Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1112 BUENA VISTA WAY; ; CBR2019-3369; PermitPERMIT REPORT Residential Permit Print Date: 04/04/2022 Job Address: 1112 BUENA VISTA WAY, CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Permit Type: Parcel#: Valuation: BLDG-Residential 1551603700 $125,490.98 Occupancy Group: #of Dwelling Units: 1 Bedrooms: Bathrooms: Project Title: Work Class: Track#: Lot#: Project#: Plan#: Construction Type: Orig. Plan Check#: Plan Check#: Second Dwelling Unit Description: BENARDINO: DETACHED 640 SF ADU OVER 743 SF GARAGE// 65 SF DECK Applicant: JOHN BENARDINO 13567 CHACO CT SAN DIEGO, CA 92129-4443 (858) 275-3318 FEE SWPPP PLAN REVIEW FEE TIER 1-MEDIUM SWPPP INSPECTION FEE TIER 1 -Medium BLDG STRONG MOTION-RESIDENTIAL Property Owner: JOHN BENARDINO 13567 CHACO CT SAN DIEGO, CA 92129-4443 (858) 275-3318 MECHANICAL BLDG RESIDENTIAL NEW/ADDITION/REMODEL ELECTRICAL BLDG RESIDENTIAL NEW/ADDITION/REMODEL BUILDING PERMIT FEE ($2000+) PLUMBING BLDG RESIDENTIAL NEW/ADDITION/REMODEL GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS PLAN CHECK & INSPECTION BUILDING PLAN CHECK FEE (BLDG) SB1473 GREEN BUILDING STATE STANDARDS FEE Total Fees: $2,059.42 Total Payments To Date: $2,059.42 (city of Carlsbad Permit No: CBR2019-3369 Status: Closed -Fina led Applied: 11/26/2019 Issued: 08/17/2020 Finaled Close Out: 04/04/2022 Inspector: Final Inspection: Balance Due: TAlva 03/25/2022 AMOUNT $55.00 $246.00 $16.31 $92.00 $66.00 $718.30 $182.00 $175.00 $502.81 $6.00 $0.00 Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the "Imposition" of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as "fees/exaction." You have 90 days from the date this permit was issued to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition. You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity changes, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project. NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitation has previously otherwise expired. 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 I 760-602-2700 I 760-602-8560 f I www.carlsbadca.gov {cicyof Carlsbad RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION B-1 Plan Check~K2QIC\-33(~9 Est. Value 612.."5, yqo PC Deposit --------- Date \\-25-19 Job Address _JJJ 2. Byeo::,. \/1 sh Ida I I > Suite: ___ APN: \SS-IW-:67-D() CT/Project#: _________________ Lot#: ___ _ Fire Sprinklers: yes/ no Air Conditioning: yes/ no Electrical Panel Upgrade: yes/ no BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORK: ~s·(-& 7'-t~ ~ Addition/New: lD'--\0 Living SF, ll11a Deck SF, ___ Patio SF, 7\\3 Garage SF Is this to create an Accessory Dwelling Uni~No New Fireplace? Yes/ No, if yes how many? __ D Remodel: _____ SF of affected area Is the area a conversion or change of use? Yes/ No 0 Pool/Spa: ____ SF Additional Gas or Electrical Features? ____________ _ □ Solar: ___ KW, ___ Modules, Mounted: Roof/ Ground, Tilt: Yes/ No, RMA: Yes/ No, Battery: Yes/ No Panel Upgrade: Yes/ No lJ Reroof: _____________________________________ _ lJ Plumbing/Mechanical/Electrical Only: __________________________ _ u Other: e::i~-a:-~-L,-@~~~-'.o,----t --c£=-,-oae-,----=B\:1J--@.-2.od---,-------=£c-lca-r_____,C=\Lt~-o.c.re.--d ... )-- APPLICANT (PRIMARY CONTACT) PROPERTY OWNER Name: _______________ Name: \Toho "T -~e.--Benocd1110 Address: Address: l ':F>lo 7 (J'\Q Co ct City: _______ State:. ___ Zip: ____ City:~ ~i==\ . _ State:(/1 Zip: 9.;i_t~._q Phone: ________________ Phone: ~~.:__.~_ts -3~~ 18 Email: Email:~ bt:nov:x:.li 1](1 0 9,md . crvn -jOt\n. DESIGN PROFESSIONAL CONTRACTOR BUSINESS Name: _________________ _ Name: ___________________ _ Address: ________________ _ Address: ___________________ _ City: ________ State:, ___ Zip: ___ _ City: ________ State:, ___ Zip: ______ _ Phone: _________________ _ Phone: ___________________ _ Email: _________________ _ Email: ___________________ _ Architect State License: ___________ _ State License:. ______ Bus. License: ______ _ (Sec. 7031.5 Business and Professions Code: Any City or County which requires a permit to construct, alter, improve, demolish or repair any structure, prior to its issuance, also requires the applicant for such permit to file a signed statement that lie/she is licensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractor's license Law {Chapter 9, commending with Section 7000 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code} or that he/she is exempt therefrom, and the basis for the alleged exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by any applicant for a permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars {$500}). 1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 Ph: 760-602-2719 Fax: 760-602-8558 Email: Building@carlsbadca.gov B-1 Page 1 of 2 Rev. 06/18 ( OPTION A): WORKERS'COMPENSATION DECLARATION: I hearby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following declarations: □ I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self-insure for workers' compensation provided by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work which this permit is issued. DI have and will maintain worker's compensation, as required by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued. My workers' compensation insurance carrier and policy number are: Insurance Company Name: ______________________ _ Policy No. _______________ Expiration Date: __________ _ □ 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 be come subject to the workers' compensation laws of California. WARNING: Failure to secure workers compensation coverage is unlawful, and shall subject an employer to criminal penalties and civil fines up to $100,000.00, in addition the to the cost of compensation, damages as provided for in Section 3706 of the Labor Code, interest and attorney's fees. CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE: __________________ cJAGENT DATE: _____ _ ( OPTION B ): OWNER-BUILDER DECLARATION: I hereby affirm that I am exempt from Contractor's License Law for the following reason: □ I, as owner of the property or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work and the structure is not intended or offered for sale (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who does such work himself or through his own employees, provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If, however, the building or improvement is sold within one year of completion, the owner-builder will have the burden of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sale). □ I, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to construct the project (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and contracts for such projects with contractor(s) licensed pursuant to the Contractor's License Law). □ I am exempt under Section ________ Business and Professions Code for this reason: 1. I personally plan to provide the major labor and materials for construction of the proposed property improvement. □ Yes □ No 2. l {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 address/ phone/ contractors' license number): 4. I plan to provide portions of the work, but I have hired the following person to coordinate, supervise and provide the major work (include name/ address/ phone/ contractors' license number): 5. I will provide some of the work, but I have contracted (hired) the following persons to provide the work indicated (include name/ address/ phone/ type of work): OWNER SIGNATURE: __________________ □AGENT DATE: ______ _ CONSTRUCTION LENDING AGENCY, IF ANY: I hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work this permit is issued (Sec. 3097 (i) Civil Code). Lender's Name: _____________________ _ Lender's Address: _____________________ _ ONLY COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING SECTION FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS ONLY: ls the applicant or future building occupant required to submit a business plan, acutely hazardous materials registration form or risk management and prevention program under Sections 25505, 25533 or 25534 of the Presley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act? □ Yes D No Is the applicant or future building occupant required to obtain a permit from the air pollution control district or air quality management district? □ Yes [1 No Is the facility to be constructed within 1,000 feet of the outer boundary of a school site? □ Yes n No lF ANY OF THE ANSWERS ARE YES, A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MAY NOT BE ISSUED UNLESS THE APPLICANT HAS MET OR IS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT. APPLICANT CERTIFICATION: I certify that I have read the application and state that the above information is correct and that the information on the plans is accurate. I agree to comply with all City ordinances and State laws relating to building construction. I hereby authorize representative of the City of Carlsbad to enter upon the above mentioned property for inspection purposes. 1 ALSO AGREE TO SAVE, INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARMLESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AGAINST ALL LIABILITIES, JUDGMENTS, COSTS AND EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINST SAID CITY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING OF THIS PERMIT.OSHA: An OSHA permit is required for excavations over 5'0' deep and demolition or construction of structures over 3 stories in height. EXPIRATION: Every permit issued by the Building Official under the provisions of this Code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or work authorized by such permit is not commenced within 180 days from the date of such permit or if the building or work authorized by such permit is suspended or abandoned at any time after the work is commenced for a period of 180 days (Section 106.4.4 Uniform Building Code). APPLICANT SIGNATURE: u~ ~bSI oc-=f'o .. u L )]0, 1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 B-1 Ph: 760-602-2719 Fax: 760-602-8558 Page 2 of 2 Email: Building@carlsbadca.gov Rev. 06118 ".•· P. 1 1• 111,11 i 111,11111 11111 1u u•11 1. 11 •1 l'' ti ii I l'1' I' ii w · n1i111 ,11 ,m 1 1 lib 1l q1 ~ Ii It 1U lttl1 ·11 ii ii ·I fJjl IJ 11l•1 11 }t it§ . !hi i• ti1rt ! it· Ill. hi! i fual 1( • n I H 111 i .f 1ti!I n !1 1in i1h ··1 1 1 u= .ir }tlt, I I 1 !1,-a-11 i ~ l -I Ji (11 t ~ ; I j l '11 I-ir ·t•tt 1\1 --~ ~ l 11 1 It hid I i i I I I J 'J" l t .. I I .. · .. 1 1 ll . 11 1 li!i r \l1t i i I ,, i i !I.fl i I I l l ~ I ! •l ~ ,1 •1,1 g l! I ~ I I § J II l ~ i ,~ s'. i r 1 t 1! ll !I. fl ! i ~ _,i 11 ti J! hi ! I I t 1 11,1 't' I f f it' ,I ' -- PERMIT INSPECTION HISTORY for (CBR2019-3369) Permit Type: BLDG-Residential Work Class: Second Dwelling Unit Status: Scheduled Date Closed -Finaled Actual Inspection Type Start Date Checklist Item BLDG-Structural Final Monday, April 4, 2022 Application Date: 11/26/2019 Owner: JOHN BENARDINO Issue Date: 08/17/2020 Subdivision: SUNNY SLOPE TRACT Expiration Date: 06/14/2022 IVR Number: 23366 Address: 1112 BUENA VISTA WAY CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Inspection No. Inspection Primary Inspector Reinspection Inspection Status COMMENTS March 25, 2022: 1. Footing steel reinforcement rebar and slab and pad steel reinforcement rebar, per structural plans and detail specifications - approved. 2. Pending Items-Approved. a) right of way/Driveway apron permit and Inspection Final-approved. b) geo-technical certification letter finish grade cert. required-approved. Passed Yes Page 9 of 9 PERMIT INSPECTION HISTORY for (CBR2019-3369) Permit Type: BLDG-Residential Work Class: Second Dwelling Unit Status: Scheduled Date 01/3112022 03/25/2022 Closed -Finaled Actual Inspection Type Start Date 01/31/2022 BLDG-Final Inspection Checklist Item BLDG-Plumbing Final BLDG-Mechanical Ftnal BLDG-Structural Final BLDG-Electrical Final 03/25/2022 BLDG-Final Inspection Monday, April 4, 2022 Application Date: 11/26/2019 Issue Date: 08/17/2020 Expiration Date: 06/14/2022 IVR Number: 23366 Owner: JOHN BENARDINO Subdivision: SUNNY SLOPE TRACT Address: 1112 BUENA VISTA WAY CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Inspection No. Inspection Status Primary Inspector Reinspection Inspection 175608-2022 COMMENTS Partial Pass Tony Alvarado January 31, 2022: 1. Footing steel reinforcement rebar and slab and pad steel reinforcement rebar, per structural plans and detail specifications - approved. 2. Pending: a) right of way/Driveway apron permit and Inspection Final. b) geo technical certification letter finish grade cert. required. January 31, 2022: 1. Footing steel reinforcement rebar and slab and pad steel reinforcement rebar, per structural plans and detail specifications - approved. 2. Pending: a) right of way/Driveway apron permit and Inspection Final. b) geo technical certification letter finish grade cert. required. January 31, 2022: 1. Footing steel reinforcement rebar and slab and pad steel reinforcement rebar, per structural plans and detail specifications - approved. 2. Pending: a) right of way/Driveway apron permit and Inspection Final. b) geo technical certification letter finish grade cert. required. January 31, 2022: 1. Fooling steel reinforcement rebar and slab and pad steel reinforcement rebar, per structural plans and detail specifications - approved. 2. Pending: a) right of way/Driveway apron permit and Inspection Final. b) geo technical certification letter finish grade cert. required. 179142-2022 Passed Tony Alvarado Reinspection Incomplete Passed Yes Yes Yes Yes Complete Page 8 of 9 PERMIT INSPECTION HISTORY for (CBR2019-3369) Permit Type: BLDG-Residential Work Class: Second Dwelling Unit Status: Closed -Finaled Application Date: 11/26/2019 Issue Date: 08/17/2020 Expiration Date: 06/14/2022 IVR Number: 23366 Owner: JOHN BENARDINO Subdivision: SUNNY SLOPE TRACT Address: 1112 BUENA VISTA WAY CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Scheduled Date Actual Inspection Type Start Date Inspection No. Inspection Status Primary Inspector Reinspection Inspection 10/26/2021 12/16/2021 BLDG-31 Underground/Conduit - Wiring Checklist Item 169189-2021 COMMENTS Passed Tony Alvarado BLDG-Building Deficiency October 22, 2021: BLDG-81 Underground Combo(11, 12,21,31) Checklist Item BLDG-21 U nde rg round-Underfloor Plumbing BLDG-31 1. Underground gas plumbing line, yellow poly propylene pipe, with tracer wire, under air pressure leak test -approved. 2. Electrical conduit wiring, correct depth trench protection, scope of work-approved. 169162-2021 Passed Tony Alvarado COMMENTS October 22, 2021: 1. Underground gas plumbing line, yellow poly propylene pipe, with tracer wire, under air pressure leak test-approved. 2. Electrical conduit wiring, correct depth trench protection, scope of work-approved. October 22, 2021: Underground-Conduit Wiring 1. Underground gas plumbing line, yellow poly propylene pipe, with tracer wire, under air pressure leak test -approved. 2. Electrical conduit wiring, correct depth trench protection, scope of work-approved. 10/26/2021 BLDG-Gas Meter Release 169348-2021 Passed Tony Alvarado Checklist Item BLDG-Buflding Deficiency COMMENTS October 26, 2021: (Virtual Inspection). No plumbing and gas line Deficiencies. 1. Inspected (2) qty., Plumbing gas line future gas meter set-up locations, new gas plumbing lines under air pressure leak test with gauge, scope of work-approved. 12/16/2021 BLDG-33 Service Change/Upgrade 172818-2021 Passed Tony Alvarado Checklist Item BLDG-Building Deficiency COMMENTS December 16, 2021: 1. New electrical service panel/electrical meter, two ground rods and cold water bond, verified a SDGE work order and location-approved. Monday, April 4, 2022 Complete Passed Yes Complete Passed Yes Yes Complete Passed Yes Complete Passed Yes Page 7 of 9 PERMIT INSPECTION HISTORY for (CBR2019-3369) Permit Type: BLDG-Residential Work Class: Second Dwelling Unit Status: Closed -Finaled Application Date: 11/26/2019 Issue Date: 08/17/2020 Expiration Date: 06/14/2022 IVR Number: 23366 Owner: JOHN BENARDINO Subdivision: SUNNY SLOPE TRACT Address: 1112 BUENA VISTA WAY CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Scheduled Date Actual Inspection Type Start Date Inspection No. Inspection Status Primary Inspector Reinspection Inspection Checklist Item BLOG-18 Exterior Lath and Drywall BLDG-23 Gas-Test-Repairs COMMENTS June 8, 2021: 1. No Exterior stucco wire lath deficiencies. 2. Exterior stucco wire last, we've screwed, I'll penetrations sealed with silicone caulking, moist-stop flashing at all perimeter windows and door openings-approved. 3. Third party Inspection performed and approved. 4. Gypsum board/drywall size, type, and nailing pattern per structural engineer plans in detail table specifications -partial pass. 5. Partial pass for gypsum board/drywall at lower level garage area. 6. OK to continue and cover with tape and drywall mud rest of drywall completed scope of work areas. 7. Gas plumbing line, under air pressure leak test, with gauge, scope of work-approved. June 8, 2021: 1. No Exterior stucco wire lath deficiencies. 2. Exterior stucco wire last, we've screwed, I'll penetrations sealed with silicone caulking, moist-stop flashing at all perimeter windows and door openings-approved. 3. Third party Inspection performed and approved. 4. Gypsum board/drywall size, type, and nailing pattern per structural engineer plans in detail table specifications -partial pass. 5. Partial pass for gypsum board/drywall at lower level garage area. 6. OK to continue and cover with tape and drywall mud rest of drywall completed scope of work areas. 7. Gas plumbing line, under air pressure leak test, with gauge, scope of work-approved. 10/22/2021 10122/2021 BLDG-23 169188-2021 Passed Tony Alvarado Gas/Test/Repairs Checklist Item BLDG-Building Deficiency Monday, April 4, 2022 COMMENTS October 22, 2021: 1. Underground gas plumbing line, yellow poly propylene pipe, with tracer wire, under air pressure leak test-approved. 2. Electrical conduit wiring, correct depth trench protection, scope of work-approved. Passed Yes Yes Complete Passed Yes Page 6 of 9 Permit Type: Work Class: Status: Scheduled Date 05126/2021 06/08/2021 PERMIT INSPECTION HISTORY for (CBR2019·3369) BLDG-Residential Second Dwelling Unit Closed -Finaled Actual Inspection Type Start Date Application Date: Issue Date: Expiration Date: IVR Number: Inspection No. 11/26/2019 08/17/2020 06/14/2022 23366 Inspection Status Owner: JOHN BENARDINO Subdivision: SUNNY SLOPE TRACT Address: 1112 BUENA VISTA WAY CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Primary Inspector Reinspection Inspection BLDG-34 Rough Electrical May 21, 2021: Yes BLDG-44 Rough-Ducts-Dampers 05/26/2021 BLDG-16 Insulation 06/08/2021 BLDG-82 Drywall, Exterior Lath, Gas Test, Hot Mop 1. No Building/shear-wall nailing Deficiencies 2. Exterior shear wall type, size, of plywood and shear-wall nailing pattern, scope of work per structural engineer's plans and tables, notes, and detail specifications-approved. Note: 2. Exterior stucco lath installation work to be completely finished, prior to rough combination MEPS Inspection. 3. Informed contractor representative, regarding new building structure to be dried-in completely, prior to requesting rough combination inspection. 4. Exterior shearwall nailing, per engineers plans and detail specifications-approved. 5. Rough combination inspection for structural framing, plumbing, electrical, mechanical scope of work-approved. 6. Hot mop and tub shower enclosures, water leak test, scope of work-approved. May 21, 2021 1. No Building/shear-wall nailing Deficiencies 2. Exterior shear wall type, size, of plywood and shear-wall nailing pattern, scope of work per structural engineer's plans and tables, notes, and detail specifications-approved . Note: 2. Exterior stucco lath installation work to be completely finished, prior to rough combination MEPS Inspection. 3. Informed contractor representative, regarding new building structure to be dried-in completely, prior to requesting rough combination inspection. 4. Exterior shearwall nailing, per engineers plans and detail specifications-approved. 5. Rough combination inspection for structural framing, plumbing, electrical, mechanical scope of work-approved. 6. Hot mop and tub shower enclosures, water leak test, scope of work-approved. 158315-2021 Passed Tony Alvarado 159323-2021 Partial Pass Tony Alvarado Yes Complete Reinspection Incomplete Monday, April 4, 2022 Page 5 of 9 PERMIT INSPECTION HISTORY for (CBR2019-3369) Permit Type: BLDG-Residential Work Class: Second Dwelling Unit Status: Closed -Finaled Application Date: 11/26/2019 Issue Date: 08/17/2020 Expiration Date: 06/14/2022 IVR Number: 23366 Owner: JOHN BENARDINO Subdivision: SUNNY SLOPE TRACT Address: 1112 BUENA VISTA WAY CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Scheduled Date Actual Inspection Type Start Date Inspection No. Inspection Status Primary Inspector Reinspection Inspection Monday, April 4, 2022 Checklist Item BLDG-14 Frame-Steel-Bolting-Welding (Decks) BLDG-24 Rough-Topout COMMENTS May 21, 2021: 1. No Building/shear-wall nailing Deficiencies 2. Exterior shear wall type, size, of plywood and shear-wall nailing pattern, scope of work per structural engineer's plans and tables, notes, and detail specificati ans-a pp roved . Note: 2. Exterior stucco lath installation work to be completely finished, prior to rough combination MEPS Inspection. 3. Informed contractor representative, regarding new building structure to be dried-in completely, prior to requesting rough combination inspection. 4. Exterior shearwall nailing, per engineers plans and detail specifications-approved. 5. Rough combination inspection for structural framing, plumbing, electrical, mechanical scope of work-approved. 6. Hot mop and tub shower enclosures, water leak test, scope of work-approved. May 21, 2021: 1. No Building/shear-wall nailing Deficiencies 2. Exterior shear wall type, size, of plywood and shear-wall nailing pattern, scope of work per structural engineer's plans and tables, notes, and detail specifications-approved. Note: 2. Exterior stucco lath installation work to be completely finished, prior to rough combination MEPS Inspection. 3. Informed contractor representative, regarding new building structure to be dried-in completely, prior to requesting rough combination inspection. 4. Exterior shearwall nailing, per engineers plans and detail specifications-approved. 5. Rough combination inspection for structural framing, plumbing, electrical, mechanical scope of work-approved. 6. Hot mop and tub shower enclosures, water leak test, scope of work-approved. Passed Yes Yes Page 4 of 9 PERMIT INSPECTION HISTORY for (CBR2019-3369) Permit Type: BLDG-Residential Work Class: Second Dwelling Unit Status: Closed -Finaled Application Date: 11/26/2019 Owner: JOHN BENARDINO Issue Date: 08/17/2020 Expiration Date: 06/14/2022 IVR Number: 23366 Subdivision: SUNNY SLOPE TRACT Address: 1112 BUENA VISTA WAY CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Scheduled Date Actual Inspection Type Start Date Inspection No. Inspection Status Primary Inspector Reinspection Inspection Monday, April 4, 2022 Checklist Item COMMENTS BLDG-13 Shear Panels-HD (ok May 21, 2021: to wrap) 1. No Building/shear-wall nailing Deficiencies BLDG-84 Rough Combo(14,24,34,44) 2. Exterior shear wall type, size, of plywood and shear-wall nailing pattern, scope of work per structural engineer's plans and tables, notes, and detail specifications-approved. Note: 2. Exterior stucco lath installation work to be completely finished, prior to rough combination MEPS Inspection. 3. Informed contractor representative, regarding new building structure to be dried-in completely, prior to requesting rough combination inspection. 4. Exterior shearwall nailing, per engineers plans and detail specifications-approved. 5. Rough combination inspection for structural framing, plumbing, electrical, mechanical scope of work-approved. 6. Hot mop and tub shower enclosures, water leak test, scope of work-approved. 157900-2021 Passed Tony Alvarado Passed Yes Complete Page 3 of 9 PERMIT INSPECTION HISTORY for (CBR2019-3369) Permit Type: BLDG-Residential Work Class: Second Dwelling Unit Status: Closed -Finaled Application Date: 11/26/2019 Issue Date: 08/17/2020 Expiration Date: 06/14/2022 IVR Number: 23366 Owner: JOHN BENARDINO Subdivision: SUNNY SLOPE TRACT Address: 1112 BUENA VISTA WAY CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Scheduled Date Actual Inspection Type Start Date Inspection No. Inspection Status Primary Inspector Reinspection Inspection 05/19/2021 05/21/2021 Checklist Item COMMENTS BLDG-Building Deficiency May 18, 2021: 1. Building Deficiencies. 2. Contractor representative canceled. 05/19/2021 BLDG-27 Shower Pan/Tubs 157543-2021 Failed Paul Burnette Checklist Item COMMENTS BLDG-Building Deficiency BLDG-84 Rough Combo(14,24,34,44) 157541-2021 Failed Paul Burnette Checklist Item BLDG-Building Deficiency BLDG-14 Frame-Steel-Bolting-Welding (Decks) BLDG-24 Rough-Topout BLDG-34 Rough Electrical BLDG-44 Rough-Ducts-Dampers COMMENTS 05/21/2021 BLDG-27 Shower Pan/Tubs 158044-2021 Passed Tony Alvarado Checklist Item BLDG-Building Deficiency COMMENTS May 21, 2021: 1. No Building/shear-wall nailing Deficiencies 2. Exterior shear wall type, size, of plywood and shear-wall nailing pattern, scope of work per structural engineer's plans and tables, notes, and detail specifications-a pp roved . Note: 2. Exterior stucco lath installation work to be completely finished, prior to rough combination MEPS Inspection. 3. Informed contractor representative, regarding new building structure to be dried-in completely, prior to requesting rough combination inspection. 4. Exterior shearwall nailing, per engineers plans and detail specifications-approved. 5. Rough combination inspection for structural framing, plumbing, electrical, mechanical scope of work-approved. 6. Hot mop and tub shower enclosures, water leak test, scope of work-approved. BLDG-83 Roof Sheating, 158045-2021 Exterior Shear (13, 15) Passed Tony Alvarado Monday, April 4, 2022 Passed No Re inspection Incomplete Passed No Re inspection Incomplete Passed No No No No No Complete Passed Yes Complete Page 2 of9 Building Permit Inspection History Finaled ( City of Carlsbad PERMIT INSPECTION HISTORY for (CBR2019-3369) Permit Type: BLDG-Residential Work Class: Second Dwelling Unit Status: Closed -Finaled Application Date: 11/26/2019 Owner: JOHN BENARDINO Issue Date: 08/17/2020 Subdivision: SUNNY SLOPE TRACT Expiration Date: 06/14/2022 Address: 1112 BUENA VISTA WAY CARLSBAD, CA 92008 IVR Number: 23366 Scheduled Date Actual Inspection Type Start Date Inspection No. Inspection Primary Inspector Reinspection Inspection Status 10/20/2020 10/20/2020 BLDG-SW-Pre-Con 141296-2020 Passed Paul Burnette Checklist Item COMMENTS BLDG-Building Deficiency 10/27/2020 10/27/2020 BLDG-21 142066-2020 Passed Paul Burnette Underground/Underflo or Plumbing Checklist Item COMMENTS BLDG-Building Deficiency 11/16/2020 11/16/2020 BLDG-11 143527-2020 Cancelled Paul Burnette FoundationlFtg/Piers (Rebar) Checklist Item COMMENTS BLDG-Building Deficiency 03/25/2021 03/25/2021 BLDG-15 Roof/ReRoof 153465-2021 Failed Paul Burnette (Patio) Checklist Item COMMENTS BLDG-Building Deficiency 05/18/2021 05/18/2021 BLDG-13 Shear 157722-2021 Passed Tony Alvarado Monday, April 4, 2022 Panels/HD (ok to wrap) Checklist Item BLDG-Building Deficiency COMMENTS May 18, 2021: 1. No Building/shear-wall nailing Deficiencies 2. Exterior shear wall type, size, of plywood and shear-wall nailing pattern, scope of work per structural engineer's plans and tables, notes, and detail specifications-approved. Note: 2. Exterior stucco lath installation work to be completely finished, prior to rough combination MEPS Inspection. 3. Informed contractor representative, regarding new building structure to be dried-in completely, prior to requesting rough combination inspection. BLDG-43 Air Cond./Furnace Set 157542-2021 Cancelled Tony Alvarado Complete Passed Yes Complete Passed Yes Reinspection Incomplete Passed No Reinspection Incomplete Passed No Complete Passed Yes Reinspection Incomplete Page 1 of 9 DATE: 7/6/2020 JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad PLAN CHECK#.: CBR2019-3369 ✓• EsG1I A SAFFou1lt C')n1rnny SET: II PROJECT ADDRESS: 1112 Buena Vista Way PROJECT NAME: Bernardino Residence ADU/Garage □ APPLICANT □ JURIS. D The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes. D The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. D The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the 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 until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. D The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. ~ The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: John Bernardino D EsGil staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. ~ EsGil staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: John Telephone#: 858-275-3318 Date contacted: (by: ) Email: john.benardino@gmail.com Mail Telephone Fax In Person ~ REMARKS: The permit application shows the address is "1112 Buena Vista Way". The plan and soil report shows "1110 Buena Vista Way". Please check with City of Carlsbad what is the right address? JI I z. ;5 co<red, DY c_onb,,.c.t~J k>i, Vt>i'CelM<ifl ort ?--IL/-z.o -'J[ By: David Yao r Enclosures: EsGil 6/25/2020 9320 Chesapeake Drive. Suite 208 ♦ San Diego, California 92123 ♦ (858) 560-1468 ♦ Fax (858) 560-1576 City of Carlsbad CBR2019-3369 7/6/2020 NOTE: The items listed below are from the previous correction list. These remaining items have not been adequately addressed. The numbers of the items are from the previous check list and may not necessarily be in sequence. The notes in bold font are current. Please make all corrections, as requested in the correction list. Submit FOUR new complete sets of plans for commercial/industrial projects (THREE sets of plans for residential projects). For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in one of two ways: 1. Deliver all corrected sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department, 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008, (760) 602-2700. The City will route the plans to EsGil and the Carlsbad Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. 2. Bring TWO corrected set of plans and calculations/reports to EsGil, 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, CA 92123, (858) 560-1468. Deliver all remaining sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department for routing to their Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. NOTE: Plans that are submitted directly to EsGil only will not be reviewed by the City Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments until review by EsGil is complete. 1. All sheets of plans must be signed by the person responsible for their preparation. (California Business and Professions Code). All S sheets were not signed by the engineer. 5. Provide stairway and landing details. Section R311.7. Maximum rise is 7-3/4" and minimum run is 10", measured from the nosing projection. Where there is no nosing, the minimum run is 11". The greatest riser height within any flight of stairs shall not exceed the smallest by more than 3/8 inch. The greatest tread depth within any flight of stairs shall not exceed the smallest by more than 3/8 inch. 7. A nosing (between¾" and 1-¼"l shall be provided on stairways with solid risers. Exception: No nosing is required if the tread depth is at least 11 inches. Section R311. 