Loading...
2002-7394 G/CN -- I Cit o NGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT yo Encinitas Capital Improvement Projects District Support Services Field Operations Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering September 3, 2003 Attn: Rancho Santa Fe National Bank 499 N. El Camino Real Encinitas, California 92024 RE: CTRH, LLC 761 Garden View Court APN 257-470-12 Grading Permit 7394-G Final release of security Permit 7394-GI authorized earthwork, d the described project., hereforen control, all as necessary to build full release of the security deposited is merited. Letter of Credit 060102, in the amount of$31,100.00, is hereby released in its 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, Masih Maher Jay Lembach Senior Civil Engineer Finance Manager Field Operations Financial Services CC: Jay Lembach,Finance Manager CTRH,LLC Debra Geishart File TEL 760-633-2600 / FAX 760-633-2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024-3633 TDD 760-633-2700 recycled paper ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT - Capital Improvement Projects City Of District Support Services Encinitas Field Operations Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering September 3, 2003 Attn: Insurance Company of the West 11455 El Camino Real San Diego, California 92130-2045 RE: CTRH, LLC 761 Garden View Court APN 257-470-12 Grading Permit 7394-G Final release of security Permit 7394-G authorized earthwork, storm drainage, and erosion control, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has approved the rough grading. Therefore, release of the security deposit is merited. Performance Bond 188 29 23, in the amount of$124,400.00, is hereby fully exonerated. The document original is enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633- 2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sinc ely, Masih Maher ay Lembach Senior Civil Engineer Finance Manager Financial Services Cc: Jay Lembach,Finance Manager CTRH,LLC Debra Geishart file enc. ACL TEL 760-633-2600 / FAX 760-633-2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024-3633 TDD 760-633-2700 recycled paper e, CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGMERING9 �v LANCASTER,CA SACRAMENTO,CA N.PALM SPRINGS,CA /1 SAN DIEGO, Ave. RIVERSIDE,an VENTURA,CA TRACY,Larch 42156 10th SL W. 3628 Madison Ave. 19020 N.Indian Ave. 2414 Vineyard Av 490 E.Princeland Ct. 1 uit Pacific 05 Ave. Suite a Larch Unit k Suite 22 Suite 2-K Suite G Suite 7 Suite 105 Sui[e F Q Escondido,CA 92029 Corona,CA 91719 Oxnard,CA 93033 Tracy,CA 95376 Lancaster,CA 93534 916 Highlands,331 6030 A 95660 N.0)329-4677 Springs,CA 922 G (76)7746-806 FAX (909)371-2168 FAX (805)486-9016 FAX (209)839-2895 FAX (661)726-0246 FAX (916)331-6037 FAX (760)328-4896 FAX ENGINEERING, INC. September 1, 2002 CTE Project No. 10-5603 Attention: Mr. Dexter Duenas Bearing Construction,Inc. 561 Saxony Place,#10 1 Encinitas, California 92024 VIA FACSIMILE: (760) 634-4118 Subject: Retaining Wall Footing Excavations Proposed CTRH Professional Building 761 Garden View Court Encinitas,California Sirs: At your request an engineering geologist from this office visited the site to review the excavations for retaining wall footings. These footing excavations are at the northern and eastern boundaries of the project. Our recommendations and observations are as follows: • Soils exposed at the base of the footing were as anticipated from our previous work at this site (native formational sandstones). These soils were probed and determined to be suitably dense to support the intended use. • Soils were confirmed to consist generally of sandstones and no mitigation measures for expansive soils are deemed necessary. • The footing excavations are dimensioned, at a minimum,per the project plans. We recommend removing any loose slough or standing water before placing concrete in these excavations. Should you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact the undersigned. Sincerely, CONSTRUCTION TESTING AND ENGINEERING,INC. 2Ch 5eeologist G dmacher, CEG# 2136 --- ! I { ! i s E? ? ' 2002 ;1 F:\10-5603\Ltr—Retaining wall footings.doc GEOTECHNICAL•ENVIRONMENTAL•CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION AND TESTING•CIVIL ENGINEERING•SURVEYING <t>PARTNERS Planning and Engineering File: 343.00 September 24, 2002 City of Encinitas Community Development Department 505 S. Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 SUBJECT: Pad Grading Certification for Grading Plan No. 7394-G(C.T.R.H.) 761 Garden View Court Our office has reviewed the attached Pad Grade Certification Survey data performed by Spear& Associates, Inc., dated September 19, 2002, for the building pad located at 761 Garden View Court which appears on Grading Plans for C.T.RH. (7394-G) prepared by this office dated August 12, 2002. I hereby certify(as defined by—and limited to—Section 6735.5 of the Business and Professions Code, 2002)that the measured pad elevation is based on the elevation indicated on our drawings and the measured pad elevation meets a tolerance of±0.10' which is the industry standard for this type of gradi the 1 nes and gradethat hown n the approved building Grading d indicated below substantially confo rms to Plans for this project. Pad Elevation Pad Elevation (meas.) Pa er Plan) ±0.101 761 Garden View Court 194.33 194.33 OQFtOF ESSlpyq Very truly yours, y C. Mpotic2 p N 59 2 1 m No Brent C. Moore,P.E. 0� RCE 59121,Expires 6/30/03 sTq� cm ��\P Enclosure F OF CAt1F0 cww043.o nnvEIUFn.aoc 9988 Hibert Street,Suite 212 San Diego,CA 92131 (858)695-3344 Fax(858)695-3117 SPEAR & ASSOCIATES INC. CIVIL ENGINEERING AND LAND SURVEYING • 750 N.CITRACADO PARKWAY,SUITE 2 ESCONDIDO,CA 92029 (760)737-7272 FAX(760)737-7274 SEPTEMBER 19, 2002 CITY OF ENCINITAS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 505 S. VULCAN AVENUE ENCINITAS, CA 92024 RE: PAD GRADING CERTIFICATION FOR GRADING PLAN NO. 7394-G C.T.R.H. 761 GARDEN VIEW COURT THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE PAD GRADING FOR THE ABOVE REFERENCED SITE HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND BY FIELD SURVEY ON AUGUST 22, 2002, DETERMINED TO BE WITHIN 0.1 9 FEET OF THE DESIGN GRADE 5 00 PER GRADING PLAN NO 70394-G WITH AN BASED A FLOOR EIGHT INCH (0.67')GRADE OF 19 FLOOR SECTION. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Sip lAND /c�,'� ON J•SP 1�,,� RAMON J. SPEAR L.S. 6404 1 Exp.12 31-ca. �i �` No.6404 OF C STORM DRAIN REPORT FOR C.T.R.H. ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA June 13, 2002 Prepared By: PARTNERS Planning and Engineering 9988 Hibert Street, Suite 212 San Diego, CA 92131 (858) 695-3344 W.O. No. 7394-G _ jr v c \��� `` EN ZV OFNE CINtiZ rE 1F Andrew J. Kann., P E., RCE 5094 Registration Expires 9-30-2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS -` PROJECT DESCRIPTION page 1 page 1 METHODOLOGY page 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS page 1 DEVELOPED CONDITIONS page 1 EXISTING RUNOFF ANALYSIS page 3 DEVELOPED RUNOFF ANALYSIS page 3 CURB INLET DESIGN AND ANALYSIS page 3 CATCH BASIN DESIGN AND ANALYSIS page 3 BROW DITCH DESIGN AND ANALYSIS page 4 CULVERT DESIGN AND ANALYSIS page 4 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS LIST OF FIGURES _. FIGURE 1: VICINITY MAP page 2 attached FIGURE 2A: EXISTING HYDROLOGY MAP attached FIGURE 2B: PROPOSED HYDROLOGY MAP LIST OF TABLES - TABLE 1: HYDROLOGY/INLET SUMMARY page 5 TABLE 2: HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC CALCS page 6 — LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 1: Design Calculations Appendix 2: Runoff Coefficients Appendix 3: Urban areas Overland Time of Flow Curves _.. Appendix 4: Intensity—Duration Design Chart Appendix 5: Handbook of Hydraulics Tables 7-4,7-5 and 7-14 Appendix 6: Gutter and Roadway Discharge—Velocity Chart Capacity of Curb Opening Inlets Appendix 7: Grate Inlet Capacity at Sump Conditions Appendix 8: City of San Diego's "Drainage Design Manual" April 1984 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: w This storm drain report has been prepared as part of the permit submittal requirements for the development of 761 Garden View Court. The site consists of approximately 0.8 acres of previously graded land east of Garden View Court east of El Camino Real in Encinitas, California. See Figure No. 1 for location. See Figures 2A and 2B Existing and Proposed Hydrology Map attached at the end of this report for the drainage basin limits. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP) and a Storm Water Management Plan(SWMP) will be prepared as separate documents and included with the plan submittal to address both pre-and post-construction BMP's. METHODOLOGY: This drainage report has been prepared in accordance with current City of San Diego regulations and procedures. All of the proposed pipes and inlets/catch basis were designed to intercept and convey runoff. SeeoAppendix 1 odified Rational design alcullationsa was used to compute the anticipated The following references have been used in preparation of this report: (1) City of San Diego Drainage Design Manual, April, 1984. (2) Handbook of Hydraulics, E.F. Brater&H.W. King, 6`" Ed., 1976. EXISTING CONDITIONS: _ The project site was previously mass graded for a future office building. The entire site sheet flows to an existing curb outlet located at the southwest corner of the site. The runoff is then conveyed via existing curb and gutter built with Garden View Court to an _. existing inlet. DEVELOPED CONDITIONS: C.T.R.H. is proposing to construct an office building and parking lot on the site. The improvements include one curb inlet, one pre-cast catch basin, one CDS Model PMSU20 - storm water treatment unit to comply with current storm water quality regulations, 103 lineal feet of 12"PVC culvert, 250 lineal feet of 3-foot wide PCC ribbon gutter, brow ditch located at the tops of retaining walls and modification to an existing curb outlet. EXISTING RUNOFF ANALYSIS: The entire surface runoff sheet flows to an existing curb outlet located at the southwest corner of the site. A runoff coefficient of 0.45 would be appropriate for the existing basin. ._ I � RD RD. yNd LEUCADIA BLVD z 2< Project site. ENCINITA S9 BLVD VICINITY MAP NO SCALE THOMAS BROS. PGS. 1147 & 1148 DEVELOPED RUNOFF ANALYSIS: All of the proposed pipes and inlets/catch basis were designed to intercept and convey the 100-year storm. The runoff coefficients for the site were based on soil group D and the "- ultimate improvements for the proposed site. A coefficient of 0.45 was used for all landscaped areas. A coefficient of 0.95 was used for all paved areas. All of the proposed drainage culverts will be PVC and were sized using a Manning's `n' coefficient of 0.013. See Table 1, Hydrology/Inlet Summary for a breakdown for each basin. CURB INLET DESIGN AND ANALYSIS: The curb inlet is located on a continuous grade and was sized utilizing Chart 1-104.12 Gutter and Roadway Discharge Velocity Chart and Chart 1-103.6A Capacity of Curb Opening Inlets from the City of San Diego Drainage Design Manual. See Appendix 6 for the charts. CATCH BASIN DESIGN AND ANALYSIS: The catch basins were designed for orifice type flow, or flow through a grate under ponding conditions. See Appendix 7 for the nomograph used to size the grated catch basins. The allowable discharge for grated catch basins was calculated assuming 0.3-foot - sump condition and 50% of the grate open area clogged. BROW DITCH DESIGN AND ANALYSIS: The brow ditch located at the tops of retaining walls was sized using King's hand book (Reference 2) Table 14 and assuming a minimum of 0.5 feet of free board. For circular �- channels: K' = Qn/[d^(8/3)s 1(1/2)] where - K' = Discharge Factor Q =Runoff Discharge (cfs) n = Manning's Coefficient d =Diameter of Channel (ft) s = Channel Slope (ft/ft) CULVERT DESIGN AND ANALYSIS: The storm drain culverts were sized using King's handbook(Reference 2) Table 14 to verify capacity. For circular conduits: K' = Qn/[d^(8/3)s^(1/2)] where K' = Discharge Factor Q=Runoff Discharge (cfs) n =Manning's Coefficient d= Diameter of Conduit (ft) s =Pipe Slope (ft/ft) See Table 2, Hydrology and Hydraulic Calcs, for culvert sizing. