The URL can be used to link to this page

2001-7039 G ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT h y - city Of Capital Improvement Projects District Support Services Encinitas Field Operations Sand Replenishment /Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering December 3, 2002 Attn: Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company C/O Maloney and Associates 2434 Vineyard Avenue Suite 101 Escondido, California 92029 RE: Way, Daniel A.P.N. 265- 025 -27 441 Cole Ranch Road Sewer Plan DCS381 Final release of security Permit DCS381 authorized public improvements as shown on approved sewer plan, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has approved the sewer installation and has reviewed the site for the final warranty inspection. Therefore, a final release of the security deposit is merited. Performance Bond SF1737, in the original amount of $14,209.00, was reduced by 75% to $3552.25. The remainder amount is hereby released in entirety. The original document is enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633- 2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely, / r Masih Maher ay L mbach Senior Civil Engineer Finance Manager Financial Services Cc: Jay Lembach, Finance Manager Daniel Way Debra Geishart file enc. TEL 760- 633 -2000 FAX 760 - 633 -263 5(6 S. V ulcan Avenue. Encinitas, California 9202 1 -3633 TDD 7611- 633 - 37()(1 �� recycled paper ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT -'4 City Of Capital Improvement Projects .� District Support Services Encinitas Field Operations " Sand Replenishment /Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering May 15, 2002 Attn: Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company C/O Maloney and Associates 2434 Vineyard Avenue Suite 101 Escondido, California 92029 RE: Way, Daniel A.P.N. 265-025-27 441 Cole Ranch Road Sewer Plan DCS381 Final release of security Permit DCS381 authorized public improvements as shown on approved sewer plan, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has approved the sewer installation. Therefore, a partial release of the security deposit is merited. Performance Bond SF1737, in the amount of $14,209.00, is hereby reduced by 75% to $3552.25. After the one year warranty period, a final inspection set up by the owner, will release the remainder portion. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633- 2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely, Masih Maher a liee Su� Senior Civil Engineer Financial Services Manager Financial Services Cc: Leslie Suelter, Financial Manager Daniel Way file enc. s TLL'(�i- r - 2<,un rAX rn - i„� - 2(,2 - ;n; S \111"111 a%cnua E:nriniru. Calif�,rni❑ �)?03 + - ir,i3 Ti)D'C�u_r;ji- = -� >'! recycled paper _«ir ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT City Of Capital Improvement Projects District Support Services Encinitas Field Operations Sand Replenishment /Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering May 15, 2002 Attn: Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company C/O Maloney and Associates 2434 Vineyard Avenue Suite 101 Escondido, California 92029 RE: Way, Daniel A.P.N. 265- 025 -27 441 Cole Ranch Road Grading Plan 7039 -G Final release of security Permit 7039 -G authorized grading, erosion control, storm drainage, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has approved the grading. Therefore, release of the security deposit is merited. Performance Bond SF1736, in the amount of $79,250.40, is hereby fully exonerated. The document original is enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633- 2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely, Masih Maher L slie Suelter Senior Civil Engineer F nancial Services Manager Financial Services Cc: Leslie Suelter, Financial Manager Daniel Way file enc. TEL 7 (,1 33 -2 6 0( 1 ' F �ti b-26- SUi "ulr.;n :A\r III e. Encinitas_ California 9- i TDD - 6l!- fiij- 2 ?tili � recycled paper lunuilICT1 r11 file. CIVIL, ED TECHNICAL, A OUALITY ENGINEERING ' FOUNDATION DESIGN • LAND SURVEYING • SOIL TESTING �.