Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1 LEGOLAND DR; ; CBC2017-0189; PermitCity of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Av Carlsbad, CA 92008 Print Date: 01/09/2018 Commercial Permit Permit No: CBC2017-0189 - www.carlsbadca.gov Patio Job Address: Permit Type: Parcel No: Valuation: Occupancy Group: # Dwelling Units: Bedrooms: Project Title: Description: 1 Legoland Dr BLDG-Commercial 2111000900 $200,000.00 Work Class: Lot #: Reference #: Construction Type: Bathrooms: Orig. Plan Check U: Plan Check U: Status: Closed - Finaled Applied: 04/24/2017 Issued: 09/05/2017 Fina led: Inspector: AKrog LEGOLAND: 2,505 SF SHADE STRUCTURE AT "WOLVES DEN" Owner: Contractor: LEGOLAND CALIFORNIA LLC COMMERCIAL BUILDERS INC P0 Box 543185 C/O Property Tax Service Co 525 B St, 1010 DALLAS, TX 75354 San Diego, CA 92101-4414 619-564-7555 BUILDING PERMIT FEE $2000+ $981.00 BUILDING PLAN CHECK FEE (BLDG) $686.70 5B1473 BUILDING STANDARDS FEE . $8.00 STRONG MOTION-COMMERCIAL $56.00 Total Fees: $1,731.70 Total Payments To Date: $1;731.70 Balance Due: $0.00 Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the "Imposition" of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as "fees/exaction." You have 90 days from the date this permit was issued to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition. ' S You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity changes, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project. NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitation has previously otherwise expired. THE FOLLOWING APPROVALS REQUIRED PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE: [:]PLANNING D ENGINEERING i:i BUILDING E FIRE EJ HEALTH EJ HAZMATIAPCD City of Building Permit Application Plan Check No!5,2Otj_Dfq 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008 Est. Values' 2-o'r___ Ph: 760-602-2719 Fax: 760-602-8558 Urfrisbad Plan Ck. Deposit email: buildingcarlsbadca.gov Date LA -.J_1 - www.carlsbadca.gov JOB ADDRESS I SUtTE#/SPACE#/UN1# I APN I - - CT/PROJECT # IPHAS I#OF N # BEDROOMS #BATHROOMS ANT BUSINES NAME Q_ COISTR.TYPE OCC.GROUP DESCRIPTION OF WORK: Include Square Feet of Affected Area(s) Z€ ' kcas 2,O5_F EXISTING USE PROPOSED USE - GARAGE (SF) PATIOS (SF) DECKS(SF) FIREPLACE, IAIRCONDITIONING IFIRESPRINKLERS - YES J#NO[:] YES NO YES[-] NO APPLICANT NAME PROPERTY OWNER Primary Co Contact ' ADDRESS .2~ 4. ADDRESS 1 dA- CITY E P - STATE CITY- - ' I STATE. ZIP PH J PHONE 7T7 3t/ 4~FA~X EMA ? c2i 5 EMAIL DESIGN PROFESSIONAL CONTRACTOR BUS. NAME C.iei' L4_-5 ..-- AD DRESS . ADDRESS ,- EITY STATE Z A7, r6G7,50 CITY STAT ZIP PHONE FAX - - FAX EMAIL (ADL_S'E_1bvt- EMAIL _ I STATE LIC. C STATE 2-. CLASS CITY BUS. LIC.# tzO(t3 (Sec. 7031.5 Business and Professions Code: Any City or County which requires a permit to Construct, alter, improve, demolish or fepair any structure, prior to its issuance, also requires the applicant for such permit to file a signed statement that he is licensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractor's License Law [Chapter 9, commending with Section 7000 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code) or that he is exempt therefrom, and the basis for the alleged exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by any applicant for a permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars ($500)). - Workers' Compensation Declaration: I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following declarations: LI I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self-insure for workers' compensation as provided by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued. 1111 have and will maintain 'compens tion,as uired by Section 3700gJe.l,abor Code, for the performan of the w rk for which this permit is issued. My workers' compensation insancec4ierad icy .57 number are: Insurance C !trke~ (.L.,e, KA !Ii"'l_. _._\..__ç.,.. Policy No. _O"3,2 I_.2 Expiration Dale This section need not be completed if the permit is for one hundred dollars ($100) or less. Certificate of Exemption: I a e performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the Workers' Compensation Laws of California. WARNING: Failur secure work rn compensation coverage is unlawful, and shall subject an employer to criminal penalties and civil fines up to one hundred thousand dollars (&100,000), in addition to the cost of compensation, dam as provided fo Sectio 3706 he Labor code, interest and attorney's fees. CONTRACTOR SIGNAT _., 0 AGENT / DATE Z_.ç 00ODOODO12 INIMUMV0013 I hereby affirm that lam exempt from Contractor's License Law for the following mason: El 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 hale (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who does such work himself or through his own employees, provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If, however, the building or improvement is sold within one year of completion, the owner-builder will have the burden of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sale). I, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to construct the project (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and contracts for such projects with contractor(s) licensed pursuant to the Contractor's License Law). El I am exempt under Section _Business and Professions Code for this reason: I personally plan to provide the major labor and materials for construction of the proposed property improvement, 0Yes IN4o I (have I have not) signed an application for a building permit for the proposed work. I have contracted with the following person (firm) to provide the proposed construction (include name address I phone! contractors' licene number): I plan to provide portions of the work, but I have hired the following person to coordinate, supervise and provide the major work (include name! address! phone /contractors' license number): 51 will provide some of the work, bull have contracted (hired) the following persons to provide the work indicated (include name / address I phone I type of work): ,.PROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE . DAGENT DATE .. it:$Thw ffu ® 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 ' 0 No , - Is the applicant or future building occupant required to obtain a permit from the air pollution control district or air qu11'ty management district? 0 Yes 0 No Is the facility to be constructed within 1,000 feet of the outer boundary of a school site? 0 Yes "No IF ANY OF THE ANSWERS ARE YES, A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MAY NOT BE ISSUED UNLESS THE APPLICANT HAS MET OR IS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT. - I hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work this permit is issued (Sec. 3097 (i) Civil Code). Lenders Name Lenders Address I crertifythat I have read the application and state that the above information is correct and that the infomialion on the plans is accurate. I agree to comply with all City ordinances and State laws relating to building construction. hereby authorize representative of the City 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 ACCRUE AGAINST SAID CITY I THIS PERMIT E excavationsS AND EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WA res over 3 stones in heght CONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING OF EXPIRATION: E y cial under the promions of Code shall expi by limitativ and become null and void if the building or wo authorized by s ch permit is not commenced within ,the B if t OSHA An OSHA permit ls required ver eep and demolition or construction of y the Building 180 days.from the date of such permit or if the bull g or work authorized by such per or ab;'~~ed at any time after the wort is comme foraperi of18 (Secton 106.4.4 Uniform Building'Code). .APPLICANT'S SIGN STOP: THIS SECTION NOT REQUIRED FOR BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE. Complete the following ONLY if a Certificate of Occupancy will be requested at final inspection.' C E RTI FICATE OF OCCUPAIII(Com m er ciali1a Fax (760) 602-8560, Email buiIdino(carIsbadca.gov or Mail the completed form to City of Carlsbad, Building Division 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. CO#: (Office Use Only) CONTACT NAME - . - OCCUPANT NAME ADDRESS , - -. BUILDING ADDRESS CITY • STATE ZIP CITY . . . STATE ZIP Carlsbad CA PHONE FAX . . . . EMAIL - . -- OCCUPANT'S BUS. LIC. No. . DELIVERY OP11ONS - 0 PICK UP: o CONTACT (Listed above) d OCCUPANT (Listed above) . . . CONTRACTOR (On Pg. 1) - .• 0 MAIL TO: a CONTACT (Listed above) o OCCUPANT (Listed above) 0 ASSOCIATED CB # - CONTRACTOR (On Pg. 1) - 0 NO CHANGE IN USE/ NO CONSTRUCTION 0 MAIL / FAX TO OTHER: CHANGE OF USE NO CONSTRUCTION ..APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE . . . DATE - Permit Type: BLDG-Cqmmercial Application Date: 04/24/2017 Owner: LEGOLAND CALIFORNIA LLC Work Class: Patio Issue Date: 09/05/2017 Subdivision: CARLSBAD TCT#94-09 UNIT#02 & 03 Status: Closed - Finaled Expiration Date: 05/28/2018 Address: 1 Legoland Dr / Carlsbad, CA 92008-4610 lVR Number: -3330 Scheduled Actual Date Start Date Inspection Type Inspection No. Inspection Status Primary Inspector Reinspection Complete 11/21/2017 11/21/2017 BLDG-12 Steel/Bond. 041126-2017 Partial Pass Andy Krogh Reinspection Incomplete Beam Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDGBuilding Deficiency Two piece columns as noted on card Yes 11/29/2017 11/29/2017 BLDG-12 Steel/Bond 041651.2017 Failed Paul Burnette Reinspection Complete Beam Checklist Item COMMENTS . Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Two piece columns as noted on card Yes BLDG-31 ' 041652-2017 Passed Paul Burnette Complete Underground/Condu it - Wiring - Checklist Item COMMENTS r Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency - No 01/09/2018 01/09/2018 BLDG-Final 045370-2018 Passed Andy Krogh Complete % ) OMMENTS Passed Yes 1 I. - Page loti H ITE HILL - INSPECTION TESTING/ENGINEERING ' December 20, 2017 City of Carlsbad Building Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 Facsimile: (760) 602-8560 Reference: LEGOLAND® CALIFORNIA-Wolves Den, Shade Structure Permit No: CBC 2017-0189 Subject: Final Verification of Special Inspection and Materials Testing Ladies and Gentlemen: Special Inspections of reinforced concrete, structural steel and welding were performed for the structure/st constructed under the, referenced project name and permit number(s) by representatives of HiTE (Hill-inspection/Testing/Engineering). To the best of my knowledge, all the work requiring special inspection and/or material sampling and testing was performed in accordance with the approved plans, construction documents and changes thereto of the approved inspection and testing program and the applicable workmanship provisions of the California Building Code. We appreciate the opportunity of providing our services. Respectfully submitted, BAR He y Barton Hill, Principal Engineer \ *\ -xV°6130119 1*11 M.S., P.E. No: C 64822 OF C Distribution: (1) Legoland (1) Commercial Builders, On-Site P0 Box 771 San Diego, CA 92038-0771 San Diego • Orange • Los Angeles • Riverside • Imperial • San Bernardino www.h-ite.com • (858) 220-1078 Office • (858) 220-7421 Fax HNITE Office (858) 220-1078 Fax (858) 220-7421 hiU@h-ite.com HILL - INSPECTION TESTING! ENGINEERING Foundation Observation Report Project Name Chima Wolves Den-Canopy Shade Structure Date 20-Nov-2017 Project Location One Legoland Drive, Carlsbad, California Owner/Developer Merlin Entertainment Contractor CBI Project/ Permit Number CBC 2017-0189 Lot(s) / Parcel 1211-100-09 Soils Report Ref. Soils Report Foundation Type Conventional (Provided by Others) Expansion Condition High Fill Geometry Category I Foundation Depth 6-0" mm. Found. Reinforcement (8) #8 Bar Vert., wl #3 ties Foundation Width 36 inch min. Interior Reinforcement Slab bedding Undisturbed Soil 1 Vapor Barrier Observations: Observed 36' Dia. Drilled piers at a mm. depth of 5'-0', at Perimeter column foundations E to I. Verified soil conditions exposed are similar to those anticipated. The bbserved foundations appear in substantial conformance. Installation of reinforcement pending. Comments: It is our understanding that all excavations will be cleaned of loose soil and debris prior to concrete placement; and that the soil moisture content will be maintained. The presence of our field representative is for the purpose of observing the construction and reporting on its compliance with the approved plans and the applicable building codes. Our work does not include the supervision or direction of the contractor's work, his employees or agents. The Contractor for this project should be so advised. The contractor should all so be advised that neither the presence of