HomeMy WebLinkAbout1 LEGOLAND DR; ; CBC2023-0269; PermitBuilding Permit Finaled ("cityof
Carlsbad
Commercial Permit
Print Date: 06/25/2024
Job Address:
Permit Type:
Parcel#:
Valuation:
Occupancy Group:
#of Dwelling Units:
Bedrooms:
Bathrooms:
Occupant Load:
Code Edition:
Sprinkled:
Project Title:
1 LEGOLAND DR, CARLSBAD, CA 92008-4610
BLDG-Commercial Work Class:
2111000900 Track#:
$450,000.00 Lot #:
Project#:
Plan#:
Construction Type:
Orig. Plan Check#:
Plan Check#:
Tenant Improvement
Permit No:
Status:
CBC2023-0269
Closed -Finaled
Applied: 08/30/2023
Issued: 11/29/2023
Finaled Close Out: 06/25/2024
Final Inspection: 03/04/2024
INSPECTOR: de Roggenbuke, Dirk
Robinson, Jarrod
Kersch, Tim
Description: LEGOLAND: (1.32 ACRES) EXTERIOR SITE IMPROVEMENTS TO TWO EXISTING ATTRACTIONS
Applicant:
RW APEL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS INC
RICHARD APEL
571 HYGEIA AVE, # B
ENCINITAS, CA 92024-2652
(760) 943-0760
FEE
BUILDING PLAN CHECK
BUILDING PLAN REVIEW-MINOR PROJECTS (LDE)
BUILDING PLAN REVIEW -MINOR PROJECTS (PLN)
FIRE A-4 & A-5 Occupancies -Tl
SB1473 -GREEN BUILDING STATE STANDARDS FEE
SITE IMPROVEMENTS
STRONG MOTION -COMMERCIAL (SMIP)
Total Fees: $4,448.80 Total Payments To Date: $4,448.80
Contractor:
ALIGN BUILDERS INC
5451 AVEN I DA ENCINAS, #STEA
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-4413
(858) 800-2531
Balance Due:
AMOUNT
$1,086.80
$197.00
$104.00
$1,144.00
$18.00
$1,773.00
$126.00
$0.00
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the "Imposition" offees, 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.
Building Division Page 1 of 1
1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad CA 92008-7314 I 442-339-2719 I 760-602-8560 f I www.carlsbadca.gov
{ City of
Carlsbad
COMMERCIAL
BUILDING PERMIT
APPLICATION
B-2
Plan Check
Est . Value
PC Deposit
Date
CB~ 102 3 --oz~ j
:L,v fli, n
Job Address 1 Legoland Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008 Suite: ____ APN: 211-100-09-00
Tenant Name #:. __ N_/A ______________ Lot #: ____ Year Built: ________ _
Year Built: 1998 Occupancy: A-5 Construction Type: V-B Fire sprinklers0ES@NO A/C:QYES€)No
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORK: Exterior site improvements to two existing attractions at LEGOLAND
5ri 'S OO ~F J theme park, "Little Dino Trail" and "Dinosaur River Expedition"
D Addition/New:(No new bldgs or additions) New SF and Use, _________ New SF and Use
______ SF Deck, _______ SF Patio Cover, _______ SF Other (Specify) ___ _
0Tenant Improvement: _____ SF,
_____ SF,
Existing Use: _______ Proposed Use: ______ _
Existing Use: Proposed Use: ______ _
D Pool/Spa: _____ SF Additional Gas or Electrical Features? ___________ _
D Solar: ___ KW, ___ Modules, Mounted: 0Roof 0Ground
D Re roof: __________________________________ _
[x] Plttmhing/Mechenicaflfilectric~ Replacement/rehab of existing site power to ride
[Kl Other: All exterior site improvements. Concrete ride track, new crane, signs,
foundations, retaining walls.
APPLICANT (PRIMARY CONTACT) PROPERTY OWNER Merlin Entertainments Group U.S. Holdings Inc.
Name: Richard Apel, R. W. Apel Landscape Architects Name: (c/o Kurt Stocks, Vice President)
Address· 571 Hygeia Ave., Unit B Address: 1 Legoland Drive
City· Encinitas State: CA Zip: 92024 City: Carlsbad State: CA Zip: 92008
Phone~ (760) 943-0760 Phone: (760) 918-5300
Email· richard.apel@rwapel.com Email: kurt.stocks@legoland.com
DESIGN PROFESSIONAL CONTRACTOR OF RECORD
Name: Richard Apel , R. W. Apel Landscape Architects Business Name: Align Builders Inc.
Address: 571 Hygeia Ave., Unit B Address: 5451 Avenida Encinas
City: Encinitas State: CA Zip: 92024 City: Carlsbad State: CA Zip:._9_2_0_0_8 ___ _
Phone: (760) 943-0760 Phone: (858) 800-2531
Email: richard.apel@rwapel.com Email: OwennG@alignbuilders.com
Architect State License: _R_L_A_2_8_25 _______ CSLB License #: 989507 Class: ____ B"'-------
Carlsbad Business License# (Required): BLNR1240887
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
c~:~~c;;:~T): Richard Apel SIGN: fbi)Gµl DATE: ?(?,oh,~
1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 Ph: 442-339-2719 Fax: 760-602-8558 Email: Buildin/@carlsbadca.gov
REV. 07/21
THIS PAGE REQUIRED AT PERMIT ISSUANCE PLAN CHECK NUMBER: &v'l-::. -1./J-(}t
A BUILDING PERMIT CAN BE ISSUED TO EITHER A STATE LICENSED CONTRACTOR OR A PROPERTY OWNER. IF THE PERSON
SIGNING THIS FORM IS AN AGENT FOR EITHER ENTITY AN AUTHORIZATION FORM OR LETTER IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO
PERMIT ISSUANCE.
(OPTION A): LICENSED CONTRACTOR DECLARATION:
I herebyaffirm underpenaltyof perjury that I am licensed under provisions of Chapter9 (commencingwith Section 7000)of Division]
of the Business and Professions Code, and my license is in full forceond effect. la/so affirm under penalty of perjury one of the
f ollowing declarations (CHOOSE ONE):
&ave and will maintain a certificate of consent to self-insure for work:rs' compensation provided by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the
work which this permit is issued. PolicyNo. VV C-<-?'} Y: '.k 'ii' 0 \ \. 6 C.. A-
-OR-
D1 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: _______________ _
-OR-O certificate of Exemption: I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not employ any person In any manner so as to become
subject 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.
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: ____________________ _
CONTRACTOR CERT/FICA T/ON: 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 ord),cmces and State laws relating to building
construction. -, (/ /
NAME (PRINT): O·w e..vi. v'l {7 c..~5 SIGNATURE: a~~ DATE: r/ / ~ z..c.,l Z,..7
Note: If the person signing above Is an authorized agent for the contractor provide a letter of authorization on contractor letterhead.
-OR -
(OPTION B): OWNER-BUILDER DECLARATION:
I hereby affirm that I am exempt from Contractor's License Law for the following reason: n 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.
'-nf44, 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).
-OR-
01, 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).
-OR-□I am exempt under Business and Professions Code Division 3, Chapter 9, Article 3 for this reason:
AND, D FORM 8-61 "Owner Builder Acknowledgement and Verification Form" is required for any permit issued to a property owner.
By my signature below I acknowledge that, except for my personal residence in which I must have resided for at least one year prior to completion of the
improvements covered by this permit, I ca nnot legally sell a structure that I have built as an owner-builder if it has not been constructed in its entirety by licensed
contractors./ understand that a copy of the applicable law, Section 7044 of the Business and Professions Code, is available upon request when this application is
submitted or at the following Web site: http: I lwww. /eginfo. ca. gov/ ca/aw. html.
OWNER CERT/FICA T/ON: 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. /agree to comply with all City ordinances and State laws relating to building
construction.
NAME (PRINT}: SIGN: __________ DATE: ______ _
Note: If the person signing above is an authorized agent for the property owner include form 8-62 signed by property owner.
1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 Ph: 442-339-2719 Fax: 760-602-8558 Email: Building@carlsbadca.gov
2 REV. 07/21
Building Permit Inspection History Finaled
{city of
Carlsbad
Permit Type:
Work Class:
Status:
Scheduled
Date
12/05/2023
12/11/2023
12/14/2023
12/19/2023
01/11/2024
03/04/2024
PERMIT INSPECTION HISTORY for (CBC2023-0269)
BLDG-Commercial Application Date: 08/30/2023 Owner: MERLIN ENTERTAINMENTS GROUP
US HOLDINGS INC
Tenant Improvement Issue Date: 11/29/2023 Subdivision: CARLSBAD TCT#94-09 UNIT#02
& 03
Closed -Finaled Expiration Date: 07/09/2024 Address: 1 LEGOLAND DR
IVR Number: 51692 CARLSBAD, CA 92008-4610
Actual Inspection Type Inspection No. Inspection Primary Inspector Reinspection Inspection
Start Date Status
12/05/2023 BLDG-11 232343-2023 Partial Pass Dirk de Roggenbuke Reinspection Incomplete
Foundation/Ftg/Piers
(Rebar)
Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed
BLDG-Building Deficiency 12/05/23 Duplo track epoxy dowels and Yes
rebar partial. SI and soils report noted
12/11/2023 BLDG-11 232896-2023 Partial Pass Tim Kersch Reinspection Incomplete
Foundation/Ftg/Piers
(Rebar)
Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed
BLDG-Building Deficiency 12/05/23 Duplo track epoxy dowels and Yes
rebar partial. SI and soils report noted
12/14/2023 BLOG-66 Grout 233594-2023 Passed Tim Kersch Complete
Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed
BLDG-Building Deficiency Yes
12/19/2023 BLOG-11 234133-2023 Passed Tim Kersch Complete
Foundation/Ftg/Piers
(Rebar)
Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed
BLDG-Building Deficiency 12/05/23 Duplo track epoxy dowels and Yes
rebar partial. SI and soils report noted
01/11/2024 BLDG-12 Steel/Bond 236358-2024 Passed Tim Kersch Complete
Beam
Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed
BLDG-Building Deficiency Yes
03/04/2024 BLDG-Final Inspection 240958-2024 Passed Tim Kersch Complete
Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed
BLDG-Building Deficiency Yes
BLDG-Plumbing Final Yes
BLDG-Mechanical Final Yes
BLDG-Structural Final Yes
BLDG-Electrical Final Yes
BLOG-SW-Inspection 241186-2024 Passed Tim Kersch Complete
Tuesday, June 25, 2024 Page 1 of 2
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley
One Legoland Drive, Carlsbad, California
0("")~ ON ._,,,
0)0 U)
ONN o-0
OMC? "l""""-
"I"""" a:>
N M
N
0
N
0
al
0
Merlin Entertainment Group
c/o LEGOLAND California, LLC
One Legoland Drive
Carlsbad, California 92008
CITY
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
Jl\ 1■1
NOVA
Services
4373 Viewridge Avenue
Suite B
San Diego, California 92123
858.292.7575
944 Calle Amanecer
Suite F
San Clemente, CA 92673
949.388.7710
www.usa-nova.com
GEOTECHNICAL
MATERIALS
SPECIAL INSPECTION
Mr. Tom Storer, Senior Project Manager
Merlin Entertainment Group
c/o LEGOLAND California, LLC
One Legoland Drive
Carlsbad, California 92008
Subject: Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley
One Legoland Drive, Carlsbad, California
Dear Mr. Storer:
DVBE•SBE •SDVOSB •SLBE
July 14, 2023
NOVA Project No. 2023109
NOVA Services, Inc. (NOVA) is pleased to present our report describing the geotechnical investigation
performed for the new Dinosaur Valley project proposed at LEGOLAND California. We conducted the
geotechnical investigation in general conformance with the scope of work presented in our proposal
dated May 22, 2023.
This site is considered geotechnically suitable for construction of the proposed development provided
the recommendations within this report are followed.
NOVA appreciates the opportunity to be of service to LEGOLAND California, LLC on this project. If
you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to call us at 858.292.7575 x 417.
Sincerely,
NOVA Services, Inc.
• ~ IJ'I,),
Gillian Carzzarella Dean, PE 87~'l'J:-~~w---::=-r.'<~ W. Lee Vanderhurst, PG, CEG 1
Senior Engineering Geologist Senior Engineer
Tom Canady, PE,50057
Principal Engineer
4373 Viewridge Avenue, Suite B
San Diego, CA 92123
P: 858.292.7575
usa-nova.com 944 Calle Amanecer, Suite F
San Clemente, CA 92673
P: 949.388.7710
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley
One Legoland Drive, Carlsbad, CA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
July 14, 2023
1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1
2. SCOPE OF WORK ......................................................................................................... 3
2.1. Field Investigation ............................................................................................................... 3
2.2. Laboratory Testing .............................................................................................................. 4
2.3. Analysis and Report Preparation ........................................................................................ .4
3. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................... 5
3.1. Site Description ................................................................................................................... 5
3.2. Site History .......................................................................................................................... 5
3.3. Proposed Construction and Anticipated Earthwork ............................................................. 5
4. GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ........................................................... 6
4.1. Site-Specific Geology .......................................................................................................... 7
5. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS .................................................................................................. 9
5.1. Faulting and Surface Rupture ............................................................................................. 9
5. 1. 1 Strong Ground Motion ............................................................................................ 9
5. 1. 2 Faulting in the Site Vicinity ..................................................................................... 9
5.2. Seismic Design Parameters .............................................................................................. 10
5.3. Landslides and Slope Stability .......................................................................................... 11
5.4. Liquefaction and Dynamic Settlement ............................................................................... 11
5.5. Flooding, Tsunamis, and Seiches ..................................................................................... 11
5.6. Subsidence ........................................................................................................................ 12
5.7. Hydro-Consolidation .......................................................................................................... 12
6. CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................... 13
7. RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................ 14
7.1. Earthwork .......................................................................................................................... 14
7. 1. 1 Site Preparation ................................................................................................... 14
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
7. 1. 2 Remedial Grading -Crane & Dinosaur Models Supported on Spread Footings. 14
7.1.3 Remedial Grading-Pedestrian Hardscape ......................................................... 14
7. 1.4 Remedial Grading -Vehicular Pavements .......................................................... 15
7.1 .5 Remedial Grading-Site Walls and Retaining Walls ........................................... 15
7. 1. 6 Expansive Soil ...................................................................................................... 15
7. 1. 7 Compacted Fill ..................................................................................................... 15
7. 1. 8 Imported Soil ........................................................................................................ 16
7. 1. 9 Subgrade Stabilization ......................................................................................... 16
7.1.10 Excavation Characteristics ................................................................................... 16
7. 1. 11 Oversized Material ............................................................................................... 16
7.1.12 Temporary Excavations ....................................................................................... 16
7. 1. 13 Temporary Shoring .............................................................................................. 17
7. 1. 14 Groundwater Seepage ......................................................................................... 17
7. 1. 15 Slopes .................................................................................................................. 17
7. 1. 16 Surface Drainage ................................................................................................. 17
7. 1. 17 Grading Plan Review ........................................................................................... 18
7.2. Foundations ....................................................................................................................... 18
7.2.1 Spread Footings ................................................................................................... 18
7.2.2 CIDH Piles ............................................................................................................ 18
7.2.3 Settlement Characteristics ................................................................................... 19
7. 2.4 Foundation Plan Review ...................................................................................... 19
7.2.5 Foundation Excavation Observations .................................................................. 19
7.3. Hardscape ......................................................................................................................... 19
7.4. Conventional Retaining Walls ............................................................................................ 19
7.5. Pipelines ............................................................................................................................ 21
7.6. Pavement Section Recommendations .............................................................................. 22
7. 7. Corrosivity ......................................................................................................................... 22
8. CLOSURE .................................................................................................................... 24
9. REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 25
ii
List of Figures
Figure 1-1. Site Vicinity Map
Figure 1-2. Site Location Map
Figure 2-1. Subsurface Exploration Map
Figure 4-1. Regional Geologic Map
Figure 4-2. Fill in Boring B-1
Figure 4-3. Old Paralic Deposits in Boring B-3
Figure 5-1 . Regional Faulting in the Site Vicinity
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
Figure 7-1 . Typical Conventional Retaining Wall Backdrain Detail
List of Tables
Table 5-1 .
Table 7-1.
2022 CBC and ASCE 7-16 Seismic Design Parameters
AC and PCC Pavement Sections
List of Plates
Plate 1 Geotechnical Map
List of Appendices
Appendix A Use of the Geotechnical Report
Appendix B Boring Logs
Appendix C Laboratory Testing
iii
.. Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
1. INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of the geotechnical investigation NOVA performed for the new
Dinosaur Valley attraction proposed at LEGOLAND California. Based on our review of the provided
conceptual design (Merlin Entertainment, 2023), we understand the Dinosaur Valley attraction is
currently planned to consist of a land entry, Little Dino Trail, and Dinosaur River Expedition. The
purpose of our work is to provide conclusions and recommendations regarding the geotechnical
aspects of the project. Figure 1-1 presents a site vicinity map. Figure 1-2 presents a site location map.
p
IS
p
• p ,,.,,,,,.,,
Pit'fffivrn
.P.,tktl
Cnrlsb0</
p
'!. \ ~ ~
P, ~
. . .. ,
d
J
p
p
p ..
p
Legoland
-CallJornla
.
..... ,._~4.
·-. II • ...
p \
1 •
p t
!, ,,, • ~
1 . • ..,_
r-,,:JXrl
•t .. 'l"'!Clff:f
,
I --p
Figure 1-1. Site Vicinity Map
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
Figure 1-2. Site Location Map
2
...
2.1 . Field Investigation
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
2. SCOPE OF WORK
NOVA's field investigation consisted of a visual reconnaissance of the site and drilling nine
geotechnical borings (B-1 through B-9) to depths between about 5 and 21 ½ feet below the ground
surface (bgs) using a limited access tripod drill rig, a limited access track-mounted drill rig, and a hand
auger. Figure 2-1 presents the approximate locations of the borings.
,. >-; .. . .
' "VI-B-7 8 ~-
B-5 _01
_,
B-6
8
...
"'
,::..
Figure 2-1. Subsurface Exploration Map
KEY TO SYMBOLS
B-9 8 GEOTECHNICAL BORING
NOVA geologists logged the borings and collected samples of the materials encountered for
laboratory observation and testing. Standard Penetration Testing (SPT) was performed in the borings
using a 2-inch outer diameter and 1¾-inch inner diameter split tube sampler. With the tripod drill rig,
the SPT sampler was driven using a cathead and rope. With track-mounted drill rig, the SPT sampler
was driven using an automatic hammer with a calibrated Energy Transfer Ratio (ETR) of 95.7%. The
number of blows needed to drive the sampler 18 inches is noted in three, 6-inch intervals on the logs.
Sampler refusal was encountered when 50 blows were applied during any one of the three 6-inch
intervals, a total of 100 blows was applied, or there was no discernible sampler advancement during
the application of 1 O successive blows. The field blow counts, N, were corrected to a standard hammer
(cathead and rope) with a 60% ETR. The corrected blow counts are noted on the boring logs as NGo-
Disturbed bulk samples were obtained from the SPT sampler and the drill cuttings. Logs of the borings
are presented in Appendix B. Soils are classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System.
3
2.2. Laboratory Testing
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
NOVA tested select samples of the materials to evaluate soil classification and engineering properties
and develop geotechnical conclusions and recommendations. The laboratory tests consisted of
particle-size distribution, Atterberg limits, expansion index, and corrosivity. Appendix C presents brief
explanations of the test procedures and the results of the laboratory tests.
2.3. Analysis and Report Preparation
The results of the field and laboratory testing were evaluated to develop conclusions and
recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of the proposed construction. This report
presents our findings, conclusions, and recommendations.
4
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
3. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.1. Site Description
LEGOLAND California is located on a 128-acre property at One Legoland Drive in Carlsbad,
California. The site of the planned development is located within the southwestern portion of the park
property. The proposed Little Dino Trail is currently occupied by the Safari Trek attraction which
consists of a concrete ride track and various landscaping and fencing. The Safari Trek is generally
bounded by a relatively flat concrete walkway to the south and east, with elevations ranging from about
+151 to +153 feet NGVD 29 (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929), and to the north and west by
an as·cending landscaped slope with elevations ranging from about +152 to +161 feet NGVD 29. The
Dinosaur River Expedition is currently occupied by the Fairy Tale Brooke attraction which consists of
a concrete-lined river boat path and various landscaping. The topography within the vicinity of the
Fairy Tale Brooke consists of elevations ranging from about +152 to +156 feet NGVD 29.
3.2. Site History
Review of historic aerial photography of the site vicinity indicates that from at least 1953, the date of
the earliest available imagery, until 1999, the area was used for agricultural purposes. Park
construction began in 1998 and was completed around 2002. The project area has generally been in
its existing configuration since the park was opened. Review of historical topographic maps indicates
that prior to construction of LEGOLAND, there was a natural north-south trending drainage course
below the western portion of the site. This drainage course drained to the south into the larger, main
east-west draining canyon just south of Palomar Airport Road . Along the eastern portion of the site,
there was a north-northwest trending ridge composed of Santiago Formation. This ridge was cut down
and the drainage course was filled, creating the existing project area. The previous site topography
accounts for the relatively deep fills encountered below the south and western portion of the site and
the formational materials encountered at shallower depths on the northeastern portion of the site.
3.3. Proposed Construction and Anticipated Earthwork
Planning for development is preliminary at this time. Based on our review of the provided conceptual
design (Merlin Entertainment, 2023), we understand Dinosaur Valley will consist of a land entry, Little
Dino Trail, and Dinosaur River Expedition. As previously discussed, the proposed Little Dino Trail and
Dinosaur River Expedition are currently occupied by the Safari Trek and Fairy Tale Brooke attractions,
respectively. The existing attractions will generally be repurposed with new signage, various dinosaur
models, and recreational improvements. We understand the existing ½-ton crane near Fairy Tale
Brooke will be replaced with a new 1-ton crane. Additionally, the existing concrete ride track may be
widened. Based on our discussions with the project team, we understand the dinosaur models will be
relatively lightly loaded. Although grading plans are not available at this time, NOVA assumes that the
proposed site grades will generally match existing grades and there will be minimal site grading to
achieve final grades. Earthwork is anticipated to consist of remedial and fine grading, excavations for
foundations (i.e., for the crane pad, various signage, and dinosaur models), backfilling retaining walls
and underground utilities, subgrade preparation, and pavement construction.
5
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 20231 09
July 14, 2023
4. GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The site is located within the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of California, which stretches
from the Los Angeles basin to the tip of Baja California in Mexico. This province is characterized as a
series of northwest-trending mountain ranges separated by subparallel fault zones and a coastal plain
of subdued landforms. The mountain ranges are underlain primarily by Mesozoic metamorphic rocks
that were intruded by plutonic rocks of the western Peninsular Ranges batholith, while the coastal
plain is underlain by subsequently deposited marine and nonmarine sedimentary formations. The site
is located within the coastal plain portion of the province, underlain by old paralic deposits and
Santiago Formation. Figure 4-1 presents the regional geology in the vicinity of the site.
ALLUVIAL FLOOD-PLAIN
DEPOSITS
YOUNG ALLUVIAL
FLOOD-PLAIN DEPOSITS
OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS.
UNIT 2-4, UNDIVIDED
OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS,
UNIT 6-7, UNDIVIDED
Figure 4-1. Regional Geologic Map
(Source: Kennedy and Tan 2007)
6
VERY OLD PARALIC
DEPOSITS. UNIT 13
SANTIAGO FORMATION
4.1. Site-Specific Geology
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
NOVA's subsurface investigation indicates that the site is underlain by fill, old paralic deposits, and
Santiago Formation. Descriptions of the materials encountered in the borings are presented below.
Plate 1 following the text of the report presents the site-specific geology.
Fill (afl: Fill was encountered beneath the existing asphalt concrete pavement in borings B-3
and B-6 and at the ground surface in the other borings. As encountered in the borings, the fill
extended to depths between about 1 ½ and 15½ feet bgs and generally consisted of loose to
medium dense silty sand and clayey sand and stiff to very stiff sandy clay with varying amounts
of gravel, cobble, and debris. NOVA has no records regarding the placement and compaction
of the fill ; therefore, it is at risk for wide variations in quality. Figure 4-2 presents a photograph
of the fill encountered in Boring B-1 .
Figure 4-2. Fill in Boring B-1
Quaternary Old Paralic Deposits (Qop): Quaternary-aged old paralic deposits were
encountered beneath the fill in borings B-1, B-2, B-3, and B-6. As encountered in the borings,
the old paralic deposits extended to depths up to about 21 feet bgs and generally consisted of
medium dense to very dense silty sand and clayey sand. Figure 4-3 presents a photograph of
the old paralic deposits encountered in Boring B-3.
7
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
Figure 4-3. Old Paralic Deposits in Boring B-3
Tertiary Santiago Formation (Tsa): Tertiary-aged Santiago Formation was encountered
beneath the old paralic deposits in boring B-6 at a depth of about 21 feet bgs. As encountered
in the boring, the Santiago Formation consisted of very dense clayey sand.
Groundwater: Groundwater seepage was encountered in borings B-5, B-6, B-7, and B-8 at
depths ranging between about 2 and 6 feet bgs and correlating to approximate elevations of
about +148 to +152 feet NGVD 29. Groundwater seepage should be anticipated during
construction. Additional perched groundwater may be encountered in the future due to rainfall,
irrigation, broken pipes, or changes in site drainage. Because perched groundwater conditions
are difficult to predict, such conditions are typically mitigated if and when they occur.
8
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
5. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
5.1. Faulting and Surface Rupture
5. 1. 1 Strong Ground Motion
The site is located in a seismically active area, as is the majority of southern California, and the
potential for strong ground motion is considered significant during the design life of the proposed
structure. Major known active faults in the region consist generally of en echelon , northwest striking,
right-lateral, strike-slip faults. These include the San Andreas, Elsinore, and San Jacinto Faults located
northeast of the site, and the San Clemente, San Diego Trough, and Agua Blanca-Coronado Bank
Faults located to the west of the site. The fault zone with the most potential for strong ground motion
in Carlsbad is the major north and northwest striking Newport-Inglewood-Rose Canyon Fault Zone
(NIRC). This fault zone is estimated to be able to generate earthquakes of Mw = 6.99.
The seismicity of the site was evaluated utilizing a web-based analytical tool provided by the Structural
Engineers Association of California (SEAOC). This evaluation shows the site-adjusted Peak Ground
Accelerations (PGAM) to be 0.531g.
5. 1. 2 Faulting in the Site Vicinity
Earthquake Fault Zones have been established along known active faults in California in accordance
with the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. The State Geologist defines an "active" fault as
one which has had surface rupture within recent geologic time (i.e., Holocene time, <11,700 years
before present). Earthquake Fault Zones have been delineated to encompass traces of known,
Holocene-active faults to address hazards associated with fault surface rupture within California.
Where developments for human occupancy are proposed within these zones, the state requires
detailed fault evaluations be performed so that engineering geologists can identify the locations of
active faults and recommend setbacks from locations of possible surface fault rupture .
The site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. No active surface faults are mapped
across the site. The nearest active fault is within the Oceanside section of the NIRC Fault Zone about
5 miles to the southwest. Due to the lack of active faulting, the probability of fault rupture at this site is
considered very low. Figure 5-1 on the following page presents regional faulting in the site vicinity.
9
Foull olong Which historic (last 200
years) displacement has occurred
Holocene raull displacement (during past
11,700 years) without historic record
y / I
I
I
KEV TO SYMBOLS
Late Quaternary rauU displacement
(dunng past 700.000 years)
Quaternary raull (age und1fferent1aled).
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
h tt I
I,
\
rt,,
\
, •• ,. f
" ,I
July 14, 2023
'-
/// \ __.-/ I
----------4
Pre-Quaternory rault (older than 1.6 million years) or
rault without recognized Quaternary displacement.
