Loading...
2001-6928 CN/G _ --- F GINEERING c SERVICES DEPARTMENT T - ity Encinitas Capital Improvement Projects -- District Support Services Field Operations Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering July 22, 2002 Attn: Branch Manager Wells Fargo Bank 276 -A North El Camino Real Encinitas, California 92024 RE: Tinney, Troy and Brooke 1674 Crest Drive APN 262 - 031 -04,05 Grading Permit 6928 -G Final release of security Permit 6928 -G authorized earthwork, private drainage improvements, and erosion control, all as necessary to build described project. Final, acceptance, and warranty inspections have all been completed to the satisfaction of the Field Operations Division. Therefore, release of the security deposit is merited. The following Certificate of Deposit Account has been cancelled by the Financial Services Manager and is hereby released for payment to the depositor. Account # 0945009694 in the amount of $ 11,151.20. The document originals are enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633 -2779 or in writing, attention the Engineering Department. Sincerely, Masih Maher Leslie Suelter Senior Civil Engineer Financial Services Manager Subdivision Engineering Financial Services CC: Leslie Suelter, Financial Services Manager Troy and Brooke Tinney File TFL'60- 633 -2600 FAX - 6 0 - 633 -202 �i15 ti_ A ulcan A� cnuc. l'ncinita�_ Cahfoinio 0202 A-3633 TDD - 633 - -01 CW ��� recycled paper ENGINEERING SER DICES DEPARTMENT City Of Capital Improvement Projects Encinitas District Support Services Field Operations Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering October 17, 2001 Traffic Engineering Attn: Indemnity Company of California 17780 Fitch Suite 200 Irvine, California 92614 RE: Troy and Brooke Tinney A.P.N. 262 - 031 -04,05 Grading Plan 6928 -G Final release of security Permit 6928 -GI authorized earthwork, storm drainage, and erosion control, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has approved the rough grading. Therefore, release of the security deposit is merited. Performance Bond 831628 S, in the amount of $44,605.00, 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 she Suelter Senior Civil Engineer Financial Services Manager Financial Services Cc: Leslie Suelter, Financial Manager Troy Tinney file enc. TF.L '60- 633 -1600 / FAX 60- 0>33 -?63' >05 S. Vulcan AVenue, Encinitas. California 92024 IDD - 60-633 -2700 recycled paper From: Mike Wells To: Duane Thompson Date: 3/14/01 3:15PM Subject: Tinney - 6928 GR Duane: We have reviewed the proposed grading for the Tinney property on Crest Drive adjacent to the east side of Cardiff Sports Park and have the following comments: Runoff from this property has had a significant impact on the Sports Park in the past, causing erosion on adjacent park slope and depositing silt on the park. The proposed development greatly increases the quantity of water that will run off the property. It also concentrates that run off at one point, thus increasing the impact to the park. This is not acceptable. Please let me know if we need to discuss possible solutions. Thanks. Mike Mike Wells Parks Supervisor City of Encinitas 505 S. Vulcan Ave. Encinitas, CA 92024 760 633 -2747 mwells@ci.encinitas.ca.us CC: Phillip Cotton Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyois/Genaal- Fngineering Contractors AB412412 135 Liverpool Drive • Suite D • Cardiff -by -the -Sea, CA 92007 • Telephone (760) 753 -1453 • Fax (760) 635 -0839 DATE: April 19, 2001 MEMORANDUM TO: Tamara O'Neal — City of Encinitas Engineering Dept. FROM: Michael Pasko PROJECT: 6928 -G - Tinney Residence SUBJECT: Storm Water Runoff The purpose of this memo is to address the project review comments from Mr. Mike Wells, City Parks Supervisor, dated March 14, 2001 and to document the issues discussed at our April 6, 2001 meeting. General Description of Site Conditions The Tinney site and other residential sites front on Crest Drive and abut the easterly boundary of the City's Cardiff Sports Park complex. These offsite residential areas slope westward toward the sports park site. The Tinney project site is located near the northeast corner of the sports complex, close to a baseball diamond. The diamond area was cut into the natural westward - declining slope and lies approximately 10 feet below the grade of the easterly boundary of the park along the Tinney site limits. As you know, drainage around the baseball diamond is typically poor as it carries little slope. General Impacts on Sports Park Site Mr. Well's concerns regarding the impacts from offsite storm water runoff onto the Cardiff Sports Park site are valid. However, the maintenance concerns he describes are the result of an incomplete storm water handling system within the Cardiff Sports Park complex. The record grading plan for the sports park site shows no storm drain system or other storm water handling provisions (e.g. D -75 concrete drainage ditch, subsurface drains) in this area of the park to deal with the naturally occurring runoff entering the Sports Park from the east, surface or subsurface. Currently, offsite drainage runs down the cut slope, drains onto the baseball diamond and continues southwesterly across the park complex to the onsite storm drain located in the center of the site. Offsite Siltation Into The Sports Park Site I have visited and examined the northeast ball field area of the park adjacent to the Tinney project site. I found no evidence of the past silting problems Mr. Wells refers to in his memo. The Tinney site has a plastic barrier sheet for silt control from the previous greenhouse operation that runs inside their fence line that has been in place for over 10 years. Once Tinney begins grading, standard city policy will mandate a combination of silt fences and containment berms along the limits of grading on the subject site until permanent vegetation is established. Tinney Site Runoff Quantities The post - development storm water runoff quantity from the Tinney site is expected to be less than the pre - development storm water runoff quantity. In his memo, Mr. Wells states that the proposed Tinney residence project will increase the storm water runoff from the site. This is not correct. As noted on page two of the site hydrology study prepared by our office, the post- development site runoff was computed to be less than the pre- development site runoff: 2.3 cfs vs. 3.0 cfs, respectively, a 23% reduction in the site's storm water runoff from its previous use (greenhouse structures, residential units and farm