our held personnel nor the observation and FIELD TECHNICIAN / REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE testing by this ttrnr shall excuse him in any way for defects in his work. If should further be understood that we are not responsible for site solely. San Diego. Orange. Los Angeles• Riverside San Bernardino H'ITE Office (858) 220-1078 Fax (858) 220-7421 hill@h-ite.com HILL - INSPECTION TESTING / ENGINEERING Foundation Observation Report Project Name Chima Wolves Den-Canopy Shade Structure Date 21-Nov-2017 Project Location One Legoland Drive, Carlsbad, California Owner! Developer Merlin Entertainment Contractor CBI Project/ Permit Number CBC 2017-0189 Lot(s) /Parcel 1211-100-09 Soils Report Ref. Soils Report Foundation Type Conventional (Provided by Others) Expansion Condition High Fill Geometry Category I Foundation Depth 5-0" mm. Found. Reinforcement (8) #8 Bar Vert., wl #3 ties Foundation Width • 36 inch m in. Interior Reinforcement Slab bedding Undisturbed Soil Vapor Barrier Observations: Observed 36" Dia. Drilled piers at a mm. depth of 5'-0", at Perimeter column foundations A to 0, J to K, and Vertical Post foundation at center. Verified soil conditions exposed are similar to those anticipated. The observed foundations appear in substantial conformance. Installation of reinforcement pending. Comments: It is our understanding that all excavations will be cleaned of loose soil and debris prior to concrete placement; and that the soil moisture content will be maintained. The presence of our field representative is for the purpose 01 observing the construction and reporting on its compliance with the approved plans and the applicable building codes. Our work does not include the supervision or direction at the contractors work, his employees or agents. The contractor for this project should be so advised. The contractor should all so be advised that neither the presence of our field personnel nor the observation and FIELD TECHNICIAN I REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE testing by this firm shalt excuse him in any way for detects In his work. It should further be understood that we are not responsible for site safety. San Diego Orange. Los Angeles• Riverside San Bernardino HITE HILL - INSPECTION TESTING / ENGINEERING Office (858) 220-1078 Fax (858) 220-7421 hill@h-ite.com Special Inspection Report Project Address Building Permit Number Jurisdiction/ File Number One Legoland Drive CBC 2017-0189 Carlsbad Project Name Wolves Den-Shade Struct Architect Legoland Construction Material Design Strength Source Engineer Walsh SE Reinforced Conc. f'c=3000 psi RMC Description of Materials General Contractor CBI ASTM A615 Grade 60 Reinforcing ASTM A 500, GR B, HSS 10 Sub Contractor CCI Other SD Const Weld Inspection Date / Start of Work End of Work 21-Nov-17 Provided Special Inspection for the placement of reinforcing steel in the Center Column Foundation and Perimeter Column Foundation B, per Foundation Plan on Sheet S-2, and Details 1, 2 & 3, on Sheet S-5, at the referenced project. All steel sizes, laps and clearances are in substantial conformance with the approved plans, specifications, and changes thereto. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE INSPECTED THE ABOVE REPORTED ) 1 WORK. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, THE WORK INSPECTED IS TO /$ 727//9'/ cc, No.: 1113681-MI THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPROVE E I$PECTOR$ATURE REGISTRATION NUMBER CONSTRUCTIOBN DOCUMENTS, AND APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE GOVERNING BUILDING LAWS. November 21, 2017 Henry Barton Hill, PE 64822 DATE San Diego Orange• Imperial • Los Angeles Riverside• San Bernardino H'ITE HILL - INSPECTION TESTING / ENGINEERING Office (858) 220-1078 Fax (858) 220-7421 hill@h-ite.com Special Inspection Report Project Address Building Permit Number Jurisdiction /File Number One Legoland Drive CBC 2017-0189 Carlsbad Project Name Wolves Den-Shade Struct Architect Legoland Construction, Material Design Strength Source Engineer - Walsh SE Reinforced Conc. rc=3000 psi RMC DescrijitiOn of Materials General Contractor CBI ASTM A615 Grade 60 Reinforcing . ASTM A 500, GR B, HSS 10 Sub Contractor CCI Superior RMC, Mix Design 26P-1, 3250 psi Other SD Const Weld Inspection Date / Start of Work / End of Work 22-Nov-17 Provided Special Inspection for the deposit of approximately 7 cubic yards (cyd) Superior RMC, Mix Design 26P-1, into the Center Column Foundation and Perimeter Column Foundation B. The concrete was placed by chute and bucket, and vibrated mechanically for consolidation. Fabricated one set of cylinders from concrete .for testing. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE INSPECTED THE ABOVE REPORTED WORK. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, THE WORK INSPECTED IS TO 1 ,? ICC, No.: 1113681-MI THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPROVE SIGNATURE EGISTRATION NUMBER / DATE CONSTRUCTIOBN DOCUMENTS, AND APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE GOVERNING BUILDING LAWS. it~22, 2017 BartVVII,PE 64822 San Diego Orange• Imperial Los Angeles. Riverside• San Bernardino HmITE HILL - INSPECTION TESTING! ENGINEERING Office (858) 220-1078 Fax (858) 220-7421 hill@h-ite.com Special Inspection Report Project Address S Building Permit Number Jurisdiction / File Number One Legoland Drive CBC 2017-0189 Carlsbad Project Name Wolves Den-Shade Struct Architect Legoland Construction Material Design Strength Source Engineer Walsh SE Reinforced Conc. f'c=3000 psi RMC Description of Materials General Contractor CBI ASTM A615 Grade 60 Reinforcing ASTM A 500, GR B, HSS 10 Sub Contractor Ccl Other SD Const Weld Inspection Date / Start of Work / End of Work 29-Nov-17 Provided Special Inspection for the placement of reinforcing steel in the Center Column Foundation and Perimeter Column Foundation A, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J & K, per Foundation Plan on Sheet S-2, and Details 1 & 3, on Sheet S-5, at the referenced project. All steel sizes, laps and clearances are in substantial conformance with the approved plans, specifications, and changes thereto. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE INSPECTED THE ABOVE REPORTED WORK. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, THE WORK INSPECTED IS TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPROVE[ CONSTRUCTIOBN DOCUMENTS, AND APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE GOVERNING BUILDING LAWS. Barton Hill, PE 64822 ICC, No.: 1113681-MI REGISTRATION NUMBER November 29, 2017 DATE San Diego Orange• Imperial Los Angeles. Riverside• San Bernardino HiTE HILL - INSPECTION TESTING! ENGINEERING Office (858) 220-1078 Fax (858) 220-7421 hill@h-ite.com Special Inspection Report Project Address - Building Permit Number Jurisdiction / File Number One Legoland Drive CBC 2017-0189 Carlsbad Project Name Wolves Den-Shade Struct Legoland Architect Construction Material Design Strength Source Engineer Walsh SE Reinforced Conc; f'c=3000 psi RMC Description of Materials General Contractor CBI ASTM A615 Grade 60 Reinforcing ASTM A 500, GR B, HSS 10 Sub Contractor CCI Superior RMC, Mix Design 26P-1, 3250 psi Other SD Const Weld Inspection Date / Start of Work / End of Work 30-Nov-17 Provided Special Inspection for the deposit of approximately 28 cubic yards (cyd) Superior RMC, Mix Design 26P-1, into the Perimeter Column Foundations A, C-K. The concrete was placed by trailer pump, and vibrated mechanically for consolidation. Fabricated one set of cylinders from concrete for testing. - I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE INSPECTED THE ABOVE REPORTED ,__-----? WORK. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, THE WORK INSPECTED IS TO ICC, No.: 1113681-MI THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPROVET SIGNAT EGISTRATION NUMBER CONSTRUCTIOBN DOCUMENTS, AND APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE '/movember 30, 2017 GOVERNING BUILDING LAWS. - IHY Bar 9t'Il(Ii, PE 64822 / DATE San Diego Orange. Imperial • Los Angeles Riverside San Bernardino H NITE HILL - INSPECTION TESTING / ENGINEERING Office (858) 220-1078 Fax (858) 220-7421 hill@h-ite.com * Special Inspection Report Project Address Building Permit Number Jurisdiction/ File Number One Legoland Drive CBC 2017-0189 Carlsbad Project Name • Wolves Den-Shade Struct Architect Legoland Construction Material Design Strength Source Engineer Structural Steel A36 Canada Walsh SE Description of Materials General Contractor ASTMA3G * CBI Sub Contractor CCI Other SD Const Weld Inspection Date / Start of Work / End of Work 3-Dec-17 Provided special inspection for the welding of weldments for TV Support Brackets and Mounting Plates at the Canopy Columns, per Detail 4 on Sheet S-5. Observed 1/8" fillet welded bracket and plate connections. Verified Welder qualifications, preparation of base metals, and handling of filler materials. All Work Complete. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE INSPECTED THE ABOVE REPORTED 7/ ,44} 7 WORK. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, THE WORK INSPECTED IS TO /,V- i!Y'U17/pZ/ ICC, No.: 1113681-MI THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPR VE II41SPECTOR'4ATURE / REGISTRATION NUMBER CONSTRUCTIOBN DOCUMENTS, AND APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE GOVERNING BUILDING LAWS. . December 3, 2017 Henry Barton Hill, PE 64822 DATE San Diego Orange. Imperial Los Angeles. Riverside San Bernardino EsGil Corporation In (Partners/up with government for cBui(&ng Safety DATE: 8/23/2017 JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: CBC2017-0189 SET:!! PROJECT ADDRESS: 1 Legoland Dr. PROJECT NAME: Legoland Wolves Den Canopy Shade Structure LI APPLICANT 2-1iU RI S. LI PLAN REVIEWER LI FILE Z The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. - The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. LI The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. LI The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at EsGil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: EsGil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. EsGil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: Telephone #: Date contacted: (byilL—) Email: / Mail Telephone Fax In Person LI REMARKS: By: David Yao * Enclosures: EsGil Corporation E GA LI EJ LI MB LI PC 8/17 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 • San Diego, California 92123 • (858) 560-1468 • Fax(858)560-1576 EsGil Corporation In (Partners flip with government for Building Safety DATE: 5/5/2017 JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: CBC2017-0189 SET:I PROJECT ADDRESS: 1 Legoland Dr. U,APPLICANT .4 JURIS. U PLAN REVIEWER U FILE PROJECT NAME: Legoland Wolves Den Canopy Shade Structure Lii The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes. The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. Lii 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. El The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: Robert Kay El EsGil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. EsGil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: Robert Kay Telephone #: 619-804-6552 4áte 7 ~-ZT cted: "(' (by:Y..)..._-Email: rkaycbi-sd.com .4aiI horTs.. Fax In Person I REMARK By: David Yao Enclosures: EsGil Corporation LI GA LI EJ LI MB LI PC 4/27 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 • San Diego, California 92123 • (858) 560-1468 • Fax(858)560-1576 City of Carlsbad CBC2017-0189 5/5/2017 PLAN REVIEW CORRECTION LIST COMMERCIAL PLAN CHECK NO.: CBC2017-0189 OCCUPANCY: U TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: VB ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA: SPRINKLERS?: REMARKS: DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY JURISDICTION: 4/24 DATE INITIAL PLAN REVIEW COMPLETED: 5/5/2017 JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad USE: shade structure ACTUAL AREA: -2505 sf STORIES: 1 HEIGHT: OCCUPANT LOAD: DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY ESGIL CORPORATION: 4/27 PLAN REVIEWER: David Yao FOREWORD (PLEASE READ): This plan review is limited to the technical requirements contained in the California version of the International Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, National Electrical Code and state laws regulating energy conservation, noise attenuation and access for the disabled. This plan review is based on regulations enforced by the Building Department. You may have other corrections based on laws and 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 based on the 2016 CBC, which adopts the 2015 IBC. The following items listed need clarification, modification or change. All items must be satisfied before the plans will be in conformance with the cited codes and regulations. Per Sec. 105.4 of the 2015 International Building Code, the approval of the plans does not permit the violation of any state, county or city law. To speed up the recheck process, please note on this list (or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed, i.e., plan sheet number, specification section, etc. Be sure to enclose the marked up list when you submit the revised plans. City of Carlsbad CBC2017-0189 5/5/2017 Please make all corrections, as requested in the correction list. Submit FOUR new complete sets of plans for commercial/industrial projects (THREE sets of plans for residential projects). For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in one of two ways: Deliver all corrected sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department, 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008, (760) 602-2700. The City will route the plans to EsGil Corporation and the Carlsbad Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. Bring TWO 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, Engineering and Fire Departments until review by EsGil Corporation is complete. 