The URL can be used to link to this page

1997-4929 G/I Street Address ? IftJl ¡ t( VO c¡ 'l Category Serial # qc¡~ ]i)5 /VI up¡ fh !) D Name Description 11'1 tt Plan ck. # Year recdescv " 8 ---4f/IJIIJ SHEPARDSON ~ ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES INC. e> 8 : :', f':.;":"'h-L~,':" " , l- 1 " , , August 1, 1997 \ '< "~I ,;: '- S.E.A. 96171-01 Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA c/o Good and Roberts 1090 Joshua Way Vista, CA 92083 ATTENTION: Terry Peterson SUBJECf: Report of In-Place Density Tests Minor Grading, Retaining Wall Backfill, Storm Drain and Sewer Trench Backfills Fitness Center Addition - Ecke Family YMCA Vista, CA Gentlemen: This report presents the results of the relative compaction tests taken during the minor grading of the subject site as tested by Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc., on June 3, 1997. The testing was performed at the request of Terry Peterson, Project Superintendent for The plans for Good and Roberts. The plans for the project are titled "Expansion of Ecke YMCA, 200 Saxony Rd.", dated May 28, 1997, prepared by Nolte and Associates, Inc. Also included in this report are the results of the relative compaction tests taken in the retaining wall backfill, storm drain and sewer trench backfill. The testing of the pavement subgrade and base will be reported at a later date following completion. The Geotechnical Investigation Report prepared by this office for the subject site is titled "Report of Geotechnical Investigation, the Gymnasium and Fitness Center Addition, Magdalena Ecke YMCA, Encinitas, CA", dated October 29, 1996. The project consists of minor fills on the order of 112 to 1 foot in depth. The grading contractor for the project was Willert Construction, Inc. Prior to the placement of fill materials, the site was brushed and cleared of debris. The native ground was then scarified to a depth of 1 foot, moisture conditioned to near-optimum moisture content and compacted. Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. . August 1, 1997 8 -2- 8 S.E.A. 96171-01 Field density tests were performed in accordance with ASTM D1556-90 and/or ASTM 2922-91. Moisture content was determined for each density sample. The results and location of the tests are given on the attached figures. Representative samples of the tested material were obtained for laboratory tests. Laboratory tests, to determine maximum density and optimum moisture relationship, were performed in accordance with ASTM 1557-91, Method A or C. The results of the laboratory compaction tests are shown on the attached Plates. All tests were taken on a random basis. The tests, as reported herein, were performed in accordance with the above-stated procedural methods and within acceptable standards of care. No other warranty is expressed or implied. Please do not hesitate to contact this office, if you have any questions regarding this report. This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Respectfully submitted, SHEPARDS 'N ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. cc: (4) Addressee Enclosures Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. . .. 8 8 S.E.A. 96171-01 COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY MAGDALENA ECKE YMCA GRADING Elevation Dry Relative or Depth Density Compac- Test of test Moisture (lbs/ Soil tion No. Date Location (ft.) (%) cu.ft.) Type (%) 1 6/3/97 New building pad EG. 9.4 117.3 1 92 2 6/3/97 New building pad F.G. 9.8 114.8 1 90 ! I I F.G. = finished grade Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. . " 8 8 S.E.A. 96171-01 COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY MAGDALENA ECKE YMCA RETAINING WALL Elevation Dry Relative or Depth Density Compac- Test of test Moisture (lbs/ Soil tion No. Date Location (ft.) (%) cu.ft.) Type (%) 1 6/11/97 Allen Block 154 9.8 117.3 1 92 Retaining Wall 2 6/11/97 Allen Block 155 10.6 114.8 1 90 Retaining Wall 3 6/12/97 Allen Block 157 10.2 116.6 1 92 Retaining Wall 4 6/12/97 Allen Block 158 9.5 116.8 1 92 Retaining Wall 5 6/12/97 Allen Block 160 11.0 118.5 1 93 Retaining Wall 6 6/12/97 Allen Block 160 9.8 112.9 1 89 (7) Retaining Wall 7 6/12/97 Allen Block 160 10.3 115.6 1 91 Retaining Wall 8 6/13/97 Allen Block 153 10.5 114.9 1 91 Retaining Wall 9 6/13/97 Allen Block 154 9.5 115.6 1 91 Retaining Wall 10 6113197 Allen Block 155 8.7 118.4 1 93 Retaining Wall 11 6/16/97 Allen Block 162 11.6 116.8 1 92 Retaining Wall 12 6/16/97 Allen Block 162 9.5 115.1 1 91 Retaining Wall 13 6/16/97 Allen Block 158 10.8 117.3 1 92 Retaining Wall 14 6/16/97 Allen Block 160 11.2 116.4 1 92 Retaining Wall ( ) Retest no. Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. . , 8 8 S.E.A. 96171-01 COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY MAGDALENA ECKE YMCA STORM DRAIN Elevation Dry Relative or Depth Density Compac- Test of test Moisture (lbs/ Soil tion No. Date Location (ft.) (%) cu.ft.) Type (%) 1 5/22/97 12" RCP storm drain 160 10.3 114.8 1 90 removed in pad 2 5/22/97 12" RCP storm drain 159 9.3 119.3 1 94 removed in pad 3 5/22/97 12" RCP storm drain 160.5 10.9 115.3 1 91 removed in pad 4 5/22/97 12" RCP storm drain 161 10.4 117.0 1 92 removed in pad 5 5122/97 12" RCP storm drain 162 10.0 116.2 1 92 removed in pad 6 5/22/97 12" RCP storm drain 162 11.0 114.6 1 90 removed in pad 7 5/22/97 12" RCP storm drain 163 9.7 117.7 1 93 removed in pad 8 6120/97 S.D. Box west of 150 11.1 115.4 1 91 tennis courts 9 6/20/97 S.D. Box west of 152 10.4 117.8 1 93 tennis courts 10 6/30/97 12" RCP east of 158 10.3 116.2 1 92 tennis courts 11 6130197 12" RCP east of 161 11.4 117.5 1 93 tennis courts F.G. = finished grade BOE = bottom of excavation ( ) Retest no. Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. I þ' 8 8 S.E.A.96171-01 COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY MAGDALENA ECKE YMCA 6" SEWER TRENCH BACKFILL Elevation Dry Relative or Depth Density Compac- Test of test Moisture (lbsl Soil tion No. Date Location (ft.) (%) cu.ft.) Type (%) 1 7/9/97 6" sewer, southern 158 9.5 118.7 1 93 end of new building 2 7/9/97 6" sewer, southern 161 10.8 112.5 1 89 (6) end of new building 3 7/9/97 6" sewer, southern 159 10.0 114.9 1 91 end of new building 4 7/9/97 6" sewer, southern 162 11.4 115.2 1 91 end of new building 5 7/9/97 6" sewer, southern 163 9.1 119.2 1 94 end of new building 6 7/9/97 6" sewer, southern 161 10.5 115.4 1 91 end of new building EG. = finished grade BOE = bottom of excavation ( ) Retest no. Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. . MAXIMUM DENSITY AND OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT ASTM: 1557-91 Maximum Optimum Soil Type Description Density Moisture ( pcr) (%) 1 Dark yellow brown clayey sand 127.0 10.0 2 Import base material 132.5 7.0 - --~ SHEPARDSON ;8' ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES INC Gto/tehnical Consul/an/s: E"gi"ttrs-Gtologis/s Date July 1997 Project No. 96171-02 MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA Summary of Compaction Curves Plate SEA R 2~O Rev: 'n8 8 ¡fin,'; !'¡Ihi"'cf"\", I¡;:~i'i('('i' C;(,:/I'.'~i',!, ( ,( ! i ,".' May 26, 1998 S.E.A. 96171-02 ... Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA c/o Good and Roberts 1090 Joshua Way Vista, CA 92083 ill ŒJ~V :4° ~ Œ @ ATTENTION: Mr. Jack Good ENGINEERING SERVICES CITY OF ENCINITAS SUBJECf: Report of In-Place Density Tests Pavement Subgrade, Base, Curb and Gutter, Additional Retaining Wall, Storm Drain and Sewer Trench Backfill Reference: Report of In-Place Density Tests Minor Grading, Retaining Wall, Backfill, Storm Drain, and Sewer Trench Backfill Dated August 1, 1997 Gentlemen: This report presents the results of the relative compaction tests taken on the pavement subgrade, base, and curb and gutter on the subject site, as tested by Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc., from May 27, 1997 through April 24, 1998. The testing was performed at the request of Terry Peterson, Project Superintendent for Good and Roberts. The plans for the project are titled "Expansion of Ecke YMCA, 200 Saxony Road" dated May 28, 1997, prepared by Nolte and Associates, Inc. Also included in this report are additional tests performed on retaining walls, storm drain, and sewer trench backfills. This report covers the final geotechnical testing for the project. Previous testing results are presented in the above referenced report. Field density tests were performed in accordance with ASTM D1556-90 and/or ASTM 2922-91. Moisture content was determined for each density sample. The results and location of the tests are given on the attached figures. Representative samples of the tested material were obtained for laboratory tests. Laboratory tests, to determine maximum density and optimum moisture relationship, were performed in accordance with ASTM 1557-91, Method A or C. The results of the laboratory compaction tests are shown on the attached Plates. Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. 8 8 May 26, 1998 -2- S.E.A. 96171-02 All tests were taken on a random, post-compaction basis. The tests, as reported herein, were performed in accordance with the above-stated procedural methods and within acceptable standards of care. No other warranty is expressed or implied. Please do not hesitate to contact this office, if you have any questions regarding this report. This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Respectfully submitted, SHEPARDS N ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INe. William E. is, .E. 293 Senior Geotechnical EngineerNice President cc: ( 4) Addressee Enclosures Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. 8 8 S.E.A.96171 COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY MAGDALENA ECKE YMCA RETAINING WALL Elevation Dry Relative or Depth Density Compac- Test of test Moisture (lbs/ Soil tion No. Date Location (ft.) (%) cu.ft.) Type (%) 1 6/11197 Allen Block 154.0 9.8 117.3 1 92 Retaining Wall 2 6/11/97 Allen Block 155.0 10.6 114.8 1 90 Retaining Wall 3 6/12/97 Allen Block 157.0 10.2 116.6 1 92 Retaining Wall 4 6/12/97 Allen Block 158.0 9.5 116.8 1 92 Retaining Wall 5 6/12/97 Allen Block 160.0 11.0 118.5 1 93 Retaining Wall 6 6/12/97 Allen Block 160.0 9.8 112.9 1 89 (7) Retaining Wall 7 6/12/97 Allen Block 160.0 10.3 115.6 1 91 Retaining Wall 8 6/13/97 Allen Block 153.0 10.5 114.9 1 91 Retaining Wall 9 6/13/97 Allen Block 154.0 9.5 115.6 1 91 Retaining Wall 10 6/13/97 Allen Block 155.0 8.7 118.4 1 93 Retaining Wall 11 6/16/97 Allen Block 162.0 11.6 116.8 1 92 Retaining Wall 12 6/16/97 Allen Block 162.0 9.5 115.1 1 91 Retaining Wall 13 6/16/97 Allen Block 158.0 10.8 117.3 1 92 Retaining Wall 14 6/16/97 Allen Block 160.0 11.2 116.4 1 92 Retaining Wall ( ) Retest no. Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. -02 8 -2- 8 S.E.A. 96171-0 Elevation Dry Relative or Depth Density Compac- Test of test Moisture (lbs/ Soil tion No. Date Location (ft.) (%) cu.ft.) Type (%) 15 10/24/97 Maintenance Bldg. 158.0 10.7 114.7 1 90 Retaining wall backfill 0 16 10/24197 Maintenance Bldg. 159.0 11.5 115.3 1 91 Retaining wall backfill 17 10/27/97 Maintenance Bldg. 160.0 10.8 117.5 1 93 Retaining wall backfill 18 10/27/97 Maintenance Bldg. 162.0 11.4 114.8 1 90 Retaining wall backfill 19 10128/97 Maintenance Bldg. 161.0 10.5 119.2 1 94 Retaining wall backfill 20 10/28/97 Maintenance Bldg. 164.0 11.7 115.6 1 91 Retaining wall backfill 21 10/28/97 Maintenance Bldg. 158.0 12.6 115.2 1 91 Retaining wall backfill 22 10/28/97 Maintenance Bldg. 161.0 10.3 116.8 1 92 Retaining wall backfill 23 10131197 Maintenance Bldg. 163.0 11.2 115.2 1 91 Retaining wall backfill 24 10/31/97 Maintenance Bldg. 163.0 10.0 117.5 1 93 Retaining wall backfill 25 2126/98 Maintenance Bldg. 157.0 13.2 115.2 1 91 Retaining wall backfill 26 2/26/98 Maintenance Bldg. 157.0 12.8 115.6 1 91 Retaining wall backfill ( ) Retest no. Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. ----- -- 2 8 -3- 8 S.E.A. 96171-02 Elevation Dry Relative or Depth Density Compac- Test of test Moisture (lbs/ Soil tion No. Date Location (ft.) (%) cu.ft.) Type (%) 27 2127198 Maintenance Bldg. 159.0 12.0 118.1 1 93 Retaining wall b~kfill 28 2/27/98 Maintenance Bldg. 159.0 11.8 117.7 1 93 Retaining wall backfill 29 2/27198 Maintenance Bldg. 161.0 12.8 116.2 1 92 Retaining wall backfill 30 2127198 Maintenance Bldg. 161.0 12.3 115.6 1 91 Retaining wall backfill I ( ) Retest no. Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. . 8 8 S.E.A.96171-02 COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY MAGDALENA ECKE YMCA CURB AND GUTTER ~ Elevation Dry Relative or Depth Density Compac- Test of test Moisture (lbsl Soil tion No. Date Location (ft.) (%) cu.ft.) Type (%) 1 3/18/98 Access road to Final grade 9.3 124.6 1 98 maintenance building of curb & gutter 2 3/18/98 Access road to Final grade 11.6 119.1 1 94 maintenance building of curb & gutter 3 3/18/98 Access road to Final grade 9.5 119.5 1 94 maintenance building of curb & gutter 4 3/18/98 Access road to Final grade 7.1 119.1 1 94 maintenance building of curb & gutter 5 3/18/98 Access road to Final grade 11.9 114.7 1 90 maintenance building of curb & (10) gutter 6 3/18/98 Access road to Final grade 12.5 113.4 1 89 maintenance building of curb & (9) gutter 7 3123/98 Access road to Final grade 4.5 129.1 3 93 maintenance building of curb & (12) gutter 8 3123/98 Access road to Final grade 4.2 130.7 3 94 maintenance building of curb & (16) gutter 9 3123/98 Access road to Final grade 4.1 129.5 3 93 maintenance building of curb & (10) gutter 10 3123/98 Access road to Final grade 5.0 129.7 3 93 maintenance building of curb & (15) gutter . 8 8 -2- S.E.A.96171-02 Elevation Dry Relative or Depth Density Compac- Test of test Moisture (lbsl Soil tion No. Date Location (ft.) (%) cu.ft.) Type (%) 11 3123/98 Access road to Final grade 4.6 128.9 3 92 maintenance building of curb & (14) gutter ~ 12 3/23/98 Access road to Final grade 4.2 130.0 3 93 maintenance building of curb & (13) gutter 13 3125/98 Access road to Final grade 6.3 132.2 3 95 maintenance building of curb & gutter 14 3125/98 Access road to Final grade 6.0 132.6 3 95 . maintenance building of curb & gutter 15 3125/98 Access road to Final grade 6.1 122.0 3 95 maintenance building of curb & gutter 16 3125198 Access road to Final grade 6.6 132.5 3 95 maintenance building of curb & gutter ( ) Retest no. Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. 