Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2708 LOKER AVE W; ; CB052695; Permit11-16-2005 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Av Carlsbad, CA 92008 Commercial/Industrial Permit Permit No: CB052695 Building Inspection Request Line (760) 602-2725 Job Address: 2708 LOKER AV WEST CBAD Permit Type: COMMIND Sub Type: COMM 0 VN Parcel No: 2090810100 Lot#: Status: Valuation: $292,600.00 -Construction Type: Applied: Occupancy Group: Reference #: Entered By: Project Title: LOKER BUSINESS CENTER 9,500 SF SHELL BLDG Plan Approved: Issued: Applicant: MARK BOWEN STE 200 12220 EL CAMINO REAL 92130 858-793-4 777 Building Permit Add'I Building Permit Fee Plan Check Add'I Plan Check Fee Plan Check Discount Strong Motion Fee Park Fee LFM Fee Bridge Fee BTD #2 Fee BTD #3 Fee Renewal Fee Add'I Renewal Fee Other Building Fee Pot. Water Con. Fee Meter Size Add'I Pot. Water Con. Fee Reel. Water Con. Fee Inspect Area: Plan Check#: Owner: FRANZ-LOKER L L C 2710 LOKER AVE W CARLSBAD CA 92008 $1,141.00 Meter Size $0.00 . Add'I Reel. Water Con. Fee $741 :65 Meter Fee $0.00 SDCWA Fee $0.00 CFO Payoff Fee $61A5 PFF (3105540) $3,800.00 PFF (4305540) $0.00 License Tax (3104193) $0.00 License Tax (43.041-93) $0.00 Traffic lmpatt Fee (3105!541) $0.00 Traffic.Impact F!:le (4305541) 0·$0!00. PLUMBING TOTAL $0'.oo ELECTRICAL. TOTAL $0.00 IYIECHANICAL TOTAL $12,746'.00 · Master Drainage Fee D1 .5· · Sewer Fee · $8Q4.00 .. Redev Parking Fee · $0.00 Additional Fees ; -:; '.·:TOTAL 'PiRMIT FEES ISSUED 07/21/2005 KG 11/16/2005 11/16/2005 $0.00 $420.00 $7,383.00 $5,859.60 $5,325.32 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $31,920.00 $0.00 $126.00 $1,010.00 $87.00 $0.00 $5,802.72 $0.00 $5,031.00 $82,258.74 Total Fees: $82,258.74 total Payments ToDate: ·$82,258. 7 4 Balance Due: $0.00 ~DING PLANS N STORAGE .:SCA.fln-e.t) _ATTACHED Inspector: FINA~f~ Date: ------Clearance: ------ NOTICE: Please take N0TICE 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 f which ou have revi sl n iv n a NOTICE similar hi r a whi h the statute of limitations has reviousl otherwise ex ired. . \l· \ L\t0 l\ c;2;ioJ?dic1""1 PERMIT APPLICATION (_)J,_,, CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008 CFJJ~ .5/1!~ t ·--~L 1. , PROJE0Tiii1NFORMATION · Address (include Bldg/Suite #) ~ 7 c:>'f!2 &~tLA"'-IZ... Business Name (at this ad ress Vl-1 ~~-, 01 02 Legal Description Lot No. Subdivision Name/Number Unit No. Phase No. Total # of units l ~<..GEAo :t:0-,r-fl=.-74.zf CGp soo.oo Assessor's Parcel # Existing Use Proposed Use ZL?j ·-OS f ·-t!:,>' v~r ~,-qz~N--~u ..... Description of Work SO. FT. #of Stories # of Bathrooms r~/5 ~T J~~~1rr«ientiiJ~mi•imil;fant1 '1: SZ:00 I ( N{,6 Name ;J;; City ~~gent tor'owii~~(;t' ' . State/Zip Telephone # Fax# ::> .o, e:Go Name Address 4llfl:iiRBQl'll:RTY QWJ\IEtt . >•li!{Jff j!('/;i! ·• •. \1?@1,;!J . ·~ . 'Nti!!fii:t' ...... ~Z. -c,..e*-EL-l l..C. i!>711: ~ M~ ZZo <'.7'.N:-' P«<c:co .~L?,::::;:: ;~:~~, . :,:,~~~r; _<,,:,:zr~::::;:.:.",, , OJ.. '1eio £~ z;4t. ,g,or Name Address City State/Zip Telephone # 5, · . ;;1,:¢j)NTMCTOR ~ 1C:oMPANYii1\IANtlirw1;;tf:c1/-/J:;i!;/f:&ilGlPi'"' (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 7 31.5 by any applic'}At for a permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars [$500]). Lu · ... 1..._o S' _ A c:;.a..u o '7 -) /l) Name Address City State/Zip Telephone# State License # 1.. 0 7 t.. e 7 License Class A : !3 City Business License # ,-z_.-?_ 'i"" a a 0 Designer Name Address City State/Zip Telephone State License # _________ _ 6:' ·")\',QRKERSfill~OMPE.NSAltiON +,:i>t4/i Workers' Compensation Declaration: I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following declarations: D 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. ~ I have and will maintain workers' compensation, as required by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued. My worker's compensation insurance carrier and policy number are: Insurance Company NA7 L) "',· y·J ~: ~.,_ Policy No. W c.. 7 ( (Ji 'f 3 'i4 Expiration Date. _ _,_/+/_,_/-1-/'--'0""-'(q.....__ r I (THIS SECTION NEED NOT BE COMPLETED IF THE PERMIT IS FOR ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS [$1001 OR LESS) D CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION: I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the Workers' Compensation Laws of California. WARNING: Failure to secure workers' compensation coverage is unlawful, and shall subject an employer to criminal penalties and civil fines up to one hundred thousand dollars ($ 0,000), in addition to the cost of compensation, damages as provided for in Section 3706 of the Labor code, interest and attorney's fees. SIGNATURE_~Zf2:!::~~==::::::::~:::....~---------------DATE 1& .,., or I~~:: •P:WIIIER~BU!~-R'PECLA,RATIOI\I :!11¥,iillib®HP';t,!'~···· !\,:!11:il:riitf>' i I hereby affirm that I am exempt from the Contractor's License Law for the following reason: D I, as owner of the property or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work and the structure is not intended or offered for sale (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who does such work himself or through his own employees, provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If, however, the building or improvement is sold within one year of completion, the owner-builder will have the burden of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sale). D I, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to construct the project (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and contracts for such projects with contractor(s) licensed pursuant to the Contractor's License Law). D I am exempt under Section ______ Business and Professions Code for this reason: 1. I personally plan to provide the major labor and materials for construction of the proposed property improvement. D YES ONO 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): 4. I plan to provide portions of the work, but I have hired the following person to coordinate, supervise and provide the major work (include name / address / phone number/ contractors license number): ________________________________________________ _ 5. I will provide some of the work, but I have contracted (hired) the following persons to provide the work indicated (include name/ address / phone number / type of work):. __________________________________________________________ _ PROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE ______________________ _ . CPMei..ETE r1;11s::se(;JIQN;eFQR NDJ!iWIJ~@l:ml4iiiUIE!!)iijG PER!Wii;~;QllltY 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? D YES ~ NO Is the applicant or future building occupant required to obtain a permit from the air pollution control district or air quality management district? D YES ~ NO Is the facility to be constructed within 1,000 feet of the outer boundary of a school site? D YES WNO IF ANY OF THE ANSWERS ARE YES, A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MAY NOT BE ISSUED UNLESS THE APPLICANT HAS MET OR IS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT. ,a; ·nr>g9N1t11uc'(1JJ>111 LEf/lblfi!G "~D' ,,, I hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued (Sec. 3097(i) Civil Code). I certify that I have read the application and state that the above information is correct and that the information on the plans is accurate. I agree to comply with all City ordinances and State laws relating to building construction. I hereby authorize representatives of the Citt of Carlsbad to enter upon the above mentioned property for inspection purposes. I ALSO AGREE TO SAVE, INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARMLESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AGAINST ALL LIABILITIES, JUDGMENTS, COSTS AND EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINST SAID CITY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING OF THIS PERMIT. OSHA: An OSHA permit is required for excavations over 5'0" deep and dem'olition or construction of structures over 3 stories in height. EXPIRATION: Every permit issued by the building Official under the provisions of this Code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or work authorized by such permit is not commenced within 180 days from the date of such permit or if the building or work authorized by such permit is suspended or abandoned at any time after the work is com=~~~ ~.,.nri"'°od f 180 days (Section 106.4.4 Uniform Building Code). APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE _..,,_~~~~~-~~L~:'.::-~-===::::::==--------------DATE 2fw&~ WHITE: File YELLOW: Applicant PINK: Finance Inspection List Permit#: CB052695 Type: COMMIND COMM ___ P~!e___ l~p~ction Item_ ...... 05/15/2006 89 Final Combo 05/11/4006 89 Final Combo 04/19/2006 14 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Weldin 04/19/2006 22 Sewer/Water Service 04/19/2006 24 Rough/Topout 04/19/2006 34 Rough Electric 04/19/2006 44 Rough/Ducts/Dampers 04/14/2006 39 Final Electrical 04/03/2006 16 Insulation 01/3112006 18 Exterior Lath/Drywall 01/25/2006 63 Walls _ 01/05/2006 14 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Weldin 01/05/2006 84 Roogh Combo • 01/04/2006 84 Rough Combo 01/03/2006 16 Insulation 01/03/2006 24 Rough/Topout 01/03/2006 34 Rough Electric 12/29/2005 13 Shear Panels/HD's 12/28/2005 13 Shear Panels/HD's 12/27/2005 15 12/12/2005_31 12/08/2005 12 12/05/2005 31 11/30/2005 21 Roof/Reroof Underground/Conduit-Wirin Steel/Bond Beam Underground/Conduit-Wirin Underground/Under Floor 11/30/2005 22 Sewer/Water-Service 11/28/2005 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers 11/28/2005 12 11/2.8/2005 31 11/22/2005 21 11/22/2005 22 11/21/2005 11 11/21/2005 21 Steel/Bond Beam Underground/Conduit-Wirin Underground/Under Floor Sewer/Water Service Ftg/Foundation/Piers Underground/Under Floor Inspector Act PC AP TP CA PC WC PC AP PC WC PC WC PC WO PC PA PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PG PC PC PC PC PC PC PC 11/21/2005 31 Underground/Conduit-Wirin PC AP AP AP AP AP NR WC PA· PA AP NR PA AP AP AP PA PA AP AP AP AP NR AP NR AP Wednesday, June 14, 2006 LOJ(ER BUSINESS CENTER 9,500 SF SHELL BLDG Comments FIRE OK NO ENG NO LANDSCAPE NEED DEPT APPROVALS EMR ROOF DRAINS CONCEILED AREAS reschedule for 12-29-2005 ROOF-SUBROOF slab conduit PRESLAB 6 FUTUR.E GREASE TRAPS UFER Page 1 of 1 City of Carlsbad Bldg.-lnspection Request For: 05/15/2006 Permit# CB052695 Title: LOKER BUSINESS CENTER Description: 9,500 SF SHELL BLDG Type: COMMIND Sub Type: COMM Job Address: 2708 LOKER AV WEST Suite: Location: APPLICANT MARK BOWEN Owner: Remarks: Total Time: CD Description 19 Final Structural 29 Final Plumbing 39 Final -Electrical 49 Final Mechanical -- -- Lot 0 Act Comments/Notices/Hold Associated PCRs/CVs Original PC# lnsgection Histo~ Date . Description Act lnsp Comments Inspector Assignment: PC Phone: 7608016258 Inspector:·~ Requested By: STEVE Entered By: JANEAN 05/11/2006 89 Final Combo CA TP NEED DEPT APPROVALS 04/19/2006 14 F-rame/Steel/Boltingiwelding WC PC 04/19/2006 42 $ewer/Water Service AP PC 04!1_9/2006 24 Rough/Topout WC PC 04/19/2006 34 Rough Electric WC PC 04/19/2006 44 Rough/Ducts/Dampers WC PC 04/14/2006 39 Final Electrical PA PC EMR 04/03/2006 16. Insulation AP PC 01/31/2006 18 Exterior Lath/Drywall AP PC 01/25/~006 63 Walls AP PC 01105/2006 14 Frame/Steel/Bolting/Welding AP PC 01/05/2006 84 Rough Combo AP PC 01/04/2006 84 Rough Combo NR PC ; Oltl DUlarlsbld ·': ·; '. final· Boildina. lnsoaction ·· -, ·:"'II":' • , .. Dept: Building Planning CMWD St Ute Fire Plan Check #: Date: RECEIVED APR 2 8 2006 CITY OF C\RLSB.:\,D ENGINEER[\G D}~.fAR.fMENT 1 CM&l Di\ b!ON 04/27/2006 Permit#: CB052695 Permit Type: COMMIND Project Name: LOKER BUSINESS CENTER Sub Type: COMM 9,500 SF SHELL BLDG C©fY Address: 2708 LOKER AV WEST Lot: 0 Contact Person: Phone: Sewer Dist: CA Water Dist: CA ····································································•····················································································· Inspected Date By: {A-~ Ao.....M Inspected: c,r;{;;;{~(o Approved: ,Disapproved:/ ' Inspected Date By: Inspected: Approved: Disapproved: __ Inspected Date By: Inspected: Approved: Disapproved: __ ............................................................................................................................................................. Comments: ______________________________ _ d(/~Ca --f:«:B ~ ~ uf:~.zkl ~ot ~ (}P,;-?~;,-l.,f ~ 0z4. f' ~) . {.r.,-.~+ e ;h:_ e,,r cnvor Carlsbad · Final Building Inspection -- ~~~, . ~ Dept: Building Engineering Pl~nning CMWD St Lite\~ Plan Check #: Date: 04/27/2006 Permit#: CB052695 PermitType: COMMIND Project Name: LOKER BUSINESS CENTER Sub Type: COMM 9,500 SF SHELL BLDG Address: 2708 LOKER AVWEST Lot: 0 Contact Person: · Phone: Sewer Dist: CA Water Dist: CA ........................................................................................................................................................... Inspected 44 By:-~· ~/MA -'---" , 44-- lnspected Date ,.-,/_ / Inspected:~ Approved: Date .Disapproved: __ By: ________ _ Inspected:_____ Approved: ___ Disapproved: __ Inspected Date By: ______ --'----Inspected: ____ _ Approved: ___ Disapproved: __ ...................................................................................................................... !···································••1 Comments: ____________________________________ _ M,ay. 1. 2006 12:32PM MTGL INC No. 3877 P. 2 Office Locations Orange County Corporate Branch; 2992 E. La Palma Avenue Suite A Anaheim,.CA 92806. Tel: 714.632.2999 Eax: 714.632.2974 Los Angeles Ventura County 13010 San Fernande Read Unit 1 Sylmar. CA 91342 Tel: 818.833.8100 Fax: 818.833.0085 San Diego Imperial County 7313 Carroll·Road Suite G . San Diego, GA 92121 Tel: 858.537.3999 Fax: 858.537.3990 Inland Empire 14320 Elsworth Street Suite,C101 Moreno Valley, CA 92553 Tel: 951.653.4999 Fax: 951.653.4666 Central Dispatch 800.491.2990 www.mtgllnc.com Geotechnical Engineering Construction Inspection Materials Testing Environmental FINAt REPORT FOR SPECIAL INSPECTION AND MATERIAL TESTING Date: May l, 2006 To: City of Carlsbad Public Works -Engineering 5950 El Camino lleaJ. Carlsbad, CA 92008 MIGL Project No; 1446"A03 MTGL Log No: 06-629/2 SUBJECT: SATISFACTORY COMPLETION OF WORK REQUIRING SPEClAL lNSPECTJ:ON AND MATERIAL TESTING. PERMIT NO: CB 052695 PROJECT NAME/ADDRESS: Retail :Building 2708 Loker Avenue West Cailsbau, California-92008 I declare under-penalty of perjUJY that, to the best of my knowledge, the work requiring special inspection, material sampling and testing, for the structure/s oonstructed under the subject perpiit is in conformance with the approved plans, the inspection and observation program and oth~ construction documents, and the applicable workmanship provisions of the Unifonn Building Code. Executed on: May 1,2006 l'he work which we provided Special Inspection consisted of : Footing Excavation, Reinfor~ing Steel, Structural Concrete, Stroctural Steel Shop Welding, and Structural Steel-Field Welding. A. lf the inspection services were provided by an approved material testing laboratory or special inspection a~ency: TESTING AGENCY: . MTGL, inc. 731~ Carroll Road, Suite a San Diego, CA 92121 RESPONSIBLE MANAGING ENGINEER OF THE TESTING LABORATORY OR SPECIAL INSPECTION AGENCY: NAME (PlllNT OR TYPE): Eduardo C, Dizon / MTGL, Inc. State of California Registration Nui:nber: C 57217 Expiration Date: 12/31/07 B) lfthe inspection services·wcte,provideq_ by an independent certified special inspector: SPECIAL INSPCETOR'S NAME (PRIN'T OR TYPE): NA Registration Number: SlGNATURE: Corporate: Branch: Branch: Branch: 2992 E .. La Palma Avenµe, Suite A, Anaheim, CA 92806 Tel: (714) 632-2999 Fax: (714) 632-2974 7313 Carroll Road; Suite G, San Diego, CA 92121 Tel: (858) 537-3999 Fax: (858) 537-3990 14320. ];llsworth Street, Suite·ClOl, Moreno Valley, CA 92553 Tel: (909) 653-4999 Fax: (909) 653-4666 13010 San Fernando Road, Unit 1, Syhnar, CA 91342 Tel: (818) 833.8100 Fax: (818) 833-0085 Report of: COMPRESSIVE STRENG1H-GROUT ASTM Cl019 ** CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT. 1635 FAR.ADAY AVENUE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 File No.: Permit No.: Project No.: 1446A03 Project Name: LOKER BUSINESS CENTER LOKER & PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD CARLSBAD, CA Client: LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION COMP ANY I\ Set No.: 6-10039 ~ge Date Nominal Actual Area (Days) Tested Size (Sq. Inch) 7 1/1212006 3X3X6 9.46 ., 28 21212006 3X3X6 9.59 28 21212006 3X3X6 10.24 Specified Strength: 2,000 PSI Sampled By: JACK WIRTZ Location: NORTHWEST WALL, THIRD LIFT Concrete Supplier: SUPERIOR READY MIX ).\fix No.: 866G Ticket No.: 192885 Water added· at Site: 20.00 gal. By FOREMAN Cement Type: Mix Time: Remarks: ALL WALLS INCLUDING ANCHOR BOLTS Distribution: LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION COMP ANY CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT. **LAB COPY** min. 2440 PSI -- toad Strength Type of (lbs.) (psi) Fracture 19,950 2,110 NIA 23,580 2,460 NIA 24,900 2,430 NIA Date Sampled: 1/512006 Date Received: 1/612006 Concrete Temp: 73 Ambient Temp: 77 Slump: 9.00 in. Tested at: San Diego Respectfully Submitted, MTGL,lnc. Eduardo Dizon, R.C.E. OF OF 28-day compression .test complies with the specified strength, I\ Corporate: Branch: Branch: Branch: 2992 E. La Palma Avenue, Suite A, Anaheim, CA 92806 Tel: (714) 632-2999 Fax: (714) 632-2974 7313 Carroll Road; Suite G, San Diego, CA 92121 Tel: (858) 537-3999 Fax: (858) 537-3990 14320 Elsworth Street, Suite ClOl, Morenp Valley, CA 92553 Tel: (909) 653-4999 Fax: (909) 653-4666 13010 San Fernando Road, Unit 1, Sylmar, CA 91342 Tel: (818) 833-8100 Fax: (818) 833-0085 Report of: COMPRESSIVE STRENG'FH-GROUT ASTM C1019 ** CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT. 1635FARADAY AVENUE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Client: LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION COMP ANY Set No.: 6-10124 Age Date Nominal Actual Area (Days) Tested Size 7 l/l9/2006 3X3X6 28 2/9/2006 3X3X6 28 2(9/2006 3X3X6 78 2/9/2006 .3X3X6 Specified Strength: 4,000 PSI Sampled By: Location: Concrete Supplier: MixNo.: Ticket No.: Water added at Site: gal. By Cement Type: Mix Time: Remarks: Distribution: LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION COMPANY CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTIONDEPT. **LAB COPY** (Sq. Inch) 9.46 9.00 9.00 9.00 min. File No.: Permit No.: Project No.: 1446A03 Project Name: LOKER BUSINESS CENTER Load (lbs.) 20,990 LOKER & PALO MAR AIRPORT ROAD CARLSBAD, CA Strength Type of (psi) Fracture 2,220 NIA Date Sampied: 1/12/2006 Date Received: 1/16/2006 Concrete Temp: Ambient Temp: Slump: in. Tested at: San Diego Respectfully Submitted, MTGL,lnc. Eduardo Dizon, R.C.E. OF OF ., Corporate: Branch: Branch: Branch: 2992 E. La Palma Avenue,.Suite A; Anaheim, CA 92806 Tel: (714) 632-2999 Fax: (714) 632-2974 7313 Carroll Road, SuiteG, San Diego, CA 92121 Tel: (858) 537-39.99 Fax: (858) 537-3990 14320 Elsworth Street, Suite ClOl, Moreno Valley, CA 92553 Tel: (909) 653-4999 Fax: (909) 653-4666 13010 San.Fernando Road, Unit 1, Sylmar, CA 91342 Tel: (818) 833-8100 ·Fax: (818) 833-0085 Report of: COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH-GROUT ASTM C1019 ** CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT. 1635FARADAY AVENUE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Client: LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION COMP ANY I\ Set No.: 5-15484 Age Date Nominal (Days) Tested Size 7 1212912005 4X4X8 28 1/1912006 4X4X8 28 1/19/2006 4X4X8 28H 1/19/2006 3X3X6 Actual Area (Sq. Inch) 16.97 17.02 16.80 9.00 File No.: Permit No.: Project No.: 1446A03 Project Name: LOKER BUSINESS CENTER Load (lbs.) . 60,010 73,210 72,100 LOKER & PALO MAR AIRPORT ROAD CARLSBAD, CA Strength Type of (psi) Fracture 3,540 NIA 4,300 NIA 4,290 NIA I\ Specified Strength: 2,000 PSI Sampled By: DA VIO FELLINGHAM Date Sampled: 12/22/2005 Date Received: 12/29/2005 Location: WEST END NORTH WALL Concrete Supplier: SUPERIOR READY MIX MixNo.: 866G Ticket No.: 9446 Water added at Sit~: gal. By Cement Type: II/V MixTime: 50 Remarks: I>istribution: LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION COMPANY CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT. **LAB COPY** min. 4300PSI Concrete Temp: 68 Ambient Temp: 77 Slump: 8,375.00 in. Tested at: San Diego Respectfully Submitted, MTGL,Inc. Eduardo Dizon, R.C.E. 28-day compression test complies with the specified strength. OF OF ,, Corporate: Branch: Branch: Branch: 2992 E. La Palma Avenue, Suite A, Anaheim, CA 92806 Tel: (714)632-2999 Fax: (714) 632-2974 7313 Carroll Road, SuiteG, San Diego, CA92121 Tel: (858) 537-3999 Fax: (858) 537-3990 14320 Elsworth Street, Suite ClOl, Moreno Valley, CA 92553 Tel: (909) 653-4999 Fax: (909) 653-4666 13010 San Fernando Road, Unit 1, Sylmar, CA 91342 Tel: (818) 833-8100 Fax: (818) 833-0085 Report of: COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH-CONCRETE ASTM C39 ** CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT. 1635 FARADAY AVENUE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Client: LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION COMP ANY A SetNo.: 6-15485 Age Date Nominal (Days) Tested Size .. 7 12/29/2005 6X 14 28 1/19/2006 6X 12 28 1/19/2006 6X 12 28JI 1/19/2006 6X 12 Actual Area (Sq.Inch) 28.27 28.27 28.27 28.27 File No.: Permit No.: Project No.: 1446A03 Project Name: LOKER BUSINESS CENTER Load (lbs.) 59,270 . 88,330 86,760. LOKER & PALO MAR AIRPORT ROAD CARLSBAD, CA Strength Type of (psi) Fracture 2,100 Cone& Split 3,120 Cone& Split 3,070 Cone & Split A Specified Strength: 3,000 PSI Sampled By: DAVID FELLINGHAM DateSampled: 12/22/2005 Date Received: 12/29/2005 Location: SOUTHWEST CORNER HIGH BASE FOR STUD FRAMING "POP OUTS" Concrete Supplier: HANSON AGGREGATES Mix No.: 3033500 Ticket No.: 905395 Water added at Site: gal. By Cement Type: IW Mix Time: 50 Remarks: Distribution: LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION COMP ANY CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT. **LAB COPY** min. 3100 PSI Concrete Temp: 65 Ambient Temp: 73 Slump: 4.00 in. Tested at: San Diego Respectfully Submitted, MTGL, Inc. Eduardo Dizon, R.C.E. . 28-day compression test complies with the specified strength. OF OF Corporate: Branch: Branch: Branch: 2992 E. La Palma Avenue, Suite A, Anaheim, CA 92806 Tel: (714) 632-2999 Fax: (714) 632-2974 7313 Carroll Road, Suite G, San Diego, CA 92121 Tel: (858) 537-3999 Fax: (858) 537-3990 14320 Elsworth Street, Suite ClOl, Moreno Valley, CA 92553 Tel: (909) 653-4999 Fax: (909) 653-4666 13010 San Fernando Road, Unit 1, Sylmar, CA 91342 Tel: (818) 833-8100 Fax: (818) 833-0085 Report of: COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH-CONCRETE ASTM C39 ** CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT. 1635 FARADAY AVENUE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Client: LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION COMP ANY A Set No.: 5-15361 Age Date Nominal (Days) Tested Size - 7 12/16/2005 6X 12 2~ 1/6/2006 qX 12 28 1/6/2006 6X12 28H 1/6/2Q06 6X 12 Actual Ar.ea (Sq. Inch) 28.p 28.27 28.27 28._27 File No.: Permit No.: Project No.: 1446A03 Project Name: LOKER BUSINESS CENTER Load (lbs.) 106,180 LOKER & PALO MAR AIRPORT ROAD CARLSBAD, CA Strength Type of (psi) Fracture 3,760 Shear I\ Specified Strength: 3,000 PSI Sampled By: NEIL TORSTENBO Date Sampled: 12/9/2005 Date Received: 12/12/2005 Location: SOUTH THIRD OF SLAB Concrete Supplier: HANSON AGGREGATES Mix No.: 3033500 Ticket No.: 1899531 Water added at Site: gal. By Cement Type: 11/V Mix Time: 45 Remarks: Distribution: LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION COMP ANY CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT. **LAB COPY** min. Concrete Temp: 80 Ambient Temp: 70 Slump: 4.00 in. Tested at: San Diego Respectfully Submitted, MTGL,Inc. Eduardo Dizon, R.C.E. "F "F Corporate: Branch: Branch: Branch: 2992 E. La Palma Avenue, Suite A, Anaheim, CA 92806 Tel: (714) 632-2999 Fax: (714) 632-2974 7313 Carroll Road, SuiteG, San Diego, CA 92121 Tel: (858) 537-3999 Fax: (858)-537-3990 14320 Elsworth Street, Suite Cl0l, Moreno Valley, CA 92553 Tel: (909) 653-4999 Fax: (909) 653-4666 13010 San Fernando Road, Unit 1, Sylmar, CA 91342 Tel: (818) 833-8100 Fax: (818) 833-0085 Report of: COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH-CONCRETE ASTM C39 ** CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT. 1635FARADAY AVENUE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Client: LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION COMP ANY /I Set No.: 5-i5362 Age Date Nominal Actual Area (Days) Tested Size (Sq. Inch) 7 12n612005 6X12 28.27 28 1/6/2006 6X 12 28.27 28 1/6/2006 6X 12 28.27 28H 1/6/2006 6X 12 28.27 Specified Strength: 3,000 PSI Sampled By: NEIL TORSTENBO Location: NORTH ONE THIRD OF SLAB Concrete Supplier: HANSON AGGREGAIBS Mix No.: 3033500 Ticket No.: 2899708 Water added at Site: gal. By Cement Type: II/V Mix Time: 45 Remarks: Distribution: LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION COMP ANY CITY OF CARLSBAD-BLDG INSPECTION DEPT. **LAB COPY** min. File No.: Permit No.: Project No.: 1446A03 Project Name: LOKER BUSINESS CENTER Load (lbs.) 79,420 LOKER & PALO MAR AIRPORT ROAD CARLSBAD, CA Strength Type of (psi) Fracture 2,810 Cone& Shear Date Sampled: 12/9/2005 Date Received: 12/12/2005 Concrete Temp: 80 Ambient Temp: 70 Slump: 4.00 in. Tested at: San Diego Respectfully Submitted, MTGL,Inc. Eduardo Dizon, R.C.E. OF OF EsGil Corporation In <Partnersliip witli <]o'flernmentfor<Bui{aing Safety DAT~: 10/13/05 JURISDICTION: City of .Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: 05-2695 PROJECT ADDRESS: 2708 Loker Ave. West PROJECi NAME: Building B SET: II D APPLICANT C: D JUR[s:::::::::> tl PLAN REVIEWER D FILE D 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. D The plan~ transmitted herewith hav~ s·ignificant deficiencies identified on the eRclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. D The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. D The applicant's copy of the.check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. D The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: IZJ Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. D Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check. has been completed. Person contacted: T~lephone #: . Date contacted: (by: ) · . Fax #: ~~ Mail Telephone Fax In Person t-i . · [8]_ REMARKS: 1. City to approve the special inspection program 2. All sheets of the final approved plan shall be signed and sealed by the architect or engineer. The attached soil engineer's comment shall be attached to the final approved plan. 4. Sheet AS1 shows all three trellises in the sewer easement on west side of the building. Please obtain sewer district's approval. By: David Yao Enclosures: Esgil Corporation D ·GA D MB D EJ D PC 10/5 tmsmtl.dot _ _..,..- 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123. + (858) 560-1468 + Fax (858) 560-1576 ~' ·.\ . ~ Phase n, Sheet AS3.l, Detail 16: Where typical concrete-curb will be adjacent to landscaping, the · curb should extend 12 inches below the aggregate base to provide a cutoff to moisture migration into pavement subgrade soils. · · Phase II, Sheet S1.1, Notes, Structural Design Criteria: Seismic Coefficient Ca should equal 0.4 Na, which is 0.40. Phase II, Sheet S1.1, Notes, Foundations: Coefficient of Friction should equal 0.35 as stated in Section 6.7.1.ofthe soils report. Should you have any questions. regarding this letter, or if we may be of further service, please contact the undersigned at your conven~ence. · Very truly yours, Joseph J. Vettel GE2401 JN:dmc (2) Addressee (1) Smith '.Consulting Architects Attention: Mr. Mark Bolen ProjectNo. 