Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
14040114-F11205 MOUNT CREST PL
14040114
GARY YUNG
SCANNED BOX # 693
C17Y OF CU P]ER71NO BUILDING ING lP]ERM17
BUILDING ADDRESS: 11205 MOUNT CREST PL
CONTRACTOR: R.J. PEREZ CONST INC
PERMIT NO: 14040114
OWNER'S NAME: GARY YUNG
10091 BYRNE AVE
DATE ISSUED: 1 1/03/2014
OWNER'S PHONE: 4086053944
CUPERTINO, CA 95014
PHONE NO: (408)252-2797
❑ LICENSED CONTRACTOR'S DECLARATION
JOB DESCRIPTION: RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL
CONSTRUCT ONE STORY ADDITION (974 SQ FT); TRELLIS
License Class Lie. # 4� S 9,0 (;1 O
(355 SQ FT); (2) SITE RETAINING: WAILS (2 FT BLOCK
Contractor ! -13 t,�It efz. Date � � fliv
WALL 28 L.F. / 4 FT CMU WALL 30 L.F.)
1 hereby affirm that I am licensed under the provisions of Chapter 9
(commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business & Professions
Code and that my license is in full force and effect.
hereby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following two declarations:
I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self -insure for Worker's
Compensation, as provided for by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the
Sq. Ft Floor Area:
Valuation: $180000
erformance of the work for which this permit is issued.
1 have and will maintain Worker's Compensation Insurance, as provided for by
Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this
APN Number: 35626005.00
Occupancy Type:
permit is issued.
APPLICANT CERTIFICATION
I certify that l have read this application and state that the above information is
PERMIT EXPIRES IF WORK IS NOT STARTLED
correct. 1 agree to comply with all city and county ordinances and state laws relating
IT ISSUANCE OR
WITHIN I��ED
to building construction, and hereby authorize representatives of this city to enter
upon the above mentioned property for inspection purposes. (We) agree to save
180 ]FRO INSPECTION.indemnify
and keep harmless the City of Cupertino against liabilities, judgments,
costs, and expenses which may accrue against said City in consequence of the
granting of this permit. Additionally, the applicant understands and will comply
ssued Date: /
with all non- t sourc regula per the Cupertino Municipal Code, Section
OOFS:
X
9.18.
Signature Date G %
All roofs shall be inspe ed fing material being installed. if a roof is
installed without first aming an inspection, l agree to remove all new materials for
inspection.
❑ OWNER -BUILDER DECLARATION
Signature of Applicant: Date:
1 hereby affirm that 1 am exempt from the Contractor's License Law for one of
the following two reasons:
ALL ROOF COVERINGS TO BE CLASS "A" OR BETTER
1, 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 & Professions Code)
1, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS DISCLOSURE
construct the project (Sec.7044, Business & Professions Code).
1 have read the hazardous materials requirements under Chapter 6.95 of the
California Health & Safety Code, Sections 25505, 25533, and 25534. I will
1 hereby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following three
maintain compliance with the Cupertino Municipal Code, Chapter 9.12 and the
declarations:
Health & Safety Code, Section 25532(a) should I store or handle hazardous
l have and will maintain a Certificate of Consent to self -insure for Worker's
material. Additionally, should I use equipment or devices which emit hazardous
Compensation, as provided for by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the
air contaminants as defined by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District I
performance of the work for which this permit is issued.
will maintain compliance with th ertino Municipal Code, Chapter 9.12 and
I have and will maintain Worker's Compensation Insurance, as provided for by
Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this
the Health & Safety Code, S on 534.
I
Owner or authorized agent: Date: L
permit is issued.
I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall
not employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the Worker's
Compensation laws of California. If, after making this certificate of exemption, I
CONSTRUCTION LENDING AGENCY
become subject to the Worker's Compensation provisions of the Labor Code, 1 must
I hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of
forthwith comply with such provisions or this permit shall be deemed revoked,
work's for which this permit is issued (Sec. 3097, Civ C.)
Lender's Name
APPLICANT CERTIFICATION
Lender's Address
I certify that I have read this application and state that the above information is
correct. I agree to comply with all city and county ordinances and state laws relating
to building construction, and hereby authorize representatives of this city to enter
upon the above mentioned property for inspection purposes. (We) agree to save
indemnify and keep harmless the City of Cupertino against liabilities, judgments,
ARCHITECT'S DECLARATION
costs, and expenses which may accrue against said City in consequence of the
I understand my plans shall be used as public records.
granting of this permit. Additionally, the applicant understands and will comply
with all non -point source regulations per the Cupertino Municipal Code, Section
Licensed Professional
9.18.
Signature Date
CONSTRUCTION] PERMIT APPLICATION
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • BUILDING DIVISION
10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3228 • FAX (408) 777-3333 • building aacupertino.org
ArIIIITTON I I AI.TFRATION/TT I I RRVTSI0N/r)F.FFRRF.n ORIMNAI.PF.RMIT9
PROJECT ADDRESS � l� P1� \ �
l./J
APN
OWNER NAME
PHONE _
E-MAIL
STREET ADDRESS 11 1 r CITY, STATE, P ^ J
N v
FAX
CONTACT NAME
PHON
E-MAIL
U Oai
STREET ADDRESS /' r
C T TE, ZIP
F cc
(Lo
❑ OWNER ❑ OWNER -BUILDER ❑ OWNER AGENT ❑ CONTRACTOR ❑ CONTRACTOR AGENT ARCHITECT ❑ ENGINEER ❑ DEVELOPER ❑ TENANT
CONTRACTOR NAME f� ®
/
LICENSE NUMBER
LICENSE TYPE
BUS. LIC #
COMPANY NAME
E-MAIL
FAX
STREET ADDRESS
CITY, STATE, ZIP
PHONE
ARCHITECT/ENGINEER NAME
LICENSE NUMBER
BUS. LIC #
COMPANY NAME
E-MAIL
FAX
STREET ADDRESS
CITY, STATE, ZIP
PHONE
DESCRIPTION OF WORK
EXISTING USE
PROPOSED USE CONSTR.
TYPE
# STORIES
3
1 /
N
?
USE
TYPE
OCC.
SQ.FT.
VALUATION (S)
EXISTG
AREA 31 j
NEW FLOOR
AREA
DEMO
AREA
TOTAL
NET AREA
1
BATHROOM
REMODEL AREA
KITCHE-NI
REMODEL AREA
OTHER
REMODEL AREA
PORCH AREA
ECK AREA
TOTAL DEC PORCH AREA
GARAGE AREA: EIDETACH
# DWELLING UNITS:
IS A SECOND UNIT ❑ YES
SECOND STORY ElYES
BEING ADDED? CK0
ADDITION? MZO
PRE -APPLICATION []YES IF YES, PROVIDE COPY OF
ISTIIEBLDGAN ❑YES
TOTAL VALUATION:
PLANNING APPL # []NO PLANNING APPROVAL LETTER
EICHLER HOME? ❑ NO
rS11
SL_
By my signature below, I certify to each of the following: I am the property owner or authori ent to act on the pr rty owner's behalf. I have r ad this
application and the information I have provided is correct. I have read the Description of Work and verify it is acc . I agree to comply with all applicable local
ordinances and state laws relatin ing constru ti n. J representatives of Cupertino to enter the above -identified pro rty for ins ction purposes.
Signature of Applicant/Agent: Date: 7
r�
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION REQ RED
PLAN CHECK'rYPE
ROUTING SLIP
❑ OVER-THE-COUNTER
❑ BUILDING PLAN REVIEW
_ New SFD or Multifamily dwellings: Apply for demolition permit for
existing building(s). Demolition permit is required prior to issuance ofbuilding
permit for new building.
❑ EXPRESS
❑ PLANNING PLAN REVIEW
_ Commercial Bldgs: Provide a completed Hazardous Materials Disclosure
❑ STANDARD
❑ PUBLIC WORKS
form if any Hazardous Materials are being used as part of this project.
❑ LARGE
❑ FIRE DEPT
_ Copy of Planning Approval Letter or Meeting with Planning prior to
0 MAJOR
ElSANITARY SEWER DISTRICT
submittal of Building Permit application.
- ❑ ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
W
BldgApp_2011.doc revised 06121111
cC= OF cCUP ER7ffNO
FEE IES7NA70 R — HUMMNG DMMON
_
ADDRESS: 11205 MOUNT CREST PL
DATE: 04/1712014
REVIEWED BY: MELISSA
APN: 356 26 005
BP#:
'VAILUATION: $180,000
*PERMT TYPE: Building Permit
PLAN CHECK TYPE: Addition
PR➢1bIlARY
USFD or Duplex
SE:
2nd Unit? Yes No
OTC? () Yes ONo
PENTANMATION
PERMIT I R3SFDADD
WORK
ADD 974 SQ FT TO CREATE N MASTER BEDROOM N OFFICE & N LAUNDRY AREA.
SCOPE
INSTALL (N) TRELLIS OVER 355 S.F.
OCCUPANCY TYPE:
TYPE OF
CONSTR.
F1LR AREA
s.f.
PC FEES
PC FEE ID
BP FEES
BP FEE ID
R-3 (Custom)
II-B,III-B,IV,V-B
974
$2,577.00
IR3PLNCK
$1,617.00
IR3INSP
TOTALS:
974
$2,577.00
$1,617.00
Iyli EC]H[, HOURLY 0 Yes G No
PLUMB, HOURLY Q Yes E) No
]E]LIEC, HOURLY © Yes D No
f 1�owb Plan i hec",
h/ec. Plan ChPef
1 i,•. r, P;., n�,. Ve"
Pl+rmh PCrma Pee:
cnr,il T ees:
ON,, r Phrrlh Invp
Uiher" Elm. Insp.
f' k'C , lrrsp /' , ,
NOTE: This estimate does not include fees due to other Departments (i.e. Planning, Public Works, Fire, Sanitary Sewer District, School
District. etc.). These fees are based on the nreliminary information available and are only an estimate. Contact the Dent far addn'l info -
FE
E ITEMS (Fee Resolution 11-053 C(f. 711113)
FEE
QTY/lFIEIE
MISC ITEMS
Plan Check Fee:
$2,577.00
355 s.f. Patio Cover / Sun Room
$1,252.00 I PATIOWOOD Wood
Suppl. PC Fee: E) Reg. ® OT
5.Q
hrs
$0.00
PME Plan Check:
$0.00
Permit Fee:
$1,617.00
Suppl. Insp. Fee-0 Reg. C) OT
Eflhrs
$0.00
PME Unit Fee:
$0.00
PME Permit Fee:
$0.00
UN:1'!lItUre l r.'�:
�:U;e';,,..,1 pit :r' 1'e'..•:
E)
Work Without Permit? 0 Yes Q No
$0.00
Advanced Planning Fee. IPLLONGR
$136.36
Select a Non -Residential E)
Building or Structure
d
,; . ,. , . l;• , ,
Strong Motion Fee: IBSEISMICR
$18.00
Select an Administrative Item
Bldg Stds Commission Fee: IBCBSC
$8.00
SUBTOTALS: $4,356.36
$1,252.00
TOTAL FEE:
$5,608.36
Revised: 04/01/2014
Project No. 3200
17 September 2014
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS
42329 Osgood Road, Unit A, Fremont, CA 94539
Phone (510) 623-7768 E-Mail: tingwayne@yahoo.com
Gary and Paula Yung
11205 Mount Crest Place
Cupertino, CA 95014
Subject: FOUNDATION ]PLAN REVIEW
Proposed Addition
11205 Mount Crest Place
Cupertino,, California
References: 1) Geotechnical Investigation
Wayne Ting & Associates, Inc.
Dated March 8, 2014
2) Foundation Plan
By Sezen & Moon Structural Engineer
Sheet SLO, Revision date 5/9/14
Sheet 52.0, Revision date 8/614
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Yung:
At your request, Wayne Ting & Associates, Inc. (WTAI) has reviewed the above referenced
materials pertaining to the subject project.
Based on our review, it is our opinion that the all geotechnical aspects and geotechnical
recommendations have been carried out in the plans (Reference 2.) The plans, as submitted, conform
to the geotechnical recommendations presented in Reference 1.
It is noted that a Y x Y x 3' deep dry well only for A. C. condensate line will be constructed. It is our
opinion that water in this dry well will percolate at the site.
Should you have any questions relating to the contents of this letter or should additional information
be required, please contact our office at your convenience.
Very truly yours, i p�1
WAYI`YIE TING & ASSOCIATES, INC.
No, 4627E;
Wayne L. Ting, C.E. * Fxp: t f
Principal Engineer
CIVIL. �C
C
Copy: 1 to Mr. and Mrs. Yung tt¢;.�
DIONY71° BUGAYAIA
Architect stale ofCalifornin; Mcense Mo.C28285
CerliFed Green Building Professional
Member The American k6litute of'Architect6
TO: CITY of CUPERTINO
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
D. r DU0A Y Archiceccure, Ann
480 Royale Park Drive, &9n Jose, CA 95136
Tel.(408) 229-8633 1'ax(408) 226-9110
www.cltbl,g5V.com Email.- ®TBugay.AlA@dtbugay.com
OCT. 10, 2014
PROJECT ADDRESS: 11205 MOUNT CREST PLACE. 1;1140�1611�1
RE: BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION EXTENSION
To Whom it may concern:
This letter is to request the Building Department to extend my Building Permit Application
for another ninety (90) days. The reason for such an extension is bacause we spend so much time
trying to resolve the issues on the slope, drainage, and retaining walls. With so many people involved
and so many designs done, and still wont go thru the Plan Check process. I do appreciate your
approval on this request.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (408) 229-8683.
11-�IQ 0
/'D If 0// �
IF
DIO®NY TT. BI AY, A Al
Architect
Project No. 3191
1 February 2016
WAYME TE G & ASS®CUTES9 ff Ca
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS
42329 Osgood Road, Unit A, Fremont, CA 94539
Phone (510) 623-7768 e-mail: tingwayne@yahoo.com
Gary and Paula Yung
11205 Mount Crest Place
Cupertino, CA 95014
Subject: RETAINING WALL OBSERVATION
Proposed Addition
11205 Mount Crest Place
Cupertino, California
References: 1) Geotechnical Investigation
Wayne Ting & Associates, Inc.
Dated March 8, 2014
2) Retaining Wall Plan
By GPM Engineer
Sheet C2, undated
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Yung:
At your request, Wayne Ting & Associates, Inc. (WTAI) has performed a site reconnaissance for the
proposed site retaining at the subject site.
Based on our observations, the new constructed site retaining wall is in a good condition at the time
of observation. The soil condition is similar to the finding in Reference 1. Therefore, it is our
opinion that the proposed wall has been constructed according to the designed plan (Reference 2.)
Should you have any questions relating to the contents of this report, please contact our office at your
convenience.
Very truly yours,
' �n�ESS10
WAYNE TING ASSOCIATES, INC.
46276
c7 No. G
Wayne L. Ting, C.E. ';C5EnP-ter"':
5
Principal Engineer
CN
Copies: 2 to Mr. and Mrs. Yung
WIN
_6 &_ ' I 130rz: 1- = �®r Uj
1
274 E. o-iamilton Avenue, suite C
Campbell, California 95008-0240 I ,y
Voice: 408-871-7273 Fax: 408-871-7274
Web: www.SMSE!nc.com l
Email: SMSEinc@aol.com
21 July 2015
Rich Perez, tto QROFEss7O
R.J. Perez Construction, Inc. (� ��@� BR141. /dim
10091 Byrne Avenue L� ca <
Cupertino, Ca. 95014
No �o
P.408.252.27 . 0 g2 C)
Www.r' rezcons ctioninc.com r� gyp• 6.302017
e: Structu obs rvation letter. ,�� CIVIL
Yung Residenc . F
11205 Mount C est Place CFCALIFO��
Cupertino, C .
SMSE Job . 5617-14
Dear Rich Perez
Sezen & Moon Structural Engineering, Inc. (SMSE) has provided consultation for
the aforementioned structure at your request on the 21 St of July 2015. Below are
the items that were brought to my attention:
ITEM 1. General conformance to design documents.
Elements that were not visible during the time of the visit were: Foundation
elements, shear wall sheathing and nailing, roof sheathing and nailing. During
the course of the observation, all sizes of framing members, sizes of beams, types
and sizes of connectors, post caps, holddowns (that were visible), and
conformance to specific details were checked.
CONCLUSIONS:
It is in my professional opinion that structure, as currently built, is in general
compliance with our design documents.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment: Field photos - 4 sheets.
This concludes my report. SMSE assumes no responsibility for conditions that were
not visible at -the time of my review.
Please call our office at 408-871-7273 ext. 4# if you have any further questions or
1/5
SA00 Sezen and Moon Structural Engineering Inc\00-2014 Jobs\0 Jobs 5601 - 5650\5617-14 Yung Residence, Cupertino\3 - Documents
�Ste
I-Ift
t�-�� si-I'tMI,
- ,--- • 1 I �-.,\r �.~--•, .,�
%W�
J�
274 E. Hamilton Avenue. Suite C
Campbell, California 95008-0240
Voice: 408-871-7273 Fax: 408-871-7274
Web: www.SMSEinc.com
2/5
SA00 Sezen and Moon Structural Engineering Inc\00-2014 Jobs\0 Jobs 5601 - 5650\5617-14 Yung Residence, Cupertino\3 - Documents
sivt�e.24
11,14
a
/�it y� � 19t,
o .�� �r,�n �er�i 11 JJ1 �4J�� .r J� JJ�1
274 E. Hamilton Avenue, Suite C
Campbell, California 95008-0240
Voice: 408-871-7273 Fax: 408-871-7274
Web: www.SMSEinc.com
3/5
S:\00 Sezen and Moon Structural Engineering Inc\00-2014 Jobs\0 Jobs 5601 - 5650\5617-14 Yung Residence, Cupertino\3 - Documents
r
r�! 1 q � I ': M_ • r '<" - ��y�, .u^a � "mil a Nrt",ry�A1lN�Y,{ ' � ' ^ +i""F �
w
-N 1 3.' ' `� A�• j'V i M"' � �'+` t `X j:Y"'_nn yr•..x�p ��
Ir
-t,`'� r �, W „ �Ij 0 r t +"3 ;.aF •M _ J d
-
r
R �
1,
JJJ
Y
�t lug IN wa
Ii Aftelall, I
Mi
0 ilia aa uc uvtl
274 E, Hamilton Avenue, Suite C
Campbell, California 95008-0240
Voice: 408-871-7273 Fax: 408-871-7274
Web: www.SMSE!nc.com
5/5
SA00 Sezen and Moon Structural Engineering Inc\00-2014 Jobs\0 Jobs 5601 - 5650\5617-14 Yung Residence, Cupertino\3 - Documents
Project No. 3191
2 Febru5�
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS
42329 Osgood Road, Unit A, Fremont, CA 94539
Phone (510) 623-7768 e-mail: tingwayne@yahoo.c
Gary and Paula Yung
11205 Mount Crest Place
Cupertino, CA 95014
Subject: FOUNDATION EXCAVATION OBSERVATION
Proposed Addition
11205 Mount Crest Place
Cupertino, California
References: 1) Geotechnical Investigation
Wayne Ting & Associates, Inc.
Dated March 8, 2014
2) Foundation Plan
By Sezen & Moon Structural Engineer
Sheet S1.0, Revision date 5/9/14
Sheet S2.0, Revision date 8/614
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Yung:
At your request, Wayne Ting & Associates, Inc. (WTAI) has observed the excavation of the footing
foundation for the proposed structure at the subject site. The footings have been excavated according
to the requirements specified in geotechnical report (ref. 1) and the foundation plans (ref. 2.)
Based on our observations, it is our opinion that soils encountered during the foundation excavations
has adequate strength for the support of the proposed structures. The footings were excavated to a
minimum depth of 24 inches below the lowest adjacent pad grade. The bottoms of the footings were
generally compacted.
Should you have any questions relating to the contents of this report, please contact our office at your
convenience.
Very truly yours,
rulyyours,
WAYVE TING
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Wa/yyne/L. Ting, C.E. 66
Principal Engineer
Copies: 2 to Mr. and Mrs. Yung
m
GPMv ENGINEERS
CUPERTWO
2051 JUNCTION AVE, Su
Building Departmen2
SAN JOSE, CA 951
TEL. 650.331.7264
FAX. 650.472.9004REVIEWED
FOR G()D� COMPLIANC&
www.gpmengneemcom Kev'8wed By. '1�4l
STRUCTURAL CALCULATONS
COPY
FOR
SlITE RETAKING WALL
AT
11205 MOUNT CREST PL
CCU PERT�NO, CA
10-13-2014
OECORAn'
N
04 AI 16
11' ALLEN
RALY W
RI OOM
REBARS
0 0 MAQ::�_ 8 U LII MP UE
WALL DIMENSION
KEY
WALL STEM 11
FOOTING
WALL
VERT.
VERT.
TOP
KEY
EIGHT
'B'
V
'KD'
'KW'
DOWELS
REBAR
REBAR
REBAR
H
MIN.'
'RI .
'R2'
'F1'
F2'
8"
1 #5016"
f/5®16" #5 116"
y4@16"
1 =1 —0
WELL —GRADED GRANULAR WALL
ROCK; 0.25 in TO 1.5 in (5 mm
to 38 mm), LESS THAN 10% FINES
in (100 Pnm)
EL DRAIN
'E VENTED TO
YLIGHT
Description : ret wall
Criteria
Retained Height =
4.00 ft
Wall height above soil -
0.00 ft
Slope Behind Wall =
0.00: 1
Height of Soil over Toe =
18.00 in
Water height over heel -
0.0 ft
Vertical component of active
Lateral soil pressure options:
NOT USED for Soil Pressure.
NOT USED for Sliding Resistance.
NOT USED for Overturning Resistance,
Design Summary
Wall Stability Ratios
Overturning =
2.76 OK
Sliding (Vertical Component NOZ.Qdar
Total Bearing Load = 3,068 Ibs
...resultant ecc, = 10.23 in
Soil Pressure @ Toe =
1,607 psf OK
Soil Pressure @ Heel =
0 psf OK
Allowable
2,000 psf
Soil Pressure Less Than
Allowable
ACI Factored @ Toe =
1,929 psf
ACI Factored @ Heel =
0 psf
Footing Shear @ Toe -
0.0 psi OK
Footing Shear @ Heel =
13.9 psi OK
Allowable =
75.0 psi
Sliding Calcs (Vertical Component NOT Used)
Lateral Sliding Force =
1,150.6 Ibs
less 100% Passive Force =
- 1,875.0 Ibs
less 100% Friction Force =
920.8 Ibs
Added Force Req'd =
0.0 Ibs OK
....for 1.5 : 1 Stability =
0.0 Ibs OK
Soil Data
Allow Soil Bearing =
2,000.0 psf
Equivalent Fluid Pressure Method
Heel Active Pressure =
85.0 psfli
Toe Active Pressure =
30.0 psfli
Passive Pressure =
250.0 psfli
Soil Density, Heel =
110.00 pcf
Soil Density, Toe =
0.00 pcf
Friction Coeff btwn Ftg & Soil =
0.300
Soil height to ignore
for passive pressure =
12.00 in
Stem Construction
TOP
Design Height Above Ftq
ft =
Wall Material Above "Ht"
_
Thickness
in =
Rebar Size
=
Rebar Spacing
in =
Rebar Placed at
=
Design Data
fb/FB +fa/Fa
=
Total Force @ Section
Ibs =
Moment.... Actual
ft-I =
Moment..... Allowable
ft-I =
Shear..... Actual
psi =
Shear..... Allowable
psi =
Wall Weight
psf =
Rebar Depth 'd'
in =
Lap splice if above
in =
Lap splice if below
in =
Hook embed into footing
in =
Masonry Data
fm
psi =
Fs
psi =
Solid Grouting
=
Stem OK
0.00
Masonry
12.00
# 5
16,00
Edge
0.427
646.3
889.8
2,085.1
9.0
38.7
133.0
6.00
30.00
7.00
7.00
1,500
20,000
Yes
Load Factors
Dead Load
1.200
Modular Ratio'n' = 21,48
Live Load
1.600
Short Term Factor = 1.000
Earth, H
1.600
Equiv. Solid Thick. in = 11.60
Wind, W
1.600
Masonry Block Type = 3
Seismic, E
1.000
Masonry Design Method = ASD
Calculations per ACI 318-08, ACI 530-08, IBC 2009,
CBC 2010, ASCE 1-05
4
CanMeveved Rats oving WO
Description : ret wall
Footing Dimensions & Strengths
Toe Width
= 0.00 ft
Heel Width
= 4.25
Total Footing Width
= 4.25
Footing Thickness
= 18.00 in
Key Width
= 12.00 in
Key Depth
= 12.00 in
Key Distance from Toe
= 0.00 ft
fc = 2,500psi
Fy = 60,000psi
Footing Concrete Density
= 150.00 pcf
Min. As %
= 0.0018
Cover @ Top 2.00
@ Btm.= 3.00 in
Footing Design Results
Toe
Heel
Factored Pressure = 1,929
0 psf
Mu': Upward = 0
0 ft-lb
Mu': Downward = 0
0 ft-lb
Mu: Design = 0
1,424ft-lb
Actual 1-Way Shear = 0.00
13.94 psi
Allow 1-Way Shear = 0.00
75.00 psi
Toe Reinforcing = # 7 @ 16.00 in
Heel Reinforcing = # 6 @ 16.00 in
Key Reinforcing = None Spec'd
Other Acceptable Sizes & Spacings
Toe: Not req'd, Mu < S * Fr
Heel: Not req'd, Mu < S * Fr
Key: Not req'd, Mu < S * Fr
Summary of Overturning & Resisting
Forces & Moments
OVERTURNING.....
.....RESISTING.....
Force
Distance Moment
Force
Distance
Moment
Item
Ibs
ft ft-lb
Ibs
ft
ft-lb
Heel Active Pressure =
1,285.6
1.83 2,357.0
Soil Over Heel =
1,430.0
2.63
3,753.8
Surcharge over Heel =
Sloped Soil Over Heel =
Toe Active Pressure =
-135.0
1.00 -135.0
Surcharge Over Heel =
Surcharge Over Toe =
Adjacent Footing Load =
Adjacent Footing Load -
Axial Dead Load on Stem =
Added Lateral Load =
* Axial Live Load on Stem =
Load @ Stem Above Soil =
Soil Over Toe =
Surcharge Over Toe =
Stem Weight(s) =
532.0
0.50
266.0
Earth @ Stem Transitions =
Total =
1,150.6
O.T.M. = 2,222.0
Footing Weight =
956.3
2.13
2,032.0
Resisting/Overturning Ratio
= 2.76
Key Weight =
150.0
0.50
75.0
Vertical Loads used for Soil Pressure
= 3,068.3 Ibs
Vert. Component =
Total = 3,068.3 Ibs R.M. = 6,126.8
* Axial live load NOT included in total displayed or used for overturning
resistance, but is included for soil pressure calculation.
CanMevered Retainlln 1 WaN
0
Description : ret wall - seismic
Criteria
Retained Height =
4.00 ft
Wall height above soil =
0.00 ft
Slope Behind Wall =
0.00: 1
Height of Soil over Toe =
18.00 in
Water height over heel =
0.0 ft
Vertical component of active
Lateral soil pressure options:
NOT USED for Soil Pressure.
NOT USED for Sliding Resistance.
NOT USED for Overturning Resistance.
