The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About078-100-009D 4. DESCRIPTION: ol� (� �I al CITY OF OROVILLE p�f�/pU ODg BUILD EPARTMENT/CODE ENFORCEMENT JOB ADDRESS:zamA'13-PN: PERMIT NUMBER: DATE ISSUED: } apWNER(S): INSULATION FlNAI ELECTRICAL APPROVALS OF THE FOLLOWING MUST BE DATED BEFORE PROCEEDING (24-HOUR NOTICE FOR INSPECTIONS - 530-538-2425) A C I INSPECTION RECORD ,v11�1 UNDERFLOOR DRAIN PIPING INSPEC7701VS D47F INSPECTOR INSPECMAS DATE INSPEC70R INSPEC77ONS DATE INSPECTOR SETBACK FLOOR NAILING EXTERIOR I LATHINGISIDING }. VQ FOUNDATION NAILING *pvjSTEEL REINFORCING SHEAR PANEL INTERIOR LATHING/DRYWALL STEEL NAILINGa�\t'1i UNDERFLOOR n FRAMING GROUNOING FRAMING GIIJNOTPUS7FR OR TAPEUN7IG wt Aso L ELECTRODE a SERVICE CONDUR UNDERGROUND ROUGH ELECTRIC q OK TO POUR PLUMBING UNDERGROUND ROUGH PLUMBING SEWER SLAB FLOOR ®w O FOOTINGS ROUGH GAS PIPE 'PRIGINITE ROUGH HEATING POOL 8 COOLING S WASTE TOP OUT POOL DECK ( ROOF(COVER) SPNPOOL I FENCES MASONRY I ooNOTGCLL FORINSLHAnow BOND BEAM } D07A7TPLACELONCR£7£ /NSPEC710W UV7R ALL OF 7NE ( ORBACXRLL LNML ASO VE AB7VEAPPROVALSNAVEB££N l 49 SIGNED OBTAINED RNAL /NSPEC77JNS SEWER INSULATION FlNAI ELECTRICAL GROUNOWOflK UNDERFLOOR DRAIN PIPING WALLS FINAL GAS TEST ELECTRICAL GROUNDWORK CEILING RNAL PLUMBING WATER PIPING GROUNDWORK ROOF FINAL HEATING/ COOLING UNDERFLOOR n FRAMING FLOOR FINALGRADING L SLAB REINFORCEMENT q OK TO POUR SLAB FLOOR G 0 qn 1:3PenWaf/ems aEme/te f Amk 12000 10%® P3 City otf Oroville Certificate of Occupancy The building or structure referred to above complies with the provisions of the Building and Fire Codes. Any change in occupancy, occupant load, or structure of the building will void this certificate. This permit may be revoked for any violation of said City ordinance and/or Health and Safety Code. This permit is not transferable. . Name of Business: ANOTHER SELF -STORAGE Address: 5930 LINCOLN BLVD Applicant Name: VAN DER MAELEN, STEPHEN SANDY Applicant Address: 5930 LINCOLN BLVD. Occupancy:.S-1/B Type of Construction: 2N Occupancy Load: 177 Units Use Zone:, . CLM ISSUED: 1/6/2005 Building / Fire Inspector Special Conditions AS -BUILDS WILL BE REQUIRED WHEN THE RVIPROVEMENTS ARE COMPLETED. PARKS AzvU, iv4� PUBLIC WO -h6� 4&" PLANNING d�� 9- 4uo . Single Family Dwelling - R -3B cla, AbAnn" Building Official /Fire Marshal Certificate of Occupancy. *rk, r� City of Oroville ' o. fCOe. Noero°atco t° r ANOTHER SELF—STORAGE Business Name 5930 LINCOLN BLVD.,OROVILL•E Address, VAN DER, MAELEN REVOCABLE TRUST N« Owner or Lessee OCCUPANCY. f " USE ZONE ' TYPE, CONSTRUCTION y a OCCUPANT LOAD. The building or structure referred to above complies with the provisions of the Building - �, and Fire Codes. Any change in occupancy, occupant load, or structure of the building will void this certificate. This permit may be revoked for any violation of said City ordinance and/or Health and Safety. Code: This permit is .not transferable. Date Building Official / Fire Marshal The following Depts,hereby cert' hat the above noted building has been inspected and is in compliance with City -and S'te Codes. )/-- Code Enforcement 126 16 67 Planning Dept. /i1, -7,g INITIALS D Ad E r INITIALS 'DATE' `. Fire Dept. Public Wks. Dept. r `�! ff Z'O "t` '> •.t. NITIALS DATE D INITIALS ATE Healthf.Dept. Parks Dept. t INITIALS DATEpE/LPtioijA G� DATE Type of Occupancy: Conditional Standard P /f . Special Conditions: r WHITE - APPLICANT COPY CANARY - FILE COPY 'PINK = FIRE.DEPT. COPY _ GOLDENROD - FINANCE COPY Property Detail Butte, CA KENNETH REIMERS, ASSESSOR Parcel # (APN): 078-100-009-000 Use Description: Parcel Status: ACTIVE Owner Name: VAN DER MAELEN REVOCABLE TRUST Mailing Address: 5930 LINCOLN BLVD OROVILLE CA 95966-9562 Situs Address: 5930 LINCOLN BLVD OROVILLE CA 95966-9562 R010 Legal Description: 012.80 AC LINCOLN BLVD ASSESSMENT Total Value: $1,353,827 Land Value: $129,827 Impr Value: $1,224,000 Other Value: % Improved 90% Exempt Amt: SALES HISTORY Use Code: CC Tax Rate Area: 091001 Year Assd: 2006 Property Tax: 01/21/2005 Delinquent Yr 2005R0004001 2004R0036517 HO Exempt?: N ParcelQuest by CD -DATA Zoning: Census Tract: Improve Type: Price/SgFt: 30.00/1 PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS Lot Acres: 12.800 Lot SgFt: 557,568 Bldg/Liv Area: 25,200 Units: Buildings: Stories: Style: Construct: Quality: Building Class: S Condition: Other Rooms: Year Built: 2004 Sale 1 Sale 2 Sale 3 Transfer Recording Date: 01/21/2005 06/17/2004 05/10/2004 01/21/2005 Recorded Doc #: 2005R0004001 2004R0036517 2004R0027145 2005R0004001 Recorded Doc Type: Spaces: Site Inflnce: Transfer Amount: Sale 1 Seller (Grantor): VAN DER MAELEN STEPHEN J 1 st Trst Dd Amt: Code1: 2nd Trst Dd Amt: Code2: PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS Lot Acres: 12.800 Lot SgFt: 557,568 Bldg/Liv Area: 25,200 Units: Buildings: Stories: Style: Construct: Quality: Building Class: S Condition: Other Rooms: Year Built: 2004 Fireplace: Effective Yr: A/C: Heating': Total Rooms: Pool: Bedrooms: Baths (Full): Park Type: Baths (Half): Spaces: Site Inflnce: Garage SgFt: *** The information provided here is deemed reliable, but is not guaranteed. Timber Preserve: Ag Preserve: OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 17, 2006 — 7:00 P.M. The agenda for the January 17, 2006 meeting of the Oroville City Council was posted on the bulletin board at the front of City Hall on Friday, January 13, 2006 at 3:20 p.m. The January 17, 2006 adjourned regular meeting of the Oroville City Council was called to order by Mayor Gordon Andoe at 7:30 p.m. Present: Council Members Bevy, Prouty, Sharkey, Simpson, Vice Mayor Jernigan, Mayor Andoe Absent: Council Member Corkin (Excused) Staff Present: Sharon Atteberry, City Administrator/City Clerk Mitchel Brown, Chief of Police Dwight Moore, City Attorney Diane MacMillan, Finance Director David Pittman, Fire Chief Karolyn Fairbanks, City Treasurer Eric Teitelman, Community Development/Public Works Director Sharon Mize, Administrative Assistant Pat Griffin, Business Assistance/Housing Development Director PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by members of the Oroville 4-H. Steve Herr, Davis Hammon & Company — Item No. 9 John Anderson — Item No. 10 Scott Richie, Roundabouts and Traffic Engineering — Item No. 10 •AAALY-111• , • - A motion was made by Council Member Berry, seconded by Council Member Sharkey, to approve the following Consent Calendar: December 20, 2005 - TOO p.m. Oroville City Council Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 10 1. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 29, 2006 5:00 P.M. SPECIAL JOINT MEETING AND THE JANUARY 3, 2006 7:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL - minutes attached. 2. TRANSFER OF HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS REVOLVING LOAN FUNDS — staff report. The Council considered a transfer of $454,681 in unanticipated HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program revenues to the Redevelopment Agency (RDA) Housing Set -Aside Fund to reimburse the 2004/2005 and 2005/2006 fiscal year budget expenditures associated with First Time Home Buyer (FTHB) In -fill New Construction Program activities. (Pat Griffin, Director of Business Assistance and Housing Development) Council Action Requested: Approve Supplemental Appropriation No. 2005106-0106-44 in the amount of $454,681 from the HOME Revolving Loan Fund budget account to the Redevelopment Agency Housing Set -Aside Fund budget account as indicated In the fiscal impact of the January 17, 2006 staff report. 3. AGREEMENT WITH BUTTE COLLEGE SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES — staff report. The Council considered an agreement in the amount of $6,000 with Butte College Small Business Development Center (SBDC) to provide professional services to local business owners. (Pat Griffin, Director of Business Assistance and Housing Development) Council Action Requested: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 6617 — A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF OROVILLE AND BUTTE COLLEGE SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER -(Agreement No. 1341-5). 2. Approve Supplemental Appropriation No. 2005106-0106.43 transferring $6,000 from fund balance to account number 451-7000-8451 as noted in the fiscal impact of the January 17, 2006 staff report. 4. CONSULTANT TO ASSIST THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IN THE REVIEW OF ENGINEERING PLANS AND DOCUMENTS RELATED TO SUBDIVISIONS — staff report. The Council considered an agreement with CSG Consultants, Inc (CSG) to assist the Community Development/Public Works Department by providing services relating to the December 20, 2005 - 7.00 p.m. Oroville City Council Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 10 review of subdivision improvement plans, commercial improvement plans and other related technical submittals requiring engineering review. Based on the current backlog of submittals and the number of submittals anticipated over the next 12 months, the agreement will provide for $75,000 in total compensation to CSG. (Eric Teitelman, Director of Community Development and Public Works) Council Action Requested: Adopt Resolution No. 6618 - A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. TO ASSIST THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT WITH ENGINEERING SERVICES RELATING TO THE REVIEW OF SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT PLANS, COMMERCIAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS AND OTHER TECHNICAL SUBMITTALS — (Agreement No. 1643). S. AGREEMENT WITH GALLAWAY CONSULTING, INC. FOR ON-CALL PLANNING SERVICES — staff report. The Council considered an agreement with Gallaway Consulting, Inc. to assist Planning staff with on-call Planning and Environmental Services. All costs of services from Gallaway Consulting would be paid by developers who request consultant assistance in order to process their development application more quickly. (Jo Sherman, Planning Manager) Council Action Requested: Adopt Resolution No. 6619 - A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH GALLAWAY CONSULTING, INC. TO ASSIST THE PLANNING DIVISION WITH PROCESSING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS — (Agreement No. 1644). 6 EXTENSION OF DEFERRED IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6930 LINCOLN BLVD., OROVILLE — staff report. The Council considered a request from Stephen and Sandra Van Der Maelen for an extension of time to complete frontage improvements for property located at 5930 Lincoln Blvd., Oroville (AP No. 036-200-009) for a period of one-year from the date of expiration of the previously granted Deferred Improvement Agreement No. 1529, a copy of which is attached; (Eric Teitelman, Director of Community Development and Public Works) Council Action Requested: Adopt Resolution No. 6620 - A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF A DEFERRED IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5930 LINCOLN BLVD., OROVILLE (APN 036-200-009). December 20, 2005 - 7:00 p.m. Oroville City Council Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 10 7. SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY INTO THE CONSOLIDATED LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT (MISSION OLIVE RANCH SUBDIVISION) — staff report. The Council considered adopting a resolution in regards to the Mission Olive Ranch Subdivision which would set a time and place for the public hearing and ordering the initiation of assessment ballot procedures. This item was continued from the December 20, 2005 Council meeting. (Eric Teitelman, Director of Community Development and Public Works) Council Action Requested: Adopt Resolution No. 6621 — A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL SETTING A TIME AND A PLACE FOR PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY INTO THE CITY OF OROVILLE CONSOLIDATED LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AND ORDERING THE INITIATION OF ASSESSMENT BALLOT PROCEDURES. 8. SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY INTO THE CONSOLIDATED BENEFIT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT (MISSION OLIVE RANCH SUBDIVISION) —staff report. The Council considered adopting a resolution in regards to Mission Olive Ranch Subdivision which would set a time and place for the public hearing, and ordering the initiation of assessment ballot procedures. This item was continued from the December 20, 2005 Council meeting. (Eric Teitelman, Director of Community Development and Public Works) Council Action Requested: Adopt Resolution No. 6622 - A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL SETTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY INTO THE CITY OF OROVILLE CONSOLIDATED BENEFIT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AND ORDERING THE INITIATION OF ASSESSMENT BALLOT PROCEDURES. The motion to approve the Consent Calendar was passed by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Berry, Mayor Andoe NOES: None ABSENT: Council Member Corkin ABSTAIN: None PUBLIC HEARINGS - None Prouty, Sharkey, Simpson, Vice Mayor Jernigan, December 20, 2005 - 7.00 p.m. Oroville City Council Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 10 9. ANNUAL AUDIT AND COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004/2005 — staff report. The Council received a copy of the 2004/05 Annual Audit and Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR).(Diane MacMillan, Director of Finance) City Auditor, Steve Herr, CPA at Davis Hammon and Company, gave a presentation on the financial status of the City of Oroville's General Fund for Fiscal Year 2004/2005. Mr. Herr reported that the City is in good financial shape with the largest outflow going to Public Safety. A motion was made by Council Member Prouty, seconded by Council Member Sharkey, to: Acknowledge receipt of the Comprehensive Financial Report for Fiscal Year 2004/05. The motion was passed by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Berry, Prouty, Sharkey, Simpson, Vice Mayor Jernigan, Mayor Andoe NOES: None ABSENT: Council Member Corkin ABSTAIN: None 10. MONTGOMERY STREET AND WASHINGTON AVENUE ROUNDABOUT PROJECT — staff report. The Council considered a resolution to accept the findings of a completed feasibility study for a roundabout to be constructed at the intersection of Montgomery Street and Washington Avenue, and authorize the Department of Public Works to proceed with the development of plans and specifications for construction of the project. (Eric Teitelman, Director of Community Development and Public Works) John Anderson, a member of the audience, stated that he felt that the City had too many projects that needed to be completed before starting this new project. Eric Teidelman, Director of Community Development and Public Works, explained that the City of Oroville had received Clean Air Funds for this roundabout project and that the City is on a timeline with this grant. Scott Ritchie, from Roundabouts & Traffic Engineering, outlined the benefits of having a roundabout at the intersection of Montgomery Street and Washington Avenue. The roundabout is proposed to improve traffic circulation, reduce air emissions, and improve December 20, 2005 - 7:00 p.m. Oroville City Council Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 10 vehicle and pedestrian safety. This item was continued to the February 7, 2006 regular meeting of the Oroville City Council to allow Council Members the opportunity to review the feasibility study for the roundabout at the intersection of Montgomery Street and Washington Avenue, therefore, no action was taken on the following: Adopt Resolution No. 6623 - A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTING THE FINDINGS OF A FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE MONTGOMERY STREET AND WASHINGTON AVENUE ROUNDABOUT PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS TO PROCEED WITH DEVELOPMENT OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE PROJECT. 11. SEWERAGE COMMISSION-OROVILLE REGION4NDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS — staff report. The Council considered a resolution to adopt June 2005 modifications to the existing industrial pretreatment program (IPP) of the Sewerage Commission-Oroville Region (SC - OR). SCOR operates and maintains the wastewater treatment plant that serves the City's sewer service area. (Eric Teitelman, Director of Community development and Public Works) A motion was made by Council Member Simpson, seconded by Vice Mayor Jernigan, to: Adopt Resolution No. 6624 - A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING INDUSTRIAL WASTE PRETREATMENT POLICY MODIFICATIONS DATED JUNE 2005 PREPARED BY THE SEWERAGE COMMISSION-OROVILLE REGION — (Agreement No. 1646). The motion was passed by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Berry, Prouty, Sharkey, Simpson, Vice Mayor Jernigan, Mayor Andoe NOES: None ABSENT: Council Member Corkin ABSTAIN: None 12. ADDITION TO ANNEXATION OF PROPERTIES IN THE VICINITY OF DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES CENTER ON GLEN DRIVE — staff report. The Council considered adding approximately 800 lineal feet of Glen Drive to the annexation of 123 properties surrounding the Department of Water Resources Center on Glen Drive. (Jo Sherman, Planning Manager) A motion was made by Vice Mayor Jernigan, seconded by Council Member Prouty, to: December 20, 2005 - 7:00 p.m. Oroville City Council Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 10 Adopt Resolution No. 6625 - A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL REQUESTING BUTTE COUNTY LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION TO TAKE PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ANNEXATION OF AN AREA THAT TOTALS APPROXIMATELY 38 ACRES, INCLUDES 123 PROPERTIES AND AN ADDITIONAL SECTION OF GLEN DRIVE, AND IS LOCATED IN THE VICINITY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESPURCES CENTER ON GLEN DRIVE. The motion was passed by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Berry, Prouty, Sharkey, Simpson, Vice Mayor Jernigan, Mayor Andoe NOES: None ABSENT: Council Member Corkin ABSTAIN: None 13. DEFERRED IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT — staff report. The Council considered a Deferred Improvement Agreement request from Joseph Bucher and Mona Mallory -Bucher for the installation of frontage improvements on property located on Oro Dam Blvd., Oroville, until such time that the City deems the improvements necessary. (Eric Teitelman, Director of Community Development and Public Works) A motion was made by Council Member Simpson, seconded by Council Member Berry, to: Adopt Resolution No. 6626 - A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A DEFERRED IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT WITH JOSEPH BUCHER AND MONA MALLORY- BUCHER FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON ORO DAM BLVD. (APN 036270-056) — (Agreement No. 1646). The motion was passed by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Berry, Prouty, Sharkey, Simpson, Vice Mayor Jernigan, Mayor Andoe NOES: None ABSENT: Council Member Corkin ABSTAIN: None 14. MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT FOR DECEMBER 2005 AND SUMMARY OF INVESTMENTS FOR NOVEMBER 2005. The Council received a copy of the Monthly Financial Report for December 2005 and the Monthly Summary of Investments for November 2005. (Diane MacMillan, Director December 20, 2005 - 7.00 p.m. Omville Co Couw7 Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 10 of Finance) Council acknowledged receipt of the December 2005 Monthly Financial Report and the November 2005 Monthly Summary of Investments. COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS/COMMITTEE REPORTS Chamber of Commerce Meeting Vice Mayor Jernigan reported that the Chamber of Commerce was very pleased with the Centennial Celebration kickoff event at the State Theater and the Chamber plans to continue to work with the City of Oroville throughout this centennial year. Oroville Recreation Area Committee Meeting - (ORAC) Council Member Sharkey reported that committee members were updated on lake conditions and Cold Water Fishery and that there will be a slight increase in State park fees this coming season. Dry Creek — South Fifth Avenue Council Member Simpson presented pictures of SC -OR and surrounding areas on South Fifth Avenue when Dry Creek overflowed and cause some flooding in December, 2005. The Facilities Committee will investigate this situation of flooding and make recommendations to the Council. 1. Parks and Trees Department — monthly reports 2.. Oroville Fire Department — activities report 3. Public Works Department — activities report 4. Business Assistance and Housing Development — activities report. 5. Chamber of Commerce — activities report 6. Code Enforcement — activities report Fire Chief David Pittman gave a presentation on flood control and reported that the 64,000 CSF retention basins are functioning properly to prevent flooding. December 20, 2005 - 7:00 p.m. Oroville City Council Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 10 Bill Connelly, 5490 Debbie Avenue, Oroville, representing the Veterans group for the Veterans Memorial Park, requested that Council push the Veterans Memorial project forward. Mr. Connelly stated that he and the other Veterans have been working on this project for a long time and feel the project is now at a stand still. Mr. Connelly stated that the Veterans group feared this project will be pushed aside and forgotten. Leroy Wyman of Oroville Cable, 3150 Harms Way, Oroville, requested that a traffic light be installed at the intersection of Lincoln Street and Wyandotte Avenue. At the December 20, 2005 City Council meeting, Mr. Wyman had given Council a petition with 145 signatures of business owners and individuals for the installation of a traffic light at that intersection. The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session at 9:35 p.m. to discuss the following: 1. Pursuant to Government Code section 54947.6, the City Council will meet with Labor Negotiator, Sharon L. Attebeny, to discuss labor negotiations for the Oroville City Employees Association (OCEA) and Department Heads. 2. Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(b) the City Council will confer with legal counsel, Dwight L. Moore, concerning a significant exposure to litigation (two cases). The meeting was reconvened at 10:37 p.m., and Mayor Andoe announced that no action was taken in Closed Session and direction was given to staff. The meeting was adjourned at 10:38 p.m. A regular meeting of the Oroville City Council will be held on Tuesday, February 7, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. Sharon L. Attebeny, City Clerk Gordon Andoe, Mayor December 20, 2005 - 7:00 p.m. Oroville City Council Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 10 December 20, 2005 - 7:00 p.m. OroviAe City Council Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 10 review of subdivision improvement plans, commercial improvement plans and other related technical submittals requiring engineering review. Based on the Current backlog of submittals and the number of submittals anticipated.'over the next 12 months, the agreement will provide for $75,000 in total compensation to CSG. (Eric Teitelman, Director of Community Development and Public Works) Council Action Requested: Adopt Resolution No. 6618 - A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. TO ASSIST THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT WITH ENGINEERING SERVICES RELATING TO THE REVIEW OF SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT PLANS, COMMERCIAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS AND OTHER TECHNICAL SUBMITTALS — (Agreement No. 1643).. S. AGREEMENT WITH GALLAWAY CONSULTING, INC. FOR ON-CALL PLANNING SERVICES — staff report. The Council considered an agreement with Gallaway Consulting, Inc. to assist Planning staff with on-call Planning and Environmental Services. All costs of services from Gallaway Consulting would be paid by developers who request consultant assistance in order to process their development application more quickly. (Jo Sherman, Planning Manager) Council Action Requested: Adopt Resolution No. 6619 - A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH GALLAWAY CONSULTING, INC. TO ASSIST THE PLANNING DIVISION WITH PROCESSING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS — (Agreement No. 1644). 6 }EXTENSION -_OF DEFERRED71MPR_OVEMENT_ AGREEMENT—FOR— ..�LOCATED AT 6930 LINCOLN -BLVD.. OROVIL'LE = staff report The Council considered a request from Stephen and Sandra Van Der Maelen for an extension of time to complete frontage improvements for property located at 5930 Lincoln Blvd., Oroville (AP No. 036-200-009) for a period of one-year from the date of expiration of the previously granted Deferred Improvement Agreement No. 1529, a copy of which is attached; (Eric Teitelman, Director of Community Development and Public Works) Council Action Requested: Adopt Resolution No. 6620 - A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF A DEFERRED IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5930 LINCOLN BLVD., u OROVILLE•(APN 036-200-009). The motion to approve the Consent Calendar was passed by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Berry, Prouty, Sharkey, Simpson, Vice Mayor Jernigan, Mayor Andoe NOES: None ABSENT: Council Member Corkin ABSTAIN: None ' - .r.,.. - - PUBLIC HEARINGS - None December 20, 2005 - 7.•00 p.m. Oroville City Council Meeting Minutes Pegs 4 of 10 DATE SHIPPERS GSO wa SlATE ACCOUNT NO. ,DEN 1-800-322-5555 COMPANY o WWW. GSO. COM U) PACKAGE ❑ LETTER ❑ PACKAGE ADDRESS INFORMATION (MAX 8 OZ) WEIGHT ❑ DECLARED ❑COD AMOUNT r VALUE Q ADDRESS STE/ EARLY SATURDAY ❑ ❑ ROOM CITYU, , leC BY 8:00 AM ZIP 'DELIVERY TIMES MAY BE LATER IN SOME AREAS - CONSULT YOUR SERVICE GUIDE OR CALL GOLDEN STATE OVERNIGHT. CA IJ, CODE SIGN TO AUTHORIZE DELIVERY WITHOUT OBTAINING SIGNATURE SENDERS CRED❑IMCCARD CREDIT CARD NUMBER EXP. DATE PHONE NAME ❑VISA ❑ AM EX NUMBER COMPANY NAME PHONE NUMBER ADDRESS • ADDRESS STE/ ROOM CITY zip d / i . Q CODE g Vyd INTERNAL LALLING ©YOUR REFERENCE WILL APPEAR ON YOUR INVOICE -� 'SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS PICK UP • INFORMATION 102855343 ON PLY 3 LIFT TAB a AND REMOVE FOR YOUR RECORD GSO TRACKING NUMBER SHIPPING AIR BILL wa SlATE ,DEN 1-800-322-5555 � o WWW. GSO. COM U) PACKAGE ❑ LETTER ❑ PACKAGE INFORMATION (MAX 8 OZ) WEIGHT ❑ DECLARED ❑COD AMOUNT VALUE Q (CASH NOT ACCEPTED) ©DELIVERY PRIORITY SERVICE OVERNIGHT EARLY SATURDAY ❑ ❑ PRIORITY DELIVERY BY 10:30 AM BY 8:00 AM 'DELIVERY TIMES MAY BE LATER IN SOME AREAS - CONSULT YOUR SERVICE GUIDE OR CALL GOLDEN STATE OVERNIGHT. RELEASE • SIGNATURE SIGN TO AUTHORIZE DELIVERY WITHOUT OBTAINING SIGNATURE CRED❑IMCCARD CREDIT CARD NUMBER EXP. DATE ❑VISA ❑ AM EX PICK UP • INFORMATION 102855343 ON PLY 3 LIFT TAB a AND REMOVE FOR YOUR RECORD GSO TRACKING NUMBER TERMS AND CONDITIONS AGREEMENT TO TERMS By giving us your shipments to deliver, you agree to all the service conditions on this Air Bill and in our most recent service guide which is available on request or through our web site at www.gso.com. LIMITATIONS ON OUR LIABILITY AND LIABILITIES NOT ASSUMED Our liability for loss of damage to any package is limited to your actual damages or $100 whichever is less, unless you pay for and declare a higher authorized value. We do not provide cargo liability insurance, but you may pay an additional charge for each additional $100 of declared value. If you declare a higher value and pay the additional charge, our liability will be the lessor of your declared value or the actual value of your package. In any event, we will not be liable for any damage, whether direct, incidental, special, or consequential, in excess of the declared value of a shipment whether or not we had knowledge that such damage might be incurred including but not limited to loss of income or profit. We won't be liable for your acts or omissions, including but not limited to improper or insufficient packaging, securing, marking or addressing, or for the acts or omissions of the recipient or anyone else with an interest in the package. Also, we won't be liable if you or the recipient violates any of the terms of our agreement. We won't be liable for loss, damage or delay caused by events we cannot control, including but not limited to acts of God, perils of the air, weather conditions, act of public enemies, war, strikes, civil commotion, or acts of omission of public authorities with actual of apparent authority. DECLARED VALUE LIMITS The highest declared value for our GSO Priority. Letter or GSO Priority PAK is $500. For other shipments the highest declared value is $25,000 unless your package contains items of "extraordinary value;' in which case the highest declared value we allow is $500. Items of "extraordinary value" include, but are not limited to, artwork, jewelry, furs, precious metals, negotiable instruments and other items with intrinsic value. Contact us at 800 322-5555 if you wish to declare a value in excess of $25,000. DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING / CODE ENFORCEMENT / FIIAE PROTECTION / PLANNING AND PREVENTION 1735 Montgomery Street Oroville, CA 95965 Phone: (530) 538-2425 CORRECTION NOTICE Building or property address The following listed corrections must be made. Contact this office for a reinspection when corrections are made. If you have any questions concerning any of the listed items please contact this office immediately. M�KO STS 1� L INC_ MAKO STRITCTITRIN" INC. 5650 EI Camino Real, Suite 235 Phone (760) 448-1760 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Fax (760) 448-1761 July 6, 2006 - Another Self Storage Attn: Stephen Van Der Maelen 5930 Lincoln Blvd. Oroville, CA 95966 Reference: Alternate to Monolithic Pour of Footing and Slab Mr. Van Der Maelen, In lieu of the monolithic pour of the footings and slab, as referenced on sheet SD2, a construction joint may be placed at the footing. If the construction joint is to be the method used # 3 tie bars must be installed at 48" on center, 3" from the bottom of the footing and bent at 90 degrees to extend a minimum of 24" into the slab. An additional continuous # 3 bar must be installed at the 90 degree bend in the tie bars in addition to the (2) # 4 or (1) # 5 bars top and bottom as shown on sheet SD2. If you have any questions, please call me. Thank you, Michael Dale, P.E. Project Engineer 07/°`l� 6 �EXP.09 30A6 �` Cl' �� s\�oFCAV-`O MAko Steel, Inc. 605Q El Camino Real, Ste. 235 4Cp-rIsbad, CA 92608 I. 2006 prVI 10 Atjo-rHer- S EzF Sro>rs5 Orr&): SMAEt,F 5 -136 LIN L -N D OJ I `L U , CA ?s--766 ►.1l111fit ►1►1'►l71,i1111 ►I1.13.11111a 1 11 11 f I I11II l►►J'IIIL►.Llltl � ' �./ -.. ... -�. - M✓»-;�'--r-.