8 8 S.E.A. 96171-02 COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY MAGDALENA ECKE YMCA SUBG RAD EIBASE Elevation Dry Relative or Depth Density Compac- Test of test Moisture (lbs/ Soil tion No. Date Location (ft.) (%) cu.ft.) Type (%) -, 1 5127/97 Parking lot S.G. 6.1 123.4 1 97 north of bldg. 2 5127/97 Parking lot S.G. 5.9 121.1 1 95 north of bldg. 3 6/5/97 Parking lot S.G. 7.6 123.5 1 97 north of bldg. 4 6/5/97 Parking lot S.G. 8.2 121.5 1 96 north of bldg. 5 6/5/97 Parking lot S.G. 6.8 117.9 1 93 north of bldg. (7) 6 6/5197 Parking lot S.G. 6.1 119.0 1 94 north of bldg. (8) 7 6/5197 Parking lot S.G. 8.8 121.2 1 95 north of bldg. 8 6/5/97 Parking lot S.G. 9.2 122.2 1 96 north of bldg. 9 6/5197 Parking lot S.G. 10.2 125.4 1 98 north of bldg. 10 6/5/97 Parking lot S.G. 10.4 124.5 1 98 north of bldg. 11 6/6/97 Parking lot Base 7.7 122.8 2 93 north of bldg. (17) 12 6/6/97 Parking lot Base 7.9 121.9 2 92 north of bldg. (18) I 13 6/6/97 Parking lot Base 8.9 128.0 2 97 north of bldg. 14 6/6/97 Parking lot Base 7.6 127.4 2 96 north of bldg. 15 6/6/97 Parking lot Base 9.1 128.0 2 97 north of bldg. S.G. = subgrade ( ) Retest no. Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. . 8 -2- 8 S.E.A. 96171-02 Elevation Dry Relative or Depth Density Compac- Test of test Moisture (lbs/ Soil tion No. Date Location (ft.) (%) cu.ft.) Type (%) 16 6/6/97 Parking lot Base 7.3 127.4 2 96 north of bldg. 17 6/6/97 Parking lot Base 7.1 126.0 2 95 north of bldg. 18 6/6/97 Parking lot Base 7.1 126.9 2 96 north of bldg. 19 6/6/97 Parking lot Base 7.8 129.1 2 97 north of bldg. 20 4120/98 Access road S.G. 8.3 122.1 1 96 east of tennis court 21 4120/98 Access road S.G. 10.2 122.8 1 97 south of tennis court 22 4120/98 Access road S.G. 10.3 123.4 1 97 west of tennis court 23 4120/98 Access road Base 7.6 128.8 4 97 west of tennis court 24 4/20/98 Access road Base 6.9 129.8 4 97 west of tennis court 25 4120/98 Access road Base 7.4 131.2 4 98 west of tennis court 26 4124/98 Access road Base 6.8 130.4 4 98 south of tennis court 27 4124/98 Access road Base 7.7 127.2 4 97 south of tennis court 28 4124/98 Access road Base 8.1 131.0 4 98 east of tennis court S.G. = subgrade ( ) Retest no. Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. 8 8 S.E.A.96171-O2 COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY MAGDALENA ECKE YMCA STORM DRAIN Elevation Dry Relative or Depth Density Compac- Test of test Moisture (lbs/ Soil tion No. Date Location (ft.) (%) cu.ft.) Type (%) .0 1 5122/97 12" RCP storm drain 160 10.3 114.8 1 90 removed in pad 2 5122/97 12" RCP storm drain 159 9.3 119.3 1 94 removed in pad 3 5122/97 12" RCP storm drain 160.5 10.9 115.3 1 91 removed in pad 4 5122/97 12" RCP storm drain 161 10.4 117.0 1 92 removed in pad 5 5122/97 12" RCP storm drain 162 10.0 116.2 1 92 removed in pad 6 5122/97 12" RCP storm drain 162 11.0 114.6 1 90 removed in pad 7 5122/97 12" RCP storm drain 163 9.7 117.7 1 93 removed in pad 8 6120/97 S.D. Box west of 150 11.1 115.4 1 91 tennis courts 9 6120/97 S.D. Box west of 152 10.4 117.8 1 93 tennis courts 10 6/30/97 12" RCP east of 158 10.3 116.2 1 92 tennis courts 11 6/30/97 12" RCP east of 161 11.4 117.5 1 93 tennis courts 12 7/9/97 Box southeast of 160.0 9.7 115.2 1 91 tennis court 13 7/9197 Box southeast of 160.0 10.3 116.5 1 92 tennis court 14 7/9/97 Box southeast of 161.0 10.8 115.3 1 91 tennis cout F.G. = finished grade BOE = bottom of excavation ( ) Retest no. Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. . , 8 8 S.E.A. 96171-01 COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY MAGDALENA ECKE YMCA 6" SEWER TRENCH BACKFILL Elevation Dry Relative or Depth Density Compac- Test of test Moisture (lbs/ Soil tion No. Date Location (ft.) (%) cu.ft.) Type (%) 1 7/9/97 6" sewer, southern 158 9.5 118.7 1 93 end of new building 2 7/9/97 6" sewer, southern 161 10.8 112.5 1 89 (6) end of new building 3 7/9/97 6" sewer, southern 159 10.0 114.9 1 91 end of new building 4 7/9/97 6" sewer, southern 162 11.4 115.2 1 91 end of new building 5 7/9/97 6" sewer, southern 163 9.1 119.2 1 94 end of new building 6 7/9/97 Sewer line trench 161.0 10.5 115.4 1 91 new building 7 9/12/97 Sewer line trench 160.0 8.9 119.4 1 95 new building 8 9/12/97 Sewer line trench 160.0 9.3 120.9 1 95 new building EG. = finished grade BOE = bottom of excavation ( ) Retest no. Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. . MAXIMUM DENSITY AND OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT ASTM : D1557-91 Maximum Optimum Soil Type Description Densitr Moisture (pcf (%) 1 REDDISH BROWN TORREY SANDSTONE 127 . 0 10.0 2 CLASS II BASE 132.5 7.0 -" 3 CLASS II BASE 139.0 7.0 4 CLASS II BASE 133.4 6.2 SHEPARDSON ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES INC Date 4/24/97 Project No. 96171-02 MAGDALENA ECKE YMCA Gtottchnical Consultants: Engintm- Gtologists Summary of Compaction Curves Plate SEA R 2'.10 Rev: '/38 8 SHEPARDSON ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES INC 8 (,<'¡)!<',-!ll1ídl (¡'Ihlllldlll,;: 1"1:,11/""1"'-(;""/",,1,1' IOU,,:) I'rl':'JI('¡/ ,lie,." S/IIII' 11i J S,u:I.-,', (/\ 9207 J nc¡s ¡,J') / -f4LJ-c}!i1U li\\ riJ~) 4-f'l-:ïSN S.E.A.96171-03 AITENTION: Mr. Terry Peterson SUBJECT: Report of In-Place Density Tests Subgrade, Base, and Sidewalk Saxony Road Ecke YMCA Encinitas, CA Gentlemen: This report presents the results of the relative compaction tests taken on the pavement subgrade and base, as tested by Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc., from May 13, 1999 through May 26, 1999. The testing was performed at the request of Terry Peterson, Project Superintendent for Good and Roberts. The plans for the project are titled "Widening of Saxony Road, Ste. 9+29 to Sta. 13+ 18 dated May 5, 1997, and prepared by Nolte and Associates. The compaction of the tested area had been partially accomplished prior to our arrival onsite. Field density tests were performed in accordance with ASTM 01556-90 and/or ASTM 2922-91. Moisture content was determined for each density sample. The results and location of the tests are given on the attached figures. Representative samples of the tested material were obtained for laboratory tests. Laboratory tests, to determine maximum dry density and optimum moisture relationship, were performed in accordance with ASTM 1557-91, Method A or C. The results of the laboratory compaction tests are shown on the attached plates. All tests were taken on a random, post-compaction basis. The tests, as reported herein, were performed in accordance with the above-stated procedural methods and within acceptable standards of care. No other warranty is expressed or implied. ECEIVED JUN 1 81999 June 17, 1999 8 -2- 8 S.E.A. 96171-03 Please do not hesitate to contact this office if you have any questions regarding this report. Respectfully submitted, SHEPARDSON ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. ~ Wi iam . Ellis, RCE/GE Senior Geotechnical EngineerNice President WEE:sj cc: (4) Addressee Enclosures . 8 8 S.E.A. 96171-03 COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY YMCA CURB, GUTIER, AND SIDEWALK Elevation Dry Relative or Depth Density Compac- Test of test Moisture (%) (lbs/ Soil tion No. Date Location (ft.) cu.ft.) Type (%) 1 5/13/99 West side/Saxony Rd. S.G. 6.8 123.3 5 95 Sta. 9+25 2 5/13/99 West side/Saxony Rd. S.G. 7.6 124.0 5 96 Sta. 10+ 10 3 5/13/99 West side/Saxony Rd. S.G. 6.4 125.9 5 97 Sta. 10+60 4 5/14/99 West side/Saxony Rd. S.G. 5.8 125.1 5 97 Sta. 11+20 5 5/14/99 West side/Saxony Rd. S.G. 4.8 123.0 5 95 Entrance 6 5/14/99 West side/Saxony Rd. S.G. 5.3 125.6 5 97 Sta. 12+50 7 5/17/99 West side/Saxony Rd. Base 8.3 127.4 4 96 Sta. 12+70 8 5/17/99 West sidelSaxony Rd. Base 7.5 126.9 4 95 Sta. 12+05 9 5/17/99 West side/Saxony Rd. Base 7.0 129.2 4 97 Sta. 11 + 10 10 5/17/99 West side/Saxony Rd. Base 4.5 126.9 4 95 Sta. 10+40 11 5/17/99 West side/Saxony Rd. Base 6.8 124.6 4 93 (14) Sta. 9+90 12 5/17/99 West side/Saxony Rd. Base 7.2 125.5 4 94 (13) Sta. 9+55 13 5/17/99 West side/Saxony Rd. Base 7.5 133.2 4 99 Sta. 9+55 14 5/17/99 West side/Saxony Rd. Base 7.1 128.5 4 96 Sta. 9+90 15 5/18/99 West side/Saxony Rd. Base 5.1 127.1 4 95 Sta. 9+65 S.G. = Subgrade ( ) = Retest no. Shepardson Engineering Associates. Inc. . 8 8 ~ -2- S.E.A. 96171-03 Elevation Dry Relative or Depth Density Compac- Test of test Moisture (%) (lbs/ Soil tion No. Date Location (ft.) cu.ft.) Tvoe (%) 16 5/18/99 West side/Saxony Rd. Base 4.6 127.1 4 95 Sta. 10+35 17 5118/99 West side/Saxony Rd. Base 6.0 127.5 4 96 Sta. 10+90 18 5/18/99 West side/Saxony Rd. Base 4.4 128.7 4 97 Sta. 11 +60 19 5/18/99 West side/Saxony Rd. Base 7.3 130.0 4 97 Sta. 12+45 20 5/18/99 West side/Saxony Rd. Base 6.2 129.2 4 97 Sta. 13+00 21 5/26/99 West side/Saxony Rd. S.G. 8.0 120.8 5 93 Sidewalk Sta. 12+40 22 5/26/99 West side/Saxony Rd. S.G. 8.6 116.9 5 90 Sidewalk Sta. 11+32 23 5/26/99 West side/Saxony Rd. S.G. 7.3 122.4 5 95 Sidewalk Sta. 10+20 24 5/26/99 West side/Saxony Rd. S.G. 6.8 117.5 5 91 Sidewalk Sta. 9+40 , , , S.G. = Subgrade ( ) = Retest no. Shepardson Engineering Associates. Inc. . 8 8 ~ S.E.A. 96171-03 COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY YMCA SUBGRADEIBASE Elevation Dry Relative or Depth Density Compac- Test of test Moisture (%) (lbsl Soil tion No. Date Location (fU cu.ft.) Type (%) 1 5/25/99 Saxony Rd. S.G. 7.1 120.8 5 93 (5) Sta. 12+85 2 5/25/99 Saxony Rd. S.G. 8.0 123.7 5 96 Sta. 11+75 3 5/25199 Saxony Rd. S.G. 7.3 124.4 5 96 Sta. 10+35 4 5/25/99 Saxony Rd. S.G. 7.8 124.1 5 96 Sta. 9+70 5 5/25/99 Saxony Rd. S.G. 7.2 123.9 5 96 Sta. 12+85 6 5/25/99 Saxony Rd. Base 7.8 128.9 2 97 Sta. 12+60 7 5/25/99 Saxony Rd. Base 8.0 126.3 2 95 Sta. 11+95 8 5/25199 Saxony Rd. Base 6.9 128.0 2 97 Sta. 10+90 9 5/25199 Saxony Rd. Base 6.7 130.9 2 99 Sta. 9+90 , I Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. June 1999 8 8 S.E.A. 96171-03 MAXIMUM DENSITY AND OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT ASTM: D1557-91 MAGDALENA ECKE YMCA Maximum Optimum Density Moisture Soil Tvoe Descriotion (pet) (%) 1 Reddish brown Torrey sandstone 127.0 10.0 2 Class II base 132.5 7.0 3 Class II base 139.0 7.0 4 Class II base 133.4 6.2 5 Yellow brown silty sand 129.5 7.0 SUMMARY OF COMPACTION CURVES ClU'l'es.lSum SheptJl'dson Engineering A$ISOCÜJtes, Inc. ~ 0; -.,. 8 8 -, DRAINAGE STUDY FOR ECKE YMCA EXPANSION 200 SAXONY ROAD ; . , I EXISTING CONDITIONS The YMCA site presently drains into two on-site inlets connected by a 12" storm drain. Westerly of the existing stonn drain located near the tennis courts on site, the system becomes an 18 .. stonn drain, which drains offsite. The westerly portion of the site drains as overland flow into a PCC brow ditch, which discharges to an offsite drainage system. PROPOSED CONDITION The proposed condition will realign the 12" stonn drain connecting the inlet in the mainb parking lot and the inlet near the tennis courts. Drainage basins on site will remain substantially unchanged; the westerly curb inlet will be reconstructed in place to accept the realigned stonn drain from the east. A building expansion will be constructed, a new service building and drivewaylservice yard will be constructed south and west of the tennis courts, and the existing PCC ditch west of the tennis courts will be repositioned to a location between the tennis courts and the top of a proposed crib-lock retaining wall. The curbed parking island in the parking lot north of the existing drop-off area will be reconstructed in place to provide for positive drainage and amended paving. SUMMARY The attached calculations and charts summarize runoff volumes for the drainage basins resulting fOnD the proposed building construction and associated grading. Capacities for the existing and realigned drainage facilities are also calculated. The existing facilities on-site that are realigned discharge into a P.C.C. ditch that drains offsite to drainage facilities on CAL TRANS right of way. Because neither the on-site drainage basin nor the ultimate runoff at buildout have been changed by the new construction, and the CAL TRANS offsite facilities are typically designed for buildout condition, no impact on the downstream conditions will result. r,.! ie",: i:) i,C" ':: c,; APR 08 1997 ENG~\!EEHjN(?¡ SERV¡CES CITY OF ENCiNiTAS C:j ~FS) {/?GvroSG-O ':;>-3 (-97) t . 8 .8 CRITERIA AND BASIS OF CALCULA nON 1. County of San Diego Design and Procedure Manual; County of San Diego isopluvials. 2. City of San Diego charts as indicated. 3. Drainage calculations evaluated for 50-year storm. 4. Use Rational Method: Q=CIA 5. Tc (Time of Concentration) and I (Intensity): See attached calculations 6. C _factor (runoff coefficient) $'0 Use C= 0.95 for paved areas and roof areas Use C= 0.50 for landscape areas ~)(. ~~ ~arnes R. Hettinger R.C 31756 Exp.12-31-00 3"")(-97 Date Cz- 0 ¡e 8) (R¿V{.$€V ::?-3'I-~7) . .~ 8 DRAINAGE STUDY FOR ECKE YMCA EXPANSION 200 SAXONY ROAD EXISTING CONDITIONS The YMCA site presently drains into two on-site inlets connected by a 12" storm drain. Westerly of the existing storm drain located near the tennis courts on site, the system becomes an 18 .. storm drain, which drains offsite. The westerly portion of the site drains as overland flow into a PCC brow dit~h, which discharges to an offsite drainage system. PROPOSED CONDITION The proposed condition will realign the 12" storm drain connecting the inlet in the mainb parking lot and the inlet near the tennis courts. Drainage basins on site will remain substantially unchanged; the westerly curb inlet will be reconstructed in place to accept the realigned storm drain from the east. A building expansion will be constructed, a new service building and drivewaylservice yard will be constructed south and west of the tennis courts, and the existing PCC ditch west of the tennis courts will be repositioned to a location between the tennis courts and the top of a proposed crib-lock retaining wall. The curbed parking island in the parking lot north of the existing drop-off area will be reconstructed in place to provide for positive drainage and amended paving. SUMMARY The attached calculations and charts summarize runoff volumes for the drainage basins resulting form the proposed building construction and associated grading. Capacities for the existing and realigned drainage facilities are also calculated. The existing facilities on-site that are realigned discharge into a P.C.C. ditch that drains offsite to drainage facilities on CAL TRANS right of way. Because neither the on-site drainage basin nor the ultimate runoff at buildout have been changed by the new construction, and the CAL TRANS offsite facilities are typically designed for buildout condition, no impact on the downstream conditions will result. Ú ~FS) (RèVf.$éO ;-3(-97) ~ 8. 8 CRITERIA AND BASIS OF CALCULA nON 1. County of San Diego Design and Procedure Manual; County of San Diego isopluvials. 2. City of San Diego charts as indicated. 3. Drainage calculations evaluated for 50-year storm. 4. Use Rational Method: Q=CIA . 5. Tc (Time of Concentration) and I (Intensity): See attached calculations 6. C _factor (runoff coefficient) 5'0 Use C= 0.95 for paved areas and roof areas Use C= 0.50 for landscape areas Jo..