001). c a a Name ' i4 WO'cic'Lt'--, Address O OX I City 4'{I,4 State/Zip ' Telephone # 72' State License # License Class il ic37q,4 it' BriinesLuc&n',. Designer Nae Address -. . . '. - -- ' City -- State/Zip Telephoné m - '- State License # * KER$QOJnPENSAT!0N * - a,WorkersrCompensation Declaration:, hereby affirm iindi,,r Denalty of perjury one of thvf Ciowing decltroticins: 0 I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self insure for workers cornpeation as :provided by Section 3700 of the Labor Code for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued r 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 inurance carrier and policy number are Insunce Cmpany 4! Polic No b4 ,.O/ - ONI ra .Expiration Date__- (THIS SECTION NEED NOT BE COMPLETED-IF THE PERMIT IS FOR ONE HUNDRED-DOLLARS ($1001 OR LESS) :'t'-:L-. o 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 tto the Workers Compensation Laws of California WARNING Failure to secure workers comensation coverage is unlawful and shall Subject an employer to criminal penalties and civil fines up to one hundred thousand dollars-($100,00 inaddft*—'-' e cost of compensation, damages as provided for in Section 3706 of the L bor code, interestand attorney's fees. SIGNATURE 7 QWNER 6JE6k-`OEdEA_RK-Ti_06E,, I hereby affirm that I am Iexempt fr6m th Cont ctor s License Law for the following reason D- I, as ownerof-th property, or, my mploy as with wages as-their sole compensation, will do the work, and the structure is~ 'not intended or offered lor'sale- (Sec. 7044,'Business and Professions Co e: T a Contractor's License Law, does not applyto an owner of property who builds or im1 11 proves thereoh, and whà does - - such work himself or through-his own-emplo es,-providéd that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If, however, the building or liprovement-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 Contréctor's License Law). 0 I am exempt under Section-' Business and Professions Code for this reason • " 1 4. 1 I personally plan to provide the major labor and materials for construction of the proposed property improvement 0 YES DNO 2 I (have / 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 / contractors license number) 4 I plan to provide portions of thew but I have hired the following person to coordinate supervise and provide the major work (include name / addrss / phone - number/ contractors license number): - -- '. - . . - ,t , 5. Lwill'provide some of the" work., but (have contracted (hired) the following persons to provide the ork indicated (include name /áddres / ho of I type' - of work) :PROPERTY-OWNER SIGNATURE -'DATE j 15 the applicant- or future building occupant - required to' submit a business plan, -acutely hazardous materials registration'form or risk manriyrnent 'and revantioh - - program under Sections 25505 25533 or 25534 of the Presley Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act? 0 YES 0 NO Is the applicant or future building occupant required to obtain a permit from the air pollution control district or air quality management district? 0 YES []-'NO Is the facility to be constructed within 1 000 feet of the outer boundary of a school site? 0 YES 0 NO * IF ANY 'D F -T'HE ANSWERSARE-YES, A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MAYNOT BE ISSUED UNLESS THE-APPLICANT HAS MET OR IS MEETING ,THE, REQUIREMENTS'OFI'HE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICt - 'I hereby affirm that there is a' consiruction lending agênrry 'rr the periurmrirrc- of the work fo v,hi h tnis permit isL-ue ICe,. v") Cvii Cody) '-_ - - - LENDER'S ,NAME LENDER'S ADDRESS__- A_PP - - I certify that I have read the application and state that the abovr' 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 Cits of Carlsbad to enter upon the above mntioned ,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 ANYWAY ACCRUE AGAINST, SAID CITY INCONSEQUENCEOF THE GRANTING. OF THIS PEAl ilTi - - - - - - - -- OSHA: Am OSHA permit 4is requ red for excavations over--5'07.deep and demolition or construction of structures over, 3 stories inheight.-' EXPIRATION-'Every permit 4m ,eenced by the building Official under the provisions of this Code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or work iuth&iz'ed bytiàh-permit is n by within 18 ays the d te f such permit orif'the building orwork authoriied by'puch permit is susended o'r abandored at any time after the work is c for a period of 80 days (Sect n 06 4 Uniform Building Code) J I - APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE 1 DATE - '-- - - --- '-- - - --" --- WHITE File YELL plicant PINK Finance ,,, V V .1 - V V V V V: City of Carlsbad Bdg Inspection Request For 08/08/2002 VPermit# CB0II006 lnspeótor Assignment: PD,) V V Title: GALLIHER RES471 I SF+800 SF. V V Description: GARAGE+870 SF DECK Type: RESDNTL ' SubType: SF0 . V V Phone: 7607293965 . V •V V Job Address: 2909 MANAGUA PL Suite: Lot 30 V V V V r V Location: V V V Inspector: V APPLICANT GARY DAUGHERTY V V V V Owner: GALLIHER CHRISTOPHER C&ERIN E V Remarks: PA ISAWAREOFTHIS1NSPECT1EIN V V V Total Time Requested By GAIL Entered By: GIOVANNAV V V V CD Description ' V. - Act Comments V V 19 Final Structural O ee et- 29 Final Plumbing V -&'L--? 3'"<-J V 39 V V Final Electrical V; V f5 49 Final Mechanical V V V V V V V Associated PCRs/CVs Inspection Histoi'i Date Description . Act Insp Comments .08/05/2002 89 Final Combo CO PD V V V V V 05/28/2002 18 Exterior Lath/Drywall AP PY V 04/10/2002 17 Interior Lath/Drywall V AP JC NOTE: CHECK FOR FLASHVGUARDS AT FINAL 04/10/2002 23 Gas/Test/Repairs V V NR JC V V V V 04/03/2002 16 Insulation V AR JC V V V V 03/29/2002 V 84 Rough Combo V AP .JC V V 03/26/2002 84 Rough Combo V - AP V JC SEE LIST V 03/19/2002 84 Rough Combo CO JC LIST ON SITE SUPERTO MAKE COPY V 02/27/2002 13 Shear Panels/HD's V AR JC 02/26/2002 15 Roof/Reroóf V AP JC. 02/19/2002 .15 Roof/Reroof V CO JC SEE NOTICE ATTACHED V V V V 01/11/2002 22 Sewer/Water Service AP JCVV V . 12/12/2001 16 Insulation . PA JC UNDER FLOOR AREA ONLY V V V V 12/11/2001 16 Insulation NR JC V V V .12/10/2001 41 Underground Ducts PA JC V 12/06/2001 21 Underground/Under Floor V V PA RC UNDER FLOOR ONLY - GAS, WATER, WASTE V Inspection List Permut# CB0II006 Type RESDNTL SFD GALLIHER RES-4711 SF+800 SF GARAGE+870 SF DECK Date Inspection Item Inspector Act Comments 08/08/2002 89 Final Combo - RI PAT KELLY IS AWARE OF THIS INSPECTION 08/08/2002 89 ,Final Combo PK AP TEMP OCCUPANCY.OK EXCEPT BEDRMS 3 & 4, PERMIT IS FINAL 08/05/2002 89 Final Combo PD CO 08/05/2002 89 Final Combo. - RI 05/28/2002 18 Exterior Lath/Drywall PY AP 04/10/2002 17 Interior Lath/Drywall JC AP NOTE: CHECK FOR FLASH GUARDS AT FINAL 04/10/2002 23 Gas/Test/Repairs JC NR 04/03/2002 16 Insulation JC AP 03/29/2002.84' Rough Combo JC AP 03/26/2002 84 Rough Combo JC AP SEE LIST 03/19/2002 84 Rough Combo JC CO LIST ON SITE SUPER TO MAKE COPY 02/27/2002 13 Shear Panels/HD's JC AP 02/26/2002 15 Roof/Reroof JC AP 02/19/2002 15 Roof/Reroof JC CO SEE NOTICE ATTACHED 01/11/2002 22 Sewer/Water Service JC AP 12/12/2001 16 Insulation JC PA UNDER FLOOR AREA ONLY 12/11/2001 16 Insulation JC NR 12/10/2001 41 Underground Ducts JC PA 12/06/2001 21 Underground/Under Floor RCB PA UNDER FLOOR ONLY GAS WATER WASTE 11/14/2001 32 Const Service/Agricultural JC AP TEMP ONLY NEED LIFER 11/14/2001 34 Rough Electric , JC WC 11/08/2001. 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers GG .. AP SEE BACK OF CARD 11/07/2001 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers GG CO SEE ATTACHED NOTICE 11/05/2001 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers RCB NR . NO PLANS, NO INSPECT CARD, 2 LABORERS ON SITE 10/29/2001 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers .. ' JC . PA •, NOTE ONCARD 10/29/2001 63 Walls - JC AP OKTO BACKFILL NO CARD ON SITE 10/22/2001 66 Grout , . JC AP , 10/15/2001 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers . JC CA . . . 10/12/2001 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers . JC PA NO PIERS 10/12/2001 62 Steel/Bond Beam JC PA . . . . 10/04/2001 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers JC PA GARGAGE/LOWER AREA 10/03/2001 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers JC NR SOILS REPORT - Tuesday,.August13, 2002 Page 1ofi 11. ry PLANNING DEPARTMENT 0 FINAL INSPECTION CHECKLIST ROUTING BLDG________ M. HARDY____ PLANNF _____ LBLACK_____ M BLACK_____ M. HARD7X. BLDG________ 4 Project Nane:ø_4...eA Plan Check No. CB Address: 7( 9 /1'(G..4(t&& 3J1 Project Number:________________________ Project Planner: Extension_________________________________ Contact Person Phone NO Drawing No._____________________________ Inspections Final Inspection Items 1st 2nd Approved All Items below Conform with Approved Site Plan Project Planner confirms conditions are met Building elevations Building materials • Building colors • Rooftop equipment screens Fence/wall height, location, and materials - Size, number and location of parking spaces compact, regular, handicap Outdoor recreation facilities Employee eating areas Trash enclosure and location Pavement treatment - - Laiidscaping installed (under separate contract) ' LIST BELOW ANY ADDITIONAL ITEMS REQUIRING SPECIAL ATTENTION BY MIKE BLACK: • Project complies with all conditions, including above-listed items: Final inspection is complete. Mike ack . Date (H:\ADMIN\COUNTER\Final Insp Check) 07/29/2002 CF _ City of Carishad - Final Building Inspection Dept Building Engineering P1annjQg CMWD St Lite Fire Plan Check M. Date.. 08/05/2002 Permit #: .CBO11006 Permit Type: RESDNTL Project Name: GALLIHER RES-4711 SF+800 SF Sub Type: SFD GARGE+870 SF DECK 0 Address 2909 MANAGUA PL Lot 30 Contact Perso'n( GAYLE' Phone: 7607293965 0 0 Sewer 01st: LC Water Dist: CA 0 Inspected IA ' Date 0 - 0 By: VVj - Inspected: " Approved: Disapproved_____ Inspected • Date 0 0 ' O By: Inspected: . Approved: . Disapyoed:_____ Inspected. . .. Date . • 0 By: . Inspected:. Approved: 0 Disapproved: . 0 0 • Comments 0 - 0 0 00. '• -. 0 0 0 0 • . - 4 • - * 0 - - 0 0 * * 0 0 - 0 • t . iS City of Carlsbad WO 2. OVp Final Building Inspection Dept: Building & jeering Planning CMWD St Lite Fire • Plan Check #: - Date: 08/05/2002 Permit #: CBO11006 Permit lype: .RESDNTL Project Name: GALLIHER RES-471 1 SF+800 SF Sub Type: SF0 GARAGE+870 SF DECK I : Address: 2909 MANAGUA PL - Lot: 30 • • - Contact Person: GAYLE Phone: 7607293965 • Sewer Dist: LC • - Water Dist: CA - ced Date - - Inspected: 8- 7 - Approved: 'Disapproved: • Inspected. - Date• • By: Inspected: •- Appoved: • Disapproved: - • : Inspected Date -- - By Inspected: - - Approved: Disapproved: • Comments: - t -• -' / 7/ - • -• - • 0 • - . - '-S GARY DAUGHERTY . .. ARCHITECT ......... - Southland Energy consultants February 19, 2002 B.A. Worthing, General Contractor. P.O. Box 1041 1 Carlsbad, CA. 92009 . . RE: Fra'm'ing revision, Galliher Residence, Managua P1. Carlsbad, CA. To Whom it may Concern,. . The following framing detail is a revision io Ridge support over the second floor Bedroom-2. I . . . . TankY Gary Daugherty Architect A36 cL6c?e 1.: AR & , TiiI1 __ :. 4Xce 'os+' I 412272 5/03 RENEWAL OATE 423 Landmark Ct. 'Son Marcos, CA. 92069 Tel: (760)471-0200 Fax: 471-0700 E-mail: GaryDaugheity@Juno.corn .. • . . - ¼ I • - C.W.I. JAMES E. LAMBERT, (760) 724-7826 / (760) 724-1675 FAX INSPECTION REPORT PAGE OF PROJECT NAME: '? ADDRESS: ARCHITECT: ENGINEER: () f/r CONTRACTOR: INSPECTION DATE: JOB# REPORT# / INSPECTION '.MATIIAL LIENTIFICATION ( )CONCRETE CONC. MIX#IPSI__________________ (ic) FIELD WELD REBAR GRADE___________________ ( )SHOP WELDING STR.STEEL HS BOLT PLAN FILE: EPDXY - - BLDG PERMIT:_ -'' "• . . , ELECTRODE OTHER: (OTHER Material Sampling 1/ )CONCRETE 'r .( ) REBAR ( )STRUCTURAL STEEL' ( )BOLTS OTHER:.____________ I INSP. PERFORMED, JOB PROBLEM, MATERIAL IDENTIFICATION, PROGRESS, WORK REJECTED, REMARKS 174 o4 /A Pc '///-i £. 4 7'4 5ççç 4 ,D/ 711- 7 P -' •'; \' c •/,/-4 J7 ,/' (,&J -___7-7'• ( ' Z • 1 ,zC4C >/ //, .,9 y\. Certification of Compliance: All work, unless otherwise noted, complies with the approved plans and specifications and the uniform building code. 4' / --- . /1 .__.'•c NAME (PRINT) "' " SIGNATURE/7< CERTIFICATION NO: :''•7 7/ : . 0• COMPACTION • 0 NORTH COUNTY •. 0 ENGINEERING, INC • November 26, 2001 Project No CE-6485 Chris & Erin Galliher 7017 Via Ostiones • Carlsbad, CA 92009 - 00 Subject Report of Soil Compaction House Retaining Wall Backfill Soils -. 0 Proposed Single Family Dwelling LotNo.30OfMap8302 0 ••• • Managua Place . Carlsbad, California Dear Mr. & Mrs. Galliher: S 0 In reskonse to your request, we are sending herewith results of laboratory and compaction tests performed on hóusè retaining wall backfill soils at the subject project. Test results indicate retainingwall backfill soils were compacted to a minimum of ninety , percent- (90%)., * • 0 • • A tabulation of test results is presented on attached Plate No. Two. Horizontal location of tests . are delineatedon attached Plate No. One. • 0 .. - Therefore, we recommend construction continue as scheduled If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated.. :. • Respectfully submitted, - OOFESSIO,V - : • 0 North County COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC !2 GE713 CD LU Ronald K. Adams 0 • Dale R. Reg . OF CM- • President Registered Civil 393 • • .. 0 • • Geotechnical Engineer 000713 • •• 0 • RKA:paj . • • 00 cc: (4) submitted - . 0 - • • :- • • • - 0 . F' 0 OX 302002 ESCONPIPO CA 92030 (760)4&0-111S FAX (760)741-656& -4 UNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. NORTH CO SOIL TESTING PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING NO SCALE MANAUGA PLACE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA ••\\\ \\\ \\S\ -- • '\S T'' ,,\\ \ " I • - ''\cR'\' - • ii • I I 't - \N \'\ • S S., NOTE: Te.st No.-'s lthru 15 5 presented in our prior report TEST LOcATION. SKETCH PROJECT No. CE-6485 PLATE No. ONE Test # Date Horizontal Vertical Field Moisture Dry Density Soil Percent of Location Location % Dry Wt. LBCu. Ft. Type Compaction 16 10/31/01 See 3095 135 1151 II 902 17 Plate 3100 127 1163 II 912 18 11/01/01 One 3115 103 117.0.,II 917 .19.3115 125 1164 II 912 20 3100 098 1172 11 919 21 11/02/01 3100 123 1162 II 911 22 3100 102 1187 11 930 23 3100 117 1161 11 910 24 11/05/01 3120 090 1208 II 947 F 25 f312.0 104 1181 II 926 26 3110 118 1161 11 910 27 11/07/01 3120 117 1160 11 909 28 3120 104 1159 II 909 29 3 12 0 08.1 122.0 II 95.6 30 3100 112 1186 II 93.01- 31 11/09/01 3120 125 1150 11 901 REMARKS Test No s 1 thru 15 are presented in our previously submitted report OPTIMUM MOISTURE/MAXIMUM DENSITY IP SOIL DESCRTION TYPE MAX DRY DENSITY OPT MOISTURE (LB CU FT) (% DRY WT' Brown Silty-Sand (Import Blend) 11 .127.5 09.1 PROJECT NO CE-6485 PLATE NO TWO 11/E15/2001 12:52 7607416560 i NOTHCO(1NTY COMPACTKENG1NEERING, SOIL TESTING & INSPECTION SERVICES NO CO COrFACT ION ENG PAGE 02 INC. Post offIox 302002, Escondido, CA 92030 (760) 480-1116 FIELD DNSTYTESTS A$TM D2922 1. Job ik44 4S P4t. b No. - Sh.._/Of_ Machine Me. IV- 1"formsfism - - To OEM COMMON MAINE- - Ill'__------. WREMIMI NNE -- UIIU H4AiI - - I In" -- - IjTu_1tIuI_ -. ME am so MENEM ONE MENEM so MEMO 0 ME moon on MMUNME ME 0 win on EX -M Monolog a.uaa...a =Mon= moon APPROVED BY 11/05/21 12:52 7607416558 NO CO COMPACTION ENG PAGE 03 NORTH COUNTY COMPACTIO PENGINEERING, INC Post Offiox 302002, Escondido, CA 92030 SOIL TESTING.P.. INSPECTION SERVICES (760) 480-1116 f2 - FIELD DENSITY TESTS ASTM 2922 job j'ii'1 ob Poe. ______ e, ,);-.Z-O! $he.+ !. O4j MSCkIIIS No. wparl 2— z ri(n re: ic'L J;-.MAI MEN! III NAME 'JIll. .1 1 LflIIJ1lE MEN IU1INUMumma lI0IUUIiSUUi uai mom I iai SOMEONE IN I MEMO NOW aaau I UIuama.aa Nola Umom, U•• RBSUN I IMMUNE on Mo, u I ImUU NEON IRUaIauu Ia.. 0 Mom' .R.R... I NONE am 0 No us on an IN 0 0 am Mumma IN am MEMOS 0 NONE IN WON mom APPROVED BY 11/85/2001 12:52 7607416558 NO (0 COMPACTION ENG PAGE 04 NORTH COUNTY COMPACTI ENGINEERING, INC. Post Office Box 302002, Escondido, CA 92030 SOIL TESTING & INSPECTION SERVICES (760) 480-1116 FIELD DENSITY TESTS A5TM Job € - - b No. Sk..t /_ O# /_- Mochw N. y__________ MormIori To: 5Se- J,353 Det. LLI' I4owi - 2 NAME momm MIEW MINE (JThHH1u11111U 1 tin niw - - - IwmThIi-II - MINE kr1Tfh U tIilIi GAME ,1rIIitliF - - 1u - MEN WINE OMAN MUMM. 0 NEON IN ONES Mon. 0 m mmommmmummm NONE 0 MIN APPROVED BY 1/05/ 2001 12:52 760741E5E8 HO NORTH COUNTY COMPACTJiENG!NEERING, INC SOIL TESTING & INSPECTION SERVICES CO COMPACTION ENG PAGE 05 Post Office Box 302002, Escondido, CA 92030 (760) 480.1116 - -,: ,----_-lrg__-, -._-_-- -- FIELD DENSITY TESTS Job , b • -. I ' Of ' MocI.m No. 1 z y MotOn To: - 535c 533 - LItIfllUJ ONE Ii1W1UZO NOW -- IMMUNE ruwi1l911jjWJ lull. - k1i[u1i1._ -."____1 _-- DON iI.Il.1 ruIJrj NOW LI{fl4flJ 0 MEN ONE suIsrnuaIrii5Jl u.auammiuuauui :0 pffiews MONO, MEN in 0 Amma iuuu uuaaamau MIN M1 In RE MEM ME a Nis amommome on a ME MEN MIR SIMONSON NONUNION 0 MEN SOMME No now ONE WEEM 01-00 MINE APPROVED BY r . S NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. . September 28, 2001 Project No. CE-6485 Chris & Erin Galliher 7017 Via Ostiones Carlsbad, CA 92009 un orCumpacted Fill Ground rt of Subject :; ua PI:L!N o. 30 of Map 8302 Dear Mr. & Mrs Galliher In response to your request, the following report has been prepared to indicate results of soil testing, observations, and inspection of earthwork construction at the subject site Testing and inspection services were performed from September 5, 2001 through September 17, 2001. -• Briefly, our findings reveal filled ground has-been compacted to a minimum of ninety percent (90%) Therefore, we recommend construction continue as scheduled SCOPE Our firm was retained to observe grading operations with regard to current standard practices and to determine the degree of compaction of placed fill. . Grading plans were not required.. Site plans were prepared by Gary Daugherty, AlA. Grading operations were performed by Mike Warner of San Marcos, California Reference is made to a previously submitted report entitled, "Preliminary Soils Investigation", prepared by H L Engineering & Surveying dated January 29, 2001. Approximate locations and depth of filled ground and extent of earthwork construction covered in this report are indicated on the attached Plate No One entitled, 'Test Location Sketch" P 0 '0X 302002 ESCONPIPO CA 92030 (7e0)480-1116 FAX (760)741-656& , S NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. Project No. CE-6485 Page Grading operations were performed in order. to create a split-level building pad to accommodate the proposed single family dwelling. Should the finished pad be altered in any way, we should be contacted to provide additional recommendations. . The site was graded in accordance with recommendations set forth in the soils report by H L Engineering and Surveying. . -. The graded pad was left in rough condition Finish grade operations are to be completed at a later date. . . . LABORATORY TESTING Representative soils samples were collected and returned to the laboratory for testing. The following tests were performed and are tabulated on the attached Plate No. Three. Optimum Moisture/Maxinium Density (ASTM D-1557) Expansion Potential Test (Fl-IA Standard) . Direct Shear Test (ASTM D-3080) . SOIL CONDITIONS . Native soils encountered were silty-gravelly clays. Fill soils were imported and generated from on-site excavation. The building site contained a transition from cut to fill. However, cut areas located within the building area were over excavated a minimum of 3 feet and brought to grade with compacted soil Over excavation was carried a minimum of 5 feet beyond the 'exterior building penmeter. Hence, no consideration need be given this characteristic. Expansive soils were observed during grading. However, they were capped with a minimum of 48 inches of non-expansive imported soils. Capping was carried a minimum of 5 feet beyond the exterior of the building perimeter. Therefore, conventional construction may be utilized. During earthwork construction, native areas to receive fill were scarified, waterd, and compacted to a minimum of ninety percent (90%) of maximum density. Fill soils were placed, watered and compacted in 6 inch lifts To determine the degree of compaction, field density .'