-tiF...wwr. -. +w::-�'�"r=. rim-. - r -ti . r -r�.. w DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING / CODE ENFORCEMENT / - FIRE PROTECTION / PLANNING AND PREVENTION 1735 Montgomery Street Oroville, CA 95965 Phone: (530) 538-2425 CORRECTION NOTICE 5-�13�7 z-11,7 Building or property address The following listed corrections must be made. Contact this office for a reinspection when corrections are made. If you have any questions concerning any of the listed items please contact this office immediately. DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING / CODE ENFORCEMENT / FIRE PROTECTION / PLANNING AND PREVENTION 1735 Montgomery Street Oroville, CA 95965 Phone: (530) 538-2425 CORRECTION NOTICE Building or property address The following listed corrections must be made.. Contact this office for a reinspection when corrections are made. If you have any questions concerning any of the listed items please contact this office immediately. . CITY OF OROVILLE BUILDING DEPARTMENT/CODE ENFORCEMENT/FIRE PROTECTION, PLANNING AND PREVENTION 1735 MONTGOMERY STREET • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965 PHONE NO.: (530) 538-2425 FAX NO.: (530) 538-2426 B0602-003 BUILDING PERMIT PERMIT NO.: PERMIT APPLICATION (WHEN PROPERLY VALIDATED THIS IS YOUR PERMIT) PROJECT ADDRESS: ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.: . 5930 LINCOLN BLVD 078100009 PROJECT DESCRIPTION PHASE 11 MINI STORAGE PERMIT CLASS (NEW, ADDITION, REMODEL): COM / MINI STORAGE DO NOT FINAL WITHOUT ALL DEPARTMENTS APPROVALS. PROPERTY OWNER(S):ADDRESS: VAN DER MAELEN, STEPHEN 368 VALLEY VIEW DRIVE 57 -332 PARADISE CA 95969 APPLICANT: DER t�E �v FAX NO.: TELtM5 368 RILEY MAELEN, STEPHEN VIEW DRIVE 872-3 32 PARADISE CA 95969 ARCHITECT, ENGINEER OR DESIGNER: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: FAX NO.: CONTRACTOR: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: FAX NO.: UBC GROUP: UBC TYPE: STORIES: PLAN NO.: 0 CENSUS NO./CENSUS DESCRIP'T'ION: BVD CODE: SEWER (EDUS): UNITS PER BLW.: NO. OF BLDG$: Vv TOTAL BLDG. TOTAL GARAGE: TOTAL PORCH:: TOTAL VALUENARDS: ZONING DISTRICT: 3964 0 LEA: 0 $ 930,747.20 AREA: AREA: (THE FOLLOWING PRELIMINARY FEES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE): DESCRIPTION: ACCOUNT NO.: FEE: PERMIT DETAIL: Building Permit 001.4220.2990 $15.00 PA 5/9/2006: OVERPAID 0 @ 296.99 Building Permit 001.4220.2990 $4,999.01 8 1/2X11 PLAN RETENTION FEE 200 @ 30.00 Electrical Permit 00 1.4222.2990 $25.00 8 1/2X14 OR LARGER PLAN RET 20 @ 7.00 PLAN CHECK FEE 001.4665.2990 $3,739.39 Building Permit 0 @ 5296.00 PLAN RETENTION FEES 705.4670.7005 $37.00 Filing Fee 1 @ 15.00 STRONG MOTION INSTR. - COMI 620.2520 $195.46 Misc. Wiring/Apparatus 1 @ 10.00 RECEIPT TOTAL FEES CHARGED: $9,010.86 RECEIPT #: CHECK #:pAY PAYMENTS RECEIVED: $9,010.86 METHOD: TOTAL BALANCE DUE: $0.00 TOTAL FEES PAID: $9,010.86 RECEIVED BY: NOTICE (Please check appropriate box in each paragraph.) THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID if work or construction authorized is not commenced within 180 days from date of issuance, or work is suspended or ' abandoned or abandoned for period of9 80 days any time after work is commenced and verified by inspection. { ) (la) 1 certify that I am licensed under the State Contractor's License Law and my contrac is license is in full force and effect; Or ( ) (lb) 1 certify that I am exempt from Business and Professions Code #7031.5 under: ( 7044 - Owner/Builder, { ) #7048 -Price of labor and t rials ss than $300, or ( ( Other ( ( (2a) I Pertify that I have on file with the City of Oroville Building Department a Certificate of Workers' Comp. Insurance: Insurer Policy No. Exp. Date , or a Certificate of Consent to self -insure by the Director of Industrial Relations; Or { ( (2b) 1 certify that I am exempt. under Labor Code #3800 because: ( ) the permit is for work of $100 or less, or { ) that the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the workers' compensation laws of California. 1 certify that 1 have read this application and declare under penalty of perjury that the information contained herein is true, correct and complete. I agree to comply with all city and county ordinances and state laws relating to building construction, and hereby authorized representatives of this city to enter upon the above mentioned property for inspection purposes. 1 am the owner of the stpcture(s) listed on this permit or I represent the owner and am acting with the owner's full knowledge and consent. Signed by: O ner age t)/C Issued by: COPIES TO: APPLICANT FINANCE Date: Date: v / D 24 HOURS NOTICE FOR INSPECTIONS INSPECTION RECORD CALL (530) 538-2425 INSPECTIONS, DATE. INSPECI'OR INSPEC'T'IONS DATE INSPECTOR INSPECTIONS DATE INSPECTOR SETBACK FLOOR NAILING EXTERIOR LA'FHING!SiuNG FOUNDATION ROOF NAILING INTERIOR LATHING; DRYt ALL SHEAR PANEL REINFORCING STEEL NAILING DO NOT PLASTER UNTIL ABOVE IS SIGNED GROUNDED ELECTRODE. FRA �911tiG SERVICE CONDUIT UNDERGROUND ROUGH ELECTRIC ' PLUMBING UNDERGROUND ROUGH PLUMOING SEWER ROUGH GAS PIPE PRE-GUNITE ROUGH HEATING v COOLING POOL POO_ DECK. ROOF ;COVER) SP&POOL FENCES MASONRY BOND . BEAM DO NOT CALL FOR INSULATION INSPECTION UNTIL ALL DO NOT PLACE. CONCRETE UNTit-ABOVE. IS SIGNED Or. THE ABOVE APPROVALS HAVE BEEN OBTAINED FINAL INSPECTIONS SEWER GROUNDWORI NSUL,^.;TIOP7 FINAL ELECTRICAL UNDERFLOOR DRAIN PIPING .BALLS FINAL :BAS TEST . ELECTRICAL . GROUNDWORK CEILING FINAL PLUMBING NATER PIPING FINAL HEATING' riROUPlDW%ORK ROOF COOLING FI^IALGRADING - SLAB REINFORCEMENT OK TO POUR SLAB FLOOR OR GUNITE DO NOT GUNITE OR PLACE CONCRETE FLOOR DO NOT GUNITE OR PLACE CONCRETE FLOOR FINAL BUILDNG UNTIL ABOVE IS SIGNED- UNTIL. ABOVE IS SIGNED City of Oroville Printed: 5/16/2006 Building Department Receipt No: B657 Cash Collections RECEIPT Check No: 593 Pay Method: Check Permit Number: B0602-003 Job Address: 5930 LINCOLN BLVD Fee or Item Description Building Permit Building Permit Electrical Permit PLAN RETENTION FEES STRONG MOTION INSTR. - COMMER. Account Number . Fee Amount 001.4220.2990 $ 4,999.01 001.4220.2990 $ 15.00 001.4222.2990 $ 25.00 705.4670.7005. $-37.00 620.2520 $ 195.46 Total Fees Paid : $ 5,271.47 Received From: VAN DER MAELEN, STEPHEN LE, BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION ` �(4 Date Application Submitted: O Trakit Permit #(�[J� ProjectAddress: J 6 �. (✓� C vl� Property Owner Information: ` , 6fe-& er VAyi fjLi Mp,P [ev,_ Assessor's Parcel No � Name: Zoning: Flood Zone, if applicable: r Mailing Address: S 9 3 � t--i v� t o l v� 50)3 O 6,_ Phone No.: (,T Project Type: Applicant's Information: (if not owner) El New Single Family ❑ Remodel El Addition ❑ Swimming pool ❑ Fence Name: o,V ❑ Second Dwelling Unit ❑ Multiple Family Commercial ❑ Addition ❑ Infill Mailing Address: ❑ Sign ❑ Other Phone No.: Project Description: �e I -� — rs �a r�� ► Contractor's Information: Name: "sG.►M 'e- Construction valuation: $ b g,6b o, Mailing Address: Phone No.: Total square feet of- Livable Space State Contractor's License No: Class Garage Architect//EInformation: Covered Deck Open Deck �ngineer's t/' a,k,® "StQ d- I Name I � If applicable: Mailing Address: 5 6,5 0 to ws i 90-01 ear? ayear? Has site been vacant for more than aD) a� 000 $ No.: � ��`�� 301, � 11 Yes o No State License No: Class If yes, have improvements been made for landscape? ❑ Yes ❑ No I hereby certify, under penalty of perjury, that I have read this application and the information I have given is true, correct and complete. I agree to comply with all city ordinances and state laws relating to building construction and hereby au- thorize representatives of the City of Oroville to enter upon the above property, for inspection purposes. Owner/Applicant/Contractor: C QD �i e �o.vA 04T Yl�ic�, e ` e h Date: (PLEASE PRINT) Owner/Applicant/Contractor: (SIGNATURE) 0 9 " Trakit Permit #: Licensed Contractor's Declaration I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury that I am licensed under provisions of Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code and my license is in full force and effect. State Contractor's License No: Class: Contractor's Signature: Date: Worker's Compensation Declaration I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following declarations: ❑ I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self -insure for workers' compensation, as provided for by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued. ❑ I have and will maintain workers' compensation insurance, as required by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued. My workers' compensation insurance carrier and policy number are: Insurance Company: Policy No.: (This section need not be completed if the permit is for one hundred dollars ($100.00) or less.) ❑ I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the workers' compensation laws of California, and agree that is I should become subject to the workers' compensation provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor`Codt, I shall forthwith comply with those provisions. Applicant's Signature: Date: Warning: Failure to secure workers' compensation coverage is unlawful, and shall subject an employer to criminal penalties and civil fines up to one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00), in addition to the cost of compensation, dam- ages as provided for in Section 3706 of the Labor Code, interest, and attorney's fees. Construction Lending Agency I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued (Section 3097, Civil Code). 1_ Lender's Name: w Q CCMvr• . Q Phone No.: 33 ' q 102V X 37 5" Lender's Address: Trakit Permit #: Owner/Builder Declaration I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury that I am exempt from the Contractors License Law for the following reason (Section 703 1.5, Business and Professions Code: Any city or county which requires a permit to construct, alter, im- prove, demolish or repair any structure prior to its issuance, also requires the applicant for such permit to file a signed statement that he is licensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractors License Law (Chapter 9 commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code) or that he or she is exempt therefrom and the basis for the alleged exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by any applicant for a permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars ($500.00): ❑ I, as owner of the property, or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work, and the structure is not intended or offered for sale (Section 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractors License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who does such work himself or herself or through his or her own employees, provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If however, the building or improvement is sold within one year of completion, the owner - builder will have the burden of proving that he or she did not build or improve for the purpose of sale.) I, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to construct the project (Section 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractors License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who contracts for such projects with a contractor(s) licensed pursuant to the Contractors License Law.) ❑ I am exempt under Section , Business and Professions Code for this reason: Owner: M Date: Certificate of exemption from Workers' Compensation insurance I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the workers' compensation laws of California, and agree that is I should become subject to the workers' compensation provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code, I shall forthwith complyCilt kse provisions. Applicant's Signature: Date: Q—. 0 �p Warning: Failure to secure workers' compensation coverage is unlawful, and shall subject an employer to criminal penalties and civil fines up to one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00), in addition to the cost of compensation, dam- ages as provided for in Section 3706 of the Labor Code, interest, and attorney's fees. Trakit Permit #: CITY OF OROVILLE BUILDING DEPARTMENT/CODE ENFORCEMENT FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING AND PREVENTION Sewer inspection record: Date: Property Address: Assessor Parcel No.:----- Building Permit No. Property Owner's Name: Contractor's Name: Work Done by: Property Owner If other, please give name and phone no.: Show diagram of sewer lateral from building to main: Building sewer inspected by: Sewer main and tap inspected by: Contractor Date Work to be Completed: Owner's Phone No.: Contractor's Phone No.: Other Date: Date: Please return this form to the building department l Trakit Permit #: CITY OF OROVILLE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS/BUILDING DIVISION 1735 MONTGOMERY STREET OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965 I SUBCONTRACTORS LIST State law requires that employers provide workers' compensation insurance. No contractor or subcontractor who falls under section 3800 of the labor code shall start work within the city without first having on file with the city building department a certified copy of workers' compensation insurance naming the City of Oroville as certificate holder. This list of subcontractors shall be submitted with the building permit application, or before any work may commence. All information must be included and legible. It shall be the responsibility of the property owner or general contractor to provide this information. Failure to do so may result in not getting any inspections. Project General Contractor: State contractor's license number: Worker's compensation required? y Phone: City license number: P Certificate provided? y Type: n Excavating Contractor:yk p- (56-rw 6 csA Phone: 5-33 -Z 710 Address: City license number: State contractor's license number: Type: Worker's compensation required? y n Certificate provided? _y n Paving Contractor: 6�q Q.,- vii V G- Phone:_ Address: City license number: State contractor's license number: Type: Worker's compensation required? y n Certificate provided?y n R Concrete Contractor: �a-�S�l Q l�jyaa l l� Vt-vl I `Q ef (/n Phone: d t{ ) d' Address: City license number: State contractor's license number: Type: Worker's compensation required? y n Certificate provided?y n Structural Steel Contractor: M�y SC -Q Ph(ne: 3$3 - 913-117 Address: City license number: State contractor's license number: Worker's compensation required? y Type: n Certificate provided? n Framing Contractor: imako csf as) Phone: Address: City license number: State contractor's license number: Worker's compensation required? ____y Plumbing Contractor: Q r' Address: State contractor's license number: Worker's compensation required? y Type: n Certificate provided? __y n S QJ Jp Phone: City license number: n Certificate provided? y n Type: Trakit Permit #: Electrical Contractor: iluW t- c � (-!(-C- Phone: 599 —b9OY Address: City license number: State contractor's license number: Worker's compensation required? y n Certificate provided? y n Type: Mechanical Contractor: l�1 Phone: Address: City license number: State contractor's license number: Type: Worker's compensation required? y n Certificate provided? y n Roofing Contractor: >,/1 la -kb C% Q l Phone Address: City license number:_ State contractor's licensb number: Worker's compensation required? y n Certificate provided? __y n Insulation Contractor: ' r Address: State contractor's license number: Worker's compensation required? y It Type: Phone: City license number: n Certificate provided? y n Masonry Contractor: I d- Phone: Address: City license number:_ State contractor's license number: Worker's compensation required? y n Certificate provided? ____y___.n Drywall Contrator: N 1 Address: State contractor's license number: Worker's compensation required? ___y Type: Type: Phone: City license number: — n Certificate provided? y n Type: Alarm Systems Contractor: ► V ` +✓r w�, SQCiN``�y Phone: ( b Address: City license number: State contractor's license number: Type: Worker's compensation required? .... y l n Certificate provided? y n Landscaping Contractor: �p`q Q..S t�5 Cc,Q s` Phone: - 3 3%% Address: City license number: State contractor's license number: Type: Worker's compensation required? ____y n Certificate provided? y n Sign Contrator: Phone: Address: City license number: State contractor's license number: Type: Worker's compensation required? y n Certificate provided? y n CITY OF OROVILLE BUILDING DEPARTMENT/CODE ENFORCEMENT CHECKLIST FOR SUBMITTAL OF BUILDING PLANS DATE: S- �`''FROM: LOCATION OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION PROJECT: U.B.C. GROUP: U.B.C. TYPE (USE) -IV2 f 1 TOTAL SQUARE FEET OF BUILDING �1! (bldg, type value) TOTAL SQUARE FEET OF GARAGE/CARPORT X (bldg. type value) TOTAL SQUARE FEET OF PORCH AREA X (bldg. type value) TOTAL CONST. VALUE: $ (g + $ + $ (bldg.(garage)(porch) W7, J CJ ARE PLANS REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECT? YES _ r NO IF PLANS ARE REQUIRED, PLEASE CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX(ES) WHICH WOULD APPLY TO THE PLANS. 1. Building Construction Plaps a. Plans Received Y Checked Yl&-- Approved YN — 2. Electrical Construction Plans a. Plans Received Y — N — Checked Y_ N — Approved Y N �• Mechanical Construction Plans a: Plans Received. Y — N — Checked Y_ N — Approved Y N 4.. Plumbing Construction Plans a. Plans Received Y — N — Checked Y— N _ Approved Y N 5. Grading/Site Construction Plans aPlans Received Y,, N — Checked Y N Approved Y— N — 6. Drainage Construction Plans a. Plans Received Y — N — Checked Y— N — Approved Y N 7: Sewer Construction Plans (layout) +a Plans Received Y N Checked Y N Approved Y— N.- 8 Landscape Construction Plans a. .Plans Received Y — N — Checked Y N — Approved Y— N — 9. Subdivision Construction Plans a. .Plans Received Y N Checked Y N — Approved Y— N — 10. Sign Construction Plans iL Plans Received Y - N — Checked Y_. N — Approved Y N 11. Other q_c�o n 4 7 CITY OF OROVILLE BUILDING DEPARTMENT/CODE ENFORCEMENT REQUEST FOR BUILDING PERMIT FEES BUILDING PERMIT Filing Fee Permit Fee OW. Plan Check Fee (65%) dl %� Strong Motion Fee (� ✓� Plan Retention Fee 1' _2EP@ .15 2_0@.35 = Other Total Building Fees PLUMBING PERMIT Filing Fee Each Trap - $5.00 x W/_Heater-Gas - $7.00 x !W/Heater-Elec. - $5.00 x Rain, Water Dra1m GasPiping$5:00 Water Piping 00 x Bldg. Sewer 9.50 x Other Total Plumbing Fees SIGN PERMIT Filing Fee Permit Fee Plan Check Fee Total Sign Fees $ 15.00 $ 62 tf -o0 $_Ig5A $ 3d ADDITIONAL FEES MAY OR MAY NOT ELECTRICAL PERMIT Filing Fee $ 15,00 Service -amps $ Subpanel(s) $ Temp. Power Pole $„ - Switches, Receptacles, $ Lighting (sq.ft. x $) $ Sign(s)-$15. '0 " $ Other $ Total'Electrical ees $� MECHANICAL PERMIT Filing. Fee $ 15.00 Heating -per schedule $ Cooling per schedule $ Resi. Hood - $6.50 $ Com. Hood I- $15.00 $ Com. Hood II- $9.5 $ Vent. Fan w/D 5.00 $ Evap. Coo $6.50 $ Wood-, ruing Stove $9.50 $ _ Other $ Total Mechanical Fees $ Energy.Plan Check fee $ Residential $ 0 Non -Res' ntial $ 46.00 Energy Com ce4nspection $ sidential $35.00 on -Residential $ 4 00 SUBTOTAL BUILDIN EES -� 1CLUDE THE FOLLOWING / Drainage Fee (Single - $3,641.37) (Multi - $4,522.90) - Thermalito Area Onl $ •- �-- City Sewer Connection Fee- # of EDU's $696 $577 $348 $ SC -OR Sewer Connection Fee-# of EDU's $1,318.00 per EDU o Tap Connection Fee x $331.32 IMPACT FEES Law Enforcement (Single - $31.71) (Multi - $54.96) Fire Suppression/Protection (Single - $41.22)�(Multi - $28.54) Traffic/Circulation System (Single - $502.08)i,(Multi - $330.84) Storm Drainage System (Single - $1,239.86) (Multi - $616.23) Sewer Collection Facilities (Single - $355.15) (Multi - $316.04) Genera(.Government/Adininistration (Single - $64.48) (Multi = $64.48) n Park Development (Single - $715.59) (Multi - $562.32) I PUBLIC WORKS FEES SUBTOTAL OF OTHER FEES: `/ Site Improvement Const. Inspection fee — (min.$16195) Site Improvement Const. Plan Check Fee-(min.$162.95) TOTAL OF ALL FEES: SCHOOL FEE (if applicable, -these fees are to be paid prior to permit issua Industrial/Commercial - $.360 x Sq. Ft.= Residential - $2.24 x Sq. Ft.= `'i 15:10 From:CSG CONSULTANTS 650 522 2513 To:15305343323 P.3/4 1700 South Amphletf Boutevard Tel: (888) 794-2016 CSGOon>s'cui)i antsin.. S Floor FOX: (650) 522•2599 San Mateo, CA. 94402 www.tsyweb5ite-tom PLAN REVIEW REPORT Date Owner/Applicant Name Address Address Phone: April 11, 2006 Stephen Van Der Maelen 5930 Lincoln '.Boulevard proville Ca; (530) 308-8283 Plan review by: Steven Huang Des/Arch/Eng Name; Mako Steel Address, 5650 EI Camino Real Ad'res§ Carlsbad, Ca 92008 Phone. 800-383-4932 City review #: B0602-003 CSG review A 26.0515 Work scope Mini Storage — Buildings 1 — $ only Project Address 5930 Lincoln Boulevard Codes applicable 2001 CBC, CPC, CMC, 2004 CElectC, 2005 CEnergyC, City ordinances INSTRUCTIONS AND INFORMATION FOR THE NEXT PLAN REVIEW: In order to accelerate the permit process, the city requested CSG Consultants, Inc. to do the building permit plan review. Please comply with the Viewing instructions. 1, Please return W, (2) complete sets of corrected plans & documents to CSO directly for recheck, Include this plan review report and your responses to review comments. Rechecks submitted era# do not Include the review report with responses and complete plans with documents such as structural calcs & energy forma will delay the process. 2. Return one (1) complete sets of corrected plans and documents to City of Oroville for their reference use. 3. Check with other City of Oroville agencies having juNsdiction for your project for their plan .raviews. Please include revisions from other City agencies on the building permit revised plans. Upon approval and compliance to building codes, CSG will send your- plans and documents to the City of Oroville by our courier. The City will finish their plan reviews for City agencies and perform the final processing for permits. Should you have any questions regarding this procedure, please feel free to call CSG's building technician, Kenia Joachin, at (888) 7942018. Our mailing address is CSO Consultants, Inc. 1700 South Amphlett Boulevard, 3f° Floor San Mateo, CA 94402 Tel: (888)794-2016 Fax. (650) 522-2589 PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS: RECEIVE® 2 7 2006 PUBLIC WORKS The following Comments remain outstanding from the checldlst dated March 17, 2006. The original comments are reprinted In Italic font and dated for your reference. 4. [3-17-061 nearly dimenslon dbtance from buildings to prep. erly 11ne as well as distance between buildings Exterfor bear ing walls shall be of one-hour fire--fvsisti a constrvcdon (w16 parapet) when bullding is located w1b71n 20 Moet ofproperfy line or assumed pmperfy /Ines between bulldlnA CBC Table 5A. 2"d Review Comment: Provide conStruCtion detail of one-hour fire resistive conStruCGon with parapetS Including basis of approval (UL design #, G.A. file #, etc.) or provide a minimum distance of 40 feet between buildings to maintain a minimum distance of 20 feet to assumed property lines. (CBC Table 5A)If Response: :5Q e QV\c 10 o e. 6 ID" ) I a 1i,-% 9 kOL'Y f'kky w/ a lir Urea J qfAA 0,A& 4-d&C,&c5- A_C-w Q Q'I b %Ai in �v.'l �&n C91M . .PAIAS a 15hv&-.c4. 15'19 From: G��STFINTS`�rM....�,,•,- _ �,�¢... ._- yj, ..ar.n�A 5. [3-17.06] Show location and detalls of van amvss/b/e parking sra%l (ac��slO16-a/I bulldings) per 1A CBCSecdon 1.1298. V4 Review Comment: Incorporate details of accessible parking stall and cross reference to site . Response: av% ..rt No c 0'� rel 610'96: cM 10"'s QCQoss a-�r�e ate. bu►1 ��qs 6. [3-17-061 Please show the path of travel Brom the public way or accessible parking stall to each unit CBC1107B.2. Handralls are requ/red If ramps a/ong.the: path of travel sloped exmwaing I foot rise in 20 feet ofhor&onta/rein (546 gradient) per CBC Ser on 11338.5.5. fiere shall not be more than a W difference between floor or landing and threshold of thedoorway. orange In level between 1/4 ' inch and 6 inch shall be beveled with a slope no greater than I unit veru'cal to 2 units horftnwl (50961slope). Oriange /n level greater than br inch shall be acromplished by means of ramp. CBC X X338.2.4,1, 2"1 Review Comment: Path of travel to buildings and road between buildings shall a no grater than 59/0. Interior road and parkin detail indicates a 5%-7% grade. Please revise.grading plan. Response- Y11 NkA f 8. [3-17-06]Provide building Aoor plans induding door types Requlred exit doorways shall not be less Man 3 feet in nominal width and not less than 6 feet 8 Inches in nominal height with a clear width of the exit not /ess than 32 Inches Limit threshold - 14 "maximum, D/menslon on the plan —clear length on each side of the door — on door swing side, 60"dear length wlth 18")amb (24"at exterior); opposite doorswing, 46"clear /engbh, (1003.3.1.3,1003..3.1.6,11338.2.4,11338.2.4.2) 22d Review Provide an arch to ral floor plan showing sIgeof each unit anddo .!1 Respon • 3 i l nq'- 5 m0 1ol,5 -• 7. o B 1 d, S�� ~1$g w • . X141. •, sd r 3,? 9. [3-.17-061 Provide build/ng elevation views t� 2n0 Review. Comment: Sheet S14 Containing building elevation views has been omitted from the permit set. Please submit sheet S14 with next submittal for review. Response: SLya C d o 5 e 10. [3-17-06) Provide mn e%Ctrica/pian Showing single line diagram, panel s�Chedu/ing, s`wltrd`ie,� /ightrng r r'" &-tums, reneptades, etc. and compllance to die 2005 77i1e 24 mandatory requirement for llghCng systems and equipment including multi level lighting conbv1s. Califomla Energy Code 131(6). 2nd Review Comment: Provide Title 24 Energy Forms (LTG.—i through 3) and Incorporate Into drawing set. Forms shall be signed by professional ponsible for the design. Response: Q e E V S e 17. [3-17-061 Provide foundation system ofsuflrdent size to support al! loads under lnterlor bearing and shearwal/s CBC 1806.3 2n4 Review comment: Per the Geotechnical Report by Appfied Testing Consultants dated April 23, 2004, item # 3.3.5.5 on page #4 recommends the installation of a 12 inch deep strip footing under interior walls: Please provide additional strip footing under Interior wails per the recommendations in the soil's report. AA Response: c1 @ Q D (x r0. r :3 i v, O -TI f r n-^ C`o-hs 7.d -cam S " & 2 e i a r (End of Comments) -v,�„ C o� Bw� s c 1` vv is C Ft tn�r\f` �'�.o int � e Y3l-D �" K>71' S � t.!/N A'7a.1 1 C CV �i A !/9n 0 w� fi e� Qi r !, �.I��ilS/�P� f• � ... � CS�Consultantsi��: www.csgwebsite.com LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL To: City of Oroville Date: March 17, 2006 *1st Review 1735 Montgomery Street CSG PC#: 260515 Oroville, CA 95965 Agency PC#: B0602-003 Attn: Building Department Job Address: 5930 Lincoln Boulevard Via: • - X Courier _ Exp. Mail _Pickup _Reg. Mail _ Other Status: Plan is ready for permit issuance for the following: _ Plan is approved. _ Architectural X Plan requires corrections. See attached list. _ Structural _ Other: _ Electrical _ Plumbing _ Mechanical _ Energy Other: We have reviewed the following documents: X Plans — 2 set(s) 2 Structural Calculations Soil Report _ Set(s) Energy Calculation _ Specifications Other: Special items to note: Plan has-been stamped and signed by CSG. Arch./Engineer wet stamp is required. Special inspection required for Environmental Health Services approval required. _ Flood Damage Prevention Regulations apply. Verify code interpretation by City/County on Structural review is required. Please collect a plan review fee for _ hrs. of plan check. Amount: $ Remarks: Plans and documents will be held at CSG office pending the next plan review FROM: Steven Huang CSG. Consultants, Inc. 1700 South Amphlett Boulevard, aro Floor ♦ San Mateo, CA 94402 ♦ Tel: (888)794-20160 Fax: 650-522-2599 ♦ www.csgwebsite.com 1 i 1700 South Amphlett Boulevard Tel: (888) 794-2016 3rd Floor Fax: (650) 522-2599 CSG1 CdQSY1taht9iinc. San Mateo, CA. 94402 www.csdwebsite.com Date Owner/Applicant Name Address Address Phone: PLAN REVIEW REPORT March 17, 2006 Stephen Van Der Maelen 5930 Lincoln Boulevard Oroville Ca, (530) 308-8283 Plan review by: Steven Huang Des/Arch/Eng Name - Mako Steel Address 5650 EI Camino Real Address Carlsbad, Ca 92008 Phone: 800-383-4932 PROJECT DATA: City review #: B0602-003 CSG review #: 260515 Work scope Mini Storage — Buildings 1 — 5 only ` Project Address 5930 Lincoln Boulevard Codes applicable 2001 CBC, CPC, CMC, 2004 CElectC, 2005 CEnergyC, City ordinances INSTRUCTIONS AND INFORMATION FOR THE NEXT PLAN REVIEW: In order to accelerate the permit process, the city requested CSG Consultants, Inc. to do the building permit plan review. Please comply with the following instructions. 1. Please return two (2) complete sets of corrected plans & documents to CSG directly for recheck. Include this plan review report and your responses to review comments. Rechecks submitted that do not include the review report with responses and complete plans with documents such as structural calcs & energy forms will delay the process. 2. Return one (1) complete sets of corrected plans and documents to City of Oroville for their reference use. 3. Check with other City of Oroville agencies having jurisdiction for your project for their plan reviews. Please include revisions from other City agencies on the building permit revised plans. Upon approval and compliance to building codes, CSG will send your plans and documents to the City of Oroville by our courier. The City will finish their plan reviews for City agencies and perform the final processing for permits. Should you have any questions regarding this procedure, please feel free to call CSG's building technician, Kenia Joachin, at (888) 794-2016. Our mailing address is: CSG Consultants, Inc. 1700 South Amphlett Boulevard, Td Floor San Mateo, CA 94402 Tel: (888)794-2016 Fax: (650) 522-2599 PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS: 1. Please provide an architectural Site Plan showing property lines, adjacent buildings, exits to public way and on-site parking as well as state accessibility requirements to each unit. Response: 2. Indicate on sheet S1.1 the Occupancy Group classification of the building to be S-1, Type of Construction to be II -N and a scope of work statement Response: 3. Please specify if building is to be fully sprinklered. Structural calculations indicate that metal structures were not designed to support a fire sprinkler system. Provide revised calculations if building are to be sprinkled. Response: 1 4. Clearly dimension distance from buildings to property line as well as distance between buildings. Exterior bearing walls shall be of one-hour fire -resistive construction (with parapet) when building is located within 20 feet of property line or assumed property lines between buildings. CBC Table 5A. Response: 5. Show location and details of van accessible parking stall (accessible to all buildings) per CBC Section 1129B. Response: 6. Please show the path of travel from the public way or accessible parking stall to each unit. CBC11076.2. Handrails are required if ramps along the path of travel sloped exceeding 1 foot rise in 20 feet of horizontal run (5% gradient) per CBC Section 1133B.5.5. There shall not be more than a 1/2" difference between floor or landing and threshold of the doorway. Change in level between 1/4 inch and 1/2 inch shall be beveled with a slope no greater than 1 unit vertical to 2 units horizontal (50% slope). Change in level greater than 1/2 inch shall be accomplished by means of a ramp. CBC 1133B.2.4.1. Response: 7. Provide a soils report for proposed improvements. CBC 1804.2. Response: 8. Provide building floor plans including door types. Required exit doorways shall not be less than 3 feet in nominal width and not less than 6 feet 8 inches in nominal height with a clear width of the exit not less than 32 inches. Limit threshold = 1/2" maximum. Dimension on the plan — clear length on each side of the door — on door swing side, 60" clear length with 18" jamb (24" at exterior); opposite door swing, 48" clear length. (1003.3.1.3, 1003.3.1.6, 11336.2.4, 1133B.2.4.2) Response: 9. Provide building elevation views. Response: 10. Provide an electrical plan showing single line diagram, panel scheduling, switches, lighting fixtures, receptacles, etc. and compliance to the 2005 Title 24 mandatory requirement for lighting systems and equipment including multi-level lighting controls. California Energy Code 131(b). Response: 11. Sheet S1.1— provide complete notes for special inspection and structural observation; list items to be inspected/observed, person(s) to perform inspection/observation, report submittals, etc. (1701 & 1702) Response: 2 12. On the plans, specify connection of roof deck to purlin/channel/angle. (Calc. p. 19) Response: 13. Calculation 29, 40 & 51 (post design) — Interaction equations - states "Section does not meet all requirements of NAS C4.6" — please explain. Response: 14. On the plans, specify connection of wall panels at each support (girt/channel/angle). (Calc. p. 61) Response: 15. End walls and side walls — specify girt location and spacing (match calculations). (Calc. p. 63, 69, 74) Response: 16. Interior shear walls — specify connector size and spacing (match calculations). (Calc. p. 91, 97, 103, 111.. 