2009-10211 G/I 40' 40' 1 {-- 20'
I I i I
I I ( I I I I
I I i I
I I I I I i i t
I I I i I
- I L- - - -- -- -- -- -- - - � --
t ,
a \ 0 O T T O
'
IIvv A
° I TR NCH RAIN
I \ I P DEITA L "B"
1� — °
4
' o I
TRENCH OR a
PER DETAI A" °° I l °
i oo i
x2 I
rl
Cl
0
cc
I o
t_
7.75' 16'
L�
N6� HANO/CAPPED ACCESSIBLE 6� -'� HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE
STEEL GRATE ��� 6oT STEEL GRATE 6oT
3° PVC G' 3" PVC
1.54q 1.00/l./
F� F� Fv
10 5 0 10 20 30
DETAIL 'A " DETAIL "B „ QROfW. �
y�`� o W. , F SCALE: 1 = 10 0 Cn C
TRENCH DRAIN TRENCH DRAIN W at- No. 20934 Cn
NO SCALE NO SCALE D(R 9-30-07
'fF OF 40F��� Z
O
e
DRAINAGE AREA MAPS
r
w
C
REVISIONS APPROVED DATE REFERENCES DATE BENCH MARK SCALE SPECIAL DISTRICT DEF DEF RWH APPROVALS CITY OF ENCINITAS
ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT DRAWING N0. a v, t
Description: SAN DIEGO COUNTY BENCH MARK NO. PLANS PREPARED UNDER SUPERVISION OF RECOMMENDED APPROVED GRADING AND EROSION
CONTROL PLAN FOR: — `
N131-1933", STD. DISK cn
HORIZONTAL AS NOTED DATE BY: BY: LJ V
Location: SE COR ENC. DRY GOODS OLD S FACE —G W W
2.5 fT ABOVE GROUND R.C.E. NO.: 20934 763 2nd St. Z D-
DATE: DATE:
Record From: SAN DIEGO COUNTY VERTICAL AS NOTED RICHARD W, HARTLEY p C
Elev: 77,4.3' Datum: M.S.L. -
EXP. 9-30-07 R.C.E. R.C.E. WORK PROJECT NO. SHEET 2 OF 3 LLJ Q
ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Capital Improvement Projects
District Support Services
Field Operations
Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance
Subdivision Engineering
Traffic Engineering
August 2, 2011
Attn: SureTec
3033 Fifth Avenue
Suite 300
San Diego, California 92103
RE: Seacrest Village
211 Saxony Road
APN 265-023-02, 03, 39, 47
06-102 MUP/DR
Grading permit 10211-G
Final release of security
Permit 10211-G authorized earthwork, drainage, private improvements, and erosion
control, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has
approved the grading and finaled this project. Therefore, a full release in the remaining
security deposit is merited.
Performance Bond 4366911, (in the original amount of$352,520.00), reduced by
75% to $88,130.00, 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
Seacrest Village
Debra Geishart
File
Enc.
C - OfENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Encinitas Capital Improvement Projects
District Support Services
Field Operations
Sand Rep lenishment/Stormwater Compliance
Subdivision Engineering
Traffic Engineering
May 17, 2011
Attn: SureTec
3033 Fifth Avenue
Suite 300
San Diego, California 92103
RE: Seacrest Village
211 Saxony Road
APN 265-023-02, 03, 39, 47
06-102 MUP/DR
Grading permit 10211-G
Partial release of security
Permit 10211-G authorized earthwork, drainage, private improvements, and erosion
control, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has
approved rough grading. Therefore, a reduction in the security deposit is merited.
Performance Bond 4366911, in the amount of$352,520.00, may be reduced by 75%
to $88,130.00. The document original will be kept until such time it is fully exonerated.
The retention and a separate assignment guarantee completion of finish grading.
Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633-
2779 or in writing, attention this Department.
Sincerely,
Debra Geis art /aymbach
Engineering Technician nance Manager
Subdivision Engineering Financial Services
CC Jay Lembach,Finance Manager
Seacrest Village
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
THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT
WAS RECORDED ON JAN 13,2009
DOCUMENT NUMBER 2009-0016310
Recording Requested By: ) DAVID L. BUTLER.COUNTY RECORDER
SAN DIEGO COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE
City Engineer ) TIME: 4:38 PM
> )
When Recorded Mail to: )
City Clerk )
City of Encinitas )
505 South Vulcan Avenue )
Encinitas, CA 92024 ) SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER'S USE ONLY
PRIVATE STORM WATER TREATMENT
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
Assessor's Parcel No. 256-340-34 Project No. 06-102 CDP
W.O.No.: 943-G
THIS AGREEMENT for the periodic maintenance and repair of that certain private storm water
treatment facilities, the legal description and/or plat of which is set forth in Exhibits attached
hereto and made a part hereof, is entered into by SEACREST HOLDINGS CORPORATION
(hereinafter referred to as "Developer") for the benefit of future owners who will use the private
storm water treatment facilities (hereinafter referred to as " Owner(s)", which shall include the
Developer to the extent the Developer retains any ownership interest in any land covered by this
agreement.
WHEREAS, this Agreement is required as a condition of approval by the City of Encinitas
(herein referred to as "City") of a development project and pursuant to City of Encinitas
Municipal Code Section 24.16.060 and Section 24.29.040; and
WHEREAS, Developer is the owner of certain real property as described in Exhibit "A"
that will use and enjoy the benefit of said storm water treatment facilities(s), said real property
hereinafter referred to as the "property"; and
WHEREAS, Property use and enjoy the benefit of certain facilities for storm water
treatment and pollution control, said facilities described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made
a part hereof; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Developer that said private storm water treatment system
be maintained in a safe and usable condition by the owners; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Developer to establish a method for the periodic
maintenance and repair of said private storm water treatment facilities and for the apportionment
of the expense of such maintenance and repair among existing and future owners; and
WHEREAS, there exists a benefit to the public the private storm water facilities be
adequately maintained on a regular and periodic basis in compliance with Exhibit "C", the City
of Encinitas Municipal Code and other related City policies and requirements; and
WHEREAS, it is the intention of the Developer that this Agreement constitute a covenant
running with the land, binding upon each successive owner of all or any portion of the property.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION
AS FOLLOWS:
1. The property is benefited by this Agreement, and present and successive owners of all or
any portion of the property are expressly bound hereby for the benefit of the land.
2. The private storm water facilities shall be constructed by the Owner, its successors and
assigns, in accordance with the plans and specifications identified in the Plan.
3. The cost and expense of maintaining the private storm water treatment facilities shall be
paid by the owner of the heirs, assigns and successors in interest or each such owner.
4. In the event any of the herein described parcels of land are subdivided further, the
owners, heirs, assigns and successors in interest of each such newly created parcel shall
be liable under this Agreement for their then pro rata share of expenses and such pro rata
shares of expenses shall be computed to reflect such newly created parcels.
5. The repairs and maintenance to be performed under this Agreement shall be limited to the
following: reasonable improvements and maintenance work to adequately maintain said
private storm water treatment facilities in proper working order as determined by
applicable City policies and requirements and to permit access to said facilities. Repairs
and maintenance under this Agreement shall include, but are not limited to, repairing
access roadbeds, repairing and maintaining drainage structures, removing debris,
perpetually maintaining adequate groundcover and/or other erosion control measures
within the private property in order to prevent sedimentation, and other work reasonably
necessary and proper to repair and preserve the private storm water treatment facilities for
their intended purposes and to prevent sedimentation in stone water runoff. The private
storm water facilities shall be maintained regularly as necessary to keep the facilities in
proper working order, with a minimum maintenance frequency of twice annually. In the
event a maintenance schedule for the Storm Water BMP facilities (including sediment
removal) is outlined on the approved plans, the schedule will be followed.
6. If there is a covenant, agreement, or other obligation for the construction of
improvements imposed as a condition of the development, the obligation to repair and
maintain the private storm water treatment facilities as herein set forth shall commence
when improvements have been completed and approved by the City.
2
7. Any extraordinary repair required to correct damage to said storm water treatment
facilities that results from action taken or contracted for by the owners or their successors
in interest shall be paid for by the party taking action or party contracting for work which
caused the necessity for the extraordinary repair. The repair shall be such as to restore the
storm water treatment facilities to the condition existing prior to said damage.
8. Any liability of the owners for personal injury to an agent hereunder, or to any worker
employed to make repairs or provide maintenance under this Agreement, or to third
persons, as well as any liability of the owners for damage to the property of agent, or any
such worker, or of any third persons, as a result of or arising out of repairs and
maintenance under this Agreement, shall be borne, by the owners as they bear the costs
and expenses of such repairs and maintenance. Owners shall be responsible for and
maintain their own insurance, if any. By this Agreement, the Developer does not intend
to provide for the sharing of liability with respect to personal injury or property damage
other than that attributable to the repairs and maintenance undertaken under this
Agreement.
9. Owners shall jointly and severally defend and indemnify and hold harmless City, City's
engineer and its consultants and each of its officials, directors, officers, agents and
employees from and against all liability, claims, damages, losses, expenses, personal
injury and other costs, including costs of defense and attorney's fees, to the agent
hereunder or to any owner, any contractor, any subcontractor, any user of the storm water
treatment facilities, or to any other third persons arising out of or in any way related to the
use of, repair or maintenance of, or the failure to repair or maintain the private storm
water treatment facilities.
10. Nothing in the Agreement, the specifications or other contract documents or City's
approval of the plans and specifications or inspection of the work is intended to include a
review, inspection acknowledgement of a responsibility for any such matter, and City,
City's engineer and its consultants, and each of its officials, directors, officers, employees
and agents, shall have no responsibility or liability therefore.
11. The Owner, its successors and assigns, shall inspect the stormwater management/BMP
facility and submit to the City an inspection report annually. The purpose of the
inspection is to assure safe and proper functioning of the facilities. The inspection shall
cover the entire facilities, berms, outlet structure, pond areas, access roads, etc.
Deficiencies shall be noted in the inspection report.
12. Chapter 11.12 of the Encinitas Municipal Code outlines in detail the nuisance abatement
process and the City's authority to require correction of any property maintenance
violation that is deemed a public health or safety hazard or threat. The City is authorized
to collect sums as appropriate for recovery of the costs for abatement of any property
maintenance violation should the property owner fail to voluntarily comply.
3
13. The Owner, its successors and assigns, hereby grant permission to the City, its authorized
agents and employees, to enter upon the Property and to inspect the stormwater
management/BMP facilities upon reasonable notice whenever the City deems necessary.
The purpose of inspection is to follow-up on reported deficiencies and/or to respond to
citizen complaints. The City shall provide the Owner, its successors and assigns, copies
of the inspection findings and a directive to commence with the repairs if necessary
14. In the event the Owner, its successors and assigns, fails to maintain the stormwater
management/BMP facilities in good working condition acceptable to the City, the City ,
its agents, or its contractors, may enter upon the Property and take the steps necessary to
correct deficiencies identified in the inspection report and to charge the costs of such
repairs to the Owner, its successors and assigns. In the event the CITY pursuant to this
Agreement, performs work of any nature, or expends any funds in performance of said
work for labor, use of equipment, supplies, materials, and the like, the Owner, its
successors and assigns, shall reimburse the City upon demand, within thirty (30) days of
receipt thereof for all actual costs incurred by the CITY hereunder. If said funds are not
paid in a timely manner, City reserves the right to file an assessment lien on the real
property with the County Recorder of County of San Diego. It is expressly understood
and agreed that the City is under no obligation to maintain or repair said facilities, and in
no event shall this Agreement be construed to impose any such obligation on the City.
