The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1185 TAMARACK AVE; ; CB061333; Permitt-=t J 09-14-2006^ Job Address Permit Type Parcel No Valuation Occupancy Group # Dwelling Units Bedrooms Project Title City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Av Carlsbad, CA 92008 Residential Permit Permit No CB061333 Building Inspection Request Line (760) 602-2725 1185 TAMARACK AV CBAD RESDNTL 2062611400 $17433800 Sub Type RAD Status ISSUED Lot# 0 Applied 05/15/2006 Construction Type VN Entered By JMA Reference* Plan Approved 09/14/2006 0 Structure Type Issued 09/14/2006 0 Bathrooms 0 Inspect Area SILVERMAN RES 1026 SF NEW 2ND Ong PC# STORY BONUS ROOM & OFFICE 306 SF MEDIA RM Plan Check# Applicant SILVERMAN TIMOTHY J&LORRI A Owner SILVERMAN TIMOTHY J&LORRI A 1185 TAMARACK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 1185TAMARACKAVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 Building Permit Add'l Building Permit Fee Plan Check Add'l Plan Check Fee Plan Check Discount Strong Motion Fee Park in Lieu Fee Park Fee LFM Fee Bridge Fee Other Bridge Fee BTD #2 Fee BTD #3 Fee Renewal Fee Add'l Renewal Fee Other Building Fee HMP Fee Pot Water Con Fee Meter Size Add'l Pot Water Con Fee Reel Water Con Fee $777 56 Meter Size $0 QO Add'l Reel Water Con Fee $505 41 Meter Fee $0 00 SDCWA Fee $0 00 CFD Payoff Fee $1743 PFF (3105540) $0 00 PFF (4305540) $0 00 License Tax (3104193) $0 00 License Tax (4304193) $000 Traffic Impact Fee (3105541) $0 00 Traffic Impact Fee (4305541) $0 00 Sidewalk Fee $0 00 PLUMBING TOTAL $0 00 ELECTRICAL TOTAL $0 00 MECHANICAL TOTAL $0 00 Housing Impact Fee $0 00 Housing InLieu Fee $0 00 Housing Credit Fee Master Drainage Fee $0 00 Sewer Fee $0 00 - Additional Fees TOTAL PERMIT FEES $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $301 74 $340 26 $000 $000 $2000 $2400 $000 $000 $000 $000 $1 047 00 $000 $3 033 40 Total Fees $3,033 40 Total Payments To Date $3,033 40 Balance Due $000 BUILDING PLANS / IN STORAGE "ATTACHED Inspector Clearance NOTICE Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the Imposition of fees dedications reservations or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as fees/exactions You have 90 days from the date this permit was issued to protest imposition of these fees/exactions If you protest them you must follow the protest procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a) and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3 32 030 Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack review set aside void or annul their imposition You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity changes nor planning zoning grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which vou have previously been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of Imitations has previously otherwise expired PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT 2075 Las Palmas Dr, Carlsbad CA 92009 50)438-1161 PROJECT INFORMATION *• •. '"'•:.„"...*--^ 0613501-2 0046 Q5/15/2QQb 001 PERMITS $407.32 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY PLAN CHECK NO t ?3 EST VAL Plan Ck Deposit Validated By Date £~( I 37 33 Address (include Bldg/Suite #)Business Name '.at this address) Legal Description " Lot No Subdivision Name/Number Unit No Phase No Total # of units Assessor s Parcel #Existing Use Proposed Use f - ON {if different from applic AddreVs / City 3 ^APPLICANT D Contractor Q Agent fbMr'Contractor :;D:dwneCrQ^errtJprX)wner;.. Fax # Name 14 PROPERTY OWNER *• { Address City State/Zip Telephone # 7 -Z^? - Address City State/Zip Telephone #Name IT" CONTRACTOR COMPANY NAME (Sec 7031 5 Business and Professions Code Any City or County which requires a permit to construct alter improve demolish or repair any structure prior to its issuance also requires the applicant for such permit to file a signed statement that he is licensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractor s License Law [Chapter 9 commending with Section 7000 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code] or that he is exempt therefrom and the basis for the alleged exemption Any violation of,Section 7031 5 by any applicant for a permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars ($5001) Name State License #~)j Address License Class City State/Zip Telephone # City Business License » <^9*7l~S /*./?-/) / 2-1 O Address Cityigner Name jte License tt 6 WORKERS COMPENSATION! ; ' Workers Compensation Declaration I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following declarations State/Zip Telephone \ LJ 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 />iL__! have and will maintain workers compensation as required by Section 3700 of the Labor Code for the performance of the work for which this permit is ^/issued My worker s compensation insurance carrier and policy number are Insurance Company ^i/^t^^y^j^_ feiL^^, ^JtSit&tfa, f-~ Policy No (s~)J ''2(^)0 ^>^ / jLx^Bcpiration Date -^ ~ r~ ^* ~ / (THIS SECTION NEED NOT BE COMPLETED IF THE PhRMIT IS FOR ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS [$100] OR LESS) O CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to Kocom9 s'_b set to f'O Workers Compensation Laws of Ca'i'on a WARNING Failure to secureworkers compensation coverage- is unlawful and shall subject an emplo>er to criminal penalties and civil fines up to one hundred thousand dollars (SiajLJJOfH'ln additioi^Wthe cost^f coj^ensation damages as provided for in Section 3706 of the Labor code interest,and attorney s fees 7 i OWNER {WILDER DECLAfwflON . . I hereby affirm that I am exempt from the Contractor s License Law for the following reason O I as owner of the property or my employees with wages as their sole compensation will do the work and the structure is not intended or offered for sale (Sec 7044 Business and Professions Code The Contractor s License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon and who does such work himself or through his own employees provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale If however the building or improvement is sold within one year of completion the owner builder will have the burden of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sale) O 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) 0 I am exempt under Section _ Business and Professions Code for this reason 1 I personally plan to provide the major labor and materials for construction of the proposed property improvement O YES QNO 2 I (have / have not) signed an application for a building permit for the proposed work 3 I have contracted with the following person (firm) to provide the proposed construction (include name / address / phone number / contractors license 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 iber / contractors license number) j I will provide some of the work but I have contracted (hired) the following of work) _ _ __ 'n provide the •,'! k ndcs^sd ' nc'_ds ~a*"3 scidrecs ,' phcrs iype PROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE DATE COMPLETE THIS SECTION FOR /VO/\M?£S/0£W77/U BUILDING PERMITS ONtY^iES? '"\- ^i~ £-,_, ^/S^ , 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? Q YES Q NO Is the applicant or future building occupant required to obtain a permit from the air pollution co itrol district or air quality management district? Q YES Q NO Is the facility to be constructed within 1 000 feet of the outer boundary of a school site? Q YES Q NO IF ANY OF THE ANSWERS ARE YES A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MAY NOT BE ISSUED UNLESS THE APPLICANT HAS K.ET OR IS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT I _ CONSTRUCTION LENDING AGENCY, 3; ,,;!:":„,,,«,,,. /..I,, ., /.^\r^''':J ,,£.,- "•':".:.'' ,>lv..;,.. : "'I- ':..-.., ,:""\. V •, :: '"- - I hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued (Sec 3097(0 Civil Code) NDER S NAME ___ __ LENDER S ADDRESS _ _ __ ~^ ^APPLICANT CERTIFICATION " |: ...... " ^ '"" ••£ ;T:~^::;;;i "..„- vt;; : .„.,"• :" i,h': ,., .', (••:"•• - ,/:' , .ff f. ,. ,.,«, i?, v"«-.,,. 4" ••••'. -z ~T~T ~ : ~~,- I certify that I have read the application and state that the above information is correct and that the inform nion on the plans is accurate I agres to comply with all City ordinances and State laws relating to building construction I hereby authorize representatives of the Cit» of Carlsbad to enter upon the above mentioned property for inspection purposes I ALSO AGREE TO SAVE INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARMLESS 1HE CITY OF CARLSBAD AGAINST ALL LWBIL TIES JUDGMENTS COSTS AND EXPENSES WHiCH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINST SAID CITY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING To!= TH.S ^ERMIT OSHA An OSHA permit is required for excavations over 5 0" deep and demolition or construction of structures over 3 stories in height iced for a period of 1 80 days (Section 1 06 4 4 Uniform Building Code) __ _ _ DATE or abandoned at any time after APPLICANT S SIGNATURE WHITE Flo VCM n\A/ fl-,DIMV r „.,— City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request For 01/12/2007 Permit* CB061333 Title SILVERMAN RES 1026 SF NEW 2ND Description STORY BONUS ROOM & OFFICE, 306 SF MEDIA RM Inspector Assignment MC Sub Type RAD 1185 TAMARACKAV Lot 0 Type RESDNTL Job Address Suite Location OWNER SILVERMAN TIMOTHY J&LORRI A Owner SILVERMAN TIMOTHY J&LORRI A Remarks Phone 7605185230 Inspector Total Time Requested By BILL Entered By CW CD Description 23 Gas/Test/Repairs Act Comment Comments/Notices/Holds Associated PCRs/CVs Original PC# Inspection History Date Description 11/21/2006 17 Interior Lath/Drywall 11/09/2006 16 Insulation 11/07/2006 14 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Weldmg 11/07/2006 34 Rough Electric 11/07/2006 44 Rough/Ducts/Dampers 10/31/2006 83 Roof Sheathing/Ext Shear 10/02/2006 14 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Weldmg 10/02/2006 16 Insulation 09/25/2006 61 Footing 09/25/2006 62 Steel/Bond Beam 09/18/2006 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 09/15/2006 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers Act AP AP AP AP AP AP AP AP we AP AP CO Insp MC MC MC MC MC MC MC MC MC MC MC MC Comments FLOOR FRAMING FLOOR INSULATION STEEL & HARDWARE PER PLAN OK PER REVISED PLAN DETAIL see notice attached City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request For 09/18/2006 Permit# CB061333 Title SILVERMAN RES 1026 SF NEW 2ND Description STORY BONUS ROOM & OFFICE, 306 SF MEDIA RM Inspector Assignment MC Sub Type RAD 1185 TAMARACK AV Lot 0 Type RESDNTL Job Address Suite Location OWNER SILVERMAN TIMOTHY J&LORRI A Owner SILVERMAN TIMOTHY J&LORRI A Remarks Phone 7605185230 Inspector Total Time CD Description 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers Act Comment Comments/Notices/Hold Requested By BILL Entered By JANEAN Associated PCRs/CVs Original PC# Inspection History Date Description Act Insp Comments k i E*/10/2006 06 13 7607583959 ALTA VISTA ENGINE Swp 18 2006 9* 1G KENNETH R PURDY RRCHITECT 7SO B12 52bS PAGE 02 P 1 SILVERMAN CHANGE ORDER c* ur \Q &t 5TUD8el8'0/C sxSILL w/ led a 1 a g/c (3)13d 9 16" 0/C AT SHEAR PANELS SHEATHING PSR ^LAW NAMING PER PLAN JSS6 HANGUPS , EXSPTCSFSlLLvV/ B/g-ClA.A.0 &3"X3/16" SEE SHEAR PANEL SCHEDULt FOHA.B SPACING fB] #5 BARS rDl& CONTINJOUS 1 TYP. STEM WALL 0^/16/2006 06 13 {,«)• IB t-UUfci 7607583959 ALTA VISTA ENGINE Lb KtHMblH H KUKUY HKUMiltLI /t>U foJi PAGE 01 p. C ?x STUDS SHU-IVC 2X6PWSILLW 5/3- DtA A.B 8t2»SQX3jnei #S BASS TOP SiOT CONTIN i VERT BAflS® Q/C STEM J 0/C ax &U. \v/1 Sd o 1 ar o/c O)18d » 1 fl" Q/C A1^ SH6AH PAN as SHEATHNQ FER PLAN j*~ FRAWINS i»6P PlAN 2X BLOCKING NAILED P& USE A36KA. BLOCK AT SHEAR PAW6LB 5/8 &££ SHEAR PANEL SCHEDULE POP A a SPACING ,2] #3 BAFlS TOP & BOTTOM CONTINUOUS ^ '*• *Uf €,</ City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request For 09/15/2006 Permit* CB061333 Title SILVERMAN RES 1026 SF NEW 2ND Description STORY BONUS ROOM & OFFICE, 306 SF MEDIA RM Inspector Assignment Sub Type RAD 1185 TAMARACK AV Lot 0 Type RESDNTL Job Address Suite Location APPLICANT SILVERMAN TIMOTHY J&LORRI A Owner SILVERMAN TIMOTHY J&LORRI A Remarks Phone 7605185230 Inspectoj Total Time CD Description 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers Act Comment Comments/Notices/Hold Requested EJy BILL Entered EJy CHRISTINE Associated PCRs/CVs Original PC# Inspection History Date Description Act Insp Comments NOTICE CITY OF CARLSBAD (760) 602-2700 BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1635 FARADAY AVENUE DATE LOCATION PERMIT NO 1,4 7, kj ^oQ-^(£^- C>F A.-pt>jRe» J, FOR INSPECTION CALL (760) 602 2725 RE-INSPECTION FEE- DUE? YES FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT«,„„ -f '4& & ~ "2-T? U PHONE j. BUILDING INSPECTOR • CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER ---- — •_ EsGil Corporation In (Partnership with government for (BuiCtfing Safety DATE July 31, 2006 D IAPBLJCANT JURISDICTION Carlsbad a PLAN REVIEWER a FILE PLAN CHECK NO 06-1333 SET II PROJECT ADDRESS 1 185 Tamarack PROJECT NAME Silverman Residence Addition and Remodel The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes XI The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff The plans transmitted herewith have significant 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 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 (by ) Fax # Mail Telephone Fax In Person ~ -^77^- ff^~ REMARKS 1) Final plans must be stamp$&a$1wgried by Architect 2) provide a foundation review letter 3) Please note that footage is increased (Existing Sunroom = New Mediajkb<3mA3p§j5q ft) By Bill Elizarraras Enclosures Esgil Corporation D GA D MB D EJ D PC 7/24/06 trnsmtldot 9320 Chesapeake Dnve, Suite 208 * San Diego, California 92123 *• (858)560-1468 *• Fax (858) 560-1576 EsGil Corporation In Partnership with government for Quitting Safety DATE May 30, 2O06 a APPLICANT" JURISDICTION Carlsbad O~PTAN REVIEWER a FILE PLAN CHECK NO 06-1333 SET I PROJECT ADDRESS 1 185 Tamarack PROJECT NAME Silverman Residence Addition and Remodel 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 building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck XI 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 XI The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to Ken Purdy 7441 Trigo Ln Carlsbad, CA 92009 Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed X Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed Person contacted Ken Purdy <J/M\ Telephone # 760-632-5422 Mail Telephone*S Fax In Person REMARKS By Bill Elizarraras Enclosures Esgil Corporation D GA D MB D EJ D PC 5/18/06 tmsmtldot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 4 San Diego, California 92123 4 (358)560-1468 * Fax (858) 560-1576 Carlsbad O6-1333 May 30, 2006 PLAN REVIEW CORRECTION LIST SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS AND DUPLEXES PLAN CHECK NO O6-1333 PROJECT ADDRESS 1185 Tamarack JURISDICTION Carlsbad FLOOR AREA 1026 sq ft Dwelling Add'n STORIES 2 HEIGHT 24' REMARKS DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY JURISDICTION DATE INITIAL PLAN REVIEW COMPLETED May 30, 2006 DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY ESGIL CORPORATION 5/18/06 PLAN REVIEWER Bill Ehzarraras FOREWORD (PLEASE READ) This plan review is limited to the technical requirements contained in the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, National Electrical Code and state laws regulating energy conservation, noise attenuation and access for the disabled This plan review is based on regulations enforced by the Building Department You may have other corrections based on laws and ordinance by the Planning Department, Engineering Department, Fire Department or other departments Clearance from those departments may be required prior to the issuance of a building permit Present California law mandates that residential construction comply with the 2001 edition of the California Building Code (Title 24), which adopts the following model codes 1997 UBC, 2000 UPC, 2000 UMC and 2002 NEC The above regulations apply to residential construction, regardless of the code editions adopted by ordinance The following items listed need clarification, modification or change All items must be satisfied before the plans will be in conformance with the cited codes and regulations Per Sec 106 4 3, 1997 Uniform Building Code, the approval of the plans does not permit the violation of any state, county or city law To speed up the recheck process, please note on Ihis 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 Carlsbad 06-1333 May 30, 2O06 • PLANS 1 Please make all corrections on the original tracings, as requested in the correction list Submit two sets of plans for residential projects For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in one of two ways 1 Deliver all corrected sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad 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 2 Bring one corrected set of plans and calculations/reports to EsGil Corporation, 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, CA 92123, (858) 560-1468 Deliver all remaining sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department for routing to their Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments 2 Plans, specifications and calculations shall be signed and sealed by the California state licensed engineer or architect responsible for their preparation Specify expiration date of license (California Business and Professions Code) 3 Provide a statement on the Title Sheet of the plans stating that this project shall comply with the 2001 editions of the California Building/Plumbmg/Mechanical Codes and the 2004 edition of the California Electrical Code, which adopt the 1997 UBC, 2000 UMC, 2000 UPC and the 2002 NEC 4 Specify on the Title Sheet of the plans the gross floor area of each element of this project, including sunroom Section 106 3 3 5 Show locations of smoke detectors a) Inside each bedroom b) Centrally located in corridor or area giving access to sleeping rooms c) On each story When the valuation of a room addition or repair exceeds $1,000, or when sleeping rooms are created, smoke detectors shall be provided per the above, except that smoke detectors added at existing construction need only be battery powered Section 3109 1 2 6 Openable window area in habitable rooms must be 1/20 of the floor area and a minimum of 5 square feet In bathrooms and water closet compartments, 1/20 of area is required and minimum is 1 5 sq ft Section 1203 3 Specify the type of windows (Sliders, casement?) 