The URL can be used to link to this page

2001-6951 FM/G/I/PEPROJECT No.: 2313SD3 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION FOR SIDONI_A EAST, 8 CUSTOM LOTS ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR BARRATT AMERICAN 5950 PRIESTLY DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 PREPARED BY GEOTEK INSITE, INC. 1384 POINSETTIA AVENUE VISTA, CALIFORNIA 92083 ECG hK October 14, 2002 1384 Poinsettia Ave., Suite A, Vista, CA 92083 (760) 599 -0509 FAX (760) 599 -0593 K 9 INSITE NC. BARRATT AMERICAN 5950 Priestly Drive Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Mr. Jason Armison Subject: Geotechnical Evaluation Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots APN 254 -613 -06 Encinitas, California Mr. Armison: Geotechnical Environmental Materials October 14, 2002 Project No.: 2313SD3 As requested and authorized, GeoTek, Inc. (GeoTek) has performed a geotechnical evaluation for the subject property located in the City of Encinitas, California. The accompanying report presents the results of our investigation, discussion of our findings, and provides geotechnical recommendations for foundation design and construction. In our opinion, the proposed development of the site appears feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint provided that the recommendations included herein are incorporated into the design and construction phases of the project. Please note that this report should supersede our preliminary report submitted to you on September 19, 2002 regarding the same. The opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to call our office. Respectfully submitted, GpEERIIVG C GeoTek Insite, Inc. °� No. EG 2248 10131 M3 J P. lake, r y CEG 2248, Exp. 10/31/03 OF CA��` Project Manager (4) Addressee FAData\D300\BARRA77\2313SD3 Sidonia East- EncinitasjfGeo Rpt.doc QPoFESS10H y Q0�\�oN I. Sq��O m w No. 62375 m Exp. 09 /30/05 7D sX CIVIL �P �rFOFCAL�fOP� Simon I. aiid, RCE 62375, Exp. 9/30/05 Senior Engineer ARIZONA CALIFORNIA NEVADA UTAH BARRATT AMERICAN Geotechnical Evaluation Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots TABLE OF CONTENT Project No.: 2313SD3 October 14, 2002 Page i 1. INTENT ....................................... ......................... . . . . .. ................. . . . . .. , 2. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES ............................................................................ ..............................1 3. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ............................................ ..............................2 3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION ...................................................................................................... ..............................2 3.2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................................... ..............................2 4. FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING .............................................. ..............................3 4.1 FIELD EXPLORATION ......................................................................................................... ..............................3 4.2 LABORATORY TESTING ..................................................................................................... ..............................3 5. GEOLOGIC AND SOILS CONDITIONS ........................................................................... ..............................3 5.1 GENERAL ......................................................................................................................... ............................... 3 5.1.1 Topsoil (Not Mapped) ............................................................................................ ..............................4 5.1.2 Artificial Fill (Mapped as Af) ................................................................................ ..............................4 5.1.3 Alluvium (Mapped as Qal) ..................................................................................... ..............................4 5.1.4 Quaternary Terrace Deposits (Mapped as Qt) ...................................................... ..............................5 5.1.5 Torrey Sandstone (Mapped as Tt) .......................................................................... ..............................5 5.2 SURFACE AND GROUND WATER ....................................................................................... ..............................6 5.2.1 Surface Water ........................................................................................................ ..............................6 5.2.2 Groundwater .......................................................................................................... ..............................6 5.3 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY .............................................................................................. ..............................6 5.4 LIQUEFACTION EVALUATION ........................................................................................... ..............................6 5.5 OTHER SEISMIC HAZARDS ................................................................................................. ..............................6 5.6 SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION ....................................................................................... ..............................7 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................ ..............................8 6.1 GENERAL .......................................................................................................................... ..............................8 6.2 EARTHWORK CONSIDERATIONS ....................................................................................... ..............................8 62.1 Site Clearing .......................................................................................................... ..............................8 62.2 Fills ........................................................................................................................ ..............................8 6.2.3 Removals ................................................................................................................ ..............................8 6.2.4 Transition Lots ....................................................................................................... ..............................9 6.2.5 Excavation Characteristics .................................................................................... ..............................9 6.2.6 Shrinkage, Bulking, and Subsidence ...................................................................... ..............................9 6.3 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................... .............................10 6.3.1 Foundation Design Criteria .................................................................................. .............................10 6.3.2 Settlement .............................................................................................................. .............................I1 6.3.3 Seismic Design Parameters ................................................................................. ..............................1 ] 6.3.4 Foundation Set Backs ........................................................................................... .............................12 6.3.5 Slab -On- Grade ...................................................................................................... .............................12 6.3.6 Subgrade Moisture ................................................................................................ .............................12 6.3.7 Soil Corrosivity ..................................................................................................... .............................12 6.4 CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION ............................................................................................. .............................13 6.4.1 General ................................................................................................................. .............................13 6.4.2 Concrete Flatwork ................................................................................................ .............................13 � 5�,E 0 rK BARRATT AMERICAN' Geotechnical Evaluation Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots TABLE OF CONTENT Project No.: 2313SD3 October 14, 2002 Page ii 6.5 RETAINING WALL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ............................................................. .............................13 6.5.1 General Design Criteria ....................................................................................... .............................13 6.5.2 Wall Backfill and Drainage .................................................................................. .............................14 6.5.3 Restrained Retaining Walls ................................................................................... .............................15 6.6 POST CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................... .............................15 6.6.1 Landscape Maintenance and Planting .................................................................. .............................15 6.6.2 Drainage ............................................................................................................... .............................16 6.7 PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS ...................................................... .............................16 7. LIMITATIONS ...................................................................................................................... .............................17 8. SELECTED REFERENCES ................................................................................................ .............................18 ENCLOSURES Figure 1 — Site Location Map Fijzure 2 — Geotechnical Map Appendix A — Logs of Exploratory Borings / Trenches Appendix B — Results of Laboratory Testing Appendix C — General Grading Guidelines for Earthwork Construction E i K BARRATT AMERICAN Project fro.: 2313SD3 Geotechnical Evaluation October 14, 2002 Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots Page 1 1. INTENT It is the intent of this report to aid in the design and construction of the proposed development. Implementation of the advice presented in Section 6 of this report is intended to reduce risk associated with construction projects. The professional opinions and geotechnical advice contained in this report are not intended to imply total performance of the project or guarantee that unusual or variable conditions will not be discovered during or after construction. The scope of our evaluation is limited to the area explored that is shown on the Geotechnical Map (Figure 2). This evaluation does not and should in no way be construed to encompass any areas beyond the specific area of the proposed construction as indicated to us by the client. Further, no evaluation of any existing site improvements is included. The scope is based on our understanding of the project and the client's needs, and geotechnical engineering standards normally used on similar projects in this region. 2. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES The purpose of this preliminary study was to evaluate the overall geotechnical conditions on the site as they relate to the proposed development. The specific services provided for this study included the following: ➢ Research and review of available published data regarding geologic and soil conditions at the site, ➢ Site exploration consisting of the excavation, logging, and sampling of 12 exploratory trenches and 5 small- diameter borings, ➢ Laboratory testing on representative samples collected during the field investigation, ➢ Review and evaluation of site seismicity, and ➢ Compilation of this geotechnical report which presents our findings, conclusions, and recommendations for site development. iy �+ BARRATT AMERICAN Project No.: 2313SD3 Geotechnical Evaluation October 14, 2002 Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots Page 2 3. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION The subject property is located within the Encinitas Ranch Development along Quail Gardens Drive in Encinitas, California (see Figure 1). The project is referred to as Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots (APN 254- 613 -06). The site is currently vacant land situated south of Luecadia Boulevard and east of Quail Gardens Drive. The site is accessible off of Quail Gardens Drive. An existing detention basin is located in the western portion of the property, adjacent to Quail Gardens Drive. The Encinitas Ranch golf course bounds the property to the north and east, and existing residential land to the south. The site is characterized by a former ridge top that has been excavated (possibly utilized as a borrow pit for surrounding developments in Encinitas Ranch) as evidenced by an existing 26- foot high cut slope and a relatively broad flat pad area (cut pad). Moderate to steeply sloping terrain (-3:1) descends from the pad into lower lying areas to the north, south and east. Existing soil and debris stockpiles are located on a substantial portion of the cut pad. A concrete brow ditch has been constructed along the top of the cut slope. The site elevation - varies between approximately 283 feet (MSL) and 234 feet (MSL). Refer to Figure 2 for further information regarding site features and topography. 3.2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT We understand that the subject property is to be developed into 8 single - family residential lots. Preliminary grading plans by SB & O dated April 23, 2002 indicate that 25,600 cubic yards of cut, 59,000 cubic yards of fill, and an estimated import quantity of 33,140 cubic yards will be required for site grading. Although foundation plans are not available for review at this time, it is anticipated that the proposed residential dwellings will consist of one or two -story wooden or light weight steel -frame structures with conventional slab on grade and shallow type foundations. Structural loads are anticipated to be less than 2,500 pounds per lineal foot for continuous wall footings and 30 kips for individual columns. Y� �K BARRATT AMERICAN Project No.: 2313SD3 Geotechnical Evaluation October 14, 2002 Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots Page 3 4. FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING 4.1 FIELD EXPLORATION Our initial field exploration was conducted on September 4, 2002 and consisted of 12 exploratory trenches excavated with a rubber tire backhoe (John Deere 510) to a maximum depth of 18 feet. An additional field exploration was performed on September 13, 2002 and consisted of 5 small- diameter borings using a truck mounted drill rig. The additional investigation was undertaken in order to explore further the subsurface conditions at greater depth. Geologists from our firm logged the excavations and collected samples for use in the laboratory testing. The logs of exploratory trenches are included in Appendix A. The logs of exploratory trenches and borings are located as shown on Figure 2. Additional information regarding field sampling and testing procedures are included in Appendix A. 4.2 LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory testing was performed on selected disturbed and relatively undisturbed samples collected during the field investigations. The purpose of the laboratory testing was to confirm the field classification of the soil materials encountered and to evaluate their physical properties for use in the engineering design and analysis. The results of the laboratory- testing program along with a brief description and relevant information regarding testing procedures are included in Appendix B. 5. GEOLOGIC AND SOILS CONDITIONS 5.1 GENERAL A brief description of the earth materials encountered is presented in the following sections _ of this report. A more detailed description of these materials is provided on the logs of exploratory trenches/borings included in Appendix A. Based on our site reconnaissance, subsurface excavations, and review of published geologic maps, the site is underlain to the depth explored by the Torrey Sandstone Formation. Alluvium deposits and fill materials overlie the Torrey Sandstone Formation in the low areas of the site. "k iK BARRAT'r AMERICAN Project No.: 2313SD3 Geotechnical Evaluation October 14, 2002 Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots Page 4 5.1.1 Topsoil (Not Mapped) The sloping natural portions of the site are mantled with a thin layer of topsoil varying in thickness between one and 2 feet. The topsoil is generally described as brown, dry to damp, loose, silty sand with rootlets. These materials are considered unsuitable for support of settlement - sensitive structures or additional fill in their current condition and should be subject to complete removal and recompaction. 5.1.2 Artificial Fill (Mapped as Af) The lower portions of the site are covered with fill materials that may be generated from previous grading activities on this site or adjacent developments (golf course, Quail Gardens Drive, etc.). The fill thickness varies and extends to a depth of 20.5 feet as noted in Boring B -3. Although the results of our investigation indicate that the fill encountered is generally in dense condition (N -value typically over 30), we could not verify its homogeneity throughout the site. In fact, wood chunks, debris, and other organic matters were noted at variable depths within the fill in Trenches T -5, T -10, and T -I1. As such, the potential for unpredictable amounts of settlement can be expected in these materials. 5.1.3 Alluvium (Mapped as Qal) Alluvial deposits underlie the lower sloping portions of the site beneath the fill. In general, these materials are comprised generally of fine to medium grained silty sands with clayey sand interbeds. Where exposed to ground surface, the upper 2 to 5 feet of these materials are considered relatively loose and potentially compressible. If not removed by the proposed grading, it is recommended that these materials be removed and recompacted within the limits of grading or if subject to additional loads. These materials are generally described as moist and dense with an average N -value over 30. Expansion Index (EI) testing was performed on two representative soil samples collected during the field investigation. Based on the results of the laboratory testing and our past experience, these materials possess a very low to medium expansion potential (0 <EI <91) in accordance with Table 18 -I -B of the 1997 UBC. The expansion index test results are shown on Plates El-1 and EI -2, Appendix B. The shear strength characteristics of these materials were estimated in accordance with the results of the laboratory direct shear testing on a representative sample collected during the field investigation. The results of the testing are presented in Table 5.2.1 below: . �K BARRAT'r AMERICAN Geotechnical Evaluation Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots Project No.: 2313SD3 October 14, 2002 Page 5 TABLE 5.1.1— RESULTS OF LABORATORY SHEAR TF.STiN(, i ARTM nanQm Soil Description/ Source Shear Stren th Dry Unit Weight Reference Friction Cohesion (De rees) (sf) (pcf) Boring B -2 at 5 29.2 1,310 116 See Plate SH -1, Appendix B (Alluvium) for more information The `hydro - collapse' potential was also evaluated in the laboratory on representative soil samples in accordance with the consolidation test procedure as per ASTM D2435. The inundation with water was performed at varying confining pressures. The test results indicate that the potential for `hydro - collapse' is considered to be very low or negligible ( <1.2 %) in these materials. The laboratory test results are included in Appendix B. 5.1.4 Quaternary Terrace Deposits (Mapped as Qt) Published geologic maps and our field reconnaissance indicate that Terrace Deposits overlies the Torrey Sandstone formation at the top of the existing cut slope along the southern boundary. As encountered, the terrace deposits generally consist of interbedded silty sands with gravels. The Terrace Deposits are generally dense and suitable for foundation support. 