1. Provide a Building Code Data Legend on the Title Sheet. Include the following code information for each building proposed: Occupancy Classification (s) U Type of Construction VB Sprinklers: Yes or No Stories 1 '. Height , Floor Area Provide a fully dimensioned site plan drawn to scale. Sec. 107.2. Include the following: a) Clearly dimension building setbacks from property lines, street centerlines, and from all adiacent buildings and structures on the site plan. Provide a statement on the site plan stating: "All property lines, easements and buildings, existing and proposed, are shown on this site plan." Note on the plan that the fabric for the shade structure should be State Fire marshal approved material. Provide soil report by Leighton and Associates. .6. Provide a letter from the soils engineer confirming that the foundation plan, grading plan and specifications have been reviewed and that it has been determined that the recommendations in the soil report are properly incorporated into the plans (when required by the soil report). 7. The soils engineer recommended that he/she review the foundation excavations. Note on the foundation plan that "Prior to the contractor requesting a Building City of Carlsbad CBC2017-0189 5/5/2017 Department foundation inspection, the soils engineer shall advise the building official in writing that: a) The foundation excavations comply with the intent of the soils report." 8. Provide complete structural calculation (vertically and laterally) for the shade structure. (include the connections and foundation) 9. The plans shall indicate that special inspection will be provided for the following work. (Section 107.2) Steel construction. Special inspections for steel elements should be provided in accordance with Section 1705.2. Pier foundation. Special inspection should be provided for pier foundations in accordance with Section 1705.8. 10. To speed up the review process, please note on this list (or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed, i.e., plan sheet, note or detail number, calculation page, etc. 11. Please indicate here if any changes have been made to the plans that are not a result of corrections from this list. If there are other changes, please briefly describe them and where they are located in the plans. Have changes been made to the plans not resulting from this correction list? Please indicate: Ll Yes U No 12. The jurisdiction has contracted with Esgil Corporation located at 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, California 92123; telephone number of 858/560-1468, to perform the plan review for your project. If you have any questions regarding these plan review items, please contact David Yao at Esgil Corporation. Thank you. City of Carlsbad CBC2017-0189 5/5/2017 [DO NOT PAY- THIS IS NOTAN INVOICE] VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: CBC2017-0189 PREPARED BY: David Yao DATE: 5/5/2017 BUILDING ADDRESS: 1 Legoland Dr. BUILDING OCCUPANCY: U BUILDING PORTION AREA (Sq. Ft.) Valuation Multiplier Reg. Mod. VALUE ($) shade structure 2505 per city 200,000 Air Conditioning Fire Sprinklers TOTAL VALUE 200,000 Jurisdiction Code 1cb IBY Ordinance Bldg. Permit Fee by Ordinance 1 'i Plan Check Fee by Ordinance V Type of Review: LJ Complete Review Structural Only I $981 .061 Vo1Oe1 Repetitive Fee 1W I Repeats Ii Other E Hourly Hr. @ * EsGil Fee Comments: Sheet 1 of 1 macvaluedoc + • STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS FOR LEGOLAND CALIFORNIA WOLVES DEN CANOPY SHADE STRUCTURE Carlsbad, California F a April 18,2017 Lu cr- 2864 : CLIENT F • 4 • LEGOLAND CALIFORNIA -.• i,_ - - F, • 44 • * •- '¼, , - -• F .. • • -4 • -- I s h SE office: 6414 E. Paseo Otono Tucson AZ 85750 I email : john@walshse.com Structural Engineering t.tc phone: 858.5396040 TABLE OFCONTENTS LEGOLAND CALIFORNIA WOLVES DEN CANOPY SHADE STRUCTURE Carlsbad, California April 18, 2017 Subject Page 1 Design Criteria 1 2 Key Plan 3 3 Lateral Load Analysis 4 4 Column Design 8 5 Foundation Design 10 L,31,18 )* lsh SE office: 6414E. PaseoOtono Tucson, AZ 85750 email: john@walshse.com Structural Engineering LIC phone: 858.539.6040 SUBJECT: By: DATE: DESIGN CRITERIA JW 04/2017 PROJECT: CHECKED: PAGE: WOLVES DEN CANOPY SHADE STRUCTURE GOVERNING CODE: 2016 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE DEAD LOAD = 2 PSF UPPER FABRIC +2 PSF LOWER FABRIC =4 PSF LIVE LOAD = 5 PSF SEISMIC SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORY D SITE CLASS RISK CATEGORY II Ss=1.123 S1 =0.432 SDS = 0.787 SDI = 0.452 I = 1.0 R=2 WIND BASIC WIND SPEED 110 MPH EXPOSURE B 1=1.0 FOUNDATION LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES PROJECT #10075.002 DATED 7/24/2013 ALLOWABLE BEARING PRESSURE = 3500 PSF ALLOWABLE PASSIVE PRESSURE = 300 PCF COEFFICIENT OF FRICTION =0.35 SHORT TERM INCREASE = 1.33 4 4 t 4/11/2017 Design Maps Summary Report 1IJSGS Design Maps Summary Report User—Specified Input Report Title LEGOLAND CALIFORNIA •' Tue April 11, 2017 21:57:38 UTC Building Code Reference Document ASCE 7-10 Standard (which utilizes USGS hazard data available in 2008) Site Coordinates 33.128°N, 117.311°W Site Soil Classification Site Class 9 - "Stiff Soil" Risk Category I/Il/Ill r- Oceansidd . * 1.- '.4 5- 5._ -' USGS—Provided Output n * b - S5 = 1.123g- : SMs = 1.180g SOS 0.787g . S1 = 0.432 g S,.= 0.677 g S01 =' 0.452 g -• • .5 f For information on how the SS and Si values above have been calculated from probabilistic (risk-targeted) and deterministic ground motions In the direction of maximum horizontal response please return to the application and select the "2009 NEI-IRP" building code reference document. AC*. Ri.pori.3i. Spii.i .i:n 0i*i,ii Resp4muc SJLL* JUi aas 077 Irl :1T111, u flIIH . : 00)CL M Q4a 0ai i o I M I a0 QLO 0C4 am JO) I 140 103 :A0 OD Parott(ae) - a For PGAM, TL, CRS! and C5, values, please view the detailed report Although this information is product of the U.S. Geological Survey, we provide no warranty, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy of the data contained therein This tool Is not a substitute for technical subject matter knowledge I JA ................................................................................................................1/1 S I A. ~4' r\,r1fl-Tb LLLk/\ z / / FOUNDATION PLAN - S I I / ,1 )< .. --.::. - ' ,-- ' / r I 7 / N V I I N / \ IIJWalsh SE office 6414 E. Paseo Otono Structural Engineering phone: 858.539.6040 SUBJECT: By: DATE: KEY PLAN JW 04/2017 PROJECT: CHECKED: PAGE: WOLVES DEN CANOPY SHADE STRUCTURE 0 Walsh SE N C 0 5 P 0 5 A SE 0 St,.ctroI Enginee.ing Subject: Canopy Seismic Job: Legoland Wolvt SEISMIC CALCULATION FOR BUILDING STRUCTURE RIGIDLY ATTACHED TO CONCRETE Item #: Equipment Type: 2016 California Building Code (ASCE 7-10) Manufacturer: Description: INPUT DATA Building Information: W: Weight= 10000.0 lbs. 1OO f )( 4- Total Height = 20.0 ft. L:' Length = 58.0 ft. D: Depth = 58.0 ft. Lateral Force Data: - S05: Spectral Acceleration, Short Period = 0.787 S1: MCE Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter = 0.432 Importance Factor= 1.00 R: Response Modification Factor = 2.50 Date: 4/11/2017 Section: Page/of: CAICULATIONS Compute Earthquake Forces: Fh: Lateral EQ Force = SDSW/(R/1)= 3148.0 lbs. - - Fminl: Min Lateral EQ Force0.044S05lW = 346.3 lbs. Fmin2: Min2 Lateral EQ Force = 0.5S5W/(R/I) = 864.0 lbs. L \hP 3148.0 lbs. <. 440 Fh: Lateral EQ Force =(Fmax)= Fv: Vertical EQ Force = 0.2SDSW = 1574.0 lbs. Omega: 0 1.25 Design Fh I: On concrete Force = Fhomega = 3935.0 lbs. Design FyI: On concrete Force = Fv'omega = 1967.5 lbs. MINIMUM DESIGN LOADS - 5/ Table 12.2-1 (Continued) Structural System Limitations Including ASCE 7 Structural Height, h (ft) Section Limits Where Response Detailing Modification Deflection Seismic Design Category Requirements Coefficient, Overstrength Amplification Seismic Force-Resisting System Are Specified R" Factor, Q' Factor, Cd" B C D Ed F' G. CANTILEVERED COLUMN 12.2.5.2 SYSTEMS DETAILED TO CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS FOR: Steel special cantilever column 14.1 2½ 1¼ 2½ 35 35 35 35 35 systems Steel ordinary cantilever column 14.1 11/4 1¼ 11/4 35 35 NP NP' N' systems Special reinforced concrete moment 12.2.5.5 and 21/2 1¼ 21/2 35 35 35 35 35 frames" 14.2 Intermediate reinforced concrete 14.2 1½ 11/4 11/2 35 35 NP NP NP moment frames Ordinary reinforced concrete moment 14.2 1 l'/4 I 35 NP NP NP NP frames Timber frames 14.5 1½ 1'/2 1½ 35 35 35 NP NP H. STEEL SYSTEMS NOT 14.1 3 3 3 NL NL NP NP NP SPECIFICALLY DETAILED FOR SEISMIC RESISTANCE, EXCLUDING CANTILEVER COLUMN SYSTEMS "Response modification coefficient, R, for use throughout the standard. Note R reduces forces to a strength level, not an allowable stress level. "Deflection amplification factor, Cd, for use in Sections 12.8.6, 12.8.7, and 12.9.2. 'NL = Not Limited and NP = Not Permitted. For metric units use 30.5 m for 100 ft and use 48.8 m for 160 ft. - See Section 12.2.5.4 for a description of seismic force-resisting systems limited to buildings with a structural height, I,,,, of 240 ft (73.2 m) or less. See Section 12.2.5.4 for seismic force-resisting systems limited to buildings with a structural height, It,, of 160 ft (48.8 m) or less: 'Ordinary moment frame is permitted to be used in lieu of intermediate moment frame for Seismic Design Categories B or C. "Where the tabulated value of the overstrength factor, £2,, is greater than or equal to 21/2, f2, is permitted to be reduced by subtracting the value of 1/2 for structures with flexible diaphragms. 'See Section 12.2.5.7 for limitations in structures assigned to Seismic Design Categories 0, E, or F. 'See Section 12.2.5.6 for limitations in structures assigned to Seismic Design Categories D, E, or F. 'Steel ordinary concentrically braced frames are permitted in single-story buildings up to a structural height, It,, of 60 ft (18.3 m) where the dead load of the roof does not exceed 20 psf (0.96 kNIm) and in penthouse structures. 'An increase in structural height, h,, to 45 ft (13.7 m) is permitted for single story storage warehouse facilities. 