7 .5.3. The response for item 5 and 7 shows see 12/A9.0. Detail 12/A9.0 did not clearly show the min. run is 1 O". The nosing appears to more than 1 '-1/4". Please clarify dimensioned on the detail. 16. Provide a copy of the project soil report. The report shall include foundation design recommendations based on the engineer's findings and shall comply with Section R401.4. (City requirement) City of Carlsbad CBR2019-3369 7/6/2020 The response by GP Studio shows not required. Soil report by SMS Geotechnical Solutions, Inc. was provided. Please revise the note on sheet S.01 to reference the soil report. 17. 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: 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." 18. 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 (See page 26 of the soil report). Section X (page 26) of the soil report shows some revisions are required by the soil engineer. Please revise the plan accordingly. a)Continuous footings should be min. 15"(wide) by 18" (deep) with 2-#5 top and bottom. Please revise the foundation plan note. b)The interior slab should be min. 4.5" with #3@16"o.c. in the middle of the slab. Please revise the foundation plan. c)Provide re-entrant corner reinforcement of all interior slab. Please add the reinforcement per figure 10 of the soil report. 22. Please provide evidence that the engineer-of-record (or architect) has reviewed the truss calculation package prepared by others (i.e., a "review" stamp on the truss calculations or a letter). CBC Section 107.3.4.1. The engineer should sign sheet S2. 24. A balcony, deck, or porch that is accessible from the interior of the dwelling will require a minimum of one receptacle outlet. CEC 210.52(E) (3). This receptacle must be GFCI protected. The response shows "GFCI outlet has been added". Sheet A2 does not show GFCI at deck. Please clarify. City of Carlsbad CBR2019-3369 7/6/2020 27. An ADU may have a separate utility service installed, or sub fed via existing service with adequate capacity. ADU's require electrical load calculations per CEC 220.83 to justify existing electrical service size is adequate. The response shows "electrical load calcs. Provide as a separate document". No electrical load calculation was provided. 29. Show water heater size /1 st hour rating). type, and location on plans. Note: For both new dwellings and additions the Energy Standards (150.0(n)) requires a gas input rating of 200,000 Btu for both tank and instantaneous gas water heaters. (Also) Provide a gas piping design for the gas system. Sheet P1 .0 shows 1" from meter to the proposed tank less water heater and ¾" to gas stove. You must show the gas meter location on the plan and show development length for all gas appliances and gas demand for gas stove to verify the gas line size. Do you proved separate gas line dedicate to ADU? Why 1" is adequate? It may need larger gas line (?). 47. Residential bathroom exhaust fans shall be energy star rated and shall be control by a humidistat capable of an adjustment between 50 and 80% humidity. CalGreen 4.506.1. Exception: Control by a humidistat is not required if the bathroom exhaust fan is also the dwelling whole house ventilation. The note on sheet A2.0 does not show the humidistat requirement on the plan. 48. Mechanical whole house ventilation must be provided. Identify the fan providing the whole house ventilation (complete with CFM and Sone rating) on the floor plans .. Sheet S2.0 does show which exhaust fan is the whole house ventilation? What is the CFM rating and sone rating? Please clarify on the plan. To speed up the review process, note on this list (or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed, i.e., plan sheet, note or detail number, calculation page, etc. Please indicate here if any changes have been made to the plans that are not a result of corrections from this list. If there are other changes, please briefly describe them and where they are located in the plans. Have changes been made to the plans not resulting from this correction list? Please indicate: Yes □ No □ City of Carlsbad CBR2019-3369 7/6/2020 The jurisdiction has contracted with EsGil, located at 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, California 92123; telephone number of 858/560-1468, to perform the plan review for your project. If you have any questions regarding these plan review items, please contact David Yao at EsGil. Thank you. DATE: 12/12/2019 JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad PLAN CHECK#.: CBR2019-3369 ✓• EsG1I A SAFf-ouilt COnlf)d'.lY SET: I PROJECT ADDRESS: 1112 Buena Vista Way PROJECT NAME: Bernardino Residence ADU/Garage □ APPLICANT D JURIS. D The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes. D The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. D The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. [ZJ The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at EsGil until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. D The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. [ZJ The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: John Bernardino D Es Gil staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. [ZJ EsGil staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: John Telephone#: 858-275-3318 Date contacted: Mail Telephone 0 REMARKS: By: David Yao EsGil (by: ) Email: john.benardino@gmail.com Fax In Person Enclosures: 11/27/19 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 ♦ San Diego, California 92123 ♦ (858) 560-1468 ♦ Fax (858) 560-1576 City of Carlsbad CBR2019-3369 12/12/2019 PLAN REVIEW CORRECTION LIST SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS AND DUPLEXES PLAN CHECK#.: CBR2019-3369 JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad PROJECT ADDRESS: 1112 Buena Vista Way FLOOR AREA: Living 640 sf Garage 7 43 sf REMARKS: DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY JURISDICTION: 11/25/19 DATE INITIAL PLAN REVIEW COMPLETED: 12/12/2019 FOREWORD (PLEASE READ): STORIES: 2 HEIGHT: DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY ESGIL CORPORATION: 11 /27/19 PLAN REVIEWER: David Yao This plan review is limited to the technical requirements contained in the California version of the International Residential Code, International Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, National Electrical Code and state laws regulating energy conservation, noise attenuation and access for the disabled. This plan review is based on regulations enforced by the Building Department. You may have other corrections based on laws and ordinance by the Planning Department, Engineering Department, Fire Department or other departments. Clearance from those departments may be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Present California law mandates that construction comply with the 2016 edition of the California Code of Regulations (Title 24), which adopts the following model codes: 2015 IRC, 2015 IBC, 2015 UPC, 2015 UMC and 2014 NEC. The above regulations apply, regardless of the code editions adopted by ordinance. The following items listed need clarification, modification or change. All items must be satisfied before the plans will be in conformance with the cited codes and regulations. Per Sec. 105.4 of the 2015 International Building Code, the approval of the plans does not permit the violation of any state, county or city law. To speed up the recheck process, please note on this list (or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed, i.e., plan sheet number, specification section, etc. Be sure to enclose the marked up list when you submit the revised plans. City of Carlsbad CBR2019-3369 12/12/2019 Please make all corrections, as requested in the correction list. Submit FOUR new complete sets of plans for commercial/industrial projects (THREE sets of plans for residential projects). For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in one of two ways: 1. Deliver all corrected sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department, 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008, (760) 602-2700. The City will route the plans to EsGil and the Carlsbad Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. 2. Bring TWO corrected set of plans and calculations/reports to EsGil, 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, CA 92123, (858) 560-1468. Deliver all remaining sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department for routing to their Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. NOTE: Plans that are submitted directly to EsGil only will not be reviewed by the City Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments until review by EsGil is complete. 1. All sheets of plans must be signed by the person responsible for their preparation. (California Business and Professions Code). 2. Provide a statement on the Title Sheet of the plans stating that this project shall comply with the 2016 California Residential Code, which adopts the 2015 IRC, 2015 UMC, 2015 UPC and the 2014 NEC. Section R106.1. 3. On the cover sheet of the plans, specify any items that will have a deferred submittal (trusses, fire sprinklers/alarms, etc.). Additionally, provide the following note on the plans: "Submittal documents for deferred submittal items shall be submitted to the registered design professional in responsible charge, who shall review them and forward them to the building official with a notation indicating that the deferred submittal documents have been reviewed and that they have been found to be in general conformance with the design of the building. The deferred submittal items shall NOT be installed until their design and submittal documents have been approved by the building official." FIRE PROTECTION 4. An automatic residential fire sprinkler system shall be installed in one-and two-family dwellings (not required for additions if the existing dwelling doesn't already have a sprinkler system). Please clearly note this on the plans. Section R313.2. a) Accessory Dwelling Units (<1,200 square feet) need not have fire sprinklers, whether attached or detached, provided the primary home does not have a fire sprinkler system. Senate Bill 1069. Please clarify on the plan. City of Carlsbad CBR2019-3369 12/12/2019 5. Provide stairway and landing details. Section R311.7. a) Maximum rise is 7-3/4" and minimum run is 10", measured from the nosing projection. Where there is no nosing, the minimum run is 11". b) The greatest riser height within any flight of stairs shall not exceed the smallest by more than 3/8 inch. The greatest tread depth within any flight of stairs shall not exceed the smallest by more than 3/8 inch. 6. Open risers are only permitted if the opening between treads does not permit the passage of a 4" diameter sphere. Section R311. 7.5.1. 7. A nosing (between¾" and 1-¼") shall be provided on stairways with solid risers. Exception: No nosing is required if the tread depth is at least 11 inches. Section R311.7.5.3. ROOFS/DECKS/BALCONIES 8. Specify on the plans the following information for the deck/balcony surfacing materials, per Section R 106.1.1: a) ICC approval number, or equal. 9. Specify roof material and application. Chapter 9. a) In California, roofing shall be a fire-retardant roof covering that is at least Class C. Section R902.1.3. 10. Specify on the plans the following information for the roof materials, per Section R106.1.1: a) Manufacturer's name and product name/number. b) ICC approval number, or equal. 11. Specify minimum ¼ inch per foot roof slope for drainage. Section R905.9.1. Sheet A2.0 shows 1/8"=1 '-0". Ponding requirement for the deck joist? 12. Show the sizes/locations of roof drains and overflows. Section R903.4. 13. Note on the plans: "Attic ventilation openings shall be covered with corrosion-resistant metal mesh with 1/16" minimum to¼" maximum openings. Section R806.1. GARAGE AND CARPORTS 14. Effective July 1, 2019, new or replacement garages shall have battery back-up installed for any garage door openers. SB969. 15. The garage shall be separated from the residence and its attic area by not less than ½" gypsum board applied to the garage side (at walls). Garages beneath habitable rooms shall be separated by not less than 5/8" Type X gypsum board. Section R302.6. City of Carlsbad CBR2019-3369 12/12/2019 FOUNDATION REQUIREMENTS 16. Provide a copy of the project soil report. The report shall include foundation design recommendations based on the engineer's findings and shall comply with Section R401.4. (City requirement) 17. 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: (if applicable) a) The building pad was prepared in accordance with the soils report, b) The utility trenches have been properly backfilled and compacted, and c) The foundation excavations, the soils expansive characteristics and bearing capacity conform to the soils report." 18. 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). 19. Note on plans that surface water will drain away from building and show drainage pattern. The grade shall fall a minimum of 6" within the first 10 feet. Section R401.3. 20. Provide calculation to justify all footing size and reinforcement. STRUCTURAL 21. Provide truss details and truss calculations for this project. Specify truss identification numbers on the plans. 22. Please provide evidence that the engineer-of-record (or architect) has reviewed the truss calculation package prepared by others (i.e., a "review" stamp on the truss calculations or a letter). CBC Section 107.3.4.1. ELECTRICAL 23. Include on the plans the following specifications for electrical devices installed in dwellings: CEC Article 210 & 406 a) b) Weather resistant type for receptacles installed in damp or wet locations (outside). GFCI protected outlets for locations described in NEC 210.8(A): Laundry areas, kitchen dishwashers, kitchens, garages, bathrooms, outdoors, within 6' of a sink, etc. City of Carlsbad CBR2019-3369 12/12/2019 24. A balcony, deck, or porch that is accessible from the interior of the dwelling will require a minimum of one receptacle outlet. CEC 210.52(E) (3). This receptacle must be GFCI protected. 25. Show on the plans that countertop receptacle outlets comply with CEC Article 210.52(C): In kitchens a receptacle outlet shall be installed at each counter space 12 inches or wider; Receptacles shall be installed so that no point along the wall line is more than 24 inches; Island and peninsular countertops 12 inches by 24" long (or greater) shall have at least one receptacle. (Counter top spaces separated by range tops, refrigerators, or sinks shall be considered as separate counter top spaces). 26. Per CEC Article 210.11 (C)1, note on the plans that there will be a minimum of 2 small appliance branch circuits within the locations specified in Article 210.52(B), i.e., kitchen and dining areas. 27. An ADU may have a separate utility service installed, or sub fed via existing service with adequate capacity. ADU's require electrical load calculations per CEC 220.83 to justify existing electrical service size is adequate. 28. A separate (detached building with a separate foundation and slab) ADU requires a separate ground electrode system per CEC 250.32 PLUMBING 29. Show water heater size (1 st hour rating). type. and location on plans. Note: For both new dwellings and additions the Energy Standards (150.0(n)) requires a gas input rating of 200,000 Btu for both tank and instantaneous gas water heaters. (Also) Provide a gas piping design for the gas system. 30. In the garage, provide an adequate barrier to protect the water heater from vehicle damage. CPC Section 507 .13. (if applicable) 31. Show the T and P relief valve at the water heater and the discharge pipe size and routing to the exterior. CPC Section 608.3. 32. If an instantaneous water heater is shown on the plans., please include a gas pipe sizing design (isometric or pipe layout) for all gas loads. a) The gas pipe sizing for a tank type water heater shall be based upon a minimum 199,000 Btu gas input rating. Energy Standards 150.0(n). 33. Dimension on the plans the 30" clear width required for the water closet compartment and the (minimum) 24" clearance required in front of the water closet. CPC 402.5. City of Carlsbad CBR2019-3369 12/12/2019 34. Provide a note on the plans: The control valves in showers, tub/showers, bathtubs, and bidets must be pressure balanced or thermostatic mixing valves. CPC Sections 408,409,410. 35. Specify on the plans: Water conserving fixtures: showerheads may not exceed 1.8 GPM of flow. CPC Sections 407, 408, 411, 412. Please revise the note. RESIDENTIAL GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS 36. Indoor water use. Show compliance with the following table, per CGC Section 4.303.1. FIXTURE FLOW RATES FIXTURE TYPE MAXIMUM FLOW RATE Showerheads 1.8 gpm @ 80 psi 1. Lavatory faucets shall not have a flow rate less than 0.8 gpm at 20 psi. 37. Recycling. Note on the plans that a minimum of 65% of construction waste is to be recycled. CGC Section 4.408.1. Please revise the note. 38. Electric Vehicle Charging. Note on the plans that electrical vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) is required in NEW one and two family dwellings and townhomes with attached garages. Include the following information on the plans: A minimum size 1" conduit originating from a panel or service having a spare 40 ampere 240 volt capacity terminating in a box located in close proximity to the location of the future EV charger. CGC 4.106.4. 39. The "EVSE ready space" shall have the following: Panel capability, 40A 2 pole breaker, 1" raceway, No. 8 conductors installed to the anticipated charger location.(City requirement too) ENERGY CONSERVATION 40. Include on the Title Sheet of the plans the following statement: "Compliance with the documentation requirements of the 2016 Energy Efficiency Standards is necessary for this project. Registered, signed, and dated copies of the appropriate CF1 R, CF2R, and CF3R forms shall be made available at necessary intervals for Building Inspector review. Final completed forms will be available for the building owner." 41. Note or provide the following design requirements for gas water heaters installed to serve individual dwelling units: ES 150.0(n) a) Gas piping sizing based upon a minimum input of 200,000 btu/hr. City of Carlsbad CBR2019-3369 12/12/2019 b) A condensate drain installed no higher than 2" above the base of the heater that also allows for gravity drainage. c) The "B" vent installed in a straight position from the room containing the water heater to the roof termination. (For future possible sleeving for high efficiency heater venting.) d) A 120 volt receptacle accessible to the heater installed within 3'. 42. Electric Vehicle Charging: Note on the plans that electrical vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) rough-in only is required in one and two family dwellings and town homes with attached garages. The EVSE rough-in consists of a minimum 1" conduit extending from the main panel to a junction box where the EVSE receptacle box will be provided. The main service panel must be sized to accommodate a future 208/240 Volt 40 ampere dedicated branch circuit. California Green Code 4.106.4. 43. Instantaneous water heaters shall have isolation valves on both the cold and the hot water piping leaving the water heater complete with hose bibs or other fittings on each valve for flushing the water heater when the valves are closed. ES 110.3(if applicable) Residential Energy Lighting Requirements: ES 150.0(k) 44. All installed luminaires shall be high-efficacy in accordance with ES TABLE 150.0-A. Light sources that are not marked "JA8-2016-E" shall not be installed in enclosed luminaires. ES 150.0(k) 45. In bathrooms, garages, laundry rooms, and utility rooms at least one luminaire shall be controlled by a vacancy sensor. Note on A2.0 is not clear. Residential ventilation requirements: ES 150.0(o)/ASHRAE 62.2 46. Bathrooms require exhaust fans (minimum 50 cfm) to be ducted to the exterior. A bathroom is defined "as a room with a bathtub, shower, or spa or some similar source of moisture". 47. Residential bathroom exhaust fans shall be energy star rated and shall be control by a humidistat capable of an adjustment between 50 and 80% humidity. CalGreen 4.506.1. Exception: Control by a humidistat is not required if the bathroom exhaust fan is also the dwelling whole house ventilation. 48. Mechanical whole house ventilation must be provided. Identify the fan providing the whole house ventilation (complete with CFM and Sone rating) on the floor plans .. MISCELLANEOUS 49. 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. City of Carlsbad CBR2019-3369 12/12/2019 50. Please indicate here if any changes have been made to the plans that are not a result of corrections from this list. If there are other changes, please briefly describe them and where they are located in the plans. • Have changes been made to the plans not resulting from this correction list? Please indicate: Yes □ No □ 51. The jurisdiction has contracted with EsGil, located at 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, California 92123; telephone number of 858/560-1468, to perform the plan review for your project. If you have any questions regarding these plan review items, please contact Error! Reference source not found. at EsGil. Thank you. City of Carlsbad CBR2019-3369 12/12/2019 [DO NOT PAY -THIS IS NOT AN INVOICE] VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad PREPARED BY: David Yao PLAN CHECK#.: CBR2019-3369 DATE: 12/12/2019 BUILDING ADDRESS: 1112 Buena Vista Way BUILDING OCCUPANCY: R3/U BUILDING AREA Valuation PORTION ( Sq. Fl.) Multiplier ivirg 640 garage 743 Reg. Mod. per applicalic>n Air Conditioning Fire Sprinders TOT.AL VALUE Jurisdiction Code cb By Ordinance Bid . Permit Fee b ordinance g y •: I t\f ,r.: Plan Check: Fee by Ordinance ' • VALUE Type of Review: Complete Review r Structural Only r RepetitiYe Fee ~ Repeats Comments: r Other 1 Hourly E&Gil F-• aHr.@• ($} 125,490 ----~--"·-· 125,490 Sheet of ~ .... ~ 6 n .... 0 ~ REVISION: REVISION: REVISION: 5-6-0 ~ I! ·-;; 11 tt 11 ·1 I 11 ! /1 II n N ._. 0 0 II !; !; ........ w ~ 8 0 N1 I 0 m II 22-0-0 4-4-8 7-9-0 i I 11 I' ii I ,I I I 11 I; ii II I I I I I I I ~2b(2 I I 11 II I II II I II I II 'I I I l 0 II I DATE: BY: DATE: BY: DATE: BY: 19-0-0 47-0-0 l. ~ I I I I ti II I 1: 'I 1: I I II I I :I CD ~II lk 2 31! II .... 0 ~I 11 ~ .... 8 .... Ii I II ~ ' 2b 3) I II I ,, II 11 I ii 0 0 0 _Q 0 I II II II I II II 6' V\ :::i:: 0 (') .,, 0, "C (1) < (1) ;::.: n> a, a, n, n, =n 3 O.n--,:,=r- I :i" 5· :::J: ':T"OQ '• Al (7Q (7Q (1) Q) .,, .i:,. ... ~2)11 .. .. oif 66 ;:.: 9: IV IV =r-.. n ::S o.i:,.,.... =r-o t!,. = .. ~ .. :XI u, V\ : IV II) I -j Ill .... 0 -· 0 a. II) ::s n ~ 25-0-0 0 II 0 'v I I I I !I 0 11 7-9-0 _Ql __ 02 I 0 I I 2-7-8 I► N I I 0 II >-t--0 )> .... 0 i 8 I I ij Notes: COMPONENT DESIGN DRAWINGS & DETAILS Aloha Lumber and Truss, Inc. Bernardino Res -Bernardino Residence 7/13/2020 2:04 PM Simpson Strong-Tie Company, Inc. 5956 W. Las Positas Blvd. Pleasanton, CA 94588 (800) 999-5099 www.strongtie.com 1. The component design drawings referenced below have been prepared based on design criteria and requirements set forth in the Construction Documents, as communicated by the Component Manufacturer. 2. The engineer's signature on these drawings indicates professional engineering responsibility solely for the individual components to be able to resist the design loads indicated, utilizing all the design parameter and materials indicated or referenced on each individual design. 3. It is the Building Designer's responsibility to review the component design drawings to insure compatibility with the Building design, Refer to all notes on the individual component design drawings. 2 Component Design Drawing(s): 1-01: SID 777979 2-B1 DL#1700: SID 777980 Simpson Strong-Tie Company, Inc. COMPONENT DESIGN DRAWINGS & DETAILS 5956 W. Las Positas Blvd. Pleasanton, CA 94588 (800) 999-5099 www.strongtie.com Notes: Aloha Lumber and Truss, Inc. Bernardino Res -Bernardino Residence 6/9/2020 9:20 AM 109772 1. The component design drawings referenced below have been prepared based on design criteria and requirements set forth in the Construction Documents, as communicated by the Component Manufacturer. 2. The engineer's signature on these drawings indicates professional engineering responsibility solely for the individual components to be able to resist the design loads indicated, utilizing all the design parameter and materials indicated or referenced on each Individual design. 3. It is the Building Designer's responsibility to review the component design drawings to insure compatibility with the Building design, Refer to all notes on the individual component design drawings. 15 Component Design Drawing(s): 1·A1 DLl800: SID 756312 2-A2: SID 756313 3-A2 DL#1700: SID 756314 4-A2a: SID 756315 5-A2b: SID 756316 6-B1 DL#1700: SID 756317 ... '11~0 SSe18 8-82: SID 756319 9-82a: SID 756320 10-82b: SID 756321 11-C1 DU300: SID 756322 12-C2: SID 756323 13·C2 DL#1300: SID 756324 14-D2: SID 756325 15·D2a: SID 756326 Component Solutions™ Important Information & General Notes ,_ General Notes Symbols and Nomenclature 1. Each Truss Design Drawing (TDD) provided with this sheet has been prepared in conformance with ANSI/TPI 1. Refer to ANSI/TPI 1 Chapter 2 for the responsibilities of all parties involved, which include but are not limited to the responsibilities listed on this sheet, and for the definitions of all capitalized 5x7 Plate size; the first digit is the plate width (perp. to the slots) and the second digit is the plate length (parallel to the slots). 5x7-18 -18, -18S5, or-18S6 following the plate size indicates different 18 gauge plate types. terms referenced in this document. 2. TDDs should not be assumed to be to scale. 3. The Contractor and Building Designer shall review and approve the Truss Submittal Package. 4. The suitability and use of the component depicted on the TDD for any particular building design is the responsibility of the Building Designer. 5. The Building Designer is responsible for the anchorage of the truss at all bearing locations as required to resist uplift, gravity and lateral loads, and for all Truss-to-Structural Element connections except Truss-to-Truss connections. 6. The Building Designer shall ensure that the supporting structure can accommodate the vertical and/or horizontal truss deflections. 7. Unless specifically stated otherwise, each Design assumes trusses willl be adequately protected from the environment and will not be used in corrosive environments unless protected using an approved method. This includes not being used in locations where the sustained temperature is greater than 150"F. 8. Trusses are designed to carry loads within their plane. Any out-of- plane loads must be resisted by the Permanent Building Stability Bracing. 9. Design dead loads must account for all materials, including sell-weight. The TDD notes will indicate the min. pitch above which the dead loads are automatically increased for pitch effects. 10. Trusses installed with roof slopes less than 0.25/12 may experience (but are not designed for) ponding. The Building Designer must ensure that adequate drainage is provided to prevent ponding. 11. Camber is a non-structural consideration and is the responsibility of truss fabricator. Handling, Installing, Restraint & Bracing 1. The Contractor is responsible for the proper handling, erection, restraint and bracing of the Trusses. In lieu of job-specific details, refer to BCSI. 2. ANSI/TPI 1 stipulates that for trusses spanning 60' or greater, the Owner shall contract with any Registered Design Professional for the design and inspection of the temporary and permanent truss restraint and bracing. Simpson Strong-Tie is not responsible for providing these services. 3. Trusses require permanent lateral restraint to be applied to chords and certain web members (when indicated) at the locations or intervals indicated on the TDD. Web restraints are to be located at mid points, or third points of the member and chord purfins are not to exceed the spacing specified by the TOD. Chords shown without bracing indicated are assumed to be continuously braced by sheathing or drywall. Permanent lateral restraint shall be accomplished in accordance with: standard industry lateral restraint/bracing details in BCSI-B3 or BCSI-B7, supplemental bracing details referenced on the TDD, or as specified in a project-specific truss permanent bracing plan provided by the Building Designer. 4. Additional building stability permanent bracing shall be installed as specified in the Construction Documents. 5. Special end wall bracing design considerations may be required if a flat gable end frame is used with adjacent trusses that have sloped bottom chords (see BCSI-B3). 6. Do not cut, drill, trim, or otherwise alter truss members or plates without prior written approval of an engineer, unless specifically noted on the TDD. 7. Piggyback assemblies shall be braced as per BCSI-B3 unless otherwise specified in the Construction Documents. 8. For floor trusses, when specified, Strongbacking shall be installed per BCSI-B7 unless otherwise specified in the Construction Documents. Referenced Standards ANSVTPI 1 : National Design Standard for Metal Plate Connected Wood Truss Construction, a Truss Plate Institute publication (www.tpinst.org). BCSI: Guide to Good Practice for Handling, Installing, Restraining & Bracing Metal Plate Connected Wood Trusses, a joint publication of the Truss Plate Institute (www.tpinst.org) and the Structural Building Components Association (www.sbcindustry.com ). These symbols following the plate size indicate the direction of II = ~ ~ the plate length (and tooth slots) for square and nearly square plates. 1 0-3-14 Dimensions are shown in feet-inches-sixteenths (for this example, the dimension is 10'-3 14/16"). --t- 2 Joints are numbered left to right, first along the top chord and then along the bottom chord. Mid-panel splice joint numbers are not shown on the drawing. Members are identified using their end joint numbers (e.g., TC 2-3). When this symbol is shown, permanent lateral restraint is required. Lateral restraint may be applied to either edge of the member. See Note 3 under Handling, Installing, Restraint & Bracing for more information. Bearing supports (wall, beam, etc.), locations at which the truss is required to have full bearing. Minimum required bearing width for the given reactions are reported on the TDD. Required bearing widths are based on the truss material and indicated PSI of the support material. The Building Designer is responsible for verifying that the capacity of the support material exceeds the indicated PSI, and for all other bearing design considerations. Truss-to-Truss or Truss-to-Structural Element connection, which require a hanger or other structural connection (e.g., toe-nail) that has adequate capacity to resist the maximum reactions specified in the Reaction Summary. Structural connection type is not limited by type shown on TOD. Toe- nails may be used where hanger type shown where allowed by detail or other connection design information. Design of the Structural Element and the connection of the Truss to a Structural Element is by others. Note: These symbols are for graphical interpretation only; they are not intended to give any indication of the geometry requirements of the actual item that is represented. Materials and Fabrication 1. Design assumes truss is manufactured in accordance with the TDD and the quality criteria in ANSI/TPI 1 Chapter 3, unless more restrictive criteria are part of the contract specifications. 