15. This Agreement imposes no liability of any kind whatsoever on the CITY and the Owner
agrees to hold the CITY harmless from any liability in the event the stormwater
management/BMP facilities fail to operate properly.
16. It is the purpose of the signatories hereto that this instrument be recorded to the end and
intent that the obligation hereby created shall be and constitute a covenant running with
the land and any subsequent purchaser of all or any portion thereof, by acceptance of
delivery of a deed and/or conveyance regardless of form, shall be deemed to have
consented to and become bound by these presents, including without limitation, the right
of any person entitled to enforce the terms of this Agreement to institute legal action as
provided in Paragraph 9 hereof, such remedy to be cumulative and in addition to other
remedies provided in this Agreement and to all other remedies at law or in equity.
17. The terms of this Agreement may be amended in writing upon majority approval of the
owners and consent of the City.
18. This agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. In the event that
any of the provisions of this Agreement are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any
court of competent jurisdiction, the validity, and enforceability of the remaining
provisions shall not be affected thereby.
4
19. If the Property constitutes a "Common Interest Development" as defined in California
Civil Code Section 1351(c) which will include membership in or ownership of an
"Association" as defined in California Civil Code Section 1351(a), anything in this
Agreement to the contrary notwithstanding, the following provisions shall apply at and
during such time as (i) the Property is encumbered by a "Declaration" (as defined in
California Civil Code Section 1351(h), and (ii) the Common Area of the property
(including the private storm water treatment facilities) is managed and controlled by an
Association:
(a) The Association, through its Board of Directors, shall repair and maintain the
private storm water treatment facilities and shall be deemed the "agent" as referred to in
Paragraph 7 above. The Association, which shall not be replaced except by amendment
to the Declaration, shall receive no compensation for performing such duties. The costs
of such maintenance and repair shall be assessed against each owner and his subdivision
interest in the Property pursuant to the Declaration. The assessments shall be deposited
in the Association's corporate account.
(b) The provisions in the Declaration which provide for assessment liens in favor of
the Association and enforcement thereof shall supersede Paragraph 8 of the Agreement in
its entirety. No individual owners shall have the right to alter, maintain or repair any of
the Common Area (as defined in California Civil Code Section 1351(b) in the Property
except as may be allowed by the Declaration.
(c) This Agreement shall not be interpreted in any manner, which reduces or limits
the Association's rights and duties pursuant to its Bylaws and Declaration.
20. It is understood and agreed that the covenants herein contained shall be binding on the
heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assignees of each of the owners.
21. The foregoing covenants shall run with the land and shall be deemed to be for the benefit
of the land of the owners and each and every person who shall at anytime own all or any
portion of the property referred to herein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement
This - day of ��,�, �4 i, 2008.
�
Developer:
;-, Ae
Seacrest Holdings Corporation: Pam Fends, CEO
Signature of DEVELOPER must be notarized. Attach the appropriate acknowledgement.
5
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE
CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of California r)Lt'County of an �D
On �C _VV, before me, UQr it /aca/
:�) (Here insert name and title of the officer)
personally appeared tit�i
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose name is/a+e subscribed to
the within instrument and acknowledged to me that ke/she/,they executed the same in 1ais/her/fir authorized
capacity(j4, and that by 11i&her/their signature(Kon the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of
which the person(4 acted, executed the instrument.
i
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph
is true and correct. mtl
=_t rfif2CA�;�F�V)Rc�lid9A{ �7gFLCg; `
} Cc mrnisslan# 1556451
TNESS my hand�nd offic, 1 seal. I 1 Notary Puh'ic-C a tarni.; Z
K`` D
San Diego County
(Notary Seal)
Signature of Notary Public
ADDITIONAL OPTIONAL INFORMATION
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THIS FORM
Any acknowledgment completed in California must contain verbiage exactly as
DESCRIPTION OF THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT appears above in the notary section or a separate acknowledgment form must be
properly completed and attached to that document. The only exception is if a
document is to be recorded outside of California. In such instances,any alternative
(Title or description of attached document) acknowledgment verbiage as may be printed on such a document so long as the
verbiage does not require the notary to do something that is illegal for a notary in
California (i.e. certifying the authorized capacity of the signer). Please check the
document carefully for proper notarial wording and attach this form if required.
(Title or description of attached document continued)
• State and County information must be the State and County where the document
Number of Pages Document Date signer(s)personally appeared before the notary public for acknowledgment.
• Date of notarization must be the date that the signer(s)personally appeared which
must also be the same date the acknowledgment is completed.
(Additional information) • The notary public must print his or her name as it appears within his or her
commission followed by a comma and then your title(notary public).
• Print the name(s) of document signer(s) who personally appear at the time of
notarization.
CAPACITY CLAIMED BY THE SIGNER • Indicate the correct singular or plural forms by crossing off incorrect forms(i.e.
he/she/*ey-is/ere)or circling the correct forms.Failure to correctly indicate this
❑ Individual(s) information may lead to rejection of document recording.
❑ Corporate Officer • The notary seal impression must be clear and photographically reproducible.
Impression must not cover text or lines. If seal impression smudges,re-seal if a
(Title) sufficient area permits,otherwise complete a different acknowledgment form.
El Parhter(s) • Signature of the notary public must match the signature on file with the office of
the county clerk.
❑ Attorney-in-Fact Additional information is not required but could help to ensure this
❑ Trustee(s) acknowledgment is not misused or attached to a different document.
1:1 Other Indicate title or type of attached document,number of pages and date.
Indicate the capacity claimed by the signer. If the claimed capacity is a
corporate officer,indicate the title(i.e.CEO,CFO,Secretary).
• Securely attach this document to the signed document
2008 Version CAPA 02.10.07 800-873-9865 www.NotaryClasses.com
Exhibit `A'
Legal Description of Real Property
APN 256-340-34
All that certain real property situated in the County of San Diego, State of California,
described as follows:
Lot 1 in that certificate of compliance recorded March 28, 2002 as file No. 2002-0260530
of Official Records.
h o
2 2 o I
E
z
\ w�S'Ns
f _ q .
W H�
U of
11 _
1.
�L
�•. ��, - J
Dal
U
m
r
I� W
I Z W� .
m I c�
Al
pp W
cz
U-4 �
OL w
o
I
l
aVOY ANOX b'S
EXHIBIT "C"
Maintenance Type Minimum Required Frequency
Storm Water Best Management Practices; Grass Inspected monthly, repaired as needed
swales,Detention basin
Drainage Facilities, inlets,Mechanical filters, Inspected monthly, replaced and repaired
storm drain outlets per manufactures' recommendations
Privately maintained,public storm drain Annually
system through property
Inspection and repair (as needed) of irrigation As needed
sprinkler system for common landscaped areas
R
U ron-�t
LS E
Intelisyn, Inc.
Geotechnical Investigation For
Seacrest Village Master Plan
211 and 345 Saxony Rd., Encinitas, California
Prepared for
Mr. Chris Page
January 18, 2006
--I
■
��;�� Helenschmidt Geotechnical, Inc.
MHelenschmidt Geotechnical, Inc.
January 18, 2006
105037
Mr.Chris Page/Intelisyn
c/o Seacrest Village
211 Saxony Road
Encinitas,CA 92024
SUBJECT: Geotechnical Investigation
RE: Seacrest Village Master Plan,
211 and 345 Saxony Road
Encinitas,California
Dear Mr. Page:
We are pleased to submit this report providing the findings, conclusions and
recommendations of our geotechnical investigation for the proposed Seacrest Village Master Plan
Special in Encinitas,California. Our work was performed in accordance with our proposal to you
dated October 18,2005.
The following technical report provides a summary of geotechnical conditions in the area of
proposed site improvements and conclusions and recommendations regarding geotechnical
hazards,grading and earthwork,foundation design criteria and pavement design.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide our geotechnical services on this project. If you
have any questions regarding our report,please call at your earliest convenience.
Sincerely,
Helenschmidt Geotecbnical,Inc.
Q�pFESS/044
Stanley Helenschmidt
Uj No.2064
Principal Engineer (,.3p •D
GE 2064(ex .6-30-06) {c
CP
,rs gTfQF CAUEO��
1'
Michael W.Hart -Al D GF�,, .
Consulting Engineering Geologist ,�� 1/• f
CEG 706(exp. 10-31-06)
5245 Avenida Encinas,Suite S Telephone 760-579-0333
Carlsbad,CA 92008 Fax 760-579-0230
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR
SEACREST VILLAGE MASTER PLAN
211 and 345 Saxony Road
Encinitas,California
Table of Contents
PEme
1.0 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Site Conditions and Proposed Construction...................................................... 1
1.2 Purpose and Scope of Work.............................................................................. 2
2.0 PHYSICAL AND GEOLOGIC SETTING.................................................................. 3
2.1 Terrain and Regional and Site Geology............................................................ 3
2.2 Seismic Setting.................................................................................................. 3
2.3 Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Conditions...................................... 5
2.4 Ground Water.................... ................................................................... 5
3.0 POTENTIAL GEOTECHNICAL HAZARDS............................................................ 5
3.1 Seismic Hazards................................................................................................ 5
3.1.1 Ground Rupture Hazards...................................................................... 5
3.1.2 Ground Shaking Hazards...................................................................... 6
3.l.3 Ground Failure Hazards....................................................................... 6
....................
3.2 Settlement Behavior ...................................................................... 6
3.3 Expansive Soils .............................................................. 6
3.4 Soluble Sulfates................................................................................................. 6
..............................
3.5 Slope Stability ..................................................................... 7
4.0 CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................................. 7
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................................... 7
5.1 Foundation Design............................................................................................. 8
5.2 Stab Design......................... ...............---........................................................ 8
...................
5.3 Retaining Wall Design .................................................................... 8
5.4 Earthwork Recommendations............................................................................ 8
.......................
5.4.1 Site Preparation ............................................................. 8
5.4.2 Excavation and Trenching.................................................................... 8
5.4.3 Removal and Recompaction................................................................. 8
5.4.3 Fill Placement and Compaction ........................................................... 9
5.5 Surface Drainage .............................................................................. 9
5.6 Seismic Design................................................................................................... 9
5.7 Pavement Design.............................................................................................. 10
5.8 Technical Review .................................................................... 10
5.9 Earthwork Construction Inspection and Testing.............................................. 10
6.0 INVESTIGATION LIMITATIONS......................................................................... 10
7.0 REFERENCES............................................................................................................ 11
i
. . ... ._-........_...
Table of Contents(cont.)
FIGURES
1 Site Location Map........................................................................................ Rear of Text
2 Retaining Wall Drainage Detail................................................................... Rear of Text
TABLES
1 Major Seismic Sources(Active Faults)in the Region................................................... 4
PLATES
I Boring Location Ma In Pocket
2 Geotechnical Engineering Cross Section A-A'................................................. In Pocket
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A-Field Investigation and Logs of Exploratory Borings
APPENDIX B-Laboratory Testing
ii
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
SEACREST MASTER PLAN
ENCINITAS,CALIFORNIA
1.0 INTRODUCTION
In accordance with your request and our proposal dated October 18, 2005, Helenschmidt
Geotechnical Inc. (HGI) has performed a geotechnical investigation for the proposed Seacrest
Master Plan located adjacent to the intersection of Saxony Lane and Saxony Road, in Encinitas,
California. The scope of our subsurface investigation was developed based upon the following
plans depicting the proposed site development:
Seacrest Village—Master Plan, Encinitas, California. Prepared by SGPA Architecture
dated 8-16-05
Topographic Map prepared by SAN-LO Aerial Surveys, Scale. 1 Inch — 30 Feet,
Contour Interval. 1 Foot,flown on 11-24-04
1.1 Site Conditions and Proposed Construction
The Seacrest Village facility is located at the intersection of Saxony Road and Saxony
Lane in Encinitas, California (Figure 1). The proposed construction incorporates three areas of
the Seacrest Village Development adjacent to Saxony Road and Saxony Lane (Plate 1). The
proposed construction consists of two story residential units, a synagogue and leisure center
complex,retaining walls,paved parking and a central plant facility.
