The URL can be used to link to this page

2007-47 G ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Capital Improvement Projects District Support Services Field Operations Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering June 30, 2009 Attn: Temecula Valley Bank SBA Department 27710 Jefferson Avenue Suite A-100 Temecula, CA 92590 RE: Jason and Bridget Edwards 1 133 Hermes Avenue APN 254-252-57 CDP 06-184 Grading Permit 47-GI Final release of security Permit 47-GI authorized earthwork, storm drainage, site retaining wall, and erosion control, all as necessary to build the described project. The Field Inspector has approved the grading and finaled this project. Therefore, a full release of the security deposited is merited. Letter of Credit#105, (in the original amount of$102,857.00), reduced by 75% to $25,714.25, is hereby released in entirety. The document original is enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633- 2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely, Debra Geishart Jay Lembach Engineering Technician Finance Manager Subdivision Engineering Financial Services Cc: Jay Lembach, Finance Manager Jason and Bridget Edwards Debra Geishart File CZ NGINEERING SER VICES DEPARTMENT Encinitas Capital Improvement Projects District Support Services Field Operations Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering June 30, 2009 Attn: Temecula Valley Bank SBA Department 27710 Jefferson Avenue Suite A-100 Temecula, CA 92590 RE: Jason and Bridget Edwards 1133 Hermes Avenue APN 254-252-57 CDP 06-184 Grading Permit 47-GI Final release of security Permit 47-GI authorized earthwork, storm drainage, site retaining wall, and erosion control, all as necessary to build the described project. The Field Inspector has approved the grading and finaled this project. Therefore, a full release of the security deposited is merited. Letter of Credit#105, (in the original amount of$102,857.00), reduced by 75% to $25,714.25, is hereby released in entirety. 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. Sin ely, / Debra Geishart Le bath Engineering Technician inance Manager Subdivision Engineering Financial Services Cc: Jay Lembach,Finance Manager Jason and Bridget Edwards Debra Geishart File TEL 760-633-2600 1 FAX 760-633-2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024-3633 TDD 760-633-2700 recycled paper *y CityOjENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Encinitas Capital Improvement Projects District Support Services Field Operations Sand Rep lem shment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering August 28, 2008 Attn: Temecula Valley Bank SBA Department 27710 Jefferson Avenue Suite A-100 Temecula, CA 92590 RE: Jason and Bridget Edwards 1133 Hermes Avenue APN 254-252-57 CDP 06-184 Grading Permit 47-GI Partial release of security Permit 47-GI authorized earthwork, storm drainage, site retaining wall, and erosion control, all as necessary to build the described project. The Field Inspector has approved rough grading. Therefore, a reduction of the security deposited is merited. Letter of Credit#105, in the amount of$102,857.00, may be reduced by 75% to $25,714.25. The document original is enclosed. The retention and a separate assignment guarantee completion of finish grading. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633- 2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely, it Debra Geish J Le ach Engineering Technician nance Manager Subdivision Engineering Financial Services Cc: Jay Lembach,Finance Manager Jason and Bridget Edwards Debra Geishart File TEL 760-633-2600 1 FAX 760-633-2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024-3633 TDD 760-633-2700 40� recycled paper jD' Recording Requested by: City Engineer When Recorded Mail To: City Clerk City of Encinitas 505 South Vulcan Avenue ABOVE FOR RECORDER' S USE Rnc�nitas . CA 92024 SPACE AB COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY WAIVER OF PROTEST TO ASSESSMENTS Assessor' s Parcel Number: 254-252-10 Project No. TPM 03-049 A. Michael Aulert a married man as his sole and separate property, ("OWNER" hereinafter) is the owner of real property ( "PROPERTY" hereinafter) and which is legally described as follows : See Attachment "All which is attached hereto and made a part hereof . B. In consideration of 03-049 TPM OWNER hereby covenants and agrees for the benefit of CITY, to do the following: No protest shall be made by the owners to any proceedings for the installation or acquisition of street improvements, including undergrounding of utility lines, under any special assessment 1911 or the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 , or any other applicable state or local law, and whether processed by the City of Encinitas or any other governmental entity having jurisdiction in the matter and for the purposes of determining property owners support for same . C . This Covenant shall run with the land and be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the future owners, encumbrancers, successors, heirs, personal representatives, transferees and assigns of the respective parties . D. OWNER agrees that OWNER' s duties and obligations under this Covenant are a lien upon the PROPERTY. Upon notice and opportunity to respond, CITY may add to the property tax bill of the PROPERTY any past due financial obligation owing to CITY by way of this Covenant . E . If either party is required to incurs costs to enforce the provisions of this Covenant, the prevailing party shall be entitled to full reimbursement of all costs, including reasonable attorney' s fees, from the other party. \\KRUSTY\VOL1\SHARED\ENG\Tamara\Word\Covenants\WaiverAss\03-049 Aulert 1139 Hermes . doc F. Failure of the OWNER to comply with the terms of this Covenant shall constitute consent to the filing by CITY of a Notice of Violation of Covenant . G. Upon OWNER' s satisfaction of OWNER' s duties and obligations contained herein, OWNER may request and CITY shall execute a "Satisfaction of Covenant" . H. By action of the City Council, CITY may assign to a person or persons impacted by the performance of this Covenant, the right to enforce this Covenant against OWNER. J , ACCEPTED AND AGREED: OWNER Dated T Michael A ert �n�ca �t {F IKEA, (Notarization of OWNER signature is attached) I OF INI AS i' Dated ��G�� by (Notarizati n not required) Peter Co a-Robles, Director of Engineering Services \\KRUSTY\VOL1\SHARED\ENG\Tamara\Word\Covenants\WaiverAss\03-049 Aulert 1139 Hermes .doc ATTACHMENT A TPM/CDP 03-049 Lot 3,Block"5" of South Coast Park, in the City of Encinitas, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 1776, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, January 11, 1924. \\KRUSTY\VOL1\SHARED\ENG\Tamara\Word\Covenants\WaiverAss\03-049 Aulert 1139 Hermes .doc CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT i State of California C ss. County of before me, t C' On Date N e and T-a car-..,"Jane D ,Notary Publi 1 l� personally appeared l<j r!c�-2 4``�rw; CJ Names)of Signer(s) ❑personally known to me icK proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the personX whose namef4 is/We subscribed to the within instrument and EDWARD Z acknowledged to me that he/s6/toy executed #1455015 the same in his/jar/tFir authorized Nokxy K _Co>N�o�No capacity and that by his4�ereir LosAngo"Cou* _ signa.turW on the instrument the personM or My Comm.Exp&w D200 the entity upon behalf of which the perso4) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my and and official seal. Signature of Notary Pudt�c , - OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law,it may prove valuable to persons,relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s)Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer ) Signer's Name: /r 17C-+"j�0,e I-Ya p' Individual Top of thumb here ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑ Partner —❑ Limited ❑General ❑ Attorney-in-Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: - 1 Signer Is Representing: ©1999 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402-Chatsworth,CA 91313-2402•www.nationalnotary.org Prod.No.5907 Reorder:Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-8827 Recording Requested By: City Planner -Pi! -K When Recorded Mail To: City Clerk City of Encinitas 505 South Vulcan Avenue USE Encinitas, CA 92024 L E SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER'S - COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY FUTURE PARK,TRAFFIC,AND FLOOD CONTROL FEES Assessor's Parcel Number: 225-252-10 Project No. TPM 03-049 A. Michael Aulert a married man as his sole and separate property ("OWNER" hereinafter) is the owner of real property("PROPERTY" hereinafter) and which is legally described as follows: Lot 3,Block"5"of South Coast Park, in the City of Encinitas, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 1776, filed in-the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, January 11, 1924. B. In consideration of Final Parcel Map approval for the above referenced project by the City of Encinitas ("CITY" hereinafter), OWNER hereby covenants and agrees for the benefit of CITY, to do the following: See Attachment "B" which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. C. This Covenant shall run with the land and be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the future owners, encumbrancers, successors, heirs, personal representatives, transferees and assigns of the respective parties. D. OWNER agrees that OWNER's duties and obligations under this Covenant are a lien upon the PROPERTY. Upon notice and opportunity to respond, CITY may add to the property tax bill of the PROPERTY any past due financial obligation owing to CITY by way of this Covenant. E. If either party is required to incur costs to enforce the provisions of this Covenant, the prevailing party shall be entitled to full reimbursement of all costs, including reasonable attorney's fees, from the other party. COV03-049 Aulert F. Failure of the OWNER to comply with the terms of this Covenant shall constitute consent to the filing by CITY of a Notice of Violation of Covenant. G. Upon OWNER's satisfaction of OWNER's duties and obligations contained herein, OWNER may request and CITY shall execute a"Satisfaction of Covenant". H. By action of the City Council, CITY may assign to a person or persons impacted by the performance of this Covenant,the right to enforce this Covenant against OWNER. ACCEPTED AND AGREED: OWNER i Dated 1 0 3 (Notarization o O R signature isOta ed) ►��u�\ V� \2�t ATTACH NOTARY HERE CITY OF ENCINITAS Dated Z� b --1.=- - IV,cl-� [/—�`� _. �1, Y (Notarization not required) Bill Weedman, City Planner COV03-049-Aulert ATTACHMENT "A" TO COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY PROJECT NO.TPM 03-049 Lot 3, Block"5" of South Coast Park, in the City of Encinitas, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 1776, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, January 11, 1924. COV03-049-Aulert PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ATTACHMENT "B" TO COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY PROJECT NO. TPM 03-049 OWNER'S DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS A. In accordance with Municipal Code Chapter 23.98 in effect at time of fees being paid,park fees for the development shall be paid prior to Final Occupancy approval. B. In accordance with the Municipal Code Chapter 23.94 in effect at time of fees being paid,traffic fees for the development shall be paid prior to Final Occupancy approval. C. In accordance with the Municipal Code Chapter 23.96 in effect at time of fees being paid, flood control fees shall be assessed and collected during the building permit processing prior to the construction of any impervious surfaces. COV03-049-Aulert CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California ss. County of Lcs On o( before me, k.��.r-v+�C' Date 7Z/e,7-7-ndJRleofOffi r(e ."Jane Doe,Notary Public personally appeared 1�i%C%/7C�°� 1-7�-�✓� !�l Names)of Signegs) ❑personally known to me ,AL3)roved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person) whose names) is/are RODRIGl1fZ subscribed to the within instru ent and Co WARD R�RIGW 5 acknowledged to me that he/sf 6/th y executed Holm KdAc.con0aNa the same in his/t r r/th authorized L,otAngelesCgsMy - capacity and that by his/h�f/t fr MVCoere EiFI iilDec6r2007 signaturwon the instrument the person or the entity upon behalf of which the person{4 acted, executed the instrument. NE WIT� SS my hand an d offi�eal. — Signature of Notary Z>1 OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law,it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document J/� _ / 1 Title or Type of Document: rY �Y�► r' �M/ Document Date: Number of Pages: _ Signer(s)Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: 1 dlvldual Top of thumb here ❑ Corporate Officer —Title(s): ❑ Partner— ❑ Limited ❑General ❑ Attorney-in-Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: _ Signer Is Representing: ©1999 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth,CA 91313-2402•www.nationalnotary.org Prod.No.5907 Reorder:Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-6827 � m ` . . ` ^ ^ - �A�TN� �Os�� Recording Requested B«: \ []tv EDQiD��[ ' ) ) When Recorded Mail To: �U-NTY Qh/ Clerk City ofEncinitas / 505 South Vulcan Avenue / Encinitas, CA 92024 ) SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER' S USE For the benefit of the City of Encinitas COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY; HOLD CITY HARMLESS FOR DRAINAGE Assessor's Parcel Project No.: TPM 03-049 A. yNiohoe| Au|ert. anlanied man aa his sole and separate property ("OWNER" hereinafter) is the owner of naa| property which is commonly known as 1139 Hermes Avenue (^PFlC)F`ERTY'' hereinafter) and which is described aafollows: EXHIBIT^A'ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE/\PART HEREOF;and B. In consideration of By the City of Encinitas ("CITY" hereinafter), OWNER hereby covenants and a8neGa for the benefit ofCITY, todm the following: See Attachment B that ieattached hereto and made a part hereof. C. This Covenant shall run with the land and be binding upon and inure Uzthe benefit of the future ovvnero, encunnbnyncens, auocaeeora, heirs, personal nepnasentoUvea, transferees and assigns of the respective parties. D. OWNER agrees that (]VVNEF{'o duties and obligations under this Covenant are a lien upon the PROPERTY. Upon notice and opportunity to respond. CITY may add to the property tan bill of the PROPERTY any past due financial obligation owing to CITY by way of This Covenant. E. If either party is required to incur costs to enforce the provisions of this Covenant, the prevailing party shall be entitled to full reimbursement of all costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees, from the other party. F. Failure of OWNER to comply with the terms of this Covenant shall constitute consent to the filing by CITY of a Notice of Violation of Covenant. ACCEPTED AND AGREED: gn and print names and titles) Dated Dated Dated Dated (Notarization of OWNER signature is attached.) CITY D ated ` by (Notarization not required) Peter Cota-Robles Director of Engineering Services EXHIBIT "A" TPM 03-049 Lot 3,Block"5"of South Coast Park, in the City of Encinitas, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 1776, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, January 11, 1924. ATTACHMENT B TO COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY: HOLD CITY HARMLESS FOR DRAINAGE PROJECT NO.TPM 03-049 OWNER'S DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS 1. For claims that are alleged to have arisen, directly or indirectly, from drainage or runoff associated with the PROPERTY or the plans, design, construction or maintenance of OWNER' s improvements, OWNER unconditionally waives all present and future claims against CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees, and agents. This waiver does not apply to claims that are alleged to have arisen out of the sole, active negligence or deliberate wrongful act of CITY. 2. It is further understood and agreed that all of OWNER'S rights under §1542 of the Civil Code of, the State of California and any similar law of any state or territory of the United States are hereby expressly waived. 9 1542 reads as follows: 1542. Certain claims not affected by general release. A general release does not extend to claims, which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his favor at the time of executing the release, which if known by him must have materially affected his settlement with the debtor. 3. OWNER agrees to indemnify and hold CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents harmless from, and against any and all liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages and costs, including all costs of defense thereof, arising out of, or in any manner connected directly or indirectly with, any acts or omissions of OWNER or OWNER's agents, employees, subcontractors, officials, officers or representatives. Upon demand, OWNER shall, at its own expense, defend CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents, from and against any and all such liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages and costs. OWNER' s obligation herein includes, but is not limited to, alleged defects in the plans, specifications and design of the improvements; but does not extend to liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages or costs that arise out of a defect in the plans, f i - specifications or design that is a result of a change required by CITY to the OWNER's proposed plans, specifications or design so long as such change is objected to, in writing, by OWNER, and the writing is filed with the City Engineer more than ten days prior to the commencement of work. OWNER's obligation herein includes, but is not limited to, alleged defects in the construction of the improvements; alleged defects in the materials furnished in the construction of the improvements; alleged injury to persons or property; and any alleged inverse condemnation of property as a consequence of the design, construction, or maintenance of the improvements. By approving the improvement plans, specifications and design or by inspecting or approving the improvements, CITY shall not have waived the protections afforded herein to CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents or diminished the obligation of OWNER who shall remain obligated in the same degree to indemnify and hold CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents, harmless as provided above. OWNER's obligation herein does not extend to liabilities, claims, demands causes of action, losses, damages or costs that arise out of the CITY's intentional wrongful acts, CITY's violations of law, or CITY's sole active negligence. 4. OWNER hereby agrees:not to develop in any manner the PROPERTY except as authorized by CITY's ordinances and then only in accordance with issued permits. Among other things, but without limitation, this shall prohibit the alteration of landforms, removal of vegetation and the erection of structures of any type, except as permitted or authorization by CITY. 5. This Covenant does not Preclude OWNER taking emergency, protective measures as approved by CITY. CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of �� S ss. On c2 Lq Lo q before me, Date 4 /'� Name and itle of Officer(e. .,"Jane Doe,Notary Public personally appeared fill, I F'-t!-'n k '�JU�eY Name(s)of Signer(s) ❑personally known to me proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(A) whose name(s) is/mss EDiNARDROOMM subscribed to the within instrument and Cam^*wn#1 15 acknowledged to me that he/st�e/t6fey executed Molo�Y Cal the same in his/hgf/thd authoriz d Los My �� capacity(i�, and that by his/her/t eir signatureX on the instrument the person(o), or the entity upon behalf of which the personM acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature of Not P OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law,it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: f-70 fG� C?*,f`J t/ ('r m Document Date: / � Number of Pages: Signer(s)Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer f Signer's Name: /1nlG "r[P� Cf�ra " Ividual Top of thumb here El Corporate Officer —Title(s): ❑ Partner — ❑ Limited ❑General ❑ Attorney-in-Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: 1 @ 1999 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth,CA 91313-2402•www.nationalnotary.org Prod.No.5907 Reorder:Call Toll-Free 1-600-876-6827 i ' ' - DOC 2004-0145863 FEB 24t% -'004 4 : 31 PM Recording Requested By: OFFICIAL RECORDS City Planner ) SAN DIEGO COIJNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE GREGORY J. SMITH, CWY RECORDER When Recorded Mail To: ) FEES: 0.00 � � City Clerk ) �,,( City of Encinitas ) 505 South Vulcan Avenue ) Encinitas CA 92024 ) SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER'S USE COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY 4'g FUTURE PARK,TRAFFIC,AND FLOOD CONTROL FEES Assessor's Parcel Number: 225-252-10 Project No. TP 03-049 j A. Michael Aulert a married man as his sole and separate property ("OWNER" hereinafter) is the owner of real property("PROPERTY" hereinafter) and which is legally described as follows: Lot 3,Block"5"of South Coast Park, in the City of Encinitas, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 1776, filed in.the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, January 11, 1924. B. In consideration of Final Parcel Map approval for the above referenced project by the City of Encinitas ("CITY" hereinafter), OWNER hereby covenants and agrees for the benefit of CITY, to do the following: See Attachment"B"which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. C. This Covenant shall run with the land and be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the future owners, encumbrancers, successors, heirs, personal representatives, transferees and assigns of the respective parties. D. OWNER agrees that OWNER's duties and obligations under this Covenant are a lien upon the PROPERTY. Upon notice and opportunity to respond, CITY may add to the property tax bill of the PROPERTY any past due financial obligation owing to CITY by way of this Covenant. E. If either party is required to incur costs to enforce the provisions of this Covenant, the prevailing party shall be entitled to full reimbursement of all costs, including reasonable attorney's fees, from the other party. COV03-049 Aulert F. Failure of the OWNER to comply with the terms of this Covenant shall constitute consent to the filing by CITY of a Notice of Violation of Covenant. G. Upon OWNER's satisfaction of OWNER's duties and obligations contained herein, OWNER may request and CITY shall execute a"Satisfaction of Covenant". H. By action of the City Council, CITY may assign to. a person or persons impacted by the performance of this Covenant,the right to enforce this Covenant against OWNER. ACCEPTED AND AGREED: OWNER - Dated .1 0 3 (Notarization ot 04MR signature is a ed) ATTACH NOTARY HERE CITY OF ENCINITAS Dated Z by .