Figure 5-1. Regional Faulting in the Site Vicinity
(Source: Fault Activity Map of California -California Geological Survey)
5.2. Seismic Design Parameters
A geologic hazard likely to affect the project is ground shaking as a result of movement along an active
fault zone in the vicinity of the subject site. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered during
our investigation, the site may be classified as Site Class D. The site coefficients and maximum
considered earthquake (MCER) spectral response acceleration parameters in accordance with the
2022 CBC and ASCE 7-16 are presented in Table 5-1.
For a Site Class D, a site-specific ground motion hazard analysis (GMHA) is required to be performed
in accordance with the requirements of 2022 CBC and ASCE 7-16. The parameters presented in Table
5-1 utilize Exception 1 contained in ASCE 7-16, Supplement 3, Section 11.4.8 which allows for
omission of a site-specific GMHA if a 50% increase is applied to the SM1 value and resulting S01 value.
NOVA should be contacted if the structural engineer requests a GMHA to support the structural
design.
10
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
Table 5-1.2022 CBC and ASCE 7-16 Seismic Design Parameters
Site Class D
Site Coefficients, Fa 1.074
Site Coefficients, Fv 1.915*
Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at Short Period, Ss 1.064g
Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 1-Second Period, S1 0.385g
Design Spectral Acceleration at Short Period, Sos 0.762g
Design Spectral Acceleration at 1-Second Period, S 01 0.737g*
Site Peak Ground Acceleration, PGAM 0.531g
•Assumes a site-specific GMHA is not required. Project structural engineer to confirm.
5.3. Landslides and Slope Stability
Evidence of landslides, deep-seated landslides, or slope instabilities were not observed at the time of
the field investigation. Additionally, there are no mapped landslides in the vicinity of the project site.
Due to the flat-lying geologic structure underlying the site, the potential for landslides or slope
instabilities to occur at the site is considered low.
5.4. Liquefaction and Dynamic Settlement
Liquefaction occurs when loose, saturated, generally fine sands and silts are subjected to strong
ground shaking. The soils lose shear strength and become liquid, resulting in large total and differential
ground surface settlements, as well as possible lateral spreading during an earthquake. Due to the
lack of shallow groundwater and the relatively dense nature of the materials beneath the site, the
potential for liquefaction and dynamic settlement is considered low.
5.5. Flooding, Tsunamis, and Seiches
The site is mapped within an area of minimal flood hazard (FEMA, 2019). The site is not located within
a mapped inundation area on the State of California Tsunami Inundation Maps (CGS, 2022b);
therefore, damage due to tsunamis is considered negligible. Seiches are periodic oscillations in large
bodies of water such as lakes, harbors, bays, or reservoirs. The site is not located adjacent to any
lakes or confined bodies of water; therefore, the potential for a seiche to affect the site is considered
negligible.
11
5.6. Subsidence
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
The site is not located in an area of known subsidence associated with fluid withdrawal (groundwater
or petroleum); therefore, the potential for subsidence due to the extraction of fluids is considered
negligible.
5. 7. Hydro-Consolidation
Hydro-consolidation can occur in recently deposited sediments (less than 10,000 years old) that were
deposited in a semi-arid environment. Examples of such sediments are eolian sands, alluvial fan
deposits, and mudflow sediments deposited during flash floods. The pore spaces between the particle
grains can readjust when inundated by groundwater, causing the material to consolidate. The
materials underlying the site are not considered susceptible to hydro-consolidation.
12
6.
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results of NOVA's investigation, we consider the proposed construction feasible from a
geotechnical standpoint provided the recommendations contained in this report are followed.
Geotechnical conditions exist that should be addressed prior to construction. Geotechnical design and
construction considerations include the following.
• There are no known active faults underlying the site. The primary seismic hazard at the site is
the potential for moderate to severe ground shaking in response to large-magnitude
earthquakes generated during the lifetime of the proposed construction. The risk of strong
ground motion is common to all construction in southern California and is typically mitigated
through building design in accordance with the CBC. While strong ground motion could affect
the site, the risk of liquefaction is considered negligible.
• The site is underlain by fills of varying thickness and formational materials consisting of old
paralic deposits and Santiago Formation. The formational materials are suitable for support of
fill or structural loads. The fill is potentially compressible and unsuitable for support of fill or
significant structural loads. However, the fill can be used to support the proposed lightly loaded
improvements provided the remedial grading recommendations contained in this report are
followed.
• Based on our laboratory testing, the on-site near-surface silty sand and clayey sand have a
very low expansion potential. These soils are suitable for reuse as compacted fill. The deeper
on-site sandy clays, however, may be expansive and not suitable for direct support of heave-
sensitive improvements. Recommendations for expansive soils are provided herein.
• In general, excavations should be achievable using standard heavy earthmoving equipment in
good working order with experienced operators. However, localized cemented formational
materials and concretions may require extra excavation effort. Seepage should also be
anticipated in excavations.
• The proposed crane and dinosaur models can be supported on shallow spread footings with
bottom levels bearing on compacted fill underlain by the existing fill and/or old paralic deposits
or cast-in-drilled hole (CIDH) concrete piles, as appropriate. Site walls and retaining walls not
connected to buildings can be supported on spread footings with bottom levels bearing on
formational materials or compacted fill. Shade structures, covered walkways, and other pole-
type structures can be supported on CIDH concrete piles. Recommendations for foundations
are provided herein.
• Groundwater seepage was encountered at depths ranging between about 2 and 6 feet bgs.
Groundwater seepage should be anticipated during construction. Groundwater levels may
fluctuate in the future due to rainfall, irrigation, broken pipes, or changes in site drainage.
Because groundwater rise or seepage is difficult to predict, such conditions are typically
mitigated if and when they occur.
13
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
The remainder of this report presents preliminary recommendations regarding earthwork construction
as well as preliminary geotechnical recommendations for the design of the proposed improvements.
These recommendations are based on empirical and analytical methods typical of the standard of
practice in southern California. If these recommendations appear not to address a specific feature of
the project, please contact our office for additions or revisions to the recommendations. The
recommendations presented herein may need to be updated once final plans are developed.
7.1. Earthwork
Grading and earthwork should be conducted in accordance with the CBC and the recommendations
of this report. The following recommendations are provided regarding specific aspects of the proposed
earthwork construction. These recommendations should be considered subject to revision based on
field conditions observed by our offices during grading.
7. 1. 1 Site Preparation
Site preparation should begin with the removal of existing improvements, vegetation, and debris.
Subsurface improvements that are to be abandoned should be removed, and the resulting excavations
should be backfilled and compacted in accordance with the recommendations of this report. Pipeline
abandonment can consist of capping or rerouting at the project perimeter and removal within the
project perimeter. If appropriate, abandoned pipelines can be filled with grout or slurry as
recommended by and observed by the geotechnical consultant.
7.1.2 Remedial Grading-Crane and Dinosaur Models Supported on Spread Footings
Beneath spread footings supporting the crane or dinosaur models, the existing soils should be
excavated to a depth of at least 1 foot below the deepest footing bottom. Horizontally, the excavations
should extend the width of the footing. If competent old paralic deposits are exposed, excavation need
not be performed. NOVA should observe the conditions exposed in the bottom of excavations to
evaluate whether additional excavation is recommended. The resulting surface should then be
scarified to a depth of 6 to 8 inches, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content, and
compacted to at least 90% relative compaction. The excavations should be filled with compacted fill
having an El of 50 or less.
7. 1. 3 Remedial Grading -Pedestrian Hardscape
Beneath proposed hardscape areas , the existing fill should be excavated to a depth of at least 2 feet
below planned subgrade elevation. Horizontally, excavations should extend at least 2 feet outside the
planned hardscape or up to existing improvements, whichever is less. If competent old paralic deposits
are exposed, excavation need not be performed. NOVA should observe the conditions exposed in the
bottom of excavations to evaluate whether additional excavation is recommended. The resulting
surface should then be scarified to a depth of 6 to 8 inches, moisture conditioned to near optimum
moisture content, and compacted to at least 90% relative compaction. The excavation should be filled
with compacted fill having an El of 50 or less.
14
7.1.4 Remedial Grading-Vehicular Pavements
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
Beneath proposed vehicular pavement areas, the existing fill should be excavated to a depth of at
least 1 foot below planned subgrade elevation. Horizontally, excavations should extend at least 2 feet
outside the planned pavement or up to existing improvements or the limits of grading, whichever is
less. If competent old paralic deposits are exposed, excavation need not be performed. NOVA should
observe the conditions exposed in the bottom of excavations to evaluate whether additional
excavation is recommended. The resulting surface should then be scarified to a depth of 6 to 8 inches,
moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 90% relative
compaction. The excavation should be filled with material suitable for reuse as compacted fill.
7. 1. 5 Remedial Grading -Site Walls and Retaining Walls
Beneath proposed site walls and retaining walls not connected to buildings, the existing fill should be
excavated to a depth of at least 2 feet below bottom of footing. Horizontally, the excavations should
extend at least 2 feet outside the planned wall footing, up to existing improvements, or up to the limits
of grading, whichever is less. If competent old paralic deposits are exposed, excavation need not be
performed. The resulting surface should then be scarified to a depth of 6 to 8 inches, moisture
conditioned to near optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 90% relative compaction.
NOVA should observe the conditions exposed in the bottom of excavations to evaluate whether
additional excavation is recommended. Any required fill should have an El of 50 or less.
7. 1. 6 Expansive Soil
The on-site soils tested have Els of O and 3, classified as very low expansion potential. To reduce the
potential for expansive heave, the top 2 feet of material beneath footings and hardscape should have
an El of 50 or less. Horizontally, the soils having a very low or low expansion potential should extend
at least the width of the crane/dinosaur model footings, at least 2 feet outside hardscape and
site/retaining wall footings, or up to existing improvements, whichever is less. We expect that the on-
site silty and clayey sand will meet the El criteria. The on-site sandy clay, however, may not meet the
El criteria.
7. 1. 7 Compacted Fill
Excavated soils free of organic matter, construction debris, and rocks greater than 6 inches should
generally be suitable for reuse as compacted fill. Areas to receive fill should be scarified to a depth of
6 to 8 inches, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 90%
relative compaction. If competent formational materials are exposed, scarification and recompaction
need not be performed. Fill and backfill should be placed in 6-to 8-inch-thick loose lifts, moisture
conditioned to near optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 90% relative compaction.
The maximum density and optimum moisture content for the evaluation of relative compaction should
be determined in accordance with ASTM D1557. Utility trench backfill below structures, pavements,
and hardscape should be compacted to at least 90% relative compaction. The top 12 inches of
subgrade beneath pavements should be compacted to at least 95% relative compaction.
15
7. 1. 8 Imported Soil
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
Imported soil should consist of predominately granular soil, free of organic matter and rocks greater
than 6 inches. Imported soil should be observed and, if appropriate, tested by NOVA prior to transport
to the site to evaluate suitability for the intended use.
7. 1. 9 Subgrade Stabilization
Excavation bottoms should be firm and unyielding prior to placing fill. In areas of saturated or yielding
subgrade, a reinforcing geogrid such as Tensar@ lnterAx™ NX650 or equivalent can be placed on the
excavation bottom, and then at least 12 inches of aggregate base placed and compacted. Once the
surface of the aggregate base is firm enough to achieve compaction, then the remaining excavation
should be filled to finished pad grade with suitable material.
7. 1. 10 Excavation Characteristics
It is anticipated that excavations can be achieved with conventional earthwork equipment in good
working order. Extra excavation effort should be anticipated in very dense/cemented materials.
Excavations may also generate oversized material that will require extra effort to screen or export from
the site. Seepage should also be anticipated in excavations.
7. 1. 11 Oversized Material
Excavations may generate oversized material. Oversized material is defined as rocks or cemented
clasts greater than 6 inches in largest dimension. Oversized material should be broken down to no
greater than 6 inches in largest dimension for use in fill, use as landscape material, or disposed of off-
site.
7.1.12 Temporary Excavations
Temporary excavations 3 feet deep or less can be made vertically. Deeper temporary excavations in
fill and old paralic deposits should be laid back no steeper than 1 :1 (horizontal:vertical). Deeper
temporary excavations in Santiago Formation should be laid back no steeper than ¾:1
(horizontal:vertical). The faces of temporary slopes should be inspected daily by the contractor's
Competent Person before personnel are allowed to enter the excavation. Any zones of potential
instability, sloughing, or raveling should be brought to the attention of the engineer and corrective
action implemented before personnel begin working in the excavation. Excavated soils should not be
stockpiled behind temporary excavations within a distance equal to the depth of the excavation. NOVA
should be notified if other surcharge loads are anticipated so that lateral load criteria can be developed
for the specific situation. If temporary slopes are to be maintained during the rainy season, berms are
recommended along the tops of slopes to prevent runoff water from entering the excavation and
eroding the slope faces.
Slopes steeper than those described above will require shoring. Additionally, temporary excavations
that extend below a plane inclined at 1 ½: 1 (horizontal:vertical) downward from the outside bottom
edge of existing structures or improvements will require shoring. Soldier piles and lagging, internally
braced shoring, or trench boxes could be used. If trench boxes are used, the soil immediately adjacent
16
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
to the trench box is not directly supported. Ground surface deformations immediately adjacent to the
pit or trench could be greater where trench boxes are used compared to other methods of shoring.
7.1.13 Temporary Shoring
For design of cantilevered shoring with level backfill, an active earth pressure equal to a fluid weighing
35 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) can be used. An additional 20 pcf should be added for 2:1
(horizontal:vertical) sloping ground. The surcharge loads on shoring from traffic and construction
equipment working adjacent to the excavation can be modeled by assuming an additional 2 feet of
soil behind the shoring. For design of soldier piles, an allowable passive pressure of 350 pounds per
square foot (psf) per foot of embedment can be used, over two times the pile diameter up to a
maximum of 5,000 psf. Soldier piles should be spaced at least three pile diameters, cen ter to center.
Continuous lagging will be required throughout. The soldier piles should be designed for the full
anticipated lateral pressure; however, the pressure on the lagging will be less due to arching in the
soils. For design of lagging, the earth pressure can be limited to a maximum of 400 psf.
7. 1. 14 Groundwater Seepage
Groundwater seepage is anticipated to occur locally in excavations. If dewatering is necessary, the
dewatering method should be evaluated and implemented by an experienced dewatering
subcontractor.
7.1.15 Slopes
Permanent slopes should be constructed no steeper than 2: 1 (horizontal:vertical}. Faces of fill slopes
should be compacted either by rolling with a sheepsfoot roller or other suitable equipment, or by
overfilling and cutting back to design grade. Fills should be benched into sloping ground inclined
steeper than 5:1 (horizontal:vertical). In our opinion, slopes constructed no steeper than 2:1
(horizontal:vertical) will possess an adequate factor of safety. An engineering geologist should
observe cut slopes during grading to ascertain that no unforeseen adverse geologic conditions are
encountered that require revised recommendations. Slopes are susceptible to surficial slope failure
and erosion. Water should not be allowed to flow over the top of slope. Additionally, slopes should be
planted with vegetation that will reduce the potential for erosion.
7. 1. 16 Surface Drainage
Final surface grades around structures should be designed to collect and direct surface water away
from structures, including retaining walls, and toward appropriate drainage facilities. The ground
around the structure should be graded so that surface water flows rapidly away from the structure
without ponding. In general, we recommend that the ground adjacent to the structure slope away at a
gradient of at least 2%. Densely vegetated areas where runoff can be impaired should have a
minimum gradient of at least 5% within the first 5 feet from the structure. Roof gutters with downspouts
that discharge directly into a closed drainage system are recommended on structures. Drainage
patterns established at the time of fine grading should be maintained throughout the life of the
proposed structures. Site irrigation should be limited to the minimum necessary to sustain landscape
17
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
growth. Should excessive irrigation, impaired drainage, or unusually high rainfall occur, saturated
zones of perched groundwater can develop.
7. 1. 17 Grading Plan Review
NOVA should review the grading plans and earthwork specifications to ascertain whether the intent of
the recommendations contained in this report have been implemented, and that no revised
recommendations are needed due to changes in the development scheme.
7.2. Foundations
The foundation recommendations provided herein are considered generally consistent with methods
typically used in southern California. Other alternatives may be available. Our recommendations are
only minimum criteria based on geotechnical factors and should not be considered a structural design,
or to preclude more restrictive criteria of governing agencies or by the structural engineer. The design
of the foundation system should be performed by the project structural engineer, incorporating the
geotechnical parameters described herein and the requirements of applicable building codes.
The proposed crane and dinosaur models can be supported on shallow spread footings with bottom
levels bearing on compacted fill or formational materials, or they can be supported on CIDH concrete
piles. Site walls and retaining walls not connected to buildings can be supported on spread footings
with bottom levels bearing on formational materials or compacted fill. Shade structures, covered
walkways, and other pole-type structures can be supported on CIDH concrete piles.
7.2.1 Spread Footings
Footings should extend at least 24 inches below lowest adjacent finished grade. A minimum width of
18 inches is recommended for continuous footings and 24 inches for isolated or wall footings. An
allowable bearing capacity of 1,500 psf can be used. The bearing value can be increased by ½ when
considering the total of all loads, including wind or seismic forces. Footings located adjacent to or
within slopes should be extended to a depth such that a minimum horizontal distance of 10 feet exists
between the lower outside footing edge and the face of the slope.
Lateral loads will be resisted by friction between the bottoms of footings and passive pressure on the
faces of footings and other structural elements below grade. An allowable coefficient of friction of 0.35
can be used. An allowable passive pressure of 350 psf per foot of depth below the ground surface can
be used for level ground conditions. The allowable passive pressure should be reduced for sloping
ground conditions. The passive pressure can be increased by ½ when considering the total of all
loads, including wind or seismic forces. The upper 1 foot of soil should not be relied on for passive
support unless the ground is covered with pavements or slabs.
7.2.2 CIDH Piles
CIDH piles should be spaced at least three pile diameters, center to center, and be embedded at least
3 feet below grade in fill and/or old paralic deposits. The axial downward capacity of piles can be
obtained from skin friction and end bearing. An allowable downward skin friction of 300 psf and an
allowable end bearing of 2,500 psf can be used. If end bearing is used, the bottom of drilled holes
18
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
should be cleaned of loose soil prior to placing concrete. The axial uplift capacity of piles can be
obtained from skin friction and the weight of the pile. An allowable uplift skin friction of 100 psf can be
used. Lateral loads can be resisted by passive pressure on the piles. An allowable passive pressure
of 350 psf per foot of embedment acting on twice the pile diameter up to a maximum of 5,000 psf can
be used, based on a lateral deflection up to ½ inch at the ground surface and level ground conditions.
The axial and passive pressure values can be increased by ½ when considering the total of all loads,
including wind or seismic forces. The upper 1 foot of soil should not be relied on for passive support
unless the ground is covered with pavements or slabs. The provided axial and lateral pile capacities
can be updated once pile size, pile spacing, and boundary conditions are known.
7. 2. 3 Settlement Characteristics
Total foundation settlements are estimated to be less than 1 inch. Differential settlements are
estimated to be less than ¾ inch between adjacent columns and across continuous footings over a
distance of 40 feet. Settlements should be completed shortly after structural loads are applied.
7.2.4 Foundation Plan Review
NOVA should review the foundation plans to ascertain that the intent of the recommendations in this
report has been implemented and that revised recommendations are not necessary as a result of
changes after this report was completed.
7.2.5 Foundation Excavation Observations
A representative from NOVA should observe the foundation excavations prior to forming or placing
reinforcing steel.
7.3. Hardscape
Hardscape should be underlain by at least 2 feet of material with an El of 50 or less. Exterior slabs
should be at least 4 inches in thickness and rei nforced with at least No. 3 bars at 18 inches on center
each way. Slabs should be provided with weakened plane joints. Joints should be placed in
accordance with the American Concrete Institute (ACI) guidelines. The project architect should select
the final joint patterns. A 1-inch maximum size aggregate mix is recommended for concrete for exterior
slabs. The corrosion potential of on-site soils with respect to reinforced concrete will need to be taken
into account in concrete mix design. Coarse and fine aggregate in concrete should conform to the
"Greenbook" Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction.
7.4. Conventional Retaining Walls
Conventional retaining walls can be supported on spread footings. The recommendations for spread
footings provided in the foundation section of this report are also applicable to conventional retaining
walls.
The active earth pressure for the design of unrestrained retaining walls with level backfill can be taken
as equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing 35 pcf. The at-rest earth pressure for the design of
19
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
restrained retaining wall with level backfill can be taken as equivalent to the pressure of a fluid
weighing 55 pcf. These values assume a granular and drained backfill condition. Higher lateral earth
pressures would apply if walls retain clay soils. An additional 20 pcf should be added to these values
for walls with 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) sloping backfill. An increase in earth pressure equivalent to an
additional 2 feet of retained soil can be used to account for surcharge loads from light traffic. The
above values do not include a factor of safety. Appropriate factors of safety should be incorporated
into the design. If any other surcharge loads are anticipated, NOVA should be contacted for the
necessary increase in soil pressure. If required, the seismic earth pressure can be taken as equivalent
to the pressure of a fluid pressure weighing 23 pcf. This value is for level backfill and does not include
a factor of safety. Appropriate factors of safety should be incorporated into the design. This pressure
is in addition to the un-factored, active earth pressure. The total equivalent fluid pressure can be
modeled as a triangular pressure distribution with the resultant acting at a height of H/3 up from the
base of the wall, where His the retained height of the wall. The passive pressure and bearing capacity
can be increased by ½ in determining the seismic stability of the wall.
Retaining walls should be provided with a backdrain to reduce the accumulation of hydrostatic
pressures or be designed to resist hydrostatic pressures. Backdrains can consist of a 2-foot-wide zone
of ¾-inch crushed rock. The crushed rock should be separated from the adjacent soils using a non-
woven filter fabric, such as Mirafi 140N or equivalent. A perforated pipe should be installed at the base
of the backdrain and sloped to discharge to a suitable storm drain facility, or weep holes should be
provided. As an alternative, a geocomposite drainage system such as Miradrain 6000 or equivalent
placed behind the wall and connected to a suitable storm drain facility can be used. The project
architect should provide dampproofing/waterproofing specifications and details. Figure 7-1 presents a
typical conventional retaining wall backdrain detail. Note that the guidance provided on Figure 7-1 is
conceptual. Other options are available.
Wall backfill should consist of granular, free-draining material having an El of 20 or less. The backfill
zone is defined by a 1 :1 plane projected upward from the heel of the wall. Expansive or clayey soil
should not be used. Additionally, backfill within 3 feet from the back of the wall should not contain
rocks greater than 3 inches in dimension. Backfill should be compacted to at least 90% relative
compaction. Backfill should not be placed until walls have achieved adequate structural strength.
Compaction of wall backfill will be necessary to minimize settlement of the backfill and overlying
settlement-sensitive improvements. However, some settlement should still be anticipated. Provisions
should be made for some settlement of concrete slabs and pavements supported on backfill.
Additionally, any utilities supported on backfill should be designed to tolerate differential settlement.
20
RETAINING
WALL
FINISHED
GRADE
CONCRETE
BROWDITCH
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
WATER PROOFING
PER ARCHITECT
July 14, 2023
~L---------FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE
(MIRAFI 140N OR APPROVED
12"
EQUIVALENT)
3/4" CRUSHED ROCK
(1 CU.FT./FT.)
: .. .'_·._-:.:;: ·:--------FILTER FABRIC
1-----u ~~: -: : • •. ~-ENVELOPE
••• • ·.;._ .": MIRAFI 140N OR
• • •• EQUIVALENT
4" DIA. SCHEDULE 40
PERFORATED PVC PIPE
OR TOTAL DRAIN
EXTENDED TO
APPROVED OUTLET
COMPETENT BEDROCK
OR MATERIAL AS
EVALUATED BY THE
GEOTECHNICAL
CONSULTANT
Figure 7-1 . Typical Conventional Retaining Wall Backdraln Detail
7 .5. Pipelines
For level ground conditions, a passive earth pressure of 350 psf per foot of depth below the lowest
adjacent final grade can be used to compute allowable thrust block resistance. A value of 150 psf per
foot should be used below groundwater level, if encountered.
A modulus of soil reaction (E') of 1,400 psi can be used to evaluate the deflection of buried flexible
pipelines. This value assumes that granular bedding material is placed adjacent to the pipe and is
compacted to at least 90% relative compaction.
Pipe bedding as specified in the "Greenbook" Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction
ca n be used . Bedding material should consist of clean sand having a sand equivalent not less than
20 and should extend to at least 12 inches above the top of pipe. Alternative materials meeting the
intent of the bedding specifications are also acceptable. Samples of materials proposed for use as
21
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
bedding should be provided to the engineer for inspection and testing before the material is imported
for use on the project. The on-site materials are not expected to meet "Greenbook" bedding
specifications. The pipe bedding material should be placed over the full width of the trench. After
placement of the pipe, the bedding should be brought up uniformly on both sides of the pipe to reduce
the potential for unbalanced loads. No voids or uncompacted areas should be left beneath the pipe
haunches. Ponding or jetting the pipe bedding should not be allowed.
Where pipeline inclinations exceed 15%, cutoff walls are recommended in trench excavations. Open
graded rock should not be used for pipe bedding or backfill due to the potential for piping erosion. The
recommended bedding is clean sand having a sand equivalent not less than 20 or 2-sack sand/cement
slurry. If sand/cement slurry is used for pipe bedding to at least 1 foot over the top of the pipe, cutoff
walls are not considered necessary. The need for cutoff walls should be further evaluated by the
project civil engineer designing the pipeline.
7.6. Pavement Section Recommendations
Based on the classification of the near surface soils, an R-value of 15 was assumed for design of
preliminary pavement sections. The actual R-value of the subgrade soils should be determined after
grading, and the final pavement sections should be provided. Based on an R-value of 15, the following
preliminary pavement structural sections are provided for the assumed Traffic Indexes on Table 7-1.
Table 7-1. AC and PCC Pavement Sections
Traffic Type
Parking Stalls
Driveways
Fire Lanes
AC: Asphalt Concrete
AB: Aggregate Base
I Traffic Index I
4.5
6.0
7.5
PCC: Portland Cement Concrete
Asphalt Concrete
I
Portland Cement Concrete
(inches) (inches)
3AC / 7 AB 6½
4 AC/ 10 AB 7
5AC/14AB 7½
Subgrade preparation should be performed immediately prior to placement of the pavement section.
The upper 12 inches of subgrade should be scarified, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture
content, and compacted to at least 95% relative compaction. All soft or yielding areas should be
stabilized or removed and replaced with compacted fill or aggregate base. Aggregate base and asphalt
concrete should conform to the Caltrans Standard Specifications or the "Greenbook" and should be
compacted to at least 95% relative compaction. Aggregate base should have an R-value of not less
than 78. All materials and methods of construction should conform to good engineering practices and
the minimum local standards.
7.7. Corrosivity
Representative samples of the on-site soils were tested to evaluate corrosion potential. The test
results are presented in Appendix C. The project design engineer can use the sulfate results in
22
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
conjunction with ACI 318 to specify the water/cement ratio, compressive strength, and cementitious
material types for concrete exposed to soil. The project design engineer should review and consider
the resistivity levels in the project design. A corrosion engineer should be contacted to provide specific
corrosion control recommendations.
23
8. CLOSURE
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
NOVA should review project plans and specifications prior to bidding and construction to check that
the intent of the recommendations in this report has been incorporated. Observations and tests should
be performed during construction. If the conditions encountered during construction differ from those
anticipated based on the subsurface exploration program, the presence of personnel from our offices
during construction will enable an evaluation of the exposed conditions and modifications of the
recommendations in this report or development of additional recommendations in a timely manner.
