The URL can be used to link to this page

2003-1457 G/I - -- ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT City Of Capital Improvement Projects Encinitas District Support Services Field Operations Sand Replenishment /Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering February 1, 2011 Traffic Engineering Attn: Insurance Company of the West 11455 El Camino Real P.O. Box 85563 San Diego, California 92186 -5563 RE: Magdalena Ecke YMCA 200 Saxony Road CDP 02 -259 -*' APN 256- 034 -02 Improvement Permit 1457 -I Final release of security Permit 1457 -I authorized public improvements, all needed to build the described project and as shown on approved grading permit 1457 -G. The Field Operations Division has finaled the installation of improvements and the warranty period. Therefore, release of the security deposit is merited. Performance Bond 212 66 16, in the amount of $18,036.00, 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, Debra Geis /nance e ac Engineering Technician Manager Subdivision Engineering Financial Services Cc: Jay Lembach, Finance Manager YMCA Debra Geishart File Enc. TEL 760- 633 -2600 / FAX 760- 633 -2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 TDD 760- 633 -2700 �� recycled paper oz �.�s ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT - °. city Of Capital Improvement Projects District Encinitas S Services Field Operations Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering April 6, 2006 Traffic Engineering Attn: Insurance Company of the West 11455 El Camino Real P.O. Box 85563 San Diego, California 92186 -5563 RE: Magdalena Ecke YMCA 200 Saxony Road CDP 02 -259 APN 256- 034 -02 Grading Permit 1457 -G Final release of security Permit 1457 -G authorized earthwork, storm drainage, and erosion control, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has finaled the grading. Therefore, release of the security deposit is merited. Performance Bond 212 66 15, in the amount of $250,444.00, 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, Z % Debra Geish y Le bach Engineering echnician Finance Manager Subdivision Engineering Financial Services Cc: Jay Lembach, FinanceManager Client Debra Geishart File Enc. TEL 760- 633 -2600 l FAX 760- 633 -2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 TDD 760- 633 -2700 recycled paper DATE PROJECT NO. FIELD REPORT PROJECT �.....,, LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO s - -- PRESENT AT SITE �� ✓�N �' °�l{' - x47... -I' � -c 1 SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: ! 7 :J RF�iQPdS. i I GEOPACFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECBNICAL CONSULTAN'T'S TEL: (760) 721 -5488 �,40PIES TO: FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. REPORT PROJECT FIELD LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE v _ SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: r r' f 1 � F � :. Y ✓% � 3 -i&' -C J I GEOPACFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECBNICAL CONSULTANTS ,�. TEL: (760) 721 -5488 _ -ONES TO: FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. FIELD REPORT PROJECT LOCATION a CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE v�ty t SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: i R S: f GEOPACIRCA SIGNATURE GEOTECBNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 I OPIES TO. FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 ACCULINE SURVEY, INC 1919 Grand Ave., Ste 1 G, San Diego, CA 92109 (858) 483 -6665 • Fax(858)483 -6056 E -mail: acculinesurvey@sbcglobal.net PARKING LOT CERTIFICATION June 2, 2005 City of Encinitas c/o Good & Roberts, Inc. 2320 Cousteau Ct. Vista, CA 92083 -8346 Re: YMCA Ecke Aquatics Center City of Encinitas Grading Permit No 1457 -G Our Job No. 685 -04 Dear Sirs, The sub - grading of the base matieral for the Parking Lot was verifed on June 2, 2005 and is in substancial conformance with the approved Grading Plans. The average elevation of said parking lot is within 0.10' of the pavement sections as shown on said plans, (7" within the parking areas and 8" within the drive sections). Respectfully, �f P ao LAND & Rudy P. Pacheco, LS W Q 0 cc ft LS 7 ,�. 9 os F �e OF CA1.�� DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT REPORT FIELD LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: T J Jam• ..c_ _a c. _.L/ RECAOMMEti ADONS; t f �l } � r� L L '"� � i "PLC � ! -�. -_.. � at_ CL <' t C ,.. :` - F ,i L i L ✓f L GEOPACIFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 COPIES TO: FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST„ SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. FIELD REPORT OCATON CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE .J_i_c/ T SUMMARY OF INSPECTION; i - : � � - ,:1 f1 11,1.<... �,� �• �'�., r /�., .._ i'r�.r1L. r'.� ��1: �,� _� _:�c'��i''�'' �:�._- !.l'ir r i GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 (,AOPIES TO; FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. FIELD REP �� PROJECT • LOCATION 0 CONTRACTOR OWNER i WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: / r %• c �4 C ;�i � r` <+•:c/ a: � � / ! / y ' Via' L � ' L �� -� / G� i. -1 �:i " , i �' !t-� <t RECOMMENDATIONS; - GEOPACFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTAN'T'S TEL: (760) 721 -5488 Ci OPIES TO: FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. FIELD REPORT PROJECT f LOCATION 0 CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE r SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: i e R ;�, ° �--- C f�' ; t dim' i C' ✓ l ti � t elf �� - � , <. E �; � ,� � `J F GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 OOPIES TO: FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT REP FI ELD LOCATION 0 CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO , t,r C i / �LiT PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: \ � � / �F',�J tOt /' � � - f...l� i � ! 7`- �Y i K/ / � `y , , ,�� _✓ � .� ./1 1 ' "� � � R j . RECOMMENDATIONS: i GEOPACIFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTAN'T'S TEL: (760) 721 -5488 O OPIES TO: FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT FIELD REP I� LOCATION T C ONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO ve• PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: j ij GEOPACIFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECEINICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721-5488 FAX (760) 721-5539 ,PIES TO: 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT -------- ------- FIELD REP ORT LOCATION :f w CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. j -j TO PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: 4-� 4Z GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS .&AAVi. TEL: (760) 721-5488 PIES TO: FAX: (760) 721-5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT J, FIELD REPORT LOCATION t� CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE 4 SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: T -4 4 I el REGONVAENDATIONS: 4, 1 - kk, GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECBMCAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721-5488 �jO PIES TO: FAX: (760) 721-5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT F IE LD RE LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE I SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: ( , �� • ,.� _ . , �z r - �, , -fay �, � -� t RECOMMENDATIONS: i 1 GEOPACFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTAN'T'S P �4, TEL: (760) 721 -5488 YOPIES To: FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. T PROJECT R F I E LD REP LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE Id f 9 SUMMARY OF INSPECTION; RECOMMENDATIONS: GEOPACIRCA SIGNATURE GEOTECBNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 `PIES TO: FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT FIELD R EPORT LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEIVIR TO PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: V ii GEOPACIFICA SIGNATURE GEOTIECBNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721-5488 ;OPIES TO: FAX: (760) 721-5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT FIELD REP LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE ✓t � r r,f t' El' � r SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: f 7 X k� , 1 .� �'r 9 ! � �/l n ✓�, � ..,r'% i:� r�� J �' .L'i� J� ✓�G; -t'- s,�' - r r RECOMMENDATIONS: i r GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECBMCAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 FAX: (760) 721 -5539 PIES TO: 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT FIE LD REPORT LOCATION f CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEIVIR TO PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: cv Rc I'VIPAEP 4 GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECBMCAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721-5488 FAX: ( 760) 721-5539 *OPIES TO: 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. FIELD PROJECT �. REPORT LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO '- z t `S" r PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: 7 , f .i t �. J 1 � i • ,�r y�C � {�. .�.L�f' C.t _.. �.I J��/ P i'`- �J � ti Lc. RECeMMENGA ONS: J J GEOPACIFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECBNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 PIES TO: FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. RT PROJECT REP j F LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER r WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE r J T V SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: r r V �Y r vim, T; R NS: GEOPACIFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT'S TEL: (760) 721 -5488 FAX: (760) 721 -5539 )OPIES TO: 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE F IE PROJECT LD REPORT PROJECT NO. t LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. f TO PRESENT AT SITE ' P SUMMARY OF INSPECTION; { �. l r Y 1 i,�.'.. _./� E`:Ll:' c '� �'- l .L: -rl� �9- L.•/.'j. -e ''i •P'' r �. "��` 1a ° J'' ! a ✓ J' ��.r ? s1 -t` b '" ; ! i f � ,: 1- , _ u GEOPACFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 FAX: (760) 721 -5539 ,OPIES TO. 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT FIELD LOCATION ' CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMR TO PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: x ...e ca.. i Y / s �� * tom " t', 'S- . t A '.�� Ti f �1� af� - � • � { � i' t'�N£..J -�' r �,� / { .f� �;;' :- y t \"�; a Y RE J GEOPACMICA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL; (760) 721 -5488 , , DPIES TO: FAX. (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST„ SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT FIELD REPORT LOCATION f CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP TO 2 r .f ;j4 PRESENT AT SITE L't_ b- "fie 1 �. SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: _ f �S� t , r ,.. R S; A l` + � -E` e -'.� � ar �' j` F'�� f `° : -�' / �!' ' � i w- r'`i ��L. d -6j��' ,,• ;;r GEOPACIFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT'S TEL: (760) 721 -5488 PIES TO: FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. F IE PROJECT LD REP f ' LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE n SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: i:;'i.r v�� _ -i�il 1�l%�'!'rf �.�s� / Wit /� � t f[l _,x :�•/� C k -�� a 0 1� l� , i' `J ii/ _ 'gp .,f •� r'L � {, .� ",/ f f �'•' ('d ='C � r R Li v GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECBNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 PIES TO: FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. F I LD REPORT PROJECT E LOCATION ,.: CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. i �` ��_:t - Z TO ,F- PRESENT AT SITE t _ SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: 7 � r / f "<� l -ct a- r27.s' ,�, . ✓ . lam f" r.' + A-t �� ,r[�� [ .ter �� ,.,,� r 2, ff /.r ,y; " � f 7 G' i � tar Li �2/ ! ✓ /9s r f't 2 +' ' �/ r . n k.s ,y�7..e , r i . �l-1 lti -i r��d�/ '6 f�if2 �� r - ',� / t t r' S. l i f _ - 'e..`` -dk� ' -''s'"r. ai / � t �'"R ( ' � �_�.,�- C..YI�°1f0 -.sE'" "> ;Y%J �., , s *,.! t� z � ?. �.:, Fes t�K _. GEOPACIFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 ,OPIES TO: FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO, F IE L D PROJECT LOCATION RE P O RT CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO 4 - ' s y ` PRESENT AT SITE 4- 4 ^ �. SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: L ktL4 t -dam zz n GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 � ro; FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT r y, FIE LD E LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO 5: -i t,' -rr` PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: .4 1 1 l . - � .. .� ( -.. r J ...I �, If i• -.. '9 ,r..l r /,l .Z ¢ k 1 L y , GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECBMCAL CONSULTAN'T'S :., TEL: (760) 721 -5488 CO PIES TO: FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO, IEL PROJECT F D REPORT LOCATION r ' rt CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO r , :.ra, , ,' PRESENT AT SITE A r SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: F- : v� rig t C I J� ..� d L� _� 4 r �4S" A e� s 'ty� ./ d1t' r 7 d ff ! GEOPACIFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 0PIES TO: FAX: (760) 721 -5539 M' 3060 INDUSTRY ST„ SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. F I EL PROJECT D R EP RT LOCATION �v CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE r f Ir SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: i j l` t l '�'...^' �.. �ts�.Fii � d' G "' 4Gf t , r � �' ��...w�/ t , c'% r't.17...� !✓_a .ds ,. r 'v t � �t�z .L �r' r i } GEOPACFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECBMCAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 e tOPIES TO: FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST„ SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT r FIELD REPORT LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO j -=- "' PRESENT AT SITE J 'F SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: r - 'z '' `�• , i 1�. -��.i ✓ L� / ,c '� f 1 " i.sf 'f...t ' e' �f.t d i 1 ' } ' s' i fi" ,j,�' <(, y� 1� c " `.�'...v,✓ � r ..�"'�1�L- d`�f . _ `� f .� .,. : � r ° ?�:.6aP` lJ t. r � f. ,M_r ' r ' l RECOvRvlENDAftONS: a F`.l t t ' i iY � r ` � Ll Y �' �G� � ♦ �� 7 Z J ' � i l / f�' ' ,� " ��1 GEOPACIFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECBNICAL CONSULTAN'T'S TEL; (760) 721 -5488 � OPIES TO: FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. FIELD PROJECT REP LOCATION RT CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE T � SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: i` '��L1 L /a ✓ tj_,j i C &± 7 „ i 4 J j v / r r RECOMMEND AREWS: l i e,..[r.; r..� GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHIVICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 !OPIES TO: FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. FIELD REP RT PROJECT LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO ��' PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: I RECOMMENDATIONS: f GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECH ICAL CONSULTANTS TEL. (760) 721 -5488 .COPIES TO: FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE y PROJECT NO. FIELD REPORT LOCATION / CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE 0 SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: 25 '30 1 / Y L 1 V RECOMMENDATIONS: r r GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 OPIES TO: FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. 0 FIELD REPORT LOOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: ;] - e l l , G RECOMMENDATIONS: 7_ DS J r - GEOPACIFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS -� TEL; (760) 721 -5488 COPIES TO: FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 ACCULINE SURVEY, INC 1919 Grand Ave., Ste 1 G, San Diego, CA 92109 (858) 483 -6665 • Fax(858)483 -6056 E -mail: acculinesurvey@sbcglobal.net PARKING LOT CERTIFICATION June 2, 2005 City of Encinitas c/o Good & Roberts, Inc. 2320 Cousteau Ct. Vista, CA 92083 -8346 Re: YMCA Ecke Aquatics Center City of Encinitas Grading Permit No 1457 -G Our Job No. 685 -04 Dear Sirs, The sub - grading of the base matieral for the Parking Lot was verifed on June 2, 2005 and is in substancial conformance with the approved Grading Plans. The average elevation of said parking lot is within 0.10' of the pavement sections as shown on said plans, (7" within the parking areas and 8" within the drive sections). Respectfully, ✓f t_k LA ND S� Rudy P. Pacheco, LS w Q n 0 O cc No. LS r7 �rROF CA``�aQ. DATE PROJECT NO. ROJECT FIELD REPORT LOCATION 0 ^ /' CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP, TO PRESENT AT SITE c SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: - ' -U r. nfv -f L( . i v GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTAN'T'S TEL: (760) 721 -5488 C / OPIES TO: FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO, FIELD R LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE j �- SUMMARY OF INSPECTION; o � REE6 DATKY46. o - ZZ - GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS �^. TEL: (760) 721 -5488 COPIES TO; FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. FIELD REPO PROJECT LOCATION s CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE 5 ' — _ SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: c - � a ' i 7 RECOMMENDATIONS: L GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECB ICAL CONSULTAN'T'S TEL; (760) 721 -5488 OCOPIES TO: FAX; (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. FIELD REPORT PROJECT 0 LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO -x� PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: o7 -- .i_ ` 4 L RE-GOMM A TIONS __ _ - e ' T oo 0 GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL; (760) 721 -5488 O OPIES TO: FAX; (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT FIELD REPORT 0 LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. f �rL L/ LJ ��Go TO PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: r) -� - 2?c� - -9:3 3U -,o ?emu 1 440- cr U i i -41 RECOMMENDATIONS: GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL; (760) 721 -5488 l �'--'COPIES TO: FAX; (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. FIELD REPORT PROJECT LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO �+! f " - PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION; Z2 RECOMMENDATIONS; �� r - / GEOPACIRCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 20PIES TO; FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT FIELD REPOR n` / �� LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO _ � ��/ PRESENT AT SITE i SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: r O _ f - -- Q Z.- — / fJ J 42 r _ RECOMMENDATIONS: r GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 OPIES TO: FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO, FIELD REPORT PROJECT LOCATION T CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO .T� • .lQ , n r PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: i� i RECOMMENDATIONS: GEOPACIHCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 ;OPIES TO: FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. FIELD REPO PROJECT LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO = - �r'f PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: u Z u o RECOMMENDATIONS: GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECITNICAL CONSULTAN'T'S TEL: (760) 721 -5488 COPIES TO. FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT � 7 FIELD REPORT LOCATION y nJ CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO �1 J -' r 411lf PRESENT AT SITE t SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: RECOMMENDATIONS: GEOPACIFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 ;OPIES TO: FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. FIELD REPORT LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER / WEATHER TEMP. TO �( PRESENT AT SITE s, SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: RECOMMENDATIONS: 0 GEOPACIFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 COPIES TO: FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT FIELD REPORT LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE C/1�t In SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: ZZ2 /z - 30 - RECOMMENDATIONS: GEOPACIRCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTAN'T'S TEL: (760) 721 -5488 �OPIES TO: FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. FIELD REPORT PROJECT J LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER r WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE r� SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: /f RECOMMENDATIONS: . z zz 'Aa-& GEOPACIFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTAN'T'S TEL: (760) 721 -5488 �OPIES TO: FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. FIELD REPORT PROJECT LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO - .. �-�s PRESENT AT SITE /7 i SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: {, / A Ll - 7 � i a, r RECOMMENDATIONS: At GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECBNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL; (760) 721 -5488 ;OPIES TO: FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT FIELD REPORT LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: i RECOMMENDATIONS: f GEOPACIRCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTAN'T'S TEL: (760) 721 -5488 :OPIES TO: FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT ./✓� /,� FIELD REPORT LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO ✓�� PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: A' r� N zz t RECOMMENDATIONS: GEOPACIRCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNTCAL CONSULTAN'T'S TEL; (760) 721 -5488 'OPIES TO: FAX; (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT �y�) FIELD REP LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE ( l^ c SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: ) RECOMMENDATIONS: GEOPACIRCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL; (760) 721 -5488 :OPIES TO: FAX; (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT FIELD REP LOCATION -. A ,'v� � CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO ,' �� PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: n a`" r RECOMMENDATIONS: y i r°r- F> r .r o.rF ✓. GEOPACI RCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL; (760) 721 -5488 :OPIES TO: FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST„ SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT R EPORT FIELD LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE �1fA_ SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: i � J L RECOMMENDATIONS: 7(7 1/7- GEOPACIRCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTAN'T'S TEL: (760) 721 -5488 FAX: (760) 721 -5539 PIES TO: 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT FIELD REP LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE 1 SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: �r ziZ /LfL RECOMMENDATIONS: GEOPACIRCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL; (760) 721 -5488 ;OPIES TO: FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT FIELD REP OR LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO J �` r��' PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: _ i f z6Z Y RECOMMENDATIONS: r � O O • �r � r GEOPACIRCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 :OPIES TO: FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. REPORT PROJECT �� FIELD LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO / D G� PRESENT AT SITE ' — SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: we i As r RE 1MENDAT.IQbIS: / GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 oPIES TO: FAX: (760) 721 -5539 '' 3060 INDUSTRY ST„ SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT FIEL D REP OR LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO Q,.li� PRESENT AT SITE yF i 1 SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: , 7J i- i c Q _ RECOMMENDATIONS: ,b GEOPACMCA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 �OPIES TO: FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT FIELD REPO LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO ��1 PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: -AV ZQ c RECOMMENDATIONS: y' <- F' 4 i r GEOPACIFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 :OPIES TO: FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. ROJECT FIELD REP RT LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. TO PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: � 1 n RECOMMENDATIONS: r � GEOPACFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 ;OPIES TO: FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT REPORT FIELD LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER r WEATHER TEMP. TO t- PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: Aor l6 tz er — RECOMMENDATIONS: �- i GEOPACIFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECBNICAL CONSULTAN'T'S TEL: (760) 721 -5488 �OPIES TO: FAX: (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST„ SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 DATE PROJECT NO. PROJECT FIELD REP LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER �.� WEATHER TEMP. TO / PRESENT AT SITE SUMMARY OF INSPECTION: t w �. IV dd RECOMMENDATIONS: GEOPACIFICA SIGNATURE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TEL: (760) 721 -5488 'OPIES TO; FAX (760) 721 -5539 3060 INDUSTRY ST., SUITE 105 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 Geotechnics Incorporated Principals: Anthony F. Belfast Michael P. Imbriglio W. Lee Vanderhurst GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION RENOVATIONS TO MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA 200 SAXONY ROAD ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA prepared for Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA — 200 Saxony Road San Diego, California 92024 — by GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED Project No. 0768 - 002 -00 Document No. 03 -0121 February 18, 2003 9245 Activity Rd., Ste. 103 • San Diego, California 92126 Phone (858) 536 -1000 • Fax (858) 536 -8311 dab, Geotechnic s Incorporated Principals: Anthony R Belfast Michael P. Imbriglio February 18, 2003 W. Lee Vanderhurst Mr. Scott Glissmeyer Project No. 0768 - 002 -00 Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA Document No. 03 -0121 200 Saxony Road Encinitas, California 92024 SUBJECT: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Renovations to Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA 200 Saxony Road Encinitas, California Dear Mr. Glissmeyer: In accordance with your request, we have completed a geotechnical investigation for the planned renovations to the existing Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA in Encinitas, California. This report presents the results of our investigation and provides recommendations for site preparation and earthwork construction, and for the design of foundations, on -grade slabs, retaining walls, and pavements. Based on the results of our investigation, we consider the proposed construction feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. We appreciate this opportunity to provide our professional services. If you have any questions or require additional services, please do not hesitate to contact us. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED ho�Canady, PE Anthony F. Belfast, PE Principal Principal Distribution: (4) Addressee 9245 Activity Rd., Ste. 103 • San Diego, California 92126 Phone (858) 536 -1000 • Fax (858) 536 -8311 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION RENOVATIONS TO MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA 200 SAXONY ROAD ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA - TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ ............................... 1 2 SCOPE OF SERVICES ................................................................................ ............................... 1 3 SITE DESCRIPTION ................................................................................... ............................... 2 4 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT .................................................................... ............................... 2 5 GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ..................................... ............................... 3 5.1 Terrace Deposits ............................................................................ ............................... 3 5.2 Fill .................................................................................................. ............................... 3 5.3 Groundwater .................................................................................. ............................... 3 6 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS .............................................................................. ............................... 4 6.1 Seismicity and Ground Motion ...................................................... ............................... 4 6.2 Surface Rupture ............................................................................. ............................... 4 6.3 Liquefaction ................................................................................... ............................... 5 _. 6.4 Landslides and Lateral Spreads ..................................................... ............................... 5 6.5 Tsunamis, Seiches, and Flooding ................................................... ............................... 5 7 CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................... ............................... 6 8 RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................. ............................... 7 8.1 Plan and Specification Review ...................................................... ............................... 7 8.2 Excavation and Grading Observation ............................................ ............................... 7 8.3 Earthwork ....................................................................................... ............................... 7 8.3.1 Site Preparation ............................................................... ............................... 8 8.3.2 Remedial Grading ........................................................... ............................... 9 8.3.3 Structural Fill Material .................................................. ............................... 10 8.3.4 Fill Compaction ............................................................ ............................... 10 8.3.5 Temporary Excavations ................................................ ............................... 11 8.3.6 Bulk/Shrink Estimates .................................................. ............................... 12 8.3.7 Slopes ............................................................................ ............................... 12 8.4 Surface Drainage .......................................................................... ............................... 13 8.5 Foundation Recommendations ..................................................... ............................... 13 8.6 CBC Seismic Parameters ............................................................. ............................... 