-..-- ){ . ~~ ¡lames R Hettinger RC 31756 Exp.12-31-00 3'-31-9 ì Date Cz- op e) CR¿:V~t!šV :?-JI-~7) 8 NOLTE and ASSOCiATES,. Inc. Engineers 1 Planners / Surveyors UBJECT éCJct: -r /1\ C A ¡.2v I'-ro,cF / ~ C H , ~ 4.(5q .8 !::. ~e S' 3" / Z-/(-;;? / 3,) I-~? I JOB NO. DATE DESIGNED BY CHECKED BY ;j-¡t71 t7 C A L LV c.....A~ -r e- l. I /~O f=-ej tt!.. 1< G'7I11. c..; ß^/ ;?"~/ \./'6 I A-l.J.t:A- .-+.Jt¡;;òi u oS c fCcJ,d. Âc...c.. -rf'f,ti'ð6 """'~ I'M .s7'U~y / "r.: =- ;: ß ((,1- c.) Võ ~ 1- '3 (/. 1- ().9f) Vc;,o ç;-;:;? Tc... ( V.lC Art.-C,ð r:. -, c ., 54 .:5 3 1"-1/ I ^-' v r~5 (CI~[.' (0 M'I'-") I,., ~ ':= 4.5 1"-1. If 1ft . I::;t ~ :]. 'ß I^í. IÍ~II¿ , A (2.. éA C A, ~ -12.. A c. o.9s A, 4. C. 1 A c, 0.65 1\3 0.52 4c. (J.8S I:¡-a 3. 8~./J,.. ~.TO 2,~ Cr5 x~o 4,.5 ;....../1". 3.1 cF.5 (('°0 ¡Cf-tj CF:; 2.'cfS All 0.057 AC. 0..$ ð 3. B;.,./L, I. I CF.; Cl-/éc'tC- ¡IN!. er C;..PIAC rry (AT PTL i) Q.r.:; ro 11oJc..e7' :: L-. (þ cF::: (3)«.57", 5' riPE "8 'I 1;<.fr...e7' J'V" SUN/-" ~) 4-.5 ~ , lA. CA~Acl-rY :::: I.s c,r-~/ roo.,- o,c OpeAlrAl§ :;0 CA"".C-I-ry ~ (q))( !¡.s) := <;.0 CF:; -) 2. b c.FS /7-' if~ 3. I Cr5 I. J c.r:-~ (j \ ~. --c::::. (3 OF 8) 8 .8 NOLTE and ASSOCIATES"Inc. Engineers / Planners / Surveyors JOB NO. SD 0 .33/ DATE 2 _//'-;X? I )-J>r-I)? DESIGNED BY (,.},It}1- -/ UBJECT é'e,cé YA1 c;IA CHECKED BY CI-f ê c 1=- P 11./ é..~ c..¡><. ¡';;04 C I T~ i ---Þ 2- c?~,~ "¡'" el¡.l{;; ( r/i- t:) ~r\ A ~) -- /, / ere: ,}o ;? Q.: ~ = /../ -+ '2-. \0 = 3. 7 C f-=' /2" J2cP e /. 0 Ïo -) DkL~ c,,5G, (BG % FU(;¿.) <:: /. 0 c.~.. ~ r -,..~ :'- c.;.. ¡;;;:- \ c:..,:+,c. ::i-4~ ~A CIIC~) CI-/êr-Ic.. /N'-é7' C,APIi'1C("'("-,' (Á7 ;::'7', 2) (.2e:.--=ð^/srdVC~ IS' A-I 1iC..IL~ ON" .::L-QP'E ~/;Oro CPs~ I'Af Gu rrCR.:, /4,' cr.s I o~ oeyr~( r:>r Fc..c;)\"v /N' Gf..J r-~ = 0 - 51 <:::: o. 8) c; (.),<8 V = 3. '2. r¡:;S (~"""""L.~~) Pe32 c, r"-I" ðF.::A1V' 0'(;(:'0 Crf.A,LT rV"ù f / -rOIf. I Z. (A 7'~A C-.4 ~ ) C,AP'A c (r-y = c? = O.? L (A-i '-( ) 3('2. ()Qù Q ~ (6. ~(/4-){ 0..33 +0 f 40)3', (~~ ~: ;Ø~~I"?<) '1 L=:;' ) cp:: C;. / c.rs (TO ;lAre. ~ / PII;}ÇJ 2 -"3) <:).c... -eo 0 00 rLù\M bY::: /4.') c~ - c;..{ cPS'-= 8 - ~ Cr.:5 (':"'-0 pr:; r ,,-I -r'" .3) Cr'icct::- ¡;¡)/P6" CAPACL"rY , 2. - 3 2" ([).1'(1 1't'J PII;}~':::- 3- ";) c.F~ .; G,! CF.7 :::: '.2> cr.s /8'- RC-P c: /2.,':) % => DId...:: O.~.s- (3r.t.7ÚPU¿,..LJ < 1.0 O,c. , ""'e::.. ( .$ tSt!f c:. ..... t.. Co -S" I-f e. t!"?" ""'" r .,... ~ C 10-/ ~ J (4- OF-B) 8 .8 NOLTE and ASSOCIATES,. Inc. Engineers / Planners / Surveyors JOB NO. S 0033/ DATE -¿-¡(-57 ( »-)(-"77 DESIGNED BY j/;t;>{.... V UBJECT CCIt:&- YAI'fCA CHECKED BY C-I-ICC Ie. I A/ L e 7' C '" ,"';" C 17"'"';" (AT pr 3) £. Qfl ro ("'IV L er -=- 8. ~ -I- A 3 =- 8.8 -+ 2_" :::- I/. 4- cr-..: (~~~) - /0' A -/ /A/C- er /N .5Vr--t'I~ CAPAClrY '= I~S c.r.: /r-?", . c)r D/:?E:'AI/^rG ~ J<J =-A,s/Acl-r'/ -= (Í-.J) KVO)': 1.5.0 ere: ::> //4 cr:::. o.~. --c!!!!::. c: (-f ¿c: Ie P IP'€ CAPA C / 'T' r ,1 U ,eCI'? Oð w/\.f.S'TR e A WI or& I'JJ"-~ Ar Pðt'Afr -3 -- . 2-tþ" e I~ 3 9-/'0 ¿ Q~a TO PIP€' .: //.4- Cr5 of- ~. 8 C-rS :: 2../- 2 C-F5 (,,¡'/t.e'r@ 3) (p"e z....~ 2J.L. C-Fs => D/cl:: 0,'8 (&B<.-2..s/<r--r..I,-'-) </.0 c), It , ~ (5 OF e) 8 12"RCP @ 1.0 %, ECKE YMCA Worksheet for Circular Channel Project Description Project File Worksheet Flow Element Method Solve For n:\sd0331\calcs.fm2 12" @ 0.9% Circular Channel Manning's Formula Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coefficient Channel Slope Diameter Discharge 0.013 0.010000 ftlft 12.00 in 3.70 cis Results Depth Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Top Width Critical Depth Percent Full Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Maximum Discharge Full Flow Capacity Full Flow Slope Flow is subcritical. 0.86 0.72 2.37 0.70 0.82 85.93 0.010784 ftlft 5.15 ftls 0.41 ft 1.27 ft 0.89 3.83 cis 3.56 cis 0.010786 ftlft ft ft2 ft ft ft 11197 :23:54 PM .8 Nolte and Associates, Inc, Haestad Methods. Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 FlowMaster v5,07 - /fD ~ \..8" 01= ;r) 8 18".RCP @ 12.9%, Ecke YMCA Worksheet for Circular Channel Project Description Project File Worksheet Flow Element Method Solve For n:\sd0331 \calcs.fm2 pipe flow cales, YMCA Circular Channel Manning's Formula Channel Slope Input Data Mannings Coefficient Depth Diameter Discharge 0.013 6.25 in 18.00 in 9.80 cfs Results Channel Slope Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Top WIdth Critical Depth Percent Full Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Maximum Discharge Full Flow Capacity Full Flow Slope Flow is supercritical. /01/97 7:47:50 AM 0.129750 ftlft 0.55 ftz 1.89 ft 1.43 ft 1.21 ft 34.72 0.008996 ftlft 17.97 ftls 5.02 ft 5.54 ft 5.13 40.70 cfs 37.84 cis 0.008705 ftlft .8 Nolte and Associates. Inc, Haestad Methods. Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury. CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 FlowMaster v5.07 (7 OF 8) 8 24" RCP, @ 1.34%, Ecke YMCA Worksheet for Circular Channel Project Description Project File Worksheet Flow Element Method Solve For n:\sd0331 \calcs.fm2 pipe flow cales, YMCA Circular Channel Manning's Formula Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coefficient Channel Slope Diameter Discharge 0.013 0.013400 ftlft 24.00 in 21.20 cis Results Depth Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Top Width Critical Depth Percent Full Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Maximum Discharge Full Flow Capacity Full Flow Slope Flow is supercritical. 3/31/97 3:11:45 PM 16.4 2.28 3.89 1.86 1.65 68.25 0.008694 ftlft 9.28 ftls 1.34 ft 2.70 ft 1.48 28.17 cis 26.19 cfs 0.008783 ftlft in ft2 ft ft ft .8 Nolte and Associates. Inc. Haestad Methods. Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury. CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 FlowMaster v5.07 (8 of ~ i - I i 8 .8. CHART 1-104.12 f ". t- L5'-i ~ ~ ..c:m ~ I~ ,.. r ItU I Of: III T I AI.. STIlE [T Ole SIO£ 0IiI. T ~ I I; ::~ 1/ ~~ ~~, ~~;:-+I "'" ' I , =- -........./P I! ~ + II I """"'.......11 ~~i ¡ì: 10 / I I V 0, I'" r-... 0: ~ , :/ 1'...... V I - . '- 'f, II ~ 1 f"""...... .~ :/1" ~ I! : ~ 'I:; f' L:? I IfT",....! I I:¡ /""""", I' ¡ I ~; I I' I ~ , ....... : - I I_' , '/ r--...,,~ ö / ~: I I ~!V!li~'/I~/1 I~V '" Rj j '9, I ~ .... f...,. . I 'i...... I I, ~: V! ¡ ;~1f T'~~i"~ ¡1 ~ I ; I ; ,7 .' Iii r;!' -....to: . I..:']: "'.. if ~ ~ I ; z !-*l' cr ~'J""I¡ I- . 1.1: . I I 1"" !, I' I ~~:............. ..-:-tiI 7"--.. 2t w' t II ",",: I .~ ....~Õ}, ~ ,I' ~- ~.V III """'~~J ~ ..... ..!'¡, J I I ~ ~ ~ ,- I ,-... fAl ...! .. I '. I - .... II, .' I ,ì'"( ,~ , . '""., J ,J? . Qt;I'~: Ii', .~. "'~ì _I". 0.1 I ' ... / fL'V " Af ' [".....1 I I ~ '.... 1;1, ............/- "7 -¡- AI I 1/ """-.c" t-'.... 'I l~ / I - I! I~. ......:........ A5- , ~ """""" /: 7'~ I 04 - ",V I I ~ " ..... ;~ / " "'-l - '-1 I IiI. I'll" I I I" I I 4 5 I ., . . 10 -~ zo JO.O JO OISCHAIItGE (c. F. 5) ONE SlOE EXAMP1..E: G¡"III: 0-10 S 12..58,. etao" "",: 0.,"11 I 0.4. Y8lDcity I 4.4 (ILL " REV. CITY OF SAN DIEGO - DESIGN GUIDE GUTTER AND ROADWAY DISCHARGE - VELOCITY CHART SHT. NO. '. r;J 70A ~, .. ,'" 8 URBAN AR'EAS TIME OF FLOW .8 OVERLAND CURVES --" ICIO Q I .. ... ... ... ... ~ ;: 100 z 400 ... u Z 0( .. '" ëi 40 .. I ." = Ž 3 ~ 200 .'..'.. "1""---'" ..-,..-.- ---.--,.. L..-:-_..., .,..c....,- ""-',--, ..,..-.... ~~. r:-:.:::;: l~:::--:-_:-:-. ~:._......:-"; ""'!- ..._~..'- --..,.,... ".,.-...-- _. JOO , .._..~'- ..- . : . . . ~.:::... ~ ::':.:...=-- . :' ~"'--..;...:: ._--,.~....._._--...._-- .--- '~..- .--...-- . .----- -...--. ~ :;:::.-- :::::::"::':=-, ,,-""----' ,..---- , .: :::-;-...- :':":':"'::::':-= ---' - --- -'.----'- .,.- 0 Surf.c. FI- Ti- Curves # -- -. --------' . EXAMPLE.. : Gtt VEN L-E.N GTH OF FLO\N ~ S i-OPE... - I. D 0/" COE-FfiC, E...N'T OF- Rv~o¡:ç: OVE-K. '-AN D ?L..DW'ï\ n1 E. = 86 400 FT. ~ :: . 70 15' K.£ A i:) ¡'V\ IN VIE.. 5 ( I -E ) ..'._'d._._._--.-'-- - - eo..' 451 -"....,.,.~,...., "'I~ -25 301 I LA! '\ ! 151 :;:0 (þ < .... 1/1 (þ ø. 338 ( " 5,7, """"V""" .... ....... 00 tn' 8 451 Prep..ted b, :a. u.s. DEPARTME~T OF COMMERCE :g NATIONAL OCEANIC AND AT IOSPIIERIC ADMINISTRATION .~ IPECIAL STUDIES BRANCH. OFFICE O¡':" 'DROLOGY. NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE CI .... >< >< .... , CI 30' Jl8° 45' 301 15 ' 1170 45' 3D' Revised 1/85 IS' . 1160 APPENDIX XI-D .-- --_.- -_.--.- ----._--- DEPARTMENT OF SANITATION ~ FLOOD CONTROL \~,p ¡;~ ~ P,.po 'd by . I~~ . 3 u.s. DEPARTMEt\ r OF COMMERCE \\ . 11 NATIONAL OCEANIC AND AT- OSPIIERIC ADMINISTRATION {;:. '> 3 ,JPECIAL STUDIES DRANCII. OFFICE OF 1\ rmOLOGV. NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE! ~ 3D' I I I ;') 451 301 151 } ,. 33- ¡ ) 4 ... 0 n 451 1180 1170 1;51 15 I 301 151 11 ÓO APPENDIX XI-G -8 8 ~<~*U, J.~~~;.;'J)~;':-"""""" ....,~,~,. u~.l!ftJ""Pf""",,48h:,,~IG" cHì\R'r-P------- - . t. ".' 0 "~ I =i.-rrr I. fi iTITT1ETrITnU'! JJ-t~'I""IIIIIII="ill"'llIlrõ-'1 . ",o::-64Su-C'--UJnHhTIi 1" Directions for Application: I.' ~ . - _do- quatlon. - 7.44 P D .: _.-: 0 .. 0;:".: . --I 6 l} From precipitation naps detennine 6 hr. and 1. 0 . . . - 24 hr. amounts for the sel ected frequency. These maps are printed in the County Hydrology Manual (10, 50 and 100 yr. maps included in th¡ Design and Procedure Manual). 2) Adjust 6 hr. precipitation (if necessary) so that it is within the range of 45% to 65% of the 24 hr. precipitation. (Not ùrrlicable to Desert) '_0 --.-. ..... .. I of the chart. "4} Draw a line through the point parallel tö, the plotted lines. 15} This line is the intensity-duration curve for the locatipn being analyzed. Application Form: a} Sel ected Frequency .s 0 yr. ".. :.. ". .. - 1) P 6 = 2. -¿'5 in oJ P 24 = :3 - ~c.?, * P 6 = .37 %* :::. '.: ~_.- : .: p ~:~~:~:~~...'~:_:..., 2} Adjusted *p = Z,L~ i~. . -- -'- . - - " 6 - .. "'" . ..... --- -~":_:. 3} t = /'0 '" --- -- c 00 - _. --"" . 0 U1.2 .. 4} I = 3. ¡;;, in/hr. min. ;Þ '"0 '"0 tT1 a ..... >< ~ .1 ~ 10 -, -~- ..~.._".....~...... I mil .. *Not Applicable to Desert Region I -, ,- .. .~- ... 1-1-.- ... - -, .0-' ,- Duration 2 3, Hours 4 5 6 so y~ 12 15 20 Minutes 30 40 50 1 - Revised 1/85 APPENDIX XI-A -_. - ---. ----.--....- . . 1 1 ] j i ~ flOOD CONTROL 45' , 30. I .' ~ (I S(~ 33- ~""'" 8 45' prcP8i'd by U.S. DEPARTMEN r OF COMMERCE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND AT. OSPIIERIC ADt.IINISTRATION SpaCIAL STUDIES BRANCH. OfFICE OF II OROLOGY. NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE 30' Jl8' 45' 30' 15' 11]° 1151 301 151 1160 Revised 1/85 APPENDIX XI-E FlOO) CONTROL 451 301 151 JJ8 451 '8 -. ," ,-'- 8 u.s. DEPARTMENtr OF COMMERCE Plepof," br . , , 1 . j .. < < .. NATIONAL OCE^:<;IC ^,fO A"nlo:iI'II£RIC AO.IINISTRATIOH 'POCI'L ITDDIES ."><"'3D::'« Df ~.'DLDGY' II.YO;.. ."T",. """CE :: IIUO 117° I~; I , I (J 0 , I ~ i I I. ~j I 1.-. 1 )01 :In. Revised 1/85 APPENDIX XI-II - --... Jl,fJ :~"~~lJ!1~:- ";1~.b.U~"I'JjI~~""""""'" ",...,......~h.tA~u """~J.leh,¡S~ÎG-Ñ-CH^RT ;.".:..;.,;:~;~~ 'D'::'64Sum,mdm'l! . 1.1- - - . i Blrw WillmtI . ;.< ~ ,I ~ 10 -, ~' .~ .4. - 15 20 Minutes 30 40 50 1 Duration 2 3 Hours 4 5 6 - ~_..- Directions for AppHcation: 1) From prec i pita t i on na ps detenni ne 6 hr. and 24 hr. amounts for the selected frequency. These maps are printed in the County Hydrology Manual (la, 50 and 100 yr. maps included in th! Design and Procedure Manual). 2) Adjust 6 hr. precipitation (if necessary) so that it is within the range of 45% to 65% of the 24 hr. precipitation. (Not «pp1icable to Desert) 3) Plat 6 hr. precipitation on the right.sid~ ~ of the chart. WI' 4) Draw a line through the point parallel to, the plotted lines. 5) This line is the intensity-duration curve for the locati~n being analyzed. Application Form: 0) Selected Frequency /QO yr. 1) P6 = 2.7 in., P24= 4-3 J *P6 = P24 in. , 2. & %* 8 2) Adjusted *P 6= 2. . ? 3) tc = /0 min. 4) I = CI.5" in/hr. *Not Applicable to Desert Region , / f!) t!) Y t!!f" .e Revised 1/85 APPENDIX XI-A --- --,--".----.""",.-- '0 - NOLTE and As~bClATES, Inc. N~ Engineers 1 Plar,llers 1 Surveyors ~ JOB NO. DATE SUBJECT DESIGNED BY CHECKED BY , q ') . ..;) /5 ,.4~ A, I /. 7 ... ì. - - A..oo,. ¿cr-] ~ 1. ~ 76. ß .-. L ~ P!},(. - 7 8. )..:- z. ::'> 6). ") 2.. At, + ~ ~IV , '" L 67'" AL r2..L,'ß~l / ~ro. .3 ;.-, z... :: I?~, 6':- t +!ì), 7"':"L+ 3b,l..~ 't.:- 33(".(:~t.::) - 1 '2.-£\.~ ...........-' ~ 2co./ - L '3, <' Cj 1+ c, ~ 1.. I¿L-4-~ ~ì.'1::-'- ". -'. ,..., . .., I 'r (rt' " II' U ;. i ~"" i f.e:. ¡ ::: ! ' ~.,: If) l:'. ".., _':; I ~.., FEB 1 3 1997 ËNG¡f\/EEH-"NG', (!:;'-RVir'E(' '.. -- vC: Iv" CITY OF ENCINITAS (() . )..:.... L ( ('a - ~..:.. 1- j (O,.5~l. A... ::. s ,- C1 (0 :..., 1. + ).1-3'::-1.-+ '1, , 6 ~ l.- GJ. 'ð1 ~ 1 => ð. '5 ~ A. C, A:3 ~ Iq."?" (, ~ 1. 7.. jAr. R;: ., J (95.1, .:...- 'L + It-13 ~ 1.. ..n...?5~'::-1. ~ !f:j', Bo~1.:: 1.53 AC, rrv.> v ~ ... + lei-. 2.. s ;:.... ê. I I I I I I I I I I I I I, II I I I I I 8 SHEPARDSON ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES INC 8 m- ~m_m~__----"m~m - "_m" mmmmm moW #Œ,~-ß rmn \W Z:æ prosP.IT;~':398 -,' ~'4~JO " r: r: (1 . ~ ,FAX .. '9~5824 , . ~ ,1QQ7 '~. SSW-A [/ CamirJ<1 Rea, Carlsbad, CA 92008 619/931-9991 FAX 619/931-0547" GeotechnIcal Consu1/anls: Engineers-Gtologists February 10, 1997 IV 0 L ';;-Cr: ": ") I'! A t'\ S UI¡U ~ DC. S.E.A. 96171-01 Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA c/o Good and Roberts 1090 Joshua Way Vista, CA 92083 r 0') ii' ';;:' ! l;, !! ',!i ." i no(' '. Ud -' FEB 1 3 1997 SUDJECI': Põveinent S~'TúI'ä1, Sectiüfi RecOmmeridations Gymilasium and Fitness Center Additions Magdalena Ecke YMCA Encinitas, CA ENGINEEíW~G SERVICES CITY OF ENC!NITAS Gentlemen: This letter provides recommendations for the pavement structural sections for the proposed service road and parking lot additions at the subject project. These recommendations have been prepared following the request of Jim Hettinger of Nolte and Associates, project Civil Engineers, The R-value used in preparing the recommendations herein was that tested and reported during the previous geotechnical investigation for the site, prepared by Leighton and Associates in 1985. The R-value test was on a sample of the native silty sand materials which are similar to those anticipated for the subgrade of the service road and parking addition areas. This R-value result was 76. In consideration of the traffic loading and frequency, we have selected Traffic Indices of 4.5 and 5.0 for the parking lot addition and service road pavement respectively. Based on the above parameters, the following pavement recommendations are provided. Asphaltic Concrete (inches) Aggregate Base (inches) Parking lot addition 2.5 4 Service road 2.5 5 It's recommended that upper 6 inches of the subgrade and the Aggregate Base be compacted to 95% of the maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM Test Procedure D1557-91. The Aggregate Base should conform to the specification for Oass II Aggregate Base as specified by the Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. I I I I I I I I I' I I I I I I I I I I 8 e February 10, 1997 -2- S.E.A. 96171-01 California State Department of Transportation. It is important for satisfactory pavement performance that adequate surface drainage be provided to prevent ponding and/or infiltration of water that can lead to saturation and weakening of the subgrade. We trust the above information will assist you in your preparation of the plans and specifications for the project. If there are any questions concerning these recommendations, please contact the undersigned. Respectfully submitted, SHEP ARDSO EN G INEERIN G ASSOCIATES, IN e. cc: (2) Addressee (1) Nolte and Associates Attn: Mr. Jim Hettinger ¡ ) . 