07192-22-01 -: \. ~2-September 16, 2005 EsGU Corporation In <Partnersfiip witfi fjof.lernmentfor<Bui{d'ina Safety DATE: 8/5/05 _c::§~~OT JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: 05-2695 SET:I D PLAN REVIEWER CJ FILE PROJECT ADDRESS: 2708 Loker Ave. West .PROJECT NAME: Building B D The plans transmitted herewith nave been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. D The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes When minor deficiencies ·identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. D The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and rJ3submitted for a complete recheck. [8J The check list tr~nsmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. D The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. · · .. [Z] . The applicant's -copy of the check. list has been sent to: D Mark Bolen 12220 El Camino Real #200 San Diego, CA 92130 Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Esgil Corporation staff did advise the appJicant that the plan check has been completed. Per~on s9pta9!ep~: Mak Bolen (0<t) Telephone#:· (858)793-4777 Date~lf ~s (by: iQn Pax #: (858)793-4787 Mail _.-fuephone FaxP'tn Person REMARKS: By: David Yao Enclosures: Esgil. Corporation [81 GA [81 MB O EJ O PC 7/25 trnsmtl.dot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 + (858) 560-1468 + Fax (858) 560-1576 City of Carlsbad 05-2695 8/5/05 [PLAN 1REVIEW CORRECTION LIST COMMERCIAL PLAN CHECK NO.: 05-2695 JURISDICT(ON: City of Carlsbad • 'OCCUPANCY: B/M USE: restaurant/retail TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: VN ACTUAL AREA: 9500 sf ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA: 24000 sf STORIES: 1 HEIGHT: SPRINKLERS?:. y · REMARKS: DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY JURISDICTION: DATE INITIAL PLAN REVIEW COMPLET!=O: 8/5/05 . ' FOREWORD (PLEASE READ): OCCUPANT LOAD: . DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY ESGIL CORPORATION: 7/25 PLAN REVIEWER: David Yao . ':' 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 ordinances enforced by the Plannir1g Department, Engineering Department, Fire Department or other departments: Clearance from those departments may be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Code sections cited are based on the 1.997 UBC. 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, cour1ty or city law. To speed up the recheck process, please note on this list (or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed, i.e., plan sheet number, specification section, etc. Be sure to: enclose the marked .up list when you submifthe revised plans. City of Carlsbad 05-2695 8./5/05 Please make all corrections on the original tracings, as requ'ested in the correction list. Submit three sets of plans for commercial/industrial projects (two sets of plans for resieential projects). For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in one of two ways: 1. Deliver ~II 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 Depc1rtment for routing to their Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. NOTE: Plans that are submitted directly to EsGil Corporation only will not be reviewed by the City Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments until review by EsGil Corporation is complete. • PLANS 1. Provide a Building Gode Data Legend -on the Title Sheet. Include the following code information for each building proposed: + Occupancy Group sheet TS1-B shows M, sheetAS1 shows 8/M + Description of Use sheet TS1-B show retail, sheet AS1 shows retail/restaurant +.·Floor Area project data on sheet TS1-B shows 20318 sf. Scope 6f work· shows 9500 sf ·· · · · 2.. Provide a statement on the Title Sheet of the plans that this project shall comply with the 2001 edit'ion of the California Building Code (Title 24 ), which adopts the 1:997 USC, 2000 UMC, 2000 UPC and the 1999 NEC. 3. Provide a note on the plans indicating if any hazardous materials will be stored ·_ and/or used within the building which exceed the quantities listed in UBC Tables 3-D and 3-:E. 4. When special inspection is re.quired, the architect or engineer of record shall prepare an inspection program which shall be submitted to the building official for approval prior to issuance of the building permit. Please review Section 106.3.5. Please complete the attached form .. • SITE PLAN 5. Clearly dimension building setbacks from property lines, street centerlines, and from .all adiacent buildings (building C} ori the site plan. 6. Provide a statement on the site plc;in stating: "All property lines, easements and buildings, both existing and proposed, are shown on this site plan." City or Carlsbad 05-2695 8/,5/05 • LOCATION ON PROPERTY 7. When two or more buildings are on the $ame property, the buildings shall have an assumed property line between them for the purpose of determining the required wall and opening protection and roof cover requirements, per Section 503.1. An exception is provided if the combined area of the buildings is within the limits $pacified in Section 504 for a single building. If this exception is used, show how the building(s) will comply with Section 503. 8. 9. 10. • MISCELLANEOUS LIFE/SAFETY Note on the plans that suspended ceilings shall comply with UBC Tables 25-A and 16-0. Note on the plans that new water closets and associated flushometer valves, if any, shall use no more-than 1.6 gallons per flush and shall meet performance standards established by the American National Standards -Institute Standard A 112.19.2. H & S Code, Section 17921.3(b ). Urinals and associated flushometer valves, if any, shall use no more than one gallon per flush and shall meet performance standards established by the American National Standards Institute Standard A112.19.2. H & S Code, Section 17921.3(b). · : · • .TIT~E 24 ,DISABLED ACCESS 11. Provide notes and details on the plans to show compliance with the enclosed Disabled Access Review List. Disabled access requirements may be more restrictive than. the UBC. • FOUNDATION · 12. Provide a letter from the soils engineer confirming that the foundation plan, grading plan and specifications have been reviewed and that it has been determined that. the recommendations in the soil report are properly incorporated into the plans (see page 11 of the soil report). 13. .. Note on plans that surface water will drain away from building and show drainage pattern. Section 1804.7. • STRUCTURAL 14. Sheet 18 of the calculation shows the 3-2x6 king post along grid line 3. The plan appears to not show it. Please check. · 1.5. Sheet 20 of the calculation shows the parapet at gridline is 2x8@16"o.c. The plan appears to not show it. Please check. i .. ? ..... ,·~ .• ' •• ~~ ... :1 -... ·-· City of Carbibad 05-2695 8/5/05 16. Sheet L 1 of the calculation shows shear wall 6E along line 1. The plan appears · to not show it. Please check. 17. Provide schematic to show the location of all the headers. 18. Provide calculation to show the main support beaip, column and footing along line 2 is adequate. 19. Provide calculation to show the trellis construction (beam, column and footing) is adequate. • ADDITIONAL 20. Note on the plan that building 8 can not be occupied until the tenant improvement was reviewed and approved by the building department. 21. Please refer to the following corrections for mechanical, plumbing, electrical and energy items. 22. 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. . . . . . 23. Please indicate here if any changes have been made to the plans that 'are not .a .. re~ult of corrections from this list.: If t.~-~~~~~re_pt~-~r c_h.ariges, please briefly r,~: ·::,/. :.: describe them and where they are located in the plans. : :;-_-.: .~: ,. . . . Have changes been made to the pl_ans not resu_lting from this correction list? Please indicate: 0 Yes D No 24. 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 questiotis regarding these plan review items, please contact David Yao at Esgil Corporation. Thank you. PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL CORRECTIONS PLAN REVIEWER: Glen Adamek 1. The final set of corrected drawings to be reviewed for signing and sealing just before the permits are to be issued. Each· sheet of the plans must be signed by the person re$ponsible for their preparation, before the permits are issued. Business and Professions Code. .. '( City of Carlsbad 05-2695 8/5./05 2. Correct the statement on the Title Sheet of the plans stating that this project shall comply with the 2001 edition of the California Building Code {Title 24 ), which adopts the 1997 UBC, 2000 UMC, 2000 UPC and the 1999 NEC. PLUMBING (2000 UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE) 3. Sheet P1 .0 is incomplete as a site plumbing .plan. Provide the site plumbing pl'ans showing the sizes and locations of the gas m~ters and water meter; and the sizes, routes, and slopes of the building sewer, storm drainage system, site gas lines, and site water lines. 4. Please show the upstream sewer manhole rim elevation. As per UPC, Section 710.1, prov.ide backwater valves on all building drains which serve plumbing fixtures with flood rim elevations below the upstream manhole rim elevations. Only fixtures with flood rim levels below the upstream manhole rim . elevation may flow through a backwater valve. 5. Provide complete water line sizing calculations, including the assumed values for water pressure, pressure losses, water demands, and developed pipe lengths used for sizing the water lines shown on the dtawings. UPC Section 610.0 and Appendix 'A'. ·- 6. Provide gas line plans and calculations, showing gas pressures, pipe lengths and gas demands for required gas lines for HVAC _units. UPC Section 1217.0 , 7. · As'per UPC, Section 1014.8, for Commerci~rKitchen please provide the requir~d . :·' ' s1zin'g' ·calcu_lations for grease interceptor~-usin:rl Ope, App~ndix H. . <·7;;·;~, ·. . . ' : ~ .. ._, 8. Provide notes or details noting the backflow protection of water connection to fire · -, . protection systems will be provided as per UPC, Section 603.4.18 MECHANICAL (2000 UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE) 9. Please ·correct the General Notes #12 on sheet M'."1 to clearly show where the required smoke detectors are to be installed. Provide smoke detection in the supply air duct of an '.'air-moving system" for required shut-off of equipment for smoke control. UMC Section 609.0. An "air-moving system" is a system designed to provide heating, cooling, or ventilation in which one or more air- handling units are used to supply air to a common space or to draw air from a common plenum or space. UMC Section 203.0. Note: If you have any questions regarding this Plumbing and Mechanical plan review list please contact Glen Adamek at (858) 560-1468. To speed the review process, note on this list (or a copy) where the corrected items have been addressed on the plans. '·. : . . . ~ ,. , . : ~ . . .' Clty, of Carlsbad 05-2695 8/5/05 ELECTRICAL AND ENERGY CORRECTIONS PLAN REVIEWER: Morteza Beheshti • ELECTRICAL (2002 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE) 1. Please remove the "Existing work" shown on single. line sheet since I just plan reviewed it! 2. Show or note on the plans the method used to limit fault currents to 10,000 amps or lower on branch circuits. 3. If utilizing a series-rated system, note on plans: "Overcurrent device enclosures will be-identified as series-rated and labeled in accordance with NEC 110-22" and "The overcurrent devices shall be AIC rated per manufacturers. labeling of the electrical equipment". • ENERGY CONSERVATION 4. The Principal Lighting Designer must sigh the imprinted LTG-1 form . . 5.. The Principal Envelope·oesigner and the Principal Mechanical Designer must sign the imprinted PERF-1 .form. . :. ' ... Note:· If you have any ·questions regarding this .Electric.al or Energy plan review. i-: '·/-:': i • list please contact Morteza Beheshti at-(858) 560.:;1468:To speed the review . ,:.> .;·. ,: .· process, note on this list (or a copy) where the corrected items have been , .. ,· -,·,: -... -·,:.'. 1. addressed on the plans. ., '. DI.SABLED ACCESS REVIEW LIST DEPARTMENT OF STATE ARCHITECT . TITLE 24 • SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS Show that an accessible route of travel 'is to be provided to all portions of the building, to accessible building entrances and between the building and the public way, per Section 1114S.1.2. .>, 4 City of Carlsbad 05-2695 8/5/05 !VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURISDICTION: City o~ Carlsbad PREPARED BY: David Yao PLAN CHECK NO.: 05-2695 DATE: 8/5/05 BUILDING ADDRESS: 2708 Loker Ave. West BUILDING OCCUPANCY: M TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: VN BUILDING AREA · Valuation ' Reg. VALUE. PORllON (Sq.Ft.) Multiplier Mod. retail 9500 per city ·- Air Conditi_oning Fire $prinklers: -. .. .. ·t' -' TOTAL VALUE .. Jurisdiction Code cb· By Ordinance ,- •. Bldg. Permit Fee by Ordinance t~ -l Plan Check Fee.by Ordinance ,.:f ! Type of Review: 0 Complete Review D Structural Only .O Repetitive Fee ~Repeats ~ Comments: D Other Hourly I Hour * D . Esgll Plan Review Fee ($) 292,600 -- . 1, :_ 2,92,600 $1,141.001 $741.651 $638.961 Sheet 1 of 1 macvalue.doc La Quinta 05-257 2/10/05 ;SPECIAL INSPECTION PROG.RAM . ADDRESS OR LEGAL DESCt;:UPTION:· '2.7olb L.•4,i!h, A'/W-W..M: PLAN CHECK NUMBER: C>'S-ZG,-t 'S' OWNER'S NAME: fi!,bMZ. • l....911:-16 , l.J..._t.-• . . . r -1, as the owner, or a,gent of tbe owner {contractors· may not employ the special inspector), berttfy that 1., or the architect/engineer of record, will be re$ponsiple-for er;nploying the special inspector( s} as req·urred' by Uniform Building Code (USG} Section 170'1 .1 for the construction p(oje9tloca:ted atthe site listed.above. UBC Sectjon 106.3.5 .. Signed ~ . lt>/..."J..J/L~ · Rtv.o~~ ,c/Vl~~~o!Cej(( t..£.c I, as the engineer/architect of recon;:1, certify that I have ptepared th\3 following .special inspection program as required by l)BC Section 1'06.S.5 for the construction project l,o:::,c~~~ the sit~disted above. Signed~- S~t~- 1. List of work requiring special i'nspection: ~ Soils Compliance Prior to 17'ount;lati'on Inspection ·f&l Structural 'Concrete Over 2500 PSI ~ fleld Welding D High Strength Bolting. ·D Prestressed Concrete ~ Expansion/Epoxy Anchors o· SprayedftOn Fireproofing ·o Other D Structural :M;;isonry D Designer Spetifi~d ------ 2.-Name(s) of.individual{~) or firm(s) responsible f~:wthe;special inspections listed above: S 11!:: , <$ " i . A. M1'6LS,~/3 C/1:~Mu_, ~. 5:p 92/YJ eP~A-ll.Do DFi!<i;.J .B. / . · / 'iQ--,17-3M/ c~ 3. Duties of the special inspectors for the work listed abov~: Inspect the construction of the items indicated above for conformance to the A. B. C. Sp approved design df'.aWiflgs ane spee#iFie~afHtiAeA"ns~.--__,..----------- FttfRts+rinspection reports to tlte·architect, E:OR, Building Off1c1al and other designated persons. "All d1screpanc1es shall be broughtto the immediate attention of the contractor for correction. · . Submit aJioa·1 sigaed report stating . ..ttie...tA&-w-0i:k-fe€tuiFing-speeial--iflspeetion was in conformance to the approved plans specifications and workmanship provisions of the C.B.C. .• DATE:. ~ /JJ./05: PLANCHECKNO.: CB (!)5":-.8(ot!S- BUILDINGADDRESS: 8',:kJer(. L-oJ<ec .k-l),,J. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: _ 2QC/_ -,{!)?;j -D( -~ ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 4fi'd Skell f>'/rt.j!: ~ EST. VALUE: ENGINEERING DEPARTMl:NT APPROVAL DENIAL The item you have submitted for review has been approved. . The approval is based on plans, information and/or specificatic:ms 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. D A Right-of-Way permit is required prior to construction of the following improvements: ATTACHMENTS D Dedication Application D Dedication Checklist D lmpr.ovement Application D Improvement Checklist D Neighporhooc! Improvement Agreement D Grading Permit Application D Grading Submittal. Checklist Please sew.e attached report of deficiencies marked wit D. · ake necessary corrections to plans or specifi .. s for compliance with applicable codes and standards. Submit corrected plans and/or specifications to this office for review. By: ' Date: <v/8-a/os- 10/;1/05 ENGINEERING DEPT. CONTACT PERSON Name: · Taniya Barrows City of Carlsbad Address: 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008 Phone: (760) 602-2773 CFD INFORMATION . Parcel Map No: Lots: D-Right-of-Way Permit Applicatio_n ___ ----·--·· -R;cordation: D Right~of-Way Permit Submittal Checklist and Information Sheet Carlsbad Tract: A-4 F:IBUILDl~'tl'~~~~'P%fl{~~-~ven·ue. Carlsbad, CA 920081-7314. (760) 602-2720. FAX (760) 602~~~/~ * BUILDING PLANCHECK CHl;CKLIST s1rE PLAN -s, % vla v1 . u..x \ \ ~ ~ ~~ ofJr--· ~ . f'.Y\O., I C:::'ireo/, 1'£ r 'M~C)V'-'t'Y~£(j" (p/dvJS a re_,, ~D / . Ci~~-(j -ll,.Y 1. Provide a fully dimensioned site plan drawn to scale. Show: A North Arrow . . .F. 8. Existing & Proposed Structures G. C. Existing Street Improvements H. D. Property Lines (show all dimensions) I. E. Easements · J. Right-of-Way Width & Adjacent Streets Driveway widths -Existing or proposed sewer lateral Existing or proposed water service Existing or proposed irrigation service ~ Show on site plan: ·A Drainage Patterns F:IBUILDJNG-PLANCHEC~CKLST FORM.doc 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." 8. Existing & Proposed Slopes and Topography C. Size, type, location, alignment of existing or proposed sewer and water service (s) that serves the project. Each unit requires a ~eparate service, however, second dwelling units and apartment .complexes are an exception. Sewer and water laterals should not be located within proposed driveways, per standards. Include on title sheet: A ·site address 8. Assessor's Parcel Number C. Legal Description For commercial/industrial buildings and tenant improvement projects, include: total bu'ilding square footage with the square footage for each different use, existing sewer-pe.rmits showing square footage of different uses (manufacturing, warehouse, office, etc.) previously approved. EXISTING PERMIT NUMSER DESCRIPTION Show all existing use of SF and new proposed use of SF. Example: ---~ · -· · -Tehantlm·provement-for3·so·o-sFof warehouse toa·sm>-sFofoffice:· - 2 Rev. 7/14/00 D D BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKL.IST D 4b. All conditions are in compliance, Date: ________ ~_ Y'EDICATlbN REQUIREMENTS . Dedication for all street Rights-of-Way adjacent tq the building site and any storm · drain or utility easements on the building site is required for all new buildings and -for remodels with a value at or exceeding $ . . 15,276 , 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 ½" 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 m\. @ 6a. All needed public improvements upon and adjacent to the building site must be l7 constructed at time of building construction whenever the· value of the construction exceeds $ 76,380 , pursl,lant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 18.40.040. . ~ lfJ-t--:f-Public improvements required as follows: ____________ _ 'S)JB,4Jt-7b Attached please find an application form and submittal checklist for the public /47---0 --;~ J ()/J,5 improvement requirements. A registered Civil Engineer must prepare the --~v'-""-=-=---~appro-pri-ate-im-p-n:>\7ement-plan-s-and-submit-th-emio-gether-with·-thlrTe-qoirem-ents· ---· ~ ~ ~ on the attached checklist to the Engineering Department through a separate plan COJW1eie¥d ~r,4 check process. The completed application form and the requirements on the ctQ ~ ('C)U-f{)). F:IBUILDING PLANCHECK CKLST FORM.doc · 3 Rev. 7/1~/00 ST 1 . D D D D D D D D D· D BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST checklist mµst be submitted in person. Applications by mail or fax are not accepted. Improvement plans must be approvec;I, appropriate securities posted and fees paid prior to issuance of building permit. Improvement Plans signed by:-------------------------Date: ---- 6b. Construction of the public improvements may be deferred pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 18.40. Please Slfbmit a recent property title report or current grant deed on the property and processing fee of$ 360.00 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: 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. SPECIAL NOTE: Damaged or defective improvements found adjacent 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 15.16.060 of the Municipal Code. D 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. c:6) cg) ~b. Grading Permit required. A separate grading plan prepared by a registered Civil · Engineer must be submitted together with the completed application form t lt')a: -:::1..A-attached. NOTE: The Grading Permit must ·be issued and rough grading ~ '-1.(FV-J~ approval obtained prior to issuance of a Building Permit. Grading Inspector sign off by: Date: _...,a_ _______ _ 7c. Partial Site Release from Engineering Inspector. F:\BUILDING PLANCHECK CKLST FORM.doe 4 Rev, 7/14/00 ) D D D D -D D D 0 D D D D D D D D D D BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST 7d. Graded Pad Certification required. (Note: Pad certification may be required even if a grading permit is not required.) ?e. No Grading Permit required. ?f. If grading is not required, write "No Grading" on plot plan. MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS 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 drain, sewer and water utilities. Right-of-Way permit required for: 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 Camino Real, Carlsbad, CA 92008. District personnel can provide forms and assistance, arid 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: NPDES PERMIT 1 0a. Storm Water Requirements Applicability Checklist Completed 1 Ob. Priority Determination and Compliance: CJ Priority Project ti Subject to Standard Permanent Storm Water BMPs /\ ~ / CJ Exempt @ (g/rn' 11.~-EES . D D D F:\BUILDING PLANCHECK CKLST FORM.doc · _ Required fees. are attached .-. ~ lJJl'II ~ c.alwlaM CJltl{e., ~{) &-wovi~ a~ et{)P~~ No fees required WATER METER REVIEW 12a. Domestic (potable) Use Ensure that the meter proposed by the owner/developer is not oversiz~d. 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. 5 --~ D .D [J F:IBUILDING PLANCHECK CKLST FORM.doc BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST • 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 meter 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 nieter station, the demand in gpm may be listed there. Irrigation s.ervices are.listed with a circled "I", and potable water i~ typically a circled "W'. The irrigation service should look like: STA 1.+00 Install 2'' service and 1.5: meter (estimated 100 gpm) 2. 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 jrrigation calculations for estimated worst-case irrigation demand (largest zone with 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 point 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 3. In general, all major sloped areas of a subdivision/project are to be irrigated via separate irrigation meters (unless the project is only SFD with no HOA). As lqng as the project is located within the City recycled water 6 Rev. 7/14/00 D D ,0 D DD BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST service boundary, the City intends on switching these irrigation s~rvices/meters to a new recycled water line. in the future. 12c. Irrigation Use (wh~re 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. 13. Additional Comments: -------------------------------------- F:\BUILDING PLANCHECK CKLST FORM.doc 7 Rev, 7/14/00 ., ENGINEERING D.EPARTMENT FEE CALCULATION WORKSHEET D Estimate based on unconfirmed information from applicant. ~ Calculation based on bui_lding plancheGk plan submittal. Address: f}.1¢P( W.b.c .~ ~. Bldg. Permit No. dbcJ:5::-IA(#'~ Prepared by:. ~ Date: . I [ /t:[/o:r Checked by: . . Date:---- EDU CALCULATIONS: l'..ist types and square footages for ail uses. Typeso~Use: ~/( Sq. Ft/Units: 1590 .I/! EDU's: 7?;.J_ct Types 0f Use:·_______ Sq. Ft./Units:_--'------EDU's: _____ _ ADT CALCULATIONS: List types and square footages for all uses .. Types of Use: f\2£-4@.,' l Sq. Ft./Units: . t/5:0C) (/3 ADT's: ..... f ...... /'A_O __ _ Types ofUse: ______ _ Sq. Ft./Units: ____ ~--ADT's: _____ _ FEES REQUIRED: WITHIN CFD: ,1¥-Es (no bridge & thoroughfare fee in District #1, reduced Traffic Impact Fee) D NO Er 1. PARK-IN-LIEU FEE FEE/UNIT: ___ _ ,#--2. TRAFFIC IMPACT. FEE ADT's/UNITS: .llt/D . . PARK AREA & #: __ _ X NO. UNITS: ___ _ X FEE/ADT: -13-3. BRIDGE AND THOROUGHFARE FEE (DIST. #1 ·__ DIST. #2 ADT's/UNITS:____ X FEE/ADT:~·--- ff-4. FACILITIES MANAGEM_ENT FEE UNIT/SQ.FT.: 1sCc> ~ 5. SEWER FEE EDU's: 5. J--,c:6 BENEFIT AREA: &8 EDU's: ~Jf{ ZONE: :S- X FEE/SQ.FT./UNIT: X FEE/EDU: qq-tj" X FEE/EDU: =$ ---- =$ 3/. C/Je; I DIST.#3 __ ) =$ e--- =$ ----- =$ 5J,ct), ,re) =$ (aol, C/'J ~/)/\ C\-00 V V ., ' ~ 7. DRAINAGE FEES PLDA. __ _ HIGH --'--/LOW __ ACRES: ___ _ X FEE/AC: __ _ 6'-8. POTABLE WATER _FEES UNITS CODE CONNECTION FEE METER FEE SDCWA FEE IRRIGATION 1 l) f, tI:J \~ 55:0 11\. ~ss-I '-f q? , I (i./<;1-':)..."'-. ~~o-:;-.it.~"G, ---,------,-- Ll9e) 1 of2 . F:\FEE CALCULATION WORKSHEET.doc Rev. 7 /14/00 .. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FEE CALCULATION WORKSHEET D 9. RECLAIMED WATER FEES UNITS CODE CONNECTION FEE METER FEE TOTAL OF ABOVE FEES*:$ ________ _ *NOTE: This calculation sheet is NOT a complete list of all fees which may be due. Dedications and Improvements may also be required with Building Permits. -- 2 of2 F:\FEE CALCULATION WORKSHEET.doc Rev. 7/14/00 NOV-04-2005 rRl:03:52 fM ENGINSPECTION FAX:7604384178 P. 001 {:.) ;;i ,, ... '· . -~: '· ' ' 'I ~' ' I{. I•. I ' ' . . ,,.: ,,, ; .: \ :_ . }K, • "• :); ,:. CITY OF CARLSBAD . <·i :· · GRADING INSPECTION CHECKLIST . ... ·. FOR PARTIAL SITE RELEASE PRO~Ec:r INSPECTOR~ ~ . DATE: ,Ja&-r,.~ ell,~ ·PROJE6T 10'2;,~=;_=: ~~GRADING PERMIT No.G& q5€fJ3e; '-·-·: '' ' LOTS REQUESTED FOR RELEASE: --e,&+~W~f8 '"'A''\ (?A~e.\ '2-H ~-.\k,~ ~] ': ~~""~t..( j. NIA= NOT APPt]CABLE' ..J = COMPLeTE . a = · I or una~ptable 1. Site access to requested lots adequate and logi~lly grouped ::, =. _ .. !. , . · 2. S~ erosion control·measures adequate. · ;·;:X.f_4 .. ·. !<;,, · ·) ._: _·;.f ;j)/ ;,::· !i ·· · :· ! ~arallsite'adequatefor health, safefy and·welfare of public. . l . . ·. ' ~. I 1;-: • • 1 .: ', '' ' ;. .. : . , 4: · : Letter from owner/Dev. requesting partial release of specific· lots, pad~ _ ......... __ _ ; ; or l:>ldg. . 5. 8½" X 11 n Site plan (attachme~tj Showing re.quested lots Submitted. i-----....... ------1 ': ,!;l;I i. ,' . -1. I ·:.: :I I'• -~ 11,! . ' :! I • . ,, . · a. Compaction ·report from soils-engineer submitted. (lf soils report lias . . . : = . • been submitted With a previous partial release, a letter from soils, ·:·:0 /1i1 j l H ~i-\:1 · t ·, ··: ·: · · eengineer ~ferencing th_e sqils · report-'and ,icf~ntifying' specific lots for · : . · . rt (:. · .. ; rel•ase shall accompany subsequent p~frtial releases). • -• • ' • I • ' • '; • -/ • £'~ J. , I •. t,[ ~: • ' I, •' 0 , ~ • j'l , < ".: • _.., )f '.'. i'.·· .. 7. :,•· '.'' EOW certification ofwori( done with rinish 'p~deJevation~ of s~~ific_lqts ./., i~ , ,, , .. , ; . . . . . .. , t~ pe ref~ed. Le~er must sta~ !~t. (~) i~ g~d~ to.,.W!~in ~ tenth ,( .. 1) ?f .;. ·.": · ·. · , . . . the approved grading plan. · · · · · · ' · · ) ~ .. ,,, . . .~ . ) .. 1 .. r·,·;;, ··.: a. A:; ' ' ,, " ' • ~ I ' •• : J_ :::, ·. ·; 9. v=~ . : ; , • I 1 " ., ~ : ' i4,i !, ';'.' ... : . ! Geologic engineer's letter if unusual geologic or subsurface conditions· exist. . Fully functional fire hydrants within 500 feet of building combustibles ~nq an all weather roads a~ ~o.sit~ i~.'r;eq4ir~. . , ' • ' • ' • ,, l :,RJTI;:/;J:e~rtif! ir~lease of Qrading for the above stated lots is approv~ for the purpose of buildiog , L!:::l,,:t'::~rt:nit issuance.. I~suimqt of building permits 1iS. still. subject to .