buildings). With the exception of the small guesthouse in the southeast corner of the site, all previous structures have been removed in anticipation of the proposed site work shown on sheet 4 of the grading plan. The post- development site condition used in our analysis is shown on sheet 2 of the project grading plans. Concentrated Offsite Flow Onto The Sports Park Site The new storm drain outlet discharges to the same general area of the Tinney site as the preceding storm water outlet point. The proposed Tinney project does not significantly change the character of the storm water outflow prom the site's former use. The new site design will reduce the total runoff and disperse the collected storm flow over a wider area to allow for increased ground percolation. cc: Troy Tinney, owner p:\00 -010 tinney \wordproc \enc010425m.doc Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers /Surveyors/General- Engineering Contractors AB412412 135 Liverpool Drive • Suite D • Cardiff-by- the -Sea, CA 92007 • Telephone (760) 753 -1453 • Fax (760) 635 -0839 HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS and HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS for TINNEY RESIDENCE 1674 CREST DRIVE ENCINITAS, CA APN 262- 031 -04 & 05 GRADING PLAN 6928 -G is % ESSI � t K. t C � IN. 41022 7 ° EXPIRES 3-31 -2003 �r4rE CIVIL OF CALL Prepared: '_._:?_..,'U �-, February 19, 2001.' SUN 142001 r Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyors/General- Engineering Contractors A8412412 135 Liverpool Drive • Suite D • Cardiff -by- the -See, CA 92007 • Telephone (760) 753 -1453 • Fax (760) 635 -0839 SITE HYDROLOGY - POST DEVELOPMENT CONDITION Tc = 18 min I = 3.6 in/hr BASIN A (sf) A (ac) C CA CIA CUMULATIVE CONCENTRATION (cfs) A 2,645 0.061 0.40 0.02 0.1 B 5,460 0.125 0.85 0.11 0.4 0.50 C 2,845 0.065 0.85 0.06 0.2 0.70 D 5,060 0.116 0.40 0.05 0.2 0.90 E 2,040 0.047 0.90 0.04 0.2 1.10 F 8,775 0.201 0.85 0.17 0.6 G 4,560 0.105 0.40 0.04 0.2 0.80 H 2,870 0.066 0.85 0.06 0.2 1.00 Outlet @ Garage SD: 2.1 cfs West Yard 13960 0.320 0.4 0.13 0.2 Outlet @ Garage SD: 2 cfs SITE HYDROLOGY - PRE - DEVELOPMENT CONDITION BASIN A (so A (ac) C CA CIA CUMULATIVE CONCENTRATION (cfs) Total Site 50,672 1.163 Building 19,690 W'ly greenhouses Building 2,975 Farm out - buildings Building 4,830 Old residence Building 395 Accessory structure AC Paving 2,980 Greenhouse draive AC Paving 1,570 Garage drive Impervious 3� 2,440 0.745 0.9 0.67 2.41 Pervious 18,232 0.419 0.4 0.17 0.60 Total Site Runoff: cfs Printed 2/18/01 Page 1 of 1 00 -010 Tinney \hydro \HYDRO.xIs i H 1.0 1 40' 20' 10' 0 40' gp' 8" SO f .• SCALE: 1"=40' ® 119 8" SO I n� 02.0 I G0 s Q,00 =2.1 cfs LEGEND r i E j 1.1 I �' '� �■ BASIN BOUNDARY i 8" SO 3so D BASIN DESIGNATOR ® 2.29 _ 0.9 CUMULATIVE FLOW AT BASIN'S POINT OF CONCENTRATION ® BASIN DESIGNATOR I •• FLOW DIRECTION TINNEY RESIDENCE SITE HYDROLOGY PREPARED 2116101 TINNEY SITE - AERIAL VIEW Pre -Site Demolition PROPERTY -0--.: LINE (TYP) EEN t USES r.�.: 4 EMO'D) ' 7 A 4 . ° ARM BUILDING (DEMO'D) r f AC DRIVE (DEMO'D) f ACCESSORY BUILDING _ +� r . (EXISTING — �„ I PREVIOUS TO REMAIN) RESIDENCE (DEMO'D) AC DRIVE „ (DEMO'D) CREST DRIVE ILI Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers /Surveyors /General - Engineering Contractors AB412412 \\f'ileserver\projects \00 -010 tinnwhydrolaerial.doc Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil E;Igineers/Surveyors/General- Engineering Contractors AB412412 135 Liverpool Drive • Suite D • Cardiff -by -the -Sea, CA 92007 • Telephone (760) 753 -1453 • Fax (760) 635 -0839 -to IN 1 ! 5 t 1 t J t I t � I t t 1 ! 1 t � k 1 r , o , : 1 ' —a _. r- /� 7t7r/V• _ t i _ t t ; d,ZS /`,6,� . t : I 7 c/3 t : Job No. DD D/d Desc. U p Date Z G b - 71 - 4n , e y if Sht of C: 4- O L �O C p L O r0 >, L C1 C a a ) + L X CO r0 L= = N O •r <J O U C X C r--• N 4 r- J::" O lO C) +J U CJ C. C1 .- C -r- C U Z�2 II1 CZl CJ 4- _ •r CJ L0 •r O 11 S " S•' •r' C O G. C O C V' r0 +J lD N r G 4- C) a (0 C1 CL 4- CJ J G 4-4- S- 4-j CJ rII r O {J {J # S- C) U L E = C) .i.J W _ ¢J r-- C S. .. N Ln aj C) C •r. 1 Ci 4-) > V Vi •r C •r S C C r ^` O N CO a•-> S - O O Q) to `V � -p C d CJ O .� b r •r L C r0 0- O r0 L Cu O i-J C) •1J }J {J CJ C Q C) N + r0 r0 r0 it C S- CD- 4•• +J +-/ L C C L -M > r0 C S - •r - 0 _ •r -r •r O) •r Cn ?� N •r \ t0 U O O S C "U U= C]. G O C U 0- E C U •r •r 4- >� ti CJ CJ •r -r • O CJ •r C r -,,- d r0 N CJ C. O G ++ CJ CJ L IJ L = O_ +-> -4-J S.- L7 L -r- S. S• - -4-J N O - C II C1. C a 3 CL O_ +J C) to C E CJ r ip Q L C) C r O S- i_ S r O N O - 0 L N - . (0 C •r •r O LL K i) - U E d,- C r S. 4 S- L r r CJ i-� 1V1 O 4- CJ r0 rb �� r0 1p L S- L U r C r0 p ^ ` ! Z N a E • C 4 -- CJ r U C C) , v 4J % C S Cu r V7 (D r0 CJ r- O O 4-J 4-) n7 N N C) L J.J rn O E L vi = • = iJ p 4J 4- 3 4-) N r +J CJ II II O CJ C tA r7 r0 O O rd p r C) rO r- +� S. d• .r r0 CJ "C7 L L O -4- S- r• L L CJ l0 U LL- N f- D +J +J 4-J d O O L` f-- 4-•r Cu _ L O r N C 7 Q O .- N Cl) 2. 'J 6 -Hour Precipitation (inches) N o Ln C3 Ln C) �n o LO o In o LAJ — _ -- -- -- - •- -- U 1� <-i M N N r Z 1 v .,..1 � I �1 :I p t, - - - T I I r lul:l•�•: ,I I, � I M O y r1 I1; illi — i I t I'I II I I o +J 1 N_ v a� I is u n n — - -- O r _ -- _ O C - T -- 'I � _ ��.: � 1 r � I t I I I I I I r LCJ •r- I � I I I I I I i j II 11 � 1 (jnoq /sayoui) X44 sua4ul Revised 1/85 APPENDIX XI -A 07/20/99 09:04 FAX 7607223490 FR4SER ENG. Inc. Q05 zo I 1 1 ,.-s• �i� _' M C3 Cl% b y Skma LAJ Cn r �n / "r 1' _�' / Lra �j � T •V S Cn get LU "! I / •� t �1 rye' u L o W M 1 x r o < is r G h N ul 1a V U N o uR° I I A O y s U. o • 14 u v► oc M CL L I+] t 0 d d d Al } U N O Z of < � XO O W rl O V O LL r1 � O F n ..1 V Y L N Revised I /65 APPENDIX XI -E U7 2U/ 99 Ua:U4 !A-& 76U7Z;&J4VU r HAbbf ( tim,. Inc. WJu4 LZ trams '•`° � ° y I � � � �� I se w U— gm Ln l 4 r i _ J co ( lam I LoU L f © N C:: IA I 1 s H Q �+ -C U K a C - ❑ m �, G = M O W O F W u O LL C' z � N J { V w a n RCVi9ed 1/85 APPENDIX 11 -H Garage Outlet SD Worksheet for Circular Channel Project Description Project File 000-010 tinney\hydro100010hyd.fm2 Worksheet 00-010 Tinney: Garage Outlet Pipe Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula F/ Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coefficient 0.009 Channel Slope 0.020000 ft/ft Diameter 8.00 in Discharge 2.10 cfs Results Depth 0.47 ft Flow Area 0.26 ft Wetted Perimeter 1.33 ft Top Width 0.61 ft Critical Depth 0.63 ft Percent Full 70,87 Critical Slope 0.012534 ft/ft Velocity 7.94 ft/s Velocity Head 0.98 ft Specific Energy 1.45 ft Froude Number 2.12 Mabmum Discharge 2.66 cfs Full Flow Capacity 2.47 cfs Full Flow Slope 0.014476 ft/ft Flow is supercritical. 