The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1 LEGOLAND DR; ; CB004394; Permitr Vti~ City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Av Carlsbad, CA 92008 01/18/2001 Commercial/Industrial_ Permit Permit No: CB004394 Building Inspection Request Line (760) 602-2725 Job Address: Permit Type: Parcel No: Valuation: Occupancy Group: Project Title: 01/18/2001 1 LEGO DR CBAD Tl 2111000900 Sub Type; Lot#: $100,000.00 Construction Type: Reference #: LEGO-ADD 1112 SF STORAGE RM, COMM 0 VN Status: Applied: Entered By: ISSUED 11/28/2000 RMA Plan Approved: CONVERT LOCKERS TO STORAGE,MISC WINDOWS/DOORSlssued: 01/18/2001 Inspect Area: Applicant: Owner: LEGOLAND CALIFORNIA INC <LF> LEGOLAND ESTATES AG LEGOLAND CALIFORNIA INC <LF> L!=GOLAND ESTATES AG C/0 PROPERTY TAX SERV CO C/0 PROPERTYTAX SERV CO PO BOX 543185 p O BOX 5431~5 . 9'209 01/18/01 0002 01 DALLAS TX 75354 DALLAS TX 75354 CGP Total Fees: $1,173.19 Building Permit Add'I Building Permit Fee Plan Check Add'I Plan Check Fee Plan Check Discou·nt Strong Motion Fee Park Fee LFM Fee Bridge Fee BTD #2 Fee BTD #3 Fee Renewal Fee Add'I Renewal Fee Other Building Fee Pot. Water Con. Fee Meter Size Add'I Pot. Water Con. Fee Reel. Water Con. Fee Total Payments To bate: $0.00 Balance Due: $1,173.19 $62'1.33 $0.00 $403.86 $0:0b; $0.00 1 $2t.00 .. $0.00-.·· - $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.d0 $0.00 · MetetSize Add'I Reel. Water Con. Fee Meter f=ee SOCWA Fee.· -. CFD Payoff Fee !?RF 1 PFF (CFD Fund) License Tax ficense Tax (CFO Fund) , J~raffi9 -Impact Fee Traffic lmpaGt (OFD Fund) LFM·z Transportation Fee PLUMB-ING TOTAL E(ECTRICA!-TOTAL M!=CHANICAL TOTAL Master brair.iage Fee: Sewer Fee: Redev Parking Fee: TOTAL PERMIT FEES $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $34.00 $60.00 $33.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,173.19 FINAL APPROVAL ,,, .(""· 0( Date: :J· ~ . Clearance: _____ _ NOTICE: Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the "Imposition" offees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as "fees/exactions." You have 90 days from the date this permit was issued to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020{a), and file the prote$t 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 tliat 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 capactiy 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 ou have reviousl been iven a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has reviousl otherwise ex ired, 02 1173°19 f PERMIT.APPUCATION CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA _92008 Validated By ____ -r--.f-b.------ Date __ -+-H--6'"=r7'-+--""'-'-"------ Address (include Bldg/Suite #) Business Name -(at this address) LQt I e> o F ~~JA-V :r:@A:l-:C °14-64 ~e.w .YHl-1± Legal Description Lot No. Subdivision Name/Number Unit No. Phase No. Total #' of units -Z..il-L D-t> Name Address City State/Zip Telephone # :4r:9~!:~~~!L2·<.L·1---::;t;,D~r?~,t~)f~"~":~f ii:a.:~:--·~.c-:~:;.&;~-:'.i,~z:ia :g~~·-,'.,~<-.. ~.-~~·:·.:t.;Z,i:~~---;; Name Address · City State/Zip Telephone# ts:.·~: . ..PP.filiM'Q.l;QB~J:i.9,MPAN.X'mr~E"., : ,:..;; . · . -;.·:;:;::,~ _,.,.: • .:-..... ::=.:-~ .. ·. , .. ,.,,,~=-~~"-""-··"'""'"""··.....;"",""·"""'·'""'·~·-·'·"'"""""""''-·-;;.:s: .. ,: .• :, (Sec. 7031.5 Business and Professions Code: Any City or County which requires a permit to construct, alter, improve, demolish or repair any structure, prior to its issuance, also requires the applicant for such -permit to file a signed statement that he is licensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractor's License Law [Chapter 9, commending with Section 7000 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code] or that he is exempt therefrom, and the basis for the alleged exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by·any applicant for a perminubjects·the.applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars ($500]). Name Address City State/Zip Telephone # State License#----~----~ !-icense Class~--------"--City Business. License # ---"------ Designer Name State License # Address City State/Zip Telephone ;s1,-:: .. :w-ORKEiis;i/:;;;c:;;;o,,::;;.M,,;:;;,~P;;;:E;;;;N:;:s;;;A;;;;r;;;;_,:;;o:;:ti,.;;; __ ;:;_::,;.=.,=.~=-,. ~7-DG,;.~;;;~,. , .. ·,>. s .· . ., .. · _,7.,,.: A ••• , .... ,. .< · ·-;;-·:?-;'':''."{':7,,_-:-'7];·-:.'.~--::;:-::; .,,.,. Workers' Compensation Declaration: I hereby affirm-under penalty of perjury one of the following declarations: 0 I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self-insure for workers' compensation, as provided by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance· qf the work for which this permit is issued. · D I have and will maintain workers' compensation, as required by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued. My worker's compensation insurance.carrier and policy number are: Insurance Company____________________ Policy No.____________ Expiration Date _______ _ (THIS SECTION NEED NOT BE COMPLETED IF THE PERMIT IS FOR ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS [$100] OR LESS) D 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' Compensatjon Laws-of California. WARNING: Failure to secure workers' compensation coverage is unlawful, and shall subject an employer to criminal penaltjes and civil fines up to one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000), in addition to the cost of compensation, damages as provided for in Section 3706 of the Labor code, interest and attorn!?y's fees. SIGNATURE. _________________ ~----------"-7--DATE ________ __,_ i:t-•0>tlii'lNER"~t1ii.fpJ:_13'D~Qt~.13Ai:lPJL~'.::.. ·2c: .;;;;-::::.:'2.::,::;:::L;::~::.:::c.r.:::_ :c_:,:;:;_:.:_,:.:.,:.-;l,:/'~ '. --;,::_·~-,:...:: :·2{ ?'.::::: ::·t:::r.I?:1.2:::'::.F J' "/1:S ,.'.'::?:':~i }/'.fi:;::·::;J] I hereby affirm that I am exempt from the Contractor's License Law for the following reason: D I, as owner of the property or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work and the structure is not intended or offered for sale (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who does such work himself or through his own, employees, provided that 'SUch improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If, however, the building or improvement is sold within one year of, completion, the owner-builder will have the burden of proving·that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sale). JXJ I, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to construct the project .(Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and contracts for such projects with contractor(s) licensed ,pursuant to the Contractor's License Law). D I am exempt under Section -'------Business and Professions Code for this reason: 1. I personally plan to provide the major labor and materials, for construction of the proposed property. improvement. 0 YES ,8JNO 2. 181 have n9t) signecj an applica.tion for a building permit for the proposed V1ork. 3. I have contracted.with the following p on (fi ml o provide the pr, posed construction (include name/ address/ phone number/ contractors license number): 4. I plan to provide portions of-the work, but I have hired the following person to coordinate, supervise and provide the major work (include name / address / phone number/ contractors license number)=---------------------------------~~---~-~----- 5. I will provide some of the work, but I have contracted (hired) the following persons to provide the. work indicated (include name / address / phone number / type of work): ~ '~~::(~~~;:~oN:~RB~NO::'S·'D~!~4!1t.,;_laGNGJ~E/lR~~tN'tl~~-. ~es>: ,;·:. · ·-:·:~;;E:,,· .1~}~;r~J. :~\,·:-'~ _, · .. · ·>,· ,~·"'":' ··~ ·<1 w ...... ~-'f'..Jl".,_,.:(.l'!JJ,,_,, ~.:MJJ~!.,..~Y ,,.,_v,,.,.."""""•'Ww>!Jl"',\ fJ~,P.,!;ft•,.,4!:!'H ,v-,,,, ~'i!,,, """'°''" L~n"""~""'"'W .,..,..~<W.' • ---~-:::....., "'-"-•<,,n<.-. ",.,, "O <"'ff~w< ,~, ._,.. """"""'V<'<, _,..,., ,,.,,l,,.,~,,_ , ........... ~_,...,,..,._,,_...,.,.. , n"-,1,.,,,.,,~' ,i..............,,...,,,...,,..., ..... ,;t-"1,.,1: Is the applicant or future building occupant required to submit a business plan, acutely hazardous materials registration form or risk management and prevention program under Sections 25505, 25533 or 25534 of the Presley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act? -0 YES D NO Is the applicant or future building occupant required .to obtain a permit from the air pollution control district or air quality management district? D YES D NO Is the facility to be constructed within 1,000 feet of the outer boundary of a school site? ,0 YES O NO IF ANY OF THE ANSWERS ARE YES, A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MAY NOT BE ISSUED UNLESS THE.AP-PLICANT HAS MET OR IS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL-DiSTRICT. l!IZ':l.~~-~~.IVP..!IQJ!t!Js~P!~9:A'§.§N.~5>j~:t-""'.1:.·;~j;,:::. _ ~·-'-~:.:.':;;;:;·::7.T7. .. , ..... c -~-... , , .•. I hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued (Sec .. 3097(i) Civil Code). LENDER'S NAME I certify that I have read the application and state that the above information is correct and that the infqrmation on the plans is accurate. I agree to comply with all City ordinances and State laws relating to building construction. I hereby authorize representatives of the Cit~ of Carlsbad to enter upon the above mentioned property for inspection purposes. I ALSO AGREE TO SAVE, INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARMLESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AGAINST ALL LIABILITIES, JUDGMENTS, COSTS AND EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN.ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINST SAID CITY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING OF THIS PERMIT. OSHA: An OSHA permit is required for excavations over 5'0" deep and demolition or construction of structures over 3 stories in height. EXPIRATION: Every permit issued by the l;luilding Official under the provisions of this Cdde shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or work authorized by such permit is not commenced within 180 days from the date of such permit or if the building or work authorized by-such permit is suspended or abandoned at any time after the work is com need fo a o 80 s (Section 106.4.4 Uniform Building-Code). APPLICANT'S SIGNATU DATE 2-0 -~OIJ • ?-(:;;te>D PINK: Finance \ ,) List 1 -Permit-Type ~'"' From the following list, determine the permit-type that best describes the work you propose to do. Please put the code of that ~rqut-type in the blank at the top of the page on the front of this application. Residential permits (only) also require the identification of the structure-type to be associated with the permit. Choose a structure-type from "List 2 -Structure-Types" and put its code m th~ appropriate blank on the front of this application. Residential Permits Code' Description APT Apartments -new construction. l . \ CONDO Condominiums -new construction. CVNNR Conversion. Convert all or a portion of a residential units. non-residential building to residential use, creating one or more new -. CVNRN Conversion. Conv~rt one or :mox:~ residenc~ in a building to non,residential usage. -. CVNRR Conversion: Increase or reduce the number of dwelling units in a residential structure through interior modifications (i.e.: a four ~oom house convert~ to a duplex, with ,2_bedrooms each). . DEMO Demolitioxi pe~t. (Also specify type of struc~e fr~m List 2). DUP Duplex -new construction. MOHO Mobile home, renovation, repair, or addition of accessory structure not yielding a new living unit. MOHON Mobile home, pre-fabricated house, or trailer installed (plumbed, wired) in a mobile home park (see distinction from single-farfilly'residence, below). · · · · . RAD Residential addition/alteration, creating no new dwelling unit(s). RREISSUE Residential permit re-issue. RREPAIR Residential building repair. Damage, fire, etc. RREPLACE Residential building replacement (no additional units). SFA Single-family, attached -new construction. A one-family house attached to one or more other houses, with one or more common walls extending from foundation to roof at, or forming, a lot line. Has own plumbing and heating system (e.~.: townhouse, row house, half-plex) SFD Single-family, detached -new construction: A one-family house with open area on all four sides. May have an attached or detached garage, or a business. May be a detached "granny flat". May be a mobile home or trailer on an individual lot, but not in a mobile home park. Non-Residential/ Accessory Permits Code Description COM Commercial structure, new construction. CREISSUE Commercial permit re-issue. CREPAIR Commercial building -repair. Damage, fire, etc. CREPLACE Commercial building -replacement. CTI Commercial tenant improvement. DEMO Demolition permit. ELEC Electrical oermit, for electrical work only. HOTEL Hotel or motel (including Managed Living Unit hotel) -new construction. HOTELR Hotel renovation. INDUST Industrial structure, new construction. ITI Industrial tenant improvement. MECH Mechanical permit, for mechanical work only. MISC Miscellaneous. Use only if proposed work doesn't fit another activity type. PATIO Patio and/or deck. PLUM Plumbing permit, for plumbing work only. POOL Gunite pools and spas. RETAIN Retaining wall oermit. SIGN Sign construction/installation permit. SOLAR Solar energy system installation permit (specify structure type to be served). SPA Factory-made or Gunite. List 2 -Structure-Type (Use with Residential Permit Only) From the following list, determine the type of residential structure that best describes the structure on which you will be working. Please put the code of that structure-type in the appropriate blank at the top of the page on the front of this application. Code Description SFA Single-family, attached. A one-family house attached to one or more other houses, with one or more common walls extending from foundation to roof at, or forming, a lot line. Has own plumbing and heating system (e.g.: townhouse, row house, half-plex). SFD Single-family detached: A one-family house with open area on all four sides. May have an attached or detached garage, or a b~iness. May be a detached "granny flat". May be a mobile home or trailer on an individual lot, but not in a mobile home park. MF2-4 Multi-family, 2 to 4 units. A residential structure on a single lot, containing two, three, or four dwelling units. Units may share master heating, plumbing, or electrical service (e.g.: duplex, triplex, quad-plex). MFS+ Multi-family, 5 or more units. Same as MF2-4, except the building has a t least five attached units on the same lot. MOHO Mobile h6me,'pre-fabricated house, or trailer installed (plumbed, wired) ih a mobile h~rne park (see distinction from single-family residence, above). '') City of Carlspad Bldg Inspection Request For: 05/14/2001 Permit# CB004394 Title: LEGO-ADD 1112 SF STORAGE RM, Description: CONVERT LOCKERS TO STORAGE,MISC WINDOWS/DOORS . Type:TI Job Address: Suite: Location: Sub Type: COMM 1 LEGO DR Lot 0 Inspector Assignment: PD ----- Phone: 7608011575 lnspectotlt_ APPLICANT LEGOLAND CALIFORNIA INC <LF> LEGOLAND ESTAtes AG Owner: Remarks: Total Time: CD Description 19 Final Structural 29 Final Plumbing 39 Final Electrical 49 Final Mechanical Act Comments Requested By: DEREK Entered By: CHRISTINE ~------_____,.....