•„ CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 6 INSPECTION ' CLIENT: WAY t PROJECT: WAY -HYD -A ' DATE: 6 JULY 2001 MR. DANIEL WAY 411 Cole Ranch Road Encinitas, CA. 92024 ENGI11EERING L SER 2Q01 ICE: 21TY OF ENCINITk Subject: Drainage Study for the proposed Residence located at 411 Cole Ranch w ' Road, Encinitas, CA. (APN: 265- 025 -27) Dear Mr. Way: Pursuant to your request and the requirements of the City of Encinitas, we t have completed our Drainage Study for the subject property. The proposed development consists of the construction of a sewer lateral and a driveway to serve an existing single family residence. The Hydrology Map and the Supporting Data ' and Calculations relative to this report are outlined in Enclosures (1) thru (8). Based on our calculations, the following conclusions were derived: The runoff conditions for the watershed area for the subject parcel was ' calculated for a 50 year storm frequency and based on the County of San Diego Procedures for Hydrologic Computations. Based on the County 200 Scale 1 Topographic Maps and the proposed Grading Plan for the subject Parcel, the total Q (discharge) that will cross the property was calculated to be 21 cfs for an area of 12.2 acres. Based on our calculations, the runoff anticipated (ie: 21 cfs) is for the natural ' watershed for the surrounding area. The proposed grading on the subject property will not change the natural drainage course for the watershed area. The anticipated runoff can be dispersed through a proposed rock lined drainage swale (Enclosure 6) ' running from south to north through the middle of the lot. However, a San Diego County Regional Standard D -40 rip -rap energy dissipator (T = 2', L = 10', W = 5', ' and rock class = light) shall be used along the northerly property boundary to disperse the drainage in a consistent manner to preclude a concentrated runoff. 1 ' 1611 -A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083 -5497 • 760 - 945 -3150 • FAX. 760 - 945 -4221 1 ; Elli finch ling, life. ' CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, 6 QUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDATION DESIGN • LAND SURVEYING • SOIL TESTING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 6 INSPECTION ' The Soil Engineer has prepared this Report for the exclusive use of the client and authorized agents. This Report has been prepared in accordance with generally ' accepted soil and foundation engineering practices. No other warranties, either expressed or implied, are made as to the professional advice provided under the ' terms of this agreement, and included in the Report. B & B Engineering Inc. and Associates appreciate this opportunity to be of ' service. Should you have any questions regarding this project, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, ' e�ypfESS1�y ' y �P C 01- rt ur C. ea�rd RCE RGE Q RGE 127 x ► Chief Engineer Up. 12/31/0 � �ECV"A �� qTF OF C A0F 1 t t 2 1611 -A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083 -5497 • 760- 945 -3150 • FAX 760 - 945 -4221 .,� .y. "�— �tl .•'?^ ai`7�t t � l n.""!'av " ��aDO*�„ �' 9 .}�. "` ` 'I !' � (/� hit �• , , T � r '� ,.,. •• i t y, is Yt w.t i • '• `�� i '.r�'�';lllM^' ��• fe ',ir. � -;e ' ; ,+v pax .�t • � �' h,� ,fit._ • �. t a � � � .s; ' e '� x. Asa �• -� � t ,u -. ��1.,, \' j i � �„r y ak. `� ,�''. , � i ; . -� � ;• ,[�!'-/ �(,/ l L L �/L�� / — ��/t� � � ,J '� ' R4 Triangular Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: WAY Comment: WAY ROCK LINED CHANNEL Solve For Depth Given Input Data: Left Side Slope.. 2.50:1 (H:V) Right Side Slope. 2.50:1 (H:V) Manning's n...... 0.033 Channel Slope.... 0.0700 ft /ft Discharge........ 21.00 cfs Computed Results: Depth............ 1.06 ft Velocity......... 7.44 fps Flow Area........ 2.82 sf Flow Top Width... 5.31 ft Wetted Perimeter. 5.72 ft Critical Depth... 1.34 ft Critical Slope... 0.0200 ft /ft Froude Number.... 