7 Show the adjacent rooms, use and window area, to check light, ventilation and egress requirements Section 1203 1,1203 3 & 3104 8 The walls and soffits of the enclosed usable space under interior stairs shall be protected on the enclosed side as required for one hour fire-resistive construction Section 1003 339 Carlsbad 06-1333 May 30, 2006 9 Guardrails (Section 509 1) a) Shall have a height of 36" b) Shall be detailed showing adequacy of connections to resist the horizontal force prescribed in Table 16-B c) Openings between railings shall be less than 4" The triangular openings formed by the riser, tread and bottom element of a guardrail at a stair shall be less than 6" 10 Provide stairway and landing details Sections 1003 3 3 a) Show a maximum rise of 8" and minimum run of 9" b) Minimum headroom is 6'-8" c) Minimum width is 36" d) Provide structural details 11 Handrails (Section 1003 336) a) Handrails and extensions shall be 34" to 38" above nosing of treads and be continuous b) The handgrip portion of all handrails shall be not less than 1-1/4 inches nor more than 2 inches in cross-sectional dimension Handrails projecting from walls shall have at least 1-1/2 inches between the wall and the handrail 12 The soils engineer recommended that he/she review the foundation excavations Note on the foundation plan that "Prior to the contractor requesting a Building Department foundation inspection, the soils engineer shall advise the building official in writing that a) The building pad was prepared in accordance with the soils report, b) The utility trenches have been properly backfilled and compacted, and c) The foundation excavations, the soils expansive characteristics and bearing capacity conform to the soils report" 13 Provide a letter from the soils engineer confirming that the foundation plan and specifications have been reviewed and that it has been determined that the recommendations in the soils report are properly incorporated into the construction documents (required by the soil report) 14 Show minimum 12" clearance to bottom of girders Section 2306 3 15 Show minimum underfloor ventilation equal to 1 sq ft for each 150 sq ft of underfloor area Openings shall be as close to corners as practical and shall provide cross ventilation on at least two approximately opposite sides Section 2306 7 16 Show stud size and spacing Maximum allowable stud heights Bearing wall 2 x4 and 2 x6max 10', Non-bearing 2x4 max 14', 2x6 max 20' Table 23-IV-B Design all studs exceeding these limitations 17 The Conventional Light-Frame Construction provisions of Section 2320 may not be used in Seismic Zones 3 & 4 for "unusually shaped buildings," and thus design calculations must be provided, as per Section 2320 5 4 a) When braced wall panels exceed 10'-0" in height b) Floor diaphragms must be continuous to the exterior brace walls Carlsbad 06-1333 May 3O, 20O6 18 In Seismic Zone 4, aspect ratios are limited to 2 1 for wood shear panels Table 23-ll-G 19 Specify plywood thickness, grade and panel span rating Table 23-H-E-1 20 Note on the plans that the FAU closet or alcove must be 12 inches wider than the furnace or furnaces being installed UMC Section 904 1 21 Show source of combustion air to furnace, per Chapter 7, UMC Specify the location and sizes of both of the combustion air openings 22 Note on the plans that receptacle outlet locations will comply with NEC Art 210-52(a) 23 Justify the Sunroom 80% of the roof and exterior walls must be glass or plastic materials which do not inhibit the passage of light (Add to the Title 24 design and provide for heating and insulated walls if you do not meet these requirements) 24 Show on the plans compliance with the residential energy lighting requirements (Mandatory requirement) a) AH other rooms require any installed fixtures to be high efficacy or be controlled by a manually-on occupancy sensor or dimmer (Closets under 70 square feet are exempt) b) Outdoor lighting fixtures are required to be high efficacy or controlled by a combination photocontrol/motion sensor Note Generally a high efficacy style of fixture is fluorescent complete with electronic ballasts Regular incandescent, quartz halogen and halogen MR lamps do not comply To speed up the review process, note on this list (or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed, i e , plan sheet, note or detail number, calculation page, etc Please indicate here if any changes have been made to the plans that are not a result of corrections from this list If there are other changes, please briefly describe them and where they are located in the plans Have changes been made to the plans not resulting from this correction list' Please indicate Yes Q No a 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 Bill Ehzarraras at Esgil Corporation Thank you Carlsbad O6-1333 May 30, 2O06 JURISDICTION Carlsbad VALUATION AND PLAN CHE CK FEE PREPARED BY Bill Elizarraras BUILDING ADDRESS 1185 Tamarack BUILDING OCCUPANCY R3/U1 PLAN CHECK NO O6-1333 DATE May 30, 2006 TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION VN BUILDING PORTION Dwelling Add'n Sunroom Air Conditioning Fire Sprinklers TOTAL VALUE Jurisdiction Code AREA (Sq Ft) 1026 306 cb Valuation Multiplier 121 94 121 94 By Ordinance Reg Mod VALUE ($) 125,110 37,314 162,424 Bldg Permit Fee by Ordinance Plan Check Fee by Ordinance Type of Review P_Repetitive Fee ^ l Repeats Comments Complete Review D Other D Hourly Structural Only Hour Esgil Plan Review Fee $740 60 $481 39 $41474 Sheet 1 of 1 macvalue doc City of Carlsbad P>xi b>l i c Wo r ks -^ E n_g i n e e r I n g BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST DATE PLANCHECK NO__^ _ BUILDING ADDRESS // 85 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT APPROVAL The item you have submitted for review has been approved The approval is based on plans information and/or specifications provided in your submittal, therefore any changes to these items after this date including field modifications, must be reviewed by this office to insure continued conformance with applicable codes Please review carefully all comments attached, as failure to comply with instructions in this report can result in suspension of permit to build G A Right-of-Way permit is required prior to construction of the following improvements DENIAL Please see\thgXattached report of deficiencies marked withS'Make necessary corrections to plans or specifications for compliance with applicable codes and standards Submit corrected plans and/or specifications to this office for review Date Date Date By FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ENGINEERING AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE BUILDING PERMIT Date ) D Dedication Application D Dedication Checklist D Improvement Application D Improvement Checklist D Future Improvement Agreement D Grading Permit Application Q Grading Submittal Checklist D Right-of-Way Permit Application U Right-of-Way Permit Submittal Checklist and Information Sheet D Sewer Fee Information Sheet Name ENGINEERING DEPT CONTACT PERSON JOANNE JUCHNIEWICZ City of Carlsbad Address 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Phone (760) 602-2775 CFD INFORMATION Parcel Map No Lots Recordation Carlsbad Tract Carlsbad CA 920O817314 • (760) 6O2-272O • FAX (760) 602-' BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST SITE PLAN .. ST 2ND D Cy 1 Provide a fully dimensioned site plan drawn to scale Show A North Arrow F Right-of-Way Width & Adjacent Streets B Existing & Proposed Structures G Driveway widths C/Existmg Street Improvements H Existing or proposed sewer lateral Property Lines I Existing or proposed water service E Easements J Existing or proposed irrigation service D D 0' 2 Show on site plan Drainage Patterns 1 Building pad surface drainage must maintain a minimum slope of one percent towards an adjoining street or an approved drainage course 2 ADD THE FOLLOWING NOTE "Finish grade will provide a minimum positive drainage of 2% to swale 5' away from building " Existing & Proposed Slopes and Topography ,Size, type, location, alignment of existing or proposed sewer and water service (s) that serves the project Each unit requires a separate service, however, second dwelling units and apartment complexes are an exception Sewer and water laterals should not be located within proposed driveways, per standards D D D/ 3 Include on title sheet Site address Assessor's Parcel Number Legal Description For commercial/industrial buildings and tenant improvement projects, include total building square footage with the square footage for each different use, existing sewer permits showing square footage of different uses (manufacturing, warehouse, office, etc) previously approved EXISTING PERMIT NUMBER DESCRIPTION F \BUILDING PLANCHECK CKLST FORM doc BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST 1ST 2ND - 3RD /DISCRETIONARY APPROVAL COMPLIANCE Project does not c Project No _Tovj 4a Project does not comply with the following Engineering Conditions of approval for T D 4b All conditions are in compliance Date DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS 5 Dedication for all street Rights-of-Way adjacent to the building site and any storm dram or utility easements on the building site is required for all new buildings and for remodels with a value at or exceeding $ 17.000 . pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 18 40 030 Dedication required as follows Dedication required Please have a registered Civil Engineer or Land Surveyor prepare the appropriate legal description together with an 8 Vz x 11" plat map and submit with a title report All easement documents must be approved and signed by owner(s) prior to issuance of Building Permit Attached please find an application form and submittal checklist for the dedication process Submit the completed application form with the required checklist items and fees to the Engineering Department in person Applications will not be accept by mail or fax Dedication completed by Date IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS CH CH CU 6a All needed public improvements upon and adjacent to the building site must be constructed at time of building construction whenever the value of the construction exceeds $ 82.000 . pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 1840040 Public improvements required as follows Attached please find an application form and submittal checklist for the public improvement requirements A registered Civil Engineer must prepare the appropriate improvement plans and submit them together with the requirements on the attached checklist to the Engineering Department through a separate plan check process The completed application lorm and the requirements on the F BUILDING PLANCHECK CKLST FORM doc ,.ST BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST checklist must be submitted in person Applications by mail or fax are not accepted Improvement plans must be approved, appropriate securities posted and fees paid prior to issuance of building permit Improvement Plans signed by Date [H 6b Construction of the public improvements may be deferred pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 1840 Please submit a recent property title report or current grant deed on the property and processing fee of $400 so we may prepare the necessary Neighborhood Improvement Agreement This agreement must be signed, notarized and approved by the City prior to issuance of a Building permit Future public improvements required as follows D D 6c Enclosed please find your Neighborhood Improvement Agreement Please return agreement signed and notarized to the Engineering Department .Neighborhood Improvement Agreement completed by Date 6d No Public Improvements required SPEECIAL NOTE Damaged or defective improvements found adiacent to building site must be repaired to the satisfaction of the City Inspector prior to occupancy GRADING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS The conditions that invoke the need for a grading permit are found in Section 15 16 010 of the Municipal Code O D D 7a Inadequate information available on Site Plan to make a determination on grading requirements Include accurate grading quantities in cubic yards (cut, fill, import, export and remedial) This information must be included on the plans Q n d 7b Grading Permit required A separate grading plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer must be submitted together with the completed application form attached NOTE The Grading Permit must be issued and rough grading approval obtained prior to issuance of a Building Permit Grading Inspector sign off by Date D D D 7c Graded Pad Certification required (Note Pad certification may be required even if a grading permit is not required ) F \BUILDING PLANCHECK CKLST FORM doc BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST ..ST 0ND oRD 1^0 / D D D /7d No Grading Permit required HD CH L2i 7e If grading is not required, write "No Grading" on plot plan MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS D D V 8 A RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT is required to do work in City Right-of-Way and/or private work adjacent to the public Right-of-Way Types of work include, but are not limited to street improvements, tree trimming, driveway construction, tying into public storm dram, sewer and water utilities Right-of-Way permit required for D D fJsH 9 INDUSTRIAL WASTE PERMIT If your facility is located in the City of Carlsbad sewer service area, you need to contact the Carlsbad Municipal Water District, located at 5950 El Cammo Real, Carlsbad, CA 92008 District personnel can provide forms and assistance, and will check to see if your business enterprise is on the EWA Exempt List You may telephone (760) 438-2722, extension 7153, for assistance Industrial Waste permit accepted by Date D D UN 10 NPDES PERMIT Complies with the City's requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit The applicant shall provide best management practices to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to discharge to sensitive areas Plans for such improvements shall be approved by the City/Engmeer prior to issuance of grading or building permit, whichever occurs/first D D 0 11 Er Required fees are attached Q No fees required WATER METER REVIEW D D CS^ 12a Domestic (potable) Use Ensure that the meter proposed by the owner/developer is not oversized Oversized meters are inaccurate during low-flow conditions If it is oversized, for the life of the meter, the City will not accurately bill the owner for the water used • All single family dwelling units received "standard" 1" service with 5/8" service F \BUILDlNG PLANCHECK CKLST FORM doc BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST iST ,ND •>RD D D • If owner/developer proposes a size other than the "standard", then owner/developer must provide potable water demand calculations, which include total fixture counts and maximum water demand in gallons per minute (gpm) A typical fixture count and water demand worksheet is attached Once the gpm is provided, check against the "meter sizing schedule" to verify the anticipated rneter size for the unit • Maximum service and meter size is a 2" service with a 2" meter • If a developer is proposing a meter greater than 2", suggest the installation of multiple 2" services as needed to provide the anticipated demand (manifolds are considered on case by case basis to limit multiple trenching into the street) 12b Irrigation Use (where recycled water is not available) All irrigation meters must be sized via irrigation calculations (in gpm) prior to approval The developer must provide these calculations Please follow these guidelines 1 If the