., .' NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. ' Project No. CE-6485 Page tests, were performed in accordance with ASTM D-1556 or D-2922 at the approximate horizontal locations designated on the attached Plate No. One entitled, "Test Location Sketch". A tabulation of test results and their vertical locations are presented on the attached Plate No. Two entitled "Tabulation of Test Results". Fill soils found to have a relative compaction of less the ninety percent (90%) were reworked until proper compaction was achieved. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS - Continuous inspection was not requested to verify fill soils are placed in accordance with current standard practices regarding grading operations and earthwork costruction. Therefore, as economically feasible as possible, part-time inspection was provided. Hence, the following recommendations are based on the assumption that all, areas tested are representative of the entire project. 1.) Compacted fill and natural ground within the defined building areas have adequate strength to safely support the proposed loads 2.) In our opinion, soil liquefaction at the site is unlikely to occur due to the following on-site soils conditions: Groundwater was not encountered at the time of grading. Fill ground and loose topsoils were compacted to a minimum of ninety percent (90%) of maximum dry density. The dense nature of the formation underlying the site. 3.) Temporary slopes to be retained and/or completed at a later date should be + 'considered unstable and may prove to be a detrimentat condition. Furthermore, we should be, contacted to supervise backfill operations. Backfill, materials should consist of non-expansive soils (having a swell of less than 2%) placed at a width behind the wall equivalent to two-thirds of the retained height. Crushed rock(1 inch minus), approved by this office, may be an alternate method. All walls should be provided with drains. Drains should consist of 4 inch perforated pipe surrounded with crushed rock placed at a minimum of I 'cubic foot per lineal foot and-have a minimum fall of one percent (1%). A structural engineer should be contacted for a retaining devise recommendations ., NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING; INC. Project No CE 6485 Page 4 4 ) Continuous footings having a minimum width of 15 inches and founded a 'minimum of 18 inches below lowest adjacent grade will have an allowable soil' bearing pressure of 1500 pounds per square f6ot. Footings located on or adjacent to slopes should be founded at a depth such . • that the horizontal distance 'from the bottom outside face offooting to the face of the slope is a minimum of 8 feet All foundations should be constructed in accordance with the recommendations presented in the Preliminary Soils Investigation by H L Engineering and Surveying. Plumbing trenches should be backfilled with a non-expansive soil having a swell of less than two percent (2%) and a minimum sand equivalent of 30. Backfill soils should be inspected and compacted to a minimum of ninety percent (90%). •. ' Completion of grading operations were left at rough grade Therefore, we recommend a landscape architect be contacted to provide finish grade and " ' drainage, recommendations. Drainage recommendations should include concrete sidewalks placed on all sides of structures a minimum of 4 feet' in width and have a minimum fall of two percent (2%), away fromfoundation zones.-To further protect water penetration of the zone, rain gutters should be installed to divert run-off. Landscape planter areas within 4 feet of the foundation should be avoided, and/or designed with sealed bottoms and a drain system 9.) Unless requested, recommendations for future improvements (additions, pools, recreation slabs, additional grading, etc.) were not included inthis report. Prior to construction, we should be contacted to update conditions and provide additional recommendations' Prior to' pouring of concrete, North County COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. should be contacted to inspect foundation recommendations for, compliance to those set forth.' Foundation recommendations presented in this report should be considered minimal Therefore, we recommend the project architect and structural engineer review this report to assure recommendations presented herein will be suitable with regard to the' type of construction planned. • •' ' • NORTH COUNTY S 's COMPACTION L7s ENGINEERING, INC. . Project No. CE-6485 Page In the event a future swimming pool is constructed, we should be contacted to inspect the pool excavation to assure that adverse soil condition's do not exist. UNCERTAINTY AND LIMITATIONS In the event foundation excavation and steel placement inspection is required and/or requested, an additional cost of $170.00 will be invoiced to perform the field inspectionand prepare a "Final Conformance Letter". If foundations are constructed in more than one phase, $12000 for each additional inspection will be invoiced. (Same applies for pool excavation inspections.) It is the responsibility of the owner and/or his representative to carry out recommeñdatibns set forth in this report. - San Diego County is located in a high risk area with' regard to earthquake. Earthquake resistant projects are economically unfeasible. Therefore, damage as a result of earthquake is probable and we assume no liability. We assume the on-site safety of our personnel only. We cannot assume liability of personnel other than our own. It is the responsibility of the' owner and contractor to insure construction operations are 'conducted in a safe manner and in conformance with regulations governed by CAL-OSHA and/or local agencies. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. This, opportunity to be of service' is sincerely appreciated. • • Respectfully submitted, • ' -Ss'01 ' , North County COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. GE 713ku '• • . ' • ' xp. 9130/05' Dale RRegli '. President ' Registered Civil &A ' I • • Geotechnical Engineer 713 RKA:paj • • ' cc: (4) submitted ' • • ' •• ' ' • •. I' ' • ' •. III I NO SCALE NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. SOIL TESTING PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING MANAUGA PLACE CARLSBAD, CAI TEST LOCATION SKETCH PROJECT No. CE-64.85 PLATE No. ONE Test # Date Horizontal Vertical Field Moisture Dry Density Soil Percent of • Location Location % Dry Wt. LB Cu. Ft. Type Compaction' 1. 09/12/01 See 304. , 10.8 112.7 ' . I 92.7 2 Plate 305 09.9 124.4 IT 97.5 3 One 304 . 11.2 111.8 I 92.0' 4 "" 305 10.6 , 113.7 J 935 5 "09/13/01 311 10.5 114.0 1 93.8 6 311' ( 12.3' ' 115.9 I 95.3 312 - 11.3 117.1 ' IT 91.9 , 8 ' ' 311 10.3 ' .119.5 .. IT 93.7 ' 9 " ' 312 , ' 11.9 115.7 IT 90.7. 10 .' " ' 306 •' 10.7 117.4 II 92.0 11 09/17/01 307 RFG 111 1169 IT 916 ' 12 307-RFG 11.6 117.0 ' . II 91.7 .13 , ". 313 RFG 10.6 120.6 II ' 94.5 ' 14 " " 313 RFG 10.9 122.1 11 ' ' 957 15 ' " ' , 313 RFG 13.1 120.5 , ' ; II 94.5 ' REMARKS RFG Rough Finish Grade PROJECT NO CE-6485 - ' PLATE NO. TWO NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. * TABULATION OF TEST RESULTS OPTIMUM MOISTURE/MAXIMUM DENSITY SOIL DESCRIPTION TYPE MAX. DRY DENSITY OPT: MOISTURE (LB. CU. FT) (% DRY WT) White Tan Silty-Sand •. ,. (Import) •. I 121.5 13.3 Brown Silty-Sand . (Import Blend) II 127.5 09.1 EXPANSION POTENTIAL SALE NO. . i ii CONDITION. Remold 90% Remold 90% INITIAL MOISTURE (%) 13.0 8.3 •. AIR DRY MOISTURE (%) 4.0 2.0 FINAL MOISTURE (%) • 18.7 . 15.8 • • . DRY DENSITY (PCF) 109.4 • 114.3 • • LOAD (PSF) • 150 • 150 • SWELL %) • Lil 1.6 •* • EXPANSION INDEX 11 I6. • : •: DIRECT SHEAR SALE NO. II. • - CONDITION • Remold 90% •: • • ANGLE INTERNAL FRICTION : 31 • • * • • COHESION INTERCEPT(PCF) 125 PROJECT NO. CE-6485 . .• •. - PLATE NO. THREE • . . . EsGil Corporation. In Partnership with government for Building.Safety DATE: Ma? 12, 2001, : . D APP I ICANT JURI . . . - . JURISDICTION: Carlsbad - 0' EVIEWER . 0 FILE. PLAN CHECK NO 01-1006 SET Ill PROJECT ADDRESS: 2909 Managua PL" . PROJECT NAME SFD for Chris & Erin Galliher The planstransmitted,herewith have been corrected where necessary*and substantially comply with the jtirisdiction's'building codes. . . • LII The plans transmitted herewith will substantially. comply. with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. The plans transmitted herewith have -significant dëficiencie identified on the enclosed cheklist and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck;.. El The check ljst transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporatidn untilcorrected plans are submitted for recheck. -. . . El The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward-to the applicnt contact person. El The applicant's copy of the chick list has bee sent to • Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed LII E'sgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed Person contacted Telephone # Date contacted (by ) Fax # Mail Telephone Fax In Person I El REMARKS: - • •.' - .• - - .. . . By Abe Doliente Enclosures Esgil, Corporation . • • :..- • 4, •• - • • .4 LI GA LI MB LI EJ LI PC • 5/3/01 . trnsmtLdot . • •• I . 4 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 •' San. Diego, California 92123. •.(858) 560-1468 • Fax (8.58) 560-1576. EsGil Corporation, In Partnership with Government for Building Safety DATE: April 23, 2001 D,ARLJCANT JURIS JURISDICTION: Carlsbad 0 P AN REVIEWER UFILE PLAN CHECK NO.: 01-1006 SET: II PROJECT ADDRESS: 2909 Managua P1 PROJECT NAME: SFD for Chris & Erin Galliher The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. LII The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes When minor deficiencies identified beloware resolved and checked by building department staff. The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for :a complete recheck. The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. - LI The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. - The applicant's copy, of the check list has been sent to: Gary Daugherty 501 Avenida Aguila, San Marcos, CA 92069 Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: Gary Daugherty Telephone #: 760/727-0923 Date contacted: 412'1(by: ç...) Fax #: ((,) Z 03 S Mail Telephone..' Fax In Person LI REMARKS: By: Abe Doliente S Enclosures: Esgil Corporation 0 GA IJ MB El EJ PC 4/16/01 trnsmtLdot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 • San Diego, California 92123 • (858) 560-1468 • Fax (858) 560-1576 JURISDICTION Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO 01-1006 PROJECT ADDRESS 2909 Managua P1 SET II DATE PLAN RECEIVED BY DATE RECHECK COMPLETED ESGIL CORPORATION 4/16/01 April 23, 2001 REVIEWED BY Abe Doliente FOREWORD (PLEASE READ) This plan review is limited to the technical requirements contained in the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, National Electrical Code and state laws regulating energy conservation, noise attenuation and disabled access This plan review is based on regulations enforced by the Building Department You may have other corrections based on laws and ordinances enforced by the Planning Department, Engineering Department or other departments The following items listed need clarification, or change All items must be satisfied before the plans will be in conformance with the cited codes and regulations; Per Sec. 106.4.3, - 1997 Uniform Building Code, the approval of the plans does not permit the violation of any state, county orcity law. 4 A Please make all corrections on the original tracings and submit two new sets of prints to Esgil Corp. or to the bldg. dept. of the juris. - B To facilitate rechecking, please identify, next to each item, the sheet of the plans upon which each correction on this sheet has been made and return this sheet with the revised plans C The following items have not been resolved from the previous plan reviews The original correction number has been given for your reference In case you did not keep a copy, of the prior correction list, we have enclosed those pages containing the outstanding corrections."Please contact me if you have any questions regarding these items D. Please'indicatehere if an 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? IYes UNo - I . •--- -.- -. 4 * - .5.. 5 5 S , Carlsbäd0l-1006 II April 23, 2001 '. 1. Plans, specifications and, calculations shall be signed and sealed bthe California state licensed engineer or architect responsible for their preparation, for plans deviating from conventional wood frame construction. Specify expiration date of license , (California !Usiness and Professions Code).' Check final sets of plans for signatures. • 2. Show locations of permanently wired smoke detectors with battery backup: d) ,. In the basement, if part of the dwelling unit. Refer to Section 310.9.4 ' of the Unifoim Building Code. NOTE:Detectors shall sound an alarm audible-in all sleeping areas of the unit. Sectio6310.9.1. ' . •. • • 3 Glazing in the following locations should be of safety glazing material in accordance with Section 2406.4 (se&exceptions):, . . . a) Walls enclosing stairway landings or within 5 feet of the bottom and top of stairways where the bottom edge of the glass is less than .60 inches above a walking surface. Recheck the windows by the stairs near the entry. . . . 19 Complete and recheck the call-outs and cross referencs to the details Sheet 9 of the plans refer .to the section as A13. It should be N1 .The jurisdiction has contracted with Esil Corporation loated 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 rearding these plan review items, please contact Abe Doliente at Esgil Corporation Thank you 3 5 - -. . . '5. ' ._ . ... .' - '-S *4 .. * _ S_S S • 45 • •. S -. '. •' 4- . . . •.5.4_•• • • . . •• -. 5 5 . • .5 5 .5.. . S -• ' E ' . . '- i_•_ 5 S • . S.. 3 •+ 55, . . a S - - S EsGil Corporation In Partnership with government for fBuzL2uing Safety ,.: DATE March 23, 2001 u ARRYçANT - ., •• - - - . • -- u (.UBj. - JURISDICTION: Carlsbad D PLAN REVIEWER -. • -' . : * 0 FILE PLAN CHECK NO 01-1006 SETI PROJECT ADDRESS 2909 Managua P1 PROJECT NAME SFD for Chris & Erin Galliher The plans transrhittedherewith have been correctedwhere necessary, and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes The planstransmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jUrisdiction's' building codes -when minordeficiencie§ identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff.' 0 • • JO . •' .- _,4 • -- . The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubrniUed 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., . LII 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,thé check list has been sent to:' - Gary Daugherty. - 501 Avenida Aguila, San Marcos, CA 92069 . IIj Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed r71 V Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed Person contacted Gary Daugherty Telephone # 760/727-0923 Date contacted 3 7-310 (by ) Fax # Mail t_-1'lephone —v Fax In Person - III REMARKS By Abe Doliente Enclosures Esgil Corporation fl -GA fi, MB fl E fl PC 3/15/01 .. . trnsrnti.dot - - . •. -• - 0 , ' - I a 9320 Chesapeake Drive Suite 208 • San Diego, Cahform 92123 • (858) 560-1468 • Fax (858) 560-1576 Carlsbad 01-1006 1 March 23, 2001 . PLAN REVIEW CORRECTION LIST. SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS AND DUPLEXES PLAN CHECK NO.: 01-1006 ., JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PROJECT ADDRESS: 2909 Managua P1 FLOOR AREA: Dwe11ing'-4,711 SF STORIES: 2 + B . . Garage - 800 SF; Deèk— 870 SF . . HEIGHT: REMARKS DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY JURISDICTION: . .ESGIL CORPORATION: 3/15/01 DATE INITIAL PLAN REVIEW PLAN REVIEWER: Abe boiiente COMPLETED: March 23, 2001 S FOREWORD (PLEASE READ):' '. . This plan review is liniited 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 basedon laws and ordinance by the Planning Department, Engineering Department, Fire Department or other departments. Clearanôe from those departments may be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. . . Present California law mandates that residential' construction, cbmply with 'the 1998 edition of the California Building Code (Title 24), which adopts the following model codes: 1997 UBC, 1997 UPC, 1997 UMC and 1996 NEC (all effective 7/1/99). The above regulations apply to residential construction, regardless of the code editions adopted by ordinance. The following items listed need clarification, modification or change. All items must be satisfied. beforethe plans will be in conformance .with the cited codes and regulations. Per Sec.. 106.4.3, 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 Processi please note on this Iist'(or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed, i.e., plan sheet -number, specification section.etc. Be sure to enàlose the marked up list when you submit the revised plans. - Carlsbad 01-1006 March 23, 2001 Please make all corrections on the original tracings, as requested in the corrections, list. Submit two sets of plans for residential projects.. For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in one of two ways: 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. 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;ll 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 ni a •Ifl VLANZO Plans, specifications and calculations shall be signed and sealed by the California state licensed enginee'r or architect responsible for their preparation, for plans deviating from conventional wood frame construction. Specify expiration date of license (California Business and Professions Code) FIRE PROTECTION Show locations of permanently wired smoke detectors with battery backup Inside each bedroom. Centrally located in corridor or area giving access to sleeping rooms. On each story; , In the basement, if part of the dwelling unit. When sleeping rooms are upstairs, at the upper level in close proximity to the stair., In rooms adjacent to hallways serving bedrooms, when such rooms have a ceiling height 24 inches or more above the ceiling height in the hallway.' NOTE: Detectors shall sound an alarmaudible in all sleeping areas of the unit., Section 310.9.1. GENERAL RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENTS Glazing in the following locations should be of safety glazing material in accordance with Section 2406.4 (see exceptions): , a) Walls enclosing stairway landings or within 5 feet of the bottom and top of stairways where the bottom edge of the glass is less than 60 inches above a walking surface 1- Carlsbad 01-1006 March 23, 2001 o FOUNDATION REQUIREMENTS Provide a copy of the project soil report prepared by a California licensed architect or civil engineer. The report shall include foundation design recommendations based on the engineer's findings and shall comply with UBC Section 1804. In Seismic Zone 4, each site shall be assigned a near-source factor. Identify this value in the soils report and on the plans. Section 1629.4.2. Investigate the potential for seismically induced soil liquefaction and soil • - instability in Seismic Zones 3 and 4. This does not apply to detached, single- story dwellings. Section 1804.5 The soils engineer recommended that he/she review the foundation excavations.. Note on the foundation plan that "Prior to the contractor requesting a Building Department foundation inspection, the soils engineer shall advise the building - official in writing that: When required by the soil report). . a) .. The building pad was prepared in accordance with the soils report, The utility trenches have been properly backfilled and compacted, and The foundation excavations, the soils expansive characteristics and bearing capacity conform to the'soils report." 