5.1.5 Torrey Sandstone (Mapped as Tt) Published geologic maps indicate the Tertiary Torrey Sandstone (Formation) underlies the site. Based on our subsurface exploration and geologic mapping, this is the predominant bedrock unit underlying the site. As encountered, these sedimentary deposits generally consist of silty fine to medium grained sands, and minor sandy silts. The Torrey Sand is generally dense with very low expansion potential (0<EI<21) in accordance with Table 18-1 - B of the 1997 UBC. The shear strength characteristics of these materials were also estimated in accordance with the results of the laboratory direct shear testing on a representative sample collected during the field investigation. The results of the testing are presented in Table 5.1.2 below: TABLE 5.1.2 — RESULTS OF LABORATORY SHEAR TESTING (A cTNI mmfiQm Soil Description/ Source Shear Strength Dry Unit Weight Reference Friction Cohesion (Degrees) (sf) (pcf) T8 -3 at 4.5' 37.2 140 106 See Plate SH -2, Appendix B (Torrey Sand) for more information �I{ BARRATT AMERICAN Project No.: 2313SD3 Geotechnical Evaluation October 14, 2002 Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots Page 6 5.2 SURFACE AND GROUND WATER 5.2.1 Surface Water If encountered, surface water on this site is the result of direct precipitation or surface run -off from surrounding sites. Overall drainage is in northwesterly direction. There is an existing detention basin in the western portion of the site. All site drainage should be reviewed and designed by the project civil engineer. 5.2.2 Groundwater Groundwater was not encountered in our exploratory trenches to the total depth explored of 18 feet. No natural groundwater condition is known to be present which would impact site development. However, groundwater or localized seepage can occur due to variations in rainfall, irrigation, and other factors not evident at the time of this investigation. 5.3 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY The site is in a seismically active region. No active or potentially active fault is known to exist at this site nor is the site situated within an Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (Special Studies Zone). The computer program EQFAULT (Blake, 2000a) was used to determine the distance to known faults and estimate peak ground accelerations based on a deterministic analysis. The Rose Canyon Fault located approximately 4.3 miles from the site is considered to represent the highest risk to generate ground shaking. A maximum earthquake magnitude of 6.9 and an estimated peak acceleration of 0.43g are postulated for this site. 5.4 LIQUEFACTION EVALUATION Liquefaction occurs when saturated fine sands and silts lose their physical strengths when subjected to earthquake shaking. The liquefaction potential at this site is considered to be low due to the dense and clayey nature of the subsurface soils. 5.5 OTHER SEISMIC HAZARDS Evidence of ancient landslides or slope instabilities at this site was not observed during our investigation. Thus, the potential for landslides is considered low at this site. t K BARRATT AMERICAN Project No.: 2313SD3 Geotechnical Evaluation October 14, 2002 Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots Page 7 The potential for secondary seismic hazards such as seiche and tsunami are considered to be negligible due site elevation and distance from an open body of water. 5.6 SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION Based on our past experience and the results of the laboratory shear strength testing, the proposed 2:1 fill slopes constructed with the onsite fill materials will have more than adequate factors of safety with respect to deep- seated failures. The proposed cut slopes along the southern boundary of the site, which vary between 1.5:1 and 3:1, are in the Torrey Sandstone Formation. As such, these slopes should be stable against deep- seated failure based on the shear strength parameters obtained. However, due to the relatively cohesionless nature of these materials, localized surface sloughing or erosion _ should be expected. Consideration should be given to provide appropriate protection against erosion on the steeper sloping portions. The landscape engineer on this project should recommend appropriate erosion control measures. I � Q IE �Y ERK BARRATT AMERICAN Project No.: 2313SD3 Geotechnical Evaluation October 14, 2002 Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots Page 8 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 GENERAL The proposed development of the site appears feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint provided that the following recommendations are incorporated into the design and construction phases of development. 6.2 EARTHWORK CONSIDERATIONS Earthwork and grading should be performed in accordance with the applicable grading ordinances of the City of Encinitas, the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBQ, and our recommendations contained in this report. The Grading Guidelines included in Appendix C outline general procedures and do not anticipate all site - specific situations. In the event of conflict, the recommendations presented in the text of this report should supersede those contained in Appendix C. 6.2.1 Site Clearing In areas of planned grading or improvements, the site should be cleared of vegetation, roots and debris, and properly disposed of offsite. Any holes resulting from site clearing, tree removal, and/or the backhoe trenches excavated during this study should be replaced with properly compacted low expansive fill materials. 6.2.2 Fills The onsite materials are considered suitable for reuse as compacted fill provided they are free from vegetation, debris and other deleterious materials. It is recommended that the low to medium expansive soils be used in the upper three feet of the building pads and in all structural areas. 6.2.3 Removals If not removed by the proposed grading, the topsoil, artificial fill, and the upper 2 to 5 feet of alluvium should be subject to complete removal and recompaction in all structural areas. The fill materials should be free of roots, debris, or any other deleterious materials. Y L0 -iK BARRATT AMERICAN Geotechnical Evaluation Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots 6.2.4 Transition Lots Project No.: 2313SD3 October 14, 2002 Page 9 All lots with a transition cut -fill situation as a result of planned grading should be overexcavated a minimum of three 3 feet below finish pad grade and replaced with low to medium expansive soils to provide a more uniform fill cap and decrease the potential for differential settlement. 6.2.5 Excavation Characteristics Our study was not a detailed evaluation of excavation characteristics. Excavation in the onsite materials for grading purposes is feasible using heavy -duty equipment. All temporary excavations for grading purposes and installation of underground utilities should be constructed in accordance with OSHA guidelines. Temporary excavations within the onsite materials should be stable at 1:1 inclinations for cuts less than 10 feet in height. 6.2.6 Shrinkage, Bulking, and Subsidence Several factors will impact earthwork balancing on the site, including shrinkage, bulking, subsidence, trench spoil from utilities and footing excavations, and final pavement section thickness as well as the accuracy of topography. Shrinkage, bulking and subsidence are primarily dependent upon the degree of compactive effort achieved during construction. For preliminary planning purposes, the following factors may be applied: 1. Fill/Alluvium 2. Terrace Deposits /Torrey Sand 5 % to 15 % shrinkage 0 % to 5 % shrinkage, top 5 feet. 0 % to 5 % bulking, below 5 feet. The above estimates are intended as an aid for project engineers in determining earthwork quantities. It is recommended that site development be planned to include an area that could be raised or lowered to accommodate final site balancing. �K BARRATT AMERICAN Geotechnical Evaluation Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots 6.3 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 6.3.1 Foundation Design Criteria Project No.: 2313SD3 October 14, 2002 Page 10 Foundation design criteria for conventional foundation system in conformance with the 1997 UBC are presented herein. These are typical design criteria for the proposed foundations described under Section 3.2 and are not intended to supersede the design by the structural engineer. Other type of foundations may require additional evaluation and a review of the recommendations presented herein. Based on the results of this investigation and our past experience, we recommend that the foundation design be prepared for the soil conditions presented in the Table 6.3.1 below. Actual as graded conditions will determine the applicable foundation design criteria. Thus, it is important that the testing of soils near finish grade be performed during site grading to verify the actual subgrade conditions. TABLE 6.3.1- MINIMUM DESIGN REQUIREMENTS Notes: 1) Where the differential depth of fill exceeds 20 feet beneath the building span, a post- tensioned foundation system should be considered. Alternatively, it is recommended that interior stiffening beams be used and the depth of perimeter beam is at least 18 inches with minimum of two no. 4 bars top and bottom. 2) Pre - soaking to be verified within 48 hours of placing visqueen or pouring concrete. 3) Properly design post- tension foundations may be used for all cases. Design criteria can be provided on request. ,- q%E K E.I. < 20 E.I. > 20 E.I. > 20 E.I. > 20 DESIGN PARAMETER P.I. <15 < P.I. 15 _ < < 15 P.I. 20 _ _ < 20 P.I. < 25 _ _ Foundation Depth or Minimum Perimeter Beam depth (inches One Story — 12 One Story — 12 One Story — 12 One Story — 18 below lowest adjacent grade) Two story —18 Two story —18 Two story —18 Two story —24 Foundation Width (Inches) One Story — 12 One Story — 12 One Story — 12 One Story — 12 Two story —15 Two story —15 Two story —15 Two story —15 Maximum Beam Spacing (feet) NA 25 22 19 1, (Cantilevered length as soil NA 0 2.1 4 function) Minimum Slab Thickness (inches) 4 4 4 4 Presaturation of subgrade soil Subgrade to be (Percent of Optimum/Depth in wforl wetted befor e pouring 100/18 120/18 120/18 inches) concrete Notes: 1) Where the differential depth of fill exceeds 20 feet beneath the building span, a post- tensioned foundation system should be considered. Alternatively, it is recommended that interior stiffening beams be used and the depth of perimeter beam is at least 18 inches with minimum of two no. 4 bars top and bottom. 2) Pre - soaking to be verified within 48 hours of placing visqueen or pouring concrete. 3) Properly design post- tension foundations may be used for all cases. Design criteria can be provided on request. ,- q%E K BARRATT AMERICAN Geotechnica; Evaluation Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots Project No,: 2313SD3 October 14, 2002 Page 11 An allowable bearing capacity of 2000 pounds per square foot (psf), including both dead and live loads, may be used if footings are designed in accordance with the table. The allowable bearing value may be increased by one -third when considering short -term live loads (e.g. seismic and wind loads). The passive earth pressure may be computed as an equivalent fluid having a density of 200 psf per foot of depth, to a maximum earth pressure of 3000 psf. A coefficient of friction between soil and concrete of 0.35 may be used with dead load forces. When combining passive pressure and frictional resistance, the passive pressure component should be reduced by one - third. 6.3.2 Settlement Based on our evaluation of settlement characteristics at this site, the total settlement is expected to be less than one inch based on the loading conditions described in Section 3.2 of this report. Differential settlement is expected to be less one -half of the total settlement based on known conditions. A differential settlement of up to one inch may occur where the fill differential exceeds 20 feet. 6.3.3 Seismic Design Parameters Seismically resistant structural design in accordance with local building ordinances should be followed during the design of all structures. Building Codes have been developed to minimize structural damage. However, some level of damage as the result of ground shaking generated by nearby earthquakes is considered likely in this general area. For the purpose of seismic design a Type B seismic source located approximately 7 km from the site may be used. Table below presents seismic design factors in keeping with the criteria presented in the 1997 UBC, Division IV & V, Chapter 16. TABLF 6_3_1 — CF.NUTf Y- IVC19 -XT D A D A r,rr, lll ,c. v IE -i�K Parameters Soil Profile Ca C� Na N,, Seismic Type Source Type Source Table 16J 16Q 16R 16S 16T 16U Value SD 0.44 0.70 1.0 1.1 B v IE -i�K BARRATT AMERICAN Geotechnical Evaluation Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots 6.3.4 Foundation Set Backs Project No.: 2313SD3 October 14, 2002 Page 12 Where applicable, the following setbacks should apply to all foundations. Any improvements not conforming to these setbacks may be subject to lateral movements and /or differential settlements: y The outside bottom edge of all footings should be set back a minimum of H/3 (where H is the slope height) from the face of any descending slope. The setback should be at least 7 feet and need not exceed 20 feet. ➢ The bottom of all footings for structures near retaining walls should be deepened so as to extend below a 1:1 projection upward from the bottom inside edge of the-wall stem. ➢ The bottom of any existing foundations for structures should be deepened so as to extend below a 1:1 projection upward from the bottom of the nearest excavation. 6.3.5 Slab -On -Grade Where applicable, concrete slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and reinforced as per structural engineer requirements. Control joints should be provided to help minimize random cracking. Where moisture condensation is undesirable, all slabs should be underlain with a minimum 10 mil polyvinyl chloride membrane, sandwiched between two layers of clean sand, S.E. 30 or greater, each being at least two inches thick. Care should be taken to adequately seal all seams and not puncture or tear the membrane. The sand should be proof rolled. 6.3.6 Subgrade Moisture Moisture conditioning of subgrade should follow the criteria presented in Table 6.3.1 above. Moisture conditioning can require an extended period of time to achieve. Our representative should verify moisture content prior to placing the vapor barrier or reinforcing steel. If the subgrade is not reasonably sealed within 24 hours by placing the vapor barrier or concrete or the concrete is not poured within 96 hours of testing, the moisture tests should be considered invalid unless evaluated otherwise by this office. The foundation contractor should be responsible to request additional verification/testing. Additional presoaking may be necessary. 6.3.7 Soil Corrosivity It is recommended that a corrosion engineer be consulted to provide recommendations for proper protection of buried metal pipes at this site. r �K BARRATT AMERICAN Project No.: 2313SD3 Geotechnical Evaluation October 14, 2002 Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots Page 13 6.4 CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION 6.4.1 General Concrete construction should follow the UBC and ACI guidelines regarding design, mix placement and curing of the concrete. If desired, we could provide quality control testing of the concrete during construction. 6.4.2 Concrete Flatwork Exterior concrete flatwork (patios, walkways, driveways, etc.) is often some of the most visible aspects of site development. They are typically given the least level of quality control, - being considered "non- structural" components. Cracking of these features is fairly common due to various factors. While cracking is not usually detrimental, it is unsightly. We suggest that the same standards of care be applied to these features as to the structure itself. One of the simplest means to control cracking is to provide weakened joints for cracking to occur along. These do not prevent cracks from developing; they simply provide a relief point for the stresses that develop. These joints are widely accepted means to control cracks but are not always effective. Control joints are more effective the more closely spaced. We would suggest that control joints be placed in two directions spaced the numeric equivalent of two times the thickness of the slab in inches changed to feet (e.g. a 4 inch slab would have control joints at 8 feet centers). As a practical matter, this is not always possible nor is it a widely applied standard. It should be noted that the above recommendations are based on soil support characteristics only. The structural engineer should design the actual slab reinforcement and specifies provisions for concrete shrinkage. 6.5 RETAINING WALL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 6.5.1 General Design Criteria Recommendations presented herein may apply to typical masonry or concrete vertical retaining walls to a maximum height of 10 feet. Additional review and recommendations should be requested for higher walls. it �K BARRATT AMERICAN Geotechnical Evaluation Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots Project No.: 2313SD3 October 14, 2002 Page 14 Retaining walls embedded a minimum of 18 inches into compacted fill or dense formational materials should be designed using a net allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 psf. An increase of one -third may be applied when considering short -term live loads (e.g. seismic and wind loads). The passive earth pressure may be computed as an equivalent fluid having a density of 200 psf per foot of depth, to a maximum earth pressure of 3,000 psf. A coefficient of friction between soil and concrete of 0.35 may be used with dead load forces. When combining passive pressure and frictional resistance, the passive pressure component should be reduced by one - third. An equivalent fluid pressure approach may be used to compute the horizontal active pressure against the wall. The appropriate fluid unit weights are given in Table 6.5.1 below for specific slope gradients of retained materials. TABLE 6_5.1 —A VTTVF V A D-M DDZ CCrmro Surface Slope of Retained Materials (H: V) Equivalent Fluid Pressure (PCF) Level 30 2:1 45 The above equivalent fluid weights do not include other superimposed loading conditions such as expansive soil, vehicular traffic, structures, seismic conditions or adverse geologic conditions. 