~II, normal City ;h · ;:;-: ·:I~:lili4i.riam·~nts. ~uit~ci°i'.>ursoarit to the building. permit'~.:·: .. -·· · 1 • ,; ' : ;r i·1·'>',,1:-, 1,; ;'ft · . ·~ )i1ft',, · , .,; ; · • · .. · ·, }, : . i""·1 t·:. ~ 1r 1,•. ,· ,1;·: ! ii ;< }~?~~~ o1the site is ~ fo~ the followhlg ~' · · , ' : j_ct:1?117r:·r:i" >i,, , :, .. . , . · ; i;!' j :i < . • 1.;, ;; ' s·-tp ·. ~ : ,, , ' f ',j,. .' , ~ . . ' ·;, ' .... '': I i 'i j '. ,'i~ : I •t ::-• _;:. ; . ' ·. ',·'·I' .i ' ! ' ' ' 1:-/. 'i , ! ! ,' ,' I .. , , . ' i \ ' ' ' : I ii' ' ,;~ 1:-~ ' iii ,,!: ,,,. I:;~-;l;': ' I,,, 'I I , ·. ,, ·,.! r , ·:-~·. :~r ! . ,,-c'i, f , I I i I : _I , I ,., ' . : ! ! I I ,; I ; -! : j ,, : • ''! NOV-04-2005 FRI D3:52 PM ENGINSPECTION FAX:7604384178 P. 001 . 7 ,, CITY OF CARLSBAD GRADING INSPECTION CHECKLIST FOR PARTIAL SITE RELEASE PROJECT lNSPECTOR:~~~.....J~~~--·oATE: ffi/9-:i«,, ~ c> l c 'le..,~ . 504 .. 1 PROJECT ID V-U-~~GRADING .PERMIT NO-l:a8' qsen.39 I.,OTS REQUESTED FOR RELEASE: ~"'=~\&"1:J \.'A''¼ (?A_~e..\ '2-W ~-, \k,~ ~ j ': ~~ct..( j.. NIA= NOT APPt:ICABLe ..J = COMPLETE . o = ,....,..,,_...,, or unacceptable 2nd .. · 1. Site access to requested lots adequate and logically grouped ,__ ___ ,..__-I r,.......1~ ........ --1 i-,.-..._...;.-t---""'I i--;_,_,..___,..-1 ·/··· /,. 1,,·. .• 2. Site erosion control measures -adequate. · 3. Overall site adequate for health, safety and welfare of public. 4. Letter from Owner/Dev. requesting partial release of specific lots, pads or bldg. 5. 8½" x 11"site plan (attachment) showing requested lots submitted. a. 7. 8. 9. Compaction report from soila engineer submitted. (If soils report lias been submitted with a previous partial release, a Jetter from soils engineer referencing the soils report and identifying specific lots for · release shall accompany subsequent partial releases). E.bW certification of wcr1( dOne with finish ·pad elevations of specific lots to be released. Letter must state lot (s) is graded to within a tenth (.1) of· the approved grading plan. ' . Geologic engineer's letter if-unusual geologic or subsurface conditions exist. · · ' FUIIY functional fire hydrants within 500 feet of buildipg combustibles and an all weather roads access to site is required. fv1 .... : partial release of grading for the above stated lots is approved for the purpose of building L!'.:::t . ·· .P8rrnit 1..,.anca. 1,,uance of building permits iS still subject to all nonnal City · ... ·'requirements required puflUant to the building permij.proeess. · , t ' ' ·D . '.Partial rei~ase of the site is denied for the follOWlng reasons: : • ~, ,~i:' I , f , . --, . • l . ' ,_ :....' ·-·----......... ----------------------------&i:9-~ . Project ·Inspector · ) ' I:~~~ ' Date r . '/Ji;zb.-,04 i~ ~II c;::r.strucrror. :\l;anager .,.lt/44/IJ/ ~ate I efoo ~DD °''' ' PLANNING DEPARTMENT BUILDIN.G PLAN CHECK REVIEW CHECKLIST Address t9-"JC8 U>feaZ. A:tm: Planner Chr.ister Westman Ph_9ne (760) 602-4614 '. I APN: . e}Cfl .. (bf-(!){ Type of Project & Use: ()s'wtyY\ · Net Project Density: ~ DU/Ad Zoning: :f}'\ General Plan:~ Facilities Management Zone: ___ _ CFD4f.Jout} -#~Date of parti~1 /'\ \. Remaining net dev acres: __ leifu'1e One . · I . \ (For non-residential development: Type _of land used created tiy this permit: QQ:M\1\1\aKC:io..Q ,,. · ) Legend:· IZJ 'Item Complete D Item Incomplete -Needs your action ·environment~I Review Required: YES ___ NO __ TYPE ~l/JC-. DAT~ O_F COMPLETION: \1-{l'?{ oq . . . Compliance with conditions of approval? If not, state .conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval: Discretionary Action Required: YES t-NO _. _ TXPE APPROVAL/RESO. NO. 'ifAt:/9et;,?, DATE \9JICf'ljt>~ PROJECT NO. (1\)f D'f~\JWf 04-0 1 OTHER RELATED CASES: ~7 _____ . _. ---------------------.. Compliance with conditions or ·approval? If not, state coaditions which require action. Conditions of Approval=--------.-------"-------------- Coastal Zone Assessment/Compliance Project site located in Coastal Zone? YES_._ N01_ CA Coastal Commissior:(Authority? YES NO . If California Coastal Commission Authority: Contact .them at -3111 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 200, San Diego CA 92108-1725; {6l9) 521-8036 Deter:mine status (Coastal Permit Required or Exempt): C(?astal Permit Determination Form already completed? YES NO · If NO, complete Coast~ Permit. Determination Form. now .. \ ' , \1 , , I " '. ,, I '. , • • , , ', , , ' , Coastal Permit Determination Log #:· · · ,. Follow-Up Actions:· 1 ) Stamp Building Plans as "Exempt" or "Coastal Permit Required" (at minimum Floor Plans). 2) Complete Coastal Permit Determ.il'}ation-Log as needed. H:\ADMIN\COUNTER\BldgPlnchkRevChklst ~DD lnclusionary Housing Fee required: YES __ NO ~ (Effective date of lnclusionary Housing Ordinance· May 21, 1993.) Data Entry Completed? YES NO ---- .,. (A/P/Ds, Activity Maintenance, enter CB#, toolbar, Screens. Hqusing Fees, Construct Housing YIN, Enter-Fee. UPDATEI! ,' ' Site Plan: ~DD . 1. Provide a fully dimensional site plan 'drawn to S'Cale. Show: _North arrow; · property lines, easements,. existing ·and proposed structures, streets, existing street improvements, rigft_t-.of.-way width, dimensi,bnal . setbacks and existing GZloo topographical lines. · · 2. Provide legal description of property and a_ssessor' s par.eel number. Zoning: D D D 1 . Setbacks: Front: lnter,ior Side: $treet Side: Rear: Required ______ _ Required ______ _ Requlred ---· , _________ _ Required· ' 1 ------- 0 D D 2. Accessory structur~ setpacks: -! Front: ~equired ______ _ · Interior $ide: . \ , Required _______ ..,....._ Street Side: Required . I •---------Rear: Required ______ _ Structure separat_i_on:-Required ______ _ 0 ·o O 3. Lot Coverage: Required-____ _ D D D 4. Height: Required ______ _ D D D 5. Parking: Spaces Required _____ _ Guest Spaces Required _____ _ Shown Shown --------------Shown -------Shown ------- Shown -------Shown -------Shown ---------Shown -------Shown -------- Shown ------- Shown ------- Shown ------ Shown ------- Additional Comments -------------------------- OK TO ISSUE AND ENTERED APPROVAL INTO COMPUTE~1QATE (o/,q_/c6 H:\ADMIN\COUNTER\BldgPl~chkRevChklst Carlsbad Fire Department Plan Review Requirements Cateo-ory: COMMIND ·-, COMM Date of Report: 07-25-2005 0 Reviewed by:--.4 ___ · ~-- Name: Address: PeJ,mit #: CB052695 MARK.BOWEN STE200 12220 EL CAMINO REAL SAN DIEGO CA 92130 Job Name: LOKER BUSINESS CENTER Job Address: 2708 LOKER AV WEST CBAD INCOMPLETE . Conditions: Cond: CON0000580 APPROVED: THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR THE PURPOSES OF ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT. THIS APPROVAL IS SUBJECT TO FIELD INSPECTION AND REQUIREb TEST, NOTATIONS HEREON, CONDITIONS IN CORRESPONDENCE AND CONFORMANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE REGULATIONS. THIS APPROVAL SHALL NOT BE HELD TO PERMIT OR APPROVE THE VIOLATION OF ANY LAW. Entry: 07/25/2005 By: GR Action: AP .. Structural Engineers PRomcr Loker Business Center -Phase II (Bldg. B) ENGR S. Stam.pill Response to Plan Check Comments (Items numbers correspond to those oftb,e review) • Structural 14. King post requirements are specified in Detail 4/Sl.2. SHEET PC-1 GSSINO. 5064A DATE 9/20/2005 15. Calculation shown on page 20 for SE parapet at gridlines does not apply. A braced parapet is being provided, per Details 17 & 18 on Sheet S4.1. 16. See Foundation Note #22 on Sheet S2 for typical shear wall requirements at exterior walls. 17. See attached (page PC-2) for roof framing location plan. 18. See attached (page PC-3) for additional calculations. 19. See attached (page PC-4) for additional calctllations. -.. . I P.H-1 ! r:-=--,, .J I I I : " ~ j" -::i: "% -- =t-::.-::.-=...-::-1'.ii:1 ©----------~-=t===4j--~~I--------=--~ ,1 ~ :, ~ ®------------- ©-----------~- A ,, "= • • Ii -:i: 'l,D :r~1JllJ1' ~ I Pt-z. • • ,GSSI Structural Engineers Project: Loker -Bldg B Engr: S. Stampfli FlVE SP AN BEAM Beams at Grid Sheet: Project No. Date: 9/20/2005 ~~~~~-i.!1 ~~~~~~~~-~-~,1~~~~=~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~ t beam 1 cant 1i beam 2 t cant 2 beam 3 cant3 t beam4 t cant4 beam5 t A Span 1 B Span 2 C Span 3 D Span 4 E Span 5 Spans & Cantilevers Span 1 = -35.0 feet Span 2 40.0 feet Span 3 = 40.0 feet Span 4 40.0 feet Span 5 35.0 feet beam 1 29.0 feet cant 1 beam2 cant2 beam3 cant3 beam4 cant4 beam5 beaml Beam Width Beam Depth Vall Mall J,beaml BeamlRr, TL = Shear OK BeamlRr, DL = Mx Bending OK 6.0 feet 40.0 feet 6.o feet 28.0 feet 6.0 feet 40;0 feet 6.0 feet 29.0 f~et 5 2/8 in. 24 in. 30.5 kips 141 ft-kips 6048 in"4 10.2 kips 5.8 l_dps 74 ft-kips I, req'd = 3841.3 in"4 Deflection OK Camber 0. 79 in. @l.5xDL Beam Total Loads TLbeaml = 0.7 plf TLcantl = 0.7 plf TLbeam2 0.7 plf TLcant2 0.7 plf TLbeam3 0.7 plf TLcant3 0.7 plf TLbeam4 0.7 plf TLcant4 0.7 plf TLbeam5 0.7 plf beam2 Beam Width ,;: 5 2/8 in. BeamDepth 28 in. Vall 35.5 kips Mall 189 ft-kips I,beam2 9604 in."4 Rb,max 29.2 kips Rc,max 28.7 kips Rb,maxforx 22.2 kips x, left = 20.0 ft. Vb,left 12.7 kips Vb,right 13.2 kips Vc,left 13.1 kips Vc,right 12.4 kips ShearO.K. +Mx 99 ft-kips -Mb 74 ft-kips -Mc = 7-1 ft-kips BendingO.K. ~ Defl. allow. = 2.00 in. Dtbeam2 TL = 2.10 in. Dfbeam2DL = 1.20 in. Dfcantl DL = -0.06 in. DfPl DL = -0.31 in. Dfcant2DL -0.06 in. DfP2DL =· -0.30 in. Deft. max. = 1.35 in. Deflection O.K. Camber 0.68 in. @1.5xDL Beam Dead Loads Loads DLbeam.l = 0.4 plf DL 16 psf DLcantl 0.4 plf LL 12 psf DLbeam2 0.4 plf Trib. Width 25.0 feet DLcant2 0.4 plf Deflection Allowable DLbeam3 0.4 plf U240 DLcant3 0.4 plf Fb 2900 psi DLbeain4 0.4 plf Fv 290 psi DLcant4 0.4 plf E 2000 ksi DLbeam5 0.4 plf P,mech'l 0.0 kips Camber = l.5*DL deflection beam3 beam4 Beam Width 5 2/8 in. Beam Width 5 2/8 in. BeamDepth 24 in. Beam Depth 28 Vall 30.5 kips Vall Mall 141 ft-kips Mall J,beam3 6048 in"4 I,beam4 Beam3Ri:, TL 9.8 kips Rd,max Shear OK Re,max Beam3Rr,DL = 5.6 kips Rd,maxforx Mx 69 ft-kips x, left Bending OK Vd,left I,req'd = 3457 in."4 Vd,right kips Deflection OK Ve,left 13.2 kips Camber = 0.69 in. Ve,right 12.7 kips ShearO.K. beaniS +Mx 99 ft-kips Beam Width 5 2/8 in. -Md 71 ft-kips BeamDepth = 24 in. -Md 74 ft-kips Vall 30.5 kips Bending O.K. 'Mall 141 ft-kips Deft. allow. = 2.00 in. I,beam.5 6048 in."4 Dfbeam4TL = 2.10 in. Beam5Rr, TL -10.2 kips Dfbeam4DL = 1.20 in. Shear OK Dfcant3DL -0.06 in. BeamSRt,DL = 5.8 kips DfP3DL = -0.30 in. Mx 74 ft-kips Dfcant4DL -0.06 in. Bending OK DfP4DL -0.31 in. I,req'd = 3841 in."4 Deft. max. = 1.36 in. Deflection OK Deflection O.K. Camber. 0.79 in. Camber 0.68 in. @1.5xDL @l.SxDL D ~ u~ ~ xt,1-1/f &1 ,._' f ,tv(,,: ~pl:-el I' n+-; f;I',£ 4-~4'-P~' fdvt,=-'7)00,1_4"4~ cti-&~" 5 Span.xis (. /'. -GSSI PROJECT Loker Business Center, Carlsbad Structural Engineers Bldg fJ"" fff'(,t.r$ ENGR. SBS . . . -·--~--· -~-.: ' ,. ' ., :·: : : . . , ' . ,....-=:o1 :~~ ! . ; SHEET pt---4 GSSINO. 5064A ·-, ___ '. -'----- . : .. , r> ·k,·:r"':. , 1,• I~ JI:_.-· ' :, '· I I I I I I I I I I I I I ·I I I I I I Structural Engineers . Calculations for .. Loker Business Center Phase II (Building B) Palomar Oaks North Industrial Carlsbad, CA July 15 ,. 2005 GSSI#5064A for .. SMITH CONSULTING ARCHITECTS 12220 El Camino Real, Suite 200 San·Diego,·CA 92130 . Phone: (858) 793-4777 Fax: (858) 793-4787 2445 Fifth Avenue, Suite 300, San Diego, California 9210 I I I I I I I I I ·I I I I I I I I I I ,GSSI SHEET . I PROJECT Loker·Basiness Cent~r. Carlsbad GSSINO. 5064A ' '' June'05 Stru·ctural Engineers Bldg B ENG;R. sas DATE p.~~v--~ ~~M,~ --· < &d~ , , ~Pm ~H !~'~-· r1+-!Cf ~~1f<)i H~H ·: ·: l~P:,;f,Nc; -:iJ; lr.~t~ ;,,~~~!J) ' :. t ·il· : : : ,; Y~)'-~~ : ; '!·fl i i 1.-: :; ,J, ;; ' ! : . , . -, ,~.:. :_;1· '1x wr,>:-,., :,i ~ : ; : . : , l , .. i . r •• i .; : ; : '. ~ : '! ' :• ,b,.: i i :-; ! ~\JJ l ·\ "l ' : ' ~· q~~;N; ~ : r i 'Pi f i i '-f-·f\ ; ~rtt~!~< :, :: ;·;: : .r1 ,!P-:; i l·:- 1 ~~~1:Nt 4Ki4c)-i 4',:.f tJf i ' : : : : • , , ; " , 1 ' ' , I~~ ~: : , L i ' ,,... l !' : ! ! . 'i , ; ; . ; : , l l ! '! ; I i !" 1 : 1 l -1 , ·, ", i i , -; · : ;D·u:...,. . ..,, ., ! :1 t~f a1+~~:r0-~.4,~f~ ·r~~~-·,wr;-l ::~::tt1t~ii~~+f :; , , :··,: .... : ' ..... : ; ! ·i ~~,v. D~l~ ~,r~·!(#~!Jr+~!~,/~-{Jrt)r~~J~ijiH~-.L: : : ! f 1 : !l: d+~~: ~t; :~~ l~~)l ,_,:;: L'..'.' · :+~i~~J. i~½-:~rW !~~ : ;~r,feri Ir,~!~~~-! ~~~f~): : ' ' : · : ' ., . : . . ki : ! i;f 1,~J,} ~ ~! : .w i~f r"f :~ ,!,t,0ti°L!-Fi-: i~tr: ii :·1; l i I;; ~v:~: ::i~i 1 '~~~/~~1'tf1'# :--r =-1? ~~!~~~iff\4-~~pr~r \ l~,:k,~.,~_: ___ :_ H, } 4--": ' 'I: , i ., r, p' ; I I I I I I I I I I I· I I I·.: .I I I I I ~ G·SS t· PROJECT Loker Business Center, Cartsbad · Structural Engineers Bldg B ENGR..-'--S_B_S __ --"-_ ; • 1 ., : . : ' . ~ : : ' . ' -------:·; !•: ~ : . ; . SHEET fl/ GSSINO. 5064A DATE June '05 ' . ' -'t j·· j .. , .I I I I I I I I I I I· I I I .1 I I 1. I ""' .. ,GSSI Structural Engineers ., : i i. PROJECT Loker Business Center, Carlsbad Bldg B ENG11, SBS SHEET 1t GSSINO. 5el64A DATE June '05 : . : i-; : : l ' ii. i ~in,~i, ~ f ; ; ; : • ! : ., ' ,. ' : ! i.: ; ·, . ' ·, : ': ' ' • l l': ! ~ . I • I .. la~nz ;: !1:-J 7/p#l!!tl,Busmess TJ-Beam®6.15 Serial Number: 7003000460 Roof Purlin -22ft 18" T Jl®/HD90 User: 2 5131/2005 1 :36:58 PM lge 1 Engine Version: 1.15.33 THIS PRODUCT MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE SET DESIGN CONTROLS FOR THE APPLICATION AND LOADS LISTED I I Member Slope: 01'12 Roof Siope0f12 fl ~ ~.~~------~-----------aal.J'...1m I I ----------------22·----------'-------'lll I All dimensions are horizontal. Product Diagram is Conceptual. OADS: · Analysis is for a Header (Flush Beam) Member. Tributary Load Width: 8' lf>rimary Load Group -Roof (psf): 20.0 Live at 125 % duration, 14.0 Dead ~ertical Loads: Type Class Live Dead Location Application Comment Point(lbs) Roof(1.25) O 300 2' lsuPPORTS: Input Bearing Ply Depth Width Length Detail Other 11 Stud wall 5.50" 5.50" Vertical Reactions (lbs) Live/Dead/Uplift/Total 1752 / 1572 / 0 / 3323 1768 / 1331 / 0 /3099 NIA NIA Nailing Depth NIA NIA End, TJI Blocking 1 Ply 18"TJl®/HD90 2 Parallam PSL Beam 5.25" Hanger 1 18.00" Top Mount Hanger None I -Web stiffeners are.required at support(s): 1, 2. See TJI JOIST INSTALLATION INFORMATION for nailing requirements. HANGERS: Simpson Strong-Tie® Connectors Support Model Slope Skew Reverse Top Flange . Flanges Offset I 2 Top Mount Hanger 83.56/18 0/12 O NIA -Nailing for Support 2: Face: 8-10d, Top 6-10d, Member: 6-N10 No TopFiange Slope 0 Support Wood Species N/A I DESIGN CONTROLS: Maximum Design Control Control Location Shear (lbs) 3230 3196 3775 Passed (85%) I Vertical Reaction (lbs) 3323 3323 3775 Passed (88%) Moment (Ft-Lbs) 15929 15929 27687 Passed (58%) Live Load Def! (in) 0.407 0.708 Passed (U626) Total Load Defl (in) 0.720 1.061 Passed (U354) Lt. end Span 1 under Roof loading Bearing 1 under Roof loading MID Span 1 under Roof loading MID Span 1 under Roof loading MID Span 1 under Roof loading I -Deflection Criteria: STANDARD(LL:U360,TL:U240). -TJ maximum bearing length controls reaction capacity. Limits: End supports, 31/2". Intermediate supports, 51/4". -Bracing(Lu): All compression edges (top and bottom) must be braced at 6' o/c unless detailed otherwise. Proper attachment and positioning of lateral 1 bracing is required to achieve member stability. I I I I PROJECT INFORMATION: Loker--Building 13 Copyright© 2004 by Trus Joist, a Weyerhaeuser Business TJI®,TJ-Bearr® and Parallam® are registered trademarks of Trus Joist. e-I Joistm,Prom and TJ-Prom are trademarks of Trus Joist. OPERA TOR INFORMATION: · GSSI Engineers 2445 Fifth Avenue Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: 619-687-3810 Fax : 619-687-3814 Simpson Strong~Tie® Connectors is a registered trademark of Simpson Strong-Tie Company, Inc. ·' -·--··---••\ 'i'ro1ects\Smith Consulting\Loker -5064A\Engineering\Cal.culations\rp-22.sms I .. '1~l!!l-. T J-Beam® 6.15 Serial Number: 7003000460 Roof Purlin -25ft 20" T Jl®/HD90 User: 2 5/31/2005 1 :38:06 PM lage 1 Engine Version: 1.15.33 THIS PRODUCT MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE SET DESIGN CONTROLS FOR THE APPLICATION AND LOADS LISTED fvlemher Slo1>e: ~tl2 Roof SIOJ>e0f12. I I ,--~---------I ----------------1~----------------I · AU dlnw:m,ions. Ql'e horfzontaL LOADS: Analysis is for a Header {Flush Beam) Member. Tributary Load Width: 8' Vertical Loads: . I Primary Load Group-Roof {psf): 20.0 Live at 125 % duration, 14.0 Dead Type Class Live Dead Location Application Comment Point{lbs) Roof(1.2o) 0 300 2' lsuPPORTS: Input Bearing Width Length 1 1 Stud wall 5.50" 5.50" 2 Parallam PSL Beam 5.25" Hanger Vertical Reactions (lbs) Live/Dead/Uplittrrotal 1992 / 1757 / 0 / 3749 2008/1511 /0/3519 Ply Depth Nailing Depth N/A N/A NIA 1 20.00" NIA Detail Other End, T JI Blocking 1 Ply 20" T Jl®IHD90 Top Mount Hanger None -Web stiffeners are required at support{s): 1, 2. See T JI JOIST INSTALLATION INFORMATION for nailing requirements. I HANGERS: Simpson Strong-Tie® Connectors Support Model Slope Skew Top Flange Offset I 2 Top Mount Hanger HB3.56/20 0/12 O -Nailing for Support 2: Face: 8-.16d, Top 4-16d, Member: 8-N16 Reverse Flanges NIA No Top Flange Slope 0 Support Wood Species N/A I DESIGN CONTROLS: Maximum Design Control Control Passed (89%) Passed (92%) Passed (67%) Passed (U552} Passed (U312) Location Shear (lbs) 3656 3621 4063 Vertical Reaction{lbs) 3749 3749 4063 Moment (Ft-Lbs) 20702 20702 30906 Live Load Deft (in) 0.527 0.808 I Total Load Defl (in) 0.931 1.211 Lt. end Span 1 under Roof loading Bearing 1 under Roof loading MID Span 1 under Roof loading MID Span 1 under Roof loading MID Span 1 under Roof loading I -Deflection Criteria: STANDARD{LL:U360,TL:U240). -TJ maximum bearing length controls reaction capacity. Limits: End supports, 3 1/2". Intermediate supports, 5114". I I I I I -Bracing{Lu): All compression edges (top and bottom) must be braced at5' 7" o/c unless detailed otherwise. Proper attachment and positioning of lateral bracing is requirE:ld to achieve member stability. PROJECT INFORMATION: Loker -Building 8 Copyright© 2004 by Trus Joist, a Weyerhaeuser Business TJI®,TJ-Beam® and Parallam® are registered trademarks of Trus Joist. e-I Joist"JM,Pro™ and TJ-Pro"M are trademarks of Trus Joist. OPERATOR INFORMATION: GSSI Engineers 2445 Fifth Avenue Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: 619-687-3810 Fax : 619-687-3814 Simpson Strong-Tie® Connectors is a registered trademark of Simpson Strong-Tie Company, Inc. '1 '· "' , • 1-,,\Pro1ects\~mith Consulting\Loker -5064A\Engineering\Calculations\rp-25. sms I ¥:l~ldl:--TJ-Beam®6'.15 Serial Number: 7003000460 Roof Purlin -28ft 24" T Jl®/HD90 User: 2 5/31/2005 1 :44:48 PM lge 1 Engine Version: 1.15.33 , THIS PRODUCT MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE SET DESIGN CONTROLS FOR THE APPLICATION AND LOADS LISTED Member SloI>e: 0112 Roof Slope0f12 I I I m []'i;t:--------------..... ------afiU:I!] I I o-------------'---------23'-------------------Q I All dimensions are horizontal. Product Diagram is Conceptual. OADS: Analysis is for a Header (Flush Beam) Member. Tributary Load Width: 8' ertical Loads: . l rimary Load Group-Roof (psf): 20.0 Live at 125 % duration, 14.0 Dead Type · Class Live Dead Location Application Comment Point(lbs) Roof(1.25) o 300 2' IUPPORTS: Input Bearing Width Length 11 Stud wall 5.50" 5.50" 2 Parallam PSL Beam 5.25" Hanger Vertical Reactions (lbs) Live/Dead/Uplittrrotal 2232 I 1946 / 0 / 4177 2248 / 1695 / 0 / 3943 Ply Depth Nailing Depth N/A N/A NIA 1 24.00" N/A Detail Other End, TJI Blocking 1 Ply 24" TJl®/HD90 Top Mount Hanger None I-Web stiffeners are required at support(s): 1, 2. See T JI JOIST INSTALLATION INFORMATION for nailing requirements. HANGERS: Simpson Strong-Tie® Connectors &upport . Model Slope Skew Reverse Top Flange No Flanges Offset 12 Top Mount Hanger HB3.56/24 0/12 O N/A -Nailing for Support 2: Face: 16-16d, Top 6-16d, Member: 10-N16 Top Flange Slope 0 Support Wood Species NIA I DESIGN CONTROLS: . Maximum Design Control Control Shear (lbs) 4084 4049 4638 Passed (87%) I Vertical Reaction (lbs) 4177 4177 4638 Passed (90%) Moment (Ft-Lbs) 26136 26136 37269 Passed (70%) Live Load Defl (in) 0.551 0.908 Passed (U593) Total Load Defl (in) 0.972 1.361 Passed (U336) Location Lt. end Span 1 under Roof loading Bearing 1 under Roof loading MID Span 1 under Roof loading MID Span 1. under Roof loading MID Span 1 under Roof loading I -Deflection Criteria: STANDARD(LL:U360,TL:U240). -TJ maximum bearing length controls reaction capacity. Limits: End supports, 31/2". Intermediate supports, 5 1/4". -Bracing(Lu): All compression edges (top and bottom) must l:le braced at 5' 6" o/c unless detailed otherwise. Proper attachment and positioning of 1 lateral bracing is required to achieve member stability. I I I I PROJECT INFORMATION: Loker~ Building B Copyright© 2004 by Trus Jofst1 a Weyerhaeuser Business TJI®,TJ-Beam® and Parallam® are registered trademarks of Trus Joist. e-I Joist'l'K, Pro'lH and TJ;.Proffl are trademarks of Trus Joist. OPERATOR INFORMATION: GSSI Engineers 2445 Fifth Avenue Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: 619-687-3810 Fax : 619-687-3814 Simpson Strong-Tie® Connectors is a registered trademark of Simpson strong-Tie Company, Inc. ·' '" -,· ,,,,·,ts\Pro4 ects\Smith Consulting\Loker -5064A\Engineering\E;alculations\rp-28. sms I -, ... I. ·1 I I I I I ,--_. I -I -I -1· I I I ,-----· I Structural Engineers ·: ' :·· ., i ~ !· ·1. ! '. PROJECT Loker Business-Center, Carlsbad_ Bldg B ENGR. SBS "---------- 'i . --,-,-------,- SHEET 4 GSSINO. 5064A DATE June '05 I I I I I I I I I I I I· I .1 I I I I I ~GSSI Structural Engineers ·i i. ;· i PROJECT Bldg B SHEET tli Loker Business Center; Carlsbad GSSINO. 5064A BNG;R. SBS DATE June'05 I Roof Header RH-1 ll~l!!l ..... T J-Beam® 6.15 Serial Number: 7003000460 5 1/2" x 11 1/2" 1.6E Solid Sawn Douglas Fir #1 THIS PRODUCT MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE SET DESIGN CONTROLS FOR THE APPLICATION AND LOADS LISTED User: 2 6/1/2005 9:22:38 AM lge 1 Engine Version: 1.15.33 Me~nher Slope: O!'f2 Roof Slope0!12 I I I ½ I ~ J ff]-: -------.@] I I I All dimensions 111re horizontal. 'loADS: ------'--10' G" ----~- Analysis is for a Drop Beam Member. Tributary Load Width: 1' ll'rimary Load Group -Roof (psf): 20.0 Live at 125 % duration, 14.0 Dead 9'ertical Loads: Type Class Live Dead Location Application_ Comment I Uniform(plf) Roof(1.25) 20.0 149.0 0 To 10' 6" Replaces Point(lbs) Roof(1.25) 2000 1400 3' 3" SUPPORTS: 11 Input Bearing Vertical Reactions (lbs) Detail Other Width Length· . Live/Dead/UpliftfTotal Stud wall 3.00" 1.50" 1495 / 1834 / 0 / 3330 By Others None 2 Stud·wall 3.00" 1.50" 715 / 1288 / 0 / 2003 By Others None I DESIGN co·NTROLS: Maximum Design Control Control Location Product Diagram is Conceptual. I Shear (lbs) 3307 3107 4480 Passed (69%) Lt. end Span 1 under Roof loading Moment (Ft-Lbs) 9434 9434 17048 Passed (55%) MID Span 1 under Roof loading live Load Deft (in) 0.061 0.342 Passed (U999+) MID Span 1 under Roof loading Total Load Deft (in) 0.136 0.512 Passed (U901) MID Span 1 under Roof loading I -Deflection Criteria: STANDARD(LL:U360,TL:U240). -Bracing(Lu): All compression edges (top and bottom) must be braced at 10' 6" o/c l,mless detailed otherwise. Proper attachment and positioning of lateral bracing is required to achieve member stability. · I -The allowable shear stress (Fv) has not been increased due to the potential of splits, checks and shakes. See NDS for applicability of increase. -Analysis based on VE;lrtical loads only and assumes structural supports as noted in the input. Axial loads are not consid~red in this analysis. ADDITIONAL NOTES: I -IMPORTANT! The analysis presented is outputfrom software developed by trus Joist (TJ). TJ warrants the sizing of its products by this software will be accomplished in accordance with T J product design criteria and code accepted design values. The specific product application, input design loads, and stated dimensions have been provided by the software user. This output has not been reviewed by a T J Associate. -Not all products are.readily available. Check with your supplier orTJ technical representative for product availability. I -Solid sawn lumber analysis is in accordance·with 1997 NOS methodology and is solely presented for comparison purposes. Program limitations and assumptions about this analysis are available through the software's On-line Help. Trus Joist does not warrant the analysis nor the performance of soli.d sawn lumber materials. I I I I -Allowable Stress Design methodology was used for Building Code UBC analyzjng the solid sawn lumber material listed above. PROJECT INFORMATION: Loker -Building B Copyright © 2004 by Trus Joist, a Weyerhaeuser Business OPERA TOR INFORMATION: GSSI Engineers . 2445 Fifth Avenue Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: 619-687-3810 Fax : 619-687-3814 \\Gssi_server_l\documents\Projects\Smith Consulting\Loker -5064A\Engineering\Calculations\rh-l.sms I ·' Roof Header RH-2 ll~e£ ... T J-Beam® 6.15 Serial Number: 7003000460 5 1/2" x 9 1/2" 1.6E Solid Sawn Douglas Fir #1 THIS PRODUCT MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE SET DESIGN CONTROLS FOR THE APPLICATION AND LOADS LISTED User: 2 6/1/2005 9:34:23 AM le 1 Engine Version; 1.15.33 I I Member Slo1>e: Otf2 Roof Slope0/12 I All dimensions nre horizontal. "-OADS: -------12· 6"------- Analysis is for a Drop BeamMeml;>er. Tributary Load Width: 1' l rimary Load Group-Roof (psf): 20.0 Live at 125 % duration, 14.0 Dead ertical Loads: Type Class Live Dead Location Application Comment .Uniform(plf) Roof(1.25) 0.0 180.0 0 To 12' 6" Replaces i§UPPORTS: ,~ Input Bearing Width Length Stud wall 3.00" 1.50" Stud wall 3.00" 1.50" I DESIGN CONTROLS: . · Maximum Shear {lbs) 1179 Vertical Reactions (lbs) Live/Dead/Upllft/T otal 0 / 1203 / 0 / 1203 0 / 1203/ 0 / 1203 Design Control -1002 2665 Detail By Others By others Other None None Location Product Diagram is Conceptual. fo I Moment (Ft-Lbs) 3609 Total Load Deft {in) 3609 8376 0.155 0.613 Control Passed (38%) Passed (43%) Passed (U948) Rt. end Span 1 under Dead loading MID Span 1 under Dead loading MID Span 1 under Dead loading -Deflection Criteria: STANDARD(Tl:U240). · -Bracing(Lu):' All compression edges (top and bottom) ml!st be braced at 12' 6" o/c unless detailed otherwise. Proper attachment and positioning of I lateral bracing is required to achieve member stability. -The allowable shear stress (Fv) has not been increased due to the potential of splits, checks and shakes. See NDS for applicability of increase. -Analysis based on vertical loads only and assumes structural supports as noted in the input. Axial loads are not considered in this analysis. I ADDITIONAL NOTES: . -IMPORT ANTI The analysis presented is output from software developed by Trus Joist (T J). T J warrants the sizing of its products by this software will be accomplished in accordancewith T J product design criteria and code accepted design values. The specific product application, input design loads, and stated dimensions h~ve been provided by the software user. This output has not been reviewed by a T J Associate. I -Not all products are readily available. Check with your supplier or TJ technical representative for·product availability. -Solid sawn lumber analysis is in accordance with 1997 NOS methodology and is solely presented for comparison purposes. Program limitations and assumptions about this analysis are available through the software's On-line Help. Trus Joist does not warrant the analysis nor the performance of solid sawn lumber materials. I -Allowable Stress Design. methodology was used for Building Code UBC analyzing. the solid sawn lumber material listed above. I I I I PROJECT INFORMATION: Loker -Building B Copyright © 2004 by Trus Joist, a Weyerhaeuser Business OPERATOR INFORMATION: GSSI Engineers 2445 Fifth Avenue Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: 619-687-3810 Fax : 619-687-3814 \\Gssi_server_l\documents\Projects\Smith Consulting\Loker -5064A\Engineering\Calculations\rh-2.sms I ~~lfitl-. T J-Beam® 6.15 Serial Number. 