02/17/01 Conway & Assoc. Inc. 08:02:11 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 FlowMaster v5.07 (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 Garage Inlets' SD Worksheet for Circular Channel Project Description Project File 000 -0 10 tinneylhydro100010hyd.fm2 Worksheet 00 -010 Tinney: Garage Inlets' SD Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula a el) Solve For Channel Depth F Input Data Mannings Coefficient 0.010 Channel Slope 0.100000 ft/ft U 8 � Diameter 6.00 in M1% GIN RF-)C� Discharge 1.10 cfs V OV ES Results Depth 0.23 ft Flow Area 0.09 ft Wetted Perimeter 0.75 ft Top Width 0.50 ft Critical Depth 0.47 ft Percent Full 46.04 Critical Slope 0.016255 ft/ft Velocity 11.33 ft/s Velocity Head 1.99 ft Specific Energy 2.22 ft Froude Number 4.75 Mabmum Discharge 2.48 cfs Full Flow Capacity 2.31 cfs Full Flow Slope 0.018796 ft/ft Flow is supercritical. Q tt� �7 �• �,�. � ►�' �� off- �,( �,, e 2z 2 ».; ti? - o- 4" 02/17101 Conway & Assoc. Inc. 08:14:30 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755 -1666 FlawMaster v5.07 o1 Page 1 of 1 S'ty PL SD Worksheet for Circular Channel Project Description Project File p:100 -010 tinneylhydro100010hyd.fm2 Worksheet 00-010 Tinney: S'ly PL SD Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coefficient 0.010 Channel Slope 0.060000 ft/ft Diameter 8.00 in Discharge 0.90 cfs Results Depth 0.22 ft Flow Area Q.10 ftZ Wetted Perimeter 0.81 ft Top Width 0.63 ft Critical Depth 0.45 ft Percent Full 32.91 Critical Slope 0.005170 ft/ft Velocity 8.99 ft/s Velocity Head 1.26 ft Specific Energy 1.48 ft Froude Number 3.97 Ma)dmum Discharge 4.14 cfs Full Flow Capacity 3.85 cfs Full Flow Slope 0.003283 ft/ft Flow is supercritical. o2117iol 08:19:29 AM ConwaY & Assoc. Inc. Fbwtvlaster v5.07 37 Haestad Methods, Inc. Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. SOIL & FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY Job Name Job # , .w- �, Y pate Project Location: , Summary of Observations: f r. �CC C,' Recommendation: By: Received by: % r 7420 Trade St. San Diego, Ca. 92121 • (858) 549 -7222 • FAX: (858) 549 -1604 *E-mail: geoteck @pacbell.net GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. SOIL & FOUNDATION ENGINEERING GROUNDWATER • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY FIELD REPORT ON OBSERVATION OF FOUNDATIONS f DATE: TIME: CLIENT: JOB NO. PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: The footing excavations listed below were bottomed on material for which the bearing values ° recommended in the foundation report are applicable. The cast -in -place drilled friction piles listed below penetrated material for which the ❑ allowable supporting capacities recommended in the foundation report are applicable. The piles were excavated to diameters at least as large as specified and the excavations extended at least to the depths indicated on the Foundation Plans. ❑ The excavations for the cast -in -place belled piers listed below were bottomed on material for which the bearing values recommended in the foundation report are applicable. The excavations were at least as large as specified on the Foundation Plans. ❑ The driven piles listed below were observed to be driven to the specified lengths and /or driving resistances to obtain the supporting capacities recommended in the foundation report. Based upon observations, it is our opinion that the foundation recommendations presented in the report of the foundation investigation, Job No.t t' -. "`, dated not) apple cable to the conditions observed. Foundation Plans by r ;. /� (are) /(are.W dated were used as a reference for our observations. j NOTE: 1. The observations reported above do not constitute an approval of foundation location, footing size or depth, reinforcement, or foundation design. 2. Loose, soft, or disturbed soils must be removed prior to placement of reinforcement or concrete. 3. The opinions and recommendations presented in this report were based upon our observa- tions and are presented in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering practice. We make no other warranty, either express or'implied. r << M99CS001128M 1/00 7420 Trade St. San Diego, Ca. 92121 • (858) 549 -7222 • FAX: (858) 549 -1604 MH T Jauutl of ' Sau PtJe > DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH LAND AND WATER QUALITY DIVISION P.O. BOX 129261, SAN DIEGO, CA 92112-9261 (619) 338-2222 FAX (619) 338-2377 1- 800 - 253 -9933 DATE: PROJ. # INSPECTION REPORT ❑ APPROVED f. INSPECTION fAPE ZO z $ REIN-SPECTION FEE REQIMED SPECIALIST: N PHONE: San Diego Office East County Office San Marcos Office 5201 Ruffin Rd., Ste. C 200 E. Main St., 6' FIr 338 Via Vera Cruz San Diego, CA 92123 El Cajon, CA 92020-3912 San Marcos, CA 92069 (858) 565-5173 (619) 441-4030 (760) 471-0730 DEH:LU-480 (2/00) NCR DISTRIBUTION: Original - Files Pink— Specialist Hard Copy — Permit Applicant Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyors/Gencral- Engineering Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive • Carlsbad, CA 92008 • Telephone (760) 753 -1453 • Fax (760) 635 -0839 September 4, 2001 City of Encinitas Engineering Services Permits 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 Project: A Portion of Lots 3 & 4 of Block C, Map 2114 — 1674 Crest Drive, Encinitas Subject: Engineer's Partial Pad Certification for Grading Permit Number 6928 -G for Release of Site Retaining Wall Building Permits Pursuant to section 23.24.3 10 of the Encinitas Municipal Code, this letter is hereby submitted as a partial Pad Certification Letter for a portion of Lots 3 and 4 of Block C, Map 2114. As the engineer of record for the subject project, I hereby state the rough grading for the building pads and the future pool area pad were completed in conformance with the approved plans and requirements of the City of Encinitas' codes and standards, as applicable for the current stage of construction. VII. The following presents the pad elevations as field verified and as shown on the approved grading plan: Pad Elevation Pad Elevation Per Site Location Pad Location Per Plan Field Verification Lower pad - garage Sump inlet @ W'ly pad line, opposite garage 363.20 363.18 Lower pad - garage Garage pad rough grade @ S'ly line 363.67 363.73 Lower pad - garage SW corner of pad 362.93 363.03 Lower pad - garage Pad, 10' W'ly of garage 363.38 363.44 Middle pad - pool SW corner of pad 370.00 370.33 Middle pad - pool Center of