6.5.2 Wall Backfill and Drainage The onsite very low to medium expansive soils are suitable for backfill provided they are screened of greater than 3 -inch size gravels. Presence of other materials might necessitate revision to the parameters provided and modification of wall designs. The backfill materials should be placed in lifts no greater than 8- inches in thickness and compacted at 90% relative compaction in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557 -00. Proper surface drainage needs to be provided and maintained. Retaining walls should be provided with an adequate pipe and gravel back drain system to prevent build up of hydrostatic pressures. Backdrains should consist of a 4 -inch diameter perforated collector pipe embedded in a minimum of one cubic foot per lineal foot of 3/8 to one inch clean crushed rock or equivalent, wrapped in filter fabric. The drain system should y RK BARRATT AMERICAN Project No.: 2313SD3 Geotechnical Evaluation October 14, 2002 Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots Page 15 be connected to a suitable outlet. A minimum of two outlets should be provided for each drain section. Walls from 2 to 4 feet in height may be drained using localized gravel packs behind weep holes at 10 feet maximum spacing (e.g. approximately 1.5 cubic feet of gravel in a woven plastic bag). Weep holes should be provided or the head joints omitted in the first course of block extended above the ground surface. However, nuisance water may still collect in front of wall. 6.5.3 Restrained Retaining Walls Any retaining wall that will be restrained prior to placing backfill or walls that have male or reentrant corners should be designed for at -rest soil conditions using an equivalent fluid pressure of 60 pcf, plus any applicable surcharge loading. For areas having male or reentrant corners, the restrained wall design should extend a minimum distance equal to twice the height of the wall laterally from the corner 6.6 POST CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 6.6.1 Landscape Maintenance and Planting Water has been shown to weaken the inherent strength of soil, and slope stability is significantly reduced by overly wet conditions. Positive surface drainage away from graded slopes should be maintained and only the amount of irrigation necessary to sustain plant life should be provided for planted slopes. Controlling surface drainage and runoff, and maintaining a suitable vegetation cover can minimize erosion. Plants selected for landscaping should be lightweight, deep- rooted types that require little water and are capable of surviving the prevailing climate. Overwatering should be avoided. The soils should be maintained in a solid to semi -solid state as defined by the materials Atterberg Limits. Care should be taken when adding soil amendments to avoid excessive watering. Leaching as a method of soil preparation prior to planting is not recommended. An abatement program to control ground - burrowing rodents should be implemented and maintained. This is critical as burrowing rodents can decreased the long -term performance of slopes. y �K BARRATT AMERICAN Project No.: 2313SD3 Geotechnical Evaluation October 14, 2002 Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots Page 16 It is common for planting to be placed adjacent to structures in planter or lawn areas. This will result in the introduction of water into the ground adjacent to the foundation. This type of landscaping should be avoided. If used, then extreme care should be exercised with regard to the irrigation and drainage in these areas. Waterproofing of the foundation and /or subdrains may be warranted and advisable. We could discuss these issues, if desired, when plans are made available. 6.6.2 Drainage The need to maintain proper surface drainage and subsurface systems cannot be overly emphasized. Positive site drainage should be maintained at all times. Drainage should not flow uncontrolled down any descending slope. Water should be directed away from foundations and not allowed to pond or seep into the ground. Pad drainage should be directed toward approved area(s). Positive drainage should not be blocked by other improvements. Even apparently minor changes or modifications can cause problems. It is the owner's responsibility to maintain and clean drainage devices on or contiguous to their lot. In order to be effective, maintenance should be conducted on a regular and routine schedule and necessary corrections made prior to each rainy season. 6.7 PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS We recommend that site grading, specifications, and foundation plans be reviewed by this office prior to construction to check for conformance with the recommendations of this report. We also recommend that GeoTek representatives be present during site grading and foundation construction to check for proper implementation of the geotechnical recommendations. These representatives should perform at least the following duties: • Observe site clearing and grubbing operations for proper removal of all unsuitable materials. • Observe and test bottom of removals prior to fill placement. • Evaluate the suitability of on -site and import materials for fill placement, and collect soil samples for laboratory testing where necessary. • Observe the fill for uniformity during placement including utility trenches. Also, test the fill for field density and relative compaction. E,K BARRATT AMERICAN Geotechnical Evaluation Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots Project No.: 2313SD3 October 14, 2002 Page 17 • Observe and probe foundation materials to confirm suitability of bearing materials and proper footing dimensions. If requested, GeoTek will provide a construction observation and compaction report to comply with the requirements of the governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the project. We recommend that these agencies be notified prior to commencement of construction so that necessary grading permits can be obtained. 7. LIMITATIONS The materials observed on the project site appear to be representative of the area; however, soil and bedrock materials vary in character between excavations and natural outcrops or conditions exposed during site construction. Site conditions may vary due to seasonal changes or other factors. GeoTek Insite, Inc. assumes no responsibility or liability for work, testing or recommendations performed or provided by others. Since our recommendations are based the site conditions observed and encountered, and laboratory testing, our conclusion and recommendations are professional opinions that are limited to the extent of the available data. Observations during construction are important to allow for any change in recommendations found to be warranted. These opinions have been derived in accordance with current standards of practice and no warranty is expressed or implied. Standards of practice are subject to change with time. -_- r-lt�K BARRATT AMERICAN Geotechnical Evaluation Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots 8. SELECTED REFERENCES Project No.: 2313SD3 October 14, 2002 Page 18 Afrouz, A., 1992, "Practical Handbook of Rock Mass Classifications Systems and Modes of Ground Failure ", CRC Press, January 1992. ASTM, 200, "Soil and Rock: American Society for Testing and Materials," vol. 4.08 for ASTM test methods D -420 to D -4914, 153 standards, 1,026 pages; and vol. 4.09 for ASTM test method D -4943 to highest number. Blake, T., 2000a, " BQFAULT, version 3.00 ", a Computer Program for Deterministic Estimation of Maximum Earthquake Event and Peak Ground Acceleration. Bowels, J., 1982, "Foundation Analysis and Design ", McGraw -Hill, Third Edition. California Code of Regulations, Title 24, 1998 "California Building Code," 3 volumes. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, DMG Open File Report 96 -02, Plate 2, Geologic Maps of The Encinitas and Rancho Santa Fe 7.5 Minute Quadrangles, 1996. California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 1997, "Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California," Special Publication 117. California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 1998, Maps of Known Active Fault Near - Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada: International Conference of Building Officials. GeoTek, Insite, Inc., In -house proprietary information. Ishihara, K., 1985, "Stability of Natural Deposits During Earthquakes ", Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, San Francisco, CA, Volume 1. Seed, H.B., and Idriss, I.M., 1982, "Ground Motions And Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes," Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. US Army Corps of Engineers, No. 9, `Settlement Analysis', Technical Guidelines, ASCE Press, 1994 Youd, T. Leslie and Idriss, Izzmat M., 1997, Proceeding of the NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, Technical Report NCEER -97 -0022. -- E ,�K 117.283330 W WGS64 117.266670 W i. 0 r. w 0 ri m 0 O O O L O Y7 117.283330 W WGS84 117.266670 W TN MN 0 5 1 MILE 130 �000 FEET 0 500 1000 METERS Printed from TOPO! 02000 Wildflower Productions (www.topo.com) BARRATT AMERICAN N Figure 1 - Sidonia East — Encinitas Ranch � Quail Gardens Drive ? Encinitas, California Site -K, INC. Location USGS 7.5- Minute 1384 Poinsettia Avenue, Suite A GeoTek Project Number: 2313SD3 Topographic Map Map Vista, California 92083 SB &O LEGEND r /ND /G4= PUBLIC /NGRE AND OF ?ASS aVC ❑ WU7'Y EASEMENT TD THE C/7Y PER RML W S INDICATES PUBLIC STDRM DRAIN EASEMENT TD THE CITY OF 6 ENCINITAS PER RIM MAP INDIC4ra SEWER EAsaWVT TO THE C/r/�F ENCIN/rAS �= S4N/TARY D/STR/Cr ORAN= PER FAAL ATE gTREETS TO rF1E 54N ❑4 /NO/G4TE3 Wi9rER FASElIENT 4N PER RNAC MAP. DIEGUITO WA1ER DISrR/Cr GRANTED h I111CA1E; LANDSCAPE MEDDW SEF LAVDSL7 PLANS FOR DETAILS /ND/C47ES PRNATE H.OA S EN © ® "AND IRR/G4r1DN M4/NTENAN GR4P141C SCrILE Base Map as per Site Plan, by SB &O, Encinitas Ranch - Sidonia East, Custom Lots, sheet 3 of 4, Au ust 23, 2002. SIDONIA EAST ENCINITAS RANCH DEVELOPMENT Barratt American APN# 254- 613 -06 Quail Gardens Drive Encinitas, California GeoTek Inc. Project No.: 2313SD3 F1 e 2 Geotechnical Map o Al %7 _-------/ --i 'N- - -- ..._. _ _. \ \ GEOTEK LEGEND T -12 Approximate location of exploratory trench B -5 Approximate location of exploratory boring At Existing Fill Qal Quaternary Alluvium; circled where buried Quaternary Terrace Deposits Ot Tt Tertiary Torrey Sandstone Approximate geologic contact; queried where uncertain Y' INC 1384 Poinsettia Avenue, Suite A Vista, California 92083 n, APPENDIX A LOGS OF EXPLORATORY TRENCHES: Borings B -1 through B -5 Trenches T -1 through T -12 Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots Encinitas, California Project No.: 2313SD3 fix Barratt American APPENDIX A Geotechnical Evaluation October 14, 2002 Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots Page A -1 LEGEND TO FIELD TESTING AND SAMPLING A - FIELD TESTING AND SAMPLING PROCEDURES The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) The SPT is performed in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1586 -99. The SPT sampler is typically driven into the ground 12 or 18 inches with a 140 -pound hammer free falling from a height of 30 inches. Blow counts are recorded for every 6 inches of penetration as indicated on the log of -- boring. The split - barrel sampler has an external diameter of 2 inches and an unlined internal diameter of 1 -3/8 inches. The samples of earth materials collected in the sampler are typically classified in the field, bagged, sealed and transported to the laboratory for further testing. The Modified flit- Barrel Sampler (Ring) The Ring sampler is driven into the ground in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 3550 -84. The -° sampler, with an external diameter of 3.0 inches, is lined with 1 -inch long, thin brass rings with inside diameters of approximately 2.4 inches. The sampler is typically driven into the ground 12 or 18 inches with a 140 -pound hammer free falling from a height of 30 inches. Blow counts are recorded - for every 6 inches of penetration as indicated on the log of boring. The samples are removed from the sample barrel in the brass rings, sealed, and transported to the laboratory for testing. Large Bulk Samples These samples are normally cloth bags of representative earth materials over 20 pounds in weight collected from the field by means of hand digging or exploratory cuttings. Small Bulk Samples These samples are normally airtight plastic bags that are typically less than 5 pounds in weight of - representative earth materials collected from the field by means of the split spoon sampler, hand digging or exploratory cuttings. These samples are primarily used for determining natural moisture content and classification indices. B — BORING/TRENCH LOG LEGEND The following abbreviations and symbols often appear in the classification and description of soil and rock on the logs of trenches: SOILS USCS Unified Soil Classification System f -c Fine to coarse f -m Fine to medium GEOLOGIC B: Attitudes Bedding: strike /dip J: Attitudes Joint: strike /dip C: Contact line ........... Dashed line denotes USCS material change Solid Line denotes unit / formational change Thick solid line denotes end of boring (Additional denotations and symbols are provided on the logs of trenches) y 10 7 15 B1 -2 010.5': Gray ,moist, dense, clayey f m SAND 9.1 20 15 10 orrev an stone 15 61 -3 SM Yellow- brown, very moist, dense, silty f -m SAND with clay; iron 10.3 16 oxide staining 50/6" B1 -4 I 020': gray, moist, dense, clayey f -m SAND with gravel -HOLE TERMINATED AT 25.5 FEET - Hole backfilled with soil cuttings and 2 50lbs Bag of Bentonite Chips No groundwater encountered - -Ring I -- -SPT 0-- -Small Bulk ® -- -Large Bulk 1:1 - --No Recovery :i-Z -- -Water Table SAMPLES GeoTek, Inc. Laboratory Testir LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING CLIENT: Barrett American DRILLER: West Hazmat LOGGED BY: LG PROJECT NAME: Sidonia East DRILL METHOD: 8° Hllow Stem Auger OPERATOR: Robert PROJECT NO.: 2313SD3 HAMMER: 140lbs/30in RIG TYPE: CME 75 �D o,., r:ROUND ELEV: 254 msl DATE: 9/13/02 10 7 15 B1 -2 010.5': Gray ,moist, dense, clayey f m SAND 9.1 20 15 10 orrev an stone 15 61 -3 SM Yellow- brown, very moist, dense, silty f -m SAND with clay; iron 10.3 16 oxide staining 50/6" B1 -4 I 020': gray, moist, dense, clayey f -m SAND with gravel -HOLE TERMINATED AT 25.5 FEET - Hole backfilled with soil cuttings and 2 50lbs Bag of Bentonite Chips No groundwater encountered - -Ring I -- -SPT 0-- -Small Bulk ® -- -Large Bulk 1:1 - --No Recovery :i-Z -- -Water Table SAMPLES n Laboratory Testir _- E BORING NO.: B -1 m m ° �D a n m a� i p n C O O rn o m y M z y O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS SM Fill Yellow brown, moist, medium dense, silty f -m SAND SM Alluvium Light brown, damp, silty f -m SAND with root hairs 5 a nese ................... V'eTliSw'= bFowri';" moist ;'iieris'e;�cl'aye'y "f= c'S'AIVD; "mang oxl..diied 50 staining 10 7 15 B1 -2 010.5': Gray ,moist, dense, clayey f m SAND 9.1 20 15 10 orrev an stone 15 61 -3 SM Yellow- brown, very moist, dense, silty f -m SAND with clay; iron 10.3 16 oxide staining 50/6" B1 -4 I 020': gray, moist, dense, clayey f -m SAND with gravel -HOLE TERMINATED AT 25.5 FEET - Hole backfilled with soil cuttings and 2 50lbs Bag of Bentonite Chips No groundwater encountered - -Ring I -- -SPT 0-- -Small Bulk ® -- -Large Bulk 1:1 - --No Recovery :i-Z -- -Water Table CLIENT: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NO.: Barrett American Sidonia East 2313SD3 GeoTek Insite, Inc. SAMPLES LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING - _ - -- DRILLER: West Hazmat LOGGED BY: LG _ DRILL METHOD: 8" Hllow Stem Auger OPERATOR: Robert _ HAMMER: 1401bs/30in RIG TYPE- CME 75 r_oni 161n M FV• 9_Z; A r, rnsl DATE: _ 9/13/02 LVI+FiIIVI`/: SAMPLES "ems - _ - -- Laboratory Testing E BORING NO.: 8 -2 m' m t m E E CD 3 c 96 ° a o ° E o to U) z' uvj ° V o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS SM it Light brown, dry, medium dense, silty fine SAND Red= fiF'own;'moisf; "rriecTium dense, clayey f =m SAIVI� with "cliunKs of" " " "" " " "'�� ..... ra cla Alluvium ray, orange, and brown, very moist, dense, siltyclayey t -m SAND SM/SC with trace clay; iron oxide staining; interbedded clayey f -m SAND 5 lavers 11.4 104 See Plate DS -1 18 -same 22 62 -1 32 @65: becomes black, moist, dense, clayey SAND 8 -same 10 10 B2 -2 15 10 15 13.5 112 See Plate CO -1 for 1 8 62 -3A @11': becomes green -gray, very moist, medium dense, clayey f -c Consolidation 18 62-3 SAND; scattered qravel 15 10 SM @15': Light gray, very moist, dense, silty f -m SAND 15 17 62 -4A 82 -4 SC @16': Black, moist, dense, clayey f -m SAND 20 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 25 SM Orange, black, gray, yellow, moist, dense, silty f -c SAND with clay 18.3 108 ............................... See Plate CO -2 for 30 B2 -5A Consolidation 35 B2 -5 Torrey Sandstone SM White, moist, very dense, silty fine SAND (sandstone) 50/6" 132 -6 -same 25 -HOLE TERMINATED AT 25.5 FEET - Hole backfilied with soil cuttings and 2 50lbs Bag of Bentonite Chips No groundwater encountered Legend: -- -Ring - - -SPT --- Small Bulk ® -- -Large Bulk [:] -- -No Recovery Q -- -Water Table CLIENT: Barrett American PROJECT NAME: Sidonia East PROJECT NO.: 2313SD3 B ' L cation Plan GeoTek Insite, Inc. LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING DRILLER: West Hazmat DRILL METHOD: E' Hllow Stem Auger HAMMER: 140lbs/30in GROUND ELEV: 254 msl LOGGED BY, LG OPERATOR: Robert _ RIG TYPE: CME 75 DATE: 9/13/02 _ LOCATION: See SAMPLES or ng 5 o Laboratory Testing _- � BORING NO.: B -3 11 0 m N y a = L F- CL n E U) G O W o m in Z D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS SM Fi Light brown, damp, silty fine SAND with gravel 18 @3': Yellow and gray, mottled, moist, dense, silty fine SAND 11.3 22 63 -1 32 5 @5': Yellow- brown, moist, dense, clayey f -m SAND mixed with white 8 24 sand 32 B3 -2 @8':Interbedded with gray - black, moist, sandy CLAY 10 ......... � .� ........................SC... Yellow, sand�mottled�green��and�black��clayey.. f- m�SAND.............................. ..... 10.... ............. ........................................... ................ 20 B3 -3 24 15 25 50(6" 63 -4 @ 15': Brown, moist, clayey f -m SAND with white chunks of sand 8 114 See Op for Consolid 18': scattered gravel 20 15 @20': Brown moist dense cla a f -m SAND; micaceous 20 B3 -5 AIIUVIUM SM Brown, moist, dense, clayey f m SAND; interbedded with black 30 moist, clavev f -m SAND with scattered roots; Green clav lenses 25 10 @25': Brown, moist, dense, clayey SAND with gravel; hard drilling 15 B3 -6 20 @26.5': black clayey sand continued -- -Ring I ---SPT z---Small Bulk ® -- - Large Bulk El ---No Recovery .- -Water Table Legend: GeoTek Insite, Inc. LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING CLIENT: Barratt American DRILLER: West Hazma; LOGGED BY: PROJECT NAME: Sidonia East DRILL METHOD: B" Hllow Stem Auger OPERATOR: PROJECT NO.: 2313SD3 HAMMER: 140lbs/30in RIG TYPE: r- onnnin Pi Gv• 95d rnsl DATE: LG Robert CME 75 9/13/02 Laboratory Testing SAMPLES c m m E T BORING NO.: B -3 N C = y d N E a E E ' K m 3 o D a o L O 2 z MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS Alluvium (continued) very hard drilling 30 @32': charcoalized wood pieces 63 -7 35 15 25 133 -8 SC Torrey San dstone Gray and green, moist, dense, clayey SAND with scattered gravel; 35 iron oxide staining SM .......... . ... .... ..............:................ ... . ...... ............................................................................... Orange- brown, moist, silty f -m SAND with gravel; micaceous .............. .............. ........................................................... 40 50/3" 133 -9 -same -HOLE TERMINATED AT 41 FEET - Hole backfilled with soil cuttings and 3 50lbs Bag of Bentonite Chips No groundwater encountered 45 50 55 Legend: -- -Ring ® - --SPT z -- -Small Bulk ® -- -Large Bulk ---No Recovery - --Water Table 5M 21 A IUVIUm 30 B4 -1 SM Yellow- brown, gray, mottled, silty f -m SAND with clay 10.9 111 50/6" @8': Black clayey SAND I10 1 I 20 1 64 -2 SC I @ 10.5': Gray-black, moist, dense, clayey -clayey SAND ND 1 11.4 I15 Brown, orange el clayey f m SAND 050/6.. I B4-3 I I @ 15.5 B ack, moist, dens, gray, moist, f -m SAND 15 C20': Interbedded layer of gray- brown, moist, dense,silty fine SAND 20 B4 -4 with root hairs 30 @20.5': Gray - black, moist, dense, clayey f -m SAND 20 4 5 SM /SW Light gray,�moist, dense, silty fine SAND consolidation continued Ring SPT Small Bulk ® Large Bulk No Recovery -- -Water Table SAMPLES GeoTek Insite, Inc. La oratory Testin LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING CLIENT: Barrett American DRILLER: West Hazmat LOGGED BY: LG BORING NO.: B -4 PROJECT NAME: Sidonia East DRILL METHOD: 8" HIIow Stem Auger OPERATOR: _ Robert PROJECT NO.: 2313SD3 HAMMER: 140lbs/30in RIG TYPE: CME 75 _ m L o o,.