�— _�_ ►�,"�` ,� (Notarization not required) Bill Weedman, City Planner COV03-049-Aulert ATTACHMENT "A" TO COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY PROJECT NO.TPM 03-049 Lot 3, Block"5" of South Coast Park, in the City of Encinitas, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 1776, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, January 11, 1924. COV03-049-Aulert PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ATTACHMENT "B" TO COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY PROJECT NO.TPM 03-049 OWNER'S DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS A. In accordance with Municipal Code Chapter 23.98 in effect at time of fees being paid,park fees for the development shall be paid prior to Final Occupancy approval. B. In accordance with the Municipal Code Chapter 23.94 in effect at time of fees being paid, traffic fees for the development shall be paid prior to Final Occupancy approval. C. In accordance with the Municipal Code Chapter 23.96 in effect at time of fees being paid, flood control fees shall be assessed and collected during the building permit processing prior to the construction of any impervious surfaces. COV03-049-Aulert CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT upume State of California / ss. County of Lb> On G before me, bV 4, Date Nye and Tale of r(e .-Jane Doe,Notary Pubi personally appeared 1�i%CiR�:�°� 1`'1 <i✓I '`�Jj,�`/ Name(s)of Signer(s) ❑personally known to me improved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person) whose names) is/are EDWARD RODRIGUEZ subscribed to the within instru ent and E f acknowledged to me that he/sfo/th�executed Nolary Ribllc.Ca 10 the same in his/Vr/th;i4r authorized to�Anps[�CouMy - capacitysj , and that by his/h,(r/t )r �AyCanf>tn E>� Dec g.2007 signatureWon the instrument the person or the entity upon behalf of which the person 4 acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. signature of Notary PWFc OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law,it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document J/�� Title or Type of Document: rK Document Date: Number of Pages: _ Signer(s)Other Than Named Above: J� Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: 1 Lr r �ircn�Kt� Mejw :11.11M dividual Top of thumb here ❑ Corporate Officer —Title(s): ❑ Partner —❑ Limited ❑General ❑ Attorney-in-Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: ° Signer Is Representing: C 1999 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth,CA 91313-2402•www.nationalnotary.org Prod.No.5907 Reorder:Call Toll-Free 1-800$76.6827 COAST GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS December 19, 2005 Ted Calvo 5594 1h Street Encinitas, CA 92024 RE: PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Proposed Single Family Residence ;a 1133 Hermes Leucadia, California E . Dear Mr. Calvo: In response to your request and in accordance with our Proposal and Agreement dated October 5, 2005, we have performed a preliminary geotechnical investigation on the subject site for the proposed residence. The findings of the investigation,laboratory test results and recommendations for foundation design are presented in this report. From a geologic and soils engineering point of view,it is our opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed development, provided the recommendations in this report are implemented during the design and construction phases. If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact us at(858) 755-8622. This opportunity to be of service is appreciated. Respectfully submitte Q COAST GEOTEC �BU�GJi �® OQRdfS1 pal 2109 (n XV IC EV.5-31-06 --1- 782 CERTIFIED ft.12-31-07 Mark Burwell, C.E. >k ENGINEERING Vithaya Singhanet, P. Engineering Geologi �aEa-OGIST `Q' Geotechnical Engineer �, Fp � TECHN OF CAL�FO 9TFOF CAt 779 ACADEMY DRIVE • SOLANA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92075 (858) 755-8622 • FAX (858) 755-9126 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Proposed Single Family Residence 1133 Hermes Leucadia, California Prepared For: Ted Calvo 559 4" Street Encinitas, CA 92024 December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Prepared By: COAST GEOTECHNICAL 779 Academy Drive Solana Beach, California 92075 TABLE OF CONTENTS VICINITY MAP 4 INTRODUCTION 5 SITE CONDITIONS 5 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 5 SITE INVESTIGATION 6 LABORATORY TESTING 6 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS 7 CONCLUSIONS 10 RECOMMENDATIONS 11 A. GENERAL 11 B. BUILDING PAD-REMOVALS/RECOMPACTION 11 C. TEMPORARY SLOPES/EXCAVATION CHARACTERISTICS 12 D. FOUNDATIONS 12 E. SLABS ON GRADE (INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR) 13 F. RETAINING WALLS 14 G. SETTLEMENT CHARACTERISTICS 14 - H. SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS 14 I. SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS 15 J. PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT DESIGN 15 K. UTILITY TRENCH 16 L. SUBDRAIN 16 M. DRAINAGE 17 N. GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATIONS 17 O. PLAN REVIEW 17 LIMITATIONS 17 REFERENCES 20 APPENDICES APPENDIX A LABORATORY TEST RESULTS EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS TRANSITION LOT DETAILS, PLATE A CROSS SECTION A-A' SITE PLAN APPENDIX B REGIONAL FAULT MAP SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRUM APPENDIX C GRADING GUIDELINES i Topo USA®5.0 1 VICINITY MAP J� capp_GL...".;1 �\ 7 �0 SUBJECT PROPERTY liiucadia i Ponto S a 3- i y', E I m �i T„ Scale 1 :6,400 Data use subject to license. m ©2004 DeLorme.Topo USA®5.0. www.delorme.com 1"=533.3 ft Data Zoom 14-7 Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 5 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation on the subject property. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the nature and characteristics of the earth materials underlying the property,the engineering properties of the surficial deposits and their influence on the proposed residence. SITE CONDITIONS The subject property is located north of Leucadia Boulevard,along the east side of Hermes Avenue, in the Leucadia district, city of Encinitas. The subject property is a residential"flag"lot with access via a driveway from Hermes Avenue. The property includes a rectangular lot that descends to the west at a grade of about 7.0 percent. Relief on the site is approximately 7 vertical feet. The property is bounded on the north, south, east and west by developed residential lots. The lot appears to have been tilled in the past and is covered by sparse vegetation. Drainage is generally by sheet flow to the west. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Concept grading plans for development of the site were prepared by Conway and Associates. The project includes construction of a single family residence supported on conventional wall footings with slab on grade floors on a cut/fill transitional pad. Grading will include cuts up to 6.3 feet for property line walls and fills up to 1.5 feet for pad development. Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 -- Page 6 SITE INVESTIGATION One (1) exploratory boring was drilled to a depth of 20 feet with a hollow-stem drill rig. Two (2) exploratory borings were drilled to a maximum depth of 10.5 feet with a portable auger drill. Earth materials encountered were visually classified and logged by our field engineering geologist. Standard penetration tests (SPT) were performed in the hollow-stem boring. Undisturbed, representative samples of earth materials were obtained at selected intervals. Samples were obtained by driving a thin walled steel sampler into the desired strata. The samples are retained in brass rings of 2.5 inches outside diameter and 1.0 inches in height. The central portion of the sample is retained in close fitting, waterproof containers and transported to our laboratory for testing and analysis. LABORATORY TESTING Classification The field classification was verified through laboratory examination,in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. The final classification is shown on the enclosed Exploratory Logs. Moisture/Density The field moisture content and dry unit weight were determined for each of the undisturbed soil samples. This information is useful in providing a gross picture of the soil consistency or variation among exploratory excavations. The dry unit weight was determined in pounds per cubic foot. The field moisture content was determined as a percentage of the dry unit weight. Both are shown on the enclosed Laboratory Tests Results and Exploratory Logs. Coast Geotechnical December 19, 2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 7 Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content were determined for selected samples of earth materials taken from the site. The laboratory standard tests were in accordance with ASTM D-1557-91. The results of the tests are presented in the Laboratory Test Results. Shear Test Shear tests were performed in a strain-control type direct shear machine. The rate of deformation was approximately 0.025 inches per minute. Each sample was sheared under varying confining loads in order to determine the Coulomb shear strength parameters,cohesion and angle of internal friction. Samples were tested in a saturated condition. The results are presented in the enclosed Laboratory Test Results. GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS The subject property is located in the Coastal Plains Physiographic Province of San Diego. The property is underlain at relatively shallow depths by Pleistocene terrace deposits. The terrace deposits are underlain at depth by Eocene-age sedimentary rocks which have commonly been designated as the Torrey Sandstone and Del Mar Formation on published geologic maps. The terrace deposits are covered by residual soil deposits. A brief description of the earth materials encountered on the site follows. Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 8 Artificial Fill No evidence of significant fill deposits was observed on the site. Minor disturbed soils from tilling/grading are present but do not appear to exceed 1.5 feet in depth. Soil Approximately 1.5 feet of brown slightly silty fine and medium-grained sand was encountered in the exploratory borings. The soil is generally dry, loose and subject to caving. The contact with the underlying terrace deposits is gradational. Terrace Deposits Underlying the surficial materials,poorly consolidated Pleistocene terrace deposits are present. The sediments are composed of tan to reddish brown slightly clayey,fine and medium-grained sand. The upper 1.0 to 2.0 feet of the terrace deposits is generally weathered but becomes increasingly dense with depth. Regionally, the Pleistocene sands are considered flat-lying and are underlain at depth by Eocene-age sedimentary rock units. Expansive Soil Based on our experience in the area and previous laboratory testing of selected samples, the soil deposits and Pleistocene sands reflect an expansion potential in the very low range. Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 9 Groundwater Seepage was encountered in Boring No. l at an approximate depth of 12 feet. It should be noted that near surface seepage problems can develop after completion of construction. These seepage problems most often result from drainage alterations,landscaping and over-irrigation. In the event that seepage or saturated ground does occur,it has been our experience that they are most effectively handled on an individual basis. Tectonic Setting The site is located within the seismically active southern California region which is generally characterized by northwest trending Quaternary-age fault zones. Several of these fault zones and fault segments are classified as active by the California Division of Mines and Geology (Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act). Based on a review of published geologic maps, no known faults transverse the site. The nearest active fault is the offshore Rose Canyon Fault Zone located approximately 3.0 miles west of the site. It should be noted that the Rose Canyon Fault is not a continuous,well-defined feature but rather a zone of right stepping en echelon faults. The complex series of faults has been referred to as the Offshore Zone of Deformation(Woodward-Clyde, 1979)and is not fully understood. Several studies suggest that the Newport-Inglewood and the Rose Canyon faults are a continuous zone of en echelon faults (Treiman, 1984). Further studies along the complex offshore zone of faulting may indicate a potentially greater seismic risk than current data suggests. Other faults which could affect the site Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 10 include the Coronado Bank,Elsinore,San Jacinto and San Andreas Faults. The proximity of major faults to the site and site parameters are shown on the enclosed Seismic Design Parameters. CONCLUSIONS 1) The subject property is located in an area that is relatively free of potential geologic hazards such as landsliding, liquefaction and seismically induced subsidence. 2) The existing fill, soil and weathered terrace deposits are unsuitable for the support of structural footings or concrete flatwork, in their present condition. 3) The existing fill, soil and weathered terrace deposits should be removed and replaced as properly compacted fill. The cut portion of the lot would have to be overexcavated and replaced with compacted fill. The intent is to provide uniform compacted fill for the support of footings and slabs on grade. 4) Our experience with this type of lot development and geotechnical conditions suggest that varying degrees of seepage can develop after construction. Post construction seepage and/or saturated ground conditions can adversely affect foundations and concrete flatwork. Therefore, special consideration should be provided for surface and possible subsurface drainage during the design and construction phases. Subdrain recommendations may be necessary based on final design plans and actual conditions encountered during remedial grading. Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 11 RECOMMENDATIONS General The existing fill, soil and weathered terrace deposits in the western portion of the building pad should be removed and replaced as compacted fill, prior to placement of proposed fill. The cut portion of the pad should be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill to reduce potential differential settlement of foundations. Building Pad-Removals/Recompaction The existing fill, soil and weathered terrace deposits should be removed and replaced as properly compacted fill in the building footprint. Removal depths are anticipated to range up to 3.5 to 4.0 feet along the western portion. All fill should be keyed and benched into competent terrace deposits. The cut portion of the building pad should be overexcavated a minimum of 3.5 feet and recompacted. Removals should include the entire building pad extending a minimum of 5.0 feet beyond the building footprint. Removals should extend 10 lateral feet beyond the western building line. Most of the existing earth deposits are generally suitable for reuse, provided they are cleared of all vegetation, debris and thoroughly mixed. Prior to placement of fill,the base of the removal should be observed by a representative of this firm. Additional overexcavation and recommendations may be necessary at that time. The exposed bottom should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6.0 inches,moistened as required and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. Fill should be placed in 6.0 to 8.0 inch lifts, moistened to approximately 1.0 - 2.0 percent above optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum of Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 12 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. Fill,soil and weathered terrace deposits in areas of proposed concrete flatwork, exterior improvements and driveways should be removed and replaced as properly compacted fill. Imported fill, if necessary, should consist of non-expansive granular deposits approved by the geotechnical engineer. Temporary Slopes/Excavation Characteristics Temporary excavations above 3.5 feet should be trimmed to a gradient of 3/4:I (horizontal to vertical) or less, depending upon conditions encountered during grading. The Pleistocene terrace deposits may contain hard concretion layers. However, based on our experience in the area,the sandstone is rippable with conventional heavy earth moving equipment in good working order. Foundations The following design parameters are based on footings founded into non-expansive approved compacted fill deposits or extended into competent terrace deposits. Footings for the proposed residence and garage should be a minimum of 12 inches wide and founded a minimum of 12 inches and 18 inches into compacted fill for single-story and two-story structures,respectively. A 12 inch by 12 inch grade beam should be placed across the garage opening. Footings should be reinforced with a minimum of two No.4 bars,one along the top of the footing and one along the base. Footing recommendations provided herein are based upon underlying soil conditions and are not intended to be in lieu of the project structural engineer's design. Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 13 For design purposes,an allowable bearing value of 1700 pounds per square foot may be used for 12 inch deep footings and 2000 pounds per square foot may be used for 18 inch deep footings. The bearing value indicated above is for the total dead and frequently applied live loads. This value may be increased by 33 percent for short durations of loading, including the effects of wind and seismic forces. _ Resistance to lateral load may be provided by friction acting at the base of foundations and by passive earth pressure. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 may be used with dead-load forces. A passive earth pressure of 300 pounds per square foot, per foot of depth of fill or terrace deposits penetrated to a maximum of 2000 pounds per square foot may be used. Slabs on Grade (Interior and Exterior) Slabs on grade should be a minimum of 4.0 inches thick and reinforced in both directions with No. 3 bars placed 18 inches on center in both directions. The slab should be underlain by a minimum 2.0-inch sand blanket(S.E. greater than 30). Where moisture sensitive floors are used,a minimum 6.0-mil Visqueen or equivalent moisture barrier should be placed over the sand blanket and covered by an additional two inches of sand. Utility trenches underlying the slab may be backfilled with on- site materials,compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. Slabs including exterior concrete flatwork should be reinforced as indicated above and provided with saw cuts/expansion joints, as recommended by the project structural engineer. All slabs should be cast over dense compacted subgrades. Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 14 Retaining Walls Cantilever walls (yielding) retaining nonexpansive granular soils may be designed for an active- equivalent fluid pressure of 35 pounds per cubic foot. Restrained walls (nonyielding) should be designed for an"at-rest"equivalent fluid pressure of 58 pounds per cubic foot. Wall footings should be designed in accordance with the foundation design recommendations. Property line wall foundations may be designed for a bearing value of 2000 pounds per square foot, provided the footings are founded a minimum of 12 inches into competent terrace deposits. All retaining walls should be provided with an adequate backdrainage system (Miradrain 6000 or equivalent is suggested). The soil parameters assume a level granular backfill compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. Settlement Characteristics Estimated total and differential settlement over a horizontal distance of 30 feet is expected to be on the order of 1/4 inch and %2 inch, respectively. It should also be noted that long term secondary settlement due to irrigation and loads imposed by structures is anticipated to be 1/4 inch. Seismic Considerations Although the likelihood of ground rupture on the site is remote, the property will be exposed to moderate to high levels of ground motion resulting from the release of energy should an earthquake occur along the numerous known and unknown faults in the region. Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 15 The Rose Canyon Fault Zone located approximately 3.3 miles west of the site is the nearest known active fault and is considered the design earthquake for the site. A maximum probable event along the offshore segment of the Rose Canyon Fault is expected to produce a peak bedrock horizontal acceleration of 0.45g and a repeatable ground acceleration of 0.30g. Seismic Design Parameters (1997 Uniform Building Code) Soil Profile Type - SD Seismic Zone - 4 Seismic Source - Type B Near Source Factor(N,,) - 1.2 Near source Acceleration Factor(NJ - 1.0 Seismic Coefficients Ca= 0.45 C,,= 0.78 Design Response Spectrum T,=0.699 To=0.140 Nearest B-Type Fault= 3.0 miles Preliminary Pavement Design The following pavement design should be considered preliminary and may need to be revised based on actual conditions encountered during grading. 