Surcharge Loads
Surchargge Over Heel =
Used To Resist Sliding & Overturning
0.0 psf
Surcharge Over Toe =
0.0 psf
Used for Sliding & Overturning
Axial Load Applied to Stem
Axial Dead Load =
0.0 Ibs
Axial Live Load =
0.0 Ibs
Axial Load Eccentricity =
0.0 in
Design Summary
Wall Stability Ratios
Overturning =
1.71 OK
Sliding (Vertical Component NO2.PM
Total Bearing Load = 3,068 Ibs
..,resultant ecc. = 15.57 in
Soil Pressure @ Toe =
2,471 psf OK
Soil Pressure @ Heel =
0 psf OK
Allowable =
2,700 psf
Soil Pressure Less Than Allowable
ACI Factored @ Toe =
2,965 psf
ACI Factored @ Heel =
0 psf
Footing Shear @ Toe =
0.0 psi OK
Footing Shear @ Heel =
13.9 psi OK
Allowable =
75.0 psi
Sliding Calcs (Vertical Component NOT Used)
Lateral Sliding Force =
1,500.6lbs
less 100% Passive Force =
- 2,497.5 Ibs
less 100% Friction Force =
- 920.8 Ibs
Added Force Req'd =
0.0 Ibs OK
....for 1.5 : 1 Stability =
0.0 Ibs OK
Load Factors
Dead Load
1.200
Live Load
1.600
Earth, H
1.600
Wind, W
1.600
Seismic, E
1,000
Soil Data
Allow Soil Bearing =
2,700.0 psf
Equivalent Fluid Pressure Method
Heel Active Pressure =
85.0 psf/ft
Toe Active Pressure =
30.0 psflft
Passive Pressure =
333.0 psflft
Soil Density, Heel =
110,00 pcf
Soil Density, Toe =
0.00 pcf
Friction Coeff btwn Ftg & Soil =
0.300
Soil height to ignore
for passive pressure =
12.00 in
Lateral Load Applied to Stem
Lateral Load =
350.0 plf
...Height to Top =
2.90 ft
...Height to Bottom =
1.90 ft
Wind on Exposed Stem = 0.0 psf
Stem Construction
Design Height Above Ftq ft =
Wall Material Above "Ht" _
Thickness in =
Rebar Size =
Rebar Spacing in =
Rebar Placed at =
Design Data
fb/FB +falFa =
Total Force @ Section Ibs =
Moment.... Actual
ft-I =
Moment,..., Allowable
ft-I =
Shear..... Actual
psi =
Shear..... Allowable
psi =
Wall Weight
psf =
Rebar Depth 'd'
in =
Lap splice if above
in =
Lap splice if below
in =
Hook embed into footing
in =
Masonry Data
f m
psi =
Fs
psi =
Solid Grouting
Calculations per ACI 318-08, ACI 530-08, IBC 2009,
CBC 2010, ASCE 7-05
Adjacent Footing Load
Adjacent Footing Load =
0.0 Ibs
Footing Width =
0.00 ft
Eccentricity =
0.00 in
Wall to Ftg CL Dist =
0.00 ft
Footing Type
Line Load
Base Above/Below Soil =
0.0 ft
at Back of Wall
Poisson's Ratio =
0,300
Stem
em
Stem OK
0.00
Masonry
12.00
# 5
16.00
Edge
0.830
996.3
1,729.8
2,085.1
13.8
38.7
133.0
6.00
45.00
7.00
7.00
1,500
20,000
Yes
Modular Ratio'n' = 21.48
Short Term Factor = 1.000
Equiv. Solid Thick. in = 11.60
Masonry Block Type = 3
Masonry Design Method = ASD
.}<
Description : ret wall - seismic
Footing Dimensions & Strengths
Footing Design Results
Toe Width
= 0.00 ft
Toe keel
Heel Width
= 4.25
Factored Pressure = 2,965 0 psf
Total Footing Width
= 4.25
Mu': Upward = 0 0 ft-lb
Footing Thickness
= 18.00 in
Mu' : Downward = 0 0 ft-lb
Mu: Design = 0 2,768 ft-lb
Key Width
Key Depth
= 12.00 in
= 1in
Actual 1-Way Shear = 0.00 13.94 psi
Key Distance from Toe
0.00
= 0.00 ft
Allow 1-Way Shear = 0.00 75.00 psi
Toe Reinforcing = # 7 @ 16.00 in
fc = 2,500 psi
Fy = 60,000 psi
Heel Reinforcing = # 6 @ 16.00 in
Footing Concrete Density
= 150.00 pcf
Key Reinforcing = None Spec'd
Min. As %
Cover @ Top 2.00
- 0.0018
@ Btm.= 3.00 in
Other Acceptable Sizes & Spacings
Toe: Not req'd, Mu < S " Fr
Heel: Not req'd, Mu < S * Fr
Key: Not req'd, Mu < S * Fr
Summary of Overturning
& Resisting Forces & Moments
.....OVERTURNING.....
.....RESISTING.....
Force Distance
Moment Force Distance Moment
Item
Ibs ft
ft-lb Ibs ft ft-lb
Heel Active Pressure
= 1,285.6 1.83
2,357.0 Soil Over Heel = 1,430.0 2.63 3,753.8
Surcharge over Heel
=
Sloped Soil Over Heel =
Toe Active Pressure
= -135.0 1.00
-135.0 Surcharge Over Heel =
Surcharge Over Toe
=
Adjacent Footing Load =
Adjacent Footing Load
=
Axial Dead Load on Stem =
Added Lateral Load
= 350.0 3.90
1,365.0 "Axial Live Load on Stem =
Load @ Stem Above Soil
=
Soil Over Toe =
Surcharge Over Toe =
Stem Weight(s) = 532.0 0.50 266.0
Earth @ Stem Transitions =
Total = 1,500.6 O.T.M. = 3,587.0 Footing Weight = 956.3 2.13 2,032.0
Resisting/Overturning Ratio = 1.71 Key Weight = 150.0 0.50 75.0
Vertical Loads used for Soil Pressure = 3,068.3 Ibs Vert. Component =
Total = 3,068.3 Ibs R.M. = 6,126.8
Axial live load NOT included in total displayed or used for overturning
resistance, but is included for soil pressure calculation.
I 12`05 MOUNT CREST FL
CUPERT�NO, CA
Station
.sm
. Sbp
29
1 7
d
J
\nESENDING SLOPE:
47> H/3 = 11/2=5.5FT SAY OK
41°
do 14bO
PROFILE —ALIGNMENT PROFILE
�pF ESS/p�
Ep S. glF2
Ca L o� m
C61
EXP. 6 /1 S
gTFO CA�1FOQ� 7-31-201 4
m
�f
1
/
,r
r
s
o
/ J
F
r
d
sr
d d
J
/d
ASENDING SLOPE:
DESIGN RETAINING WALL FO
SLOPE, PROVIDE DRAINAGE
WALL, FOLLOW SOILS REPOT=
REGARDING FTG EMBED.
10
ct
IND
FEES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • BUILDING DIVISION RECEIVED
ALBERT SALVADOR, P.E., C.B.O., BUILDING OFFICIAL
10300 TORRE AVENUE ° CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 AUG 04 �0�4
(408) 777-3228 e FAX (408) 777-3333 - buildingC@cupertino.org
PURPOSE:
�'. Bel
0.. '
The 2013 CalGreen Code applies to all newly constructed hotels, motels, Abing houses, dwellings,
dormitories, condominiums, shelters, congregate residences, employee housing, factory -built housing and
other types of swellings with sleeping accommodations and new accessory buildings associated with such
uses. Existing site and landscaping improvements that are not otherwise disturbed are not subject to the
requirements of CALGreen.
Project Name:
Project Address:
Project Description.
Instructions: REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE
keviewed By:
1. The Owner or the Owner's agent shall employ a licensed professional experie cgd,wit-rthre�California
Green Building Standards Codes to verify and assure that all required �ud,rkq de crbe` eeaI`,us properly
planned and implemented in the project.
2. The licensed professional, in collaboration with the owner and the design profes'orAl shall initial Column
2 of this checklist, sign and date Section 1 - Design Verification at the end of this checklist and have the
checklist printed on the approved plans for the project.
3. Prior to final inspection by the Building Department, the licensed professional shall complete Column 3
and sign and date Section 2- (Implementation erification at the end of this checklist and submit the
completed fo.r•m to the Building. Inspector.; k:
tii
Column 2 Column 3
MAHDATOPY FEATURE OR MEASURE Project Verification
Reauirements
a %r
Pi;annir g, nd'Desidn
:
4.106.2 Storer water drainage and retention during construction. A plan is
developed and implemented to manage storm water drainage during ®X
construction.
4.106.3 Grading and paving. The site shall be planned and developed to
keep surface water away from buildings. Construction plans shall indicate how El
site grading or a drainage system will manage all surface water flows.
Page 1 of 5 CalGreen 2014.doc revised 01115114
Ae .2 ENERGY EFFICIENCY
General Y. w r ... n aTw
4.201.1 Low-rise residential buildings shall meet or exceed the minimum
standard design required by the California Energy Standards.
A d WATER AND CONSERVATION
a�p t.Y
• em.>� �f 3 T' �" e'•i C'.G.' 'P•9�e�>'�-c `� wr•S.h::w. awa,« .`I `'R!rri 'P`TPin. _.#.s a'.�.`
4.303.1 Water conserving plumbing fixtures and fittings. Plumbing fixtures
(water closets and urinals) and fittings (faucets and showerheads) shall comply
with the following:
24.303.1.3.2 Water Closets. The effective flush volume of all water closets
shall not exceed 1.28 gallons per flush. Tank -type water closets shall be
certified to the performance criteria of the U.S. EPA WaterSense
Specifications for Tank -type Toilets.
® 4.303.1.3.2 Urinals. The effective flush volume of urinals shall not
0.5 gallons per flush.
�exceed
2 4.303.1.3.1 Single Showerheads. Showerheads shall have a maximum
flow rate of not more than 2.0 gallons per minute at 80 psi. Showerheads
shall be certified to the performance criteria of the U.S. EPA WaterSense
Specification for showerheads.
® 4.303.1.3.2 Multiple Showerheads serving one shower. When a
shower is served by more than one showerhead, the combined flow rate of
all showerheads and/or other shower outlets controlled by a single valve
shall not exceed 2.0 gallons per minute at 80 psi, or the shower shall be
ful
designed to allow only one shower outlet to be in operation at a time.
9-'4.303.1.4.1 Residential lavatory faucets. The maximum flow rate of
residential lavatory faucets shall not exceed 1.5 gallons per minute at 60
psi. The minimum flow rate of residential lavatory faucets shall not be less
than 0.8 gallons per minute at 20 psi.
® 4.303.1.3.2 Lavatory faucets in common and public use areas. The
maximum flow rate of lavatory faucets installed in common and public use
areas (outside of dwellings or sleeping units) in residential buildings shall
not exceed 0.5 gallons per minute at 60 psi.
® 4.303.1.4.3 Metering faucets. Metering faucets when installed in
buildings shall not deliver more than 0.25 gallons per cycle.
/residential
l� 4.303.1.4.4 Kitchen Faucets. The maximum flow rate of kitchen faucets
shall not exceed 1.8 gallons per minute at 60 psi. Kitchen faucets may
temporarily increase the flow above the maximum rate, but not to exceed
2.2 gallons per minute at 60 psi, and must default to a maximum flow rate
of 1.8 gallons per minute at 60 psi.
4.303.2 Standards for plumbing fixtures and fittings. Plumbing fixtures
and fittings shall be installed in accordance with the California Plumbing Code,
and shall meet the applicable standards referenced in Table 1401.1 of the
California Plumbing Code.
Page 2 of 5 Ca[Creen_2014.doc revised 01115114
y
� � R a � �:� � � „��,.� � ,<jggg��,1
>
Outdoor WaterPUse �YY � � "r.
M
ey f N. •ey .R@R `Rarva t .C #'m.,M W
.. a
'^ H.•F, W J, lj 4' �,.f.#YY:k f G
4.304.1 Irrigation controllers. Automatic irrigation systems installed at the
time of final inspection shall be weather -based.
® 4.304.1.1 Controllers shall be weather- or soil moisture -based controllers
that automatically adjust irrigation in response to changes in plants' needs
as weather conditions change.
❑
❑
��,,
kr4.304.1.2 Weather -based controllers without integral rain sensors or
communication systems that account for local rainfall shall have a separate
wired or wireless rain sensor which connects or communicated with the
controller(s). Soil moisture -based controllers are not required to have rain
sensor input.
A4.4 MATERIAL
Enhanced Durability: and Mainterimance.
;Reduced k
.w. -�
4.406.1 Rodent proofing. Annular spaces around pipes, electric cables,
conduits, or other openings in plates at exterior walls shall be protected
❑
against the passage of rodents by closing such openings with cement mortar,
concrete masonry or similar method acceptable to the enforcing agency.
�onciiai§WUdtoD1suFng r "
4.408.2 Construction waste management plan. Where a local jurisdiction
does not have a construction and demolition waste management ordinance, a
❑
❑
construction waste management plan shall be submitted for approval to the
enforcing agency.
V k w f � '
Builc��ng Ma�ntgnance end Operation �
"T' 441 t x
4.410.1 Operation and maintenance manual. At the time of final inspection,
an operation and maintenance manual shall be provided to the building ® ❑
occupant or owner.
A4.5 ENVIRONMENTALQUALITY
Fireplace
4.503.1 General. Install only a direct -vent sealed -combustion gas or sealed
®
❑
wood -burning fireplace, or a sealed woodstove.
- _ _:"-:"�i. s a c.,q. 'a. ,sit, qr. �y .. c Tr "�
Pofiutarl t ontrof O
& a" 4• a A .�. .. H .yY ., x r p.gap • ''t;.rt'�•H $ i. �..fiT+....d,a.4 t :.�. £. ,gym
4.504.1 Covering of duct openings and protection of mechanical
equipment during construction. Duct openings and other related air
X❑
❑
distribution component openings shall be covered during construction.
4.504.2.1 Adhesives, sealants and caulks. Adhesives, sealants and caulks
❑
❑
shall be compliant with VOC and other toxic compound limits.
4.504.2.2 Paints and coatings. Paints, stains and other coatings shall be
❑
❑
compliant with VOC limits.
4.504.2.3 Aerosol paints and coatings. Aerosol paints and other coatings
shall be compliant with product weighted MIR Limits for ROC and other toxic
[]X
❑
compounds.
Page 3 of 5 CalGreen_2014.doe revised 01115114
4.504.2.4 Verification. Documentation shall be provided to verify that
❑
❑
compliant VOC limit finish materials have been used.
4.504.3 Carpet Systems. Carpet and carpet systems shall be compliant with
❑
VOC limits.
4.504.4 Resilient flooring systems. Eighty (80) percent of floor area
receiving resilient flooring shall comply with the VOC-emission limits defined in
the Collaborative for High Performance Schools (CHPS) Low -emitting
❑X
❑
Materials List or be certified under the Resilient Floor Covering Institute (RCFI)
FloorScore program.
4.504.5 Composite wood products. Particleboard, medium density
fiberboard (MDF), and hardwood plywood used in interior finish systems shall
❑X
❑
comply with low formaldehyde emission standards.
Al
l a M fix
�`
Interior Moisture Contro20
ul
t ., b k ...
4.505.2 Concrete slab foundation. Required vapor retarders and capillary
❑
❑
breaks are also required to comply with CalGreen Section 4.505.2.1.
4.505.3 Moisture content of building materials. Moisture content of building
❑
❑
materials used in wall and floor framing is checked before enclosure.
-. .. .. 4 • W .. 9 - PY 4 W„w � d iA �' a} $ Q ': •F -G � �++� }R-� �{
Ind or Quality and Exhaust r y
s N�
.� � � .Sy, G�y � �¢ � 1' �
x
�Zt
4.506.1 Bathroom exhaust fans. Exhaust fans which terminate outside the
❑
building are provided in every bathroom.
a � ,
f �,v
Environmental�Coinfort
a Y.
4.507.2. Duct systems are sized and designed and equipment is selected
using the following methods:
1. Establish heat loss and heat gain values according to ACCA Manual J or
equivalent.
❑
2. Size duct systems according to ACCA 29-D (Manual D) or equivalent.
3. Select heating and cooling equipment according to ACCA 36-S (Manual S)
or equivalent.
INSTALLER AND SPECIAL INSPECTOR QUALIFICATIONS
,• 'y -_ , a ., _ - - � - ti" �° � r �.��'s. � �"�, vim, t �' f ,� �,� ^✓ '�`
Qualifications`
v
702.1 Installer training. HVAC system installers are trained and certified in
❑
the proper installation of HVAC systems.
702.2 Special inspection. The Licensed Professional responsible to verify
CALGreen compliance is qualified and able to demonstrate competence in the
❑X
❑
discipline they inspect and verify.
Yerificafions
703.1 Documentation. Verification of compliance with CALGreen may
include construction documents, plans, specifications, builder or installer
certification, inspection reports, or other methods acceptable to the enforcing
❑
agency which show substantial conformance. Implementation verification shall
be submitted to the Building Department after implementation of all required
measures and prior to final inspection approval.
Page 4 of 5 CalGreen 2014.doc revised 01115114
CA C ;EEr` SIGH ATU�E DEC A�ATIOr
Project Name
Project Address
Project Description:
i1?1105 f Gh
SECTION I m DESMI VER11MCAMN
Complete all lines of Section 1 — "Design Verification" and submit the completed checklist (Columns 1 and 2) with the
plans and building permit application to the Building Department.
The owner and design professional responsible for compliance with CalGreen Standards have revised the plans and
certify that the items checked above are hereby incorporated into the project plans and will be implemented into the
project in accordance with the requirements set forth in the 2013 California Green Building Standards Code as
adopted by the City of Cupertino.
4 -I
Owner's Signat re Date
Owner's Name Please Print)
Design Professional's Signature Date
Design Professio al's Name (Please Print)a
Signature of License Professional responsible f r CalGreen compliance Date
1W
Name of License Professional esponsible for Cal reen com Ii ce (Please Print) Phone
1JC o % WL
Email Address for License Profes ional responsible for CalGreen co e
SECTOM 2 e IMG'LEMENTATI]OM QlER1F1CATI]OM
Complete, sign and submit the competed checklist, including column 3, together with all original signatures on Section
2 to the Building Department prior to Building Department final inspection.
I have inspected the work and have received sufficient documentation to verify and certify that the project identified
above was constructed in accordance with this Green Building Checklist and in accordance with the requirements of
the 2013 California Green Building Standards Code as adopted by the City of Cupertino.
Signature of License Professional responsible for CalGreen compliance
Date
Name of License Professional responsible for CalGreen compliance (Please Print) Phone
I Address for License Professional responsible for CalGreen compliance
Page 5 of 5 CalGreen 2014.doc revised 01115114
P
Electronically Filed by William J Sellards and Authenticated at Ca10ERTS.com - 8/8/2014
EleC?ronieally Signed at CalCERTS.com by Diony T Bugay (D.T. Bugay Architecture, inc.) 8/9/2014
'PERFORMANCE CERTIFICATE: Residential Part 1 of 5
CF-1 R
Project blame
Gary & Paula Yung
Building Type ® Single Family ❑ Addition Alone
0 Multi Family ® Existing+ Addition/Alteration
Date
81612014
Project Address
11205 Mount Crest Place Cupertino
California Energy Climate Zone
CA Climate Zone 04
Total Cond. Floor Area
3,912
Addition
974
# of Stories
2
FIELD INSPECTION ENERGY CHECKLIST
® Yes ® No HERS Measures -- If Yes, A CF-4R must be provided per Part 2 of 5 of this form.
® Yes ®fro Special Features -- If Yes, see Part 2 of 5 of this form for details.
INSULATION
Construction Type
Area Special
Cavity ft) Features see Part 2 of 5
Status
wall wood Framed
R-11 2,063
Existing
Door Opaque Door
None 133
Existing
Floor wood Framed w/Crawl Space
None 1,637
Existing
Roof wood Framed Attic
R-19 1,637
Existing
Wall wood Framed
R713 §25
New
Door Opaque Door
None
Floor wood Framed w/Crawl Space
R-19 9 4'V§§
V61w,
Roof wood Framed Attic
R-30 97 0
New
FENESTRATION U- QExterio,
Orientation Area 2Factor SFiGC OverhangSidefins Shades ft
Status
Right (NlAJ 75.0 0.710
0.73 2.0 none Bug Screen
ExtiGng
Front (NE) 135.0 0.710 <.,. -;
..Q.73x„ 2,0 ,, ,none Bug, Screen ,r ,, „ :..Existing
Left (SE). `ry 60.0 0.710
&731 2.0' none"' " ` ;Bug Sc►eeir
Existing
Left (SE°)� A-57.0 0.710
ll
0 73 , . none : none ,* 4, . Bug Screep,i ..
Existing
Front (Atfr).# . - ..12.0G710
07 1 noire .Bug Screen n Extstirig
Rear (SIN)" s.' 2.0 0:710
0 79" ° I Bug Screen "" 'Existing
Rear (SIM 120.0 0.710
,. z. .•..
0.73 10.0 nori Scre
Existing
Left (SE) 20.0 0.710
0.73 none nn-- S , en
Removed
Right (NIA) 39.0 0.710
0.73 none none Bug Sc
%Rsting
Left (SE) 96.0 0.390
0.37 10.0 none Bug Screen
New
Front (NE) 96,0 0.390
0.37 10.0 none Bug Screen
New
HVAC SYSTEMS
Ot . Heating Min. Eff
Coolin Min. Eff Thermostat
Status
1 Central Furnace 80% AFUE
Packaged Air Condition 13.0 SEER Setback
Altered
HVAC DISTRIBUTION
Location HeaUng
Duct
Coolin Duct Location R-Value
Status
HVAC System Ducted
Ducted Attic, Ceiling Ins, vented 8.0
Altered
�
WATER HEATING�¢, � IIiN1�C
eyi �ti. Building De art mer
Qty. Type Gallons Min. EffDistrib tion Status
1 Instant Gas 0
0.84 `yKtCiierr`:pipe Ind n �
Altered
REVIEWED F010, CODE COMPI 14"IC6
Ene Pro5.1 by Ene Soft User Number 7824
RunCode:2014-08-06T15:18:32 ID: 14-140-
Page 1 of9
Reg: 214-NO07150SA-000000000-0000 Registration Date/Time: 2014/08/08 16:00:54 HERS Provider: CalCERTS, Inc
0
Electronically Filed by William J Sellards and Authenticated at CalCERTS.com - 8/8/2014
Electronically Signed at CaICERTS.com by Diony T Bugay (D.T. Bugay Architecture, Inc.) 8/9/2014
PERFORMANCE CERTIFICATE: Residential Part 1 of 5
CF-'I R
Project Name
Daly Paula Yung
Building Type m Single Family ❑ Addition Alone
❑ Multi Family ® Existing+ Addition/Alteration
Date
81&2014
Project Address
11205 Mount Crest Place Cupertino
California Energy Climate Zone
CA Climate Zone 04
Total Cond. Floor Area
3,912
Addition
974
# of Stories
2
FIELD INSPECTION ENERGY CHECKLIST
® Yes ® No HERS Measures -- If Yes, A CF-4R must be provided per Part 2 of 5 of this form.
® Yes El No Special Features -- If Yes, see Part 2 of 5 of this form for details.
INSULATION Area Special
Construction Type Cavit Features see Part 2 of 5 Status
Floor Wood Framed w/o Crawl Space None 1,301 Existing
FENESTRATION U- Exterior
Orientation Area -Factor SHCiC Overhang Sidefins Shades Status
Rear (SVI9 24.0 0.390 0.30 none none Bug Screen
New
Right (NIA9 31.5 0.390- Q.30 R hone ug Sheen
New
Rear (SLV 70.0 0 �10 0.73 a2 0 , e epee dug Scre_e._ n� ._
Existing
Rear S' /'4 0 ,0. 10 0.73 t' F ;- "�' ,,
( - �Q: none _"Pug screen
Existing,
HVAC SYSTEMS
GR . Heating Min. Eff Qoolling Min. Eff Thermostat Status
HVAC DISTRIBUTION Duct
Location Heating Cooling Duct Location R-Value Status
WATER HEATING
Cat . Type Gaoi®ns Mine Eff Distribution Status
Ene Pro 5.1 b Ene Soft User Number: 7824 RunCode: 2014-08-06T15:18:32 ID: 14-140
Page 2 of 9
Reg: 214-N007150SA-000000000-0000 Registration Date/Time: 2014/08/08 16:00:54 HERS Provider: CalCERTS, Inc
Electronically Filed by William J Sellards and Authenticated at CalCERTS.com - 8/8/2014
Electronically Signed at Ca10ERTS.com by Diony T Bugay (D.T. Bugay Architecture, Inc.) 8/9/2014
PERIFOHNIANC E CEH)1F1]CQ7E: HeWenRlid Part 2 of 5) CIF-1 R
Project Name
Gary & Paula Yung
Building Type ® Single Family ❑ Addition Alone
1 ❑ Multi Family ® Existing+ Addition/Alteration
Date
1 81612014
SPECIALS FEATURES IIMSPEC T1100 H CHECKLIST
The enforcement agency should pay special attention to the items specified in this checklist. These items require special written
justification and documentation, and special verification to be used with the performance approach. The enforcement agency
determines the adequacy of the justification, and may reject a building or design that otherwise complies based on the adequacy of
the special justification and documentation submitted.
r., T it
Y.� pm+, k _1
M
U Il E R E /(�,�\
- �'��4F8C�W�O�
", na t .i y. , M4'9 s`� .r �:�1�.
Items in tf�t SeCtl n req Jre field tetungan�Ugrrt icatfp'byceEf,,edlIER Rated The Insectormus receive a
com leted CF=4R form for each of the measures` listed below for finai to be even.
The HNAC System HVAC System incorporates HERS verified Duct Leakage. HERS field verification and diagnostic testing is required to verify that
duct leakage meets the specified criteria.
Erie Pro 5.1 bv EnemvSoft User Number. 7824 RunCode: 2014-08-06T15:18:32 ID: 14-140 Pa e 3 of 9
Reg: 214-N0071505A-000000000-0000 Registration Date/Time: 2014/08/08 16:00:54 HERS Provider: Ca10ERTS, Inc
Electronically Filed by William J Sellards and Authenticated at Ca10ERTS.com - 8/8/2014
Electronically Signed at Ca10ERTS.com by Diony T Sugay (D.T. Sugay Architecture, Inc.) 8/9/2014
PERFORMANCE CERTIFICATE-. Residential Part 3 of 5) CF-1 R
Project Name
Building Type ® Single Family ❑ Addition Alone
Date
Gary & Paula Yung
1 ❑ Multi Family 10 Existing+ Addition/Alteration
8/6/2014
ANNUAL ENERGY USE SUMMARY
Standard Proposed Margin
TDV kBtu/ft2- r
Space Heating 49.43 40.90 6,52
Space Cooling 16.49 12.63 3.66
Fans 9.66 7.95 1.71
Domestic Hot Water 11.06 7.46 3.60
Pumps 0.00 0.00 0.00
7Wags 86.64 68.95 17.70
Percent Setter Than Standard. 20.4 %
BUILDING COMPLIES - HERS VERIFICATION REQUIRED
Fenestration
Building Front Orientation: (NE) 25deg Ext. Walls/Roof Wall Area Area
Number of Dwelling Units: 1.00 (NE) 843 243
Fuel Available at Site: Natural Gas (SE) 1,098 213
Raised Floor Area: 3,912 (SVi9 954 271
Slab on Grade Area: 0 (NVl9 1,039 146
Average Ceiling Height: 6.2 Roof 2,611 0
Fenestration Average U-Factor: 0•62 TOTAL: 673
Average SHGC: 0.62 Fenestration/CFA Ratio: 22.3 %
REMARKS
The listed components are minimums and any items) that exceed the requirements can be substituted.
M
The HVAgsAtem(s) lifted on any "existingladdifion/alteratrontir thrs 1" Y4 rep�;is foi fepence only, andjdoes not kessarily reflect user needs/or
comfort 1,",A headhg/coodn contr pr w l igner is to be i ansulted for eX cfl llges, or , syste a installed . We accept no
respons%bitrty for the desig, of g HV�1C system. This report �s ased, on info' Eron pinvided b ;the -designer` r contractor, and standard practices
of T-24 reporting
STATEMENT OF COMPUANCE
This certificate of compliance lists the building features and specifications needed
to comply with Title 24, Parts tthe Administrative Regulations and Part 6 the
Efficiency Standards of the California Code of Regulations.
The documentation author hereby certifies that the documentation is accurate and complete.
Documentation Author
Company Advanced Residential Engineering
81612014
Address 1632 Santa Clara Street Name William J Sellards 4f—
City/State/ZlpSanta Clara, CA 95050 Phone 408-832-5892 Signed Date
The individual with overall design responsibility hereby certifies that the proposed building design represented in this set
of construction documents is consistent with the other compliance forms and worksheets, with the specifications, and
with any other calculations submitted with this permit application, and recognizes that compliance using duct design,
duct sealing, verification of refrigerant charge, insulation installation quality, and building envelope sealing require
installer testing and certification and field verification by an approved HERS rater.