-,., i #i GROUND ELEV: 252 msl _ DATE: 9 /13/02 5M 21 A IUVIUm 30 B4 -1 SM Yellow- brown, gray, mottled, silty f -m SAND with clay 10.9 111 50/6" @8': Black clayey SAND I10 1 I 20 1 64 -2 SC I @ 10.5': Gray-black, moist, dense, clayey -clayey SAND ND 1 11.4 I15 Brown, orange el clayey f m SAND 050/6.. I B4-3 I I @ 15.5 B ack, moist, dens, gray, moist, f -m SAND 15 C20': Interbedded layer of gray- brown, moist, dense,silty fine SAND 20 B4 -4 with root hairs 30 @20.5': Gray - black, moist, dense, clayey f -m SAND 20 4 5 SM /SW Light gray,�moist, dense, silty fine SAND consolidation continued Ring SPT Small Bulk ® Large Bulk No Recovery -- -Water Table SAMPLES o La oratory Testin o _- E T BORING NO.: B -4 C m y a .0 V) « C c0 m 9� p, m L o ° 3 0 o 0 o m in z D _T� MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS F-1 T_ I Fill dense, silty f -m SAND SM Red - brown, moist, medium 5M 21 A IUVIUm 30 B4 -1 SM Yellow- brown, gray, mottled, silty f -m SAND with clay 10.9 111 50/6" @8': Black clayey SAND I10 1 I 20 1 64 -2 SC I @ 10.5': Gray-black, moist, dense, clayey -clayey SAND ND 1 11.4 I15 Brown, orange el clayey f m SAND 050/6.. I B4-3 I I @ 15.5 B ack, moist, dens, gray, moist, f -m SAND 15 C20': Interbedded layer of gray- brown, moist, dense,silty fine SAND 20 B4 -4 with root hairs 30 @20.5': Gray - black, moist, dense, clayey f -m SAND 20 4 5 SM /SW Light gray,�moist, dense, silty fine SAND consolidation continued Ring SPT Small Bulk ® Large Bulk No Recovery -- -Water Table GeoTek Insite, Inc. LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING CLIENT: Barratt American DRILLER: West Hazmat LOGGED BY: PROJECT NAME: Sidonia East DRILL METHOD: 8" Hllow Stem Auger OPERATOR: PROJECT NO.: 2313SD3 HAMMER: 140lbs/30in RIG TYPE: -- _ —• --. __ -, - _ -.:__ r-cntintn FI FV- msl DATE: LG Robert CME 75 9/13/02 Laboratory Testing SAMPLES o m ' ci m E V1 BORING NO.: 8 -4 _- r F- m CL (o o. E E W ca 30 it, a O E (n o m rnz' D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS orre andstone continued SM Light gray, moist, dense, silty fine SAND 30 35 50/6" B4 -6 -same -HOLE TERMINATED AT 36.5 FEET - Hole backfilled with soil cuttings and 2 50lbs Bag of Bentonite Chips No groundwater encountered 40 45 50 55 Legend: -- -Ring I ---SPT 0-- -Small Bulk ® -- -Large Bulk ---No Recovery -- -water Table SAMPLES o r a BORING NO.: B -5 d o E E U) W = U U) m Z MATERIAL DESCRIPTION ANC Fil CL Black, moist, stiff, sandy CLAY 5 10 ICUSCIOrange, black, and brown, mottled, sandy CLAY and clayey SAND; 10 B5 -1 manganesse oxidized staining 10 I10 15 I I CL (Gray- black, moist, hard sandy CLAY with gravel 25 B5 -2 33 -Z --- SC Brown, very moist, B5 -3 15 20 @15': Brown, moist, dense, clayey f -m SAND with chunks of yellow 20 654 sand 20 50/6" 185 -5 I 1 @20'; Gray- brown, moist, dense, clayey f -m SAND Laboratory Testil GeoTek, Inc. 0 N LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING v N C CLIENT: Barrett American DRILLER: West Hazrnat LOGGED BY: LG PROJECT NAME Sidonia East DRILL METHOD: 8" Hiiow Stem Auger OPERATOR: Robert PROJECT NO.: 2313SD3 HAMMER: 140lbs130in RIG TYPE: CME 75 .,.. ,T^K1 wee n, i� „..,— ainn GROUND ELEN: 235 msl DATE: 9113102 SAMPLES o r a BORING NO.: B -5 d o E E U) W = U U) m Z MATERIAL DESCRIPTION ANC Fil CL Black, moist, stiff, sandy CLAY 5 10 ICUSCIOrange, black, and brown, mottled, sandy CLAY and clayey SAND; 10 B5 -1 manganesse oxidized staining 10 I10 15 I I CL (Gray- black, moist, hard sandy CLAY with gravel 25 B5 -2 33 -Z --- SC Brown, very moist, B5 -3 15 20 @15': Brown, moist, dense, clayey f -m SAND with chunks of yellow 20 654 sand 20 50/6" 185 -5 I 1 @20'; Gray- brown, moist, dense, clayey f -m SAND Laboratory Testil 0 N v N C d N L OU. " O U Q 15.5 1 111 I See Plate CO -5 for I Consolidation 15 B5 -6 SM Light gray, very moist to wet, silty fine SAND iron oxide staining 15 (continued) Legend: ® —Ring ® —SPT 0 —Small Bulk ® —Large Bulk 1:1- -No Recovery -�_Z -- -Water Table 135 -1 140 -1 145-1 1IRK 1 55 -- -Ring -- -SPT -- -Small Bulk ®- --Large Bulk D---No Recovery � ---Water Table GeoTek Insite, Inc. Laboratory Testir LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING o CLIENT: Barrett American DRILLER: West Hazmat LOGGED BY: LG PROJECT NAME: Sidonia East DRILL METHOD: 8° Hllow Stem Auger OPERATOR: Robert PROJECT NO.: 2313SD3 HAMMER: 140lbs130in RIG TYPE: CME 75 .r^K1 0 S^r!n Location Plan GROUND ELEV: 235 mSl DATE: 9/13/02 135 -1 140 -1 145-1 1IRK 1 55 -- -Ring -- -SPT -- -Small Bulk ®- --Large Bulk D---No Recovery � ---Water Table Laboratory Testir SAMPLES o m a BORING NO.: B -5 N m Z Cn Cn Q n O oy E n m rE D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS Torrey Sandstone (continued 30 15 SM Gray, wet, dense, silty fine SAND 30 B5 -7 40 HOLE TERMINATED AT 31.5 FEET - Hole backfilled with soil cuttings and 2 50lbs Bag of Bentonite Chips No groundwater encountered 135 -1 140 -1 145-1 1IRK 1 55 -- -Ring -- -SPT -- -Small Bulk ®- --Large Bulk D---No Recovery � ---Water Table PROJECT NO.: PROJECT NAME: CLIENT: I AlATIl1A1. GeoTek Insite, Inc. LOG OF EXPLORATORY TRENCH 2313SD3 LOGGED BY: LG Sidonia East EQUIPMENT: 510 John Deere Barratt American DATE: 9/4/02 FnninitaS_ California ELEVATION: 276 MSL Torrey Sandstone SM Light yellow, moist, silty f -m SAND; iron oxide staining 5 X5.5': Light yellow, moist, fine SAND - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 6.5 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled ICE IiM1111111111 I" Sample Legend: - -- Small Plastic Bag ® Large Bulk Sample Z7 Water Table I Labor ory Testin SAMPLES o P E E T : TRENCH NO. T -1 a� C _ N C ^ i N U p _ Q fa L 41 Q 'a E ca N Z ? O O in MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS Alluvium SM Light brown, damp, silty fine SAND T1 -1 f -m SAND; iron oxide staining with gray mois yellow- brown, moist, silty Torrey Sandstone SM Light yellow, moist, silty f -m SAND; iron oxide staining 5 X5.5': Light yellow, moist, fine SAND - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 6.5 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled ICE IiM1111111111 I" Sample Legend: - -- Small Plastic Bag ® Large Bulk Sample Z7 Water Table I GeoTek Insite, Inc. LOG OF EXPLORATORY TRENCH LOGGED BY• LG PROJECT NO.: 2313SD3 PROJECT NAME: Sidonia East EQUIPMENT: 510 John Deere CLIENT: Barratt American DATE: 9/4/02 nPATinni• Encinitas. California ELEVATION: 254 MSL 110 -1 @12': Green, moist, clayey, f -c SAND 15 'W T2 -3 I I Interbedded with black, moist, sandy CLAY 9.2 T2-4 @17.5': Yellow, moist, silty f -c SAND 15.6 - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 18 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled 20 L Maximum achievable depth due to maximum reach of backhoe "Sample Legend: ® -- Small Plastic Bag ®— Large Bulk Sample —water Table Labor to Testin SAMPLES E T TRENCH .: - 0 E2 & t FT - a a U p 4) �Y + L O p E (n to Z Cn a? Z p MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS Fill SM Light brown, damp, silty fine SAND; desiccated upper 6 "; root hairs up to 2.5' Interbedded with red - brown, moist, silty f -c SAND and gray silty clay T2 -1 Alluvium 10.8 SM grown, moist, silty f -c SAND ; 6' layer Grades to yellow- brown, moist, silty f -m SAND; scattered gravels; iron oxide staining at 4 feet 8.8 PI =21, LL =44, EI =67 T2 -2 SC Gray and black, moist, medium dense, clayey f -m SAND; iron oxide 5 staining interbedded with yellow- brown, moist, silty f -m SAND; laminated and Dark gray, moist, silty, f -m SAND 110 -1 @12': Green, moist, clayey, f -c SAND 15 'W T2 -3 I I Interbedded with black, moist, sandy CLAY 9.2 T2-4 @17.5': Yellow, moist, silty f -c SAND 15.6 - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 18 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled 20 L Maximum achievable depth due to maximum reach of backhoe "Sample Legend: ® -- Small Plastic Bag ®— Large Bulk Sample —water Table PROJECT NO.: PROJECT NAME: CLIENT: 1 r%f%ATIr%K1- GeoTek Insite, Inc. LOG OF EXPLORATORY TRENCH 2313SD3 LOGGED BY: LG Sidonia East EQUIPMENT: 510 John Deere Barratt American DATE: 9/4/02 Encinitas. California ELEVATION: 262 MSL T3 -3 ............................................................................................................................................................................... ............................... Sc Light brown, moist, clayey f -c SAND with gravel; increase in moisture @8'; Layer of gravel, cobble and boulders up to 9" Torrey Sandstone SM Yellow- brown, moist, dense, f -m SAND; iron oxide staining 10 - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 9 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled 115-1 I* Sample Legend: ® Small Plastic Bag ®- -- Large Bulk Sample Z7.- -- -water Table I Laborato Testin SAMPLES c TRENCH NO.: T -3 a; L N U) o C O E (nn Z uVi 7 m o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS rn IFill SM Brown, damp, silty f -c SAND; root hairs; rebar; nails; shells T3 -1 Alluvium SM Light brown, damp, silty f -m SAND; with caco3 -2' layer; root hairs;iron oxide staining; scattered cobble T3 -2 @3': 1 foot layer of white vesicular rock - gravel and cobble size with abundance of root hairs root hairs up to 4 feet @4': Light yellow- brown, moist, silty f -m SAND; scattered roots; 5 laminated T3 -3 ............................................................................................................................................................................... ............................... Sc Light brown, moist, clayey f -c SAND with gravel; increase in moisture @8'; Layer of gravel, cobble and boulders up to 9" Torrey Sandstone SM Yellow- brown, moist, dense, f -m SAND; iron oxide staining 10 - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 9 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled 115-1 I* Sample Legend: ® Small Plastic Bag ®- -- Large Bulk Sample Z7.- -- -water Table I GeoTek Insite, Inc. LOG OF EXPLORATORY TRENCH PROJECT NO.: 2313SD3 LOGGED BY: PROJECT NAME: Sidonia East EQUIPMENT: CLIENT: Barratt American DATE: nrATinni. Encinitas. California ELEVATION: LG 510 John Deere 9/4/02 255 MSL T4 -1 SM Light gray- brown, damp, silty f -m SAND; root hairs 4.8 @4': Dark yellow -brown and gray, very moist, silty f -m SAND; iron T4 -2 oxide staining 7.1 11': Light green and gray, very moist, silty f -m SAND 1 13.6 I I See Plate SA -1 ' Torrey Sandstone T4 -5 SP Orange, moist, medium dense, f -m SAND - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 17 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled Maximum achievable depth due to maximum reach of backhoe * Sample Legend: - -- Small Plastic Bag ® Large Bulk Sample Water Table Laboratory Testin SAMPLES M E TRENCH NO.: T -4 C N C '� m a ~ E O E E cn z U o O Cl) cc = MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS Fill Light brown, moist, loose, silty f -m SAND; ac pieces; layer of gravel at T4 -1 SM Light gray- brown, damp, silty f -m SAND; root hairs 4.8 @4': Dark yellow -brown and gray, very moist, silty f -m SAND; iron T4 -2 oxide staining 7.1 11': Light green and gray, very moist, silty f -m SAND 1 13.6 I I See Plate SA -1 ' Torrey Sandstone T4 -5 SP Orange, moist, medium dense, f -m SAND - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 17 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled Maximum achievable depth due to maximum reach of backhoe * Sample Legend: - -- Small Plastic Bag ® Large Bulk Sample Water Table PROJECT NO.: PROJECT NAME: CLIENT: I nreTfnnb GeoTek Insite, Inc. LOG OF EXPLORATORY TRENCH 2313SD3 _ LOGGED BY: Sidonia East EQUIPMENT: Barratt American DATE: Encinitas. California ELEVATION: LG 510 John Deere 9/4/02 254.5 MSL 1 5-4 110 -t @6.5': Interbedded black silty f -m SAND T5 -1 I I @ 13': 4" Concrete old pipe 15 @ 15': Dark gray and green, very moist, silty f -m SAND with root trunk chunks and black paper T5 -2 SM @ 16.5': Brown, moist, silty f -m SAND - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 16.5 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled Maximum achievable depth due to maximum reach of backhoe Sample Legend: - -- Small Plastic Bag ® Large Bulk Sample -- -water Table SAMPLES Labor tory Testir C a 0 a TRENCH NO.: T -5 a o F as D U o m" p a o L O E CU cctln = MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS Fill SC Light brown, moist, clayey f -c SAND; chunks of light gray sand and orange laminations dessicated; roots in upper 1 foot; root hairs to 3.5 feet; 6" layer of balck clayey sand at 1 foot @35: Gray - borwn, moist, clayey f -c SAND .............................................................. ............................... ............................... . ....................... ....................................................................................... SM Yellow- brown, moist, silty f -m SAND 1 5-4 110 -t @6.5': Interbedded black silty f -m SAND T5 -1 I I @ 13': 4" Concrete old pipe 15 @ 15': Dark gray and green, very moist, silty f -m SAND with root trunk chunks and black paper T5 -2 SM @ 16.5': Brown, moist, silty f -m SAND - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 16.5 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled Maximum achievable depth due to maximum reach of backhoe Sample Legend: - -- Small Plastic Bag ® Large Bulk Sample -- -water Table GeoTek Insite, Inc. LOG OF EXPLORATORY TRENCH PROJECT NO.: 2313SD3 LOGGED BY: LG PROJECT NAME: Sidonia East EQUIPMENT: 510 John Deere CLIENT: Barratt American DATE: 9/4/02 ❑. ;, ; +�� r:.lifnrnia ELEVATION: 253 MSL Laboratory Testin SAMPLES _ � z TRENCH NO.: T -6 _ m y E2 L CL F d a n E E � U O E v) z' a o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS n Fill SM Red - brown, moist, silty f -m SAND @ 1': Light gray- brown, damp, silty f -m SAND Alluvium 5 SM -SC Brown, moist, silty f -m SAND and clayey f -m SAND interbedded @5': 2" black sandy clay layer; discontinous Interbedded gray, moist, silty fine SAND and sandy CLAY and clayey sand interbedds 10 T6 -1 14.6 P1 =Non Plastic See Plate SA -2 15 ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ T6 -2 SC Gray- brown, moist, clayey f -c SAND 13.7 ............................... - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 18 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled Maximum achievable depth due to maximum reach of backhoe * Sample Legend: - -- Small Plastic Bag ® - -- Large Bulk Sample -- -water Table GecTek Insite, Inc. LOG OF EXPLORATORY TRENCH PROJECT NO.: 2313SD3 LOGGED BY: PROJECT NAME: Sidonia East EQUIPMENT: CLIENT: Barratt American DATE: =;,4.. r'".lifnrnin ELEVATION: LG 510 John Deere 9/4/02 258 MSL `vv^ Labo cry Testing SAMPLES o E T TRENCH NO.: T -7 _ 0 N E as E E n L O od E ca U) z iav o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS Topsoil Light gray- brown, damp, loose silty f -m SAND; root hairs Torrey Sandstone T7 -1 Light white -gray, moist, dense, silty f -m SAND; massive; laminations roots hairs up to 2 feet; iron oxide staining; fracturing N80E 20W @2'3 ": brown clayey sand organic layer 5 - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 7 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled 10 15 * Sample Legend: ® - -- Small Plastic Bag ® - -- Large Bulk Sample -- -water Table GeoTek Insite, Inc. LOG OF EXPLORATORY TRENCH PROJECT NO.: 2313SD3 LOGGED BY: PROJECT NAME: Sidonia East EQUIPMENT: CLIENT: Barratt American DATE: r%r+ArIMKI. Pncinitas. California ELEVATION: LG 510 John Deere 9/4/02 254 MSL @3': Yellow- brown, moist, silty f -m SAND 5 - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 4 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled 110 -4 115-1 I. Sample Legend: --- Small Plastic Bag ®- -- Large Bulk Sample � -- -water Table I Labor ory Testir SAMPLES O E 1 TRENCH NO.: T-7A 5 = Y N C 4F t H a n U) 0� U o a) a a (D E E U) 3 v o v 0 E ca W z' MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS Torrey Sandstone SM Red - brown, moist, medium dense, silty f -m SAND T7A -1 @3': Yellow- brown, moist, silty f -m SAND 5 - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 4 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled 110 -4 115-1 I. Sample Legend: --- Small Plastic Bag ®- -- Large Bulk Sample � -- -water Table I GeoTek Insite, Inc. LOG OF EXPLORATORY TRENCH LOGGED BY: LG PROJECT NO.: 2313SD3 PROJECT NAME: Sidonia East EQUIPMENT: 510 John Deere CLIENT: Barratt American DATE: 9/4/02 r..1wr1nni. Encinitas. California ELEVATION: 284 MSL 110 -1 115-1 �' Sample Legend: Small Plastic Bag ®--- Ring Sample ® Large Bulk Sample water Table Laboratory Testin SAMPLES E T TRENCH NO.: T -8 c E 0 a) L F- a o � V o C L o ° ca m` 0 O � MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS Torrey Sandstone im SW White moist, f -m SAND; massive T8 -1 T8 -2 @2.5': scattered roots @3': Yellow, moist, dense, f -m SAND; massive; laminations T8 -3 @4.5': White, moist, dense, f -m SAND 6.0 1108.1 5 - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 5 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled 110 -1 115-1 �' Sample Legend: Small Plastic Bag ®--- Ring Sample ® Large Bulk Sample water Table PROJECT NO.: PROJECT NAME: CLIENT: /1nwTiP kl• GeoTek Insite, Inc. LOG OF EXPLORATORY TRENCH 2313SD3 LOGGED BY: LG Sidonia East EQUIPMENT: 510 John Deere Barratt American DATE: 9/4/02 Fnrinitas_ California ELEVATION: 282 MSL 1 5-1 - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 5.5 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled 1 i[o]Cm 115-1 I" Sample Legend: ® - -- Small Plastic Bag ® Large Bulk Sample Table water 1 Labor tory Testin SAMPLES 0 � TRENCH NO.: T -9 d 0 N t F- CL U) U o V U p a t O p E U) Z ca MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS ca Topsoil SM Brown and orange, damp, silty f -m SAND; dessicated; roots Torrey Sandstone SW Light yellow, moist, f -m SAND; iron oxide staining; laminations with gray silty clay pockets 1 5-1 - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 5.5 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled 1 i[o]Cm 115-1 I" Sample Legend: ® - -- Small Plastic Bag ® Large Bulk Sample Table water 1 PROJECT NO.: PROJECT NAME: CLIENT: . lII+A TIAAI. GeoTek Insite, Inc. LOG OF EXPLORATORY TRENCH 2313SD3 LOGGED BY: LG Sidonia East EQUIPMENT: 510 John Deere Barratt American DATE: 914/02 Pnninitns. California ELEVATION: 238 MSL 1 5.4 110 -1 @I 3':odor; trace organic matter 14.5': root hairs 15 T15 -1 SC Yellow- brown, moist, silty SAND mixed with gray and black sandy T15 -2 clay; gravel 12 P1 =Non Plastic @16': Orange- brown, moist, silty f -m SAND; interbedded with gray sandy clay chunks - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 16.5 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled Maximum achievable depth due to maximum reach of backhoe * Sample Legend: Small Plastic Bag ® Large Bulk Sample water Table Labo tory Testin SAMPLES E a TRENCH NO.: T-10 _ t: a� U ) a O Q E ca Z j CO m o F MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS U) Fill CL Black, damp, sandy CLAY; dessicated ; with roots ....... ..................... .................. SC -SM ........................................................................................ Y.................................................................... ................ Interbedded with red - brown, moist, silt f -c SAND and green clayey ............... ......................... sand @5': Light brown, moist, clayey SAND; heavy odor, trace organics; white sand chunks scattered roots up to 7 feet 1 5.4 110 -1 @I 3':odor; trace organic matter 14.5': root hairs 15 T15 -1 SC Yellow- brown, moist, silty SAND mixed with gray and black sandy T15 -2 clay; gravel 12 P1 =Non Plastic @16': Orange- brown, moist, silty f -m SAND; interbedded with gray sandy clay chunks - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 16.5 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled Maximum achievable depth due to maximum reach of backhoe * Sample Legend: Small Plastic Bag ® Large Bulk Sample water Table GeoTek Insite, Inc. LOG OF EXPLORATORY TRENCH PROJECT NO.: 2313SD3 LOGGED BY: LG ry PROJECT NAME: Sidonia East EQUIPMENT: 510 John Deere CLIENT: Barratt American DATE: 9/4/02 ...r.,.. Fnninitas_ California ELEVATION: 236 MSL wv^ Laborato Testin SAMPLES o .0 TRENCH NO.: T -11 m N t H a s U p n t p 112 a E in Z m p O cco = MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS Fill SM Yellow- brown, moist, silty f -m SAND; scattered boulders ............. .. SC Gray and green, moist, clayey f -c SAND 1 5-1 '0 Interbedded yellow- brown, moist, clayey f -c SAND 11': black rotted root; organics T11 -1 CAD 14'; Yellow- brown, moist, silty f -m SAND with clay 15 T11 -2 Alluvium SM Gray - black, damp, silty f -m SAND with clay and roots - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 17 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled Maximum achievable depth due to maximum reach of backhoe * Sample Legend: Small Plastic Bag =171 Large Bulk Sample water Table PROJECT NO.: PROJECT NAME: CLIENT: neeTION• GeoTek Insite, Inc;. LOG OF EXPLORATORY TRENCH 2313SD3 Sidonia East Barratt American Encinitas. California LOGGED BY: EQUIPMENT: DATE: ELEVATION: LG 510 John Deere 9/4/02 234.5 MSL •_. -. Laborato Testing SAMPLES E TRENCH NO.: T -12 c Z 1? °' as � U o y p a O p co U) z U) = m p MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS U) Fill SC Light brown, damp, clayey f -c SAND; highly dessicated; 2" to 4" SC Light brown, moist clayey f -m SAND; iron oxide staining interbedded with gray black silty sand 5 T12 -1 P1 =Non Plastic Alluvium I SM Gray black, moist, silty f -m SAND; harder to dig at 9 feet 10 ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. SC Yellow- brown, moist, clayey f c SAND; iron oxide staining ............................... T12 -2 - -HOLE TERMINATED AT 12.5 FEET- - No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled 15 * Sample Legend: - -- Small Plastic Bag ® - -- Large Bulk Sample ZZ, - --water Table APPENDIX B RESULTS OF LABORATORY TESTING Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots Encinitas, California Project No.: 2313SD3 r 1E �x Barratt American APPENDIX B Geotechnical Evaluation October 14, 2002 Sidonia East, 8 Custom Lots Page B -1 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING Classification Soils were classified visually according to the United Soil Classification System (USCS). -- The soil classifications are shown on the logs of trenches. Liquid limit, plastic limit and plasticity index were determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method D4318. The test results are included herein and shown on the logs of exploratory borings/ trenches in Appendix A. - In Situ Moisture and Unit Weight The field moisture content was measured in the laboratory on selected samples collected during the field investigation. The field moisture content is determined as a percentage of the dry unit weight. Results of these tests are presented on the logs of exploratory borings in Appendix A. The dry density was measured in the laboratory on selected ring samples. The results are shown on the logs of exploratory borings in Appendix A. Expansion Index Expansion Index testing was performed on a representative near - surface samples. Testing was performed in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D4829. The results are shown on the logs of exploratory borings and presented on Plates El-1 through EI -2 included herein. Direct Shear Shear testing was performed in a direct shear machine of the strain - control type in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D3080. The rate of deformation is 0.03 inches per minute. The sample was sheared under varying confining loads in order to determine the coulomb shear strength parameters, angle of internal friction and cohesion. The shear test results are presented on Plates SH -land 2 included herein Consolidation Settlement predictions of the soil's behavior under loads are made on the basis of the consolidation tests in general accordance with ASTM D 2435. The consolidation apparatus is designed to receive a one -inch high ring used in the California split -spoon sampler. Loads are applied in several increments in a geometric progression, and the resulting deformations are recorded at selected time intervals. Porous stones are placed in contact with the top and bottom of each specimen to permit addition and release of pore fluid. Samples are tested fully saturated at various normal loads. The results are shown on Plates C -1 through C -5o K 100 90 80 70 Particle Size Distribution Report II 717-7 �I °# W 60 /2 in. Z _ LL I 100.0 Z 5C Z /4 in. W U /2 in. 100.0 I 0- 4C /8 in. 100.0 3( #4 2( ICI I 1( Particle Size Distribution Report II 717-7 �I °# PASS? (X =NO) /2 in. 100.0 I 100.0 /4 in. 100.0 /2 in. 100.0 I /8 in. 100.0 #4 100.0 ICI I #8 100.0 I i I i I I I I i , i I LF I I � I I 100.0 I 100.0 T —�— I. I 100.0 #200 34.1 � I I I I ' - I I III i 1 �- r --r- I li -' it i 'i' 1-- r--- ' r-- �-�-�- I i I i I I 500 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 UNAIN JILL - Ii1fI1 °/, COBBLES % GRAVEL % SAND % SILT I % CLAY 0.0 0.0 65.9 34.1 EVE IZE PERCENT FINER SPEC.* PERCENT PASS? (X =NO) /2 in. 100.0 1 in. f 100.0 /4 in. 100.0 /2 in. 100.0 /8 in. 100.0 #4 100.0 #8 100.0 #16 100.0 #30 100.0 #50 100.0 #100 100.0 #200 34.1 (no specification provided) Sample No.: 3 Location: T4 GeoTek Soil Description Atterberq Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D85= 0.128 D60= 0.0985 D50= 0.0887 D30= D15= D10= Cu= Cc= Classification USCS= AASHTO= A- 2 -4(0) Remarks 200 Wash Only Source of Sample: Client: Barratt Inc. Project: Sidonia East Project No: 2313SD3 Date: 9/16/02 Elev. /Depth: I V Plate SA -1 100 9C 8C 7C re W 6( Z Ll Z 5( LU UJ U tY 0- 41 31 2' 1 Particle Size Distribution RePOI't 5UU -I UU % COBBLES % GRAVEL 00 0.0 SINE SIZE - - - -- -- I 100.0 i I I ICI I III LL 100.0 1/2 in. 100.0 I III! #4 100.0 #8 99.7 j TT[7 I 99.5 - + I- 1I 96.7 -- II ,I I II II I i I l I I I I, I i I n � I I I I n 111 0 -bC11 5UU -I UU % COBBLES % GRAVEL 00 0.0 SINE SIZE PERCENT FINER SPEC." PERCENT PASS? (X =NO) 1 -1/2 in. 100.0 1 in. 100.0 3/4 in. 100.0 1/2 in. 100.0 3/8 in. 100.0 #4 100.0 #8 99.7 #16 99.5 #30 96.7 #50 74.5 #100 34.6 #200 26.3 GRAIN SIZE - mm % SAND 73.7 % SILT % CLAY 26.3 Soil Description Atterbera Limits PL= NP LL= NV P1= NP Coefficients D85= 0.383 D60= 0.235 D50= 0.201 D30= 0.102 D15= D10= Cu= Cc= Classification USCS= AASHTO= A- 2 -4(0) (no specification provided) Sample No.: 1 Source of Sample: Location: T6 Client: Barratt Geo)Tek,., I Project: Sidonia East Remarks Date: 9/13/02 Elev. /Depth: 10' Plate SA -2 1 50 40 x w 0 Z 30 U H Q a 2C 1( i LIQUID AND PLASTID LIMITS TEST REPORT Dashed line indicates the approximate upper limit boundary for natural soils ■ of I Gv i ;Cl�-Ml- ML or OL n 30 LIQUID LIMIT i I I I O II MH or OH SOIL DATA NATURAL SAMPLE DEPTH WATER PLASTIC LIQUID PLASTICITY USCS SYMBOL SOURCE NO. (ft.) CONTENT LIMIT LIMIT INDEX (%) (%) (%) ( %) • B5 -3 652 13' 20 29 9 ■ T2 -2 652 4' 23 44 21 LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT Client: Barratt Project: Sidonia East GeoTek, ' Project No.: 2313SD3 Plate PI - I `/1J W x W N Z _ o Z O a Z Q CL W 5� N LO co 0 Z .Q 0.S J U C) N O O N' N_ O r C t6 � y N tB N U F- U (6 m m o d d a h x w M� O y y D 0 0 E 0 c m •E •E c = o E E c LL r r 117 D � a� c ,n ` c 10 Z Z ►°,i r :2 C_ 3 V V V O O O O CL a a LO M cql N NI "—I I v� c .c m 0 Q M E o cu s w U o 0 6 O co co E Q .G E rn U C C T o o C N O C .D N 0 0 Z 3 Z O a z_ W F- LU C z O Q a m C!l OI MI 6Ol MOI NI -e c 0 w o m c 0 m c cn 0 N o U N Cl) J in O 2 !:Y, W .- j (� m 0 0 W LL (9 2— -i `1 ti m II W 0 0 Z Z O y Qe O x w r Mu LIJ Q J CL ZLo Z O o _ 0 _ Lo r Lo r Lo L r _I 2 v N N Q W O O O O O W W Z_ w O O O 77 a W _ E z z cc L W F- 0 O N 0 0 N 0 0 N o O N LU L O O N Q r r N r r \ r r O O r O r O r O r D � a� c ,n ` c 10 Z Z ►°,i r :2 C_ 3 V V V O O O O CL a a LO M cql N NI "—I I v� c .c m 0 Q M E o cu s w U o 0 6 O co co E Q .G E rn U C C T o o C N O C .D N 0 0 Z 3 Z O a z_ W F- LU C z O Q a m C!l OI MI 6Ol MOI NI -e c 0 w o m c 0 m c cn 0 N o U N Cl) J in O 2 !:Y, W .- j (� m 0 0 W LL (9 2— -i `1 ti m II W 0 0 Z Z O y Qe O x w r Mu LIJ Q J CL � r Z O o _ r Z _ U) N N _ _I 2 2 °c� W W W D _ E z z cc L LU LU L LO M cql N NI "—I I v� c .c m 0 Q M E o cu s w U o 0 6 O co co E Q .G E rn U C C T o o C N O C .D N 0 0 Z 3 Z O a z_ W F- LU C z O Q a m C!l OI MI 6Ol MOI NI -e c 0 w o m c 0 m c cn 0 N o U N Cl) J in O 2 !:Y, W .- j (� m 0 0 W LL (9 2— -i `1 ti m II W 0 0 Z Z O y Qe O x w r Mu LIJ Q J CL Z O a z_ W F- LU C z O Q a m C!l OI MI 6Ol MOI NI -e c 0 w o m c 0 m c cn 0 N o U N Cl) J in O 2 !:Y, W .- j (� m 0 0 W LL (9 2— -i `1 ti m II W 0 0 Z Z O y Qe O x w r Mu LIJ Q J CL m 0 0 W LL (9 2— -i `1 ti m II W 0 0 Z Z O y Qe O x w r Mu LIJ Q J CL U) W r X Q4 N Z Go _ o OZI m _ a IL W r� N Cn CO C CO CO 0 z N - M N Cc m T Ch U J L6 T m O m U W O Y Q V ` V d V y y O w d I=' O y 0 @ C U z O Q 0 m @ Z 0 Q U-) T T O o C • w T T O c 'E U) CI' T O E E iT — O C) T T to @ C U z O Q Z 0 Q U-) T T O v T T O 0 T T O w T T O N U) CI' T O NW L.L 2 d C) W E c LL7 cc Zw ¢ U Cn Cn CO E Co O �= > M T W rn W O C N O J w F- Q O N N O O N N N N O N N II O N M 0' Q T T T T T O O O O CD O @ C U z O Q rl 3 Z W N m 2 d C) W E c LL7 cc N U � U m CZ E O F- E Co O �= > M cm rn W O C N O J D v II w w CD m @ cy 0 c cn C.0 T C Cn O � Ln y Gd •Q *+ s � c avi avi avi �I MI �I rl �I rn c 06 3 C cD m o d C) O E O LL7 cc N U U m CZ E O C E Co O �= > M cm rn 2) a) 3 O C N O J z O z W W G z O Q ¢ N o o � o O O O O Ln 0 o CO 3 C w cu (n O o U N w N J x II w w CD c? �° m V a W LL 0 _— � Y MI 11 W Z Z O .. a` a x w N Ill W J a DIRECT SHEAR TEST Project Name: Barratt / Sedonia Sample Source: B2 -1 at 5' Project Number: 2313 SD3 Date Tested: 9/17/02 Soil Description: Gray clayey f -m sand (Alluvium) 5.5 5 4.5 W Y 4 w W OC 3.5 NA Q A W 3 y =0.56x +1.31 H 2.5 2 A 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 NORMAL STRESS (k5f) Shear Strength: (= 29.2 ° C = 1.31 ksf Notes; 1 - The soil specimen used in the shear box were "ring" samples collected during the field investigation. 2 - Shear strength calculated at maximum load. 3 - The tests were ran at a shear rate of 0.05 in/min. PLATE SH -1 Test No. Load (ton) Water Content ( %) Dry Density (pcf) 1 0.7 7 117 2 1.4 7 114 3 2.8 7 113 Notes; 1 - The soil specimen used in the shear box were "ring" samples collected during the field investigation. 2 - Shear strength calculated at maximum load. 3 - The tests were ran at a shear rate of 0.05 in/min. PLATE SH -1 DIRECT SHEAR TEST Project Name: Barratt / Sedonia Sample Source: T8 -3 & 4.5' Project Number: 2313 SD3 Date Tested: 9/11/02 Soil Description: White f -m sand (Torrey sands) 5.5 5 4.5 Y 4 N W OC 3.5 v~i K 3 y =0.76x +0.14 a 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 NORMAL STRESS (kSf) Shear Strength• (D = 37.2 ° C = 0.14 ksf Notes: 1 - The soil specimen used in the shear box were "ring" samples collected during the field investigation. 2 - Shear strength calculated at maximum load. 3 - The tests were ran at a shear rate of 0.05 in/min. PLATE SH -2 Test No. Load (ton) Water Content ( %) Dry Density (pcf) 1 0.7 7 106 2 1.4 7 106 3 2.8 7 106 Notes: 1 - The soil specimen used in the shear box were "ring" samples collected during the field investigation. 2 - Shear strength calculated at maximum load. 3 - The tests were ran at a shear rate of 0.05 in/min. PLATE SH -2 AK, INC. CONSOLIDATION TEST Project Name: Sedonia East Project Number: 2313 SD3 Soil Description: Brown clayey SAND (alluvium) Initial Void Ratio: NA Sample Source: B2 -3A @ 10' Date Tested: 9/16/02 Initial Dry Density: 111.5 pcf Initial Water Content: 13.5% 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 Z 7.0 8.0 vFi 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 — -- 13.0 — l 14.0 15.0 0.1 1 10 100 STRESS (tsf) Notes: The soil initially tested at natural moisture content. Water added at .5 ton. PLATE CO -1 CONSOLIDATION TEST Project Name: Sedonia East Project Number: 2313 SD3 Soil Description: Brown silty sand with clay (alluvium) Initial Void Ratio: NA Sample Source: B2 -5A @ 20' Date Tested: 9/25/02 Initial Dry Density: 108 pcf Initial Water Content: 18.3% 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 0 6.0 x 7.0 .d, t� 8.0 r 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 -- 14.0 — 15.0 0.1 1 10 100 STRESS (tsfl Notes: The soil initially tested at natural moisture content. Water added at 1.0 ton. PLATE CO -2 AK, INC. CONSOLIDATION TEST Project Name: Sedonia East Project Number: 2313 SD3 Soil Description: Brown clayey SAND (fill) Initial Void Ratio: NA 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 Z 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 0.1 Sample Source: B3 -4 @ 15' Date Tested: 9/25/02 Initial Dry Density: 116 pcf Initial Water Content: 9.6% 1 10 STRESS (tsf) Notes: The soil initially tested at natural moisture content. Water added at 1.0 ton. 100 1 PLATE CO -3 AK, INC. CONSOLIDATION TEST Project Name: Sedonia East Project Number: 2313 SD3 Soil Description: Brown clayey SAND (alluvium) Initial Void Ratio: NA Sample Source: B4 -5 @ 25' Date Tested: 9/25/02 Initial Dry Density: 124 pcf Initial Water Content: 9.0% 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 Z 7.0 8.0 9.0 i 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 0 1 1 10 100 STRESS (tslf) Notes: The soil initially tested at natural moisture content. Water added at 1.0 ton. PLATE CO -4 CONSOLIDATION TEST Project Name: Sedonia East Project Number. 2313 SM Soil Description: Black sandy clay (alluvium) Initial Void Ratio: NA 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 x 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 150 Sample Source: B5 -2 @ 10' Date Tested: 9/16/02 Initial Dry Density: 111 pcf Initial Water Content: 15.5% 0.1 1 STRESS (tslf) 10 Notes: The soil initially tested at natural moisture content. Water added at 0.5 ton. 100 I PLATE CO -5 APPENDIX C GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES FOR EARTHWORK CONSTRUCTION Sidonia East, S Custom Lots Encinitas, California Project No.: 2313SD3 y`K GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIX C Sidonia East 2313SD3 Encinitas, California Page 1 of I GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES Guidelines presented herein are intended to address general construction procedures for earthwork construction. Specific situations and conditions often arise which cannot reasonably be discussed in general guidelines, when anticipated these are discussed in the text of the report. Often unanticipated conditions are encountered which may necessitate modification or changes to these guidelines. It is our hope that these will assist the contractor to more efficiently complete the project by providing a reasonable understanding of the procedures that would be expected during earthwork and the testing and observation used to evaluate those procedures. General Grading should be performed to at least the minimum requirements of governing agencies, Chapters 18 and 33 of the Uniform Building Code and the guidelines presented below. Preconstruction Meeting A preconstruction meeting should be held prior to site earthwork. Any questions the contractor has regarding our recommendations, general site conditions, apparent discrepancies between reported and actual conditions and/or differences in procedures the contractor intends to use should be brought up at that meeting. The contractor (including the main onsite representative) should review our report and these guidelines in advance of the meeting. Any comments the contractor may have regarding these guidelines should be brought up at that meeting. Grading Observation and Testing 1. Observation of the fill placement should be provided by our representative during grading. Verbal communication during the course of each day will be used to inform the contractor of test results. The Contractor should receive a copy of the "Daily Field Report" indicating results of field density tests that day. If our representative does not provide the contractor with these reports, our office should be notified. 2. Testing and observation procedures are, by their nature, specific to the work or area observed and _ location of the tests taken, variability may occur in other locations. The contractor is responsible for the uniformity of the grading operations, our observations and test results are intended to evaluate the contractor's overall level of efforts during grading. The contractor's personnel are -- the only individuals participating in all aspect of site work. Compaction testing and observation should not be considered as relieving the contractor's responsibility to properly compact the fill. 3. Cleanouts, processed ground to receive fill, key excavations, and subdrains should be observed by our representative prior to placing any fill. It will be the Contractor's responsibility to notify our representative or office when such areas are ready for observation. 4. Density tests may be made on the surface material to receive fill, as considered warranted by this firm. l K GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES Sidonia East Encinitas, California APPENDIX C 231303 Page 2 of 2 5. In general, density tests would be made at maximum intervals of two feet of fill height or every 1,000 cubic yards of fill placed. Criteria will vary depending on soil conditions and size of the fill. More frequent testing may be performed. In any case, an adequate number of field density tests should be made to evaluate the required compaction and moisture content is generally being obtained. 6. Laboratory testing to support field test procedures will be performed, as considered warranted, based on conditions encountered (e.g. change of material sources, types, etc.) Every effort will be made to process samples in the laboratory as quickly as possible and in progress construction projects are our first priority. However, laboratory workloads may cause in delays and some soils may require a minimum of 48 to 72 hours to complete test procedures. Whenever possible, our representative(s) should be informed in advance of operational changes that might result in different source areas for materials. 7. Procedures for testing of fill slopes are as follows: a) Density tests should be taken periodically during grading on the flat surface of the fill three to five feet horizontally from the face of the slope. b) If a method other than over building and cutting back to the compacted core is to be employed, slope compaction testing during construction should include testing the outer six inches to three feet in the slope face to determine if the required compaction is being achieved. 8. Finish grade testing of slopes and pad surfaces should be performed after construction is complete. Site Clearing 1. All vegetation, and other deleterious materials, should be removed from the site. If material is not immediately removed from the site it should be stockpiled in a designated area(s) well outside of all current work areas and delineated with flagging or other means. Site clearing should be performed in advance of any grading in a specific area. 2. Efforts should be made by the contractor to remove all organic or other deleterious material from the fill, as even the most diligent efforts may result in the incorporation of some materials. This is especially important when grading is occurring near the natural grade. All equipment operators should be aware of these efforts. Laborers may be required as root pickers. 3. Nonorganic debris or concrete may be placed in deeper fill areas provided the procedures used are observed and found acceptable by our representative. Typical procedures are similar to those indicated on Plate G -4. Treatment of Existing Ground 1. Following site clearing, all surficial deposits of alluvium and colluvium as well as weathered or creep effected bedrock, should be removed (see Plates G -1, G -2 and G -3) unless otherwise specifically indicated in the text of this report. - E' -� -fix APPENDIX C GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES 231303 Sidonia East Page 3 of 3 Encinitas, California 2. In some cases, removal may be recommended to a specified depth (e.g. flat sites where partial alluvial removals may be sufficient) the contractor should not exceed these depths unless directed otherwise by our representative. 3. Groundwater existing in alluvial areas may make excavation difficult. Deeper removals than indicated in the text of the report may be necessary due to saturation during winter months. 4. Subsequent to removals, the natural ground should be processed to a depth of six inches, moistened to near optimum moisture conditions and compacted to fill standards. 5. Exploratory back hoe or dozer trenches still remaining after site removal should be excavated and filled with compacted fill if they can be located. Subdrainage 1. Subdrainage systems should be provided in canyon bottoms prior to placing fill, and behind buttress and stabilization fills and in other areas indicated in the report. Subdrains should conform to schematic diagrams G -1 and G -5, and be acceptable to our representative. 