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 soils report are properly incorporated into, the construction documents (when required by the soil report). Show minimum underfloor access of 18" x 24". Section 2306.3. - Show minimum underfloor ventilation equal, to 1'sq. ft. for each 150 sq. ft. of underfloor area. Openings shall be as close to comerg as practical and shall provide cross ventilation on at least two approximately opposite sides. Section 2306.7. - r • FRAMING - Please show in the calculations how the redundancy was determined, per Section 1630.1.1. • Provide calculations for G-4 shown on sheet 9 of jhe plans. Structural calculationsinclude restrained retaining walls; Clearlyshow the location of these on the plans. ProVide construction details. • - 14 Structural calculations include beams HI-1(6 X 10 DF #2), 1-1I-2 (4 X 12 DF #- 2), and 1-12-1 (4 X 10 DF # 2) Show where these beams are located • . .. .. Carlsbad 01-1006 . March 23, .2001 . MECHANICAL (UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE). - - 15. Specify on the plans the following info,rnation for the firelace(s), per Section 106.3.3: . . . Manufacturer's name. . - • Model name/number. ICBO approval umber, orqual. Show, height of chimney above roof per I.C.B.O. approval or UBC Table 31-B. •. ' - Note on the plans That approved spark arrestors shall be-installed on all , chimneys. UBC, Section 3102.3:8. 16 1 Note on plan: Gas vents and noncombustible piping in walls, passing through • .. three floors or less, shall be effectively draft stopped' at each floor or ceiling. . UBC, Section 711.3. .. .. ,, . ELECTRICAL (NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE) 17. Show on the plan the amperage of the electrical service, the location of the . , service panel and the location of any sub-panels. If service is over 200 amps, • submit single line diagram, panel schedule and load calculations. • . -18. , Note on the plans that receptacle outlet locations will comply with NEC Art: 210-52(a) . 'MISCELLANEOUS . 19 Complete and recheck the call-outs and cross references to the details To speed up the review process, note on this list (or a copy) where each -. correction item has been addressed, i.e., plan sheet,' note or detail number, calculation page, etc Please indicate here if'any changes have been made to the plans that Pare not a result of corrections from this list. If there' are other changes, please briefly describ them and where they are located in the plans. Have changes been made to the pins not resulting from this correction list? Please indicate: • • . -• • '• 4 .•- - - Yes U - • • 'No U '.. . • 22..The jurisdiction has contracted with Esgil Corporation located at 9320 ' . • - Chesapeake Drie, Suite 208, San Diego, California 92123; telephone number of • 858/560-1468, toperform'the plan review for your project. If you have any. questions regarding these plan review items, please contact Abe Doliente at Esgil Corporation Thank you ' • •* • • . . • • •• • • • r • Carlsbad 01-1006 March 23, 2001 . " S VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURISDICTION Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO 01-1006 PREPARED BY: Abe DOliente DATE: ,March 23, 2001 BUILDING ADDRESS: 2909 Managua P1 ' BUILDING OCCUPANCY R-3/U-1 TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: V-N BUILDING AREA Valuation ] Reg. ' vALUE ($) PORTION , (Sqi. Ft.) Multiplier Mod. S Dwelling 4711 0Q - ' S ' 400,435 Garage ' - 800 '360 5- 5 , S • 18,400 Deck • - -. .,. - 870 - '1øC - ' - 10,440 -*4 Air Conditioning Fire Sprinklers TOTAL VALUE ________ • . 5 _________ - -. 5 '. 429,275 Jurisdiction Code cb By Ordinance '• •. - 1994UBC Building Permit Fee , 1994 UBC Plan Check Fee •' ' I $1,154. - Type of Review: , ConpIete Review El Structural Only , F1Repetitive Fee•• [1 Other , •- , jRepeats E:1I Hourly - • I Hour(s). • Esgil Plan Review Fee -- - I $923.561 Comments Sheet I of I - macvalue.doc - 5 *4 • - (. w (it Carlsbad, BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST DATE: (i (o ( - .PLANCHECKNO.: CB* b,1 I OO BUILDING ADDRESS: 0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT T). DENIAL Please s e attached report of :deficiencies marked ith 0 ake necessary corrections to plans or speci ions for compliance with applicable codes and standards. Submit corrected plans and/or specificationCti ce for review. By: I V 'Date: JJJj/I (U I By: Date: By: Dam: APPROVAL The item you have submitted for review has been approved. ' The approval is based on plans, information and/or specifications provided in your submittal; therefore any changes to these items after this date, including field modifications, must be reviewed by this office to insure continued conformance with applicable codes. Please review carefully all comments attached, as failure to comply with instructions in this report can result in suspension of permit to build. LA Right-of-Way permit is required prior to construction of the following improvements: / / / . . FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 1' E4511EERINc AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE BUILDING PERMIT:. By: ., . f•• ATTACHMENTS ENGINEERING DEPT. CONTACT PERSON El Dedication Application Name: KATHLEEN M. FARMER LI Dedication Checklist City of Carlsbad LI lmprovementApplkation :. Address: .1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008 LI Improvement Checklist . . . Phone: (760) 602-2741 LI Future Improvement Agreement . .. CFD INFORMATION . LI Grading Permit Application Parcel Map No: LI Grading Submittal Checklist Lots: LI Right-of-Way Permit Application Recordation: 0 0 fl Right-of-Way Permit Submittal Checklist Carlsbad Tract: and Information Sheet . LI Sewer Fee Information Sheet CA 9200-731 4 • (760) 602-2720 • FAX (760) 602R86 BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST T ND 21p::ea fully dimensned site plan draw to scale Show Arrow ' 5 4-Tight-6f-Way Width & Adjacent Streets B-'Existing & Proposed Structures Driveway widths - show 'c () Existing Street lmprovements S'ng or proposed sewer la'feral 97' _a?operty Lines - - xisting or proposed Water-service• —E)sements J Existing or proposed irrigation service tk( Q 2 Show on site plan _A-6nagePatterns. 4 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 willprovide a minimum positive - drainage of 2% to swaie-5' away from buikllng? . ize,.type, location, alignment of existing or proposec sewer and water service ; . (s) that serves the project. Each unit requires a separate service, however, ' econd dweIIin units and apartment complexes are an exception ewer and water laterals should not be located within proposed driveways, per standards. . . . 3.- Include on title sheet A Site address B.4 Assessor's Parcel Number -. . C Legal Description -S * 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 (rnanufactu1ng, warehouse, office, etc) previously approved.' EXISTING PERMIT NUMBER -•' . DESCRIPTION -' . .. . . -,., • . .- - 444 4. - 4 1 - • • . . • .- -- - - 4. . 4 .. -• M - .• - . HWORD0CS0QGST4BU Planthed, CkSt For,, (Genedc).doc 2 Rev 7114100 S S - — , . - - •- 'S S - •.. - 5, • ' BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST , - .5, 5 5 ..' -. S ' Sh , - . • •. - I .-S 2 ND 3 DISCRETIONARY APPROVAL COMPLIANCE -. - - t - ? t1\ LI -. D '4a. Project does not comply with the following Engineering Conditions of approval for Project No - . :- -' - •-• LI 0 0 4b All conditions are in compliance Date - '- - - - •, _ - - ; DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS Al LI LIt 5 Dedication for all street Rights-of-Way adjacent to the building site and any storm ' drain'br utility easements on the buildingsite is required for all new buildings -and - 5 -- for remodels with a value at or. exceeding $15,000, pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 18.40.030. Dedication required as follows _5,. 5 - -5, •51 * Dedication required Please have a registered Civil Engineer or Land Surveyor ' prepare the appropriate legal description together with an 8 W' x Ii" 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. 'App!ications will not be accept by mail orfax. . Dedication completed by Date / IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS ( LI LI 6a All needed public improvements upon and adjacent to the building site must be constructed at time of building 'construction whenever the value of the construction' exceeds $75,000, 4pursuant to" Carlsbad Municipal Code, Section ii 18.40.040., AJ •' VP" '°. -, . . - -. - . -. -. Public improvements required as follows: - O - Attached "please find an application form and submittal checklist for the public, ' improvement requirements. A registered Civil Engineer -'must prepare, the -,- appropriate improvement -plans and submit them together with the requirements - V , 9 ' 'on the attached checklist to the Engineering Department throUgh a separate plan : - 'check process. The completed--application form and the requirements on the- HWORD\D9CSICiKLSV8uiSrrg Planthed, Cldst Form (RIDDLE HARVEY? 12-00) doC 3 Re 12126/96 • - 5- -. - . .. . 4 61 BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST . . . . .i5-.5-%. •. 1ST 2ND 3rd 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 -El . 6b. Construction-f the 'public inirovemerith may be deferred pursUant to. Carlsbad r ' . Municipal Codë.Section 18.40. Please submit a recent -propertyjle report or current grant deed on the property and processing fee of 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 Neighborhood Improvement Agreement will include the following 0 LI 0 6c: Enclosed please find your Neighborhbod improvement Agreement. Please return agreement signed and notarized to the Engineering Department Neighborhood Ifriprovement Agreement completed by: - . Date: • t . . •• . •- 0 0 0 6d No Public Improvements required SPECIAL NOTE Damaged or defective improvements found adiaáent to building site must be repaired tothé satisfactibn of the City Inspector prior to occupancy GRADING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS The conditions that, invoke the need for a. grading permit are found in Section 11 06 030 of the Municipal Code S.,,- . ) 5__ •... -5-h D 0 7a. Inadequate information availableon'SitePlan to make a.determinatioh on grading requirements lnclude accurate grading quantities (cut, fill import, export) 0 0 - 7b. Grading, Permit required. A separaté grading plan prepared by a'registerd Civil Engineer must be submitted -together with the completed application form ' attached. NOTE: The Grading Permit must be • issued and rough grading approval obtained prior to issuance of a Building Permit.; .• 'S. . . S • 5_.' 5 5-.-.... -- Grading Inspector sign off by Date:, El El 7c Graded Pad Certification required (Note Pad thrtification may be required even if a grading permit is not required) - , • . * - • S • I - S , 5 55 5- .5 5 .• *'. • - . . , - S .. : • . . . ', - • . . . •- ''.• - - S * S • • S 4 .. • . - . . Rev. 9/2a= - . S BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST 1ST 2ND 3RD 0. 0 0 7d No Grading Permit reqUired.. * V 0 0 0 7e If grading is not required, write "No Grading" on plot plan MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS O 0 8 A RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT is required to do work in City Right-of-Way and/or V V - private work adjacent to the public. Rig ht-of-Way. TySesof work include, but a're' : not limited to: treet improvements, tree trimming, driveway 'construction"tying V into public storñi drain, sewer,and water utilities. .. •• - -- •' Right-of-Way permit required for * V •• V .- V •• V . V - V V 0 0 9. INDUSTRIAL WASTE PERMIT If your facility is located in the City of Carlsbad V sewer service area, you need to contact the Carlsbad Municipal Water District, V V - V Iocèted at 5950 El Camino Real, Carlsbad, ,CA 92008. District personnel can provide forms and assistance, and will check to see if your businese enterprise is V on the EWA Exempt List. You may telephone (760) 438-2722, extension- 7153, V V V V V for assistance:• V V V V V - V V . . V - - VV• .. Industrial Waste permit accepted by: -. V.. Date - .10 NPDES PERMIT V Complies with the City's requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge., V Elimination System (NPDES) ;permit. The applicant shall provide best V V management practices to reduce: surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to - V * V discharge to sensitive areas. Plans for.such improvements shall be approved by *thé City Engineer prior to issuance of grading or building permit, whichever - V V VV • V V . - occurs first. r'_ - 0 0 11. equired feesare attached V V V V - V ' No fees required V V , - V. •V • . •V V V - WATER METER REVIEW O 0 0 V• 12a. Dornéstic'(potable) Use V V V ' . • Ensure 'that the meter pr6posed by .the. owner/developer, is not ovethized. Oversized meters are inaccurate during low-flow conditions If it is oversized, for • ., V '- the life of the meter, the City will not accurately bill the—owner for the water used. • V All single family dwelling units received "standard" 1" service,with 5/8" service V V V - , - V . V V V • V 4 V V , V - V -. ' • V • V V - V • V V V V - • V V - * •V V - ,•V - H:WORO\DOCSC*OQSTSU)din9 Piai,theck CId* Form (Generic) VdOC , V V -Rev. 7114/CO V ,*VVVVV•/V 'V . -, . V • • V - - V . • -: .• V . VV V - VV V .: I V lNG PLANCHECK CHECKLIST V r/develope proposes V a size other than the- "sthndard",,thn' lvinner must nrovidé - otabIe water demand calculations. - Vper minute (gpm). A typical iixture count ano.water uemanu woncsneet us V attached: Once the gpm is provided, check against the. "meter sizing schedule" to ierify.Vthe anticipated meter size for the unit. •. V V . Maximum service and, meter size is a 2" service with a 2"m6ter.. If a developer is proposing a meter, greater than 2", suggest the instalIatio of'multiple 2" seMceaè --heeded to provide the anticipated V V V demand.. (manifolds are considered Von case by iase basis to limit muitipletrènching into the street). V • V VV •V V V . V •V - V . - 0 0 0 12b. Irrigation Use (where recycled water is not available) V V All irrigation meters must be sized -c'ia irrigation calculations (in gpm) prior to approval. The developer must provide these caIculatiohs Please follow these guidelines V V . V •_ V V V V 1. If the project is a newer development (newèr.thán 1998),'check the recent V improvement plans and ;observeIf. the new-irrigation service is reflected on the improvement sheets., If so, at the water meter station, the demand in gpmmay be listed there. Irrigation service listed with a circled "I", V and potable water is typically a circled 'W" The irrigation service should V VV V look like: V V V V V V 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 V V service/meter will be installed via another instrument such asthe building * V V V plans or grading plans (wl a right of way permit of. course), .then the applicant V 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 hav&been prepared,. V V but the applicant must provide the calculations to you for your use. once- _V . you have received a good example of irrigation calculations, keep a set for V your reference In general the calculations will include Hydraulic grade line - • V V Elevation at point Of. connection (POC) V - V V V V • 'Pressure at POC in pounds per square inch (PSI) V • - V VV V,Worse case zone (largest, farthest away from valve - . Total Sprinkler heads listed (with gpm use per head) - V :V • V , ••.. lnclud a 10% residual pressure at point of connection - V V V • .3. In general: all major sloped areas of a subdivision/project are to, be V V irrigatedvia separate irrigation meters (unless the project is only SF0 with 4 no HOA) As long as the project is located within the City recycled water ft\WORDDOCSCHlUSTlBIra Plandiedi Ctht Form (Gérie?C)VdOC - - - 6 • - V - - •' V Rev. - V 4 BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST 1 ST 2ND 3RD - service boundary, the Cit' intends on switching these irrigation services/meters to a new recycled water line in the future 0 12c Irrigation Use (where recycled water is available) 1. Recycled water meters are sized the same as the irrigation meter above.. If a project fronts :a street with recyàled water,: then they should be connecting to this line to irrigate slopes within the development For t subdivision, this should have been idéntifléd, 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 isavailable), then,the applicantmust 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 cannotguarantee the refund, and. they must deal with the SDCWA for this - 13. Additional Comments' - - - • - . (7) A 1td itc a - aixL 1aej /T ôJ iq4c CA - - - •-, - * - * a. -- - C - - • - - -- I - ...-• •'- --- - - H:\WORD\DOCSCHXL$flBui Ptanched CkISI Form (Geneflc).dOc . - . -. 7 -, . Rev. 1114100 -- . ! . /O . ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT - -- FEE—CALCULA-TJONWORKSH.EET Estimate based on unconfirmed information from applicant. PL. il D Calculation based on building plancheck plan submittal. Address: 9 NkcLt1&j't.&& PC Bldg. Permit No. O(- /00(0 Prepared by: Date: Checked by: . Date: ____________ EDUCALCULATIONS: List types and square footages for all uses. Types of Use: Sq. Ft./Units _(1) EDU's: Types of Use: Sq. Ft./Units: EDU's: ADT CALCULATIONS: List types and square footages for all uses. / . . Types of Use: Sq. Ft./Units:. ADT's: Types of Use. . Sq. Ft./Units: . . ADT's: : FEES REQUIRED: . ., WITHIN CFD: 0 YES (no bridge & thoroughfare fee in District #1 reduced Traffic Impact, Fee) 0 NO 0 1 PARK IN LIEU FEE PARK AREA & FEE/UNIT X NO UNITS '*.D 2. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE......- • • ---.. . ADT s/UNITS X FEE/ADT ) = $____________ DIST 3 BRIDGE AND THOROUGHFARE FEE JDIST #1 42 DIST #3 ADT's/UNITS- X FEE/ADT 3 0 4 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT FEE ZONE:- UNIT/SQ FT X FEE/SQ T /UNIT:,$_- 5 SEWER FEE BENEFIT AREA EDU s X FEE/EDU = $ • 0 6: SEWER LATERAL ($2,500). ' . . •• "- -: .: • . . ,.=$ . .. - • .0. 7. DRAINAGE FEES PLDAI)_: , HIGH. 