Designer or Owner (per Business & Professions Code)
Company D.T. Bugay Architecture, Inc
Address 480 Royale Park Dr. Name Diony T. Bugay, A/A
City/State/Zip San Jose, Ca 95136 Phone 408-229-8683 Signed Lice11 nse # Date
Enea7yPro 5.1 by Ene Soft User Number: 7824 RunCode: 2014-08-06T15:18.32 ID: 14-140 Pa e 4 of 9
if
Reg: 214-NO07150SA-000000000-0000 Registration Date/Time: 2014/08/08 16:00:54 HERS Provider: CalCERTS, Inc
Electronically Filed by William J Sellards and Authenticated at CalCERTS.com - 8/8/2014
Electronically Signed at Ca10ERTS.com by Diony T Bugay (D.T. Bugay Architecture, Inc.) 8/9/2014
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE: Residential (Part 4 of 5) CF-1 R
Project Name
Gary & Paula Yung
Building Type ® Single Family ❑ Addition Alone
❑Multi Family ®Existing+ Addition/Alteration
Date
816, 2014
OPAQUE SURFACE DETAILS
Surface
Type
Area
U-
Factor
Insulation
Azm
Tilt
Status
Joint Appendix
4
Location/Comments
CavitylExterior
Frame
Interior
Frame
Wall
48
0.110
R-11
1
251
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 1
Wall
20
0.110
R-11
295
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 1
Wall
19
0.110
R-11
250
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 1
Door
20
0.500
None
250
90
Existing
4.5.1-A4
Zone 1
Wall
140
0.110
R-11
295
90
Existin
4.3.1-A2
Zone 1
Wall
94
0.110
R-11
25
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 1
Wall
135
0.110
R-11
115
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 1
Wall
44
0.110
R-11
25
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 1
Wall
69
0.110
R-11
115
90
Existin
4.3.1-A2
Zone 1
Wall
25
0.110
R-11
25
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 1
Wall
69
0.110
R-11
115
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 1
Wall
24
0.110
R-11
205
90
Existin
4.3.1-A2
Zone 1
Wall
43
0.110
R-11
115
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 1
Wall
9
0.110
R-11
205
90
Existing
4:3.1-A2
Zone 1
Wall
16
0.110
R-11
115
90
Remove
4.3.1-A2
Zone 1
Wall
43
0.110
R-11
205
90
1 Remove
4.3.1-A2
Zone 1
FENESTRATION
SURFACE
DETAILS
ID
Type
Area
U-Factor
SHGC2
Azm
Status
Glazin T e
Location/Comments
1
Window
25.0
0.710
Default
0.73
Default
295
Existing Double
Metal Clear
Zone 1
2
Window
40.0
0.710
Default
0.73
Default
295
Existing Double
Metal Clear
Zone 1
3
Window
25.0
0.710
Default
0.73
Default
25
Existing Double
Metal Clear
Zone 1
4
Window
25.0
0,710
Default
0.73
Default
25
Existing Double
Metal Clear
Zone 1
5
Window,,,. ,.
40.0
0.710
Default
0.73
Default
J15
Existin .. Double
g
Metal, Clear..
Zone 1
6
Window'
" 10.0
0.710
°Default.
il. " 0.73
De1au
25
Existin Double
9
Metal Clear ;'Zone
1
7
Window'
25.0
0.710
1 Default
0.73
DefaUlf•<.
i 15
Existin pvub/e
Mei$l Glear ° 'A,.
-,Zone 1
8
Window
12.0
: '0-710
"
Default
0.73
Defaulf
25
Existing,:, Double
Metal, Clear
Zona 1
9
Window
8;0
,: 0.710
Default _
0.73
Default =�
115
Existing.,,'A Double
Metal Clear ; .
-Zone 1
10
Window
r ,'�16.0
a: 0.7,1'0
Default`":
0.73
Default'
15
Existinv "Double
9
.eta.
Me alf€leari :"
'Zone f.;,,,
11
Window
„; 8,0
0.71,0
Default
,<0;73
Default.,.-
q,„!tS
Existing ;,17oubfa:Metal
Clear , , :="
12
Wndow
12.0
0,710
Default
0.73
Default
205
Existing Double
Metal Clear ' ':
Zone 1
13
Window
120.0
0.710
Default
0.73
Default
205
Existin Double
Metal Clear
Zone 1
14
Window '
20.0
0.710
Default
0.73
Default
115
Removed Double
Metal Clear
Zone 1
15
Wndow
30.0
0.710
Default
0.73
Default
295
Existing Double
Metal Clear
Zone 1
16
Wndow
9.0
0.710
Default
0.73
Default
295
Existing Double
Metal Clear
Zone 1
(1) LI-Factor Type: 116-A = Default Table from Standards, NFRC = Labeled Value
2 SHGC Type: 116•B = Default Table from Standards, NFRC = Labeled Value
EXTERIOR
SHADING DETAILS
ID
Exterior Shade Type
SHGC
Window
Overhanq
Left Fin
Ri ht Fin
H t
Wd
Len
H t
LEA
I RExt
Dist
Len
H t
Dist
Len
H t
1
Bug Screen
0.76
5.0
5.0
2.0
0.1
2.0
2.0
2
Bug Screen
0.76
5.0
8.0
2.0
0.1
2.0
2.0
3
Bug Screen
0.76
5.0
5.0
2.0
0.1
2.0
2.0
4
Bug Screen
0.76
5.0
5.01
2.0
0.1
2.0
2.0
5
Bug Screen
0.76
5.0
8.0
2.0
0.1
2.0
2.0
6
Bug Screen
0.76
4.0
5.0
2.0
0.1
2.0
2.0
7
Bug Screen
0.76
8
Bug Screen
0.76
4.0
3.0
10.0
0.1
10.0
10.0
9
Bug Screen
0.76
10
Bug Screen
0.76
11
Bug Screen
0.76
12
Bug Screen
0.76
13
Bug Screen
0.76
8.0
15.0
10.0
0.1
10.0
10.0
14
Bug Screen
0.76
15
Bug Screen
0.76
16
1 Bug Screen 1
0.7611
Ene Pro 5.1 b Ene Soft User Number. 7824 RunCode: 2014-08-06T15:18:32 ID: 14-140 Page 5 of 9
Reg: 214-N0071505A-000000000-0000 Registration Date/Time: 2014/08/08 16:00:54 HERS Provider: Ca10ERTS, Inc
Electronically Filed by William J Sellards and Authenticated at CalCERTS.com - 8/8/2014
Electronically Signed at CalCERTS.com by Diony T Bugay (D.T. Bugay Architecture, Inc.) 8/9/2014
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE: Residential (Part 4 of 5) CF-'I R.
Project Name
Gary & Paula Yung
Building Ty pe ® Single Family ❑ Addition Alone
❑ Multi Family ® Existing+ Addition/Alteration
Date
81612014
OPAQUE SURFACE DETAILS
Surface
Type
Area
U-
Factor
Insulation
Azm
Tilt
Status
Joint Appendix
4
Location/Comments
Cavity
Exterior
Frame
Interior
Frame
wall
57
0.110
R-11
115
90
Removec
4.3.1-A2
Zone 1
Door
20
0.500
None
115
90
Removec
4.5,1-A4
Zone 1
wall
113
0,110
R-11
205
90
Removec
4.3.1-A2
Zone 1
wall
69
0.110
R-11
295
904EX4ftn
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 1
Wall
122
0.110
R-11
295
004.3.1-A2
Zone 1
Door
18
0.500
None
295
904.5.1-A4
Zone 1
Floor
1,637
0.097
None
0 1804.4.1-A1
Zone 1
Roof
336
0.049
R-19
25
184.2.1-A4
Zone 1
wall
104
0.102
R-13
115
90
4.3.1-A3
Zone 1
Wall
38
0.102
R-13
25
90
New
4.3.1-A3
Zone 1
Wall
180
0.102
R-13
115
90
New
4.3.1-A3
Zone 1
Wag
274
0.102
R-13
205
90
New
4.3.1-A3
Zone 1
Door
21
0.500
None
205
90
New
4.5.1-A4
Zone 1
Wall
231
0.102
R-13
295
90
New
4.3.1-A3
Zone 1
Door
18
0.500
None
295
90
New
4.5.1-A4
Zone 1
Floor
974
0.037
R-19
0 180
New
4.4.1-A4
Zone 1
f�ENESTRATION
SURFACE
DETAILS
ID
Type
Area
U-Factor
SHGC
Azm
Status
Glazing Type
Location/Comments
17
Window
48.0
, 0.3901
NFRC
0.37
NFRC
1 115
New Sierra
Pack Windows & Doors
Zone 1
18
Window
48.0
0.390
NFRC
0.37
NFRC
115
New Sierra
Pacific Windows & Doors
Zone 1
19
Window
96.0
0.390
NFRC
0.37
NFRC
25
New Sierra
Pacific Windows & Doors
Zone 1
20
Window
24.0
0.390
NFRC
0.30
NFRC
205
New Marvin
Clad Casemaster Low E
Zone 1
21
window _.
9.0
0.390
NFRC
0.30
NFRC, ,
2A5
New. Marvin
Clad.CasemasterLow E
Zone 1
22
Window'
7.5
0.390
rNFRC
0.30
NFRC: ;, .
- 295
New ,,, ManFin,C/ad
Casem ' ,,oLowyE
Zone 1
23
Window
7.5
0.390
NFRC
0.30
NFRC
295
New, - Tl
Marvin
Clad GaseniasteC ow E
Zone 1
24
lndow
7.5
.-;0.390
NFRC.
0.30
NFRCe'
I ;. 295
s=Marvin
Newsemaste'
Clad Ca ow E
Zone;,1
25
radow
2Q 0,
.�L�.710�,Default�.
0.73
Defapll�;,„
_ . 25
Exirfil g...�a;,Double
Metal Clear
26
Window
10.0
"
0.710
Default
0.73
Default
, -
295
'Existing , poub/e
Met l Clear:" =Zone
'
27
Wndo�v
25.6
0:710
Default,
0:73
DeFat
� '
r25
Existing "Double�Metal'
clear°.. , �
a
"Z�ine
28
Window �
20.0 �
0.710,
Default`-
: 0.73
Default
"�25
Existing ;r Double,
Metal, Clear ". �`
Zone
29
Window
20.0
0.710
Default
0,73
Default
115
ExistingDouble
Metal Clear
Zone 2
30
Window
20.0
0.710
Default
0.73
Default
205
Existing Double
Metal Clear
Zone 2
31
Window
25.91
0.710
1 Default
11
0.73
Default
205
Existing Double
Metal Clear
Zone 2
32
Window 1
45.01
0.710
1 Default
0 73
1 Default
1 2051
Existing I Double
Metal Clear
Zone 2
(1) U-Factor Type: 116-A = Default Table from Standards, NFRC = Labeled Value
2 SHGC Type: 116.E = Default Table from Standards, NFRC = Labeled Value
EXTERIOR
SHADING DETAILS
FID
Exterior Shade Type
SHGC
Window
Overhanq
Left Fin
Ri ht Fin
Hat I
Wd
Len
Hat
LE
I RExt
Dist
I Len
Hat
Dist
Len
Hat
17
Bug Screen
0.76
8.0
6.0
10.0
0.1
10,01
10.0
18
Bug Screen
0.76
8.0
6.0
10.0
0.1
10.0
10.0
19
Bug Screen
0.76
8.0
12.0
10.0
0.1
10.0
10.0
20
Bug Screen
0.76
21
Bug Screen
0.76
3.0
3.0
2.0
0.1
2.0
2.0
22
Bug Screen
0.76
3.0
2.5
2.01
0.1
2.0
2.0
23
Bug Screen
0.76
3.01
2.5
2.0
0.1
2.0
2.0
24
Bug Screen
0.76
3.01
2.5
2.0
0.1
2.01
2.0
25
Bug Screen
0.76
6.7
3.0
2.0
0.1
2.01
2.0
26
Bug Screen
0.76
5.0
2.0
2.0
0.1
2.01
2.0
27
Bug Screen
0.76
5.0
5.0
2.0
0.1
2.0
2.0
28
Bug Screen
0.76
5.0
4.0
2.0
0.1
2.0
2.0
29
Bug Screen
0.76
6.7
3.0
2.0
0.1
2.0
2.0
30
Bug Screen
0.76
5.0
4.0
2.0
0.1
2.0
2.0
31
Bu Screen
0.76
5.0 1
5.0
2.0
0.1
2.0
2.0
32
JBuq Screen 1
0.76
5.01
9.0
4.0
0.1
4.0
4.0
Ene Pro 5.1 b Ene Soft User Number., 7824 RunCode: 2014-08-06T15:18:32 ID: 14-140 Pie 6 of 9
Reg: 214-N0071505A-000000000-0000 Registration Date/Time: 2014/08/08 16:00:54 HERS Provider: Ca10ERTS, Inc
Electronically Filed by William J Sellards and Authenticated at Ca10ERTS.com - 8/8/2014
Electronically Signed at Ca10ERTS.com by Diony T Bugay (D.T. Bugay Architecture, Inc.) 8/9/2014
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Residential Part 4 of 5 CF-1 R
Project Name
Gary & Paula Yung
Building Type ® Single Family ❑ Addition Alone
❑ Multi Family ® Existing+ Addition/Alteration
Date
8/6/2014
OPAQUE SURFACE DETAILS
Surface
Type
Area
U
Factor
Insulation
Azm
Tilt
Status
Joint Appendix
4
Location/Comments
Cavity
Exterior
Frame
Interior
Frame
Roof
974
0.031
R-30
115
18
New
4.2.1-A20
Zone 1
wall
43
0.110
R-11
25
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 2
Door
20
0.500
None
25
90
Existing
4.5.1-A4
Zone 2
Way
18
0.110
R-11
2501
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 2
Door
18
0.500
None
1
250
90
Existing
4.5.1-A4
Zone 2
Way
71
0.110
R-11
295
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 2
wall
156
0.110
R-11
25
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 2
wall
56
0.110
R-11
115
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 2
Door
20
0.500
None
115
90
Exisnq
4.5.1-A4
Zone 2
Way
27
0.110
R-11
25
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 2
Door
18
0.500
None
25
90
Existing
4.5.1-A4
Zone 2
Well
20
0.110
R-11
295
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 2
Wall
56
0.110
R-11
25
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 2
wall
176
0.110
R-11
115
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 2
wall
32
6. 110
R-11
0 90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 2
Wall
9
0.110
R-11
205
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 2
FENESTRATION
SURFACE
DETAILS
ID
Type
Area
U-Factor
SHGC
Azm
Status
Glazing Type
Location/Comments
33
Window
25.0
0.710
Default
0.73
Default
205
Existing Double
Metal Clear
Zone 2
K .
A
r
4
- .g$ .�{
ram,`
(1) U-Factor Type: 116-A,= Default Table from Standards, NFRC = Labeled Value
2 SHGC Type: 116-B = Default Table from Standards, NFRC = Labeled Value
(EXTERIOR SHADING DETAILS
ID
Exterior Shade Type
SHGC
Window
Ove hang
Left Fin
Right Fin
H t
Wd
Len
I H t
LExt
RExt
Dist
Len
H t
Dist I
Len
H t
33
Bug Screen
0.76
5.0
5.0
2.01
0.1
2.0
2.0
Ene Pro 'iyEnerqySoft User Number. 7824 RunCode: 2014-08-06T15:18:32 ID: 14-140 Page 7 of 9
Reg: 214-N0071505A-000000000-0000 Registration Date/Time: 2014/08/08 16:00:54 HERS Provider: CalCERTS, Inc
Electronically Filed by William J Sellards and Authenticated at CaICERTS.com - 8/8/2014
Electronically Signed at Ca10ERTS.com by Diony T Bugay (D.T. Bugay Architecture, Inc.) 8/9/2014
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE- Residential (Part 4 of 5) CF-'I R
Project Name
Gary & Paula Yung
Building Type ® Single Family ❑ Addition Alone
❑ Multi Family ® Existing+ Addition/Alteration
I Date
8/6/2014
OPAQUE SURFACE
DETAILS
Surface
Type
Area
U-
Factor
Insulation
Azm
Tilt
Status
Joint Appendix
4
Location/Comments
Cavit
Exterior
Frame
Interior
Frame
Wall
90
0.110
R-11
205
90
Existing4.3.1-A2
Zone 2
Wall
9
0.110
R-11
295
90
Existing4.3.1-A2
Zone 2
Wall
45
0.110
R-11
205
90
Existing4.3.1-A2
Zone 2
Wall
28
0.110
R-11
295
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 2
Door
20
0.500
1 None
295
90
Existing
4.5.1-A4
Zone 2
Wall
40
0.110
R-11
205
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 2
Wall
33
0.110
R-11
115
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 2
Wall
96
0,110
R-11
205
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 2
Wall
128
0.110
R-11
295
90
Existing
4.3.1-A2
Zone 2
Floor
1,301
0.238
None
0 180
Existing
4.4.2-A 1
Zone 2
Roof
1,301
0.049
R-19
25
18
Existing
4.2.1-A4
Zone 2
FENESTRATION
SURFACE
DETAILS
ID
Type
Area
U-Factor
S C4
Azm
Status
Glazing Type
Location/Comments
:w ., +':.
3',
� '"
i
.w
p
0. a
'
�s� •
:fir,- ,
-. ,
(1) U-Factor Type: 116-A = Default Table from Standards, NFRC = Labeled Value
2 SHGC Type: 116-13 = Default Table from Standards, NFRC = Labeled Value
EXTERIOR
SHADING DETAILS
ID
Exterior Shade Type
SHGC
Window
Ove hang
Left Fin
Ri ht Fin
H t
Wd
Len
H t
LExt
RExt
Dist
I Len
H t
Dist
I Len
H t
11 EqqVPro 5.1 Py Eoe Soft User Number. 7824 RunCode: 2014-08-06T15:18:32 /D: 14-140 Page 8 of 9
Reg: 214-N0071505A-000000000-0000 Registration Date/Time: 2014/08/08 16:00:54 HERS Provider: Ca10ERTS, Inc
Electronically Filed by William J Sellards and Authenticated at CalCERTS.com - 8/8/2014
Electronically Signed at CalCERTS.com by Diony T Bugay (D.T. Bugay Architecture, Inc.) 8/9/2014
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE: Residential Part 5 of 5 CF-1 R.
Project Name
Gary & Paula Yung
Building Type ❑ Single Family ❑ Addition Alone
❑ Multi Family 10 Existing+ Addition/Alteration
Date
81612014
BUILDING ZONE INFORMATION
System Name
Zone Name
Floor Area
Volume
Year Built
New
Existinq
Altered I
Removed
HVAC System Existing
1 st floor
1,637
13,096
1984
Addition
Istfloor
974
8,766
2nd
existing floor
1,301
10,408
1984
Totals
974
2,938
0
0
HVAC SYSTEMS
System Name
Ot .
Heating T e
Min. Eff.
Cooling Type
Min. Eff.
Thermostat Type
Status
HVAC System
1
Central Furnace
80% AFUE
Packaged Air Conditione
13.0 SEER
Setback
Altered
re -altered for above
Central Furnace
78% AFUE
Split Air Conditioner
13.0 SEER
Setback
�ISTR...
s.a
.Y
HVAro ,UTIO.N.mwrl��utit`..�e.b
S stem Name
`'Heatin
Cooliri `
'` " Duct Location'
`� R-Value
ddiiJ 2}'9
Tested?
Status
HVAC System . Ducted
Ducted
Attic, Ceiling Ins, vented
8.o
m
Altered
pre-aftered,for above, Ducted
Ducted
Attic, Ceiling Ins, vented
4.0
❑
WATER HEATING SYSTEMS
S stem Name
Qty.
Type
Distribution
Rated
Input
Btuh
Tank
Cap.
al
Energy
Factor
or RE
Standby
Loss or
Pilot
Ext.
Tank
Insul. R-
Value
Status
Noritz America Corp. N-05
1
Instant Gas Kitchen
Pipe Ins
140,000
0
0.84
n/a
n/a
Altered
Default Gas Prior to 1999
1 1
Small Gas pre
-altered for Above 1
28,0001
50
0.53 1
n/a
n/a
MULTI -FAMILY WATER
HEATING
DETAILS
HYDRONIC
HEATING
SYSTEM
PIPING
Control
Hot Water Piping Length
ft
0
a
a —
System Name
Pipe
Length
Pipe
Diameter
Insul.
Thick.
Qty.
HP
Plenum
Outside
Buried
Ene Pro 5.1 b Ene SoR User Number. 7824 RunCode: 2014-08-06T15:18:32 ID: 14-140 Page 9 of 9
Reg: 214-N0071505A-000000000-0000 Registration Date/Time: 2014/08/08 16:00:54 HERS Provider: Ca10ERTS, Inc
STATEMENT OF SPEUAL INSPECTMNS, 2013 CBC
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT - BUILDING DIVISION RECEIVED
ALBERT SALVADOR, P.E., C.B.O., BUILDING OFFICIAL
10300 TORRE AVENUE - CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 AUG 0 4 20W
(408) 777-3228 - FAX (408) 777-3333 - buildingCcDcupertino.org
SITE
ADDRESS
APN
Owner........ l"................. ...............................�.............................
!...I.. .. .........
Address..�....,.\.�...............
.................
Contractor�......................................................................................
Address...........................................................................................................
..
.................
Phone
Zip...................... Phone
City/St....1,/..)!......... ...l`!............. Zip....... .. ....IV41
... .....................
City/St.................................................
........................
Applicant..s�1.��. ..............'.... .. ..........I
111111 . ...........�................................
Address .................. ........Address..
J .. r...........
Engineer/Arrcchitect.a .................q o /_ 4.1...�?!.�. a ......
.........
LrL.(.....t...7Y .�fJ� 7v:l...!.�
City/St..... .....��...........�lp ........ .... ....
..... Phone "t�
City/St .... .Y.d�IQ.......
.?Zip...l`.�t!V Phone!f1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This "STATEMENT OF SPECIAL INSPECTIONS" is submitted in fulfillment of the requirements of CBC Sections 1704 and 1705. This
form is structured after and used by permission from the Structural Engineer Association of Northern California's (SEAONC) mode
statement of Special Inspections. Also, included with this form is the following:
❑ "LIST OF SPECIAL INSPECTION AGENCIES (page 2). A list of testing agencies and other special inspectors that will be
retained to conduct the tests and inspections for this project
❑ "SCHEDULE OF SPECIAL INSPECTION" (page 3 — 6). The Schedule of Special Inspections summarizes the Special
Inspections and tests required. Special Inspectors will refer to the approved plans and specifications for detailed special
inspection requirements. Any additional tests and inspections required by the approved plans and specifications shall also
be performed.
Special Inspections and Testing will be performed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications, this statement and CBC
Sections 1704, 1705, 1706, 1707, and 1708. Interim repo II srkr"T'I ®the Building Official and the Registered Design
Professional in Responsible Charge1n79c—cq ar with C ecti
f3ullGir, bG� F>i
A Final Report of Special Inspections, docuNkting required Special Inspections, testing and correction of any discrepancies noted in
the inspections shall be submittedi rior to iss tuance f a C rtffica `� ,f Use and Occupancy (Section 1704.1.2). The Final Report will
document: `` ,1
o Required special inspectidris'. �~ f �+�L coIANCE
• Correction of discrepancieskggteo in/rfl$pdc� d3s.
//ffow
The Owner recognizes his or her obligatioixty�edg4tQ'the`Constuction complies with the approv9q pe?mit documents and to
implement this program of special inspections. In partial fulfillment of these obligations, the Owner will retain and directly pay for the
Special Inspections as required in CBC Section 1704.1.
This plan has been developed with the understanding that the Building Official will: ;
• Review and approve the qualifications of the Special Inspectors who will perform ih' ins etlons:
Monitor special inspection activities on the job site to assure that the Special Ins`pe t�quallfed and are, performi i�'!#t it
duties as called for in this Statement of Special Inspection. \viJ j u
• Review submitted inspection reports.
• Perform inspections as required by the local building code. '
I have read and agree to comply with the terms and conditions of this statement
Prepared By: /
Project ❑ Engineer C3 Architect
�
``'
C.
�..........�......
Registered D6si n Professional in Charge
Signature ... .. ............
...................................... Lic.# .�1 ��2�.,1............
Date:
Owner
lNamme—e:
eur�a
Sina ure ...............
.......Own.............................................................
Date:.. ...............
Inspection Agency / Inspector Name:
� f f
����� � �O11�
Signature .................... ....
d
.............................. Lic.#........ ...... ..... ............Date:.......
2
..............
Building Official or designee:
Signature .. ..........V
l-k-
Date:... �. �I
J
Im
SpeciahispectionForm 2012.doc revised 09106112
UST OF SPEUAL NSPECTION AGENCIES
APPROVAL OF SPECIAL INSPECTORS:
Each special inspection agency, testing facility, and special inspector shall be recognized by the Building Official prior to performing any
duties. Special Inspection agency's listed on this form must be pre -approved and listed on Cupertino's approved Special Inspector's list.
Special inspectors shall carry approved identification when performing the functions of a special inspector. Identification cards shall
follow the criteria set by the California Council of Testing and Inspection Agencies. No personnel changes shall be made without first
obtaining the approval of the Building Official. Any unauthorized personnel changes may result in a "Stop Work Order' and possible
permit revocation. To be pre- approved by the City of Cupertino, refer to the SPECIAL INSPECTION CRITERIA handout. Please allow
two weeks to complete the application process.
The following are the testinq and special inspection aqencies that will be retained to conduct tests and inspection on this project:
EXPERTISE
FIRM / INSPECTOR INFORMATION `
1. Special Inspection (except for
Firm........!��..................................................
Addr......................................................................................
...
geotechnical)
City ..............................................
.................. State .......................Zi
Telephone......................................
Fax ............................................
Email .........................................................
2. Material Testing
Firm.....................................................................Addr.........................................................................................
City..........................................................................................................
State .......................Zip
......................
Telephone..... ... ......................... ...... Fax ........................
........... ........ Email.........................................................
3. Geotechnical Inspections
Firm.....................................................................Addr.........................................................................................
City..........................................................................................................
State .......................Zip
......................
Telephone......................................
Fax ............................................
Email.........................................................
4. Other:
Firm.....................................................................Addr.........................................................................................
City..........................................................................................................
State .......................Zip
......................
Telephone......................................
Fax ............................................
Email .........................................................
'All agencies specified on this form must be pre -approved and listed on the City of Cupertino's Approved Special Inspector's List.
SEISMIC REQUIREMENTS (Section 1705.3.6)
Description of seismic -force -resisting system and designated seismic systems subject to special inspections as per Section 1705.3:
t
The extent of the seismic -force -resisting system is defined in more detail in the construction documents.
WIND REQUIREMENTS Section 1705.4.1
Description of main wind -force -resisting system and designated wind resisting components subject to special inspections in accordance with Section
1705.4.2:
The extent of the main wind -force -resisting system and wind resisting components is defined in more detail in the construction documents.
SpeciahispectionForin_2012.doc revised 09106112
SCHIEDULE OF SPEMAlL IINSPECTION
SITE APN BP#
ADDRESS
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Notation Used in Table:
Column headers:
C Indicates continuous inspection is required.
P Indicates periodic inspections are required. The notes and/or contract documents should clarify.
Box entries:
X Is placed in the appropriate column to denote either "C" continuous or "P" periodic inspections.
--- Denotes an activity that is either a one-time activity or one whose frequency is defined in some other
manner.
Additional detail regarding inspections and tests are provided in the project specifications or notes on the drawings.
VERIFICATION AND INSPECTION C P REFERENCED IBC REFERENCE
STANDARD
INSPECTION OF FABRICATORS
1. ❑ Inspect fabricator's fabrication and quality control --- 1704.3
procedures.
INSPECTION OF STEEL
1. Material verification of high -strength bolts, nuts and washers.
❑ Identification marking to conform to ASTM stds
AISC 360,
specified in the approved construction documents.
X
Section AU and
applicable ASTM
material standards
❑ Inspect fabricator's fabrication and quality control
X
procedures.
---
2. Inspection of high -strength bolting:
❑ Snug -tight joints.
---
X
❑ Pretensioned and slip -critical joints using turn -of -nut
with matchmarking, twist -off bolt or direct tension
---
X
AISC 360,
indicator methods of installation.
1704.3.3
Section M2.5
❑ Pretensioned and slip -critical joints using turn -of -nut
without matchmarking or calibrated wrench methods
X
—
of installation.
3. Material verification of structural steel and cold -formed steel deck.
❑ For structural steel, identification markings to conform
X
AISC 360,
to AISC 360.
Section M2.5
❑ For other steel, identification markings to conform to
Applicable ASTM
ASTM standards specified in the approved
---
X
material standards
construction documents.