7003000460 Roof Header RH-3 5 1/4'' x 14" 2.0E Parallam® PSL User; 2 6/1/2005 9:50:13 AM 'age 1. Engine Version: 1.15.33 THIS PRODUCT MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE SET DESIGN CONTROLS FOR THE APPLICATION AND LOADS LISTED I I MemberSl01>e: 0/'(2 RoofSlopeOf12 1.-----*-----*----1 [l~----------.w~ I I ----------. 16'6"----------I Air dimensions are horizontal. LOADS: Product Dingrnm is Conceptunl. Analysis is for a Drop Beam Member. Tributary Load Width: 1' I Primary Load Group-Roof (psf}: 20.0·-Live at 125 % duration, 14.0 Dead Vertical Loads: Type Class Live Dead Location Application Comment . Uniform(plf} Roof(1.25) 20.0 149.0 0 To 16' 6" Replaces I Point(lbs) Roof(1.25) 2210 1570 6' 3" Point(lbs) Roof(1.25) 2210 1570 14' 3" I SUPPORTS: Input Bearing Vertical Reactions (lbs) Width Length Live/Dead/Uplift/Total Detail Other 1 Stud wall 3.50" 1.98" 1828 / 2600 IO/ 4429 L 1 tPly 11/4" x 14" 1.3E TimberStrand® LSL I 2 Stud wall 3.50" 2.82" 2922 / 3377 / 0 / 6299 L 1 1 Ply 11/4" x 14" 1.3E TimberStrand® LSL DESIGN CONTROLS: I Maximum Design Control Control Location Shear(lbs) -6267 -6019 17763 Passed (34%) Rt. end Span 1 under Roof loading Moment (Ft-Lbs) 23194 23194 50928 Passed (46%) MID Span 1 under Roof loading Live Load Deft (in) 0.209 0.539 Passed (U927) MID Span 1 under Roof loading Total load Deft (in) 0.467 0.808 I -Deflection Criteria: STANDARD(LL:U360,TL:U240). Passed (U416) MID Span 1 under Roof loading II -Bracing(Lu): All compression edges (top and bottom) must be braced at 16' 6" o/c unless detailed otherwise. Proper attachment and positioning of I lateral bracing is required to achieve member stability. . ADDITIONAL NOTES: -IMPORTANT! The,anaiysis presented is output from software developed by Trus Joist (TJ). T J warrants the sizing of its products by this software will I be accomplished in accordance with T J product design criteria and code, accepted design values. The specific product application, input design loads, and stated dimensions have been provided by the software user. This output has not been reviewed by a T J Associate. -Not all products are readily available. Check with your supplier or T J technical representative for product·availability. I I I I I -THIS ANALYSIS FOR TRUS JOIST PRODUCTS ONLY! PRODUCT SUBSTITUTION VOIDS THIS ANALYSIS. -Allowable Stress Design methodology was used for Building Code UBC analyzing the T J Custom product listed above. PROJECT INFORMATION: Loker -Building 8 Copyright© 2004 by Trus Joist, a Weyerhaeuser Business Parallam® is a registered trademark of Trus Joist. OPERATOR INFORMATION: GSSI Engineers 2445 Fifth Avenue Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: 619-687-3810 Fax : 619-687-3814 \\Gssi_server_l\documents\Projects\Smith Consulting\Loker -5064A\Engineering\Calculations\rh-3.sms I Roof Header RH-4 tl~lf!!l-. T J-Bearn® 6.15 Serial Number: 7003000460 · 5 1/2" x 11 1/2" 1.6E Solid Sawn Douglas Fir #1 THIS PRODUCT MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE SET DESIGN CONTROLS FOR THE APPLICATION AND LOADS LISTED Ir: 2 6/1/200510:00:53AM e 1 Engine Version: 1.15.33 Member Slope: 01'12 Roof Slor>e0i12 I I HJ~---------...,.j~g] I I I . All dimensions nre horizontal. 'loADS: ------.,-----16'6"---------- Analysis is for a-Drop Beam Member. Tributary Load Width: 1' l rimary Load Group-Roof (psf): 20.0 Live at 125 % duration, 14.0 Dead ertical Loads: · Type Class Live Dead Location Application Comment 'Uniform(plry Roof(1.25) 0.0 135.0 0 To 16' 6" Replaces UPPORTS: Input Bearing Width Length 11 Stud wall 3.50" 1.50" . 2 Stud wall 3.50" 1.50" Vertical Reactions (lbs) Live/Dead/Uplift/Total 0 I 1238 / 0 / 1238 0 / 1238 /0 / 1238 I DESIGN CONTROLS: Maximum Design Control Control Detail Other E3y Others None By Others None Location Product Diagram is Conceptual. Shear (lbs) 1213 -1050 3226 Passed (33%) I Moment (Ft-Lbs) 4901 4901 12274 Passed (40%) Total Load Deft (in) 0.207 0.808 Passed (U938) Rt. end Span 1 under Dead loading MID Span 1 underDead loading MID Span 1 under Dead loading -Deflection Criteria: STANDARD(TL:U240). 1-Bracing(Lu}: All compression edges (top and bottom) must be braced at 16' 6" o/c unless detailed otherwise. Proper attachment and positioning of lateral bracing is required to achieve member stability. -The allowable shear stress (Fv) has not been increased due to the potential of splits, checks and shakes. See NDS for applicability of increase. -Analysis based on vertical loads only and assumes structural supports as noted in the·input. Axial loads are not considered in this analysis. I ADDITIONAL NOTES: -IMPORTANT! The analysis presented is output ftom software developed by Trus Joist (T J). T J warrants the sizing of its products by this software will be accomplished in accordance with t J product design criteria and code accepted design values. The specific product application, input design loads, and stated dimensions have been provided by the software user. This output has not been reviewed by a T J Associate. I -Not all products are readily available. Check with your supplier or T J technical representative for product availability. -Solid sawn lumber analysis is in accordance with 1997 NDS methodology and is solely presented for comparisqn purposes. Program limitations and assumptions about-this analysis are-available through the software's On-line Help. Trus Joist does not warrant the analysis nor the performance of I . I I I I solid sawn -lumber materials. -Allowable Stress Design methodology was used for Building Code UBC analyzing the solid sawn lumber material listed above . PROJECT INFORMATION: Loker -Building B Copyright© 2004 by Trus Joist, a Weyerhaeuser Business OPERA TOR INFORMATION: GSSI Engineers 2445 Fifth Avenue Suite300 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: 6.19-687-3810 Fax : 619-687-3814 \\Gssi_server_l\docurnents\Projects\Smith Consulting\Loker -5064A\Engineering\Calculations\rh-4,sms I Roof Header RH-5 tl~l!!L,..,. T J-f:!eam® 6. 15 Serial Number. 7003000460 5 1/2" x 7 1/2" 1.6E Solid Sawn Douglas Fir #1 THIS PRODUCT MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE SET DESIGN CONTROLS FOR THE APPLICATION AND LOAOS LISTED User: 2 6/1/2005 10:06:45 AM lge 1 Engine Version: 1.15.33 I I Member SlpJ)e: 0.1'12 Roof Slope0/12 ----~-10· 6"------ l .All dimensions ~ue horizontal. OADS: Analysis is for a Drop Beam Member. Tributary Load Width: 1' lfrimary Load Group-Roof (psf): 20.0 Live at 125 ¾ duration, 14.0 Dead rertical Loads: Type Class Live Dead Location Application Comment Uniform(plf) Roof(1.25) 30.0 186.0 0 To 10' 6" Replaces lsuPPORTS: Input Bearing Width Length 11 Stud wall 3.50" 1.50" 2 Stud wall 3.50" 1.50" I DESIGN CONTROLS: Maximum Shear (lbs) 1148 Vertical Reactions (lbs) Live/Dead/Uplift/Total 158 / 1028 / 0 / 1185 158/1028/0/1185 Design Control Control -848 2104 Detail Other By Others None By Others None Location Product Diagram is Conceptual. I Moment (Ft-Lbs) 2917 Live Load Defl (in) Total Load Def! (in) 2530 5221 0;023 0.339 0.175 0.508 Passed (40%) Passed (48%) Passed (U999+) Passed (U695) Rt. end Span 1 under Dead loading MID Span 1 under Dead loading MID Span 1 under Roof loading MID Span 1 under Roof loading -Deflection Criteria: STANDARD(LL:U360,TL:U240). 1-Bracing(Lu): All compression edges (top.and bottom) must be braced at 10' 6" o/c unless d.etailed otherwise. Proper attachment and positioning of lateral bracing is required to achieve-member stability. -The allowable shear stress (Fv) has not been increased due to the potential of splits, checks and shakes. See NOS for applicability of increase. I -Analysis based on vertical loads only and assl)mes structural supports as noted in the input. Axial loads are not considered in this analysis. ADDITIONALNOTES: -IMPORTANT! The analysis presented is output from software developed by Trus Joist {T J). T J warrants the sizing of its products by this software will be accomplished in accordance with T J product design criteria and code accepted design values. The specific product application, input design loads, I and stated dimensions have been provided by the software-user. This output has not been reviewed by a T J Associate. , -Not all products are readily available. Check with your supplier or T J technical representative for product availability. -Solid sawn lumber analysis is in accordance with 1997 NOS methodology and is solely presented for comparison purposes. Program limitations and I assumptions about this analysis are available through the software's On-line Help. Trus Joist does not warrant the analysis nor the performance of solid sawn lumber materials. -Allowable Stress Design methodology was used for Building Code UBC analyzing the solid sawn lumber material listed above. I I I I PROJECT INFORMATION: Loker -Building B Copyright © 2004 by Trus Joist, a Weyerhaeuser Business OPERA TOR INFORMATION: GSSI l;ngineers 2445 Fifth Avenue Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: 619-687-3810 Fax : 619-687-3814 \\Gssi_server_l\documents\Projects\Smith Consulting\Loker -5064A\Engineering\Calculations\rh-5.sms I Roof Header RH-6 ~~l~ .. .,. TJ-Beam®6.15 Serial Number: 7003000460, 5 1/2" x 111/2" 1.6E Solid Sawn Douglas Fir #1 THIS PRODUCT MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE SET DESIGN CONTROLS FOR THE APPLICATION AND LOADS LISTED User: 2 6/1/200510:10:40'AM lage 1 Engine Version: 1.15.33 Member Slope: Otl2 Roof Slope0/12 I I J------'-------~ I ! ---------~·16' , .. ___________ _ I All dimensions are horizontal. LOADS: Analysis is for a Drop Beam Member. Tributary Load Width: 1' ' Primary Load Group-Roof {psf): 20.0 Live at 125 % duration, 14.0 Dead Vertical Loads: Type Class Live Dead Location Application Comment Unifor'm(plf) Roof(1.25) 30.0 186.0 0 To 16' 6" Replaces lsUPPORTS: Input Bearing Width Length 1 1 Stud wall 3.50" 1.50" 2 Stud wall 3.50" 1.50" Vertical Reactions (lbs) Live/Dead/UpliftfT otal 248 / 1658 / 0 / 1906 248 / 1658 / 0 / 1906 Detail Other By Others None By Others None Product Diagram is Conceptual. I DESIGN CONTROLS: Maximum Design Control Control Location Shear (lbs) 1867 -1407 3226 I Moment (Ft-Lbs) 7548 Live Load Deft (in) Total Load Deft (in) 6568 12274 0.041 0.539 0.318 0.808 Passed (44.%) Passed (54%) Passed (U999+) Passed (U609) Rt. end Span 1 under Dead loading MID Span 1 under Dead loading MID Span 1 under Roof loading MID Span 1 under Roof loading I I -Deflection Criteria: STANDARD(LL:L/360,TL:L/240). -Bracing(Lu): All compression edges (top and bottom) must be braced at 16' 6" 'o/c unless detailed otherwise. Proper attachment and positioning of lateral bracing is required to i:ichieve member stability. -The allowable shear stress (Fv) has not been increased due to the potential of splits, checks and shakes. See NDS for applicability of increase. -Analysis based on vertical loads only and assumes structural supports as noted in the input. Axial loads are not considered in this analysis. ADDITIONAL NOTES: -IMPORT ANT! The analysis presented is output from software developed by T rus Joist (T J). T J warrants the sizing of its products by this software will I be accomplished in accordance with T J product design criteria and code accepted design values. The specific product application, input design loads, and stated dimensions have been provided by the .software user. This output has not been reviewed by a T J Associate. -Not all products are readily available. Check with your supplier or T J technical representative for product availability. I I I I I -Solid sawn lumber analysis is in accordance with 1997 NOS methodology and is solely presented for comparison purposes. Program limitations and assumptions about this analysis are available through the software's On-line Help. · Trus Joist does not warrant the analysis nor the performance of solid sawn lumber materials. -Allowable Stress Design methodology was used for Building Code UBC analyzing the solid sawn lumber material listed above. PROJECT INFORMATION: Loker --Building B Copyright© 2004 by Trus Joist, a Weyerhaeuser Business OPERATOR INFORMATION: GSSI Engineers 2445 Fifth Avenue Suite300 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: 619-687-3810 Fax , 619-687-3814 \ \Gssi _server_l \,docuroents\Pi::ojects\Smith Consulting\Loker -5064A\Engineering\Calculations\rh-6. sms I ). Roof Header RH-7 r:i~l!!l-. TJ-Beam®S.15 Serial Number: 7003000460 5 1 /2" x 13 1 /2" 1.6E Solid Sawn. Douglas Fir #1 THIS PRODUCT MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE SET DESIGN CONTROLS FOR THE APPLICATION AND LOADS LISTED User: 2 6/1/2005 10:17:30 AM lge 1 Engine Version: 1.15.33 Member Slo1>e: 0/'12 Roof Slope0/12 I I []~-----------------d~g] I I ------------20' , .. _______________ _ I All dimensions are horizontal. LOADS: Analysis is for a Drop Beam Member. Tributary Load Width: 1' ' Primary Load Group-Roof (psf): 20.0 Live at 125 % duration, 14.0 Dead Vertical Loads: Type Class Live Dead Location Application Comment Uniform(plf) Roof(1.25) 0.0 180.0 0 To 20' 6" Replaces lsuPPORTS: Input Bearing Width Length 1 1 Stud wall 3.50" 1.50" 2 Stud wall. 3.50" 1.50" Vertical Reactions (lbs) Live/Dead/Uplift/Total O I 2046 I 01 2026 0 I 2026 I O I 2026 Detail Other · By Others None By Others None ProductDiagram is Conce11tual. IC;l I DESIGN CONTROLS: . Maximum Design Control Control Passed (46%) Passed (59%) Passed (U594) Location Shear (lbs) 1993 -1746 3787 I Moment (Ft-Lbs) 10047 10047 16915 Total Load Defl (in) 0.408 1.008 Rt. f:lnd Span 1 under Dead loading MID Span 1 under Dead loading MID Span 1 under Dead loading -Deflection Criteria: STANDARD(TL:U240). I -Bracing{Lu): All compression edges (top and bottom) must be braced at 20' 6" o/c unless detailed otherwise. -Proper attachment and positioning of lateral bracing is required to achieve member stability. -The allowable shear stress (Fv) has not been increased due to the potential of splits, checks and shakes. See NDS for applicability of increase. -Analysis based on vertical loads only and assumes structural supports as noted in the input. Axial loads are not considered in this analysis. I. ADDITIONAL NOTES: -IMPORTANT! The analysis presented is output from software developed by Trus Joist (T J). T J warrants the sizing of its products by this software will be accomplished in accordance with T J product design criteria and code accepted design values. The specific product application, input design loads, and stated dimensions have been provided. by the software user. This output has not been reviewed by a T J Associate. I -Not all products,are readily available. Check with your supplier or T J technical representative for product availability. -Solid sawn Ii.Imber analysis is in accordance with 1997 NDS methodology and is solely presented for comparison purposes. Program limitations and assumptions about this analysis are available through the software's On-line Help. Trus Joist does not warrant the analysis nor the performance of I I I I I solid sawn lumber materials. -Allowable Str~ss Design methodology was used for Building Code UBC analyzing the solid sawn lumber material listed above. PROJECT INFORMATION: Loker -Building B Copyright © 2004 by Trus Joist, a Weyerhaeuser Business OPERATOR INFORMATION: GSSI Engineers 2445 Fifth Avenue Suite300 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: 619-687-3810 Fax : 619-687-3814 \\Gssi_server_l\documents\Projects\Smith Consulting\Loker -5064A\Engineering\Calcu1ations\rh-1.sms I , ~~l!!!l.-Roof Header RH-8 T J-Beam® 6.15 Serial Number:·7003000460 5 1/4" x 14" 2.0E Parallain® PSL User: 2 6/1/2005 10:43:06 AM 'age 1 Engine Version: 1.15.33 THIS PRODUCT MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE SET DESIGN CONTROLS FOR THE APPLICATION AND LOADS LISTED Member Slor>e: Otl2 RoofSlopeOM2 I I I * I ------10' 6"------ I All dimensions are horizontal. LOADS: Analysis is for a Drop Bea.m Member. Tributary load Width: 1' Product Dia.gram is Conceptual. I Primary load Group-Roof (psf): 20.0 live at 125 % duration, 14.0Dead Vertical loads: Type Class live Dead Location "Application Comf!'lent Uniform(plf} · Roof(1.25) 30.0 186.o· 0 To 10' 6" Replaces I Point(lbs) Roof(1.25) 5650 5280 5' 3" SUPPORTS: I Input Bearing Vertical Reactions (lbs) ·Detail Other Width Length Live/Dead/Uplift/Total 1 Trimmers 3.00" 1.71" 2983 I 3737 / 0 / 6720 l2 None 2 Trimmers 3.00" 1.71."· 2983 / 3737 / 0 / 6720 1:.2 None I DESIGN CONTROLS: Ma.ximum Design Control Control Location I Shear{lbs) 6690 -6381 17763 Passed (36%) Rt end Span 1 under Roof loading Moment {Ft-lbs) 31147 31147 50928 .Passed (61 o/~) MID Span 1 under Roof loading Live Load Def! (in) 0.118 0.342 Passed (U999+) MID Span 1 under Roof loading . Total Load Def! (in) 0.250 0.512 Passed (U492) MID Span 1 under Roof loading -Deflection Criteria: STANDAR0(LL:U360,TL:U240). J(p -Bracing(Lu): All compression edges (top and bottom) must be braced at 10' 6" o/c unless detailed otherwise. Proper attachment and positioning of lateral bracing is required to achieve member stability. ADDITIONAL NOTES: I I -IMPORTANT! The ·analysis.presented is output from software developed by Trus Joist {T J). T J warrants the sizing of its products by this software will be accomplished in accordance with T J product design criteria and code accepted design values. The specific product application, input design loads, and stated dimensions have been provided by the software user. This output has not been reviewed by a TJ Associate. I -Nbt all products are readily available. Check with your supplier or T J technical representative for product availability. -THIS ANALYSIS FOR TRlJS JOIST PRODUCTS ONL Yl PRODUCT SUBSTITUTION VOIDS THIS ANALYSIS. I I I I I -Allowable Stress Design methodology was used for Building Code UBC analyzing the T J Custom product listed above. PROJECT INFORMATION: Loker -Building B Copyright© 2004 by Trus Joist, a Weyerhaeuser Business Parallam® is a regi"stered trademark of Trus Joist. OPERATOR INFORMATION: GSSI Engineers 2445 Fifth Avenue Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: 619-687-3810 Fax : 619-687-3814 \\Gssi_server_l\documents\Projects\Smith Consulting\Loker -5064A\Engineering\Calculations\rh-8.sms I I I I I I I I I I I I .1 I I I I I I Structural Engineers ·! r; ! i ·: ·• ! i :• ' . ' SHEET __ _.__f 1-<--_ i>ifo.mcT._L_o-'k_e_r_B_u_s_in_e_s--'-s_C_e_n_te_r.+, _C_a_rl_s_ba_d ____ ---'-··--· oss1No .. _5_0_6_4'--A __ _ Bldg B ENG).l. . .,__S::...:. B::c..S-=------DATE June '05 ---------- ,· ' l .. ,· I] ! I ... . . ; SHEET. __ __,_1 ~i-~ . . '•, .I .· -~-~ GSS I PROIBc_r · L~ker Business·Cente~Carlsbad · oss1No. 5064A jlll"' SBS TB June '05 I Structural Engineers Bldg _B ENGR. . . DA: • : : : ~ h;Jt~~-1 «tw~:1~:1 ~~~~.trr : : : : : • i: t • I : : , ' 'wf~c,: Lbk"P;' i-' f.l< :1 t.i~ )K1,,t XW*P ~jtfr~ 1~: > • ' ' ' : , • • . , I i : • j ,tf~~ µ 1i6*!t~f~±:'i J IA! ! i,j ~*~~·/?!~ i (i~-~!1i~) I I I I I I .I : ! '. i i i ! '·.: : ! i i : : : ,: ' : i lf i l ! : .i !~: i [ i : : : i i ! ; : i : : : : : : • j ; ' : •• : • ' ; : : ' '~'°' i l'ii ;,,,, (1 rp; ,._ I ~-!fr~[},tV;n.:' : ,W, f ~ : ' ; :~ : ' i ~' : : ' ' , H i :: i I : ti 1 l J i 11 : : M I u rr i !Tl rt 1 : 1 1 r) r 1 J:~ : : j : ! l i : 1 • , i,. · ,fl?·=-, lt.?Pt?x,\:,~i.~l.?l.: .,ltlt.J1,ft1,,,, ! ; , , ; : : ·,:: i .• ; ,. , : . ·,·t :;,~.-r·1U9.Gt ;tp).,&><b; Lill :4.~~~*il'''-~';':'?1(~,-v1~.V:: [,, i::;, ! ; . ; ' . ' ; ~ ' ; ' ' ; ii~ p.'r~, ,~,pr' ' ' 'i ; ' ; :~~. ~~; H'"'S."'"."!"'h ..... 11 ! l ill i 1 i'rn'['i ![ i ! i !,! i !J11! 111!: !jifiltS~{f:~f ! : ; :~ :1 ti{~:?H°: ! i6?rm 1M'l-H ! : : : : : : : , i ·,: :,: •:,;. ·:: I . . ..; : ' ffi~ ! 11r/011r s. Tei I ;,: r~-i, >' f ~ ,. ' ~~; ,~, 6 . 1 ,t ': 1 g_fp • ! 1 T1 i µ) ii ~jf ,LJ~11n; ~ ~}ir,w : : : 1 : i : : : : 1 !, : : : 1 : : : : • .--H: .. ! lt1~1JA ::! (ei.~:,,,:~.klX\t<,?µ :l~!Jb:~. i •:';:: •: •. • '.. :; i • ~ '.: l ~:,~it;\~!!;: i; i: ~ l'·J_.p~-.. ~-~[5--··:·~·-·r 7 :··i·; :·--:·-~-~---~~---~--'.·~~~:::,::,:: I ; i '.;: \75£:itl;::; i1~f_;; ~>'(: d :;,;·;r~: :L: '.B() :<~s;rJ, ':\:: ~-: · : ; ; : ~ _;..::: :-\.:::/)•:,V:tp' I·~-~: :v...-;c,-_x.:v·PF-·_·., a·"·: ·, .. -~ . · · zt; n ~ rlL 'v 2o_ --=-------------·-------~---·--.. --· ""'~ 1·~ I I I I I I I I I I ·I I I I I I I I ". . -GSSI SHEET _ __,,'-'q __ GSSIN0.__;5=..::0:..::6:_.:4;:_A:___.. __ DATE__cJ::..:u::.:n..:.:e=--::'0::..::5C--._ PROJECT~L::c:o:.:ck:.:.e-'-r=B-'-'u.:C.si-'--n-"-e.C:...ss.;.___:;.C_e_n_tec...r,_, _C..;._a_rls_b_a_d ____ _ Structural Engineers Bldg B ENGR .. .L-,S_Bc...S ___ _ ! ' .; ·J l ; . : i • ~ . ! . :· ; : • t •l i' ·! .l : f. ~;P:t': F4~-i~: !itHH~!~ ;11.~-(~1~-;· ·! • : : • ,: •: I : i . : : j • -. : ! • ~ ' . '· wl~:vi-h1~T i*} ~ i· ·· . ;~Jrt>! (E'. ii01i) ·; ;~J. f]i~14t:{.;:~t ;J~i:!-( ; 1 : . ; i I I, i ; : j CI; i l '. t l / ; I tT [ : ~ ' : '. . ·: I ; '"7" ; ; 7 't( ; l : . : ! ~ ~/~ ; ~-11\ z._ l-<1: e: *t-1,-~ r~ilJLi1)lit~)i~: ~)' ; i : I~< , : p: r~ i : j :i: i . (~0?) ! ; : ;. 1: ~ ~ 00:17; , ~ , : , , ; -. , ;---~~~ -·-. -•·· ; -f / ·I 1 -GSSI I Structural Engineers I I I I I I I I ·I ; . ~ I i ···-: --- I .1 I I I I SHEET ?/) PROJECT Loker Business Center, Carlsbad GSSINO. 5064A DATE June '05 Bldg B i. : . : \• 1; : I, ; ': . ; i · .; ENG;R. SBS ~:11. :~l 'ITiJ r,,'.~ -: : i ! : !~ ~~rir1 £iA .1J~J. 4.W) ;t~:~/. ~PJ-~ ; : ~ : . . : . : ~ . A,--,--:·A:~' , . Vi· ;. ;-...... : ;O.; . : . . : . : ; ~ : ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .1 I I I I i>ko.mcT--Loker Business Center, Carlsbad · Structural Engineers Bldg B .; • t ' ENG~. S8S SHEET 1, I ------- GSSfNO .. _ .. _5:.....:0:....:6:....:4:.:...A.:__ __ DATE June '05 I 1_ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 9GSSI PRoract· Loker Business Center, Carlsbad Structur~I Engineers Bldg B ·-: ~ i • i-·: ; ' ., ' • l ! 1 ;Pl 11,.,4-; :V~/tV. I • '. ~i~~1j. if·'}f &,lf1! ·: : : l ENGR-S8S . ' i = . r : ~ : ,· !· i SHEET l, \ GSSlNO~ 5064A DATE June '05 .. "j I ! ; .. ! 1 ! . ; I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I.-: .Jr:, I I I I ,GSSI Structural Engineers ·1 . ~ -: . ;· SHEET __ -..!C...i, 1,, __ _ ·PROJECT__:l=-=o::..:.· k-=-=ec:..r--=-8:.::u=sc.::.in=e--=-s~s ..::;C:...::ec:..n--=-te=-=-r.,__, -'-C--=-a:.:..:rl.::..sb-'--'acc,,;d:c,_ ___ -_-_----Gss1 No .. _5:;_;0:....:6:_;4:;:_A.:...--- Bldg B ENG;R._,__S_B_S ___ _ J I: [ : 1':1 r :7, : F d ·:· t. f 1-,, : . : . l8'' l-. , !~ i ~: !J! ! ! : i---'-"--M~·i-------r-!h !4·!~-_: ; 't • I ~ . 'l ;·~--++; : • ! .. ! DATE_J:_;u:c:_n_;_ec_.._:'0'--5 __ J,,' ;~ i:,2~: , iel(~~- ! . :· : ! . : ! ;: : .. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Structural Engineers SHEET _ ____:\.,e:....'yL---_ ·1>1lorncT_..!L~o~k~e:.'...r~B~u~s·~m~e~ss:::....::C:::e~n:.::te~r.L, -=C=-=a:.:.:rl=-sb:::..:a::..:d=---· ____ ·_----·ossrno.-'5::....:0:....:6:....:4,:_A;,,__ __ BldgB ENGJ:l. _ SBS DATE---=J=-=u:.:..:n=-=e_'0.:...5.c..... __ ' . . : 1 : : \ ~-,· : I'. : ' '. : : : ~ f:\ !'<?t· ~ ):J:;>:ff' F 1 : : : I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _, I I ,GSSI Structural Engineers !' ! . PRomct ·-taker 'Business Center, Carlsbad BldgB ENG;R...___S_B_S ___ _ SHEET __ -=--c..:.i-t-- . GSSIN0.__;5:.....:0-'6-'4"--A'-· -- DATE_Jc..;u:.:.::n..c..e:.-:'0 __ 5 __ ;.,:.; ):~:' iP~F:! ... : : .. ,· : . : : •-: . ! ., : '· : ·7, !v: : : ~ ; i : ..... , : . : --------''--'---"--·-·-· I I . ~ .. ---------, G·ss 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1---------·· I I I I I Structural Engineers ··; _, ·i .. "! ., ' ~ ·1 ·:· ·; ----r--;- PROJECT___:L=-:o::..:k~e::..r--=B::..:u::::s:.:..:in..:.:·e::..:s:.:::s:....;C:::..e=--=n:.::..t=-=e:.:..cr,'---e.::,:-.::.:a.:..c.rls=_b.:...,;a:.c...d"--~--- SHEET __ ____,1,!'---1?~_ GSSI NO .. _5::...;0:...;:6;_.;4cc....A-=------ Bldg B ; . ! ' ' ;~;-: ENGR._,__S.;__B_S ___ _ DA 'TE June '05 ,,,_ ----'-'-'----- ... , ·: ~; ; ! \ i~ _! :~~ ntr\~-:-i· : 1' .\ :i-~~ pL~l -~ . ! l i ! . ~ ~ 1 ' .,. I ' : ' ., ,. r I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1· ·I I I I ·PROJECT. -taker Business Center; Carlsbad Structural Engineers Bldg 8 ENGR. SBS i· ., i -:, ·i SHEET __ --'l,-'~'--- GSSIN"O:--5064A DATE June '05 :~irl . . ·: : . ' ,. Ii i ., : 7,: :, [1' ... ,..-: ,. ' : ! ' : : I _J. I I I I I I I I I I -I I I I 1- ,-------·. I ....... . . SHEET L.1 ,GSSI PROJECT Loker Busines·g:-Center, Carlsbad GSSINO. 5064A June'05 ·structural Engineers Bldg B ENGR. SBS DATE ~ L-,L) ~i~1t; W,tbit0!&. . ' ·· !J4,~' ~vtb ii i -~ : ; ; '1>': : i i : . ' : . . -? ii : :: \i~?~;-<: g8 bi½ • : •! •• f : : , j ; ; : ~ ; -""t !A.~! /•7; '? I !' : . . -. , ~ : l i1 b ~- ; I < ; : ; ; : ~ ; t-i»! r;~:+~1'hitrU : i ~ i ~ ; ~ ·: ; I ; 1 ! : . tH~T ihk4'W ~-~ ! . ! "'• ! . i· !" ' 1+¢-1 ~ ~1~i,,·: ~: 1 i ~ ;, ; ·:. ;;.;;·....,;,,!.' : : ~: iii ·: ! ; . : i1i,,;-'t".i, ,,, ;~! '7i : !· ! ; i : : i ·; :-! . ! ; . ; . ! .... ---~~------,·-·. ,, ' ! ' ! ;: . ,; I i ! . :· I •• I I ,GSSI Project: Loker· Building B I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Structural Engineers Engr: SBS Wall Design UBCorDSA? - Wall ht., h = Wall, t = t eff = Wallwt .. = w = Mwall = Vert. Reinf. = Rebar spacing = d = pn = k = j = Mmas = Ms = No. of Horiz Reir = Horiz. Reinf. Horiz. Spacing = Steel Ratios p_v = p_h = f'm = fy = Es, steel = Em, mas. = n = E/Em = Wall thickness = Vert. Re inf. = Horiz. reinf. = Footing Thickrn = Footing Width = CONCRETE BLOCK FENCE DESIGN ( 2001 CBC) Typical Block Screen UBC 6.0 ft. 8 in. 7.63 in. 102 psf 25.1 psf 452 ft-lbs #5 24 inches o/c 3.8 inches 0.087 0.340 0.887 ,,. WU .... 1441 ft-lbs > 1394 ft-lbs > 452 Mwall, Okay 452 Mwall, Okay 1 #4 24 inches o/c 0.0016 0.0011 0.0027 1500 psi 60,000 psi 29,000 k/inA2 1;125 k/inA2 25.8 8 in. #5@ 1 #4@ 14 inches 2.5 feet > .0007, Okay > .0007, Okay > .002, Okay 24 in. o/c 24 in. o/c h Seismic Source Type = Dist. to Seicmic Source = Na = Soil Profile Type = Seismic Zone - Seismic Coeff, Ca = Importance Factor, Ip = RR = V = 2.S*Ca*lp*W/R/1.4 = Foundation Design Soil Bearing Cap = fc = Footing Thickness, FT = Footing Width, B = OTM, w*h*(h/2+FT) = OTM* 1.5 = Resisting Moment, RM = Wall, wt*ht. = Footing, 150*FT*B = Total Fence Wt,Wall+Ftg. = RM, TFWt*B/2 = a=(RM-OTM)rro_tal Wt = 3*a - e=B/2-a = q, if3*a < B '"' q1, Soil Pressure q1 = q2, Soil Pressure q2 = Moment Footing, Mfootin~ = MuFooting, Mfooting*1.4 = Effective depth, Footing = Ku, Mu*12/(phi*bdA2) = p, pFooting = As, min @ wall,AsFooting = Rebar size, Footing Reinf = As,FootingSteel = Vertical reinforement = B 10km 1.0 Sc Zone_4 0.40 1.00 SheetNo. HI. Project No.: 5064A. Date: 6/8/2005 2.9 0.25W 2500 psf 3000 psi 14 inches 2.50 feet 628 ft-lbs 942 ft-lbs 612 lbs. 438 lbs. 1050 lbs. 1312 ft-lbs> OTM * FS, Okay 0.65 ft Ok, in mid halfofB 2.0 < B 0.6 ft. 107 4 psf < q,allow, Okay 387 psf 687 psf 523 ft-lbs 733 ft-lbs 10.5 inches 5 psi 8.8E-05 0.01475 inA2 per foot required #5 0.31 in/\2 per foot 252.2 inches o/c I Note: wt of the block wall incluqes 1 O psf for stucco each face on the wall for total of 20 psf additional wt. Loker B Fence w CL reinforcing.xis I .lo Sheet: I ~GSSI Project No: Structural Engfneers Project: I Date: 7/14/2005 I I Engineer:· Allowable Post Loads CBC 2001, Sec. 2307 Grade= D.F. #1 Fc4 = 1300 psi @ 4xposts E4 = 1,600,000 psi @4xposts Fee = 1000 psi @ 6xposts and larger Ee = 1,600,000 psi @ 6xposts and larger Fbrg = · 625 psi . c' = 0.80 (0.80 for sawn lumber, 0,85 for poles, 0.90 for glue-laminated lumber I I I I KcE = 0.30 (0.30 for visually graded lumber, 0.413 for machine stress rated sawn and GLB posts) I I I I I I I I I 1· le/d, max= 50 FcE = KcE*E*Cm/(h/d)A2 F'c = Fc*((1+(Fce/Fc))/(2*c')-sqrt(((1+(Fce/Fc))/(2*c'))"2-(FcE/Fc)/c')) Pall = A * F'c*Cd*Cm*Cf Duration, Cd= 1.00 for Fe only Wet Use Factor for Fe Wet Use, Cm = 1.00 @ 4x's 1.00 @ normal conditions and 0.80 @ exposed conditions Wet Use, Cm = 1.00 @ 6x's and larger 1.00@ normal conditions and 0.91@ exposed conditions Wet Use Factor for E Wet Use, Cm = 1.00 Wet Use, Cm = 1.00 Size Factor for Fe Size Factor, Cf = 1.15 Size Factor, Cf = 1.10 Size Fac;tor, Cf = 1.05 · Size Factor, Cf = 1.00 Size Factor, Cf= 1.00 .