'am E. Ellis, G.E. 293 Senior Geotechnical EngineerNice President WEE:sj Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8 8 REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TIŒ GYMNASIUM AND FITNESS CENTER ADDmON MAGDALENA ECKE YMCA ENCINIT AS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR: Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA c/o Good and Roberts 1090 Joshua Way Vista, CA 92083 PREPARED BY: Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. 10035 Prospecti\venue Santee, California 92071-4398 October 29, 1996 S.E.A. 96171-01 I ; 5 H E PAR 0'0 N I .,- ~:::::,":::i:~~OClATES INC I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8 t'"I"<'I"'-' ;"';""", :, III.), {""",,'ct .-I;'c '.n:tc,', L.-I ~:(i:-1.~;d" i,,/()- ,I E: L.II""'" ¡,,'III L.lri.,¡'¡¡¡j, L,\ ":,1118 ri~ .f~:L'J,'311 ¡,1:'i'J31-~~~'1 F~,\I'I~i.f.f'L;,;:~ F,\.\ "¡,, ~;; .,J ;-i.- October 29, 1996 S.E.A.96171-01 Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA clo Good and Roberts 1090 Joshua Way Vista, CA 92083 ATTENTION: Mr. Jack Good SUBJECT: Report of Geotechnical Investigation The Gymnasium and Fitness Center Addition Magdalena Ecke YMCA Encinitas, CA Gentlemen: We are please to present the attached Report of Geotechnical Investigation for the proposed gymnasium, fitness center and maintenance building additions to the existing Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA facilities in Encinitas, California. In general, we found excellent foundation conditions in the areas of the proposed structures. It is our opinion that the geotechnical conditions at the site are suitable for the proposed structures provided the recommendations contained in the body of this report are incorporated into the design. If there are any questions concerning this report, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. The opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Respectfully submitted, SHEPARDSON ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INe. Ke~ Vic~es~ ~ F!b ~ ' ~{j/~~. G,E, 293 Senior Geotechnical EngineerNice President - cc: (6) Addressee Enclosures Shepardson Engineering Associates, lnc. I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I 8 8 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. 1.0 INTRODUCTION.....................................................1 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK........................................... .........2 3.0 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION ..........................................2 4.0 FINDINGS ..........................................................2 4.1 4.2 4.3 5.0 Site Description .................................................2 Site Geology and Subsurface Conditions ...............................3 SeismicitylFaulting ...............................................3 CONCLUSIONS ......................................................4 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................4 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 7.0 Earthwork .....................................................4 Foundation.....................................................5 LateralEarthPressures............................................5 Slabs-on-Grade ..................................................6 SurfaceDrainage ................................................7 LABORATORYTESTS ................................................7 8.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION .........................................7 9.0 ADOmONALSERVICES ..............................................8 APPENDICES Plate No. APPEND IX A Site Plan - Gymnasium/Fitness Center Addition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ". . . . . . .. Al Site Plan-Maintenance Building ........................................ A2 APPEND IX B - Exploration Logs Explanation of Logs .................................................. B1 Logs of Test Borings .............................................. B2-B10 APPENDIX C Laboratory Test Results .............................................C1-C6 APPENDIX D Recommended Guide for Placement of Engineered Fill I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I 8 8 REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION GYMNASIUM AND FITNESS CENTER ADDmON MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA October 29, 1996 S.E.A. 96171-01 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of a Geotechnical Investigation for the site of a proposed gymnasium and fitness center contiguous to the existing offices and workout facilities at the Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA in Encinitas. It also includes an investigation for a proposed 30 ft. x 30 ft. maintenance building to be constructed immediately west of the existing tennis courts which will separate the maintenance building from the gymnasium. The YMCA facility is located at 200 Saxony Road in Encinitas. Preliminary site plans for the addition, prepared by Architects/Larson/Carpenter, indicate that the combined area of the proposed gymnasium and fitness center will be on the order of approximately 25,800 sq. ft. The attached Plate No.1 is a site plan, based on a recent topographic map, which shows the approximate area of the proposed addition, as well as existing facilities. It appears that very little grading will be required in order to construct the fitness center and gymnasium. Based on the existing topography we would expect that a few feet of cut in the area of the fitness center and up to four feet of fill along the southern end of the gymnasium will be required. It is our understanding that the new construction will consist of concrete block perimeter walls and on-grade concrete slabs. We are assuming that the gymnasium will have hardwood flooring over the concrete slab. For the purpose of this report, we have assumed the various column loads for the proposed structure will not exceed 75 kips per isolated column, nor 3 kips per lineal foot of continuous wall. The preliminary plans indicate that the maintenance building will be constructed so that the first story will be partially subterranean on the east, west, and north sides. Apparently, these three walls of the structure will act as retaining walls in addition to their role as exterior bearing walls for the structure. It appears that these walls will be required to retain a maximum of approximately 9 to 10 ft. of soil. An additional retaining wall is planned to retain the east side of the service yard/access road fronting the maintenance buildings. Shepardson Engineering AssOCUlres, Inc. I I I I I I I , I I I I 8 . October 29, 1996 -2- S.E.A. 96171-01 2.0 SCOPE AND PURPOSE The purpose of this investigation was to provide an assessment of the geotechnical conditions as they might affect the design and construction of the proposed structures. The scope of this investigation included a number of tasks which are briefly summarized as follows: 1. Review of soil investigation report prepared by Leighton and Associates, titled "Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed North County Family YMCA Expansion", dated March 11, 1985. 2. 3. Drilling of nine exploratory borings to investigate the subsurface conditions. Laboratory testing of representative soil samples retrieved during the exploration program. Evaluation and analysis of field and laboratory data gathered. Preparation of this report summarizing the findings, conclusions and recommendations regarding the geotechnical parameters affecting the project design. 4. 5. 3.0 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS II II I I I I I I As part of our current investigation we reviewed the data contained in a report by Leighton and Associates prepared for the existing YMCA facilities. The investigation contained several borings and test trenches, two of which were near or within the area of the proposed building expansion. The conditions encountered by Leighton and Associates generally conformed to the conditions we encountered in our investigation. 4.0 FINDINGS 4.1 Site Description The site of the proposed addition is relatively flat and has been previously graded. The area of the proposed gymnasium and fitness center is essentially in an area that was previously cut in order to achieve the existing grades. There is existing fill in the area of the proposed maintenance building, however, the proposed floor elevation of the building will result in the removal of all of the existing fill from beneath the new structure. S~pardson Engineering AsSOCÜltes, Inc. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ,I I ,I 8 8 October 29, 1996 -3- S.E.A. 96171-01 The area of the proposed gymnasium and fitness center structure is currently occupied by lawn areas, driveways, parking areas and open ground. There are two portable office structures in the area of the proposed gymnasium that will have to be moved. 4.2 Site Geology and Subsurface Conditions Our investigation indicates that the site of the proposed additions is underlain primarily by dense, sandy soils thought to be part of Pleistocene age Terrace Deposits possibly associated with ancient coastal dunes. These deposits were found to be only slightly clayey. However, we encountered a zone in Test Boring No.5 that was classified as clayey sand-type material at a depth of between two and four feet below the existing ground surface. Also in Boring No.5 we encountered approximately two feet of existing fill soils. These are the only fill soils of significant thickness encountered in the area of the proposed gymnasium/fitness center. In the area of the proposed maintenance building, we estimate that a maximum thickness of fill, on the order of five feet deep may exist at the hinge point of the slope. According to the preliminary plans for this building, the elevation of the first floor should be such that it will be below any existing fill and, therefore, the footings will be in undisturbed terrace deposits. 4.3 SeismicitylFaulting There are no known faults that pass through, or near, the project site. In our opinion, the nearest active fault which could possibly affect the project site would be the Rose Canyon Fault, which is thought to parallel the coastline approximately 3 miles offshore. This fault is considered active, however, the recurrence interval for a major earthquake is thought to be on the order of, possibly, 300 years. We estimate that a maximum probable earthquake on the Rose Canyon Fault would be on the order of 6.0 magnitude. In our opinion, the most likely source for a major earthquake which could affect the project site, would be the Coronado Banks Fault Zone, which lies approximately 18 miles to the west. This fault zone is considered very active and capable of producing a maximum probable earthquake on the order of 6.75 magnitude. If a maximum probable earthquake should occur on the Rose Canyon or the Coronado Banks fault, maximum peak ground accelerations at the site would probably be on the Shepardson Enginuring Associates, IlU:. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8 . October 29, 1996 -4- S.E.A. 96171..01 order of .3g and .1g for the Rose Canyon and Coronado Banks Faults respectively. These calculated accelerations are based on Campbell's "Attenuation Relationships for Soil-like Materials" (1993). 5.0 CONCLUSIONS / From a Geotechnical Engineering standpoint, it is our opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed structures. Relatively shallow spread or continuous wall footings designed for moderate loads are an appropriate foundation system for the site. Recommendations for foundation design, earthwork and site preparation are contained in the following sections. 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 Earthwork The minor amount of fill which is thought to be present within the areas of the proposed structures is not considered to be significant enough to affect the structures provided the recommendations in this report are followed. Any soft or unstable fill, or natural materials encountered during construction should be removed and replaced with compacted fill. Fill will be required to raise a portion of the site to the desired grade. Fill may consist of the onsite materials if they are free of organics and any debris. The guideline specifications for fill placement and compaction are contained in the attached "Recommended Guide for Placement of Engineered Fill" included in the Appendix of this report. All fill should be placed at, or slightly greater than, optimum moisture content, and then compacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density, as referenced to ASTM Test Method D1557. This compaction should also be applied to all utility trench backfill and subgrade beneath pavement areas as well. In addition, the upper six inches of subgrade beneath pavement areas, as well as any overlying aggregate base, should be compacted to 95% of its maximum dry density. SMpardson Enginaring AssocŽiJtes, Inc. I I I I I I I I I I I I :1 I I I I I I 8 8 October 29, 1996 -5- S.E.A. 96171-01 6.2 Foundations Due to the tendency for fill soils and natural formational soils to settle differentially under applied loads, we recommend that all foundations for the proposed structures be constructed in the natural soils onsite. In order to achieve this, based on our interpretation of the proposed finished floor elevations, deepened footings on the order of four feet will be required in the southern area of the proposed gymnasium, where fill is to be placed. We recommend that footings extend a minimum of one foot into undisturbed, competent formational soils, or a minimum depth of 18 inches below the adjacent finish grade whichever is deeper. The recommended minimum footing width is 12 inches for continuous footings, and 18 inches minimum width for column footings. The recommended maximum allowable soil bearing pressure is 3,000 lbs./sq. ft. for dead plus live load. This pressure may be increased 33% for wind or seismic loading. We estimate that differential settlement for similarly loaded foundations designed to the maximum allowable soil bearing pressure will not exceed 0.5 inches. We further anticipate that the settlement will occur relatively rapidly following imposition of a load upon these relatively granular subgrade materials. Final footing reinforcement should be selected by a structural engineer. As a minimum, we recommend one No.4 reinforcing bar in both the top and bottom of the footing. The onsite native soils are predominantly silty sands with small amounts of clay fines. In our opinion, these soils provide very low expansive characteristics and should not promote excessive expansive pressures upon foundations or slabs. However, we do recommend that the subgrade soils be maintained in a moist condition prior to placement of concrete for footings andlor slabs. 