❑ Manufacturer's certified test reports.
---
X
Specia(nspectionFonn_2012.doc revised 09106112
VERIFICATION AND INSPECTION
C
P
REFERENCED
STANDARD
IBC
REFERENCE
4. Material verification of weld filler materials:
❑ Identification marking to conform to AWS specification
in the approved construction documents.
-
X
AISC 360,
Section A3.5 and
applicable AWS A5
documents
❑ Manufacturer's certificate of compliance required.
---
X
---
---
5. Inspection of welding:
a. Structural steel and cold -formed steel deck:
❑ Complete and partial joint penetration groove welds.
X
---
AWS D1.1
1704.3.1
❑ Multipass fillet welds.
X
---
❑ Single -pass fillet welds > 5/16"
X
---
❑ Plug and slot welds.
X
---
❑ Single -pass fillet welds <= 5/16"
--
X
❑ Floor and roof deck welds.
--
X
AWS D1.3
b. Reinforcing steel:
❑ Verification of weldability of reinforcing steel other than
ASTM A 706.
_-
X
AWS D1.4 ACI 318:
Section 3.5.2
❑ Reinforcing steel resisting flexural and axial forces in
intermediate and special moment frames, and
boundary elements of special structural walls of
concrete and shear reinforcement.
X
__
❑ Shear reinforcement.
X
---
❑ Other reinforcing steel.
---
X
6. Inspection of steel frame joints details for compliance:
❑ Details such as bracing and stiffening.
---
X
---
1704.3.2
❑ Member locations.
---
X
❑ Application of joint details at each connection.
---
X
VERIFICATION AND INSPECTION
C
P
REFERENCED
STANDARD
IBC
REFERENCE
INSPECTION OF WELDING
1. ❑ Welded studs when used for structural diaphragms.
--
X
---
1704.3
2. ❑ Welding of cold -formed steel framing members.
--
X
3. ❑ Welding of stairs and railing systems.
---
X
SpecialnspectionForm_2012.doc revised 09106112
VERIFICATION AND INSPECTION
C
p
REFERENCED
STANDARD
IBC
REFERENCE
INSPECTION OF CONCRETE
1. ❑ Inspection of reinforcing steel, including prestressing
---
X
ACI 318: 3.5, 7.1-7.7
1913.4
tendons and placement.
2. ❑ Inspection of reinforcing steel welding in accordance
AWS D1.4 ACI 318:
with Table 1704.3 Item 5b.
-
—
3.5.2
- -
3. ❑ Inspection of bolts to be installed in concrete prior to
and during placement of concrete where allowable
X
-
ACI 318: 8.1.3,
1911 5 1912.1
loads have been increased or where strength design
21.2.8
is used.
4. ❑ Inspection of anchors installed in hardened concrete.
---
X
ACI 318:
1912.1
5. ❑ Verifying use of required design mix.
1904.2.2,1913.2,
_--
X
ACI 318:
1913.3
6. ❑ At time fresh concrete is sampled to fabricate
ASTM C 172
specimens for strength tests, perform slump and air
X
---
ASTM C 31
1913.10
content tests and determine the temperature of the
concrete.
ACI 318: 5.6, 5.8
7. ❑ Inspection of concrete and shotcrete placement for
X
---
ACI 318: 5.9, 5.10
1913.6, 1913.7,
proper application techniques.
1913.8
8. ❑ Inspection for maintenance of specified curing
---
X
ACI 318: 5.11-5.13
1913.9
temperature and techniques.
9. Inspection of prestressed concrete:
❑ Application of prestressing forces.
X
---
ACI 318: 18.20
❑ Grouting of bonded prestressing tendons in the
X
---
ACI 318: 18.18.4
---
seismic force -resisting system.
10. ❑ Erection of precast concrete members.
---
X
ACI 318: Ch. 16
--
11. ❑ Verification of in -situ concrete strength, prior to
stressing of tendons in posttensioned concrete and
_--
X
ACI 318: 6.2
--
prior to removal of shores and forms from beams and
structural slabs.
12. ❑ Inspect formwork for shape, location, and dimensions
X
ACI 318: 6.6.1
--
of the concrete member being formed.
13. ❑ Bolts Installed in Existing Masonry or Concrete
❑ Direct tension testing of existing anchors.
---
X
See ICC ES Reports form special
inspection requirements for proprietary
products
❑ Direct tension testing of new bolts.
—
X
❑ Torque testing of new bolts.
—
X
❑ Prequalification test for bolts and other types of
anchors.
__-
X
14. ❑ Other:
SpecialnspectionForm_2012.doc revised 09106112
REFERENCE FOR CRITERIA
VERIFICATION AND INSPECTION
C
P
IBC
TMS 402/ACI
TMS 402/ACI
SECTION
530/ASCE 5
530/ASCE 6
INSPECTION OF LEVEL 1 MASONRY
1. ❑ Compliance with required inspection provisions of
the construction documents and the approved
---
X
---
---
Art. 1.5
submittals shall be verified.
2. ❑ Verification of f m and f AAc prior to construction
-__
X
---
--
Art. 1.4B
except where specifically exempted by this code.
3. ❑ Verification of slump flow and VSI as delivered to
X
---
---
---
Art. 1.513.1.b.3
the site for self consolidating grout.
4. As masonry construction begins, the following shall be verified to ensure compliance:
❑ Proportions of site -prepared mortar.
--
X
---
---
Art. 2.6A
❑ Construction of mortar joints.
--
X
--
---
Art.3.313
❑ Location of reinforcement, connectors,
X
---
---
Art. 3.4, 3.6A
prestressing tendons, and anchorages.
❑ Prestressing technique.
---
X
--
---
Art. 3.613
❑ Grade and size of prestressing tendons and
"'
X
---
---
Art. 2.4B, 2.4H
anchorages.
5. During construction the inspection program shall verify:
❑ Size and location of structural elements.
---
X
--
---
Art. 3.3F
❑ Type, size, and location of anchors, including
Sec. 1.2.2(e),
other details of anchorage of masonry to
---
X
""
1.16.1
structural members, frames or other construction.
❑ Specified size, grade, and type of reinforcement,
anchor bolts, prestressing tendons and
---
X
---
Sec. 1.15
Art. 2.4, 3.4
anchorages.
❑ Welding of reinforcing bars.
X
---
---
---
❑ Preparation, construction and protection of
masonry during cold weather (temperature below
X
Sec. 2104.3,
---
Art. 1.8C, 1.81D
40 degrees F) or hot weather (temperature above
2104.4
90 degrees F).
❑ Application and measurement of prestressing
X
___
___
-__
Art. 3.613
force.
6. Prior to grouting the following shall be verified to ensure compliance:
1D Grout space is clean.
--
X
--
---
Art. 3.21D
❑ Placement of reinforcement and connectors and
___
X
--
Sec. 1.3
Art. 3.4
prestressing tendons and anchorages.
❑ Proportions of site -prepared grout and
__-
X
--
---
Art. 2.613
prestressing grout for bonded tendons.
❑ Construction of mortar joints.
---
X
---
---
Art. 3.313
7. Grout placement:
❑ Grout placement shall be verified ensure
X
___
__
__
Art. 3.5
compliance.
❑ Observe grouting of prestressing bonded
X
---
---
---
Art 3.6C
tendons.
SpecialnspectionForm_2012.doc revised 09106112
REFERENCE FOR CRITERIA
VERIFICATION AND INSPECTION
C
P
IBC
TIMS 402/ACI
TMS 402/ACI
SECTION
530/ASCE 5
530/ASCE 6
8. ❑ Preparation of any required grout specimens,
Sec.
mortar specimens, and/or prisms shall be
---
X
2105.2.2,
---
Art. 1.4
observed.
2105.3
INSPECTION OF LEVEL 2 MASONRY
1. ❑ Compliance with required inspection provisions
of the construction documents and the approved
---
X
---
---
Art. 1.5
submittals.
2. ❑ Verification of f, and fAAc prior to construction
and for every 5,000 square feet during
---
X
---
---
Art. 1.46
construction.
3. ❑ Verification of proportions of materials in
premixed or preblended mortar and grout as
---
X
---
--
Art. 1.513
delivered to the site.
4. ❑ Verification of slump flow and VSI as delivered to
X
---
---
---
Art. 1.513.1.b.3
the site for self consolidating rout.
5. The following shall be verified to ensure compliance:
❑ Proportions of site -prepared mortar, grout, and
---
X
---
---
Art. 2.6A
prestressing grout for bonded tendons.
❑ Placement of masonry units and construction of
_--
X
---
---
Art. 3.313
mortar joints.
❑ Placement of reinforcement, connectors and
_-_
X
__
Sec. 1.15
Art. 3.4, 3.6A
prestressing tendons and anchorages.
❑ Grout space prior to grouting.
X
---
--
---
Art. 3.21D
❑ Placement of grout.
X
---
---
---
Art. 3.5
❑ Placement of prestressing grout.
X
---
---
---
Art. 3.6C
❑ Size and location of structural elements.
---
X
---
---
Art. 3.3F
❑ Type, size, and location of anchors, including
other details of anchorage of masonry to
X
---
--
Sec.1.2.2(e)
--
structural members, frames and other
construction.
❑ Specified size, grade, and type of reinforcement,
anchor bolts, prestressing tendons and
---
X
--
Sec. 1.15
Art. 2.4, 3.4
anchorages.
❑ Welding of reinforcing bars.
X
-_-
---
Sec. 2.1.9.7.2,
--
3.3.3.4 (b)
❑ Preparation, construction, and protection of
masonry during cold weather (temperature below
X
Sec. 2104.3,
Art. 1.8C, 1.81D
40 degrees F) or hot weather (temperature above
2104.4
90 degrees F).
❑ Application and measurement of prestressing
X
---
---
---
Art. 3.6B
force.
6. ❑ Preparation of any required grout specimens,
Sec.
mortar specimens, and/or prisms shall be
X
---
2105.2.2,
--
Art. 1.4
observed.
2105.3
SpeciuhispectionForm_2012.doc revised 09106112
VERIFICATION AND INSPECTION
C
P
REFERENCED
STANDARD
IBC
REFERENCE
INSPECTION OF WOOD
1. ❑ Inspect prefabricated wood structural elements and
assemblies in accordance with Section 1704.2.
---
---
---
1704.6
2. ❑ Inspect site built assemblies.
---
---
3. Inspect high -load diaphragms:
❑ Verify grade and thickness of sheathing.
---
---
❑ Verify nominal size of framing members at adjoining
panel edges.
--
1704.6.1
❑ Verify nail or staple diameter and length,
---
---
❑ Verify number of fastener lines,
---
---
❑ Verify spacing between fasteners in each line and at
edge margins.
4. ❑ Metal -plate -connected wood trusses spanning 60 feet
or greater: Verify temporary installation
restraint/bracing and the permanent individual truss
---
X
---
1704.6.2
member bracing are installed in accordance with the
approved truss submittal package.
REQUIRED VERIFICATION AND INSPECTION OF SOIL
1. ❑ Verify materials below footings are adequate to
achieve the desired bearing capacity.
---
X
2. ❑ Verify excavations are extended to proper depth and
have reached proper material.
--
X
3. ❑ Perform classification and testing of compacted fill
materials.
X
---
Table 1704.7
4. ❑ Verify use of proper materials, densities and lift
thicknesses during placement and compaction of
X
---
compacted fill.
5. ❑ Prior to placement of compacted fill, observe subgrade
and verify that site has been prepared properly.
---
X
REQUIRED VERIFICATION AND INSPECTION OF DEEP DRIVEN FOUNDATION ELEMENTS
1. ❑ Verify element materials, sizes and lengths comply
X
---
with the requirements.
2. ❑ Determine capacities of test elements and conduct
X
-_
additional load tests, as required.
3. ❑ Observe driving operations and maintain complete
X
---
and accurate records for each element.
4. ❑ Verify locations of piles and their plumbness, confirm
type and size of hammer, record number of blows per
---
Table 1704.8
foot of penetration, determine required penetrations to
X
--
achieve design capacity, record tip and butt elevations
and document any damage to foundation element.
5. ❑ For steel elements, perform additional inspections in
accordance with Section 1704.3.
6. ❑ For concrete elements and concrete filled elements,
perform additional inspections in accordance with
---
---
Section 1704.4.
SpecialnspectionForin_2012.doc revised 09106112
VERIFICATION AND INSPECTION
C
P
REFERENCED
STANDARD
IBC
REFERENCE
7. ❑ For specialty piles, perform additional inspections as
determined by the registered design professional in
---
---
--
Table 1704.8
responsible charge.
REQUIRED VERIFICATION AND INSPECTION OF CAST -IN -PLACE DEEP FOUNDATION ELEMENTS
1 ❑ Observe drilling operations and maintain complete and
X
_--
accurate records for each element.
2. ❑ Verify placement locations and plumbness, confirm
element diameters, bell diameters (if applicable),
lengths, embedment into bedrock (if applicable), and
X
---
---
Table 1704.9
adequate end -bearing strata capacity. Record
concrete or grout volumes.
3. ❑ For concrete elements, perform additional inspections
in accordance with Section 1704.4.
HELICAL PILE FOUNDATIONS
1. ❑ Record installation equipment used, pile dimensions,
X
�
�
--_
1704.10
r
tip elevations, final depth, final installation torque.
SPRAYED FIRE-RESISTANT MATERIALS
Physical and visual tests
1. Condition of substrates.
❑ Inspect surface for accordance with the approved fire -
resistance design and the approved manufacturer's
---
written instructions.
❑ Verify minimum ambient temperature before and after
X
application.
_--
❑ Verify ventilation of area during and after application.
---
X
2. ❑ Measure average thickness per ASTM E605 and
S
Section 1704.12.4.
"'
---
1704.12.1
3. ❑ Verify density of material for conformance with the
approved fire-resistant design and ASTM E605. (Ref.
---
---
Section 1704.12.5)
4. ❑ Test cohesive/adhesive bond strength per Section
1704.12.6.
5. ❑ Condition of finished application.
MISCELLANEOUS
1. Mastic and Intumescent Fire -Resistant Coating.
---
---
---
1704.13
2. Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems (EIFS). Water -
resistive barrier coating when installed over a sheathing
---
---
--
1704.14
substrate.
3. Special Cases
---
---
--
1704.15
4. Smoke Control System
---
---
---
1704.16
5. Seismic Resistance
❑ Suspended ceiling systems and their anchorage.
---
---
---
1705.3 [4.3]
SpecialnspectionForm_2012.doc revised 09106112
VERIFICATION ARID INSPECTION
C
P
REFERENCED I
STANDARD IREFERENCE
IBC
6. Wind Resistance
❑ Roof cladding and roof framing connections.
--
---
---
❑ Wall connections to roof and floor diaphragms and
framing.
❑ Roof and floor diaphragm systems, including
collectors, drag struts and boundary elements.
❑ Vertical wind -force -resisting systems, including braced
frames, moment frames, and shear walls.
❑ Wind -force -resisting system connections to the
foundation.
❑ Fabrication and installation of systems or components
required to meet the impact resistance requirements
---
---
---
of Section 1609.1.2.
SPECIAL INSPECTION FOR WIND REQUIREMENTS
1. Structural Wood
❑ Inspect field gluing operations of elements of the main
X
wind -force -resisting system.
---
1706.2
❑ Inspect nailing, bolting, anchoring, and other fastening
of components within the main windforce-resisting
X
system, including wood shear walls, wood
diaphragms, drag struts, braces and hold-downs.
2. Cold -Formed Steel Framing
❑ Welding of elements of the main wind -force -resisting
X
system.
❑ Inspection of screw attachments, bolting, anchoring,
and other fastening of components within the main
"'
1706.3
wind -force -resisting system including shear walls,
---
X
braces, diaphragms, collectors (drag struts) and hold-
downs.
3. Wind -resisting components
❑ Roof cladding.
---
X
---
1706.4
❑ Wall cladding.
---
X
SPECIAL INSPECTIONS FOR SEISMIC RESISTANCE
1. ❑ Special inspection for welding in accordance with the
X
---
1707.2
quality assurance plan requirements of AISC 341.
2. Structural Wood
❑ Inspect field gluing operations of elements of the
X
__-
seismic -force -resisting system.
Inspect nailing, bolting, anchoring, and other fastening
of components within the seismic -force -resisting
1707.3
system, including wood shear walls, wood
---
X
diaphragms, drag struts, braces, shear panels and
hold-downs.
3. Cold -Formed steel light -frame construction
❑ Welding of elements of the seismic -force -resisting
X
1707.4
system.
SpecialnspectionForm_2012.doc revised 09106112
❑ Inspection of screw attachments, bolting, anchoring,
and other fastening of components within the seismic-
_-
X
force -resisting system including shear walls, braces,
diaphragms, collectors (drag struts) and hold-downs.
4. Storage racks and access floors
❑ Anchorage of storage racks 8 feet or greater in height
X
1707.5
and access floors.
5. Architectural components
❑ Inspect erection and fastening of exterior cladding
weighing more than 5 psf and higher than 30 feet
---
X
above grade or walking surface.
❑ Inspect erection and fastening of veneer weighing
more than 5 psf.and higher than 30 feet above grade
---
X
or walking surface.
--
1707.E
❑ Inspect erection and fastening of all exterior non -
bearing walls higher than 30 feet above grade or
---
X
walking surface.
❑ Inspect erection and fastening of all interior non -
bearing walls weighing more than 15 psf and higher
---
X
than 30 feet above grade or walking surface.
6. Mechanical and Electrical Components
❑ Inspect anchorage of electrical equipment for
X
emergency or stand-by power systems.
❑ Inspect anchorage of non -emergency electrical
_-
X
equipment.
❑ Inspect installation of piping systems and associated
mechanical units carrying flammable, combustible, or
---
X
---
1707.7
highly toxic contents.
❑ Inspect installation of HVAC ductwork that contains
X
hazardous materials.
__-
❑ Inspect installation of vibration isolation systems
_-
X
where required by Section 1707.7.
7. ❑ Verify that the equipment label and anchorage or
mounting conforms to the certificate of compliance
1707.8
when mechanical and electrical equipment must be
-_-
seismically qualified.
8. ❑ Seismic isolation system: Inspection of isolation
---
X
--
1707.9
system per ASCE 7 — Section 17.2.4.8
9. ❑ Obtain mill certificates for reinforcing steel, verify
compliance with approved construction documents,
--
--
--
1708.2
and verify steel supplied corresponds to certificate.
10. ❑ Structural Steel: Invoke the QAP Quality Assurance
1708.3
requirements in AISC 341.
11. ❑ Obtain certificate that equipment has been seismically
_
1708.4
qualified.
12. ❑ Obtain system tests as required by ASCE 7 Section
---
_-_
1708.5
17.8.
SpeciahzspectionForm_2012.doc revised 09106112
IV 4 1Ar
COTTON, SHIRES AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS
July 29, 2014
C5074
TO: George Schroeder
Associate Planner
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
SUBJECT: Geologic and Geotechnical ]Peer Review
RE: Yung, Proposed Addition
11205 Mount Crest Place
At your request, we have completed a geologic and geotechnical peer review of the
permit application for the proposed addition using the following documents:
Geotechnical Investigation (report), prepared by Wayne Ting & Assoc. Inc.,
dated February 11, 2014;
Geologic Investigation (report), prepared by Louis A. Richardson, dated
March 11, 2014; and
Architectural Plans (10 sheets), prepared by Perezidential Homes, dated
April 17, 2014.
In addition to evaluating the referenced documents, we have reviewed pertinent
technical documents from our office files and performed a recent site reconnaissance.
DISCUSSION
Based on our review of the referenced documents, we understand that the applicant
proposes to construct a 974 square -foot, one-story addition onto the southwest side of the
existing two-story residence. According to the referenced documents, the proposed
addition is to be founded on spread footings embedded into competent bedrock.
SITE CONDITIONS
The project site is characterized, in general, by moderately steep (up to 25-degree
inclination), east -facing, natural hillside topography. Original grading for residential
construction resulted in the development of a relatively level cut and fill building pad. Cut
slopes are generally steep (up to 26-degree inclinations), with an increase in slope
inclination towards the residence. Most of the cut slope is retained by a 2- to 4-foot high
Northern California Office
330 Village Lane
Los Gatos, CA 95030-7218
(408) 354-5542 o Fax (408) 354-1852
Central California Office
6417 Dogtown Road
San Andreas, CA 95249-9640
(209) 736-4252 o Fax (209) 736-1212
www.cottonshires.com
Southern California Office
550 St. Charles Drive, Suite 108
Thousand Oaks, CA 91360-3995
(805) 497-7999 o Fax (805) 497-7933
0
George Schroeder July 29, 2014
Page 2 C5074
block retaining wall, and a 3- to 6-foot high concrete wall that abuts the existing residence.
Fill slopes on the northern and eastern portions of the site are generally steep to very steep
(up to 33-degree inclination). Some minor erosion has occurred on unprotected cut slopes
on the west side of the property as well as on the fill slope on the north side of the property.
Drainage is generally characterized by sheet flow directed toward the north and east.
The City Geologic Hazards Map indicates that the site is underlain by bedrock
materials of the Santa Clara Formation (i.e., sandstone, conglomerate, and potentially
expansive claystone). The City Geologic Hazards Map indicates that the property lies
within an "F" zone, which is defined as: "Area of potential surface fault rupture hazard
within 300 feet east and 600 feet west of the Monta Vista and Berrocal faults." The active
San Andreas fault is located approximately 3.5 miles southwest of the project site, and the
potentially active Monta Vista fault is mapped approximately 300 feet northeast of the site.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDED ACTION
The proposed development is potentially constrained by proximity to the Monta
Vista fault, potentially expansive surficial soil materials, and the presence of undocumented
fill within the footprint of the proposed addition. The Project Geologist has evaluated the
geologic hazards at the site and has determined that no geologic hazards are present that
preclude prudent development at the site. The Project Geologist has concluded that the
potential for surface fault rupture associated with the Monta Vista fault is remote. The
Project Geotechnical Consultant has performed an investigation of the site and has provided
geotechnical design recommendations that, in general, are consistent with the standards of
the industry. These recommendations include founding the additions on spread footings to
match the existing residential foundation. Loose artificial fill was encountered in the
borings and recommendations have been provided to extend footings through this material.
Due to the close proximity of the Monta Vista fault, and the loose fill in the vicinity
of the proposed addition, we recommend that the Project Geologist (as opposed to the
Geotechnical Engineer), perform inspections of the foundation excavations to assure
adequate embedment into competent, consistent, and non -expansive bedrock materials
below the artificial fill and buried soil materials. With this understanding, we recommend
approval of the permit application from a geologic and geotechnical standpoint. The
following Item #1 should be performed prior to building permit approval:
1. Geotechnical Plan Review - The applicant's geotechnical consultant should
review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the development plans (i.e.,
site preparation and grading, site drainage improvements and design
parameters for foundations and retaining walls) to ensure that their
recommendations have been properly incorporated.
COTTON, SHIRES AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
G
g George Schroeder July 29, 2014
Page 3 C5074
The Geotechnical Plan Review letter should be submitted to the City for
review and approval by City staff prior to issuance of building permits.
2. Geologic/Geotechnical Construction Inspections - The geologic and
geotechnical consultants should inspect, test (as needed), and approve all
geotechnical aspects of the project construction. The inspections should
include, but not necessarily be limited to: site preparation and grading, site
surface and subsurface drainage improvements and excavations for
foundations and retaining walls prior to the placement of steel and concrete.
The results of these inspections and the as -built conditions of the project
should be submitted by the geologic/geotechnical consultant to the City for
review prior to final project approval.
LIMITATIONS
This geotechnical peer review has been performed to provide technical advice to
assist the City with its discretionary permit decisions. Our services have been limited to
review of the documents previously identified, and a visual review of the property. Our
opinions and conclusions are made in accordance with generally accepted principles
and practices of the geotechnical profession. This warranty is in lieu of all other
warranties, either expressed or implied.
JMW:POS:SWN
Respectfully submitted,
(COTTON, SHIRES AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
CITE[ GEOTECEINICAIL CONSULTANT
Joli M. Wallace
Principal Engineering Geologist
CEG 1923
Patrick O. Shires
Senior Principal Geotechnical Engineer
GE 770
COTTON, SHIRES AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
p
� � ��m �� � 5'1�11
274 E. Hamilton Avenue, Suite C
Campbell, California 95008-0240
Voice: 408-871-7273 Fax: 408-871-7274 SUBMTTAL
Web: www.SMSEinc.com
Email: SMSEinc(@aol.com #2
July 14, 2014
City of Cupertino
Build,: PF R � R lan Check Division
10300 Torre Avenue
CuperR-
211
1120RI4
408-77
Attenti&ffL§g-p_nJJ-Qtch
Re: Plan Check Response
Yung Res,
11205 Mount Crest PI.
Cupertino, CA 95014
Permit No.: 14040114
SMSE job: 5617-14
Dear Sean
This letter is written with the purpose of providing responses for your structural plan check
comments.
STRUCTURAL COMMENTS:
Response to Item 20: S2.0: The square footing notes failed to include
information for 16 square inch footings (diamond 1) and for 24 inch square footings
(diamond 2). Information for both is now provided, and additionally the method of
construction is now more specifically shown to be indicated by detail bubble 18/-.
Response to Item 21: S2.0: The note has been updated regarding fasteners
in pressure treated wood.
Response to Item 22: 52.0: The calculations pertaining to venting and
locations of vents are not handled by the structural engineer. As such this information
should not be shown on our sheets as we cannot take liability for this information. The
architect has been notified to handle the response for this item and to indicate locations
on another of the Architectural sheets.
Response to Item 23: S3.0: The appropriate hangar has been indicated via
a note on the plans.
Response to Item 24: 53.0: Detail 17 is correctly referenced on the plan
drawing, but the box border around the detail was missing, and is now visible.
Page 1 of 1
0
Iasi
274 E. Hamilton Avenue, Suite C
Campbell, California 95008-0240
Voice:408-871-7273 Fax:408-871-7274
Web: www.SMSEinc.com
Email: SMSEinc(aiaol.com
)ment of this project. If you require
-871-7273 (extension 4# for Joshua
Sincerely,
Joshua J. Carter
Project Engineer.
Page 2 of 1
274 E. Hamilton Avenue, Suite C
Campbell, California 95008-0240
Voice:408-871-7273 Fax:408-871-7274
Web: www.SMSE.com
Email: Slm
/e
f,a,,11,,
6i 0
LU 2 cw
R�o.70892
Exp. u.30.2015
F OF GALIf
Firs Floor Addition
Structural Calculations
For
Yung Residence
11205 Mount Crest Place
Cupertino, Ca.
SMSE Job Number: 5617-14
DESIGN -BUILDER:
Rich Perez,
R.J. Perez Construction, Inc.
10091 Byrne Avenue
Cupertino, Co. 95014
P.408.252.2797, ., .
Www.r{pere�.construcfiQ,9iP
A r.. L. YA..... A.
