No preview available
20983 APPLICANT TO FILL IN INFORMATION WITHIN RED LINES - USE BALL POINT PEN ONLY Build! Pm em Identlfl¢tim PERNIITNO. Buadl n�irty:,g Rl - cL-tPe :-�L- 0 20983 ne ante: I one: e Z53- CITY OF CUPERTINO-BUILDING DIVISION �j Q Copt re 'e Name: Lte.N¢ APPLICATION / PERMIT / BUILDING-a D=RICALPLUMBINGMFGHAMCAL CATEGORY CONTROL �Archl6m/Gglrcer. Lle.Nee QTY ELECTRIC PERMIT PEE. BUILDING PERMIT INFO Addrmc © ❑ O ❑ LICENSED CONTRACTORS DECLARATION PFRMITISSUANCE whereby d(trmthat l arnIv Bcrosedurderpessand of Chaplerode,m me A]ePl]ANCE4RESIDFMIAL N )OBD /1/sr Ingwlth5emlon2000)o/Dlvldm3 dth<Businasaand Code,and n yI ��Cleancfl�in full andLAlefe,. 4,�-W5 PANELS I5` q /r L/J )/J Date_ ,(ZConlnmor / N ` // ARCHITECI'S DECLARATION MI-1000 AMPS ERZ Iunden.6e my plain.hallbe,used u m public mda OVER1000AMPS SQ.Fr.FLOOR AREA $/SQ.FF. OC U LI¢w.d PmfmbrRl SIGNSELE)CTRICAL �< OWNER-BUILDER DECLARATION SPECIALCIRCUIT/MLSC I-�� Iherebyaffi.tMtlamexemptfnomthe CoMr et Lle Lwfm Ne pp following re..(5cmIm7R)1S,Buainee.nd Pmfeeelonu Code:An tl r OZ Y ty° TEhIP.ME7'ERORPOLEINST. ���� cvuntywhmprt tolaperamt a requalter,Improve,tfowch,orrtpalr any ehumure atereelb that nee a6°nqu6nscant 1 the mddo ermitto POWER DEVICES 06 a tlgnnd tlatement that he 611 need pu cing to the plan 70 ro f the Contntlor's Lkeroelaw(Chapter9(mmmentlngwM Sembn 7000)o(DW1- SWp�BNG POOL ELECTRIC VALUATION I,L, 05 the ba ftfo thealiaind P empt aCee)orNion of Seempt therefrom and the bean for the alleged exeaIhea Mytto violation o(rakyo ect15 by any -- Og applicant fora pemdt ub}ec6theappllcant toot tlWl penaltydnot moretlun 0IIII-EF'SVJI'ICI-&SP7XIUR15 flv�SS.�h,undred dd6n(5500), I,u owner of the property,or my empbyem with wages ae their sole, NEW RFSIDFNITAL ELECIR `��' STORIES TYPE CONSTRUCTION %< mnpe.tlon Waothew¢k uatbeetrutlure6mc Wended or°!toed(or ❑ sale 6cc 20 ae Profmbro Code:The ora ro I� dMnprovema ewy at.rc.rot Inretenrddedpomrpoellertynewd(¢°bsaulelld.so,rimpw hemd who domuchworkhMxRorthough wownemployem provided thatsuch OCCGROUP RFS,UNITE Ifhoweve,theWIldhtSor TOTAL Lnprov Matnddw hlnoneyearofcmnpletbn,theovner-buMerwWhave �� t ben olprodng thx he did int buildorkrpmvefop,,rpcn of"ie,I, QTY. PLUMBING PERMIT FEE T-T,DDD aDnE APN L sa owner of the Property,am eswtvely contracting with IteenaN contnnm to corotnm the pm)M(See.70K Busiom and Prdmbro Code: PENIFFISSUANCE The Connmori Lloenue I�w done no apply to an owner of property who ALTER-DRAIN 4 VENT-WATER(EN W Ud. or Improves thereon, and who condoms for..ch p(oj c a whh a . o7atect¢(e)11vN pumunt to the Contractor's Ll¢ue law.der BACK FLOW PROTFi'I',DEVICE FEE SUMMARY IJ I am exempt unSec B h P C for this reason —UU—TSIDE FEES DRAINS FLOOR,ROOF,AREA,CONTI. SANITARY Y_ N_ O.vner E RECEDrT I WORKMAN COMP ENSATLON DECLARATION MIME&PFR TRAP SCHOOL TAX Y_ N �1 hereby aBbm that I Faun a¢rtIR¢te of<onuent to eeB-Wort,m• R��T I oe Ieaeof Worken Cmnperaaumllreunn¢¢a¢rtR4d mpytherto((Sec. GAS FA.SYSTEM-1 INCL OUTLET PAR7C FEE Y N 3800,Lab C) �7 /a Pd I 2'1 vP 1 ^9d GAS FA.StSfFM-OVPR (FA) RECETTI G°������r^ppyppa.a.^Y BUILDING DIVISION FEES Certified copy 6 filedtherew th the ed. GREASE/INDUSIFL WASTE INTERCEPTOR PLANCHECK FEE edified ropy 6 flied with the ERY Inspection divlNm. CERTIFICATE OP"EVil"TION FROM WORKERS' GREASE TRAP PAID COMPENSATION INSURANCE (TSEVER-S ARYSIORMFA 7(1LFT Date Recei t# w sembnneed not be complmM lithe permit is(orone hundred dollua (5100)orlmJ WATER EEATERW/VENT/ELECTR ENERGYFEE Y— N I¢rtuywtbme perrnmwn¢°rtnewetrorwldehtwpemw 6ledea. — IsaU n¢empl°y any pemm N any manner m ae W bac wbjea to the WATER SYSTEM/TREATING Worken'Compensatbn Lawsof CGWorn6. Deme PAID — z O Z N'OUCFApplicant NOTICE O TO APPLIGNT:IL after mkingtw Certlfl¢te of Exemptbn,you NEWRESlDFNIIALPLMB. SQFr. Date Recei t# F N a mldbemmeeubjectmthe