1.80 (flow is Supercritical) Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.43 (c) 1991 Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 Flowrate 31-4 cfs Diameter $$ inches' Slope .07 ft/ft 0 Mannings roughness (n) depth ! Results of Calculation Normal Depth =1.02 ft, 12.2 in Velocity = 8.825 fps Hydraulic Radius =.63 ft Flow Area = 3.56 sf Dr_ R.D. Eaglin', University of Central Florida r ` a v • a �1 A \1 a • • 1 t � r • 0 Z< • . . . . . �. CO CL - --=-=-----___=-___- � aa��a�Yarr�•aa+��Y�a�a�� — �a��ar�a�aar —� —ate aa•aa�a��aa�� a�at.aa•aa� �• � —� � �.— aa - - a. r� aa�aa — aaaa� � �MMM —I AIWA��I��— �M��IfW//IFmwmmm� -wmm VAN FAMMA rM WMAMM&M MOKAMEN NNE ■■ MINE MEM! IMMINIMMIN ° r l!1 C 01� Mc i O ..: LL- LA ` J G i O Z 0 T tun ca -- �� 1 CV :J. _ W Ull J /. zH CO r W 1 co Z it Z K J y z U\ U y, O r z J Z i< H < z v O F i V m ;. ' ! LLJ T_ O a a ° 0 G col < U. N O O — a 00 �... 4:4 < z w C) Lu x v. en ' =0 CL. M �� o 0 ` x'Di a J U �ics��osu, 0 LA jV LM grown ca-z c6 y 1 L C cz IL N LL- CN �y� 7 , ' � to ` � '� � • N "' t1! N N v • r CM I / N CN I � �r�r� ..'� 4. P;�� • r. ; \�T\ - - ter. w. W— UA a L ry r . 4ir� `t` N 0 W v 2 O W < CM•, / J 2 ' tip Z O p u> ►r LM U y c to .. I O W ZlL_t a l zW M ' N U � M < U o� z'0 V 0 w ' uz oz J w O W J m u D U- 0 w = D h M J �lvC �� u it 0. / Revised l /8s AAPPNTnTV NIT S UAt E y " Ft C s � P t0 r C r Nip D O nnE , At c5 LeC2 s AtD- ti- tE SmE < s. ' LvF3 HrC 4tD2 HrE� x . Cf D Hr � ' 02 C4M Hr S m E 17 s C Cf C RuG D Hr �,G ' c. AtE2 ' A h .t SI.., p I vn r At a r ° At E a1hE OhE �tD ' CfC , CsC Ck , o ��'' Ohl d R AtD u G CSD � HrD A � v Oh C "G b o H C 0 OhF c cS0 W •� AtD At E t H r. C ,, J �Cv HrC' AtC HrC � � t v h `' � y HrD2' � P AtD �AtE ' 02 HrC2 N< AtC A G CsC O h E LvF3 t � G� Z Oh E A. C PAN Hr I P Hr � AtE • o Tf S A N ID 1 E o HrD2 Lv HrE2 'AtF ' 25 E HrC HrE2 ` C a J f A. At EL oCV Ac> hE. a w N ? C4c C p s�, s8 p .Hrc2 HrD Lv F3 s LvF3 CbD 6 C LeD2 s HrC S. 33 °00• CsD ` LvF3 TeF D a ' 117° 15' 1 733 P 99 g ,�ir�cosu� Gsj ' Circular Channel Analysis & Design Solved with Manning's Equation Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: WAY 301 ' Comment: WAY - DRY ROCK LINED SWALE Solve For Actual Discharge Given Input Data: Diameter.......... 7.30 ft ' Slope.. 0.0700 ft /ft Manning 's n....... 0.023 Depth ............. 0.75 ft Computed Results: Discharge......... 23.61 cfs > ZI CF$ (f- Velocity.......... 10.42 fps Flow Area. 2.27 sf Critical Depth.... 1.21 ft Critical Slope.... 0.0096 ft /ft Percent Full...... 10.27 % Full Capacity..... 1068.44 cfs QMAX @.94D........ 1149.33 cfs ' Froude Number..... 2.57 (flow is Supercritical) d•7S' Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.43 (c) 1991 Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 l ! Triangular Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: WAY 301 A Comment: DANNY WAY - ARIZONA CROSSING ! Solve For Depth ! Given Input Data: Left Side Slope.. 12.50:1 (H:V) Right Side Slope. 10.00:1 (H:V) Manning's n...... 0.013 ! Channel Slope.... 0.0700 ft /ft Discharge........ 21.00 cfs Computed Results: Depth. 0.42 ft Velocity. 10.64 fps Flow Area........ 1.97 sf Flow Top Width... 9.43 ft Wetted Perimeter. 9.46 ft Critical Depth... 0.74 ft ! Critical Slope... 0.0035 ft /ft Froude Number.... 4.10 (flow is Supercritical) ! ! ! ! ' Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.43 (c) 1991 Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 �'r�ctosv 2000 REGIONAL SUPPLEMENT AMENDMENTS 5Ta' So EC$ F 61L VISUL wow C&AAT` 2ovc FOITlonl individual pieces of any class of rock slope protection shall be determined by the ratio of the number of individual pieces larger than the smallest size listed in the table for that class also pertaining to 200 -1.7� 200 -1.6.3 Quality Requirements Page 45 - First paragraph, second sentence .change "60 days" to "30 days ". 