project is a newer development (newer than 1998), check the recent improvement plans and observe if the new irrigation service is reflected on the improvement sheets If so, at the water meter station, the demand in gpm may be listed there Irrigation services are listed with a circled "I", and potable water is typically a circled "W The irrigation service should look like STA 1+00 Install 2" service and 5 meter (estimated 100 gpm) If the improvement plans do not list the irrigation meter and the service/meter will be installed via another instrument such as the building plans or grading plans (w/ a right of way permit of course), then the applicant must provide irrigation calculations for estimated worst-case irrigation demand (largest zone wilh the farthest reach) Typically, Larry Black has already reviewed this if landscape plans have been prepared, but the applicant must provide the calculations to you for your use Once you have received a good example of irrigation calculations, keep a set for your reference In general the calculations will include • Hydraulic grade line * -"—• Elevation at'pojnt of'connection^(POC)~—- • Pressure at POC in pounds per square inch (PSI) • Worse case zone (largest, farthest away from valve • Total Sprinkler heads listed (with gpm use per head) • Include a 10% residual pressure at point of connection In general, all major sloped areas of a subdivision/project are to be irngated via separate irrigation meters (unless the project is only SFD with no HOA) As long as the project is located within the City recycled water F \BUILDING PLANCHECK CKLST FORM doc BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST sen/ice boundary, the City intends on switching these irrigation services/meters to a new recycled waler line in the future D D OK 12c Irrigation Use (where recycled water is available) 1 Recycled water meters are sized the same as the irrigation meter above 2 If a project fronts a street with recycled water, then they should be connecting to this line to irrigate slopes within the development For subdivisions, this should have been identified, and implemented on the improvement plans Installing recycled water meters is a benefit for the applicant since they are exempt from paying the San Diego County Water Capacity fees However, if they front a street which the recycled water is there, but is not live (sometimes they are charged with potable water until recycled water is available), then the applicant must pay the San Diego Water Capacity Charge If within three years, the recycled water line is charged with recycled water by CMWD, then the applicant can apply for a refund to the San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) for a refund However, let the applicant know that we cannot guarantee the refund, and they must deal with the SDCWA for this D D D 13 Additional Comments F \BUIILDING PLANCHECK CKLST FORM doc » ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FEE CALCULATION WORKSHEET D Estimate based on unconfirmed information from applicant Q^^Calculation based on building plancheck plan submittal ±LAddress __Bldg Permit No.H. u- Prepared by o\j Date T//ty0£ Checked bvy - ^ EDU CALCULATIONS List types and square footages for all uses Types of Use £D I) So Ft /Units Types of Use APT CALCULATIONS List types and Types of Use o \ )\J Types of Use Sq Ft /Units square footages for all uses Sq Ft /Units Sq Ft /Units Date EDU's EDU's ADT's ADT's I ( FEES REQUIRED WITHIN CFD D YES (no bridge & thoroughfare fee in District #1, reduced Traffic Impact Fee)Q-tfO K-IN-LIEU FEE FEE/UNIT PARK AREA & # X NO UNITS 2 TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE ADT's/UNITS FEE/ADT BRIDGE AND THOROUGHFARE FEE (DIST #1 DIST #2 DIST #3 ADT's/UNITS i MANAGEMENT FEE UNIT/SO FT 5 SEWER FEE EDU'S / X FEE/ADT ZONE X FEE/SO FT/UNIT =$_ =$_ FEE/EDU /OV7 y EDU's FEE/EDU 6 SEWER LATERAL ($2,500) 7 DRAINAGE FEES PLDA ACRES __ HIGH. X FEE/AC /LOW =$_ =$_ 8 POTABLE WATER FEES UNITS CODE CONNECTION FEE METER FEE SDCWA FEE SDCWA FEE F \FEE CALCULATION WORKSHEET doc 1 of 2 Rev 7/14/00 D PLANNING DEPARTMENT BUILDING PLAN CHECK REVIEW CHECKLIST Plan Check No CB Planner 06-1333 Address 1185 Tamarck Ave Erin Endres Phone (760)602-4625 APN 206-261-14-00 Type of Project & Use Sf addition_ Zoning R-1 General Plan RLM_ CFD finjZiiiltV^ Date of participation _ Net Projec t Density DU/AC Facilities Management Zone _ Remaining net dev acres (For non-residential development Type of land used created by this permit ) Legend Item Complete Environmental Review Required DATE OF COMPLETION Item Incomplete - Needs your action YES NO \ TYPE Compliance with conditions of approval9 If not, state conditions which require action Conditions of Approval Discretionary Action Required APPROVAL/RESO NO PROJECT NO YES ^ NO DATE TYPE OTHER RELATED CASES S~D(J> Compliance with conditions or approval7 If not, state conditions which require action Conditions of Approval Coastal Zone Assessment/Compliance Project site located in Coastal Zone9 YES\ NO _ CA Coastal Commission Authority9 YES _ NO _ If California Coastal Commission Authority Contact them at - 7575 Metropolitan Drive, Suite 103, San Diego CA 92108-4402, (619)767-2370 ~_ Determine status (Coastal Permit Required or Exempt) ~£sO&f*~£)..y Coastal Permit Determination Form already completed9 YES If NO, complete Coastal Permit Determination Form now Coastal Permit Determination Log # _ NO D Follow-Up Actions 1) Stamp Building Plans as "Exempt" or "Coastal Permit Required" (at minimum Floor Plans) 2) Complete Coastal Permit Determination Log as needed Inclusionary Housing Fee required YES NO (Effective date of Inclusionary Housing Ordinance - May 21,1993) Data Entry Completed9 YES.NO. (A/P/Ds, Activity Maintenance, enter CB#, toolbar, Screens, Housing Fees, Construct Housing Y/N, Enter Fee, UPDATE') H \ADMIN\COUNTER\BldgPlnchkRevChklst Rev 9/01 D Site Plan 1 Provide a fully dimensional site plan drawn to scale Show North arrow, property lines, easements, existing and proposed structures, streets existing street improvements, right-of-way width, dimensional setbacks and existing topographical lines (including all side and rear yard slopes) 2 Provide legal description of property and assessor's parcel number DD D n Policy 44 - Neighborhood Architectural Design Guidelines 1 Applicability YES NO \ 2 Project complies YES NO Zoning 1 Setbacks Front Interior Side Street Side Rear Top of slope 2 Accessory structure setbacks Front Interior Side Street Side Rear Structure separation Required Required Required Required Required -^ ^ Shown -T""^ <-> D ' Shown Igr'^&^L Shown J^ £>' Shown -<2-O 7 Shown Required Required Required Required Required Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown 3 Lot Coverage 4 Height Required Required Shown a s•+- Spaces Required Shown5 Parking (breakdown by uses for commercial and industrial projects required) Residential Guest Spaces Required 1 Shown Additional Comments Please show the length of the arc at the front yard setback, this is your lot width (Per Section 21 04263) Your side yard setbacks will be 10% of this lot width (Per Section 21 10 070) Your front and rear yards are non-conforming, therefore, any such enlargement shall not increase the floor space more than forty percent of the original building square footage Our records indicate previous additions- a 46 sg ft addition, permit (CB 99-4046) and a 61 sq ft addition, permit (CB 02-2337), totaling 107 sg ft total additions ^There are outstanding issues with the "sunroom" and the 3 kitchenette upstairs The guest room qualifies as a second dwelling unit (per section 21 10030^ of Carlsbad's Municipal Code- it is located within the Coastal Zone, and therefore requires an Administrative Coastal Development Permit Please feel free to contact me to discuss all of these issues in detail L \AAA- OK TO ISSUE AND ENTERED APPROVAL INTO COMPUTER H \ADMIN\COUNTER\BldgPlnchkRevChklst SILVERMAN ADDITION KENNETH A PURDY ARCHITECT 7441 TRIGO LANE CARLSBAD CA 92009 (760) 632-5422 FAX (760) 632-5269 ROOF LOADING ITEM ELEMENTS UNIT WEIGHT Roof FLOOR LOADING ITEM Floor Roofing Felt Shtg Framing Clg Misc Dead Load Live Load Total Load ELEMENTS Dead Load Live Load Total Load Ibs/sf 65 5 20 30 20 20 160 160 32psf UNIT WEIGHT Ibs/sf 10 40 50psf SOIL BEARING ASSUMED 1000 PSF PER U B C TABLE 18-l-A FLOOR JOIST L= 8' w= 50X1 33 = 67 M=B7X 8s/Q = 536 S = 536 X 12 / 1000 = 6 USE2X6 DF #1 @16"0/C GIRDER L = 81 w= 8 X 50 = 400 M = 40QX8a/8 = 3200 S = 3200X 12/1000 = 38 USE4X10DF #1 i RIDGE BEAM SPAN (SP) = 26', w = 32 X 13 - 416 PLF MOMEN F [M] = 416 X 262 / 8 = 351 52 Fb = 40,740, E = 2 0 X 1 OB PSI USE 5 1/4" X 14 PARALLAM 2 OE PSL FLOOR BEAM SPAN (SP) = 26' w= 7 X 50 = 350 PLF M=350 X262 =29575 Fb = 39,805 E= 2 0 X 1 OB PSI USE 7X11 7/8" PARALLAM 2 OE PSL HEADER L= 6' w = 50 X 7 = 350 M=350X 62/ 8 = 2871 S = 2871 X12/ 1000 = 34 USE 4 X10 DF #2 PAD RIDGE BM = 5400 FLOOR BM = 4500 PAD =1100 11000/1000= 11 SF 3'-B" SQ X 12" THICK PAD W/ 5-#4 EA WAY SILVERMAN CHANGE ORDER 2x STUDS@>16"0/C 2XSILL W/16d@16"0/C (3)1 Bd 016" 0/C AT SHEAR PANELS SHEATHING PER PLAN FRAMING PER PLAN JB26 HANGERS 2X8PTDFSILLW/ 5/8" DIA AB &2"X3/16" WASHERS ©48" 0/C SEE SHEAR PANEL SCHEDULE FORAB SPACING (2) #5 BARS TOR & BOTTOM CONTINUOUS 4 -24 " #5 BARS VERT @ TYP. STEM WALL 2x STUDS@16"0/C 2X6PTDFSILLW/ 5/8"DIA AB &2"SQ X3/16" WASHERS® 48" 0/C #5BARSTOP&BOT CONTIN #5 VERT BARS @ 48" 0/C STEM 2x STUDS ©16" 0/C 2XSILL W/16d@1B"0/C (3)1 Bd @ 16" 0/C AT SHEAR PANELS SHEATHING PER PLAN FRAMING PER PLAN 2X BLOCKING NAILED PER SCHEDULE USE A35 EA BLOCK AT SHEAR PANELS 2X6 PTDF SILL W/ 5/8 DIA AB £2 X3/16 WASHERS®48 0/C SEE SHEAR PANEL SCHEDULE FOR A B SPACING (2) #5 BARS TOP & BOTTOM CONTINUOUS ^ & <24 '0 ( #5 BARS VERT ©24 0/C Aha Vista Engineering Civil Engineers and Land Planners STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS FOR THE SILVERMAN ADDITION Owner Site address Mr & Mrs Tim Silverman 1185 Tamarack Carlsbad, CA 92008 760-720-4203 1185 Tamarack Carlsbad, CA 92008 Engin Brucferfl MacFarlalie RCE 28062, Expires 3-31-08 969 Vale Terrace, Suite A, Vista, California 92084 (760) 758-3955 QbOb STRUCTURE TYPE- Two story, wood frame, truss and comp shingle roof, siding exterior, wallboard interior LOADING:ITEM ELEMENTS UNIT WEIGHT Ibs/SF Roof Ceiling Exterior Walls Interior Walls Floors /Deck Balcony Soffit (optional) comp shingles felt 1/2" ply framing / truss Dead Load = Live Load = framing 1/2" gypsum miscellaneous Dead Load = studs / plates 1/2" gypsum 1" siding Dead Load = studs / plates 1/2" gypsum (2 sides) Dead Load = framing 3/4" plywood 1/2" gypsum miscellaneous Dead Load = Floor Live Load = framing 3/4" plywood 1/2" gypsum miscellaneous Dead Load = Floor Live Load = framing 7/8" stucco miscellaneous 40 05 20 25 90 160 20 20 1 0 50 30 20 40 90 30 40 70 40 30 20 1 0 100 400 40 30 20 1 0 100 600 20 11 0 1 0 Dead Load = 140 LATERAL ANALYSIS AND DESIGN WIND CRITERIA P— CeCqCJs/w For Wind Exposure Height (ft ) 0-15 15-20 20-25 25-30 30-40 Vw=PA=(Cqqs/w)CeA Vw= 1638 CeA Vw= PA Pro PB' Co 062 067 072 076 084 Cq= 1 3 /w= 1 Projected area method eq 20-1 qs= 126 A = Projected area (sf) SEISMIC CRITERIA Eh=(25Ca/W/R)/1 4 eq 305/1 4= 0 143 W R= 5 5 Ca = 0 44 C. Na = 0 44 Na (Soil Type Sd) Assumed = W=Dead Load Z = 0 4 7=1 E=Eh+Ev , Ev = 0 (A S D ) Reliability/ Redundancy Procedure 1 Do initial seismic design assuming p - 1 0 for -rrEh 2 Determine r, max and p max per story (p - 1 0 mm , 1 5 max ) 3 Adjust seismic load (E=/?Eh) for shearwall and holdown design 4 Design to most critical lateral force E or Vw Vertical Distribution of Force hn= 32 C. = 0 02 Fx=(V-Ft)wxhx/2w,h, eq 30-15 T=Ct(hn)3M = 027 Ft= 07TV (Ft=0 for T less than 0 7 sec) r i (max) = VWs 107 VTOT'W 1 0<yOused< 1 5 SHEARWALL CASE DESCRIPTIONS CA SE1 WALL SHEAR PANEL CA SE 2 DOOR PIER SHEARWALL H H e2(SL)min -j ph //=Vs(SL) <ph)/(SL-03) H H k s L a NOTE M\XRATK) ph/S,=2 1 ph (ph)/(SL- 03) I^-SL—sl NOTE Iv^XRATIO ph/ SL =2 1 CA SE 3 WINDOW PIER SHEARWALL fr- 2 (SL ) min -3| ~®' wph (ph)/(SL-03) NOTE MAX RATIO (wph)/(SL) =2 1 (T) HEADER TO SOLID BLOCKING TIE STRAP STRAP CAPACITY TO BE 1/2 VSP MTN 2) SILL PLATES TO SOLID BLOCKING TIE STRAP STRAP CAPACITY TO BE 1/2 VSP MIN KEY vs UNIT SHEAR (#/lf) VSP PANEL SHEAR (#) H HOLD DOWN FORCE (#) SL SHEARWALL LENGTH (10 ph PANEL OR HEADER HEIGHT (ft) wph WINDOW PIER HEIGHT (ft) 0 3' HOLD DOWN OFFSET FROM PANEL EDGE SHEAR PANEL SCHEDULE 3/8" C-D, C-C OR OSB PLYWOOD NAILED WITH 6-D NAILS @ 3" O C AT EDGES AND 12" O C FIELD PER TABLE 23-11-1-1 U B C , ALLOWABLE SHEAR CAPACITY = 350 #/FT USE 5/8" ANCHOR BOLTS @ 24" O C WITH 2" X 2" X 3/16" WASHERS FOR 2" NOMINAL SILL PLATE ** ON FOUNDATION OR SILL NAIL WITH 16D @ 6" O C TOGETHER WITH A-35 OR A-35F @ 24" O C TO FLOOR PLY AND SOLID BLOCKING PLYWOOD JOINT AND SILL NAILING SHALL BE STAGGERED MAINTAIN 1 7/8" EDGE DISTANCE WITH ANCHOR BOLTS USE A-35 @ 16" O C FROM TOP PLATE TO ROOF OR FLOOR BLOCKING OR JOIST 3/8" C-D, C-C, OR OSB PLYWOOD NAILED WITH 8-D NAILS @ 3" O C AT EDGES AND 12" O C FIELD PER TABLE 23-11-1-1 U B C , ALLOWABLE SHEAR CAPACITY == 490 #/FT ALL FRAMING MEMBERS RECEIVING EDGE NAILING FROM ABUTTING PANELS SHALL. NOT BE LESS THEN A SINGLE 3" NOMINAL MEMBER USE 5/8" ANCHOR BOLTS @ 16" O C WITH 2" X 2" X 3/16" WASHERS FOR 2" NOMINAL SILL PLATE ** ON FOUNDATION OR SILL NAIL WITH 16D @ 4" O C TOGETHER WITH A-35 OR A-35F @ 20" O C TO FLOOR PLY AND SOLID BLOCKING PLYWOOD JOINT AND SILL NAILING SHALL BE STAGGERED MAINTAIN 1 7/8" EDGE DISTANCE WITH ANCHOR BOLTS USE A-35 @ 12" O C FROM TOP PLATE TO ROOF OR FLOOR BLOCKING OR JOIST 15/32" C-D, C-C OR OSB PLYWOOD NAILED WITH 10-D NAILS @ 3" O C AT EDGES AND 12" O C FIELD PER TABLE 23-11-1-1 U B C , ALLOWABLE SHEAR CAPACITY = 600 #/FT ALL FRAMING MEMBERS RECEIVING EDGE NAILING FROM ABUTTING PANELS SHALL NOT BE LESS THEN A SINGLE 3" NOMINAL MEMBER USE 5/8" ANCHOR BOLTS @ 14" O C WITH 2" X 2" X 3/16" WASHERS FOR 2" NOMINAL SILL PLATE ** ON FOUNDATION OR SILL NAIL WITH 16D @ 4" O C TOGETHER WITH A-35 OR A-35F @ 16" O C TO FLOOR PLY AND SOLID BLOCKING PLYWOOD JOINT AND SILL NAILING SHALL BE STAGGERED MAINTAIN 1 7/8" EDGE DISTANCE WITH ANCHOR BOLTS USE A-35 @ 8" O C FROM TOP PLATE TO ROOF OR FLOOR BLOCKING OR JOIST ** SEE "PLYWOOD SHEARWALL SILL PLATE ANCHOR BOLTING TO FOUNDATION CALCULATIONS FOR 2" NOMINAL PLATE" IN STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS PLYWOOD SHEARWALL SILL PLATE ANCHOR BOLTING TO FOUNDATION CALCULATIONS FOR 2" NOMINAL PLATE REF 1997 NATIONAL DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS (NDS) 1997 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE (UBC) FOR WOOD TO CONCRETE CONNECTIONS SEE SECTIONS 8 2 3, 7 '$ 2, 2 3 2, TABLES 7 3 1, 8 2E (NDS), TABLE 19D AND 23-1-11-1 (UBC) FOR 1-1/2" WOOD MEMBER,5/8" ANCHOR BOLT WITH 6° EMBEDMENT Z= 890#/BOLT (TABLE 8 2E NDS) Z'= 50%*(890#/BOLT)1 6**= 712#/BOLT FOR ALLOWABLE SERVICE LOAD ON EMBEDDED BOLT PER TABLE 19D (UBC) 5/8" BOLT EDGE DIST = 3-3/4" ALLOWABLE SHEAR = 2750# CALC FOR EDGE DIS F 50%(3-3/4")= 1-7/8" PRORATE ALLOWABLE SHEAR 50%(2750) = 13 75# = Ze Ze1 = 50%* (Z' CONTROLS) ANCHOR BOLTING FOR VARIOUS SHEAR PANEL RATINGS (#/FT) 2" SILL PLATE FOR 350#/FT OR LESS SHEAR PANEL USE 5/8" ANCHOR BOLTS @ 24" O C (712#/350 = 203VBOLT) 490#/FT OR LESS SHEAR PANEL USE 5/8" ANCHOR BOLTS @ 16" O C (712#/490 = 1 457BOLT) 600#/FT OR LESS SHEAR PANEL USE 5/8" ANCHOR BOLTS @ 14" O C (712#/600=1 197BOLT) FOR ALL USE 6" MIN EMBEDMENT ANCHOR BOLT WITH 1-7/8" MIN EDGE DISTANCE, 2" NOMINAL SILL PLATE FOR PLYWOOD SHEAR WALLS 350- 600#/FT CAPACITY USE 2"x2"x3/l6" WASHERS WITH ANCHOR BOLTS *REDUCTION FACTOR TABLE 23-11-1-1, NOTE 3 (UBC) "CD TABLE 232 (NDS) GRID SECTOR KEY MAP - XX DIRECTION LEGEND GRID SECTOR BOUNDARY C^ GRID SECTOR SHEARWALL ,,Vi ? ^Z\ UPPER x^- Y A y Y >X LOWER |! k-J GRID A , DIRECTION XX WIND EXPOSURE, UPPER Vwu= i638CeuAu = 2,571 # (Au = 218 S F) (Ceu = 072 ) WIND EXPOSURE, LOWER VwL= Vwu+ 1638 CeA = 4,155 * (AL = 156 SF) (CeL = 0 62 ) SEISMIC MASS SF */s/=. w* HT ' K*' (AVE) (wxhx) UPPER ROOF & CEILING 365 14 5110 20 102 STORY EXTERIOR WALLS 398 9 3582 15 54 INTERIOR WALLS 87 56 15 1 LOWER ROOF & CEILING 0 14 0 10 0 STORY FLOOR/DECK 221 10 2210 11 24 EXTERIOR WALLS 342 9 3078 45 14 INTERIOR WALLS 112 7 784 45 4 = 14,820 * ^(w,h,)= 198 *' 4(WSD) = 2,117* Vsu = VsL( 102 +54 + 1 )K* = 1,672 * = y Wx1x / ^ W,Ai, ^#' 198 ^ SHEARWALLS UPPER P^= 122 ^ = 122 /„= 4.6 LF = 559*/FT=V l/SE 46 LF USE 1 - SW32 x 8 RF SIMPSON STRONGWALL =1480* CAPACITY USE 1 - SW24 x 8 RF SIMPSON STRONGWALL =1105* CAPACITY TOTAL CAPACITY = 2585# SHEARWALLS LOWER p—=i23 p = 123 lw= 46LF //w= 903*/FT=V L/SE 46 LF USE 1 - SW32 x 9 SIMPSON STRONGWALL =2600# CAPACITY USE 1 - SW24 x 9 SIMPSON STRONGWALL =1585* CAPACITY TOTAL CAPACITY = 4185# GRID B , DIRECTION XX WIND EXPOSURE, UPPER J£ Vwu= i638CeiAj = 2,547 (Au = 216 SF) (Ceu= 072 ) WIND EXPOSURE, LOWER VwL=Vwu+ 1638 06^= 3,888 SEISMIC MASS UPPER ROOF & CEILING STORY EXTERIOR WALLS INTERIOR WALLS LOWER ROOF & CEILING STORY FLOOR / DECK EXTERIOR WALLS INTERIOR WALLS VsL =%W 25CA//R14(WSD) = /su = VsL( 101 +52 + 1 )K*' = •\QA K * (A,= SF * 362 384 6 0 237 297 54 1 jt 1,998 # 1,587 * 132 /SF. 14 9 7 14 10 9 7 tw = = V SF) W* 