Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1373 FOREST AVE; ; CBM2019-0004; PermitPERMIT REPORT (city of Carlsbad Manufactured Home Permit Print Date: 05/02/2022 Job Address: 1373 FOREST AVE, CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Permit Type: Parcel#: Valuation: BLDG-Manufactured Home 1561108400 $135,783.73 Occupancy Group: R-1 #of Dwelling Units: 1 Work Class: Track#: Lot#: Project#: Plan#: Installation DEV2018-0205 Bedrooms: 3 Bathrooms: 3.0 Construction Type:V-B Orig. Plan Check#: Plan Check#: Project Title: NEWBY -PUZO RESIDENCE Description: NEWBY: 2,608 SF LIVING// 572 SF GARAGE// 504 SF OF DECK & STAIRS Property Owner: NEWBY BRENT KYLE & PUZO LISA JEANNE 1373 FOREST AVE FEE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY DRAINAGE FEE PLDA A Low Runoff CARLSBAD, CA 92008 SEWER CONNECTION FEE (General Capacity all areas) TRAFFIC IMPACT Residential Apartments Outside CFD STRONG MOTION-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PLAN CHECK FEE (BLDG) BUILDING PERMIT FEE ($2000+) PUBLIC FACILITIES FEES -outside CFD SWPPP INSPECTION FEE TIER 1 -Medium BLDG SWPPP PLAN REVIEW FEE TIER 1-MEDIUM WATER METER FEE 1" Displacement (P) Total Fees: $24,993.86 Total Payments To Date: $24,993.86 Permit No: CBM2019-0004 Status: Closed -Finaled Applied: 02/14/2019 Issued: 07/10/2019 Fina led Close Out: 05/02/2022 Inspector: Final Inspection: Contractor: CRenf 04/11/2022 PLUMB SQUARE AND LEVEL CONSTRUCTION 12253 CARMEL VISTA RD, # 183 SAN DIEGO, CA 92130-2533 (760) 436-9002 Balance Due: AMOUNT $15.00 $4,381.65 $960.00 $3,390.00 $17.65 $527.66 $753.80 $14,590.10 $246.00 $58.00 $54.00 $0.00 Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the 11 lmposition" of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as "fees/exaction." You have 90 days from the date this permit was issued to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition. You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity changes, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project. NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitation has previously otherwise expired. 1635 Faraday Avenue I Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 I 442-339-2719 I 760-602-8560 f I www.carlsbadca.gov { Cicyof Carlsbad RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION B-1 Plan Check Est. Value PC Deposit ---~~~--- Date 0,/tl(/jq , . Job Address 1373 Forest Avenue, Carlsbad CA 92008 Suite: APN: 156 ---------------110 84 00 CT/Project #: ___________ Lot#: ____ Fire Sprinklers:@/ no Air Conditioning: yes /ifS§) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORK: New 3 bedroom -3 bath 2608 sf modular home with a 572 sf two car garage and a 422 sf deck ■ Addition/New: 2608 Living SF, ;122 ")<>'/ Deck SF, ___ Patio SF, 572 Garage SF Is this to create an Accessory Dwelling Unit? Yes/@ New Fireplace?@! No, if yes how many? _I_ D Remodel: _____ SF of affected area Is the area a conversion or change of use? Yes/ No □ Pool/Spa: ____ SF Additional Gas or Electrical Features? Tankless water heater, Sewer pump □ Solar: ___ KW, ___ Modules, Mounted: Roof/ Ground , Tilt: Yes/ No, RMA: Yes/ No, Battery: Yes/ No Panel Upgrade: Yes/ No D Reroof: ___________________________________ _ D Plumbing/Mechanical/Electrical Only: D Other:----------------------------------- APPLICANT (PRIMARY) Name: Brent Newby Address: 12253 Carmel Vista Road, Unit 183 City: San Diego State: CA Zip: 92130 Phone: 858-334-8743 Email: brentknewby@gmail.com DESIGN PROFESSIONAL Name: Apollo Structural Address: 4850 E. Arrow Highway City: Montclair State: CA Phone: 909-542-9553 Email: stephen(«}apollostructural.com Zip: 91763 Architect State License: __:C:::8'-4'-'9-'-4"-5 _______ _ PROPERTY OWNER Name: Brent Newby & Lisa Puzo -Trustees Address: 12253 Carmel Vista Road, Unit 183 City: San Diego State: CA Zip: 92 I 30 Phone: 858-334-8743 Email: brentknewby@gmail.com newby-puzo@att.net CONTRACTOR BUSINESS Name: Plumb2 Square & Level Construction -Brent Newby Sole Owner Address: 12253 Carmel Vista Road, Unit 183 City: San Diego State: CA Zip: -'-'92~1~3~0 ___ _ Phone: 858-334-8743 Email: brentknewby(a)gmail.com State License:_5:...7-'2-'1_75'---___ Bus. License: (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/she 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/she is exempt therefrom, and the basis for the alleged exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by any applicant for a permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars {$500}). 1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 Ph: 760-602-2719 Fax: 760-602-8558 Email: Building@carlsbadca.gov B-1 Page 1 of 2 Rev. 06/18 ( OPTION A): WORKERS'COMPENSATION DECLARATION: I hearby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following declarations: □ I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self-insure for workers' compensation provided by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work which this permit is issued. □ I have and will maintain worker's compensation, as required by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued. My workers' compensation insurance carrier and policy number are: Insurance Company Name: ______________________ _ Policy No. _______________ Expiration Date: __________ _ ■ 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 be come subject to the workers' compensation Laws of California. WARNING: Failure to secure workers compensation coverage is unlawful, and shall subject an employer to criminal penalties and civil fines up to $100,000.00, in addition the to the cost of compensation, damages as provided for in Section 3706 of the Labor Code, interest and attorney's fees. CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE: _o_..:frc_"-_._r--\_a ___________ □AGENT DATE: 2,./i '-/ / r '1 ( OPTION B ): OWNER-BUILDER DECLARATION: I hereby affirm that I am exempt from Contractor's License Law for the following reason: □ 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). □ 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. □ Yes D No 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/ 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/ 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/ type of work): OWNER SIGNATURE: □AGENT DATE: _____ _ ---------------------- CONSTRUCTION LENDING AGENCY, IF ANY: I hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work this permit is issued (Sec. 3097 (i) Civil Code). Lender's Name, Bank Lender's Address, 7700 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad CA 92008 ONLY COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING SECTION FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS ONLY: 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? □ 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? 0 Yes D No If ANY OF THE ANSWERS ARE YES, A r"INAL 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. APPLICANT CERTIFICATION: I certify that I have read the application and state that the above information is correct and that the information on the plans is accurate. I agree to comply with all City ordinances and State laws relating to building construction. I hereby authorize representative of the City of Carlsbad to enter upon the above mentioned property for inspection purposes. I ALSO AGREE TO SAVE, INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARMLESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AGAINST ALL LIABILITIES, jUDGMENTS, COSTS AND EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINST SAID CITY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING OF THIS PERMIT.OSHA: An OSHA permit is required for excavations over 5'0' deep and demolition or construction of structures over 3 stories in height. EXPIRATION: Every permit issued by the 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 commenced for a period of 180 days (Section 106.4.4 Uniform Building Code). APPLICANT SIGNATURE: _O_~_"_·_r--\_a _____________ DATE: _z_/'--1-'L-f_,_/_1_1,___ 1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 B-1 Ph: 760-602-2719 Fax: 760-602-8558 Page 2 of2 Email: Building@carlsbadca.gov Rev. 06/18 PERMIT INSPECTION HISTORY for (CBM2019-0004) Permit Type: BLDG-Manufactured Home Application Date: 02/14/2019 Owner: COOWNER NEWBY BRENT KYLE & PUZO LISA JEANNE Work Class: Installation Issue Date: 07/10/2019 Subdivision: PARCEL MAP NO 14710 Status: Closed -Finaled Expiration Date: Address: 1373 FOREST AVE IVR Number: 17107 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Scheduled Date 04/04/2022 04111/2022 Actual Inspection Type Start Date 04/04/2022 BLDG-Final Inspection Checklist Item Inspection No. 179630-2022 COMMENTS BLDG-Building Deficiency BLDG-Plumbing Final BLDG-Mechanical Final BLDG-Structural Final BLDG-Electrical Final 04/11/2022 BLDG-Final Inspection 180166-2022 Checklist Item COMMENTS BLDG-Building Deficiency BLDG-Plumbing Final BLDG-Mechanical Final BLDG-Structural Final BLDG-Electrical Final Monday, May 2, 2022 Inspection Primary Inspector Reinspection Inspection Status Cancelled Chris Renfro Reinspection Incomplete Passed No No No No No Passed Chris Renfro Complete Passed Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Page 5 of 5 PERMIT INSPECTION HISTORY for (CBM2019-0004) Permit Type: BLDG-Manufactured Home Application Date: 02/14/2019 Owner: COOWNER NEWBY BRENT KYLE & PUZO LISA JEANNE Work Class: Installation Issue Date: 07/10/2019 Subdivision: PARCEL MAP NO 14710 Status: Closed -Finaled Expiration Date: Address: 1373 FOREST AVE IVR Number: 17107 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Scheduled Date Actual Inspection Type Start Date Inspection No. Inspection Primary Inspector Reinspection Inspection Status Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency 2nd story above garage deck nailing. Yes 12/03/2019 12/03/2019 BLDG-12 Steel/Bond 112425-2019 Partial Pass Chris Renfro Re inspection Incomplete Beam Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Grade beam footing for back deck. OK to Yes pour 12/10/2019 12/10/2019 BLDG-11 113201-2019 Partial Pass Chris Renfro Reinspection Incomplete Foundation/Ftg/Piers (Rebar) Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Deck pier figs complete Yes 12/1712019 12/17/2019 BLDG-84 Rough 114111-2019 Failed Chris Renfro Reinspection Incomplete Combo(14,24,34,44) Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Rough combo on garage pending. Needs to No be completely watertight. Need to make up grounds and neutrals in boxes. BLDG-14 No Frame-Steel-Bolting-Welding (Decks) BLDG-24 Rough-Topout No BLDG-34 Rough Electrical No BLDG-44 No Rough-Ducts-Dampers 12/19/2019 12/1912019 BLDG-84 Rough 114348-2019 Passed Chris Renfro Complete Combo(14,24,34,44) Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Rough combo on garage Yes BLDG-14 Yes Frame-Steel-Bolting-Welding (Decks) BLDG-24 Rough-Topout Yes BLDG-34 Rough Electrical Yes BLDG-44 Yes Rough-Ducts-Dampers 12/24/2019 12/24/2019 BLDG-17 Interior 114756-2019 Passed Paul York Complete Lath/Drywall Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Yes Monday, May 2, 2022 Page 4 of 5 PERMIT INSPECTION HISTORY for (CBM2019-0004) Permit Type: BLDG-Manufactured Home Application Date: 02/14/2019 Owner: COOWNER NEWBY BRENT KYLE & PUZO LISA JEANNE Work Class: Installation Issue Date: 07/10/2019 Subdivision: PARCEL MAP NO 14710 Status: Closed -Finaled Expiration Date: Address: 1373 FOREST AVE IVR Number: 17107 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Scheduled Actual Inspection Type Inspection No. Inspection Primary Inspector Reinspection Inspection Date Start Date Status Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Yes 10/28/2019 10/28/2019 BLDG-11 108895-2019 Partial Pass Chris Renfro Reinspection Incomplete Foundation/Ftg/Piers (Rebar) Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Partial pass on (3) deck column footings. Yes OK to pour. Call for grade beam tie-in inspection 11/08/2019 11/08/2019 BLDG-15 Roof/ReRoof 110327-2019 Failed Michael Collins Reinspection Incomplete (Patio) Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency No contractor or approved plans on site No 11/12/2019 11/12/2019 BLDG-83 Roof Sheating, 110723-2019 Passed Chris Renfro Complete Exterior Shear (13, 15) Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Roof and shear inspection on garage Yes portion only. OK to wrap BLDG-13 Shear Panels-HD (ok Yes to wrap) BLDG-15 Roof Yes Sheathing-Reroof 11/15/2019 11/15/2019 BLDG-18 Exterior 111106-2019 Passed Chris Renfro Complete Lath/Drywall Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Garage only Yes 11/18/2019 11/18/2019 BLDG-11 111113-2019 Failed Chris Renfro Reinspection Incomplete F ou n dation/Ftg/P iers (Rebar) Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Not ready No BLDG-12 Steel/Bond 111115-2019 Failed Chris Renfro Reinspection Incomplete Beam Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Not ready No 11/25/2019 11/25/2019 BLDG-14 111980-2019 Partial Pass Peter Dreibelbis Reinspectlon Incomplete Frame/Steel/Bolting/We !ding (Decks) Monday, May 2, 2022 Page 3 of 5 PERMIT INSPECTION HISTORY for (CBM2019-0004) Permit Type: BLDG-Manufactured Home Application Date: 02/14/2019 Owner: COOWNER NEWBY BRENT KYLE & PUZO LISA JEANNE Work Class: Installation Issue Date: 07/10/2019 Subdivision: PARCEL MAP NO 14710 Address: 1373 FOREST AVE Status: Closed -Finaled Expiration Date: IVR Number: 17107 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Scheduled Date 08/13/2019 0912612019 1011512019 10/1612019 10/21/2019 Actual Inspection Type Start Date Inspection No. Inspection Status Primary Inspector 0811312019 BLDG-11 100580-2019 Partial Pass Chris Renfro Foundation/Ftg/Piers (Rebar) Checklist Item COMMENTS BLDG-Building Deficiency Raised stem wall foundation inspection; Need soils report, compaction, form certs. Garage pending BLDG-12 Steel/Bond 1 00583-2019 Passed Chris Renfro Beam Checklist Item COMMENTS BLDG-Building Deficiency 09/26/2019 BLDG-11 105508-2019 Partial Pass Chris Renfro Foundation/Ftg/Piers (Rebar) Checklist Item COMMENTS BLDG-Building Deficiency Garage foundation and main modular home connections to foundation. Need height certification BLDG-14 105622-2019 Partial Pass Chris Renfro Frame/Steel/Bolting/We lding (Decks) Checklist Item COMMENTS BLDG-Building Deficiency Modular home connections to foundation and modular sections. Need height certification 10/15/2019 BLDG-11 107415-2019 Cancelled Chris Renfro Foundation/Ftg/Piers (Rebar) Checklist Item COMMENTS BLDG-Building Deficiency Garage foundation and main modular home connections to foundation. Need height certification 10/16/2019 BLDG-14 107823-2019 Partial Pass Chris Renfro Frame/Steel/Bolting/We lding (Decks) Checklist Item COMMENTS BLDG-Building Deficiency 2nd story above garage deck nailing. 10/2112019 BLDG-11 108104-2019 Cancelled Chris Renfro Foundation/Ftg/Piers (Rebar) Monday, May 2, 2022 Reinspection Inspection Reinspection Incomplete Passed Yes Complete Passed Yes Reinspection Incomplete Passed Yes Reinspection Incomplete Passed Yes Re inspection Incomplete Passed Yes Relnspection Incomplete Passed Yes Re inspection Incomplete Page 2 of 5 Building Permit Inspection History Finaled (city of Carlsbad PERMIT INSPECTION HISTORY for (CBM2019-0004) Permit Type: BLDG-Manufactured Horne Application Date: 02/14/2019 Owner: COOWNER NEWBY BRENT KYLE & PUZO LISA JEANNE Work Class: Installation Issue Date: 07/10/2019 Subdivision: PARCEL MAP NO 14710 Status: Closed -Finaled Expiration Date: Address: 1373 FOREST AVE IVR Number: 17107 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Scheduled Actual Inspection Type Inspection No. Inspection Primary Inspector Reinspection Inspection Date Start Date Status 07/12/2019 07/12/2019 BLDG-SW-Pre-Con 097296-2019 COMMENTS Passed Chris Renfro Checklist Item BLDG-Building Deficiency 08/01/2019 08/01/2019 BLDG-11 099313-2019 Failed Chris Renfro F ou n datio n/Ftg/P iers (Rebar) Checklist Item BLDG-Building Deficiency COMMENTS See back of card for corrections. Foundation rebar does not match what is on plans. See detail SO1 #3; Alternating bars Calls out rebar@ 12" on center on plans. Need to add 20' UFER ground. Call for reinspection. BLDG-12 Steel/Bond Beam 099312-2019 Failed Chris Renfro Checklist Item BLDG-Building Deficiency COMMENTS See back of card for corrections. Foundation rebar does not match what is on plans. See detail SD1 #3; Alternating bars Calls out rebar@ 12" on center on plans. Need to add 20' UFER ground. Call for reinspection. 08/02/2019 08/02/2019 BLDG-11 099526-2019 Passed Peter Dreibelbis Monday, May 2, 2022 Foundatlon/Ftg/Piers (Rebar) Checklist Item BLDG-Building Deficiency COMMENTS See back of card for corrections. Foundation rebar does not match what is on plans. See detail SD1 #3; Alternating bars Calls out rebar@ 12" on center on plans. Need to add 20' UFER ground. Call for reinspection. BLDG-12 Steel/Bond Beam 099527-2019 Passed Peter Dreibelbis Checklist Item BLDG-Building Deficiency COMMENTS See back of card for corrections. Foundation rebar does not match what is on plans. See detail SD1 #3; Alternating bars Calls out rebar@ 12" on center on plans. Need to add 20' UFER ground. Call for reinspection. Complete Passed Yes Reinspection Incomplete Passed No Reinspection Incomplete Passed No Complete Passed Yes Complete Passed Yes Page 1 of 5 '1 ii NOISl/\10 8NI071rffield Report 6lOZ t 1 9nv RECORD COPY SCST, LLC • San Diego Client: Project: LEA: 47, Exp: 0412s,20,ieqsiJe"' ,0 Al""'i-.---------------------- 6280 Riverdale Street t' v 7 ~nt Kyle Newby & Lisa Jeanne Puzo Revocable 190126N San Diego, CA 92120 Living Trust Forest Ave Parcel 3 T&I-Brent Kyle Newby & Lisa Phone: (619) 28~321 12253 Carmel Vista Road, Suite 183 Jeanne Puzo RLT Fax: (619) 280-4717 San Diego, CA 92130 Forest Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Technician: Jimenez, Roger Date: 08/08/2019 Authority Having Jurisdiction: City of Carlsbad Pennit Number: GR2018-0044 Architect: BWE Engineer: BWE City of Carlsbad AUG 14 2019 RUI LDING DIVISION Contractor: GreafOaks Start Time 10:00 End Time: 12:00 Time (Hours): 2.00 Location Details: (Concrete Sampling) -Footings for House Pad Service Being Performed: Technician Services Type of Inspection: Material Sampling Material Classification: Concrete Concrete Sample Data Load# Truck# Ticket# Slump (in) AirTemp Concrete Air Samples (oF) Temp (°F) Content Cast (%) 2 1006581 28547363 5.00 84 5 Details: -On site as requested to sample concrete for footings at house pad. -Cemex supplied 714LB 3/8" TP FA (4000PSl@28Days) -Material Code: 1577814 -Concrete placed directly into pump stationed adjacent to garage pad. -Temperature (ASTM C1064) and Slump (ASTM C143) test performed on sampled concrete. Unit Location Weight House Pad Footings -Fabricated 1 set of 5 (4"x8") concrete cylinders to be delivered to SCST San Diego Lab and tested at (4,28,28,28,H) days -Set #1 / Metafield #45253 120 SE ,so ,~ ! 210 SW 210 Y'fi I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • 0 204°SW (T) @ 33°10'16"N, 117°20'29"W :t19.7ft • 150ft cc: Project Architect; Structural Engineer; Project Inspector; DSA Regional Office (If Applicable); i~ . ' • . . .., • 11 • .,, .,, J ! 11 in I § •i !{ II I' .. ~ i 11 i lq, i ~ j • • ~ .. t a~ ii } -~ j ~:€ " i~ i ,! .1. 1:; ;; ,.c !~ li"'!l ~ ~:!I • a ·I Ii ;1:i !: 1. ii ·P i ,-&~ !.'l .,., , ... a: i~ 'EiA ~i S ,_,~ ~I ~G. 11! ;; a.5Jt~:a'i fl-~ !! )r1;~i 'i; "'' j"' )Ua!!h nt Page 1 of 2 '1 ii SCST, LLC -San Diego LEA: 47, Exp: 04/25/2021 6280 Riverdale Street San Diego, CA 92120 Phone: (619) 280-4321 Fax: (619) 280-4717 Field Report Client: Brent Kyle Newby & Lisa Jeanne Puzo Revocable Living Trust 12253 Carmel Vista Road, Suite 183 San Diego, CA 92130 Project: 190126N Forest Ave Parcel 3 T&I-Brent Kyle Newby & Lisa Jeanne Puzo RL T Forest Avenue Car1sbad, CA 92008 Status of Work Element: Work Element Inspection Completed, In Accordance with Approved Documents. Discrepancy: No cc: Project Architect; Structural Engineer; Project Inspector; DSA Regional Office (If Applicable); Page 2 of 2 SCST, LLC -San Diego LEA: 47, Exp: 04/25/2021 6280 Riverdale Street San Diego, CA 92120 Phone: (619) 280-4321 Fax: (619) 280-4717 Memo By: Feeney, Chelsea Subject: Footing Observation Memo: Field Memorandu~ECQRD COPY Client: Brent Kyle Newby & Lisa Jeanne Puzo Revocable Living Trust 12253 Carmel Vista Road, Suite 183 San Diego, CA 92130 Date: 07/30/2019 Project: 190126N Forest Ave Parcel 3 T&I-Brent Kyle Newby & Lisa Jeanne Puzo RL T Forest Avenue Car1sbad, CA 92008 Foundation excavations were observed for the referenced project. The continuous footings observed are located on the building pad located on parcel 3, Gridlines A-D/ 2-4. The excavations expose compacted fill. The subsurface conditions and materials exposed in the foundation excavations are generally consistent with the conditions described in the referenced geotechnical investigation and are considered suitable for the support of the proposed structure. The footings are excavated a minimum of approximately 12 inches below the adjacent finished grade, in general accordance with the foundation plan. Prior to the placement of concrete, loose soils and debris should be cleaned from the excavations. Additional Comments: Footings originally had a standing water in the bottom. Contractor removed this saturated the material and recompacted footing bottoms until firm and unyielding compaction was achieved. Discrepancy: No cc: Project Architect; Structural Engineer; Project Inspector; DSA Regional Office (If Applicable); Page 1 of 1 B\VE RECORD copy STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING • CIVIL ENGINEERING• LAND SURVEYING• LA~D PLANNING CUTSHEET Date: Job name: Survey Pro version: Distance/Coord units: 338 I 10050 1-- r I oosi 1 ---- ! ;:::-1 lioos3 I 9••4~ t:ialboil Ave nu,: • Suite 170 • San U,~go • LA • ')212 3 P6192995550 • F619299993-1 • www.bwe~tLLun1 7-19-19 13200-NEWBY-7-19- 19-TT-TR 6.2.0.23 US survey feet -· 1----· ---------·-----·------·- 1 S-BLDG 5 OS GARAGE [coR IS-BLDG 5 OS GARAGE [coR ----------~------------ [ S-BLDG 5 OS GARAGE ICOR T Page 1 of 1 ~---rs-BLDG 5 OS BLDG COR [ is-BLDG 8 OS BLDG ICOR/ 26.26 OS GARAGE ICOR is-BLDG 5 OS GARAGE ICOR 45 Since 1971 DATE: Mar. 26, 2019 JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad PLAN CHECK#.: cbM2019-0004 ✓• EsG1I SET II PROJECT ADDRESS: 1373 Forest Ave. PROJECT NAME: New Custom Modular SFD D APPLICANT D JURIS. ~ The plans transmitted herewith have 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 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 resubmitted for a complete recheck. D The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at EsGil 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: Brent Newby ~ EsGil staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. D EsGil staff did advise the app icant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: Brent e~ Telephone#: 858-334-8743 Date contacted: (bts:J;/..; ) Email: brentknewby@gmail.com Mail Telephone • Fax In Person 0 REMARKS: By: Rich Moreno by CS EsGil 3/19/2019 Enclosures: 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 ♦ San Diego, California 92123 ♦ (858) 560-1468 ♦ Fax (858) 560-1576 DATE: 2/26/2019 JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad PLAN CHECK#.: cbM2019-0004 ✓• EsG1I SETI PROJECT ADDRESS: 1373 Forest Ave. PROJECT NAME: New Custom Modular SFD □ APPLICANT □ JURIS. D The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes. D The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. D The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. ~ The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at EsGil 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. ~ The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: Brent Newby D EsGil staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. ~ EsGil staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: Brent Newby Telephone#: 858-334-8743 Date contacted: Mail Telephone 0 REMARKS: By: Rich Moreno EsGil (by: ) Email: brentnewby@gmail.com Fax In Person Enclosures: 2/19/2019 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 ♦ San Diego, California 92123 ♦ (858) 560-1468 ♦ Fax (858) 560-1576 City of Carlsbad cbM2019-0004 2/26/2019 PLAN REVIEW CORRECTION LIST SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS AND DUPLEXES PLAN CHECK#.: cbM2019-0004 PROJECT ADDRESS: 1373 Forest Ave. FLOOR AREA: REMARKS: DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY JURISDICTION: DATE INITIAL PLAN REVIEW COMPLETED: 2/26/2019 FOREWORD (PLEASE READ): JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad STORIES: HEIGHT: DATE PLANS RECEIVED BY ESGIL CORPORATION: 2/19/2019 PLAN REVIEWER: Rich Moreno This plan review is limited to the technical requirements contained in the California version of the International Residential Code, International Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, National Electrical Code and state laws regulating energy conservation, noise attenuation and access for the disabled. This plan review is based on regulations enforced by the Building Department. You may have other corrections based on laws and ordinance by the Planning Department, Engineering Department, Fire Department or other departments. Clearance from those departments may be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Present California law mandates that construction comply with the 2016 edition of the California Code of Regulations (Title 24), which adopts the following model codes: 2015 IRC, 2015 IBC, 2015 UPC, 2015 UMC and 2014 NEC. The above regulations apply, regardless of the code editions adopted by ordinance. The following items listed need clarification, modification or change. All items must be satisfied before the plans will be in conformance with the cited codes and regulations. Per Sec. 105.4 of the 2015 International Building Code, the approval of the plans does not permit the violation of any state, county or city law. To speed up the recheck process, please note on this list (or a copy) where each correction item has been addressed, i.e., plan sheet number, specification section, etc. Be sure to enclose the marked up list when you submit the revised plans. City of Carlsbad cbM2019-0004 2/26/2019 [DO NOT PAY -THIS IS NOT AN INVOICE] VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE JURISDICTION: City of Carlsbad PREPARED BY: Rich Moreno BUILDING ADDRESS: 1373 Forest Ave. BUILDING OCCUPANCY: BUILDING AREA Valuation PORTION ( Sq. Ft.) Multiplier Air Conditioning Fire Sprinklers TOTAL VALUE Jurisdiction Code cb By Ordinance ---------- 1997 UBC Buildin Permit Fee g .i 1997 UBC Plan Check Fee Type of Review: D Repetitive Fee 3 Repeats * Based on hourly rate Comments: -------' □ Complete Review D Other □ Hourly EsGil Fee PLAN CHECK#.: cbM2019-0004 DATE: 2/26/2019 Reg. VALUE ($) Mod. D Structural Only ,__ ___ __,31 Hrs. @ • $90.00 _ $210.001 Sheet 1 of 1 City of Carlsbad cbM2019-0004 2/26/2019 • PLANS 1. Please make all corrections, as requested in the correction list. Submit FOUR new complete sets of plans for commercial/industrial projects (THREE sets of plans for residential projects). For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in one of two ways: 1. Deliver all corrected sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department, 1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008, (760) 602-2700. The City will route the plans to EsGil Corporation and the Carlsbad Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. 