2. Unless specifically stated, lumber shall not exceed 19% moisture content at time of fabrication or in service. 3. Design is not applicable for use with fire retardant, preservative treated or green lumber unless specifically stated on the TDD. 4. Plate type, size, orientation and location indicated are based on the specified design parameters. Larger plate sizes may be substituted in accordance with ANSI/TPI, Section 3.6.3. Plates shall be embedded within ANSI/TPI 1 tolerances on both faces of the truss at each joint, unless noted otherwise. 5. Truss plates shall be centered on the joint unless otherwise specified. DSB-89 Recommended Design Specification for Temporary Bracing of Metal Plate Connected Wood Trusses, a Truss Plate Institute publication (www.tpinst.org ). NDS: National Design Specification for Wood Construction published by American Forest & Paper Association and American Wood Council. ESR-2762 Simpson Strong-Tie® AS Truss Plates are covered under ESR-2762 published by the International Code Council Evaluation Service (www.icc-es.org ). TD-GEN-0003A 5/2019 Bernardino Rn -Bernardino RHldence Customer: - Truss Mfr. Contact: SL ,.._ I 0 !"-i I N 1 3-15 :t 4-2-10 4-2-10 2 4/12 3 3-4-14 7-7-8 4 5x8pm 3-4-14 11-0-6 5 4-2-10 15-3-0 6 -4/12 Qty: 1 7 Truss: A1 Dl.#800 3-15 :t 00 I N I ,.,., SID: 0000756312 TIO: 109772 Date: 06 / 10 / 20 Page: 1 of 1 Typical plat e: 1. 5x4 1 Code/Design: CBC-2016/TPI-2014 PSf' Live Dead Dur Factors TC 20.0 15.0 Live Wind Snow BC 0.0 10.0 Lum 1.25 1.60 N/11 Total 45.0 Plt 1.25 1.60 N/1\ Spacing: 2-00-00 o.c. Plies: Repetitive Member Increase: Yes Green Lumber: Yes Wet service: No Fab Tolerance: 20, Creep (Ker ) -2. 0 OH Sof!it Load: 2. 0 psf Material Summary TC 2x4 DFL 12 BC 2x4 DFL 12 Webs 2x4 DFL 12 Other 2x4 DFL t2 Member Forces Summary ••. Mem ••• Ten Comp .CSI. TC OH-1 53 0 0 .19 1-2 33 10 0. 09 1-2 357 435 0 .21 2-3 386 420 0.24 3-4 252 61 0.28 4-5 252 63 0. 28 5-6 386 420 0 .24 6-7 33 10 0 .09 6-7 357 435 0 . 21 7-0H 53 0 0.19 BC 1-8 382 352 0 .25 7-12 382 352 0.25 8-9 382 352 0. 06 9-10 382 352 o. 06 10-11 382 352 0.06 11-12 382 352 0 .06 Web 3-10 192 423 0. 09 4-10 150 387 0. 05 5-10 192 423 0. 09 7-7-8 7-7-8 8 9 10 11 7-7-8 15-3-0 12 15-3-0 -----------snow Load Specs--------------------Wind Load Spec•---------- ASCE7-10 Wind Speed (V) • 115 mph Risk Cat: 11 Exposur e Cat: c 7 -------Additional Design Checks------ 10 psf Non-Concur rent BCLL: Yes 20 psf BC Lirnit.ed Storage: Yes ASCE7-10 Gr ound Snow (Pg) • N/A Risk Cat: II Terrain Cat: C Roof Exposure: Sheltered Thermal Condition: 1'11 Others (l.O) unobstr ucted Slippery Roof: No Low-Slope Minimums (P!min} : No Unbalanced Snow LOads: No Rain Surcharge: No Ice Dam Chk: No Bldg Dims : L • 47,0 ft B • 29.0 !t M.R.H(h) • 15.0 ft Kzt • LO 200 lb BC Acce .. ible Ceiling: Yes 300 lb TC Maintenance Load: Yes Bldg Enclosure: Enclosed 2000 lb TC Safe LOad: No Wind DL(psf): TC• 9.0 BC • 6.0 Unbalanced TCLL: Yes End vertical Exposed: L • Yes R • Yes Wind Uplitt Reporting: ASCE1 MWFRS C&C End zone: 3-00-00 Reaction Summary --------------Reaction Summary (Lbs) ---------------- Jnt --X-Loc-React -up---Width--Reqd -Mat PSI l 1-03-04 571 17 15-03-00 10 7-07-08 609 51 15-03-00 7 13-11-12 571 17 15-03-00 Reactions not shown: down < 400 and up < 150 ----Reaction Sun'ITlary (p lf) ----- Jnt-Jnt React -up---Width- 1-7 10 0 15-03-00 (reduced ) Max Horiz • -30 / +30 at Joint 1 Loads Summary This truss has been designed for the effects ot an unbalanced top chord live load occurring at [7-07-081 using a 1.00 Full and 0.00 Reduced load factor. Tb.is truss has been designed for a 800. 0 lb Drag Load distributed along the top chord rake in each direction and resisted at any bea:cing location shown. See Loadcase Report tor loading combinations and additional details. Dead Loads may be slope adjusted: > 12 .0/12 Tooth-Holding reduction factors applied:Green Lumber Notes Gable webs are attached with min. lx3 20 ga .plates. The max . rake overhang • 1/2 the truss spacing. It this t russ is exposed to wind loads perpendicula:c to the plane of the truss, it must be braced according to a standard detail matching the wind criteria shown, or according to the Construction Documents and/or BCSI -83. Designed tor green l umber that will be seasoned by time ot installa tion. Plates designed for Cq at O. 80 and Rotational Tolerance of 10. O degr ees Pl ates located at TC pitch breaks meet t he pr escriptive minimum size requirt,:rnent to transfer unblocked diaphragm loads across t hose joints. A "pm" next to the plate size indicates that the plate has been user moditied; see Pla to Offsets tor any specia l positioning requirements. The top chord may be notched 1.5" deep x 3 .5" wide at 24" o.c. max. for outlookers. Do not notch in the heel areas marked or anywhere ther e is a single chord member. Do not cut the connector plates. Attach stacked chords with 2x4 20 ga. plates, u.n.o. Deflection Summary TrussSpan Limit Actual (in) Location Vert LL L/360 L/999( 0.00) 1-8 Vert DL L/180 L/999 I O. 00) 1-8 \Tar t CR L/240 L/999 ( 0. 00) 1-8 Horz LL 0.75in ( 0.01) @Jt l Horz CR l.25in ( 0.01) @Jt 1 Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999 (-0. 01) 1-1 Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999(-0.0!) 7-7 Vert CR and Hor z CR are the vertical and horizontal deflections due to live load plus the creop component ot detlection due to dead load, computed as Detl LL -t (Ker -l) x Oetl DL in accordance Wt th 1\NSI/TPI 1. - Bracing Data Summary ------------Br acing Data------------ Chords; continuous except where shown Web Bracing --None Plate offsets (X, Y}: (None unless indicated bolow) Jntl (-10-02, -02-05), JntJ (-00-03, 00-09), Jnt5 (00-02,00-09), Jnt7 (10-02, -02-06), Jnt4 (0, 01-06) NOTICE A copy of lhls design shall be furnished lo the erection contractor. The design of this lndMdual truss Is baHd on design crtt•~• and requtemants supplied by the Truss Manufacturer end relies upon the accuracy and oompleteness of the Jnfonnatton aet forth by the BuUdlng Designer. A seal on this drew;ng Indicates acceptance of professional engineering responsibility solely for the truss component design shown. Soe the cover page and the •1mportent Information & General Notes• poge for additional Information. All connector plates shall be manufactured by Simpson Strong-lla Company, Inc In eccordanca with ESR•2762. All connedor plates are 20 gauge. unless the ,peclfled plate size Is followed by a "-18" which indicates an 18 gauge plate, or "S# 18", which Indicate. a high tenolon 18 gauge plate. ■1111111111~""-llllllllllla CcMllpon•nt Solutiorut lfilh'flit-+•1£■ Truu Studio V 2020.1.0.136 ly ~\'/I' '3' f PJI He l pdealt: 1-866-252-8606 -CSRelp@etr ongtl•.com Bernardino Rea • Bernardino RHldence Customer: • Truss Mfr. Contact: SL 1-0-v 1 ,.,_ I ~ I N 3-1S t Code/De•ign: CBC-2016/TPI-2014 PSF Live Dead our F~ctors 1 TC 20. 0 15. 0 Live Wind Snow BC 0.0 10.0 Lum 1.25 1.60 N/A Total 45. 0 Plt 1. 25 1. 60 N/A Spacing: 2-00-00 o.c. Plies: Repetitive Member Increase: Yes Green Lumber: Yes Wet Service: No Fab Toler ance: 20t Creep (Ker) • 2.0 OH Sotfit Load: 2. 0 pst Material Summary TC 2x4 DFL t2 BC 2x4 DFL 12 Webs 2x4 DFL 12 Member ForcH Summary ••. Mem •.• Ten Comp .CSI. TC OH-l 49 0 0 .18 l-2 515 2332 0.26 2-3 333 1881 o. 40 3-4 324 1881 0. 40 4-5 521 2332 0 .26 5-0H 49 0 0. 18 BC 1-6 2205 429 0. 68 s-6 2205 444 o. 68 Web 2-6 234 595 0.11 3-6 845 50 0 .15 4-6 232 595 O.ll Qty: 5 Truss: A2. 4-4-14 3-2-10 3-2-10 4-4-14 4-4-14 2 7-7-8 3 10-10-2 4 1S-3-0 4/12 3x5 -4/12 7-7-8 7-7-8 7-7-8 6 1S-3-0 1S-3-0 -----------snow Load Specs---------- ASCE7-10 Ground Snow(Pg) • N/A Risk Cat: II Terrain Cat: C --·---·---Wind Load Specs-·-------- ASCE7-10 Wind Speed (V) • 115 mph Risk Cat: II Exposure Cat: C 1-0-1.t r s 5 3-15 t co I N I ,.,., SID: 0000756313 TIO: 109772 Date; 06 / 10 I 20 Page: 1 of 1 -------Additional Design Checks------ 10 pst Non-Concurrent BCLL: Yes 20 pst BC Limited Storage: Yes Root Exposure: Sheltered Thermal Condition: All Others ( 1. 0) Unob:structed Slippery Roof: No Low-Slope HiniJnwns (P!min) : No Unbalanced Snow Loads: No Rain Surcharge: No Ice Dam Chk: No Bldg Dims: L • 47. 0 !t B • 29. 0 !t M.R.H(h) • 15.0 rt Kzt • 1.0 200 lb BC Accessible Ceiling: Yes 300 lb TC Maintenance Load: Yes Bldg Enclosure: Enclosed 2000 lb TC Sate Load: No Hind DL (psf): TC• 9.0 BC • 6.0 Unbalanced TCLL: Ye.s End Vertical Exposed: L -Yes R • Yes Wind Oplitt Reporting: ASCE7 HWFRS c,c End zone: 3-00-00 Reaction Summary --------------Reaction Summary (Lbs)---------------- Jnt --X-Loc-React -up---Width--Reqd -Mat PSI 1 02-12 772 0 05·08 00-13 DFL 625 5 15-00-04 772 0 05-08 00-13 DFL 625 Max Horiz • -28 / +28 at Joint l Loads Summary This truss has been designed tor the effects of an unbalanced top chord live load occurring at [7-07-08] using a 1. 00 Full and O. 00 Reduced load factor. See Loadcase Report tor loading combinations and additional details. Dead Loads may be slope adjusted: > 12.0/12 Tooth-Holding reduction factors applied: Green Lumber Notes Designed for green lumber that will be .seasoned by time ot installation. Plates designed for Cq at O. 80 and Rotational Tolerance ot 10. 0 degrees Plates located at TC pitch breaks meet the prescriptive minimum size requirement to transt'er unblocked diaphragm l oad~ across those joints. Deflection Summary TrussSpan Limit Actual (in) Location Vert LL L/360 L/999 (-0.12) 1-6 Vert DL L/180 L/999 (-0 .16) 6-5 Vert CR L/240 L/608 (-0.28) 6-5 Horz LL 0. 75in ( 0.07) @Jt 5 Horz CR 1. 251n ( 0 .15) @Jt 5 Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999 (-0. 01) l-l Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999 (-0. 01) 5-5 Vert CR and Horz CR are the vertical and horizontal deflections due to live load plus the creep component ot deflection due to dead load, computed as Dell LL + (Ker -1) x Detl DL in accordance With ANSI/TPI l. - Bracing Data Summary ------------Bracing oa ta------------ Chords; continuous except where shown Web Bracing --None Plate offset& (X, Y): (None unless indicated below) Jnt6 (0, -00-12) NOTICE A copy of this design shell be furnished to the erection contraclor. The design of this lndlYtdual trusa ltl based on design aiterta and requ~amants supplied by the Truss Manufacturer end relies upon Iha accuracy end completeness of the Information set forth by the Bulfdlng Designer. A seal on this drawing indicates acceptance of professional engineering responsibWty &0lely for the trus.s component design shown. See the cover page end the ·important Information & General Noles" page fo, additional lnfonnatton. All connector plales shall be manufactured by SlrTlfl'IOl1 Strong-Tie Company. Inc In accordance with ESR-2762. AU connector platas ore 20 gauge, unless the specified plate size Is followed by a "·18" which lndlcales an 18 gauge plots, or "S# 18", which indicates a high lansion 18 gauge plate. •• Studio V 20.1.0.136 lpdeok: 1-866·252-8606 Help@•trongtie.com Bernardino Res -Bernardino Rasidance Qty: 1 Truss: A2 DL#1700 Customer: - Truss Mfr. Contact: SL ,.... I 0 ,--t I N 3-15 t Code/Design: CBC-2016/TPI-2014 1 1 PSF Live Dead Dur Factors TC 20. 0 15. 0 Live Wind Snow BC 0.0 10.0 Lum 1.25 1.60 N/A Total 45. 0 Plt 1. 25 1. 60 N/A Spacing: 2-00-00 o. c. Plies: l Repetitive Member Increase: Yes Green Lumber: Yes Wet Service: No Fab Tolerance: 201 Creep (Ker) • 2. 0 OH Sot!it Load: 2.0 psf Material Summary TC 2x4 OFL f2 BC 2x4 DFL t2 Webs 2x4 DFL t2 Member Forces Summary ... Mem... Ten Comp TC OH-1 49 0 1-2 515 2332 2-3 333 1881 3-4 324 1881 4-5 521 2332 5-0H 49 0 BC 1-6 2205 429 5-6 2205 444 Web 2-6 234 595 3-6 B45 50 4-6 232 595 .CSI. 0 .18 0 .26 0. 40 0. 40 0 . 26 0 .18 0 . 6B 0. 6B 0 .11 0 .15 0 .11 4-4-14 3-2-10 3-2-10 4-4-14 4-4-14 2 7-7-8 3 10-10-2 4 15-3-0 4/12 3xS -4/12 7-7-8 7-7-8 7-7-8 6 15-3-0 15-3-0 -----------Snow Load Specs---------- ASCE1-10 Ground Snow (Pg) • N/A Risk Cat: II Terrain Cat: C Root Exposure: Sheltered Thermal Condition: All Others(l.0) Unobstructed Slippery Roof: No Low•Slope Minimums (Pfmin): No Unbalanced Snow Loads: No Rain Surcharge: No Ice Dam Chk: No Reaction Summary ----------wind Load Specs---------- ASCE1-10 Wind Speed(V) • 115 mph Risk Cat: II Exposure Cat: C Bldg Dims: L • 41.0 rt B • 29.0 ft M.R.H(h) • 15.0 ft Kzt • 1.0 Bldg Enclosure: Enclosed Wind DL(psf): TC • 9.0 BC• 6.0 End vertical Exposed: L • Yes R -Yes Wind Uplift Reporting: ASCE1 MWFRS c,c End Zone: 3-00-00 --------------Reaction Summary (Lbs}---------------- Jnt --x-Loc-React -Up---Width--Reqd -Mat PSI 1 02-12 112 0 05-08 00-13 DFL 625 5 15-00-04 112 0 05-08 00-13 DFL 625 Max Horiz • -28 / +28 at Joint 1 Loads Summary This truss has been designed for the effects of an unbalanced top chord live load occurring at [7-07-08} using a 1.00 FUll and 0 .00 Reduced load factor . This truss has been designed for a 1700.0 lb Drag Load distributed along the top chord rake in each direction and resisted at any bearing location shown. See Loadcase Report for loading combinations and additional details. Dead Loads may be slope adjusted: > 12.0/12 Tooth-Holding reduction factors applied:Green Lumber Notes Designed for green lumber that will be seasoned by time o.t installation. Plates designed for cq at 0.80 and Rotational Tolerance of 10.0 degrees Plates located at TC pitch breaks meet the prescriptive minimum size requirement to transfer unblocked diaphragm l oads across those joints. SID: TIO: Date: Page: 0000756314 109772 06 I 10 / 20 1 of 1 1-0-v r 5 5 3-15 t 00 I N I m -------Additional Design Checks------ 10 psf Non-Concurrent BCLL: Yes 20 psf BC Lim! ted Storage: Yes 200 lb BC Accessible Ceiling: Yes 300 lb TC Maintenance Load: Yes 2000 lb TC Safe Load: No Unbalanced TCLL: Yes Deffectlon Summary TrussSpan Limit Act.ual (in) Location Vert LL L/360 L/999 (-0 .12) 1-6 Vert DL L/180 L/999(-0.16) 6-5 Vert CR L/240 L/608(-0.28) 6-5 Horz LL 0.15in ( 0.08) @Jt 5 Horz CR l.25in ( 0 .16) @Jt 5 Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999(-0.01) 1-l Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999(-0.01) 5-5 Vert CR and Hor z CR are the vertical and horizontal deflections due to live load plus the creep component of deflection due to dead load, computed as Detl LL + (Ker -l} x Defl DL in accordance With ANSI/TPI l. - Bracing Data Summary ------------Bracing Data------------ Chords; continuous except where shown Web Bracing --None Plate offsets (X, Y): (None unless indicated below} Jnt6 (0, -00-12) Compon•nt Solution• NOTICE A topy of this design shall be furnished to the erect/on contractor. The design of this individual truss lo based on design criteria and requirements •upplled by tho Truss Manufacturer end relies upon !he accuracy end completeness of the Information set forth by the BuUdlng Designer. A seal on this drawing Indicates acceptance of professional engineering responsibility solely for the truss component design &hOwn. See the oover page and the •important Information & General Notes• page for additional Information. All connector plates shall be manufactured by Simpson Strong•lie Company, Inc In accordance with ESR•2762. All connector plates are 20 gauge, unless the specified plate size Is followed by a •.1s• which lndicatas an 18 gauge plate, or •S# 1a·. Which indicates a high tension 18 gauge plate. J-J I\'/ r S 1 • l£ ■ Tru■-Studio V ========= 2020 .1 . 0 .136 t1• t'P'3 ia Kelpdealt: 1-866-252-8606 -CSHalp@atrongtia.com Bernardino Res -Bernardino RHldence Customer: - Truss Mfr. Contact: SL ,-... I 0 rl I N 3-15 t Code/Design: CBC-2016/TPI-2014 PSF Live Dead Dur Factors TC 20.0 15.0 Uva llind Snow BC 0.0 10.0 Lum 1.25 1.60 N/A Total 45. 0 Plt J. 25 1. 60 N/A Spacing: 2-00-00 o. c. Plies: Repetitive Member Increase: Yes Green Lumbar: Yes Wet Service: No Fab Tolerance: 201 Creep (Ker) • 2.0 OH So!!it Load: 2.0 psf Material Summary TC 2x4 OFL f2 BC 2x4 DFL t2 Webs 2x4 OFL t2 Member Forces Summary ... Mem... Ten Comp TC OH-l 49 0 1-2 589 2355 2-3 389 1901 3-4 401 1901 4-5 596 2401 BC 1-6 2228 519 5-6 2216 514 lieb 2-6 232 594 3-6 864 92 4-6 243 616 .CSI. 0 .18 0.26 0.40 0 .40 0. 21 0. 68 0.69 0.11 0 .15 0.11 1 1 Qty: ,4 Truss: A2.a 4-4-14 3-2-10 4-4-14 7-7-8 2 4/12 7-7-8 7-7-8 -----------Snow Load Specs---------- 3-2-10 4-4-14 3 10-10-2 4 15-3-0 3x5 -4/12 7-7-8 6 15-3-0 15-3-0 ----------Wind Load Specs---------- ASCE1-10 Wind Speed(V) • 115 mph Risk Cat: II Exposure Cat: C 5 3-15 t 5 00 I N I m SID: 0000756315 TIO: 109772 Date: 06 / 10 / 20 Page: 1 of 1 -------Additional Design Checks------ 10 pst Non-Concurrent BCLL: Yes ASCE1-10 Ground Snow (Pg) • N/A Risk Cat: II Terrain Cat: c Roof Exposure: Sheltered Thermal Condition: All Others ( 1 . 0) Unobstructed Slippery Roof: No Low-Sl ope Minimums (Pfmin): No Unbal anced Snow Loads: No Rain Surcharge: No Ice Dam Chk: No Bldg Dims: L • 41. 0 ft B • 29. 0 ft M.R.H(h) • 15.0 ft Kzt • 1.0 20 psf BC Limited Storage: Yes 200 lb BC Accessible Ceiling: Yes 300 lb TC Maintenance Load: Yes Bldg Enclosure: Enclosed 2000 lb TC Safe Load: No Wind OL(ps!): TC • 9.0 BC • 6.0 Unbalanced TCLL: Yes End Vertical Exposed: L • Ye9 R • Yes lii nd Uplift Reporting: ASCE1 MliFRS c,c End Zone: 3-00-00 Reaction Summary --------------Reaction Summary (Lbs)---------------- .Jnt --X-Loc-React -Up---Width--Reqd -Mat PSI 1 02-12 111 0 05-08 00-13 DFL 625 5 15-00-04 681 0 05-08 HGR DFL 625 Max Horiz • -22 / +36 at Joint 1 Loads Summary This t russ has been designed tor the effects of an unbalanced top chord live load occurring at (7-07-08) using a 1.00 Full and 0.00 Reduced load factor. See Loadcase Report ror loading combinations and additional details. Dead Loads may be slope adjusted: > 12.0/12 Tooth-Holding reduction factors applied:Green Lumber Notes Designed tor green lumber that will be seasoned by time of in9tallation. Plates designed tor Cg at O. 80 and Rotational Tolerance of 10. O degrees Plates located at TC pitch breaks meet the prescriptive minimum size requirement to transfer unblocked diaphragm loads across those joints. Deflection Summary TrussSpan Limit Actual (in) Location Vert LL L/360 L/999 (-0, 12) 1-6 Vert DL L/180 L/999 (-0 .11) 6-5 Vert CR L/240 L/599 (-0, 29) 6-5 Horz LL 0.15in ( 0.01) @Jt 5 Horz CR l.25in ( 0.15) @Jt 5 Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999(-0.01) 1-l Vert CR and Horz CR ar e the ver tical and horizontal de.flections due to live load plus t he creep component or derlection due to dead load, computed as De.fl LL + (Ker -1) x Defl DL in accordance with ANSI/TPI 1. - Bracing Data Summary ------------Bracing Data------------ Chords; continuous except where shown Web Bracing --None Plate offsets (X. Y): (None unless indicated below) Jnt5 (00-13, -00-04), Jnt6 (0, -00-12) NOTICE A copy of this design shall be furnished to Iha erection contractor. The design of this ln<IMdual truu Is based on design aflaria and requirements supplied by the TN&S Manufacturer and reue, upon the acctK11cy and completeness of the lnformatlon set forth by the Bulldlng Oesignor. A seal on this drawing Indicates acceptance of professlonel englnea~ng responsibility solely for the truss component design shown. See the cover page and the "Important lnfonnation & General Notes• page for additional lnfonnatlon. All connector plates shaH be manufactured by Simpson Strong-lle C~ny, Inc In accordance with ESR-2762. All connector olates are 20 gauge, unless the specffied plate size Is foltowed by a "-18"whlch Indicates en 18 gauge plate, or "S/118", wllk:11 Indicates• high tension 18 gauge plate. 1 ... 11111 ..... "llflllll"IIIII Component Solution• l:-11\'ils1•l£1 rru.a Studio v 2020 .1 . 0 .136 fjl ❖ii'@ih BelpdHk: 1-866-252-8606 -CSHelp@atrongti•.com Bernardino Rlla -Bernardino RHldence Customer: - Truss Mfr. Contact: SL r-- 1 0 .-i I N 3-15 t Code/Design: CBC-2016/TPl-2014 PSF Live Dead Dur Factors 1 1 TC 20. 0 15. 0 Live Wind Snow BC 0.0 10.0 Lum J.25 1.60 N/A Total 45.0 Plt 1.25 l.60 N/A Spacing: 2-00-00 o.c. Pliu: Repetitive Momber Increase: Yes Green Lumber: Yes Wet Service: No Fa.b Tolerance: 201 Creep (J(cr) • 2. 0 OH Sotrit Load: 2. 0 psf Material Summary TC 2x4 OFL t2 BC 2x4 DFL f2 Webs 2x4 OFL f2 Member Forces Summary •.. Mam .•• Ten comp .CSI. TC OH-l 53 0 0 .19 l-2 339 1413 0.25 2-3 231 1067 0 .28 3-4 231 1067 0. 28 4-5 339 1413 0.25 5-0H 53 0 0 .19 BC 1-6 1306 257 0.56 5-6 1306 267 0. 56 Web 2-6 178 460 0 .10 3-6 Hl 4 0.07 4-6 177 460 0. 10 Qty: 3 Tru": A2b 4-2-10 3-4-14 3-4-14 4-2-10 4-2-10 2 7-7-8 3 11-0-6 4 15-3-0 4/12 3x4= -4/12 7-7-8 7-7-8 7-7-8 6 15-3-0 15-3-0 -----------snow Load Specs---------- ASCE7-l0 Ground Snow (Pg) • N/A Risk Cat: II Terrain Cat: c ----------Wind Load Specs---------- ASCE7-l0 Wind Speed(V) • 115 mph Risk Cat: II Exposure Cat: c SID: 0000756316 TIO: 109772 Date: 06 / 09 / 20 Page: 1 of 1 5 5 3-15 t 00 I N I ,..., -------Additional Design Check.s------ 10 pst Non-concurrent BCLL: Yes Root Exposure: Shel tered Thermal Conditioc: All Ot hers (1. 0) Unobstructed Slippery Roof: No Low-Slope Minimums (P.fmin): No Unbalanced Snow Loads: No Rain surcharge: No I ce Dam Chk: No Bldg Dims: L • 47.0 ft B • 29.0 ft M.R.H(h) • 15.0 ft Kzt • 1.0 20 pst BC Limited Storage: Yes 200 lb BC l\ccossible Ceiling: Yes 300 lb TC Maintenance Load: Yes Bldg Enclosure: Enclosed 2000 lb TC Safe Load: No Wind OL(psf): TC • 9.0 BC • 6.0 Unbalanced TCLL: Yes End Vertical Exposed: L • Yes R • Yes Wind Uplift Repor ting: I\SCE7 MWFRS c,c End Zone: 3-00-00 Reaction Summary --------------Reaction Summary (Lbs)---------------- Jnt --X-Loc-React -Up---Width--Reqd -Mat PSI l 02-12 772 0 05-08 00-13 OFL 625 5 15-00-04 772 0 05-08 00-13 DFL 625 Max Horiz • -26 / t-26 at Joint 1 Loads Summary This truss has been designed tor the effects o.r an unbalanced top chord live load occurring at [7-07-08) using a 1.00 Full and 0.00 Reduced load !actor . See Loadcase Report tor loading combinations and additional details. Dead Loads may be slope adjusted: > 12.0/12 Tooth-Holding reduction !actors applied:Green Lumber Notes Designed for green lumber that will be seasoned by time of installation. Plates designed tor Cq at O. 80 and Rotational Tolera nce of 10. 0 dogrees Plates located at TC pitch breaks meet the prescriptive minimum size requirement to t r ansfer unblocked diaphragm loads across those joi nts. Deflection Summary TrussSpan Limit Actual (in) Location Vert LL L/360 L/999(-0.05) 1-6 Vert DL L/180 L/999(-0.07) 1-6 Vert CR L/240 L/999 (-0. l3J 1-6 Horz LL O. 75in ( 0. 01) @Jt 5 Horz CR l.2Sin ( 0.03) @Jt 5 Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999 (-0. 01) 1-1 Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999(-0.01) 5-5 Vert CR and Horz CR are the vertical and horizontal deflections due to live load plus t he creep component ot deflection due to dead load, computed as Oefl LL t (Ker -1) x Defl DL in accordance With ANSI/TPI 1. - Bracing Data Summary ------------Bracing Oa ta------------ Chords; continuous except where shown Web Bracing --None Plate offsets (X, Y): (None unless indicated below) NOTICE A copy of this doslgn shall be furnished to the oroctlon contractor. The design of this lndMdual truss Is based on design Clitoris and requ~ements supplled by tha Truss Manufacturer and relies upon the accuracy and oompleteness of the lnfonnation set forth by the Building Oaa~nor. A seal on this draWfng Indicates acceptance of profasslonal englnearing rasponsibrnty solely for the truss component ctesJgn shown. See the cover page and the •important Information & General Notes• page fo, additional Information. All connoclor ptatos shaN ba manufactured by Slmpsoo Strong-118 Company, Inc In acconlance with ESR-2762. All conneclor plates are 20 gauge, unless Ille specified plelo size is followed by• •.19• which Indicates an 18 gauge plala, or "S# 18", which indialtes a high lenslon 18 gauge plale. Component Sol utiona Tru•• Studio V 2020.1.0 .136 Relpdaak: 1-866-252-8606 CSRelp8a trongti.a. c:ca Bernardino Rea -Bemardlno RHldenc1 Customer. - Truss Mfr. Contact SL 1 3-15 :t 1 5-2-8 5-2-8 5-2-8 5-2-8 8 Code/Design: CBC-2016/TPI-2014 PSF Live Dead Dur Factors TC 20.0 15. 0 Live ilind Snow BC 0.0 10. 0 Lum 1. 25 1.60 N/A Total 45 .o Plt 1.25 1. 60 N/A Spacing: 2-00-00 o.c. Plies: Repetitive Member Increase: Yes Green Lumber: Yes Wet Service: No Feb Tolerance: 201 Creep (Ker) • 2 .0 OH Sof!it Load: 2 .0 psf Material Summary TC 2x4 DFL f2 BC 2x4 DFL 12 Webs 2x4 DFL 12 Member Forcea Summary ••• Hem ••• Ten Comp .CSI. TC OH-l 53 0 0 .19 ·1-2 869 605 0. 31 2-3 1718 592 0. 47 3-4 979 544 0.37 4-5 409 142 0. 46 5-6 341 0 0. 48 6-7 224 1397 0 .58 7-0H 49 0 0 .18 BC 1-8 369 616 0. 21 7-17 1301 139 0 . 53 8-9 68 233 0.08 9-10 68 233 0. 03 10-11 294 541 0.05 11-12 215 966 0 .07 12-13 2H 966 0.52 13-14 215 966 0.52 14-15 17 11 0. 39 16-17 1297 HI 0.55 ileb 2-9 781 453 0. 10 2-11 471 1354 0.45 3-11 227 979 0. 17 3-14 733 108 0. 13 4-14 516 1094 o. 36 4-16 714 418 0. 10 5-16 182 373 0.06 6-16 246 1493 0. 74 6-17 287 0 0.05 14-16 222 660 0. 09 15-16 144 15 0.08 4-4-12 4-4-12 I ;5··55--~ I 9-7-4 5-8-3 Qty: 1 6-10-9 Truas: B1 DL.#1700 SID: 0000777980 TIO: 111512 Date: 07 / 14 / 20 Page: 1 of 1 2 3 14-0-0 4 5 21-1-7 6 28-0-0 7 9 4/12 4-4-12 9-7-4 10 11 4-4-12 14-0-0 12 6x6= 1.5x4 1-7-0 is-1-d 13 14 15 , 16 28-0-0 5-6-7 21-1-7 17 -----------snow Load Specs--------------------Wind Load Specs---------- ASCE7-10 ilind Speed (V) • 115 mph Risk Cat: II Exposure Cat: c 6-10-9 28-0-0 7 3-15 :t 0 I V I "' -------Additional Design Checks------ 10 psf Non-concurrent BCLL: Yes 20 pst BC Limited Storage: Yes ASCE7-10 Ground Snow (Pg) • N/A Risk Cat: II Terrain Cat: C Roof Exposure: Sheltered Thermal Condition: All Others (l.O) Unobstructed Slippery Root: No LOw-Slope Minimums (P!min): No Unbalanced Snow Loads: No Rain Surcharge: No Ice Dam Chk: No Bldg Dilllll: L • 47.0 ft 8 • 29.0 ft M.R.H(h) • 15.0 ft l<zt • 1.0 200 lb BC Accessible Ceiling: Yes 300 lb TC Maintenance Load: Yes Bldg Enclosure: Enclosed 2000 lb TC Safe Load: No Wind DL(psf): TC • 9.0 BC • 6.0 Unbalanced TCLL: Yes End Vertical Exposed: L • Yes R • Yes Wind Uplift Reporting: ASCE7 MIIFRS c,c End Zone: 3-00-00 Reaction Summary ---------------Reaction Summary (Lbs)---------------- Jnt --X-Loc-React -Up---Width--Reqd -Mat PSI 7 27-09-04 617 2 05-08 00-11 DFL 625 I 04-14 364 170 13-02-08 9 s-02-08 505 149 13-02-08 11 9-07-04 1351 0 13-02-08 12 11-04-14 40 168 13-02-08 13 13-02-08 784 0 13-02-08 Reactions not ----Reaction Jnt.-Jnt 1-13 Max Horiz • shown: down < 400 and up < 150 Summary (plf) -----React -up---Width- 10 0 13-02-08 (reduced) -54 I +54 at JoinL Loads Summary This truss has been designed !or the eftects of an unbalanced top chord live load occurring at (14-00-00J using a 1.00 Full and 0.00 Reduced load !actor. This truss has been designed tor a 1700. O lb Drag LOad distributed along the top chord rake in each direction and resisted along the bottom chord by shear walls: Shear Wall 1 : 0 to 13-02-08 See Loadcase Report for loading combinations and additional details. Dead Loads may be slope adjusted: > 12. 0/12 Tooth-Holding reduction !actor.s applied:Creen Lumber Notea Designed tor green lumber that will be seasoned by time of installation. Plates designed for Cq at O. 80 and Rotational Tolerance of 10. 0 degrees Plates located at TC pitch breaks Peet the prescriptive minimum size requirement to transfer unbloclced diaphragm loads across those joints. Deflection Summary TrussSpan Limit Actual Un) Location Vert LL L/360 L/999(-0.06) 17-7 Vert DL L/180 L/999(-0.09) 17-7 Vert CR L/240 L/999(-0.16) 17-7 Horz LL 0.751n ( 0.04) @Jt 7 Herz CR 1. 25in ( 0. 07) @Jt 7 Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999(-0.0l) 1-1 Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/9'>9 (-0.01) 7-7 Vert CR and Horz CR are the vertical and horizontal deflections due to l ive load plus the c reep component of deflection due to dead load, computed as Defl LL + (Ker -1 J x Defl DL in accordance With ANSI/TPI 1. - Bracing Data Summary ------------Bracing Oata------------ Chords; continuous except where shown Web Bracing --None Plate offsets (X. Y): (None unless indicated below) Jnt4 (0, -00-05), Jnt9 (0, -00-09), Jntl6 (00-03, 01-04) NOTICE A copy of this design shall be furnished to the erection oontn,ctor. The design of 1h11 Individual lrus. la based on dssign criteria and requirements supplied by the Truss Manufacturer and reties upon the accuracy and oompletenes.s of the Information set forth by the Build Ing Designer. A seal on this drawing lncUcatas acoeptance of professional engineering rasponsibllity sofety for the truss component design shown. Sea the cover page and the ·important Information & General Noles" page for addiUonel lnformaUon. All conneelor plates shell ba manufactured by Simpson Strong-lle Compeny. Inc In accordanoo with ESR-2762. All connedo, plates an, 20 gouge, unless the specified plale gize I• followed by a "-18" Whk:11 lndialles an 18 gauge plo<e. or"S# 18", which Indicates a high tension 18 gauge plala. Component Solution• lfilll'fls1•1£p Truu Studio v 2020.1.0.136 •§lh:\§ih uipa..t, 1-866-252-8606 -CSHelp8atrongti•. cca Bernardino RH -Bernardino RHldence Customer: - Truss Mfr. Contact: SL "' ,-4 I ,-4 ,-4 I ..;- 3-15 t 1.-0-l.4 r r 1 1 7-4-14 7-4-14 5-7-11 5-7-11 Code/Design, CBC-2016/TPI-2014 PSF Live Dead Dur Factors TC 20.0 15.0 Liva Wind Snow BC 0.0 10.0 Lum 1.25 1.60 N/A Total 45.0 Plt 1.25 1.60 N/A Spacing: 2-00-00 o.c. Plies: Repetitive Member Increase: Yes Green Lumber: ¥es Wet Service: No Fab Tolerance: 20, Creep (Ker) • 2.0 OH Soffit Load: 2.0 ps! Material Summary TC 2x4 DFL 12 BC 2x4 DFL 12 2x4 DFL 11B 10-6 Webs 2x4 DFL f 2 Member Forces Summary .• , Mem. . • Ten Comp TC OH-l 53 0 1-2 468 2918 2-3 456 2409 3-4 110 393S 4-5 611 4104 5-6 185 5249 6-0H 49 0 BC 1-1 2162 354 6-11 4979 616 1-8 2111 398 8-9 69 10 10-11 4991 680 Web 2-7 277 0 2-8 201 658 3-8 80 621 3-10 2386 365 4-10 131 199 5-10 188 1153 5-11 221 0 8-10 2116 294 9-10 105 0 .CSI. 0 .19 0 .16 0. 82 0. 62 0.11 0.82 0. 18 0. 55 0.11 0.56 0.31 0. 81 0. 05 0 .16 0. 33 0 .42 0.32 0. 51 0. 04 0. 48 0. 29 Qty: 2 Truas: B2 6-7-2 5-8-3 14-0-0 21-1-7 2 3 4 5 4-9-15 5-1-7 5-6-7 7 10-5-9 8 15-7-0 9,10 21-1-7 11 28-0-0 -----------snow Load Specs---------- ASCE1-10 Ground Snow(Pg) • N/A Risk Cat: II Terrain Cat: C ----------Wind Load Specs---------- ASCE1-10 Wind Speed (V) • 115 mph Risk cat: II Exposure Cat: c 6-10-9 28-0-0 6 6-10-9 28-0-0 6 SID: 0000756319 TIO: 109772 Date: 06 / 10 / 20 Page: 1 of 1 3-15 t 0 I v i "' -------Additional Design Checks------ 10 pst Non-Concurrent BCLL: Yes 20 ps! BC Limited Storage: Yu Roof Exposure: Sheltered Thermal Condition: All Others (1. 