2002-7519 G ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Capital Improvement Projects
city O of District Support Services
Encinitas
Field Operations
Sand Rep leni shment/Stormwater Compliance
Subdivision Engineering
Traffic Engineering
December 17, 2003
Attn: American Contractors Indemnity Company
254 E. Grand Avenue, Suite 100A
Escondido, California 92025
RE: Joseph and Susan Beeson
1572 Caudor Street
APN 254 - 163 -35
Grading Permit 7519 -G
Final release of security
Permit 7519 -G authorized earthwork, storm drainage, and erosion control, all needed to
build the described project. The Field Operations Division has approved the grading.
Therefore, release of the remaining security deposit is merited.
Performance Bond 138875, in the remaining amount of $4,860.00, is hereby fully
exonerated. The original bond amount was for $19,440.00. 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,
Q ?avy Masih Maher mbach
Senior Civil Engineer Finance Manager
Financial Services
Cc: Jay Lembach, Finance Manager
Beeson, Joseph and Susan
Debra Geishart
File
Enc.
TEL 760- 633 -2600 1 FAX 760 -633 -2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 TDD 760- 633 -2700 AC).'
recycled paper
EN INEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
City o
Encinitas Capital Improvement Projects
District Support Services
Field Operations
Sand Rep lenishment /Stormwater Compliance
Subdivision Engineering
Traffic Engineering
December 5, 2002
Attn: American Contractors Indemnity Company
254 E. Grand Avenue, Suite 100A
Escondido, California 92025
RE: Joseph and Susan Beeson
1572 Caudor Street
APN 254- 163 -35j
Grading Permit 7519 -G
Partial release of security
Permit 7519 -G authorized earthwork, storm drainage, single driveway, and erosion
control, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has
approved the rough grading. Therefore, a reduction in the security deposit is merited.
Performance Bond 138875, in the amount of $19,440.00, may be reduced by 75% to
$4,860.00. The document original will be kept until such time it is fully exonerated. The
retention and a separate assignment guarantee completion of finish grading.
Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633-
2779 or in writing, attention this Department.
Sincerely,
ALembach
Masih Maher
Senior Civil Engineer Finance Manager
Field Operations Financial Services
CC Jay Lembach, Finance Manager
Joseph and Susan Beeson
Debra Geishart
File
]FL 1,aV 700- (,33 - -'(,2? iUi ti. Vulcan Accnur. Encinitas. Calitoinia )2021 -3133 7 -'60- 633 -2 00 recycled paper
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC. May 15, 2002
Project No. CE -5999
Joseph & Susan Beeson
7014 4` Street
Encinitas, CA 92024
Subject: Foundation Plan Review and Calculations for Keystone Retaining Wall
Proposed Beeson Residence
1572 Caudor Street
Leucadia, California
Reference: 1.) "Foundation Plans" prepared by Shinji Isaacs, C.A.D. dated May 6, 2002
2.) "Keystone Retaining Wall Design" prepared by Sowards & Brown
Engineering dated December 14, 2001
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Beeson:
Per your request, we have reviewed the above referenced project plans for the purpose of
determining conformance to the recommendations presented in our Preliminary Soils
Investigation dated December 23, 1999.
Our review revealed the above referenced plans and keystone wall design criteria was prepared
in accordance with recommendations set forth in our report.
Therefore, we recommend plans be submitted to the City of Encinitas as scheduled.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. This opportunity to be of service
is sincerely appreciated.
Respectfully submitted,
North County
COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC.
c� G E 713 r Z,
-xp 9/30/05 z;
Ronald K. Adams Dale R. Reg
President Registered Civi_a�
Geotechnical Enginee 13 '
'i
RKA: a' JUN 18 2002
cc: (4) submitted
P.O. BOX 302002 " ESCONDIDO, CA 9203O FAX (7(b 741 -6568
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
' PRELIMINARY SOILS INVESTIGATION
' FOR
PROPOSED BEESON RESIDENCE
1572 CAUDOR STREET
'. LEUCADIA, CALIFORNIA
t
PREPARED FOR
JOSEPH BEESON
7014"' STREET
ENCINITAS, CA 92024
' DECEMBER 23, 1999
PROJECT NO. CE -5999
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
' December 23, 1999
Project No. CE -5999
Joseph Beeson
701 4` Street
Encinitas, CA 92024
' SUBJECT: Preliminary Soils Investigation
Proposed Beeson Residence
' 1572 Caudor Street
Leucadia, California
' Dear Mr. Beeson:
In response to your request, we have performed a Preliminary Soils Investigation for the subject
' project.
' The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate the suitability of the site for the proposed
development and make recommendations with regard to site grading and foundation design.