200 - 1.7 Selection of Riprap and Filter Blanket Material Add Section 200 -1.7 "Selection of Rip Rap and Filter Blanket Material" shall be per Table 200 -1.7 Table 200 -1.7 Rip Filter Blanket Upper Laver(s) Velocity Rock Class Rap 3 Meters/Sec (2) Thic Option 1 Optio (Ft/Sec) k- Sect. 200 n2 Option 3 Lower (1) Nes (4) Sect.4 (5) Layer s 00 (6) "T" 4 ' 2(6-7) No. 3 Backing 0.6 5 mm (3/16 ") C2 D.G. ---- d, U - 2.2(7-8) No. 2 Backing 1.0 6 mm (1/4 ") B3 D. G. ---- O 2.6(8-9.5) Facing 1.4 9.5 mm (3/8 ") ---- D.G. ---- 3(9.5-11) Light 2.0 12.5 mm 0 /a ") ---- 25mm (3/4"- 1 -1/2 ") -- 3.5(11-13) 220 kg (1/4 Ton) 2.7 19 mm (3/4 ") ---- 25mm (3/4 "- 1 -1/2') SAND ' 4(13-15) 450 kg (%a Ton) 3.4 25 mm (1 ") ---- 25mm (3/4 "- 1 -1/2 ") SAND 4.5(15-17) 900 kg (1 Ton) 4.3 37.5 mm (1 -1/2 ") ---- TYPE B SAND 5.5 (17 -20) 1.8Tonne (2 Ton) 5.4 50 mm (2) ---- TYPE B SAND See Section 200 -1.6. see also Table 200 -1.6 (A) Practical use of this table is limited to situations where "T" is less than inside diameter. ' (1) Average velocity in pipe or bottom velocity in energy dissipater, whichever is greater. (2) If desired rip rap and filter blanket class is not available, use next larger class. ' (3) Filter blanket thickness = 0.3 Meter (1 Foot) or "T ", whichever is less. ' 8 4,41CL0 5612e CO 6_71/ CIVIL, ED TECHNICAL. 6 QUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDATION DESIGN • LAND SURVEYING • SOIL TESTING /\ .•., CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 6 INSPECTION 6 ' CLIENT: WAY PROJECT: WAY 301 DATE: 20 MAR. 2001 ' MR. DANIEL WAY yt 411 Cole Ranch Road 20 01 ' Encinitas, CA. 92024 c Iny OF ' Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Soils Engineering Investigation for the proposed Residential Grading and Sewer Main & Lateral for the lot located at 411 ' Cole Ranch Road, Encinitas, CA. (APN: 265- 025 -27) Dear Mr. Way: ' Pursuant to our request, a Preliminary Soils y q ry Engineering Investigation was 1 performed at the subject site. The purpose of the Investigation was to determine the general engineering characteristics of the soils on and underlying the site and to provide specific recommendations for the design parameters for retaining wall ' structures and site earthwork grading. 1 The proposed development consists of the construction of (1) Sewer Main Extension in Cole Ranch Road; (2) Sewer Lateral to the existing residence; (3) Retaining walls for the support of the sewer lateral; and (4) Grading for a driveway ' and a level parking pad for the residential structure. 1 SITE CONDITIONS The subject site is located approximately 0.2 mile east of Rancho Santa Fe 1 Rd. (S -10) on Cole Ranch Road in Encinitas. The property is bounded on the north, south and east by existing single family residences and on the west by Cole Ranch 1 Road. There is an existing 2 story residential structure located on the easterly side of the lot and 2 greenhouse structures along the north side of the property. The site topography consists of a gently sloping lot falling from the west and the east to a ' saddle in the center of the lot. The house pad and driveway are supported by a westerly facing fill slope. At the time of this investigation, the lot was landscaped with trees, shrubs, and surface vegetation, and an asphalt driveway. 1 1611 -A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083 -5497 • 760- 945 -3150 • FAX 760 - 945 -4221 ' - CIVIL, ED TECHNICAL. d DUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDATION DESIGN • LAND SURVEYING • SOIL TESTING .•.. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT d INSPECTION FIELD AND LABORATORY TESTING On 2 March, 2001, a Field Investigation was performed at the subject site. This investigation consisted of the excavation of two test pits dug by hand. ' Locations of these test holes are shown on the Plot Plan, Enclosure (1) and the detailed Logs of these Test Pits are presented on Enclosure (2). ' As the test pits were advanced, the soils were visually classified by the Field Engineer. Undisturbed and bulk samples, as well as in -place density tests, were ' obtained at various depths representative of the different soils horizons. All samples were returned to our laboratory for detailed testing. Results of the in -place compaction tests, the Maximum Dry Density Test values for the various soils sampled and the Expansion Potential Test results are 1 presented on Enclosure (3). These materials were also tested for Shearing Strength, Enclosure (4). ' Shear tests were