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: All of the proposed pipes and inlets/catch basis were designed to intercept and convey the 100-year storm. Per the City of San Diego Drainage Design Manual, a Type `A' curb outlet will handle flows ranging from 0.5 cfs to 4.0 cfs. The 100-year flow generated by the developed condition for this site is 2.6 cfs (routed). Therefore, the existing curb outlet can remain in place. The undeveloped basin generates 1.6 cfs during the 100-year storm. The developed basin generates 2.6 cfs (routed) during the 100-year storm. The increased runoff is due to the increased impervious area which is consistent with the future improvements for which this site was zoned. -- Runoff from basin `A' is intercepted via a 7-foot Type `B-1' curb inlet and conveyed via a 12-inch diameter PVC culvert to a CDS Unit where the storm water will be cleansed of impurities. The remainder of the runoff from the site will be cleansed via a bio-filtration swale located at the rear of the proposed building. It is common practice to limit grass lined swales to a I% minimum slope since flatter slopes cannot be accurately constructed in the field without the potential for flat areas where ponding could occur and cause possible flood damage to nearby improvements. Calculations show that the swale can accommodate the 100-year storm. Unfortunately, in meeting the 100-year design requirement, the limitations required for a bio-filtration swale could not be met. For a rainfall intensity of 0.4-inches per hour,the depth of flow within the channel was calculated to be approximately 3.5-inches which exceeds the maximum 1.5-inches limit per the City of Encinitas SUSMP. The travel time within the swale was calculated as 5.4 minutes per Urban Overland Time of Flow Curves (Appendix A3)which is less than the minimum 10 minutes required by the SUSMP. Although the grass swale designed for this project does not meet the minimum standards for the SUSMP bio-filtration swale, CTRH is satisfied that the stringent requirements for storm water cleansing were met to the maximum extent possible for a site of this size r N O O N d r � CO U' U O U F- 04 T N F- N U 01 C Q O CD 0 C7 Q C7 i O 1 G r N LL CL O d O 1+' d' 3 C. r t C7 O x (j O — a+ G1 m 3 m CL cm Cl) O T - 0 F• CO U L 7 v 6 r N M Z N Cf cq r r r _ t ° ( v C M C O 1� O E In CO LO a U, M U) O W J $ O NN co J N C) N Z C �p } d 0 (1 L � 00 O O O O _ J -y O 3 w Co ^ °vc° o o M O = L v v Cl? Co U1 Q O o o CO M F- c U `v v' w ; 04 O r, > 4=. R M U o O ,I: W Q o ° 00 rn 00 N O ° � � N ..a A N C> ° i „a 0� 00 a V N O ke) W) ►y .\C C O � � kn 00 00 O ('r O O cq 00 I Cl rte+ C t N ra > O a.i N v� UI o ° ° UI I o o I I I I l l l l i i Oa Q U o C:, I -5Y., V WIC I I o� p i ►� � o� r'i ! I I I I � I� I I 'v m c j � : : APPENDIX A S s u P 770 3-) 0, OX - P= Z �44) eN //0/0 Z-- ICU L- y= 0,2-7 ,7 r o me :(Fox IV A 7/ Rz- Z- kn In c 7-15 41 CS C DOE U, 65 C-Ics Fob ZY 11 c .42 7-C) /,/A X ��Pv rA -r7 L 0 t4j f pt:; 5;"v Ac Tr q 0. -7 5 e- yj LD'7- 0 Ol -7 5 p o 5 A RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS (RATIONAL METHOD) DEVELOPED AREAS (URBAN) Coefficient, C Soil Group Land Use A B D D Residential: Single Family .40 .45 .50 .55 - Multi-Units .45 .50 .60 .70 Mobile Homes .45 .50 .55 .65 Rural (lots greater than 1/2 acre) .30 .35 .40 .45 Commercial 12' 80% Impervious .70 .75 .80 .85 Industrial 'Z' 90% Impervious .80 .85 .90 .95 NOTES: "' Soil Group maps are available at the offices of the Department of Public Works. 'Z) Where actual conditions deviate significantly from the tabulated imperviousness values of 80% or 90%, the values given for coefficient C, may be revised by multiplying 80% or 90% by the ratio of actual imperviousness to the tabulated imperviousness. However, in no case shall the final coefficient be less than 0.50. For example: Consider commercial property on D soil group. Actual imperviousness = 50% Tabulated imperviousness = 80% Revised C = 50 x 0.85 = 0.53 80 Q Z IV-A-9 ` APPENDIX IX i i„�+�*o 4 A Irl _ URBAN AREAS OVERLAND T iME OF FLOW CURVES �l � 1-. I . rt't'��._r 1.-L.:. . y�}t.+h�-}} O �1 1��• �1 •+tl 1-! _ t�•i_'.�� 700 + .-� t-{ , �i• '�I 1. `}- T +. ''''TT' r ♦ �ice. f 4 T rs I.8(1� 1-C1� _1«t r+� _ ' ; ..1.� h �ji ,}yl�T�yj fir r ! r•r; 1 ,L• TT f'= Use Formulo For fr' �`r -' 4T1 80 600 �;.;: _ pistonces in Ezcess; :-- ` ` y -i -� ;Y =, **� .T Of 800 Feet. T ;; - j} i 1 a\* -4 � 1�:\o_ i�.+�-•.1 t t �•l ZT 500 '4 L: r -l. J�•i�-_.-F { 1 y *i"f Nf .� 1 ^rl�� �T+ ♦ .i1-f..1T1 t a1� t,+ i.i�•++ T ��..i-1+-r t� r�iJ 400 �.:...� n.�n.�Y.� Mss �1. T•--•4 Z t ` L. 11 ,.a—r =':_� .-.-. 4-�S1+fY�i � 1 •1}}r+ -rTt?l. .. y�.-��r. •_ J:�� i♦--... _1��_' - 1 100 L }, Y _ _ _ - _ _ C` ' .:.- -+• ~ t;: + •r - - t;�',i_ ' C` j go C. r'. Surface Flow romw Gwra+ - F-XAMPLE Cwt V Etil LEI» GTH of FLOW = 400 FT. ✓ LL Or r—, = I .0 9'o GoEFF i Ci ENT of G = . 70 AD 0V& ZLAr4 D PLOWTtiCrnE- = ( T M(NV i ES A3> 86 0 cr- q 0 I i I II I •� � ' / - Z .. C' O Qc —_- - ---�—_- - —=-- - — —_ Ci 1 _ , - - - — — uJ p O o oc+ © 40 n n N -0 p 0 O O O O G anOH a3 d S3HDNI (003110 NVS) Jl 1 I S N3 L N I RAINFALL C o - INTENSITY - DURATION- FR�GUEN- — o u o a o h o o r, CURVES qr T for p o 0 0 0 COUNTY OF SAN GIEGO W O O O O O u o W I O O O W a n o ° 0 0 0 o W m P. = APPENDIX _ 83 /� I yI NDBOOK Or IIYDRAULICS for the Solution of Ilw1ratclic Engineering Problems 'Pale 7-1.1. Values of /t:' for Circular Chall"cls in the Formula U = ticpth of water d = tliam.-ter of channel U OG 07 O8 .09 .00 .01 .02 .03 .04 .05 d .0 1.00007 .00031 .00074 .00138 .00222 .00328 .004 55 .00604'.007 7 .1 .00907.01 18 0142 .0161,7 .01!15 .0225 .0257 0`.2'91 .0327 03fiG 38 .07!1:3 .08 lit i.o4ls I .11537 .o5s5 .oa3-3 .oast .07. .3 .0907 1.0966 .1027 .1089 .1153 .1218 .-1284 .1352 .1420 .1.19 0 3 .15(1,l .1 G33 .1705 .1779 .1854 .1929 2005 .2082 .'2160 L2'2:38 _'32 230 2-17 255 263 271 -^7!I 287 "IS :3(13 w 6 .:311 .:31!1 .327 .:335 .313 .650 .t5S .3116 .373 ,SO I .7 .388 .3'.15 .4(1'2 .l0!) .416 .422 12!1 135 .-I11 . 147 8 .•153 1:18 .-163 .4 a8 .473 .477 .481 1!35 155 .4!)1 .!I ,494 .4!10 .4!17 .•108 .•198 .-1!18 .4!1,11, 4!19 .48!1 183 1.0 .•163 ti'I'L.�f)1" L•�E1 0It "r,cm' Iv 01'E,, C11_k\\f':LS 7-3 > ,r.1,515 714. For Determining; the Area a of the C'roSS Section of a Circular Corldt'it I10%virtg; fart, Dull ticpth of water n and C' = the tabulaGnl cah3c, Then a lnetcr of channel d n AO 01 .02 .03 .04 .05 .06 .07 OS OD • ti 0 OOOOI .0013 .003; 0013'91 .0105 .0117 ()192' .0242 .020.3 .03,50 .040'9 .().1,70 .0.53.1 Otil)OI .OtiliB .073!)1 .05.111 .0855 .11!)11,]` .10:3!) 2 ills .11'99 .12511 .13115 .14.1!)• .15.1. 1 .l'62:3i .1711, .l`11111 .1536 n 2n 0 2:355 .24501 2541-1 .264''1 .27,'9 .YS:;ti .3 .1'98'3 2074 t 671 (i .3827 ,21 .2'Ja-3 .3032 .3130 .322'9 .3323 .3-125 .35'.1 .:3G"_, 3. 5 .3'93 .403 .413 42:3 .433 .443 I .453 .4 11,2 .4721 .482• Ii 492 .502 .51'2 .521 .5:31 .540 I .550 .559 .569 .57S t .111-1 .62:3 .632 .641) .11,.1,9 .65 7 .606 .7 .587 .8911, .605 .8 .674 .681 .689 G97 .703 it2 .7 t9 .725 .732 .738 .9 1 .745 .750 .756 .7111 .7613 .771 .775 .779 .782 .7 8 A5- CHART 1-104.12 N RES1DENrIAL S'h£ET CuE S+DE der Itt � " - cx cc , i ' N .` ... O < N ✓ I c ! C I i , • Il i i C• C `` , LZ Lo cs , i 1 C+ C ci Q7 I , j I I I ! I III i i I i x 7 • 6 t T • f 10 20 JO •o so — DISCHARGE (C F S) ONE SIDE EXAMPLE' Given. 0= IO s= 2_5% CAorI gvtf: k;irt c 0.4, VOccity c 4.4 fps. 1 - REV. j CITY OF SAN DIEGO - DESIGN GUIDE SNT. N G. GUTTER AND ROADWAY DISCHARGE - VELOCITY CHART I 1 CHART 1-103 .6 A CAPACITY OF CURB OPENING INLETS ASSUMED 2% CROWN . Q = 0 .7L (A+Y) 3/2 *A = 0 .33 Y = HEIGHT OF WATER AT CURB FACE (0 .4' MAXIMUM) REFER TO CHART 1-104 .12 L = LENGTH OF CLEAR OPENING OF INLET *Use A=0 when the inlet is adjacent to traffic; i .e. , for a Type "J" median inlet or where the parking lane is removed. A (, Z REV. CITY OF SAN DIEGO - DESIGN GUIDE SHT. N0. CAPACITY OF CURB OPE14ING INLETS IV-39 10 a n, f1PfNING RATIO 6 —•P-1-7/8-4 0.6 r P-1-7/8 Q9 f ti 5 o.6 J "' P-1 1/8 R@licutint 0.8 - b 4 A Cw 0.35 0 • vtd von@ 30• till-bor 0.34 0 3 ` . T@sl@d die 2 W 0.8 1 = 0.6 w 0.5 CURB : o T 0.4 ( O yy 3 O f 0.3 Q A O 1 5 r-- L —1 0 0.2 �o A =CLEAR OPENING AREA _ P : 2W + L (WITH CURB) -P ■2(W+L) (WITHOUT CURB) Q7C 1 2 3 4 6 6 8 10 20 30 40 50 60 80 100 wscmmmE a (Fr 3is) ! CHART 11 . Grate inlet capacity in sump conditions. Figure IV-20. Grate inlet capacity in sump conditions (Reference IV-4, p. 71) A 5,-5q to 1. 0 c f s So% 6gq-rc SLd 40 6;E A O L) M tN <XM TE :5PAGF d,5 I 1-103.6 4- (3) Type "C" Curb Inlet - Not permitted where street grade is less than five percent (5%). May be used to gain additional inlet capacity of two (2) C.F.S. maximum when a Type "B" curb inlet is slightly insufficient and combined with a street grade over five percent (5%). (4) Type "D" Curb Inlet - Not permitted in the City of San Diego. (5) Type "E" curb Inlet - Not permitted without special approval. r (6) Type "F" Catch Basin - To be used to intercept surface drainage from ditches or swales outside of traveled ways. Not permitted adjacent to sidewalks, bikeways or trails for public use. (7) Type "G" Catch Basin - Not to be used, use Type "I" catch basin. -- (8) Type "H" Curb Inlet - Not permitted in the public right-of-way (to be used in alleys, parking areas or similar paved areas). (9) Type "1" Catch Basin - Only to be used under special , conditions and with prior approval. May be used in alleys. (10) Inlet aprons shall be limited to parking lanes only. (11) Use curb inlet - Type "J" Median (D-45) for center median inlets (four feet (41) maximum opening L=5' Max.). Do not depress the gutter beyond the lip of the gutter i.e. , not into the driving lane. (12) Sidewalk Underdrains - Use Type "A" curb outlet (D-25) for 0.5 C.F.S. to 4.0 C.F.S. ; sidewalk underdrains(s) D-27 for flows to 0.5 C.F.S. D-26 is not permitted in the City of San Die o. (13) Minimum inlet opening length is four feet (41) , L = 51. (14) Maximum inlet opening length is twenty feet (201) , L = 211. i (15) All drainage shall be intercepted and collected at superelevated roadway transition sections where concentrated flows are not permitted to cross traveled lanes under the design storm frequency for the street. Median inlets shall be designed and spaced so the lane adjacent to the median (number one lane or fast lane of traffic adjacent to the median) is free from drainage flow for the design storm frequency. __ 10 A8 ,RO JFCT"0111 . qRY J4S1N No �UCn/RF NC �\ O a 0 p�a�l,1 ,9,9(9 07 � L Oc Q X O C7) Zt, LQ SCALE: 1 = 130' co Co Q- Cc cz� cc) cc 71 Y 8 A N A C T 5 0 ti M A F 1, C 1 0 0117 14 V.]AS.61 ....... --- �7�771 c �60i.[O N Ibnoo M31A N3011 VE) C, .....................j z4 t RMON Y2 IS ' ONSTRUCTION TEsTING & ENGNERING, IN �L SAN DIEGO,CA RIVERSIDE CA 7 , VENTURA,CA TRACY,CA LANCASTER,CA 2414 Vineyard Ave. 490 E.Princeland Ct SAC . 1645 Pacific Ave. 242 W.Larch SACRAMENTO CA N.PALM SPRINT Suite G Suite 105 42156 10th St.W 3628 Madison Ave. 19020 N.Indian A Suite 7 Suite F G Escondido,CA 92029 Corona,CA 91719 Oxnard,CA 93033 Tracy,CA 95376 Unit k Suite 22 Suite 2-K(760)746-4955 (909)371-1890 Lancaster,CA 93534 N.Highlands,CA 95660 N.Pam Springs, (760)746-9806 FAX (909)371-2168 FAX (805)486-6475 (209)839-2890 (661)726-9676 (916)331-6030 ENGINEERING, WC, (805)486-9016 FAX (209)839-2895 FAX (661)726-0246 FAX (916)331-6037 FAX (760)329-4677 (960)328-4896 FA: - FINAL REPORT FOR COMPACTION TESTING PROPOSED CTRH PROFESIONAL BUILDING _ 761 GARDEN VIEW COURT, LOT#12 ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA CITY OF ENCINITAS PLAN FILE NO. 30211-1-3-D PREPARED FOR: l MR. TIM HALVERSON �rIGIM1' ;E 285 N. EL CAMINO ROAD, SUITE 110 ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024 ' PREPARED BY: EA CONSTRUCTION TESTING& ENGINEERING, INC. 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE, SUITE G ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029 CTE PROJECT NO. 10-5603 MAY 6, 2003 GEOTECHNICAL*ENVIRONMENTAL•CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION AND TESTING.CIVIL ENGINEERING•SURVEYING SECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 2.0 TREATMENT OF BUILDING PAD........................................................................................1 3.0 FILL PLACEMENT..................................................................................................................1 4.0 TESTIN ............................. ............. 5.0 ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION................................................ 6.0 CONCLUSIONS 7.0 LIMITATIONS........................................................................................ ............................3 TABLES TABLE I COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY TABLE II LABORATORY TEST DATA FIGURES FIGURE 1 SITE INDEX MAP FIGURE 2 COMPACTION TEST LOCATION MAP F:110-56031Rpt_Final Compaction.doc Interim Report for Testing of Compacted Fill for Building Pad Proposed CTRH Professional Building Page 1 Encinitas, California May 6, 2003 CTE Job No 10 5603 1.0 SITE DESCRIPTION The proposed project is located on the east side of the Garden View Court cul-de-sac,just north of its intersection with Garden View Road in Encinitas California. Areas surrounding the site are used mainly for commercial enterprises or residential purposes. Figure 1 is an index map showing the location of the proposed project. 2.0 TREATMENT OF BUILDING PAD AND PAVEMENT AREAS As anticipated by the preliminary soils report (Limited Soil Investigation and Updated Soil-related Recommendations, CTRH Professional Building, Lot 12—Garden View Court, Encinitas, California, Geotechnical Exploration, Inc., 1/30/02),the entire proposed building pad will be placed on competent, engineered fill materials. According to the preliminary soils report this site and its immediate area were mass-graded several years ago. At that time the majority of the lot consisted of native,cut soil materials. However,as noted below the site was overexcavated during grading activities to provide a minimum of 18 inches of engineered fill underneath all foundation elements and paving areas. 3.0 FILL PLACEMENT Compacted fill was placed during grading to prepare the site for the construction of the proposed - development. Fill material was derived from onsite and import sources. Fill was generally placed in uniform compacted lifts at near optimum moisture content. Grading was performed using standard heavy-duty constriction equipment. Where observed, organic material and rocks greater than six FAI0-5603\Rpt_Final CompactionAm Interim Report for Testing of Compacted Fill for Building Pad Proposed CTRH Professional Building Page 2 Encinitas, California May 6 2003 CTE Job No. (0-5603 inches were selectively picked from the fill. All fill has been properly recompacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90% or 95% (ASTM D-1557) per project specification. - 4.0 TESTING Field and laboratory testing were performed throughout the site earthwork activities. Testing was generally performed to supplement field observations, to promote compliance with the applicable project requirements,and to develop additional recommendations for further site development. Testing of compacted fill addressed by this report was conducted from August 2002 through April 2003. Field testing of the compacted fill material was conducted according to ASTM D2922 and D3017 (nuclear methods). Results of the field testing show that fill materials were compacted to appropriate engineering specifications (depending on location at the site either 90% or 95% of the laboratory determined maximum dry density). The laboratory determined maximum dry density and optimum moisture content were ascertained per test method ASTM D-1557. Tabulated results of the field compaction testing performed are provided in the attached Table I, "Compaction Test Summary." Laboratory determination of the reference compaction values for the fill - materials are provided in Table II, "Laboratory Test Results." Additionally, locations of field test are attached in Figure 2 "Compaction Test Location Map". F:110-5603\Rpt_Final Compaction.doc Interim Report for Testing of Compacted Fill for Building Pad Proposed CTRH Professional Building Page 3 Encinitas, California Ma 6 2003 CTE Job No, 10-5603 5.0 ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION Specific recommendations presented in the referenced soil investigation report should be incorporated during construction of any future additions at this site. These recommendations include inspections of footing excavations by an engineer or geologist from this office. 6.0 CONCLUSIONS Based on site preparation,observations,and test results, the sites are deemed suitable for support of the proposed improvements. The soil engineering and geologic aspects of the grading are in compliance with the approved geotechnical report and the grading and/or improvement plans(Drawing No. 30211- 1-3-D). All foundations, building and retaining wall, were found to extend to proper depth and bearing strata and were founded in competent material suitable for support. 7.0 LIMITATIONS As limited by the scope of the services that we agreed to perform, our opinions presented herein are based on our observations, test results, and understanding of the proposed site development. Our service was performed according to the currently accepted standard of practice and in such a manner as to provide a reasonable measure of the compliance of the grading operations with the job requirements. No warranty,express or implied, is given or intended with respect to the performance of the project in - any respect. Submittal of this report should not be construed as relieving the grading contractor of his responsibility to comply with the project requirements. F:\10-5603\Rpt_Final Compaction.doc Interim Report for Testing of Compacted Fill for Building Pad Proposed CTRH Professional Building Page 4 Encinitas, California Mav 6 2003 CTE Job No. 10-5603 The opportunity to be of service is appreciated. If you have any questions regarding testing conducted, _ observations made during construction or recommendations presented herein,please do not hesitate to contact this office. Should you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Sincerely, CONSTRUCTION TESTING AND ENGINEERING, INC. aTan . Math, CE#610 13 3 Senior Engineer an oodmacher, CEG#2136 - ief Ge ogist �G�NEERING 0 W. N 2173 m w Mu. 4 gyp..s�oN4 10103 FOFCA FA10-5603\Rpt_Final Compaction.doc 117'17,000' ✓✓ TOGO! map punted on 09/05/02'r""Callf0mla-MO"and"Untitled rpy 1 °16^00 N .:: 171 15.0!'0 ca .v •�r35134 it?'14.00(Y W ':.�:i:i' ::' \,rd$v :> } -,•.,a �.?4 f •^ (rte, f„.,,n ,x,,.xm, ..�' �i�w 4 ai F ,e 9 ws rS: }`>�� r, .. � � w ``�, 3 }pal Y• < �� / s a` : > 4�4, y�y a '/ �: � Fr �'-�e... x�4 p..• .,�y� ar,\w 3 3 �` K' �%� z O 2 SkN ♦�✓. !`: �: s ./'.� t F� � y,,,,',� ,•a�7'::,,,.+'G„::'3:>' o ',�, ,..._.. Q'> /Et j.- ^ ..>.> a. -l' F < 8 rYaa; 'w•'„° <f♦ f3:""r,n;::E' .4[;`�>'. Yl .,< Ci ✓. Y F x f• 4 1..: nk y� 4 Sh i wt•. ..ro ,; a .,f:5:.< ;`'. "! 9'a<. w f I_';: Z G.X M h�- J R ,x.♦r v ,rraf,.>" �<��'•))st' y 11 `Cy[2 ,L', q$> ...:y }:2< <r,,:s <Y .lA•x v:; t "• ;.d�o'y:�.b�.. f!':%[;:c: :Mt'y; ''<^=; p O ui .f s i :•Y a y Y a �k .!<<>< .Yn Y �" / R f': .;G:::,3i, ':..8` :':-:•�SY < , 'X.',Y-. .._ E C. § C /,.. .y,).f d7/,p•+ 3. �s::. ✓y •y3sFw ����)R.,:,,,;,.,.,....::.:�::n�:.i.. ,.,a•...���\:tif: tt< 34x•3' (.C. ,,.o?°i S. { .'.f '.:ti.., n• `rYCIQ` \4 da..r } y '> ✓ o*' r, r r-/.. 4 sa 4� a ♦�>7.:3'.,,`: Q- / t r 2 r t ^<y. 2 •�:f ,<1 N ¢�. 7 '.> :: <s.!.; Y•. -e°t .,;::: v/:� X44•. 'fut/ C % c,('> r r.... {• Zxy .,) ��.✓rr -1' / 4 . .. � .. �( < } � ♦` t ♦ f/,C3•, •kv;;.::,.< `xy '\ y3 � <<�tiufS..wl � /l b L �.: 2 '#'a: :t a .♦. y„�aY,,, < o• rt`ft ? ?7.: .,.q ♦. ` cafe\ r / ,:! - ,A/�: S`u Y t>. �}'S t '2 t r ♦i`3. •>,.'-,y? <�, r "� y , Y/aJs ?< %( .,• 4 y.C{ o..}n a v '1,•y 7< # �tk ✓c�f; .:f> 2..:'L ro '.< ) ,'Y• < t7 ( e�< Cif_--:?, yiV \•J'ba : Q 1 r� ''w'' ;° cyk S -`t...^ .t.:: +.J.<� ?'r �[� r✓fs. )♦ i- ^C+r<ri-,,:�C">k__ O � "._.,y v r �3� #n[.;:;:: c;;i:� f� _ - a N!D�•,v. / .\ f t► s.� ctnr„ntrsd t �"`O00`3 f�?t¢lt } -,� o ._.- m.a` � ys', kk,i >io:4•a ;S. < c@ y /.. o'` /,.. / .....` �J4v��,� °o 6 SITE {tE`E,�,e4'�<3,v YY•S� - 4SY2 <s.. 3. ,oy �.�::2. ro - f 2 ( � f 1.." <<v5 �\ �> t'..: � - ,,..,- t. +,�•.� .a :a3 r '< ) :,A •h{ •. :: tr 4 `'`?t�,,,,y♦ :::2f< s. � Y �.<� k k _;�. > h ,�� 4 ♦ r +♦ 9 4»<f < K � 4 _ t \> s S - j 'Z`i 'fi` '�• \� ` i a ')i �$p3 A e f d > , x J 4 1; [•. .Yj f� k f a:.n:4,k[k�s•.�,'•,'.., ��1f L<,8: ♦' '�-..t i y / �S. u`. s._.'t' E. h\3 .t �i �j't a,,: 3 3� / ( !2f-.. < �•!�.s+v,,�+[sv < ��.` S f ..-_ r. :.� 4t[�'S.b ✓ :^,�k• o a. f �a.: }t/( `•p;:�s{;":- . ' 3-.::C.:.tG."i;3 < .6�.::1.% .�".; js ih.t[:�5,, -� ry,<ro s :,n � 4- z ;s>,•Y ,�-..: ,gti•�rJ♦w.' t4�Jc"t,^/.;::`:.:'�-td[ < f yy :.3::. .} ..Svc.:.Y+� ,4}.4. ���'�(33.% v�-.• ;•y �"� ,•r'..3: :#: o".,3 f�-<>.n!a,� '3 S 4:::a.a.<}�.:. :> .6 ��L / .s.::•3. -'✓ :S.:..,vi;'. i f ':`1'Y<"•� .C„'C i T >.}i:;:,, _. `.:•• r•' \;:..::;: ...$::::;k3gf"`y`�;�;�:;A, :3:YNo: "SY�it :�3.: z :- ... :. •q\fi.:, rr::1: t4'.t:•3'k;-.r' -!�� .r::�::-':::::::..:L::i•'T'.. ..<:)'i:`3::> - :. :,�: ..... .,::..: •< :....::.::. ,$. �Y f :.�>:>::: .:.:✓:;.:3r.to";c;;;;;SSS::;,Y' .S.r t<-x4: /•:< .....JY04f .:.:..,.:: n +3_::::F .'I.iv::.:::.:>. 3�iT•.;`<43... ..: \::. :. O >b':i?>3'i a' Y :: !' t�:.<: ` ,. F, -'Jt> »< na(Y: .2'•',:J:'f... -: 4:Xe. ''��: L<:::t 'SfY'-: ,y.k�if[ y.i:;:�f,'N b•..N :. ,�.(.:•',,:�?:::i3•-::-$+f.`(;:;;f.�`.,h'r' W!C,,.: {:CJ�"� 'J'i' Mo f ¢"" " <-. '�`�`v 3 fss2g��, fit' YN`••+s- . cea," s'i`x' 2' fit[ •Z:"r;;;s•s" z M y` 6!. '�� Y K:y'�31pB•('?.� i6F4�<S ..?� `'3` s��,p�¢'+A � � .: •+•' O M Y '1 .�- � 4 a C.# f � t• .�!aF;n%4 r �; O 'v �`P .'•!(f�,'ti4 \.l' x ::':�4:<>fe-. ?s.d t°•'3.• ';cf.";r'. ,q"k-Y-4 a s' M ''� 4 ♦\`c�c:woe.T '! Er .i'.. 4�; t ::x: 1cK ':: •� < ?` > - a•Yeec• .�r �,�:, e 4 ,� ate"a,F 'x., ��G♦ 3�.<, ���, d.�• �a+}$$�'3 Pa �'; lK t F,�1��' r ,'°°`'..aoee o a♦�`')t,:.C;: •JbK �J ...s ff { L Xis :-\ 't y[ 'n{x'�2 400 .U..... , rn• < -'?M4'�«i%G ��,� YS 3'S-f�•g2 �y L�?� " ! i,. a�'�.y� r'.i' T�� > �` L\," NO: t s �{'24 > 4i' j v.'^�og Sao}`,.\4.".f..f",k` �,�' ,�•t'{''� "�' � axl, � ?• b:£:.', `• •�)" 3:• �«�tlf -.v,3Q�y:,+ �'`� F - Y g.. ,s+ : SY� r �� k#,�k�3✓ `• Z-' i '1... }A C- 3 2. !".1 < .t4� t tg >�! ..` }:{{; •C .!'d'asYti�..,,.r.3:: ,.�,'. � ::�....;?+.:£..."<fw" •:4•s• .O. _ ; s;$;<::t::: gg :.i : t , :c; ( ;:j:.: 4#:x}'334 • ,.s. -•' is:'.' #.' '•s£<t.v ":F' ..t.,E2.y'f"r."%: :{:`. §.t 31:: ;-�. !'''',.:t;.",., .4.� _.L'-,• !:�)"\at 1..Z.� air \\, ltr ;'F:.;{#:. .'�.' ",2::',ky�r "�v... Z :<!@',•': '�•:`•F Si; �•:. .oy ZV;s' :,N:, f`:•tci <49 t?!ba�::.::..' 'k�.': "::'1yw;:�,�.sy�:`' \�y. ':t?l!4<�� �-f o ;tr.,�:#.E. � gu "a /�,-s-sk.'�..v�[..` > �• !•'3::y-`%�"•v.\"\Z r:" I a: �c `:. Q t x?:,.,.<• 3 of � '. �+ �N�,. �•r y.F'. ::i.•'''O4"+<i:f'J\)� r':4 < { / ,\ fi: N f f< .:L ,.i 4 4 X� v,i'/b ':l `9:6. � �Q/ �`��yyt):i:\: ': +n ��: t•ai Z y!,q•,••:;::<`:i � •k N3 .�.s. .d Ct�wr��;' •f:Y,c �.�. <\�,h,d.�.�•,,,,i :✓y 6 /4s"a'l f• ~,�� v-v O M[ •} -) T'• rk -` ' ; 4.: , t3 a i3`w�3 r : .EN \Q✓ < j 7 ) > .I• \:y 9S ./ `-►:..'\i"" O ) .[t•S•• �>. ee... l4 Y*�"1Da� �,"✓ \ p �S�S<: - � l,J� X\ ;'�}- M \ `� � �( A �/?'1' Y £' �,�5'`'f`C'.II9XGGff C� � C \< 3\'` ' >} ♦�: \ j�p"':C�()(. M '.t- '. ;♦ s'itrCr.::!2: .�,,k�''S >::}:)g�`: 4< ':w 4',l •,;>.\ .,.2>L'4i t �� �>:r�^"> 7' Y � F� 1 y� S r_ S f♦ �ti,�,�. Mm 117'17.000' W £Y•-.' �:0iff'f:�„-Ii t fP� £y `�,<� .j /,t f ✓ / TNjjrAN 13. 1�177-°16.000'W ✓` 3 11't0 t Llh S OCii' .a 84 .. 11?'14.000'W -- Punted:mrn TOPOI O'xm l'Odr 3+ar Psodirtn[SS(.-o.,.-• •'W'taoa r1�m1 o' � CONSTRUCTION TESTING & E\GIi\-EERING, INC. `Fl 2 GEOTECHNICALAND CON5"I'RI'r-;'fr;N'b:NGfYEERISCi';iIST;N..AND^;5PEC7E'10N CWfN XXNCrNC 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE,iTF;; ES rn NU[b0 i -� '�=�._•1 i'oi1/746-4955 SITE INDEX MAP rE '° �0 FOOT CONTOUR ELEVATIONS PROPOSED MIR PROFEsSIO.N,V, II,UL�'<; 10-'603 761 GARDEN MEIN CUI:R 1',Lo'l, I: =ALE: AS SHOWN \\F:\PROJECTS\10-1000\LNDEX(Li P.CNP ENCINICAS,CALIIrOI NL\ iA FE' � (A 02 j TABLE I COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY Job Name: CTHR PROFESIONAL BUILDING Job Address: 761 GARDEN VIEW COURT,ENCINITAS Job No. 10-5603 Date Test Date: 9/4/2002 Location No. (See Densit Moisture Relative O� (See map) y Mi Soil Feet pcf Content Compaction Type %Dry % 8/21/2002 l On Buildin Pad,Finish Grade Wei ht 8/2!