Independent Living Homes- The Independent Living Home site is located
northeast of the intersection of Saxony Road and Saxony Lane. The site is
currently covered with paved parking,an outdoor basketball court and landscaping.
The proposed construction consists of two-story wood framed independent living
homes with associated paved parking.
Garden Court Addition- The Garden Court site is located southeast of the
intersection of Saxony Road and Saxony Lane. The site is currently occupied by
paved driveway and parking areas and an electrical equipment enclosure and a
building pad that was prepared during the original site grading that has
subsequently been used for temporary disposal of vegetation and soils materials
generated by landscaping activities. The site slopes gently toward the south.
Proposed construction consists of a two-story building housing a Fitness and
Aquatic Center (lower floor) and synagogue/multipurpose room (upper floor),
multiple attached two-story living units and associated paved parking. We
understand that the existing equipment room will be replaced with a central plant
at another area of the site.
Additional Im rovements — A loading dock and retaining walls are proposed
near the entrance of the site north of Seacrest Way. In addition, a central plant is
proposed to house electrical and mechanical equipment.
1
Mr. Page January 17,2006
105037
Building plans are not yet available. However, we assume that building loads will be
typical for this relatively light construction. We anticipate that the proposed building will be
founded on shallow continuous and isolated spread footings. Excavations associated with site
grading are anticipated to be approximately 5feet below existing site grades,but may be up to 13
feet in areas of undocumented fills (See Section 5.4.3). The proposed improvements are
indicated on Plate 1 (rear of text).
1.2 Purpose and Scope of Work
The purpose of our investigation was to develop geotechnical recommendations for site
grading and preliminary project design. Supplemental investigation may be warranted if the
proposed construction differs considerably from the assumptions of this report, if additional
design parameters are needed that were not apparent at the time of this report or if components of
the proposed Master Plan will be subject to OSHPD review. Our objectives during our
investigation were to adequately characterize the site geologic, seismic and geotechnical
conditions and to develop relevant recommendations regarding potential geotechnical hazards,
site grading, foundation type and minimum design criteria, and estimated settlement. The
following scope of work was performed:
Geotechnical Reconnaissance - A geotechnical site reconnaissance was
performed to observe current surficial conditions of the property and to evaluate
equipment access for drilling.
Review of Geologic and Seismic Data — We reviewed available published
geologic data, aerial photographs and maps pertinent to the site area (Section
7.0). We also evaluated site seismicity relevant to nearby faults with the
EQFAULT program to develop design horizontal ground accelerations.
Subsurface Investigation—We performed boring permit coordination(County of
San Diego) and utility markout coordination (Underground Service Alert) prior
to subsurface investigation. We excavated, logged and sampled eleven small
diameter exploratory borings to a maximum depth of 51.5 feet at the locations
indicated on Plate 1 to characterize site geologic and geotechnical conditions.
After completion of drilling, borings were backfilled with grout in accordance
with San Diego County Health Department Guidelines. An As-Built Boring
Report was filed with the San Diego County Health Department for borings that
exceeded 20 feet in depth.
Laboratory Testing - Representative samples from the field investigation were
tested for strength,chemical, maximum dry density and expansive properties.
Technical Analyses - Field and laboratory test data were analyzed and
conclusions and recommendations were developed for mitigation of geotechnical
constraints and formulation of foundation and drainage criteria.
Seismic Evaluation - Ground accelerations at the site were determined utilizing
the EQFAULT computer program and considering maximum probable seismic
events on nearby faults.
2
January 17,2006
Mr. Page 1 05037
Report Preparation — We have prepared this technical report that provides a
characterization of site geologic conditions, and recommended geotechnical
design criteria for the proposed construction.
2.0 PHYSICAL AND GEOLOGIC SETTING
The site of the proposed improvements is located adjacent to the intersection of Saxony
Lane and Saxony Road in Encinitas, California. Regional influences on the geotechnical
conditions of the proposed development include terrain, geology and seismicity. The following
sections present descriptions of each of these parameters.
2.1 Terrain and Regional and Site Geology
The area of the proposed master plan improvements consists of three individual areas with
gentle westerly sloping topography. The improvement areas are underlain by Pleistocene terrace
deposits which are subsequently underlain by Torrey Sandstone (Tan and Kennedy, 1996).
Artificial fill overlies the terrace deposits over most of the site and was encountered to a
maximum depth of approximately thirteen feet below existing site grades in our exploratory
borings. The lateral extent of the fill soils was not determined during our subsurface
investigation but has been extrapolated from boring information and our field observations. Fill
soils consist of silty sands likely derived from the onsite Pleistocene Terrace materials. Local
areas of deeper fill may be present that were not identified by our exploratory borings. The
following provides a description of each improvement area and depth of geologic units.
Independent Living Homes- The Independent Living Home site is located
northeast of the intersection of Saxony Road and Saxony Lane. The site is
currently covered with paved parking,an outdoor basketball court and landscaping.
Fill depths encountered in our borings ranged from 3 to 13 feet with the deepest
fills at the western boundary of the improvement area. Fill soils are underlain by
terrace deposits to a depth of 38 feet below existing grade. Terrace deposits are
underlain by Torrey Sandstone to the total depth explored of 50.25 feet.
Garden Court Addition- The Garden Court site is located southeast of the
intersection of Saxony Road and Saxony Lane. The site is currently occupied by
paved driveway and parking areas and an electrical equipment enclosure as well as
unimproved terrain. The site slopes gently toward the west. Fill depths
encountered in our borings ranged from 4 to 7 feet with the deepest fills at the
western boundary of the improvement area. Fill soils were placed under the
observation and testing of Fill soils are underlain by terrace deposits to a depth of
26.5 feet below existing grade. Terrace deposits are underlain by Torrey Sandstone
to the total depth explored of 50.5 feet.
Loading Dock, Retaining Walls and Central Plant — The area of proposed
improvements is located on the south side of the existing kitchen facility and
adjacent to turn around area in front of the Goldberg Healthcare Center. The fill
depth encountered in boring B-11 was 11 feet. Fill soils are underlain by terrace
deposits to at least 35.5 feet below existing grade. Terrace deposits are underlain
by Torrey Sandstone although the Torrey sandstone was not encountered in boring
B-11.
3
Mr. Page January 17, 2006
105037
2.2 Seismic Setting
Active faults are defined as those faults which exhibit conclusive evidence of movement
during the Holocene Epoch (during the last 11,000 years)according to criteria established by the
California Geological Survey (CGS), formerly known as the California Division of Mines and
Geology (CDMG). Based on our review of CGS maps (Tan and Kennedy(1996), no active or
potentially active faults are known to traverse the subject site. The closest mapped fault is
located in the coastal bluffs approximately one mile southwest of the site and apparently does not
displace the Late Pleistocene terrace deposits.
The closest active fault is the Rose Canyon fault located offshore approximately 3.7 miles
west of the site (Blake, 1998). The Rose Canyon fault has been active during the Holocene(last
11,000 years)and is the most significant fault to the site with respect to the potential for seismic
activity. Lindvall and Rockwell(1995) have described the Rose Canyon fault system in terms of
several segments that each has distinctive earthquake potential. The site lies nearest to the Del
Mar segment that extends offshore from La Jolla to Oceanside. The Mission Bay segment
extends from La Jolla to San Diego.
According to Lindvall and Rockwell (1995), the Mission Bay and Del Mar fault segments
are capable of generating M,y6.4 to M,,6.6 earthquakes, respectively, with an estimated
recurrence time of approximately 720 years for these events and 1800 years for an earthquake
event of M,r6.9 that would result from rupture of both segments concurrently. Such an event
could produce peak ground accelerations at the site on the order of 0.4g (Bozorgnia, Campbell,
and Niaze, 1999).
In addition to seismic shaking generated by Rose Canyon fault, the site will be affected by
seismic activity as a result of earthquakes on major active faults located elsewhere in southern
California. The nearest of these regional fault systems, the Coronado Bank fault, lies
approximately 18 miles to the west. Other active faults, the Elsinore, San Jacinto, and San
Andreas Faults lie approximately 28, 53, and 70 miles, respectively, to the east. Major seismic
events on any of the local or regional active faults could subject the site to moderate to severe
seismic shaking. A summary of the seismic characteristics of major earthquake sources is
included on Table I.
Table 1
Major Seismic Sources(Active Faults)in the Resion
Fault Zone Seismic Distance Maximum Peak Horizontal
Source Typel (miles) Moment Ground
Magnitude2 Acceleration(g)
Rose Canyon B 3.7 6.9 0.41
Newport-Inglewood (offshore) B 11.2 6.9 0.20
Coronado Banks B 18.3 7.4 0.17
Elsinore(Julian Segment) A 27.5 7.1 0.09
Elsinore(Temecula Segment) B 27.5 6.8 0.08
1 Uniform Building Code(1997).
2 Maximum Moment Earthquake as suggested in CDMG OFR-File Report 96-08(1996).
4
Mr.Page January 17, 2006
105037
2.3 Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Conditions
Subsurface exploration of the project site was performed on October 10'' and I 1 th 2005
and included drilling eleven 8-inch diameter borings to a maximum depth of approximately 50.5
feet below existing grade with a truck-mounted, hollow-stem auger drill rig. Borings were
continuously logged during drilling by examination of cuttings and drive samples. Drive samples
were obtained using a "Modified California Split Tube Sampler" and a Standard Penetrometer.
The samplers were driven by a 140-pound automatic hammer falling 30 inches. Representative
disturbed and undisturbed samples were obtained during drilling for laboratory testing.
Following drilling, each boring was completely backfilled with grout. Boring locations are
indicated on the Site Location and Geologic Map (Plate 1). Boring logs are provided in
Appendix A. Subsurface conditions are depicted on the Engineering Geologic Cross Sections
HGI 1-1' and HGI 2-2'.(Plate 2).
Subsurface conditions, as encountered in our exploratory borings, predominantly
consisted of dense sandy terrace soils mantled by 3 to 13 feet of sandy fill soils. Both fill and
natural soils encountered were generally damp to moist. In borings B-2 and B-10 the terrace soils
were underlain by dense Torrey Sandstone at depths of 38 and 26.5 feet below the existing
ground surface. Due to the sites past agricultural use, shallow fill soils may be present in other
areas as well. Documentation of engineered placement of fill soils for the Independent Living
Horne area (northeast of the intersection of Saxony Road and Saxony Lane) was not located
during our study. Accordingly, existing fill soils in the independent living area are considered
potentially compressible and will require removal.
Results of laboratory maximum dry density, pH, resistivity, direct shear, expansion,
chloride content and soluble sulfate tests performed on representative samples are presented in
Appendix B of this report. Moisture-density determinations are presented on the boring logs
(Appendix A).