made with a direct shear machine of the strain control type in which the rate of strain is 0.05 inches perminute. The machine is so designed that tests may be performed ensuring a minimum of disturbance from the field conditions. Saturated, remolded specimens were subjected to shear under various normal loads. Expansion tests were performed on typical specimens of natural soils. These tests were performed in accordance with the procedures outlined in U.B.C. Standard 29 -2. SOIL CONDITIONS ' As indicated by our Test Pit Logs, Enclosure (2), the lot is underlain with approximately 1 to 2 feet of loose topsoil material consisting of damp to moist, porous clayey sands with some roots. Underlying the topsoil materials are the Terrace Deposit materials consisting of damp to moist, dense clayey sands. ' GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ' According to published information, there are no known active or potentially active faults on or in the immediate vicinity of the subject site. Therefore, the potential for ground rupture at this site is considered low. There are, however, ' several faults located within a close proximity to this site that the movement 2 1611 -A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083 -5497 760 - 945 -3150 •FAX: 760 - 945 -4221 I Ellyinew .I n , 111C• CIVIL, GEO TECHNICAL, 6 DUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDATION DESIGN • LAND SURVEYING • SOIL TESTING �. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT A INSPECTION ' associated with them could cause significant ground motion. The following table presents the distance of major faults from the site, the assumed maximum credible earthquake magnitudes and estimated peak accelerations anticipated at the site. The probability of such an earthquake occurring during the lifetime of this project is ' considered low. The severity of ground motion is not anticipated to be any greater at this site than in other areas of San Diego County. ' SEISMICITY OF MAJOR FAULTS ESTIMATED MAXIMUM ' MAGNITUDE CREDIBLE FAULT DISTANCE (RICHTER) ACCELERATION (g) ' Rose Canyon 7 mi. 7.0 0.25 Elsinore 27 mi. 7.5 0.35 ' San Jacinto 50 mi. 7.8 0.17 San Andreas 76 mi. 8.3 0.12 ' The following information is presented relative to the subject site and Seismic Zone 4 per the U.B.C.: ' (z) Seismic zone factor = 0.4 (Na) Near- source factor = 1.0 ' (A) Seismic source type = A (Sd) Soil profile type = Sd (Ca) Seismic coefficient = 0.40 Na (Cv) Seismic coefficient = 0.64 Nv (Nv) Near- source factor = 1.2 LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL ' Liquefaction analysis of the soils underlying the site was based on the consideration of various factors which include the water level, soil type gradation, relative density, intensity of ground shaking and duration of shaking. Liquefaction ' potential has been found to be the greatest where the ground water level is shallow and loose fine sands occur within a depth of 50 feet or less. These conditions are ' not present within the site area and, therefore, the potential for generalized liquefaction in the event of a strong to moderate earthquake on nearby faults is considered to be low. 3 - - - 1611 -A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 9 • 760 945 3150 •FAX: 760 - 945 -4221 y ' CIVIL, ED TECHNICAL. A QUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDATION DESIGN • LAND SURVEYING • SOIL TESTING �.•., CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 6 INSPECTION r STABILITY ' The relatively dense nature of the slopes within the site and the nature of the material underlying the site generally preclude the occurrence of major landslide ' conditions. The area surrounding the site is not known to be within an area of ground subsidence. The potential for deep seated slope failure at the subject site is considered low. ' The site surface materials consist of clayey sands. These materials are susceptible to erosion. Drainage control is essential to maintain the stability of any planned slopes or slope areas. ' CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ' Based