/2002 2 On Build' Pad,Finish Grade FG 107.0 17.0 92% 1 8/21/2002 3 On Buildin Pad,Finish Grade FG 1 14'5 12.5 99% 1 8/21/2002 4 On Building Pad,Finish Grade FG 108'2 15.7 93% 1 8/212002 5 On Building Pad,Finish Grade FG 108.3 11.4 93% 1 9/102002 6 SEWER FG 105.9 14.3 91 co 9/102002 7 *RE-TEST OF##6* -6.5 95.2 14.1 82% 91102002 1 8 SEWER -6•5 104.5 16.9 90% 9/102002 1 9 *RE-TEST OF 1#8* -5 5 99.7 21.5 86% 1 9/102002 1 10 SEWER -5.5 105.8 19.7 9/102002 1 11 SEWER -5.0 104.4 14.7 90°10 9/102002 1 12 SEWER 4.0 106.9 14.3 92% I 9/102002 1 13 SEWER -3.0 109.0 11.7 94% 9/102002 1 14 SEWER 4.0 108.0 12.8 93% 1 9/102002 1 15 SEWER -3.0 110.8 8.4 96% 9/102002 1 16 SEWER -4.0 105.1 8.9 91% 9/102002 1 17 SEWER -2.0 114.0 5.6 98% 1 9/102002 1 18 SEWER -7.0 107.9 12.5 93% 9/132002 1 19 SEWER -1.0 108.7 1 L5 94% 9/132002 1 20 SEWER -4.0 106.1 14.7 91% 9/132002 1 21 *RE-TEST OF 20* -2.0 9/132002 22 SEWER -2.0 103.9 13.8 90% 9/132002 23 *RE-TEST OF 22* 1 0 101.4 10.5 87% 1 9/1 32002 24 ELECTRIC -1.0 103.8 11.4 89% 1 9/132002 25 *RE-TEST OF 24* -2.0 103.4 11.9 89% 1 9/132002 26 ELECTRIC -V•0 109.1 10.0 94% 1 9/132002 27 *RE-TEST OF 26* -1.0 102.0 9.5 88% I 9/132002 28 ELECTRIC -1.0 105.6 9.4 91% 1 9/132002 29 *RE-TEST OF 28* -1.0 98.2 14.5 85% 9/132002 30 *RE-TEST OF 29* -1.0 102.0 12.6 88% 1 9232002 31 WALL AT EAST SIDE OF SITE 1.0 107'6 115 93% 9232002 32 WALL AT EAST SIDE OF S[TE 196.0 105.9 14.4 91% 1 9232002 33 WALL AT EAST SIDE OF SITE 196.0 106.8 14.9 92% 9232002 34 STOWM DRAIN 197'0 105.7 13.5 91% 9232002 35 STOWM DRAIN 192.0 105.1 14.5 91% 1 9232002 36 STOWM DRAIN 192.0 108.1 13.5 93% I 9232002 37 STOWM DRAIN 192.5 105.6 15.5 91% 9232002 38 STOWM DRAIN 192'0 109.7 13.7 95% 1 9232002 39 STOWM DRAIN 186.0 109.0 14.7 94% 1 9242002 40 WALL AT NORTH SIDE OF SITE 186.0 107.0 15.5 92% 1 9242002 41 WALL AT NORTH SIDE OF S[TE TW -2 104.5 13.6 90% 9242002 42 WALL AT NORTH SIDE OF SITE TW -2 105.8 13.7 91% 1 9242002 43 WALL AT NORTH SIDE OF SITE TW -2 104.8 13.8 90% 1 9242002 44 WALL AT NORTH SIDE OF SITE TW -2 105.0 15.4 91% 1 9242002 45 WALL AT EAST SIDE OF SITE TW -2 104.3 14.8 90% 1 9242002 46 WALL AT EAST SIDE OF SITE 199.0 108.3 14.8 93% 1 9242002 47 WALL AT EAST S[DE OF SITE 199.0 105.0 14.5 91% 1 9242002 48 WALL AT EAST SIDE OF SITE 199.0 108.3 13.5 93% 1 9242002 49 STORM DRAIN 1990 106.9 13.6 92% 1 9242002 50 STORM DRAIN 188.0 104.9 15.0 90% 1 9242002 51 STORM DRAIN 188.0 105.8 15.4 91% 1 9242002 52 STORM DRAIN 188.0 104.5 15.5 90% 1 9252002 53 STORM DRAIN 193.0 104.7 14 7 90% 1 _. 9252002 54 STORM DRAIN 190.0 106.0 14.4 91% 1 9252002 55 STORM DRAIN 190.0 104.2 14.2 900 1 9252002 56 STORM DRAIN 190.0 104.5 14.3 90% 1 9252002 57 STORM DRAIN 191.0 105.3 15.5 y(qg 1 191.0 105.8 15.4 91% 1 1 TABLE I COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY Job Name: CTHR PROFESIONAL BUILDING Job Address: 761 GARDEN VIEW COURT,ENCINITAS Job No. 10-5603 Date Test Date: 9/4/2002 Location Elevation Dens it Moisture Relative No. (See map) y Soil Feet pcf Content Compaction Type %Dry % 9/25/2002 58 STORM DRAIN Wei ht 102212002 1 59 WATER LINE 192.0 104.4 13.5 90% !0/21'2002 1 60 WATER LINE 2.0 109.7 13.7 95% 1 10/2/2002 61 WATER LINE -1.0 109.3 13.9 94% 1 10!1/2002 62 WATER LINE FSG 111.0 13.6 96% 1 1 0/7/2002 63 ELECTRIC -1.0 107.5 9.6 93% 1 1Or12002 64 ELECTRIC -3.0 110.6 5.8 95% ( 10/7/2002 65 ELECTRIC -2.0 112.7 8.8 97% 1 10!1/2002 66 WALL AT NE CORNER -1.0 108.9 11.5 94% 1 10!7/2002 67 WALL AT NE CORNER TW -2 112.5 15.3 97% 1 10/7/2002 68 WALL AT NE CORNER TW -1 109.9 17.6 95% 1 10/10/2002 69 WALL AT NE CORNER TW -1 104.0 14.9 90% 1 10/10/2002 70 WALL AT NE CORNER TW -1 109.4 14.0 94% (0/102002 71 WALL AT NE CORNER TW 108.0 13.9 93% 1 10/102002 72 WALL AT NE CORNER TW 112.3 14.I 97% I 10/102002 73 WALL AT NE CORNER TW+1 109.9 13.5 95% 1 10/102002 74 WALL AT NE CORNER TW+1 108.2 13.8 93% 10/102002 75 WALL AT NE CORNER TW+1 107.4 13.6 93% 10/102002 76 WALL AT NE CORNER TW+2 108.0 14.1 93% 10/11/2002 77 SEWER TW+2 111.2 15.7 96% 10/112002 78 SEWER -2.0 110.1 14.1 95% 10/11/2002 79 SEWER -1.0 112.5 13.7 97% I 10/112002 80 SEWER 15 108.2 13.5 93% 10/112002 81 SEWER -1.5 108.8 13.7 94% 10/1 1/2002 82 SEWER -0.5 1 1 L l 13.8 96% ► 10/112002 83 SEWER FSG 109.1 13.6 94% 10/11/2002 84 FIRE SERVICE FSG 107.9 13.9 93% 10/11/2002 85 FIRE SERVICE -2.0 117.6 13.5 90% 2 10/11/2002 86 FIRE SERVICE FSG t l L2 13.0 96% 1 10/1 1/2002 87 FIRE SERVICE -3.0 118.0 11.6 90% 2 10/142002 88 PLUMBING FSG 112.1 13.6 97% 1 10/142002 89 PLUMBING FSG 110.8 13.6 96% 1 10/142002 90 PLUMBING FSG 107.7 15.3 93% 1 10/142002 91 PLUMBING FSG 109.7 14.4 95% 1 10/142002 92 PLUMBING FSG 107.7 15.0 93% 1 10/142002 93 SIDEWALK FSG 108.2 13.9 93% 10/142002 94 SIDEWALK FSG 107.8 8.4 93% 10/142002 95 SIDEWALK FSG 104.9 7.9 90% 10/142002 96 ELECTRIC FSG 107.1 10/142002 97 ELECTRIC 192.0 106.8 15.5 92% l 10/142002 98 ELECTRIC 194.0 112.4 14.8 97% 10/142002 99 ELECTRIC 191.0 105.2 13.5 91%a 10/142002 100 ELECTRIC 193.0 104.3 15.5 90% 10/142002 101 ELECTRIC 194.0 104.3 13.5 90% 10/142002 102 ELECTRIC 191.0 107.5 13.8 93% 1 10/142002 103 ELECTRIC 193.0 104.8 14.1 90% 1 10/142002 104 ELECTRIC 193.0 109.5 13.6 94% 1 10/152002 105 PLUMBING 191.0 107.3 • 13.9 93% 1 10/152002 106 PLUMBING FSG 110.6 13.6 95% 10/152002 107 PLUMBING FSG 109.8 13.5 95% 10/152002 108 PLUMBING 192.5 110.6 13.8 95% 10/152002 109 PLUMBING FSG 108.5 13.6 94% 10/152002 110 ELECTRIC FSG 105.5 13.5 91% 10/152002 Ill ELECTRIC FSG 96.5 8.8 83% 10/15/2002 Ill ELECTRIC FSG 97.3 9.0 84% 10/152002 113 ELECTRIC 192.0 105.6 15.1 91% 10/I62002 114 *RE-TEST OF tl l l0* FSG 107.5 13.6 93% FSG I O5.I 13.5 91 2 TABLE I COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY ii;RNER e: CTHR PROFESIONAL BUILDING ress: 761 GARDEN VIEW COURT,ENCINITAS Job No. 10 5603 te Test Date: 9/42002 Location Elevation Density Moisture Relative Soil No. (See map) Feet pcf Content Compaction Type %Dry % 2002 l 15 *RE-TEST OF#111* Wei ht 2002 1 16 GRADING AT SW CORNER FSG 107.7 13.6 93% 1 002 1 17 GRADING AT SW CORNER -1-5 110.9 14.6 96% 1 002 118 GRADING AT SW CORNER -2 5 114,3 12.7 99% 1 002 1 19 GRADING AT SW CORNER -15 109.4 13.8 94% 1 002 120 GRADING AT SW CORNER FSG 1 13.0 14.5 97% 1 002 121 GRADING AT SW CORNER 2'0 112.3 15.8 97% LL/1142002 122 GRADING AT SW CORNER -1.5 109.8 1 1.0 95% 1 11/172002 123 WATERLINE -1.0 110.6 14.1 95% I 11/172002 124 SEWER FSG 114.0 13.9 98% 1 11/172002 1 125 SEWER FSG 111.4 14.1 96% 1 1 1/172002 1 126 *RE-TEST OF#125* FSG 107.1 14.2 92% 1 1 1/172002 1 127 ASPHALT AT WATER LINE FSG 114.2 13.8 98% 1 1/172002 1 128 ASPHALT AT WATER LINE FG 126.8 90% 3 l(/172002 1 129 ASPHALT AT SEWER LINE FG 127'5 90% 3 LL Y17/2002 1 130 ASPHALT AT SEWER LINE FG 127.2 90% 3 4/102003 1 131 CURB&GUTTER FG 127.8 91% 3 4102003 1 132 CURB&GUTTER FSG 1 1 1.3 13.5 96% 1 4/102003 1 133 CURB&GUTTER FSG 106.8 13.6 92% ( 4/102003 1 134 CURB&GUTTER FSG 114.4 14.0 99, l 4/102003 1 135 CURB&GUTTER FSG I I I.0 13.6 96% 1 4/102003 1 136 CURB&GUTTER FSG I I l9 13.5 96% 4/102003 1 137 CURB&GUTTER FSG 1 10.7 13.6 95% 4/102003 138 CURB&GUTTER FSG l 10.5 13.8 95% 1 4/102003 139 CURB&GUTTER FSG 108.5 13.5 94% 1 4/102003 140 CURB&GUTT ER FSG 100.9 12.0 87% 4/102003 141 CURB&GUTTER FSG 105.1 10.8 91% 1 4/102003 142 CURB&GUTTER FSG 110.9 15.0 96% 1 4/102003 143 CURB&GUTTER FSG 110.7 13.5 95% 1 4/102003 144 CURB&GUTTER FSG 110.2 13.6 95% 1 4/102003 145 CURB&GUTTER FSG 1 1 L6 13.5 96% 1 4/102003 146 CURB&GUTTER FSG 1 1 1.0 13.6 96% 1 4/102003 147 CURB&GUTTER FSG 1 1 1.6 13.8 96% 1 4/10/2003 148 CURB&GUTTER FSG l 1 I.1 13.5 96% 1 4/102003 149 CURB&GUTTER FSG 1 1 1.2 13.6 96% 4/102003 150 *RE-TEST OF#132* FSG l 1 1.6 13.5 4/102003 151 *RE-TEST OF#138 FSG 110.2 13.9 95% 4/11/2003 152 *RE-TEST OF#139* FSG 110.5 13.5 95% 1 4/112003 153 *RE-TESTOF#l40* FSG 110.6 13.9 95% 1 4/11/2003 154 BIN AREA FSG 1 1 L 1 13.0 96% 1 4/11/1-003 155 BIN AREA FSG 107.2 13.0 92% 1 4/11/2003 156 BIN AREA FSG 107.7 13.7 93% 1 4/122003 157 *RE-TEST OF#154* FSG 99.0 14.6 85% 1 4/122003 158 *RE-TEST OF#155* FSG 111.8 12.2 96% 1 4/122003 159 *RE-TEST OF#156* FSG 110.3 14.7 95% 1 4/122003 160 ELECTRIC FSG 110.6 14.8 95% 1 4/122003 161 ELECTRIC -1.0 104.9 12.7 90% l 4/122003 162 ELECTRIC -1.0 106.2 12,4 92% I 4/122003 163 ELECTRIC FSG 110.8 13.2 4/122003 164 GAS FSG 1 11.2 12 8 96% l 4/122003 165 GAS FSG 109.9 13.2 95% 1 4/12/2003 166 IRRIGATION FSG 110.6 12.5 95% 1 4/122003 167 IRRIGATION FSG 111.0 12.8 96% 1 1/122003 168 IRRIGATION FSG 113.6 13.1 98% 1 4/122003 169 IRRIGATION FSG 111.4 12.5 96% 1 4/182003 170 DRIVE AREA FSG 110.9 13.0 96% l 4/18/2003 171 DR[VE AREA FSG 1 1 1.4 13.8 96% 1 FSG 110.2 14.6 95% I 3 TABLE I COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY Job Name: CTHR PROFESIONAL BUILDING Job Address: 761 GARDEN VIEW COURT,ENCINITAS Job No. 10-5603 Date Test Date: 9/4/2002 Location Elevation Density oisture Relative No. (See map) y Soil Feet pcf Content Compaction Type %Dry 4/18/2003 172 ELECTRIC Weight 4/18/2003 173 ELECTRIC FSG 105,4 14.8 91% 1 4/18/2003 174 ELECTRIC FSG 110.2 14.3 95% 1 4/18/2003 175 ELECTRIC FSG 106.5 15,5 92% 1 4/28/2003 176 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS FSG 106.1 14.9 91% 1 4128/2003 177 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS FSG 110.8 13.3 96% I 4/28/2003 178 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS FSG 1 1 1,0 12 9 96% 4/28/2003 179 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS FSG 110.6 11.8 95% 4/28/2003 180 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS FSG 111.2 13.5 96% 4/282003 181 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS FSG 110.1 11.8 950, 4282003 182 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS FSG 111.1 13.1 95% 4282003 183 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS FSG 1 10.3 12.6 97% 4282003 184 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS FSG l 12.2 13.4 96% 4282003 185 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS FSG 1 10.9 12.8 96% 1 4292003 186 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS BASE FSG 111.4 13.0 96% 4292003 187 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS BASE FG 128'0 5.9 95% 4 4292003 188 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS BASE FG 128'6 6.1 95% 4 4292003 189 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS BASE FG 129.7 5.6 96% 4 4292003 190 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS BASE FG 130.5 5.2 97% 4 4292003 191 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS BASE FG 128'8 5.6 95% 4 4292003 192 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS BASE FG 129'4 5,4 96% 4 4292003 193 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS BASE FG 129'8 5.9 96% 4 4292003 194 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS BASE FG 128'4 6.0 95% 4 4292003 195 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS BASE FG 128'2 6.2 95% 4 4/302003 196 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS PAVEMENT FG 129'9 6.1 95% 4 4/302003 197 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS PAVEMENT FG 135.0 96% 5 4/302003 198 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS PAVEMENT FG 136'2 97% 5 4/302003 199 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS PAVEMENT FG 139.4 9901 5 4/302003 200 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS PAVEMENT FG 140'2 99% 5 4/302003 201 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS PAVEMENT FG 138'8 98% 5 4/302003 202 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS PAVEMENT FG 134'7 95% 5 4/302003 203 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS PAVEMENT FG 134.0 95% 5 4/302003 204 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS PAVEMENT FG 134.1 95% 5 4/302003 205 PARKING&DRIVE AREAS PAVEMENT FG 139.1 FG 140.6 99% 5 4 TABLE II LABORATORY TEST DATA Job Name: CTHR PROFESIONAL BUILDING Job Address: 761 GARDEN VIEW COURT, ENCINITAS Job No. (0-5603 - Date 7/29/2002 Maximu=nt um Sample No. Dry Densure Soil pcf Description 1 116.0 13.5 Light Brown, Silty, Sand 2 122 11.5 Silty, Sand 3 131.0 ASPHALT(MAX BY OTHERS) 4 135 7 CLASS 2 BASE 5 141.0 BITIMOUS PAVEMENT 1 LIMITED SOIL INVESTIGATION AND UPDATED SOIL-RELATED RECOMMENDATIONS CTRH Professional Building Lot 12, Garden View Plaza Garden View Court Encinitas, California JOB NO. 86-4824.12 30 January 2002 - Prepared for: Mr. Timothy A. Halverson CTRH, LLC SP4 GE �I OTE CHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. SOIL&FOUNDATION ENGINEERING - GROUNDWATER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT - ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 30 January 2002 Mr. Timothy A. Halverson CTRH, LLC ]ob No. 86-4824.12 285 N. El Camino Real, Suite 110 Encinitas, CA 92024 Subject: Limited Soil Investi ation and U Ddat ed Soil-related Recommendations CTRH Professional Building Lot 12 - Garden View Plaza Garden View Court Encinitas, California Dear Mr. Halverson: In accordance with your request, Geotechnica/ Exploration, Inc, submits this report as an update to our "Final Report of Grading Observation and Field Density Testing", dated January 18, 1990 (Job No. 86-4824). The rough grading report was prepared for the subdivision's mass grading. It is our understanding that development plans have been prepared for Lot 12 since the issuance of our 1990 report and that the site is to be developed to receive a 20,000-square-foot, two- story professional office building with adjacent asphalt parking and other improvements. The site has not been significantly altered since our initial observation and testing, however, the site was only graded to rough pad elevation for the planned business park and will require additional grading operations specifically suited for the professional office building and associated improvements. In our opinion, if the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are implemented during site preparation, the site should be suited for the proposed development. 