15 Geotechnics Incorporated GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION RENOVATIONS TO MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA 200 SAXONY ROAD - ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA - TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 8.7 Interior Building Slabs ................................................................. ............................... 15 8.7.1 Moisture Protection for Interior Slabs .......................... ............................... 15 8.7.2 Exterior Slabs ................................................................ ............................... 16 8.8 Earth- Retaining Structures ........................................................... ............................... 16 8.9 Pipelines ....................................................................................... ............................... 18 8.9.1 Thrust Blocks ................................................................ ............................... 18 8.9.2 Modulus of Soil Reaction ............................................. ............................... 18 8.9.3 Pipe Bedding ................................................................. ............................... 18 8.10 Pavements .................................................................................. ............................... 19 8.10.1 Asphalt Concrete ......................................................... ............................... 19 8.10.2 Portland Cement Concrete .......................................... ............................... 20 8.11 Soil Corrosivity .......................................................................... ............................... 20 9 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION ..................................................... ............................... 21 APPENDICES REFERENCES.............................................................................. ............................... Appendix A SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION ................................................. ............................... Appendix B LABORATORY TESTING ........................................................... ............................... Appendix C SEISMICDATA ............................................................................ ............................... Appendix D ILLUSTRATIONS SITE LOCATION MAP ....................................................................... ............................... Figure 1 GEOTECHNICALMAP ...................................................................... ............................... Figure 2 FAULT LOCATION MAP ................................................................... ............................... Figure 3 TRANSITION DETAILS ..................................................................... ............................... Figure 4 WALL DRAIN DETAILS ................................. ............................... ........................Figures 5 and 6 Geotechnics Incorporated GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION RENOVATIONS TO MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA 200 SAXONY ROAD ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 1 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation for the planned renovations to the existing Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA in Encinitas, California. The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate the existing subsurface conditions at the site as they relate to the proposed development and provide geotechnical design parameters for the planned construction. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the subsurface conditions encountered during our field explorations, laboratory testing, engineering evaluations, and our experience with similar soils and geologic conditions. 2 SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of services provided during this investigation was generally as described in our Proposal No. 02 -338 dated December 18, 2002. Our scope of work did not include evaluation of potentially contaminated soils. Our scope of work included the following items: • Review of available published geologic maps, prior geotechnical reports, topographic maps, aerial photographs, and other literature pertinent to the geotechnical conditions at the site. Pertinent references are presented in Appendix A. • Subsurface explorations consisting of drilling 7 truck- mounted, hollow -stem auger borings to depths up to about 20 feet below existing grade. Relatively undisturbed and bulk samples were collected for laboratory testing. The borings were logged by our geologist, and then backfilled with an impervious material in accordance with State of California regulations. The boring logs are presented in Appendix B. • Laboratory testing of selected samples of the on -site soils to assess the pertinent physical characteristics of the materials. The testing included in -place moisture content and dry density, particle size distribution, Atterberg limits, R- value, maximum density and optimum moisture content, expansion potential, soluble sulfate content, pH, resistivity, soluble chloride content, and direct shear. The results of the laboratory testing are presented in Appendix C. Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 - PAGE • Evaluation of potential geologic hazards and the site's seismicity. • Engineering evaluation of the on -site soils with regard to settlement potential, expansion potential, bearing and lateral load capacities, lateral earth pressures, and pavement section design. • Preparation of this report presenting our findings, conclusions, and recommendations. 3 SITE DESCRIPTION The existing YMCA facility is located at 200 Saxony Road in Encinitas, California. The site location is shown on Figure 1. Existing facilities include various buildings, an aquatics center, a skateboard park, a BMX park, tennis courts, and paved parking and access drives. Plans provided to us indicate that current site elevations range from about 160 feet above mean sea level (MSL) on the south to about 170 feet MSL on the north. The site is bordered on the west by a descending slope up to about 45 feet high that descends to the I -5 freeway below. 4 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT We understand the proposed construction will include a new aquatics center, skateboard park, youth center, toilet rooms, and pavements for parking and site access. Retaining walls up to 8 feet high will be constructed. The new aquatics center development will include demolishing the existing pool enclosure and dive tank (the existing warm pool will remain), and constructing a new 14 -lap pool in the area of the demolished dive tank. A new pool enclosure will also be constructed, along with a 10- foot -high, free - standing masonry wall on 3 sides of the enclosure. The existing BMX park will be demolished, and a new skateboard park will be constructed in this area. The existing tennis courts and skateboard park will be demolished, and a new parking lot and fire lane will be constructed in this area. -- The new pool enclosure will be of metal frame construction. The new youth center and toilet rooms will be pre- engineered modular structures. Structural loading information and finish pad elevations were not available at the time of this report. Geotechnics Incorporated I' �UNRiCH EXINITAS ST a Lti,*,'i RAhGj{ CT v N r� 7. , _- P , LS Ft7�NW1,I o� Jq— E. 9RtTTwIY RD F s p tti, � DFKD P r LEUCADIA QLVD r A > LY a k.� extir r �xoR� a w SILO "1l� x' � � g p k i ! A P . __ y pq da ilFf lt',N _ _ST T � tT r C '1 i�� 4 , f ' PASc. ST . G4f&. H5 � Gl s is 'i rif t�fL yE.�F t 7TFr i ST AINZ � fr, c F T G - a CLEIA ST � c J wy W n IItT c c ar PS HICL ,E POK TER }s ` { I ;y htt P ;L W PA 5T A 'M !WIT FAITi ST 'L sWnxls:�F 1! 0.5 Mj es P,�tRt' ff $ .s --- -- -- Reference: Thomas Brothers Guide 2003. Project Document No. 03 - No. 03- 0121 2-00 G e o t e c h n i c s Documen Incorporated SITE LOCATION MAP FIGURE 1 Rev. 6199 MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 3 5 GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The site is located within the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of California. This province is characterized by rugged north -south trending mountains separated by subparallel faults, and a coastal plain of subdued landforms underlain by sedimentary formations. The subject site is situated in the coastal plain portion of the province. The site is underlain by Pleistocene -age terrace deposits and fills. The approximate locations of our exploratory borings are shown on Figure 2. The boring logs are presented in Appendix B. Generalized descriptions of the subsurface materials, from oldest to youngest, are as follows: 5.1 Terrace Deposits Pleistocene -age terrace deposits were encountered beneath the site in each of our exploration borings. As observed in the borings, the terrace deposits generally consist of weakly to moderately cemented silty sandstone. However, scattered concretions of strongly cemented material may exist. The materials are characterized by relatively high bearing capacity, low compressibility, and very low expansion potential. - 5.2 Fill Fill soils were encountered in each of our exploration borings to depths ranging from about 4 to 17 feet below existing grade. Thicker fills may exist at other locations. No documentation on the placement and compaction of the fill was available. The undocumented fill generally consists of loose to medium dense silty sand (Unified Soil Classification: SM) and clayey sand (SC). Asphalt concrete debris was observed within the fills. Laboratory tests indicate that the fills have a very low expansion potential. The undocumented fills are considered compressible. 5.3 Groundwater Groundwater was not observed in the exploratory borings drilled during for this investigation. However, groundwater seepage may be encountered in the future due to rainfall, irrigation, broken pipes, or leaky pools. Since the prediction of the location of such conditions is difficult, they are typically mitigated if and when they occur. Geotechnics Incorporated O e— !V s Cq Cb O w 4 x'L 0 V. _ v Z CL) Ln t i J m - o w r N q. r W x _ � o co O . o a O co M cu o v� � W Q CM J Z i s 0) • �; U) J U U _ W ►• _� a� m �* a� MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 4 6 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS The subject site is not located within an area previously known for significant geologic hazards. Evidence of active faulting, landslides, liquefiable soils, or collapsible soils was not encountered during this investigation. Seismic hazards at the site may be caused by ground shaking during seismic events on regional active faults. Existing and potential geologic hazards are as follows: 6.1 Seismicity and Ground Motion Site coordinates were estimated using the CD -ROM TOPO! (National Geographic Holdings, 2001). The site is located at a latitude of 33.0514 north and a longitude of 117.2867° west. Figure 3 shows the locations of known active faults within 100 kilometers of the site. Table 1 shows the properties of these faults. The deterministic values of these faults shown in the table were developed using the program EQFAULT (Blake, 2000). The program FRISKSP (Blake, 2000) was used to perform a probabilistic analysis of seismicity to provide an estimate of the potential peak ground acceleration that the site may experience. The analysis was conducted using the characteristic earthquake distribution of Youngs and Coppersmith (1985). Based on the results of the -- probabilistic analysis, the estimated peak ground acceleration for the site resulting from the Upper Bound Earthquake, defined as the motion having a 10 percent probability of being exceeded in 100 years, is 0.48g. The estimated peak ground acceleration resulting from the Design Basis Earthquake is 0.35g (10 percent probability of being exceeded in a 50 years). 6.2 Surface Rupture Surface rupture is the result of movement on an active fault reaching the surface. The site is shown in relation to known active faults in the region on Figure 3. The nearest known active fault is the Rose Canyon fault zone which is located about 3.1 miles (5.0 kilometers) west of the site based on the Maps of Known Active Fault Near- Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada (CDMG, 1998). There are no known active faults underlying the site or projecting toward the site. In our opinion, the probability of surface rupture due to faulting beneath the site is considered low. Geotechnics Incorporated i s. ly �' 1 I d ��'1� I — / / 1 1/ fli a -- I fD •°• ° ?o ',!g n Q =mmM /! co�$�c oom^� ��mN� a pm m j3.m mm rcg$�m3 \)\ /o �mc.a zm3� 8 '/ J //l m ?�Cc m 8; m m a mm � /! / ( is ( \ \ / I ° mbi m a c o m a � 3 53msz to m. N � - SiCnIG O V CD 0 Tgac mm �s-o c 10000 .3 t a 875 a �Q m �� — �� o CD o"� m r, _ ' �• off- j }� ,,� � m / w U d r —s'Y w� 'i 3 \4� ;! /�+ aA f za or Q _! j / i /l � : _ ! � �j : ( / _. a te _ / 'l( � � -\�\ � ii 1 ' / �' r• r / /Gi l �• ... 1 l , lip r o\ Je- r / / / - AO J l l �J S �Q � r /� ¢� I o° /m W I j {, f�\l:jrm� / ,�JZ+�'M fiat t,JT- - - I ' r'� / ., a� m I , l \ \ I f/ -e ,(IS 0 �y I 0. 11) o m _� � •c3� `�� .m � ;, //• r / � I � ti A ARO ell Q, o it_ E v CL Oy /I 1 i l /7r ,v r _ CL g f Project No. 0768 - 002 -00 Document No. 03 -0121 =�G e o t e c h n i c s FAULT LOCATION MAP FIGURE 3 Incorporated CD F D a 00 N o r r H I c r - o N W �Un0O °o°oo °0000 C)C c ° °O co 0 r �- M lf) N ltd M N N N O co J �- r `- r' N 0o Q W co Y p0 Q. I o~ M C 0 Z c o c d > Z U) N �- r r r r r r r r r �- r r m M U 7 Ix � r �-- �-- r r r r r r �-- �- + + + + + + + + � � � � O U Q J V + + + + + + + + + p W d W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W _ j3 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 =3 O r- 4. y 0 Q co co CM M M M M M M M M M M M M M M E V M co c'M M CY) M co co M cM M M co M M c'M M X CD Y O O � o O W W N N M N M M N M N M M N M N N N N U Q a Y Q Q N + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + -� y- cu cu F E w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w ti m e ? v��o�o O � o�no O r` N O C o LO c� j _� N CO W Q co D fa N W .o v Y a c N ca _V W a C 4 N F _. YW a U) oc�- � Q 0 M L O C0 O O C N O H M rn Tt M M M .- N O M CO M a ti CO C y ti co � r- r` O � 00 Co N CD CD (o O c6 OU c J W Q t•- rn o 0 � Z >, t O cli �z �° ° � C7 °w O o °� c� ° W Q C) ti Q Cn M O O, M c tt CD 0 "t Lo -t ch M N 0-) c g �W ' - Nr - C) —0000- 000000 0CL 0 W Y U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 C co O Q E aa. U rn .� Q rn-�� -m � En cu W U ° 'o ° w E V N Q cn E Lo M M �tco(DCDr -NV IT COrl- OCn U c° -° a) N 0 v r N �t �t O cD CD 00 CO 00 00 00 00 00 O) _ O - 4) s O = & m cn N 0 v U ._ Y U ! p Co C N C - co O O F Y ' 0 C m C C c6 J] 0 Y 0 C > N N U Q m _C io C Y C O C U CU :3 fn e-� C a) (n co L c oo m > c N co O p W L cn t U J (� O° ( E Q) (7 N a) 0 E ° O N O (U N O N O c 0 o N �' N U o O c t m° �-+ ° O .c N c m c O c U O �C rn cu N W �n CL cu N c U U cu ca w o w v) w w cn Q c E 3 -3 m o . C L m cu (D Co m W U = a� (n W 'fl E L a) c ° Z a� o cn z U- 2w� a �- CV M rl- LO, MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA FEBRUARY 18, 2003 PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 5 6.3 Liquefaction Liquefaction is a process in which soil grains in a saturated deposit lose contact after the occurrence of earthquakes or other sources of ground shaking. The soil deposit - temporarily behaves as a viscous fluid; pore pressures rise, and the strength of the deposit is greatly diminished. Liquefiable soils typically consist of cohesionless sands and silts that are loose to medium dense, and saturated. To liquefy, soils must be subjected to ground shaking of sufficient magnitude and duration. Given the relatively dense nature of the formational materials beneath the site, and the absence of a shallow groundwater table, the potential for liquefaction to occur is negligible. 6.4 Landslides and Lateral Spreads Evidence of ancient landslides or slope instabilities was not observed at the site during our investigation. Accordingly, the potential for landslides to significantly impact the site is considered low. Due to the relatively dense nature of the underlying materials, the site is not believed to be susceptible to lateral spreading or landsliding associated with a seismic event on a nearby active fault. 6.5 Tsunamis, Seiches, and Flooding Given the distance between the subject site and the coast, and the site's elevation above sea level, damage due to tsunamis (seismically induced waves) is considered negligible. There does not appear to be any open or confined bodies of water upslope from the site. Accordingly, the possibility of earthquake- induced flooding due to seiches or dam failures is also considered negligible. Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA FEBRUARY 18, 2003 PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 6 7 CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of this investigation, it is our opinion that the proposed construction is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint provided the following recommendations and appropriate construction practices are followed. No geotechnical conditions were encountered that would preclude the proposed construction. Geotechnical design and construction considerations include the following: • The site is underlain by undocumented fill and formational terrace deposits. The undocumented fills are considered compressible and may experience settlement under increased loading from structures or new fills. Remedial grading recommendations are provided in this report. The terrace deposits are generally considered suitable for support of structural or fill loads. • The proposed modular buildings may be supported on conventional shallow footings provided the recommendations of this report are followed. Foundations for the proposed pool enclosure are anticipated to consist of drilled pier foundations or deepened spread footings. • Based on expansion index test results, the silty to clayey sand fills have a very low expansion potential. We anticipate that the silty sandstone terrace deposits also have a very low expansion potential. • In general, excavations at the site should be achievable using standard heavy earthmoving equipment in good - working order with experienced operators. However, localized strongly cemented concretions may require extra effort to excavate or may encounter excavation refusal. These excavations may also generate oversized material that will _. require extra effort to crush or export from the site. • Although not encountered in our borings, groundwater may develop at a later date and may be encountered in some excavations. • There are no known active faults underlying the project site. Potential seismic hazards at the site would more likely be associated with ground shaking associated with seismic events along regional active faults. Seismic shaking hazards are typically mitigated through building designs in accordance with the California Building Code. Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA FEBRUARY 18, 2003 PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 7 _. 8 RECOMMENDATIONS The remainder of this report presents recommendations regarding earthwork construction as well as preliminary geotechnical recommendations for the design of the proposed structures and improvements. These recommendations are based on empirical and analytical methods typical of the standard -of- practice in southern California. If these recommendations appear not to address a specific feature of the project, please contact our office for additions or revisions to the -- recommendations. 8.1 Plan and Specification Review A preliminary site plan was used as the basis for this investigation. We recommend that grading plans, foundation plans, and earthwork specifications be reviewed by Geotechnics Incorporated prior to finalization to evaluate conformance of the plans with the intent of the recommendations of this report. Significant changes in the locations of the proposed structures may require additional geotechnical evaluation. 8.2 Excavation and Grading Observation Foundation excavations and site grading should be observed by Geotechnics Incorporated. Geotechnics Incorporated should provide observation and testing services continuously during grading. Such observations are considered essential to identify field conditions that differ from those anticipated by the preliminary investigation, to adjust designs to actual field conditions, and to determine that the grading is accomplished in general accordance with the recommendations of this report. Recommendations presented in this report are contingent upon Geotechnics Incorporated performing such services. Our personnel should perform sufficient testing of fill during grading to support our professional opinion as to compliance with compaction recommendations. 8.3 Earthwork Grading and earthwork should be conducted in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC) and with the recommendations of this report. The following recommendations are provided regarding specific aspects of the proposed earthwork Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 8 construction. These recommendations should be considered subject to revision based on field conditions observed by the geotechnical consultant during grading. 8.3.1 Site Preparation General site preparation should include the removal of unsuitable and deleterious materials, existing structures, or other improvements from areas that will be subjected to structural or fill loads. Clearing and grubbing should consist of the removal of vegetation including brush, grass, weeds, wood, tree roots, and otherwise deleterious materials from areas to be graded. Clearing and grubbing should extend to the limits of grading. Unsuitable materials include vegetation, trash, construction debris, highly organic soil, highly expansive clays, rocks more than 6 inches in greatest dimension, contaminated soils, or other undesirable materials. Removed materials should be hauled off -site and legally disposed. The removal of unsuitable materials should be conducted under the observation of the geotechnical consultant to evaluate the competency of the exposed materials for support of structural and fill loads. The excavation of unsuitable materials should be conducted in a way that minimizes the disturbance of competent materials. All buildings, structures, foundations, utilities (above and below ground), and any other man -made improvements within the grading limits, that are not to be saved for future use, should be demolished and legally disposed off -site. Subsurface improvements or obstructions that are to be removed should be excavated and hauled off -site. The resulting excavations should be backfilled and compacted in accordance with the recommendations of this report. Demolition of pipelines may consist of capping or rerouting at the project perimeter, and removal within the project perimeter. If appropriate, abandoned pipelines may be filled with grout or slurry cement as recommended by, and under the observation of, the geotechnical consultant. Man -made improvements to be saved should be protected from damage by the contractor. Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 9 8.3.2 Remedial Grading Compressible Soils Remedial grading is recommended where compressible soils exist within proposed building pads and other structural fill areas, within exterior concrete flatwork areas, or wherever the existing soils are disturbed due to demolition of existing structures or improvements. These soils should be over - excavated and replaced as compacted fill. Compressible soils at the site may include undocumented fills, weathered formational materials, or other soil subject to settlement under increased loads, wetting, or bio- degradation. Remedial - grading is anticipated to consist of the removal of the undocumented fills, which were observed in our exploration borings to depths up to about 17 feet below _ existing grade. Removal bottoms should be observed by Geotechnics Incorporated personnel during grading. Deeper removals may be required based on the conditions observed. The removals should extend horizontally at least 5 feet beyond the limits of the proposed building. Care should be taken to not undermine existing structures or improvements. Cut /Fill Transitions Where transitions from formational materials to compacted fill will exist beneath building pads, we recommend that the formational portion of any individual pad be over - excavated and replaced with compacted fill to provide a relatively uniform compacted fill layer. The depth of the over - excavation should be 3 feet below the bottom of foundation, or to a depth of H/2, whichever is greater, where H is the greatest depth of fill beneath the structure. The pad grade should then be re- established with fill compacted as recommended in this report. Figure 4 should be used as a general guideline in determining the over - excavation depths of individual pads. Expansive Soils Expansive soils within 2 feet of exterior flatwork should be over - excavated and replaced with soils having a low expansion potential _ (expansion index of 50 or less). The replacement material may consist of on -site or imported soil with an expansion index of 50 or less, based on the guidelines of LTBC Test Method 18 -2 or ASTM D 4829. The replacement material should be compacted as recommended in this report. Geotechnics Incorporated CASE 1.0 - -__ FILL RIP 12 INCHES, 3 FEET � WATER, COMPACT (MAXIMUM) FORMATION CASE 2.0 2% SLOPE -- - _ FILL OVER - EXCAVATE TRANSITION TO A DEPTH OF H/2 (3 FEET MINIMUM) H > 3 FEET - FORMATION CASE 3.0 - _ H > 3 FEET 2% SLOPE --i ' - - _ - - - _ FILL OVER- EXCAVATE TRANSITION TO A DEPTH OF H/2 (3 FEET MINIMUM) FORMATION G e o t e c h n i c s Project No. 0768- 002 -00 Incorpora TRANSITION DETAILS Document No. 03 -0121 FIGURE 4 \Drafting \CorelDraw \Overex Rev. 1/00 MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 10 - 8.3.3 Structural Fill Material In general, the on -site materials may be used in the required fills, less any unsuitable or deleterious materials described previously. Soils that have an expansion index greater than 20 should not be used within the upper 5 feet of finish building subgrade, within the upper 2 feet of finish hardscape subgrade, or as retaining wall backfill. Imported fill sources, if needed, should be observed prior to hauling onto the site to determine the suitability for use. Representative samples of imported materials and on -site soils should be tested by the geotechnical consultant to evaluate their engineering properties for the planned use. Imported fill soils should have an expansion index of no more than 20. During grading operations, soil types other than those evaluated in the geotechnical report may be encountered. Geotechnics should be notified to evaluate the suitability of these soils for use as fill and as finish grade soils. 8.3.4 Fill Compaction After making the recommended removals and prior to fill placement, the exposed ground surface should be observed by Geotechnics Incorporated. Any remaining dry, loose or soft materials should also be removed until a stable, unyielding condition under equipment loads is achieved. All fill and backfill should be placed at slightly above optimum moisture content using equipment that is capable of producing a uniformly compacted product throughout the entire fill lift. Fill materials at less than optimum moisture should have water added and the fill mixed to result in material that is uniformly above optimum moisture content. Fill materials that are too wet should be aerated or mixed with drier material to achieve uniformly moisture - conditioned soil. Flooding should not be permitted as a method of compacting fill or backfill. The fill and backfill should be placed in horizontal lifts at a thickness appropriate for the equipment spreading, mixing, and compacting the material, but generally should not exceed 8 inches in loose thickness. The minimum relative compaction Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE I 1 recommended for fill and backfill is 90 percent of maximum dry density based on the guidelines of ASTM D 1557. Sufficient observation and testing should be - performed by Geotechnics Incorporated so that an opinion can be rendered as to the compaction achieved. 8.3.5 Temporary Excavations Temporary excavations, such as for remedial grading and foundation and utility excavations, are anticipated to be less than 10 feet in depth and are expected to be stable provided they are laid back in accordance with our recommendations or shored. All excavations should conform with Cal -OSHA guidelines. Workmen -- should be protected from falling rocks and caving soils in accordance with Cal - OSHA requirements. Temporary excavations extending to a depth of 3 feet or less may be made vertically. Temporary excavations up to 10 feet deep should be laid back no steeper than 1:1 (horizontal: vertical), or shored, prior to allowing workers to enter. Should deeper temporary excavations be required, Geotechnics Incorporated should be notified so that additional recommendations may be provided. Where temporary excavations extend below a plane inclined at P/2:1 — (horizontal: vertical) downward from the outside bottom edge of adjacent existing footings, shoring is recommended. Temporary excavations that encounter seepage or other potentially adverse conditions should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant on a case -by -case basis during grading. Remedial measures may include shoring, or reducing the inclination of the temporary slope. For temporary excavations that will be shored, but not braced with tiebacks or struts, we recommend using a triangular pressure distribution for calculating earth pressures. Cantilevered shoring design may be based on an equivalent fluid -- pressure of 35 lbs /ft plus any groundwater pressures encountered in the excavation and any surcharge loads resulting from loads placed above the excavation and within a 1:1 plane extending upward from the base of the excavation. Should surcharge loads be anticipated, or braced shoring be used, Geotechnics Incorporated should be contacted for additional design parameters. Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 _ FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 12 For design of soldier piles, an allowable passive pressure of 6001bs /ft per foot of embedment up to a maximum of 5,000 lbs /ft may be used. Soldier piles should be spaced at least two pile diameters on center. 8.3.6 Bulk/Shrink Estimates Based on comparisons between the in -situ densities of the on -site soils and the estimated densities of compacted fills, and our experience with similar materials, the terrace deposits are expected to neither bulk nor shrink significantly when over- excavated and recompacted. The undocumented fill is estimated to shrink about 5 to 10 percent when over- excavated and recompacted. It should be noted, however, that bulking and shrinking potential can vary considerably based on the variability of the in -situ densities of the materials in question. 