' Briefly, our investigation revealed favorable soil conditions and in our opinion, the site is
suitable for the proposed development, provided recommendations set forth in the attached
report are adhered to.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. This opportunity to be of service
is sincerely appreciated.
I Respectfully submitted,
QP pFtSS1
I North County �o �� R. R ql�
COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC.
No. 713 Z
I _ m
p. 9/30/01 �
Ronald K. Adams Dale R. Re s� � CHN� `
President Registered Ci
Geotechnical En 13
I
RKA. pad
cc: (3) submitted
(2) filed
P. O. BOX 302002 * ESCONDIDO, CA 92030 * (760)480 -1116 FAX (760)741 -6568
I
' NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
' TABLE OF CONTENTS
I
' Page
1. Purpose and Scope 1
' 2. Location and Description of Site 1
3. Field Investigation 1
4. Soil Conditions 2
' 5. Laboratory Soil Testing 2
_ 6. Recommendations and Conclusions 2
A. Grading 3
' B. Foundations 4
C. Slopes 5
' D. Retaining Walls 5
E. Estimated Paving Section 6
F. Review of Grading Plan 6
' 7. Uncertainty and Limitations 6
APPENDIX
Appendix A: Exploration Legend & Unified Soil Classification Chart
Plate No. One Test Pit Location Plan
I Plate No. Two thru Four Exploration Logs
Plate No. Five Tabulation of Test Results
Appendix B: Recommended Grading Specifications
I
I
NORTH COUNTY •
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
r Project No. CE -5999
Page 1
1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE
' The purpose of the investigation was to determine if the site is suitable for the proposed single
family dwelling and detached garage.
' The scope of the investigation was to:
' A. Determine the physical properties and engineering characteristics of the
surface and subsurface soils.
' B. Provide design information with regard to grading, site preparation, and
foundation design of the proposed structure(s).
2. LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE
' The site is located at 1572 Caudor Street in the City of Encinitas (Leucadia), California. Access
to the property is provided by an easement road traversing from east to west between Caudor
Street and the property.
The `L' shaped parcel is approximately 70 feet in width and 257 feet deep. It is our
understanding, the east/west trending leg of the property will be utilized for development, and
I the north/south trending leg will remain as open space. The property is bordered by single
family dwellings to the north and east, and vacant land to the west and south.
' Site topography at the immediate building site consist of an east/west ridge line sloping gently to
moderately downhill to the north, south, east and west. Stockpiled fill soils are present along the
top of the ridge and were found to vary between 2 feet to 4 '/Z feet in depth. It is our
understanding these fill soils will be utilized to construct the proposed building pad.
Site vegetation consists of sparse native grasses and brush.
I
3. FIELD INVESTIGATION
The field investigation was performed on December 8, 1999 and included an inspection of the
site and the excavation of three exploratory trenches, with a backhoe to depths of 9 feet.
I Location of test pits are shown on the attached Plate No. One, entitled "Test Pit Location Plan ".
As excavation proceeded, representative bulk samples were collected. In place natural densities
and moisture contents were determined at different depths in the excavations and are included
on Plate No.'s Two through Four. Subsequent to obtaining soil samples, our exploratory
excavations were backfilled.
I
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
' Project No. CE -5999
Page 2
1
4. SOIL CONDITIONS
' Loose surficial soils (silty- sands) consisting of old fill and/or plowed ground were found to be
4 feet, 1 % feet and 4 '/2 feet in depth in Test Pit No.'s One, Two and Three, respectively.
' Underlying native soils to depths explored were dense silty sandstones.
On -site soils were found to have an expansion index of less than 5 and are classified as being
' "very low" in expansion potential.
Groundwater was not encountered at the time of our investigation, nor did caving of exploratory
trenches occur. In addition, due to the dense nature of the underlying sandstone formation at the
site, it is our opinion, soil liquefaction is unlikely to occur in the event grading is performed in
accordance with the recommendations set forth in this report.
5. LABORATORY SOIL TESTING
' All laboratory test were performed on typical soils in accordance with accepted test methods of
the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM).
Tests conducted include:
I A). Optimum Moisture & Maximum Density (ASTM D -1557)
B). Direct Shear (Remold) (ASTM D -3080)
Q. Sieve Analysis (ASTM D -421)
D). Field Density & Moisture (ASTM D -1556)
E). Expansion Potential (FHA Standard)
I Test results are tabulated on the attached Plate No.'s Two through Five, entitled "Exploration
Log" and "Tabulation of Test Results ".
6. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
I General
It is our understanding, the proposed dwellings will consist of wood frame construction utilizing
slab on grade foundations.
In our opinion, the site is suitable for the proposed single family dwelling and garage.
I Recommendations presented in this report should be incorporated into the planning, design, and
construction phases of the subject project.