___- Associated PCRs PCR00040 ISSUED PCR00060 ISSUED PCR00231 ISSUED PCR01056 ISSUED PCR99002 ISSUED PCR99004 ISSUED PCR99007 ISSUED PCR99020 ISSUED PCR99021 ISSUED PCR99022 ISSUED PCR99023 ISSUED PCR99024 EXPIRED PCR99025 ISSUED PCR99026 PENDING PCR99029 ISSUED PCR99034 EXPIRED PCR99064 APPROVED PCR99199 ISSUED FEB-14-01 11,31 FROM,PINE TREE LUMBER . l' . IO,8587450325 PAGE 1/3 -- 707. N •. ANOREASeN ORIVE 'ESCOM>lDO. Cft 92025 * { 760) 7 45-0414 * FAX: ( 760) 74S-0325 FAX TRANSMISSION TO: DATE: FROM: Bill Hansen . NO. OF PAGES: INCLUDING THIS SHEET MESSAGE: . . . . ;, . . . . . . • • 4, • . . . . . . · p····.·o·-·.:o··R···-_-.. . . '. ·... . . . . ·. .; . . . . ' . :• . . . . .. . . . . ' . . . . :. . .. . . Q'. ·. •.. . ::--·-· . . ;/.-.;-,, .. ,, .. -' · -· · UA ___ ··LIT--·-y· ---;s.... . . . . . --~-' ~ •. ·-., ./ • . :• .. ,. ,, -:... . ··~-· ._.. . _. .. , . . .¥ -• . . ., . . ' . .. ,. . . . . . : .. ' . • • ,ii •• ·o···.,. ·R_.<,:~----,.,f:,-·G·· .... ~,,;,,: ,·._.N .... ,._ .,.A_,._, .. L·' ( .. ·_s··". . . ·. . . ··. .~:'· . . . :~ . . ·. •. ·. ..· . . . . -. . . .. . . . . . .. . . ·. . . ' . ,. . , , ' . . . , < FEB-14-01 fl,31 FROM•PINE TREE LUMB~R ID, 85874·50325 PAGE 2/3 '1 I i i I I > I . • ,., . .,, ,-.,.:.,,.~.,,.. .. , .. --~-' .. :..... ,._, .. -·"~·-""';....1·-"_:• ·-'l\ll<•""'".F.',-,....--~aa: . .: .• , HE UNDERSIGNED MANUFACTURER HEREBY CERHFIES . that ~e pl'Qdu*·identiffld below and on azraohed ~ Nos-.. · ana marked with . Ute Colfdvc Mari< of tha AMeRIOAN INSTITUTE OF'llMB!!Pl CONSTRU(mON (NTC) and were manufactured in confotmancawith appUcable pn,visions Of Amerioan NdOliaI Standanf ANSUAJTC · A 1 so.1 .. 1992. strr..rcUlral ~lfSl'Jimber. .u:ad 1hat such ma,,'ufacture has be~n at our plant in 1 whicfl Plar!t has a qu:.\lfty contr0f ~ approved b'/ the lnspec:iic:ln Bureau of the AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF TIMBER CO~UCTION and inspec:ed pertoQicaly by $UCh Bureau. . ·: . . . . . ••• ·. · . ' . ' YAR1:>, &oo-s•7-7762 · l ' Jee NAME:· 1 z400 st nve:1 AUE. · 1 .. J081.0CA':'10N:· _________ ___,;. ____ : -·--i"J: .... : ___ __,__....:,_,._-:--_ ,;_' _' _· '.:.." _..;..,__ CONSIGN ·· ·01/02/2001 1001 CUST0MER'SORO£RNO. _____ :QAn : MFGR'SOi:DER~.---: ____ _ ltG. #FP., Dla)y. Wl'RIPED SD. .Dlllt!R j§>Ot L, CIJL :l4F'~ W-mRIOl .fllt!, · 0 nc.smc . :,.~\SID JtmlJS . ;: ;i ·i :: .... • i ......,,_ · &. A,s.: ' • . ~ · rl. B~ Cllffl'fORA°!IOl'I · QUALITY C0NTR0'-RT. 1 8E:JX,!,1t9-tm· · i · · :. :,. .', nn.E .... • -------ADDRESS i . r».TE ,,, I-to -o I I. . . FEB-14-01 11•32 FROM,PINE TREE ~UMBER 10•8587450325 PAGE 3/3 I I·· I I I I • - • ATTACHMENT NUMBER 1 TO SheetNo.~---- AITC Certificate of Conformance No. Oated 02/14/01 Job Name: PINE TREE Job Location: ~ .•. ,, . ' . ! Customer>s Order No. CS-7M8&--88 bated Mfgr'1 Order No. Toe following identifies Iha members and gives tne basic specificatjons 1tlat were used on this job: . . ! ll,RTlberSpedes; P-184 Am: t.lcln!9d Plant Q.B. Corporation ~y r l, !,; 1: .Mieril:anlr..muc.dTrmber~ AITC. · [~ ~lfiedUcen... ;' r I: • I ., :: '' .,. ':· ' . . . : I'' '** TOT~ PAGE.03 ** -_[ ][ Jr ] • [ ][ Edward W. Marshall, P.E. [ ] 2044 Wildhorse Lane, Big Bear City CA 92314-9024 8Q0.337.7q83 * 909.584.1190 * Fax 877.639.8375 (toll free) February 20, 2001 Richard & Richard Construction Co. Inc. 4751 Oceanside Bt, STE D Oceanside, CA 92056 ATTN: Jack Nestor RE: Legoland West Complex Storage room project Dear Mr. Nest<?r; Per our phone conversation today I have reviewed your proposed ffold revisions with regards to the twenty-two-fooflong~3-178 x 18 ·GtB "tlraris-bl~itig-mstalled fonhls vroJe-ctThey are acceptable. Specifically: 1) A continuous 2'-9" wide footing is acceptable as an alternate to the new 36" square discrete footings called out on the plans. 2) A 4x6 post, with a Simpson ABU46 post base at the existing concrete curb, and a Simpson ECC5-1/4-4 column cap to the GLB is acceptable at either or both ends of the subject beam. Retrofit a length of 5/8" diameter threaded rod, w/ 8" minimum enibedment, set with Simpson SET epoxy or equivalent. Use a 3/4" diameter-drill bit. Feel free to contact me with any questions you might have . . -. ' , -. ,-. ,.., ~ ... ' . . ·:~,. ,,J ' 1' ~. ',·~:-: ~:_ ,\ ~-.~.,-, :. .~ ':'· ' ,, . ~ ~ "' , • .,...., ' l . P~~/; o ;. /4:·/;1J JiM ~~d Pr9&01J1; {)//!, Date:~ I· Report N~. _ · 2..-,0 I . .. ' Location: . ,,. A;,tf h?J //--1fJ . Da)I: &Zci ~~S' 41t.. &dB, ·' -,@T w T F s s Client/Con~ctor: ~ ,.//4: . · . & , Supt/Foreman: ·' weather::~. · ,ltt,.,e)_ . ·C/~O ,rc//-;nt.-0. . ,.-t: .. Field Supervisor: / _· J ·Geolqgist _ Soil Engineer: : .. , Ol;>servation/Testing of: ~-1:-l- Tech~ ,/ft0 .. 'Equipment-Workin_~: Hours ', l Z,J '. .. " .. Tc;,day's Yardage: .. . ' " Yardage to-Date: " .. . -Summafy cif Operations:· ,. kh 1-e,,, l x UV d'o-J .. -rf . _,c/4 µ'~ clfl I't:-nu_~ M e:--11-Tt., !Lt:-t::,._ k, . , '1-;-l..,,, ~/Y~ -t;; QI( e ;f e,w;~ t:;; 12~ Ptn.. . J:;n:;,711-/4)al7~ . /n-41 J4;ft,.C- r F Ccvl:'J..A ,,. ,~ -. I' . )I/ &-t--Nt-t¥7~ tA77!-~J.- ~/Jl.rl.¢ ,.,-vrl? .nl"Lh t V/y,-/ I a,,1:;,1~-It>. ~g ~t;n-C-.. , .. . . .. . ·------' . . . 'Jlt~k -: bLJ>iJ~ /tr.,>tl ;:::-_ .. /J~/1-,A./ __.. c:,7L,.~~H6-::S /jAJ J-:1 tf. P' )'t.;... .. . .. ~~ £>&-J1vw ~ . ---5' lht_L--·l. r;J /7& ?trt-1 Jh--ue-ft_; j!,v/..,/-$' ,1~/m,/1-Jt.,--t.rlllf' r1~)l... <fl/Jzs IJe:i/CaJ. • ". ' .. .. .. ,, ., .-.. ·, ., .. .. ., , . ,·' -· .. . ' Page_-of .. . . ' ---... Rece;v ~u1ts' . . . ~11 t.-EIGHTON AND-ASSOCIATES, INC: .. ' ' . 'I ' . '· -~ -~ -,, .DAILY-F:IELD -REPORT ., ~ . --' Prfnt (11: ___ L /;J }~,\{A ~-. .;.;:: . . -' . . -...,;;:!--.: . --/~3@¥5 f/ . ,.. " -~-. <j. ' .. 3910 1098 White -File Copy Yellow -Client COP)'. · :Pink -Field Copy Gold-Client/Agency CoP,y CIIY of Carlsbad · Final Building Inspection Dept: Building Engineering Planning CMWD St Lite Ja.t.e Plan Check#: Date: 04/06/2001 Permit#: CB004394 Permit Type: Tl Project Name: LEGO-ADD 1112 SF STORAGE RM, Sub Type: COMM CONVERT LOCKERS TO STORAGE,MISC WINDOWS/D Address: 1 LEGO DR Lot: 0 Contact Person: CINDY Sewer Dist: CA Phone: 7609185461 Water Dist: CA .•.••..... ,.,i •.•••••••.•. -.•.•.•.••.•.•••••.••.•..•.•••••.•••...•.•...••••••••••.•...•.•.•••.••.••.....•.•...••.•••••...••.•..••••••.•••....•.....•••••••. lns_pecte~ ~· //... . Date /../~/ By. ~ ~ · Inspected: 7/i/J Of Inspected Date Approved: ~approved: __ By: ___________ Inspected: ______ Approved: ___ Disapproved: __ Inspected Date By: _______ -___ Inspected: ______ Approved: ___ Disapproved: __ ............................................................... 11111 •• -•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Comments: ------------,------------------------ EsGi I Corporation 1-n Partnersnip Witn (jovem111£nt for 'lJuilaing Safety DATE: January 11, 2001 JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: 00-4394 PROJECT ADDRES.S: 1 Legoland Dr. SET:11 PROJECT NAME: Storage Addition to West Complex; Co:Qvert Storage to ~et~il /·· ' i D The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substat1tially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. ~ The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are.resolved and checked by building department staff. D The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficienci'es identified on the enclosed check list arid should be corrected and resubmitte~ for a complete recheck. D The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. D The applicant',s copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. D The applicant's copy of the check ·list has been sent to: ~ Esgil Corporation staff c;lid nQt advise the .applicant that the plan c~eck has been completed. D Esgil. Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: · Telephone.#: Date contacted: Fax#: Mail Telephone· Fax I· ~ REMARKS: 1.. All sheet f the plans mast be signed by a licensed architect/engineer. 2. Note to city staff: T valuation has changed. See attached. By: Kurt Culver Esgil Corporation · o GA o· Ms o EJ o Pc· Enclosures: 1/5/01 trnsmtl.dof 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 + (858) 560--1468 + Fax (858) 560-1576 Cadsbad ,00-4394 December 6, 2000 VALUATION AND PLAN CH!=CK FEE (Revised 1/12/01 kc) JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PREPARED BY: Kurt Culver BUILDING ADDRESS: 1 Legoland Dr. BUILDING OCCUPANCY: SI PLAN CHECK NO.: 00-4394 DATE: December 6;, 2000 iYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: V-N BUILDING AREA Valuation· Reg. PORTION ( Sq. Ft.) Multiplier Mod. Storaqe Add. &Tl -- Air Conditioning Fire Sprinklers· TOTAL VALUE Jurisdiction Code cb By Ordinance . I 1994 UBC Building Pl:!rmit Fee •I 11994 UBC Plan Check Fee . I~ I Type of Review: 0-complete Review D Repetitive Fee ~Repeats :Oother D Hourly l r Esgil Plan Review Fee Comments: Value provided by designer. VALUE .. , a7,Ge4 .. - 100,000 I D Structural Only ($) a+;G_e4 a+,Ge4 ~, 621.08 ~, 403.70 ~, 322.96 Sheet 1 of 1 macvalue.doc I EsGH Co-rporation " . fJ.n Pattners/i.ip :wit/i. qovernme_nt for 'lJuif:{ing Safety DATE: December 6, 2000 JURISDICTION: Car1sbad PLAN CHECK NO.: ·00-43.94 PROJECT ADDRESS~ .1 Legoland Dr. SET:I 0 APPLICANT -~ 0 PLAN REVIEWER 0 FILE PROJECT NAME: Sto~age Addition to West Complex; Convert Sto·rage to Retail ~~Go LAN Zl} D The plans transmitted herewith have bee11 corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. D The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficie_ncies identified below are n~solved and checked by building department staff. D The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. ~ The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck-. ' . D The applicant's copy of the check list is-enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to th~ applicant contact person. · · · · · [gj The applicant's copy of the check list has been .$ent to: Howard Anderson 2154 Carmel Valley Rd. Del Mar 92014 D Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plah check !'.las been completed. [gj Esgil Corporation staff did-advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: Howard Anderson Telephone#: (858) 755-5009 Date contacted:\?.-/-1/;/oo (by: P--) . Fax #: -1236 Mail '-""'Telephonev Faxlo"" In Person D REMARKS: By: Kurt Culver Esgil Corporation D GA D MB D EJ [] PC Enclosures: 11/30/00 trnsmtl.dot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + SanD~~g9, Califorrtia92123 + (858) 560-1468 + Fax (85&) 560-1576 'Carlsbad 00-4394 December 6, 2000 PLAN REVIEW CORRECTION LIST COMMERCIAL PLAN CHECK NO.: 00-4394 OCCUPANCY: S-1 TYPE OF CONST:RUCTION: V-N spr. ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA: OK SPRINKLERS?: Yes JURISDIGJ"ION: Carlsbad USE: Storage ACTUALAREA:. +704 STORIE§: 1 HEIGHT: -12' OCCUPANT LOAD: +22 * · REMARKS: * (Due to conversion of storage to retail, too). DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY JURISDICTION: 11/28/00 DATE INITIAL PLAN REVIEW COMPLETED: December t;, 2000 FOREWORD (PLEASE READ): DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY ESGIL CORPORATION: 11/30/00 PLAN REVI.EWER: Kµrt Culver This plan review is limited fothe technical requirements contained::in the Uniform Suilding Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, -National Electrical Code .and state laws regulating energy conservation, noise attenuation anEI access for the ·disabled. This plan review is based on regulations enforced by the Building Department. You may-have other corrections based on laws and ordinances enforced by the Planning Department, Engineering Department, Fire Department or other departments. Clearance from those .departments may ·be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Code sections cited are ba~ed on the· 19.97 UBC. The following items listed need clarification, modification or chang.e. All items must be satisfied before the plans will be in conformance with the cited codes and regulations. Per Sec. 106.4.3, 1997 Uniform Building Cocie, the approval of the plans. does not perrnit the violation of any state, county or city law; To speed up the recheck process. please note_ on this list (oca copy) where each correction item .. has been addressed, i.e., plan sheet number, specification section, etc. Be sure to enc~ose the marked. up list when you submit the ·revised plans. Carlsbad 00-4394 December 6, 2000 • GENERAL 1. Please make all cotrections on the original tracings, as requested in the correction list. Submit three sets of plans for commerci~l/industrial projects ,two sets of plans - for residential projects). For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in· one of two ways: · _ . 1. Deliver all corrected sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Builc;Hng Oepartment, 163'5 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008, (760) 602-2700. The City will route the plans to EsGil Corporation and the Carlsbad Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. 