S.T. Bugay Architecture
Diony Bugay'AIA
480 Royale Park Drive
San Jose, CA 95136
Tel. (408) 229-8683
Fax. (408) 226-9110
DTBugay.AIA@dtbugay.com
15 April 2014
Engineering by: Joshua Carter
Project Engineer
j��
a
Table of Contents
1. Dead Load calculations
20 Roof &Ceiling Framing Summary andAnalysis
3. Lateral Analysis
3.1© Determination of Lateral Loads
Determination of Lateral Wind Loads
® Determination of Building Mass
Determination of 2010 CBC Seismic loads
® Determination of 2010 CBC Diaphragm loads
3.2. Diaphragm lateral Analysis for Roof
3.3. Reliahility/Redundancy Analysis for Roof
_ 3.4. Shear Wall Analysis _ -
4. Foundation Analysis and Summary
� 0�.� ����� � j� 9gj�'B- �'� g'2 �•-aN� ma o �'d e�n+�'o�''id �3 ���.'$a:� �dppgjj °,y�a GQ$�"GrQ$•'gx777G�a�nZ o�c m �__ � e o m
a UP call �•
a cD c
I I- f �•
000 NNNmIJN+�g �, (r U�AOINA� +a riemm�nWuNaur.�r.�+I? N 000+00+ WN++� O
uBS, i5888So�1+ o 8 o� a�ubogl= $ggino8s �oo800 8 8S88888 98991.9998 $� � CD
r �
o m coo
a
�FG
e Wao+WW9 @�
8g 88ggg.—U N o
m�
+o+p+UU G +ty+n� +u{y auyWNN+uW{y NNqq+O OGI �VU1+NNVN /yq3.�' pI
t!289.B mO.O mlf mfJ WOmmNW 8 tNnmU O T} �
a � m
O 1gD A S fC
ir
n
19D6 +++�_ 00000+o� o� oII1F'�-�' oIIIiK� 00000 olllrK�3, OOo o OOOOo 00o+0IIIFi_�'� 00000+....IiK�=' ......... 1D
A 7 1 I I I I O
0-0
�
C � 7 �
N A
a
a
0003' 00000No4 04,{ 03' 0LI9' Oo00003' 000000000000+0 ,{ 00000+0000 000000000LL3'
c NiSS 88881008 8 3 8 8I-1 888888�$a 888888888888&'8�3 $888$888$8�" 88888888$I�� $S'
o NR
R� ga
a u
The date is 04/15/14
u
Sezen &{boon Structural Engineering, Inc. Voice:408-871-7273
274 E. Hamilton Avenue, Suite C Fax: 408-871-7274
Campbell, CA 95008
Project name: Yung Residence Job No.: 5617-14 Roof Dead Loading
written by Kent S. Sezen, MS, SE
Title:
Framing
2x4
2x6
2x8
2x10
2x12
3x4
3x6
4x4
4x6
4x8
4x10
4x12
4x14
4x16
trus ioist macmillan
TJ125 to 35P
TJI 40C & 40P
TJI55C & 55P
TJL & TJLX
TJ W
TJ60
other wood joist
Miscellaneous beams
metal decking (vulcraff)
1.5B24
1.5B22
1.5B21
1.51320
1.5B19
1.5B18
1.5816
Other gage decking
steel joist
Open web joist
steel girders
Open web girders
ceilinas
Roof Dead Loading (Rafters
acoustical fiber file
1/2' gypsum board
518" gypsum board
plaster on wood lath
suspended steel channel
suspended metal lath & plaster
wood furring suspension system
Stucco
other stuff
mechanical
sprinklers
Miscellaneous
weight
Wt. (plf)
_spacing (in)
psf
quantity
in (psf)
1.40
24
0.70
0
0.00
2.20
24
1.10
1
1.10
2.90
24
1.45
0
0.00
3.70
24
1.85
0
0.00
4.40
24
2.20
0
0.00
2.31
24
1.16
0
0.00
3.63
24
1.82
0
0.00
3.24
24
1.62
0
0.00
5.08
48
1.27
0
0.00
6.70
24
3.35
0
0.00
8.55
24
4.28
0
0.00
10.40
96
1.30
0
0.00
12.50
96
1.56
0
0.00
14.30
96
1.79
0
0.00
spacing
weight
pl(
(inches)
psf
quantity
in psf
4.00
48
1.00
0
0.00
5.70
48
1.43
0
0.00
6.30
48
1.58
0
0.00
4.25
48
1.06
0
0.00
5.25
48
1.31
0
0.00
5.75
48
1.44
0
0.00
spacing
weight
pH
(inches)
psf
quantity
in psf
20
480
0.50
0
0.00
weight
f
quantity
in psf
1.46
0
0.00
1.78
0
0.00
1.97
0
0.00
2.14 -
_
0
0.00 -
2.49
0
0.00
2.82
0
0.00
3.54
0
0.00
1.1
0
0.00
spacing
weight
plf
(inches)
psf
quantity
in psf
10
48
2.50
0
0.00
spacing
weight
plf
(inches)
psf
quantity
in psf
50
600
1.00
0
0.00
psf
quantity
in psf
1.00
0
0.00
2.20
0
0.00
2.80
0
0.00
8.00
0
0.00
2,00
0
0.00
15.00
0
0.00
2.50
0
0.00
2.00
0
0.00
weight
psf
quantity
in psf
0.50
0
0.00
0.50
0
0.00
0.75
1
0.75
12.15
total weight in psf
F 12.81
roof slope accounted for
total weight in psf
This is page 2
a
Date 411512014 Sezen & Moon Structural Engineering, Page: 2
9:36 AM Inc. Voice: 408-871-7273
274 E. Hamilton Avenue, Suite C Fax: 408-871-7274
Campbell, CA 95008
IRf#2 (N1 Hips)
13.5•ft cantilever:= O-ft tb:= 0-ft
to := 0 ft L A-= 10-plf 0 := ,45-deg
uniform loading.
W= DLroof tribW,idth.roof + DLceiling'tfibwidth.ceiling + DLbm
:= LLroof tribwidth.roof
wLL.ceiling LLattic.uninhabitable* tribwidth.ceiIing
trianglular loading.
w := DLrooftribwidth.r.f.triangular'sin(0)
trib ` �'' Span' trib = 9.546 ft
width.rooftnangular : width.rooftriangulaz
0 is angle degree between framing and roof member, which is
usually 45 degrees for hip and/or valley member.
w LLroof-tribwidth.rooftrian lar'sin(0) 'TL oofx 2 5
Use I.75 x 9.3"lilicrolla►a. See following spread,4e'e! for detailed analysis.'
Rf#3 (NJ iRidge)
AM= 9.75-ft Cantr
)460f-ta dth oof t Rlinj' bw.id eiijrtg, DL'—
W = LL.f tribwidth.roof
h 'A' L i4 plf
PDL := (464 + 464 + 0)1b From Canti Pload Hips RF#2
Xpj,;= (608 + 608 + 0)lb
Use 3.5"x Ill. 7#" Paralla►a. See appendix for detailed ahay i.,.'
PDL = 928 lb
PDL = 1216lb
Date 4/l5/2014 Sezen & Moon Structural Engineering, Page: 4
9:36 AM Inc. Voice: 408-871-7273
274 E. Hamilton Avenue, Suite C Fax: 408-871-7274
Campbell, CA 95008
Hrd#7 New 13eader
,Wan= 19:ft ti _ (0) ft tri :_ (6.665) ,ft trµib � := 4.5 ft ,- 14 Of
r
DLrooftrtbwadthmof 1%LE.will (Oft) + D,Lcealtn� byvidth ceiltttg f D,5Lb4
_ __...__
w LLrooitribwidth.roof goof 1'9
x.
— WIT
LLattic.uninhabitable'tribwidth.ceiling 1 g 45
: f
Use 6.75 x 9 24F I� Qilae-Lam 63'/StCamberCaber See app iendiz-, or detailed a'nalysiS,`...
Rf#8 Vaulted Sloped roof rafters
:= 13.5•ft anti .= (0)•ft , 1bci6UbaR8&i` : (2)'ft to =.O-it _, 0-plf
DLioofvaiilt bwtd' roof }XD�E w81i40ftj •i-�L�11t - — �' dth Celitng D t `L f
,
LLrobwidth.roof — {OWN
df �
Use cexxim. See appendix for dethiledRa ialysis.
Girder#9 Cross door girder
0 ft to 5 33 ft trt uLd �0 'ft 14 1f
s at = 4.583 ft n�{0)•ft trnvvw�S4�S�dR6�ty ( ) rbwtdth.Floor f ). �w pp t
+Y ..?Y. - - I r+ q•�li N+. w _�.xx..a .ux. 5�i'S .. s.- • ` ,•N:3s.
lam' D roofryvauti tb,� t t + LL W I (Oft) + FILL `...... �d . , tlg ..>Llxoorwld 17dd� 29 1
LLroo{•tribwidth.roof
WL.LFloor LLfloor'tribwidth.Floor
MPS;= (754 + 754 + 0)1b PDL = 1508lb
From Grt#9 @ 6"
_ (440 + 440 + 0)1b PDL = 8801b
Use 6x6 timber girder. See appendix for detailed analysis:
Sezen & Moon Structural Engineering, Inc. voice: 408-871-7273
274 E. Hamilton Avenue, Suite C fax: 408-871-7274
e s Campbell, CA s5008-0240
Project Name: Yung Res Job: 5617-14 Spread sheet ueated by Kent S. Sezen, MS, SE
Member name: Rf#1 Member location: Rafters
Fla Ft Fv Fc (perp) Fc (parallel) E
I I ipsi psi psi use code
;Design values 900 _, 575 180 625 1350 1600000 1 DFtf2 Lumber
load
wet
beam
size
Fb
repetitive
duration
service
temp,
sfaulity
factor
size
flat use
member
tonn
factor
factor
factor
factor
gib
factor
factor
factor
(actor
CD
cm
Ct
CL
cv
CF
Cfu
Cr
Cf
1.25
1.00
1.00
0.605
1.000
1.20
1.00
1.15
11.00
load duration
CQ CD used
c3 53��
duration factor
1.25 t.25
_
c7I h2 -I-�
c1 lbl
repetitive member
Cr use
Cr used
- ;---�
three or more
1,15 1
1.15
P"� nil P31 Poi
two or less
1 0
0.00
1.15
oA
� V V V
r
beam loads
values
soaMoad conditions
distance
I
rl;''I 11 �
1�l! ILI! 1 i I
wDL1 dead load (plf)
26.00 at midspan
span (feet) simple
9.75
.1
"'3
wLLI live load (piq
40.00 at..Npan
card; (teet) no carol
0.00
1
i
p co'i
wl total load (pit)
66 at midspan
"a1"(feet)
2.00
-1�.LJ 0 : l 1m'm�lTffT1
vvDL2 dead load (p�
0.00 m ®rrcae.er
b1"(feel)
'a2'(feet)
7.75
iT7n1
11�111111 i i i l l l i I I I I I I I I I I IT i w2
wLL2 live load (calf)
v✓1 total load (pit)
0.00 rx carsaeer
m®nW-
'b2'(feel)
5.00
4.75
.
wOL3 dead load (pff)
0.00 tri nu tar to right
"a3"(feet)
7,00
1-_ span f Corti
wLL3 live load (piq
0.00 aiarguurm right
b3"(feet)
2.75
V (1e11) V (Might)
w3 totalload (pit)
vavaar to right
"a4'(feet)
9.00
wOL4 dead toad (off)
0.00 rrlarvr to left
b4-(feet)
0,75
wL1-4 live load (calf)
w4 total load (ptf)
0.00 MenguWr 0 Leff
0ciarg,narro left
gemet (
values
Reaction a left support
RDL(lbs) 127
Reaction gb, right support
ROL(Ibs) 127
beam width (mdtes)
1.50
R LL tbs 195
R LL Ibs 195
PDL1 point dead load (Ib)
0.00 at 'a 1"
beam depth (inches)
7.25
Total Obs) 322
Total Ibs 322
PLL1 point live load (lb)
0.00 at "0"
P l total pot nt load (lb)
at "a1"
material type DFa2 Lumber
df2
P012 point dead load (lb)
0.00 at "a7
PLL2 point live load (lb)
0.00 at -a2'
conditions
values
camber use Camber used
P2 total point load (lb)
at "a7
quantity (members connected together)
1
Radius GLB (stock = 3500-ft) 3500
PDL3 point dead bad (Ib)
0.00 at'a3'
beam used upright
1
stock camber 0.041 1 0.04
PLL3 point line load (lb)
0.00 at "a3'
beam used on side
0
upright variable camber 0.07 0 0.00
P3 total point load (Ib)
at "a3'
Lu unsupported length > 0 (inches)
117.00
no camber (overide), yes = 1, no = 0 0 0.00
PDL4 point dead load (lb)
0.00 at -a4'
LAW > 0 .
16.14
PLL4 point live bad (Ib)
0.00 at "a4'
Moments values (ftab.)
P4 total point bad (lb)
at "a4'
Shears
values
M mas ®span (DU 309
V DL (left)
127
Ibs M mas ®span (LL) 475
POL-cant point dead load (Ib)
0.00 rx emtiiaver
V LL (left)
195
as M max @ span (total) 794
PLL-cant point live load (lb)
0,00 1d -rmle er
V DL (right) left six
127
eu M a canpaever (CC) 0
Plant total point bad (lb)
m rantae er
vLL (rignq left side
195
e,e M ® canodaver (LLI 0
beam size
X
uired _geometric properties values
req'd (inA2) 2.1E
on mod. req'd (InA3) 10.03
actual _geometric properties values
cross sectin area used (InA2) 10.88 okoy
section modulus used (inA3) 13.14 okay
moment Inertia used (In-4) 47.63
Shear Diagram
400
' -----------
300
------ r... . _..........i .._...._-.i-.__.......
200
100
r ...... _ ..).......
-----_
e Live
oTotal
-100
-------------
_ , ...... _j.. .. .. ;. ...
-200
- ........ .. .. ... ..
-300-40010
.. ... .: .. ..
V DL (right) right
V LL (right rlgth We
V max (total)
o
0
322
Ors
tbs
Ibs
M max @ cantilever (total) 0
Cons lder tree 1 no - 0 yes tree
Consider weep for members where probability of constant dead load is high.
Don't consider creep for roof framinq with attic space below.
7.26
DF#2 Lumber
simple span beam 0.000 camber (inches)
deflec, span
suitable use
inches
deflec, cant suitable us(
inches
dead load
0.1040
creep used dead bad
0.0000
live load
okay, tx floor
0.1067
0ve load r o renal-
0.0000
total load
k y.0la floor
0.2108 total load ao c fflde er
0.0000
deflection
deflection
criteria
inches
criteria
inches
apard12O
0.9750
spaW240
0.0000
spanl180
0.6500
spanf38o
0.0000
spanr240
0.4875
spanl480
0.0000
spanr360
0.3250
span1600
0.0000
spanf480
0.2438
span(720
0.0000
spanf600
0.1950
spanr720
0.1625
Moment Diagram
800 - -----
700. --- -- --- ---i------- ...o............. .. ........_i......__. ..
i i-
600.....-.................,........__..1........ ....;......... _...
500 ^.._......... ..-.._............... -;..... .......
400 ............. ..... .... i..........
300 -- •....
200 ... ... ...._... .... ... }......... :... ...
too _; _.. •- )...
0
n 7 A A a 1n
Deflection Diagram
Sezen &r Moon Structural Engineering, Inc. voice: 408-871-7273
274 E. Hamilton Avenue, Suite C fax: 408-871-7274
e Campbell, CA 95008-0240
Project Name: Yung Res Job: 5617-14 Spread sheet created by Kent S. Sezen, MS, SE
Member name: Rf#3 Member location: New Ridge
Fb Ft Fv Fc (perp) Fc (parallel) E
P.,
t ipsi psi psi use code
�esign values 2400 1100 265 650 1650_ 1700000 zo 24F Glu Lam
load
wet
beam
size
Fb
repetitive
duration
service
temp.
stability
factor
size
flat use
member
to
factor
factor
factor
factor
glb
factor
factor
factor
factor
CO
CM
Ct
CL
Cv
CF
Cfu
Cr
Cf
1.25
1.00
1.00
0.997
1.000
not used
1.00
1.00
1 AO
load duration CD CD used �a} bJ
duration factor 1.25 L 125 a2_ b2. T
repetitive member Cr use Cr used �_ c7_ bt
}___ I
three or more 1.15 0 0.00 P1 I P2� P3 P4�
two or less 1 1 1.00 P
1.00 w4
I
beam loads values spannoad conditions distance
wOLt dead load (pit) 144.00 at midspan span (feet) 9.75 Eli
w}
P-cent
wLL1 live load (pin 200.00 at midspan canti (feet) yes ranti 5.00
�.,rr�Tf1�I
w1 total load (pit) at midspan 'al. (to,) 2.00 ree7�iw1WJLLll.
wDL2 dead bad (pit) 0.00 at carajev bl-(feet) 7.75 r,,,,-rrm P
wLL2 live load (pin 0.00 a r .1z (feet) 5.00 � � � l ��T1ITn�, rl.T7,7iT1, TffT! 11l'Tij
w2 total load (plf) �m mae.�e oarr -bY(feet) 4.75 .. �� .. .,
wDL3 dead load (pit) 0.00 irwVdarm right 'aT(feet) 7.00
wLL3 live load (calf) 0.00 uiarhgdarm rigor 'W"(feet) 2.75
v (lei!) v (right)
w3 lotalload (plf) b-vdamrigm W (feel) 9.00
wDL4 dead load (pit) 0.00 triargumr m tM "W (fed) 0.75
wLL4 live load (pit) 0.00 0-,W ar m left Reaction OD left support Reaction 0 right support
w4 total bad (pit) Luw,,A-m ten nt values R OL (Ibs) 226 R DL (lbs) 2106
beam width (inches) 3.50 R LL Ibs 351 R LL(lbs) 2815
PDL1 point dead bad Ob) 0.00 at "al" beam depth (inches) 10.50 Total(lbs) 578 Total(lbs) 4921
PLO point live load (lb) 0.00 at all
P1 total point load (lb) at all material type 24F Glu Lam gl
PDL2 point dead bad (lb) 0.00 al'a7
PLt2 point live bad Ob) 0.00 at'a2' conditions values camber use Camber used
P2 total point load (lb) at'a7 quantity (members connected together) 1 Radius GLB (stock = 3500-ft) 3500
PDL3 point dead bad (lb) 0.00 at'a3' beam used upright 1 stock camber 0.041 1 0.04
PLL3 point live load (Ib) 0.00 Wa3' beam used on side 0 upright variable camber 0.04 0 0.00
P3 total point bad (lb) at'a3' Lu unsupported length s 0 (inches) 12.00 no camber (overide), yes = 1, no = 0 0 0.04
PDL4 point dead load Ob) 0.00 d'94'. Luld > 0 - 1.14 -
PLL4 point five bad Ob) 0.00 at W, Moments values fft4b.1
P4 total point bad (lb) at'a4' shears values M more ®span (DL) 4640
V DL ten) 226 ors M max 0 span (ua 6D80
PDL-cant point dead load (lb) 928.00 in card)le er V LL (ten) 351 rbs M mac @ span (total) 10720
PLL-cant point live bad (lb) 1216.00 a mnhikva v DL (right) left We 1178 lbs M a ca tor- (DL) 4640
P-cant total point bad (lb) 2144 m cerNleher V LL (rqm) kit sloe 150 bs M a C-ta.- (LL) -6080
V DL (rVM OV on lbs M max @ cantilever (tota0 -10720
V LL (right) rip sue 1216 V.
V max (total) 2776 lbs Consider tree es =1 no = 0 yes tree
Consider Creep for members vAh- probability of constant dead load is high.
oeam shze
ng
X
24F Glu lam
fired geometric properties
values
deflec, span
suitable use
inches
req'd (inA2)
12.57
dead bad
camber used
-0.0046
on mod. req'd (InA3)
43.02
live bad
okay, dte poor
0.0460
total load
okay, We floor
0.04 3
deflection
lal geometric properties
values
criteria
inches
i sectin area used (inA2)
36.75
okay sparLM20
0.9750
Din modulus used (inA3)
64.31
okay spanf180
0.6500
ant Inertia used (InA4)
337.64
spanr240
0.4875
span/36o
0.3250
span148o
0.2438
apan1600
0.1950
apan/720
0.1625
Shear Diagram
oLive
Total
Moment Diagram
-4000............_......... ;
-6000 I. .....i... eTotal
-8000 ...... <. _.
10000 ;
i I
12000
n 7 A R a I 1) 1A 1n
I-, , -Pr-oo-nrm Wral amc 6 ace Detow.
hm with cantilever 0.041
camber (inches)
deflec, cant suitable us(
inches
creep used dead bad
0.2597
live load inadequate
0.3337
total load truaaquoa
0.5934
deflection
criteria
inches
spanr240
0.5000
span1360
0.3333
spanJ480
0.2500
span1600
0.2000
spanr720
0.1667
Deflection Diagram
I
0.1 i
_....:.........:.._.... .................. 1... ......
' {. ........._.............i _
I ,
GA.......:........!...._............... .... I..
I
1-__'----h - -
i I
-0.6 '
n
Ej
Sezen &!Moon Structural Engineering, Inc. voice: 408471.7273
274 E, Ramihon Avenue, Suite C lax: 408-871.7274
> . Campbell, CA 95008-0240
Project Name: Yung Res Job: 5617-14 Spread sheet creased by Kent S. Sezen, MS, SE
Member name: Rf#3b Memberiocation: New Ridge
Fla Fl Fv Fc (tarp) Fc (parallel) E
P.,
I 1psi psi psi use code
Design values 2400 1100 265 650 1650 1700000 20 41F Glu Lam
load
wet
beam
size
Fb
repetitive
duration
service
temp.
stability
factor
size
flat use
member
form
factor
factor
factor
factor
gib
factor
lactor
factor
factor
CO
CM
Ct
CL
CV
CF
Ctu
Cr
of
1.25
1.00
1.00
0.997
1.000
1 not used
1.00
1.00
1.00
load duration
CO
CO used
duration factor
1.25
1.25
repetitive member
Cr
use
Cr used
three or more
1.15
0
0.00
two or less
1
1
1-00
1.00
beam loads
values
s1lannoad conditions
wDL1 dead bad (ptf)
144.00
at midspan
span (feet)
wLL1 live load (ptf)
200.00
at midspan
canti (feet) yes cant!
wl total load (ptf)
at midspan
'al'(feet)
wOL2 dead load (ptf)
0.00
mmr4-
-bl-(feet)
wLL2 live load (pff)
0.00
at ceralever
-a2-(feet)
w2 total load (ptf)
m c.".er
--(led)
wDL3 dead bad (ptf)
0.00
biargraert-qri
'a3' (feet)
wLL3 live load (pit)
0.00
tnangrter to rgnt
b3' (feet)
'a4'((erl)
w3 total load (plf)
O�-ngularmrigM
vvDL4 dead bad (pit)
0.00
trimgter to left
OW (feet)
wLL4 live load (plf)
0.00
biangrnar to left
w4 total load (01)
o
Owgular to left
1leometry
beam width Cinches)
PDL1 point dead bad Ob)
goo
at all
beam depth (inches)
PLL1 point live bad (Ib)
0.00
at'at-
P7 total point bad (lb)
at "at"
material type 24F Glu Lam
PDL2 point dead bad (tb)
0.00
1 W,
PLL2 point rive load (lb)
0.00
at'a7
conditions
"a7
P2 total point bad (Ito)
at
Quantity (members connected together)
PDL3 point dead bad (Ib)
0.00
at'a3'
beam used upright
PLO point live load (lb)
0.00
at'a3'
beam used on side
'a3'
P3 total point load ((b)
Lu unsupponed length > 0 (inches)
POL4 point dead bad (lb)
0.00
at "al'
Luld > 0 -
PLL4 point live bad (Ib)
0.00
at -a4'
P4 total point load (lb)
at'a4'
Shears
V DL (I.M
PDL-cant point dead load (lb)
928.00
at whEkver
V LL (I.0
PILL -cant point live load Ob)
1216.00
at ennlerer
V DL (rVhl) left side
P-cant total point load (lb)
2144
at canal-
V LL (right) left side
V DL (right right
V u (NM ngth We
V max (total)
y� -
__ 03 r '13
a2 1- a2
all r.7 1131 P4
w4 V V V V
distance I� 1 T,
9.75 w3
F-ccr„
5.00
2.00 �LLI1111L111J_I1Ll.
7.75 1
I u wTillll II w2
5.00 '
4.75
7.1100
Span cams
2.75 V (sell) V (right)
9.00
0.75
Reaction 0 left support Reactionright support
values R DL (lbs) 226 R DL (Ibs) 2106
3.50 R LL Ibs 351 R LL Qbs) 2815
10.50 Total Ibs 578 TotalOhs) 4920
Ol
values
1
1
0 upright
12.00
1.14
values
226 IS
351 bs
1178 bs
15M bs
eta Its
1216 bs
2776 Ibs
ua
beam size
Using
x 10.5
24F Glu Lam
required geometric properties
values
deflec, span
suitable use
inches
area req'd (In^2)
12.57
dead bad
camber used
-0.0046
section mod. req'd (In^3)
43.02
five bad
okay, tile near
0.0460
total load
okay, use noar
0. 3
deflection
actual geometric properties
values
criteria
inches
cross sectinarea rued (in^2)
36.75
okay spanM20
0.9750
section modulus used (in" 3)
64.31
okay spanf180
0.6500
moment inertia used (In^4)
337.64
span/240
0.4875
spanf360
0.3250
spanf480
0.2438
spard&00
0.1950
sparu720
0,1625
Moment Diagram
-20001--
camber use
®
Camber used
Radius GL8 (stock = 3500-ft) 3500
stock camber 0.041 1
0.04
variable camber 0.04 0
0.00
no camber (overide), yes = 1, no = 0 0
0.04
oments
values (ft-lb.)
M max span (DL)
4640
M max span (LL)
6050
M max @ span (total)
10720
M a cmrolever (Oct
4640
M a cantilever (LL)
-6080
M max @ cantilever (total)
-10720
ConsIder creep, yes=7 no=0 1
yes tree
Consider creep for members where probability of corutand dead bad is high.
Don't consider creep for roof tram!ng with attic space below.
beam with cantilever 0.041
camber (inches)
deflec, cant. suitable usl inches
creep used dead load
0.2597
live bad Ina
0.593
total blno-q- ad drr♦nxte
0.5934
deflection
criteria
inches
spaN240
0.5000
span/360
0.3333
span/480
0.2500
span/soo
0.2000
spanJ720
0.1667
-4000 ._...y._ ......._....
pM olive TMaI
-8000 ._ .. ..._ ... ......... ......
1oo00 _. _._ .... '- i ..... ...
12000
n I A R a 1n 1j 1A I
Deflection Diagram
Sezen & Moon Structural Engineering, Inc. voice: 408-871.7273
274 E- HamlBon Avenue, Suite C lax: 408.871-7274
• r. Campbell, CA 96000-0240
Protect Name: Yung Res Job: 5617-14 Spread sheet created by Kent S. Sezen, MS, SE
Member name: T#4 Memberbcation: Trellis slats
Fb Ft Fv Fc (perp) Fc (parallel) E
i i ipsi psi psi use code
sign values _ 1000 675 180 625 1500 1700000 1 DF#1 Lumber
load
wet
beam
size
Fb
repetitive
duration
service
temp.
stability
factor
size
flat use
member
form
factor
factor
factor
factor
glb
factor
factor
factor
factor
CD
CM
CI
CL
CV
CF
Cfu
Cr
Cf
1.25
0.85
1.00
0.998
1.000
1.30
1.00
1.00 1
1.00
load duration
duration factor
CD
1.25
CD used
I -`
I__ 03 b3
'
cl 1;1
repetitive member
Cr
use
Cr used
three or more
1.15
0
0,00
pt I P2 P3 r4
two or less
1
1
1 00
04
I�
beam loads
values
spanAoad conditions
distance
i
wDL1 dead load (pm
14.00
at midspan
span (feet)
simple
22.33
I;I u3
I%-coni
wLL1 live load (ph)
0.00
at midspan
mmi(feel)
no cants
0.00
II
-al-
ri
wl total load (pIG
wDL2 dead load (plf)
14
0.00
at midspan
at rang
(feet)
'b1'(feel)
4.00
18.33
l a2
TfliilTlI1TMlfliiiT111Ti11 rri nmin-n-m`r
wLL2 live load (cats)
0.00
le cnei•eve+
'a2' (feet)
9-`•�
_ - . ...
w2 total load (ptf)
�mosrca�..e.
W7(feet)
12.83
-'
wDL3 dead load (ph)
0,00
v npg wrptn
'a3'(feet)
13.00
span coati
�.
�i
wLL3 live load (plf)
0.00
iris v,-to right
W"(teet)
9.33
V Qel:) V (righQ
via total load (pit)
hanpn,a b num
'34'(fed)
17.00
vvDL4 dead load (pit)
0.00
varqumr to Left
'b4"(feet)
5.33
w1.14 live load (plf)
0.00
marquee, to Left
Reaction
left support Reaction
right support
w4 total load (plf)
L0
v.w.to it
geometry
values
RDL(Ibs)
156 RDL(Ibs)
156
beam width (nches)
3.50
R LL 01s
115 R LL lbs
85
PDLI point dead bad Ob)
0.00
at "al"
beam depth (inches)
7.25
Total Obs)
271 Total Ibs
241
PLLI point live load (lb)
0.00
at "a1'
P1 total point load (lb)
at "al'
material type
DF#1 Lumber
dfl
PDL2 point dead load Ob)
0.00
at'a2'
PLL2 point live bad (Ib)
200.00
at'a2'
conditions
values
camber use
Camber used
P2 total point load (lb)
at'a7
quantity (members connected together)
1
Radius GLB (stock = 3500-i) 3500
PDL3 point dead load (Ib)
0.00
at "a3'
beam used upright
1
stock camber 0214 1
0.21
PLL3 point live bad Ob)
0.00
at'a3'
beam used on side
0
upright
variable camber 0.49 0
0.00
P 3 Iota I point load (lb)
0
at'a3'
Lu unsupported length > 0 (inches)
12.00
no camber (ovende), Yes = 1, no = 0 0
0.00
PDL4 point dead load (Ib)
0.00
at'a4'
Lind > 0-
1.66
_
-
PLL4 point live bad (lb)
000
at'a4'
Moments
values (ftab.)