@ 4x's 1.00 @ normal conditions and 0.90 @ exposed conditions for E @ 6x's and larger for E @4x4 posts @4x6 posts @4x8 posts @4x10 posts @6x posts Post Size 4 X 6 X 8 X 10 X 4 X 6 X 8 X 10 X 12 X 4 X 6 X 8 X 10 X 12 X 8 4 7.8 4 11.8 4 14.8 4 18.0 6 20.7 6 30 6 40 6 51 6 61 8 30 8 47 8 65 8 82 8 97 Allowable Post -Loads, kips Heiaht, ft 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 · 18 6.4 5.3 4.5 3.8 3.3 2.8 9.6 8.0 6.7 5.7 4.9 4.3 hid exceeds 50 14.1 10.1 8.4 7.2 . 6.2 5.4 14.7 12.2 10:3 8.7 7.5 6.5 .16.9 15.0 13.1 11.5 10.1 8.9 7.9 7.0 6.3 5.7 27 24 21 18 16 14 12 11 9.9 8.9 36 32 28 25 22 19 17 15 13 12 46 41 36 31 21 24 21 19 17 15 54 48 42 37 33 29 25 23 20 18 29 27 26 24 22 20 18 16 15 13 -45 43 · 40 37 34 31 28 26 23 21 62 59 55 51 46 42 38 35 32 29 78 74 69 64 59 54 49· 44 40 36 93 88 82 76 70 63 58 52 47 43 Post Table.XLS I Pendicular to 19 Grain Bearini:i 7.7 12 16 20 5.1 12 8.0 19 11 26 14 33 16 39 12 16 19 26 26 35 33 45 39 53 I I I I I I· I I I I ·I ' ' 11 11 ,. ~ ' I j j ill GEOCON C INCORPORATED . ~ ,--------------------,---''--------,-G-E_O_T-EC_H_N_IC_A_L _C_b_N_S_Ul-TA_N_T_S • Proje'ctNo. 0'7192-22-01 December .17, 2003 Fr,anz-Loker LLC % .o 'Day Consultants 2710 Loker.Avenue-West, Suite 100 Carlsbad, California 92008 -Attention: Mr. Pat O'Day ·Subject: CARLSBAD OAKS WEST LOKER A VENUE AND PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD CARLSBAD, CALiFORNIA . ' GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Gentlemen: . . fa accordance with your authorization and our Proposal No. LG-03538. dated Octoqer 23, 2003, we herein submit the results of our geotechnical investigation for the subject site. The acqompanying report presents the results of the study 'With our conclusions and recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of project development. · ln our opinion, the site can qe developed as proposed provided the rec,;nmnendations cont~ined in this report are followed. · · Should you have any questions regarding this report, or if we ·may be ·of further·_service, please contact the undersigned at your convenience. Very tI'.uly yours, GEOCON INCORPORATED (6/del) Addressee 6960 Flanders Drive • San Diego, California 92121-2974 • 1elephone (858) 558-6900 • Fax (858) 558-6159 I I I I .1 I I I· I .JI. -· ) I I I 11 I -- 6.1 6.Ll 6.1.2 6.1:3 6.1.4 6.2 6.2.1 6.2.2 6.2.3 6.3 6.3.1 .6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General No soil or geologic conditions were encountered during this investigation that, in our ·opinion, would preclude the continued development of the property as .presently planned, , . provided the recommendations of thi~ report are followed. The site is underlaip by previously placed fill and the Santiago Formation. The fill material ~enerally ranges in thickness to .a maximum of 18 feet ~d will. require re~edial grading in the form of a partial removal and recompaction. Groundwater was not encoll:lltered in any of the borings and is i:iot e~pected to significantly affect the proposed development. Followjng remedial grading, the proposed co~ercial structures can be ·supported· on a conventional footing foundation system-in properly compacted fill or formational material. Soil and Excavation Characteristics The in situ soils can be excavated with moderate to heavy effort using· conventional heavy-duty gradi~g equipment. Cemented zones are common in .the Santiago Formation and, if encountere~, may requir~ a very heavy effort to e~cavate. Ceinenteq zones rriay also generate oversized material _requiring.special handling M.d placement pr9cedures. It is the re~ponsibility of the contractor to ensure that all excavations and trenches are properly shore~ and maintained in accordance with applicable OSHA rules and_ regulations in order to maintain safety and the stability of adjacen~ existing improvements. The majority of soil encountered during the investigation are considered to have .e. "medium" to "high" expansion potential (Expansion Index [EI] between SO and 130) as defined by Uniform Building Code (UBC) 'Table No. 18-I-B. Grading All grading should be performed in ·accordance with the Recommended Grading . . Specifications contained in Appendix C. Where the recommendations of Appendix C conflict with this report, the recommendations of this report take precedence. -5-December 17, 2003 .1 I I I I I I I I I .1 I I :;I J1 i I I I . 6.3.2 6.3.3 . 6.3.4 6.3.5 6.3.6 6.3.7 6.3.8 6.3.9 Prior· to conunencing grading, a preconstruction conference should be held at the site with the owner or. developer, grading contractor, civil engineer, and geotechnical engineer in attendance. Special soil handling procedures and/or the grading plans can be discussed at that time. Site preparation should begin with the ·removal of all deleterious material and vegetation. The depth of removal should be ~uch that material exposed in cut areas and the soil to be used as fili is relatively free of organic ma~er and construction debris. Debris generated · during stripping and/or sjte demolition sho:uld be exported from the site. The upper four feet of existing fill soils in proposed pav~d or building areas should b~ . . removed and replaced with properly compacted fill. 'J1}at portio~ of the abandoned sewer line backfill that is deeper than four feet and with a 1.5: 1 plane extending down and out from the perimeter-of a proposed ~uiiding should also be removed and replaced with properly compacted fill. . . Where buildings are planned on a cut fill transition, the formational material should be removed to a depth of 4 feet"below the proposed finish grade. . . Where practical, removals should extend at least 5 fe~t beyond the building footprint. Prior to placing fill, the ~ound surface should be scarified to a depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned, anci compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction in accordance with ASTM Dl-557-00. . Existing fill soils and excavated soils of the Santiago Form~tion are suitable .for re-use as fill proyided they are free of"vegetation, debris and other deleterious material. Fill layers should be no thicker than will allow for adequate b_onding and co~paction. All fill, incl1:1ding backfill and. sca!i~ ed ground surfaces, should be compacted to at least 90-percent of maximum dry density at near optimum moisture content, as determined in accordance with ASTMTestProcedure D 1557-00. Rocks greater than 6 inches in maximum dimension should not be placed within 3 feet of finish grade iµ building pad areas or street.subgrade. Rock fragments greater than 12 inches in maximum dimension should not be placed within 5 feet of finish grade or 3 feet of the deepest utility. Proiect No. 07192-22-01 -6-Decemb~r 17, 2003 I I I I I I I ,. I I ~ ' I I I ' -·1 •1 ,, !3.4 6.4.1 6.5 6.5.1 6.5.2 Seismic Design Criteria The following table summarizes site-specific seismic design CD; teria obtained from the 2000 California Building Code (CBC). The values listed on Table 6.4 are /or the Jµlian segment of the Elsinore Fault (located approximately 22 miles west of the site), which is identified as a Type A fault and the Rose Canyon Fault, which is identified as a Type B fault. TABLE 6.4. SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS ., Parameter De~ign Value . UBC Reference Seisµnc Zone Factor, Z 0.40 Table 16-I Soil Profile Type . Sc Table 16-J Seismic Coefficient, Ca ·0.40 Table 16-Q .. Seismic Coefficient, Cv 0.56 ·Table 16-R Near-Source Factor, Na 1.0 Table 16-S Near-Source Factor, Nv 1.0 Table. 16-T Seismic Source A/B Table 16-U Foundations . . The project is suitable for the use of continuous strip footings, isolated spread footings or appropriate combinations. thereof, provided the }?receding grading re~ommendations are fo.11~-yved. · The following recommendations are for one-to three-story structures and ass~e that the grading will be performed as r~commend~d in this rep9rt. Continuous footings should be at least 12 inches wide and should extend at least 24 inches below lowest adjacent pad grade and be founded on properly compacted fill or firm formational soil. Isolated spread footings should be at least 2 feet wide, extend a minimum of 24 inches below lowest adjacent pad grade, and be founded on properly compacted fill or firm fonnational soil. If soils with an Expansion Index greater than 90 are ~:p._counte~ed on.a building pad, perjm~ter footings should be deepened to 30 inches below lowest adjacent pad grade. A typical footing dimension detail is presented on Figure 4. Minimum reinforcement for continuous footings should consist of four No. 5 $teel reinforcing bars placed· horizontally in the footings, two near the top and two.near the bottom·. Recommendations for reinforcement of isolated spread footings should be provided by the project structural engineer. . -7 -Decemberl7,2003 I I I I j I I I I I I I I I I I· I JI JI ' ' ~• f,., ... I I t·:·-. I .~ ·.;·-: ' I .. ' .,., r . II •1 , •1 6.5.3. 6.5.4 6.5.5 6.5.6 6.5.7 6.6 6.6.1 6.6.2 . . The foundation dimensions and concrete reinforcement recommended above are based on soil characteristics only and are not intended to be used in lieu ·of those necessary to satisfy structural loading. Actual reinforcement of the foundations should be designed by· the project structural· engineer. The recommended allowable bearing capacity for foundations designed as recommended· above is Z,500 pounds per square.foot for foundations in properly compacted fill material or finn formational material. The soil bearing pressure may be increased by 300 psf and 500 psf for each ·additional foot of foundation width and depth, respectively, up to a maximum allowable soil bearing. pressure of 4,000 psf. The recommended allowable bearing capacity is-for dead p~us live loads and may be increased by one-third whep. considering transient loads due to wind or seismic;; forces. Foundation excavations should be observed by a represep.tative of Geocon Inc. prior to placing reinforcfug steel to verify that the exposed soil con~itions are similar to those . . . anticipated. Where buildings or other improvements ~re planned near the top of a slope steeper than .3: 1 (horizontal:vertical), special foundations and/ot design considerations are-recommended to . . -. mi~igate lateral soil movement. Building footings should be deepened such that the bottom outside edge.of the footing is at least 7 feet horizontally from the face of the slope. · No special subgrade presaturation is deemed necessary prior to placing concrete, however, the exposed foundation and slab subgra~e soils should be mois~ened as necessary to main~ain a moist soil condition as would be expected in any such concrete placement. Concrete Slabs-on-Grade Concrete slabs-on-grade not subjected to vehicular traffic should be at least 6 inches thick. . . Min_imum slab reinforcement should consist of No. 3 steel reinforcing bars placed 18 inches on center in both horizontal directions and positioned near the slab 1:nidpoint. The concrete slabs-on~grade should be underlain by at Jeast 4 ~:qches of clean sand (Sand '. Equivalent greater than 30) and, where moisture-sensitive floor coverings are planned, a visqueen moisture barrier placed at the midpoint of the sand cushion should also be provided. Exterior slabs should be provided with crack-contrpl joints spaced at intervals no greater than 10 feet. Joints should be constructed using sawcuts or other methods as soon as practical following concrete placement. Crack-control joints should extend a minimum ..... r, .. -8 -December 17, 2003 · I I I. I I I 1·· I I jl jl I ) ' a ·, ' I . .. I I ' ',• .... depth of one-fourth the slab thickness. Construction joints should 'be designed by the project structural engineer. . . 6.6.3 Exterior concrete flatwork should be thickened at'the edge (shovel footing), to reduce the potential for moisture migration underneath.the slab. 6.6.4 The recommendatious of this report are intende_d to i:educ~ the potential for cra~king of slabs due to exp~sive soils a!ld differential settlemeµt of fills of v~ing ~iclmess. However, even with · the incorporation of the recom:meridations presented herein, foundations, stucco walls and slabs-on-grade placed on such soil. conditions may exhibit some cracking due to soil movement and/or shrinkage. The occurrence of concrete shrinkage cracks is independent of the supporti~g ~oil characteristics. Their occurrence may be reduced and/or controlled by l~niiting the slump of the concrete, proper concrete placement and curing, and by the plac~ment of crack-control joints at periodic intervals, particularly where re-entrant slab corners occur. 6. 7· Lateral Loads 6. 7 .1 For resistance to lateral loads, an allowabl~ passive earth pressure equivalent to a fluid with a density of 300 pcf is recommended for footings or shem: keys poured. neat against properly compacted granular fill soils or undisturbed natural soils. Th~ allowable passive pressure assu111:es a horizontal surface extending at least 5 feet or· three times the surface generati~g the passive p:ressure, whichever is greater. The upper 12 inches of material not protected by floor slabs · oi pavemen~ should not be included in the· design . for lateral resistance. ~ allowable fric~on coefficient of 0.35 may be used for resistance to slidtng between soil and' concrete. This friction coefficient may be combined with.the allowable passive earth press~e when determining resistance-to lateral loads. 6.8 · Preliminary Pavement Design 6.8.1 Our preliminary pavement design is based on ari·assumed.Resistance Value (R-Value) of 5. Final pavement sections should .be.designed ,ac<;:ordj:ng. t9. the subgrade R-Valµe following_ final grading. It is understood that flexible pavement sections will be utilized . 6.8.2 The flexible pavement sections were evaluated in general conformance with the California Department .of Transportation (Caltrans) method of flexible pavement design. Recom- mendations for flexible pavement sections are presented on Table 6.8. -9-December 17, 2003 -~GEoCoN _I N_c_o_R_P_O_R_A_T_E_D ______ --,--,:_:·:·-... -,-i:---;';i-i\_f_r;:_n_u.....;n_r~-~;"'===.l~-z,;':":'·iJ:ci~h-c-H-NI-CA-L-CO_N __ S-U-LTA_N_TS Ci=~-. . • I I, , I n ir H V!J If · ~ · · i l i ) ! ["'~::: ... ~;;.~--~:: . ;:: ..... __,....;_;;_,l \ . ) : .: . · .Project No. 07192-22-01 September 16, 2005 Franz-Loker LLC % O'Day Consultants 2710 Loker Avenue West, Suite 100 Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Mr. Pat O'Day f •.. ~ ; • • l ); • '· l '.' '! ! \.,:.· ! •.:.~. -· Subject: LOKER BUSINESS CENTER (CARLSBAD OAKS WEST) LOKER A VENUE AND PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA STRUCTURAL.AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN REVIEW Gentlemen: In accordance with a request from Mr. Mark Bolen of Smith Consulting Architects, Geocon Incorporated has performed a review of the project structural and improvement plans for Phase I (Staples) and Phase II. The plans were reviewed for conformance with the recommendations contajned in the project geote9hnical investigation report-entitled G~otechnical Investigation, Carlsb[!d Oaks We~t, Loker·Avenue and Palomar Airpor,t _Roac!, Carlsbad, California, prepared by . · .·. Geocon_Inqorporated,' dated December 17, 2003'._ The reviewed structuraJ and improvement plans are entitled, Shell/Tenant Improvements For: Staples, Loker· -Business Center, Phase I, Carlsbad, · C,alifor~ia.92008.1,ot I of Palomar Oaks North l'f!-dustrial prepared by Smith. Consulting Architects, ·_ dated· July · 18, 2005 · and Shell Jmprove!J1.ef!is For: · Loker Business Cent~r, · Phase II, Carlsbad,· · . · . .. · Califor.nia 92008.Lot I of Palomar Oaks North 'Industrial .prepared ]?y Smith Consulting Architects,'. ·_ . · dated J1:1ly rs, ~oos. · ·. · --. · ·. : .. ' · Our review was limited · to items rel~d-only to geotechnical aspects· of the structural and improvement plans. Based upon our review,. it is the opinion of Geocon Incorporated that the plans · have been prepared in substantial conformance with the recommendations pres~nted in the project geotechnical report with the following comments: ' Phase I (Staples), Sheet AS3.1, Detail 16: Wher~ typical ·concrete curb will be adjacent to landscaping, the curb should extend 12 inches below the aggregate base to provide a cutoff to moisture migration into pavement subgrad·e soils. · Phase I (Staples), Sheet 81.1, Notes, Structural Design Criteria: Seismic Coefficient Ca should equal 0.4 Na, which is 0.40. Phase I (Staples), Sheet Sl.1, Notes, Foundations: Coefficient of Friction should equal 0.35 as stated in S~ction 6.7.1 of the soils report. 6960 Flanders Drive • San Diego, California 92121 Phase I1, Sheet AS3.1, Detail 16: Where typical concrete curb will be adjacent to landscaping, the curb should extend 12 inches below the aggregate base to provide a ·cutoff to moisture migration into pavement subgrade soils. · · · Phase II, Sheet Sl.1, Notes, Structural Design Criteria: Seismic Coefficient Ca should equal 0.4 Na, which is 0.40. Phase II, Sheet Sl.1, Notes, Foundations: Coefficient of Friction should equal 0.35 as stated in Section 6.7.1 of the soils report. Should you have any questions regarding this letter, or if we may be of further service, please contact the undersigned at your convenience. · Very truly yours, ~~~ORAT@ Joseph J. Vettel GE2401 JN:dmc (2) (1) Addressee Smith "Consulting Architects Attention: Mr. Mark Bolen Project No. 07192-22-01 \ • -2-September 16, 2005 ~GSSI Structural Engineers PROJECT Loker Business Center -Phase II (Bldg. B) ENGR. S. Stampfli Response to Plan Check Comments (Items numbers correspond to those of the review) • Structural 14. King post requirements are specified in Detail 4/Sl.2. SHEET PC-1 GSSI NO. 5064A DATE 9/20/2005 15. Calculation shown on page 20 for SE parapet at gridlines does not apply. A braced parapet is being provided, per Details 17 & 18 on Sheet S4.1. 16. See Foundation Note #22 on Sheet S2 for typical shear wall requirements at exterior walls. 17. See attached (page PC-2) for roof framing location plan. 18. See attached (page PC-3) for additional calculations. 19. See attached (page PC-4) for additional calculations. ,,, ' ©--------. -~-=j==:=~·i_ -~~fg·r -~~~ ~ h~---~i------Ol,:'.\J ~ "':t: - ~1r-----;;::;:;t------=s;:,\.]~ ~ ..._, ®------------~ ©-·----------~----· -- -" ' ,Gss·1 Structural Engineers Project: Loker -Bldg B Engr: S. Stampfli FIVE SP AN BEAM Beams at Grid Sheet: Project No. Date: 9/20/2005 t beaml ~-~~~~~~~~-~-,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~ I canot beam 2 t cant 2 beam 3 cant3 t beam4 t cant4 1-beams t A Span 1 B Span2 C Span3 D Span4 E Spans D Spans & Cantilevers Span 1 35.0 feet Span 2 40.0 feet Span 3 40.0 feet Span 4 40.0 feet Span 5 35.0 feet beam 1 29.0 feet cant 1 6.0 feet beam2 cant2 beam3 cant 3 beam4 cant4 beams beanil Beam Width Beam Depth Vall Mall I,beaml BeamlRr, TL Shear OK BeamlRr, DL = Mx Bending OK 40.0 feet 6.0 feet 28.0 feet 6.0 feet 40.0 feet 6.0 feet 29.0 f~et 5 2/8 in. 24 in. 30.5 kips 141 ft-kips 6048 inA4 10.2 kips 5.8 kips 14 ft-kips· I, req'd = 3841.3 inA4 Deflection OK Camber 0.79 in. @l.SxDL Beam Total Loads TLbeaml 0.7 plf TLcantl 0.7 plf TLbeam2 0.7 plf TLcant2 0.7 plf TLbeam3 0.1 plf TLcant3 0.7 plf TLbeam4 0.7 plf TLcant4 0.7 plf TLbeamS 0.7 plf beam2 Beam Width 5 2/8 in. Beam Depth 28 in. Vall 35.5 kips Mall 189 ft-kips I,beam2 9604 inA4 Rb,max 29.2 kips Rc,max 28.7 kips Rb,maxforx 22.2 kips x,left 20.0 ft. Vb,left 12.7 kips Vb,right 13.2 kips Vc,left 13.1 kips Vc,right 12.4 kips ShearO.K. +Mx 99 ft-kips -Mb 74 ft-kips -Mc 71 ft-kips Bending O.K. Defl. allow. = 2.00 in. Dfbeam2 TL = 2.10 in. Dfbeam2DL = 1.20 in. Dfcantl DL -0.06 in. DfPlDL -0.31 in. Dfcant2DL -0.06 in. DfP2DL -0.30 in. Deft. max. = 1.35 in. Deflection O.K Camber 0.68 in. @l.SxDL Beam Dead Loa_ds Loads DLbeaml 0.4 plf DL 16 psf DLcantl 0.4 plf LL 12 psf DLbeam2 0.4 plf Trib. Width 25.0 feet DLcant2 0.4 plf Deflection Allowable DLbeam3 -0.4 plf LJ 240 DLcant3 0.4 plf Fb 2900 psi DLbeam.4 0.4 plf Fv 290 psi DLcant4 0.4 plf E 2000 ksi DLbeam.5 0.4 plf P,mech'l 0.0 kips Camber = l.S*DL deflection beam3 beam4 Beam Width--5 2/8 in. Beam Width 5 2/8 in. Beam Depth 24 in. Beam Depth 28 in. Vall 30:5 kips Vall Mall 141 ft-kips Mall I,beam3 6048 inA4 l,beam4 Beam3Rr,.TL 9.8 kips Rd,max Shear OK Re,max Beam3Rr,DL = 5.6 kips Rd,maxforx Mx 69 ft-kips x, left Bending OK Vd,left 12.4 I, req'd = 3457 inA4 Vd,right 13.1 kips Deflection OK Ve,left 13.2 kips Camber 0.69 in. Ve,right 12.7 kips ShearO.K b(\am5 +Mx 99 ft-kips Beam Width 5 2/8 in. -Md 71 ft-kips Beam Depth 24 in. -Md 74 ft-kips Vall 30.5 kips BendingO.K Mall 141 ft-kips Deft. allow. = 2.00 in. I,beam5 6048 inA4 Dfbeam4TL = 2.10 in. BeamSRr, TL -10.2 kips Dfbeam4DL= 1.20 in. Shear OK Dfcant3 DL -0.06 in. BeamSRr,DL = 5.8 kips DfP3 DL -0.30 in. Mx 74 ft-kips Dfcant4DL -0.06 in. Bending OK DfP4DL -0.31 in. I, req'd = 3841 in"4 Defl. max. 1.36 in. Deflection OK Deflection O.K. Camber 0.79 in. Camber 0.68 in. @l.5x DL @1.SxDL ~ u~ ~xC;-r-1/fto~, f~.:~oP-etJ'~+: 5 Span.xls U~E ~x4'..Pi, fnvi,=-'7100,(4~4~ 44.&~/ SHEET pt---4 PROJECT Loker Business Center, Carlsbad GSSINO. 5064A Structural Engineers Bldg f;,..,, '1 ~l.,1? ENGR. SBS ~~J,~~; i {;;;; i:··l l t: <; j ! ~J': r ~1zJ,if 1f<t,.i' i.l-4: lt'r~·~:::; .. ··-·----- 1 1 i i i i i 1 ~~~ ;t,1~+1q r~r+-: r ~;"1~); ~ ;,~ p~,-=: . l : : Hh ~~'f~b !.tb L~ l• ~ i ' ' ; : ! l , . '~: :-i$.f~~.1 ~ '. l:Tfsf: ' i i]t~!1~~1fh:! ~1!4 1h f ' : : ' ' ' '. ' .. 1 . . ; : ~ :=; i'?~~~l~;.::: ~ 1:ei~~ f~:,; (fvt-1N,kkiL) · : : ; : : r : : t n ml: r : 1 UJi : e: i · • · · , · .. ·-. ~-t 1&-J?!j~~~; , ·1 ~)lilV = = 0lr~ 1~!:At.-r= : = : : :~; : ' HfHrH+i ,~:·/'I I ! i i ! H . : ! t ; : 1 , : • ; : ] ! ;: i : Nt,/rf-:) ii--F~P*-l:1 i+-1 ,: t f ~ ~ '.. j_ 1 ~ t-j ~ ~~ ;. l ; :ti·: .. ~~ r!dfi~i~t H-!f~qi+ t:, 1 ·;:; l-: ; : +i :_: ' 1zjpixf,z.i ; ; i µ~; ff't vt l t·: : .:. ! : ! .. . . . . ; . ' : l i 'u~L\ i u~tr ;":, !~::::: \· i:: .... ! : ! ~~.~~iJ~i l .. ! ! ~! f!~WQ.4~\u Wi·;~-~~~w· '1: . : . '! :rrrn. =+:.:' : ; : : : . . . ~ . : i i : (<McPARLANE C{ASSOCIATES CONSULTING-MECHANICAL·ENGINEERS RESPONSE Plan Check Comments Loker Business Park September 23, 2005 Prepared By: Art Mata Our Project No.: 2865.A & B ~fi,i~~J.;:F~~~~~~6tb~:~\~~~~ .. ~'?t::·:r.:~:~~:::~;l::::;;~~~~:::~:~s¼~~;;~,~~~J~~~¥f~~~~~~1~~~~~~.:~ []I l [J CJ ! I I 6. I ' ' ! I I I CJ 18 11 Sheet P1 .0 incomplete as a site plumbing plan. Response: Complied. Also see i:;ivil plan. Please show upstream sewer manhole rim elevation. Response: Complied. Provide complete water line sizing calculations. Response: Complied. .. Provide gas line plans. Response: HVAC units do not require gas. Restaurant tenant information is unavailable at this time. Gas design for restaurant tenants shall be completed during processing of restaurant tenant permit. Proposed qas meter location shown on Sh!3et P2.0. -- Provide required sizing calculatioris for grease interceptors. Response: See estimated qrease interceptor calcula.tion on sheet P0.1. Provide note or detail noting backflow protection of water connection to fire protection system. Response: Complied; Note #37, Sheet P0.1. PRINCIPALS: PAUL F. McPARLANE, P.E. and JOHN H. McGEE V ·1 C E P R ES I D E N T: D O U G LA S R . I S A A KS , P . E . ASSOCIATE: KEN ROST 4619 Viewridge Avenue, Suite C, San Die~o, California 92123-1639 Ph (858) 277-9721 • FAX (858) 277-9760 • email@mcparlane.com ! l t ! I I l ! • I l ! ! ' I l ! l ___ ...,. --· ·-•••• ,,, L..11~1-1,lfJ.L-J .;;,c.uu p.7 City of Carlsbad 05-2695 8/5/05 2. Correct the state111ent on the Title Sheet of the plans stating that this project shall comply with the 2001 edition-of the California Buifding Code (Title 24 ), which adopts the ·1997 UBC, 2000 UMC, 2000 UPC and the 1999 NEC. PLUMBING {2000 UNIFORM PLUMl!)ING CODE) 3. Sheet P1 .o is incomplete as a site plumbing pf ah. Provide the site plumbing plans showing the sizes and locations of the gas meters and water meter; and the sizes, routes. and slopes of the building sewer, storm drainage system. site gas lines, and site water lines. 4. Please show the upatteam sewer manhole rim elevation. As per UPC, Section 710.1. provide backwater valves on all building drains which seive plumbing fixtures with flood rim elevations below the upstream manhole rim elevations. Only fixtures with flood rim levels below the upstream _manhole rim elevation maY. flow through a backwater valve. 5. Provide complete water line sizing calculations, including the assumed values for water pressure, pressure losses, water demands, and developed pipe lengths used for sizing the ~ater Jines shown on the drawings. UPC Section 610.0 and Appendix &A'. 6. Provide gas line plans and calculations, showing gas pressures. pipe lengths and gas demands for required gas lin~ for HVAC !Jnits. UPC Section 1217.0 I 7. · A~_per UPC, Section 1014.8, for CommercJal_~rt~hen pleas_e provide the requir~d ! · .:· .; · sizing calcul~tions for grease interceptors usih,9 UPC.Appendix H. ·:i::,,:~J ·: :: ·.-· 8. Provide notes or details noting the backflow protection of water connection to fire · ., . protection systems will be provided as per UPC, Section 603.4.18 MECHANICAL (2000 UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE) . 9. Vn:t ~pidl'~ ..,,-z,1?~ Please correct the General Notes #12 on sheet M-1 to ctea[ly show where the regulred smoke detectors are to be insta11eg~ Provld~ smoke detection in the supply air duct of an "air-moving system" for required shut-off of equipment for smoke control. UMC Section 609.0, An "air-moving system'" is a system designed to provide heating, cooling, or ventUation in which one Qr more air- handling units are used to supply air to a common space or to draw air from a common plenum or space. UMC Section 203.0. ~~ Note: If you have any questions regarding this Plumbing and Mechanical plan review list please contact Glen Adamek at (858) 560-1468. To speed the review process, note on this list (or a copy) where the corrected items have been address~d on the plans. Loker Phase II Plan File No. 05-2693 PLAN REVIEW SHEET FOR PLAN CHECK COMMENTS RESPONSES 1. Remove 'iExisting Work" shown on Existing work removed ~ingle line sheet 2. Show or note on the plans the method Fault current calculations provided with used to limit fault currents to 10,000amps resubmittal. Panel AIC rating modified to or lower on branch circuits be within fault currents. 4. If Utilizing a series rated system, note Note added to singleline diagram . · on plans: "Overcurrent device enclosures will be identified as series . rated and labeled in. accordance with NEC 110-22." And "The overcurrerit devices shall be AIC rated per manufacturers labeling of the electrical equipment. 5. The Principal Lighting Designer must Sheet will be signed. sign the imprinted L TG-1.form - .. LOKER BUSINESS PARK PHAS~ II DATE: 9 21 5 TIME: 8 6 AM l.OKER2 . j . ALL INFORMATION PRESENTED IS FOR REVIEW, APPROVAL INTERPRETATION AND APPLI<::ATION BY A REGISTERED · ENGINEER ONLY . . ----------------------------·-------------------,------------------------------BUSSPOWER THREE PHASE FAULT.ANALYSIS PROGRAM VERSION 1.0 COPYRIGHT SKM SYSTEMS ANALYSIS, INC. 1983, 1986 DISTRIBUTED EXCLUSIVEL y._ BY .BUSSMANN, COOPER INDUSTRIES lDATE: 9 21 5 TIME: 8 6 AM LOKER BUSINESS PARK PHASE II C O N T R I B U T I O N D A T A PAGE 2 CONTRIBUTION VOLTAGE L-L SYMMETRICAL DUTY GEN/MOTORS FROM NAME NO NAME KVA AMPS X/R HP/KVA Xd" SDG&E 999 SDG&E 208. 