2. Bring one corrected set of plans and calculations/reports to EsGil Corporation, 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite. 208, San Diego, CA 92123, (858) 560-1468. Deliver all remaining· sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department for routing to their Planning·, Engineering and Fire Departments. NOTE: Plans that are submitted directly to EsGil Corporation only will not be reviewed by the City Planning, Engineer:i,ng and Fire Departments until review by EsGil Corporation is complete. · 2. UBC Section 107.2 requires the Building Official to deter.mine the total·value of all construction work proposed under this permit. The Value shall include all finish work, painting, roofing, electrical, plumbing, -heating; air conditioning, elevator, fire extinguishing systems and any other permanent equipment. Please provide the -designer's or contractor's construction cost estimate of all work proposed. • PLANS 3. All sheets of the plaqs and the first sheet of the calculations are required to be signed by the California licensed architect or engineer responsible for the plan preparation. Please include the California lieense number, se·al, date of license expiration and the date the plans are signed. Business and Professions Code. 4. Provide a Building Code Data Legend on the Title· Sheet. !nclude the· following code information for each building proposed: . • Occup~ncy Group (Change tnis to S-1 fc;>r the ~torage) • Floor Area-· (The reported floor area to be added is Jncorrect) 5. Provide a -note on the plans indicating if any hazardous materials will be stored and/or-used within the building which exceed the quantities listed in UBC Tables 3-D and 3-E. · 6. Provide skylight details to show compliance with Sections 2409 and 2603, or' specify on the plans the following information for the skylight(s), per Section - 106.3.3: a) Model name/number. b) ICBO approval number, or equaL Carlsbad 00-4394 December 6, 2000 • ENERGY CONSERVATION· 7. Provide plans, cal.culations and worksheets to show compliance with current snergy standards. P'rovide the·completed ENV-, LTG-, and MECH-forms showing energy compliance.. . 8. The completed and signed ENV~t, LTG-1, and MECH.-1 forms n;ust be imprinted on the plans. • FOUNDATION · 9. Provide·a copy of the project soil report prepared by a California licensed architect ot civil engJneer. The report shall include found~tion design recommendations b~sed on the engineer's ·findings and shall comply with USC Section 1804. 10. Provide a letter from the soils engineer confirming that the foundation plan, · grading plan and ~pecifications have been reviewed and that it has been determined that the recommendations in the soil report are properly incorporated into the plans. (When required by the soil report). · 11. Note on plans that sttrface water will drain away from building and show drainage pattern. Section 1804.7. 12. The following anchor bolt requirements shall apply in Seismic Zones 3 and 4, per Section 1'806.6.1-: a) The.minimum nominal anchor bolt diameter shall be 5/8-.inch (for Seismic Zone 4 only). Note: This will require a minimum distance from the ends of sill plates to be 4-3/8'' (and a maximum of 12"). b) Plate washers (minimum size of 2" x 2" x 3/16") shall be used on each anchor bolt. . • . STRlJCTURAL · 13. Specify nail size and spacing for all shear Walls; floor and roof diaphragms. Indicate required blocking. Maintain maximum diaphragm dimension ratios. Sections 231.Sand 2513 .. 14. Specify roof plywood grade and panel span rating. Table 23-11-E:-1. 15. On sheet S-2, please clarify "existing"walls versus "proposed;' walls. 16. Specify the missing header sizes at the storage room addition on sheet S-2. 17. Detail H/S-3 refers to "shear per plan," but shear walls don't seem to be shown anywhere. Please darify. Carlsbad 00-4394 December 6, 2000 18. Please explain th_e purpose of the angles at detail H/S:-3. 19. Detail B/S..,3 seems to be incomplete. • ADDITIONAL 20. To speed up the review process, note on this list (or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed, Le., plan sheet, note or detail number, calculation page, etc. · 21. Please indicate here if any changes have been made to the plans that are not a· result of correctior:is from -this list. If there are other changes,. please briefly. describe them and where they are located in the pians. Have changes been made to the plans not resulting from this correction iist? Please indicate: d Yes D .No 22. The jurisdiction has coAtracted with Esgil Corporation located at 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Die§Q, California 92123; telephone number of 858/560:..1468, to perform the plan review for your project. If you have any questions regarding these plan review items, please contact Kurt Culver at Esgil Corporation. Thank ymL · 'Carlsbad 00-4394 December 6, 2000 VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE . JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.:. 00-.4~94 PREPARED BY: Kurt Culver BUILDING ADDRESS: 1 Legoland Dr. BUILDING OCCUPANCY: Sl PATE: December· 6, 2000 TYP~ OF CONSTRUCTION~ V-N BUILDING AREA-Valuation . Reg. VALUE PORTION (Sq. Ft) _ Multiplier Mod. Storaqe Add. &Tl . . ' 57,064 . . . ,, . ' ,. ' . . ' .. Air Conditioning ·- Fire Sprinklers ' . TOTAL VALU.E .. ay Ordinance . Jurisdiction Code cb / 1994 UBC Building Permit Fee . .. . .-, 1.1994 UBC Plan Check_F.ee _ I""' I Type of Review: 0 Complete Review D Repetitive Fee [BRepeats Comments: I D Structural Only []other D~u~ 1 ! ' ' E~gil Plan Review Fee ($) 57,064 57,064 4?7.331 284.261 227.41 I Sheet 1 of 1 macvalue.doc -SJ "' 0 >-.c ~ -"' 0 a, ,,: (.) C "' a: -SJ "' 0 >-.c (') 'Ila -"' 0 a, ,,: (.) C "' a: ¢00 ~DD ·: PLANNING DEPARTMENT BUILblNG PLAN CHECK REVIEW CHECKLIST Plan Check N6. CB odL/39c/ · Address I L£G'oL/'W<'.1 ~£ lv'.G" Planner <6on Ne_u . · Phone (619) 438 1161, extension GQZ4b/2 APN: 2.II-/CXJ--Q9 . . . Type of Project & Use:r~!~ ,,-4, Net Project Density: N//t . DU/AC Zoning: C-T-9 General Pl~n: . 7--£. Facilities Management Zone: ,<3' CFD~out} # I Date of participation: IZ-21---93 Remaining net dev acres: /.J,.s± ~le One (For non-residential development: Type of land used created by this permit: All .o±hec Ce:m,•,ecc.tct.! Use t ) Legend: ~ · Item Complete · (0) Item lnco~plete -Needs your action Environmental Review Required: YES NO TYPE ---- DATE OF COMPLETION: q-/9'-00 Compliance with conditions of approval? If not, ~tate conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval: Discretionary Action Reqµired, YES __ NO TYPE ___ _ APPROVAL/RESO. NO.--,---.....,......-DATE ¥'-/9'-oo- PROJECT NO. ..S4t9 96-N 't S,(J;' 96--/~cA-) OTHER RELATED CASES: A1t' 9G-IG .I C:}/J 9b-~(d_) Compliance with conditions or approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval: __ ........,.. ______ ---'---'-------------- ~ D D Coastal Zone Assessment/Compliance Project site locate.d in' Coastal Zone:? YES NO .. CA Coastal Commission Authority? YES __ NO If California. Coastal Commission. Authority: Contact them at -3111 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 200, San Diego CA 92108-1725; (619) 521-8036 Determine status (Coastal Permit Required or Exernpt): Coastal Permit Determination Form already compl~ted? YES NO If NO, complete Coastal Perniit Determination Form now. Coastal Permit Determination Log #: Follow-Up Actions: 1) Stamp Building Plans as "Exempt" or "Coastal Permit Required" (at minimum Floor Plans)~ , _\ .... -2) Complete :(;,oas.~~! .f~rmit Determination Log as needed. ~DD )g DD ~D D 13-D D -SD D ~D D ~D D D D D lnclusionary Housing Fee required: YES __ NO --X_ (Effective date of lnclusionary Housing Ordinance -May 21, 1993.) Data Entry Completed? YES NO (A/P/Ds, -Activity Mai11tenanc13, enter CB#, toolbar, Screens, Housing Fee·s, Construct Housing Y /N, Enter Fee, UPDATE!) Site Plan: 1.., P_rovide a fully dimensional ··s,ite · plan drawn to scale. Show: North arrow, property lines, easements, existing· and proposed structures, streets, existing street improvements, right-of-way width, dimensional setbacks and existing topographical lines: · 2. Provide legal description of property and assessor's parcel number. Zoning: 1. Setbacks: Front: Required Shown Interior Side: Required Shown Street Side: Required Shown Rear: Required Shown 2. Accessory structure setbacks: Front: Required Shown Interior Side: Requ1red Shown Street Side: --Required Shown Rear: Required Shown Structure separation: Required Shown 3. Lot Coverage: Required Shown 4. Height: Required Shown 5. Parking: Spaces Required Shown Guest Spaces Required Shown Additional Comments OK TO ISSUE AND ENTERED APPROVAL INTO COMPUTER SL 71,,/J DA TE //-JO--CO ·Carlsbad Fire Department 004394 1'63$ Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Plan Review Requirements Category: Fire Prevention· (760) 602-4660 Date of R~port: 1210112000 ----------------- · .Building Plan Reviewed by: Name: Howard Anderson Address: 2194 Carmel Valley Rd City, State: Del Mar CA 92014 · Plan Checker: Job#: 004394 -------,- Job Name: Legoland Retail West 81 d g #: CB004394 -------------------,.---,,----------,--... Job Address: 1 Legoland Drive Ste. or Bldg._ No. ~ Approved D Approved Subject to D Incomplete ·, Review FD Job# The item you have submitted for review has been approved. Tbe approval is based on plans, information and / or specifications provided in your submittal; therefore any-changes to these items after tt:iis date, including field modifications, must be reviewed by this office fo insure continued conformance with applicable codes and standards. Please review carefully all comments attached as failure to comply wit~ instructions in this report can result in suspension of permit to construct or ins.tall improvements. The item you have submitted for review has been approved subject to the attached conditions. The approval is bas_ed on plans, information and/or specifications provided in your submittal. Please review carefully all 9omments attached, as failure to comply with instructions in this report can result in suspension of permit to construct or install improvements. Pleas.e resubmit to this office the necessary plans and/ or specifications required to indicate compliance with applicable codes and standards. "fhe item you have submitted for .review is_ incomplete. At this time, this office cannot adequately conduct a review to determine compliance with the applicable codes and / or standards. Please review carefully all comments attached. Please resubmit the necessary plans and/ or specifications to this office for review and approval. 1st 004394 2nd FD File# 3rd Other Agency ID [ ][ ][ l Structural Calculations , [ ][ Ed"\Vard W. Marshall, P.E. ( ] 2044 Wildhorse Lane, Big Bear City CA 92314-9024 800.337.7083 * 909.584.1190 * Fax 815.327.9145 Remodel/addition Project Legoland, Carlsbad Situs L1:1goland Owner Howard Anderson & Associates Designer • I Snow Loads, 1997 UBC recognized national standard, ANSI/ASCE 7-95 Minirriutn0esign Loads for Buildings and Other Structures IIAII 11911 "C" "D" o.oo o.oo O.OQ o:oo = Pg, Ground snow load Ver 1.1b o.oo o.oo o.oo o:od = Roof Pitch 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 = Angle AOS AOS AOS AOS = Roof surface, USS (Unobstructed slippery) or AOS (All-other surfaces) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 = I, Table 7-4 Occupancy Importance Factor, 0.8, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2 7-1 (Flat) 7-1 (Flat) 7-1 (Flat) 7-1 (Flat) = Formula-required, .Eq. 7-1, 7-2 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 = Ce, Tabl.e 7-2, 0.9, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2 1.20 1.1 o· 1.00 1.00 = Ct, thermal factc;,r, Table 7-~ 1.0, 1.1, 1.2 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 = Cs, Fig, 7-2; Slope adjustment coefficient 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 = Pf, flat roof snow load n/a n/a n/a n/a = Ps, sloped roof snow load 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ='Balanced snow-load 0.00 a.ob 0.00 0.00 = Unbalanced " 0.00 0.00 0:00 0.00 = Balanced @75% (Seismic value) Loads Balcony 60 FLL 40 RDL 15 Wall 56 FOL 10 Floor 50 CDL 5 RLL 20 SnowA 0 Snows o SnowC 0 SnowD 0 UBSnowA 0 UBSnowB Q lJBSnowC 0 UBSnowD 0 RoofA 40 RoofB 40 RoofC 40 RoofD 40 UBRoofA 40 UBRoofB 40 UBRoofC 40 UBRoofb 40 Evaluate controlling load quration factor: Case II controls Case I 22.2 (CDL+RDL) * (1/.9) Case II 32.0 (CDL +RDL +RLL)*(1/1.25) Abbreviations B Beam Hip Hip rafter P Point load Sel Select • Bed Bedroom Kit Kitchen PP 2xP T Triangular C Ceiling L-DF TPI DF/L PR Purlin U Uniform D Dormer L-ES TPI ES-LP-AF Prem Premium UB Unbalanced F Floor Liv Living room R Rafter V Valley Fam Family room Master Master-SR Ridge Ridge beam WL40 Wall Log 40 H Header Mbath Master·bath Rstc Rustic rev. 1.5 Report: None. Allowables, bearing: 1 ;000 psf Lateral: n/a I • Legoland 1. wb3 1 of 3 0 ·~ u " • • • Location: Addition Lateral Design & Analysis rev 2.2 , Fault Rose Canyon Fault -. T;ype: Table 16-5 ( Na) Table 16-T (Nv) 0.440 Ca, T. 16-Q Source Type <=2~m A 1.5 B 1.3 C 1. Source type <=2~m A 2 B 1.6 C 0.020 Ct, 1630.2.4 Location: typical I. Table 16-K 1 R, Table 16-N, 16-R 5.5 B Distance: 7.0km 5km >= 10 km 1.2 1 1 5-km 10 km >= 15 km 1.6 1.2 1 1.2 1 0.717 Cv, 16-R Height, uppermost _2_0 __ __, _ __,.......a..-,----,----.------------. T, Section 1630.2.2 _o_.1_8_9_-,---,-~----~1~--____ -.... l ____ __. Eq. 30-4/W Eq. 30-5/W Eq. 30-6/W Eq. 30-7/W Z, Table 16-1 0.4 Cvl/(RT) 0.689 2.5 Cal/(R) (Limit on eq. 30-4) 0.200 0.11 Cai 0.048 0.82Nvl/(R) 0.065 Controlling coefficient 0.200 Map Page: 0-36 Na: 1.000 Nv: 1.120 Basic Wind speed, exposure: 70 mph, _exp, C Wind Load determination, ver 1.5 l Table 16-F 70 mph 12.6 Table 16-F __ -=--,---------,---c _____ B __ _ Height D Wind stagnation pressure 80 mph 16.4 1.06 0.62 15 1.39 90 mph 20.8 100mph 25.6 Calculation: Height 15 25 30 4d Ge, T 16-G 1.06 1.13 1·:23 1.31 25 1.45 30 1.54 40 1.62 Cq T.1.6-H qs T. J6-F 1.3 12.6 1.3 12.6 1.3 12.q 1.3 12.6 Reference: Resisting vertical weight, with and without snow Adjustment factor: 60% Location Gables Bearing Tributary roof span 2.0 11.0 · floor span O O Wall loading 56 56 RDL 15 15 CDL 5 5 FOL Snow@75% Total w/o snow " with snow Factored total w/o snow " with snow 10 0 96 96 58 58 10 0 276 276 166 166 1.13 0.67 1.23 0.76 1.31 0.84 lwT. 16-K Wind Pres . 