Woneni Compensatlo pmv6b ofthe Lamr TOTAL: Code,you na.t forthwith comply with uch provatbro or that permit"I be, W ] deemed mooed. QUILDING FEE 11 4 GCONSTRUCTIONLENDINGAGFNCY SEISMIC FEE I hemby affirm that there b a comammtm lending egerry for the rforrm Z an¢of the work"!or which this permh 6 bssmd(Sec 30 Yl,CW.C,) TOTAL: ELECTRIC FEE (� O Lanais N. PLUMBING FEE LL F Leeer.Add. QTY.j MECHANICAL PERMIT FEE - MECHANICAL FEE O W iseeI¢rt ify that l have read th6applmt n and state that the above Information FEES rmet.Iagnetoc°mplywkhaUr yandmuntyora nm•nd+ telaws PERMIT ISSUANCE PAID: } N mrelating to building construction,aandheneby.whmlu reprcun6tives of this F Z y to enter upon the abovcmentbnad Property for Wpembn purpose.. ALTERORADDIOMEM. Date Reeei t# — (We)agree to save,leW enfy an d keep harmlm the City of Cu Perlin. agaWt166w6n,/,dgmew,me6ard exprn.which may In any way amus ARI HA NDLING UNIT CIL!l0,O00 CFM) SUBTOTAL ' age lost said City N consequerue of the granting d tw perms. AIR HANDLING UNIT(OVER 10,"CFID CONSTRUCTION TAX = Sigwwreof Appllonl/Cmtrvctm Date E)(HAUST HOOD(W/DUCT) CONSTRUCTION TAX PAID: �I�c• HAZARDOUS MATERLALS DISCLOSURE a WUlthcappllontorfutumbuUdiegcc pantmomorlueleharardoue HEATING UNIT(TO 100,0DO BTln Date Recei t# maler las deflwd by the Cupertlrm Municipal Code,Chapter 937,and the Health and Safety Cee on 25532(a)? HEATING UNIT(OVER 100,000 RT1A Y. TOTAL: t ❑ No Will the applicantfawn,Wildingar pant use equipment or devim VENTILATION FAN(SINGLE RFSID) ISSUANCE DATE which enelt havMms air mntamlra Ma ae deflned by the Bay Area Ab Qaality Management Dat 7 BOILER{OMP OHP OR 10UM RTU) P,q� Ye No I have read the he emalcrla6 mqubrmen6 under Chapter 6.95 of BOMER-COMP(OVER I KOM BN) r p � 1990 the Ca Womla Health h Safety Code,Sem lona 255!6,25533 and 25534.I S e sae enta rd that if the WUd Ng don not ea rrently have a tenant,that it 6 my NEW RESI DENIAL MECH. SQ.F7 resporoibUhy to notify the o pa M d the rryulmments which mut be oct Prlorto nee da Certificate of O.P..cy. J / o` (j}y /� Ownepur author!' agent Date 1 TOTAL ISSUED BY:VVt✓ 11 \l`�-tE1��—Q .v V OFFICE COPY APPROVED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF joseLh Mic elucci G.E. CUPERTINO.CODES AND ORDINANCES Richard Quarry Michelucci C&t ciates, Inc. Consulting Geote0&iilul Engineers ttry� N 1 June 4, 1990 This set of plans and specificetlona MUST be kept on the job at 611 times and It it on. Job No. 90638 be to make any chahges at alterations the same without written Cupertino, flan Emu 0 the stitni in Dept, Cpl of Cupertino, E (rj(�➢ D The etnmping of thio plan and spacif�atfona D SHALL NOT be held to permit or, to be sit $ P 193(1 State Farm Insura@p&a0.0liprantpn of any prQY)BM P. O. Box 36506 of any. City- Ordinance Qc 8tie Wlj6 San Jose, California 95158-6506 BLDG. INSPECTION DEPARTMER Cliff DE CUPPWIKQ-� Attention: Tom Logan Re: Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Hill/Howard Residence j 10428 South Foothill Boulevard Cupertino, California Claim#05-U938-424 In accordance with your authorization, we have completed a preliminary geotechnical evaluation of the above-referenced home located at 10428 South Foothill Boulevard in Cupertino, California. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the condition of the } residence with respect to the site geotechnical conditions and to discuss the role that the October 17, 1989, Loma Prieta earthquake had upon problems reported by the owners. Our findings are discussed below. STUDY METHODS Y Our .study included a detailed site reconnaissance by J ie _chlaeDfar our project engineer, and Richard Quarry in the company of the owners on April 11 , 1990. In. addition, on May 7, 1990, the undersigned geotechnical engineer accompanied Ms. Schlaepfer to the I site and performed an additional