I
' NORTH COUNTY •
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
Project No. CE -5999
Page 3
6A. Grading
' General
It is our understanding cut/fill earthwork construction will be performed to construct a split -level
' building pad to accommodate the proposed dwelling and detached garage.
' All grading should be performed in accordance with the City of Encinitas Grading Ordinance
and the Recommendations /Specifications presented in this report.
Subsequent to site demolition, loose surficial soils (plowed ground/old fill), as indicated on the
attached Plate No's Two through Four, should be undercut or removed to firm native ground and
recompacted in accordance with the attached Appendix `B' entitled "Recommended Grading
Specifications ". Firm native ground may be determined as undisturbed soil having an insitu
density of greater than ninety percent (90 %) of maximum dry density. We should be contacted to
document firm native ground is exposed and properly prepared prior to filling.
Prior to constructing fill slopes, shear keys should be excavated a minimum of 2 feet into firm
native ground, inclined back into slope, and have a minimum width of 15 feet. We should be
' contacted to document keyways were properly constructed prior to placing fill.
Natural terrain steeper than an inclination of 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), should be benched
' (stair- stepped) to provide a stable bedding for subsequent fill. Sizing of benches should be
determined by the Soils Engineer or his representative during grading.
I All fill soils generated from earthwork construction should be placed in conformance with the
attached Appendix `B' entitled, "Recommended Grading Specifications ".
' Should soils be imported, they should be non - expansive (less than 2% swell) and granular by
nature, having strength parameters equal to or greater than the prevailing on -site soils. We
should be contacted to inspect an/or test imported soils prior to hauling then on -site to assure
' they will be suitable for the proposed construction.
If encountered, leach lines and/or pipes should be removed. Concrete pipes may be crushed in
' place. Trench lines should be recompacted in accordance with Appendix `B'.
It is highly probable the proposed structure will be traversed by a transition from cut to fill.
Therefore, to reduce structural damage occurring from foundations bearing on two different soil
types, the following measure should be employed:
I It is recommended the cut side of the transitional areas be removed to a depth of 1 foot below
the bottom of the deepest proposed footing and brought back to grade with properly compacted
fill. This will allow the proposed dwelling and detached garage to bear entirely on a compacted
I fill mat, thus reducing the probability of differential settlement. The removal area should extend
under and a minimum of 5 feet beyond the proposed structure(s).
_ • ' NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
' Project No. CE -5999
Page 4
6B. Foundations
' General
The prevailing on -site soils possess "very low" expansive potential and have above average
' strength with regard to support of structures. Therefore, conventional foundations may be
utilized, provided the aforementioned Grading Recommendations are adhered to.
' For One -Story Construction:
Continuous footing having a minimum width of 12 inches and founded a minimum depth of 12
' inches below lowest adjacent grade will have an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2000 pounds
per square foot.
' For Two -Story Construction:
' Continuous footings should have a minimum width of 15 inches and be founded a minimum
depth of 18 inches below lowest adjacent grade.
' Isolated square footings having a diameter of 18 inches and founded a minimum depth of 18
inches below lowest adjacent grade will have an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2000 pounds
per square foot.
I All continuous footings are to be reinforced with one #4 bar top and bottom. Steel should be
positioned 3 inches above bottom of footing and 3 inches below top of footing.
' Interior slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and reinforced with #3 bars on 18 inch
centers, both ways at mid -point of slab thickness.
I Slab underlayment should consist of 4 inches of washed concrete sand with a visqueen moisture
barrier installed at mid -point of sand (2 inches sand, visqueen, 2 inches sand). Sand should be
I tested in accordance with ASTM D -2419 to insure a minimum sand equivalent of 30.
Foundation set -backs from top of slopes should be a minimum of 8 feet. If this cannot be
' achieved, footings near or on adjacent slopes should be founded at a depth such that the
horizontal distance from the bottom outside edge of footing to the face of the slope is a
minimum of 8 feet.
Prior to pouring of concrete, North County COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. should be
contacted to inspect foundation recommendations for compliance to those set forth.
' During placement of concrete North County COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. and/or a
qualified concrete inspector should be present to document construction of foundations.
I
' NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
' Project No. CE -5999
Page 5
Seismic Design Considerations (Soil Parameters)
' A.) Soil Profile = SD (Table 16 -J of the 1997 Uniform Building Code)
' B.) Type `B' Fault (Rose Canyon)
C.) Distance = 11 km (California Department of Conservation,
' Division of Mines and Geology [maps] in conjunction with Tables 16 -S
and 16 -T of the 1997 Uniform Building Code).