2. Bring TWO corrected set of plans and calculations/reports to EsGil Corporation, 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, CA 92123, (858) 560-1468. Deliver all remaining sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department for routing to their Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. NOTE: Plans that are submitted directly to EsGil Corporation only will not be reviewed by the City Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments until review by EsGil Corporation is complete. 2. All sheets of plans to once again be signed by the person responsible for their preparation on re-submittal. (California Business and Professions Code). 3. Plans deviating from conventional wood frame construction shall have the structural portions signed and sealed by the California state licensed engineer or architect responsible for their preparation, along with structural calculations. (California Business and Professions Code). 4. Please delete notes on plans for "City of Carlsbad to plan check" site-built modifications. Any modifications to the modular unit must be submitted and approved by the state. Provide all necessary documentation to show that the design was approved by the state prior to issuance of permit. 5. I could not locate beam 6 on plans to check foundation. 6. Provide a copy of the project soil report. The report shall include foundation design recommendations based on the engineer's findings and shall comply with Section R401.4. 7. The soils engineer recommended that he/she review the foundation excavations. Note on the foundation plan that "Prior to the contractor requesting a Building Department foundation inspection, the soils engineer shall advise the building official in writing that: a) The building pad was prepared in accordance with the soils report, b) The utility trenches have been properly backfilled and compacted, and City of Carlsbad cbM2019-0004 2/26/2019 c) The foundation excavations, the soils expansive characteristics and bearing capacity conform to the soils report." 8. 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 soils report are properly incorporated into the construction documents (when required by the soil report). 9. Show distance from foundation to edge of cut or fill slopes ("distance-to- daylight") and show slope and heights of cuts and fills. Section R403.1.7. 10. Overflow roof drains shall terminate in an area where they will be readily visible and will not cause damage to the building. If the roof drain terminates through a wall, the overflow drain shall terminate 12" minimum above the roof drain. Policy 84-35. 11. All new residential buildings, including additions, require a soils report. An update letter is required if the report is more than 3 years old. 12. Garage slab must be sloped towards the vehicle entrance and away from the building. R309.1. • MISCELLANEOUS 13. 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. 14. Please indicate here if any changes have been made to the plans that are not a result of corrections from this list. If there are other changes, please briefly describe them and where they are located in the plans. • Have changes been made to the plans not resulting from this correction list? Please indicate: Yes □ No □ 15. The jurisdiction has contracted with Esgil Corporation located at 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, California 92123; telephone number of 858/560-1468, to perform the plan review for your project. If you have any questions regarding these plan review items, please contact Rich Moreno at EsGil Corporation. Thank you. A p O LL O 14650 E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR. CA 91763 Structural Calculations for: Newby-Puzo Residence New Single Family Residential Structure & Garage > 1373 Forest Avenue t- Carlsbad, CA 92008 - APN 156-11-84-00 CJ ----------- Prepared For: Dvele 205 5th Street Santa Rosa, CA 95401 January 23, 2019 Job#: 19-1819 e,,,,m59 (6'1a()l1-ar,/ 1/15/2019 U.S. Seismic Design Maps ~ • """"""" NEWBY Latitude, Longitude: 33.1716, -117.3416 . court ~' \,.'3~ Las Flores Dr Design Code Reference Document Risk Category 1/15/2019, 5:18:27 PM ASCE7-10 II Site Class Type Value Ss 1.132 S1 0.435 SMs 1.186 SM1 0.681 Sos 0.79 So1 0.454 Type Value soc D Fa 1.047 Fv 1.565 PGA 0.445 FPGA 1.055 PGAM 0.469 TL 8 SsRT 1.132 SsUH 1.19 SsD 1.502 S1RT 0.435 S1UH 0.434 S1D 0.602 PGAd 0.563 CRS 0.952 I C~1 1.003 https://~eismi9r1aps.org/ Description MCER ground motion. (for 0.2 second period) MCER ground motion. (for 1.0s period) Site-modified spectral acceleration value Site-modified spectral acceleration value Numeric seismic design value at 0.2 second SA Numeric seismic design value at 1.0 second SA Description Seismic design category Site amplification factor at 0.2 second Site amplification factor at 1.0 second MCEG peak ground acceleration Site amplification factor at PGA Site modified peak ground acceleration Long-period transition period in seconds Probabilistic risk-targeted ground motion. (0.2 second) D -Stiff Soil Factored uniform-hazard (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) spectral acceleration Factored deterministic acceleration value. (0.2 second) Probabilistic risk-targeted ground motion. (1.0 second) Factored uniform-hazard (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) spectral acceleration. Factored deterministic acceleration value. (1.0 second) Factored deterministic acceleration value. (Peak Ground Acceleration) Mapped value of the risk coefficient at short periods Mapped value of the risk coefficient at a period of 1 s Page 2 of 59 OSHPD ' Map data ©2019 Google j 1/2 ' 1/15/2019 :§ <ti Cl) MCER Response Spectrum 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 2.5 5.0 Period, T (sec) -Sa(g) Design Response Spectrum 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 2.5 5.0 Period, T (sec) -Sa(g) U.S. Seismic Design Maps 7.5 7.5 DISCLAIMER V\/hile the information presented on this website is believed to be correct, SEAOC /OSHPD and its sponsors and contributors assume no responsibility or liability for its accuracy. The material presented in this web application should not be used or relied upon for any specific application without competent examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability and applicability by engineers or other licensed professionals. SEAOC / OSHPD do not intend that the use of this information replace the sound judgment of such competent professionals, having experience and knowledge in the field of practice, nor to substitute for the standard of care required of such professionals in interpreting and applying the results of the seismic data provided by this website. Users of the information from this website assume all liability arising from such use. Use of the output of this website does not imply approval by the governing building code bodies responsible for building code approval and interpretation for the building site described by latitude/longitude location in the search results of this webstie. Page 3 of 59 https://seismicmaps.org/ 212 A p □LL □ 14650 E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR. CA 91763 Project Name: Newby-Puzo Residence Project Address: 1373 Forest Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Latitude/Longitude: 33.1716,-117.3416 Project Manager: Stephen Sam e-mail: stephen@apollostructural.com Applicable Building Code: 2016 California Building Code Project Description: New Single Family Residential Structure & Garage Page 4 of 59 ROOF: FLOOR: A p □ LL □ 14650 E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR. CA 91763 GRAVITY DESIGN LOADS: Roofing Material: 2.0 psf 15/32" APA Sheathing: 1.5 psf Mfg. Roof Trusses at 24" o.c. 3.0 psf Batt Insulation: 1.0 psf 5/8" Ceiling Drywall: 1.5 psf Miscellaneous: 3.0 psf (Plumbing, Mechanical, Fire Sprinkler, solar) DEAD: (D) 12.0 psf ROOF LIVE: (Lr) 20.0 psf Finish Floor Material: 5.0 psf 23/32" APA Sheathing: 1.5 psf Conventional Wood Framing: 3.0 psf Modular Ceiling Framing (2x6 at 24" o.c.): 2.0 psf (2x6 at Short Mods) 5/8" Ceiling Drywall: 1.5 psf Batt Insulation: 1.0 psf Miscellaneous: 1.0 psf (Plumbing, Mechanical, Fire Sprinkler) DEAD: (D) 15.0 psf LIVE: (L) 40.0 psf DECK: Finish Floor Material: 5.0 psf 23/32" APA Sheathing: 0.0 psf Conventional Wood Framing: 3.0 psf Modular Ceiling Framing (2x8 at 24" o.c.): 0.0 psf (2x6 at Short Mods) 5/8" Ceiling Drywall: 0.0 psf Batt Insulation: 0.0 psf Miscellaneous: 2.0 psf (Plumbing, Mechanical, Fire Sprinkler) DEAD: (D) 10.0 psf LIVE: (L) 60.0 psf Page 5 of 59 A p □ LL □ 14650 E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR. CA 91763 DESIGN PARAMETERS: SOIL DESIGN PARAMETERS: Geotechnical Engineer: SCST Inc. Geotechnical Report Number: 180318N Report Date: 9/26/2018 Allowable Soil Bearing Pressure: 2,500 psf Expansion Index (El): Non expansive Plasticity Index (Pl): not provided Antici pated Differential Settlement: 3/4" Soil Sulfate Content: not provided Soil Corrosivity to Ferrous Metals: not provided Allowable Passive Pressure: 350 psf Active Pressure: 35 psf -Level Backfi II SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS: Soil Site Class: D Per Soils Report or Assumed D Short Period Spectral Acceleration, Ss (g): 1.133 USGS -2015 NEHRP Provisions Long Period Spectral Acceleration, S1 (g): 0.435 USGS -2015 NEHRP Provisions Occupancy Category: II Importance Factor, le: 1.0 WIND DESIGN PARAMETERS: Wind Design Speed, 3s Gust : 110 mph (ASCE 7-10) Building Wind Exposure: C Importance Factor, lw: 1.0 Page 6 of 59 ~FORTE~ 01: Level Member Name Bl B2 B3 B4 BS BG B7 B8 B9 Bl0 Bll B12 B13 Forte Software Operator Apollo Structural Partners Apollo Structural Partners ( ) apollo.structural@gmail.com JOB SUMMARY REPORT BEAM CALCS.4te Results Passed Passed Passed Passed Passed Passed Passed Passed Passed Passed Passed Passed Passed Job Notes Current Solution 1 Piece(s) 6 x 8 Douglas Fir-Larch No. 1 2 Piece(s) 1 3/4" x 16" 2.0E Microllam® LVL 1 Piece(s) 6 x 10 Douglas Fir-Larch No. 1 1 Piece(s) 6 x 8 Douglas Fir-Larch No. 1 1 Piece(s) 6 x 8 Douglas Fir-Larch No. 1 1 Piece(s) 5 1/4" x 16" 2.0E Parallam® PSL 1 Plece(s) 6 x 12 Douglas Fir-Larch No. 1 1 Plece(s) 6 x 12 Douglas Fir-Larch No. 1 1 Plece(s) 6 x 10 Douglas Fir-Larch No. 1 1 Piece(s) 11 7/8" TJI® 560@ 12" oc 1 Plece(s) 6 x 6 Douglas Fir-Larch No. 1 2 Plece(s) 1 3/4" x 11 7/8" 2.0E Microllam® LVL 2 Piece(s) 1 3/4" x 9 1/4" 2.0E Mlcrollam® LVL 1-'a e 7 01 59 g Comments 1/23/2019 4:20:25 PM Forte v5.4, Design Engine: V7.1.1.3 BEAM CALCS.4te Page 1 of 14 ~FORTE ' + 0 MEMBER REPORT Level, 81 1 piece(s) 6 x 8 Douglas Fir-Larch No. 1 Overan Length: 12' 3" 12' ~ + 0 All locations are measured from the outside face of left support (or left cantilever end).AJI dimensions are horizontal.;Drawing is Conceptual Design Results Actual O Location Allowed Result LDF Load: Combination (Pattern) Member Reaction {lbs) 1902@ 0 5156 (1.50") Passed (37%) --1.0 D + 1.0 Lr {All Spans) Shear {lbs) 1669@ 9" 5844 Passed (29%) 1.25 1.0 D + 1.0 Lr {All Spans) Moment (Ft-lbs) 5823 @ 6' 1 1/2" 6446 Passed (90%) 1.25 1.0 D + 1.0 Lr (All Spans) Live Load Defl. (in) 0.246 @ 6' 1 1/2" 0.408 Passed (L/598) --1.0 D + 1.0 Lr {All Spans) Total Load Defl. {In) 0.508 @ 6' 1 1/2" 0.613 Passed (L/289) --1.0 D + 1.0 Lr {All Spans) • Deflection criteria: LL (L/360) and n (L/240). • Top Edge Bracing (Lu): Top compression edge must be braced at 12' 3" o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Bottom Edge Bracing (Lu): Bottom compression edge must be braced at 12' 3" o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Applicable calculations are based on NOS. Bearing Loads to Supports (lbs) Supports Total Available Required Dead Roof Total Accessories Live 1 -Trimmer -DF 1.50" 1.50" 1.50" 983 919 1902 None 2 -Trimmer • DF 1.50" 1.50" 1.50" 983 919 1902 None Tributary Dead RoofUve Loads Location (Side) Width (o.90) (non-snow: 1.25) Comments 0 -Self Weight (PLF) o to 12· 3" N/A 10.4 1 • Uniform (PSF) Oto 12' 3" 7' 6" 20.0 20.0 Residential • Living Areas Weyerhaeuser Notes Weyerhaeuser warrants that the sizing of Its products will be In accordance with Weyerhaeuser product design criteria and published design values. Weyerhaeuser expressly disclaims any other warranties related to the software. Use of this software Is not Intended to circumvent the need for a design professional as determined by the authority having jurisdiction. The designer of record, builder or framer is responsible to assure that this calculation is compatible with the overall project. Accessories (Rim Board, Blocking Panels and Squash Blocks) are not designed by this software. Products manufactured at Weyerhaeuser facilities are third-party certified to sustainable forestry standards. Weyerhaeuser Engineered Lumber Products have been evaluated by ICC ES under technical reports ESR-1153 and ESR-1387 and/or tested in accordance with applicable ASTM standards. For current code evaluation reports, Weyerhaeuser product literature and Installation details refer to www.weyerhaeuser.com/woodproducts/document·llbrary. The product application, input design loads, dimensions and support information have been provided by Forte Software Operator PASSED System: Wail Member Type : Header Building Use : Residential Building Code : IBC 2015 Design Methodology : ASD ~ SUSTAINABlE FORESTRY INITIATIVE Forte Software Operator Apollo Structural Partners Apollo Struclural Partners Job Notes 1/23/2019 4:20:25 PM Forte v5.4, Design Engine: V7.1.1.3 BEAM CALCS.4/e ( ) apollo.slructural@gmail.com Page 2 of 14 Pa g e 8 of 59 ~FOR TE '" + 0 MEMBER REPORT Level, B2 2 piece(s) 1 3/4" x 16" 2.0E Microllam® LVL Overan Length: 26' 25' 6" + 0 All locations are measured from the outside face of left support (or left cantilever end).AII dimensions are horlzontal.;Drawing Is Conceptual Design Results Actual O Location Allowed Result LDF Load: Combination (Pattern) Member Reaction (lbs) 3306@ 1 1/2" 3828 (1.75") Passed (86%) --1.0 D + 1.0 Lr {All Spans) Shear {lbs) 2926@ 1' 7" 13300 Passed (22%) 1.25 1.0 D + 1.0 Lr {All Spans) Moment (Ft-lbs) 21246@ 13' 38893 Passed {55%) 1.25 1.0 D + 1.0 Lr (All Spans) Live Load Defl. (in) 0.647@ 13' 0.644 Passed (L/4 78) --1.0 D + 1.0 Lr (All Spans) Total Load Defl. (in) 1.105@ 13' 1.288 Passed (L/280) --1.0 D + 1.0 Lr {All Spans) • Deflection criteria: LL (L/480) and TL (L/240). • Top Edge Bracing (Lu): Top compression edge must be braced at 8' o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Bottom Edge Bracing (Lu): Bottom compression edge must be braced at 25' 10" o/c unless detailed otherwise. Beari1111 Loads to Supports (lbs) Supports Total Avallable Required Dead Roof Total Accessories Live 1 -Stud wall -OF 3.00" 1.75" 1.51" 1381 1950 3331 1 1/4" Rim Board 2 -Stud wall -OF 3.00" 1.75" 1.51" 1381 1950 3331 1 1/4" Rim Board • Rim Board Is assumed to carry all loads applied directly above it, bypassing the member being designed. Tributary Dead RoofUve Loads Location (Side) Width (0.90) (non-snow: 1.25) Comments 0 -Self Weight (PLF) 1 1/4" to 25' 10 N/A 16.3 3/4" 1 -Uniform (PSF) 0 to 26' (Front) 7' 6" 12.0 20.0 Residential -Living Areas Weyerhaeuser Notes Weyerhaeuser warrants that the sizing of Its products will be In accordance with Weyerhaeuser product design criteria and published design values. Weyerhaeuser expressly disclaims any other warranties related to the software. Use of this software Is not Intended to circumvent the need for a design professional as determined by the authority having jurisdiction. The designer of record, builder or framer is responsible to assure that this calculation Is compatible with the overall project. Accessories (Rim Board, Blocking Panels and Squash Blocks) are not designed by this software. Products manufactured at Weyerhaeuser facilities are third-party certified to sustainable forestry stanclards. Weyerhaeuser Engineered Lumber Products have been evaluated by ICC ES under technical reports ESR-1153 and ESR-1387 and/or tested In accordance with applicable ASTM stanclards. For current code evaluation reports, Weyerhaeuser product literature and Installation details refer to www.weyerhaeuser.com/woodproducts/document-library. The product application, Input design loads, dimensions and support Information have been provided by Forte Software Operator PASSED System : Floor Member Type : Flush Beam Building Use : Residential Building Code : IBC 2015 Design Methodology : ASO ~ SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY INITIATM Forte Software Operator Apollo Structural Partners Apollo Structural Partners Job Notes 1/23/2019 4:20:25 PM Forte v5.4, Design Engine: V?.1.1.3 BEAM CALCS.4/e ( ) apollo.structural@gmail.ccm Page 3 of 14 Pa e 9 of 59 g ~FORTE ~ + 0 MEMBER REPORT Level, 83 1 piece(s) 6 x 10 Douglas Fir-Larch No. 1 Overall Length: 12' 7" el + 0 All locations are measured from the outside face of left support (or left cantilever end).AII dimensions are horizontal.;Drawing is Conceptual Design Results Actual O Location Allowed Result LDF Loacl: Combination (Pattern) Member Reaction (lbs) 3052@ 2" 5259 (2.25") Passed (58%) --1.0 D + 1.0 Lr (All Spans) Shear (lbs) 2569@ 1' 1" 7402 Passed (35%) 1.25 1.0 D + 1.0 Lr (All Spans) Moment (Ft-lbs) 9252 @ 6' 3 1/2" 11634 Passed (80%) 1.25 1.0 D + 1.0 Lr (All Spans) Live Load Defl. (in) 0.269 @ 6' 3 1/2" 0.408 Passed (L/547) --1.0 D + 1.0 Lr (All Spans) Total Load Deft. (In) 0.442 @ 6' 3 1/2" 0.613 Passed (L/333) --1.0 D + 1.0 Lr (All Spans) • Deflection criteria: U (L/360) and TL (L/240). • Top Edge Bracing (Lu): Top compression edge must be braced at 12' 5" o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Bottom Edge Bracing (Lu): Bottom compression edge must be braced at 12' 5" o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Applicable calculations are based on NOS. Bearing Loads to Supports (lbs) Supports Total Available Required Dead Roof Total Accessories Uve 1 -Stud wall -SPF 3.50" 2.25" 1.50" 1214 1BB8 3102 1 1/4" Rim Board 2 -Stud wall -SPF 3.50" 2.25" 1.50" 1214 1888 3102 1 1/4" Rim Board • Rim Board is assumed to carry all loads applied directly above It, bypassing the member being designed. Tributary Dead RoofUve Loads Location (Side) Width (0.90) (non-snow: 1.25) Comments 0 • Self Weight (PLF) 1 1/4" to 12' 5 3/4" N/A 13.2 1 • Uniform (PSF) 0 to 12' 7" (Front) 15' 12.0 20.0 Roof Weyerhaeuser Notes Weyerhaeuser warrants that the sizing of Its products will be In accordance with Weyerhaeuser product design criteria and published design values. Weyerhaeuser expressly disclaims any other warranties related to the software. Use of this software is not Intended to circumvent the need for a design professional as determined by the authority having Jurisdiction. The designer of record, builder or framer is responsible to assure that this calculation Is compatible with the overall project. Accessories (Rim Board, Blocking Panels and Squash Blocks) are not designed by this software. Products manufactured at Weyerhaeuser facilities are third-party certified to sustainable forestry standards. Weyerhaeuser Engineered Lumber Products have been evaluated by ICC ES under technical reports ESR-1153 and ESR-1387 and/or tested In accordance with applicable ASTM standards. For current code evaluation reports, Weyerhaeuser product literature and Installation details refer to www.weyerhaeuser.com/woodproducts/document·llbrary. The product application, Input design loads, dimensions and support Information have been provided by Forte Software Operator PASSED System : Roof Member Type : Flush Beam Building Use : Residential Building Code : IBC 2015 Design Methodology : ASD Member Pitch: 0/ 12 ~ SUSTAJNABlE FORESTRY INITIATM Forte Software Operator Apollo Structural Partners Apollo Structural Partners Job Notes 1/23/2019 4:20:25 PM Forte v5.4, Design Engine: V7.1.1.3 BEAM CALCS.4/e ( ) apollo.structural@gmail.com Page 4 of 14 Pa g e 10 of 59 i:.i!FORTE (< + 0 MEMBER REPORT Level, 84 1 piece(s) 6 x 8 Douglas Fir-Larch No. 1 OveraU Length: 12' r 12' m + 0 All locations are measured from the outside face of left support (or left cantilever end}.AII dimensions are horlzontal.;Drawlng Is Conceptual Design Results Actual C Location Allowed Result LDF Load: Combination (Pattern) Member Reaction (lbs) 1576@ 2" 12031 (3.50") Passed (13%} --1.0 D + 1.0 Lr {All Spans) Shear {lbs} 1346@ 11" 5844 Passed (23%) 1.25 1.0 D + 1.0 Lr (All Spans) Moment (Ft-lbs) 4698 @ 6' 3 1/2" 6446 Passed (73%) 1.25 1.0 D + 1.0 Lr {All Spans) Live Load Defl. (In) 0.246 @ 6' 3 1/2" 0.408 Passed (L/598) --1.0 D + 1.0 Lr {All Spans) Total Load Defl. {In} 0.410@ 6' 3 1/2" 0.613 Passed (L/358) --1.0 D + 1.0 Lr {All Spans) • Deflection criteria: LL (L/360) and TL (L/240). • Top Edge Bracing (Lu): Top compression edge must be braced at 12' 7" o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Bottom Edge Bracing (Lu): Bottom compression edge must be braced at 12' 7" o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Applicable calculations are based on NOS. Bearing Loads to Supports (lbs) Supports Total Available Required Dead Roof Total Accessories Uve 1 -Stud wall -OF 3.50" 3.50" 1.50" 632 944 1576 Blocking 2 -Stud wall -DF 3.50" 3.50" 1.50" 632 944 1576 Blocking • Blocking Panels are assumed to carry no loads applied directly above them and the full load is applied to the member being designed. Tributary Dead RoofUve Loads Location (Side) Width (D.90) (non-snow: 1.25) COmments 0 -Self Weight (PLF) Oto 12' 7" N/A 10.4 1 -Uniform (PSF) 0 to 12' 7" (Front) 7' 6" 12.0 20.0 Residential -Living Areas PASSED System : Floor Member Type : Drop Beam Building Use : Residential Building Code : !BC 2015 Design Methodology : ASD f-W_e...,:y_e_rh_a_e_u_s_e_r_N_o_t_es _____________________________________ ~ ~ SUSTAINASlE FORESTRY INITIATIVE Weyerhaeuser warrants that the sizing of Its products will be In accordance with Weyerhaeuser product design criteria and published design values. Weyerhaeuser expressly disclaims any other warranties related to the software. Use of this software is not Intended to circumvent the need for a design professional as determined by the authority having jurisdiction. The designer of record, builder or framer is responsible to assure that this calculation is compatible with the overall project. Accessories (Rim Board, Blocking Panels and Squash Blocks) are not designed by this software. Products manufactured at Weyerhaeuser facilities are third-party certified to sustainable forestry standards. Weyerhaeuser Engineered Lumber Products have been evaluated by ICC ES under technical reports ESR-1153 and ESR-1387 and/or tested in accordance with applicable ASTM standards. For current code evaluation reports, Weyerhaeuser product literature and Installation details refer to www.weyerhaeuser.com/woodproducts/document-llbrary. The product application, Input design loads, dimensions and support information have been provided by Forte Software Operator Forte Software Operator Job Notes Apollo Structural Partners Apollo Structural Partners ( ) apolio.slruclural@gmail com Page 11 of 59 1/23/2019 4:20:25 PM Forte v5.4, Design Engine: V7.1.1.3 BEAM CALCS.4/e Page 5 of 14 ~FORTE '" + 0 MEMBER REPORT Level, 85 1 piece(s) 6 x 8 Douglas Fir-Larch No. 1 OVeraU Length: 14' r 14' m el + 0 All locations are measured from the outside face of left support (or left cantilever end).AII dimensions are horizontal.;Drawing Is Conceptual Design Results Actual C Location Allowed Result LDF Load: Combination (Pattem) Member Reaction (lbs) 543 @2" 12031 (3.50") Passed (5%) .. 