8.3.7 Slopes All slopes should be inclined no steeper than 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). The surficial slope stability may be enhanced by providing good site drainage. The site should be graded so that water from the surrounding areas is not allowed to flow over the top of the slope. Diversion structures should be provided where necessary. Surface runoff should be confined to gunite -lined swales or other appropriate devices to reduce the potential for erosion. We recommend that slopes be planted with vegetation that will increase their stability. Ice plant is generally not recommended. We recommend that vegetation include woody plants, along with ground cover. All plants should be adapted for growth in semi -arid climates with little or no irrigation. A landscape architect should be consulted in order to develop a specific planting palate suitable for slope stabilization. It should be recognized that the outer few feet of all slopes are susceptible to gradual down -slope movements due to slope creep. This will affect hardscape such as concrete slabs. We recommend that settlement sensitive hardscape not be constructed within 5 feet of the top of slopes. Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 13 8.4 Surface Drainage - Foundation and slab performance depends greatly on how well the runoff waters drain from the site. This is true both during construction and over the entire life of the structure. The ground surface around structures should be graded so that water flows rapidly away from the structures without ponding. The surface gradient needed to achieve this depends on the prevailing landscape. In general, we recommend that pavement and lawn areas within 5 feet of buildings slope away at gradients of at least 2 percent. Densely vegetated areas should have minimum gradients of at least 5 percent away from buildings in the first 5 feet. Densely vegetated areas are considered those in which the planting type and spacing are such that the flow of water is impeded. Planters should be built so that water from them will not seep into the foundation, slab, or pavement areas. Roof drainage should be channeled by pipe to storm drains, or discharged at least 10 feet from buildings. Site irrigation should be limited to the minimum necessary to sustain plants. Should excessive irrigation, surface water intrusion, water line breaks, or unusually high rainfall occur, saturated zones or "perched" groundwater may develop in the underlying soils. 8.5 Foundation Recommendations The foundation recommendations provided herein are considered generally consistent with methods typically used in southern California. Other alternatives may be available. Our recommendations are only minimum criteria based on geotechnical factors and should not be considered a structural design, or to preclude more restrictive criteria of governing agencies or by the structural engineer. The design of the foundation system should be performed by the project structural engineer, incorporating the geotechnical parameters described herein and the requirements of applicable building codes. The proposed modular buildings may be supported on conventional shallow footings. The proposed pool enclosure may be supported on drilled pier foundations or deepened spread footings. Foundation excavations should be observed by Geotechnics Incorporated to evaluate the suitability of the bearing materials for conformance with the recommendations of this report. i Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 14 Conventional Shallow Footings The following design parameters assume that the recommended remedial grading will be performed, and that the foundations for the proposed buildings will consist of shallow footings bearing entirely on compacted fill with a low expansion potential. A one -third increase in the soil bearing and passive pressure values may be used for short-term wind or seismic loads. Allowable Soil Bearing: 2,000 lbs /ft Minimum Footing Width: 12 inches. Minimum Footing Depth: 24 inches below lowest adjacent compacted soil, slab, or pavement grade. Passive Pressure: 3001bs /ft per foot of embedment. Coefficient of Friction: 0.4 Differential Settlement: Foundations should be designed for 3 /4 -inch of differential settlement over a distance of 40 feet. Drilled Piers or Deepened Spread Footing The following design parameters assume that the foundations will be embedded in compacted fill or undisturbed formation. For cast -in -place concrete piers, uplift loads may be resisted by friction acting along the surface area of the pier, plus the weight of the pier. For deepened spread footings, uplift loads may be resisted by the weight of the footing and the weight of the compacted backfill overlying the footing. A one -third increase in the soil bearing, frictional uplift, and passive pressure values may be used for short-term wind or seismic loads. Allowable Soil Bearing: 2,000 lbs /ft in compacted fill; 500 lbs /ft increase for each additional foot of depth below the minimum depth up to a maximum of 5,000 lbs /ft 5,000 lbs /ft in undisturbed terrace deposits. Minimum Diameter /Width: 12 inches. Minimum Depth: 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade. Soil Unit Weight: 120 lbs /ft Frictional Pier Uplift: 3001bs /ft Passive Pressure: 300 lbs /ft per foot of embedment based on an estimated lateral deflection up to '/2 -inch. Differential Settlement: 3 /4 -inch between adjacent piers or footings. Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 15 8.6 CBC Seismic Parameters The following seismic parameters may be used for design of the proposed structures. They are based on a site -to -fault distance of 5.0 kilometers scaled from fault maps (CDMG, 1998) intended for use in conjunction with the 2001 California Building Code. Seismic Zone Factor, Z: 0.4 4 Seismic Source Type: B Soil Profile Type: S Seismic Coefficients, C,: 0.44N„ C,: 0.64N Near - Source Factors, N,,: 1.0 N,: 1.2 8.7 Interior Building Slabs Building slabs should be supported by undisturbed formational materials or compacted fill prepared as recommended in this report and having a low expansion potential. Slabs should be designed for the anticipated loading. If an elastic design is used, a modulus of subgrade reaction of 250 lbs /in may be used. Slab thickness and reinforcement should be designed by the project structural engineer and should conform to the requirements of the 2001 CBC. We recornmend that building slabs be at least 5 inches in thickness and reinforced with at least No. 3 bars spaced 24 inches on center, each way, and placed at slab mid - height. 8.7.1 Moisture Protection for Interior Slabs Concrete slabs constructed on soil ultimately cause the moisture content to rise in the underlying soil. This results from continued capillary rise and the termination of normal evapotranspiration. Because normal concrete is permeable, the moisture will eventually penetrate the slab. Excessive moisture may cause mildewed carpets, lifting or discoloration of floor tiles, or similar problems. To decrease the likelihood of problems related to damp slabs, suitable moisture -- protection measures should be used where moisture sensitive floor coverings or other factors warrant. Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 16 A commonly used moisture protection in southern California consists of about 2 inches of clean sand covered by at least 10 mil plastic sheeting. In addition, 2 - inches of clean sand are placed over the plastic to decrease concrete curing problems associated with placing concrete directly on an impermeable membrane. However, it has been our experience that such systems will transmit from approximately 6 to 12 pounds of moisture per 1,000 square feet per day. This may be excessive for some applications, particularly for sheet vinyl, wood flooring, vinyl tiles, or carpeting with impermeable backing that use water soluble adhesives. The project architect should review the moisture requirements of the proposed flooring system and incorporate an appropriate level of moisture protection as part of the floor covering design. This may include waterproofing the slab. 8.7.2 Exterior Slabs Exterior slabs should be at least 4 inches thick and should be reinforced with at least 6 -inch by 6 -inch, W2.9 by W2.9 welded wire fabric placed at slab mid - height. Crack control joints should be used on all exterior slabs, with a maximum spacing of 5 -foot centers each way for sidewalks and 10 -foot centers each way for slabs. Differential movement between buildings and slabs, or between sidewalks -- and curbs may be decreased by doweling the slab into the foundation or curb. 8.8 Earth - Retaining Structures Retaining walls should be designed by the project structural engineer, using the geotechnical parameters provided below. For design of cantilever retaining walls, the following soil parameters may be used. Allowable Soil Bearing: 2,000 lbs /ft (allow a one -third increase for short- term wind or seismic loads). Coefficient of Friction: 0.4 Passive Pressure: 3001bs /f1 per foot of embedment (allow a one -third increase for short-term wind or seismic loads). Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY I8, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 17 Active Earth Pressure: Equivalent fluid pressure of 35 lbs /ft for level backfill or 55 lbs /ft for 2:1 sloping backfill. Assumes walls are free to yield at the top at least 0.2% of the wall height. At -Rest Earth Pressure: Equivalent fluid pressure of 55 lbs /ft for level backfill or 85 Ibs /ft for 2:1 sloping backfill. Assumes walls are restrained. Minimum Footing Width: 12 inches. Minimum Footing Depth: 18 inches below lowest adjacent compacted soil, slab, or pavement grade. _ For design of gravity walls, the following soil parameters may be used. Friction Angle: 32° Cohesion: 0 lbs /ft Moist Unit Weight: 120 Ibs /ft - Foundations should be setback from descending slopes a minimum distance of 8 feet measured horizontally from the outside bottom edge of the foundation to the slope face. In addition to the recommended earth pressure, walls adjacent to vehicular traffic should be designed to resist a uniform lateral pressure of 100 lbs /ft acting as a result of an assumed 300 lbs /ft surcharge behind the wall. If the traffic is kept back at least ten feet from the walls, the traffic surcharge may be neglected. The above pressures assume no hydrostatic pressures or surcharge loads, which will increase the lateral pressures on the wall. We should be contacted for additional recommendations if hydrostatic or surcharge pressures are applicable. Walls should contain an adequate subdrain to reduce -- hydrostatic forces as shown on Figures 5 and 6. Backfilling retaining walls with expansive soils can increase lateral pressures well beyond the active or at -rest pressures indicated above. We recommend that retaining walls be backfilled with free - draining, cohesionless soil having an expansion index of 20 or less. The backfill area should include the zone defined by a 1:1 plane projected upward from the heel of the wall. Retaining wall backfill should be compacted to at least Geotechnics Incorporated DAMP - PROOFING OR WATER - PROOFING AS REQUIRED ROCK AND FABRIC ALTERNATIVE o COMPAGTED• BACKFILL' °0 12 -INCH _ ► MINIMUM MINUS 3/4 -INCH CRUSHED ROCK o0 ENVELOPED IN FILTER FABRIC ° WEEP -HOLE (MIRAFI 140NL, SUPAC 4NP, OR oo ALTERNATIVE APPROVED SIMILAR) o �/ 77 777 1 4 -INCH DIAM. PVC ° PERFORATED PIPE DAMP - PROOFING OR WATER- PROOFING AS REQUIRED GEOCOMPOSITE PANEL DRAIN — r. PANEL DRAIN /. ALTERNATIVE CQMPACTED. BACKF4LL• 1 CU. FT. PER LINEAR FOOT OF ; WEEP -HOLE MINUS 3/4 -INCH CRUSHED / ALTERNATIVE ROCK ENVELOPED IN FILTER FABRIC �i 4 -INCH DIAM. PVC PERFORATED PIPE NOTES - 1) Perforated pipe should outlet through a solid pipe to a free gravity outfall. Perforated pipe and outlet pipe should have a fall of at least 1 %. 2) As an alternative to the perforated pipe and outlet, weep -holes may be constructed. Weep -holes should be at least 2 inches in diameter, spaced no greater than 8 feet, and be located just above grade at the bottom of wall. 3) Filter fabric should consist of Mirafi 140N, Supac 5NP, Amoco 4599, or similar approved fabric. - Filter fabric should be overlapped at least 6- inches. 4) Geocomposite panel drain should consist of Miradrain 6000, J -DRain 400, Supac DS -15, or approved similar product. 5) Drain installation should be observed by the geotechnical consultant prior to backfilling. - 1 G e o t e c h n i c s Project No. 0768- 002 -00 Incorporated WALL DRAIN DETAILS Document No. 03 -0121 FIGURE 5 \Drafting \Core1Draw \Wa1Idrn Rev. 6/99 Interceptor Drain Consisting of Geocomposite Panel or Crushed Rock Blanket (SEE DETAIL) Height of Drain Equal to 2/3 Height of Wall Tt Gravel Collector Approximate With Pipe Excavation Line Filter Fabric Surrounding - -- Geocomposite Crushed Rock Pan _ g Minus 3/4" Crushed Rock Panel Drain -� Approximate Approximate At Least 2" of Excavation Excavation >s At Least 2" of Line ode Crushed Rock Line — Crushed Rock Surrounding Pipe e2' - - "me Surrounding Pipe 4" Diameter Perforated 4" Diameter Perforated -Pipe, ABS or PVC, Pipe, ABS or PVC, _ Draining to Gravity Outfall Draining to Gravity Outfall ROCK BLANKET ALTERNATIVE GEOCOMPOSITE PANEL ALTERNATIVE NOTES 1) Geocomposite Panel should consist of Miradrain 6000, J -DRain 400, Supac DS -15 or approved similar product. 2) When back -cut excavation is in competent rock, filter fabric may be eliminated adjacent to rock. 3) Drainage pipes should have a fall of at least 1 percent. 4) Filter fabric should consist of Mirafi 140N, Supac 5NP, Amoco 4599 or similar approved product. - =G e o t e c h n i c s Project No. 0768 - 002 -00 Incorpor WALL DRAIN DETAILS Document No. 03 -0121 FIGURE 6 \Drafting \CorelDrawkWalldrn - gravity Rev. 12199 MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 18 90 percent relative compaction, based on ASTM D 1557 guidelines. Backfill should not be placed until walls have achieved adequate structural strength. Heavy compaction equipment which could cause distress to walls should not be used. 8.9 Pipelines Project improvements may include underground pipelines. Geotechnical aspects of pipeline design include soil bearing and lateral resistance for thrust blocks, modulus of soil reaction, and pipe bedding. 8.9.1 Thrust Blocks For design of thrust blocks, the following design parameters may be used for thrust blocks embedded in either compacted fill or formational materials. Allowable Soil Bearing: 2,000 lbs /ft (allow a one -third increase for short-term wind or seismic loads). Passive Pressure: 300 lbs /ft per foot of embedment (allow a one -third increase for short-term wind or seismic loads). Coefficient of Friction: 0.4 8.9.2 Modulus of Soil Reaction The modulus of soil reaction (E) is used to characterize the stiffness of soil backfill placed along the sides of buried flexible pipelines. For the purpose of evaluating deflection due to the load associated with trench backfill over the pipe, a value of 1,500 lbs /in may be used assuming granular bedding material is placed adjacent to the pipe. 8.9.3 Pipe Bedding Typical pipe bedding as specified in the "GREENBOOK" may be used. As a minimum, we recommend that pipes be supported on at least 4 inches of granular Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 19 bedding material. Where pipeline or trench excavation inclinations exceed 15 percent, we do not recommend that open graded rock be used for pipe bedding or backfill because of the potential for piping and internal erosion of the overlying backfill. The recommended bedding is coarse sand having a sand equivalent greater than 30. Alternatively, sand - cement slurry can be used for the bedding. The slurry should consist of at least a 2 -sack mix having a slump no greater than 5 inches. If the sand - cement slurry is used for the pipe bedding to at least 1 foot over the top of the pipe, cut -off walls may not be considered necessary. This recommendation should be further evaluated by the project civil engineer designing the pipe system. 8.10 Pavements Subgrade preparation should be conducted immediately prior to the placement of the pavement section. The upper 12 inches of pavement subgrade should be scarified, brought to about optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density based on ASTM D 1557 guidelines. Aggregate base should conform to the specifications for crushed aggregate base, crushed miscellaneous base, or processed miscellaneous base as defined in Section 200 -2 of the "GREEN Aggregate base should be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density based on ASTM D 1557 guidelines. 8.10.1 Asphalt Concrete Two traffic types are assumed for the design of asphalt concrete pavements: automobile parking areas (Traffic Index = 4.5) and driveways /fire lanes (Traffic Index = 6.0). Laboratory testing of a sample of the on -site soils indicate an R- value of 63. Based on the indicated Traffic Indexes and a design R -value of 63, the following pavement sections are recommended in accordance with the - Caltrans design method. Traffic Index Asphalt Concrete Aggregate Base 4.5 3 inches 4 inches 6.0 4 inches 4 inches Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 20 Hardcourt play areas with no vehicular traffic may be paved with 3 inches of full - depth asphalt concrete. Asphalt concrete should conform to "GREENBOOK" specifications. Asphalt concrete should be compacted to at least 95 percent based on the Hveem unit weight. 8.10.2 Portland Cement Concrete Concrete pavement design was performed in accordance with the simplified design procedure of the Portland Cement Association. This method is based on a 20 -year design life. For design, it was assumed that aggregate interlock joints will be used for load transfer across control joints. The Portland cement concrete was assumed to have a minimum 28 -day flexural strength of 600 lbs /in The subgrade soils are assumed to provide "medium" subgrade support (corresponding to sand and sand - gravel mixtures with moderate amounts of silt and clay). Based on these assumptions, we recommend that the pavement section consist of 6 inches of Portland cement concrete over 4 inches of aggregate base over the compacted subgrade. Concentrated truck traffic areas, such as trash truck aprons and loading dock areas, should be reinforced with at least number 4 bars on 24- inch centers, each way. 8.11 Soil Corrosivity A selected soil sample was evaluated for water - soluble sulfate content to assess the general degree of sulfate exposure of concrete in contact with the site soils. The test results are presented in Appendix C. The project design engineer may use the test results in conjunction with Table 19 -A -4 of the California Building Code to specify a suitable cement type, water cement ratio, and minimum compressive strength for concrete used on site which will be in direct contact with soil, including all foundations and slabs. The sulfate content test results are believed to represent the existing soil conditions at the site. Additional testing of the finish grade materials should be performed to evaluate the final as- graded condition of the site. It should be noted that soluble sulfate in the irrigation water supply, and /or the use of fertilizer may cause the sulfate content in the surficial soils to increase significantly with Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 21 time. This may result in a higher sulfate exposure than that indicated by the test results reported herein. Studies have shown that the use of improved cements in the concrete, and a low water - cement ratio will improve the resistance of the concrete to sulfate exposure. Based on the resistivity test results, the on -site soils appear to be mildly corrosive to ferrous metals. A corrosion consultant should be contacted to provide corrosion control recommendations. 9 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION This investigation was performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical consultants practicing in this or similar localities. No warranty, express or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional opinions included in this report. The samples taken and used for testing and the observations made are believed representative of the project site; however, soil and geologic conditions can vary significantly between field explorations. As in most projects, conditions revealed by excavation may be at variance with preliminary findings. If this occurs, the changed conditions must be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant and additional recommendations made, if warranted. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the design consultants for the project and incorporated into the plans, and the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractors carry out such recommendations in the field. Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 22 Changes in the condition of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether due to natural processes or the work of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards of practice may occur from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the 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 three years. GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED Thomas B. Canady, P.E. 50057 W. Lee Vanderhurst, C.E.G. 1125 Principal Principal C ro n y F. Belfast, P.E. 40333 ` ED Principal �� VAN ERHURST U) No. 1125 ' CERTIFIED ' ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST LP t2 31 43 "'k- � Q , W oF EvSto y�l 9T�'OF C B. F No. 50067 .�� rn Exp. �- 3e -ec clq�F C I V I OF CPi-� Geotechnics Incorporated APPENDIX A REFERENCES American Society for Testing and Materials (2000), Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Section 4, Construction, Volume 04.08 Soil and Rock (I): D 420 - D 4914,West Conshohocken, PA. Anderson, J. G. (1984), Synthesis of Seismicity and Geological Data in California, U.S. Geological Survey Open -File Report 84 -424, 186 pp. Blake, T.F. (2000), EQFAULT and FRISKSP: Computer Programs for Estimation of Peak Horizontal Acceleration from Southern California Historical Earthquakes. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG) (1992), Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist - Priolo Special Studies Zone Act of 1972: California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG) (1998), Maps of Known Active Fault Near - Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada. Idriss, I. M. (1994), Attenuation Coefficients for Rock/Stiff Soil Conditions. International Conference of'Building Officials (1997), 2001 California Building Code. Jennings, C. W. (1975), Fault Map of California: California Division of Mines and Geology, California Geologic Data Map Series. Kennedy, M.P. (1975), Geology of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, California, Point Loma 7%2 Minute Quadrangle, California Division of Mines and Geology, California, Bulletin 200. Mualchin, L. and Jones, A.L. (1992), Peak Accelerations from Maximum Credible Earthquakes in California (Rock and Stiff -Soils Sites): California Division of Mines and Geology, Open -File Report, 92 -1. - National Geographic Holdings, Inc. (2001), TOPO!, Seamless USGS Topographic Maps on CD- ROM: San Francisco, California. Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development ( OSHPD) (1995), Reconciliation Between OSHPD Review and Seismic Hazards Mapping Approaches to Probabilistic Seismic Hazards Assessments, Division of Mines & Geology, Status Report dated January 18. Public Works Standards, Inc. (1999), "GREENBOOK," Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, 2000 Edition. Geotechnics Incorporated APPENDIX A REFERENCES (Continued) United States Department of Agriculture (1953), Stereo Aerial Photographs, AXN -8M -75 and 76, April 11. Wesnousky, S. G. (1986), Earthquakes, Quaternary Faults, and Seismic Hazard in California: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 91, no. B12, p. 12587 - 12631. Youngs, R.R. and Coppersmith, K.J. (1985), Implications of Fault Slip Rates and Earthquake Recurrence Models to Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Estimates, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, vol. 75, no. 4, pp. 939 -964. Geotechnics Incorporated — APPENDIX B SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Our field explorations consisted of drilling seven exploratory borings on January 20, 2003 using a truck- mounted drill rig. The borings were drilled with an 8 -inch diameter, hollow -stem auger to depths up to about 20 feet below the existing ground surface. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on Figure 2. Logs describing the subsurface conditions encountered are presented on the following Figures B -1 through B -7. Relatively undisturbed samples were collected using a California (CAL) sampler. The CAL sampler is a ring -lined tube with an inside diameter of 2% inches and an outside diameter of 3 inches. The ring samples were sealed in plastic bags, placed in rigid plastic containers, labeled, and returned to the laboratory for testing. In addition to obtaining CAL samples, standard penetration testing (SPT) was also performed. The SPT sampler is a split tube with an inside diameter of 1% inches and an outside diameter of 2 inches. The hammer used to drive the CAL and SPT samplers weighed 140 pounds, with a free fall of 30 inches. The number of blows needed to drive the CAL and SPT samplers 12 inches is shown on the logs. Bulk samples were also obtained from auger cuttings at selected intervals. The approximate locations of the bulk and drive samples are indicated on the logs with shading. Boring locations were established in the field by taping distances from landmarks shown on the plans provided. The locations shown should not be considered more accurate than is implied by the method of measurement used. The lines designating the interface between soil units on the boring logs are determined by interpolation and are therefore approximations. The transition between the materials may be abrupt or gradual. Further, soil conditions at locations between the borings may be substantially different from those at the specific locations explored. It should be recognized that the passage of time can result in changes in the soil conditions reported in our logs. Geotechnies Incorporated LOG OF EXPLORATION BORING NO. 1 Logged by: JCS Date Drilled: 1/20/2003 - Method of Drilling: 8 -inch diameter hollow -stem auger Elevation: 170' MSL w w F LL a 0- v e LL w a W v y N DESCRIPTION a u, Y w LAB TESTS W O J Z N O m O m O 2 _ FILL: Silty sand brown, fine to medium grained, Few gravel, moist, medium 1 dense. 2 3 32 CAL 106 8.1 4 5 6 27 sPr 7 8 TI HTS: 9 Silty sandstone, reddish rown, tine to medium grained, 10 50/6" CAL 117 9.7 moist, dense, weakly cemented. ' 11 12 13 14 15 Yellowish brown. 16 33 17 Total depth: 16% feet 18 No groundwater encountered 19 20 21 22 _. 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 [ 30 PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE B -1 LOG OF EXPLORATION BORING NO. 2 Logged by: JCS Date Drilled: 1/20/2003 Method of Drilling: 8 -inch diameter hollow -stem auger Elevation: 168' MSL ILL a a v e LL w g a w U) N U)i I-- DESCRIPTION ua, 3 UJI J z T LAB TESTS m o m o _ Clayey sand brown, tine to medium grained, few gravel, pieces of 1 asphalt concrete, moist, medium dense. Gradation Atterberg Limits 2 Expansion Index 3 21 'stT ° TERRACE DEPOSITS: silty 4 sandstone, brown, fine to medium graine , mois , 5 moderately cemented. 6 57 CAL 122 11.3 7 8 Reddish brown. 9 10 11 50/5' SPT 12 Total depth: 11 feet No groundwater encountered 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 PROJECT NO. 0768- 002 -00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE B -2 LOG OF EXPLORATION BORING NO. 3 Logged by: JCS Date Drilled: 1/20/2003 Method of Drilling: 8 -inch diameter hollow -stem auger Elevation: 166' MSL I.- w w W a a v o LL a a a w w W Y N DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS G O J Z Silty sand brown, fine o me wm grained, moist, dense. 1 2 3 43 spr 4 5 6 21 sPt Medium dense. 7 8 9 10 11 23 sPt Silty sandstone, re is rown, tine to medium grained, 12 moist, weakly to moderately cemented. 13 14 15 Yellowish brown. 16 40 SPT 17 Total depth: 16Yz feet 18 No groundwater encountered 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 PROJECT NO. 0768- 002 -00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE B -3 LOG OF EXPLORATION BORING NO.4 Logged by: JCS Date Drilled: 1120/2003 Method of Drilling: 8 -inch diameter hollow -stem auger Elevation: 159'/2' MSL U. LL W a a a a a w a w Cn ? DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS W O � . Z N D Uj _ FT i sand , reddish rown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium 1 dense. Corrosivity 2 3 16 spTT 4 5 6 32 K CAL' 103 6.0 TERRACE DEPUSM: 7 b ilty sandstone, light brown, fine to medium grained, 8 moist, dense, weakly cemented. 9 10 _ 11 35 spT' 12 Total depth: 11Y-feet 13 No groundwater encountered 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE B -4 LOG OF EXPLORATION BORING NO. 5 Logged by: JCS Date Drilled: 1/20/2003 Method of Drilling: 8 -inch diameter hollow -stem auger Elevation: 163'/i MSL U. LL � a a a W g W = a w N DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS W 0 j J Z N O CIO O m G _ FILL Silty sand brown, fine to medium grained, moist, loose. 1 Maximum Density 2` 3 38 t?aL 121 10.5 4 Wet. 5 6 4 Sn 7 8 9 10 Dark brown, moist. ` 11 4 SPT, 12 13 14 Light brown. 15 16 8 SPT 17 TFIRRAGE DEPOSITS: S ilty sandstone, brown, tine to medium grained, moist, 18 medium dense, weakly cemented. 19 20 29 SIFT 21 Total depth: 20 feet No groundwater encountered 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 PROJECT NO. 0768- 002 -00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE B -5 LOG OF EXPLORATION BORING NO. 6 Logged by: JCS Date Drilled: 1/20/2003 Method of Drilling: 8 -inch diameter hollow -stem auger Elevation: 164' MSL � LL a a v W g a W c o > Y y DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS m o m a 0 4%" As halt Concrete 1 Silly san brown, fine to me ium grained, moist, loose. 2 3 17 CAL 110 12.6 Direct Shear 4 5 - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- ------ •-- ------ - - - - -- --- - - - - -- ------------------------------------- Clayey sand (S�), brown, line to medwm grained, moist, loose. --------- - - - - -- 6 6 SPT` 7 8 Silty TERRACE DEPOSITS: san s one, brow Fine to medium grained, moist, 9 dense, weakly cemented. 10 11 34 SPT 12 Total depth: 11 % feet 13 No groundwater encountered 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 PROJECT NO. 0768- 002 -00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE B -s LOG OF EXPLORATION BORING NO. 7 Logged by: JCS Date Drilled: 1/20/2003 Method of Drilling: 8 -inch diameter hollow -stem auger Elevation: 164' MSL a -� v LL w a W = n. N U) DESCRIPTION W 3> Y y y LAB TESTS W p J Z 5" Asphalt Concrete 1 Silty sand b rown, fine to medium grained, moist, medium dense. R -Value 2 17 4 TER DEPOSITS: s ilty sandstone, reddish rown, tine to coarse grained, 5 moist, dense, weakly cemented. 