6C. Slopes
' Cut and compacted fill slopes constructed to maximum heights of 15 feet with maximum slope
ratios of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical units) will be stable with relation to deep seated failure,
provided they are properly maintained. During grading, positive drainage away from top of
I slopes should be provided. Subsequent to completion of grading, slopes should be planted as
soon as possible with light groundcover indigenous to the area.
' Our slope stability analysis was performed utilizing "Taylor's Charts" for cut and compacted fill
slopes and factor of safety of 1.5.
I 6D. Retaining Walls
I For static conditions, the prevailing soils will have an allowable equivalent passive fluid
pressure of 229 psf, increasing 229 psf per foot in depth. Allowable pressures assume walls are
backfilled with a non - expansive sand a distance behind the wall equivalent to two - thirds the
retained height.
Allowable active pressures may be assumed to be equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing
55 pcf for unrestrained walls. These values assume a vertical, smooth wall, and a level, drained
backfill. Should these conditions not be met, we should be contacted for new values.
I Allowable active pressures for restrained walls may be assumed to be equivalent to the pressure
of a fluid weighing 55 pcf, plus an additional uniform lateral pressure of 8H. H= height of
retained soils above top of wall footing in vertical feet.
Allowable active pressures for retaining walls with 2:1 inclinations of sloping surcharge may be
assumed to be equivalent to a pressure of fluid weighing 79 pcf.
I The coefficient of friction of concrete to soil may be assumed to be .24 for resistance to
horizontal movement.
I
t NORTH counTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
' Project No. CE -5999
Page 6
6E. Estimated Paving Section
' Structural section for asphaltic paving for the proposed driveways and parking area are based on
an estimated R -Value of 35. The following section is provided for bid purposes only. Actual
sections should be determined subsequent to completion of grading operations.
Assumed Traffic Index = 4.5
' (Light Vehicular Traffic)
3 inches of asphaltic paving on
' 4 inches of select base coarse on
6 inches of recompacted native subgrade.
' All materials and construction for asphaltic paving and base should conform to the Standard
Specifications of the State of California Business and Transportation Agency, Department of
Transportation, Sections 39 and 26, respectively. Class II base material should have a minimum
' R -Value of 78 and a sand equivalent of 30. All materials should be compacted to a minimum of
ninety -five percent (95 %).
' Rigid Concrete Paving:
5 inches of concrete reinforced with #3 bars on 18 inch center, both ways, on
' 4 inches of Class II base material on
6 inches of recompacted native subgrade soil.
NOTE: All concrete should have a minimum compressive strength of 3250 psi. All subgrade and
base materials should be compacted to a minimum of ninety -five percent (95 %).
6F. Review of Grading Plan
' Approved site and grading plans were not available at the time of our investigation. Therefore,
upon their completion, we should review them to assure compliance with the recommendations
presented in this report.
' Preliminary Plans used during our investigation were prepared by Zijlstra Architecture of Solana
Beach, California.
7. UNCERTAINTY AND LIMITATIONS
' Surface and subsurface soils are assumed to be uniform. Therefore, should soils encountered
during construction differ from those presented in this report, we should be contacted to provide
I their engineering properties.
I
NORTH COUNTY
' COMPACTION •
ENGINEERING, INC.
Project No. CE -5999
Page 7
It is the responsibility of the owner and contractor to carry out recommendations set forth in this
' report.
' During our investigation of the subject site, evidence of faulting was not encountered.
Subsequent to review of available geologic literature, we feel any faulting in the vicinity of the
site may be classified as inactive. However, it should be noted that San Diego County is located
in a high seismic area with regard to earthquake. Earthquake proof projects are economically
' unfeasible. Therefore, damage as a result of earthquake is probable and we assume no liability.
We assume the on -site safety of our personnel only. We cannot assume liability of personnel
other than our own. It is the responsibility of the owner and contractor to insure construction
operations are conducted in a safe manner and in conformance with regulations governed by
'• CAL -OSHA and/or local agencies.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. This opportunity to be of
' service is sincerely appreciated.
Respectfully submitted,
' O� F_ p
North County QP N
COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC.
' cr, No. 713 m
d E P. /30/01 z
X
Ronald K. Adams Dale R. R TE C kA
President Registered WF 393
Geotechnical En 000713
I
RKA:paJ
cc: (3) submitted
(2) filed
I
I
NORTH COUNTY i
COMPACTION •
'
ENGINEERING, INC.
EXPLORATION LEGEND
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
' SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUP SYMBOL TYPICAL NAMES
' I. COARSE GRAINED: More than
half of material is jugLr than
No. 200 sieve size.
GRAVELS CLEAN GRAVELS GW Well graded gravels, gravel -sand
' More than half of coarse fraction mixtures, little or no fines.
is larger than No. 4 sieve size, but
smaller than 3 ". GP Poorly graded gravels, gravel sand
mixtures, little or no fines.