'TLOW. , _S'• , 'Yr) FEE/AC: 60 , 3,f. _O ACRES: X , 8. POTABLE WATER FEES UNITS CODE CONNECTION FEE METER FEE SDCWA FEE • IRRIGATION lqo -I,i -l .. . lof2 WordDocsMIsfonnsFee Calculation Worksheet . . Rev. 7114/00 PLANNING DEPARTMENT BUILDING PLAN CHECK REVIEW CHECKLIST Plan Check No CB 01100 Lo Address mirjpc6Uf\ ?L Planner Greg Fisher Phone (760) 602-4629 APN: Q \— Lkcl 4-23 ' Type of Project & Use Net Project Density DU/AC IeLi Zoning P-C_ General Plan 2.. . Facilities Management Zone Lc' .CFD 1in/nuit # Date of participation: .Remaining net dev acres:_____ Circle One - >, >• (For non-residential development: Type of land used created by . this permit Legend: Item Complete Item Incomplete - Needs your action Environmental Review. Required YES NO TYPE - DATE OF COMPLETION:_____________ . - . -Compliance with conditionsof approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval: F1 F1 Discretionary Action Required: YES NO TYPE APPROVAL/RESO. NO. . DATE PROJECT NO OTHER RELATED CASES: Compliance with conditions or approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval: . ri ETJ\ . . L,4J LI LJJ Coastal Zone Assessment/Compliance N Project site located in Coastal Zone? YES____ NO—>4 CA Coastal Commision Authority? YES .. NO___ 1 * If California Coastal Commission Authority; Contact them at 3111 Camino Del Rio North Suite 200 San Diego CA 92108-1725 (619) 521-8036 Determine status (Coastal Permit Required or Exempt) Coastal Permit Determination Form already completed? YES NO____ If NO, *complete Coastal Permit Determination Form now. . Coastal Permit Determination Log # Follow-Up Actions: . . • 1) Stamp Building Plans as "Exempt" or "Coastal Permit Required" (at minimum F.kOrPldrIs). '4 - - . 2) Complete coasta! Permit Determination Log as needed. 4 1, .• •I - . N \ADMiN\çi1NTERBidginchkRevChkist _ ,. zi Inclusionary HousingFee required ,YES K!NO (Effective date of Inclusionary Housing Ordinance May 21 1993 ) 4 4 - Data Entry Completed? YES NO l / j 1 i '(A/P/Ds rActivityMaintenance enter CB# toolbar Screens' Housing Fees Construct Housing YIN Enter Fee UPDATEi) V r r Site Plan , 1 Provide a fully dimensional site7plan drawn to scale Show North arrow, property lines, easements, existing. and proposed(structures, streets, 4existing Street inpriements, rigtit-of-way width,'-.dimensional setbacks andéising Y thpographicl lines I • 2 Provide legal description of property and assessor's parcel number. Zoning , - ElI 1 Setbacks ¼ Front: Required I Shown .-• Interior Side Required Shbwn Street Side: Réquiredr -- -. Shoivn ---- Required. ___..., Shown - 4 4 Eli fl 2 Accessory structure setbacks Front: : . Required Shown - Interior Side: Required. ___1Sh'own • Street Side Required Shov'n Rear .'Required Shown Structure Separation:- Required Shown -. K ,.? - -.' _•q. •__ -. - I--.- • 'I - - 3 Lot Coverage - Fequired _ Shown:__ 4 'iieight -' Required 2O ' Shown / --4 .- .'-.• • - - - -• -..- - 4 .4 ' j i::i- LII 5 Parkin g8 Spaces Required 2 cptr~' 4Sho8vn .4 GuestSpaces Required r Shown (EiIJ LI Additional Commenf's) F\1 P(T(t A-t- o cure x pos - o -c-- m O c1cn (4 r'\* k\ij ecn -o rxrwr1+ mvt& -ro C5 +kD ('Thpc c Hr--- ck4-i- - G eO rco2c OK TO ISSUE AND ENTERED APPROVAL INTO COMPUTER DATE H \ADMcO - Cc Wall line , Lateral Load Total segment wall (%) HD trib V I v shr h Mo Dl intersect Mr HD Force Simpson .. . (ft) (#).' (ft) (#.I ft) # (ft) .(ft-#) (w) (p) (ft-#) (#). F Mbath 6.0 2367 8 296 10 10 23666 258 387 7606 2007 PHD2 V1= 30765 # wind 0.85 1 Media 4.0 1738 3 290 10 10 8691 80 . 120 . L 612 2693. PHD2 Media 3 290 10 10 8691 100 390 1377 2438 PHD2 2 'Library 15.0 6519 6' . 310 10 10 18625 96 80 1877 2791 PHD2 • Laundry , 15 310 10 10 46562 184 320 21675 1659 PHD2 . " 3 Mclos 15.0 6519 21 ' 310 ' 10 10 65186 80 320 20706 2118 PHD2' 4,5 Nook 19.0 8257 4 459. 12 10 18349 80 240 1360 .4247 PHD5 Nook 4 459 12 10 18349 80 240 ' 1360 4247 PHD5 Living . 5 459 12 10 22936 . 80 240, 1870 4213 PHD5 Shower . , 5 459 '.: 12 ., 10 22936 80 240. 1870 4213 •PHD5 6 Famly 10.0 4346 1 4346 , 12 52149 moment frame ' Vj= 27378# seismic Redundancy factor . UBC 1630.1.1 • • V1 =• 27378 total story shear • Vmax = , 6519 shear wall @ Mclos wall line 3 rm= 0.24 lbs Vmax/Vi element-story shear ratio • AB = 3272 sf Ground floor area p= 1.0 - rmax = 0.532 . 1 5 p 1.5 .. • . Notes: • . . • ' . ' . 1 Use Simpson SSTB28 bolts @ PHD2 and PHD5 locations - 2 MST37 may be used for PHD2 on double stud if cénteredw/ equal nails in each stud 3 ** requires header & sill straps (strap out detail) • , . O$'o/- Galliher Residence H ip support S - . Date: 3/28/01 BeamChek 2.0 Choice 4x 10 DF-L #2 S BASE Fb = 875 ADJ Fb 1397 Conditions '91 NDS S Min Pørinn Aran P1= 1 fin2 P9= fl A in2 fli flfI fl 1 in Data - Attributes - Actual Critical - . - Status Ratio - - Values Adjustments STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS Project: Galliher Residence •: - :Date 3128101 Plan Check R S Item •• 5 Per soils report (Na = 10, Nv= 1.0)us4§d câlc sheet 2 6 Per soils report (Na = 1.0, Nv = 1.0). used calc sheet 3 • •. ii revised redundancy factor calculated calc sht 4 (no change) • 12. • Attached • •• • 13 Restrained condition occurs @ perimeter footing/ stem wall where soil height difference is greater than 24". Detail 1/S1.1 incorporates: the: cal c req's and is identified on fdn plan 14 Labeled • •: • • • • •. •• Hi-i sht 10;. wall lines 4- • •, • • • S • Hi-2 sht 10, wall lines A-4 • • •• H2-1 sht 11 wall line 2-C • 9re, eyç cc • • STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS 1 Project Galliher Residence , Date 1/25/01 .. •• •• • IX , City Managua P1, Carlsbad Building Dept Carlsbad Phone Plan Check EsGil Phone * , •. .• t I * - - - *. .* UBC 1997 Soil Report HL Engineering Seismic Zone 4 Soil Profile SD Seismic Factor 182 Allowable Bearing 1500 psf Near source class : B Active Pressure ' : 40 pcf (level), 55 pcf 2:1 Basic Wind Speed 70 mph Passive Pressure 350 pcf 4 Wind Exposure C Friction Coefficient 50 .. - .-.. •1 I • -. LOADS ROOF FLOOR WALLS Roof Covering 5 0 psf Flooring 1 5 psf Ext Stid 16 psf Ply (1/2") 1 5 psf Underlayment 0.0 psf Int Stud 8 psf. ..Rafters '. 1.8 psf Plywood .- 2.0 psf Veneer :' 40 psf Joists 1.2 psf Joists 2.5. psf CMU 135 pcf Insulation 0.5 psf Insulation 0.5 psf Ceiling 2.5 psf DywaIl / T Bar 2.5 psf Misc. 1.5 psf Misc. : '. 1.0 psf,, Dead Load 14.0 psf Dead Load 10.0 psf Snow Load 0.0 psf *Live Load 16.0 psf Live Load • 40:0 psf - .• . • .- TOTAL LOAD 300 psf TOTAL LOAD 500 psf MATERIALS.(UON) •.- . • .-•. • • . ' Concrete -- f' • :2500 psi. Masonry 'fm - : 1,500 psi - • • , . .'' • Grout • : 2000 psi'Mortar - : Type Mor S .. •• Reinforcing Steel A-615 40 #5 & smaller 601 #6 & larger Structural Steel • A-36 Lumber DF I L Grade #2 --.joist, rafter, header #1,- beams & stringers • stud grade ,- studs0 AR ' . * .- -' -• - - ' . -• I - --:-' •: * 012272 )* - RENEWAL - - :• - -- . DATE S'TRUCTURAL..CALCULATIONS' •. ' . ., Project: Galliher Residence Managua P1, Carlsbad Date 1/25/01 Lateral Analysis :. • .' . .' .. Dimensions: 1st 2nd htlw ' 0 Front to Rear. 63 42 ft 0.43,Floor diaphragm height 11 ft Side to-side 78 57 ft 0.35 Exterior wall height (typ) 20 ft Wall Height 10 8 Ridge height (avg) 27 ft Wind: . . P = Ce Cq q '6 . Cq = 1.30 Pressure coefficient (projected area) UBC 1621.3 ExposüreC , ' q= 12.6 psf Wind stagnation pressure Basic wind speed = 70 mph Front - rear , Side - side Height AFF . Ce P . •. ' sf Force ' . Sf 'Force, 0-15' 1.06 17.4 ' 1275 22138#' ' 840 145850 15-20' .,1.13 '.' 18.5 , '. 285.. . 5275# •. 223 4128# . 20-25' 1.19 19.5 . 172 , 3353 # . , 108 2105 # 25-30' 1,.23 201 0# 0# Net base.wi'ndload P = 30765 # . P = 20818 #' Baseshear' •.. , . V1.=' 394#/ '' , #/ft Second level wind load ' . ' . P2 = 17222 # P2 9879# 'Second level shear ' . , . 302 #Ift . V2 = 235 f/ft Seismic Method UBC 16.30.2.1 ' ' ' ' Seismic zone 4 . Z = 0.40' Soil profile , = SD. . •" . . . Importance faôtor . ' , . I = 1.0 V (2.5Ca/ R) W ' , 'Plywood shear walls . '. . ' R'= 5.50 V = E = CsWg . . . ' Seismic amplification factor : .'. . f' = 2.80 V =_,0.1.8120, ' .' . . . 'Near'source acceleration factor ' ' Na' 1.00 Ground acceleration coefficient Ca = 0 40 X Na Weights 2nd level 1st level #Isf.,.; ' 'SF' • lbs 'ht '' . M , SF lbs, ht M0 Roof ' 14 • 2102, = 29428 23 676844 ' 1713. = 23982'' 13 • .311766 Floor DL .10 ',: ' ' ' ' ' ' .1821 • = 18210 11. 200310 Ext wall 2.. 16 ." 820 .13120 17 223040', 820 = 13120 13 ".170560' Etwalll,: 16 :'' . , • • 1625 = 26000 8 '208000 1ntwa112 8 "j' 820 ' = 6560 17 '. 111520 • 820 = 6560 13 85280 • lntwall 1' • 8. • ' . • • 0 ' , .. 1700 '= .. 13600. 8 108800 W2,=. 49108 # • 1011404 '• •, ..Wi=. ' 1,91472 # ' 1084716 Seismic loading Seismic distribution 2nd level 13210# V2=VM2/IM1+2 UBC 1630.5 1st level t27378# V, IV, Dead Load factor Front --fear Seismic Wind (Seismic/1 5wind) 2nd level '. v= 232 #Ift < '302 , • WIND GOVERNS ' , ," ., .. 'Use 0.67 DL ,. 1st level : , ,. ' v= 351 #Ift < 394 ' F-R , ' WIND GOVERNS • ', Use 0.67 DL' • ' ,,•0 • ' . Side - side • •r • , , '. ' 0 ' ' ' 0 2nd' level •. v= 315 #/ft> 235 , ........ SEISMIC GOVERNS . _0.89, • Use 0.85 DL 0 • ,' 1st level '' v= 435'#/ft.> 330 SS_ •, SEISMIC GOVERNS 0.88 k, ' Use 0.85 DL STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS ' Project: Gâlliher Residence ' '• Date 1/25/01 Managua P1, Carlsbad Front - rear loading ft Side - side loading S ft 2nd level v= 302 #/ft 57 2nd level v= 315 #/ft 42 1st level v 394 #/ft : 78 • 1st level v= 435 #/ft 63 Wall line Lateral Load. 'Total segment wall . . (%) HO trib V I v shr h Mo Dl intersect Mr HO Force Simpson (ft) (# / ft) # (ft) (ft-#) (w) (p) (ft-#) (#) 2nd Level. , " . . . 0.67 B Closet 10.0 3021 . 16 126 10 8 . 16115 198 512 22469 -397. 'OTSF OK Closet ' . •' '8 :' 126 10 8 ' 8057 198 512 6989 133 OTSF OK C Bed-3 20.0 6043 . 10 252 10 8 20143 198 198 7960 ' 1218 PHD2 - :Bed-4 14 252 10 8 28200 198 198 14858 953: PHD2 D : Bed-3 19.0 5741 4 302 .10 8 9669 80, , 120 750 2230 PHD2 Sitting . 11 302 10 8 26589. 80 120 .. 4127 2042 PHD2 Bed-2 4 302 , 10 ' '8 9669 . 80 120 750 2230 PHD2 E Closet 8.0 2417 12 .. 201 ' 10 .8 1'9337 1987 128 10581 730 .. PHD2 V2= 17222# wind 0.85 2 .Landing 12.0. 3774 4 210 10 8 6710 198 198 2020.. . 1173 . PHD2 Closet . . ' ' 9 210 , . .10 , 8.15098:1 198 198 8331 752 PHD2. Closet . 5 . 210. 10 8 8388 198 , ' 198 2945 1088 PHD2' 3 Stair 13.0 4089 16 . 256 ' 10 8 32711 .64 64 7834 .1555 PHD2 4 Cbs 4 . 12.0 3774 .12 164 10 8. 15754 198 990 22216 -538 OTSF OK 'Sitting , '5' 164 10 8 6564 198 990 "6311 51 OTSF OK Bed-2 ' . . 6 ' 164 10 8 7877 , 198 990 8078 -34 OTSF OK 5 Bed-2' 5.0 1573 5 , 157 10 8 6291 156 .468 3647 529 ST22 Bed-2 ' . . '5 157 - 10 . 8. . 6291 156 468 3647 ' 529' ST22 overal . 17 ' 157 10 '8 21388 156 468 25923 -267 .OTSF OK '12= '13210# seismic . 1st Level 0.67. A Family 14.0 5522 9.5 ' .245 10 12 27978 290 290 10614 .. 1828 PHD2 Kitchen ' 8 . 245 10 10 19634 290 290 '7772 1483 PHD2 Kitchen ' - 5 245 ' 10 10 12271 290 290 3400 1774 PHD2 C Family 250 9861 '11 365 11 " 12 '48208 290 ' 290 13892 3120 PHD2 Media ' , ' 16 . 365 ' 11 10 .58434.' 272 -272 26243 2012 PHD2 o .M-bed :1.9.0 7494 12 341. 10 ' 10 40877 144 276 9166 ' 2643 PHD2" Library' . ' ' 10 341 10 , 10 34064 ' 276 276 11095 ' 2297 PHD2 E Mbed 14.0. 5522 12 251 10': .10 ' 30120 144 . 288 9262 ' 1738 PHD2 Library . . 10 251 10 10 25100 276 ' 276 11095 1400 P1-102 Wall line . ... Lateral Load Total segment wall .. (%) HD trib V I v -..,shr h Mo. Dl Antdrsect Mr HD Force Simpson ,(ft) (#) (ft) (# / ft) # (ft) (ft-#) (w) F Mbath 6.0 2367 8 296 10 10 23666 258 387 7606 2007 PHD2 Vj= 30765 # wind 0.85 1 Media .4.0 1738 3 290 10 10 $1691 80 120 612., 2693 PHD2 Media . 3 290 10 10 8691 100. 390 1377 2438 PHD2 :2 Library 15.0 6519 .6 310 10 10 18625 96 80 1877 2791 PHD2'.. Laundry . 15 310 10 10 46562 184. 320 21675 1659 PHD2., 3 Mclos 150 6519 21 310 10 10 65186 80 320 20706 2118 PHD2 45 Nook 190 8257 4 459 12 10 18349 80 240 1360 4247 PHD5 Nook .., . 4 459 12 10 18349; ..801 240 1360 4247 PHDS: Living .' 5 459 . '12 10 22936 80 ,. ,240. 1870 4213 PHD5. Shower . . . 5 459.., 12 - 10 22936 80;1 . ' 240 1870 4213 PHD5 6 Famly 10.0 4346 1 4346 12 52149 moment frame V1= 27378 # . seismic • . . Redundancy factor UBC 1630.1.1 V1 = 27378 total story shear 0 0 ', , Vmax= 4346 wall line 2 bed 4 rmax 0.16 lbs Vma/Vi ..element-story shear ratio . AB= 3272 s 0 . 0 0 . . p= 1.0 2-(20 / r&m A) = -0.2 1 P,:5 1.5-.1 Notes: I Use Simpson SSTB28 bolts @ PHD2 and PHDS locations 2 MST37 may be used for PHD2 on double stud if centered w/ equal nails in each stud 3 requires header & sill straps (strap out detail) 4 STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS Project Galluher Residence Date 1125101 La 13 .- * Ii - - - a' . * Ii (iiE t I ;-t-------- - -'.• -- . -• '1 • I -f STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS -. * Project: Galliher Residence Date 1125101 ivlt II -@ I I / F71 CA 1* •; D - - STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS Project: GalliherResidencé , Date 1125101 SYM SHEAR WALL SHEAR TRANSFER #IFT MATERIAL NAILING (1 2) BLK (3) BOLT TO NAIL / BOLTJOISTING (5) SPLICE (6) (9) CONCRETE OD 4 DRYWALL NO 5/9'@ 77 16d @24 16d @24 16d t 16' 50 6d WB @ 5 NO 5/9'@ 7Z 16d @ 16 16d @ 16 16d @ 16 62 6 DRYWALL YES 5/8".@ 7Z 16d @ 16.16d @ 16' 16d @ 16 62 6d WB @ 7 YES 5/8 @72 16d @ 16' 16d @ 16 16d @ 16 75 8 7/8 STUCCO #16 NO 5/8" (6 72'. 16d @6 A35 @ 32" 16d @ 8", 180 9 3/8!' PLYWOOD 8dBx@6 , YES 5/8"@48" 16d@5" A35@20" 16d@8" CDX-260 ,10 3/8 PLYWOOD 8d BX @ 4 YES 5/8 @36' A35 @ 16 16d @8 CDX 350 24 RI=350 11 3/8 PLYWOOD 8d BX@ YES 5/8 @ 30 5/8 X6 A35,@ 12 16d @ 8 R I= 430 1 2 3/8 PLYWOOD Sd BX@ YES 5/8@240r A35 @ 10 16d @8 CDX=490 1 3 3/8 PLYWOOD 8d BX@ 2 YES 54@4or LAGSA35 @8 16d @ 8" CDX-640 14 15/32' PLYWOOD 10dBX@2" YES 5r A356" 16d@8" CDX 770 5TR1870 NOTES:, For plaster and gypsum products, nail spacing applies at all studs, blocks, top & bottom plates For plywood walls, nail spacing applies at all panel edges with field nailing at 12'OC (LION). - Where blocking is required, all panel edges shall be blocked with 2' nominal blocking. '• Sill bolts are 5/8" x 10" anchor bolts with 7" min embedment, with T x 2 x 3/16" plate washers. . Applies to joist/blocking and roof diaphragm to shear wall connections. , 6 Minimum lap splice to be 4ft with 8-16d nails @ each end and 116d nail every 16' OC 7. Sill & framing at adjoining panals shall be 3" nominal min where shear exceeds 350 #Ift. 8 Sill nailing to be through floor diaphragm into joist/blocking Nails to be staggered 9 Studs to be at 16 OC max 10. Pilot holes required for lag bolt installation. . . . . .. ' ABBREVIATIONS: BL - Blue nails ST - Staples WB - Wallboard nails BX - Box nails La'g'.- A307 Standard Lag screw w/ washer STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS .• .' Project: Galliher Residence : Date 1/25/01 • Reviéd Frame -column analysis 0 h = 12 ft frame height 1= 12 ft unbraced height X-axis : b= 12 ft frame width K9'=' 2.0 buckling,factor •• P = 3155 lbs axial load on column (1 ODL + 1.014.) PE = 1191 lbs seismic induced axial load on column (Mo -Mr/b) 2.80 seismic amplification factor . • E =. 4346 lbs seismic induced lateral load . ;. Vi = V2 = 2173 lbs column base shear (Ff2) • Preliminary estimate, .. . ••. •• : F'= 36000. psi A36 steel :': '• E = '2.9E+07 psi Cc = 126 column slenderness ratio • 6 = 0.72 in story drift limit 005h = 0.40 in bending deflection limit 0360 Try W1Ox26 Properties Required section' = 144 in4 M 3 13E+05 in-lbs E x h /2 S = 27.9 in3 S(req) = 14.51 in3 M I Fb A= 7.61 in2 . ' " 'A req = 0.15 in2 vi F, shear r = 4.35 in . '. ' A.8c1 0.39s. in2. (P+f oPE) I Fa axial Wt= 26.00 lbs/ft,.; k/fr = 66 -• •• Actual stresses % Max Fa=. 16840 psi : fa '415 psi P/A 2%. F = 14400 psi 4Fy fv = 571 psi F / A 4% Fb= 21600 psi .617 " 1b 11215, psi MIS Psc = 217.9 kips I 7FaA Pa = .6 .5 kips P+f OPE 3% = 0.51792 in calculated deflection Combined stress :0.54385 <1.33 OK fa I Fa fb I Fb W 10X26 A36 OK 8" x 12"x 1/2" bearing plate OK Bearing plate . 0 .• , - •• 0 , d = 10.33 in depth of column B = ' 8 in breadth of bearing plate • b = 5.77 in breadth of column • N = 12 in, depth, of bearing-plate •. •• . M = 1.09 in (N-.95d) /2 A2 = 288 si area of concrete bearing 12 x 24 n 1.692 'in • (B-8/2 • • Ai= 96 si area of.bearing plate Fy = 36000 • psi A36. steel yield strength • : . 0 0 • '• f'c = 2000 psi concrete design mi • • . • ••' • • . F 1200 psi .35f 'c x (A2/ A1)1'2 6 f' max allowable concrete bearing stress' O • • fp : 71 psi [P+ Wt(col)+CIOPE] /A'l . actual bearing stress •• Fb = . .• 27009 psi • .75F • -, . • 0 allowable plate bending stress ' t = -0:0970 .• in • (3 fp m2 / Fb)11 2 . required plate thickness • = 01501 in 2n(fplFy)1/2 0 • Bolts @plate • . •• • 0 • • 0 • • • • 0 0 , • V = 6084. lbs , CI E • each column • _ • . Vaow = 8500" lbs • shear capactiy per UBC 19-D 0 (2) 3/4" bolts = 2 X .4418 each column lallow. = 3000 lbs tension capactiy per UBC 19-D (2) 3/4" bolts = 2 X 1500 each column STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS " Project: Galliher Residence Date 1/25/01.. Revised Masonry pilaster h = 6.0 ft .' pilaster height 16" x 16" pilaster wl 4- #5 bars (v) #3 ties @ 16" t = 15.625 in . pilaster depth 8" x 12" x 1/2" A36 bearing plate bp = , 15.625 in ' pilaster breadth '. • P = 4546 lbs axial load On pilaster 4.0 in load eccentricity . . Masonry " f'M.= 1500 psi d = 11.625 in face to CL reinfg 33f'm Fb = 250 W = 40.0 psf lateral pressure . Reinforcing steel F = 60 ksi 0.0 ft surcharge ' .4F, Fsc = 24 ksi = '.2000 psi , Grout f'c Design analysis ' FJ11 = wh3 /6.+wh22 /2 M=eP. 35,464 i-lbs bending moment ' ':' ' .........A5 = M / F5 j d j = .9assumed = 0.141 in2 A90=bd '' ,, ' • '. . . . = .244 in2 . effectivearea . , A> .005Ae UBC21O7.2.13.1' 1.221 in2 < 1.24 in qty x db ' , ' r = (I /A.J1/2 d / 121/2 = .289d ' # 5 bars '4 0.31 = 3.36 in radius of gyration h' /r = -21.46. <99 ' ' ' , Flexure coefficients — ' np=Es As /Em bd Pa = [0.25 f'mAe +065AsFsc] [i -(h' / 140r)2] ' =0.088 ' UBC 21Ô7.2.5 ' ', 110861 lbs allowable axial load ' ' 2/kj =,6.623 j0.886 is = M / A5 j d tensile reinforcing stress f s - ., 712 psi < 24000 psi OK ' , , Id = 0.002'dbfs + 1 2d = 4.2 in development length lb = (2/kj) (M / bd2) compressive stress lb = ,. 111 'psi < 250 psi OK , Unity check Special inspection not required P / Pa lb / Fb = 0.26.< I . . OK Bearing plate' , , 0 , ' • ' " Fbr= 0.26f'm UBC2IO7.2.11. • •• ' • = 390 psi allow bearing stress • '0 • • - Properties' • 0 ' Areq = P/ Fbr ' • • •B = 8 in plate width = 11.7 in2 min bearing area , • N, = 12 in •o plate depth • •• 0 d = 10.33ih • 'column flange depth , A = NB . • ' • b' = • 5.77 in column flange width • 0 • . = 96.0 in2 plate area • m = 1.09 in •. (N-.95d) /2 • • • • n = 1.692 in • (B-.8bf) /2 • • fp P / A : • • -• 0 - • F, = '36000 psi ' • A36 steel yield strength = 47 'psi bearing stress • Fb = 27000 psi .75F allowable bending stress 0 = .0.0793 in: (3 1p m2 / Fb) 112, required plate thickness.. • • • = 0.1227 in - (2n (f p/ F)l/2 required plate thickness • • - STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS Project: - Galliher Residence Date 1/25/01 Managua P1, Carlsbad V - FOOTINGS Increse per UBCTabIe 18-1-A' Embedment inches' 12 18. 24 30 36 42 48 Bearing 1500psf 1,500 z 1,50 1,800 11,950 2,100 2,250 2,400 Type , Spec V. . A' continuous 15" wide by 24" de'ep net (18" embed) w/ 244 T&B monolithic B continuoUs 15" wide by 24" deep net (18" embed) w/ 244 T&B w/ 16" maso stem monolithic V V C continuous 15" wide by 24" deep net (18" embed) wl 244 T&B w/ 40" maso stem monolithic D isolated pad 24" x 24" x 18" deep w/ 344 each way . * V V V V V V E isolated pd 36" x 36" x 18" deep w/ 444 each way V . V V F :isolatedV pad ' 48" x48" x 18" deep w/445 each- way* ' - -• V V V floor slab tV.4hm nornw/#3@18 b OC each way mid htmin T= 4 Mf(max)=AsFsJd' . ' V f'c= 2000 psi V V M = W L2 /12 V Fs = 20000 psi .5F V V - L(,) = [2M /W]1/2 . V V V V V V j = 0.9 V (assumed) V V P(max) [Soil Bearing'- (deØth/12c wt)].x Area wt 150 pcf V 'V V V V V Allowable., V V depth' As d . W b M(max) L(max) Area # I If P(max) ' 133% V V Cont in si . in: lbs/ft in ft-lbs ..ft 5f V V lbs lbs lbs V A 24' 0.40', 21 375 V V 15, 15750 9.2 ' ..11.5 ' 1875 :12888' 17142 V V V V V V B 24 0.40 H .. '28 "500 5 21000 9.2 11.5 2063 12888 17141 V C 24 '0.40 51. 