5068 3456 42 0 2370 2673 378 13,987 wxhx / . (CeL = 062 ) HT' (AVE) 20 15 15 10 11 45 45 *2(w,h,) = $ W,h, K*' (*xhx) 101 52 1 0 26 12 2 # 194 SHEARWALLS UPPER P^= 12 p = 1 is lw= 46LF /lw= 554*/FT=V USE 46 LF 15/32" PLY SCH 3 USE 1 - SW32 x 8 RF SIMPSON STRONGWALL =1480* CAPACITY USE 1 - SW24 x 8 RF SIMPSON STRONGWALL =1105# CAPACITY TOTAL CAPACITY = 2585# SHEARWALLS LOWER p—=12 p = 1 is /w= 46LF //w= 845#/FT=V L/SE 46 LF 15/32" PLY SCH 3 USE 1 - SW32 x 9 SIMPSON STRONGWALL =2600# CAPACITY USE 1 - SW24 x 9 SIMPSON SFRONGWALL =1585# CAPACITY TOTAL CAPACITY = 4185# GRID SECTOR KEY MAP - YY DIRECTION LEGEND GRID SECTOR BOUNDARY X*~" """V. ^*Dm OC/*TrtDV, _} GRID SECTOR SHEAR WALL /\ K|5l ^UPPER A ^" fc 1 "i <^T~^»CJ^ „ JEj(-^' ^ *T i 4. UH • Vl ( 1 [•— — 1 — 1 C~?T^\ -^ ;^,-j 1 — - ' I ' ^ -• V = jr. Y A X ^ _ ^ ^ * Y >1 j \| r LOWER I 11 GRID 1 DIRECTION YY WIND EXPOSURE, UPPER Vwu= 1638CeuAu= 1,368 WIND EXPOSURE, LOWER VwL= Vwu+ 1638 CeA = 2,272 SEISMIC MASS 116 SF) (Ceu= 072 ) * (AL = 89 S F ) (CeL = 0 62 ) UPPER STORY LOWER STORY ROOF & CEILING EXTERIOR WALLS INTERIOR WALLS ROOF & CEILING FLOOR/DECK EXTERIOR WALLS INTERIOR WALLS VsL=XlV25CA//R1 4(WSD) = i Vsu = VsL( 104 +47 + 0 )K* = 189 K* SHEARWALLS UPPER SF. 372 346 0 0 220 356 0 1,961 1,561 '/SF. 14 9 7 14 10 9 7 2w = # # = V w* 5208 3114 0 0 2200 3204 0 13,726 wxhx / 1 HT ' (AVE) 20 15 15 10 11 45 45 * 2(w,h f w,h, K*' (*xhx) 104 47 0 0 24 14 0 -) = 189 # I Pused= 1 0 p = 049 lw= 95 LF p used V SL 55 4 CASE 1 3 164 * QTY 1 1 /FT= V VSP 904 657 ph 8 7 USE 9 5 HOLD DOWN FORCES (H) # 1390 1244 LF 3/8" PLY SCH 1 RECOMMENDED HOLD DOWNS MST 37, MSTC66B3 MST 37, MSTC66B3 SHEARWALLS LOWER VwL//w= 239 * /FT= V - 1 0 /? = 0 36 / W~ 9 5 LF USE 9 5 LF 3/8" PLY SCH 1 SL 55 4 CASE 1 3 QTY 1 1 VSP 1315 957 ph 9 8 HOLD DOWN FORCES (H) # 2277 2068 RECOMMENDED HOLD DOWNS STHD10 PHD2, or HTT22 w/ SSTB16 STHD10, PHD2, or HTT22 w/ SSTB16 GRID 2 .DIRECTION YY WIND EXPOSURE, UPPER : 1,392 WIND EXPOSURE, LOWER VwL= Vwu+ 163's CeA = 2,428 SEISMIC MASS 118 SF)0 72 ) UPPER STORY LOWER STORY ROOF & CEILING EXTERIOR WALLS INTERIOR WALLS ROOF & CEILING FLOOR/DECK EXTERIOR WALLS INTERIOR WALLS VsL=SlV25CA//R1 4(WSD) = i = VsL( 103 +49 + 1 )K* = (AL = SF * 368 364 14 174 286 202 198 2,432 * 1,669 * 102 E 14 9 7 14 10 9 7 2w = = V SF) W* 5152 3276 98 2436 2860 1818 1386 17,026 wxhx / . (CeL = HT' (AVE) 20 15 15 10 11 45 45 * 2(w £ w,h, 062 ) K*' («Xhx) 103 49 1 24 31 8 6 A)= 224 224 SHEARWALLS UPPER Pused- •) 0 p - 021 lw= 120 LF used V SL 12 su/lw = CASE 1 139 * QTY 1 /FT= V VSP 1669 ph 8 USE 120 HOLD DOWN FORCES (H) # 1141 LF 3/8" PLY SCH 1 RECOMMENDED HOLD DOWNS MST 37, MSTC66B3 SHEARWALLS LOWER p^ =p - 033 lw= 120 LF used V SL 12 SL 1 lw = CASE 1 203 w QTY 1 /FT= V VSP 2432 ph 9 USE 120 HOLD DOWN FORCES (H) # 1871 LF 3/8" PLY SCH 1 RECOMMENDED HOLD DOWNS STHD10, PHD2, or HTT22 w/ SSTB16 GRID* 3 .DIRECTION YY WIND EXPOSURE Vw= 1638 CeA = 975 * (A = 96 S F ) (Ce = 062 SEISMIC MASS S.F. */SF. w* FLOOR 178 10 1780 EXTERIOR WALLS 205 9 1845 INTERIOR WALLS 108 7 _ 756 *= 4,381 Vs=XlV25CA//R14(WSD) = 626* SHEARWALLS pmea = 15 p = ITS lw= 20LF Vw//w= 487*/FT=V l/SE 20 LF USE 1 - SW24 x 9 SIMPSON STRONGWALL =1585# CAPACITY BEAM DESIGN # 1 DESCRIPTION RIDGE BEAM LOAD TYPE. UNIFORM LOADING • SPAN (SP) = 24 0 FT TRIB.FT. VSF LOAD*/FT ROOF UL CEILING 4444444 EXT WALL * — = — — — — — : r_| IIV 1 VVfM-L. L A FLOOR /DECK BALCONY SOFFIT <OD . ^ /~IT7.//TDor ^ U///L.rc 10 25 9 5 9 7 50 70 14 R R TOTAL UNIFORM LOAD (UL) = Fb = E : SHEAR CAPACITY REQ = MOMENT CAPACITY REQ = V = R= SP(UL/2 = UL(SP)2/8 = 2900 PSl MOMENT OF INERTIA REQ - (5/384)(UL/12)(SPx12)4/EA= = 2 0 x 106 PSl /ALLOWED DEFLECTION (A) = SP(12/ USE MIN. 5 1/4 "x 16 360 = PARALLAM 2.0 E. 250 45 0 0 0 0 0 295 #/FT 3540 # 21240 * 1376 IN4 080 IN GIVEN PROPERTIES M - 52430* V= 16240* 1= 1790 IN4 BEAM DESIGN # 2 DESCRIPTION FLOOR BEAM LOAD TYPE LOADING. UNIFORM 4i —4 4 UL 4 4 4 4 R SPAN (SP) = 20 0 FT TRIB FT VSF LOAD */FT ROOF CEILING EXT WALL INT WALL FLOOR/DECK 6 BALCONY SOFFIT OTHER TOTAL UNIFORM LOAD (UL) = Fb = 2900 PSl E = 20X106PSI USE MIN. GIVEN PROPERTIES SHEAR CAPACITY REQ = MOMENT CAPACITY REQ = MOMENT OF INERTIA REQ = ALLOWED DEFLECTION (A) = 5 1/4 "x 14 M= 40740 * , V= 14210 (5/384)(UL/12)(SPx12)4/EA= SP(I2/ PARALLAM 2.0 E. 1= 1200 IN4 25 5 9 7 50 70 14 JL) = /2 = /8 = EA= 0 = 0 0 0 0 300 0 0 300 */FT 3000 # 15000* 810 IN4 067 IN SP •BEAM DESIGN # 3 DESCRIPTION UPPER WINDOW HEADER SUPP ROOF & CEILING LOAD TYPE: UNIFORM SPAN (SP) = 6 0 FT LOADING. TRIB FT */SF LOAD */FT. ROOF 8 25 200 UL CEILING 7 5 35 I __ I _i __i_ _j _ ^, j: ^^WALL 9 ° //VT WALL 7 0 FLOOR/DECK 50 0 BALCONY 70 0 SOFF/T 14 o OTHER 60 R R TOTAL UNIFORM LOAD (UL) = 295~ #/FT MOMENT (M) = UL(SP)2/8 = 1328 # END REACTION (R) = SP(UL)/2 = 885 * ALLOWED DEFLECTION (&)= SP(12)/ 360 = 0 20 IN d = 6 IN SECTIONAL AREA REQ = (R - UL (rf/12)) 1 5 / 85 PSI = 13 IN2 Fb= 1300 PSI SECTION MODULUS REQ = M(12)/Fb = 12 IN0 E= 16x106PSI MOMENT OF INERTIA REQ = (5/384)(UL/12)(SPx12)4/EA= 27 IN4 L/SE M//V. 4"x 6" DOUGLAS FIR LARCH #1 GIVEN PROPERTIES A= 19 3 IN2 S= 17 7 IN3 1= 48 5 IN4 BEAM DESIGN # 4 DESCRIPTION: WINDOW HEADER SUPP ROOF & CEILING LOAD TYPE: UNIFORM SPAN (SP) = 6 0 FT LOADING TRIB FT */SF LOAD */FT ROOF 25 0 CEILING 5 0 EXT WALL 6 9 54 INT WALL 7 o FLOOR/DECK 6 so 300 BALCONY 70 0 SOFF/T 14 0 OTHER 60 R R TOTAL UNIFORM LOAD (UL) = 414 #/FT MOMENT (M) = UL(SP)2/8 = 1863 # END REACTION (R) = SP(UL)/2 = 1242 # ALLOWED DEFLECTION (A) = SP(12)/ 360 = 0 20 IN d - 6 IN SECTIONAL AREA REQ = (R - UL (rf/12)) 1 5 / 85 PSI = 18 IN2 Fb= 1300 PSI SECTION MODULUS REQ = M(12)/Fb = 17 IN" E= 16x106PSI MOMENT OF INERTIA REQ = (5/384)(UL/12)(SPx12)4/EA= 38 IN4 USE MIN. 4"x 6" DOUGLAS FIR LARCH #1 GIVEN PROPERTIES A= 19 3 IN2 S= 17 7 IN3 1= 48 5 IN4 'BEAM DESIGN # 5 DESCRIPTION: DOORWAY HEADER SUPP WALL, ROOF & CEILING LOAD TYPE: UNIFORM LOADING: R R MOMENT (M) = UL(SP)2/8 - 1836 ALLOWED DEFLECTION (A) = SP(12/ SECTIONAL AREA REQ = SECTION MODULUS REQ = MOMEN F OF INERTIA REQ = MIN. 4 " x 6 " d = 6 IN Fb = 1300 PSI E = 1.6 x 106 PSI USE GIVEN PROPERTIES SPAN (SP) = ROOF CEILING EXT WALL INT WALL FLOOR/DECK BALCONY SOFFIT OTHER TOTAL UN * END REACTS ^} - A) = SP(12/ (R - UIL (d/12)) 1 5 M(12/Fb = (5/384)(UL/12)(SPx12)4/EA= TRIB. 8 8 12 '•ORM, tf(R) = 12)) 1 6 OFT FT. VSF 25 5 9 7 50 70 14 LOAD (UL) = = SP(UL/2 = 360 = 5/85 PSI = LOAD */FT 200 40 108 0 0 0 0 60 408 #/FT 1224* 020 IN 18 IN2 37 IN4 A ==19 3 IN2 DOUGLAS FIR LARCH #1 S = 17 7 IN3 I = 48 5 IN4 BEAM DESIGN # 6 DESCRIPTION MEDIA ROOM RIDGE BEAM LOAD TYPE LOADING UNIFORM d SP R R MOMENT (M)= UL(SP)2/8= 7560 ALLOWED DEFLECTION (A) = SP(12)/ SECTIONAL AREA REQ = SECTION MODULUS REQ = MOMENT OF INERTIA REQ = MIN. 6 " x 10 " d = 10 IN Fb = 1300 PSI E = 1 6 x 106 PSI USE GIVEN PROPERTIES SPAN(SP)= 12 OFT TRIB. FT. VSF LOAD#/FT ROOF 12 CEILING 12 EXT WALL INT WALL FLOOR/DECK BALCONY SOFFIT OTHER TOTAL UNIFORM LOAD (UL) = ># END REACTION (R) = SP(UL/2 = SP(12)/ 360 = (R -UL(J/12))1 5/ 85 PSI = M(12)/Fb = (5/384)(UL/12)(SPx12)7 EA= 25 5 9 7 50 70 14 JL) = /2 = 0 = 'Sl = 'Fb = EA= 300 60 0 0 0 0 0 60 420 #/FT 2520 # 040 IN 38 IN2 70INJ 306 IN4 DOUGLAS FIR LARCH #1 52 3 IN2 Q —827 IN3 1 =393 IN4 I I I I Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Addition 1185 Tamarack Avenue Carlsbad, California May 17, 2006 Prepared For MR TIMOTHY J SILVERMAN 1185 Tamarack Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 _ Prepared By | VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102 • Escondido, California 92029 Job #06-229-P I ' • \ \X_\X \VlNTE & MlDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC • Job #06-229-P I I I I 2450 Vineyard Avenue Hso.ndido Calirbrnu 92020 1229 Phone(760; 743 1214 Kix (7601 739-0343 May 17, 2006 I Mr Timothy J Silverman 1185 Tamarack Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 I PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION, PROPOSED ADDITION, • 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Pursuant to your request, Vmje and Middleton Engineering, Inc has completed the • enclosed Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Report for the proposed residential addition at the above-referenced property • The following report summarizes the results of our field investigation, including laboratory analyses and conclusions, and provides recommendations for the proposed new addition as understood From a geotechnical engineering standpoint, it is our opinion that the study • portion of the property is suitable for the planned addition provided the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the design and construction of the project I The conclusions and recommendations provided in this study are consistent with the site * geotechnical conditions and are intended to aid in preparation of final development plans and allow more accurate estimates of development costs ' If you have any questions or need clarification, please do not hesitate to contact this office Reference to our Job #06-229-P will help to expedite our response to your inquiries ™ We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you I VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC I / Dennis Middleton CEG #980 DM/jt I TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO I INTRODUCTION 1 II SITE DESCRIPTION 1 III PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 1 IV SITE INVESTIGATION 2 V GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS 2 A Earth Materials 2 B Groundwater and Surface Drainage 2 C Slope Stability 2 D Faults / Seismicity 3 E Geologic Hazards 5 F Laboratory Testing / Results 5 VI SITE CORROSION ASSESSMENT 8 VII CONCLUSIONS 9 VIII RECOMMENDATIONS 11 A Remedial Grading and Earthworks 11 B Footings and Slab-on-Grade Foundations 15 C Exterior Concrete Slabs / Flatworks 17 D Soil Design Parameters 18 E General Recommendations 19 IX Limitations 21 TABLE NO Fault Zone 1 Site Specific Seismic Parameters 2 Soil Type 3 Gram Size Analysis 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content 5 Maximum-Density Test (Undisturbed Ring Samples) 6 Expansion Index Test 7 Direct Shear Test 8 pH and Resistivity Test 9 SulfateTest 10 Chloride Test 11 Years to Perforation of Steel Culverts 12 PLATE NO Regional Index Map 1 Site Plan 2 Boring Logs 3-4 Geologic Cross-Sections 5 Fault - Epicenter Map 6 Isolation Joints and Re-entrant Corner Reinforcement 7 Retaining Wall Dram Detail 8 REFERENCES PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED ADDITION, 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA I INTRODUCTION The subject of this work includes portions of the a developed residential graded pad located at the above-referenced property A Regional Index Map showing the site location is included with this report as Plate 1 We understand that northwest areas of the property are proposed for the support of an attached two-story addition Consequently, the purpose of this investigation was to determine soil and geotechnical conditions at the property and to ascertain their influence upon the planned addition Geologic mapping, test borings, and soil sampling/testing were among the activities conducted in conjunction with this effort which has resulted in bearing soil preparations and foundation recommendations presented herein The scope of this report is limited to the area proposed for the new addition as specifically delineated in this report Other areas of the property, including existing structures and improvements not investigated, are beyond the scope of this work II SITE DESCRIPTION The study location is located in the northwest portion of a residential lot that was originally developed more than 50 years ago Documentation for earthworks or construction at the property is not available for review A Site Plan showing existing site conditions and the proposed addition is included herein as Plate 2 Shallow fills mantle the proposed addition that presently supports a covered concrete patio and landscaped lawn areas The nearly level lawn terminates to the west at a steep slope that descends approximately 10 vertical feet to the adjacent property The upper 7 feet of the slope, constructed at approximately % 1 (horizontal to vertical) gradient, has a concreted slope face with the lower 3 feet supported by a short retaining wall The slope appears to be performing well with no indication of distress> or instability noted III PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT A two-story addition is proposed to attach to northwest sections of the existing dwelling No grade alterations are planned and the addition will be constructed at or very near existing grades Conditions of the existing foundations and slabs to remain were not investigated and are unknown to us ! Detailed construction plans are not available, however, the addition is anticipated to consist of conventional wood-framed with exterior stucco structures supported on conventional foundations with stem-walls and slab-on-grade floors, or slab-on-ground with turned-down footings VINII- & MinnLiiTON HNGINI-.TKING INC • 2450 Vim-ynrd Avenue • Hscondido California 92029-1229 • Phone ;760) 743-1214 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 2 PROPOSED ADDITION, 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE. CARLSBAD MAY 17, 2006 IV SITE INVESTIGATION Subsurface conditions at the study area were chiefly determined by the excavation of two exploratory test borings drilled with a truck-mounted drill Both borings were logged by our project geologist who also retained representative soil samples for laboratory testing Boring locations are shown on Plate 2 Logs of the Test Borings are enclosed with this report as Plates 3 and 4 A Geologic Cross-Section depicting subsurface relationships based on our borings is included with this report as Plate 5 Laboratory test results are summarized in following sections V GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS The study area is directly underlain by shallow fills that mantle natural Terrace Deposits Instability is not indicated at the property A Earth Materials The property is underlain by Pleistocene age Terrace Deposits that are typical of Carlsbad coastal areas As exposed, the Terrace Deposits typically consist of red- brown colored fine to medium grained sandstone The sandstone was found in a weathered friable and moderately cemented conditions overall Project sandstone are competent deposits that will adequately support the planned new addition Shallow fill deposits mantle the sandstone at the property The fill ranges to 4 feet thick maximum, as measured in our test borings, and was found to be in slightly moist and loose to compact conditions overall Site earth deposits are very low to non-expansive B Groundwater and Surface Drainage Subsurface water was not encountered in our test excavations to the depths explored and is not expected to impact the new addition as presently proposed However, like all developed properties, the proper control of surface drainage and storm water is an important factor in the continued stability of the graded pad Ponding of surface drainage should not be allowed and over-watering of site vegetation should be avoided C Slope Stability Graded slopes are not planned in conjunction with the proposed addition The nearby concrete covered slope is a modest embankment with no indication of slope instability VlNIi: & MlDDLITON r.NOINni-:KINii INC • 2450 Vineyard /Wmio • Escondido ( nlifornia 92029-1229 • Phono (760) 743-1214 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED ADDITION, 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE, CARLSBAD PAGE 3 MAY 17, 2006 D Faults / Seismicity Faults or significant shear zones are not indicated on or near proximity to the project site As with most areas of California, the San Diego region lies within a seismically active zone, however, coastal areas of the county are characterized by low levels of seismic activity relative to inland areas to the east During a 40-year period (1934-1974), 37 earthquakes were recorded in San Diego coastal areas by the California Institute of Technology None of the recorded events exceeded a Richter magnitude of 3 7, nor did any of the earthquakes generate more than modest ground shaking or significant damages Most of the recorded events occurred along various offshore faults which characteristically generate modest earthquakes Historically, the most significant earthquake events which affect local areas originate along well known, distant fault zones to the east and the Coronado Bank Fault to the west Based upon available seismic data, compiled from California Earthquake Catalogs, the most significant historical event in the area of the study site occurred in 1800 at an estimated distance of 10 8 miles from the project area This event, which is thought to have occurred along an off-shore fault, reached an estimated magnitude of 6 5 with estimated bedrock acceleration values of 0 123g at the project site The following list represents the most significant faults which commonly impact the region Estimated ground acceleration data compiled from Digitized California Faults (Computer Program EQFAULT VERSION 3 00 updated) typically associated with the fault is also tabulated TABLE 1 iS;' SN& '" '; 3p*?