pad 370.00 369.84 Middle pad - pool NE corner of pad 370.00 369.44 Upper pad - house NW corner of house subgrade 372.60 372.55 Upper pad - house NE corner of house subgrade 372.60 372.67 Upper pad - house center of house subgrade 372.60 372.56 Upper pad - house SW corner of house subgrade 372.60 372.49 Upper pad - house Center of garage pad subgrade 375.45 375.44 IX. The location and inclination of all manufactured slopes and retaining wall footing excavations have been field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan. The following items are specifically excluded from the aforementioned pad certification as they were incomplete at the time of my field review: VIII. Construction of the engineered drainage devices and retaining walls are not yet complete and are not in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan at this time. X. The construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage are not yet complete been field verified and are not in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan at this time. p:\00 -010 tinny\wordproclpadcert01094.doc Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers /Surveyors /General- Engineering Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive • Carlsbad, CA 92008 • Telephone (760) 753 -1453 • Fax (760) 635 -0839 It is my understanding that an additional review of the final grading and drainage- related work will be required for the project after the construction and backfill of the site retaining walls and storm drain construction to assess substantial conformance of these items with the approved plans. The as- graded elevation data listed herein was compiled by Dan Hooper, L. S. on August 28, 2001 using field survey methods. Submitted by Conway & Associates, Inc. c J*Gf ES$10,y pE l K. A 4 E. 0 OP Michael K. Pasko, P.E. — No. 41022 z T Engineer of Record o EXPIRES 3 -31 -2003 C 1 V I I. OF CAL �F cc: Troy Tinney — owner p:\00 -010 tinney\wordproc \padcert01094.doc REPORT OF GRADING OBSERVATION, SOIL TESTING AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING Proposed Tinney Residence 1674 Crest Drive - Encinitas, California JOB NO. 00 -7895 06 September 2001 Prepared for: TINNEY DEVELOPMENT Attn: Mr. Troy Tinney Pik 0 T� SPIN l GEOTECH NICAL EXPLORATION, INC. SOIL & FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 06 September 2001 TINNEY DEVELOPMENT Job No. 00 -7895 P.O. Box 484 Solana Beach, CA 92025 -� Attn: Mr. Troy Tinney Subject: Reuort of Grading Observation Soil Testing and Geotechnical Engineering Proposed Tinney Residence 1674 Crest Drive Encinitas, California Dear Mr. Tinney: As requested, Geotechnical Exploration, Inc., hereby submits the following report summarizing our work and test results, as well as our conclusions and recommendations concerning the subject project. A representative of our firm observed the recent rough grading operation and tested the fill soils that were removed and recompacted during the preparation of the building pad area (see Figure No. Ib). The grading described herein consisted of removing and recompacting topsoil and loose fill, and undercutting and recompacting soils under foundations for raised wood floors. The grading was observed and /or tested between August 7 and 22, 2001. SCOPE OF WORK The scope of work of our services included: 1. Observations during rough grading of the site. 7420 TRADE STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92121 • (858) 549 -7222 • FAX: (858) 549 -1604 • E -MAIL: geotech @ixpres,com Proposed Tinney Residence Job No. 00 -7895 Encinitas, California Page 2 2. Performing field density tests in the placed and compacted fill. 3. Performing laboratory tests on representative samples of the fill material. - 4. Providing professional opinions, conclusions, and recommendations regarding the observed grading and the pending work. GENERAL SITE INFORMATION The property is located on the west side of the north -south trending Crest Drive, in the City of Encinitas, California. The property is bordered on the north and south by existing single - family residences; on the west by similar rural residential property; and on the east by Crest Drive. Prior to grading, the property sloped moderately to the west, with elevations ranging from approximately 380 feet above mean sea level (MSL) to 352 feet above MSL at the southwest corner of the lot. Precise, mapped survey information concerning actual elevations after grading was not available at the time of this report preparation. Existing structures on the site prior to grading included a house that was demolished and removed, and a smaller existing house by the southeast corner of the property that still remains. Existing vegetation prior to grading consisted of several mature trees, scattered shrubbery and hedges along the north and south property lines. The site has been prepared to receive the proposed residence, which will be a maximum of two stories in height. It is our understanding that the building will be constructed in conformance with the Uniform Building Code, utilizing conventional - Proposed Tinney Residence Job No. 00 -7895 Encinitas, California Page 3 type foundations, footings, and building materials. A Plot Plan illustrating the approximate location of all our tests taken throughout the grading operation is enclosed as Figure No. I. Work that remains to be completed at the site and that will require our observations and /or testing include any retaining wall backfill, trench backfill, R -value testing for areas to be paved, and final subgrade and base preparation of areas to receive pavement and /or hardscape improvements. FIELD OBSERVATIONS Periodic tests and observations were provided by a representative of Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. to check the grading contractor's (Mike Warner) compliance with the grading specifications. The presence of our field representative at the site was to provide to the client a continuing source of professional advice, opinions, and recommendations based upon the field representative's observations of the contractor's work, and did not include any superintending, supervision, or direction of the actual work of the contractor or the contractor's workers. Our visits were made on request of the contractor's representative. The grading operation was observed to be performed in the following general manner: 1. Prior to placing any compacted fill, the areas to be graded were cleared of surface trash, miscellaneous debris, and /or vegetation, and hauled off -site. 2. Uncompacted fills, loose or disturbed materials, and /or unsuitable soils were removed to expose competent ground. The removed material in the building pad areas was extended to a depth of at least 1 foot below existing grade, f Proposed Tinney Residence Job No. 00 -7895 Encinitas, California Page 4 and to at least the approximate limits shown on the plot plan (see Figure No. Ib). In the north driveway area, the recompaction of loose soils was extended to a depth of at least 12 inches. 