2.4 Ground Water
Ground water was not encountered in our exploratory borings and is not anticipated to be
a factor in the development of the site. However, it should be noted that variations in
groundwater may result from subsurface stratification, rainfall, irrigation, and other factors that
may not have been evident at the time of our exploration
3.0 POTENTIAL GEOTECHNICAL HAZARDS
The following discussion provides a summary of pertinent geotechnical hazards at the
site.
3.1 Seismic Hazards
3.1.1 Ground Rupture Hazards - According to the State of California (CDMG 1993),
no active faults have been recognized on, or mapped through, the subject property.
Therefore, the potential for surface faulting and ground rupture on the property is
considered to be low.
5
Mr.Page January 17,2006
105037
3.1.2 Ground Shaking Hazards- Ground shaking associated with an earthquake on the
nearby active Rose Canyon fault zone is considered to be the most significant seismic
hazard in the site area. Based on a design earthquake event of Magnitude 6.9, strong
shaking with a duration of several tens of seconds can be expected. Other significant
effects associated with seismic activity are discussed below.
3.1.3 Ground Failure Hazards - Seismically-induced ground failure mechanisms
include: liquefaction and differential compaction. Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon in
which a saturated, cohesionless, near-surface soil layer loses strength during cyclic
loading, (such as typically generated by earthquakes). During the loss of strength, the
soil acquires a "mobility" sufficient to permit both horizontal and vertical movements.
Soils that are most susceptible to liquefaction are clean, loose, saturated, uniformly
graded, fine-grained sands that are generally located within 40 feet of the ground surface.
Due to the dense nature of the Pleistocene Terrace soils and the Torrey Sandstone
underlying the site and the absence of groundwater to the total depth explored of 51.5
feet,the potential for seismically induced liquefaction is considered nil.
Seismically induced differential compaction can occur due to reorientation of soil
particles during strong shaking and liquefaction settlement of saturated loose granular
soils. Due to the absence of a near surface ground water table and the density of the
underlying Terrace soils and Torrey Sandstone, the potential for seismically induced
differential compaction is considered very low.
3.2 Settlement Behavior
The existing fill soil's at the Independent Living Home area are considered compressible in
their present state and would likely be prone to excessive settlement under proposed building,
pavement and fill loads. We were unable to locate documentation of engineering observation
and testing of the fill soils encountered in this area. Other fill areas are present that were placed
under the observation and testing of G.A. Nicoll and Associates, Inc. and documented in their
report entitled Rough Grading Report, Seacrest Village, Encinitas, California dated October 15,
but have been disturbed by rodent burrows near the ground surface(upper 4 to 5 feet,estimated).
These near surface fill soils are not considered suitable for structural support and will require
remediation in areas of proposed improvements. Additional fill areas that were not apparent by
our subsurface investigation may be identified during site grading. Mitigative measures for fill
soils encountered in the proposed improvement areas are provided in Section 5.4.3 of this report.
3.3 Expansive Soils
The soils encountered in our subsurface investigation are generally sandy and typically
possess low expansion characteristics. The results of our laboratory testing of representative
samples of the encountered materials yielded an Expansion Index of less than 20,which indicates
a very low expansion potential for these materials. Therefore special design considerations to
resist expansive soil are not considered to be warranted.
3.4 Soluble Sulfates
A soluble sulfate test was performed on a representative soil sample to determine the
sulfate attack potential on exposed concrete. The test result indicated 0.007 percent water-
soluble sulfate. According to the 1997 Uniform Building Code(UBC), soil containing 0.00-0.10
6
Mr.Page January 17,2006
105037
percent water-soluble sulfate has a"Negligible" potential for sulfate attack on concrete. For the
proposed buildings and improvements, no mitigative measures are considered necessary to
protect concrete from sulfate attack.
3.5 Slope Stability
The proposed building areas are relatively flat and are flanked by existing fill slopes with
maximum heights of 15 feet. The proposed 2 to 1 horizontal to vertical fill slopes will have a
minimum static factor of safety of at least 1.5 at the proposed heights. Adequate foundation
setbacks should be maintained from slopes as discussed in the following recommendations.
Aerial photographic review and review of geologic publications did not indicate the presence of
ancient landsliding in this area. In addition, the Pleistocene Terrace soils are typically not
considered prone to bedding plane landsliding. However, because of their granular nature, the
slope soils may be subject to erosion.
4.0 CONCLUSIONS
The proposed Master Plan improvements are considered feasible from a geotechnical
standpoint provided that the recommendations of this report are incorporated into the design and
construction of the project. The most significant geotechnical conditions which will require
mitigation are related to potential settlement of compressible fill soils. This condition may be
effectively mitigated by removal and recompaction of compressible fill materials, where not
already removed by planned site grading and overexcavation and recompaction of the cut portion
of building pads to mitigate potential differential settlement effects. The compressible fill
materials encountered in our exploratory boring and the natural terrace soils appear to be suitable
for re-use as compacted fill.
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
The following foundation design recommendations are provided based on the proposed
development plans and geotechnical conditions disclosed by our investigation, testing and
analysis. In addition, if conditions are encountered which were not evident at the time of our
investigation, additional recommendations may be required. Please note that these
recommendations have been provided prior to development of detailed foundation and site
development plans. Supplemental geotechnical investigation, testing and analysis may be
necessary when detailed plans are available. We can provide a proposal for such investigation(if
warranted)following review of design plans.
5.1 Foundation Design
The proposed buildings may be founded on conventional isolated and continuous spread
footings founded at least 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade. Footings should extend into
properly compacted fill soils as determined by the geotechnical consultant. At this depth,
footings may be designed for an allowable bearing capacity of 3000 psf. Isolated spread footings
should be constructed with a minimum width of 2 feet, while continuous footings should be
designed with a width of at least 18 inches. Minimum footing reinforcement should consist of
two number five re-bars, top and bottom. Steel reinforcement should have a minimum concrete
cover of 3 inches. Recommendations for removal and recompaction of soils within the building
area are provided in a following section.
7
Mr. Page January 17, 2006
105037
Lateral resistance may be calculated by assuming a passive equivalent fluid weight of 350
pounds per cubic foot. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 between concrete and soil may also be
assumed. The above bearing and passive resistance values may be increased by one third for
short duration loadings such as wind or seismic loads.
The outside edge of all building footings located above slopes should be setback from the
top of slope a distance equal to one third the height of the slope,not less than 5 feet.
5.2 Slab Design
Floor slabs should be at least 4 inches in thickness and have minimum reinforcement
consisting of# 3 re-bars at 18 inches on center each way placed at mid-height in the slab. Slabs
should be underlain by a 2-inch layer of clean sand (sand equivalent(SE) of at least 30) over a
10-mil moisture barrier over a 2-inch layer of clean sand.
5.3 Retaining Wall Design
Exterior cantilever retaining walls with level backfill conditions and retaining on-site,non-
expansive,granular soils should be designed for an"active"equivalent fluid weight of 40 pounds
per cubic foot. Restrained walls with level backfill conditions and retaining on-site, non-
expansive granular soils may be designed for an"at rest" equivalent fluid pressure of 60 pounds
per cubic foot. If sloping backfill conditions are anticipated, this office should be notified for
appropriate recommendations. Retaining wall footings may be designed in accordance with the
bearing and lateral resistance criteria above for building foundations. Retaining walls should be
provided with appropriate drainage as shown in Figure 2.
5.4 Earthwork Recommendations
5.4.1 Site Preparation- Prior to construction of the proposed improvements, the site
should be cleared of surface and subsurface obstructions and debris, including
abandoned utilities,vegetation, roots and irrigation lines.Any generated debris should be
removed from the site. If allowed by local agencies, remnants of asphaltic concrete
pavement may be incorporated into fill areas provided fragments are not greater than 3
inches in maximum dimension and fragments are not located within one foot of finish
grade. Depressions or voids resulting from removal of buried obstructions should be
filled with properly compacted fill material as described below.
5.4.2 Excavation and Trenching- Excavation may be accomplished by conventional
heavy duty earth moving equipment in good working condition. The existing soils are
friable and may slough when exposed in vertical excavations. Trenches over 4 feet in
depth should be provided with shoring or laid back to a I to 1 (horizontal to vertical)side
slope inclination if workers are to enter excavations. Stockpiling of materials directly
.adjacent to utility trenches can promote sloughing or cave-ins and should be avoided.
Stockpiles should be located a minimum horizontal distance from the side of the trench
equal to the trench depth.
5.4.3 Removal and Recompaction- Undocumented fill soils were encountered to a
maximum depth of 13 feet in the proposed improvement areas for the Independent
Living Home area. Due to absence of engineering documentation of observation and
testing of these fill soils, these soils are considered potentially compressible and should
8
Mr. Page January 17, 2006
105037
be removed and recompacted as part of the proposed construction. In addition to
mitigate potential differential settlement effects in building areas along the east side of
the Independent Living Home area where fill depths of approximately 3 feet were
encountered building pads should be undercut to a depth of 5 feet below existing grade
or below proposed finish grade whichever is lower.
In the area of the proposed Garden Court site improvements and the loading dock,
retaining wall and central plant areas, soils disturbed by rodent activity are present
overlying engineered fill soils. Fill soils should be removed and recompacted to a depth
of 5 feet below finish grade or existing grade, whichever is lower, in proposed building
areas. The base of the removal areas should extend at least 5 feet beyond the building
footprints. In areas of proposed parking or other improvements,fills should be removed
to a depth of at least 3 feet below finish grade or existing grade whichever is lower. The
removal bottoms should be observed and approved by a representative of HGI prior to
fill placement. If areas of uncompacted or otherwise unsuitable soils are encountered
deeper removals may be recommended. It should be noted that deeper fill areas may be
encountered during site grading, if other areas of undocumented fill soils are
encountered,they should be removed and replaced with properly compacted fill
5.4.4 Fill Placement and Compaction- Fill material should be granular and non-
expansive in nature, free of debris and deleterious matter and have no particles larger
than 6 inches in maximum dimension. Imported fill (if needed) should be approved by
the geotechnical consultant prior to hauling.
Fill should be placed at near optimum moisture and in uniform horizontal lifts not
exceeding 6 to 8 inches in loose lift thickness. Fill should be compacted to at least 90
percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557. The upper 12
inches of fill in areas to receive pavement should be compacted to at least 95 percent of
maximum dry density. Utility trench backfill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 6 to
8 inches in loose lift thickness and compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry
density. Aggregate base in those areas to receive pavement should be compacted to at
least 95 percent of maximum dry density. Due to the granular nature of the on-site soils,
compaction should most easily be achieved with vibratory equipment.
5.5 Surface Drainage
We recommend that all surface drainage be permanently diverted away from the planned
structures at a minimum 2 percent grade into an appropriate catch basin/storm drain system.
5.6 Seismic Design
A peak ground acceleration of 0.41 g may be assumed for design purposes. Seismic
design should also assume a shaking duration of several tens of seconds. This site should be
considered to have Type Sc soil. The site is located within Seismic Zone No. 4 (1997 Uniform
Building Code). Based on the site soil type and location within Seismic Zone No. 4, the
following design values should be used: Seismic Coefficients Ca and Cv of 0.40 and 0.56,
respectively;and Na and Nv values of 1.2 and 1.5,respectively.
9
Mr.Page January 17,2006
105037
5.7 Pavement Design
Based on an assumed R-value of 40 and an assumed traffic index of 6.0 corresponding to
relatively light loading and service vehicle use, we recommend that new pavement sections
consist of a minimum of 3 inches thickness of asphaltic concrete underlain by a minimum of 7
inches of aggregate base compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of maximum dry density
(ASTM D1557) be considered for preliminary design. Actual pavement design should be
performed subsequent to R-value testing of subgrade soils during construction.