6.3 Lateral Earth Pressures The active state lateral earth pressures may be assumed equivalent to a pressure of fluid weighing 36 lbs./cu. ft. and 56 Ibs./cu. ft. for unrestrained and restrained walls, respectively. Passive earth pressures may be taken as equivalent to a fluid weighing 350 lbs./cu.ft. These above lateral earth pressures do not include any reduction factors for factor of safety. In addition, these pressures are applicable for conditions of level backfill, no surcharge loads within the backfill, and where the backfill is drained. A friction coefficient of 0.35 may be used to determine the resistance of sliding between the base of the foundations and firmly compacted soil. Shepan:lson EngiMering Associaæs, Inc. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8 8 October 29, 1996 -6- S.E.A. 96171-01 6.4 Slabs-on-Grade Concrete slab-on-grade floors may be supported directly upon the native soils and/or compacted fills. The final slab reinforcement should be incorporated as determined by the structural engineer. As a minimum, we recommend No.3 reinforcing bars spaced at 24 inches maximum in each direction. Supports for the reinforcement should be provided as needed to maintain the position of the reinforcement at mid-slab during concrete placement. Due to the sandy nature of onsite soils, we expect that subsurface transmission of infiltrating water, from irrigation and rainfall will be extensive. It should be anticipated that slabs near irrigated areas could eventually be subjected to high soil moistures within the native or fill soils. Since we expect hardwood flooring will be placed on the concrete slab in the gymnasium, we recommend that careful planning be incorporated in the design and construction to prevent soil moisture vapors from penetrating the slab. As a minimum, an impermeable membrane placed beneath the slab is recommended where moisture sensitive floor coverings are to be used or where potential floor dampness from moisture vapor is undesirable. The membrane should be 6 mils or thicker and should be covered, and underlain, with 2 inches or more of coarse sand to protect the membrane. The sand overlying the membrane should be moist to promote more uniform curing of the concrete slab. Our experience also suggests that considerable moisture may enter the concrete slab by "wicking" of the moisture from adjacent landscaped areas, through the footingtstemwall. We recommend consideration be given to isolating the slabs from the footinglstemwall with the use of a cold joint and a moisture proof barrier. Plastic shrinkage cracking of concrete is common in large, flat slab areas which are not designed or constructed to account for this characteristic. We recommend the designer incorporate appropriate details and specifications for material, workmanship and quality control to reduce the adverse effects of concrete shrinkage cracks. SMpardson Engi1ll!ering AsSOCÚltes, /111:. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8 8 October 29, 1996 -7- S.E.A.96171-01 6.5 Surface Drainage It is important to provide positive surface drainage away from buildings and pavements. Ponding of water near pavements and/or footing areas could lead to disruptive, differential settlement and elevated interior moisture. Irrigation of landscaping near these structures should be carefully monitored and controlled. 7.0 LABORATORY TESTS Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with generally accepted American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) test methods or suggested procedures. Representative samples were tested for natural density and in-place moisture content, maximum dry density determinations, expansion index, consolidation characteristics and direct shear properties. The results of these tests are presented in Appendix C or on the Boring Logs, Appendix B. 8.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION The subsurface exploration performed as part of this investigation included the drilling of nine exploratory borings via continuous flight, hollow stem auger advanced by a drill rig. The conditions encountered in the exploratory borings were visually examined and logged by a geologist from our office. The soils were described in accordance with the Unified Soil Oassification System as illustrated on the Explanation of Logs attached in Appendix B. In addition, a visual textural description of the wet color, apparent moisture content, and the density or consistency of the soils are illustrated on the boring logs. Soil densities for granular soils are given as either loose, medium dense, or very dense. The boring logs are presented as Plate Nos. B2-BlO. Bulk samples and relatively undisturbed drive samples were obtained from the borings and transported to our office for testing and/or further classification. SMpardson Enginuring Associates, Inc. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8 8 October 29, 1996 -8- S.E.A. 96171-01 9.0 ADDmONAL SERVICES This report completes our scope of services for this project. During the construction phase, the Geotechnical Engineer should be contacted to observe and test compacted fill placement, inspect placement of slope drains and to verify that the exposed soil conditions are as anticipated. These services are intended to permit the Geotechnical Engineer to express the opinion that the geotechnically related work is in conformance with the project specifications and plans, and to document changes encountered or made during construction. Shepardson Enginuring AsSOCÚltu, Inc. iL .1 . ¡ J --- .,..:.....¡- I ! ~ i i ! ¡ i I i I I i tl ". . j ~ i.l ¡j ! } ¡j ~ ~ .. , t ... ~ L Ii ~ .i jllO J -- +'v ----------------------- r- ---r---:t...-- --------- :)/), l"'lul........... l.h.._ù'O I\~ ¡, I I I ~----------------_____---I ------ -------- 2 Fitness ICenter ~ ~r~ ~~ -, :;:-,~ -ouu- ----""'_-_n- - _. I .. I l I I ¡ ! ! I I I I I I I I --.- -1----/ "--"'" ---~- : I . I :"--...1 Existing -$- = Test Boring .-r~--r'--~-' ........ -... ~.~--..--- .~;,::: :1 ---~-_..--.-.-.-- --' -- '--.,. ó------..-... ¡ ,......... I I I I I I I J J 1 j .aà .. ~ SEA R.171 Rev: 4/88 Scale: 1" = 16' -I~.j- . % -.-mo --'" ......... I --- , ,... - .,....,.,.,. ........ -.- Job NLmber: 98171-01 Date: October 1996 '.'-~' --, ~ SHEPARDSON ;~ ENGINfERING AssocIATES INC , '. . ":'..-. SITE PLAN Gy.....8I.. 8IId FIlM.. Cent.r Addition Magd.18na Eok. YMCA Enolnl.... CA GtØlrc/lllü:.1 Gnuu/t."", E"lirwm-Gmøtw$ N ~ Plat. A1 I 1 1 ., ',,",' 1:;1' ", ,,<' .."":"" .,..;;,: ,~;:::; I,,'~ , ,',." ". " ,",;.;t:l. """'/"" , rl!:.:t;{;-- ' " ' . , 1',.- "', , ",~ ,~. ";,,, , :", '. I .,' I' I I I I I I I I I I I , --,' ", ',J -,. ',-' " , ' - ' . ,,' """,,~,. ,'"..-, ..:- ,,'.- ....'.' '".f- " " ' .,', " , ' APPENDIX -A- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8 0 I- U1 . S EXISTA" P.V.C. SEWER 163.62 TENNIS COURT x 1 63.23 = Test Boring ~ Scale: 1 = 20' -~ SHEPARDSON ~ ENGINEERING ASSOCI,A,TES INC Gtoltch"ic/JI CO"swlt/J"ls: E"gi"ttTS-GtOlogisls Date Cctober 1996 Project No. 98171..01 SITE PLAN M.lnt.n."oe Building A2 Plate SEA A.17Q Aev: 4/88 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . . . . " APPENDIX S' SHEPARDSON ENGINEERING SOIL CLASSIFICATION PROCEDURE The Tables Included Below are Used By Shepardson Engineering Associates. Inc. to Determine the Group Symbol for a Soil in Accordance with ASTM Test Standards. The Name Used in Conjunction with the Group Symbol is Determined By Using ASTM Test Method 02487-85 COARSE MATERIAL (ASTM D2487) Ualor Dlvlalon. Group Symbol. Typical N.m.. Î'i . CD > .. ¡¡; 0 0 CII "0 ~2: Cl)c '00 "'0 c.. -c "- ~.. CJ- ,.. ..a: ~~ ~ =.. 00 °....> u'" II)~::.! c 'Oc..D..CI) :IS c .. 0 == :::u~-;¡ ~ ~ÕÕ2: 0 0:lS ~ E ù: SP Poorly Graded Sand. and Gravelly Sand, lillie or no Fines ãi > '" ð GW Well-Graded Gravel and Gravel-Sand Mixtures, Ut~1e or no Rnes .. "c ;;;0 0", ~-š~ 0",.. j!!o;¡¡; "'oa:. èiEco ~.2z °õ ~.. où: II) c '" .!! u GP Poorly Graded Gravel and Gravel- Sand Mixtures, Uttle or no Fines GM Silty Gravel. Gravel-Sand-Clay Mixtures ~ ãi"" .. >- .. !J"i~ GC Clayey Gravels. Gravel-Sand-Clay Mixtures SW Well-Graded Sand and Gravelly Sands, Lillie or no Fines '0 C '" CI) c '" .!! u ... FI NER MATERI ALS (More Than 50 Percent Passing a No.4 Sieve) 0 5 f 12 t w > I ~ I CI) 0 ... 0 C'õ .. CJ L f ~ CI) CI) < 50 "- I- 2: w L I u a: w D.. 70 L I 85 I 100 ~ ~ -.. SW or SP (5.. Tabl. No,11 SW-SM or SP-SM SW-SM/SC or SW-SC or SP-SC SP-SM/SC I (SM) (SM-SC) eSC) (MU (ML-CU (CL or CHI (MU (ML-CU eCL or CHI (MU (ML-CU eCL or CHI -""II( Fines Below 'A" Line Rnes Above 'A' Line Fines - PI < 4 Fines 4 < PI < 7 F;n..~ PI ~ '7 ~ Notes: 1. 00<"" not Dlstlnqulsh between Sill-Elastic Silt -Organic Silt 2, Classification 01 CH (Fat Clayl is uMd when LL ~ sa. Classily as lean Clay (CLI when LL<Sa 3. Assumes less than 15% Gravel SEA: R'300 2/88 .. --- -- -- -' - - .- SAND GRAVEL SILTS AND CLAYS I Medium I Coarse Fine I Coarse COBBLES BOULDERS Fine GRAIN SIZES Classlllcatlon Crlt.rla u CI) ::i CI) Ù CJ ~" CJ ~ I c." 0'0/0", Go..,., '.aft . ~-õ '0,0,2 ern c.' 1I1'_ft 1 a"" 3 :. [ °'0 . °.0 CCl) .. .g ~ I Not Meeting both Criteria for GW c "0 _u ~~~ "E .. .. oo!!.. a3U~ .. D.. ~ CI) iLi gõ :: .. CJ co" .2~ ~ 0; c 0 u.. -u - ~ -¡¡; .. .. .. "D.. > > .. .. 0>.. Ü õ OItéñ ~ éñ :.. ~ ",g -g D.. ¡; .. c,,! :;i"! ~¡¡; a3~o.co-o -2: - 2: 00 .." ""-CII ..: o;~o 2/e.. ~ D.. '" 2: Atterberg Limits Plot Below . A" Line or Plasticity Index lass than 4 Atterberg Limits Plot Above . A' Une and Plasticity Index Greater than 7 c. - °.0 I °'0 c..a... "'aft . c. . '~O,2 -IIo'_ft Ie"" 3 °ta . O.. No: Meeting Criteria for SW U.S. STANDARD SERIES SIEVE zoo 40 10 MOISTURE CONTENT Description Criteria "Dry' Absence of Moisture; Dusty; Dry to the Touch 'Damp. Some Moisture But less Than Optimum for the Soil 'Moist' Near Optimum for the Soil 'Wet" Above Optimum lor the Soil "Saturated" Containing Visible Free Moisture These fina I logs represènt Shepardson Engineering Associate¡¡', interpretation of subsurface conditions bused on . field logs In combination with the results of labaratory examination and tests of representative field samples. Therefore, these logs contain both factual and interpretative information, The logs represent subsurface 'conditlons at the dates and locatians indicated and are not necessarily representative of subsurface conditions at other locatior.s and times. The horizon tal lines represent the approxi mate generic and/or lithologic boundary between types of soil and/or rock material and the transition may be gradual. Please note that the logs summarize only a portian of the geotechnical report. They should not be reproduced for distribution separated from the bady of the report and the data contained on the lag should be used only in conjunction with the report . "Refusal': indicates inability to extend excavation practically/ econamically with exploration equipment used. KEY TO LOG SalT'()le Interval 00 c- ~. * ~ ,,- - - ""= .!. og ~= :;¡ :;~ ... ~ ~: ~ ~ u... ~ ~ ~ ë =: ~ i a~ ';:1- ~i... - ~~ 01- ::) ~ ã- 0 0 , 7 ~ f 5 103 11 "-' ~ 0 6 :g~ '. t - . ~ - I- Atterberg Umits Plotting in Hatched Area are Borderline Classifications Requiring use at Dual S~bols I CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENINGS * Unified Soil Classification System " 3/4' 3" IZ' NOTES: COMPACTNESS CON SISTENCY SANDS GRAVELS AND NON-PLASTIC SlL15 CLAYS AND PLASTIC SILTS Very Loose Loose Medium Dense Dense Very Soft Soft Firm Still Very SUfI Hard Very Dense _.~ SHE PAR D SON ~ ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES INC GtOltChniclIl CoFlSullllnls: Enginllrs,Glologisls Job Number: 95171-01 r-- Level of Free Water & Date Measured rJ Seepagp. at Time 01 Boring TYP".. OF SAMPL E OA SAMPLER SS . Siandard Penetralion Test Sample (ASTM) 0 . Evans Sampler (3.ZS' 0.0., 2.6' I.DJ H . Californ'a Sampler ¡3"0.0.. Z.37S' I,D.) SI . S!>elby Tube 13"0.0./ 5Z. Shelby TuDe (Z.S'O.D.I PB . Pitcher Barrel (3'0.0.1 . - UnaDle to Aetrieve Sample B . Bulk Sample C . Chunk Sample NUMBEA OF BLOWS FOR LOWER IZ' OF DAIVE SAMPLE When SS Sampler Used, Blows are Taken Using 14alb Hammer-30' Drop Energy Criteria on Log for Other Samplers P - Push Under Hammer Weight MOISTUAE CONTENT (Percent Dry Weiqhtl DAY DENSITY (Pounds Per Cubic Footl (AI - Relative Compaction OTHER TESTS PERFORMED SG - Specific Gravity OS - Direct Shear UC - Unconfined Comoression TC - Triaxial COm¡¡ression R S - Residual Shear CN . Consolidalior. EX - Expansion EI - Expansion Index 1.40 . Maximum Density-Optimum SE . Sand Equivalent GS - Grain Size Determination PM - Permeability. AL - Atterburg Li mits R - R -Value CBA - Ca610rnia Bearing Ratio CH - Chemical Tests MoiSlure Date: 10/29/96 Plate YMCA GYMNASIUM AND FITNESS CENTER ENCINITAS CA EXPLANATION OF LOGS 81 I I I I Drilling Date(s): Logged By: ...c- ë.~ QQ CI:t:. Q -Q 0.0. E> <01- en I I - 2 )c B H I- 4 I I - - -- f-6ZH f- 8 I I I 10 ZH 12 14 I I 16 18 I I 20 Ix: H -22 -24 I I 8 8 LOG OF TEST BORING NO. B-1 09/17/96 KLS Drilling Equipment: Method/Hole Size: Q -"" ....- ~ ... ë ~'#. ~ ~C:Õ~ïñC'::JQ- 5- I- .2 g 0 è5 c: g, ; ë'#. .... c: aJu5 ~-~8- ~.g ~ 55 8.2 46.2 DS , '2 ------ ------ 39 76 37/6' Drive Energy Data: Hammer Type CAT HEAD Weight 140 Ibs. Drop 30 ins. en u en ~ U :201 0.0 ~...J (:1 Surface Elevation: Bottom Elevation: SM I - - ŠM-ŠC vV'. /. [(:I l/ft / .V . / l/Y v'.¡//. i/// VY'/ v'.¡//. i/// VY'/ v'.