'In Section 2.2 of AC! 318. A shear wall is defined as a structural wall. "In Section 2.2 of AC! 318. The definition of "special structural wall" includes precast and cast-in-place construction. "In Section 2.2 of ACt 318. The definition of "special moment frame" includes precast and cast-in-place construction. "Alternately, the seismic load effect with overstrength, E,, is permitted to be based on the expected strength determined in accordance with AlSl S 110. "Cold-formed steel - special bolted moment frames shall be limited to one-story in height in accordance with AISI SIlO. 77 'iWaIsh SE INC OR P OR Al ED StructurI Engineoring oice 5015 Caminito Exquisito San Diego 'CA 92130 Owe 858,720.0154 fox 858.720.0754 SUBJECT: Wv V5)\ By: DATE: tko)07 PROJECT: CHECKED: PAGE: CA?' zZ4' 15'LØY -)S VhP 5f (6D (&) )ô 68 - 6 r ____ 4 ? -______ ________ ________ ________ r4f U1LE1' Ct4 I r (2) CHAPTER 27 WIND LOADS ON BUILDINGS-MWFRS (DIRECTIONAL PROCEDURE) Main Wind Force Resisting System - Part 1 0.25:5 h/L 15 1.0 Figure 27.4-5 1 Net Pressure Coefficient, CN Pitched Free Roofs Open Buildings 0 5 450,,y = 00, 1800 CNW D Wind on : ,1 00 Roof Angle e Load Case Wind Direction, y = 00, 1800 Clear Wind Flow Obstructed Wind Flow CNW CNL CNW CNL 7.50 A 1.1 -0.3 -1.6 -1 B 0.2 -1.2 -0.9 -1.7 0 A (ITT) -0.4 -1.2 -1 B i (iTs -06 -1.6 0 22.5 A 1.1 -1,2 B . -0.1 -0.8 -0.8 -1,7 30 A 1.3 0.3 -0.7 -0.7 B -0.1 -0.9 -0.2 -1.1 37.50 A 1.3 0.6 -0.6 -0.6 B -0.2 -0.6 -0.3 -0.9 0 A 1.1 0.9 -0:5 -0.5 B -0.3 -0.5 -0.3 -0.7 Notes: I. and CNL denote net pressures (contributions from top and bottom surfaces) for windward and leeward half of roof surfaces, respectively. Clear wind flow denotes relatively unobstructed wind flow with blockage less than or equal to 50%. Obstructed wind flow denotes objects below roof inhibiting wind flow (>50% blockage). For values of B between 7.5° and 45°, linear interpolation is permitted. For values of B less than 7.5°, use monoslope roof load coefficients. Plus and minus signs signify pressures acting towards and sway from the top roof surface, respectively. All load cases shown for each roof angle shall be investigated. Notation: L : horizontal dimension of roof, measured in the along wind direction, ft. (m) h : mean roof height, ft. (m) 'y direction of wind, degrees 0 : angle of plane of roof fl'om horizontal, degrees 268 office: 6414 E. Paseo Otono 114"Wa I S Ii S E email: johncwalshse.com Tucson, AZ 85750 Structural Engineering LLC phone: 858.539.6040 SUBJECT: . BY DATE: PROJECT: 6440 P CHECKED: PAGE: VC • 4 r, ) 1-1 MAI \\— • I 4-640 /4OL. + Iso Z4-10 L -. • . - . - •- I N I(ar - - ( Oita 'o) i,. . % FO - 42 •152 IN ç 3 Im - 341 . TJLY) 0 9 () - • - (.1Z- 5PT9 ?i-4&1 CLUM1J' DIMENSIONS AND SECTION PROPERTIES OF ROUND HSS Shape Design Wall Thickness, t Nominal Wt DIt Area,A I S r Z Torsion J C in. lb/ft in .2 in.4 in.' in. in.' in.' in .3 HSS20XO.50( 0.500 104.23 30.6 40.0 1460 146 6.90 190 2910 291 XO.375 0.375 78.67 23.1 53.3 1110 111 6.94 144 2230 223 HSS18XO.500 0.500 93.54 27.5 36.0 1050 117 6.19 153 2110 234 XO.375 0.375 70.66 20.8 48,0 807 89.6 6.23 117 1610 179 HSSI6XO.625 0.625 102.73 30.2 25.6 894 112 5.44 148 1790 223 XO.50( 0.500 82.85 24.3 32.0 732 91.5 5.48 120 1460 183 X0.43 0.438 72.87 21.4 36.5 649 81.1 5.50 106 1300 162 XO.375 0.375 62.64 18.4 42.7 562 70.3 5.53 91.6 1120 140 XO.312 0.312 52.32 15.4 51.3 473 59.2 5.55 76.8 946 118 XO.250 0.250 42.09 12.4 64.0 384 48.0 5.57 62.0 767 95.9 HSS14XO.625 0.625 89.36 26.3 22.4 589 84.1 4.73 112 1180 168 XO.500 0.500 72.16 21.2 28.0 484 69.1 4.78 91.2 968 138 X0.37 0.375 54.62 16.1 37.3 373 53.3 4.82 69.6 746 106 XO.31 0.312 45.65 13.4 44.9 314 44.9 4.84 58.5 629 89.7 XO.250 0.250 36.75 10.8 56.0 255 36.5 4.86 47.3 511 72.9 HSS12.75X0.50( 0.500 65.48 19.2 25.5 362 56.7 4.33 75.1 723 113 XO.375 0.375 49.61 14.6 34.0 279 43.8 4.38 57.4 559 87.5 XO.25( 0.250 33.41 9.82 51.0 192 30.1 4.42 39.1 384 60.1 HSS10.75X0.500 0.500 54.79 16.1 21.5 212 39.4 3.63 52.6 424 78.5 X0.37 0.375 41.59 12.2 28.7 165 30.6 3.67 40.4 329 61.1 XO.250 0.250 28.06 8.25 43.0 114 21.2 3.71 27.6 227 42.3 HSS10X0.62 0.625 62.64 18.4 16.0 203 40.6 3.32 55.0 406 80.6 XO.50( 0.500 50.78 14.9 20.0 169 33.8 3.36 45.2 338 67.2 X0.37 0.375 38.58 11.3 26.7 132 26.3 3.41 .34.8 263 52.5 XO.312 0.312 32.31 9.50 32.1 112 22.3 3.43 29.3 223 44.5 XO.25( 0.250 26.06 7.66 40.0 91.1 18.2 3.45 23.8 182 36.4 X0. 1881 0.188 19.72 5.80 53.2 69.8 14.0 3.47 18.1 140 27.9 I I I I I I I 2 office IaIsh S E . 5015 Caminito Exquisito San Diego, CA 92130 I N C 0 R P o R A I E o phone 858.720.0154 Structural Engineering fox 858.720.0754 SUBJECT: Pi1r By: DATE: I 4/i7 PROJECT: L66L1 64fP( CHECKED: PAGE: • i lOt 14° IN 2 cL 4At ' J1 -- loll Leighton and Associates, Inc A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY. V . - -- . - V • June 5, 2017 , . Project No. 10075.020 * Merlin Entertainments Group US Holdings, Inc. C/6 LEGOLAND California, LLC 1 LEGOLAND Drive - REc,0 - Carlsbad, California 92008 ' , .- .. •- - SEP052017 - Attention: . Mr. Scott Lloyd -, -CITY OF C - - . ARLSB, NG Subject Geotechnical Update VISiON l. Replacement of Shade Structure . . Water Park Activity Pool, LEGOLAND California - • •- I4 , Carlsbad, California , . • - . .. References: -California Building Standards Commission (CBSC), 2016, California. BuildingCode (CBC) .1 Leighton and Associates, 2013, Geotechnical Update Report, Proposed V Water Park Activity Pool, LEGOLAND Theme Park, Carlsbad, California, . * Project No 10075 002, July 24, 2013 Leighton and Associates, 2014, As-Graded Report of Rough, Fine and Post Grading Water Park Activity Pool, LEGOLAND Theme Park, .' .. , Carlsbad, California, Project No. 10075:003, May 7, 2014 •As requested, this letter presents a Geotechnical Update for the proposed new shade structure at Water Park Activity Pool at LEGOLAND California The purpose of this update study, was to review our previous geotechnical reports (Leighton, 2013 and - - 2014) and to provide additional geotechnical recommendations, if any, for new shade :structure. We also performed a.site visit on May 31, 2017 to observe the current siteV conditions. I, 1 S. -V . • •. V - 4 .4 -_V - . - . V. - I. - -- . -I • - -. . .•. .. . - -- 3934 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite B205 • San Diego, CA 92123-4425 858.292.8030 • Fax 858.292.0771 • www.leightongroup.com Table 1' CBC Mapped Spectral Acceleration Parameters' Site Class . . D Site Coefficients Fa = 1.050 F .1.567 Mapped MCER Spectral • Ss = 1:124 Accelerations ' Si 0.433 Site Modified MCER Spectral1 . SMS 1.181 Accelerations . , . - .. Stvii 0.678 Sos ,= . 0.787 , Design Spectral Accelerations . 5. . 0:452 .4 • 1 -.4 i, -I - .' I. :1 I 10075020 Based on our observations' of the currant site conditions and review of the referenced project geotechnical document, the geotechnical conditions of the subject site have not changed since the completion of our as-grade geotechnical report (Leighton, 2014).,. Therefore, it is our professional opinion that the geotechnical recommendations presented in the referenced geotechnical reports (Leighton, 2013 and 2014) are still 'applicable for its intended use, provided the following recommendations are incorporated into the design and construction of the structures and improvements I : The effect of seismic shaking may be mitigated by adhering to California Building Code (CBC,'2016) for subject site The following seismic design parameters have been -, determined in accordance with the 2016. CBC and the USGS U.S. Seismic Design. Values tool (Version 3.1.0). - -.. - '4 ''4* . - , •. . . . . * L Utilizing ASCE Standard 7-10, in accordance with Section 11.8.3, the following '' additiohal parameters for the peak horizontal ground acceleration are associated with- the Geometric Mean Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCEG) The mapped MCEG, "peak ground acceleration (PGA) is 0.445g for the site. For a Site Class D, the FPGA is . , 1.055 and the mapped peak ground acceleration adjusted for Site Class effects (PGAM) is 0.469g for the site The conclusions and recommendations in this letter are based in part upondata that were obtained from a limited number of observations, site visits excavations samples, and tests 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 .i- - •. •• ' - .• . .4. . . ' - . . . - .. - ... -. .- .* 4 • • , .. - . . . 4 * . ' .--- • 1 . f 2 Leighton 10075.020 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 conditions during grading and construction of the project, in order to confirm that our preliminary findings are representative for the site. If you have any questions regarding our report, please do not hesitate to contact this Respectfully submitted, I office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. LQ LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES INC. ( INEERING GEOL 'GIST. D. OFC ,3 No. 4S2013 7m- William D. Olson, RCE 45283 Exp.41 f5 VM Mike D. Jensen, CEG 2457 Associate Engineer Senior Project Geologist Distribution: (4) Addressee 3 . Leightor .4 ECHNICAL UPDATE REPORT . . WATER PARK ACTIVITY POOL. LEGOLAND THEME PARK CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA .. MERLIN ENTERTAINMENT GROUP! US HOLDING, INC. . -, - 1 CD 0) C) . F. U) - - . 0 ' OD . • • LLJ cr 4 :- QD LQ . . .. Leighton and Associates, I m cob O Z Lu . A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY - Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY July 24, 2013 Project No. 10075.002 To: Merlin Entertainment Group/US Holding, Inc. One Lego Drive Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Mr. Chris Romero Subject: Geotechnical Update Report, Proposed Water Park Activity Pool, LEGOLAND Theme Park, Carlsbad, California In accordance with your request and authorization, Leighton and Associates, Inc. (Leighton) has conducted a geotechnical update for the proposed Water Park Activity Pool that is planned for the LEGOLAND Theme Park in Carlsbad, California (Figure 1). This report presents the results of our field investigation activities, review of the laboratory testing, geotechnical analyses, and provides our conclusions and recommendations for the proposed improvements. Based on the result of our preliminary geotechnical investigation, the proposed project is considered feasible from a geotechnical standpoint provided our recommendations are implemented in the design and construction of the project. If you have any questions regarding our report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. NPL Respectfully submitted, D. N .2457 LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERING o !t*N 45283 _ William D. Olson, RCE 45289 Mike D. Jensen, 2457 Associate Engineer OF Project Geologist Distribution: (4) Addressee (3) R.W. Apel Landscape Architects, Attention: Richard Apel 3934 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite B205 • San Diego, CA 92123-4425 858.292.8030 • Fax 858.292.0771 • www.leightongroup.com TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................... 2.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING..........................3 3.0 SUMMARY OF GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS....................................................5 4.0 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY...............................................................................10 5.0 CONCLUSIONS.....................................................................................................13 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................... 15 Leighton 0 2,000 4,000 Feet ism V Project: 10075.002 IYLcT'APIs11II! SITE ILOCATIONI ' Water Activity •• LEGOLAND California Base Map: ESRI Resource Center, 2010 Thematic 1 Lego Drive Info: Leighton Carlsbad, California 0 as aranlng\isu,s\us\j!sioT_2oi3-o2-i 5\Flgarel mad on 7123/2013 8:54:23 AM PLATE 1 Geotecbnta]1VIap S 4 - - •_4 4 -' — - N K Afu Af ij - fu 'I 101,111 1 i 10 - - - / — / cs L2CEND j2 . / E / \ - - -- - .- •u D2 uou -. PE—UM 0 ti ' AN Af 000 000E OlE (000000 -ERE 00000) PLATE GEOTECHNICAL MAP 00 ouc oopo. (0 00 / _lE0 j-Ol_ _ - - — — - 10000 0010 000l 00115005 PIOI 10075 EI19/Guo( WDQQADJ I - - Lo.5000 S0uIol.2 O07.2Ol3 - - - - .- - - - - - - - - APPEND IX A R einces 10075.002 APPENDIX A R eiences Am ei±an Conciete Institute QkC 1), 2006, Guile br Concrete Slabs that Receive M otne-Sens±ie Fboi±g M aterb. Blyant. W .A . and Hait. E .W .,2007, FaukRupliiie Hazaid Zones in Ca,Aut- PrbSpec1Stids Zones Actof1972 w:th Index tDSpec1St.idy Zone Maps, D eparn entof C onseivatbn, DJvjsbn of M ±ies and G eobgy, Spec1Pubkatbn 42, dated 1997 w±h 2007 Interiri Rev±n. CaYbinja Building and Safety Comm issbn (CBSC),2010,Carn:à Building Code. Kennedy, M P., and Tan, SS., 2007, G eobgh Map of the Oceansile 30'x60' Quadiang, Ca]irn, C ahbinh G eobgr Suivey, 1:10 0,0 0 0 scab. Lehton and Associates, Inc., 1995, Prelixi ±iaiy Geotechnba1 hvestatbn, Lego Fam i}y Park and Pointe Resorts, Lots 17 and 18 of the Cabad Ranch, Caibad, Ca]iin, PrrxctNo. 950294-001, dated 0 ctDber5, 1995. 1996, Supplemental Geotechna1 Investigation, Lego Family Park, -, 1998, F±ial As-G iaded Report of Rough-G iad±ig, LEG 0 LAND, C aibad, Ca,PioctNo.4960151-O03,dated FebruarylO. -, 2009, G eotena1Invstat±n, Proposed W atenorks C lister, LEGO LAND Theme Park,Ca]bad,Ca]ibm,P10-jctNo.96o151-o31, dated september3o. -, 2011, Geotechr±al hvesatbn, Proposed Pirate Island Atbactbn, LEGO LAND Theme Park, Cabad, Ca]frin, ProctNo. 960151-035, dated September30. A-i 10075.002 APPENDIX A (Conthued) NCMA, 2OO9, Design M anualbrSegm en Re±i±ig W a], 3 Edthn R . ApelLandscape Aithiects, bc., 2013, ConceptualSIe P lan, 2014 W aterPaik Expansbn, Legond, Caibad Ca]in, dated Ju'15 Tan, S. S. and Kennedy, M .P.,1996,GeobgMapsof the NoithwestexnPaitofSan D go County, Ca]nà, D i±n of Mines and Geobgy (JM G) Open-Fib Repot96-02,San Luis Rey and San axcosQuadiangès. Treir an, JA., 1993, The Rose Canyon Faut Zone, Southern Ca]in: Ca1iimà DinofM±ies and Geobgy,Open-FibRepoit93-O2,45p. United States Geobg± Survey (USGS), 2010, GiDund Motbn Paameter , Cabitor, Veisbn 51.0. A -2 APPENDIX B Borbg Logs GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG KEY Project No. Date Drilled Project KEY TO BORING LOG GRAPHICS Logged By Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Drilling Method Ground Elevation Location Sampled By a SOIL DESCRIPTION 42 C '' _' 0) 0.0 Z U) , '! U) This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the U) I— 0. 