1 17.36 18.51 20.15 21.46 Revised 29 April, 2000 15:16 l Legoland1 .wb3 2 of 3 20-Nov 01 :59 PM Reference: EWP rafters Engineered Wood Joists.Rev2.5 Reference R1 Location Rafters @ storage room Span 22.0 Member T JI/Pro/550/14 • Spaced/Trib 4.00 Load type RoofA TotalUnif 40, LiveUnif 20 M.eval. 11.0 Deval. 11.0 Distr. load: ,169 Ewpd.l. 4.5 R1 1,810 R2. 1,810 Mx 9;952 El*DEFL 1.09E+09 SF1 165 SF2 165 Index 11 Shear, Design 1,810 Table shear, 100% 2,'.125 LDF 1.25 Allowble 2,656 FOS 1.47 Bending, Design 9,952 Table bending, 100% 9,420 LDF 1.25 Allowable 11,775 FOS 1.18 Deflection 1.24 Ratio 212 Defl, live 0.62 Ratio 424 • Location: Storage headers, two-point load evaluation • Element: H1 Loads: R1 Length: 6.0 Wet/dry: dry Analysis Load Type Point Point Point Rect. Rect. Rect. Triangular Design Index 1 w, net 3.5 d, net 7.3 P/w 1,810 1,810 0 0 0 0 0 Material: I 2x4 DFL#2 Fb Table: 875 Modified: 1,509 Design: 708 Allow/Dsgn 2.13 Legoland1 .wb3 Braced@ Repet?: Station 1 5 3 6 6, 6 TOTALS: Cs: Ck: Cengr: Cm: Fv 95 109 42 2.58_ 6.0 no 8.44 34.68 1.00 1.00 R1 1,508 302 0 0 0 0 0 1,810· - Spaced@ Uniform: trib.: R2 302 1,508 0 0 0 0 0 1,810 S: I: Cd: CF: E 1,600,000 1,600;000 ~:of~ Refe_rence: __ Refererice: B 1 Point& Uniform Load A"& D, LS001 Rev. 4.4c H1 Location,· Convenience store, at removed wall Span: 22.0 Storage headers 6.0 Spaced/Tri~: 20.0 #of Plys 1 toad types: RoofA Point load: 0 P .L. station: 11.00 Uniform: 40 lndeix# 320 Member 5.125x1B Gib Dell. criteria: 240 · LbF: 1 Loading: u· FsL: 1, Distr. load: 800 Footing: 36 (2x=52) ·End reaction: 8,800 FB 2,400 FV 165 .o 1.10 RMF 1 ldf'rmrcf*f-1: 1.00 FB'/fb 1.12 FV'/Fv 1.34 D/d 1.01 B 2.7 Multiple point/uniform loads 2x4 DFL#2 Mx Ei*DEFL 905 6.77E+06 905 6.77E+06 0 O.OOE+OO 0 O.OOE+OO 0 O.QOEz+OO 0 O.ciOE+OO 0 O,OOE+OO 1,809 1.35E+07 . ' 30.i Area: 111.1 le: 1. 15 Cs': 1.50 Crep: D V360 0.20 0.08 . 2.62 ,, 1.0 1 R1 1,810 3.00 40 8 4x8DFL#2 360 u 40 16 (2x=20) 1,025 875 95 0.20 1.15 1.50 1.14 1.61 2.31 0,5 Version 1.1 a M eval.: 3.0 Deval.: 3.0 SF1 SF2 1,810 0 0 1,810 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,810 1,810 25.38 10.03 1.00 1,00 20-Nov 01 :59 PM 0-36 S •t Activ~ F~~-lt Near-$ource Zones I Us This map 1s intended to be used 1n conjunction with . . • · the 1997 Uniform Building Code, tables 16-S and 16-T ][ ][ ] [ ][ Edward W. Marshall, P.E. Fault Rose Canyon Type: "B" Distance: 7 km Map page #: 0-36 Na: 1.000 Nv: 1.120 Legoland [ ] 2044 Wildhorse Lane, Big Bear City CA 92314-9024 800.337.7083 * 909.584.1190 * Fax 815.327.9145 West Complex Addition revised 11/20/2000 13-:2& (Calculations Reference Only) LOF 1 p4 LOF2 1 LOF3 ][ ][] [ ][ Edward W. Marshall, P.E. [ ] 2044 Wildhorse Lane, Big Bear City CA 92314-9024 800.337.7083 * 909.584.1190 * Fax 815.327.9145 pl [A] p3 Legoland West Complex Addition revised 11/20/2000 13:28 p2 1 LOF4 (Calculations Reference Only) • • • J[ ][ ]Project: Loegoland West Compiex Storage room J [' Edward W. Marshall, P-.E. ] 2044 Wildhorse Lane, Big Bear City CA 9231'4-.9024 800.337.7083 * 909.584.1190 * Fax 815,327.91-45 Lateral Design Segment T_able 6f Contents:" SECTION DESCRIPTION Section O 2000.Nov.20 14:09 ( c,) 2000 E W Marshall =====================.====----·========·====== .,====-, ===. =====. 1 Shear ,panel & holddown summary. 2 Diaphragm, reliab~lity factor, & line of force details. 3 Shear panel-detail, wind & EQ forces. 4 Input data file. 5 Shear schedule, ti~ down ~eference tables . • • • ][ ][ ]Project: Loegoland West Complex Storage room Section 1 ] [' Edward W. Marshall, P. E. ·2000. Nov. 20 14: 09 ] 2044 Wildhorse Lane, Big Bear City CA 92314-9024 800. 337. 7083 * 909. 584. 1190 * Fax 815. 327. 91·45 ( c) 2000 E W Marshall Shear Panel & HD Summary Length EQ/ Max Max Shear A.B.J ID Gross Net Wind V Uplift Sched. Mudsill 1 22.0 22.0 Wind 1,944 423 2 23.0 23.0 EQ 1,642 -1,052 3 22.0 22.0 Wind 1,944 423 4 23.0 23.0 EQ 1,642 -1,052 Corner Tiedown Combinations --------------------------- ID A B C O M B O S A 2 3 B 3 4 Section 1 notes: Uplift -1, 0~ 4 -1, 014 A 48/2X A 48/2x A 48/2x A 48/2x [Hold .Down AB -ST min 1. HTT16' is an HTT16 insta~led on a 2x stud. [Hold AB Down Options] ST min ST max ------- Options] ST max Straps 2. ST min is for ST straps installed within 1/2" of -corner. 3. ST max requires 2 x le minimum from corner. 24" maximum. 4. Simpson Strongwall panel per PFC-5485. 5. Tiedown corner combinations calculated by SRSS method~ 6. ID prefix key: None Shear panel, typical. " " Panel not in9luded in calculations. Straps "+" Steel or concrete element. LRFD adjusted: De$ign calculations for element included in maih .body of struc1;unal calcuiations . • • • ][ ][ ]Project: Loegoland West Complex Storage room Section 2 JP Edward W. Marshall, P.E. 2000.Nov.20 14:09 ] 2044 Wildhorse Lane, Big Bear City CA 92314-9024 800.337.7083 * 909.584.1190 * Fax 81'5,.327.9,145 (c) 2000 E W Marshall Diaphragm Detail Length Wind Exposure ID Story N/S E/W N/S E/W OA Area Gross Weight LOF Sums N/S E/W ----------------·-----.---------------------, --------------· --. ,=== A 0 32.0 22.0 7.0 7.0 704 . 17,600 100 100 Reliability Factor Detail (Story Shear) (Max Unit Shear)·(Shear Ratio) Story N/S E/W N/S E/W N/S E/W ==========================================.=== '_=·====-==.=-=== 0 704 704 77 80 1.087 1.136 Reliability factors~ N/S = 1.307 E/W = 1.337 (See notes below) Line of Force Detail Alignment .Net Panel Shear ID Story Accel. N/S E/W Avail Wind Shear EQ 1 2 3 4 0 0 0 0 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 0% 100% 0% 22.0 1,944 1,760 22.0 1,944 1,760 23.Q 1,337 1,760 23.0 1,337 1,760 Section 2 notes: 1. Reliabilility/Redundacy factor caiculated per 1'997 UBC Section 1630. See formula (30-3), Sec 1630.1.1. Refer to Sec. 1628 for notations . • I I • • • [ ][ ][ ]Project: Loegoland West Complex Storage room [. JP Edward W. Marshall, P.E. [ ] 2044 Wildhorse Lane, Big Bear City CA 92314-9024 800.337.7083 * 909.584.1190 * Fax 815.327.9145 Shear panel Detail, Wind Length Pier Unit Vert. ID Gross Net Level LOF Hgt. V plf OT Section 3 2000.Nov.20 14:09 (c) 2000 E W. Marshall RM Net OT Soio Uplift Composite Uplift -------------------------------------------.-----------------------------· -----. ---------------- 1 22.0 22.0 0 1 12.0 88 58 23,332 14,.036 9,296 423 423 2 23.0 23.0 0 4 12.0 58 166 16,041 43,907 -27,866 -1,212 -1,212 3 22.0 22.0 0 2 12.0 88 58 23,332 14,036 9,296 423 423 4 23.0 23.0 0 3 12.0 58 166 16,041 43,907 -27,866 -1, 212 -1, 212 Shear panel Detail, Earthquake ------------------------------ 1 22.0 22.0 0 1 12.0 76 58 20,165 14,036 6,129 279 279 2 23.0 23.0 0 4 12.0 71 166 19,710 43.,907 -24, 197 -1,052 -1,052 3 22.0 22.0 0 2 12.0 76 58 20, H>!? 14., 036 6,129 279 279 4 23.0 23.0 0 3 12.0 71 166 19,710 43,907 -24, 197 -1,052 -1,052 . -- 'I • • • [, J( J[ ]Project: Loegoland West Complex ·storage room Section 4 [ Jf Edward W. Marshall, P.E, 2000.Nov.20 14:09 ( J 2044 Wildhorse Lane, Big Bear City CA 923j4-~024 800.337.7083 * 909.584.1190 * Fax 815.327.9145 (c) 2000· E W Marshall Input Data #### Project Data Project: Loegoland West Complex Storage rdom Run Description: Initial floorplan, revised 11/20/2000 13:57 #### Diaphragm Data ID Level DW Snow Wind NSLeng EWl,.ehg Plate A 0 25 0 17.36 32 22 12 #### Diaphragm Wind Integration Data Parent %,ID (%,IP, .. ) A 100,A #### Diaphragm EQ Integration Data Parent % ID (%,ID ... ) A 100,A #### Line of Force Data LOF NS% EW% V/W %,ID (%,ID ... ) 1 0 100 20 50,A 2 0 100 20 50,A 3 100 0 20 5.0,A 4 100 0 20 59,A #### Panel Data Panel LOF Length PLateH voids PierH wvert EVert 1 1 22 12 0 12 !58 58 2 4 23 12 0 12 166 1"66 3 2 22 12 0 12 58 58 4 3 23 12 0 12 166 166 #### Corner Tiedown Combinations ID Panel A Panel B A 2 3 B 3 4 #### End of File NSWind EWWind 7 7 (%,ID ... ) • • • [ ][ ][ ]Project: Loegoland West Complex Storage room Section 5 ['][•Edward W. Marshall, P.E. · 2000.Nov.20, 14:09 [ ] 2044 Wildhorse Lane, Big Bear City CA 92314-9024 800.337.7083 * 909.584.1190 * Fax 8:15.327,9145 (c) 2000 E w Marshall Shear Schedule, Tie Down Table revised 25 September, 2000 15:35 Allowable Shear for Wind or Seismic Forces, Stru.ctural I Panels, Table 23-II-I-1 Values, 1997~BC {note, 1, 2, 3) Panel Callout Shear Vmax 15/32" APA Min. Mudsill LTP4/A35 Struct. I /Framing at 5/8" A.B. Std/H1 Sheathing Panel edges (note 4,) (note 5) Sill Nailing. 16d -----------------------------------------·--------------------------------- A 280 8d*-6"o.c. 2x 48 18/48 8 B 350 8d*-4"o.c. 2x 36 16/48 5 C 430 8d*-4"o.c. (6) 3x 36 12/24 5 D 550 8d*-3"o. C, (6) 3x 32 9/16 4 E 730 8d*-2"o.c. (6) 3x 24 7 /10 3 F 870 1 Od -2" o . c . ( 6) 3x 18 6/ 8 3 D-D 1,100 8d * -3" 0. C. ( 6} 3x 16 (6) 9/16 (7). 4 (8) E-E 1,460 8d*-2"o.c. (6) 3x 12 (6) 7/10 (7) 3 (8) F-F 1,740 10d-2"o.c. (6) 3x 9 (6) ei s (7) . 3 (8) * Use 10d fasteners over G.W.B .. NOTES: 1. Panel edges blocked with min. 2"-nominal or wider framing, 16" stud spacing, common, not sinker, nails or galv. box. nails. 2. 5/8" T1-11 nailed through 5/8" section maybe used. 3. 12" o.c. spacing in field, typical all callouts. 4. 2 x 2 x 3/16 plate washers are required at all anchor bolts. 5. One each (1) H1 seismic tie required at each truss. 6. Staggered. 7. Both sides of panel. 8. (2) rows at table spacing. Double blocking/double rim . Allowable Tension, Simpson StrongTie Holddowns, Straps, Catalog C-99 (1, 2, 3) Anchor Threaded T max Holdown Stud Bolt CL . so Rod T max Strap Stud ====----=----====================<====-==·=========-===== =======·======== 1,656 HTT16' 2x SSTB20 3,480 HTT16 4X SSTB20 4,565 HTT22 4x SSTB24 5,585 PHD6 4x SSTB28 7,120 PHD8 4x SSTB28 8,910 HD10a 4x SSTB28 11,080 HD14a (5) 4x 1 X 42 15,305 HD15 (5,6) 6x 1-1/4 X 44 1-3/8 1/2 1°3/8 1 /2 1-3/8 1/2 1-3/8 1-5/8 1-3/8 1 -5/.8 ?-1 /16 Q/11:l 2-3/16 5/-8 2-1 /8 3-5/8. (4) ( 4) (4) 5/8 5/8 5/8 7J8 7/8 7/8 1 1-1/4 j,000 LSTA36 2x 2,145 MSTC40 4x 3,375 MSTC52 4x 5,635 MSTC66 4x 5,855 MSTC78 4x NOTES: 1. See Simpson Str'ongTie Catalog for manufacturer's written instructions. 2. Washers are required 1,mder stud bolt nuts. 3. SO= Min. plate stanqoff height, eL = Stud face to bolt centerline. 4. Estimated. 5. 36" minimum embedment. 6. HD15 requires standard washer between base plate and nut . 01/03/2001 09:50 8582920771 , LEIGHTON SAN. DJ;Et;iO PAGE 02 ~u, II: =::: ' :;--------Leighton and Assoc1a.tes ,;;; -;:: --... A GTG Company GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS To: Attention: Subject: Reference: Legoland Califor:nia One Lego Drive Carlsbad, California 92008 Mr. Chris.Romero January 2, 2001 Projectl~fo. 960151-018 Geotechnic~J Foundation Plan Review, West Complex Retail Store Expansion, Legoland Theme Park, Carlsbad, California, :Leighton ,~nd Associates. 2000, Geotechnical Up~ate ReP.9rt, Proposed West' Complex Retail Store Expansion~ Legoland Theme Park, Carlsb~d,'Califcfrniii, Proje<;:t No. 960151_- 018. dated January 2, 2001. Howard Anderson & Associates, 2000, Proposed Addition & Remodeling for Legoland C~Jifomia • West Complex Retail Store, 1 Lc::goJaµ,d, -Drive, Carlsbad. California, Dated December 13, 2000. As reque.sted, we have reviewed the referenced foundation.plans in an attempt to identify potential conflicts with our refefenced geote·chnical x-eport. Based on Ollt review, the plans wefe found to be in general agre·ement with the geotechnical recom:rnend~tionsexcepi:foi the following comment: 1. Sheet S-3, Detail N: Tl:lis detail should show 2 inches of sand below the sl~b, the sand should be additionally underlain ,by a visqueen moisture harrier underlain by an additional 2 inches of sand. Sand should possess a sand eqitfvalent of 30 9r great~r. The option for: aggregate base should be eliminated. ' ,' The conclusions and recommendations in this teview are based in part upon datathat were obtained from a limited number-of observations, site visits, excavations, samples, and. tests. Such fofonnation is by necessity· incomplete. The nature of many sites is such that differingge.otechn'ical or geological subsuxfaceconditions can and do occur. Th,erefon:, the findings, conctusions and tecommi;,ndationspresen~ed in this review and previous report can be relied,upon only if Leighton has ~be opportuoityto observe the subsurface conditions during grading and· construction of this project Only with these observations are we able to confirm that our preliminary findings are representativefor the·site. 3934 Murphy Canyo~ 'AQ~d, #8205, San· Dl~go, CA Q2123A4425 (858) 292•8030 • FAX (85&) 292-0771 • www.le;ghtonge-s 00 ,.,, , " 01/03/2001 09:50 8582920771 LEIGHTON SAN .PI~GO PAGE 03 960151-018 ;. If you haye &ny questions regarding this .letter,.pl~ase col)tact this office .. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service.' · · · ·. Respectfully submitted) LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Distribution: 01/03/2001 08:28 ~EIGHTDN SAN DIEGO PAGE 02 / .,' .:.: ,•: ~-' ., : ·. §01=--_... -.:: h £¥Lr• Leigh·ton and Associates A GTG Comp~ny GEOTEOHNICAL CONSULTANTS GEOTECBNICAL UPDATE REPORT, PROPOSED WEST COMPLEX REI AIL STORE EXPANSION, LEGOLANJ) THEME PARK, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA . . Project No. 960151-018 January 2, 2001 Prepared For LEGOLAND CALIFORNIA · One Lego Drive Carlsbad, California 92008 393.4 Murphy Canyon Road, #B205, Sa~ Diego, CA 92123-4425 (858) 292-8030 • FAX (858) 292-0771 ~ www·.leightongeo.corn C/J~D 419 LI 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 03 §UR:::::: 9 .. --. ---------Leighton and Associates A GTG Company GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS To: Attention: Subject: Introduction Legoland California One Lego Drive Carlsbad, California 92008 Mr. Chris Romero January 2, ~0o-1 - Project No. 960151·018 Geotechnica,l Update Report, Proposed West Complex Retail Store Expansion, Legoland Therne Park, Carlsbad, C!!lifomia In accordance with your request and authorization, this report has been prepared to provide an updated summary of the geotechnical conditions relative-to the proposed West Complex retail stare expansion in the LegoJand Theme Park in Carls had, California (Figure l ). The recommendations provided herein are based on our review of th~ as-graded conditions in the ~rea of proposed_ buiiding. expansfon and the foundation design for the proposed strueture. I_n preparation of this update letter, we have reviewed the available geotechnical reports relative to the Legoland site (Appendix A) and made a site visit to observe the current site conditions. Site Development The West Comple~ retail store expansion is located in the southern portion of the Legoland Theme Park in the City of Carlsbad, California (Figure l). We understand that the proposed expansion wUI include the removal of a portion of the existing parking lot and construction of an additional approximately 1,000 square feet to the West Complex -retail store. In addition, we understand seve.ri:'!