118) Response: 17. Provide foundation system of sufficient size to support all loads under interior bearing and shearwalls. CBC 1806.3 Response: 18. Detail 17/SD-1 (cross -bracing at gusset) — reference detail to each roof plan. Response: 19. Roof plans — calculate and detail chord members at roof cross -bracing. Response: 20. Calculate and limit story drift — ex. At exterior wall lines (with piers). (1630.9 & .10) (End of Comments) W 03/17/2006 11:17 15305343323 STEPHEN VANDERMAELEN PAGE 02' T • W0�'B�ISQ9MBSa'MMM • 665Z•ZM-059 :XRJ •OTOZ-b6L(M) :ft • ZOOS VD'MWW URS • 1*wd pA'Puem" WN&W 4MOS 0041 'A+I's mnsLarJ M fim" UWAIS :W()Vd Ma!nat umd vou go bwwww—w 9sa W Pla4 at! ILIM RUMUR oP Pup SUVId Ampeul1! qLE*uM VW) MOO to W4 — J% W) AWAW Ueld a Pglw OMM _ 'Pwptw s! Mwai RHMUS uo AW►ro7/A%D Aq UM=drdN OW AMA •Aldde suoRn6et uoAuar w ese<uea Doom 'patlnbai lena:dde SWOMS 4WN MAMUqAu3 Jol Pm.ndw Uawaftl IePad5 'pat!nbas sl dui pm aaatn6v3/'tl N 19SD Aq patft Pus Podujm uaeq ss4 uey ` Nam 0% st"m pmft suoomyaads r" uoiWl�7 � (glias :Jm ` Pa!aeti3 — GURU )d — I�f�l3 IWnprWs IWnimi4wv :Sl% mR jaJ owmnnl amend J% ApQW sl UW vo ft Bos — suo"rome:r p"s. i mw z – SU* 7 'quammop I MR pwmvm &MR am W patppe ee5 'sUOWaM sagnbRj ue!d X pawidde sl ueld -WROO JaW ` lmw ,We __.. dMpld — 119W •dam sWnco jl MA PJ UPX41 OCR -ISS06pPd Or wwwoom bugning :WR soo"LM ,#Dd A:us6V SM6 tri a JAWQ slow -#3d m MIR tuwam as MW VI* Li 4P,!:am all!"° O IOMD :Ol "1VLUtgSNM dO MUM u�'a�st�t6sy'nnMa+ VA/TA mvd 30 AIII3 3TIIADNO 9004/41/E0 900/ZOoo 'T33,Ls ON" T9LTgttO9LT %VA TO:LT 9002/LT/t;0 03/17/2006 17:01 FAX 17604481761 MAKO STEEL ' IA 003/005 03/17/2006 10:43 5305382426 CROVILL.E CITY OF PAGE 02/04 4700 $Guth (M) 7W2016 30 Floor Ampltlstt 8ot�gvard Am (650'1522-25M ��1ldefeall�tf�tlthwd San mawal OAS sm www. ate.com PLAN REVIEW REPORT Date Manch 17, 2006 Owner/Applicant Name Stephen Van Der Maslen Address 5930 Unooln Boulevard Address Oroville Ca, Phone: (530) 30&8283 plan revsow by, Steven Huang Des/Arch/Eng Name Mako Steal Address 5650 EI Camino Real Address Carlsbad, Ca 02008 Phon@. 800-83-4932 SECT DAT -A.• City review* 60602-003 CSG review #: 260515 Work scope Mini Storage — Buildings 1 — 5 only Project Address 8930 Lincoln Boulevard Codes applicable 2001 CBC, CPC, CMC, 2004 CEIectC, 2005 CEnergyC, City ordinances INSTRUCTIONS AND INFORMATION FOR THE NEXT PLAN REVIEW: In order to swelera<e the permit process. the cloy requested CSO Consultants, Inc, to do the building permit pian review. Please Compo VA& the following Instrurfbns. J, Please rerm W M eemplete acts of corrected plow a dacun oixim to CSG dir ady tar mdmdc. htolude this plan review report and your msponses to review catnerenis. RedwmM submiltad that do not 4rdude the review report with responses and complete plana with documents such as strUctural cabs S anereyf wo will delay fire 1• I Return ane (1) complete sets of corrected pians and dowmants to City of onsvilia for their reference ueo. s. Check with other City of OrwAle agenciesio having �urlsdie n for your pro)act for their plan revbws. Please indude revieWo from other City agenclea on the building permit ravined plane. Upon epprvval and Compliance to building code=, CSG vAl send yore ptan8 and dowments to the City of 0mvllle by our courier. rhe City will finish their plan reviews for Catty agencies and perform the final pmweeing for permits. Should you have arty Questions "rding this omcedwe, pleas® feel free to call CSG's bulidtng technician. Kenla doachin, at (ties) 7e4,2ai6. Our matting address Is: CSG Consultants, Inc. VOID South AmphM Boulevard, a Floor San Mateo. CA 94402 Tel: (098)784-2018 Pax (850) 5=25% WAN REVIEW COMMENTG.v 1. Please provide an architectural Site Pion showing property lines, adjacent buildings, e)ft to public way and on-site parking as well as shite accessibility requirements to each unit. Response; Q-^. c ty S J OIndicate on sheet S1 A the occupancy Group classification of the building to be S-1, 'type of Coriouctlon to be 11-N and a scope of work statement 3. Pieria specify If building is to be (fully sprinkler+ed. Structural calcuiadorts Mdcate that metal struOunes were not dWgn ed to support a fire sprinkler system. Provide revised calculations if twilling are to be Winkled. OnAnnrumt n (st t E0 39dd N3-13VWNSaIWA N3Hd31S EZEEVE50EST 41:TT 900Z/4T/E0 03/17/2006 17:01FA% 17604481761 MARO STEEL - 9004/005 03/17/2006 10:43 63215382426 OROVILL.E CITY OF f'AE*- ejinR 4: Clearly dimenslon distance from buildings M property line as Weil as dunce between buildings. ."rior bearing walls shall be of one-hour fire 4esistive consbvcgon (with parapet) when building is locded within 20 fast of property line or assumed pmperty lines between bulkInp. CBC Table 5A. Resporhse: Y1 0 u 1 ► H C� 03 0.v Jr' S ti e S. Show location and details of van accessible parking stall (accessible to all buildings) per CBC Section � P 6.2Paced` �j p�►as -- r sd- i �q fee.. p ar--k. rK j .i�s ¢�� ,f 0.sS�d t+� t�sP2el'/'cM, t— b- o S Response: 6. Please show the path of travel from the public way or accessible parldng still to each unit. CBC1107B.Z. Handrails are required If ramps along the path of travel sloped ®weeding 1 foot rise in 20 feet of horizontal run (5% gradient) per CBC Section 11338 S.S. There shall not be mune than a %" difference between floor or landing and threshold of the doorway. Change in level betwemh 1/4 Inch and % inch shall be beveled with a slope no gr�er than 1 unit verticil to 2 units horizontal . (50% slope). Change in level g, eater than y'a inch shall be accomplished by means of a ramp. CBC 11336.2.4.1. 50 Q �; �-Q la �. .--� 0.{} �>n id dt r 1 Rte: �lop�c st��'r:y��`,rrs�ci�s'ctv.s 7. Provide a soils report for prop03e<'1 improvements. CDC 1804.2 Responses S. Provide building floor plans induding door types. Required eYA doOrW3 s shall not be less than 3 feet In nominal width and not I= than 5 feet 8 Inches In nominal height with a dear width of the exit not less than 32 Indies. Limit threshold m 'ha maximum. Dimension on the plan — dear length on each side of the door — on door swing side, 60" dear length with 18" jamb (24" at exterior); opposite door swing, 48" dear length. (1003.3.1-3r 1003.3.1.61 11338.2.4, 11338.2.4.2) Rasmr�, `4 o ► ^1 -y-t o r h a ((w 0.y s .%. a 1 ! _ro rs , a e ce ss bl e Provide building elevation views. ^ R) 10. Provide an dec rlcal plan showing single line diagram, panel setreduGng, swWies, Lighting fixtures, receptacles, etc. and compliance to the 2005 Title 24 mandatory rWArernent for lighting systems and equipment including multi-level lighting controls. Cardiomia Energy Code 131(b). 1' Sheet S1.1 �ruvlde=com*�Wno�temsfbr�insg� on nd sbuctural observation; f1SC it M to be irFC40M. ed/ on/observadon, report submittals, dx- (1701.& 1702) _ Rte; ff c(m V W W11 -i 2 VO 3SVd N313VWd3QNVA N3Hd31S ELEEVE50E5T LT:T.T 900Z/LT/E0 03/17/2006 17:02 FAX 17604481761 MAKO STEEL 83/17/2086 10:43 53®6382426 ORpVILLE CITY OF Qon the plans, speai�r annnec�ion of roof deck to purlln/channel/eng` 1 �1�ZiV� 13 CalculaQon 29, 40 & 51 (post design) — mqut wm% of NAS C4.6"— pleme e)q 14. tris plans, specify connection of wall IM 005/005 raft 041 V4 (Cale. P. 19) equations — statim "Sedon does not meet all at each support (girt/,channel/angle). (Calc. P. 61) @)FA d walls and side walls — specify girt I 'on and -spacing (matt wtculations). (Calc. p. 63, 69, 74) aInterior shear walls — specify connector and spacing (match calCula tIOM). (COIC. P. 91, 97, 103, 111. 118) 17. roWde foundation system of suf8clent to support all Toads under invertor beating and sheammIls. 1808.3 18. it II/mi. (clo-bracing at gusset) — &oOf plans — calculi and detail chord OAL•w..wM• ZO. alculabe and unfit svory drfli — ex. At exberW (End of Cornments) 3 detail to each roof plan. at roof oaoss-bracing: lines (vitt .plers). (1630.9 & .10) 90 39dd N3-13VW83aWA N3Hd31S EZEEVESOEST LT:TT 90OZ/4T/£O <+ CSGC®nsuldantsinc. _. www.csgwebsite.com LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL To: City of Oroville Date: May 5, 2006 *3`d Review 1735 Montgomery Street CSG PC#: 260515 Oroville, CA 95965 Agency PC#: B0602-003 Attn: Building Department Job Address: 5930 Lincoln Boulevard Via: X Courier _ Exp. Mail _ Pickup _ Reg. Mail _ Other Status: X Plan is approved with conditions see remarks below: _ Plan requires corrections. See attached list. Other: We have reviewed the following documents: X Plans — 2 set(s) 2 Structural Calculations Dated Feb. 2006 2 Soil Report Dated April 23, 2004 Special items to note: x Plan has been stamped and signed by CSG. Arch./Engineer wet stamp is required. _ Special inspection required for Environmental Health Services approval required. _ Flood Damage Prevention Regulations apply. Verify code interpretation by City/County on Structural review is required. Please collect a plan review fee for _ hrs. of plan check. Remarks: Plan is ready for permit issuance for the following: X Architectural X Structural X Electrical _ Plumbing _ Mechanical _ Energy Other: 2 Set(s) Energy Calculation _ Specifications 2 Other: Letter from Geo. Engr. Dated 3/29/06 1 Other: Conditions of approval Amount: $ Building Official to approve accessibly path of travel prior to issuance of permit. FROM: Steven Huang CSG Consultants, Inc. 1700 South Amphlett Boulevard, 3rd Floor ♦ San Mateo, CA 94402 ♦ Tel: (888)794-2016♦ Fax: 650-522-2599 www.csgwebsite.com 1; 03/17/2006 17:01 FAX 17604481761 i nKO STEEL 002/005 1 ' 03/17/2006 10:43 5305382426 OROVILLE CITY OF PACE ei/ba I �Goonsumenftnw. WWWd sgwebs%Q-1=rn LMER OF T RANSMMAL To: gjX of Oraville UN MO nma Street Orovl4e, 222M Atte; Bulla Deoartrnent VW; X courier _ EV. Mall stab= Plan Is approved. X Plan requires corrt:Ct m. See a1WcW fist. Other., we hmm MkWed the folio Mm dorAr mit X Pans – 2 segs) 9tructme Mculatlons _ So8 PAWK Date: March V. 2M*19 Riiew MG PC#: 2"i5 Agency PC# o 80602-+003 Sob Address: 5930 Uncan Boulevard Pickup Reg• Mail — Ober Pho in rvody for powit fssname for the fafia W Architectural Sfixtural Blechical PlWV31ng Metitani®1 _ Ener9Y Other. �s� Cabuladon Other: SpWall Keefe to crow Plan has been vamped wd sipped by CSG. _._. N dQEegineer wet scamp Is required. _ Special fropedlon requaed for henrnental Health SoMm app m r fequired. Flood Damage Pmuention "ulftns apply. _ VerffV code h upr+eaftri bV City/County on Smftrral revew is rewrw. Please collect a plan review fee for _ hm of plan check, Amount S fttemarlrs: Plans and documerb will be held at CSG ofSee pertdlnd the next plan Waw 1700 South Amphlett Boulevard, 30 Floor • San Mateo, CA 9W2 ♦ Tel: (8"794-20164 FOX: 650.522.2599 • www,csgwebsite.com • ZO 39tid N313t/W83QNVA N3Hd31S 1 EZEEPE50EST LT:TT 900Z/LT/E0 03/17/2006 17:01 FAX 17604481761 KAK0 STEEL Q003/005 n r 03/17/2006 10:43 15305382426 OROVILLE CIN 13F PAGE 02/04 17M South Amphrai BolaavUd Td: (titiB) 7W2D16 3po Floor FWG 522-2599 �r'•��dalnenlll elr>I� ►. sin Mame, GA. she www `00 . itemm PLAN REVIEW REPORT Date Manch 17, 2006 Plan reA= bbX Steven Huang Owner/Applicant Des/Arch/Eng Name Stephen Van Dar Maslen Name Mako Steal Addrm 5930 Lincoln Boulevard Address 6650 EI Camino Real Address Orovillle Ca, Address Carlsbad, Ca 92008 Phone: (330) 30&8253 Phone: 800-883-41332 fSNECT DATA• City reAsw Al: B0602 -M CSG review #: 260515 Worts scope Mini Storage — Buildings 1— 5 only Project Address 6930 Lincoln Boulevard Codes applicable 2001 CBC, CPC, CMC, 2004 CEledC, 2005 CEnergyC, City ordinances INSTRUCYIONS AND INFORMATION FOR THE NEXT PLAN REVIEW: In cyder to awok me the permit process. the ally requested CSO Consuttente, Ino, to do the building permit plan review. Please comply mft the fbibwing Mona. y Please return _ba (10 eomplem aM of corrected Mans 8 document's to CSG dlnmdy for mdwdL Include this plan review raw and your rresporam W review comments. RedwaW submitted the! do not include the review report with responses and complete plane with documents wish as strUeNraal cabs 8 enerW►farma will delay hiss pmcm- 2, Return are (1) eonWais seta of corteded pians and documents to QV of onavNe for their rubmee rare. s. Check w11h a dw City of OrwAlle agancles having Jurisdiction for your pf"ect for !herr pian reviews. Please include revisiorm from adwr City ageneles an flue building permit revised pians. Upon approval and compliance to building codec, CSG will send your plane and doaorn®nts to the City of 0mville by our Courier. The City will finish !heir pian reviewa for City agencies and perk"n itre final processing for permits. Should you have any questions regarding this procedure, plass foal lies to Call CSGs bulldtng technician. Kenla Joachin, at (fi68) 794,2016. Our mailing address Is: CSG Dons+ lhM, Ino. 1700 South Amphlatt Boulevard, V4 Floor San Mateo. CA 94402 Tot: (80)7044018 Fax (850) 522-2598 PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS: 1. Please provide an architectural Site Plan showing property llnes, adjacent buildings, � to public way and onsite parking as well ars state accessibility requirements to each unit. Respon9e: 0 ^ e-10 S ! 1P 2. Indicate on sheet S1.1 the Occupancy Group classiflcatlon of the building to be S-1,1jpe of Constm Won to be III N and a scope of work statement ch QC -,k- 1'9-5 cJns 3. Please spe* if building is to be Tully sprinkler+ed. Structural calculadons indicate that meWl st>'uctures were not designed to support a fire sprinkler system. Provide revised cak�ulabons if buliding are to be spi'inklW.. (� f 1 E0 3Jdd N3-UVW83aWA N3Hd31S EZEEPESOC91 41:TT 9002/4T/E0 03/17/2006 17:01 -FAX 17604481761 MAN STEEL IA004/005 03/17/2006 10:43 8305382426 OFMILL.E CITY OF PAW-- ej1tl0 CC4: Clearly dimension distance frvm buildings to property tine as well as distance between buildings. "dor bearing walls shall be of one-hour fire4esistive construction (with parapet) when building is located within 20 feet of property line or assumed property lines between buildings. CBC Table 5A. rin 10ui��Vt 603e -r- Chav% SSa' t Prv-p,11we 5 QQ- 'Site. P lo►v% S. Show location and details of van accessible parking stall (accessible to all buildings) per CBC section e'`�S ii i -c P tom P t°`tt` cT� �Lt0.s a �Xi S� i v�� e �. p oa - c rK.1 Responset AsIR ¢.c� 0 PspasScd 1V%4 iirre �. 1— b- o S . — G. Please show the path of travel from the public way or accessible paridrrg stall to each unit. . CBC1107B.Z. Handrails are required If ramps along the path of trawl sloped exceeding 1 foot rise in 20 feet of hortwntal run (5% gradient) per CBC Section 11336.5.5. There shall not be more than a 1/2" difference between floor or landing and threshold of the doorway. Change in level between 114 inch and % inch shall be beveled with a slope no greater than 1 unit vertical to 2 units horizontal (50% slope). Change in level greater than Vh inch shall be accomplished by means of a ramp. CBC 1133B.2.4.1. '5eC 'Sift. ail ive —`f Response. 1 o pstd siA+ry._ �y 51+ruV�5 �7<Provtde a soils report for proposed improvements. CBC 1804.2. Response: szv1 0- 1 Ds Q:6 8. Provide building floor plana including door types. Required exit doorways shall not be less than 3 feet in nominal width and not less than 6 feet 8 Inches In nominal height WO a dear width of the exit not less than 321ndtes. limit threshold - W maximum. Dimension on the plan - char length on each side of the door - on door swing side, 60" clear length with 18" jamb (24" at eaeterlor); opposite door Swing, 48" dear 1"th. (1003.3.1.3, 1003.3.1.61 11330.7-4111338.2.4.2) R ns11, p► ,tert o r- h& I I w 0.y s� a l I" ro I I by V#+ c-( c, dtr;ve.— . PProvide building elevation views. 10. Provide an elebical plan showing single line diagram, panel Owduling, switctrms,lighting fbdures, receptacles, etc. and compliance to rite 2005 Title 24 mandatory requirement for lighting systems and equipment including multi-level IighUng controls. CaGfomla Energy Code 131(b). Response; - Sheet 51.1 roAde complete notes for alt on nd structural obswiabon; list Itenrs to be Inspect* , person s pe Inspectlon/observativn, resort submittals, eth. (1701.& 1702) IMM yVX%A 2 VO 39Vd N313VWN3QNVA N3Hd31S EZEEPESOESi LT:T.T 900Z/Li/E0 03/17/2006 17:02 FAX 17604481761 NAKO STEEL IM005/005 03/17/2®86 10:43 5385382426 on the piano, spwry connection of roof PL Q�/ %new /-Ifvv'� I° V tO 13 CWculatlon 29, 40 & 51 (post design) — requir xwo of NAS C4.6"— please eq 14. the pians, spe* connection of wall OROVILLE CITY OF (Calc. P. 19) tt ej ram n4i ori equations — stabs "Section does not meet all at each support (girt/channel/angle). (Cak. p. 61) @)"n d walls and slide walls — specify girt Ior on and -spacing (match Calculations). (Calc, p. 63, 69, 74) atnWrior shear walls — spedfy connector 111. 118) 17. rowde foundation system of sufficient CBC 1806.3 and spacing (match calculaf9ons). (Calc, P. 91, 97, 1030 to support all loads under interior bearing and shearwalls. 18. it 1//SD•1(Uass-bractrng at gusset) — I ce deftil to each roof plan. 19. oaf plans — calculaba and detail chord Iculate and limit story drfft — ex, At exterior (End of COinmenhs) 3 at roof caw&bracing: lines (ver .plers). (1630.9 fat .10) 90 39dd N3-13M4H3OMA N3Hd31S EZEEVESOEST LT:TT 90OZ/Lt/£0 15:16 From:CSG CONSULTANTS 650 522 2513 To: 15305343323 P.3/4 � ' . 1700 South AmphleH Boutevard Tel: (ON) 7942016 3i0 Floor Fax: (650) 522.2599 O5SGtOonsgultantninc. San Mateo, CA. 9"02 www.csgmbshe.com Date Owner/Applicant Name Address Address Phone: PLAN REVIEW REPORT April 11, 2008 Stephen Van Der Maslen 5930 Lincolri.Boulevard Oroville Ca, (530) 308-8283 Plan review by-, Steven Huang Des/Arch/Eng Nerve; Mako Steel Address_ 5650 EI Camino Real Adore Carlsbad, Ca 92008 Phone: 800-383-4932 PROJECT DATA: City review * B0602-003 CSG review A 260515 Work scope Mini Storage — Buildings 1 — 5 only Project Address 5930 Lincoln Boulevard Codes applicable 2001 CBC, CPC, CMC, 2004 CEiectC, 2005 CEnergyC, City ordinances INSTRUCTIONS AND INFORMATION FOR THE NEXT PLAN REVIEW.- In EVIEW:In order to accelerate the permit process, the city requested CSG Consultants, Inc, to do the building permit plan review. Please comply with the following instructions. L Please return I= (2) complete sets of corrected plans 8 documents to CSG directly for recheck. include this plan review report and your responses to review comments. Rechecks submitted that d0 not include the review report with responses and complete plans with documents such as structural cabs 8 energy forma will delay the process. 2. Return one (1) complete sets of corrected plana and documents to City of Oroville for their reference use. 3. Check with other City of Orpvllie agencies having jurisdiction for your project for their plan ravlows. Please include revisions from other City agencies on the building permit revised plans. Upon approval and compliance to building codes, CSG will send your -plans and documents to the City of Orville by our courier. The City will finish their plan reviews for City agencies and perform the final processing for permits. Should you have any questions regarding this procedure, please feel free to call CSG's building technician, Konia Joaehin, at (888) 7942016. Our mailing address is CSO Consultants, Inc. 1700 South Amphlett Boulevard, 3f6 Floor San Mateo, CA 94402 Tel: (888)794.2016 Fax. (650) 622-2589 PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS: The following Comments remain outstanding from the checidist dated March 17, 2006. The original comments are reprinted In Italic font and dated for your reference. 4,73-17-0, Q'early dimenslon dl5tanw from bulldings to property line as well as distance between uildings Exterior bearing walls shall be of one-haur &C-fWIStivle consbvcdon (W6 parapet) when Ulld/17 is locaW within 20 feet of propertyllne or assumed properly lines between buildings CBC ble 5A. . 2rrd Review Comment: Provide construction detail of one-hour fire resistive Construction with parapets including basis of approval (UL design #, G.A. file #, etc.) or provide a minimum distance of 40 feet between buildings t4 maintain a minimum distance of 20 feet to assumed property lines. (CBC Table Resennse: 5 2 e QnnC l o J e- 8 txH C7t ^q �,oq rwdt W/ of lir, 9_P r,>A o,-�heryS S ) p, f e A II.W V k Y 1 15.'19 From: GSGL7ti`.C7FiSiT"" [�-17-06] Show location and details of van acmes/ble parldng stall (able 116-allbulldings) per BC Secri'on 11298. 72 "O lReviewComment: Incorporate details of accessible parking stall and cross reference to site . Response: i vn e� 3 ►" o� xl- ) V C o�� t1 oR �1 (ova 5 h(n•� `h �6. [3-17-06] Please show the path of travel fmm the public way oraccessib/e painting sbl/ to each unit CBC1107B.2. Handrails are requlmd If ramps along the teeth of travel sloped exceeding X foot rise in 20 feet ofhor/zonta/ run (5% gradient) per C8C.Section 11338.5.5. There shall not be more than a Wdlf erencv between floor or landrIng and threshold of the doorway. Change /n /ewe/ between 1/4 inch and r6 inch shall be bevaled with a slope no greater than 1 unit verNra/ to 2 units hon2vnrvl (50% slope). Oriange in level greater than I-1 indr shall be acrompl/shed by means of ramp. CBC 11338.2.41. 21d Review Comment: Path of travel to buildings and road between buildings shall a no grater than 5%. interior road and parki detail Indicates a 5%-7% grade. Please revise.grading plan. Response: k til r 9 f 8. [3-17-06]Provide building floor plans inducing door types. Requfre+d exit doorways shall not be less �, than 3 feet in nominal width and not less than 6 feet 8 Inches In nominal height with a clear width of the exit not less than 32 Inches: Umlt threshold - 0 "maximum, D/menslon on the plan — dear length on each side of the door — on door swing side, 60"dear length with 18"jamb (24"at exter/or), oppww/te doorswing, 48"Cl6Vrlength. (1003.3.1.3,1003.,7.1.6, ll33B.2,4,1133B.2.4.2) "�Review Provide an arch teoural floor plan showing s e of each unit and do s. Respon! 1P 4614 ,-3 Li A (73-17-061 Provide bullding a/evabron clews no w Comm n ; Sheet S14 Containing building elevation views has been omitted from the permit set. Please submit sheet S14 with next submittal,for review. Response: 03 e i0 -17.061 Provide an e/e�Cbrcal plan Showing single line diagram, parcel sdieduling, S'wfthes, lighting F re&xgotades, etc. and compliance to the 2005 Tlae 24 mandatory reequlrrement for l/ghdng ms and equipment including multi-levellight ng contry/s. California Energy Code 1.31(b). eview Comment: Provide Title 24 Energy Forms (LTG. -1 through 3) and incorporate into drawing set. Forms shall be signed by professional esponsible for the design. Response: Q.,, C i o S Q 3-17061 Provide foundation system Ofsuf fent size to support all !bads under interlor bearing and earwal/s CBC 1806.3 2n° Review comment: Per the Geotechnical Report by Appfied Testing Consultants dated April 23, 2004, item # 3.3.5.5 on page #4 recommends the installation of a 12 inch deep strip footing under interior walls. Please provide additional strip footing under Interior walls per the recommendations in the soil's report. Response: p, r 0. et tr 3 t h 2 t l i'UYr APP.1Fit cG . - St Ivel Co-),sV,-H-NA s Q clarA� (End of Comments) T\",b� r c i ., �,�i _Q R,9 A` ?TOdrP,9 O" d h e C�P/b•� h i t1LL -tic s I P• ii' S rx t L, L-1 A-1.11 i o �V ISI O JVU A r� ale 0 0 1.0 4)VMM 0 0 �. � Proiect Route Sheet For Office Use Only Date Application Submitted: APN: 03(,a- ZOO- Wq Applicants Name: Project Address: Is Prop Trakit Permit # located in Enterprise ZoneXes ❑ No Project Type: ❑ New Single Family ❑ Remodel ❑ Addition ❑ Swimming Pool ❑ Fence ❑ Second Dwelling Unit ElMultiple F ily v Co erc'al ❑ Addition ❑ Infill ❑ Sign ❑ Grading ❑ Other .j rior to'issuance of permit, route project to: ❑ Building/Fire ❑ Planning ❑ Public Works ❑ Parks & Trees Planning ❑ No Comment Comments below Reviewed by: -�44a- Review Date:' Zoning: General Plan: Administrative permits required: ❑ Yes ❑ No Home Occupation Second Unit Large Family Day Care Land Use permits required: ❑ Yes El No Land Use permits approved with conditions (log # DRB6-3Z pW� Use Permit Variance Rezone General Plan Amendment TPM/TSM 11ied Skp6x- ax -y �Id xwd 4 cxw 6ftv- �, D03 9,.,- 2"0 ,:. N Stephen Van Der Maelen 5930 Lincoln Blvd Oroville, CA 95966 CITY OF OROVILLE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 1735 MONTGOMERY STREET • OROVILLE, CA 95965-4897 530-538-2401 Fax 530-538-2426 March 14, 2006 NOTICE TO APPLICANT RE: EZ DRB No. 06-05 (Van Der Maelen) - A proposal to expand the existing mini - storage facility at 5930 Lincoln Blvd (APN 036-200-009) to cover the entire 12.8 - acre site, The current facility (Phase.l, EZ DRB 03-17) occupies 2.8 acres along a portion of the Lincoln Boulevard frontage, and provides 33,330 square feet total of both enclosed and canopy storage totaling 204 units. The property is in the County; but is subject to City development standards because it is within the Enterprise Zone. Dear Mr. Van Der-Maelen: Please be advised that Oroville City staff has reviewed and approved your application for full development of the 12.8 -acre property to mini -storage facilities, subject to the conditions of approval described in this letter. Conditions of Approval: A. General Conditions: 1. If the location of structures on the site differs substantially from the site plan received by the City on February 27, 2006, additional review by City staff may be required. 2. The location of new structures and the width of aisles between them shall allow fire trucks to make turns and access all buildings on the site. 3. New mini -storage units shall have the same general elevations and colors and be constructed of the same materials as the existing units already constructed (as approved in the application for DRB 03-17). 4. Development of the site may occur in phases, provided improvements are made for each phase in accordance with the requirements described in this letter. Building & Fire Safety Code Enforcement Engineering Operations & Maintenance Planning Division Division Division Division Division 530-538-2425 530-53872435 530-538-2420 530-538-2490 530-538-2430 RE: EZ DRB 06-03: Expand Mini- Storage at 5930 Lincoln Blvd March 14, 2006 Page 2 of 4 B. Prior to issuance of a building permit: 1. Structural plans shall be submitted to the building department. a. Facility shall be designed by a registered professional designer and shall reflect the requirements listed in this section. Building plans shall conform to the 2001 California Building Code. A one-hour fire wall is required for all exterior walls within 20 feet of the property line. 2. Site, grading, drainage, and improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Oroville Public Works Division prior to any work on the site. The. plan shall include the information and. improvements described below: A Construction Storm Water Permit issued by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. No structures or parking spaces may be located closer than 15 feet to the right-of-way line of Lincoln Boulevard. C. Street frontage improvements shall be constructed along Lincoln Boulevard to the northerly boundary of the site prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any structures constructed within 200 feet of the V-1 Road right-of-way. d. Street frontage improvements shall be constructed along the V-1 Road frontage of the project site prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any structures constructed within 200 feet of the right-of-way of that road, or at the time specified in a deferment agreement approved in accordance with City Code. e. Obtain approval from Butte County Public Works Department for frontage and drainage improvements to be constructed within the right-of-way of County roads. Obtain an encroachment permit from Butte County Public Works for all construction within the right-of-way of Lincoln Boulevard and V-1 Road. g. Provide a minimum 3 -foot wide planter strip along the V-1 Road and Lincoln Boulevard frontage of the property, at the time road improvements are constructed on those streets. Street trees, a variety of shrubs, and an RE: EZ DRB 06-03: Expand Mini- Storage at 5930 Lincoln Blvd March 14, 2006 Page 3 of 4 irrigation system shall be installed in the landscape strip in accordance with a landscape plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect, or a contractor. with a contract to install landscaping, after the plan has been submitted to and approved by the Parks and Trees department. h. For each new phase of the project, all portions inside the boundaries of the area being. developed that are not covered by buildings or pavement shall be landscaped. For each new'phase of construction: 1) Provide on-site drainage detention/retention facilities sufficient that there is no.increase in the pre -project peak storm water discharge from the site for any design -storm event up to and including a 100 year design storm event. Prior to construction of Phase 2 improvements, provide drainage calculations for the pre- and post - development peak discharge rates. 2) Detention/retentionfacilities shall include flow metering for 2 -year, 10 -year, and 100 -year storm events. 3) The drainage detention/retention facility constructed for phase 2 stage of site construction shall compensate for flow metering deficiencies of the facility constructed for the Phase 1 project. 