763 ,V 18 '45900 V 11.0 165 2475 17276 22977 V V Pads V V V V V lbs S V fc fs V V V D. 1k811, 0.60 •15' , 900 V 24 V 2083 900. 4.0 28 V 3086' 5100 V V ' E 18 .. 0.80 15 2025 36 8000 1350 V .9.0 'V 71 8889 11475 V 18 1.24 15 3600 V 48 20167 . 1800 VV V1.0 134 14456 20400 Punching shear P(max) V V , 04 06 V 6X6 8X8 V , ' c = 2 X (f 'c)1"2 . ., . depth lbs v (psi) v (psi) v (psi) v (psi) v (psi) c= 89.4 V D . 18 V .5100 V V2361' 20:24 16.19 V 12.88 . 9.77 V V V E 18 11475 : V 53.13 45.54 36.43 28.98 21.98 F V 18 V '20400 N.G. 80.95 64.76 51.52 39.08 ' V Shear Wall a Vp , W(looting) L,, L(req) V 'X - V ft lbs V spec ftg+61 ft '' Vft ft-lbs - B Garage . 13 3632 B 800.02 4.5 .--. 4122 B Bath VV 6 3801 B V .800.02 4.8 -- V 4515 V C Storage 12 . 2155 , B 800.02 ' 2.7 -- , .1451 I Exercise:.. 5 2117 V B 800.02 2.6. -- V 1400 V 3 Exercise 6 2606 B V 800.02 V 33 -2122 plf of footing Item - V psf roof - V 35 walls V 16 floor 50. footing 'V Total load perfoot V P load @ hèader. Footing spec ------V V 'V .•. V V * V V V V V ,• V V - V ' V - . V, V V , V V V V - V V V V • ' V V V V ______V 'I•__ '•'' , ' _. __ CASE I ' Perimeter loads CASE 2 CASE 3 CASE 4 CASE 5 V V 'Wall line 4 V V Wall line 3 V Pad @ FR Pads D/R Pad @ Mbed Trib load Trib load'' Trib • load Trib load Trib load ft lbs/ft ft lbs/ft ft ,lbs/ft, ft . lbs/ft ft lbs/ft 10 , 350 -14 490 ' 0.. V V 0 10 35.0 ,V 96 3360 17 " 272 9 144 V V 0 0 36 576 32 512 16' 800 13 650 .72 3600 56 V 2800 105 5250 732 . V , 375 900 . . 900, V V ' 2025 2154 V 1659 4 7539 4 V V 6636 4500 V .4626 11147 FtgC'•'_FtgB . PadD _V V Pad D _PadE STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS : Project: Galliher Residence .. : Date 1/25/01 Masonry wall A- 5-0" retaining wl pier surcharge Revised Design parameters Properties .. h = 5.00 ft 'masonry height masonry f'm = 1500 psi t = 7.63 in wall stem base thickness ... Wm = 140 pcf d= 5.13 in face toCLreinf'g reinforcing F= 40ksi hi = 4.50 ft retained soil height .5F Fs = 24 ksi' 24 max h2= 0.00 feet slope surcharge grout f'g = 2000 psi PDL = 140 lbs axial load DL PTL = 740 lbs axial load DL + LL active soil pressure w = 40 pcf e = 2 in axial eccentricity . b = 12 in effective section width A=bd Point load surcharge . = 61.50 in2 effective area 2800 lbs tributary point load ... .. -. .. ...........: . ' ... .. ... ... h = 2.00 ft heighf'abové footing r = (I /Ae)1/2 = d /121/2 = .289d ' x = . 7 ft . horiz distance to face ., . = 1.479 in radius of gyration R = 0.6P h 2 / x2+h 2 , h'./r = 73.00 <99 = 127 'lbs surcharge load (.55P max) d = x[ (x 2Ih 2+1)(tan 1 hIx)' (X/h)] .::Allowable masonry stresses = 1.31 ft ' depth of surcharge . R= 50% Special inspection reduction factor No Special Inspection Req'd Calculations wall stem •.' . . . . '. F 0.25 fm [1 -(h' / 140r)2] R UBC 2107:2.5 M1 = wh13 /6 + wh22 /2 + ePTL . : = 187 psi compressive stress = 731 ft-lbs bending moment M2 = R (h-d) . . 'F = .33 fm R . ' UBC 2107.2.6 87 ft-lbs surcharge moment ' = 248 psi flexural stress (2000 psi max) Asreq= (Mi+M2)/ Fj d ' S Fv 1.O(.f'm)112 R UBC 2107.2.8 = 0.089 in2: =.9 assumed .. . . = 19 psi shear stress (50 psi max) A = 0.230 in2 . USE # 5 , rebar Flexure coefficients . 0.31 in2 @ 16 in OC np = 0.096 = EA / Embd • . S 2/kj=6.418 ." Calculated stresses S S S j = 0.882. . S V=wh2 /2 +'R S . S S = 531.79 psi base shear .. . S = V / bjd . shear stress.' , Reinforcement fv = 9.8 psi <Fv OK ' ' l = 0:002 db fs +1 2db . = 19.3 in develop'ment length fs = M I A j d tensile reinforcing stress Is = 9435 psi <Fs OK . 'Horizontal steel S • As .0007Ae ' #4 • ©24 ía = (P + Wwaii) IAe axial compressive stress • = 0.0431 in2 < 0.098 'in2 OK , ía 13 Psi <Fa OK ' . S S • S fm = (2/kj) (M / bd2) bending compressive stress Unity check S • S • 5 fm • 200 psi. <'Fb.OK . fa/Fafrn/Fb . 0.88<1 • , OK • STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS Project: Galliher Resdencé' - Date 1/25/01 Masonry wall footing 5'-0" retaining wl pier surcharge : Design parameters Prdperties t = .7 .625 in wall stem thickness soil density = 120 pcf a = 34 in footing toe dimension allowable soil bearing q = 1000 psf b = 6.in ., footing heel dimension . at rest soil pressure w = 40 pcf L= 397 ft overall footing width • passive soil pressure qp = 350 pcf . dftg = 12 in footing depth saturation -15.00 % Wftg = 595 plf footing weight friction coefficient p. = 0.50 S1 = 0.50 ft . soil above toe concrete. . f'c = 2500 psi S2= 4.50 ft soil above heel .. . wc 150póf . . h'= 6.00 ft overall soil height dk= 6.in. key depth . tK = . 6 in - key width • .• .: ...................-. ..: . - . - . wt(lbs) . rm (ft) Overturning stability Soil on heel . 270 X. 3.72. • 1004 M0 = w(h' + dftg)3 I 6 Soil on toe 170 X 1 42 241 = 2287 ft-lbs overturning moment Wall stern 534 . X 3.15 1682 Footing 595 X 1:98 .. 1181 M= 4513 ft-lbs resisting moment Key 38 X. 1.32 50 Axial DL 85% 119 X 2.98 355 OTSF = 1.97 >1.5 OK . . . Ri = 1726 lbs IMR = 4513 ft-lbs Soil pressure calculations . Sliding . .... •. P = Wng + Wwaii + W5011 +Wkey + PTL .• RH = p. (Pv) = 2088 lbs',total vertical load •..• , =, 863 lbs friction reaction X= (MR -M)/Pv PH=wh'2/2 +IRS = 1.29 ft <kern 1.323 ft (L/3) = 847 lbs • base reaction (sliding) e' = 1J2 - X dK = 1 5 SF (2 (PH-RH) / qp)1/2 - dftg = 0.69 ft footing eccentrictiy, = :0.00 ft required key depth Sp = 2P/3X toe pressu're .. SLSF = 1.51 > 1.5 sliding safety factor OK • 1079psf. s S .. S . S S * • . Sp = • • • heel pressure . • Key . • • •: • • . •0psf •Mkey=qpdftg2 /2 +qpdk3 l3 • •: S . S • -• 5 • . = 175ftlbs • : P = Spt /3X soil pressure slope.'• S • • S S • = 279 plf As req = Mkey / Fs j d .5 • .. S • = 0.032 in2 j. = .9 assumed •. Mng (Spt - aPs)a2/2 + P5a3/3 • • A = 0.230 j2 USE #. 5 rebar.. = •• 3273 ft-lbs rnax.footing moment 0.31 in2 © 16 in OC • • As req Mftg I Fs j d • •. S S • = 0.202 in2 j =,.9 assumed: • S As = 0.230 *1n2 • USE # 5 rebar . * . .. • • 0.31 in2 @ 16 in OC STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS Project: ,. Galliher Residence Date 1/25/01 Masonry. wall B- '4'-O" retaining stem wall ' Revised Design parameters - . - Properties. h = 4.00 ft masonry height masonry I'm = 1500 psi t = '. 7.63 in wall stem base thickness ' Wm = 140 pcf d= 5.13 in face to CL reinf'g . reinforcing Fy = 40 ksi h1= 3.50 ft retained soil height .- '.5Fy F5 24 ksi 24 max 0.00 feet slope surcharge - - grout . f'9 = 2000 psi PDL = 248 lbs axial load D1 . PTL = 1152 lbs axial load DL + LL active soil pressure w = 35 pcf e = .2 in axial eccentricity. b= 12 in effective section width. -- A=bd Point load surcharge . ., = 61 50 in2 effective area Ps = ' 0 lbs tributary paint load h5 = 0.00 ft height above, footing - r = (I /A0)112 = d /121/2 = .289d x = 0.00 ft honz distance *to face = 1.479 in radius of gyration R5 ,0.6 Ph 2 /x-2+h52 h'/r 56.78 <99 = 0 lbs surcharge load (.55Ps max) , = x[(x?/h52+1)tan-i,h5Ix) - xIh5)] ' .Allowable masonry stresses 0.00 ft depth of surcharge ' R = 50% Special inspection reduction factor '• : ' , ' No Special Inspection Req'd Calculations wall stein'..,.. - Fa = 0.25 I'm [i (h' / 140r 2] R UBC 2107.2.5 M = wh13 /6 + wh22 /2 + ePTL , = 187 psi compressive stress = 442 ft-lbs bending moment - ••• M2 = R5 (h-d5) , F= .33 fm R - .- UBC 2107.2.6 , 0 ft-lbs surcharge moment , = ,• 248 psi ' flexural stress (2000 psi max) As req = (M1+M2)'/ Fs d -. , . Fv 1.0 (f'm)1i'2 R ' . U13C'2107.2.8 = '0.048 in2 j = 9 assumed = 19 psi shear stress (50 psi max) As = 0.098 in2 ,. USE# 4 rebar. - Flexure coefficients - 0.20 in2 24' in QC '. np = 0.041 E5A5 / Embd -. 2/kj=8.770 Calculated stresses ' . . , j = 0.917 V=Wh2 /2 +R5 .. - , . ' . .•.• I = 214.38 psi base shear : fv= " / bjd' '. •. , shear stress - ' Reinforcement •. . , fv = ' 3.8 psi <Fv' OK ' .' - l = 0.002 db Is + 12db 17.5 in ,: development length Is = M / As d ' tensile reinforcing stress- Is = ' 11497. psi, - 4s '< Fs OK - Horizontal steel • . ' A .0007A9 #4 @24 - fa = (P + Wwaii) / A0. axial compressive stress -: = 0.0431 in2 < 0.098 in2. OK - fa' - 20 psi <Fa OK • - S , - - fm = (2/kj) (M / bd2) bending compressive stress ;Unity check fm = 148 psi <Fb OK fa ,/ Fa + lm / Fb = 0.70L <1 OK STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS Project: Galliher Residence . . . . . . Date 1/25/01 Masonry wáH footing 4'-0"retaining stem wall . Design parameters Properties . .: t 7.625 in wall stem thickness soil density ' w = 120 pcf a = 18 in footing toe. dimension . allowable soil bearing q . 1000 psf b = 4 in footingheel din'iension' . active soil pressure w = 35 pcf . L = 2.47 ft overall footing width . . passive soil pressure qp = 350 pcf. dttg = 12 in footing depth saturation . • 15.00 % Wng = 370 plf footing weight friction coefficient = :0,50 Si = 0.50 ft . soil above toe Concrete • f'c = 2500 psi.., S2 = 350 ft soil above heel w = 150 pcf = 5.00 ft., overall soil height. . . . . . .., . dK = 6 in key depth . . . . . . • tK = ... '6 in key width . . . . : •.. ......... . . . . wt (Ibs) rm Overturning'stability' . . Soil on heel 140 : X 2.30 322 M0 = w(h' + dng)3 / 6 Soil on toe 90 X 0.75 68 = 1260 ft-lbs . overturning moment Wall stem ' 445 X . 1.82 .809 Footing .370 X 1.23 457 MR = 2034 ft-lbs resisting moment Key 38 X 0 82 31 Axial DL 850% 211 X 1.66 348 ' OTSF = 1.61 > 1.5 OK . . . Pv = 1293 lbs IMR = 2034 ft-lbs Soil pressure calculations Sliding ,P Wftg+'Wwaii+Wsoii+Wkey+PTL . , RH= p.(Pv) . . . . . = . 2056 lbs total vertical load . = . . 647 lbs friction reaction .. X (MA M) / Pv . : . . . PH = wh'2/2 +' R . = 0.60 ft <kern d.823 ft (L/3) . . . = . 438 lbs base reaction (sliding) & = U2' x' . •' . . . . . • . . d'= .5 SF (2 (PH-RH) I qp)1/2- ftg = 0.64 ft fooiing eccentrictiy .= 0.00 ft • required key depth',. • . . . Spt = 2P/3X' . toe pressure SLSF = • 2.43 > 1.5 sliding safety factor OK = 2289 psf • .. . . ., .' .•.•. . . . . Sph =. •. heel pressure . Key . . • . 0 psf ,. .• • . Mkey, qp dftg2/2 + qp di<3 /3 . • l75ftlbs . Ps , Spt I3X . soil pressure slope . .. . , . • : . 1275 plf . •. . •,' • . • Asreq= Mkey/FsJd • , 0.032 in2 . j = .9 assumed Mng (Spt - aPs)a2/2 + P5a3i3 . . , • A5 0.230 in2 • . USE # '5 . rebar = .1858 ft-lbs max footing moment . • ". .0.31 in2 @ 16 . in OC AsreqMftg/FsJd . •. = 0.115 j2 . j = .9'assurned . As 0.230 in2 .. USE # 5.' rebar, '0.31.in2 @ . 16 .inOC STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS Project: Galliher Residence ". '. Date 1/25/01 Masonry wall C- restrained stem wall ,' •' Revised Design parameters : Properties .• •.. : . . h = 4.00 ft masonry height ' . masonry .• . I'm = 1500 psi , h1 = 3.50 ft retained soil height . . . . Wm = 140 pcf h2 = 0.00 feet slope surcharge reinforcing Fy = 40 ksi PDL = 248 lbs axial load DL . . .5Fy ' Fs 20 ksi 24 max PTL.= 1152 lbs axial load DL + LL grout' . ::.f' = 2000 psi e = '. 2 in axial eccentricity V= .435 lbs/ft in-plane shear load (Wall line A) atrest soil pressure w= 55 pcf t = 7.625 in. wall stem thickness: . passive soil pressure 350 pcf d= 5.125 in. face to CL reinf'g b = 12 in effective section width . . . Point load surcharge . . . A0 = bd • . . . . = .0 lbs tributary point load . . 61.50 in2 effective area hs 0.00 ft ,. height above.footing. . . . . . .. X .1 ft ' . horiz distance to face r= I/A0)1/2 =d/12lI2 =.289d R5 = 0.6 Ps h52 / x2 h52 . . . . . = 1.479 in radius of gyration = 0 lbs surcharge load (.55P max) Ii' /r = 32.44 <'99 • . = x[ (x2/h52+1)(tan-1 h5/x) - (x/h5)] . . . . . " . . . . ,............. = 0.00 ft depth of surcharge ............. Allowable masonry stresses . R 50% Special inspection reduction factor Calculated moment ' . . No Special lnspection.Req'd M1= .1283 wh 13 /2 +wh2 2 /2 + ePTL . .. . . . . . = 343 ft-lbs bending moment ' . Fa = 0.25 I'm [1 -(h' / 140r)2]R . UBC 2107.2.5 M2 = R (h5 d) • .. = 187 psi compressive stress . = 0 ft-lbs surcharge moment • F = .33-fm R , UBC 2107.2.6 As req = (Mi+M2) /'Fs j d . ' " .• = 248 psi flexural stress (2000 psi max). = 0.045 in2 j = .9 assumed • , . . A5 = 0.b98 in2 USE # •. 4 rebar ' • Fv = 1.0 (I'm)112 R UBC 2107.2.8 0.20 in2 @ • 24 • in OC = 19 psi shear stress (50 psi max) Calculated stresses , Flexure coefficients V= 225 lbs .' :base shear .. . . ' np0.041 EsAs /Embd fv= V/bjd •,•. shearstress . 2/kj=8.770 . = 4.0 psi <Fv OK . . ,, •j = 0.917 fs = M I A5 j d ' tensile reinforcing stess • . Reinforcement. .. . . f= 8927 psi , <FsOK , . . . . • .ld=Q002dbfs+12db . . = 14.9 in development length ía = (P + Wwat) / A9 axial compressive stress ' . . • , . . . .• . . • . ía = .20 psi • <Fa OK . Horizontal steel • .. , ,•.. .. As =..0007 A9 . • # 4 24 fm = (2lkj)(M I bd2) . bending *compressive stress . . • = 0.043 j2 <,0.098 in2 'OK fm = . 115 psi <Fb OK • . Unity check . . falFa+fmIFb 057<1 OK • . . . '• •., , . . . STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS Project: - Galliher Residence . ' Date 1/25/01. Masonry wall footing restrained stem wall '. . . . Design parameters ' Properties . = 7.625 in wall stem thickness soil denity = Ws 120 pcf a = 4' in footing toe dimension allowable soil bearing q = 1500 psf. 4 in footing heldimension -• at rest soil pressure w = . 55' pcf dng = 18 in footing depth I passive soil pressure qp = '350'06f . ': S1 = 0.50 ft '.' soil above toe ' saturation . . ' 15.00 % S2 = 3.00 ft ' soil above heel , . ' • • friction coefficient = 0.50 Aftg ' 1.30 Sf footing area per wall ft ' • concrete - Ic = 2500 psi' Wng = . 195 plf footing weight . '-' .: " wc = 150 pcf dK= 0 in ,key depth • ' • , . - tK = ' 0 in , key width ' ' -. , - h' 3.00 ft ' overall soil height , -, .' Soil pressure-calculations' • ' .. .• • - . , . . , •, , • - ..WTL = Wftg + Wii + W ojj'+Wke + PIL ' . . . . • : .' • • , .• . " - = 1823 lbs total vertical load PA "= -WTL / Aftg soil pressure = 1400 psf. OK < 1500 psf , RH = P (WTL PLL) = 460 lbs 'friction reaction', . . . ,• •. , • ' • • ., PH = wh'2/3 + R(d/h) - RH , •' ' . . ' ' - = -295 lbs - base reaction (sliding) • . ' - ' ' - ' .. - . - •, I - AK (2PH /.q)i/2 dftg', • ' .. ' -• .0.00 ft - , required key depth. PH wh 2/6 + R5[(hd/h)] 83 lbs -top reaction (restraining) • ..' -•• -,,.'. ,' STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS •.• • .. - ' • ( ' Project: Galliher Residence .. ' •- Date' . 1/25/01' Headers Modifiers 4 V( max) = Fv bd /1.5 Shear limit Cd duration factor - .= I wv =,2,V./ L Maximum EUL @ shear limit Cm '= wet service factor M(,) = Fb x S Bending limit v Ch.';-'shear stress factor' wb = 8 M I L2 Maximum EUL @ bending limit Ct = temperature factor =4L / 360 Deflection limit Cf = form factor w = 384EIE I 5L4 Maximum EUL © deflection limit Cr = repetitive use Span= 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 ft : auov = 'O.07' 0.13 •'0.20 0.27 ; 0.33 0.40 0.47 0.53 0.60 0.67 '073 0.80 in - .. ,,- 4x6#2DFIL .. b = 3.50 in Adj. Values Cd Cm Ct Ch - Cf, 'Cr -Base values d- 5'50 in F = 95 ' 1 00 1.00,1.00,1.06-, '95 psi • .'• . .A= . 19.3 j2 ' Fb= .1138 1.00 ,. 1.00 1.00 13190 '875 psi ... S = 17 6 in3 F1 ='688 1.00 1.00, -- 110 625 psi = 48.5 in4 'Ft = 748 1 00 1.00 ' L 1 30 575 psi , 'i V(max) l2l9lbs. '' E=-16 • .1O0,1OO *• 16l4si M(max) = 1673 ft-lbs bearing = 117 in2 single trimmer OK , • ." Span 2. 4. 6 8 10 12 14 16. .18 .20 22 24 ft = 219 610 Wb 1w - P-11 F1 37 10 #/ft mEN/1, 4x8#2.DF/L ' ' .-. •• ' l ' .-. b = 3 50 in . Adj. Values Cd Cm Ct Ch C Cr Base values . d 7.25 in .. •. F.95c.1.00 1.00. i.00'.i.00, ' . 95 psi .. . A= 254 in2 - Fb= 1138 100 1.00 100 ---'.1.30 100 875'psi 30:71na. Fi=656 ' i:oo ' 1.00.' .1.05 •.625.psi'',','.. . 1= 1111 in4 Ft= 690 100 100 120 575 psi 1607 lbs. ,.Ymax) E=i.6 • •,, 1.00 1.00, .. 1.6Mpsi ., M(max) = 2906 ft-lbs bearing = 2.45 in2 single tnmmer OK 'Span 2 '4 '. 6•.- 8' .1.2 .10 14 16 •18." 20 22 .24 ft ,'. 'Wj 1607 , -,,i r • #Ift. 1,52 96 4 4x10#2DF/L '. , b = 3.50 in Adj. Values Cd C Ct Ch Cf Cr Base values d= .'9.25in -' F=95 'IMO.-i.00, 1.00.1:00 •. '95 P's i ' A= 324 in2 Fb= 10501 100 100 100 120 100 875 psi S=' .49.9 in3 ' FI= 625 tOO, -1.00 . ' i:oo . .625 psi , . • I = 230 8, in4 Ft = 633 1.00 .1 " 110 575 psi .00 V(max) = .2050 lbs E='1.6 1.00 1.00 -•-• 1.6 Mpsk • . M(m) = 4367 ft-lbs " bearing,- 3.2& in2 single trimmer OK 4 -. - • - - Span 2 '4 6 -8 - 10 12. 14 "16 .18 :20 22 24 - ft 134 94 68j,,fg4#/ft STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS r • - ', S ,• - S - - 4 - ..• ',. Project: Gâlliher Résidénce . '- -':--'" Date 1/25/01 .5 5 -. . _:-.-. • Headers .•_.._,- '.5 - .5 . ''5 Modifiers "V(max) =F bd I 1.5 Shear limit Cd = duration factor _ W = 2 V / L Maximum EUL c shear limit Cm = wet service factor, - = Fb x S Bending limit Ch = shear stress factor wb = 8 M / L2 Maximum EUL,,@ bending limit Ct = temperature factor Al= ;L I 360 Deflection limit - ' Cf = form factor - w . 384EIi'/ 5L4 Maximum EUL deflection limit Cr = repetitive use Span= 2 4 6, 8, 10 12 14, 16 18 20 22 24 ft Max defl -' 007 0.13i ,0.20' 0.27- 0.33 0.40 .0.47 0.53 0.60 0.67. 0.73 0.80 in 4x12#1DF/L b = 3'56 in Adj. Values Cd Cm Ct Ch df Cr Base values 11'-25.in''S - F= 95' 1:00 100 "1.00' 1.00 ' 95 S A= 394 in2 Fb= 1100 100 100 ,** 1.00 100 1100 psi S = 73 8 in3 F1 = 625 1 00 1 OO ** -- --' 625 psi - I = 415 3 in4 Ft = 675 1 00 1 00 675 psi V(max) 2494 lbs E = 1.7' 1'00. 1.00 -- -'-' --- 1.7 Mpsi M(rnax)=-6768ft-lbs ' ' - 4 ., bearing = -3.99 in2 " • Span 2 : ,4 6 - 8 .. 10 12 14. 16 ''18 :20 22 24 ft ' -' wV 2494,1247 831 623 Wb = 376 276 211 167 '#/ft = 131 6 x 8 #1 DF/L b = 5.50 in Adj Values Cd Cm Ct Ch, Cf Cr Base values d= 725 in F= 85 1.00.1,.00 100 100 85 psi A= :399,1 2 . .' '• Fb= 1300 1.00 .1.00 1.00 1.00' 1300 psi S= 482 In3 FL= 625 1.00. 100 625 psi = 174.7 in4 Ft = 675 1.'00 1'.00 675 psi V(m) = 2260 lbs ,. E = 1 6 ,i 00 -1.00,-- -'-' '5 1.6 Mpsi M(rna)522O-ft-lb- 5' ' .. .;•. ' -: ' -' bearing =, 3.62 in2- Span 2 4 .- 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 ft 610#1 DFIL f - I --' - . b= 5.50.W Adj.Values' C, 'Cm ''Ct' Ch. Cf C Base vlUes -d= -- 9.25 in :, 85'; 1.00 .1.00 1.00' 1.00 : -- , 85, psi A= 509 in2 Fb= 1300 100k 100 -- -' 100 100 1300 psi S = 78 .4, in3 FJ. = 625 .1 .00 1.00 -- -- 625 psi 1= 362.71n4 .. -Ft675. - '1.00 1.00 ** 675.psi V(max) = 2883 lbs E = 1.6 1.00 ... 00 1 6 Mpsi M(maX) 8497 ft-lbs bearing = - 4.61 in2 'Span 2 4 6 8 .10 12 14 16, 18 'S 20 22 24 ft Galliher Residence floor beam © bed -3 FB-1 . Date: 2/03/01 BeamChek 2.0 Choice 5-114x 14 2.OE WS TJM PARALLAM® PSL BASE Fb 2900 ANFb = 2851, Conditions Min Bearing Area R1= 4.3 in R2= 4.3 in2 DL Defi 0.20 in Data Attributes Actual Critical - Status Ratio Values Adjustments BeamChek has automatically added the beam self-weight into the calculations. Loads Uniform TL: 50=A Uniform LL' 40. • . V Point LL Point TL.T Distance Par UnifTL Start End 800 B=1829 8.0 . • H=128 01 16.0 256 C =560 . 8.0 .•.- • - - V V - V V., . • -- . ., - - 3M • . . V . I . Uniform LoadA .....;--'--"' .- Pt loads RI = 2802 ;.-LcR2=2802 • • ..::1. ' - - SPAN .I6 FTJ '-- . '_•1. r Uniform and partial uniform 10ads'are lbs per lineal ft. fl '.- '1 ,. • --'-'..: •-•-.•l•••,. V••• • • -. ,• -, * - ¶. i o i -, "V •4 . .•- - I -v ..,*' ••'• '•( 1'• 4 •V*•• 1;;,fV 'V.