-1 interior walls are to be added to the existing structure. The proposed.structute will consist of a slab-on"grade foundation with wood framing. 3934 Murphy Ca.nyon Road, #B205, San Diego, CA 92123-4425 (858) 292-8030 • FAX (858) ~9~·.0771 • www.leightongeo.com I _J 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 NORTH BASE .MAP: Tl,Qma.a Bri:>s. Gi,oFlrider for Windows, San Dieg9-Coun1y, ,1995, Page 1126. LEGOLAND California West Complex Expansion One Lego Drive Carlsbad, C~liforni~ LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO 111=2·,000' SITE LOCATION MAP Project No. 960151-018 Date January 2001 PAGE 04 IA "Figure No. 1 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 05 960151-018 Con cl us jogs Based on the results of our site visit and review of the project geotechnical repons (Appendix A), it appears that the geoiechnical conditions of the ~ite have ~,ot changed sjgnificantly since the date of our as-graded report for the site (Leighton; 1998). Tbe subject site was originally graded as part of the Legoland Theme Park development under the observation and testing of Leighton and Associates (Leighton, 1998). Grading operations for the subject portion of site incl ~ded excavation of up to· 15 feet of Quaternary Te.rrace deposits bedrock. The aerial extent of the mapped geologic units on the site is depicted the Geotechnical Map (Figure 2). Groundwater was not encountered nor .anticipated during the previous rough grading operations or during our recent site reconnaissance at the location of the proposed West Complex expansion. We have reviewed the fout1dation plans for the proposed expansion an.cl are presenting the results of our review under separate cover. Based on the current slte conditions, our review of the referenced geotechnical reports, foundation plar{s, and our experience during development of the Lego land project, it is our professional opinion that the proposed development is feas·ible from an engineering st.a.ndpoiot provided the appropriate recommendations of this report are incorporated into the construction phases of the project. Recommendatj ans 1. E!!irthwork We anticipate that future earthworkon the sjte will consist of demolition anci removal of the existing parking area in preparation for co.o.st.ruction of the proposed addition and associated improvements. We recommend that earthwork on the site-be perfomed in accordance with the following recommendations, the City of Carlsba:d grading requirements, and the Gener.al Earthwi;,rk and Grading Specifications of Rough-Grading included in Appendix B. In case of conflict,· the following recommendations shall supersede those in AppendixB. · • Site Preparation We anticipate removal of the existing parking Ic:,t for the proposed expansion will disturb the subsurface soils. Due to the length of time since the compl~ion of the latest phase of grading, we also ao.ticipate that the near-su:rtac.e soils have_ become desiccated and/or over~wet. We 1,'ecom.mend that in the areas of proposed d6velopment the subsQrface soils be removed to a depth of 6 to l2 inches, moisture,..conditfonedto near-optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM TestMethod D 1557). If additional grading, such as fill placement, is planned on the site, the areas to receive structural fill or engineered structures should be cleared of. subsurface obstructions, potentially compressible material (such as desiccated fill ·soils) and stripped of vegetation prior to grading. Vegetation and debris should be removed and properly disposed of offsite. Holes resulting form removal of buried obstmctions which extend below finish site grades should be replaced with suitable compacted fill material. Areas to receive fill and/or other surface irnprovements should be scarified to a minimum depth of 12 inches, brought to near-optimum moisture condition, and i:ecompacted to at least 90 percent relative cornpaction{b~sed on ASTM Test Method D1557). 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 05 960151-018 • Excavations Excavations of the on~site materials may generaliy be accomplished with conventional heavy-duty earthwork equ.ipmeot. It is net anticipated that blasting will be, required, or that significant quantities of oversized rock (i.e., rock with maximum dimensions greater than 6 inches) will be generated during future grading. However~ Jf oversized rock is encountered, it should be hauled offsite, placed in non-structural or landscape areas. Excavation of utility trenc,hes should be perforrned in accordance with the project plans, specifications and all ~ppiicable OSHA requirements. The c01'1tractor should be responsible for providing the "competent person" required by OSHA s.tandards. Contractors should be advised that sandy soils and/or adversely~oriented,bedfock structures can make excavations patticularly unsafe if all safety precantions are not taken. Spoil piles due to the excavation and construction equipment should be kept away from and on the down slope side ofthe trench, • Fill Placement and Compaction The on-site soils are generally suitable for use as compacted fill ,provided they are free of o:rganjc material, debris, and rock fragments l~rger than ,6 inches in maximum dimension. All fill soils should be brought to near-optifuwn moisture conditions and compacted in uniform lifts to at least 90 percent relative compaction based on the laboratory maximum dry density (ASTM Test Method D 1557). The optimum lift thicknes~ requjred to produce a uniformly compacted fill will depend on the type and size of compaction equipment used. In general, fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 4. to 8 inche$ in eompa~ted thic;kness. Placement and compaction of fill should be performed in general accordance with th~ current City of Carlsbad grading ordinances, sound construction practices, and the Generals Earthwork and Grading Specifications of Rough-Grading presented in AppendixB 2. Faulting and Seismicity Our discussion of f'aults on the, site is prefaced with a discussion of California legislation and state policies concerning the classification and land-use criteria a,ssociated tvith faults. By definition of the California Mining anc,i Geology Board, a.n active· fatdt .is a fault which has had surface displacement within Holocene time (a.bout the last 11,000 years). The State Geologist has defined a pgtentia!ly active fault as any fault considered active during Quaternai:ytim:e (last 1,600,000 years) but that has not been proven to be active or inactive. This definition is used in delineating Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones as mandated by the Alquist-P,riolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act of 1972 and as most recently revised in 1997. The intent of this act is to assur~ thai unwise urban development does not occur .;i.cross the traces of active faults. Based on our review 'of the Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones; the site is not located within any Fault-Rupture Hazard Zone as cr-eatE:ld by the Alquist-PrioloAct (Hart, 1997). San Diego, like the rest of squthero California, is seismically active as a result of being located near the active margin berw~en the North American and Pacffic tectonic plates: The principal source of seismic activity ,jg, movement along the northwest-trending regional fault zones such as the San Andreas, San Jacinto and Elsinore Faults, Zones; as well as along less active faults such as the Rose Canyon and Newport Inglewood ,Fault Zones. Our review qf available geologic literature indicates that there are no 'known major active faults.on or In the imm~diate vicin-ity of the site, The nearest -4- 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 07 960151, -018 known active regional faqlt is the Rqse Canyon Fault Zone located apprqximately 4.7 mjles west of the site. · · The site can be considered to lie within a seismically active region, as can all of Southern Californi!:l- Table 1 identifies potential seismic events that could be produced by a max:imum credible earthquake oo the closest regional active faults. A .maximum credible earthquake is the maximum ~oectable earthquake given the known tectonic framework. Site-specific seismic parameters included in Table 1 (below) are the distances to the causative faults, earthquake magottude-s, and expected ground accelerations. Table 1 Seismic Parameters for Active Faults Maximum Credible Peak Horizontal Potential Causative Distance from Fault to Earthqu~ke Ground Acceleration Fault Zone Site (Moment Mag9itud(I) (g) Rose Canyon 4.7 miles (7.5 km) 6.9 0.66 N ewport•lnglewood 7.1 miles (11.5 ktn) 6.9 0.52 '' Coronado Bank 20.7 miles (33.3 km) 7.4 0.32 As indicated in Table 1, the Rose Cariyott Fault Zone is the 'active' fault considered having the most significant effect at the site frotn a design standpoint. A maximum credible earthquake of moment magnitude 6.9 on the fault could produc~ an estimated peak horizontal ground acceleration of 0.66g at the site. The effect of seismic shaking may be mitigated by adhering to the Uniform Building Code and state-of~the-art seismic design parameters of the Structural Engineers Association of California. • l 997 UBC Seismic Criteria The site is located within Seismic Zone 4 (per 1997 UBC, FiijtJ.r,e 16-2). Th~ Rose Canyon and NewporHnglewood Fault Zones are considered Type B seismic sources according to Table 16-U of the 1997 Unifonn Building Code. The Coronado Bank fault is considered a Type A seismic source according to Table 16-U. Based on· our engineering geologic' lissessment, the site is considered to have a type Sr> soil profile (per 1997 UBC Table 16-J). The near source factors N~ equal to 1.0 and Nv equal to U are considered appropriate based on the seismic setting applicable to the site (per 1997 UBC,. Tables 16-S and 16-T). Secondary effects that can be associated with severe gfound shaking folloWfng a relatively large earthquake include shaUow ground rupture, soil' Uquefactipn and dynamic settlement, seiches and tsunamis. These secondary effects of seismic shaking are discussed in the following sections. • Shallow Ground Rugture Gro,,md rupture because of active faulting is not believed to present a significant hazard to the site. Cracking due to shaking from distant seismic events is not considered a significant hazard eitlJer, although it is a possjbility.at aoy site in Southern California. ~5- 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 08 960151-018 • Liquefaction and Dynamic Settlement Liquefaction and dynamic settlement of soils can be caused ·by strong vibratory motion due to earthquakes. Both research aod· 'historical data indicate tba~ loosei saturated) granular soils are susceptible to liquefaction and dynamic settlement while the stability of stiff silty clays and clays and dense sands are not adversely affected by vibratory motion. Liquefaction is typified by a total loss of shear .strength in the affected soil layer, thereby causing the soil to flow as a liquid. This effect may be manifested by excessive settlements and sand boils at the ground surface. The surficial improvements on the site are underlain by bedrock materials of Quaternary Terrace deposits) \¥hich is not generally considered liqqeffable due to physical characteristics and unsaturated co,o.dition. • Tsunamis and Seiches Based on the distance l;>etween the site and large) open bodies of water, and the elevation of the site with respect to sea level, the possibility of seiches and/ortsu,o.amis is considered very low. 3. Foundation Design Conside,ratio.ns The proposed foundation and slab of the proposed building expansion should be designed in accordance with structural considerations provided by the structural engineer; All foundations should be designed for low expansive soils unless expansion index testing performed on the finished building pad soils indicate the soils within the upper 4 feet of finish grade indicate otherwise. If import material is utilized as fill QP. the site1 the impo:rfmaterial should consist of very low or low-expansive sandy material (with an e>;pan~ioninde.idess than SO per UBC 18-I-B). • Fou!!,_dation Desigg The proposed structures may be founded on shallow isolated and continuous footings. Isolated square or circular footings should have a minimum dimension of 2 feet and the continuous footings should have a minimum width of LS feet. The minimum embedment depth of 2 feet below lowest adjacent grade should be used for all footings and at least 6 inches into the formation material (Terrace Deposits). whichever is deeper. At these depths~ footings founded in competent formatiooal materials may be designed for a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot All continuous footings should be reinforced wjth a minimum of one No. 5 steel reinforcing bar at the top and bottom. Actual steel ·reinforcing Should be designed by the structural e!)gineer. Footing excavations should be kept moist from the time they are excavated llntil foundation concrete is placed. Water should not be allowed to pond in the bott9m of the excavations. Areas that become water damaged should be overexcavated to a firm base. Maximum anticip'ated total .and differential settlement of square/circular footings and continuous footings, constructed in accordance with the above~recommendations, are estimated to be less than½ inch. -6- 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 09 960151-018 Resistance to lateral loads can be provided· by friction acting at the base of founda~ions and by passive earth pressure. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 may be assumed with dead-load forces. An allowable passive lateral earth pressure of 309 psf per foot of depth up to a maximum of 3,000 psf may be used. for sides of footings poured against undisturbed natural materials or _properly compacted fill. This allowable passive pressure is applicable for level (ground slope equal to or flatter than 5: l, horizontal:vertical) conditions only. Bearing values indica!ed above a.re for total dead-load and frequently applied live loads. The above vertical bearing may be increased by 1/3 for short durations of loading which will include the effect of wind or seismic forces. • Floor Slab Design The slab-on-g.radeshould be at least 4 inches thick and be reinforced With No. 3 r-eba.rs 18 inch,es on center each way (minimum), placed at midheight in the slab. Slabs should be undertaken by a 2-inoh layer of clean sand .. The sand should be additionally underlain by a visqueen moisture barrier underlaih by afi additional 2 inches of sand. Sand should possess a sand equivalent of 30 or greater. We recommend control joints be provided across the slab at approp.rfa.te intervals as designed by the project architect. Priot to placernent of the vapor .barrjer, the upper 12 inches of slab subgrade should be moisture conditioned to a moisture content at or above the laboratory determined optimum. The potential for slab cracking may be further reduced by careful co:otrql of water/cement ratios. The contractor shbUld tak.e appropriate·curing precautions during the pouring of concrete in hot weather to minimize cracking of slabs. We recommend that a slipsheet (or equivalent) be utilized if grouted tile, marble tile, or other crack~sensitive floor covering is planned directly on concrete slabs. All slabs should oe designed in accordancewith structural considerations. If heavy vehicle or equipment loading is proposedfor the slabs, gre?,ter thickness and increased reinforcing may be required. ,. • Footing Setback We recommend a minimum.horizontal setback distance from the face of slopes fo:r all structui:al footings and settlement-sensitive structures. This distance is measured from the outside edge of the footmg,horiiontallyto the slope face (orto the face of a retaining wall) and should be a minimum of l O feet. We _sho11ld note that the soils within the structural setback area possess poor lateral stability, and improvements (such a.s retaining walls,. sidewall<s~ fences, .pools, pavement, underground utilities, etc.) constructed within this setback area may ·be subject to lateral movement and/or differential settlemeri.t. 4. Lateral Earth Pressures and Resistance Embedded structural walls should be designed for .lateral earth pressures exerted on them. The magnitude of these pressures depends on the atn9unt of deformation that the wall can yield under load. If the wall can yield enough to mobilize the full shear strength of the soil, it can be designed for "active" .pressure. If the wall cannot yield under the applied load, the shear strength of the soil cannot be mobilized and the earth pressure will be hifJher. Such wall should be designed for "at rest" -7- 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 10 960151-018 conditions. If a structure moves toward the so'ils, the resulting resistance development f:?y the soil is the "passive'' resistanc;e. · For design purposes, the recommended equivalent fluid pressure for each case for walls founded above the static ground water table and backfilled with very low .to low expansion potential soils is provided on Table 2. Determination of which condition, active or at-rest, is appropriate for design will depend on the flexibility of the wall. The effect of any surcharge ( dead or live load) should be added to the proceeding lateral earth pressures. Based on our investigation, the sandier oosite soils may provide low to very low expansive potential backfill material. All wall backfill soils should have an expansion potential of less than 20 (per UBC 18-I~B). Table2 Lateral Earth Pressures -,. Equivalent Fluid Weight (pcf) Condition Level 2:1 Slope Active 35 55 At-Rest 55 85 Passiv~ 300 (Maxinr1Jm of3 ksf) 150 (sloping down) The above values assume a very low to low expansi9n (less than 20 per UBC 18-I-B) potential backfill and free•drainitig conditions. If conditions other than these covered herein are anticipated, the equivalent fluid pressure values should be pro-vided on ah individual-c:;ase basis by the geotechnical engineer. A surcharge load for~ restrained or unrestrained wall resulting from automobile traffic may be assumed to ·be equivalent to a unifoim-presst.ii:e of 75 psf which is in addition to the equivalent fluid 'pressures given: above. All retaining wall ~tructures should be provided with appropriate drainage and waterproofing. Typical drainage design is illustrated in Appendix l3. As an alternative, an approved drainage board system inst.all ed. in accordan~ewjth the manufacturers' recommendations maybe used. Wall backfill should be _compacted by mechanical methods to at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM Test Method D1557). Should structute-s or driveway areas be located adjacent to retaining walls, the backfill' should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM Test Method D1557) and this ofnce should provide a4ditional surcharge recommendations. Surcharges :from adjacent structures, traffic, forklifts or other loads·adjacent to retaining walls should be considered in the design. Wall footings design and setbacks should be performed in accordance. with the previous foundation design recommendations and reinforced fa accordance with structural considerations. Soil resistance developed against lateral structural movement can be obtained from the passive pressure value provided above. Further, for sliding resistance, a friction coefficient of 0.35 may be used at the concrete and soil interface. These values may be increased by one~third when considering loads of short duration including wind or seismic loads. The total resistance may be taken as the sum of the frictional and passive resistance provided· tha.t the passive portion does not exceed two-thirds of the total resistance. -8- 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 11 5. Geochemical Considerations Concrete in . direct contact with soil that contains a high concentration of soluble sulfates can be subject to chemical deterioration commonly known as "sulfate attack." Testing of the finish grade soils should be perfonned at the completion of site grading. Additional recommendations can be provided at that time ff needed. 6. .<:oncrete Flatwork Jn order to reduce the potential for differential movement ot cracking of driveways, sidewalks, patios, other concrete flatwork, wire m~sh reinforcement is suggested along with keeping pad grade soils at an elevated moisture content. The recommended type of wire mesh reinforcement (based on the expansion potential of sjmilar soils) is px:esented on Table 3. , Table 3 Recommended Wire-Mesh Reinforcement of Concrete Flatwork Expansion Potential/Index Recomm~nded :Flatwork Reinforcement Very Lo\v to Low 6x6~6/6 w~lded~wire mesh .. Additional control can be obtained .by-provid{ng thickened edges and 4 or 6 inches of granular base or clean sand, respectively, below the flatwork. Reinforcement should be placed tnidheight in concrete. Even though the slabs a.re reinforced, some eXpau.sive soil~related movement (i.e., both horizontal to vertical differential movement, etc.) should be anticipated due to the nature of the expansive soils. A unifo_nn moisture content on the s~te should be maintajned tb.roughout the year to reduce differential heave of flatwor.k such as sidewalks> fla:twork, etc. 7. Control of Surface Water and Drainage Control Positive drainage of surface water away from structures is very important. No water should be allowed to pond adjacent to pi.Hidings. Positive drainage may be accomplished by providing drainage away from buildings at a gradient of at least 2 percenHor a distance of at least 5 feet, and further maintained by a swale or drainage path at a gradient of at least 1 perceAt, Eave gutters, with properly connected downspouts to appropriate outlets, !ij'e recommended to ~duce water infiltration into the subgrade soils. Planters wjth open bottoms adjacent to buUdi:n.gs should be avoided~ if possible. Planters should not be design adjacent to buHdings unless provisions for drainage, such as catch basins and pipe drains, are made. Overwatering of lots should be avoided. -9- 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON SAN DI~GO PAGE 12 960151-018 8. Construction Observation and Testing and Plan;Review Construction observation and testing should be performed by the geotechnical corisultaot during future grading, excavations and foundation or retaining wan construction at the site, Site-specific recommendations should be provided by a qualified geotechnical consultant and should be based on actual site conditions. Grading and foundation design plans should also be reviewed by the geotechnical consultant prior to const.rQction aod a final. report of geotechnical services should be prepared to document geotechnical servi~es upon completion of site development. 9, Limitations The conclusions and recommendations in this report are based in part upon data that were obtained by us and others from a limited number of observations and site -visits. Such information is by necessity incomplete, The nature of many sites is such that differing geotechnical or geological conditions can occur within small distances and under varying climatic conditions. Changes in subsurface conditions can and do occur over time. Therefore; the findings, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this report can be relied upon only if Leighton has the opportunity to observe the subsurface concUtions during grading and construction of the -p:roject, in order to confirm that our preliminary findings are representative for the site. Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. . Distribution: Attachments: . -10- Michael R. Stewart, CEG 1349 Vice President/ Principal Gl;lologist 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON $AN DIEGd PAGE 13 ·LEGEND- ·: =AJ!. · A~lflclal Fill -placed under the. observation and l"\l.. testing of Leighton and Associates, Inc. (Leighton, 1998) ---~ ..... ·, (J:t· Quaternary Terrace deposits (circled where bl,Jl'ied.). -··-· . Geotechnical Map . · West Gomplex -Expans.ion Carlsbad, Califonia BLUEPRINT soui:ice & SUPPLY l6!i~6l · Project No: · 960151--0~ Sc~e ~l~~-~=~3~0-' ____ _ EngrJGeol. ~C/KBC Drafted By .. K .... B._C......,__ ....,.· ---~,......... Date _,1..:.../=.2a..-/..._Q~1 ___ _ 1042 !189 Figure No. 2 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIG~TQN SAN bIEGO PAGE 14 960151-018 APPENDIX A References Blake, T. F., 1998a, EQFAULT, Version 2.2. ----, 1998b, FRJSKSP, Version 3.01. California Building and Safety Commission (CBSC), 1998, California Building Code. California Division of Mines and .Geology, CDMG, 1996, Probabilistic Seismic Haz~rd Assessment for the State of California,. Open File Report 96:..08. Hart, E. W., 1997, Fault Rupture Hazard Zories in California, Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones Act of 1972 with Inde~ to Special Study Zone Maps, Department of Conservation-, Division of Mines and Geology, Special P1,1blication 42. Howard Anderson & Ass~ciates, 2000, Proposed Addition & Remodeling for Legoland California, West Comple}( Retajl Store, 1 Lego land Dr. Catlsbad,-CA. 92008, dated December 13, 2000. International Conference ofB1,dlding Officials, 1997, Uniform Building Code. Leighton and Associates, Inc., 1995, Preliminary GeotechriicaI Investigation, Lego Family Park and Pointe Resorts; Lots 17 and 18 of the Carlsbad Ranch, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 950294-001, dated October 5, 1995. Leighton and Associates, Inc., 1996, Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation, Lego Family Park, Carlsbad Ranch, C1;1.rlsbad~ California, Project No. 960151-00.l, dated July 23, 1996. Leighton and Associates, Inc., 1998, Final As-Graqed Report of Rough Grading, Legq Family Park, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 960151-003 i dated February 10, 1998. Tan, S.S. and Kennedy, M. P., 1996, Geologic Maps ofthe Northwestern Part of San Diego County, California, Division of Mfnes· and Geofogy (DMG) Open--.File_ Report 96-02, San Luis Rey and San Marcos Quadrangles. A-1 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 15 Leighton e.nd Assoda.tes, Inc:, GENERAL EARTHWORl<AND GRADINGSRECJ:FICA TIONS P~ge 1 of 6 LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROUGH GRADING I.O General J030.I094 1.1 J'ntent: These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are for the grading and earthwork shown on the approved gr~ding plan(s) and/or indicated in tbe geotechnical report(s). These Specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical r(lport(s). In case of conflict, the specific recommendations in the geotechnical report shall supersede these more general Specifications. Observations of the earthwork by the project Geotechnical Consulta)"lt dudng the course of grading may result in new or revised recommendations that could supersede these specifications or the recommendations in the geotechnicalr~port(s). 1.2 Th.,e GeotechnicalConsultantofRecord: Priorto commencement of work, the owner shall employ the Geotechnical Consultant of Record (Geotechnical Consultant). The Geptechoical Consult.ants shall be responsible for reviewing the approved geotechnical report(s) and accepting the adequacy of the preliminary geotechnical findings, conclusions, and recommendations priqr to the commencement of the grading. 