0) Unobstructed Slippery Roof\ No Low-Slope Minimums (P!min) , No Unbalanced Snow Loads: No Rain Surcharge: No Ice Dain Chk: No Bldg Dims: L • 41.0 ft B • 29.0 !t M.R.H(h) • 15.0 ft Kzt • 1.0 200 lb BC Accessible Ceiling: Yes JOO lb TC Maintenance Load: Yl!!i:s Bldg Enclosure: Enclosed 2000 lb TC Safe Load: No Wind DL(ps!): TC • 9.0 BC• 6.0 Unbalanced TCLL: Yes End Vertical Exposed: L • Yes R • Yes Hind Uplift Reporting: ASCE1 MWFRS c,c End zone, 3-00-00 Reaction Summary --------------Reaction Summary (Lbs)---------------- Jnt --X-Loc-React -up---Width--Reqd -Mat PSI 1 02-12 1346 0 05-08 01-01 DFL 625 6 27-09-04 1346 0 05-08 01-01 DFL 625 Max Horiz • -54 / +54 at Joint 1 Loads Summary This truss has been designed !or the ef:!ects of an unbalanced top chord live load occurring at {14-00-00J using a 1 .00 Full and 0.00 Reduced load !actor. See Loadcase Report tor loading combi nations and additional details. Dead Loads may be slope adjusted: > 12.0/12 Tooth-Holding reduction factor s applied:Creen Lumber Notes Designed tor green lumber that will be seasoned by time of installation. Plates designed tor Cq at 0.80 and Rotational Toler ance of 10.0 degrees Plates located at TC pitch breaks meet the prescriptive minimum size requirement t.o t.i:ansfer unblocked diaphragm loads across t.hose joints. Deflection Summary TrussSpan Limit Actual (in) Location Vert LL L/360 L/833(-0.39) 10-11 Vert DL L/180 L/635(-0.51) 10-11 Vert CR L/240 L/3601-0. 90) 10-11 Horz LL 0.15in I 0 .16) @Jt 6 Horz CR l. 25in I O. 36) @Jt 6 Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999(-0.0l) 1-l Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999(-0.01) 6-6 Vert CR and Horz CR are the vertical and horizontal deflections due to live load plus the creep component ot. deflection due to dead load, computed as Detl LL + (Ker -1) x Defl DL in accordance With ANSI/TPI l. - Bracing Data Summary ------------Bracing Data------------ Chords; continuous except where shown Heb Bracing --None Plate offsets (X, Y): (None unless indicated below) Jllt3 (0, -00-13), Jnt6 (-00-03, 00-08), JntlO (01-12, 01-15) NOTICE A copy of this design shell be furnished to the erection contractor. Tho design of this lndMdual truss is based on design a1te11a and requlrementa &upplied by the Tru$5 Manufectu,ar and r8'ie& upon the accuracy and oompletenass of the Information set forth by the Bulldlng Designer. A seal on this dra'N(ng indicates acceptance of professlonel engineering respond>ility solely for th• truss component design shown. Sea tho cover page and the "Important lnformallon & Generel Notes· page for addillonal Information. All connector ploles shan be manufactured by SlmpS<>n Strong-llo Company. Inc In accoolance with ESR-2762. AH connector nb:iitAJt ArA ,n nAuoa. unless the soecffled otste size is followed by a ··18" which Indicates an 18 gauge plate, or •S,t 1s·, which Indicates a high tension 18 gauge plate. Ccaponant Solutions l-11\Ws1•1s1 Truu Studio v 2020. l. 0 .136 •u~s'!WiUIJ llal.pde•k= 1-866-252-8606 -CSHelp@etrongti•.com Bernardino Res -Bernardino Rnidence Customer: - Truss Mfr. Contact: SL 11'1 .-i I .-i .-i I v 3-15 t 1 1 7-4-14 7-4-14 5-7-11 5-7-11 Code/Design: CBC-2016/TPJ-2014 PSF Live Dead Dur Factors TC 20. 0 15. 0 Live Nind Snow BC 0.0 10.0 Lum 1.25 1.60 N/A Total 45.0 Plt J.25 1.60 N/A Spacing: 2-00-00 o.o. Plies: Repetitive Member Increase: Yes Green Lumber: Yes Wet Service: No Fab Tolerance: 201 Creep (Ker) • 2.0 OH So!!it Load: 2.0 ps! Material Summary TC 2x4 DFL f2 BC 2x4 DFL t2 2x4 DFL tlB 10-6 Webs 2x4 DFL 12 Member Forces Summary ••• Mem ••. Ten Comp .CSL TC OH-1 53 0 0.19 1-2 480 2985 0. 15 2-3 4 69 2411 o. 82 3-4 126 3951 0. 53 4-5 688 4121 0.11 5-6 863 5306 o. 80 BC 1-1 2169 386 0.55 6-11 5036 146 0 .80 1-8 2118 430 0 .56 0-9 10 11 0. 31 10-11 5041 149 0. 81 Web 2-7 271 0 0.05 2-8 201 658 0.16 3-8 91 626 0. 34 3-10 2396 319 0. 42 4-10 129 191 0. 33 5-10 249 1193 0 .59 5-11 224 0 0 .04 0-10 2121 338 0.48 9-10 105 0 0.30 Qty: 4 Truss: B2a 6-7-2 5-8-3 2 14-0-0 3 4 21-1-7 5 4-9-15 5-1-7 5-6-7 7 10-5-9 8 15-7-0 9,10 21-1-7 11 28-0-0 -----------snow Load Specs---------- ASCE1-10 Ground Snow (Pg) • N/A Risk Cat: II Terrain Cat: C ----------Wind Load Specs---------- ASCE1-10 Wind Speed (V) • 115 mph Risk Cat: II Exposur e Cat: C 6-10-9 28-0-0 6 6-10-9 28-0-0 6 SID: 0000756320 TIO: 109772 Date: 06 / 10 / 20 Page: 1 of 1 3-15 t 0 I v I 11'1 ---·---Additional Design Checks------ 10 psf Non-Concurrent BCLL: Yes 20 psf DC Limited Storage: Yes Root Exposure: Sheltered Ther111&l Condition: All Others ( l. 0 I Unobstructed Slippery Root: No Low-Slope Minimums (P!min) : No Unbalanced Snow Loads: No Rain Surcharge: No Ice Dam Chk: No Bldg Dims: L • 41.0 tt B • 29.0 tt M.R.H(h) • 15.0 !t l(zt • 1.0 200 lb BC Accessible Ceiling: Yes 300 lb TC Maint enance Load: Yes Bldg Enclosure: Enclosed 2000 lb TC Safe Load: No Wind DL (psf): TC • 9.0 BC • 6.0 Unbalanced TCLL: Yes End Ver tical Exposed: L • Yes R -Yes Wind Upli!t Reporting: ASCE1 MWFRS c,c End Zone: 3-00-00 Reaction Summary --------------Reaction Sufflff\8r y (Lbs)---------------... Jnt --x-Loc-React -up---Width--Reqd -Mat PSI J 02-12 1348 0 05-08 01-01 DFL 625 6 21-09-04 1251 0 05-08 HGR DFL 625 Max Horiz • -48 / +63 at .Joint Load& Summary This truss has been designed tor the effects ot an unbalanced top chord live l oad occurring at (14-00-00] using a 1.00 Full and 0.00 Reduced load factor. See Loadcase Repor t for loading cosnbinations and additional details. Dead Loads may be slope adjusted: > 12.0/12 Tooth-Holding reduction factors applied: Groen Lumber Notes Designed tor green lumber that will be seasoned by time of installation. Plates designed tor Cq et 0.80 and Rotational Tol e rance of 10.0 degrees Plates located at TC pitch breaks meet the prescriptive minimum size requirement to t ransfer unblocked diaphragm loads across those joints. Deflection Summary TrussSpan Limit Actual (in) Location Ver t LL L/360 L/833(-0.39) 10-11 Vert DL L/180 L/635(-0.51) 10-11 Vert CR L/240 L/360(-0.90) 10-11 Horz LL 0.15in ( 0.16) @Jt 6 Horz CR 1. 25in ( 0. 31) @Jt 6 Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999(-0.01) 1-.1 Vert CR and Horz CR a re the vertical and horizontal deflections due to live load plus the creep component ot deflection due to dead load, computed as Defl LL + (Ker -l) · x Defl DL in accordance with ANSJ/TPJ 1. - Bracing Data Summary ------------Bracing Data------------ Chords1 continuous except where shown Web Bracing --None Plate offsets (X, Y}: (None unless indicated below) Jnt3 (0,-00-13), Jnt6 (-00-03, 00-08), JntlO (01-12, 01-15) NOTICE A copy of this de•lgn shell be furnished to the erection contractor. The design of this lnclMduel truss Is based on design criteria and requirements supplied by the Truss Manufacturer and reHea upon the accuracy and completeness of the Information set forth by the Building Designer. A seal on thts drawing Indicates acceptance of professlonal engineering responsibthty sotely f« the truss component design shown. See the cover page and the important Information & General Not8$· page for eddillonal lnformaUon. All connector platos shall bo manufactured by Simpson Strong•lle Company, Inc In accordance wUh ESR-2762. All connedor ............. ?n ,,a11nA unless the ,oec:ffled plate size is folloWed by a "'-18"' which Indicates an 18 gauge plate. or •S# 1e•, which Indicates a high tension 18 gauge plate. C011p0nent Solution• .. ,l(Jl;t-1eu■ Truu Studio V ======== 2020.1.0 .136 1.:r~M,'·a Mh Helpdeak : 1-866-252-8606 CShlp8•trongtie. c:xa Bernardino Res -Bernardino Residence Customer: - Truss Mfr. Contact SL l,-0-;1.4 r r 4-10-9 1 4-10-9 3-15 t 6-11-0 1 6-11-0 Code/Design: CBC-2016/TPI-2014 PSF Live Dead Dur Factors TC 20.0 15.0 Liva Wind Snow BC 0 .0 10.0 Lum l.25 l.60 NIA Total 45.0 Plt l.25 l.60 N/A Spacing: 2-00-00 o.c. Plies: Repetitive Member Increase: Yes Green Lumber : Yes "et Service: No Fab Toler ance: 20\ Creep (Ker) • 2. 0 OH Softit Load: 2. 0 psf Material Summary TC 2x4 DFL 12 BC 2x4 DFL 12 2x4 DFL llB 12-8 Webs 2x4 DFL t2 Member Forces Summary , •• Mem ••• Ten Comp .CSL TC OH-1 53 0 0 .19 1-2 497 3057 0. 34 2-3 457 2815 0. 38 3-4 633 3899 0. 41 4-5 607 3634 0. 21 s-6 589 3708 0. 42 6-7 751 4758 o. 63 7-8 769 5178 0. 61 8-0H 49 0 0 . 18 BC 1-9 2848 401 0. 64 8-14 4906 670 0 . 87 9-10 49 7 0.47 11-12 3732 426 0 . 70 12-13 4550 602 0.57 13-14 4928 673 o. 87 Web 2-9 115 349 0.04 3-9 203 952 0. 21 3-11 529 0 0.09 4-11 473 56 o. 32 4-12 175 519 0.06 5-12 2014 309 0.35 6-12 227 1054 o. 31 6-13 293 0 0. OS 7-13 87 615 0.17 7-14 141 48 0.02 9-11 3290 441 0. 58 10-11 122 0 0.23 2 Qty: 2 Trull: B2b 4-0-13 4-0-13 8-11-7 13-0-4 3 6-3-0 9 13-2-0 11-12 14-0-0 4 5 10-0 14-0-0 10,1112 4-3-4 4-3-3 18-3-4 6 22-6-6 7 4-3-4 4-3-3 18-3-4 13 22-6-6 14 28-0-0 -----------snow Load Specs--------------------Wind Load Specs---------- ASCE7-l0 Wind Speed (V) • 115 mph Risk Cat: II Exposure Cat: C 5-5-10 28-0-0 8 5-5-10 28-0-0 8 SID: 0000756321 TIO: 109772 Date: 06 / 10 I 20 Page: 1 of 1 3-15 t 0 I .... I "' -------Additional Design Checks------ 10 pst Non-Concurrent BCLL: Yes 20 ps! BC Limited St orage: Yes llSCE7-10 Ground Snow (Pg) • N/A Ri sk Cat: II Terrain Cat: C Root Exposure: Sheltered Thermal Condition: All Others(l.0) Unobstructed Slippery Roof: No Low-Sl ope Minimums (Pfmin) : No Unbal anced Snow Loads: No Rain Sur charge: No Ice Dam Chk: No Bldg Dims: L • 47.0 ft B • 29.0 ft M.R.H(h) • 15 .0 ft Kzt • l.0 200 lb BC Accessible Ceiling: Yes JOO lb TC Maintenance Load: Yes Bldg Enclosure: Enclosed 2000 lb TC Safe Load: No Wi nd DL(psf): TC • 9.0 BC • 6.0 Unbal anced TCLL: Yes End Vertical Exposed: L • Yes R • Yes Wind Uplift Reporting: ASCE7 HWFRS c,c End Z.one: 3-00-00 Reaction Summary --------------Reaction Summary (Lbs)---------------- .Jnt --x-Loc-React -up---Width--Reqd -Mat PSI 1 02-12 1346 0 05-08 01-07 DFL 625 8 27-09-04 1346 0 05-08 01-07 DFL 625 Max Horiz --54 / ..,54 at Joint l Loads Summary This truss has been designed tor the ef fects ot an unbalanced top chord live load occurring at (14-00-00] using a l.00 Full and 0.00 Reduced load factor. Sea Loadcase Report for loading combinations and additional details . Dead Loads may be slope adjusted: > 12.0/12 Tooth-Holding reduction factors applied:Gr een Lumber Notes Designed tor green lumber that will be seasoned by time ot installation. Plates designed for Cq a t 0.80 and Rota tional Tolerance of 10.0 degrees Plates l ocated at TC pitch breaks meet t he prescriptive minimum si ze re qui rement. to t.can.ster unblocked diaphr agm loads a.cross t hose joints. Deflection Summary Tr ussSpan Limit .Actua l (in) Location Vert LL L/360 L/818 (-0. 401 13-14 Vert DL L/1 80 L/651 (-0.50) 12-13 Ver t CR L/240 L/363 (-0. 89) 12-13 Horz LL 0.75in ( 0.18) @Jt 8 Horz CR l. 2Sin ( 0. 42) @Jt 8 Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999(-0 .0l) 1-l Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999(-0.0l) 8-8 Ver t CR and Horz CR ar e t.he vertical and horizontal do!lections due to live load plus t he creep component o! deflect ion due to dead load, computed as De!l LL + (Ker -1) x Detl DL in accordance With "ANSI/TPI l. - Bracing Data Summary ------------Bracing Data------------ Chords; continuous except where shown Web Bracing --None Plate offsets (X, Y): (None unless indicated below) Jnt8 (-00-03, 00-08), Jntll (-00-02, 00-121, Jntl2 (0, -00-01) NOTICE A copy of this design shall be furnished to the erection contractor. The design of this individual trugs ls based on design criteria and requirements supplied by the Truss Manufecturer and '9lles upon the accuracy and oompteteneos of the lnformalfon set forth by tho Building Designer. A seal on this drawing Indicates acceptance of professional engineering rosponalblllty SO,ely for the truss component design shown. See the cover page ond the •important Information & General Notes• page for addlttonal Information. AJI connector plates shall be manufactured by Simpson Strong~ lle Company, Inc In accordance with ESR-2762. All connedor · ·~~ ·--'\A_,..,_,. ""'-• tna cnar.ifiN1 nlate size Is followed by a •-18" which Indicates an 18 gauge plate, or •5# 1e·, which lndtcllt86 a high tensk>n 18 gauge plate. Component Solution• Trua■ Studio V 2020 .1. 0 .136 Belpda■lt: l -866-252-8606 CSHelp&■trongti•. com Bernardino Res -Bernardino RHldenc• Customer: - Truss Mfr. Contact: SL "' .-l I m I m 3-15 t 1 4-10-14 4-10-14 2 3 4-1-2 9-0-0 4 5x8pm 4-1-2 13-1-2 5 Qty: 1 4-10-14 18-0-0 6 7 Truss: C1 DL#300 3-15 t SID: 0000756322 TIO: 109772 Date: 06 / 10 / 20 Page: 1 of 1 0 I 00 I m Typical plate: l. Sx4 1 Code/Design: CBC-2016/TPI-2014 PSF Live Dead Our Factors TC 20.0 15.0 Live Wind Snow BC 0.0 10.0 LUJI\ 1.25 1.60 N/A Total 45.0 Plt 1.25 1.60 N/A Spacing: 2-00-00 o. c. Plies: Repetitive Member Increase: Yes Green Lumber : Ye.s Wet Service: No Fab Tolerance: 201 Creep (!<er) • 2. O OH sortit Load: 2.0 ps! Material Summary TC 2x4 DFL 12 BC 2x4 DFL 12 Webs 2x4 DFL I 2 Other 2x4 DFL 12 Member Forces Summary ... Hem. • . Ten Comp TC OH-1 53 0 1-2 28 9 1-2 459 423 2-3 495 411 3-4 425 338 4-5 425 338 5-6 495 411 6-1 28 9 6-1 459 423 7-0H 53 0 BC 1-8 376 453 7-14 376 453 8-9 376 453 9-10 404 473 10-11 404 473 11-12 404 473 12-13 404 473 13-14 376 453 Web 3-9 610 826 3-11 1111 1127 4-11 102 282 5-11 1111 1127 5-13 610 826 .csr. 0 .19 0.08 0 .18 0.28 0. 33 0.33 0 .28 0.08 0 .18 0 .19 0.27 0.27 0.06 0.06 o. 06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0. 08 0.32 0. 04 0.32 0 .08 4-10-14 4-10-14 8 9 4-1-2 9-0-0 10 11 4-1-2 13-1-2 12 13 4-10-14 18-0-0 14 18-0-0 -----------Snow Load Specs---------- ASCE?-10 Ground Snow(Pg) • N/A Risk C.tt: II Terrain Cat: C ----------Wind Load Specs---------- ASCE?-10 Wind Speed(V) • 115 mph Risk Cat: II Exposure Cat: C 7 -------Additional Design Chect.s------ 10 psf Non-Concurr ent BCLL: Yes 20 psf BC Limited Storage: Yes Roof' Exposure: Shel tared Thermal Condition: All Others(l.O) Unobstr ucted Slippery Roof: No LOw--Slope Minimums (Pf11in) : No Unbalanced Snow Loads: No Rain surcharge: No Ice Dam Chk: No Bldg Dims: L • 47.0 ft B • 29.0 !t M.R.H(h) • 15.0 ft Kzt • 1.0 200 lb BC Accessible Ceiling: Yes 300 lb TC Maintenance Load: Yes Bldg Enclosure: Enclosed 2000 lb TC Sate Load: No Wind DL(ps!): TC • 9.0 BC • 6.0 Unbalanced TCLL: Yes End Ver tical Exposed: L • Yes R • Yes Wind Uplift Reporting: ASCE7 MWFRS c,c End Zone: 3-00-00 Reaction Summary --------------Reaction Summary (Lbs)---------------- .Jnt --X-LOc-React -Up---Width--Reqd -Mat PSI 1 1-03-04 567 14 18-00-00 8 2-10-10 74 153 18-00-00 9 4-10-14 877 568 18-00-00 13 13-01-02 877 568 18-00-00 14 15-01-06 74 153 18-00-00 1 16-08-12 567 14 18-00-00 Reactions not shown: down < 400 and up < 150 ----Reaction Suminary (pH) ----- Jnt-Jnt React -up---wi dth- 1-7 10 0 18-00-00 (reduced) Max Horiz --36 I +36 at Joint Loads Summary This trus.1 has been designed for the effects ot an unbalanced top chord live load occurring at {9-00-00) using a 1.00 Full and 0.00 Reduced load factor. This truss has been designed tor a 3000.0 lb Drag Load distributed along tho top chord rake i n each direction and resisted at any bearing location shown. See Loadcase Report tor loading cor\binations and additional dotails. Dead Loads may be slope adjusted: > 12.0/12 Tooth-Holding reduction factors applied: Green Lumber Notes Gable webs are attached with min. lx3 20 ga.plates. The max.rake overhang • 1/2 the truss spacing. I! this truss is exposed to wind loads perpendicular to the plane ot the truss, it must be braced according to a standard detail matching the wind cri ter ia shown, or according to the Construction Documents and/or SCSI -B3. Designed for green l umber that will be seasoned by timo or installation. Plates designed tor Cq at 0 .80 and Rotational Tolerance of 10.0 degrees Plates located at TC pitch breaks meet the prescripti ve minimum size requirement to transfer unblocked diaphragm loads across those joints. A "pm" next to the plate size i ndi cates that t he plate has been user moditiod; see Plate Oft sets for any special positioning requirements. The top chord may be notched 1.511 deop x 3.5" wide at 24" o.c. max. tor outlookers. Do not notch in the heel areas marked or anywhere there is a single chord member. Do not cut the connector plates. Attach stacked chords with 2x4 20 ga. plates, u.n.o. Deflection Summary TrussSpan Limit Actual (in) Location Ver t LL L/360 L/999 ( 0. 00) 1-8 Ver t DL L/180 L/999 ( 0. 00) 1-8 Vert CR L/240 L/999 ( 0. 00) 1-8 Rorz LL 0.75in ( 0.01) @Jt l Horz CR l.25in ( 0.01) @Jt l Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999(-0.0l) 1-l Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999 (-0. 01) 7-7 Vett CR and Horz CR are the vertical and horizontal de!lections due to live load plus the creep component ot defl ection due to dead load, computed as Oe!l LL ..- (Ker -1) x Oefl DL in accordance With A!OSI/TPI 1. - Bracing Data Summary ------------Bracing Oa ta------------ Chords; continuous except where shown Web Bracing --None Plate offsets (X, Y): (None unless indicated below) Jntl (-09-14, -02-05), Jnt3 (00-07, 01-01), Jnt5 (-00-05, 01-01), Jot? (10-01, -02-05), Jnt4 (0, 01-06) NOTICE A copy of this do•lgn shall be furnished to the erection 00ntme1or. Tho design of this lndMduol trusa Is ba&od on design atteria and r.qunmenta supplied by the Truss Manufacturer and relies upon the accuracy end oompJetaness of the lnformalk>n sat forth by the Building Designer. A seal on this drawing Indicates acceptance of professlonal englnee~ng responslblllly solely for the truss componenl design &hoWn. Seo the COYor page and lhe "lmportan( Information & General Notes• page for additional Information. All connector plates shall be manufactured by Simpson Strong•Tie Company, Inc ln accordance wnh ESR•2762. All connedor _.._.,. .. -. .... ?n n•11nA 11nlA1.~ the soecifled ~ate size Is followed by a •~1e• which indicates an 18 gauge plate, or •S# 1s•, which Indicates a high tensk>n 18 gauge plate. component Solution• '7tl❖IS1•1£■ 'rrua■ Studio V ======= 2020.1.0 .136 ·•+s•B'ii5 llelpd.uk : 1-866-252-8606 -CSH•lp@at.rongtie.com Bt1rnardlno llH • Bernardino Rnldence Customer: • Truss Mfr. Contact SL 1 3-15 t 1 Code/Design: CBC-2016/TPI-2014 PSF Live Dead Dur Factor s TC 20.0 15.0 Live wind Snow BC 0 .0 10.0 Lum 1.25 l.60 N/A Total 45. 0 Pl t l. 25 l. 60 N/A Spacing: 2-00-00 o.c. Plies: Repetitive Member Increase: Ye.1 Gr een Lumber: Yes Wet Ser vice: No Fab Tolerance: 20, Creep (Ker) -2.0 OH So!!it Load: 2.0 ps! Material Summary TC 2x4 DFL 12 BC 2x4 DFL t2 Webs 2x4 DFL t2 Member Forces Summary ••• Mem ••• Ten Comp .CSL TC OH-l 53 0 0.19 1-2 341 1751 o. 31 2-3 292 1260 0 .32 3-4 292 1260 0.32 4-5 341 1751 0. 31 5-0H 53 0 0 .19 BC 1-6 1617 254 0.39 5-8 1617 263 0.39 6-7 1617 254 0.39 7-8 1617 263 0. 39 Web 2-6 212 0 0.03 2-7 134 571 0 .17 3· 7 485 39 0.08 •-1 133 571 0 .17 •-8 212 0 0.03 Qty: 2 Truss: C2 4-10-14 4-1-2 4-1-2 4-10-14 4-10-14 2 9-0-0 3 13-1-2 4 18-0-0 4/12 3x5 -4/12 4-10-14 4-1-2 4-1-2 4-10-14 4-10-14 6 9-0-0 7 13-1-2 8 18-0-0 18-0-0 -----------snow Load Specs--------------------Wind Load Speca---------- ASCE7-10 Wind Speed (V) • 115 mph Risk Cat: II Exposure Cat: C l-o-v 5 5 3-15 t SID: 0000756323 TIO: 109772 Date: 06 / 09 / 20 Page: 1 of 1 0 I 00 I "" -------Additional Design Checks------ 10 pst Non-Concurrent BCLL: Yes 20 ps! BC Limited Storage: Yes ASCE7-10 Ground Snow (Pg) • N/A Risk Cat: II Terrain Cat: C Root Exposure: Sheltered Thermal Condition: All Others (1.0) Unobstructed Slippery Root: No Low-Slope Minimums (P!min): No unbalanced Snow Loads: No Rain Sur charge: No Ice Dam Chk.: No Bldg Dims: L • 47.0 !t B • 29.0 !t M.R.H(h) • 15.0 !t Kzt • l.0 200 lb BC Accessible Celling: Yes 300 lb TC Maintenance Load: Yes Reaction Summary Bldg Enclosure: Enclosed Wind DL(ps!): TC • 9.0 BC • 6.0 End Vertical Exposed: L • Yes R • Yes Wi nd Uplift Repor ting: ASCE7 MWFRS c,c End Zone: 3-00-00 --------------Reaction Suwn.ary (Lbs)---------------- Jot --X-Loc-React -op-·-Width--Reqd -Mat PSI l 02-12 896 0 05-08 00-15 DFL 625 5 17-09-04 896 0 05-08 00-15 DFL 625 Max Horiz • -32 / +32 at Joint 1 Loads Summary This t russ has been designed tor the effects of an unbalanced top chord live load occurring at [9-00-00} using a 1.00 Full and 0.00 Reduced load factor. See Loadcase Report tor loading combinations and add! tional details. Dead Loads may be slope adjusted: > 12. 0/12 Tooth-Holding reduction factors applied: Green Lumber Notes Designed for green lumber that will be seasoned by time ot i nstallation. Plates designed for Cq at 0.90 and Rot a tional Tolerance ot 10.0 deg.rees Plates located at TC pitch breaks meet the prescriptive minim.wn size requirement to transfer unblocked diaphragm loads across those joints. 2000 lb TC Sate Load: No Unbalanced TCLL ! Yes Deflection Summary TrussSpan Limit Actual {in) Location Vert LL L/360 L/999 (-0.06) 7-8 Vert DL L/180 L/999(-0.08) 7-8 Vert CR L/240 L/999(-0.13) 7-8 Horz LL 0. 75in ( 0 .02) @Jt 5 Horz CR l.25in ( 0.04) @Jt 5 Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999(-0.0l) 1-l Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999(•0.0!) 5-5 Vert CR and Horz CR are the vertical and horizontal deflections due to live load plus the creep component of deflection due to dead load, computed as Defl LL + (Ker -1) x Detl DL in accordance. With ANSI/TPI I. - Bracing Data Summary ------------Bracing Oata------------ Chords; continuous except where shown Web Bracing --None Plate off■ets (X, Y): {None unless indicated below) NOTICE A copy of this design shall be furnished to lhe erection conlractor. The design of this Individual lr\Jss Is based on design critel1a and roqu~ements aupplied by the Truss Manufacturer and ralioa upon the accuracy and completanar.s of the lnfonnation set forth by the BulJdlng Designer. A aeal on this drawfng lndk:ates acceptance of professional engineering responsibility solely for the truss component design shown. Sae the cover page and the •important Information & General Notes· page for addltk>nal Information. AJI connector plates shell be manufactured by Simpson Strong-Tle Company, Inc Jn accordance with ESR~2762. AA connector ni.lA<Are 20 oauoe. unless the specified plate sira Is followed by a "-18' Which lndk:alaS on 18 gauge plalo, or 'S# 18", Which Indicates a high lonslon 18 gauge plole. Component SoluUon• l-1!❖1s1•u■ Truoa Studio V 2020 .1. 0 .136 •u•❖i:••&itJ R•lJ><M■k: 1-866-252-8606 -CSBelp@atrongt.1.•. c:ca Bernardino Res • Bernardino Residence Customer: • Truss Mfr. Contact: SL ,.,.., ... I "" I "" 3-15 :t 1 1 Code/Design: CBC-2016/TPl-2014 PSF Live Dead Dur Factors TC 20.0 15.0 Live !find Sno1< BC o.o 10.0 Lum 1.25 1.60 N/A Total 45. 0 Plt l. 25 l. 60 N/A Spacing: 2-00-00 o. c. Plies: Repetitive Member Increase: Yes Green Lumber: Yes Wet Service: No Fab Tolerance: 201 creep (Ker) • 2. o OH Sottit Load: 2.0 psf Material Summary TC 2x4 OFL 12 BC 2x4 DFL 12 Webs 2x4 OFL f2 Member Forces Summary ••• Mcm ••• Ten Comp .CSI. TC OH-l 53 0 0.19 1-2 341 1751 0.31 2-3 292 1260 0.32 3-4 292 1260 0.32 4-5 341 1751 o. 31 5-0H 53 0 0 .19 BC 1-6 1617 254 0.39 5-8 1617 263 0.39 6-7 • 1617 254 0.39 7-8 1617 263 0.39 Web 2-6 212 0 0.03 2-7 134 571 0.17 3-7 485 39 0.08 •-7 133 571 0.17 4-8 212 0 0.03 Qty: 1 Trusa: C2 Dl#1300 4-10-14 4-1-2 4-1-2 4-10-14 4-10-14 2 9-0-0 3 13-1-2 4 18-0-0 4/12 3x5 -4/12 4-10-14 4-1-2 4-1-2 4-10-14 4-10-14 6 9-0-0 7 13-1-2 8 18-0-0 18-0-0 -----------snow Load Specs---------- ASCE7-10 Ground Snow (Pg) • N/A Risk Cat: II Terrain Cat: C ----------Wind Load Specs---------- ASCE7-10 Wind Spced(V) • 115 mph Risk Cat: II Exposure Cat: C 5 3-15 :t 5 SID: 0000756324 TIO: 109772 Dale: 06 I 09 / 20 Page: 1 of 1 0 I co I "" -------Additional Design Check.s------ 10 pst Non-Concurrent BCLL: Yes 20 pst BC Limited Storage: Yes Roof Exposure: Shelter ed Thermal Condition: All Others(l.0) Unobstructed Slippery Roof: No Low-Slope Minimums (Ptmin) : No Unbalanced Snow Loads: No Rain Surcharge: No Ice Dam Chk: No Bldg Dims: L • 47.0 !t B • 29.0 ft M.R.H(h) • 15.0 ft Kzt • l.0 200 lb BC Accessible Ceiling: Yes 300 lb TC Maintenance Load: Yes Bldg Enclosure: Enclosed 2000 lb TC Safe Lead: No Wind DL (ps!) : TC • 9. 0 BC • 6. 0 Unbalanced TCLL: Yes End Vertical Exposed: L • Yes R • Yes Wind Uplift Reporting: l\SCE7 MWFRS c,c End Zone: 3-00-00 Reaction Summary --------------Reaction Summary (Lbs)---------------- Jnt --x-Loc-React -up---Width--Reqd -Mat PSI l 02-12 896 0 05-08 00-15 DFL 625 5 17-09-04 896 0 05-08 00-15 DFL 625 Max Horiz • -32 / +32 at Joint 1 Loads Summary Thls truss has been designed tor t he ettects o! an unbalanced top chord l ive load occurring at ( 9-00-00 I using a 1. 00 Full and O. 00 Reduced load factor. This truss has been designed tor a 1300.0 lb Drag Load distributed along the top chord rake in each direction and resisted at any bearing location shown. See Loadcase Report tor loading coa'\binations and addi tiona l details. Dead Loads may be slope adjusted: > 12. 0/12 Tooth-Holding reduction factor s applied:Green Lumber Notes Designed for green lumber that will be seasoned by time or i nstallation. Plates designed tor Cq at 0.80 and Rotational Tolera.nce o! 10.0 degrees Plates located at TC pit.ch breaks meet t.he prescriptive minimum size requi rement to transfer unblocked diaphragm l oads across those joints. Deflection Summary Trus.sSpan Limit Actual (in) Location Vert LL L/360 L/999 (-0. 06) 7-8 Vert DL L/180 L/999 (-0. 08) 7-8 Vert CR L/240 L/999 (-0. 13) 7-8 Horz LL 0. 75in ( 0.02) @Jt 5 Horz CR 1.25in ( 0.04) @Jt 5 Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999 (-0.01) 1-1 Ohng CR 2L/240 2L/999(-0.01) 5-5 Vert CR and Horz CR are the vertical and horizontal deflections due to 11 ve load plus the creep component ot de!lection due to dead load, computed as Detl LL + (Ker -l} x Detl DL in accordance With ANSI/TPI I. - Bracing Data Summary ------------Br acing Oata------------ Chords; continuous except where shown Web Bracing --None Plate offsets (X, Y): (None unless indicated below) NOTICE A copy of this design ohaH be furnished to the erectfon oontractor. Tho design of this Individual truss ts based on design criteria and requlremant1 6'lpplied by the Truss Manufecturor and reties upon the accuracy and completeness of tha tnformaUon set forth by Ule Buikfing Designer. Asaal on this drawing lndk:atas acceptance of profeulonal engineering responsl>ltity oolely for the truss component design shown. See the cover page and the ·important lnfonnation & General Notes· page for additional Information. All connector plates shall be manufactured by Simpson Strong-lle Company, Inc In accordance with ESR .. 2762. AU connector -•-•----?n ............ untA~,::; thA JU>8cffied Plate size Is fottowed by a •~18• whk:h indicates an 18 gauge plate, 0t •St1 18", which Indicates a high tension 18 gauge plate. Coaponent Solutions l:-1lt'!ls1•U• ~ru■a Stud.io V 2020.1 .0 .136 •#{idWiti Belp,wak: 1-866-252-8606 · CSll•lp@•trongti•.com Bernardino Jtea -Btrnardlno Reaidenc• Customer: - Truss Mfr. Contact: SL Coda/Design: CBC-2016/TPI-2014 PSP' Live Dead Our Factors TC 20.0 15.0 Liva Wind Snow BC 0.0 10.0 Lum 1.25 l.60 N/A Total 45.0 Plt 1.25 l.60 NIA Spacing: 2-00·00 o.c. Plies: Repetitive Member Increa~e: Yea Green Lumber: Yes Wet Ser vice: No Fab Toler ance: 201 Creep (Ker ) -2.0 OH Softit Load: 2.0 psf Material Summary TC 2x4 Df'L t2 BC 2x4 Df'L t2 Webs 2x4 Df'L t2 Other 2x4 DFL t2 Member Forces Summary ... Mem. . • Ten Comp TC 1-2 6 2 l -2 141 314 2-3 165 312 3-4 165 312 4-5 6 2 4-5 141 314 BC l• 6 264 69 5-? 264 69 6-1 264 69 .CSL 0.03 0.04 0. 09 0.09 0.03 0.04 0.08 0. 08 0.05 Qty: 2 Truas: 01 1 3-15 t 1 3-10-8 3-10-8 2 4/12 6 -----------Snow Load Specs---------- ASCE?•l O Ground Snow(Pg) • N/A Risk Cat : II Terrain Cat: c Root Exposure: Sheltered Thermal Condition: All Other s < l. 0 I Unobstr ucted Sl ippery Root: No Low-Slope Minimums (P!min): No Unbalanced. Snow Loads: No Rain Surcharge: No Ice Dam Chk : No Reaction Summary 3-10-8 3 7-9-0 4 s -4/12 7-9-0 7-9-0 7 s ----------Wind Load Specs---------- ASCE?-10 Wind Speed(V) • 115 mph Risk Cat: II Exposure Cat: C Bl dg Dims : L • 41. 0 ft B • 2 9. 0 ft M.R.H(h) • 15,0 ft Kzt • 1.0 Bldg Enclosure: Enclosed Wind DL(psf): TC • 9.0 BC • 6.0 End Ver tical Exposed: L • Yes R • Yes Wind Uplift Reporting: ASCE? MWFRS c,c End Zone: 3-00-00 Reactions not shown: down < 400 and up < 150 ----Reaction Swrrnary (pH) -----Jnt-Jnt React -up---width- 1-5 89 0 ?-09-00 Max Horiz • -n I +11 at Joint Loads Summary This t russ has been designed tor the e!fects of an unbalanced top chord live l oad occurring at [3-10-081 using a 1.00 Full and 0.00 Reduced load factor. See toadcase Report for loading combinations and additional details. Dead Loads may be slope adjusted: > 12.0/12 Tooth-Holding reduction factors applied: Gr aen Lumber Notes SID: 0000777979 TIO: 111512 Date: 07 / 14 / 20 Page: 1 of 1 --·----Additional Design Checks------ 10 psf Non-Concurrent BCLL: Yes 20 psf BC Limited Stor age: Yes 200 lb BC Accessible ceiling: Yes 300 lb TC Mai ntenance Load: Yes 2000 l b TC Sate Load: No Unbalanced TCLL: Yes Deflection Summary Tr ussSpan Limi t Actual (in) Location Vert LL L/360 L/999(-0.00) 6-1 Vert DL L/180 L/999 (·0.00) 6-? Vert CR L/240 L/999(-0.00) 6-1 Horz LL O. ?51n ( 0 .00) @Jt 5 Horz CR l.25in ( 0.00) @Jt 5 Vert CR and Horz CR are the ver tical and horizontal dotlections due to live load plus t he creep component ot deflection due to dead load, computed as Def'.l LL + (Ker -1) x Oefl DL in accordance Wit h ANSI/TPI I. - Bracing Data Summary ------------Bracing Oata------------ Chords; continuous except where shown Web Br acing --None Gable webs ar e attached with min. lx3 20 ga.plates. The max.rake overhang • 1/2 t he tr uss spacing. I f this truss i s exposed to wind loads perpendicular to the plane ot the truss, it must be braced according to a standar d detail matching t he wind criteria shown, or accord.ing to the Conat ruction Documents and/or BCSI -B3. Plate offsets (X, Y): Designed for green lumber that will be seasoned by time of installation. Plates designed tor Cq a t 0.80 and Rotational Toler ance ot 10.0 degrees Plates located at TC pi tch brea ks meet the prescr iptive minimum size requirement to transfer unblocked diaphragm loads across t hose j oints. A "pm" next to the plate size indicates that the plate has been user 1T10ditied; see Plate Offsets tor any special positioning requirements. The top chord may be notched 1.5" deep x 3.5" wide a t 24" o .c. max. tor outlookers. Do not notch i n the heel areas marked or anywhere there is a single chord membet. Do not cut the connector plates. Attach stacked chords with 2x4 20 ga. plates, u .n.o . (None unless i ndicated below) Jntl (-10-04,-02-07), JntS (10-01, •02-06), Jnt3 (0, Ol-06) NOTICE A copy of lhl• design shell be furnished ID the erecllon conin,ctor. The design of this indMduol tl\Jss is based on design atto~a and requifllmento aupplied by the Truss Manufacturer and relies upon the accu,aey and completeness of tha Information set forth by the Building De&lgnar. A seat on this dmwing lndlcetes ecceplsnce of profeasional englnee~ng n1Sponsl>llity solely for lhe truss component design shown. Sao lho cover page and lhe "Important lnfonnallon & General Notes• page for addlllonal lnfonnation. AJI oonnoctor plates shall be manufactured by Simpson Strong-Tie Company, Inc In acoordan<1e with ESR-2762. All connector plates aro 20 gauge, unless the specified plate size Is followed by a "-18" whlcll Indicates sn 18 gauge ptele, or "S# 18", which Indicates a high tension 18 gauge plate. Cc:lllponent Sol utiona 1:-11❖1s1•u■ Truu Stucllo V ~020 .1. 