7420 TRADE STREET - SAN DIEGO, CA 92121 - (858)549-7222 - FAX: (858)549-1604 - E-MAIL: geotech @ixpres.com Proposed Professional Building Job No. 86-4824.12 Encinitas, California Page 2 A representative of our firm observed the grading operation and tested fill soils that were placed during the preparation of the lots within the Garden View Plaza subdivision development. Review of our original report and recent site observations indicate that Lot 12 is mainly a cut lot with a minor amount of fill in the southwest corner of the lot. In a recent visit to the site by a representative of our firm revealed that the site has not been significantly altered since the completion of grading. However, drainage runoff across the lot has caused shallow ravines and loose surface soil conditions that will require removal and recompaction prior to site development. I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION In addition to our recent site visit, we reviewed the following documents prepared by Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. concerning the subject site and adjacent lots. 1. "Report of Geotechnical Investigation -- Unit No. 1 and No. 2," by GEI, Job No. 86-4824, dated February 13, 1987. 2. "Report of Geotechnical Investigation, Garden View Plaza -- Unit No. 3," by GEI, Job No. 86-4824, dated March 27, 1987. 3. "R-value Test Results and Preliminary Pavement Cross Section Recommendations, Garden View Plaza," by GEI, Job No. 86-4824, dated September 19, 1989. 4. "Final Report of Grading Observations and Field Density Testing, Garden View Plaza," by GEI, Job No. 86-4824, dated January 18, 1990. SH Proposed Professional Building Job No. 86-4824.12 Encinitas, California Page 3 Our document reviews and recent site visit revealed that the site is underlain by dense formational materials that were found to be suitable to support the proposed structure and improvements. However, the site was graded to rough pad elevation for the planned business park and will require additional minor grading operations specifically suited for the proposed building pad and associated improvements. Also, the current surface of the entire lot has become weathered and should be reworked to a depth of at least 1 foot, to provide a uniform soils base for the proposed structure, improvements and any additional fill. The findings of the 1990 report are still considered valid when used in conjunction with the following "Conclusions and Recommendations" section. This new section updates the report to existing standards and shall be adhered to for the proposed development. II. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The following conclusions and recommendations are based upon the original site work conducted by our firm in 1989, and resulting laboratory tests, in conjunction with our knowledge and experience with the soils in the City of Encinitas. A. Pret)aration of Soils for Site Development 1. Any existing debris and vegetation observed on the site must be removed prior to the preparation of the building pad and/or areas to receive structural improvements. 2. To provide a uniform soil base for the proposed structure, improvements and pavement, the existing loose and desiccated surface soils shall be removed and properly recompacted typically up to a depth of 1 foot, or as per the Proposed Professional Building Job No. 86-4824.12 Encinitas, California Page 4 direction of our field technician. The bottom of the excavation shall be scarified to a depth of at least 12 inches and properly recompacted. The excavated soils shall be cleaned of any debris and deleterious materials, watered to approximately optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density. Any additional properly prepared fill soils should be placed in layers not exceeding 8 inches in thickness, and be compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density (ASTM D1557- 98) to achieve the designed pad elevation. Any areas to receive new fill or that will support rigid improvements or proposed retaining structures should be prepared in a like manner. In order to have all parts of the building foundation embedded in soils of similar density, we recommend that the footings be founded only on the properly compacted fill. If, during grading, our field representative observes and anticipates that parts of the footing will be founded on transition fill and dense formation, we will require undercutting of at least 6 inches below the bottom of the footings. An option to this requirement would be to have all fill soils supporting structures compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density (ASTM D1557) and not undercut the dense formation. Whichever option is chosen shall be clearly indicated in the project plans. Any areas observed during grading to include loose or soft soils shall have the soils removed and properly recompacted. 3. No uncontrolled fill soils shall remain on the site after completion of any future site work. In the event that temporary ramps or pads are constructed of uncontrolled fill soils during the grading operation, the loose fill soils shall be removed and/or recompacted prior to completion of the grading operation. �r� Proposed Professional Building Job No. 86-4824.12 Encinitas, California Page 5 4. Any buried objects that might be discovered on the site shall be removed and the resulting excavation be properly backfilled with approved on-site or imported fill soils, and shall then be compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density. 5. Any backfill soils placed in utility trenches or behind retaining walls that support structures and other improvements (such as patios, sidewalks, driveways, pavements, etc.) shall be compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density. B. Design Parameters for Foundations and Retaining Walls 6. The recommended allowable bearing value for design of foundations for the proposed structure is 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf). This load-bearing value may be utilized in the design of continuous foundations and spread footings when founded a minimum of 18 inches into the properly compacted fill only, measured from the lowest adjacent grade at the time of foundation construction. This total load-bearing value may be increased one-third for design loads that include wind or seismic analysis. If imported soils are required to bring the site to grade, the imported soils should be obtained from an approved off-site borrow area. An increase of up to 450 psf in the static soil value (of 2,000 psf) may be allowed for every additional foot in footing width and an increase of 900 psf for every additional foot in depth, up to a maximum total bearing value of 4,500 psf. Based on our laboratory test results, and our experience with the soil types on the subject site, the soils should experience differential settlement in �r� Proposed Professional Building Job No. 86-4824.12 Encinitas, California Page 6 magnitude of less than 1 inch. The maximum differential angular rotation will not exceed 1/300. 7. The following table summarizes site-specific seismic design criteria for the calculation of seismic base shear. The design criteria was obtained from the Uniform Building Code (1997 edition) based on the soil profile classification and the distance to the closest active fault. Parameter Value Reference Seismic Zone Factor, Z 0.40 Table 16-I - Soil Profile Type SC Table 16-3 Seismic Coefficient, Ca 0.40% Table 16- Seismic Coefficient, C„ 0.56N„ Table 16-R Near-Source Factor, Na 1.0 Table 16-S Near-Source Factor N 1.0 Table 16-T Seismic Source Type B Table 16-U 8. Due to numerous reasons, footings and slabs occasionally crack, causing ceramic tiles or other brittle floor coverings to become damaged. Footings and slabs should therefore contain at least a nominal amount of reinforcing steel to reduce the separation of cracks, should they occur. 8.1 A minimum of steel for continuous footings should include at least four No. 4 steel bars continuous, with two bars near the bottom of the footing and two bars near the top. 8.2 Isolated square footings should contain, as a minimum, a grid of No. 4 steel bars on 12-inch centers, in both directions, with no less than three bars each way. Proposed Professional Building Job No. 86-4824.12 - Encinitas, California Page 7 8.3 Floor slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches actual thickness and be reinforced with at least No. 3 steel bars on 18-inch centers, in both directions, placed at midheight in the slab. Slabs should be underlain by a 3-inch-thick layer of clean sand (S.E. = 30 or greater) overlying a 6-mil visqueen membrane. Slab subgrade soil shall be moistened prior to placement of the vapor barrier and pouring of concrete. It is recommended that moisture content of subgrade soil for slabs and footings be checked within 48 hours prior to concrete placement. We recommend the project Civil/Structural Engineer incorporate isolation joints and sawcuts to at least one-fourth the thickness of the slab in any floor designs. The joints and cuts, if properly placed, should reduce the potential for and help control floor slab cracking. In any case, spacing of control joints shall not exceed 25 feet between centers and at reentrant corners. However, due to a number of reasons (such as base preparation, construction techniques, curing procedures, and normal shrinkage of concrete), some cracking of slabs can still be expected. NOTE: The project Structural Engineer shall review all reinforcing schedules. The reinforcing minimums recommended herein are not to be construed as structural designs, but merely as minimum safeguards to reduce possible crack separations. The actual reinforcing schedule shall be as per the direction of the Structural Engineer. 9. As a minimum for protection of on-site improvements, it is recommended that all nonstructural concrete slabs (such as patios, walkways, etc.) be at least 4 inches thick, underlain by at least 3 inches of clean sand, include 6x6- 10/10 welded wire mesh at the center of the slab, and contain adequate Proposed Professional Building Job No. 86-4824.12 Encinitas, California Page 8 isolation joints. Proper shrinkage joints (sawcuts) should be provided and spaced no farther than 12 feet or the width of the slab, whichever is less, and also at re-entrant corners. It should be noted that the performance of on- site improvements can be greatly affected by soil base preparation and the quality of construction, and is therefore the responsibility of the designer and the contractor installing the improvements. All concrete (flatwork) slabs or rigid improvements should be built on properly compacted and approved subgrade and/or base material. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. will accept no liability for damage to flatwork or rigid improvements built on untested or unapproved subgrade or base material. C. Retaining Walls All proposed retaining walls should be founded in dense native materials or properly compacted fill and designed utilizing the following criteria: 10. The active earth pressure (to be utilized in the design of cantilever, walls) shall be based on an Equivalent Fluid Weight of 38 pounds per cubic foot (for level backfill only). In the event that a retaining wall is surcharged by sloping backfill, the design active earth pressure shall be based upon the appropriate Equivalent Fluid Weight presented in the following table: Height of Slope/Height of Wall* Slope Ratio 0.25 0.50 0.75 1 00(+) 2.0:1.0 44 48 50 52 Proposed Professional Building Job No. 86-4824.12 „ Encinitas, California Page 9 *To determine design active earth pressure for ratios intermediate to those presented, interpolate between the stated values. The design pressures presented above are based on utilization of an uncontrolled mixture of soils native to the site in backfill operations. In the event that imported, clean granular fill soils or approved on-site clean sands are utilized as backfill material, this firm should be contacted for possible reduction of design pressures for level backfill, sloping backfill or restrained wall conditions. We recommend that the structural plans indicate the type of soil that can be used in the backfill as assumed in the structural design. In the event that a retaining wall is to be designed for a restrained condition, a uniform pressure equal to 8xH (eight times the total height of retained wall, considered in pounds per square foot) shall be considered as acting every- where on the back of the wall in addition to the design Equivalent Fluid Weight, when utilizing an uncontrolled mixture of existing soils as backfill. Retaining walls supporting any surcharge applied within the potential failure block shall also be considered in the design. 11. The passive earth pressure of the encountered natural-ground soils and compacted fill soils (to be used for design of shallow foundations and footings to resist the lateral forces) shall be based on an Equivalent Fluid Weight of 300 pounds per cubic foot. This passive earth pressure shall only be considered valid for design if the ground adjacent to the foundation structure is essentially level for a distance of at least three times the total depth of the foundation and is properly compacted or dense natural soil. Proposed Professional Building Job No. 86-4824.12 Encinitas, California Page 10 12. A Coefficient of Friction of 0.40 times the dead load may be used between the bearing soils and concrete foundations, walls, or floor slabs. Both the passive pressure and friction coefficient given above have incorporated a 1.5 factor of safety. D. Site Drainage Considerations 13. Adequate measures shall be taken to properly finish-grade the site after the structures and other improvements are in place. Drainage waters from this site and adjacent properties are to be directed away from foundations, floor slabs, footings, and slopes, onto the natural drainage direction for this area or into properly designed and approved drainage facilities. Proper drains and downspouts should be installed on all structures, with runoff directed away from the foundations via closed drainage lines. Proper, sufficient subsurface and surface drainage will help minimize the potential for waters to seek the level of the bearing soils under the foundations, footings, and floor slabs. Failure to observe this recommendation could result in undermining and differential settlement of the structure or other improvements on the site. In addition, appropriate erosion-control measures shall be taken at all time during construction to prevent surface runoff waters from entering footing excavations and ponding on finished building pads or pavement areas. In addition, a Swale shall be provided at the top of any retaining walls to help prevent erosion of the soils and to quickly transport the runoff or irrigation water. Due to the presence of groundwater (derived primarily from rainfall and irrigation), excess moisture is a common problem in below-grade structures and behind retaining walls that might be proposed on this site. These �r� Proposed Professional Building Job No. 86-4824.12 Encinitas, California Page 11 problems are generally in the form of water seepage through walls, mineral staining, mildew growth and high humidity. In order to minimize the potential for moisture-related problems to develop at the site, proper drainage ventilation and waterproofing must be provided for any below- ground areas as well as in the backfill side of all structure retaining walls must be adequately waterproofed and drained. Proper subdrains and free draining backwall material or geodrains boards shall be installed behind all retaining walls on the subject project. The subdrains shall outlet into approved drainage facilities. Geotechnica/ Exploration, Inc. will assume no liability for damage to structures that is attributable to poor drainage. Subdrains shall consist of perforated pipes (SDR 35) placed in an envelope of crushed rock gravel and wrapped with filter cloth. Furthermore, retaining walls shall be provided with a waterproofing membrane on the soil retaining side of the wall. 14. Planter areas, flower beds, and planter boxes shall be sloped to drain away from the foundations, footings, and floor slabs. Planter boxes shall be constructed with a closed bottom and a subsurface drain, installed in gravel, with the direction of subsurface and surface flow away from the foundations, footings, and floor slabs, to an adequate drainage facility. Sufficient area drains shall be provided in any landscape areas. E. General Recommendations 15. Following placement of any concrete floor slabs, sufficient drying time should be allowed prior to placement of floor coverings. Premature placement of floor coverings could result in degradation of adhesive materials and loosening of the finish-floor materials. µ �r� Proposed Professional Building Job No. 86-4824.12 Encinitas, California Page 12 16. We recommend the placement of a PCC slab (at least 6 inches thick) beneath and in front of any proposed trash enclosures. It has been our experience that most concentrated point loads often occur surrounding the trash enclosures from both the trash vehicles and the wheel loads of the trash container, resulting in damage to the asphaltic pavement. 17. In order to minimize any work delays at the subject site during site development, this firm should be contacted 24 hours prior to any need for inspection of footing excavations or field density testing of compacted fill soils. If possible, placement of formwork and steel reinforcement in footing excavations should not occur prior to observation of the excavations; in the event that our observation reveals the need for deepening or redesigning foundation structures at any locations, any formwork or steel reinforcement in the affected footing excavation areas would have to be removed prior to correction of the observed problem (i.e., deepening the footing excavation, recompacting soil in the bottom of the excavation, etc.). 18. Contemporary pavement section design methods require compaction of the upper 6 inches of subgrade soils (natural ground or compacted fill) to 95 percent of Maximum Dry Density, and all base materials to at least 95 percent of Maximum Dry Density. We therefore recommend that the upper 6 inches of subgrade soils and all base materials beneath the proposed, driveway and parking area pavements be compacted to these standards. This recommendation also applies to the upper soils in backfilled trenches or behind retaining walls that will support pavement sections. Design of pavement sections was not included within the scope of this report. Pavement sections will depend largely on the subgrade soil conditions Proposed Professional Building Job No. 86-4824.12 Encinitas, California Page 13 exposed after rough grading and should be based on R-value test results. These tests should be performed after completion of the grading operation. For preliminary grading estimates and based on public street R-values obtained previously, we have estimated that, for parking stalls, a preliminary cross section of at least 3 inches of asphalt concrete on 4 inches of Caltrans Class II base may be used at the site for an R-value of at least 38 and a traffic index equal to 4.5. Heavy traffic areas shall have a preliminary cross section of 3 inches of asphalt on 7 inches of Class II base. As indicated previously, the R-values will have to be verified after rough-grading of the lots is completed and prior to paving. M. GRADING NOTES Any required grading operations shall be performed in accordance with the General Earthwork Specifications (Appendix B) and the requirements of the City of Encinitas Grading Ordinance. 19. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. recommends that we be asked to verify the actual soil conditions revealed during site grading work and footing excavations to be as anticipated in this "Limited Soil Investigation and Updated Soil-related Recommendations." In addition, it is our recommendation that the compaction of any fill soils placed during site grading work be tested by a representative of our firm. It is the responsibility of the grading contractor to comply with the requirements on the grading plans and the local grading ordinance. 20. It is the responsibility of the owner and/or developer to ensure that the recommendations summarized in the report are carried out in the field operations and that our recommendations for design of the project are Proposed Professional Building Job No. 86-4824.12 Encinitas, California Page 14 incorporated in the building and grading plans. Our firm should review the final grading and foundation plans when they become available and before construction operations start. 21. This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for the safety of personnel other than our own on the site; the safety of others is the reasonability of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if he considers any of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe. IV. LIMITATIONS Our conclusions and recommendations have been based on all available data obtained from our field investigation and laboratory analysis, as well as our experience with the soils and formation materials located in this area of the City of Encinitas. Of necessity, we must assume a certain degree of continuity between exploratory excavations and/or natural exposures. It is, therefore, necessary that all observations, conclusions and recommendations be verified at the time grading operations begin or when footing excavations are placed. In the event discrepancies are noted, additional recommendations may be issued, if required. The work performed and recommendations presented herein are the result of an investigation and analysis that meet the contemporary standard of care in our profession within the San Diego County area. No warranty is provided. This report should be considered valid for a period of two (2) years, and is subject to review by our firm following that time. If significant modifications are made to the building and/or grading plans, especially with respect to the height and location Proposed Professional Building Job No. 86-4824.12 Encinitas, California Page 15 of any proposed structure, this report must be presented to us for immediate review and possible revision. The firm of Geotechnica/ Exploration, Inc. shall not be held responsible for changes to the physical condition of the property, such as addition of fill soils or changing drainage patterns, which occur subsequent to issuance of this report. Once again, should any questions arise concerning this report, please feel free to contact the project coordinator. Reference to our Job No. 86-4824.12 will help to expedite a reply to your inquiries. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. vr ay K. Heiser, Project Coordinator Jai rros, P.E. �Q�pfE S/0�, R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007 9� A. Senior Geotechnical Engineer �£,p� JKH/JAC/pj i W No. 002007 I 1 � Exp. /30/03 1 ry �� N c 0 � ' SITE MAP rL t ( CorT S�RD RCtip ° B° oss�o FtLLOSr y��JS'E y �tiP j z W 1600 CO Al2 59 GARDEN %sic�`� �oc�FN p�OR F ° t' PD 1500 `� - � 1 =j 1 00 z� ;- ° EwraA�A VANESSA CI �£ LA 'b`�--�' t C t HUIMIpCk J !NG Hy i r t, C I R GLEN CO SPLI A'S?EN G mti VALLEDA �, ` how DRE r r r r r !o C,LA►1 i A 1"(.0 1ti `ilk�Q11�i TOP LN AVENI ; EON ! � E s 5T QI�r / IN 2�v NZ N' V'L r`��7►9 1 „ CLEAR ��Bow ET jP1 r �� �12 r*+ 4��+ R SUE f L►r`MOUWT p1� GE 1 i , viA `� tsoo TENNIS MATCH Let :600 VZ t NpNTECSTO` �-- -___� �,ry I E RD c�rcNIEGAND My ' FLAIR ENCINIj�$ MOUNTAIN l GP •• \ CO` (� ` (�•r `��� GATE SHIt ELDS AY- 1 PLEASANT PL ��� �� :� l� inn t,,a 2 GENTLE BREEZE LN� PL MOLENA SHERIFF STASKE !�� �' ���i�' pl rn j \ ENCINITAS TUC� 9, �J 3° VILLAGE DR ENCINITAS PLAZA BLVD try �� Eu� m 1400 t 8, Z ST z }yt�` sRA AZ o , . 