0— time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations 0 4) 0 E and may change with time. The description is simplification of the 0. 0 C#) actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be >, gradual. --=_ Asphaltic concrete ,. . Portland cement concrete CL Inorganic clay of low to medium plasticity; gravelly clay; sandy clay: silty clay; lean clay CH Inorganic clay; high plasticity, fat clays 01. Organic clay; medium to plasticity, organic silts ML Inorganic silt; clayey silt with low plasticity mH Inorganic silt; diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils; elastic silt ML-CL Clayey silt to silty clay - OW Well-graded gravel; gravel-sand mixture, little or no lines GP Poorly graded gravel; gravel-sand mixture, little or no fines 10— 0 GM Silty gavel; gravel-sand-silt mixtures GC Clayey gravel; gravel-sand-clay mixtures - sw Well-graded sand; gravelly sand, little or no fines . sp Poorly graded sand; gravelly sand, little or no fines SM Silty sand; poorly graded sand-silt mixtures Sc Clayey sand; sand-clay mixtures Bedrock Ground water encountered at time of drilling - B-I Bulk Sample 20— C-1 Core Sample - G-I Grab Sample R-I Modified California Sampler (3" O.D., 2.5 l.D.) - SH-I Shelby Tube Sampler (3" O.D.) S-I Standard Penetration Test SPT (Sampler (2' O.D., 1.4' ID.) 25— PUSH Sampler Penetrates without Hammer Blow SAMPdPTYPES: TYPE OF TESTS. B BULK SAMPLE -200 % FINES PASSING OS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS C CORE SAMPLE AL ATTERBERG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX SE SAND EQUIVALENT G GRAB SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION H HYDROMETER TR THERMAL RESISTIVITY 4 P RING SAMPLE CO COLLAPSE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY UC UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE CR CORROSION PP POCKET PENETROMETER T TUBE SAMPLE CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAI. RV R VALUE * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * Page 1 of 1 GEOTECHNICALBORING LOG B-I Project No. 10075.002 Date Drilled Project Legoland Water Park Activity Pool Logged By Drilling Co. Baja Exploration Hole Diameter Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger - 1401b - Autohammer - 30" Drop Ground Elevation Location See Boring Location Map Sampled By 5-23-13 FJW 8" 184' FJW o SOIL DESCRIPTION Z 'a.0 . U) I.. - (flQ) 'a DI 4) .i!() 0) U 'I-This Soil Description applies Only to a location of the exploration at the LL LL 0. .2— a. .- time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations 0 E ai 0 arid may change with time. The description is a simplification of the rL () U)—' actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may beCL > gradual. 0': TOPSOIL B-I 04 SM 4": UNDOCUMENTED ARTIFICIAL FILL (Afu) Silty SAND with gravel, dense, light brown to brown, moist - . . light brown to gray 180 SM @ 4.5': ARTIFICIAL FILL (At) Silty SAND, dense, reddish brown, moist, micaceous S-I 6 El, SA, - ' B-2 12 CR 5-10' II 175 - 10- f [ SC-SM @ 10.5': QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Oft - R-1 S Silty Clayey SAND, medium dense, dark reddish brown, moist, DS - I 12 27 micaceous 170 - F --- SM Silty SAND with gravel, very dense, light reddish brown, dry to 15— . . moist, micaceous S-2 14 B-3 20 15-17 20 • R-2 23 - - - - SP-SC Poorly graded SAND with Oa very dense, dark reddish brown, - - 165 ___ moist, micaceous 20— Total Depth 19' Groundwater not encountered Back tilled on 5/23/2013. 160 - 25- 155 - SAMPL0TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: B BULK SAMPLE -200 % FINES PASSING DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS C CORE SAMPLE AL ATTERBERG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX SE SAND EQUIVALENT G GRAB SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION H HYDROMETER SG SPECIFIC GRAVITY R RING SAMPLE CO COLLAPSE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY UC UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE CR CORROSION PP POCKET PENETROMETER T TUBE SAMPLE CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL RV R VALUE * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a standalone document. * * * Page 1 of 1 GEOTECHNICALBORING LOG B-2 Project No. 10075.002 Project Leqoland Water Park Activity Pool Drilling Co. Baja Exploration Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger - 1401b - Autohammer - 30" Drop Location See Boring Location Map - Date Drilled 5-23-13 Logged By FJW Hole Diameter 8" Ground Elevation 172' Sampled By FJW o SOIL DESCRIPTION 1i .2 ' rLo Z W° This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the I- >U ow cc,,j °. 2 ._ 2. time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations 0 E or OD and may change with time. The description is a simplification of the 0. U) 0 o cj co— actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be - I S I I CL I I gradual. -i B-i \( 0': TOPSOIL 2' UNDOCUMENTED ARTIFICIAL FILL (Afu) o-4' Ailty SAND, dense, brown to gray, moist 170 - - - Well-graded GRAVEL with Sand, gray tobrown, moist, with Silt - -GW 5 4.5': QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (01) R-1 9 SC-SM illy, Clayey SAND, very dense, dark brown, moist, medium sand, - 26 micaceous B-2 50/5" 165 - . 6-10' 10- ---------------------------- S-I 12 SW-SC Well-graded SAND with Clay, dense to very dense, brown, moist, - - - 14 medium sand, micaceous B-3 16 160- .------ Is- .' - ---- - R-2 21 - 50/5" 155 - A . 6' s-2I -- Silty SAND, dense light brown, moist, fine to medium sand, - . . 27 micaceous, friable 20— Total Death 19,5' Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 5/23/ 013 13 150 - 25- 145 - SAMPL0TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: B BULK SAMPLE .200 % FINES PASSING DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS C CORE SAMPLE AL ATTERBERG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX SE SAND EQUIVALENT G GRAB SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION H HYDROMETER SG SPECIFIC GRAVITY 4 R RING SAMPLE CO COLLAPSE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY UC UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE CR CORROSION PP POCKET PENETROMETER T TUBE SAMPLE CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL RV R VALUE * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * Page 1 of 1 Previous Boring by Leighton - 2011 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG KEY Project No. Project Drilling Co. Drilling Method Location KEY TO BORING LOG GRAPHICS Date Drilled Logged By Hole Diameter Ground Elevation Sampled By C -. SOIL DESCRIPTION In z This Soil Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the ,. C_j a0 — a 0 a. time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations 0 4) C3 and may change with time. The description is a simplification of the W CL 0 U) actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types maybe gradual. S Asphaltic concrete Portland cement concrete CL lnoranic clay of low to medium plasticity; gravelly clay; sandy clay; silty clay; lean clay CH Inorganic clay; high plasticity, flit clays or. Organic clay; medium to plasticity, organic silts I rva. Inorganic silt; clayey silt with low plasticity Inorganic silt; diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils; elastic silt - ML-CL Clayey silt to silty clay - - GW Well-graded gravel; gravel-sand mixture, little or no fines op Poorly graded gravel; gravel-sand mixture, little or no fines GM Silty gravel; gravel-sand-silt mixtures Gc Clayey gravel; gravel-sand-clay mixtures 6 sw Well-graded sand; gravelly sand, little or no fines sp Poorly graded sand; gravelly sand, little or no fines SM Silty sand; poorly graded sand-silt mixtures 15 Sc Clayey sand; sand-clay mixtures Bedrock V - Ground water encountered at time of drilling B-I Bulk Sample 20— C-I Core Sample G-1 Grab Sample R-I Modified California Sampler (3" O.D., 2,5 ID.) - SR-I Shelby Tube Sampler (3" O.D.) S-I Standard Penetration Test SPT (Sampler (2" O.D., 1.4" ID.) 25— - PUSH Sampler Penetrates without Hammer Blow SAMPLrY'PES: B BULK SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE TYPE OF TESTS: -200 % FINES PASSING AL AUERBERG LIMITS Os El DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS EXPANSION INDEX SE SAND EQUIVALENT G GRAB SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION H HYDROMETER TR THERMAL RESISTIVITY $0 R RING SAMPLE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE CO COLLAPSE CR CORROSION MD PP MAXIMUM DENSITY UC UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH POCKET PENETROMETER T TUBE SAMPLE . CU UNDRAINEDTRIAXIAL RV RVALUE * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * Page 1 of 1 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-I Project No. 960151-035 Project LEGOLAND Drilling Co. Baja Excavation Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger - 1401b - Autohammer - 30" Drop Location South Central Date Drilled Logged By Hole Diameter Ground Elevation Sampled By 7-22-11 MDJ 8" 180' MaJ__ o iv > 2 OIL _j w .9 S w - o 0. z 0 2— . 0. g C.) tau) .!j (j (fl UI CL SOIL DESCRIPTION This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and may change with time. The description is a simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types maybe gradual. - - 0 180 0 : - - -i;r- ARTIFICIAL FILL (Mo) @01: Silty SAND with clay: Brown to red-brown, moist, loose (top 3 feet) and then dense B-I 3'-6' 175 5 R-I 15 116 It SM @5': Silty fine SAND with clay: Orange-brown to red, moist, very 39 dense 44 170 i0- 9.5': Clayey medium SAND: Brown to red-brown, moist, dcnsc; SC mottled II Ii 1K K I @ SM @ IT: Silty fine SAND with clay: Red-brown, damp to moist, very dense; formation at tip 165 15— .• . R-3 Ii 127 10 - 16 60 SM QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) . 18': Silty fine SANDSTONE Red/orange-brown, damp very dense 160 20— •- - •• R-4 27 - .• .. • 50 155 25— • -- R-5 28 116 10 @25': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Light brown, damp, . 50/3' very dense -. • - B-2 - • • 25'-30' IVI dIPLTYPES: - - TYPE OF TESTS. B C BULK SAMPLE CORE SAMPLE -200 % FINES AL ATTERBERG PASSING Os DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX SE SAND EQUIVALENT G GRAB SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION H HYDROMETER SG SPECIFIC GRAVITY R RING SAMPLE CO COLLAPSE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY UC UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE CR CORROSION PP POCKET PENETROMETER T TUBE SAMPLE CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL RV R VALUE * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * Page 1 of 2 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-I Project No. 960151-035 . Date Drilled 7-22-11 Project LEGOLAND Logged By MDJ Drilling Co. Baja Excavation Hole Diameter 8" Drilling Method Hallow Stem Auger - 1401b - Autohammer - 30" Drop Ground Elevation 180' Location South Central Sampled By MDJ C M >LL LL 30- i 0) 0.0 _s 04)— 4) ___ Z 01 0. E ____ 0 CL . n o. _ o Li j Cl) Ed)'4- SOIL DESCRIPTION This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and may change with time. The description is a simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. In 0 0. >. ISO - _______________________________ SM TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) 30': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Very ltbt gray-brown • R-6 62/6' 110 8 to off-w1itc, damp, very dense; top 2 rings disturbed 145 35— • • . R-7 70/6' III 9 @ 35': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Very light gray-brown to off-w1ite, damp, very dense; top 2 rings disturbei 140 40— . S-I 52/6 @40': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Light gray-brown, • . damp very dense 135 45— R-8 61/6" 111 11 @45': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Light gray-brown, .. damp, very dense 130 50—. • S-2 - X ._52&_ - - - @ 50': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Light brown, damp, - \_very dense - Total Depth = 50.5 Feet - No ground water encountered at time of drilling Backfllled with bentonitc and native soil on 7/22/I1 125 55- 3PLTYPES: B BULK SAMPLE .200 % FINES PASSING DS TYPE OF TESTS: DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS C CORE SAMPLE AL AUERBERG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX SE SAND EQUIVALENT 4 G GRAB SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION H HYDROMETER SG SPECIFIC GRAVITY R RING SAMPLE CO COLLAPSE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY UC UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE CR CORROSION PP POCKET PENETROMETER T TUBE SAMPLE CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL RV R VALUE * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document.' * * Page 2 of 2 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-2 .Project No. 960151-035 Date Drilled Project LEGOLAND Logged By Drilling Co. Baja Excavation Hole Diameter Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger - 1401b - Autohammer - 30" Drop Ground Elevation Location Northwest - -- Sampled By 7-22-11 MDJ - 8" 190' MDJ o > LU - a 0 - O) W d Z °- E 1 $ W=) .2— w IL . ou a. I... . c U)U) .j C.,j Cl)- SOIL DESCRIPTION This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and may change with time. The description is a simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. w 0 a 190 0 - .