Loading...
2008-10045 G/TE ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT City Of Capital Improvement Projects Encinitas District Support Services Field Operations Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering April 4, 2012 Attn: Union Bank of California Downtown San Diego Branch #601 1201 5"' Avenue San Diego, California 92101 RE: Ronald Lee and Catherine D. Busick 1660 Brahms Road APN 260-264-16 CDP 08-097 Grading Permit 10045-GI Release of security- 25% Permit 10045-GI authorized earthwork, private drainage improvements, and erosion control, all as necessary to build described project. The Field Inspector has approved the grading and finaled the project. Therefore, full release of the remaining security deposit is merited. The following Certificate of Deposit Account has been cancelled by the Financial Services Manager and is hereby released for payment to the depositor. Account# 4799004108 in the amount of$ 3,071.50. The document originals are enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633-2779 or in writing, at4yLeinbach ngineeri Department. Sincerely, ;1� Debra Geish�ft Engineering Technician Finance Manager Subdivision Engineering Financial Services .lay Lcmbach,Finance Manager Cathy Busick Debra Geishart File I!nc TFL 760-633-2600 / F,,�X 760-633-262; SUS 5 Vulcan A venue, Fnciniais. California 92024-1633 TDD ?60-633-2-00 04 recycled paper ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT City of Capital Improvement Projects Encinitas District Support Services Field Operations Sand Rep lenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering April 4, 2012 Attn: INSCO/DICO Insurance Services, Inc. 17780 Fitch Suite 200 Irvine, California 92614 RE: Ronald Lee and Catherine D. Busick 1660 Brahms Road APN 260-264-16 CDP 08-097 Grading Permit 10045-GI Final release of security- 25% Grading permit 10045-GI authorized earthwork, private improvements, and erosion control, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has approved the grading and finaled the project. Therefore, a full release of the remaining security deposit is merited. Performance Bond 7291585, (in the original amount of$49,144.00), reduced by 75% to $12,286.00 is hereby released in entirety. The document original is enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633- 2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely, Debra Gei art Jz Let ach Engineering Technician mance Manager Subdivision Engineering Financial Services CC Jay Lembach, Finance Manager Cathy Busick Debra Geishart File f=,nc TEL 760-633-2000 / FA\ ?60-6 . . . . m4 3633 DD 6u-G3 _ p0 ti� recycled paper ,33-262 THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT WAS RECORDED ON APR 14,2009 pA 16 DOCUMENT NUMBER 2009-0190196 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND, S DAVID L. BUTLER.COUNTY RECORDER WHEN RECORDED MAIL.TO: ) SAN DIEGO COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE } TIME: 3:43 PM ) CITY CLERK ) CITY OF ENCINITAS ) 505 SOUTH VULCAN AVENUE } ENCINITAS, CA 92024 ) SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER'S USE ENCROACHMENT MAINTENANCE AND REMOVAL COVENANT ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. 1004S- PE A.P.N.: 260 -• 2_44- -16 Project No: 08.097 tbP /00415- G An encroachment permit is hereby granted to the Permittee designated in paragraph one, Exhibit "A", as the owner of the Benefited property described in paragraph two, Exhibit"A," to encroach upon City Property described in paragraph three, Exhibit"A", as detailed in the diagram, Exhibit "B". Exhibit"A" and "B" are hereby incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth at length. In consideration of the issuance of this encroachment permit, Permittee hereby covenants and agrees, for the benefit of the City, as follows: 1. This covenant shall run with the land and be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the future owners, encumbrancers, successors, heirs, personal representatives, transferees, and assigns of the respective parties. 2. Permittee shall use and occupy the City Property only in the manner and for the purpose described in paragraph four, Exhibit"A". 