GRAVELS WITH FINES GM Silty gravels, poorly graded gravel-
' (Appreciable amount of fines) sand -silt mixtures.
GC Clayey gravels, poorly graded
gravel -sand, clay mixtures.
SANDS CLEAN SANDS SW Well graded sand, gravely sands,
' More than half of coarse fraction little or no fines.
is smaller than No. 4 sieve size. SP Poorly graded sands, gravely sands,
little or no fines.
' SANDS WITH FINES SM Silty sands, poorly graded sand and
(appreciable amount of fines) silt mixtures.
SC Clayey sands, poorly graded sand
and clay mixtures.
' II. FINE GRAINED: More than half
of material is smaller than No.200
sieve size.
SILTS AND CLAYS ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands,
rock flour, sandy silt or clayey -
silt -sand mixtures with slight
' plasticity.
Liquid Limit CL Inorganic clays of low to medium
less than 50 plasticity, gravely clays, lean clays.
OL Organic silts and organic silty clays
of low plasticity.
SILTS AND CLAYS MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or
diatomaceous find sandy or silty
soils, elastic silts.
Liquid Limit CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity,
greater than 50 fat clays.
OH Organic clays of medium to high
' plasticity.
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat and other highly organic soils.
I US - Undisturbed, driven ring sample or tube sample
CK - Undisturbed chunk sample
I BG - Bulk sample
V - Water level at time of excavation or as indicated
APPENDIX `A'
t NORTH CCNWTY COMPACTION ENGINEEWG, INC.
so ' ESTING & INSPECTION SERVIC
TEST PIT LOCATION PLAN
PROPOSED BEESON RESIDENCE
1572 CAUDOR STREET
LEUCADIA, CALIFORNIA
APPROX. SCALE
' 1" 28'
z F-
\, \ \ PEN SPXCE
Q. 6
\ F PIT
C N
c�
£ 4ST
/s Cy
�ES r PTg
PROJECT NO CE -5999 PLATE NO ONE
t NORTH COUNTY � •
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
' EXPLORATION LOG
' PROJECT NAME: BEESON RESIDENCE DATE LOGGED: 12/08/99
ELEVATION: EXISTING GRADE TEST PIT NO. ONE
Depth Sample Dry Moisture Passing Sample Soil Description & Remarks
' (Feet) Type Density Content #200 Depth Classifi
(pcf) M Sieve cation
SM ORANGE BROWN, DRY, LOOSE
' SILTY -SAND
l- (STOCKPILED FILL)
I + (REMOVE AND RECOMPACT)
2- ----- - - - - -- -----------------------------------------------------
SM DARK BROWN, DRY, LOOSE,
SILTY -SAND
3- (TOPSOIL - PLOWED GROUND)
(REMOVE AND RECOMPACT)
4- ----- - - - - -- -------------------------
SM ORANGE - BROWN - YELLOW, MOIST
DENSE, SILTY - SANDSTONE
5- CK 110.6 7.9 9.4 5' (FIRM NATIVE)
BG
I 6-
7
8
I 9- ---- - - - - -- ----- - - - - -- ------ - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- - ----------------- ------------
BOTTOM OF TEST PIT
I
PROJECT NO. CE -5999 PLATE NO. TWO
NORTH COUNTY •
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
EXPLORATION LOG
PROJECT NAME: BEESON RESIDENCE DATE LOGGED: 12/08/99
1
ELEVATION: EXISTING GRADE TEST PIT NO. TWO
'
Depth Sample Dry Moisture Passing Sample Soil Description & Remarks
' (Feet) Type Density Content #200 Depth Classifi
(pcf) ( %) Sieve cation
SM LIGHT BROWN, DRY, LOOSE,
' SILTY -SAND
(STOCKPILED FILL)
1-
'' (REMOVE AND RECOMPACT) - - -- — -----
SM ORANGE - BROWN - YELLOW, HUMID,
' 2- DENSE, SILTY- SANDSTONE
(FIRM NATIVE)
I 3- CK 114.3 6.6 3'
' 4-
I
5-
I 6-
I 7-
8 - ---- - - - - -- ----- - - - - -- ------ - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- ----- - - - - -- -----------------------------------------------------
I BOTTOM OF TEST PIT
PROJECT NO. E -5999 PLATE NO. THREE
NORTH COUNTY
' COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
EXPLORATION LOG
PROJECT NAME: BEESON RESIDENCE DATE LOGGED: 12/08/99
ELEVATION: EXISTING GRADE TEST PIT NO. THREE
I
Depth Sample Dry Moisture Passing Sample Soil Description & Remarks
' (Feet) Type Density Content #200 Depth Classifi
(pcf) M Sieve cation
SM BROWN, DRY, LOOSE SILTY -SAND
' (STOCKPILED FILL)
1-
(REMOVE AND RECOMPACT)
' BG 16.4 1.5'
2
I 3-
' 4-
----- - - - - -- -----------------------------------------------------
SM ORANGE - BROWN, HUMID, DENSE,
5- CK 112.6 6.5 5' SILTY - SANDSTONE
' (FIRM NATIVE)
I 6-
I 7-