//. . // VY'/ .;/. // y¡ .f. ;// y¡ .f/ ;// Y'¡- .i')/. (/ y¡- . ://. ;// ÿv ./11- . /V Yll ./11- /v ill -164' -142' FLIGHT AUGER/6" MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TFRRACF nFPOSITS (Ot). Sandstone, silty sand, dense, moist, yellow-red brown. " - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- LQt¡;. Sandstone, slightly clayey sand, medium dense to dense, moist to wet, orange brown. :Less clay, becomes silty sand. :Becomes slightly clayey. :4" thick gravel zone. END OF BORING AT -20.5 FT. Hole left open for 6 hrs., no free water. Please refer to symbols and note limitations shown on "Explanation of Lo s" I ::;::!;¡:S H E PAR D SON ¿:::: - ENGINEERING ASSOCIA rES INC. Geotechnical Consultants: Engineers-Geologists II Project No.: 96171-01 Plate Log of Test Boring No. B-1 Encinitas YMCA B2 <0 0) CI) (/) M -I CI) 1 of 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I 8 8 LOG OF TEST BORING NO. B-2 Drilling Date(s): Logged By: 09/17/96 KLS Drilling Equipment: Method/Hole Size: Surface Elevation: Bottom Elevation: -164' -154' FLIGHT AUGER/6 " aJ > aJ- ~~ <c¡; .~ ..e- ~ëZ "'c U) -aJ ð'~~ ~aJ- aJ ..em ë.~ 0.0. o~o ;ë~ ~- I- U 0.0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION aJaJ E> -00 -c ~ U) ~-i o:t:. 101- ccU:S aJ- 00- 100 :::J U) 0 ~U U).;:; 10 c.=J -i SM TFRRAC'.F nFPO~IT~ (Ot). Sandstone, silty sand, medium dense, wet, orange brown mottled gray. 2 2 H 21 121 11.8 85.8 - 4 r- 6 r- 8 X H 58 END OF BORING AT .9 FT. 10 12 14 16 18 1-20 r-22 r-24 Drive Energy Data: Hammer Type CAT HEAD Weight 140 Ibs. Drop 30 ins. Project No.: 96171-01 .:;¡¡¡;¡:S H E PAR D SON .::HH>"'- ENGINEERING ASSOCIA TES INc. .", Plate Log of Test Boring No. B-2 Encinitas YMCA 83 (C en aJ en M -' aJ Geotechnical Consultants: Enginee rs-Geol ogists 1 of 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1,1 I I 8 8 LOG OF TEST BORING NO. B-3 Drilling Date(s): Logged By: Drilling Equipment: Method/Hole Size: 09/17/96 KLS Surface Elevation: Bottom Elevation: -164' -154' FLIGHT AUGER/6" <I) -~ >- <1)- ~~ 'õ; .!:! .c~ ""C: en -<I) ~~¥~]: ;;¡<I)~ cu .cO! -- c.c. I- U c.<I) ;ë~ ::1- c.o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION <l)CU E>- -C: .a en ~...J C)~ «II- cou-- ~- oo~ «10 ~ en ~u en.;:; ca <.::) ...J U SM-SC, -:¡'-V Fill (7)' slightly clayey silty sand, medium dense, moist, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -ŠM' brown. ' B TFI:fRÃëF-nFPosiT~ (Ot):- Sãndstõnë, siÌi:ÿ sãñd~ dëñsë, - - - ~ 2 ~ H 36 121 11.7 86.0 moist, yellow brown and gray brown, mottled. 4 6 8 X' H 35 END OF BORING AT .9 FT. 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 f--24 Drive Energy Data: Hammer Type CAT HEAD Weight 140 Ibs. Drop 30 ins. Project No.: 96171-01 .::;¡¡~¡~: SHE PAR D SON :¡H¡¡¡¡¡¡:o - ENGINEERING ASSOCIA rES INC. .", Plate Log of Test Boring No. B-3 Encinitas YMCA 84 <C O'J co (/) ("') ~ co Ceotec:hnic:al Consultants: Engineer s- Ceol ogists 1 of 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II 8 8 LOG OF TEST BORING NO. B-4 Drilling Date(s): Logged By: 09/17/96 KLS Drilling Equipment: Method/Hole Size: Surface Elevation: Bottom Elevation: -163 ' -147' FLIGHT AUGER/6" >- <1)- ~i - ,~ .c- c ~ë;:; ""c CI en -c ~'~]. ::1<1)- c .cO) -- c.c. ~ U c.c 0::10 ~-~ ::I- c.o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION CC E>- -00 - co -c .Q en ~...J a::=. <V~ ccu5 c- 00- <Vo :::::> en 0 ~u en..;:; <V <.:) ...J SM TFRRAC'.F OFPOSITS lOt), Sandstone, silty sand, dense. moist, red brown, 2 I-- 4 I-- 6 :g H 40 121 9,7 70.2 CN " 8 :Becomes orange brown. 10 ~ H 82 12 14 t>< H 42/6' 16 END OF BORING AT -15,5 FT. 1--18 1--20 ~22 24 Drive Energy Data: Hammer Type CAT HEAD Weight 140 Ibs, Drop 30 ins. Please refer to symbols and note limitations shown on "Explanation of Lo s" .,:::::~:;: SHE PAR D SON ,:,H¡¡n,::: - ENGINEERING ASSOCIA rES /NC. ." Plate Project No.: 96171-01 Log of Test Boring No. B-4 Encinitas YMCA B5 CD (j) co en M ...J co Geotechnical Consultants: En g ¡nee r s - Ceolo gis is 1 of 1 I 8 I I I 8 LOG OF TEST BORING NO. B-5 Drilling Date(s): Logged By: 09/17/96 KLS Drilling Equipment: Method/Hole Size: Q ~ëz >- Q- .¡,~ ûí .~ ..c- ~c: (IJ -Q ~O~g ~Q- Q ..cO) ë.Q; 0..0.. ~Q f- U o:::¡o ûí-~ :::¡- 0..0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION QQ E> -00 - C:Q -C: .Q (IJ ~~ a~ tIIf- CDU:::: Q- 00- tIIo :::::> (IJ a ~u (lJo;:; tII ~ ~ SM ÐLL silty sand. medium dense, moist, dark yellow-gray brown. 2 => .J.i-- 44. - - - - - - - - - - - - - -šë ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- MD TFRRAC:F nFPOSITS (Ot). Sandstone, clayey sand, medium ~ dense to dense, moist to wet, red brown. f-4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- SM '~ ~ Sandstone, silty sand, dense, moist. red brown-orange B brown f- 6 f- 8 R H 54 END OF BORING AT .9 FT. 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 °1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Drive Energy Data: Hammer Type CAT HEAD Weight 140 Ibs. Drop 30 ins. Surface Elevation: Bottom Elevation: -164' -154' FLIGHT AUGER/6O1 ::;;i!¡¡: SHE PAR D SON '" ENGINEERING ASSOCIA rES INC. Geotechnical Consultants: En g inee r s - Geolo g is ts Project No.: 96171-01 Log of Test Boring No. B-5 Encinitas YMCA Plate B6 (0 a> CD (/ M -J CD 1 of 1 I I I I I I I I I I , I I I I II ¡I I I 8 8 LOG OF TEST BORING NO. B-6 Drilling Date(s): Logged By: 09/17/96 KLS Drilling Equipment: Method/Hole Size: Surface Elevation: Bottom Elevation: -164' -149' FLIGHT AUGER/6" >- IU- ~~ - .~ .I:~ IU ~ëz "'C en (J' -IU ~.~C" ::IIU~ IU .I:C) ë.Q; 0..0.. 0::10 ;ë~ ::I- ~ u 0..0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION lUlU E>- -00 o~g -c ~ (J' ~.... c~ IC~ aJu:S 00- reo ~ (J' C ~u (J'.;:; IC l:) .... SM TFRRAC'.F nFPOSITS' Sandstone, silty sand, medium dense to dense, moist, red brown. 2 ~ H 25 116 6.6 40.8 CN 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1--- -SM ---------------------------------- !Q.1l.:. sandstone, silty sand, dense, moist, dark gray brown. 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1--- SM-SC :71..:.- ---------------------------------- I- 8 ';/r; !Q.1l.:. Sandstone, slightly clayey-silty sand, dense, moist to X H 47 yl.J wet, orange brown mottled gray. ~ .'/1.,.<' /v 1-10 'Yv .j/I.,< ;/v ;"V I/./'I.,< 1-12 I//v v;"v I/./' X H ap/10.5 I/;/v 1-14 "-' v"'<v END OF BORING AT -14 FT. 1-16 18 20 22 24 Drive Energy Data: Hammer Type CAT HEAD Weight 140 Ibs. Drop 30 ins. Please refer to symbols and note limitations shown on "Explanation of Lo s' ..::¡¡:!¡¡:S H E PAR D SON .::i!W¡¡¡::- ENGINEERING ASSOCIA rES INC. .", Geotechnical Consultants: Engineers-Geologists Project No.: 96171-01 Plate Log of Test Boring No. B-6 Encinitas YMCA B7 CD en CD (J) M ..J CD 1 of 1 I 8 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8 LOG OF TEST BORING NO. B-7 Drilling Date(s): Logged By: 09/17/96 KLS Drilling Equipment: Method/Hole Size: Surface Elevation: Bottom Elevation: - 160' -139' FLIGHT AUGER/6" QJ >- QJ- ~~ tí .~ ..e~ ~¡:;:; -c en -QJ >-.~C' ::JQJ- QJ ..eC) -" 0.0. I- U c.QJ 0::J° ;¡:<¡e ::J- 0.0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION QJQJ E>- -00 pcg, -I: .Q en ~~ Q::::' All- ccu:$ QJ- 00- Alo :;) en Q ~u en.;:: AI <.:) ~ B 2 4 H 6 113 7.9 45.6 EI 30 112 10.3 57.8 8 H 63 10 ------ ------ 12 14 16 18 20 H 71 22 24 Drive Energy Data: Hammer Type CAT HEAD Weight 140 Ibs. Drop 30 ins. I , I I SC TE=RRACF OFPOSITS (at). sandstone, clayey sand, medium dense, wet to moist, red-orange brown. :Becomes gray brown. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- !Q1l.:. Sandstone, clayey silty sand, dense, wet, orange brown mottled gray. :Becomes silty sand. END OF BOR91NG AT -20 FT. .::;¡¡~¡¡: SHE PAR D SON ~ ENGINEERING ASSOCIA rES INC. Geotechnical Consultants: Engineers-Geologists Project No.: 96171-01 Log of Test Boring No. B- 7 Encinitas YMCA Plate B8 <0 a> CD en M -J CD 1 of 1 I I I I I 8 8 LOG OF TEST BORING NO. B-8 QJ ~¡:;:; >- QJ- "'~ 'ü; .!:a .c- "'c en -QJ ~.~ç :J QJ- QJ .cO) ã.4í 0.0. ...a f- U O:J° ;¡:¡¡!! :J- 0.0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION QJQJ E>- -00 è5~Ë: -c ~ en ~-I a:= C'CIf- aJu:S 00- C'CIo ::J en a ~u en..;:: C'CI <.::J -I - - - - - ~Sl'tiT~ ~ . ASPHAI T r.ONr.RFTF ANn RASF. - - - - - - - - - - - - - t- SM TFR-RÃë.F-n-FPo~c;iT~ (Ot):- -S~nd;t~n~:~I~y~ÿ s-a~d~ ~e-di~~ - - B dense to dense, wet, red brown. 2 Z H 30 123 10.2 79.0 ~ - 4 :Becomes silty sand, dense, moist. I- 6 :2 H 67 115 9.7 58.6 DS j. I - 8 10 12 :Becomes orange brown, moist to wet. '.. 14 16 H END OF BORING AT -16 FT. H8 1-20 22 24 Drilling Date(s): logged By: 09/17/96 KlS I I I I I I I I I I I Drive Energy Data: Hammer Type CAT HEAD Weight 140 Ibs. Drop 30 ins. I I I Drilling Equipment: MethodlHole Size: Surface Elevation: Bottom Elevation: -162' -145' FLIGHT AUGER/6°O ::,¡¡m: SHE PAR 0 SON :¡!!i¡¡¡::':- ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES INC. .", Geotechnical Consultants: Engineers-Geologists Project No.: 96171-01 Log of Test Boring No. B-8 Encinitas YMCA Plate 89 <D en CD (f) C") ...J CD 1 of 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I 8 8 lOG OF TEST BORING NO. 8-9 Drilling Date(s): Logged By: Drillin~ Equipment: Method/Hole Size: 10/02/96 KLS CME 55 HOLLOW STEM/S Of Surface Elevation: Bottom Elevation: Q ~ê:z >- Q- ,!: ..c- -Q - -c III (/) -" 0.0. 5'~], :;'Q- .c- U ..cO) o.Q E>- 0:;,0 ;ê:~ ralll 0.0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION QQ -00 ...J~ (/) ~...J 0::::" tal- aJu:$ Q- 00- ::J (/) 0 ~u ~ SM ElLL:. silty sand, medium dense, damp, light brown-red brown. 8-- - - - - - - - - - - - - ŠM - ------------------------------------ - - 2 TFRRAC'.F nFPOSITS. Sandstone, fine to medium grained silty )< H 85 130 6.4 sand. dense to very dense, moist to wet, red brown to brown, - 4 " 6 .' 8 :8: H 32 113 6,2 10 ,..12 ~ H 87 -14 -16 '-18 .' 1-20 End of boring at -20 ft. 1-22 1-24 Drive Energy Data: Hammer Type Automatic Weight 140 Ibs. Drop 30 in. Project No.: 96171-01 ::;¡:m: SHE PAR D SON ,::U¡¡¡¡¡::- ENGINEERING ASSOCIA rES INC. .", Plate Log of Test Boring No. B-9 Encinitas YMCA 810 <0 m cry ....J CI) Geotechnical Consultants: Engineers-Geologists 1 of 1 I I I I I I I I I I I - I I I . I I I I I 8 8 .. . " . . , APPENDIX C- I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I Sample Location 8- 7 @ 1,0 EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS Initial Moisture (%) 7.9 Compacted Dry Density (pcf) 113 Final Moisture (%) 16.4 Classification of Expansive Soil (ASTM D 4829-88, EI @ 50% sat. estimated) Expansion Index 0 - 20 21 - 50 51 - 90 91 -130 130+ Date: ,:¡:¡¡¡¡'S H E PAR D SON ,¡¡¡ny:::':- ENGINEERING ASSOCIA rES INC. ."", Geotechnical Consultants: Enginee rs-Geol ogists Potential Expansion very low low medium high very high Expansion Index 10 October, 1996 I Project No.: Expansion Index Test Encinitas YMCA Expansive Classification very low 96171-01 Plate C1 co m t:: UJ I I -1 I 0 I I - I c 2 4J ~ 4J Co z I Q 3 f- <: 0 ..J 0 I (J) z 4 0 u I 5 I 6 I 7 I I I I I I I I 8 -2 8 100 10000 1000 NORMAL LOAD (pst) SAMPLE DATA Sample Location and Depth (teet): B-4 @ 5.5 Soil Type and Visual Description: clayey sand. yellowish brown Sampling Method/Sample Type: H / insitu TEST RESULTS USCS Moisture Content (%) Dry Density (pet) Group Symbol Initial Final Initial Final 9.7 12.0 121 124 Water Added @ (pst): 5749 Expansion/Hydrocompression (%): -0.78 Date: Project No.: 96171-01 October, 1996 oo¡¡¡¡:j:oS H E PAR D SON ¿:::oo- ENGINEERING ASSOCIA TES INC. Geotechnical Consultants: Enginee rs-Geol ogists Plate Consolidation Test Encinitas YMCA C2 co en ~ z u I -2 I -1 I 0 I I I I I I I 6 I 7 I I I I I. I I I ë Q) u ... Q) Q, z 0 I- ~ 0 ....J 0 (/) z 0 u 2 3 4 5. 8 100 1000 NORMAL LOAD (pst) SAMPLE DATA Sample Location and Depth (teet): B-6 @ 2.5 Soil Type and Visual Description: silty sand, yellowish brown Sampling Method/Sample Type: H / ¡nsitu TEST RESULTS USCS Moisture Content (%) Dry Density (pet) Group Symbol Initial Final Initial Final 6.6 12.8 116 120 Water Added @ (pst): 5726 Expansion/Hydrocompression (%): -1.50 Date: October, 1996 Project No.: 96171-01 .:::,;¡;.S H E PAR D SON .:nnm::::':- ENGINEERING ASSOCIA TES INC. ., Geotechnical Consultants: Engineers - G eol 0 gists Consolidation Test Encinitas YMCA Plate C3 to 01 ~ z u I I 3000 I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I 2500 íî" 2000 (/') a.. (/') (/') UJ ~ 1 500 (/') c:: « UJ ::I: (/') 1000 500 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 NORMAL STRESS (PSF) Sample Location and Depth (feet): Soil Type and Visual Description: Sample Type/Sampling Method*: USCS Group Symbol and Name: B-1 @ 2.0 silty sand yellow brown insitu / H Test Data MOISTURE CONTENT (%)* * Initial Test: 8.2 Final Test: 15.0 DRY DENSITY (pcf)** Initial Test: 113 TEST CONDITIONS: NORMAL LOADS (pst): STRAIN RATE (in/min): (C,D,S) 1000,2000,3000 0.0020 Results INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE (degrees) Peak: 36 Ultimate: 35 APPARENT COHESION (psf) Peak: 151 Ultimate: 0 * See Explanation of Logs for sampler symbol definitions. ** Average of three test points. Date: October. 1996 Project No.: .:;;";,,S H E PAR D SON .:::H!!'::::':- ENGINEERING ASSOCIA rES INc. ." Geotechnical Consultants: Engineers-Geologists Direct Shear Test Encinitas YMCA 3000 3500 96171 -01 Plate C4 (() en (f) 0 I I I I I I I 3000 500 2500 u:- 2000 en a.. en en UJ ~ 1 500 en a: ~ UJ :J: en 1000 I I I I I I I !I I I I I 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 NORMAL STRESS (PSF) Sample Location and Depth (feet): Soil Type and Visual Description: Sample Type/Sampling Method*: USCS Group Symbol and Name: B-8 @ 5.5 clayey sand drk. yellow brown ¡nsitu / H Test Data MOISTURE CONTENT (%)** Initial Test: Final Test: 9.7 14.2 DRY DENSITY (pcf)** Initial Test: 115 TEST CONDITIONS: NORMAL LOADS (pst): STRAIN RATE (in/min): (C,D,S) 1000,2000,3000 0.0020 Results INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE (degrees) Peak: 40 Ultimate: 33 APPARENT COHESION (pst) Peak: 44 Ultimate: 0 * See Explanation of Logs for sampler symbol definitions. ** Average of three test points. .:,:,,;,'S H E PAR D SON ¿"':::':- ENGINEERING ASSOCIA TES INC. Geotechnical Consultants: En ginee r s- G e 010 gists Date: October, 1996 Project No.: 96171-01 Direct Shear Test Encinitas YMCA Plate C5 <0 (' (/) 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 125 - u E: I-- ::I: Q L.U 120 ~ t:: z ::¡ >- a:: a 115 100 0 Sample Location and Depth (feet): Soil Type and Visual Description: 8-5 @ 2.5 clayey sand, drk. yellow brown 140 Results ASTM D 1557-91 Method: Maximum Dry Density (pcf): Optimum Moisture Content (%): In-Place Moisture Content (%): 135 USCS Group Symbol: Liquid Limit (%): Plastic Limit (%): ,;¡¡¡¡¡~¡, SHE PAR D SON .¡¡¡¡¡H:¡::"- ENGINEERING ASSOCIA rES INC. ., Geotechnical Consultants: En ginee r s - G eol 0 gists 130 Percent Finer 3/4-ìnch: Percent Finer 1/4-inch: Specific Gravity: 110 105 10 WATER CONTENT - PERCENT OF DRY WEIGHT Date: October, 1 996 Project No.: A 127 10.0 Zero Air Void Curves Gs=2.75 Gs = 2.70 Gs = 2.65 20 96171-01 Compaction Curve Encinitas YMCA Plate C6 to en Cl.. U I 8 I I '."'