- SM ARTIFICIAL FELL UNDOCUMENTED (Mu) - I @0': Silty tine to medium SAND with clay: Red-brown to medium 1 . brown, damp to moist, loose B-I 3-6' iss CL @ 7.5% Sandy CLAY: Black, loose, moist, loose; organics 10— • SM @ 9.5': Silty medium SAND: Gray-brown and red-brown, moist, -180- . . . R-I II 120 11 medium dense to dense • 18 • 25 SM ART WICIAL FILL (Mo) .• 15-- • @ 14': Silty fine SAND: Red-brown, moist, dense 175- • • R-2 18 124 11 . . 26 35 170 20 • . S-i - 12 @ 20': Silty fine to medium SAND: Brown to dark red-brown, - • 22 moist, dense 28 SM QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) @23.5': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp, 25—' very dense 165 .• R-3 30 123 9 CR - 50/4' 3-2 - • 26'-28' 25 - - S-2 30 SAM PC'TYPES: - -. - 30 - - TYPE OF TESTS: B C CORE BULK SAMPLE SAMPLE -200 % FINES PASSING AL ATTERBERG LIMITS DS El DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS EXPANSION INDEX SE SAND EQUIVALENT LOOR G R GRAB RING SAMPLE SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION CO COLLAPSE H MD HYDROMETER SG SPECIFIC GRAVITY MAXIMUM DENSITY UC UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH NOto" S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE CR CORROSION PP POCKET PENETROMETER T TUBE SAMPLE CU UNDRJNED TRIAXIAL RV R VALUE * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. Page 1 of 2 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-2 Project No. 960151-035 Date Drilled 7-22-11 Project LEGOLAND Logged By MDJ Drilling Co. _Baia Excavation Hole Diameter 8" / Drilling Method Hollow Stem AuQer - 1401b - Autohammer - 30" Drop Ground Elevation 190' Location Northwest Sampled By _FyJ__________ C M 41 > 00LL C) 0.0 0.0 0 (fl0 Z 0. E U).0 0— M10 - U Cflcf) CO SOIL DESCRIPTION This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and may change with time. The description is a simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. U) w I— 0 C) 0. >1 160 30— _ Total Depth = 30.5 Feet — - No ground water encountered at time of drilling Backfihled with bentonite and native soil on 7/22/11 155. 35 150- 40- 145 140 50- 135 - SAM PL TYPES: B C BULK SAMPLE CORE SAMPLE .200 % FINES AL ATTERBERG PASSING DS LIMITS El TYPE OF TESTS: DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS EXPANSION INDEX SE SAND EQUIVALENT G GRAB SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION H HYDROMETER SG SPECIFIC GRAVITY R RING SAMPLE CO COLLAPSE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY UC UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE CR CORROSION PP POCKET PENETROMETER T TUBE SAMPLE CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL RV R VALUE * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * Page 2 or 2 Previous Boring by Leighton - 2009 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-I Project No. 960151-031 Date Drilled Project LEGO/Waterworks Cluster Logged By Drilling Co. Baja Exploration Hole Diameter Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger - 1401b - 30" Drop Ground Elevation Location Southwest Portion of Site - Sampled By 8-25-09 MDJ 8" 167 d SOIL DESCRIPTION o . I . 0) Z ca-a cn i-. . C 111(1) The Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the 0. 2 0. .!. jj time of drilling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and 0 . 0 may change with time. The description is simplification of the actual W o dr— conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types maybe gradual. >,. Sl CL 0— - SM AR1117I0AL FILL (Afl @0': Silty hue SAND with clay: Dark red-brown, moist, medium dense, top 2 inches dry 165 - -. . .. . B-I 2-4' CR 160 • -. - . . . R-1 13 38 50 127 11 ( 6': Silty medium SAND: Red-brown, moist, very dense 155 10— - : . :• R-2 14 29 122 9 10': Silty fine SAND: Red-brown, moist, dense, traces of clay 150 -. • - . R-3 R4 24 43 50/4' 36 130 115 9 7 @ 15': Same as 10 feet except very dense QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSiTS (Ot) @ 17.5: Silty Fine to medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp to moist, very dense 145 140- - - 25- 30 Total Depth = 21 Feet No ground water encountered at time of drilling Backfilled on 8/25/09 SAMPLE TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: S SPLIT SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS -200 % FINES PASSING R RING SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY SE SAND EQUIVALENT AL ATTERBERG LIMITS B BULK SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION El EXPANSION INDEX CO COLLAPSE CR CORROSION RV R VALUE PP POCKET PENETROMETER T TUBE SAMPLE UC UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH Page 1 of 1 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-2 Project No. 960151-031 Date Drilled Project LEGO/Waterworks Cluster Logged By Drilling Co. Baja Exploration Hole Diameter Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger - 1401b - 30" Drop Ground Elevation Location Center of Site Sampled By 8-25-09 MDJ 8" 173 MDJ C; SOIL DESCRIPTION o 'a .2 W Z 0 .c 0 UICI) The Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the w > aj 0. .2 - . ..2i time of drilling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and 0 Lu 20 5 may change with time. The description is a simplification of the actual 0 (I) conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. >, SM UNDOCUMENTED ARTIFICIAL FILL (Afu) • . 0': Silty tine SAND: Medium to dark red-brown, moist, dense 170 - •• . B-I - .• . . 3-5' - T25—tO SM ICJALFILL(AM-- - - 5': Silty fine SAND: Medium to dark red-brown, moist, dense . 27 165 SM QUTENARY TERRACE DEPQSITSfQt) • © 7.': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp to - . .. moist, very dense - 10 R2 7 120 10 @10': Same as above • 29 so - .• @ 12': Very dense 160 - 15— S-I II @ 15': Silty fine SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp and moist, - . • . 15 dense, several friable layers 15 155- 20—. - S-2 10 16 17 - - 20': Same as above except more friable 150 145 - - 25- - 30-- Total Depth = 21.5 Feet No ground water encountered at time of drilling Backfihled on 8/25/09 SAMPLE TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: S SPLIT SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS .200 % FINES PASSING R RING SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY SE SAND EQUIVALENT AL ATTERBERG LIMITS B BULK SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION El EXPANSION INDEX CO COLLAPSE T TUBE SAMPLE CR CORROSION RV R VALUE PP POCKET PENETROMETER UC UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH Page 1 of 1 - - - Elevation Feet Cl) tA 01 - — Depth I I I I I I Feet F : Graphic a MIMM~MXM 8 C) ______ ______________ I Attitudes Cl) I ' Sample No. - -- Blows CCOOED ) Z Cfl . 00 kA , 00 Per 6 Inches COOED M I Dry Density HORI pcf Øcn zo 00 — Moisture I - Content, % CnI Soil Class. (U.S.C.S.) 0 I QIDS (PD (PD gm rnn co M co a • CD••I CV 0 CD C; 2. rn CI) U 2 - C) i (I) C) .-4 — —I I 0OF '00 -71 SD (I) - o. • -.CD 3 - 0 C3,r co . I a . D I— Z C' - Cr > I - 0 .,. .. - -. M g ZOI , Q - or' C) 2 Ez 0 Cr - 0q CD 0 co co a. CD kIII I 0 ca CX Type of Tests I DDu o ID ID o z IDO 0 0 CL GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-4 ,Project No. 960151-031 Date Drilled 8-25-09 Project LEGO/Waterworks Cluster Logged By MDJ Drilling Co. Bala Exploration Hole Diameter 8" Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger - 1401b - 30° Drop Ground Elevation 175' Location Northwest Portion of Site Sampled By MDJ ci .' SOIL DESCRIPTION U, U Z U (fl.0 W I-,- UICI) .Q The Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the U LL CD 04) 0 0.0 010U, U C.) time of drilling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and 0 E ° >,, o 0:3 may change with time. The description isa simplification of the actual U 0. U ø conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. CL > ty tine to methun top 4 inches dry moist, medium 170 5 ------------------ - H I I 25 I 111 @5': Silty line to medium SAND: Red-brown, moist, dense 10 R-2 12 129 9 @ 10': Same as 5 feet - B-I 22 10-13' 44 - El R-3 9 117 10 @ 15: Silty fine SAND with clay: Red-brown, moist, medium DS - 12 dense 14 ir r F F FQUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (ofl --- I I-I I I I I 8': Silty SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp, dense 20 121 1 8 45 50/4" 25 13 145J 30 SAMPLE TYPES: S SPLIT SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE TYPE OF TESTS: DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS -200 % FINES PASSING R RING SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY SE SAND EQUIVALENT AL ATTERBERG LIMITS B BULK SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION El EXPANSION INDEX CO COLLAPSE T TUBE SAMPLE CR CORROSION RV RVALUE PP POCKET PENETROMETER UC UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH * * * This log Is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * Page 1 of 2 I— g CDD •-U . 5•(a(a 5 3 a C) Z (DO 0 0 C. C) M 0 —I M C) I z C) I— w 0 z C) I- 0 C) w - - - - Elevation w cn Feet m 0 m U) U) U) U) Depth - U) U) U) U) I I I I I I I I Feet m rn"1 Graphic - Log C)C) 8 ° Attitudes M (AU) m -- Fn Sample No. I I I I I I I I I I Blows Cnoza Per 6 Inches coc)gom z000 n DryDensity ozzxm z 100 OR f flCflCU) U) 250 x Moisture Content,% Soil Class. (U.S.C.S.) > (m'7< -nimU)ø U) CD X Z> Fn a OO •) 74. QZ —' Co LA CD Z~5 h& s 75 UO'00>I) a — co Ca. ag D rn Cl) M > C c,-oc.,.. co a Z gz - CD CD Q. o CD iw Type of Tests 1 g D aa . ID' c•) z M 0 0 0 CL -I W In ca — - - - - - Elevation Feet CA m m ca — Depth Cn I I I I Feet I I Graphic Log C)C) ° I Attitudes 0 1 Fn Fn — , I — -- Sample No. Blows COOED -1 Per 6 Inches OZ0U) COOED M zoo o — Dry Density M Ia pcf Z902-4 - — I Moisture mz>amw a mti> OZ I 00 Content,% c, o a I i Soil Class. (U.S.C.S.) M~M caw WZ- 0I CD Cb z 0-' CD I CO)Z C C#I co Q oc I 0011n CD C, M 20' oO (I) 0 C) Z - QC,DI -o In mn GQ C11 I I ZC, CD I . . I (DD CD I CL Type of Tests APPENDIX C Laboittiy TestR esu]ts 10075.002 APPENDIX C Laboratory Testhg Procedures and TestR esu]t Folbw±ig are tables that sum mai±e boiatoiy test±ig that was pebimed by other consultants and prov±Ied tD Lehn. Cops of the tests results we were provided are ±iclided atthe end of this appendc. M oture and D ensi' D eteim natbn Tests: M oEtuie content and thy densiy deteirn ±iatbns were peiff:xmi ed on reti'e' undithed sam ps ob±ied from the test bothgs accoid±ig tD ASTM D 2216 and D 2937. The results of these tests are presented n the boring logs. W here applicable, on' m oliire content was determ ±ied flDm ndtithed" ordturbed sam pbs. DiectS hear, A diect shear test was pe]±irn ed n accordance with AS TM D 3 0 8 0 on selected a sam ph thatwere soaked brundera surchaige equalti the app]d norm al brce duthg testhg. The rate of sheai±ig used br the tests was reported to be 0.05 jnAn ±i. p bts of the hdirilual test results are provided w :th±a this appendc. S bength env&bpes are piDviled on each of the idir:dualp:bts. Those envebpes conespond tD the peak shearrestance and the shearresEtance atthe end of the test M±iinum Resd,iy and pH Tests: Miiinum restri31r and pH tests were pethimed n generalaccoidance w ±h Ca]bns TestM ethod CT643. The results are presented n the table bebw: M iiin um ResrI.' Sam ph Locathn pH (ohms-cm) L B-i® 5-10 feet 7.14 2,455 C hbrd.e Content C hbre contentw as tested ii accordance w th DO T TestM ethod No. 422. The resu]IB are presented bebw: Chrde Content Sam p Locatnn D egree of C onosriy pm) B-i® 5-10 feet 12 Low c-i 10075.002 APPENDIX (Continued) S obbb Su1s: The soluble su]te contents of selected samps weie deteim ±ied by Cahans TestM ethod CT417. The testisu1s am piesented n the table below : PotentàlDegiee of Sample Locatbn Su]te Content (ppm) Su]te Attack* F— B-1@ 5-10 feet - 210 Neg]bè *Based on the Am ei±an Concrete Institute Comm ±tee 318-08,Tab:b No.4.3.1. Expansbn :hdex Tests: The expans:bn potenthiof a selected m atethiwas evaluated by the Expansbn Index Test ASTM TestM ethod 4829. The piepared 1-±ich thbk by 4 -inch dm eter specthi ens am :baded to an equivalent 144 psf suichaige and am ±lundatEd w:th tap wateruntiLvolim eb± equiliDrilm B reached. The resulof the test presented ±i the table bebw: Sam p I Depth (ft) SampDescrtin I I Expansbn I II Expansbn I II Locatbn II ndex Potenthi. B-i 5 to 10 DañcReddhBiown-SiIySand M) I 1 Veiy Low C-2 - a I '. 