3. A septic tank was removed in the northern area of the home and backfilled with sand - cement slurry. Also, a seepage pit 3 feet in diameter and 40 feet deep to sludge was found by the northeast corner of the middle pad. The seepage pit had 10 feet of water on top of the sludge surface. The seepage pit was backfilled with crushed rock gravel in the lower half, and with 2 -sack sand - cement slurry in the upper half up to -4 feet from the surface. 4. The perimeter wall foundation area soils were undercut at least 3 feet in depth and recompacted to provide an all -fill layer under all foundations. Imported soils (approximately 2 1 /2 to 3 feet in thickness) were used in the upper pad to reach crawl space elevation. In the driveway area, approximately 12 to 18 inches were removed and recompacted. The import soils were very similar to the on -site soils. 5. A septic tank encountered outside of the southeast corner of the garage was active and serving the existing house left on the property. The existing tank was pumped, cleaned and backfilled with sand - cement slurry and gravel (per Mr. Tinney). 6. The driveway circle east of the new building pad is outside the scope of our work. 7. The exposed ground surface was scarified at least 6 inches and uniformly recompacted prior to placement of compacted soil. Scarification or recompaction was not required on sound bedrock. Proposed Tinney Residence Job No. 00 -7895 Encinitas, California Page 5 8. Areas to receive compacted fill were, in general, observed and evaluated by our field representative prior to placing compacted fill. In slope fill areas, adequate benching was provided by keying into competent natural ground or approved compacted fill as the compacted fill was placed above the toe area. 9. Soils approved for use in the compacted fill were placed in horizontal layers not exceeding approximately 8 to 10 inches in loose thickness. 10. Fill material was watered or dried at or near optimum moisture content, and mixed prior to compaction. 11. The soils utilized in the grading operation were from on -site and import, and consisted primarily of golden brown, silty, fine to medium sand; and orange - brown, silty, fine to medium sand. 12. Fill materials were tested at specific test locations and found to be compacted at those locations to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density. 13. Compaction was achieved by drying or wetting the soil, mixing it and rolling it with heavy construction equipment such as a track - mounted loader. Moisture was provided with a water hose. 14. Field density tests were taken at the approximate locations shown on the plot plan (Figure No. I). _._ TESTS Field density tests were performed in accordance with ASTM D1556 and ASTM D2922. Maximum density determinations were performed in accordance with ASTM T�i-iJ Proposed Tinney Residence Job No. 00 -7895 Encinitas, California Page 6 D1557. The relative compaction results, as summarized on Figure No. II, are the ratios of the field densities to the laboratory Maximum Dry Densities, expressed as percentages. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The following conclusions and recommendations are based upon our analysis of all data available from the testing of the soils compacted on this site. Our observations of the grading operation (while in progress), our field and laboratory testing of the typical bearing soils, and our general knowledge and experience with the natural - ground soils and recompacted fill soils on this site were utilized in conducting our services. A. General Grading 1. The soils utilized in the grading operation were from existing on -site soils that were removed and recompacted, and imported materials that were placed and recompacted. The soils consisted primarily of silty, fine to medium sands. Soils of this type are considered very low to low expansive, as measured by the UBC Expansion Index Test (29 -2 standard) and per simple visual inspection. 2. During the grading operation, the natural - ground soils in the building pad area were exposed (where necessary) and properly prepared to receive the fill soils. The fill soils were placed, watered, compacted, and then tested at specific test locations, and were found to be compacted at the tested locations to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density, in accordance with the requirements of the City of Encinitas. The maximum depth of fill soils �r�� 'J Proposed Tinney Residence Job No. 00 -7895 Encinitas, California Page 7 placed on this site at the time of the grading operation monitored by this firm was not in excess of 5 feet in vertical thickness. 3. Any surplus, loose, stockpiled soils remaining at the property should be removed and hauled off the site. 4. Grading work that needs to be completed and performed under our observations and testing include any retaining wall backfill, trench backfill, and finish subgrade and base preparation in areas to receive pavement. B. Foundations and Slabs On -Grade 5. The continuous foundations and spread footings shall extend a minimum depth of 18 inches into the firm natural ground or properly compacted fill, and have a minimum width of 12 inches. One -story portions of the house may have foundations only 12 inches deep. The continuous foundations shall be reinforced with at least four No. 5 steel bars; two bars shall be located near the top of the foundations and two bars 3 inches from the bottom. Additional steel may be required by the structural engineer in deeper footings. 6. Prior to pouring footings and foundations, and prior to placement of floor slab base sections, the subgrade moisture content and penetration should be verified by our field representative within 48 hours prior to concrete pouring. The bottom of the foundation excavation should be firm, not muddy, and have the acceptable moisture content. 