reconnaissance. OFFICE COPY 270 Oyster Point Boulevard , • South San Francisco, California 94080 (415) 742-0899 FAX: (415)742-0913 Page 2 June 1990 Job No. 90638 During our first site visit, a liquid level (manometer) survey of the relative floor elevations throughout the structure was performed. The results of such a survey, which are used to evaluate foundation performance, are included on the attached Figure 1 . Several photographs were taken of the site features during our inspections. Selected photographs are appended at the end of this report. In addition, we reviewed available published geologic literature and information related to the Loma Prieta earthquake. We also reviewed our files for other projects we have performed in the site vicinity. • SITE CONDITIONS The subject residence is located on the south side of South Foothill Boulevard directly east of the intersection with Palm Avenue in Cupertino, California. The topography in the site vicinity slopes very gently downward from South Foothill Boulevard towards the residence. The subject residence was reportedly constructed about 60 years ago. Our observations suggests that the home was built upon a shallow spread footing type foundation system. . The foundation system consists of continuous perimeter footings and isolated interior pedestal supports. It should be noted that we observed evidence of past releveling and foundation work, as many of the post supports beneath the structure appear to be relatively new and some post supports were replaced with adjustable jacks at some time in the past. The current owners have lived in the structure for less than a year and were unaware of the foundation work. • Page 3 June 4, 1990 Job No. 90638 DISCUSSION According to the owners, many problems were noted after the Loma Prieta earthquake. The problems included the following: Cracks throughout the interior plaster and lathe walls; Cracks in the exterior stucco; An over-toppled chimney; ' A walkway damaged by impact from the falling chimney; • ' A distressed front brick planter area; A cracked perimeter foundation. CONDITION OF FOUNDATION In order to evaluate the condition of the foundation, we performed a detailed reconnaissance of the foundation crawl space. The reconnaissance revealed significant and numerous cracks throughout the perimeter foundation occurring most frequently at areas where the foundation turns and/or is stepped. We also observed evidence of past foundation releveling and/or repairs, as the interior posts had been in some cases replaced with adjustable screw jacks. In other places, the wood posts appeared to be newer than the original construction. The soil conditions exposed in the foundation crawl area consisted of what appeared to be moderately expansive sandy to silty clay (expansive soil tends to swell when wet and shrink upon drying). • Page 4 June 4, 1990 Job No. 90638 In order to evaluate past foundation performance, we conducted a liquid level survey of the relative floor elevations throughout the structure. The results of this survey revealed that the residence is approximately 2 inches "out of level" as illustrated on Figure 1 . As noted, there is evidence that the floors had been releveled at some time prior to our inspections. Without information regarding foundation movement prior to releveling, as well as the accuracy of the releveling efforts, the absolute magnitude of differential movement remains unknown and the current measurements may not accurately represent the magnitude and pattern of the settlement. GENERAL SEISMICITY The owner indicates that most of the problems reported were noticed after the October 17, 1989, Loma Prieta earthquake. This earthquake, which was centered roughly 22 miles to the southeast of the site, had a Richter Scale magnitude of 7.1 . The earthquake caused considerable