3. By accepting the benefits herein, Permittee acknowledges title to the City Property to be in the City and waives all right to contest that title. 4. The term of the encroachment permit is indefinite and may be revoked by the City and abandoned by Permittee at any time. The city shall mail written notice of revocation to Permittee, addressed to the Benefited Property which shall set forth the date upon which the benefits of encroachment permit are to cease. 5. City is entitled to remove all or a portion of the improvements constructed by Permittee in order to repair, replace, or install public improvements. City shall have no obligation to pay for or restore Permittee's improvements. 6. Permittee agrees to hold harmless, defend and indemnify from and against all claims, demands, costs, losses, damages, injuries, litigation, and liability arising out of or related to the use, construction, encroachment or maintenance to be done by the Permittee or Permittee's agents, employees or contractors on City Property. 7. Upon abandonment, revocation, completion, or termination, Permittee shall, at no cost to the city, return City Property to its pre-permit condition within the time specified in the notice of revocation or prior to the date of abandonment. 8. If Permittee fails to restore the City Property, the City shall have the right to enter upon the City Property, after notice to the Permittee, delivered at the Benefited Property, and restore the City Property to its pre-permit condition to include the removal and destruction of any improvements and Permittee agrees to reimburse the city for the costs incurred. Notice may be given by first class mail sent to the last known address of the Permittee, which shall be deemed effective three calendar days after mailing, or by any other reasonable method likely to give actual notice. 9. If either party is required to incur costs to enforce the provisions of this covenant, the prevailing party shall be entitled to full reimbursement for all costs, including reasonable attorney's fees. 10. Permittee shall agree that Permittee's duties and obligations under this covenant are a lien upon the Benefited Property. Upon 30-day notice, and an opportunity to respond, the City may add to the tax bill of the Benefited Property any past due financial obligation owing to city by way of this covenant. 11. Permittee waives the right to assert any claim or action against the City arising out of or resulting from the revocation of this permit or the removal of any improvements or any other action by the City, its officers, agents, or employees taken in a manner in accordance with the terms of the permit. 12. Permittee recognizes and understands that the permit may create a possessory interest subject to property taxation and that the permittee may be subject to the payment of property taxes levied on such interest. 13. As a condition precedent to Permittee's right to go upon the City Property, the agreement must first be signed by the Permittee, notarized, executed by the City and recorded with the County Recorder of the County of San Diego. The recording fee shall be paid by Permittee. I It mtr`� 0 1 14. Approved and issued by the City of Encinitas, California, this day of , 20 Dated_ 1 oa d -) Y u q k Owner/Permittee Signature 1� ner/Permittee Print Dated: 03 1 ao00, /Owner/Permittee Signature Owner/Permittee Print (Notarization of PERMIT, .gnatu ttach Dated. d �n M Peter Cota-Robles Engineering Service Director, City of Encinitas ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of San DZf-3 C ) On 1Kary-k �y��-coq before me, � Saw, K (insert name and title of the officer) personally appeared Rana LcC L (3u.s7c-k who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the personal whose name/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that&she/they executed the same in tPher/their authorized capacity( , and that by(gher/their signature(Won the instrument the person or the entity upon behalf of which the person'acted,executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. .Waw�ws WITNESS my hand and official seal. OFFICIAL SFA MARK SIMEK LIP NOTARY PlJ®LIO= RNIA UN`IY MY COMM.EXP.AUG.2T,2010 Signature (Seal) WRN "i ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of