6 55 GAL 115 8.5 7 Total depth: 6 feet No groundwater encountered 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE B -7 APPENDIX C LABORATORY TESTING Selected samples of soils encountered during the investigation were tested using generally accepted testing standards. The soils selected for testing are believed to be generally - representative of the materials encountered during the investigation at the site; however, variations may occur in the soils at the site, and the materials tested may not be representative of the materials encountered during construction. Laboratory testing was conducted in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in the same locality. No warranty, express or implied, is made as to the correctness or serviceability of the test results or the conclusions derived from these tests. Where a specific laboratory test method has been referenced, such as ASTM or California Test, the reference -- applies only to the specified laboratory test method and not to associated referenced test method(s) or practices, and the test method referenced has been used only as a guidance document for the general perfonnatice of the test and not as a "Test Standard." A brief description of the tests performed follows: Classification Soils were classified visually according to the Unified Soil Classification System as described in ASTM D 2488. Visual classification was supplemented by laboratory testing of selected soil samples and classification in general accordance with the laboratory soil classification tests outlined in ASTM D 2487. The resultant soil classifications are shown on the boring logs in Appendix B. In -Situ Moisture /Density The in -place moisture contents and dry unit weights of selected soil samples were determined using relatively undisturbed samples from the CAL sampler liner rings. The dry unit weights and moisture contents are shown on the boring logs in Appendix B. Particle Size Analysis Particle size analyses were performed on a selected soil sample in general accordance with the laboratory procedures outlined in ASTM D 422. The grain size distribution was used to estimate presumptive soil strength parameters and foundation design criteria. The test results are presented in Figure C -1. Atterberg Limits The liquid limit, plastic limit, and plasticity index of a selected soil sample were estimated in general accordance with the laboratory procedures outlined in ASTM D 4318. The test results are given in Figure C -1. Geotechnics Incorporated APPENDIX C LABORATORY TESTING (Continued) R- Value An R -value test was performed on a sample of the upper soils in general accordance with the laboratory procedures outlined in California Test 301. The test results are given in Figure C -2. Maximum Density /Optimum Moisture The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of a selected soil sample were estimated in general accordance with the laboratory - procedures outlined in ASTM D 1557. The test results are given in Figure C -2. Expansion Index The expansion potential of a selected soil sample was estimated in general accordance with the laboratory procedures outlined in ASTM D 4829. The test results are given in Figure C -2. Sulfate Content To assess the potential for reactivity with below grade concrete, a selected soil sample was evaluated for water - soluble sulfate content. The water soluble sulfate was extracted from the soil under vacuum using a 10:1 (water to dry soil) dilution ratio. The extracted solution was then tested for water - soluble sulfate in general accordance with ASTM D 516. The test results are given in Figure C -3. pH and Resistivity To assess the potential for reactivity with buried metal pipe and below grade ferrous materials, a selected soil sample was tested for pH and resistivity in general accordance with the procedures outlined in California Test 643. The test results are given in Figure C -3. Chloride Content A selected soil sample was evaluated for water - soluble chloride content in general accordance with the Standard Method for Evaluation of Waste Water Test SMEWW4500CL which is conducted in general conformance with EPA Test Method 375.4. The test results are given in Figure C -3. Di rect Shear The shear strength of a selected soil sample was assessed through direct shear testing performed in general accordance with the laboratory procedures outlined in ASTM D 3080. The test results are presented in Figure C -4. Geotechnics Incorporated N O O O O N N ~ O O O N p C� N o ai W +- o � I- i !- H X ao 1 t - - — _ ui co Z 5 t — �_ o I 0 U y Z LL - + F- F- W ». E _ H C7 U) U v CD 0 J ! a E _ - _ 1 I p - +- -- - o g 1 1 p U Z Z Irt - i 0 I C) t LL C) (U N CD W I Q O LO - -- -t- - -F Z J ? N Cf) -r -- LL >, - j -� D 'A _m - - U) Q U (n (O r T - j - - _ _ : V c ZO I I � I ' i I U) t } - - d cn W W - -.L __ i -_ f _ w — (j) j { -1 - -. _ r - � -- Q) I oo + 7 1 - CY) f Z O LL • ,-, Cl) ui m 0 - } W LU L7 J m W N { - IL j o O I Z J � l L : O U OZ LL r _ rt , f f -j__ F, < CD - 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0) QO r- Co U') V M N 0- 146iaM Aq jauid ;uaJad w a R -VALUE TEST RESULTS (California Test 301) SAMPLE R -VALUE B -7 at 0' to 4' 63 MAXIMUM DENSITY /OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT (ASTM D 1557) MAXIMUM OPTIMUM _. SAMPLE DRY DENSITY MOISTURE (Pofl N B -5 at 0' to 4' 131 9%2 EXPANSION INDEX TESTS (ASTM D 4829) SAMPLE EXPANSION EXPANSION INDEX POTENTIAL B -2 at 0' to 4' 0 Very Low CLASSIFICATION OF EXPANSIVE SOIL EXPANSION INDEX POTENTIAL EXPANSION 0 -20 Very Low 21 -50 Low 51 -90 Medium 91 -130 High - Above 130 Very High Reference: Table 18 -1 -13, 2001 California Building Code Project No. 768 - 002 -00 =G e o t e c h n 1 c s Document No. 03 -0121 I n c o rp o r a t e d LABORATORY TEST RESULTS FIGURE C -2 SULFATE, pH, RESISTIVITY, AND CHLORIDE TEST RESULTS WATER- SOLUBLE WATER- SOLUBLE SAMPLE SULFATE CONTENT p H RESISTIVITY CHLORIDE CONTENT (% of Dry Soil Wt.) (Caltrans 643) ((Caltran ohm-cm) (% of Dry Soil Wt.) (ASTM D 516) (SMEWW4500CL C) B -1 at V to 3' 0.00 7.5 6,070 0.005 Water Soluble Sulfate(SO4)Content in % of Dry Soil Wt. General Degree of Reactivity with Concrete over 2.00 Very Severely Reactive 0.2 to 2.00 Severely Reactive 0.10 to 0.20 Moderately Reactive 0.00 to 0.10 Negligible Reference: Table 19 -A -4, 2001 California Building Code Soil Resistivity in ohm -cm General Degree of Corrosivity to Ferrous Metal 0 to 1,000 Very Corrosive 1,000 to 2,000 Corrosive 2,000 to 5,000 Moderately Corrosive 5,000 to 10,000 Mildly Corrosive greater than 10,000 Slightly Corrosive -` Water Soluble Chloride (CI) Content in % of Dry Soil Wt. General Degree of Corrosivity to Metal over 0.15 Severely C orrosive 0.03 to 0.15 Corrosive 0.00 to 0.03 Negligible Project No. 0768 - 002 -00 G e o t e c h n i c s Document No. 03 -0121 I n c o rp o r a t e d CORROSIVITY TEST RESULTS FIGURE C -3 y 3500 --T a 3000 I A 2500 ■ e ■■ ■ee■! .�L. 2000 e e 0 1500 e� 1000 13 E313 000 500 o ■eee ■ ■ ■■ ■e■■ 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 Strain ( %) 4500 4000 © Peak Strength iI 3500 ♦ Ultimate Strength i I i 3000 a ! I a 2500 - - - -- 2000 1500 1000 - 500 I 0 I 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 Normal Stress (pst) Sample: B -6 @ 2'- 3' Peak Ultimate FILL Silty sand (SM), brown �� 36 34 C. 100 sf 0 psf In -Situ As- Tested Strain Rate: 0.005 In. /Min. Yd 109.9 pcf P19.0 09.9 pcf (Sample was consolidated and drained) w, 12.6 % % =G e o t e c h n i c s Project No. 0768 - 002 -00 Incorporated DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Document No. 03 -0121 FIGURE C-4 Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers /Surveyors /General- Engineering Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive • Suite 102 • Carlsbad, CA 92008 • Telephone (760) 753 -1453 • Fax (760) 635 -0839 HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS and HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS for MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA SKATE PARK 200 SAXONY ROAD, ENCINITAS 02 -259 MUPMOD /CDP ENCINITAS, CA APNs 256- 340 -11, -20 -29 & -30 GRADING PLAN 1519 -G 1 f ---� -- F Prepared: January 26, 2004 Revised: February 4, 2004 Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/ Surveyors /General- Engineering -HAZ Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive • Suite 102 • Carlsbad, CA 92008 • Telephone (760) 753 -1453 • Fax (760) 635 -0839 INDEX INDEX Page 2 INTRODUCTION AND REPORT METHODOLOGY Page 3 TIME OF CONCENTRATION CALCAULATIONS & TRIBUTARY BASIN HYDROLOGY COMPUTATIONS Page 5 STORM DRAIN HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS Page 18 SITE HYDROLOGY MAP (1" =120', 17 99x11") Page 21 Page 2 Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/ Surveyors /General- Engineering -HAZ Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive • Suite 102 • Carlsbad, CA 92008 • Telephone (760) 753 -1453 • Fax (760) 635 -0839 INTRODUCTION AND REPORT METHODOLOGY Introduction The purpose of this report is to present the results of the hydrology study and hydraulic design analysis prepared by Conway and Associates, Inc. for the proposed Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA skate park project site located at 200 Saxony Road, Encinitas. This report serves as the basis of design for the various on -site storm drain facilities shown on the project grading plans. The storm drain facilities analyzed in this report are based on a 100 -year return rainfall event. Site Description The subject property is located at 200 Saxony Road in Encinitas, CA (APNs 256- 340 -11, -20, -29 & -30, City of Encinitas 02 -259 MUPMOD /CDP) and fronts on the west side of Saxony Road. The subject property has an irregular wedge shape, encompassing slightly over 21.5 acres. The proposed skate park project, hereinafter "subject site ", encompasses 0.83 acres of the subject property, a relatively minor portion of the area of interest of City of Encinitas 02 -259 MUPMOD /CDP master plan area. The tributary basin area associated with the subject site (approximately 1.4 acres) is the focus of this report. The subject site is presently capped with compacted D.G. and is not used for regular YMCA activities. The site was previously developed as a bike moto -cross (BMX) track (reference City drawing 6369 -G). The earthen ramps from the BMX use have since been removed and the grades restored to the pre -BMX park condition. The proposed site development consists of flattening the existing 2% southwestward slope of the subject site to 1% and installing concrete paving over the entire proposed park area. Two swimming pool -like skate bowls will be constructed in conjunction with the proposed site grading. Reference the 1" =120' -scale hydrology map included in this report for the subject site's location on the YMCA campus and the relative limits of the proposed skate park's tributary basin. General Basin Descriptions and Flow Characteristics The topography in and around the project site generally slopes southwesterly, towards the easterly limits of the Interstate 5 right of way. Presently, the tributary basin slopes from one to two percent towards the I -5 right of way. An existing top of slope /on -site D -75 concrete -lined ditch intercepts storm water runoff from the subject property and channels it to an existing private /on -site storm drain catch basin. The existing on -site catch basin is tied to the existing Caltrans -owned and maintained storm drain system located along the easterly cut embankment within the Interstate 5 right of way. Page 3 Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/ Surveyors /General- Engineering -HAZ Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive • Suite 102 • Carlsbad, CA 92008 • Telephone (760) 753 -1453 • Fax (760) 635 -0839 The tributary basin was analyzed as two sub - basins. Sub -basin A lies north of and outside of the subject site limits and is made up of a portion of a turf baseball field and a strip of D.G. running track. Sub -basin B is the subject site. The subject site's proposed concrete paving grades will generally be above than the existing running track grades, thereby blocking the existing surface sheet flow pattern. A new intercepting trench drain will be installed between the new skate park concrete pavement and the existing concrete mow strip on the edge of the running track. The new trench drain will convey runoff from sub -basin A via new private storm drain lines which will be tied into the on -site D -75 concrete -lined ditch. Runoff from the skate park pavement area (sub -basin B) will be directed to a new catch basin located next to and connect to, the existing on -site catch basin. Hydrology Study Methodology and Results A rational- method format was used to evaluate design runoff quantities for the tributary basins presented herein in accordance with the County of San Diego hydrology manual. The project site was evaluated by grouping site use into one of the three following categories: turf areas (C= 0.35), compacted D.G. surfaces (C =0.65) and concrete -paved areas (C= 0.95). 100 -year and 10 -year return- frequency storm events were used to compute pre- development and post - development design runoff quantities for the project tributary basin and are presented in hydrology computations section of this report. Conclusion It is the professional opinion of Conway and Associates, Inc. that the proposed storm drain systems shown on the project's grading plans will convey the Q100 design flows anticipated by the calculations contained in this report. Page 4 Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers /Surveyors /General- Engineering Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive • Suite 102 • Carlsbad, CA 92008 • Telephone (760) 753 -1453 • Fax (760) 635 -0839 TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND TRIBUTARY BASIN HYDROLOGY COMPUTATIONS Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers /Surveyors /General- Engineering Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive - Suite 102 - Carlbad, CA 92008 - Telephone (760) 753 -1453 - Fax (760) 635 -0839 TIME OF CONCENTRATION & PEAK STORM WATER RUNOFF COMPUTATIONS Ecke Family YMCA Skate Park - 200 Saxony Road, Encinitas 1/23/04 02 -259 MUPMOD /CDP 1519 -G City of Encinitas ON -SITE TIME OF CONCENTRATION COMPUTATIONS: PRE - DEVELOPMENT Computations based on Figure 816.6A, Caltrans Design Manual C L (ft) L (m) S m/m Tc (min) 1 5.0 Initial basin saturation Basin A 2 0.40 145 44.2 0.7% 9.5 Rear yard area (grass ballfield) 14.5 min C L (ft) L (m) S m/m TC (min) 1 5.0 Initial basin saturation I Basin B 2 0.65 195 59.4 0.9% 6.5 Rear yard area I_ (DG pvmt) min 27.0 min - Basin A + Basin B ON -SITE HYDROLOGY DATA 10 YEAR EVENT 100 YEAR EVENT tc (min) 27 min. tc (min) 27 min. P6 (10 YR Return) 1.7 in. P6 (100 YR Return) 2.6 in. I, intensity (in /hr) 1.5 in. /hr. I, intensity (in /hr) 2.3 in. /hr. PRE - DEVELOPMENT CONDITION SUB AREA AREA "C" Q10 Q100 BASIN (SF) (ACRES) FACTOR (CFS) (CFS) Al 23,205 0.53 0.40 0.32 0.49 131 18,100 0.42 0.65 0.41 0.62 B2 17,900 0.41 0.65 0.40 0.62 1.36 1.13 1.73 0.55 -weighted C value Printed 2/4/2004 Page c a 03- 020hydro -1.xls Hydrology Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyors /General - Engineering Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive • Suite 102 • Carlbad, CA 92008 - Telephone (760) 753 -1453 - Fax (760) 635 -0839 TIME OF CONCENTRATION & PEAK STORM WATER RUNOFF COMPUTATIONS Ecke Family YMCA Skate Park - 200 Saxony Road, Encinitas 1/23/04 02 -259 MUPMOD /CDP 1519 -G City of Encinitas ON -SITE TIME OF CONCENTRATION COMPUTATIONS: POST - DEVELOPMENT Computations based on Figure 816.6A, Caltrans Design Manual C L (ft) L (m) S m/m Tc (min) 1 5.0 Initial basin saturation Basin A 2 0.40 145 44.2 0.7% 9.5 Rear yard area I (grass ballfield) 3 2.0 Pipe flow 16.5 min C L (ft) L (m) S m/m Tc (min) 1 5.0 Initial basin saturation 1 Basin B 2 0.95 195 59.4 1.0% 2.1 Rear yard area I (PCC skate park pvmt) 7.1 min 17.2 min - Basin B controls ON -SITE HYDROLOGY DATA 10 YEAR EVENT 100 YEAR EVENT tc (min) 17 min. tc (min) 17 min. P6 (10 YR Return) 1.7 in. P6 (100 YR Return) 2.5 in. I, intensity (in /hr) 2.0 in. /hr. I, intensity (in /hr) 3.0 in. /hr. POST - DEVELOPMENT CONDITION " SUB AREA AREA "C" Q10 Q100 BASIN (SF) (ACRES) FACTOR (CFS) (CFS) Al 23,205 0.53 0.40 0.43 0.64 131 18,100 0.42 0.95 0.80 1.18 B2 17,900 0.41 0.95 0.79 1.17 1.3 5 2.03 2.99 0.73 - weighted C value POST - DEVELOPMENT CONDITION " SUB AREA AREA "C" Q10 Q100 BASIN (SF) (ACRES) FACTOR (CFS) (CFS) A2 1,305 0.03 0.40 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.04 Printed 2/4/2004 Page 03- 020hydro -1 -As Hydrology Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers /Surveyors /General - Engineering Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive * Suite 102 * Carlbad, CA 92008 * Telephone (760) 753 -1453 • Fax (760) 635 -0839 TIME OF CONCENTRATION & PEAK STORM WATER RUNOFF COMPUTATIONS Ecke Family YMCA Skate Park — 200 Saxony Road, Encinitas 1/23/04 02 -259 MUPMOD /CDP 1519_G --------------------------------------------------------- - -- City of Encinitas WATER QUALITY TREATMENT VOLUME COMPUTATIONS Determine maximized detention volume per WEF, p.175 Po = (a * C) * P6 Maximized detention volume a = 1.299 24 -hr regression constant C = 0.95 Adjusted site runoff coefficient P6 = 0.60 in. Mean storm depth (85th percentile 24 -hour rainfall) Po = 0.74 in. Maximized detention volume A = 18,100 sf Sub -Basin B2 area — Catch Basin #2 Vol r = Po * A Required storage volume Vol r= 1,117cf Outflow rate = Vol r/24 hrs 5.8 gpm 0.01 cfs 1.2 cfs rated capacity (filtered flow) OF "Flo -Gard +PLUS' model FGF -36CI Printed 2/4/2004 Page 03- 020hydro -1.xls Hydrology �e la t y_ lilt 1 ♦ ' 1 • . ' • 1 .. 11' Flo-Gard+Plus Filter installed Initial Total Solids Filtered Bypass Secondary Bypass Inlet Grate OD Storage Flow Cap. Bypass Cap. Model No. width in in x in Ca cu ft cfs cfs Cap. ( cfs cfs FGP -24CI 24 NA 0.9 0.8 5.5 0.1 5.6 FGP -30CI 30 NA 1.1 1.0 6.5 0.2 6.7 FGP -36CI 36 NA 1.4 1.2 7.5 0.2 7.7 FGP -42C1 42 NAT 1.6 1.4 8.6 0.2 8.8 FGP48CI 48 NA 1.9 1.5 9.6 0.3 9.9 FGP -5CI 60 NA 2.3 1.8 11.3 0.3 11.6 FGP -6CI 72 NA 2.8 2.2 13.4 0.4 13.8 FGP -7C1 84 NA 3.2 2.5 15.5 0.4 15.9 FGP -8C1 96 NA 3.7 2.9 17.5 0.5 18.0 F2P -10CI 120 NA 4.6 3.5 21.3 0.6 21.9 FGP -12C1 144 NA 5.6 4.2 25.4 0.8 26,2 FGP -14CI 168 NA 6.5 4.9 29.2 0.9 30.1 FGP -16C1 192 NA 7.5 5.6 33.4 1.0 34.4 FGP -18CI 216 NA 8.3 6.2 37.2 1.1 38.3 FGP -21 CI 252 NA 9.7 7.2 43.0 1,3 44.3 FGP -28CI 336 NA 13.0 9.5 56.8 1.8 58.5 NOTES: 1. 9:aagecapadty rdleds 8D%d mad rrum solids coll.dionpriortoirrpe rVilltArrigbypas. .FLU - GARB ' +PLUS 2. Fke. dilorvrateirwludecarafetyfadord2 $. Flo-Gard+Rus Catch Basin Filer insets are mail CATCH BASIN FILTER INS ART in the standard six= (me abo„e )or in custom sizes. tCurb Mount) Can for datailson customsizelnsat. FLAT TgRATW NLU d. Flo•Gard+Rusfikr f inserts be used inconjundian wth a regular malnteiaioe prowam. Rdar to SHEET 1 OF 2 manufacturer's recommended mantenanoe gUdelines. KrlStar Enterprises, I ne., Sente R osa, C A (800) 579 -8819 IJS PATENT PENDING Attach to catch basin wall or Debris Trap wall mount bracket assembly \ (16 Ga. stainless steel) 12" Varies TOP VIEW Initial (filtering) Bypass \ Gasket 0 0 11 11 11 1LJL 11 12" Stainless Steel / Liner Support Basket FRONT VIEW Catch Basin Wall Stainless Steel 0 0 Debris Trap (16 Ga.) Filter Liner (optional) SIDE VIEW � Stainless Steel Support Basket (0.08) FLOGARD +PLUS" CATCH BASIN FILTER INSERT (CURB OPENING STYLE) SHEET 2 OF 2 KdStar Enterprises, Inc., Santa Rosa, CA (800) 579 -8819 Go c 44j d L "a C in O 4 w d r to a L Of Y b t0 N t— O N G tr V1 4� t+ is r tJ 'p Z tiD 0 41 N OJ G O t- C CI W L C C V 3Q C. 't- t0 o II W O. Q! M• •r d Ln r L W 0. r E� V to C 4j d a t0 0.' N -'• 44 Q ' ^ 4t O C O 4j N t O .r to N r 4+ L O O 41 N r �}` (� 4� C Q.d'0 Q — r t C e0 Q E V vv ` O .0 4i 0/ 4j 411 4j 4/ G O •,y -r 4••1 4J t- m •t- .0 tb b 4j t0 �. II C S. C.4J 4� 4+ .0 G tT C d a t0 C S. r 'a:7 C -r r r CI •r CI 7f N +- \ b C u o0i=t1 u =s a C u 4 E >= N r r V- CL 40 N d rr r O �- 41 N i u V L t 41 01 Q t0 W W tC O = 4-0 N N t 4► C C •C>: Q 4j 4-A L LO L r L $- • 4J III • Cr C M Q r C t0 n. 3C O. C 4i QI N C E E r t,p 43 f. L mC r0 L L LL S. r o N C •O .0 N b C r •• Q LV 4J aI•. d to v t0 t0 .0 i .0 N C t0 to C .� _ ++ -.� e1' N ID 47 b W t o O 4 1 v 44 # C i ai1 t0 Cl, VI N 4J t� r N rA O 11 = H 3 a. O 4J G 4► 4. 3 4j N 41 0 M A r N C Vl t0 O A W O •►• O r .0 t a t-» V-- L r— L t N t0 d 6p c N LP Lt. N 1. - 41 44 i� z d O O C 1 - 4. "r N aZ + • O t►- CL CL N C in 4 O N Cn d• tj a 6 -Hour Precipitation (inches) Ca O In 0 In 0 In Q O Q to Cz Z LIZ 10% 0 it 0 1./► !•f� . .. r. • t t •t1 O !. �' Ili _ +� I' i 1 ' I! 1 1' 1 F 1 _ w _��... t � - — �• t.... —._ O to !llil Nib N 3 ' •• !� C . 4 IFF OF .� • - .. .� �. +•• t f 1 f 1 '• _ t I ' 1• t�.'I I 1 d r tti r a .R O "' 'R I 'll t• R Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers /Surveyors/General- Engineering Contractors AB412412 /2 O V 4�4 ' � c cz cm rears S.l.J ,�, • i v LA t � S 1 .O`er ` \\� M �. AVID Q �l �. = ^` I CD c co 6J CN N u cm cm W M r o< _ # i t a O U x o Q I I a aHc w _ D N * +"1 tI1 a L a 0 O +'t• csi M 2 LL -j e tdA O C t� 1 cu.,o us u ri o z O � 4 O O m _ ✓ v a 4. � o z � F t u Le 6 a 13 t' r. t1 i r. �� ern � '/' .7�`•a �`' 4..1 L. cz In go IT tA / o erf n _ m cm CC / so --1 LA- Lai Uj uj CD ca Q N © o N 4 �J oe <� w 7 Lk z w < 4b �j < _ Z Q 2> tr m= aDy0 t�sl Z .. •i 1 I I - - r I I c z r p y Z < 0 0 a <U cc V�. p SV vi c� iCo e n, / O W -1 0 m L.) a LL. c r M • u w L N J¢ L) CM at CN CN UN az UP" 0 cm Lr3 k—i C= 7n > cc cz CIO LA C3 , f CN co DPW CZ az f I n, LL.1 co C.3 C: 6 9— LL.1 u C42 ; k% a C w C) u W 0 C) E 0 LLI a-" oc 92 C4 - 2: U. j tj r l % O LLJ 0 d2c jo gi rD -3 23 LL, C S do LA. Z 0 2 R fd id u 61 0. Revised APPENDIX XI -'C >s cam': �/ � •-r,•• • I ° LM ol LA— LAJ cm L19 i LM Am arm / 1 /�•�� ` e a N o � 1 o •� � s to O M W +-e U a o i-- A U. a v O'v.tt e t x f • F S a q ¢oa �F-F�- M d z+ two Cw� }-!mv u� y O V WCC4 ps It 2C LC Q W N_ e p ad .. x� M a .1 u r L toc- a ■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■ fJ■ rI ■ ■ ■rl ■ ■IJ ■ ■m ■r1■/m■ ■r1■■■■■%m ■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■il■il■■■► /■ ■r /■w,■■'A ■I1■■■ANNA■ /� ■■ ■■■■■■■■ ■E■ E■ f/■ ft ■ ■ ■'� ■ ■� ■!1 ■I ■ ■I / ■ ■II ■ ■ ■ ■ ■� / ■■ ■■ ■N■■■ ■E ■EN■ • ■■ 7■ �� ■ ■ / ■ ■I� ■ ■�1 ■r1 ■IJI ■ ■ ►1 ■ ■ ■ ■ / ■ ■■ ■ ■N■■■■■ ■ ■ ■■ ■! f!•■! • ■ ■r1 ■ ■IJ ■I ■ ■1 ■II ■ ■!I ■ ■ ■ ■ ■�1 ■ ■■ WOMMEMMEMEM ■■ ■N■■■■ ■■ ■■ ■ IC� ■ ■ ■'1 ■ / ■ ■ ►1 ■11 ■I. ■ ■ ■A ■ ■ ■ ■I ■ ■ ■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■ ■ ■II ■ ■ ■II ■ / ■ ■1 ■I / ■ ■r/ ■ ■ ■ ■I� ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■ ■N'JI■rl■ / FI■r1 ■MENA■ ■'A■■■ ■I■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■ . ■ ■ / ■ ■ ■ ■ ■�J�1 ►1 ■I/E ■I� ■ ■ ■■I /N■■ ■E■ ■■■■■■ ■E■■ ■ ■�i ■�; ■ ■ ■�■11 �I ►ANNA ■I ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■■■■■■ ■EN■ ■Ail ■ /1 ■ ■II ■ ■�1 ■rl I , ■ ■ ■ ■I / ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■■■ ■■■■■ ■■■■■ ■■u■r�■■u■�.■■r� ■■ �■ ANNE■■■■ SME ■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■i■i■■A ■r� ■�a.r�■�■ ■■■■■■■■■■ ■ ■ ■f. ■/. ■ ■/� ■ ■'/ ■11 ■► / ■I / ■ ■► / ■■ ■■■■■■■■■ �� ■■■�� ■rl��r��■■'��■■� ■SAN■ i■■ ■■■■■■■ iiiiiiiiiiii�iiii�i�i�ii�iiiii ` iiiiii:ii MEN OEM ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■L / / % /i /,LA ►I ■�/ ■mil ■ ■ ■ ■I ■ ■i ■ ■ /i �� ■N ■ ■ ■ /.i� ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■1 /�l /� ■� /� /� /I ■I.■ ■VIII ■ ■ ■I ■■ % ■ ■ ► % ■,� I� ■ ■� % ■■ ■■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■� / % %� / %I/ ■ % ■I. ■ ■ ■1: / /I ■ ■�■ ■Gib ■ ■■ ,I ■t5 %■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ III/ /I / /�I ►�I� ■ /� ■ ■IIIR % ■ / % ■�� ■ ■ ■/t � _�� ■ ■■ ■ ■ ■ /, % %' /. % %� / % ■ ■ ■I.AI.t/ %Ili ■ ■�� ■■ ■fir ■ ■ ■ ■■ �� ■ ■■ ■■ ■ ■I,' /.�. iii % % ■ ■ ■ ■I. /I ■� ■ /.� 1 ■ /i ■ ■ ■��"% ■ ■ ■ ■ ■�:l ■ ■��■ / /- �%■■■■■ ■ ■� ►. /G■5 ■■� ■ ■�� ■ ■ ■ ■C� ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■C9 ■NEB■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ / "I. %G /_% /� / /�%■ ■mss% ■ ■ ■ ■/�i ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ .1■■ ■■ ■ ■�' /.�i� %� /G�� /�i� ■ ■ ■ ■ ■!!�i� ■■ ■!ins :iii ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■ ■R�' Gib% �irN�wi� %��r� ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers /Surveyors /General- Engineering Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive • Suite 102 • Carlsbad, CA 92008 • Telephone (760) 753 -1453 • Fax (760) 635 -0839 STORM DRAIN HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS 03 -020 YMCA: 6" SD - Basin Al Worksheet for Circular Channel Project Description Project File p: \03 -020 ymca \hydro \ymca- 01.fm2 Worksheet 03 -020 YMCA: 6" SD - Basin Al Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coefficient 0.009 Channel Slope 0.015000 ft/ft Diameter 6.00 in Discharge 0.64 cfs Results Depth 0.29 ft Flow Area 0.12 ft Wetted Perimeter 0.87 ft Top Width 0.49 ft Critical Depth 0.41 ft Percent Full 58.42 Critical Slope 0.006347 ft/ft Velocity 5.37 ft/s Velocity Head 0.45 ft Specific Energy 0.74 ft Froude Number 1.93 Maximum Discharge 1.07 cfs Full Flow Capacity 0.99 cfs Full Flow Slope 0.006236 ft/ft Flow is supercritical. 02/04/04 Conway & Assoc. Inc. FlowMaster v5.07 03:21:33 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 03 -020 YMCA: 8" SD - Basin B1 Worksheet for Circular Channel Project Description Project File p: \03 -020 ymca \hydro \ymca- 01.fm2 Worksheet 03 -020 YMCA: 8" SD - Basin B1 Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coefficient 0.009 Channel Slope 0.010000 ft/ft Diameter 8.00 in Discharge 1.20 cfs Results Depth 0.41 ft Flow Area 0.22 ft Wetted Perimeter 1.19 ft Top Width 0.65 ft Critical Depth 0.52 ft Percent Full 60.92 Critical Slope 0.005232 ft/ft Velocity 5.39 ft/s Velocity Head 0.45 ft Specific Energy 0.86 ft Froude Number 1.62 Maximum Discharge 1.88 cfs Full Flow Capacity 1.75 cfs Full Flow Slope 0.004727 ft/ft Flow is supercritical. 02104/04 Conway & Assoc. Inc. FlowMaster v5.07 04:01:32 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers /Surveyors /General- Engineering Contractors AB41241 2525 Pio Pico Drive • Suite 102 • Carlsbad, CA 92008 • Telephone (760) 753 -1453 • Fax (760) 635 -0839 HYDROLOGY MAP (1" =120', 17 "x11 ") I I � 'i , I I 'no W W o , I , I I � � � N 1,965.200 + + + + + 1+ I w l. � - , �' ... .. ... � " - �. �' , . , .! I I V �' . " 'k , " . , '� " I - . . , I �' ' I , "I 41, 1� '. I � ' '�-'. , , \ �' __' " , I I � -, - .� � � .'� 4I.- 6 - ... - - � - " '_ . i - � 11..� ' , - ", 4, , _- ' -- 't '. � � -, .� � , .. � �' 5 �_ '. M_ " ' I ' - -'� "Cv, � 1 \' '' " A I "', � __ � 1 � 'r � 1, q � � �' ., , , , N "I., ,' ; !j \\_'� - -; "o. J. 1, ��. �":�� .." , "�: 1 "I'v I -.1. _.'_' I - - ." _. - - , . I :_ I ' I . 1 � " '-�' �: � i� " '. I-, - �. . - '�' � . �':' "r - .' L.. ! , I , I t - . , , . � -_ - I "\,'-�"A ...... I!- I I , " , ! , . . , W_ , . ---, .' � �', _'Z' , , - --,-.--. I , , - 4 .�' � �-'\ �' '. t � . - V�' �' - '.- �.4t';�� !_. I )1-1 -I L . . '�i , % , - " '�' �. '.- , .:. _..' - ii , �' 1 4, I - .,.: ! -__',�".' ..�; r . I , 1 ,_ ., _ "_ - - . , .�' , , �� , � � -�__L_ � � � ' ' "I . , _* �' :;'�� - � _ _ _ � X , - - _ , _ � ' -: ! +" � r _� • — '�=:�: . — . — —. . " � \ 1 1 . I "$ Lf�; , -___r�_-_'�� — - - - _�� . _� i - _ N 1 . 9 6 5.000 . I . k � � � : .1�11 � � — _ r __�".' . .'�_' � __ , I � + , \ , - -'r ' ' � _ _ , . ____ _ — _ - � ' 77 1, , . I . � - Z�� — , , , - . . I r r I � I — _ , r __ � I .r.., .. , _ - " m ' - , , � � " � I ;, "Ir . j ." I r . ,,r""- 1. - - - � . I ... �_ I � '_ � ' , - . � 7 ; - . - - - - - ' _- .: - - '�. 0 � -.1 - � . � , , � I I � , �, � ' - :. 'r' ,' - I j - , , � . - � , , � r . r� , _ 1 � , ��"�_" , ;�_ - 11 - � ' -, 11 . � " � , . - ': --- _.. _�' r : I * 0 ). 'R ). 2 ! R 8 A � 11 8 2 " , .�' _ 1. r , , ,1 , � " _ . ,I p '.� " I .1 � � ��` , - - . "" . r " ' . r .� � ; .r & .r., ... - � ' ' ' r' , r- -'* _. . ,. I ' I L . I I r . . . , I �r .�' ' . - , � ` " . i I . . � � - : �r I -1. � - - __ - - _' . - - � � r .1 11 'I � � .7 � 1 ��" ' R r i I '. ' A,. 1 % .1 ' ,- '� . r - - .... .... � � -'r I - - � - - ' 7 ' il , '.' � 1 I r . QaL .;�t I �' ,. , . , - ; . - n . ! � _ _. ' _ _rrr' , , . :� .�g I � i ' ' 1. __ QQ --- * .. "_ , - -A 11 " ' r V. � '. ' --, - ' . I : i ' " __ _r , - m __ r- - I ' , � ; ; 1 , _r . _' I I " . I . I ' . , r'm _ . ' 14 , I , '_ ��__ '4� -1 C) ). . I k. � I I 1 ! I ,r I . , \'_ 3 , - , �! � � ,,,,, " , I ': . m -, � )�- � 5� z ;t . ; r r i r ..' 0 3 , , � - , I ' 1 , _ " � z r r ' ;' - v � � , 1 0 - Z � r 'S �' � . I � . I � , � � � U t � ' 11 I I � -, � __ "" , ,I 1� ' , , Ii�. , I . �' t , 1 . , \1 . , 0...-_.. mr '' - - - � - ,., , . ; (o § I " I . I . , . I � I _ In , to , : M 0 A I I , I , tz (A 5� '_ j r �; , . �', :0 r - V , . . I 1. I 74 , j '�\ i � � 2 - A� "' �' � , � I , 'm �) � z r I .- \ - 9 [9 9 1 � li . i - I % �' , -1 � � i 1.11 , � it 119 - � I ij � R I � 1 . � I I k , '. I � � � ' , v ";. ? � rm '7k�' A 5i ? y j—A 6 1 1 1 A I (n --( I . . , . � % . . -)..,-- 41 , � � R '' 1 ' � 1 , . ' Nq 1 _' � - ?! 1 1 . . \', , 11 a r 1� 1� _' _?, I ! 14 . , '� . "� ,r'� ,r r "M � 'o I i __ ... tl� - 9 jq :; N N Q -�. g .,. ?! b " � I � .�! 6 Z - � ! 1 M %� � " ) � tA so � . . � I z g�- - - ' r �" � r �� ' . " 'D ' _j 0 � ? - � ,O M `I X ' MI 0 )b. t ? z 54 in �8 t . ' " �� _'r 0 �- : . . . . j I ` , I \ ! % 1 � - . En SO „-"� ). 2 J. 3t N A , , , �; � 9 � S� k m 8 ; � ' - 1 , ) o N�.” . '4 �_"I , + �G � -� N 11964.600 � � " -�' , . _ - I � i .' 1 4 0 --- �- � 2 �' , , 1I � v- , I , . - 1 % � � : ! 11 __F Z� j . . I N . I CA — 1:_ . --0 � � 3� 1 , � + 9 A -- � M_ 0 01 �� , � Z j. , \_. i''`' 1 , - Ir � .� 0 . 1 ,, I - . 'i � i . I r I � " , , .' , M A � ' " " L ' , , � , - .. 'W J? (n 2: rvl FR . , \ ' I . ' W - " " I - t' :' " p - \' , 1 x '� § 5 , '� ., � \ 1 1 11 , . _ . - � I I . , � � Ii ' .t'.3 . , I * . r I � . I '� , _ - I I . . ', . . . - . �. �1 , ,r ' '\ ' r , . I , ' - - - - - ' '-r . - --- . _ -, ___ ". d , r ' . � � . � � � '!� , , ;' " . \ � , � , � ' . - . ' 11 r r . I . . _' � 1: - � . . - " � 111_1 � , ..' ,_, _ � - - r 1 _` f 1 1 e . r ."_';�� I I ' ` � , " � L "I � �� I " �� > �, , , , � ; � , , i% ' . r ' ' . " - , _ _ . ' I _ _ ' , 4.. , " , t % � I I �_ . - " , - — . � .. ��' � " I J� � 11 - , Q - . I � r . � " \ , , I -, I I I / I --. � I � , . " ' , - . � i; � g . _ � I r � I I � ' . � � . , r �� - , ,.- - I . - , i — -� - Z 0 �o � , , . � ' ' � 1 .� I I � ' r' "" " . � , , I 'I'll �' �'� - i i - X � ;a Z r ' . � ' , � ,% , r , , I 2 " , 0 ( , . ' , � ',", r I , / �_ - - -"- � K 1 ' r , , , p ' r , , , I r � - I' T , , , 1 � , , i ' :_:�_- '�� , � I � , , "* ."\ � � , i 1, 1 , ' � . ' . " / . R A " �" , �''' (" \ .r � , , � ' . - - . . - . _9� _ � � , , . 7�' �' � '� r, , ' � � ; , � "r � " . ' � - ;f „ , , - , � . ' i . 4 . , I .1 � 4 , '. '. _ � -� . ; n I I �i , ; _ , r � . � ; � ' L k '. �:' , �r I I . I r� . ' - 4 T 11 N I I ! - - - - - - � - , , 1 � - . � �. i).1 I r 'I , � 3� ---”, '" / /' N I a J 4p , �' I � " to _ 1:3 A , R;L 0 JA _ 4 \N8 � � "..... 9 . N , 11 M " , I , I �' � � -4 " � k � r � - �R I ,. ' � ' �' r ' I ! I " " I '� I z . ; 1 I __ . . . I � . I , .. . . � 4' i V � 1-1 - r - -� r. " / -� � , - - - to, ," �. 1: 'i . L, r !.'I ". ,. � ____` I .. __ A Q t " ;... r'.,�7 �j , '� -, �, 75 , r _ - �11�. : - 1 I - - ". - -, , . - "..% �.-: t �� _�! � 1 ! A , � ,I I .� / -* " .. A_ 9 - ','� "'r. " I. Ir � -. - '' ." ( 5 � -- , , . v r � - , , - 0 , " � , - ' , .,r ' !� . . I I " - - '__ ` -- ; ... .... - _ : I' Z _',, i. - � "' ' � r.". ; j � , . , ; _' � � ,, �' , , : . - . � 10 - - - - � , . 4 : ' r ' 1 , - I Z, I I � , . I " Z' !� , �� t .r _' _ ' , I , , �r ,1 " . '. , ��'_f` ' Y " - " I ' I , � , ; , I ,� . ,- I �; , .; , , ; ;: 1 - � r 1 1 _ " - �K ` o �; Ir ' ;' 1 : .' . , I " � 1 � 1 �: ' j! ' � ; � _ , ., ., , � �-t." ' v �' , i � �; , Z. _ f� 1 "', " - % 11 � ! )p ,.r I . R l 1 � ,9 - T ) - - - - - d, I , /- *� � I - w ,_._ - � I � �. _ ' \ � - �- - . - 1 - "r � � I , I I : I I � L�' " " i - 0 , 1 ' ' . , I.. ", ? 1 , .'