4) On-site.storm drainage shall be collected and detained on-site and then transported via underground conduit to an approved detention/retention drainage facility or other approved drainage facility. For each phase of construction, provide fire hydrants in accordance with the requirements of the Oroville Fire Department and plans approved by the South Feather Water and'Power District and the Oroville Fire Department. k. Improvement plans shall show existing and proposed easements. Grading shall not begin until grading plans have been approved by Public Works. M. No additional parking spaces are required. However: 1) All areas utilized for parking of vehicles shall be improved with a dust -free surface in accordance with City standards. :K RE: EZ DRB 06-03: Expand Mini- Storage at 5930 Lincoln Blvd March 14, 2006 Page 4of4 2) All parking spaces and access to those spaces shall conform to City design standards. n. Provide an engineer's estimate of the cost of on-site and off-site improvements o. Pay for improvement plan checking fees C. Prior to. issuance of a certificate of occupancy for a structure, Fire extinguishers shall be provided. The type and number shall be determined at the time of the occupancy inspection. 2. Construct all public works improvements in accordance with approved plans. 3. Install approved landscaping and irrigation system. 4. For all new installed landscaping, the property owner shall sign a Landscape Maintenance Agreement which runs with the land and is binding on all its successors in interest prior to occupancy. 5. Buildings shall be addressed per City requirements 6. "As -built" construction plans shall be provided to the City on Mylar and in electronic format, preferably AutoCAD 2002. 7. All driveways, parking, loading, and vehicle circulation areas shall be paved with concrete or asphalt. 8. Development and use of the site shall also conform to all applicable local, state and federal regulations. PLEASE NOTE: City staff strongly recommends that you provide a copy of these conditions of approval to all contractors and sub -contractors who will work on this project. If you have any questions regarding the development requirements described above, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, o Sherman Planning Manager N313tlW 2130 NtlA N3Hd315 er¢-MM -0 M=Wd On XW vi ziw sale v "J n d arwa tut - .1 oNl1'inSNW it gg : •t} Ntlld311S. W77 J Q O o . 2 O c� a )? ti Cli Z . �j an Z Lincoln Blvd d 21.t 5iG ° W Ihp117 T o Ix ti d q 1 i I R s j. k I p i I I •R I ^ �,/P7 0 In I 1j. j ( a d a �@ i I III I `n . I a I I I L a g ° db '2 ---- - � � I R r W C C I�� tj. y a I � I ll � � � d I •� LL 6� ij W �1 \ n r -♦7 a_J it 3 cCLd LLJ i, W .J • - � O Stephen Van Der Maelen 368 Valley View Drive Paradise, CA 95969 DISCOVER GOLD ... DISCOVER OROVILLE 1735 MONTGOMERY STREET • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-4897 January 16, 2004 NOTICE TO APPLICANT PLANNING DEPARTMENT (530) 538-2430 RE: EZ DRB 03-17: Construct 25,200 square feet of enclosed mini -storage buildings (176 units) and 8,100 square feet of covered RV parking area on an approximately 2.7 -acre portion of a 12.8 -acre site located on Lincoln Boulevard . north of Ophir Road. Development of the site will include an office/residence structure of approximately 1,6000 square feet, and a stormwater detention pond. Dear Mr. Van Der Maelen: Please be advised that Oroville City staff has reviewed and approved the site plan, elevations and colors for the above -noted application subject to the conditions of approval described below: A. Development and use of the site shall generally conform to the approved site plan and elevations for the mini -storage units and residential unit, all of which are date-stamped as received by the Planning Division on December 12; 2003. B. Approved colors and materials of the structures are as follows: 1) House will be a light, neutral color with a composition roof. 2) Mini -storage units will be metal finished with a light, neutral, non -reflective color and a-deepgreen trim. 3) The canopy will be a light, neutral color with dark -colored posts. C. No structures of parking spaces may be located closer than 15 feet to the right- of-way line for Lincoln Boulevard. 0 _ �4. RE: EZ DRB 03-17: Van Der Maelen mini -storage units on Lincoln Boulevard January 16, 2004 Page 2 Prior to the issuance of building permits. On- site grading, drainage and improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted to and approved by the Public Works Department prior to any work on the site. a) Plans shall be submitted separately from building plans. b) Plans shall show the location of existing and proposed easements. c) Plans shall show the location of existing underground and above -ground utilities. d) Plans shall demonstrate that owner is providing sufficient on-site drainage detention capacity to maintain the pre -development rate of peak stormwater runoff during a storm event of any design up to and including a 100 -year storm event, and that drainage discharged from the site will meet applicable water quality standards. e) Frontage improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk, paveout, and utility lines shall be shown on the plans. 2. Obtain an encroachment permit from Butte County for any work in the public right-of-way. 3. The facility shall be designed by a registered professional designer. 4. Building plans shall conform to the 2001 California Building Code. 5. A one-hour fire wall is required for all exterior walls within 20 feet of the property line. 6. Design and construction of the facility must conform with the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 24, Part 2, §1101 B, et seq. (ADA) 7. Obtain a permit for an on-site domestic waste disposal system from Butte County Environmental Health Department. 8. A landscape and irrigation plan, prepared by a licensed landscape architect or contractor with a contract to install landscaping, shall be submitted to and approved by the Parks and Trees Director. Landscape plans should not be submitted to the Building Department for approval. Landscaping requirements for this project include the following: RE: EZ DRB 03-17: Van Der Maelen mini -storage units on Lincoln Boulevard January 16, 2004 Page 3 a) Street trees b) At least 50% of the parking area.(stalls, aisles, and driveways) shall be shaded. c) A minimum 3 -foot wide planter strip along Lincoln Boulevard d) All areas within the 2.7 -acre area being developed that are not covered by buildings or pavement shall be landscaped. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy. 9. All utilities shall be placed underground. 10. Construct Lincoln Boulevard street frontage improvements, or obtain approval of a deferment. 11. Provide a minimum of 8 parking spaces, and construct all parking lot improvements in accordance with City standards and approved plans. 12. All driveways, parking, loading, and vehicle circulation areas shall be paved with concrete or asphalt. 13. The driveway from Lincoln Boulevard may not be wider than 35 feet, in accordance with the City's adopted standards. 14. Install approved landscape and irrigation improvements. 15. Street trees shall be installed with the cost thereof borne by the developer. 16. Property owner shall sign a Landscape Maintenance Agreement that runs with the land and is binding on all successors in interest. 17. Fire extinguishers shall be provided. The type and number shall be determined at the time of the occupancy inspection. 18. Fire hydrants shall be installed per the requirements of the Oroville Fire Department and the South Feather Water and Power District. 19. Provide an additional on-site fire hydrant per the requirement f the Fire Chief. The additional fire hydrant shall be located in the southeast portion of the development. t. RE: EZ DRB 03-17: Van Der Maelen mini -storage units on Lincoln Boulevard January 16, 2004 Page 4 20. The site shall be addressed per City requirements. 21. Owner shall provide a refuse collection enclosure in accordance with City Code. 22. Owner shall provide "as -built" construction plans. 23. Development and use of the site shall also conform to all applicable local, state and federal regulations. PLEASE NOTE: City staff strongly recommends that you provide a copy of these conditions of approval to all contractors and sub -contractors who will work on this project. If you have any questions regarding the development requirements described above, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, r' o Sherman Planning Manager CITY DE r�oo-zte.ao �y� o,+°r fB 2:t P: 10' MVM POND BOTTOM -214.8 21&03 . POND STORAGE -7150 F13 i3, Ory OJT .. TOP-210.tiU . TOP. 170 DETENTION POND DETAIL 1• AO, -VARIES. 23' TO 3Nr apt d rt.T Ac 11/ ERNE 51 COAT, 1. / q -S'CL2AS SUBCRADE TO BE COMPACTED TO 95X RELATIVE COMPACTION INTERIOR ROAD AND PARKING I NO SCALE Y X Y WICK PCC SPLASH PAD 6• OUTFALL. 'DE TAIL NO SCALE NEAT CUT ip MST YAC W/ PRD2 COAsON IT CL 2 M R -M N� DRIVEWAY APPROACH DETAIL NO SCALE I j 229.21 N O Q d 229.21 tp 236.40IS 132.77 199.12.58 1 Z, S 88'4-� 9 3'_W - - - -L11tr R6A3 - '91 It� SCALE 1'� 40• _ 24• Nes -{- // ..-. Sae I , - - - - - - - �... - - - - - - - - - - -... - �� - - --- � • il-- 1--- 2zs. 9 OUST CONTROL PLAN GENERAL -NOTES: EP 1) DURING REARING, CRAONG, GROUND DISTURBANCE CR EXCAVATION OPERATIONS 1) ALL WORK SMALL BE DONE M ACCORDANCE MM TIME FUGITVE DUST EMISSONS SHALL BE CONTROLLED BY REGULAR WATERING. PAV.NO OF CITY OF OROM LE VPPOVEI4MT STANDARDS ANO A CONSTRUCTO;V ROADS, OR OTHER OUST PREVENTATIVE MEASURES OR AS DIRECTED SPECIFICATIONS APPROVAL OF THE OTY ENGINEER • I I BY 14E ENGINEER OR HIS AU111 IOZED REPRESENTATIVE IS REOWRED. CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE SIGNED PLAN$ M MS Jt 2) ALL MATEr9AL EXCAVATED OR CRAVED SMALL BE S PMENTLY WATERED TO PREVENT POSSESSION MR1OR TO THE COVME ICEMEN7 OF MURK. . EXCESSIVE AMOUNTS OF OUST. WATERING. WITH COMPLEIC'COVERAGE, SHALL OCCUR AT LEAST TWICE DAILY; PREFERABLY M THE LATE MORNING AND AFTER WORK IS DOME FOR 2) PRIOR 70 THE START OF CONSITNCTON THE CON- 0.101 FL THE DAY. TRACTOR SMALL RE RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING ALL UTILITY COMPAMS AND/OR UTILITY p9TIMCiS AS TO . >) ALL CLEARING. GRADING CACTI/ 1NA/170 OR EXCAVATIONACIIMDES SMALL CEASE Mgt UTILITY LOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND FAMITIES. THE WINDS EXCEED 13 VPN AVERAGED OVER I NOUN. CONTRACTOR SMALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LOCATIONOF ALL UNDERGROUND FACILITIES OR I IED 4) TIME ADISTURBED BY DEMOLITION. CLEAMN4 GUDINO EARTH YOMNG, OR OSACTS WHICH WAY ee ENCOUNTERED B Y WIN REA CH ARC N / EXCAVATION OPERATIONS SHALL BE MINIMIZED At ALL TIMESe NOT SY.CWN ON THESE PVNS J 5) PORTIONS OF THE CONSTRUCTION SITE TO REMAIN INACTIVE LONOM THAN A PERIOD 07 22a9B / >) THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REOUESR CDNSTNUCTION 3TANE'e. s MOMS SHALL DC SEEDED AND WATERED UNTIL CRASS COVER 5 CROML NOR ANY PARIIWVR PHASE Or MARK AT LEAST. 40 CRAVE OITpI'Tp DRAM M t0O 0)'ALL ON-SITE ROADS SMALL BE PAVED AS SOON AS FEAS BILE OR WATERED PER10pCALL HORS PRIOR 10 COMUENCFMENT OF COYSTRUCTOIL )F OROVILLE OR CHEMICALLY SIABIUEED. CONTRACTOR SHALL REQUEST A FORM 0.t GRADE !TAKE 2 31OD CIHEOIL PlSOR TO RACING OF OAPROVELIEW13, r a16 to ,^I / 7) MUD AMD ORT CURRIED ON7'0'STRF1Ef SIIRFFCES 8r N:ONSTRUOTICM EOUWVOFT S7W1 BC 4) WER CONSULTING OVR ENGMEER ASS MES NO RES'OMSBiIU1Y )' �*L OI REMOVED W A DALLY BASS FOR ANY 'MORN CONSTRUCTED I► STAKEOtBY OTHERS NOT ,g 1 r 3tv W�, 41 /� 6) HAUL ,'RUCKS SHALLL BE COVERED M1N TARPAULINS OU OTHER EFFECRLE COVERS AT APPROVED BY MER CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEER. VJ' RESIDENCE 1 /OM3 ALL 1WE1 S) PRIOR Tp AFY OpRRECTNE ACTION eY THE CONTRACTOR F �.2� V L MOOM IS NECESSARY DUE TO STAIONG ERRORS TINE j CONTRACTOR SMALL NOTIFY TME CNCNEER.rOR K- I CONSTRUCTION NOTES STAKING AND VERIFICATION w PREVIOUS STAKMG. THE MING DEPT N 0.l ENGNECR ASSUMES NO UARR11Y FOR THE CASTS B G.2 w9 I p/a t) AC S DEFINED AS TYPE 'B' ASPHALT CONCRETE t/1' MAl0YU1L IGEpW WApIP+ INCURRED FOR iM5 WORK INST OOpIK3 PRODUCTS IF $P n IF 6) CONTRACTOR TO BE RESPONSIBLE rM THE PROTECTION 24' OL GRATE 21920 221.ta n LAN PC 1) AB O DEXO®..AS CLAS! 2 AGGREGATE BASE 7/a' YAIeWM GRADING. M OUT 17-217.00 1O/ O MA ALL EXISTING MONUMENTSTRUCT AND ALL 04 MONVEY iY 3) IF. DURING GRO ND DISTURBING ACONTES ANY CULTURAL RESOURCES ARE MARKERS OURMG GMSTPUC1tON, ALL SUCH MONUMENTS ENCOUNTERED. ALL VWORK SMALL CEASE WITIN THE AREA OF THE FIND PENDING AN OR MARKERS DESTROYED CURING CONSTP.UCTION SMALL 1 I .2 e. 220. 0 3'.N 7 1F•� EAf^w�e ETGAUMATW OF INE STE AND MATERIALS BY A PROFESSIONAL ARCWAEOLO=T. BE REPLACED AT CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE 30' THIS PERSON WLL ASSESS ME SGNIFICANOC OF THE FIND AND PREPARE .. MST COOKS APPROPRIATE MITIGATOR MEASURES FOR PEYEM BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOOL ALL 7) T11E CONTRACTOR SMALL APPLY ETM WATER OR 0 WV O. CRATE -219 E.%+ 2r MITIGATION MEASURES OETCRMMEI TO BE APPROPRIATE FOR TIIS'PROiCT BY THE OUST PAL:ATIVE OR BOTH FOR THE ALLEMATION OG. DN 10. OUT -217.05 ill PLANNING DIRECTOR SHALL BE IMPLEMENTED PURSUANT TO THE TERMS Or rA P. DON Or OUST NUISANCE I Trw1, E-d•F-Hl I ARCHAEOLOGISTS REPORT. e) UTRUTY LINES SMALL BE RACED (UNDER CULVERTS WHEN 3 '. 3W FF -220.3! Msr Fi0 Ls Fpr MIDPE 4) HDPE STORM DRAM PIPE'94ALL BE 9AOOTM MIEWDR (TYPE S) McBED POL,YYwtt M CONrUtT. W 31aRAGE uM'3 S! / /. .'p.'rD•. CHLORIDE DRAIN PIPE MEMO THE REOUIIRMENI3 FGI MAIERIAIg AND INSTALLATION' S-0.01 OF SECTION 9A, PLASTIC PAL O� TME STANDARD SPEOFTCATIONS PPE BEGGING AND B) SHOULD OCCASION ARISE WHERE THE VALIDITY OF A Q SHADING MATH FROM UIQ BOr Or THE TM04 TO A PLANE ONE FOOT ABOVE STAKE IS OUESPONABLE DIVER AS TO ITS LOCATION THE TOP OF ME PLASTIC POPE, WHERE NOT OTMERMSE SPEOFIEO. SHALL'BE CLEAN OF INE OFFSET MARKED THEREON. OR AS TO THE o 1e.60 H / SAND MM A t/4', MAXIMUM PARTICLE SIE AND MIM.RMUM 6TD7N PASSING A NOL 20 ELEVATION OF RUT OR FILL MARKED THEREON. THE CLyJ 21v 0' SCREEN OR ASS 2 AGCRE6ATE BASE, 3/4' MAXIMUM ORADINO. COMPACTED TO CCNIA' IME EM RACTOR SMALL NOT" ANO 219.1 A RELATIVE COMPACTION OF NOT LESS MAN 951E OEVELOIDTS ENOMEER WHO WILL CHECK THE STAKE OR / 6 STAKES IN QMTCN. IT SHALL 8C THE CCNTRACTOR'S - Oleg, 210. E I{ �r 5) IF GROUNDWATER IS'ENCOUNTERED DURING CONSTRUCTION AND DE-WATE"4C BECOMES RESPONS+9RUT'T TO CIAMME THE STAKES BEFORE 30' STORAGE UNITS 3 , A2 r 16• tr.. NECESSARY A OENERAI MPOE3 OEWATIR. O PERMIT MUST BE OBTAINED FROM 11HE COMMS C;40 OPMATIONS. ANY STAKE FOUND TO eE b PHONE.(.0, t7MMN0. R PULL RE THE RE eOARp CENTRAL �ACTpR TO RESPROR WU'K.RESEEONSIBLE. FOR.ANY OiROR MTHE C :NE ACTT ED ALL 01 E�^T COOK TPRO S �T 153 LFB' 0900 PVC I OBTAIN $IGN POINT'AT IRS OWN DIPENSL OUST REVVED BY INC JOCK rM FAAUIR RESULTING rRDM ANY ltIICBTONABIE OF CARONCO R NY 7MM.2119! ^o i TO COWRY WILL B( BORNE B7 IME ODIIRIDIOI, STAX1[$ NOT REPORTED TO THE ENOMCO) OR 6) CHP FUL.149% SKULL MRT THE REGU9tIEW" A ltC 1 96 BF THE CAL "ANS DMOPExE ENOMQIL MST a, OV, 25- CM�3 STANDARD SPERFiCA11ONs 10) ALL AC PAVING, (/MNL CO 11130 SHALL Bt COMPACTED V47H I� . W RUBBJR-TRES R=M MS,T 25 LONG U FF -219.15 e"4 EROSION CONTROL PLAN e a r.N 2S STORAGE U41S ?T7 N ' CONSIRUCTIOM OF ROADWAYS UNDERTAKEN DURING TME PERIOD BETWEEN OCTOBER 1S . / ANO /PRIL 1 WILL REWRC TWAT TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL MEASURES WILL 9E //Ra�r f' 0. .6 b ' 25' //, RAtR TAKEN M AOVAMLLE OF PREDICTED RAINFALL. AS LISTED ORO* C F"W^� = 1e.e.w \ W41-1 VA_ L I I A) "CAVA" AND VCGEtAYft YAIpeALS SMALL "Of B6 PLACED IN ANY LOCATION Chprn L[awH W404 ALLOWS EROSION, SEDIZ AT1ON OR CARRY OFF INTO ®COEXISTING AND 20. n-210.!6 iFa PROPOSED DRAINAGE WAWAYS.g UNITS „ B)' EROSW calimOL SMALL MPLY WIl1M Twit rOVLOWING �d1A0t MO LvSt 170 V ttf I ' 1) SHALLOW SWALES SHALL BE GRADED M THE LOT LINES 10 DIRECT ISDN -Or 1 66 �, y,O00a a / TO THE ROADWAY DRAINAGE FACILITY.) 1) ALL DRAINAGEWAYS, DITCHES AND PIPES SMALL -BE CLEANED OF SILT AND I I 1. DEBRIS At COMPLETION Or WORN. NMI 1 1 .9 aQPJ �. 1 be e Z .7 .tl r s) PLACE WAY BALES OR GRAVEL FILLED SANDBAGS AT SM ENTRANCES UNTIL GRAM MEAL CAROM PARKING , NAVE BEEN LANDSCAPED AND MUMFOUNDATION POURED. (TEMPORARY) 4) RD" TEMPORARY EROSNON CONTROLS AFTER LANDSCAPING HAS GERMINATED- AND IS ESTABLISHED. 210.w 1. 1 I I C MST COOKS PRODUCTS Q ^y BENCHMARK 24' 1F°LwLFCRATE-2 9.;s ,rr INM�1X TE.2 Hep M Ct- ed g mark used for UN Survey M eulle E�lmI1: No 24-A Ip• tt . INv TINEA t0'-21175 9 InIc"e equor, h LDe NW ab of Mkge ebuU H>( ,? Tnlerae n .1 .8afhV HD19 O)fhtr. PFS& 50 if Iy HOPE 21 .f OewtbT . Z10.84 5.0.0010 215.6! n 716.391 A 37 210.11 n STOR "m UNITS I Vy O 0 INST 3O LF t0• NOPE 61St COOKS DL GRA1E PRODUCTS IRT' S-Mam MV THRU IV -214I5 11w 10•HDur413.0o M'V OUT 10'-rs.or r.. W POFD eoTroM-212 e 5 0.00t1tj 11r 1MppC 5[[ OCIE/TICH POND 0 -.TAO. Ory OUT -214.46 a. 8 8852'11' W 2C nE'F�938�t3� F aP .w Ewe. I .A�o•Oso�Lr tfi' NwE Mw1t4. . 2{ 30.63 nq`N--�:�.- ( ^ _ j/"�- tn•TG W 2ta2p 21520 Rp 114 i 1 ' ro s//.• a b�N �nEN EON GRAD[ TO DRAW DITCH IiNw2iie2 O ' _PAINTED GL �R1S1' I J I 60 IB' 14g. ORP, 0 f t o LOCATION MAP NO SCALE LEGEND (3 - CG JOINT PRE - 1Y HYDRANT 219.60 - PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE �•7e N -COSTING GRADE ' - CRUDE DITCH TO ORM M 150' co «fie a �---- 0.l WATER MAIN I TMST 6' 0.v A ' MST COOKS PRODUCTS 16. OL MUTE -217.95 asv 1NIIV'IR-2153! . 'i ED cRADe TG DRAIN MATOM F>< M210.66 CL R.OIE I p . •1 INSTV IV ROPE I EDI , N a to 41. BUTTE COUNTY SCHOOLS IMPACT FEE CERTIFICATION FORM (O a form per Building) School District Building Department No. 40— — A.P. Number Jurisdiction: LRI City County 141AS 036 Property Owner Property Location/Address rlia Subdivision Lot No. ..:................................................................................................................ Residential Development tJ Sq. Footage No of Living Mobile Home Addition/ 'Supplemental to (Group R) Units Installation Conversion Permit 0 '(No foundation inspection):: :....................................................:............................................................ Commercial/Industrial /) i Sq. Footage. v New Addition. . C. (Including Exterior Roofed Areas)' Building Dgp4`rtment Representative ,,,,�, ,� Date (Floor Plans reviewed by School District Personnel) District Identification No. It4 5 School District certifies that— (Applicant) l (Street Address(- (Phone Number) ri S50( b 5 (City( (State) (Zip Code) has complied with the requirements of Resolution No. d 5-0(0 Oq by payment of $ 3 1 representing. 3CA , 0 square feet. AB 2926 S FULL MITIGATION $ School District Represent tiye Date Paid by. Check'(( SA .S 'Remarks:�� ✓ 3q�to�o � oP v^ Notice: You may protest the imposition of the fees identified above by'submitting a written protest to the District, in compliance with, Government Code Section 66020(x); within 90 days from the date fees are paid. Failure to submit a timely written protest will prohibit you from challenging.the imposition of the fees in any court action. If, subsequent to the School District Representative signing this Butte County Schools Impact Fee Certification Form, the School District is notified by the applicable Local Planning Agency that this project is being reviewed under the California Environmental Quality. Act (CEQA), this project may be subject to additional school fees to fullymitigate its impact on the school district's schools. White (applicant), Yellow (building department), Pink (school district) teelorm.xis 110/98)dmm MAkLXL_5 ' Ines SELF STORAGE BOAT STORAGE RV STORAGE #913 March 2006 4_ ------------ Plan Check Response for Another . Self Storage Oroville, CA Stephen Van Der Maelen Oroville, CA CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Ph: (800) 3834932 Fax: (760) 448-1761 MSO Steel, �In�_ SELF STORAGE BOAT STORAGE RV. STORAGE Date: March 22, 2006. CSG PC #260515 Agency PC #130602-003 To: City of Oroville Building Department CSG Consultants, Inc. Attn: Steven Huang 1700 South Amphlett Blvd, ) Floor San Mateo, CA 94402 P: 888 794-2016, F: 650-522-2599 Regarding: Another Self Storage in Oroville, CA Please reference the following for the responses to the plan check review #1 dated March 17, 2006: 1. By others 2. Indicate on Sheet Sl. l the Occupant), Group classification of the building to be S-1, Type of Construction to be II -N and scope of work statement. Please reference Sheet S1.1 under the "Project Data" note for the occupancy group, tvne of construction. and huildin¢ floor area for the nroiect. 3. By others 4. By others J. By others 6. By others 7. By others 8. By others 9. Provide building elevation vieivs. Please reference Sheet S14 for General Standard Building Elevations. 10. By others 11. Sheet S1.1 —provide complete notes for special inspection and structural observation; list items to be inspected/observed, person (s) to perform inspectionlob.servation, report submittals, etc. (1701 & 1702). Please reference Sheet Sl.l for the added notes for Special Inspection and Structural Observation. CARLSBAD, CA 92008 1 Ph: (800) 383-4932 Fax: (760) 448-1761 1VXAXL2O 1W-teeI, * Izz4e_ SELF STORAGE BOAT STORAGE RV STORAGE 12. On the plans, specify connection of roof deck to purlin/channel/angle. (Calc p. 19) Please reference Detail 3 on Sheet S1.3, which show the attachment for the roof deck. 13. Calculation 29, 40, & SI (post design) — interaction equations — states "Section does not meet all requirements of NAS C4.6" —please explain. Regarding Section C4.6, Compression Members Having One Flange Through - Fastened to Deck or Sheathing, the design provision is developed based on metal building posts or purlins with a metal roof or wall panels attached to one flange of the member. However, one of the criteria is that 6"<d<12". For the `C' 4" posts/studs, this condition is not met. However, the calculation does calculate the posts/studs for the axial compression and bending. 14. On the plans, specify connection of wall panels at each support (girt/channel/angle). (Calc. p. 61) Please reference Detail 2 on Sheet S1.3 for the siding supports. 15. End walls and side walls — specify girt location and spacing (match calculations). (Calc p. 63, 69, 74) Please reference the Partition Plans for the buildings, which callout typical girt spacing for endwall and sidewall or different girt spacing for each individual endwall and sidewall. 16. Interior shear walls — specify connector size and spacing (match calculations). (Calc p.91, 97, 103, 111, 118) Please reference Detail 1 on Sheet S1.3 for the metal shear wall panel to posts/studs and vertical girt screw pattern. Please reference Details 6, 7 & 9 on Sheet SDI for detail showing eave channel to vertical girt to metal shear wall panel. Please reference Detail 11 on Sheet SDI, which shows the interior metal panel attaching to the exterior wall posts/studs. Please reference Detail 1, 4, & 5 on Sheet SDI, which shows the metal panel to posts/studs or vertical girt with attachments to concrete foundations. Please reference Details 7, 9, 10, 15, & 20 on Sheet SDI for exterior wall posts/studs or jambs to concrete foundations. 17. Provide foundation system of suffr.cient size to support all loads under interior bearing and shear walls. CBC 1806.3 Please reference the note added to Sheet S1.1 regarding the Soil's Report. Please reference the additional note to the foundation plans, which state the 4" gravel, vapor barrier, 2" sand, and soil's report for additional information. The perimeter footing has been deepen to 18" to help reduce the soils for expanding and contracting due to moist. The Geotechnical Engineer will review and provide the plan check with a letter stating the foundation plans following the Soil's Report, per CSG request. CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Ph: (800) 383-4932 Fax: (760) 448-1761 MAL �O Steel, Ing_ SELF STORAGE BOAT STORAGE RV STORAGE 18. Detail 17/SD-1 (Cross -bracing at gusset) — reference detail on each roof plan. This detail has been omitted from the plans. On Sheet SD2 three details have been added to the plans showing the roof x -bracing condition, which callouts for these details have been added to the roof framing plans. 19. Roof plans — calculate and detail chord members at roof cross -bracing. The roof x -bracing is tension only bracing. The loads are transferred from one tension strap through the purlins (compression) and then to the next tension strap. Since the x -bracing is not part of a horizontal truss system a chord member is not needed. 20. Calculate and limit story drift — ex. At exterior wall lines (with piers). (1630.9 & 10) At the low eave buildings the 16" wide door piers are used to help resist the.lateral loads. The worse case force at the top of the 16" wide x 8'-6" tall pier is 169#. The As = 0.58" and the Am = 1.84". The allowable story drift is 0.025h = 2.55". The metal piers are the worse case. The following is the Load Path for horizontal bracing system system: One -Story Building: Transverse Direction: Since the roof is only % per 12 slope, the lateral wind/seismic loads are distributed by the continuous eave channel, which spans horizontally between the metal shear walls. The shear is transferred from the eave channel to either vertical girts or exterior wall posts/studs. The lateral loads are transferred from the vertical girt or exterior wall posts to the metal shear wall panel, and then to the anchors at the base of the posts. The loads are then transferred to the foundation through the expansion anchors. Longitudinal Direction: There are horizontal metal flat strap x -bracing at the roof level at a maximum of 40 feet on center. At Buildings 1, 2, &3, the x -bracing transfers the lateral loads to the metal pier system and interior shear walls. At Buildings 4 &5, the x -bracing transfers the lateral loads to the continuous exterior metal -framed sidewall. The lateral loads transfers from the x -bracing to the either the roof purlins or eave channels. At the sidewalls, the loads are transferred from the eave channel to either the metal pier system or metal -framed shear walls. The loads are then transferred through the concrete anchors into the foundations. At the interior walls, the loads are transferred from the roof purlins, through the roof posts/vertical girts into the metal shear wall panels. The loads are then transferred from the shear walls through the concrete anchors into the foundations. If you have any questions, please call me. Thank you, Michael Dale, P.E. Project Engineer FESSIo �PEL R. p �EOFCA��F�� MAR 2 2 2006 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Ph: (800) 383-4932 Fax: (760) 448-1761 CFS Version -5.0.1 } Section: 16-P I ERS-C4x18. sct Channel 16x4x0.0176 Y center of gravity 0 in Page 1 center of Michael Dale, P.E. - -1.3392 in MAKO Steel, Inc. Outside dimensions, Open Rev. Date: 3/21/2006 10:20:02 AM By: Michael Dale, P.E. Section Inputs Material: A653 SS Grade 33 No strength increase from cold work of forming. Modulus of Elasticity, E 29500 ksi Yield Strength, Fy 33 ksi Tensile Strength, Fu 45 ksi Warping Constant Override, Cw 0 in^6 Torsion Constant Override, J 0 in^4 Connector Spacing- 0 in Channel, Thickness 0.0176 in Placement of Part from Origin: .26 CA PIC -9 WRAP X to center of gravity 0 in Y to center of gravity -1.3392 in Outside dimensions, Open shape Length Angle Radius Web k Hole Size Distance Distance (in) (deg) (in) Coef. (in) (in) 1 4.000 270.000 0.18750 Single 0.000 0.000 2.000 2 16.000 180.000 0.18750 Cee 0.000 0.000 8.000 3 4.000 90.000 0.18750 Single 0.000 0.000 2.000 Stiffened Channel, Thickness 0.0466 in Placement of Part from Origin: X to center of gravity -7.1218 in Y -o center cf gravity -6.226e-7 in Outside dimensions, Open shape Length Angle Radius Web k Hole Size Distance (i:-:) (deg) (in) Coef. (in) (in) l 0.5000 270.000 0.18750 None 0.000 0.0000 0.2500 2 2.5000 -0.000 0.18750 Single 0.000 0.0000 1.2500 3 4.00 0 90.010 0.18750 Cee 0.000 0.0000 2.0000 2.50::0 0.000 0.18750 Sinale 0.000 0.0000 1.2500 0.5G:_ -?0.00.x: G.i8750 None 0.000 0.0000 0.2500 'CFS Vei-sion'5.0.1 . Section: 16 -PI ERS-C4x18:sct Channel 16x4x0.0176 Rev. Date: 3/21/2006 10:20:02 AM By: Michael Dale, P.E. Part 3, Thickness 0.0466 in Placement of Part from Origin: Michael Dale, P.E. MAKO Steel, Inc. X to center of gravity 7.1218 in 0.000 Y to center of gravity 0 in 0.0000 Outside dimensions, Open shape 0.000 0.0000 Length Angle Radius Web 1.5861 (in) (deg) (in) 1 0.5000 -90.000 0.18750 None 2 2.5000 0.000 0.18750 Single 3 4.0000 90.000 0.18750 Cee 4 2.5000 180.000 0.18750 Single 5 0.5000 270.000 0.18750 None k Hole Size Coef. (in) 0.000 0.0000 0.000 0.0000 0.000 0.0000 0:000 0.0000 0.000 0.0000 Page 2 Distance (in) 0.2500 1.2500 2.0000 1.2500 0.2500 Full Section Properties Area 1.2997 in^2 Wt. 0.0044190 k/ft Width 42.700 in Ix 3..468 in^4 rx 1.6335 in Ixy SX(t) 1.4264 in^3 y(t) 2.4315 in a Sx(b) 2.1866 in^3 y(b) 1.5861 in Height 4.0176 in Iy 60.178 in^4 ry 6.8045 in Xo Sy(1) 7.5222 in^3 x(1) 8.0000 in Yo Sy(r) 7.5222 in^3 x(r) 8.0000 in jx Width 16.0000 in jy Il 60.178 in^4 rl 6.8045 in I2 3.468 in^4 r2 1.6335 in Ic 63.646 in^4 rc 6.9978 in Cw Io 72.684 in^4 ro 7.4782 in J E=.29 Soo j< ,161 �G 0.000 in^4 90.000 deg 0.0000 in -2.6370 in 0.0000 in 5.0219 in 28.272 in^6 0.0006809 in^4 L15 MAk-X& Wtc!� In4_ SELF STORAGE BOAT STORAGE RV STORAGE #913 March 2006 Plan Check Response for Another; Self Storage Oroville, CA Stephen Van Der Maelen Oroville, CA CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Ph: (800) 383-4932 Fax: (760) 448-1761 0 MAk_I*O Steel0in4e. SELF STORAGE BOAT STORAGE RV. STORAGE Date: March 22, 2006 CSG PC #260515 Agency PC #130602-003 To: City of Oroville > Building Department CSG Consultants, Inc. Attn: Steven Huang 1700 South Amphlett Blvd, 3 d Floor San Mateo, CA 94402 P: 888 794-2016, F: 650-522-2599 Regarding: Another Self Storage in Oroville, CA Please reference the following for the responses to the plan check review #1 dated March 17, 2006: 1. By others. 2. 3. 4. S. 6. 7. 8. 9. Indicate on Sheet Sl. I the Occupancy Group classification of the building to be S-1, Type of Construction to be II -N and scope of work statement. Please reference Sheet S1.1 under the "Project Data" note for the -occupancy group, tune of construction. and building floor area for the nroiect. By others By others By others By others By others By others Provide building elevation views. Please reference Sheet S14 for General Standard Building Elevations. 