15131. 42000. 30.0 POS SEQUENCE IMPEDANCE .00220 + J .06605 PER UNIT lDATE: 9 21 5 TIME: 8 6 AM PAGE 3 LOKER BUSINESS PARK PHASE II FEEDER FROM NO NAME FEEDER TO NO NAME F E E D E R D A T A QTY VOLTS LENGTH /PH L-L FEET FEEDER DESCRIPTION SIZE TYPE DUCT INSUL 1 MSB 2 PANEL HPB 1 208. 10. 2 C M THWN POS SEQ Z .2020 + J .0585 OHMS/MFT .04669 + J .01352 PER UNIT 1 MSB 999 SDG&E 1 208. 55. 750 C M THWN POS SEQ Z .0216 + J .0445 OHMS/MFT .02746 + J .05657 PER UNIT lDATE: 9 21 5 TIME: 8 6 AM PAGE 4 LOKER BUSINESS PARK PHASE II 1 MSB 2 PANEL HPB 999 SDG&E T H R E E P H A S E F A U L T R E P O R T FAULT: 22002. VOLTAGE: 208. CONTRIBUTIONS: FAULT: 17783. VOLTAGE: 208. CONTRIBUTIONS: RMS SYM AMPS, 7926. KVA IMPEDANCE TO GND= .00128 + J 999 SDG&E 22002. AMPS RMS SYM AMPS, 6406. KVA IMPEDANCE TO GND= .00330 + J 1 MSB 17783. AMPS X/R: 4.134 .00531 OHMS X/R: 4.134 X/R·: .00589 X/R: 1.783 OHMS 1.783 FAULT: 42000. RMS SYM AMPS, 15131. KVA X/R: 30.000 VOLTAGE: 208. IMPEDANCE TO GND= .00010 + J .00286 OHMS Page 1 r CONTRIBUTIONS: lDATE: 9 21 5 TIME: 8 6 AM LOKER BUSINESS PARK PHASE II FA U LT BUS RECORD NO NAME 1 MSB 2 PANEL HPB 999 SDG&E S T U D Y VOLTAGE L-L 208. 208. 208. s LOKER2 SDG&E U M M A R Y AVAILABLE 3 PHASE 22002. 17783. 42000. 3 BUSES, 3 BRANCHES, 1 CONTRIBUTIONS *** SHORT CIRCUIT STUDY COMPLETE*** Page 2 42000. AMPS X/R: 30.000 PAGE 5 RMS DUTIES MOMENTARY 26379·. 18299. 68010. I . I GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION CARLSBAD OAKS WEST LOKER AVENUE AND PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA · PREPARED FOR FRANZ-LOKER LLC % O'DA Y CONSULTANTS CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA GEOCON INCORPORATED Project No. 07192-22-01 December 17, 2003 Franz-Loker LLC % 0 'Day Consultants 2710 Loker A venue West, Suite IO0 Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Mr. Pat O'Day Subject: CARLSBAD OAKS WEST Gentlemen: LOK.ERA VENUE AND PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION 0 In accordance with your authorization and our Proposal No. LG-03538 dated October 23, 2003, we herein submit the results of our geotechnical investigation for the subject site. The acQompanying report presents the results of the study with our conclusions and recortm1endations regarding the geotechnical aspects of project development. fu our opinion, the site can be developed as pl'oposed provided the recommendations contained in this report are followed. Should you have any questions regarding this report, or if we may be of further service, please contfl,ct the undersigned at your convenience. Very truly yours, GEOCON INCORPORATED (6/del} Addressee 6960 Flanders Drive • San Diego, California 92121-2974 • Telephone {858) 558-6900 • Fax {858) 558-6159 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Pl.JR.POSE AND SCOPE ................................................................................................................. 1 2. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................ : ................................. 1 3. SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ........................................................................................ 2 3.1 Previously Placed Fill (Qpf) .................................................................................................. 2 3.2 Santiago Formation (Tsa) .............................................. , ....................................................... 2 4. GROUNDWATER .......................................................................................................................... 2 5. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ................................................................................................................. 3 5.1 Faulting and Seismicity ............. , ........................................................................................... 3 5 .2 Liquefaction .......................................................................................................................... 4 5.3 Landslides ................................................. -............................................................................ 4 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................... 5 6.1 General .................................................................................................................................. 5 6.2 Soil and Excavation Characteristics ...................................................................................... 5 6.3 Grading ........................................... _ ....................................................................................... 5 6.4-Seisµric Design Criteria ......................................................................................................... 7 6.5 Foundations ........................................................................................................................... 7 6.6 Concrete Slabs-on-Grade ...................................................................................................... 8 6. 7 Lateral Loads ......................................................................................................................... 9 6.8 Preliminary Pavement Design .................................. , ............................................................ 9 6.9 Site Drainage and Moisture Protection .. _ ............................................................................. 10 6.10 Foundation and Grading Plan Review ................................................................................ 11 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1, Vicinity Map Figure 2, Geologic Map figure 3, Cross-section A-A' Figure 4, Cross-section B-B' Figure 5, Wall/Colunui Footing Dimension Detail APPENDIX A FIELD JNVESTIGATION Figures A-1 -A-5, Logs of Borings APPENDIXB LABORATORY TESTING Table B-I, Summary of Laboratory Direct Shear Test Results Table B-II, Summary of Laboratory Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content Test Results Table B-ill, Summary of Laboratory Expansion Index Test Results Figures B-1 ~ B-4, Consolidation Curve APPENDIXC RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS LIST OF :REFERENCES GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION 1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation for the proposed Carlsbad Oaks West project located east of the McClellan Palomar Airport in Carlsbad, California (see Vicinity Map, Figure 1). The purpose of the study was to investigate the soil and geologic conditions at the site and to identify geotechnical constraints (if any) that may impact the proposed development. This report provides recommendations pertinent to the geotechnical engineering aspects of developing the property as proposed. The scope of the investigation included a review of aerial photographs and readily available published and unpublished geologic literature (see List of References). The scope also included a field inves~gation, laboratory testing to characterize physical properties of the soil, eng_ineering analyses, and preparation of this report. The field investigation was performed on November 13, 2003, and consisted of drilling five small-diameter borings at the locations indicated on the Geologic Map, Figure 2. Logs of the exploratory borings and other details of the field investigation are presented in Appendix A .. Laboratory tests we:re performed on selected soii samples obtained during the field investigation to evaluate pertinent physical characteristics of the soil. Details of the laboratory tests and a summary of the test results are presented in Appendix B. The recommendations presented herein are based on analysis of the data obtained from the exploratory borings, laboratory test results, and our experience with similar soil and geologic conditions. The Site Development Plan for Carlsbad Oaks West, prepared by O'Day Consultants, dated October 2003, was used as the basis for this study. 2. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The approximately 41/2 acre, rectangular-shaped site consists of a previously graded vacant lot. A three-story office building occupies the adjacent lot to the north; lanq. adjacent to the west boundary is undev:eloped. According to the Site Development Plan, -a 25-foot-wide sewer easement exists along the west boundary of the lot. Previous.grading has created a 2.:1 fill slope along the northern portion of the west boundary and 2:1 cut slopes along the east and southeast property margins. Project No. 07192-22-0 I -1 -December 17, 2003 .P ' "\ We understand that a commercial development consisting of three buildings and associated paved parking is planned for the site. Grading for thy building pads and parking lots is expected to consist of cuts and fills ofless than S feet deep. The existing sewer line in the northwest corner of the lot will be relocated closer to the west property boundary. The location$ and descriptions of the site and propqsed development are based on a site reconnaissance and discussions with project consultants. If project details vary significantly from those described, Geocon should be consulted to provide additional recommendations and/or analyses. 3. SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS Based on the field investigation and review of the literature, the geologic units underlying the site consist of previously placed fill and the Santiago Formation. The approximate location and extent of each geologic unit is depicted on the Geologic Map, Figure 2 and the Geologic_ Cross-Sections, Figures 3 and 4. Each unit is described below. 3.1 Previously Placed Fill (Qpf) Previously placed fill was observed in Boring B4 and generally consisted of very stiff sandy clay and clayey sand. The fill soils were tested and observed by San Diego Soils Engineering Incorporated and are discussed in their report entitled: As-Graded Geotechnical Report for th~ Carlsbad Oaks Business Center, dated November 17, 1986. Geologic Cross-Sections A-A' and B-B' (Figures 3 and 4) show our interpretation of fill thickness within the existing pad area. The compacted fill is considered suitable for receiving additional fill or structures following partial removal and recompaction. 3.2 Santiago ,Formation (Tsa) Santiago Formation was encountered at the surface in Borings B 1, B2, B3, and BS and beneath the ;fill in Boring B4. Where observed, the Santiago Formation consists of very stiff to.hard siltstone, stiff to hard claystone, and very dense silty very fine sand. Cemented sandstone was also encountered in Borings B2, B3 and BS. 4. GROUNDWATER Groundwater was not encountered within the upper 20 feet of the existing building pad area. Groundwater is not expected to affeqt project development as presently proposed; however, it is not uncommon for groundwater or seepage conditions to develop where none previously existed. Proper surface drainage of irrigation and rainwater will be critical to future performance of the project. Project No. 07192-22-01 -2-December 17, 2003 5. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 5.1 i=aulting and Seismicity Based on the field reconnaissance and a review of aerial photographs and published geologic maps, the site is not located on any known active or potentially active fault trace as defmed by the California Geologic Survey (CGS). The closest known active faults and associated maximum earthquake magnitudes are indicated on Table 5.1. In order to estimate the distance of known faults to the site, the computer program EQFAULT (Blake, 1989, updated 2000) was utilized. The program calculates the distance from the site within a specified search radius to known "active" California faults that have been digitized in an earthquake catalog. Associated peak site accelerations based on attenuation relationships of Sadigh, et al., (1997) are also presented on Table 5.1. TABLE 5.1 DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS FOR SELECTED FAULTS Fault Distance From Maximum Peak Site Site (miles) Earthquake Magnitude Acceleration (g) Rose Canyon Fault. Zone 7 6.9 0.28 Newport-Inglewood (Offshore) 10 6.9 0.23 Elsinore-Julian 22 7.1 0.13 Elsinore-Temecula 22 6.8 0.11 Coronado Bank 23 7,4 0.15 Elsinore-Glen Ivy 36 6.8 0.06 Earthquake Valley 40 6.5 0.04 Palos Verdes 41 7.1 0.07 San Jacinto-Anza 45 7.2 0.06 San J acinto-SanJ acinto Valley 47 6.9 0.05 San Jacinto-Coyote Creek 49 6.8 0.04 The results of the deterministic analysis indicate that the Rose Canyon Fault Zone is the closest source for potential ground motion occurring at the site. The Rose Canyon Fault Zone is located approximately 7 miles west of the site. The Rose Canyon Fault Zone is postulated as having the potential to generate a Maximum Earthquake Magnitude of 6.9. The "maximum earthquake magnitude" is defined as the maximum earthquake that appears capable of occurring under the presently known tectonic framework (California Division of Mines and Geology Notes, Number 43). It is our opinion that the site could be subjected to moderate to severe ground shaking in the event of an earthquake along any of the faults listed on Table 5 .1 or other faults in the southern ProjectNo. 07192-22-01 -3 -December 17, 2003 .,_ >. California/northern Baja California region. Bowever, we do not consider the site to possess any greater risk than that -of the surrounding. developments. While listing maximum earthquake magnitudes is useful for comparison of potential effects of fault activity in a region, other considerations are important in seismic design, including the frequency and duration of motion and the soil conditions underlying the site. We recomm~nd that seismic design of the structures be performed in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC) guidelines and/or those currently adopted by the City of Carlsbad. 5.2 Liquefaction The potential for liquefaction during a strong earthquake is limited to relatively clean, sandy soils that are in a loose, unconsolidated condition .and are located below the water table. Due to the lack of near-surface groundwater table and the underlying very dense formational Soils, the potential for liquefaction is considered very low. 5.3 Landslides No evidence of landsliding was observed at the site during the site reconnaissance nor during our review of historic aerial photographs of the site. We consider the potential for landslide hazard to be low for the subject property. Project No. 07192-22-01 -4-December 17, 2003 l 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . ' 6.1 General 6.1.l No soil or geologic conditions were encountered during this investigation that, in our opinion, would preclude the continued development of the property as presently planned, provided the recommendations of this report are followed. 6.1.2 . The site is underlain by previously placed fill and the Santiago Formation. The fill material generally ranges in thickness to a maximum of 18 feet and will require remedial grading in the form of a partial removal and recompaction. 6.1.3 Groundwater was not encountered in any of the borings and is not expected to significantly affect the proposed developmept. 6.1 .4 Following remedial grading, the proposed commercial structures can be supported on a conventional footing foundation system in properly compacted fill or formational material. 6.2 Soil and Excavation Characteristics 6.2.1 The in situ soils can be excavated with moderate to heavy effort using conventional heavy-duty grading equipment. Cemented zones are common in the Santiago Formation and, if encountered,. may ;require a very heavy effort to excavate. Cemented zones may also generate oversized material requiring special handling and placement procedures. 6.2.2 It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that all excavations and trenches are properly shored and maintained in accordance with applicable OSHA rules and regulations in order to maintain safety and the stability of adjacent existing improvements. 6.2.3 The majority of soil encountered during the investigation are considered to have a "medium" to "high" expansion potential (Expansion Index [EI] between 50 and 130) as defined by Uniform Building Code (Ul3C) Table No. 18-I:B. 6.3 Grading 6.3 .1 All grading should be performed in accordance with the Recommended Grading Specifications contained in Appendix C. Where the recommendations of Appendix C conflict with this report, the recommendations of this report take precedence. Project No. 07192-22-01 December 17, 2003 l L 6.3 .2 Prior to commencing grading, a preconstruction conference should be held at the site with the owner or developer, grading c_ontractor, civil engineer, and geotechnical engineer in attendap.ce. Special soil handling procedlJ,fes and/or the grading plans can be discussed at that time. 6.3.3 Site preparation should begin with the removal of all deleterious material and vegetation. The depth of removal should be such that material exposed in cut areas and the soil to be used as fill is relatively free of organic matter and construction debris. Debris generated during stripping and/or site demolition should be exported from the site. 6.3.4 The upper four feet of existing fill soils in proposed paved or building areas should be removed and replaced with properly compacted fill. That portion of the abandoned sewer line backfill that is deeper than four feet and with a 1.5:1 plane extending down and out from the perimeter of a proposed building should also be removed and replaced with properly compacted fill. 6.3 .5 Where buildings are planned on a cut fill transition, the fonnational material should be removed to a depth of 4 feet below the proposed finish grade. 6.3.6 Where practical, removals should extend at least 5 feet beyond the building footprint. 6.3.7 Prior to placing fill, the ground surface should be scarified to a depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction in accordance with ASTM D1557-00. 6.3.8 Existing fill soils and excavated soils of the Santiago Fonn~tion are suitable for re-use as fill provided they are free of vegetation, debris and other deleterious material. Fill layers should be no thicl<:er than will allow fot adequate bonding and compaction. All fill, including backfill and scarified ground surfaces, should be compacted to at least 90-percent of maximum dry density at near optimum moisture content, as determined in accordance with ASTM Test Procedure D 1557-00. 6.3.9 Rocks greater than 6 inches in maximum dimension should not be placed within 3 feet of finish grade in building pad areas or street subgrade. Rock fragments greater than 12 inches in maximum dimension should not be placed within 5 feet of finish grade or 3 feet of the deepest utility. Project No. 07192-22-01 -6-December 17, 2003 l !t 6.4 Seismic Design Criteria 6.4.1 The following table summarizes site-specific seismic design criteria obtained from the 2000 California Building Code (CBC). The values listed on Table 6.4 are for the Julian segment of the Elsi11ore Fault (located approximately 22 miles west of the site), which is identified as a Type A fault and the Rose Canyon Fault, which is identified as a Type B fault. TABLE6.4 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS Parameter Design Value UBC Reference Seismic Zone Factor, Z 0.40 Table 16-I Soil Profile Type Sc Table 16-J Seismic Coefficient, Ca 0.40 Table 16-Q Seismic Coefficie:t1t, Cv 0.56 Table 16-R Near-Source Factor, Na 1.0 Table 16-S Near-Source Factor, Nv 1.0 Table 16-T Seismic Source AIB Table 16-U 6.5 Foundations 6.5.l The project is suitable for the use of continuous strip footings; isolated spread footings or appropriate combinations thereof, provided the preceding grading recommendations are followed. 6.5.2 The following recommendations ate for one-to three-story structures and assume that the grading will be performed as rec9rnmended in this report. Continuous footings should be at least 12 inches wide and should extend at least 24 inches below lowest adjacent pad grade and be founded on properly compacted fill or firm formational soil. Isolated spread footings should be at least 2 feet wide, extend a minimum of 24 inches below lowest adjacent pad grade, and be founded on properly compacted fill or firm formational soil. If soils with an Expansion Index greater than 90 are encountered on a building pad, perimeter footings should be deepened to 30 inches below lowest adjacent pad grade. A typical footing dimension detail is presented on Figure 4. Minimum reinforcement for continuous footings should consist of four No. 5 steel reinforcing bars placed horizontally in the footings, two near the top and two near the bottom. Recommendations for reinforcement of isolated spread footings should be provided by the project structural engineer. Project No. 07192-22-01 -7-December 17, 2003 ). 6.5.3 The foundation dimensions and concrete reinforcement recommended above are based on soil characteristics only and are not.intended to be used in lieu of those necessary to satisfy structural loading. Actual reinforcement of the foundations should be designed by the project structural engineer. 6.5.4 The recommended allowable bearing capacity for foundations designed as recommended· above is 2,500 pounds per square foot for foundations in properly compacted fill material or· firm formational material. The soil bearing pres~ure may be increased by 300 psf and 500 psf for each additional foot of foundation width and depth, respectively, up to a maximum allowable soil bearing pressure of 4,000 psf. The recommended allowable bearing capacity is for dead plus live loads and may be increased by one-third when considering transient loads due to wind or seismic forces. 6.5.5 Foundation excavations should be observed by a representative of Geocon Inc. prior to placing reinforcing steel to verify that the exposed soil conditions are similar to those anticipated. 6.5 .6 Where buildings or other improvements a1:e planned near the top of a slope steeper than 3: 1 (horizontal:vertical), special foundations and/or design considerations are recommended to mitigate lateral soil movement. Building footings should be deepened such that the bottom outside edge of the footing is at least 7 feet horizontally from the face of the slope. 6.5.7 No special subgrade presaturation is deemed necessary prior to placing concrete, however, the exposed foundation and slab subgrade soils should be moistened as necessary to main~ain a moist soil condition as would be expected in any such concrete placement. 6.6 Concrete Slabs-on-Grade 6.6.1 Concrete slabs-on-grade not subjected to yehicular traffic should be at least 6 inches thick. Minimum slab reinforcement should consist of No. 3 steel reinforcing bars placed 18 inches on center in both horizontal directions and positioned near the slab midpoint. The concrete slabs-on-grade should be underlain by at least 4 inches of clean sand (Sand Equivalent greater than 30) and, where moisture-sensitive floor coverings are planned, a visqueen moisture barrier placed at the midpoint of the sand cushion should also be provided. 6.6.2 Exterior slabs should be provided with crack-control joints spaced at intervals no greater than 10 feet. Joints should be constructed using sawcuts or other methods as soon as practical following concrete placement. Crack-control joµits should extend a minimum Project No. 07192-22-01 -8 -December i7, 2003 i l ). depth of one-fourth the slab thickness. Construction joints should be designed by the project structural engineer. 6.6.3 Exterior concrete flatwork should be thickened at the edge (shovel footing), to reduce the potential for moisture migration underneath the slab. 6.6.4 The recommendations of this report are intended to .reduce the potential for cracking of slabs due to expansive soils and differential settleme;nt of fills of varying thickness. However, even with the incorporation of the recommendations presented herein, foundations, stucco walls and slabs-on-grade placed on such soil conditions may exhibit · so:me cracking due to soil movement and/or shrinkage. The occurrence of concrete shrinkage cracks is independent of the supporting soil characteristics. Their occurrence may be reduced and/or controlled by limiting the slump of the concrete, proper concrete placement and curing, and by the placement of crack-control joints at periodic intervals, particularly where re-entrant slab corners occur. 6.7 Lateral Loads 6.7.1 For resistance to lateral loads, an allowable passive earth pressure equivalent to a fluid with a density of 300 pcf is recommended for footings or shear keys poured neat against properly compacted granular fill soils or undisturbed natural soils. The allowable passive pressure assumes a horizontal surface extending at least 5 feet or three times the surface generating the passive pressure, whichever is greater. The upper 12 inches of material not protected by floor slabs or pavement should not be included in the design for lateral resistance. An allowable friction coefficient of0.35 may be used for resistance to sliding between soil and concrete. This friction coefficient may be combined with the allowable passive earth pressure when determining resistance to lateral loads. 6.8 Preliminary Pavement Design 6.8.1 Our preliminary pavement design is based on an assumed Resistance Value (R-Value) of 5. Final pavement sections should be designed according to. the subgrade R-Value following final grading. It is understood that flexible pavement sections will be utilized. 6.8.2 The flexible pavement sections were evaluated in general conformance with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) method of flexible pavement design. Recom- mendations for flexible pavement sections are presented on Table 6.8. Project No. 07192-22-01 -9-December 17, 2003 \ ! I l, JI TABLE6.8 PRELIMINARY FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT SECTIONS Traffic Index Asphalt Class 2 Proposed Utilization R-Value Aggregate Base (TI) (inches) (inches) Auto Parking Stalls 5 4.5 3.0 8.0 Auto Driveways 5 5.5 3.0 12.0 Fire LanestHeavy Trucks. 5 7.0 4.0 15.5 6.8,3 Pavement subgrade soils should be scarified, moisture conditioned, and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction as determined by ASTM D 1557-00 to a depth of 12 inches. Class 2 base course material should be moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction as determined. by ASTMD 1557-00. 6.8.4 Asphaltic concrete should conform to Section 39-2 of the Standard Specifications of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Class 2 base material should conform to Section 26-l.02B of the Suqidard Specification of California Department of Transportation. 6.8.5 The performance of pavements is highly dependent upon providing positive surface drainage away from the edge of pavements. Ponding of water on or adjacent to the pavement will likely result in saturation of the subgrade materials and subsequent pavement distress. If planter islands are planned~ the perimeter curb should extend at least 12 inches below the bottom of the Class 2 aggregate base. 6.9 Site Drainage and Moisture Protection 6.9.1 Adequate drainage is critical to reduce the potential for differential soil movement, erosion and subsurface seepage. Under no circumstances should water be allowed to pond adjacent to footings or pavement. The site should be graded and maintained such that surface ' drainage is directed away from structures and the top of slopes into swales or other controlled drainage devices. Roof and pavement dJ;ainage should be directed into conduits that carry nuioff away from the proposed improvements. 