0 .136 ff >'i:iein lhllpda•lt: l-866-252-8606 -CSBelp@atrongt1e.com . Bernardino Res -Bernardino RHldence Customer: - Truss Mfr. Contact SL Code/Design: CBC-2016/TPI ·2014 PSF Live Dead Dur Factors TC 20.0 15.0 Live Hind Snow BC 0 .0 10.0 Lum 1.25 1.60 N/A Total 45.0 Plt 1.25 1.60 N/A Spacing: 2·00-00 o.c. Plies: Repetitive Member Increase.: No Green Lumber: Yes Wot Service: No Fab Tolerance: 201: Creep (Ker) -2. 0 OH Soffit Load: 2.0 psf Material Summary TC 2x4 OFL f2 BC 2x6 OFL f2 Webs 2x4 OFL f2 Member Forces Summary ••. Hem... Ten Comp TC l· 2 0 2582 2-3 0 2588 BC 1-2447 0 3-2447 0 Heb 2-4 1302 0 .CSL 0 .15 0.11 0.37 0. 37 0.11 Qty: 1 Truss: 02 SID: 0000756325 TIO: 109TT2 Date: 06/09/20 Page: 1 of 1 2-Ply 3-10-8 3-10-8 1 3-10-8 2 7-9-0 3 4/12 -4/12 3x4= 3-15 ~ 3-15 t 681# 3-10-8 1 3-10-8 -----------snow Load Specs---------- ASCE7-10 Ground Snow(Pg) • N/A Risk Cat: II Ter rain Cat: C t 1. Sx4 681# 681# 3-10-8 4 7-9-0 3 7-9-0 ----------Wind Load Specs---------- ASCE7-10 Wind Speed (V) • 115 mph Risk Cat: II Exposure Cat: C -------Additional De•ign Checks------ 10 psf Non-Concurrent. BCLL: Yes 20 psf BC Limit.ed Storage: Yes Roof Exposure: Sheltered Thermal Condition: All Othcrs(l.0) Unobstructed Slippery Root: No Low-Slope Minimums {Pfmin): No Unbalanced Snow Loads: No Rain surcharge: No Ice Dam Chk: No Bldg Dims: L • 4 7. 0 ft B • 2 9. 0 ft M.R.H(h) • 15.0 ft Kzt • 1.0 200 lb BC Accusible Ceiling: Yes 300 lb TC Maintenance Load: Yes Bldg Enclosure: Enclosed 2000 lb TC Safe Load: No Hi nd OL(psf): TC • 9.0 BC • 6.0 Unbalanced TCLL: Yes End Vertical Exposed: L • Yes R • Yes Wind Uplift Reporting: ASCE7 MWFRS c,c End Zone: 3-00•00 Reaction Summary --------------Reaction Summary (Lbs)---------------- Jnt --X-Loc-React -up---Width--Reqd -Mat PSI 1 02·12 1492 0 05·08 00-13 OFL 625 3 7-06-04 1247 0 05-08 00-11 OFL 625 Max Horiz • ... 13 / +13 at Joint 1 Loads Summary This truss has been designed for the effects ot an unbalanced top chord live load occurring at [3-10-08] using a 1.00 FUll and 0.00 Reduced load factor. See Loadcase Report for loading combinations and additional details. Dead Loads may be slope adjusted: > 12.0/12 • Loads based on maximum and minimum reactions from tie-in spans Domain Max Min Location Dir Description Transfer loads: BC 681 17 BC 681 17 BC 681 17 1-05-04 3-05-04 5-05-04 Tooth-Holding reduction factors 2-PLY TRUSS Fastener Spacing V~rt A2a @ Vert A2a @ Vert A2a @ applied: Green -90 Deg -90 Deg -90 Deg Lumber Fasten ea.ch ply to the adjacent ply a s follows (rows st.aggared}: TC 2x4, 1-row(s) of 10d Nails (0.120" dia. x 2-7/8" min.) @ 12.0" o.c. BC 2x6, 2-row{s) ot l Od Nails (0 .120" dia. x 2-7/8" min.} @ 12.0" o.c.u WB 2x4, 1-row(s) of 10d Nails (0.120" dia. x 2-7/8" min.) @ 9.0" o.c. •• Use additional tastene.rs of the same type within +/-12" or the loca tion (S) indicated (except where approved hangars are used with fasteners that transfer the load to all plie.s}: BC:l-05-04, 2, BC:3-05-04, 2, BC:5-05·04, 2 Notes Designed tor green lumber that will be seasoned by time of installation. Plates designed for Cq at 0.80 and Rotational Tolerance ot 10.0 degrees Plates located at TC pitch breaks meet the prescriptive minimum size requirement to transfer unblocked diaphragm loads across those joints. Deflection Summary TrussSpan Limit Actual (in) Location Vert LL L/360 L/999(-0.02) 4-3 Vert OL L/180 L/9991-0. 03) 4-3 Vert CR L/240 L/999(-0.05) 4-3 Horz LL 0.75in ( 0 .01) @Jt 3 Horz CR 1. 25in I O. 01) @Jt 3 Vert CR and Horz CR a re the vertical and horizontal deflections due to live load plus the creep component of deflection due to dead load, computed as Detl LL -t (Ker -1) x Defl DL in accordance With ANSI/TPI 1. - Bracing Data Summary ------------Bracing Oa ta------------ Chords; continuous except where shown Web Bracing --None Plate offsets (X, Y): (None unless indicated below) Jntl C-00-06, -00-02), Jnt3 (00-06, -00-02) NOTICE A copy of this design shall be furnished to lhe erection contractor. The design of this lndMdual truss Is based on design criteria and requirements supplied by the Truss Manufacturer and relies upon the accuracy and completeness of the lnformalion set for1h by the Building Designer. A seal on this drawing indicates acceptance of professional engineering responsibility solely for the truss component <Mfslgn shown. See the cover pego and the ·important Information & GeneraJ Notes· page for additional Information. All connector plates shaH be manufactured by Simpson Strong-TI• Company. Inc In acoordsnce with ESR-2762. All connector otales ere 20 Rouge, unless the specified plele size Is followed by• ·-18° which Indicates an 18 gauge piste. or "S# 18", which indicetes a high tension 18 gauge plate. ■""'"""'"'••1111•1a Coaponent Solutiooa J-11\'/lit-1•JS ■ TruH Studio V 2020.1.0.136 •§li+t§ifij -lpde■k: l-866-252-8606 -CSBelp@etrongtie.c0111 • Bernardino R•s -Bernardino RHldence Customer: - T I\JSS Mfr. Contact: SL COde/Deoign: CBC-2016/TPI-2014 PSF Live Dead Dur Factors TC 20.0 15.0 Live Wind Snow BC 0.0 10.0 Lum 1.25 1.60 N/A Total 45, 0 Plt l. 25 l. 60 N/A Spacing: 2-00-00 o.c. Plies: 2 Repetitive Member Increase: No Green Lumber: Yes Wet Service: No Fab Toler ance: 201 Creep (Ker) • 2. O OH So!tit Load: 2.0 psf Material Summary TC 2x4 DFL 12 BC 2x6 DFL 12 Webs 2x4 OFL 12 Member Forces Summary ... Mem... Ten Comp TC 1-2 0 4340 2-3 0 4345 BC 1-4 4129 0 3-4 4129 0 Web 2-4 2324 0 .CSI. 0. 21 0. 24 0. 65 0.65 0 .20 Qty: 1 Truu: D2a 2-Ply 3-10-8 1 3-10-8 2 4/12 3x5 3-10-8 7-9-0 -4/12 3 SID: 0000756326 TID: 109772 Date: 06 / 09 / 20 Page: 1 of 1 3-15 ~ 3-15 l 1258# 3-10-8 3-10-8 1 -----------snow Load Specs---------- ASCE1-10 Ground Snow (Pg) -N/A Risk Cat: II Terrai n Cat: C l 3x6 1258# 1258# 3-10-8 7-9-0 4 3 7-9-0 ----------Nlind Load specs---------- ASCE1-l O Wind Speed(V) -115 mph Risk Cat: II Exposur e Cat: c -------Addi tional Design Checks------ 10 pst Non-Concurrent BCLL: Yes 20 psf 8C Limited Storage: Yes Roof Exposure: Sheltered Thermal Condition: All Others(l.0) Unobstructed Slippery Root: No Low-Slope Minimums (Pf min) : No Unbalanced Snow Loads: No Rain Surcharge: No Ice Dam Chk: No Bldg Dims: L -41, 0 ft B -2 9. 0 ft H.R.H(h) • 15.0 ft Kzt -1.0 200 lb BC Accessible Ceiling: Yes 300 lb TC Mai ntenance Load: Yes Bldg Enclosure: Enclosed 2000 lb TC Safe Load: No Wind OL(psf): TC -9.0 BC • 6.0 Unbalanced TCLL: Yea End Verti cal Exposed : L • Yes R • Yes Wind Uplift Reporting: ASCE1 HWFRS c,c End Zone: 3-00-00 Reaction Summary --------------Reaction Summary (Lbs)---------------- .Jnt --X-Loc-React -Up---Width--Reqd -Mat PSI l 02-12 2332 0 05-08 01-04 DFL 625 3 1-06-04 2138 0 05-08 01-02 DFL 625 Max Horiz --13 / +13 at Joint l Load& Summary This t russ has been designed for the eftects ot an unbalanced top chord live load occurring at (3-10-08) using a 1.00 Full and 0.00 Reduced load factor. See Loadcase Report tor loading combinat ions and additional details. Dead Loads may be slope adjusted: > 12.0/12 LOads based on maximum and minimum reactions from tie-in spans Domain Max Min Location Dir Descr iption Transter loads: BC 1258 25 BC 1258 25 BC 1258 25 1-08-04 3-08-04 5-08-04 Tooth-Holding reduction tactozs 2-PLY TRUSS Fastener Spacing Vert B2a @ Vert 82a @ Vert 82a @ applied:Green -90 Deg -90 Deg -90 Deg Lumbe r Fasten each ply to the adjacent ply as follows (rows staggered): TC 2x4, 1-row(s) ot 10d Nails (O.J20" dia. x 2-?/8" min.) @ 12.0" o.c . BC 2x6, 2-row(s) o! l Od Nails (0,120" dia. x 2-7/8" min.) @ 12.0• o.c.•• WB 2x4, 1-row(s) of 10d Nails (0.120" dia. x 2-1/8" min.) @ 9.0• o.c. "" use additional testeners of the same type within +/-12" ot the location (s) indicated {except where approved hangers are used with fasteners that transfer the load to all plies) : BC: 1-08-04, 6, BC: 3-08-04, 6, BC: 5-08-04, 6 Notes Designed tor green lumber that will be seasoned by time of installation. Plates designed tor Cq a t O. 80 and Rotational Tolerance of 10. 0 degrees Plates located at TC pitch breaks meet the prescriptive minimum size requirement to transfer unblocked diaphr agm loads across t hose joints. Deflection Summary TrussSpan Limit Actual (in) Location Vert LL L/360 L/999(-0.04) 4-3 Vert OL L/180 L/999 (-0. 05) 4-3 Vert CR L/240 L/936 (-0. 09) 4-3 Horz LL O. 15in ( 0.01) @Jt 3 Horz CR 1. 25in ( 0. 03) @Jt 3 Vert CR and Horz CR are t he vertical and horizontal deflections due to live load plus the creep coq:,onent o! deflection due to dead load, computed as Def'l LL + (Ker -1) x Defl DL in accordance With ANSI/TPI 1. - Bracing Data Summary ------------Bracing Oa ta------------ Chords; continuous except where shown Web Bracing --Nona Plate offsets (X, Y): (None unless indicated below) Jnt4 (0, -01-03) NOTICE A oopy of this design shall be furnished lo tho erection oontractor. The design of this lndMdual truss Is based on design cr11orfa and roquifoments supplied by the Truss Manufacturer and reltes upon the accuracy end completeness of the lnfonnation set forth by the Bulldlng Deslgnar. A seal on this drawing Indicates accept.once of professional engineerlng rosponslblity solely for Iha tru6S oomponent design shoWn. See tho oover page and the "Important tnformalloo & General Notes" page for additional Information. All oonnactor plates shall be manufactured by Simpson Strong-lle Company, Inc In acoordance with ESR-2762. AN connector olates ere 20 aeuoe. unless the specified plate site Is followed by a ·-1a· which lndJcates an 18 gouge plate, or•S# 1s-, which Indicates a high tensk>n 18 gauge plate. Coapon•nt Solution• ... .,lrfls1•]£• Trun Studio v ~020 .1. 0 .136 •w,•kzM'] 8-lpd,oak: 1-866-252-8606 · CSl:l•lp8atrongti•. ccxa Project No. GI-20-02-109 July 17, 2020 Ms. Debbie Benardino 1110 Buena Vista Way Carlsbad, California 92008 jndbeano@aol.com 6Jl6GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS, INC. Consulting Geotechnical Engineers 5931 Sea Lion Place, Suite 109 Carlsbad, California 92010 760-602-7815 smsgeosol.inc@gmail.com Geotechnical Foundation Plan Review, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista War, Carlsbad, California We have received and reviewed the project foundation plan and details for the proposed new ADU at the above-referenced property, prepared by HTK Structural Engineers, LLP, dated July 13, 2020. Based on our review of drawings made available to us, and from a geotechnical engineering J lint of view, the project foundation plan and details are in substantial compliance with · recommendations provided in the following report prepared by this office: LIMITATIONS Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) Benardino Residence 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad, California Project No. GI-20-02-109 Report dated March 24, 2020. This geotechnical plan review is not a "Plan Check Review" and does not relieve the responsibility of the project design consultant(s) and contractor(s) to get completely fallliliarized with the requirements of the project soil report(s) and fully incorporate its recommendations into the project design, plans and construction works, where appropriate, and as applicable. Our review and comments are for general geotechnical conformance of the project plans with the intent of the project soil report and design recommendations. Review of structural and civil engineering calculations, architectural intent and structural and civil engineering design modeling and basis, verification of set back requirements, easements and right-of-ways, as well as code, city and county compliance are \ Geotechnical Foundation Plan Review July 17, 2020 Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit, Benardino Residence, Carlsbad, California Page 2 beyond geotechnical engineering services. It is the owner's or his (her) representative's responsibility to provided copies of all pertinent soil report(s), updates, addendum letters and plan review letters to respective design consultant(s ), and general contractor and his (her) subcontractor( s) for full compliance. This opportunity to be of service again is sincerely appreciated. Should any questions arise concerning this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Reference to our Project: GI-20- 02-109 will help to expedite our response to your inquiries. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. 6.116Geotechnical Solutions, Inc. Distribution: Addressee (2, e-mail) 6.116 GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS. INC. LIMITED FOUNDATION BEARING SOIL STUDY PROPOSED ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT (ADU) BENARDINO RESIDENCE 1110 BUENA VISTA WAY CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA March 24, 2020 ~ >-t: JUN 2 2 2020 0 Prepared For: Ms. Debbie Benardino 13567 Chaco Court San Diego, California 92129 Prepared By: SM§ Geotechnical Solutions, Inc. 5931 Sea Lion Place, Suite 109 Carlsbad, California 92010 Project No. GI-20-02-109 Project No. Gl-20-02-109 March 24, 2020 Ms. Debbie Benardino 13567 Chaco Court San Diego, California 92129 §M§ GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS. INC. Consulting Geotechnical Engineers 5931 Sea Lion Place, Suite 109 Carlsbad, California 92010 Office: 760-602-7815 smsgeosol.inc@gmail.com , ted Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), i Btiardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad, California .. -~ " .. · Pursuant to your request, §MS Geotechnical Solutions, Inc. has completed the attached " Limited Geotechnical Foundation Bearing Soil Study for the proposed additional dwelling unit , (ADU) at the above-referenced residential property . . Tlie following report summarizes the results of our research and review of the pertinent documents and geotechnical reports, subsurface exploratory test excavations, field sampling, laboratory testing, engineering analysis and provides conclusions and recommendations for the proposed new ADU, as understood. From a geotechnical engineering standpoint, it is our opinion that the study areas of the property are suitable for the support of new ADU provided the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the design and construction of the project If you have any questions or need clarification, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Reference to our Project No. Gl-20-02-109 will help to expedite our response to your inquiries. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. SM§ Geotechnical Solutions, Inc. C1077 D3740 E329 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 II. SITE DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 IV. FIELD INVESTIGATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 V. REGIONAL GEOLOGIC SETTINGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 VI. GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 A. Earth Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 B. Groundwater and Surface Drainage ................................... , 3 C. Geologic Hazards and Slope Stability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 D. Site Classification for Seismic Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 E. Faults and Seismicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 F. Seismic Design Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 G. Field and Laboratory Tests and Test Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 VII. SITE CORROSION ASSESSMENT ...................................... 10 VIII. CONCLUSIONS ...................................................... 11 IX. RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................ 13 A. Grading and Earthwork ............................................. 13 1. Existing Underground Utilities and Buried Structures ................. 14 2. Clearing and Grubbing ........................................... 14 3. Stripping and Removals .......................................... 14 4. Trenching and Temporary Construction Slopes ...................... 15 5. Fill/Backfill Materials, Shrinkage and Import Soils .................... 16 6. Fill/Backftll Placement, Spreading and Compaction ................... 17 7. Surface Drainage and Erosion Control .............................. 17 8. Engineering Observations and Testing .............................. 17 B. Footings and Slab-on-Grade Floor Foundations ......................... 19 C. Soil Design Parameters .............................................. 20 D. Exterior Concrete Slabs and Flatwork ................................. 21 E. Pavement Design ................................................... 22 F. General Recommendations ........................................... 24 X. FOUNDATION PLAN REVIEW ......................................... 26 XI. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER OF RECORD (GER) ....................... 26 XII. LIMITATIONS ....................................................... 27 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) FIGURES Regional Index Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Geotechnical Site Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Test Pit Logs ............................................................. 3 & 4 Geologic Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Cross-Section A-A' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Fault-Epicenter Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Grain Size Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Typical Over-Excavation and Recompaction Detail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Typical Isolation Joints and Re-Entrant Corner Reinforcement ..................... 10 Typical Pipes Through or Trench Adjacent to Foundations ......................... 11 Typical Retaining Wall Back Drainage Detail .................................... 12 APPENDIX LIMITED FOUNDATION BEARING SOIL STUDY PROPOSED ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT (ADU) BENARDINO RESIDENCE 1110 BUENA VISTA WAY CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA I. INTRODUCTION The project property consists of an existing relatively level developed lot, located west of the Interstate 5 Freeway, at the northeast corner of Buena Vista Way and Tuttle Street intersection in a coastal residential neighborhood within the limits of the city of Carlsbad. The property supports an existing older residential dwelling ( circa 1970's) with perimeter stem walls and interior isolated pier type footings and raised wood floors. The existing older dwelling at the property is currently under remodeling and enlargement with new building additions. The approximate site location is shown on a Regional Index Map attached to this report as Figure I. A Geotechnical Site Plan depicting existing site conditions and proposed new ADU location is included as Figure 2. The approximate site coordinates are 33. I 690"N latitude and -l l 7.3464°W longitude. We understand that a detached additional dwelling unit (ADU) is planned in the front yard areas on the southwest portions of the property, as shown on the attached Figure 2. Consequently, the purpose of this limited study was to evaluate shallow foundation bearing soil conditions at the proposed ADU site and to ascertain their influence upon the planned new construction. Exploratory test pit excavations, soil sampling, laboratory testing and engineering analysis were among the activities conducted in conjunction with this effort which resulted in the remedial bearing and subgrade soil preparation and foundation recommendations presented herein. The scope of this work is limited to those areas planned for the new ADU as specifically delineated in this report. Other areas of the property including the existing residence, new remodeling and building additions, site structures and improvements were not investigated and are beyond the scope of this work. II. SITE DESCRIPTION A Geotechnical Site Plan depicting the existing general site conditions and proposed new ADU location, reproduced from the available architectural Site Plan, is included with this report as Figure 2. Topographically, areas of the property planned for the support of a new ADU consist ofrelatively level existing pad surfaces situated near the adjacent frontage street grades. Large natural or graded slopes are not present at or in an immediate vicinity of the property. The proposed ADU construction areas of the property are mostly landscaped surfaces which currently support low-lying vegetation and scattered mature trees. Existing level building pad surfaces were likely developed by minimal to minor grading efforts. Engineering and grading records pertinent to the original pad development and existing building construction are not available for review. Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page2 Site existing surface drainage is not well defined. Excessive scouring or erosion was not noted at the time of our field study. III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Based on available project plans, the new construction will consist of a detached 2-story conventional wood frame with exterior stucco ADU building supported on perimeter shallow stiff continuos and spread pad concrete footings with slab-on-grade floor type foundations, with an exterior staircase. Associated improvements include underground utilities. The new ADU building pad grade is planned at or very near the existing ground surfaces with the project earthwork operations chiefly consisting of remedial grading and bearing soil preparation work. However, minor contour or fine grading efforts are expected for establishing a level ADU building pad surface and to develop positive perimeter drainage. IV. FIELD INVESTIGATION Subsurface conditions at the project ADU construction site at the property were chiefly determined by the excavation of two exploratory test pits dug with a mini-excavator (Deere 350). Test pits were logged by our project engineer, who also supervised in-situ testing and the collection of representative soil samples at selected intervals for subsequent laboratory testing. Test Pit locations are shown on the enclosed Figure 2. Logs of the exploratory Test Pits are attached to this report, as Figures 3 and 4. Laboratory test results and engineering properties of selected representative soil samples are summarized in following sections. V. REGIONAL GEOLOGIC SETTING The subject property is located in the Costa! Plans subdivision of the Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province of San Diego. The coastal plain area is characterized by Pleistocene marine terrace landforms. These surfaces are relatively flat erosional platforms that were shaped by wave action along former coastlines. The step-like elevation of the marine terraces was caused by changes in sea level throughout the Pleistocene by seismic activity along the Rose Canyon Fault Zone located west of the coastline. The Rose Canyon Fault Zone is one of many northwest trending, sub-parallel faults and fault zones that traverse the nearby vicinity. Several of these faults, including the Rose Canyon Fault Zone, are considered active faults. Further discussion of faulting in regards to the site is provided in the Faults and Seismicity section of this report. A Geologic Map showing mapped units at and near the study site is attached as Figure 5. Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad VI. GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS March 24, 2020 Page3 The project ADU site is a relatively level existing building pad surface underlain at very shallow depths by Quaternary age (late to middle Pleistocene) Old Paralic Deposits that are widely exposed along coastal areas of Carlsbad. Instability which could preclude construction of the planned new ADU was not in evidence. A Cross-Section depicting subsurface conditions based on our test excavations is attached as Figure 6. The following earth materials were recognized: A. Earth Materials Fill/Disturbed Natural Ground (af/Qs): A shallow layer of undifferentiated fill/disturbed natural ground, on the order of2.5 feet thick maximum, mantles the project ADU site at the property. The upper soil mantle consists of tan to light brown fine to medium grained sand to silty sand deposits in a moist and loose conditions overall. Old Paralic Deposits (Qop): Quaternary age Old Paralic Deposits, typical oflocal coastal areas, underlie the project new ADU construction site at shallow depths. As exposed in our exploratory test pits to the depth explored, the Old Paralic Deposits typically consist of tan to orange-brown colored poorly graded, cohesionless fine to medium grained sand that was generally found in a weathered loose to medium dense conditions near the upper exposures becoming more dense and tight with depth overall. Detailed descriptions of the underlying soil profile are presented in the attached Test Pit Logs, Figures 3 and 4. Project surficial soil mantle and upper exposures of the Old Paralic Deposits are loose and compressible, not suitable for structural support in their present conditions, and should be regraded as specified in the following sections. Site soils are very low expansive. B. Groundwater and Surface Drainage Subsurface water was not encountered in our exploratory test pits to the depths explored and is not expected to impact planned new ADU construction work. However, like all graded building sites, the proper control of site surface drainage and efficient irrigation techniques are critical components to overall stability of the project graded surfaces, as well as continued performance of the new ADU building. Surface water should not pond upon graded surfaces, and irrigation water should not be excessive. Perimeter surfaces should direct run-off away from the building foundations and site improvements in a positive manner. Surface run-off should be properly captured and discharged into approved drainage facilities. Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Pages Historically, the most significant earthquake events which affected local areas originated along well known, distant fault zones to the east and the Coronado Bank Fault to the west. Based upon available seismic data, compiled from California Earthquake Catalogs, the most significant historical event in the area of the study site occurred in 1800 at an estimated distance of 12 miles from the project area. This event, which is thought to have occurred along an offshore fault, reached an estimated magnitude of 6.5 with an estimated bedrock acceleration value of 0. 138g at the project site. The following list represents the most significant faults that commonly impact the region. Estimated ground acceleration data compiled from Digitized California Faults (Computer Program EQFAUL T VERSION 3.00 updated) typically associated with each fault is also tabulated. TABLE 1 MAXIMUM FAULTWNE DISTANCE FROM SITE PROBABLE ACCELERATION IR.H.) Newport-Inglewood Fault 4.8 miles 0.249g Rose Canyon Fault 5.2 miles 0.241g Coronado Bank Fault 21.4 miles 0. 183g Elsinore-Julian Fault 24.0miles 0.143g The locations of significant faults and earthquake events relative to the study site are depicted on a Fault -Epicenter Map attached to this report as Figure 7. Recently, the number of seismic events that affect the region appears to have somewhat heightened. Nearly 40 earthquakes of magnitude 3 .5 or higher have been recorded in coastal regions between January 1984 and August 1986. Most of the earthquakes are thought to have been generated along offshore faults. For the most part, the recorded events remain as moderate shocks which typically resulted in low levels of ground shaking to local areas. A notable exception to this pattern was recorded on July 13, 1986. An earthquake of magnitude 5.3 shook county coastal areas with moderate to locally heavy ground shaking. This resulted in $700,000 in damages, one death, and injuries to 30 people. The quake occurred along an offshore fault located nearly 30 miles southwest of Oceanside. A series of notable events shook county areas with a (maximum) magnitude 7.4 shock in the early morning of June 28, 1992. These quakes originated along related segments of the San Andreas Fault, approximately 90 miles to the north. Locally high levels of ground shaking over an extended period of time resulted; however, significant damages to local structures were not reported. The increase in earthquake frequency in the region remains a subject of speculation among geologists; however, based upon empirical information and the recorded seismic history of county areas, the 1986 and 1992 events are thought to represent the highest levels of ground shaking that can be expected at the study site as a result of seismic activity. Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page 6 I In recent years, the Rose Canyon Fault has received added attention from geologists. The fault is a significant structural feature in metropolitan San Diego that includes a series of parallel breaks trending southward from La Jolla Cove through San Diego Bay toward the Mexican border. Test trenching along the fault in Rose Canyon indicated that at that location the fault was last active 6,000 to 9,000 years ago. More recent work suggests that segments of the fault are younger having been last active 1,000 -2,000 years ago. Consequently, the fault has been classified as active and included within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone established by the State of California. Furthermore, a more recent study concluded that the coastal region of San Diego may experience earthquakes up to magnitudes 7.3 and 7.4 (Sahakian et al, 2017). This study used the Newport-Inglewood/Rose Canyon Fault offshore. An earthquake of this magnitude has likely not occurred in the last 100,000 years, according to the data. Fault zones tabulated in the preceding table are considered most likely to impact the region of the study site during the lifetime of the project. The faults are periodically active and capable of generating moderate to locally high levels of ground shaking at the site. Ground separation as a result of seismic activity is not expected at the property. F. Seismic Design Values Seismic design values are presented in the attached Appendix in accordance with Chapter 16, Section 1613 of the 2019 California Building Code (CBC) and ASCE 7 Standard. Presented values are generated using ASCE developed web interface that uses the United States Geological Survey (USGS) web services and retrieves the seismic design data in a report format. G. Field and Laboratory Tests and Test Results Earth deposits encountered in our exploratory test pits were closely examined and sampled for laboratory testing. Based upon our test pits and field exposures, site soils have been grouped into the following soil types: TABLEZ Soll Type I Descri11tion I I Tan to light brown fine to medium grained sand to silty sand (FilVDisturbed Natural Ground) 2 Tan to orange brown fine to medium sand (Old Paralic Deoosits) Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page? I I I The following tests were conducted in support of this investigation: 1. Grain Size Analysis: Grain size analyses were performed on representative samples of onsite Soil Types 1 and 2. The test results are presented in Table 3 below, and graphically illustrated on the attached Figure 8. TABLE3 Sieve Size II ¾" I ½" I #4 I #10 I #20 I #40 I #100 I #200 I Location I Soil Type II Percent Passing I TP-1@ 1.5' 1 ---100 99 86 31 23 TP-1 liiJ 4.5' 2 ---100 99 87 27 19 2. Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of Soil Types 1 and 2 were determined in accordance with ASTM D1557. The test results are presented in Table 4 below. TABLE4 Location Soil Maximum Dry Optimum Moisture Tvne Densltv 1'Y' m-ncfl Content /6loot-%l TP-1@ 1.5' I 1 I 132 I 8.3 I TP-1 (a) 4.5' 2 127 9 3. Unit Wei~ht & Moisture Content Tests: In-place dry density and moisture content of collected representative soil samples were determined from relatively undisturbed chunk samples using the Water Displacement method (Method A) in accordance with ASTM D7263, and Water Content of Soil and Rock by Mass test method in accordance with ASTM D2216. The test results are presented in Table 5 and tabulated on the attached Test Pit logs at corresponding locations. Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad TABLES Field Field Dry Max.Dry In-Place Sample Soil Moisture Location Type Content Density Density Relative (r.i-%) (ld-pcf) (Y'm-pcf) Compaction TP-1@ 1.5' I 7 113.7 132 86 TP-1 @4.5 2 8 115.9 127 91 TP-1 @6' 2 8 ]12 127 88 TP-2@ I' I 6 106.5 132 81 TP-2@4' 2 9 109.4 127 86 TP-2 @6' 2 9 113.2 127 89 Assumptions and Relationships: In-place Relative Compaction= (Yd+ Ym) X!OO Gs= 2.65 e = (Gs Yw + Yd) -I S = (w Gs)+ e March 24, 2020 Page 8 Degree of Saturation Sl¾l 41 51 44 31 44 52 4. Expansion Index Test: One expansion index (EI) test was performed on a representative sample of onsite Soil Type I in accordance with the ASTM D4829. The test results, are presented in Table 6. TABLE6 Sample Soil Molded Degree of Final Initial Dry Measured EI Location Type (,) Saturation (,) Density EI 50% (%) (%1 (%) (PCF) Saturation TP-1@ 1.5' I 7.9 45.4 13.3 I 14.6 0 0 w = moisture content in percent. EI50 = Eimeas -(50 -Smcas) ((65 + Eimeas) + (220 -Smeas}) Expansion Index (EI} Expansion Potential 0 -20 Very Low 21 -50 Low 51 -90 Medium 91 -130 High ) 130 Verv Hieb Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page 9 I 6. Direct Shear Test: One direct shear test was performed on a representative remolded sample of onsite soils in accordance with ASTM D3080. The prepared specimen was soaked overnight, loaded with normal loads of I, 2, and 3 kips per square foot respectively, and sheared to failure in an undrained condition. The test results are presented in Table 7 below. TABLE7 Sample Location Soil Sample Unit Angle of Apparent Weight Int. Frie. Cohesion Type Condition tTw-ocfl <111-De.,.l /c-osO TP-1 rn, 1.5' I Remolded to 90% ofYm Im% wool 128.4 31 50 7. pH and Resistivity Test: pH and resistivity of a representative sample of onsite soils were determined using "Method for Estimating the Service Life of Steel Culverts," in accordance with the California Test Method (CTM) 643. The test result is tabulated in Table 8. TABLES Sam le Location Soil T e Minimum Resistivi OHM-CM H TP-1@ 1.5' 7200 7.5 8. Sulfate Test: A sulfate test was performed on a representative sample of onsite soils in accordance with the California Test Method (CTM) 417. The test result is presented in Table 9. TABLE9 Sample Location Soil Type Amount of Water Soluble Sulfate In Soil 1% bv Wei.,htl TP-1@ 1.5' I I I 0.004 I 9. Chloride Test: A chloride test was performed on a representative sample of onsite soils in accordance with the California Test Method (CTM) 422. The test result is presented in Table 10. Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page 10 TABLE 10 Sample Location Soil Type Amount of Water Soluble Chloride In Soil <% bv Wei,.htl I TP-1@ 1.5' I I I 0.002 I VII. SITE CORROSION ASSESSMENT A site is considered to be corrosive to foundation elements, walls and drainage structures if one or more of the following conditions exist: * Sulfate concentration is greater than or equal to 2000 ppm (0.2% by weight). * Chloride concentration is greater than or equal to 500 ppm (0.05 % by weight). * pH is less than 5.5. For structural elements, the minimum resistivity of soil (or water) indicates the relative quantity of soluble salts present in the soil ( or water). In general, a minimum resistivity value for soil (or water) less than 1000 ohm-cm indicates a potential for presence of high quantities of soluble salts and a higher propensity for corrosion. Appropriate corrosion mitigation measures for corrosive conditions should be selected depending on the service environment, amount of aggressive ion salts ( chloride or sulfate), pH levels and the desired service life of the structure. Results oflimited laboratory tests performed on selected representative of site soil samples indicated that the minimum resistivity is greater than I 000 ohm-cm suggesting presence oflow quantities of soluble salts. Test results further indicated that pH levels are greater than 5.5, sulfate concentrations are less than 2000 ppm and chloride concentration levels are less than 500 ppm. However, the project property is located near (approximately within 1000 feet) from the Pacific Ocean which is typically considered a corrosive environment. NMN Geotechnical Solutions, Inc. does not consult in the field of corrosion engineering and the client, project architect or structural engineer should agree on the required level of corrosion protection, or consult a corrosion engineer as warranted. However, based on the result of the tested soil sample, the amount of water soluble sulfate (SO4) was found to be 0.004 percent by weight ( 40 ppm) which is considered negligible according to AC! 318 (SO Exposure Class with Not Applicable severity). Water soluble chloride (CL) was found 0.002 percent by weight (20 ppm), however, due to the proximity to the ocean, as minimum, exposures to chloride should be considered moderate (CI Exposure Class with Moderate severity). Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page 11 In our opinion and based on the site corrosive environment, as a minimum, concrete consisting of Portland cement Type II (ASTM C 150) with minimum 28 days compressive strength (f c} of 4000 psi and maximum 0.50 water-cement ratio may be considered, unless otherwise specified, or noted on the project plans. Table 11 below is appropriate based on the pH-Resistivity test results. Adequate protective measures against corrosion should be considered for all buried metal pipes, connections, elbows, conduits, improvements and structures, as necessary and appropriate. Buried metal pipes and conduits should be wrapped and provided with appropriate protective cover wherever applicable. TABLE 11 Design Soil Type Gauge 16 14 12 10 8 1 Years to Perforation of Metal Culverts 69 89 124 158 192 VIII. CONCLUSIONS Based on the foregoing investigation, the planned new ADU project, substantially as proposed, is feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint. The project portions of the property planned for the support of new ADU are generally underlain by Old Paralic Deposits at very shallow depths overlain by a mantle of loose undifferentiated fill/disturbed natural ground cover. The following factors are unique to the property and will most impact project construction procedures and associated costs from a geotechnical viewpoint: A. Landslides, faults or significant shear zones are not present at the project property and are not considered a geotechnical factor in planned site redevelopment. The study site is not located near or within the Alquist -Priolo earthquake fault zone established by the State of California. Moderate to locally high levels of ground shaking, however, are expected at the site during occasional periods of seismic activity along distant active faults. B. Existing ground at and surrounding the ADU site is generally characterized by relatively level building pad surfaces, and large natural or graded slopes are not present on or near the immediate vicinity of the project site. Significant grade modifications or the creation ofnew large graded slopes are also not planned in connection with the proposed ADU development. Consequently, slope stability is not considered a geotechnical concern in the project development. C. Final ADU pad surfaces are anticipated to be established at or very near the existing grades, with proj eel earth operations mainly consisting of remedial bearing soil preparation and some fine or contour grading efforts. All excavations, earthwork, remedial and fine grading efforts should be completed in accordance with requirements of the following sections. Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page 12 E. Site surficial soil mantle and upper exposures of the underlying Old Paralic Deposits are loose and compressible deposits not suitable for structural support. These deposits should be stripped (removed) to the underlying more dense Old Paralic Deposits, as approved in the field, and placed back as properly compacted fills in accordance with the recommendations of this report. In order to additionally enhance stability of bottom ofremovals and promote achieving the specified minimum compaction levels within the new compacted fills, a layer of ground stabilization geogrid (TerraGrid RX-1200 or greater), placed directly over the entire prepared bottom of removals, should also be considered. Approximate stripping depths are also provided in the following sections. F. Stripping and recompaction remedial grading work will be required under all proposed new structures and site improvements in order to construct uniform bearing and subgrade soil conditions throughout, as specified in the following sections. There should be at least 24 inches of well-compacted fills below bottom of the deepest footing(s), and site improvements, unless otherwise approved. Cut-fill daylight transition is not expected to be a factor in the planned ADU pad development, provided our remedial grading recommendations are followed. G. Added care will be required to avoid any damages to the existing nearby offsite structures and improvements due to site excavations, remedial earthwork grading and construction works. Adjacent public and private properties and right-of-ways should also be properly protected as necessary and appropriate. For this purpose, completing excavations and remedial grading adjacent to the existing foundations, structures and improvements in a limited section(s) may become necessary based on actual field conditions and should be anticipated. Permission to perform offsite or near property line(s) grading works shall also be obtained from neighboring property owners and public agencies as necessary and appropriate. H. Earth deposits generated from the site excavations will predominantly consist of sandy deposits which are considered suitable for reuse as new fills and backfills, provided they are prepared and manufactured into a uniform mixture in accordance with requirements of this report. I. Project new fills and backfills should be clean deposits free of trash, roots, stamps, construction debris, organic matter and deleterious materials, properly processed, throughly mixed, placed in thin Ii fts horizontal lifts and compacted as specified in the following sections. J. Based on our field observations and laboratory testing, final bearing and sub grade soils at the project property are expected to chiefly consist of sandy to silty sand (SM/SP) deposits with very low expansion potential (expansion index less than 20) based on ASTM D4829 classification. Expansive soils are not considered to be a geotechnical factor in the planned site new redevelopment. Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page 13 K. Groundwater conditions were not encountered to the depths explored and are not expected to be a factor in the planned new ADU construction or impact future performance of the new building and site improvements. As with all graded sites, the proper control of surface drainage and storm water is a critical component to overall site and building performance. Run off water should not pond upon graded surfaces, and irrigation water should not be excessive. Over-watering of site vegetation may also create perched water and the creation of excessively moist areas at finished surfaces and should be avoided. Storm water and drainage control facilities should be designed and installed for proper control and disposal of surface water as shown on the approved grading or drainage improvement plans. L. Settlement of foundation bearing soils is not expected to be a major geotechnical factor in the construction of the planned new ADU construction provided our recommendations are followed. Post construction foundation bearing soil settlements are expected to be less than approximately I-inch and should occur below the heaviest loaded footing(s ). The magnitude of post construction differential settlements, as expressed in terms of angular distortion, is not anticipated to exceed ½-inch in a distance between similarly loaded adjacent structural elements, or a maximum distance of 20 feet. M. Soil collapse, liquefaction and seismically induced settlements will not be a factor in the development of the project property provided our remedial grading recommendations are implemented at the site. IX. RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are consistent with the indicated geotechnical conditions at the project ADU site and should be reflected in the final plans and implemented during the construction phase. Added or modified recommendations may also be appropriate and should be provided in a plan review report when final grading and redevelopment plans are available: A. Gradin& and Earthwork Modest remedial and minor fine or contour grading efforts are anticipated in order to achieve final design pad grades and construct safe and stable level surfaces for the support of planned new ADU building and site improvements. All excavations, grading, earthwork, fill soil materials and processing, placement and compaction procedures should be completed in accordance with Chapter 18 (Soils and Foundations) and Appendix "J" (Grading) of the 2019 California Building Code (CBC), the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, City of Carlsbad Ordinances, the requirements of the governing agencies and following sections, wherever appropriate and as applicable: Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page 14 1. Existing Underground Utilities and Buried Structures: All existing underground waterlines, sewer lines, pipes, storm drains, utilities, tanks, structures and improvements at or nearby the project site should be thoroughly potholed, identified and marked prior to the initiation of the actual grading and earthwork. Specific geotechnical engineering recommendations may be required based on the actual field locations and invert elevations, backfill conditions and proposed grades in the event of a grading conflict. Utility lines may need to be temporarily redirected, if necessary, prior to earthwork operations and reinstalled upon completion of earthwork operations. Alternatively, permanent relocations may be appropriate as shown on the approved plans. Abandoned irrigation lines, pipes and conduits should be properly removed, capped or sealed off to prevent any potential for future water infiltrations into the foundation bearing and subgrade soils. Voids created by the removals of the abandoned underground pipes, tanks and structures should be properly backfilled with compacted fills in accordance with the requirements of this report. 2. Clearing and Grubbing: Remove all existing surface and subsurface structures, tanks, vaults, pipes, old foundations and slabs, improvements, vegetation, tree roots, stumps, and all other unsuitable materials and deleterious matter from all areas proposed for new fills, improvements, and structures plus a minimum of 5 horizontal feet outside the perimeter, where possible and as approved in the field. Project demolition efforts should effectively remove all existing foundations and remnants of old buried structures, unless otherwise approved. All debris generated from the site demolition work, clearing, trash, debris and vegetation removals should also be properly disposed of from the site. Trash, vegetation and debris generated from the site demolitions should not be allowed to occur or contaminate new site fills and backfills. The prepared grounds should be observed and approved by the project geotechnical consultant or his designated field representative prior to grading and earthwork. 3. Stripping and Removals: Uniform and stable bearing soil conditions should be constructed under the planned new ADU building and associated site improvements. For this purpose, stripping (removal) and recompaction ofall existing loose and compressible surficial soil cover and upper exposures of the underlying Old Paralic Deposits to the minimum specified depths will be required in all areas planned to receive new fills, structures, and improvements. Stripping and remedial grading should extend a minimum of 5 horizontal feet outside the perimeter envelop of new fills, building and site improvements, where possible and as directed in the field. Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page 15 Stripping (removal) depths should be extended to the underlying more dense to firm Old Paralic Deposits throughout, as approved in the field. Minimum stripping depth, as currently established based on the available exploratory test borings are anticipated to be 4 feet below the existing ground surfaces (BGS), or 2 feet below the bottom of deepest footing(s), whichever is more. Locally, in the areas of the existing large trees and/or buried structures, deeper removals may be necessary and should be anticipated. A Typical Over-Excavation And Reconstructions Detail is included in attached Figure 9. In areas of site improvements such as driveway, and concrete sidewalks, a minimum 2 feet removals BGS is considered acceptable, unless otherwise directed in the field. Bottoms ofremovals are expected to expose modest in-situ conditions (in-place densities greater the 85% per ASTM D 1557). Consequently, enhancing bottom of removal stabilization by neatly placing a layer of earth reinforcement geogrid (TerraGrid RX-1200 or greater) directly over the prepared exposures is recommended herein. Installing the earth reinforcement geogrid at the bottom of removals will also facilitate achieving the minimum specified compaction levels within the site new fill. Exploratory test pits excavated in connection with our study at the indicated locations (see Figure 2) were backfilled with loose and uncompacted deposits. The loose/uncompacted exploratory trench backfill soils shall also be re-excavated and placed back as properly compacted fills in accordance with the requirements of this report. Bottom of all removals should also be adequately prepared, ripped and recompacted to a minimum depth of6 inches prior to the geogrid placement. Preparation of the bottom of removals and over-excavations shall construct neat, level surfaces suitable for the geogrid installation. The exposed stripping, removals and over-excavations bottoms should be observed and placement of earth reinforcement geogrid confirmed by the project geotechnical consultant or his designated field representative prior to fill or backfill placement. 4. Trenching and Temporary Construction Slopes: Temporary open excavations and trenching necessary for the project development are expected to be relatively shallow to be on the order of 4 feet deep maximum. Consequently, significant construction impacts on the nearby off-site structures and improvements are not anticipated. Excavations and removals adjacent to the existing property lines, foundations, improvements and structures should be performed under observations of the project geotechnical engineer. Undermining adjacent neighboring properties, existing public right-of-ways and underground utilities, foundations, structures, and improvements to remain should not be allowed by the project excavations and earthwork operations. Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page 16 Temporary excavations and trenching less than 4 feet height maximum may be developed at near vertical gradients, unless otherwise noted or directed in the field. Larger trenching and temporary excavations should be laid back at I: I maximum gradients. The laid back slope should then be properly benched out and new fills/backfills tightly keyed- in as the backfilling progresses. Performing excavations and remedial grading in limited sections (one-halflengths) may also become necessary near the property lines, existing building foundations and public right-of-ways, based on actual field exposures, and should be anticipated. Performing remedial grading in limited sections will also limit open exposures and reduce overall stockpile quantities. More specific recommendations should be given in the field by the project geotechnical consultant based on actual site exposures. Revised temporary excavation and trenching recommendations including flatter laid back slopes, larger setbacks, completing excavations and remedial grading in smaller limited sections and the need for temporary shoring/trench shield support may be necessary and should be anticipated. The proj eel contractor shall also obtain appropriate permits, as needed, and conform to Cal-OSHA and local governing agencies' requirements for trenching/open excavations and safety of the workmen during construction. 5. Fill/Backftll Materials, Shrinkage and Import Soils: Stripping, removals and excavations at the project site are expected to chiefly generate sandy to silty sandy soil deposits that typically work well as site new fills and backfills, provided they are adequately prepared, processed, placed and compacted in accordance with the requirements of this report. Vegetation, roots and tree stumps, buried pipes and conduits, construction debris, and organic matter, where encountered, should be throughly removed and separated from the fill/backfill mixture to the satisfaction and approval of the project geotechnical consultant. Onsite upper soils may be expected to shrink nearly 5% to I 5%, on volume basis, when compacted (minimum 90%) as specified herein. Import soils, if required to complete grading and achieve final grades should be good quality sandy granular non-corrosive deposits (SM/SW) with very low expansion potential (I 00% passing I-inch sieve, more than 50% passing #4 sieve and less than 18% passing #200 sieve with expansion index less than 20). Import soils should be observed, tested as necessary, and approved by the project geotechnical engineer prior to delivery to the site. Import soils should also meet or exceed engineering characteristic and soil design parameters as specified in the following sections. Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page 17 6. FiWBackftll Placement, Spreading and Compaction: Uniform bearing and subgrade soil conditions should be constructed throughout the building and improvement surfaces by the project pad and remedial grading earthwork operations. Site soils should be adequately processed, thoroughly mixed, moisture conditioned to slightly (2%) above the optimum moisture levels, as directed in the field, neatly placed over the bottom stabilization geogrid in thin (8 inches maximum) uniform horizontal lifts and mechanically compacted to a minimum of 90% of the corresponding laboratory maximum dry density per ASTM D1557, unless otherwise approved or directed in the field. 7. Surface Drainage and Erosion Control: A critical element to the continued stability of project graded ADU building pad and improvements are an adequate storm water and surface drainage control. Surface water should not be allowed to flow toward or pond near the building foundations or impact the graded construction and improvement sites. For this purpose establishing positive drainage (minimum 5%) during fine grading efforts away from the building and site improvements onto a suitable drainage collection and disposal facility will be necessary. Roof gutters and area drains should be installed. Over-watering of the site landscaping should also not be allowed. Only the amount of water to sustain vegetation should be provided. Temporary erosion control facilities and silt fences should be installed during the construction phase periods and until landscaping is fully established. Site drainage improvements should be completed as shown on the project approved grading/erosion control plans. 8. Engineering Observations and Testing: All earthwork operations including excavations, removals (stripping), suitability of earth deposits used as compacted fills and backfills, and compaction procedures should be continuously observed and tested by the project geotechnical consultant and presented in a final report. The nature of finished bearing and subgrade soils should be confirmed in the final report at the completion of project earthworks construction. Geotechnical engineering observations and testing should include but are not limited to the following: * Initial observation -After clearing and grading limits have been staked, but before demolition work/brushing and excavation starts. Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page 18 * Stripping, removals and bottom of over-excavation observation -After dense and firm Old Paralic Deposits are exposed at the minimum specified depth, and during preparation and installing the bottom stabilization geogrid, but before new fill or backfill is placed. * Temporary trenching and excavation observations -After the excavation is started but before the vertical depth of excavation is more than 4 feet. Local and Cal-OSHA safety requirements for open excavations apply. * Fill/backfill observation -After the fill/backfill placement is started but before the vertical height of fill/backfill exceeds 2 feet. A minimum of one test shall be required for each 100 lineal feet maximum in every 2 feet vertical gain, with the exception of wall backfills where a minimum of one test shall be required for each 30 lineal feet maximum. Finish rough and final pad grade tests shall be required regardless of fill thickness. * Foundation trench and subgrade soils observation -After the foundation trench excavations but prior to the placement of steel reinforcing for proper moisture and specified compaction levels. * Geotechnical foundation/slab steel observation -After the steel placement 1s completed but before the scheduled concrete pour. * Underground utility, plumbing and storm drain trench observation -After the trench excavations but before placement of pipe bedding or installation of the underground facilities. Local and Cal-OSHA safety requirements for open excavations apply. Observations and testing of pipe bedding may also be required by the project geotechnical engineer. * Underground utility, plumbing and storm drain trench backfill observation-After the backfill placement is started above the pipe zone but before the vertical height of backfill exceeds 2 feet. Testing of the backfill within the pipe zone may also be required by the governing agencies. Pipe bedding and backfill materials shall conform to the governing agencies' requirements and project soils report if applicable. Plumbing trenches more than 12 inches deep maximum under the floor slabs should also be mechanically compacted and tested for a minimum of 90% compaction levels. Flooding or jetting techniques as a means of compaction method should not be allowed. Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page 19 * Pavement/improvements base and sub grade observation -Prior to the placement of concrete or asphalt for proper moisture and specified compaction levels. B. Footings and Slab-on-Grade Floor Foundations The following recommendations are consistent with the anticipated sandy to silty sand (SM/SP) bearing soils with very expansion potential (expansion index less than 20), and site indicated geotechnical conditions. All design recommendations should be further confirmed and/or revised as necessary at completion ofremedial grading works based on actual testing of final bearing and subgrade soils: I. Shallow stiff concrete footings and slab-on-grade floor type foundations may be considered for support of the new ADU building. All foundations should be supported on minimum 90% compacted fills, placed in accordance with the requirements of this report. There should be at least 24 inches of compacted fills below bottom of the deepest footing(s) throughout ( or at least 4 feet of compacted fill below rough finish pad grades), unless otherwise approved. Foundation trenching should be completed in substantial conformance with the Typical Foundation Formwork Detail included in the attached Figure 9. 2. Perimeter and interior continuous strip footings should be sized at least 15 inches wide and 18 inches deep for one and two-story building loading conditions. Isolated spread pad footings, if any, should be at least 24 inches square and 18 inches deep and structurally interconnected with the continuous strip footings with grade beams. Interconnecting grade beams should be a minimum of 12 inches wide by 18 inches deep. Footing depths are measured from the lowest adjacent ground surface, not including the sand/gravel layer underneath floor slabs. Exterior continuous footings should enclose the entire building perimeter. Flagpole footings also need to be tied together if the footing depth is less than 4 feet below rough finish grade. Continuous interior and exterior footings should be reinforced by at least 2-#5 reinforcing bars placed near the top and 2-#5 reinforcing bars placed near the bottom. Interconnecting grade beams, if any required, should be reinforced with minimum 2-#4 bars top and bottom and #3 ties at 30 inches center to center maximum. Reinforcement details for spread pad footings should be provided by the project architect/structural engineer. Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page 20 3. All interior slabs should be a minimum 4.5 inches in thickness, reinforced with #3 reinforcing bars spaced 16 inches on center each way, placed mid-height in the slab. Slabs should be underlain by 4 inches of clean sand (SE 30 or greater) which is provided with a well performing moisture barrier/vaporretardant (minimum I 0-mil Stego) placed mid-height in the sand. Alternatively, a 4-inch thick base of compacted ½-inch clean aggregate provided with the vapor barrier (minimum 15-mil Stego) in direct contact with (beneath) the concrete may also be considered provided a concrete mix which can address bleeding, shrinkage and curling is used Provide "softcut" contraction/control joints consisting of sawcuts spaced 10 feet on centers each way for all interior slabs. Cut as soon as the slab will support the weight of the saw and operate without disturbing the final finish which is normally within 2 hours after final finish at each control joint location or 150 psi to 800 psi. The sawcuts should be minimum I-inch in depth but should not exceed I ¼-inches deep maximum. Anti- ravel skid plates should be used and replaced with each blade to avoid spalling and raveling. A void wheeled equipments across cuts for at least 24 hours. Provide re-entrant corner reinforcement for all interior slabs. Re-entrant corners will depend on slab geometry and/or interior column locations. The enclosed Figure IO may be used as a general guideline. 