4.0 inches of asphaltic paving or 5.0 inches of concrete on 6.0 inches of select base (Class 2) on 12 inches of compacted subgrade soils Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 16 Subgrade soils should be compacted to the thickness indicated in the structural section and left in a condition to receive base materials. Class 2 base materials should have a minimum R-value of 78 and a minimum sand equivalent of 30. Subgrade soils and base materials should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of their laboratory maximum dry density. The pavement section should be protected from water sources. Migration of water into subgrade deposits and base materials could result in pavement failure. Utility Trench We recommend that all utilities be bedded in clean sand to at least one foot above the top of the conduit. The bedding should be flooded in place to fill all the voids around the conduit. Imported or on-site granular material compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction may be utilized for backfill above the bedding. The invert of subsurface utility excavations paralleling footings should be located above the zone of influence of these adjacent footings. This zone of influence is defined as the area below a 45 degree plane projected down from the nearest bottom edge of an adjacent footing. This can be accomplished by either deepening the footing,raising the invert elevation of the utility, or moving the utility or the footing away from one another. Subdrain Subdrain recommendations may be necessary based on final design plans and/or actual conditions encountered during grading. Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 17 Drainage Specific drainage patterns should be designed by the project engineer. However, in general, pad water should be directed away from foundations. Roof water should be collected or transferred to hardscape. Pad water should not be allowed to pond. Vegetation adjacent to foundations should be avoided. If vegetation in these areas is desired, sealed planter boxes or drought resistant plants should be considered. Other alternatives may be available,however,the intent is to reduce moisture from migrating into foundation subsoils. Irrigation should be limited to that amount necessary to sustain plant life. All drainage systems should be inspected and cleaned annually, prior to winter rains. Geotechnical Observations Structural footing excavations should be observed by a representative of this firm, prior to the placement of steel and forms. All fill should be placed while a representative of the geotechnical engineer is present to observe and test. Plan Review _ A copy of the final plans should be submitted to this office for review prior to the initiation of construction. Additional recommendations may be necessary at that time. LIMITATIONS This report is presented with the provision that it is the responsibility of the owner or the owner's Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O.P-476105 Page 18 representative,to bring the information and recommendations given herein to the attention of the project's architects and/or engineers so that they may be incorporated into plans. If conditions encountered during construction appear to differ from those described in this report, our office should be notified so that we may consider whether modifications are needed. No responsibility for construction compliance with design concepts,specifications or recommendations given in this report is assumed unless on-site review is performed during the course of construction. The subsurface conditions, excavation characteristics and geologic structure described herein are based on individual exploratory excavations made on the subject property. The subsurface conditions, excavation characteristics and geologic structure discussed should in no way be construed to reflect any variations which may occur among the exploratory excavations. Please note that fluctuations in the level of groundwater may occur due to variations in rainfall, temperature and other factors not evident at the time measurements were made and reported herein. Coast Geotechnical assumes no responsibility for variations which may occur across the site. The conclusions and recommendations of this report apply as of the current date. In time,however, changes can occur on a property whether caused by acts of man or nature on this or adjoining properties. Additionally,changes in professional standards may be brought about by legislation or the expansion of knowledge. Consequently, the conclusions and recommendations of this report may be rendered wholly or partially invalid by events beyond our control. This report is therefore subject to review and should not be relied upon after the passage of two years. Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 19 The professional judgments presented herein are founded partly on our assessment of the technical ---- - data gathered,partly on our understanding of the proposed construction and partly on our general experience in the geotechnical field. However, in no respect do we guarantee the outcome of the project. This study has been provided solely for the benefit of the client and is in no way intended to benefit or extend any right or interest to any third party. This study is not to be used on other projects or extensions to this project except by agreement in writing with Coast Geotechnical. Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 20 REFERENCES 1. Hays,Walter W., 1980,Procedures for Estimating Earthquake Ground Motions,Geological Survey Professional Paper 1114, 77 pages. 2. Petersen, Mark D. and others (DMG), Frankel, Arthur D. and others (USGS), 1996, Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State of California,California Division of Mines and Geology OFR 96-08, United States Geological Survey OFR 96-706. 3. Seed,H.B.,and Idriss,I.M., 1970,A Simplified Procedure for Evaluating Soil Liquefaction Potential: Earthquake Engineering Research Center. 4. Tan, S.S.,and Giffen,D.G., 1995,Landslide Hazards in the Northern Part of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, Plate 35D, Open-File Report 95-04, Map Scale 1:24,000. 5. Treiman, J.A., 1984, The Rose Canyon Fault Zone, A Review and Analysis, California Division of Mines and Geology. MAPS/AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS 1. Aerial Photograph, 1982, Foto-Map D-9, Scale 1"=2000'. 2. California Division of Mines and Geology, 1994, Fault Activity Map of California, Scale 1"=750,000'. 3. Geologic Map of the Encinitas and Rancho Santa Fe 7.5' Quadrangles, 1996, DMG Open File Report 96-02. 4. Conway and Associates, 2005, Concept Grading Plan, 1133 Hermes Avenue, Leucadia, California, Scale 1"=20'. 5. U.S.G.S., 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Topographic Map, Encinitas, Digitized, Variable Scale. APPENDIX A LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TABLE I Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content (Laboratory Standard ASTM D-1557-91) Sample Max. Dry Optimum Location Density Moisture Content OPC f) B-1 @ 1 . 0 ' -3 . 0 ' 126 . 2 10 . 1 TABLE II Field Dry Density and Moisture Content Sample Field Dry Field Moisture Location Density Content OPC f) % B-1 @ 4 . 0 ' 109 . 5 8 . 9 B-1 @ 5 . 0 ' SPT 8 . 6 B-1 @ 8 . 0 ' 102 . 1 7 . 0 B-1 @ 9 . 0 ' SPT 6 . 6 B-1 @ 12 . 0 ' 104 . 7 18 . 0 B-1 @ 13 . 0 ' SPT 20 . 1 B-1 @ 16 . 0 ' SPT 19 .2 B-1 @ 19 . 0 ' SPT 18 . 0 - B-2 @ 1 . 5 ' 98 . 6 4 . 3 B-2 @ 5 . 0 ' Sample Disturbed 5 . 9 B-2 @ 8 . 0 ' Sample Disturbed 6 . 0 B-3 @ 2 . 0 ' 101 . 2 4 . 8 B-3 @ 5 . 0 ' Sample Disturbed 5 . 2 B-3 @ 8 . 0 ' Sample Disturbed 5 . 9 (Page 1 of 2) TABLE III Direct Shear Test Results Sample Location Angle of Apparent Cohesion Internal Friction (nf) B-1 @ 1 . 0 ' -3 . 0 ' 30 Degrees 37 (Remolded) P-476105 (Page 2 of 2) LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING NO. I DRILL RIG: PORTABLE HOLLOW-STEM AUGER PROJECT NO. P-468075 BORING DIAMETER: 6.0" DATE DRILLED: 11-21-05 SURFACE ELEV.: 71' (Approximate) LOGGED BY: MB STANDARD PENETRATION TEST 140 POUND HAMMER, 30" DROP W E~ w O U Z U Q W Q U Q H U aa7 x U cn 0 � PQ CIO La GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION .. 71.00 0.00 SP SOIL(Qs):Bm.fine and medium-grained sand,slightly silty Dry, loose 69.00 2.00 SP TERRACE DEPOSITS(Qt): Tan to Reddish brn.,fine and med.-grain sand - I 67.00 .1:.r_.. 109.5 8.9 a.00 ti= - SPT 8.6 31 Dense 65.00 6.00 rrar rar�_ 63.0 " 102.1 7.0 8.00 Medium Dense SPT 6.6 20 61.00 - 10.001, 59.00. @ IT, SEEPAGE 104.7 i 18.0 12.00:...:...::.. -- AIM IMII -IIMSSNI SPT 20.1 50 -- 57.00 —= Very Dense 14.00 : . :rr:x•• 55.0 ,. t,:, Dense, Clayey Sand SPT 19.2 39 16.00....::.::;. SC Brn.-Grey Clayey Sand =, ...... I � 53.00: ._...:_ 18.0 SPT 18.0 50(8") Very Dense End of Boring @ 20' —L SHEET 1 OF 1 COAST GEOTECHNICAL LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING NO. 2 DRILL RIG: PORTABLE BUCKET AUGER PROJECT NO. P-476105 BORING DIAMETER: 3.5" DATE DRILLED: 11-16-05 SURFACE ELEV.: 74.5' (Approximate) LOGGED BY: MB F w Z C H U 0. z 3 a _ t H U a W U a q a� U p Q p Q � � GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION 1 74.501 1 0.00 SP SOIL(Qs):Brn.fine and medium-grained sand,slightly silty 73.50 1.00 Graditional Contact 1 98.6 4.3 SP TERRACE DEPOSITS(Qt): Tan to Reddish brn.,fine and med.-grained sand -- 72.5 - 2.00 71.5 i 3.00 ••- Dry to slightly moist _ 70.so ----------- 4.00 Cn I 69.50 4; .......... Distrube 5.9 5.00� 3 b I 68.5 O 0 I � 6.00 ......._.. I O z 67.50 7.00 ... 66.50 Distrube 1 6.0 8.00 . I 65.50 9.00 - ........... 64.500- 10.00M End of Boring @ 105 SHEET 1 OF 1 COAST GEOTECHNICAL LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING NO. 3 DRILL RIG: PORTABLE BUCKET AUGER PROJECT NO. P-476105 BORING DIAMETER: 3.5" DATE DRILLED: 11-16-05 SURFACE ELEV.: 73' (Approximate) LOGGED BY: MB l z H o 0 3 U U a O z ¢ w w Q v CIO Q � Q o GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION 73.00 0.00 SP SOIL(Qs):Bm.fine and medium-grained sand,slightly silty dry,loose,Caving 72.00 1.00 Graditional Contact SP TERRACE DEPOSITS(Qt): Tan to Reddish bm.,fine and med.-grained sand 71.0 101.2 4.8 2.00 I 70.00- 3.00 --- Dry to slightly moist a) I 69.00 a) 4.00 N N I O 68.00 IDistrube 1 5.2 °' 5.00 I � 67.00 6.00 . O z 66.0 .: 7.00 .. I � I 65.00........... Distrube 5.9 8.00 - 64.00.. 9.00 - _.__ 63.00 10.00.aa; . I End of Boring @ 10.5' SHEET'of l COAST GEOTECHNICAL TRANSITION LOT DETAILS CUT-FILL LOT EXISTING GROUND SURFACE i COMPACTED_====__===��=�`- -a11► '_ ��`--- -= ="==-===== ____ -------- (OVEREXCAVATE � -`-== AND RECOMPACT COMPETENT BEDROCK �—OR MATERIAL EVALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT - CUT LOT EXISTING GROUND SURFACE r i- REMOVE / r UNSUITABLE / 6 f MATERIAL---. MIN, ==COMPACTED=_= r-Tu cn cn ,'I Q I U I o � O Q � I I (40) � W En cn I ' c I • � o , x W w ui I IN l I I � i I I � _ J LO in co LO r - � r . • 1 � ' FASMIASSIT i 0 1 10, 20' i irNX -� -- •------- i !• IX SHALE AT MP k , , CF Wa 4`11-A i W r N7 --- 1 j I ' 4 1 j 1 I r� NG PLAN LNG LOCATION (approx.) COAST GEOTECHNICAL P-476105 APPENDIX B CALIFORNIA FAULT MAP CALVO 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 •ate° o SI 0 -100 -200 -300 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 *********************** * * U B C S E I S * * Version 1.03 * *********************** COMPUTATION OF 1997 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS JOB NUMBER: P-476105 DATE: 12-06-2005 JOB NAME: CALVO FAULT-DATA-FILE NAME: CDMGUBCR.DAT SITE COORDINATES: SITE LATITUDE: 33.0696 SITE LONGITUDE: 117.3030 UBC SEISMIC ZONE: 0.4 UBC SOIL PROFILE TYPE: SD NEAREST TYPE A FAULT: NAME: ELSINORE-JULIAN DISTANCE: 43 .6 km NEAREST TYPE B FAULT: NAME: ROSE CANYON DISTANCE: 4.8 km NEAREST TYPE C FAULT: NAME: DISTANCE: 99999.0 km SELECTED UBC SEISMIC COEFFICIENTS: Na: 1.0 Nv: 1.2 Ca: 0.45 Cv: 0.78 Ts: 0.699 To: 0.140 U � o C7 a H d k U O I � ! Cd 14I C) PMR O \ 'sim I ! W 1 ! I , r E- -. 1 y 1 t- -a• � Iq6 / e ly w j V I �i -----`� --- at / / y / d / ' { t I OGL] W 1 ! / ' - C Na le Y I b •.r, lam,-...-• `� �-"� ,r-- i O -3nv s3WH3H --------------------------- SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS --------------------------- Page 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I APPROX. ISOURCE I MAX. I SLIP I FAULT ABBREVIATED IDISTANCEI TYPE I MAG. I RATE I TYPE FAULT NAME I (km) I (A,B,C) I (Mw) I (mm/yr) I (SS,DS,BT) ROSE CANYON I 4.8 I B I 6.9 I 1.50 I SS NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) I 15.2 I B I 6.9 I 1.50 I SS CORONADO BANK I 29.4 I B I 7.4 I 3.00 I SS ELSINORE-JULIAN I 43.6 I A I 7.1 I 5.00 I SS ELSINORE-TEMECULA I 43.6 I B I 6.8 I 5.00 I SS PALOS VERDES I 63.7 I B I 7.1 I 3.00 I SS ELSINORE-GLEN IVY I 63.9 I B I 6.8 I 5.00 I SS EARTHQUAKE VALLEY I 68.4 I B I 6.5 I 2.00 I SS SAN JACINTO-ANZA I 80.4 I A I 7.2 I 12.00 I SS SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY I 82.8 I B I 6.9 I 12.00 I SS NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (L.A.Basin) I 83.0 I B I 6.9 I 1.00 I SS SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK I 85.7 I B I 6.8 I 4.00 I SS CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) I 86.4 I B I 6.7 i 1.00 I DS ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN I 88.5 I B I 6.8 I 4.00 I SS ELSINORE-WHITTIER I 92.6 I B I 6.8 I 2.50 I SS SAN JACINTO - BORREGO I 104.4 I B I 6.6 I 4.00 I SS SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO I 105.4 I B I 6.7 I 12.00 I SS SAN ANDREAS - Southern I 111.7 I A I 7.4 I 24.00 I SS SAN JOSE I 119.7 I B I 6.5 I 0.50 I DS PINTO MOUNTAIN I 122.5 I B I 7.0 I 2.50 I SS CUCAMONGA I 123.9 I A I 7.0 I 5.00 I DS SIERRA MADRE (Central) I 124.0 I B I 7.0 I 3.00 I DS SUPERSTITION MTN. (San Jacinto) I 129.0 I B I 6.6 I 5.00 I SS BURNT MTN. I 130.1 I B I 6.5 I 0.60 ( SS NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (West) I 131.8 I B I 7.0 I 1.00 I DS CLEGHORN I 134.0 I B I 6.5 I 3.00 I SS EUREKA PEAK I 134.5 I B I 6.5 I 0.60 I SS ELMORE RANCH I 135.1 I B I 6.6 I 1.00 I SS SUPERSTITION HILLS (San Jacinto) I 136.7 I B I 6.6 I 4.00 I SS ELSINORE-LAGUNA SALADA I 137.8 I B I 7.0 I 3.50 I SS RAYMOND I 138.5 I B I 6.5 I 0.50 I DS NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East) I 138.8 I B I 6.7 I 0.50 I DS CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT I 139.1 I B I 6.5 I 0.50 I DS SAN ANDREAS - 1857 Rupture I 139.6 I A I 7.8 I 34.00 I SS VERDUGO I 142.2 I B I 6.7 I 0.50 I DS HOLLYWOOD I 145.2 I B I 6.5 I 1.00 I DS LANDERS I 147.0 I B I 7.3 I 0.60 I SS HELENDALE - S. LOCKHARDT I 150.2 I B i 7.1 I 0.60 I SS BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE I 151.9 I B I 6.5 I 25.00 I SS SANTA MONICA I 152.5 I B I 6.6 I 1.00 DS LENWOOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN SPRGS I 155.8 I B I 7.3 I 0.60 I SS MALIBU COAST I 156.7 I B I 6.7 I 0.30 I DS EMERSON So. - COPPER MTN. I 159.5 I B I 6.9 I 0.60 I SS JOHNSON VALLEY (Northern) I 160.1 I B I 6.7 I 0.60 I SS IMPERIAL I 162.5 I A I 7.0 I 20.00 I SS SIERRA MADRE (San Fernando) I 163.1 I B I 6.7 I 2.00 I DS --------------------------- SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS --------------------------- Page 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I APPROX. ISOURCE I MAX. I SLIP I FAULT ABBREVIATED IDISTANCEI TYPE I MAG. I RATE I TYPE FAULT NAME I (km) I (A,B,C) I (Mw) I (mm/yr) I (SS,DS,BT) ANACAPA-DUME I 164.8 I B I 7.3 I 3.00 I DS SAN GABRIEL I 166.0 I B I 7.0 I 1.00 I SS PISGAH-BULLION MTN.-MESQUITE LK I 169.2 I B I 7.1 I 0.60 I SS CALICO - HIDALGO I 173.0 I B I 7.1 I 0.60 I SS SANTA SUSANA I 178.3 I B I 6.6 I 5.00 I DS HOLSER I 187.2 I B I 6.5 I 0.40 I DS SIMI-SANTA ROSA I 194.5 I B I 6.7 I 1.00 I DS OAK RIDGE (Onshore) I 195.4 I B I 6.9 I 4.00 I DS GRAVEL HILLS - HARPER LAKE I 203.6 I B I 6.9 I 0.60 I SS SAN CAYETANO I 203.9 I B I 6.8 I 6.00 I DS BLACKWATER I 219.0 I B I 6.9 I 0.60 I SS VENTURA - PITAS POINT I 222.4 I B I 6.8 I 1.00 I DS SANTA YNEZ (East) I 223.7 i B I 7.0 I 2.00 I SS SANTA CRUZ ISLAND I 230.1 I B I 6.8 I 1.00 I DS M.RIDGE-ARROYO PARIDA-SANTA ANA I 233.2 I B I 6.7 I 0.40 I DS RED MOUNTAIN I 236.3 I B I 6.8 I 2.00 I DS GARLOCK (West) I 240.5 I A I 7.1 I 6.00 I SS PLEITO THRUST I 245.6 I B I 6.8 I 2.00 I DS BIG PINE I 251.2 I B I 6.7 I 0.80 I SS GARLOCK (East) I 255.3 I A I 7.3 I 7.00 ( SS SANTA ROSA ISLAND I 264.8 I B I 6.9 I 1.00 I DS WHITE WOLF I 266.4 I B I 7.2 I 2.00 ( DS SANTA YNEZ (West) I 268.1 I B I 6.9 I 2.00 I SS So. SIERRA NEVADA I 279.7 I B I 7.1 I 0.10 I DS LITTLE LAKE I 284.3 I B I 6.7 I 0.70 I SS OWL LAKE I 284.9 I B I 6.5 I 2.00 ( SS PANAMINT VALLEY I 285.1 I B I 7.2 I 2.50 I SS TANK CANYON I 286.0 I B I 6.5 I 1.00 I DS DEATH VALLEY (South) I 293.6 I B I 6.9 I 4.00 I SS LOS ALAMOS-W. BASELINE I 310.1 I B i 6.8 I 0.70 I DS LIONS HEAD I 327.7 I B I 6.6 ( 0.02 I DS DEATH VALLEY (Graben) I 335.2 I B I 6.9 I 4.00 I DS SAN LUIS RANGE (S. Margin) I 337.6 I B I 7.0 I 0.20 I DS SAN JUAN I 338.7 I B I 7.0 I 1.00 I SS CASMALIA (Orcutt Frontal Fault) I 345.9 I B I 6.5 I 0.25 I DS OWENS VALLEY I 352.8 I B I 7.6 I 1.50 I SS LOS OSOS I 367.7 I B I 6.8 I 0.50 I DS HOSGRI I 373.4 I B I 7.3 I 2.50 I SS HUNTER MTN. - SALINE VALLEY I 379.1 I B I 7.0 I 2.50 I SS INDEPENDENCE I 388.6 I B I 6.9 I 0.20 I DS DEATH VALLEY (Northern) I 388.7 I A I 7.2 I 5.00 I SS RINCONADA I 388.8 I B I 7.3 I 1.00 I SS BIRCH CREEK I 444.9 I B I 6.5 I 0.70 I DS SAN ANDREAS (Creeping) I 445.5 I B I 5.0 I 34.00 I SS WHITE MOUNTAINS I 449.5 I B I 7.1 I 1.00 I SS DEEP SPRINGS I 468.0 ( B I 6.6 I 0.80 I DS --------------------------- SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS --------------------------- Page 3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I APPROX. ISOURCE I MAX. I SLIP I FAULT ABBREVIATED IDISTANCEI TYPE I MAG. I RATE I TYPE FAULT NAME I (km) I (A,B,C) I (Mw) I (mm/yr) I (SS,DS,BT) -° DEATH VALLEY (N. of Cucamongo) I 473.1 I A I 7.0 I 5.00 I SS ROUND VALLEY (E. of S.N.Mtns. ) I 480.0 I B I 6.8 I 1.00 I DS FISH SLOUGH I 487.9 I B I 6.6 I 0.20 I DS HILTON CREEK I 506.1 I B I 6.7 I 2.50 I DS ORTIGALITA I 530.0 I B I 6.9 I 1.00 I SS HARTLEY SPRINGS I 530.4 I B I 6.6 I 0.50 I DS CALAVERAS (So.of Calaveras Res) I 535.5 I B I 6.2 I 15.00 I SS MONTEREY BAY - TULARCITOS I 537.9 I B I 7.1 I 0.50 I DS PALO COLORADO - SUR I 538.7 I B I 7.0 I 3.00 I SS QUIEN SABE I 548.7 I B I 6.5 I 1.00 I SS MONO LAKE I 566.4 I B I 6.6 I 2.50 I DS ZAYANTE-VERGELES I 567.2 I B I 6.8 I 0.10 I SS SAN ANDREAS (1906) I 572.4 I A I 7.9 I 24.00 I SS SARGENT I 572.5 I B I 6.8 I 3.00 I SS ROBINSON CREEK I 597.7 I B I 6.5 I 0.50 I DS SAN GREGORIO I 613.3 I A I 7.3 I 5.00 I SS GREENVILLE i 622.4 I B I 6.9 I 2.00 I SS MONTE VISTA - SHANNON I 622.6 I B I 6.5 I 0.40 I DS HAYWARD (SE Extension) I 622.8 I B I 6.5 I 3.00 I SS ANTELOPE VALLEY I 638.0 I B I 6.7 I 0.80 I DS HAYWARD (Total Length) I 642.5 I A I 7.1 I 9.00 I SS CALAVERAS (NO.of Calaveras Res) I 642.5 I B I 6.8 I 6.00 I SS GENOA I 663.3 I B I 6.9 i 1.00 I DS CONCORD - GREEN VALLEY I 690.4 I B I 6.9 I 6.00 I SS RODGERS CREEK I 729.1 I A I 7.0 I 9.00 I SS WEST NAPA I 730.0 I B I 6.5 I 1.00 I SS POINT REYES I 747.9 I B I 6.8 I 0.30 I DS HUNTING CREEK - BERRYESSA I 752.6 I B I 6.9 ( 6.00 I SS MAACAMA (South) I 791.9 I B I 6.9 I 9.00 I SS COLLAYOMI I 808.8 I B I 6.5 I 0.60 I SS BARTLETT SPRINGS I 812.4 I A I 7.1 I 6.00 I SS MAACAMA (Central) I 833.5 I A I 7.1 I 9.00 I SS MAACAMA (North) I 893.1 I A I 7.1 I 9.00 I SS ROUND VALLEY (N. S.F.Bay) I 899.3 I B I 6.8 I 6.00 I SS BATTLE CREEK I 923.1 I B I 6.5 I 0.50 I DS LAKE MOUNTAIN ( 957.8 I B I 6.7 I 6.00 I SS GARBERVILLE-BRICELAND I 974.9 I B I 6.9 I 9.00 I SS MENDOCINO FAULT ZONE 1 1031.1 I A I 7.4 I 35.00 I DS LITTLE SALMON (Onshore) 1 1037.9 I A I 7.0 I 5.00 I DS MAD RIVER 1 1040.7 I B I 7.1 I 0.70 I DS CASCADIA SUBDUCTION ZONE 1 1044.8 I A I 8.3 I 35.00 I DS McKINLEYVILLE 1 1051.1 I B I 7.0 I 0.60 I DS TRINIDAD 1 1052.7 I B I 7.3 I 2.50 I DS FICKLE HILL 1 1053.1 I B I 6.9 I 0.60 I DS TABLE BLUFF 1 1058.5 I B I 7.0 I 0.60 I DS LITTLE SALMON (Offshore) 1 1071.8 I B I 7.1 I 1.00 I DS - O LO - � to d' QLO M a o ocn M c 0 V1 � N C/) 0 ° � o N (D a y a Lq rTl U � O Lq H � � H O w O ^ 1 O N o LO o U-) o LO o LO o LO o LO N O I--_ m N O I*-- 0 N O N N N T- T- T- O O O O (6) uoileaalaooy lealoadg APPENDIX C GRADING GUIDELINES Grading should be performed to at least the minimum requirements of the governing agencies, Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code, the geotechnical report and the guidelines presented below. All of the guidelines may not apply to a specific site and additional recommendations may be necessary during the grading phase. Site Clearint Trees, dense vegetation, and other deleterious materials should be removed from the site. Non- organic debris or concrete may be placed in deeper fill areas under direction of the Soils engineer. Subdrainage 1. During grading, the Geologist and Soils Engineer should evaluate the necessity of placing - additional drains. 2. All subdrainage systems should be observed by the Geologist and Soils Engineer during construction and prior to covering with compacted fill. 3. Consideration should be given to having subdrains located by the project surveyors. Outlets should be located and protected. Treatment of Existing Ground 1. All heavy vegetation,rubbish and other deleterious materials should be disposed of off site. 2. All surficial deposits including alluvium and colluvium should be removed unless otherwise indicated in the text of this report. Groundwater existing in the 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. 3. 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. Fill Placement 1. Most site soil and bedrock may be reused for compacted fill; however, some special processing or handling may be required (see report). Highly organic or contaminated soil should not be used for compacted fill. 2. Material used in the compacting process should be evenly spread, moisture conditioned, processed, and compacted in thin lifts not to exceed six inches in thickness to obtain a uniformly dense layer. The fill should be placed and compacted on a horizontal plane,unless otherwise found acceptable by the Soils Engineer. (1) 3. If the moisture content or relative density varies from that acceptable to the Soils engineer, the Contractor should rework the fill until it is in accordance with the following: 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. b) Each six inch layer should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum density in compliance with the testing method specified by the controlling governmental agency. In this case, the testing method is ASTM Test Designation D-1557-91. 4. Side-hill fills should have a minimum equipment-width key at their toe excavated through all surficial soil and into competent material(see report)and tilted back into the hill. As the fill is elevated, it should be benched through surficial deposits and into competent bedrock or other material deemed suitable by the Soils Engineer. 5. Rock fragments less than six 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 supervised by the Soils Engineer. 6. Rocks greater than six inches in diameter should be taken off site, or placed in accordance with the recommendations of the Soils Engineer in areas designated as suitable for rock disposal. 7. In clay soil large chunks or blocks are common; if in excess of six (6) inches minimum dimension then they are considered as oversized. Sheepsfoot compactors or other suitable methods should be used to break the up blocks. 