8 - ----- - - - - -- ----- - - - - -- ------ - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- ----- - - - - -- -----------------------------------------------------
' BOTTOM OF TEST PIT
I
PROJECT NO. E -5999 PLATE NO. FOUR
' NORTH COUNTY • is
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
TABULATION OF TEST RESULTS
OPTIMUM MOISTURE/MAXIMUM DENSITY
' SOIL DESCRIPTION TYPE MAX. DRY DENSITY OPT. MOISTURE
(LB, CU. FT) (% DRY WT)
' Orange- Brown- Yellow,
Silty -Sand P1 @ 5' 118.2 12.3
' Brown Silty -Sand
(Stockpiled Fill) P3 @ 1.5' 125.0 10.7
EXPANSION POTENTIAL
' SAMPLE No PI 95' P3 9 1.5'
CONDITION Remold 90% Remold 90%
INITIAL MOISTURE ( %) 12.7 10.6
' AIR DRY MOISTURE ( %) 8.0 6.5
FINAL MOISTURE ( %) 20.3 17.5
DRY DENSITY (PCF) 106.4 112.5
I LOAD (PSF) 150 150
SWELL ( %) .000 .000
EXPANSION INDEX 0 0
DIRECT SHEAR
SAMPLE No PI (2 5' P3 (2 1.5'
CONDITION Remold 90% Remold 90%
' ANGLE INTERNAL FRICTION 25 20
COHESION INTERCEPT (PCF) 300 360
PROJECT NO. CE -5999
I PLATE NO. FIVE
I
' NORTH COUNTY •
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
' (General Provisions)
' 1. INTENT
The intent of these specifications is to provide procedures in accordance with current standard
' practices regarding clearing, compacting natural ground, preparing areas to receive fill, and
placing and compacting of fill soil to the lines, grades, and slopes delineated on the project
plans. Recommendations set forth in the attached "Preliminary Soils Investigation" report or
' special provisions are a part of the "Recommended Grading Specifications" and shall supercede
the provisions contained hereinafter in case of conflict.
2. INSPECTION & TESTING
A qualified Soils Engineer shall be employed to inspect and test the earthwork in accordance
with these specification and the accepted plans. It will be necessary that the Soils Engineer or his
' representative be allowed to provide adequate inspection so that he may certify that the work
was or was not accomplished as specified or indicated. It shall be the responsibility of the
contractor to assist the Soils Engineer and to keep him appraised of work schedules, changes,
' new information and dates, and new unforeseen soils conditions so that he may make these
certifications.
' If substandard conditions (questionable soils, adverse weather, poor moisture control, inadequate
compaction, etc.) Are encountered, the Soils Engineer will be empowered to either stop
construction until conditions are remedied or recommend rejection of the work.
I Soil tests used to determine the degree of compaction will be performed in accordance with the
following American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) test methods:
' *Maximum Density Optimum timum Moisture Content (ASTM D- 1557 -78)
P
* Density of Soil In -Place (ASTM D -1556 or ASTM D -2922 & 3017)
3. MATERIALS
Those soils used as fill will have a minimum of forty percent (40 %) passing a #4 sieve. They
will be free of vegetable matter or other deleterious substances and contain no rock over 6
inches in size. Should unsuitable material be encountered, the Soils Engineer will be contacted
to provide recommendations.
I
APPENDIX `B'
I
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
'
4. PLACING AND SPR EADING OF FILL
' The selected fill material shall be placed in layers which when compacted will not exceed 6
inches in thickness.
' Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly blade mixed during the spreading to
insure uniformity of material in each layer.
' When moisture content of the fill material is below that recommended by the Soils Engineer,
water shall then be added until the moisture content is as specified to assure thorough bonding
' during the compacting process.
When the moisture content of the fill materials is above that recommended by the Soils
' Engineer, the fill material shall be aerated by blading or other satisfactory methods until the
moisture content is as specified.
' 5. COMPACTION
' After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted to
not less than ninety percent (90 %) relative compaction. Compaction shall be by sheepsfoot
rollers multiple -wheel pneumatic tired rollers or other types of rollers.