- • • V • • :t V • •• V • • Galliher Residence floor beam @ Bed -2 " FB-2 ' '. .,Date: 2/03/01 BeamChek 2.0 • -, __1. - - . Choice I.5-1I4x 14 2.OE Ws TJM.PARALLAM® PSL BASE Fb = 2900 ADJ Fb = 2851 Conditions.' Mm Bearing Area ,, RI= 4.4 in R2= 4,4 in DL Defi- 0.20 in . -• Data BeamSpan 16.0 ft Reaction I 2839# Reaction 1.LL 864 # ,- BeanWtperft. 22.97#. Reaction . 2839# Reaction 2LL 864# BeamWeiht 368# Maximum 2839# Max Moment 16283 # Max V (Reduced) 2605 # TL Max Dell 1/240 240 TL Actual Defi L/615 * LL Max Dell ' L/360 . LL Actual Defi . L />1 600 -Attributes Section (in3) . Shear (in 2) TL Defi (in). LL Defi . Actual . . 171.50 . 73.50 0.31 0.11 -. . • . . Critical , 68.54. 13.47 ' 0.80 - .. 0.53 Status. OK OK OK . ' OK . Ratio ' 40% 18% 39% 20% Fb (psi) . Fv (psi).. E (psi x mil) Fc± (psi) - . Values Base Values , 2900 290 , 2.0 650 - ''.• Base Adjusted ., 2851 290 2.0 650 Adjustments CF Size Factor 0.98 • Cd Duration . - . - ,• -.. , . . . - Cr Repetitive . . - . . -- -.. - , . Ch Shear Stress Cm Wet Use -- BeamChek has automatically added the beam self-weight into the calculations. Loads • • UnifornTL: 50 =A Uniform LL: . 40 -. Point LL • Point TL • Distance • Par Unif TL • Start End 832 B=1903 • 8.0 . H=128 0 16.0 ...,. • 256 - t - C = 560 8.0 • •-- ,. - • - '.• - - • • . • .:_ - •, - • a q ' •- ' • '' I - Uniform LoadA • , , I Ptloads I ' -, •,. --- :-- - • - . - L~ -. R1=2839 . . - •1 - .'•••, ---4 - - — R2=2839' - - SPAN- I6FT - ,- . -. .. '- •;-,-:--'. - , Uniform and partial uniform loads are lbs per lineal ft.' aJ*1 4* r —. - • . ••. - A- • - •.•*,_4..t •-4. *' - I • - .' ,•• •. - • •-.-- - • •. I, -•--•1 ......... • 2 •. - • -. • . - - • a- .. , • ..'., , . ••• •,_ - . -' -•' - •-' ; - .. •';:- • ,, •-- ' £ (. , ' , - a 4 - ,• H •••" •' 4 ' 2 - • • ' f"- \ - - 1* - a • •.- - -, -. • . - • . '4 4 . .. • •-'-4''.• -,•. •- • '1 • . , - t.•• -.4* - - • 2' - - - - .. • - •- - , • - , ,- . - a _ •, _•• •,• r ' ' _ • . I - - • - .: '- - - - -• . • - S GaIIihe Residence S floor beam © Bed-2 - - FB 3 Date 2/03/01 BeamChek 2.0 Choice 7x 11.7/8 2.0E WS TJM PARALLAM® PSL BASE Fb 2900 ADJ Fb 2903 * Conditions ..• - . Min Bearina Area R1= 4.4 In2 R2=4.4in2 DL Defi 0.25 in I 4. ,- 4. - Galliher Residence floor beam @ Landing FB-4 Date 2/03/01 BearnChek2.0 bho,ce ,[3-1/U .11-716 2 OE WS TJM PARALLAM® PSL BASE Fb = 2900 ADJ Fb 2903 Conditiohs -, Mm Bearing Area RI*= 4.3- , in2 R2= 4.3 in DLDefl 0 05 In Data Beam Span 12 0 ft Reaction l- 2776A Reaction I LL 2160 # .. BeamWt per ft 1299# Reaction 2778# Reaction 2LL 2160# Beam Weight 156 # Maximum V 2778 # Max Moment 8334W Max V (Reduced) 2320 # TL Max Def( L / 240 TL Actual Defi L/652 LL Max Dell 'L / 360 LL Actual Defi L / 839 il .Attributes ", Section (in 3) Shear (in2), TL Defl (in)-. LL Defi - --• - Actual,-82.26',41.56 0.224i , 0.17 - Critical , 34 44 12 00 060 040 Status, . OK OK OK ' OK Ratio \. 42% 29% j - 37% 43% Fb (psi) ' Fv (psi) E (psi x mu) Fc1 (psi) Values Base Values 2900 290 ;- 2.0 650 ,,•' , -. • Base Adjusted 2903 290 2.0,,- 650 Adjustments CF Size Factor '1.00 .'.,, Cd Duration Cr Repetitive - Ch Shear Stress Wet*Use -,. - — - -- •..-• -.-•-• -• • 4 •__ - -- -., .• -. • ;.- Galliher Residence floor beam @ Bed -4 cbs FB-5 ••d • •. Date:.2/03/O1 BeamChek2O Choice 3-112x114182.OEWSTJMPARALLAM®PSL BASE Fb29OO. ADJFb29O3. I - Conditsors r - - . 4 4 " . ,-'.,...... -..• ,. '' , . .4 - - 1 Galliher Residence - floor beam @ rear deck FB 6 Date 2/03/01 BeamChek 2.0 Choice" 6x12 DFL#1 ' BASEFb= 1350 ADJFb1350 Conditions 91 NDS '4 'Min Bearing Area RI= 3.1 in R2= 3 1'in 2 DL Defi '0.08 In . Data Beam Span 16 0 ft Reaction 1 1923 # Reaction I LL 1440 # Beam Wt per ft 15.37 # Reaction 2 1923# Reaction 2 LL 1440 # • Bem Weight 246 #- Maximum V 'T1923# Max Moment 7692 # Max V (Reduced) 1693,-# TL Max Defi L / 240 TL Actual Defi -L/605 LL Max Defi . L / 360. LL Actual Defi , Li 608- A - '- Attributes 4 ,Actual -. . .4 .4. .. Critical, Status Status I , Ratio 4 BeamChek has. automatically added the beam self-weight into the calculations. ' ' . •'. 4 . S Loads UniformTL: 225 ='A, - , Uniform LL: '.180 •. - . '. . ' 4 ,; , ,.• , . -4 - 4 , ' 4 ,_].•, ' ,. 44 'I"- 1'. .4' * a - 4. .- .4 7 • 4., - . . 7 '4 •.,4 .4 •' ._ . , '4' ,, - •;; " ,. .4,4 '_ 4' - -.. ' - . 4 '4 4' 444 1 • - , 1 , • 4. ., . 1., ' , '• - 4 7 . '•..44 •7. ,4" .4 . . 4' .,, . •-4. , * '4 1 Uniform Load A I 4' R1=1923 - R2=1923 .4 .'.. 4:.SpAN_416 FT. 44 I , 4, - • 4 . -. '4 4 -4 . 4 Uniform and partial uniform loads are lbs per lineal ft .. , -. , - 4.. 7 4, -• . '.4 , 4'.' . . - I • ' - - '1 4. - - 4 • ..4 ;, • .4 . .4 - , . , -'.'. ' ' - - - 4 - ., l• _4' . ' 44_ , . . - , 't•_7' - . - '4 44 - ' .- - ,. - 4 - . •. -- ., . - -., - : - _, - ,'' -. . ''., - 4.'a 44 , •. '4' -(4 , . - - 4'-, , 1 41 '-_ • -' , - -' - ' '4 . 4 -- 4' •147 Attributes -. 'Actual,*, - - Critical-. Status Ratio. - - VaIues Adjustments I - . i '.,4_ .-,• --- , . . .5 1 - '0 •- '• 1'' •'' -- . 1 Galliher Residence . floor beam © reardéck (diàg) FB-7.: ', 1. Date: 2/03/01 BeamChek2.0 • Choide I4x105DF-L#2 - BASE Fb=875 ADJFb=•1050 Conditions. Increasing Load, '91 NDS ' .Min BearingArea R1=1.01n2 R2=2.01n2 DLDefl 0.05 in Data '-4 a - .• .. a a .. . Galliher ResIdene - 'FLo& beam @ B FB 8 'Date 2/03/01 BeamChek 2.0 Choice, 1-3!4x11-718 1.8EWSTJM.MICRO=LAM®LVL •.,,BAsEFb=2600 . ADJFb26O4- Conditions -: Min BearinqArea RI=4.31n2. R2=4.3 In DLDéfl 0.06 in 4 V. I.., u.ua I. V Critical 27.65 112.40. Status OK . OK OK -. ,OK . . Ratio- .67% 60% 35% Fb(psi). Fv(psi) E(psi xmil) Fc±(psi) . Values Base Values 2600 285 1.9 750 Base Adjusted . 2604 . 285 1.9 750 Adiustrnents CF Size Factor .....too - .,-, . - Cd Duration . . Cr Repetitive - Ch Shear Stress. .. .- •0 - ...... ...... 0 :: Cm Wet Use, .4 . . ..... ., BeamChek has automatically added the beam self weight into the calculations Loads Uniform TL 400 A Uniform LL 320 -. . T - . . • Par Unif LL Par Unif TL Start * End 7 - . • . -- .; . 60 • . H =75. .. 0 .75 :- 0 =128 0 7.5 • • . 112 •- J245 - -. 0 . 7.5k . ,0 0I . 0 ••0 4 o 0 - 0 - ......._ . .. - '- 0 - - . - .4 00• 4 ,0 . • 0, - • . 0 . . : . . - •0 -.4 -. : - - . . . . - • . . . . 0 - - • ': . - 0 • . . 0 H • . .- - Uniform Load A .. - 0 . . . • 0 . - 0 -. • . 0 . a- 0 0 4 . . ... .= 3200 . - . :. . , R2= 3200 p • - SPAN = 7.5 FT Uniform and ,artial uniform loads re lbs per linal ft. 0 0 0 9'. 0• ,p•4 .4 0 . 0 • . -• . 40* - ,1 • . 4;, -. . A - - 4-,. - . 4 ., - a .' 0 • .4 - .4 . . -. ,. 0 • 0 *0 00 . .4 ,. * 4, 0 .4•' 0 ,_., •_ . - ' 40 - . 0 * - - 4 - . . ,- - k q. • 4 0 1 0 , - - . ' 4_ 4 -.. . . 7,, . . 4 .4 - 0 9 4,•t 9 1 - t o • -, - ' A 0.. " - :' - -• 4 - - • 0 . I. * • -- 4 ° • 0 -. , ' '9'' - , - ° - 4 ...i .. .. ., -.. • -. - _f 1 _.- • ,• 4 I •, '..'.#$ * , : - ' ' .. ., '- .4. I w. Galliher Residence . Girder @ crawispace '- G-2 Data 2/03101 BeamChek 2.0 Choice 3-1/2x 9-1/2 2.01E WS TJM PARALLAM® PSL BASE Fb 2900 ADJ Fb = 2976 'Conditions. •, - . * - .• . . .MinBearingArea RI- 2.5 in2 R2= 2.5 in DL Defi 0.04 in DatJ Beam Span jO 5 ft Reaction T, 1630# Reaction I LL 1260# r , :-- -, --•- Beam Wtperft.4 . 10.39# 'Reaction 2. 1630# -Reaction 2 LL- ' .1260# Beam Weight , 109 # Maximum V 1630# Max Moment 4278 # Max V (Reduced) A.384 # TL MaxDefl . L-/240 TL Actual Defi L/744 . : -- . - LL Ma Defi L/ 360 LL Actual Defl' -' L/962 . 4 * Attributes -, "i Section Shear (in 2) TL Defi (in) LL Defi . . .. Actual' '. . 52.65 -. 33.25 •. 0.17 • 0.13 . • 'Critical' '17.25 . . 7.16 0.52. - 035 Status OK . . OK ', OK' OK ' • . . . Ratio 33% 22% 32% - 37% - Fb (psi) Fv (psi) E (psi x mil). .' FcJ. (psi) . : Values :, Base Values' •, ' 2900 290 .' 2.0 . 650, BaseAdjusted . '2976 - 290 - - 2.0 " , 650 Adjustments CF Size Factor' :,I.03 .- . ' . . ' . ' .• .4 . . . Cd, Duration. . . • '• Cr Repetitive . - a._ . 44 - Ch,Shear Stress 44 ' ' - . 44 I..• - * . •. , • . . , Cm Wet Use - ' .. . BeamChek has automatically iddied the beam self-weiht into the ca1cu1atións 4 4 f Loads Uniform TL: 300 =A Uniform LL:.' 240' '4 . - ' . . . -44• . , 4 - 4 ' ; 4. 4- . . -. . ' -4 4 . .ç • -. '., I , '4 . . .4 4 '4 _,•-1 . .-. . 4: I - Uniform Load A I 4.., 44 . '- - 4 ' . . ', '': ,• - . - "4 4 - ••• . , .,•.. Ri = 1630 . .-.' • . -.'- 'I) R2 1630 • . • ••• ' - 'SPAN =IO5FT t) .. 'b, - -• Uniform and .. - S - , -* - partial uniform loads are lbs per lineal ft , ,•' .- '"b :. - S - , ' '•-. .', , • - .-,' ._* 7 . '"' - " - . -- ' '- 1 ., 4 4- 44 44 .• . - . - - , .. . .- - . . - • . . - •• —4 5. -4, 4 - * - - 4 ,4 44 44 4. .44 44 1 - • . - 4 • 4-4., ,, 4•• '44 •. . - - 1' , -• . :• - - * -. I. • 4 4 * L - . . . . • . Galiher Residence Girder @ garage G-3 - '.' • . '. Date: 2/03/01 BeamChek2.0 Choice - 8-314x 18 GLB 24F-V4 DFIDF BASE Fb = 2400 - ADJ Fb = 2241 -- • Conditions.' • • - - - - Min Bearing Area RI=31.9in2 R2=31.9in2. DL Defi -0.l8in Suqqested Camber 0.27 in • ) d • Attributes Actual Critical * Status Ratio- - .,. -- . .. . .,.. .-.' ,. - - . - .-• .4 -, Galliher Residence' Header '@ family room ' Hi-I • : .. Date: 2/03/01 BeamChek2.0 . - • Choice , 6x 10 DF-L #1 BASE Fb = 1350 AN Fb = 1350 Conditions 91 NDS ActuaL Criticà! Status Ratio -: Va!ue Adjustments -:- 1 VV .5 Galliher Residence,HiNalIey#1 HV 1 - Date 2/03/01 BeamChek 2.0.1 Choice 6x 12 DF-L#1 •. ,- . BASE Fb = 1350 ADJ Fb =13 Conditions Increasing Load 91 NDS - 4. i-wriuuws ecuon I1V) :near lfl) IL ueii c,Ifl) LL ueii . Actual 12123 6325 050 .021 Critical - 75.65 34.34 . , 0.95 0.64 Status OK ,-.. OK T OK OK 5. V Ratio 62% 54%. 52% , -33% Fb (psi) . Fv (psi) E (iisix mil) Fci. (psi) Values . Base Values 1350, ' 85 -' .1.6 625 Base Adjusted 1350 85 - 1.6 . - 625 .. V Adjufmenfs CF Size Factor 1.00 Cd Duration . . . . . . . . Cr Repetitive - V - Ch Shear Stress CmWetUse - BeamChek.has automatically added the beam setf;weight into the calculations. ' I 5 .- 54?• 5 V• - - V .• !V 5, 4 I- V • S ,..VI. V Loads Increasing TL = 3189 Increasing LL = 1458 - 4 'a ' 'VV 4• V V ,-: .- V 4 - 5. 5-- V V -. S . • V• VV V V • - , V V S. 4 -. V -' 4 V V. 5_V - • V V S V a V Ri = 1210 2273 V SPAN =19 09 FT The Increasing toad is total poUnds V 5*- 4 ,4 - V • on the beam. Beam weight and any uniform load is PLF.V _ .5* - V - -S V V .1 -V * V •. V V . . .5 - . i-S V 'a 4 V V5 V Galliher Residence HipNalley #2 . . HV-2 ' . .' . Date: 2/03/0 BeamChek 2.0 Choice .4x 10 DF-L#2 . - . .• . BASE Fb=875 -ADJ Fb= 1050 Conditions Increasing Load, 9,1 NDS. ''. .. Min Bealing Area RI= 0.9 in R2= 1.8 in DL Defi 0.15 in Data Beam Span , 13.44 ft Reaction 1 —. 579# Reaction ILL 241# Beam,Wt per ft 7.87# Reaction 2 1106# Reaction2LL .481 # - Beam Weight 106# -MaximumV .' 1106# Max Moment 2902A Max V (Reduced) 924 # TLMaxDefl - . L/240 TL Actual Defi ' L1632 LLMáX Defl' •. L/360 LL Actual Defi L/>.1000 . .' . . . . . Attributes , Section (in 3) Shear (in 2) TL Defi (in) . LL Défi :- Actual ' 49.91 ,- 32.38 . 0.26 •. 0.11. 4 .'Critical', . 33.16 . 14.59 ,. . 0.67 - 0.45 . Status OK OK OK OK 4 Ratio .'66% 45% 38% 24% Fb (psi) Fv(si) . E (psix mil) Fc± (psi) Values Base Values 875 95 ' 1.6 . - 625 .- . Base Adjusted 1050 . 95 . .1.6 625 . . .. . . . Adiustmei'its' CF Size-Factor 1.20 Cd Duration Cr Repetitive Ch .Shear Stress. '- ' • S . -4.• . '' f- • . •.5..,,, - • - . ,,-• -CmWetUse.- - . , . .. . . - . • - - -. - • . BeamChek has automatically added the beam self weight into the caIculations - :- • .• '. . .5 ' —, ;.1. 4 . Loads Increasing TL = 1579 Increasing LL 722 • ": :-.'"' :4 • -. 4'..4 •.__ 24.4 ; .42. ,'f4....__ , - * _., 4 4 - I - • . -. - . 42 - - 4 , ' •• • :, '4 - • 4.2 - - • 4 :' • -4 - - 4 . . 4 - • S '.' • .. ..' • •_4_'"_ " , L' ,., ,, . ' - '2 . , - 4 42 4.4 - 42 -. - ,- R1= 579,' ,- • -. b-.. R2=1106 SPAN' =1344FT The Increasing load is total pounds orthe beam Beam weight and any uniform load is PLF I '4 4 5 .- . " .- . 'S.. '* '' 's. , 4 . 4•5 I'4 " • 5.. ''4 .• • - - 9 4 — '_ -• -, _5 •4 2' . - - 4 . - . • ,• 5 - .- • 5 5 - . •. • 5, . .. 9 - . 'S '.. , . . - - • . 4. - • 4 5 . , _425 ' ,_ .. I ' . - . . . - S •' 5 -. , - ..4.. -. ••. . -- . - . .- 44, ' * •.•' . S - - - 4 ' - .... . . - S - _'• Galliher Residence Ridge beam @ Bed -3 Ol RB-I - - - - Date - 2/03/01 BeamChek 2.0 choice • 6x 10 DF-L#I .. • BASE Fb= 1350 ADJ Fb= 1350 Cnditions '91 NDS • ••• • - . Min Bearing Area 'RI= 2.9 in2 R2= 2.9 in DL Defi 0.14 in • 0 I t + I * - : -- .--• Gafliher Residence Ridge beam @ Bed -2,,, RB 2 Date 2/03/01 BeamChek 2.0 L. Choice. 6x10 DF-L#1 . BASEFb=1350 ADJFb=-135O I Conditions 91 NDS I 0 Min Bearing Area R1=301n2 R2=3.0in2DLDefl0.17in -, Attributes I Actual Critical - • Status - -. Ratio:: ; - Vailies Adjustments - I . . -, 4 4 .- -•. I - . • -- I -• . ..'k_ I- Galliher Residence Ridge beam @ Bed-4 RB 3 1 Date 2/03/01 BeamChek 2:0 - Choice - 61O DFL#1 - . - BASE Fb135O - ADJFb=1350 H Conditions 91 NDS '77........ KAir Pionrinei Araci P1 fl in2 P)= qn in2 fli flfl fl ii in -I- Attributes Section (in3). Shear (in 2) TL Defl(iri) I LL Defi Actual 16706 7425 0.46, 020 Critical 12786 4872 090 060 Status OK OK OK OK Ratio 77% 66% 51% 33% Fb (psi) Fv (psi) . E (psi x mu) Fc..L (psi) Values Base Values 1350 85 1 6 625 '. Base Adjusted. 1332 85. 1.6 625 . . Adjustments CF Size Factor 0.99 Cd Duration Cr Repetitive • Ch Shear Stress Cm Wet Use BeamChek has automatically added the beam self weight into the calculations 1 Loads Uniform TL 333 = A Uniform LL 152 . . - tt S - I -. -. :. ., 4I . + 9. I Uniform Load A I I I I" R1=3155 R2=3155 9 SPAN =18FT Uniform and partial uniform loads are lbs per lineal ft .. • 2• -, -_t - - _.9 +1 1 t 'I .• . . .... 9 9 I,. 19 4 1 BOISE CASCADE. BC CALCTm 2000b DESIGN REPORT - US Thursday, February 15,200110:42 Single - 11 7/8" BCI 400 ?me Galliher BCC Job Name - Galliher Residence Customer Gary Daugherty Architect Address,. - qD Managua Place ,: Specifier - - Designer .CEJáckson . - City, State, Zip Carlsbad, CA Company: - Consultant Code'Reorts - 'ICBO 4665, NER 446 Misc: - Member Diagram . 'ZNQ PtaL JD/,T Vez.. Ii iZAj 67 lbs LL 628 lbs LL " 791 lbs LL 310 lbs LL 151 lbs DL 1306-00 870lisDL 05-06-00 24lbsDL 144)0-00 126 lbs; pL - 0 ' . •, Total Horizontal Length - 33-00-00 Version: US Imperial' ID Description Load Type •. Ref. Start End .' LiveDead OCS Dür. S Standard Unf.Area Load Left 0040-00 3340-00 0 PSF 5 PSF 16" 100 Member Type: - Joist I Upper and Lower roof trib Conc.Pt. Load Left 09-06-00 '09-06-00 213 lbs 466 lbs n/a 115 Number of Spans - 3 . 2 . Exterior wall ©2nd floor Conc.Pt. Load Left . 09-06-00 09-06-00 01bs 171 lbs nla ' 90 Left Cantilever - No 3 2nd floor load-, Unf.Area Load Right 00-00-00 .,23-06-00 ' 40 PSF 10 PSF 16" 100 Right Cantilever - No - . ,• Controls Summary Slope ,'. 0/12 ' Control Type 'Value % Allowable Duration Loadcase Span Location CC, Spacing , 16"' Moment 1792 ft-lbs 52.5% @115%- 6 . 1-Right Repetitive Yes. End Reaction 429 lbs. , 45.1%, @ 100% 2 3-Right Construction Type Glued ' mt. Reaction 1498 lbs 59.2% @ 115% 6 . I - Right Cont. Shear . 1003 lbs ' ' 53.7% - @115%' 6 1-Right Live Load: 0 PSF Total Deflection L1886 (0.183") 27.1% . " 4 1 Dead Load 5 PSF Live Deflection L/1555 (0108) 231% 4 3 Part Load 0 PSF Total Neg. Defi. -0.049" 9.8% ' , 4 . ' 2 Duration . 100 Span/Depth 14.1 '' 3 Disclosure The completeness and accuracy of NOTES: the input must be verified by anyone Design meets COde minimum (Lt240) Total load deflection criteria. . who would rely on the output as Design 'meets Code minimum (L/360) Live load deflection criteria; - evidence of suitability for a particular Minimum End bearing length is 1-3/4!.' application., The output above is , Minimum In bearing length is 3-112°. based upon building code-accepted ,, .- ' . '• .. design properties and analysis methods. Installation of Boise Cascade engineered wood products must be in accordance with the current Installation Guide and the applicable building codes. TO obtain an Installation Guide or if you have any questions, please call (800)232-0788 before beginning product installation. I -4- Page lofi 2231IbsLL 1106 bs DL * 12-00-00 Total Horizontal Length - 254)6-00 13-06-00 4" $ BOISE CASCADE - BC CALCrm 2000b DESIGN REPORT- US Thursday, February 15,200111:24 - % Single - 11 7/8" BCI 450 ?me Untitled ) Job Name - Galliher Residence Customer - Gary Daugherty Architect - Address - ' Managua Place Specifier - - " ., Designer - CE Jackson City State Zip Caisbad CA Company Consultant Code Reports - ICBO 4665, NER 446 Misc: - Member Diagram /',i j? i0/5T Ne 6r General Data Load Summary - - Version: US Imperial ID Description Load Type Ret.' Start End Live Dead OCS Dur. S Standard Unf Area Load Left 00-00-00 25-06-00 40 PSF 10 PSF 16 100 Member Type: - Joist 1 Joist /wall load from 2nd Conc.Pt. Load Left 13-06-00 13-06-00 628 lbs 870 lbs n/a 100 Number of Spans - 2 2 Joist load 2nd floor (R3) Conc.Lin. Load Left 19-00-00' 19-00-00 791 PLF 24 PLF 16' 100 Left Cantilever - No Right Cantilever - No Controls Summary. Control Type Value. . % Allowable Duration .Loadcase Span Location Slope 0/12 Moment 3400 ft-lbs 97.4% . 100% 5 2- Internal CC Spacing -16"' - End Reaction 740 lbs 72.2% . @ 100% 5 2- Right Repetitive 'es : Int. Reaction 1839 lbs 79.1% @ 100% 2. 2- Left Construction Type Glued Cont. Shear 1201 lbs 73.9% r @ 100% 2 2- Left Uplift -51 lbs 5 1 -Left Live Load 40 PSF Total Deflection L/557 (0,258") 43.1% . 5 2 •, Dead Load . . 10 PSF Live Deflection L1587 (0.245") . 61.3% , 5 2 Part Load 0 PSF Total Neg. Defi. -0.101" . 20.2% . . 5 1 Duration , 100 . Span/Depth 13.6 ; . - 1 Disclosure . CAUTIONS: . The completeness and accuracy of . . Uplift of -51 lbs found at span I - Left. * . the input must be verified by anyone . * Who would rely on the output as, . . evidence of suitability for a particular NOTES• . . application. The output above is' Design meets Code minimum (6240) Total load deflection criteria. based upon building code-accepted Design meets Code minimum (1/360) Live load deflection criteria. . design Proreri7 nd:isis . . nstation of Boise Minimum End bearing length is1-3/4": Cascade engineered wood products . Minimum Intermediate bearing ength Is 3-1 I2," must be in accordance with the current Installation Guide and the applicable building codes. To obtain an Installation Guide or if you have any questions, please call (800)232-0788 before beginning product installation. * - - * Page 1 of 1 BCI® and Versa Lam® are registered trademarks of Boise Cascade Corp ENGINEERING 1525 S. Escondido Blvd. Suite A, Escondido, CA 92025 (760) 741-0533 FAX (760) 741-5794 April 9, 2001 City of Carlsbad Building Department 1635Faradav Ave. I ENGINEERING I & SURVEYING 1525 S. Escondido Blvd. Suite A, Escondido, CA 92025 I (760) 741-0533 FAX (760) 741-5794 January 29, 2001 Chris & Erin Galliher 7017 Via Ostiones . I Carlsbad; CA 92009 I Job No. 4963 . I Re: Managua Place, Carlsbad Lot 30,-Map 8302 Subject: Preliminary Soils Investigation I TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: ' Per the request of the project owner, our firm has conducted a Preliminary Soils Investigation of the soil conditions found, at the above referenced site. This report represents the findings and recommendations for the proposed development based upon the results of this investigation. . I. This investigation consisted of a site geologic reconnaissance and the excavation of several I auger borings to a maximum depth of approximately 8' feet. Laboratory testing was. performed on representative soils samples obtained from these excavations in order to evaluate pertinent physical properties of the soils encountered. The conclusions and recommendationsthat follow are based upon review of the proposed development, I inspection of the site, analysis of the data obtained and our experience with similar soil i 'conditions. • V ' • • I ••••' • IV ' • ' .