3.0 a 'a, 2.0 C,) . C -. a U) - 1.0 -. •*• . - 0.0- Boring No. B Sample No. R-1 Depth (ft) 11-12.0 Sample Tvoe: RING Soil Identification: CLAYEY SAND (SC), reddish brown. Strength Parameters C(psf) 4) ( Peak 631.5 30. ]E33.10 Ultimate 116.0 Normal Stress (kip/ft2) 0.500 1.000 2.000 Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft2). 0.914 D 1.222 A 1.787 Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) 0 0.446 D 0.757 A 1.417: Deformation Rate (in./min.) 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 Initial Sample Height (in.) . 1.000 1.000 1.000 Diameter (in.) 2.415 2.415 . 2.415 Initial Moisture Content (%)- 12.06 10.33 11.58 Dry Density (pcf , 118.6 123.2 . .114.9 Saturation (%) . 77.3 757 67.0 Soil Height Before Shearing (in) 0.9993 0.9964 - 0.9757 Final Moisture Content (%) 17.9 15.1 15.4 a -I a - S 1• a .1 .4 - .uu 1.50 U) U) . 1.00 U) () .••; •.r: U) . .' 0.50 a. ••• •a'J a. a 0.00 0. 0 . 0.1 0.2 . . ' 0.3 Horizontal Deformation (in.) •. 41 0.0 . 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 •' Normal Stress (ks a : f) - - a . Project No.: 10075.002 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS / Leighton • Consolidated Drained ASTM D-3080 LEGOLAND WATERPARK EXPANSION . • 06-13 Direct Shear -Geornat!c;B.l, R-1 (23.13) GRAVEL ISAND FINES - COARSE - FINE COARSE T MEDIUM FINE SILT - I CLAY u.. a It%iU?JU WEVr urtpllrlL, U.s. b I1NL)IkKU S1LVt NUMLK HYDROMETER 3.0" 1 1/2' 3/4" 3/8" #4 #8 #16 #30 #50 #100 #200 100 • ,, S • S k 90 80 70 60 x 0 Ui 50 co - It UJ 40 U- I— z Ui 30 C, Ui 0 20 10 Oh hlhl I I I III 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 III 100.000 10.000 1.000 0.100 0.010 PARTICLE - SIZE (mm) Project Name: LEGOLAND I WATERPARK EXPANSION Project No.: 10075.002 Exploration No.: Sample No.: sm I __________________________________ Depth (feet): 5-10.0 - Soil Type: PARTICLE - SIZE Leighton DISTRIBUTION Soil Identification: SILTY SAND WITH TRACE GRAVEL (SM), dark reddish brown. .4i ASTM D 6913 GR:SA:FI : (%) 1 65 34 Sieve Landscape; B-I, B-2 (5-23-13) Previous Laboratory Testing by Leighton - 2011 960151-035 APPENDIX C Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results Following are tables that summarize laboratory testing that was performed by other consultants and provided to Leighton. Copies of the tests results we were provided are included at the end of this appendix. Moisture and Density Determination Tests: Moisture content and dry density determinations were performed on relatively undisturbed samples obtained from the test borings according to ASTM D 2216 and D 2937. The results of these tests are presented in the boring logs. Where applicable, only moisture content was determined from "undisturbed" or disturbed samples. Direct Shear: A direct shear test was performed in accordance with ASTM D3080 on selected a sample that were soaked for under a surcharge equal to the applied normal force during testing. The rate of shearing used for the tests was reported to be 0.05 in/mm. Plots of the individual test results are provided within this appendix. Strength envelopes are provided on each of the individual plots. Those envelopes correspond to the peak shear resistance and the shear resistance at the end of the test. Minimum Resistivity and pH Tests: Minimum resistivity and pH tests were performed in general accordance with Caltrans Test Method CT643. The results are presented in the table below: L Sample Location pH Minimum Resistivity (ohms-cm) B-2 © 24-28 feet 7.39 1,373 Soluble Sulfates: The soluble sulfate contents of selected samples were determined by Caltrans Test Method CT417. The test results are presented in the table below: Sample Location Sulfate Content (ppm) Potential Degree of Sulfate Attack* B-2 @ 24-28 feet 150 [ Negligible * Based on the American Concrete Institute (ACI) Committee 318-08, Table No. 4.3.1. c-i Direct Shear 8-1, R-4 c 20.$ 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 Z 1.00 0.50 0.00 0 0.3 Horizontal Deformation (in.) 4.0 3.0 1.0 4.0 0.0 Normal Stress (ksf) Project No.: 960151-035 Leighton DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Lego Consolidated Undrained 08-11 I. Sample No. R-4 Depth (ft) 20.5 Sample Type: Drive Soil Identification: Strong brown silty sand (SM) Boring No. B- ' Strength Parameters C (psf) 4 (0) Peak 104,0 51.1 Ultimate 31.0 32.7 Normal Stress (kip1ft2) 0.500 1.000 2.000 Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft2) • 0.676 U 1.412 A 2.556 Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) 0 0.374 00.641 1.327 Deformation Rate (in./min.) 0.0500 0.0500 0.0500 Initial Sample Height (in.) 1.000 1.000 1.000 Diameter (in.) 2.415 2.415 2.415 Initial Moisture Content (%) 9.17 9.17 9.17 Dry Density (pcf) 108.9 120.9 124.3 Saturation (%) 45.2 62.9 69.6 Soil Height Before Shearing (In.) 0.9920 0.9929 0.9870 Final Moisture Content (%) 17.8 15.1 14.5 Previous Laboratory Testing by Leighton - 2009 960151-031 APPENDIX C Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results Following are tables that summarize laboratory testing that was performed by other consultants and provided to Leighton. Copies of the tests results we were provided are included at the end of this appendix. Moisture and Density Determination Tests: Moisture Content and dry density determinations were performed on relatively undisturbed samples obtained from the test borings according to ASTM D 2216 and D 2937. The results of these tests are presented in the boring logs. Where applicable, only moisture content was determined from "undisturbed" or disturbed samples. Direct Shear: A direct shear test was performed in accordance with ASTM D3080 on selected a sample that were soaked for under a surcharge equal to the applied normal force during testing. The rate of shearing used for the tests was reported to be 0.05 in/mm. Plots of the individual test results are provided within this appendix. Strength envelopes are provided on each of the individual plots. Those envelopes correspond to the peak shear resistance and the shear resistance at the end of the test. Expansion Index Tests: The expansion potential of selected materials was evaluated by the Expansion Index Test; ASTM Standard D4829 Specimens are molded under a given compactive energy to approximately 50 percent saturation. The prepared 1-inch thick by 4-inch diameter specimens are loaded to an equivalent 144 psf surcharge and are inundated with water until volumetric equilibrium is reached. The results of these tests are presented in the table below: Sample Location Compacted Dry Density (pcf) Expansion Index B-3@3-4feet 114.9 20 B-4@I0-13 feet 116.9 11 11 Minimum Resistivity and pH Tests: Minimum resistivity and pH tests were performed in general accordance with Caltrans Test Method CT643. The results are presented in the table below: Sample Location pH Minimum Resistivity (ohms-cm) B-I @2-4 feet 7.2 1,570 Soluble Sulfates: The soluble sulfate contents of selected samples were determined by Caltrans Test Method CT417. The test results are presented in the table below: C-i - I le C-2 960151-031 Sample Location Sulfate Content (ppm) Potential Degree of Sulfate Attack* B-I @ 2-4 feet 210 Negligible * Based on the American Concrete Institute (ACT) Committee 318-08, Table No. 4.3.1. 3000 Peak Point 2500 2000 U- U) U) U) U, Ui 1500 U) / UJ / = U, 1000 /0000 500 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 NORMAL STRESS (PSF) Interpreted Shear Strength Peak Relaxed _______ Friction Angle Friction Angle Location Sample No. Depth (It) USCS Cohesion (psi) (deg) Cohesion (psi) (deg) B-4 R-3 15 SC 100 42 50 35 Sample Description: Dark brown clayey SAND Strain Rate = 0.05 in/mm. ASTM D 3080 Project No. 960151-031 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS LEGOLAND Waterworks Cluster 4 Carlsbad, California Leighton I I U Residual Point Linear (Peak Point) - z - —Linear (Residual Point) / 7, _ _ APPENDIX D C]DH NbCapacityCuives Total ResislancelF.S. (tons) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 rT,mrrrrrT--I—rF—r—[ p1Errrirnrrr_—r 11 [rrri-T-r1 nrrm $ I I I I I I $ I I a I I I (_I • • _________ --- __________ I I I I I I a I a I I I I • I I I I I V ______ VV__I_••_.•I =V - J I __$VV -IV V I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 'oF - -I '•-IV ..i_•VI_._--VI -V I I I V •V-_+ -- I I I aol = ------- -.- --------------------- - I I I I I I I * I I $ I I $ = . $ tV_V I a I I I $ a I I I I I - -------------------------------------- I I I I I I I I I I VI ,$I I._V_ 1V____IV _.$ --------------------------- I I a I a I a I I $ I a I I I a a I I — — — — — — — — a •- - I I a --------------- Cq of LECOLANI) %Vnterpark Activity POOL - CIDIt Axial Capacity APPENDIX E G eneia1E arthw ark and G iad±ig Speciftatbns Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 1 o 6 LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROUGH GRADING 1.0 General 1.1 Intent: These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are for the grading and earthwork shown on the approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the geotechnical report(s). These Specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report(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 Consultant during the course of grading may result in new or revised recommendations that could supersede these specifications or the recommendations in the geotechnical report(s). 1.2 The Geotechnical Consultant of Record: Prior to commencement of work, the owner shall employ the Geotechnical Consultant of Record (Geotechnical Consultant). The Geotechnical Consultants shall be responsible for reviewing the approved geotechnical report(s) and accepting the adequacy of the preliminary geotechnical findings, conclusions, and recommendations prior to the commencement of the grading. Prior to commencement of grading, the Geotechnical Consultant shall review the "work plan" prepared by the Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) and schedule sufficient personnel to perform the appropriate level of observation, 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 during the design phase, the Geotechnical Consultant shall inform the owner, recommend appropriate changes in design to accommodate the observed conditions, and notify the review agency where required. Subsurface areas to be geotechnically observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested include natural ground after it has 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-conditioning and processing of the subgrade and fill materials and perform relative compaction testing of fill to determine the attained level of compaction. The Geotechnical Consultant shall provide the test results to the owner and the Contractor on a routine and frequent basis. 3030.1094 Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 2of6 1.3 The Earthwork Contractor: The Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, experienced, and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparation and processing of ground to receive fill, moisture-conditioning and processing of fill, and compacting fill. The Contractor shall review and accept the plans, geotechnical report(s), and these Specifications prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing the grading in accordance with the plans and specifications. The Contractor shall prepare and submit to the owner and 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 the Geotechnical Consultant of changes in work schedules and updates to the work plan at least 24 hours in advance of such changes so that appropriate observations and tests can be planned and accomplished. The Contractor shall not assume that the Geotechnical Consultant is aware of all grading operations. The Contractor shall have the sole responsibility to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the earthwork in accordance with the applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, these Specifications, and the recommendations in the approved geotechnical report(s) and grading plan(s). If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Consultant, unsatisfactory 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 recommend to the owner that construction be stopped until the conditions are rectified. 