NOVA should be advised of changes in the project scope so that the recommendations contained in
this report can be evaluated with respect to the revised plans. Changes in recommendations will be
verified in writing. The findings in this report are valid as of the date of this report. Changes in the
condition of the site can, however, occur with the passage of time, whether they are due to natural
processes or work on this or adjacent areas. In addition, changes in the standards of practice and
government regulations can occur. Thus, the findings in this report may be invalidated wholly or in part
by changes beyond our control. This report should not be relied upon after a period of two years
without a review by us verifying the suitability of the conclusions and recommendations to site
conditions at that time.
In the performance of our professional services, we comply with that level of care and skill ordinarily
exercised by members of our profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in the same
locality. The client recognizes that subsurface conditions may vary from those encountered at the
boring locations and that our data, interpretations, and recommendations are based solely on the
information obtained by us. We will be responsible for those data, interpretations, and
recommendations, but shall not be responsible for interpretations by others of the information
developed. Our services consist of professional consultation and observation only, and no warranty
whatsoever, express or implied, is made or intended in connection with the work performed or to be
performed by us, or by our proposal for consulting or other services, or by our furnishing of oral or
written reports or findings.
24
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
9. REFERENCES
American Concrete Institute, 2014, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-14)
and Commentary, dated September.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 2018, Standard Specifications.
California Geological Survey (CGS), 2002, California Geomorphic Provinces Note 36, Electronic
Copy, Revised December 2002.
--, 2007, Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30' x 60' Quadrangle, California, Scale 1: 100,000.
--, 2008, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Special
Publication 117 A, September 2008.
--, 2011, Susceptibility to Deep-Seated Landslides in California.
--, 2018, Earthquake Fault Zones, Special Publication 42, Revised 2018.
--, 2022a, Fault Activity Map of California, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/, accessed in
July 2023.
--, 2022b, Tsunami Hazard Area Map, County of San Diego; Produced by the California Governor's
Office of Emergency Services; dated October 7, mapped at 1 :72,000 scale.
California State Water Resources Control Board, Geo Tracker website:
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/, accessed July 2022.
Commercial Development Resources (CDR), 2022, Topographic Map, Legoland 24 Dino, 1 Legoland
Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008, undated.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2019, FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map, San Diego County,
Firm Panels 06073C1027H and 06073C0764H, https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search, effective
December 20 ; accessed July 2023.
Google Earth Pro, found at: http://www.google.com/earth/index.html, accessed July 2023.
Historic Aerials Website, https://www.historicaerials.com/, accessed July 2023.
International Code Council, 2021 , 2022 California Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title
24, Part 2, Volume 2 of 2, Based on the 2021 International Building Code, Effective 1/1/23.
Kennedy, M.P. and Tan, S.S., 2008, Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30' x 60' Quadrangle, California,
California Geological Survey, Scale 1 :100,000.
Leighton and Associates, Inc., 1998, Final As-Graded Report of Rough-Grading, LEGOLAND,
Carlsbad, California, Project No. 4960151-003, February 10.
Merlin Entertainments, 2023, Dinosaur Valley, Legoland California Resort, Concept Book 5, dated
April.
25
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
OpenStreetMap Foundation (OSMF), OpenStreetMap website: https://www.openstreetmap.org,
accessed July 2023.
Public Works Standards, Inc., 2021, "Greenbook" Standard Specifications for Public Works
Construction, 2021 Edition.
Tan, S.S., 1995, Landslide Hazards in San Diego County, California, California Division of Mines and
Geology.
Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC), 2023, OSHPD Seismic Design Maps: found
at https://seismicmaps.org/, accessed in July 2023.
United States Geological Survey (USGS), USGS Geologic Hazards Science Center, U.S. Quaternary
Faults, accessed July 2023.
26
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
PLATES
·-<r ' r '\ \ -,. I I • ~~ -
\ i\.. -~ ---1......---. C..,,.. _C, --; _,. ---'-{ i J>-~-_
,,
-,...__ J
~
<>---"""// / --~=---
\
\
~
//
~
r,
(-·;\
\.~
-~
.. f ~ ", ~i~
• ---i ~-,.
1/ll!ff/111 I•,
<a._
~-..----
~~~----
--~;..~~--~-· -_.,,.-,,.. --
·• .. ,,
/ ' \
' ---\,}., -~---" "'-'~ •• .. :~-·~ '
--
"/; \ ' / .
' ----v
-_,,,.~ ,,.
J
~.
\
\
\
KEY TO SYMBOLS
af FILL
Qop OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS
Tsa SANTIAGO FORMATION
B-9
8 GEOTECHNICAL BORING
0 50'
I ·BASE MAP: CDR, 2022 I
•NOTE: LOCATIONS APPROXIMATE
I
I
I
100'
,a~ ,_, GEOTECHNICAL
MATERIALS
SPECIAL INSPECTION
NOV A, DVBE•SBE•SOVOSB•SLBE
4373 Viewndge Avenue. Suite B
San Diego. CA 92123
P 858.292.7575
944 Calle Amanecer, Suite F
San Clemente, CA 92673
P 949.3887710
www.usa-nova.com
>-w
---' ---' <(
w <( >
0::: >Z -0:: :::> 0:: 0
<( 0 LL o-(/) z .....J
0 <( <(
.....J u z 0 ~ -CJ 0 0 w~ I
0 .....J Cf) w .....J z z 0::
<( 0 <(
---' u
0
(.9
w
---'
PROJECT NO 2023109
DRAWN BY OJ
REVIEWED BY: GO/AN
SCALE: 1"=50'
DRAWING TITLE:
GEOTECHNICAL MAP
PLATE NO. 1 OF 1
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
July 14, 2023
APPENDIX A
USE OF THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
Im ortant Information About Your
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Subsurface problems are a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes.
The following information is provided to help you manage your risks.
Geotechnical Services Are Performed for
Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects
Geolechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs of
their clients. A geotechnical engineering study conducted for a civil engi-
neer may not fulfill the needs of a construction contractor or even another
civil engineer. Because each geotechnlcal engineering study Is unique, each
geotechnlcal engineering report is unique, prepared solelyfor the client. No
one except yoo should rely on your geotechnlcal engineering report without
first conferring with the geotechnlcal engineer who prepared It. And no one
-not even you -should apply the report for any purpose or project
except the one orlglnally contemplated.
Read the Full Report
Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical
engineering report did not read ii all. Do not rely on an executive summary.
Do not read selected elements only.
A Geotechnical Engineering Re_port Is Based on
A Unique Set of Project-Specific Factors
Geotechnlcal engineers consider a number of unique, project-specific fac-
tors when establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors Include: the
client's goals, objectives, and risk management preferences; the general
nature of the structure Involved, Its size, and configuration; the location of
the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site improvements,
such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless the
geolechnical engineer who conducted the study specifically indicates oth-
erwise, do not rely on a geotechnlcal engineering report that was:
• not prepared for you,
• not prepared for your project,
• not prepared for the specific site explored, or
• completed before important project changes were made.
Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical
engineering report include those that affect:
• the function of the proposed struclure, as when it's changed from a
parking garage to an office building, or from a light industrial plant
to a refrigerated warehouse,
• elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the
proposed structure,
• composition of the design team, or
• project ownership.
As a general rule, always Inform }'Oll' geotechnlcal engineer of project
changes-even minor ones-and request an assessment of their Impact.
(,eotechnlcal engineers cannot accept responslblllty or l/ab/1/ty for problems
that occur because their reports do not consider developments of 'MIich
they ~e not Informed.
Subsurface Conditions Can Change
A geotechnical engineering report is based on conditions that existed at
the time the study was performed. Do not rely on a geotechnical engineer-
Ing repo,twhose adequacy may have been affected by: the passage of
time: by man-made events, such as construction on or adjacent to the site;
or by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctua-
tions. Always contact the geotechnlcal engineer before applying the report
to determine If It Is still reliable. A minor amount of additional tesllng or
analysis could prevent major problems.
Most Geotechnical Findings Are Professional
Opinions
Site exploration Identifies subsurface conditions only al those points where
subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. Geotechnlcal engi-
neers review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional
judgment to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughoul the
site. Actual subsurface conditions may differ-sometimes significantly-
from those Indicated In your report. Retaining the geotechnlcal engineer
who developed your report to provide construction observation Is the
most effective method of managing the risks associated with unanticipated
conditions.
A Report's Recommendations Are Not Final
Do not overrely on the construction recommendations included in your
report. Those recommendations are not nnal, because geotechnical engi-
neers develop them principally from Judgment and opinion. Geotechnlcal
engineers can finalize their recommendations only by observing actual
subsurface conditions revealed during construction. The geotechnlcal
engineer who developed your report cannot aSSllme responsibility or
liabillty for the report's recommendations If that engineer does not perform
cons/rudlon observation.
A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Subject to
Misinterpretation
Other design team members' misinterpretation of geotechnlcal englnoo-lng
reports has resulted In cos11y problems. Lower that risk by having your goo-
technical engineer confer with appropnate members of the design team after
submitting the report. Also retain your geotechnical engineer to review perti-
nent elements of the design team's plans and specifications. Contractors can
also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering report. Reduce that risk by
having your geotechnical engineer participate in prebid and preconstruction
conferences, and by providing construction observation.
Do Not Redraw the Engineer's Logs
Geotechnicat engineers prepare final boring and testing togs based upon
their interpretation offietd logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or
omissions, the logs Included In a geotechnical engineering report should
never be redrawn for Inclusion In architectural or other design drawings.
Only photographic or electronic reproduction Is acceptable, but recognize
that separating logs from the report can elevate risk.
Give Contractors a Complete Report and
Guidance
Some O'IITiers and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make
contractors liable for unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what
they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems, give con-
tractors the complete geotechnical engineering report, but preface it with a
clearly 'Mitten letter of transmittal. In that letter, advise contractors that the
report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the
report's accuracy is limited: encourage them to confer with the geotechnlcal
engineer who prepared the report (a modest fee may be required) and/<J' to
conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they
need <l' prefer. A prebid conference can also be valuable. Be sure aJfltrac-
tors have sufficient time to perform addltlonal study. Only then might you
be In a position to give contractors the best Information available to you,
while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responslbllltles
stemming from unanticipated conditions.
Read Responsibility Provisions Closely
Some clients, design professionals, and contractors do not recognize that
geolechnlcal engineering Is far less exact than other engineering disci-
plines. This lack of understanding has created unrealistic expectations that
have led to disappointments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce the risk
of such outcomes, geotechnlcal engineers commonly include a variety of
explanatory provisions In their reports. Sometimes labeled "limitations·
many of these provisions Indicate where geotechnlcal engineers' responsi-
bilities begin and end, to help others recognize their own responslbllltles
and risks. Read these provisions closely Ask questions. Your geolechnlcal
engineer should respond fully and frankly.
Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered
The equipment, techniques. and personnel used to perform a geoenviron-
mental study differ significantly from those used to perform a geolechnical
study. For that reason, a geotechnlcal engineering report does not usually
relate any geoenvironmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations:
e.g .. about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or
regulated contaminants. Unanticipated environmental problems have led
to numerous project failures. If you have not yet obtained your own geoen-
vironmental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk man-
agement guidance. Do not rely on an environmental report prepared for
someone else.
Obtain Professional Assistance To Deal with Mold
Diverse strategies can be applied during building design, construction,
operation, and maintenance to prevent significant amounts of mold from
growing on indoor surfaces. To be effective, all such strategies should be
devised for the express purpose of mold prevention. integrated into a com-
prehensive plan, and executed with diligent oversight by a professional
mold prevention consultant. Because just a small amount of water or
moisture can lead to the development of severe mold Infestations, a num-
ber of mold prevention strategies focus on keeping building surfaces dry.
While groundwater, water infiltration, and similar issues may have been
addressed as part of the geotechnical engineering study whose findings
are conveyed In this report. the geotechnical engineer in charge of this
projed is not a mold prevention consultant: none of the services per-
formed In connection with the geotechnlcal engineer's study
were designed or conducted for the purpose of mold preven-
tion. Proper implementation of the recommendations conveyed
In this report will not of Itself be sufficient to prevent mold
from growing In or on the structure involved.
Rely, on Your ASFE-Member Geotechncial
Engineer for Additional Assistance
Membership in ASFE/The Best People on Earth exposes geotechnical
engineers to a wide array of risk management techniques that can be of
genuine benefit for everyone Involved with a construdion project. Confer
with you ASFE-member geotechnlcal engineer for more Information.
A5FE
TU leSI Peule ,n 181th
8811 Colesville Road/Suite G106, Sliver Spring, MD 2091 o
Telephone: 301/565-2733 Facsimile: 301/589-2017
e-mail: lnfo@asfe.org www.asfe.org
Copyright 2004 by ASFE. Inc. Duplication. reprodUCl.lon, or copying of this document, In whole or In part, by any means whatsoever, Is strictly prohibited. except with ASFE'S
spec/flc written permlSs/on. Excerpting, quoting, or otherwise extracting wording from this document IS permitted only with the express written perm/ss/on of ASFE, and only for
fJllPOSeS of scholllrty researr:11 ar book rewew. Only members of ASFE may use this doaJment as .t ct111,-,1ll!lllt ti ar .as an eltment al a geatechn/cal engineering report. Any olher
lllm, lntlvtiJal. ar other entity /hat so ll5l!S t/is document without being an ASFE member COfJd be anmDlg l1l!!f1lgtd ar lnlmlJmal {fraudulent) misrepresentation.
IIGER06045.0M
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
APPENDIX B
BORING LOGS
July 14, 2023
MAJOR DIVISIONS TYPICAL NAMES
GW WELL-GRADED GRAVEL WITH OR WITHOUT
CLEAN GRAVEL SAND
LJ.J WITH LESS THAN > 15% FINES LJ.J GRAVEL GP POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH OR cii WITHOUT SAND
0 MORE THAN HALF 0 N COARSE FRACTION ci IS LARGER THAN GM SILTY GRAVEL WITH OR WITHOUT SAND enZ NO. 4 SIEVE
::!~ GRAVEL WITH
OJ: 15% OR MORE
enl-FINES
00:: GC CLAYEY GRAVEL WITH OR WITHOUT SAND LJ.JLJ.J
~en
~c:: (!)< WELL-GRADED SAND WITH OR WITHOUT ,0 SW LI.JU GRAVEL enen CLEAN SAND c::-
<U.. WITH LESS THAN
o..J 15% FINES u~ SAND SP POORLY GRADED SAND WITH OR WITHOUT
z GRAVEL
< MORE THAN HALF J: COARSE FRACTION I-
LJ.J IS FINER THAN NO. SM SIL TY SAND WITH OR WITHOUT GRAVEL c:: 4 SIEVE SIZE 0 SAND WITH 15% ::i: OR MORE FINES
SC CLAYEY SAND WITH OR WITHOUT GRAVEL
LJ.J SILT WITH OR WITHOUT SAND OR > ML GRAVEL LJ.J
cii
0 0 N SILTS AND CLAYS LEAN CLAY WITH OR WITHOUT SAND
ci CL OR GRAVEL (/)z LIQUID LIMIT 50% OR LESS
::!~ ORGANIC SILT OR CLAY OF LOW TO OJ: (/)I-OL MEDIUM PLASTICITY WITH OR 00:: LJ.JLJ.J WITHOUT SAND OR GRAVEL ~z ~u: ELASTIC SILT WITH OR WITHOUT SAND (!)en MH ,-OR GRAVEL LI.JU. Z..J -<I: U..:i:: SILTS AND CLAYS z CH FAT CLAY WITH OR WITHOUT SAND OR
< LIQUID LIMIT GREATER THAN 50% GRAVEL J: I-
LJ.J ORGANIC SILT OR CLAY OF HIGH c:: 0 OH PLASTICITY WITH OR WITHOUT SAND OR
::i: GRAVEL
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
=:/Y LAB TEST ABBREVIATIONS RELATIVE DENSITY OF CONSISTENCY OF COHESIVE SOILS GROUNDWATER / STABILIZED COHESIONLESS SOILS Al A TTERBERG LIMITS ~ CN CONSOLIDATION SPT N60 SPTN60 POCKET PENETROMETER
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE CR CORROSIVITY RELATIVE DENSITY BLOWS/FOOT CONSISTENCY BLOWS/FOOT MEASUREMENT (TSF)
OS DIRECT SHEAR ~ BU LK SAMPLE El EXPANSION INDEX
MO MAXIMUM DENSITY VERY LOOSE 0-4 VERY SOFT 0-2 0-0.25
rzl SPT SAMPLE ( ASTM 01586) RV RESISTANCE VALUE LOOSE 4 -10 SOFT 2-4 0.25-0.50
SA SIEVE ANALYSIS MEDIUM DENSE 10-30 MEDIUM STIFF 4-8 0.50-1.0
□ MOD . CAL. SAMPLE (ASTM 03550) SE SAND EQUIVALENT DENSE 30 -50 STIFF 8-15 1.0-2.0
VERY DENSE ·ovER 50 VERY STIFF 15-30 2.0-4.0
* UNRELIABLE BLOW COUNTS LOG ABBREVIATIONS HARD OVER30 OVER4.0
--GEOLOGIC CONTACT REF REFUSAL NUMBER OF BLOWS OF 140 LB HAMMER FALLING 30 INCHES TO DRIVE A 2 INCH 0.0.
(1-3/8 INCH 1.0.) SPLIT-BARREL SAMPLER THE LAST 12 INCHES OF AN 18-INCH DRIVE
--SOIL TYPE CHANGE (ASTM-1586 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST).
IF THE SEATING INTERVAL (111 6 INCH INTERVAL) IS NOT ACHEIVED. N IS REPORTED AS
REF .
• GEOTECHNICAL www.us~,nova.com
MATERIALS 437J V11,11vr,ct1;w Ave Swte B
1
944 Cat.o AmiJ.MCer Suite F
SPECIAL INSPECTION San O,&go, CA 92123 San Ct1:1mante CA 92673 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LEGEND P 856 292 7575 P 949 388 771 0
NOVA DVBE •SBE•SOVOSH•Sl.BE
LOG OF BORING B-1
DATE DRILLED: 5/24/23 DRILLING EQUPMENT: HAND AUGERfTRIPOD SAMPLE METHOD: HAMMER: 140 LBS., DROP: 30 IN
ELEVATION (FT): ± 152 NGVD 29
GROUNDWATER DEPTH (FT): ...:N..::.IA:..,:__
DRILLING METHOD: 31/.-IN HAND AUGER/6-IN TRI-POD LOGGED BY: ...Q!L_
REVIEWED BY: _§Q____
w w ...J ...J a.. [ a.. ::E ::E <( <( Cl) I Cl) w I-::,:: > a.. ...J ir w ::, Cl Ill Cl
0
-
-
-
X
5
-I -
--
-I
10-
-
15
~
<0 a::
~z
Cl)
3: 0 ...J Ill
6
8
8
3
11
20
w a:: ::,~
-l tic 6 ::E
16
31
GEOTECHNICAL
MATERIALS
SPECIAL INSPECTION
~ ui ziu w C.
Cl ->-a:: Cl
OVBE • SBE • SOVOSB • SLBE
www usa-nov-a com
4 J73 Viawridga AvAnoo Su11a B
Siln Diogo. CA 92123
P 858 292 7575
944 Calle Amafllx:Cr Su11u F
San Clemunlo CA 9?673
P 949 388.7710
Cl)
(/)~ :5 (/) u &l
...J::, 6~
Cl)
SC
NOTES: _N_/A ___________ _
SOIL DESCRIPTION
SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
(USCS; COLOR, MOISTURE, DENSITY, GRAIN SIZE, OTHER)
FILL (af): CLAYEY SAND; YELLOW BROWN, MOIST, LOOSE, FINE TO MEDIUM GRAINED
SOME DEBRIS
REDDISH YELLOW BROWN, TRACE COBBLE
SC OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS (Qop): CLAYEY SAND; REDDISH YELLOW AND GRAY MOTTLING,
MOIST, MEDIUM DENSE, FINE GRAINED SAND
MICACEOUS
GRAY SANDY CLAY BELBS THROUGHOUT
DENSE
BORING TERM/NA TED AT 9 FT. NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED.
DRAFTED BY HP
LEGOLAND -DINOSAUR VALLEY
ONE LEGOLAND DRIVE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT: 2023109 FIGURE 8.1
~ Cl) w l-
oo :5
SA
AL
CR
LOG OF BORING 8-2
DATE DRILLED: 5/24/23 DRILLING EQUPMENT: HAND AUGER SAMPLE METHOD: _,B..,U,,.,L"'K'-'B"'-A.,,G..,S.__ _________ _
ELEVATION (FT): ± 151 NGVD 29 DRILLING METHOD: ... H""A-"N..,_,D"-"-TO=O:LS=-----------LOGGED BY: ...Q!L_
REVIEWED BY: ..QQ_ GROUNDWATER DEPTH (FT): N/A NOTES: -'-N-"-/A--'------------
w ~ w _, (D _, Q. 0:: Q. [ ::E ~ ~z <( <(
(/) :r (/) (/)
I-:.:: w ~ > Q. _, ii:: 0 w ::i _,
0 (Il 0 (Il
0
-
-
-
-
5 -
-
-
-
' J
-
J .
10
-
-
-
-
15
A,a~l ~-~ NOVA
437:. V1ewr1dgo Avenuo, Sui!e B
s~n 01ago CA 92123
P 858 292 7575
w 0:: ::i_
-} t;~
6 ~
GEOTECHNICAL
MATERIALS
SPECIAL INSPECTION
~ in Z'5' w a. o-~ 0
OVBE • see • SOVOSB • SLBE
944 Calla Ama11ocer Su1ht F
San Clumonto CA 92673
P 949 388 7710
ui (/)_
5 (/)
(.)~ _, ::i 5 -
(/)
SM
SOIL DESCRIPTION
SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
(USCS; COLOR, MOISTURE, DENSITY, GRAIN SIZE, OTHER)
FILL (af): SIL TY SAND; YELLOW BROWN, MOIST, LOOSE, FINE TO MEDIUM GRAINED
LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE
SOME DEBRIS
SM OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS (Qop): SIL TY SAND; RED BROWN, MOIST, MEDIUM DENSE, FINE
GRAINED, SOME SANDSTONE PIECES
BORING TERM/NA TED AT 9 FT. NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED.
DRAFTED BY. HP
LEGOLAND -DINOSAUR VALLEY
ONE LEGOLAND DRIVE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT: 2023109 FIGURE. B 2
SA
LOG OF BORING B-3
DATE DRILLED: 5/24/23 DRILLING EQUPMENT: LIMITED ACCESS RIG SAMPLE METHOD: HAMMER: 140 LBS .• DROP: 30 IN
ELEVATION (FT): ± 153 NGVD 29 DRILLING METHOD: SOLID STEM AUGER LOGGED BY: _QM_
REVIEWED BY: _QQ__ GROUNDWATER DEPTH (FT): ~N=/A~-
w ...J
w ll.
...J ::!:
[ ll. <(
::!: (/)
<( I-
I (/) ll.
I-:.: (/)
ll. ...J :::i w ::::, <(
Cl Ill (.)
0 .....
-X
-...-
_u
--n I
5
--
-
--
-I
10-
-
-
-
-
15
~
<O a::
~z
(/)
3: 0 ...J Ill
11
15
19
17
19
22
16
20
24
w a:: ::::,-
-l ~~ 6 ::!:
54
66
70
GEOTECHNICAL
MATERIALS
SPECIAL INSPECTION
/: cii zc w u Cl .E!,
>-a:: Cl
OVBE • see • SDVOSB • SLBE
-N~w. usa nova corn
4J7J l/111wnd{)u Avenue Su11e B
S:1:1 D,vgo. CA 92123
P 858 292 7575
944 Catie Amanocor Suitt1 F
San Clemente CA 9?{;73
P 949 388 7710
cri
(/)-5 (/)
(.) lil
...J::::, 6~
(/)
SC
SM
NOTES: ETR-95.7%, Nso -~·N-1.6·N
SOIL DESCRIPTION
SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
(USCS; COLOR, MOISTURE, DENSITY, GRAIN SIZE, OTHER)
3 IN OF ASPHALT CONCRETE
FILL (af): CLAYEY SAND; DARK GRAY BROWN, MOIST, MEDIUM DENSE, FINE TO MEDIUM
GRAINED, LIGHT GRAY MOTTLING
OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS (Qop): SIL TY SAND; DARK BROWN, MOIST, MEDIUM DENSE TO
DENSE, FINE TO MEDIUM GRAINED
VERY DENSE
DARK YELLOW BROWN
WEAKLY CEMENTED
BORING TERMINATED AT 9½ FT. NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED.
DRAFTED BY. HP
LEGOLAND • DINOSAUR VALLEY
ONE LEGOLAND DRIVE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT: 2023109 FIGURE. B 3
(/) I-(/) w I-
Ill 5
SA
LOG OF BORING B-4
DATE DRILLED: 5/24/23 DRILLING EQUPMENT: HAND AUGER SAMPLE METHOD: ....,B=U=L,,_K,_,B"'"A..,,G=S:...._ _________ _
ELEVATION (FT): ± 151 ½ NGVD 29 DRILLING METHOD: .... H.,,_A.,,_N,.,,Dc...T.:...;O=.cO""L::.:S"'----------LOGGEDBY: _Q§_
REVIEWED BY: _QQ__ GROUNDWATER DEPTH (FT): N/A NOTES: _N_/A ___________ _
LU ~
LU -' tO -' Cl. a:: t Cl. ::E ::E <( ~z <( Cl)
I Cl) Cl) ..... ~ LU :!: Cl. -' > 0 LU :::) ii -' 0 Ill 0 Ill
0 " -J
'
~ LU iii a:: z c
=>~ LU'-'
~ ti;~ o-9:
>-z 6 a:: ::E 0
Cl)
Cl)~ :5 Cl) u &l -' :::) 5~
Cl)
SC
SOIL DESCRIPTION
SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
(USCS; COLOR, MOISTURE, DENSITY, GRAIN SIZE, OTHER)
FILL (af): CLAYEY SAND; GRAY BROWN, MOIST, LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, FINE TO MEDIUM
GRAINED
TRACE COBBLE
Cl) ~
LU .....
(D
:5
SA
AL
------------------~-------------------------------------~--X SM SIL TY SAND; YELLOW BROWN, MOIST, LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, FINE TO MEDIUM
GRAINED
------------------~-------------------------------------~--
-
5
-
-
-
10-
15
I
J n
GEOTECHNICAL
MATERIALS
SPECIAL INSPECTION
OVBE • SBE • SOVOSB • SLBE
www o!xl no-.,a coin
4373 V1cwndge Avenwi, Su110 B
San 01ego CA 92123
P 858 292 7575
944 Ca'tu Amanv,cor Su1lb F
S<m Clernenle CA 92673
P: 949 388.nio
SC CLAYEY SAND; YELLOW REDDISH BROWN, MOIST, MEDIUM DENSE, FINE TO MEDIUM
GRAINED
AUGER REFUSAL AT 5 FT ON UTILITY PIPES. NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED.