7. Concrete floor slabs shall be founded on at least 2 inches of sand overlying a moisture barrier on 2 inches of sand. The slabs shall be reinforced with at Proposed Tinney Residence Job No. 00 -7895 Encinitas, California Page 8 least No. 3 steel bars placed on 18 -inch centers. Any steel reinforcement should be placed in the middle of the floor slab section. Proper supports should be used to keep the steel reinforcement separated from the base or soil subgrade. 8. It is recommended that all nonstructural concrete slabs (such as patios, sidewalks, etc.) be founded on 12 inches of nonexpansive, properly compacted soils. Proper shrinkage joints (sawcuts) should be provided and spaced no farther than 15 feet or the width of the slab, whichever is less, and also at re- entrant corners. The sawcuts should be performed no later than 12 hours after pouring, or as soon as the concrete is set. Sawcuts should be deepened to at least one - quarter of the thickness of the slab. 9. All concrete (flatwork) slabs or rigid improvements should be built on - properly compacted and approved subgrade and /or base material. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc, will accept no liability for damage to flatwork or rigid improvements built on untested or unapproved subgrade or base material. C. Foundation Design Parameters 10. The recommended allowable soil bearing capacity of the properly compacted fill soils placed on the site is 2,000 pounds per square foot. The recommended allowable soil bearing capacity may be increased 1,000 psf for each additional foot in depth, and 500 psf for each additional foot in width. The total bearing capacity shall not exceed 6,000 psf. This soil - bearing value may be increased one - third for design loads that include wind or seismic analysis. Additionally, these bearing capacities may be utilized in the design of foundations and footings of the proposed structure when founded a J Proposed Tinney Residence Job No. 00 -7895 Encinitas, California Page 9 minimum of 12 inches into the firm natural ground or compacted fill for single -story structures, 18 inches for two -story structures. For on -site conditions, it is expected that the maximum settlement will not exceed 1 inch, and the maximum differential angular rotation will not exceed 1/240. 11. The passive earth pressure of the encountered natural - ground soils and well - compacted fill soils (to be used for design of building foundations and footings to resist the lateral forces) shall be based on an Equivalent Fluid Weight of 275 pounds per cubic foot. This passive earth pressure shall only be considered valid for design if the ground adjacent to the foundation structure is essentially level for a distance of at least three times the total depth of the foundation, the soil is properly compacted fill or natural dense material, and the concrete is poured tight against the walls of the excavation. 12. A Coefficient of Friction of 0.40 times the dead load may be used to calculate the total friction force between the bearing soils and the bottom of concrete wall foundations, or structure foundations, or floor slabs. D. Retaining Wall Design Parameters 13. The active earth pressure (to be utilized in design of cantilever walls, etc.) shall be based on a Equivalent Fluid Weight of 38 pounds per cubic foot (for level backfill only and nonexpansive or low- expansive, on -site native soils). In the event that the cantilever retaining wall is surcharged by sloping backfill, the design active earth pressure shall be based on the appropriate Equivalent Fluid Weight for 2.0:1.0 slopes (horizontal to vertical). Pbl T� Proposed Tinney Residence Job No. 00 -7895 Encinitas, California Page 10 In the event that a retaining wall is to be designed for a restrained condition, a uniform pressure equal to 8xH (eight times the total height of retained soil, considered in pounds per square foot) shall be considered as acting everywhere on the back of the wall, in addition to the design Equivalent Fluid Weight. The design pressures presented above are based on utilization of an uncontrolled mixture of expansive or low- expansive soil native to the site used in backfill operations. Additional surcharge pressures to be considered in the wall design include any loads applied within the failure block retained by the wall. E. Cut and Fill Sloues 14. Firm, natural - ground cut slopes of maximum inclinations of 1.5 horizontal to 1.0 vertical, and compacted fill slopes of maximum inclinations of 2.0 horizontal to 1.0 vertical, shall be stable and free from deep- seated failures for materials native to the site and utilized in compacted fills. 15. Although the compacted fill soils have been verified at the tested locations to a relative compaction of 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density or better, the compacted fill soils that occur within 8 feet of the face of the fill slope may posses poor lateral stability. If not properly founded, the proposed structures and associated improvements (such as walls, fences, patios, sidewalks, swimming pools, driveways, asphalt paving, etc.) that are located within 8 feet of the face of compacted fill slopes could suffer differential movement as a result of the poor lateral stability of these soils. Proposed Tinney Residence Job No. 00 -7895 Encinitas, California Page 11 The foundations and footings of the proposed structures, fence posts, walls, etc., when founded 8 feet and farther away from the top of compacted fill slopes, may be of standard design in conformance with the recommended soil value. If proposed foundations and footings are located closer than 8 feet inside the top of compacted fill slopes, they shall be deepened to at least 1 1 /2 feet below a line beginning at a point 8 feet horizontally inside the fill slopes, and projected outward and downward, parallel to the face of the fill slopes (see Figure No. III). 16. It is recommended that all compacted fill slopes and natural cut slopes be planted with an erosion - resistant plant, in conformance with the requirements of the City of Encinitas. F. Drainage 17. Adequate measures shall be taken to properly finish -grade the site after the structure and other improvements are in place. Drainage waters from this site and adjacent properties are to be directed away from foundations, floor slabs, footings, and slopes, onto the natural drainage direction for this area or into properly designed and approved drainage facilities. Roof gutters and downspouts should be installed on all structures, and the runoff directed away from the foundations via closed drainage lines. Proper subsurface and surface drainage will help minimize the potential for waters to seek the level of the bearing soils under the foundations, footings, and floor slabs. Failure to observe this recommendation could result in uplift or undermining and differential settlement of the structure or other improvements on the site. 18. Proper subdrains shall be installed behind any retaining and restrained retaining walls, in addition to proper waterproofing of the back of the walls. H r Proposed Tinney Residence Encinitas, California Job No. 00 -7895 Page 12 The drainage of said subdrains shall be directed to the designed drainage for the project or the natural drainage for the area. Crawl space areas with outside grade elevations higher than inside the crawl space shall be provided with waterproofing, subdrains and proper cross ventilation. 