Asphaltic concrete should be placed and compacted in accordance with the requirements
of Section 39 of the Caltrans Standard Specifications; aggregate base should conform to the
provisions of Section 26(Caltrans)for 3/4-inch maximum Class 2 Aggregate Base,and should be
compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction based on ASTM D-1557.
5.8 Technical Review
Supplemental geotechnical design recommendations should be provided by our firm
based on specific design needs developed by the other project design professionals. This report,
and any supplemental recommendations, should be reviewed by the contractor as part of the bid
process. It is strongly recommended that no construction be started nor grading undertaken until
the final drawings, specifications, and calculations have been reviewed and approved in writing
by a representative of Helenschmidt Geotechnical,Inc.
5.9 Earthwork Construction Inspection and Testing
All excavations should be inspected by a representative of Helenschmidt Geotechnical,
Inc. prior to filling or pouring of concrete foundations. Any grading should also be inspected
and tested, as appropriate, to assure adequate stripping and compaction. Our office should be
contacted with a minimum of 48 hours advance notice of construction activities requiring
inspection and/or testing services.
6.0 INVESTIGATION LIMITATIONS
Our services consist of professional opinions and recommendations made in accordance
with generally accepted engineering geology and geotechnical engineering principles and
practices. No warranty, expressed or implied, or merchantability of fitness, is made or intended
in connection with our work, by the proposal for consulting or other services, or by the
furnishing of oral or written reports or findings.
Any recommendations and/or design criteria presented in this report are contingent upon
our firm being retained to review the final drawings and specifications,to be consulted when any
questions arise with regard to the recommendations contained herein, and to provide testing and
inspection services for earthwork and construction operations. Unanticipated soil and geologic
conditions are commonly encountered during construction which cannot be fully determined
from existing exposures or by limited subsurface investigation. Such conditions may require
additional expenditures during construction to obtain a properly constructed project. Some
contingency fund is recommended to accommodate these possible extra costs.
10
• Mr. Page January 17,2006
105037
This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or
of his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are
called to the attention of the project architect and engineer and incorporated into the plans.
Furthermore, it is also the responsibility of the owner, or of his representative, to ensure that the
contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field.
7.0 REFERENCES
Blake, T.F., 1998, A computer program for the estimation of Peak Horizontal acceleration from
3-D fault sources.
Boore, D.M., Joyner, W.B., and Fumal, T.E., 1997, "Equations for Estimating Horizontal
Response Spectra and Peak Acceleration from Western North American Earthquakes: A
Summary of Recent Work," Seismological Research Letters,Vol 68,No. 1, pp. 128-153.
Bozorgnia,Y., Campbell, K.W., and Niaze, M., 1999, Vertical ground motion: Characteristics,
relationship with horizontal component, and building code implications, Proceedings of the
SMIP99 seminar on utilization of strong motion data,September 15,Oakland,pp.23-49.
California Division of Mines and Geology, 1996, Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for
the State of California,DMG Open-File Report 96-08.
California Division of Mines and Geology, 1998, Maps of Known Active Fault Near-Source
Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada.
County of San Diego, 1975, Topographic Survey (OrthoTopo) sheets 322-1677 and 322-1683,
September 17, 18
County of San Diego Aerial Photographs; 1960,Flight T-2-SDC,photos 3-92,93,July 30;
1978,Flight 210-15B, photos 37, 38,December 13;and 1989,Flight WAC-89CA,photos 1-
209,211,April 4.
Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, 1982 Soil Mechanics, Naval
Facilities Design Manual DM-7.1, 1982, 348 p.
Department of Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, 1982, Foundations and Earth
Structures,Naval Facilities Design Manual DM-7.2,224 p.
Hart, E.W. and Bryant, W.A., 1997, Fault-rupture Hazard Zones in California, California
Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42,38 p.
G.A.Nicoll and Associates, Inc., 1987, Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for Seacrest
Village,Encinitas,California.
G.A.Nicoll and Associates, Inc., 1987, Rough Grading Report, Seacrest Village, Encinitas,
California.
International Conference of Building Officials, Whittier,CA, 1997 Uniform Building Code, 1997
Edition,,3 Volumes.
11
Mr.Page January 17,2006
105037
Tan, S.S., and Kennedy, M.P., 1996, Geologic Maps of the Northwestern Part of San Diego
County,California,P1.1, Calif. Div. Mines and Geology,DMG Open-File Report 96-02.
Youd, et.al., 2001, "Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 NCEER
and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils",
American Societe of Civil Engineers Journal of Geotechnical and GeoEnvironmental
Engineering, Vol. 127,No. 10,pp. 817-833.
12
N
0
x
V Leucadi vd
aC
a
0
Project
Site
Saxony lane
1May
Encinitas
Blvd.
Pacific
Ocean
Imo'Helenschmidt Geotechnical_ Inc.
Site Location Map
Seacrest Village Master Plan,
Encinitas,California
Project Number:105037 Date:January 2006
[hafted:JSH EnglGeo:SRHWA
Scale:Not To Scale Figure Number: 1
WATERPROOFING PER ARCHITECT
OR CIVIL ENGINEER
"X FINISH GRADE
3/4-INCH WASHED GRAVEL
1.0'MIN. 1.0 SURROUNDED BY MIRAFI
RETAINING WALL 140N FILTER FABRIC OR
70�
i,, APPROVED EQUIVALENT
ap �\
p v, 4-INCH DIAMETER
SCHEDULE 40 PVC OR SDR
p Q Q 23.5 PERFORATED PIPE
o OD d O (PERFORATIONS DOWN)TO
v
47 SUITABLE OUTLET
FINISH GRADE 'o
oa o D D
o a �
a
4
'I"2.0"Min.
Helenschmidt Geotechnical, Inc.
Retaining Wall Drainage Detail
Seacrest Village Master Plan,
Encinitas,California
Project Number:105037 Date:January 2006
Drafted:RSA Eng/Geo:SRH/RSA
Scale:Not To Scale Figure Number: 2
APPENDIX A
FIELD INVESTIGATION
Subsurface conditions at the site were explored by means of eleven 8-inch diameter auger borings
drilled to depths of 21.5, 50.3,6.4,21, 21.3, 20.6, 19.5, 7.4, 21.3, 50.4, and 35.5 feet using solid stem
auger equipment. The locations of the borings are shown on Figure 1. The geologist who logged the
borings directed the drilling and visually classified the soils in accordance with ASTM D-2487. We
obtained relatively undisturbed samples of the materials encountered at selected depths from borings.
These samples were obtained in brass rings that were 2.5 inches in outside diameter and 1 inch high;
the rings were inside a modified split-barrel California sampler(designated CM on the Boring Logs).
The blow counts to drive the samplers are an indication of the relative density of the soils. Blow
counts are indicated on the boring logs,and sample depths are shown on the logs.
Descriptive logs of the borings are presented in this appendix. These logs depict our interpretation of
the subsurface conditions at the dates and locations indicated, based on representative samples
collected at roughly 2 foot sample intervals. It is not warranted that they are representative of
subsurface conditions at other times and locations. The contacts on the logs represent the
approximate boundaries between earth materials and the transitions between these materials may be
gradual.
HELENSCHMIDT GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY DRILLING
Project t r Ian Boring No. gt
Location Saxony lane Encinitas California Project No. 105037
Drilling Contractor/Rig California Pacific DriuincB-61 Date of Drilling 11/10/05
Ground Surface Elev. --196.1 Feet Logged By ism Hole Diameter a nchc -
'Surface Conditions Grass Field
Weather •"---
a
Geoteehnicfl d C 'a �a s Comments
C o.o V : Description 9 g Ca a o
A
v
SM 0.0'-0.25'As halt
0.25'-13.0' Fill(AD.
2 Brown to dark brown, fine to medium
grained Silty Sand with minor amounts CM-1 118.6 9.2 44 CM too
of Clay. Medium dense to loose, damp
4 to wet.
_ CM-2 120.3 11.7 23 CM 100
6
CM-3 123.7 9.5 64 CM 90
8 Becoming red brown,dense.
CM-4 127.0 7.7 39 CM 100
10—
Becoming Light brown to yellow brown, CM-5 115.9 5.9 100+ CM 80
mottled (oxidized), very dense.
12
GRADATIONAL_ _ __ _ _ _ _
- -' - -ONTACT
14 SM 13 0'-20 0'•Terrace Deposits{Ot)
Dark red-brown to brown, medium
grained Silty Sand with minor amounts CM-6 121.7 12.1 16 CM 100
16 of Clay. Dry to moist, medium dense to
dense, pinhole porosity, some small
pebbles.
t8
cm-7 123.9 8.7 34 CM 100
20 Total Depth:20.0'
No groundwater encountered.
Backfilled with bentonite grout on
22 11/10/05
24
26
28
HELENSCHMIDT GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY DRILLING
Project Sescrest Master Plan
Boring No. R-2
Location Saxony Lane Encinitas California Project No. 105037
Drilling Contractor/Rig California Pacific Drillinv/8 61 Date of Drilling 1V11/05
Ground Surface Elev. --198.3 Feet Logged By !SH Hole Diameter Alndics
Surface Conditions Asphalt
Weather Warm end Sonny
i
V L
Geotechaical � a Comments
o m U Description d a c 3 a
SM 0.0'-0.25'Asphalt
015'-3.0' Fill(At)
2 Grey brown to orange brown, fine to
medium grained Silty Sand . Medium
dense,damp to moist.
4 SM 3 0'-38.0'-Terrace Deposits(ii
Dark red-brown,medium 118.9 11.0 100+ CM 100
Silty Sand . Dense to very d6 _ to moist.
126.5 9.3 71 CM 90
8
CM-3 123.8 9.3 46 CM 100
10
CM-4 123.9 10.0 27 CM 100
1z
14—
Becomes orange brown to grey brown. CM-5 117.8 13.8 25 CM 100
16
18
20 Dark orange brown, medium to coarse
grained Silty Sand with minor amounts CM-6 l22.5 13.0 100+ CM 90
of Clay. Dense to very dense.
22
24
CM-7 114.9 12.3 28 CM 100
26
28
HELENSCHMIDT GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY DRILLING
Project Gscrest Master Plan pate 11/11/45 Boring No. B-2
Geotechnieal ='
a.. a n a a°' 0\ Comments
a U '"
Description 9 C
G� V aU
SM Becomes loose to friable, darker in CM_g 124.2 10.4 100+ CM 90
color.
32
34
CM-9 110.3 11.1 100+ CM 100
36
38 - - ---- --- - - - - - - - -
SP 3&0'-50.25%Torrey Sand Stone(Tt)
Light yellow-brown to brown, fine to
medium grained Sand. Very Dense
40
-t101.0 9.5 100+ CM 60
42
44
Becomes micaceous. -11 93.2 8.0 100+ CM 60
46
48
CM-I 9 70 45
Refusal at 50.25'
No groundwater encountered.