' Rolling shall be accomplished while the fill material is at the specified moisture content. Rolling
each layer shall be continuous over it's entire area and the roller shall make sufficient trips to
I insure that the desired density has been obtained.
The fill operation shall be continued in 6 inch compacted layers, or as specified above, until the
' fill has been brought to the finished slopes and grades shown on the project plans.
6. WALL BACKFILL
I Backfill soils should consist of non-expansive sand, Compaction should be achieved with light
hand -held pneumatic tampers to avoid over compaction and hence cause structural damage.
I Wall backfill should be compacted to a minimum of ninety percent (90 %) of maximum density.
I 7. TRENCH BACKFILL
All trench backfill located within structural areas should be compacted to a minimum of ninety
I percent (90 %) of maximum density.
I APPENDIX `B'
I
DRAINAGE STUDY FOR BEESON RESIDENCE
PREPARED BY:
FRANK ZAIDLE, PX
7434 TH STREET
ENCINITAS, CA 92024
760 - 942 -1753
DATE: 7/17/02
QR pFESSlay 9
Q k, aK M. 2,gify
4 � ? m
°C No. 053703
* Exphs
z�
l •� C ' 1 ` •i��i
p C CAE w
stn i s
ENGINEERING SERVICES
CITY OF ENCINITAS
DRAINAGE CRITERIA AND METHODOLOGY
Design Storm: 100 -year
Land Use: Natural (Current)
Residential (Future)
Soil Type: Soil type based on SCS Soil Survey for San Diego County
Hydrologic Soil "D" was used for this analysis.
Runoff Coefficirnts: "C" value based on San Diego County Hydrology manual
Rainfall intensity: Based on criteria presented in the San Diego County
Hydrology Manual
RATIONAL METHOD
THE RATIONAL METHOD WAS ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED TO ESTIMATE
RUNOFF FROM SMALL URBAN AND DEVELOPED AREAS, AND ITS USE SHOULD
GENERALLY BE LIMITED TO THESE CONDITIONS.
BASICALLY, THE RATIONAL- METHOD EQUATION RELATES RAINFALL
INTENSITY, A RUNOFF COEFFICIENT, AND DRAINAGE -AREA SIZE TO THE
DIRECT PEAK RUNOFF FROM THE DRAINAGE AREA. THE RELATIONSHIP IS
EXPRESSED BY THE EQUATION:
Q = CIA
WHERE:
Q = THE RUNOFF IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND (CFS) FROM
A GIVEN AREA.
C = A RUNOFF COEFFICIENT REPRESENTING THE RATIO OF
RUNOFF TO RAINFALL.
I = THE TIME - AVERAGED RAINFALL INTENSITY IN INCHES
PER HOUR CORRESPONDING TO THE TIME OF
CONCENTRATION.
A = DRAINAGE AREA, (ACRES).
THE VALUES OF THE RAINFALL COEFFICIENT (C) AND THE RAINFALL
INTENSITY (I) ARE BASED ON A STUDY OF DRAINAGE -AREA
CHARACTERISTICS SUCH AS TYPE AND CONDITION OF THE RUNOFF SURFACES
AND THE TIME OF CONCENTRATION.
DATA REQUIRED FOR THE COMPUTATION OF PEAK DISCHARGE BY THE
RATIONAL METHOD ARE: (i) RAINFALL INTENSITY, (I) FOR A STORM OF
SPECIFIED DURATION AND SELECTED DESIGN FREQUENCY, (ii) DRAINAGE -
AREA CHARACTERISTICS OF SIZE (A), SHAPE, SLOPE, AND (iii) A
RAINFALL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT (C).
RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS (RATIONAL METHOD)
DEVELOPED AREAS (URBAN)
Coefficient. C
Soil Group
Land Use A B D D
Residential:
Single Family - .40 .45 .50 .55
Multi -Units .45 .50 .60 .70
Mobile Homes .45 .50 .55 .65
Rural (lots greater than 1/2 acre) .30 .35 .40 .45
Commercial 121
80% Impervious .70 .75 .80 .85
Industrial (2)
90% Impervious .80 .85 .90 .95
NOTES:
Soil Group maps are available at the offices of the Department of Public Works.
121 Where actual conditions deviate significantly from the tabulated imperviousness
values of 80% or 90 %, the values given for coefficient C, may be revised by
multiplying 80% or 90% by the ratio of actual imperviousness to the tabulated
imperviousness. However, in no case shall the final coefficient be less than 0.50.
For example: Consider commercial property on D soil group.
Actual imperviousness = 50%
Tabulated imperviousness = 80%
Revised C = 50 x 0.85 = 0.53
80
,IV-A-9
APPENDIX IX
i 1- ,4-* -.4 n ro
� ;.cam �' � • '�' • � � .�
SM
Ln
c M O/ M UN
V�5- c
U.