P4 total point bad (lb)
at'a4'
Shears
values
M -g "e (DL)
973
V DL peR)
156
bs
M - @ epan (LL)
1092
PDL-.ant point dead load Ob)
0.00
at
V LL (kt0
115
ror
gA man @ span (total)
1964
PLL-cant point live bad (lb)
0.00
at r Ie cr
V DL (righ0 Left We
156
bs
M ® cantilever (DL)
0
P-cant total point bad (lb)
at --hewer
V LL (d^ left side
85
bs
M ® cantilever (LL)
0
V DL (right) Nft
0
bs
M max @ cantilever (total)
0
V LL (tigh0 right side
0
bs
V max (total)
271
Ibs
Consider tree es = 1 no - 0 t
ves tree
Consider creep for members where probability of constant dead bad is high.
uan'
beam size
Don't consider creep for roof framing with attic space below.
Sing
1(
7.25
DF#1 Lumber
simple span beam 0.000
camber (inches)
required geometric properties
Values
deflec, span
suitable use
inches
deflec, cant. suitable us1
inches
area req'd (In"2)
2.13
dead load
0.7315
creep used dead load
0.0000
section mod. req'd (ln•3)
17.09
live load
0", carpal Roar
0.4847
live load ra oeeriir•.,r.
0.0000
total load
okay, cellbq
1.216 total load m ra 8leve
0.0000
deflection
deflection
actual geometric properties
values
criteria
inches
criteria
inches
cross sectin area used (In"2)
25.38
x.y
span/120
2.2330
sparW240
0.0000
section modulus used (In43)
30.66
*k.y
sparalao
1.4887
spanr360
0.0000
moment Inertia used (in44)
111.15
span1240
1.1165
sparV480
0.0000
span7360
0.7443
span1600
0.0000
spanl480
0.5583
sp.W20
0.0000
spard600
0.4466
spard720
0.3722
Shear Diagram
300 -- - ---:
200 ... .... ... :... ...... _......... ..... .......
100 ..._... .....i._..
0 ...... i... l...............
. i........
100 ...... ; .._ . t. .
y..y-
200 t 1. '......
I I
300
N
Moment Diagram
n n a d) in -)n ')n
Deflection Diagram
0
G.E
-4.(f
--
I
i I
;.._.. . ...........;....... '
• !
i
°Total
... ..... I ....... ........... ........ .. .................
I
n A O A1 AC 1n n,l
Sezen & Moon Structural Engineering, Inc.
voice: 408.871.7273
274 E. Hamitton Avenue, Suite C
fax: 408-871.7274
a r
Campbell, CA 95008-0240
Pro)ect Name:
Yung Res
rob: 5617-14
Spread sheet created by Kent S. Sezen, MS, SE
Member name:
Header #6
Member Iocation: Header
Fb
Fl Fv Fc (perp) Fc (parallel) E
1
1 ipsi PSI psi
use code
Design values -
900
575 160 625 1350 1600000 I
t 1DF#2 Lumber
bad
wet
beam
sae
Fb
repetitive
duration
service
temp.
stability
factor
sae
flat use
member
form
factor
factor
factor
factor
gib
factor
factor
factor
factor
CD
cm
Ct
CL
cv
CIF
clu
Cr
Cf
1-00
1.00
1.00
0.998
1 1.000
1.10
1.00
1.00
1 1.00
toad
CO
CD used
1 c---- b
ito
durationon factor
1.00
1.00
-
-- c7 � L•2 -
repetitive member
Cr
use
Cr used
three or more
1.15
0
0.00
F; Fi r'3 Pe
two or less
1
1
1.00
!
x.4 V V V
beam loads
values
spaMoad conditions
distance
Till l
vvDL1 dead load (plf)
105.00
at midspan
span (feet) simple
12.00
w3
! t i P-cent
wLL1 live load (pll)
wl total bad (ptf)
95.00
200
at midspan
at midspan
cant (feet) no canti
'al"(feet)
0.00
2.00.I
l l
wDL2 deadUbatl(Pm
0.00
at canmcer
b1"(feet)
'a2'
0
rlMEWIIIIIIIIIIIII ilTfl TIl-iTim sl'Tr,nJ
w2 live load (ptf)
0.00
atrarttilever
(feel)
4.04.00
- ... ..
w2 total load (ptf)
at canule.d
'b2'(feet)
8.00
tvDL3 dead bad (PI)
0.00
aerguiar to rigtd
"aY (feel)
6.00
wLL3 live load (ptf)
0.00
biargAw to right
'b3'(feet)
6.00
V (lefl) v (6ght)
w3 total load (ptf)
benguiar to dgta
'a4'(feet)
8.00
vvDL4 dead bad (pit)
0.00
biargrAw to left
'b4" (feet)
4.00
wLL4 live load (pit)
000
burgAwto kit
Reaction
0 left support Reaction 0 right
support
w4 total bad (ptf)
L o li-rpaar
to left
geometry
values
R DL (Ibs)
630 R DL (Ibs)
630
beam width inches)
3.50
R LL Obs)
570 R LL Ibs
570
PDL1 point dead bad (lb)
0.00
at "al"
beam depth (inches)
11.25
Total Ibs
1200 Total Ibs
1200
PLO point live load (Ib)
0.00
at *a 1"
P l total point load (lb)
Dat"al"
material type DF02 Lumber
d2
PDL2 point dead load (Ib)
0.00
at'a2•
PLL2 point live load (lb)
0.00
at'a2'
conditions
values
camber use
Camber used
P2 total point load (lb)
at'a2•
quantity (members connected together)
1
Radius GLB (stock = 3500-ft) 3500
PDL3 point dead bad (lb)
0.00
at'a3'
team used upright
1
stock camber 0.062 1
0.06
PLO point live load (lb)
0.00
at'aT
team used on side
0
upright
variable camber 0.07 0 0.00
P3 total point load (lb)
at'a3'
Lit unsupported length > 0 (inches)
12.00
no camber (overide), yes = 1, no = 0 0
0.00
PDL4 point dead bad Ob)
0.00
at "a4
Luld > 0
1.07
-
PLL4 point live load (lb)
ODD
at'a4'
Moments
values fft4b.)
P4 total point load (lb)
at'a4'
Shears
values
M max ® span (DL)
1890
V DL (left)
630
IDs
M max a span (LL)
1710
PDL-cant pant dead load (lb)
0.00
at cantilever
V LL (left)
570
Ibs
M max @ span (total)
3600
PLL-cant point live bad (lb)
0.00
at ra til_
v DL (right) lett side
630
om
M ® c arblew" (GL)
0
Peant total point bad (Ib)
[
et cemile�e
V LL (e#d) left side
570
ms
M ® r ILL)
0
V OL (rgh0 right
0
e>s
M max @ cantilever (total)
0
V LL (rgM rip side
0
Ibs
v max (total)
1200
It's
Consider tree es = 1 no = 0 1
yes tree
Consider creep for members where probability of constant dead bad is high-
ua "
beam size
Don't consider creep for roof framing with allic space below.
Sing
)L 11.25
DF#2 Lumber
simple span beam 0.000 camber (inches)
required geometricreguired geometric properties
values
deflec, span
suitable use
inches
deflec, cant suitable us(
inches
area req'd (in^2)
10.00
dead bad
0.1106
creep used dead Load
0.0000
section mod. req'd (inA3)
43.71
live load
okay, tile floor
0.0667
live load no o nalevar
0.0000
total bad
okay. tk noon
0-1773 total bad oo cantle...
0.0000
deflection
deflection
actual4eometricproperties
values
criteria
inches
criteria
inches
cross secUri area used (inA2)
39.38
okay span/120
1.2000
spar11240
0.0000
section modulus used (inA3)
73.83
okay spanl180
0.8000
spanf360
0.0000
moment Inertia used (in^4)
415.28
spard240
0.6000
span/480
0.0000
sparnGO
0.4000
span)600
0.0000
spanl480
0.3000
spar%r720
0.0000
spard600
0.2400
span/720
0.2000
Shear Diagram
1200 - ---
800 -.... ' . ..-.-..... - ...
AAA
i
Live
-Total
-400
_4.,-
-800
Moment Diagram
4000 -- , - ----
3500 ........ ...._------ - ._. _. .......
3000 .._..J.-H
- - r .. E..._......
2500 --------------
2000
----------_-- .... .... .... °Live
1500 .._ - -...- -- =- --....
Total
7000..... .. - .. .. ; .....,.
500 :..... ..-;.. :.
n A R a 1n 11)
Deflection Diagram
Sezen & Moon Structural Engineering, Inc.
voice: 408.871-7273
274 E- llamihon Avenue, Suite C
fax: 408.871-7274
s .
Campbell, CA 95008-0240
Proiect Name:
Yung Res
Job: 5617-14
Spread sheet created by Kent S. Sezen, MS, SE
Member name:
Roof #8
Member location: Vaulted Sloped roof rafters
Fb
Ft Fv Fc (perp) Fc (parallel) E
P.
i Ipsi psi psi use
code
0¢sign_values___ ___
900
575 180 625 1350 1600000 1
1 DF#2 Lumber.
load
wet
beam
sae
Fb
repetitive
duration
service
temp.
stability
factor
sae
Oat use
member
form
factor
factor
factor
(actor
gib
factor
factor
factor
factor
CD
CM
Ct
CL
CV
CIF
Cfu
Cr
Cf
1.00
1.00
1M
0.992
1.000
1.10
1.00
1.00
1.00
load duration CD CD used a,, b3
duration factor 1.00 1.00 f
07 t b2 1
1-- -- - f
01 �i
repetitive member Cr use Cr used -
three or more IA5 0 0.00 P1 i p21 o3 14I
two or less 1 1 1 1.00
w4 ,
beam loads values soaMoad conditions distance )
w130 dead load (plf) 36.00 at midspan span (feet) simple 13.50 ■3
.1-0 live load (pK) 40.00 at midspan Anti (feet) no cant! 0.00
wl total load (pif) 76 at midspan 'al'(feet) 3-W
wDL2 dead load (plf) 0.00 at eanLle"er -b1"(feet) 10.50 !IIII Illlllllltllllllllllllllr(IlTfrn.lTfmli1
wL12 live bad (call) 0.00 mcm 0- 'a2'(feet) 6.00
w2 total load (ptf) st cm:4- "h2•(feet) 7.50
wDL3 dead load (pit0.00 rriangmacmdpm 'a3' (reel) g 00 S spo^ cent
wLL3 live load (pIQ 0.00 biangukvmtipm 'W'(feet) 4.50
v (tell) v (49h1)
w3 total load (Ptf) bianpW. dam "a4-(feet) 12.00
wDL4 dead load (pit) 0.00 uwV%aar m ten 'W (feet) 1.50
wLL4 live bad (ptf) 0.00 tdanptaarm ten Reaction left support Reaction 9D right support
w4 total load (pIQ L0 star ,mien peometry values RDL(lbs) 243 RDL(lbs) 243
beam width (inches) 1.50 R LL Ibs 270 R LL Ibs 270
PDL1 point dead load (lb) 0.00 at "al" beam depth (riches) 9.25 Total Ibs 513 Total Ibs 513
PLLt point live load (lb) 0.00 at 181"
P1 total point load (lb) al "al" materlaf type DFi72 Lumber df2
PDL2 point dead load (Ib) 0.00 at "az
PLL2 point live load (lb) 0.00 at'a2' conditions values camber use Camber used
P2 total point load (lb) at "a2' quantity (members connected together) 1 Radius GLB (stock = 3500-ft) 3500
PDL3 point dead load (lb) 0.00 at "aT beam used upright 1 stock camber 0.076 1 0.08
PLO point live load Qb) 0.00 at "aT beam used on side 0 upright variable camber 0.17 0 0.00
P3 total point load (lb) at'a3' Lu unsupported length > 0 (niches) 12.00 no camber (overide), yes = 1, no = 0 0 0.00
PDL4 point dead load (lb) - 0.00 at "a4' Luld> 0 1.30 -
PLL4 point live load (lb) 0.00 at "a4' oments values fft-lb.)
P4 total point load (lb) at "04' Shears values M ma. ® Wan (DL) a2o
V OL pen) 243 lb. M me" @ span (LL) 911
PDLcant point dead bad (lb) O.Do m V LL (left) 270 Ibs M max @ span (total) 1731
PLL-cant point live load (lb) 0.00 at -1t$ .0 v DL (n^ left side 243 bs M a r rmlever (DL) 0
Plant total pointbad (lb) m carole er v LL (dght) kn We 270 Ibs M a rankle-(L.1 0
V OL (119" 69m 0 Ibs M max @ cantilever (total) 0
V LL (right) dpm side 0 Ibs
V max (total) 613 Ibs Consider tree es - 1 no - 0 1 es tree
Consider creep for members where probability of constant dead bad is high.
ua beam sae Don1 consider creep for roof framing with attic space below.
Sing 1.5 tt 9.25 DF#2 Lumber simple span beam 0.000 camber (inches)
required geometric properties values deflece span suitable use inches deflece cant. suitable us( inches
area req'd (In42) 4.28 dead load 0.2549 creep used dead bad 0.0000
section mod. req'd (103) 21.16 live load okay, We favor 0.1888 It- load no "ntlla 0.0000
total load okay, carpet roof 0.4438 total load no "ntlla 0.0000
deflection deflection
actual geometric properties values criteria inches criteria inches
cross sectin area used (in•2) 13.88 okay span(120 1.3500 spanr240 0.0000
section modulus used (In" 3) 21.39 okay span(180 0.9000 spanf360 0.0000
moment Inertia used (In" 4) 98.93 spanl240 0.6750 apan/480 0.0000
span7360 0.4500 spanl600 0.0000
spanl480 0.3375 apanr72O 0.0000
spanl600 0.2700
spanf720 0.2250
Shear Diagram
Moment Diagram
n 7 A R R 1ri 17 1A
Deflection Diagram
Sezen &r Moon Structural Engineering, Inc.
voice: 408-871-7273
274 E. Hamilton Avenue, Suite C
fax: 408.871.7274
• ,
Campbell. CA 954108-0240
Project Name:
Yung Res
rob: 5617-14
Spread sheet created by Kent S. Sezen MS SE
member name:
Girder 910
Member location: Girder under bearing wall
Fb
Ft Fv Fc (peril) Fc (parallel)
E
Ip.I
psi Psi psi
psi
use
code
Design values
875
425 170 625 600
1300000
!
10 DF#2 Timber
bad
wet
beam
size
Fb
repetitive
duration
service
temp.
stability
factor
sae
flat use
member
form
factor
factor
factor
factor
gib
factor
factor
factor
factor
CD
CM
Ct
CL
CV
CF
Cfu
Cr
cl
load duration
CD CD used
duration factor
1.00 1.00
repetitive member
Cr use
Cr used
three or more
1.15 0
0.00
two or less
1 1
1.00
1.00
beam loads
values
soannoad conditions
wDL1 dead bad got
274.00 at m!dspan
span (feet) simple
wLL1 live bad (pff)
180.00 at midspan
cardi ff" no cant)
wl total load (plt)
Oat -wan
^a 1'(feet)
wOL2 dead bad (ptf)
0.00 at w,+a-
-b1(feet)
wLL2 live bad (pit)
0.00 at-Ift er
-a2- (feet)
w2 WWI load (ptf)
at-dileawr
-b2'(feet)
wOL3 dead load (ptf)
0.00 uiangutm to right
�3' (feet)
wLL3 live load (ptf)
0.00 triangular m right
ro3' (feet)
w3 total load (pit)
marprrtarto right
"a4* (feet)
wDL4 dead load (ptf)
0.00 uwrgurar to left
'b4' (feet)
wL1-4 rive bad (pit)
0.00 oiaryura to left
w4 total load (plf)
L 0 1rrieaeuar to left
1leome[ry
beam width (inches)
PDL1 point dead bad (Ib)
0.00 at 'a 1"
beam depth (inches)
PLO point five load (Ib)
0.00 at "a 1"
P1 total point load jib)
at "a 1"
material type DF62 Timber
PDL2 point dead bad (tb)
0.00 at "a7
PLL2 point live bad (1b)
0.00 at'a7
Conditions
P2 total point load (lb)
at "a2'
quantity (members connected together)
PDL3 point dead load (lb)
0.00 at "aT
beam used upright
PLO point live bad (lb)
0.00 at "aT
beam used on side
1`3 total point load (lb)
at "aT
Lu unsupported length > 0 (inches)
PDL4 point dead load (Ib)
0.00 - at "a4'
Lu/d > 0
PLL4 point live load (Ib)
0.00 at "a4'
P4 total point load (lb)
at 'a4'
Shears
V DL (left)
PDL-cant point dead bad (Ib)
0.00 at canhlavr
v LL (left)
PLL-cam point live load (Ib)
0.00 at cantilever
V DL (right) ten side
Pt nt total point load (lb)
at canelaser
V LL g" L-ft We
V DL (rigIV right
V LL (right) :iglu side
V max (total)
uired geometric properties values
req d (In-2) 11.02
on mod. req'd (iri 23.55
actual Geometric properties values
cross sectin area used (!nA2) 30.25
section modulus used [Iri 27.73
moment Inertia used (In-4) 76.26
Shear Diagram
- °2 - 1 b2 ---{
Ir1 I -I
i
1 F'1j
w4 III 1 1 1 V
distance l •!i I I ! ' .
5.50 I w3 P-ccrl
0.00
0.50 II I •i 1
mI n i wi
2.00 [1 iW 1' i t 1 1 ! 1 I nTnTIITIITTiTm
3.50 .. _ I
4.00 {- spen-_anti I.
1.50 v (tell) v'-(,fight) ---iii
4.25
1.25
Reaction JD left support Reaction 0 right support
values R DL (lbs) 754 R DL (lbs) 754
5.50 R LL(lbs) 495 R LL(lbs) 495
5.50 Total Obs 1249 Total Obs) 1249
d2.
values
camber use
Camber used
1
Radius GLB (stock = 3500-ft) 3500
1
stock camber 0.013 1
0.01
0
upright
variable camber 0.06 0
0.00
12.00
no camber (owride), yes = 1, no = 0 0
0,00
2.18
-
Moments
values f04b.1
values
M ma ® span (DL)
1036
754
ens
M - a span (LL)
681
495
bs
M max @ span (total)
1716
754
bs
M C (DL)
0
495
Ias
M a mnterer (W
0
0
bs
M max @ cantilever (total)
0
0
ens
1249
lbs
Consider tree es =1 no - 0 1
tree
X 0.5
DF#2 Timber
deflec, span
suitable use
inches
dead load
0.0853
rive load
okay, al. hoar
0.0374
total load
okay, rile floor
0.1227
deflection
criteria
inches
otrcy span/120
0.5500
okay span/180
0.3667
spant240
0.2750
apanf360
0.1833
spard480
0.1375
apari
0.1100
spanf720
0.0917
Moment Diagram
1600
Consider creep for members where probability of constant dead bad is high.
Don't consider creep for roof framing with attics ace below.
simple span beam 0.000 camber (inches)
deflec• cant suitable usl
inches
creep used dead bad
0.0000
live load ro camulewr
0.0000
total load no ummrwr
0.0000
deflection
criteria
inches
sparV240
0.0000
sparlr360
0.0000
spard480
0.0000
apanl600
0.0000
spaM20
0.0000
1000 r-- --i`
.......;...... 800
I .. -... o ^ Total
600 ........<....... ... ._ .......
400 .. ;... .... f ..
200 i
n 1 7 1 A F a
Deflection Diagram
0
-00
-00
0.1
G.1
......_ ... .- ........_................... .i...........
- --- --
.._...... ! ..__..!_........_i........ T_..^........_
...... .... .......... ...
Live
Total
C C
E. iateral Analysis
4/14/2014 Design Maps Sum-oryReport
. Design Maps Summary Report
User -Specified Input
Report Title Yung Res.
Tue April 15, 2014 02:52:15 UTC
[Building Code Reference Document ASCE 7-10 Standard
(which utilizes USGS hazard data available in 2008)
Site Coordinates 37.305170N, 122.058781W
Site Soil Classification Site Class D - "Stiff Soil"
Risk Category I/II/III
•Tj
5o00nr'V's z ? r jip, gFt
M5a,
A.
r =.. �k+;.� � � �� t 1 � � � ,," F� �4, r 33 t � '• i : YF`"�,' �.�;,. r � � '�Y; � ,n� �� R
ba• i . � }..fib P^�+z`' '�,:; � �- '" .:tea, `�� >: ,y l>,�.• { F i waj '��;'' x� - �� � br weSi . � T F�,
V
,: • .yew ,d, a 'f -°'� ..�.,n s '`', "� ;
jo
U SGS-[Provided output
SS = 2.502 g SKS = 2.502 g SuS = 1.668 g
SSa = 0.947 g SMi = 1.421 g SDI = 0.947 g
For information on how the SS and S1 values above have been calculated from probabilistic (risk -targeted) and
deterministic ground motions in the direction of maximum horizontal response, please return to the application
and select the "2009 NEHRP" building code reference document.
PRICER Response Spectrum
2.86
2.60
a.34
2.09
1.82
1.56
1.30 `
1.04
0.79
0.52
0.26
0.00
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.20 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.00 2.00
Period, T (sec)
1.07
1.70
1.53
1.36
1.19
GR 1.02
M 0.85
0.6B
0.51
0.34
0.17
0.00
0.00 0.20 0.40. 0.60 0.90 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.90 2.00
Period, T (sec)
Design Response Spectrum
For PGA,„ TU C.., and CF, values, please view the detailed report.
http://ehpl-earthqual-.cr.usgs.goVdesignmaps/us/surtvnaryphp?templ ate=minimal&latitude=37.3051717&longitude=-122.0587782&siteclass=3&rislcategory 1/2
Date 4/14/2014 Sezen & Moon Structural Engineering Page 2
8:51 PM 274 E. Hamilton Ave #C
Campbell, CA. 95008-0240
Building edge strip per Note-9 in Fig. 28.6-1.
ax:= max(min(0.1•roofx,0.4•mean-heightoof)10.04•roofx,3•ft)
ay:= max(min(0.I-roofy,0.4•mean_heightr.f),0.04•roof,,3•ft)
A.2 Wind, load, cakulalnons
Ps = X'Kzt-POO Main Wind Force Resisting System (MWFRS), Envelope Procedure - Part 2
condition, := 6 Input yes=0, no=1 for Simple building diaphragm per Section 26.2
"3t83 rn
condition2 := 0 Input yes=0, no=1 for Low-rise building mean roof height < 60 ft per Section 26.2
condition3 := 0 Input yes=0, no=1 for Building enclosed per Section 26.2
condition4 := 0 Input yes=0, no=1 for Regular -shaped building per Section 26.2
conditions := 0 Input yes=0, no=1 for Not flexible building per Section 26.2 [T<l sec. T=0.1 x (no. of story)]
condition6 := 0 Input yes=0, no=1 for No special wind characteristics, vortex, galloping, channeling or buffeting.
conditions := 0, Input yes=0, no=1 for Approx. symmetrical w/ flat, gable or hip roof
conditions :__` 0 Input yes=0, no=1 for No torsional effects per Note-5 of Fig. 28.4-1
sumcondition condition, + condition2 + condition3 + condition4 + conditions + condition6 + conditions + conditions
applicabilitym,thod-1 := if(sumcondition > 1, "Part 2 is NOTapplicable, Use Part 1" , "Part 2 is applicable")
apliabtite� j "Part>2 ts�appltc&lei'
1V; c.;oscc.`.ct
Risk. category := 2 ; Risk category of building and other structures per Table 1.5-1.
]E_xpo`sure "O", X: Adjustment factor foi building �;f
Mean roof
Exposure
height and exposure from ASCE 7-,10 Fig.28 6 iur F '
height (ft)
B
O
)D
15
1.00
1.47
t ean: hetghtroQf 13 S ft
20
1.00
-29
1.55
o,.-�-..a
25
1.00
1.61
30
1.00
n40'
1.66
35
1.05
4j
1.70
- 1.00 Topographical effects in Section 26.8, unless
40
1.09
s4Q
1.74
topographic reports is provided by others.
45
1.12
1.7850
1.16
1.81
55
1.19
N
1.84
60
1.22
:2
1.87
Page: 2
Date 4/94/2014 Sezen & Moon Structural Engineering Page 4
8:51 PM 274 E. Hamilton Ave #C
Campbell, CA. 95008-0240
A.3 Wind load in "X" direction.
roofr y := 1 Input "1" for hip roof and "2" for gable end roof
Roof level
Load at the roof in End zone
heightroof
Vroofx.E t rooftypey >— 2,Ps.A .
2•ay ,PS.B•(heightroof 2'ay�
roofty�.y
Load at the roof in Interior zone
heightroof
Vroof.x.1 i rooftyp,.y >— 2,Ps.0 •(roofy — 2-ay� ,Ps.D•�heightroof �roofy — 2-ay�j
rooft,, y
Load at the 1st floor wall in End zone
height.,,
Vfloor.x.E Ps.A' (- 2 2'ay Vfloor.x.E = 866.1 lb
- -
Load at the 1st floor wall in Interior zone
height.,, 1
Vfloor.x.1:= Ps.C' 2 floory — 2-ay)�
Vtotal.wind.x (Vroof.x.E + Vroof.x.1 + Vfloor.x.E + Vfloor.x.l)'0.6
Vroof.x.E = 575.01b
Vroof.x.I = 2300.0lb
Vfloor.x.1 = 2255.21b
Page: 4
Date 4/14/2014 Sezen & Moon Structural Engineering Page 6
8:51 PM 274 E. Hamilton Ave #C
Campbell, CA. 95008-0240
B. Seismic Qoad calculations (ASC E 7-10, Section 12.8 Equivalent lateral Force procedure)
IB.1 Building dead weight calculation
DLr,Of:= 13•psf DLceiling = 6•psf DLE�n 16 psf DLl.wal] 8`Psf
Areafloor := [(31.19) + (20.16.5)] •sf Areafl,,r = 919.0•sf
Arearoof := Areafl06r'(105•%0) Arearoof = 965.0•sf
105% accounts for miscellaneous roof features (i.e. roof overhangs).
floor, = 35.0 ft floory = 30.0 ft
lengthE wall : 2•.(flo6rz'+'floor0 lengthE Wan = 130.0 fi
length,.wall := 2'(floor.'+,;floor3f) lengths wall = 130.0ft
height,vall = 9.0 ft
heightwall height all
Wbldg := (DLroof + DLceil;og)•Arearoof + DLE.wall'lengthE.wall' 2 + DLI ull•lengthl_wall 2
Bldg 32.4 kip.
Page: 6
Date 4/1412014 Sezen & Moon Structural Engineering Page 8
8:51 PM 274 E. Hamilton Ave #C
Campbell, CA. 95008-0240
catagoryseismic.design if(S, ? 0.75, "Seismic Design Catagory E" , "Worst of Table 1613.3.5 (1) or Table 1613.3.5 (2)" )
Gat3gorySetsm�cdestgci "Selsmlcl�estgn Catagory" ._
)<2esnonse modification coefficient from ASCE 7-10, Table 12.2-1.
:= 6.5 Bearing wall system. Light -frame (wood) walls with •plywood
sheathing.
Seismic Base Shear. ASCE 7-10, Section 12.8.1.
V = Cs• W equation 12.8-1
Approximate Fundamental Period (in seconds). ASCE 7-10, Section 12.8.2.1.
Ta = Ct•hnx equation 12.8-7
Ct := 0.02 x:= 0.7-5 All other structural system as .per structure -type in Table 12.8-2
hn := Elevplate The height in feet above the base to the highest level of the structure. We often consider the highest plate height.
x
Ta := Ct I hnJ sec—
ft �:...._,.:�..
Determine coefficient for upper limit on calculated period. ASCE 7-10, Section 12.8.2.
SDI = 0.9470 as calculated above.