• i". -j :•• • •. • IK.:.', .' • Hiij& "' • ...-.'°'"'''^v • 'ir -.. _ ''2%w- .. •,_,:^lultZonefe^ - • Rose Canyon Newport-lnglewood Coronado Bank Elsmore-Julian ^<;:::,^^,.. ..... . -#*'" ''•'•-'?''• -V-fef. ,r ,._ ; : .., W Distance from 'Sitfe^-1- ": 5 0 miles 5 6 miles 21 2 miles 24 1 miles PR -"iK. mm •:" •'."•• >..,.;:.- Maximum ProSs^le :;m, ,.< - i*;r ^^tceleratioriiR^Hflsii.."- 0244g 0231g 0184g 0142g The location of significant faults and earthquake events relative to the study site are depicted on a Fault - Epicenter Map enclosed with this report as Plate 6 YlNIH & MlOOLLTON Esi'ilNITKINCi INC • 2450 Vineyard Avenue • Escondido Giliiornn L)2029-1229 • Phone (760; /43-I2I4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .1I PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 4 PROPOSED ADDITION, 11185 TAMARACK AVENUE, CARLSBAD MAY 17, 2006 More recently, the number of seismic events which affect the region appears to have heightened somewhat Nearly 40 earthquakes of magnitude 3 5 or higher have been recorded in coastal regions between January 1984 and August 1986 Most of the earthquakes are thought to have been generated along offshore faults For the most part, the recorded events remain moderate shocks which typically resulted in low levels of ground shaking to local areas A notable exception to this pattern was recorded on July 13, 1986 An earthquake of magnitude 5 3 shook County coastal areas with moderate to locally heavy ground shaking resulting in $700,000 in damages, one death, and injuries to 30 people The quake occurred along an offshore fault located nearly 30 miles southwest of Oceanside A series of notable events shook County areas with a (maximum) magnitude 7 4 shock in the early morning of June 28, 1992 These quakes originated along related segments of the San Andreas Fault approximately 90 miles to the north Locally high levels of ground shaking over an extended period of time resulted, however, significant damages to local structures were not reported The increase in earthquake frequency in the region remains a subject of speculation among geologists, however, based upon empirical information and the recorded seismic history of County areas, the 1986 and 1992 events are thought to represent the highest levels of ground shaking which can be expected at the study site as a result of seismic activity In recent years, the Rose Canyon Fault has received added attention from geologists The fault is a significant structural feature in metropolitan San Diego which includes a series of parallel breaks trending southward from La Jolla Cove through San Diego Bay toward the Mexican border Test trenching along the fault in Rose Canyon indicated that at that location the fault was last active 6,000 to 9,000 years ago More recent work suggests that segments of the fault are younger having been last active 1000 - 2000 years ago Consequently, the fault has been classified as active and included within an Alquist-Pnolo Special Studies Zone established by the State of California Fault zones tabulated in the preceding table are considered most likely to impact the region of the study site during the lifetime of the project The faults are periodically active and capable of generating moderate to locally high levels of ground shaking at the site Ground separation as a result of seismic activity is not expected at the property For design purposes, site specific seismic parameters were determined as part of this investigation in accordance with the California Building Code The following parameters are consistent with the indicated project seismic environment based on site specific study and our experience with similar earth deposits in the vicinity of the project site, and may be utilized for project design work YINJL & MIDDLLTCN tNCiNbLKiNC, INC • 1450 ViHcvnrd Avcmic • Lscondido California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED ADDITION, 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE, CARLSBAD PAGE 5 MAY 17, 2006 TABLE 2 fsiteSoil ^Profile Type So Seismic Zone '.•BiiSrsv- Vj 4 Vseismity Zone .S Facto? ••;*.:•,• • -SiSBSels 04 jiSejsmie-" rHource Type B lilifc*: Seismic Response Coefficienis ' .,: Na 1 0 Nv 1 1 * Ca 044 Cv5:'^ 069 isfif^ 0626 ^i-vfyfr- to 0125 According to Chapter 16, Divisions IV & V of the 200 1 California Building Code A site specific probabilistic estimation of peak ground acceleration was also performed using the FRISKSP (T Blake, 2000) computer program Based upon Boore et al (1997) attenuation relationship, a 10 percent probability of exceedence in 50 years was estimated to produce a site specific peak ground acceleration of 0 35g (Design-Basis Earthquake, DBE) The results were obtained from the corresponding probability of exceedance versus acceleration curve E Geologic Hazards Geologic hazards are not presently indicated at the project site The most significant geologic phenomenon at the property will be those associated with ground shaking in the event of a major seismic event Liquefaction or related ground rupture failures are not anticipated F Laboratory Testing / Results Earth deposits encountered in our exploratory test excavations were closely examined and sampled for laboratory testing Based upon our exploratory test borings and field exposures site soils have been grouped into the following soil types TABLE 3 i"so,lType« 1 2 ';•' " • • • - '' " ''• N" O ~^^ttO^I"lOtlttW ' •*'V^JC1:i.'"'." - '- ": ^b*ite'<^i-> *«" -• •WCOOI I|JIIWII ^•k*^^"V''ij ' • : "•: • : • •'-•' brown silty fine sand (Fill/Terrace Deposit) red-brown fine to medium sand with trace of clay (Terrace Deposit) The following tests were conducted in support of this investigation VINIH & Mini.M.1-TON nNi'ilNP.l-KlNO INC * 2450 X'incyard Avenue • Hscondido C;ililbrnia 92029-1229 • 1'lionc :'7CiO") 743-1214 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED ADDITION, 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE, CARLSBAD PAGE 6 MAY 17, 2006 1 Standard Penetration Test Standard penetration tests (SPT) were performed at the time of bore-hole drilling in accordance with the ASTM standard procedure D-1586, using a mechanical hammer The procedure consisted of a standard 51 MM outside diameter sampler, 457 MM in length and 35 MM in inside diameter using 5-foot long AW drill rods driven with a 140 pounds hammer dropped 30 inches The bore hose was 200 MM (8 inches) in diameter and water or drill fluid was not necessary to aid drilling The test results are indicated at the corresponding locations on the enclosed Boring Logs (Plates 3-4) 2 Grain Size Analysis Gram size analyses were performed on representative samples of Soil Types 1 and 2 The test results are presented in Table 4 TABLE 4 Sieve Size Location B-1 @ 3' B-2 @ 4' Soil Type 1 2 „, %"'.: #10 ||i:#20 T #40 •• .--s^jw, , #200 Percent Passing 100 - 100 *..::•:: - ''V Jrfel.QO :;, " 100 100 100 •• ..r|s».. •k. " "*" 99 82 82 " 'V?0,, ... " 34 ' 3 Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moistuie Content The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of Soil Types 1 and 2 were determined in accordance with ASTM D-1557 The test results are presented in Table 5 TABLE 5 ; • >: ^••<~VJ'."t~f^w'''.^. ^rtoeation**. B-1 @ 3' B-2@4' soil Type* •'•"•'•• 1 2 Maximum Dry Density (Ym-pcf) 1360 1367 :''*SK':'-" ••'A'ffii: OptinStMoisture^L Conterii|[(abpt-%)-.^i3L:" 85 80 Moisture-Density Test (Undisturbed Ring Samples) In-place dry density and moisture content of representative soil deposits beneath the site were determined from relatively undisturbed ring samples using the weights and measurements test method The test results are presented in Table 6 and tabulated on the enclosed Boring Logs YiNii: & Minm.iTON F.NGINIHIKINC; INC • 2450 Vineyard Avenue • liscondido C nlifornia 92029-1229 • Phone •; 760'} 743-1214 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED ADDITION, 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE, CARLSBAD PAGE 7 MAY 17, 2006 TABLE 6 Sample !lHS6ati0ji.J B-1 @ 3' B-1 @ 5' B-2 @ 4' Soil TVer. 1 2 2 j^^miaSii ' •• v* l^^-r^ps^tiil '6 '-*& ^Moisture^ Content (W-%)j 95 11 7 114 ': *^Iiil(ry Density (Yd-pcf),;«| 125 1 121 0 121 8 SBifc'Y.A, ,-< •••••< WiSfiBSftS^S:,; Max Dry1?5 Density Bi^-p?1). 1360 1367 1367 Ratip Of In-Place Dry «? •:..:.'. Dem ity^o^Max^Drg^ Density*' ''''^8t*- ^(Yd/YmxlOO) 7"^ 920 885 891 'Designated as relative compaction for structural fills Minimum required relative compaction for structural fill is 90% unless otherwise specified Expansion Index Test One expansion index test was performed on a representative sample of Soil Type 1 in accordance with the California Building Code Standard 18-2 The test result is presented in Table 7 TABLE 7 Locatio Type"(%).^Expansion Pbtential .. B-1 @ 3'non-expansive non-plastic (u)) = moisture content in percent 6 Direct Shear Test One direct shear test was performed on a representative sample of Soil Type 1 The prepared specimen was soaked overnight, loaded with normal loads of 1, 2, and 4 kips per square foot respectively, and sheared to failure in an undrained condition The test result is presented in Table 8 TABLES •A .?^f- ., .y; ., ... , . ^ain'ple'tl Location B-1 @ 3' • •<%?»• .. sau Type 1 ? Sample "lijuQohdition remolded to 90% of YM @ % coopt Wet Density (Yw-pcf) 1328 AngleffH Int Fnc (0-beg^l 33 Apparent Cohesion t* (c-psf) 45 7 pH and Resistivity Test pH and resistivity of a representative sample of Soil Type 1 was determined using " Method for Estimating the Service Life of Steel Culverts," in accordance with the California Test Method (CTM) 643 The test result is presented in Table 9 VlNjE &' MlDDl.HTON HNijINI-EK ING, I NT: • 2450 \'inc\-;ird Avenue • Hscondido ( alitbrma 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED ADDITION, 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE, CARLSBAD PAGE 8 MAY 17, 2006 TABLE 9 I Sample Location I B-1 @ 3' .?*^°£- : ; Soil Type «? 1 . iSSfi'.,; ,£SSiX .'•>Minimum Resistivity (OHM-CM) 7840 «», £„«%,> 63 8 Sulfate Test A sulfate test was performed on a representative sample of Soil Type 1 in accordance with the California Test Method (CTM) 417 The test result is presented in Table 10 TABLE 10 Sample Location B-1 @ 3' %,HTypJ; ' 1 —ft??;;" ^mounTdi Water Soluble Sulfate ^;% *%yn Soil (% bva/Veight) "" : "" 0001 Chloride Test A chloride test was performed on a representative sample of Soil Type 1 in accordance with the California Test Method (CTM) 422 The test result is presented in Table 11 TABLE 11 . .Sampler-Location? ...SoilJSype B-1 @ 3'1 0009 VI SITE CORROSION ASSESSMENT A site is considered to be corrosive to foundation elements, walls and drainage structures if one or more of the following conditions exists * Sulfate concentration is greater than or equal to 2000 ppm (0 2% by weight) * Chloride concentration is greater than or equal to J>00 ppm (0 05 % by weight) * pH is less than 55 For structural elements, the minimum resistivity of soil (or water) indicate the relative quantity of soluble salts present in the soil (or water) In general, a minimum resistivity value for soil (or water) less than 1000 ohm-cm indicates the presence of high quantities of soluble salts and a higher propensity for corrosion Appropriate corrosion mitigation measures for corrosive conditions should be selected depending on the service environment, amount of aggressive ion salts (chloride or sulfate), pH levels and the desired service life of the structure VINIL &' MiDDLinoN I:NGIM;I;KIN<.; JNC ..* 2450 Vincy;irJ A\vmu- • Escondido California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-12J4 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED ADDITION, 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE, CARLSBAD PAGE 9 MAY 17, 2006 Laboratory test results performed on selected representative site samples indicated that the minimum resistivity is greater than 1000 ohm-cm suggesting presence of low quantities of soluble salts Test results further indicated that pH is greater than 5 5, sulfate concentration is less than 2000 ppm, and chloride concentration is less than 500 ppm Based on the results of the corrosion analyses, the project site is considered non-corrosive The project site is not located within 1000 feet of salt or brackish water Based upon the result of the tested soil sample, the amount of water soluble sulfate (SO4) was found to be 0 001 percent by weight which is considered negligible according to the California Building Code Table No 19-A-4 Portland cement Type II may be used Table 12 is appropriate based on the pH-Resistivity test result TABLE 12 Design Soil : -10 1 Years to Perforation of Steel Culverts 22 28 35 I 48 | 61 74 VII CONCLUSIONS Based upon the foregoing investigation, development of the study location for a new addition is feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint The site is underlain by stable Terrace Deposits that will provide adequate support for the new structures Adverse geologic conditions which could preclude the planned addition were not indicated at the property The following factors are unique to the property and will most impact project development and associated costs from a geotechnical viewpoint * Existing site fills at the project construction site occur in a loose condition and are not suitable for structural support Underlying Terrace Deposits are suitably dense and will provide good support for the proposed structures and compacted fills *.. Removal and recompaction of the site existing upper loose fill deposits will be necessary in order to construct stable ground surfaces for the support of the proposed addition as recommended below Estimated soil removal depths based upon data generated during this study at the locations explored are given in the following sections * Site undisturbed Terrace deposits and new well-compacted fills are expected to exhibit similar engineering characteristics Consequently, added removals of undisturbed Terrace deposits below the foundation depths, and reconstruction with compacted fills to alleviate cut-fill or non-uniform bearing soil transition, is currently not indicated ViMb & Mmm.i:.TON INC: • 2450 Vmevard Avenue • Oscondido, California 92029- 1 229 •- Phone i. 760) 743-I2I4 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 10 PROPOSED ADDITION, 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE, CARLSBAD MAY 17, 2006 A modest slope nearly 10 feet high at % 1 gradient supported at the toe with a short retaining wall occurs near the planned addition (see Geologic Cross-Section, Plate 5) The new building foundations should be adequately deepened and stepped as necessary to avoid surcharging the adjacent slopes and wall as specified below Slope stability is not expected to be a major geotechnical concern in connection with the construction of the new addition provided our earthworks and foundation recommendations are followed Final grades are expected at or very near the existing grades and major grade alterations are not anticipated, and on-site earthworks construction will chiefly consist of removals and recompaction remedial grading operations Site soils predominantly con&ist of sandy granular, very low to non-expansive materials which typically work well as compacted fills Final bearing soils are anticipated to consist primarily of sandy to silty sand (SP/SM) deposits with very low expansion potential (expansion index less than 21) according to the California Building Code classification (Table 18A-I-B) Actual classification and expansion characteristics of the finish grade soil mix can only be provided in the final as-graded compaction report based upon proper testing of bearing soils when rough finish grades are achieved Added care will be required to avoid any damages to the nearby existing slopes, walls, structures and improvements due to earthwork grading and construction works Temporary construction surcharging of the adjacent slopes and walls should not be allowed Undermining of the existing adjacent structure due to soils removals shall also be disallowed as discussed in the following sections Site remedial grading and proposed reconstruction will not geotechnically impact the adjacent properties provided our recommendations are incorporated into the final designs and implemented during the construction phase Added field recommendations, however, may also be necessary and should be given by the project geotechnical consultant for the protection of adjacent properties and should be anticipated Natural groundwater is not expected to impact project grading or the long term stability of the developed lot Adequate site surface drainage control is a critical factor in the future stability of the developed property as planned Drainage facilities should be designed and installed for proper control and disposal of surface run-off Post construction total and differential settlements are not expected to be a factor in the redevelopment of the project site provided our remedial grading and foundation recommendations are incorporated into Ihe design and construction of the project V'INIK & MII.HH.LTON