1.0 D + 1.0 Lr (All Spans) Shear (lbs) 475@ 11" 5844 Passed (8%) 1.25 1.0 D + 1.0 Lr (All Spans) Moment (Ft-lbs) 1890 @ 7' 3 1/2" 6446 Passed (29%) 1.25 1.0 D + 1.0 Lr (All Spans) Live Load Defl. (in) 0.120@ 7' 3 1/2" 0.475 Passed (L/999+) --1.0 D + 1.0 Lr (All Spans) Total Load Defl. (in) 0.223 @ 7' 3 1/2" 0.712 Passed (L/766) --1.0 D + 1.0 Lr (All Spans) • Deflection criteria: LL (l/360) and Tl (l/240). • Top Edge Bracing (Lu}: Top compression edge must be braced at 14' 7" o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Bottom Edge Bracing (Lu): Bottom compression edge must be braced at 14' 7" o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Applicable calculations are based on NOS. Bearing Loads to Supports (lbs) Supports Total Available Required Dead Roof Total Accessories Live 1 • Stud wall • OF 3.50" 3.50" I.SO" 251 292 543 Blocking 2 • Stud wall -OF 3.50" 3.50" 1.50" 251 292 543 Blocking • Blocking Panels are assumed to carry no loads applied directly above them and the full load is applied to the member being designed. Tributary Dead Roof Live Loads Location (Side) Width (0.90) (non-snow: 1.25) Comments 0 -Self Weight (PLF) 0 to 14' 7" N/A 10.4 1 -Uniform (PSF) 0 to 14' 7" (Front) 2' 12.0 20.0 Residential • Living Areas Weyerhaeuser Notes Weyerhaeuser warrants that the sizing of Its products will be In accordance with Weyerhaeuser product design criteria and published design values. Weyerhaeuser expressly disclaims any other warranties related to the software. Use of this software Is not Intended to circumvent the need for a design professional as determined by the authority having Jurisdlctlon. The designer of record, builder or framer Is responsible to assure that this calculation Is compatible with the overall project. Accessories (Rim Board, Blocking Panels and Squash Blocks) are not designed by this software. Products manufactured at Weyerhaeuser facilities are third-party certified to sustainable forestry standards. Weyerhaeuser Engineered Lumber Products have been evaluated by ICC ES under technical reports ESR-1153 and ESR-1387 and/or tested in accordance with applicable ASTM standards. For current code evaluation reports, Weyerhaeuser product literature and Installation details refer to www.weyerhaeuser.com/woodproducts/document-llbrary. The product application, Input design loads, dimensions and support information have been provided by Forte Software Operator PASSED System : Floor Member Type : Drop Beam Building Use : Residential Building Code : !BC 2015 Design Methodology : ASD &j> SUSTAJNASlf FORESTRY INITIATIVE Forte Softwaro Operator Apollo Structural Partners Apollo Slructural Partners Job Notes 1/23/2019 4:20:25 PM Forte v5.4, Design Engine: V?.1.1.3 BEAM CALCS.4te ( ) apollo.structural@gmail.com Page 6 of 14 Pa e 12 of 59 g ~FORTE '~ ♦ 0 MEMBER REPORT Level, B6 1piece(s)51/4" x 16" 2.0E Parallam® PSL Overaft Length: 18' 6" I 18' I el ♦ 0 All locations are measured from the outside face of left support (or left cantilever end).AII dimensions are horizontal.;Drawing is Conceptual Design Results Actual O Location Allowed Result LDF Load: Combination (Pattern) Member Reaction (lbs) 8568 @ 11/2" 9844 (3.00") Passed (87%) --1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Shear (lbs) 7101@ 1' 7" 16240 Passed ( 44%) 1.00 1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Moment (Ft-lbs) 38563 @ 9' 3" 52432 Passed (74%) 1.00 1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Live Load Defl. {In) 0.543@9' 3" 0.608 Passed (L/404) --1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Total Load Defl. (in) 0.698@9' 3" 0.913 Passed (L/314) --1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) • Deflection criteria: LL (L/360) and TL (L/240). • Top Edge Bracing (Lu): Top compression edge must be braced at 18' 6" o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Bottom Edge Bracing (Lu): Bottom compression edge must be braced at 18' 6" o/c unless detailed otherwise. Bearing Loads to Supports (lbs) Supports Total Available Required Dead Floor Total Accessories Live 1 -Trimmer -DF 3.00" 3.00' 2.61" 1908 6660 8568 None 2 -Trimmer -OF 3.00" 3.00" 2.61' 1908 6660 8568 None Tributary Dead Floor Live Loads Location (Side) Width (0.90) (1.00) Comments 0 -Selr Weight (PLF) Oto 18' 6" N/A 26.3 1 -Uniform (PSF) 0 to 18' 6" 12' 15.0 60.0 Residential -Living Areas PASSED System : Wall Member Type : Header Building Use : Residential Building Code : !BC 2015 Design Methodology : ASD ,_w_e_,yc,_e_r_h_a_e_u_se_r_N_o_t_es _____________________________________ -1 ~ SUSTAINABI.E FORESTR'I' INITIATIVE Weyerhaeuser warrants that the sizing of Its products will be In accordance with Weyerhaeuser product design criteria and published design values. Weyerhaeuser expressly disclaims any other warranties related to the software. Use of this software Is not Intended to circumvent the need for a design professional as determined by the authority having jurlsdletion. The designer of record, builder or framer Is responsible to assure that this calculation Is compatible with the overall project. Accessories (Rim Board, Blocking Panels and Squash Blocks) are not designed by this software. Products manufactured at Weyerhaeuser facilities are third-party certified to sustainable forestry standards. Weyerhaeuser Engineered Lumber Products have been evaluated by ICC ES under technical reports ESR-1153 and ESR-1387 and/or tested in accordance with applicable ASTM standards. For current code evaluation reports, Weyerhaeuser product literature and Installation details refer to www.weyerhaeuser.com/woodproducts/document-library. The product application, Input design loads, dimensions and support Information have been provided by Forte Software Operator Forte Software Operator Apollo Structural Partners Job Notes 1/23/2019 4:20:25 PM Forte v5.4, Design Engine: V7.1.1.3 Apollo Structural Partners BEAM CALCS.4te ( ) apollo.structural@gmail.com Page 7 of 14 1-'a e 13 ot 5~ g + 0 MEMBER REPORT Level, 87 1 piece(s) 6 x 12 Douglas Fir-Larch No. 1 Overall Length: 14' 11" + 0 All locations are measured from the outside face of left support (or left cantilever end).Ail dimensions are horizontal.;Drawing is Conceptual Design Results Actual O Location Allowed Result LDF Load: Combination (Pattern) Member Reaction (lbs) 3207 @4" 14609 (4.25") Passed (22%) --1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Shear (lbs) 2634 @ 1' 5" 7168 Passed (37%) 1.00 1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Moment (Ft-lbs) 11067 @ 7' 5 1/2" 13638 Passed (81 %) 1.00 1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Live Load Defl. (in) 0.333 @ 7' 5 1/2" 0.356 Passed (l/514) --1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Total Load Defl. (in) 0.403 @ 7' 5 1/2" 0.712 Passed (l/424) --1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) • Deflection criteria: LL (L/480) and TL (L/240). • Top Edge Bracing (Lu): Top compression edge must be braced at 14' 9" o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Bottom Edge Bracing (Lu): Bottom compression edge must be braced at 14' 9" o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Applicable calculations are based on NDS. Bearing Loads to Supports (lbs) Supports Total Available Required Dead Aoor Total Accessories Live 1 -Stud wall -DF 5.50" 4.25" 1.50" 565 2685 3250 11/4" Rim Board 2 -Stud wall -DF 5.50" 4.25" 1.50" 565 2685 3250 1 1/4" Rim Board • Rim Board Is assumed to carry all loads applied directly above it, bypassing the member being designed. Tributary Dead Floor Live Loads Location (Side) Width (0.90) (1.00) Comments 0 -Self Weight (PLF) 1 1/4" to 14' 9 3/4" N/A 16.0 1 -Uniform (PSF) 0 to 14' 11" (Front) 6' 10.0 60.0 Residential -Living Areas Weyerhaeuser Notes Weyerhaeuser warrants that the sizing of Its products will be in accordance with Weyerhaeuser product design criteria and published design values. Weyerhaeuser expressly disclaims any other warranties related to the software. Use of this software Is not intended to circumvent the need for a design professional as determined by the authority having jurisdietion. The designer of record, builder or framer is responsible to assure that this calculation Is compatible with the overall project. Accessories (Rim Board, Blocking Panels and Squash Blocks) are not designed by this software. Products manufactured at Weyerhaeuser facilities are third-party certified to sustainable forestry standards. Weyerhaeuser Engineered Lumber Products have been evaluated by ICC ES under technical reports ESR-1153 and ESR-1387 and/or tested In accordance with appllcable ASfM standards. For current code evaluation reports, Weyerhaeuser product literature and installation details refer to www.weyerhaeuser.com/woodproducts/document-llbrary. The product application, Input design loads, dimensions and support Information have been provided by Forte Software Operator PASSED System : Floor Member Type : Flush Beam Building Use : Residential Building Code : !BC 2015 Design Methodology : ASD ~ SUSTAJNASLE FORESTRY INITIATM Forte Software Operator Apollo Structural Partners Apollo Structural Partners Job Notes 1/23/2019 4:20:25 PM Forte v5.4, Design Engine: V7.1.1.3 BEAM CALCS.4te ( ) apollo.structural@gmail.com Page 8 of 14 Pa g e 14 of 59 ~FORTE '" ♦ 0 MEMBER REPORT Level, BB 1 piece(s) 6 x 12 Douglas Fir-Larch No. 1 Overall Length: 8' 11" [i] ♦ 0 All locations are measured from the outside face of left support (or left cantilever end).AII dimensions are horizontal.;Drawing is Conceptual Desian Results Actual O Location Allowed Result LDF Load: Combination (Pattern) Member Reaction (lbs) 1289 @4" 14609 (4.25") Passed (9%) --1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Shear (lbs) 900@ 1' 5" 7168 Passed (13%) 1.00 1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Moment (Ft-lbs) 2519 @ 4' 5 1/2" 13638 Passed (18%) 1.00 1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Live Load Defl. (in) 0.025 @ 4' 5 1/2" 0.206 Passed (L/999+) --1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Total Load Defl. (In) 0.031 @ 4' 5 1/2" 0.412 Passed (L/999+) --1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) • Deflection criteria: LL (1./480) and TL (1./240). • Top Edge Bracing (Lu): Top compression edge must be braced at 8' 9" o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Bottom Edge Bracing (Lu): Bottom compress!on edge must be braced at 8' 9" o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Applicable calculations are based on NDS. Bearing Loads to Supports (lbs) Supports Total Available Required Dead Floor Total Accessories Live 1-Stud wall -DF 5.50' 4.25" 1.50" 248 1070 1318 1 1/4" Rim Board 2 -Stud wall -DF 5.50' 4.25" 1.50" 248 1070 1318 1 1/4" Rim Board • Rim Board Is assumed to carry all loads applied directly above It, bypassing the member being designed. Tributary Dead Floor Uve Loads Location (Side) Width (0.90) (1.00) Comments 0 -Self Weight (PLF) 1 1/4" to 8' 9 3/4" N/A 16.0 1 -Uniform (PSF) O to 8' 11' (Front) 4' 10.0 60.0 Residential -Living Areas PASSED System : Floor Member Type : Flush Beam Building Use : Residential Building Code : !BC 2015 Design Methodology : ASD f-W_e_,yc...e_rh_a_e_u_s_e_r_N_o_t_es _____________________________________ -l ~ SUSTAINASlE FORESTRY INITIATM Weyerhaeuser warrants that the sizing of its products will be in accordance with Weyerhaeuser product design criteria and published design values. Weyerhaeuser expressly disclaims any other warranties related to the software. Use of this software is not intended to circumvent the need for a design professional as determined by the authority having Jurisdiction. The designer of record, builder or framer is responsible to assure that this calculation is compatible with the overall project. Accessories (Rim Board, Blocking Panels and Squash Blocks) are not designed by this software. Products manufactured at Weyerhaeuser facilities are third-party certified to sustainable forestry standards. Weyerhaeuser Engineered Lumber Products have been evaluated by ICC ES under technical reports ESR-1153 and ESR-1387 and/or tested in accordance with applicable ASTM standards. For current code evaluation reports, Weyerhaeuser product literature and Installation details refer to www.weyerhaeuser.com/woodproducts/document-library. The product application, input design loads, dimensions and support information have been provided by Forte Software Operator Forte Software Operator Job Notes Apollo Structural Partners Apollo Structural Partners ( ) apollo.structural@gmail.com Page 15 of !:>\:I 1/23/2019 4:20:25 PM Forte v5.4, Design Engine: V7.1.1.3 BEAM CALCS.4te Page 9 of 14 + 0 MEMBER REPORT Level, 89 1 piece{s) 6 x 10 Douglas Fir-Larch No. 1 Overall Length: 12' 8" 11' 9" ffi el + 0 All locations are measured from the outside face of left support (or left cantilever end).AII dimensions are horlzontal.;Drawing is Conceptual Design Results Actual Cl Location Allowed Result LDF Load: Combination (Pattern) Member Reaction (lbs) 3549@4" 14609 (4.25") Passed (24%) --1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Shear (lbs) 2758@ 1' 3" 5922 Passed (47%) 1.00 1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Moment (Ft-lbs) 8136@ 4' 6" 9307 Passed (87%) 1.00 1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Live Load Defl. (in) 0.257@ 5' 9 7/8" 0.300 Passed (lj561) --1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Total Load Defl. (in) 0.317 @ 5' 10 1/16" 0.600 Passed (lj454) --1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) • Deflection criteria: LL (l/480) and TL (l/240). • Top Edge Bracing (Lu): Top compression edge must be braced at 12' 6" o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Bottom Edge Bracing (Lu): Bottom compression edge must be braced at 12' 6" o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Applicable calculations are based on NOS. Searl~ Loads to Supports (lbs) Supports Total Available Required Dead Floor Total Ac<:e5SC>ries Uve 1 -Stud wall • OF 5.50" 4.25" 1.50" 627 2992 3619 1 1/4" Rim Board 2 • Stud wall • OF 5.50" 4.25" 1.50" 276 1017 1293 1 1/4" Rim Board • Rim Board is assumed to carry all loads applied directly above it, bypassing the member being designed. Tributary Dead Floor Live Loads Location (Side) Width (D.90) (1.00) Comments 0 -Self Weight (PLF) 1 1/4" to 12' 6 3/4" N/A 13.2 1 • Uniform (PSF) 0 to 12' 8" (Front) 8 1/16" 10.0 60.0 Resldentlal -Living Areas 2 -Uniform (PSF) 0 to 4' 6" (Front) 9' 10.0 60.0 Resldentlal -Living Areas 3 -Point (lb) 4' 6" (Front) N/A 248 1070 Linked from: B8, su~rt 2 PASSED System : Floor Member Type : Flush Beam Building Use : Residential Building Code : !BC 2015 Design Methodology : ASO f-W_e-'y'-e_r_h_a_e_u_s_e_r_N_o_t_es _____________________________________ -l ~ SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY INITIATM Weyerhaeuser warrants that the sizing of Its products will be In accordance with Weyerhaeuser product design criteria and published design values. Weyerhaeuser expressly disclaims any other warranties related to the software. Use of this software Is not Intended to circumvent the need for a design professional as determined by the authority having Jurisdiction. The designer of record, builder or framer is responsible to assure that this calculation Is compatible with the overall project. Accessories (Rim Board, Blocking Panels and Squash Blocks) are not designed by this software. Products manufactured at Weyerhaeuser facilities are third-party certified to sustainable forestry standards. Weyerhaeuser Engineered Lumber Products have been evaluated by ICC ES under technical reports ESR· 1153 and ESR-1387 and/or tested In accordance with applicable ASTM standards. For current code evaluation reports, Weyerhaeuser product literature and Installation details refer to www.weyerhaeuser.com/woodproducts/clocument-llbrary. The product application, Input design loads, dimensions and support information have been provided by Forte Software Operator Forte Software Operator Apollo Structural Partners Job Notes 1/23/2019 4:20:25 PM Forte v5.4, Design Engine: V7.1.1.3 Apollo Structural Partners BEAM CALCS.4te ( ) apollo.structural@gmail.com Page 10 of 14 Pa e 16 of 59 g + 0 MEMBER REPORT Level, B10 1 piece(s) 11 7 /8" TJI® 560 @ 12" OC Overall Length: 21' 10• m + 0 All locations are measured from the outside face of left support (or left cantilever end).AII dimensions are horizontal.;Drawlng is Conceptual Design Results Actual O Location Allowed Result LDF Load: Combination (Pattern) Member Reaction (lbs) 811 @2 1/2" 1396 (2.25") Passed (58%) 1.00 1.0 D + 1.0 L {All Spans) Shear (lbs) 797 @3 1/2" 2050 Passed (39%) 1.00 1.0 D + 1.0 L {All Spans) Moment (Ft-lbs) 4300@ 10' 11" 9500 Passed (45%) 1.00 1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Live Load Defl. (in) 0.457@ 10' 11" 0.535 Passed {l./563) --1.0 D + 1.0 L {All Spans) Total Load Def!. (in) 0.571 @ 10' 11" 1.071 Passed (l./450) --1.0 D + 1.0 L {All Spans) TJ-Pro ™ Rating 45 40 Passed ---- • Deflection criteria: LL (l/480) and n (l/240). • Top Edge Bracing (Lu): Top compression edge must be braced at 8' 6" o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Bottom Edge Bracing (Lu): Bottom compression edge must be braced at 21' 8" o/c unless detailed otherwise. • A structural analysis of the deck has not been performed. • Deflection analysis is based on composite action with a single layer of 23/32" Weyerhaeuser Edge•• Panel (24" Span Rating) that Is glued and nailed down. • Additional considerations for the TJ-Pro'" Rating Include: None Bearing Loads to supports (lbs) Supports Total Available Required Dead Floor Total Accessories Live 1 -Stud wall -SPF 3.50" 2.25" 1.75" 164 655 819 1 1/4" Rim Board 2 -Stud wall -SPF 3.50" 2.25" 1.75" 164 655 819 1 1/4" Rim Board • Rim Board is assumed to carry all loads applied directly above It, bypassing the member being designed. Dead Floor Uve Loads Location (Side) Spacing (0.90) (1.00) Comments 1 -Uniform (PSF) 0 to 21' 10" 12" 15.0 60.0 Residential -Living Areas Weyerhaeuser Notes Weyerhaeuser warrants that the sizing of Its products will be In accordance with Weyerhaeuser product design criteria and published design values. Weyerhaeuser expressly disclaims any other warranties related to the software. Use of this software is not intended to circumvent the need for a design professional as determined by the authority having Jurisdiction. The designer of record, builder or framer is responsible to assure that this calculation Is compatible with the overall project. Accessories (Rim Board, Blocking Panels and Squash Blocks) are not designed by this software. Products manufactured at Weyerhaeuser facilities are third-party certified to sustainable forestry standards. Weyerhaeuser Engineered Lumber Products have been evaluated by ICC ES under technical reports ESR-1153 and ESR-1387 and/or tested in accordance with applicable ASTM standards. For current code evaluation reports, Weyerhaeuser product literature and installation details refer to www.weyerhaeuser.com/woodproducts/document-library. The product application, input design loads, dimensions and support Information have been provided by Forte Software Operator PASSED System : Floor Member Type : Joist Building Use : Residential Building Code : !BC 2015 Design Methodology : ASD ~ SUSTAINABLE FOl!ESTRY INITIATIVE Forte Software Operator Apollo Structural Partners Apollo Structural Partners Job Notes 1/23/2019 4:20:25 PM Forte v5.4, Design Engine: V7.1 .1.3 BEAM CALCS.4/e ( ) apollo.structural@gmail.com Page 11 of 14 Pa e 17 of 59 g ~FORTE ~ + 0 MEMBER REPORT Level, B11 1 piece(s) 6 x 6 Douglas Fir-Larch No. 1 Overall Length: 3' 2 1/16" el + 0 All locations are measured from the outside face of left support (or left cantilever end).AII dimensions are horizontai.;Drawing is Conceptual Design Results Actual Cl) Location Allowed Result LDF Load: Combination (Pattern) Member Reaction (lbs) 1233@ 1 1/2" 6016 (1.75") Passed (20%) --1.0 D + 1.0 L {All Spans) Shear (lbs) 730@ 8 1/2" 3428 Passed (21%) 1.00 1.0 D + 1.0 L {All Spans) Moment (Ft-lbs) 887@ 1' 7" 2773 Passed (32%) 1.00 1.0 D + 1.0 L {All Spans) Live Load Deft. {In) 0.009@ 1' 7" 0.073 Passed (L/999+) --1.0 D + 1.0 L {All Spans) Total Load Defl. (in) 0.011@ 1' 7" 0.146 Passed (L/999+) --1.0 D + 1.0 L {All Spans) • Deflection criteria: LL (L./480) and TL (L./240). • Top Edge Bracing (Lu): Top compression edge must be braced at 3' o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Bottom Edge Bracing (Lu): Bottom compression edge must be braced at 3' o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Applicable calculations are based on NOS. Bearing Loads to Supports (lbs) Supports Total Available Required Dead Floor Total Accessories Uve 1 • Stud wall • DF 3.00" 1.75" 1.50" 273 1046 1319 1 1/4' Rim Board 2 • Stud wall • DF 3.00" 1.75" 1.50' 273 1046 1319 1 1/4" Rim Board • Rim Board is assumed to carry all loads applied directly above it, bypassing the member being designed. Tributary Dead Floor Uve Loads Location (Side) Width (G.90) (1.00) Comments 0 • Self Weight (PLF) 1 1/4" to 3' 13/16" N/A 7.7 1 • Uniform (PSF) 0 to 3' 2 1/16" 11' 15.0 60.0 Residential • Living /Front\ Areas PASSED System : Floor Member Type : Flush Beam Building Use : Residential Building Code : !BC 2015 Design Methodology : ASD 1-W_e_,yc,_e_rh_a_e_us_e_r_N_o_t_es _____________________________________ -l ~ SUSTAJNABI.E FORESTRY INITIATM Weyerhaeuser warrants that the sizing of Its products will be In accordance with Weyerhaeuser product design criteria and published design values. Weyerhaeuser expressly disdaims any other warranties related to the software. Use of this software is not intended to circumvent the need for a design professional as determined by the authority having Jurisdiction. The designer of record, builder or framer is responsible to assure that this calculation Is compatible with the overall project. Accessories (Rim Board, Blocking Panels and Squash Blocks) are not designed by this software. Products manufactured at Weyerhaeuser facilities are third•party certified to sustainable forestry standards. Weyerhaeuser Engineered Lumber Products have been evaluated by ICC ES under technical reports ESR·1153 and ESR·1387 and/or tested in accordance with applicable ASTM standards. For current code evaluation reports, Weyerhaeuser product literature and installation details refer to www.weyerhaeuser.com/woodproducts/document·library. The product application, Input design loads, dimensions and support Information have been provided by Forte Software Operator Forte Software Operator Job Notes Apollo Structural Partners Apollo Structural Partners ( ) apollo.structural@gmail.com Pa g e 18 of 59 1/23/2019 4:20:25 PM Forte v5.4, Design Engine: V7.1 .1.3 BEAM CALCS.4te Page 12 of 14 r:.iJ FORTE '" + 0 MEMBER REPORT Level, 812 2 piece(s) 1 3/4" x 11 7 /8" 2.0E Microllam® LVL Overall Length: 8' 9" + 0 All locatlons are measured from the outside face of left support (or left cantilever end).AII dimensions are horizontal.;Drawing is Conceptual Design Results Actual O Location Allowed Result LDF Load: Combination (Pattern) Member Reaction (lbs) 4374 @3" 7109 (3.25") Passed (62%) --1.0 D + 0.75 L + 0.75 Lr (All Spans) Shear (lbs) 3744 @ 1' 4 3/8" 9871 Passed (38%) 1.25 1.0 D + 0.75 L + 0.75 Lr (All Spans) Moment (Ft-lbs) 6172 @ 3' 10 3/8" 17848 Passed (35%) 1.00 1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Live Load Defl. (In) 0.051 @ 4' 2 1/8" 0.206 Passed (lj999+) --1.0 D + 0.75 L + 0.75 Lr (All Spans) Total Load Defl. (in) 0.108@ 4' 2 5/16" 0.412 Passed (LJ919) --1.0 D + 0.75 L + 0. 75 Lr (All Spans) • Deflection criteria: LL (L/480) and n (L/240). • Top Edge Bracing (Lu): Top compression edge must be braced at 8' 7' o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Bottom Edge Bracing (Lu): Bottom compreSSion edge must be braced at B' 7" o/c unless detailed otherwise. Bearing loads to Supports (lbs) Supports Total Available Required Dead Floor Roof Total Accessories Uve Uve 1 -Stud wall -OF 4.50" 3.25" 2.00" 2288 1313 1536 5137 1 1/4" Rim Board 2 -Stud wall -OF 4.50" 3.25" 1.50" 1493 1313 414 3220 1 1/4" Rim Board • Rim Board is assumed to carry all loads applied directly above It, bypassing the member being designed. Tributary Dead Floor live Roof Uve Loads Location (Side) Width (D.90) (1.00) (non-snow: 1.25) Comments 0 -Self Weight (PLF) 1 1/4" to B' 7 3/4" N/A 12.1 1 -Uniform (PSF) 0 to 8' 9" (Front) 7'6" 15.0 40.0 Residential -Living Areas 2 -Uniform (PSF) 0 to 8' 9" (Front) 10' 15.0 -Residential -Living Areas 3 -Point (lb) 2' (Front) N/A 1381 -1950 Linked from: B2, su~rt 1 PASSED System : Floor Member Type : Flush Beam Building Use : Residential Building Code : !BC 2015 Design Methodology : ASO 1--W_e..:y_e_rh_a_e_us_e_r_N_o_t_es _____________________________________ -l ~ SUSTAINABlE FORESTRY INITIATM Weyerhaeuser warrants that the sizing of Its products will be in accordance with Weyerhaeuser product design criteria and published design values. Weyerhaeuser expressly disclaims any other warranties related to the software. Use of this software is not intended to circumvent the need for a design professional as determined by the authority having jurisdietion. The designer of record, builder or framer Is responsible to assure that this calculation Is compatible with the overall project. Accessories (Rim Board, Blocking Panels and Squash Blocks) are not designed by this software. Products manufactured at Weyerhaeuser facilities are third-party certified to sustainable forestry standards. Weyerhaeuser Engineered Lumber Products have been evaluated by ICC ES under technical reports ESR-1153 and ESR-1387 and/or tested In accordance with applicable ASTM standards. For current code evaluation reports, Weyerhaeuser product literature and installation details refer to www.weyerhaeuser.com/woodproducts/document-llbrary. The product application, Input design loads, dimensions and support information have been provided by Forte Software Operator Forte Software Operator Job Notes Apollo Structural Partners Apollo Slruclural Partners ( ) apollo.structural@gmail.com 1-'a g e 7!:I ot 59 1/23/2019 4:20:25 PM Forte v5.4, Design Engine: V7.1.1.3 BEAM CALCS.4te Page 13 of 14 + 0 MEMBER REPORT Level, B13 2 piece(s) 13/4"x91/4" 2.0E Microllam® LVL Overall Length: 8' 9" + 0 All locations are measured from the outside face of lelt support (or lelt cantilever end).AII dimensions are horizontal.;Drawing is Conceptual Design Results Actual O Location Allowed Result LDF Load: Combination (Pattern) Member Reaction (lbs) 4672 @ 3" 7109 (3.25") Passed (66%} --1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Shear (lbs} 3533 @ 1' 1 3/4" 6151 Passed (57%) 1.00 1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Moment (Ft-lbs) 9307 @ 4' 4 1/2" 11204 Passed (83%) 1.00 1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Live Load Deft. (in) 0.207 @ 4' 4 1/2" 0.206 Passed (L/4 77) --1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) Total Load Deft. (in) 0.280 @ 4' 4 1/2" 0.412 Passed (L/353) --1.0 D + 1.0 L (All Spans) • Deflection criteria: LL (l/480) and TL (l/240). • Top Edge Bracing (Lu): Top compression edge must be braced at 8' 7" o/c unless detailed otherwise. • Bottom Edge Bracing (Lu): Bottom compression edge must be braced at 8' 7" o/c unless detailed otherwise. Bearing Loads lo Supports (lbs) Supports Total Available Required Dead Floor Total Accessories Live l -Stud wall • DF 4.50" 3.25" 2.14" 1241 3544 4785 l 1/4" Rim Board 2 -Stud wall -DF 4.50" 3.25" 2.14" 1241 3544 4785 1 1/4" Rim Board • Rim Board Is assumed to carry all loads applied directly above it, bypassing the member being designed. Tributary Dead Floor Uve Loads Location (Side) Width (0.90) (1.00) Comments 0 -Self Weight (PLF) l 1/4" to 8' 7 3/4" N/A 9.4 1 • Uniform (PSF) 0 to 8' 9" (Front) 7' 6" 15.0 40.0 Residential -Living Areas 2 • Uniform (PSF) 0 to 8' 9" (Front) 6' 12.0 60.0 Residential -Living Areas 3 • Uniform (PSF) 0 to 8' 9" (Front) 7' 6" 12.0 20.0 Residential -Living Areas Weyerhaeuser Notes Weyerhaeuser warrants that the sizing of its products will be in accordance with Weyerhaeuser product design criteria and published design values. Weyerhaeuser expressly disclaims any other warranties related to the software. Use of this software Is not Intended to circumvent the need for a design professional as determined by the authority having jurisdiction. The designer of record, builder or framer is responsible to assure that this calculation ts compatible with the overall project. Accessories (Rim Board, Blocking Panels and Squash Blocks) are not designed by this software. Products manufactured at Weyerhaeuser facilities are third-party certified to sustainable forestry standards. Weyerhaeuser Engineered Lumber Products have been evaluated by ICC ES under technical reports ESR-1153 and ESR-1387 and/or tested In accordance with applicable ASTM standards. For current code evaluation reports, Weyerhaeuser product literature and Installation details refer to www.weyerhaeuser.com/woodproducts/document·library. The product application, Input design loads, dimensions and support Information have been provided by Forte Software Operator PASSED System : Floor Member Type : Flush Beam Building Use : Residential Building Code : !BC 2015 Design Methodology : ASD ~ SUSTAINASU FORESTRY INITIATIVE Forte Software Operator Apollo Structural Partners Apollo Structural Partners Job Notes 1/23/2019 4:20:25 PM Forte v5.4, Design Engine: V7 .1.1.3 BEAM CALCS.4te ( ) apollo.structural@gmail.com Page 14 of 14 Pa e 20 ot 59 g A p D LLD 14650 E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 STRUCTU RAL MONTCLAIR. CA 91763 Sheet: Date: #: EQ-ANALYSIS 01/15/19 19-1819 Horizontal Earthquake Load Analysis -2016 California Building Code /ASCE 7-16 FOR LATERAL LOADS ONTO W D SHEAR WALL Short Period Spectral Response Acceleration, Ss = ls Period Spectral Response Acceleration, S1 = Soil Site Class = Risk Category of Building or Structure= Site Coefficient, Fa = Site Coefficient, Fv = Sms = Fa*Ss = Sm1 = Fv*Sl = Sds = 2/3 *Sms = Sd1 = 2/3*Sml = Seismic Design Category = 1.133 0.435 D II 1.20 1.70 1.36 0.74 0.91 0.49 D Per USGS -2015 NEHRP Per USGS -2015 NEHRP Per ASCE Minimum Table 1.5-1 Table 11.4-1 Table 11.4-2 Equation 11.4-1 Equation 11.4-2 Equation 11.4-3 Equation 11.4-4 Table 11.6-1 & 2 Building Structure -Seismic Equivalent Lateral Force Procedure -Section 12.8 Importance Factor, le = Response Modification Factor, R = c, = X = Approximate Fundamental Period, Ta = C1 (h0)' = Long Period Transition Period, TL = Average Height of Roof, h n = Cs = Sds / (R/le) = Cs = Sdl / Ta(R/le) = Cs= Sdl T J Ta2(R/le) = Cs = 0.044 Sds le = Cs = 0.5 Sl / (R/le) = Seismic Base Shear, V = Cs W= Red undancy Factor, r = (Strength Level) 1.0E h = rQe = (ASD Level) 0.7£ h = rQe = 1.00 Table 1.5-2 6.50 Wood Shear Wall O.Q2 Table 12.8-2 0.75 Table 12.8-2 0.23 s, Equation 12.8-7 12 Figure 22-(12-16) 26.50 ft 0.14 Equation 12.8-2 0.32 Equation 12.8-3 16.68 Equation 12.8-4 0.04 Equat ion 12.8-5 0.03 Equation 12.8-6 0.14 W, Equation 12.8-1 1.30 Section 12.3.4.2 0.181 W, Equation 12.4-3 0.127 W, Equation 12.4-3 Page 21 of 59 Table 12.2-1 MAX;T ~TL MAX; T >TL MIN 2'._0.01 MIN; S12'.. 