52 BackfiHed with bentonite grout on
11/11/05
54
56
58
60
62—
HELENSCHMIDT GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY DRILLING
Project Seacrest Master Plan Boring No. 11-3
Location Saxony Lane Encinitas California Project No. 105037
Drilling Contractor/Rig California Pacific Drilling/ :fil Date of Drilling 11/10/05
Ground Surface Elev. -194.7 Feet Logged By JSH Hole Diameter x Inches -
Surface Conditions Grass Field Weather warm and Sunny
a
g
Geotecbnical A a d \ Comments
$° Description a A a s 0�, - rg
A� U aU A •
SM 0.0'-6.5'Fill(Af)
Brown to grey, fine to medium grained
2 Silty Sand . Moist to wet,medium dense
to very dense. Occasional pebbles and CM-1 122.1 11.4 25 CM 100
organic material.
4
Becomes dark brown, oxidation rc-
6 2 118.5 13.5 45 CM 100
CM-
mottling in places.
3 117.0 13.4 100+ CM 60
Total Depth:6.5'
No groundwater encountered.
g Backfilled on 11/10/05
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
HELENSCHMIDT GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY DRILLING
Project Scacrest Master Plan Boring No. B-4
Location Saxony Lane Encinitas California Project No. 105037
Drilling Contractor/Rig California Pacific Drilling/8-61 Date of Drilling 11/10/05 _
Ground Surface Elev. -195.1 Feet Logged By .lsH Hole Diameter a inches
Surface Conditions Grass Field Weather warm and Sunny
^s
Geotechnical %; C z
Y C /� a x
A d
e y Description ` C6
Comments
g v ;3 9 g^
SM 0.0'-13.0' Fill(Af)
Brown to orange brown, fine to
2 medium grained Silty Sand. Moist to
dry, dense to very dense with orange CM-1 118.5 8.1 41 CM too
oxidation mottling, occasional wood
fragments and clay lenses.
4
CM-2 1232 6.8 57 CM 100
6
CM-3 122.3 7.9 53 CM 100
8
CM-4 127.0 5.0 50 CM 100
10
Becomes yellow-brown Sand with Silt CM-5 114.1 11.3 100+ CM 85
with orange-bown rounded pebbles.
Very dense.
12
- - - -- .��QATI9LV�L- ----- -
SM CONTACT
14--.. 13.0'-19.5':Terrace Deposits t
Orange to red brown, fine to very fine
Silty Sand.Very dense.
CM-6 109.6 30.3 100+ CM 60
16
l8
Becomes red to orange brown,medium to
coarse grained,slightly clayey. clot-7 116.9 8.2 too+ CM 70
20 Refusal at 19.5'
No groundwater encountered.
Backfilled with bentonite grout on
11/10/05
22
24
26
28
HELENSCHMIDT GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY DRILLING
Project Seacrest Master Plan Boring No. B s
L"ation Saxony Lane Encinitas California Project No. 105037
Drilling Contractor/Rig Calif rnis Pacific Drillingl Ll-fil Date of Drilling 11111/05
Ground Surface Elev. -194.5 Feet Logged By isn Hole Diameter -mches
Surface Conditions Asphalt Weather Warm and Sunnv
i
Geotechnical = ° ,� a d '.. Comments
Description E 5 J.
SM 0.0'-0.25'As halt
0.25-3.0'Fill(Af)
z Brown to light brown, fine to medium
grained Silty Sand. Medium dense,
moist to dry.
4 SM 3.0'-19.25':Terrace Deposits
Red brown, medium to coarse grained CM-1 122.0 9.1 32 CM 100
Silty Sand with minor amounts
of Clay. Dense to very dense,
6 moist, round to sub rounded grains.
CM-2 127.3 9.7 54 CM 100
8
CM-3 123.9 9.2 30 CM 100
10
Becomes orange-brown to brown. CM-4 124.7 10.1 33 CM 100
12
14
CM-5 123.6 13.2 37 CM 90
16
18
CM-6 118.8 12.7 78 CM 80
Refusal at 19.25'
20 No groundwater encountered.
Backlilled with bentonite grout on
11/11/05
22—
24
26
28
HELENSCHMIDT GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY DRILLING
Project Seacrest Master Plan Boring No. ll-6
Location Saxony Lane Encinitas California Project No. 105037
Drilling Contractor/Rig California Pacific Drilling/8 761 Date of Drilling 11/10/05
Ground Surface Elev. --188.5 Feet Logged By .Isis Hole Diameter 8 lnd.
Surface Conditions Grass Field Weather Warm and Sunny
s
.; Ir z
Geotechnical a :K
Description c°—° A C o a a. o Comments
AU mA A
SM 0.0'-7.0' Fill(Af)
Orange brown to light brown, fine to
2 medium grained Silty Sand. Medium
dense to very dense with occasional
clay lenses,and organic matter. CM-1 126.9 9.2 50 CM 100
4
CM-2 127.0 8.3 40 CM 100
6
GRADATIONAL 117.3 7.6 16 CM 100
SM
CaIM11 T
8 7,01-19.25':Terrace Deposits(Qt)
Orange brown to red brown, fine to CM-4 123.7 10.9 48 CM 90
medium grained Silty Sand with minor
10—".''.'
0 amounts of clay. Dense to very dense.
CM-5 116.3 11.7 100+ CM 60
12
14
CM-6 114.5 8.0 100+ CM 75
16
18
CM-7 120.4 7.0 1 oo+ CM 60
Refusal at 19.25'
20 No groundwater encountered.
Backfilled with bentonite grout on
11/10/05
22
24
26
28
HELENSCHMIDT GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY DRILLING
Project Scacrest Master Plan Boring No. A-7
Location Saxony Lane Encinitas California Project No. 105037
Drilling Contractor/Rig California Pacific Drill'tngl"I Date of Drilling 11/10/05
Ground Surface Elev. --188.1 Feet Logged By .IsE Hole Diameter K Inches
Surface Conditions Asphalt Weather Ramey
a
Geotechnical
a `" ^ Descri lion a m A �, e _ a s o Comments
U V,SM 0.0'-0.25'As halt
0.25'-6.5' Fill(Af)
2 Orange-brown to brown, fine to
medium grained Silty Sand with minor CM-1 124.9 10.2 29 CM 100
amounts of Clay. Medium dense, damp
to moist.
4
CM-2 121.6 13.3 29 CM 100
6 _ __ _ _ GRADATIONAL
CONTACT CM-3 123.9 10.6 27 CM 100
SM 6.5'-19.5%Terrace Deposits
8 Orange to orange brown, fine to medium
grained Sand with minor amounts of CM-4 123.7 10.9 28 CM 100
clay,medium dense to dense.
10
V.
CM-5 121.5 12.3 25 CM 100
12
14
CM-6 121.9 11.9 38 CM 100
16
18
Becomes black to red brown,very dense CM-7 120.6 10.3 58 CM 90
20 Refusal at 19.5'
No groundwater encountered.
Backfilled with beotonite grout on
11/10/05
22
24
26
28
HELENSCHMIDT GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
J LOG OF EXPLORATORY DRILLING
Project Seacrest Master Plan Boring No. n-8
Location Saxony Lane Encinitas California Project No. 105037
Drilling ContractorlMg California Pacific DrillinW -61 Date of Drilling 11/10/05
Ground Surface Elev. --185 5 Feet Logged By 1S1i Hole Diameter R inches
Surface Conditions Asphalt Weather warm and Satiny
i
Ceottchoical ao v p a v > Comments
&n Description A �'
y 4 r►� w
U U y
SM 0.0'-0.25'Asphalt/
0.25'-7.5' Fill(Af)
2 Brown to orange brown, fine to medium
grained Silty Sand with minor amounts CM-1 127.2 9.0 25 CM 100
of Clay.Moist to wet,medium dense to
dense with occasional pebbles,
4 and organic debris.
CM-2 120.6 11.0 47 CM 100
6
CM-3 123.9 10.4 41 CM 100
8 Total Depth:7.5'
No groundwater encountered.
Backfilled with cuttings on 11/10/05
10
12
14
16
18
20
n-
24—
26
28
HELENSCHMIDT GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY DRILLING
Project Seacrest Master Plan Boring No. B-9
Location Saxony Lane Encinitas California Project No. 105037
Drilling Contractor/Mg California Pacific Drillingt -61 Date of Drilling 11/10/05
Ground Surface Elev. -183.1 Feet Logged By IsH Hole Diameter R Inches
Surface Conditions Asphalt Weather Warm and Sunny
a
Geotechnical
Description Comments
WA
SM 0.0'-0.25'Asphalt/—
0.25'-4.0' Fill(Af)
2 Brown to orange brown,fine to medium
grained Silty Sand with minor amounts CM-t 120.0 9.7 18 CM 100
of Clay. Medium dense, damp to moist,
with pebbles, and organic material.
4
SM 4.0'-19.75:Terrace Deposits(Qt) CM-2 121.2 8.1 64 CM 100
Orange-brown to light brown, fine to
6 medium grained Silty Sand. Damp to
moist, very dense.
CM-3 125.4 8.0 55 CM 100
8
CMA 121.2 10.8 100+ CM 90
10
CM-5 126.9 10.4 87 CM 90
12
14
16
Becomes darker in color. CM 6 122.9 9.2 50 CM 100
I8 -- - - - - - - - --- - - - -- - - - -- - -
SC Becomes coarse grain Sand with Clay,
very dense. cr t-7 119.5 12.4 58 CM 100
20 Total Depth:19.75'
No groundwater encountered.
Backfilled with bentonite grout on
22 1!/10/05
24
26
28
HELENSCHMIDT GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
r LOG OF EXPLORATORY DRILLING
Project a crest Master Plan Boring No. n-t0
Location Saxony Lane Encinitas California Project No. 105037
Drilling Contractor/Mg California Pacific Drininga61 Date of Drilling 11/10/05
Ground Surface Elev. -186.8 Feet Logged By „isti Hole Diameter 8 Inches
Surface Conditions Asphalt Weather Rainy
g �
Geotechoical = d C +s
$^. a Comments
Description
SM 0.0' 25'As halt
-0.
0.25'-6.0'Fill(AD
2 Orange brown to brown, fine to medium
grained Silty Sand. Medium dense,
moist, occasional small pebbles.
4
CM-1 125.1 10.0 23 CM 100
6 - - --- --- - - - --- --- -- - -- -
SM 60-26.5':Terrace Deposits(Qt) CM-2 122.7 11.8 30 CM 100
Red brown to brown, fine to medium
8 grained Silty Sand with minor
amounts of clay.Medium dense to very CM-3 124.0 11.6 25 CM loo
dense,dry to moist.
to
CM-4 120.3 12.0 47 CM 100
1z
14
CM-5 123.6 12.8 44 CM loo
16
18
20
CM-6 115.6 10.5 95 CM 100
u
24—
Becomes dark red to black, more cMa It7.3 12.1 loo+ CM 90
26 cohesive,very dense.
SP 26.5'-50.5 :Torrey Sandstone(Tt)
Light brown, fine to very fine Sand.
Loose to friable, dry to moist.
HELENSCHMIDT GEOTECHNICAL9 INC.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY DRILLING
Project Sciterest Mister Pisn Date 11/10/05 Boring No. B-10
d
u Geotechnical
Description �a°! A ^; o Comments
y u a.a Ens
O� V Z;)U
SP 26.5'-50.5':Torrey Sandstone(Tt) CM-8 101.2 13.5 100+ CM 70
Very dense.
32
34
CM-9 100.3 12.5 100+ CM 70
36 Light yellow to light brown,with
oxidation mottling in places.
38
40
Becomes finer grained. -10 97.2 14.1 100+ CM 70
42
44
46
Very dense. M-11 101.9 10.4 100+ CM 70
48
50 M-12 96.8 7.9 M
Refusal at 50.5'
No groundwater encountered.