19. It should be noted that changes of surface and subsurface hydrologic conditions, plus irrigation of landscaping or significant increases in rainfall over the "accepted average - annual" rainfall for San Diego County in past years, may result in the appearance of minor amounts of surface or near - surface water at locations where none existed previously. The damage from such water is expected to be minor and cosmetic in nature, if corrected immediately. Corrective action should be taken on a site - specific basis if, and when, it becomes necessary. 20 Planter areas, flower beds, and planter boxes shall be sloped to drain away from the foundations, footings, and floor slabs. Planter boxes shall be constructed with a sealed bottom, and be provided a subsurface drain installed in gravel, with the direction of subsurface and surface flow away from the foundations, footings, and floor slabs, to an adequate drainage facility. 21. Any backfill soils placed adjacent to or close to foundations, in utility trenches, or behind retaining walls, that support structure and other improvements (such as patios, sidewalks, driveways, pavements, etc.), other than landscaping in level ground, shall be compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density. It is recommended that Geotechnical Exploration, Inc, observe and test the backfill during placement. - s. Proposed Tinney Residence Encinitas, California Job No. 00 -7895 Page 13 Geotechnica/ Exploration, Inc. will accept no liability for damage to structures that occurs as a result of improperly backfilled trenches or walls, or as a result of fill soils placed without our observations and testing. G. Miscellaneous Recommendations 22. Following placement of concrete floor slabs, sufficient drying time must be allowed prior to placement of floor coverings. Premature placement of floor coverings may result in degradation of adhesive materials and loosening of the finish -floor materials. 23. The remaining soil work to be completed at the site (such as trench and retaining wall backfill, final preparation of subgrade to receive pavement or rigid improvements, etc.) should be performed under our observations and testing. 24. It is also recommended that all footing excavations be observed by a representative of this firm prior to placing concrete, to verify that footings are founded on satisfactory soils for which the recommendations expressed in the soil investigation report remain applicable. SUMMARY Based on our field testing and grading observation, it is our opinion that the grading operation described herein, in general, was performed in conformance with the City of Encinitas Grading Ordinance. It is to be understood that our test results and opinion of general acceptance do not guarantee that every cubic yard of compacted fill has been compacted to specification since not every cubic yard has been observed or tested. Our test results indicate the measured compaction degree 'J Proposed Tinney Residence Encinitas, California Job No. 00 -7895 Page 14 obtained at the specific test location. We can only attest that our tests and observations have been made in accordance with the care and current professional standards in our field. All observed or tested and approved work done during the grading operation appears, in general, to have been performed in accordance with the soil investigation report for this site, issued by our firm and dated November 29, 2000 (Job No. 00- 7895). The grading described herein was observed and /or tested between August 7 and 22, 2001. All statements in the report are applicable only for the grading operation observed by our firm, and are representative of the site at the time of our final site visit before the report was prepared. The firm of Geotechnica/ Exploration, Inc. shall not be held responsible for fill soils placed without our observations and testing at any other time, or for subsequent changes to the site by others, which directly or indirectly cause poor surface or subsurface drainage, water erosion, and /or alteration of the strength of the compacted fill soils. In the event that any changes in the nature, design, or location of the building or improvements are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed and the conclusions of this report modified or verified in writing. Professional opinions presented herein have been made based on our tests, observations, and experience, and they have been made in accordance with generally accepted current geotechnical engineering principles and practices within the County of San Diego. This warranty is in lieu of all other warranties, either expressed or intended. Pik 0 J a. Proposed Tinney Residence Job No. 00 -7895 Encinitas, California Page 15 Thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should any questions arise concerning this report, please do not hesitate to contact us. Reference to our Job No. 00 -7895 will help to expedite a reply to your inquiries. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. Jaime A. Cerros, P.E. R.C.E. 34422/G. E. 2007 Senior Geotechnical Engineer JAC /PJ sS -`,��� / 4 Rt cc: Addressee (4) L ' ivo. '002'.)07 � m w Exp. 9;?':'1C 3 � * JI,� 1 `� o TtcHN` c F Of T�i-iJ SITE MAP LN wr �t -. �.ao, �ir- "� z .gip, -n ..tlC, =. - . � � • N . -,T /✓ , SJh!1 N,ttIW :. rr et: Proposed Tinney Residence 1 674 Crest Drive Encinitas, CA. _ Figure No. la Job No. 00 -7895 _ 4r Existing C Do Not Legend (� ASSUMED PROF THIS PLOT PLAN WAS PREPARED LISTING GRADING PLAN BY CONWAY PROPOSED STh3ATES INC, DRAWING N ❑. 