4. Foundation trenches and slab Subgrade soils should be observed and tested for exposing suitable bearing strata, proper moisture and specified compaction levels and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to steel placement or pouring concrete. C. Soil Design Parameters The following soil design parameters are based upon tested representative samples of onsite earth deposits. All parameters should be re-evaluated when the characteristics of the final as-graded soils have been specifically determined: I. Design soil unit weight= 128 PCF. 2. Design angles of internal friction of soil = 31 degrees. 3. Design active soil pressure for retaining structures' = 41 PCF (EDP), level backfill, cantilevers, unrestrained walls. 4. Design at-rest soil pressure for retaining structures = 62 pcf (EFP), non-yielding, restrained walls. 5. Design passive soil resistance for retaining structures = 400 pcf (EFP), level ground surface on the toe side (soil mass on the toe side extends a minimum of 10 feet or 3 times the height of the surface generating passive resistance). 6. Design coefficient of friction for concrete on soils= 0.38. Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page 21 7. Net allowable foundation pressure (minimum 15 inches wide by 18 inches deep footings) =2000 psf. 8. Allowable lateral bearing pressure (all structures except retaining walls)= 200 psf/ft. Notes: * Use a minimum safety factor of 1.5 for wall over-turning and sliding stability. However, because large movements must take place before maximum passive resistance can be developed, a minimum safety factor of 2 may be considered for sliding stability particularly where sensitive structures and improvements are planned near or on top of retaining walls. * When combining passive pressure and fiictional resistance the passive component should be reduced by one-third. The upper 6 inches of ground surfaces should not be included in the design for passive soil resistance, unless otherwise noted or specified. * The indicated net allowable foundation pressure provided herein was determined based on a minimum 15 inches wide by 18 inches deep footings and may be increased by 20% for each additional foot of depth and 20% for each additional foot of width to a maximum of 5500 psf. The allowable foundation pressures provided herein also apply to dead plus live loads and may be increased by one-third for wind and seismic loading. * The lateral bearing earth pressures may be increased by the amount of designated value for each additional foot of depth to a maximum 1500 pounds per square foot. D. Exterior Concrete Slabs and Flatwork 1. All exterior slabs (walkways, patios) supported on very low expansive subgrade soils should be a minimum of 4 inches in thickness, reinforced with #3 bars at 18 inches on centers in both directions placed mid-height in the slab. The subgrade soils should be recompacted to minimum 90% compaction levels at the time of fine grading and before placing the slab reinforcement. Reinforcements lying on subgrade will be ineffective and shortly corrode due to lack of adequate concrete cover. Reinforcing bars should be correctly placed extending through the construction joints tying the slab panels. In construction practices where the reinforcements are discontinued or cut at the construction joints, slab panels should be tied together with minimum 18 inches long #3 dowels at 18 inches on centers placed mid-height in the slab (9 inches on either side of the joint). Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page 22 2. Provide "tool joint" or "softcut" contraction/control joints spaced IO feet on center (not to exceed 12 feet maximum) each way. The larger dimension of any panel shall not exceed 125% of the smaller dimension. Tool or cut as soon as slab will support weight, and can be operated without disturbing the final finish which is normally within 2 hours after final finish at each control joint location or 150 psi to 800 psi. Tool or softcuts should be a minimum of I-inch but should not exceed I ¼-inch deep maximum. In case of softcut joints, anti-ravel skid plates should be used and replaced with each blade to avoid spalling and raveling. A void wheeled equipment across cuts for at least 24 hours. Joints shall intersect free-edges at a 90° angle and shall extend straight for a minimum of I½ feet from the edge. The minimum angle between any two intersecting joints shall be 80°. Align joints of adjacent panels. Also, align joints in attached curbs withjoints in slab panels. Provide adequate curing using approved methods ( curing compound maximum coverage rate= 200 sq. ft./gal.). 3. As a minimum, use Green Book 560-C-3250 concrete for sidewalks, flatwork and exterior slabs. All exterior slab designs should be confirmed in the final as-graded compaction report. 4. Subgrade soils should be tested for proper moisture and specified compaction levels and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to the placement of concrete. E. Pavement Design I. Asphalt Concrete (HMA) Paving: Specific HMA pavement designs can best be provided at the completion of rough grading based on R-value tests of the actual finish subgrade soils; however, the following structural sections may be considered for initial planning phase and cost estimating purposes only (not for construction): * A minimum section of 4 inches HMA (AC) on 6 inches Cal trans Class 2 aggregate base (AB) or the minimum structural section required by City of Carlsbad, whichever is more, may be considered for the onsite asphalt paving surfaces outside the private and public right-of-way. Actual designs will depend on final subgrade R-value and design TI, and the approval of the City of Carlsbad. • Maximum lift for asphalt concrete shall not exceed 3 inches, unless otherwise approved. The asphalt concrete layer ( 4-inch total section) may consist of2.5 inches of a binder/base course (¾-inch aggregate) and 1.5 inches of finish top course(½- inch aggregate) topcoat, placed in accordance with the applicable local and regional codes and standards. The Class 2 aggregate or recycled base (AB) materials shall meet or exceed the requirements set forth in the current California Standard Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page 23 Specification (Caltrans Section 26-1.02). Aggregate base {AB) materials should be compacted to a minimum 95% of the corresponding maximum dry density (ASTM D-1557). Subgrade soils beneath the asphalt paving surfaces should also be compacted to a minimum 95% of the corresponding maximum dry density within the upper 12 inches. 2. PCC Pavings: Residential PCC driveways and parking supported on very low expansive (expansion index less than 20) granular subgrade soils should be a minimum of 5.5 inches in thickness, reinforced with #3 reinforcing bars at 16 inches on centers each way placed at mid-height in the slab. Subgrade soils beneath the PCC driveways and parking should be compacted to a minimum 95% of the corresponding maximum dry density, unless otherwise specified. As a minimum, use Green Book 560-C-3250 concrete for PCC pavings. Reinforcing bars should be correctly placed extending through the construction ( cold) joints tying the slab panels. In construction practices where the reinforcements are discontinued or cut at the construction joints, slab panels should be tied together with minimum 18 inch long (9 inches on either side of the joint) #3 dowels at 16 inches on centers placed mid-height in the slab. Provide "tool joint" or "softcut" contraction/control joints spaced IO feet on center (not to exceed 15 feet maximum) each way. The larger dimension of any panel shall not exceed 125% of the smaller dimension. Tool or cut as soon as the slab will support the weight and can be operated without disturbing the final finish which is normally within 2 hours after final finish at each control joint location or 150 psi to 800 psi. Tool or softcuts should be a minimum of I-inch in depth but should not exceed I ¼-inches deep maximum. In case of softcut joints, anti-ravel skid plates should be used and replaced with each blade to avoid spalling and raveling. Avoid wheeled equipment across cuts for at least 24 hours. Joints shall intersect free-edges at a 90° angle and shall extend straight for a minimum of I½ feet from the edge. The minimum angle between any two intersecting joints shall be 80°. Align joints of adjacent panels. Also, align joints in attached curbs with joints in slab panels. Provide adequate curing using approved methods ( curing compound maximum coverage rate= 200 sq. ft./gal.). 4. General Paving: Base section and subgrade preparations per structural section design, will be required for all surfaces subject to traffic including roadways, travelways, drive lanes, driveway approaches and ribbon (cross) gutters. Driveway approaches within the public right-of-way should have 12 inches subgrade compacted to a minimum of95% compaction levels and provided with a 95% compacted Class 2 base section per the structural section design. Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page24 Base layer under curb and gutters should be compacted to a minimum of 95%, while subgrade soils under curb and gutters, and base and subgrade under sidewalks should be compacted to a minimum of90% compaction levels, unless otherwise specified. Base section may not be required under curb and gutters, and sidewalks, in the case of very low to non-expansive subgrade soils (expansion index less than 20). More specific recommendations should be given in the final as-graded compaction report. F. General Recommendations I. The minimum foundation design and steel reinforcement provided herein are based on soil characteristics and are not intended to be in lieu of reinforcement necessary for structural considerations. 2. Adequate staking and grading control is a critical factor in properly completing the recommended remedial and site grading operations. Grading control and staking should be provided by the project grading contractor or surveyor/civil engineer, and is beyond the geotechnical engineering services. Staking should apply the required setbacks shown on the approved plans and conform to setback requirements established by the governing agencies and applicable codes for off-site private and public properties and property lines, utility easements, right-of-ways, nearby structures and improvements, leach fields and septic systems, and graded embankments. Inadequate staking and/or lack of grading control may result in illegal encroachments orunnecessary additional grading which will increase construction costs. 3. Open or backfilled trenches parallel with a footing shall not be below a projected plane having a downward slope of I-unit vertical to 2 units horizontal (50%) from a line 9 inches above the bottom edge of the footing, and not closer than 18 inches from the face of such footing. The Typical Trench Adjacent to Foundation is provided in the enclosed Figure 11 and may be used as a general guideline. 4. Where pipes cross under-footings, the footings shall be specially designed. Pipe sleeves shall be provided where pipes cross through footings or footing walls, and sleeve clearances shall provide for possible footing settlement, but not less than I-inch ail around the pipe. A schematic detail entailed Pipes Through or Below Foundation is included on the enclosed Figure 11. 5. Expansive clayey soils should not be used for backfilling of any retaining structure. All retaining wails should be provided with a I: I wedge of granular, compacted backfill measured from the base of the wall footing to the finished surface and a well-constructed back drain system as shown on the enclosed Typical retaining Wail Back Drainage, Figure 12. Planting large trees behind site retaining wails should be avoided. Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page25 6. All underground utility and plumbing trenches should be mechanically compacted to a minimum of90% (95% in public right-of-way) of the maximum dry density of the soil unless otherwise specified or required by the governing agencies. Care should be taken not to crush the utilities or pipes during the compaction of the soil. Very low expansive, granular import backfill soils should be used. Trench backfill materials and compaction beneath pavements within the public right-of-way shall conform to the requirements of governing agencies. 7. Finish ground surfaces immediately adjacent to the building foundations shall be sloped away from the building at a minimum 5% for a minimum horizontal distance of IO feet measured perpendicular to face of the building wall (CBC 1804.4 Site Grading). If physical obstructions or property lines prohibit IO feet of horizontal distance, a 5% slope shall be provided with an alternative method for diverting water away from the foundation. Swales used for this purpose shall be sloped not less than 2% where located within IO feet of the building foundation. Impervious surfaces ( concrete sidewalks) within IO feet of the building foundation shall also be sloped at minimum 2% away from the building. 8. Care should be taken during the construction, improvements, and fine grading phases not to disrupt the designed drainage patterns. Rooflines of the buildings should be provided with roof gutters. Roof water should be collected and directed away from the buildings and structures to a suitable location. 9. All foundation trenches should be observed to ensure adequate footing embedment and confirm competent bearing soils. Foundation and slab reinforcements should also be observed and approved by the project geotechnical consultant. I 0. The amount of shrinkage and related cracks that occur in the concrete slab-on-grades, flatwork and driveways depend on many factors, the most important of which is the amount of water in the concrete mix. The purpose of the slab reinforcement is to keep normal concrete shrinkage cracks closed tightly. The amount of concrete shrinkage can be minimized by reducing the amount of water in the mix. To keep shrinkage to a minimum the following should be considered: * Use the stiffest mix that can be handled and consolidated satisfactorily. * Use the largest maximum size of aggregate that is practical. For example, concrete made with %-inch maximum size aggregate usually requires about 40-lbs. more (nearly 5-gal.) water per cubic yard than concrete with I-inch aggregate. * Cure the concrete as long as practical. Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page 26 X. The amount of slab reinforcement provided for conventional slab-on-grade construction considers that good quality concrete materials, proportioning, craftsmanship, and control tests where appropriate and applicable are provided. 11. A preconstruction meeting between representatives of this office, the property owner or planner, city inspector as well as the grading contractor/builder is recommended in order to discuss grading and construction details associated with site development. FOUNDATION PLAN REVIEW Project ADU foundation plans and details were provided to us and were reviewed as part of our services. Based on our review, the following comments are appropriate: A. Continuous strip footings should be a minimum of 15 inches wide and 18 inches deep reinforced with minimum 2-#5 bars top and bottom. B. Interior slabs should be a minimum 4.5 inches in thickness, reinforced with #3 reinforcing bars spaced 16 inches on center each way, placed mid-height in the slab. C. Provided re-entrant corner reinforcement for all interior slabs as specified, where appropriate. XI. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER OF RECORD {GER} SMS Geotechnical Solutions, Inc. is the geotechnical engineer of record (GER) for providing a specific scope of work or professional service under a contractual agreement unless it is terminated or canceled by either the client or our firm. In the event a new geotechnical consultant or soils engineering firm is hired to provide added engineering services, professional consultations, engineering observations and compaction testing, SMS Geotechnical Solutions, Inc. will no longer be the geotechnical engineer of the record. Project transfer should be completed in accordance with the California Geotechnical Engineering Association (CGEA) Recommended Practice for Transfer of Jobs Between Consultants. The new geotechnical consultant or soils engineering firm should review all previous geotechnical documents, conduct an independent study, and provide appropriate confirmations, revisions or design modifications to his own satisfaction. The new geotechnical consultant or soils engineering firm should also notify in writing SMS Geotechnical Solutions, Inc. and submit proper notification to the City of Carlsbad for the assumption of responsibility in accordance with the applicable codes and standards (1997 UBC Section 3317.8). Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad XII. LIMITATIONS March 24, 2020 Page 27 The conclusions and recommendations provided herein have been based on available data obtained from the review of pertinent reports and plans, subsurface explorations well as our experience with the soils and formational materials located in the general area. The materials encountered on the project site and utilized in our laboratory testing are believed representative of the total area; however, earth materials may vary in characteristics between excavations. Of necessity, we must assume a certain degree of continuity between exploratory excavations and/or natural exposures. It is necessary, therefore, that all observations, conclusions, and recommendations are verified during the site excavations and construction operations. In the event discrepancies are noted, we should be contacted immediately so that an obseivation can be made and additional recommendations issued if required. The recommendations made in this report are applicable to the site at the time this report was prepared. It is the responsibility of the owner/developer to ensure that these recommendations are carried out in the field. It is almost impossible to predict with certainty the future performance of a property. The future behavior of the site is also dependent on numerous unpredictable variables, such as earthquakes, rainfall, and on-site drainage patterns. The firm of 61'16 Geotechnical Solutions, Inc., shall not be held responsible for changes to the physical conditions of the property such as addition of fill soils or changing drainage patterns which occur without our observation or control. This report should be considered valid for a period of one year and is subject to review by our firm following that time. If significant modifications are made to your tentative construction plan, especially with respect to finish pad elevations and the ADU final layout, this report must be presented to us for review and possible revision. This report is issued with the understanding that the owner or his representative is responsible for ensuring that the information and recommendations are provided to the project architect/structural engineer so that they can be incorporated into the plans. Necessary steps shall be taken to ensure that the project general contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations during construction. The project geotechnical engineer should be provided the opportunity for a general review of the project final design plans and specifications in order to ensure that the recommendations provided in this report are properly interpreted and implemented. If the project geotechnical engineer is not provided the opportunity of making these reviews, he can assume no responsibility for misinterpretation of his recommendations. Limited Foundation Bearing Soil Study, Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Benardino Residence, 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad March 24, 2020 Page 28 §MN Geotechnical Solutions, Inc., warrants that this report has been prepared within the limits prescribed by our client with the usual thoroughness and competence of the engineering profession. No other warranty or representation, either expressed or implied, is included or intended. Once again, should any questions arise concerning this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Reference to our Project No. GI-20-02-109 will help to expedite our response to your mqumes. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. §MS Geotechnical Solutions, Inc. di S. Shariat, Geotechnical Engineer ~J~✓~J~_; Steven J. Melzer, ~#2362 Engineering Geologist Kevin McFarland Staff Geologist Distribution: Addressee (3, e-mail) , Q. °' CERTI * ENGINEE GEOLO ~ ·,, 'f)l ~O~F-C- SMS GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS, INC. REFERENCES -Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Section 4 -Construction, Volume 04.08: Soil and Rock (!); D420-D5876, 2019. Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Section 4 -Construction, Volume 04.09: Soil and Rock (II); D5877 -Latest, 2019. Highway Design Manual, Caltrans. Fifth Edition. Corrosion Guidelines, Caltrans, Version 1.0, September 2003. California Building Code (CBC), California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 2, Volumes I & 2, 20 I 9, International Code Council. -"The Green Book" Standard Specifications For Public Works Construction, Public Works Standards, Inc., BNi Building News, Latest Edition. California Geological Survey, 2008 (Revised), Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Special Publication 117 A, I 08p. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (California Geological Survey), 1986 (revised), Guidelines for Preparing Engineering Geology Reports: DMGNote44. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (California Geological Survey), 1986 (revised), Guidelines to Geologic and Seismic Reports: DMG Note 42. EQFAULT, Ver. 3.00, 1997, Deterministic Estimation of Peak Acceleration from Digitized Faults, Computer Program, T. Blake Computer Services and Software. -EQSEARCH, Ver 3.00, 1997, Estimation of Peak Acceleration from California Earthquake Catalogs, Computer Program, T. Blake Computer Services and Software. -Tan S.S. and Kennedy, M.P., 1996, Geologic Maps of the Northwestern Part of San Diego County, California, Plate(s) I and 2, Open File-Report 96-02, California Division of Mines and Geology, I :24,000. "Proceeding of The NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance Soils," Edited by T. Leslie Youd and Izzat M. Idriss, Technical Report NCEER-97-0022, Dated December 31, 1997. -"Recommended Procedures For Implementation ofDMG Special Publication 117 Guidelines For Analyzing and Mitigation Liquefaction In California," Southern California Earthquake Center; USC, March 1999. REFERENCES (continued) -"Soil Mechanics," Naval Facilities Engineering Command, DM 7.01. -"Foundations & Earth Structures," Naval Facilities Engineering Command, DM 7.02. -"Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering, Robert D. Holtz, William D. Kovacs. -"Introductory Soil Mechanics and Foundations: Geotechnical Engineering," George F. Sowers, Fourth Edition. -"Foundation Analysis and Design," Joseph E. Bowels. -Caterpillar Performance Handbook, Edition 29, 1998. -Jennings, C.W., 1994, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas, California Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Data Map Series, No. 6. -Kennedy, M.P., 1977, Recency and Character of Faulting Along the Elsinore Fault Zone in Southern Riverside County, California, Special Report 131, California Division of Mines and Geology, Plate 1 (East/West), 12p. -Kennedy, M.P. and Peterson, G.L., 1975, Geology of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, California: California Division of Mines and Geology Bulletin 200, 56p. -Kennedy, M.P. and Tan, S.S., 1977, Geology of National City, Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa Quadrangles, Southern San Diego Metropolitan Area, California, Map Sheet 24, California Division of Mines and Geology, 1 :24,000. -Kennedy, M.P., Tan, S.S., Chapman, R.H., and Chase, G.W., 1975, Character and Recency of Faulting, San Diego Metropolitan Areas, California: Special Report 123, 33p. -"An Engineering Manual For Slope Stability Studies," J.M. Duncan, A.L. Buchignani and Marius De Wet, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, March 1987. -"Procedure To Evaluate Earthquake-Induced Settlements In Dry Sandy Soils," Daniel Pradel, ASCE Journal Of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Engineering, Volume 124, #4, 1998. -"Minimum Design Loads For Buildings and Other Structures," ASCE 7-16, American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). -"Seismic Constraints on The Architecture of The Newport-Ingelwood/Rose Canyon Fault: Implications For The Length And Magnitude of Future Earthquakes," Sahakian, V., Bormann, J., Driscoll, N., Harding, A. Kent, G. Wesnousky, S. (2017), AGU. doi:10.1002/2016 JB 013467. TOPOI map printed on 03/13/20 from "5anDfego.tpo• and "Untltled.tpg" 117.35000° W WGS84 117.33333° W ' __) ' ' ' . ' uiat ,';; 1 • •, ~ : Sc • •~.-;• "t... • • • ,..;/• "±-!'--•c.!.11 : • • • ·~ •• • • _,r I • /.. -~·· i\11··._·. :.~,···~· : z ,•x---. . ....-..., °' • 1.·~ • i ,:f -. ~\ t~i ~~ r,i' f. u o ~h-. ~-·---. · ½'-·.d -~1.;.3/ ~ c ~ ... , ri, ,:,;,a,~>:. ."-• "X.l't"j ,,;i; • ~ i:l ,. ........... ~ ,/~. 1~· .,. Q) ♦ • -+ -- ; I ": I ~ CT\ 1 1 I z . 0 ~ ... ,,; fTI ,:,-;' ,?i \ ' \ ' - \ \ \ ' \ .Al'llll' and N Aeade , . \ \ \ \ . . ·cA~LSBA \ \ ' \ \ .. \ \ ,• \ \ \ ' \ '.' \ \ • I -.. \ . \. ' \ ' Job Sit~ Cool'diDattt : Lat. 33.1690°, Lon. 117.3464° 117.35000° W WGS84 117.33333° W f:==c=====:i=~===i==:===fMU I I I lqoG f1ET , I I I I 5!'m I I I I 1000'" Pri,,ud nm TOPO• 1:1999 '11-ddfl""'lf Productioa.s C•~·.1opo.com) UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (USCS) Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests" Soll Classlflcatlon Group Group Name S mbol ~ ~;!H!l !ilJ~!l Cw ~ 4 and 1 :S: C. :S: 3• GW Well-araded gravel' More than 50" of coarse less than 5" flnes< Not meeting above gradation for GW GP Poorly graded gravel' ~!!'n §ralntll ~ol!l fraction retained on #4 Grav1ls with Flne1 Fines classify as Ml or MH GM Silty gravel'AH More than 5°" sieve More than 12" flnes' Fines classify as Cl or CH GC Clayey gravel',11.N retained on #200 ~ C!!1n S,nds Cw~6 and 1SC.:S:3' sieve• less than 5" fines" Not meeting above gradation for SW S°" or more of coarse 1•!1111 ~!lb f!n1s Fines classify as Ml or MH SW Well-graded sand' SP Poorly graded sand' SM SIity sand'"" fraction passes #4 sieve More than 12" flnes" Fines dasslfy as Cl or CH SC Clayey sand•...., Inorganic Pl > 7 and plots on or above • A" line' ll!b 1!'.!5! Q!l!! Pl< 4 and plots below "A• line' Cl leandafl:" Ml Siltc,1-M Eln~ !i!Jlned ~11s Liquid limlt less than SO organic liquid limit-oven dried so" or more passes liquid Limit-not dried the #200 sieve• Inorganic Pl plots on or above "A" line 11!1! an!! Cla!!! Pl plots below "A" llne <0.75 Ol Organic clatl.M.N Organic silt"''-'40 CH Fat claf:':'"' MH liquid llmlt 50 or more organic liquid limit-oven dried liquid limit-not dried <0.75 OH Organic clat~M., Organlcsl~ Highly organic soils Primarily organic matter, dark In color, and organic odor PT Peat • For solls having S to 12" passing the No. 200 sieve, use a dual symbol such as GW-GC. A Based on the material passing the 3 in. (75 mm} sieve. 1 If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add "with cobbles or boulders, or both" to group name. c Gravels with 5" to 12" fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded gravel with silt, GW--GC well-graded gravel with clay, GP-GM poorly graded gravel with silt, GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay. 0 Sands with 5% to 12" fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded sand with slit, SW-SC well-graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand. For classifications of fine-grained soils and fine-grained fraction of coarse- grained soils. Equation of• A" line. Horizontal at Pl=4 to LL=25.5, then Pl=0.73 (LL-20). Equation of •u• line. Vertical at ll=l6 to Pl=7, then Pl = 0.9 (LL-8) fj(} so =-40 0.. >< a, '"O E 30 ~ ·.:; :.:; "' <II ii: 20 10 7 4 0 F If soil contains ll.5" sand, add "with sand" to group name. G If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM " If fines are organic, add "with organic fines" to group name. If soil contains ~15" gravel, add "with gravet to group name. If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soll ls a CL-ML. silty clay. 1 If soil contains 15" to 29" plus No. 200, add "with sand" or "with gravel" whichever is L If soil contains ~3°" plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add "sandy" to group name. M If soil contains ~°" plus No. 200 predominantly gravel, add "gravelly" to group name. N Pl ~4 and plots on or above "A" llne. 0 Pl <4 or plots below "A" line. P Pl plots on or above "A" line. Q Pl plots below "A" line L H MH or OH 0 10 16 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Liquid Limit (LL } ~IM1)~ Geotechnical Solutions, Inc. KEY TO BORING / TEST PIT LOGS DRILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS: lgj Spilt Spoon -1 -3/8" 1.0., 2" 0.0., Unless otherwise noted HS: Hollow Stem Auger □ Chunk Sample ST: Thin-Walled Tube -2" 0.0., Unless otherwise noted PA: Power Auger 'V Sandcone Density Test ~ Ring Sampler-2.375" 1.0., 2.5" 0.0., Unless otherwise noted HA: Hand Auger 08: Diamond Bit Coring-4", N, B RB: Rock Bit ■ Bulk Sample or Auger Sample WB: Wash Boring or Mud Rotary The number of blows required to advance a standard 2-inch 0.0. split-spoon sample (SS) the last 12 Inches of the total 18-lnch penetration with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 Inches is considered the "Standard Penetration" or "N-value". For 2.5" 0.0. ring samplers (RS) the penetration value is reported as the number of blows required to advance the sampler 12 inches using a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches, reported as "blows per foot" and is not considered equivalent to the "Standard Penetration" or "N-value". WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS Wl: WCI: DCI: AB: Water level Wet Cave In Ory Cave In After Boring WS: WO: BCR: ACR: While Sampling WhlleDrllling Before Casing Removal After Casing Removal N/E: Not Encountered Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the times Indicated. Groundwater levels at other times and other locations across the site could vary. In pervlous soils, the Indicated levels may reflect the location of groundwater. In low permeability soils, the accurate determination of groundwater levels may not be possible with only short-term observation. DESCRIPTIVE SOIL QASSIFICATION: Soil classiflcatlon ls based on the unlfled classiflcatlon system. Coarse Grained Soils have more than 5()'}(, of their dry weig'1t retained on a #200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Ane Grained Solis have less than 5()'}(, of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are principally described as clays If they are plastic, and silts If they are slightly plastic or non-plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added according to relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse-grained soils are defined on the basis of their In-place relative density and flne-gralned soils on the basis of their co_nslstency. CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOJLS Unconfined Standard ~msslve Penttration or N- Strennh, gu, 2sf value (SSl BlowilFt. Conslsten~ <500 <2 Very Soft 500-1000 2-3 Soft 1001-2000 4-6 Medium Stiff 2001-4000 7-12 4001-8000 13-26 8000+ 26+ RELATIVE PROPORTION OF SAND AND GRAVEL DesqlptiYe Term($) of other Stiff Very Stiff Hard RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS Standard Penetration or N- value (SSI BlowslFt, 0-3 4-9 10-29 30-49 50+ Ring Sampler (RS) Blowslft. 