IiisViiSTP.Ki.NG INC • 2450 VmevLird Avenue • F.scondido California 92029-1229 • Phone ''760': 743-1214 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 11 PROPOSED ADDITION, 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE, CARLSBAD MAY 17, 2006 Minor cracking and separations may be anticipated between the new building addition and existing slabs/foundations planned to lemam Improvements to such normal features for this type of construction can be made by tying the existing building to the new addition as recommended in the following sections * Liquefaction and seismically induced settlements will not be a factor in the redevelopment of the project site * Soil collapse will not be a factor in redevelopmenl of the study site provided our remedial grading recommendations are followed VIII RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are consistent with the indicated geotechnical conditions at the project site and should be reflected in final plans and implemented during the construction phase Added or modified recommendations may also be appropriate and can be provided at the final plan review phase A Remedial Grading and Earthworks Remedial grading techniques may be used in order to achieve final design grades and construct safe and stable surfaces for the support of the new structure All grading and earthworks should be completed in accordance with Appendix Chapter 33 of the California Building Code, City of Carlsbad Grading Ordinances, the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction and the requirements of the following sections wherever applicable 1 Cleaning and Grubbing Surface vegetation, trash, deleterious matters, and construction debris generated from the demolition of existing structures and improvements, as well as other unsuitable materials should be removed from the areas proposed for support of the structure and improvements plus 3 feet outside the perimeter, where possible, and as, directed in the field Trash, vegetation and construction debris shall not be allowed to occur or contaminate new site fills Existing underground structures, pipes and utilities should be pot-holed, identified and marked prior to the actual remedial grading work In the event of a conflict between the specified removal depths and existing underground utility lines to remain, additional recommendations should be given by the project geotechnical engineer in the field based on actual conditions &• MIDDI.I-: TON ENGINI-.HKINC,, INC • 2450 Vinev.id Avenue • Escondido California 92029-1229 • Phone ; 760; 743-1214 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 12 PROPOSED ADDITION, 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE, CARLSBAD MAY 17, 2006 All irrigation lines should be properly removed from the construction areas Abandoned irrigation lines should be properly capped and sealed off to prevent any future water infiltrations into the foundation bearing and subgrade soils Voids created by the removals of the abandoned underground pipes and structures should be properly backfilled with compacted fills in accordance with the requirements of this report Prepared ground should be inspected and approved by the project geotechnical engineer or his designated field representative prior to grading 2 Removals and Over-excavation The most effective method to mitigate the existing upper loose fills will utilize removal and recompaction remedial grading techniques Upper loose soils in the areas of the property planned for the support of new addition plus 3 feet outside the perimeter, where possible and as directed in the field, should be removed to the underlying dense Terrace Deposit units as approved by the project geotechnical engineer, and recompacted Approximate removal depths are expected to be on the order of 2Vz to 4 feet below existing ground surfaces Locally deeper removals may be necessary based upon actual field exposures and should be anticipated The bottom of all removals should be additionally ripped, prepared and recompacted as part of the remedial grading work to a minimum depth of 6 inches Bottom of all removals should be inspected and approved by the project geotechnical engineer or his designated field representative 3 Temporary Construction Slopes Excavations and removals adjacent to the existing structures/foundations and improvements should be performed under inspection of the project geotechnical engineer Undermining existing structures/improvements and underground utilities to remain should not be allowed by the removal operations Temporary construction slopes should maintain adequate set-backs from the existing slructures and improvements as directed in the field and laid back at 1 1 gradient maximum Elsewhere, construction slopes less than 3 feet high maximum may be constructed at near vertical gradients unless otherwise directed in the field Construction slopes greater than 3 feet and less than 10 feet may be constructed at near vertical gradients within the lower 3 feet, and laid back at 1 1 gradient within the upper portions Temporary trench and construction slopes greater than 3 feet maximum constructed at near vertical gradients will require shoring/trench shield support, unless otherwise approved YINJF. & MIDI.ILI-TON HNGINLLIRING, INC • 2450 Vineyard Avenue • Kscondido California 92029-1229 • Phone (760"; 743-1214 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 13 PROPOSED ADDITION, 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE, CARLSBAD MAY 17, 2006 The remaining wedge of soil exposed at the laid back temporary slopes should then be properly benched out and new fills/backfills tightly keyed-m as the backfilling progresses All temporary construction slopes require continuous geotechnical inspections during the construction operations Additional recommendations including revised slope gradients, setbacks and the need for temporary shoring/trench shield support should be given at that time as necessary The project contractor shall also obtain appropriate permits, as needed, and conform to Cal-OSHA and local governing agencies' requirements for trenching/open excavations and safety of the workmen during construction Fill Materials, Shrinkage, Import Soils and Compaction Soils generated from on-site excavations will be suitable for reuse as new compacted fills All trash, deleterious matter, irrigation pipes, debris, roots and organic materials should be thoroughly separated from the soil and properly disposed of to the satisfaction of the project geotechnical engineer Upper site fills may also be expected to shrink nearly 5% to 15% on volume basis when compacted to at least 90% of the corresponding maximum dry density Import soils, if required to complete grading and achieve final design grades, should be sandy granular non-corrosive deposits (SM/SW) with very low expansion potential (100% passing %-inch sieve, more than 50% passing #4 sieve and less than 20% passing #200 sieve with expansion index less than 21) Import soils should be inspected, tested as necessary, and approved by the project geotechnical engineer prior to delivery to the site Import soils should also meet or exceed engineering characteristic and soil design parameters as specified in the following sections Project fills and backfills shall be clean deposits free of vegetation, trash, debris, organic materials, deleterious matter, and larger than 6 inches rock sizes, as approved in the field by the project geotechnical consultant or his designated field representative Uniform bearing soil conditions should be constructed at the site by the remedial grading operations Site fills and backfills should be adequately processed, moisture conditioned to slightly (2%) above optimum levels, thoroughly mixed, placed in thin (8 inches maximum) uniform horizontal lifts and mechanically compacted to a minimum 90% of the corresponding laboratory maximum dry density (ASTM D-1557), unless otherwise specified Surface Drainage and Erosion Control A critical element to the continued stability of the graded building pads is an adequate surface drainage system Surface and storm water shall not be allowed to impact the regraded construction and improvement site Building pad surface run-off should be VINJH. & MiDULiiTON KNiiiNiii-kiNT, INC • 2450 Vineyard Avenue • Hscondido California 92029-1229 • Phone : /60) 743-1214 I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 14 PROPOSED ADDITION, 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE. CARLSBAD MAY 17, 2006 coljected and directed away from the planned buildings, top of slope and improvements to a selected location in a controlled manner Area drains should be installed Temporary erosion control facilities and silt fences should be installed during the construction phase periods and until landscaping is fully established as indicated and specified on the approved project grading/erosion plans Engineering Inspections All grading operations including removals, suitability of earth deposits used as compacted fill, and compaction procedures should be continuously inspected and tested by the project geotechnical consultant and presented in the final as-graded compaction report The nature of finished subgrade soils should also be confirmed in the final compaction report at the completion of grading Geotechnical engineering inspections shall include but not limited to the following * Initial Inspection - After the grading/brushing limits have been staked but before grading/brushing starts * Bottom of over-excavation inspection - After the competent Terrace deposits is exposed and prepared to receive fill, but before fill is placed * Excavation inspection - After the excavation is started but before the vertical depth of excavation is more than 3 feet Local and Cal-OSHA safety requirements for open excavations apply * Fill/backfill Inspection - After the fill/backfill placement is started but before the vertical height of fill exceeds 2 feet A minimum of one test shall be required for each 100 lineal feet maximum in every 2 feet vertical gam with the exception of wall backfills where a minimum of one test shall be required for each 25 lineal feet maximum Wall backfills shall also be mechanically compacted to at least 90% compaction levels unless otherwise specified Finished rough grades and final pad grade tests shall be required regardless of fill thickness * Foundation trench inspection - After the foundation trench excavations but before steel placement * Foundation bearing / slab subgrade soils inspection - Prior to the placement of concrete for proper moisture and specified compaction levels YINII: & MinPi.hiOK KNV.INITKINC INC • 2450 Vmovaivl Avenue • Escondido California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 15 PROPOSED ADDITION, 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE, CARLSBAD MAY 17, 2006 * Geotechnical foundation / slab steel inspection - After the steel placement is completed but before the scheduled concrete pour * Wall back dram inspection - After the trench excavations but during the actual placement All material shall conform to the project material specifications and approved by the project geotechnical engineer * Underground utility/plumbing trench inspection - After the trench excavations but before installation of the underground facilities Local and Cal-OSHA safety requirements for open excavations apply Inspection of the pipe bedding may also be required by the project geotechnical engineer * Underground utility / plumbing trench backfill inspection - After the backfill placement is started above the pipe zone but before the vertical height of backfill exceeds 2 feet Testing of the backfill within the pipe zone may also be required by the governing agencies Pipe bedding and backfill materials shall conform to the governing agencies' requirements and project soils report, if applicable All trench backfills shall be mechanically compacted to a minimum 90% compaction levels unless otherwise specified Plumbing trenches over 12 inches deep maximum under the interior floor slabs should also be mechanically compacted and tested for a minimum 90% compaction levels Flooding or jetting techniques as a means of compaction method shall not be allowed * Improvements subgrade inspections - Prior to the placement of concrete for proper moisture and specified compaction levels B Footings and Slab-on-Grade Foundations The following recommendations are consistent with very low expansive (expansion index less than 21} sandy to silty sand (SP/SM) foundation bearing soils and site specific geotechnical conditions Additional recommendations may also be required and should be given at the plan review phase All design recommendations should be further confirmed and/or revised as necessary at the completion of rough grading based on the expansion characteristics of the foundation bearing soils and as-graded site geotechnical conditions, and presented in the final as-graded compaction report 1 Continuous strip stem wall and turned-down footings should be sized at least 15 inches wide and a minimum of 18 inches deep for single and two-story structures Isolated pad footings should be at least 24 inches square and 12 inches deep Footing depths are measured from the lowest adjacent ground YlNIi: &. Mmni.FTON I;N(.;INI;I;KIKG INC • 2450 Vmev;ird Avenue • Escondido California 92029-1220 • Phone : 760} 743-1214 I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 16 PROPOSED ADDITION, 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE, CARLSBAD MAY 17, 2006 surface, not including the sand/gravel beneath floor slabs Exterior continuous stem wall foundation and turned-down footings should enclose the entire building perimeter Continuous interior and exterior stem wall foundations should be reinforced by at least four #4 reinforcing bars Place a minimum of two #4 bars 3 inches above the bottom of the footing and a minimum of two #4 bars 3 inches below the top of the stem wall Turned-down footings should be reinforced with a minimum of two #4 bars at the top and two #4 bars at the bottom Reinforcement details for spread pad footings should be provided by the project architect/structural engineer . Existing footings should be tied near the top and bottom to the new adjacent footings with a minimum 18 inches long #4 dowels at 18 inches on centers maximum with 6 inches deep drill and epoxy giout to existing footings and 12 inches into new footings New slabs adjacent to existing footings/slabs should also be provided with a minimum 15 inches wide by 18 inches deep thickened edge reinforced with minimum 1-#4 bar top and bottom and tied with #4 dowels as specified 2 New foundations should not be allowed to surcharge the nearby over- steepened slope and lower short wall For this purpose and in order to alleviate adverse impacts of an open excavation parallel with the footing, portions of the foundation near the adjacent slope should be adequately deepened so that the bottom of the footing is 9 inches below a projected plane having a upward slope of 1-unit vertical to 2-units horizontal (50%) from the base of the lower wall or toe of slope, as typically shown on the enclosed Geologic Cross-Section (Plate 5) Foundations can be stepped up as the distance of the building to the top of slope increases until a minimum of 18 inches foundation depths are achieved as specified herein Foundations shall be stepped so that both top and bottom of such foundations are level Individual steps in continuous footings shall not exceed 18 inches in height, and the slope of a series of such steps shall not exceed 1-unit vertical to 2 units horizontal (50%) unless otherwise specified The steps shall be detailed on the structural drawings The local effects due to the discontinuity of the steps shall also be considered in the design of foundations as appropriate and applicable 3 All interior slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches in thickness reinforced with #3 reinforcing bars spaced 18 inches on center each way placed mid-height in the slab Slabs should be underlain by 4 inches of clean sand (SE 30 or VlNjr. & Minni RON hNGlNr.r.KINC, INC • 245(1 Vincvard Avenue • Escondido California 92029-1229 • Phone ; 760'> 743-1214 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 17 PROPOSED ADDITION, 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE. CARLSBAD MAY 17, 2006 greater) which is provided with a well performing moisture barrier/vapor retardant (minimum 10-mil plastic) placed mid-height in the sand Provide "softcut" contraction/control joints consisting of sawcuts spaced 10 feet on centers each way for all interior slabs Cut as soon as the slab will support the weight of the saw and operate without disturbing the final finish which is normally within 2 hours after final finish at each control joint location or 150 psi to 800 psi The sawcuts should be a minimum of 1-inch in depth but should not exceed 1%-mches deep maximum Anti-ravel skid plates should be used and replaced with each blade to avoid spallmg and raveling Avoid wheeled equipments across cuts for at least 24 hours Provide re-entrant corner reinforcement for all interior slabs Re-entrant corners will depend on slab geometry and/or interior column locations The enclosed Plate 7 may be used as a general guideline 4 Foundation trenches and slab subgrade soils should be inspected and tested for proper moisture and specified compaction levels and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to the placement of concrete C Exterior Concrete Slabs / Flatworks 1 All exterior slabs (walkways, and patios) should be a minimum of 4 inches in thickness reinforced with 6x6/10x10 welded wiie mesh carefully placed mid- height in the slab There should be a minimum 12 inches of 90% compacted fills beneath all exterior slabs 2 Provide "tool joint" or "softcut" contraction/control joints spaced 10 feet on center (not to exceed 12 feet maximum) each way Tool or cut as soon as the slab will support weight and can be operated without disturbing the final finish which is normally within 2 hours after final finish at each control joint location or 150 psi to 800 psi Tool or softcuts should be a minimum of 1-inch but should not exceed 11/4-mches deep maximum In case of softcut joints, anti-ravel skid plates should be used and replaced with each blade to avoid spallmg and raveling Avoid wheeled equipments across cuts for at least 24 hours 3 All exterior slab designs should be confirmed in the final as-graded compaction report 4 Subgrade soils should be tested for proper moisture and specified compaction levels and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to the placement of concrete JVIiDOiJ.