2. For canyon subdrains, runs less than 500 feet may use six -inch pipe. Typically, runs in excess of 500 feet should have the lower end as eight -inch minimum. 3. Filter material should be clean, 1/2 to 1 -inch gravel wrapped in a suitable filter fabric. Class 2 permeable filter material per California Department of Transportation Standards tested by this office to verify its suitability, may be used without filter fabric. A sample of the material should be provided to the Soils Engineer by the contractor at least two working days before it is delivered to the site. The filter should be clean with a wide range of sizes. 4. Approximate delineation of anticipated subdrain locations may be offered at 40 -scale plan review stage. During grading, this office would evaluate the necessity of placing additional drains. 5. All subdrainage systems should be observed by our representative during construction and prior to covering with compacted fill. 6. Subdrains should outlet into storm drains where possible. Outlets should be located and protected. The need for backflow preventers should be assessed during construction. 7. Consideration should be given to having subdrains located by the project surveyors. Fill Placement 1. Unless otherwise indicated, all site soil and bedrock may be reused for compacted fill; however, some special processing or handling may be required (see text of report). 2. Material used in the compacting process should be evenly spread, moisture conditioned, processed, and compacted in thin lifts six (6) to eight (8) inches in compacted thickness to obtain a uniformly dense layer. The fill should be placed and compacted on a nearly horizontal plane, unless otherwise found acceptable by our representative. 3. If the moisture content or relative density varies from that recommended by this firm , the Contractor should rework the fill until it is in accordance with the following: _ . 1K GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIX C 2313SD3 Sidonia East Page 4 of'4 Encinitas, California a) Moisture content of the fill should be at or above optimum moisture. Moisture should be evenly distributed without wet and dry pockets. Pre - watering of cut or removal areas should be considered in addition to watering during fill placement, particularly in clay or _ dry surficial soils. The ability of the contractor to obtain the proper moisture content will control production rates. b) Each six -inch layer should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry - density in compliance with the testing method specified by the controlling governmental agency. In most cases, the testing method is ASTM Test Designation D -1557. 4. Rock fragments less than eight inches in diameter may be utilized in the fill, provided: a) They are not placed in concentrated pockets; b) There is a sufficient percentage of fine - grained material to surround the rocks; C) The distribution of the rocks is observed by and acceptable to our representative. 5. Rocks exceeding eight (8) inches in diameter should be taken off site, broken into smaller fragments, or placed in accordance with recommendations of this firm in areas designated suitable for rock disposal (See Plate G -4). On projects where significant large quantities of oversized materials are anticipated, alternate guidelines for placement may be included. If significant oversize materials are encountered during construction, these guidelines should be requested. 6. In clay soil dry or large chunks or blocks are common; if in excess of eight (8) inches minimum dimension then they are considered as oversized. Sheepsfoot compactors or other suitable methods should be used to break up blocks. When dry they should be moisture conditioned to provide a uniform condition with the surrounding fill. Slope Construction 1. The Contractor should obtain a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent out to the finished slope face of fill slopes. This may be achieved by either overbuilding the slope and cutting back to the compacted core, or by direct compaction of the slope face with suitable equipment. 2. Slopes trimmed to the compacted core should be overbuilt by at least three (3) feet with compaction efforts out to the edge of the false slope. Failure to properly compact the outer edge results in trinuning not exposing the compacted core and additional compaction after trimming may be necessary. 3. If fill slopes are built "at grade" using direct compaction methods then the slope construction should be performed so that a constant gradient is maintained throughout construction. Soil should not be "spilled" over the slope face nor should slopes be "pushed out" to obtain grades. Compaction equipment should compact each lift along the immediate top of slope. Slopes should be back rolled or otherwise compacted at approximately every 4 feet vertically as the slope is built. 4. Corners and bends in slopes should have special attention during construction as these are the most difficult areas to obtain proper compaction. ''r END — iK APPENDIX C GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES 2313SD3 Sidonia East Page 5 of 5 Encinitas, California 5. Cut slopes should be cut to the finished surface, excessive undercutting and smoothing of the face with fill may necessitate stabilization. Keyways, Buttress and Stabilization Fills Keyways are needed to provide support for fill slope and various corrective procedures. 1. Side -hill fills should have an equipment -width key at their toe excavated through all surficial soil and into competent material and tilted back into the hill (Plates G -2, G -3). As the fill is elevated, it should be benched through surficial soil and slopewash, and into competent bedrock or other material deemed suitable by our representatives (See Plates G -1, G -2, and G -3). 2. Fill over cut slopes should be constructed in the following manner: a) All surficial soils and weathered rock materials should be removed at the cut -fill interface. b) A key at least one (1) equipment width wide (or as needed for compaction) and tipped at least one (1) foot into slope should be excavated into competent materials and observed by our representative. C) The cut portion of the slope should be excavated prior to fill placement to evaluate if stabilization is necessary, the contractor should be responsible for any additional earthwork created by placing fill prior to cut excavation. (See Plate G -3 for schematic details). 3. Daylight cut lots above descending natural slopes may require removal and replacement of the outer portion of the lot. A schematic diagram for this condition is presented on Plate G -2. 4. A basal key is needed for fill slopes extending over natural slopes. A schematic diagram for this condition is presented on Plate G -2. 5. All fill slopes should be provided with a key unless within the body of a larger overall fill mass. Please refer to Plate G -3, for specific guidelines. Anticipated buttress and stabilization fills are discussed in the text of the report. The need to stabilize other proposed cut slopes will be evaluated during construction. Plate G -5 is shows a schematic of buttress construction. 1. All backcuts should be excavated at gradients of 1:1 or flatter. The backcut configuration should be determined based on the design, exposed conditions and need to maintain a minimum fill width and provide working room for the equipment. 2. On longer slopes backcuts and keyways should be excavated in maximum 250 feet long segment. The specific configurations will be determined during construction. 3. All keys should be a minimum of two (2) feet deep at the toe and slope toward the heel at least one foot or two (2 %) percent whichever is greater. 4. Subdrains are to be placed for all stabilization slopes exceeding 10 feet in height. Lower slopes are subject to review. Drains may be required. Guidelines for subdrains are presented on Plate G -5. 5. Benching of backcuts during fill placement is required. APPENDIX C GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES 2313SD3 _. Sidonia East Page 6 of 6 Encinitas, California Lot Capping 1. When practical, the upper three (3) feet of material placed below finish grade should be comprised of the least expansive material available. Preferably, highly and very highly expansive materials should not be used. We will attempt to offer advise based on visual evaluations of the materials during grading, but it must be realized that laboratory testing is needed to evaluate the expansive potential of soil. Minimally, this testing takes two (2) to four (4) days to complete. 2. Transition lots (cut and fill) both per plan and those created by remedial grading (e.g. lots above stabilization fills, along daylight lines, above natural slope, etc.) should be capped with a three foot thick compacted fill blanket. 3. Cut pads should be observed by our representative(s) to evaluate the need for overexcavation and replacement with fill. This may be necessary to reduce water infiltration into highly fractured bedrock or other permeable zones, and/or due to differing expansive potential of materials beneath a structure. The overexcavation should be at least three feet. Deeper overexcavation may be recommended in some cases. UTILITY TRENCH CONSTRUCTION AND BACKFILL Utility trench excavation and backfill is the contractors responsibility. The geotechnical consultant typically provides periodic observation and testing of these operations. While, efforts are made to make sufficient observations and tests to verify that the contractors' methods and procedures are adequate to achieve proper compaction, it is typically impractical to observe all backfill procedures. As such, it is critical that the contractor use consistent backfill procedures. Compaction methods vary for trench compaction and experience indicates many methods can be successful. However, procedures that "worked" on previous projects may or may not prove effective on a given site. The contractor(s) should outline the procedures proposed, so that we may discuss them prior to construction. We will offer comments based on our knowledge of site conditions and experience. 1. Utility trench backfill in slopes, structural areas, in streets and beneath flat work or hardscape should be brought to at least optimum moisture and compacted to at least 90 percent of the laboratory standard. Soil should be moisture conditioned prior to placing the trench. 2. Flooding and jetting are not typically recommended or acceptable for native soils. Flooding or jetting may be used with select sand having a Sand Equivalent (SE) of 30 or higher. This is typically limited to the following uses: a) shallow (12 + inches) under slab interior trenches and, b) as bedding in pipe zone. The water should be allowed to dissipate prior to pouring slabs or completing trench compaction. 3. Care should be taken not to place soils at high moisture content within the upper three feet of the trench backfill in street areas, as overly wet soils may impact subgrade preparation. Moisture may be reduced to 2% below optimum moisture in areas to be paved within the upper three feet below sub grade. J 1 ,y iK GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES Sidonia East Encinitas, California APPENDIX C 231303 Page 7 of 7 4. Sand backfill should not be allowed in exterior trenches adjacent to and within an area extending below a 1:1 projection from the outside bottom edge of a footing, unless it is similar to the surrounding soil. 5. Trench compaction testing is generally at the discretion of the geotechnical consultant. Testing frequency will be based on trench depth and the contractors procedures. A probing rod would be used to assess the consistency of compaction between tested areas and untested areas. If zones are found that are considered less compact than other areas, this would be brought to the contractors attention. JOBSAFETY General Personnel safety is a primary concern on all job sites. The following summaries our safety considerations for use by all our employees on multi - employer construction sites. On ground personnel are at highest risk of injury and possible fatality on grading construction projects. The company recognizes that construction activities will vary on each site and that job site safety is the contractor's responsibility. However, it is, imperative that all personnel be safety conscious to avoid accidents and potential injury. In an effort to minimize risks associated with geotechnical testing and observation, the following precautions are to be implemented for the safety of our field personnel on grading and construction projects. 1. Safety Meetings: Our field personnel are directed to attend the contractor's regularly scheduled safety meetings. 2. Safety Vests: Safety vests are provided for and are to be worn by our personnel while on the job site. _ 3. Safety Flags: Safety flags are provided to our field technicians; one is to be affixed to the vehicle when on site, the other is to be placed atop the spoil pile on all test pits. In the event that the contractor's representative observes any of our personnel not following the above, we request that it be brought to the attention of our office. Test Pits Location, Orientation and Clearance The technician is responsible for selecting test pit locations. The primary concern is the technician's safety. However, it is necessary to take sufficient tests at various locations to obtain a representative sampling of the fill. As such, efforts will be made to coordinate locations with the grading contractors authorized representatives (e.g. dump man, operator, supervisor, grade checker, etc.), and to select locations following or behind the established traffic pattern, preferable outside of current traffic. The contractors authorized representative should direct excavation of the pit and safety during the test period. Again, safety is the paramount concern. 1 } r �l j� IK GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES Sidonia East Encinitas, California APPENDIX C 2313SD3 Page 8 of 8 Test pits should be excavated so that the spoil pile is placed away from oncoming traffic. 'The technician's vehicle is to be placed next to the test pit, opposite the spoil pile. This necessitates that the fill be maintained in a drivable condition. Alternatively, the contractor may opt to park a piece of equipment in front of test pits, particularly in small fill areas or those with limited access. A zone of non - encroachment should be established for all test pits (see diagram below) No grading equipment should enter this zone during the test procedure. The zone should extend outward to the sides approximately 50 feet from the center of the test pit and 100 feet in the direction of traffic flow. This zone is established both for safety and to avoid excessive ground vibration, which typically decreases test results. TEST PIT SAFETY PLAN SinF VIEW I Test Pit Spoil pile 50 ft Zone of Traffic Direction Non - Encroachment Vehicle Test Pit Spoil parked here pile Non - Encroachment I 150 ft Zone of Non - Encroachment Slope Tests When taking slope tests, the technician should park their vehicle directly above or below the test location on the slope. The contractor's representative should effectively keep all equipment at a safe operation distance (e.g. 50 feet) away from the slope during testing. The technician is directed to withdraw from the active portion of the fill as soon as possible following testing. The technician's vehicle should be parked at the perimeter of the fill in a highly visible location. Trench Safety It is the contractor's responsibility to provide safe access into trenches where compaction testing is needed. Trenches for all utilities should be excavated in accordance with CAL -OSHA and any other applicable safety standards. Safe conditions will be required to enable compaction testing of the trench backfill. All utility trench excavations in excess of 5 feet deep, which a person enters, are to be shored or laid back. Trench access should be provided in accordance with OSHA standards. Our personnel are directed not to enter any trench by being lowered or "riding down" on the equipment. 1::t9 _; tK APPENDIX C GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES 2313SD3 Sidonia East Page 9 of 9 Encinitas, California Our personnel are directed not to enter any excavation which; 1. is 5 feet or deeper unless shored or laid back, 2. exit points or Ladders are not provide, 3. displays any evidence of instability, has any loose rock or other debris which could fall into the trench, or 4. displays any other evidence of any unsafe conditions regardless of depth. If the contractor fails to provide safe access to trenches for compaction testing, our company policy Th requires that the soil technician tl todeffect a solution notifies All backfill supervisor. not t stee d contractors to safety representative concerns or will then be contacted in an effort other reasons is subject to reprocessing and/or removal. Procedures In the event that the technician's safety is jeopardized or compromised as a result of the contractor's failure to comply with any of the above, the technician is directed to inform both the developer's and contractor's representatives. If the condition is not rectified, the technician is required, by company policy, to immediately withdraw and notify their supervisor. The contractor's representative will then be contacted in an effort to effect a solution. No further testing will be performed until the situation is rectified. Any fill placed in the interim can be considered unacceptable and subject to reprocessing, recompaction or removal. In the event that the soil technician does not comply with the above or other established safety guidelines, we request that the contractor bring this to technicians attention and notify our project manager or office. Effective communication acoordination der element the above program ato contractors' and and the field technician(s) is strongly encouraged in o safety in general. The safety procedures outlined above of thesedsafety procedures partic lady then one of non, serve to inform and remind equip p encroachment. r Ed ALTERNATE 3' 6 "' PERFORATED PIPE IN 9 CUBIC FEET PER BOTTOM OF CLEANOUT TO BE AT I a LINEAL FOOT CLEAN GRAVEL WITH FILTER LEAST 1.5 TIMES THE WIDTH OF — FABRIC TO COVER SURFACE OR COMPLETE COMPACTION EQUIPMENT 1 -3' —I WRAP PER FEILD CONDITIONS ALTERNATE BOTTOM OF CLEANOUT TO BE AT LEAST 1.5 TIMES THE WIDTH OF COMPACTION EQUIPMENT STANDARD GRADING GUIDELINES GeoTek Insite, Inc. 6 "' PERFORATED PIPE IN 9 CUBIC FEET PER LINEAL FOOT CLEAN GRAVEL WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC TYPICAL CANYON CLEANOUT PLATE G -1 TYPICAL FILL SLOPE OVER NATURAL DESCENDING SLOPE FINISH GRADE MIN 36 COMPACTED FILL SLOPE FILL CAP TOE OF FILL TOPSOIL, SLOPE PER C4LLUVIWM : PLAN PROJECT CREEP Zbt tE R T ,,,.....-BEDROCK 1 TO 1 ZllZZZZZZZ'llz"_'Z_zz .. :BEDROCK: 2' MIIN —� MIINIMUM \ 15 FT CLEAR` OR 1.5 EQUIPMENT WIDTHS FOR DAYLIGHT CUT AREA OVER NATURAL DESCENDING SLOPE MIN. 36" COMPACTED FILL zz TOPSOIL 2' MIIN —► COtLU�I[UM ;BEDROCK CREEP ZONE \MIINIMUM \15 FT CLEAR OR 1.5 EQUIPMENT WIDTHS FOR COMPACTION ::BEDROCK TREATMENT ABOVE STANDARD GRADING GUIDELINES NATURAL SLOPES GeoTek Insite, Inc. I PLATE G-2 TYPICAL FILL SLOPE_ OVER PROPOSED CUT SLOPE TOE OF FILL SLOPE PER FILL SLOPE PLAN TOE OF FILL SLOPE AFTER REMOVAL OF UNSUITABLE MATERIALS CUT SLOPE - \1Y�'1'1hNY� hhhh .yjhti'\'S, \.C'yV\ � yhh'1�S'Cn ,'Ylhti'\ \'l Lhti\Y \hhYS'\hhh TYPICAL FILL SLOPE SLOPE MINIMUM MINIMUM HEIGHT KEY WIDTH KEY DEPT 5 7 1 10 10 1.5 15 15 2 20 15 2.5 25 15 3 >25 SEE TEXT CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY WITH SOIL ENGINEER PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION STANDARD GRADING GUIDELINES GeoTek Insite, Inc. COMMON FILL SLOPE KEYS PLATE G-3 CROSS SECTIONAL VIEW FINISH GRADE NQ ROCKS FILL SLOPE SEE NOTE 1 S,ZONE 1 CC - -- - -- T 15'. . PLAN VEIW FILL SLOPE MIINIMUM 15 FT CLEAR OR 1.5 PLACE ROCKS END TO END. W EQUIPMENT WIDTHS FOR COMPACTION DO NOT PILE OR STACK. NOTES: 1) MININUM SOIL FILL OVER WINDROWS SHOULD BE 7 FEET AND SUFFICIENT FOR FUTURE EXCAVATIONS (e.g. SWIMMIING POOLS) T AVOID ROCKS. 