• I PROJECT SCOPE I Explore the subsurface conditions to the depths influenced ,by the proposed construction Evaluate, by. visual analysis and labortory:test, the pertinent engineering properties of the various strata wliichwill influence the dêvelopment, including their bearing capacities, I expansive characteristics and settlement potential: Develop soil engineering criteria for the site grading and provide design information regarding thesiability.ofciitJfiul slopes. Determine potential construction difficulties and provide recommendations concerning these problems. Recommend an appropriate foundation system for the type of structures anticipated and develop soil engineering design cntena for the recommended design I I : I 1 I. •: Page 2of15 I r THE SITE I . V - V V V V I The site consists of a nearly rectangular shaped residential lot V located within the City of V * Carlsbad. This lot was created as a part of a major subdivisioii,by Carlsbad Tract No. 75- 4, Map 8302. V, V •V V V V V I . V V The parce1 slopes moderately, from the Northeast to the Southwest. The subject lot fronts. : V V V on Managua Place. V The majority of the lot is covered with. native grasses and vegetation V I common to the area. Large, modern single family, residences have been developed in the V V surrounding area. VI V V V V I V The proposed development will consist-of a residence on raised foundation with a lower . level garage utilizing some retaining walls. Site specific plans are not available at this V V I time I I - I V V V V V V V VII V V I I I * I VVVVVV VVVVV . V.VV . '-I I - I t p V V V V Page 3 of 15 V• V V V V V - •V V V •V V FIELD INVESTIGATION In January of 2001, our firm made a field reconnaissance of the site Several 6" diameter borings were made on the site within or near the proposed development area The surface of the lot is irregular and covered with native grasses Numerous dispersed piles of cuttings, vegetation, and some construction debris were noted on the site In all of the excavated borings, the soil profiles were nearly identical The upper 3-31/2 feet of soil consists of reddish-brown clay. The underlying soils consist of a, gray tan silty clay with small pieces of rock intermixed It appears that stockpiles of dirt from other sites have-been dumped on this lot and then leveled out. Representative soil samples were taken from the site and laboratory testing was performed on these soil samples in order to evaluate pertinent physical characteristics so that we might make appropriate development recommendations contained later in this report. These granite soils are considered to be rippable by modern dozers although it is possible that underlying granite rock floaters that require blasting will be encountered as excavation progresses Ground water was not encountered during our investigation and ground water is not expected to be a problem during the grading process The predominant soils anticipated to be encountered during residential lot grading are I considered to be expansive and special design considerations will be necessary to compensate for expansive characteristics Any import soils shall be approved by this I Engineer prior to placement This import soils will need to be laboratory tested prior to issuing any soils design criteria or foundation recommendations Page 4 of 15 I I LABORATORYTESTS I .. ... - Laboratory tsts were performed in accordance with generally accepted test methods of the Amencan Society for Testing 'a id Materials (ASTM) and, id other suggested procedures I The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of the near surface soils were determined in accordance with ASTM test D1557, Method A I Field moisture content and dry density were determined from representative undisturbed. I samples This information was an aid to classification and permitted recognition of .variations in material consistent with depth. The dry unit weight is determined in pounds I per cubic foot, and the field moisture content is determined as a percentage of the soils dry I weight - Field classifications were verified in the laboratory by visual examination The final soils I classifications are in accordance with the Unified Soil Classifications System Direct shear tests were not performed at this time Maximum dry density of the clayey I silty sandy layer. ftund from approximately 3V2- 7W below grade was determined to average 123.5 pcf. 12.7% optimum moisture content I A laboratory expansive analysis of these soils was performed m conformance with UBC 18-2 procedures The resultant of this test was 90, which indicates a high medium to high expansion pàtential. Based uponthe laboratory analysis and experience in the area, I have I made the conclusion that this'material is detnmentally, expansive Special design considerations will be necessary to compensate for expansive soil characteristics', if construction occurs on these soil types I I Page 5of15 - ½ TECTONIC SETTING Along with most of the Southwestern portion of Califoñiia, Carlsbad, San Diego County, and parts of Mexico are located on a relatively stable tectonic plate This plate is bounded on the East by the San Andreas Fault System and on the West by the San Clemente Fault System These faults contain many other parallel faults which are essentially high angle stnkeslip faults with a Northwest/Southeast trend Although the bounding fault systems are active, the interior of the tectonic plate is not generally disturbed by the fault movement Geological references indicate that not much damage will occur from earthquakes of magnitude of less than 6 for sites eight miles or more from the fault Since maximum probable earthquakes for the general San Diego Area is in the known active faults we can infer, that the shaking problem will not be too great Current seismic design criteria as imposed by the U.B.C. should be satisfactory to compensate for seismic action There are no existing landslides, faults or other natural disturbances noted on the site or in the immediate area as determined from air photos, and field inspection This does not preclude the possibility of sliding by poor grading or other man made practices This site can be considered relatively free of geologic hazards. LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL A review of the "Active Fault Near-Source Zones Map" prepared by the California Department of Conservation division of Mines and Geology indicates that there are no mapped type A faults within 15 kilometers and type B faults within 10 kilometers of the subject site In conformance with Tables 16-S and 16-T of the 1997 U B C , the Na factor is 1.0 and the Nv factor is 1.0. The soils classification in conformance with the 1997 Uniform Building Code is SD Page 6ofi5 I * V I Typically, liquefaction requires cohesionless soil deposits, which are loose and exhibit low permeability characteristics combined with the presence of high ground water levelsl During periods of ground shaking, soils that possess these physical characteristics will become very unstable and are not suitable for suppdrt of structures.. I However, this site dues not contain any of those characteristics. Ground water is not concern at this site and founding soils consists of silty clays with fractured rock intermixed, which are considered to be stable ever during periods of earth shaking. This site is considered suitable for the proposed development and liquefaction is not probable I • I .. . I I I V I I. • I •f •. I .. I I 1 . .. .. . Page 7of15 4, I CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS I The folio'ing conclusions and recommendations are based on the results of our dócumenf review, field 'reconnaissance and invéstigatioñs, test borings, laboratory data and engineering analysis; our experience in the general vicinity of the site, and our professional judgments.", . I .• The' site may be utilized for the proposed development provided the recommendations of - this'report are careftully followed. -Properly compacted imported soils should adequately support the proposed structures without detrimental settlement. . ,, • I . Due to the highly expansive nature of the onsite soils which were sampled, it is recommended that the Upper 4' of existing soil be exported from the site. Exact removal I depths and limits to be determined during actual grading. A select iranular non-expansive material shall then be placed and compacted to a minimum of,90% relative compaction. The recommendations presentd in this report are' contingent on review of final plans and: I - specifications. It is recommended that HL Engineering & Surveying, be retained to provide continUoussoil engineering services during the earthwork operations. This is to '1 I - . observe compliance vrith the design concepts, specifications, and recommendations and to allow design changes in the event subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to start of construction GENERAL SITE PREPARATION 4 Rethoval of loose, unsuitable soil will be required before placement of engineered fill in all I ' •" proposed 'fill areas. We recommend that all organic matter, oversize rock, and other deleterious materials be removed from the site. All loose or porous surface soils, and any I • • fill soils not removed by the grading operation, shall be excavated and scarified as required, watered, and compacted prio to placing any additional fill. All existing trees - . . Page .8 of 15 • .. that need to be removed to. grade the site (including root systems) shall be removed from the site. Surface and subsurface water is not expected to be a problem during the construction of the pad embankment. The anticipated depths of surface soils removal in the proposed I . driveway area and residential pad are anticipated to be approximately 3-5 feet in depth.,* The toe key of the. proposed fill shall then be founded a minimum of 2.0 feet into thô underlying formational material. After overexcavation, the exposed surface shall be scarified to a depth of 12 inches, watered as required, and properly compacted prior to placing fill. In-situ scarification can I generally treat the upper 12 inches of soil; otherwise, overexcavation will be necessary. I The actual depth of the excavation and recompaction should be determined in the field by the soil engineer or' his representative during grading, when the soils are exposed. All embankment shall be compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction and all I existing ground within 7.0 feet laterally and to a depth of 1.0 foot below the bottom of foundations shall be compacted to a least 90% relative compaction. Driveway subgrade shall be compacted to at least 95°( relative compaction. Rock over 12 inches in diameter is not considered acceptable as fill, and will have to be removed from the site, or I incorporated with the site landscaping. . I ' Results of our, field explorations indicate that most material within the proposed grading' ' 'depths can be excavated with medium to heavy npping' effort with heavy-duty grading' I . equipment. The efficiency of excavation is dependent upon condition of equipment and capability of the operator. . It is not expected that non-rippable rock will be encountered I , ' during the proposed grading operation; however, if blasting becomes necessary, a separate blasting permit will be required by the-City of Carlsbad. Page 9 of 15 Cut and fill slopes should be provided with appropriate surface drainage features and landscaped with drought tolerant, slope stabilizing vegetation as soon as possible, to minimize potential for erosion. Berms should be provided at the top of all slopes and lot drainage directed such that surface runoff on slope faces is minimized. STABILiTY OF FILL SLOPES AND CUT/FILL SLOPES We recommend that all fill slopes be constructed at slopes ratios of 2:1 (horizontal and vertical) or flatter. Slopes constructed of on-site soils and/or granular soils are considered stable against deep-seated failures and surface sloughing when constructed at slope inclinations no steeper than the recommended 2:1. In addition, we recommend that all fill slopes, or fill portions of cut/fill slopes, be keyed into existing formational materials and benched in accordance with our grading specifications. The importanceof proper compaction of all fill materials out to the slope face cannot be overemphasized. Slopes should be either overfilled and cut back to a compacted finish surface or, the outer surface of the fill slopes should be backrolled utilizing a sheepsfoot roller (at intervals not exceeding 4 feet in vertical height during placement) or grid rolled with standard grid rolling equipment. Continuing grading inspection will be required during the site grading and construction of the cribwall. Permanent slope maintenance programs should be initiated immediately after the compaction of slope construction in order to minimize future surfacial sloughing. Until landscaping is filly established, plastic sheeting and installation materials should be kept accessible to protect the slopes from periods of prolonged and/or heavy rainfall. Slope maintenance should include proper care of erosion and drainage control devices, rodent control, and immediate planting with deep-rooted, light-weight, drought-resistant vegetation. Experience has shown that slope performance is largely dependent upon Page 10 of 15 proper slope maintenance (planting, maintaining a uniform moisture content, clearing of I drainage devices, etc.). Slopes which are properly planted and conscientiously maintained are not expected to exhibit significant raveling or sloughing. I, DRAINAGE We recommend that measures be taken to properly finish grade the site after structures and other improvements are completed so that positive drainage away from all floor slabs and foundations exist. Even when proper drainage measures have been taken, experience I has shown that a shallow groundwater or surface water condition may develop in areas - , where no such water condition existed prior to site development. This is particularly true when substantial increase in surface water infiltration results from landscape irrigation. We recommend that surface drainage be designed to have a minimum two percent slope I away from buildings and that all drainage water are collected and directed to discharge I structures via properly designed surface swales, ditches or subsurface conduits. Installation of roof gutters and downspouts are recommended on any planned building, I with all discharge being properly routed away from foundations and slabs, preferably into underground conduits. FOUNDATIONS Two requirements must be fulfilled by any foundation soil material. First, it should be safe I ' against shear failure of the foundation soils which would, result in lateral movement of soil under the load. Second, foundation settlement or heave should be within acceptable limits I for, the structure. It is our opinion that the type of structures proposed for future site development can be supported on conventional, isolated or continuous footings. The foundation design criteria provided herein are based, on guidelines provided by the Federal Housing 'Authority, (FHA) and the Los Angeles District Portland Cement - Association (PCA). Specifically, these' guidelines are intended to lessen the adverse Page 11 of 15 I - :"affects of expansive and/or compressible soils. They do not stop differential movement I . since str ctures may move in response to variation in soil moisture. These movements can and do cause some cracking of exterior stucco, concrete foundations and slab-on-grade ' I . floors. The design guidelines developed by the FHA and PCA were intended to provide foundation systems that limit cracking and other strain features to generally acceptable I ,levels. Attempts to reduce strain features below these generally acceptable levels require -. engineering and construction 'costs typically considered inappropriate for residntial construction. If should be noted that implementation of the foundation recommendations contained herein can be expected to 'result in some minor cracking of slabs, footings' and I. * walls, which should be considered the normal 'result of a necessary balance between benefits and costs. Minorcracking does not affect the serviceability of structure and is I 'generally considered acceptable. PRELIMINARY FOOTING DESIGN ' I We recommend that footing for fight to medium-weight structures be founded in properly compacted non-expansive fill soils or formational materials. I ' Minimum foundation for .a single story structure shall be 15 iiiches wide and founded 18 inchei below grade- and shall have four #4 bars of reinforcing steel. Two bars shall be I 'placed 4 inches below the, top of foundation, and the other two bars shall be placed 4 -. inches from the bottom of foundation. These recommendations are based upon soil p charactenstics only and do not reflect any possible design considerations imposed by 'building design which might increase these recommendations. The proposed foundations I may be designed utilizing an allowable bearing pressure of 1500 L.B./S.F. This value may be increased by 1/3 for the design of loads that include wind and seismic analysis. Slab on I grade shall be 'iifl with #3 bar reinforcement placed on 18 inch centers both 5 directions. This reinforcing-'shall be placed midway in the slab. All foundations shall maintain 10 feet of lateral support to any fill slope face, measured from the bottom of the foundation. - The, above foundation requirements are for a single story structure. In the Pige 12 of 15 I I event a two story is proposed, the minimum foundation depth shall be increased to 24 1 inches I ANTICIPATED PERFORMANCE OF STRUCTURES LOCATED ON FILLS AND CUT/FILL LOTS I It has been our experience that structures constructed on fills with variable thickness and I cut/fill lots are subjected to adjustments of the fill mass throughout the life of the structure Such fill adjustments may produce an array of strain features in the structure I In addition, construction practices, by themselves, may also produce various strain features A description of typical strain features that could occur, are presented in I Appendix E. I LATERAL RESISTANCE - - 4 To provide resistance for design lateral loads of footmgs and shear keys poured neat against vertical, excavations, we recommend using a passive pressure of 350 pounds per cubic foot for properly compacted granular- fill. This value assumes a horizontal surface for the footing or three time the height of the surface generating the passive pressure, whichever is greater. The upper 12 inches of soil in areas Lnot protected by floor slabs or pavements should not be included in design for passive resistance to lateral loads If friction is to be used to resist lateral loads, we recommend a coefficient of friction of 0.50 between soil and concrete I ACTIVE WALL PRESSURES I We recommend that any proposed retaining walls that are unrestrained at the to and free to deflect, be designed for an active equivalent fluid pressureof 40 pounds per cubic foot I This assumes the soil behind the retaining wall will consist of compacted, non-expansive, granular soils This also assumes level backfill conditions and that no surcharge loads I I J, Page - i I Pagel3of15 - 4 - I. . exist. For walls with a sloping backfill of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical), we recommend an active equivalent fluid pressure of 55 pcf. 1 We recommend that a positive, drainage system be incorporated into the design of retaining walls or, alternately, that walls be designed for hydrostatic pressure. Additional or final recommendations will be made and contained in the final "As Graded Report" - -. when a-more complete evaluation of foundation soils can be'made. APPURTENANT STRUCTURES I . 