0-6 7-18 19-58 59-98 99+ GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY Relative Density Very Loose Loose Medium Dense Dense Very Dense constituents Percent of Dry Weight Trace With Modifiers < 15 15 -29 > 30 Major Component of Sample Boulders Partide Size Over U In. (300 mm) RELATIVE PROPORTION OF FINES Desulptlve Term(sl of other tonstituents Trace With Modifiers Percent of Dry Weight < 15 15 -12 > 12 Cobbles Gravel Sand Silt or Clay !erm Non-plastic Low Medium High 12 In. to 3 In. (300 mm to 75 mm) 3 in. to #4 sieve (75 mm to 4.75 mm) #4 Sieve to #200 Sieve (4. 75 mm to 0.075 mm) Passing #200 Sieve (0.075 mm) PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION Plasticity Index 0 1-10 11-30 30 + ~~~ Geotechnical Solutions, Inc. SMS ·Geotechnical Solutions, Inc. PROJECT: Proposed New ADU Test Pit: TP-1 CLIENT: John & Debbie Benardino PROJECT No.: GI-20-02-109 PROJECT LOCATION: 1110 Buena Vista Wa Carlsbad Date Excavated: _-e3_/4_/2---'-0_ Equipment: Mini Excavator DEERE 35G . u EPTII Xo (ft) ~g 0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Logged By: ----=S=.M=.S..:..... __ FILL/ DISTURBED NATURAL GROUND (af/ Os): SM/S Sand to silty sand. Tan to light brown color. Fine to medium-grained. "Clean" and cohesionless. Loose to medium dense. Moist. Numerous roots and rootlets throughout. 7 ll3.7 86 41 2 3 4 5 6 ■ BULK SAMPLE ST-1 OLD P ARALIC DEPOSITS (Oop): Sand. Tan to orange-brown color. "Clean" and cohesionless. Poorly graded. Fine to medium-grained. Moist. Weathered and loose in upper exposures. At 3.5 feet, an approximately 18 inches thick layer of dense deposits. Grades back to moist and medium dense to dense below. ST-2 □ CHUNK DENSITY Bottom of test pit at 6.5 feet. SP 8 115.9 91 51 8 112.0 88 44 FIGURE 3 Test Pit: TP-2 SMS Geotechnical Solutions, Inc. PROJECT: Pro osed New ADU CLIENT: John & Debbie Benardino PROJECT No.: GI-20-02-109 PROJECT LOCATION: 1110 Buena Vista Wa Carlsbad Date Excavated: 3/4/20 Logged By: Equipment: Remarks: u ~8 EPTH (ft) ~...:i t:> 2 3 4 5 6 Mini Excavator EERE 35G . MATERIAL DESCRIPTION FILU DISTURBED NATURAL GROUND {af/ Os}: Sand to silty sand. Tan to light brown color. Fine to medium-grained. "Clean" and cohesionless. Loose. Damp to moist. Numerous roots and rootlets throughout ST-1 OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS {Ool!}: Sand. Tan to orange-brown color. "Clean" and cohesionless. Poorly graded. Fine to medium-grained. Moist to very moist. Weathered and loose in upper exposures. At 4 feet, becomes loose to medium dense and moist to very moist. S.M.S. .,; !!I..., !~i u ~~ .,; ::i ;,; ~8 SM/S 6 SP 9 ii ~~-""o Oi:; l!l ~~ ~"'t 0 ~~ o< 106.S 81 31 109.4 86 44 At 6 feet, grades back to medium dense to dense. .,__.......~"-T ST-2 9 113.2 89 52 ■ '-------------------------' Bottom of test pit at 6.5 feet. BULK SAMPLE □ CHUNK DENSITY FIGURE 4 GEOLOGIC MAP 1110 BUENA VISTA WAY, CARLSBAD Geologic Units: Old paralic deposits, undivided (late to middle Pleistocene) Exerpt From the Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30' x 60' Quadrangle, California Michael P. Kennedy and Siang S. Tan 2007. SMS GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 5931 Sea Lion Place, Suite I 09 Carlsbad, CA 920 I 0 Scale 1 :33,333 Project Number: GI-20-02-109 Figure Number: 5 CROSS-SECTION A-A' Legend 1110 BUENA VISTA WAY, CARLSBAD, CA r---, -..._ ...... -t ... Geologic I I Proposed A.D.U. Contact (Approx.) l-.--- SCALE: 1" = 10' O' 10' ~ ~ Fill / Disturbed Existing Grade Natural Ground LJ Test Pit Location B Old Paralic Approximated Deposits A N 80- ---------------------7 I I I I Proposed A.D.U. : Existing Grade 75 -j : I / I F-=J----}-____ Fill/ Disturbed Natural Ground (af/Qs) J __ J ___ _ 70- 65 -TP-2 TP-1 Old Paralic Deposits (Qop) 60- 55....,_ __________________________ _ ~ . -] MS GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS INC I Sea Lion Place. Suite I 09 ~lsbad, C_!,. 92010 Figure Number: 6 Project Number: GI-20-02-109 ' .. EPICENTER MAP LEGEND 1[.JO. 1868 1869• I~.!• 1•11 1m ~7.0 ••• ~ ... i 6.5-6.9 g 8.0-6.• • • • 55-5.9 • • • 50·( I • e l-'"oltOtlC.l:IF4U''ng -- H,:,toceneFautr,g -- High\ .. ,s(i IAJOf} -- Hll)hways \Minor) --- Ll "'81 r A La•1"'·~1sotMl!65 ...,. 0~ Ulqualo' )'Oal • FAULT EPICENTER MAP SAN DIEGO COUNTY REGION Indicated Earthquake Events Through a 200 Year Period ;✓-1-: .. !:'.! • •S""""' , ,,_ ~; ~I - Map is reproduced from California Division of Mines and Geology, "Epicenters of/ and Areas Damaged by M > 5 California Earthquakes, 1800-1999". SMS GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 5931 Sea Lion Place, Suite I 09 Project Number: GI-20-02-109 Figure Number: 7 Carlsbad, CA 92010 SMS Geotechnical Solutions, Inc. 5931 Sea Uon place, Suite 109 Carlsbad, CA 92010 Sieve Analysis ASTM D 6913 • 04 Project John & Debbie Benardino Job# Address Date Gl-20-02-109 Supervising Lab Tech Supervising Lab Manager 100 90 80 70 00 60 C: .iii V, ro Q. 50 ..... C: QJ u ,_ 40 QJ Q. 30 20 10 0 500 Location TP-1 TP-1 N .... Cobbles 100 TP-1@ 1.5' 060 030 010 Depth Symbol 1.5' ~ 4.5' () S.B. 1110 Buena Vista Way, Carlsbad S.M .S. 3/18/2020 Tech S.B. 50 = 00 ~-.... rt') 0 .-I # 10 5 1 Grain Size (mm) 0 0 0 N rt'I -=I' ### 0.5 Gravel Sand Coarse I Fine Coarse I Medium I TP-1@4.S' 060 060 030 030 010 010 uses NAT, w¾ LL PL Pl SM-SP 7 SP 8 8 .-4 # Fine 0 0 N !It 0.1 0.05 060 030 010 Cu {060/010) 0.01 Silt or Clay Cc (D230/ 060*010) I Figure 8 I Notes: Typical Over-Excavation And Recompaction Detail Schematic, No-Scale FDaMGRAOI:---. SEE MOTE:I ----, LlNEC,,e>a. NATMHAT!llaAL ellll.O~ FQH)ATIGIN EIUJLO~ PAO ELEVATION 1'1JN. fllECO?ACTEC> FJU flER&oJL.6~. &E! Al.SO NOTE: ~ 1. Minimum depth of over-excavation per soils report, but not less than 2' below the bottom of deepest footing(s) or depth of approved dense native ground, whichever greater. 2. New fills shall be compacted to minimum 90% compaction level per ASTM D1557 at approximately 2% above the optimum moisture content, unless otherwise specified in the soils report or directed in the field. Notes: Typical Foundation Formwork Detail Schematic, No-Scale AFTER !ET CLEAN TO~LAITAI-ICE •5Cll'1------. E><CAVA TIOH 1'1JST BE K!fDT ClEAH AND IIIIIEE c,, 0EBRI& 1. Foundation concrete shall be poured directly against neat trench excavation exposing approved bearing soil strata. 2. Foundation trench walls shall be stable. Sloughing or disturbed trench side walls shall not be allowed. 3. Foundation trenches shall be observed and approved by the project geotechnlcal consultant to insure clean excavation immediately prior to, and during placing of concrete. 4. Formwork is not permitted below grade unJess fully formed. 5. Stakes are not permitted within the footing section. Project No: Gl-20-02-109 6.116GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 5931 Sea Lion Place, Suite 109 Carlsbad, California 92010 Figure: 9 NOTES: (a) RE-ENTRANT CORNER REINFORCEMENT NO. 3 BARS PLACED MID-HEIGHT IN SLAB ISOLATION JOINTS CONTRACTION JOINTS I NOSCALE I (b) RE-ENTRANT CORNER CRACK 1. Isolation joints around the columns should be either circular as shown in (a) or diamond shaped as shown in (b). If no isolation joints are used around columns, or if the corners of the isolation joints do not meet the contraction joints, radial cracking as shown in (c) may occur (reference ACI). 2. In order to control cracking at the re-entrant corners(+ /-270 degree corners), provide reinforcement as shown in (c). 3. Re-entrant corner reinforcement shown herein is provided as a general guideline only and is subject to verification and changes by the project architect and I or structural engineer based upon slab geometry, location, and other engineering and construction factors. TYPICAL ISOLATION JOINTS AND SMS GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS1 INC. RE-ENTRANT CORNER Consulting Geotechnical Engineers & Geologists REINFORCEMENT 5931 Sea Lion Place, Suite 109 Carlsbad, California 92010 PROJECT NO. FIGURE NO. 760-602-7815 smsgeosol.inc@gmail.com Gl-20-02-109 10 .. Typical Pipes Through or Trench Adjacent to Foundations SPREADFTG., CQMT. FTG., OR GRADEBEN.1 Sl/lB~GRAOE Schematic, No-Scale LOCATE TRENCH SO ---.. THA T FOOTINGS ARE NOT UNDERMINED 1'-6' MIN- BACKAU. TRENCH PER G£OTcCHN1CAl REPORT NOTES: 1. DO NOT PLACE SLEEVES OR CONDUIT IN ISOlATED SPRfAO FOO'TlHGS • RlM AROUNO OR 88.0N nESE FOOllMGS. 2. SLEEVES ARE HOT TOP~ THROUGH CONTltlJOUS FOOTINGS OR GAAOE BEAMS UHLESS SHOWN OTHERWISE· wtERE SLEEVES ARE PBWITTED, SEE SEE SECTION ea.ow Trench Adjacent to Foundation CONT. FOOTNG ORGRAOEBENJ . . . PRO\'!Ol PlPE ~ ,to. T LARGER THAN PIPE 0.0.) WHERE ADJACENT TO CONC. -TYPICAL LllAIT DISTANCE BETWEEN SLEEVES TO NO LESS 1l1AN lAAGER SlEEVE OUTSIDE DIAMETER ORS" ELEVATION A-A CONT. FOOTING ORGRAOE l!NA .__ __ EXTEND FOOTING MIN. 6" BELOW SLEEVE (TYP.) Project No: Gl-20-02-109 Pipes Through or Below Foundation 61/6GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 5931 Sea Lion Place, Suite 109 Carlsbad, California 92010 Figure: 11 Typical Retaining Wall Back Drainage Schematic, No-Scale RfTAINING WAtl --- FILTER MATERJAt, 3/◄' · 1~' CRUSHED ROCKS (WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC OR CAI.TRANS Cl.ASS 2 PERMEMU: MA'TERIAl.5 (SEE SPECIFICATIONS) WATERPROOFING (lYP) -----~-=--~F-'.":IN:;;;ISK GRADE SPECIFICATIONS FOR CAI. TRANS CLASS 2 PEllMfABlf W.TERIAI. 168-1.025) U.S. STANDAAD SIMSIZf 1· 3/~ 3/8 No.-' No, 8 No.30 No.50 No. 200 "PASSING 100 90-100 ,0.100 25-40 18-33 5-15 0-7 0-3 SAND EQUIVALENT > 75 6'MIN. CONCRfTf.LINED DRAINAGE DITCH FILTER MATERIAi., 3/4' • If CRUSHED ROCtcS (WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC OR CAI..TRANS CIASS 2 PERMEABLE W.TI:RIALS (SEE SPECIFICATIONS) WATER,,.OOFING (TYP) --- PROPOSED GRADE 6"MIN. GROUND SURFACE MIN. 90% COMPACTED Fili APPROVED FILTER FABIUC jMIWI U0N) 12' OVERLAP, TVP. ◄' PVC PERFORATED PIPE MIN. (SCH ◄0 OR SW5) MtN. l /2% fAI.L TO APPROVED OUTLET (SEE REPORT) NATURAL OR GRADED St.OPE TEMPORARY • l :l CUT SLOPE PROPERLY COMPACTED (MIN. 90") BACKFILLED GROUND ----BENCH ANO TIGHTI.Y t<EY INTO TEMPORARY . z IDw .-.., !!l. BACKCUT AS BACKFILLING PltOGRESSfS APPROVED FILTER FABRIC (MIIWI 140N) 12' OVWAP, TVP. '-------4' PVC PERFORATED Ptl'E MIN. (SCH 40 OR SDR35) MIN. 1 /2" FALL TO APPROYED OUltfT (SEE CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS: REf'ORl) · 1. Provide granular, non-expansive backfill soil in 1 :1 gradient wedge behind wall. Compact backfill to minimum 90% of laboratory standard. 2. Backdrain should consist of 4" diameter PVC pipe (Schedule 40 or equivalent) with perforations down. Drain to suitable at minimum½%. Provide¾" -1-½" crushed rocks filter materials wrapped in fabric (Mirafi 140N or equivalent). Delete filter fabric wrap if Caltrans Class 2 permeable material is used. Compact Class 2 permeable material to minimum 90% of laboratory standard. · 3. Seal back of wall with approved waterproofing in accordance with architect's specifications. 4. Provide positive drainage to disallow ponding of water above wall. Drainage to flow away from wall at minimum 2%. Provide concrete-lined drainage ditch for slope toe retaining walls. 5. Use 1-½ cubic feet per foot with granular backfill soil and 4 cubic feet per foot If expansive backfill is used. Project No: Gl-20-02-109 6Jl6GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 5931 Sea Lion Place, Suite 109 Carlsbad, California 92010 Figure: 12 . . ASCE. Nl/l1'ICNI SOt1£IY CY C\ll ENGINIIRS Address: No Address at This Location https://asce 7hazardtool.online/ ASCE 7 Hazards Report Standard: ASCE/SEI 7-16 Risk Category: II Soll Class: D -Stiff Soil Page 1 of 3 Elevation: 75.86 ft (NAVO 88) Latitude: 33.169 Longitude: -117.3464 ......... -. .... 1\-.. ...... ~- '\ \ Fri Mar 13 2020 \ I ') ,, \ .. .c ,1111 , ·• .. APPENDIX . . N.fJIICM S0CETY Cf CM.EHGIHIBIS Seismic Site Soll Class: Results: Ss : S1 F, : Fv : SMs D • Stiff Soil 1.055 0.383 1.078 N/A 1.138 So1 N/A TL : 8 PGA : 0.464 PGAM : 0.527 Fpo,. 1.136 SM, : N/A 1. : 1 Sos : 0.758 Cv : 1.311 Ground motion hazard analysis may be required. See ASCE/SEI 7 -16 Section 11 .4.8. Data Accessed: Fri Mar 13 2020 Date Source: usGs Seismic Desiga Maps https·//asce7hazardtool.onllrie/ Page 2 of3 Fri Mar 13 2020 . . AMEIICAN S0aElY CS CM. £HGINSIIS The ASCE 7 Hazard Tool ls provided for your convenience, for Informational purposes only, and Is provided •as is" and without warranties of any kind. The location data Included herein has been obtained from Information developed, produced, and maintained by third party providers; or has been extrapolated from maps Incorporated In the ASCE 7 standard. While ASCE has made every effort to use data obtained from rellable sources or methodologies, ASCE does not make any representations or warranties as to the accuracy, completeness, rellabillty, currency, or quality of any data provided herein. Any third-party links provided by this Tool should not be construed as an endorsement, affiliation, relationship, or sponsorship of such third-party content by or from ASCE. ASCE does not Intend, nor should anyone Interpret, the results provided by this Tool to replace the sound Judgment of a competent professional, having knowledge and experience In the appropriate field(s) of practice, nor to substitute for the standard of care required of such professionals In Interpreting and applying the contents of this Tool or the ASCE 7 standard. In using this Tool, you expressly assume all risks associated with your use. Under no circumstances shall ASCE or Its officers, directors, employees, members, affiliates, or agents be liable to you or any other person for any direct, Indirect, special, Incidental, or consequential damages erising from or related to your use of, or rellance on, the Tool or any information obtained therein. To the fullest extent permitted by law, you agree to release and hold harmless ASCE from any and ell liability of any nature arising out of or resulting from any use of data provided by the ASCE 7 Hazard Tool. https://asce 7hazardtool. on line/ Page 3 of 3 Fri Mer 13 2020 -(City of Carlsbad .. ,:~CERTIFICATION OF SCHOOL FEES PAID a !leant and the appropriate school districts and returned to the City prior This fo.rm must be comple.tedThby cth,te ~i• n~t,stfe any 'building permit without a completed school fee form. to lssumg a building permit. e Y Project# & Name: Permit#: CBR2019-3369 Project Address: 1112 BUENA VISTA WAV Assessor's Parcel#: =15~5'.!160~3:..'.:700~------------ Project Applicant ~JOH~N!..:!U!!.!:E:!!!N~A~RD:!!l!!NO~---------- (Owner Name) Resldantlal Square Feet: New/Additions: _______________ _ Second.Dweffing Unit !:640=. ______________ _ Commenal Scpant Feet New/Additions; ________________ _ City Cer1fflcation:atv of cartstadllulldina Division Date: 08/13/2020 Certiticallon of AppflCllfll/Ownas. The ..,_ U9Qlllng W. declaration ("Owner") certifies under penally DI pajury 111111 (t) 111e lnlannallon pn,,,ldal above Is correct and true to the best of the Owner's mowtedge, and lhat the Owra will 111a an amended certification of payment -, l'8Y 1h11 addllorlal a If 0wriar ~ an Increase In the number of dwelling units or square footage after Iha buldlng permit Is lsaued or If the Initial determination of Ll1ils er ~ foolage ia found tD tie lnc:om!ct, and that (2) the Owner la the ownerldewtlDper of 1he abowt dla:ribed projael(a). DI' 1hat the person exacutlng this declaration ia authorized to sign on behalf of Iha Owrmr. @ Carlsbad Unified School District 6225 El Camino Real Carlsbad CA 92009 Phone: (760) 331-5000 D Encinitas Union School District 101 South Rancho Santa Fe Rd Encinitas, CA 92024 Phone: (760) 944-4300 x1 166 D San Dlegulto Union H.S. Dlatrlct 684 Requeza Dr. Encinitas, CA 92024 Phone: (760) 753-6491 Ext 5514 (By Appl. Only) D San Marcos Unified Sch. District 255 Pico Ave Ste. 100 San Marcos, CA 92069 Phone: (760) 290-2649 Contact: Katherine Marcelja (By Appt.only) □ Vista Unified School District 1234 Arcadia Drive Vista CA 92083 Phone: (760) 726-2170 x2222 SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL FEE CERTIFICATION (To be completed by the school district(•)) TifJS FORM INDICATES THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS FOR ltfE PROJECT tlAVE BEEN OR WILL BE SATISFIED. The unde,..._., being claly ..ahorized by the appllcable School District, certlflu that the developer, builder, or owner ,_ Atfsflecl the obligation for Khool flldlltfu. This I• to certify that the applicant llslad on ,... 1 ha• paid all amounts or completed other appllcable school mitigation determined by the School Dlatrlct. The City mav ,..,. bullcllng parmlts for this project. Signature of Authorized School District Official: Qr . Be V\ ! C\ VY\ i V\ C V\\J vd'.\11 l TIiie: ~\)~r iY'RVJdCAllf NameofSdmDlltrtct CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT arlsbad, CA 92008 I 760-602-2719 I 760-602-8 ---.. .---, ... -~ -L. .,...=---... .... ... I '1 ... ~ ... ~. Ml ---... 1111 ....... --... -.,..... ..... HII ,I iiiiolw .... , .. ........ , .. ---, .. I~ _..,.iiiiiillilll HI --~ , .. i I ' """ ....... ... ---... ~ I I ,....,._ ,-:11 ----... --.. ... " 111111-.... I --t•JI ~ ~ _, ■ l•JI ~ ~ 1, --U-QI ~-= HII I ....,.._ I-GI -·--,-aa It i 11 ff I 3 I ~ • - (city of Carlsbad PURPOSE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST 8-50 Development Services Building Division 1635 Faraday Avenue (760) 602-2719 www .carlsbadca.gov This checklist is intended to assist building permit applicants identify which Climate Action Plan (CAP) ordinance requirements apply to their projects. The completed checklist must be included in the building permit application. It may be necessary to supplement the completed checklist with supporting materials, calculations or certifications, to demonstrate full compliance with CAP ordinance requirements. For example, projects that propose or require a performance approach to comply with energy-related measures will need to attach to this checklist separate calculations and documentation as specified by the ordinances. NOTE: The following type of permits are not required to fill out this form ❖ Patio I ❖ Decks I ❖ PME (w/o panel upgrade) I ❖ Pool .,. If an item in the checklist is deemed to be not applicable to a project, or is less than the minimum required by ordinance, an explanation must be provided to the satisfaction of the Building Official. .,. Details on CAP ordinance requirements are available on the city's website . .,. A CAP Building Plan template (form B-55) shall be added to the title page all building plans. This template shall be completed to demonstrate project compliance with the CAP ordinances. Refer to the building application webpaqe and download the latest form. Project Name/Building Permit No.: Property Address/APN: Applicant Name/Co.: Applicant Address: Contact Phone: ~S'[ -d. '{S~-33 \& Contact Email ~ _ bftYJ cl 1 (\~ ~ ~\ \ _ C6'Y\ Contact information of person completing this checklist (if different than above): Name: Company name/address: B-50 Contact Phone: Contact Email: Date:~\ \_-_,9,_l_-_19_ Page 1 of 6 Revised 08/19 City of Carlsbad Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist Use the table below to determine which sections of the Ordinance Compliance checklist are applicable to your project. For alterations and additions to existing buildings, attach Building Permit Valuation worksheet. Building Permit Valuation (BPV) from worksheet:$ ______ _ & ResidenUal A high-rise residential building is 4 or more stories, Including a Low-rise High-rise mixed-use building in which at least 20% of its conditioned floor . , . area is residential use 1,;i_ New construction ( 2A, 3A, 1B, 2B, 4A I 3B,4A □ Additions and alterations: □ BPV < $60,000 N/A N/A All residential additions and alterations □ BPV;, $60,000 1A, 4A 4A 1-2 family dwellings and townhouses with attached garages □ Electrical service panel upgrade only only 'Multi-family dwellings only where interior finishes are removed □ BPV;, $200,000 1A, 4A' 1 B, 4A' and significant site work and upgrades to structural and mechanical, electrical, and/or plumbing systems are proposed 0 Nonresidential □ New construction 1 B, 2B, 3B, 4B and 5 □ Alterations: □ BPV;, $200,000 or additions;, 1,000 1B, 5 square feet □ BPV;, $1,000,000 1B,2B,5 Building alterations of;, 75% existing gross floor area □ ;, 2,000 sq. ft. new roof addition 2B, 5 1 B also applies if BPV;, $200,000 1. Energy Efficiency Please refer to Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) sections 18.21.155 and 18.30.190, and the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) for more infonmation when completing this section. A D Residential addition or alteration~ $60,000 building permit valuation. See CMC section 18.30.190. Year Built Single-family Requirements □ Before 1978 Select one: □ Duct sealina □ Attic insulation □ Cool roof □ 1978 and later Select one: □ Lighting package □ Water heating Package □ Between 1978 and 1991 □ 1992 and later □ N/A _________ _ □ Exception: Home energy score~ 7 (attach certification) Multi-family Requirements □ Attic insulation Select one: □ Duct sealin~ □ Attic insulation □ Cool roof Select one: □ Lighting package □ Water heating package B. D Nonresidential' new construction or alterations~ $200,000 building permit valuation, or additions~ 1,000 square feet. □ N/A Updated 8/1512019 2 City of Carlsbad Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist See CMC 18.21.155 and CALGreen Appendix AS, Division A5.2-Energy Efficiency. AS.203.1.1 Choose one: D .1 Outdoor lighting D .2 Warehouse dock seal doors D .3 Restaurant service water heating (comply y,rjth California Energy Code secbon 140.5, as amended) D N/A _________ _ D .4 Daylight design PAFs D .5 Exhaust air heat recovery AS.203.1.2.1 Choose one as applicable: D .95 Energy budget D .90 Energy budget D N/A AS.211.1" D On-site renewable energy D N/A AS.211.3" D Green power (if offered by local utility provider, 50% minimum renewable sources) D N/A AS.212.1 D Elevators and escalators D N/A A5.213.1 D Steel framing D N/A 'Includes hotels/motels and high-rise residential buildings .. For alterations" $1,000,000 BPVand affecting> 75% existing gross floor area, or alterations that add 2,000 square feet of new roof addition: comply with CMG 18.30.130 instead. Residential new construction (for low-rise residential building pennit applications submitted after 1/1/20l Refer to 2019 California Energy Code section 150.1(c)14 for requirements. Notes: 1) High-rise residential buildings are subjectto nonresidential photovoltaic requirement (28 below) instead. 2) If project includes installation of an electric heat pump water heater pursuantto CMC 18.30.150(8) (high-rise residential) or 18.30.170(8) (low-rise residential), increase system size by .3kWdc if PV offset option is selected. Floor Plan ID (use additional CFA #d.u. Calculated kWdc' sheets if necessary) - ( · ... ~ 'yi ,/ \l...:n) ~ ~Al \. '-( ) "<f->1 , "--J Total System Size: kWdc = (CFAx.572) I 1,000 + (1.15 x#d.u.) 'Fonnula calculation where CFA = conditional floor area, #du= number of dwellings per plan type If proposed system size is less than calculated size, please explain. Exception D D D D kWdc 8. D Nonresidential new construction or alterations ~$1,000,000 8PV and affecting ~75% existing floor area, or addition that increases roof area by ~,000 square feet Please refer to CMC section 18.30.130 when completing this section. Note: This section also applies to high-rise residential and hotel/motel buildings. Choose one of the following methods: □ Gross Floor Area (GFA) Method GFA: □ If< 10,000s.f. Enter: 5 kWdc Min. System Size: □ If ;e 10,000s.f. calculate: 15 kWdc x (GFA/10,000)., kWdc "Round building size factor to nearest tenth, and round system size to nearest whole number. □ Time-Dependent Valuation Method Updated 8/15/2019 3 City of Carlsbad Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist Annual TDV Energy use:"' ______ x .80= Min. system size: _____ kWdc '"Attach calculation documentation using modeling software approved by the California Energy Commission. ting idential and hotel/motel new construction ease refer to CMC sections 18.30.150 and 18.30.170 when completing this section. )!(_ For systems serving individual dwelling units choose one: □ Heat pump water heater AND Compact hot water distribution AND Drain water heat recovery (low-rise residential only) □ Heat pump water heater AND PV system .3 kWdc larger than required in CMC section 18.30.130 (high rise residential hotel/motel) or CA Energy Code section 150.1 (c) 14 (low-rise residential) □ Heat pump water heater meeting NEEA Advanced Water Heating Specification Tier 3 or higher □ Solar water heating system that is either .60 solar savings fraction or 40 s.f. solar collectors □ Exception: □ For systems serving multiple dwelling units, install a central water-heating system with all of the following: □ Gas or propane water heating system □ Recirculation system per CMC 18.30.150(B) (high-rise residential, hotel/motel) or CMC 18.30.1 ?0(B) (low- rise residential) □ Solar water heating system that is either: □ .20 solar savings fraction □ .15 solar savings fraction, plus drain water heat recovery □ Exception: B. D Nonresidential new construction Please refer to Carlsbad Ordinance CMC section 18.30.150 when completing this section. □ Water heating system derives at least 40% of its energy from one of the following (attach documentation): □ Solar-thermal □ Photovoltaics □ Recovered energy □ Water heating system is (choose one): □ Heat pump water heater □ Electric resistance water heater( s) □Solar water heating system with .40 solar savings fraction □ Exception: Updated 8/15/2019 4 City of Carlsbad Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist ric Vehicle Cha In Residential New construction and major alterations• ease refer to Carlsbad Ordinance CMC section 18.21.140 when completing this section. ~ One and two-family residential dwelling or townhouse with attached garage: 'l!5! One EVSE Ready parking space required □ Exception : □ Multi-family residential· □ Exception · Total Parking Spaces EVSE Spaces Proposed Capable Readv Installed Calculations: Total EVSE spaces= .10 x Total parking (rounded up to nearest whole number) EVSE Installed= Total EVSE Spaces x .50 (rounded up to nearest whole number) EVSE other= Total EVSE spaces-EVSE Installed (EVSE other may be "Capable," "Ready" or "Installed.") Total 'Major alterations are: (1) for one and two-family dwellings and townhouses ~th attached garages, alterations have a building pennit valuation~ $60,000 or include an electrical seNice panel upgrade; (2) for multifamily dwellings (three units or more ~thout attached garages), atterations have a building pennit valuation ~ $200,000, interior finishes are removed and significant site work and upgrades to structural and mechanical, electrical, and/or plumbing systems are proposed. B D Nonresidential new construction (includes hotels/motels) □ Exception · Total Parking Spaces EVSE Spaces Proposed Caoable I Readv Installed I Total I I Calculation· Refer to the table below· Total Number of Parkina Spaces provided Number of reauired EV Spaces Number of reauired EVSE Installed Spaces □ 0-9 1 1 □ 10-25 2 1 □ 26-50 4 2 □ 51-75 6 3 □ 76-100 9 5 □ 101-150 12 6 □ 151-200 17 9 □ 201 and over 10 percent of total 50 oercent of Required EV Spaces lJpdatcd 8/15/2019 5 City of Carlsbad Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist 5. D Transportation Demand Management (TOM): Nonresidential ONLY An approved Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan is required for all nonresidential projects that meet a threshold of employee-generated ADT. City staff will use the table below based on your submitted plans to detenmine whether or nor your penmit requires a TDM plan. If TDM is applicable to your permit, staff will contact the applicant to develop a site-specific TOM plan based on the penmit details. Acknowledgment· Employee ADT Estimation for Various Commercial Uses Use EmpADTfor first 1,000 s.f. Emp ADTI 1000 s.f., Office (all), 20 Restaurant 11 Retail, 8 Industrial 4 Manufacturing 4 Warehousin 4 1 Unless otherwise noted, rates estimated from /TE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition 13 11 4.5 3.5 3 1 , For all office uses, use SANDAG rate of 20 ADTl1,000 sf to calculate employee ADT , Retail uses include shopping center, variety store, supermarket, gyms, pharmacy, etc. Other commercial uses may be subject to special consideration Sample calculations: Office: 20,450 sf 1. 20,450 sf/ 1000 x 20 = 409 Employee ADT Retail: 9,334 sf 1. First 1,000 sf= 8 ADT 2. 9,334 sf -1,000 sf= 8,334 sf 3. 8,334 sf/ 1,000 x 4.5 + 8 = 46 Em lo ee ADT I acknowledge that the plans submitted may be subject to the City of Carlsbad's Transportation Demand Management Ordinance. I agree to be contacted should my permit require a TDM plan and understand that an approved TOM plan is a condition of penmit issuance. Applicant Signature __________________ _ Date: ______ _ Person other than Applicant to be contacted for TOM compliance (if applicable): Name(Printed) __________________ _ Phone Number: _____ _ Email Address: -------------------- Updated 8/15/20 I 9 6 PERMIT REPORT Revision Permit Print Date: 04/11/2022 Job Address: 1112 BUENA VISTA WAY, CARLSBAD, CA 92008 {city of Carlsbad Permit No: PREV2021-0014 Status: Issued -Active Permit Type: BLDG-Permit Revision Work Class: Parcel#: 1551603700 Track#: Residential Permit Revisi1 Applied: 01/25/2021 02/22/2021 Valuation: $125,490.98 Lot#: Occupancy Group: #of Dwelling Units: 1 Bedrooms: Bathrooms: Project Title: Project#: Plan#: Construction Type: Orig. Plan Check#: CBR2019-3369 Plan Check#: Description: BENARDINO: MOVED LOCATION OF STAIRS Applicant: JOHN BENARDINO 13567 CHACO CT SAN DIEGO, CA 92129-4443 (858) 275-3318 FEE MANUAL BLDG PLAN CHECK FEE Property Owner: JOHN BENARDINO 13567 CHACO CT SAN DIEGO, CA 92129-4443 (858) 275-3318 BUILDING PLAN CHECK REVISION ADMIN FEE Total Fees: $166.25 Total Payments To Date: $166.25 Issued: Finaled Close Out: Inspector: PBurn Final Inspection: Balance Due: AMOUNT $131.25 $35.00 $0.00 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 I 760-602-2700 I 760-602-8560 f I www.carlsbadca.gov