DRAFTED BY HP
LEGOLAND • DINOSAUR VALLEY
ONE LEGOLAND DRIVE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT: 2023109 FIGURE 8.4
LOG OF BORING 8-5
DA TE DRILLED: 5/24123 DRILLING EQUPMENT: HAND AUGERrTRIPOD SAMPLE METHOD: HAMMER: 140 LBS., DROP: 30 IN
ELEVATION (FT): ± 154 NGVD 29 DRILLING METHOD: 31/,-IN HAND AUGER/6-IN TRI-POD
GROUNDWATER DEPTH (FT): SEEPAGE AT 2 NOTES: _N.c./A-'-------------
LOGGEDBY: _Q§__
REVIEWED BY: Jill__
w ~ w ...J <D ...J a. a:: a. [ :E :E ~z < < en en en :c w ~ -} I-:.:: > a. ...J a: 0 w ::, ...J 0 (D 0 (D
0
' J -}
~ -
-
~ w ci5 a:: zc ::,_ w (.) ~~ o.9:
6 >-a:: :E Cl
ui en-::i en
(.)~
...J::, 5~
en
SC
SOIL DESCRIPTION
SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
(USCS; COLOR, MOISTURE, DENSITY, GRAIN SIZE, OTHER)
FILL (af): CLAYEY SAND; YELLOW BROWN, MOIST, LOOSE, FINE TO MEDIUM GRAINED,
MICACEOUS
OLIVE AND YELLOW BROWN MOTTLING, WET, MEDIUM DENSE, FINE TO COARSE GRAINED,
ORANGE STAINING, TRACE COBBLES
SA
MEDIUM DENSE, INCREASE SAND CONTENT, SOME BLACK MINERAL PRECIPITATE DEPOSITS AL
-J
5
-I -
---
--1
10 -
-
15
WHITE LENSES El
5
7
6 13
STANDING WATER AT 4 FT
LENS OF SIL TY SAND, GRAY/SH BROWN
YELLOW RED TO GRAYISH BROWN MOTTLING, FINE TO MEDIUM GRAINED, 2-IN LENS OF
SANDY CLAY
CR
---------------~-------------------------------------~---6_ _ _ CL SANDY CLAY; GRAY BROWN AND YELLOW RED MOTTLING, MOIST, STIFF (PP=1.5 TSF), FINE
-GRAINED 9 '>--->---SC-CLAYEY SAND; REDDISH YELLOW, MOIST, MEDIUM DENSE, FINE TO MEDIUM GRAINED ------16 25
GEOTECHNICAL
MATERIALS
SPECIAL INSPECTION
ovse • see • sovose • SLBE
www.usa 11ovd com
BORING TERM/NA TED AT 8½ FT. SEEPAGE AT 2 FT.
LEGOLAND -DINOSAUR VALLEY
ONE LEGOLAND DRIVE
CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA
417:3 Vmwr1d(}t., Avenuo Suite 8
SM Owgo C.A 92123
944 Calio ArnAnl.._m Su•lft F
San Clemen1e CA 92673 DRAFTED BY HP PROJECT: 2023109 FIGURE: 8.5
P B56 292 7575 P 949 388 n,o
LOG OF BORING B-6
DATE DRILLED: 5/24/23 DRILLING EQUPMENT: LIMITED ACCESS RIG SAMPLE METHOD: HAMMER: 140 LBS., DROP: 30 IN
ELEVATION (FT): ± 152 NGVD 29 DRILLING METHOD: SOLID STEM AUGER LOGGED BY: _QM_
REVIEWED BY: _QQ__ GROUNDWATER DEPTH (FT): SEEPAGE AT 4
w ...J
[ Cl.
::E <(
:c en
I-:.:: Cl. ...J w :, 0 ID
0
--
-J
w ...J Cl. ::E <( en
I-Cl. ~ <( u
~
(D
0::
~z
en ~ 0 ...J ID
5
5
8
~ en UJ iii en ~ 0:: z c-5 en :, ~ w (.) u~ -} ~c o-9: ...J :, 6 >-5 ~ 0:: ::E 0 en
SC
21
NOTES: ETR-95.7%, N60 -~•N-1.6*N
SOIL DESCRIPTION
SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
(USCS; COLOR, MOISTURE, DENSITY, GRAIN SIZE, OTHER)
4 IN OF ASPHALT CONCRETE
FILL (af): CLAYEY SAND; LIGHT GRAY WITH BROWN MOTTLING; MOIST, MEDIUM DENSE, FINE
TO MEDIUM GRAINED, SCATTERED GRAVEL
LESS GRAVEL
PERCHED WATER AT 4 FT, NO GRAVEL
~ w I-
ID 5
--------------------~-------------------------------------~--
--
-J
-' 10
-
-
-
-
15
I 6
7
10 -27
GEOTECHNICAL
MATERIALS
SPECIAL INSPECTION
DVBE • SBE • SOVOSB • SLBE
www uc a nova com
4373 Viewndge Avenue. Suite B
Sim Diogo CA 92123
P 858 2927575
944 CAHt1 Am,moco, Su1tfl F
San Ciumonte. CA 9~73
P 949 388 7710
CL SANDY CLAY; DARK GRAY BROWN, WET, VERY STIFF, MEDIUM GRAINED SAND, SAMPLE
SATURATED BY PERCHED WATER
BECOMES MOIST
PP=2.0 TSF
DRAFTED BY. HP
LEGOLAND • DINOSAUR VALLEY
ONE LEGOLAND DRIVE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT. 2023109 FIGURE. B.6
LOG OF BORING 8-6 CONTINUED
DATE DRILLED: 5/24123 DRILLING EQUPMENT: LIMITED ACCESS RIG SAMPLE METHOD: HAMMER: 140 LBS .• DROP: 30 IN
ELEVATION (FT): ± 152 NGVD 29 DRILLING METHOD: SOLID STEM AUGER LOGGED BY: .QM__
REVIEWED BY: .Jill__ GROUNDWATER DEPTH (FT): SEEPAGE AT 4
UJ ~ ...J
UJ Cl. <O ...J ::E Cl'.'. ~ ui [ Cl. <{
::E CJ) ~z UJ cii CJ)~
<{ I-Cl'.'. zc ~CJ)
I CJ) Cl. CJ) :J~ UJ (,,)
(,)~ I-:.:: CJ) ~ -l ~~ o.9:
:::i >-...J :J Cl. ...J 0 0 5~ UJ :J <{ ...J Cl'.'.
Cl CD (,) CD ::E Cl CJ)
15 I CL 11
I 19 -30 78 SM
----
-
-
-
20--I 15
25
I jl :,u
-
-
-
25 -
-
-
-
-
30
j,a~I GEOTECHNICAL
MATERIALS
~-Q
SPECIAL INSPECTION
NOVA OVBE • SBE • SDVOSB • SLBE
www.usa-nova com
437' V1tiwr10{lo Avenue, Suite B 944 Calle Anianocor Su le F
Sao 01ugo CA 92123 San Clornente CA 92673
P 858 29l7575 P 949 388 7710
NOTES: ETR-95.7%, Nso -~•N-1.6*N
SOIL DESCRIPTION
SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
(USCS; COLOR, MOISTURE, DENSITY, GRAIN SIZE, OTHER)
FILL (af): (CONTINUED) SANDY CLAY; DARK GRAY BROWN, MOIST, VERY STIFF, MEDIUM
GRAINED SAND
OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS (Qop): SIL TY SAND; RED BROWN, MOIST, VERY DENSE, FINE TO
MEDIUM GRAINED
SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): CLAYEY SAND; PALE OLIVE, MOIST, VERY DENSE, FINE TO
MEDIUM GRAINED
BORING TERMINATED AT 21½ FT. SEEPAGE AT 4 FT.
DRAFTED BY: HP
LEGOLAND • DINOSAUR VALLEY
ONE LEGOLAND DRIVE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT: 2023109 FIGURE. 8.7
LOG OF BORING 8-7
DATE DRILLED: 5/24123 DRILLING EQUPMENT: HAND AUGER SAMPLE METHOD: __,B...,U..,L"-K,_,B"'-A.,_,G...,S.__ _________ _
ELEVATION (FT): ± 155 NGVD 29 DRILLING METHOD: _.,Hc.eAc.,,N..,_,Da<....!.TO=O=eLS"'---------LOGGED BY: ~
REVIEWED BY: _QQ__ GROUNDWATER DEPTH (FT): SEEPAGE AT 6
w _J
[ a..
:::!E <( rn :r I-:.:: a.. _J w :::,
Cl CD
0
" -
-n
_8
-X -5-X
t5< ~
-
10-
-
-
15
w ~
_J <O a.. Q'. :::!E ~z <(
(/) (/) w ~ > 12 0 _J
Cl CD
w Q'.
=>-.f ~~ 0
:::!E
GEOTECHNICAL
MATERIALS
SPECIAL INSPECTION
~ iii z,;::-w <.> Cl ,9:
>-Q'. Cl
OVBE • SBE • SDVOSB • SLBE
WW'N uc.a novi.l corn
4.H3 V111wu1:,gc.: Avenuo S1.,1:b 8
5M 011..>90. CA 92123
P 858 292 ;575
944 Canu Arr,;inocer $urt1-> F
San Clomenlo CA 9~6 7~
P: 949 388 7710
(I)
C/J -:5 (/)
(.) ~
_J :::, 5 ~
(/)
SC
NOTES: ..:.N.::;IA:..:,_ __________ _
SOIL DESCRIPTION
SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
(USCS; COLOR, MOISTURE, DENSITY, GRAIN SIZE, OTHER)
FILL (af): CLAYEY SAND; YELLOW BROWN, MOIST, MEDIUM DENSE, FINE TO MEDIUM
GRAINED
MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE
LIGHT GRAY
2-IN LA YER OF SANDY CLAY; GRAY BROWN, MOIST, STIFF, FINE TO MEDIUM GRAINED SAND
MIXED LIGHT GRAY, YELLOW BROWN, AND GRAY BROWN CLAYEY SAND, WET, MEDIUM
DENSE, TRACE GRAVEL
LIGHT GRAY LA YER
BORING TERMINATED AT 6 FT DUE TO SEEPAGE AND CAVING.
DRAFTED BY HP
LEGOLAND -DINOSAUR VALLEY
ONE LEGOLAND DRIVE
CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA
PROJECT 2023109 FIGURE. B 8
rn
ti> w I-
~
SA
LOG OF BORING B-8
DATE DRILLED: 5/24/23 DRILLING EQUPMENT: HAND AUGER SAMPLE METHOD: ~B~U~L~K~B=A~G~S~----------
ELEVATION (FT): ± 154 NGVD 29 DRILLING METHOD: ...,_H..:a.A..:a.N.:.:D'-T"""O""O:;L:.,S"----------LOGGED BY: _Q!L_
REVIEWED BY: _QQ__ GROUNDWATER DEPTH (FT): SEEPAGE AT 4½
w w ...J ...J a. a. [ ::i: ::i:
< < (/) J: (/) w f-::.-:: > a. ...J a: w ::> 0 CD 0
0
J -
-'
-~
J
-
-
10 -
-
-
15
~
co
0::
~z
(/) s: 0 ...J CD
w
0:: =>~ t;~ ~ z 6 ::i:
GEOTECHNICAL
MATERIALS
SPECIAL INSPECTION
~ iii zc wu o.3::
>-0:: 0
DVBE • SBE • SOVOSB • SLBE
www u..,a nova com
4.373 V11,wndfll-! Aw,muu Suite 8
SM 01ego. CA 92123
P 858 292 7575
94.t Collie Amanocer. SUilf! F
San Clemente CA 92673
P 949.388.7710
(I)
(/) ~ :5 (/)
() vi
...J ::> 5-
(/)
SC
NOTES: _N_/A ____________ _
SOIL DESCRIPTION
SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
(USCS; COLOR, MOISTURE, DENSITY, GRAIN SIZE, OTHER)
FILL (af): CLAYEY SAND; YELLOW BROWN, MOIST, LOOSE, FINE TO MEDIUM GRAINED
LIGHT GRAY
WET
LIGHT GRAY LA YER
BORING TERMINATED AT 6 FT DUE TO SEEPAGE AND CAVING AT 4½ FT.
DRAFTED BY. HP
LEGOLAND • DINOSAUR VALLEY
ONE LEGOLAND DRIVE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT. 2023109 FIGURE. B 9
LOG OF BORING B-9
DATE DRILLED: 5124123 DRILLING EQUPMENT: HAND AUGER SAMPLE METHOD: _,B"'U"-'L=!..K,_,B""A"-'G"'S"------------
ELEVATION (FT): ± 154 NGVD 29 DRILLING METHOD: ....:H_,,A_,,N..,_,D"--T.,_O"'-O=LS"----------LOGGED BY: ..illL_
REVIEWED BY: Jill.__ GROUNDWATER DEPTH (FT): NIA NOTES: ..;.N.;;.IAc..;_ __________ _
w w _J _J Cl. Cl. [ ::E ~ <( (/)
J: (/) w I-:.: > Cl. _J ii: w :,
0 [I) 0
0
-'J
-
5 -
10-
-
15
~
<O
a::
~z
(/)
3: 0 _J
[I)
~ w u5 a:: z ti :, -w a. -} ~~ □->-6 a:: ::E 0
Cl)
(/)-
:s (/)
l) ~
_J :, 5 -
(/)
SC
SOIL DESCRIPTION
SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
(USCS; COLOR, MOISTURE, DENSITY, GRAIN SIZE, OTHER)
FILL (af): CLAYEY SAND; YELLOW BROWN, MOIST, LOOSE, FINE TO MEDIUM GRAINED
-SM SIL TY SAND; YELLOW BROWN, MOIST, LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, FINE TO MEDIUM ,_
GRAINED, MICACEOUS
-SC CLAYEY SAND; LIGHT GRAY, MOIST, LOOSE, MEDIUM DENSE, FINE TO MEDIUM GRAINED, ~
---_ MICACEOUS -------~--
GEOTECHNICAL
MATERIALS
SPECIAL INSPECTION
OVBE • SBE • SOVOSB • SLBE
NWW usa·nova com
SM SIL TY SAND; YELLOW BROWN, MOIST, LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, FINE TO MEDIUM -
GRAINED, MICACEOUS
BORING TERM/NA TEO AT 7 FT. NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED.
LEGOLAND • DINOSAUR VALLEY
ONE LEGOLAND DRIVE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
4J73 V1owr1dg1J AvtJnuo. Su le B
San Diego. CA 92123
944 Calle Arnanocer SUtlft F
S.m Clemont1;1. CA 92673 DRAFTED BY HP PROJECT: 2023109 FIGURE: B 10
P 858 292 7575 P 949 388 7710
SA
AL
El
---
Geotechnical Investigation
LEGOLAND -Dinosaur Valley, Carlsbad, CA
NOVA Project No. 2023109
APPENDIX C
LABORATORY TESTING
July 14, 2023
Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with the generally accepted American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) test methods or suggested
procedures. Brief descriptions of the tests performed are presented below:
• CLASSIFICATION: Field classifications were verified in the laboratory by visual examination. The final soil classifications are in accordance with the
Unified Soils Classification System and are presented on the exploration logs in Appendix 8 .
• GRADATION ANALYSIS (ASTM D6913): Gradation analyses were performed on representative soil samples in general accordance with ASTM
0422. The grain size distributions of the samples were determined in accordance with ASTM 06913.
• ATTERBERG LIMITS (ASTM D4318): Tests were performed on selected representative fine-grained soil samples to evaluate the liquid limits, plastic
limits, and plasticity indexes in general accordance with ASTM 04318. These test results were utilized to evaluate the soil classification in accordance
with the Unified Soil Classification System.
• EXPANSION INDEX (ASTM D4829): The expansion indexes of selected materials were evaluated in general accordance with ASTM 04829. The
specimens were molded under a specified compactive energy at approximately 50 percent saturation (plus or minus 1 percent). The prepared 1-inch
thick by 4-inch diameter specimens were loaded with a surcharge of 144 pounds per square foot and were inundated with distilled water. Readings of
volumetric swell were made for a period of 24 hours.
• CORROSIVITY TEST (CAL. TEST METHOD 417,422,643): Soil pH and minimum resistivity tests were performed on representative soil samples in
general accordance with test method CT 643. The sulfate and chloride contents of the selected samples were evaluated in general accordance with
CT 417 and CT 422, respectively.
Soil samples not tested are now stored in our laboratory for future reference and evaluation, if needed. Unless notified to the contr6ry, samples will be disposed
of 60 days from the date of this report.
GEOTECHNICAL
MATERIALS
SPECIAL INSPECTION
DVBE • SBE • sovose • SLBE
www.usa nova com
4373 V1ew•1oge A11enue. S1J1t111 B
Sa,101t}QO. CA92123
P 858 292 7575
~44 Calle Amanocer. SuitP F
San Clomento. CA 92673
P 949 388 7710
BY:HP
LAB TEST SUMMARY
LEGOLAND • DINOSAUR VALLEY
ONE LEGOLAND DRIVE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
REVIEWED BY GD PROJECT 2023109 FIGURE: C.1
~ Size (Inch&•) ~~ -~ Hydrometer Analysis U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes , ' ,
~ ~ ~ ~ ., ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ N .., -i .s .2 j .2 c:i
100 t--i .... I '' I I I
I I I
I '-I
90 I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I
80 I I \ I I
I I \
m 70 I I
C: -, I \ iii I I
(I) I I
CV I I \1 I
l. 60 I --L L L l f--~ , __ '-f-·---c I I I } I I
I I I I I Q) I I I \ I I I:! I I I \ I I I
Q) 50 ~ I r---t-,_ I l. I I I I I
I I \ I I
I I I \ I I I
I I I I I I 40 I r I I l
I I I r-. I I
I I I -., I
I I I I
30 I I I " I I
I I I I ~ I I I
.I
I
I I I I I 20 I ,_ I I I I ----·-
I I I I I
I I I I I I
I I I I I I
10 I I I I I I
I r I I I I 11
I
I I I I I I
I I I :1
I I
I I I I I
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Grain Size (mm)
Gravel Sand Silt or Clay
Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine
Sample Location: B-1 Atterberg Limits (ASTM D4318):
Depth (ft): 0-4 Liquid Limit, LL: 31
uses Soil Type: 25 Plastic Limit, PL: 15
Passing No. 200 (%): SC Plasticity Index, Pl: 16 ,
li,a~l GEOTECHNICAL CLASSIFICATION TEST RESULTS
MATERIALS
~-R
SPECIAL INSPECTION LEGOLAND. DINOSAUR VALLEY
ONE LEGOLAND DRIVE
NOVA OVBE • SBE • SOVOSB • SLBE CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA
www.usa nova com
4373 V10WT•dgt, Avenuu St.J!tt B 944 Cal•e Amanec!l1 Suite F
San 0"'90 CA 92123 Sdn Clemenle CA 92673 BY: HP REVIEWED BY: GD PROJECT: 2023109 FIGURE: C.2
P &58.292 7575 P 949 388.7710
~ Size /lnchos) )( ~ , Hydrometer Analysis U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes ,,, ,,
~ ~ ~ 2 e 8
~ .., ~ ~ .., N
-i'I i i ci ci ci ~ ci
100.0 z z z z ..... ,, I I
' I I
I
90.0 --1\ I I ---··--------I I I
I I
I I
I I I 80.0 I
I I
I I I
Cl 70.0 I I
C I II ·;;; I I I ~
IA
I
I I \ <II I I
0. 60.0 I -~---I t ,._~ ,_ _L__ ~ -----<-c I
I I \ I
GI I I I
~ I I I
-+ I I .\ I t: GI 50.0 T ,_ I-I I ,._ >-I -~ --~-0. I " I
I I I
I, I I I I I 40.0 I I\ I I
I
T T I I \ I ,, I
I I I
I I I I I
I \ I I
30.0 \ I I I I I
I I I I I
I ,, I
I I ... I l 20.0 ----, 1--.;: ------· I-
I I "-I I
I I I
10.0 I I I I
I I I I I
Ii
I I I I
I I I I I
I I I I
0.0 ·
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Grain Size (mm)
Gravel Sand Silt or Clay
Coarse I Fine Coarse Medium Fine
Sample Location: B-2
Depth (ft): 0-7½
uses Soil Type: SM
Passing No. 200 (%): 16
li,a~I GEOTECHNICAL CLASSIFICATION TEST RESULTS
MATERIALS
~-~ SPECIAL INSPECTION LEGOLAN0 • DINOSAUR VALLEY
ONE LEGOLAND DRIVE
NOVA DVB! • SBE • IDVOH • SLBE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
wwv.-.u-:a-nova COfTI
4373 V11.1w11dgv Av~nuo Su,•a B 9.i.i C,111e Amanocv, Su,lc-F
San o,ogo. CA 92123 ~n ClemunlO CA 92673 BY HP REVIEWED BY. GD PROJECT: 2023109 FIGURE. C.3
P 8~.292 7!', 75 P 949 388 r,o
~ SIZe (Inches) ~~ , Hydrometer AnalY1I• U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes ,, ' ,,
... e ~ 0 0 § ~ "l ... S! ~ ... "' --i'I i c:i ~ i ~ i c:i
100.0 -z z --r = ... ~--I I I • I I I
I I I :, I I I
I I I I I I
90.0 I ' ' I ' ' I I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I :\ I I
80.0 --I I -I I
I \ I
I I
Cl 70.0 I I
C 1 \ I
'iii I ' I VI Ill \I I
Q. 60.0 ' ' .. 1 I
C I GI u I .. \ I GI 50.0 Q. ' I
-
I
\ I
I 40.0 -'---· r 7 -\ T -~-----~ •-'-
' I .. I
I I ',. I i
30.0 I I
I I
I I
I I
20.0 ,-~-----, 1-I -
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
10.0 --I -'-_, -I I -------I I -i -I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I I
0.0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Grain Size (mm)
Gravel Sand Silt or Clay
Coarse I Fine Coarse! Medium Fine
Sample Location: B-3
Depth (ft): 2-5
uses Soil Type: SM
Passing No. 200 (%): 28
li,a~I GEOTECHNICAL CLASSIFICATION TEST RESULTS
MATERIALS
~-R
SPECIAL INSPECTION LEGOLAND -DINOSAUR VALLEY
ONE LEGOLAND DRIVE
NOVA 0VBE • SSE • S0V0SB • SLBE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
www.u'ia nova com
437J v-.~1•dgt1 Avonua Su,1e B 944 Cal1o Amanf'ICer Suite F
San D,ego. c" 92123 San Oemenlo CA 92673 BY: HP REVIEWED BY GD PROJECT. 2023109 FIGURE: C.4
P 858 292 7575 P 949388 7710
~ --~ ~ Hydrometer Analysis ... Size (Inches) ,,. ... U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes , 7
"1 ... ~ ~ e 0 0 0 ~ 8
-,i ... N ... "' N
ci .!i 2 ci ci 2 100 -~--.. I ...... I I
,1 I ; I I 90 I
I I
I ~ I
I I I
80 I I I I
I
I I t I
I I l c,, 70 I I
C I \1 l "iii I I
1/) I I ' I'll I I I 11. 60 I ' I I I 11 .. I I I 1 \ I C I I I I QI ~ I I I I I I I QI 50 ,_,_ 1--i--l I I ,~ \ I I _,_ ._ -I--11. ,_, -
I I I I I I
I I I I \ I I
Hl
I I I ~ I I
40 I I I 'I I -,_ ,r --i-+i \ ' I I I I
I I I 1 , I
I I I I I ~ I
30 I I I ' I I
I I I I
I I I I I
I I I I I
20
I I I I I I
I I I I I
I I I I I
10 I I I I I
I I I
I I I I I I
I I I I I I
I I I I I I
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Grain Size (mm)
Gravel Sand
I Coarse!
Silt or Clay
Coarse Fine Medium Fine
Sample Location: B-4 Atterberg Limits (ASTM 04318):
Depth (ft): 0-2 Liquid Limit, LL: 27
uses Soil Type: SC Plastic Limit, PL: 11
Passing No. 200 (%): 28 Plasticity Index, Pl: 16
j,a~I GEOTECHNICAL CLASSIFICATION TEST RES UL TS
MATERIALS
g■R SPECIAL INSPECTION LEGOLAND -DINOSAUR VALLEY
ONE LEGOLAND DRIVE
NOVA OVBE • SBE • SOVOSB • SLBE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
www u\a novil com
4373 \11EtW11~e Avunue. $1..,1 B 944 Calle An,anocur Suite F
San 01~0. CA 92 I 23 San Clerrn,nla C,6, ~2673 BY·HP REVIEWED BY GD PROJECT: 2023109 FIGURE: C.5
P 858 291 7~1S P 949 388.7710
~ Size (lnchos) )( -~ Hydrometer Analyels U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes , ' /
~ 0 0 0 § 8
"1 .., ~ ~ .., N .., <D N
-;;i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
100.0 z z z z z z z -~
! I I I I
'\ I I I .. I I I
90.0 I I I I ·-~ I
I
I
I I
I ' I I
I ,, I
80.0 ~ I I
I I I
I I ~ I
C, 70.0 I I ' I
C: ~ --. I
'iii I I ~ I
II) I I ~, I
C'O I I I a. 60.0 ----• -~L ~t I J J -11 .._ ._ .._ .. I I I I\ I I I -
C: I I I I I GI I I I ~ I I ~ I I I ·~ I I GI 50.0 a. I I I ,\ I I
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I
40.0 I I I \ I I
II ~ I ''\
I I \ I I
I I '\ : I
I I I
30.0 I~ I -'---J ,, I --I ' ' I
• 20.0 ---~ ·--1 t C-C-
I I
I I I
I I I I
10.0 I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
0.0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Grain Size (mm)
Gravel Sand
I Coarse!
Silt or Clay
Coarse Fine Medium Fine
Sample Location: 8-5 Atterberg Limits (ASTM D4318):
Depth (ft): 2 -5 Liquid Limit, LL: 31
uses Soil Type: SC Plastic Limit, PL: 12
Passing No. 200 (%): 22 Plasticity Index, Pl: 19
A,a~l GEOTECHNICAL CLASSIFICATION TEST RESULTS
MATERIALS
~-R
SPECIAL INSPECTION LEGOLAND • DINOSAUR VALLEY
ONE LEGOLAND DRIVE
NOVA OVBE • SBE • SOVOSB • SLBE CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA
www usa-nova com
4373 V,vwuc.tg(l Avunue Su•H B 944 c~,ne Amanacvr Suite F
Sar• Oie,go. CA 92123 5.3n Clemonlo CA 92673 BY·HP REVIEWED BY· GD PROJECT: 2023109 FIGURE: C.6
P 858 292 /575 P 949 386.7710
~ . , -, Hydrometer Analysis -Size (Inches) __,., U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes , -,,
"1 ... ~ Ill e 0 0 0 § g
~ rl ... N .., <D N
0 si -2 0 0 -2 0
100 ,... 's I 'I I
I ,,
:I
I
I .. I
90 I I
I " II I
I I •I I
I I ~ I
I I I I
80 I I I
I I \i I
I I ' I
Cl 70 I I \ I
C I I I I
'iii <fl I I \, I
cu I I I
ll. 60 11 L ,_u f-~ __J__ 1 -... I I I I I
C I I .~ I I QI I I 1\ I I I,) .. I I I I I I QI 50 ll. I I I I ~ I I I
I I I I ' I I I
I I I I I I
40 ~ --I I I I \ I I
II I I 11 I I I
I I I I ,· I
I I I I I
I I I I I
30 I, ' I -I
I I I I " I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I I
20
I I I I I
I I I I I
I I I ii I I
10 -I I I I I
II I I
:I
I I
I I I I I
I I I I I
I I I I I I I
0 ..
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Grain Size (mm)
Gravel Sand
I Coarse!