4 - .- Construction of any, proposed appurtenant structures such as pools, spas, walls, gazebos,' decks, etc., should be reviewed by the Engneer in order-to verify surface and subsurface conditions and provide necessary recommendations. I WARRANTY AND LIMITATIONS I . '... .4 ... I The recommendations an m d opinions expressed this report reflect our best estimate of the project requirements based on an evakiations of the subsurface exploration locations and I the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate appreciably from the those encountered. It should, be recognized that the perfdrmance of the foundations may, be -. I influenced by 'undisclosed or unforeseen variations inthe soil conditions that may occur in the intermediate and unexplored a?eas Any unusual conditions not covered in this report that may be encountered during site development should be brought to the attention of the Soils Engineer so that he may make modifications if necessary I . It is the responsibility of the Developer or their representative to ensure that,-the information .'and recommendations contained herem are brought to the attention of the I . .Engineer and Architect .for the project and incorporated 'into the project plans and specifications. It is further 'their responsibility to take the necessary measures to insure I that the contractor, and his sub-contractors carry out such recommendations during construction,- I Page 14of15 I : I RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS I HL ENGThEER1NG & SURVEYING hereinafter described as ih&Soil Engineer, should be consulted prior to any site work connected with site deielopment to ensure I . compliance with these specificaiions: These specifications shall only• be used in conjunction with the soil report towhich they are attached and made a part thereof. 1.0 General i. .. • This work shall consist ofall clearing and grubbing, preparation of land to be I filled, filling of the land, spreading, compacting, control of the fill, and all subsidiary work necessary to complete the grading of the filled area to conform I •. . with the lines, grades, and slopes as shown on the accepted plans. I 1.1 The Soil Engineer shall test and observe all grading operations. In the event that : any unusual conditions'not covered by the Soil Engineer's recommendations or : I special provisions are enountered during the grading operations, the Soil Engineer shall be contacted for fuither information. 2.0 Tests I The standard test used to define maximum density-'of all compaction work shall. , be the ASTM Test Procedure Dl 557-70. All densities shall be expressed as a ' reIati'e compaction in terms of the maximum dry density obtained in the laboratory by.the foregoing procedure. I 3.0 Clearing, Grubbing, and Preparing Areas to be Filled . . - Any trees noi utilized in landscaping, structures, weeds, and other rubbish shall 'be I removed, piled, or otherwie disposed of so as to leave the areas that have' been 0 disturbed with a neat and finished appearance, 'free from unsightly debris'. I 4 fr I 4. 4 - - I 3 1 Any septic tanks if encountered and debris must be removed from the site prior I to any building grading, or fill 'operations. Septic tanks including all connecting drain fields, and other lines, must be totally removed and the resulting depressions properly reconstructed and filled to the complete satisfaction of the I supervising Soil Engineer. 3.2 - All water wells on4the site shall be capped, according to the requirements of the I San Diego County Health Department, at least two feet below the final elevations of the adjacent grade prior to any grading of fill operations The strength of the I cap shall be at least equal to the adjacent soil I 3.3 All buried tanks, if encountered, must be totally removed and the resulting depressions properly reconstructed and filled to the complete satisfaction of the supervising Soil Engineer. 3.4 All deleterious matter and soil designated as unsuitable by the Soil Engineer shall be removed under supervision and direction of the Soil Engineer. The exposed I surface shall then be plowed or scarified to a depth of at least eight inches and until the surface is free from ruts, hummocks or other uneven features which would tend to prevent uniform compaction by the equipment to be used 3.5 The original ground upon which the fill is to be placed shall be plowed or .scarified deeply, md where the slope ratio of the original ground is steeper than. 6 0 horizontal to 1.0 vertical, the land shall be stepped or benched At the toes of I the major fills and on the sideslope fills, the base key shall be, as described elsewhere in this report, at least ten feet in wi.dth;.put at least three feet into the I undisturbed dr native soil, and sloped back into the hillside at a gradient of not less than two percent Subsequent keys should be cut into the hillside as the fill is I brought up the slope The construction of subsequent keying operations shall be determined by the Soil Engineer during grading operations Ground slopes which I I I n. I are flatter than 6 to 1 shall be benched when considered necessary by the Soil Engineer. ' 3.6 After the foundation for the fill has been cleared, plowed, or scarified, it shall be disced or bladed until it is uniform and free from large clods, brought to the ' proper moisture content by adding water or aerating, and recompacted to a relative compaction of not less than 90 percent '4.0. Materials Native soil free of organic material and undesirable deleterious matenal, may be used as fill Native soil which is expansive shall not be placed within the top 1 three feet of the building pads without the prior approval of the Soil Engineer. 4.1 The materials for fill shall be approved by the Soil Engineer before commencement of grading operations Any imported material must be approved I for use before being brought to the site The matenals used shall be free from vegetable matter and other deleterious material, and be non-expansive. I Expansive soil is defined as soil which expands more than three percent when saturated at 90 percent relative compaction and optimum moisture content under I a surcharge of 150 p s f I '5.0 Placing, Spreading, and Compacting Fill Material The selected fill material shall be placed in layers which, when compacted shall I allow adequate bonding and compaction Each layer shall be spread evenly and I shall be thoroughly blade mixed during the spreading to ensure uniformity of material in each layer. - 5 1 When the moisture content of the fill material is below that specified by the Soil I Engineer, water shall be added until the moisture content is as specified to assure thorough bonding during the compaction process When the moisture content of I I I I I the fill material is above that specified by the Soil Engineer, the fill material shall be aerated by blading or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is I as specified. . I • 5.21 After each layer has been placed, mixed and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted to a relative compaction of not less that 90 percent aj I 5.3 When fill material includes rock, no rock will be allowed to nest, and all voids must be carefully filled with small stones or earth, and properly compacted No I rocks larger, that twelve inches in greatest dimension will be permitted in the pad fill. All rock placement shall be continuously supervised. 5.4 Compaction shall be by sheepsfoot rollers, multiple w' heel. pneumatic-tired . I rollers, or other types of acceptable compacting equipment. I 5.5 Field density tests shall be made bthe Soil Engineer: Where sheepsfoot rollers are .used and the soil may be disturbed to a depth of several inches, density tests shall be taken in compacted material below the disturbed surface. When these tests indicate that the density of any layer of fill or portion thereof is below th& I required 90 percnt relative compaction, the, particular layer or portion shall be reworked until the required density has been obtained. I . 5.6 The fill operation shall be continued in compacted layers, as specified above, I . .. until the fill has been brought to the finished slopes and graded as shown on the I '. accepted plans. . I . 5.7 Fill slopes .shal1be-compacted by means of sheepsfoot iollers or other suitable equipment Compaction operations shall be continued until the slopes are stable I I I I 5 8 All earthmoving and working operations shall be controlled to revent water from running into excavated areas All water shall be promptly removed and the site 1 - kept dry. 1 6.91. Disposal of Oversize Rock Oversizd rock shall be either exported from the site, used for landscaping I purposes or placed in conformance with the Soil Engineer's recommendations 1 7.O 7.Oz Engineering Observation Field observations by the Soil Engineer shall be made dunng the fill and I compaction operations so that that Soil Engineer can express his opinion regardin the conformance of the grading with the accepted specifications 8.0 Seasonal Limits I No fill material shall be placed, spread, or rolled while it is at an unsuitable high content nor dunng tnfavorable weather coiditins When the work is I moisture interrupted by heavy rains, fill operations shall not be resumed until field tests by I the Soil Engineer indicate that the moisture content and density of fill area is as previously specified.. I I I I I I I 0 I • ______ ç. - EXPANSION TST (In àr'vv.lp,- tAIIH If d2 ( J(R 1t JOB NO. L2/-/0/- JOB NAM /7'. DAT EoII,' / Q3 / -- SAMPLE / TECHNICIAN DESCRIPTION . VnW Mature Caroeld Compacted Moi.bre Content P4rer Optimum .. /9• l tnitiel Bulk SurTIpl. Weight 0. WM of Semplo P*sInQ No.4 Sieve . . C E . 0 -. . .. . CompctedWeght. RJnQ • Sol G. W939h1 of Rbg N Specimen Weight, (F) (3 I. Compacted Wet 0.n3ity X 0,3017) - . 4 ____ ____ ____ -. J Compacted Dry Danay (V (1 • B)j • _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____ _____ ____ _____ ____ _____ K Degre. of Saturallon, (B/62 - 0.37041 -. s.sQ.7 . :... .___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ SWELL DATE — DATE TIME. DIAL STATIC LOAD =144PS . . L FINAL READING: M. INITIAL READING: OL EXPANSION READING . L-M-O UNCORRECTED EXPANSION INDEX- . (Ox 103) . o UNCORRECTED EXPANSION POTENTIAL - )t U 11) CORRECTED EXPANSION INDEX -1 000 X OX E CORRECTED EXPANSION POTENTIAL FINAJOISTyRE CONTENT (Submerged) Wet Weight*Ring . Dry Weight. Water Low (1-2) WeIght of (RJng) Dry WeIght. (2-4) S. Final Motature, 3/5*100 I APPENDIXE ORIGIN OF STRAIN FEATURES AND CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES I V ORIGIN OF STRAIN FEATURES Strain features, for example cracks in walls and slabs, are a restilt of deformation of the I house and improvements under the action of forces. Some of these forces may originate in the underlying soil; however, other forces originate as a result of construction methods I . and materials. These origins of forces often interact as contributing factors. I . The goal of construction practice and engineering is to limit development of strain features to generally accepted levels. An attempt to reduce strain features below generally accepted levels requires more expensive engineering and construction. In addition to cracks in walls and slabs, strain features include the following: bulges at I wallboard seams, out-of-squafe door and windów framed that cause rough operation, cracked footings, displacement of separate structural elements such as between walls and I . chimneys or across contractionjoints in slabs, and unusual variations in topography of the floor slab. * . IL. CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES I Some cracking of slabs, footing, and wal1si s corisidered normal and is the result of a necessary balance between benefits and costs. Minor cracking does not affect the serviceability of a house and has been considered generally acceptable. I - - In some conditions 'a concrete slab or footing may develop a single large crack or numerous small cracks. Data I in Engineering Bulletin No. 3, Design and Control of I Concrete Mixtures by the Portland Cement Association, indicated that a high-quality slab or footing that is50 feet in dimension may experi ence 0.361nches of shrinkage during the I .. •. first 38 months after construction Approximately 0 12 inches of shrinkage would occur during the first month and an additional 0.2 inches would occur in the next 10 months Moreover, concrete in residential structures is often placed with high water content high initial temperatures, small aggregate, and during hot and dry, weather conditions All of these can increase the amount of shrinkage. In some slabs, the shrinkage may be expressed as one or two cracks rather than being distributed as small shrinkage cracks. HL CAUSES OF PLASTIC SHRINKAGE CRACKS AND RECOMMENDED CORRECTIVE MEASURES These highly unsightly cracks are caused by a rapid evaporation of water and surface drying of fresh concrete Plastic concrete shrinkage cracks can be minimized by using good construction practices, such practices are listed below 1 Saturate the subgrade and forms 2 Lower the temperature of the concrete in hot weather (over 85°F) 3 Reduce the time between placing the concrete and finishing it 4 Provide environmental controls, such as sun-shades, windbreaks or temporary coverings 5 Don't overwork finishing effort as this will cause separation of aggregates and bring excessive water to surface 6 Provide expansion/contraction Joints These maybe accomplished by "cold Joint" expansion material Joint, or sawcut, within 24 hours of pour. The Engineer will be ad to review your building plans and provide recommendations 7. Avoid adding excessive water to PCC mix, as this reduces concrete strength and contributes to cracking S : Cit Y--0 f Q arl sba d 1 . CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE PAYMENT OF SCHOOL FEES OR OTJIER MTTIGATION 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 w,3Jl not issue any building permit without a completed school fee form Project Name Jczif, 'L/ zS14cV Building Permit Plan Check Number Project Addiess: APN A&Aoqa"',~ Project Applicant (Owner Name):" WA4_______________________________ Project Description Building Type (OI Residential Number of New Dwelling Units I Square Feet of Living Area in New Dwelling 71/ YF Second Dwelling Unit:' Square Feet of Living Area in SDU - Residential Additions Net Square Feet New Area Commercial/Industrial Square Feet Floor Area City Certification of, AplicantInformatKn (jtui t1,vç4TJ7 Date / SCHOOL DISTRICTS WITHIN7 rc ~ 1YO -€W,.SBAD---------. Carlsbad Unified School District SanarcUnified chool Dis ft 1c 801 Pine A'e. ataay . •• I 'Carlsbad CA 92009 (729-9291) a CA 92069 (736-2200 , I.. Encinitas Union School District San Dieguitó Union High School District 101 South Rancho Santa Fe Rd 710 Encinitas Blvd. 4 . - Encinitas, CA 92024 (944-4300) Encinitas, CA 92024 (753-6491) - Certification of Applicant/Owners. The person executing this declaration ("Owner") certifies under penalty of 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 Athat (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. . . . . .• Signatur,)( jj ,r(' 5QJJJJ4/ Date 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlbád, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 662-2700 • FAX (760) 602-8560 Revised 4/20/00 SAN MARCOS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT FACILITIES DEPARTMENT 215 Math Way, Bldg 5(2 fidFloor) San Marcos CA 92069 -2 105 /M*NA C (IA 760-736-2200 . CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE jic 1 'gn- Project Description:' Tract No: S)MCLE Assessor's Parcel No: 21 Received From: . . . . The Sum of: . 1,P7t,J J SA iJ V)Jc2. jJtT1 tJiA/& &Wd IVIOo r Number f Square Feet/Units: . q7iI7i . Rate: Check Number Amount $ _35c . Gov.Code 53080/65995 -(AB 18 1) 0 CFD No. . . . 0 Gov.Code 65970 (SB 201) 0 Prior Existing Mitigation Agreement 0 Not subject to fee requirements Certification of ApplicantfOwners: The person executing .this declaration ("Owner) certifies under penalty of perjury that (1) the information provided is correct and true to the best of Owner's knowledge and that Owner will file an amended certification of payment and pay the additional fee if Owner requests an increase in the number of dwelling units/square footage after the building permit is issued.,or if the initial determination of units/square footage iS found to be incorrect, and that 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: . . Dated: /3 &ifr (So. jLU- This is to certify that the applicant listed has paid all amounts determined by the information presented and due to the San Marcos Unified School District. The payment of these amounts.is a prerequisite to the. issuance of a building permit. . School District Official: C flaw at.&& . 31 0/ San Marcos U)i1led School District - Facilities Department, 760/736-2200 NOTICE OF 90 DAYPERIOD FOR PROTEST OF FEES AND STATEMENT OF FEES/EXPIRATION OF CERTWICA Section 66020 of the Government Code enacted by Assembly Bill 3081, effective January 1, 1997, requires that this. District provide (1) a written notice to the project appellant, at the time of payment of school fees, mitigation payment or other exactions Fees of the ninety (90) day. period to. protest the imposition of these Fees and (2) the amount of the fees. Therefore, in accordance with Section 66020 of the Government Code and other applicable laws, this Notice Shall serve to advise you that the ninety (90) day protest period in regard to such Fees or the validity thereof, commences with the payment of the fees or performance of any other requirement as described in Section 66020 of the Government Code. Additionally, the amount of the fees imposed is as herein set forth, 'whether payable at this time or In whole or In part prior to Issuance Of a Certificate of Occupancy.". As In the latter, the ninety (90) days starts on the date hereof. This Certificate of Compliance Is valid for one hundred eighty (180) days from the date of issuance. Extensions will be granted only for good cause, as determined by the Facillties'Departrnent of the School District, and one (1) sixty (60) day extension may be granted. At such time as this Certificate expires, if a building permit has not been issued for the 'project that is the subject of this CertifIate, the owner will be reimbursed all fees that were paid to obtain this Certificate of Compliance without interest. Distribution: Faculties - White customer - Canary Accounting - Pink Audit - Goldenrod .. 77 / C13011006 2909 MANAGUA PL CBAD GALLIHER RES-4711 SF+800 SF - GARAGE+870 SF DECK . RESDNTL . SFD LOW, 30 GARY DAUGHER TY fr7 .J / .. . 7? 7) J / - . . . 1L BUILDING ENGINEERING RREAPPR/FOIM WALTH DEPT 1H /ive.J /O (ço/Y &JJ ô&&J • _____ . . . • TO . FRM BLDG GRADING LETTER - . '. . • 18d APPLICANT . APPLICANT PLAN CORR .•-7 t'/ v ' _______ SCHOOL FORM CFD FORM (. . • L P E & M WORKSHEET nr PLEfF. j ( / 7 -7. •j n t S,4 )/d( C9 . •. . - - .-.. - 1 p