52 Backfilled with bentonite grout on
11/10/05
54
56
58
60
62
HELENSCHMIDT GEOTECHNICAL9 INC.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY DRILLING
Project SeacrqtMostcr Plan Boring No. n-u
Location Saxony Lane Encinitas California Project No. 105037
Drilling Contractor/Rig California Pacific Dri1GngLB-61 Date of Drilling 11/11/05
Ground Surface Elev. --198.5 Feet Logged By isn Hole Diameter R inches _
Surface Conditions Grass Weather Warm and Sunny
s
Geotechnical
az_ a$° �U ; Description 6 as a c CL Q Comments
CA
A� C7 AU �A A
SM 0.0'-11.0'Fill(Af)
Light to dark brown, fine to medium
2 grained Silty Sand . Moist to wet,
very dense.
4
CM-1 127.0 10.0 81 CM 90
6
8
Becomes grey to green grey with CM-2 106.5 11.3 82 CM 100
oxidation mottling.
10
SM 11.0'-35.5':Terrace Deposits(Qt)
12 Dark orange-brown to brown, medium
grained Silty Sand With minor amounts CM-3 124.1 1 L3 33 CM 100
of clay. Moist, dense to very dense.
14
16
CM-4 123.0 12.6 41 CM 100
18
20
CM-5 121.9 11.8 71 CM 90
22
24
26
28
HELENSCHMIDT GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY DRILLING
Project ----"' °lao Date 11/11/05 Boring No. D 11
h �
Geotechnial .,
$ a U . Description Y A c
c o �. a s o; Comments
dW �� y� A A N AE v0°iFT OG`�
aU to
SM CM-6 113.9 9.1 69 CM 90
32
Becomes medium to coarse grained,moist,
34 medium dense to very dense, micaceous.
CQCM-7 105.5 112 25 1 CM 30 Terminated drilling due to
36 Total Depth:35.5' —equipment malfunction
No groundwater encountered.
Backfilled with bentonite grout on
38 11/11/05
40
42
44
46
4s
50
52
54
56
58
60
62
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTING
The laboratory analysis performed for the site consisted of limited testing of the principal soil types
sampled during the field investigation to evaluate moisture and density of characteristic subsurface
materials. The soil descriptions and the field and laboratory test results were used to assign
parameters to the various materials at the site. The results of the laboratory testing program are
presented on the boring logs and in this Appendix.
The following laboratory tests were performed as part of this investigation:
1. Detailed soil description; ASTM D 2487
2. Natural moisture content of the soil;ASTM D 2216
3. In-situ density of the soil(wet and dry)
4. Maximum Dry Density;ASTM D 1557
5. Particle Size analysis;ASTM 422
6. Direct Shear Test;ASTM D 3080
7. Remolded Direct Shear Test,ASTM D 3080
8. Expansion Index; ASTM D 4829
9. Sulfate and Chloride Concentration,Conductivity,Resitivity and p.H.
MM
it-��w��w�r������•w�• _ _
w
w.
MMMM
�mc�
� i y
w
����I����
BORING/SAMPLE NO. B-1/CM-2 DEPTH 4'
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION
APPARENT ANGLE OF PEAK 39 APPARENT PEAK 0.68
INTERNAL FRICTION, COHESION,C(KSF)
O(DEGREES)
EFFECTIVE OVERBURDEN STRESS(KSF)
DRY DENSITY(PCF) 120.3 SAMPLE DIAMETER 2.4 Inches
NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT N 11.7 HORIZONTAL SHEAR RATE(in.per min.) 0.91
5.0
4.0
w
3.0 :.-.-.-.-..
COT
t
-----------------------------------------
0
0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
SURCHARGE, a(KSF)
Helenschmidt Geotechnical, Inc.
■
Direct Shear Test
Seacrest Master Plan
Encinitas CA 92024
Project Number:105037 Date:December 2005
Drafted:JSH Eng/Geo:SRH/RSA
Scale:N/A Figure Number: C-4
BORING/SAMPLE NO. B-7 BULK DEPTH 0-5 FEET
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION Clgyey Clayey Silt
APPARENT ANGLE OF PEAK — 2.2 APPARENT PEAK 0.0
INTERNAL FRICTION, COHESION,C(KSF)
0(DEGREES)
EFFECTIVE OVERBURDEN STRESS(KSF)
DRY DENSITY(PCF) 119.7 SAMPLE DIAMETER 2.4 Inches
REMOLDED MOISTURE CONTENT(%) 7.5 HORIZONTAL SHEAR RATE(in.per min.)
0.01
5.0
w
rn
a
H
M
a i ----...........
...
CA
' ...................
-------------....................................{_.__..._._
0
0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
p LO
SURCHARGE, a(KSF)
rRemolded Helenschmidt Geotechnical, Inc.
Direct Shear Test
Seacrest Village Masterplan
Project Number:105037 Date:December 2005
Drafted:RSA Eng/Geo:SRH/RSA
Scale:N/A Figure Number: C-5
SUPPLEMENTAL DRAINAGE ANALYSIS
SEACREST VILLAGE RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES
LOADING DOCK - PHASE 1
211 SAXONY LANE
ENCINITAS, CA
DWG NO.
QV�pFESS/ N
c� 7 r,
2 ^'
.3-31-09
�l CIVI1 �Q
9TFof CA 1F
PREPARED BY:
STUART ENGINEERING
7525 METROPOLITAN DRIVE, SUITE 308
SAN DIEGO, CA 92108
JOB NO. 343-07-13
STUART PEACE, RCE 27232
May 5, 2008
Table of Contents
1. Introduction............................................................................ 1
2. Existing Drainage...... ............................................................... 1
3. Proposed Drainage............................................. ......... ... .......... 1
4. Analysis and Mitigation............................................................... 1
5. Conclusion...... ...... ............... ................................................... 2
Appendices
1. Vicinity Map
2. Detention Calculations
3. Detention system Detail
Introduction
This site is located in the City of Encinitas adjacent to Saxony Road, Seacrest Way, and Saxony
Lane (see Appendix 1). The actual project site is located within an existing retirement
community that is being constructed in multiple phases. The current proposed development
occurs at an existing emergency access route which is to be modified.
The proposed loading dock is located where currently there is an existing emergency access
turning circle off of Seacrest Way. The existing emergency access drive has a grade of
approximately 5% going up to the Southeast corner of the existing Garden Court Building. The
proposed loading dock will be located where currently there is a slope adjacent to the access
drive. A new emergency access drive will be constructed northeasterly of the proposed loading
dock and will be at a higher grade supported by a retaining wall. The existing parking
configuration contains 23 parking spaces and the proposed development proposes 21 parking
spaces a net decrease of 2 spaces. An existing curb inlet on Seacrest Way will be relocated
approximately 35' west adjacent to the new driveway entrance.
Drainage Analysis Report Information
Under separate cover is an overall site Drainage Analysis having a revision date of January 15,
2008 which was submitted for the entitlement portion of this project. That report extensively
studied both the existing and proposed conditions for Phase 1 and all other proposed future
phases. This report is intended to be used as a supplement to that overall site Drainage
Analysis report dated January 15, 2008 and provide more detailed information beyond what has
already been provided. The reviewer of this report should reference the previously submitted
overall site Drainage Analysis for any additional information that is needed.
Existing Drainage
Reference the overall site Drainage Analysis dated 1-15-08 for the existing conditions drainage
analysis information.
Proposed Drainage
Reference the overall site Drainage Analysis dated 1-15-08 for proposed conditions drainage
analysis information.
Analysis and Mitigation
The City of Encinitas has advised that there are known capacity issues with the Public Storm
Drain system downstream of this project. Due to the known capacity issues the City has
advised that this project will be required to maintain predevelopment peak 100-year runoff
volumes so as to not exacerbate the downstream drainage issues that the City is currently
facing.
Additionally the City requested that the flow from proposed project be studied to the 30" outlet
pipe at the caltrans ROW. The overall site Drainage Study dated 1-15-08 analyzed the entire
drainage basin that contributes flow to the 30" pipe outlet at the Condominium complex. The
analysis was performed for 3 different 100-year states; existing conditions, proposed conditions
without detention, and proposed conditions with detention. The calculations show that after the
1
proposed development has been constructed with detention facilities at peak 100-year
discharge it will have no greater impact than the undeveloped site that exists today.
Per the overall Site Drainage Analysis, to maintain predevelopment conditions at peak 100-year
discharge the proposed phase 1 development must detain 0.75 cfs. The detention will be
achieved by using an orifice restriction plate at the outlet and pipe with a storage pipe
constructed upstream. For detention and storage calculations reference Appendix 2. For a
detail of the detention system reference the details contained in Appendix 3.
Conclusion
By the nature of the design, runoff from the proposed development will primarily continue to flow
to the same offsite locations therefore no adverse impacts are anticipated due to direction of
runoff.
In regards to volume of flow, this proposed project has been extensively studied and will have
no adverse impacts at 100-year peak flow with the above mentioned detention facilities in place.
343-07-13
May 5,2008
F AADMIN13431C L5439.doc
2
APPENDIX 1
Vicinity Map
Q
Q
CL...
W Q
31
1 8017N00%V: o W
' v
APPENDIX 2
Detention Calculations
DETEN T:opt STORAO'r
_ �RvC:Duxes
InDUt Va r i a'rb es ( ']rian Cord i t Ions)
1X hour pr eC:71tat10n =mount (�nCf1e5) 2. 7o
Time of concentration (thin . ) 4,s�
Coef�icient o runoff C pig
Basin area (acres) 1, HO
Comz)utation
Ti zee to peak
T? = 2 . OT,XD/ ( 1 Kp) = 1 , 1072T. T q.99
Ti ms of hvCrograph to
TA = 20 - T T 15,00
Time o hydrograPh to end s
T, = 20 1 . 5 T T 2-7. L19
Pa_ak flow
Q? C:i A
r� = 7 . 44 P,/T_a.�s = 7.6Z in . /rI . Qn �.� 3
PCs- CO.k�Q�hE��h
Surrounding fl.cw (Qs) S
Depth oLreClPltatlCn for 2 hours
D , = 7 . 44 P 12 0 a.+u
D,20 0 . 6785 P; _ in .
Depth of Precipitation for hvdrograph
DX
Surrounding Intensity
Is = 60 (D 120 - DH) / ( 120 - 2 . STS)
in .
Q; = C1"sA
Qs
Plot Hvdroa=DI, and Surrounding r I cw
Outflow / Basin Size (Natural Conditions)
outf 1ow
C = T- = min.
P 6 l
7 . 4 4 /m e o.�+s =
^
QN '¢ CIA
QN
1 • Plot on Hyd.rograph
a . Draw line, horn surrounding :low in terse Dr. w4 th
beginning hydrograph limb to Q
K
2 . Cstirnate volume needed for reservoir
a. Detez-�tine preiiminary reservoir dimensions
b . Surrounding glow discharges dir_ctly through
reservoir without detaining any storage
3 . Size outlet works
a . ou�. �L St Q
flow/ Q less than or eu-ua1 to
n. Stay W-th In -the limits o� tide r?S.crVOlr
4 . Rout
a Refine reservo__ d:mens ions and/or cutf l
cw
�acility
.in;ic.'nri
Civil Engineering/Surveying/Planning JOB NO.