6928 -G -01 AND FROM ❑N -SITE FIELD 'ANCE PERFORMED BY GEI, C _ UM /TS OF REMI APPROXIMATE L • ie F /EW DENSITY' X64% BOTTOM OF EX PLOT PLAN Proposed Tinney Resldence FILL SLOPE 1674 Crest Drive EnclnHas CA Figure No. lb `mss PRE-GRADING 7 Job No. oo -7895 6eofiechAical c APPROXIMATE L E7[p10�'atlOA, inc. 00- 78952 F (F—fi // C. Cut) �"'� COMPACTION TEST RESULTS TEST DATE LOCATION ELEVATION MOISTURE FIELD SOIL RELATIVE OF (°�) DENSITY FILL TYPE COMPACTION 1 8/7/01 Lower pad 355' 14.3 122 pcf II o 94 /o 2 8/8/01 Lower pad 357' 12.4 124 pcf II o 96 /o 3 8/8/01 Lower pad 359' . 13.6 121 pcf II o 93 /o 4 8/8/01 Lower pad 360' 14.0 121 pcf 11 0 93 /o 5 8/9/01 Lower pad 362' 9.3 120 pcf II o 92 /o 6 8/9/01 Lower pad 363.5'/FG 10.5 121 pcf II o 93 /o 7 8/9/01 Middle pad 362' 11.7 122 pcf II 94% 8 8/10/01 Middle pad 364' 11.1 121 pcf II o 93 /o 9 8/13/01 Middle pad 366' 12.4 122 pcf II 94% 10 8/13/01 Middle pad 367' 12.4 121 pcf II 93% 11 8/13/01 Middle pad 366' 13.0 121 pcf II o 93 /o 12 8/16/01 Middle pad 368' 10.0 117 pcf II o ,0 90 /o 13 8/16/01 Upper pad 370' 11.1 120 pcf II o 92 /o 14 8/17/01 Upper pad 371.5' 8.7 117 pcf 11 0 90 /o 15 8/17/01 Garage pad 373' 10.7 117 pcf II 90% 16 8/22/01 Pool pad 370' /FG 8.7 120 pcf II 92% 17 8/22/01 Upper pad 372.5'/FG 9.3 119 pcf 11 0 91 /o 18 8/22/01 Garage pad 375'/FG 8.7 120 pcf II 92% SOIL CLASSIFICATION TYPE DESCRIPTION O.M.C. MAX. DRY DENSITY 1 Golden brown, silty, fine to medium sand. 10.5% 127.5 pcf II Orange- brown, silty, fine to medium sand. 10.0% 130 pcf Job No. 00 -7895 Figure No. 11 .rte 1 FOUNDATION REQUIREMENTS NEAR SLOP ' ES _+ PROPOSED STRUCTURE TOP OF COMPACTED FILL SLOPE (Any loose soils on the slope surface CONCRETE FLOOR SLAB shall not be considered to provide lateral or vertical strength for the SETBACK footing or for slope stability. B depth of imbedment shall be a Needed . • • .. measured • . • . • . • . • from competent soil.) \ ` • . • . COMPACTED FILL SLOPE WITH \ • , o ;' '? MAXIMUM INCLINATION AS REINFORCEMENT OF \ PER SOILS REPORT FOUNDATIONS AND FLOOR SLABS FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ��• TOTAL DEPTH OF FOOTING MEASURED t�• J ARCHITECT OR STRUCTURAL ENGINEER FROM FINISH SOIL SUB-GRADE a \ COMPACTED FILL CONCRETE FOUNDATION \ 18" MINIMUM OR AS DEEP AS \ REQUIRED FOR LATERAL OUTER MOST FACE _ STABILITY OF FOOTING $� J .. TYPICAL SECTION ( SHOWING PROPOSED FOUNDATION LOCATED WITHIN 8 FEET OF TOP OF SLOPE) 18" FOOTING / 8' SETBACK TOTAL DEPTH OF FOOTING 1.5:1.0 SLOPE # 2.0:1.0 SLOPE J 0 w 0 O 82" 6611 Ix LL O 2' H 66° 54" W Z 0 4� 51" 42" y o 6' 34" 30 81 18" 18 11 # when applicable FIGURE NUMBER JOB NUMBER 0077895 ����in Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers /Surveyors/General- Enginecring Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive • Carlsbad, CA 92008 • Telephone (760) 753 -1453 • Fax (760) 635 -0839 September 4, 2001 City of Encinitas Engineering Services Permits 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 Project: A Portion of Lots 3 & 4 of Block C, Map 2114 — 1674 Crest Drive, Encinitas Subject: Engineer's Partial Pad Certification for Grading Permit Number 6928 -G for Release of Site Retaining Wall Building Permits Pursuant to section 23.24.3 10 of the Encinitas Municipal Code, this letter is hereby submitted as a partial Pad Certification Letter for a portion of Lots 3 and 4 of Block C, Map 2114. As the engineer of record for the subject project, I hereby state the rough grading for the building pads and the future pool area pad were completed in conformance with the approved plans and requirements of the City of Encinitas' codes and standards, as applicable for the current stage of construction. VII. The following presents the pad elevations as field verified and as shown on the approved grading plan: Pad Elevation Pad Elevation Per Site Location Pad Location Per Plan Field Verification Lower pad - garage Sump inlet @ W'ly pad line, opposite garage 363.20 363.18 Lower pad - garage Garage pad rough grade @ S'ly line 363.67 363.73 Lower pad - garage SW corner of pad 362.93 363.03 Lower pad - garage Pad, 10' W'ly of garage 363.38 363.44 Middle pad - pool SW corner of pad 370.00 370.33 Middle pad - pool Center of pad 370.00 369.84 Middle pad - pool NE corner of pad 370.00 369.44 Upper pad - house NW corner of house subgrade 372.60 372.55 Upper pad - house NE corner of house subgrade 372.60 372.67 Upper pad - house center of house subgrade 372.60 372.56 Upper pad - house SW corner of house subgrade 372.60 372.49 Upper pad - house Center of garage pad subgrade 375.45 375.44 IX. The location and inclination of all manufactured slopes and retaining wall footing excavations have been field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan. The following items are specifically excluded from the aforementioned pad certification as they were incomplete at the time of my field review: VIII. Construction of the engineered drainage devices and retaining walls are not yet complete and are not in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan at this time. X. The construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage are not yet complete been field verified and are not in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan at this time. p:\00 -010 tinney \wordproc\padcert01094.doc Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyors/Gencral- Engineering Co,t,,,t s AB412412 2525 Po Pico Drive. Carlsbad, CA 92008 • Telephone (760) 753 -1453 • Fax (760) 635 -0839 It is my understanding that an additional review of the final grading and drainage- related work will be required for the project after the construction and backfill of the site retaining walls and storm drain construction to assess substantial conformance of these items with the approved plans. The as- graded elevation data listed herein was compiled by Dan Hooper, L. S. on August 28, 2001 using field survey methods. Submitted by Conway & Associates, Inc. QV.pfESS /0 K. I+ q! � 9d s Michael K. Pasko, P.E. CP tP CA No. 41022 T Engineer of Record * EXPIRES 3 -31 -2003 a CPr 'f CIVIL Op cc: Troy Tinney — owner CAI��� P 00 -010 tinneAwordproc\padcert01094.doc C���xxtt of Aan DEpARTMEHT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH LAND AND WATER QUALM LH MO N P.D. BOX 426 BAIT 01260. CA 931124281 (811) aaa -2222 PAX 16191 338-2377 DATE: / t•9�a- :aa•9ssa PROI, v INSPECTION REPORT APPROVE ❑ DISAPPROVED IV INUFAMON TYPE VQ a- o gEjNSpEC=X 1lEE RPOTTMEn SPECIALIST: LA PHONE. San Diego OffieC East County Office San 105 Office 5201 Ruffin Rd., Ste. C 200 E. Mein St, 6 FIr 338 Via Vera Crw San Plop, CA 92123 EI Cajon, CA 92020 -3912 Soo Marcos, CA 92069 (859 565 -5173 (619)441.4030 (760)471 - 0730 DISTXBL TION: Original - Fft ow-.LU -490 (21W NCR Pink - Spaial;ss Mud Cavy r Permit ARDl+nal