6039 E TIBER STCT
iINDALL ENGINEERING, INC., apc
3365 E. Miraloma Ave., Suite 207
Anaheim, CA 92806
office )949) 222-0165
tindallengineering@gmailAco,!,,% oo VLJ�O p '
RECEI n`L) 27 July 2021
AUG 18 2021
CITY OF ANAHEIM
PLANNING & BUILDING DEPARTMENT
Mr. Perry
6039 E. Tiber St.
Anaheim, Ca
Mr. Perry: Subject: Structural Observation and Testing of the
of your Swimming Pool
J3131-21
This letter has been prepared at your request and presents the findings, conclusions and
recommendations regarding the structural integrity of an in -ground gunite swimming pool. No
record of a building permit issued for the construction of the pool has been found in City
records. Our firm was recommended by Pool Engineering, Inc, since we specialize in the
forensic analysis in swimming pools and spas. At your direction, we performed an on-site
structure observation and testing on July 14, 2021.
The findings, conclusions and recommendations contained within this report have been
prepared based upon my extensive knowledge and experience as an "industry expert" with
many years of experience as a'Registered Civil Engineer in the state of California. I have specific
expertise in the design and construction of various structures including swimming pools, spas,
retaining wall systems, block walls and other appurtenant structures. This experience includes
performing similar inspections and evaluations for other homeowners, homeowner
associations, property management companies, real estate professionals, contractors,
attorneys, insurance companies and public agencies.
BASIS FOR MY OPINIONS)
1. Over 40 years of experience in the structural design of various structures including in -
ground reinforced concrete swimming pool.
2. Unique understanding of the standards set out in the various Uniform Building Codes
3. Extensive education and professional experience as a Registered Civil Engineer.
4. Extensive knowledge of proper trade and construction practices.
Mr. Perry Page 2 27 July 2021
On -Site Structural Observations and Testing:
An Overall Photograph of the Subject Pool taken on July 14, 2021
The following procedures were employed as part of our structural observation and testing of
the subject in -ground reinforced concrete spa:
• Measurements were taken to determine the levelness of the pool
• A detailed visual observation the structure was performed looking for signs of structural
distress or failure(s)
• A "ring test" was performed to determine the solidness of the structure and to
determine if areas of inferior shotcrete was present
• Reinforcing steel used in the construction of the subject pool and spa was located in
several locations key locations by using a GPR rebar detector. This device accurately
locates the presences of reinforcing steel including its placement within the structure.
Mr. Perry
Page 3 27 July 2021
• We measured to daylight distance from the outside edge of the pool to where this
imaginary line would exist the adjacent descending slope (2:1) to determine if the pool's
set back from the existing slope complies with Section 1808.7 including Figure 1808.7.1
contained in the 2019 California Building Code (CBC); and, the design assumptions of the
approved structural plans for the spa prepared by Pool Engineering, Inc. (Pool Structural
Plan 100).
• Results of the observations and testing were then compared the various requirements
contained with the attached structural plans prepared by Pool Engineering, Inc.
Findings:
No signs of structural distress or failures were observed within the pool structure. In addition,
the pool shell was found to be solid with no signs of inferior material used in its construction.
Reinforcing at a depth of 4 four feet below the top of the bond beam was found to consist of
#3 rebar at 6" on center (oc) with a cover of 4 inches (Refer to the attached GPR scan No. 1) and
a wall thickness of 8 inches. The same findings were consistent throughout the pool.
Measurements taken on an area of the floor revealed the use of No. 3 rebar at 6" oc in one
direction and 12 inches on center the other direction with a cover of 3 inches. The floor
thickness was measured to exceed 6 inches.
The daylight distance from the bottom of the shallow end of the pool to the adjacent
descending slope was measured to be 15 feet (worse case. The requirement per Section
1808.7 for swimming pools is H/6 or in this situation 10 feet. Therefore, the construction of the
pool conforms to Section 1808.7 of the 2019 CBC.
One of the first signs of distress within an in -ground reinforced concrete swimming pool is that
the pool is not level. Measurements taken indicate that the subject swimming pool is level.
The CBC allows for an in-place (in-situ) load test. Since the subject swimming pool has been in
existence for well over 10 years with no structural distress or failure, it can be assumed that the
pool has passed an in-place load test.
In our opinion, the swimming pool is structurally sound, constructed within industry standards;
complies with the structural requirements of Pool Engineering, Inc. Standard Pool Structural
Plan 100, which is attached; and, included as part of our report. The pool also complies with
the various structural requirements of the 2019 CBC.
Mr. Perry
Recommendation:
Page 4 27 July 2021
It is recommended that the City of Anaheim accept the subject swimming pool from a structural
standpoint and issue a building permit so other issues can be addressed. If you or the City has
any questions please feel free to call.
attachments: 1) GPR Scan of Outer Pool Wall 2) GPR Scan of Floor 3) Pool Engineering, Inc.
Standard Pool Structural Plan 100 4) Stamped Site plan
Q�pFESS�ON
c
No. 1 9 1 m
Exp.
CMI.
�F