C„ := 1.4 For SDI >= 0.4 sec as per Table 12.8-1
]Period Determination, ASCE 7-10, Section 12.8.2
T = C,; Ta1 0 3455 s
Determination of Tt din seconds), lone -period transition period as defined in ASCE 7-10, Section 11.4.5
TL := 8.sec Per figure 22-12 in ASCE 7-10, page 170.
Page: 8
Date 4/14/2014
8:51 PM
Sezen & Moon Structural Engineering
274 E. Hamilton Ave #C
Campbell, CA. 95008-0240
]B.3 ][Diaphragm design force per ASCE 7-10 Section 12.10.1.1
In the "%" and "Y" direction
Wroof := W , := us
n
IFi
i=x
Fpx = . Wpx
n
z Wi
i=x
sumWi := W"'f
sumFi := F
At roof Bevel
sumFi
Fp.roof :_ *Wroof
sumWi
Wpx := Wroof
equation 12.10-1
sumWi = 32.4•kip
sumFi = 5.8•kip
Fp.roof = 5.8•kip
][Determine "F'px" max from equation 12.10-3
Fpx.max := 0.4•SDS'Ie'Wpx Fpx.max = 21.6•kip
][Determine "F'px" min from equation 12.10-2
Fpx.min:= 0.2•SDS.Ie'Wpx Fpx.min = 10.8•kip
A = if(Fpx.max> Fp.roof,Fp.roof)Fpx.max) Fp.roof = 5.8•kip
4NW�;= if(Fp.roof > Fpx.min � Fp.roof � Fpx.min) Fp.roof = 10.8•kip
D O 8000 k1p Use this valuefor roof analyse Fp := max(F, Fp.roof) T'
Page 10
Page: 10
Date 4/1412014 Sezen & Moon Structural Engineering
8:51 PM 274 E. Hamilton Ave #C
Campbell, CA. 95008-0240
Buildine Area
aloor ` f4 ysf he}gh#„u 9 ft E;��' 6 5 rIl S'i
:25b6 Ar
'ca b :.�Seisrru Ca off.
�se�. A design . _z. '
D. Summary of Diaphragm ]Loads
Roof Diaphragm ]Loads of roof, " X" & "YY" Direction.
VD = 10.8000-kip AreaflOr = 919.0000•sf
VD
(Froof ate{' 11 7.519apsf
Areafloor
E. Summary of Shea- Loads
Determining the Rellialbillily/Redaundaffiey ]Factor ffd shear -walls
Dst Floor: "X" and "Y"' - Direction
VS := VS = Fp
VS = 5.8154-kip
VS
Cred
D
VD = 10.8000•kip Note: Vs is the original base shear, which would be
the governing lateral load of either wind or seismic.
VD is the elevated diaphragm lateral load.
iCs� Q 53�>5 F.
Page 12
Page: 12
0
Au,F-4 Z� q ka,
,qs = 5,1?IsI�
C
G,
LAUNDRY
n n
Date 4/14/2014 Sezen & Moon Structural Engineering, Inc. Page: 1
8:51 PM 274 E Hamilton Ave #C
Campbell, CA. 95008
LIMITS TO BE USED FOR FOLLOWING CALCULATIONS. kip = 1000.1b sf = ft2 cf = ft3
pli = Ib in plf = Ib kli a 1000•pli klf =— 1000-plf psi = l 2 psf = I b ksi 1000-psi ksf = 1000•psf
ft inft
pci = lb pcf = lb kci = 1000•pci kcf = 1000•pcf
in3 ft3
ZYu nR Residence. J®bo 5617-14
Diaphragm analysis for rooff
FP:= 10.800 kip Area,,,f:= 919•sf
FP
0'roof
Arearoof v ...M ,_.>,.
aooff 11f &6."X" pia s"t"r'tS�:
]From ¢rid A to C
span := 20.33-ft
depth ¢= 'Wft
w:= o-roofdepth
w = 188.03•plf
span
W.
2
M:— w span
M = 9714.333 ft•lb
8
.4' .
Summation check Urg,r,r, �0•lb
Vim := VS,,,,, + V•2 VSum = 3822.6591b
v := V v = 119.458 •plf comment„ := if(v < 230•plf, , "RV , if(v < 340•plf, , 1'R2" , if(v < 505 •plf , "R3" , "stress too high")))
depth
comment„>
M
chord :=
depth
chord = 607.146 lb
commenthord := if (chord < 1300• lb, "Nominal, DBL 2x4 top plate w/ 16-16d nails staggered at 4'-0" min. long splice" , "To be designed")
cocr mentc��oi� t "N��mirial, DBL 2x4 topplate w! 16 �'Gd nails tagger�d' t�4 w0 nrn to g sp1 c
10 diaphragm lateral analysis for roof 13Jun11.xmcd
Date 4A4I2014 Sezen & Moon Structural Engineering, Inc. Page: 3
8:51 PM 274 E Hamilton Ave #C
Campbell, CA. 95008
From grid 4 to 7
.= 19-ft
= goof depth
span
2
2
span
8
= V v = 111.643•plf
AM depth
M
c rd
depth
de t := 11•ft
w = 129.271 •plf
V 228 0 4��S
..�.. M4
M = 5833.351 ft•lb
Summation check
,V,Sµ�- V,,m + V•2 V,,m = 10818.215lb
co en .= if(v <_ 230•plf , "Rl" , if(v _< 340-p1f , "R2" , if(v _< 505•plf , "R3" , "stress too high")
chord = 530.305 lb
c := if (chord < 1300•lb, "Nominal, DBL 2x4 top plate w/ 16-16d nails staggered ,agtt 4'-0" min. long splice" , "To be designed")
Via. o , 116-2
commentt�,ora °1Ndhi nai;� B 2x4iop plate w/ 16=1bd ails stagge\redxa it 0'-m;n�v asp is
». "� 2 .
10 diaphragm lateral analysis for roof 13Junl1.xmcd
*1
LAUNDRY
I--
Date 411412014 Sezen & Moon Structural Engineering, Inc. Page: 2
8:51 PM 274 E. Hamilton Ave., Ste. C
Campbell, CA 95008-0240
Grid line D
Determine " p
v�• 4714.lb V2:= 0•Jb V = 0•Ib
v — AV~
(V1 + V2 + V3 + V4)•Cred + Vabove
5-ft ^L22:= 3.75•fft 3µ:=, 0•ft
su := L1 + L2 + L3 + L4 — openings
r�� �5383141b
L4':= 0-ft U eii n s:=.(0 +: 0,+ 0)•ft
sumL = 8.75 ft
max(L1, L2, L3, L4) maxwall.length = 5 ft
Summation check
VI := Vsum + V Vsum = 5784.708 lb
Vy' maxwall.length
Nv�^= rati�ov:= ratio = 25•% RfA6 .= if (ratio < 33•%,"Rho=1.00" ,'Rho=1.3")
sumL Vs.total
(maxwall.length)
;= 2 nbays = 1.111 ;ASCE Section 12.3.4.2
heightplate
Awl:= if(nba s Z 2, "Exception,Rho=1.00" , "No Exception") ezCC `h f�� � 0 c e ti h t —
Grid;line 2
Determine " p
1V = 4i81ll V2` = 0-lb V = 0-lb
NVw:= (V1 + V2 + V3 + V4)•Cr,d + Vabove
1 = 5 ft L2 := 4;ft L3,.= 0•f.
225 3 *J
.-(0+0+0),_fft
su = L1 + L2 + L3 + L4 — openings sumL = 5 ft
Summation check V 0 lti.
nr�5i>iRn , ice,
:= max(L1,L2,L3,L4) maxwall.length = 5 ft VN:= V,,m + V Vsum = 2251.3141b
vmax
V ra t0 '_ wau length ratio = ,"Rho=1.3")
V AM
V:= 39•% if(ratio < 33•%, "Rho=1.00" � �Q�'
sumL s.total�_..s.__,.,i� t.
(maxwall.length)
,a4o6" 2 height nbays = 1.111 ;ASCE Section 12.3.4.2
plate
— Wr
it (nbaY— s >2, "Exception,Rho=1.00" , "No Exception" i � k' u"Iv10 E C i10I1'�
r��!'vi fiSµRl' J9JL'— p h�ePt',
20 Reliability Redundancy Factor for shear walls.xmcd
3.4. Shear WailAeaivsis
Date: 4/14/2014 Sezen & Moon Structural Engineering, Inc. Page: 1
Time: 8:51 PM 274 E. Hamilton Ave., Ste. C
UNITS TO BE USED FOR FOLLOWING CALCULATIONS. kip = 1000•lb sf = ftg cf = ft3
pli = lb plf = lb ft kli = = lb 1000•pli klf = 1000•plf psi psf = l2 ksi = 1000•psi ksf = 1000-psf
in to ft
pci = lb pcf = lb kci = 1000•pci kcf = 1000•pcf
in3 ft3
Yung ResWence. Job: 5617-14
Isf floor —shear —Walls.
Grid line A p : 1.3 �V := 3246•lb•(p) + 0-lb quant§shearwA..segments .� x 6%in holdown distance
from wall edge.
heightplate = 9-ft L1 := 14.3•ft L2:= 4-ft L3 := 3.33 ft L4 ft L II := L1 + L2 + L3 + L4 + LS
Lwindow (0 + 0 + 0 + 0)•ft Lnet Lwall — quantityshearwall.segments_ vwall = V Ij 2U4.:S4 sy
Lnet — Lwindow
segmental width := L1 segmentwajl:height heightplate
segment�ll.height
commentratio := if >_ 3.5 , "Inadequate aspect" , "Acceptable aspect"
segmental width
segment„ a] .height 2•segmentwall.width
aspect�t;o := if >_ 2, ,1
segmentwall.width segmentwall. height
vwall
_
aspectratio
?}wall �2Q4.547sp1
shearwall := W567 <— if(v,11 < 760plf , "W5(BS)" , if(vwall < 980•plf , "W6(13S)" , if(vWall < 1280•plf , "W7(13S)" , "Shear too high"���
W34 <— if(vwall <_ 490•plf , "W3" , if(v,l < 640•plf , "W4" , W567))
W12 <— if(v,1 5 260•plf,"W1" ,if(v,l <_ 380•plf,"W2" ,W34))
'sheaiwa� ` r�W1"
Check shearwall uplift forces.
Upliftab�,e `= 0 lli Uplift forces from above (ie, shear -wall above)
OTM H.
OTM := V•heightalate OTM = 37978.2 ft-lb UP := + Upliftabo e
Lnet �M
HD := HD19 <—if(Up <_ 19070•lb, "use HD19 w/ 6x post wide ftg"" , "Tension too high; Use other holdown method")
HDU14 <— if(Up <_ 14925•lb, "HDU14 w/ 6x post and wide ftg" ,HD19)
HDU11 <— if(Up S 9215•Ib, "HDUl lw/ 6x post and wide ftg" ,HDU14)
HDU8 <— if(Up <_ 6490•1b, "HDU8r (retro) with underpinning, HDU8-SST slab or HDU8 wide ftg" ,HDUI 1)
HDU5 <— if(Up S 5645•1b, "HDU5r (retro) with underpinning„ HDU8-SSTB slab or T-footing or HDUS wide ftg" ,HDU8)
HDU2b <— if(Up <_ 3075•lb, "HDU2r (retro) with underpinning, HDU2-SST slab or T-footing" ,HDU5)
HDU2a <— if(Up < 1400•lb,"HDU2r (retro), HDU2-SSTB slab orT-footing" ,HDU2b)
HDnone <— if (Up <_ 500•lb, "Tension low; Holdown not requireid" ,HDU2a)
HD.`"fDU2r �tetr )kwit derptning,u SS l slabs foitngr'
30 Shearwall Analysis for 1st floor - 18Feb13.xmcd
Date: 4/14/2014 Sezen & Moon Structural Engineering, Inc. Page: 3
Time: 8:51 PM 274 E. Hamilton Ave., Ste. C
Grid lime 2 p:= 1.3 22574b•(p) + 0•lb uanti = 1 �= 6-in holdown distance
from wall edge.
heightplate = 9 ft 5•ft 12 := 0•ft:= 0 ft:= 0 ft LN =Oft L1 + L2 + L3 + L4 + LS
Vr z»
(0 + 0 + 0)-ft = "1, - quantityshearwall.segments* X v _ � l 652 y0 2 pL
Lnet - Lwindow
meyy= Ll se en�= heightplate
segmentmll.height
4gt men:= if _> 3.5, "Inadequate aspect" , "Acceptable aspect"
segrrtentwall.width
segmentwal►.height 2•segtnentwal►.width R.
ARect = if >_ 2, ,1 aspect7ata�.
segment�ll•w;dd, segment�yap.height
vwall
aspectmt;o
r4`0.
s022rpIf,
&a wall W567 <— if(vwall < 760p1f , "W5(BS)" , if (VWajl s 980•plf , "W6(BS)" , if (VWall <_ 1280•pif, , "W7(BS)" , "Shear too high" )))
W34 F- if(v,,,all 5 490•plf,"W3" ,if(vwall <_ 640•plf,"W4' ,W567))
W12 <— if(v,vap <_ 260•pif,"W1" ,if(v„,all <_ 380•plf,"W2" ,W34))
shear�vall E,
Check shearwall uplift forces.
�= 0•lb Uplift forces from above (ie, shear -wall above)
iR := V•heightplate OTM = 26406.9 ft•lb XR:= OTM + Upliftaboveir
p 86811b
net
HD19 <-- if(Up <_ 19070•ib, "use HD19 w/ 6x post wide ftg"" , "Tension too high; Use other holdown method")
HDU14 +- if (Up 5 14925•lb, "HDU14 w/ 6x post and wide ftg" ,HD19)
HDU11 +- if(Up <_ 9215•ib,"HDUI lw/ 6x post and wide ftg" ,HDU14)
HDU8 if(Up <_ 6490•1b, "HDU8r (retro) with underpinning, HDU8-SST slab or HDU8 wide ftg" ,HDU11)
HDUS if(Up <_ 5645•lb, "HDU5r (retro) with underpinning„ HDU8-SSTB slab or T-footing or HDU5 wide ftg" ,HDU8)
HDU2b if(Up <_ 3075• lb, "HDU2r (retro) with underpinning, HDU2-SST slab or T-footing" ,HDUS)
HDU2a if(Up 5 1400•lb, "HDU2r (retro), HDU2-SSTB slab or T-footing" , HDU2b)
HDnone <— if(Up 5 500•lb, "Tension low; Holdown not requireid" ,HDU2a)
HD "HDU8r (retro) wlth�nderptnntng, HI?'�8 SST sla arU$ ytde :ftg"
30 Shearwall Analysis for 1st floor-18Feb13.xmcd
Date: 4/14/2014 Sezen ri; Moon Structural Engineering, Inc. Page: 5
Time: 8:51 PM 274 E. Hamilton Ave., Ste. C
Giid line 7 p = 1.3 V := 2912.1b-(p) + 0-lb uanti 1 z ='`6 in holdown distance
AW .
from wall edge.
-heightplate = 9 ft Li 12.5•ft 12 := O-ft 3,= O-ft W .= O-ft .55 := 0* ��:= L1 + L2 + L3 + L4 + L5
til �y= (0 + 0 + 0)•ft N= Lill — quantityshearwall.segments'x Ny ,IJ j= V v, 3 5 46 p
Lnet — Lwindow ���A
s men = Ll se en _. heightpjate
segment�Lheight
if >_ 3.5, Inadequate aspect ,Acceptable aspect"
Segmentmll.width
segmentwall.height 2•segment alLwidth
a ct = if >_ 2, , l
segmentwall.width segmentwall.height �p_s,10.
ywall£
vim=vwali - 37 5 467 plf:
aspectratio
shear.wallll := W567 <— if(v l :— 760p1f , "W5(BS)" , if(vw.,ll <_ 980-plf , "W6(BS)" , if (v,l :— 1280•plf , "W7(BS)" , "Shear too high" M
W34 <— if(vwall <_ 490•plf,"W3" ,if(vwajj <_ 640•plf,"W4' ,W567))
W12 <— if(vwall <_ 260•plf,"W1",if(vwall <_ 380•plf,"W2",W34))
:rshearwall "W2y'
Check shearwall uplift forces.
�.= O lb Uplift forces from above (ie, shear -wall above)
,2M:= V•heightplate OTM = 34070.4 ft•lb JP,; = OTM + UpliftaboVe 13p 21b
m
Lnet
HD19 <— if(Up :5 19070•1b, "use HD19 w/ 6x post wide ftg"" , "Tension too high; Use other holdown method")
HDU14 <— if(Up 5 14925•1b, "HDU14 w/ 6x post and wide ftg" ,HD19)
HDU11 <— if(Up 5 9215•1b, "HDU11w/ 6x post and wide ftg" ,HDU14)
HDU8 <— if(Up :5 6490•1b, "HDU8r (retro) with underpinning, HDU8-SST slab or HDU8 wide ftg" ,HDU11)
HDU5 (— if(Up —< 5645•lb, "HDU5r (retro) with underpinning„ HDU8-SSTB slab or T-footing or HDU5 wide ftg" ,HDU8)
HDU2b <— if (Up 5 3075-1b, "HDU2r (retro) with underpinning, HDU2-SST slab or T-footing" ,HDU5)
HDU2a <— if (Up <_ 1400•lb, "HDU2r (retro), HDU2-SSTB slab or T-footing" ,HDU2b)
HDnone <— if (Up :5 700•lb, "Tension low; Holdown not requireid" , HDU2a)
HD "HDU rietro)ytlundeipmrung, HDC�2 SS p slab pr Tfootng
30 Shearwrall Analysis for 1st floor-18Febl3.xmcd
" Sezen & Moon Structural Engineering, Inc. Page 1
274 E. Hamilton Avenue, Suite C Date 4/15/2014
UNITS TO BE USED FOR FOLLOWING CALCULATIONS. kip = 1000•lb sf = ft2 cf = ft 3
pli = lb plf = lb kli = 1000•pli klf = 1000•plf psi = lb psf = 16 ksi = 1000•psi ksf = 1000•psf
in ft in ft2
pci = lb pcf = lb kci = 1000•pci kcf = 1000•pcf
in3 ft3
Yung Res. Job: 5617-114
Typical sql u2 re foofing c2p2 ➢ty check;. Alllowable ➢nax.16�d peltyPnc2➢`ff®®H"size: 4increment.
Concrete Spread footing design. IFTG#1
PDL -= (1.0)•kip PDL= 1•kip PLL:= (1.5):kip PLL = 1.5•kip
The allowable vertical soil pressures given by Soil Engineer of 2013 CBC minimum values (if there is no soil report).
o-1L 1500 psf QI)L := 1500 psf
Determine required footing area.
ADL
.— PDL ADL = 0.667 ft2 — ATL := PDL + PLL ATL = 1.667 ft2
(FDL O'TL
Arequired = if (ADL > ATL, ADL, ATL)
bftg :_ ;required lbftg,� 1,5.1I1
Use square footing of these dimensions.
Cone1 d Sp➢ cad foofifig d 6ign..:IFTG#2
.kip PDL = 3-kip
Determine required footing area.
PDL 2
,A •._ — ADL = 2 ft
ADL
if (ADL > ATL. ADL, ATL)
PDL + PLL
nv - O'TL
PLL = 3-kip
= Arequired b;4. Use square footing of these dimensions.
ATL = 4 ft2
� yam`
Af � ''
�• �� � # s � .
�: $r<
� � �ll�
.��!
i
As
ADD
; `" •
F •. :`-� -
fix& _ �. f .. Y � � �
�br
� ate
1
��.
_ ' * � - �, �;
: .�. - !'�
•. 7
�w,
.F
°•!► �/ 4w
T
�401
OEOLOOOO WVESTOGAT�ON March 11, 2014
11205 Mount Crest Place Project 1009.27
Cupertino, CA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................1
SCOPEOF SERVICES...........................................................................................1
LIMITATIONS..........................................................................................................2
REGIONAL GEOLOGIC SETTING.........................................................................2
Geologyand Terrain....................................................................................2
Earthquake Faulting and Seismicity............................................................2
SITE CHARACTERIZATION...................................................................................4
SiteDescription...........................................................................................4
SiteGeology................................................................................................4
VicinityFault Traces....................................................................................5
Coseismic Earthquake Effects....................................................................5
Slope Stability and Landsliding...................................................................6
Drainageand Erosion..................................................................................6
SITE GEOLOGIC HAZARD CONSIDERATIONS AND RECOMENDATIONS ......6
GroundShaking..........................................................................................6
Table 1 - Earthquake Scenarios.....................................................7
FaultRupture...............................................................................................7
Landsliding.................................................................................................8
Soil Liquefaction and Settlement................................................................8
OtherHazards.............................................................................................8
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS..........................................................................8
CLOSURE................................................................................................................8
BIBLIOGRAPHY......................................................................................................10
Photos1 — 2...........................................................................................11
Photos3 — 4...........................................................................................12
Modified Mercalli Scale............................................................................................Table 2
PLATES
SitePlan.....................................................................................Plate 1
SiteLocation Map........................................................................................
Plate 2
Seismic Hazards Zones Map......................................................................
Plate 3
Regional Fault Map........................................................................Plate 4
Geologic Hazards Zones Map.....................................................................
Plate 5
Hazards Zones Map Legend.......................................................................Plate
5A
1989 Earthquake Damage.........................................................................
Plate 6
BORING LOGS (by Wayne Ting & Associates, Inc.)
LOUIIS A. RIICIEIIARDSON, P.G., C.E.G.
CONSULTING G ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
0
1
CONSULTING ENGINEERING GIE®II.000PaT
- PROFESSIONAL GEOLOGIST
- CERTIFIED ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
- CALIFORNIA - OR EGON - WASIH[III`�IGTON
March 11, 2014
ATTN: Gary and Paula Yung
11205 Mount Crest Place
Cupertino, California 95014-4750
Re: (Engineering Geologic Considerations for
Proposed Addition to (Existing Residence at
22205 Mount Crest Place (APM 356-26-005)
Cupertino, CaHfornia
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Yung:
l TRODUCTIOH
Q650D 967-11®®®
LO U@LAIIBCIEG. COM
P.O. BOX 2085
MOUNTAIN VIEW
CALIFORNIA 9404
Project No.1009.27
Pursuant to your request, this report summarizes the results of a screening investigation of
potential geologic hazards that the undersigned has performed for a proposed addition to a
two-story residence on the above -referenced parcel located about 275 feet west of the
intersection of Mount Crest Place and Mount Crest Drive in the City of Cupertino, Santa Clara
County, California. The attached Photo I and the Site Plan, Plate 1, illustrates the existing
house and footprint of the proposed addition. As requested, the purpose of this work is to
provide supplemental geologic information to a geotechnical report for the project prepared by
Wayne Ting & Associates, Inc. A list of references and other materials that were utilized is
included at the end of the report.
SCOPE OF SS( RV� C(ESS
The work for this geologic investigation included:
1. Research and review of certain published and unpublished geologic and geotechnical
information, including aerial photographs relevant to the site;
2. Afield geologic reconnaissance of the site and vicinity on March 6, 2014;
3. Review of subsurface information from two borings that were sampled and logged at the
site by Wayne Ting and Associates, Inc. in February, 2014;
#; 4. Preparation of this report including geologic maps, recommendations and opinions
regarding the suitability of site from an engineering geologic standpoint and a bibliography
of references utilized.
11205 Mount Crest Place Page 2
March 11, 2014
LIMITATIONS
There are certain limitations inherent in a qualitative screening level evaluation of a site. Adverse
conditions or site variations which might require further investigation could exist or occur in the
future that were not apparent or observed at the time of the work. It should be recognized that
the passage of time may also result in significant changes in site conditions, as well as current
technology and science.
The opinions and conclusions expressed herein follow generally accepted engineering geologic
principles and practices for the limited scope of a qualitative level reconnaissance and screening
investigation. No other warranty, either expressed or implied, as to the methods, results,
conclusions or professional advice is made.
This report summarizes the results of the geologic research and other work and is intended to
assist in evaluation of this specific home site from a geologic standpoint. It is not intended to
provide engineering services or design and should not be so construed.
REGIONAL GEOLOGIC SETTING
Geology and Terrain
As shown on the attached Site Location Map, Plate 2, the site residence is situated southeast of
Linda Vista Park in the southwestern area of the City of Cupertino at an elevation of about 510
feet. This locality, at Latitude 37.306 and Longitude-122.059 is in northwestern Santa Clara
County near the edge of a system of foothills overlooking the Santa Clara Valley along on the
eastern flank of the Santa Cruz Mountains. The mountains and foothills are structurally
controlled by a long, complex history of tectonic folding and faulting, enhanced by uplift and
subsequent erosional processes.
Geologic mapping of the area (Dibblee (2007), Hitchcock, et al, (1994) and Sorg and McLaughlin
(1975) indicates that the bedrock unit encompassing the site is of Santa Clara Formation
terrestrial materials, usually consisting of gravelly conglomerate with some weakly indurated
sandstone or mudstone. Monterey Formation bedrock, typically composed of grayish -colored,
siliceous marine shale or sandstone lies a short distance to the west. Landslides of various
sizes, forms and ages are scattered throughout the hills of this region. The site lies just outside
the edge of a State of California Earthquake -Induced Landslide Hazard Zone (see Plate 3).
Earthquake Faulting and Seismicity
The west -central area of California, including Cupertino, is within a region of active faulting that
extends eastward from offshore areas of the Pacific Coast through the San Francisco Bay region to
the western side of the Sacramento -San Joaquin Valley. It is one of the most seismically active
areas of the state. The location of the site relative to known active earthquake faults within the
1
LOUIIS A. RIIClE AR DSON, ]P.(G., C.E.(G.
I
7
0 11205 Mount Crest Place Page 3
March 11, 2014
a
site region is shown on Plate 4, Regional Fault Map. The San Francisco Bay area has the highest
O rate of seismic moment release per square mile of any urban area in the United States. It is
emerging from the stress shadow of the great 1906 San Francisco Earthquake and future large
earthquakes are considered a certainty. Active faults in the region have generated 22 moderate
ato great earthquakes of magnitude 6.0 or greater in the last 160 years — an average of one _.
every seven years.
Most of the large earthquakes that have shaken the site region during historic time have been
associated with the major sub -linear, northwest -trending, active fault traces shown on Plate 4. All
of these faults branch from, or are related to, the active San Andreas fault, which is the major
geologic structure of the region, extending along western California for more than 600 miles. The
main strand of the fault, which ruptured during the great 1906 San Francisco Earthquake, is within
the mountains about 3.7 miles southwest of the subject site. The San Andreas fault generated an
earthquake on the San Francisco Peninsula in 1838 of about magnitude 7.0 as well as the great
earthquake of 1906 of an approximate moment magnitude (Mw) of 7.9. The Loma Prieta
Earthquake of 1989 (6.9 Mw) occurred within the San Andreas system approximately 21 miles
south-southeast of the project site, causing extensive damage throughout the Santa Cruz
Mountains and the San Francisco Bay area.
The probability for an occurrence of a magnitude 6.7 - or greater - earthquake in California
during the next 30 years is considered to be more than 99%. The chance for such an
occurrence in the San Francisco Bay region is placed at about 63%. The probability for the
occurrence of a magnitude 6.7 - or greater - earthquake on the northern California segment of
the San Andreas fault during the next 30 years is 21% (Working Group, 2008).
Other major active faults that could significantly impact this locality include the Hayward fault,
which slices northwesterly through the eastern side of San Francisco Bay about 14 miles to the
east. It ruptured about 145 years ago in 1868 with a magnitude 6.9 earthquake that resulted in
widespread damage in the San Francisco Bay region. Paleoseismic studies along the Hayward
fault have determined that the last five large earthquakes on that fault occurred at an average
interval of 138 years (Lienkaemper, et al, 2002). The fault is, therefore, considered the most
probable source of the next major earthquake in the Bay Area. The probability calculation for
the occurrence of a magnitude 6.7 - or greater - earthquake on the Hayward fault during the
next 30 years is 31% (Working Group, 2008).
The Calaveras fault, about 17 miles northeast of the site property, was probably responsible for an
earthquake of about magnitude 6.4 in 1861. It has generated swarms of small to moderate
earthquakes in the past 30 years, including the magnitude 6.2 Morgan Hill Earthquake of 1984.
The San Gregorio fault follows the coast about 17 miles southwest of the site. Although not active
during historic times, it is also considered capable of generating a significant earthquake.