Silt or Clay
Coarse Fine Medium Fine
Sample Location: B-7
Depth (ft): 0-2½
uses Soil Type: SC
Passing No. 200 (%): 26
j,a~I GEOTECHNICAL CLASSIFICATION TEST RESULTS
MATERIALS
~-R
SPECIAL INSPECTION LEGOLANO -DINOSAUR VALLEY
ONE LEGOLAND DRIVE
NOVA ovee • SBE • SOVOSB • SLBE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
www usa f'lova com
4'..H3 V1Pwt'Ogl. Avt.nue, Su1l1.1 B 944 C,1110 Amanecer Su te F
$:in O,ogo. CA 92123 San c1emon1e CA 92673 BY HP REVIEWED BY· GD PROJECT: 2023109 FIGURE. C.7
P 858 292 7575 P 949 388 7710
~ Size (Inches) ~ --Hydrometer Analysis ' , ' U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes ,, /
... S! 0 0 :is 8 ~ ~ ... s ~ "' ... --,I 0 ~ ~ ~ i i 0
100.0 z z
I I -. ., --, ...... I I +-, I I I
I I I I I :I I I ,, I I I
90.0 I I .• I I I
I I I I I I :1 I I I I I I
I I I ~ I I I
I I I ~~ I I I
80.0 -1,-,_ ~,-I I ,_ >-I -~ f-1-f--->--~ ~-
I I I I I I
I I I I 1' ,. I I I: I
I
I I :I ' I
Cl 70.0 .~ I I I I ,_ '-
C I' 1 :r 1--~
'iii I I I ~ "' I I I •I
ftl I I I l I
a.. 60.0 --µ, ~ L L _[ if\ 1---II -·-... I C I I \ Cl) u I I •• .. I'. I I Cl) 50.0 ---J-~ I •-· .\ f--1 a.. I: I \
ii I I \
I I
40.0 II \
I :1 \ I
'I ' I 30.0 I ~ I I
1, I I I I I 'I 20.0 I --1-,1-1-•-~ 1----I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I 10.0 I I I I I I
I I I I I I
i
I I I I I , I
ll I I I I ! I I
I I I •I I
0.0 I
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Grain Size (mm)
Gravel Sand Silt or Clay
Coarse I Fine Coarse! Medium Fine
Sample Location: B-9 Alterberg Limits {ASTM D4318):
Depth (ft): 0 -3 Liquid Limit, LL: 32
uses Soil Type: SC Plastic Limit, PL: 14
Passing No. 200 (%): 28 Plasticity Index, Pl: 18
j,a~I GEOTECHNICAL CLASSIFICATION TEST RESULTS
MATERIALS
~-'1
SPECIAL INSPECTION LEGOLAND -DINOSAUR VALLEY
ONE LEGOLAND DRIVE
NOVA OVBE t SSE • SOVOSB • SLBE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
www. u~a nova com
431'.l IJ1v•,w1dqt AvfJr ue. Su1h:, B 9•4 Calt~ Amanecer Sv,tu f
Son 01eoo, CA 92123 San Clemt?nle CA 92673 BY·HP REVIEWED BY GD PROJECT: 2023109 FIGURE: C.8
P 858 792 7575 P 94938-8.7710
Expansion Index (ASTM D4829)
Sample
Location
B-5
B-9
Sample Depth
(ft.)
2-5
0-3
Expansion
Index
0
3
Expansion
Potential
Very Low
Very Low
Classification of Expansive Soil (ASTM 04829)
Expansion Expansion
Index Potential
0-20 Very Low
21-50 Low
51-90 Medium
91-130 High
>130 Very High
Corrosivity (Cal. Test Method 417,422,643)
Sample Sample Depth Resistivity Sulfate Content Chloride Content
Location (ft.) pH (Ohm-cm) (ppm) (%) (ppm) (%)
8-1 0-4 7.5 2048 24 0.002 156 0.016
8-5 2-5 8.3 1420 45 0.005 201 0.020
Water-Soluble Sulfate Exposure (ACI 318 Table 19.3.1.1 and Table 19.3.2.1)
Water-Soluble Sulfate (504)
in Soil (% by Weight)
SO4 < 0.10
0.10 s SO4 < 0.20
0.20 s SO4 s 0.20
SO4 > 2.00
GEOTECHNICAL
MATERIALS
SPECIAL INSPECTION
NOV A OVBE • SBE • SDVOSB • SLBE
4373 Vruvmdg(I A.'11!.'nue Su,!e A
San 01ego. CA 92123
P 858.292 757f>
944 Cal•e Amanecttr St1,1e F
San Cleman10 CA 92673
P 949 388 7i10
Exposure Exposure
Severity Class
NIA so
Moderate S1
Severe S2
Very Severe S3
BY:HP
Cement Type
(ASTM C150)
No type restriction
II
V
V plus pozzolan or slag cement
LAB TEST RESULTS
LEGOLAND -DINOSAUR VALLEY
ONE LEGOLAND DRIVE
CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA
Max.
W/C
NIA
0.50
0.45
0.45
REVIEWED BY GD PROJECT· 2023109
Min.fc'
(psi)
2,500
4,000
4,500
4,500
FIGURE: C.9
OFFICE USE ONLY SAN DIEGO REGIONAL
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
QUESTIONNAIRE
RECORD ID # __________________ I
PLAN CHECK# ________________ _
Business Name
LEGOLAND CALIFORNIA
Business Contact
Tom Storer
BP DATE
Telephone#
858-334-8938
Project Address (include suite)
1 LEGOLAND DRIVE CiCARLSBAD State
CA
Zip Code
92008
APN#
211-100-09-00
Mailing Address (include suite)
SAME AS ABOVE
Project Contact
RICHARD APEL
City
Applicant E-mail
richard .a el
State Zip Code Plan File#
Telephone#
760 943-0670
The following questions represent the facility's activities, NOT the specific project description.
PART Ii EIRE DEPARTMENT HAZARDOUS MATERIAL§ DIYl§IONi OCCUPANCY CLA§§fEICATtONi (not reaujred tor projects within the Cjtv of §an
~: Indicate by circling the item, whether your business will use, process, or store any of the following hazardous materials. If any of the items are circled,
applicant must contact the Fire Protection Agency with jurisdiction prior to plan submittal.
Occupancy Rating: Facility's Square Footage (including proposed project):
13. Corrosives 1. Explosive or Blasting Agents 5. Organic Peroxides 9. Water Reactives
2. Compressed Gases 6. Oxidizers 10. Cryogenics 14. Other Health Hazards
3. Flammable/Combustible Liquids 7. Pyrophorics 11 . Highly Toxic or Toxic Materials
4. Flammable Solids 8. Unstable Reactives 12. Radioactives
15. None of These.
PART Iii §AN DtEGO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH HAZARDOUS MATERIAL§ DIYl§ION (HMP): If the answer to any of the
questions is yes, applicant must contact the County of San Diego Hazardous Materials Division, 5500 Overland Avenue, Suite 170, San Diego, CA 92123.
Call (858) 505-6700 prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Expected Date of Occupancy: FEES ARE REQUIRED Project Completion Date:
(for new construction or remodeling projects)
Is your business listed on the reverse side of this form? (check all that apply).
0 CalARP Exempt
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
YES NO □ ~ B 0
□ □ □ □ □
Will your business dispose of Hazardous Substances or Medical Waste in any amount?
Will your business store or handle Hazardous Substances in quantities greater than or equal to 55 gallons, 500
pounds and/or 200 cubic feet?
Will your business store or handle carcinogens/reproductive toxins in any quantity?
Will your business use an existing or install an underground storage tank?
WIii your business store or handle Regulated Substances (CalARP)?
Will your business use or install a Hazardous Waste Tank System (Title 22, Article 10)?
Will your business store petroleum in tanks or containers at your facility with a total facility storage capacity equal to
or greater than 1,320 gallons? (California's Aboveground Petroleum Storage Act).
Date Initials
0 CalARP Required
Date Initials
0 CalARP Complete
Date Initials
PART 111: SAN DIEGO COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT APCD : The following questions are intended to identify the majority of
air pol utIon issues at the panning stage. Your project may require addIt1onal measures not identified by these questions. Residences are typically
exempt, except-single building with more than four dwelling units and those with more than one detached residential buildings
on the property-e.g. granny flats [+Excludes garages & small outbuildings not used as dwelling units]. If yes is answered for the questions below
please see link for further instructions: ~ or for more comprehensive requirements, please contact apcdcomp@sdapcd.org or call (858) 586-2650.
YES NO
1•□ 0
2. □ 0
3. □
4.0
□
□
Will the project disturb 100 square feet or more of existing building materials? If yes, submit an asbestos survey to apcdcomp@sdapcd.org.
Will any load supporting structural members be removed? If yes, submit an asbestos survey and demolition notification to
apcdcomp@sdapcd.org at least 1 O working days prior to starting the demolition of a load bearing structure. A notification is required even if no asbestos is present
in the structure.
(ANSWER ONL y IF QUESTION 1 IS YES) Will 100 square feet or more of friable asbestos material be disturbed? If yes, submit a notification of asbestos
removal to apcdcomp@sdapcd.org at least 10 working days prior to starting asbestos removal.
Will any equipment or operations be installed that may require an APCO Permit to Operate? Please see the reverse side of this form for typical equipment
requiring an APCO permit. If yes, contact APCO prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Briefly describe business activities: Briefly describe proposed project:
Rehabilitation and repair of two existing exterior attractions Amusement park
Date
BY· DATE· I I
EXEMPT OR NO FURTHER INFORMATION REQUIRED RELEASED FOR BUILDING PERMIT BUT NOT FOR OCCUPANCY RELEASED FOR OCCUPANCY
COUNTY-HMO' APCO COUNTY-HMO APCO COUNTY-HMO APCO
.. • A stamp in this box Jmb! exempts businesses from completing or updating a Hazardous Matenals Business Plan. Other permitting requirements may still apply
HM-9171 (01/22) County of San Diego -DEH -Hazardous Materials Division
( City of
Carlsbad
PURPOSE
CLIMATE ACTION PLAN
CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST
B-50
Development Services
Building Division
1635 Faraday Avenue
442-339-2719
www.carlsbadca.gov
This checklist is intended to help building permit applicants identify which Climate Action Plan (CAP) ordinance requirements
apply to their project. This completed checklist (B-50) and summary (B-55) must be included with the building permit
application. The Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) can be referenced during completion of this document.
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
The 8-50 checklist was originally developed several years ago to support implementation of the CAP. Recent updates to
the California Building Standards Code have imposed newer performance standards on building permit applications.
Therefore, the applicant is advised to review all applicable code sections and apply the maximum performance standard,
which may exceed the CAP consistency checklist requirements
Consultation with a certified Energy Consultant is encouraged to assist in filling out this document. Appropriate
certification includes, but is not limited to: Licensed, practicing Architect, Engineer, or Contractor familiar with Energy
compliance, IECC/HERS Compliance Specialist, ICC GB Energy Code Specialist, RESNET HERS rater certified, certified
ICC Residential Energy Inspector/Plans Examiner, ICC Commercial Energy Inspector and/or Plans Examiner, ICC CALgreen
Inspector/Plans Examiner, or Green Building Residential Plan Examiner.
If an item in the checklist is deemed to be not applicable to a project, or is less than the minimum required by ordinance,
check N/A and provide an explanation or code section describing the exception.
The project plans must show all details as stated in the applicable Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) and/or Energy Code and
Green Code sections.
Appllcatlon lnfonnatlon
Project Name/Building
Permit No.: Legoland Dinosaur Valley BP No.: Date:
Property Address/APN: 1 Legoland Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008 APN 211-100-09-00
ApplicantName/Co.: Richard Apel , R. W. Apel Landscape Architects Inc.
Applicant Address: 571 Hygeia Ave, Unit B, Leucadia CA 92024
Contact Phone: (760) 807-6564 Contact Email: richard.apel@rwapel.com
Contact information of person completing this checklist (if different than above):
Name: Same as above
Company
name/address:
B-50
Contact Phone:
Contact Email:
Page 1 of 7 Revised 12/22
Use the table below to determine which sections of the Ordinance checklist are applicable to your project. For alterations and additions to existing
buildings, attach a Permit Valuation breakdown on a separate sheet. For purposes of determining valuation, the amount should be upon either
the actual contract price for the work to be permitted or shall be determined with the use of the current "ICC Building Valuation Data• as
published by the International Code Council, whichever is higher (refer to Section 18.04.035 of the CMC).
Building Permit Valuation (BPV) $ breakdown_4_5_O...:.., 0_0_0 _______ _
Construction Type I Complete Sectlon(s) I Notes:
D Residential
D New construction 2A*, 3A*, 4A* *Includes detached, newly constructed ADU
D Additions and alterations:
D BPV < $60,000 N/A All residential additions and alterations
D BPV ~ $60,000 1A, 4A 1-2 family dwellings and townhouses with attached garages
D Electrical service panel upgrade only only.
*Multi-family dwellings only where interior finishes are
D BPV ~ $200,000 1A, 4A* removed and significant site work and upgrades to structural
and mechanical, electrical, and/or plumbing systems are
orooosed
28* *Multi-family dwellings only where ~$1 ,000,000 BPV AND
BPV ~ $1,000,000 affecting ~75% existing floor area
Ii] Nonresidential and hotels/motels
D New construction 1 B, 2B, 3B, 4B and 5
~ Alterations:
~ BPV:?: $200,000 or additions c? 18, 5 1,000 square feet
D BPV ~ $1,000,000 18, 28, 5 Building alterations of~ 75% existing gross floor area
~ 2,000 sq. ft. new roof addition 28,5 1 B also applies if BPV ~ $200,000
Instructions:
1. Choose first between residential or non-residential based on the type of project being submitted.
2. Next chose between new construction or addition/alteration for residential or non-residential.
3. The columns to the right of your selection will determine which sections of the CAP program are applicable to your project.
4. Appropriate details must be included on the plans for selections made.
EXAMPLE:
Scope of work includes a new, 2 story, single family residential structure.
The selections would be: Residential and New construction in the table above. For a 2-story structure, CAP sections 2A, 3A and 4A would be
applicable. (Solar PV, water heating, EV charging) The • indicates that new detached ADU's are included.
EXAMPLE:
Scope of work includes a tenant improvement (i.e., alterations) valued at over one million dollars.
The selections would be: Non-residential and Alteration BPV ~ $1,000,000. CAP sections 1 B, 28 and 5 would be applicable to this project. (Energy
efficiency, Solar PV and Transportation Demand Management (TDM)*)
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.
3
rz tt
Checklist Item
Check the appropriate boxes, explain all not applicable and exception items, and provide supporting calculations and documentation as necessary.
1. Energy Efficiency
Please refer to Section 18.30.060 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) and Section 150.2 of the CEC for more information. Appropriate
details and notes must be placed on the plans according to selections chosen in the design.
A. 0 Residential addition or alteration 2!: $60,000 building permit valuation.
Details of selection chosen below must be placed on the plans
referencing CMC 18.30.060.
D NIA _________ _
D Exception: Home energy score
2!:7 (attach certification)
Year Built Single-family Requirements Multi-family Requirements
D Before 1978 Select one option:
D Attic insulation □ Duct sealing □ Attic insulation □Cool roof
D 1978 and later Select one option:
D Liqhtinq packaqe □ Waterheatinq packaqe
D Between1978-1991 Select one option:
□ Duct sealina □ Attic insulation D Cool roof
D 1992 and later Select one option:
□ Liqhtina oackaae □ Water-heatina oackage
B. GJ New Nonresidential construction (including additions over 1,000sf), new hotel/motel construction AND alterations 2!::
$200,000 building permit valuation. See Section 18.21.050 of the CMC and CALGreen Appendix AS.
At least one measure from each applicable building component required. 0 NIA No bldgs
AS.203.1.1 Choose one:
D Outdoor lighting D Restaurant service water heating (Section 140.5 of the CEC)
D Warehouse dock seal doors D Daylight design PAFs D Exhaust air heat recovery
□ N/A ----------
AS.203.1.2.1 Choose one: □ .95 Energy budget
(Projects with indoor lighting OR mechanical)
□ .90 Energy budget
(Projects with indoor lighting AND mechanical) □ NIA ________ _
AS.211.1 ** □ On-site renewable energy:
□ N/A
AS.211 .3** D Green power: (If offered by local utility provider, 50% minimum renewable sources)
0 N/A
AS.212.1 D Elevators and escalators:(Project with more than one elevator or two escalators)
0 N/A
AS.213.1 □ Steel framing: (Provide details on plans foroptions 1-4 chosen) 0 N/A.___ ______ _
* High-rise residential buildings are 4 or more stories.
** For alterations~ $1 ,000,000BPV and affecting> 75%existing gross floor area, OR alterations that add 2,000 square feet of new roof addition: comply
with Section 18.030.040 of the CMC (section 28 below) instead.
4
2. Photovoltaic Systems
A. □ Residential new construction. Refer to Section 150.1 (c)14 of the CEC for single-family requirements and Section
170.2(d) of the CEC for multi-family requirements. If project includes installation of an electric heat pump water
heater pursuant to CAP section 3 below (residential water heating), increase system size by .3kWdc if PV offset
option is selected.
Floor Plan ID (use additional CFA orSARA #d.u. Calculated kWdc* Exception
sheets if necessary)
D
□
D
□
Total System Size: kWdc
kWdc = (CFAx.572) I 1,000 + (1.15 x #d .u.)
*Formula calculation where CFA = conditional floor area, #du= number of dwellings per plan type
If proposed system size is less than calculated size, please explain.
B. 0 Nonresidential, hotel/motel and multifamily additions, alterations and repairs of these projects ~$1 ,000,000 BPV AND
affecting ~75% existing floor area, OR addition that increases roof area by ~2,000 square feet. Please refer to
Section 18.30.040 and 18.30.070 of the CMC when completing this section.
Choose one of the following methods: (Gross floor area or Time-Dependent Valuation method)
D Gross Floor Area (GFA)Method
GFA: Min.System Size: kWd
D If< 1 O,OOOs.f. Enter: 5 kWdc
D If.: 1 O,OOOs.f. calculate: 15 kWdc x (GFN10,000) ••
**Round building size factor to nearest tenth, and round system size to nearest whole number.
D Time-Dependent Valuation Method
C. 0
Annual TDV Energy use:••• ______ x .80= Min. system size:. ______ kWdc
***Attach calculation documentation using modeling software approved by the California Energy Commission.
• All newly constructed non residential, hotel/motel and highrise multifamily buildings that are required by CEC section
140.10(a) to have a PV system shall also have a battery storage system meeting CEC section 140.10(b). Non
residential, hotel/motel and multifamily additions, alterations or repairs that trigger solar due to the Carlsbad Climate Action
Plan will NOT require battery storage. Battery storage is required when triggered by CEC section 140.10(a) and/or 170.2(9).
5
3. Water Heating
A. Residential. Refer to Section 18.30.050 of the CMC and Sections 150.1(c)8 or 170.2(d) of the CEC when completing this
section. Provide complete details on the plans.
Residential new construction and alterations:
□ Required: 60% of energy needed for service water heating from on-site solar or recovered energy.
For systems serving individual units, choose one system:
□ Single 240-volt heat pump water heater AND compact hot water distribution AND Drain water heat recovery (low-rise
residential only)
□ Single 240-volt heat pump water heater AND PV system .3 kWdc larger than required.
□ 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
□ Gas or propane system with a solar water hearing system and recirculation system.
For systems serving multiple units, choose one system:
□ Heat pump water heating system with recirculation loop tank and electric backup.
□ Solar water heating system that is either:
□ .20 solar savings fraction □ . 15 solar savings fraction, plus drain water heat recover
OR:
□ System meets performance compliance requirements of section 150.1(d) or 170.2(d) and deriving at least 60% of energy from
on-site solar or recovered energy.
□ Exception: ______________________________________ _
8. Nonresidential and hotel/motel new construction. This section also applies to high-rise residential. Refer to Sections 18.030.020
and 18.040.030 of the CMC and Sections 140.5 and 170.2 of the CEC when completing this section. Provide complete details
on the plans.
1. Non-residential:
□ Required: Water heating system derives at least 40% of its energy from one of the following:
□ Solar-thermal □ Photovoltaics □ Recovered energy
□ Required: High-capacity service water heating system
2. Water heating system Is (choose one):
D Heat pump water heater
D Electric resistance water heater(s)
□ Solar water heating system with .40 solar savings fraction
3. Hotel/motel:
□ Required: High-capacity service water heating system (meeting Section 170.2(d) of the CEC)
□ Required: Located in garage or conditioned space
Exception:
6
4. Electric Vehicle Charging
A □ Residential -New construction and major alterations.* This section also applies to hotel/motel projects. Refer to Section
18.21.030 of the CMC and Section 4.106.4 of the GBSC when com letin this section.
Choose one:
□ One and two-family residential dwelling alterations with attached private garage. (not required if a panel upgrade would be needed)
□ New detached ADU. (no EV space required when no additional parking facilities are added)
□ New one and two-family residential dwellings and townhouse with attached private garage.
□ One EV Ready parking space required □ Exception: __________ _
□ New and major alterations to multi-family and hotel/motel projects: D Exception: ________________ _
Total Parking Spaces Proposed EVSE Spaces
EV Capable ( 10% of total) I EV Readv (25% ofTotall T EV charoers 15% of Total)
I l
*Major alterations are:
(1) for one and two-family dwellings and for town houses with an attached garage, alterations have a building permit valuation~$ 60,000 or
include an electrical service panel upgrade.
(2) for multifamily dwellings (three units or more without attached garages), alterations have a building permit valuation ~ $200,000, interior finishes a re
removed and significant site work and upgrades to structural and mechanical, electrical, a nd/orp lumbing systems are proposed.
B. D Non-Residential -New construction D Exception : _____________ _
Please refer to Section 18.21.040 of the CMC when completing this section
Total Parl<ing Spaces
Prooosed EV Capable I EVCS (Installed with EVSE) I EV Ready (optional) I EV Space (optional)
I I 1
Calculation: Refer to the table below:
Total Number of Parking Spaces provided Number of required EV Capable Spaces Number of required EVCS (Installed with EVSE)
D 0-9 1 1
□ 10-25 4 1
□ 26-50 8 2
□ 51-75 13 3
□ 76-100 17 5
IJ 101-150 25 6
□ 151-200 35 9
D 201 andover 20 percent of total 25 percent of Required EV Spaces
Calculations: Total EV Capable spaces= .20xTotal parking spaces proposed (rounded up to nearest whole number)
EVSE Installed= Total EVSE Spaces x .25 (rounded up to nearest whole number)
EVSE other may be "EV Ready" or "EV Space"
7
• 5. O Transportation Demand Management (TOM): Nonresidential ONLY
An approved Transportation Demand Management (TOM) 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 determine whether your permit requires a TOM plan. If TOM is applicable to
your permit, staff will contact the applicant to develop a site-specific TOM plan based on the permit details.
No applicable
new or altered
Use in this
project
Acknowledgment:
Employee ADT Estimation for Various Commercial Uses
Use
EmpADTfor
first 1,000 s.f.
EmpADTI
1000 s.f.1
Office (all)2 20
Restaurant 11
Retai'3 8
Industrial 4
Manufacturing 4
Warehousin 4
1 Unless otherwise noted, rates estimated from /TE Trip
Generation Manual, 1 ()lh Edition
13
11
4.5
3.5
3
1
2 For all office uses, use SAN DAG rate of 20 ADT/1,000 sf to
calculate employee ADT
3 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 Employee ADT
I acknowledge that the pla • • t to the City of Carlsbad's Transportation Demand Management Ordinance. I agree to be
contacted should my pe d understand that an approved TDM plan is a condition of permit issuance.
Applicant Signature: --1.-l~~-...£+-:P-4~~--
Name: Richard Apel
Date: 8\~ 0 {tvo'V,):,
Phone No.: (760) 807-6564
8
( City of
Carlsbad
CAP Building Plan
Template
8-55
Development Services
Building Division
1635 Faraday Avenue
760-602-2719
www.carlsbadca.gov
CLIMATE ACTION PLAN (CAP) COMPLIANCE
The following summarizes project compliance with the applicable Climate Action Plan ordinances of the Carlsbad Municipal Code and California
Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen), current version. The following certificate shall be jnduded on the plans for all bujlding permits that
are required to comply with the CAP measures:
1. ENERGY EFFICIENCY APPLICABLE: □YES [i) NO
Complies with CMC 18.30.060
or 18.21.050 0Yes ON/A
Existing Structure, year built: ------.,
Prepared Energy Audit? Des 0No
Energy Score: _____ _
Efficiency Measures included in scope:
2. PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEM APPLICABLE: □YES II] NO
Complies with CMC section 18.30.040 and 2022 California Energy
Code section 150.l(c)14 0 Yes D IA
Size of PV system (kWdc):
Sizing PV by load calculations D Yes 0No
If by Load Calculations:
Total calculated electrical load:
80% of load:
Exception Requested
Exception Approved
0Yes~ D Yes 0No
3. ALTERNATIVE WATER HEATING SYSTEM APPLICABLE: □ YES Ii] NO
4.
s.
Complies with CMC sections 18.30.020
18.20.030 and/or 18.30.050?
Alternative Source:
o Electric
o Passive Solar
Exception Requested
Exception Approved
OYes
□Yes
ELECTRIC VEHICLE (EV) CHARGING APPLICABLE: DYes
Complies
section
with CMC
18.21.030?
Panel Upgrade?
Total EV Parking Spaces:
No. of EV Capable Spaces:
No. of EV Ready Spaces:
No. of EV Installed Spaces:
Hardship Requested
Hardship Approved
D Yes ON/A D Yes 0No
Requjred Provided
----Oes
oves
TRAFFIC DEMAND MANAGEMENT APPLICABLE:
Compliant?
TOM Report on file with city?
( City of
Carlsbad
STORM WATER STANDARDS
QUESTIONNAIRE
E-34
Development Services
Land Development Engineering
1635 Faraday Avenue
442-339-2750
www.carlsbadca.gov
I INSTRUCTIONS:
To address post-development pollutants that may be generated from development projects, the city requires that new
development and significant redevelopment priority projects incorporate Permanent Storm Water Best Management
Practices (BMPs) into the project design per Carlsbad BMP Design Manual (BMP Manual). To view the BMP Manual, refer
to the Engineering Standards (Volume 5).
This questionnaire must be completed by the applicant in advance of submitting for a development application (subdivision,
discretionary permits and/or construction permits). The results of the questionnaire determine the level of storm water
standards that must be applied to a proposed development or redevelopment project. Depending on the outcome, your
project will either be subject to 'STANDARD PROJECT' requirements, "PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP)
requirements or not considered a development project. This questionnaire will also determine if the project is subject to
TRASH CAPTURE REQUIREMENTS.
Your responses to the questionnaire represent an initial assessment of the proposed project conditions and impacts. City
staff has responsibility for making the final assessment after submission of the development application. If staff determines
that the questionnaire was incorrectly filled out and is subject to more stringent storm water standards than initially assessed
by you, this will result in the return of the development application as incomplete. In this case, please make the changes to
the questionnaire and resubmit to the city.
If you are unsure about the meaning of a question or need help in determining how to respond to one or more of the
questions, please seek assistance from Land Development Engineering staff.
A completed and signed questionnaire must be submitted with each development project application. Only one completed
and signed questionnaire is required when multiple development applications for the same project are submitted
concurrentlv
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT NAME: Dinosaur Valley APN:
ADDRESS: 1 Legoland Drive, Carlsbad CA 92008 211 -1 00-09, 11
The project is (check one): D New Development IE! Redevelopment
The total proposed disturbed area is: 13,374 ft2 ( 0.307 ) acres
The total proposed newly created and/or replaced impervious area is: 9.471 ft2 ( 0.217 ) acres
If your project is covered by an approved SWQMP as part of a larger development project, provide the project ID and the
SWQMP # of the larger development project:
Project ID SDP15-26 SWQMP #: CDP15-50
Then, go to Step 1 and follow the instructions. When completed, sign the form at the end and submit this with your
application to the city.
IS ox or IV se n1v Th ' B fi c ·t U O I
YES NO Date: Project ID:
City Concurrence:
□ □ By:
E-34 Page 1 of 4 REV 04/23
Building Permit Finaled
Revision Permit
Print Date: 06/21/2024
Job Address: 1 LEGOLAND DR, CARLSBAD, CA 92008-4610
Permit No:
Status:
{'city of
Carlsbad
PREV2024-0027
Closed -Finaled
Permit Type: BLDG-Permit Revision
2111000900
Work Class: Commercial Permit Revision
Parcel#:
Valuation:
Occupancy Group:
#of Dwelling Units:
Bedrooms:
Bathrooms:
Occupant Load:
Code Edition:
Sprinkled:
Project Title:
$0.00
Track#:
Lot#:
Project#:
Plan#:
Construction Type:
Orig. Plan Check#: CBC2023-0269
Plan Check #:
Description: LEGOLAND: DINO VALLEY -REVISIONS TO STRUCTURAL FOUNDATION
Applicant:
RW APEL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS INC
RICHARD APEL
571 HYGE IA AVE, # B
ENCINITAS, CA 92024-2652
(760) 943-0760
FEE
BUILDING PLAN CHECK REVISION ADMIN FEE
THIRD PARTY REVIEW -Consultant Cost (BLDG)
Total Fees: $275.00 Total Payments To Date:
Building Division
$275.00
Applied: 02/22/2024
Issued: 04/18/2024
Finaled Close Out: 06/21/2024
Final Inspection:
INSPECTOR:
Balance Due:
AMOUNT
$35.00
$240.00
$0.00
Page 1 of 1
1635 Faraday Avenue, Ca rlsbad CA 92008-7314 I 442-339-2719 I 760-602-8560 f I www.carlsbadca.gov
( City of
Carlsbad
PLAN CHECK REVISION OR
DEFERRED SUBMITTAL
APPLICATION
B-15
Development Services
Building Division
1635 Faraday Avenue
442-339-2719
www.carlsbadca.gov
I by City Stafl!