'Prior to commencement-of grading, the Geotechoical Consultant shall review the "work plan" prepared by the Earthwork Contractor(Contractor) and schedule sufficient personnel to perform the appropriate level of observatio!l, mapping, and compaction testing. During the grading and earthwork operations, the Geotechnical Consultant shall observe, map, and document the subsurface exposures to verify the geotechnical design assumptions. If the observed· conditions are found to be significantly different than the interpreted. assumptions d~I'ing the design phase, the Geotechnical Consultant shall .inform the owner, recommend a.ppropriatec changesc in design to accommodate the observed conditions, and notify the .review agency whe.re required. Subsurface areas to be geotechnicallyobse.rved, mapped, elev.a.tions recorded, and/or tested include natural ground after it ha& been cleared for receiving fill but before fill is .placed, bottoms of all "remedial removal" areas. all key bottoms, and benches made on sloping ground to receive fill. The Geotechnical Consultant shall observe the moisture-conditioningand processing of the subgrade and fill materials and perform relative compaction testing of fill to detennine the attained level of compaction. The Geotechnical Consultant shall provide the test results to the owner and the Contractor on a routine and frequentbasis. 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LE~GHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 15 Leiighton and Associates, lnc. GENERALEARTHWORKAND GRADlNGSPECIFICATIONS Page 2 of t5 2.0 30J0.109/4 1.3 The Earthwork Contractor: The. Earthwork Contract.or (Contractor) shall be qualified, .experienced, and knowledgeable in earthwork logisticsj preparation and processing of ground .to receive fill, moisture-conditioning and processing of fill, and compacting fill. The Contractor s.hall review and ,accept the plans, geotechnical report(s), and these Specifications prior to commencem.ent of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing the grading in accordani;e with the plans and specifications. The Contractor shall prepare and subrnjt to th~ owner a:nd the Geotechnical Consultant a work plan that indicates the sequence of earthwork grading, the number of "spreads" of work and the estimated .quantities of daily earthwork contemplated for the site prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall inform the owner and th.,e Geotechnical Cons\.lltant of changes in work schedules and upqates to the wor,k plan at least 24 hours io advance of such i;:hanges so that appropriate observations and tests can be planned and accomplished. The Contractor shall not assume that the Geotechnical Consultant is aware of a.I] grading operations. The Conti:-actor shf!.ll have the sole responsibiHty to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish tht;1 earthwork in accordance with the.applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, these _Specifications, and the r.ecomm.endations in the approved geotechnical report(s) and gr~ding plan(s). If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Consultant,.unsatisfactocy conditions, such as unsuitable soil, improper moisture condition, inadequate compaction, insufficient buttress key size, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifications, the Geotechnical Consultant shall reject the work and may recomm.end to the owner that const;ruction be stopped until the conditions are rectified. . Preparation of Areas.to ~e Filled 2 .1 Clearing and Grubbing: Vegetation, such as. brush,. grass, roots, and other deleterious material shall be sufficieqtly removed and properly disposed ·Of in a method acceptable to the owner, gover:nfog agencies, and the Geotechnical Consultant The Geotechni~al Consultant shall evaluate the extent of these removals depending oo specific si~ conditions. Earth fill material shall not contain more than 1 percent of organic materials (~y volume). No fil( lift shall contain more than 5 percent of organi9 matter. Nesting of the organic materials shall not be allowi;:d. If potentially hazardous materials are encountered, the Contractor shall stop work in the affected area, and a hazardous material specialist shaJJ be infomed immediately for proper evaluation and handling of these materials,ptiot to cc:mtinuing to work in that area. . . As presently defined by the State .of California, most refined petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, grea~ei coolant,. etc.) have chemical constituents that are considered to be hazardous Waste. As such, the indiscriminate dumping or spillage of these fluids onto the ground may cqnstitule a misdemeanor, p~rnishable by fines and/or imprisonment, and shall not be allowed. 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 17 ' Leighton ancl Assodat:es,Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORKAND G.RADlNGSPECIBCATIONS Page3 of 6 3.0 3030;1094 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 Processing: Existing ground that has been declared satisfactory for support of fill by the Geotechnical Consultant shall be scariti¢d to a :minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground that is not sati,sfactory shall 1;,e overexcavated as specified in the following section.· Scarification shall continue until soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features that would inhibit unifonn compaction. Overexcavation: In addition to removals and overexcavations recommended in the approved geotechnical repqrt(s) and the grading plan, soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy, organic.:rich, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be overexcavated to competent ground as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. Benchi11g: Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5: 1 (horizontal to vertical units), the ground shall be stepped or benched. Please see the Standard Details for a graphic illustration. The lowest bench or key. shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide and at least'2 feet deep, into cornpetent material as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant. Other benches shaU be excavated a minirnu.m height of 4 feet into competent material or as otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. :fill placed on ground sloping flatter: than 5: 1 shall also be benched or otherwise overexi;:avated to provide a flat subgrade for the fill. Evaluatfon/ Acceptance· of fill Areas: All areas to receive fill, including removal and processed areas. key bottom~, and benches, shall be observed, mapped, elevations . recorded, anq/or tested prior to being accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant as suit.able to receive :ult The Contracto.r shall obtain a written acceptaflce from the Geotechnical Consultantpdor to· fill placement,. A licensed su1;Veyor shall .provide the survey control for determining elevations of processedar~as. keys~ and benches. Fill Material 3 .1 General: Material to be used as fill shall be essentially free of organic matter .and other deleterious substances evaluat~d and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prio:r to placement, Soils of poor · quality,, such as those with unacceptable gradation, high expansion potential, or low strength shall be plac;:ed in areas acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant er mi~ed with other so.lls to achieve.satisfactory fill material. 3 2 Oversize: Oversize-material defined as ro~k. or other ir:reduciblematerial with a maximum dimension greater than 8 inches, shall not be buried or placed in fill unless location, materials; and placement methods are specifically accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant. Placement operations shall be such that nesting of oversized material does not occur and such that oversize materialis completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 vertical feet of finish grac{e or within 2 feet of future utiHties or underground construction. 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 18 . Leighton and Assodates,1nc. G'.ENERALEARTHWORKAND CRADINGSP~CIFICA!IONS Page4 of.6 3 J Import: If importing·of fill material is required for grading, proposed import material shall meet the requirements of Section 3 .1. The potential import source shall be given to the Geotechnical Consl,lltant at least 48 hours (2 working d~ys) before importing begins so that its suitability can be· determined and' appropriate tests performed. 4.0 Fill Plac_ementand Compaction J030.J094 4.1 Fill Layers: Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill (per Section 3.0) in neat-horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. The Geoi:echnkal Consultant rnay accept thicker layers if· testing indicates the grading procedures can adequately compact the thkker layers. ijath h1yer shaH be spread evenly · ao.d rnixed thoroughly to attain relative uniformity of m11terial and tnoisture throughout. 4.2 . Fill Moisture Conditioning: Fill soils shall be watered, dried back, blended, and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a relatively unifonn moisture content at or ~lightly over optimum. Maxi!J).um density and optimuxn soil moisture content tests shall be performed in accordance with the Ameticao Society of Testing and Materjals (ASTM Test Method D1557-91). 4.3 Compaction of fill: After each layer has been moisture-conditioned., mixed, and evenly spread~ it shall he uniformiy compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum d.ry density (ASTM Test Method D1S57-91). Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be either specifically designed. for soil compaction or of proven reHability to efficiently achiev~ the specified level of compaction with unifonn'ity. · 4.4 Compaction of Fill Slopes: · In addition tc;, nounal compaction procedures specified above, · compaction of slopes shall be accompUshed by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at increments of 3 to 4 feet in fill elevation, Pr by other methods producing satisfactory .results accepta!>le to the· Geotechnic~l Consultant. Upon completion of grading, relativ~ compactio;n of the fill, out to the slope face, shall be at least 90 percent of maximum density per ASTM Test Method D1557-91. 4.5 Compaction Testing: Field tests for moisture· content and relative compaction of the :fill soils shall be perfonned by the Geotechni~al Consultant. Location and frequency of tests shall be at the Consultant's discretion based on field conditions encounteted. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be selected ·on a random basis. Test locations shall be selected to verify adequacy of compaction levels in ar~as that are judged to be prone to inadequate com pactfon (such as close to slope faces aod at the fi I I/bedrock benches). 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 19 • Lelghtonand A.ssodates,lnc;. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND CRADINGSPECiflJCATIONS Pages of 6 5.0 6.0 4.6 Frequency of Compaction Testing: Tests shall be taken at intervals not exceeding 2 feet in vertical rise and/or 1,000 cubic yards of compact.ed·fill soils embankment. In addition, as a guideline, at least one test shall be taken on slope faces for each 5,000 square feet of slope face and/or. each 10 feet of vertical height of slope. The Contractor shall assure that fill construction is such that the testing schedule can-be accomplisJ,ed by the Geotechnical Consultant. The Contractor shall stO!) or slow down the earthwork construction if these minimum standards are,not met. 4.7 Compactio.9i Test Locations: The Geotech.nicaI Consultant shall document the-approximate elevation and horizontal coordinates of each test location. The Contractor shal I coordinate with the project sUiveyor to assure that sufficient grade stakes are established so that the Geotechnkal Consultant can detennine the test locations with sufficient accuracy. At a minimum, two grade stakes within a horizontal distan~e of I 00 feet and vertically 1ess than 5 feet apart from potentialtest locations shall be prov1ded. Subdrain Insfallation Subdrain systems shaU be installed in accordance with the approved geotechnical report(s), the grading plan, and the Standard Details. The Geotechnica:l Consultant may recommend additional subdrains and/or,changes in s~bdrain extent, location~ grade, or material depending on conditions encountered during grading. All subdrains shall' be surveyed by a land surveyor/civil engineer for line and grade after im,tallation and pdor to burial. Sufficient time should be allowed by the Contractor for these surveys. Excavation Excavations, as well as . over-excavation for remedial pui:poses, shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. Remedial removal depths shown on geotechn.icaJ plans are estimates only. The actual extent ·of remoYal shall be detennined by the Geotechnical Consultant based on the field evaluationof exposed conditions during grading. Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded, the cut portion of the slope shall be made, evaluated, and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to· placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the slope, unless otherwise recommended by the Geo technical Consultant 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 L~IGHTON ·SAN DIEGO PAGE 20 Lelghto.na.nd. Associates,!nc. GENERAL EARTHWORKAND·GRADINGSPEC[:FlCA t'IONS Page6 of 6 7.0 Trench Backfills 3030.1094 7.1 The Contractor shall follow all OHSA and Cal/OSHA requirements for safety of trench excavations. 7.'2 All bedding and backfill ofutility trenches.shall be done in accordance with the applicable provisions of Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction. Bedding material shall have a Sand Equivalent greater than 30 (SE>30). The bedding shall be placed to I foot over the top of the conduit and densifie~ by jetting. Backfill shall be placed and densified to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum from 1 foot above the top of the conduit to the surface. · 7.3 The jetting of the bedding around the conduits shall be observed by the Geotechnical Consultant. 