on field data and our laboratory tests results, the following Conclusions and Recommendations are presented and are to be utilized in conjunction with the Grading and Building Plans: ' All radin shall g g be performed in accordance with the applicable recommended grading specifications contained in this report and the City of Encinitas Grading Ordinance. ' On the basis of our investigation, development of the site as proposed is considered feasible from a soils engineering standpoint provided that the recommendations stated herein are incorporated in the design of foundation systems and are implemented in the field. Site preparation should begin with the removal of any trash, debris, and other deleterious matter. These materials, as well as vegetative matter, are not suitable ' for use in structural fills and should be exported from the site. Also, any subsurface structures such as cesspools, wells, or abandoned pipelines, which are uncovered during the grading operation, shall be removed or backfilled in accordance with the ' requirements of the City of Encinitas. ' All on -site earth materials are considered suitable for the support of the proposed structures. However, prior to placing fill, the loose topsoil materials occurring in the area of the proposed retaining walls and fill slopes shall be 4 ' 1611 -A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083 -5497 • 760- 945 -3150 • FAX 760 - 945 -4221 H X111 %/IL'('1'I111 111C. ' CIVIL.. GEOTECHNICAL. A QUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDATION DESIGN • LAND SURVEYING • SOIL TESTING �. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 6 INSPECTION removed to a depth where firm, dense native soils are encountered. The depth of removal is anticipated to be approximately 1 to 2 feet below the existing surface. This can be accomplished during the rough grading operation and/or by over - excavating the upper 24 inches of the surface soils at finish grade, ripping the exposed bottom surface to a minimum depth of 12 inches, and recompacting the soil to the design grade. ' In general, the topsoil and the Terrrace Deposit materials were found to have a low expansion potential according to our Expansion Index Test results. It is recommended that standard grading practices shall be utilized to create the proposed fill slopes and retaining wall backfills. All structural fill shall be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density at 2% over optimum moisture content as determined in accordance with ' ASTM Test Procedure D 1557 -91 or equivalent. Site drainage should be dispersed by non - erodible devices in a manner to ' preclude concentrated runoff over graded and natural areas in accordance with the City of Encinitas requirements. All grading and /or foundation plans shall be reviewed by the Soil Engineer. ' FOUNDATION DESIGN ' For foundation design purposes, the following earth pressures were calculated based on our Shear Test results (Enclosure 4) for the native soils and based on a foundation depth and width of 12 inches: TEST PIT NO.2 AT 2 FEET DEEP: ' (Brown Clayey Sand) Shear Test: Cohesion = 330 psf; Angle of Friction = 29 °. Allowable Bearing Value = 1850 psf (Safety factor = 3) ' Equivalent Fluid Pressure = 45 psf Passive Lateral Resistance = 370 psf ' Active Pressure = 45 psf Coefficient of Friction = 0.35 ' S 1611 -A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083-5497 760- 945 -3150 • FAX. 760 - 945 -4221 E1111nCT1'1111 111C. ' CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, A OUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDATION DESIGN • LAND SURVEYING • SOIL TESTING �.•., CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 6 INSPECTION ' These values are for dead plus live loads and may be increased b one -third Y Y (1/3) for seismic and wind loads where allowed by code. These design bearing ' values are in accordance with the Uniform Building Code and were calculated based on Terzaghis' Formula. LATERAL LOAD PARAMETERS ' The lateral load parameters to be used in the design of the foundations, retaining and restraining walls (using level backfills) are derived from the friction ' angle, �, obtained from the direct shear test from Test Pit #2 at a depth of 2 feet using the following formulas: A. Active Pressure Coefficient, Ka = 1 -sin = 0.35 l +sin (� B. Passive Pressure Coefficient, Kp = 1/Ka = 2.88 C. At Rest Pressure Coefficient, Ko = 1 -sin (� = 0.52 The equivalent fluid pressures are obtained by the formulas: 1 Active Pressure: z Ka Y = 0.35 x 128.5 = 45 pcf Passive Pressure: z Kp y = 2.88 x 128.5 = 370 pcf Pressure at Rest: z Ko y = 0.52 x 128.5 = 67 pcf Applicable where Y = wet density (128.5 pcf), 4) = 29', and z = 1.0'. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 may be used for design of concrete on the t native soils. ' RETAINING WALLS An equivalent fluid pressure of thirty (30) pounds per cubic foot may be used for design of retaining walls. These figures are based on a drained condition and use of level granular backfill. If native soils are used as backfill, the equivalent ' fluid pressure will be 45 pounds per cubic foot. For 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) sloping backfill, an active pressure equivalent to that exerted by a fluid weighing 60 pcf should be assumed. 6 1611 -A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083 -5497 • 760 -845 -3150 • FAX 760 - 945 -4221 Ell •A in c h e� ��f ll� 111C• ' CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, d OUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDATION DESIGN • LAND SURVEYING • SOIL TESTING ..•„ CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT d INSPECTION ' If imported soil materials are used during grading to bring the building pad to the design elevations, or if variations of soils or structure locations are encountered, ' foundation and slab designs shall be reevaluated by our firm upon the completion of the rough grading operation. Footings located on or adjacent to the top of slopes shall be extended to a sufficient depth to provide a minimum horizontal distance of 7 feet between the bottom edge of the footing and the face of the slope. ' LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS The analysis and recommendations submitted in this Report are based in part ' upon the data obtained from the test pit excavations performed on the site and our experience and judgement. The nature and extent of variations between the test pits ' may not become evident until construction. If variations then appear evident, it will be necessary to re- evaluate the recommendations of this Report. ' Findings of the Report are valid as of this date; however, changes in conditions of a property can occur with passage of time whether they be due to ' natural process or works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards occur whether they result from legislation or broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, findings of this Report may be invalidated ' wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this Report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of one year. This Report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibili ty of the owner, or of his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are called to the attention of the Architect and Engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans and that the necessary steps are taken to see ' that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field. The Soil Engineer has prepared this Report for the exclusive use of the client ' and authorized agents. This Report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices. No other warranties either ' expressed or implied are made as to the professional advice provided under the terms of this agreement, and included in the Report. 7 ' 1611 -A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083 -5497 • 760 - 945 -3150 • FAX. 760 - 945 -4221 '��1 � ill 1111,'LI'%I11 �11C. CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, 6 QUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDATION DESIGN • LAND SURVEYING • SOIL TESTING �.•.. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 6 INSPECTION 1 It is recommended that the Soil Engineer be provided the opp ortun i t y for a PP ty general review of the final design and specifications in order that earthwork and ' foundation recommendations may be properly interpreted and implemented in the design and specifications. (If the Soil Engineer is not accorded the privilege of making this recommended review, he can assume no responsibility for misinterpretation of his recommendations). ' B & B Engineering, Inc. appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions regarding this project, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Sincerely, ' �QWOFESS/�, V R C. F y � n � / � RGE 127 c C. Beard RCE RGE rn Exp. 12/31/01 '° Chief Engineer F OF CAI�F r � g 1611 -A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083 -5497 760 - 945 -3150 FAX 760 - 945 -4221 1 , �'- If If Ar 7. .X i� +IPN. ZS5�Ops B ,__._..._ _ ._.._.._ A71 YJff11'..,1�A7 `tea :'.:.•'�..s:;t, �:..k•r' ::��\ ._.. _.__._. "._ __ _ . 100 r k T( -Z } r� 1 � APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF FIELD EXPLORATORY TEST PIT 1 PLOT PLAN ' ,4 LOCATION: 4 1 COLE RANeH K4• �i //� / / /L'L'/� / //I ///L: t C / T� C CA CIVIL, GEOTECNNICAL, d OUALITY ENGINEERS 1G J • STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING • LAND SURVEYING A . P . N . 2 l0 5 _ Z 7 • PERCOLATION A SOIL TESTING • CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT A INSPECTION PROJECT: WO ,30/ DATE : 3 Zc�il ENCLOSURE (1) 1 riir. CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, 3 OUALITY ENGINEERS • STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING • LAND SURVEYING 17A NN 1 y W Aq ~ • PERCOLATION & SOIL TESTING - CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT d INSPECTION W A V 301 M4 ec'IA 7,001 LOG OF TEST PITS EXCAVATED 3-8-0 RmalG ea Pay NANp ' PIT DIMENSIONS IN FEET W L D _ TP I SURFACE ELEVATION IN FEET DATUM Mean Sea Level G E L 0 G ICAL W =W o C ENGINEERING TEST DATA CLASSIFICATION w �w ; M CLASSIFICATION AND _ D _ 0 t DESCRIPTION W Z ° Z y M DESCRIPTION tRC) 1095 1 U T A N CCA ' TC221aG( _ SAN (SC) P012ov5. gegff5,6QAS5. _TJ POStTS DAMP -M015► LOOSE 'DENSE 4 ' S IZOvUtiI c�nyE Iv c AMP M01'5 VE ' e)rrom OF TEST P1T Co 4 10 15 ' PIT DIMENSIONS IN FEET W L D SURFACE ELEVATION IN FEET TP_2 ' TO PSb U, 2UST_ O "W() E- 520WN c c-4 E '['k_R VLr_%c c_ _ _5AN 0 _(S c.� I coa r3 Lee Po RovS �e 51TS ROOTS D Ry l.005E - b eras 12ooT5 DA K 9 ' 5ecoM1N6) MoRE2 !fix: w n • /0 BoTTON} op Tts1__91T e Q _c�L_oSuR -E �?)__ 11 4CHEngincering, hic. i CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, A QUALITY ENGINEERS • STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING • LAND SURVEYING •. • PERCOLATION & SOIL TESTING • CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION i CLIENT: k14 q PROJECT: (1,4q 9 / 04TE: I'M eC/H &eol ' Test Test Test Test Soil Dry Den slt . p Moisture. % Relative Retest No. Date Location E1 /Depth Type Field Maxiaana. Field Opt. Compaction No. TP I tz 110 3 /26.$ >l - /D.0 87 TP_ 1 2 & 11�,G /Z6.5 12,G 9.5 91 i 3 0 -1'p -3 12 4 /1 /, 1 /26 g. /0. 88 Tp -z �S'' 8 117,4 /28.5 9.2 q 91 i ' COMPACTION CURVE DATA OPTIMUM MAXIMUM DRY ' SOIL TYPE AND DESCRIPTION MOISTURE% DENSITY (pcf) QUST - 012A1yI I 9 CL J41V T,o -/ /26 8 g ��20HJn/ CG SAN T,D -2 9 S 128 S ' EXPANSION POTENTIAL 3 (LOW) 1 - 20 - Very Low 21 - 50 - Low Tom_-- _Z___.... _. 2._.. ..___- .---- - - - - -- 51 - 90 = Moderate 91 -130 - High ' 131 - above - Critical ' EXPANSION AND COMPACTION TEST DATA ENCLOSURE (3) 1 2000 i ' a 1600 1~ c9 Z W CC 1200 I- N i" Z Q 800 IW cn 1 400 29° 1 1 0 0 400 800 1200 1600 2000 i NORMAL LOAD (PSF) i SOIL TYPE c BORING NO. DEPTH MOISTURE COHESION ANGLE OF E (B.N) (ft) ( %) (PSF) FRICTION (o) i 330 s 2 1 i Ifecillivagillecring, iiic. CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, 6 QUALITY ENGINEERS • STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING • LAND SURVEYING i ' • PERCOLATION A SOIL TESTING - • CONST MANAGEMENT 6 INSPECTION u' SHEAR STRENGTH T EST ='c1t1ceo,5Ukoe (4-) 1 -