1500 j_1600 ---�. CTRH Professional Building Lot 12 Garden View Court Encinitas, CA. Figure No. la Job No. 86-4824.12 NoText APPENDIX A UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART SOIL DESCRIPTION Coarse-grained (More than half of material is larger than a No. 200 sieve) GRAVELS, CLEAN GRAVELS GW Well-graded gravels, gravel and sand mixtures, little (More than half of coarse fraction or no fines. is larger than No. 4 sieve size, but smaller than 3") GP Poorly graded gravels, gravel and sand mixtures, little or no fines. GRAVELS WITH FINES GC Clay gravels, poorly graded gravel-sand-silt mixtures (Appreciable amount) SANDS, CLEAN SANDS SW Well-graded sand, gravelly sands, little or no fines (More than half of coarse fraction is smaller than a No. 4 sieve) SP Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. SANDS WITH FINES SM Silty sands, poorly graded sand and silty mixtures. (Appreciable amount) SC Clayey sands, poorly graded sand and clay mixtures. FINE-GRAINED (More than half of material is smaller than a No. 200 sieve) SILTS AND CLAYS ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, sandy silt and clayey-silt sand mixtures with a slight plasticity. Liquid Limit Less than 50 CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, silty clays, clean clays. OIL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity. MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts. Liquid Limit Greater than 50 CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat and other highly organic soils APPENDIX B GENERAL EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS General The objective of these specifications is to properly establish procedures for the clearing and preparation of the existing natural ground or properly compacted fill to receive new fill; for the selection of the fill material; and foi the fill compaction and testing methods to be used. Scope of Work The earthwork includes all the activities and resources provided by the contractor to construct in a gooc workmanlike manner all the grades of the filled areas shown in the plans. The major items of work covered in thi; section include all clearing and grubbing, removing and disposing of materials, preparing areas to be filled compacting of fill, compacting of backfills, subdrain installations, and all other work necessary to complete the grading of the filled areas. Site Visit and Site Investigation 1. The contractor shall visit the site and carefully study it, and make all inspections necessary in order tc determine the full extent of the work required to complete all grading in conformance with the drawings anc specifications. The contractor shall satisfy himself as to the nature, location, and extent of the worN conditions, the conformation and condition of the existing ground surface; and the type of equipment, labor. and facilities needed prior to and during prosecution of the work. The contractor shall satisfy himself as tc the character, quality, and quantity of surface and subsurface materials or obstacles to be encountered. Any inaccuracies or discrepancies between the actual field conditions and the drawings, or between the drawing; and specifications, must be brought to the engineer's attention in order to clarify the exact nature of the work to be performed. 2. A soils investigation report has been prepared for this project by GEL It is available for review and should be - used as a reference to the surface and subsurface soil and bedrock conditions on this project. Any recommendations made in the report of the soil investigation or subsequent reports shall become ar addendum to these specifications. Authority of the Soils Engineer and Engineering Geologist The soils engineer shall be the owner's representative to observe and test the construction of fills. Excavation anc the placing of fill shall be under the observation of the soils engineer and his/her representative, and he/she shat give a written opinion regarding conformance with the specifications upon completion of grading. The soil,, engineer shall have the authority to cause the removal and replacement of porous topsoils, uncompacted of improperly compacted fills, disturbed bedrock materials, and soft alluvium, and shall have the authority to approve or reject materials proposed for use in the compacted fill areas. The soils engineer shall have, in conjunction with the engineering geologist, the authority to approve the preparation of natural ground and toe-of-fill benches to receive fill material. The engineering geologist shall have the authority to evaluate the stability of the existing or proposed slopes, and to evaluate the necessity of remedia measures. If any unstable condition is being created by cutting or filling, the engineering geologist and/or soil., engineer shall advise the contractor and owner immediately, and prohibit grading in the affected area until such time as corrective measures are taken. The owner shall decide all questions regarding: (1) the interpretation of the drawings and specifications, (2) the acceptable fulfillment of the contract on the part of the contractor, and (3) the matter of compensation. � p+PT Appendix B Page 2 Clearing and Grubbing 1. Clearing and grubbing shall consist of the removal from all areas to be graded of all surface trash, abandonel improvements, paving, culverts, pipe, and vegetation (including -- but not limited to -- heavy weed growth trees, stumps, logs and roots larger than 1-inch in diameter). 2. All organic and inorganic materials resulting from the clearing and grubbing operations shall be collected piled, and disposed of by the contractor to give the cleared areas a neat and finished appearance. Burning o combustible materials on-site shall not be permitted unless allowed by local regulations, and at such time and in such a manner to prevent the fire from spreading to areas adjoining the property or cleared area. 3. It is understood that minor amounts of organic materials may remain in the fill soils due to the nea impossibility of complete removal. The amount remaining, however, must be considered negligible, and in n case can be allowed to occur in concentrations or total quantities sufficient to contribute to settlement upoi decomposition. Preparation of Areas to be Filled 1 . After clearing and grubbing, all uncompacted or improperly compacted fills, soft or loose soils, or unsuitabl materials, shall be removed to expose competent natural ground, undisturbed bedrock, or properly compacte fill as indicated in the soils investigation report or by our field representative. Where the unsuitable material are exposed in final graded areas, they shall be removed and replaced as compacted fill. 2. The ground surface exposed after removal of unsuitable soils shall be scarified to a depth of at least i inches, brought to the specified moisture content, and then the scarified ground compacted to at least th specified density. Where undisturbed bedrock is exposed at the surface, scarification and recompaction sha not be required. 3. All areas to receive compacted fill, including all removal areas and toe-of-fill benches, shall be observed an approved by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist prior to placing compacted fill. 4. Where fills are made on hillsides or exposed slope areas with gradients greater than 20 percent, horizont� benches shall be cut into firm, undisturbed, natural ground in order to provide both lateral and vertic� stability. This is to provide a horizontal base so that each layer is placed and compacted on a horizonv plane. The initial bench at the toe of the fill shall be at least 10 feet in width on firm, undisturbed, natur ground at the elevation of the toe stake placed at the bottom of the design slope. The engineer sha determine the width and frequency of all succeeding benches, which will vary with the soil conditions an the steepness of the slope. Ground slopes flatter than 20 percent (5.0:1.0) shall be benched whe considered necessary by the soils engineer. Fill and Backfill Material Unless otherwise specified, the on-site material obtained from the project excavations may be used as fill c backfill, provided that all organic material, rubbish, debris, and other objectionable material contained therein is fir: removed. In the event that expansive materials are encountered during foundation excavations within 3 feet c finished grade and they have not been properly processed, they shall be entirely removed or thoroughly mixed wit good, granular material before incorporating them in fills. No footing shall be allowed to bear on soils which, in th opinion of the soils engineer, are detrimentally expansive -- unless designed for this clayey condition. However, rocks, boulders, broken Portland cement concrete, and bituminous-type pavement obtained from th project excavations may be permitted in the backfill or fill with the following limitations: Appendix B Page 3 1. The maximum dimension of any piece used in the top 10 feet shall be no larger than 6 inches. 2 Clods or hard lumps of earth of 6 inches in greatest dimension shall be broken up before compacting the material in fill. 3. If the fill material originating from the project excavation contains large rocks, boulders, or hard lumps that cannot be broken readily, pieces ranging from 6 inches in diameter to 2 feet in maximum dimension may be used in fills below final subgrade if all pieces are placed in such a manner (such as windrows) as to eliminate nesting or voids between them. No rocks over 4 feet will be allowed in the fill. 4. Pieces larger than 6 inches shall not be placed within 12 inches of any structure. 5. Pieces larger than 3 inches shall not be placed within 12 inches of the subgrade for paving. 6. Rockfills containing less than 40 percent of soil passing 3/4-inch sieve may be permitted in designated areas. Specific recommendations shall be made by the soils engineer and be subject to approval by the city engineer. 7. Continuous observation by the soils engineer is required during rock placement. 8. Special and/or additional recommendations may be provided in writing by the soils engineer to modify, clarify, or amplify these specifications. t 9. During grading operations, soil types other than those analyzed in the soil investigation report may be encountered by the contractor. The soils engineer shall be consulted to evaluate the suitability of these soils as fill materials. Placing and Compacting Fill Material 1. After preparing the areas to be filled, the approved fill material shall be placed in approximately horizontal layers, with lift thickness compatible to the material being placed and the type of equipment being used. Unless otherwise approved by the soils engineer, each layer spread for compaction shall not exceed 8 inches of loose thickness. Adequate drainage of the fill shall be provided at all times during the construction period. 2. When the moisture content of the fill material is below that specified by the engineer, water shall be added to it until the moisture content is as specified. 3. When the moisture content of the fill material is above that specified by the engineer, resulting in inadequate compaction or unstable fill, the fill material shall be aerated by blading and scarifying or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is as specified. 4. After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted to not less than the density set forth in the specifications. Compaction shall be accomplished with sheepsfoot rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or other approved types of acceptable compaction equipment. Equipment shall be of such design that it will be able to compact the fill to the specified relative compaction. Compaction shall cover the entire fill area, and the equipment shall make sufficient trips to ensure that the desired density has been obtained throughout the entire fill. At locations where it would be impractical due to inaccessibility of rolling compacting equipment, fill layers shall be compacted to the specified requirements by hand-directed compaction equipment. Appendix B Page 4 5. When soil types or combination of soil types are encountered which tend to develop densely packed surfaces as a result of spreading or compacting operations, the surface of each layer of fill shall be sufficiently roughened after compaction to ensure bond to the succeeding layer. 