~:' '. . I . ~ .' I' ,;,.;.., .. '4. ,'; I ,'-' '., " ^ ~, I I I I I I I .. I I I I I I 0, , ' , , .' ~~~:~... 8 ,'0, '". , " '. - " " .' ,~'.;;~~"" . " ,', ",n',"..' APPENDIX .' D I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1.0 8 8 RECOMMENDED GUIDE FOR PLACEMENT OF ENGINEERED FILL GENERAL 1.1 Purpose The intent of this guide is to outline procedures for placing engineered fill soil to the lines and grades shown on the approved plans. The recommendations contained in the preliminary geotechnical investigation report prepared by Shepardson Engineering Associates, Inc. are a part of this guide and would supersede the provisions contained in the guide in the case of conflict. 1.2 Jùv. 1192 Definition of Terms 0 Fill: All soil or rock material placed by man to raise the natural grade of the site or to backfill an excavation. 0 Onsite Material: Soil and/or rock obtained from excavations within the boundaries of the project. 0 Import Material: Soil andlor rock hauled in from offsite. 0 Engineered Fill: Fill which has been placed under the properly documented observation and testing of a Geotechnical Engineer. 0 ASTM Specifications: Specifications contained. in the latest edition of the Standard. Specifications of the American Society for Testing and Materials. 0 Relative Compaction: The ratio, expressed as a percentage, of the in-place dry density of a soil, to the maximum dry density of the same material based on specific test procedures referenced in the preliminary geotechnical investigation report. 0 Geotechnical Report: The soil and geologic reports (including addendwns) were prepared specifically for the development of the project. The owner should confirm that this report is current and valid for the project as presently planned. 0 Geotechnical Engineer: A registered professional Civil Engineer authorized by the State of California to use the title Geotechnical Engineer (G.E.). 0 Engineering Geologist: An Engineering Geologist certified by the State of California. SJIEP ARDSON ENGINEERING ASSOCIA TBS, INe. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I :1 I I I I 8 8 - 2- 0 Design Civil Engineer: A California Registered Professional Civil Engineer responsible for the preparation of the grading plans and as-built topographical surveys. 1.3 Testing and Observations The person responsible for the quality of the fill placement should employ a qualified Geotechnical Engineer to provide observation and testing of the fill construction. The Geotechnical Engineer should, when under contract, observe the grading operations during both preparation of the site and construction of any engineered fill. He should perform a sufficient number of field observations and tests to form an opinion regarding the conformance of the site preparation, the suitability of the fill material, and the extent to which the results of the testing indicate that the degree of compaction of the constructed fill meets the project specification. The Geotechnical Engineer will inform the owner if the fill does not meet the specifications and can assist in determining the limits of fill not meeting specified requirements. It is the responsibility of the contractor and owner to keep the Geotechnical Engineer notified regarding work schedules and changes in the project, or plans. It is the sole responsibility of the contractor to determine the nature of the work and the equipment/method required to adequately perform all work. 1.4 Existing Soil Conditions A geotechnical investigation has been performed for this site. The contractor should familiarize himself with geotechnical conditions at the site, whether covered in the report or not, and acknowledge his understanding of all findings, conclusions, and recommendations associated with the grading, or make a written request to the owner for appropriate clarification. 2.0 SITE PREPARATION 2.1 Clearing Prior to excavating or filling all brush, vegetation, rubbish, debris and topsoil should be removed or otherwise disposed of so as to leave the areas to be ftlled free of vegetation and debris. Any soft and/or wet spots should be corrected by draining and/or removal of the unsuitable material. The limits to which removal will be extended should be determined by the Geotechnical Engineer. Grubbing consists of the removal of all tree stumps, roots or other projections larger than 2 inches RII'. 1/92 SHEPARDSON BNGINBBRlNG ASSOCIATES, INe. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8 8 - 3 . to a depth at least 3 feet below finished grade. Topsoil may be stockpiled for reuse subject to evaluation by the Geotechnical Engineer. 2.2 Site Preparation The ground to receive fill or improvements should be excavated of all loose and porous soil to the depth recommended by the Geotechnical report. The natural ground exposed at the level which is determined to be satisfactory for the support of the fill should then be plowed or scarified to a depth of at least six inches and until the surface is free from ruts, hummocks.or other uneven features which inhibit uniform compaction by the equipment to be used. The scarified ground should be brought to the recommended moisture content and compacted to the minimum relative compaction specified in the investigation report. Where undisturbed dense bedrock is exposed at the surface, scarification and recompaction may be omitted if acceptable to the Geotechnical Engineer. 2.3 Benching Where fill is placed on hillsides or exposed slope areas, the e?Ósting surface soil should be removed. The depth of removal will vary based on site-specific conditions. If existing slopes are steeper than five horizontal to one vertical (i.e.. 20%). horizontal benches should be cut into firm and competent undisturbed soil or bedrock in accordance with illustration on the attached "Standard Grading Guidelines." The width and frequency of the subsequent. higher benches may be varied by the Geotechnical Engineer based on ground conditions and steepness of slope. The new horizontal portion of each bench should be compacted prior to receiving fill. Ground slopes flatter than 20% should be benched when recommended by the Geotechnical Engineer. The benches should be constructed with the suñace inclined at not less than 2% gradient into the slope. 2.4 Subdrains Canyon sub drains should be installed where recommended by the Geotechnical Engineer. Details for subdrain construction are provided in the investigation report. 3.0 FILL MATERIAL AND SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS 3.1 The fill should consist of soil material approved for use by the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative. This material may be obtained from the onsite excavation areas and any other approved sources, or by blending soil from one or more sources. Samples of proposed import fill should be submitted to the Geotechnical Engineer for review and testing at least five working days /In. 1/'2 SHEPARDSON ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, me. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8 8 - 4 - prior to its importation. 3.2 Fill material should consist of soil so graded that at least 40% by dry weight of the material passes a standard No.4 sieve. Soil with greater than low expansion potential should not be placed within the upper four feet of the fill unless and placement is provided for in the preliminary geotechnical investigation, or specific acceptance by the Geotechnical Engineer is obtained. A definition of the expansion potential is presented in the investigation report. The material used should be free of organic matter and other deleterious substances, and should not contain rocks or lumps greater than twelve inches in least dimension except as provided for in the investigation report. Soil with objectionable characteristics should be disposed of offsite or in nonstructural fill areas, as defined by the project Design Civil and/or Geotechnical Engineer. The Geotechnical Investigation Report may also specify additional soil suitability parameters for the fill. 3.3 During grading operations, testing may be performed to further determine the physical characteristics of the fill. Any special treatment recommended as a result of this testing should become an addendum to this guide. Boulders greater than twelve inches in least dimension, or the thickness of the compacted lift, whichever is least, should be placed in accordance with the "Rock Disposal Detail" presented in the investigation report. Continuous observation and testing by the Geotechnical Engineer is a necessity during rock disposal operations. 3.4 All fill material shall be free of hazardous materials as defined by the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 30, Article 9 and 10: 40CFR and any other applicable local, state, or Federal regulations. The Geotechnical Engineer is not responsible for the identification of possible hazardous material. The Geotechnical.Engineer may however observe soil discoloration, odor or other indicators that may prompt him to recommend that the owner terminate grading operations in the suspect area, and assess there condition prior to proceeding. 4.0 PLACING, SPREADING AND COMPACfING F1LL MATERIAL The engineered fill material should be placed in approximately level layers which, when compacted, do not exceed approximately eight inches in thickness, or less if necessary to obtain uniform, minimum specified relative compaction. Each loose layer should be spread evenly and thoroughly mixed during the spreading to promote both uniformity of material and moisture content. Rn. 1/92 SHEPARDSON ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. I I I I I I I I I I I I :1 I I I I I I 8 8 - 5 - When the moisture content of the fiU material is below that recommended by the Geotechnical Engineer, Water should be uniformly added and blended until the moisture content is satisfactory. When the moisture content of the fill material is above that recommended by the Geotechnical Engineer, the fill material should be aerated by blending, scarifying, or other satisfactory means until the moisture content is satisfactory. Fill, with a moisture content outside the recommended limits, is normally considered unsuitable. After each layer has been placed, mixed and spread evenly, it should be thoroughly compacted to not less than 90% or the minimum relative compaction as referenced to AS1M D1557-78. Compaction equipment should be of such design so as to compact the fill material to at least the recommended density in a continuous and uniform manner over the entire area. Fill slopes should be compacted by a means of sheepsfoot and grid rollers. Compacting of the slope face should be accomplished by uniformly backrolling the slopes in maximum 4 feet fill height intervals of elevation gain, or other methods producing satisfactory results to a relative compaction of at least 90% followed by grid-rolling. Overbuilding and compacting the fill slope beyond the finished slope line with subsequent trimming of all excess material is an acceptable alternate method. 5.0 TRENCH BACK.F1LL Trench excavations for utility lines and pipes should be accomplished to the line and grade shown on the project plans. The utility line or pipe should be properly bedded by backfilling the space under and around the pipe with clean sand or approved granular soil to a depth of at least one foot over the top of the pipe. The sand backfill should be uniformly compacted in place before the engineered backfill is placed on the sand bedding. The soil material accepted by the Geotechnical Engineer for use as backfill over the pipe, should be watered and mixed as necessary prior to placement. The backfill should be compacted to a density equivalent to at least 90% of the maximum laboratory dry density determined by the Geotechnical Engineer. In-place density tests and observations of the backfill procedures should be made by the Geotechnical Engineer during backfilling. The contractor should provide test holes and exploratory pits required by the Geotechnical Engineer during backfilling. The contractor should provide test /In. 1192 SHEPARDSON ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8 8 - 6 - holes and exploratory pits required by the Geotechnical Engineer to permit sampling and testing. Shoring and/or sloping of the test holes should be provided by the contractor when the trench depth exceeds five (5) feet. 6.0 TREATMENT AFTER COMPLETION OF GRADING After grading is completed and the Geotechnical Engineer has finished his observations of the work, no further excavation of filling should be done, except with the advanced notification of, and under the observation of, the Geotechnical Engineer. It is the responsibility of the contractor to prevent erosion of the freshly graded area during construction and until such time as permanent drainage and erosion control measures have been installed and established. Surface drainage should be maintained during and following construction to avoid damage to the site or adjoining properties. 7.0 SEASONAL LIMITS No fill material should be placed, spread or rolled while it is at an unsuitable high moisture content, or during unfavorable weather conditions. When the work is interrupted by rain, fill operations should not be resumed until tests by the Geotechnical Engineer indicate that the moisture content and density of fill already placed are still within recommended limits. The contractor must control surface water to avoid damage to finished work on the site or adjacent property. 8.0 UNFORESEEN CONDITIONS In the event that site or soil conditions are encountered during site preparation and construction that were not encountered during the preliminary geotechnical investigation, the Geotechnical .Engineer should be notified immediately to permit evaluation and submittal of alternative recommendations as needed. The Geotechnical Engineer should be notified of any significant changes in the proposed site grading. Røv. 1192 SHBP¡(JlJ)SON ENGINBElUNG ASSOCIATES, INC. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8 8 - 7 - 9.0 REPORTING Upon completion of the work, Contractor should furnish Owner a certification by the Design Civil Engineer stating that the lots andlor building pads are graded to within proper tolerance of elevations shown on the grading plans and that all tops and toes of slopes are also within tolerance of the positions shown on the grading plans. After installation of a section of subdrain, the project Design Civil Engineer should survey its location and prepare an as-built plan of the subdrain location. The project Design Civil Engineer should verify the proper outlet for the sub drains and the Contractor should ensure that the drain system is free of obstructions. The Owner is responsible for furnishing a final as-graded geotechnical report to the appropriate governing or accepting agencies. The as-graded report should be prepared and signed by a Geotechnical Engineer and, and if necessary by a California Certified Engineering Geologist, indicating that the geotechnical aspects of the grading were performed in substantial conformance with the Specifications or approved changes to the Specifications. Rw. 1/92 SHEPARDSON ENGlNEERING ASSOCIATES, INe. ~. a) CUT LOT It.. Variable FIll Slope Height Ì'.., backcut--varle. ð."" --- -: :. .i-1 Downslope Key Depth Comp acted FIll ---- - --- -- ~~ ---- -- -- ---- ~ .......... ~~O"~""""" .......... ~ ~,-~ /' øCO\~~ '{ 9"\\" ~ ...---þ ~ ~--- Toe 01 Slope Shown On GradIng Plan --- ~ iro..; Benche. to be designed to proVIde gradual change to sldehlJl fill. MInImum height of benches I. 4 feet; wider benches when specified In Investigation report or when recommended by con8Ultant. - ¿II.' 118'0"01 Suitable to Consuttant 3° mIn. . f l.0V8rexcaV8t8d and Recompact ( Bedrock or approved foundation materIal. DEEPER OVER-EXCAVATION MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER IN STEEP TRANSITIONS. L Keyway In firm earth material. Minimum width of 15 f..t or a. 8p8clfled In InvestIgatIon report [L1'tllt I' back (mIn.) NOTE: Where natural slope gradIent I. Ie... than 5:1, the nece88lty for benchIng ..all be determined by the con8Ultant. b) CUT-FILL LOT (TRANSmON ) Figure No.1 1 i ... Keyway In firm earth material. MInimum width of 15-f..t or a. specified In In_.tlgatlon report. ..--- Cut elope to be conatncted prior to placement of fill CutlflJl contact shown on gradIng Plan Compacted All -........"" -- -_....- -- ---"" .....- ..A<J~' CO\\\'r-A(oG~ -- "" .-ft\\' fð"" .... ~09"'- e(.I> ," ~e.";:~ . to#'Ò '1'-- \',\~.\ 9 ------ ot ::: ---- ..;: ....",,' L TYPICAL SIDEHILL FILL MASS ABOVE NATURAL SLOPE i... L Remo- all top80lI, colluvium and creep Material from transition 3' min. !b'-, Setback betw8en cut and fill stope when 8p8c1f1ed In In_.tlgatlon report. \ ( \ -r- Soli or MaterIal Suitable to Con8Ultant loti ¡ IIIi Natural S]ope ---- -- ,...¿ -- --- -- --- -- Cut 8Iope T ~ Sod,... ., S""." foundation material. Benche. to be de8lgned to proVIde gradual change to sldehlll fill. Minimum heIght of benches I. 4 f..t; wider benches when specifIed In Investigation report or when recommended by con.ultant. Figure No.3 - STRIPPING DETAIL-REMOVAL OF DA YUGHT UNE b -¡.¡ Figure No.2 TYPICAL SIDEHILL FILL MASS ABOVE EXISTING CUT SLOPE NOTE: As an alternatl_, the cut po,rtlon of the 8Iope can be o_rexcaV8t8d and the 8Iope rebuilt using a keyway a. shown on FIgure No.1 NOTE: For additIonal details refer to the text of the Geotechnical Investigation Report and the Recommended Guide for Placement of Engineered Fill. BackdraJns may be required ba8ed on consultant's observations. c.... ~ SHEPARDSON ~. ENC1NEERING AssoaA75 INC. Gcøt«lutial ÚtuMlt.tds: £"fÌrurn- GcoleriW Job Number: . Date: Plate STANDARD GRADING GUIDEUNES k. SEA R !leY: 41811 . .~ NOLTE and Asso8TES, Inc. . .. Engineers / Planners / Surveyors JOB NO. ~DO? ",,-2. DATE / / //9/ 9 {¡; DESIGNED BY æ CHECKED BY Ij J2f1 8 SUBJECT ~OD I?d. ,JC(I'1'ßj (- V) ~ I'~,'D-~ ¡-e f,ILÌ Il.~, !! I,v' ! ' ! C,,' ,,_IF, 1 '.', '1': \, j:" --' - - \ ¡ ¡ ! ru L~) .,J JAN 1 4 1997 ENGINEERING SERVICES CITY OF ENC¡NITj\:~ ~ -C.do/'LO)O \ " ~\ ~\ - ~ ~ ~) \ ~ ..... X <..J ........ Q.) 11 (7=1 /6 'ð}ð')/ ) ' à (:;;1. g.£. l dJ ~ 1:\.\ t ~ '" \ \ 77 flt'if "' ~ ~ .. h-.' II ~ \,)-- - I ~\ ~ ...\ ;.: "- ,~ ,I\}--~~, ~~~ .N~ NOLTE and Asso8TES, Inc. ~ Engineers / Planners / Surveyors SUBJECT ~x~ "Rd IIJldill//'.t1 0' ~- ~'L'll ^ ~¡ ::s: () 77 1/,." ~ ~ Cz/'gðJ/) " ( 7.::ÏdJ!; 'Lð) i) (. 'Z2L @6 'LftJ /) 7:J z,9:L.<7J/ "JJ.. ?,o'g~ / ( f./'dJdJ /) 8 ~1""Y"'. (;2tl,.e JOB NO. ~--- ~ DATE II /Jq Ie¡ Ú) DESIGNED BY ¿13 CHECKED BY ¡j J2H ~ " ~~ ~ ~ , «> ~ ({) ~ ... . .~--~- . .. ~ ~ .. ..'\ ~ ~" ~~ ~~ ~ .......~ NOLTE and ASSO.ES, Inc. ~- ~ Engineers / Planners / Surveyors SUBJECT 'Sqxo~ ¡q;¡ I/Jdenl '() ~ -. -p-- -- ---~-~ ~ -..-:: (-J.//;ð)!) 8 JOB NO. SP:>~~~ DATE IIIJ919~ DESIGNED BY /.,/3 CHECKED BY i/ lZII ~~ - (C:/£t7J,gtT)/) Iù ~ CJB'EJdJ l -:>::i c:7)g.' 8ðJ / ~ P.l. o;Q '6ð'J1 ' ~ ~ ~ '- 771/f'1 (Lr7J '~dJ/) .",'___n... ... 8- -Q ~ "h- ~\\ \\ D'~ " N ~ :--...'-\...\ -- ~- ~ ~-~ NOLTE and ASSO~ES, Inc. Engineers 1 Planners / Surveyors SUBJECT ~~ Rq w4el?/~ f'- ~ \'::V (Z<J'oL~ C'16 . 'J'J.? ï7f1(YJ 8 JOB NO. "EEo B ~ .z. DATE 11/ /9 ¡'J(p DESIGNED BY LJ3 CHECKED BY V ¡¿../-I ~b ~ '" .. ~ \.f) ... ~ , 't' .Q ~ ~ ~ ~I ;:1\ û"'" "" r-J ~~í \j) ~ ::s. N. . NOLTE and ASSO~ES, Inc. ~ Engineers 1 Planners / Surveyors SUBJECT <::::v,V,' "', I '~;j" //) ,Ie, . ~^'--I;~' c-- \ ,/\ 111"/ ~, (:: 0 " ~ I \ \ \~ \ g ( ~.9 'OtJ ) n,__- -------- ðJL 'OLI 7::1 þ/'oL/ 'DlV') 'OLI ( '1 $' C'L/) .ì >- 't() ~ \<) ~ N l[> ~ 8 JOB NO. ÇCO~S~ DATE ////'1/q~ DESIGNED BY ;.;-ß CHECKED BY iJ/?ft -------, ~~ Ò' ~ '....... ~ Ç) 0 ,I' II ~~,,~ ~.. '~ t>J ~ ~~l~ "N~ NOLTE and ASSO.TES, Inc. ~ Engineers / Planners / Surveyors SUBJECT ~~ Rei (AJ¡c!f"/7ìtl1 c/ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ç) ~ ~ i\~ ~~ " \~ \ 8 ~ ........ (~¡"'I I) 77{,p; ('7:2' 'oLD (ï).L 0'21L I) 7=i ~'Ot., ?L $';'; LI JOB NO. SDa~~-Z DATE ////Cf/o/CR DESIGNED BY ¿'ß CHECKED BY I/Rfl ,----,,-~- ~~ '~ . '4) t ~ - ~ (91J~/) -~----- .... _-n- "-nn,, - °.Q~ - ..~--~"--:.w- n ..... ....... , ~ ....... -, N ~~ _n~ ~~ . ~ NOLTE and Asso8TES Ine - Engineers / Planners / Surv~yor; 8 SUBJECT S::ix~ ¡:?q w,d€-nIlJQ CY JOB NO. ~CO 'Z ~ '2. DATE III /9/9tP DESIGNED BY t..l3 ~ ........ CHECKED BY :}.elf ~ ( n;' Z/.. !) , - ._-~ ~ ~\ ~\ .J.SlX;; .:;:::;\ ~ßII ~ £~ 'ILl Q ~~ ~ s -.::. -~--+---- .. ~~ - '-5< "tti c.. 7:::1 'U- '! LI ? DJ. bb ïLI) 7=1 Ls, 'IL I :lL Lo' LI t Iò ~ \\-. \0 'to- ... ~ 0... 3f~ ... ~" ~ " '1\& -t ~~§ ( -þb'dJl}/) Î'flf"1 .N~ NOLTE and ASSO&ES, Inc. ~ Engineers / Planners / Surveyors SUBJECT S;{~ f?cI t<,.)¡clélJ~ ~ \ ~, ~ \ .Ls./ X a EEl.! 776<11 8 R -.. JOB NO. ~.[;c'3Bt. DATE 1111'1/9ú; DESIGNED BY ¿ B CHECKED BY ;) t:H - (:2'8' 'J,Lt) ~ 'tù 0 ~ -S , ~ \J1 * 7.::¡;1' Z L. 1 -;.L bL 'JL I ~'J'~~J/) 0 Ò... ~, ":- \J i-.. _'I II ~... ~ """ ....~ ~!~ NOLTE and ASSO8rES, Inc. Engineers 1 Planners / Surveyors SUBJECT Sà.xù1; 'Kt" ¿1)¡[/(/It1(j 0' ~ \ \ J 1::.\ ~ \ .../.SIX;) ...Lß.!it.{ 7 i -1:1 (VJ 8 Q ----.. JOB NO. SDð~~~ DATE / II/919ft; DESIGNED BY :...8 CHECKED BY iI~)f l' ì (LdJ "2Lr) .--- -. --. _.- .... ~~ ~)< LQ (7.dti2'~¡) ;:J.L9Þ'$LI) ~ ' ~ ~ -. .~ 'd otJ '~L I 7)L~~ ';'L ( () .. Q-~ ~ ,'I ,\\ ~""'" ......Nt ~ju§ 0 r.....~ NOLTE and ASSO8rES, Inc. A. ~ Engineers / Planners / Surveyors SUBJECT ~XCJl(3 I?d rÌ:Jldl'n/(J g " ~ \ '\ ( Co ÞL.I) \ ~\ ~ ~\ \ J ~,,~ ~ '-...... ........... (7.=1 S-~ '~LI j 72L6JL.'9L.1) 77f1fYJ 8 JOB NO. $'DOß'3~ DATE ////9/9f.# DESIGNED BY ¿13 CHECKED BY I/¡::'¡¡ h ti~ , 0.- ~ ~ ( dJt.'~ f) ---t-r~ -- ----1 --t--- . - f',- -.. () - - ""'- ~~" ~ J)-~ " ~ ----- ~ ~..~ 8 8 rrr" ~ DRAINAGE STUDY FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN SAXONY ROAD, STA. 9+29 TO 13+18, WEST SIDE EXISTING CONDITIONS The present drainage condition is that runoff in Saxony Road breaks north and south at a high point at approximately station 21 +50. Runoff is collected against the existing west side curb and gutter, and conveyed southerly to the existing type "c" inlet and the 16' type "B-1" inlet at station 9+25 (as shown on TM 4281-1). These existing stonn drain inlets are located at the southerly tenninus of the proposed improvements. Existing City of Encinitas topo (attached) and a field check of the area shows that streets are crowned, therefore the drainage basin will consist only of the area west of the Saxony Road centerline and north of the inlets to station 21 +50. See cales for this area and the resultant runoff. PROPOSED CONDITION This project proposes only to remove the existing berm on the west side of Saxony Road, and replace with a curb, gutter and sidewalk at the ultimate width. The adjacent on-site work for the expansion of the YMCA facility consists strictly of on-site work, downslope from the street; therefore, no additional runoff will be created in the street as a result of this project. Drainage calculations for on-site work will be covered by a separate grading plan submittal. Therefore, the existing drainage facilities will remain in place and will be adequate to collect the runoff. SUMMARY The attached calculations and charts show the runoff calculations and capacities for the curb and inlet on Saxony Road described above. It is assumed that the installation ofthe existing inlets and stonn drain was perfonned for ultimate runoff capacity. Because the subject project does not increase runoff, there is no need to improve the existing stonn drain system. tL _-/L~ Jimes R Hettinger RC.E 56 Exp. 12-31-96 /1-2. 7-'" Date ~ .,( JLTf and ASSOCIATfS.lnc "'"~" "',"om, '"~~ 8 8 N~ NOLTE and ASSOCIATES, Inc. ~ Engineers / Planners / Surveyors SUBIECT_~("....,.,.....rÂG ¡;; ;;¡;,?'t.I¡;)Yj ~V"rJ....r"r /-tL()øI1-~ ./ JOB NO. 5. D 0 3':3 L- DATE / / - Z ?-;Jc. DESIGNED BY 9 ¡¿')Î- CHECKED BY c;.,(2 ( -r€7¿ I A , 1:1 ~ r J 0 F C/I '- c- V'-;4. 71' 0 ;oJ I f) C:9 VMr-( ö¡:: ..s.,A~ Df £GO oe.~/6v t p~f!) CßOc/A!!J!!!1- ¡t/'IA-NI/Æ-L. COv'NrY cS>F $..4V" DIeGO t:'.50Pc..VV/AL$ (CJ-fA;"I27S ~~ 2-) oe.7e/£"~'1l'f..Je r¿VtVùf7C" ~,L /OO.Yc...1...L f5Ve;".....fr ~) V:: e. /~ ~~/' ON A l- HI e:?'~é) ~ ; 9,..;),J .::- C-.I; ~ A 4) I~ C 7"'#1 e ~ c.:JAft:e,.Jr~,A"""cj;o../) ] ::e:e- A7rA c"" er:;;; 1; 0 () (/N 7'"'&J':: fry) s) c - FA Co- ..,.... ð r¿ ( 12 C) N' ()F7C c-o ~ I'" ~ I (!7...1"'" ) t./ $ ~ c.. =- c. 9f .... Vla~C/'A\ c. L Y """'"" '-~ -+-tltc:"A-- /..$ /M~YIO liS ~) /t¡¡~ OF P¡ti!Ar"'/Â.Gf!f- 81+.$.'rV: ,LIA'-r-W,~rH d-F , ~ T~~ ; .sHðVL..o~ 9- + '2..S" ?""~ 2.1 +..s-o II A = ð.':; A c. ¡¿ v^rð F F Q'<J,j .:= C. I,o( A Ie- .: /.5 (f.J-C)Vo ~ 9,~v := (p.ø;~4-.S)(O~ ~3) Ie. ~ 8.; M 'A/c) 7~.s ({/J~ ,It) ~4r"..,.) (?~ù ~ 3.~' ~ tI-. t) C¡:',£ I,orJ-= 4.5" /.N./HOiI~ POtJOING oe-p~ /AI ~u.".r~ .5T4Z6:E?r S~oð'~ 3.2../"0 1 cO= 4.~ CP~ J O~Jtl7""~ .:: o. 3:3 P7: < 0, 4-0 ~-q .t::!. . ~ ( '1-$,5 4AV1 es 2..70 c ~.vJ V ~ s- 0 ~.s Pt:X. (;.{~Y' ()¡C .s.O- -. ----- 8 8 NOLTE and ASSOCIATES, Inc. Engineers I Planners I Surveyors JOB NO. DATE SPCJ33'2- I( - ¿7-g~ O/Z-;>J.- , UBjECT O¡2.AI~Â ç;;cs: s-rvc; y J ..:;.A >cc,..ry l'C::ôcÅD ,. DESIGNED BY CHECKED BY C (-1 ~ c..¡ c:.. I' A/ c...l!!!!-I' c.. ~ ~ A C I .,-y /G I B -( I'~r'-~ Œ c:,:; + Z-.:J" //<.J '- ~ <:) ~ ..; '-\J ~e ./ AT" ~ . ~ 10 ( í. ,.../\, 4- 2..B 1- / ) 0= 4-° c..r-s .::- ¡jIJ &;) ~ "'r"~ ""7 (;,(.)'<"8 = O~ 2... '7 / V.: 5" - ~ P-ï'$, :: P4 ~ ~ (-,-..." ~ 311- Q ~ ð-? '- (A~Y) A =- 0- '3.3 '-t=Q~,-7' c... .:: I'.:s-' -------------- C-A~A C,'r"1' :: 9::. (0- ?)(, $) ( 0- 3'3 + o.l-?) ')'1- -~------------ - ~ -- -- -- - C ~~A C I..,..Y = 4-,f,8 CF$ > Q. 0 C- ,:::: .!. <::) , Ie::-. ~ u ----------- --- - ---- -- - u- .- ----------. .u--------_u_---- ------.-- 8 8 URBAN AREAS TIME OF FLOW OVERLAND CURVES ---- 800 Q , - ... ... ... ~ - I '" ~ Ž 3 ~ ~ ~ 100 600 400 ... u Z ~ - '" ã ;.;..:¡~:::; I; :::..:.;-;.~: ..----.. :-: :;-I:-~ 1 - ." "-I_. . 3CIO . .... . ... ," . . '--' -. .. h -~. . . -. . , .. ;- 200 . œ-= 1: ~- t ~..., .- .. _.. - . . . --.. -" ¡;~::':':=;:. .. . ,-'.... - 100 :; r:-:_-;;=~: ~ '-.. -:...... :~~:.. - .._.~ .. ,::nl-: ; ; . ,...-..... 10 - 0 Surf8ce "- TI- c..- ~ - - -- --------- - E.XAM PLE-: (:,tVEN L..E.NGiTH OF FLo,^, ~ ~ i-OPE..;:. ,. D Cf'e. c.OEFftc'IE.NT OF- R.v~oF~ OV~ L..AN D FLOwr' mE.;:. 86 400 Fr- e. :: .70 K.~ A ï:> t5 M,NVí~5 ( I -£) FLOOD CONTROL 4S' 30' : 338 45' P,ep."d br 8 ~ 8 - - u.s. DEPARTMEN~r OF COMMERCE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND AT. OSPIIEHIC ADMINISTRATION .paCIAL ITUDI&I BRANCH. OFFICE OF 81 DROLOOV. NATIONAL WEATtI£R SERvrca 30' 118' 4S' 30' 115' 117° IS' 30' 151 116° Revised 1/85 APPENDIX XI-E "51 301 IS I .338 "SI SIn:: ,-0- u.s. DEPARTMENlr OF COMMERCE Plep.t... br 8 8 NATIONAL OCI::A:"IC AND A"':~O~I'IIERIC ADMINISTHATION SpaCIAL STUDIES 8HANCII. Ot'l"IC~ 01' IItO¡':OLOGY. NATIONAL WI::ATIIEK SERVICE 30' -< ~ 1 'J: . ~ IWO liS' 301 1.-. I 117° ,~ 1 116" '1 ~i . ]01 Revised 1/85 APPENDIX XI-II ¡m I n í'~~:: ::: ,.. ";" ;,:,.í..;,:,~; ~ ~ 'D'~ :'645 u¥", n II 11m 1/ - . -] . - . I . Intensity Un./Hr.) . n- P6. 6 Hr. Precipitation (In.) D . .~ " lit .. ~ . .. .." ~ - - . .1 ~ . .. . . .. . ~.. - . .I.""""""""'. . _e.":: HHUUIUUIIIU""" ..: :r.'" .. - . -..-- .......................-... t- - ... . .. . mmwHJIHH Itt:H:HmI: . I nmmtnmunll:1tttnmt ~ . . 1001il .. .! ',. . - 1.5' ,., -, - t;. J 1.0 - ".-"'1"': . 10 15 20 Minutes 30 40 50 1 Duration 2 3: Hours 5 6 4 Directions for Application: 1) From precipitation r!laps detennine 6 hr. and 24 hr. amounts for the selected frequency. These maps are printed in the County Hydrology Manual (10.50 and 100 yr. maps included in thl Design and Procedure Manual). 2) Adjust 6 hr. precipitation (if necessary) so that it is within the range of 45% to 65% of the 24 hr. precipitation. (Not applicable to Desert) 3) Plot 6 hr. precipitation on the right side 4IÞ of the chart. 4) Draw a line through the point parallel to the plotted lines. 5) This line is the intensity-duration curve for the location being analyzed. Application Form: 0) Selected Frequency /00 yr. * 1) P6 = 2.7 in.. P24= 4-."3. P6 = P24 in. Cø2.~S* 8 2) Adjusted *P 6c '2- .7 3) t = ~ .3 min. c 4) I = 4-.S: in/hr. *Not Applicable to Desert Region Revised 1/85 APPENDIX XI-A .' , '" ¡ , I i- .... -r t- ~ III ! ~ lit ~ ~ I.S"" REV. 8 8 CHART /-/04./2 t -Y. t- LI'-f ~ ..~ ~O" -f-t ,~ IlUIDrNTIAI. '"'En' CIC IIDI 0..' 10 II L-:. I I. Noll ~"~-.- ;::::;:¡ II ~~,,' I ~~,+ -- r "'iiiT 81 " ..... J ; 'f...... I ; I I II V / j FO;; .....l. . ¡ Ì"...... 'I t !~...... I, ~1 '~I .1 :7, -........1 I : ~ I.: ';~.f I '!".... I I~ /'"'.1' .~. - 0 '1.: ~Io... ,,~¡ I "'": .! vI :~~ / '~ 7 I /~V' : I j,f¡ ¡ - i '/l~ ~ ~ #I ~! / : i)j . V j ¡ ~ ~ ;¡, ~~.. ~ ~ / i . ~ '-J/' I '.f --r--.t.~~.il . ~-¡. ~i l' / -: I' I' LI ; I !t'.~""""'- to) '^- , \I' I II , 110.. I~. J.~ 'C7 -./1.., ~ I .. , ') - .J':"...... -.-.o¡ I' ~ I I II: ,I ""'""-I. t 'f '"q . ff -N- ~: J.7 ~ 10" V J ~ ...... ~ .. .~ ~. }. '" ~ 7 ,/ ~- ; QI ........ : v ...... ::s..{¡' ~ ~ I ~l J,'- QI I / -"... I J' ~ rç:.I ~it ~. A1 1 I ;"'0 .... I j ~T"""'10.... I -.....:::. I-' "W/ ,--¡- " / ~~~# f.' .'~ ~ I I - cu- 7 I ~ ~ I ~ /: ~ T 04- ",V' ""- '- 7 ~ / I- N - I I I I f"ll I I I I' . I I. "'10 ID JO -010 OISCMA- (Crs) ÞAM~ : ONE SlOE Gi..flIO8tO '82,5.,. CMtt ."'1 0.,... 8 Go4. Ylllcitr . 4.4 taL 'i I ro ¡ ., , I . . CITY OF SAN DIEGO - DESIGN GUICE GUTTER ANC ROADWAY DISCHARGE- VELOCITY CHART SHT. NO- 70A