6.9.2 Landscaping planters adjacent to paved areas are not recommended due to the potential for surface or irrigation water ·to infiltrate the pavement's subgrade and base course. We recommend that subdrains to collect excess irrigation water and transmit it to drainage structures or impervious above-grade planter boxes be used, In addition, where landscaping Project No. 01192-22-01 -10-December 17, 2003 6.10 6.10.1 is planned adjacent to the pavement, we recommend construction of a cutoff wall along the edg~ of the pavement that extends ~t least 12 inches below the bottom of the base material. Foundation and Grading Plan Review Geocon Incorporated should review the foundation and grading plans for the project prior to final design submittal to determine whether additional analysis and/or recommendations are required. Project No. 07192-22-01 -11 -December 17, 2003 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS 1. The recommendations of this report pertain only to the site investigated and are based upon the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate from those disclosed in the investigation. If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during construction, or if the proposed construction will differ from that anticipated herein, Geocon Incorporated should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be given. The e-yaluation or identification of the potential presence of hazardous or corrosive materials was not part of the scope of services provided by Geocon Incorporated. 2. This' report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner or his representative to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans, and that the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such reco1mnendations in the field. 3. The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they are due to natural processes or the works ·of man on this 9r adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of three years. Project No. 07192-22,01 December 17, 2003 ,_ l N' .. ~.,,---~:,.,,.,,,.-----~ ...... I zaoo .. · ·----1 ,A•" .,..,;.,' ... -~~~ I , ,;,/ .. ____ .,.." j / _,' SEE \~;'H2 w5 ·" / l c:: \/ l PASEO AIHIAA Z PASEOt.lWIS \ 3 PASEO GIIAMlll \ . ::~~:~ \ .. 6 RANCIIJ POSTA \\ I 7 PASEO VALLE '.\ "--'-, 8 RANCIIJ BRIii', ~OS 0 \ . \ 9 PASED'SAUNcRO ~-(_ CT f ~ \_ . .,...:..---,: . " ., ,i ..,..;,, ----"\ .,,-, I \ ,_ SOURCE: 2002 THOMAS BROTHERS MAP · · SAN DlEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA REPRODUCED WITH PERMISSION GRANTED BYTHOMAS BOIUHERS IMPS. THIS MAP IB COPYRIGHT BY THOMAS BROS. MAPS. rr IS UNLAWFUL TO COPY OR REPRODUCE ALI. OR#lY PART THEREOF, WHETHER FOR PERSONAL use OR RESALE, WITHOUT PERMISSION. - .GEOCON, I.NCO RPO RATE :0 0 GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE· SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121 -2974 PHONE 858 558-6900 • FAX 858 558--6159 ,._i .. ·· t -N 1 CM 2 er NO SCALE VICINITY MAP CARLSBAD OAKS WEST CARLSBAD, C~LIFORNIA KC/RA I. I DSK/E0000 DATE 12-17-21)03 I PROJECT NO. 07192 -22 -01 I FIG.1 L WALL FOOTING CONCRETE SLAB VISQUEEN 90LUMN FOOTING CONCRETE SLAB VISQUEEN *' (!J :i: ~ Ii: Ow QC IL I. 1/ FOOTING* WIDTH _.o · · · ·.9 . .':0 • • :.~. ,':" • · .·.9 . .':" · · ···'9· .':" · . FOOTING WIDTH* * ...... SEE REPORTFOR FOl,JNDATIONWIDTH AND DEPTH RECOM.MENDATION NO SCALE WALL COLUMN FO-OTING DETAIL GEOCON INCORPORATED 0 GEOTECHNltAL CONSULTANTS . 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE-SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121-2974 PHONE 858 558-6900-'FAX 858 558--6159 . KC/KC · I CARLSBAD ·OAKS WE.ST ·CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA DATE 12-17-2003 I PROJECT NO. 07192-22-01 I FIG .. 5 " I. ,., .,/., // . / I / ff,!' I ll_' I I ~ l !§.~ ,'i, I ~ -a I ~ ii_ :~ If! ·,. I 1~ 1' 1·1 "· ,tj I I l I i11:1"f II I I ,,,.//I I I I I I I E/2003m92_KaDWG/am. " /1,1" ~ ~ ? ,. LU--::o-.4---m ... L~---_:--/=:I =:I :::,.-~=:..~~!lo,,,·.----~ i ~I~"' :!:" ----------------------------------' ---....... ., ______ c--- I I I ~ Qp fl-:·r· J ..... \ ~ I •••: '\ . . . ' ... , BLYJG. , A, ',k__.....-), ... ' • rl I XX '-f'F. I ~ ~. • I <tk-\ I 'Jg(.--r \ I '· I "'-, I / '1.~-,~ I lr-----"Jo~· -I--' '-,., ? I . ·,._ I . ', I i EXIST. ta•· !iCI' STOHJl IIP.AIH POI OWG HO. 218-5 SHEU~ I .. I EX/BlJNe 8-:S70RY 1 · HIJl!..D/N!d I I /. --'l!.tfAJol#S/iJJ"lio. 10:w/ \ /, :/ ,~.,., -"~"• .........,~,,,.. -~ -------~ CARLSBAD OAKS WEST CARLSBAD I CALIFORNIA <!/~~---~-"· 0/· '-··· /A~ ---~·:~ /~---,,,.,,; --. ,/ / / , . I t i///,/ 1' --c_ . .' / ;/ . ---- 1 -,ff// -~:I I /i /,c:'t_fJJ -~ 1//{f/1. LEGEND 20' ACCESS E.451,/ENT 1'£/i DOC 1988--11629( EXIST. Sf()!' S/llN 1 ~EXIST. Sl'/1/NKlEH CONTI/Ot BOX ~--_9--EXIST. TEI.D'HONE 11/SE/i ' ~ B Qpf ........ PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL Tsa ........ SANTIAGO FORMATION (Dotted Where Buried) r-,... J ........ APPROX. LOCATION OF GEOLOGIC CONTACT (Interred from San Diego County Topographic Survey, Sheet No. 350-1689) B-5 ~ ........ APPROX. LOCATION OF GEOTECHNICAL BORING B' ........ APPROX. LOCATION OF GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTION '----....1 -~..,, g-~ggg!'! 0 GEOTEONCALCONSULTANTS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE· SAN DIEGO, CAUfORNIA 92121·2974 PHONE 858 558-6900 • FAX 858 558-6159 PROJECT NO. 07192 -22 · 0~ . -~----· . ,_. ----- SCALE: 1" = 60' GEOLOGIC MAP ! FIGURE 2 DATE 12-17-2003 A 480-,· . 420- --B-2 B-3 A' -480 I- CARLSBAD OAKS WEST CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 1-420 .. 360-I Tsa I B-4 ,.,.. · Qpf _ L?----==--~?----? ...... ---?----,. Tsa Tsa -360 -·· 300...I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . I I I I . I I . I I,; 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 · GEOLOGIC CROSS -SECTION -A-A' SCALE : 1 • • 60' (HORIZ. • VERT.) C:\DOCUMENTS AND·SETTINGS\DRAFTl~G 4\KC\RA\07192\DWG. -.. ~ ...-...... --~""'"'"' ~ ---" ---" . ......, _______ .' .. -300 GEOCON LEGEND ·Qpf ........ PREVIOUSLY PU\CED FILL Tsa ....... :sANTIAGo FORMATION ?" /"'" . J ........ APPROX. LOCATION OF GEOLOGIC CONTACT (Queried Where Uncertain) GEOCON INCORPORATED. 0 GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE • SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121 • 2974 PHONE 858.558-6900 • FAX 858 558-6159 PROJECT NO. 07192 -22 -01 FIGURE3 DATE 12-17-2003 B 480- - ·~11 ~f . 8-5 8-3 8~1 I I < --.ll-'-?--:..JP i Tsa 360-U Tsa Tsa .... 300-1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .1 I I I I I I. 0 60 120 180 240 ·300 360 420 480 540 600 GEOLOGIC CROSS -SECTION B-B' SCALE : 1 w = 60' (HORIZ. • VERT.) C:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\DRAFTING 4\KC\RA\07192\DWG. B' -480 I. 1r~ 1r~00 i....300 CARtSBA0 OAKS WEST CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA GEOCON LEGEND Qpf ..... :.;PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL Tsa ........ SANTIAGO FORMATION ,-? _/ ........ APPROX. LOCATION OF GEOLOGIC CONTACT (Queried Where Uncertain) GEOCON INC OR PO RAT E'D e GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS . 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE-SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121 -2974 PHONE 858 558-6900 -FAX 858 558-6159 PROJECT Nb. 07192-22 -01 FIGURE4. DATE 12-17-2003 . ' ,. ' '-·~ ,,. ' _,.,. ~ ~ ~-/ -·}-. -: :;... -~--t• -~ .. --~ ~~ /.~ ~.._:------- 1", ,.,,.;: --" .: .•· . ', 't ..• ,· .. _,,· .. ~- : .. _ t ·::: ' ' ,,, .. , __ ., ,, . .,.. I I . ! l APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION The field investigation was performed on November 13, 2003, and consisted of a site reconnaissance and drilling five small-diamete:r: borings. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on the Geologi.c Map, Figure 2. The borings were drilled using an Ingersoll-Rand A300. truck-mounted drill rig equipped with an 8- inch-diameter hollow-stem auger. Relatively undisturbed samples were obtained by driving a 3-inch 0. D. split-tube sampler 12 inches into the undisturbed soil mass with blows from a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The split-tube sampler was equipped with 1-inch-high by 2¾-inch- diameter brass rings to facilitate sample removal and testing. The soils encountered in the borings were visually examined, classified and logged in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D-2488 Description and Identification of Soils (Visua[.,Manual Method). Logs depicting the soil and geologic conditions encountered and the depths at which samples were obtained are presented as Figures A-1 through A-5. Project No. 07192-22-01 . -A-1-December 17, 2003 '. I L .. "·PROJECT NO. 07192-22-01 >- DEPTH C) SAMPLE 0 IN ..J 0 FEET NO. ~ ::i 0 Bl-1 2 Bl-2 4 . ~ T Bl-3 .... .... . . . 6 . . . . 8 10 12 14 -16 18 0:: BORING B 1 w ~· SOIL ~ CLASS ELEV. (MSL.) 373 DATE COMPLETED 11-13-2003 z ::, (USCS) ~ EQUIPMENT IRA-300 C) MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SANTIAGO FORMATION Very stiff, danip, olive-green, SILTSTONE ML ---------------------------------·sM Very dense, damp, pale green -yellow, Silty, very fine SANDSTONE ---------------------------------Hard, damp, olive -green, SILTSTONE -!----'---------------------------------- CL · Stiff to very stiff, moist, brown, CLA YSTONE --I----'---------------------------------- CL Hard, damp, yellow -brown, CLA YSTONE -Sample disturbed BORING TERMINATED AT 19.5 FEET No groundwater encountered Hole filled with cuttings mixed with 1 sack cement Zw~ ~ ~ Qot w* en-=-o::- ~Z-::> f-~Cl) zu. 1-Z ~q tu !Q ~ cnW >-e::. o!z z Cl) .J wWc:i 0:: :::EO C. o::-0 0 33 50/6" 103.4 13.8 5016" 108.2 13.7 50/3" Figure A.;1,, 07192-22-01.GPJ Log of Boring B 1, Page 1 of 1 SAMPLE SYMBOLS D ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ~ ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE IJ ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ~ .... CHUNKSAMPLE .... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) !'. ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE.CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. . l X -,· PROJECT NO. 07192-22-01 0:: BORING B 2 z w ---f --->-w Q l) ti: w~ 0 I-(/) -=-c::~ DEPTH ~ SOIL i-z_. :::> I-g c2 i:= (/) zu. IN -SAMPLE w· 1-Z 0 Cl ·cLASS ELEV. (MSL.) 377 DATE COMPLETED 11-13-2003 1-(/)~ o<-'.! !!21:! NO. z FEET ~ ::l (USCS) wen ..J >-~ oz 0 z w CXl 0:: ::§:0 ..J ~er:~ 0 (.) 0:: EQUIPMENT IRA-300 0 MATERIAL .DESCRIPTION -0 SANTIAGO FORMATION --Hard, damp, olive -green, SILT.STONE - B2-1 -2 -- B2-2 64 109.0 18.4 --- -4 -- -·--B2-3 ML 50/5" 103.2 16.5 -6 --6 inch layer of cemented sangstone at 5 .5 feet >- ,--- -8 >-- • --- .... 10 --.i32~4 -Becomes mottled olive -green lµld tan at 10 feet 89 -,-- -1,2 ..: ~---------------------------------------1------- CL Stiff to very stiff, moist, brown, CLA YSTONE --'-_, ______ , .-----------------' -----------1-------1n Hard, damp, olive -green, Clayey SILTSTONE; orange -red staining in -14 -~ seams - ~~ ML --ii J,j - B2-5 ~ ill 62 107.7 17.5 -16 -- / --7 -----------------.----. ---------------------":" Hard, damp, brown, Clayey SILTSTONE; with mica -18 -ii - ML ---B2-6 111 I 53 103.4 22.0 -~w BORING TERMINATED AT 20 FEET No groundwater encountered Hole filled with cuttings mixed with portland cement Figure A-2., 07192-22-01.GPJ Log of Boring B 2, Page 1 of 1 . SAMPLE SYMBOLS D ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ~ ... DISTURBED OR•BAG SAMPLE [I ... STANDA~D,PENETRA1]0N TEST liiii:I ... CHUNK SAMPLE .... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) _y_ ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE lOG OF StlBSURFACE·CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES"ONL Y AT THE SPECIFIC-BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT-WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS ANP TIMES. l f. l { · PRO~ECT Nb. 07192-22-01 ••' 0:: BORING B 3 Zw,-._ t w~ >-.w Qu~ DEPTH (!) t: ~Zf:!:: Cl)---:-0:: -SOIL :::>~ SAMPLE g ·:s: ~Cl) zu. IN w· ~w 0 .Cl CLASS ELEV. (MSL.) 373 DATE COMPLET!=D 11-13-2003 I-Cl)~ o<.:! FEET NO. :c z >-e::. -1- :::,, (USCS) w.u5 ..i oz t:: o: z W CD 0:: :zo ..I ~ 0:: -0 (.) 0:: EQUIPMENT IRA-300 (!) MATERIAL DESCRIPTION .... 0 SANTIAGO FORMATION .... -Hard, damp, olive -green, SILTSTONE; With trace of fine sand -B3-1 -2 -- B3-2 59 106.5 14.5 -·-- ,-4 -- ---B3-3 67 112.2 13.6 ~ 6 ,_ - I--' ' I- :tvIL I-8 -..... -Becomes tan at 8 feet I--I- -10 -I- B3-4 83/10" 110.3 15.6 I----4 inch layer of cemented sandstone at 11 feet I-12 -- --- I-14 -- -I---No recovery 84/11" -16 -- -.... - -18 --------------------------------------------: :~ r Very dense, damp, tan -brown, Silty SANDSTONE with mica .. . rt: SM --"A".! .. ~ ::; -.. <;l)/<;11 BORING TERMINATED AT 19.5 FEET No groundwater encountered Hole filled with cuttings mixed with portland cement ' ,, .Figure A-3, 07192-22--01.GPJ Log of.Boring B 3,.Page 1 of 1 SAMPLE SYMBOLS D ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ~ ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE [l ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ~ ... CHUNK SAMPLE .... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) ,!'. ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APF'LIES'ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT 15 NOT WARRANTED TO'BE REPRESENTATIVE-OF·SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER l.:OCATIONS AND TIMES. ' ; I l. J • .. · PROJECT NO. 07192-22-01 ' a:: BORING B 4 Zw-w ~ w* ~ ~ QoG: DEPTH SOIL ~Z-ci5 -=-a::~ .o ~ i'.5 (/) zu. ::::> I- IN SAMPLE ..J w· I-z 0 CLASS ELEV. (MSL.) 3.68 DATE COMPLE'.fED 11-13-2003 I-Cl) s: Cl~ cnW FEET NO. :c z w-o >-~ o!z 5 ::::>· (USCS) z IB ..1 0 w c:: Ol 0:: ~o a:: EQUIPMENT !RA-300 a. ~ Cl (.) (!) MATERIAL DESCRIPTION ~ 0 .-1. ·1--I· FILL ~ -1·1 ·1 Dense, damp, pale tan, Silty, fme to-coarse SAND -B4-1 SM -2 -:1 ·1:. 1· .... B4~2 52 103.4 14.3 r-:,.1 ·lj ,, .... ----------------------------.-----1-----t-------E% Very stiff; damp, brown, Sandy CLAY and Clayey SAND . ...., 4 -~ ,- .... -,- I B4-3 ~ 41 120.0 14.0 i-6 .., ,- I--- i-8 - .~ .... --.... CL-SC ,;.. 10 ~ I ,- B4-4 ~ 47 117.7 11.1 .... -.... ... 12 -,- ,_ -~ I- ,_ 14 -I- ---B4-5 30 104.2 15.9 ~ 16 -' ~ .... .... -,- ;... 18 -·r SANTIAGO FORMATION . : .. · .. ML ;... -Bard, damp, orange -tan, Sandy SILTSTONE; trace ofmfoa ,- B4-6 1 · 92/10" 120.3 8.5 BORJNG TERMINATED AT 19.8 FEET No groundwater ~ncountered Hole. filled with cuttings mixed with portland cement ' Figure A-4, 07192-22-01.GPJ Log of Boring B 4, Page 1 of 1 SAMPLE SYMBOLS D .. : SAMPLING:UNSUCCl;:SSFUL ~ ... DISTURBED OR.BAG SAMPLE [I ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ·liJ ... CHUNK SAMPLE .... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) ~ ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE; THE LOG OF'SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS·SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC-BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESEIIITATIVE.OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER L0CATIONS AND TIMES. ' I I· r ,, " PROJECT NO. 07192-22-01 DEPTH IN FEET -0 -- -2 - -- -4 - -- ,_ 6 -. - .... 8 - ,.:.. - -10 - .... "-12 - -14 - - -16 - - -18 - -- SAMPLE NO. B5-1 B5-2 B5-3 B5-4 B5-5 B5-6 SOIL CLASS (USCS) ML BORING B 5 ELEV. (MSL.) __ 37_4 __ DATE COMPLETED 11-13-2003 EQUIPMENT IR A-300 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SANTIAGO FORMATION Medium dense, damp, pale tan and yellow, Silty, very fine SANDSTONE -Becomes dell$e at 5 feet Hard, damp, pale tan and yellow, SILTSTONE; some mica - 42 109.4 - :... 51 107.2 f----1---- ,_ -62 100.7 ~=====CH======~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~O~=============:=== • -:..· • ~ t--c:-~==-== ___ Ven:dense.:.-dam_p.yementedSANDSTbNE ____________ ,.,,,. ____ ~--- ' .r •• ·~· 0 .r: .... ':~. . Hard, damp, pale tan and yellow, SILTSTONE; some mic;a - ML ----~---------------------------------SM Very dense, damp, tan, Silty, very fme SANDSTONE BORING TERMINATED AT 19.8 FEET No groundwater enc~untered Hole filled with cuttings mixed with cement 59 103.3 - '- -92/10;;--111.6 w~ a::-=> 1-1-Z 00W -1-oz :ao C) 16.1 18.2 24.1 -----· ' 20.5 ----16.3 ~igure A-5, 07192-22-01.GPJ Log of Boring B 5, Page 1 of 1 SAMPLE SYMBOLS D ... ·SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ~ •.. DIStURBED OR BAG SAMPLE IJ ... ·STANDARD.PENETRATION TEST liiiiJ ... -CHUNK SAMPLE •••• DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) _y_ ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPUES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC·BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE, DA TE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT'OTHER:J:OCATIONS AND TIMES. .,.. ____ ,, ... ,~.-,..-.,_,_ . ..,_ .,. ______ _,_ __ .,.. ------~-- ' 'I -• . ':' ', ~ .. -. - ~ • : I \ . -.-- -' ,_ :,·::. -·:-- , . : -~ -.•' \':~ .. , ,. {.:·-.·:·· ' -"..:. -· ·.- n C ._ ":. . I• ·-~-: - __ -:1 ~ '-~ ,,,. : ·~,:_ -~ I ' ••: y s l · APPENDIXB LABORATORYTESTING Laboratory tests were performed in accorqalice with generally accepted test methods of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) or other suggested procedures. Selected soil samples were tested for their in-place dry density and moisture content, maximum dry density and optimum moisture cqntent, expansion potential, consolidation, and shear strength characteristics. The results of our laboratory tests are presented in T.al;>les B-I through B-ill and Figures B-1 and B-4. Tue results of in-,place dry density and moisture content test results are presented on the boring logs, Figures A-1 though A,,.5. Sample No. .. B3-1_* B4-Z TABLE B-1 . SUMMARY OF LABORATORY DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS ASTM D 3080. Dry Density Moisture Content Unit Cohesion Angle of Shear (l>ct) (%) (psf) Resistance ( degrees) 105.9 14.4 690 9 103.4 14.3 635 32 * Sample remolded to approximately 90 percent relative compaction. Sample No. B3-J TABLE. B-11 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY AND OPilMUM MOISTURI: CONTENT TEST RESULTS ASTM D 1551 Description MaximumBry Optimum Moisture . Density (pct) Content (% dry wt.) Oliv.e-gr~en Silt with trace of ±hie ~and 117.6 14.3 Project No. 07192-22-01 :.EH-December 17, 2003 ! I • TABLE B-ill SUMMARY OF LABORATORY EXPANSION INDEX TESTRESULTS ASTM D 4829 Moisture Content Dry Density Expansion Sample No. (pct) Index Before Test (%) After Test(%)" B2-1 14.0 35.0 96.2 116 B4-1 13.6 26.1 101.2 60 B5-1 12.4 26.6 103.3 76 . Project No. 07192-22-01 -B..-2-December 17, 2003 .,_ <. PROJECT NO. 07192-22-01 . SAMPLE NO. 83-2 -10 -8 -6 -4 z 0 -;2 ~ r-,-~~ 0 ::i "' 0 ' . en z 0 - 0 -t---i\ 0 t---i--, I-~~ z I~ w i--. ~ i-~ ... 2 --.... ' w r--[\ a. ,..._ r--~. r---, r- 4 '' '. ' 6 . 8 10 0;1 10 IJQ . APPLIED PRESSURE (ksf) Initial Dry Density (pcf) 106.5 Initial Saturation (%) 68.9 Initial Water Content(%) 14.5 Sample Saturated at (ksf) .5 .. CONSOLIDATION CURVE CARLSBAD OAKS WEST CARLSBAD, CA[IFORNIA .. 07192-22-01.GPJ Figure B-2 PROJECT Nb. 07192-22-01 . SAMPLE NO. 82-2 -10 -8 -6 ' -4 --t-z "'"i-, ............... 0 -2 ~ ....... -- """" "' 0 ..... :J .... i-,. ~ 0 i-, ............... en ~ _, z 0 - 0 "' ......... "' 0 r-,.... ~ I'-, I-~ :-,... ~ z 1:::-. UJ ~ ~ 2 UJ a. 4 6 8 10 0.1 10 l 1JO APPLIED PRESSURE (ksf) Initial Dry Density (pcf) 109.0 Initial Saturation (%) 93.3 Initial Water Content(%) 18.4 Sa_mple Saturated at (ksf) .5 CONSOLIDATION CURVE CARLSBAD OAKS WEST CARLSBAD_, CALIFORNIA 07192•22·01.GPJ Figure B-1 ·r PROJ!;CT NO. 07192-22-01 . SAMPLE NO. B4-3 ..,10 . -8 -6 .,.4 z ~ 0 -2 . .. ~ ~ .... ~~ 0 :i 0 tn ~ z 0 -0 ·---r---. ~ "' (.) i--.... i-....., ~ I-......,, ~---------z ' w (.) I-..... 0:: 2 r-.... .... w ~~ C. ........ ...... 4 6 8 10 O.r lU 1)0 APPLIED PRESSURE (ksf) Initial Dry Density (pct) 120.0 Initial. Saturation (%) 97.3 lnltlai Water Content(%) 14.0 Sample Saturated at (ksf) .5 ' CONSOllDAUON CURVE ... , CARLS.BAD OAKS WEST ' CARLSBAD, CAUPORNIA 07192-22-01.GPJ Figure B-3 PROJECT NO. 07192-22-01 . . SAMPLE NO. B5-2 -10 .,.g -6 -4. z 0 ·-2 ~ Cl ::::i 0 <J> z 0 -0 -------(.) --I --r-I"--. -,~ z ~-'-w (.) 2' 0:: w ---'"" ..... '--.,r---.. 0. ------------·' 4 . ,-.-~:::.. 6 8 10 0.1 lU oo APPLIED PRESSURE (l<~f) Initial Dry Density (pcf) 109.4 Initial Saturation (%) 82.7 Initial Water Content(%) 16.1 Sample Sat.urated at (ksf) .5 CONSOLIDATION CURVE CARLSBAD OAKS WEST CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA .. 07192·22·01.GPJ Figure B-4 ; ,-,:--. !,:, ;~, --:. f .,. > ' i'''I<' _. ', ,• ;: , -. >,,.._ ,. ,· \, .. ,-' ., ~ ·: . '· \ r { . _)_.· f .~ -_. ~-. - ~,µ,. 'i _J .. ] , r 1· --· ,· . '' ,, .... ,::,. ···_ .. -~. -+ ~- ,·,-- .:,-·. ~ ·. -.:., . ---: . ' "' ', i. ._· .. ·:,.,. ... _ ,::_ --.··-,.- ~ ... ,' ' ~·, :. '• {q ":: :-~1 ,,. '::t'il ·.·· ... ,j ,, . 1 ; , . 'l ; .J.: ::\i :,IHJ . ·:,::·1 ~,,-, .. ':_,-'_,l :.-1 . .::; I </i;l . ·' .. -. ',,,:: ~ . ~~ . ~ J · .. -~ j . ,;,,1 :;i .. >')j .·,.J APPENDIX C RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR CARLSBAD OAKS WEST LOKERAVENUEAND PALOMARA,IRPORT ROAD CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 07192-22-01 RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS 1. · GENERAL 1.1. These Recommended Grading Specifications shall be used in conjunction with the Geotechni~al Report for the project prepared by Geocon Incorporated. The recom- mendatious conta:ined :in the text of the Geotechnical Report are a part of the earthwork and grading specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter :in the case of conflict. 1.2. Prior to the commencement of grading, a geotechnical consultant (Consultant) shall be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and test:ing the fills for substantial conformance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Report and these specifications. It will be necessary that the Consultant provide adequate testing and observation services so that he may determine that, in his opinion, the work was performed in substantial conformance with these specifications. It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to assist the Consultant and keep him appri$ed of work schedules and changes so that personnel may be scheduled accordingly. 1.3. . It shall be the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the work in accordance with applicable grading codes or agency qrdinartces, these specifications and the approved grading plans. If, in the opinion of the Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions such as questionable soil materials, poor. moisture Qondition, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, and so forth, result :in a quality of work not in conformance with these specifications, the Consultant will be empowered to reject the work and recommend to-the Owner that construction be stopped until the unacceptable conditions are corrected. 2. DEFINITIONS 2.1. Owner shall refer to the owner of the property or the entity on whose behalf the grad:ing work is being performed and who has ·contracted with the Contractor to have grading performed. 2.2. Contractor shall refer to the Contractor performing the site grading work. 2.3. Civil Engineer or Engineer -of Work shall refer to the California licensed Civil Engineer or consulting firm responsible forpreparation of the grading plans, surveying and verify:ing as-graded topography. GI rev. 07 /02 )' 2.4. ,consultant shall refer to the soil engineering and engineering geology consulting firm retained to provide geotecbnical services for the project. 25. Soil Engineer shall refer to a California licensed Civil Engineer retained by the Owner, who is experienced in the practice of geotechnical engineering. The Soil Engineer shall be responsible for having qualified representatives on-site to observe and test the Contractor's work for conformance with these specifications. 2.6. Enghteering Geologist shall refer to a California licensed Engineering Geologist retained by the Owner to provide geologic observations and recommendations during. the site grading. 2.7. Geotechnical Report shall refer to a soil report (including all addenda) which may include a geologic reconnaissance or geologic investigation that was prepared specifically for the development of the project for which these Recommended Grading Specifications are intended to apply. 3. MATERIALS 3 .1. Materials for compacted fill shall consist of any soil excavated from the cut areas or imported to the site that, in the opinion of the Consultant, is suitable for use in construction of fills. In general, fill materials can be classified as soil fills, soil-rock fills or rock fills, as defined below. 3.1,1. Soil fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps greater than 12 inches in maximum dimension and containing at least 40 percent by weight of material smaller than 3/ 4 inch in size. 3. i .2. Soil-rock fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps larger than 4 feet in maximum dimension and containing a sufficient matrix of soil fill to allow for proper compaction of soil fill around the rock fragments or hard lumps as specified in Paragraph 6.2. Oversize rock is defined as material greater than 12 inches. 3 .1.3. Rock rills are defmed as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps larger than 3 feet in maximum dimension and containing little or no fines. Fines are defined as :inaterial smaller than 3/4 inch in maximum dimension. The quantity of fines shall be less than approximately 20 percent of the rock fill quantity. GI rev. 07/02 4 • l 3.2. Material of a perishable, spongy, or otherwise unsuitable nature as determined by the Consultant shall not be used in fills. 3.3. Materials used for fill, either imported or-on-site, shall not contain hazardous materials as defmed by the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 30, Articles 9 and 1 O; 40CFR; and any other applicable local, state or federal laws. The Consultant shall not be responsible for the identification or analysis of the potential presence of hazardous materials. However, if observations, odors or soil discoloration cause Consultant to suspect the presence of hazardous materials, the Consultant niay request from the Owner the termination of grading operations within the affected area. Prior to resuming grading operations, the Owner shall provide a written report to the Consultant indicating that the suspected materials are not hazardous as defined by applicable laws and regulations. 3.4. The outer 15 feet of soil-rock fill slopes, measured horizontally,· should be composed of properly compacted soil fill materials approved by the Consultant. Rock fill may extend to the slope face, provided that the slope is not steeper than 2: 1 (horizontal:vertical) and a soil layer no thicker than 12 inches is track-Walked onto the face for landscaping purposes. This procedure may be utilized, provided it is acceptable to the governing agency, Owner and Consultant. 3.5. Representative samples of soil materials to be used for fill shall be tested in the laboratory by the Consultant to determine the maximum deJ1sity, optimum moisture content, and, where appropriat~, shear strength, expansion, and gradation characteristics of the soil. 3.6. Dl.}ring grading, soil or groundwater conditions other than those identified in the Geotechnical Report may be encountered by the Contractor. The Consultant shall be notified immediately to evaluate the significanc_e of the unanticipated condition 4. CLEARING AND PREPARING AREAS TO BE FILLED 4.1. Areas to be excavated and filled shall be cleared and grubbed. Clearing shall consist of complete. removal above the ground surface of trees, stumps, brush, vegetation, man-made structures and similar debris. Grubbing shall consist of,removal of stumps, roots, buried logs and other unsuitable material and shall be performed in areas to be graded. Roots and other projections exceeding 1-1/2 inches in diameter shall be removed to a depth of 3 feet below the surface of the groilnd. Borrow ateas shall be grubbed to the extent necessary to provide .suitable fill materials. GI rev. 07/02 ., ·- l 4.2. Any asphalt pavement material removed during clearing operations should be properly disposed at an approved off-site facility. Concrete :fragments which ate free of reinforcing steel may be placed in fills, provided they are placed in accordance with Section 6.2 ot 6.3 of this document. 