2) MAXIMUM ROCK SIZE IN WINDROWS IS 4 FEET MINIMUM DIAMETER. WINDROWS 3) SOIL AROUND O SUBJECT 4) ALL SPACING AND CLEARANCES MUST BE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW FOR PRO PER COMPACTION.EER ROCK BURIAL STANDARD GRADING GUIDELINES DETAILS PLATE G - 4 GeoTek Insite, Inc. I GRADE TO DRAIN TERRACE DRAIN AS REQUIRED BACK DRAINS SEE DETAIL 4" DIAMETER PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE PVC SCH. 40 OR EQUIVALENT IN 6 CUBIC FT DRAIN ROCK WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC FALL TO HEEL' MINIMUM 1 FT I `, KEY TO BE MINIMUM 2 FT DEEP OR PER REPORT ;KEY TO BE MINIMUM 15 FT PLUS WIDTH JOF TERRACE DRAINS OR 1.5 EQUIPMENT' (WIDTH USED FOR COMPACTION 2% MINIMUM FALL NOTE: ADDITIONAL BACKDRAINS MAY BE RECOMMENDED STANDARD GRADING GUIDELINES GeoTek Insite, Inc. 4" DIAMETER SOLID OUTLET LATERALS TO SLOPE FACE OR STORM DRAIN SYSTEM AT MAXIMUM 100 FT INTERVALS BUTTRESS AND STABILIZATION SLOPES PLATE G-5 ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Capital Improvement Projects city Of District Support Services Encinitas Field Operations Sand Replenishment /Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering August 18, 2004 Attn: The Continental Insurance Company CNA Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60685 RE: Toll Brothers, South Mesa 7000 Sq. Ft. Encinitas Ranch TM 00 -128 APN 257- 020 - 01,02, &05 Grading Permit 6951 -G Monumentation Bond Final release of security The final monuments have been set and the Engineer of work has been paid in full. Therefore, release of the security deposit is merited. Performance Bond 929231746, in the amount of $24,000.00, 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, per_ f Masih Maher Senior Civil Engineer, Cc: Jay Lembach, Financial Manager Toll Brothers Debra Geishart File Enc. �r L bach Financial Services Manager Financial Services CDD 760 -633 2700 recycled paper Ttit. 760 -633 -2600 / FAX 760 - 633 -2627 505 s. Vulcan Avenue, E {ncinitas, California 9'024 -3633 i NGiNEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT City O Capital Improvement Projects Encinitas District Support Services Field Operations Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering September 2, 2004 Attn: Bank of America, N.A. Trade Operations Mail Code: IL1- 231 -17 -00 231 S. LaSalle Street, 17th Floor Chicago, Illinois 60697 RE: Toll Brothers, South Mesa 7000 Sq. Ft. Encinitas Ranch TM 00 -128 APN 257- 020 - 01,02, &05 Grading Permit 6951 -G Final release of security Permit 6951 -G authorized earthwork, storm drainage, single driveway, and erosion control, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has approved the finish grading. Therefore, a full release of the remaining security deposit is merited. Irrevocable standby Letter of Credit No. 7406043, in the remaining amount of $15,855.25, is hereby released in entirety. The original amount was $63,421.00. The document original is enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra A. Geishart at (760) 633 -2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sinc,cryly, ` Vin!ancial embach Masih Maher Services Manager Senior Civil Engineer Financial Services Field Operations CC- Jay Lembach, Financial Services Manager Toll Brothers Debra Geishart File TEL, 760 - 633 -2600 / FAX 760 - 633 -2627 X05 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 FDD 760-63,3-2700 recycled paper NGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT City OJ Capital Improvement Projects Encinitas District Support Services Field Operations Sand Rep lenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering September 1, 2004 Attn: The Continental Insurance Company CNA Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60685 RE: Toll Brothers, South Mesa 7000 Sq. Ft. Encinitas Ranch TM 00 -128 APN 257- 020 - 01,02, &05 Grading Permit 6951 -G Final release of security erosion Permit 6951 -G authorized earthwork, bser The Field operations Dv is on has control, all needed to build the de project. approved the finish grading. Therefore, a full release of the security deposit is merited. Performance Bond 929225048, in the Was $253,683.00. The hereby al is released in entirety. The original amount enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns, P lease contact Debra A. Geishart at (760) 633 -2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sinc rely, Q Masih Maher Senior Civil Engineer Field Operations CC- Jay Lembach, Financial Services Manager Toll Brothers Debra Geishart File Enc. TEL 760 - 633 -2600 l FAX 760 - 633 -2627 ~inancial Services Manager Financial Services 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 1-[)[7 6U- 633 -700 recycled paper - - ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Capital Improvement Projects " city CST District Support Services i , tL�S Field Operations �.�YL�'ZYl Z Sand Replenishment /Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering August 18, 2004 Attn: The Continental Insurance Company CNA Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60685 RE: Toll Brothers, South Mesa 7000 Sq. Ft. Encinitas Ranch TM 00 -128 APN 257- 020 - 01,02, &05 Grading Permit 6951 -G Monumentation Bond Final release of security The final monuments have been set and the Engineer of work has been paid in full. Therefore, release of the security deposit is merited. Performance Bond 929231746, in the amount of $24,000.00, is hereby fully exonerated. The document original is enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633- 2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely, Masih Maher Senior Civil Engineer Cc: Jay Lembach, Financial Manager Toll Brothers Debra Geishart File Enc. 9 F� �' L Bach Financial Services Manager Financial Services TEL 760- 633 -2600 /FAA �G0- G.i3 -2(?� �- Vulcan A:'rnue. F.ncinicas. California 92024 �� „� �i)O -(,0-,',, i - "-n) 7i,17 recycled paper ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT r— - Capital Improvement Projects � Z� District Support Services Y � f Field Operations 1--1'LCZY it(IS Sand Replenishment /Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering January 25, 2005 Attn: The Continental Insurance Company C/O Toll Brothers 250 Gibraltar Road Horsham, Pa. 19044 Attn: Caroline Cannistrace RE: Toll Brothers, South Mesa 7000 Sq. Ft. Encinitas Ranch TM 00 -128 APN 257- 020 - 01,02, &05 Grading Permit 6951 -G Monumentation Bond Final release of security The final monuments have been set and the Engineer of work has been paid in full. Therefore, release of the security deposit is merited. Performance Bond 929231746, in the amount of $24,000.00, is hereby fully 60685 on exonerated. The document original was mailed t of the etterathat wasama'led and a copy August 18, 2004 and was lost. Attached is a copy of the original bond. This letter serves as a release in entirety for this bond. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633- 2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sinc ly, Zi6�� Debra Geishar Engineering T Subdivision Engineering Cc: Jay Lembach, Financial Manager Toll Brothers Debra Geishart File Enc. Vy L�inbach Financial Services Manager Financial Services ecycled Paper City of .ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Encinitas Capital Improvement Projects District Support Services Field Operations Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering October 6, 2005 Attn: The Continental Insurance Company C/O Toll Brothers 250 Gibraltar Road Horsham, Pa. 19044 Attn: Caroline Cannistrace RE: Toll Brothers, South Mesa 7000 Sq. Ft. Encinitas Ranch TM 00 -128 APN 257- 020 - 01,02, &05 Improvement Permit 6951 -I Final release of security Permit 6951 -I authorized improvements as shown on approved plan, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has accepted the improvements. Therefore, a final release of the security deposit is merited. Performance Bond r nt2was $475,469 OOr The document original$118,867.25, enclosed, hereby released in entirety. The original Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra A. Geishart at (760) 633 -2779 or in writing, attention this Department. / Si ly, Jay Le bac ebra Geishart Fin ial S ices Manager Engineering Tec ician Fi cial IS Subdivision Engineering CC- Jay Lembach, Financial Services Manager Toll Brothers 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 E GINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT C'Zt�l O)7 Capital Improvement Projects Encinitas District Support Services Field Operations Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering August 22, 2002 Attn: Bank of America, N.A. Trade Operations Mail Code: IL1- 231 -17 -00 231 S. LaSalle Street, 17`t' Floor Chicago, Illinois 60697 RE: Toll Brothers, South Mesa 7000 Sq. Ft. Encinitas Ranch TM 00 -128 APN 257- 020 - 01,02, &05 Grading Permit 6951 -G Partial release of security Permit 6951 -G authorized earthwork, storm drainage, single driveway, and erosion control, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has approved the rough grading. Therefore, a reduction in the security deposit is merited. Irrevocable standby Letter of Credit No. 7406043, in the amount of $63,421.00, may be reduced by 75% to $15,855.25. The document original will be kept until such time it is fully exonerated. The retention and a separate assignment guarantee completion of finish grading. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra A. Geishart at (760) 633 -2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely,� 4she Suelter Masih Maher Financial Services Manager Senior Civil Engineer Financial Services Field Operations CC- Leslie Suetler, Financial Services Manager Toll Brothers File TFL -on -0 -36u() F �V !� („3 ul,an .�.NcmW. En�_inita.. �'alil�nnia 92102 4 -3633 TIT « recycled paper E GINEERING SER VICES DEPAR TMENT C'Zt�1 O� Capital Improvement Projects Encinitas District Support Services Field Operations Sand Rep lenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering August 22, 2002 Attn: The Continental Insurance Company CNA Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60685 RE: Toll Brothers, South Mesa 7000 Sq. Ft. Encinitas Ranch TM '00 -128 APN 257- 020 - 01,02, &05 Improvement Permit 6951 -I Partial release of security Permit 6951 -I authorized improvements as shown on approved plan, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has approved the improvements. Therefore, a reduction in the security deposit is merited. Performance Bond 929231747, in the amount of $475,469.00, may be reduced by 75% to $118,867.25. The document original will be kept until such time it is fully exonerated. The retention and a separate assignment guarantee completion of improvements after the one -year warranty period and upon final inspection. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra A. Geishart at (760) 633 -2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely, Masih Maher Le lie Suelter Senior Civil Engineer Financial Services Manager Field Operations Financial Services cc- Leslie Suetler, Financial Services Manager Toll Brothers File TEL - (,i�- hj3 -'Fnu F�V _(" �� cnue. F:ncinil;�,. Cilil��rnia `)71!_ I -�GSi T{ I1 - '(:u- �;i3 -2 O1) t-, recycled Paper )7 E GINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT G'Zty O Capital Improvement Projects Encinitas District Support Services Field Operations Sand Replenishment /Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering August 22, 2002 Attn: The Continental Insurance Company CNA Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60685 RE: Toll Brothers, South Mesa 7000 Sq. Ft. Encinitas Ranch TM 00 -128 APN 257- 020 - 01,02, &05 Grading Permit 6951 -G Partial release of security Permit 6951 -G authorized earthwork, storm drainage, single driveway, and erosion control, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has approved the rough grading. Therefore, a reduction in the security deposit is merited. Performance Bond 929225048, in the amount of $253,683.00, may be reduced by 75% to $63,420.75. The document original until such exonerated. The retention and sep arae assignment guarantee comp etion of finish grading. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra A. Geishart at (760) 633 -2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely, ,,,, / -- Masih Maher Senior Civil Engineer Field Operations CC- Leslie Suetler, Financial Services Manager Toll Brothers File Le ie Suelter Financial Services Manager Financial Services TFL - hn- bi3 -36(x� F,AA - C,!! -nj -'(�'- �n5 ti �'ulcui 4ecnue. I ncinii�i,. Calil��mi.i 9_n_i -i(�� '1 DD 'bu- 633-2 -Ufi �� recycled paper SBFebruary 21, 2003 0 Job No. 56903.00 CITY OF ENCINITAS SB &O, INC. Engineering Services Permits 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 �! MAR 4 2003 i.. INURING SERVICES I CITY OF ENCINITAS RE: Encinitas Ranch South Mesa, 7.000 SF Lots Engineer's Building Pad Drainage Certification for TM No. 00 -128 & Grading Permit No. 6951 -G hereb Pursuant to Section 23.24.310(B)6 of the Encinitas hMeunicip berms and positive i building Land submitted as certification that the construction of Planning . pad drainage have been field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan for Lots 40 -42. Civil Engineering Land ,urveying Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, SB &O, INC. Peter R. afmo, P President PRS:MSB:ama .44M O o E" p'� ,& e cc: Larry Kennedy /Toll Brothers via facsimile 760- 436 -4929 DA56902 \Itrs \DRAINAGE -CERT 4042.doc orate Office: 3615 Kearny Villa Road, Suite 201♦ San Diego, CA 92123 ♦Phone (858) 560 -1141 Fax (858) 560 -8157 9007 Arrow Route, Suite 120 ♦ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 ♦ Phone (06934814 Fax (909) 69348 2050 27715 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 201 ♦ Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Ph ( 9 ) DATE: February 27, 2003 TO: Gary Roberts Toll Brothers 548'/: Shasta Drive Encinitas, CA 92024 SUBJECT: Certification of Substantial Compliance Landscape Installation REFERENCE Encinitas Ranch South Mesa PROJECT: 7000 sf Lots — The Links (Lots 40, 41, & 42) OWNER: Toll Brothers CONTRACTOR: Nissho —Landscape Contractor V l.0 r11 1 MAR - 3 2003 I state that I have observed the planting and above grade irrigation improvements for the above referenced project; see attached map for the lots this certi atlon the plansrepared by improvements, including parkways, are in substantial compliance NY Landscape Architects; (dated: 12/18/01). M. Landscape Architect's Registration Number: Expiration Date: 2145 6/30/03 Date: Landscape Architecture - Planning 434 West Cedar Street, Suite 300, San Diego, California 92101 Phone: (619) 235 -5360, Fax: (619) 235 -5369 San Diego Laguna Beach Long Beach V V W W Z yO V W m N Z me P R U `O W N a N Z V H Z C �MW m C Nm a VIS C4 Z Z u� W CUR 0 r- N M C7 CD O c 0 E 0 c w A O co 0 UJ¢� vi 0. W Z IL - ? LL W Q -Y W W a a:0 w O C n. i Q O 3 at 0 00 LU H �E o O Z w W U 1 Z Q �O 2 an O to C w O U w Q Z a Z U_ as p w Z Z O o U) D ¢ o to W to J W Z OO►- 0 7t �N WW QU WW rU W = Q } N Z �0> 7¢ ¢W to wZ O r 0 NZ w N ..- a_ N C 0cc0 unaLL r> tn0 ¢0 n U 00 aU LL _ tT 5.9 N O C n. i Q O 3 at 0 00 LU Q O O to �E o rn LL F- 1 Z W O to C .v N (n W.9 E 0 aw c =3 W C to CL d U N - > C U > N Z t "' y 3aUiu, c O_ �-- 0 tll W = Q } S m J cn W W C.0 W � N ..- a_ N C -O E- Z_ 0) O N _! O� U Q p Q i� Q cn Z_ ca U) pc(s LL U c •� F- -0 to A W j G d � C L 0:6 O tp W R V y�a0 d c P pip 7 '20 L.0 U y N 010,00 O u > > E v m 2 CL C M f3. N m m L Z L C w a N L O m N Y tl F- ¢ N •., 0.0 U� Z U. c °O Y v 0 _w WO Z f� ti+ 0 C � « ¢ Z W ¢ IL N W o f N z3 r � E v_�� a0 0 Z~ W= m CL. CL �� W W o o2 3� ~ u W W W 'L' C L O a LL cc W i•3 OZ Z W LL a 3: 0 V a ¢ W wwm C m C W CL �mZ M'S N 3►-�- JJW OC � d� MQ CL �- �t o oo¢ao i = OTa z =W ryr Q!}- -6W.Na 0 cn v -ra 3 E a >- Ya w Z f 0D OMZ TW.E ; CCM00a N -j LL LLO LLa� E o o E aN 3m JO 0- 3 aZ LL.a w m rQ avLL _° w u aLLa Oz >O y ZWUps. W ry00W w W z 0 L y MOB W It Ma z 4 W 0 .cuZW N� M 0 J�Q CC t0 C) W S =N a aaN v E n � �~ Uz ar Y0�CW� W to O W 0 N w a a CL 44 N y w Q O 2 r LU O U to z LL F- 1 Z W Q f D 2 J w U w Q J LL wa Z S20 W = Q } S m in LL to A W j G d � C L 0:6 O tp W R V y�a0 d c P pip 7 '20 L.0 U y N 010,00 O u > > E v m 2 CL C M f3. N m m L Z L C w a N L O m N Y tl F- ¢ N •., 0.0 U� Z U. c °O Y v 0 _w WO Z f� ti+ 0 C � « ¢ Z W ¢ IL N W o f N z3 r � E v_�� a0 0 Z~ W= m CL. CL �� W W o o2 3� ~ u W W W 'L' C L O a LL cc W i•3 OZ Z W LL a 3: 0 V a ¢ W wwm C m C W CL �mZ M'S N 3►-�- JJW OC � d� MQ CL �- �t o oo¢ao i = OTa z =W ryr Q!}- -6W.Na 0 cn v -ra 3 E a >- Ya w Z f 0D OMZ TW.E ; CCM00a N -j LL LLO LLa� E o o E aN 3m JO 0- 3 aZ LL.a w m rQ avLL _° w u aLLa Oz >O y ZWUps. W ry00W w W z 0 L y MOB W It Ma z 4 W 0 .cuZW N� M 0 J�Q CC t0 C) W S =N a aaN v E n � �~ Uz ar Y0�CW� W to O W 0 N w a a CL 44 N Z O Q O 15 b LU N to z z F- 1 Z W p f D � Q a D w o, LL N (=7 F Z O w w ¢ � W = Q } Q Q ap W J to N Y J= Q p tri a Z :r LL w W 0 a O= 3 > O LL z aw a o. (n U Z 00 Z Z LL LL ¢¢ 00 n. a 0 p W w cc cc wW ¢¢ LO (A J J O 0 ¢o ¢ CL aCL Qa a 0 Ww S m 00 LL LL O w Y w S U LL t W V- � w F- w w Q Q Q 1 0 ¢ p f D t M D r 0� tri a a w 0 ¢ 2 O w Q <Z O p- Zd U w w- m W w a oa (n ora (n < - Z_ - Z - _ w �W O-i O� Uz w 3 W m W0 m uaiW cr Z r r O U ¢ Z ¢ ¢ c7 Z 0= U)O W ¢ V > w w w W m J = U � (9 w W m 0 W J Z¢�- U Z 0 Z m r !n Q Om Z U W Z N a 0 0 W W 2� N 0 N Z wU' �_ w O W W 3 w~ �Z OJ r ¢ <n wn O 00 0= ¢MM.(D 090 ¢ o¢ wa�Zw Z =Z- wa v wOwaw Z tn¢ Q ZO Y U¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ p ¢„ fn m w w w w g Z o m C7 O w ao g >> ti m m¢ ¢ rn Z r a Q ¢ w w Q m r Q tl 7 ] Z 0 Z¢ r O p p r w¢ WZZZa3wOZ¢o O O a a D¢ O crEE LLrza o .� �c.;� n u T n m A m m 0 A m D N 2 -I C o 2. CI- Ui ° D m mz o °_.01 n. �oCm `° �a �m :3 a w DDN �d�, Om COO o � c m -<on -4p �, O< z -n 'a Tr Z?O MT OD o O O m w* N9 3 0 0 3 mC, < i m o m00W79D ' O, Z30 co 3 D >�MC0 m 3 �' ��a d N DM00 0 �~ 0'0 DC ago C -3TT S ODm Z 0- u) N Z< Uf C O -1 1 -4 CL m m— D� m = W mtn7C-C � o TOZ Dm £ o m m MZ H ? mm m- o � m-4 99 w =� c N O -4 CA 3 coo 0'< �Z NZ o M d ca o� Q Q0 n °o N TI d ' N f0 =r d iD O N A N _ I N 0 7 V M 4 z O O) W z W N J V -7 (Da * N co 0 w 0 V O� O O W W N V W O cn 0 W H d _ d N C9 a m N O N cm A w CA w m z n z a U) v c r v z z N lu m n 0 z z N M m 9 z m m n rl W H ¢ a s Q 4 D z a Z Q a to v 0 0 z .� C13 O z J - Cc ir 1 N s Z �O Z 2 LLLL O ¢ O 0 0 0 O Wa �= Q0 v ? C.2 canes w w Oo a w � Z Z Z as Z ul r �• J LL W ~ ¢ J I e Q WW w a� 3 a U Q l °C ¢ a J Q a ¢ o -<J '> z a W -- ° w = 2¢ O F a D Z w U y W tr cn O F as a P z U IL Q ) :n O z ti W x z cc U LL w W 2 f ¢¢ a U, ;z U J t9 ! O O J H j ? J (n O Z Z 0 N '� ~ ~ i N W W N Z¢ C .q Q U W a Z -CO- W O Z ¢ f- 0= 0 2>- Y Y Z R Q (4 LL (� V 2 2 a° W 2OOO �° �rw- zH w 1¢- w a 20 j w � W W J w w? w z¢ ap Q L Z Vr Q N 2¢ PQ 3 to Q U (n Y J x a .0 xx Z z o Z W 0 0 _ l] M-• to J Z_ x LL 2 W O U U LL :t:3'. w ,Z O --) W O W N 7 2 W cr W Z to Z W 0 0 a Z 0 0> 2 0 LLLL W' W a 0 N 020 F-> 20 00 LL > > O LL x -- C7 N a LL to O a U aU LL S m N M to O tv W F- c W , Q W Q 2 0 i D ui 0 0� O ` 0 ` ¢ a Z "•"' ' O Q O � W mQ 1 O W Z a W 0031 d CL a ° ¢ � OF a to rw- ¢ z u, to z Z Z w ¢ zo? W J O2 UZ_ Q 3 aLL EU 0 0 `' W ° (/)W Z 2 z 2 O Q J m¢ ? 0 �"� W U o ¢ C� � x U LL cc 2 W [D --� _ ❑ 3 U Z C7 ? to Q O m U W W w t'L U 03 W 2 J W w J Z m Z J W 3 Z r W wa3cn0NZiw o viz 3 ¢9 o z 2tnzoza O O O W O O Z 2 J J> fn O W 0 U J J to O U 0= U) 2 2 2 2 0 U F cr 0 ¢ w a b w= z z F w a W 2 z 2 U Q Y z 2 O x x Z N Z x 0 a U W O W a W C7 C7 a a C7 Y m W W W W O Z w D o to ZO 0 0 W J °a U O Z F} (n Q J Q C a �0a0 �w000z�a ooa amQ02 z �o 3mtrw)rW 3 1 w Z Z z >¢ z 2 0 2 a� 3 0 r- LL a[ a Li i O U) O O O> f/7 2 LL O 0 LL a N 7 Q n 0 r O Cry •- N t') v �) f` cU tT O tV 7 U C rn d u m 4) N d , .O t O C 0. Y Y N N O y m t1V v 3 3 v v�o c c ° °°¢ v. Q m 0 c cn 0 0 co d m m °- o of 0 m 0 f E L� 01 x O O v" N Z H z N W 3 M t to v O O w w J . • M .O C C ` `- c c a a 0 U U W W' - 0 t to C mo . .° N d d- c Y Y o W Wa °�0 o e W w C a�i v m m:='ta W W 5.m 0 0z 0W ;v c O iY c c_ E o a a N N E-° ° o- as ° Z t Z 7 7 a a) W d0 N U) CC y F d to a a Tc 2 2_ m m O_3 U) UJ O Q Q)-6 0 0t;v z z w o ¢¢ -►-Wa 3 E W > - a W W Z L m m Wm U w o �' OLL o Oai QCL- ¢m00 W C CL a Z L rn ° °'LL a a ' ' Cott E° 3 E aZ 3' 4. z z O O a) a) E y H.. o o E W Wz X00 0 fir• to a0 a•. z - -1 d d � 0 u10i O A nod L LU (1) c t O O'D 0 0. 