Original Plan Check Number C BC2023-0269 L:.P..:.:la;.:.:.n.:..:R:.;,;e:;;.:v;.:.;;is:.:.:io;:.:,n.:...:.;N.:;;,u.:.:.m.:.::;b;,.:;e.:..r .1;;;;;;;;.~~~~;;;.;;:;;:~:;;;;;;;;:;;..;1
Proj ect Address 1 Legoland Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008 ____________ _
General Scope of Revision/Deferred Submittal: __ R_e_v,_·s_io_n_s_to_st_ru_c_t_ur_a_l _fo_u_n_d_at_io_n_d_r_a_w_ings for
"Dino Valley Portal Sign" and "Dino River Base Camp" features at LEGOLAND California.
CONTACT INFORMATION:
Name Richard Apel Phone 760-807-6564 ________ Fax~---------
Address _5_7_1_H_y_g_e_i_a_A_v_e_. ,_U_n_it_B ________ City Encinitas Z. 92024 'P -----
Email Address richard.apel@rwapel.com
Original plans prepared by an architect or engineer, revisions must be signed & stamped by that
person.
1 . Elements revised: Ii] Plans Ii] Calculations D Soils D Energy D Other
Note: revisions are 2. 3.
clouded delta 5 Describe revisions in detail List page(s) where each
revision is shown
1. Revised foundation details for Dino Valley Portal Sign due to existing S-200, S-201 , S-202
underground utilities that were found at site that precluded digging
deeper foundations in original design.
2. Revised foundation details for Dino River Base Camp feature due to existing S-260, S-261 ,
underground utilities that were found at site that precluded digging S-262, S-263
deeper foundations in original design.
3. Revised structural calculations for above changes.
4. Does this revision, in any way, after the exterior of the project? Oves [Z]No
5. Does this revision add ANY new floor area(s)? Oves [{]No
6. Does this revision affect any fire related issues? Oves [Z]No
7. ls this a full set replacement (all sheets)?
£SSignature /J~ tJ ... ~
Oves [ZJ No
Date 2/22/2024
1635 Faraday Avenue. Carlsbad. CA 92008 fl:l: 760-602-2719 fax: 760-602-8558 Emau· builcti□Q@carlsbadca QOY
www.carlsbadca.gov
True North
COMPLIANCE SERVICES
March 22, 2024
City of Carlsbad
Community Development Department -Building Division
1635 Faraday Ave.
City of Carlsbad -FINAL REVIEW
City Permit No: PREV2024-0027
True North No.: 24-01 8-160
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Plan Review: Commercial Revision to Structural Foundation
Address: 1 Legoland Dr
Applicant Name: Richard Apel
Applicant Email: richard.apel@rwapel.com
The plans have been reviewed for coordination with the permit application.
Valuation: Confirmed Scope of Work: Confirmed Floor Area: Confirmed
Attn: Building & Safety Department,
True North Compliance Services, Inc. has completed the final review of the following documents for the project
referenced above on behalf of the City of Carlsbad:
1. Drawings: One (1) copy dated February 16, 2024, by Reverence Engineering.
2. Structural Calculations: One (1) copy dated March I 3, 2024, by Reverence Engineering.
The 2022 Cali fornia Building, Mechanical, Plumbing, and Electrical Codes (i.e., 202 1 IBC, UMC, UPC, and 2020
NEC, as amended by the State of California), 2022 California Green Building Standards Code, 2022 Californ ia
Existing Building Code, and 2022 California Energy Code, as applicable, were used as the basis of our review.
Please note that our review has been completed and we have no further comments, however, we bring the
following to your attention:
l. This project is Hourly. Please charge the applicant the following hours of plan review.
Review No.
1st Review
2nd/Final Review
Hours
1.5
0.5
Total
Total
We have enclosed the above noted documents bearing our review stamps for your use. Please call if you have any
questions or if we can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
True North Compliance Services
Review By: Areli Sanchez -Plan Review Engineer
True North Compliance Services, Inc.
8369 Vickers Street, Suite 207, San Diego, CA 92111
T / 562. 733.8030
REVERENCE
ENGINEERING
STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS
for
Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package
at
1 Legoland
Carlsbad, CA
Prepared for:
Align Builders
..... rro-jec-t #:_23_0_11_6_4 __ 111
DESIGN CRITERA n DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS
1 California Building Code (CBC) 2022
2 ASCE 7-16: Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures
3 ACI 318-19: Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete
4 ANSI/AISC 360-16: Specification for Structural Steel Buildings
PREV2024-0027
1 LEGOLAND DR
LEGOLAND: DINO VALLEY -REVISIONS TO STRUCTURAL
FOUNDATION
2111000900 CBC2023-0269 3/13/2024
PREV2024-0027
Page 1 of 17
::Wind:: V00 = 105 mph
Exposure: C
Date Signed: 3/6/2024
> 1--0
Project#:
2301164
Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package
1 Legoland, Carlsbad, CA
Dino Valley Portal
Page 2 of 17
REVERENCE
ENGINEERING
Project#:
2301164
Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package
1 Legoland, Carlsbad, CA
Wind Pressure Analysis
REVERENCE
E N G IN EERI N G
WIND LOADS ON OTHER STRUCTURES AND BUILDING APPURTENANCES PER CHAPTER 29
DESIGN WIND LOADS -SOLID SIGNS (SECTION 29.5)
V= 105 mph Basic Wind Speed
Exp: C Exposure Category
h= 7.0833 ft Average Height
s= 3.625 ft Vertical sign dimension
B= 20 ft Horizontal sign dimension
t= 100% Solid to Gross Area Ratio (porosity)
FoS = 0% Add'I. FoS applied to Pz
b= 19 ft 2-pole spacing ('0' for one pole or other)
Design for two poles with flexible cabinets:
s/h =
Bis=
lg =
a=
K.i =
Kz1 =
G=
0.5118 -
5.5172 -
900 ft
9.5 •
0.85
1
0.85 •
Cabinent to Overall Height Ratio
Cabinent Width to Height Ratio
Terrain Exposure Constant [Table 26.9-1]
Terrain Exposure Constant [Table 26.9-1]
Directionality Factor [Table 26.6-1]
Topographic Factor [26.8.2]
Gust Effect Factor (26.9.1]
0.2B = 4 ft Case B Offset (Used for minimum torsion in the case of a single pole)
Distribution Factor: 0.7105 -(Fraction of sign load that must be attributed to each pole, if more than one is present)
Figure 29.4-1 C1 Cases A & B
sih Aspect Ratio Bis
0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 4 5 10 20 30 45 INTERPOLATION
1.00 1.80 1.70 1.65 1.55 1.45 1.40 1.35 1.35 1.30 1.30 130 1.30 5 5.5172
0.90 1.85 1.75 1.70 1.60 1.55 1.50 1.45 1.45 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 0.7 1.55 1.55
0.70 1.90 1.85 1.75 1.70 1.65 1.60 1.60 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 0.5118 1.69
0.50 1.95 1.85 1.80 1.75 1.75 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.75 0.50 1.70 1.70
0.30 1.95 1.90 1.85 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.85 1.85 1.85 Cr= 1.6912 -
10
1.55
1.70
0.20 1.95 1.90 1.85 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.85 1.90 1.90 1.95 Force Coefficient [Figure 29.4-1]
0.16 1.95 1.90 1.85 1.85 1.80 1.80 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.90 1.90 1.95
Page 3 of 17
Project#:
2301164
Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package REV ERENCE
ENGINEERING 1 Legoland, Carlsbad, CA
Wind Load Analysis
SIGN BUILD
FORCE is PER POLE and reflects distribution oer Case B to aoolicable comoonents
#
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
H=
t.h Width Cant. CAB? h
(ft) (ft) (ft)
0 0 0.0
4.9167 2.8333 4.9
0.8333 2.4479 5.8
0.5 2.125 6.3
0.2917 17188 6,5
6.9167 1.3333 13.5
0.5 20 X 14.0
2.4583 19.667 X 16.4
0.5 20 X 16.9
0.1667 1.3333 X 17.1
17.083 ft Overall heiqht check
h = Cumulative Height to top of section
z = Centroid of Section Height
z K, q,
(ft) (psij
0 0.8489 20.365
2.4583 0.8489 20.365
5.3333 0.8489 20.365
6 0.8489 20.365
6.3958 0.8489 20.365
10 0.8489 20.365
13.708 0.8489 20.365
15.188 0.8511 20.418
16.667 0.8679 20.822
17 0.8715 20.909
P,
(psQ
29.275
29.275
29.275
29.275
29.275
29.275
29.275
29.351
29.931
30.056
K, = Velocity Pressure Exposure Coefficient
qh = Velocity Pressure (psQ
p = Design Wind Pressure (psQ
q, = 0.00256'K/K,'K,t'V2
p = qh'G'C,
SPLICE (OR SECTION) LOADS
NOTES:
Moments include an additional 10% per 29.4-1 if s/h=1.
~
(sqft)
0.0
13.9
2.0
1.1
0.5
9.2
10.0
48.3
10.0
0.2
2 Moments and Shears include either 50% split or Distribution Factor in the case of 2 poles
3 In the case of 2 poles, Torsion is zero.
Splice h Stage w h+ p ~ F, z
(ft) (ft) (ft) (psQ (sqft) (kip) (ft)
1
2
3
4
GRADE
Page4 of 17
F, M, T, M,, M,2 (kip) (k-ft) (k-ft)
0.0 0.0 0.0
0.2 0.5 0.2
0.0 0.2 0.0
0.0 0.1 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0
0.1 1.3 0.1
0.2 2.9 1.2
1.0 15.3 5.6
0.2 3.5 1.2
0.0 0.1 0.0
1.8 23.9 8.3 0.0 0.0
kio kio-ft kio-ft kio-ft kio-ft
These are intermediate values and may not match
final values used.
[Table 29.3-1 I
[Eqn 27.3-1)
[Eqn 29.4-1)
V(kip)
1.825
M(k-ft) T (k-ft)
23.941 0.000
Project#:
2301164
Lego land Dinosaur Valley Sign Package REVER ENCE
E N G IN EERI N G 1 Legoland, Carlsbad, CA
Seismic Load Analysis
SEISMIC ANALYSIS FOR NON-BUILDING STRUCTURES NOT SIMILAR TO BUILDINGS
Site Class:
s, =
S1 =
TL=
1.
h = n
w=
R=
F = • F = V
St.ts=
S1,11 =
Sos =
So1 =
x=
C,=
D -Default
1.092 of g
0.394 of g
8 sec
1.3
17.083 ft
15 psf
3
1.20 •
1.91 •
1.31 •
0.75 •
0.87 -
0.50 •
0.75 •
0.02 -
Short Period Spectral Acceleration (USGS)
1-sec Period Spectral Acceleration (USGS)
Long-Period Transition Period (USGS)
ASCE 7-16 Table 1.5-2 per 15.4.1.1
Structural height
Seismic Weight for analysis (conservative)
Response Modification Coefficient for:
Signs and Billboards (Chapter 15)
Short-Period Site Coefficient
Long-Period Site Coefficient
Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter
Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter
Design Spectral Acceleration Parameter
Design Spectral Acceleration Parameter
Period Parameter
Period Parameter
T, = 0.17 sec Approximate Fundamental Period
T, = 0.5731 sec
SEISMIC RESPONSE COEFFICIENTS PER ASCE 7-1612.8.1.1
C, = 0.364 -Seismic Response Coefficient
C, = 1.2412. Upper limil for Ts TL
C, = 59.086 -Upper limit for T > TL
c,.use = 0.364 •
Weight Overrides
# llh Width w w w h z
(fl) (ft) (lb) (plQ (psQ (ft) (ft)
1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
2 4.9 2.8 4.9167 2.4583
3 0.8 2.4 5.75 5.3333
4 0.5 2.1 6.25 6
5 0.3 1.7 6.5417 6.3958
6 6.9 1.3 13.458 10
7 0.5 20.0 13.958 13.708
8 2.5 19.7 16.417 15.188
9 0.5 20.0 16.917 16.667
10 0.2 1.3 17.083 17
11 17.083 17.083
12 17.083 17.083
13 17.083 17.083
14 17.083 17.083
15 17.083 17.083
16 17.083 17.083
17 17.083 17.083
18 17.083 17.083
19 17.083 17.083
20 17.083 17.083
H= 17.083 fl Overall heiaht check
w
(lb)
0
208.96
30.599
15.938
7.5195
138.33
150
725.21
150
3.3333
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Site
Class
D
Site
Class
D
[Eqn 11.4-1)
[Eqn 11.4-2)
[Eqn 11.4-3)
[Eqn 11.4-4]
[Table 12.8-2)
[Table 12.8-2]
[Eqn 12.8-7)
(Eqn 12.8-2]
[Eqn 12.8-3]
[Eqn 12.8-4]
F, M,
(kip) (k-ft)
0 0
0.0761 0.187
0.0111 0.0594
0.0058 0.0348
0.0027 0.0175
0.0504 0.5035
0.0546 0.7485
0.264 4.0091
0.0546 0.91
0.0012 0.0206
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Page 5 of 17
REF: ASCE CHAPTER 15
Table 11.4-1: Short-Period Site Coefficient, F, (excerpt)
Short Period Spectral Acceleration, S,
0.25 I o.5 I 0.75 I 1.0 I 1.25 T 1.5 1.00 1.25
1.6 I 1.4 I 1.2 I 1.1 I 1.0 I 1.0 1.10 1.00
Table 11.4-2: Long-Period Site Coefficient, F, (excerpt)
0.1
2.4
1-Sec Period Spectral Acceleration, S1
I
I
0.2 I 0.3 I 0.4 I 0.5 I 0.6 0.30 0.40
2.2 I 2 I 1.9 I 1.8 T 1.7 2.00 1.90
Section 11.4.8 Exception:
2. Structures on Site Class D sites with S1 greater than or
equal to 0. 2, provided the value of the seismic response
coefficient Cs is determined by Eq. /12.8-2) for values of Ts
1.STs and taken as equal to 1.5 times the value computed in
accordance with either Eq. /12.8-3) for TL'<:. T > 1.STs or Eq.
/12.8-4/forT> TL.
Values for Section 11.4.8 Exceotlon (as reauired):
for Ts 1.5T, C,= 0.364 • <-Use
for 1.ST,<TSTL C,; 1.8619 •
for T > TL C,; 88.63 -
C,use = 0.364 -
1 c, use = o.364 • Seismic Response Coefficient
Seismic Load (per pole):
Base Bending Moment: 3.2 k-ft
Base Shear: 0.2602 kip
Overstrength (per pole):
Base Bending Moment:
WIND GOVERNS
0; 1.75 •
5.7 k-ft
Base Shear: 0.4554 kip
WIND GOVERNS
Post-Installed Anchors (0. 75) per 17 .2.3.4.4:
/ only when applicable)
Base Bending Moment: 7.6 k-ft
Base Shear: 0.6 kip
WIND GOVERNS
I
I
Project#:
2301164 Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package
1 Legoland, Carlsbad, CA
Pedestal Reinforcement
REVERE NCE
ENGINEERING
LONGITUDINAL REINF REQUIREMENT FOR CODE SEISMIC PROVISIONS (0.005 RATIO)
Pier Diameter (ft)
l:lar II uo no 1.b 'L 'L.b J J.b 4 b 0 tl
b U.ti'Lb U.JUtit! 'L b ti 1'L 1/ 'LJ JU 4( ti( !:11 111:!
ti U.fb U.4411:! 'L J ti ti 1'L 1ti 'L1 J'L 4/ tiJ !l'L
7 0.875 0.6013 1 3 4 6 9 12 16 24 34 47 61
8 0.7854 2 3 5 7 9 12 18 26 36 47
!:I 1. l 'Lb U.!:J!:14 'L J 4 ti 1U 1b 'Ll 'Lt! Jf
PIER ANCHOR ROD EMBEDMENT SQUARE PLATE w/ (4) ANCHORS
n t-'Ier uIameter
in Fastener spacing
Vert. Ub -U.b in
nes Ub = U.5 in
in ::;Iae 1.;Iear 1.;over
in 1 op 1.;Iear 1.;over
Vert. Hebar circle diam: 16.5 in
11.31 in
l.bl:IJ In
A.B. circle diam:
l.:iap:
1 ensue tsreaKout pIane:
Vertical add:
Jo aeg
1.!l16in
I-or Straight Hebar:
Hebar-A.1::1. lap:
l::mbed Uo washer:
1::Mt:11::U I U USI:::
I-or Hebar w/ Hooks (g) I op:
Hebar-A.1::1. lap:
t:moea t10 wasner:
t:Mtst:U I U U::it::
25.!l:l in
27.8 in
:m In
14 in
1 b.tl in
'ltl in
~b -U. Hlti sqIn
~b = 0.1% sqIn
ver. Keoar uIam.
Cone. 28-day Comp. Strength
Hebar Grade (Yield)
lightweight ModiticatIon Factor
t:poxy Moamcauon t-actor
Lover Moamcauon t-actor
LonrIrnng Moamcauon t-actor
Casbng ModIticatIon I-actor
f-------------d:-•-tfv~:~c4i.lT{s6>.-f(f.1Y _______________________ !
I ldh = max { 8'db = 12 in I ! 0 f
[ ....... ,d.= ... max{ .. ~~• '(\l1114Je'i't (25>.:./(fc')'i" ............... = .......... 24 ..... in ......... 1
............................................................................................................................
1\p"' 3.142 sqtt
= 452.4 sqIn
X 0.0U!>
2.202 sqIn
Pier Area
f-'Ier Area
Hequired Heintorcement Halio
HequIred Heintorcement Area
u:st:: 1l \min.J lt4 vert. tsars
Page 7 of 17
Project#:
2301164
Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package
1 Legoland, Carlsbad, CA
Pole Design
MEMBER SELECTION STAGE· LRFD DESIGN
SquareHSS M = 23.94 k-ft Tu=•f*'·OO k-ft cp = 0.9 Section Type: u -V = 1.83 kip L = 17.083 ft = 205 in u
Section Name z cpM. cpV. cpT,
( ) LEASTZ (in3) (k-ft) DIC Check (kip) DIC Check (k-ft) (Flexure Only) HSS5-1/2X5-1/2X3/16 7.19 24.806 0.9651 OKI 43049 0.0424 OKI 20.392
Section Name z cpM. cpV, cpl,
(X) MANUAL (in3) (k-fl) DIC Check (kip) DIC Check (k-ft) SELECTION HSS5X5X5/16 9.16 31.602 0. 7576 OK! 59.707 0.0306 OK1 26.518
Page 6 of 17
DIC
0
DIC
0
REVERENCE
ENG I NEERIN G
F = y 46 ksi
Z,.., = 6.9393 in3
Combined
Check DIC Check
OKI 0.9651 OK1
Combined
Check DIC Check
OKI 0.7576 OK'
Project#:
2301164
B=§ain H-in
s = . In
klp
kip
kip
kip-in
kip-in
kip-in
0
FEXx = /U kSI
Fn,w = 4.! kSI
(j) = 0.75 •
cpFnw = 31.5 ksi
b=ain h = in
QTY= •
Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package REVERENC E
E N GINEERING 1 Legoland, Carlsbad, CA
Weld Design
WELD GR6UP: Rectangular Tube w/ Strong Axis Stiffeners
Reel Tube Weld Pattern Width (Weak Axis)
Keet I uoe Weld 1-'attem Height (::itrong Axis)
t-lllet wela size
In Plane Force
In Plane Force
Out-of-Plane Force
Weld Group Moment
Weld Group Moment
Weld Group Torsion
Wela 1ensIIe strength
Nominal weIa strength
Strength Reduction Factor
Weld design capacity
Stiffener Weld Pattern Width (Weak Axis)
::itIttener Weld 1-'attem Height (::itrong Axis)
1 otal numoer 01 s11neners
(Assume half each side)
a= 0.1768 in Weld Throat M~~;~~el ,..,.,,-J.~J~ t-Illet weld area FEXX =
'w,x-x -14.729 Rect. Weld Moment of Inertia (Strong Axis)
l,;)(·X :;;;;: 2.5 in Extreme Fiber location (Strong Axis)
l..y-y= 14.729 in Weld Moment of Inertia
"'l·Y -2.5 in Extreme Fiber location (Weak Axis)
J= 29.458 Polar Moment of Inertia vJ -7.0711 in Radial Distance
,..,.,,-1.1\/Jl ••• Wela Area per ::itlttener
nw -2.3861 Total Weld Area (all stiffeners)
lw,x-, = 1.0936 Ill Weld Moment of Inertia (Strong Axis, 1 stiffener)
t,;)[•;(-1.5 in Extreme Fiber location (Strong Axis)
c,i.-,1. = 4 in Distance from stiffener centroid to group centroid
•w.x-x -40.365 Total Weld Moment of Inertia (all stiffeners)
•w,y-y -0.0388 Weld Moment of Inertia
"'l·Y -0.1875 in Extreme Fiber location (Weak Axis)
J= 1.1325 Ill Polar Moment of Inertia
CJ= 3.0233 in Radial Distance
nw -5.9211 Total Weld Group Area
1 W,X•X -55.094 Total Weld Group Moment of Inertia
I,; X·X -4 in Extreme Fiber location (Strong Axis)
•v,y -Weld stress due to Vy 0.5164 ksi
lv,lC = 0 ksi Weld stress due to V,
Ov.z = 0 ksi Weld stress due to P,
Ub,X·II ~ 20.858 ksi Weld force due to M,.,
Ub.y-y -0 ksi Weld force due to M1.1 •z.z -0 ksi Torsion shear stress due to M,.,
•z-z,y -0 ksi Torsion shear stress Y-component
lz.z,x = 0 ksi Torsion shear stress X-component
COMPARATIVE STRESSES ,, -0 ksi Total shear stress in X ,, = 0.5164 ksi Total shear stress in Y
o, = 20.858 ksi Total normal stress in Z
1RES = 20.864 ksi Resultant Stress D/C: 0.6624 OK
Page8of17
psi
Project#:
2301164
Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package
1 Legoland. Carlsbad, CA
Plate & Anchor Design
STEEL PLATE SQUARE POST, SQUARE PLATE UNIAXIAL BENDING
uesIgn Moment Tg,p, = Jo.\111 kip t;roup I ensIon
Plate Width M,.p1 = oJ.lloo k-In Plate Moment
tlolt toge uIstance Z= 1.ll\lt!4 .. ' Plasuc ::iecuon MoouIus
IU0e Uepth Mn= t:ill.J44 k-ln Nominal Yield Moment
t-astener spacing 'l'b -U.\I -::itrength 1<eouctIon t-actor
Plate Bending Arm lj/lVln -61.509 k-in Yield Moment Capacity
Bending Width Override
1:nectIve tlenoing WIdtn DIC: U.ll/o/ UK
F1554 ANCHOR ROD (STEEL! CHECK
T = u 18.0 kip Rod Tension N,. = 26.781 kip Nominal Tensile Capacity
V = u 0.9127 kip Rod Shear cp = 0.75 -
droc1 = 0.875 in Rod diameter cpN., = 20.085 kip
GR.: 36 Rod Grade D/C : 0.894 OK Tension Capacity Ratio
X Grout Pad? (V n x 0.80) V = .. 16.07 kip Nominal Shear Capacity
nr= 9 -Threads per inch (TPI) cp = 0.65 -
F,, = 36 ksi Yield Strength cpV,. = 8.3555
Fu1a = 58 ksi Ultimate Strength D/C : 0.1092 OK Shear Capacity Ratio
F,1a = 58 ksi Min(Fu1a, 1.91,a, 125)
A,.,N = 0.4617 in2 Effective Coss-Sectional Area D/C : 0.8545 OK Combined Capacity Ratio
Page 9 of 17
t-astener I , =
X U.t:i =
REVERENCE
E NGINEER I NG
Plate Yield
Plate thickness
11 I tasteners
18.0 klP(LRFD)
10.ll "'f'(ASOJ
Dian· Pl
L 2° 21
0175 fj
.., 05 '3 :n "' lln25 '1 ,-
0) C, C' 0 75 10
~ 0 675 G .:e! 0) a:: 1 8
• 125 7
1 25 7
1 5 6
Project#:
2301164
Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package
1 Legoland, Carlsbad, CA
REVERENCE
ENGINEERING
Spread Footing Design
SPREAD FOOTING CALCULATION FOR STEEL BASE PLATE ON CONCRETE
FOO I ING PARAME I ERS:
L = vvIatn \perp to sign race J
Lengtn \para11eI to sign race J
t-0011ng ueptn
•u -. K
ueptn or sou aoove
Memoeraeptn
t!ase Plate depth
Moment at graae •••s
's
-
-IVlu-§§K-n
ru -10
::;near at graae
AXIaI at graae ,,-
SOIL P IES
4a ~~~ST
q; = 1995 pst
INI I IAL REINFORCEMEN I:
11r---r7oars
°b -~ In !jar aIame1er
"b -U.'li:/b "' !jar area
i..;Iear i..;over
m= J.5 In
l b.!)!) K-n '-'Cl YIVO" IYI \V .V l'llu/
'I.Ui:/!:l K vc• v1vc " \V,v ''"ul
41b./ 10 V CIYIVC I \I IJ' l ,4J
"t -Ll " rooung Area
t-0011ng merua 'f -t)!).f!) "
MA I ERIAL PROPER I IES:
•c -psi 1-,;oncrete i..;omp. :,1rengm
'y -
t: :;:
Ye -
Ys -
A=
Keoar Y IeIa ::itrengtn
M00UIUS OT t:Ias11c11y
i..;oncrete ::;pecInc vveIgm
:,011 ::;pecmc vveIgnt
Lt Wt Agg t-actor
t,;UNl,;Kt: It: VULUMt: \l:iKU::i::i t-'AU UNLY)
::: bJ ••
::: L.JJJ ,-
A::iU AL I LC#/ -U + wU.tiW
w = 1.J -
A::iU Lt; #/ -.tiU + U.tiW
Mor= 19.84 k-tt
LKt-U LC #4-1.2U + W
qu,+ = 1672 psi
Ya -l i:ii:i!:l psr
I.ls,• -1JJJ psr
4s,--·H!:lH.b psr
!:jt:AKINl:i: UI\
Ut-'Llt-I: Tes
FLEXURAL CRITICAL SECTION (BOTTOM FLEXURAL REBAR)
L'= 3.146 ft t= 0.351 in t:;:
4u -660 psi A= U.1 lb In ,,: :;:
M= 19.81 Kip-TT !Vin -Li:/1 .i:/ K-ln IVln -
:;: 2J7.7 k-in <p = U.8 -<p:;:
Us -JL. /!) In ljllVln -LbL.I K·tn '+'"'n -
A= 3.21!> in U/t;: U.8U5 • U/C:
<p:;: 0.8 -A's = U.135 Ill A's=
A = s 0.148 Ill A'c = J.810 Ill X
Ac= 4.217 Ill As,req =
FLEXURAL CRITICAL SECTION (TOP FLEXURAL REBAR)
U::: 1.HU4 n "s -U.U1H '" ljllVln -
M= L.J!:l4 Kip-TT "c -U.!:lUl "' U/V
:;: 28.25 k-in t:;: 0.042 in A' = s
a = s 32.75 tn A'::: 0.U21 tn X
A= 3.275 in Mn= 34.85 k-tn As,req =
<p:;: 0.8 -<p:;: U.8 -
SHEAR CRITICAL SECTION
Assume concrete outside top and bottom layers carries no shear
Ve= 1Utl kip
<p::: 0.75 -
<pVc = 81 kip
L"= 0.417 11
4u -l!:lJH psr
q·Rl = ti40.8 lb per tt width
q· R2 = 27. 83 lb per It width
v -2.U0ti kip
IVIR -LU.Ub K·TT
UVt:K I UKN: UI\
0.318 in
U. l!:li:/ In
Lb4.J K-ln
U.9 -
LJ/ .i:i K-tn
1.UU -
U.1J5 Ill
1.JJ
0.18 Ill
Jl ,Jb K-ln
U.i:/Ul •
0.01ti Ill
1.JJ Ill
0.021 Ill
Page 10 of 17
4u,---::itiu.4 psr
Slope :;; -Ja lb/fl
Req'd Steel per ft. 0.073 m
!jar ::;pacing: lH tn
UVt:KKIUt: Y in
Available Width: in
11 !jars 4 -
t!alance l:a. l:nd: 4.5 tn
A = s U./!15 Ill
Use (4) -#4 Bars (gl 9 in O.C.