0.6 A p D LLD 14650 E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR. CA 91763 Sheet: Date: #: EQ-ANALYSIS 01/15/19 19-1819 Horizontal Earthquake Load Analysis -201.6 California Building Code /ASCE 7-1.6 FOR LATERAL LOADS ONTO WOOD SHEAR WALL Vertical Distribution of Seismic Forces -Section 12.8.3 (Light Framed Shearwalls) Building Weight Summar:_l( -Projected Horizontal Plan Weight Roof Weight = 12.0 psf Ceiling Weight = 5.0 psf Floor Weight= 15.0 psf 1-Story Building Vertical Distribution of Forces Building Info Distribution 1.0 E (Stren2th) 0.7 E (ASD) Level Wi (psf) hi (ft) Wi hik SWi hik Fx Fx Fx Fx 1 17.0 10.0 170.0 170.0 0.181 w 3.08 jpsf 0.127 w 2.16 jpsf Base 17.0 0.0 0.0 170.0 0.181 w 3.os lpst 0.127 w 2.16 lpst k= I 1.0 I 2-Story Building Vertical Distribution of Forces Buildimi Info Distribution 1.0 E (Stren2th) 0.7 E (ASD) Level Wi (psf) hi (ft) Wi hik SWi hik Fx Fx Fx Fx 2 17.0 20.0 340.0 340.0 0.101 w 4.75 psf 0.071 w 3.32 psf 1 30.0 9.0 270.0 610.0 0.080 w 3.77 psf 0.056 w 2.64 psf Base 47.0 0.0 0.0 610.0 0.181 w 8.52 psf 0.127 w 5.96 psf k= I 1.0 I Page 22 of 59 A p □LL □ 14650 E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR. CA 91763 Sheet: Date: #: fl: EQ-ANAL YSIS 01/15/19 19-1819 Horizontal Earthquake Load Analysis -2016 California Building Code /ASCE 7-16 FOR LATERAL L ,ilD ONTO STEEL CANT. LUMN Short Period Spectral Response Acceleration, Ss = ls Period Spectral Response Acceleration, 51 = Soil Site Class = Risk Category of Building or Structure= Site Coefficient, Fa = Site Coefficient, Fv = Sms = Fa*Ss = Sml = Fv*Sl = Sds = 2/3 *Sms = Sdl = 2/3*Sml = Seismic Design Category = 1.133 0.435 D II 1.20 1.70 1.36 0.74 0.91 0.49 D Per USGS -2015 NEHRP Per USGS -2015 NEHRP Per ASCE Minimum Table 1.5-1 Table 11.4-1 Table 11.4-2 Equation 11.4-1 Equation 11.4-2 Equation 11.4-3 Equation 11.4-4 Table 11.6-1 & 2 Building Structure -Seismic Equivalent Lateral Force Procedure -Section 12.8 Importance Factor, le = 1.00 Table 1.5-2 Response Modification Factor, R = 1.25 STEEL CANT. COLUMN Table 12.2-1 Ct = 0,02 Table 12.8-2 X = 0.75 Table 12.8-2 Approximate Fundamental Period, Ta = C1 (hnl' = 0.23 s, Equation 12.8-7 Long Period Transition Period, TL = 12 Figure 22-(12-16) Average Height of Roof, h n = 26.50 ft Cs= Sds / (R/le) = 0.73 Equation 12.8-2 Cs = Sdl / Ta(R/le) = 1.69 Equation 12.8-3 MAX; T ~TL Cs= Sdl T J Ta2(R/le) = 86.73 Equation 12.8-4 MAX; T >TL Cs = 0.044 Sds le= 0.04 Equation 12.8-S MIN ~0.01 Cs= 0.5 Sl / (R/le) = 0.17 Equation 12.8-6 MIN; S1 ~ 0.6 Seismic Base Shear, V = Cs W= 0.73 W, Equation 12.8-1 Redundancy Factor, r = 1.30 Section 12.3.4.2 (Strength Level) l.OE h = rQe = 0.943 W, Equation 12.4-3 (ASD Level) 0.7E h = rQe = 0.660 W, Equation 12.4-3 Page 23 of 59 Sheet: EQ-ANAL VSIS AP D LLD 14650 E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 Date: Ol/l S/l9 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR. CA 91763 __ #_: ~_1_9_-1_s1_9 _ 6 : Horizontal Earthquake Load Analysis -2016 California Building Code /ASCE 7-16 FOR LATERAL LOADS NTO STEEL CANT. COLUMN Vertical Distribution of Seismic Forces -Section 12.8.3 (Light Framed Shearwalls) Buildin Wei ht Summar -Pro·ected Horizontal Plan Wei ht Level 2 1 Base Roof Weight= Ceiling Weight= Floor Weight= 12.0 psf 5.0 psf 10.0 psf 2-Story Building Vertical Distribution of Forces Building Info Distribution 1.0 E (Strenl!th) 0.7 E (ASD) Wi (psf) hi (ft) Wihik SWihik Fx Fx Fx Fx 17.0 22.0 374.0 374.0 0.543 w 22.82 psf 0.380 w 15.97 25.0 11.0 275.0 649.0 0.399 w 16.78 psf 0.280 w 11.74 42.0 0.0 0.0 649.0 0.943 w 39.59 psf 0.660 w 27.71 k= I 1.0 I Page 24 of 59 psf psf psf A p □ L L □ 14968 ARROW HWY #F STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR, CA 91763 Sheet: Date: #: W-ANALYSIS 01/15/19 19-1819 Chapter 27 -All Buildings -Directlonql Procedure -Residential Building FOR MAIN STRuqURE Building Risk Category = II Table 1.5-1 Basic Wind Speed, V = 110 mph, Fig. 26.5-lA, B, C Building Enclosure Classification = Enclosed Section 26.2 Factor+/-GCpi = 0.18 Table 26.11-1 Building Flexibility= Rigid nl > 1 Hz Gust Factor, G = 0.85 Section 26.9.4 Directionality Factor, Kd = 0.85 Table 26.6-1, MWFRS Exposure Category = C Section 26.7 Topographic Factor, Kzt = 1.0 Section 26.8.2 -FLAT Velocity Pressure Coefficients, Kz, Kh = 0.93 Table 26.6-1, MWFRS Building Width, B = 46.0 ft Building Length, L = 62.0 ft L/8 = 1.3 Approximate Roof Area, A = 2852.0 sf Roof Pitch= 4 :12, Q = 18.4 degrees h/L= 0.4 2-Story Building Wind Analysis I Level Height (ft) Kz/Kh qz (psf) I Velocity Pres Ridge Height 26.5 0.95 25.07 =qh Mean Roof 23 0.93 24.38 2nd Level 20 0.90 23.70 1st Level 9 0.85 22.38 Pressure on Building By Component (Roof Loads Normal to Roof Surface) qh ,.~. ~JJyj,:; Level External Internal .. Surface Cp q (ft) or (psf) Pressure, Pressure, + - qz q(GCp) (psf) qh(+/-GCpi) (GCpi) (GCpi) Windward Roof -(-Ci 27 -0.46 qh 25.07 -9.71 4.5 -5.20 -14.22 Windward Roof -(+C 27 0.00 qh 25.07 0.00 4.5 4.51 -4.51 Leeward Roof 27 -0.57 qh 25.07 -12.12 4.5 -7.60 -16.63 Windward Wall 20 0.8 qz 23.70 16.11 4.5 20.63 11.60 Leeward Wall 20 -0.43 qh 25.07 -9.17 4.5 -4.66 -13.68 Windward Wall 9 0.8 qz 22.38 15.22 4.5 19.73 10.71 Leeward Wall 9 -0.43 qh 25.07 -9.17 4.5 -4.66 -13.68 Page 25 of 59 A p □ LL □ 14988 ARROW HWY #F STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR, CA 91763 Sheet: Date: #: l:J. : W-ANALYSIS 01/15/19 19-1819 Chapter 27 -All Buildings· Directional Procedure · Residential Building FOR MAIN STRUCTURE Wind Loading -Horizontal Components Surface ~evel (ft +Intern~ -I nterna Design Min. psf (psf) (psf) Windward Roof 27 1.43 -1.43 3.83 8 Leeward Roof 27 -2.40 -5.26 Windward Wall 20 20.63 11.60 25.28 16 Leeward Wall 20 -4.66 -13.68 Windward Wall 9 19.73 10.71 24.39 16 Leeward Wall 9 -4.66 -13.68 WIND LOAD NORMAL TO RIDGE AT SLOPED ROOF Level 1.0W (Strength) 0.6W (ASD) 2nd Fir 191 plf 115 plf 1st Fir 249 plf 149 plf c:) Base 440 plf 264 plf WIN WIND LOAD NORMAL TO GABLE END Level 1.0W (Strength) 0.6W (ASD) 2nd Fir 249 plf 149 plf 1st Fir 249 plf 149 plf c:) Base 498 plf 299 plf WIN Page 26 of 59 1 I A p D LLD 14650 E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR. CA 91763 Sht: W 1 Date: 1/15/2019 #: 19-1819 WOOD FRAMED SHEAR WALL -2016 CBC/ AF&PA SDPWS-2015 Load = Load = Load = Load = Load = 3.32 psf X 3.32 psf X 0.00 psf X 0.00 psf X 0.00 psf X Load = 149 Load = 0 Load = 0 Load = 0 SECOND FLOOR GRIDLINE A 29 12 0 0 0 plf plf plf plf Seismic Load ft X 46 ft X 30 ft X 0 ft X 0 ft X 0 Total Length of Shear Wall Segments= 21.67 21.67 ft/ 2 2214 lbs ft I 2 S98 lbs ft/ 2 0 lbs ft/ 2 = 0 lbs ft/ 2 0 lbs ---Total Seismic Load = 2812 lbs ..._ ___ __. Wind Load X 46 ft / 2 3427 lbs X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs X 0 ft I 2 O lbs X 0 ft 0 lbs -----Total Wind Load= 3427 lbs ____ __. PERFORATED WALL ADJ. FACTOR, Co= 1.00 FULL HEIGHT· S00mented Shear Wall Check ner AF&PA SDPWS-2015 Section 4.3.5.1 ·7 LOAD SHEAR WIDTH UNIT SHEAR Aspect Ratio Check (h/w) ALLOW SHEAR s.w. TYPE Vu (LB) (FT) Vu (PLF) Height, h = 10 lft v0 (PLF) TYPE SEISMIC 2,812 21.67 130 Width, w = 21.67 ft 260 6 I WIN D 3,427 21.67 158 Aspect Ratio = 0.46 (h/w) 365 6 I Shear Wi!II Overturning Deiign I Worst Case Wall: Shear Load at Wall = 3427 lbs Height= 10 ft Overturning Moment (O.T.M.) = 34270 ft-lb Width = 21.67 ft (0.6-0.14S05) Resisting Moment (R.M.) = 17976 ft-lb Trib.Dead Load on Wall Net Moment (OTM-RM) = 16294 ft-lb Roof = 2 ft I 2 Sos= 0.91 Uplift= 752 lbs Wall = 10 ft Uplift from Shear Wall Above = 0 lbs Floor = 0 ft I 2 Total Uplift at End Post= 752 lbs Provide: CS14 FLOOR TO FLOOR STRAP AT BASE OF END POST Provide: STHD14 HOLDOWN TO CONCRETE AT BASE OF END POST ALT: HTT4 Total Lateral Load, V = 3427 lli To12 Plate Stress = 118 Q)f Length of Diaphragm, L = 29 ft Top Plate Drag Length = 7 ft Diaphragm Stress, v = V/L = 118 plf Top Pit Splice Load = 827 lbs Length of Shear Wall Line, Lw = 29 ft Provide: CS16 Hardware Spacing = 68 "o.c. Page 27 of 59 Sht: W2 A p O LL O 14650 E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 Date: 1/15/2019 #: 19-1819 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR. CA 91763 t:, : WOOD FRAMED SHEAR WALL -2016 CBC l AF&PA SDPWS-2015 2 SECOND FLOOR GRIDLINE D Total Length of Shear Wall Segments= Seismic Load 6.33 Load= 3.32 psf X 29 ft X 46 ft I 2 2214 lbs 3 Load = 3.32 psf X 12 ft X 30 ft I 2 598 lbs 4.33 Load= 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load= 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Total Seismic Load = 2812 lbs Wind load · Load = 149 plf X 46 ft I 2 3427 lbs Load= 0 plf X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load= 0 plf X 0 ft 0 lbs Total Wind Load = 3427 lbs PERFORATED WALL ADJ. FACTOR, Co= 1.00 FULL HEIGHT· Segmented Shear Wall Check Rer AF&PA SDPWS-2Q15 Section 4.3.:i.1 J LOAD SHEAR WIDTH UNIT SHEAR Aspect Ratio Check (h/w) ALLOW SHEAR s.w. TYPE Vu (LB) (FT) Vu (PLF) Height, h = 10 ltt v. (PLF) TYPE SEISMIC 2,812 13.66 206 Width, w = 3 ft 210 4 WIND 3,427 13.66 251 Aspect Ratio = 3.33 (h/w) 365 6 I Shear Wall OVerturaing Design ' - Worst Case Wall: Shear Load at Wall = 753 lbs Height = 10 ft Overturning Moment (O.T.M.) = 7526 ft-lb Width= 3 ft (0.6-0.1450sl Resisting Moment (R.M.) = 345 ft-lb Trib.Dead Load on Wall Net Moment (OTM-RM) = 7182 ft-lb Roof = 2 ft I 2 S05 = 0.91 Uplift = 2394 lbs Wall = 10 ft Uplift from Shear Wall Above= 0 lbs Floor= 0 ft I 2 Total Uplift at End Post = 2394 lbs Provide: 2-CS14 FLOOR TO FLOOR STRAP AT BASE OF END POST Provide: STHD14 HOLDOWN TO CONCRETE AT BASE OF END POST ALT: HTT4 Total Lateral Load, V = 3427 lli ToQ Plate Stress = 118 .12.!f Length of Diaphragm, L = 29 ft Top Plate Drag Length = 4 ft Diaphragm Stress, v = V/L = 118 plf Top Pit Splice Load = 473 lbs Length of Shear Wall Line, Lw = 29 ft Provide: CS16 Hardware Spacing = 68 II Q.(, Page 28 of 59 Sht: W3 A p □ LL □ 14650 E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 Date: 1/15/2019 #: 19-1819 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR. CA 91763 I:!,. : WOOD FRAMED SHEAR WALL -2016 CBC/ AF&PA SDPWS-2015 3 SECOND FLOOR GRIDLINE 2 Total Length of Shear Wall Segments= 6.75 Seismic Lgad 3.75 Load = 3.32 psf X 46 ft X 15 ft I 2 1145 lbs 3 Load = 3.32 psf X 12 ft X 30 ft/ 2 598 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Total Seismic Load = 1743 lbs Wind Load Load = 149 plf X 27 ft I 2 2012 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft 0 lbs Total Wind Load = 2012 lbs PERFORATED WALL ADJ. FA OR, Co= 1.001 FULL HEIGHT· Seirmented Shear Wall Check ner AF&PA SDPWS-2015 Section 4.3.5.1 7 CT LOAD SHEAR WIDTH UNIT SHEAR Aspect Ratio Check (h/w) ALLOW SHEAR s.w. TYPE Vu (LB) (FT) Vu (PLF) Height, h = 10 ft v. (PLF) TYPE SEISMIC 1,743 6.75 258 Width, w = 3 ft 294 3 I WIND 2,012 6.75 298 Aspect Ratio= 3.33 (h/w) 365 6 I I Shear Wall overturning Design I Worst Case Wall: Shear Load at Wall = 894 lbs Height= 10 ft Overturning Moment (O.T.M.) = 8940 ft-lb Width = 3 ft (0.6-0.14S05) Resisting Moment (R.M.) = 510 ft-lb Trib.Dead Load on Wall Net Moment (OTM-RM) = 8430 ft-lb Roof = 15 ft I 2 Sos= 0.91 Uplift = 2810 lbs Wall = 10 ft Uplift from Shear Wall Above = 0 lbs Floor = 0 ft I 2 Total Uplift at End Post = 2810 lbs Provide: 2-CS14 FLOOR TO FLOOR STRAP AT BASE OF END POST Provide: 2-STHD14 HOLDOWN TO CONCRETE AT BASE OF ENO POST Total Lateral Load, V = 2012 !l:1 To(;! Plate Stress -44 Q!f Length of Diaphragm, L = 46 ft Top Plate Drag Length= 28 ft Diaphragm Stress, v = V/L = 44 plf Top Pit Splice Load = 1224 lbs Length of Shear Wall Line, Lw = 46 ft Provide: CS16 Hardware Spacing = 184 ti o.c. Page 29 of 59 Sht: W 3.1 A p D LLD 14650 E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 Date: 1/15/2019 #: 19-1819 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR. CA 91763 ti : CANTILEVER COLUMN -2016 CBC / AF&PA SDPWS-2015 3.1 SECOND FLOOR GRIDLINE 2 CANT. COLUMN CALC. Total Length of Shear Wall Segments= 0 Seismic Load Load = 15.97 psf X 13.5 ft X 32 ft I 2 3450 lbs Load= 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load= 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load= 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load= 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Total Seismic Load = 3450 lbs Wind load Load = 149 plf X 13.5 ft I 2 = 1006 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft I 2 = 0 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft 0 lbs Total Wind Load = lbs Page 30 of 59 Sht: W4 A p O LL O 14650 E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 Date: 1/15/2019 #: 19-1819 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR. CA 91763 ti : WOOD FRAMED SHEAR WALL -2016 CBC l AF&PA SDPWS-2015 4 SECOND FLOOR GRIDLINE 3 Total Length of Shear Wall Segments= Seismic Load 4 Load = 3.32 psf X 46 ft X 28 ft/ 2 2138 lbs 4.75 Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft/ 2 = 0 lbs 4.5 Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft/ 2 0 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft/ 2 0 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft/ 2 = 0 lbs Total Seismic Load = 2138 lbs Wind Load Load = 149 plf X 28 ft / 2 = 2086 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft / 2 = 0 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft / 2 0 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft 0 lbs Total Wind Load = 2086 lbs PERFORATED WALL ADJ. FACTOR, Co= 1.00 FULL HEIGHT -Seomented Shear Wall Check ner AF&PA SDPWS-2015 Section 4.3.5.1 7 LOAD SHEAR WIDTH UNIT SHEAR Aspect Ratio Check (h/w) ALLOW SHEAR s.w. TYPE Vu (LB) (FT) Vu (PLF) Height, h = 10 ft Va (PLF) TYPE SEISMIC 2,138 13.25 161 Width, w = 4 ft 208 6 I WIND 2,086 13.25 157 Aspect Ratio = 2.50 (h/w) 365 6 I I Shear Wall Overturning Design _J Worst Case Wall: Shear Load at Wall = 484 lbs Height = 10 ft Overturning Moment (O.T.M.) = 4841 ft-lb Width = 3 ft (0.6-0.14S05) Resisting Moment (R.M.) = 510 ft-lb Trib.Dead Load on Wall Net Moment (OTM-RM) = 4331 ft-lb Roof = 15 ft/ 2 Sos= 0.91 Uplift = 1444 lbs Wall= 10 ft Uplift from Shea r Wall Above = 0 lbs Floor = 0 ft/ 2 Total Uplift at End Post = 1444 lbs Provide: CS14 FLOOR TO FLOOR STRAP AT BASE OF END POST Provide: STHD14 HOLDOWN TO CONCRETE AT BASE OF END POST ALT:HTT4 Total Lateral Load, V = 2138 12 To12 Plate Stress = 46 fill Length of Diaphragm, L = 46 ft Top Plate Drag Length = 16 ft Diaphragm Stress, v = V/L = 46 plf Top Pit Splice Load = 720 lbs Length of Shear Wall Line, Lw = 46 ft Provide: CS16 Hardware Spacing = 173 II Q,C. Page 31 of 59 s A p O LL O 14650 E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR, CA 91763 Sht: W 5 Date: 1/15/2019 #: 19-1819 t:,: WOOD FRAMED SHEAR WALL -2016 CBC/ AF&PA SDPWS-2015 Load = Load = Load= Load= Load = 3.32 psf X 0.00 psf X 0.00 psf X 0.00 psf X 0.00 psf X Load = 149 Load = 0 Load = 0 Load= 0 SECOND FLOOR GRIDLINE 4 46 0 0 0 0 plf plf plf plf Total Length of Shear Wall Segments = 19.5 ----Seismic Load 4 """'""'-, ft X 13 ft X 0 ft X 0 ft X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 ft I 2 ft I 2 ft I 2 ft I 2 = 993 0 0 0 0 Total Seismic Load = 993 lbs lbs lbs lbs lbs lbs Wind Load X 13 ft I 2 969 lbs X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs X 0 ft I 2 O lbs X 0 ft O lbs -----Total Wind Load =.___9_6_9 _ ___.lbs 3.5 12 PERFORATED WALL ADJ FACTOR Co -1 00 I -I FULL HEIGHT -Seirmented Shear Wall Check ner AF&PA SDPWS-2015 Section 4.~.5.1 7 LOAD SHEAR WIDTH UNIT SHEAR Aspect Ratio Check (h/w) ALLOW SHEAR s.w. TYPE Vu (LB) (FT) Vu (PLF) Height, h = 10 ft v3 (PLF) TYPE SEISMIC 993 19.5 51 Width, w = 3.5 ft 182 6 I WIND 969 19.5 50 Aspect Ratio = 2.86 (h/w) 365 6 I -Shear Wall Overturnlns Deslsn l Worst Case Wall: Shear Load at Wall = 178 lbs Height = 10 ft Overturning Moment (O.T.M.) = 1782 ft-lb Width = 3.5 ft (0.6-0.14505) Resisting Moment (R.M.) = 695 ft-lb Trib.Dead Load on Wall Net Moment (OTM-RM) = 1087 ft-lb Roof= 15 ft/ 2 Sos= 0.91 Uplift = 311 lbs Wall = 10 ft Uplift from Shear Wall Above= 0 lbs Floor = 0 ft I 2 Total Uplift at End Post = 311 lbs Provide: CS14 FLOOR TO FLOOR STRAP AT BASE OF END POST Provide: STHD14 HOLDOWN TO CONCRETE AT BASE OF END POST ALT: HTT4 Total Lateral Load, V = 993 1h ToQ Plate Stress = 22 .Q!f Length of Diaphragm, L = 46 ft Top Plate Drag Length = 10 ft Diaphragm Stress, v = V/L = 22 plf Top Pit Splice Load = 216 lbs Length of Shear Wall Line, Lw = 46 ft Provide: CS16 Hardware Spacing = 373 "o.c. Page 32 of 59 6 I A p O LL O 14650 E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR. CA 81763 Sht: W 6 Date: 1/15/2019 #: 19-1819 I::,,: WOOD FRAMED SHEAR WALL -2016 CBC/ AF&PA SDPWS-2015 Load = Load = Load = Load = Load = 3.32 psf X 29 3.32 psf X 12 2.64 psf X 29 0.00 psf X 0 0.00 psf X 0 Load = 149 plf Load = 149 plf Load = 0 plf Load= 0 plf FIRST FLOOR GRIDLINE A Seismic Load ft X 46 ft X 29 ft X 40 ft X 0 ft X 0 Total Length of Shear Wall Segments= 11.83 3.33 ft I 2 ft I 2 ft I 2 ft I 2 ft I 2 = 2214 578 1531 0 8.5 Total Seismic Load = 0 4323 lbs lbs lbs lbs lbs lbs Wind Load X 46 ft I 2 3427 lbs X 20 ft I 2 = 1490 lbs X 0 ft I 2 = 0 lbs X 0 ft 0 lbs --------Tot a I Wind Load = 4917 lbs ...... ___ _ PERFORATED WALL ADJ. FACTOR, Co = 1.00 FULL HEIGHT -Seomented Shear Wall Check ner AF&PA SDPWS-2015 Section 4.3.5.1 1 LOAD SHEAR WIDTH UNIT SHEAR Aspect Ratio Check (h/w) ALLOW SHEAR s.w. TYPE Vu (LB) (FT) Vu (PLF) Height, h = 9 ft v. (PLF) TYPE SEISMIC 4,323 11.83 365 Width, w = 3.33 ft 474 2 WIND 4,917 11.83 416 Aspect Ratio = 2.70 (h/w) 532 4 I Shear Wall Overturning Design l Worst Case Wall: Shear Load at Wall = 1217 lbs Height = 9 ft Overturning Moment (O.T.M.) = 10953 ft-lb Width= 3.33 ft (0.6-0.1450s) Resisting Moment (R.M.) = 424 ft-lb Trib.Dead Load on Wall Net Moment (OTM-RM) = 10528 ft-lb Roof = 2 ft I 2 Sos= 0.91 Uplift = 3162 lbs Wall = 9 ft Uplift from Shear Wall Above = 752 lbs Floor = 2 ft I 2 Total Uplift at End Post = 3914 lbs Provide: 3-CS14 FLOOR TO FLOOR STRAP AT BASE OF END POST Provide: 2-STHD14 HOLDOWN TO CONCRETE AT BASE OF END POST Total Lateral Load, V = 4917 lli ToQ Plate Stress = 170 Qjf Length of Diaphragm, L = 29 ft Top Plate Drag Length = 8 ft Diaphragm Stress, v = V/L = 170 plf Top Pit Splice Load = 1356 lbs Length of Shear Wall Line, Lw = 29 ft Provide: CS16 Hardware Spacing = 47 ,, o.c. Page 33 of 59 I A p D LLD 14650 E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR. CA 91763 Sht: W 7 Date: 1/lS/2019 #: 19-1819 WOOD FRAMED SHEAR WALL -2016 CBC/ AF&PA SDPWS-2015 FIRST FLOOR GRIDLINE B Total Length of Shear Wall Segments= Selsmli; Load 12 Load= 2.64 psf X 29 ft X 30 ft I 2 = 1148 lbs 12 Load = 2.64 psf X 12 ft X 23 ft I 2 364 lbs Load = 2.64 psf X 11 ft X 22 ft I 2 319 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Total Seismic Load = 1832 lbs Load = 149 plf X 30 ft I 2 = 2235 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft 0 lbs Total Wind Load = lbs PERFORATED WALL ADJ. FACTOR, Co = 1.00 FULL HEIGHT -Seirmented Shear Wall Check ner AF&PA SDPWS-2015 Sertlnn 4.3.S.l._---, LOAD SHEAR WIDTH UNIT SHEAR Aspect Ratio Check (h/w) ALLOW SHEAR s.w. TYPE Vu (LB) (FT) Vu (PLF) Height, h = 9 ft v. (PLF) TYPE SEISMIC 1,832 24 76 Width, w = 12 ft 260 6 I WIND 2,235 24 93 Aspect Ratio = 0.75 (h/w) 365 6 I Shear Wall Overturning Design 1 Worst Case Wall: Shear Load at Wall = 1118 lbs Height= 9 ft Overturning Moment (O.T.M.) = 10058 ft-lb Width = 12 ft (0.6-0.14S05) Resisting Moment (R.M.) = 5104 ft-lb Trib.Dead Load on Wall Net Moment (OTM-RM) = 4953 ft-lb Roof= 0 ft I 2 S05 = 0.91 Uplift = 413 lbs Wall= 9 ft Uplift from Shear Wall Above = 0 lbs Floor = 2 ft I 2 Total Uplift at End Post= 413 lbs Provide: CS14 FLOOR TO FLOOR STRAP AT BASE OF END POST Provide: STHD14 HOLDOWN TO CONCRETE AT BASE OF END POST ALT: HTT4 Total Lateral Load, V = 2235 ll! ToQ Plate Stress = 77 Q[f Length of Diaphragm, L = 29 ft Top Plate Drag Length = 1 ft Diaphragm Stress, v = V/L = 77 plf Top Pit Splice Load= 77 lbs Length of Shear Wall Line, Lw = 29 ft Provide: CS16 Hardware Spacing = 104 "o.c. Page 34 of 59 8 Sht: W 8 A p □ LL □ 14650 E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR. CA 91763 Date: 1/15/2019 #: 19-1819 fl : WOOD FRAMED SHEAR WALL -2016 CBC/ AF&PA SDPWS-2015 FIRST FLOOR GRIDLINE C Total Length of Shear Wall Segments= 12 Seismic Load 12 Load = 2.64 psf X 62 ft X 27 ft I 2 2210 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Total Seismic Load = 2210 lbs Wind load Load = 149 plf X 27 ft I 2 = 2012 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft I 2 O lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft 0 lbs -----Total Wind Load = 2012 lbs ----PERFORATED WALL ADJ. FACTOR, Co= 1.00 FULL HEIGHT· Sa .. mented Shear Wall Check oer AF&PA SDPWS-2015 Section 4.3.5.1 LOAD SHEAR WIDTH UNIT SHEAR Aspect Ratio Check (h/w) ALLOW SHEAR s.w. TYPE Vu (LB) (FT) Vu (PLF) Height, h = 9 ft v0 (PLF) TYPE SEISMIC 2,210 12 184 Width, w = 12 ft 260 6 WIND 2,012 12 168 Aspect Ratio = 0.75 (h/w) 365 6 She1r Wall Overturning Design J l - Worst Case Wall: Shear Load at Wall = 2210 lbs Height = 9 ft Overturning Moment (O.T.M.) = 19890 ft-lb Width= 12 ft (0.6-0.14S05) Resisting Moment (R.M.) = 5104 ft-lb Trib.Dead Load on Wall Net Moment (OTM-RM) = 14786 ft-lb Roof = 0 ft I 2 Sos= 0.91 Uplift = 1232 lbs Wall= 9 ft Uplift from Shear Wall Above = 0 lbs Floor = 2 ft I 2 Total Uplift at End Post = 1232 lbs Provide: CS14 FLOOR TO FLOOR STRAP AT BASE OF END POST Provide: STHD14 HOLDOWN TO CONCRETE AT BASE OF END POST ALT: HTT4 Total Lateral Load, V = 2210 )Q Toi;i Plate Stress = 76 gJf Length of Diaphragm, L = 29 ft Top Plate Drag Length = 1 ft Diaphragm Stress, v = V/L = 76 plf Top Pit Splice Load = 76 lbs Length of Shear Wall Line, Lw = 29 ft Provide: CS16 Hardware Spacing = 106 II Q,(, Page 35 of 59 9 5ht: W 9 A p O LL O 14650 E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR. CA 91763 Date: 1/15/2019 #: 19-1819 WOOD FRAMED SHEAR WALL -2016 CBC l AF&PA SDPWS-2015 FIRST FLOOR GRIDLINE D Total Length of Shear Wall Segments= 25.16 Seismic L2ad 2.58 Load = 2.64 psf X 62 ft X 16 ft/ 2 1309 lbs 2.58 Load = 3.32 psf X 29 ft X 46 ft/ 2 2214 lbs 20 Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft/ 2 0 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft/ 2 0 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft/ 2 0 lbs Total Seismic Load = 3524 lbs Wind Load Load= 149 plf X 27 ft / 2 2012 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft / 2 = O lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft / 2 = 0 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft 0 lbs Total Wind Load = 2012 lbs PERFORATED WALL ADJ. FACTOR, Co = 1.00 FULL HEIGHT -Seamented Shear Wall Check Der AF&PA SDPWS-2015 Section 4 3 5 1 ... LOAD SHEAR WIDTH UNIT SHEAR Aspect Ratio Check (h/w) ALLOW SHEAR s.w. TYPE Vu (LB) (FT) Vu (PLF) Height, h = 9 ft v. (PLF) TYPE SEISMIC 3,524 25.16 140 Width, w = 2.58 ft 149 6 WIND 2,012 25.16 80 Aspect Ratio = 3.49 (h/w) 365 6 Shear Wall Overturning Design Worst Case Wall: Shear Load at Wall = 361 l ibs Height = 9 ft Overturning Moment (O.T.M.) = 3252 ft-lb Width = 2.58 ft (0.6-0.14S05) Resisting Moment (R.M.) = 236 ft-lb Trib.Dead Load on Wall Net Moment (OTM-RM) = 3016 ft-lb Roof= 0 ft I 2 Sos= 0.91 Uplift= 1169 lbs Wall = 9 ft Uplift from Shear Wall Above = 2394 lbs Floor= 2 ft I 2 Total Uplift at End Post= 3563 lbs Provide: 3-CS14 FLOOR TO FLOOR STRAP AT BASE OF END POST Provide: 2-STHD14 HOLDOWN TO CONCRETE AT BASE OF END POST Total Lateral Load, V = 3524 lli To12 Plate Stress = 122 Q[f Length of Diaphragm, L = 29 ft Top Plate Drag Length = 1 ft Diaphragm Stress, v = V/L = 122 plf Top Pit Splice Load = 122 lbs Length of Shear Wall Line, Lw = 29 ft Provide: CS16 Hardware Spacing = 66 II 0.