. r- , I , , 11 � � "n- 14 -yi �_ , , � � . , . ''� . . . . ;__ .1 i I I I. � , . __ - . ... ��--;,'_, ,_" �%__ r�;. I "r . ' :-, � �; . : ? to :!�'� ' �_� � � / �_ 9 in z ;t � F z R -�' (4 53 (' , j � 1; I �.. , , r . � I '_t_ r 1�r . 1 �_�� ' i. i - . ... - I :� � . - I 'r. � -- , - _� or:: %, I � .. i �' �.% - v � _1 , . .__� J� " �'' I . � �� r , '� ', � - r , ." I , '� � r , � ' ' I �) I '�o _< . t N vi ' I \ , � ". , , , ' 11 . i" ' �' I . �'.� . %�:Ii .- _,r..-, r� '... �!. ' I .. ,4 , .'� ... \ . . �� , . -71 - - m 11 _@ �- \ . � � " 1 , \ - " � ;' I � 0 In '! L \ - " 7 __'_ ... �' . � r''r '�� % , 4 ' -- -I Irl 'r- I I , � - . I r ) � " ", , � .' i _ _ r � . 1 ' I 1 i I � a � r " 1 1 , , . r - ?�-'f , ""�= - ff;" -- " ,- , , , , 1 � IV* --:: . ; 2 , 1 '- I L I ' 1 'L I , ., " ' � . - . , j, , 1 . ..... .."-,._. 'r � - - -.1- �� - _. - �� .1. 1 ; F -- "'- r "'; , ,',,_ _' '__':J-�_..1'._- . .' . " % 1 � I �� .' _�"i�"" _�� 111. - -1 _'_� -.- - - - V % ' - I, 5 ' r ,.. ' .. -� , o � i��''- � � - 1 - , -, I l� ! -- A � + i� � ;u , 10 . 0 ,.. , ; � ;; �, . � , i j � � , _ � � r _ I - ___ _ - ' --- _ I " I .1 . . . r �'.j� q �� I i� _ " . :_ " � _ r', 1 1, % i, i.� 1� � , I \ . � \ � , � �': _ _� 1 . %� \,.� . I , � � .� , \� �r Ij !'. . � r '. I �; '_ � s 4R� � " Im - t '� i7 �� n �� l r�' " , , I , I . � " , m 8 8 � '� 1 "'' ' L I , � L , _': %. - - �' - �. - - � r 1�� ___.�_� - 17. -1 _., _ -�- � T7_ .-I , r. . ..' . ,. ;: 1 1 ! � i il � 2 (A ' r - `4 , � _ " - � ) N M -4 In 1 " I � - ' .' \ ' ' 4 ! � ';� , r � I , 11 \ a A -.1 1 F " - I I � 4 j ,I I . � ' � � � q, il . - . i J __ ' I ." , � ; , I -V 2 _ I , , �; 'v ' - I ; . . . I"� . . . ��_ 6 - - I 'I � \ 2 � , . g -� Un \ ,. f \ j � V. " j� ,- i . ." I j - 4_ " � v ; � \. 1 .,, , � . t ; i I , . III 14 , ! �" ' I ' ,, : . f. 5 l - --- , + A � ? ' � ( la .� E � u3 N 1,964.2. IS , I i ,� 11 ol , , , I �� . + �� + -! � ; I � , ; , . I � "� ' . 4 -4 9 4 `� , "i, ` ,4 I �t n �' " - \ , I m I I � i �2 t ; - I ;" . , j I !4 1 , I ', i � � "" � , I �_ , � : '�" ; i I S2 . , I �- j � " , , r " I I � '� � " � � S , 1 Q) � ; � j 1 ; 1 , I . ' x ' �d U) r , I ,_ ,". �M' 1 I � I . - ' I ` , _ . .:I ", � � . ' �� A ", � � � r . " � ., YA ' , , . " rl_.� . � i . > - , '� " �� , 1, �. - - - _( ,' . ' , „, ';' � 13 ,� ' ” � I � _ 'L I �' ; . � I . � I .14 F � nf� I r I ! W-7 ,, r I � 1 ' - "" � ��. ig��=� r, ; I I 1. " � , I � , 1 , : � i z � ' . ,r I - �' . � � 11 I '. . I ' �, ; ! ------. J ; ' � 4 - ..' . . � ,r' ' .� t I 11 I _.'� 7 I .. v I � I E� - � � ; ' .i I 11 I X. t , .' � I I- 1, ", r m * .. � " J21 , I 41 ' - � I " r r " � '� , , 1� I . ' p , , I \ . \ 11 -1 I ii " t . i '(o' I 1 �';' -' I .. ;z I L - , � ;: -- L I 1 '!i :; � �' � I � , I . , .i � ".1"'. 1 , '� 0 � � I F I f - I1 ' I I \ , . " I "I � , , . , I r I ' .I I I , , � ' � ,I \ I , � , , _ � , -, '. '� � � , , . �r , -- . . " �� . �;j " � I 1 A I I . � . .... . -, .� 1 . . � - ., , - !" I ' _ I r � �� k - �' ! ' � ! � I �v i I 4 r ; - � . ' I I � .! i . , � ��'. -. ----I , ' ' ,, ' , ' r ,,' , - i ; I 1 � " ! � , I . , \ ., ". , � , , _= � I , . , 1 � ."-r, ,. ' ' . I , � , . ,- , , I " "'� i�� ,- , � . 4 ;�� . " � ' I � ,: . ' � ,,: I . , � , i 1 . � - - _ � A , -� . � � I _. - � !' � , 11 0 -� `,' � A \ , - , , '� � , " i . 'I --- - . . ; - __- - - - , I- � < , i - _�'� � � t \ 'I, �" � 4 , I �_,_.. I I j � I , '' I I , '� . " N. � , " � , . r , - . , I ! i , I ." 4r � I i \ 1� I t t ? .' . 1.983.600 1, " V., \ . ; , I . ' �t :1 : ,' I ; �' + '\\I i + � i " ' i 4 I 11- i I � , � , �� .1. , , .1 ,, � i I I , I i ;: I !I � I , � % \ '. i z ' � , , , I , � � " �� ", r , �' I � Z 0 - ;u I ',, r \ , I_- - 1'1 � � � , I— /_ - I - -� - -- -r-.-. lt a p . r '-. l Z 1 � ."- - - .' t , -�. , �' �j *-- � � In > 8 > ' ', " _.;; _ _ t _q "' "., �. . _ "_:� -. r . . _ �_. _ .. " .� ' �- . _ . - - -1 --"r � - . I L �' - ...... ___ __'._1. _____ 1- . -1 :Z�'� -, �' , � � 1. - , - _' - I'-' - '- -- r , ' .4 -< � \'\ -.11 , : � 1 1 %� - ' � '�� P, � ' F > 4 -�----_._--., � I r 2 � ' � 4 1 , 11 - I - m :� � .. , , _ \ t ! I I 11 '� , 11 , i � , q , , I , I V , r. �i t 0 � �\ 6� [ i � t' i �r N 1,963.6W I , , ' � ) , � I �,' , ri- � '_ � I I 2 + + 0 I I I . I ! : + 1) > cl - I t . D V) 1 k* m 0 11 z (n � ��' - - - 2 1 1 0 0 ; I" - 2 i p rn > I � , 'I I z — - m 22 ' N . - I 1 1. z ! , L " z to S I 0 § § § 7 It I I 7 . . 9 1z 0 � IT! i I . . - I � � �: w . z - c - c > I C1 11 a M X i - D 5 � . � � j ' ;� C r I � j� m 9 I. - - r r l a >. 43 1 d 0 - NJ K) � ' (: 0 L. � T � � P-1. " ,,, i i � 1 I ' m � t- oo R � � (b N � 2 x � I .� � . w � I ; � 6 � � � 1 1 .2 I � _q I � I z . 1 . � G) p (b I � STORM DRAIN REPORT FOR MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA March 18, 2004 I k s =e CI Y + TA Prepared By: PARTNERS Planning and Engineering - 15938 Bernardo Center Drive San Diego, CA 92127 (858) 376 -3444 DWG No. 1457 -G r D /I Andrew J. Kann., E., RCE 50940 Registration Expires 9 -30 -2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT DESCRIPTION METHODOLOGY page 1 -- EXISTING CONDITIONS page 1 DEVELOPED CONDITIONS page 1 EXISTING RUNOFF ANALYSIS page 1 DEVELOPED RUNOFF ANALYSIS page 1 VEGETATED STRIP DESIGN AND ANALYSIS page 3 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS page 3 -- page 3 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1: VICINITY MAP page 2 FIGURE 2A: EXISTING HYDROLOGY MAP attached FIGURE 2B: PROPOSED HYDROLOGY MAP attached LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 1: Runoff Coefficients Appendix 2: Urban areas Overland Time of Flow Curves Appendix 3: Intensity — Duration Design Chart Appendix 4: King's Handbook of Hydraulics Table 7 -11 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This storm drain report has been prepared as part of the permit submittal requirements for the proposed expansion of the Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA located at 200 Saxony Road. The site of the proposed renovation area currently consists of existing pool facilities, tennis courts and pared areas within a 2.8 acre limit of disturbance. The site is located east of Interstate 5 and north of Encinitas Boulevard in Encinitas, California. See Figure No. 1 for location. See Figures 2A and 2B Existing and Proposed Hydrology Map attached at the end of this report for the drainage basin limits. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) will be prepared as separate documents and included with the plan submittal to address both pre -and post - construction BMPs. METHODOLOGY: This drainage report has been prepared in accordance with current City of Encinitas regulations and procedures. The Rational Method was used to compute the anticipated runoff for the 100 -year storm. The following references have been used in preparation of this report: (1) City of San Diego Drainage Design Manual April, 1984.. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The project renovation area currently consists of existing pool facilities, tennis courts and pared areas within a 2.8 acre limit of disturbance. Storm water runoff from the site drains east to west towards an existing brow ditch located adjacent to the westerly property line within Caltrans right -of -way and ultimately to the Batiquitos Lagoon. DEVELOPED CONDITIONS: The Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA is proposing to renovate the existing site by constructing new pool facilities, playground area and parking lot with associated - landscaping. The improvements include the construction of a vegetated strip at the southwest corner of the parking lot for water quality purposes. EXISTING RUNOFF ANALYSIS: The entire surface runoff sheet flows east to west to an existing brow ditch located - adjacent to the westerly property line within Caltrans Right -of -way. A runoff coefficient of 0.95 would be appropriate for the existing basin. 1 LEUCADIA BL VD � z n � C> Protect site. 1 5 SEA CRES T o z WA Y ENCINI TAS ° S9 < BL VD D Z VICINITY MAP NO SCALE THOMAS BROS. PG. 1147 DEVELOPED RUNOFF ANALYSIS: The runoff coefficients for the site were based on soil group D and the ultimate improvements for the proposed site. A coefficient of 0.45 was used for all landscaped areas. A coefficient of 0.95 was used for all paved areas. VEGETATED STRIP DESIGN AND ANALYSIS: The vegetated strip within this project was sized using King's Handbook (Ref. 3) Table 7 -11. For rectangular channels: K'= Qn /[b ^(8/3)s ^(1/2)) where K' = Discharge Factor Q = Runoff Discharge (cfs) n = Manning's Coefficient b = Channel Bottom Width (ft) s = Channel Slope (ft/ft) Natural, vegetated lined channels are capable of withstanding erosion for velocities up to 5 fps. _._ The vegetated strip was designed with the minimum length required to meet the optimum residence time for the 85 percentile storm and at the same time provide the necessary capacity to convey the 100 -year storm. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The existing basin generates 9.0 cfs based upon a time of concentration 7.0 minutes during the 100 -year storm. The renovated basin generates 9.6 cfs based upon a time of concentration of 8.5 minutes during the 100 -year storm. The incremental increase in -- runoff is due to the additional surface runoff basin area of 0.2 acre draining to the entrance of the existing brow ditch located adjacent to the westerly property line. Due to the fact that all of the storm water runoff from the YMCA drains to the existing brow -- ditch at one location or another, the incremental increase in surface area within the renovated site is not considered to be a diversion of flow. See the attached calculations for 100 -year, 10 -year, 2 -year and 85` percentile storm events. t' yo r .w T z •,, 2► /y _ - -- - q c .5 -- - - - - -- - -- --- 'r T los - 4a E w a er ©, s o o o i Z• yd i1. / f1t Z h - - -- - _ - C l3u S 1 ''_ s _ Al QAI _ i 67 , _ /2'• ij _� ii Mc�gola,��a y,Z - y /G /o cgs r 3'a gf3 ,,L 0, ok 3 C � � ��3 (D.Op S J lz _ Ti9'sG9- _ U 411 Ors rhava *70 �Q,S clos) FRO IAS L, 7-// � �2 �' = 0,0035, ��j, d, ��► L = 0 1A 'T 30ep � All � n �uk�j� yiHC - Y/41/0 WAfi /Pte— �,�A PL O /A/4 L G,SLA —fvN� L Z ( T2 �= ol k � }Co.o3J h _ l NrISS TA��G - - • / o' 4 IA t e FP7 — / Gff ,4 A A f Sl�o u L /J NDT SCO G /m-, wr/--- iren 'f5- %d s'Ta.�<►'t 7 OZ -4. - 7 - //. ro/z i'' 0 0,0 3 5 , 1>1 OP T 7 - 4 L T /•f -r r , 4- TE Tn ip T APPENDIX TABLE 2 RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS (RATIONAL METHOD) DEVELOPED AREAS (URBAN) Land Use Coefficient C so i 1 Type 1 Residential: D Single Family .55 Multi -Units .70 Mobile Homes .65 Rural (lots greater than 112 acre) .45 Commercial (2) 80 % mpervious _ I .85 Industrial (2) 90% Impervious - - .95 NOTES: ( Type D soil to be used for all areas. ( 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 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. Actual imperviousness = 50% Tabulated imperviousness = 80 Revised C = 50 x 0.85 = 80 0.53 82 h 1 URBAN TIME O A FL C R V ES -++ r r�t 700 : t- } T 1.e 1 1.1 - t * 600 Use Formulo For + 0istonces in E xcess ; ' t t a � ` �`- � 24 +tr I Of 800 Feet. ' }j • _ eo ;' ,.i _.. y�a�F�.� -.11 a-: :.l l�,f y--•�r � - r 1 �1� h f • -T: a t ^ ' � «: �t� +-}+ t• t t .i+ } Y r 1 t i t . _ . r t . _ - : J . 1..: i" 1h '� .. T i .. ,11 0 f - r•' . _i. ` _ 70 a 1 l t� 1 � � �� l-, � ice--+ tt �r�� • � _ . i � ..•.} t i l;-� ',y � � . y • I �..�_ W - }� ♦4 -�.�s. �-'�' --7 O tt h t I . i ..� _- f i .r. , - a r r _. _ J--. i • "l i i a"�' -{ _i111 -!-�^; z 60 _�._. Z �" 1� *r ' ; - �" � t i iLYt - � ?y .' 4 � .-. ; T+ � -T7 3w yJ Lt _~�'. "ti •- rt•, -Ly_ - Y l +•—y' i __.O —ice r — _'�_ so 1 _ �0 Ltt . • _ _ - .�T .- 100 I . T'1�'T_ _ _ _ 1 � 1 _ �T jJL♦ � IJ� �'.'_ Co _ - - '{. +Tr - ! T y r - f �"'�_ + _ ♦• i 1 __ .,_.. :�� r.��: -lam" • 1�' - --i 0 Surface Fiw. Tiw,e C++rvu EXAM ?LE- W Gi V EN '. L_E, ",i G-rH of FJ_ow FT t 40o . `� �.� c C0 EFF 1 CiENT OF RvNor-F G = .70 �..�I�D ; OVF- �ZLA�D fiLC>WTtt� _ _ � 15 MrN viES 86 �� li;l .II: 1 cc qr O f =1 l -- - -�. - - ws I r __ ` CY Z in cc uj W J. I L I ai N 0 1'1 O 1+ 1O IA N — O 0 0 O O O O O unO 83d S3H:)N1 (00310 NVS) k.LIS N3.LN I cr kAI N FALL - INTENSITY - DURATION- FREQUEN( C Y p 4 0 n N O O • — = = = ti = CURVES • for c $ c ° o y COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO J e - O +d ( I f Q a P. u O O O O O W ° n o ~ o A 0 0 w 0 >E _ APPENDIX, F- . A 83 C".) ( b P tl nNWMao onootl 00nm�c NtlaOnW i+ j ON�nO �O — N MM aMN•�00 W Nan.+ tD .+n �MN O••+Nw n.+�DmO OOnna00 m maOmOn W 0000.+ NMM V��OOnaO O.+N V� �O�OOON .y% ODON eM t�WNb nOM�00 �DO Vin O 00000 00000 00000 0�+ NN NNNMM MP'O CqW W �bc01b c0 tl �onnn Omoomo A nNWNtl bOOtlm WnbPW bnbWO ON WnO WWWWb NWnbW vb2g NbW P bN Cp 00n tl 000 CV tl0.0 .. 00 tlWMMW 0000. -� NNM WWbOn OOPO. -+N ��OOODW MV%"J 00 ONW.W WnOMO W<OW -n q a CU. v m I 00000 00000 00000 00.-. •+.-+ NNNNN MMMmCO �W WWb bbtltltl W .O C d WNWtln ....... . . ONWnO WOOMOOW WomN 00 .--� N bt Oomw NOOW be On bWmmm oNtl cmot- - I 00 ;.N % .- 00 , --% NNM WWb MO2 2�tln 0•+mbtl wo"WM OOONbn ONb000 00000 00000 00000 0 .- +,--%. - 0 . . N NNNN NMmMM MWW WW n %O!O IOR O -173 t O O�.r cD 00 M �." I tlNMM � m_ClW Oct-"" t,coPm _ ONW tN.O ZO2mwM Oom- M ntltlbtl nWOMCO WCCnNOp W.- -�aOGW MN mW N to 00 + .bW N 0000.+ NNm WWbtltl na0P0••. N�Mtln 000•-%MW tlOOP..M bn W'.m bnONW V 3 00000 00000 00000 000.-+.-+ . -+NNNN NNNMM MmMWW WW�O bb W O G E ' I cON m 0 0 OOObbW no CnN 0m0•+tl ONWnO M 00b.+00tl WN.+OP 00•-.Nm b Woo Ntl. --inM WHOm.•+W wt-t t- o k -: O t.., O I 0000 NNM MWObc n00W00 �M�btD na00. -+N W%On000 M�OnaO ON W0000 O O 00000 00000 00000 00 0• - •-% .-+NNN NNN NM MMmMm W W W W W m�NPO tlbWn00 M..MWn ObWtl•+ C td ONWc O _m - t- Pb" OnbMN •rO0o0 O=. 000 MtlP M_= nmPbN • .p ti 0000. -+ NNM MW o nt-MM2 =!2:2 b Ct_00�O MW o wm= bI 0MON 00000 000 0 0 00000 0000 '+ N NNNNN NNMMNJ CO O]0]WW N C cD ..N OpW wMCON• -c WOON00 Ooo0 mm I-a •c-• a a. y `A . I ONWtlP Mn•+tl•+ tlN00W0 nWNPn tlb WMN "o"Nm WbnaO.-. Mb00 ••.b O =N Iz L=% O U 00000 NNm MWWbtl tlnOO OOW O -+�m� �W O•-+N MCO o7n000 ••� NWbn00 M 00000 00000 00000 00000 •.-+ .-% • +.+ NNNNN NNNMM O�MMmm V O m Nnt N .:. oo WOOWWb Otl tln.. _ C c I ONWc m Mtn. -•uJ bO�ONtA b.r aO YJM WnbM N. --i00W WPWWO NMWCD l�QQ�� WcD O 00000 NNm MWWbb o x -ma , 00•.N� w�nnn OOW O•-.m Wbo-oo WONmW y .t7 O 00000 00000 00000 00000 NNN NNNNN„ NMMMCJ I ncD O..WW MmtlNW WOWWtl cOb[�• -c cD ONWtlW 22 WPWOb OOWOn W OOCm WnbM NOWOO tlbWWM MmMMm p1 00000 NNN MMWbb tic -mw POO..N MMW bo 1,wmm0 NmWb tln00W0 n A I OO000 00000 00000 00000 O N NNNNN NNNMM t`N O ".--� WtlbZo oo NaDb MN O+M=n ONWc g " w "t-- nN ODMW b.. nMWtlN WcONWtl mom, •+ tlm OO cO W L 00000 00000 00000 00000 000^+•. ti NMMW 222D mo ;;_ OO �NNN NNNNN C � I NMWCO cO n00W0 .•+Nm�cO cOn00W0 Nmvc of -tom0 g"mv a ot-woo Nmvo ci NNNNN (,',p 00000 0000.! N N NMM MMM N) "i ci d�W'd!W V! 1 tltlbbW WWMc•O w n0 NNN...+ •+000P p OOnnncO cOc ,4r Mm bWWWW mM _l n 1 I t"�MMMM MMMMM mWmm MMMmM mmMmN NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN tl w m O---- m --nn ---bb bW WWM MMMNN ...+ .+O OOWPW O%Op OOm00 nnnmtl I d!c` MmMMm ci f•]MmM mmmmM mc?v?mM MMMMm MMMNN NNNNN ci c! n m mm MMM mmMmM Mmmmm Mm Mm Pj Mmmmm mf mMm c• o ci Mmmmm m0 mm N m U WW000000 nnncDtl tlbbbW WWMm W W W 00 00 00 00 00 OOM00a000 00000000 MNNN. -. ••+00 OOWPW 00 a00D aon M ao mm mm ao ao O OO OO ao ao oo oo oo oo oo oo ntn to nnnnn N NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN NNNNCi Ct OVOVNOV OVNNOVN NNNNN N 00 OOWPP00 0000nnn tltlbbb bWWW. MM .NN N•+.+... --c OOOPW PPOO O0 a0 W .M W Wc•O M mm MMMm CM ci ci MM Mmmmm Mmmmm mmMmM mmMNN NNNNN n aj Q 3 - N NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN CV NNNN NNNNN .. a a � � 'O Q C 1 I OOOWW W000000n nncO CpO cO U'�v)WW y�mm MN NNN•-c .--i .-. 000 WWWP00 000000nn W W W Wo000 — oo - -- — 00x00000 0o o0 oo ----- 00 oo x000 ao 00 a0 a0M 00 nt�nnn l�nnnn N Qq w c A C. I I �nntl mbbbW WWMMM NNN. --, m O •� O MMm MM mmmMm m__MM mc+ MM NNNNN NNNNN c 00V G C (,+ G cd OWWW00 Mmnnn tlu7tlbb bWWWW MMMNN NN•�. --c .+ coomW m Oo IS m0 O O O Oj U 1 I 0000 0 0000 00000 00000 00000 00000 — ,.. -- � ��, -c -- OOOWP PPPPW WWPPW O ...r ,--� ...- -c .r..r .. — .--, .+ .-. .- -i .-.. -. — .- - �j. Z ^� 0) G y I nMO_nW nW.. oO bNPCOW .. o0bN0 nWNWCO W. -iPcDW NPnWN OOD 4')M.-+ POJWNO W 00 OPPP00 Moonnn nti c0tltl bbbWW WWMMM MMMNN N•. .-•.. .--� 00000 n o0 o0 WaD OD o0nnnn nl�nl. . nnn . n nnnnn nnnnn nnnnn nnnnn nnnnn N 4 ^ U mOn .-+ 00bNOn ��WCOW PtlW.+ PnWNO ncOm -cP cDWN0o0 cOWN000 O�WNOP E O � � 'O 1 I WWMmM NNNN 000 OPPWP 0000 a00p 00 nnnnn VJtltDtlb bbcUbW WWWWm P � I � \v c9 bc[J CO CO •t'��O cObvJ cO �fi bcO cO cpWWWW WWWWW WWWWV� WWWWW WdcWWW WWWWW O 'p a. I <OM• -�WCL NWnvJ MOMC'1W NOmc , N000nc0 M•.WncD WN.+Wn cDW<`9 ..P 00 <DbmN O WPWOGW OOnnn nn DaJtl tltlbbb u�u�W Wyr WWMMM MMMNN NNNN. -r O F ;� I NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN O Ii CV t•y WW q l-o I oOWa x000 n 00 a WPNCAP WWWPO 00000 0000 .-. N.M;w;_15 m o0 a0 _ a0P0 tiNMWa'J 't N NNNNN I �� '+•�•� ""^ '.'.N NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN 8 "I OfO.rNM .0!10n M CA O. -+M b tO 00 OD ON COf c'1 nN C O o7Nn ll b rCO aa�� a00M OInrO V� M .01 "C! ONM -m MG.rMW tlm Q.•1M .0tlMON O~ M`d�.0 .0 .0 -6b -610-6 10-610=16 tlmtltO tO nnnnn nt- 000000 MM 00 C;0 0+0+0100 4-1 O .0.0 000 QD<O b tl tltln tOb1O 00O!O.+N co t- M1O 00.•100 tO O100 tl0 m1-. -1tl q p I I , C 001 11O tl 01 MO? O.r NO]p n M C ! .0IDO M.0�1O tl 0O0 .•I NM.01tl th 0001-4.01 .0000g2 cl N M mmmmm MmMm00 V "vv .01.01.01vv -6 -6 -6 -6p 1O1O1010tO tltlmmtl tltl nnnnao Imo„ y � I OO NNM OM0��0 .000000 tl -M.•�O Mntl .0w MMNN.+ N WW tlnMO.+ n Q .•+ zi U NM.0!.0! btl O10 +NM .0! .0tl 010..~400 V11Otl QO.+M.0� M .0 .0tlnMO C _ N NNNCOm MmMmm MMMMM Mwv4.0l yi.0ta}.01y1 y11p1010 1010 10 0tltl:p tltltl x a0 NM.0 mQ -N0, .00,40" OM .0NO M-OM0 O 8 �10.0 m0 Db N .r i1 •O b W I .0!v110tl nn M Ol O! O j Cl y! .0t1O "R F: nM0 0 0 NM-}- .0 mnaow O. -1C V� .0tO 1-00 O> a N NNNNN NNNNN MMMMM mmMMM MMMV1.01 .01.0x.01 .0 y1 .0�.0�44-W -0.010 101010-6 - 3t 0 1 I N- 1-N 1-41-41- mwmmo OCNM.01 O�NM.0 1-.0 -t1- V1.+Op -N mcDm -w CM-= � M p 00.+. -1N Nm Ci 14 -UCDn W Q 00000 NNaq .01 ID na0000:0 O> -�NMM W- c'�cDn O O p .+ NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN NNNNm mmmmM MMMMM m mmm -0 " OMnO -v M -100100 n� -t .0Qm �.+ .0 Q.N MN n..ro �. q f • .: I Dtlmnr r.ma000Q o ooO.+ .0o-Q .01Q.01Q.x C .0; Q .0oc� n NNNM ma1.01 .0.0 R tltl 40 C I CO ^.+! CO 0 ? ,* ! - t - r+ .O [ - - - i' t - �' - - -- .- --oi NNNNN NNNNN NNNNN NNNNM mmc+ mm MMMMM O c a -0 e7 0 nOMtlQ N -00. -1 y1 1-O 00!00001- < , D'* z.0c 004 -QM 1-.+.0 !00 Qm n.� .0 O U "� ��s! tlnnn00 x000 O�OlQ 000.�.y NNNM MV�3� 2 .0tl tln nMMQQ i Z 0 }0 '•� - "' - - i• '� - ----- NNNNN NNN NN CI N NNN "N"N" NNNNN 3 O - ...r °Cj1., .7 y �bMON e? . � .0�nQ.•rM tl Mtl MOM tl MtlQ.••1 y a p Cl w .••1 NN 'y N 'y m .-1 M 00011 .0 .., . •,ti.r - tltltltO t✓ L�I�nMM MO?Q 000. -i .+ wn OIN.0 000MtlQ N .000.•1 y1 �OMtlQ - - .�-1 .-i ti - C! C? .-I -.-1 r- 1.1.•1 .ti � - NNN N - H r•1> -•1 r•1 iw P. m CVNNNN NNNNN �+ "" � b .y � I a1QwQ.01 0 -.•1tlN 1� 1•-1 ,� MQ.+N.0� tl ON W .0n QO O>Ql Ol N� .0n� ONW .0n Q.� M- 1-Q. -tN.0� 1O a00NW 00 0000.! NNNNN 400000000 M t IDtltl .-t .-I - ..i --.-1 - -i-.- - ----- - -.-1 -- -.- --- -- .-I-- - -.- -1r Q) Q 0100 n tl .01 a m C �•A mU 00.0 u N V'n 0 �+ m.-a "10Qntl .0.0 QMntl.0 .0�MN.rO Qntl -d1 .� N N M.01 .0 tlnMQO NNM•y� btl QO. -+4m .0 -V 1-m 00Q0 -+N L I'�, m"R.'R mtD lDCzn lr iz"i:: 1-1- -1-00 0000000000 0000000000 0 8 p�O p1 Q Ol pl000 W C I F NM W.0 tl 400.0 tlnMQO -Nmv ID�MQO NM.0 tlnMQO (, I.O I QQQQO 0;0005 00000 OOOOti .--1 .ti �N �NN�N Cl ! 1! Nm 1 � tl O n 0 M i 000 - OW WO�i 00. .n-cN NNnMQ V10 cONQ -.-- i.1 eM .0tllD 09 �0>N -r Qtld''••'O n -M.-c0 MIAtl -- O •--, .-a .ti .-� �-a .-� .r .-1 .-1 .r .-c .r .-t .-1 .-i .-I N M 0 0.--� N M .� K O n O •1-1 ^ NNNNN NNNNN Nts tvj mm mm MC)Oj _ COOMnM 01- -y1- ..` -.` 1-0000 tl0 aM 004 1-.-1 -OVA QMMMaO y� r ,� m a0 QQQ0 O.-+. --iN4 NmM'W .01 lr cDQ- tl000 .-I 1-'•0001- V�. -+M .0N On .0Mti - r-i .-i r-i .-1r -i .-1 .-t .-1 .r W - - tl i 1 cD - - -n QNU. --c;D 000001-1- "'N NNNNN NNNNN 4440000 U r A .0, "1 IJ mtlanti MN .0ON <OO 00 00 1-.- -1 k 1-0000 0000. -1 NN - •-1 i-' .-1 ••• •r •-1 .-a NNNNN 8 H 1rc 1 N 'D N .V I .0�J JCN70 �rn �M MM c a a OO� -1 .1-i NNOMn .+IDO.0�Q 0000000000 MMMMM NMM L. U E A 0tiM -M NIO .rpN M -NOM ncD ;D .� I.rti ~~ NN NNNNN /� F. . O � -1tJ 110 -,0 cD CD CJ�n a m .r V�nO 60OWn O .�i 1 -1-000000 00000,0 00.+. -I .-y NNGMVM- mMIDOW OONn -+10 Qyi O0 0000 O ^ O M MV�V� -- -lO lDnn nMMQO M - M:OMO 000 -N_ CD UC:J C:J C?n nnn OOW MOO OI QOOOO 41O a0 .rW n0"'J ;^O ^'J_7 =•'J'7 '+NN NM:+'JMCC W ?W -cO ': NnM 0 00000000 QO.+N p ' " I d'v!.n .r .n .t! v!,n -1r� h .0000 I�:�conn n�0 o O o�o a,p c 0000 '+N NN_tMM T � � 3 ° Q - •.••••• T - v N Q 00000000.1• WWWCV� V��O -10- -000400 1 01-0004 Op MnO v01O 1O ,O'..^. -_ O � � µ, � � .0 m •nn 1-1-1-1-00 000000000 QQC>O,O C000.r E+ ° V .b 7 j � NCW4'J 01-0000 NM_vJ :DM ONy�00 w .-r Q � ,� I MMMMM MMMMW err y�Oi y�C M,,: `.-+N di ,O Or�Q O. `0 QMn. -.J CJ Q 1 - - nnnnn OO MOCMM Cd I N_!NC! -I MM _• - >�; ^� MMM. M rQi� wcw� " MN .1n�u�10 M MMMMM OC'I�OMMQ Geotechnic s Incorporated Principals: Anthony F. Belfast Michael P. Imbriglio W. Lee Vanderhurst GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION RENOVATIONS TO MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA 200 SAXONY ROAD - ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA prepared for Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA 200 Saxony Road San Diego, California 92024 by GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED Project No. 0768 - 002 -00 Document No. 03 -0121 February 18, 2003 9245 Activity Rd., Ste. 103 • San Diego, California 92126 Phone (858) 536 -1000 • Fax (858) 536 -8311 �. Geotechnics Incorporated him- _ Principals: Anthony F. Belfast Michael P. Imbriglio W. Lee Vanderhurst February 18, 2003 Mr. Scott Glissmeyer Project No. 0768 - 002 -00 Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA Document No. 03 -0121 200 Saxony Road Encinitas, California 92024 SUBJECT: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Renovations to Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA 200 Saxony Road Encinitas, California Dear Mr. Glissmeyer: In accordance with your request, we have completed a geotechnical investigation for the planned renovations to the existing Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA in Encinitas, California. This report presents the results of our investigation and provides recommendations for site preparation and earthwork construction, and for the design of foundations, on -grade slabs, retaining walls, and pavements. Based on the results of our investigation, we consider the proposed construction feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. We appreciate this opportunity to provide our professional services. If you have any questions or require additional services, please do not hesitate to contact us. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED ho�Canady, PE Anthony F. Belfast, PE Principal Principal Distribution: (4) Addressee 9245 Activity Rd., Ste. 103 • San Diego, California 92126 Phone (858) 536 -1000 • Fax (858) 536 -8311 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION RENOVATIONS TO MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA - 200 SAXONY ROAD ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ ............................... 1 2 SCOPE OF SERVICES ................................................................................ ............................... 1 3 SITE DESCRIPTION ................................................................................... ............................... 2 4 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT .................................................................... ............................... 2 5 GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ..................................... ............................... 3 5.1 Terrace Deposits ............................................................................ ............................... 3 5.2 Fill .................................................................................................. ............................... 3 5.3 Groundwater .................................................................................. ............................... 3 6 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS .............................................................................. ............................... 4 6.1 Seismicity and Ground Motion ...................................................... ............................... 4 6.2 Surface Rupture ............................................................................. ............................... 4 6.3 Liquefaction ................................................................................... ............................... 5 6.4 Landslides and Lateral Spreads ..................................................... ............................... 5 6.5 Tsunamis, Seiches, and Flooding ................................................... ............................... 5 7 CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................... ............................... 6 8 RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................. ............................... 7 8.1 Plan and Specification Review ...................................................... ............................... 7 8.2 Excavation and Grading Observation ............................................ ............................... 7 8.3 Earthwork ....................................................................................... ............................... 7 83.1 Site Preparation ............................................................... ............................... 8 8.3.2 Remedial Grading ........................................................... ............................... 9 8.3.3 Structural Fill Material .................................................. ............................... 10 8.3.4 Fill Compaction ............................................................ ............................... 10 4 8.3.5 Temporary Excavations ................................................ ............................... 8.3.6 Bulk/Shrink Estimates .................................................. ............................... 12 8.3.7 Slopes ............................................................................ ............................... 12 8.4 Surface Drainage .......................................................................... ............................... 13 8.5 Foundation Recommendations ..................................................... ............................... 13 8.6 CBC Seismic Parameters ............................................................. ............................... 15 -- Geotechnics Incorporated GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION RENOVATIONS TO MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA - 200 SAXONY ROAD ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 8.7 Interior Building Slabs ................................................................. ............................... 15 8.7.1 Moisture Protection for Interior Slabs .......................... ............................... 15 8.7.2 Exterior Slabs ................................................................ ............................... 16 8.8 Earth - Retaining Structures ........................................................... ............................... 16 8.9 Pipelines ....................................................................................... ............................... 18 8.9.1 Thrust Blocks ................................................................ ............................... 18 8.9.2 Modulus of Soil Reaction ............................................. ............................... 18 8.9.3 Pipe Bedding 18 8.10 Pavements .................................................................................. ............................... 19 8.10.1 Asphalt Concrete ......................................................... ............................... 19 8.10.2 Portland Cement Concrete .......................................... ............................... 20 8.11 Soil Corrosivity .......................................................................... ............................... 20 9 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION ..................................................... ............................... 21 APPENDICES _ REFERENCES .............................................................................. ............................... Appendix A SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION ................................................. ............................... Appendix B LABORATORYTESTING ........................................................... ............................... Appendix C SEISMICDATA ............................................................................ ............................... Appendix D ILLUSTRATIONS SITELOCATION MAP ....................................................................... ............................... Figure 1 GEOTECHNICALMAP ...................................................................... ............................... Figure 2 FAULTLOCATION MAP ................................................................... ............................... Figure 3 TRANSITIONDETAILS ..................................................................... ............................... Figure 4 WALLDRAIN DETAILS ................................. ............................... ........................Figures 5 and 6 Geotechnics Incorporated GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION RENOVATIONS TO MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA 200 SAXONY ROAD ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA -- 1 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation for the planned renovations to the existing Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA in Encinitas, California. The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate the existing subsurface conditions at the site as they relate to the proposed development and provide geotechnical design parameters for the planned construction. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the subsurface conditions encountered during our field explorations, laboratory testing, engineering evaluations, and our experience with similar soils and geologic conditions. 2 SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of services provided during this investigation was generally as described in our Proposal No. 02 -338 dated December 18, 2002. Our scope of work did not include evaluation of potentially contaminated soils. Our scope of work included the following items: • Review of available published geologic maps, prior geotechnical reports, topographic maps, aerial photographs, and other literature pertinent to the geotechnical conditions at the site. Pertinent references are presented in Appendix A. _. Subsurface explorations consisting of drilling 7 truck- mounted, hollow -stem auger borings to depths up to about 20 feet below existing grade. Relatively undisturbed and bulk samples were collected for laboratory testing. The borings were logged by our geologist, and then backfilled with an impervious material in accordance with State of California regulations. The boring logs are presented in Appendix B. • Laboratory testing of selected samples of the on -site soils to assess the pertinent physical characteristics of the materials. The testing included in -place moisture content and dry density, particle size distribution, Atterberg limits, R- value, maximum density and - optimum moisture content, expansion potential, soluble sulfate content, pH, resistivity, soluble chloride content, and direct shear. The results of the laboratory testing are presented in Appendix C. Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 2 • Evaluation of potential geologic hazards and the site's seismicity. • Engineering evaluation of the on -site soils with regard to settlement potential, expansion potential, bearing and lateral load capacities, lateral earth pressures, and pavement section design. • Preparation of this report presenting our findings, conclusions, and recommendations. 3 SITE DESCRIPTION The existing YMCA facility is located at 200 Saxony Road in Encinitas, California. The site location is shown on Figure 1. Existing facilities include various buildings, an aquatics center, a skateboard park, a BMX park, tennis courts, and paved parking and access drives. Plans provided to us indicate that current site elevations range from about 160 feet above mean sea level (MSL) on the south to about 170 feet MSL on the north. The site is bordered on the west by a descending slope up to about 45 feet high that descends to the I -5 freeway below. — 4 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT We understand the proposed construction will include a new aquatics center, skateboard park, youth center, toilet rooms, and pavements for parking and site access. Retaining walls up to 8 feet high will be constructed. The new aquatics center development will include demolishing the existing pool enclosure and dive tank (the existing warm pool will remain), and constructing a new 14 -lap pool in the area of the demolished dive tank. A new pool enclosure will also be constructed, along with a 10- foot -high, free - standing masonry wall on 3 sides of the enclosure. The existing BMX park will be demolished, and a new skateboard park will be constructed in this area. The existing tennis courts and skateboard park will be demolished, and a new parking lot and fire lane will be constructed in this area. The new pool enclosure will be of metal frame construction. The new youth center and toilet rooms will be pre- engineered modular structures. Structural loading information and finish pad elevations were not available at the time of this report. -- Geotechnics Incorporated EAVINIT IS > ST r n IS RE { R }l b COL T. BRITTA`IY_ v - -DIDM c a� LJ UCADIA BLV D CAS ST ST 'r t Y Y, -Fr.. n - IT i l S ITE a :aV�i S • a . r U z 1 'OXGLOVE , d0MVIC:t •, p J � ,l �•,aG' � �'c'rms: � � r �m x.R>rau�r. ,. � tt`u'N Or,EaN r F MY V1E , ST - = r W lk tt ev A! :CE ,7 Vl r a A S DR m 4 E' m , n i k • r '! F `may -d 5fh 1SEtl3 : ri n Z BRA7S.. _ WINDY�w c . ^.'t, llr() _ HILL 1�1 r..S rrR F E' W, PACK V .K SE, i A H var r :1{SE4$T = ' FAiTI ST � pax .:4 z 0.5 Mf a Reference: Thomas Brothers Guide 2003. Project Geotechnics Docu Document Incorporated SITE LOCATION MAP FIGURE 1 Rev. 6199 MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 3 5 GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The site is located within the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of California. This province is characterized by rugged north -south trending mountains separated by subparallel faults, and a coastal plain of subdued landforms underlain by sedimentary formations. The subject site is situated in the coastal plain portion of the province. The site is underlain by - Pleistocene -age terrace deposits and fills. The approximate locations of our exploratory borings are shown on Figure 2. The boring logs are presented in Appendix B. Generalized descriptions of the subsurface materials, from oldest to youngest, are as follows: 5.1 Terrace Deposits Pleistocene -age terrace deposits were encountered beneath the site in each of our exploration borings. As observed in the borings, the terrace deposits generally consist of weakly to moderately cemented silty sandstone. However, scattered concretions of strongly cemented material may exist. The materials are characterized by relatively high bearing capacity, low compressibility, and very low expansion potential. 5.2 Fill Fill soils were encountered in each of our exploration borings to depths ranging from about 4 to 17 feet below existing grade. Thicker fills may exist at other locations. No documentation on the placement and compaction of the fill was available. The undocumented fill generally consists of loose to medium dense silty sand (Unified Soil Classification: SM) and clayey sand (SC). Asphalt concrete debris was observed within the fills. Laboratory tests indicate that the fills have a very low expansion potential. The undocumented fills are considered compressible. 5.3 Groundwater Groundwater was not observed in the exploratory borings drilled during for this - investigation. However, groundwater seepage may be encountered in the future due to rainfall, irrigation, broken pipes, or leaky pools. Since the prediction of the location of such conditions is difficult, they are typically mitigated if and when they occur. Geotechnics Incorporated _p r x .. , a ,E. , Y • �{ n 3. ... .- a '. r r.- ,s w, r v B - - r Y : m B 2 d : • r a x.. , is ,.'.; ... .. -. .. ,.... �. ,.... -.: .. ... ...:.. .'. • B -3 , r a SCALE: 1" = 100' B -5 136 EXPLANATION B-4 B -7 B -7 Boring number and approximate location Reference: 416MSTR.dwg, provided by Partners Planning and Engineering, 2003. Project No. 0768 - 002 -00 AMkk6, Geotechnics SITE PLAN Document No. 03 -0121 Incorporated FIGURE 2 rev. 12 -99 MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 6 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS The subject site is not located within an area previously known for significant geologic hazards. Evidence of active faulting, landslides, liquefiable soils, or collapsible soils was not encountered during this investigation. Seismic hazards at the site may be caused by ground shaking during seismic events on regional active faults. Existing and potential geologic hazards are as follows: 6.1 Seismicity and Ground Motion Site coordinates were estimated using the CD -ROM TOPO! (National Geographic _ Holdings, 2001). The site is located at a latitude of 33.0514° north and a longitude of 117.2867° west. Figure 3 shows the locations of known active faults within 100 kilometers of the site. Table 1 shows the properties of these faults. The deterministic V values of these faults shown in the table were developed using the program EQFAULT (Blake, 2000). The program FRISKSP (Blake, 2000) was used to perform a probabilistic analysis of seismicity to provide an estimate of the potential peak ground acceleration that the site may experience. The analysis was conducted using the characteristic earthquake distribution of Youngs and Coppersmith (1985). Based on the results of the probabilistic analysis, the estimated peak ground acceleration for the site resulting from the Upper Bound Earthquake, defined as the motion having a 10 percent probability of being exceeded in 100 years, is 0.48g. The estimated peak ground acceleration resulting from the Design Basis Earthquake is 0.35g (10 percent probability of being exceeded in a 50 years). 6.2 Surface Rupture Surface rupture is the result of movement on an active fault reaching the surface. The site is shown in relation to known active faults in the region on Figure 3. The nearest known active fault is the Rose Canyon fault zone which is located about 3.1 miles (5.0 kilometers) west of the site based on the Maps of Known Active Fault Near - Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada (CDMG, 1998). There are no known active faults underlying the site or projecting toward the site. In our opinion, the probability of surface rupture due to faulting beneath the site is considered low. Geotechnics Incorporated 8 °a= 3 � 9 ,0 a`� �� I� : �- RN QQ g 1 L F ORA 7� g'.8 sl S DI g c 1�a� oT Q ¢ rna.z iX n � .� � 11 o• y !P, � � q c 9 g 1 vis =nom n �Q �5a�. .a sub c�F'i ��' / / I I /i / / J ' / / s r I LL ft c ^W A Q�A o� a'�SL g m ' 3t 3 d ��. c c 7 � ag8g o g X41= co 2 $ Q..ra Y 1 § ?m � / / / T ` a ICI_ �� 9i� ^� �� 0 I la , it 154 m' a� m v at n �'� c o _ $ J ' r' �,` 4�� nNfmQ wig C CD � CR d alp �✓ - ' /- �-✓-_ - Net / \ r e v ,fp � ;m / kA (, = \ f �y �/ f / i m a g o / i J ' !'� y�J / / _ t ' i l v \ �� CP 1 c "g,"- � a N� y e tfi n �.. / A 6 T o =;p (n: : N D < f Y C / a =G e o t e c h n i c s Project No. 0768- 002 -00 Inc orporated FAULT LOCATION MAP Document No. 03 -0121 FIGURE 3 ai CC) a) C) � rn -C ° W _ F�O. L C N o J O p O i d o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Op 0 0 0 0 0 0 N Op � + (C) (f� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O E r r M LO UO N LO Cf) N r r N O C o Z Q c w co Q c Z E tf C > U N N r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r w ^ O o /N r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r L Q Q J + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + E � O w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w � m LL = 0 C O O G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E M �, CM M CM m M m co (M M M M C) M M C) co M M M M co co co c7 CM M co cM m co co M M M N O O =3 O o O N e N N N M N M m N m N m M N co N N N N L N Y C r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r m M Q QN + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w � p N L F. V (() Op r O C) O o m O N o (O It N O (O LO 'CT CO r O r- N O (O O r M ti ti �- O a N ca ti 00 N (D r M Lo r M r CD r 00 11) U') N _ Y Q w LL rn� w c LL Y " � o Q w a c m W o � (f O O t 00 r LO 00 r U) N O O r O 00 f� 00 J _ X x Z co co r� cfl r-- ti co ti (D ti 00 (C) r cfl cri co cD _ o c c J Q a rn o? a E Z w� .�w C O U — o E CD �rn m o W o z o rn � E c� z ch.L��c ~ _.. Q � Q I.C) M � � r M tf') ti � Cfl O d' l!) � � � M �w �CN� CD C) C) O O�-o0 00 0 0 a o Y w G O O O O O O O O O O G O 0 0 0 0 E 2 4-- E L N W V LU � w (n ca a �' 00 W E w N M c n (� w (n ~ 00 O d O (O (O ti �- N O ti O U C Y N N r N w (0 (o 00 0o 00 00 co co co O O c6 (n fn 0 v C) M m "0 0 N C (6 -0 O E cd 3-� ° a) C O c C O -c 'in L U p N co O >, p E _ C > a) co c a -0 N 0 C O c v C — (n °—) c a) c J Co 'uC-i c}u M � .� o m a) .� o c o Q C 0 o 2 W L c (n cn s � U J ca ° O N O U > c N c C) O o .O M co W -p ~ () 3 H 0 v7 = C- (n o a) p -°v L c 5 E O LL o c 0 N p c F L -� o c C U U ,� E U U N LU cu N a m M .9 m, o 0 � E v .E � V' • a) a) o w w w m C o 'n `° cca N CL (� U ±+ L a� w- Z ��Z U- wH �- N M LO MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 PAGE 5 6.3 Liquefaction Liquefaction is a process in which soil grains in a saturated deposit lose contact after the occurrence of earthquakes or other sources of ground shaking. The soil deposit temporarily behaves as a viscous fluid; pore pressures rise, and the strength of the deposit is greatly diminished. Liquefiable soils typically consist of cohesionless sands and silts that are loose to medium dense, and saturated. To liquefy, soils must be subjected to ground shaking of sufficient magnitude and duration. Given the relatively dense nature _ of the formational materials beneath the site, and the absence of a shallow groundwater table, the potential for liquefaction to occur is negligible. 6.4 Landslides and Lateral Spreads Evidence of ancient landslides or slope instabilities was not observed at the site during our investigation. Accordingly, the potential for landslides to significantly impact the site is considered low. Due to the relatively dense nature of the underlying materials, the site is not believed to be susceptible to lateral spreading or landsliding associated with a seismic event on a nearby active fault. 6.5 Tsunamis, Seiches, and Flooding Given the distance between the subject site and the coast, and the site's elevation above sea level, damage due to tsunamis (seismically induced waves) is considered negligible. There does not appear to be any open or confined bodies of water upslope from the site. Accordingly, the possibility of earthquake- induced flooding due to seiches or dam failures is also considered negligible. Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 PAGE 6 7 CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of this investigation, it is our opinion that the proposed construction is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint provided the following recommendations and appropriate _ construction practices are followed. No geotechnical conditions were encountered that would preclude the proposed construction. Geotechnical design and construction considerations include the following: • The site is underlain by undocumented fill and formational terrace deposits. The undocumented fills are considered compressible and may experience settlement under increased loading from structures or new fills. Remedial grading recommendations are provided in this report. The terrace deposits are generally considered suitable for support _ of structural or fill loads. • The proposed modular buildings may be supported on conventional shallow footings provided the recommendations of this report are followed. Foundations for the proposed pool enclosure are anticipated to consist of drilled pier foundations or deepened spread footings. • Based on expansion index test results, the silty to clayey sand fills have a very low expansion potential. We anticipate that the silty sandstone terrace deposits also have a very low expansion potential. _ In general, excavations at the site should be achievable using standard heavy earthmoving equipment in good- working order with experienced operators. However, localized strongly cemented concretions may require extra effort to excavate or may encounter excavation refusal. These excavations may also generate oversized material that will require extra effort to crush or export from the site. • Although not encountered in our borings, groundwater may develop at a later date and may be encountered in some excavations. • There are no known active faults underlying the project site. Potential seismic hazards at the site would more likely be associated with ground shaking associated with seismic events along regional active faults. Seismic shaking hazards are typically mitigated through building designs in accordance with the California Building Code. Geotechnics Incorporated - MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 DOCUMENT NO. 03-0121 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 PAGE 7 8 RECOMMENDATIONS The remainder of this report presents recommendations regarding earthwork construction as well as preliminary geotechnical recommendations for the design of the proposed structures and improvements. These recommendations are based on empirical and analytical methods typical of the standard -of- practice in southern California. If these recommendations appear not to address a specific feature of the project, please contact our office for additions or revisions to the recommendations. 8.1 Plan and Specification Review A preliminary site plan was used as the basis for this investigation. We recommend that grading plans, foundation plans, and earthwork specifications be reviewed by Geotechnics Incorporated prior to finalization to evaluate conformance of the plans with the intent of the recommendations of this report. Significant changes in the locations of - the proposed structures may require additional geotechnical evaluation. 8.2 Excavation and Grading Observation Foundation excavations and site grading should be observed by Geotechnics Incorporated. Geotechnics Incorporated should provide observation and testing services continuously during grading. Such observations are considered essential to identify field conditions that differ from those anticipated by the preliminary investigation, to adjust designs to actual field conditions, and to determine that the grading is accomplished in - general accordance with the recommendations of this report. Recommendations presented in this report are contingent upon Geotechnics Incorporated performing such services. Our personnel should perform sufficient testing of fill during grading to support our professional opinion as to compliance with compaction recommendations. 8.3 Earthwork Grading and earthwork should be conducted in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC) and with the recommendations of this report. The following recommendations are provided regarding specific aspects of the proposed earthwork Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768-002-00 NO. 03 -0121 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 PAGE 8 _ construction. These recommendations should be considered subject to revision based on field conditions observed by the geotechnical consultant during grading. 8.3.1 Site Preparation General site preparation should include the removal of unsuitable and deleterious materials, existing structures, or other improvements from areas that will be subjected to structural or fill loads. Clearing and grubbing should consist of the removal of vegetation including brush, grass, weeds, wood, tree roots, and otherwise deleterious materials from areas to be graded. Clearing and grubbing should extend to the limits of grading. Unsuitable materials include vegetation, trash, construction debris, highly organic soil, highly expansive clays, rocks more than 6 inches in greatest dimension, contaminated soils, or other undesirable - materials. Removed materials should be hauled off -site and legally disposed. The removal of unsuitable materials should be conducted under the observation of the geotechnical consultant to evaluate the competency of the exposed materials for support of structural and fill loads. The excavation of unsuitable materials should be conducted in a way that minimizes the disturbance of competent materials. All buildings, structures, foundations, utilities (above and below ground), and any other man -made improvements within the grading limits, that are not to be saved for future use, should be demolished and legally disposed off -site. Subsurface — improvements or obstructions that are to be removed should be excavated and hauled off -site. The resulting excavations should be backfilled and compacted in accordance with the recommendations of this report. Demolition of pipelines may consist of capping or rerouting at the project perimeter, and removal within the project perimeter. If appropriate, abandoned pipelines may be filled with grout or — slurry cement as recommended by, and under the observation of, the geotechnical consultant. Man -made improvements to be saved should be protected from damage by the contractor. _ Geotechnics Incorporated PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 _. MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 PAGE 9 8.3.2 Remedial Grading Compressible Soils Remedial grading is recommended where compressible soils exist within proposed building pads and other structural fill areas, within exterior concrete flatwork areas, or wherever the existing soils are disturbed due to demolition of existing structures or improvements. These soils should be over- - excavated and replaced as compacted fill. Compressible soils at the site may include undocumented fills, weathered formational materials, or other soil subject to settlement under increased loads, wetting, or bio- degradation. Remedial grading is anticipated to consist of the removal of the undocumented fills, which were observed in our exploration borings to depths up to about 17 feet below existing grade. Removal bottoms should be observed by Geotechnics Incorporated personnel during grading. Deeper removals may be required based on the conditions observed. The removals should extend horizontally at least 5 feet beyond the limits of the proposed building. Care should be taken to not undermine existing structures or improvements. Cut/Fill Transitions Where transitions from formational materials to compacted fill will exist beneath building pads, we recommend that the formational portion of any individual pad be over - excavated and replaced with compacted fill to _ provide a relatively uniform compacted fill layer. The depth of the over - excavation should be 3 feet below the bottom of foundation, or to a depth of H/2, whichever is greater, where H is the greatest depth of fill beneath the structure. The pad grade should then be re- established with fill compacted as recommended in this report. Figure 4 should be used as a general guideline in determining the over - excavation depths of individual pads. Expansive Soils Expansive soils within 2 feet of exterior flatwork should be over- excavated and replaced with soils having a low expansion potential (expansion index of 50 or less). The replacement material may consist of on -site or imported soil with an expansion index of 50 or less, based on the guidelines of UBC Test Method 18 -2 or ASTM D 4829. The replacement material should be compacted as recommended in this report. -- Geotechnics Incorporated CASE 1.0 FILL RIP 12 INCHES, 3 FEET WATER, COMPACT (MAXIMUM) FORMATION CASE 2.0 2% SLOPE - -> ' - - - - _ _ _ FILL OVER - EXCAVATE TRANSITION H > 3 FEET - TO A DEPTH OF H/2 (3 FEET MINIMUM) FORMATION CASE 3.0 H >3FEET 2% SLOPE —► - ' - - - _ _ _ _ FILL OVER - EXCAVATE TRANSITION ' ' �- - _ _ _ _ TO A DEPTH OF H/2 (3 FEET MINIMUM) FORMATION Project No. 0768- 002 -00 Ad0b Geotechnics Document No. 03 -0121 n c o rp o r a t e d TRANSITION DETAILS FIGURE 4 \Drafting \CorelDraw \Overex Rev. 1/00 PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 PAGE 10 8.3.3 Structural Fill Material In general, the on -site materials may be used in the required fills, less any unsuitable or deleterious materials described previously. Soils that have an expansion index greater than 20 should not be used within the upper 5 feet of finish building subgrade, within the upper 2 feet of finish hardscape subgrade, or as retaining wall backfill. Imported fill sources, if needed, should be observed prior to hauling onto the site to determine the suitability for use. Representative samples of imported materials and on -site soils should be tested by the geotechnical consultant to evaluate their engineering properties for the planned use. Imported fill soils should have an expansion index of no more than 20. During grading operations, soil types other than those evaluated in the geotechnical report may be encountered.. Geotechnics should be notified to evaluate the suitability of these soils for use as fill and as finish grade soils. 8.3.4 Fill Compaction After making the recommended removals and prior to fill placement, the exposed ground surface should be observed by Geotechnics Incorporated. Any remaining _ dry, loose or soft materials should also be removed until a stable, unyielding condition under equipment loads is achieved. All fill and backfill should be placed at slightly above optimum moisture content using equipment that is capable of producing a uniformly compacted product throughout the entire fill lift. Fill materials at less than optimum moisture should _ have water added and the fill mixed to result in material that is uniformly above optimum moisture content. Fill materials that are too wet should be aerated or mixed with drier material to achieve uniformly moisture - conditioned soil. Flooding should not be permitted as a method of compacting fill or backfill. The fill and backfill should be placed in horizontal lifts at a thickness appropriate for the equipment spreading, mixing, and compacting the material, but generally should not exceed 8 inches in loose thickness. The minimum relative compaction Geotechnics Incorporated PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 - MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 PAGE I 1 recommended for fill and backfill is 90 percent of maximum dry density based on the guidelines of ASTM D 1557. Sufficient observation and testing should be performed by Geotechnics Incorporated so that an opinion can be rendered as to the compaction achieved. 8.3.5 Temporary Excavations Temporary excavations, such as for remedial grading and foundation and utility excavations, are anticipated to be less than 10 feet in depth and are expected to be _ stable provided they are laid back in accordance with our recommendations or shored. All excavations should conform with Cal -OSHA guidelines. Workmen should be protected from falling rocks and caving soils in accordance with Cal - OSHA requirements. Temporary excavations extending to a depth of 3 feet or less may be made vertically. Temporary excavations up to 10 feet deep should be laid back no steeper than 1:1 (horizontal: vertical), or shored, prior to allowing workers to enter. Should deeper temporary excavations be required, Geotechnics Incorporated should be notified so that additional recommendations may be provided. Where temporary excavations extend below a plane inclined at 1' /z:1 (horizontal: vertical) downward from the outside bottom edge of adjacent existing footings, shoring is recommended. Temporary excavations that encounter seepage or other potentially adverse conditions should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant on a case -by -case basis during grading. Remedial measures may include shoring, or reducing the inclination of the temporary slope. For temporary excavations that will be shored, but not braced with tiebacks or struts, we recommend using a triangular pressure distribution for calculating earth pressures. Cantilevered shoring design may be based on an equivalent fluid pressure of 35 lbs /ft plus any groundwater pressures encountered in the excavation and any surcharge loads resulting from loads placed above the excavation and within a 1:1 plane extending upward from the base of the excavation. Should surcharge loads be anticipated, or braced shoring be used, Geotechnics Incorporated should be contacted for additional design parameters. Geotechnics Incorporated - MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 PAGE 12 For design of soldier piles, an allowable passive pressure of 600 lbs /ft per foot of embedment up to a maximum of 5,000 lbs /ft may be used. Soldier piles should be spaced at least two pile diameters on center. 8.3.6 Bulk/Shrink Estimates - Based on comparisons between the in -situ densities of the on -site soils and the estimated densities of compacted fills, and our experience with similar materials, the terrace deposits are expected to neither bulk nor shrink significantly when over - excavated and recompacted. The undocumented fill is estimated to shrink about 5 to 10 percent when over - excavated and recompacted. It should be noted, however, that bulking and shrinking potential can vary considerably based on the variability of the in -situ densities of the materials in question. 8.3.7 Slopes v All slopes should be inclined no steeper than 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). The surficial slope stability may be enhanced by providing good site drainage. The site should be graded so that water from the surrounding areas is not allowed to flow over the top of the slope. Diversion structures should be provided where necessary. Surface runoff should be confined to gunite -lined swales or other appropriate devices to reduce the potential for erosion. We recommend that slopes be planted with vegetation that will increase their - stability. Ice plant is generally not recommended. We recommend that vegetation include woody plants, along with ground cover. All plants should be _ adapted for growth in semi -arid climates with little or no irrigation. A landscape architect should be consulted in order to develop a specific planting palate suitable for slope stabilization. It should be recognized that the outer few feet of all slopes are susceptible to gradual down -slope movements due to slope creep. This will affect hardscape such as concrete slabs. We recommend that settlement sensitive hardscape not be - constructed within 5 feet of the top of slopes. Geotechnics Incorporated PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 PAGE 13 8.4 Surface Drainage Foundation and slab performance depends greatly on how well the runoff waters drain from the site. This is true both during construction and over the entire life of the structure. The ground surface around structures should be graded so that water flows rapidly away from the structures without ponding. The surface gradient needed to achieve this depends on the prevailing landscape. In general, we recommend that pavement and lawn areas within 5 feet of buildings slope away at gradients of at least 2 percent. Densely vegetated areas should have minimum gradients of at least 5 percent away from buildings in the first 5 feet. Densely vegetated areas are considered those in which the planting type and spacing are such that the flow of water is impeded. Planters should be built so that water from them will not seep into the foundation, slab, or pavement areas. Roof drainage should be channeled by pipe to storm drains, or discharged at least 10 feet from buildings. Site irrigation should be limited to the minimum necessary to sustain plants. Should excessive irrigation, surface water intrusion, water line breaks, or unusually high rainfall occur, saturated zones or "perched" groundwater may develop in the underlying soils. 8.5 Foundation Recommendations The foundation recommendations provided herein are considered generally consistent with methods typically used in southern California. Other alternatives may be available. Our recommendations are only minimum criteria based on geotechnical factors and should not be considered a structural design, or to preclude more restrictive criteria of governing agencies or by the structural engineer. The design of the foundation system should be performed by the project structural engineer, incorporating the geotechnical parameters described herein and the requirements of applicable building codes. The proposed modular buildings may be supported on conventional shallow footings. The proposed pool enclosure may be supported on drilled pier foundations or deepened - spread footings. Foundation excavations should be observed by Geotechnics Incorporated to evaluate the suitability of the bearing materials for conformance with the recommendations of this report. Geotechnics Incorporated PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 -- MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 PAGE 14 Conventional Shallow Footings The following design parameters assume that the recommended remedial grading will be performed, and that the foundations for the proposed buildings will consist of shallow footings bearing entirely on compacted fill with a low expansion potential. A one -third increase in the soil bearing and passive pressure values may be used for short-term wind or seismic loads. Allowable Soil Bearing: 2,000 lbs /ft Minimum Footing Width: 12 inches. Minimum Footing Depth: 24 inches below lowest adjacent compacted soil, slab, or pavement grade. Passive Pressure: 3001bs /ft per foot of embedment. Coefficient of Friction: 0.4 Differential Settlement: Foundations should be designed for 3 /4 -inch of differential settlement over a distance of 40 feet. Drilled Piers or Deepe Spre Footings The following design parameters assume that the foundations will be embedded in compacted fill or undisturbed formation. For cast -in -place concrete piers, uplift loads may be resisted by friction acting along the surface area of the pier, plus the weight of the pier. For deepened spread footings, uplift loads may be resisted by the weight of the footing and the weight of the compacted backfill overlying the footing. A one -third increase in the soil bearing, frictional uplift, and passive pressure values may be used for short-term wind or seismic loads. Allowable Soil Bearing: 2,000 lbs /ft in compacted fill; 500 lbs /ft increase for each additional foot of depth below the minimum depth up to a maximum of 5,000 lbs /ft 5,000 lbs /ft in undisturbed terrace deposits. Minimum Diameter /Width: 12 inches. Minimum Depth: 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade. Soil Unit Weight: 120 lbs /ft Frictional Pier Uplift: 300 lbs /ft Passive Pressure: 300 lbs /ft per foot of embedment based on an estimated lateral deflection up to '/2 -inch. Differential Settlement: 3 /4 -inch between adjacent piers or footings. Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 PAGE 15 8.6 CBC Seismic Parameters The following seismic parameters may be used for design of the proposed structures. They are based on a site -to -fault distance of 5.0 kilometers scaled from fault maps - (CDMG, 1998) intended for use in conjunction with the 2001 California Building Code. Seismic Zone Factor, Z: 0.4 Seismic Source Type: B Soil Profile Type: SD Seismic Coefficients, G: 0.44N,, G: 0.64N, Near - Source Factors, N 1.0 N 1.2 8.7 Interior Building Slabs Building slabs should be supported by undisturbed formational materials or compacted fill prepared as recommended in this report and having a low expansion potential. Slabs should be designed for the anticipated loading. If an elastic design is used, a modulus of subgrade reaction of 250 lbs /in may be used. Slab thickness and reinforcement should be designed by the project structural engineer and should conform to the requirements of the 2001 CBC. We recommend that building slabs be at least 5 inches in thickness and reinforced with at least No. 3 bars spaced 24 inches on center, each way, and placed at slab mid - height. 8.7.1 Moisture Protection for Interior Slabs Concrete slabs constructed on soil ultimately cause the moisture content to rise in - the underlying soil. This results from continued capillary rise and the termination of normal evapotranspiration. Because normal concrete is permeable, the moisture will eventually penetrate the slab. Excessive moisture may cause mildewed carpets, lifting or discoloration of floor tiles, or similar problems. To decrease the likelihood of problems related to damp slabs, suitable moisture protection measures should be used where moisture sensitive floor coverings or other factors warrant. - Geotechnics Incorporated PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 PAGE 16 A commonly used moisture protection in southern California consists of about 2 inches of clean sand covered by at least 10 mil plastic sheeting. In addition, 2 _ inches of clean sand are placed over the plastic to decrease concrete curing problems associated with placing concrete directly on an impermeable membrane. However, it has been our experience that such systems will transmit from approximately 6 to 12 pounds of moisture per 1,000 square feet per day. This may be excessive for some applications, particularly for sheet vinyl, wood flooring, vinyl tiles, or carpeting with impermeable backing that use water soluble adhesives. The project architect should review the moisture requirements of the proposed flooring system and incorporate an appropriate level of moisture protection as part of the floor covering design. This may include waterproofing _ the slab. 8.7.2 Exterior Slabs Exterior slabs should be at least 4 inches thick and should be reinforced with at least 6 -inch by 6 -inch, W2.9 by W2.9 welded wire fabric placed at slab mid- _ height. Crack control joints should be used on all exterior slabs, with a maximum spacing of 5 -foot centers each way for sidewalks and 10 -foot centers each way for slabs. Differential movement between buildings and slabs, or between sidewalks and curbs may be decreased by doweling the slab into the foundation or curb. -` 8.8 Earth - Retaining Structures Retaining walls should be designed by the project structural engineer, using the geotechnical parameters provided below. For design of cantilever retaining walls, the following soil parameters may be used. Allowable Soil Bearing: 2,000 lbs /ft (allow a one -third increase for short- _ term wind or seismic loads). Coefficient of Friction: 0.4 Passive Pressure: 300 lbs /ft per foot of embedment (allow a one -third increase for short-term wind or seismic loads). Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768- 002 -00 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 PAGE 17 Active Earth Pressure: Equivalent fluid pressure of 35 lbs /ft for level backfill or 55 lbs /ft for 2:1 sloping backfill. _ Assumes walls are free to yield at the top at least 0.2% of the wall height. At -Rest Earth Pressure: Equivalent fluid pressure of 55 lbs /ft for level backfill or 85 lbs /ft for 2:1 sloping backfill. Assumes walls are restrained. Minimum Footing Width: 12 inches. Minimum Footing Depth: 18 inches below lowest adjacent compacted soil, slab, or pavement grade. For design of gravity walls, the following soil parameters may be used. Friction Angle: 32° Cohesion: 0 lbs /ft Moist Unit Weight: 120 lbs /ft Foundations should be setback from descending slopes a minimum distance of 8 feet measured horizontally from the outside bottom edge of the foundation to the slope face. In addition to the recommended earth pressure, walls adjacent to vehicular traffic should be designed to resist a uniform lateral pressure of 100 lbs /ft acting as a result of an assumed 300 lbs /ft surcharge behind the wall. If the traffic is kept back at least ten feet from the walls, the traffic surcharge may be neglected. The above pressures assume no hydrostatic pressures or surcharge loads, which will increase the lateral pressures on the wall. We should be contacted for additional recommendations if hydrostatic or surcharge pressures are applicable. Walls should contain an adequate subdrain to reduce hydrostatic forces as shown on Figures 5 and 6. Backfilling retaining walls with expansive soils can increase lateral pressures well beyond the active or at -rest pressures indicated above. We recommend that retaining walls be backfilled with free - draining, cohesionless soil having an expansion index of 20 or less. The backfill area should include the zone defined by a 1:1 plane projected upward from the heel of the wall. Retaining wall backfill should be compacted to at least — Geotechnics Incorporated DAMP - PROOFING OR WATER- PROOFING AS REQUIRED ROCK AND FABRIC ALTERNATIVE COMPACTED. BACKFILL' 00 / 12 -INCH MINIMUM MINUS 3/4 -INCH CRUSHED ROCK °o ENVELOPED IN FILTER FABRIC ° WEEP -HOLE (MIRAFI 140NL, SUPAC 4NP, OR oo ALTERNATIVE APPROVED SIMILAR) 4 -INCH DIAM. PVC PERFORATED PIPE DAMP - PROOFING OR WATER- PROOFING AS REQUIRED GEOCOMPOSITE } / PANEL DRAIN PANEL DRAIN 1 ALTERNATIVE COMPACTED. BACKRLL WEEP -HOLE 1 Cu. FT. PER LINEAR FOOT OF ALTERNATIVE MINUS 3/4 -INCH CRUSHED ROCK ENVELOPED IN FILTER FABRIC �' iii < °o 4 -INCH DIAM. PVC PERFORATED PIPE NOTES 1) Perforated pipe should outlet through a solid pipe to a free gravity outfall. Perforated pipe and outlet pipe should have a fall of at least 1 %. 2) As an alternative to the perforated pipe and outlet, weep -holes may be constructed. Weep -holes should be at least 2 inches in diameter, spaced no greater than 8 feet, and be located just above grade at the bottom of wall. 3) Filter fabric should consist of Mirafi 140N, Supac 5NP, Amoco 4599, or similar approved fabric. Filter fabric should be overlapped at least 6- inches. 4) Geocomposite panel drain should consist of Miradrain 6000, J -DRain 400, Supac DS -15, or approved similar product. 5) Drain installation should be observed by the geotechnical consultant prior to backfilling. Project No. 0768 - 002 -00 , d 4 b h - G e o t e c h n i c s Document No. 03 -0121 Inco rporated WALL DRAIN DETAILS FIGURE 5 \Drafting \Core1Draw \Wa11drn Rev. 6/99 Interceptor Drain Consisting of Geocomposite Panel or Crushed Rock Blanket (SEE DETAIL) Height of Drain Equal to 2/3 Height of Wall ow Gravel Collector / Approximate With Pipe �/ Excavation Line 000� o Filter Fabric S Geocomposite Surrounding ° Panel Drain - - �j Crushed Rock Minus 3/4" - 4 Crushed Rock Approximate Approximate o Excavation At Least 2" of pp ;s At Least 2" of Excavation owe Crushed Rock Line Crushed Rock Line Surrounding Pipe Surrounding Pipe 4" Diameter Perforated 4" Diameter Perforated Pipe, ABS or PVC, — Pipe, ABS or PVC, Draining to Gravity Outfall Draining to Gravity Outfall ROCK BLANKET ALTERNATIVE GEOCOMPOSITE PANEL ALTERNATIVE NOTES 1) Geocomposite Panel should consist of Miradrain 6000, J -DRain 400, Supac DS -15 or approved similar product. 2) When back -cut excavation is in competent rock, filter fabric may be eliminated adjacent to rock. 3) Drainage pipes should have a fall of at least 1 percent. 4) Filter fabric should consist of Mirafi 140N, Supac 5NP, Amoco 4599 or similar approved product. Project No. 0768- 002 -00 AMb&- G e o t e c h n i c s Document No. 03 -0121 Incorporated WALL DRAIN DETAILS FIGURE 6 \ Drafting \CorelDraw \Walldrn - gravity Rev. 12199 MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 PAGE 18 90 percent relative compaction, based on ASTM D 1557 guidelines. Backfill should not be placed until walls have achieved adequate structural strength. Heavy compaction equipment which could cause distress to walls should not be used. 8.9 Pipelines - Project improvements may include underground pipelines. Geotechnical aspects of pipeline design include soil bearing and lateral resistance for thrust blocks, modulus of soil reaction, and pipe bedding. 8.9.1 Thrust Blocks For design of thrust blocks, the following design parameters may be used for thrust blocks embedded in either compacted fill or formational materials. Allowable Soil Bearing: 2,000 lbs /ft (allow a one -third increase for short-terns wind or seismic loads). Passive Pressure: 300 lbs /ft per foot of embedment (allow a one -third increase for short-term wind or seismic loads). Coefficient of Friction: 0.4 8.9.2 Modulus of Soil Reaction The modulus of soil reaction (E') is used to characterize the stiffness of soil Backfill placed along the sides of buried flexible pipelines. For the purpose of evaluating deflection due to the load associated with trench backfill over the pipe, a value of 1,500 lbs /in may be used assuming granular bedding material is placed adjacent to the pipe. 8.9.3 Pipe Bedding Typical pipe bedding as specified in the "GREENBOOK" may be used. As a minimum, we recommend that pipes be supported on at least 4 inches of granular Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 PAGE 19 bedding material. Where pipeline or trench excavation inclinations exceed 15 percent, we do not recommend that open graded rock be used for pipe bedding or backfill because of the potential for piping and internal erosion of the overlying backfill. The recommended bedding is coarse sand having a sand equivalent greater than 30. Alternatively, sand - cement slurry can be used for the bedding. The slurry should consist of at least a 2 -sack mix having a slump no greater than 5 - inches. If the sand - cement slurry is used for the pipe bedding to at least 1 foot over the top of the pipe, cut -off walls may not be considered necessary. This recommendation should be further evaluated by the project civil engineer designing the pipe system. 8.10 Pavements Subgrade preparation should be conducted immediately prior to the placement of the pavement section. The upper 12 inches of pavement subgrade should be scarified, brought to about optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density based on ASTM D 1557 guidelines. Aggregate base should conform to the specifications for crushed aggregate base, crushed miscellaneous base, or processed miscellaneous base as defined in Section 200 -2 of the "GREENBOOK." Aggregate base should be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density based on ASTM D 1557 guidelines. 8.10.1 Asphalt Concrete - Two traffic types are assumed for the design of asphalt concrete pavements: automobile parking areas (Traffic Index = 4.5) and driveways /fire lanes (Traffic Index = 6.0). Laboratory testing of a sample of the on -site soils indicate an R- value of 63. Based on the indicated Traffic Indexes and a design R -value of 63, the following pavement sections are recommended in accordance with the Caltrans design method. Traffic Index Asphalt Concrete Aggregate Base 4.5 3 inches 4 inches 6.0 4 inches 4 inches Geotechnics Incorporated - MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 PAGE 20 Hardcourt play areas with no vehicular traffic may be paved with 3 inches of full - depth asphalt concrete. Asphalt concrete should conform to "GREENBOOK" specifications. Asphalt concrete should be compacted to at least 95 percent based on the Hveem unit weight. 8.10.2 Portland Cement Concrete Concrete pavement design was performed in accordance with the simplified _. design procedure of the Portland Cement Association. This method is based on a 20 -year design life. For design, it was assumed that aggregate interlock joints will be used for load transfer across control joints. The Portland cement concrete was assumed to have a minimum 28 -day flexural strength of 600 lbs /in The subgrade soils are assumed to provide "medium" subgrade support (corresponding to sand and sand - gravel mixtures with moderate amounts of silt and clay). Based on these assumptions, we recommend that the pavement section consist of 6 inches of Portland cement concrete over 4 inches of aggregate base over the compacted subgrade. Concentrated truck traffic areas, such as trash truck aprons and loading dock areas, should be reinforced with at least number 4 bars on 24- inch centers, each way. 8.11 Soil Corrosivity _ A selected soil sample was evaluated for water - soluble sulfate content to assess the general degree of sulfate exposure of concrete in contact with the site soils. The test results are presented in Appendix C. The project design engineer may use the test results in conjunction with Table 19 -A -4 of the California Building Code to specify a suitable cement type, water cement ratio, and minimum compressive strength for concrete used on site which will be in direct contact with soil, including all foundations and slabs. The sulfate content test results are believed to represent the existing soil conditions at the site. Additional testing of the finish grade materials should be performed to evaluate the final as- graded condition of the site. It should be noted that soluble sulfate in the irrigation water supply, and /or the use of fertilizer may cause the sulfate content in the surficial soils to increase significantly with Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 PAGE 21 time. This may result in a higher sulfate exposure than that indicated by the test results reported herein. Studies have shown that the use of improved cements in the concrete, and a low water- cement ratio will improve the resistance of the concrete to sulfate exposure. Based on the resistivity test results, the on -site soils appear to be mildly corrosive to ferrous metals. A corrosion consultant should be contacted to provide corrosion control recommendations. 9 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION This investigation was performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical consultants practicing in this or similar localities. No warranty, express or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional - opinions included in this report. The samples taken and used for testing and the observations made are believed representative of the project site; however, soil and geologic conditions can vary significantly between field explorations. As in most projects, conditions revealed by excavation may be at variance with preliminary findings. If this occurs, the changed conditions must be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant and additional recommendations made, if warranted. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the design consultants for the project and incorporated into the plans, and the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractors carry out such recommendations in the field. Geotechnics Incorporated MAGDALENA ECKE FAMILY YMCA PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 FEBRUARY 18, 2003 DOCUMENT NO. 03 -0121 PAGE 22 Changes in the condition of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether due to natural processes or the work of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards of practice may occur from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the 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 three years. GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED Thomas B. Canady, P.E. 50057 W. Lee Vanderhurst, C.E.G. 1125 Principal Principal _ ED G�p�O ony F. Belfast, P.E. 40333 'C3 W. LEE Principal �� VANDERHURST U No. 1125 ' CERTIFIED ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST Q gpj H sir� `C k, \ e, Co N N�.5{]051 � Of Geotechnics Incorporated APPENDIX A REFERENCES American Society for Testing and Materials (2000), Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Section 4, Construction, Volume 04.08 Soil and Rock (I): D 420 - D 4914,West Conshohocken, PA. Anderson, J. G. (1984), Synthesis of Seismicity and Geological Data in California, U.S. Geological Survey Open -File Report 84 -424, 186 pp. Blake, T.F. (2000), EQFAULT and FRISKSP: Computer Programs for Estimation of Peak Horizontal Acceleration from Southern California Historical Earthquakes. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG) (1992), Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist - Priolo Special Studies Zone Act of 1972: California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG) (1998), Maps of Known Active Fault Near - Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada. Idriss, I. M. (1994), Attenuation Coefficients for Rock/Stiff Soil Conditions. International Conference of Building Officials (1997), 2001 California Building Code. Jennings, C. W. (1975), Fault Map of California: California Division of Mines and Geology, California Geologic Data Map Series. Kennedy, M.P. (1975), Geology of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, California, Point Loma 7'/i Minute Quadrangle, California Division of Mines and Geology, California, Bulletin 200. Mualchin, L. and Jones, A.L. (1992), Peak Accelerations from Maximum Credible Earthquakes in California (Rock and Stiff -Soils Sites): California Division of Mines and Geology, Open -File Report, 92 -1. National Geographic Holdings, Inc. (2001), TOPO!, Seamless USGS Topographic Maps on CD- ROM: San Francisco, California. Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development ( OSHPD) (1995), Reconciliation Between OSHPD Review and Seismic Hazards Mapping Approaches to Probabilistic -- Seismic Hazards Assessments, Division of Mines & Geology, Status Report dated January 18. Public Works Standards, Inc. (1999), "GREENBOOK," Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, 2000 Edition. Geotechnics Incorporated APPENDIX A REFERENCES (Continued) United States Department of Agriculture (1953), Stereo Aerial Photographs, AXN -8M -75 and 76, April 11. Wesnousky, S. G. (1986), Earthquakes, Quaternary Faults, and Seismic Hazard in California: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 91, no. B12, p. 12587 - 12631. Youngs, R.R. and Coppersmith, K.J. (1985), Implications of Fault Slip Rates and Earthquake Recurrence Models to Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Estimates, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, vol. 75, no. 4, pp. 939 -964. -- Geotechnics Incorporated APPENDIX B SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Our field explorations consisted of drilling seven exploratory borings on January 20, 2003 using a truck- mounted drill rig. The borings were drilled with an 8 -inch diameter, hollow -stem auger to depths up to about 20 feet below the existing ground surface. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on Figure 2. Logs describing the subsurface conditions encountered are presented on the following Figures B -1 through B -7. - Relatively undisturbed samples were collected using a California (CAL) sampler. The CAL sampler is a ring -lined tube with an inside diameter of 2% inches and an outside diameter of 3 _ inches. The ring samples were sealed in plastic bags, placed in rigid plastic containers, labeled, and returned to the laboratory for testing. In addition to obtaining CAL samples, standard penetration testing (SPT) was also performed. The SPT sampler is a split tube with an inside diameter of 1% inches and an outside diameter of 2 inches. The hammer used to drive the CAL and SPT samplers weighed 140 pounds, with a free fall of 30 inches. The number of blows needed to drive the CAL and SPT samplers 12 inches is shown on the logs. Bulk samples were also obtained from auger cuttings at selected intervals. The approximate locations of the bulk and drive samples are indicated on the logs with shading. Boring locations were established in the field by taping distances from landmarks shown on the plans provided. The locations shown should not be considered more accurate than is implied by the method of measurement used. The lines designating the interface between soil units on the boring logs are determined by interpolation and are therefore approximations. The transition between the materials may be abrupt or gradual. Further, soil conditions at locations between the borings may be substantially different from those at the specific locations explored. It should be recognized that the passage of time can result in changes in the soil conditions reported in our - logs. Geotechnics Incorporated LOG OF EXPLORATION BORING NO. 1 Date Drilled: 1/20/2003 -- Logged by: JCS Elevation: 170' MSL Method of Drilling: 8 -inch diameter hollow -stem auger U. J J V o 0 . N N DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 3 > —1 z W N F° m o m o � _ i y sand brown, ine o me wm grame ew grave , moist, me wm dense. 1 2 3 32 CAL 106 8.1 4 5 6 27 SPT 7 r 8 g TERlUCE DEP i y san stone, redd rown, fine to medium grained, moist, dense, weakly cemented. 10 50/6" GAL 117 9.7 11 12 13 14 Yellowish brown. 15 16 33 SPT 17 Total depth: 16'/2 feet No groundwater encountered 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 ED FIGURE B -1 PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORAT LOG OF EXPLORATION BORING NO. 2 Logged by: JCS Date Drilled: 112012003 Method of Drilling: 8 -inch diameter hollow -stem auger Elevation: 168' MSL U. J Wj U W o U- a a a y y N DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS a 3 w x U W > J Z p m C m C ay san rown, ine o me ium grained, few grave , pieces o asphalt concrete, moist, medium dense. Gradation 1 Atterberg Limits Expansion Index 2 3 21 swr 4 - TERRACEMEMSM: SiffFsandstone, brown , me o 1111a1311-1111 grained, moist, moderately cemented. 5 6 57 CAL 122 11.3 7 Reddish brown. 8 9 10 11 50/5" SPIT Total depth: 11 feet 12 No groundwater encountered 13 14 15 _ 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 PROJECT NO. 0768- 002 -00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE B -2 LOG OF EXPLORATION BORING NO. 3 - Logged by: JCS Date Drilled: 1120/2003 Method of Drilling: 8 -inch diameter hollow -stem auger Elevation: 166' MSL I-- J W ^ U. � a a va e N N N F M Ui DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS a 3 w Y rn W > J Z O m G m WW MU Silty sand rown, fine to medium grained, moist, ense. 1 2 3 43 SPr 4 5 6 21 sp"T Medium dense. 7 8 9 10 11 23 S ilty sandstone, redd rown, tine to me ium grained, moist, weakly to moderately cemented. 12 13 14 15 Yellowish brown. 16 40 SPT 17 Total depth: 16'/2 feet 18 No groundwater encountered 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 PROJECT NO. 0768- 002 -00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE B -3 LOG OF EXPLORATION BORING NO. 4 Logged by: JCS Date Drilled: 1/20/2003 Method of Drilling: 8 -inch diameter hollow -stem auger Elevation: 159'/2' MSL LL J W LL �= W a a L) U . N N N DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS a w x Fn rn W > J Z Silty _ sand re is rown, fine o coarse grained, moist, medium Corrosivity dense. 1 2 3 16 "sir 4 5 6 32 CAL 103 6.0 7 Silty sandstone, light fine to medium grained, moist, dense, weakly cemented. 8 9 10 11 35 SPr 12 Total depth: 11 % feet No groundwater encountered 13 -- 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE B-4 LOG OF EXPLORATION BORING NO. 5 Logged by: JCS Date Drilled: 1120/2003 Method of Drilling: 8 -inch diameter hollow -stem auger Elevation: 163'/2' MSL U. J J V o LL a a a = a U) N DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS a 3 w Y m W > J Z ❑ m Q m W ❑ rL Silty sand brown, fine to medium grained, moist, loose. '— Maximum Density 1 2 3 38 CAL 121 10.5 4 Wet. 5 6 4 SPT 7 8 9 10 Dark brown, moist. 11 4 SPT" 12 13 14 Light brown. 15 16 8 SPT- 17 Silly sandstone, brown, tine to medium grained, moist, medium dense, weakly cemented. 18 19 20 29 SPT: Total depth: 20 feet 21 No groundwater encountered 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE B -5 LOG OF EXPLORATION BORING NO. 6 Logged by: JCS Date Drilled: 1120/2003 Method of Drilling: 8 -inch diameter hollow -stem auger Elevation: 164' MSL LL J W F a 0. W a e U. a a a DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS x N y a R. w W N > J Z N m G m Q 0 4 Asphalt Concrete _ i y san rown, ine o medium rained, moist, oose. 1 2 3 17 CAL 110 12.6 Direct Shear 4 5 - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - --- -- - --- - -- ----- -- --- --- -- -- ined, --- ------ ------------------ �la yey --- sand - --- - (Si;), brown, fine to medwm grained, moist, loose. 6 6 SPT 7 8 Silty san s one, 5rown, tine to medium grained, moist, dense, weakly cemented. 9 10 11 34 SPT 12 Total depth: 11 % feet No groundwater encountered 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 1 PROJECT NO. 0768 - 002 -00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE B -6 LOG OF EXPLORATION BORING NO. 7 Logged by: JCS Date Drilled: 1/20/2003 Method of Drilling: 8 -inch diameter hollow -stem auger Elevation: 164' MSL U. J J V- e LL a a a x a. N < DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS w 0 > -j z 5" As halt Concrete _ i y san rown, ine o medium Brame , mois , me ium dense. R -Value 1 2 3 17 SPT 4 i y san s one, re is rown, me o coarse gra ne , moist, dense, weakly cemented. 