1
CONSULTING ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
a11205 Mount Crest Place Page 4
March 11, 2014
H
SITE CHARACTERIZATION
Site Description
Site features and geologic units are shown on plate 1, Site Plan. The site property (APN No.
356-26-005) is an irregular, flag -shaped parcel of about 0.67 acre in size. A two-story residence
that was constructed in 1984 exists in central area of the property. The parcel is on an
easterly -facing hillside that, based on aerial photographs dating back to 1948, was utilized as an
orchard until being graded into a series of terraces for locating the residences that now exist on
the site property and surrounding parcels. Access to the site residence is by an approximately
300 foot -long driveway that climbs along the northern side of the property from Mount Crest
Place on the east.
The existing house and the subject addition are on a nearly level pad that appears to have been
developed by cutting into hillside on the upslope, western side of the residence and filling along
the downsloping eastern side. The site residence and level rear yard area, shown on the
attached Photo 1, is bounded on the western side by a brush -covered slope that extends
upward at an average inclination of about 25° into open space beyond the western property
line. It steepens somewhat toward the base, which is retained along much of the western side
of the yard by interlocking concrete block retaining walls ranging from about two to four feet in
height. The eastern side of the site parcel extends downward at an inclination of about 330 into
an adjacent property to the east.
Based on plans by Perezidential Homes that were provided for this project, the proposed
residential addition at 11205 Mount Crest Place will extend into the level rear yard on the
southeastern side of the existing house, as shown on Photo 2 and Plate 1. Vegetation at the
site consists of lawn and landscaping around the house with native brush and some trees on
the upslope area to the west.
Site Geology
Surficial conditions observed during the area reconnaissance for this report and a review of
subsurface explorations performed in February, 2014 by Wayne Ting & Associates, Inc. for the
project geotechnical investigation show that the area of the proposed addition and adjacent
slopes are underlain by weakly cemented, dense, coarse, gravelly conglomerate materials of
the Santa Clara Formation. The surficial soils are mostly a relatively thin layer of gravelly, sandy
clay that is derived from weathering -in -place of the underlying Santa Clara Formation, mantled
by local areas of man-made fill, primarily along the eastern side of the building pad which was
originally graded for the site of the existing house and rear yard. Copies of logs of Boring Nos. 1
and 2 by Wayne Ting & Associates in the area of proposed addition are attached at the end of
this report.
A
CONSULTING ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
11205 Mount Crest Place Page 5
March 11, 2014
I
Vicinity Fault Traces
The range front of the Santa Cruz Mountains along the southwestern margin of the Santa Clara
Valley is bounded by a continuity of thrust faults that root into the San Andreas fault to the
southwest. These westerly dipping faults, termed the Foothills Thrust Belt, are generally
considered to be a manifestation of compressional forces and resulting uplifting of the Santa
Cruz Mountains generated by strike -slip movement on the active San Andreas fault. Along the
range front in the Cupertino area they are identified as the Monte Vista - Shannon fault system
which extends northward through Santa Clara County from New Almaden south of San Jose
through Cupertino and Los Altos Hills and into southern San Mateo County. Displacement on
the faults tends to move the bedrock on the southwestern side upward to the northeast.
Santa Clara County and the City of Cupertino have established geologic hazard zones along
perceived surface projections of these faults. As shown on Plate 5, Geologic Hazard Zones
Map, the subject site lies within a designated fault hazard zone for the Monte Vista Fault. As
mapped, the fault trace is an inferred surface projection of bedrock fault features that are
deeply buried by surficial sediments. This southwesterly dipping thrust fault is a northwesterly -
trending trace that follows the edge of the valley floor about 350 feet northeast of the
proposed addition. It separates alluvial sediments in the valley from Santa Clara Formation
bedrock of the hills to the southwest
Coseismic Earthquake Effects
In 1989, the magnitude 6.9 (Mw) Loma Prieta Earthquake in the Santa Cruz Mountains was
centered about 21 miles south of the subject property. Shortly after the earthquake, a survey
of damage was performed in the range front area (Haugerud, 1990 and Terratech, 1990). It was
determined that the earthquake triggered movement along some of the range front faults of
the Foothills Thrust Belt on the southwestern side of the Santa Clara Valley, including the area
of Cupertino near the site locality.
Discontinuous concentrations of linear damage patterns paralleling the front of the Santa Cruz
Mountains were found in the Los Altos, Cupertino, Los Gatos and Blossom Hill areas that
included damage to structures and pavements, buckled curbs, breaks in curbs, distorted storm
drain grates and some instances of manhole covers that popped up. These occurrences were
evidently surface expressions of thrust fault movement at depth subsidiary to the main
earthquake. Similar effects were reported after the 1906 earthquake on the San Andreas fault
(Lawson, 1908).
The reported damage was attributed to possible sympathetic movement on the Monte Vista
fault and other interlacing branches of the Foothills Thrust Belt and is documented on mapping
compiled by personnel of the U.S. Geological Survey (Schmidt and others, 1995). It shows
several localities of reported pavement distress along the fault trace in the area northeast of
site property (see Plate 6, 1989 Earthquake Damage Map).
1
LOUIIS A. RIICHAR SON, P.G., C.E.G.
CONSULTING LTIING ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
11
11205 Mount Crest Place Page 6
March 11, 2014
Ia Slope Stability and Landsliding
The locality of the property at 11025 Mount Crest Place is just outside the edge of a State
Seismic Hazard Zone for earthquake -induced landsliding (CGS, 2002), as presented on Plate 3.
A review of a series of aerial photographs of the site area dating back to 1948 was performed
for this study. The site hillside and area to the east was being utilized for orchards in 1948.
Residential development of the area was complete by the early 1990's. No prominent signs of
unstable slope conditions were observed on the aerial photographs before and after
construction of the residential development throughout the site locality. The cut slope
adjacent to the western side of the site residence and proposed addition exposes intact, stable -
appearing conglomerate of the Santa Clara Formation.
Drainage and Erosion
Generally, the surface drainage at the site property appears well controlled at this time. At the
time of the site reconnaissance for this work, no indications of runoffs causing significant surface
erosion were observed on the site property, although some erosional gullies were evident on
poorly vegetated slopes in offsite areas to the northwest.
SITE GEOLOGIC HAZARD CONSIDERATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Ground Shaking
California has experienced many earthquakes of varying sizes and frequency and there is always a
potential for future earthquakes at any time. Based on the seismic history of the region, it is
reasonable to assume that, similar to other localities in the San Francisco Bay Area, the project site
will be subjected to shaking and ground accelerations, both horizontal and vertical, from at least
one significant earthquake during the life of any improvements. The most recent 30-year
probability calculation for a magnitude 6.7 or greater earthquake capable of causing extensive
damage or loss of life in the San Francisco Bay region is placed at 63% (Working Group, 2008).
From the standpoint of impact to the site from a large earthquake in the relatively near future,
the peninsula segment of the northern San Andreas fault is the predominant source of greatest
ground shaking potential. The most recent 30-year probability calculation for an occurrence of
a magnitude 6.7 - or greater - earthquake on the northern San Andreas fault is 21% (Working
Group, 2008).
Historically, slip on the range front reverse faults of this area ordinarily occurs sympathetically
in concurrence with large earthquakes within the Santa Cruz Mountains. Small earthquakes
have, however, been recorded in the proximity of the Monte Vista fault. On December 19,
a2010, a shallow, Magnitude 3.1 earthquake on the Foothills system was felt with weak intensity in
the Los Altos area. It was centered near the intersection of Magdalena Avenue and Foothill
Expressway in the Loyola Corners area, about 4.25 miles northwest of the subject site (CISN, 2010).
ff OUIIS A. IRIIC]EIIARDSON, P.G., C.E.G.
CONSULTING ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
0
E
11205 Mount Crest Place Page 7
March 11, 2014
Scenarios for maximum earthquakes on the closest known active faults and modeled estimates
of potential shaking intensities defined by the Modified Mercalli Scale calculated for the site
locality by Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG, 2010 and 2013) are illustrated on the
following table:
TABLE I - EARTHQUAKE SCENARIOS
Distancdlo Site
�,Aaximum .
wSite Sliakirig.
,
fault,
(apprQX.)AAoddied`BBercalllscale)
Magnitude (Mw)
Intensity:
(estimated)
Monte Vista - Shannon
0.06 mi (0.10 km)
6.6
IX (Violent)
San Andreas (1906 quake)
3.7 mi (6.0 km)
7.9
IX (Violent)
Hayward
14.0 mi (22.6 km)
6.9
VII (Strong)
Calaveras
16.9 mi (27.2 km)
6.8
VI (Moderate)
San Gregorio
17.3 mi (27.8 km)
7.2
VII (Strong)
lll..lfJ GV IV al IV GV IJ.
As shown above, earthquake shaking intensity modeling of a magnitude 7.9 (Mw) earthquake
on the San Andreas fault indicates that, if an earthquake similar to the one that occurred on
that fault in 1906 is repeated along the closest trace of the fault, the site neighborhood could
be subjected to a "violent" (IX) intensity of shaking on the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale, as
described in Table 2 at the end of this report. Although of a lesser probability, should the
maximum capable earthquake take place on the nearby trace of the Monte Vista fault, a similar
intensity of shaking could be experienced.
Fault (Rupture
Although this site is not within a State designated Earthquake Fault Zone (CDMG, 1974), it is
within a fault rupture hazard zone specified by the City of Cupertino, as shown on Plate S.
Studies performed in the site vicinity by various authors (Hitchcock, et al, 1984) and published
geologic maps (Dibblee, 2007) show that the northerly -trending Monte Vista thrust fault is
mapped at least 300 feet northeast of the proposed addition, separating alluvium to the northeast
from Santa Clara Formation to the southwest. The geologic research, area reconnaissance and
adjacent cutslope exposures (see Photos 3 and 4) indicate the location of the second unit is
underlain by Santa Clara Formation bedrock mapped to be southwest of the fault. Based on these
findings, it appears that a hazard from surface fault rupture at the subject residential addition is
aremote.
11,
LOUIIS A. RIICIEIIA]E8➢ SON, P.G., C.➢-U.
a11205 Mount Crest Place Page 8
March 11, 2014
Documented coseismic ground deformation that occurred in the site vicinity as a result of the 1989
Loma Prieta Earthquake is shown on plate 6, 1989 Earthquake Damage. The type of damage that
was reported signifies response to ground shaking and ground warping or distributed deformation
over a wide area, rather than a result of discreet fault offset at the surface. Design of foundations
and improvements in this locality should consider the potential such broadly distributed ground
n deformations.
Landsliding
At this time, there is not an apparent hazard from slope instability other than scattered shallow
sloughing and erosion such as occurs on unprotected, exposed slopes of the general area
during times of concentrated rain and runoff. Cutslope exposures along the hillside adjacent to
the western side of the proposed site addition exposes seemingly competent, intact
conglomerate of the Santa Clara Formation and indications of grossly unstable slope conditions
were not observed during our site reconnaissance or on the aerial photographs studied.
Soil Liquefaction and Settlement
Incidences of seismically -induced soil liquefaction are dependant upon strength and duration of
ground shaking, soil properties and depth to saturation. The shallow, dense Santa Clara
Formation bedrock units that exist in the site locality indicate a setting which is not conducive
to liquefaction. The site property is, therefore, not mapped as an area having a hazard from
x liquefaction (CGS (2002) and Holzer (2008)).
Earthquake -generated strong, cyclic ground motions can cause settlement of loose or poorly
compacted soils. The project geotechnical investigation by Wayne Ting & Associates reported a
layer of "very moist and loose (uncontrolled fills)" in Boring 1 at the site of the proposed
addition. Foundations should be designed accordingly.
Other Hazards
The interior location and elevation of the site property is not within a recognized area of
inundation from potential dam failure, flooding or occurrences of seiches or tsunami hazards.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
,. This screening investigation has found no evidence of geologic conditions that would preclude
prudently designed improvements appropriate to the specific location of the proposed
residential addition on the property at 11025 Mount Crest Place in Cupertino, California. Areas
of landsliding and concealed, deeply buried fault traces exist in the nearby areas of Cupertino
but none have been recognized at the presently proposed site location. Project designers
LJ
LOUIIS A. RIICHA]F8➢ SON, P.G., C.E.Q.
CONSULTING ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
11205 Mount Crest Place Page 9
March 11, 2014
Oshould, however, consider that the site is within an area of potentially high seismic ground
shaking and that there is a potential for some degree of related ground deformation.
Similar to any site within a seismically active hillside setting, it should be recognized that there may
be a higher than ordinary risk of property damage and possible personal injury from geologic
events, particularly during moderate to large earthquake in the nearby region. It is imperative that
improvements at this site be designed for appropriate seismic loading and forces. Property
owners or buyers are encouraged to obtain and read a publication prepared by the California
Seismic Safety Commission (2005) entitled "The Homeowners Guide to Earthquake Safety' which
can be accessed online (see attached list of references).
Surface and subsurface conditions may, and often do, vary between specific locations. Should
persons concerned with this project observe geologic or geotechnical features or conditions at the
site or in surrounding areas which are different from those described in this report, those
observations should be reported immediately to the project geologist and geotechnical engineer
for evaluation. Subsequent, additional subsurface exploration, testing and analysis may be
required.
f 1 CLOSURE
'this report has been prepared as a qualitative evaluation of the site from a geologic standpoint
E and is for the exclusive use of Gary and Paula Yung and their engineers and design professionals
for this specific project only. It is not intended to provide engineering services or design and
n should not be so construed.
R
"fhe opportunity to be of assistance in this matter is sincerely appreciated and it is hoped that this
report provides the information that is required at this time. If there are any questions, or if
further services are required, please feel free to contact the undersigned.
AL G�
Very truly yours,
LOUIS A.
0 RICHARDSON �1
No.1085
Q
CERTIFIED
o ENGINEERING o
Louis A. Richardson
GEOLOGIST
EXP. 09/30/15
Certified Engineering Geologist
Fp¢�
No. EG 1085
C
ILOUIIS A. IIBIIC;HAIZIl3SON, P.G., C.E.G.
C ONSU LTIINCII IENGIINIl:IEIlRIING G E®lL®CIIIIST
11205 Mount Crest Place Page 10
March 11, 2014
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), 2010 and 2013, Static Shaking Maps for Future Earthauake Scenarios, Cupertino,
California.
California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 1974, State of California Special Studies Zones, Cupertino Quadrangle, Official
Map Effective July 1, 1974.
California Geological Survey (CGS), 2002, State of California Seismic Hazard Zones, Cupertino Quadrangle, Official Map released
September 23, 2002.
California Integrated Seismic Network (CISN), 2010. Magnitude 3.1 Earthquake, December 19, 2010, with USGS Community
Internet Intensity Map.
California Seismic Safety Commission, 2005, The Homeowners Guide to Earthquake Safety, Publication No. SSC 5-01, available
online at: https://www.disclosuresource.com/downloads/earthquake.pdf.
Cotton, Shires and Associates, Inc., 2003, Geologic and Seismic Hazards Map of the City of Cupertino.
Dibblee, T.W., 2007, Geologic Map of the Cupertino and San Jose West Quadrangles, Santa Clara and Santa Cruz Counties,
California, Dibblee Geology Center Map DF-351.
Graymer, R.W., et al, 2006, Map of Quaternary -active Faults in the San Francisco Bay Region, U.S. Geological Survey Scientific
Investigations Map 2919.
Haugerud, R.A. and Ellen, S.D., 1990, Coseismic Ground Deformation Along the Northeast Margin of the Santa Cruz Mountains in Field.
Guide to Neotectonics of the San Andreas Fault System, Santa Cruz Mountains, in light of the Loma Prieta Earthquake, U.S.
Geological Survey Open -File Report 90-274
Hitchcock, C.S., Kelson, K.I., and Thompson, S.C., 1994, Geomorphic Investigations of Deformation Along the Northeastern Margin of the
Santa Cruz Mountains, report prepared by William Lettis & Associates, Inc.
Holzer, T.L., Noce, T.E., and Bennett, M.J., 2008, Liquefaction Hazard Maps for Three Earthouake Scenarios for the Communities of San
Jose, Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Gatos, Milpitas, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Santa Clara. Saratoga. and Sunnyvale.
Northern Santa Clara County, California, U.S. Geological Survey Open -file Report 2008-1270.
Lawson, A.C., and others, 1908, The California Earthauake of April 18, 1906, Report of the State Earthquake Investigation Commission:
Carnegie Institute of Washington, no. 87.
Lienkaemper, J.J., Dawson, T.E., Personius, S.F., Seitz, G.G., Reidy, L.M. and Schwartz, D.P., 2002, A Record of Large
Earthquakes on the Southern Hayward Fault for the Past 500 Years, in Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America,
October 2002, vol. 92 no. 7 pp 2637-2658.
Terratech, Inc., 1990, Concentrated Damage from the Loma Prieta Earthquake in the Monta Vista Fault Study Area, Santa Clara
County, California.
Santa Clara County, 2002, Santa Clara County Geologic Hazard Zones, Map Sheet 18.
Schmidt, K.M. and others, 1995, Breaks in Pavement and Pipes as Indicators of Range -Front Faulting_ Resulting From the 1989 Loma
Prieta Earthauake Near the Southwest Margin of the Santa Clara Valley, California, U.S. Geological Survey Open -File Report
95-820.
Sorg, D.H. and McLaughlin, R.J., 1975, Geologic Map of the Sargent-Berrocal Fault Zone between Los Gatos and Los Altos Hills.
Santa Clara County. California, U.S. Geological Survey Map MF-643.
Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, 2008, The Uniform California Earthauake Rupture Forecast, Version 2,
USGS Open File Report 2007-1437.
Aerial Photographs:
The following aerial photographs were reviewed in Google historical imagery files:
Photo Date: 9/25/48, Source: USGS
Photo Date: 10/29/91, Source: USGS
Photo Date: 5/20/2002, Source: Digital Globe
Photo Date: 212312012, Source: Google.
LOUIIS A. RIIC11ARDSON, P.G., C.E.G.
U
i
1U
11205 Mount Crest Place
March 11, 2014
Photo I — View westerly across rear yard.
Photo 2 — View northerly across rear yard.
Approximate footprint of proposed addition is outlined in yellow.
Page 11
LOIJIS A. RICHARDSON, P.G., C.E.G.
CONSULTING ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
11205 Mount Crest Place Page 12
March 11, 2014
cam,.
p
Photo 3 — Santa Clara Fm. Conglomerate in cut on west side of house.
Photo 4 — Conglomerate in cut near southwest corner of house.
LOUIIS A. RIICIEIIAR DSON, P.G., C.E.G.
CON2ULTING ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
0
0
Modified Mlercalli Scale
I
Deteaed only by sensitive instruments
Felt by few persons z.t bit, cspeeiw y on
I
upper floors, &KxaWy sucj,*nded objects
may swing
Felt notirc,-Ny intt =, but not ahv4s rec-
I
ognize l as an ecthquake, sta t6nq autos
rock s^gh4, v�bretions like a passing truck
Felt indoors by many, outdoors by tear, M
IV
might !�^_me eaaken, fishes, w1ndmvs, doors
&3:urbad: standing autos roa neticeati'y
Felt by most pn;!e,, some breakage of
V
d shcs, wintgaas, and plaster; disturbance
of W object
Felt by a!% many finplened and run ovt-
VI
doors; falling p'astsr and chirrmoys, dsm-
oge srrt-_.
Everybody runs outdo m: dance to build -
VI I
mg,, vcnes depeneng on quaf:ty of ean-
s+tuct:on; noltced by dnvers of autos
Panel wells Ovown cut of frames, xvCs,
VI II
monuments, clr mneys fall; sand and mud
ojected; drivcm of culos disturbed
&Rings sntfted off foundations, cracked,
IX
thrown out of plumb; ground cracked; un-
derground ppcs broken
Most masonry and franc structures de-
X
s?foyed, ground c=ked, rats tent, land.
slides
Feu structures remain sting; bridges
XI
dostroycd, fissures in ground, p!pzs broken,
fends, rail bout
Damage total: waves seen on ground sur-
XI I
taco. lines of sight and level distorted, ob-
jects thrown up into air
C upgr uto, CA
(MODIFIED MERCALLI SCALE
Proj. No. TABLE
1009.27 March 2014 2
LOUISA. RICHARDSON
a
Consulting Engineering Geologls4
W
E°�
P�
/81
A4
A
4
v
B-2\
w n(D
0 10 20 30 50
SCALE: V= 30
EXPLANATION
Existing
House
11 Proposed
Addition
N
Approx.
Location of
Boring by
Wayne Ting &
Assoc., Inc
Feb. 2014
Bedrock -
QSC Santa Clara Fm.
conglomerate;
locally mantled by
man-made fills
in house area.
Base from: Site Plan
by Stephen Clark, AIA.
Sheet 1, dated 12/1/82.
11205 mounCrW P0ace SITE PLAN
Cupqnuno' CA P roj. No. March 2014 Plate
1009.27 1
LOUISA. RICHARDSON
Consulting Engineering Geologist
F
I
rs:be:ao, rro Sofflo Pou!a Ave ,�. 1' v� - I _ �McClelan Rd - YV
y l-' p Lincoln aMc
d
Elementary
an Gr�u
eta
Ranch Park Schaal
Presift 0
�G t, D9 anmspon Qr
1%ilee207 QF���IoQLr � shattuchD'i d
Goff Coarse
a John F. Ke
Middle's
. Rosario Ave
Rucker Or. 1
Ica� � Edward c�ay
us Ave
ccoquelen St n
. ✓ `J(SBe Peres may, n - Terroce Or
l 1 ps1/.
Ln
110
l' F� / * o J 'w Out V
ple
SCALE: 1 " = 1,000'
I U05 Mount C Feat Pkcs
Cupenuno9 CA
Base: Google Maps
SHE LOCATION ITION MAP
Proj. No. Plate
1009.27 March 2014 2
LOW A. MClf;ARDSCH
Consulting Engineeving Geo ftisl;
In
Zones o0 Regutlred Onveatigation:
Liquofaction
Areas where historic occurrence of liquefaction, or local geological,
geoWmIcal and groundwater conditions Indicate a potential for permanent
ground displacernwrts such that mitigatlon as defined In Public Resources
Code Section 2693(c) would be required.
Enthquake-Induced Londeiidoo
Areas where previous occurrence of landslide movement, or local
topographic, geological, geotechnical and subsurface water conditions
Indicate a potential for permanent ground displacements such that mitigation
as defined In Public Resources Code Section 2693(c) would be required.
11205 Mount Crash P14c e
C upenono9 CA
SIENWC HAZARDS ZONES MaAF)
Proj. No. Plate
1009.27 March 2014 3
LOADS A. MCNARDSO M
Cons ulftg En&eeolng Sedoglst
in
1
1
IN
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
ij •.r /r t y t % 1W{Ateo Pre
l .�•..`�<s� �f�N
c- 5
` *4[�yn/'� /fV L a // ��/y-•am �,,.., .- ^New- ark ` :$�
J\rid. .^� ("✓ r, 7
1� �Q
% 1
Palo
q'�.'`
Santa
�r }�� �r
hp f`� ;�►JA y PPE
" 3�,�'� day � �> - �• r. i -
� � � c9lpertino
Hi0..ff'Odh rR
� 31J r" r�`,�1 /�"'r1�1��"� ��i} /, f�'--• r '�'�YS"�!'�"if"r yC�.Jr 'a .�LJ '�,', r _`�.
Al
-r�, ! :'r,_ !' it � ;;lib � �/✓,!' sv �'�' � � � • �y ` � ' ,'
a S
r
r J r o•�t) ';•�'
r,•, C ` i
REFERENCE: Graymer (2006)
MAP KEY
t�.
------ fault that had ground rupture in an earthquake in historic time [since 1776), Dotted where concealed by water
Holoceue•ac6velault. Dotted where concealed by overlying rocks, sediments, or water
Ouateuratyactive faun. Dotted where concealed by overlying rocks, sediments, or water
1111205 Mount (greet place
Cupertino, CA
REG110HAL FAULT MAP
Proj. No. Plate
1009.27 March 2014 4
LOU MA. ROCHARDS®N
Consulting Engineevi g Geologist
� 0
in
if
in
in
■
in
in
In
I
I
in
in
in
REFERENCE: Cotton, Shores (2003)
SCALE: 1 ° = 500'
FOR LEGEND, SEE PLATE 5A
7GE—OU0611c HAZARD ZOME3 Hap
`i111205 �do�uio�� C�Pesi� Mace
Cuper no, CA Proj. No. March 2014 Plat
1009.27 5
LOUIS A. MC HARDSOM
cans ulUng Engl 9eeftg aealcost
H
H
In
in
PtQ7TfEMTIAL GEOTECHLAICAL HAZARD ZONES
FAULT RUPTURE:
a (�
Area of potential surface faun rupture ht;,zard within 300 feet earl and 6W feet
f
west of fe Monte Vista and Serrocal Faults.
i
SLOPE INSTABILITY:
Area includes all recognized IandNido deposits. and steep walls of Stevens
CT--k canyon, with a vnoamte to Nigh landslift potendol under ststic a
*eisrruo corrditior.. Asua also #efects the mapped zonu of potential
earthquak&tnduced landslfding pmpared by the Cattiomia Geological Survey
cacwa>.
HOLLVIDE:
�f }
Area contains mocL-rate to steep slope cmidltions not incluyed in the atrove
w
c aleWy. walA an uWetermm®d polennal for slope inslabitily
LIQUEFACTION ! 0HUNDATI®W:
Arw wtwre local geological, geolechnical and grvundwatar eondittons lrtdOle
� a putontlat for nqu8fsdion under seisrrticcondltlars Much of lh+s area also
tws tho poundal for periodic flood inundation. The Lique". on I Inundation
Zone is sbpp:ed wnere covered by an overvAng NO Zone
VALLEY FLOOR:
n (7
Amo rnelud®S an relallvoly level valley row totrdin not induftd in the above
calgpdas with relatively low levels of geologic hazard risk (beyond ant`cipated
vory strong seismic ground shaWrig),
MAP SYMBOLS
—Vdodd------Q- V—
11205 MDUM C TSZS P0ace
Cupen1m, CA
Infeirred Paulo
HAZARD ZONES MAP LEGEND
Proj. No. March 2014 Plate
1009.27 5A
L1 CUM A. RICHAR®SOM
cansuMng Englnee tg i3edoest
I
N
N
in
in
in
III
1
in
IN
in
0 Frooh brook or bucklo cuggootivo of contractional deformation
(Reported by USGS; come aloo reported by local governments)
0 areak with unspecified sense of deformation
IRegarted by local govornaxrnto)
0 Aggarently Preoh breax with unspecified sense of deformation
(Reported by USUS; some also reported by local governments)
COIIII8me psm MIEMS
��nTMz motor:' limo
M0339tc9 bY IlCCob B0V0W, ȢigiY CCZ0WLc0e 026 tom)
meowerwMe Mtt 01-08o dilltsibution limo
Mcsostc6 by Utility CCT3=100 0216 1=1 TRE:Oag)
0-6 ens" ob-0oo dio¢r lwtion lino QRq;*gt(3fi by utility cep)
OTHER SYMBOLS
❑ Fault Hillside area underlain by bedrock
11205 ,Mv cunr C irez� Nar's
C upenuno, CA
1989 EARTHQUAKE DAM AGE
Proj. No. Plate
1009.27 March 2014
LOWS A. RICHARDSON
I BORING LOG'.'--z-.,o
by
Wayne Ting & Associates, Inc.
Feb. 12, 2014
11205 Mount Crest Plcae, Cupertino, California Project No. 3191
Or -
Description z
0
M-
Grayish brown silty sand with clay, very moist
SM
and loose
1
1-1
7
11.9
uncontrolled fills
2
CL
Brown sandy clay with gravel, moist and stiff
3
SM
52
119.8
13.1
Brown silty sand with grave 1-2
4
5
1-3
>50
124.4
10.4
6
7
1-4
>50
11.2
Boring terminated at 7.0 feet.
No ground water encountered.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
WAYNIE TI NU & ASSO CEAT ES, OTC.
BORING LOG NO. l
III
11205 Mount Crest Plcae, Cupertino, California Project No. 3191
0
w
`-'
Description
°
w
•°
°
W
y
�a
3a
U
e�w,
Brown silty sand with gravel, dense and moist
SM
1
2
3
2-1
4
28
13.7
5
Boring terminated at 5.0 feet.
No ground water encountered.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1$
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
V V AYNE MG ALB & ASSOCIATES, TES, NC.
B®1fOJl1 V G LOG IV®. 2