8. The Contractor should be required to 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. 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 approximately every 4 feet vertically as the slope is built. 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. (2) In addition, 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. Finish grade testing of the slope should be performed after construction is complete.Each day the Contractor should receive a copy of the Soils Engineer's"Daily Field Engineering Report" which would indicate the results of field density tests that day. 9. 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 1 equipment width wide (see report) and tipped at least 1 foot into slope should be excavated into competent materials and observed by the Soils Engineer or his representative. C) The cut portion of the slope should be constructed 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. 10. Transition lots (cut and fill) and lots above stabilization fills should be capped with a four foot thick compacted fill blanket(or as indicated in the report). 11. Cut pads should be observed by the Geologist 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. 12. Exploratory backhoe or dozer trenches still remaining after site removal should be excavated and filled with compacted fill if they can be located. Grading Observation and Testing 1. Observation of the fill placement should be provided by the Soils Engineer during the progress of grading. 2. In general, density tests would be made at intervals not exceeding two feet of fill height or every 1,000 cubic yards of fill placed. This criteria will vary depending on soil conditions and the size of the fill. In any event, an adequate number of field density tests should be made to evaluate if the required compaction and moisture content is generally being obtained. 3. Density tests may be made on the surface material to receive fill, as required by the Soils Engineer. (3) 4. Cleanouts, processed ground to receive fill, key excavations, subdrains and rock disposal should be observed by the Soils Engineer prior to placing any fill. It will be the Contractor's responsibility to notify the Soils Engineer when such areas are ready for observation. 5. A Geologist should observe subdrain construction. 6. A Geologist should observe benching prior to and during placement of fill. Utility Trench Backfill Utility trench backfill should be placed to the following standards: 1. Ninety percent of the laboratory standard if native material is used as backfill. 2. As an alternative, clean sand may be utilized and flooded into place. No specific relative compaction would be required; however, observation, probing, and if deemed necessary, testing may be required. 3. Exterior trenches,paralleling a footing and extending below a 1:1 plane projected from the outside bottom edge of the footing, should be compacted to 90 percent of the laboratory standard. Sand backfill,unless it is similar to the inplace fill,should not be allowed in these trench backfill areas. Density testing along with probing should be accomplished to verify the desired results. (4) Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyors/General-Engineering Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive•Suite 102•Carlsbad,CA 92(W.jTe0hone t7SU)T537 -5831 I _ f i 4 L... SFFMCES Ci?Y OF FNCIN'JAS - DRAINAGE STUDY for EDWARDS RESIDENCE 1133 HERMES AVENUE LEUCADIA, CA 06-184 CDP APN 254-252-57 - PARCEL 2, PARCEL MAP 19807 (TPM 03-049) GRADING PLAN 0047-G JWofESSIV* �p VtL . K � '!! No.41022 d EXPIRES 3-31-2001 a l V I L r! OF CA01 Prepared: January 21, 2006 Revised: October 26, 2006 Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyors/General-Engineering-HAZ Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive•Suite 102•Carlsbad,CA 92008•Telephone(760)753-1453•Fax(760)434-5831 INDEX INDEX Page 2 INTRODUCTION AND REPORT METHODOLOGY Page 3 TIME OF CONCENTRATION CALCAULATIONS & TRIBUTARY BASIN HYDROLOGY COMPUTATIONS Page 5 SITE HYDROLOGY MAP (1"=40', 17"x119') Page 14 PRIVATE ON-SITE STORM DRAIN HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS Page 16 Page 2 Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyors/General-Engineering-HAZ Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive•Suite 102•Carlsbad,CA 92008•Telephone(760)753-1453•Fax(760)434-5831 INTRODUCTION AND REPORT METHODOLOGY Introduction The purpose of this report is to present the results of the hydrology study and hydraulic design analysis prepared by Conway and Associates, Inc. for the proposed Edwards residence (proposed single-family home) in Encinitas. The project site is located at 1133 Hermes Avenue, Leucadia(Encinitas). This project was submitted for coastal development review to the City of Encinitas Planning Department(permit application 06-184 CDP). This report serves as the basis of design for the proposed on-site storm drain facilities shown on the project grading plans. The storm drain facilities analyzed in this report are based on a 100-year return rainfall event. Proiect Site Description The subject site is located at 1133 Hermes Avenue in Leucadia(Encinitas), California(APN 254-252-57), approximately 0.3 miles north of Leucadia Boulevard, and fronts on the east side of Hermes Avenue. The subject site is a flag lot created as Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 19807 (TPM 03-049) and is currently vacant land. Previous to the parcel map subdivision, the subject site was developed with a small accessory living unit. Parcel 2 is a flag lot with an area of approximately 0.25 acres. The subject site fronts on the east side of Hermes Avenue and is bounded by residential development on its north, south and east sides. _. General Basin Descriptions and Flow Characteristics The subject site's tributary basin consists of an offsite sub-basin located East of the site (0.5 acres, C=0.8 — future condition, ranging from the East boundary line to Hygeia Avenue) and the onsite sub-basins of the project site (0.25 acres). The topography in and around the project site slopes westerly, generally perpendicular and away from Hygeia Avenue westerly towards the Hermes Avenue right of way. Currently, runoff from the tributary basin is generally directed to Hermes Avenue via sheet flow over the subject basin. The proposed project will construct a private storm drain system to intercept the sheet flow runoff of the offsite sub-basin and convey it - to Hermes Avenue shoulder via an 8-inch private storm drain. Hydrology Study Methodology A rational-method format was used to evaluate design runoff quantities for the tributary basins presented herein in accordance with the County of San Diego hydrology manual. The project site was evaluated by grouping site use into two categories: landscape areas (C=0.40) and paved areas (C=0.90), yielding an area- weighted average C value of approximately 0.7 for the drainage basin. Page 3 Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyors/General-Engineering-HAZ Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive•Suite 102•Carlsbad,CA 92008•Telephone(760)753-1453•Fax(760)434-5831 A 100-year return event storm was used to compute the design runoff quantities for the various project drainage basins and are presented in hydrology computations section of this report. Storm Water Quality Site Design Components Runoff from the proposed roof structure and surrounding building pad area will surface-flow over landscaped areas prior to entering the private storm drain system. Conclusion It is the professional opinion of Conway and Associates, Inc. that the proposed storm drain systems shown on the project's grading plans will convey the Q100 design flows anticipated by the calculations contained in this report. Page 4 Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyors/General-Engineering Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive•Suite 102•Carlsbad,CA 92008•Telephone(760)753-1453•Fax(760)434-5831 TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND TRIBUTARY BASIN HYDROLOGY COMPUTATIONS Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyors/General-Engineering Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive•Suite 102•Carlbad,CA 92008•Telephone(760)753-1453•Fax(760)434-5831 DRAINAGE STUDY COMPUTATIONS Edwards Residence - 1133 Hermes Avenue, Leucadia v City of Encinitas 06-184 CDP 0047-G DATE: 10/26/06 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ON-SITE TIME OF CONCENTRATION COMPUTATIONS: PRE-DEVELOPMENT Computations based on Figure 3-3, County of San Diego Hydrology Manual, June 2003 -- C L(ft) S TC (min) 5.0 Initial basin saturation I Basin A 0.75 255 7.0% 5.3 E'ly O/S area 0.5 E'ly channel 225 1.5 pipe travel 12.3 min C L(ft) S TC (min) TC (min) 5.0 Initial basin saturation 1 Basins B&C 0.40 20 2.8% 4.0 rear yard 0.5 rear slope toe 230 1.0 pipe travel 10.5 min ON-SITE HYDROLOGY DATA 10 YEAR EVENT 100 YEAR EVENT tc (min) 10 min. tc (min) 10 min. P6 (10 YR Return) 1.7 in. P6 (100 YR Return) 2.5 in. I, intensity (in/hr) 2.9 in./hr. I, intensity (in/hr) 4.2 in./hr. P24 (10 YR Return) 2.9 in. P24 (100 YR Return) 4.3 in. P6/ P24 59% P6/ P24 58% POST-DEVELOPMENT CONDITION "N. Basin - SUB AREA AREA "C" Quo Q100 Subtotal BASIN (SF) (ACRES) FACTOR C*A (CFS) (CFS) (CFS) Al 22,420 0.51 0.80 0.41 1.18 1.73 ; 1.73 off site ------------- 22,420 F 0.51 F 0.41 F 1.18 F 1.73 weighted C value: 0.80 61 961 0.02 0.90 0.02 0.06 0.08 house 62 1,910 0.04 0.40 0.02 0.05 0.07 :1 0.16 yard C1 360 0.01 0.40 0.00 0.01 0.01 yard C2 583 0.01 0.90 0.01 0.03 0.05 0.06 pvmt ------------- Printed 10/26/2006 Page 1 of 2 06-007_Hydro-061026.xis Hydrology Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyors/General-Engineering Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive•Suite 102•Carlbad,CA 92008•Telephone(760)753-1453•Fax(760)434-5831 - DRAINAGE STUDY COMPUTATIONS Edwards Residence - 1133 Hermes Avenue, Leucadia City of Encinitas 06-184 CDP - 0047-G DATE: 10/26/06 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- W. Basin SUB AREA AREA "C" Q10 Q100 Subtotal BASIN (SF) (ACRES) FACTOR C`A (CFS) (CFS) (CFS) D1 617 0.01 0.90 0.01 0.04 0.05 roof/pvmt D2 1,100 0.03 0.40 0.01 0.03 0.04 0,10 yard ------------- D3 216 0.00 0.90 0.00 0.01 0.02 house D4 1,367 0.03 0.40 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.07 pvmt ------------- E1 1,938 0.04 0.90 0.04 0.11 0.17 0.17 I------------- E2 1,698 0.04 0.90 0.04 0.10 0.15 0.15 pvmt 10,750 0.25 0.17 0.48 0.71 weighted C value: 0.68 2.44 Printed 10/26/2006 Page 2 of 2 06-007_Hydro-061026.xls Hydrology - _ _ _ _ _ 0 It CD Q 0 CO CD WCO It G-Hour Precipitation(inches) _ � " _ _ _ _ _ - _ 7 10 W IT 14 1 Cl or 41. _ wo 3g t 4 H ti > -ca �E W IS 3 a € €E O 0 R o g 3`. ¢r rteO I1J 45 L 1/y. Lt] M O FT } °o o f mperial County ........ o I - ;I rJ 3A N co ,o su ire •--R- n C7 z . n -- . •� � �,' ,S4sll o m �.,rl � r 1 , , ,0 Li — y ^ A R y. _w • , y v o. ,i• So', � OGg2� i {\4Co m C ' M M N N wog y -a Q v w N ' Sew H1 `F YI 4"si nEg e6 d ens u Imperial County a t.. - •' b� O ,m •.i Al .0£eeLL •' £. _ ,• ---' :•., .' " wry, • S ., ;0 9ll _ � t O O V :S4,9Li �,.qy � _ ,S4o911 7 K 42 j o .%. .•• ',, mss` ,000[L,.L > 6`a 3• ,00.LLL r , t - m w ,4.6f G 2 ha,: w Esc o G� Pa u o m m N _d w C - C V of^.o e�ai ViOOr'i viN N.- •- •- •- •- I i _ { ((pp _ II .. E,C = ' C C 0 \ ? 1 1tf R tp h.MMMm0f 90 Nf[f h-/�z,a Gr MN N Of.-U3 h CV Ol N m.L ii O Q! �F� m Q.y = .� 10 R3 ° Q. ' Sri- v�-.Oi r`X07,O v m m N N 0 V h 0 FO Q% N .L O. .� 0 .. no^v'.rnrnnfn.zf wusa on -mas ►'w '� .tL U O fn- ri moo."r .1 M:to�-•r m s>r o n+•rs o o>w CV._ N O. L t w C m'co�r.-r.i c�N h cv •- -.�-.o o L SL V' 7' '"' U +'� ._.. ti, O 93 a 'O HOMO m Q%C MN mm Y7o C Q N r- O '^_ °?6i,m oo:N n rF w u> .-.rn m r. _. {O N O rn. 1Z Q O I F a, I f n on v:c c•i M N N.-,: .-.--v o o. -p z` L �_ y BFI N 0 ` Nv.O> MN 001N�c�m an+n'r_ O to lO _ Q. ,p_ vn MnMncl aon m tv N (td '7 to FO U Y W s0 fn a ri m N N N �- .- Q is Q y p y N L l�O c f�O 1t� �.. N N "vn nQ,- m<aco.rn M fa m'm Ed U .� a O y y �.- N�r .N r N m a o w a a m r`+a:u� +�••~O C �'- m C (� C : psp fn.rn M 01n 6`+rnM NRO of 11 N .,,,.� O .L-. d 7 V �to M.- Of MO m Nm-1Y9 r- v NOORrl oW U t6 aN c a C d 'ItF 4 iF 0) n m f!.'M rs�i c.i N .=•-o o o o'o ` C C U Fn 0 U „T. - OS O �4 O.M n N M M N V)M In V n N CO N� c4 p C IZ L C >, N V U j �" �n�+iv6Nvti '�na�400ciocio �4�! !j 0) 0) 0 U Q- M C i n v nCA U?n Ch NyyGfNMmM V -.. C T� C- �- M B 7 C C C �- Q,IN N- N N MN ��t'l.-Om t0 U3 ra7v MM Q. O. fm N U i°i..) T .- 0 .--p Q) C I i L .a U)@ M N N� .-.-Lj O Q Q:O 0.0 Q O �,. tU d E � C N vz.W'.M.N N o v M,. .O .c m cn m V) Q OG Q p m N Cr - '� N 1°. m u:m ID n cvo o�fwm�r- v CJMNN Q'NTH M v O �- G) a5 T 1�1 .,*-. �+ d l0 M^•in '-.- .-OO OOO O O OO N �T L C C C -0 1 D I U 1 pp me�e�C OM G7 9NO T _ Q.� �?.� C d L @ C @ 0 .�.. ` Q1 Y1 ?` •-- tb•- e�Ot7f m�fD U:.O t'S NNN•- •- C M U N N:�- r' O O Q 4 O.O O Q OO OO 0 E� '' $ to _c II �_ f- v u�novsovr000000000 0 ' p O T9 � Q O m L N {(J Fi II r N N M V'YA t0.�N u7 W:N.. LL w{� Q .= FO FL 1- t� Q V7 Q Q .X Q1 ...... .r... V �- Q f`6 .� U 'D Z d O .w 6-Hou€Precipitation(inches) O fA O U) O fA O Iq O KS O L cp 1n tt) V a' M M N N .- E ._ .. .. ..... ..... .. .. ..._ ...._ ko r V c0 _.._ { s m } _ tf a F Z cs) n c Oo "�.E ..(_... a --- __ m._ .. __.. .__ _.__. ______._ __ _. _ _ (p Q i r +'� C o m W _ ; j N h C � jl I 1 ! Q ._. _�.,._,._,. II ii ii it ____ _ _. __ _ .....__. ___. _ _ _ _ _ ...._ ...... _ .- -... _.._ _-_ nllln __ a O � r .. ._.._ __._.. .._ ..._.._. ._.._. ... ._.___. ..._-__._... ..____._.____ __._ _._._ _...._...._....... _. __. }. f` cc� < i - > i G } N 3, � ji k' £ iI iF 1 �t I ' � ]1 3_) I g € W a � I � I � 3 0 o Q a Q o 0 o a o rn m r, m W� v m � N 0 m c0 r= 0 N v of N - 0 0 0 0 0 o d o 0 (anoy/sayou�)Apsua;uj �n1 /°�•, w 3� i �V F M 0 Imperial County :SLa9lL .SLo9lt 1.$ 9S ,oESLL .: ,, .•, oEes�L 3s. -�5 a - :. ✓' a.: ,S4sLl � •. 40 _.. N . �OO,LLL .-. .•'� � .P..' _< �- � a� � ILL m , � 00 LL 4 ° 01 , f , I , f - J h 6 5 7� �� w Gear P acs{` � 1 O ��•.. Sig 3q �' --ee I � ti O O _o53 ENE f n Iq O o ill R d fibs H S E8 ce 11$ ; o imperial County ..,......_ O V M ........ ......._._. ..� M.....- _..}... tom') Cb ;- ............' N _ °-- 30 -0 !h 4 i , ...� u , _ �4 ,Sb,9 Cl r --a i b - sL,nl 5 ea ,• � C o v m 0 ,0£,L L L M � Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyors/General-Engineering Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive•Suite 102•Carlsbad,CA 92008•Telephone(760)753-1453•Fax(760)434-5831 HYDROLOGY MAP (1"=40', 11 99x1799) POST-DEVELOPMENT CONDITION ' ! LEGEND A SUB-BASIN DESIGNATOR I 3064 SUB-BASIN AREA (S.F.) .40 SUB-BASIN 'C' FACTOR I 254-252-44 m BASIN BOUNDARY SUB-BASIN BOUNDARY Ld I .I 5 I W LLJ 1 254-252-56 1 LLJ I w E2 / 11698 .90 Q100 = 2.5 CFS (TOTAL) — QA = 1.7 CFS (OFF SITE QB—E = 0.8 CFS (ON SI)E) I / �� 254-252-28 I / Cl? / • J I • I � ; A • P _ 40' 20'10'0 40' 80' — c SCALE: 1"=40' -� • ' - I H d�ol A o Ma Y , Y ost-D velop ent Condition _ 06-1184 CDP • • — — _ Edwfards Residence U N / October 19,2006 � N REVISIONS APPROVED DATE REFERENCES DATE OF ENCINfTAS DRAMANG N0. 46 ; - (L.ND) WER PL"OGY MAP FOR: -- _ sa 35 FEET 147S-BARDS RESIDENCE � Ex. SSWH IN Hu HERMES AVENUE, LEUCADIA, CA C FRONTANGE: ELE254-252-57 05-266 CDP (TPM 03-049) SHEET 1 OF 1 � N Conway & Associates, Inc. -- Civil Engineers/Surveyors/General-Engineering Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive•Suite 102•Carlsbad,CA 92008•Telephone(760)753-1453•Fax(760)434-5831 PRIVATE ON-SITE STORM DRAIN HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS EAST PROPERTY LINE INTERCEPTOR SWALE 2 PAGES STORM DRAIN SYSTEM GEOMETRY WORKSHEET 2 PAGES STORM DRAIN LAYOUT PLAT (1"=20', 11"x179') 1 PAGE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS 14 PAGES DRIVEWAY FLOW 2 PAGES DRIVEWAY OUTLET SWALE 2 PAGES ON-GRADE OVERFLOW CONDITION (@ SW GARAGE CORNER) _2 PAGES ON-GRADE OVERFLOW CONDITION (@ SE GARAGE CORNER) _2 PAGES M O v N X r N O (O � O w m p W yl � Z W CO O Z g H a Z T v � LL1 LL Q � w LO LO 0 W W F— F— .U) 00 F' p p Z p Z p Cl) H _ wZ_ _ a w a w Z O O Z O Z E � i- E- F- z Z FL ZFL N E F- ww www w c, O D J J J 0 J J W J J J W J U V O Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z p Z °o — M 00 CO O O O N �- O CO — 0 r- 1,- O O O O U j O M N (V M m N O 0 a 0 '^ N N N 00 00 co CO co 00 (o co co co Wr �O O O O O LLI Q P- co O O O O co O M O O C E 00 00 O O O O 1- M r O N Cl) N p � .- N N N O 4 0 0 O CD Y 0- c O o LO Iq � M V- O 000 N dM � Z _ m N CNO CN CO � '� OD CV) Co Co E y 0 V � N � J O N O LO co N O O O co N O 114: CO (O M CO CO Cn OR M a1 O Q F- W o CO CO co co o- O� co (.0 (0 W - N F- o O N O 0 00 N N O O O O 00 00 v O � g q M CO CO O to 00 CO M M U W a) I- ti O 0 0 0 0 00 CA CA — O O V] •� C ~ v y NZ ,- 000000 OOO O W N V O y 9 2 - O 0 t1) O O O 0 M OR 0 O N N � CA CC') N — N •C W LL CO I� ti ti N W -t2 72 O Q O N M LO (O N 1- 00 CA M p� W 0 W E 0 O — N 0 '%t LO CO I� co 0 O i � O � N A ►n N t` M � U I O BOUNDARY DATA (STARTING AT NW CORNER AT HERMES AVE) 1 N 74'50' 19'E 119.00' APN 254-252-40 2 N 15'03' 53"W 60.06' 3 N 74'51' 44"E 106.09' -. _... 4 N 15'03' 20"W 80.01' _ 5 N 74'50' 19"E 225.07' 20' 110'5'0 20' 40' 6 N 15'03'53" W 20.00' -�6�'h 6 NOTE: THE PROPERTY LINE AND ALL BACKBONE SITE AND UTILITY SCALE:-1 =20' CONTROL DATA SHALL BE REVIEWED AND SET BY A LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR. THE LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR SHALL REVIEW AND VERIFY ALL DATA ON THIS PLAN AS WELL AS EXISTING FIELD :... ... . - CONNECTION POINTS. W - _ NOTE: ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS ARE NOT PART OF THIS PLAN AND ARE SHOWN FOR GENERAL INFORMATION ONLY. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO INDEPENDENTLY LOCATE(FROM THE APPROVED Z ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS)ALL ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS, C ELEVATIONS,DIMENSIONS AND SETBACKS. 00' L W PCC DRAINAGE - DITCH PER SORSD D-75, it EXISTING TYPE B = SINGLE FAMILY RESIDE N 1139 HERMES AVE APN 254-252-5E N LO N a ,RUBBLE BED SECTION JOINS PCC OUTLET APRON 66.09 FL °-- PCC OUTLET APRON JOINS AC DRIVE \ \ \ \ APRON-65.88 FL I bioo=2.5 CF5 -' '��' �� \\ V A V A A 1 A V A A A } 1 A Y 5 '- BSSFC rn 6 .=:.:._ .. -. T. 1 10.00' 22.04 a 2 SEE BM 2775 P NOTE 3 1\� ti TOP OF PIPE \r\$ EXPOSED $ 68.20 TC/LUG 6700 SO FL 12"-THK ROCK-LINED 6"714K PCC OUTLET CHANNEL-S-3.28% _ < ' 1 APRON SEE SEC ROCK SECTION: 4'-WIDE N01 m . A-A, SHT 4 BEACH COBBLE x 8" INK/ a 4"THK/FILTER FABRIC R.C./NATIVE O 90%R.C. APN 254-252-28 3 o d 7 NIDiH PER PLAN— VARIES TURF REINFORCEMENT L PER PLAN m a A W . ?t � AC DRWY .. F CHANNEL BOT,B-B, SHT 4 PCC HEADER STRIP EDGE OF PAYE PER DET 1 5 ° , SHT � ADDITIONAL NOTES: 6 1) THE LANDSCAPED-LINED SW SHALL L PLANTED WITH ORI Storm Drain Layout Plat GROUND COVER PLAN71NO 2)A PERMANENT IRRIGATION SYSTEM EM SHALL BE FRONDED AND 3)FOR BMP PURPOSES-NO MOOIFICA77ONS ALLOWED EXCEPT 4)GRASS-LINED: INSTALL "PYRAMAT 450"UV-RESISTANT TURF SYNTHETIC INDUSTRIES EN EQUIVALENT. Post-DeVeIO went Condition w 5)PROPOSED NEWER'EQUIVALENT'EROSION LEER OF PRODUCTS SHAI.I n IN THE CITY ENGINEER AND THE ENGINEER OF WORK PRIOR TO r a INSTALLATION. 6)ANCHORAGE PLACEMENT PER MANUFACTURER'S SPEC-2 AP 06-184 CDP q MATERIAL MINIMUM. y DETAIL 1 Edwards Residence LANDSCAPED—LINED DRAIN SWALE october27,2006 0 U REVISIONS APPROVED DATE REFERENCES DATE Ef OF ENCINITAS DRANANG N0. ; - -- EX. SSMH I.E. 4'DGY MAP FOR: STORM DRAIN PLAN c` ._ (LWD)SEWER P V RDS RE DWG. NO. 147-ASIDENCE 0. _ — 5&35. sswH N H,HERMES AVENUE, LEUCADIA, CA o FROVTANCE EL254-252-57 05-266 CDP (TPM 03-049) SHEET 1 OF 1 v Oct 27,2006—13:24:59 P\06-007 Eoworas�x•eh\05016GP3_dwg PIOr 0 1"=1 Storm Sewer Design & Analysis Proj. file: 007-8C.STM IDF file: SAMPLE.IDF No. Lines: 10 10-26-2006 m C O c � 8=Z W r N Cl) 't If) a0 � m a to a °o ONi tl M N O O O O N O N^ co O O O O o O O O O O O O W Q J R R R f # # k R a a CDp O r O r CD C nn 1- r r n Of J C _v M co M v M w m Cl) d' Cl) QD (D O ^ O O O O m d o CrO � O � N � C O e 00 aD O O O) O r O) 0i W J M V r N V O o r' Z N N ' J 0 z J CL ta- -- m N O tD OD N O O O O >J st (D (D M (D N to 00 M � F-- C W n 00 0) C O O 01 m - C O CD (D r- r` n CD (D I-- r O v c U W O^ O N O to O N O co O w cc >J O (D (D M (D O UC 00 M C W r- 00 m O O OD 0) 0) O to CD to CD I- h (D to to I, LL co Of 0 O�p W U L J m a+ to CD V. O N 'a LL C J q M r M N O - CO Q # U N L11 } 0 L a LL O LL v U U U U U U U U U U O Ott` 00 00 co W a0 00 O O co co d CL E cc rn OOO n fl� LL i V N N - - - r- O O O O O a II - E a co g n v' � y L cU A+ 0 ao m /�� n J U LL 11 p H U � W L 0 O 0 m (L z J Z Line I Q =2.29 Size=8 x 8 (Cir) Nv =0.009 Len=22.5 JLC= 1.00 1 /Outfall Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 67.00 6 67.53 68.45 J 0.30 7.70 0.54 N/A Upstrm 67.42 6 67.95 68.87 0.30 7.70 0.54 0.91 Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 1.867 Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 1.867 Time of conc. (min) = 0.93 Critical depth (in) = 8 Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 69.00 ' Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 0.00 Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 0.17 Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 2.38 -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = MM Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to offsite = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Line 2 Q=2.12 Size=8 x 0 (Cir) Nv =0.009 Len=62.6 JLC= 1.00 2/Downstream line= 1 Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 67.42 8 68.87 69.44 0.35 6.07 0.00 0.91 Upstrm 68.60 8 69.80 70.37/ 0.35 6.07 0.00 3.63 Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 1.884 Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 1.477 Time of conc. (min) = 0.58 Critical depth (in) = 8 Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 72.90 Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 0.53 Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 0.05 Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 2.39 -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = MH Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to 1 (cfs) = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Line 3 Q = 1.90 Size=8 x 0 (Cir) Nv= 0.009 Len= 52.4 JLC = 1.00 3 /Downstream line=2 Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 68.60 8 70.37 70.83 0.35 5.44 0.00 3.63 Upstrm 69.65 8 70.99 71.45 0.35 5.44 0.00 2.18 Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 2.003 Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 1.186 Time of conc. (min) = 0.29 Critical depth (in) = 8 Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 72.50 Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 0.67 Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 0.01 Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 2.47 -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = NIIH Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to 2 (cfs) = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Line 4 Q= 1.89 Size= 8 x 0 (Cir) Nv=0.009 Len=36.4 JLC = 1.00 4 /Downstream line= 3 Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 69.65 8 71.45 71.91 0.35 5.42 0.00 2.18 Upstrm 70.38 8 71.88 72.33- 0.35 5.41 0.00 2.95 Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 2.007 Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 1.174 Time of conc. (min) = 0.09 Critical depth (in) = 8 Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 74.00 ' Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 0.83 Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 0.00 Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 2.47 -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = NM Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to 3 (cfs) = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Line 5 Q = 1.73 Size=8 x 0 (Cir) Nv=0.009 Len = 12.4 JLC = 1.00 5 /Downstream line=4 Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 70.38 8 72.33 72.72 0.35 4.96 0.00 2.95 Upstrm 70.62 8 72.46 72.84' 0.35 4.96 0.00 3.71 Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 1.931 Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 0.984 Time of conc. (min) = 0.02 Critical depth (in) = 7 Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 75.00 Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = '0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 1.17 - Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 0.23 Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 2.42 -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = MH Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to 4 (cfs) = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Line 6 Q= 1.50 Size=8 x 0 (Cir) Nv=0.009 Len= 4.0 JLC= 1.00 6/Downstream line= 5 Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 70.62 8 72.84 73.12 0.35 4.30 0.00 3.71 Upstrm 70.70 8 72.87 73.15 0.35 4.30 0.00 3.63 Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 2.000 Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 0.739 Time of conc. (min) = 0.00 Critical depth (in) = 7 Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 75.00 Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 1.50 Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 1.50 Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 2.47 -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = MH Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to 5 (cfs) = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Line 7 Q =0.17 Size=6 x 0 (Cir) Nv=0.009 Len= 18.9 JLC = 1.00 7 /Downstream line=2 Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 68.60 6 70.37 70.38 0.20 0.87 0.00 3.80 Upstrm 69.50 6 70.38 70.39 - 0.20 0.87 0.00 2.90 Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 4.764 Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 0.044 Time of conc. (min) = 0.28 Critical depth (in) = 3 Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 72.90 Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 0.38 - Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 0.01 Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 1.77 -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = MH Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to 2 (cfs) = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Line 8 Q =0.16 Size=6 x 0 (Cir) Nv=0.009 Len =33.2 JLC = 1.00 8/Downstream line= 7 Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 69.50 6 70.39 70.40 0.20 0.82 0.00 2.90 Upstrm 69.80 6 70.40 70.41 0.20 0.81 0.00 1.00 Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 0.903 Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 0.039 Time of conc. (min) = 0.09 Critical depth (in) = 2 - Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 71.30 Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 0.10 Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 0.06 Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 0.77 -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = MH Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to 7 (cfs) = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Line 9 Q =0.10 Size=6 x 0 (Cir) Nv= 0.009 Len= 16.4 JLC = 1.00 9/Downstream line= 8 Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover - Dnstrm 69.80 6 70.41 70.42 0.20 0.51 0.00 1.00 Upstrm 71.30 2 71.46 71.51 0.05 1.84 0.47 1.00 - Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 9.130 Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 6.675 Time of conc. (min) = 0.00 Critical depth (in) = 2 Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 72.80 Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 0.00 Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 0.10 Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 2.45 -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = MH Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to 8 (cfs) = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Line 10 Q=0.16 Size=6 x 0 (Cir) Nv=0.009 Len = 6.8 JLC = 1.00 10/Downstream line=4 Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 70.38 6 72.33 72.34 0.20 0.82 0.00 3.12 Upstrm 70.51 6 72.34 72.35 0.20 0.81 0.00 0.89 Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 1.923 Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 0.039 Time of conc. (min) = 0.00 Critical depth (in) = 2 Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 71.90 Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 1.33 Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 0.16 Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 1.12 -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = MH Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to 4 (cfs) = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- N �C OOO�p c (� n > >�O ` OD C C C m _ moo/ °��OJ " `6 Gc�b'i� aft � � b ai co co co� L a o C c nC c�o _ .. M �tMD J(n y � \ } C C V 1n0� N V 0coN I � > >Yco C M O J N _ I O s R 1 1 n 1 c��C rnr�co c CV _ I > >Y o C C to EaCmN NRD0Jfn LO O 1 A+ W � ` O O N 04 O N co L " C a »�Go �R `o4) 3 as U) o 0 0 0 0 L > ci w O m ClA W v♦ C14 CD CD Cl) O U) CV 00 T 0 W::)0 CO 10 t6 > >:E vV o m c LO to (D C> -E U') > E 00 a c d! J CA O O err U') 0 CV co I- C,co CO Ci cli 4) 0 > > co O r 6 CL C N cq D 0 to 0 to to Co LM -E-E Cv ai CL .. E C) C, CD C, C) C) E Lei ci ui C=; &6 C; > O 00 t co LU C CU q°o° ao Cn� C. OGo O ~ mac c0 U*) co�� ' CD c00 N > >.- . C C rJ• O _ O ao �OJ CD I of co 0w (D rV cli c c co u') n — d C ra N i r-- 00 !A V cc / \ I1' _ 4 O 1 � I �Nd'•� 00 to N O�j�-E to C C14 C c w O t—— N C NR 0-1 A I l 5 LO N LM IL 4 I O ti L � i O O O O O O a°o n t; c'oo vI 06-007 - Rock-Lined Channel: Pipe + 10' Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description Project File p:\05-016 calvo\hydro\06-007_a.fm2 Worksheet 06-007- DW Chnl - End PCC Curb Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Water Elevation Input Data Channel Slope 0.033000 ft/ft Elevation range: 66.67 ft to 67.89 ft. Station (ft) Elevation (ft) Start Station End Station Roughness 0.00 67.89 0.00 0.01 0.130 0.01 67.39 0.01 16.00 0.150 16.00 67.07 16.00 16.51 0.130 16.50 67.07 16.51 19.01 0.150 16.51 66.67 19.00 66.67 19.01 67.57 Discharge 2.29 cfs Results Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.149 Water Surface Elevation 67.34 ft Flow Area 3.62 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 17.51 ft Top Width 16.45 ft Height 0.67 ft Critical Depth 66.97 ft Critical Slope 0.634273 ft/ft Velocity 0.63 ft/s Velocity Head 0.01 ft Specific Energy 67.35 ft Froude Number 0.24 Flow is subcritical. 10/27/06 CBAlnc FlowMaster v5.07 03:18:17 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Rock-Lined Channel: Pipe + 10' Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Project File p:\05-016 calvo\hydro\06-007_a.fm2 Worksheet 06-007— DW Chnl - End PCC Curb Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Water Elevation Section Data Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.149 Channel Slope 0.033000 ft/ft Water Surface Elevation 67.34 ft Discharge 2.29 cfs 67.8 67.6 V 67. C 0 M > _. W 67.2 67.0 66.8 66.6 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 Station (ft) 10127/06 C&AInc FlowMaster v5.07 03:17:57 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 06-007 - Driveway Channel - Rock-Lined Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description _. Project File p:\05-016 calvo\hydro\06-007_a.fm2 Worksheet 06-007 - DW Chnl - Pipe Outlet Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Water Elevation Input Data Channel Slope 0.033000 ft/ft Elevation range: 67.00 ft to 68.20 ft. Station (ft) Elevation (ft) Start Station End Station Roughness 16.00 68.20 16.00 16.51 0.130 16.49 68.20 16.51 19.00 0.150 16.50 67.70 19.00 19.50 0.130 16.51 67.00 19.00 67.00 19.01 68.20 19.50 68.20 Discharge 2.29 cfs Results - Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.142 Water Surface Elevation 67.79 ft Flow Area 1.96 ft2 - Wetted Perimeter 4.06 ft Top Width 2.51 ft Height 0.79 ft Critical Depth 67.30 ft Critical Slope 0.619442 ft/ft Velocity 1.17 ft/s Velocity Head 0.02 ft Specific Energy 67.81 ft Froude Number 0.23 Flow is subcritical. 10/27/06 C&AInc FlowMaster v5.07 03:18:53 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Rock-Lined Channel @ Pipe Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Project File pA05-016 calvo\hydro\06-007_a.fm2 Worksheet 06-007 — DW Chnl - Pipe Outlet Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Water Elevation Section Data Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.142 Channel Slope 0.033000 ft/ft Water Surface Elevation 67.79 ft Discharge 2.29 cfs 68.0 67.8 .2 67.6 m W 67.4 67.2 67.0 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0 18.5 19.0 19.5 Station (ft) 10127/06 C&Alnc FlowMaster v5.07 03:18:44 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 06-007 - S'ly SY Spillway - East R.1 Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description Project File p:\05-016 calvo\hydro\06-007_a.fm2 Worksheet 06-007 - S'ly SY Spillway-Gar East Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Water Elevation Input Data Channel Slope 0.005000 ft/ft Elevation range: 72.80 ft to 74.00 ft. Station (ft) Elevation (ft) Start Station End Station Roughness 0.00 74.00 0.00 0.01 0.016 0.01 73.10 0.01 8.40 0.035 2.00 72.80 6.00 72.80 8.40 74.00 Discharge 1.96 cfs Results Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.035 Water Surface Elevation 73.11 ft Flow Area 1.66 ftZ Wetted Perimeter 6.72 ft Top Width 6.61 ft Height 0.31 ft Critical Depth 72.98 ft Critical Slope 0.033564 ft/ft Velocity 1.18 ft/s Velocity Head 0.02 ft Specific Energy 73.13 ft Froude Number 0.42 Flow is subcritical. 10127/06 CBAInc FlowMaster v5.07 03:21:14 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 ~ SE Garage Corner — 73.9 FF Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Project File p:\05-016 calvo\hydro\06-007_a.fm2 Worksheet 06-007— S'ly SY Spillway - Gar East Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Water Elevation Section Data Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.035 Channel Slope 0.005000 ft/ft Water Surface Elevation 73.11 ft Discharge 1.96 cfs 73.8 73.6 73.4 C 0 c� W 73.2 73.0 \'IN 72.8 72.6 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 Station (ft) 10127/06 C&AInc FlowMaster v5.07 03:21:08 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 06-007 — S'ly SY Spillway - West RA Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description Project File p:\05-016 calvo\hydro\06-007_a.fm2 Worksheet 06-007 — S'ly SY Spillway-Gar West Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Water Elevation Input Data Channel Slope 0.005000 ft/ft Elevation range: 73.30 ft to 74.50 ft. Station (ft) Elevation (ft) Start Station End Station Roughness 0.00 74.50 0.00 9.26 0.016 0.01 73.49 9.25 73.30 9.26 74.50 Discharge 1.96 cfs Results Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.016 Water Surface Elevation 73.52 ft Flow Area 1.19 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 9.50 ft Top Width 9.24 ft Height 0.22 ft - Critical Depth 73.51 ft Critical Slope 0.007994 ft/ft Velocity 1.65 ft/s Velocity Head 0.04 ft Specific Energy 73.57 ft Froude Number 0.81 Flow is subcritical. 10/27/06 C&Alnc FlowMaster v5.07 03:22:09 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 SW Garage Corner - 73.6 FF Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Project File p:105-016 calvo\hydro\06-007_a.fm2 Worksheet 06-007— S'ly SY Spillway-Gar West Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Water Elevation Section Data Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.016 Channel Slope 0.005000 ft/ft Water Surface Elevation 73.52 ft Discharge 1.96 cfs 74.4 74.2 74.0 0 CU W 73.8 73.6 73.4 73.2 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 Station (ft) 10/27/06 C&AInc FlowMaster v5.07 03:22:03 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 1995-Y£6(094) XVd • 656I-694(094) -.gdasay 90026 VO'Pe45Iie0•ZOI al,s•-l(I-d and 9M, 91MVar -11111aa0 9uu.-B.2 seiaaa0/s OSaemS/saaamPu3 Isni0 �IIj `Sa"}Pi00S5V �P,MiiOD Ct - `V �,� z ^� z O ti O W H o CL o r \ I µi' o a W Q°.+yl 207 Q `� ♦� fl1 U Q� C, (n p < < WO Q Z WfOp'�NN ZWy°N O LO Qp ^ :3 mN� J IL � z yl3W•TW3 �y.��o� �I�ZCZ • rte) � QO Q < �ppN�N�N w<5 WOPW41°J V z z SOZp If10 a< po F ai W =m J p �Jpo�}v <wJmuZss E-F Q Lj m v Z Z z 2 z Z Kj W Z .a <> I Z k rc rc ° ��.{{ �'� W IZ1 O ^analnm z ��0 z7dX aka ZZ-ZGZ-4SZ NdV w I m Y oop Lo t2 A W 1 mJo c- II III zo oa 70° bl � z> In CNII F \I \ \ \ \ \ 1 11 I� °aQ h WWU' \ o r a�iia �3�1d'dGo CNI zo Za a ova -a Rio cc W 8 Y QY W \ 4 �II 1 asz qg * e a za LL.=�'J v '' 1 111 PIII 3 ��<w 251- c+cpop 0 F-? Ira$a �zW W J (, V - v � WFIW O .... I yWC p2 ��Vl�m OC9ZQVl'. ssL cr_ Ili v I'1 w "Rh 0 13 L-u(f) _a W n US W n rlf \ ------__ \ \ \ I U w•ik�m-'C.p,,.`._ aWJJJpJZW W W w W IJ J 22Z Z < m � I V J \ an (Z' to Qk- m,oNOno moo m Z - �- 1 I,.., �3-:i. - -- n ..... aQ.. mmcommm �o Zo�o �o <RM! (L y�a� �t � OCR O a 0. Jp IpIfU IV(U IpV VOQ• fU JW� 3= 4t n b _i i y IIJ W N NdYfn�lf0 m INf n '<'Oy�•� ' °� J 3 Jv NNII!(b'I- -��. N W m UW aII�JJ ` III a � ONOVImN o0o m r W a ati4 oeb or o mv�m a o Q� i aH� ��IjFJ 2„,�uc a 1J 2 i`�J �/�� IUIIM h QI: 0 Z Q 0 °�a4 Q zi�<�s U S 3 opppo_ppQo.l°nonpo0n0n 0 �To$f°o•f n 0°D n Q°J• Z �7< m�S3 2i 5i W a i 0.69 31 ZOJ O 7 , i I�m0000 s d °Z�ia W = N ¢ V O e W 11 ' R' mNNYV3N NON alz.�� aaapk� rG�p� jpq ^ z � 1' ) �W 1]G UoQ O.yN4nON.y nmm o a�Tiao 1WJNN� I<<K�� 2l^� ��?= FZp� y¢Q Z J {{fi�eyf A� p' Z�.3WJ�3 O W INMOIA�0 nmV• m NM1H< =�Nnfr Hok y N F bSmU - � Iq ❑ J�Q7d N O�NlOVIn NnW < U^ O � ib3,c v �il''. 4 LHS 2 p •-�p�q 2 �O ^�� B Jx� p Z 3 aK Q. °gyCID $o ° )- m W �V xk F co +=nm�'g Imo. -fig 1 1 $, �FFFF- e`- 17j ZUW Z W<y3� V tiyIOW II z Z i t LHS MM z la i~m4 a pam'al Ci N �C �h o ��" W X4.1 ZH�I u0ol N d W Zl� p S >Y QQO N �} �N a ip ��jM� 150 'N g �$ Z i � g It WIC) ~ N WQ 2N Z W MCE m� -7a ;1 � o9 ,N c'! I r z �Nm ¢ ,Ea S318VA xr y2a z Z W T-p c 2 F W2 aT,a yzj i _ ak I r� aS Iy IVW, y2 7��Wy�N'dY Ism l � a 1 N Wg I NNW>`� CS 0 i �o t LHS hod v ag$ I F zsmoJ (n e 0 e = wi� <W W3c�a Q O 0 X-< 1- Z p Cam^ W ;in + � ^ a °a^c�Nn^aylpm?b7 p J � I °z O N a...... - O O N 1-0 b II li j m K 0 3nN3Ab S3V483H N COAST GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS December 12, 2006 Jason Edwards 555 Hygeia Avenue, Suite B Encinitas CA 92024 ' JAN 11 200 Subject: GRADING PLAN REVIEW Edwards Residence 1133 Hermes Avenue APN 254-252-57 Leucadia, California Reference: PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Proposed Single Family Residence 1133 Hermes Leucadia, California Prepared by Coast Geotechnical Dated December 19, 2005 Dear Mr. Edwards: Our review of the proposed grading plan prepared by Conway and Associates,Sheet 4, suggests that they have, in general, included the applicable recommendations presented in our Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation. COMMENTS 1) The grading plan suggests that the proposed residence will be constructed on a cut/fill transitional pad. Site walls will be necessary for pad and driveway development. Additional recommendations will be necessary based on actual conditions encountered during grading. 779 ACADEMY DRIVE • SOLANA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92075 (858) 755-8622 • FAX (858) 755-9126 Coast Geotechnical December 12,2006 W.O. P-476105 — Page 2 2) Grading should be observed and tested by an engineering geologist and geotechnical engineer, or their representatives. LIMITATIONS The findings and opinions presented herein have been made in accordance with generally accepted professional principals in the fields of engineering geology and soils engineering. No warranty is provided. If you have any questions regarding this report,please contact our office. Reference to our Job No. P-476105 will help expedite a response to your inquiry. Respectfully submitted, COAST GEOTEC 2109, EXP, s-�4,t-08 J � � 2 782 Mark Burwell, C.E. GiwRWIED Vithaya Singhanet, EXP.12-31-07 ENGINEERING Geotechnical Engin � Engineering Geologi GEOLOGIST � 9TEOF C AL�� COAST GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS December 19, 2005 Ted Calvo 559 4" Street Encinitas, CA 92024 RE: PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION -- Proposed Single Family Residence 1133 Hermes Leucadia, California Dear Mr. Calvo: In response to your request and in accordance with our Proposal and Agreement dated October 5, 2005, we have performed a preliminary geotechnical investigation on the subject site for the proposed residence. The findings of the investigation,laboratory test results and recommendations for foundation design are presented in this report. _ From a geologic and soils engineering point of view,it is our opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed development, provided the recommendations in this report are implemented during the design and construction phases. If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact us at(858) 755-8622. This opportunity to be of service is appreciated. Respectfully submitte yz" COAST GEOTEC < R ESSt 4 2 s SING F t rr'a8�f� -2, 782 �+ � 6iv� c e��A &P.12-31-07 � Mark Burwell, C.E. Vithaya inghanet P. Engineering Geologis Geotechnical Enginee G �G gTFOF OAI�F�Q 779 ACADEMY DRIVE • SOI_ANA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92075 (858) 755-8622 • FAX (858) 755-9126 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Proposed Single Family Residence 1133 Hermes Leucadia, California Prepared For: Ted Calvo 559 4" Street Encinitas, CA 92024 December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Prepared By: COAST GEOTECHNICAL 779 Academy Drive Solana Beach, California 92075 TABLE OF CONTENTS VICINITY MAP 4 INTRODUCTION 5 SITE CONDITIONS 5 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 5 SITE INVESTIGATION 6 LABORATORY TESTING 6 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS 7 CONCLUSIONS 10 RECOMMENDATIONS 11 A. GENERAL 11 B. BUILDING PAD-REMOVALS/RECOMPACTION 11 C. TEMPORARY SLOPES/EXCAVATION CHARACTERISTICS 12 D. FOUNDATIONS 12 E. SLABS ON GRADE (INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR) 13 F. RETAINING WALLS 14 G. SETTLEMENT CHARACTERISTICS 14 H. SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS 14 I. SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS 15 J. PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT DESIGN 15 K. UTILITY TRENCH 16 L. SUBDRAIN 16 M. DRAINAGE 17 N. GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATIONS 17 O. PLAN REVIEW 17 LIMITATIONS 17 REFERENCES 20 APPENDICES APPENDIX A LABORATORY TEST RESULTS EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS TRANSITION LOT DETAILS, PLATE A CROSS SECTION A-A' SITE PLAN APPENDIX B REGIONAL FAULT MAP SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRUM APPENDIX C GRADING GUIDELINES Topo USA®5.0 VICINITY MAP i 00 co 0. Cn z� s \ \ \y JPBO�- to SUBJECT PROPERTY Leucadia = Ponto State Beach-- �y Z -F m S� JPSe�� CROCUS CT 2 O _ POP,BLUD to a m y� p�EUG �ACO�`N', G�Liy u � m � ru Scale 1 :6,400 Data use subject to license. ° m 2004 DeLorme.Topo USA®5 0. www.delorme.com v=5313 It Data Zoom 14-7 Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 5 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation on the subject property. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the nature and characteristics of the earth materials underlying _ the property,the engineering properties of the surficial deposits and their influence on the proposed residence. SITE CONDITIONS The subject property is located north of Leucadia Boulevard,along the east side of Hermes Avenue, in the Leucadia district, city of Encinitas. The subject property is a residential"flag"lot with access via a driveway from Hermes Avenue. The property includes a rectangular lot that descends to the west at a grade of about 7.0 percent. Relief on the site is approximately 7 vertical feet. The property is bounded on the north, south, east and west by developed residential lots. The lot appears to have been tilled in the past and is covered by sparse vegetation. Drainage is generally by sheet flow to the west. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Concept grading plans for development of the site were prepared by Conway and Associates. The project includes construction of a single family residence supported on conventional wall footings with slab on grade floors on a cut/fill transitional pad. Grading will include cuts up to 6.3 feet for property line walls and fills up to 1.5 feet for pad development. Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 -- Page 6 SITE INVESTIGATION One (1) exploratory boring was drilled to a depth of 20 feet with a hollow-stem drill rig. Two (2) — exploratory borings were drilled to a maximum depth of 10.5 feet with a portable auger drill. Earth materials encountered were visually classified and logged by our field engineering geologist. Standard penetration tests (SPT) were performed in the hollow-stem boring. Undisturbed, representative samples of earth materials were obtained at selected intervals. Samples were obtained by driving a thin walled steel sampler into the desired strata. The samples are retained in brass rings of 2.5 inches outside diameter and 1.0 inches in height. The central portion of the sample is retained in close fitting, waterproof containers and transported to our laboratory for testing and analysis. LABORATORY TESTING Classification The field classification was verified through laboratory examination,in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. The final classification is shown on the enclosed Exploratory Logs. Moisture/Density The field moisture content and dry unit weight were determined for each of the undisturbed soil samples. This information is useful in providing a gross picture of the soil consistency or variation among exploratory excavations. The dry unit weight was determined in pounds per cubic foot. The — field moisture content was determined as a percentage of the dry unit weight. Both are shown on the enclosed Laboratory Tests Results and Exploratory Logs. Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 -- Page 7 Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content were determined for selected samples of earth materials taken from the site. The laboratory standard tests were in accordance with ASTM D-1557-91. The results of the tests are presented in the Laboratory Test Results. Shear Test _. Shear tests were performed in a strain-control type direct shear machine. The rate of deformation was approximately 0.025 inches per minute. Each sample was sheared under varying confining loads in order to determine the Coulomb shear strength parameters,cohesion and angle of internal friction. Samples were tested in a saturated condition. The results are presented in the enclosed Laboratory Test Results. GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS The subject property is located in the Coastal Plains Physiographic Province of San Diego. The property is underlain at relatively shallow depths by Pleistocene terrace deposits. The terrace deposits are underlain at depth by Eocene-age sedimentary rocks which have commonly been designated as the Torrey Sandstone and Del Mar Formation on published geologic maps. The terrace deposits are covered by residual soil deposits. A brief description of the earth materials encountered on the site follows. Coast Geotechnical December 19, 2005 W.O. P-476105 -- Page 8 Artificial Fill No evidence of significant fill deposits was observed on the site. Minor disturbed soils from tilling/grading are present but do not appear to exceed 1.5 feet in depth. Soil Approximately 1.5 feet of brown slightly silty fine and medium-grained sand was encountered in the -- exploratory borings. The soil is generally dry, loose and subject to caving. The contact with the underlying terrace deposits is gradational. Terrace Deposits Underlying the surficial materials,poorly consolidated Pleistocene terrace deposits are present. The sediments are composed of tan to reddish brown slightly clayey,fine and medium-grained sand. The upper 1.0 to 2.0 feet of the terrace deposits is generally weathered but becomes increasingly dense with depth. Regionally, the Pleistocene sands are considered flat-lying and are underlain at depth by Eocene-age sedimentary rock units. Expansive Soil Based on our experience in the area and previous laboratory testing of selected samples, the soil deposits and Pleistocene sands reflect an expansion potential in the very low range. Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 9 Groundwater Seepage was encountered in Boring No. 1 at an approximate depth of 12 feet. It should be noted that near surface seepage problems can develop after completion of construction. These seepage problems most often result from drainage alterations, landscaping and over-irrigation. In the event that seepage or saturated ground does occur,it has been our experience that they are most effectively handled on an individual basis. Tectonic Setting The site is located within the seismically active southern California region which is generally characterized by northwest trending Quaternary-age fault zones. Several of these fault zones and fault segments are classified as active by the California Division of Mines and Geology (Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act). Based on a review of published geologic maps, no known faults transverse the site. The nearest active fault is the offshore Rose Canyon Fault Zone located approximately 3.0 miles west of the site. _ It should be noted that the Rose Canyon Fault is not a continuous,well-defined feature but rather a zone of right stepping en echelon faults. The complex series of faults has been referred to as the Offshore Zone of Deformation(Woodward-Clyde, 1979)and is not fully understood. Several studies — suggest that the Newport-Inglewood and the Rose Canyon faults are a continuous zone of en echelon faults (Treiman, 1984). Further studies along the complex offshore zone of faulting may indicate a potentially greater seismic risk than current data suggests. Other faults which could affect the site Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 10 include the Coronado Bank,Elsinore, San Jacinto and San Andreas Faults. The proximity of major faults to the site and site parameters are shown on the enclosed Seismic Design Parameters. CONCLUSIONS 1) The subject property is located in an area that is relatively free of potential geologic hazards such as landsliding, liquefaction and seismically induced subsidence. 2) The existing fill, soil and weathered terrace deposits are unsuitable for the support of structural footings or concrete flatwork, in their present condition. 3) The existing fill, soil and weathered terrace deposits should be removed and replaced as properly compacted fill. The cut portion of the lot would have to be overexcavated and replaced with compacted fill. The intent is to provide uniform compacted fill for the support — of footings and slabs on grade. 4) Our experience with this type of lot development and geotechnical conditions suggest that varying degrees of seepage can develop after construction. Post construction seepage and/or saturated ground conditions can adversely affect foundations and concrete flatwork. Therefore, special consideration should be provided for surface and possible subsurface drainage during the design and construction phases. Subdrain recommendations may be necessary based on final design plans and actual conditions encountered during remedial grading. Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 -- Page 11 RECOMMENDATIONS General The existing fill, soil and weathered terrace deposits in the western portion of the building pad should be removed and replaced as compacted fill, prior to placement of proposed fill. The cut portion of the pad should be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill to reduce potential differential settlement of foundations. Building Pad-Removals/Recompaction The existing fill, soil and weathered terrace deposits should be removed and replaced as properly compacted fill in the building footprint. Removal depths are anticipated to range up to 3.5 to 4.0 feet along the western portion. All fill should be keyed and benched into competent terrace deposits. The cut portion of the building pad should be overexcavated a minimum of 3.5 feet and recompacted. Removals should include the entire building pad extending a minimum of 5.0 feet beyond the building footprint. Removals should extend 10 lateral feet beyond the western building line. Most of the existing earth deposits are generally suitable for reuse,provided they are cleared of all vegetation, debris and thoroughly mixed. Prior to placement of fill, the base of the removal should be observed by a representative of this firm. Additional overexcavation and recommendations may be necessary at that time. The exposed bottom should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6.0 inches,moistened as required and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. Fill should be placed in 6.0 to 8.0 inch lifts, moistened to approximately 1.0 - 2.0 percent above optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum of Coast Geotechnical December 19, 2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 12 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. Fill,soil and weathered terrace deposits in areas of proposed concrete flatwork, exterior improvements and driveways should be removed and replaced as properly compacted fill. Imported fill, if necessary, should consist of non-expansive granular deposits approved by the geotechnical engineer. TemporM Slopes/Excavation Characteristics Temporary excavations above 3.5 feet should be trimmed to a gradient of 3/4:1 (horizontal to vertical) or less, depending upon conditions encountered during grading. The Pleistocene terrace deposits may contain hard concretion layers. However, based on our experience in the area, the sandstone is rippable with conventional heavy earth moving equipment in good working order. Foundations The following design parameters are based on footings founded into non-expansive approved compacted fill deposits or extended into competent terrace deposits. Footings for the proposed residence and garage should be a minimum of 12 inches wide and founded a minimum of 12 inches and 18 inches into compacted fill for single-story and two-story structures,respectively. A 12 inch by 12 inch grade beam should be placed across the garage opening. Footings should be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars,one along the top of the footing and one along the base. Footing recommendations provided herein are based upon underlying soil conditions and are not intended to be in lieu of the project structural engineer's design. Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 13 For design purposes,an allowable bearing value of 1700 pounds per square foot may be used for 12 inch deep footings and 2000 pounds per square foot may be used for 18 inch deep footings. The bearing value indicated above is for the total dead and frequently applied live loads. This value may be increased by 33 percent for short durations of loading, including the effects of wind and seismic forces. Resistance to lateral load may be provided by friction acting at the base of foundations and by passive earth pressure. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 may be used with dead-load forces. A passive earth pressure of 300 pounds per square foot, per foot of depth of fill or terrace deposits penetrated to a maximum of 2000 pounds per square foot may be used. Slabs on Grade (Interior and Exterior) Slabs on grade should be a minimum of 4.0 inches thick and reinforced in both directions with No. 3 bars placed 18 inches on center in both directions. The slab should be underlain by a minimum 2.0-inch sand blanket(S.E. greater than 30). Where moisture sensitive floors are used,a minimum 6.0-mil Visqueen or equivalent moisture barrier should be placed over the sand blanket and covered -- by an additional two inches of sand. Utility trenches underlying the slab may be backfilled with on- site materials,compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. Slabs including exterior concrete flatwork should be reinforced as indicated above and provided with saw cuts/expansion joints, as recommended by the project structural engineer. All slabs should be cast over dense compacted subgrades. Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 14 Retaining Walls Cantilever walls (yielding) retaining nonexpansive granular soils may be designed for an active- equivalent fluid pressure of 35 pounds per cubic foot. Restrained walls (nonyielding) should be designed for an"at-rest"equivalent fluid pressure of 58 pounds per cubic foot. Wall footings should be designed in accordance with the foundation design recommendations. Property line wall foundations may be designed for a bearing value of 2000 pounds per square foot, provided the footings are founded a minimum of 12 inches into competent terrace deposits. All retaining walls should be provided with an adequate backdrainage system (Miradrain 6000 or equivalent is suggested). The soil parameters assume a level granular backfill compacted to a minimum of 90 -' percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. Settlement Characteristics Estimated total and differential settlement over a horizontal distance of 30 feet is expected to be on the order of 3/4 inch and '/2 inch, respectively. It should also be noted that long term secondary settlement due to irrigation and loads imposed by structures is anticipated to be '/4 inch. Seismic Considerations Although the likelihood of ground rupture on the site is remote, the property will be exposed to moderate to high levels of ground motion resulting from the release of energy should an earthquake occur along the numerous known and unknown faults in the region. Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 15 The Rose Canyon Fault Zone located approximately 3.3 miles west of the site is the nearest known active fault and is considered the design earthquake for the site. A maximum probable event along the offshore segment of the Rose Canyon Fault is expected to produce a peak bedrock horizontal _ acceleration of 0.45g and a repeatable ground acceleration of 0.30g. Seismic Design Parameters (1997 Uniform Building Code) Soil Profile Type - SD Seismic Zone - 4 Seismic Source - Type B Near Source Factor(N j - 1.2 Near source Acceleration Factor (Na) - 1.0 Seismic Coefficients Ca= 0.45 C,= 0.78 Design Response Spectrum T,= 0.699 — To= 0.140 Nearest B-Type Fault= 3.0 miles Preliminary Pavement Design The following pavement design should be considered preliminary and may need to be revised based on actual conditions encountered during grading. 4.0 inches of asphaltic paving or 5.0 inches of concrete on — 6.0 inches of select base (Class 2) on 12 inches of compacted subgrade soils Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 — Page 16 Subgrade soils should be compacted to the thickness indicated in the structural section and left in a condition to receive base materials. Class 2 base materials should have a minimum R-value of 78 — and a minimum sand equivalent of 30. Subgrade soils and base materials should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of their laboratory maximum dry density. The pavement section should be protected from water sources. Migration of water into subgrade deposits and base materials could result in pavement failure. Utility Trench We recommend that all utilities be bedded in clean sand to at least one foot above the top of the conduit. The bedding should be flooded in place to fill all the voids around the conduit. Imported or on-site granular material compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction may be utilized for backfill above the bedding. The invert of subsurface utility excavations paralleling footings should be located above the zone of influence of these adjacent footings. This zone of influence is defined as the area below a 45 degree plane projected down from the nearest bottom edge of an adjacent footing. This can be accomplished by either deepening the footing, raising the invert elevation of the utility, or moving the utility or the footing away from one another. Subdrain Subdrain recommendations may be necessary based on final design plans and/or actual conditions encountered during grading. Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 -- Page 17 Drainage Specific drainage patterns should be designed by the project engineer. However, in general, pad water should be directed away from foundations. Roof water should be collected or transferred to hardscape. Pad water should not be allowed to pond. Vegetation adjacent to foundations should be avoided. If vegetation in these areas is desired, sealed planter boxes or drought resistant plants should be considered. Other alternatives may be available,however,the intent is to reduce moisture from migrating into foundation subsoils. Irrigation should be limited to that amount necessary to sustain plant life. All drainage systems should be inspected and cleaned annually, prior to winter rains. Geotechnical Observations Structural footing excavations should be observed by a representative of this firm, prior to the placement of steel and forms. All fill should be placed while a representative of the geotechnical engineer is present to observe and test. Plan Review A copy of the final plans should be submitted to this office for review prior to the initiation of construction. Additional recommendations may be necessary at that time. LIMITATIONS This report is presented with the provision that it is the responsibility of the owner or the owner's Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 18 representative to bring the information and recommendations given herein to the attention of the project's architects and/or engineers so that they may be incorporated into plans. If conditions encountered during construction appear to differ from those described in this report, _ our office should be notified so that we may consider whether modifications are needed. No responsibility for construction compliance with design concepts,specifications or recommendations given in this report is assumed unless on-site review is performed during the course of construction. The subsurface conditions, excavation characteristics and geologic structure described herein are based on individual exploratory excavations made on the subject property. The subsurface -' conditions, excavation characteristics and geologic structure discussed should in no way be construed to reflect any variations which may occur among the exploratory excavations. Please note that fluctuations in the level of groundwater may occur due to variations in rainfall, temperature and other factors not evident at the time measurements were made and reported herein. _ Coast Geotechnical assumes no responsibility for variations which may occur across the site. _ The conclusions and recommendations of this report apply as of the current date. In time,however, changes can occur on a property whether caused by acts of man or nature on this or adjoining properties. Additionally, changes in professional standards may be brought about by legislation or the expansion of knowledge. Consequently, the conclusions and recommendations of this report may be rendered wholly or partially invalid by events beyond our control. This report is therefore subject to review and should not be relied upon after the passage of two years. Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 19 The professional judgments presented herein are founded partly on our assessment of the technical data gathered, partly on our understanding of the proposed construction and partly on our general experience in the geotechnical field. However, in no respect do we guarantee the outcome of the project. This study has been provided solely for the benefit of the client and is in no way intended to benefit or extend any right or interest to any third party. This study is not to be used on other projects or extensions to this project except by agreement in writing with Coast Geotechnical. Coast Geotechnical December 19,2005 W.O. P-476105 Page 20 REFERENCES 1. Hays,Walter W., 1980,Procedures for Estimating Earthquake Ground Motions,Geological Survey Professional Paper 1114, 77 pages. _ 2. Petersen, Mark D. and others (DMG), Frankel, Arthur D. and others (USGS), 1996, Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State of California,California Division of Mines and Geology OFR 96-08, United States Geological Survey OFR 96-706. 3. Seed,H.B.,and Idriss,I.M., 1970,A Simplified Procedure for Evaluating Soil Liquefaction Potential: Earthquake Engineering Research Center. 4. Tan, S.S.,and Giffen,D.G., 1995,Landslide Hazards in the Northern Part of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, Plate 35D, Open-File Report 95-04, Map Scale 1:24,000. 5. Treiman, J.A., 1984, The Rose Canyon Fault Zone, A Review and Analysis, California Division of Mines and Geology. MAPS/AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS 1. Aerial Photograph, 1982, Foto-Map D-9, Scale 1"=2000'. _ 2. California Division of Mines and Geology, 1994, Fault Activity Map of California, Scale 1"=750,000'. 3. Geologic Map of the Encinitas and Rancho Santa Fe 7.5' Quadrangles, 1996, DMG Open File Report 96-02. 4. Conway and Associates, 2005, Concept Grading Plan, 1133 Hermes Avenue, Leucadia, California, Scale I"=20'. -- 5. U.S.G.S., 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Topographic Map, Encinitas, Digitized, Variable Scale. - - - - - - - APPENDIX A - LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TABLE I Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content (Laboratory Standard ASTM D-1557-91) Sample Max. Dry Optimum Location Density Moisture Content (pcf) B-1 @ 1 . 0 ' -3 . 0 ' 126 . 2 10 . 1 TABLE II Field Dry Density and Moisture Content Sample Field Dry Field Moisture Location Density Content (pcf) % B-1 @ 4 . 0 ' 109 . 5 8 . 9 B-1 @ 5 . 0 ' SPT 8 . 6 B-1 @ 8 . 0 ' 102 . 1 7 . 0 B-1 @ 9 . 0 ' SPT 6 . 6 B-1 @ 12 . 0 ' 104 . 7 18 . 0 B-1 @ 13 . 0 ' SPT 20 . 1 B-1 @ 16 . 0 ' SPT 19 . 2 B-1 @ 19 . 0 ' SPT 18 . 0 B-2 @ 1 . 5 ' 98 . 6 4 . 3 B-2 @ 5 . 0 ' Sample Disturbed 5 . 9 B-2 @ 8 . 0 ' Sample Disturbed 6 . 0 B-3 @ 2 . 0 ' 101 . 2 4 . 8 B-3 @ 5 . 0 ' Sample Disturbed 5 . 2 B-3 @ 8 . 0 ' Sample Disturbed 5 . 9 (Page 1 of 2 ) TABLE III Direct Shear Test Results Sample Location Angle of Apparent Cohesion Internal Friction (psf) - B-1 @ 1 . 0 ' -3 . 0 ' 30 Degrees 37 (Remolded) P-476105 (Page 2 of 2 ) f — LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING NO. I DRILL RIG: PORTABLE HOLLOW-STEM AUGER PROJECT N0. P-468075 BORING DIAMETER: 6.0" DATE DRILLED: 11-21-05 SURFACE ELEV.: 71' (Approximate) LOGGED BY: MB STANDARD PENETRATION TEST 140 POUND HAMMER, 30" DROP H w Z H w p v� ZO I w aw > — U < W� 2 O w w v a q14 3 .a a a Q o Q I c w GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION 71.00 0.00 SP SOIL(Qs):Brn.fine and medium-grained sand,slightly silty Dry, loose 69.0 2.00 " SP TERRACE DEPOSITS(Qt): Tan to Reddish bm.,fine and med.-graine sand 109.5 8.9 4.00 A. ICI SPT 8.6 31 Dense 65.00 6.00 -; 63.00.::.:::.:':. 102.1 7.0 8.00 Medium Dense SPT 6.6 20 61.00 10.00 — :-rrxu – ..:.-::-.:: _ 59.00::::::::::;: L, IT, SEEPAGE 10417 18.0 - - 1200. 6 SPT 20.1 1 50 -_ 57.00 Very Dense 10ou '`rarriS-i�a KwS6gdRtgt Ssoo�> s Dense, Clayey Sand 39 1600 III ; u S( Brn.