5 -° 6 55 CAL 1 115 L Total depth: 6 feet 7 No groundwater encountered 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 PROJECT NO. 0768- 002 -00 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE B -7 APPENDIX C LABORATORY TESTING Selected samples of soils encountered during the investigation were tested using generally accepted testing standards. The soils selected for testing are believed to be generally representative of the materials encountered during the investigation at the site; however, variations may occur in the soils at the site, and the materials tested may not be representative of _ the materials encountered during construction. Laboratory testing was conducted in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in the same locality. No warranty, express or implied, is made as to the correctness or serviceability of the test results or the conclusions derived from these tests. Where a specific laboratory test method has been referenced, such as ASTM or California Test, the reference applies only to the specified laboratory test method and not to associated referenced test method(s) or practices, and the test method referenced has been used only as a guidance document for the general performance of the test and not as a "Test Standard." A brief description of the tests performed follows: Classification Soils were classified visually according to the Unified Soil Classification System as described in ASTM D 2488. Visual classification was supplemented by laboratory testing of selected soil samples and classification in general accordance with the laboratory soil classification tests outlined in ASTM D 2487. The resultant soil classifications are shown on the boring logs in Appendix B. In -Situ Moisture/Density The in -place moisture contents and dry unit weights of selected soil samples were determined using relatively undisturbed samples from the CAL sampler liner rings. The dry unit weights and moisture contents are shown on the boring logs in Appendix B. Particle Size Analysis Particle size analyses were performed on a selected soil sample in general accordance with the laboratory procedures outlined in ASTM D 422. The grain size distribution was used to estimate presumptive soil strength parameters and foundation design criteria. The test results are presented in Figure C -1. Atterbery, Limits The liquid limit, plastic limit, and plasticity index of a selected soil sample -- were estimated in general accordance with the laboratory procedures outlined in ASTM D 4318. The test results are given in Figure C -1. Geotechnics Incorporated APPENDIX C LABORATORY TESTING (Continued) R- Value An R -value test was performed on a sample of the upper soils in general accordance with the laboratory procedures outlined in California Test 301. The test results are given in Figure C -2. Maximum Density /Optimum Moisture The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of a selected soil sample were estimated in general accordance with the laboratory procedures outlined in ASTM D 1557. The test results are given in Figure C -2. Expansion Index The expansion potential of a selected soil sample was estimated in general accordance with the laboratory procedures outlined in ASTM D 4829. The test results are given in Figure C -2. Sulfate Content To assess the potential for reactivity with below grade concrete, a selected soil sample was evaluated for water - soluble sulfate content. The water soluble sulfate was extracted from the soil under vacuum using a 10:1 (water to dry soil) dilution ratio. The extracted solution was then tested for water - soluble sulfate in general accordance with ASTM D 516. The test results are given in Figure C -3. pH and Resistivity To assess the potential for reactivity with buried metal pipe and below grade ferrous materials, a selected soil sample was tested for pH and resistivity in general accordance with the procedures outlined in California Test 643. The test results are given in Figure C -3. Chloride Content A selected soil sample was evaluated for water - soluble chloride content in general accordance with the Standard Method for Evaluation of Waste Water Test SMEWW4500CL which is conducted in general conformance with EPA Test Method 375.4. The test results are given in Figure C -3. Direct Shear The shear strength of a selected soil sample was assessed through direct shear testing performed in general accordance with the laboratory procedures outlined in ASTM D 3080. The test results are presented in Figure C -4. Geotechnics Incorporated -- -- — N O O M r r I I I I I I I 0 0 0 N O W J F- F- X CO o _ I 0 Z D _ 1 - a h- W J J Z . �_ co ❑_ U � Z CD LL j uj E I _ I � C7 Q U a�i v { O } CL r + , r- U E ` t t o O T z t - 1 t t J � i � U) i I I I I CD I I— =- r L o LL. rn N W Q I I I z I _ E J L - C) co ,_ Cl) - r - F U (n f (A Q V d r + t v co r _ - Y r p J N � i + � W J Z cu c ~ CL + - C -j — ! W V 00 m I �_ I (/) I - � I I I W uj it of W U zi - t I i E r^ i VJ � I LL C� O N � I I I I i l i � J O I c I 1 �1 M + t W U U - �- w Co a ►--� W cD Ja � UJ ,., Q azo O N zo a I - j -- U — 1 _ —+ - (n J 0 0 C) C) � L p O�i O O O O a X � w 1146iaM Aq jauiq;uaOJad R -VALUE TEST RESULTS (California Test 301) SAMPLE R -VALUE B -7 at 0' to 4' 63 MAXIMUM DENSITY /OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT " (ASTM D 1557) MAXIMUM OPTIMUM SAMPLE DRY DENSITY MOISTURE (Pcfl (°io) L !B- : 5 . atO'to 4' 131 9 �2 EXPANSION INDEX TESTS (ASTM D 4829) SAMPLE EXPANSION EXPANSION INDEX POTENTIAL B -2 at 0' to 4' 0 Very Low CLASSIFICATION OF EXPANSIVE SOIL EXPANSION INDEX POTENTIAL EXPANSION 0 -20 Very Low 21 -50 Low 51 -90 Medium 91 -130 High Above 130 Very High Reference: Table 18 -1 -13, 2001 California Building Code Project No. 768 - 002 -00 A � - G e o t e c h n i c s Document No. 03 -0121 n c o r p o r a t e d LABORATORY TEST RESULTS FIGURE C -2 SULFATE, pH, RESISTIVITY, AND CHLORIDE TEST RESULTS WATER- SOLUBLE WATER- SOLUBLE (Caltrans RESISTIVITY CHLORIDE CONTENT SAMPLE SULFATE CONTENT an (% Soil (ohm -cm) % of Dr Wt. ) (% of Dry Soil Wt.) 643) (Caltrans 643) - (ASTM D 516) (SMEWW4500CL C) B -1 at 1' to 3' 0.00 7.5 6,070 0.005 - Water Soluble Sulfate(SO4)Content in % of Dry Soil Wt. General Degree of Reactivity with Concrete over 2.00 Very Severely Reactive 0.2 to 2.00 Severely Reactive 0.1 to 0.20 Moderately R 0.00 to 0.10 Negligible -. Reference: Table 19 -A -4, 2001 California Building Code Soil Resistivity in ohm -cm General Degre of Corrosivity to Ferr Metal 0 to 1,000 — _ Very Cor 1,000 to 2,000 _ Corros 2,000 to 5,000 _ Moderately Corrosive 5,000 to 10,000 Mildly Corrosive greater than 10,000 Slightly C Water Soluble Chloride (Cl) Content in % of Dry Soil Wt. General Degree of Corrosivity to Metal over 0.15 Severely Corrosive - 0.03 t 0.15 Corrosive 0.00 to 0.03 Negligible Project No. 0768- 002 -00 �- G e o t e c h n i c s Document No. 03 -0121 n c o r p o r a t e d CORROSIVITY TEST RESULTS FIGURE C -3 a 3500 - - -� - - - -- T — Q 3000 I _ -- ■ * �7��1ff■� ■H�# T ■ ■� ■ ■ ■ ■I a 2500 -- ■ �- — a 2000 ■ ■ ■ �- L Q O [31 W 1500 - d 1000 ■ O © ©© �■ ®7f� ■ ■ ■■ _ s 500 �■ 8 �■ �� 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 Strain ( %) 4500 - �- 4000 o Peak Strength �- 3500 ♦ Ultimate Strength - - -J i I 3000 - rt -- - — -- CL 2500 L _ L 2000 - r- -- - -_ - - �- --- _ -_ V! 1500 - r - - - -- - T 1000 - - - --- - - - - -� — —. l i 500 - - -- - -- 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 -- L - -- Normal Stress (psf) Sample: B -6 @ 2'- 3' Peak Ultimate FILL Silty sand (SM), brown �' 36 ° 34 ° C. 100 sf 0 psf In -Situ As- Tested Strain Rate: 0.005 In. /Min. Yd 109.9 pcf 109.9 pcf (Sample was consolidated and drained) w 12.6 0 /. __ j 19.0% G e o t e c h n i c s Project No. 0768- 002 -00 — I n c o r p o r a t e d DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Document No. 03 -0121 FIGURE C-4 THE O4 �...NAL OF THIG DOi1L!NE�i T WAS RECORDED ON APR 0(, - "'gL; DOCUMENT NUMBER 2004-0 Recording Requested By: ) GREGORY J. SMITH, COUNT`` RECORDER SAN DIEGO COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE City Engineer ) TIME: 4:2 FM When Recorded Mail to: ) City Clerk ) City of Encinitas ) 505 South Vulcan Avenue ) Encinitas CA 92024 ) SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER'S USE ONLY PRIVATE STORM WATER TREATMENT MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Assessor's Parcel No. 256- 340 - 11,20,29,30 Project No.: 02 -259 CDP W.O.No. 1365 -G THIS AGREEMENT for the periodic maintenance and repair of that certain private storm water treatment facilities, the legal description and/or plat of which is set forth in Exhibits attached hereto and made a part hereof, is entered into by YMCA OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY (formerly YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SAN DIEGO AND SAN DIEGO COUNTY), (Hereinafter referred to as "Developer ") for the benefit of future owners who will use the private storm water treatment facilities (hereinafter referred to as " owners ", which shall include the Developer to the extent the Developer retains any ownership interest in any land covered by this agreement. WHEREAS, this Agreement is required as a condition of approval by the City of Encinitas, and WHEREAS, Developer is the owner of certain real property and developed as Attachment "A" that will use and enjoy the benefit of said storm water treatment facilities(s). A complete legal description and/or plat of said real property to be maintained is attached, and labelled Attachment `B ", and incorporated by reference. Said real property is hereinafter referred to as the "property "; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Developer that said private storm water treatment system be maintained in a safe and usable condition by the owners; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Developer to establish a method for the periodic maintenance and repair of said private storm water treatment facilities and for the apportionment of the expense of such maintenance and repair among existing and future owners; and WHEREAS, there exists a benefit to the public if the private storm water facilities be adequately maintained on a regular and periodic basis; and WHEREAS, it is the intention of the Developer that this Agreement constitute a covenant running with the land, binding upon each successive owner of all or any portion of the property. NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 1. The property is benefited by this Agreement, and present and successive owners of all or any portion of the property are expressly bound hereby for the benefit of the land. 2. The cost and expense of maintaining the private storm water treatment facilities shall be paid by the owner of the heirs, assigns and successors in interest or each such owner. 3. In the event any of the herein described parcels of land are subdivided further, the owners, heirs, assigns and successors in interest of each such newly created parcel shall be liable under this Agreement for their then pro rata share of expenses and such pro rata shares of expenses shall be computed to reflect such newly created parcels. 4. The repairs and maintenance to be performed under this Agreement shall be limited to the following: reasonable and improvements and maintenance work to adequately maintain said private storm water treatment facilities to permit access to said facilities. Repairs and maintenance under this Agreement shall include, but is not limited to, repairing access roadbeds, repairing and maintaining drainage structures, removing debris, if any, and other work reasonably necessary and proper to repair and preserve the private storm water treatment facilities for their intended purposes. Adequate maintenance of said drainage facilities shall be conducted at a minimum of every six months. 5. If there is a covenant, agreement, or other obligation imposed as a condition of the development, the obligation to repair and maintain the private storm water treatment facilities as herein set forth shall commence when improvements have been completed and approved by the City. 6. Any extraordinary repair required to correct damage to said storm water treatment facilities that results from action taken or contracted for by the owner's or their successors in interest shall be paid for by the party taking action or party contracting for work which caused the necessity for the extraordinary repair. The repair shall be such as to restore the storm water treatment facilities to the condition existing prior to said damage. 7. Any liability of the owners for personal injury to an agent hereunder, or to any worker employed to make repairs or provide maintenance under this Agreement, or to third persons, as well as any liability of the owners for damage to the property, by agents of the owner, or any such worker, or of any third persons, as a result of or arising out of repairs and maintenance under this Agreement, shall be borne, by the owners as they bear the costs and expenses of such repairs and maintenance. Owners shall be responsible for and maintain their own insurance, if any. By this Agreement, the Developer does not intend to provide for the sharing of liability with respect to personal injury or property damage other than that attributable to the repairs and maintenance undertaken under this Agreement. 8. Owners shall jointly and severally defend and indemnify and hold harmless City, City's engineer and its consultants and each of its officials, directors, officers, agents and employees from and against all liability, claims, damages, losses, expenses, personal injury and other costs, including costs of defense and attorney's fees, to the agent hereunder or to any owner, any contractor, any subcontractor, any user of the storm water treatment facilities, or to any other third persons arising out of or in any way related to the use of, repair or maintenance of, or the failure to repair or maintain the private storm water treatment facilities. 9. Nothing in the Agreement, the specifications or other contract documents or City's approval of the plans and specifications or inspection of the work is intended to include a review, inspection acknowledgement of a responsibility for any such matter, and City, City's engineer and its consultants, and each of its officials, directors, officers, employees and agents, shall have no responsibility or liability therefore. 10. The foregoing covenants shall run with the land and shall be deemed to be for the benefit of the land of the owners and each and every person who shall at anytime own all or any portion of the property referred to herein. 11. It is understood and agreed that the covenants herein contained shall be binding on the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assignees of each of the owners. 12. It is the purpose of the signatories hereto that this instrument be recorded to the end and intent that the obligation hereby created shall be and constitute a covenant running with the land and any subsequent purchaser of all or any portion thereof, by acceptance of delivery of a deed and /or conveyance regardless of form, shall be deemed to have consented to and become bound by these presents, including without limitation, the right of any person entitled to enforce the terms of this Agreement to institute legal action as provided in Paragraph 8 hereof, such remedy to be cumulative and in addition to other remedies provided in this Agreement and to all other remedies at law or in equity. 13. The terms of this Agreement may be amended in writing upon majority approval of the owners and consent of the City. 14. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. In the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, the validity, and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected thereby. 15. If the Property constitutes a "Common Interest Development" as defined in California Civil Code Section 1351(c) which will include membership in or ownership of an "Association" as defined in California Civil Code Section 1351(a), anything in this Agreement to the contrary notwithstanding, the following provisions shall apply at and during such time as (1) the Property is encumbered by a "Declaration" (as defined in California Civil Code Section 1351(h), and (ii) the Common Area of the property (including the private storm water treatment facilities) is managed and controlled by an Association: (a) The Association, through its Board of Directors, shall repair and maintain the private storm water treatment facilities and shall be deemed the "agent" as referred to in Paragraph 7 above. The Association, which shall not be replaced except by amendment to the Declaration, shall receive no compensation for performing such duties. The costs of such maintenance and repair shall be assessed against each owner and his subdivision interest in the Property pursuant to the Declaration. The assessments shall be deposited in the Association's corporate account. (b) The provisions in the Declaration which provide for assessment liens in favor of the Association and enforcement thereof shall supersede Paragraph 8 of the Agreement in its entirety. No individual owners shall have the right to alter, maintain or repair any of the L Common Area (as defined in California Civil Code Section 1351(b) in the Property except as may be allowed by the Declaration. (c) This Agreement shall not be interpreted in any manner, which reduces or limits the Association's rights and duties following its Bylaws and Declaration. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement This ZS day of Ft? E5e-"M -! 1 2004. Developer: YMCA of, San Diego County , �// - -; By Name / ✓G r' ft �d�/ �` Title By A r( F�- Title Signature of DEVELOPER must be notarized. Attach the appropriate acknowledgement. Accepted by J Peter Cota - Robles City Engineer, City of Encinitas 5 State of California County of San Diego On February 25, 2004 before me, Carol E. Latimer, Notary Public, personally appeared Richard A. Collato and Alan R. Perry personally known to me ( to be the person(s) whose name(s) isfare subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that heAke /they executed the same in hi4hff/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by lisfher/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. CAROL E. LATIMER Commission # 1370036 Notary Pubic - California San Diego County Expirm Sep 12, - Carol E. Latimer My commission expires September 12, 2006 OPTIONAL CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT fJ 5 t o r rn l.4 - ) ' 1 7'C-r Individual �c�."C vr, a rt W�d.vtTe n C- A c t Corporate Officer s Title or Type of Document Pc`eatcg.ea� a- �sST Title(s) 5 «'rC.'Tw r y `(a Number of Pages Signer is Representing: Y-� � '�'- Date of Document VA tgners (other than named above) 02/20/04 14:30 FAX 1 760 844 8328 NAUVALbriA LUM Mm A mutt ATTACHMENT 'A' THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 13 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE THEREOF, SOUTH 89 WEST (RECORD NORTH 89° 32' 26" EAST) 493.86 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF Tf iE LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECORDED AUGUST 30, 1962 AS DOCUMENT NO. 149821 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE NORTH 18 IT 02" WEST (RECORD NORTH 17 34'58' WEST) 407.97 FEET; THENCE PARALLEL WITH SAID SOUTH LINE NORTH 89 49'30" EAST 629.07 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE SOUTH 01 08'00* WEST 388.02 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. �1 lA i�rs rJ�,r - �' Cfi;� -� / / /// 11fe ii ' %� % %iii/ i� 0,%%%li ii �I ii �OFCAiwiiii ' �b { 'P !r rl 71��II: i /irrari��I /1 d ii i' %;%'', %I�i�i / r/ 1„ / ion 11 -- i wire, Irv. ow, 0 »irArarPA�� / OP or I r' %'► %, /I�'� % ► / �/ /' % 11/ .I1 / / / / /I ��iu. /,��% / % % F,% �I� 5'D. ! Ire 5 W10 �I /,'!/ 31, THE Ok— AL Or THIS} ! OCUME's l WAS) RECORDED ON APR 06, 2004 DOCUMENT NUMBER '.; X04 02894 f Recording Requested By: ) GREGORY J. SMITH, COUNT`S RECORDER SAN DIEGO COUNTY RECORDE'''D OFFICE. City Engineer ) TIME: 4: 9 -J PM When Recorded Mail to: ) City Clerk ) City of Encinitas ) 505 South Vulcan Avenue ) Encinitas CA 92024 ) SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER'S USE ONLY PRIVATE STORM WATER TREATMENT MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Assessor's Parcel No. 256- 340 - 11,20,29,30 Project No.: 02 -259 CDP W.O.No. 1365 -G THIS AGREEMENT for the periodic maintenance and repair of that certain private storm water treatment facilities, the legal description and/or plat of which is set forth in Exhibits attached hereto and made a part hereof, is entered into by YMCA OF SAN DIEGO.COUNTY (formerly YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SAN DIEGO AND SAN DIEGO COUNTY), (Hereinafter referred to as "Developer ") for the benefit of future owners who will use the private stone water treatment facilities (hereinafter referred to as " owners ", which shall include the Developer to the extent the Developer retains any ownership interest in any land covered by this agreement. WHEREAS, this Agreement is required as a condition of approval by the City of Encinitas, and WHEREAS, Developer is the owner of certain real property and developed as Attachment "A" that will use and enjoy the benefit of said storm water treatment facilities(s). A complete legal description and/or plat of said real property to be maintained is attached, and labelled Attachment `B ", and incorporated by reference. Said real property is hereinafter referred to as the "property "; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Developer that said private storm water treatment system be maintained in a safe and usable condition by the owners; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Developer to establish a method for the periodic maintenance and repair of said private storm water treatment facilities and for the apportionment of the expense of such maintenance and repair among existing and future owners; and WHEREAS, there exists a benefit to the public if the private storm water facilities be adequately maintained on a regular and periodic basis; and WHEREAS, it is the intention of the Developer that this Agreement constitute a covenant running with the land, binding upon each successive owner of all or any portion of the property. NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 1. The property is benefited by this Agreement, and present and successive owners of all or any portion of the property are expressly bound hereby. for the benefit of the land. 2. The cost and expense of maintaining the private storm water treatment facilities shall be paid by the owner of the heirs, assigns and successors in interest or each such owner. 3. In the event any of the herein described parcels of land are subdivided further, the owners, heirs, assigns and successors in interest of each such newly created parcel shall be liable under this Agreement for their then pro rata share of expenses and such pro rata shares of expenses shall be computed to reflect such newly created parcels. 4. The repairs and maintenance to be performed under this Agreement shall be limited to the following: reasonable and improvements and maintenance work to adequately maintain said private storm water treatment facilities to permit access to said facilities. Repairs and maintenance under this Agreement shall include, but is not limited to, repairing access roadbeds, repairing and maintaining drainage structures, removing debris, if any, and other work reasonably necessary and proper to repair and preserve the private storm water treatment facilities for their intended purposes. Adequate maintenance of said drainage facilities shall be conducted at a minimum of every six months. 5. If there is a covenant, agreement, or other obligation imposed as a condition of the development, the obligation to repair and maintain the private storm water treatment facilities as herein set forth shall commence when improvements have been completed and approved by the City. 6. Any extraordinary repair required to correct damage to said storm water treatment facilities that results from action taken or contracted for by the owners or their successors in interest shall be paid for by the party taking action or party contracting for work which caused the necessity for the extraordinary repair. The repair shall be such as to restore the storm water treatment facilities to the condition existing prior to said damage. 7. Any liability of the owners for personal injury to an agent hereunder, or to any worker employed to make repairs or provide maintenance under this Agreement, or to third persons, as well as any liability of the owners for damage to the property, by agents of the owner, or any such worker, or of any third persons, as a result of or arising out of repairs and maintenance under this Agreement, shall be borne, by the owners as they bear the costs and expenses of such repairs and maintenance. Owners shall be responsible for and maintain their own insurance, if any. By this Agreement, the Developer does not intend to provide for the sharing of liability with respect to personal injury or property damage other than that attributable to the repairs and maintenance undertaken under this Agreement. 8. Owners shall jointly and severally defend and indemnify and hold harmless City, City's engineer and its consultants and each of its officials, directors, officers, agents and employees from and against all liability, claims, damages, losses, expenses, personal injury and other costs, including costs of defense and attorney's fees, to the agent hereunder or to any owner, any contractor, any subcontractor, any user of the storm water treatment facilities, or to any other third persons arising out of or in any way related to the use of, repair or maintenance of, or the failure to repair or maintain the private storm water treatment facilities. 9. Nothing in the Agreement, the specifications or other contract documents or City's approval of the plans and specifications or inspection of the work is intended to include a review, inspection acknowledgement of a responsibility for any such matter, and City, City's engineer and its consultants, and each of its officials, directors, officers, employees and agents, shall have no responsibility or liability therefore. 10. The foregoing covenants shall run with the land and shall be deemed to be for the benefit of the land of the owners and each and every person who shall at anytime own all or any portion of the property referred to herein. 11. It is understood and agreed that the covenants herein contained shall be binding on the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assignees of each of the owners. 12. It is the purpose of the signatories hereto that this instrument be recorded to the end and intent that the obligation hereby created shall be and constitute a covenant running with the land and any subsequent purchaser of all or any portion thereof, by acceptance of delivery of a deed and /or conveyance regardless of form, shall be deemed to have consented to and become bound by these presents, including without limitation, the right of any person entitled to enforce the terms of this Agreement to institute legal action as provided in Paragraph 8 hereof, such remedy to be cumulative and in addition to other remedies provided in this Agreement and to all other remedies at law or in equity. 13. The terms of this Agreement may be amended in writing upon majority approval of the owners and consent of the City. 14. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. In the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, the validity, and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected thereby. 15. If the Property constitutes a "Common Interest Development" as defined in California Civil Code Section 1351(c) which will include membership in or ownership of an "Association" as defined in California Civil Code Section 1351(a), anything in this Agreement to the contrary notwithstanding, the following provisions shall apply at and during such time as (i) the Property is encumbered by a "Declaration" (as defined in California Civil Code Section 1351(h), and (ii) the Common Area of the property (including the private storm water treatment facilities) is managed and controlled by an Association: (a) The Association, through its Board of Directors, shall repair and maintain the private storm water treatment facilities and shall be deemed the "agent" as referred to in Paragraph. 7 above. The Association, which shall not be replaced except by amendment to the Declaration, shall receive no compensation for performing such duties. The costs of such maintenance and repair shall be assessed against each owner and his subdivision interest in the Property pursuant to the Declaration. The assessments shall be deposited in the Association's corporate account. (b) The provisions in the Declaration which provide for assessment liens in favor of the Association and enforcement thereof shall supersede Paragraph 8 of the Agreement in its entirety. No individual owners shall have the right to alter, maintain or repair any of the L Common Area (as defined in California Civil Code Section 1351(b) in the Property except as may be allowed by the Declaration. (c) This Agreement shall not be interpreted in any manner, which reduces or limits the Association's rights and duties following its Bylaws and Declaration. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement This 1. 7_ day of Vk C gUim -z- , 2004. Developer: YMCA o San Diego County By i�Iame Title By Title Signature of DEVELOPER must be notarized. Attach the appropriate acknowledgement. Accepted by Peter Cota - Robles City Engineer, City of Encinitas 5 State of California County of San Diego On February 25, 2004 before me, Carol E. Latimer, Notary Public, personally appeared Richard A. Collato and Alan R. Perry personally known to me ( to be the person(s) whose name(s) isfare subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that heAhe /they executed the same in his4w/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by 44&gm /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. CAROL E. LATIMER Commission # 1370036 FI&, Notary Public - California �¢ San Diego County 12, Carol E. Latimer My commission expires September 12, 2006 OPTIONAL CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT -t o r rh l.J e T cr (�r�� >Ta 5 1 Individual N r cc."'Cvhe n rc, e X Corporate Officers Title or Type of Document P-re-5 to e -) - 1 'A (ASST Title(s) 5 GC- Y' t�w Number of Pages Signer is Representing: � � ?c Date of Document vX\ c. ( 0 R S4 lgners (other than named above) U 1 1 02/20/04 14:30 FAX 1 760 944 9329 MAGDALEM r;l;M YXUA �! J ATTACHMENT 'A' THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 13 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE THEREOF, SOUTH 89 30" WEST (RECORD NORTH 89 32' 26' EAST) 493.86 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF TliE LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECORDED AUGUST 30, 1962 AS DOCUMENT N0.149821 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE NORTH 18 IT 02" WEST (RECORD NORTH 17 34'58 WEST) 407.97 FEET; THENCE PARALLEL WITH SAID SOUTH LINE NORTH 89 49'30' EAST 629.07 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE SOUTH 01 08' 00' WEST 388.02 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. `ti J 1 1 1 it •' � I � � I j• i itf, lid j "ri r I/�I /:I ,►. ////1 � 1f��i'' .. // //1 rig or /� / %: P:: Ar rA �f' o r �+ icy: rri r.►.aO��r.�,..r,ir'w:�� /l/' /O% f WWI o � OAF / r op ou ol, 00 �",0,0 p� WWI FOWWArjr __.�.�1'/ /ice � � ' � • ' ir / W, -- -- / ► � /, /i 1 �� ko ..._ .�I/ e /_ /i �../A + r /1. /ii . P � /I ARA \ / /,/.� /�a0,� / /. c! ��/ edtJ „ i , . / , _1 �/. , �� /1�� /f��.► F � a p 1 i 02/20/04 14:27 FAX 1 760 944 9,1.29 MAGDALENA ECKE YMCA 0002 MUSICK, PEELER & GARRETT LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 225 BROADWAY, SUITE 1900 LOS ANCALUS SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92101 -5028 ORANOR COUNTY ALAN R. PERRY SAN DIEC;O a.perry @mpgtaw.com SAN FRANCISCO (619) 525 -2514 TELEPHONE: (619) 525-2500 FACSIMILE: (619) 231 -1234 SANTA BAR9ARA WWW.MPGWEB.COM FIT,P. NO. 9363.9900 February 9, 2004 Ms. Susan Eight Executive Director Magdalena Ecke YMCA 200 Saxony Road Post office Box 907 Encinitas, California 92024 Re: P rivate Storm Water Treatment Mainten Agreeme Dear Susan: I have reviewed the above agreement; enclosed is a copy with my numbered comments. As I am sure you know, the topic of the document is the serious environmental problem of contaminated storm water runoff from urban roofs and hardscape. In my experience, most local governments have dealt with the problem through (i) conditions in discretionary permits (e.g., CUPS), (ii) building codes and (iii) ordinances. This is the first time I have seen it handled as a so- called "covenant running with the land" (see the last "Whereas "). Clearly, it is not enforceable as a covenant running with the land because it does not comply with California Civil Code section 1461. However, it is clearly an agreement (that is, a meeting of the minds) of the City and yMCA. But it may not be an enforceable contract of YMCA, since there does not appear to be any consideration. However, if the City wants the document with the few changes I have suggested, I will recommend to Mr. Collato that we sign and deliver it to the City. YMCA will not attempt to get out of i.ts commitments on some purely technical grounds. One last point -of which you may be aware: If I am right that Exhibit B deals with drains, my experience is that 02/20/04 14:90 FAX 1 760 944 99" -° MAGDALENA ECKE YMCA IJ011 ATTACHMENT `A' -- THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 13 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE THEREOF, SOUTH 89° 4Q 30" WEST (RECORD NORTH 89 32'26 EAST) 493.86 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF Tf iE LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECORDED AUGUST 30, 1962 AS DOCUMENT NO. 149821 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE NORTH 18 13' 02" WEST (RECORD NORTH 17 34'58" WEST) 407.97 FEET; THENCE PARALLEL WITH SAID SOUTH LINE NORTH 89 49' 30" EAST 629.07 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE SOUTH 01 08' 00" WEST 388.02 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. •tit 02/20/04 14:28 FAX 1 760 944 9399 MAGDALENA ECHE YMCA X003 MUSICK, PEELER & GARRETT tLP ATTORNEYS A*r LAW Ms. Susan Hight February 9, 2004 Page 2 they contain filters and those filters require annual maintenance (it not replacement). I do not know the cast. Please give the City a copy of this letter, as well as a copy of the enclosed document and my brief no e . Very trul y r L an R. Perry for MUSICK, PEELER & GARRETT LLP ARP:dme Encl. CC: Mr. Richard A. Collato President, YMCA 350336.1 I ! I I I i ! I I 1 I d' d0 ItIN „ f l S 9A yw d :z od g5l rr r w ca, n I / I -- N,� 00 I 1s I r Tj D6 rk IT C) W .. rr l .f D - EX. 4" GRA TES \ FR57 U) ILL— • n, ^ ^ I .n . r � x ! D oo 18" CURB — I I OPENIN n" I M1 . C C EX. 1x1 ' n .I GRA TE _ y y I EX 1 x� ®EX. 8 x8 I t� ! ho GRATE GRATE 0 00 _ n X I D 165. � o - � � � o> � . n � Q) ' EX. 1 'x1 ' _ GRA TE I 2.1 n h r EXIS - 42'.FSMT .7R ROA�OSES RANTED TO THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO BY DOC. REC MAY 21, 69 � A3`77M -- NO, 8 skz� Z ,_ .... __.. x y ..... _.,._:.._N078 "F 20014° Fl n N012124 I f 387 69 ! SCALE.• 1' = 30' I I I I Q) 1 i ZZI C tal Op I � 4 n ! con ! 416hydro.dwg 3 -18 -04 9:35:53 am EST I �I i I I I I I ; I n�� i j I i 00 sop ✓ ✓ do ✓ 0 I ✓ oop I ✓ ✓ doo so I � ✓ I I I I i I , I I I I ti I _ I I I � I I EX. 4" GRA TES I D I � ' I I I i I I I I D I I < I O I ; I I I � - I I I � rn r� I x I D I EX. 1'x1' GRATE I I I I ■ EX. 1'x1' ® EX 8 "x8 GRA TE GRATE I i ) � I ti � I I a o EX. 1'x1' GRATE I I � _ I EXIST. 42' ESMT. FOR ROADWAY PURPOSES GRANTED TO THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO BY_DOC. REC, MAY 21, 1969 AS DOC. NO. 89931. now ��••� am �,, 4woo'n ..... mom i 7\ �� O - i SCALE i" = 80' I I I I z z r o y `y C Q p �+.. II pp � � � � � • • j �L C-., o-4, L m olq con I I I �_ II �� I I I I I i I 416hydroEX.dwg 12 - 4 - 03 8:13:15 am EST I I