(. Page 36 of 59 I I ' • Sht: W 10 A p O LL O 1465□ E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 STRUCTURAL M□HTCLAIR. CA 91763 Date: 1/15/2019 #: 19-1819 WOOD FRAMED SHEAR WALL -2016 CBC/ AF&PA SDPWS-2015 Load= Load = Load= Load= Load= FIRST FLOOR GRIDLINE 2 Total Length of Shear Wall Segments= Seismic Load 3.32 psf X 46 ft X 29 ft/ 2 2.64 psf X 46 ft X 29 ft/ 2 = 3.32 psf X 29 ft X 12 ft/ 2 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft/ 2 = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft/ 2 Total Seismic Load = Wind load Load= 149 plf X 29 ft / 2 Load= 149 plf X 40 ft / 2 Load= 0 plf X 0 ft / 2 Load= 0 plf X 0 ft = Total Wind Load = PERFORATED WALL ADJ. FACTOR, Co= 1.00 2214 1761 578 0 0 4553 2161 2980 0 0 5141 lbs lbs lbs lbs lbs lbs lbs lbs lbs lbs lbs 11.33 6.5 4 FULL HEIGHT· Seomented Shear Wall Check oer AF&PA SDPWS-2015 Section 4.3.5.1 LOAD SHEAR WIDTH UNIT SHEAR Aspect Ratio Check (h/w) ALLOW SHEAR s.w. TYPE Vu (LB) (FT) Vu (PLF) Height, h = 9 ft v0 (PLF) TYPE SEISMIC 4,553 21.83 209 Width, w = 4 ft 231 6 WIND 5,141 21.83 235 Aspect Ratio = 2.25 (h/w) 365 6 She51r W51ll 0Verturnln1 Deslsn - Worst Case Wall: Shear Load at Wall= 942 lbs Height= 9 ft Overturning Moment (O.T.M.) = 8477 ft-lb Width= 4 ft (0.6-0.14505) Resisting Moment (R.M.) = 1991 ft-lb Trib.Dead Load on Wall Net Moment (OTM-RM) = 6487 ft-lb Roof = 29 ft/ 2 Sos= 0.91 Uplift= 1622 lbs Wall = 9 ft Uplift from Shear Wall Above = 0 lbs Floor = 29 ft/ 2 Total Uplift at End Post= 1622 lbs Provide: 2-CS14 FLOOR TO FLOOR STRAP AT BASE OF END POST Provide: STHD14 HOLDOWN TO CONCRETE AT BASE OF END POST ALT: HTT4 Total Lateral Load, V = 5141 il2 ToQ Plate Stress= 112 Jill Length of Diaphragm, L = 46 ft Top Plate Drag Length = 9 ft Diaphragm Stress, v = V/L = 112 plf Top Pit Splice Load = 1006 lbs Length of Shear Wall Line, Lw = 46 ft Provide: CS16 Hardware Spacing = 72 "o.c. Page 37 of 59 j Sht: W 10 A p □ LL □ 14650 E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 Date: 1/15/2019 #: 19-1819 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR. CA 91763 I:,: WOOD FRAMED SHEAR WALL -2016 CBC l AF&PA SDPWS-2015 10 FIRST FLOOR GRIDLINE 3 Total Length of Shear Wall Segments= Seismic Load 12 Load = 3.32 psf X 46 ft X 29 ft/ 2 = 2214 lbs 12 Load = 2.64 psf X 46 ft X 29 ft/ 2 = 1761 lbs 4.5 Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft J 2 0 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft/ 2 0 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft/ 2 0 lbs Total Seismic Load = 3975 lbs Wind Lo d Load = 149 plf X 27 ft / 2 2012 lbs Load = 149 plf X 27 ft / 2 2012 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft / 2 0 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft 0 lbs Total Wind Load = lbs PERFORATED WALL ADJ. FACTOR, Co = 1.00 FULL HEIGHT· ~el!!!ented Shear Wall Check ger AF&PA SDPWS-2015 Section 4.3.5.1 l LOAD SHEAR WIDTH UNIT SHEAR Aspect Ratio Check (h/w) ALLOW SHEAR s.w. TYPE Vu (LB) (FT) Vu (PLF) Height, h = 9 ft Va (PLF) TYPE SEISMIC 3,975 28.5 139 Width, w = 4.5 ft 260 ' 6 WIND 4,023 28.5 141 Aspect Ratio = 2.00 (h/w) 365 6 I Shear Wall Overturning Design I Worst Case Wall: Shear Load at Wall = 635 lbs Height = 9 ft Overturning Moment (O.T.M.) = 5717 ft-lb Width= 4.5 ft (0.6-0.14S05) Resisting Moment (R.M.) = 2519 ft-lb Trib.Dead Load on Wall Net Moment (OTM-RM) = 3198 ft-lb Roof = 29 ft/ 2 SDs = 0.91 Uplift = 711 lbs Wall= 9 ft Uplift from Shear Wall Above = lbs Floor= 29 ft/ 2 Total Uplift at End Post= lbs Provide: 2-CS14 FLOOR TO FLOOR STRAP AT BASE OF END POST Provide: STHD14 HOLDOWN TO CONCRETE AT BASE OF END POST ALT: HTT4 Total Lateral Load, V = 4023 lli ToQ Plate Stress = 87 Iill Length of Diaphragm, L = 46 ft Top Plate Drag Length = 9 ft Diaphragm Stress, v = V/L = 87 plf Top Pit Splice Load = 787 lbs Length of Shear Wall Line, Lw = 46 ft Provide: CS16 Hardware Spacing = 92 II Q,(, Page 38 of 59 10.1 A p □ LL □ 14650 E. ARROW HWY, STE. A7 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR, CA 91763 Sht: W 10.1 Date: 1/15/2019 #: 19-1819 CANTILEVER COLUMN -2016 CBC / AF&PA SDPWS-2015 SECOND FLOOR GRIDLINE 2 CANT. COLUMN CALC. Total Length of Shear Wall Segments= 0 Seismic Load Load = 11.74 psf X 38 ft X 12 ft I 2 2677 lbs Load= 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 = 0 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Total Seismic Load = 2677 lbs Wind Load Load = 149 plf X 12 ft I 2 894 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft 0 lbs Total Wind Load = 894 lbs Page 39 of 59 A p D LLD I 465D E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR. CA 91763 Sht: W 11 Date: 1/15/2019 #: 19-1819 !::, : WOOD FRAMED SHEAR WALL -2016 CBC / AF&PA SDPWS-2015 Load= Load = Load = Load= Load= 3.32 psf X 46 2.64 psf X 46 2.64 psf X 26 0.00 psf X 0 0.00 psf X 0 Load = 149 plf Load = 149 plf Load = 0 plf Load= 0 plf FIRST FLOOR GRIDLINE 4 Total Length of Shear Wall Segments = 27 Seismic Load ___________ 14.75 ft X 13 ft I 2 993 lbs ft X 13 ft I 2 789 lbs ft X 22 ft I 2 755 lbs ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs -----Total Seismic Load = 2537 lbs Wind Load X 13 X 35 X 0 X 0 ft I 2 ft I 2 ft I 2 ft 969 2608 0 0 lbs lbs lbs lbs Total Wind Load = 3576 lbs 12.25 PERFORATED WALL ADJ. FACTOR, Co= 1.00 --.--·-----------FULL HEIGHT -SeRmented Shear Wall Check oer AF&PA SDPWS-2015 Section 4 3 5 1 ... LOAD SHEAR WIDTH UNIT SHEAR Aspect Ratio Check (h/w) ALLOW SHEAR s.w. TYPE Vu (LB) (FT) Vu (PLF) Height, h = 9 ft v0 (PLF) TYPE SEISMIC 2,537 27 94 Width, w = 12.25 ft 260 6 WIND 3,576 27 132 Aspect Ratio= 0.73 (h/w) 365 6 I Shear Wall Overturning Design I Worst Case Wall: Shear Load at Wall = 1622 lbs Height = 9 ft Overturning Moment (O.T.M.) = 14602 ft-lb Width = 12.25 ft (0.6-0.14505) Resisting Moment (R.M.) = 11010 ft-lb Trib.Dead Load on Wall Net Moment (OTM-RM) = 3592 ft-lb Roof= 13 ft I 2 Sos= 0.91 Uplift = 293 lbs Wall = 9 ft Uplift from Shear Wall Above= 311 lbs Floor = 13 ft I 2 Total Uplift at End Post = 604 lbs Provide: CS14 FLOOR TO FLOOR STRAP AT BASE OF END POST Provide: STHD14 HOLDOWN TO CONCRETE AT BASE OF END POST ALT: HTT4 Total Lateral Load, V = 3576 J.Q ToQ Plate Stress = 78 Qjf Length of Diaphragm, L = 46 ft Top Plate Drag Length = 9 ft Diaphragm Stress, v = V/L = 78 plf Top Pit Splice Load = 700 lbs Length of Shear Wall Line, Lw = 46 ft Provide: CS16 Hardware Spacing = 103 II Q,C. Page 40 of 59 12 I Sht: W 12 A p O LL O 14650 E. ARROW HWY. STE. A7 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR, CA 91763 Date: 1/15/2019 #: 19-1819 WOOD FRAMED SHEAR WALL -2016 CBC l AF&PA SDPWS-2015 FIRST FLOOR GRIDLINE 5 Total Length of Shear Wall Segments= 7.34 Seismic Loj!d 3.67 Load= 2.64 psf X 26 ft X 22 ft I 2 755 lbs 3.67 Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load= 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 = 0 lbs Load = 0.00 psf X 0 ft X 0 ft I 2 = 0 lbs Total Seismic Load = 755 lbs Wind Load Load= 149 plf X 22 ft / 2 1639 lbs Load= 0 plf X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load = 0 plf X 0 ft I 2 0 lbs Load= 0 plf X 0 ft Total Wind Load= 0 lbs -----1639 lbs PERFORATED WALL ADJ. FACTOR, Co = 1.00 FULL HEIGHT · Seirmented Shear Wall Check ner AF&PA SDPWS-2015 Section 4.3.5.1 LOAD SHEAR WIDTH UNIT SHEAR Aspect Ratio Check (h/w) ALLOW SHEAR s.w. TYPE Vu (LB) (FT) Vu (PLF) Height, h = 9 ft v3 (PLF) TYPE SEISMIC 755 7.34 103 Width, w = 3.67 ft 212 6 WIND 1,639 7.34 223 Aspect Ratio = 2.45 (h/w) 365 6 I I i L Shear Wi!II OVerturnins Desisn ____J Worst Case Wall: Shear Load at Wall = 820 lbs Height = 9 ft Overturning Moment (O.T.M.) = 7376 ft-lb Width = 3.67 ft (0.6-0.14S 0sl Resisting Moment (R.M.) = 850 ft-lb Trib.Dead Load on Wall Net Moment (OTM-RM) = 6526 ft-lb Roof = 22 ft/ 2 Sos= 0.91 Uplift = 1778 lbs Wall= 9 ft Uplift from Shear Wall Above = 0 lbs Floor = 0 ft/ 2 Total Uplift at End Post = 1778 lbs Provide: 2-CS14 FLOOR TO FLOOR STRAP AT BASE OF END POST Provide: STHD14 HOLDOWN TO CONCRETE AT BASE OF END POST ALT:HTT4 Di Total Lateral Load, V -1639 12 ToQ Plate Stress = 63 Q]f Length of Diaphragm, L = 26 ft Top Plate Drag Length = 9 ft Diaphragm Stress, v = V/L = 63 plf Top Pit Splice Load = 567 lbs Length of Shear Wall Line, Lw = 26 ft Provide: CS16 Hardware Spacing= 128 II Q.(, Page 41 of 59 AP □LL □ Project NEWBY STRUCTURAL Cales for HSS 6X6X3/8 Cales by I Cales date I Checked by I Checked date SJS 1/17/2019 STEEL COLUMN DESIGN In accordance with AISC360-10 and the ASD method lo ➔ 0.35" ..---------6"-------- Column and loading details Column details Column section Design loading Required axial strength Moment about x axis at end 1 Moment about x axis at end 2 Maxim um moment about x axis Moment about y axis at end 1 Moment about y axis at end 2 Maximum moment about y axis Maximum shear force parallel toy axis Maximum shear force parallel to x axis Material details Steel grade Yield strength Ultimate strength Modulus of elasticity Shear modulus of elasticity Unbraced lengths For buckling about x axis For buckling about y axis For torsional buckling Effective length factors For buckling about x axis HSS 6x6x0.375 P, = 7 kips (Compression) Mx1 = 33.7 kips_ft Mx2 = 0.0 kips_ft Single curvature bending about x axis Mx = max(abs(Mx1), abs(Mx2)) = 33.7 kips_ft Mv1 = 0.0 kips_ft Mv2 = 0.0 kips_ft Mv = max(abs(Mv1), abs(Mv2)) = 0.0 kips_ft Vrv = 1.8 kips V,x = 0.0 kips A500 Gr. B Fv = 46 ksi Fu= 58 ksi E = 29000 ksi G = 11200 ksi L,=144in Lv = 144 in Lz = 144 in K,=2.1 0 Page 42 of 59 Job no. 19-1818 Start page no./Revision 1 Approved by I Approved date Tedds calculation version 1.0.07 APOLLO Project Job no. NEWBY 19-1818 STRUCTURAL Cales for Start page no./Revision HSS 6X6X3/8 2 Cales by I Cales date I Checked by I Checked date Approved by I Approved date SJS 1/17/2019 For buckling about y axis For torsional buckling Section classification Section classification for local buckling (cl. 84) Critical flange width Critical web width Width to th ickness ratio of flange (compression) Width to thickness ratio of web (compression) Width to thickness ratio of flange (major flexure) Width to thickness ratio of web (major flexure) Width to thickness ratio of flange (minor flexure) Width to thickness ratio of web (minor flexure) Compression Limit for non slender section Flexure Limit for compact flange Limit for noncom pact flange Limit for compact web Limit for noncompact web Slenderness Member slenderness Slenderness ratio about x axis Slenderness ratio about y axis Second order effects Kv = 1.00 Kz = 1.00 b = b, -3 x t = 4.953 in h = d -3 x t = 4.953 in 1,_c = b / t = 14.192 l w_c = h / t = 14.192 lux = b / t = 14.192 Aw_fx = h / t = 14.192 lr_ry = h / t = 14.192 l w_ty = b / t = 14.192 Ar_c = 1 .40 X ✓(E / Fy) = 35.152 The section is nonslender in compression Apt_r= 1.12 x ✓(E /Fy) = 28.121 111_, = 1.40 x ✓(E / Fv) = 35.152 A.pw_f = 2.42 X ✓(E / Fy) = 60.762 Arw_r = 5.70 x ✓(E / Fy) = 143.118 The section is compact in flexure about the major axis S Rx = Kx X Lx / rx = 132.6 SRy = Ky x Ly/ ry = 63.2 Second order effects for bending about x axis (cl. App 8.1) Coefficient Cm Coefficient a Elastic critical buckling stress P-6 amplifier Required flexural strength Cmx = 0.6 + 0.4 X Mx2 / Mx1 = 0.600 a= 1.6 Po1x = n2 X E X Ix/ (K1x X Lx)2 = 545.2 kips B1x = max(1.0, Cmx / (1 -a x Pr / Pe1x)) = 1.000 M,x = B1x X Mx = 33.7 kips_ft Second order effects for bending about y axis (cl. App 8.1) Coefficient Cm Coefficient a Elastic critical buckling stress P-6 amplifier Required flexural strength Shear strength Shear parallel to the minor axis (cl. G2.1) Shear area Cmy = 0.6 + 0.4 x Mv1 / Mv2 = 0.600 a= 1.6 Po1y = 1t2 X E X ly / (K1y X Ly)2 = 545.2 kips 81y = max(1.0, Cmy / (1 -a X Pr/ Pe1y)) = 1.000 Mry = 81y x My = 0.0 kips_ft Aw = 2 X (d -3 X t) X t = 3.457 in2 Page 43 of 59 APOLLO STRUCTURAL Web plate buckling coefficient W eb shear coefficient Nominal shear strength Project Cales for Cales by SJS Allowable shear strength (cl.G1 & G2.1(a)) Safety factor for shear Allowable shear strength Job no. NEWBY 19-181 8 Start page no./Revision HSS 6X6X3/8 3 I Cales date I Checked by I Checked date Approved by I Approved date 1/17/2019 kv = 5.0 Cv = 1.000 Vny = 0.6 x Fy x Aw x Cv = 95.4 kips nv = 1.67 Vcy =Vny/Ov =57 .1 kips PASS -The allowable shear strength exceeds the required shear strength Reduction factor for slender elements Reduction factor for slender elements (E7) The section does not contain any slender elements therefore:- Slender element reduction factor Q = 1.0 Compressive strength Flexural buckling about x axis (cl. E3) Elastic critical buckling stress Flexural buckling stress about x axis Nominal flexural buckling strength Flexural buckling about y axis (cl. E3) Elastic critical buckling stress Reduction factor Flexural buckling stress about y axis Nominal flexural buckling strength Allowable compressive strength (cl. E1) Safety factor for compression Fex = (ir2 x E) / (SRx)2 = 16.3 ksi Fcnc = 0.877 x Fex = 14.3 ksi Pnx = Fcrx x Ag = 108.2 kips Fey= (ir2 X E) / (SRy)2 = 71 .8 ksi Ov = Q = 1.000 Fcry = Qy x (0.658°YxFy/Fey) x Fy = 35.2 ksi Pny = Fcry x Ag = 266.6 kips Oc =1.67 Allowable compressive strength Pc= min(Pnx, Pnv) / f.!c = 64.8 kips PASS -The allowable compressive strength exceeds the required compressive strength Flexural strength about the major axis Yielding (cl. F7 .1) Nominal flexural strength Mnx_yld = Mpx = Fy x Zx = 60.6 kips_ft Allowable flexural strength about the major axis (cl. F1) Safety factor for flexure f.!b = 1.67 Allowable flexural strength Mex = Mnx_yld / f.!b = 36.3 kips_ft PASS -The allowable flexural strength about the major axis exceeds the required flexural strength Combined forces Member utilization (cl. H1 .1 ) Equation H1-1b UR = abs(P,) / (2 x Pc) + (Mrx /Mex + Mry /Mey)= 0.983 PASS -The member is adequate for the combined forces Page 44 of 59 AP □LL □ Project Job no. NEWBY 19-1818 STRUCTURAL Cales for Start page no./Revision STEEL COLUMN BASEPLATE 1 Cales by I Cales date I Checked by I Checked date Approved by I Approved date SJS 1/23/2019 COLUMN BASE PLATE DESIGN In accordance with AISC 360-10 T b -I b l - b N ..:t.. + + I I + □ + - -- f-2"_, ..... 1•4 ---6"·------.w-2"-.j Plan on baseplate Design forces and moments Axial force Bending moment Shear force Eccentricity Anchor bolt to center of plate Column details Column section Depth Breadth Thickness Baseplate details Depth Breadth Thickness Design strength Foundation geometry Member thickness Dist center of baseplate to left edge foundation Dist center of baseplate to right edge foundation Dist center of baseplate to bot edge foundation Dist center of baseplate to top edge foundation Minimum tensile strength, base plate Minimum tensile strength, column Compressive strength of concrete Safety factors Compression Flexure Weld shear Elevation on baseplate Pu= 7.0 kips (Compression) Mu = 0.0 kip_in Fv = 1.8 kips e = ABS(Mu / Pu) = 0.000 in f = Qin = 0.000 in HSS 4x4x0.313 d = 4.000 in br = 4.000 in t = 0.291 in N = 10.000 in B = 10.000 in tp = 0.750 in Fy = 36 .0 ksi ha = 20.000 in Xce1 = 30.000 in Xce2 = 30.000 in y ce1 = 30.000 in y ce2 = 30.000 in Fy = 36 ksi FyCol = 50 ksi f c = 2.5 ksi Oc = 2.50 Ob= 1.67 Ov = 2.00 Page 45 of 59 Tedds calculation version 2.1.00 Bolt diameter -0.6" Bolt embedment -8.0" Flange/base weld -0.3" Web/base weld -0.3" 0.07 ksi APOLLO STRUCTURAL Plate cantilever dimensions Area of base plate Project Cales for Cales by SJS Maximum area of supporting surface Nominal strength of concrete under base plate Bending line cantilever distance m Bending line cantilever distance n Maximum bending line cantilever Plate thickness Required plate thickness Specified plate thickness Design bearing strength (AISC 360-05-JS) Design bearing strength Factored bearing strength Flange weld Flange weld leg length Tension capacity of flange Force in tension flange Critical force in flange Flange weld force per in Electrode classification number Design weld stress Design strength of weld per in Shear weld Shear web weld leg length Shear web weld force per in Electrode classification number Design weld stress Design strength of weld per in Job no. NEWBY 19-1818 Start page no./Revision STEEL COLUMN BASEPLATE I Cales date I Checked by I Checked date Approved by 1/23/2019 A,= B x N = 100.000 in2 A2 = (N + 2 X lmin) X (B + 2 X lmin) = 3600.000 in2 Pp= 0.85 x f c x A, x min(✓(A2 / A,), 2 ) = 425.0 kips m = (N -0.95 x d)/2 = 3.100 in n = (B -0.95 x br) / 2 = 3.100 in I = max(m, n) = 3.100 in lp.req = I x ✓((2 x Ob x Pu)/ (Fy x B x N)) = 0.250 in Ip = 0.750 in 2 I Approved date PASS -Thickness of plate exceeds required thickness Pp= 425.00 kips Pp/Oc = 170.00 kips PASS -Allowable bearing stress exceeds applied bearing stress tw1 = 0.3125 in Ptt = b, x t x Fycol = 58.2 kips Fu= Mu / (d • t) • Pu x (br x t) / Aco1 = -2.0 kips F, = m in(Pu, max(Ftt, 0kips)) = 0.0 kips Rw1 = F, / bt = 0.0 kips/in Fexx = 70.0 ksi Fnwonn = 0.60 X Fexx X (1.0 + 0.5 X (sin(90deg))1·5) / O v = 31.500ksi Rn1onn = Fnwonn X tw1 / ✓(2 ) = 7.0 kips/in PASS -Available strength of flange weld exceeds force in flange weld !ww = 0.3125 in Rwr = Fv / (2 x (d -2 x t)) = 0.268 kips/in Fexx = 70.0 ksi Fnwonn = 0.60 x Fexx x (1 .0 + 0.5 x (sin(0deg))l.5) / Ov = 21.000ksi Rn1onn = Fnwonn X !ww / ✓(2) = 4.6 kips/in PASS -Available strength of shear weld exceeds force in shear weld Page 46 of 59 SPECTRA ASDIP Foundation 3.2.2 GEOMETRY Column to Column Distance ............. Exterior Footing Length (X) ............ 3.25 Footing Width (Z) .............. 3.25 Footing Thickness ............ 18.0 Soil Cover ......................... 0.00 Column Length (X) ........... 10.0 Column Width (Z) ............. 10.0 Column Offset .................. 0.0 Strap Beam Width ....................... Strap Beam Height ...................... APPLIED LOADS -Exterior Col. Axial Force p ················ Moment about Z Mz ..... Shear Force Vx ............. -Interior Col. Axial Force p ................ Moment about Z Mz ..... Shear Force Vx ............. ·" 0 Service 7.0 33.7 1.8 Service 7.0 33.7 1.8 t Project: Engineer: Page#_ 1/22/2019 Descrip: STRAP BEAM STRAP FOOTING DESIGN www.asdipsoft.com SOIL PRESSURES (Comb: Service) 18.00 ft Gross Allow. Soil Pressure ............... 3.6 ksf Interior Exterior Interior 3.25 ft Reaction Force ·············· 14.3 5.0 kip 3.25 ft Bearing Pressure . ......... 1.4 0.5 ksf 18.0 in OK Bearing Ratio . ................ 0.38 0.13 OK 0.00 ft 10.0 in MATERIALS 10.0 in Beam Footings 0.0 in OK Concrete fc ................. 3.0 3.0 ksi 12.0 in Reinf. Steel fy . ............. 60.0 60.0 ksi 18.0 in Soil Cover Density ..................... 120.0 pcf Factored 7.0 kip 33.7 k-ft 1.8 kip Factored 7.0 kip 33.7 k-ft 1.8 kip Tu t! j, 3.25 ft ! 18.00 ft ijg ~r l 3.25ft l ,. ,. Controlling Load Comb: Selvioe Page 47 of 59 SPECTRA Project: Engineer: Descrip: STRAP BEAM Page#_ 1/22/2019 ASDIP Foundation 3.2.2 STRAP FOOTING DESIGN www.asdipsoft.com -Exterior footing Moment Mz = 33.7 k-ft Shear Force Vx = 1.8 kip SOIL BEARING PRESSURES (Comb. Service) Arm= 3.00 + 18.0 / 12 = 4.50 ft Moment = 1.8 • 4.50 = 8.1 k-ft Overturning moment Z-Z = 33. 7 + 8.1 = 41.8 k-ft Footing weight = W • L • Thick •Density= 3.25 • 3.25 • 18.0 / 12 * 0.15 = 2.4 kip Pedestal weight= W • L • H •Density= 10.0 / 12 • 10.0 / 12 * 3.0 * 0.15 = 0.3 kip Soil cover= W • L •SC• Density=(3.25 • 3.25-10.0 / 12 * 10.0 / 12) * 0.0 * 120 = 0.0 kip -Buoyancy= W • L • V •(SC+ Thick -WT)= 3.25 * 3.25 • 62 • (0.00 + 18.0 / 12 -2.00) = 0.0 kip -Interior footing Moment Mz = 33.7 k-ft Shear Force Vx = 1.8 kip Arm= 3.00 + 18.0 / 12 = 4.50 ft Moment = 1.8 * 4.50 = 8.1 k-ft Overturning moment Z-Z = 33. 7 + 8.1 = 41.8 k-ft Footing weight= W • L • Thick •Density= 3.25 * 3.25 * 18.0 / 12 * 0.15 = 2.4 kip Pedestal weight= W • L • H • Density = 10.0 / 12 * 10.0 / 12 * 3.0 * 0.15 = 0.3 kip Soil cover= W • L •SC• Density= (3.25 * 3.25 -10.0 I 12 • 10.0 I 12) * 0.0 * 120 = 0.0 kip -Buoyancy= W • L • V •(SC+ Thick -WT)= 3.25 * 3.25 • 62 ' (0.00 + 18.0 / 12 -2.00) = 0.0 kip . ext (P + Ped) • (D -int Off) + ext (Ftg + SC -B) • (D -ext Off-int Off) + OTM -int (P + Ped) • int Off Ext reaction=------------------------------- D -ext Off -int Off (7.0 + 0.3) * (18.0-0.00) + (2.4 + 0.0-0.0) * (18.0 -0.00-0.00) + 41 .8 + 41 .8 -(7.0 + 0.3) * 0.00 = -------------------------------= 14.3 kip 18.0 -0.0 / 12 -0.0 I 12 Int reaction = ext (P +Ped+ Ftg + SC -B) + int (P +Ped+ Ftg + SC -B) -ext Reaction = (7.0 + 0.3 + 2.4 + 0.0 -0.0) + (7.0 + 0.3 + 2.4 + 0.0 -0.0) -14.3 = 5.0 kip Ext gross bearing = Max (0, ext Reaction I (ext Ftg L • ext Ftg vv,J) =Max (0, 14.3 / (3.3 • 3.3)) = 1.4 ksf Int gross bearing = Max (0, int Reaction I (int Ftg L • int Ftg W)) =Max (0, 5.0 / (3.3 • 3.3)) = 0.5 ksf SLIDING CALCULATIONS (Comb. Service) Internal friction angle= 28 deg (assumed) Passive coefficient kp = 1 I ka = 1 / 0.36 = 2. 77 -Exterior footing Active coefficient ka = 0.36 Pressure at mid-depth = kp • Density •(Cover+ Thick 12) = 2.77 * 120 / 1000 * (0.00 + 18.0 / 12 / 2) = 0.25 ksf Passive force= Pressure• Thick• Width = 0.25 * 18.0 / 12 • 3.25 = 1.2 kip Friction force= Resisting force • Friction coeff. = Max (0, 14.3 * 0.45) = 6.5 kip -Interior footing Pressure at mid-depth = kp • Density •(Cover+ Thick I 2) = 2.77 • 120 / 1000 • (0.00 + 18.0 I 12 / 2) = 0.25 ksf Passive force = Pressure • Thick •Width= 0.25 • 18.0 I 12 • 3.25 = 1.2 kip Friction force = Resisting force • Friction coeff. = Max (0, 5.0 • 0.45) = 2.3 kip Use 100% of Passive+ 100% of Friction for sliding resistance Passive force+ Friction __ 1.00 * (1.2+ 1.2) + 1.00 • (6.5 + 2.3) Safety factor= -------- Horizontal load 1.8 + 1.8 = 3.10 > 1.50 OK Page 48 of 59 2 SPECTRA Project: Engineer: Descrip: STRAP BEAM Page#_ 1/22/2019 ASDIP Foundation 3.2.2 STRAP FOOTING DESIGN www.asdipsoft.com UPLIFT CALCULATIONS (Comb. Service) -Exterior footing Pedestal+ Footing+ Cover-Buoyancy 0.3 + 2.4 + 0.0 -0.0 Uplift safety factor=-------------= -------= 99.99 > 1.00 OK Uplih load 0.0 -Interior footing Pedestal+ Footing+ Cover-Buoyancy 0.3 + 2.4 + 0.0 -0.0 Uplift safety factor --------------= -------= 99.99 > 1.00 OK Uplih load o:o ONE-WAY SHEAR CALCULATIONS (Comb. Factored) Concrete f c = 3.0 ksi Steel fy = 60.0 ksi Soil density= 120 pcf -Exterior footing d Bot X-dir = Thick -Cover -X-diameter 12 = 18.0 -3.0 -0.6 / 2 = 14. 7 in d Bot Z-dir = Thick -Cover-X-diameter-Z-diameter 12 = 18.0 -3.0 -0.6 -0.6 I 2 = 14.1 in <!JVcx = 2 • ¢ • v(fc) • Width • d 1 1000 = 2 * 0.75 * ✓(3000) * 3.3 * 12 * 14.7/1000 = 47.1 kip <!JVcz = 2 • ¢ • Y(fc) • Length • d 11000 = 2 * 0.75 * ✓(3000) * 3.3 * 12 * 14.1 / 1000 = 45.1 kip Eff. width Wx (-Side)= LI 2-Offset-Lcol 12-d = Max (0, 3.25 I 2 -(0.0 + 10.0 / 2 + 14.4) / 12) = 0.01 ft Eff. width Wx (+ Side) =L 12 +Offset-Leo! I 2-d =Max (0, 3.25 I 2 + (0.0 -10.012 -14.4) / 12) = 0.01 ft Eff. width Wz = W/2-Wcol/2-d= Max(0, 3.25/ 2-(10.0/ 2 + 14.4) / 12) = 0.01 ft Vux (-Side)= (Bearing -Overburden) • W • Wx = (1.4 -0.3) * 3.25 * 0.01 = 0.0 kip Vux (+ Side) = (Bearing -Overburden) • W • Wx = (1.4 -0.3) * 3.25 * 0.01 = 0.0 kip Vuz (-Side)= (Bearing -Overburden) • L • Wz = (1.4 -0.3) * 3.25 * 0.01 = 0.0 kip Vuz (+ Side) = (Bearing -Overburden) • L • Wz = (1.4 -0.3) * 3.25 * 0.01 = 0.0 kip -Interior footing d Bot X-dir = Thick -Cover -X-diameter I 2 = 18.0 -3.0 -0.6 I 2 = 14. 7 in < 47.1 kip OK < 47.1 kip OK < 45.1 kip OK < 45.1 kip OK d Bot Z-dir = Thick -Cover -X-diameter -Z-diameter I 2 = 18.0 -3.0 -0.6 -0.6 I 2 = 14.1 in <!JVcx = 2 • ¢ • v(fc) • Width • d 1 1000 = 2 * 0.75 * ✓(3000) * 3.3 * 12 * 14.7/1000 = 47.1 kip <!JVcz = 2 • ¢ 'Y(fc) •Length• di 1000= 2 • 0.75 * ✓(3000) * 3.3 * 12 ' 14.111000 = 45.1 kip Eff. width Wx (-Side)= L 12 -Offset-Leo/ 12-d = Max (0, 3.25 / 2 -(0.0 + 10.0 / 2 + 14.4) / 12) = 0.01 ft Eff. width Wx (+ Side) =LI 2 +Offset-Leo! I 2-d =Max (0, 3.25 / 2 + (0.0 -10.012 -14.4) / 12) = 0.01 ft Eff. width Wz= W/2-Wcol/2-d= Max(0, 3.25/2-(10.0 I 2 + 14.4) / 12) = 0.01 ft Vux (-Side)= (Bearing -Overburden) • W • Wx = (0.5 -0.3) * 3.25 * 0.01 = 0.0 kip < 47.1 kip OK Vux (+Side)= (Bearing -Overburden) • W • Wx = (0.5 -0.3) * 3.25 * 0.01 = 0.0 kip < 47.1 kip OK Vuz (-Side)= (Bearing -Overburden) • L • Wz = (0.5 -0.3) * 3.25 * 0.01 = 0.0 kip < 45.1 kip OK Vuz (+Side)= (Bearing -Overburden) • L • Wz = (0.5 -0.3) * 3.25 * 0.01 = 0.0 kip < 45.1 kip OK Page 49 of 59 ACI Eq. (22.5.5.1) ACI Eq. (22.5.5.1) 3 SPECTRA Project: Engineer: Descrip: STRAP BEAM ASDIP Foundation 3.2.2 STRAP FOOTING DESIGN -Strap beam (Comb: Factored) Use #3 Closed Stirrups@6.0 in along the Beam Av = 2 • As = 2 • 0.11 = 0.22 in2 4>Vc = 2 • ¢ • V(fc) • Width • d 1 1000 = 2 • 0.75 • ✓(3000) * 12.0 * 14.3/1000 = 14.1 kip 4>Vs = ¢Av• fy • d Is= 0.75 * 0.22 • 60 • 14.3 / 6.0 = 23.6 kip Design shear strength ¢Vn =¢Ve + ¢ Vs = 14.1 + 23.6 = 37. 7 kip Max. Shear at Beam Vu= 4.6 kip < 37.7 kip OK Min. Avis ratio = 0.000 in (since Vu < 0.5*4>Vc) Avis ratio= Av I spacing= 0.2216.0 = 0.037 in > 0.000 in OK Max. spacings= Min (24.0, d I 2) =Min (24.0, 14.3 / 2) = 7.2 in > 6.0 in OK -Exterior footing Use 5 #5 Z-Bars Use 5 #5 X-Bars FLEXURE CALCULATIONS (Comb. Factored) p = As I b d = 1.6 / (3.25 • 12 * 14.1) = 0.0028 p = As I b d = 1.6 / (3.25 * 12 * 14. 7) = 0.0027 Bending strength ¢Mn = ¢ • b • d2 • fc • q • (1 -0.59 • q) 4>Mnx = 0.90 • 3.25 • 12 • 14.1' • 3.0 • 0.057 • (1 -0.59 • 0.057) = 94.8 k-ft 4>Mnz = 0.90 • 3.25 • 12 • 14.72 • 3.0 • 0.054 • (1 -0.59 • 0.054) = 99.2 k-ft Etf. width Wx (-Side) = LI 2-Offset-Leo! I 2 = Max (0, 3.25 / 2 -(0.0 + 10.0 / 2) / 12) = 1.21 ft Etf. width Wx (+ Side) = LI 2 +Offset-Leo/ 12 = Max (0, 3.25 / 2 + (0.0 -10.0 I 2 ) / 12) = 1.21 ft Etf. width Wz = W 12-Wcol 12 = Max (0, 3.25 / 2 -(10.0 / 2) / 12) = 1.21 ft Mux (-Side)= (Bearing-Overburden) • L • Wx2 I 2 = (1.4 -0.3) * 3.25 • 1.21' / 2 = 2.6 k-ft Mux (+Side)= (Bearing-Overburden) • L • Wx2 I 2 = (1.4 -0.3) * 3.25 • 1.212 / 2 = 2.6 k-ft Muz (-Side) = (Bearing-Overburden) • W • Wz2 I 2 = (1.4 -0.3) * 3.25 • 1.21' / 2 = 2.6 k-ft Muz (+Side)= (Bearing-Overburden) • W • Wz2 I 2 = (1.4 -0.3) * 3.25 • 1.21' / 2 = 2.6 k-ft X-As min= 0.0018 •Width* Thick =0.0018 '3.25 * 12 • 18.0 = 1.3 in2 < 1.6 in2 OK Z-As min = 0.0018 • Length • Thick =0.0018 * 3.25 • 12 * 18.0 = 1.3 in2 < 1.6 in2 OK Page#_ 1/22/2019 www.asdipsoft.com ACI Eq. (22.5.5.1) ACI Eq. (22.5.10.5.3) ACI Eq. (22.5.1.1) ACI Eq. (7.5.1.1) ACI 9.6.3.3 ACI 11.4.6.3 q = 0.0028 * 60 I 3.0 = 0.057 q = 0.0027 • 60 I 3.0 = 0.054 ACI 22.2.2 < 94.8 k-ft OK < 94.8 k-ft OK < 99.2 k-ft OK < 99.2 k-ft OK X-Cover factor= Min (2.5, (Cover+ db /2, Spacing I 2) I db)= Min (2.5, (3.0 + 0.63 / 2, 8.8 / 2) / 0.63) = 2.5 Straight X-Ld = Max (12.0, 3/40 • fy/(fc)½ • Size/Cover *db• ratio) X-Ld = Max (12.0, 3 / 40 * 60.0 * 1000 I (3000)½' 0.8 / 2.5 * 0.63 '0.03) = 12.0 in Hooked X-Ldh = 0.02 • fy I (fc)½ • db • 0. 7.:tl.02 * 60.0 * 1000 I (3000)½ * 0.63 '0.7 * 0.03 = 6.0 in -X Ld provided = (Length -Col) I 2 -Offset-Cover= (3.25 * 12 -10.0) / 2 -0.0 -3.0 = 12.5 in ACI Eq. (25.4.2.3a) ACI 25.4.3 +X Ld provided =(Length-Co/)/2+ Offset-Cover=(3.25' 12-10.0) / 2 + 0.0-3.0 = 12.5 in > 6.0 in OK Z-Cover factor= Min (2.5, (Cover+ db 12, Spacing I 2) I db)= Min (2.5, (3.0 + 0.63 12, 8.8 / 2) I 0.63) = 2.5 Straight Z-Ld = Max (12.0, 3 I 40 • fy I (fc)½ • Size I Cover• db • ratio) Z-Ld = Max (12.0, 3 / 40 * 60.0 * 1000 I (3000)½ * 0.8 / 2.5 * 0.63 * 0.03) = 12.0 in Hooked Z-Ldh = 0.02 • fy I (fc)½ • db • 0. 7 -'0.02 * 60.0 ' 1000 / (3000)½ * 0.63 * 0.7 * 0.03 = 6.0 in -Z Ld provided = (Width -Col) I 2 -Cover= 3.25 ' 12 / 2 -10.0 / 2 -3.0 = 12.5 in > 12.0 in OK +Z Ld provided =(Width -Col) 12 -Cover= 3.25 * 12 / 2 -10.0 / 2 -3.0 = 12.5 in > 12.0 in OK Page 50 of 59 ACI Eq. (22.4.2.3a) ACI 22.4.3 4 SPECTRA Project: Engineer: Descrip: STRAP BEAM ASDIP Foundation 3.2.2 STRAP FOOTING DESIGN -Interior footing Use 5#5Z-Bars p =As lb d = 1.6 / (3.25 * 12 * 14.1) = 0.0028 Use 5#5X-Bars p =As lb d = 1.6 / (3.25 • 12 * 14.7) = 0.0027 Bending strength ¢Mn= ¢ • b • d2 • fc • q • (1 -0.59 • q) ~Mnx = 0.90 * 3.25 * 12 * 14. P • 3.0 * 0.057 * (1 -0.59 * 0.057) = 94.8 k-ft ~Mnz = 0.90 * 3.25 * 12 * 14.72 * 3.0 * 0.054 * (1 -0.59 * 0.054) = 99.2 k-ft Eff. width Wx (-Side) = LI 2-Offset-Leo! I 2 = Max (0, 3.25 / 2 -(0.0 + 10.0 / 2) / 12) = 1.21 ft Eff. width Wx (+ Side) =LI 2 +Offset-Leo/ 12 = Max (0, 3.25 / 2 + (0.0 -10.0 / 2) / 12) = 1.21 ft Eff. width Wz = W 12-Wcol/2 = Max (0, 3.25 I 2 -(10.0 I 2) / 12) = 1.21 ft Mux (-Side) = (Bearing -Overburden) • L • Wx2 I 2 = (0.5 -0.3) * 3.25 * 1.212 / 2 = 0.5 k-ft Mux (+ Side) = (Bearing -Overburden) • L • Wx2 I 2 = (0.5 -0.3) * 3.25 * 1.212 / 2 = 0.5 k-ft Muz (-Side) = (Bearing -Overburden) • W • Wz2 I 2 = (0.5 -0.3) * 3.25 * 1.212 / 2 = 0.5 k-ft Muz (+ Side) = (Bearing -Overburden) • W • Wz2 I 2 = (0.5 -0.3) • 3.25 * 1.212 / 2 = 0.0 k-ft X-As min = 0. 