San D tot o ) On Maw--c,I, ltit -'t&" before me, tc SaynBk (insert name and title of the officer) personally appeared ca*h m z c who proved to me on the basis.of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose nam /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he ose7they executed the same in his(W'/their authorized capacity.loo,and that by his/tVAheir signaturpW on the instrument the person;or the entity upon behalf of which the personi'J acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. OFFICIAL&EAL MARK SIMEK Cc i m' :NOTARY PUBLIC-GA_ I€�IHNIA •, SAN IFGO COUNTY Signatu (Seal) MY COMM.EXP.AUG.27,201 EXI�BIT "A" TO COVENANT REGARDING ENCROACHN[ENT PERMIT NO PARAGRAPH ONE: PERM ME RONALD L.BUSICK AND CATHERINE D.BUSICK,HUSBAND AND WIFE AS CONflAUNITY PROPERTY WITH RIGHT OF SURVIVORSHIP. PARAGRAPH TWO: BENEFITED PROPERTY ALL THAT LAND AS DESCRIBED IN GRANT DEED DOC.NO.2008-0254621 RECORDED ON 12-MAY-2008 IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY. PARAGRAPH THREE: CITY PROPERTY THAT PORTION OF THE WESTERLY HALF OF BRAHMS ROAD LAYING ADJACENT AND EASTERLY TO THE PROPERTY AS DESCRIBED IN PARAGRAPH TWO AS DESCRIBED IN SAID DOC.NO.2008-0254621 AND AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT"B". PARAGRAPH FOUR: PURPOSE ENCROACHIKENT FOR TURFBLOCK SWALE AND STREET TREES IN RIGHT- OF-WAY. r SCALES 1"=200' • •'D 1 . • o•g 1 EXHIBIT "B" ,0 • 1 • 1 i 1 1 1 i � 1 1 1 1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Q i ! oh) 1 �A �a 1 too O 1 coc) 1 mn �n 1 MC i mo oO m j 0 1 0 M� 1 1 rn �m ! 1 � -zi ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ! 1 ! 1 1 � ! 1 58. ! rr�r=rr-r- rr rrr rr Q rrrrr r rrrrrrrrrrr 12 rrrrr-rrrrrrr DRIVEWAY BRAHMS ROAD CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of 1514, O On .2 before me, Date ,o Here Insert Name and Title of the Officer personally appeared / �7� � Cd7 - f3LE5 Name(s)of Signer(s) who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s)6 re subscribed to the )n instrument and acknowI dged to me that # RANDA G. l he a/they executed the same i i her/their authorized ca aci •es Commission a1709661 p ty( ), and that b�er/their signature(s) on the NOWY��. instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of >11y ' E Di bn.O " t which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. 1 certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature G22 Place Notary Seal Above ature of Notary Public OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑General ❑ Attorney in Fact • ❑Attorney in Fact • El Trustee Top of thumb here ❑Trustee Top of thumb here ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: ❑Other: Signer Is Representing: Signer Is Representing: 02007 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,PO.Box 2402•Chatsworth,CA 91313-2402•www.NationalNotaryorg Item#5907 Reorder:Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-6827 CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING. INC. 1441 MONTIEL ROAD, SMITE 115 1 Mown, CA 12 026 1711.741.4955 1 FAX 761.741.1111 April 3, 2009 CTE Job No. 10-9448G Ronald and Catherine Busick 14071 Arbolitos Drive Poway, California 92064 Subject: Review of Grading Plans Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road Cardiff by the Sea,Encinitas,California References: Response to City of Encinitas Comment Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road 9 Cardiff by the Sea,California �QR Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road Cardiff by the Sea, California CTE Job No.: 10-9448G, dated November April 7, 2008 Grading&Improvement Plans for: 1660 Brahms Road Ronald&Catherine Busick APN: 260-26416-00 5 Sheets Prepared by Von Reiter Group, Undated Mr. and Mrs. Busick: At the request of Sebastian Mariscal Studio and the Von Reiter Group, Construction Testing & Engineering,Inc.