damage throughout isolated pockets of the San Francisco Bay region. Most of the earthquake damage occurred near the epicenter, or in areas underlain by soft soil or landfill. In addition, damage occurred in areas where construction was not up to today's standards. s Page 5 • June 4, 1990 Job No. 90638 PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS In our opinion, the subject foundation was in relatively poor condition prior to the Loma Prieta earthquake. The floor level variations measured by the liquid level survey represents previous foundation settlement and/or uplift rather than settlement related to the earthquake. The fact that there are adjustable jacks and other obvious previous foundation work in the crawl space suggests that this problem had been on-going It is, however, our opinion that the Loma Prieta earthquake exacerbated the situation (i.e. existing cracks may have opened up a little bit more and some minor new cracking may have affected the foundation.) At this time, in order to return the foundation to its pre-earthquake integrity, we would suggest that all vertical cracks be sealed with a suitabler�essure • py In the case of the fallen chimney and brick planter area, it is obvious that the earthquake caused considerable cracking and distress. The chimney should be repaired with a suitable chimney constructed in accordance with the applicable building codes. The concrete walkway at the front of the site was obviously affected by impact of the falling chimney. In the case of the cracked concrete walk at the rear of the property, it appears that the cracks are old, as they are infilled with soil and probably pre-existed the_ earthquake. _ The exterior stucco surrounding the structure appears to have also been affected by previous cracking, however, the Loma Prieta earthquake probably caused some additional cracking and widened some existing cracks. In the case of the interior plaster walls, it appears that many of the cracks were old, however, there is evidence to suggest that the • earthquake caused considerable cracking throughout the interior of the structure. We would suggest that suitable patching and repairs be made. Page 6 June 4, 1990 Job No. 90638 It should be noted that the foundation system is obviously not up to today's requirements .an , e� repairs are made, iITer67 always the possibility that future "normal" settlement and/or uplift may occur.�Our observations suggest the drainage is relatively poor and the owner _may.--considerimproving drainage to ,. help. . mitigate _the foundation movement. LIMITATIONS The opinions expressed in this report are based upon a visual examination of the property and upon the scope of work described above. No test borings or any other type of subsurface investigation ® was undertaken. While we believe that our conclusions are well founded, it is possible that there may be undiscovered conditions that would cause us to revise our opinions. We are pleased to have been of service to you on this project. Please contact us if you have any questions. Sincerely, MICHELUCCI & ASSOCIATES Tie / �Cc_,�(.(J G2t4�y-e�� Schlaepfer Project Engineer Jo ' Michelucci Geotechnical Engineer #593 OOR LEVEE SURvEY 104j-11$ yOUTk FDofIAl�I. 61,Vp. 4unF- iNO , cALIFORNIp, SLALE : 1" = 10, Y ` V' a z � 1 I 6. A_ p `p.1 , :K900R e, I 0.9 xl.o5e„ LZ ` /I 5 � co 21 i r i -IBS -1 9 \ .- Z.Z 19'. '1_0 —1.63 i yn) —1 i i18 - LGA -IZ -IG �, 2' �FIRf:PUAc.E I i ASN � � EN'1'RANLE i youf 1= 00fV* ILL 60uLtiVARD I) READIfy(,�j IN IN[.NES � Z) 0.0 Wbit FOIN-f 3•) SURVEY PERFOKMEV 0 `} 11 90 • Job No. Michelucci & Associates, Inc. Flgure {{�� �• � -iV y m � _ � x � z m �Co Z � 57-� � � � oaD to aTo • . � s � o o � m °, v. N Z rn CD LL_ `= m = 3g = -� N W� Cn O C • CD Iff H m i m � - o Hod 3 Com t 3 n o m rn'n CII C> C- frl fTl N Ri f