STUART ENGINEERING SCALE SHEET OF
7525 Metropolitan Dr.,Ste.308 BY DATE
San Diego,California 92108 DESCRIPTION
(619)296-1010 Fax(619)296-9276
S�Nt/V\ a F -r K4 =a P-ni.A-n b j
16-
w�'�^��- . � ���� . �_3 ��• cis ,
Oe w\ ro;Po O.7,S C_FS
L4'2 G�
a _
Pb "
e_x�S�ivW
C.G,-1Ir )C?¢. _
wee. n_OCLW,._ 3 2 3e
9e.i:?r Rom NEBS CFISTQ.,M'prinUng service t-ego sit�a327 NEfR fir.;.Pac ior ,nt•,�i11 n"c:om,
Fist.No G 21 8X70?92
Civil Engineering/Surveying/Planning JOB NO.
STUART ENGINEERING SCALE SHEET OF
7525 Metropolitan Dr., Ste. 308 BY DATE
San Diego,California 92108 DESCRIPTION
(619)296-1010 Fax(619)296-9276
D EsE.�T tiva t-�yc,�q c�rzAeh ;
T� Pew = 4,99 _
OF 0 ry,iv�J�rt�
-7,9$ cFs
J
S 4 scc:
15� -
fiE
►•JU F
I
-.- , ,
_
r
\ ' r
5
_._
5:
< +0 c- , f
4
H<.—r rnm NESS CUSTOM"p,intiny service i tvr)Bra. -7 Ntt-.. io-: r..«Do ti-�.,an.NH.0'34'16
P,ef.No:G 211L'FiU232
Civil Engineering/Surveying/Planning JOB NO.
STUART ENGINEERING SCALE SHEET OF
7525 Metropolitan Dr., Ste. 308 BY DATE
San Diego, California 92108 DESCRIPTION
(619)296-1010 Fax(619)296-9276
Aj t'2" Pyre.
c..-F s
cP of _ ow
/ Tc S9 �
S�6. 39
ti
32,2. -w 2:53 =-
sz
l►.2S
Flow from Node 302 to 303 in exiting 12" pipe
****************************************************************************
»»PIPEFLOW HYDRAULIC INPUT INFORMATION««
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PIPE DIAMETER(FEET) = 1.000
PIPE SLOPE(FEET/FEET) = 0.0296
PIPEFLOW(CFS) = 3.55
MANNINGS FRICTION FACTOR= 0.011000
--------------------------______
CRITICAL-DEPTH FLOW INFORMATION:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CRITICAL DEPTH(FEET) = 0.80
CRITICAL FLOW AREA(SQUARE FEET) = 0.677
CRITICAL FLOW TOP-WIDTH(FEET) = 0.793
CRITICAL FLOW PRESSURE +MOMENTUM(POUNDS) = 51.55
CRITICAL FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.243
CRITICAL FLOW VELOCITY HEAD(FEET) = 0.43
CRITICAL FLOW HYDRAULIC DEPTH(FEET) = 0.85
CRITICAL FLOW SPECIFIC ENERGY(FEET)= 1.23
---------------------______
NORMAL-DEPTH FLOW INFORMATION:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NORMAL DEPTH(FEET) = 0.49
FLOW AREA(SQUARE FEET) = 0.39
FLOW TOP-WIDTH(FEET) = 1.000
FLOW PRESSURE +MOMENTUM(POUNDS) = 68.19
FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 9.177
FLOW VELOCITY HEAD(FEET) = 1.308
HYDRAULIC DEPTH(FEET) = 0.39
FROUDE NUMBER= 2.600
SPECIFIC ENERGY(FEET) = 1.80
APPENDIX 3
Detention Detail
LLJ §
2 .
R O {
@ . Q 2 a
w
z@
zt
�
�
� !
§§
@f f
~ d k§\
\ �
Q: CL Oc ƒ d
d � @Q
� 3
, k
� \
�
�
q �
v �
�
� ± �
k ` �
� Q �
M �
� ƒ
a y
\ CL
R
o
d 2 v
Q .
» ®
U7
Y
3 � w
t.,
iT
b
T3 w N
Leichtag Family
0 0�` M- -- Assisted Living Residence o
a HGI-1'
HGI-1 1 1 ago
Proposed independent Living Area
220
Garden Court Retirement Living Community
Qaf
s rs't?.. 7iS. •?�,., ,v ,y,a rc , r..:r n_,u ,., Vii.,, v z
( <-, . C.. . : '.'f '. �'' . c ,..n r., - '-.`^ 2' r r.,�n�:�yh.y 3-?y•—'Y-!a<w�,e x�ts.:.`4^;f�_v t t '`S,.>..��k'y..t.hY_:•;y r�.<s."s Y�x+f+[{
�1 1 3 4 'r i,�.
- . . _
:'2_.'o 7 , x•;.'',..,i.+ >+z.>YI''a o H, .p.:;. a^-v 5,s�i y Sr's'v 1 r{< E+;x<;2,* #`..a..g-.f3::`•+1.:.:,.'.,t';".wv".f2te"8.d�t�.ti.-.-..r,�a{i�e
2F,"I^i x?-"tr3�,r s:.�br.�r.r.r,%s.xSr' t_°y"�CNr�t'. isF"�Cy�v T,,';r,t•�.,(fi�r�a+p T aa mY>e. m g,?,x3'�y S T
'^r,
3
O
a
<: . 9MINAgv -�}
ISO ?'
t. .2, r. ..v.... ., fr .. .. .-., .., m.... ,. ...... ._.. . . , .r...
1
x
is
t � S
yy
, :,w. , iw.,.. .. ..•n 5' , w,.,: }m:... fit., ,. ,cry .,kx. . n.. x� ..,... c,, ..... Y , A._,,: .. _.:..... . ^';. .•: _- , �... ,..,,,
. . Elevation
'�( � cn fin. '". As 5"'. �;+.r^` >• r ,b„ s t f :.a`veF Xa, 3.:., tS< a yZ'�''�b h F,yr'. K',:r„J,`r
Elevation (feet)
(feet) 140
140
. r � �,#3 ,a .rg,r fit. . '.:,,zr. .� i '.:;,.,3`M`� ti�:'4..• Af�i ;,.,.. r � k.,.n::,,` ;Fa
.; ar �#�Y�„-. ���„�yyYj4._#i�a l �.c , r"S� NS”? 4' a .?u�� }>
f ...„� ....r -,..�� ..., r` .:.,v ...a:_r• i ..::. ,a -:'. L n s,..:.. r�s i ,..,.,.. t4 ,.A. @k4G 1 ,. .5 t r`'
$ate° i�> ,. � S � .�, }' :.., .X c T=r .,�.,.h, ,.�tly.... T t.:>�.w,. �`„ ?��`+ +'�»
+#, `?✓+ �. it. ._. . _ x' r Cb "� t-a3... f .. k .., ... y..- L-'* > ,.. t _I .p.., a t ,:.,. a,:,, ^. 1pe3
Yo:aA � >rr ,c:'. s'c
d� e `?, v. ...,• �. p ., ♦M1 n, l�c h.G.F•^> a •v. _. .) .o.... i :s.. .. �'.iY. . ._u .... _ , ..� :\.,
: /.:�.�
e: . . w5 :., n � -. -.. ,a .."^'Y,. S n,,��. �...,. ,. d ., 1 ✓... :at... f .: -....:.zJ
100
Due North
Y
Y �
HGI-2 a ! 1 ! HGI-2'
Proposed Independent Proposed Garden Court Area y 220
220- LivingArea ---
Existing Dining Facility
r •
.n
f �•-• "
:: �' ,',• cFS":,.:,�:. a rF;-' ,: ,,,.0_. .; ,. 'TS,. :�, 3 9'R 3 r's.:.v�.,.:`>'" , r .-jf.Y>R:e+a-fir e,F - 1.;} tw°�n�h
r
180
180 , r dxf,4St_ i.� Y z<• "Sr.,x �,, r
k
Elevation
Elevation (feet)
(feet)
140
140
;.:� .s-�c >?`��{'rx F � K°�,�+2T` rAS�r 4'rli'y���;3 '`�'✓ ; i'1'`r4�d Cy�,+}£Clzr �};� f`- ME£��r'�.��`� '�n��� `'Y��
t,��� Ai�t�`" p.�E.
�'..� ? �` � � .- s i t '. S k4ti�,f&`' +r?V�SkC'Sy aw Fr vYf1h r ;, "T r :r• t� S': � ,:': „ �
i� $ . :.. . . : :�� ., ' ..... - .Y'.. � . ' r ,, a �! kn� ,•r#L E, ri°. r „” r:?:. n z .
-.n' �-• '. .y. . . ras^r t.r:k":Y� 5 vwa+',+ vY . �ro?tu*�” „n �;. - :fir. <:rr ... an ,C
t 100
lao ._
l' N26°W
LEGEND
Qaf Artificial Fill Geologic Contact
Helenschmidt Geotechnicat Inc.
.' Quaternary Terrace Deposits --?--- ?— Ipterpolated Geologic Contact
Geologic Cross-Sections HGI 1-1' and HGI 2-2'
Seacrest Village Master Plan, Encinitas
Torrey Sand Stone .... 0 40 80 120 California
Proposed Building
SCALE- 1":40' (H=V) Project Number:105037 Date:January 2006
1 Exploratory Boring Drafted:JSH Eng/Geo:SRH/RSA
(Total Depth) Scale: 1 Inch : 40 Feet Plate Number:2
19.5'
_ _ - - -- - _ — „.. ,,. _ _ - -- - -- -ry- - - -- -- - - - - - _ 1�T'
� -
B-1 (21.5'/13.0
I E 1 a x 1 11
18-2(54.25'/3,0')
c di
f._ ”„
PROPOSED C`• q
4
(6 5'-16 '�rx
r
l INDEPENDENT l Al
LIVING HOMES � ��� w hrojOct
i. (FIRST FLOOR) ) �a s Site
VVI
I � 1
1_ b_
Bncinitas
I
RETENTION BASIN f
1 '
A
B-4{ti W/13 0) I YICINITYMAP
is ,.
- .a ( �• B-5(21.3'/3�D NOT TO SCALE
s �
1
I
�AXO N Y LAN "
I ,
1 ( "WO
$-! +}(20.7Y7.0 ..: B 7(1957 6 5), �
Vt
�• "j J � i 3 r1 i l \ � _
1 ;
i 40
.. ::
\
LEICHi'AG �AAi1ILY< �� ' 80 120
K+ s R A
D'NCE G
x L
r.m �SIDE E - 1
1 5 i SCALE ":q0'
.aQfEQt) _ ADMI N
1 8(7.4'/7 4)
GARDEN COURT
1 ADDITION"
0) ' B-10 (50.5'16.0) MEL'S
PLACE
FITNESS AQR ATICS COFFEE �
HOUSE
'
,
:
LEGEND
THE GARDEN COURT 4
RETIREMENT LIVING COMMUNITY KITCHEN/DINING B-7 (19.5'165) Exploratory Boring -
Boring depth shown in bold, depth
Y '
3 to Fill/Terrace contact(if encountered)
shown in italics.
1 7 i _ `t
Q� ;{ Approximate limits of artificial fill overlying
} t4 i Quaternary Terracedeposits.
1— I / \�
B-11 (35.5'!1!.0) \\
_
Qaf(Qt) 1
r .
\ I H"elenschmidt Geotechnical, Inc.14
` ��\ Boring Location and Geologic Map
Seacrest Village Master Plan
. w
Encinitas,California
HGI 1'
Project Number: 105037 Date: January 2006
Drafted: JSH Eng/Geo: SRH/RSA
Scale: 1 Inch : 40 Feet Plate Number: 1