(CTE)is pleased to present this review of the referenced grading and improvement plans. We have reviewed these plans for conformance with the recommendations of our report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, also referenced above. The plans appear to conform to our recommendations, with the following exception. Surface drainage/infiltration features appear to be proposed over the backfill of underground garage retaining walls.Where these features are proposed within 10 feet of a retaining wall,we recommend that they be underlain by an impervious barrier to prevent infiltration into the backfill. Without such a barrier, the backfill could become saturated,which increases the pressure on the retaining wall and increases SAN DIEGO I ESCONDIDO I RIVERSIDE I VENTURA I MERCED I TRACY I SACRAMENTO I PALM SPRINGS I PHOENIX GEOTECHNICAL I ENVIRONMENTAL I CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION AND TESTING I CIVIL ENGINEERING I SURVEYING ........... .... .... ..... . . .. . Review of Grading& Improvement Plans Page 2 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road,Cardiff by the Sea, California April 3, 2009 CTE Job No.: 10-9448G the likelihood that water may infiltrate into the underground garage. Please reference this review letter, and illustrate such a barrier,on the plans. Though it is not apparently a part of the grading plans, a swimming pool is proposed in close proximity to the underground garage retaining walls. As indicated in our referenced Response to City of Encinitas Comment,it may be appropriate to design these walls for hydrostatic pressures,or install a cut-off or chimney drain system between the walls and the pool. Recommendations for the design of such a drain system can be provided upon request if deemed necessary. Particular attention should also be paid to the waterproofing, the specification of which is outside the scope of geotechnical engineering, of these walls. Please send us a revised copy of these plans when they become available. If we can be of further service please do not hesitate to contact us. Respectfully submitted, CONSTRUCTION TESTING&ENGINEERING,INC. QA Mark B. Catlin, GE#2179 :.�� y z», Martin E.Siem,CEG#2311 Senior Geotechnical Engineer Senior Engineering Geologist cc: (2)Addressee OF CA��F° (1)Von Reiter Group,Civil Engineering Consultants,Attention: Beth Reiter, (1)Sebastian Mariscal Studio, Attention: Pavlina Ilieva ��Gt3ALGFa� 0. rRR1UG EXP.ElStt1Q Z 9TF d F C PA-�4 O 'msµ, CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. G 1441 MONTIEL ROAD, SUITE 115 1 ESCONDIDO, CA 92026 1 760.746.4955 1 FAX 760.746.9608 oz, v � March 18,2009 CTE Job No. 10-9448G Ronald and Catherine Busick 14071 Arbolitos Drive Poway, California 92064 Subject: Response to City of Encinitas Comment Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road Cardiff by the Sea, California Reference: Review of Foundation Plan Sheets SO.1, S02, S0.3, S1.0, S1.1, and S2.1 Proposed Phoenix House(Former Busick Residence) 1660 Brahms Road Cardiff By the Sea, California DCl Engineers,dated December 15,2008 Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road Cardiff by the Sea,California CTE Job No.: 10-9448G,dated November April 7, 2008 Addendum: Lateral Pressures for Retaining Walls Due to Earthquakes Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road Cardiff by the Sea, California CTE Job No. 10-9448G, dated January 29,2009 Ronald and CatheriW Busick: At the request of the civil engineer, Von Reiter Group, Construction Testing&Engineering,Inc. (CTE) is providing this response to a City of Encinitas Review Comment. The comment was reiterated to us via the civil engineer,and reads"Please provide a letter from soils engineer that the building walls have been designed to withstand hydrostatic pressure." In addition, a copy of a portion of plan sheet 10045-G,sheet 2 of 4 was provided that shows a detail of a basement wall with a sump pump behind the wall and an outlet pipe penetrating the wall.The above comment is hand- written next to the drawing detail, and is assumed to be the original comment from the City. This plan sheet has not been previously reviewed by CTE.A copy of this detail is attached for reference. SAN DIEGO I ESCONDIDO I RIVERSIDE I VENTURA I MERCED I TRACY I SACRAMENTO I PALM SPRINGS I PHOENIX GEOTECHNICAL I ENVIRONMENTAL I CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION AND TESTING I CIVIL ENGINEERING I SURVEYING I 4 IN IE EXTENT IECK OR PLANS 4 i ZX �W 14' (VARIES) r�NI THE LA T-`IE THE TRANSITION ', rECs :I CI PAVING ,. Y of �. Tw'/ -G 189.75 189.55 J cv ASPhAL �c.9U cv z Wow w z w ovo K' z w -s Ln � w v I o w co rr d- ` � N r a �CiT��F i 'i1''c. D 000 W 00 S tALE L I FLd -_ °C o z uj Z 0 \ >T CL cP (Mir!; ; .yip` �/. BASt tv1LNY -A !j-0- sump PurnP GREGATF) Ji IE-52.bC �.