OK
Project#:
2301164 Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package
1 Legoland, Carlsbad, CA
River Ride Base Camp
Page 11 of 17
REVERENCE
ENGINEERING
Project#:
2301164
Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package
1 Legoland, Carlsbad, CA
Wind Pressure Analysis
REVERENCE
E N G IN EE RI N G
WIND LOADS ON OTHER STRUCTURES AND BUILDING APPURTENANCES PER CHAPTER 29
DESIGN WIND LOADS -SOLID SIGNS (SECTION 29.5)
V= 105 mph Basic Wind Speed s/h = 0.2246 -Cabinent to Overall Height Ratio
Exp: C Exposure Category B/s = 1.4516 • Cabinent Width to Height Ratio
h= 11 5 ft Average Height lg= 900 ft Terrain Exposure Constant [Table 26.9-1]
s= 2.5833 ft Vertical sign dimension a= 9.5 • Terrain Exposure Constant [Table 26.9-1]
B= 3.75 ft Horizontal sign dimension Kd = 0.85 Directionality Factor [Table 26.6-1]
t= 100% Solid to Gross Area Ratio (porosity) K~ = Topographic Factor [26.8.2]
FoS = 0% Add'I. FoS applied to p, G= 0.85 -Gust Effect Factor [26.9.1]
b= 20.143 ft 2-pole spacing ('0' for one pole or other)
Design for two poles with flexible cabinets:
0.2B = 0.75 ft Case B Offset (Used for minimum torsion in the case of a single pole)
Distribution Factor: 0.5372 -(Fraction of sign load lhal must be attributed to each pole, if more than one is present)
Figure 29.4-1 C1 Cases A & B
s/h Aspect Ratio Bis
0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 4 5 10 20 30 45 INTERPOLATION
1.00 1.80 1.70 1.65 1.55 1.45 1.40 1.35 1.35 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1 1.4516 2
0.90 1.85 1.75 1.70 1.60 1.55 1.50 1.45 1.45 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 0.3 1.80 1.80 1.80
0.70 1.90 1.85 1.75 1.70 1.65 1.60 1.60 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 0.2246 1.80
0.50 1.95 1.85 1.80 1.75 1.75 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.75 0.20 1.80 1.80 1.80
0.30 1.95 1.90 1.85 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.85 1.85 1.85 c,= 1.8.
0.20 1.95 1.90 1.85 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.85 1.90 1.90 1.95 Force Coefficient [Figure 29.4-1]
0.16 1.95 1.90 1.85 1.85 1.80 1.80 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.90 1.90 1.95
Page 12 of 17
Project#:
2301164
Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package REVERENCE
ENGINEERING 1 Legoland, Carlsbad, CA
Wind Load Analysis
SIGN BUILD
FORCE is PER POLE and reflects distribution oer Case B to a[ olicable components
#
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
H=
tih Width Cant. CAB? h
(ft) (ft) (ft)
3.5 2 3.5
2 4 5.5
5 14 10.5
1 1 11.5
11.5 ft Overall height check
h = Cumulative Height to top of section
z = Centroid of Section Height
K, = Velocity Pressure Exposure Coefficient
qh = Velocity Pressure (psij
p = Design Wind Pressure (psQ
SPLICE (OR SECTION) LOADS
NOTES:
z K, q, P,
(ft) (psQ (psij
1.75 0.8489 20.365 31.159
4.5 0.8489 20.365 31.159
8 0.8489 20.365 31.159
11 0.8489 20.365 31.159
q, = 0.00256'K/K, 'K,t'V2
p: qh'G'C1
Moments include an additional 10% per 29.4-1 if s/h=1 .
~
(sqft)
7.0
8.0
70.0
1.0
2 Moments and Shears include either 50% split or Distribution Factor in the case of 2 poles
3 In the case of 2 poles, Torsion is zero.
Splice h Stage w h+ p ~ F, z
(ft) (ft) (ft) (psQ (sqft) (kip) (ft)
1
2
3
4
GRADE
Page 13 of 17
F, M, T,
(kip) (k-ft) (k-ft) M,1 Mu2
0.1 0.2 0.1
0.1 0.6 0.2
1.1 8.7 6.1
0.0 0.2 0.0
1.3 9.6 6.4 0.0 0.0
kio kip.ft kip.ft kip-ft kip.ft
These are intermediate values and may not match
final values used.
[Table 29.3-1)
[Eqn 27.3-1)
[Eqn 29.4-1)
V(kip)
1.340
M(k-ft) T (k-ft)
9.647 0.000
Project#:
2301164
Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package
1 Legoland, Carlsbad, CA
Seismic Load Analysis
SEISMIC ANALYSIS FOR NON-BUILDING STRUCTURES NOT SIMILAR TO BUILDINGS
REVERENCE
ENGINEERING
REF: ASCE CHAPTER 15
Site Class: D-Default Table 11.4-1 : Short-Period Site Coefficient, F 1 (excerpt) I
s = s 1.092 of g Short Period Spectral Acceleration (USGS)
s,= 0.394 of g 1-sec Period Spectral Acceleration (USGS)
TL= 8 sec Long-Period Transition Period (USGS)
1. 1.0 ASCE 7-16 Table 1.5-2 per 15.4.1.1
hn = 11.5 ft Structural height
w= 15 psi Seismic Weight for analysis (conservative)
R= 3 Response Modification Coefficient for:
Signs and Billboards (Chapter 15)
F = • 1.20 -Short-Period Site Coefficient
F = V 1.91 -Long-Period Site Coefficient
SMs = 1.31 • Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter
SM,= 0.75 • Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter
Sos = 0.87 -Design Spectral Acceleration Parameter
So,= 0.50 -Design Spectral Acceleration Parameter
x= 0.75 -Period Parameter
c,= 0.02 -Period Parameter
Ta= 0.12 sec Approximate Fundamental Period
T, = 0.5731 sec
SEISMIC RESPONSE COEFFICIENTS PER ASCE 7-1612.8.1.1
C = s 0.2912 -Seismic Response Coefficient
C = s 1.3361 -Upper limit for T s TL
C,= 85.583 • Upper limit for T > TL
c,.use = 0.2912 -
Weight Overrides
# tih Width w w w h z
(ft) (ft) (lb) (plQ (psQ (ft) (ft)
1 3.5 2.0 3.5 1.75
2 2.0 4.0 5.5 4.5
3 5.0 14.0 10.5 8
4 1.0 1.0 11.5 11
5 11 .5 11.5
6 11.5 11.5
7 11.5 11.5
8 11,5 11.5
9 11.5 11.5
10 11.5 11.5
11 11.5 11.5
12 11.5 11.5
13 11.5 11.5
14 11.5 11.5
15 11.5 11.5
16 11.5 11.5
17 11.5 11.5
18 11.5 11.5
19 11.5 11.5
20 11.5 11.5
H= 11.5 ft Overall heiaht check
w
(lb)
105
120
1050
15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Site
Class
D
Site
Class
D
[Eqn 11.4-1]
[Eqn 11.4-2]
[Eqn 11.4-3]
[Eqn 11.4-4]
[Table 12.8-2]
[Table 12.8-2]
[Eqn 12.8-7]
[Eqn 12.8-2]
IEqn 12.8-3]
[Eqn 12.8-4]
F, M,
(kip) {k-ft)
0.0306 0.0535
0.0349 0.1572
0.3058 2.4461
0.0044 0.048
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Page 14 of 17
Short Period Spectral Acceleration, S,
0.25 I o.5 I o.75 I 1.0 I 1.25 l 1.5 1.00 1.25
1.6 I 1.4 I 1.2 I 1.1 I 1.0 I 1.0 1.10 1.00
Table 11.4-2: Long-Period Site Coefficient, Fv (excerpt)
0.1
2.4
1-Sec Period Spectral Acceleration, S1
I
I
0.2 I 0.3 I 0.4 I o.5 I 0.6 0.30 0.40
2.2 I 2 I 1.9 I 1.0 I 1.7 2.00 1.90
Section 11.4.8 Exception:
2. Structures on Site Class D sites with S1 greater than or
equal to 0.2, provided the value of the seismic response
coefficient Cs is determined by Eq. /12.8-2) for values of Ts
1.5Ts and taken as equal to 1.5 times the value computed in
accordance with either Eq. /12.8-3) for TL~ T> 1.5Ts or Eq.
(12.8-4)for T> TL.
Values for Section 11.4.8 Exception (as reauired):
for Ts 1.5T, C,= 0.2912 -<--Use
for 1.ST,<TSTL C,= 2.0042 -
for T > TL C = I 128,38 •
C,u,.= 0.2912 -
I C,.,.. = 0.2912 -Seismic Response Coefficient
Seismic Load (per pole):
Base Bending Moment: 1.4 k-ft
Base Shear: 0.1878 kip
Overstrength (per pole):
Base Bending Moment:
WINO GOVERNS
O= 1.75 -
2.4 k-ft
Base Shear: 0.3287 kip
WIND GOVERNS
Post-Installed Anchors (0.75) per 17.2.3.4.4:
/only when applicable)
Base Bending Moment: 3.2 k-ft
Base Shear: 0.4 kip
WINO GOVERNS
I
Project#:
2301164
Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package
1 Legoland, Carlsbad, CA
Pole & Reinforcement Design
MEMBER SELECTION STAGE· LRFD DESIGN
PipeA53 M = ~ k-ft T,=:~-00 k-ft <p = 0.9 Section Type: u
V = 1.34 kip L = 11.5 ft 138 in u =
Section Name z <pM" <pV, <pTn
( ) LEAST Z lin3\ (Flexure Only) 4" Std. Pipe (k-ft) DIC Check (kip) DIC Check (k-ft)
4.05 10.631 0.9075 OK1 27.972 0.0479 OK! 10.011
MANUAL Section Name z <pM, <pV, <pT"
(X) SELECTION 6" Std. Pipe (in3\ (k-ft) DIC Check (kip) DIC Check (k-ft)
10.6 27.825 0.3467 OKI 49.14 0.0273 OKI 26.193
LONGITUDINAL REINF REQUIREMENT FOR CODE SEISMIC PROVISIONS (0.005 RATIO)
Pier Diameter (ft)
tlar II YO "t> 1.b ' ,.b J :J.b 4 b ti !!
5 0.625 0.3068 2 5 8 12 17 23 30 47 67 91 118
6 0.75 0.4418 2 3 6 8 12 16 21 32 47 63 82
I U.ll/b U.tiU1:J :J 4 ti \I 1, 1ti ,4 :J4 41 ti1
ll U.tll:,4 ' :J b \I ,, 1ll ,ti :Jti 41
\I 1.1,b U.\1\14 ' J 4 ti 1U lb ,1 ,ll :JI
Page 15 of 17
DIC
0
DIC
0
REVERENCE
ENGINEERING
Fv = 35 ksi
Z...= 3.6752 in3
Combined
Check DIC Check
OKI 0.9075 OKI
Combined
Check DIC Check
OK1 0.3467 OKI
Project#:
2301164 Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package
1 Legoland, Carlsbad, CA
Base Plate Design
REVERENCE
ENGINEERING
ECCENTRIC WELD GROUP (CIRCULAR SECTION, MULTI-AXIAL)
D=~in
S=[~]n
'y -kip
'• -kip .. , -kip
M •. x = 115 77 kip-in -1.iy.y kip-in
u1z.z -kip-in
Fw= 70 ksi
Fn,w= 4:l kSI
cp = U.lo •
cpFn,w = 31.5 ksi
STEEL PLATE
~"::i~ft
d = 6 in
St,= in
rb = 5.6569 in
r = :J.:J1:lo In
arm = :l.:J444 In
btff=r-7in
b,n=~in
A307 BOLT CHECK
T,=~2 kip
V, = . kip
u""" = · in
Ai.., 0.4418 in2
1, 1.5164 ksi
r n1 43.5 ksi
+Y
Weld Pattern Diameter (smallest governing pattern)
t-illet weld size
a= 0.1768 in
nw -o.:J!IW in2
Weld Throat
t-I11et weld area FEJOC = psi
In Plane Force
In Plane Force
Out-of-Plane Force
Weld Group Momeni
Weld Group Moment
Weld Group Torsion
Weld tensile strength
Nominal weld strength
:strengtn KeouctIon t-actor
Weld design capacity
+X
•w-20.183 Weld Moment of Inertia
3.3125 in Center of Gravity
J= 40.365 '" Polar Moment of Inertia
CJ: 3.3125 in Radial Distance
•v,y -0.2481 ksi Weld stress due to v, .... ,. -Weld stress due to V, 0 ksi
Ovz = 0.5556 ksi Weld stress due to P,
Vb,l·X -19.001 ksi Weld force due to M,.,
VD.y-y -Weld force due to M,., 0 ksi
lz.z = 0 ksi Torsion shear stress due to M,.,
1z-zy -0 ksi Torsion shear stress Y-component
1z-u = 0 ksi Torsion shear stress X-component
COMPARATIVE STRESSES
'x -0 ksi Total shear stress in X
'Y -0.2481 ksi Total shear stress in Y u,-19.556 ksi Total normal stress in Z
IRES = 19.558 ksi Resultant Stress DIC: 0.6209 K
ROUND POST, SQUARE PLATE UNIAXIAL BENDING
Design Moment T grp1 = 14.471 kip Group Tension
Plate width M,_p1 = 33.926 k-in Plate Moment
Bolt Edge Distance Z= 1,2218 Ill Plastic Section Modulus
Pole diameter Mn= 43.987 k-in Nominal Yield Moment
F, =eaksl Plate Yield
t = in Plate thickness
n = -# T fasteners
Fastener spacing 4'o -0.9 • Strength Reduction Factor
Bolt Cirde Radius 4JMn-39.588 k-ln Yield Moment Capacity
Pole KadIus 1 a-,u;,111,,,1 1 u -/ .'l. "'.-,(LRfD)
Plate t:1enoing Arm DIC: U.llo/ UK XU.ti = 4,;J "'t'IASO)
Bending Width Override
Effective Bending Width
q> 0./5 • Sttenglh Reaucuon Factor
Fastener Tension Fu= 58 ksi cpT. = 14.413 kip Tensile Rupture Capacity
Fastener Shear Fn1 = 43.5 ksi DIC: 0.502 OK
Bolt diameter F., = 26.1 ksi qiv. = 8.648 kip Shear Rupture Capacity
Area of Bolt DIC: 0.0775 OI
Required Shear Stress 4'"'1 = 14.413 kip Combined Rupture Capacity
Modified Nominal Tensile Stress DIC: 0.502
Page 16 of 17
Project#:
2301164
Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package
1 Legoland, Carlsbad, CA
REVERENCE
ENGINEERING
Spread Footing Design
SPREAD FOOTING CALCULATION FOR STEEL BASE PLATE ON CONCRETE
FOO I ING PARAME I ERS: INI I IAL REINFORCEMEN I:
lfl°7oars
IYlu -sK·TI •u -. K
r u -10
SOIL P IES
4a~~~St
qa = 1995 psi
vvIom \perp 10 sign ,ace J
Len gm (para11eI to sign ,ace J
i-0011ng uepm
ueptn or sou aoove
Memoeroepm
Hase 1-'late depth
% -~ In
"b -U.jU/ '"
tsar 0Iameter
tsar area
(.;lear (.;over
Moment at graoe
:snear at graoe
"'•-lj.\1\1 K-n
's -'l.bUts K
V Oi 't'll.10 IYI \V,V IIIUJ
AxIaI at graoe ' s -lL:JU 10
"t -
't -
JU"
\IU"
i-ootmg Area
i-0011ng inerua
MA I ERIAL PROPER I IES:
'c -psi (.;oncrete (.;Omp. :strengm
'y -KSI Keoar Y IeI0 :strengm
t= KSI MOOUIUS 01 tlaSIIClty
Ye -pct (.;oncrete :specI11c vveIgnt
Ys -pct ::ion :specmc vveIgnt
A= Lt Wt Agg t-actor
(.;UN(.;Kt It VULUMt. \ \jKU:S:S t-'AU UNL Y j
= \IU ..
= j ,JJJ ,-
A~U AL I LC #I -U t WU.bW
w = 1.3 -
A~U LC #I -.bU t U.bW
Mor = 18.81 k-ft
LHt-U LC #4-1.W + W
Qu,+ = 1349 psi
4a -7\1\1:J psi
4s,+ -lUtsJ pst
4s,---:Jb4.:> pst
tst.AKIN\j'. UI\
Ut-'LII'" I: Tes
FLEXURAL CRITICAL SECTION (BOTTOM FLEXURAL REBAR)
L'= 2.771 ft t= 0.379 in t =
4u -631 psf ,,.. = U. lts\l In A·=
M= 21.3 Klp-n IVln -j'IJ.ts K-I0 !Vin -
= l5!>.b k-in <p = U.9 • (j) =
U5 -jL.b\l In '!'IYln -LtsL.4 K·IO '!'IYln -
A= 3.lb9 In U/C: U.9U5 • UIC:
<p = U.9 • A' -s -U.14b Ill A. -s-
A = s U.1b1 Ill A' = C 4.113 Ill X
Ac= 4.544 Ill As,req =
FLEXURAL CRITICAL SECTION (TOP FLEXURAL REBAR) u = U./\IL n "s -U.UlJ "' '!'lVln -
M= 'I.ILL Klp-n "c -U.jt>/ '" UI\.,'.
= lU.b7 k-in t = U.031 in A' = s
0 = s 3l.b9 In A'= U.U,5 in X
A= 3.lb9 in Mn= l5.51 k-In As,req =
(j) = U.9 • <p = U.9 -
SHEAR CRITICAL SECTION
Assume concrete outside top and bottom layers carries no shear
Ve= 18U kip
<p = 0.75 -
(j)Vc = 135 kip
L" = U.047 ft
4u -ljj/ psi
q·Rl = bl.o7 lb per ft width
q·R2 = U.l85 lb per ft width
v -U.315 kip
U/V U.UU UI\
IYIR -L:J. /4 K·TI
UVl:K I UKN: UI\
0.343 in
U.111 In
Lts4.L K·IO
U.9 •
L:J:J.ts K·IO
1.UU •
U.14b Ill
1.33
U.194 Ill
LL.\l:J K·IO
U.\I .
u.u1i '"
1.33 Ill
U.01b Ill
Page 17 of 17
4u,---LU:J. l psi
Slope = -L:>!1 lb/ft
Req'd Steel per ft. 0.044 10
tsar :spacing: lts In
UVl:KKIUI:
~
In
Available width: In
If tsars t> •
Halance ta. end: /.5 In
A -s -1.841 Ill
use (6) -#5 Bars @ 9 in o.c.
OK
Building Permit Finaled
Revision Permit
Print Date: 06/21/2024
Job Address: 1 LEGOLAND DR, CARLSBAD, CA 92008-4610
Permit No:
Status:
\Ccityof
Carlsbad
PREV2023-0295
Closed -Finaled
Permit Type: BLDG-Permit Revision Work Class: Commercial Permit Revision
Parcel #: 2111000900 Track #:
Valuation: $0.00 Lot #:
Occupancy Group: Project#:
#of Dwelling Units: Plan#:
Bedrooms:
Bathrooms:
Occupant Load:
Code Edition:
Sprinkled:
Project Title:
Construction Type:
Orig. Plan Check #: CBC2023-0269
Plan Check #:
Applied: 12/22/2023
Issued: 01/29/2024
Finaled Close Out: 06/21/2024
Final Inspection:
INSPECTOR:
Description: LEGOLAND:REVISIONS MADE TO EXTERIOR SITE, GRADING PLANS AND "GREEN TUNNEL" STRUCTURE
Applicant:
RW APEL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS INC
RICHARD APEL
571 HYGEIA AVE, # B
ENCINITAS, CA 92024-2652
(760) 943-0760
FEE
BUILDING PLAN CHECK REVISION ADMIN FEE
THIRD PARTY REVIEW -Consultant Cost (BLDG)
Total Fees: $395.00 Total Payments To Date:
Building Division
$395.00
Contractor:
ALIGN BUILDERS INC
5451 AVENI DA ENCINAS, #STEA
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-4413
(858) 800-2531
Balance Due:
AMOUNT
$35.00
$360.00
$0.00
Page 1 of 1
1635 Faraday Avenue, Ca rlsbad CA 92008-7314 I 442-339-2719 I 760-602-8560 f I www.carlsbadca.gov
( City of PLAN CHECK REVISION OR Deve/op_ment Services
DEFERRED SUBMITTAL Building Division
Carlsbad APPLICATION 1635 Faraday Avenue
442-339-2719
B-15 www.carlsbadca.gov
. . CBC2023-0269 (byCityStaftj
Plan Revision Number P J2.£ \/2()23-0.Z q _c; Orrgrnal Plan Check Number
Project Address 1 Legoland Drive , Carlsbad, CA 92008
G IS f R --,,0 f d 5 b ·tt I Revisions to "Green Tunnel" steel arbor structure, enera cope o ev1s1on, e erre u m1 a : ___________________ _
revisions to exterior site pavement, retaining walls, curbs and precise grading plan.
CONTACT INFORMATION:
Name Richard Apel Phone 760-807-6564 ________ Fax,__ ________ _
Address _5_7_1_H_yg_e_i_a_A_v_e_._, _U_n_it_B ________ City Encinitas Z. 92024 'P -----
Email Address richard.apel@rwapel.com
Original plans prepared by an architect or engineer, revisions must be signed & stamped by that
person.
1. Elements revised: Ii] Plans Ii] Calculations D Soils D Energy D Other
Note: revisions are 2. 3.
clouded delta 4 Describe revisions in detail List page(s) where each
revision is shown
1. Revised grading plan: deleted curbs, retaining wall TW, BW, TF elevations, ride track elevs. C-100, C-101 , C-102
2. Deleted stairs, deleted portion of "high" curbs at ride track, added segmental L-1 09, L-110, L-111 , L-112
gravity retaining wall <4' height (at green tunnel). L-203, L-204, L-206, L-207
3. Added alternative spread footing detail at "green tunnel" steel arbor at locations S-250, S-254
where underground utilities were found precluding deep pier foundation.
4. Revised green tunnel from arched shaped top to flat top. L-206, S-251, S-252
5. Revised pier foundation detail--top of pier to be above grade. S-253
4. Does this revision, in any way, alter the exterior of the project? 0Yes 0No
5. Does this revision add ANY new floor area(s)? 0Yes 0No
6. Does this revision affect any fire related issues? Oves 0No
7. Is this a full set replacement (all sheets)? 0Yes 0No
.-@'.S'Signature--#~ tJ~ ~-----Date 12/21 /2023
1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008 Ph: 760-602-27 l 9 ~: 760-602-8558 Email: building@carlsbadca.gov
www.carlsbadca.gov
REVERENCE
ENGINEERING
STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS
for
Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package
at
1 Legoland
Carlsbad, CA
Prepared for:
Align Builders
Package l ype:
Construction Change 1
DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS
1 California Building Code (CBC} 2022
2 ASCE 7-16: Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures
3 ACI 318-19: Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete
4 ANSI/AISC 360-16: Specification for Structural Steel Buildings
PREV2023-0295
1 LEGOLAND DR
LEGOLAND:REVISIONS MADE TO EXTERIOR SITE,
GRADING PLANS AND "GREEN TUNNEL" STRUCTURE
2111000900
CBC2023-0269 12/22/2023
PREV2023-0295
1 of 16
roject # 2301164
DESIGN CRITERA
::Wind:: V,., = 105 mph
Exposure: C
::Seismic Design Parameters::
Site Class: D -Default
s, = 1.092 g
s, = 0.394 g
TL= 8 sec
SOC: D
Date Signed: 12/12/2023
Project#:
2301164
Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package
1 Legoland, Carlsbad, CA
Dino Trail Tunnel
2 of 16
REVERENCE
ENGINEERI N G
Project#:
2301164
Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package
1 Legoland, Carlsbad, CA
Wind Pressure Analysis
Enclosed and Partially Enclosed
v::~mph
h::~tt
t:1asIc Wind :;peed
Mean Hoot Height
"zt -1.U 1 opographIc t-actor
I\,:: 0.85 • Wind Directionality Factor
a:: \l.o • I errain t:xposure Gonstant
Lg -\JUU It 1 errain 1:xposure Gonstant
''h -U.ll4\l • Velocity 1-'ressure coettIcIent
c=JClear t-lOW
~Obstructed t-lOW
[Ll:i.!l.L per£ r .J.LJ
[Table 26-6.1 per 26.6 per 27 .3.2]
[26.9]
I I able Lti.\l.1 per I able :u .J-1 J
I I aole Lti.\l.1 per I able :.u .J· 1 J
I I able U .J· 1 per LI .J.LJ
REVERENCE
ENGINEERING
::iurtace Koughness: ~
t:xposure Gategory:
KISk Gategory:
t:!Ulldlng I ype:
qh: 20.37 psf Velocity Pressure [Eqn 27.3-1] q, = U.UUloti"l\,"Kh"Kzt"V"
Wind Direction 1
<.; = U.llo • <.;ust t:ttect t-actor
Rise:~ft
Kun (L): . ft
::;Iope: ttm
Angle: U deg
L=~ft h = 10.75 ft
ts= ft
WINDWARD WALL LEEWARD WALL ROOF
UB = 0.575 • UB= 0.575 • h/L = 0.9348 •
l,; =~Wllhq t;P =~with qh p . z
0 to h/2 -1.3 -0.18
-0.7 -0.18
p= 17.514 P = -4.9894 p= 0.5499
10.183 -12.321 -6.7816
3 of 16
Project#: Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package REVERENCE
2301164 1 Le~oland, Carlsbad, CA EN GINEE RI N G
I Foundation & Pole Design
ENEVELOPE JOINT REACTIONS PER RISA
Joint Column1 X LCx y LCy z LCz Mx
N34 max /.977 4 66/.09 5 Sol.I 9 2209.4
N34 min -13.006 13 377 12 33.891 3 124.81
N35 max -4.05 3 362.69 1 408.12 12 1826.4
N35 min -58.809 8 -128.37 13 -45.099 2 -163.58
N69 max 19.138 8 1231.1 5 712.03 9 2724.2
N69 min 3.438 3 687.88 12 30.869 3 121.27
N70 max 9.981 12 1061.4 5 688.77 12 2477.4
N70 min -4.405 2 395.79 12 -42.064 2 -160.58
N104 max 20.188 8 730.87 5 515.71 9 2246.3
N104 min 3.434 3 412.01 12 33.862 3 124.75
N105 max 8 12 603.58 1 563.95 12 2224.5
N105 min -4.512 2 89.507 13 -44.124 2 -163.58
CAST-IN-PLACE PIER DESIGN • *SOILS REPORT*
Fooling diameter·
Moment at grade M, = 1.6345 k-ft
Shear at grade v, = 0.4272 k
Lateral Bearing per Soils Report
X Increase 1/3 for Wind & Seismic (x)
LIM= 5000 psf
Double Bearing Capacity for Soil Arching
Lateral Bearing Limit per Soils Report
(if blank, defaults limits per IBC 1807.3.2.1)
ITERATION PER IBC 1807.3.2.1
h = 3.83 ft S1 = 428.29 psf
d = 3.4416 ft A= 1.5561 ft
LCmx My
9 1.4!!4
3 -19.041
13 1.58
2 -44.464
9 -0.332
3 -18.995
12 -0.451
2 -24.045
9 3.665
3 -12.525
12 0.42
2 -14.803
!:i-erv1ce M (U.ti"Mu)
!:i-erv1ce V (0.ti"V u)
LCmy Mz LCmz
2 14.H/<! 13
12 -55.635 8
2 177.51 8
12 10.935 3
3 -14.655 3
8 -100.37 8
3 20.223 4
8 -25.53 13
13 -14.586 3
8 -101 .7 8
13 21 .609 4
8 -22.984 13
p-multiplier: 0.8 •
P = 427.22 lb
"max -20. 188 lb
"min --58.809 lb
I max -1231.1 lb
lnw,--128.37 lb
'-ma, -712.03 lb
L.,,,,, = -45.099 lb
,v,,.,,,., -2724.2 lb-ft
'"'"'" --163.58 lb-ft
'"'Ymai -3.665 lb-ft
Mymin = -44.464 lb-ft
IYILm,11 -177.51 lb-ft
IVILffil:fl --101 .7 lb-ft
Lateral Wind Force
s' = 373 psf/ft Allowable Lateral Bearing Pressure wl Increases
LIM'= 6667 psi Lateral Bearing Limit w/ Increases
DESIGN RESULTS
MIN. PIER DEPTH: 3 ft and 6 In
MIN. PIER DIAMETER': 1 ft and 6 in
'Also refers to diagonal of a square or rectangle
Ratio
2.333333333
NOTE: Pier Depth must be increased by 1 foot to account for neglected depth at surface per soils report.