-. ION h-Ni.iNhLKiNC. INC • 2450 Ymevard Avenue • HsconJido California 92029-1229 • Phone {760, 743-1214 I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 18 PROPOSED ADDITION, 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE, CARLSBAD MAY 17, 2006 D Soil Design Parameters The following soil design parameters are based upon tested representative samples of on-site earth deposits All parameters should be re-evaluated when the characteristics of the final as-graded soils have been specifically determined * Design wet density of soil = 133 pcf * Design angle of internal friction of soil = 33 degrees * Design active soil pressure for retaining structures = 39 pcf-(EFP), level backfill, cantilever, unrestrained walls * Design at-rest soil pressure for retaining structures = 61 pcf (EFP), non-yielding, restrained walls * Design passive soil resistance for retaining structures = 450 pcf (EFP), level surface at the toe * Design coefficient of friction for concrete on soils = 0 40 * Net allowable foundation pressure (minimum 15 inches wide by 18 inches deep footings) = 2000 psf * Allowable lateral bearing pressure (all structures except retaining walls) = 200 psf/ft Notes * Use a minimum safety factor of 1 5 for wall over-turning and sliding stability However, because large movements must take place before maximum passive resistance can be developed, a minimum safety factor of 2 may be considered for sliding stability particularly where sensitive structures and improvements are planned near or on top of retaining/basement walls * When combining, passive pressure and frictional resistance the passive component should be reduced by one-third * The indicated net allowable foundation pressure provided herein was determined based on a minimum 15 inches wide by 18 inches deep footings and may be increased by 20% for each additional foot of depth and 20% for each additional foot of width to a maximum of 4500 psf The allowable foundation pressures provided herein also apply to dead plus live loads and may be increased by one-third for wind and seismic loading * The lateral bearing earth pressures may be increased by the amount of designated value for each additional foot of depth to a maximum 1500 pounds per square foot VINII- & Minni.i-IVN ENC.INIMIKINI; INC • 2450 Ytnevard Avenue • IZscondido Calttornia 92029-1229 • Phone (TOO) 743-1214 I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 19 PROPOSED ADDITION. 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE. CARLSBAD MAY 17, 2006 E General Recommendations 1 The minimum foundation design and steel reinforcement provided herein are based on soil characteristics and are not intended to be in lieu of reinforcement necessary for structural considerations 2 Adequate staking and grading control is a critical factor in properly completing the recommended remedial and site grading operations Grading control and staking should be provided by the project grading contractor or surveyor/civil engineer, and is beyond the geotechnical engineering services Inadequate staking and/or lack of grading control may result in unnecessary additional grading which will increase construction costs 3 Footings located on or adjacent to the top of slopes should be extended to a sufficient depth to provide a minimum horizontal distance of 7 feet or one-third of the slope height, whichever is greater (need not exceed 40 feet maximum) between the bottom edge of the footing and face of slope unless otherwise specified This requirement applies to all improvements and structures including fences, posts, pools, spas, etc Concrete and AC improvements should be provided with a thickened edge to satisfy this requirement 4 Open or backfilled trenches parallel with a footing shall not be below a projected plane having a downward slope of 1-unit vertical to 2 units horizontal (50%) from a line 9 inches above the bottom edge of the footing and not closer than 18 inches form the face of such footing 5 Where pipes cross under footings, the footings shall be specially designed Pipe sleeves shall be provided where pipes cross through footings or footing walls, and sleeve clearances shall provide for possible footing settlement but not less than 1-inch all around the pipe 6 Expansive clayey soils should not be used for backfilling of any retaining structure All retaining walls should be provided with a 1 1 wedge of granular, compacted backfill measured from the base of the wall footing to the finished surface and a well-constructed back drainage as typically shown on the enclosed Plate 8 7 All underground utility and plumbing trenches should be mechanically compacted to a minimum 90% of the maximum dry density of the soil unless otherwise specified Care should be taken not to crush the utilities or pipes during the compaction of the soil Non-expansive, granular backfill soils should be used Trench backfill materials and compaction beneath pavements within the public right-of-way shall conform to the City of Carlsbad requirements VINJI: & MiuoLbTON HMJINCUKING INC • 2450 Vineyard Avenue • Bcondido California 92029-1220 • Phone '760! 743-1214 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 20 PROPOSED ADDITION, 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE, CARLSBAD MAY 17, 2006 8 Site drainage over the finished pad surfaces should flow away from structures onto the street in a positive manner Care should be taken during the construction, improvements, and fine grading phases not to disrupt the designed drainage patterns Roof lines of the buildings should be provided with roof gutters Roof water should be collected and directed away from the buildings and structures to a suitable location 9 Final plans should reflect preliminary recommendations given in this report Final foundations and grading plans may also be reviewed by the project geotechnical consultant for conformance with the requirements of the geotechnical investigation report outlined herein More specific recommendations may be necessary and should be given when final grading and architectural/structural drawings are available 10 All foundation trenches should be inspected to ensure adequate footing embedment and confirm competent bearing soils Foundation and slab reinforcements should also be inspected and approved by the project geotechnical consultant 11 The amount of shrinkage and related cracks that occurs in the concrete slab- on-grades, flatworks and driveways depend on many factors the most important of which is the amount of water in the concrete mix The purpose of the slab reinforcement is to keep normal concrete shrinkage cracks closed tightly The amount of concrete shrinkage can be minimized by reducing the amount of water in the mix To keep shrinkage to a minimum the following should be considered * Use the stiffest mix that can be handled and consolidated satisfactorily * Use the largest maximum size of aggregate that is practical For example, concrete made with 3/a-mch maximum size aggregate usually requires about 40-lbs more (nearly 5-gal) water per cubic yard than concrete with 1-inch aggregate * Cure the concrete as long as practical The amount of slab reinforcement provided for conventional slab-on-grade construction considers that good quality concrete materials, proportioning, craftsmanship, and control tests where appropriate and applicable are provided 12 A preconstruction meeting between representatives of this office, the property owner or planner, city inspector as well as the grading contractor/builder is recommended in order to discuss grading/construction details associated with site development YiN'li & Minni.noN HNGINLI'HINI; INC • 2450 Vmcvad Avenue • l-seonJido California 92029-1229 • Phone (760; 743-I2I4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 21 PROPOSED ADDITION, 11185 TAMARACK AVENUE, CARLSBAD MAY 17, 2006 IX LIMITATIONS The conclusions and recommendations provided herein have been based on available data obtained from the review of pertinent reports and plans, subsurface exploratory excavations as well as our experience with the soils and formational materials located in the general area The materials encountered on the project site and utilized in our laboratory testing are believed representative of the total area, however, earth materials may vary in characteristics between excavations Of necessity we must assume a certain degree of continuity between exploratory excavations and/or natural exposures It is necessary, therefore, that all observations, conclusions, and recommendations be verified during the grading operation In the event discrepancies are noted, we should be contacted immediately so that an inspection can be made and additional recommendations issued if required The recommendations made in this report are applicable to the site at the time this report was prepared It is the responsibility of the owner/developer to ensure that these recommendations are carried out in the field It is almost impossible to predict with certainty the future performance of a property The future behavior of the site is also dependent on numerous unpredictable variables, such as earthquakes, rainfall, and on-site drainage patterns The firm of VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC , shall not be held responsible for changes to the physical conditions of the property such as addition of fill soils, added cut slopes, or changing drainage patterns which occur withoul our inspection or control The property owner(s) should be aware that the development of cracks in all concrete surfaces such as floor slabs and exterior stucco are associated with normal concrete shrinkage during the curing process These features depend chiefly upon the condition of concrete and weather conditions at the time of construction and do not reflect detrimental ground movement Hairline stucco cracks will often develop at window/door corners, and floor surface cracks up to Vs-mch wide in 20 feet may develop as a result of normal concrete shrinkage (according to the American Concrete Institute) This report should be considered valid for a period of one year and is subject to review by our firm following that time If significant modifications are made to your tentative development plan, especially with respect to the height and location of cut and fill slopes, this report must be presented to us for review and possible revision This report is issued with the understanding that the owner or his representative is responsible to ensure that the information and recommendations are provided to the project architect/structural engineer so that they can be incorporated into the plans Necessary steps shall be taken to ensure that the project general contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations during construction V'IMI. i\- Mu.n.iLi-iTON ENGINLHKIKG IM. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue • EsconJicIo California 92029-1229 • Phono ;760'; 743-1214 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED ADDITION, 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE, CARLSBAD PAGE 22 MAY 17, 2006 The project soils engineer should be provided with the opportunity for a general review of the project final design plans and specifications in order to ensure that the recommendations provided in this report are property interpreted and implemented The project soils engineer should also be provided the opportunity to verify the foundations prior the placing of concrete If the project soils engineer is not provided the opportunity of making these reviews, he can assume no responsibility for misinterpretation of his recommendations Vmje & Middleton Engineering, Inc , warrants that this report has been prepared within the limits prescribed by our client with the usual thoroughness and competence of the engineering profession No other warranty or representation, either expressed or implied, is included or intended Once again, should any questions arise concerning this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office Reference to our Job #06-229-P will help to expedite our response to your inquiries We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC Dennis Middleton CEG #980 hdi S Shari 6174CEG 980 Z CERTIFIED ENGINEERING CERTIFIED ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST Steven J Melzer CEG #2362 DM/SMSS/SJM/jt Distribution Addressee Kenneth A Prudy Architect (3) c /jt/myfiles/06prelims/06-229-P VISIT. & MlUDLLTON Esc.INLLUINO, INC • 2450 Vineyard Avenue • liscondido California 92029-1229 • Phone (760; 743-1214 © 2OO2 DoUorme Topo USA <B> Data copyright of content owner www delorme com $ 3o £ O CDCQ O O = O CD 3cn cfa o mx "0 TAMARACK o> o Dm enO o O CT r>o l\3 COs CD 1^333oi Q cSg3> S coo > m 33 D O > > £Q a^ ^ o m o m CO m -D > m PRIMARY DIVISIONS GROUP SYMBOL SECONDARY DIVISIONS 3 5co QUJ DC CD UJ CO 5< < DC o LU O < W s o LL Z LU 0 z b!u_ < co <* 21 DC LU Z UJ CO^ O z 5 ^DC CO GRAVELS MORE THAN HALF OF COARSE FRACTION IS LARGER THAN NO 4 SIEVE SANDS MORE THAN HALF OF COARSE FRACTION IS SMALLER THAN NO 4 SIEVE CLEAN GRAVELS (LESS THAN 5% FINES) GW Well graded gravels gravel sand mixtures little or no fines GP Poorly graded gravels or gravel sand mixtures little or no fines GRAVEL WITH FINES GM Silty gravels gravel sand silt mixtures non plastic fines GC Clayey gravels gravel sand clay mixtures plastic fines CLEAN SANDS (LESS THAN 5% FINES) sw Well graded sands gravelly sands little or no fines SP Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands little or no fines SANDS WITH FINES SM Silty sands sand silt mixtures non plastic fines sc Clayey sands sand clay mixtures plastic fines CO LU rr y ML_ CO UJ CO Q ICOCO Z ^ _ (—i SILTS AND CLAYS LIQUID LIMIT IS LESS THAN 50% Inorganic silts and very fine sands rock flour silty or clayey fine sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity gravelly clays sandy clays silty clays lean clays OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity DC CJ LU UJ DCrr uj SILTS AND CLAYS LIQUID LIMIT IS GREATER THAN 50% MH Inorganic silts micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils elastic silts CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity fat clays OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity organic silts HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat and other highly organic soils GRAIN SIZES u s STANDARD SERIES SIEVE 200 40 10 CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENINGS 3/4 3 12 SILTS AND CLAYS SAND FINE MEDIUM COARSE GRAVEL FINE COARSE COBBLES BOULDERS RELATIVE DENSITY CONSISTENCY SANDS, GRAVELS AND NON PLASTIC SILTS VERY LOOSE LOOSE MEDIUM DENSE DENSE VERY DENSE BLOWS/FOOT 0 4 4 10 10 30 30 50 OVER 50 CLAYS AND PLASTIC SILTS VERY SOFT SOFT FIRM STIFF VERY STIFF HARD STRENGTH 0 % V. '/! '/! 