0 I IL z Naa M2 a (n dm o f a a °: � �2¢ C 1O o c W2 Stan �`— co V Va. c c a aaNYcdavtn az U 7 O m C r N W ' '� y C W- W J O'O U 7 C Nato W W 3 316E'�tn Z m c to O Oco F Ft- two► -� a a a tr°i U- U c.c 1 1-- aocv'r O z z O rn F- ISB (& 0 SB &O, INC. Land Planning Civil Engineering Land Surveying September 22, 2003 nn Job No. 56903.00 D U CITY OF ENCINITAS r Engineering Services Permits OCT 7 2003 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, California 92024 ENGINEERING SERVICES CITY Of ENCINITAS RE: Encinitas Ranch - South Mesa 7,000 S.F. lots. Engineer's Pad Certification for TM No. 00 -086 Grading Permit No. 6689 -G hereby Pursuant to Section 23.24.3 10 of thee for Lot Municipal 1 16 9, 53a 54 and 58 -615 As the submitted as a Pad Certification Lett Engineer of Record for the subject project, echeckedtand has September 18 d in 22, 2003, the rough grading for these units was re conformance with the approved plans and requirements of the City of Encinitas, Codes and Standards. 23.24.3 10 (B). The following list provides the pad elevations as field verified and shown on the approved grading plan: Please see attached. Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, E C. no, PE PRS:MSB cc: Larry Kennedy /Toll Brothers, Inc. D: \56902 \1etters \RG Re -cert 11 -16 19 53 54 58- 61.doc Corporate Office: 3615 Kearny Villa Road, Suite 201 ♦ San Diego, 30 : 12 ♦ Phone 94858450 Fax (909) 94858750 560-8157 9007 Arrow Route, Suite 120 ♦ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 917 27715 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 201 ♦ Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (909) 693 -3310 Fax (909) 693 -3320 MLONI Land Planning Civil Engineering Land Surveying D: \56902 \Cut Sheets \Lot Grades 7000 Corporate Office: 3615 Kearny Villa Road Suite 201♦ San Diego, CA 92123 ♦Phone (858) 560 -1141 Fax (858) 560 -8157 9007 Arrow Route, Suite 120 ♦ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 ♦ Phone (909) 948 -3450 Fax (909) 948 -2750 27715 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 201 ♦ Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (909) 693 -3310 Fax (909) 693 -3320 &10 South Mesa 7,000's OCT 7 2003 SB &O, INC. Elevation Pad sub -grade re- certific As -built Pad ion Pad �i4� RING Eiy LElev. Pad Lot # Why CF E dC Vii� Lot # per Plan Elevation 53 337.30 337. 11 307.50 307.50 295.30 54 337.50 337.50 12 13 295.30 298.30 298.30 58 340.80 340.80 14 302.70 302.70 59 341.60 341.60 341.00 15 305.10 305.10 60 61 341.00 339.50 339.50 16 306.50 306.50 19 308.80 308.80 Land Planning Civil Engineering Land Surveying D: \56902 \Cut Sheets \Lot Grades 7000 Corporate Office: 3615 Kearny Villa Road Suite 201♦ San Diego, CA 92123 ♦Phone (858) 560 -1141 Fax (858) 560 -8157 9007 Arrow Route, Suite 120 ♦ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 ♦ Phone (909) 948 -3450 Fax (909) 948 -2750 27715 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 201 ♦ Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (909) 693 -3310 Fax (909) 693 -3320 I SB September 10, 2003 Job No. 56903.00 & 0 CITY OF ENCINITAS Engineering Services Permits SB &O, INC. 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 - OCT 7 .� �• ' LV IJ j j� E' RE: Encinitas Ranch - South Mesa, 7000 SF Lots Engineer's Building Pad Drainage Certification for TM No. 00 -128 & Grading Permit No. 6951 -G Pursuant to Section 23.24.310(B)6 of the Encinitas Municipal Code, this letter is hereby Land submitted as certification that the construction of the earthen berms and positive building Planning pad drainage have been field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan for Lots 26 and 27. Civil Engineering Land Surveying Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, SB &O, INC. A19 f/`- Peter R. Safino, President PRS:MSB:ama NO. 4A 71 CK Exp— �jE Uf CA�� cc: Larry Kennedy /Toll Brothers via facsimile 760 - 436 -4929 DA56902 \1etters \DRAINAGE -CERT Lots 26 &27.doc Corporate Office: 3615 Kearny Villa Road, Suite 201♦ San Diego, CA 92123 ♦ Phone (858) 560 -1141 Fax (858) 560 -8157 9007 Arrow Route, Suite 120 ♦ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 ♦ Phone (909) 948 -3450 Fax (909) 948 -2750 27715 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 201 ♦ Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (909) 693 -3310 Fax (909) 693 -3320 September 19, 2003 & 0 Job No. 56903.00 CITY OF ENCINITAS SB &O, INC. Engineering Services Permits 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 RE: Encinitas Ranch - South Mesa, 7000 SF Lots Engineer's Building Pad Drainage Certification for TM No. 00 -128 & Grading Permit No. 6951 -G Land Pursuant to Section 23.24.310(B)6 of the Encinitas Municipal Code, this letter is hereby Planning submitted as certification that the construction of the earthen berms and positive building pad drainage have been field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan for Lots 8, 9, 10, 22 and 25. Civil Engineering Land Surveying Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, SB &O, INC. Peter R. Safino, P President PRS:MSB: yy Ci. 44111 g <� O3 n x cc: Larry Kennedy /Toll Brothers via facsimile 760 - 436 -4929 DA56902 \1etters \DRAINAGE -CERT Lots 8 -10 22 25.doc Corporate Office: 3615 Kearny Villa Road, Suite 201♦ San Diego, CA 92123 ♦ Phone (858) 560 -1141 Fax (858) 560 -8157 9007 Arrow Route, Suite 120 ♦ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 ♦ Phone (909) 948 -3450 Fax (909) 948 -2750 27715 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 201 ♦ Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (909) 693 -3310 Fax (909) 693 -3320 SB E �W E Se p tember'26, 2003 Job No. 56903.00 &I k--,f =OCT7 CITY OF ENCINITAS SB &O, INC. Engineering Services Permits ENGINEERING SERVICES 505 South Vulcan Avenue CITY Of ENClNITAS Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 RE: Encinitas Ranch - South Mesa, 7000 SF Lots Engineer's Building Pad Drainage Certification for TM No. 00 -128 & Grading Permit No. 6951 -G Land Pursuant to Section 23.24.310(B)6 of the Encinitas Municipal Code, this letter is hereby Planning submitted as certification that the construction of the earthen berms and positive building pad drainage have been field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan for Lots 17 and 18. Civil Engineering Land Surveying Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, SB &O, INC. Peter . Safino, PE' President G PRS:MSB: &ESS�Q � k t NO. 44174 U * YG C; cc: Larry Kennedy /Toll Brothers via facsimile 760 - 436 -4929 D: \56902 \1etters \DRAINAGE -CERT 17 18.doc Corporate Office: 3615 Kearny Villa Road, Suite 201♦ San Diego, CA 92123 ♦ Phone (858) 560 -1141 Fax (858) 560 -8157 9007 Arrow Route, Suite 120 ♦ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 ♦ Phone (909) 948 -3450 Fax (909) 948 -2750 27715 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 201 ♦ Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (909) 693 -3310 Fax (909) 693 -3320 SBDecember 23, 2003 Job No. 56903.00 Isz 0 CITY OF ENCINITAS SB &O, INC. Engineering Services Permits 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 RE: Encinitas Ranch - South Mesa, 7000 SF Lots Engineer's Building Pad Drainage Certification for TM No. 00 -128 & Grading Permit No. 6951 -G Land Pursuant to Section 23.24.310(B)6 of the Encinitas Municipal Code, this letter is hereby Planning submitted as certification that the construction of the earthen berms and positive building pad drainage have been field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan for Lot 1. Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, SB &O, INC. Civil Engineering Peter R. Safino, PE President PRS:MSB: Land Surveying ? EL NO. 44 71 '1 E* cc: Larry Kennedy /Toll Brothers via facsimile 760 - 436 -4929 DA56902 \1etters \DRAINAGE -CERT Lot Ldoc Corporate Office: 3615 Kearny Villa Road, Suite 201♦ San Diego, CA 92123 ♦ Phone (858) 560 -1141 Fax (858) 560 -8157 9007 Arrow Route, Suite 120 ♦ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 ♦ Phone (909) 948 -3450 Fax (909) 948 -2750 27715 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 201 ♦ Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (909) 693 -3310 Fax (909) 693 -3320 SBDecember 29, 2003 &10 Job No. 56903.00 CITY OF ENCINITAS SB &O, INC. Engineering Services Permits 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 RE: Encinitas Ranch - South Mesa, 7000 SF Lots Engineer's Building Pad Drainage Certification for TM No. 00 -128 & Grading Permit No. 6951 -G Pursuant to Section 23.24.310(B)6 of the Encinitas Municipal Code, this letter is hereby Land submitted as certification that the construction of the earthen berms and positive building Planning pad drainage have been field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan for Lots 4 and 6. Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, SB &O, INC. r' Civil Engineering "'� Peter R. Safmo, President Land Surveying PRS:MSB: cc: Larry Kennedy/Toll Brothers via facsimile 760 - 436 -4929 DA56902 \1etters \DRAINAGE -CERT Lots 4 & 6.doc Corporate Office: 3615 Kearny Villa Road, Suite 201♦ San Diego, CA 92123 ♦ Phone (858) 560 -1141 Fax (858) 560 -8157 9007 Arrow Route, Suite 120 ♦ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 ♦ Phone (909) 948 -3450 Fax (909) 948 -2750 27715 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 201 ♦ Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (909) 693 -3310 Fax (909) 693 -3320 V &OZ PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING June 9, 2004 Job No. 56903.00 CITY OF ENCINITAS Engineering Services Permits 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 RE: Encinitas Ranch - South Mesa, 7000 SF Lots Engineer's Building Pad Drainage Certification for TM No. 00 -128 & Grading Permit No. 6951 -G Pursuant to Section 23.24.310(B)6 of the Encinitas Municipal Code, this letter is hereby submitted as certification that the construction of the earthen berms and positive building pad drainage have been field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan for Lots 54 and 61. Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, SB &O, INC. j; u0.44171 Peter R. Safino, PE President PRS:MSB:ama cc: Larry Kennedy /Toll Brothers via facsimile 760 -436 -4929 D:A56902 \letters \DRAINAGE -CERT 54. 61.doc Corporate Office: 3990 Ruffin Road, Suite 120 • San Diego, California 92123 • Phone 858.560.1141 Fax 856.560.8157 9007 Arrow Route, Suite 120 • Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 • Phone 909.948.3450 Fax 909.948.2750 27715 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 201 • Temecula, CA 92590 • Phone 909.693.3310 Fax 909.693.3320 B&O V Z PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING May 25, 2004 Job No. 56903.30 CITY OF ENCINITAS Engineering Services Permits 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 RE: Encinitas Ranch - South Mesa, 7000 SF Lots Engineer's Building Pad Drainage Certification for TM No. 00 -128 & Grading Permit No. 6951 -G Pursuant to Section 23.24.310(B)6 of the Encinitas Municipal Code, this letter is hereby submitted as certification that the construction of the earthen berms and positive building pad drainage have been field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan for Lots 53 and 60. Please contact me if you have any questions. Y. Sincerely, SB &O, INC. , J I Peter R. Safino, PE , President r r t PRS:ama cc: Larry Kennedy /Toll Brothers via facsimile 760 - 436 -4929 D: \56902 \1etters \DRAINAGE -CERT Lots 53 & 60.doc Corporate Office: 3990 Ruffin Road, Suite 120 • San Diego, California 92123 • Phone 858.560.1141 Fax 858.560 8157 9007 Arrow Route, Suite 120 • Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 • Phone 909.948.3450 Fax 909.948.2750 27715 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 201 • Temecula, CA 92590 • Phone 909.693.3310 Fax 909.693.3320 Ci t o ,ENGINEERING SE, VICES DEPAR TMENT y Capital Improvement Projects Encinitas District Support Services Field Operations Sand Replenishment /Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering July 26, 2004 Attn: The Continental Insurance Company CNA Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60685 RE: Toll Brothers, South Mesa 7000 Sq. Ft. Encinitas Ranch TM 00 -128 APN 257- 020 - 01,02, &05 Sewer Permit DES377 Final release of security Permit DES377 authorized sewer improvements as shown on approved plan, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has approved the one -year warranty of the improvements. Therefore, a release of the remainder security deposit is merited. Performance Bond 929231745, in the original amount of $168,698.00, is hereby released in entirety. The remaining amount is $42,174.50. The document original is enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra A. Geishart at (760) 633 -2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely, a Mas' Maher Senior Civil Engineer Field Operations J Lem ach Finance Manager Financial Services CC- Jay Lembach, Finance Manager Toll Brothers Debra Geishart File TEL 760- 633 -2600 / FAX 760- 633 -2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 9024 -3633 TDD -/60-633-27()() recycled paper City of P Encinitas September 27, 2001 Robert Foto SB &O, Inc. 3615 Kearny Villa Road, Suite 201 San Diego, CA 92123 Re: Encinitas Ranch CFD 1, Condition SC7 for Tentative Map No. 00 -128: South Mesa 7,000 SF Lots. Assessor's Parcel Numbers 254- 661 -03, 254- 661 -07 and 254- 662 -02. Dear Mr. Foto: This letter is to inform you that your request for exempt status of private streets and common areas has been received and reviewed. In your correspondence you requested exempt status for the following: 1) 4.22 acres of private streets, 2) 1.84 acres of common area. After substantial review with the CFD Administrator, it has been determined that 1.64 acres has already been exempted from special taxes. The remaining private streets and common area acreage (4.42 acres) shall be designated as Taxable Property Owner Association Property beginning in the 2002/03 tax year and will be subject to taxation under certain circumstances as stated in the Rate and Method of Apportionment. There is no requirement to prepay any special taxes. If you have any questions regarding these determinations, please feel free to contact me. Sincerel , Kerry L. Miller City Manager cc:1✓esfe Swelter - City of Encinitas, Financial Services C Diane Langage—F5 City of Encinitas, Community Development Y Karen Scott - Scott Associates, CFD Administrator TEL i u i;?,;- 2c;iiii FAX, i;u r?_, c;_? ;,ih ti. Vulcan .`.acnuc. Fnciniia.,. CahJoinia �)21i?9 -363 Tlll; - hn- h3i -Z -uu recycled paper November 5, 2001 CITY OF ENCINITAS Engineering Department 505 South Vulcan Ave. Encinitas, Ca. 92024 -3633 RE: Encinitas Ranch -South Mesa (7,000 S.F. Lots) City of Encinitas Tentative Map No. 00 -128 Letter of Permission for Grading Dear Sir: We are the owners, or have interest in, the property adjacent to the above referenced project. We have reviewed the grading plans and landscape and irrigation plans, and are satisfied with the improvements shown thereon. We hereby grant Toll Brothers, Inc. the right to grade, fill, drain, landscape and irrigate upon and across said property, in accordance with City of Encinitas Drawing No. 6951 -G. All work shall be coordinated with the Encinitas Ranch Golf Course superintendent and only that portion of the golf course that is directly related to the improvements will be crossed over or worked upon. "• ►.._ ENCINITAS RANCH GOLF AUTHORITY Date: January 2, 2002 To. Tamara O'Neil Company: City ofEncinitas, Engineering Department Address: 505 West Vulcan Ave. Front: Jeff Meyer Project: 7000's Projects 00023 Subject: Signatures ____Per Your Request ,_._For Your Use x For Necessary Ac:tfon _For Your Review /COMMentS _ For Approval __._For Your WOO/Files Tamara David Root notified me that the 7004 Landscape plaits are being held at the City because they have a Department of Environmental Health signature block with no signature. Reclaimed water will not be used within the 700('6 and therefore the Department of Environmental Health will not treed to approve these plans. The DEH title block may be removed or crossed out if necessary. If you have any questions, please contact me at your earliest convenience. Thank You Jeff Meyer Ivy Landscape .Architects, Inc. Tms enrage h h,tenoea ror att use of the hw '" or enW to wrrcn it is adOmwd ara mar contte0 MrWrMOen toot 11 orM*Od corAberW^ ana Wenw fre- o4 mwe Ur%W a00UCtle hrw- = VY reacrer or #* mestayt K not Ore kNerwer7 rlcv*m you are twrVOY raw" VW4 any Ors%t'nWVW O%VIDuwn or tVWV Or V" COMM,rwravan lr s&k* P - Landscape Architecture - Planning 434 West Cedar Street, Suite 300, San Diego. California 92101 Phone' 1619) 23S -5360, Fait. (619) 235 -5369 Toll `Brothers, cInco January 4. -10(1`2' Tamara O'Neal Cite of Encinitas Engineering Department 505 S. Vulcan :we. Encinitas. Calit. 92024 RE: South Mesa 7000's. Department of t":nviromilcmal Health Signature I checked with both Randy Satmo and .Icti' Mevcr. see attached letter. that the Department o l'.M 'll'olllllental Health is not regUlrcd to Sign the pla►1S because thCl'C 1S llo reclaimed water �� ithin our project or propert� . Per .leti. the title block mad he crossed out as necessar\ . 1 will assume that vw have n0v, "let w ith all necessary neap requirements. per C oln recent e -mail. and our nlap approval has been place on the January 17`x' public hearing agenda. you have any other questions or plan issues please let nlc know Sillcel'Cl, . David Root San Diego Regional Manager The Links at Encinitas Ranch 6227 Paseo Colina • Carlsbad, CA 92009 Telephone 760 - 436 -4231 • Fax 760- 436 -4929 SB &10 56903.16 <LL SB &O, INC. City of Encinitas f4 Engineering Permit Services (Dan Bender) 505 South Vulcan Encinitas, CA 92024 RE: Encinitas Ranch- 7000 S.F. Lots TM 00 -128 Building Setback Certification Land this letter is hereby submitted as a setback Planning Pursuant to the Encinitas Municipal Code, certification letter for lots 40 -52 and 62 -70. As engineer of record for the subject project, I hereby state that the building foundation setbacks have been constructed in conformance with the above referenced plans and requirements of the City of Encinitas' Codes and Standards. Please contact me with any questions you may have._ Sincerely, Civil Engineering Peter R. Safino, President SB &O, Inc. Q�pf E3S1py� f C-q °- N0.44 71,0 r" x Exp �lf aF CaL�E° CC: Toll Brothers /Larry Kennedy via facsimile 760 - 436 -4929. Land Surveying 3615 Kearny Villa Road, Suite 201 ♦ San Diego, CA 92123 9007 Arrow Route, Suite 120 ♦ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Phone (858) 560 -1141 Fax (858) 560 -8157 Phone (909) 948 -3450 Fax (909) 948 -2750 DA56902 \1trs \B1dgSetBackCert Phase Ldoc E GINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT C'Zty V Capital Improvement Projects Encinitas District Support Services Field Operations Sand Replenishment /Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering September 5, 2002 Attn: The Continental Insurance Company CNA Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60685 RE: Toll Brothers, South Mesa 7000 Sq. Ft. Encinitas Ranch TM 00 -128 APN 257- 020 - 01,02, &05 Sewer Permit DES377 partial release of security Permit DES377 authorized sewer improvements as Operations shown on approved lan, Division has approved the all needed to build the described project. The Field improvements. Therefore, a reduction in the security deposit is merited. Performance Bond 929231745, in the amount l will of 168,ung 10s0, y befit educed by fully 75% to $42,174.50. The document origin exonerated. The retention and a separate assignment guarantee completion of improvements after the one -year warranty period and upon final inspection. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra A. Geishart at (760) 633 -2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely, f� /4P Masih Maher Senior Civil Engineer Field Operations Jay Leinua -11 Finance Manager Financial Services CG Jay Lembach, Finance Manager Toll Brothers File TEL 33 -2O") F_�S �(,n_(i� -?o2- �u� ,ti_ Vuk.u� A�rnur- F.ncinitis. C.il�F�n nia 71()3 -1 -303? TllD recycled paper