-Grey Clavey Sand SCI 5 .00. is 00 '.. ,P,1' 18.0 50 (8 11) I VcrDcnsc . End of Boring (a) 20' sEU.;r t car• i COAST GEOTECHNICAL LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING NO. 2 DRILL RIG: PORTABLE BUCKET AUGER PROJECT NO. P-476105 BORING DIAMETER: 3.5" DATE DRILLED: 11-16-05 SURFACE ELEV.: 74.5' (Approximate) LOGGED BY: MB i I o -- H c z H o 0 3 > _ U U a �i W U Q x U GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION 74.50 -- - 0.00 SP SOIL(Qs): lam. fine and medium-grained sand,slightly silty 73.5 _ 1.00 Graditional Contact 98.6 4.3 "" SP TERRACE DEPOSITS(Qt): Tan to Reddish bm.,fine and med.-grained sand 72.50 2.00 71.5 3.00 :...:....:. Dry to slightly moist n 70.50 4.00 Cn O 69.5 'Distrube4 5.9 a) 5.00 -v 68.50 6.00 -.......... O z 67.50... .. f_ -- 7.00 .. II - I F-- - 66.50............ - — 1)IstitIhcd 0.0 j - 8.00 -' iii 65.50 9.00- 64.5 10.0 """"" End of Boring (q�, 10.5' SHETr I OF I COAST GEOTECHNICAL LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING NO. 3 DRILL RIG: PORTABLE BUCKET AUGER PROJECT NO. P-476105 BORING DIAMETER: 3.5" DATE DRILLED: 11-16-05 SURFACE ELEV.: 73' (Approximate) LOGGED BY: MB I i L 0 � z W U U U p J W U Q Q H a x a. U C4 O p Q O GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION 73.00 0.00 SP SOIL(Qs): Brn. fine and medium-grained sand,slightly silty dry,loose,Caving I � 72.00_ - Graditional Contact SP TERRACE DEPOSITS(Qt): Tan to Reddish bm.,fine and med.-grained sand 71.00:: 101.2 4.8 2.00 ::_::•..:;. � I 70.00--- - 3.00 Dry to slightly moist 69.0 ---------- 4.00 � I 68.00 Distrube 1 5.2 °.3 5.00 b 67.00 o 6.00 ........... U Z �, 66.00M - -7.00 .� 11 II www �uauM}}k �)ISUUbI, � u . RuroCh\ti\\l- 64.no�ii3ii�(i{� goo riiantitii+w _ 7SYM•ih11! A)h04A�ti\k I 5NYlIY'!Y! �., � l4KtlCltlS 0.00.S4MUSlt End of Boring (q� 10.5' SHF.Fr i OF i COAST GEOTECHNICAL TRANSITION LOT DETAILS CUT-FILL LOT EXISTING GROUND SURFACE MIN. - - -- - ----- -- ----------- ---------- - - --------- ---- -- -- -------- --- - - --- ----------- -- "64 IWN* ----------- - -- - ---------- --COMPACTED:- --------- ------ ------------- Iit-fit (OVER/ EXCAVATE -J� AND RECOMPACT --- - - --------- -- ---------- COMPETENT BEDROCK OR I MATERIAL EVALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT CUT LOT EXISTING GROUND SURFACE REMOVE NSUITABLE MATERIAL ----------- - - ------ - ------------- - ---- ------------------ - --- T, OMPAdf-E " (OVEREXC'AV'AT"E " AND RECOMPACT* COMPETENT BEDROCK �OR MATERIAL EVALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT *NOTE: Deeper or laterally more extensive overexcavation and recompaction may be recommended by the goottchnical consultant based on actual field conditions encountered' and locations of proposed Improvements PLATE A r—ru I U x � � QW I I as un o c coo I, i O L LU w w I C/) I i ' I I I - I � I t L m LO h 1� - Cd k ilk co oil ku - APPENDIX B CALIFORNIA FAULT MAP CALVO 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 •aL`� O iSl O 0 -100 -200 -300 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 *********************** U B C S E I S * * Version 1.03 * COMPUTATION OF 1997 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS JOB NUMBER: P-476105 DATE: 12-06-2005 JOB NAME: CALVO FAULT-DATA-FILE NAME: CDMGUBCR.DAT SITE COORDINATES: SITE LATITUDE: 33 .0696 SITE LONGITUDE: 117.3030 UBC SEISMIC ZONE: 0.4 UBC SOIL PROFILE TYPE: SD NEAREST TYPE A FAULT: NAME: ELSINORE-JULIAN DISTANCE: 43.6 km NEAREST TYPE B FAULT: NAME: ROSE CANYON DISTANCE: 4.8 km NEAREST TYPE C FAULT: NAME: DISTANCE: 99999.0 km SELECTED UBC SEISMIC COEFFICIENTS: Na: 1. 0 Nv: 1.2 Ca: 0 .45 —. Cv: 0.78 Ts: 0 .699 To: 0 . 140 SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS --------------------------- Page 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I APPROX. ISOURCE I MAX. I SLIP I FAULT ABBREVIATED IDISTANCEI TYPE I MAG. I RATE I TYPE FAULT NAME I (km) I (A,B,C) I (Mw) I (mm/yr) I (SS,DS,BT) ROSE CANYON SS==== I 4.8 B 69 iSO I NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) I 15.2 I B I 6.9 I 1.50 I SS CORONADO BANK I 29.4 I B I 7.4 I 3.00 I SS ELSINORE-JULIAN I 43.6 I A I 7.1 I 5.00 I SS ELSINORE-TEMECULA I 43.6 I B I 6.8 I 5.00 I SS PALOS VERDES I 63.7 I B I 7.1 I 3.00 I SS ELSINORE-GLEN IVY I 63.9 I B I 6.8 I 5.00 I SS EARTHQUAKE VALLEY I 68.4 I B I 6.5 I 2.00 I SS SAN JACINTO-ANZA I 80.4 A I 7.2 I 12.00 I SS SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY I 82.8 I B I 6.9 I 12.00 I SS NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (L.A.Basin) I 83.0 I B I 6.9 I 1.00 SS SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK I 85.7 B 6.8 4.00 I SS CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) I 86.4 I B I 6.7 I 1.00 I DS ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN 88.5 B 6.8 I 4.00 SS ELSINORE-WHITTIER I 92.6 I B I 6.8 2.50 SS SAN JACINTO - BORREGO 104.4 I B I 6.6 I 4.00 I SS SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO I 105.4 B 6.7 I 12.00 I SS SAN ANDREAS - Southern I 111.7 I A I 7.4 I 24.00 SS SAN JOSE 119.7 I B I 6.5 I 0.50 DS PINTO MOUNTAIN I 122.5 B 7.0 2.50 I SS CUCAMONGA I 123.9 I A I 7.0 I 5.00 I DS SIERRA MADRE (Central) I 124.0 I B I 7.0 I 3.00 DS SUPERSTITION MTN. (San Jacinto) I 129.0 I B I 6.6 I 5.00 I SS BURNT MTN. I 130.1 I B I 6.5 I 0.60 SS NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (West) 131.8 I B I 7.0 I 1.00 I DS CLEGHORN I 134.0 B 6.5 3.00 I SS EUREKA PEAK I 134.5 B I 6.5 I 0.60 I SS ELMORE RANCH I 135.1 I B I 6.6 I 1.00 SS SUPERSTITION HILLS (San Jacinto) 136.7 I B I 6.6 I 4.00 I SS ELSINORE-LAGUNA SALADA I 137.8 B 7.0 3.50 I SS RAYMOND I 138.5 B I 6.5 I 0.50 I DS NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East) 138.8 B 6.7 I 0.50 I DS CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT I 139.1 B 6.5 0.50 I DS SAN ANDREAS - 1857 Rupture 139.6 I A I 7.8 I 34.00 SS VERDUGO 142.2 I B 6.7 I 0.50 I DS HOLLYWOOD I 145.2 B 6.5 1.00 I DS LANDERS I 147.0 I B I 7.3 I 0.60 SS HELENDALE - S. LOCKHARDT 150.2 B 7.1 0.60 I SS BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE I 151.9 B 6.5 25.00 SS SANTA MONICA I 152.5 B 6.6 I 1.00 DS LENWOOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN SPRGS 155.8 B 7.3 I 0.60 SS MALIBU COAST 156.7 B 6.7 0.30 DS EMERSON So. - COPPER MTN. 159.5 B I 6.9 0.60 SS JOHNSON VALLEY (Northern) 160.1 B 6.7 0.60 I SS IMPERIAL 162.5 A 7.0 20.00 SS SIERRA MADRE (San Fernando) 163.1 B 6.7 I 2.00 DS --------------------------- SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS .,_ --------------------------- Page 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _ I APPROX. ISOURCE I MAX. I SLIP I FAULT ABBREVIATED IDISTANCEI TYPE I MAG. I RATE I TYPE FAULT NAME I (km) ( (A,B,C) l (Mw) I (mm/yr) I (SS,DS,BT) ANACAPA-DUME 164.8 B 7.3 3.00 DS SAN GABRIEL 166.0 B I 7.0 1.00 SS PISGAH-BULLION MTN.-MESQUITE LK 169.2 B 7.1 I 0.60 SS CALICO - HIDALGO 173.0 B 7.1 0.60 SS SANTA SUSANA 178.3 B 6.6 5.00 DS HOLSER 187.2 B 6.5 0.40 DS SIMI-SANTA ROSA 194.5 B 6.7 1.00 DS OAK RIDGE (Onshore) 195.4 B 6.9 4.00 DS GRAVEL HILLS - HARPER LAKE 203.6 B 6.9 0.60 SS - SAN CAYETANO 203.9 B 6.8 6.00 DS BLACKWATER 219.0 B 6.9 0.60 SS VENTURA - PITAS POINT 222.4 B 6.8 1.00 DS SANTA YNEZ (East) 223.7 B 7.0 2.00 SS SANTA CRUZ ISLAND 230.1 B 6.8 1.00 DS M.RIDGE-ARROYO PARIDA-SANTA ANA 233.2 B 6.7 0.40 DS RED MOUNTAIN 236.3 B 6.8 2.00 DS GARLOCK (West) 240.5 A 7.1 6.00 SS PLEITO THRUST 245.6 B 6.8 2.00 DS BIG PINE 251.2 B 6.7 0.80 SS GARLOCK (East) 255.3 A 7.3 7.00 SS SANTA ROSA ISLAND 264.8 B 6.9 1.00 DS WHITE WOLF 266.4 B 7.2 2.00 DS SANTA YNEZ (West) 268.1 B 6.9 2.00 SS So. SIERRA NEVADA 279.7 B 7.1 0.10 DS LITTLE LAKE 284.3 B 6.7 0.70 SS OWL LAKE 284.9 B 6.5 I 2.00 SS PANAMINT VALLEY 285.1 B 7.2 2.50 SS TANK CANYON 286.0 B 6.5 1.00 DS DEATH VALLEY (South) 293.6 B 6.9 4.00 SS LOS ALAMOS-W. BASELINE 310.1 B 6.8 0.70 DS LIONS HEAD 327.7 B 6.6 0.02 DS DEATH VALLEY (Graben) 335.2 B 6.9 4.00 DS SAN LUIS RANGE (S. Margin) 337.6 B 7.0 0.20 DS SAN JUAN 338.7 B 7.0 1.00 SS CASMALIA (Orcutt Frontal Fault) 345.9 B 6.5 0.25 DS OWENS VALLEY 352.8 B 7.6 1.50 SS LOS OSOS 367.7 B 6.8 0.50 DS HOSGRI 373.4 B 7.3 2.50 SS HUNTER MTN. - SALINE VALLEY 379.1 B 7.0 2.50 SS INDEPENDENCE 388.6 B 6.9 I 0.20 DS DEATH VALLEY (Northern) 388.7 A 7.2 5.00 SS RINCONADA 388.8 B 7.3 1.00 SS BIRCH CREEK 444.9 ( B 6.5 0.70 DS SAN ANDREAS (Creeping) 445.5 B 5.0 34.00 SS WHITE MOUNTAINS 449.5 B 7.1 1.00 SS DEEP SPRINGS 468.0 B 6.6 0.80 DS --------------------------- SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS Page 3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- I APPROX. ISOURCE I MAX. I SLIP I FAULT ABBREVIATED IDISTANCEI TYPE I MAG. I RATE I TYPE FAULT NAME I (km) I (A,B,C) I (Mw) I (mm/yr) I (SS,DS,BT) DEATH VALLEY (N. of Cucamongo) I 473.1 I A I 7.0 I 5.00 I SS ROUND VALLEY (E. of S.N.Mtns. ) I 480.0 B I 6.8 1.00 I DS FISH SLOUGH I 487.9 B I 6.6 I 0.20 I DS HILTON CREEK I 506.1 I B I 6.7 I 2.50 I DS ORTIGALITA I 530.0 I B I 6.9 I 1.00 I SS HARTLEY SPRINGS I 530.4 B I 6.6 I 0.50 I DS CALAVERAS (So.of Calaveras Res) I 535.5 I B I 6.2 I 15.00 I SS MONTEREY BAY - TULARCITOS I 537.9 I B I 7.1 I 0.50 I DS PALO COLORADO - SUR I 538.7 B I 7.0 I 3.00 I SS QUIEN SABE I 548.7 I B I 6.5 I 1.00 SS MONO LAKE I 566.4 I B I 6.6 I 2.50 I DS ZAYANTE-VERGELES 567.2 I B I 6.8 I 0.10 I SS SAN ANDREAS (1906) I 572.4 A I 7.9 I 24.00 SS SARGENT I 572.5 B I 6.8 I 3.00 I SS ROBINSON CREEK I 597.7 I B I 6.5 0.50 I DS SAN GREGORIO I 613.3 I A 7.3 I 5.00 I SS GREENVILLE 622.4 B I 6.9 I 2.00 SS MONTE VISTA - SHANNON I 622.6 B 6.5 I 0.40 I DS HAYWARD (SE Extension) I 622.8 B I 6.5 I 3.00 I SS ANTELOPE VALLEY I 638.0 B I 6.7 0.80 DS HAYWARD (Total Length) I 642.5 A I 7.1 I 9.00 SS _ CALAVERAS (No.of Calaveras Res) I 642.5 B I 6.8 I 6.00 SS GENOA I 663.3 I B 6.9 I 1.00 I DS CONCORD - GREEN VALLEY 690.4 I B I 6.9 6.00 SS RODGERS CREEK I 729.1 A I 7.0 I 9.00 I SS WEST NAPA I 730.0 B I 6.5 I 1.00 I SS POINT REYES I 747.9 I B 6.8 0.30 I DS HUNTING CREEK - BERRYESSA I 752.6 I B I 6.9 I 6.00 I SS MAACAMA (South) 791.9 B I 6.9 I 9.00 SS COLLAYOMI I 808.8 B 6.5 I 0.60 I SS -' BARTLETT SPRINGS ( 812.4 A 7.1 I 6.00 I SS MAACAMA (Central) I 833.5 I A I 7.1 9.00 I SS MAACAMA (North) 893.1 A I 7.1 9.00 I SS ROUND VALLEY (N. S.F.Bay) I 899.3 B I 6.8 I 6.00 SS BATTLE CREEK I 923.1 B I 6.5 I 0.50 DS LAKE MOUNTAIN I 957.8 I B 6.7 I 6.00 SS GARBERVILLE-BRICELAND I 974.9 B 6.9 I 9.00 SS MENDOCINO FAULT ZONE 1031.1 A 7.4 35.00 DS LITTLE SALMON (Onshore) 1037.9 A I 7.0 5.00 I DS MAD RIVER 1 1040.7 B I 7.1 0.70 I DS CASCADIA SUBDUCTION ZONE 1 1044.8 I A 8.3 35.00 I DS McKINLEYVILLE 1 1051.1 B 7.0 0.60 DS TRINIDAD 1052.7 B 7.3 I 2.50 DS FICKLE HILL 1053. 1 B 6.9 I 0.60 I DS TABLE BLUFF 1058.5 B 7.0 0.60 DS LITTLE SALMON (Offshore) 1071.8 B I 7.1 1.00 DS O LO w �0 o -0 � a M o � o _ O � O 'L N � a � a LO O I—I o w O - � O O LO O U') O LO O LO O In O LO N O f� LO N O f� U') N O N N N � � � � O O O O - (6) uoileaalaooy lealoads _ APPENDIX C GRADING GUIDELINES °- Grading should be performed to at least the minimum requirements of the governing agencies, Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code, the geotechnical report and the guidelines presented below. All of the guidelines may not apply to a specific site and additional recommendations may be necessary during the grading phase. Site Clearing Trees, dense vegetation, and other deleterious materials should be removed from the site. Non- organic debris or concrete may be placed in deeper fill areas under direction of the Soils engineer. Subdraingge 1. During grading, the Geologist and Soils Engineer should evaluate the necessity of placing additional drains. 2. All subdrainage systems should be observed by the Geologist and Soils Engineer during construction and prior to covering with compacted fill. 3. Consideration should be given to having subdrains located by the project surveyors. Outlets should be located and protected. Treatment of Existing Ground 1. All heavy vegetation,rubbish and other deleterious materials should be disposed of off site. 2. All surficial deposits including alluvium and colluvium should be removed unless otherwise indicated in the text of this report. Groundwater existing in the 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. 3. 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. Fill Placement 1. Most site soil and bedrock may be reused for compacted fill; however, some special processing or handling may be required (see report). Highly organic or contaminated soil should not be used for compacted fill. 2. Material used in the compacting process should be evenly spread, moisture conditioned, processed, and compacted in thin lifts not to exceed six inches in thickness to obtain a uniformly dense layer. The fill should be placed and compacted on a horizontal plane,unless otherwise found acceptable by the Soils Engineer. _ (1) 3. If the moisture content or relative density varies from that acceptable to the Soils engineer, the Contractor should rework the fill until it is in accordance with the following: 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. b) Each six inch layer should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum density in compliance with the testing method specified by the controlling governmental agency. In this case, the testing method is ASTM Test Designation D-1557-91. 4. Side-hill fills should have a minimum equipment-width key at their toe excavated through all surficial soil and into competent material(see report)and tilted back into the hill. As the fill is elevated, it should be benched through surficial deposits and into competent bedrock or other material deemed suitable by the Soils Engineer. 5. Rock fragments less than six 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 supervised by the Soils Engineer. 6. Rocks greater than six inches in diameter should be taken off site, or placed in accordance with the recommendations of the Soils Engineer in areas designated as suitable for rock disposal. 7. In clay soil large chunks or blocks are common; if in excess of six (6) inches minimum dimension then they are considered as oversized. Sheepsfoot compactors or other suitable methods should be used to break the up blocks. 8. The Contractor should be required to 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. 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 approximately every 4 feet vertically as the slope is built. 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. (2) In addition, 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. Finish grade testing of the slope should be performed after construction is complete.Each day the Contractor should receive a copy of the Soils Engineer's"Daily Field _._ Engineering Report" which would indicate the results of field density tests that day. 9. 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 1 equipment width wide (see report) and tipped at least 1 foot into - slope should be excavated into competent materials and observed by the Soils Engineer or his representative. C) The cut portion of the slope should be constructed 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. 10. Transition lots (cut and fill) and lots above stabilization fills should be capped with a four foot thick compacted fill blanket (or as indicated in the report). 11. Cut pads should be observed by the Geologist 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. 12. Exploratory backhoe or dozer trenches still remaining after site removal should be excavated and filled with compacted fill if they can be located. Grading Observation and Testing 1. Observation of the fill placement should be provided by the Soils Engineer during the progress of grading. 2. In general, density tests would be made at intervals not exceeding two feet of fill height or every 1,000 cubic yards of fill placed. This criteria will vary depending on soil conditions and the size of the fill. In any event, an adequate number of field density tests should be made to evaluate if the required compaction and moisture content is generally being obtained. 3. Density tests may be made on the surface material to receive fill, as required by the Soils Engineer. (3) 4. Cleanouts, processed ground to receive fill, key excavations, subdrains and rock disposal should be observed by the Soils Engineer prior to placing any fill. It will be the Contractor's responsibility to notify the Soils Engineer when such areas are ready for observation. 5. A Geologist should observe subdrain construction. 6. A Geologist should observe benching prior to and during placement of fill. Utility Trench Backfill Utility trench backfill should be placed to the following standards: 1. Ninety percent of the laboratory standard if native material is used as backfill. 2. As an alternative, clean sand may be utilized and flooded into place. No specific relative compaction would be required; however, observation, probing, and if deemed necessary, testing may be required. 3. Exterior trenches,paralleling a footing and extending below a 1:1 plane projected from the outside bottom edge of the footing, should be compacted to 90 percent of the laboratory standard. Sand backfill,unless it is similar to the inplace fill,should not be allowed in these trench backfill areas. Density testing along with probing should be accomplished to verify the desired results. (4) Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyors/General-Engineering Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive•Suite 102•Carlsbad,CA 92008•Telephone(760)753-1453•Fax(760)434-5831 DRAINAGE STUDY for CALVO RESIDENCE 1133 HERMES AVENUE LEUCADIA, CA -- 05-266 CDP APN 254-252-57 PARCEL 2, PARCEL MAP 19807 (TPM 03-049) GRADING PLAN xxxx-G E S S I Oy �1 jAN 25 2W6 O 1r l K• p ! �c► �p 4 `rte � CIO No.41022 CA d EXPIRES 3-31-2007 �lq C1VIti OF C AOF�Q� Prepared: January 21, 2006 Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyors/General-Engineering-HAZ Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive•Suite 102•Carlsbad,CA 92008•Telephone(760)753-1453•Fax(760)434-5831 INDEX INDEX Page 2 INTRODUCTION AND REPORT METHODOLOGY Page 3 TIME OF CONCENTRATION CALCAULATIONS & TRIBUTARY BASIN HYDROLOGY COMPUTATIONS Page 5 SITE HYDROLOGY MAP (1"=40', 17"x11") Page 13 PRIVATE ON-SITE STORM DRAIN HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS Page 15 Page 2 Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyors/General-Engineering-HAZ Contractors A13412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive•Suite 102•Carlsbad,CA 92008•Telephone(760)753-1453•Fax(760)434-5831 INTRODUCTION AND REPORT METHODOLOGY Introduction The purpose of this report is to present the results of the hydrology study and hydraulic design analysis prepared by Conway and Associates, Inc. for the proposed Calvo residence (proposed single-family home) in Encinitas. The project site is located at 1133 Hermes Avenue, Leucadia(Encinitas). This project was - submitted for coastal development review to the City of Encinitas Planning Department(permit application CDP 05-266). This report serves as the basis of design for the proposed on-site storm drain facilities shown on the project grading plans. The storm drain facilities analyzed in this report are based on a 100-year return rainfall event. - Proiect Site Description The subject site is located at 1133 Hermes Avenue in Leucadia(Encinitas), California(APN 254-252-57), approximately 0.3 miles north of Leucadia Boulevard, and fronts on the east side of Hermes Avenue. The subject site is a flag lot created as Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 19807 (TPM 03-049) and is currently vacant land. Previous to the parcel map subdivision, the subject site was developed with a small accessory living unit. Parcel 2 is a flag lot with an area of approximately 0.25 acres. The subject site fronts on the east side of Hermes Avenue and is bounded by residential development on its north, south and east sides. General Basin Descriptions and Flow Characteristics The subject site's tributary basin consists of an offsite sub-basin located East of the site (0.5 acres, C=0.8 — future condition, ranging from the East boundary line to Hygeia Avenue) and the onsite sub-basins of the project site (0.25 acres). The topography in and around the project site slopes westerly, generally perpendicular and away from Hygeia Avenue westerly towards the Hermes Avenue right of way. Currently, runoff from the tributary basin is - generally directed to Hermes Avenue via sheet flow over the subject basin. The proposed project will construct a private storm drain system to intercept the sheet flow runoff of the offsite sub-basin and convey it to Hermes Avenue shoulder via a 12-inch private storm drain. Hydrology Study Methodology A rational-method format was used to evaluate design runoff quantities for the tributary basins presented herein in accordance with the County of San Diego hydrology manual. The project site was evaluated by grouping site use into two categories: landscape areas (C=0.40) and paved areas (C=0.90), yielding an area- weighted average C value of approximately 0.8 for the drainage basin. - Page 3 Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyors/General-Engineering-HAZ Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive•Suite 102•Carlsbad,CA 92008•Telephone(760)753-1453•Fax(760)434-5831 A 100-year return event storm was used to compute the design runoff quantities for the various project drainage basins and are presented in hydrology computations section of this report. - Storm Water Quality Site Design Components Runoff from the proposed roof structure and surrounding building pad area will surface-flow over landscaped - areas prior to entering the private storm drain system. The exterior vehicle parking area locate south of the proposed garage will pave with a"grasscrete"-type paving system. Conclusion It is the professional opinion of Conway and Associates, Inc. that the proposed storm drain systems shown on the project's grading plans will convey the Q100 design flows anticipated by the calculations contained in this report. Page 4 Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyors/General-Engineering Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive•Suite 102•Carlsbad,CA 92008•Telephone(760)753-1453•Fax(760)434-5831 TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND TRIBUTARY BASIN HYDROLOGY COMPUTATIONS Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyors/General-Engineering Contractors AB412412 ° 2525 Pio Pico Drive•Suite 102-Carlbad,CA 92008•Telephone(760)753-1453•Fax(760)434-5831 DRAINAGE STUDY COMPUTATIONS Calvo Residence - 1133 Hermes Avenue, Leucadia City of Encinitas_ CDP_05.266--- nnnn_G_ --------------- DATE_ 1/20/06 ON-SITE TIME OF CONCENTRATION COMPUTATIONS: PRE-DEVELOPMENT Computations based on Figure 3-3, County of San Diego Hydrology Manual, June 2003 C L (ft) L(m) S m/m Tc (min) 5.0 Initial basin saturation I Basin A 0.75 255 77.7 7.0% 2.9 E'ly O/S area 0.5 E'ly channel 225 1.5 pipe travel 9.9 min C L(ft) L (m) S m/m Tc (min) 5.0 Initial basin saturation I Basins B&C 0.40 20 6.1 2.8% 2.2 rear yard 0.5 rear wall 230 1.5 pipe travel 9.2 min ON-SITE HYDROLOGY DATA 10 YEAR EVENT 100 YEAR EVENT tc (min) 10 min. tc (min) 10 min. P6 (10 YR Return) 1.7 in. P6 (100 YR Return) 2.5 in. I, intensity (in/hr) 2.9 in./hr. I, intensity (in/hr) 4.2 in./hr. P24 (10 YR Return) 2.9 in. P24 (100 YR Return) 4.3 in. P6/ P24 59% P6/ P24 58% _ POST-DEVELOPMENT CONDITION asin SUB AREA AREA "C" Q10 Q100 Subtotal BASIN (SF) (ACRES) FACTOR C"A (CFS) (CFS) (CFS) Al 22,420 0.51 0.80 0.41 1.18 1.73 1.73 off site ------------- 22,420 0.51 0.41 1.18 1.73 weighted C value: 0.80 61 1,519 0.03 0.40 0.01 0.04 0.06 yard 132 549 0.01 0.40 0.01 0.01 0.02 yard B3 1,425 0.03 0.90 0.03 0.08 0.12 0.20 house C1 455 0.01 0.40 0.00 0.01 0.02 yard -::C2 2,901 0.07 0.90 0.06 0.17 0.25 house C3 3,902 0.09 0.90 0.08 0.23 0.34 ; 0.61 drive ------------- 10,751 0.25 0.19 0.55 0.81 weighted C value: 0.78 2.55 Printed 1/24/2006 Page 1 of 1 05-016_Hydro-060120.xls Hydrology • 1 • • 1 • r _ ��s�r-- •.