1 1 2 2 4 OVER 4 BLOWS/FOOT 0 2 2 4 4 8 8 16 16 32 OVER 32 1 Blow count 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches on 2 inch O D split spoon sampler (ASTM D 1 586) 2 Unconfmed compressive strength per SOILTEST pocket penetroimeter CL 700 V Sand Cone Test Chunk Sample | Bulk Sample | O Driven Rings 246 = Standard Penetration Test (SPT) (ASTM D 1586) with blow counts per 6 inches 246 = California Sampler with blow counts per 6 inches VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC 2450 Vineyard Ave , #102 Escondido, CA 92029-1229 KEY TO EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D-2487) PROJECT NO KEY BORING LOG B-1 DEPTH FT - 0 - - 5 - - 10- - 15- - 20- SAMPLE om 710 o 712 876 Description FILL Silty sand Brown color Slightly moist Loose to dense Color changes to red-brown at 2' ST-1 TERRACE DEPOSIT Sandstone Fine to medium grained Trace of clay Red-brown color Weathered Friable Moderately cemented Medium dense No apparent structure ST-2 Lense of clean medium sand at 101/2' Brown - weakly cemented Friable ST-1 End Boring at 111/2' No Caving No Groundwater uses SYMBOL SM SP SW MOISTURE (%) 95 11 7 t1 •• PROJECT 1 1 85 TAMARACK AVENUE. CARLSBAD Project Drill, Si No 06-229-P Date Drilled 5-2-06 Lo< imple Method Truck-mounted rotary drill 8" Hollow-stem Au 140-lb Hammer, 30" drop - Rope & Cathead jged By ger 5' AW re SJM ds DRY DENSITY (PCF) 1251 121 0 RELATIVE COMPACTION (%) 920 885 Bulk Sample • Ring Sample O SPT Sample || Sand Cone Test T PLATE 3 VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC BORING LOG B-2 DEPTH FT - 0 - - 5 - - 10- - 15- - 20- SAMPLE 01 1216 7912 Description FILL Silty fine sand Brown color Slightly moist Loose ST-1 TERRACE DEPOSIT Sandstone Fine to medium grained Trace of clay Red-brown color Weathered Friable Moderately cemented Medium dense to dense No apparent structure ST-2 End Boring at 91/2' No Caving No Groundwater uses SYMBOL SM SP MOISTURE (%) 11 4 PROJECT 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE. CARLSBAD Project Drill, S< No 06-229-P Date Drilled 5-2-06 Lo< imple Method Truck-mounted rotary drill 8" Hollow-stem Au 140-lb Hammer, 30" drop - Rope & Cathead jged By gei 51 AW re SJM ids DRY DENSITY (PCF) 121 8 RELATIVE COMPACTION (%) 891 Bulk Sample • Ring Sample O SPT Sample || Sand Cone Test T PLATE 4 VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PLATES T - 0 -10 - PROPOSED TWO- STORY ADDITION -10 Scale 1"=10' NOTE See Soils Report for Bearing & Subgrade Soils Remedial Grading Earthworks V&M Job #06-229-P MILES I I I I I FAULT - EPICENTER MAP SAN DIEGO COUNTY REGION INDICATED EARTHQUAKE EVENTS THROUGH 75 YEAR PERIOD (1900-1974) Map data is compiled from various sources including California Division of Mines and Geology, California Institude of Technology and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Map is reproduced from California Division of Mines and Geology, "Earthquake Epicenter Map of California, Map Sheet 39 " Earthquake Magnitude 40 TO 49 • 1 1 O 50 TO 59 0 60 TO 69 O 70 TO 79 Fault PROJECT PLATE Job #06-229-P 1185 TAMARACK AVENUE. CARLSBAD. BSQLATBON JOINTS AIND RE-ENTRANT CORNER RE8NFQRCEEVJENT Typical - no scale CONTRACTION JOINTS RE-ENTRANT CORNER—* REINFORCEMENT NO 4 BARS PLACED 1 5" BELOW TOP OF SLAB RE-ENTRANT CORNER CRACK NOTES 1 Isolation pints around the columns should be either circular as shown in (a) or diamond shaped as shown in (b) If no isolation joints are used around columns, or if the corners of the isolation joints do not meet the contraction joints, radial cracking as shown in (c)may occur (reference ACI) 2 In order to control cracking at the re-entrant corners (±270° corners), provide reinforcement as shown in (c) 3 Re-entrant corner reinforcement shown herein is provided as a general guideline only and is subject to verification and changes by the project architect and/or structural engineer based upon slab geometry, location, and other engineering and construction factors VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC PLATE 7 RETAINING WALL DRAIN DETAIL Typical - no scale Granular, non-expansive backfill Compacted Waterproofing Perforated dram pipe drainage Filter Material Crushed rock (wrapped in filter fabric) or Class 2 Permeable Material (see specifications below) Competent, approved soils or bedrock SPECIFICATIONS FQRCA1.TRANS CLASS 2 PiRMiASte MATERIAL (68-1 026) U.S STANDARD SIEVE SIZE % PASSING 1" 3/4 3/8 No 4 No 8 Mo 30 No 50 No 200 100 90-100 40-100 25-40 18-33 5-15 0-7 0-3 Sand Equivalent > 75 CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS 1 Provide granular non-expansive backfill soil in 1 1 gradient wedge behind wall Compact backfill to minimum 90% of laboratory standard 2 Provide back drainage for wall to prevent build-up of hydrostatic pressures Use drainage openings along base of wall or back dram system as outlined below 3 Backdrain should consist of 4" diameter PVC pipe (Schedule 40 or equivalent) with perforations down Dram to suitable outlet at minimum 1% Provide %" - 1V4" crushed gravel filter wrapped in filter fabric (Mirafi 140N or equivalent) Delete filter fabric wrap if Caltrans Class 2 permeable material is used Compact Class 2 material to minimum 90% of laboratory standard 4 Seal back of wall with waterproofing in accordance with architect's specifications 5 Provide positive drainage to disallow ponding of water above wall Lined drainage ditch to minimum 2% flow away from wall is recommended * Use VA cubic foot per foot with granular backfill soil and 4 cubic foot per foot if expansive backfill soil is used VINJE: & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. PLATE 8 REFERENCES Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Section 4 - Construction, Volume 04 08 Soil And Rock (I), D 420-05611,2005 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Section 4 - Construction, Volume 04 09 Soil And Rock (II), D 5714-Latest, 2005 Highway Design Manual, Caltrans Fifth Edition Corrosion Guidelines, Caltrans, Version 1 0, September 2003 California Building Code, Volumes 1 & 2, International Conference of Building Officials, 2001 "Green Book" Standard Specifications For Public Works Construction, Public Works Standards, Inc , BNi Building News, 2003 Edition California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (California Geological Survey), 1997, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, DMG Special Publication 117, 71 p California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (California Geological Survey), 1986 (revised), Guidelines for Preparing Engineering Geology Reports DMG Note 44 California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (California Geological Survey), 1986 (revised), Guidelines to Geologic and Seismic Reports DMG Note 42 EQFAULT, Ver 3 00, 1997, Deterministic Estimation of Peak Acceleration from Digitized Faults, Computer Program, T Blake Computer Services And Software EQSEARCH, Ver 3 00, 1997, Estimation of Peak Acceleration from California Earthquake Catalogs, Computer Program, T Blake Computer Services And Software Tan S S and Kennedy, M P , 1996, Geologic Maps of the Northwestern Part of San Diego County, California, Plate(s) 1 and 2, Open File-Report 96-0?, California Division of Mines and Geology, 1 24,000 UBCSEIS, Ver 1 03, 1997, Computation of 1997 Uniform Building Code Seismic Design Parameters, Computer Program, T Blake Computer Services And Software "Proceeding of The NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance Soils," Edited by T Leslie Youd And Izzat M Idnss, Technical Report NCEER-97-0022, Dated December 31,1997 "Recommended Procedures For Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117 Guidelines For Analyzing And Mitigation Liquefaction In California," Southern California Earthquake center, USC, March 1999 "Soil Mechanics," Naval Facilities Engineering Command, DM 7 01 "Foundations & Earth Structures," Naval Facilities Engineering Command, DM 7 02 "Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering, Robert D Holtz, William D Kovacs "Introductory Soil Mechanics And Foundations Geotechnical Engineering," George F Sowers, Fourth Edition "Foundation Analysis And Design," Joseph E Bowels Caterpillar Performance Handbook, Edition 29, 1998 Jennings, C W , 1994, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas, California Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Data Map Series, No 6 Kennedy, M P , 1977, Recency and Character of Faulting Along the Elsmore Fault Zone in Southern Riverside County, California, Special Report 131, California Division of Mines and Geology, Plate 1 (East/West), 12p .Kennedy, M P and Peterson, G L , 1975, Geology of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, California California Division of Mines and Geology Bulletin 200, 56p Kennedy, M P and Tan, S S , 1977, Geology of National City, Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa I of Faulting, San Diego Metropolitan Areas, California Special Report 123, 33p Caterpillar Performance Handbook, Edition 29, 1998 Jennings, C W, 1994, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas, California Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Data Map Series, No 6 Kennedy, M P , 1977, Recency and Character of Faulting Along the Elsmore Fault Zone in Southern Riverside County, California, Special Report 131, California Division of Mines and Geology, Plate 1 (East/West), 12p Kennedy, M P and Peterson, G L , 1975, Geology of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, California California Division of Mines and Geology Bulletin 200, 56p Kennedy, M P and Tan, S S , 1977, Geology of National City, Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa Quadrangles, Southern San Diego Metropolitan Area, California, Map Sheet 24, California Division of Mines and Geology, 1 24,000 Kennedy, M P , Tan, S S , Chapman, R H , and Chase, G W , 1975, Character and Recency of Faulting, San Diego Metropolitan Areas, California Special Report 123, 33p "An Engineering Manual For Slope Stability Studies," J M Duncan, A L Buchignani And Manus De Wet, Virginia Polytechnic Institute And State University, March 1987 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE RESIDENTIAL COMPUTER METHOD CF-1R Page 1 Project Title SILVERMAN ADDITION ** Date 07/07/06 08 31 31 Project Address 1185 TAMARACK ******* CARLSBAD, CA 92008 *v7 10* | Documentation Author RON MOORE ******* | Building Permit # Ron Moore Title 24 Energy Calcs 1 4152 Chasm Street I Plan Check / Date Oceanside, CA 92056 | 760-806-1026 I Field Check/ Date Climate Zone 07 Compliance Method MICROPAS7 v7 10 for 2005 Standards by Enercomp, Inc ~~—=——==~====^===S=~==^iK^3======i==t£=:=C======:==s=:====:=r=====—=ssts===;=;==;=:==: =s======r:=i=x===;S:==:=:===== I MICROPAS7 v7 10 File-SILVERM Wth-CTZ07S05 Program-FORM CF-lR | I User#-MP1315 User-Ron Moore Title 24 Energy Run-SILVERM I MICROPAS7 ENERGY USE SUMMARY = Energy Use Standard Proposed Compliance = (kTDV/sf-yr) Design Design Margin = Space Heating 8 31 6 24 2 07 = Space Cooling 6 42 7 57 -1 15 Total 14 73 13 81 0 92 = = = *** Building complies with Computer Performance *** = = *** Water Heating not calculated *** = GENERAL INFORMATION HERS Verification Not Required Conditioned Floor Area 1122 sf Building Type Single Family Detached Construction Type . . Addition Alone Fuel Type NaturalGas / CT Building Front Orientation Front Facing 235 deg (SW) }r',JGfi. Number of Dwelling Units 0 26 * Number of Building Stories 2 Weather Data Type . FullYear Floor Construction Type Number of Building Zones Conditioned Volume Slab-On-Grade Area Glazing Percentage Average Glazing U-factor Average Glazing SHGC Average Ceiling A4eight Raised Floor 1 16320 cf 0 sf 25 7 % of floor area 0 4 Btu/hr-sf-F 0 3 14 5 ft City of Carlsbad Building Department CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE PAYMENT OF SCHOOL FEES OR OTHER MITIGATION This form must be completed by the City, the applicant, and the appropriate school districts and returned to the City prior to issuing a building permit Trip City will not issue any building permit without a completed school fee form Project Name Building Permit Plan Check Number Pieject Address APN Project Applicant (Owner Name) Project Description Building Type Residential Second Dwelling Unit Silverman Residence CB061333 1185 Tamarack Ave 206-261-14-00 Tim Silverman 1332 SF addition SFD New Dwelling Units Square Feet of Living Area in New Dwelling Square Feet of Living Area in SOU Residential Additions 1332 Net Square Feet New Area Commercial/Industrial City Certification of Applicant Information Square Feet Floor Area Date arlsbad Unified School District 6225 El Cammo Real Carlsbad CA 92009 (331-5000 OOL. DISTRICTS WITHIN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD Vista Unified School District 1234 Arcadia Drive Vista CA 92083 (7262170) San Marcos Unified School District 215 Mala Way San Marcos CA 92069 (290 2649) Contact Nancy Dolce (By Appt Only) Encimtas Union School District 101 South Rancho Santa Fe Rd Encimtas CA 92024 (944 4300 cxt 166) San Dieguito Union High School District 710 Encimtas Blvd Encimtas CA 92024 (753 6491) Certification of Applicant/Owners The person executing this declaration ("Owner") certifies under penalty of perjury that (1) the information provided above is correct and true to the best of the Owner's knowledge, and that the Owner will file an amended certification of payment and pay the additional fee if Owner requests an increase in the number of dwelling units or square footage after the building permit is issued or if the initial determination of units or square footage is found to be incorrect, and that (2) the Owner is the owner/developer of the above described project(s), or that the person executing this declaration is authorized to sign on behalf of the Owner Signature Revised 3/30/2006 Date <=\\\ WtU UB.38 AN 01IY UH OHKbLBHU t-HA NU. IbU-blk bbbtt Ub SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL FEE CERTIFICATION (To be completed by the school distrlct(s)) • »************+**»T«»Ti»»i»im •*»**************+***********+***««»•»»»«»«»»*•**********************+** THIS FORM INDICATES THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROJECT HAVE BEEN OR WILL BE SATISFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT The undersigned, being duly authorized by the applicable School District, certifies that the developer, builder, or owner has satisfied the obligation for school facilities This is to certify that the applicant listed on page 1 has paid all amounts or completed other applicable school mitigation determined by the School District The City may Issue building permits for this project SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED SCHOOL DISTRICT OFFICIAL TITLE NAME OF SCHOOL DISTRICT DATE PHONE NUMBER iw CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 6225aCAMINOREAL CARLSBAD, CA 02009 Revised 3/30/7006 ;.".t;? •; 3' 3- \^,s /||l | '" '" ' "" ~ ^ "" r"r^"""~i~ "" n | [ VALLEY MIDDLE SCHOOL | \BUENA VISTA SCHOOL RECEIVED FROM (If Applicable) PARENT OF BVtMENTFQH,ACCQ.UMLMJMEEB AMOUNT ui -. ':• •-* .»•; $< RECEIVED BY CASH..CHECK #.TOTAL |r " From Millet Widenput AT. FfrM Service Insurance To Bill Sh*ffer Date 5/15/2000 02 22PM P«g« 1 of 1 jgpfc CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE .J&.P fts/is/06 fix*t Service Xnc LlC fOCl 34 7 3 216 txtate* Dr Ste 1 Roaeville CA 95678 Phone 800-591-9692 Fax 800-591-1845 wsvmeo f haf f er . Con* ^.ructionTil gEitejaii Street Carlsbad CA 92011 THM CWmWe»Tt « ISSUED AS A MATTER OF WKHMKATtQN UNt-T MK> vwiwcna nu i^nr HOt0li,THttGeRT|«CAT« ALTER tftt COVERAGE APF DOWJJOT AMEND. EXTEND OR ORDECTSY THE POLICIES BELOW INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE NAICS iHaUREP \ Uncaln Cw»nl uwuiinci Co INSURER B INSURER D NSUREP E COVERAGES THFP'yiriFSOF' WjRAWFilSTFr Ri-i O><-.< rtAVF R«r itjipr T'iTHF NSURFDNAMrfl A3 «F -ORTHFP^Iir, P=RiOO INniCATD NOTAP1- .,TAM">INi /»NY HtJjUtVfcM ICKMCK _<>•«-" ON .•-ANi'UJNiKA. ! ,.'>- :1 rlb"L' (.MMbNI W' H-ibsl-bC. .'' WIILrt ih b '.bKIII-ii ,ltM<i tot bSLtL) O< !\4Y?e«MN -HEMS-iJPArCeAFF^DEDSl 'HEP 'LICIESOES' RlBEC lEfiS'MsSUSje^TO A - T-E TEF /S E, CuJS Or SAND CONCP HNS OF SJ..H POLIC'Lto A3SRCGATC L M T^ "y ' -AVN M.a^ 1 l-VC HIC-I PCDir-P Dv °A'D O.«IM3 HUHWDT ' _|WRDl A vs,,x_ 1— -IFEOFHSCKANCE (ERAL LIABILITY |riA«,=;MADE [x~| '~cup SCNL Ata'3RCGA 1 1 LIMIT APPLIL3 PC0 AU1 j_ — J"~ rOMOBILE LIABI ITY AKiCA.ro 'ALLO'V-JEOAJTJO SCHEDULED AUTi. •. HII")E3 ajJTOC WM-OWNFC ALTOs OARAOE LIABLTV j | ANY iro I [ i EXCESS/UMBRELLA 1 :AHLrTY j f.t Uk | j — A'i(.-MALt 1 1 1 DEDUCTIBLE | 1 }ET=NT ON * WORKERS COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS LIABILITY W HKi>KltlOWf/WIIJt4'b/c(.l! ivb OFF ^EP,f^C,»*EF EVC1.UDFL'1 1 /e s de*t,ribt> under "5FELIAL PROVlSIJNti D?IOW OTHER POLIC" 4UMBER j fj^TK • MWDDm ) DATE (MKl'DD YY) 632003813300 05/22/06 05/22/07 j i i UNITS C«CHPCCLRR34CE C 1000000 FREM SES (Ea cn,cufeni,e) f'ED E P 'Any irs ,.«-son, i-bKSj|^M_ i AJif IN. IJKY GENERAL A< ^?RE^ATE FFODL.--T5 COMP/OPA&3 jWbl'JtU SslNjLt LIMII 'Ej a^ctdoit) LOL,IUi INJURE EOCILY !NJUP> (Pf a^uoert) Ffi^ftiRTi DAVAi^E (Psraccidsrt) .AA.TOCM.Y ;A ACCIDENT ijTH~f THAT El^ACC ALTD "*-f A*,. EA. H C. -O PPEKii E 'A^^lfl'.L i I'JU- TJRl'LIWiC | 1 E^ .1.1 EL C SEA at EAEMFL YEC i=l CISE>.c MXIL LlMT $ 100000 «5000 !» 1000000 s 2000000 i Included s s 5 S S 5 - -. 5 s , ., ', DiSCRIPTION OE OPG3AT1OMS / LOCATIONS /EHP .ES EXCLUSIONS ACDEC B ' EHDORSEMEH-T ,' SPEC'AL PROVISIONS Proof of Insurance CERTtftCATE HOLDER Proof of Insurance CANCELLATION PROOFOF SHOULD AMY OF ^E ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BE'ORE THE EXPRAT1ON DATE THEREOF THE ISSUING INSURER XViLL ENDEAVOR TO MAIL 10 DAYS ARTTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER MAMED TO THt LEFT BUT FAILURE TO DO SO SHALL IMPOSE ND CBUGtTIOH OR UABILHr OF AWY KIND UPON THE NSJSER ITS AGENTS OR REPRtSSNTATIVES. AUTHCRI7H5.*?PRMMU1tVS ^vuLf-K-L 'ACORD 25 (2001/08)