4 of 16
I
Project#:
2301164
Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package
1 Legoland, Carlsbad, CA
Foundation & Pole Design
REVERENCE
ENGINEERING
LONGITUDINAL REINF REQUIREMENT FOR CODE SEISMIC PROVISIONS (0.005 RATIO)
Pier Diameter (ft)
Bar# Ub "b 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 5 6 7 8
5 0.625 0.3068 2 5 8 12 17 23 30 47 67 91 118
6 0.75 0.4418 2 3 6 8 12 16 21 32 47 63 82
7 0.875 0.6013 3 4 6 9 12 16 24 34 47 61
8 0.7854 2 3 5 7 9 12 18 26 36 47
9 1.125 0.994 2 3 4 6 7 10 15 21 28 37
PIER ANCHOR ROD EMBEDMENT SQUARE PLATE w/ (4) ANCHORS
U=
'-''-'top·
n t-'Ier uIameter
in Fastener spacing
Vert. db= 0.5 in
Ties db= 0.5 in
in ::iIde L;iear L;over
in I op L;lear L;over
Vert. Rebar circle diam: 10.5 in
A.B. circle diam: 11.31 in
Gap: -U.4U/ in
Tensile Breakout plane: 35 deg
Vertical add: -0.285 in
For Straight Rebar:
Keoar-A.l::l. lap:
Embed Vo washer:
EMBED TO USE:
For Rebar w/ Hooks @ Top:
Rebar-A.B. lap:
Embed Vo washer:
EMBED TO USE:
Z~./Z In
25.7 in
30 in
14 in
13.7 in
18 in
= HI In
At,= 0.196 sqin
At,= 0.196 sqin
U.o in
psi
ksi
Ver. Keoar uIam.
Cone. 28-day Comp. Strength
Rebar Grade (Yield)
Lightweight Modification Factor
t:poxy ModI1IcatIon I-actor
L;over ModItIcat10n I-actor
L;on11nIng ModItIcat10n I-actor
Casting Modification Factor
------------------------------· ,,--------------------------· ! db• ( fyllJelllclllr) / ( 50Av(fc')) ! ldh = max { 8.db = 12 in
: 6
I\, = 1. 767 sqft
= 254.5 sqin
X 0.005
1.272 sqin
Pier Area
Pier Area
Required Reinforcement Ratio
Required Reinforcement Area
USE: 7 (min.) #4 Vert. Bars
5 of 16
= 24 in
Project#:
2301164
Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package
1 Legoland, Carlsbad, CA
Base Plate Design
RE VERENCE
ENGINEERI N G
ECCENTRIC WELD GROUP (RECTANGULAR SECTION, MULTI-AXIAL)
Weld Pattern Width
H = in Weld Pattern Height (Strong Axis)
Fillet weld size
a= 0.2209 in
,.._ -2.6513 in2
Weld Throat
Fillet weld area FEJOc = psi B=~in
s = . in
kip
kip
kip
kip-in
kip-in
kip-in
In Plane Force
In Plane Force
Out-of-Plane Force
Weld Group Moment {tJJ 3.9769
c,,., = 1.5 in
1w,y-y = 3.9769 In
..,., -1.5 in
Weld Moment of Inertia
Center of Gravity
Weld Moment of Inertia
Center of Gravity
FEXX =
Fn,w =
q> =
ipFn,w =
70 ksi
42 ksi
0.75 •
31.5 ksi
+Y
Weld Group Moment
Weld Group Torsion
Weld tensile strength
Nominal weld strength
Strength Reduction Factor
Weld design capacity
+X
STEEL PLATE SQUARE POST, SQUARE PLATE
M,1 = 2.724 Design Moment Tg,p1 =
b= 8 in Plate width M,,p1 =
edge= 1.25 in Bolt Edge Distance Z=
d= 3 in Tube Depth M = n
s.= 5.5 in Fastener spacing q>b:
arm= 1.25 in Plate Bending Arm q>Mn =
ben =c:Jin
bett = 5 in
Bending Width Override
Effective Bending Width D/C:
F1554 ANCHOR ROD STEEL CHECK
T, = 3.0 kip Rod Tension N = ..
V, = 0 kip Rod Shear q> =
d,oo = 0.625 in Rod diameter q>N,. =
GR: 36 Rod Grade D/C :
X Grout Pad? (Vn x 0.80) V = ..
nr= 11 • Threads per inch (TPI) q> =
F,. = 36 ksi Yield Strength q>V,. =
F,1a = 58 ksi Ultimate Strength D/C:
Fu1a = 58 ksi Min(F,.., 1.9fya, 125)
A,.,N: 0.226 in2 Effective Coss-Sectional Area DIC:
J = 7.9538
4.2426 in
1-..y -
1z.z,y-
1z-Z,K -
0.2686 ksi
0 ksi
0.6035 ksi
12.33 ksi
0 ksi
0 ksi
0 ksi
0 ksi
Polar Moment of Inertia
Radial Distance
Weld stress due to v,
Weld stress due to V,
Weld stress due to P,
Weld force due to M,.,
Weld force due to M,.,
Torsion shear stress due to M,.,
Torsion shear stress Y-component
Torsion shear stress X-component
COMPARATIVE STRESSES ,,-0 ksi
T = y 0.2686 ksi
CJ = z 12.934 ksi
1RES -12.937 ksi
Total shear stress in X
Total shear stress in Y
Total normal stress in Z
Resultant Stress D/C: 0.4107 OK
UNIAXIAL BENDING
5.9438 kip Group Tension
7.4297 k-in Plate Moment
0.7031 in• Plastic Section Modulus
25.313 k-in Nominal Yield Moment
09-Strength Reduction Factor
22.781 k-in Yield Moment Capacity
0.3261 OK
13.108 kip Nominal Tensile Capacity
0.75 •
9.8311 kip
0.3023 OK Tension Capacity Ratio
7.86 kip Nominal Shear Capacity
0.65 •
4.0897
0 OK Shear Capacity Ratio
0.1362 OK Combined Capacity Ratio
6 of 16
F =~ksi ~ = 0.75 in
n = 2 •
t-astener 1, =
X 0.6 =
Plate Yield
Plate thickness
# T fasteners
3.0 KIP(LRFO)
1.8 KIP(ASO)
Diam TPI
025 20
0 J75 16
.l!! 0.5 13 .n "' ... a 625 11
~ 0 75 10 C & 0 875 3 J!! Q) 0:. 8
• 125 7
125
15 6
Project#:
2301164
Legoland Dinosaur Valley Sign Package
1 Legoland, Carlsbad, CA
REVERENCE
ENGINEERING
Alt. Footing Design
SPREAD FOOTING CALCULATION FOR STEEL BASE PLATE ON CONCRETE
Fuu I ING PAKAME I ERS: INI I IA[ REINFORCEMEN I:
L = n Width (perp to sign lace J
I:! = n Length (parallel to sign lace)
LOAD TERS:
t-ootIng uepth
Uepth 01 SOIi above
Member depth
Base Plate depth
:u :9:-n :~:~:\ ~:~~:de
r-~ = • lb AX1a1 at grade
SOIL P • IES
qa =rrumrlpsl
xL......or,rr-
qa· = 1330 psf
IVl5 -
v, -
r , -
#~bars
% =~ In
Ab= u.,~o 111
CC=~tn
m= 2.5 in
l:!ar diameter
l:!ar area
Clear cover
1.oJb K-n \JelVl\...t: IVI \V.U IVluJ
U.4,U k
44/.~ lb
VCIVl\,,,t: V \V.V IVlu}
.;,t,1 v11.,t: r 1r u' l.t./
t-oottng Area
t-ootlng Inertia
MA I ERIAL PROPER I IES:
psi concrete comp. ~trength
Kebar Yield ~trength
Modulus ot t1ast1c1ty
Concrete ~pec111c weight
~Oil ~pec111c Weight
Lt Wt Agg Factor
CUNCKt It VULUMt (l,;KU~~ t-'AU UNL Y)
=
= U.JJJ ,,,
ASD ALT LC #7 -D + w0.6W
w = 1.3 •
ASD LC #7 -.6D + 0.6W
Mor = 2.062 k-ft
LRFD LC #4 -1.2D + W
Qu,+ = 914.1 psf
qa =
qs,+ =
qs,-=
1JJU psi
/:l~.b psi l:!tAKINt;: UK
·Jb~.~ psi Ut-'Llt-1: Yes
IV1R = :l.U!:14 k-n
UVtKIUKN:UK
FLEXURAL CRITICAL SECTION (BOTTOM FLEXURAL REBAR)
L'= 1.271 ft t= 0.12in
4u = 401 psf A'= U.Uti m
M = 1.8 kip-ft Mn = 26.49 k-in
= 21 .6 k-in <p = 0.9 -
Us= ti.lb m (IJIVln = :l:.l.1:14 k-ln
II= 0.875 in D/C: 0.906 •
<p = U.~. As= U.U4ti Ill
A = s 0.051 tn A' -c -1.3 In
Ac= 1.434 In
FLEXURAL CRITICAL SECTION (TOP FLEXURAL REBAR)
U = 0.735 ft As = 0.013 1n
M = 0.458 kip-ft Ac = 0.365 1n
= 5.491 k-in t = 0.03 in
d5 = 8.75 in II'= 0.Q15 in
II= 0.875 in M0 = 6.767 k-in
<p = 0.9 -<p = 0.9 -
SHEAR CRITICAL SECTION
t = 0.108 in
A'= U.UM In
M = n 24.02 k-in
0.9 -
(IJIVln = :l1.o:l k-tn
0/C: 1.00 -
As= U.U4o Ill
X 1.33
As,req = 0.061 tn
<pM0 = 6.09 k-in
D/C: 0.902 •
A's = 0.012 tn
X 1.33 In
A,,req = 0.Q15 tn
Assume concrete outside top and bottom layers carries no shear
Ve= 21.6kip
<p = 0.75 -
<pVc = 16.2 kip
L" = 0.542 ft
qu'= 695.5 psf
q'Rl =
q'R2 =
V=
D/C:
376.7 lb per ft width
59.21 lb per ft width
1.308 kip
0.08 OK
7 of 16
4u,-= -:l~o. I psi
slope = -4U4 lb/ft
Req'd Steel per ft.
l:!ar ~pacing:
OVERRIDE
Available width:
# l:!ars
Balance Ea. End:
0.025 in~
Hl m
l7in
~in
£ -
9 in
Use (2) • #4 Bars @ 18 in O.C.
UK
IIIRISA 1------------i
SK-6
Dec 12, 2023 at 08:43 AM
2301164.r3d
8 of 16
IIIRISA 1---------i
SK-7
Dec 12, 2023 at 08:43 AM
2301164.r3d
9 of 16
Loads: BLC 2, DEAD (IMP)
IIIRISA 1-----------t
SK-1
Dec 12, 2023 at 08:41 AM
2301164.r3d
10 of 16
Loads: BLC 3, WIND 1
IIIRISA f---------,
SK-2
Dec 12, 2023 at 08:42 AM
2301164.r3d
11 of 16
Loads: BLC 4, WIND 2
IIIRISA 1-----------1
SK-3
Dec 12, 2023 at 08:42 AM
2301164.r3d
12 of 16
Loads: BLC 5, LIVE ROOF
IIIRISA 1---------1
SK-5
Dec 12, 2023 at 08:42 AM
2301164.r3d
13 of 16
IIIRISA
Company
Designer
Job Number
Model Name:
Hot Rolled Steel Properties
Label E fksil G fksil
1 A992 29000 11154
2 A36 Gr.36 29000 11154
3 A572 Gr.50 29000 11154
4 A500 Gr.B RND 29000 11154
5 A500 Gr.B Rect 29000 11154
6 A53 Gr.B 29000 11154
7 A1085 29000 11154
8 A913 Gr.65 29000 11154
Hot Rolled Steel Section Sets
Label Shaoe Tvoe
1 Main Frame HSS3X3X2 Beam
2 Purlin HSS1X1X2 Beam
3 Beam HSS3X3X2 Beam
4 Horizontal HSS1X1X2 Beam
Basic Load Cases
BLC Descriotion
1 DEAD
2 DEAD /IMP\
3 WIND 1
4 WIND2
5 LIVE ROOF
6 SNOW
7 BLC 2 Transient Area Loads
8 BLC 3 Transient Area Loads
9 BLC 4 Transient Area Loads
10 BLC 5 Transient Area Loads
Load Combinations
Nu
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
Therm Coeff I1e5°F-1l Density lk/ft3l Yield lksil Rv
0.65 0.49 50 1.1
0.65 0.49 36 1.5
0.65 0.49 50 1.1
0.65 0.527 42 1.4
0.65 0.527 46 1.4
0.65 0.49 35 1.6
0.65 0.49 50 1.25
0.65 0.49 65 1.1
12/12/2023
8:46:16 AM
Checked By :
Fu [ksi] Rt
65 1.1
58 1.2
65 1.1
58 1.3
58 1.3
60 1.2
65 1.15
80 1.1
Desian List Material Desiqn Rule Area lin21 lvv lin•l lzz fin•] J fin•]
Tube A500 Gr.B Rect Tvnical 1.3 1.78 1.78 2.84
Tube A500 Gr.B Rect Tvnical 0.438 0.057 0.057 0.084
Tube A500 Gr.B Rect Tvnical 1.3 1.78 1.78 2.84
Tube A500 Gr.B Rect Tvnical 0.438 0.057 0.057 0.084
Cateaorv Y Gravitv Distributed Area(Member)
None -1
None 16
None 16
None 16
None 12
None
None 118
None 118
None 118
None 48
Descriotion Solve P-Delta BLC Factor BLC Factor BLC Factor BLC Factor
1 LRFD #1: 1.4D
2 LRFD #2a: 1.2D+0.5Lr
3 LRFD #2b: 1.2D+0.5S
4 LRFD #3a: 1.2D+1 .6Lr+0.5W
5 LRFD #3a: 1.2D+1.6Lr+0.5W
6 LRFD #3b: 1.2D+1 .6S+0.5W
7 LRFD #3b: 1.2D+1 .6S+0.5W
8 LRFD #4a: 1.2D+1.0W+0.5Lr
9 LRFD #4a: 1.2D+1.0W+0.5Lr
10 LRFD #4b: 1.2D+1 .0W+0.5S
11 LRFD #4b: 1.2D+1.0W+0.5S
12 LRFD #5: 0.9D+1 .0W
13 LRFD #5: 0.9D+1.0W
Load Combination Design
Descri tion
LRFD #1 : 1.4D
2 LRFD #2a: 1.2D+0.5Lr
RISA-3O Version 21
Yes y 1 1.4
Yes y 1 1.2
Yes y 1 1.2
Yes y 1 1.2
Yes y 1 1.2
Yes y 1 1.2
Yes y 1 1.2
Yes y 1 1.2
Yes y 1 1.2
Yes y 1 1.2
Yes y 1 1.2
Yes y 1 0.9
Yes y 1 0.9
Service Hot Rolled Cold Formed Wood
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
I 2301164.r3d J
14 of 16
2 1.4
2 1.2 5 0.5
2 1.2 6 0.5
2 1.2 5 1.6 3 0.5
2 1.2 5 1.6 4 0.5
2 1.2 6 1.6 3 0.5
2 1.2 6 1.6 4 0.5
2 1.2 3 1 5 0.5
2 1.2 4 1 5 0.5
2 1.2 3 1 6 0.5
2 1.2 4 1 6 0.5
2 0.9 3 1
2 0.9 4 1
Concrete Mason Aluminum Stainless Connection
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Page 1
IIIRISA
Company
Designer
Job Number
Model Name :
Load Combination Design (Continued)
12/12/2023
8:46:16 AM
Checked By :
Descriotion Service Hot Rolled Cold Formed Wood Concrete Masonrv Aluminum Stainless Connection
3 LRFD #2b: 1.2D+0.5S Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
4 LRFD #3a: 1.2D+1 .6Lr+0.5W Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
5 LRFD #3a: 1.2D+1.6Lr+0.5W Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
6 LRFD #3b: 1.2D+1.6S+0.5W Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
7 LRFD #3b: 1.2D+1.6S+0.5W Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
8 LRFD #4a: 1.2D+1 .0W+0.5Lr Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
9 LRFD #4a: 1.2D+1 .0W+0.5Lr Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
10 LRFD #4b: 1.2D+1.0W+0.5S Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
11 LRFD #4b: 1.2D+1 .0W+0.5S Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
12 LRFD #5: 0.90+1.0W Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
13 LRFD #5: 0.90+1.0W Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Envelope Node Reactions
o e a e N d L b I X llbl LC y [lb] LC Z flbl ---LC MX [lb ftl LC MY fib ftl LC MZ [lb ftl LC
1 N34 max 7.977 4 667.093 5 507.703 9 2209.417 9 1.484 2 14.872 13
2 min -13.006 13 376.999 12 33.891 3 124.806 3 -19.041 12 -55.635 8
3 N35 max -4.05 3 362.691 1 408.115 12 1826.351 13 1.58 2 177.513 8
4 min -58.809 8 -128.365 13 -45.099 2 -163.576 2 -44.464 12 10.935 3
5 N69 max 19.138 8 1231.051 5 712.032 9 2724.237 9 -0.332 3 -14.655 3
6 min 3.438 3 687.877 12 30.869 3 121.268 3 -18.995 8 -100.365 8
7 N70 max 9.981 12 1061.43 5 688.774 12 2477.375 12 -0.451 3 20.223 4
8 min -4.405 2 395.792 12 -42.064 2 -160.581 2 -24.045 8 -25.53 13
9 N104 max 20.188 8 730.867 5 515.708 9 2246.325 9 3.665 13 -14.586 3
10 min 3.434 3 412.01 12 33.862 3 124.753 3 -12.525 8 -101 .699 8
11 N105 max 8 12 603.577 1 563.947 12 2224.467 12 0.42 13 21.609 4
12 min -4.512 2 89.507 13 -44.124 2 -163.582 2 -14.803 8 -22.984 13
13 Totals: max 0.018 12 4440.62' 4 3036.345 13
14 min -0.01 9 1925.38! 13 0.011 3
Envelope A/SC 15TH (360-16): LRFD Member Steel Code Checks
Member Shape Code Check Loc[inl LCShear Check Loc[inl DirLCohi*Pnc [lb ohi*Pnt [lb ohi*Mn Y-Y fib-ft
1 M9 HSS3X3X2 0.407 126 12
2 M10 HSS3X3X2 0.47 126 9
3 M35 HSS3X3X, 0.522 126 1(
4 M36 HSS3X3X2 0.597 126 9
5 M61 HSS3X3X, 0.465 126 1,
6 M62 HSS3X3X2 0.491 126 9
7 M108 HSS3X3X2 0.155 49.477 9
8 M109 HSS3X3X2 0.09 0 9
9 M111 HSS3X3X, 0.065 92.779 11
10 M114 HSS1X1X2 0.122 24.739 8
11 M129 HSS1X1 X2 0.314 46.39 9
12 M131 HSS1X1X2 0.209 24.739 8
13 M133 HSS1X1X2 0.21 24.739 8
14 M135 HSS1X1X2 0.205 24.739 8
15 M137 HSS1X1X2 0.06 24.739 10
16 M140 HSS1X1X2 0.641 48 9
17 M141 HSS1X1X~ 0.598 46.39 9
18 M144 HSS1X1X2 0.644 47 11
19 M145 HSS1X1X2 0.184 46.39 11
20 M102 HSS1X1X2 0.805 47 8
21 M107 HSS1X1X2 0.643 48 11
22 M110 HSS1X1X2 0.242 48 1(
RISA-3D Version 21
0.038
0.034
0.051
0.048
0.04
0.035
0.013
0.004
0.003
0.009
0.013
0.024
0.019
0.028
0.015
0.029
0.026
0.03
0.01
0.039
0.027
0.011
126 z 1, 24672.403
126 z 9 24672.403
126 z 1, 24672.403
126 z 9 24672.403
126 z fl 24672.403
126 z 9 24672.403
49.477 V 9 47721 .366
0 V 9 34222.364
92.779 V 1135260.005
49.477 z 1 5257.075
92.779 z 11 1495.042
49.477 z 8 5257.075
49.477 z 8 5257.075
49.477 z 8 5257.075
49.477 z 8 5257.075
96 z 9 1396.41
0 z 9 1495.042
0 z 11 1396.41
92.779 z 9 1495.042
0 z 1( 1396.41
0 z 9 1396.41
96 z 1( 1396.41
I 2301164.r3d I
15 of 16
53820 4830
53820 4830
53820 4830
53820 4830
53820 4830
53820 4830
53820 4830
53820 4830
53820 4830
18112.5 498.632
18112.5 498.632
18112.5 498.632
18112.5 498.632
18112.5 498.632
18112.5 498.632
18112.5 498.632
18112.5 498.632
18112.5 498.632
18112.5 498.632
18112.5 498.632
18112.5 498.632
18112.5 498.632
ohi*Mn z-z [lb-ft Cb Eqn
4830 2.33 1H1-1
4830 3 IH1-1
4830 3 H1-1
4830 12.33: H1-1
4830 1.797 H1-1
4830 2.28~ H1-1
4830 12.251 H1-1
4830 '.58, H1 -1 t
4830 12.01€ H1-1 b
498.632 1.13E IH1-1b
498.632 1.13E H1-1 b
498.632 1.131 H1-1b
498.632 1.13E H1-1b
498.632 1.12~ H1-1b
498.632 1.13f H1-1b
498.632 1.136 1-11-1
498.632 1.13E H1-1
498.632 1.13f H1-1
498.632 1.144 H1-1
498.632 1.13f H1-1t
498.632 1.13E H1-1t
498.632 1.14~ H1-1t
Page 2
IIIRISA
Company
Designer
Job Number
Model Name:
Envelope A/SC 15TH (360-16/: LRFD Member Steel Code Checks (Continued/
Member Shaoe
23 M113 HSS1X1X2
24 M123 HSS1X1X2
25 M125 HSS1X1X2
26 M128 HSS1X1X2
27 M130 HSS1X1X2
28 M132 HSS1X1X2
29 M134 HSS1X1X2
30 M60 HSS3X3X2
31 M69 HSS3X3X:;
32 M70 HSS3X3X2
33 M68 HSS3X3X2
34 M91 HSS1X1X2
35 M92 HSS1X1X2
36 M93 HSS1X1X2
37 M94 HSS1X1X2
38 M95 HSS1X1X2
39 M103 HSS1X1X2
40 M104 HSS1X1X2
41 M105 HSS1X1X2
42 M106 HSS1X1 X2
43 M112 HSS1X1X,
44 M115 HSS1X1X2
45 M116 · HSS1X1X.
46 M117 HSS1X1X2
47 M118 HSS1X1X2
RISA-3D Version 21
Code Check Locfinl LCShear Check Locfinl DirLcohi*Pnc fib ohi*Pnt fib
0.457 48 8 0.019
0.336 48 9 0.013
0.828 48 8 0.04
0.805 48 8 0.039
0.598 46.39 9 0.028
0.589 47.356 11 0.03
0.198 48 11 0.01
0.046 0 1C 0.003
0.25 131 .987 9 0.04
0.225 139.12€ 9 0.024
0.236 131.987 9 0.024
0.359 48 5 0.025
0.4 48 5 0.028
0.4 48 4 0.026
0.4 48 5 0.028
0.374 48 5 0.025
0.164 24.739 1C 0.025
0.495 49 9 0.024
0.617 49 1C 0.029
0.456 44.457 9 0.024
0.165 31 .229 5 0.022
0.223 35.76 5 0.02
0.295 39.624 5 0.025
0.28 43.49 5 0.023
0.129 29.779 5 0.023
96 z 1:; 1396.41
96 z 1~ 1396.41
96 z 8 1396.41
96 z 8 1396.41
92.779 z 1, 1495.042
92.779 z 9 1495.042
0 z 11 1396.41
0 V 1C 34222.364
131.987 V 5 22869.343
139.128 V 5 20774.41
131.987 V 5 22869.343
96 V 4 1396.41
96 V 4 1396.41
96 V 4 1396.41
96 V 4 1396.41
96 V 4 1396.41
49.477 z 8 5257.075
96 z 11 1396.41
96 z 8 1396.41
92.779 z 9 1495.042
0 V 5 3162.925
71.519 V 5 2515.978
79.248 V 4 2049.187
0 V 4 1701.046
56.055 V 5 1396.41
[ 2301164.r3d]
16 of 16
18112.5
18112.5
18112.5
18112.5
18112.5
18112.5
18112.5
53820
53820
53820
53820
18112.5
18112.5
18112.5
18112.5
18112.5
18112.5
18112.5
18112.5
18112.5
18112.5
18112.5
18112.5
18112.5
18112.5
ohi*Mn v-v fib-fl
498.632
498.632
498.632
498.632
498.632
498.632
498.632
4830
4830
4830
4830
498.632
498.632
498.632
498.632
498.632
498.632
498.632
498.632
498.632
498.632
498.632
498.632
498.632
498.632
12/12/2023
8:46:16AM
Checked By :
ohi*Mn z-z fib-ft Cb Eon
498.632 1.13E H1 -1 t
498.632 1.13€ H1 -1t
498.632 1.13E H1-1t
498.632 1.13€ H1-1b
498.632 1.13E H1-1t
498.632 1.137 H1-1t
498.632 1.144 H1-1b
4830 2.501 H1-1 t
4830 2.131 H1-1t
4830 '.06': H1 -1t
4830 2.061 H1-1t
498.632 1.13f H1-1t
498.632 1.13€ H1 -1t
498.632 1.13€ H1-1t
498.632 1.13E H1-1t
498.632 1.138 H1 -1t
498.632 1.15~ H1 -1t
498.632 1.141 H1-1t
498.632 1.141 H1-1t
498.632 1.143 H1 -1t
498.632 1.135 H1 -1b
498.632 1.136 H1-1b
498.632 1.141 H1 -1b
498.632 1.13~ H1 -1t
498.632 1.139 H1-1t:
Page 3