2.0 Preparation of Areas to be Filled 2.1 Clearing and Grubbing: Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots, and other deleterious material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed of in a method acceptable to the owner, governing agencies, and the Geotechnical Consultant. The Geotechnical Consultant shall evaluate the extent of these removals depending on specific site conditions. Earth fill material shall not contain more than 1 percent of organic materials (by volume). No fill lift shall contain more than 5 percent of organic matter. Nesting of the organic materials shall not be allowed. If potentially hazardous materials are encountered, the Contractor shall stop work in the affected area, and a hazardous material specialist shall be informed immediately for proper evaluation and handling of these materials prior to continuing to work in that area. As presently defined by the State of California, most refined petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, grease, 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 constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or imprisonment, and shall not be allowed. 3030.1094 Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 3 of 6 2.2 Processing: Existing ground that has been declared satisfactory for support of fill by the Geotechnical Consultant shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground that is not satisfactory shall be 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 uniform compaction. 2.3 Overexcavation: In addition to removals and overexcavations recommended in the approved geotechnical report(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. 2.4 Benching: 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 competent material as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant. Other benches shall be excavated a minimum 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 overexcavated to provide a flat subgrade for the fill. 2.5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas: All areas to receive fill, including removal and processed areas, key bottoms, and benches, shall be observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant as suitable to receive fill. The Contractor shall obtain a written acceptance from the Geotechnical Consultant prior to fill placement. A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for determining elevations of processed areas, keys, and benches. 3.0 Fill Material 3.1 General: Material to be used as fill shall be essentially free of organic matter and other deleterious substances evaluated and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptable gradation, high expansion potential, or low strength shall be placed in areas acceptable to the Geotechnical * Consultant or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material. 3.2 Oversize: Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material 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 material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 vertical feet of finish grade or within 2 feet of future utilities or underground construction. 3030.1094 Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 4 of 6 3.3 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 Consultant at least 48 hours (2 working days) before importing begins so that its suitability can be determined and appropriate tests performed. 4.0 Fill Placement and Compaction 4.1 Fill Layers: Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill (per Section 3.0) in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. The Geotechnical Consultant may accept thicker layers if testing indicates the grading procedures can adequately compact the thicker layers. Each layer shall be spread evenly and mixed thoroughly to attain relative uniformity of material and moisture throughout. 4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning: Fill soils shall be watered, dried back, blended, and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a relatively uniform moisture content at or slightly over optimum. Maximum density and optimum soil moisture content tests shall be performed in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM Test Method Dl 557-07). 4.3 Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been moisture-conditioned, mixed, and evenly spread, it shall be uniformly compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum dry density (ASTM Test Method D1557-07). Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability to efficiently achieve the specified level of compaction with uniformity. 4.4 Compaction of Fill Slopes: In addition to normal compaction procedures specified above, compaction of slopes shall be accomplished by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at increments of 3 to 4 feet in fill elevation, or by other methods producing satisfactory results acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant. Upon completion of grading, relative compaction of the fill, out to the slope face, shall be at least 90 percent of maximum density per ASTM Test Method D1557-07. 4.5 Compaction Testing: Field tests for moisture content and relative compaction of the fill soils shall be performed by the Geotechnical Consultant. Location and frequency of tests shall be at the Consultant's discretion based on field conditions encountered. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be selected on a random basis. Test locations shall be selected to verify adequacy of compaction levels in areas that are judged to be prone to inadequate compaction (such as close to slope faces and at the fill/bedrock benches). 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 compacted 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 accomplished by the Geotechnical Consultant. The Contractor shall stop or slow down the earthwork construction if these minimum standards are not met. 3030.1094 Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 5 of 6 4.7 Compaction Test Locations: The Geotechnical Consultant shall document the approximate elevation and horizontal coordinates of each test location. The Contractor shall coordinate with the project surveyor to assure that sufficient grade stakes are established so that the Geotechnical Consultant can determine the test locations with sufficient accuracy. At a minimum, two grade stakes within a horizontal distance of 100 feet and vertically less than 5 feet apart from potential test locations shall be provided. 5.0 Subdrain Installation Subdrain systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved geotechnical report(s), the grading plan, and the Standard Details. The Geotechnical Consultant may recommend additional subdrains and/or changes in subdrain 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 installation and prior to burial. Sufficient time should be allowed by the Contractor for these surveys. 6.0 Excavation Excavations, as well as over-excavation for remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. Remedial removal depths shown on geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actual extent of removal shall be determined by the Geotechnical Consultant based on the field evaluation of 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 Geotechnical Consultant. 3030.1094 Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 60f6 7.0 Trench Backfills 7.1 The Contractor shall follow all OHSA and CaL/OSHA requirements for safety of trench excavations. 7.2 All bedding and backfill of utility 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 densified 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 the trench backfill for relative compaction. At least one test should be made for every 300 feet of trench and 2 feet of fill. 7.5 Lift thickness of trench backfill shall not exceed those allowed in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction unless the Contractor can demonstrate to the Geotechnical Consultant that the fill lift can be compacted to the minimum relative compaction by his alternative equipment and method. 3030.1094 FILL SLOPE PROJECTED PLANE- 1 TO 1 MAXIMUM FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO APPROVED GROUND - - REMOVE EXISTING ._::::...T: UNSUITABLE GROUND SURFACE - - 2% N. BENCH 'BENCH HEI G (4- TYPICAL) HT MATERIAL 15' MIN. 2' MIN.- LOWEST KEY BENCH DEPTH (KEY) FILL-OVER-CUT SLOPE - EXIST NG GROUNDSURFACE Ll -_-[BENCH HEIGHT - - -:---:-: (4' TYPICAL) 15 MIN. LOWEST REMOVE - 2' MIN. BENCH UNSUITABLE KEY (KEY) MATERIAL DEPTH CUT FACE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR ...- TO FILL PLACEMENT TO ASSURE ADEQUATE GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS/2 EXISTING UT FACE SHALL BE CUT-OVER-FILL SLOPE CDE_Z2 CONSTRUCTED PIOR TO FILL PLACEMENT OVERBUILD AND TRIM BACK --:-:Y..-:-: REMOVE DESIGN SLOPE -PACT J- ----Fl UNSUITABLE PROJECTED PLANE --:-:-L'' - - MATERIAL 1 TO 1 MAXIMUM ---:-:-:-:-:-- FROM TOE OF SLOPE ,---:- '- - FOR SUBDRAINS SEE TO APPROVED GROUND - I'tI FOR HEIGHT STANDARD DETAIL C (4' TYPICAL) J 15' MIN, 2" IN. LOWEST KEY BENCH BENCHING SHALL BE DONE WHEN SLOPE'S DEPTH (KEY) ANGLE IS EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN 5: 1. MINIMUM BENCH HEIGHT SHALL BE 4 FEET AND MINIMUM FILL WIDTH SHALL BE 9 FEET, GENERAL EARTHWORK AND ... KEYING AND BENCHING GRADING SPECIFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS A a FINISH GRADE SLOPE FACE FILl. -------------- ------------ 4 MIN MIN nvrPcI7r wir.inPnw OVERSIZE ROCK IS LARGER THAN 8 INCHES IN LARGEST DIMENSION. * EXCAVATE A TRENCH IN THE COMPACTED FILL DEEP ENOUGH TO BURY ALL THE ROCK. BACKFILL WITH GRANULAR SOIL JETTED OR FLOODED IN PLACE TO FILL ALL THE VOIDS. * DO NOT BURY ROCK WITHIN 10 FEET OF FINISH GRADE. WINDROW OF BURIED ROCK SHALL BE PARALLEL TO THE FINISHED SLOPE. --6" MAX -- -. - GRANULAR MATERIAL TO 8E DENSIFIED IN PLACE BY DETAIL FLOODING OR JETTING. JETTED OR FLOODED GRANULAR MATERIAL TYPICAL PROFILE ALONG WINDROW OVERSIZE ROCK DISPOSAL GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS B / / N " EXISTING 'N GROUND SURFACE / i-j::::::::::::::::::::::-::::::::-:_:_ - - REMOVE _....,- - UNSUITABLE BENCHING MATERIAL SUBDRAIN TRENCH SEE DETAIL BELOW 6 MIN. OVERLAP CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE- OR #2 ROCK (9FT3/FT) WRAPPED) .°." IN FILTER FABRIC 7, :• FILTER FABRIC (MIRAFI 140N OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT)- 6" MIN. COVER 4" MIN. BEDDING .' t COLLECTOR PIPE SHALL BE MINIMUM 6" DIAMETER SCHEDULE 40 PVC PERFORATED PIPE. SEE STANDARD DETAIL D FOR PIPE SPECIFICATIONS DESIGN FINISH GRADE .-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:10' MIN. BACKFILL OMPACTED FILTER FABRIC (MIRAFI 140N OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT) o ..—CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE -. " - OR #2 ROCK (9FT3/FT) WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC I" 20 MIN. "15 MIN. PERFORATED NONPERFORATED 6" 0 MIN. b 0 MIN. PIPE GENERAL EARTHWORK AND CANYON SUBDRAINS GRADING SPECIFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS C 15 MIN. OUTLET PIPES 4" 0 NONPERFORATED PIPE. 100' MAX. O.C. HORIZONTALLY, 30 MAX O.C. VERTICALLY BACK CUT FLATTER BENCH KEY WIDTH AS NOTED ON GRADING PLANS L KEY 12" MIN. OVERLAP DEPTH (15' MIN.) FROM THE TOP HO (2' MIN.) RING TIED EVERY 6 FEET CALTRANS CLASS II PERMEABLE OR #2 ROCK (3 Fff3/FT) WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC ç-4" 0 \ NON—PERFORATED ' OUTLET PIPE _- - - - - PROVIDE POSITIVE SEAL AT THE JOINT t.t. UI1UIN IFLNLI1 DETAIL LOWEST SUBDRAIN SHOULD BE SITUATED AS LOW AS POSSIBLE TO ALLOW SUITABLE OUTLET 1—CONNECTION FOR COLLECTOR PIPE TO OUTLET PIPE 1 16" MIN. COVER ...!- 4"O = I PERFORATED _t_ PIPE - MIN 4 MIN. BEDDING FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE (MIRAFI 140 OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT) SUBDRAIN TRENCH DETAIL SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION - subdroin collector pipe shall be installed with perforation down or, unless otherwise designated by the geotechnicol consultant. Outlet pipes shall be non—perforated pipe. The subdroin pipe shall have at least 8 perforations uniformly spaced per foot. Perforation shall be 1/4" to 1/2" if drill holes ore used. All subdroin pipes shall hove a gradient of at least 2% towards the outlet. SUBDRAIN PIPE - Subdroin pipe shall be ASTM D2751, SDR 23.5 or ASTM D1527, Schedule 40, or ASTM D3034, SDR 23.5. Schedule 40 Polyvinyl Chloride Plastic (PVC) pipe. All outlet pipe shall be placed in o trench no wide than twice the subdroin pipe. Pipe shall be in soil of SE >/=30 jetted or flooded in place except for the outside 5 feet which shall be native soil backfill. BUTTRESS OR GENERAL EARTHWORK AND •.: REPLACEMENT FILL GRADING SPECIFICATIONS . . SUBDRAINS STANDARD DETAILS D