•,•�� s�i.�i..��i �sspsis//�ss�s��rs �u_rI/ri�r/��_��s�!--i-i�_r�rw�..�...._�'• iss�.s=_mw I o 4 CL FA cy cL 'iii all son MERAPA' WMAPFAMOMPAMIUmm WASI_�c�� WAgMIAWAISM M ski Crrrr"�iiii'i��iii'.�►�ir'ls i'i��iS?r5i�'�i�ir'ir'S'Q��i��'i®�i� � ' r�rr r=iirr=i i� 'wArarwiIr.i ��i MWWAMM rrwrrsrJ-. rrr�rr��s� �% i��iii.�� _ E c= cc FA ff.a r.MA,W,-Fib—Y s��= Fs'm ZW WMMWAM MAF AffA ��r.►��I III��5�� Mo i�JM.MCCI=.�.■'Qi'i�Cisli'�i'® WAS ■ AM /m M�■Mmmmm�ml r ��r �► r r Q xt4 J � �' `S g v •� L ^ M .S IM I :� w•i ,� � f -i� zoo •E g --- c.,._, bA �• w - •„ � „�� [yam F� F1i � � l o o Imperial County m ,s (ri 3 �. ,57.9 t l SJ C� r: .z m ' I } .1 ,5l•tt1 �, ' t �3 z_ � m ,.._. a) 7 �,. /\ `"`••tea l - M i p m. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ CD Imperial County Z� CP Tr ' ' - — - -----~--------- • a r � r • Cr"'rr�r • •r�s•+WMWAW�UNWII�iMMw it' iss"i•�a��r`�'iil�S i_ a�•�wr�/ww�a�a�r!wrallr�al�IF�Ilral��/MBI/!NAM Ms FAM- as 12 0 Mr no FINNII an ir��ii'di �i'i►ti�ir� �i�i iii��ir'�'i mimic mom IMIN LAMMMINIAFAME mom •• a �rrim.. + i .'r '"�""'�'•... M"7•�'�"5•�.","r�i HiS "SEE MOM MUSHRIESS �� w_w� wow was � �-=MWAS� �.csrs� —,cam" Ci === rri ti 7AiT,4 wir�"r�® rn AMWiMMJV.'=i r�i i®WuR�i=Ci :- sir .r.�.�� s�,.��:: �- —M _ . L?S•�i��i�"l�'�'r`GZ'�rr'i'Si�:ii'r^'i'i _ _ RESSEMPAFAWAMMM NErrrr�rsas/� rsaar� MErWArAirdrATAWMWMWA��W�l F,A SPIMMAMMM w MIME &iUMFURAWA'VAMI M ® MOM IBMq r r s .fir oil! 1,111 •ti t i '.__ Bog h e §; ^' °y to__`QQ V1 s3ma g €t5 -1 [ E N rd ED 0 r� o o Imperial County Er • N M N - er ,D£o9ll U 2 q. ,a ,94,91 l i r "O I O ni • r . .,. •fix t J , Z?" /.. ;,• � � .4 g Sty o � a. ,Sl•Lll & - .v, .n `; _ y, ,Sl•Lll , 9� \ z. _ •.sx, _ Oedi1 cD rn Alcm ._... � ._ 1. ....... JL cd o as 6 , a � ; LU 0 v o U z M o Imperial County ° , -• . t stt 30 9:0 o rn, - 1 - G. _ ic cb O _ � t � �s t a izl, z z : .: ••. so � eat' o LO - c ,oEoLa t ,oEoL�t_ IIo ° . Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyors/General-Engineering Contractors AB412412 2525 Pio Pico Drive•Suite 102•Carlsbad,CA 92008•Telephone(760)753-1453•Fax(760)434-5831 HYDROLOGY MAP (1"=40', 11"x17") - POST-DEVELOPMENT CONDITION I LEGEND L SUB—BASIN DESIGNATOR _ Al 3064 SUB—BASIN AREA (S.F.) .40 SUB—BASIN 'C' FACTOR 254-252-44 m BASIN BOUNDARY SUB—BASIN BOUNDAR • I too LLJ Ld z z Ld Q I C1 Q I 254-252-56 5,r 4 Q I U) I W I W I I ry II uj t • / 1 25. I • I I I IA�, 4 • 254-252-28 I VERT ERT I / I I 40' 20'10'0 40' 80' —SCAM: 1"=40' I H d olo Ma y , Y p - - - - - ost-D velop ent Condition • • 05.,t266 CDP Ca1vo Residence — — — — / / January 18,2006 REVISIONS APPROVED DATE I REFERENCES I DATE CITY OF ENCINITAS DRAVMNG N0, EX SSMH LE O ST (LWD)SEWER PLANS HYDROLOGY MAP FOR: ONG. NO. 147-9, SH CALVO RESIDENCE 58.35 FEET MSL Loc, 1FA1"1133 HERMES AVENUE_ LEUCADIA. CA Conway & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers/Surveyors/General-Engineering Contractors AB412412 — 2525 Pio Pico Drive•Suite 102•Carlsbad,CA 92008•Telephone(760)753-1453•Fax(760)434-5831 PRIVATE ON-SITE STORM DRAIN HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS EAST PROPERTY LINE INTERCEPTOR SWALE 2 PAGES STORM DRAIN SYSTEM GEOMETRY WORKSHEET 2 PAGES STORM DRAIN LAYOUT PLAT (1"=20', 11"x17") 1 PAGE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS 14 PAGES ON-GRADE OVERFLOW CONDITION (@ SW GARAGE CORNER) _2 PAGES HERMES AVENUE DRIVEWAY OUTLET SWALE 2 PAGES 05-016 Calvo Fly RW Channel Worksheet for Rectangular Channel Project Description Project File p:\05-016 calvo\hydro\05-016_a.fm2 Worksheet 05-016 Calvo RW trench Flow Element Rectangular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coefficient 0.016 Channel Slope 0.005000 ft/ft Bottom Width 1.00 ft Discharge 1.80 cfs Results Depth 0.64 ft Flow Area 0.64 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 2.28 ft Top Width 1.00 ft Critical Depth 0.47 ft - Critical Slope 0.011572 ft/ft Velocity 2.81 ft/s Velocity Head 0.12 ft - Specific Energy 0.76 ft Froude Number 0.62 Flow is subcritical. 01/24106 C&Alnc FlowMaster v5.07 11:54:45 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section Cross Section for Rectangular Channel Project Description Project File p:\05-016 calvo\hydro\05-016_a.fm2 Worksheet 05-016 Calvo RW trench Flow Element Rectangular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coefficient 0.016 Channel Slope 0.005000 ft/ft Depth 0.64 ft Bottom Width 1.00 ft Discharge 1.80 cfs 0.64 ft 1 V N 1.00 ft H 0.5 NTS 01/24/06 C&Alnc FlowMaster v5.07 11:55:13 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Co 00 O N LL r O } co °o O cl c rn r. Z W N Li R' Z W W N w o w w p r = J Z z U) d ~ J J J Y J J N o E w w J Z W c w E ° w w g > > U) c V = N N H CD LL.. Cn M O o 'O _ Ch N O O N O ^ w F CU C O) Co N O) CA CO Q O o U') p m Cl) �- O O Co N U CY R fA d Q U m U N m a� > F- W m i i Nlzl- of M 'IT 7 CO r r - n y C) U') M ti O O O r N r M � LO O CO O N LO T qT CO O Lo O Lo O LO d LO 'CT LO O LO tv O C pq;r ,:T r r M LO M M L6 d r r r U Z = = = - c c c c N N C N N N N N N N N N N N N CO) O O O O O r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o N C o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a -0 � G C 0 Ln LO LO LO LO LO O O O O f� cc a/ C N N N N N N O O O O M OO E i r r r r r r N N L N N M M Ov rn LO r LO f- N O O O O CO N (� r- O r r 0) Co 0 O O M r N N O N Q L r N N r O r co N M M Cl) J O r O r M r- O O M d' d N r tl0 N CO CO O O N r CA N 0 W O O) 1 00 1 00 CO CO O O c0 O CO CO CO CO CO m O r M I,- O O CO 14- CO � N CO O 00 O Q N CO CO O O N "t r r r N N r M 0') O 0 W O ti ti 00 00 00 co* O O m 0) CF) 00 CA CO O N _ Q O CO CO CO O O (O CO CO co (O O (O O O ti o (A O r M f� CA O 00 Lo N LO O O O N CO (O O O N ' r C) N O M O �r m W CD CO ti � 00 O w 00 O N i CA �1' 1 0) i O F� CO U _ U O CO CO O O O CO CO r- O !� CO I� 0 O Lo E d O CO CO V 00 O rt 00 CO O M O co O �+ ut - U r- O O tom- ti � G� A U 0 R N �_ N m f- C`) co co co O -- M Ln M co LC) co r r N V CO C O v NF- (� W " Ln QO LO T O O *k r r r N O m 0 0- CD 04 M 'IT L) O ti M r- O r Z C U C w+ c _ T NO r M LO CO f- 0 C 0 0 v L (o m o ) c6 0) LL \ / 7 ® \ \ 7 \ � ■ \ \ § / § � o � Q 0 o a LO R 6 \ d CD \ . . CO M / m 2 \ W / \ � 0 .2 m & / Y Q � k k d / w ± § ? 0 $ ^ < < D O \ c O 2 03 � co O CL O m2k �< < < q Q (D _ D _ w 2 # 7 / W O q u — k c e F 7 U c § m ? < m $ m 2 R #_= (D .2- < 2 2 w 2 ® CL CY Z Z 0 w i z 0 L 2 a 7 w w E E < d 0 o w _ m $ z LL § CO � x2 E0 / \ 2 G Q 2 L > u / h \ to 2 O O R / I ƒ / R u = m z e E U 0 2 I a - L m I m v 9 uj a) a - O O \ ƒ I � ƒ $ o . = \ k 3 E 0 ¥ % w § k a_ > > > w Cl) \ -, / _ 3 O % D 2 a < R < 2 2 a k � H M a A g r U 2 m '\ \ / / \ / / / / k / / � 0 ® / ƒ % G / f m & a I & n # e 0 --- (D L « U 2r An I W % b E / U \ / O U): O BOUNDARY DATA (STARTING AT NW CORNER AT HERMES AVE) { i r I N 74'S0' 19'E 119.00' 2 N 15'03' 53' W 60.06' 3 N 74'51' 44' E 106.09' 4 N 15'03' 20' W 60.01' 5 N 74'50' 19' E 225.07' 10'5'0 20' 40' /,. ~ 6 N 15'03' 53' W 20.00' NOTE: THE PROPERTY LINE AND ALL BACKBONE SITE AND UTILITY -- SCALE:!11`=20' ' CONTROL DATA SHALL BE REVIEWED AND SET BY A LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR. THE LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR SHALL REVIEW AND VERIFY ALL DATA ON THIS PLAN AS WELL AS EAST1NG FIELD CONNECTION POINTS. NOTE. ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS RE NOT PART OF THIS PLAN LLF I :r AND ARE SHOWN FOR GENERAL INFORMATION ONLY. CONTRACTOR IS j RESPONSIBLE TO INDEPENDENTLY LOCATE(FROM THE APPROVED L1 12'W x 12'D ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS) ALL ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS, i PCC SWALE'O ELEVATION% DIMENSIONS AND SETBACKS. Q w t-- TOP MIN AT .,;— ,;,.� TOP of watt Li I f_ - EXISTING W r I - ' % SINGLE FAMILY RESIDEN 1139 HERMES AVE r APN 254-252-56 12' 7 PAC HEADWALL OF 6' � CU OF PCC CURB ALONG SIDES 6' I---+,--` -C .---- `- -THK PCC,S1 SLAB--- - 4 .--- CCONCRETE ENCASE 12' PCC REINFORCED w/f 0 PIPE PRO„ECTS ABOVE Oi COVER IS LESS 7HAN 6' 0 N�66610 9 r+� y1y 1%. . B I 6 SD ' B �' E- RIM ig L- • IE 69 6 SD t I i i r 6' 774K PCC OUTLET APRON w/6'PCC CURB 6� •I �¢ j PER SDRSD G-1 ALONG i Y 1 I I i r Y 4� I4 7T Storm Drain Layout Plat Post-Development Condition 05-266 CDP Calvo Residence January 19,2006 REVISIONS APPROVED DATE REFERENCES DATE BENC CITY OF ENCINITAS DRAWING NO EX SSMH I.E. O STA HYDROLOGY MAP FOR: STORM DRAIN PLAN (LWO)SEWER PLANS DWG. NO. 147-8, SH CALVO RESIDENCE 58.35 FEET MSL LOG/ ""'""1133 HERMES AVENUE. LEUCADIA. CA _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ CN CD LL ui LL LO _____ Line 1 Q =2.54 Size= 12 x 0 (Cir) Nv=0.009 Len = 112.7 JLC= 1.00 1 / Outfall Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 66.20 6 66.68 67.41 0.37 6.87 1.00 N/A Upstrm 67.61 6 68.09 68.82 0.37 6.87 1.00 4.45 Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 1.251 Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 1.251 Time of conc. (min) = 0.60 Critical depth (in) = 8 Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 73.06 Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 0.00 Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 0.00 Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 5.75 -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = MH Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to offsite = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Line 2 Q= 1.93 Size= 12 x 0 (Cir) Nv=0.009 Len = 1.8 JLC = 1.00 2/Downstream line= 1 Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 67.61 12 68.82 68.91 0.79 2.46 0.00 4.45 Upstrm 67.63 12 68.82 68.92 0.79 2.46 0.00 4.43 Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 1.143 Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 0.141 Time of conc. (min) = 0.59 Critical depth (in) = 7 Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 73.06 - Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 0.19 Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 0.00 Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 5.50 -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = MH -4 Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to 1 (cfs) = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Line 3 Q = 1.93 Size= 12 x 0 (Cir) Nv=0.009 Len= 34.9 JLC =0.40 3 /Downstream line=2 Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 67.63 12 68.92 69.01 0.79 2.46 0.00 4.43 Upstrm 68.07 11 68.95 69.05 0.73 2.65 0.66 4.67 Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 1.260 Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 0.127 Time of conc. (min) = 0.40 Critical depth (in) = 7 Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 73.74 Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 0.00 Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 0.00 Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 5.78 -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = JIM Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to 2 (cfs) = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Line 4 Q= 1.93 Size= 12 x 0 (Cir) Nv=0.009 Len= 1.8 JLC =0.40 4/Downstream line= 3 Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 68.07 11 68.99 69.09 0.76 2.56 0.96 4.67 Upstrm 68.09 11 68.99 69.09 0.74 2.59 0.60 4.69 Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 1.143 Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 0.259 Time of conc. (min) = 0.39 Critical depth (in) = 7 Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 73.78 Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 0.00 Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 0.00 Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 5.50 -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = MH Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to 3 (cfs) = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Line 5 Q = 1.93 Size= 12 x 0 (Cir) Nv=0.009 Len= 9.2 JLC =0.40 5 /Downstream line=4 Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 68.09 11 69.03 69.13 0.77 2.52 0.97 4.69 - Upstrm 68.20 10 69.02 69.14 0.69 2.81 0.77 1.50 Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 1.200 w Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 0.106 Time of conc. (min) = 0.34 Critical depth (in) = 7 Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 70.70 Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 0.00 Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 0.00 - Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 5.63 -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = NM Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to 4 (cfs) = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ----------------------------------------=----------------------------------------------------------------------- Line 6 Q = 1.93 Size= 12 x 0 (Cir) Nv=0.009 Len=21.9 JLC = 1.00 6/Downstream line= 5 Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 68.20 10 69.07 69.18 0.72 2.67 0.93 1.50 Upstrm 68.48 7 69.07 69.32 0.48 4.01 0.98 1.66 Drainage area(ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 1.277 Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 0.645 Time of conc. (min) = 0.22 Critical depth (in) = 7 Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 71.14 Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 0.00 Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 0.00 Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 5.81 -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = MH - Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to 5 (cfs) = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Line 7 Q= 1.73 Size= 12 x 0 (Cir) Nv=0.009 Len=33.0 JLC = 1.00 7 /Downstream line= 6 Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 68.48 10 69.32 69.41 0.70 2.46 0.92 1.66 ._ Upstrm 69.14 7 69.70 69.93 0.45 3.84 0.99 3.48 Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 2.000 Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 1.558 Time of conc. (min) = 0.03 Critical depth (in) = 7 Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 73.62 Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 0.00 Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 0.00 Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 7.27 -------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = MH Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 - Q Bypassed to 6 (cfs) = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Line 8 Q= 1.00 Size= 12 x 0 (Cir) Nv=0.009 Len=2.0 JLC= 1.00 8 /Downstream line = 7 Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 69.14 9 69.93 69.96 0.66 1.51 0.89 3.48 Upstrm 69.18 9 69.93 69.97 0.63 1.59 0.87 5.62 Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 2.000 Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 0.212 Time of conc. (min) = 0.00 Critical depth (in) = 5 Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 75.80 Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 0.00 Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 1.00 Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 7.27 -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = MH Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to 7 (cfs) = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Line 9 Q=0.73 Size= 12 x 0 (Cir) Nv=0.009 Len= 4.0 JLC = 1.00 9/Downstream line=7 Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 69.14 9 69.93 69.95 0.66 1.10 0.89 3.48 Upstrm 69.22 8 69.92 69.94 0.59 1.24 0.92 3.43 Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 2.000 Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = -0.050 Time of conc. (min) = 0.01 Critical depth (in) = 4 _w Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 73.65 Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 0.00 Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 0.00 - Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 7.27 -------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = TVIH Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to 7 (cfs) = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Line 10 Q=0.73 Size= 12 x 0 (Cir) Nv=0.009 Len=2.0 JLC = 1.00 10/Downstream line=9 Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 69.22 9 69.94 69.97 0.61 1.20 0.85 3.43 Upstrm 69.26 8 69.94 69.97 0.57 1.28 0.93 5.54 Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 2.000 Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 0.032 Time of conc. (min) = 0.00 Critical depth (in) = 4 Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 75.80 Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 0.00 Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 0.73 Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 7.27 -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = NM Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to 9 (cfs) = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Line 11 Q=0.61 Size=6 x 0 (Cir) Nv=0.009 Len=35.4 JLC= 1.00 11 /Downstream line= 1 _ Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 68.11 6 68.82 68.97 0.20 3.11 0.00 4.45 -d Upstrm 69.30 5 69.70 69.90 0.17 3.65 0.41 1.50 Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 3.363 Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 2.640 Time of conc. (min) = 0.00 Critical depth (in) = 5 Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 71.30 Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 0.00 Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 0.61 -- Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 1.49 -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = MH Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to 1 (cfs) = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Line 12 Q=0.20 Size= 6 x 0 (Cir) Nv=0.009 Len =32.1 JLC= 1.00 12/Downstream line=6 Invert Depth HGL EGL Area Vel T-Wid Cover Dnstrm 68.98 4 69.32 69.35 0.14 1.41 0.41 1.66 Upstrm 70.00 3 70.23 70.31 0.09 2.31 0.50 1.50 Drainage area (ac) = 0.00 Slope of invert (%) = 3.176 _. Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.00 Slope energy grade line (%) = 2.989 Time of conc. (min) = 0.00 Critical depth (in) = 3 Inlet Time (min) = 0.00 Natural ground elev. (ft) = 72.00 Intensity @ 5 yr (in/hr) = 0.00 Upstream surcharge (ft) = 0.00 Cumulative C x A = 0.00 Additional Q (cfs) = 0.20 Q = CA x I (cfs) = 0.00 Full-flow capacity (cfs) = 1.44 -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Q Catchment (cfs) = 0.00 Inlet Type = MH Q Carryover (cfs) = 0.00 Gutter slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Captured (cfs) = 0.00 Cross slope (ft/ft) = 0.00 Q Bypassed to 6 (cfs) = 0.00 Width of Flow (ft) = 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- LO ti U) c 11 L.0 41) 11) C) C to r -j C) N min °O S C14 LO 04 04 d G1 D cn it C) C) Lo LO In C14 LM Lo CD C, C, E c; C6 cli c6 OD 0 co H ~ U o (6 o O LO O N O CL LO 00, _ ui c, J C t '1 1 W 1 �t 1 _.v 1 1 1 I LO N 04 r 1 i b O N Cl) lz I as o 0 0 Q L > co co r- � co ui O m '0 W __ ) C, to cli LO R C14 fn CM O Lo A�-2 as 0 CD co Go to H UA O U L.0 m O j° CC w 1 N r 1 I V t� O 1 � 1 � u, cc v N C N I I O LO 1 � I 1 1 l ` I N O I G. LM o ° O o ° O ti ccoo � 111 '^ H to U C) to C3 1 i a o 1 � � 1 � m i I � I 1 C 1 I o 1 i� _ LO N 1 1 O IL I ` L 4 u_ 3 CD CD c L o o O O O O 0 W � ti C COD co 05-016 Calvo - On-Grade Flow @ SW Garage Worksheet for Triangular Channel Project Description Project File p:\05-016 calvo\hydro\05-016_a.fm2 Worksheet 05-016 Calvo-On-Grade Flow @ SW Garage Flow Element Triangular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coefficient 0.016 Channel Slope 0.020000 ft/ft Left Side Slope 50.000000 H : V Right Side Slope 0.000000 H : V Discharge 2.00 cfs Results Depth 0.18 ft - Flow Area 0.78 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 9.00 ft Top Width 8.82 ft Critical Depth 0.21 ft Critical Slope 0.008136 ft/ft Velocity 2.57 ft/s Velocity Head 0.10 ft Specific Energy 0.28 ft Froude Number 1.52 Flow is supercritical. 01/24/06 C&Alnc FlowMaster v5.07 11:50:45 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Pvmt X-Sec @ SW Gar Corner Cross Section for Triangular Channel Project Description Project File p:\05-016 calvo\hydro\05-016_a.fm2 Worksheet 05-016 Calvo-On-Grade Flow @ SW Garage Flow Element Triangular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coefficient 0.016 Channel Slope 0.020000 ft/ft Depth 0.18 ft Left Side Slope 50.000000 H : V Right Side Slope 0.000000 H : V Discharge 2.00 cfs J=0.18 ft 1 V N H 2.0 NTS 01/24/06 C&Alnc FlowMaster v5.07 11:51:19 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 05-016 Calvo Outlet Apron -~ Worksheet for Rectangular Channel Project Description Project File p:\05-016 calvo\hydro\05-016_a.fm2 Worksheet 05-016 Calvo Outlet Apron Flow Element Rectangular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coefficient 0.016 Channel Slope 0.020000 ft/ft Bottom Width 2.00 ft Discharge 2.60 cfs Results Depth 0.28 ft Flow Area 0.55 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 2.55 ft Top Width 2.00 ft Critical Depth 0.37 ft Critical Slope 0.007909 ft/ft Velocity 4.72 ft/s Velocity Head 0.35 ft Specific Energy 0.62 ft Froude Number 1.59 Flow is supercritical. 01/24/06 C&Alnc FlowMaster v5.07 11:51:47 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section Cross Section for Rectangular Channel Project Description Project File p:\05-016 calvo\hydro\05-016_a.fm2 Worksheet 05-016 Calvo Outlet Apron Flow Element Rectangular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coefficient 0.016 Channel Slope 0.020000 ft/ft Depth 0.28 ft - Bottom Width 2.00 ft Discharge 2.60 cfs - 0.28 ft ._ 1 V N 2.00 ft H 1 NTS 01/24/06 C&AInc FlowMaster v5.07 11:52:12 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1