0018 • Width •Thick = 0.0018 * 3.25 * 12 * 18.0 = 1.3 in2 < 1.6 in2 OK Z-As min= 0.0018 •Length• Thick =0.0018 * 3.25 * 12 * 18.0 = 1.3 in2 < 1.6 in2 OK Page#_ 1/22/2019 www.asdipsoft.com q = 0.0028 * 60 / 3.0 = 0.057 q = 0.0027 * 60 / 3.0 = 0.054 ACI 22.2.2 < 94.8 k-ft OK < 94.8 k-ft OK < 99.2 k-ft OK < 99.2 k-ft OK X-Cover factor= Min (2.5, (Cover+ db /2, Spacing I 2) I db}= Min (2.5, (3.0 + 0.63 / 2, 8.8 I 2) / 0.63) = 2.5 Straight X-Ld = Max (12.0, 3/40 • fy/(fc)½ •Size/Cover• db• ratio) ACI Eq. (25.4.2.3a) X-Ld = Max (12.0, 3 / 40 * 60.0 * 1000 / (3000)½ * 0.8 / 2.5 * 0.63 * 0.01) = 12.0 in Hooked X-Ldh = 0.02 • fy I (fc)½ • db • 0.7 :t1.02 * 60.0 * 1000 / (3000)½ * 0.63 * 0.7 * 0.01 = 6.0 in ACI 25.4.3 -X Ld provided = (Length -Col} 12-Offset-Cover= (3.25 * 12 -10.0) / 2 -0.0 -3.0 = 12.5 in +X Ld provided =(Length -Col} I 2 +Offset-Cover =(3.25 * 12 -10.0) / 2 + 0.0 -3.0 = 12.5 in > 12.0 in OK > 12.0 in OK Z-Cover factor= Min (2.5, (Cover+ db 12, Spacing I 2) I db}= Min (2.5, (3.0 + 0.63 12, 8.8 / 2) / 0.63) = 2.5 Straight Z-Ld = Max (12. 0, 3 I 40 • fy I (fc)½ • Size I Cover • db • ratio) Z-Ld = Max (12.0, 3 / 40 • 60.0 * 1000 / (3000)½ * 0.8 / 2.5 * 0.63 * 0.01) = 12.0 in Hooked Z-Ldh = 0.02 • fy I (fc}½ • db • 0. 7 "tl.02 * 60.0 * 1000 / (3000)½ * 0.63 * 0.7 * 0.01 = 6.0 in -Z Ld provided = (Width -Col} I 2 -Cover= 3.25 * 12 / 2 -10.0 / 2 -3.0 = 12.5 in > 12.0 in OK +Z Ld provided =(Width -Col} 12-Cover= 3.25 * 12 / 2 -10.0 / 2 -3.0 = 12.5 in > 12.0 in OK -Strap beam ACI Eq. (22.4.2.3a) ACI 22.4.3 Use 2 #5 Top Bars p =Aslb d =0.61 (12.0 * 14.3) = 0.0036 q = 0.0036 * 60 / 3.0 = 0.072 Use 2 #5 Bot Bars p =As lb d =0.6 / (12.0 * 14.3) = 0.0036 Bending strength ¢Mn= ¢ • b • d2 • fc • q • (1 -0.59 • q) ~Mn Top= 0.90 * 12.0 * 14.32 * 3.0 * 0.072 * (1 -0.59 * 0.072) = -38.2 k-ft ~Mn Bot= 0.90 * 12.0 * 14.32 * 3.0 * 0.072 * (1 -0.59 * 0.072) = 38.2 k-ft Max. Negative Mu = -37.3 k-ft < -38.2 k-ft OK Max. Positive Mu = 34.3 k-ft < 38.2 k-ft OK As min = Min (413 • As req, Max (0.2, 0. 003 • ✓re)) I Fy • b • d} As min Top= Min (4/3 * 0.6, Max (0.2, 0.003 * ✓3000) / 60 * 12.0 * 14.3) = 0.6 in2< 0.6 in2 OK As min Bot= Min (4/3 * 0.6, Max (0.2, 0.003 * ✓3000) / 60 * 12.0 * 14.3) = 0.6 in2 < 0.6 in2 OK Page 51 of 59 q = 0.0036 * 60 / 3.0 = 0.072 ACI 22.2.2 ACI 22.2.1.1 5 SPECTRA ASDIP Foundation 3.2.2 tip 3 ·p 4 lklip 6ilc!jp 43/k~ 32lk-:ft 21 lk~ft 11/k~ 11t-ft 21 lk:..ft 3211t..ft 431k:..ft Project: Engineer: Descrip: STRAP BEAM STRAP FOOTING DESIGN SHEAR DIAGRAM (Comb. Factored) MOMENT DIAGRAM ,(Comb. FactoredJ Page 52 of 59 Page#_ 1/22/2019 www.asdipsoft.com 6 SPECTRA Project: Engineer: Descrip: STRAP BEAM Page #_ 1/22/2019 ASDIP Foundation 3.2.2 STRAP FOOTING DESIGN www.asdipsoft.com PUNCHING SHEAR CALCULATIONS (Comb. Factored) -Exterior footing X-Edge = Length I 2-Offset-Col I 2 = 3.25 * 12 / 2 -0.0 -10.0 / 2 = 14.5 in asx = 10 Z-Edge = Width /2-Offset -Coll 2 = 3.25 * 12 / 2 -10.0 I 2 = 14.5 in asz = 10 as= asx+asz= 10 + 10 = 20 Col type= Corner 13 = L /W= 10.01 10.0 = 1.00 ACI 22.6.5.2 Perimeter bo = asz I 10 • (L + d I 2 + X-Edge) + asx I 10 • (W + d I 2 + Z-Edge) ACI 22.6.4.2 bo = 10 / 10 • (10.0 + 14.4 / 2 + 14.5) + 10 / 10 • (10.0 + 14.4 / 2 + 14.5) = 63.4 in Area Abo= (L + d I 2 + X-Edge) • (W + d 12 + Z-Edge) .:(10.0 + 14.4 / 2 + 14.5) * (10.0 + 14.4 / 2 + 14.5) = 1004.1 in2 4>Vc= ¢'Min(2+41/3, as 'd/bo+2, 4)'V(fc) ACI 22.6.5.2 4>Vc = 0.75 • Min (2 + 4 / 1.00, 20 * 14.4 / 63.4 + 2, 4) • ✓(3000) = 164.3 psi Punching force F = P +Pedestal+ Abo • Thick •Density-Bearing F = 7.0 + 0.4 + 0 * 1004.1 / 144 * 18.0 / 12 * 0.15-4.5 = 4.7 kip b1 = L +d/2+X-Edge =!1 0.0+ 14.4/2 + 14.5 = 31.7 in b2 = W+d/2+Z-Edge =10.0 + 14.4 / 2 + 14.5 = 31.7 in 1 1 yvx factor= 1-------= 1 --------= 0.40 1 + (213) v'(b2 I b 1) 1 + (2/3) ✓(31. 7 / 31. 7) ACI Eq. (8.4.4.2.2) 1 1 yvz factor = 1 -------= 1 --------= 0.40 1 +(213) l(b1 l b2) 1 + (2/3) ✓(31 .7 / 31.7) X2z= bt2/2/(b1+b2)= 31.72 /2/(31.7+31.7)=7.9 in X2x= b22 /2/(b2+b1}=7.9 in Jez= b1 *d'l 12+b1' *di 12+b1 'd *(bf /2-X2z)2+b2 'd * X2z2 Jez= 31.7 • 14.4' / 12 + 31.7' • 14.4 / 12 + 31.7 * 14.4 • (31.7 12 * 7.9)2 + 31.7 * 14.4 • 7.92 = 103130 in' Jex= b2 • d'l 12 + b23 * di 12 + b2 * d • (b2 /2-X2x)2+ bf* d • X2x2 Jez= 31.7 * 14.4' / 12 + 31.7' * 14.4 / 12 + 31.7 * 14.4 * (31.7 / 2 * 7.9)2 + 31.7 * 14.4 * 7.92 = 103130 in' Stress due to P =FI (bo • d) • 1000 = 4.7 I (63.4 * 14.4) • 1000 = 5.2 psi Stress due to Mz = vvz • Z-OTM • X2z I Jez= 0.40 • 41.8 • 12 • 7.9 / 103130 • 1000 = 15.4 psi Punching stress = P-stress + Mz-stress = 5.2 + 15.4 = 20.6 psi < 164.3 psi OK -Interior footing X-Edge = Length 12-Offset -Col 12 = 3.25 * 12 / 2 -0.0 -10.0 / 2 = 14.5 in asx = 10 Z-Edge = Width 12-Offset-Col 12 = 3.25 * 12 / 2 -10.0 / 2 = 14.5 in asz = 10 ACI Eq. (8.4.2.3.2) ACI R8.4.4.2.3 ACI R8.4.4.2.3 as= asx + asz = 10 + 10 = 20 Col type = Corner 13 = LI W = 10.0 I 10.0 = 1.00 ACI 22.6.5.2 Perimeter bo = asz I 10 • (L + d I 2 + X-Edge) + asx I 10 • (W + d I 2 + Z-Edge) ACI 22.6.4.2 bo = 10 / 10 • (10.0 + 14.4 / 2 + 14.5) + 10 / 10 • (10.0 + 14.4 / 2 + 14.5) = 63.4 in Area Abo= (L + d 12 + X-Edge) • (W + d 12 + Z-Edge) :t,10.0 + 14.4 / 2 + 14.5) * (10.0 + 14.4 / 2 + 14.5) = 1004.1 in2 4>Vc = ¢ • Min (2 + 41 /3, as • d I bo + 2, 4) • v'(fc) ACI 22.6.5.2 4>Vc = 0. 75 • Min (2 + 4 / 1.00, 20 • 14.4 / 63.4 + 2, 4) • ✓(3000) = 164.3 psi Punching force F = P +Pedestal+ Abo • Thick •Density-Bearing F = 7.0 + 0.4 + 0 * 1004.1 / 144 * 18.0 / 12 * 0.15 -0.9 = 8.3 kip b1 = L +d/2 +X-Edge =!10.0 + 14.4 / 2 + 14.5 = 31.7 in b2 = W+d/2+Z-Edge =10.0 + 14.4/ 2 + 14.5 = 31.7 in Page 53 of 59 7 SPECTRA Project: Engineer: Descrip: STRAP BEAM Page#_ 1/22/2019 ASDIP Foundation 3.2.2 STRAP FOOTING DESIGN www.asdipsoft.com 1 1 yvx factor= 1-------= 1 --------= 0.40 1+(2/3)v'(b2/b1) 1 +(2/3)✓(31.7/31.7) 1 1 yvz factor= 1-------= 1 --------= 0.40 1 + (213) V(b1 l b2) 1 + (2/3)✓(31.7 / 31.7) X2z= b1212/(b1+b2)= 31.72 /21(31.7+31.7)=7.9 in X2x= b22 /2/(b2+b1)=7.9 in Jez = b 1 • d' 112 + b 13 • d 112 + b 1 • d • (b 11 2 -X2z)2 + b2 • d • X2z2 Jez= 31.7•14.43 112 + 31.73 • 14.4112 + 31.7 • 14.4 • (31.712 • 7.9)2 + 31.7 • 14.4 • 7.92 = 103130 in' Jex= b2 • d'l 12 + b2" di 12 + b2 •d • (b2 / 2-X2x)2+ b1 • d • X2x2 Jez= 31.7 • 14.43 / 12 + 31.73 * 14.4 I 12 + 31.7 * 14.4 • (31.7 / 2 * 7.9)2 + 31.7 * 14.4 * 7.92 = 103130 in• Stress due to P = FI (bo • d) • 1000 = 8.3 I (63.4 • 14.4) * 1000 = 9.2 psi Stress due to Mz = vvz • Z-OTM • X2z I Jez= 0.40 * 41.8 • 12 * 7.91103130 * 1000 = 12.4 psi Punching stress= P-stress + Mz-stress = 9.2 + 12.4 = 21.6 psi < 164.3 psi OK LOAD TRANSFER CALCULATIONS (Comb. Factored) -Exterior footing Area A 1 = col L • col W = 10.0 • 10.0 = 100.0 in2 Sx= co/W'co/L2/6=10.0*10.02 l6=166.7 in' BearingPbu=PIA1+Mz/Sx= 7.0/100.0+41.8*12I166.7=2.9 ksi Min edge= Min (L 12-X-offset -col LI 2, W 12-col W 12) Min edge= Min (3.25 • 1212 -0.0 -10.0 / 2, 3.25 * 12 / 2 -10.0 I 2) = 14.5 in Area A2 = Min [L • W. (col L + 2 • Min edge) • (col W + 2 • Min edge)} A2 = Min [3.25 * 12 • 3.3 • 12, (10.0 + 2 * 14.5) * (10.0 + 2 * 14.5)) = 1521.0 in2 Footing ¢Pnc = ¢ • 0.85 • fc • Min [2, v'(A2 I A 1)/ =0.65 * 0.85 * 3.0 * Min [2, ✓(1521.0 1100.0)] = 3.3 ksi Footing ¢Pns = ¢ • As • Fy I A 1 = 0.65 * 3.52 * 60.0 I 100.0 = 1.4 ksi Footing bearing ¢Pn = ¢Pnc + ¢Pns = 3.3 + 1.4 = 4.7 ksi > 2.9 psi OK Column ¢Pnc = ¢ • 0.85 • fc = 0.65 • 0.85 * 4.0 = 2.2 ksi Column ¢Pns = ¢ • As • Fy I A 1 = 0.65 * 3.52 * 60.0 I 100.0 = 1.4 ksi Column bearing ¢Pn = ¢Pnc + ¢Pns = 2.2 + 1.4 = 3.6 ksi > 2.9 psi OK Shear friction ¢Vn = ¢ •As• Fy • µ =0.75 • 3.52 * 60.0 • 0.6 = 95.0 kip Shear Vu = 1.8 kip < 95.0 kip OK Straight Ld= Max (12.0, 3/40 • fyl(fc)½ •Size/Cover• db• ratio) Ld = Max (12.0, 3 I 40 * 60.0 * 1000 I (4000)½ * 0.8 I 1.8 * 0.75 * 0.95) = 23.2 in Hooked Ldh = 0.02 • fy I (fc)½ * db • 0.7 = 0.02 * 60.0 * 1000 I (4000)½ * 0.75 • 0.7 * 0.95 = 9.5 in Ld provided = Pedestal height-Cover= 3.00 * 12 -2.0 = 36.0 in > 23.2 in OK Ldh provided = Footing thickness -Cover= 18.00 -3.0 = 15.0 in > 9.5 in OK Page 54 of 59 ACI Eq. (8.4.4.2.2) ACI Eq. (8.4.2.3.2) ACI R8.4.4.2.3 ACI R8.4.4.2.3 ACI R22.8.3.2 ACI 22.8.3.2 ACI 22.8.3.2 ACI Eq. (22.9.4.2) ACI Eq. (25.4.2.3a) ACI 25.4.3 8 SPECTRA Project: Engineer: Descrip: STRAP BEAM ASDIP Foundation 3.2.2 STRAP FOOTING DESIGN -Interior footing Area A 1 = col L • col W = 10.0 • 10.0 = 100.0 in2 Sx = col W • col L 2 I 6 = 10.0 • 10.02 / 6 = 166.7 in• Bearing Pbu=PIA1 +Mz/Sx= 7.01100.0+41.8 * 121166.7 =2.9 ksi Min edge= Min (LI 2-X-offset -col L I 2, WI 2-col WI 2) Min edge= Min (3.25 • 12 / 2 -0.0 -10.012, 3.25 • 12 / 2 -10.0 / 2) = 14.5 in Area A2 = Min fl • W, (col L + 2 • Min edge) • (col W + 2 • Min edge)] A2 = Min [3.25 • 12 • 3.3 * 12, (10.0 + 2 • 14.5) • (10.0 + 2 • 14.5)] = 1521.0 in2 Footing ¢Pnc = ¢ • 0.85 • fc • Min /2, ✓(A2 I A 1)/ =0.65 • 0.85 • 3.0 • Min [2, ✓(1521 .0 / 100.0)] = 3.3 ksi Footing ¢Pns = ¢ • As • Fy I A 1 = 0.65 • 3.52 • 60.0 / 100.0 = 1.4 ksi Footing bearing ¢Pn = ¢Pnc + ¢Pns = 3.3 + 1.4 = 4.7 ksi > 2.9 psi OK Column ¢Pnc = ¢ • 0.85 • fc = 0.65 • 0.85 • 4.0 = 2.2 ksi Column ¢Pns = ¢ • As • Fy I A 1 = 0.65 • 3.52 • 60.0 / 100.0 = 1.4 ksi Column bearing ¢Pn = ¢Pnc + ¢Pns = 2.2 + 1.4 = 3.6 ksi > 2.9 psi OK Shear friction ¢Vn = ¢ • As • Fy • µ =0.75 • 3.52 • 60.0 • 0.6 = 95.0 kip Shear Vu = 1.8 kip < 95.0 kip OK Straight Ld = Max (12.0, 3/40 • fyl (fc)½ •Size/Cover• db• ratio) Ld = Max (12.0, 3 / 40 • 60.0 • 1000 I (4000)½ • 0.8 / 1.8 • 0.75 • 0.95) = 23.2 in Hooked Ldh = 0.02 • fy I (fc)½ • db • 0. 7 = 0.02 • 60.0 • 1000 / (4000)½ • 0. 75 * 0. 7 • 0.95 = 9.5 in Ld provided= Pedestal height-Cover= 3.00 • 12 -2.0 = 36.0 in > 23.2 in OK Ldh provided = Footing thickness -Cover= 18.00 -3.0 = 15.0 in > 9.5 in OK COLUMN CALCULATIONS (Comb: Factored) Concrete fc = 4.0 ksi Max. strain = 0.0030 Young's Modulus Ee= 57 • (fc • 1000/2 = 57 • (4000)2 = 3605 ksi Rupture fr=1.5'(fc'1000)½/1000=7.5 *(4000)½ /1000=0.47 ksi Steel fy = 60.0 ksi -Exterior column Es= 29000 ksi Page#_ 1/22/2019 www.asdipsoft.com ACI R22.8.3.2 ACI 22.8.3.2 ACI 22.8.3.2 ACI Eq. (22.9.4.2) ACI Eq. (25.4.2.3a) ACI 25.4.3 ACI 19.2.2.1 ACI Eq. (19.2.3.1) ACI 20.2.2.2 Use 8-#6 Longitudinal Bars As= 3.52 in2 , p = 0.035 Use Ties#J < 3.52 in2 OK d' = 2.8 in As min= 0.00S'L 'W=0.005*10.0*10.0=0.50 in2 Pedestal weight= 1.20 • W • L • H •Density= 1.20 • 10.0 / 12 • 10.0 / 12 • 3.0 • 0.15 = 0.4 kip Axial Pu= 7.0 + 0.4 = 7.4 kip Shear Vux = 1.8 k-ft Moment Muz = 33.7 + 1.8 • 3.00 = 39.1 k-ft Page 55 of 59 ACI 16.4.3.1 9 SPECTRA Project: Engineer: Descrip: STRAP BEAM Page#_ 1/22/2019 ASDIP Foundation 3.2.2 STRAP FOOTING DESIGN www.asdipsoft.com By trial and error, neutral axis depth k = c Id= 0.43 Cone. force Fe = C = Sum (Fci) = Sum (lei • Aci) = 122.4 kip Cone. moment Mc = Sum (Mei) = Sum (Fci • (h I 2 -di)) = 32.6 k-ft Nominal flexural strength Mn =Ms+ Mc= 17 .3 + 32.6 = 49.9 k-ft $-factor slope= (0.65 -0.90) I (0.65 • Pn (balanced)-0.9 • Pn (Es= 0.005) $-factor slope =(0.65 -0.90) I (0.65 * 114.9 -0.9 * -24.5) = -0.0026 $-factor= Min (0.9, Max (0.65, slope• (Pu-0.9 • Pn (Es= 0.005)) + 0.9)) $-factor= Min (0.9, Max (0.65, -0.0026 • (7.4 -0.9 • -24.5) + 0.9)) = 0.82 Axial strength Pn = 0.8 • 0.85 • fc • (A 1 -As)+ fy •As= 0.8 • 0.85 * 4.0 • (100 -3.5) + 60 • 3.5 = 428.4 kip Design flexural strength $Mn = 0.82 * 49.9 = 41.1 k-ft Strength ratio = Max (Pu I ¢Pn, Mu I ¢Mn)= Max (7.4 I (0.65 • 428.4), 39.1 / 41.1) = 0.95 < 1.0 OK -Interior column Use 8-#6 Longitudinal Bars As = 3.52 in2 , p = 0.035 Use Ties #3 As min= 0.005'L 'W=0.005*10.0*10.0=0.50 in2 < 3.52 in2 OK Pedestal weight= 1.20 • W • L * H • Density= 1.20 * 10.0 / 12 * 10.0 / 12 * 3.0 * 0.15 = 0.4 kip Axial Pu= 7.0 + 0.4 = 7.4 kip Shear Vux = 1.8 k-ft Moment Muz = 33.7 + 1.8 * 3.00 = 39.1 k-ft By trial and error, neutral axis depth k = c I d= 0.43 Cone. force Fe = C = Sum (Fci) = Sum (fci • Aci) = 122.4 kip Cone. moment Mc =Sum (Mei)= Sum (Fci • (h I 2-di))= 32.6 k-ft Nominal flexural strength Mn= Ms+ Mc= 17.3 + 32.6 = 49.9 k-ft $-factor slope =(0.65-0.90)/(0.65 • Pn (balanced)-0.9 • Pn (Es =0.005) $-factor slope= (0.65 -0.90) I (0.65 • 114.9 -0.9 • -24.5) = -0.0026 4>-factor = Min (0.9, Max (0.65, slope • (Pu -0.9 • Pn (Es= 0.005)) + 0.9)) $-factor= Min (0.9, Max (0.65, -0.0026 • (7.4 -0.9 • -24.5) + 0.9)) = 0.82 d' = 2.8 in Axial strength Pn = 0.8 • 0.85 • fc • (A 1 -As) + fy •As= 0.8 • 0.85 • 4.0 • (100 -3.5) + 60 • 3.5 = 428.4 kip Design flexural strength $Mn = 0.82 • 49.9 = 41.1 k-ft Strength ratio= Max (Pu I ¢Pn, Mu I ¢Mn)= Max (7.4 / (0.65 • 428.4), 39.1 / 41.1) = 0.95 < 1.0 OK DESIGN CODES Concrete Design .................. ACI 318-14 Load Combinations .............. User-defined Page 56 of 59 ACI 21.2.2 ACI 21.2.2 ACI 16.4.3.1 ACI 21.2.2 ACI 21.2.2 10 SPECTRA Project: Engineer: Page#_ 1/22/2019 Descrip: STRAP BEAM ASDIP Foundation 3.2.2 STRAP FOOTING DESIGN www.asdipsoft.com ,Wn(lcipJ 351 ,_Po '·,~ .. 0.8~'·-.. 28(1-t---'"'- 210 140 70 211SBott [ l 3 .. 25ft l ' ' l-46T&B 1-IJ6 -l&R .. 9 ---z 0 - L 10.0 ;., L " " 8 16 24 70 -190 EXT. INTERACTION DIAGRAM Controlling Load Comb: Fact«ed ELEVATION 18.00ft PLAN Page 57 of 59 351 280 210 140 70 0 70 -190 l 3.25ft l ' ' Pn(lcip) Po ·-----·-0.8 p~'·-.. 8 _fil 3--#ST&B 146 _;; L&R 9 ---z 0 - L ,oo.. L ,, " tMn Ck-fO INT. INTERACTION DIAGRAM Controlling Load Comb: Factored 11 Sht: F 1 A p O LL O 14650 E. ARROW HWY, STE. A7 STRUCTURAL MONTCLAIR. CA 91763 Date: 1/15/2019 CONVENTIONAL FOUNDATION ANALYSIS Design Values: Allowable Soil Bearing Pressure (psf) = 2500 Soils Report by: Job Number: Date: Maximum Bearing Wall Load: Roof= 32 psf * ( 25 Ceiling = 5 psf * ( 25 Wall = 15 psf * ( 21 Floor = 55 psf * ( 50 Deck*= 70 psf * ( 13 SCST,INC. 180318N September 26, 2018 I 2 + 0 / 2 + 0 + 0 / 2 + 0 / 2 + 0 = 400.0 plf 62.5 315.0 = 1375.0 455.0 w = 2607.5 plf Existing Cont. Stem Wall Footing Design: Required Footing Width = 2608 / ( 2500 -so ) = 1.06 ft 1-Story Footing: 24 "x 24 "w/ Steel Reinforcing Per Plans 2-Story Footing: 24 "x 24 "w/ Steel Reinforcing Per Plans P max= S.B.P. x S x Width/ 144 S = 2 x (Depth)+ Post Width (3in min post width used) P max at 1-Story = 21250 lb P max at 2-Story = 21250 lb Cont. Garage Footing Design: Required Footing Width = 2608 / ( 2500 -so ) = 1.06 ft 1-Story Footing: 24 "x 24 "w/ Steel Reinforcing Per Plans 2-Story Footing: 24 " x 24 " w/ Steel Reinforcing Per Plans Allowable Point Load at Footing: P max = S.B.P. x S x Width / 144 Page 58 of 59 #: 19-1819 li : S = 2 x (Depth+ Slab Thick)+ Post Widl (3in min post width used) P max at 1-Story = 24583 lb P max at 2-Story = 24583 lb Pad Design: As Needed Fl j 24 i" Sq. xi 1s I• Op. Pad Footing w/ (5) #4 BOT. EA WA~ Pmax = I 10000 LB Page 59 of 59 -AN ATLAS COM PANY- GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT -PARCEL 3 Forest Avenue Carlsbad, California ,,/ ~ ~ ~ Prepared For: Brent K. Newby Trustee 12253 Carmel Vista Road, Suite 103 San Diego, California 92130 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION ---------+ February 13, 2019 Mr. Brent K. Newby Trustee 12253 Carmel Vista Road, Suite 103 San Diego, California 92130 SCST Project No. 180318N Report No. 1 R Subject: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT -PARCEL 3 FOREST AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Dear Mr. Newbey: SCST, Inc. is pleased to present our report describing the geotechnical investigation performed for the subject project. We conducted the geotechnical investigation in general conformance with the scope of work presented in our agreement dated August 4, 2018. Based on the results of our investigation, we consider the planned construction feasible from a geotechnical standpoint provided the recommendations of this report are followed. If you have questions, please call us at (619) 280-4321 . Respectfully submitted, SCST, INC. Isaac Chun, GE 2 Principal Engineer DAS:hu D, Douglas A. Skinner, CEG 2472 Senior Geologist (1) Mr. Brent Newby via e-mail: BNewby@McCarthy.com SCST. LLC Corporate Headquarters · 6280 R,verdale Street • San D,ebo CA 92120 8772154321 • 6192804321 • 619280.4717 • wwwscstcom TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................. i 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 1 2. SCOPE OF WORK ................................................................................................................. 1 2.1 FIELD INVESTIGATION ............................................................................................... 1 2.2 LABORATORY TESTING ................................................................................................. 1 2.3 ANALYSIS AND REPORT PREPARATION ..................................................................... 1 3. SITE DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................... 2 4. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS .............................................................................................. 2 5. GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .................................................................... 2 6. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS .......................................................................................................... 3 6.1 FAUL TING AND SURFACE RUPTURE ....................................................................... 3 6.2 CBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS .......................................................................... 3 6.3 LIQUEFACTION AND DYNAMIC SETTLEMENT ............................................................. 3 6.4 TSUNAMIS, SEICHES, AND FLOODING ....................................................................... 4 6.5 LANDSLIDES AND SLOPE STABILITY ........................................................................... 4 6.6 SUBSIDENCE ................................................................................................................... 4 6.7 HYDRO-CONSOLIDATION ............................................................................................. .4 7. CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................................... 4 8. RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................... 5 8.1 SITE PREPARATION AND GRADING ............................................................................. 5 8.1.1 Site Preparation ....................................................................................................... 5 8.1.2 Remedial Grading .................................................................................................. 5 8.1.3 Excavation Characteristics ...................................................................................... 5 8.1.4 Temporary Excavations .......................................................................................... 5 8.1.5 Temporary Shoring .................................................................................................. 6 8.1.6 Temporary Dewatering ............................................................................................ 6 8.1. 7 Expansive Soil ........................................................................................................ 6 8.1.8 Compacted Fill ......................................................................................................... 6 8.1.9 Imported Soil .................. . .... 7 8.1.10 Slopes .................................................................................................................... 7 8.1 .11 Surface Drainage .................................................................................................. 7 8.1.12 Grading Plan Review ............................................................................................. 8 8.2 FOUNDATIONS ................................................................................................................ 8 8.2.1 Shallow Spread Footings ................. . 8.2.2 Settlement Characteristics .................................................................................... 8 8.2.3 Foundation Plan Review .................................................. . 8.2.4 Foundation Excavation Observations .................................................................. 9 8.3 SLABS-ON-GRADE ......................................................................................................... 9 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) SECTION PAGE 8.3.1 Interior Slabs-on-Grade ......................................................................................... 9 8.3.2 Exterior Slabs-on-Grade ........................................................................................ 9 8.4 CONVENTIONAL RETAINING WALLS ............................................................................ 9 8.4.1 Foundations ............................................................................................................. 9 8.4.2 Lateral Earth Pressures ......................................................................................... 10 8.4.3 Seismic Earth Pressure .......................................................................................... 10 8.4.4 Backfill .................................................................................................................... 10 8.5 PIPELINES ...................................................................................................................... 11 8.5.1 Thrust Blocks ......................................................................................................... 11 8.5.2 Modulus of Soil Reaction ....................................................................................... 11 8.5.3 Pipe Bedding .......................................................................................................... 11 8.5.4 Cutoff Walls ............................................................................................................ 11 8.5.5 Backfill .................................................................................................................... 12 8.6 PAVEMENT SECTION RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................. 12 8.7 SOIL CORROSIVITY ...................................................................................................... 13 9. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DURING CONSTRUCTION .......................................... 13 10. CLOSURE ............................................................................................................................. 13 11. REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................... 14 ATTACHMENTS FIGURES Figure 1 ............................................................................................................. Site Location Map Figure 2 ............................................................................................ Subsurface Exploration Map Figure 3 ..................................................................................... Regional Geology and Fault Map Figure 4 ........................................................................ Typical Retaining Wall Backdrain Details APPENDICES Appendix I ......................................................................................................... Field Investigation Appendix II ....................................................................................................... Laboratory Testing 1. INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of the geotechnical investigation SCST, Inc. (SCST) performed for the single-family residential development located on a portion (identified as Parcel 3) of the vacant lot behind 1365 Forest Avenue in the city of Carlsbad, California. We understand that the project will consist of the design and construction of a single-family residence with associated improvements. Figure 1 presents a site vicinity map. The purpose of our work is to provide conclusions and recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of the project. 2. SCOPE OF WORK 2.1 FIELD INVESTIGATION We explored the subsurface conditions by excavating 3 test pits within the proposed improvement area up to 7 feet below the existing ground surface using a backhoe. Figure 2 presents the approximate locations of the test pits. An SCST geologist logged the test pits and collected samples of the materials encountered for laboratory testing. Appendix I presents logs of the test pits. Soils are classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System illustrated on Figure 1-1. 2.2 LABORATORY TESTING Selected samples obtained from the test pits were tested to evaluate pertinent soil classification and engineering properties and enable development of geotechnical conclusions and recommendations. The laboratory tests consisted of particle-size distribution, expansion index, and corrosivity testing. Appendix II presents the results of the laboratory tests and brief explanations of the test procedures. 2.3 ANALYSIS AND REPORT PREPARATION The results of the field and laboratory tests were evaluated to develop conclusions and recommendations regarding: • Subsurface conditions beneath the site • Potential geologic hazards • Criteria for seismic design in accordance with the 2016 California Building Code (CBC) • Site preparation and grading • Temporary excavations and shoring • Excavation characteristics • Foundation support, potential foundation settlement, resistance to lateral loads and lateral earth pressures Mr. Brent K. Newby SCST Project No. 180318N -01R Proposed Residential Development -Parcel 3 • Estimated foundation settlements • Support for concrete slabs-on-grade • Lateral pressures for the design of retaining walls • Soil corrosivity 3. SITE DESCRIPTION The site consists of a vacant lot, identified as parcel 3, located south of 1365 Forest Avenue in the city of Carlsbad, California. The site is generally flat with natural surface drainage to the southwest. The site is bordered by residential properties on the north, south, east, and west. Topographically, the site has an elevation difference of less than 5 feet across the property. The site currently supports native vegetation. 4. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS The proposed improvements will consist of a single-family residence and associated hardscape areas. We anticipate that site grading will consist of cuts and fills up to about 5 feet thick. Fill slopes will be constructed at 2:1 (horizontal:vertical). Design level drawings were not available at the time this report was published. 5. GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The materials encountered in the test pits consist of residual soil and old paralic deposits. Descriptions of the materials are presented below. Figure 2 presents the site-specific geology. Figure 3 presents the regional geology in the vicinity of the site. Residual Soil -Residual soils are the result of in-place weathering of the parent rock. The residual soil at the site consists of loose to medium dense silty sand. The soil extends to depths up to 3 feet below the existing ground surface where explored. Deeper residual soil may be encountered in areas not explored. Old Paralic Deposits -Old paralic deposits underlie the residual soil. The old paralic deposits consist of dense, poorly indurated sandstone. This material breaks down to a silty sand. The old paralic deposits extend beyond the maximum depth explored at the site. Groundwater -Groundwater was not encountered in the test pits. However, groundwater levels may fluctuate in the future due to rainfall, irrigation, broken pipes, or changes in site drainage. Because groundwater rise or seepage is difficult to predict, such conditions are typically mitigated if and when they occur. 2 Mr. Brent K. Newby SCST ProJect No. 180318N -01R Proposed Residential Development -Parcel 3 6. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 6.1 FAULTING AND SURFACE RUPTURE The closest known active faults are the Newport Inglewood/Rose Canyon Fault (Oceanside section) fault located 5.2 miles (8.4 kilometers) west of the site and the Elsinore (Julian) fault located 22.5 miles (36.2 kilometers) east of the site. The site is not located in an Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. No active faults are known to underlie or project toward the site. Therefore, the probability of fault rupture is considered low. 6.2 CBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS A geologic hazard likely to affect the project is ground shaking as a result of movement along an active fault zone in the vicinity of the subject site. The site coefficients and adjusted maximum considered earthquake spectral response accelerations in accordance with the 2016 CBC are presented below: Site Coordinates: Latitude 33.17141 ° Longitude -117.34164° Site Class: D Site Coefficients, Fa= 1.047 F, = 1.565 Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at Short Periods, S, = 1.133g Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 1-Second Period, S, = 0.435g Design Spectral Acceleration at Short Period, Sos= 0.791g Design Spectral Acceleration at 1-Second Period, So, = 0.454g Site Peak Ground Acceleration, PGAM = 0.469g 6.3 LIQUEFACTION AND DYNAMIC SETTLEMENT Liquefaction occurs when loose, saturated, generally fine sands and silts are subjected to strong ground shaking. The soils lose shear strength and become liquid, potentially resulting in large total and differential ground surface settlements as well as possible lateral spreading during an earthquake. Due to the lack of shallow groundwater, and given the relatively dense nature of the materials beneath the site, the potential for liquefaction and dynamic settlement to occur is considered negligible. 3 Mr. Brent K. Newby SCST ProJect No. 180318N -01R Proposed Residential Development -Parcel 3 6.4 TSUNAMIS, SEICHES, AND FLOODING The site is not located within a mapped area on the State of California Tsunami Inundation Maps (Cal EMA, 2009); therefore, damage due to tsunamis is considered low. Seiches are periodic oscillations in large bodies of water such as lakes, harbors, bays, or reservoirs. The site is not located adjacent to any lakes or confined bodies of water; therefore, the potential for a seiche to affect the site is low. The site is not located within a flood zone or dam inundation area (County of San Diego, 2012). 6.5 LANDSLIDES AND SLOPE STABILITY Evidence of landslides or slope instabilities was not observed. The potential for landslides or slope instabilities to occur at the site is considered low. 6.6 SUBSIDENCE The site is not located in an area of known subsidence associated with fluid withdrawal (groundwater or petroleum); therefore, the potential for subsidence due to the extraction of fluids is negligible. 6.7 HYDRO-CONSOLIDATION Hydro-consolidation can occur in recently deposited (less than 10,000 years old) sediments that were deposited in a semi-arid environment. Examples of such sediments are aeolian sands, alluvial fan deposits, and mudflow sediments deposited during flash floods. The pore space between particle grains can re-adjust when inundated by groundwater causing the material to consolidate. The relatively dense materials underlying the site are not considered susceptible to hydro-consolidation. 7. CONCLUSIONS The main geotechnical considerations affecting the planned development are the presence of potentially compressible residual soil. Remedial grading will need to be performed to reduce the potential for distress to the planned improvements. Remedial grading recommendations are provided in Section 8.1.2 of this report. 4 Mr. Brent K. Newby Proposed Residential Development -Parcel 3 8. RECOMMENDATIONS 8.1 SITE PREPARATION AND GRADING 8.1.1 Site Preparation SCST Project No. 180318N -01R Site preparation should begin with the removal of existing improvements, topsoil, vegetation, and debris. Subsurface improvements that are to be abandoned should be removed, and the resulting excavations should be backfilled and compacted in accordance with the recommendations of this report. Pipeline abandonment can consist of capping or rerouting at the project perimeter and removal within the project perimeter. If appropriate, abandoned pipelines can be filled with grout or slurry as recommended by and observed by the geotechnical consultant. 8.1.2 Remedial Grading To reduce the potential for settlement, the residual soils and old paralic deposits should be removed to a minimum depth of 2 feet below deepest planned footing bottom and replaced with compacted fill. Any existing fill encountered should be excavated in its entirety beneath settlement sensitive improvements and new fills. Excavations up to 5 feet below existing grade are anticipated. Horizontally, the excavations should extend a minimum distance of 5 feet outside proposed improvements. An SCST representative should observe conditions exposed in the bottom of the excavation to determine if additional excavation is required. 8.1.3 Excavation Characteristics It is anticipated that excavations in residual soils and old paralic deposits can generally be achieved with conventional earthwork equipment in good working order. Contract documents should specify that the contractor mobilize equipment capable of excavating and compacting the on-site materials. 8.1.4 Temporary Excavations Temporary excavations 3 feet deep or less can be made vertically. Deeper temporary excavations should be laid back no steeper than 1 :1 (horizontal:vertical) in fill or colluvium or ½:1 (horizontal:vertical) in old paralic deposits. The faces of temporary slopes should be inspected daily by the contractor's Competent Person before personnel are allowed to enter the excavation. Any zones of potential instability, sloughing or raveling should be brought to the attention of the Engineer and corrective action implemented before personnel begin working in the excavation. Excavated soils should not be stockpiled behind temporary excavations within a distance equal to the depth of 5 Mr. Brent K. Newby SCST Project No. 180318N -01R Proposed Residential Development -Parcel 3 the excavation. SCST should be notified if other surcharge loads are anticipated so that lateral load criteria can be developed for the specific situation. If temporary slopes are to be maintained during the rainy season, berms are recommended along the tops of slopes to prevent runoff water from entering the excavation and eroding the slope faces. Slopes steeper than those described above will require shoring. Additionally, temporary excavations that extend below a plane inclined at 1½:1 (horizontal:vertical) downward from the outside bottom edge of existing structures or improvements will require shoring. A shoring system consisting of soldier piles and lagging can be used. 8.1.5 Temporary Shoring For design of cantilevered shoring, an active soil pressure equal to a fluid weighing 35 pcf can be used for level retained ground or 55 pcf for 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) sloping ground. The surcharge loads on shoring from traffic and construction equipment adjacent to the excavation can be modeled by assuming an additional 2 feet of soil behind the shoring. For design of soldier piles, an allowable passive pressure of 350 psf per foot of embedment over twice the pile diameter up to a maximum of 5,000 psf can be used. Soldier piles should be spaced at least three pile diameters, center to center. Continuous lagging will be required throughout. The soldier piles should be designed for the full anticipated lateral pressure; however, the pressure on the lagging will be less due to arching in the soils. For design of lagging, the earth pressure can be limited to a maximum value of 400 psf. 8.1.6 Temporary Dewatering Groundwater seepage may occur locally and should be anticipated in excavations. Dewatering can be accomplished by sloping the excavation bottom to a sump and pumping from the sump. A layer of gravel about 6 inches thick placed in the bottom of the excavation will facilitate groundwater flow and can be used as a working platform. 8.1.7 Expansive Soil The on-site soils tested have an expansion index of very low. The recommendations presented herein reflect a very low expansion potential. The on-site soils are generally expected to be suitable for use as compacted fill. 8.1.8 Compacted Fill Excavated material, except for vegetation, debris, and rocks greater than 6 inches can be used as compacted fill. Concrete slabs and retaining wall footings should be underlain by at least 2 feet of material with an expansion index of 20 or less. We expect 6 Mr. Brent K. Newby SCST ProJect No. 180318N -01R Proposed Residential Development -Parcel 3 that most of the on-site materials will meet the expansion index criteria and can be used as compacted fill. Fill should be moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 90% relative compaction. Fill should be placed in horizontal lifts at a thickness appropriate for the equipment spreading, mixing, and compacting the material, but generally should not exceed 8 inches in loose thickness. The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for evaluating relative compaction should be determined in accordance with ASTM D 1557. Utility trench backfill beneath structures, pavements and hardscape should be compacted to at least 90% relative compaction. The top 12 inches of subgrade beneath pavements should be compacted to at least 95%. 8.1.9 Imported Soil Imported soil should consist of predominately granular soil free of organic matter and rocks greater than 6 inches. Imported soil should have an expansion index of 20 or less and should be inspected and, if appropriate, tested by SCST prior to transport to the site. 8.1.10 Slopes Permanent fill slopes with a maximum height of no more than 6 feet are anticipated for the site. Permanent fill slopes should be constructed no steeper than 2: 1 (horizontal:vertical). Faces of fill slopes should be compacted either by rolling with a sheepsfoot roller or other suitable compaction equipment or by overfilling and cutting back to design grade. All slopes are susceptible to surficial slope failure and erosion. Water should not be allowed to flow over the tops of slopes. Slopes should be protected or planted with vegetation that will reduce the potential for erosion. 8.1.11 Surface Drainage Final surface grades around improvements should be designed to collect and direct surface water away from the improvement and toward appropriate drainage facilities. The ground around the improvement should be graded so that surface water flows rapidly away from the improvement without ponding. In general, we recommend that the ground adjacent to the improvement slope away at a gradient of at least 2%. Densely vegetated areas where runoff can be impaired should have a minimum gradient of at least 5% within the first 5 feet from the improvement. Drainage patterns established at the time of fine grading should be maintained throughout the life of the proposed improvements. Site irrigation should be limited to the minimum necessary to sustain landscape growth. Should excessive irrigation, impaired drainage, or unusually high rainfall occur, saturated zones of perched groundwater can develop. 7 Mr. Brent K. Newby SCST Project No. 180318N -01R Proposed Residential Development -Parcel 3 8.1.12 Grading Plan Review SCST should review the grading plans and earthwork specifications to ascertain whether the intent of the recommendations contained in this report have been implemented and that no revised recommendations are needed due to changes in the development scheme. 8.2 FOUNDATIONS 8.2.1 Shallow Spread Footings The planned structure can be supported on shallow spread footings with bottom levels on compacted fill. Footings should extend at least 18 inches below lowest adjacent finished grade. A minimum width of 12 inches is recommended for continuous footings and 24 inches for isolated or wall footings. An allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 psf can be used. The allowable bearing capacity can be increased by 500 psf for each foot of depth below the minimum and 250 psf for each foot of width beyond the minimum up to a maximum of 5,000 psf. The bearing value can be increased by ½ when considering the total of all loads, including wind or seismic forces. Footings located adjacent to or within slopes should be extended to a depth such that a minimum horizontal distance of 7 feet exists between the lower outside footing edge and the face of the slope. Lateral loads will be resisted by friction between the bottoms of footings and passive pressure on the faces of footings and other structural elements below grade. An allowable coefficient of friction of 0.35 can be used. Passive pressure can be computed using an allowable lateral pressure of 350 psf per foot of depth below the ground surface for level ground conditions. The passive pressure can be increased by ½ when considering the total of all loads. including wind or seismic forces. The upper 1 foot of soil should not be relied on for passive support unless the ground is covered with pavements or slabs. 8.2.2 Settlement Characteristics Total foundation settlements are estimated to be less than 1 inch. Differential settlements between adjacent columns and across continuous footings are estimated to be less than ¾ inch over a distance of 40 feet. Settlements should be completed shortly after structural loads are applied. 8.2.3 Foundation Plan Review SCST should review the foundation plans to ascertain that the intent of the recommendations in this report has been implemented and that revised 8 Mr. Brent K. Newby SCST ProIect No. 180318N -01R Proposed Residential Development -Parcel 3 recommendations are not necessary as a result of changes after this report was completed. 8.2.4 Foundation Excavation Observations A representative from SCST should observe the foundation excavations prior to forming or placing reinforcing steel. 8.3 SLABS-ON-GRADE 8.3.1 Interior Slabs-on-Grade The project structural engineer should design the interior concrete slabs-on-grade floor. However, we recommend that building slabs be at least 5 inches thick and reinforced with at least No. 4 bars at 18 inches on center each way. Moisture protection should be installed beneath slabs where moisture sensitive floor coverings will be used. The project architect should review the tolerable moisture transmission rate of the proposed floor covering and specify an appropriate moisture protection system. Typically, a plastic vapor barrier is used. Minimum 10-mil plastic is recommended. The plastic should comply with ASTM E1745. The vapor barrier installation should comply with ASTM E1643. The slab can be placed directly on the vapor barrier. 8.3.2 Exterior Slabs-on-Grade Exterior slabs should be at least 4 inches thick and reinforced with at least No. 3 bars at 18 inches on center each way. Slabs should be provided with weakened plane joints. Joints should be placed in accordance with the American Concrete Institute (ACI) guidelines. The project architect should select the final joint patterns. A 1-inch maximum size aggregate mix is recommended for concrete for exterior slabs. The corrosion potential of on-site soils with respect to reinforced concrete will need to be taken into account in concrete mix design. Coarse and fine aggregate in concrete should conform to the "Greenbook" Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction 8.4 CONVENTIONAL RETAINING WALLS 8.4.1 Foundations The recommendations provided in the foundation section of this report are also applicable to conventional retaining walls. 9 Mr. Brent K. Newby SCST Project No. 18031 BN -01 R Proposed Residential Development -Parcel 3 8.4.2 Lateral Earth Pressures The active earth pressure for the design of unrestrained retaining walls with level backfill can be taken as equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing 35 pcf. The at-rest earth pressure for the design of restrained retaining walls with level backfills can be taken as equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing 55 pct. These values assume a granular and drained backfill condition. An additional 20 pcf should be added to these values for walls with a 2: 1 (horizontal:vertical) sloping backfill. An increase in earth pressure equivalent to an additional 2 feet of retained soil can be used to account for surcharge loads from light traffic. The above values do not include a factor of safety. Appropriate factors of safety should be incorporated into the design. If any other surcharge loads are anticipated, SCST should be contacted for the necessary increase in soil pressure. Retaining walls should be designed to resist hydrostatic pressures or be provided with a backdrain to reduce the accumulation of hydrostatic pressures. Backdrains may consist of a 2-foot-wide zone of ¾-inch crushed rock. The backdrain should be separated from the adjacent soils using a non-woven filter fabric, such as Mirafi 140N or equivalent Weep holes should be provided, or a perforated pipe should be installed at the base of the backdrain and sloped to discharge to a suitable storm drain facility. As an alternative, a geocomposite drainage system such as Miradrain 6000 or equivalent placed behind the wall and connected to a suitable storm drain facility can be used. The project architect should provide waterproofing specifications and details. Figure 4 presents typical conventional retaining wall backdrain details. 8.4.3 Seismic Earth Pressure If required, the seismic earth pressure can be taken as equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing 20 pcf. This value is for level backfill and does not include a factor of safety. Appropriate factors of safety should be incorporated into the design. This pressure is in addition to the un-factored, static active earth pressure. The passive pressure and bearing capacity can be increased by ½ in determining the seismic stability of the wall. 8.4.4 Backfill Wall backfill should consist of granular, free-draining material. Expansive or clayey soil should not be used. Additionally, backfill within 3 feet from the back of the wall should not contain rocks greater than 3 inches in dimension. We anticipate that a portion of the on-site soils will be suitable for wall backfill. Backfill should be compacted to at least 90% relative compaction. Backfill should not be placed until walls have achieved adequate 10 Mr. Brent K. Newby SCST Project No. 18031 SN -01 R Proposed Residential Development -Parcel 3 structural strength. Compaction of wall backfill will be necessary to minimize settlement of the backfill and overlying settlement sensitive improvements. However, some settlement should still be anticipated. Provisions should be made for some settlement of concrete slabs and pavements supported on backfill. Additionally, any utilities supported on backfill should be designed to tolerate differential settlement. 8.5 PIPELINES 8.5.1 Thrust Blocks For level ground conditions, a passive earth pressure of 300 psf per foot of depth below the lowest adjacent final grade can be used to compute allowable thrust block resistance. A value of 150 psf per foot should be used below groundwater level, if encountered. 8.5.2 Modulus of Soil Reaction A modulus of soil reaction (E') of 2,000 psi can be used to evaluate the deflection of buried flexible pipelines. This value assumes that granular bedding material is placed adjacent to the pipe and is compacted to at least 90% relative compaction. 8.5.3 Pipe Bedding Pipe bedding as specified in the "Greenbook" Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction can be used. Bedding material should consist of clean sand having a sand equivalent not less than 30 and should extend to at least 12 inches above the top of pipe. Alternative materials meeting the intent of the bedding specifications are also acceptable. Samples of materials proposed for use as bedding should be provided to the engineer for inspection and testing before the material is imported for use on the project. The on-site materials are not expected to meet "Greenbook" bedding specifications. The pipe bedding material should be placed over the full width of the trench. After placement of the pipe, the bedding should be brought up uniformly on both sides of the pipe to reduce the potential for unbalanced loads. No voids or uncompacted areas should be left beneath the pipe haunches. Ponding or jetting the pipe bedding should not be allowed. 8.5.4 Cutoff Walls Where pipeline inclinations exceed 15 percent, cutoff walls may be necessary in trench excavations. Additionally, we do not recommend that open graded rock be used for pipe bedding or backfill because of the potential for piping erosion. The recommended bedding is clean sand having a sand equivalent not less than 30. Alternatively, 2-sack sand-cement slurry can be used for the pipe bedding. If sand-cement slurry is used for 11 Mr. Brent K. Newby SCST ProJect No. 180318N -01R Proposed Residential Development -Parcel 3 pipe bedding to at least 1 foot over the top of the pipe, cutoff walls are not considered necessary. The need for cutoff walls should be further evaluated by the project civil engineer designing the pipeline. 8.5.5 Backfill Excavated material free of organic debris and rocks greater than 6 inches in any dimension are generally expected to be suitable for use as backfill unless beneath buildings or hardscape. Imported material should not contain rocks greater than 4 inches in any dimension or organic debris. Imported material should have an expansion index of 20 or less. SCST should observe and, if appropriate, test proposed imported materials before they are delivered to the site. Backfill should be placed in lifts 8 inches or less in loose thickness, moisture conditioned to optimum moisture content or slightly above, and compacted to at least 90% relative compaction. The top 12 inches of soil beneath pavement subgrade should be compacted to at least 95% relative compaction. 8.6 PAVEMENT SECTION RECOMMENDATIONS The pavement support characteristics of the soils encountered during our investigation are considered moderate to good. An R-value of 20 was assumed for design of preliminary pavement sections. The actual R-value of the subgrade soils should be determined after grading and final pavement sections are provided. Based on an R-value of 20, the following pavement structural sections are recommended. Location Driveway Driveway Flexible Pavement Sections Traffic Index 5.0 Asphalt Concrete 1 (inches) Portland Cement Concrete Pavement Sections 5.0 6 Aggregate Base (inches) 6 4 The top 12 inches of subgrade should be scarified, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95% relative compaction. All soft or yielding areas should be removed and replaced with compacted fill or aggregate base. Aggregate base and asphalt concrete should conform to the Caltrans Standard Specifications or the "Greenbook" and should be compacted to at least 95% relative compaction. Aggregate base 12 Mr. Brent K. Newby SCST ProIect No. 180318N -01R Proposed Residential Development -Parcel 3 should have an R-value of not less than 78. All materials and methods of construction should conform to good engineering practices and the minimum local standards. Deepened curbs or vertical cutoff membranes consisting of 30 mil HOPE or PVC should be installed at the edges of pavements adjacent to stormwater infiltration facilities to reduce the potential for water-related distress to pavements. The curb/membrane should extend below the aggregate base section. 8.7 SOIL CORROSIVITY A representative sample of the on-site soils collected from Parcel 2 was tested to evaluate corrosion potential. In our opinion, the sample collected from Parcel 2 is representative of the material encountered on Parcel 3. The test results are presented in Appendix II. The project design engineer can use the sulfate results in conjunction with ACI 318 to specify the water/cement ratio, compressive strength and cementitious material types for concrete exposed to soil. A corrosion engineer should be contacted to provide specific corrosion control recommendations. 9. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DURING CONSTRUCTION The geotechnical engineer should review project plans and specifications prior to bidding and construction to check that the intent of the recommendations in this report has been incorporated. Observations and tests should be performed during construction. If the conditions encountered during construction differ from those anticipated based on the subsurface exploration program, the presence of the geotechnical engineer during construction will enable an evaluation of the exposed conditions and modifications of the recommendations in this report or development of additional recommendations in a timely manner. 