6. Unless otherwise specified, fill slopes shall not be steeper than 2.0 horizontal to 1.0 vertical. In general, fil slopes shall be finished in conformance with the lines and grades shown on the plans. The surface of fil slopes shall be overfilled to a distance from finished slopes such that it will allow compaction equipment tc operate freely within the zone of the finished slope, and then cut back to the finished grade to expose the compacted core. Alternate compaction procedures include the backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot roller; in increments of 3 to 5 feet in elevation gain. Alternate methods may be used by the contractor, but the} shall be evaluated for approval by the soils engineer. 7. Unless otherwise specified, all allowed expansive fill material shall be compacted to a moisture content o approximately 2 to 4 percent above the optimum moisture content. Nonexpansive fill shall be compacted a near-optimum moisture content. All fill shall be compacted, unless otherwise specified, to a relativE compaction not less than 95 percent for fill in the upper 12 inches of subgrades under areas to be pave( with asphalt concrete or Portland concrete, and not less than 90 percent for other fill. The relativ( compaction is the ratio of the dry unit weight of the compacted fill to the laboratory maximum dry uni weight of a sample of the same soil, obtained in accordance with A.S.T.M. D-1 557 test method. 8. The observation' and periodic testing by the soils engineer are intended to provide the contractor with ar ongoing measure of the quality of the fill compaction operation. It is the responsibility of the gradin( contractor to utilize this information to establish the degrees of compactive effort required on the project More importantly, it is the respqnsibility of the grading contractor to ensure that proper compactive effort i; applied at all times during the grading operation, including during the absence of soils engineerinc representatives. Trench Backfill 1. Trench excavations which extend under graded lots, paved areas, areas under the influence of structure loading, in slopes or close to slope areas, shall be backfilled under the observations and testing of the soil. engineer. All trenches not falling within the aforementioned locations shall be backfilled in accordance witl the City or County regulating agency specifications. 2. Unless otherwise specified, the minimum degree of compaction shall be 90 percent of the laborator, maximum dry density. 3. Any soft, spongy, unstable, or other similar material encountered in the trench excavation upon which th bedding material or pipe is to be placed, shall be removed to a depth recommended by the soils engineer an replaced with bedding materials suitably densified. Bedding material shall first be placed so that the pipe is supported for the full length of the barrel with fu bearing on the bottom segment. After the needed testing of the pipe is accomplished, the bedding shall b completed to at least 1 foot on top of the pipe. The bedding shall be properly densified before backfill i placed. Bedding shall consist of granular material with a sand equivalent not less than 30, or other materi� approved by the engineer. 4. No rocks greater than 6 inches in diameter will be allowed in the backfill placed between 1 foot above th pipe and 1 foot below finished subgrade. Rocks greater than 2.5 inches in any dimension will not be allowe in the backfill placed within 1 foot of pavement subgrade. Pkl Appendix B Page 5 5. Material for mechanically compacted backfill shall be placed in lifts of horizontal layers and properly moistened prior to compaction. In addition, the layers shall have a thickness compatible with the material being placed and the type of equipment being used. Each layer shall be evenly spread, moistened or dried, and then tamped or rolled until the specified relative compaction has been attained. 6. Backfill shall be mechanically compacted by means of tamping rollers, sheepsfoot rollers, pneumatic tire rollers, vibratory rollers, or other mechanical tampers. Impact-type pavement breakers (stompers) will not be permitted over clay, asbestos cement, plastic, cast iron, or nonreinforced concrete pipe. Permission to use specific compaction equipment shall not be' construed as guaranteeing or implying that the use of such equipment will not result in damage to adjacent ground, existing improvements, or improvements installec under the contract. The contractor shall make his/her own determination in this regard. 7. Jetting shall not be permitted as a compaction method unless the soils engineer allows it in writing. 8. Clean granular material shall not be used as backfill or bedding in trenches located in slope areas or within distance of 10 feet of the top of slopes unless provisions are made for a drainage system to mitigate the potential buildup of seepage forces into the slope mass. Observations and Testing 1. The soils engineers or their representatives shall sufficiently observe and test the grading operations so tha they can state their opinion as to whether or not the fill was constructed in accordance with the specifications. 2. The soils engineers or their representatives shall take sufficient density tests during the placement o compacted fill. The contractor should assist the soils engineer and/or his/her representative by digging tes pits for removal determinations and/or for testing compacted fill. In addition, the contractor should cooperate with the soils engineer by removing or shutting down equipment from the area being tested. 3. Fill shall be tested for compliance with the recommended relative compaction and moisture conditions. Fiel density testing should be performed by using approved methods by A.S.T.M., such as A.S.T.M. D1556 D2922, and/or D2937. Tests to evaluate density of compacted fill should be provided on the basis of no less than one test for each 2-foot vertical lift of the fill, but not less than one test for each 1,000 cubic yard of fill placed. Actual test intervals may vary as field conditions dictate. In fill slopes, approximately half c -. the tests shall be made at the fill slope, except that not more than one test needs to be made for each 51 horizontal feet of slope in each 2-foot vertical lift. Actual test intervals may vary as field conditions dictate. 4. Fill found not to be in conformance with the grading recommendations should be removed or otherwis handled as recommended by the soils engineer. Site Protection It shall be the grading contractor's obligation to take all measures deemed necessary during grading to maintai adequate safety measures and working conditions, and to provide erosion-control devices for the protection c excavated areas, slope areas, finished work on the site and adjoining properties, from storm damage and floo hazard originating on the project. It shall be the contractor's responsibility to maintain slopes in their as-grade form until all slopes are in satisfactory compliance with the job specifications, all berms and benches have bee properly constructed, and all associated drainage devices have been installed and meet the requirements of th specifications. Appendix B Page 6 All observations, testing services, and approvals given by the soils engineer and/or geologist shall not relieve the contractor of his/her responsibilities of performing the work in accordance with these specifications. After grading is completed and the soils engineer has finished his/her observations and/or testing of the work, nc further excavation or filling shall be done except under his/her observations. Adverse Weather Conditions 1. Precautions shall be taken by the contractor during the performance of site clearing, excavations, anc grading to protect the worksite from flooding, ponding, or inundation by poor or improper surface drainage Temporary provisions shall be made during the rainy season to adequately direct surface drainage away frorr and off the worksite. Where low areas cannot be avoided, pumps should be kept on hand to continually remove water during periods of rainfall. 2. During periods of rainfall, plastic sheeting shall be kept reasonably accessible to prevent unprotected slope, from becoming saturated. Where necessary during periods of rainfall, the contractor shall install checkdams desilting basins, rip-rap, sandbags, or other devices or methods necessary to control erosion and provide saf( conditions. 3. During periods of rainfall, the soils engineer should be kept informed by the contractor as to the nature o remedial or preventative work being performed (e.g. pumping, placement of sandbags or plastic sheeting other labor, dozing, etc.). 4. Following periods of rainfall, the contractor shall contact the soils engineer and arrange a walk-over of the - site in order to visually assess rain-related damage. The soils engineer may also recommend excavations an( testing in order to aid in his/her assessments. At the request of the soils engineer, the contractor shall mak excavations in order to evaluate the extent of rain-related damage. 5. Rain-related damage shall be considered to include, but may not be limited to, erosion, silting, saturation swelling, structural distress, and other adverse conditions identified by the soils engineer. Soil adversel affected shall be classified as Unsuitable Materials, and shall be subject to overexcavation and replacemen with compacted fill or other remedial grading, as recommended by the soils engineer. 6. Relatively level areas, where saturated soils and/or erosion gullies exist to depths of greater than 1 .0 fool shall be overexcavated to unaffected, competent material. Where less than 1.0 foot in depth, unsuitabl materials may be processed in place to achieve near-optimum moisture conditions, then thoroughl recompacted in accordance with the applicable specifications. If the desired results are not achieved, th affected materials shall be over-excavated, then replaced in accordance with the applicable specifications. 7. In slope areas, where saturated soils and/or erosion gullies exist to depths of greater than 1.0 foot, they sha be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill in accordance with the applicable specifications. Wher affected materials exist to depths of 1.0 foot or less below proposed finished grade, remedial grading b moisture-conditioning in place, followed by thorough recompaction in accordance with the applicable gradin guidelines herein presented may be attempted. If materials shall be overexcavated and replaced a compacted fill, it shall be done in accordance with the slope-repair recommendations herein. As fiel conditions dictate, other slope-repair procedures may be recommended by the soils engineer. 8+63.00 CMS? titfT (£XfST / r t y JT ' 7 (,:JI 1 Yi ` lr E "7E= .� _.. SEE SECRON `8_11' lei ON SHEET 2 _ rENM — — - N 88`43'41'° E 239.03' .. -- E1ST. EEC TC REkdAll \' '. - .. . . .._ -_ .. T .........rw l VIFDC ___ Pi II II pli I ° ! ,� \ it I . 0900- I 4. i 1 II A C7 t° � ) c i x ( 17 pA 1 e� I , /. Y ih r j. a 2. 4 , r\°� CIT Y Cr °�>�CINITA r �: 4v -- -- - - - - J 13th i I, MATCH EXIST. { MWWAY tot s t T 1 or e a F ff ° I I Zb 9 a 1 �T 46x... � � L t q r r- pp � 1i U ........ 14A W ! � .. C ' ! .: ..,• _... '— __ .'. �'\a F]f � ter., a� .t.. s } 9 'fx/IIlLG . LAND A " C� p 1B#44.�O �G )(171 i I F _....__ i_ JVAP NO, 119'U9 4: a ST 'S +W.00, k SE R LATERAL 0 7.1k\�s `A` � P'1' ° �w y�" FF-'g � ` t . LU � T 45 ��yygg alL jjj }1 ! L P Y -78 A ON SHEET 2 I hi � 4 44 LOT 1 xYb x 1, 1 Ab�� uj 3' MROW i 1 i aye � , t'A 1w ViTo cl Pvc N _ r . , . pRl3�A1E DE N 88 3 41 E 239.07 —pETA1L ti 2 , ? �ALi« �rA+L B . o . TE �LK UA 9RAM! . ...2-_w.._ V 2.4 N. -- TA w ._ - ..__w - 8.ff' flt�E EftCf 4 1 BOIN SAES t 1 0 F ti i A t „ _ __ { 1 ..........:... i' . \; N i t SEE sECnoN 'c-'c' t�1/AF' 2 1 o T 44 M asEEr 2 T 13 I - ^REA pE5100 iED F S ` i 't _ — — U fr7�xt �'.< t-'o��u ra�.I : 1 os � � 1 10* .. _ ° ' F ; •�. 10 30 5+08.00 C#P M t EXIST r+t ..�.': 111 i �- � � : GRAPHIC SCALE _ .4 3 _ Eao IQ. tTESfGMEO Y i+ BSS (YdE D BY: bA REV1 oNS APPRf31�E'D DATE REFERENCES DATE BENCH MARK SCALE GLR APPROVALS ENGNEE NG DEPAfi'��fl C '�4 Nib. l TOP OF BRASS IN KLL kV NT PLANS PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERWSIO+ OF RECOMMENDED APPROVED �A 6 VS Fes: Q LQCAI1t3N. A STA. 58+75 B.C., EL CAMWO REAL HORIZONTAL AS NOTE DATE. _ .Tm , .� 'rt _ R.C.E. NO. : 50"0 BY + BY. CM FMW. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO WW77CAL ONNa DATA 4E'MAL N/! ANOREW .» KAHN EXP. 9-30-05 DATE: I Q ""`— PRt CT NO. � 5 EL£1�A71f1N: 124.117 DAT1Al: ML.