10. By others 11. Sheet Sl. l —provide complete notes for special inspection and structural observation; list items to be inspected/observed, person (s) to perform inspection/observation, report submittals, etc. (1701 & 1702). Please reference Sheet S1.1 for the added notes for Special Inspection and Structural Observation. CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Ph: (800) 383-4932 Fax: (760) 448-1761 r MAii&O 1Wtee150In4e40 SELF STORAGE BOAT STORAGE RV STORAGE 12. On the plans, specify connection of roof deck to purlinlchannel/angle. (Calc p. 19) Please reference Detail 3 on Sheet S1.3, which show the attachment for the roof deck. 13. Calculation 29, 40, & 51 (post design) — interaction equations — states "Section does not meet all requirements of NAS C4.6 " —please explain. Regarding Section C4.6, Compression Members Having One Flange Through - Fastened to Deck or Sheathing, the design provision is developed based 'on metal building posts or purlins with a metal roof or wall panels attached to one flange of the member. However, one of the criteria is that 6"<d<12". For the `C' 4" posts/studs, this condition is not met. However, the calculation does calculate the posts/studs for the axial compression and bending. 14. On the plans, specify connection of wall panels at each support (girtichannellangle). (Calc. p. 61) Please reference Detail 2 on Sheet S1.3 for the siding supports. 15. End walls and side walls — specify girt location and spacing (match calculations). (Calc p. 63, 69, 74) Please reference the Partition Plans for the buildings, which callout typical girt spacing for endwall and sidewall or different girt spacing for each individual endwall and sidewall. 16. Interior shear walls — specify connector size and spacing (match calculations). (Calc p.91, 97, 103, 111, 118) Please reference Detail 1 on Sheet S1.3 for the metal shear wall panel to posts/studs and vertical girt screw pattern. Please reference Details 6, 7 & 9 on Sheet SDI for detail showing eave channel to, vertical girt to metal shear wall panel. Please reference Detail 11 on Sheet SDI, which shows the interior metal panel attaching to the exterior wall posts/studs. Please reference Detail 1, 4, & 5 on Sheet SDI, which shows the metal panel to posts/studs or vertical. girt with attachments to concrete foundations. Please reference Details 7, 9, 10, 15, & 20 on Sheet SDI for exterior wall posts/studs or jambs to concrete foundations. 17. Provide foundation system of sufficient size to support all loads under interior bearing and shear walls. CBC 1806.3 . Please reference the note added to Sheet SIJ regarding the Soil's Report. Please reference the additional note to the foundation plans, which state the 4"gravel, vapor barrier, 2" sand, and soil's report for additional information. The perimeter footing has been deepen to 18" to help reduce the soils for expanding and contracting due to moist. The Geotechnical Engineer will review and provide the plan check with a letter stating the foundation plans following the Soil's Report, per CSG request. CARLSBAD, CA 92008. Ph: (800) 383-4932 Fax: (760) 448-1761 MAA*O Stec lI *Xx .4e. .SELF STORAGE BOAT STORAGE RV STORAGE 18. Detail 17/SD-I (Cross -bracing at gusset) — reference detail on each roof plan. This detail has been omitted from the plans. On Sheet SD2 three details have been added to the plans showing the roof x -bracing condition, which callouts for these details have been added to the roof framing plans. 19. Roof plans — calculate and detail chord members at roof cross -bracing. The roof x -bracing is tension only bracing. The loads are transferred from one tension strap through the purlins (compression) and then to the next tension strap. Since the x -bracing is not part of a horizontal truss system a chord member is not needed. 20. Calculate and limit story drift — ex. At exterior wall lines (with piers). (1630.9 & 10) At the low eave buildings the 16" wide door piers are used to help resist the.lateral loads. The worse case force at the top of the 16" wide x 8'-6" tall pier is 169#. The As = 0.58" and the Am =1.84". The allowable story .drift is 0.025h = 2.55". The metal piers are the worse case. The following is the Load Path for horizontal bracing system system: One -Story Building: Transverse Direction: Since the roof is only 'h per 12 slope, the lateral wind/seismic loads are distributed by the continuous eave channel, which spans horizontally between the metal shear walls. The shear is transferred from the eave channel to either vertical girts or exterior wall posts/studs. The lateral loads are transferred from the vertical girt or exterior wall posts to the metal shear wall panel, and then to the anchors at the base of the posts. The loads are then transferred to the foundation through the expansion anchors. Longitudinal Direction: There are horizontal metal flat strap x -bracing at the roof level at a maximum of 40 feet on center. At Buildings 1, 2, &3, the x -bracing transfers the lateral loads to the metal pier system and interior shear walls. At Buildings 4 &5, the x -bracing transfers the lateral loads to the continuous exterior metal -framed sidewall. The lateral loads transfers from the x -bracing to the either the roof purlins or eave channels. At the sidewalls, the loads are transferred from the eave channel to either the metal pier system or metal -framed shear walls. The loads are then transferred through the concrete anchors into the foundations. At the interior walls, the loads are transferred from the roof purlins, through the roof posts/vertical girts into the metal shear wall panels. The loads are then transferred from the shear walls through the concrete anchors into the foundations. If you have any questions, please call me Thank you, Michael Dale, P.E. Project Engineer IY CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Ph: (800) 383-4932 Fax: (760) 448-1761 ".f.. .. x *t7.-.:7 `y, =;'� j4µ .r-r{r-'-��.a4 a.�y+ �a xi:•u i m �i, .�,.y�, S ' s n�'; ,� ��"' Vii':"4 i et,'�fTF;.,` t `�t+*k24�..0 - 4CFS Veision`5.0 '` n xti;, ; ;r . �z - �, a ><yt ; , > page 1 ° sS'.-r•:� y Section: 16-PIERS-C418.sct` Michael Dale, Channel 16x4x0.0176 MAKO Steel, Inc. ' Rev. Date: 3/21/2006 10:20:02 AM By: Michael Dale, P.E: Section Inputs Ik- 'z5G-4 P/C -l2 wWAP Material: A653 SS Grade 33 No strength increase from cold work of forming. Modulus of Elasticity, E 29500 ksi Yield Strength, Fy 33 ksi Tensile Strength, Fu 45 ksi Warping Constant Override, Cw .0 in^6 Torsion Constant Override, J 0 in^4 Connector Spacing 0 in Channel, Thickness 0.0176 in Placement of Part from Origin: X to center of gravity 0 in Y to center of gravity -1.3392 in Outside dimensions, Open shape Length Angle Radius Web k Hole Size Distance (in) (deg) (in) Coef. (in) (in) 1 4.000 270.000 0.18750 Single 0.000 0.000 2.000 2 16.000 180.000 0.18750 Cee 0.000 0.000 8.000 3 4.000 90.000 0.18750 Single 0.000 0.000 2.000 Stiffened Channel, Thickness 0.0466 in Placement of Part from Origin: X to center of gravity -7.1218 in Y to center of gravity -6.226e-7 in Outside dimensions, Open shape Length Angle Radius Web k Hole Size Distance (in) (deg) (in) Coef. (in) (in) 1 0.5000 270.000 0.18750 None 0.000 0.0000 0.2500 2 2.5000 180.000 0.18750 Single 0.000 0.0000 1.2500 3 4.0000 90.000 0.18750 Cee 0.000 0.0000 2.0000 4 2.5000 0.000 0.18750 Single 0.000 0.0000 1.2500 5 0.5000 -90.000 0.18750 None 0.000 0.0000 0.2500 u el f #CFSVersion 5. 0.1 ' . ` Section: 16-PIERS-C4x18:sct Michael Dale, P. E.. Channel 16x4x0.0176 MAKO Steel, Inc. Rev. Date: 3/21/2006.10:20:02 AM By: Michael Dale, P.E. Part 3, Thickness 0.0466 in Distance Coef. Placement of Part from Origin: (in) X'to center of gravity 7.1218 in 0.0000 Y to center of gravity 0 in 0:000 Outside dimensions, Open shape 1.2500 0.000 Length Angle Radius Web in (in) (deg) (in) r2 1 0.5000 -90.000 0.18750 None 2 2.5000 0.000 0.18750 Single 3 4.0000 90.000 0.18750 Cee 4 2.5000 180.000 0.18750 Single 5 0.5000 270.000 0.18750 None � 4 Page 2 k Hole Size Distance Coef. (in) (in) 0.000 0.0000 0.2500 0.000 0.0000 1.2500 0.000 0.0000 2.0000 0:000 0.0000 1.2500 0.000 0.0000 0.2500 Full Section Properties Area 1.2997 in^2 Wt. 0.0044190 k/ft Width 42.700 in Ix 3.468 in^4 SX(t) 1.4264 in^3 Sx(b) 2.1866 in^3 Iy 60.178 in^4 Sy(1) 7.5222 in^3 Sy(r) 7.5222 in^3 I1 60.178 in^4 I2 3.468 in^4 Ic 63.646 in^4 Io 72.684 in^4 s � 3�� G• _5v rx 1.6335 in Y(t) 2.4315 in y(b) 1.5861 in Height 4.0176 in ry 6.8045 in X(l) 8.0000 in x(r) 8.0000 in Width 16.0000 in rl 6.8045 in r2 1.6335 in rc 6.9978 in ro 7.4782 in E=d C- SooKs' R = Z-/. 5 Ll�, _ �. 7 ►� Q� = 0, 7 01 O, OAS h� -G, 0a5(g Pr, 55 Ixy 0.000 in^4 a 90.000 deg Xo 0.0000 in Yo -2.6370 in jx 0.0000 in jy 5.0219 in Cw J P -16' 28.272 in^6 0.0006809 in^4 ns u -1\ CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE (Part.1 of 2) OLTGA -C PROJECT NAME �- ,,,�DATE PROJECT ADDRESS V 5 9 3 0 )-Ancd,-i ... G I JCQ . Or'ovM e, 04 95-9 6 6 PRINCIPAL DESIGNER -LIGHTING TELEPHONE Buildino Permit .VN Jv/k&zKl 673v TA -9 -;.>I/,. 341 DOCUMENTATION AUTHOR TELEPHONE Checked bv/DFe- Enforcement Agency Use GENERAL INFORMATION x DATE OF PLANS l °Z "a� �S OUTDOOR LIGHTING ZO N ✓ EI'LZI MILZ2 ❑ FUNCTION TYPE LJ OUTDOOR LIGHTING ❑ OUTDOOR SIGNS ❑ INDOOR SIGNS PHASE OF CONSTRUCTION ❑ NEW CONSTRUCTION 2 ADDITIONS ❑ .ALTERATIONS STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE This Certificate of Compliance lists outdoor lighting system specifications need to comply with Title 24, Parts 1 and 6 of the California Code of Regulations. This certificate applies only to building lighting requirements. The documentation preparer hereby certifies that the documentation is accurate and complete. G� !%Nr1/ T�HNSO.I/ I .i' per -Com•--- V z v _ a G The Principal Lighting Designer hereby certifies that the proposed out(ror lighting and signs 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. The proposed building has been designed to meet the lighting requirements contained in the applicable parts of Sections 110, 119,130 through 132, 146, and 149 of Title 24, Part6. Please ✓ one: ❑ I hereby affirm that I am eligible under the provisions of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code to sign this document as the person responsible for its preparation: and that I am licensed in the State of California as a civil engineer or electrical engineer, or I am a licensed architect. CJ I affirm that I am eligible under the provisions of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code by section 5537.2 or 6737.3 to sign this document as the person responsible for Its preparation; and that I am a licensed contractor performing this work. ❑ I affirm that I am eligible under the provisions of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code to sign this document because It pertalns.to a structure or type of work described as exempt pursuant to Business and Professions Code Sections 5537,5538 and 6737.1. (These sections of the Business and Professions Code are PrInted In full In the Nonresidential Manual. PRINCIPAL LIGHTING DESIGNER -NAME SIG DATE DATE LIC. # 641,t -,VAI TQIIAvSOAJ _171-2-0-06 3-16-91 -) 2005 Nonresidential Compliance Forms April 2005 CERTIFICATE .OF COMPLIANCE (Part 2 of 2) OLTG-1-C PROJECT NAME Y,b01Q r- Je.W-Jfi r 01.Q ,Lighting Schedules on Plans Show that Outdoor Lighting Meets Allowed Lighting Power L Lighting power allowances for general site illumination on OLTG-2-C Part 1 of 4 ❑ Not Applicable ❑ ighting power allowances for local ordinances or for security multipliers on OLTG-2-C Part 2 of 4 Ll Not Applicable ❑ Lighting power allowances for specific applications, other than vehicle service stations with canopies on OLTG-2-C Part 3 of 4 R Not Applicable ❑ Lighting power allowances for vehicle service. station canopies on OLTG-2-C Part 4 of 4 O'Not Applicable ❑ Sign lighting compliance on OLTG4-C ErNot Applicable Mandatory Measures on Plans.Show that Outdoor Lighting Meets Outdoor Lighting Controls and Equipment Indicate location on plans of Note Block for Mandatory Measure ❑ Installed lighting power has been determined in accordance with § 130(c)l ❑ Not Applicable ❑ All permanently installed luminaires with lamps rated over 100 watts either have a lamp efficacy of at least 60 lumens per watt or are controlled by a motion sensor § 132(a) ET—Not Applicable ❑ All Luminaires with lamps rated greater than 175 watts in hardscape areas, including parking lots, building entrances, canopies, and all outdoor sales areas meet the Cutoff Requirements of § 132(b) Q�Not Applicable 2'All permanently installed outdoor lighting meets the Control Requirements of § 132(c)l ❑Not Applicable LJ' . Building facades, parking lots, garages, canopies, and outdoor sales areas meet the Multi-Level Lighting Requirements of § 132(c)2 ❑ Not Applicable MANDATORY AUTOMATIC CONTROLS CONTROL LOCATION CONTROL IDENTIFICATION CONTROL TYPE Auto Time 3witch/Photosensor, etc AREA CONTROLLED -- NOTE TO FIELD ?�vG rr« Pdv s,�,��a-c, w �►t 6 ECL zov5 Nonresidential Compliance Forms April 2005 LIGHTING COMPLIANCE SUMMARY Part 1 of 4 OLTG-2-C PROW ECT � 61'k or. `S.eJ-F- 6 6 r -a Q DATE LIGHTING POWER ALLOWANCES — GENERAL SITE ILLUMINATION — able 147-A A Lighting Applications Category (Table 147-A) B DD m^ s N �-- O C O �p o 0 v D 0 0. ao " 0 n �' E r C n 3 a 1< d �, 'O O m F Description G W y z °: c O O H r 3 v ,� m Lam smallasts I 0 C3 3 v d N 3 -0 Cr m `�° `�° J v `�° y K 0 r0�/ 3 d '' 3 m. Q' `M° I L v C. r 3 N d 390A0 ,.08" 3120 M (� 4.9c4, P AfW / 7J 70 UtCH r+uuuea vvaas I.3/ Z v 2005 Nonresidential Compliance Forms M N O O r c' 3 Z -r Ci o m E3 x Er M (� Q ai rFi a 33 2310 Total Installed Watts I 2 3 % April 2005 CIS r3 Ps 14� Ps -ILLUMINATED AREA CALCULATION WORKSHEET Part 1 PROJECT NAME A it Y16*1 Q /- �C 6 nCLCJQ of 5 OLTG-3-C DATE 1 1-1 Hardscape - Method j . A. Hardscape for automotive vehicular use, including parking lots, driveways and site roads A B cD E F Actual Paved Area plus 5' i Areas (ft) to Subtract from G H perimeter of adjacent within Illuminated Area unpaved land. Includes Areas between planters and landscaped poles or Overlapping areas less than 10' wide luminaires that Areas Sub Total are greater than Areas of that are enclosed by 6 mounting Another hardscape on at least 3 List Specific Applicationable Obstructed By Sign or of areas to Subtract 147- A) height distance Application or Building fA livable sides Luminaire Areas Other Structure (C +D + Illuminated Area E + F (B - G) L B Hardscape for pedestrian use, including plazas, sidewalks, walkways and bikeways A B c D E F JTotal . H Areas (ft Z) to Subtract from within Illuminat;AreaActual Paved Area plus 5' Areas between of unpaved land on either poles orOverlapping Are side of path of travel. Shall luminaires that include all contiguous are greater than Areas of Obstructed of areas to List Specific Application6 mounting Another Building By Sign or Subtract Illuminated Area (Table 147-A) paved area before height distance Application or Areas Other (C +D + including adjacent grounds.(If A livable Luminaire Structure E + F) (B — G) ❑ § 147(c)1 B — Each portion of all illuminated areas has been assigned only one lighting applicatio�he applications a�consi stent vwth the actual use of the areas u 3 147(c)i A General dlumination areas incudes only those illuminated areas that are m the bouhe Application and are wrthm a square pattern around aluminaire thatissa timesthe luminaire mounting heightwrth the luminaire in the middle of the patternless any aare within buildings, under canopies, beyond property lines, or obstructed by a signs or other structures 2005 Nonresidential Compliance Forms April 2005 L I G H T I N' G WP2H700T TYPE: JOB NAME: 152Ab7grIAL ej%V14.b4W 41L DATE: DESCRIPTION Sensor controlled WP2 SmartPack in 42 watt CFL cutoff & 84 watt CFL refractor models. Starting temperature 0° F/ -18°C. Sensor has 180° detection and controls up to 250 watts. 120 volts only. Lamp included. SPECIFICATIONS Cutoff Lens Tempered glass. Finish Chip and fade resistant epoxy powder FFA!Mg Die cast aluminum, 1/2" NPS tapped holes top, both sides and back for conduit or photocontrol. Hinged refractor frame. Continuous silicone rubber gasket. ORDERING INFORMATION Reflector Specular anodized aluminum, removable for installation. Symmetrical light pattern maximizes distance between fixtures. Refractor Prismatic optics designed to minimize glare and throw light down and out. Heat resistant borosilicate glass. UL Listing Suitable for wet locations. HID fixtures can be wired with 90° C supply wiring if supply wires are routed 3" away from ballast. DIMENSIONS 22.9 cm 14• — 35.6 co __- ---1 PHOTOMETRICS 15OW HPS @10' Mounting Height 5 43 N2tlp�1of a0� ft Height 3 Mourning Het ht Nlutti Iter ' 1.6 10' 1.0 12' .7 16' .4 20' .25 5 Watts Multiplier HIPS MH CFL 175 .9 150PS .9 150 1.0 .8 125PS .7 100 .6 .6 70 .4 .4 42 .2 84 .4 Total Lamp Lamp Starting Amps/ Operating Amps Input LAMP Initial Lamp Watts Type Base Ballast 120V 208V 240V 277V Watts ANSI Lumens Hours Metal Halide 70 ED17 Medium HX-HPF QT .7/.8 .4/.45 .35/.4 .3/.35 70 M98 5600 15000 Lamp supplied with fixture Factory Installed Options Button Photocontroi /PC Swivel Photocontrol /PCS Add suffix to Catalog Number Double fusing for 208 and 240 volt IFF Tamperproof screws frP Single fusing for 120 and 277 volt /F 02006 Note: Specifications may change without notice RAB Lighting, Inc. • 170 Ludlow Ave- Northvale, NJ 07647 - Tel: 888 RAB-1000 - Fax: 888 RAB-1232 • www.rabweb.COM MIK Steel, Inc. SELF STORAGE BOAT STORAGE _ RV STORAGE #913 April 2006 Plan Check Response for Anothers Self Storage Oroville, CA N. Stephen Van Der Maelen Oroville, CA FESS/611 LR p9 F � � F y � � .0 6 s� C11101 q�OFCAL�F�� APR 2 0 2006 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Ph: (800) 383-4932 Fax: (760) 448-1761 MAKO S*eel, Inc_ SELF STORAGE BOAT STORAGE RV STORAGE Date: April 20, 2006 CSG PC #260515 Agency PC #130602-003 To: City of Oroville Building Department CSG Consultants, Inc. Attn: Steven Huang 1700 South Amphlett Blvd, 3`d Floor San Mateo, CA 94402 P: 888/794-2016, F: 650/522-2599 Regarding: Another Self Storage in Oroville, CA Please reference the following for the responses to the plan check review #1 dated March 17, 2006: 4. 2" d Review Comments: Provide construction detail of one-hour fire resistive construction with parapets including basis of approval (UL design #, G.A. file #, etc.) or provide a minimum distance of 40 feet between buildings to maintain a minimum distance of 20 to assumed property lines. (CBC Table SA). The owner added 2 -Hour Rated Walls in Buildings 1. 2. 3. & 4. which will extend from the finish floor to the under side of the non-comhustihle metal roof deck. (CHC Section 504.6.4 item #2.4) 9. Provide building elevation views. 2" d Review Comment: Sheet S14 containing building elevation views has been omitted from the permit set. Please submit sheet S14 with next submittal for review. Please reference the revised set of plans for Sheet S14. All other responses are by others. If you have any questions, please call me. Thank you, Michael Dale, P.E. Project Engineer CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Ph: (800) 383-4932 Fax: (760) 448-1761 Y' MSK® Steel, In4e_ . r1 SELF STORAGE BOAT STORAGE RV STORAGE #913 March 2006 Plan Check Response for Another . Self Storage Oroville, CA Stephen Van Der Maelen Oroville, CA CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Ph: (800) 383-4932 Fax: (760) 448-1761 MAIKO Steel, Iizc_ SELF STORAGE BOAT STORAGE RV. STORAGE Date: March 22, 2006 CSG PC #260515 Agency PC #130602-003 To: City of Oroville Building Department CSG Consultants, Inc. Attn: Steven Huang 1700 South Amphlett Blvd, 3`� Floor San Mateo, CA 94402 P: 888 794-2016, F: 650-522-2599 Regarding: Another Self Storage in Oroville, CA Please reference the following for the responses to the plan check review #1 dated March 17, 2006: 1. By others. 2. Indicate on Sheet SI.1 the Occupancy Group classification of the building to be S-1, Type of Construction to be II -N and scope of work statement. Please reference Sheet S1.1 under the "Project Data" note for the occupancy group, Noe of construction. and building- floor area for the nroiect. 3. By others 4. By others 5. By others 6. By others 7. By others S. By others 9. Provide building elevation views. Please reference Sheet S14 for General Standard Building Elevations. 10. By others 11. Sheet S1. I — provide complele notes.ft)r special inspection and structural observation,- lis/ bservation;list items to be inspected/observed,' person (s) to performm inspection/observation. report submittals, etc. (1701 & 1702). Please reference Sheet S1.1 for the added notes for Special Inspection and Structural Observation. CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Ph: (800) 383-4932 Fax: (760) 448-1761 MAKO Seel, Izz4e. SELF STORAGE BOAT STORAGE RV STORAGE �1 On the plans, specify connection of roof deck to purlinlchannel/angle. (Calc p. 19) Please reference Detail 3 on Sheet S1.3, which show the attachment for the roof deck. Calculation 29, 40, & 51 (post design) — interaction equations — states "Section does not meet all requirements of NAS C4.6" —please explain. Regarding Section C4.6, Compression Members Having One Flange Through - Fastened to Deck or Sheathing, the design provision is developed based on metal building posts or purlins with a metal roof or wall panels attached to one flange of the member. However, one of the criteria is that 6"<d<12". For the `C' 4" posts/studs, this condition is not met. However, the calculation does calculate the posts/studs for the axial compression and bending. 4. On the plans, specify connection of wall panels at each support (girt/channel/angle). (Calc. p. 61) Please reference Detail 2 on Sheet S1.3 for the siding supports. P5. End walls and side walls — specify girt location and spacing (match calculations). (Calc p. 63, 69, 74) Please reference the Partition Plans for the buildings, which callout typical girt spacing for endwall and sidewall or different girt spacing for each individual endwall and sidewall. 16. Interior shear walls — specify connector size and spacing (match calculations). (Calc p.91, 97, 103, 111, 118) Please reference Detail 1 on Sheet S1.3 for the metal shear wall panel to posts/studs and vertical girt screw pattern. Please reference Details 6, 7 & 9 on Sheet SDI for detail showing eave channel to vertical girt to metal shear wall panel. Please reference Detail 11 on Sheet SDI, which shows the interior metal panel attaching to the exterior wall posts/studs. Please reference Detail 1, 4, & 5 on Sheet SDI, which shows the metal panel to posts/studs or vertical girt with attachments to concrete foundations. Please reference Details 7, 9, 10, 15, & 20 on Sheet SDI for exterior wall posts/studs or jambs to concrete foundations. '17. Providefouundution system ofsu fcient si_e to supporl all loads underinterior bearing and shear walls. CBC 1806.3 Please reference the note added to Sheet SJJ regarding the Soil's Report. Please reference the additional note to the foundation plans, which state the 4" gravel, vapor barrier, 2" sand, and soil's report for additional information. The perimeter footing has been deepen to 18" to help reduce the soils for expanding and contracting due to moist. The Geotechnical Engineer will review and provide the plan check with a letter statins the foundation plans following the Soil's Report, per CSG request. CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Ph: (800) 383-4932 Fax: (760) 448-1761 B MAMC_ O Slel, Izz.4e. SELF STORAGE BOAT STORAGE RV STORAGE '-1-8.1'Detail 17/SD-1 (Cross -bracing at gusset) — reference detail on each roof plan. This detail has been omitted from the plans. On Sheet SD2 three details have been added to the plans showing the roof x -bracing condition, which callouts for these details have been added to the roof framing plans. t'19� Roof plans — calculate and detail chord members at roof cross -bracing. The roof x -bracing is tension only bracing. The loads are transferred from one tension strap through the purlins (compression) and then to the next tension strap. Since the x -bracing is not part of a horizontal truss system a chord member is not needed. 26�-,,, Calculate and limit story drift — ex. At exterior wall lines (with piers). (1630.9 & 10) At the low eave buildings the 16" wide door piers are used to help resist the.lateral loads. The worse case force at the top of the. 16" wide x 8'-6" tall pier is 169#. The As = 0.58" and the A. = 1.84". The allowable story drift is 0.025h = 2.55". The metal piers are the worse case. The following is the Load Path for horizontal bracing system system: One -Story Building: Transverse Direction: Since the roof is only %2 per 12 slope, the lateral wind/seismic loads are distributed by the continuous eave channel, which spans horizontally between the metal shear walls. The shear is transferred from the eave channel to either vertical girts or exterior wall posts/studs. The lateral loads are transferred from the vertical girt or exterior wall posts to the metal shear wall panel, and then to the anchors at the base of the posts. The loads are then transferred to the foundation through the expansion anchors. Longitudinal Direction: There are horizontal metal flat strap x -bracing at the roof level at a maximum of 40 feet on center. At Buildings 1, 2, &3, the x -bracing transfers the lateral loads to the metal pier system and interior shear walls. At Buildings 4 &5, the x -bracing transfers the lateral loads to the continuous exterior metal -framed sidewall. The lateral loads transfers from the x -bracing to the either the roof purlins or eave channels. At the sidewalls, the loads are transferred from the eave channel to either the metal pier system or metal -framed shear walls. The loads are then transferred through the concrete anchors into the foundations. At the interior walls, the loads are transferred from the roof purlins, through the roof posts/vertical girts into the metal shear wall panels. The loads are then transferred from the shear walls through the concrete anchors into the foundations. If you have any questions, please call me. Thank you; Michael Dale, P.E. Project Engineer MAR 2 2 2006 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Ph: (800) 383-4932 Fax: (760) 448-1761 �- .26 4- G -A Pic -9 I^JRAP Section Inputs Material: A653 SS Grade 33 No strength increase from cold work of forming. Modulus of Elasticity, E 29500 ksi Yield Strength, Fy 33 ksi Tensile Strength, Fu 45 ksi Warping Constant Override, Cw 0 in^6 Torsion Constant Override, J 0 in^4 Connector Spacing 0 in Channel, Thickness 0.0176 in Placement of Part from Origin: X to center of gravity .. CFS Version 5:0.1 : Page 1 Section: 16-PIERS-C4x18.5ct ` Michael Dale, P.E. -1.3392 in Channel 16x4x0.0176 MAKO Steel, Inc. Rev. Date: 3/21/2006 10:20:02 AM Outside dimensions, Open shape By: Michael Dale, P.E. SAP (VAa ) Angle Radius J �- .26 4- G -A Pic -9 I^JRAP Section Inputs Material: A653 SS Grade 33 No strength increase from cold work of forming. Modulus of Elasticity, E 29500 ksi Yield Strength, Fy 33 ksi Tensile Strength, Fu 45 ksi Warping Constant Override, Cw 0 in^6 Torsion Constant Override, J 0 in^4 Connector Spacing 0 in Channel, Thickness 0.0176 in Placement of Part from Origin: X to center of gravity 0 in Y to center of gravity -1.3392 in Outside dimensions, Open shape Length Angle Radius Web k Hole Size Distance (in) (deg) (in) Coef. (in) (in) 1 4.000 270.000 0.18750 Single 0.000 0.000 2.000 2 16.000 180.000 0.18750 Cee 0.000 0.000 8.000 3 4.000 90.000 0.18750 Single 0.000 0.000 2.000 Stiffened Channel, Thickness 0.0466 in Placement of Part from Origin: X to center of gravity -7.1218 in Y to center cf gravity -6.226e-7 in Outside dime -cions, Open shape Length Angle Radius Web k Hole Size Distance (in) (deg) (in) Coef. (in) (in) i 0.5000 270.000 0.18750 None 0.000 0.0000 0.2500 2 2.5000 18x.000 0.18750 Single 0.000 0.0000 1.2500 3 4.00•D0 9,'.000 0.18750 Cee 0.000 0.0000 2.0000 - 2.50'2 .000 0.18750 Sincle 0.000 0.0000 1.2500 5 0.5C;'- -_.000 0.18750 None 0.000 0.0000 0.2500 f : -CFS Veision*5.0.1 Page 2 Section: 16-PIERS-C4x18:sct Michael Dale, P.E.. Channel 16x4x0.0176 MAKO Steel, Inc. Rev. Date: 3/21/2006 10:20:02 AM By: Michael Dale, P.E. Part 3, Thickness 0.0466 in Placement of Part from Origin: X to center of gravity 7.1218 in 3..468 in^4 SX(t) 1.4264 Y to center of gravity 0 in I2 3.468 in^4 Ic Outside dimensions, Open shape Io 72.684 in^4 Width 16.0000 Length Angle Radius web k Hole Size Distance rc (in) (deg) (in) 7.4782 Coef. (in) (in) 1 0.5000 -90.000 0.18750 None 0.000 0.0000 0.2500 2 2.5000 0.000 0.18750 Single 0.000 0.0000 1.2500 3 4.0000 90.000 0.18750 Cee 0.000 0.0000 2.0000 4 2.5000 180.000 0.18750 Single 0.000 0.0000 1.2500 5 0.5000 270.000 0.18750 None 0.000 0.0000 0.2500 Full Section Properties Area 1.2997 in^2 Ix 3..468 in^4 SX(t) 1.4264 in^3 Sx(b) 2.1866 in^3 Iy 60.178 in^4 Sy(1) 7.5222 in^3 Sy(r) 7.5222 in^3 I1 60.178 in^4 I2 3.468 in^4 Ic 63.646 in",-" Io 72.684 in^4 wt. 0.0044190 k/ft width rx 1.6335 in Y(t) 2.4315 in y(b) 1.5861 in Height 4.0176 in ry 6.8045 in X(l) 8.0000 'in x(r) 8.0000 in Width 16.0000 in rl 6.8045 in r2 1.6335 in rc 6.9978 _.. ro 7.4782 in F=�-I Sooks 3 PT Ixy a X Yo jx jY Cw J 42.700 in 0.000 in^4 90.000 deg 0.0000 in -2.6370 in 0.0000 in 5.0219 in 28.272 in^6 0.0006809 in^4 ns Her 29 06 12:030 HTC 15301 ,,891 -4243 p. 2 4 ATC_ APPLIED TEONG CONSULTANTS MATERIALS TESTING, ENGNEERfNG AND NSPECTION March 29, 2006 Stephen Van Der Maclen 368 Valley View Drive Paradise, CA 95969 Re: leoundativn Design review for Another Self Storage -- Oroville, Ca Gentlemen: We have recently reviewed the foundation plans and specifications fox Another Self Storage located at 5930 Lincoln Blvd in Oroville. A conversation with Project Architect Michael Dale verified that the design of the foundation plan was to help mitigate the effects of thu expansive soils on site, Our plan review indicated the following; The footings were shown as eighteen inch deep with #4 continuous top and bottom reinforcing steel. Under slab preparation includes prc-saturation to eighteen inches deep within the footing lines. A capillary break of uncompacted gravel will be placed over grade to allow for swelling, Reinforcing steel will be #4 bars at fifl"m inches oil center. if sand is used tinder reinforcing;, a vapor harrier or other fabric will be used to separate the sand from the uncompacted gravel layer. Control joints in the four inch concrete slab will be set at twelve 1'cc t six inches on center, [arr fethat the ruundation design and undcrslab preparation for the above mentioned project is cient to comply with the rccommendations.containcd in section 3.3 (Soil Expansion Potential) snd section 3.6 (Slab -on -Gracie) of the Geotechnical Report prepared by our firm on April 23, 2004. A representative rrom our office should be on site to verify that the different components design are executed properly on the jobsite. p of this ATC is not the foundation design .engineer for this project. Designs for consolidation, expansive soils, differential settlement and hearing on till arc by others. Thank you for using ATC to provide the Geotechnical service for your project. Please call if You have any quetitions regarding our services described above;. Very truly yours, Brad -orsytltc Vice President Director of Operations 3060 Thorntree Drive, Suite 10 9 Chico, CA 95973 • Telephone: (530) 891-6625 6 i USImiie: (530) 891-4243 GEOTECHNICAL REPORT For Another Self -Storage Oroville, California April 23, 2004 APPLIED TESTING CONSULTANTS 3060 Thorntree Drive, Suite #10 Chico, CA 95973 M V Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1 1.1 General.........................................................................................................................1 1.2 Scope ........................................ :......................................................... :........................ 1 1.3 Attachments................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 FINDINGS......................................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Site Description........................................................................................................... 1 2.2 Subsurface Soil Conditions......................................................................................... 1 2.3 Ground Water.................................................................:............................................ 2 3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................ 2 3.1 Site Clearing... .............................................................................................................. 2 3.2 Site Preparation............................................................................................................ 2 - 3.3 Soil Expansion Potential ................... :........................................................................... 3 3.4 Site Geology & Seismicity........................................................................................... 4 3.5 Foundation Design....................................................................................................... 5 - 3.6 Slab-on-Grade..............................................................................................................6 3.7 Pavement Design......................................................................................................... 6 4.0 LIMITATIONS..................................................................................................................6 -- Figures: Figure 1: Site Location Figure 2: Test Pit Location Plan Figure 3: Unified Soil Classification System Appendix A — Field Investigation Description & Logs - Appendix B — Laboratory Test Data \\Otto\C\Work\2004\01 I-Oroville soils\reportldoc page 1 Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 General We have completed a geotechnical engineering investigation of the site for the proposed _ storage units, west of Lincoln Blvd and south of V-1 Road in Oroville, California. The purpose of our investigation was to explore the site, investigate subsurface soil conditions, and to provide design recommendations for the preparation of the proposed development. This report represents the results of our work. The site was saturated at the time of our initial investigation 28 January 2004, additional testing resumed on 6 April 2004 when the saturated condition no longer existed. 1.2 Scope The scope of our work included: a field exploration consisting of five test pits, testing and analysis of soil samples obtained from the number 1, 2.and 4 test pits, and.the preparation of a report of our findings and recommendations. 1.3 Attachments This report contains Site and Test Pit Location Plans, Profile Logs for Test Pit 1 to 5, and our Laboratory Test Data Sheets (including Atterburg Limits, Gradations and Expansion Index). See Figures and Appendices. 2.0 FINDINGS 2:1 Site Description The relatively square shaped site is located at the west side of Lincoln Blvd and south of V-1. Road in Oroville, California, and is approximately 13 acres in size. The proposed development for.the site is for approximately 1.4 acres of mini storage units and a office. On the date of our visits, 28 January 2004, and 6 April 2004 no recent site grading was apparent. No trees or shrubs are located on the site. 2.2 Subsurface Soil Conditions With a backhoe, five excavations were made to a depth of about two to eight feet, as seen in Test Pit Logs 1 to 5. It was determined that the tests pit were of sufficient depth to represent the soil profile in that area of the site. The soil varies throughout the site Sandy Elastic SILT w/ Gravel, MH, Sandy Fat CLAY, CH, and Clayey GRAVEL w/ Sand, GC was found. After the test pits were dug and soil samples taken, the holes were backfilled with excavated material and not properly compacted. \\Otto\C\Work\2004\011-OroviIle soils\report2.doc page 1 Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 2.3 Ground Water Ground water evidence was discovered in Test Pit I at the time of our exploration. Saturated soil was. encountered down to two and one half feet. 3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS At the time that this report is being prepared, it is our understanding that the proposed construction at this site consists of a multi -unit mini storage complex with slab -on -grade foundations. The recommendations contained' in this report are based upon these assumptions. Prior to commencement of earthwork of the site a pre -construction meeting will be required in order to ensure that the recommendations included in this report are conveyed and performed in the manner in which they were intended. A representative of our office, the builder, the general engineer, the structural engineer and/or architect, and the governing, jurisdiction should all be in attendance. A minimum of 72 hours notice will be required. to coordinate scheduling. 3.1 Site Clearing Upon arrival to the site very little site work had been done. Prior to site grading, all surface weeds and organics should be removed from the construction areas. This material can either be removed or stockpiled for later use in landscape areas. After clearing has been completed, a representative of our office shall inspect the site to verify that all vegetation and loose debris have been removed prior to the commencement of construction. The extent of soil removal may vary depending upon the findings of this subsequent inspection. Loose soils may be exposed after, scarification requiring further removal. 3.2 Site Preparation The soil conditions encountered by our office are classified as highly expansive and precautions should be taken in order to limit the amount of damage caused by the expansive soil. If imported fill material is to be used, follow the guidelines in the following two paragraphs for specifications of this material. Prior to placement of engineered fill within the pad areas, all tree stumps and roots shall be removed and replaced with compacted engineered fill. The exposed subgades should be moisture conditioned and compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction, based on test method ASTM D1557. Engineered fill should be placed in 8" loose lifts, moisture conditioned and also compacted to 90% relative compaction. The compacted thickness of each layer shall not exceed 6 inches: Compaction control and testing should be performed by a qualified testing agency to insure the recommendations of this report are followed. Depending on the amount of rock encountered in the on-site or import soils. We recommend that compaction testing be performed using Sand Cone methods (per ASTM D1556), or Nuclear Density methods (per ASTM D2922). \\Otto\C\W6rk\2004\01 I-Oroville soi1s\repor12.doc page 2 Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 At the time this report was prepared, it was uncertain whether or not enough on-site soils could be generated to complete construction of the building pads to the proposed finish grades. If imported off-site material is required to complete the pads, it must be approved by a representative from our office and meet the following minimum criteria. Import material must have a plasticity index of less than 4; be non -expansive (EI<20); have 100% passing the 3" sieve; 30% to 60% passing the #4 sieve; and no more than 20% passing the #200 sieve. 3.3 Soil Expansion Potential The surface and near surface soils encountered at the site were found to contain a certain amount of clay; which has potential for volumetric changes. An. Expansion Index test was performed per UBC Standard 18-2 on two samples, which in our judgment contained the most expansive potential clay (see Attachment 1). The test results indicated an E.I. of 99, 94 and 66, which is considered as having high expansion potential, per UBC Table 18 -I -B. A qualified representative from our office should inspect the rough foundation excavations in order to determine if the following expansive soil recommendations are required. There are several solutions that will eliminate or reduce the potentially deleterious effects of expansive soils. Slabs on grade and pavements are particularly sensitive to swell and shrinkage of the soils subgrade. A list of options is provided below: 3.3.1 Remove all expansive materials and replace with non -expansive fills. 3.3.2 Modify the existing soils with a chemical treatment, (lime, gypsum, concrete, etc.). If this option is chosen contact our office for recommended design requirements. 3.3.3 Change to a raised floor foundation and use deepened stem -walls engineered as grade beams capable of spanning 4'-0" voids or swells, or with bottom of footing placed beneath the expansive materials. 3.3.4 Design slabs to resist movements ie.; post -tension slab, waffle. slabs, or other reinforcing methods. 3.3.5 Modify construction to conform to the following list of eight recommendations. 3.3.5.1 Extend the perimeter footings to a depth of 18" below the surrounding natural grade. The purpose of this is to minimize the effects of seasonal variations in moisture content of the supporting soil. The deeper foundations will also help minimize desiccation of the soil from water absorption through the roots of adjacent shrubbery and/or trees used in landscaping. 3.3.5.2 Do not landscape next to the perimeter of the foundation with shrubbery and/or trees. The trees may grow root systems that can extend under the foundation. 3.3.5.3 Install a minimum of one No. 4 reinforcing bar at the top and bottom of all perimeter and strip footings to resist bending stresses . that may result from changes in soil volume. \\Otto\C\Work\2004\01 I-Oroville soils\report2.doc pa& 3 Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 3.3.5.4 Footing trenches should be pre-soaked for a minimum of six hours prior to placing concrete. Excess water should be removed or allowed to soak in. Care must be taken to prevent a muddy condition at the time of concrete placement and to prevent mud on the surface of the reinforcing bars.. The soil in the trench bottoms should be moist, but firm at the time concrete is placed. 3.3.5.5 Provide a 12" deep strip footing under interior walls to footings to help minimize wall cracking that may result from changes in soil volume. Install a minimum of one No. 4 reinforcing bar of the top and bottom of the strip footing. 3.3.5.6 A minimum of 4" of crushed. rock or V x #4 gravel should be installed under the floor slab to act as a capillary break. After the gravel is placed the area should be soaked uniformly for a period of six hours before placing concrete. Install a plastic moisture barrier and a 2" sand blanket over the gravel to limit dampness on the slab surface during winter months. 3.3.5.7 Any 6 x 6 WWF should be replaced with No. 3 reinforcing bars spaced a maximum of 15" on center in the mid -depth of the floor slab to resist bending — stresses that may result from changes in soil volume. The slab depth should be a minimum of 4". 3.3.5.8 Contraction joints should be installed at intervals not to exceed twenty feet in any direction. Such joints may be formed by deep (3/4") grooving or by the installation of Zip Strips. The eight options listed above are not intended to exclude other engineered solutions. The completed engineering may include more than one of the several options. Options one and two are intended to eliminate soil expansion. Options three and four are intended to resist, the effects of the soil expansion. Option five is intended to reduce the amount of soil expansion. The. best solutions are obviously one and two, but they may not be feasible from an economic standpoint. Options three, four, and five have been provided as options to reduce but not eliminate damage to structures however, even under ideal conditions the risks for damage to structures due to the swelling and shrinking of soils are not completely eliminated. 3.4 Site Geology & Seismicity Butte County and the surrounding area are located on the western portion of a faulted and downwarped series of ancient metamorphic rocks of the Western Sierra Nevada Mountain Range. Granitic rocks associated with Mesozoic thrust faulting are located in the eastern portion of the County. In .the western portion of the County, gently folded younger and sometimes faulted sediments. of the Sacramento Valley overlie older metamorphic rocks similar to those of the Sierra Nevada. The stratigraphic and structural trend of metamorphic rocks is generally northward with steeply dipping bedding in most places. The formations and geologic structure of the County appear to be controlled or strongly modified by Cenozoic faults extending along the western portion of the Sierra Nevada Mountains and \\Otto\C\Work\2004\011-OroviIle soils\report2.doc page 4 Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 trending north_northwest along with the Big Bend, Camel Peak, Dogwood Peak, Rich Bar, y and Melones faults, most of which lie to the north and east of Butte County in the area of granitic intrusions. Most Sierra Nevada faults are a combination of strike slip and thrust movements. (Bailey, Geology of Northern California, California Division of Mines and Geology.) The site is located in Northern California west of the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountain Range and is not within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. According to the State of California and the USGS, there are no faults running through the site. According to the book "Maps of Known Active Fault Near -Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada" prepared by California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology in cooperation with SEAOC, the site is an area of inactive faults. However, the Cleveland Hill fault lies seven kilometers to the East and should be considered potentially active. Earthquake related ground shaking should be expected during the life of structures constructed on this site. The maximum probable earthquake in this area is a Richter magnitude 6.7 event. Properly designed structures, using the current Uniform Building Code requirements, should reduce the damage from an earthquake event Soil Profile Type: SD Seismic Zone: 3 Seismic Zone Factor: 0.30 Seismic Source Type: B Seismic Coefficients: Ca 0.36, C,=0.54 Near Source Factor: Na 1.0, N,=1.2 3.5 Foundation Design Our f eld investigation and laboratory test results indicate that the existing native soils, at the proposed site, are adequate for support of a small retail, lightly loaded structures. The retail building proposed for this site may be supported upon conventional spread footings and continuous perimeter footings. Based on results of our laboratory testing performed on samples of the predominant soil type encountered, foundations should; be designed in accordance with the two alternatives provided below. For this project, finish pad subgrade shall be defined as, "the surface on which the capillary break/moisture barrier materials are placed." Foundations bearing on fill materials may be sized for vertical compression loads in accordance with the Uniform Building Code for Class 5 materials, utilizing maximum allowable soil pressures of 1,000 pounds per square foot (psf) for dead and live loads, and may be .increased to 1,250 pounds for all loads including wind or seismic forces. Lateral sliding resistance may be computed using a friction coefficient of, µ = 0.25. Foundation designs accounting for lateral bearing may use a lateral bearing pressure of 100 pcf. \\0tlo\C\Work\2004\01 I-Oroville soils\report2.doc page 5 Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 Plasticity index testing, along with gradation analysis, were performed on four samples that are representative of the subsurface soil types encountered. The results of these tests are included in the attachments. Although the structural engineer should make the final determination of foundation reinforcement, we recommend as a minimum, that foundations contain a single #4 bar placed at the top and bottom of all foundations. It is further recommended, that foundation reinforcement should be consistent. 3:6 Slab -on -Grade Interior slab -on -grade floors should be underlain with a 4" layer of free -draining gravel. The gravel should be graded, such that, 100% passes the 1" sieve, and not more than 2% passes the #4 sieve. Over the gravel,, should be a durable vapor barrier of visqueen, which is 10 ml. or thicker. These will both serve as a capillary moisture deterrent, as well as, to promote uniform curing of the slab concrete. For slab -on -grades, we recommend that slabs be reinforced with reinforcing bars or welded wire fabric. This reinforcing will minimize cracking, if minor differential settlement occurs beneath the slab. It is important that the slab reinforcing be located in the middle of the slab, and be held in place during concrete placement. Contraction joints should be installed at intervals, not to exceed, twenty feet in any one direction. Such joints may be formed by deep (3/4") wet grooving while the concrete is still plastic, or by the installation of Zip Strips. 3.7 Pavement Design The Project Civil Engineer had advised our office, that pavement design would not be required within this report. However, we were requested to provide R -Value testing on samples. of material encountered. within the proposed street sections. One excavation was made within or near the street section and two samples were obtained for R -Value testing. For locations of the sample, refer to the Test Pit Location Plan, Figure 2. The depths and results of R -Value testing are as follows: It is our recommendation that the pavement design be based upon the values obtained from TP3. This R -Value is more representative of the type of soil that was encountered. The results from TP5 shall be disregarded and not used in the design. Table 1.0 - R -Value Test Result Test Pit # Sample Depth Exudation Pressure (psi) R -Value TP3 16" 300 19 TP5 18" 300 <5 4.0 LIMITATIONS Our recommendations are based upon the information provided regarding the proposed construction, combined with our analysis of site conditions revealed by the field exploration \\0tt0\C\W0rk\2004\011-Oroville soi1s\report2.doc page6 Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 and laboratory testing programs: We have used our best engineering judgment, based upon the information provided and the data generated from our investigation. Our test pits were dug in locations determined to be representative of the site. However, if the proposed construction is'niodified or re-sited, or if it is discovered during. construction that subsurface conditions differ from those encountered at the boring locations, we should be afforded the opportunity to review the new information or changed conditions, to determine if our conclusions and recommendations must. be modified. We do not claim that our recommendations are suitable for discovery items or other site changes other than the conditions and testing specifically discussed in this report. Furthermore we cannot be held responsible for discovery items or other site changes. If there is a substantial lapse of time between the submission of our report and the start of _ . construction at the site, or if the conditions have changed due to natural causes or construction operations at, or adjacent to the site, we urge that this report be reviewed to determine the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations considering the changed __. conditions and time lapse. This report should not be used after 3 years. We would appreciate the opportunity to review the final plans and specifications to -- determine if the intent of our recommendations has been implemented in those documents. Applied Testing Consultants is. not the foundation design engineer for this project. Design for consolidation, differential settlement and bearing on fill materials are by others. We emphasize that Applied Testing Consultants does not represent that these test results and/or recommendations are - suitable, whether or not modified, for any other site or development on this site, other than the one for which they were. specifically prepared. Applied Testing Consultants disclaims responsibility for these test results and/or recommendations if they are used whole or in part at any other site or type of development on this site. Applied Testing Consultants (ATC) Vice -President & Director of Operations Charles Roberts, PE, MS C-038692 Exp. 3/31/05. Staff Engineer \\Otto\C\Work\2004\01 I-Oroville soi1s\repor12.doc page 7 Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 Figures 1W A I'VE a4v 2aU 12 FA . . . . . . . . . . . . Ina m Tl scall' I : 50.000 1" a 4,166.67 rt (D 2001 Dcl-ormc. -l'opo USAO 3.0 Zoom Level: 12-0 Datum: WGS84 0 2 W 0 0 co d c o' C7 0 a LA W CD O LAW a 00 N LA 0 n CD LA lh W O W i A N A W O OV1 ROAD b �r O y � �y O UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMBOLS CODE TYPICAL NAMES Grain Size = Drive Sample: no recovery GW Q. Well graded gravels or gravel -.sand mixtures, little or no fines =Final Water Level — — — = Estimated or gradational 12" to 3" material change line rn GRAVELS GP P1= Poorly graded gravels or gravel -sand mixtures, little of no fines d o (More than # of coarse UCC = Unconfined Compression Test TR = GM GR= Silty gravels, gravel- sand - silt mixtures A fraction > No. 4 sieve size) A a 'o No. 10 to No. 40 2.00 to 0.420 I No. 40 to No. 200 w . 4 c SILT & CLAY GC4*� Below 0.074 Clayey gravels, gravel - sand - clay mixtures ¢z iu c� �' wc SW •: . , ' Well graded sands or gravely sands; little or no fines SP Poorly graded sands of gravely sands, little or now fines o `" SANDS p(More than } of coarse SM.Silty sands, sand - silt mixtures U fraction < No. 4 sieve size) SC Clayey sands, sand -clay mixtures ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock , silty or clayey fine c SILTS & CLAYS sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity O Z CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravely clays, sandy Ch .. r LL < 50 clays, siltyclays, lean clays OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity w c �, N MH I I I I I I I I I I Inorganic silts, micaceous of diatomaceous fine sandy or silty fC0 C5. SILTS & CLAYS I I I I I coils, elastic silts W ` N o CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays u�, LL>50 Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silty clays, OH organic silts HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT= _ _ _ _ Peat and other highly organic soils OTHER SYMBOLS a= Drive Sample: 2-1/2" O.D. Below/ ft. Description California sampler Grain Size = Drive Sample: no recovery sieve size = Initial Water Level —V—f =Final Water Level — — — = Estimated or gradational 12" to 3" material change line GRAVEL = Observed material change line Laboratory: Tests P1= Plasticity Index EI = Expansion Index UCC = Unconfined Compression Test TR = Triaxial Compression Test GR= Gradation Analysis (Sieve) CON = Consolidation Test APPLIED TESTING CONSULTANTS GRAIN SIZE CLASSIFICATION CLASSIFICATION RANGE OF GRAIN SIZE Below/ ft. Description U.S. Standard Grain Size <3 Very Loose sieve size in Millimeters BOULDERS Above 12" Above 305 COBBLES 12" to 3" 305 to 76.2 GRAVEL 3" to No. 4 76.2 to 4.76 coarse\se (c) 3" to 3/4" 76.2 to 19.1 fine ( f) 3/4" to No. 4 19.1 to 4.76 SAND . No. 4 to No. 200 4.76 to 0.074 coarse ( c) No. 4 to No. 10 4.76 to 2.00 medium (m) No. 10 to No. 40 2.00 to 0.420 fine (f) No. 40 to No. 200 0.420 to 0.074 SILT & CLAY Below No. 200 Below 0.074 CONSISTENCY CLASSIFICATION COHESIVE SOILS GRANULAR SOILS Description Below/ ft. Description Below/ ft. Very Soft <3 Very Loose <5 Soft 3-5 Loose. 5-15 Medium ( firm) 6-10 Medium Dense 1640 Stiff 11-20 Dense 41-65 Very Stiff 2140 Very Dense > 65 Hard >40 Figure 3 3060 Thorntree Drive, Suite #10 -.Chico, CA 95973 - Telephone: (530) 891-6625 - Facsimile: (530) 891-4243 Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 Appendix A Profile Log for Test Pit # 1 Steven Van Der Maelen. Oroville Storape Units. Ornvillo_ CA Fria to —0,* s 1.-- n-1-- Depth Log Soil Description Redish-Brown Sandy Elastic SILT w/ Gravel MH (high amount of ground water was present) 1 1111111 I I I I Illllll Sample TP 1-S 1@- P-0" - Grading. PI, EI 2 Illllll Illllll I I I I Il.l1I1I I I I Light Redish-Brown Sandy Elastic SILT w/ Gravel MH 3 I I I I�I�I�I I I I I 4 Illllll I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I�I�I�I Sample TPI -S2 @ -4'-0" 5 Illllll Illlljl I I I I .Illllll 6 IIlll�l I I I I Illllll 7 Illllll Illllll 1.111111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Sample TPI -S3 @ -7'-6" - Grading, PI, EI 8 I I I I Terminated @ -8'-0" 9 10 Attachment (1) APPLIED TESTING CONSULTANTS 3060 Thorntree Drive, Suite #10 - Chico, CA 95973 - Telephone: (530) 891-6625 - Facsimile: (530) 891-4243 Profile Log for Test Pit # 2 Steven Van Der Maelen. 0rnv;11P RtnrnaP 71";ty n—m. re Depth Log Soil Description Redish-Brown Sandy. Fat Clay w/ Organic Material 1 Redish-Brown Sandy Fat Clay w/ Minor Cobble 2 Redish-Brown Sandy Fat Clay CH 3 Sample TP2-S 1@ -3'-0" - Grading. PI, EI Yellow Sandy Fat Clay 4 Sample TP2-S2 @ -4'-6" 5 6 7 Tenninated @ -7'-0" 8- 9- 910 10 Attachment (2) -.- APPLIED TESTING CONSULTANTS 3060 Thorntree Drive, Suite #10 - Chico, CA 95973 - Telephone: (530) 891-6625 - Facsimile: (530) 891-4243 Profile Log for Test Pit # 3 Steven Van Der Maelen. Oroville Storave Units. nrnviUv Ca Depth Log -r• Soil Description Redish-Brown Sandy Fat Clay w/ Minor Cobble 1 Sample TP3-S1 @ -1'-0" Sample TP3-S2 @ -1'-6" R -Value 19 2 3 4 Yellow Sandy Fat Clay 5 Terminated @ -5'-0" Cobble- Hard Pan 6 7 8 9 10 Attachment (3) - APPLIED TESTING CONSULTANTS 3060 Thorntree Drive, Suite #10 - Chico, CA 95973 - Telephone: (530) 891-6625 - Facsimile: (530) 891-4243 Profile Log for Test Pit # 4 Steven Van Der Maelen nrnv;i1, .4z,— o t/nil, n—;no r -A _rte c Depth Log Soil Description Clayey Gravel w/ Sand GC 1 Sample TP4-S1 @ -2'-0" 2 3 Yellow Sandy Fat Clay 4 5 f Sample TP4-S2 @ -5'-0" 6 Terminated @ -6'-0" 8 9 10 Attachment (4) APPLIED TESTING CONSULTANTS 3060 Thorntree Drive, Suite #10 - Chico, CA 95973 - Telephone: (530) 891-6625 - Facsimile: (530) 891-4243 ° Profile Log for Test Pit # 5 Steven Van DerMnelen nrnvVh Rlnrnoo 1/nifc nrn»Ulo /'A c__r� �____.,__.•___ Depth Log Soil Description Clayey Gravel w/ Sand 1 Sample TP5-S1 @ -1'-6" 2 Terminated @ -2'-0" 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Attachment (5) - APPLIED TESTING CONSULTANTS 3060 Thorntree Drive, Suite #10 - Chico, CA 95973 - Telephone: (530) 891-6625 - Facsimile: (530) 891-4243 Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 Appendix B n 0 A %jlcvC Aiidiybmi - Combined Client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Address: 368 Valley View Drive City, State, zip: Paradise, CA Attn.: Stephen Van Der Maelen Project: Another Self -Storage Sample source: Sampled by ATC Sample Description: MH, Sandy Elastic SILT w/ Gravel Sample location: Test Pit 1, Sample1 Sample depth: taken at minus 1'-0" 100.0% 3 0.0 q Start Wt, Course: 2,551.7 g 21/2 Start Wt. fine: 508.5 g Sample No: TPI -SI Date: 28 -Jan -04 Tech: B. Carter Sieve Size Weight Retained Percent retained Cumulative Percent Specified Retained Passing 41/2 0.0 g 100.0% 4 0.0 q 100.0% 31/2 0.0 g 100.0% 3 0.0 q 100.0% 21/2 0.0 q 100.0% 2 0.0 g 100.0% 1 1/2 0.0 q 100.0% 1 201.6 q 7.9.% 7.9% 92.1% 3/4 69.7 q 2.7% 10.6% 89.4% 1/2 71.3 g 2.8% 13.4% 86.6% 3/8 28.0 q 1.1% 14.5% 85.5% #4 20.3 q 0.8% 15.3% 84.7% #8 7.4 q 1.2% 16.6% 83.4% #16 10.6 g 1.8% 18.3% 81.7% #30 10.5 g .1.7% 20.1% 79.9% #50 17.3 g 2.9% 22.9% 77.1% #100 30.7 g 5.1% 28.1% 71.9% #200 33.6 g 5.6% 33.7% 66.3% This test was performed according to Cal Trans Test 202 Sieve Analvsis - Combinp-d Sample No: TPI -SI Client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Date: 28 -Jan -04 Address: 368 Valley -View Drive Tech: B. Carter City, State, Zip: Paradise, CA Attn.: Stephen Van Der Maelen .Project: Another Self -Storage Sample source: Sampled by ATC Sample Description: MH, Sandy Elastic SILT w/ Gravel Sample location: Test Pit 1, Sample1 Sample depth: taken at minus 1'-0" D.10 = n/a CU =1 n/a Dao = ri/a Cc =1 n/a D60 = n/a GRADATION CURVE U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS. 100.0% = - 90.0% J 9 W 80.0% } 70.0% 60.0% - - — — — --- - -- — — - Z 50.0% - - —. 40.0% - z 30.0% U 20.0% -1 10.0%- W-- 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS Plasticity Index Project:" Another Self -Storage Sample No: TP1-S1 Client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Date: 6 -Feb -04 Address 368 Valley View Drive Technician: B. Carter City, State, Zip: Paradise, CA Attention: Stephen Van Der Maelen Source: Sampled by ATC Material Description: MH, Sandy Elastic SILT w/ Gravel" Liquid Limit: Trial Number. Tin Label: Wet Weight + Tare: Dry Weight + Tare: Weight of Water: " Weight of Tare: Weight of Dry Soil: Moisture Content: Number of Blows: 1 2 3 4 5 6 6 7 g 32.71 35.45 35.26 27.17 28.95 28.62 5.54 6.50 6.64 15.44 15.37 15.38 11.73 13.58 13.24 47.23% 47.86% 50.15% 331'27 21 Liquid Limit, LL Plastic Limit, PL Plasticity Index, PI 49 31 18 "Plastic Limit TrialNumber: Tin Label: Wet Weight + Tare: Dry. Weight + Tare: _ Weight of Water: Weight of Tare: Weight of dry soil: Moisture Content: w, ~ W i "�yio -11111=0000re vm 27,' 33 M.,--® i w, ~ W i "�yio LYs'R vm 27,' 33 i 0 RAN MEs Expansion Index Test Sample No: TPI -S1 Client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Project: Another Self -Storage Contact: Stephen Van Der Maelen Soil description: MH, Sandy Elastic SILT w/ Gravel Sample location: Test Pit 1, Sample1 Sample taken by: Sampled by ATC Depth of sample: taken at minus 1'-0" Moisture determination Gross wet wt. 360.5 Gross dry wt: 324.2 Pan wt: 83.5 Net dry wt: 240.7 Moisture Loss: 36.3 Moisture content: 15.1 Density determination Wt of soil & ring: 551.5 Tare of ring: 200.1 Net compacted soil wt: 351:4 Dry Density, pcf: 92.6 Saturation determination Volume of solids: 0.549 Volume of water: 0.224 Volume of air: 0.228 Degree of saturation: 49.6% Gross final wet wt: 409.2 Gross final dry wt: 302.7 Final moisture loss: 91.2 Final net dry wt: 219.2 Final moisture content: 41.6% This test was performed per ASTM D-4829-88 Sta 2/07/04 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Z Fina Date: 6 -Feb -04 Tech: B. Carter Time Reading t: 10:40:00 AM 0.0000 2 10:50:00 AM 0:0170 3 11:00:00 AM 0.0318 4 11:30:00 AM , 0.0390 5 12:00:00 PM 0.0531 6 1:00:00 PM 0.0556 7 2:00:00 PM '0.0606 B 7:30:00 AM 0.0662 91 8:30:00 AM 0.0662 0 9:00:00 AM 0.0662 1 7:301 0.0662 Expansion Index: 66 Sieve Analysis - Combined Client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Address: 368 Valley View Drive City, State, zip: Paradise, CA Attn.: Stephen Van Der Maelen Project: Another Self -Storage Sample source: Sampled by ATC Sample Description: MH, Elastic SILT w/ Gravel Sample location: Test Pit 1, Sample3 Sample depth: taken at minus 7'-6" D10 = n/a Cu =1 n/a D30 = n/a CC = n/a Deo = n/a f- 100.0% 90.0% UJ 80.0% } . 