7.4 · The Geotechnical Consultant shall. test th~ trench backfill for relative compaction. At least one test should be made for ev1:1ry 300 feet of trench and 2 foet of fill. 7.5 Lift thickness -of trench backfill· shall not exceect those allowed in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction unless the Contractor can demonstrate to the Geotechnical ConsJ.lltant that the fill lift can be· compacted to the minjmum reiative compaction by his alternative equipment and method. 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON· SAN DIEGO PAGE 21 OUTLET PIPES 414, NON-PERFORATED PIPE, 1001 M~ O,C. HORIZONTALLY, 301 MAX. O.C. VERTICALLY ~---16' MIN. ___ _ KEYWIOTH ~'9"-. BACKCUT 1 :1 --~ OR FLATTER • SUBOAAIN INSTALLATION -Subdraln collector pipe shall-~ Installed with perforations down or, unless atherwfsa designated by the geoteehnloal consultant. Outl!at pipes shall be non-perforated pipe. · The aubdraln pipe shalt .have at least 8 perforatiOoS untformly spaced per foot. Perloration 8haJJ be ¼" to ½• If drilled holes are used. All subdrafn pipes shall hav.e.a gradient .pt least~ towards the outlet • SUBORAIN PIPE· Subdrafn pipe soall be ASTM D2751, SOR 23.5 or ASTM D15Z1, Schedule 40, or ASTM 03034, SDR 23;5, Sched~le 40 Polyvtnyl Chloride Plastic ~VO) pipe. • All outlet P'P8 shall be placed In a trench no wicter than ·twice the subdraln pipe. Pipe shall be In soil of SE>30 jetted or flooded In pl$ce except for the outside s .feet Which shall be natiVe soil back1ill. BUTTRESS -OA REPLACE'.MENT FILL SUBDRAINS . GENERAL EAATHWORK ANO GRADING ~IT] SPECIFICATIONS U STANDARD DETAILS D 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 ·---- CUTPACi! 2'MIN. . ICEYDEPTH at-W-1-BE C0N8TRUCTED PF10A T0 FU. A.ACEMEN1'T0 ASSUFE AOEQUA~ ~ CONDl110N8 PROJECTED Pl.AH! . 1 TO 1 MAXIMUM FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO APPFOYED·GROUND 2· MIN. KEY DEPTH KEYING AND BENCHING LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 22 r,~~CH HEIGl1T REMOVE UNSUl'l".ABLE MATERIAL .., . FILL SLOPE FILL-OVER..CUT . SLOPE CUT .QV~R-FILL SLOPE For Subdralns See .. Standard. Oetal! c 8ENCHNQ 8t-lAU. 8E DONE WHEN 8C.0PES ANOlJ: IS EQUAL TO CIA OAEATEfl THAN :1:1 ...._... BENCH HeOHT 8HA1.L BE 4 FEET MINiMUM F1U. WDTH SHAU. BE g FEET Gl;N~RAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING []Ej[J] SPECfFICA TIONS U STANDARD DETAILS A 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 23 FINISH GRADE- ----------..-..--------· -.-----:------~----- . ------------------· -,-----------------..._ ----------------· -----------=-----:.;...-1-0'_M_IN-;--..,.:-_-:.,-COMPA~C-TED_F_ILL.,.. :-------..:-: ---~---------·-------------=-----=------=------=-------FE-_-::...-_-;,:,----,...:;-....::-_-_-:-,,.....:-_-_-_-_-_-: __ __,_......_ ____ ......., ______________________ _,__ ~----------~---------------~-~~--~---------~_........-~~ . ~_,_., -..... ?:-=-==~.j-):==~-=-~~=~~~=~-=-=-=-=--=--=-n..:.~-::: -------~~-~--------~-=---------~~--~-=----:~ -~-~;.;~=-:= __ =:=:-::;-;-~==~-=----=:=:~--__ -:...-...:. .... .:.:-.;,..~ .... ~----~ ---~~-_-...:;:-..::;-_-_TI_~-----=---..: -=-cii,;~~~:§:=--,=-_.:=-==~-'Co -~:ti===-=-=~=~..,.~~===~:t=-----=-==-=~~:-z--~-=-=-=-=-==-:: ~:_f!!!N-::-_J!'_t,!m.:.·:_ -:"""'=~==~- --------~-=-~---~.;...------~=:t==i ____ :.......:.~----- . :_:§_;::~--~ __ .::~~-i-=-:~:=3= =-~~-==-:-f===:B=:~~=-?-:=-~· =-=~=-~=-o1ie~SllE -: .... ..:--:-==--=====-~=-::::::---:::-:-:. _-:.~-JETTED OR FLOODED _:::7._:::WINOROW -=====·=====~=:-:--------.---~ GRANULAR MATERIAL -..-..:------, __ '------ • Oversize rock Is larger than 8 Inches In largest dimension, . • Excavate a trench 1n·the compacted. fill deep enough to bury all the -rock. • Backfill with granular' soll jetted or flooded IQ place to flit all the voids, • Do not bury rock within 1 O feet of finish grade. • Windrow ct buried rock Shall be· ~ to the finished siope fill. ELEVATION A-A' -~ROFII..E ALONG WINC).ROW ----· ---- JETTED OR f'LOODED 'GRANULAR MATERIAL OVERSIZE ROCK DISPOSAL -~--..........---·- GENERAL E4~THWOAK AND GRADING [1j[I] SPEClf'ICATIONS U STANDARD DETAILS 8' 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 · NATURAL ~GROUND "'' LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 24 CAL TRANS CL.ASS it · PERMEABLE OR #2 ROCK (9FT. ~/FT.) WRAPPED IN ·FILTER FABRIC · F1Li"£R FABRIC (MIRAFI 140 OR . . APPROVED '-coLLECTOR PIPE SHAU EQUIVALENT} BE MINIMUM r DIAMETER . . . ' SCHEDULE 40 PVC PERFORATED CANYON SUBDRAIN OUTLET DETAIL PIPE. SEE STANDARD DETAIL. 0 DESIGN, FINlSHEO ~RADE PERFORATED PIPE s•+ MIN. 1--20' MIN.~, . NON-PERFORATED 5' MIN. e•• MIN~ CANYON SUBDRAINS FOR PIPE SPECIFICATION FILTER FABRIC (MIAAFl 140 OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT) #2 ROCK WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC OR CALTBANS CLASS II PERMEABLE. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING [1j[D SPECIFICA TlONS . U STANDARD DETAILS C . . 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 25 -~ETAINING WAL~ DRAINAG·e DETAIL FINIS~ GRA~E) . NO!f TO. SCAL~ ·SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL U.S. Standard Sieve Size 1" 3/4" 3/8" No. 4 No. 8 No. 30 No. 50 No. 200 % Passing 100 90-100 40-100 25-40 18-33 5-15 0-7 0~3 Sand Equivalent>75 .SOIL ,BACKFl.l.L, COMPAC 0 TED TO 9~ Pl;A~ENTiRELA'rlVE 'COMPACTION*· £;(~!~~iA,~§,'r.ER :PERFOAA.'rEO -'PVC Pl ·(SCHEDIJLE 4.0.0Ri eouj_v AL~'r> w·n:i:i. PEAFOBAT10Ns .Q~·~-~.t~.~iJ~PW.N..!.~.~. Q.J;PJCT~.Q:. . 'MINU;flJM. ~ J'ERC!;NJ' GA'A"DU:!N_T; ,:o SlJIT~f;ILE OUT~~:r· . . . . ·.· ·- . ·co'MP~YE~:t"":~Eti'Roc1<. oA M.AteR1AL' AS. EVALUATt:D ·BY :1'.HE ·.oeoTECHNt'QAL: '.coNSI.IL TANT~ . . . • rl ·: ~-.• .-: ... **tF CAL1'RANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL (SE:E-GRADATIO'N TO LEF'r> IS USED IN PLACE OF 13/4":..1..:t12" GAAVEL, Fll.iER FABRIC.MAY.BE· DE_LE:t~D. CAL TRAN·~· C:LA$$ 2 PSRMEABLE MATERIAL SHOULD BE C.O.MPACTED TO 9.q: PERQEN1tfRELATIVE COMPACTION*. NOtE:COMPOSITE DRAINAGE: PRODUCiS SUCH AS MIRAORAIN OR J-PRAIN MAY SE USED AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO GRAVEL OB CLASS 2. INSTALLATION SHOULD aE; PEAFORtvED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURER'S SPECIF1CA TIONS. 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 26 'STAB..141TV rill / 9UTT.8ESS DETAIL OUTLST PIPES 4• 91 NONPERfOFIATi:p. PIPE.,· , 1 OO' MAX. Q.O. HORIZ'ONTALLV ,· '3()' 'MAX. O.C. 'VER.TICAL'-Y . -~~--~~=~~~~~:::~~ii,:; .'SEE .SUBDRAIN TRENCH · .. DETAIL .. ;.~ . ;, ' ·. LO.·~,ES,l,$1.'-'i.PFJAIN. SHO~LO: ' BE SITUA. .cD AS .. LOW A·S -~~=t~~(iM~c.J~P~~=§::§::§:-=-111 .. ·'pc).$s)Ef.tif 'to Ai.LOW/ ·su1T.A~~E .O0T'LET: . t~'c ,~.,~------~=~-~=1 --• . KE··v .. WiD1't-f . . · A$ NOT.E~_: ~-~.)~RAPING' ·,P.L-ANS: . 11;1 MIN,. · ••• ' • ol •• •• ' FIL TEA ,FA.B'R.IC .ENVELO~E.' (Mlff At!t 140N OR APP.ROVl:D· · EQU.IVAL.ENT)* . . , • I SEE 'T,~C.O.NNEOTIOH, · OE't Al.~. . "· SUBDRAIN ttiEN.CH. DETAIL .NOTES: . ·:~ ... : . . :. . . . --: . * 'IF.· ¢,}L~R~NS .. ~.Lf.'~S 2 PE;RM.EAE,iLE .M~TERIAI:-.. l.~ U~~p 'IN PL'Ac·e :OF . S1ill;~~1-1'[2~ :aRA:'/EL, FIL TEA ·FABRl'C u~ v .:a·e ·DE.Leteo · · SPECIFICAlIONS FOR CALTAANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL U.S. Standard Sieve Size 111 3/411 3/8'' No. 4. No. 8 No, 30 No. 50 No. 200 % Passing 100 90-100 40:..100 25-40 18-33 5-15 0-7 0-3 Sand Equi val ant> 75 F9r buttreae. d1menalon1, see. geotec'h·n1a.a1,.,r.eport!Plans. Actu·al .dlma·nalorta of buttress and .. aub_dral~. ma~. be. cha_ngec, by the geotechnlcal· .conaultan.t· baaed on field oondlHo·ns. SUBDFIAIN INS:f'AL.LATIOt4.,.Subduln pipe ahould· 11e li'lat•lled with p.erforatlona down as ~ep·lcted. At tocetlona recom~enc:led by the o•,;it~.chnlcal1oonsultan.t, nonp~r'forated pipe ·ahoul.i.1 be.·lnatalled SUBDF.!AIN TY_PE.:..Subdraln type ehQUlt1 be A.cryll;,r'I trl'le Elutadlene Styrene. (A .• 9.$.), Polyvl.nyl Chlotlde (PVC) or apprQved eq1,1lvalent, Cl'aa• UU:i.·SDR S2.6. ahould t,e uaed for ml'lxlmum till depth& of 86 htet. Claea 200,SOR 21 should be used for l'n·&xlmum fill d1;1ptha of 100 feet •. 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 27 CALIFORNIA FAULT MAP Legolq11dTheme Park -retail Store E.x.pansio -100 ,-'-----'--'L-.1--j---'-........... -'--lr-'--...._.__--'-t---'--'-'--~..1-1.--1-J.--f-.ii....1-.L-l...+-l,-i-Jl-&.+-1-..J..-lj~i-,.L....L....L..LI-....L.l--'-Ll 600 "400 -300 "200 -100 a 100 200 300 400 500 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO * * * * * E Q F A U L T Version 3.00 * * * * * *** **·**"**** * * * * * * * *'**** DETERMINIS'l'!C ESTIMATION OF EEAK ACCELERATION FROM DIGITIZED FAULTS JOB NUMBER: 960151-018 DAT:E: 12~29-2000 J'OB NAME: LegolandThe~e Park -retail Store Expansio CALCULAT~ON NAME: Test Run Analysis FAULT~DATA-FIL£ .NAME: CPMGFLT.E. DAT SITE COORDINATES: SITE LATITUDE: SI'l'E LONGITUDE: 33.1252 117 .3:U3 SEARCH RADIUS: ;l,.00 mi ATTENUAT~ON RELATION: 3) Boo~e et UNCE:RTAlN'.I:'Y (M..,Median, S=Sigroa): DISTANCE MEASURE: cd_2clrp SCOND: 0 al. s (J,997) ijoriz. -NEHRJ? D (250) · Number of Sigmas; 1,.0 Basement Deptb: 5.00 km Campbell SSRl Campbell SHR: COMPUT:E PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERA~ION :FAULT-DATA FILE USED: CDMGFLTE, DAT. MINIMUM DEPTH VALUE ()ml,): 0.0 PAGE 28 01/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LE1GHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 29 -----:----.;....;.._ ..... __ _ EQFAULT SUMMARY _____________ ,..., --------------------------- DET~RMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS ------------------------~~--- Page 1 ------------------------.. ----------------------------------------------------I I ESTIMATED MAX. EARTHQU.A.i<E EVENT I APPROXIMATE 1---------~--------------------- .ABBREV,IATEO I DISTANCE I MAXIMUM I PEAK I EST. SITE FAULT NAME I mi (km) IEARTHQUAKEI SITE IIN':rENSITY I I MAG. (.Mw) I ACCEL. g ·1MOD.MERC. =======""'""""""=================""===· I ============= . I = . ,.,,d===== · · 1 ========== I ..,.=,=,====== ROSE CANYON NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore} CORONADO BANK ELSINORE-T~MECULA ELSINORE-JULIAN ELSINORE-GLEN IVY PALOS VJ;::RDES EARTHQUAKE VALLEY SAN JACINTO-ANZA SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY NEWPQRT~lNGLEWOOD (L.A.Basin) CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK WHITTIER ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN COMPTON THRUST ELYSIAN PARK THRUST SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO SAN JACIN~O -BORREGO SAN ANDREAS -San Bernardino SAN ANDREAS~ Southern SAN JOSE PINTO M:OUN'.l'AIN CUCAMONGA SIERRA MADRE SAN ANDREAS -Coachella NORTH FRONTAL tAULT ZONE (West) BURNT MTN, CLEGHORN SUPERSTITION MTN, {Sa-n Jacinto) EUREKA PEAK NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East} RAYMOND CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT SAN ANDREAS -1B57 R~pture I 4. 7 ( 7. 5) I I 7 .1 ( · 11. 5 l I I 20.7( 33.3) I I 24.5( 39.4) I .I 2 4 . 5 < 3 9 . 4 l I I 35 • 9 ( !S 7 . 7 ) I I ·37,9( 61.0ll J 42.4 ( 68.2) I. I 47. 3 ( 7 6 .-1) I I 4 B . 2 ( 7 7 • 6 ) !· ·1 4B.6(-78.2)1 I · 49.5( 79.6) I I 51.fi{ 83.4) I I 53.7( 86-.S}I I . 5 6. o ( .90. 2 l I I 58.3( 93.8) I I 6-l. O. ( 98 .1) 1 • I 61.7( 99,3)1 I 64.9( 104.4) I I 66 .. 1( 106.3} I I 66.1( 106,3) I I 70. 6 ( 113. 6) I I 72.9( 117.3)1 I 73.2( 117.8) I 73_.3( 117,9) I 73. 5 ( 110. 3.) I 77.2( 124,3)1 78.4-( 126.1) I 7 ~;. s ( 12 7 . 9} I 80.9( 130.2)1 81.1( _130:5} I 81.2( 130.7) I 8 2. 4 ( 132. 6) I 82.7( ];33.1)1 SAN ANDRE:AS ~ Mojave .l 82.9( 133.4) I 82 .. 9(. 133.4) I 84.6( 136.1) I 8 4. 9 ( i3 6 • 6) I s5.6.( 137.Bl r 86.9( 139.8) I ELMORE RANCH I VERDUGO I SUPERSTITION HILLS (San .Jacinto) I HOLLYWOOD I 6.9 6.9 7.4 6.8 7.1 6.8 7.1 6.5 7.2 6. 9. . 6. 9 6,7 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.7 · 6. 7 6.6 7.3 7.4 6,5 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.1 7.0 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.4 6. 7 . .6. 5 6. 5- 7 .·8 7.:). 6.6 6.7 6.6 6.4 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0.658 0.515 0.315 0.202 0.237 0.lSl 0.169 0.113 0.150 0.126 0.126 0.136 0 .113 0 .110 0,107 0.126 0.115 0.094 0.086 0.122 O.l.29 0.093 0. 097 0.117 0.117 o. 101· 0.113 0. 067 0. 0.70 0.072 0.065 0.092 o.os2 0.082 0.l33 0.092 0.070 0.089 o.069 o·. 015 I X I X I. IX I VIII I IX I Vl!I I VIII I VII I VIII ,. vIU I VIII I VIII I VII I VII I VII I VIII I VII I VII I VII I VII I VIII I VII I VII I VII I VII I VII I VII I VI I VI I VII I VI I VII I VII I VII I VIII I VII I VI I VII I VI I VII 81/03/2001 08:28 8582920771 LEIGHTON SAN DIEGO PAGE 30 --'---------s---·------------ DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS -~----~---------------~------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ABBREVIATED FAOLT NAME APPROXIMATE DISTANCE mi ( k_rn) IEST[MATED MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT l--------------~----------------1 MAXIMUM I PEAK IEST. SITE I EARTHQUAKE I SITE IINTENSI"TY I MAG. (Mw) I ACCEL. g IMOD.MERC. --------------------~---~-------1------~~---~~=l=-~~~~~~~=1------=---1·--------- LAGUNA. SALADA . I 87.2( 14·0.3) I . 7.0 I 0.08~ I VII LANDERS I 88.4 ( 14.2.3) I 7.3 I 0.098 I VII HELENDALE -S. LOCKHARDT ·J 89 .. 8 ( 144. 5) I 7. l I O. 087 I VII SANTA MONICA I 91.7( 147.-5) I 6.~ I 0,080 I VII LENWOOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN SPRGSI 93.5-( 150.4)-1 7.3 I 0.093 I VII BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE -I 94. l ( ;15:1_. 4) I 6. 4 I O. 058 I VI MALIBU COAST I 94.1( 151,9)1 6.7 I 0.082 I VII JOHNSON VALLEY (:Northe:i::-.n) I 96. 4 ( 155. JJ I 6. 7 I 0. 066 I VI EMERSON So. -C:Ol'PE:R MT}:11. I 96.5( 155.3) I 6.9 I 0.074 I VII SIERRA MADRE (San Fernando) I 97.9( 157.5) I 6.7 I 0.080 I VlI NORTHRIDGE (E. Oak Ridge) I 98.1( 157.9}1 6,9 I 0.089 I VII SAN GABRr£J;., I 99. 7 ( 160. 4) I ,7. O I O .-076 I VII ANACAPA-DUME I 99.7 ( 160.4) I 7.3 I 0.108 I VII **********************************************************f******************** -END OF SEARCH-53 FAULTS FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH RADIUS. THE ROSE CANYON fA.U;LT IS CLOSEST TO THE SITE. IT rs ABOO'.I.' 4.7 MILES (7.5 km) AWAY. LARGES'.!: MA..'UMUM-EARTHQUAI<.E SITE ACCELERATION:' 0. 65 7 6 g