10. CLOSURE SCST should be advised of any changes in the project scope so that the recommendations contained in this report can be evaluated with respect to the revised plans. Changes in recommendations will be verified in writing. The findings in this report are valid as of the date of this report. Changes in the condition of the site can, however, occur with the passage of time, whether they are due to natural processes or work on this or adjacent areas. In addition, changes in the standards of practice and government regulations can occur. Thus, the findings in this report may be invalidated wholly or in part by changes beyond our control. This report should not be relied upon after a period of two years without a review by us verifying the suitability of the conclusions and recommendations to site conditions at that time. 13 Mr. Brent K. Newby Proposed Residential Development -Parcel 3 SCST Project No. 180318N -01R In the performance of our professional services, we comply with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of our profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in the same locality. The client recognizes that subsurface conditions may vary from those encountered at the test pit locations and that our data, interpretations, and recommendations are based solely on the information obtained by us. We will be responsible for those data, interpretations, and recommendations, but shall not be responsible for interpretations by others of the information developed. Our services consist of professional consultation and observation only, and no warranty of any kind whatsoever, express or implied, is made or intended in connection with the work performed or to be performed by us, or by our proposal for consulting or other services, or by our furnishing of oral or written reports or findings. 11. REFERENCES American Concrete Institute (ACI) (2012), Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-11) and Commentary, August. California Emergency Management Agency, California Geological Survey, University of Southern California (Cal EMA) (2009), Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning, June 1. Caltrans (2010), Standard Specifications. Caltrans (2014), Pervious Pavement Design Guidance, August. County of San Diego (2012), SanGIS Interactive Map. Gary Maxwell Testing (2006), Percolation Test Data, Rancho Nuevo, Via Tesoro, Alpine 91901, January 2. International Code Council (2016), 2016 California Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Volume 2 of 2, Based on the 2015 International Existing Building Code, Effective Date: January 1, 2015. Kennedy, M.P. and Tan, S.S. (2008), Geologic Map of the San Diego 30' x 60' Quadrangle, California, California Geological Survey. Public Works Standards, Inc. (2015), The "Greenbook," Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, 2015 Edition. 14 /J l~ <)' :s-;z_ ~ o} ,~ I:' f ..... ____ .---·--;.: . I 'l l ~ 'foutt1,1"""•ait I I ~---' --~~~ ko.p(itO"'t,~ {a,1>'.✓ l I <I'~ /"' ~-~p Hosp Grove P,ark i ,;;, 1 ,.,. ~ I i " "'' '· ,.,.., ~PRO~CT SITE . '"' ~ ~~~Pdw ~ ~ 1 ~~- ~ \, l w __ .V:sta goon e '1 C ii --1 I 'r Suona.lllmWf'J-- 1~ ' ,J ~ J t-'llv"1•Plk~ ~ l t I 1,000' ~ .!-i ·1(1'14Wlff A-~ J I C .J SCST, Inc. ~-"'\:, \ \ .,, !I fl • -+!kl~--Wiy \ I 1- \ 8'W11VltuWayj, __ Ii\ Cyf\lttl.rlM>t -- i I ~ ~ ~ ~. "' li' t -~ _ _.,. --a I _$1T.11fci',l L1nit SITE VICINITY MAP Forest Avenue -Parcel 3 Carlsbad , California '\ J>(,#' ~;~ Ple1za Camino Real .;,, ,,,.-to~--.. -Mar'~'<~ Hosp Grove Park ~M19t11f- \, ll-:r Yi i 1-o. 'to . ¾i.,. ~ 'XCJ\<lp"vt'J!~• i "' i \ _!:.----~- }' ~ • ~. ,-:~ "i i. l 'h..-# •'• #"',.;. ✓ ~ \ f ,; ' a\~;!/~ ~ ~.,,_ .... ~ // i ~ ~~ ... ~ ~ i '\ "' ,•t t•~ \~ ,. ·p ; . ·~ ~/■; ·t . ,~ '":.. _,,,y ·'-~ ·. -/ . >~-l. ?"" " ,.,,. ""' ~ / ,..:. , "'\ . ""SI, ©2018 O ~ penStreet Map Date: By: Job No.: September, 2018 EMW 180318N-1 Figure: 1 SCST LEGEND: liii::iiil TP-3 Location of Test Pit ~ (7) (Depth in Feet) 1 -7 ,__ -...I D CJ ~ Ii Project Site Parcel 2 Parcel 3 SCST, Inc. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION MAP Forest Avenue -Parcel 3 Carlsbad, California Date: By: Job No.: September, 2018 EMW 180318N-1 Figure: 2 ~ 0 ~ ,,_, SCST, Inc. ii o.5mi 1 mi SCALE Reference: Kennedy, M.P. and Tan, S.S. (2007), Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30' x 60' Quadrangle, California, California Geological Survey, SCALE 1:100,000 REGIONAL GEOLOGY MAP Forest Avenue -Parcel 3 Carlsbad, California EXPLANATION: ~ Young alluvial flood-plain deposits I Qoa I Young alluvial flood-plain deposits l aoP2◄I Old paralic deposits, units 2-4 l aoPa-1 I Old paralic deposits, units 6-7 lavop10I Very old paralic deposits, units 1 O lavop1,I lavop12I lavop13I it!ZCZZZ41 •• ~ I Tmo I 70 _t_U [)-- ® -4 _L Date: By: Very old paralic deposits, units 11 Very old paralic deposits, units 12 Very old paralic deposits, units 13 Santiago Formation Undivided Eocene rocks Undivided sedimentary rocks Fault -Solid where accurately located; dashed where approximately located; dotted where concealed. U = upthrown block, D = downthrown block. Arrow and number indicate direction and angle of dip of fault plane. Landslide -Arrows indicate principal direction of movement. Queried where existence is questionable. Strike and dip of sedimentary joints Strike and dip of beds Inclined September, 2018 EMW Figure: Job No.: 180318N-1 3 Backfill t 12" Minimum .t . 0 or equivalent, ~ M;,adra,n 600 2/3 Wall Height '----.._ 4" Perforated PVC or ABS Pipe 4" Perforated PVC or ABS Pipe / Backfill 18" Minimum 3 Cu. Ft. per Linear Ft. of 3/4" Crushed Rock Enveloped in Filter Fabric 3/4" Crushed Rock, 2/3 Wall Height Enveloped in Filter Fabric ~I •------•-l~=~-t-1 12" Minimum NOTTO SCALE NOTES: 1) Dampproof or waterproof back of wall following architect's specifications. 2) 4" minimum perforated pipe, SDR35 or equivalent, holes down, 1 % fall to outlet. Provide solid outlet pipe at suitable locations. 3) Drain installation and outlet connection should be observed by the geotechnical consultant. '1 -ii SCST, Inc. TYPICAL RETAINING WALL BACKDRAIN DETAILS Forest Avenue -Parcel 8 Carlsbad, California Date: September, 2018 By: EMW Job No.: 180318N-1 Figure: 4 APPENDIX I FIELD INVESTIGATION APPENDIX I Our field investigation consisted of a visual reconnaissance of the site and excavating 3 test pits on August 22, 2018 along the planned street alignments to depths between about 6 and 7 feet below the existing ground surface using a backhoe. Figure 2 presents the approximate locations of the test pits. The field investigation was performed under the observation of an SCST geologist who also logged the test pits and obtained samples of the materials encountered. The soils are classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System as illustrated on Figure 1-1. Logs of the test pits are presented on Figures 1-2 through 1-4. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LEGEND UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUP TYPICAL NAMES SYMBOL I. COARSE GRAINED, more than 50% of material is larger than No. 200 sieve size. GRAVELS CLEAN GRAVELS GW Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines More than half of coarse fraction is larger than No. 4 GP Poorly graded gravels, gravel sand mixtures, little or no fines. sieve size but GRAVELS WITH FINES GM Silty gravels, poorly graded gravel-sand-silt mixtures smaller than 3". (Appreciable amount of fines) GC Clayey gravels, poorly graded gravel-sand, clay mixtures. SANDS CLEAN SANDS SW Welt graded sand, gravelly sands, little or no fines. More than half of coarse fraction is smaller than No. SP Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines 4 sieve size. SM Silty sands, poorly graded sand and silty mixtures. SC Clayey sands, poorly graded sand and clay mixtures II. FINE GRAINED, more than 50% of material is smaller than No. 200 sieve size. SIL TS AND CLAYS ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, sandy silt or clayey-silt- (Liquid Limit less sand mixtures with slight plasticity. than 50) CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays OL Organic silts and organic silty clays or low plasticity SILTS AND CLAYS MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, (Liquid Limit elastic silts. greater than 50) CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity. Ill. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat and other highly organic soils. SAMPLE SYMBOLS LABORATORY TEST SYMBOLS cg -Bulk Sample AL -Atterberg Limits CAL -Modified California Sampler CON -Consolidation ~ CK ~ -Undisturbed Chunk sample COR -Corrosivity Tests ~ -Maximum Size of Particle (Resistivity, pH, Chloride, Sulfate) ST ~ -Shelby Tube OS -Direct Shear SPT ~ -Standard Penetration Test sampler El -Expansion Index MAX -Maximum Density GROUNDWATER SYMBOLS RV -R-Value v -Water level at time of excavation or as indicated SA -Sieve Analysis 6 6 -Water seepage at lime of excavation or as indicated '1C FOREST AVENUE PARCEL 3 SCST, LLC Carlsbad, CA SU By: JRD I Date: September, 2018 Job Number: 180318N-01 !Figure: 1-1 LOG OF TEST PIT TP-1 Date Drilled: 8/22/2018 Logged by: AGL Equipment: Backhoe Reviewed by: DAS Elevation (ft): 150 MSL Depth to Groundwater (ft): Not Encountered SAMPLES ~ ~ (/) UJ u ,e f-z-f-(/) <( ~ z f-w UJ I f-g I-·;::: f-(!) [fl "O >-[fl iii -z I u z "' UJ 0 0 0 w 0:: f-UJ w u S'. 0 a_ [fl SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS > ---' Cl'.'. SE' z ::, ::, f-UJ O'. l9 ~ UJ t: ~ 0 en Cl'.'. 0 Z 0 ::, z >3 f-::, 0 O'. [fl >-"' 0 i5 0:: ::i ::, 0 SM RESIDUAL SOIL: SIL TY SAND, loose to medium dense, dry, light ~ 1 reddish brown, fine to medium grained. ~ 2 OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS {Qo11): SIL TY SANDSTONE, dense, , 3 moist, reddish brown, fine to medium grained. '-4 ~ 5 ~ 6 tx SA , 7 BORING TERMINATED AT 7 FEET '-8 ~ 9 ~ 10 , 11 '-12 '-13 ~ 14 ~ 15 ~ 16 ~ 17 ~ 18 ,_ 19 '-20 l;tC FOREST AVENUE PARCEL 3 SCST, LLC Carlsbad, CA s ii By: JRD Date: September, 2018 Job Number: 180318N-01 Figure: 1-2 LOG OF TEST PIT TP-2 Date Drilled: 8/22/2018 Logged by: ACL Equipment: Backhoe Reviewed by: DAS Elevation (ft): 152 MSL Depth to Groundwater (ft): Not Encountered SAMPLES ~ C CJ) w u 0 -S f- z->-CJ) <( !!: z f-w w I f-g I-·;:: >-CJ [/) "' >-[/) z I z iii -0 0 w 0:: >-0 w " w 0 ~ 0 s: 0 ()._ [/) SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS > _J o:: E z f-w ::::, ii' ::::, CJ ~ w t:: ~ 0 "' D:'. 0 Z 0 ::::, z >e >-:::, 0 ii' [/) >-CD 0 6 0:: <( ::;; 0 _J SM RESIDUAL SOIL: SIL TY SAND, loose to medium dense, dry, light f-1 reddish brown, fine to medium grained. >-2 Becomina Dense. X OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS (Qo11}: SIL TY SANDSTONE, dense, SA f-3 moist, reddish brown, fine to medium grained. -El -4 - -5 ~ >-6 >-7 BORING TERMINATED AT 61/, FEET -8 f-9 -10 -11 -12 -13 -14 f-15 -16 -17 -18 -19 -20 (;JC FOREST AVENUE PARCEL 3 SCST,LLC Carlsbad, CA s ii By: JRD Date: September, 2018 Job Number: 180318N-01 Figure: 1-3 LOG OF TEST PIT TP-3 Date Drilled: 8/22/2018 Logged by: ACL Equipment: Backhoe Reviewed by: DAS Elevation (ft): 152 MSL Depth to Groundwater (ft): Not Encountered SAMPLES ~ C (fJ w u (.) ,e f-z->-(fJ <l'. ~ z >-w w I >-g I-·.:::: >-(!) (/) .,, >-(/) U) -z I z 0 0 w 0:: >-(.) w " w 0 ~ (.) ~ 0 (/) ..J [r'. '!: z a. ::, SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS > ::, f-w ~ (!) ~ w t:: ~ 0 OJ [r'. 0 Z 0 ::, z >e >-::, 0 ~ (/) >-CD 0 6 0:: <{ ::, 0 ..J SM : .._,,L 1 1 __,,..,,,,.LJ, 1oose, ury, 11gr1l ye11ow1sr1 urown, -1 fine to medium grained. Dense. -2 ~ SA -3 OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS {Qo11}: SIL TY SANDSTONE, dense, -4 moist, reddish brown, fine to medium grained. -5 -6 -7 BORING TERMINATED AT 7 FEET -8 -9 -10 -11 f-12 -13 -14 -15 -16 -17 -18 -19 -20 l;JC FOREST AVENUE PARCEL 3 SCST, LLC Carlsbad, CA s Ii By: JRD Date: September, 2018 Job Number: 180318N-01 Figure: 1-4 APPENDIX II LABORATORY TESTING APPENDIX II Laboratory tests were performed to provide geotechnical parameters for engineering analyses. The following tests were performed: • CLASSIFICATION: Field classifications were verified in the laboratory by visual examination. The final soil classifications are in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. • PARTICLE-SIZE DISTRIBUTION: The particle-size distribution was determined on three samples in accordance with ASTM D422. Figures 11-1 through 11-3 present the test results. • EXPANSION INDEX: The expansion index was determined on three samples in accordance with ASTM D4829. Figure 11-4 presents the test results. • CORROSIVITY: Corrosivity testing was performed on a sample collected from the adjacent Parcel 2. In our opinion, the sample collected from Parcel 2 is representative of the material present on Parcel 3. The pH and minimum resistivity were determined in general accordance with California Test 643. The soluble sulfate content was determined in accordance with California Test 417. The total chloride ion content was determined in accordance with California Test 422. Figure 11-4 presents the test results. Soil samples not tested are now stored in our laboratory for future reference and analysis, if needed. Unless notified to the contrary, all samples will be disposed of 30 days from the date of this report. U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes 6" 3" 1-½" 314" 318" #4 #8#10 #16 #30 #40#50 :E 100 90 80 .!1' 70 ~ ~60 ~ " J: 50 1: ~ 40 " ll. 30 - 20 10 0 1000 Cobbles SAMPLE LOCATION P3-TP1 -6" SAMPLE NUMBER ~-YU 32446 SCST, LLC ......... " • ----- --~---- -+ l ' + -1 100 10 Grain Size in Millimeters Gravel Sand Coarse Fine Coarse Medium UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: SM DESCRIPTION SILTY SAND By: Job Number: #100 #200 0.1 0.01 Silt or Clay Fine ATTERBERG LIMITS LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX Forest Avenue Parcel 3 Carlsbad. California RU Date: 180318N-01 Figure: -- -- -- September, 2018 11-1 100 90 80 t 70 "iii ~ ~60 ~ ., -~ 50 --u. "E ~ 40 l 30 20 10 ~- o 1- 1000 Cobbles SAMPLE LOCATION P2 • TP3 -2' SAMPLE NUMBER 32445 ~~ 6" ---J 100 ~ ~- ~ u SCST,LLC U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes 3/8" #4 #8 #10 #16 #30 #40 #50 l l 10 Grain Size in Millimeters Gravel Sand Coarse Fine Coarse Medium UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: SM DESCRIPTION SILTY SAND B Job Number: #100 #200 r 0.1 0.01 Silt or Clay Fine ATTERBERG LIMITS LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX Forest Avenue Parcel 3 Carlsbad, California RU Date: 180318N-01 Figure: .. .. .. September, 2018 11-2 100 90 80 t7o "iii ::: ~60 ~ ~ -~ 50 11. 140 F 30 ~ 20 10 0 1000 6" 3" 1-½" ~ - -- -- I 100 Cobbles Coarse U.S. Standard Slave Sizes 3/4" 3/8" #4 #8 #10 #16 #30 #40 #50 10 Grain Size in Millimeters Gravel Sand Fine Coarse Medium SAMPLE LOCATION UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: SM P3-TP3-2' SAMPLE NUMBER '1 ■ ~ii 32448 SCST,LLC DESCRIPTION SILTY SAND B Job Number: #100 #200 0.1 0.01 Silt or Clay Fine ATTERBERG LIMITS LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX Forest Avenue Parcel 3 Carlsbad, California RU Date: 180318N-01 Fi~ure: -- -- -- September, 2018 11-3 II EXPANSION INDEX ASTM D2489 tRIIJ DESCRIPT1ON ~ ,:,r'' t TP-2@4 feet SILTY SAND Classification of Expansive Soil 1 EXPANSIVE INDEX POTENTIAL EXPANSION 1-20 Very Low 21-50 Low 51-90 Medium 91-130 High Above 130 Very High 1. ASTM -04829 RESISTIVITY, pH, SOLUBLE CHLORIDE and SOLUBLE SULFATE pH & Resistivity (Cal 643, ASTM G51) Soluble Chlorides (Cal 422) Soluble Sulfate (Cal 417) REll8TI · TY QI.cm) pH · TP-2@ 4 feet (from Parcel 2) 2,890 7.86 0.005 Sulphate Exposure Classes 2 @1. 0 0.009 CLASS SEVERITY WATER-SOLUBLE SULFATE (SO4) IN SOIL, PERCENT BY MASS so Not applicable S1 Moderate S2 Severe S3 Very Severe 2. ACI 318, Table 19.3.1.1 SCST,LLC B: Job Number: SO4 <0.10 0.10 s so,< 0.20 0.20 s S04 s 2.00 S04 > 2.00 Forest Avenue Parcel 3 Carlsbad, California DRB Date: 180318N-1 Figure: II Se !ember, 2018 11-4 March 14, 2019 Mr. Brent K. Newby Trustee 12253 Carmel Vista Road, Suite 103 San Diego, California 92130 Subject: GRADING AND FOUNDATION PLAN REVIEW PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT -PARCEL 3 FOREST AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA SCST No.180318N Report No. 3 References: 1. Apollo Structural, (2019), Structural Plans Prepared for Newby-Puzo Residence, 1373 Forest Ave., Carlsbad, California 92008, March 7. 2. BWE, (2018), Grading and Improvement Plans for: Newby-Puzo Residence, dated September 12. 3. SCST, LLC., (2019), Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Residential Development-Parcel 3, Forest Avenue, Carlsbad, California, dated February 13, SCST Project Number 180318N-01R Dear Mr. Newby: This letter confirms that SCST, LLC has reviewed the project foundation plans (Reference 1) and grading plans (Reference 2). Based on our review, is our opinion that the referenced grading and foundation plans have substantially incorporated the recommendations contained within the referenced geotechnical investigation (Reference 3). We appreciate this opportunity to be of continued service to you. If you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact us at 619-280-4321. Respectfully submit! SCST,LLC Isaac Chun, GE 26 Principal Engineer DAS:IC:hu (1) Addressee via email: BNewby@McCarthy.com __D,t Douglas A. Skinner, CEG Senior Geologist SCST. LLC Corporate l-leadquarlers 62BU r)1vP1(l1l0 ~)liPPI s 111 [)11•,rr, CA 9)120 l:.'i//21~1)j2) 619280 ✓))21 61928(),1/1/ WWld',CStcorn (city of Carlsbad CERTIFICATION OF SCHOOL FEES PAID This form must be completed by the City, the applicant, and the appropriate school districts and returned to the City prior to issuing a building permit. The City will not issue any building permit without a completed school fee form. Project No. & Name: DEV2018-0205, NEWBY -PUZO RESIDENCE 2iJ/9 @ Carlsbad Unified School District 6225 El Camino Real Plan Check No.: CBM2019-0004 Project Address: 1373 FOREST AVE Assessor's Parcel No.: 1561108400 Project Applicant: COOWNER NEWBY BRENT KYLE & PUZO LISA JEANNE (Owner Name) Residential Square Feet: New/Additions: 2,608 Second Dwelling Unit: Commercial Square Feet: New/Additions: City Certification: City of Carlsbad _Building Divi_sio_n Date: 03/28/2019 ... -----~---~------- Certification of ApplicanUOwners. The person executing this declaration ("Owner") certifies under penalty of perjury that (1) the information provided above is correct and true to the best of the Owner's knowledge, and that the Owner will file an amended certification of payment and pay the additional fee if Owner requests an increase in the number of dwelling units or square footage after the building permit is issued or if the initial determination of units or square footage is found to be incorrect, and that (2) the Owner is the owner/developer of the above described project(s), or that the person executing this declaration is authorized to sign on behalf of the Owner. Carlsbad CA 92009 Phone: (760) 331-5000 D Encinitas Union School District 101 South Rancho Santa Fe Rd Encinitas, CA 92024 Phone: (760) 944-4300 x1166 D San Diegulto Union H.S. District 684 Requeza Dr. Encinitas, CA 92024 Phone: (760) 753-6491 Ext 5514 (By Appt. Only) Q San Marcos Unified Sch. District 255 Pico Ave Ste. 100 San Marcos, CA 92069 Phone: (760) 290-2649 Contact: Katherine Marcelja (By Appl.only) j>-,>j Vista Unified School District 1234 Arcadia Drive Vista CA 92083 Phone: (760) 726-2170 x2222 SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL FEE CERTIFICATION (To be completed by the school district(s)) THIS FORM INDICATES THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROJECT HAVE BEEN OR WILL BE SATISFIED. The undersigned, being duly authorized by the applicable School District, certifies that the developer, builder, or owner has satisfied the obligation for school facilities. This is to certify that the applicant listed on page 1 has paid all amounts or completed other applicable school mitigation determined by the School District. The City may issue building permits for this project. Signature of Authorized School District Official: Name of School District: Building Division CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ema CAMINO mt CARLSBAD, CA 92009 'f ~L'-c._1..e,_iGt '-J1Q_ Date _lj J_J -~J!J__ _ Phone "lr.c a -· 3. "1 L· ~rt i) L&l~bdd, CA 92008 I /GO GO} } fl g /60-602 85S8 fax I build1ng(tyc ,Hhbddtd g()v STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION NOTES 1. ALL NECESSARY EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS SHALL BE AVAILABLE ON SITE TO FACILITATE RAPID INSTALLATION OF EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPs WHEN RAIN IS EMINENT. 2. THE OWNER/CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTORE ALL EROSION CONTROL DEVICES TO WORKING ORDER TO THE SA Tl SF ACTION OF THE CITY INSPECTOR AFTER EACH RUN-OFF PRODUCING RAINFALL. 3. THE OWNER/CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL ADDITIONAL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AS MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE CITY INSPECTOR DUE TO INCOMPLETE GRADING OPERATIONS OR UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH MAY ARISE. 4. ALL REMOVABLE PROTECTIVE DEVICES SHALL BE IN PLACE AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY WHEN THE FIVE (5) DAY RAIN PROBABILITY FORECAST EXCEEDS FORTY PECENT ( 40%). SILT AND OTHER DEBRIS SHALL BE REMOVED AFTER EACH RAINFALL. 5. ALL GRAVEL BAGS SHALL CONTAIN 3/4 INCH MINIMUM AGGREGATE. 6. ADEQUATE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL AND PERIMETER PROTECTION BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE MEASURES MUST BE INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED. 7. THE CITY INSPECTOR SHALL HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ALTER THIS PLAN DURING OR BEFORE CONSTRUCTION AS NEEDED TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH CITY STORM WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS. OWNER'S CERTIFICATE: I UNDERSTAND AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I MUST: (1) IMPLEMENT BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS) DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICABLE TO AVOID THE MOBILIZATION OF POLLUTANTS SUCH AS SEDIMENT AND TO AVOID THE EXPOSURE OF STORM WATER TO CONSTRUCTION RELATED POLLUTANTS; AND (2) ADHERE TO, AND AT ALL TIMES, COMPLY WlTH THIS CITY APPROVED TIER 1 CONSTRUCTION SWPPP THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES UNTIL THE CONSTRUCTION WORK IS COMPLETE AND APPROVED BY THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. o .-Z&N I N Ev-J !3, OWNER(S)/OWNER'S AGENT NAME (PRINT) ':2-. K . •"'-l --,_ --,-,,~ I \GENT ~~(SIGNATURE) c ;OWNER'S A -• E-29 zj,--J Ir i ~ STORM WATER COMPLIANCE FORM TIER 1 CONSTRUCTION SWPPP OOMdOlt -(I{f)!f_ BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP) SELECTION TABLE Erosion Control Sediment Control BMPs Tracking Non-Storm Water Wa&e Management and Matelials BMPs Control BMPs Management BMPs Pollution Control BMPs C: -C: C: 0 -0 0 :;:; C: C: ,:, :;:; :;:; "' 0 Q) ,:, Q) ,:, "' C: u u C: £ "' E C: E C: -0 -:, :, 0 ·c: a_ 0 0 0 E Q) L L :;:; ,:, L ·5 Q) ::;; ,:, "' L "' L --0 .5 '->, "' "' C: Q) C: Q) c "'"' "' CT L 0 C: .Id o-a a_ Q) ·c. ·c: -C: "' C: > L L u.J Q) C: 0 Best Management Practice* C: 0 CD L 0 Q) 0 L '-' Q) > :;:; :c: "'"' "' ~ Q) 0 C: u Q) -Q) 0 -C: E UL "' ,:, w "' ::;; C: Q) C: (BMP) Description ➔ "' u Q) (/) "' "' Q) "' CD ·o c: "' ,:, "' j Q) Q) ·5 Q) C: C: D ::, -Q) :, ~ Q) L u -0 0 0 "' C: LQ ~~ ,:, >, 0"' C: C: 0 Q) > [!l E :;:; C: D CD (/) ·-"' □--u Q) Oo "' Q) ::;; D c> 0 C: Q) c:: E 0 -No, i!:: 0 Q) E 8, c ~ L-3' Q) X Q) u CTI:;:::; ~£ Q) 0 E ..,,_ w -:, ..Cl E hl = en =3: L•-Zi ·c: a. e "' -,:, ..c: C: Q) LL 0 L Q) :, :.a~ ·--0 ~b C: 0 u C: LO ..,,_ -·-0. > -0 L-..Cl 0 -~ ~ 0 Q) L Q) u -,:, 0 0 0 '5 Q) Q) Q) u C: ·-0 -;=: C: =c: LO 0 -0 0 0 0 "' .8 0 00 0 ..c: Q) -o 0 Q) j OL U1 Q) ..c: ..Cl L !,o 0 -L in C: 3' ct ~u o_ 0 -a_ 0 oo '-' u.J 0 en (/) u G: '-' VJ> VJ VJ a. VJ c:: a. 0 a. ::;; VJ ::;; VJ VJU VJ::;; CASQA Designation ➔ r---CX) 0, "' .... "' <O r---CX) 0 N "' r---CX) N "' .... "' I I I 'T 'T I I I I I I I I I 'T I I I 'T I I I I u u u u u.J u.J u.J u.J u.J u.J u.J u.J go go VJ VJ VJ VJ ::e ::e ::e ::e ::e Construction Activity u.J u.J u.J u.J VJ VJ VJ VJ VJ VJ VJ VJ z z z z 3' 3' 3' 3' 3' Gradinn !Soil Disturbance Trench inn /Excavation Stocknilina Drillinn /Barino Concrete/Asohalt Sawcuttina Concrete Flatwork Pavina )( " Conduit/Pioe Installation )( Stucco/Mortar Work Waste Disoosal 'f- Staainn /Lav Down Area Eauinment Maintenance and Fuelinn Hazardous Substance Use /Storaae Dewaterina Site Access Across Dirt Other (iist1: Instructions: 1. Check the box to the left of all applicable construction activity (first column) expected to occur during construction. 2. Located along the top of the BMP Table is a list of BMP's with it's corresponding California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA) designation number. Choose one or more BMPs you intend to use during construction from the list. Check the box where the chosen activity row intersects with the BMP column. 3. Refer to the CASQA construction handbook for information and details of the chosen BMPs and how to apply them to the project. PROJECT INFORMATION Site Address: 1 ~ 7 "3 Fe. n.. E "> T .A '-I £ Assessor's Parcel Number: 1'>(, --11 O -· '5 -4 -oc Emergency Contact: Name: 5 •-C J:c N -;-N !? w 3 1 24 Hour Phone: '8 ":>'.l -'3 '3 '-I -!I 7 '-J ~ Construction Threat to Storm Water Quality (Check l\°j ~DIUM □ LOW Q) -"' 0 ;;,:-C: "' Q) " E 0 Q) ~ "' oO N C: 00 :r: ::;; <O I ::e 3' Q) -"' o-3' C: Q) ., E -Q) ~ "' uo C: C: 0 0 u::;; CX) I ::e 3' X. -.,( Page 1 of 1 REV 11/17 City of Carlsbad Valuation Worksheet Building Division SFD and Duplexes 2,608 $141.76 $369,710.08 Residential Additions $169.50 $0.00 Remodels/ Lofts $46.51 $0.00 Apartments & Multi-family $126.35 $0.00 Garages/Sunrooms/Solariums 572 $36.98 $21,152.56 Patio/Porch $12.33 $0.00 Enclosed Patio $20.03 $0.00 Decks/Balconies/Stairs 504 $20.03 $10,095.12 Retaining Walls, concrete,masonry $24.65 $0.00 Pools/Spas-Gunite $52.39 $0.00 Tl/Stores, Offices $46.51 $0.00 Tl/Medical, restaurant, H occupancies $64.72 $0.00 Photovoltaic Systems/# of panels $400.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Fire Sprinkler System 3,180 $3.94 $12,529.20 Air Conditioning -commercial $6.37 $0.00 Air Conditioning -residential $5.31 $0.00 Fireplace/ concrete, masonry $4,961.73 $0.00 Fireplace/ prefabricated Metal 1 $3,373.05 $3,373.05 $0.00 $0.00 TOTAL $416,860.01 Valuation: $416,860 CFD Comm/Res (C/R): C li11 Yes (PFF=l.82%) li11 No (PFF = 3.5%) Building Fee $1,751.35 Land Use: Plan Check Fee $1,225.95 Density: Strong Motion Fee $88.00 Improve. Area: Green Bldg. Stand. Fee $16.00 Fiscal Year: Green Bldg PC Fee $170.00 Annex. Year: Factor: License Tax/PFF $14,590.10 License Tax/PFF (in CFO) $7,586.85 CREDITS PFF and/or CFD CFO Explanation: Plumbing $62.00 Mechanical $42.00 Electrical $41.00