70.0% 60.0% Z 50.0% LL 40:0% z 30.0% U 20.0% Of 10.0% a Sample No: TPI -S3 Date: 12 -Feb -04 Tech: B. Carter GRADATION CURVE U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS 1 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS Plasticity Index Project: Another Self -Storage — Client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Address 368 Valley View, Drive City, State, Zip: Paradise, CA — Attention: Stephen Van Der Maelen Source: Sampled by ATC Material Description: MH, Elastic SILT w/ Gravel _ Li uid Li it: Trial Number: Tin Label: _ Wet Weight + Tare: Dry Weight + Tare: Weight of Water: Weight of Tare: Weight of Dry Soil: Moisture Content: Number of Blows: Sample No: TPI -S3 Date: 13 -Feb -04 Technician: K. Coy 1 2 3 4 5 6 6 7 g 34.87 35.99 34.66 26.93 27.58 26.59 7.94 8.41 8.07 15.41 15.55 15.35 11.52 12.03 11.24 68.92% 69.91% 71.80% 34 271 22 Liquid Limit, LL Plastic Limit, PL Plasticity Index, PI 71 _ 37 34 Plastic Limit- Trial Number: Tin Label: Wet Weight + Tare: Dry Weight + Tare: Weight of Water: Weight of Tare: Weight of dry soil: Moisture Content: 0 72.00-io c 71.50% 71.00% o 70.50% y 70.00% y 69.50% 0 69.00% 2 68.50°% Liquid Limit 10 number of blows 100 Y = -0.0016x + 0.4055 Expansion Index Test Sample No: TPI -S3 client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Project: Another Self -Storage Contact: Stephen Van Der Maelen Soil description: MH, .Elastic SILT w/ Gravel Sample location: Test Pit 1, Sample3 Sample taken by: Sampled by ATC Depth of sample: taken at minus 7'-6" Moisture determination 1:00:00 PM Gross wet wt: 292.8 0.0797 Gross dry wt: 246.0 7:00:00 AM Pan wt: 83.4 0.0940 Net'dry wt: 162.6 Moisture Loss:46.8 Moisture content: 28.8% Density determination Wt of soil & ring: 488.4 Tare of ring: 200.1 Net compacted soil wt: 288.3 Dry Density, pcf: 67.9 Saturation determination Volume of solids: 0.402 Volume of water: 0.313 Volume of air: 0.285 Degree of.saturation: 52.4% Gross final wet wt: 365 Gross final dry wt: 226.9 Final moisture loss: 91.2 Final net dry wt: 143.5 Final moisture content: 63.6% This.test was performed per ASTM D-4829-88 Start 1 11 2/21/048 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .20 Final: Date: 20 -Feb -04 Tech: B. Carter Time 2 a 5 6 7 8 s 0 Reading 8:45:00 AM 0.0000 9:00:00 AM 0.0120 s 9:15:00 AM 0.0181 9:30:00 AM 0.0255 10:00:00 AM 0.0353 10:45:00 AM 0.0470 11:15:00 AM 0.0592 12:15:00 PM 0.0728 1:00:00 PM 0.0766 1:30:00 PM 0.0797 2:00:00 PM 0.0811 7:00:00 AM 0.0940 8:00:00 AM . 0.0940 9:00:00 AM 0.0940 7:00 0.0940 Expansion Index: 94 %.71WVV h[IdIYb15 - L OMDinea Client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Address: 368 Valley View Drive City, State, zip: Paradise, CA attn.: Stephen Van Der Maelen Project: Another Self -Storage Sample source: Sampled by ATC ' Sample Description: CH, Sandy Fat Clay Sample location: Test Pit 2, Sample1 Sample depth: taken at minus 3'-0" 100.0% 3 0.0 g , Course: E 3,053.8 g 21/2 . fine: 482.6 .g Sample No: TP2-S1 Date: 8 -Apr -04 Tech: B. Carter Sieve Size Weight Retained Percent retained - Cumulative Percent Specified Retained Passing 41/2 0.0 g 100.0% 4 0.0 q 100.0% 31/2 0.0 q 100.0% 3 0.0 g 100.0% 21/2 0.0 g 100.0% 2 0.0 g 100.0% 1 1/2 0.0 g 100.0% 1 94.7 g 3.1% 3.1% 96.9% 3/4 27.7 g 0.9% 4.0% 96.0% 1/2 29.1 g 1.0% 5.0% 95.0% 3/8 53.0 g 1.7% 6.7% '93.3% #4 143.0 g 4.7% 11.4% 88.6% #8 8.6 q 1.6% 13.0% 87.0% #16 13.6 g 2.5% 15.5% 84.5% #30 17.8 g 3.3% 183% 81.3% #50 24.7 g 4.5% 23.3% 76.7% #100 25.8 4.7% 28.0% 72.0% #200 22.7 g 4.2% 32.2% 67.8% This test was performed according to Cal Trans Test 202 Sieve Analysis - Combined Client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Address: 368 Valley View Drive City, State, zip: Paradise, CA Attn.: Stephen Van Der Maelen .Project: Another Self -Storage Sample source: Sampled by ATC Sample Description: CH, Sandy Fat Clay Sample location: Test Pit 2, Sample1 Sample depth: taken at minus 3'-0" z 30.0% Dio = n/a CU = n/a Dso = n%a CC = n/a Dso = n/a F- 100.0% 90.0% � 80.0% }, 70.0% 60.0% Z 50.0% M 40.0% z 30.0% V 20.0% W 10.0% a Sample No: TP2-S1 Date: 8 -Apr -04 Tech: B. Carter GRADATION CURVE U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS 100 10. 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS Plasticity Index Project: Another Self -Storage Sample No: TP2-S1 Client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Date: 13 -Feb -04 Address 368 Valley View Drive Technician: K. Coy City, State, Zip: Paradise, CA Attention- Stephen Van Der Maelen Source: Sampled by ATC Material Description: CH, Sandy Fat Clay Liquid Limit: Trial Number: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Tin Label• _ Wet Weight + Tare: 1 2 3 30.88 31.81 35.93 Dry Weight +Tare: 25.25 25.8 28.41 Weight of Water: 5.63 6.01 7.52 Weight of Tare: 15.3 15.27 15.4 Weight of Dry Soil 9.95 756.58% 10.53 13.01 Moisture Content: 57.08% 57.80% Number of Blows: 321 25 21 1 Plastic Limit, PL Plasticity Index, PI Liquid Limit, LL 571 22 35 Plastic. Limit Trial Number: Tin Label Wet Weight +Tare: Dry Weight + Tare: Weight of Water: Weight of Tare:. Weight of dry soil: Moisture Content: Liquid Limit 58.00% mg .�°'. 57.50% C u 57.00% y 56.50% 2 56.00% 10 100 number of blows y = -0.0016x + 0.4055 u Expansion Index Test Sample No: TP2-S1 Client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Project: Another Self -Storage Contact: Stephen Van Der Maelen Soil description: CH, Sandy.Fat Clay . Sample location: Test Pit 2, Sample1 Sample taken by: Sampled by ATC Depth of sample: taken at minus T-0" _ Moisture determination Gross wet wt: 292.8 Gross dry wt: 246.0 Pan wt: 83.4 Net dry wt: 162.6 Moisture Loss: 46.8 Moisture content: 28.8% Density determination Wt of soil & ring: 488.4 Tare of ring: 200.1 Net compacted soil wt: 288.3 Dry Density, pcf: 67.9 Saturation determination Volume of solids: 0.402 Volume of water: 0.313 Volume of air: 0.285 Degree of saturation: 52.4% Gross final wet wt: 365 Gross final dry wt: 226.9 Final moisture loss: 91.2 Final net dry wt: 143.5 Final moisture content: 63.6% This test was performed per ASTM D-4829-88 Star 1 2/21/0411 1 1 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Final: Date: 20 -Feb -04 Tech: B. Carter Time s 0 2 3 Reading 9:40:00 AM 0.0000 2 9:55:00 AM 0.0075 3 10:10:00 AM 0.0140 t 10:30:00 AM 0.0240 s .11:00:00 AM 0.0358 i 11:30:00 AM 0.0478 11:40:00 AM 0.0540 1:00:00 PM 0.0830 2:00:00 PM 0.0882 2:20:00 PM 0.0890 .7:00:00 AM 0.0990 8:00:00 AM 0.0990 9:00:00 AM 0.0990 8:00 0.0990 . Expansion Index: 99 I i Sieve Analysis - Combined Client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Address: 368 Valley View Drive City, State, zip: Paradise, CA Attn.: Stephen Van Der Maelen Project: Another Self -Storage Sample source: Sampled by ATC Sample Description: GC, Clayey GRAVEL w/ Sand Sample location: Test Pit 4, Sample1 Sample depth: taken at minus 2'-0" bio = n/a Cu =1 n/a D30 = n/a CC =1 n/a D60 = n/a r— 100.0% C=7 90.0% LU 80.0% >. 70.0% 60.0% Z 50.0% LL 40.0% z 30.0% U 20.0% w 10.0% a Sample No: TP4-S1 Date: 14 -Apr -04 Tech: B. Carter GRADATION CURVE U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS 1 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS i - Plasticity Index Project: Another Self -Storage Sample No: TP4-S1 Client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Date: 13 -Feb -04 Address 368 Valley View Drive Technician: K. Coy City, State, Zip: Paradise, CA Attention:. Stephen Van. Der Maelen Source: Sampled by ATC Material Description: GC, Clayey GRAVEL w/ Sand Trial Number: Li uid Limit: - 1 . 2 3 4 5 6 Tin Label: 1 2 3 6 - Wet Weight + Tare: 35.65. 37.98 33.16 36.82 Dry Weight + Tare: 30.24 31.78 28.23 30.93 Weight of Water: 5.41 6.20 4.93 5.89 _ Weight of Tar -o Weight of Dry Soil 15.26 14.98 15.25 15.38 16.53 12.85 15.41 Moisture Content: 36.11% 7.51%_ 38.37% 15.52 37.95% Number of Blows: 291 20 24 Liquid Limit, LL JPlastic Limit, PL Plasticity Index, PI 37 19 18 Plastic Limit: Trial Number: Tin Label: Wet Weight + Tare: Dry Weight + Tare: Weight of Water: Weight of Tare: Weight of dry soil: Moisture Content: Liquid Limit 39.00% c 38.50% ' ; 'a'MMM c 38.00% s r0( ♦ 2u� ' v 37.50% m 37.00% ' w 36.50%f 0 36.00%NI X29 i 35.50% ..zs . 10 100 number of blows Y = 0.0016x + 0.4055 o• Liquid Limit 39.00% c 38.50% ' ; 'a'MMM c 38.00% s r0( ♦ 2u� ' v 37.50% m 37.00% ' w 36.50%f 0 36.00%NI X29 i 35.50% ..zs . 10 100 number of blows Y = 0.0016x + 0.4055 e _4 A- Sleel'v I IXX4D. SELF STORAG BOAT STORAGE RV STORAGE #913 April 2006 APR 2 0 2006 Plan Check response for Anothers Self StoraLye v Oroville, CA Stephen Van Der Maelen Oroville, CA CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Ph: (800) 383-4932 Fax: (760) 448-1761 s . 4 lVXA]GE O eel, IXXc_ SELF STORAGE BOAT STORAGE RV STORAGE Date: April 20, 2006 CSG PC #260515 Agency PC #130602-003 To: City of Oroville Building Department CSG Consultants, Inc. Attn: Steven Huang 1700 South Amphlett Blvd, 3rd Floor San Mateo, CA 94402 P: 888/794-2016, F: 650/522-2599 Regarding: Another Self Storage in Oroville, CA Please reference the following for the responses to the plan check review #I dated March 17, 2006: 4. 2nd Review Comments: Provide construction detail of one-hour fire resistive construction with parapets including basis of approval (UL design #, G.A. file #, etc.) or provide a minimum distance of 40 feet between buildings to maintain a minimum distance of 20 to assumed property lines. (CBC Table SA). The owner added 2 -Hour Rated Walls in Buildings 1. 2.3. & 4. which will extend from the finish floor to the under side of the non-comhustihle metal roof deck. TRC Section 504.0.4 item #2.4) 9. Provide building elevation views. 2"d Review Comment: Sheet S14 containing building elevation views has been omitted from the permit set. Please .submit sheet S14 with next submittal for review. Please reference the revised set of plans for Sheet S14. All other responses are by others. If you have any questions, please call me. Thank you, Michael Dale, P.E. Project Engineer CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Ph: (800) 383-4932 Fax: (760) 448-1761 Mar 29 06 12:03P RTC March 29, 2006 (530) 891-4243 p2 APPLIED TES11NG CONSULTANTS MATERIALS TESTING, ENGINEERING AND INSPECTION Stephen Van Der Maclen 368 Valley View Drive; Paradise, CA 95969 Re: Youndation Design review for Another Self Storage — Oroville, Ca Gentlemen: We have recently reviewed the foundation plums and specifications for Another Self Storage located at 5930 Lincoln Blvd in Oroville. A conversation with Project Architect Michael Dalc verified that the design of the: foundation plan was to help mitigate the effects of thu expansive soils on site. Our plan review indicated the following; The footings were shown as eighteen inch deep with #4 continuous top and bottom reinforcing Stec]. Under slab preparation includes prc-saturation to eighteen inches deep within the footing lines. A capillary break of uncompactcd gravel will be placed over grade to allow for swelling. Reinforcing steel will be #4 bars at fifteen inches on center. If sand is used under reinforcing, a vapor barrier or other fabric will be used to separate the sand from the uncompacted gravel layer. Control joints in the four inch concrete slab will be sct at twelve lett six inches on center. We tcel that the foundation design and underslab preparation for the above mentioned project is sufficient to comply with the recommendations contained in section 3.3 (Soil Expansion Potential) and section 3.6 (Slab -on -Grade) of the Geotechnical Report prepared by our firm on April 23, 2004. A representative from our office should be on site to verify. that the different components of this dcsip are executed properly on the jobsitc. ATC is not the foundation design engineer for this project. Designs for consolidation, expansive soils, differential settlement and hearing on fill arc by others. Thank you for using ATC to provide the Geotecimical service for your project. Please call If you have any questions regarding our services described above. Very truly yours, Brad -orsythc Vice President Director of Operations 3060 Thorntree Drive, Suite 10 0 Chico, CA 95973 • Telephone: (530) 891-6625 9Facsimile: (530) 891-4243 OEM } CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE (Part.1 of 2) OLTG-1-C `PROJECT NAME p 0+ l e r � I ^' 1 �el DATE PROJECT ADDRESS %! 5930 1-!'vtrr31n ...�,�o/cQ. Oro VhmQ, (4 9s46 6 Buildina Permit Checked bv-MY-e PRINCIPAL DESIGNER -LIGHTING N.v JVAV& K) DQ %jctyTTi sFtfc?rziC TELEPHONE 5,Y0 5-A-9 -2l 3�� DOCUMENTATION AUTHOR TELEPHONE Enforcement Agency Use GENERAL INFORMATION r DATE OF PLANS Z -oat- 05- TD O LI H N Z IE I✓ n ❑ L LJ Y172 ❑ LZ3 ❑ LZ4 FUNCTION TYPE LJ OUTDOOR LIGHTING ❑ OUTDOOR SIGNS ❑ INDOOR SIGNS PHASE OF CONSTRUCTION ❑ NEW CONSTRUCTION DADDITIONS ❑ .ALTERATIONS STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE This Certificate of Cmmnllanrn lists nnfrinnr linh9n. ---._.._ .._ _ , r., ...,., Regulations. This certificate applies only to building Ilghtin'01t4 I anu o yr ine uamomla cone of g requirements. The documentation preparer hereby certifies that the documentation is accurate and complete. uA�tzv—a y- c The Principal Lighting Designer hereby certifies that the proposed out oor lighting and signs 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. The proposed building has been designed to meet the lighting requirements contained In the applicable parts of Sections 110, 119,130 through 132, 146, and 149 of Title 24, Part 6. Please ✓ One: ❑ I hereby affirm that I am eligible under the provisions of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code to sign this document as the person responsible for Its preparation; and that I am licensed In the State of California as a civil engineer or electrical engineer, or I am a licensed architect. E3.11 affirm that I am eligible under the provisions of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code by section 5537.2 or 6737.3 to sign this document as the person responsible for its preparation; and that I am a licensed contractor.perfonning this work. ❑ I affirm that I am eligible under the provisions of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code to sign this document because it pertains to a structure or type of work described as exempt pursuant to Business and Professions Code Sections 5537,5538 and 6737.1. (These sections of the Business and Professions Code are printed in full in the Nonresidenflal ratan„al I � G� /L tiN J'o/fyS�•y � / d7�� ,...- �r��` �” t LIC. a INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT OUTDOOR LIGHTING COMPLIANCE i WORKSHEETS (✓ box If worksheet Is Included) For detailed instructions on the use of this and. all Energy Etirciency Standards compliance forms, please refer to the Nonresidential Manual published by the Califomia Energy Commission. OLTG-I-C Certificate of ComplianceRequired on plans for all submittals for outdoor lighting. Part 2 of 2 maybe incorporated in schedules on the laps. Either LTG -1-C or OLTG-I-C may be used for signs as follows: 1. Use LTG -1-C if the project consists solely of indoor signs 2. Use LTG -1-C if the project .consists of indoor lighting, and outdoor or indoor signs, but no other outdoor lighting. 3. Use OLTG-I-C if the project consists solely of outdoor signs 4. Use OLT6-1-C if the project consists of outdoor lighting, and indoor or outdoor signs, but Do other indoor Ii htin OLTG-2-C LIGHTING COMPLIANCE SUMMARY. Applicable Parts required for ALL outdoor lighting allowances (Exceptfor Signs) Ud OLTG-3-C AREA CALCULATIONS.WORKSHEETS. Applicable parts required for all outdoor area calculations. ❑ OLTG-4-C SIGN LIGHTING COMPLIANCE. Required for all internally and externally illumin outdoor signs. ated signs, for both indoor and -� Consultants, Inc.. do=•� by CSG an eltts M iewed Pad of the permit package 2005'Nonresidential Compliance Forms tipri12005 Date -,.-LS' 0� CERTIFICATE .OF COMPLIANCE (Pa.rt 2 of 2) OLTG-1-C PROJECT NAME b 5e.w-A .e Lighting Schedules on Plans Show that Outdoor Lighting Meets Allowed Lighting Power L'! Lighting power allowances for general site illumination on OLTG-2-C Part 1 of 4 ❑ Not Applicable ,❑ Ighting power allowances for local ordinances or for security multipliers on OLTG-2-C Part 2 of.4 Not Applicable ,❑ Lighting power allowances for specific applications, other than vehicle service stations with canopies on OLTG-2-C Part 3 of 4 LJ Not Applicable ❑ Lighting power allowances for vehicle service.station canopies on OLTG-2-C Part 4 of 4 Not Applicable ❑ Sign lighting compliance on OLTG-4-C Not Applicable Mandatory Measures on Plans Show that Outdoor Lighting Meets Outdoor Lighting Controls and Equipment Indicate location on plans of Note Block for Mandatory Measure ❑ Installed lighting power has been determined in accordance with § 130(c)1 ❑ Not Applicable ❑ All permanently installed luminaires with lamps rated over 100 watts either have a lamp efficacy of at least 60 lumens per watt or are controlled by a motion sensor § 132(a) - `r -Not Applicable ❑ All Luminaires with lamps rated greater than 175 watts in hardscape areas, including parking lots, building entrances, canopies, and all outdoor sales areas meet the Cutoff Requirements of § 132(b) -Not Applicable C1 All permanently installed outdoor lighting meets the Control Requirements of § 132(c)1 ,❑1 Not Applicable LJ. Buildirig facades, parking lots, garages, canopies, and outdoor sales areas meet the Multi -Level Lighting Requirements of § 132(c)2 ❑ Not Applicable MANDATORY AUTOMATIC CONTROLS CONTROL LOCATION CONTROL IDENTIFICATION CONTROL TYPE Auto Time 3wltch/Photosensor, etc AREA CONTROLLED_ - NOTE TO FIELD -------------- 2005 Nonresidential Compliance Forms April 2005 LIGHTING COMPLIANCE SUMMARY Part 1 of 4 OLTG-2-C PROJECT NAMEinl3t� e r �� l �� DATE LIGHTING POWER ALLOWANCES — GENERAL SITE ILLUMINATION — able 147-A A Allotted B Watts C D Luminaire E F G Lam sBallasts I H I J K Installed Watts L M N O Applications Category r D ? � � � 0 Do o � � CL � WLighting n 3 0 -i F3 Description p o 0 m ror 3c 3 m�� rx va — 3 � m CD. ' M ✓ 0 mm 0 r Z c P md x Zm(Table147-A) 0 CL 39 40 ,.d$ 3 ZD 7t�c�-r» -w •� r�nrcl / 70 70 23/0 P , Total Allotted Watts Total Installed Watts Z 3' 2005 Nonresidential Compliance Forms April 2005 `y F4 Z4, ra kv IZ `y F4 Z4, ra kv `y F4 Z4, ra ! -ILLUMINATED AREA CALCULATION WORKSHEET -1 Including plazas, sidewalks, walkways and bikeways (Part PROJECT NAME jr VI 614-�I g r Q of 5 OLTG-3-C DATE 1 t i�_ . Q Hardscape - Method ( i')—�;?l -6 j . A. Hardscape for automotive vehicular use, including B parking lots, driveways and site roads F G H A B c D E F Actual Paved Area plus 5' 2 Areas (ft ) to Subtract from G H perimeter of adjaoent within Illuminated Area unpaved land. Includes Areas between Actual Paved Area plus 5' Areas between planters and landsp poles or areas less than 10' Wde luminaires that Overiapping Areas Sub Total are greater than Areas of that are enclosed by s mounting Another List Specific Application harclscape on at least 3 Obstructed By Sign or of areas to Subtract able 147-A height distance Application or Building sides rif Applicable Luminaire Areas Other (C +D + Illuminated Area �,7 SCr�swt / rt)-ZC%.r��n /LL_ Structure E + F (B — G) B Hardscape for pedestrian use, Including plazas, sidewalks, walkways and bikeways A B D E F G H Areas (ftZ) to Subtract from within Illuminated Area Actual Paved Area plus 5' Areas between of unpaved land on either side of path of travel. Shall poles or Overlapping luminaires that Areas Sub Total List Specific Application6 include all contiguous paved area before are greater than Areas of mounting Another Building Obstructed By Sign or of areas to Subtract Illuminated Area (Table 147-A) including adjacent grounds. height distance Application or Areas IfA Other (C +D + livable Luminaire Structure E + Fl (R _ r;► i Checklist ❑ 147 c 1 B — Each ortion of all illuminated areas has been assi ned onlyone lighting application, and thea 1i tions are consistent with the actual use of the areas. ❑ § 147(c)1 A - General illumination areas includes only those illuminated areas that are in the bounds of the Application and are within a square pattern around a luminaire_ that is six times the luminaire mounting height, with the luminaire in the middle of the pattern, less any areas that are within buildings, under canopies, beyond property lines, or Obstructed by a signs or other structures. 2005 Nonresidential Compliance Forms April 2005 RAS L I G H T I N' G WP2H70QT TYPE: JOB NAME:OW-rtl,,.f�lAil yi�``(; P,1 DATE: DESCRIPTION Sensor controlled WP2 SmartPack in 42 watt CFL cutoff & 84 watt CFL refractor models. Starting temperature 0° F/ -18°C. Sensor has 180" detection and controls up to 250 watts. 120 volts only. Lamp included. SPECIFICATIONS Cutoff Lens Tempered glass. Finish Chip and fade resistant epoxy powder FROM9 Die cast aluminum, 1/2" NPS tapped holes top, both sides and back for conduit or photocontrol. Hinged refractor frame. Continuous silicone rubber gasket. ORDERING INFORMATION Reflector Specular anodized aluminum, removable for installation. Symmetrical light pattern maximizes distance between fixtures. Refractor Prismatic optics designed to minimize glare and throw light down and out. Heat resistant borosilicate glass. UL Listing Suitable for wet locations. HID fixtures can be wired with 90° C supply wiring if supply wires are routed 3" away from ballast. DIMENSIONS s� 22:9 on 7114- 18.4 cm 14' 95.6 cm --------- PHOTOMETRICS 150w HPS Q10' Mounting Height Mountin Hei ttt Multi tier ' 1.6 10' 1.0 12' .7 16' .4 20' .25 Total Lamp Lamp Starting Amps/ Operating Amps Watts Type Base Ballast 120V 208V 240V 277V Metal Halide 70 ED17 Medium HX-HPF OT .7/.8 .4/.45 .35/.4 .3/.35 Lamp supplied with fixture Factory Installed Options Button Photocontrol /PC Swivel Photocontrol /PCS Add suffix to Catalog Number Double fusing for 208 and 240 volt /FF Tamperproof screws RP Single fusing for 120 and 277 volt /F 6 Watts Muttiplier HIPS MH CFL 175 .9 150PS .9 150 1.0 .8 125PS .7 100 .6 .6 70 .4 .4 42 .2 84 A Input LAMP Initial Lamp Watts ANSI Lumens Hours 70 M98 5600 15000 02006 Note: Specifications may change without notice RAB Lighting, Inc. • 170 Ludlow Ave- Northvale, NJ 07647 • Tel: 888 RAB-1000 • Fax: 888 RAB-1232 - www.rabweb.com NOTE: 1) A MIN 3' OF CONC COVER BETYAIN STEEL AND EARTH. 2) FOOTING AND SLAB TO BE A MONOLITHIC POUR. 3) EXTEND SLAB REINFORCING DOWN TO WITHIN 3' FROM BOTTOM OF F00711K TYP. . #4 AT 24' ,' eparzment Of Code Enforcenert Approved City Of Oroville Dab 1--,2666! 3'-0' 30f FELT 6' THICK .1 O G ° d---------------na=cnnana -- • d a °-I I I= I ° ° a STOP MID BOT OM CONTINUOUS BARS, 12' MIN I_ /4 x 1'—B' LONG TIES AT 12' OC WITH 8' MIN EMBED INTO EASTING WITH ML71 HY-150 ADHESIVE NEW SLAB AND FOOTING AT EXL91TNG Go o- stowi�U6 - FE��o N Corporate - 5650 EI Camino Real, Suite 235 - Carlsbad, rP CA 92008 - (760} 448-1760 -Fax (760} 448-1761 Eastern Division -1450 Flagler Avenue, Suite 15 - Jacksonville, FL 32207 306-9611 d ' - (904) -'Fax (904) 306-9612 Internet - www.mal(osteal.com - into@makosteel.com 9' N Project TIV= ANOTHER SELF STORAGE ®R®VILLE, CA srq ClUl1. orCAuc' \ Data 09-14-06 Omni by: 1 MEZ 09/14/2006 14:21 FAX 17604481761 M 0 STEEL ',(..i:iif,::a:c•��,; y�,'�if:;!' l:Y�' '�.'; f:; .j..�_ - ;rv.. i;; i° :'�:k°>''�^�5� � NS!SC_i�iu:�;y��1�-.•aYyc, :l:ii 3� - ' it'�-':3:y •'.�•• 3. 6 • .2. . �• � , ••.'•�•: �" ' 7.a'•:�'�:.: :r.',' S - �r �.::�J�ifiy�. '?�i}� S ��Y �'�S :�' n •gib• _ .. •.!?t 1•� ?�.�'.-S j.'' :r 'f,�:' ::�'. �:�i Y, W N_ 1 0 v 9002/092 0 CSG Consultants, Inc. These documents have been reviewed by CSG and are part of the permit package. By — Date o� GEOTECHNICAL REPORT For Another Self -Storage Oroville, California April 23, 2004 ATrAPPLIED TESTING CONSULTANTS — 3060 Thorntree Drive, Suite #10 Chico, CA 95973 ^ . AnotherSelf-Storage23 April 2004 _ TABLE OF CONTENTS 1'0 INTRODUCTION ------------------------..-----------..l � — l.] Geoero}-------------------------._-------------'1 . � _ l�� cmp�—.----.-------.-------------------..--------1 l.] Attachments ----------------------------------_--..l _ 2'0 FINDINGS ----_--------'_---_--'_—_-----------..---.,.l _ 2.l Site ----------------------..-------------1 � ^ 2.2 Subsurface Soil Conditions -----------..-----------------. 1 _ 2.3 Ground Water ............................................................................................................... 2 _ 3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................ 2 � 3.1 Site Clearing ................................................................................................................ 2 _ 3.2 Site Preparation .-----------------------------------.. 2 � — 3.3 Soil Expansion Pmteotiu}--.---...--..----...-------.---------. 3 � 3,4 Site Geology & S ------------------....-----------4 _ 3.5 Foundation Design----------------------------------. 5 _ 3.6 S ------------------------------------..6 � 3.7 Pavement Design ---------------.-------------------.. 6 _ 4.0 LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................. 6 � -' Figures: Figure l: Site Location Figure 2: Test Pit Location Plan — Figure 3: Unified Soil Classification System Appendix A—Fiold & Logs Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 General. We have completed a geotechnical engineering investigation of the site for the proposed _ storage units, west of Lincoln Blvd and south of V-1 Road in Oroville, California. The purpose of our investigation was to explore the site, investigate subsurface soil conditions, and to provide design recommendations for the preparation of the proposed development. This report represents the results of our work. The site was saturated at the time of our initial investigation 28 January 2004, additional testing resumed on 6 April 2004 when the saturated condition no longer existed. 1.2 Scone The scope of our work included: a field exploration consisting of five test pits, testing and analysis of soil samples obtained from the number 1, 2.and 4 test pits, and.the preparation of a report of our findings and recommendations. 1.3 Attachments This report contains Site and Test Pit Location Plans, Profile Logs for Test Pit 1 to 5, and our Laboratory Test Data Sheets (including Atterburg Limits, Gradations and Expansion Index). See Figures and Appendices. 2.0 FINDINGS 1I. -Site Description The relatively square shaped site is located at the west side of Lincoln Blvd and south of V-1. Road in Oroville, Califomia, and is approximately 13 acres in size. The proposed development for the site is for approximately L4 acres of mini storage units and a office. On the date of our visits, 28 January 2004, and 6 April 2004 no recent site grading was apparent. No trees or shrubs are located on the site. 2.2 Subsurface Soil Conditions - With a backhoe, five excavations were made to a depth of about two to eight feet, as seen in Test Pit Logs 1 to 5. It was determined that the tests pit were of sufficient depth to represent the soil profile in that area of the site. The soil varies throughout the site Sandy Elastic SILT - w/ Gravel, MH, Sandy Fat CLAY, CH, and Clayey GRAVEL w/ Sand, GC was found. After the test pits were dug and soil samples taken, the • holes were backfilled with excavated material and not properly compacted. \\Otto\C\Work\2004\011-Oroville soils\report2.doc page 1 Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 2.3 Ground Water Ground water evidence was discovered in Test Pit l .at the time of our exploration. Saturated soil was. encountered down to two and one half feet. 3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS At the time that this report is being prepared, it is our understanding that the proposed construction at this site consists of a multi -unit mini storage complex with slab -on -grade foundations. The recommendations contained' in this report are based upon these assumptions. Prior to commencement of earthwork of the site a pre -construction meeting will be required in order to ensure that the recommendations included in this report are conveyed and performed in the manner in which they were intended. A representative of our office, the builder, the general engineer, the structural engineer and/or architect, and the governing. jurisdiction should all be in attendance. A minimum of 72 hours notice will be requiredto coordinate scheduling. 3.1 Site Clearing Upon arrival to the site very little site work had been done. Prior to site grading, all surface weeds and organics should be removed from the construction areas. This material can either be removed or stockpiled for later use in landscape areas. After clearing has been completed, a representative of our office shall inspect the site to verify that all vegetation and loose debris have been removed prior to the commencement of construction. The extent of soil removal may vary depending upon the findings of this subsequent inspection. Loosesoils may be exposed after'scarification requiring further removal. 3.2 Site Preparation The soil conditions encountered by our office are classified as highly expansive and precautions should be taken in order to limit the amount of damage caused by the expansive soil. If imported fill material is to be used, follow the guidelines in the following two paragraphs for specifications of this material. Prior to placement of engineered fill within the pad areas, all tree stumps and roots shall be removed and replaced with compacted engineered fill. The exposed subgades should be _ moisture conditioned and compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction, based on test method ASTM D1557. Engineered fill should be placed in 8" loose lifts, moisture conditioned and also compacted to 90% relative compaction. The compacted thickness of each layer shall not exceed 6 inches: Compaction control and testing should be performed by a qualified testing agency to insure the recommendations of this report are followed. Depending on the amount of rock encountered in the on-site or import soils. We recommend that compaction testing be performed using Sand Cone methods (per ASTM D1556), or Nuclear Density methods (per ASTM D2922). \\0tto\C\W6rk\2004\011-Or6ville soils\report1doc page 2 Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 At the time this report was prepared, it was uncertain whether or not enough on-site soils could be generated to complete construction of the building pads to the proposed finish grades. If imported off-site material is required to complete the pads, it must be approved by a representative from our office and meet the following minimum criteria. Import material must have a plasticity index of less than 4; be non -expansive (EI<20); have 100% passing the 3" sieve; 30% to 60% passing the #4 sieve; and no more than 20% passing the #200 sieve. 