CM
CD z C14
LZJ
up
IL tL-AA
CWN
VIP
R
�� • 1 � � •�� rte/ , � Gi ' �_
z
O
fr o
Z
� T tf1
V
O Z o <
O v
u cc
r 0 a G
V
Z Li J M V�
cr O C fV'► ' W < O
U- Z ~
uz
O ul o cli G u
z
cc
z
Q O y
O Cj- O F W
O Lki —i I Z g
u = LL.
F
y
J
u
a
e
H EQLIAT /ON 3 385
- Feef T /� 9L
Cy �
SDOD Tc = Tune of concenfiation _
4000 L = Lenglh of waleished
H • Differ-r�ce /n e%vaticn along
elleef/ve s/ooe 1117e (See Appendix v W
3000 L T
iLJi /es Feef .yours iYlinufes
1000 4 Z4D
3 /80
/0
/ODD
900 1 /20
BOO
700 /DO
600 \ S 90
SOO \ \ BD
4fOD \�� 4 70
\3� 3 / 60
\ so
2010 \ \ Z QO
\ 30
/DO / � SDDD
�4QDD 20
3000 � /6
4O 2000 \ \ 12
/800 \
.70 NOTE /600 /0
/low 9
HFOR NATURAL WATERSHEDS g
20 ADD TEN MINUTES TO /000 7
II COMPUTED TIME OF CON- 900
�CENTRATION_ JI 800 6
� 700
• 600 S
/ SOO ¢
400
3
300
5
200
H L T
SAN DIEGO COUNTY NOMOGRAPH FOR DETERMINATI"ON
DEPARTMENT OF SPECIAL DISTRICT SERVICES OF TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc)
FOR NATURAL WATERSHEDS
DESIGN MANUAL f1ATf- /2 /� /� 4 A.1.�.011111 11-11
1 o ^ �� 1 ` /• i t
t J
V
O
1
1 _
J/ '
�° ,,� o f -' a • `° d — 1 � �-, . • � . � � � , '"� R ^ •; ^
r� r G7• - \ ° 1_G� �.`�„•�
cm cm
N Lei
LLJ m
'_ !sue V � • < I O 1 �` \\ ^� Q ` 6 + 1 • J � •n — t!'f !'l
momills
Y 1
ul
Ul
QM
co
O
PD 1 co
Wo
• � o
J
• H L c _
Q U >:
Z U x
C)
t .,¢ y 00
cv) a ��
v_
Z[LJ < V _
4
N O C t!1 C tf1 3 D 0 e�
en
ow0 '^ U O
?- i v u = < s
1- c:: M z9
Z <
00.0 F W
O w J Z p
U Cl U D
F
N
V
u
a
loo
oq5 At.- c c� 10
r A-L
Ll
cr
A IL
C37 A 7
z. C eg q.(Ol
A Alf,
oS 3
tr
T Qjvrft,
I �
j I
i
I
i
G h[. " t *- riot,) � �•- �v� �
t At Z) /L,Vesr A f SvC-n O N
»•nw:i
.i v. n:,.: I i
Ali:: r ..
I
R I
c I
'z- I
- I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
i
I
138 grandview 16' private access drive
Worksheet for Triangular Channel
Project Description
Project File d:lhaestadlfmw1138.fm2
Worksheet 1
Flow Element Triangular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Channel Depth
_ Input Data
Mannings Coefficient 0.013
Channel Slope 0.015000 ftfft
Left Side Slope 50.000000 H : V
Right Side Slope 50.000000 H : V
Discharge 0.41 cfs
Results
Depth 0.07 ft
Flow Area 027 ftz
Wetted Perimeter 7.30 ft
Top Width 7.30 ft
Critical Depth 0.08 ft
Critical Slope 0.007087 ftfft
Velocity 1.54 ftfs
Velocity Head 0.04 ft
Specific Energy 0.11 ft
Froude Number 1.42
Flow is supercritical.
06J21 101
FlowtMaster v5.13
09:24:44 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury. CT 06708 (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1
Cross Section
Cross Section for Triangular Channel
Project Description
Project Fie untitled.fm2
Worksheet 1
Flow Element Triangular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Channel D epth
Section Data
Mannings Coefficient 0.013
Channel Slope 0.015000 ft/ft
Depth 0.07 ' ft
Left Side Slope 50.000000 H : V
Right Side Slope 50.000000 H : V
Discharge 0.41 cfs
0.07 ft
1
VD
H 1
NTS
FlowMaster v5.13
05!21101
09;21 :21 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1
I Aq2
2-8
77.
ou
121
NEI
gag
�w I i i
!erg M> Kim o PR
man WM
42 0