4.3. After clearing and gnibbing of organic matter or other unsuitable m~terial, loose or porous soils shall be removed to the depth recommended in the Geotecbnical Report. The depth of removal and compaction shall be observed and approved by a representative of the Consultant. The exposed surface shall then be plowed or scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches and until the surface is free from uneven features that would tend to prevent uniform compaction by the equipment to be used. 4.4, Where the slope ratio of the original ground is steeper than ·6: 1 (horizontatvertical), or where recommended by the Consultant, the original ground should be benched in accordance with the following illustration. TYPICAL BENCHING DETAIL Finish Grade Remove All Unsuitable Material As Recommended By Soil Engineer DETAIL NOTES: Slope To Be Such That Sloughing Or Sliding Does Not Occur Original Ground 2 ~1 r Finish Slope Surface Varies See Note2J No Scale (1) Key .width "B" should be a minimum of 10 feet wide, or sufficiently wide to permit complete coverage with the compaction equipment used. The base of the key should be graded horizontal, or inclined slightly into the natural slope. (2) The outside of the bottom key should be below the topsoil or unsuitable surficial material and at least 2 feet into .dense fonnational material. Where hard rock is exposed in the bottom _of the key, the depth and configuration of the key may be modified as approved l~y .the Consultant. GI rev. 07/02 4.5. After areas to receive fill have been cleareq., plowed or scarified, the surface should be disced or bladed by the Contractor until it is uniform and free from large clods. The area should then be moisture conditioned to achieve the proper moisture content, and compacted as recommended in Section 6.0 of these specifications. 5. COMPACTION EQUIPMENT 5 .1. Compaction of soil or soil-rock fill shall be accomplished by sheepsfoot or segmented-steel wheeled rollers, vibratory rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or other types of acceptable compaction equipment. Equipment shall be of such a design that it will be capable of compacting ~he soil or soil-rock fill to the specified relative compaction at the specified moisture content. 5 .2. Compaction of rock fills shall be performed in accordance with Section 6.3. 6. PLACING, SPREAll>ING AND COMPACTION OF FILL MATERIAL 6. l. Soil fill, as defined in Paragraph 3 .1.1, shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with the following recommendations: 6.1.i. Soil fill shall be placed by the Contractor in layers that, when compacted, should generally not exceed 8 inches. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during spreading to obtain uniformity of material and moisture in each layer. The entire fill shall be constructed as a unit in nearly level lifts. Rock materials greater than 12 inches in maximum dimension shall be placed in accordance with Section 6.2 or 6.3 of these specifications. 6.1.2. In general, the soil fill shall be compacted at a moisture content at or above the optimum moisture content as determined by AS1M D1557-00. 6.1.3. When the moisture content of soil fill is below that specified by the Consultant, water shall be added by the Contractor until the, moisture content is ih the range specified. 6.1.4. When the moisture content of the soil fill is above the range specified by the Consultant or too wet.to achieve proper compaction, the soil fill shall be aerated by the Contractor by blading/mixing, or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is within t:he range specified. GI rev. 07/02 ,( 6. 1.5. After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted by the Contractor to a relative compaction of at least 90' percent. Relative compaction is defined as the ratio (expressed in percent) of the in-place dry density of the compacted fill to the maximum laboratory dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM Dl557-00. Compaction shall be continuous over the entire area, and compaction equipment shall make sufficient passes so that the specified minimum relative compaction has been achieved throughout the entire fill. 6.1.6. Soils having an Expansion Index of greater than 50 may be used in fills if placed at least 3 feet below finish pad grade and should be compacted at a moisture content generally 2 to 4 percent greater than the optimum moisture content for the material. 6.1.7. Properly compacted soil fill shall extend to the design surface of fill slopes. To achieve proper compaction, it is recommended that fill slopes be over-built by at least 3 feet and then cut to the design grade. This procedure is considered preferable to track-walking of slopes, as described in the following paragraph. 6.1.8. As an alternative to over-building of slopes, slo_pe faces may be back-rolled with a heavy-duty loaded sheepsfoot or vibratory roller at n:iaXimum 4-foot fill height intervals. Upon completion, slopes should then be track-walked with a D-8 dozer or similar equipment, such that a dozer track covers all slope surfaces at least twice. 6.2. Soil-rock fill, as defined in Paragraph 3 .1.2, shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with the following recommendations: 6.2.1. Rocks larger than 12 inches but less than 4 feet in maximum dimension may be incorporated into the compacted soil fill, but shall be limited to the area measured 15 feet minimum horizontaily from the slope face and 5 feet below finish grade or 3 feet below the deepest utility, whichever is deeper. ' 6.2.2. Rocks or rock fragments up to 4 feet in maximum dimension may either be individually placed or placed in windrows. Under certain conditions, rocks or rock fragments up to 10 feet in maximum dimension may be placed using similar methods. The acceptability of placing rock materials greater than 4 feet in maximum dimension shall be evaluated during grading as specific cases arise and shall be approved by the Consultant prior to placement. GI rev. 07/02 \ I 6.2.3. For individual placement, sufficient space shall be provided between rocks to allow for passage of compaction equipment. 6.2.4. For windrow placement, the rocks should be placed in trenches excavated in properly compacted soil fill. Trenches should be approximately 5 feet wide and 4 feet deep in maximum dimension. The voids around and beneath rocks should be filled with approved granular soil having a Sand Equivalent of 30 or greater and should be compacted by flooding. Windrows may also be placed utilizing an "open-face" method in lieu of the trench procedure, however, this method should first be approved by the Consultant. 6.2.5. Windrows should generally be parallel to each other and may be placed either parallel to or perpendicular to the face of the slope depending on the site geometry. The minimum horizontal spacing for windrows shall be 12 feet center-to-center with a 5-foot stagger or offset from lower courses to next overlying course. The minimum vertical spacing between windrow courses shall be 2 feet from the top of a lower windrow to the bottom of the next higher windrow. 6.2.6. All rock placement, fill placement and flooding of approved granular soil in the windrows must be continuously observed by the Consultant or his representative. 6.3. Rock fills, as defined in Section 3.1.3., shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with the following recommendations: 6.3.1. The base of the rock fill shall be placed on a sloping surface (minimum slope of 2 percent, maximum slope of 5 percent). The surface shall slope toward suitable subdrainage outlet facilities. The rock fills shall be proyided with subdrains during construction so that a hydrostatic pressure buildup does not develop. The subdrains shall be permanently connected to controlled drainage facilities to control post-- construction infiltration of water. 6.3.2. Rock fills shall be placed in lifts not exceeding 3 feet. J;>lacement shall be by rock ' trucks traversing previously placed lifts and dumping at the edge of the currently placed lift. Spreading of the rock fill shall be by dozer to facilitate seating of the rock. The rock fill shall be watered heavily during placement. Watering shall consist of water trucks traversing in front of the current rock lift face and spraying water continuously during rock placement. Compaction equipment with compactive energy co111parable to or greater than' that of a 20-ton steel vibratory roller or other c0mpaction equipme:p:t providing suitable energy to achieve the required compaction or deflecti.0n as recommended in Paragraph 6.3.3 shall be GI rev. 07/02 .. l utilized. The number of passes to be made will be determined as described in Paragraph ·6.3.3. Once a rock fill lift has been covered with soil fill, no additional roc'ff; fill lifts will be permitted over the soil fill. 6.3.3. Plate bearing tests, in accordance with AS1M Dl 196-93, may be performed in both the compacted soil fill and in the rock fill to aid in determining the number of passes of the compaction equipment to be performed. If performed, a minimum of three plate bearing tests shall be performed in the properly compacted soil fill (minimum relative compaction of 90 percent). Plate bearing tests shall then be performed on areas of rock fill having two passes, four passes and six passes of the compaction equipment, respectively. The number of passes required for the rock fill shall be determined by comparing the results of the plate bearing tests for the soil fill and the rock :fill and by evaluating the deflection variation with number of passes. The required number of passes of the compaction equipment will be performed as necessary until the plate bearing deflections are equal to or less than that determined for the properly compacted soil fill. In no case will the. required number of passes be less than two. 6.3.4. A representative of the Consultant shall be present_ during rock fill operations to verify that the minimum number of "passes" have been obtained, that water is being properly applied and that specified procedures are being followed. The actual number of plate bearing tests will be determined by the Consultant during grading. In general, at least one test should be performed for each approximately 5,000 to 10,000 cubic yards of rock fill placed. 6.3.5. Test pits shall be excavated by the Contractor so that the Consultant can state that, in· his opinion, sufficient water is present and that voids between large rocks are properly filled with smaller rock material. In-place density testing will not be required in the rock fills. 6.3.6. To reduce the potential for "piping" of fines into the rock fill from overlying soil fill material, a 2-foot layer of graded filter material shall be placed above the uppermost lift of rock fill. The need to place graded filter material below the rock should be deter.mi:ned by the Consultant prior to commencing grading. The gradation of the graded filter material will be determined at the time the rock fill is being exc~vated. Materials typical of the rock fill should be submitted to the Consultant in a timely manner, to allow ·design of the graded filter prior to the commencement of.rock fill placement. GI rev. 07 /02 If :1 ! :( :J,.. \ 6.3.7. All rock fill placement shall be continuously observed during placement by representatives of the Consultant. 7. OBSERVATION AND TESTING 7 .1. The Consultant shall be the Owners representative to observe and perform tests during clearing, grubbing, filling and compaction operations. In general, no more than 2 feet in vertical elevation of soil or soil-rock fill shall be placed without at least one field density test being performed within that interval. In addition, a minimum of one field density test shall be performed for every 2,000 cubic yards of soil or soil-rock fill placed and compacted. 7 .,z. The Consultant shall perform random field density tests of the compacted soil or soil-rock fill to provide a basis for expressing an opinion as to whether the fill material is compacted as specified. Density tests shall be performed in the compacted materials below any disturbed surface. When these tests indicate that the density of any layer of fill ot portion thereof is below that specified, the particular layer or areas represented by the test shall be reworked until the specified density has been achieved. 7.3. During placement of rock fill, the Consultant shall verify that the minimum number of passes have been obtained per the criteria discussed in Section 6.3.3. The Consultant shall request the excavation of observation pits and may perform plate bearing tests on the placed rock fills. The observatj.on pits will be excavated to provide a basis for expressing an opinion as to whether the rock fill is properly seated and sufficient moisture has been applied to the material. If performed, plate bef!rlng tests will be performed randomly on the surface of the most-recently placed lift. Plate bearing tests will be performed to provide a basis for expressing an opinion as · to whether the rock fill is adequately seated. The maximum deflection in the rock fill determined in_ Section 6.3.3 shall be less than the maximum deflection of the proper~y compacted soil fill. When any of the above criteria indicate that a layer of rock fill or any portion thereof is below that specified, the affected layer or area shall be reworked until the rock fill has been adequately seated and sufficient moisture applied. 7.4. A settlement monitoring program designed by the Consultant may be conducted in areas of rock fill placement. the specific design of the monitoring program shall be as recommended in the Conclusions and Recommendations section of the project Geotechnical Report or in the final report of testing and observation services performed during grading. GI rev. 07/02 1 /. I ! ~;. 7.5. The Consultant shall observe the placement of subdrains, to verify that the drainage devices have been placed and constructed in substantial conformance with project specifications. 7.6. Testing procedures shall conform to the following Standards as appropriate: 7 .6.1. Soil and Soil-Rock Fills: · 7.6.1.1. Field Density Test, ASTM Dl556-00, Density of Soil In-Place By the Sand-Cone Method. 7 .6.1.2. Field Density Test, Nuclear Method, AS'IM D2922-96, Density of Soil and Soil-Aggregate In-Place by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth). 7.6.1.3. Laboratory Compaction Test, ASTM D1557-00, Moisture-Density Relations of Soils and Soil-Aggregate Mixtures Using I 0-Pound Hammer and 18-Inch Drop. 7.6.1.4. Expansion Index Test, ASTM D4829-95, Expansion Index Test. 7 .6.2. Rock Fills 7. 6.2.1. Field Plate Bearing Test, A.STM P 1196-93 (Reapproved 1997) Standard Method for Nonreparative Static Plate Load Tests of Soils and Flexible Pavement Components, For Use in Evaluation and Design of Airport and Highway Pavements. 8. PROTECTION OF WORK 8.1. During construction, the Contractor shall properly grade all excavated surfaces to provide positive drainage and prevent ponding of water. Drainage of surface water shall be controlled to avoid damage to adjoining properties or to fmished work on the site. The Cpntractor shall take remedial measures to prevent erosion of freshly graded areas until such time as permanent drainage and erosion control features have been installed. Areas subjected to erosion or sedimentation shall be properly prepared in accordance with the Specifications prior to placing additional fill or structures. 8.2. After completion of grading as observed and tested, by the Consultant, no further excavation or filling shall be conducted except in conjunction with the services of the Consultant. GI rev. 07 /02 •• 9 t 9. CERTIFICATIONS AND FINAL REPORTS 9 .1. Upon completion of the work, Contractor shall furnish Owner a certification by the Civil Engineer stating that the lots and/or building pads are graded to within 0.1 foot vertically of elevations shown on the grading plan and that all tops and toes of slopes are within 0.5 foot horizontally of the positions shown on the grading plans. After installation of a section of subdrain, the project Civil Engineer should survey its location and prepare an as-built plan of the subdrain location. The project Civil Engineer should verify the proper outlet for the subdrains and the Contractor should ensure that the drain system is free of obstructions. 9.2. The Owner is responsible for furnishing a final as-:graded soil and geologic report satisfactory to the appropriate governing or accepting agencies. The as-graded report should be prepared and signed by a California: licensed Civil Engineer experienced in geotechnical engineering and by a California Certified Engineering Geologist, indicating that the geotechnica1 aspects of the grading were performed in substantial conformance with the Specipcations o;-approved changes to the Specifications. GI rev. 07 /02 {· l l LIST OF REFERENCES 1. 1953 Stereoscopic Aerial Photographs of the site and surrounding areas (AXN-8M-70 and 71). 2. Blake, Thomas F., EQFAULT, A Computer Program for the Deterministic Prediction of Peak Horizontal Acceleration from Digitizea California Faults, Users Manual, 1989a, p. 79 (Revised 1993), program revised 2000. 3. G?otechnical Investigation, Carlsbad Oaks Business Park Lot 2, prepared by Geocon Incorporated, dated November 15, 2000. 4. Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in Califorri.ia, California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG) Special Publication 117, adopted March 13, 1997. 5. Prelimina1y Geotechnical Investigation McMahan Headquarters, Carlsbad Oaks Business Park Lot 2, prepared by San Diego Geotechnical Consultants Inc., dated August 7, 1987. 6. Tan, S.S. and M. P. Kennedy, 1996, Geologic map of the Oceanside, San Lµis Rey and San Marcos 7.5' quadrangles, Plate 1, San Diego County, California, California Division of Mines and Geology, Open-File Report 96-0,. 1 :24;000. 7. U.S. Geological Survey, 1967, San Luis Rey, California 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Map, 1968. 8. Unpublished maps and reports on file at Geocon Incorporated. Project No. 07192-22-01 December 17, 2003 OCT-17-2005 110N 10:02 Al1 GITY OF CARSLBAD FAX NO, 760 602 8558 P, 05 , Community Facilities· District No. 1 NON-RESIDENTIAL GERTIFICATE; Non-Residential Land Owner, please read this option caretully and be sure you thoroughly understand the options before signing. The option you chase will affect your payment of the developed Special Tax assessed on your property. This option is available only at the time of the first building pennit issuance. Property owner signature is required before a: building permit will-be issued. Your signatufe is confinning the accuracy of all information shown. pg&:JJ 2 -t..OK,eL-t. L.. c:.. ?£1-2 t fJ-?7 t1 I N~ of Owner • Telepho11e 'i?,.n ;3/IL$o4 /WIZ ~ ;;.,1o 2,7oK ~ L.()j;.J_JZ ;,$Ii w 1/r Address . . Project Address · "Sli1AI /);<:4t;, , /1d'; fz/z.~ Carlsbad1 California 9200 City, St~te . 7 Zip Code -Ci~'~ty-, S~ta....jte__,. __ ,.._;.;;.~---......;Zi;:..;;p_,C .... od_o_ (i(}q-· av -01-1.ic2 . : . . Assessor's Parcel Number or APN and Lot Number it'not yet subdividc:,d by County Assessor. C/J(>5 Q6cis·· · · ··· ·· · . , ...... Buil~ingPernut Number(s) . As cited by Ordinance No. NS-JSS and adopted by the City of Carlsbnd, California, the City. is authorized . to levy a Special Tax ln Community FaciJities District No. J. All non-residential property, upon tho issuanoe of a bwlding pcnni~ shall have the option to (I) pay the SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT TAX ONE- TIME or (2) assume the ANNl1AL SPECW., TAX • PEVELOPED PROPERTY for a period n9t to exceed twenty-five (2S) year.s. Please in~can: your choice hy initi4llng !he l\ppropriate line below: OPTION (l): X elect to pay tho SPECIAL TAX· ONE-TIM} now, as a one-time payment. Amount of One-T~ttirj11J. ~ax~ S, 5', /51 . {, O . ·· . . . Ow11¢r' s ~tials r. OPTION(2): I elect to pay the SPECIAL DEVELOPMEN't TAX ANNUALLY for a period not to exc~ed twenty-five (2$) years. · Maxim'Ulll Annual Special Tax: $ . . Owner's Initials ----- I nq HBREBY Cf!R.TIFY UNDER PENAL'l'Y ·op l>ERJURV THAT nm UNDERSIGNED 1s THE PROPERTY OWNER OF THE SUBJECT JIR.OPER.TY AND THAT I UNDE}{STAND AND WILL COMPLY WITH THE PROVISIONS AS STATED ABOVE. ~ Title P.rintName /IJl~f'l<>C Dftte I 'nl,e .CHy of Carlsbad has not independently verified the information shown above. Therefore, we accept no responsibility as to the accuracy or completeness of this infonnation. . L~nd Use, FY ,Factor/ ll,flv (T~ 181.S/:l/4.J ' , ' { /,j' X Square Ft. q 5 /JO "-' 5, J5 9 , 6 6 001_17_2005 MON 10:01 AM CITY OF CARSLBAD FAX NO, 760 602 8558 P, 03 City of Carlsbad 1~uoroutJ1:-,am1,r,,1;an1 . CtRTJFICATE OF COMPLIANCE PAYMENT OF SCHOOL FEES OR OTHER MITIGATIO~ This form must be completed by .the City, the applicant, and the appropriate school districts ar,q returned to the City prior to issuing a building permit. The City will not issue any building permit without a completed school fee form. ·ProjectName: ht?t:tf< /)t;..f/lJJ[/f: C~ Building Permit Plan Check Number: Project Address: A.P.N.: Project Applicant (Owner Name): Project Oescription: Building Type: (/;~ s rl& Cff ~ /) q -.12£(_ --{2/ao Residential: Number of New Dwelling Uoits Square Feet of Living Area in New Dwell.in9 Se~ond Dwelling. Unit: Square Feet of Living Area in SOU Residential Additions: Net Square Feet New Area Commercial/Industrial: City Certification of Applicant Information: arlsbad Unified School District 6225 El Camino Reill Car)$bad CA 92009 (3'.H-5000) Encinitas Union School District IO I South Rancho Santa Fe Rd Encinitas, CA 92024 (944-4300 exr 166) Date: San Marcos Unified School Disi:rict 215 Mata Way San Mateos, CA 92069 (i9o-2649) Contact Nanc Dolce B A t, Onl S~ Dieguito Union High School District 71Q Encinitas Blvd, Encinitas, CA920i4(753-649I) Certification of ApplicanVOwners. The person executing this declaration ("Owner") certifies under penally of perjury that (1) the Information ptovided above Is correct and true to the best of the Owner's knowledge, and that the Owner will file an amended certification of payment 1nd pay the additional fee if Owner requests an increase in the number of dwefllng units or square footage after the building permit is issu,d or if th& initial determination of units or square footage Is found to be incorrect, and that (2) the Owner is the owner/Cleveloper of the abolfe dezcribeel project(s), or that the person executing this declaratiC?n is authorized to sign on behalf of the Owner, Signature; R.cYi,cd 4/20/00 Date: 1635 Farac;Jay Avenue• Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602·2700 Building Counter • (760) 602-2719 • FAX (760) 602-8558 OCT-17-2005 MON 10:01 AM CITY OF CARSLBAD FAX NO, 760 602 8558 SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL FEE CERTIFICATION (To be completed by the school district(s)) P, 04 ************************************************************************************•************** 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 iss~e building permits for this project. SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED SCHOOL DISTRICT OFFICIAL TITLE NAME OF SCHOOL DISTRICT DATE PHONE NUMBER Rcvi£cd 4/20/00 Gru~~(W;Y) I~ . G~~AN DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 6225 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBM>, CA~ TITLE 24 REPORT Title 24 Report for: Loker Business Center Phase 1 Lot 1 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Project Designer: Report Prepared By: Steve Balderrama Stueven Engineering Consultants 326 Kalmia Street Escondido, CA 92025 (760) 735-8577 Job Number: Date: 7/5/2005 The EnergyPro computer program has been used to perform the calculations su·mmarized in this compliance report. This program has approval and is authorized.by the California Energy Commission for use with both the Residential and Nonresidential 2001 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. This program developed by EnergySoft, L~C (415) 897-6400. EnergyPro 3.1 By EnergySoft Job Number: LOKER BUSINESS PARK PHASE II DATE: 9 21 5 TIME: 8 6 AM LOKER2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ALL INFORMATION PRESENTED IS FOR REVIEW, APPROVAL INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION BY A REGISTERED ENGINEER ONLY -----------------·------------------------------------------------------------BUSSPOWER THREE PHASE FAULT ANALYSIS PROGRAM VERSION 1.0 COPYRIGHT SKM SYSTEMS ANALYSIS, INC. 1983, 1986 DISTRIBUTED EXCLUSIVELY BY BUSSMANN, COOPER INDUSTRIES ---------------------------------------~---.----------------------------------lDATE: 9 21 5 TIME: 8 6 AM PAGE 2 LOKER BUSINESS PARK PHASE Ii C O N T R I B U T I O N D A T A ---------------CONTRIBUTION VOLTAGE L-L SYMMETRICAL DUTY GEN/MOTORS FROM NAME NO NAME KVA AMPS X/R HP/KVA Xd" ============,=== ----=========---------- SDG&E 999 SDG&E 208. i5131. 42000. 30.0 POS SEQUENCE IMPEDANCE .00220 + J .06605 PER UNIT lDATE: 9 21 5 TIME: 8 6 AM PAGE 3 LOKER BUSINESS PARK PHASE II F E E D E R D A T A ==:::;=:=============~=== -----=======: FEEDER FROM NO NAME FEED!:'.R TO NO NAME QTY VOLTS LENGTH /PH L-L FEET FEEDER DESCRIPTION SIZE TYPE DUCT INSUL ==== ---------==;:::===========-=· ============ 1 MSB 2 PANEL HPB 1 208. 10. 2 C M THWN POS SEQ Z .2020 + J .0585 OH~S/MFT .04669 + J .01352 PER UNIT 1 MSB 999 SDG&E 1 208. 55. 750 C M THWN POS SEQ Z .0216 + J .0445 OHMS/MFT .02746 + J .05657 PER UNIT lDATE: 9 21 5 TIME: 8 6 AM PAGE 4 LOKER BUSINESS PARK PHASE II T H R E E P H A S E F A U L T R E P O R T =====·========================================== ---== 1 MSB FAULT: 22002. RMS SYM AMPS, VOLTAGE: 208. IMPEDANCE TO GND= CONTRIBUTIONS: 999 SDG&E 2 PANEL HPB FAULT: 17783. RMS SYM AMPS, VOLTAGE: 208. IMPEDANCE TO GND= CONTRIBUTIONS: 1 MSB 999 SDG&E FAULT: 42000. RMS SYM AMPS, VOLTAGE: 208. IMPEDANCE TO GND= Page 1 7926. KVA .00128 + 22002. AMPS 6406. KVA .00330 + 17783. AMPS 15131. KVA .00010 + J J J X/R: 4.134 .00531 OHMS X/R: 4.134 X/R: 1. 783 .00589 OHMS X/R: 1. 783 · X/R: 30.000 .00286 OHMS ' -. CONTRIBUTIONS: lDATE: 9 21 5 TIME: 8 6 AM LOKER BUSINESS PARK PHASE II LOKER2 SDG&E F A U L T S T U D Y S U M M A R Y 42000. AMPS BUS RECORD VOLTAGE AVAILABLE RMS DUTIES NO NAME L-L 3 PHASE MOMENTARY 1 MSB 2 PANEL. HPB 999 SDG&E 208. 208. 208. 22002. 17783. 42000. 3 BUSES, 3 BRANCHES, 1 CONTRIBUTIONS *** SHORT CIRCUIT STUDY COMPLETE*** Page 2 26379. 18299. 68010. X/R: 30.000 PAGE 5 -------------"·------------·-···----.:-.-~----,-----. ---· CB052695 2708 LOKER AV WEST CBAD LOKER BUSINESS CENTER 9,500 SF SHELL BLDG COMM IND COMM 1 -, /J. "<:\QWEN ,l ~,:;-t#tl~~~"?.<2J.Jt:}{}/t,71c' \ :1 /,;7_,7tf----~, .... ·-._ I ~-~~~ \_ j f/Jl~t~-6tit:-Vt~~J'.,~ '. ,, 1£-5-Q<;-eatp} CL//f' ·;-' , -; :_--.. -: @ I ,· 9~~./ rthJ, ~ ' ;~ J ' ··11 -v-vo I, j I e,{ r,, {"',; 4¥'r' 't> <; , ,..,+ 1 .,_, -f-,:, ·, ;>.e~f ly Jo ,:;-Sq ',I .:l _ -· . C \+y ~ /C:> C; ./-7 \: fo/n!QJ t9~ .f:/d-Pe_ . )> \\\I \-0'5 -~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I 11,1~,s-.81y){, vatL;X;~ ~'(~a, ., lt/ft,/or tin -,V .;-Lvf::ri:JL ;cl)la:--J .l // (f b(!J/;;5V-'>4!) . . ; ,1 l i t l ' ', ~ r., . .. "\ -ti;: ~·~ - -......__ --• ~·w ',• -<.,: ..,.,~ iT-, . I .\ _j/J_ !u I/), r 0,/,,,,_ 1 '<:;:,...~ ~=1/"~ /'>J {1-3':?-ns-,-r'GlNEERING . =-=======.,_ IREAPPR/FORM HEALTI-t OSP1' --HAZMAT I Alij OTI-IER'S ffltAf. . -. EWER O!STR _, __ ,,------...... ...,. •....--~-~·,.--,