3.3 Soil Expansion Potential The surface and near surface soils encountered at the site were found to contain a certain amount of clay; which has potential for volumetric changes. An. Expansion Index test was performed per UBC Standard 18-2 on two samples, which in our judgment contained the _. most expansive potential clay (see Attachment 1). The test results indicated an E.I. of 99, 94 and 66, which is considered as having high expansion potential, per UBC Table 18 -I -B. A qualified representative from our office should inspect the rough foundation excavations in order to determine if the following expansive soil recommendations are required. There are several solutions that will eliminate or reduce the potentially deleterious effects of expansive — soils. Slabs on grade and pavements are particularly sensitive to swell and shrinkage of the soils subgrade. A list of options is provided below: 3.3.1 Remove all expansive materials and replace with non -expansive fills. 3.3.2 Modify the existing soils with a chemical treatment, (lime, gypsum, concrete, etc.). If .this option is chosen contact our office for recommended design requirements. 3.3.3 Change to a raised floor foundation and use deepened stem -walls engineered as grade beams capable of spanning 4'-0" voids or swells, or with bottom of footing placed beneath the expansive materials. 3.3.4 Design slabs to resist movements ie.; postAension slab, waffle: slabs, or other reinforcing methods. 3.3.5 Modify construction to conform to the following list of eight recommendations. 3.3.5.1 Extend the perimeter footings to a depth of 18" below the surrounding natural grade. The purpose of this is to minimize the effects of seasonal variations in moisture content of the supporting soil. The deeper foundations will also help — minimize desiccation of the soil from water. -absorption through the roots of adjacent shrubbery and/or trees used in landscaping. 3.3.5.2 Do not landscape next to the perimeter of the foundation with shrubbery and/or trees. The trees may grow root systems that can extend under the foundation. 3.3.5.3 Install a minimum of one No. 4 reinforcing bar at the top and bottom of all perimeter and strip footings to resist bending stresses. that may result from changes in soil volume. \\Otto\C\Work\2004\01 I-Oroville soils\report2.doc page 3 Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 3.3.5.4 Footing trenches should be pre-soaked for a minimum of six hours prior to placing concrete. Excess water should be removed or allowed to soak in. Care must be taken to prevent a muddy condition at the time of concrete placement and to prevent mud on the surface of the. reinforcing bars.. The soil in the trench - bottoms should be moist, but firm at the time concrete is placed. 3.3.5.5 Provide a 12" deep strip footing under interior walls to footings to help minimize wall cracking that may result from changes in soil volume. Install a minimum of one No. 4 reinforcing bar at the top and bottom of the strip footing. 3.3.5.6 A.minimum of 4" of crushed. rock or %" x #4 gravel should be installed under the floor slab to act as a capillary break. After the gravel is placed the area should be _..._ soaked uniformly for a period of six hours before placing concrete. Install a plastic moisture barrier and a 2" sand blanket over the gravel to limit dampness on the slab surface during winter months. 3.3.5.7 Any 6 x 6 WWF should be replaced with No. 3 reinforcing bars spaced a maximum of 15" on center in the mid -depth of the floor slab to resist bending stresses that may result from changes in soil volume. The slab depth should be a minimum of 4". -- 3.3.5.8 Contraction joints should be installed at intervals not to exceed twenty feet in any direction. Such joints may be formed by deep (3/4") grooving or by the installation of Zip Strips. The eight options listed above are not intended to exclude other engineered solutions. The completed engineering may include more than one of the several options. Options one and two are intended to eliminate soil expansion. Options three and four are intended to resist the effects. of the soil expansion. Option five is. intended to reduce the amount of soil expansion. The -best solutions are obviously one and two, but they may not. be feasible from an economic standpoint. Options three, four, and five have been provided as options to. reduce but not eliminate damage to structures however, even under ideal conditions the risks for damage to structures due to the swelling and shrinking of soils are not completely eliminated. 3.4 Site Geoloizv & Seismicit Butte County and the surrounding area are located on the western portion of a faulted and downwarped series of ancient metamorphic rocks of the Western Sierra Nevada Mountain Range. Granitic rocks associated with Mesozoic thrust faulting are located in the eastern - portion of the County. In .the western portion of the County, gently folded younger and sometimes faulted sediments. of the Sacramento Valley overlie older metamorphic rocks similar to those of the Sierra Nevada. The stratigraphic and structural trend of metamorphic - rocks is generally northward with steeply dipping bedding in most places. The formations and geologic structure of the County appear to be controlled or strongly modified by Cenozoic faults extending along the western portion of the Sierra Nevada Mountains and \\0tto\C\Work\2004\01 I-Oroville soils\report2.doc page4 Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 trending north:northwest along with the Big Bend, Camel Peak, Dogwood Peak, Rich Bar, and Melones faults, most of which lie to the north and east of Butte County in the area of granitic intrusions. Most Sierra Nevada faults are a combination of strike .slip and thrust movements. (Bailey, Geology of Northern California, California Division of Mines and Geology.) The site is located in Northern California west of the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountain Range and is not within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. According to the State of California and the USGS, there are no faults running through the site. According to the book _ "Maps of Known Active Fault Near -Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada". prepared by California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology in cooperation with SEAOC, the site is an area of inactive faults. However, the Cleveland Hill fault lies seven kilometers to the East and should be considered potentially active. Earthquake related ground shaking should be expected during the life of structures constructed on this site. The maximum probable earthquake in this area is a Richter magnitude 6.7 event. Properly designed structures, using the current Uniform Building Code requirements, should reduce the damage from an earthquake event Soil Profile Type: SD Seismic Zone: 3 Seismic Zone Factor: 0.30 Seismic Source Type: B Seismic Coefficients: Ca 0.36, CV= 0.54 Near Source Factor: Na 1.0, Nv= 1.2 3.5 Foundation Design - Our field investigation and laboratory test results indicate that the existing native soils, at the proposed site, are adequate for support of a small retail, lightly loaded structures. The retail building proposed for this site may be supported upon conventional spread footings and continuous perimeter footings. Based on results of our laboratory testing performed on samples of the predominant soil type encountered, foundations should., be designed in accordance with the two alternatives provided below. For this project, finish pad subgrade shall be defined as, "the surface on which the capillary break/moisture barrier materials are placed." Foundations bearing on fill materials may be sized for vertical compression loads in accordance with the Uniform Building Code for Class 5 materials, utilizing .maximum allowable soil pressures of 1,000 pounds per square foot (psf) for dead and live loads, and may be :increased to 1,250 pounds for all loads including wind or seismic forces. Lateral sliding resistance may be computed using a friction coefficient of, µ = 0.25. Foundation designs accounting for lateral bearing may use a lateral bearing pressure of 100 pcf. \\Otto\C\Work\2004\01I-Oroville,soils\repor12.doc page 5 Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 Plasticity index testing, along with gradation analysis, were performed on four samples that - are representative of the subsurface soil types encountered. The results of these tests are included in the attachments. Although the structural engineer should make the final determination of foundation reinforcement, we recommend as a minimum, that foundations contain a single #4 bar placed at the top and bottom of all foundations. It is further recommended, that foundation reinforcement should be consistent. 3:6 Slab -on -Grade Interior slab -on -grade floors should be underlain with a 4" layer of free -draining gravel. The gravel should be graded, such that, 100% passes the 1" sieve, and not more than 2% passes the #4 sieve. Over the gravel; should be a durable vapor barrier of visqueen, which is 10 ml. or thicker. These will both serve as a capillary moisture deterrent, as well as, to promote uniform curing of the slab concrete. For slab -on -grades, ' we recommend that slabs be reinforced with reinforcing bars or welded — wire fabric. This reinforcing will minimize cracking, if minor differential settlement occurs beneath the slab. It is important that the slab reinforcing be located in the middle of the slab, and be held in place during concrete placement. Contraction joints should be installed at intervals, not to exceed, twenty feet in any one direction. Such joints may be formed by deep (3/4") wet grooving while the concrete is still — plastic, or by the installation of Zip Strips. 3.7 Pavement Design The Project Civil Engineer had advised our office, that pavement design would not be required within this report. However, we were requested to provide R -Value testing on — samples. of material encountered. within the proposed street 'sections. One excavation was made within or near the street section and two. samples were obtained for R -Value testing. _ For locations of the sample, refer to the Test Pit Location Plan, Figure 2. The depths and results of R -Value testing are as follows: It is our recommendation that the.pavement design be based upon the values obtained from TP3. This R -Value is more representative of the type of soil that was encountered. The results from TP5 shall be disregarded and not used in the design. Table 1.0 = R -Value Test Result Test Pit # Sample Depth Exudation Pressure (psi) R -Value TP3 16" 300 19 TP5 18" 300 <5 4.0 LIMITATIONS Our recommendations are based upon the information provided regarding the proposed construction, combined with our analysis of site conditions revealed by the field exploration \\0tto\C\Work12004\011-Oroville soils6port2.doc page -6 Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 and laboratory testing programs: We have used our best engineering judgment, based upon the information provided and the data generated from our investigation. Our test pits were dug in locations determined to be representative of the site. However, if the proposed construction is'modified or re-sited, or if it is discovered during. construction that subsurface conditions differ from .those encountered at theboring locations, we should be afforded the opportunity to review the new information or changed conditions, to determine if our conclusions and recommendations must. be modified. We do not claim that our recommendations are suitable for discovery items or other site changes other than the conditions and testing specifically discussed in this report. Furthermore we cannot be held responsible for discovery items or other site changes. If there is a substantial lapse of time between the submission of our report and the start of _ construction at the site, or if the conditions have changed due to natural causes or construction operations at, or adjacent to the site, we urge that this report be reviewed to determine the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations considering the changed __. conditions and time lapse. This report should not be used after 3 years. We would appreciate the opportunity to review the final plans and specifications to -- determine if the intent of our recommendations has been implemented in those documents. Applied Testing Consultants is. -not the foundation design engineer for this project. Design for consolidation, differential settlement and bearing on fill materials are by others. We emphasize that Applied Testing Consultants does not represent that these test results - and/or recommendations are suitable, whether or not modified, for any other site or development on this site, other than the one for which they were. specifically prepared. Applied Testing Consultants disclaims responsibility for these test results and/or recommendations if they are used whole or in part at any other site or type of development on this site. Applied Testing Consultants (ATC) Brad Forsythe Vice -President & Director of Operations Charles Roberts, PE, MS C-038692 Exp. 3/31/05 Staff Engineer \\0tto\C\Work\2004\01 I-Oroville soilArepor12.doc page 7 Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 Figures WIT. iw I Env - I via p I wa �ifV _41 Y Nos -11 NIA PR m ,�p -r, AV.; ��\, sz ifqv VI oil A�, A Put; -W 9 ZZ EEO= IA i6" A .4.a Ok Nk -15 R6_ Vj bg do I. EP AIMAt, W:3 MEL_ mm 92 �7,- �*Lokme.: - - -- - - - - - -. _ OROVILLE MINI STORAGE Figure 2 APPLIED TESTING CONSULTANTS 3060 Thorntree Drive, Suite #10 - Chico, CA 95973 - Telephone: (530) 891-6625 - Facsimile: (530) 891-4243 C UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMBOLS CODE TYPICAL NAMES Grain Size Bclow/ ft. GW in Millimeters Well graded gravels or gravel - sand mixtures, little or no fines N GRAVELS GP � � � G O Poorly graded gravels or gravel -sand mixtures, little of no fines c O Z (More than } of coarse 76.2 to 4.76 coarselse (c) 3" to 3/4" 76.2 to 19.1 fine ( f) 3/4" to No. 4 C4 A fraction > No. 4 sieve size) GM 4.76 to 0.074 Silty gravels, gravel - sand - silt mixtures A — a 4.76 to 2.00 medium (m) No. 10 to No. 40 2.00 to 0.420 w.o .� Z o. ; No. 40 to No. 200 GC ZZClayey gravels, gravel - sand - clay mixtures Below 0.074 -C: wc S W d 4 . , : Well graded sands or gravely sands; little or no fines N y N c SANDS SP .Poorly graded sands of gravely sands, little or now fines p(More than } of coarse SM _ Silty sands, sand - silt mixtures U fraction < No. 4 sieve size) SC Clayey sands, sand - clay mixtures ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock , silty or clayey fine SILTS & CLAYS sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity z CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravely clays, sandy cn v S LL < 50 clays, siltyelays, lean clays OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity c � ,mow > r� .N MH I I I I I I III I Inorganic silts, micaceous of diatomaceous fine sandy or silty YSILTS & CLAYS I I I I 1 coils, elastic silts N LZ w o. CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays LL>50 OH ;" Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silty clays, organic silts HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT_ _ _ _ = Peat and other highly organic soils OTHER SYMBOLS a= Drive Sample: 2-1/2" O.D. California sampler = Drive Sample: no recovery 17 = Initial Water Level �f =Final Water Level — — — = Estimated or gradational material change line = Observed material change line Laboratory: Tests PI = Plasticity Index EI = Expansion Index UCC = Unconfined Compression Test TR = Triaxial Compression Test GR = Gradation Analysis (Sieve) CON = Consolidation Test GRAIN SIZE CLASSIFICATION CLASSIFICATION RANGE OF GRAIN SIZE Description U.S. Standard Grain Size Bclow/ ft. sieve size in Millimeters BOULDERS Above 12" Above 305 COBBLES 12" to 3" 305 to 76.2 GRAVEL 3" to No. 4 76.2 to 4.76 coarselse (c) 3" to 3/4" 76.2 to 19.1 fine ( f) 3/4" to No. 4 19.1 to 4.76 SAND . No. 4 -to No. 200 4.76 to 0.074 coarse ( c) No. 4 to No. 10 4.76 to 2.00 medium (m) No. 10 to No. 40 2.00 to 0.420 fine (f) No. 40 to No. 200 0.420 to 0.074 SILT & CLAY Below No. 200 Below 0.074 CONSISTENCY CLASSIFICATION COHESIVE SOILS GRANULAR SOILS Description Below/ ft. Description Bclow/ ft. Very Soft <3 Very Loose <5 Soft 3-5 Loose 5-15 Medium ( firm ) 6.10 Medium Dense 16.40 Stiff II -20 Dense 41.65 Very Stiff 2140 Very Dense > 65 Hard >40 Figure 3 APPLIED TESTING CONSULTANTS 3060 Thorntree Drive, Suite #10 —Chico, CA 95973 - Telephone: (530) 891-6625 - Facsimile: (530) 891-4243 Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 Appendix A Profile Log for Test Pit # 1 Steven Van Der Maelen. Drov;lle Stnrnoe r/n;tc n.,,,,rna re Depth Log — ..b.. u,y Soil Description IIIIIII Redish-Brown Sandy Elastic SILT w/ Gravel MH I I (high amount of ground water was present) I IIIIIII I I I I IIIIIII Sam le TPI -S1 I'-0" -Gradin PI EI p @- g• , 2 IIIIIII I i I 1111111 I IIII Light Redish-Brown Sandy Elastic SILT w/ Gravel MH 3 i IIIIIII I I I 4 1.111111 I I I I III 1 1 1 1 I�I�I�I . Sample TP 1-S2 @ -4'-0" 5 1'111111 I I I I I I I I 6 111111 I I I IIIIIII I I i I 1111111 7 1111111 IIIIIII I I I I I�I�I�I Sample TPI -S3 @ -7'-6" - Grading, PI, EI 8 I I I I Terminated @ -8'-0" 9 10 Attachment (1) APPLIED TESTING CONSULTANTS 3060 Thorntree Drive, Suite #10 - Chico, CA 95973 - Telephone: (530) 891-6625 - Facsimile: (530) 891-4243 Profile Log for Test Pit # 2 Steven Van DerMaefen_ Orm'Hlo.cInenoo n.,;f� n ..:ne fA Depth Log — --- anrwuruuun uu:rr April v, zvv9 Soil Description Redish-Brown Sandy. Fat Clay w/ Organic Material 1 Redish-Brown Sandy Fat Clay w/ Minor Cobble 2 Redish-Brown Sandy Fat Clay CH 3_ Sample TP2-S 1 @ -3'-0" - Grading. PI, EI Yellow Sandy Fat Clay 4 Sample TP2-S2 @ -4'-6" 5 6 7 Terminated @ -7'-0" 8 9 10 Attachment (2) -- APPLIED TESTING CONSULTANTS 3060 Thorntree Drive, Suite #10 - Chico, CA 95973 - Telephone: (530) 891-6625 - Facsimile: (530) 891-4243 Profile Log for Test Pit # 3 ,.Steven Van Der Maelen. OrnvilleRlnmap l/—ue 1)—;no re – --- Depth Log --g—un uum. npru u, -uu i Soil Description Redish-Brown Sandy Fat Clay w/ Minor Cobble 1 Sample TP3-S1 @ -P-0" Sample TP3-S2 @ -1'-6" R -Value 19 2 3 4 Yellow Sandy Fat Clay 5 Terminated @ -5'-0" Cobble- Hard Pan 6 7 8 9 10 Attachment (3) - APPLIED TESTING CONSULTANTS 3060 Thorntree Drive, Suite #10 - Chico, CA 95973 - Telephone: (530) 891-6625 - Facsimile: (530) 891-4243 Profile Log for Test Pit # 4 ,Steven Van Der Maelen, Oroville Storage Units, Oroville, CA Field b Depth Log wraoguuvn ciuie: rypru o, cuuq Soil Description Clayey Gravel w/ Sand GC 1 Sample. TP4-S 1 @ -2'-011. 2 3 Yellow Sandy Fat Clay 4 5 Sample TP4-S2 @ -5'-0" 6 Terminated @ -6'-0" 7 8 9 10 Attachment (4) APPLIED TESTING CONSULTANTS 3060 Thomtree Drive, Suite #10 - Chico, CA 95973 - Telephone: (530) 891-6625 - Facsimile: (530) 891-4243 Profile Log for Test Pit # 5 Steven Van DerMaelen nrnvillo.C/nmao I].;iv n..,:n re Depth Log - •.6 •• nY•„ u, —y Soil Description Clayey Gravel w/ Sand 1 Sample TPS -S1 @ -P-6" 2 Terminated @ -2'-0" 3 4 • 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Attachment (S) - APPLIED TESTING CONSULTANTS 3060 Thorntree Drive, Suite #10 - Chico, CA 95973 - Telephone: (530) 891-6625 - Facsimile: (530) 891-4243 _ Another Self -Storage 23 April 2004 Appendix B Sieve Analvsis - Combinp-d Sample No: TPI -SI client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Date: 28 -Jan -04 Address: 368 Valley View Drive Tech: B. Carter C4, State, Zip: Paradise, CA Attn.: Stephen Van Der Maelen .Project: Another Self -Storage Sample source: Sampled by ATC Sample Descriptlom MH, Sandy Elastic SILT w/ Gravel Sample location: Test Pit 1, Sample1 Sample depth: taken at minus V-0" D10= n/a C11 = n/a Edao = ri/a CC = n/a E0 = n/a GRADATION CURVE U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS. �-.100.0% -11 90.0% H-1 111 1 1111111 1 Lu 80.0% } 70.0% - - 60.0%— — -- - 14 Z 50:0% - 1 LL 40.0% z 30.0% — --- V 20.0% - W .10.0% ---- LU 1.00 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS Sample No: TPI -SI Date: 6 -Feb -04 Technician: B. Carter 51 6 Liquid Limit, LL Plastic Limit, PL rticity—i—ndex, PI 49 1 31 18 Plastic Limit: Trial Number: Tin Label: Wet Weight + Tare: Dry Weight + Tare: Weight of Water: Weight of Tare: Weight of dry soil: Moisture Content: Elasticity Index Project:. Another Self -Storage Client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Address 368 Valley View Drive City, State, Zip: Paradise, CA Attention: Stephen Van Der Maelen Source: Sampled by ATC Material Description: MH, Sandy Elastic SILT w/ Gravel Liquid Limit: Trial Number: 1 21 31- 4 Tin Label: 6 7 8 Wet Weight + Tare: 32.71 35.45 35.26 Dry Weight + Tare: 27.17 28.95 28.62 Weight of Water: 5.54 6.50 6.64 Weight of Tare: 15.44 15.37 15.38 Weight of Dry Soil: 11.73 13.58 Moisture Content: 47.23% 47.86% .13.24 50.15% Number of Blows: 331 27 21 Sample No: TPI -SI Date: 6 -Feb -04 Technician: B. Carter 51 6 Liquid Limit, LL Plastic Limit, PL rticity—i—ndex, PI 49 1 31 18 Plastic Limit: Trial Number: Tin Label: Wet Weight + Tare: Dry Weight + Tare: Weight of Water: Weight of Tare: Weight of dry soil: Moisture Content: Expansion Index Test Sample No: TP1-S1 Client: Stephen.Van Der Maelen Project: Another Self -Storage Contact: Stephen Van Der Maelen Soil description: MH, Sandy Elastic SILT w/ Gravel Sample location: Test Pit 1, Sample1 Sample taken by: Sampled by ATC Depth of sample: taken at minus 1'-0" Moisture determination Gross wet wt.. 360.5 Gross dry wt: 324.2 Pan wt: 83.5 Net dry wt: 240.7 Moisture Loss: 36.3 Moisture content: 15.1 Density determination Wt of soil & ring: 551.5 Tare of ring: 200.1 Net compacted soil wt: 351.4 Dry Density, pcf: 92.6 Saturation determination Volume of solids: 0.549 Volume of water: 0.224 Volume of air: 0.228 Degree of saturation: 49.6% dross final wet wt: 409.2 Gross final dry wt: 302.7 Final moisture loss: 91.2 Final net dry wt: 219.2 Final moisture content: 41.6% This test was performed per ASTM D-4829-88 Star 2/07/04 1 11 1 1 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Final: Date: 6 -Feb -04 Tech: B. Carter Time d 7 8 s 0 2 3 Reading 10:40:00 AM 0.0000 > 10:50:00 AM 0:0170 3 11:00:00 AM 0.0318 1 11:30:00 AM 0.0390 i 12:00:00 PM 0.0531 1:00:00 PM 0.0556 2:00:00 PM '0.0606 7:30:00 AM 0.0662 8:30:00 AM 0.0662 9:00:00 AM 0.0662 7:30 0.0662 Expansion Index: 66 � � J Sieve Analysis - Combined Client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Address: 368 Valley View: Drive City, State, zip: Paradise, CA Attn.: Stephen Van Der Maelen Project: Another Self -Storage . Sample source: Sampled by ATC - Semple Description: MH, Elastic SILT w/ Gravel Sample location: Test Pit'1, Sample3 Sample depth: taken at minus 7'-6" 100.0% 1,34.3.7 g 0.00 Start Wt, Course: Start Wt. fine: 1 480.0 g 2 172 Sample No: TPI -S3 Date: 12 -Feb -04 Tech: B. Carter Steve Size Weight Retained Percent retained Cumulative Percent Specifled Retained Passing 4 1 /2 0.0 100.0% 4 0.0 100.0% 31/2 0.0 g 100.0% 3 0.00 100.0% 2 172 0.0 q 100.0% 2 0.0 Q 100.0% 1 1/2 120.8 q 9.0% 9.0% 91.0% 1 71.3 q 5.3% 14.3% 85.7% 3/4 0.0 q 14.3% 85.7% 1/2 0.0 g 14.3% 85.7% 3/8. 1..9 q 0.1% 14.4%. 85.6% #4 13.3 g 1.0% 15.4% 84.6% #8 1.5 g 0.3% 15.7% 84.3% #16 0.9 0.2% 15.9% 84.1% #30 1.3 q 0.2% 16.1% 83.9% #50 2.2 q 0.4% 16.5% 83.5% #100 2.4 q 0.4%1 16.9%1 83.10 #200 12.5 g 2.2%1 19.1%1. 80.90/o This test was .performed according to Cal Trans Test 202 Sieve Analysis - Combined Client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Address: 368 Valley View Drive City, State, Zip: Paradise, CA Attn.: Stephen Van Der Maelen Project: Another Self -Storage Sample source: Sampled by ATC _ Sample Description: MH, Elastic SILT w/ Gravel Sample location: Test Pit 1, Sample3 Sample depth: taken at minus 7'-6" D10 = n/a Cu = n/a D30 = n/a CC =1 n/a - iso = n/a I— 100.0% 90.0% Lu 80.0% y. 70.0% 60.0% Z 50.0% u, 40:0% z 30.0% V 20.0% W 10.0% 0- Sample No: TPI -S3 Date: 12 -Feb -04 Tech: B. Carter GRADATION CURVE U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS 1 I 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 1 e Project: Client: Address City, State, Zip: Attention: Source: Material Description: Trial Number: Tin Label: Wet Weight + Tare: Dry Weight + Tare: Weight of Water: . Weight of Tare: Weight of Dry Soil: Moisture Content: Number of Blows: Liquid Limit, LL 71 Trial Number: Tin Label: Wet Weight + Tare: Dry Weight + Tare: Weight of Water: Weight of Tare: Weight of dry soil: Moisture Content: 72.00% 71.50% 71.00% o 70.50% 70.00% 69.50% 0 69.00% 2 68.50% 10 Plasticity Index Another Self -Storage Stephen Van Der Maelen 368 Valley View Drive Paradise, CA Stephen Van Der Maelen Sampled by ATC MH, Elastic SILT w/ Gravel Liquid Limit: 1 2 3 6 7 8 34.87 .35.991 34.66 26.93 27.58 .26.59 7.94 8.411 8.07 15.41 15.55 15.35 11.52 12.03 11.24 68.92% 69.91 % 71.80% 34 27 22 Plastic Limit, PL 37 Plastic Limit: . Sample No: TP1-S3 Date: 13 -Feb -04 - Technician: K: Coy 5 6 Plasticity Index, PI • 34 number of blows 100 Y = -0.0016x + 0.4055 Pl p Expansion Index Test i Sample No: TPI -S3 client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Project: Another Self -Storage Contact: Stephen Van Der Maelen Soil description: MH, .Elastic SILT w/ Gravel Sample location: Test Pit 1, Sample3. Sample taken by: Sampled by ATC Depth of sample: taken at minus T-6" Moisture determination Gross wet wt: 292.8 Gross dry wt: 246.0 _ Pan wt: 83.4 Net'dry wt: 162.6 Moisture Loss: 46.8 Moisture content: Density determination Wt of soil & ring: 488.4 Tare of ring: 200.1 Net compacted soil wt: 288.3 Dry Density, pcf: 67.9 Saturation determination _ Volume of solids: 0.402 Volume of water: 0.313 Volume of air: 0.285 Degree of.saturation: 52.4% Gross final wet wt: 365 Gross final dry wt: 226.9 Final moisture loss: 91.2 Final net dry wt: 143.5 Final moisture content: 63.6% This. test was performed per ASTM D-4829-88 Star 11 1' 2/21/041 1: 1� 1; 1E 1i 1E 1£ .2C Final: Date: 20 -Feb -04 Tech: B. Carter Time Reading 8:45:00 AM 0.0000 >. 9:00:00 AM 0.0120 s 9:15:00 AM 0.0181 t 9:30:00 AM 0.0255 i 10:00:00 AM 0.0353 10:45:00 AM 0.0470 11:15:00 AM 0.0592 12:15:00 PM 0.0728 1:00:00 PM 0.0766 1:30:00 PM 0.0797 2:00:00 PM 0.0811 7:00:00 AM 0.0940 8:00:00 AM . 0.0940 9:00:00 AM 0.0940 7:00 0.0940 Expansion Index: 94 Sieve Analysis - Combined _ Client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Address: 368 Valley View Drive UJ City, State, Zip: Paradise, CA _ Attn.: Stephen Van Der Maelen .Project: Another Self -Storage Sample source: Sampled by ATC - Sample Description: CH, Sandy Fat Clay ir Sample location: Test Pit 2, Sample1 z Sample depth: taken at minus 3'-0" Dto = n/a CU =n/a Dia n%a CC = n/a Dso = n/a E- 100.0% 90.0% UJ 80.0% )- 70.0% 60.0% Z 50.0% ir 40.0% -- z 30.0% U 20.0% - W 10.0% a ce Sample No: TP2-S1 Date: 8 -Apr -04 Tech: B. Carter GRADATION CURVE U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS 10. 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS _ Plasticity Index _ Project: Another Self -Storage Sample No: TP2-S1 Client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Date: 13 -Feb -04 Address City, State, Zip: 368 Valley View Drive Paradise, CA Technician: K. Coy - Attention: Stephen Van Der Maelen Source: Sampled by ATC Material Description: CH, Sandy Fat Clay • Trial Number: Liquid Limit: . 1 2 Tin Label 3. 41 5 6 1 2 3 _ Wet Weight + Tare: 30.88 31.81 35.93 Dry Weight + Tare: 25.25 25.8 28.41 Weight of Water: 5.63 6.01 7.52 Weight of Tare: 15.3 15.27 15.4 _ Weight of Dry Soil: 9.95 10.53 13.01 Moisture Content: 56.58% 57.08% 57.80% Number of Blows: 321,25 21 Limit, PL Plasticity Index, PI Liquid Limit, LLPlastic 57 22 35 Plastic. Limit - Trial Number: Tin Label: Wet Weight +Tare: Dry Weight + Tare: Weight of Water: Weight of Tare:. Weight of dry soil: .58.00% .dc. 57.50% c v 57.00% y 56.50% 2 56.00% 10 Liquid Limit 100 number of blows y = -0.0016x + 0.4055 Expansion -Index 'Test _ sample No: TP2-S1 Client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Project: Another Self -Storage Contact: Stephen Van Der Maelen Soil description: CH, Sandy.Fat Clay. . Sample location: Test Pit 2, Samplel Sample taken by: Sampled by ATC Depth of sample: taken at minus 3'-0" Moisture determination Gross wet wt: 292.8 Gross dry wt: 246.0 Pan wt: 83.4 Net dry wt: 162.6 Moisture Loss:F 46.8 Moisture content: 28.8% - Density determination Wt of soil & ring: 488.4 Tare of ring: 200.1 Net compacted soil wt: 288.3 Dry Density, pcf: 67.9 Saturation determination Volume of solids: 0.402 Volume of water: 0.313 Volume of air: 0.285 Degree of saturation: 52.4% Gross final wet wt: 365 Gross final dry wt: 226.9 Final moisture loss: 91.2 Final net dry wt: 143.5 Final moisture content: 63.6% This test was performed per ASTM D-4829-88 Stai 1 2/21/0411 1 1 1 15 16 17 18 19 20 Final: Date: 20 -Feb -04 Tech: B. Carter Time 0 2 3 4 Reading t: 9:40:00 AM 0.0000 2 9:55:00 AM 0.0075 3 10:10:00 AM 0.0140 4 10:30:00 AM 0.0240 5 11:00:00 AM 0.0358 5. 11:30:00 AM 0.0478 r - -11 :40:00 AM 0.0540 3 1:00:00 PM 0.0830 i 2:00:00 PM 0.0882 2:20:00 PM 0.0890 .7:00:00 AM 0.0990 8:00:00 AM 0.0990 9:00:00 AM 0.0990 8:00 0.0990 Expansion Index: 99 e�> �] ar Sieve Analysis - Combined Client: Stephen Van Der Maelen Address: 368 Valley View Drive City, state, zip: Paradise, CA Attn.: Stephen Van Der Maelen Project: Another Self -Storage Sample source: Sampled by ATC Sample Description: GC, Clayey GRAVEL w/ Sand Sample location: Test Pit 4, Sample1 S ample depth: taken at minus 2'-0" Dto = n/a CU = n/a Dso = n/a Cc = n/a Dso = n/a F— 100.0% 0 90.0% UJ 80.0% >. 70.0% 60.0% Z 50.0% LL 40.0% Z 30.0% V 20.0% W 10.0% a Sample No: TP4-S1 pate: 14 -Apr -04 Tech: B. Carter GRADATION CURVE U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS 1 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS -- Plasticity Index C 38.50% _ Project: Another Self -Storage ' o 37.50% Sample No: TP4-S1 Client: Stephen Van Der Maelen 36.50% 0 36.00% Address 368 Valley View Drive 10 Date: 13 -Feb -04 City, State, Zip: Paradise, CA. Technician: K. Coy Attention: Stephen Van. Der Maelen Source: Sampled by ATC t Material Description: GC, Clayey GRAVEL w/ Sand i Trial Number: Li 1 uid Limit: Tin Label: 2 1 2 3 3 4 5 E Wet Weight + Tare: 35.65 37.98 33.16 36.82 Dry Weight + Tare: 30.24 31.78 28.23 30.93 Weight of Water: 5.41 6.20 4.93 5.89 -- Weight of Tare: 15.26 15.25 15.38 15.41 Weight of Dry Soil: 14.98 16.53 12.85 Moisture Content: 36.11% 37.51 % 38.37% .15.52 37.95% .. Number of Blows:1 291 23 201 24 Liquid Limit, LL Plastic Limit, PLicity Index, PI 37 19 Plast18 Plastic Limit: Trial Number: 1 2 3 4 5. 6 Tin Label: 4 5 . Wet Weight + Tare: 22.28 24 7 Dry Weight + Tare: 21.19 23.24 - Weight of Water:.. 1.09 1.46 Weight of Tare: 15.31 15.45 Weight of dry soil: 5.88 7.79 Moisture Content: 18.54% 18.74% 0 39.00% C 38.50% :: 38.00% ' o 37.50% 37.00% 3 36.50% 0 36.00% E 35.50% 10 � 4 t Liquid Limit 100 number of blows y = -0.0016x + 0.4055 +4 .A t i r t