� --- -- 40T TC S „..,. .. .,., ENGINEEING SERVICES J' =NTI DRAWING NO , N�� h� DNS FOR: "ae,63 BRAHMS ROAD 1�o A � DONALD & CA;HEP,fN ;�� �FC��+,. . %-N. 260_2-6 16 ` SHEET 2 OF 4 OF 7CDP _. =mom a i' THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT WAS RECORDED ON APR 14.2009 DOCUMENT NUMBER 2009-0190196 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND, } DAVID L. BUTLER,COUNTY RECORDER WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: } SAN DIEGO COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE TIME: 3:43 PM ) ) CITY CLERK ) CITY OF ENCINITAS ) 505 SOUTH VULCAN AVENUE ) ENCINITAS, CA 92024 ) SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER'S USE ENCROACHMENT MAINTENANCE AND REMOVAL COVENANT ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. l004S. PE A.P.N.: 260 244- 46 Project No: 086097 L'bP /00+6- G An encroachment permit is hereby granted to the Permittee designated in paragraph one, Exhibit "A", as the owner of the Benefited property described in paragraph two, Exhibit'A" to encroach upon City Property described in paragraph three, Exhibit"A", as detailed in the diagram, Exhibit"B". Exhibit"A" and "B" are hereby incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth at length. in consideration of the issuance of this encroachment permit, Permittee hereby covenants and agrees, for the benefit of the City, as follows: 1. This covenant shall run with the land and be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the future owners, encumbrancers, successors, heirs, personal representatives, transferees, and assigns of the respective parties. 2. Permittee shall use and occupy the City Property only in the manner and for the purpose described in paragraph four, Exhibit"A". 3. By accepting the benefits herein, Permittee acknowledges title to the City Property to be in the City and waives all right to contest that title. 4. The term of the encroachment permit is indefinite and may be revoked by the City and abandoned by Permittee at any time. The city shall mail written notice of revocation to Permittee, addressed to the Benefited Property which shall set forth the date upon which the benefits of encroachment permit are to cease. 5. City is entitled to remove all or a portion of the improvements constructed by Permittee in order to repair, replace, or install public improvements. City shall have no obligation to pay for or restore Permittee's improvements. 6. Permittee agrees to hold harmless, defend and indemnify from and against all claims, demands, costs, losses, damages, injuries, litigation, and liability arising out of or related to the use, construction, encroachment or maintenance to be done by the Permittee or Permittee's agents, employees or contractors on City Property. 7. Upon abandonment, revocation, completion, or termination, Permittee shall, at no cost to the city, return City Property to its pre-permit condition within the time specified in the notice of revocation or prior to the date of abandonment. y. a 7si S. if Permittee fails to restore the City Property, the City shall have the right to enter upon the City Property, after notice to the Permittee, delivered at the Benefited Property, and restore the City Property to its pre-permit condition to include the removal and destruction of any improvements and Permittee agrees to reimburse the city for the costs incurred. Notice may be given by first class mail sent to the last known address of the Permittee, which shall be deemed effective three calendar days after mailing, or by any other reasonable method likely to give actual notice. 9. If either party is required to incur costs to enforce the provisions of this covenant, the prevailing party shall be entitled to full reimbursement for all costs, including reasonable attorney's fees. 10. Permittee shall agree that Permittee's duties and obligations under this covenant are a lien upon the Benefited Property. Upon 30-day notice, and an opportunity to respond, the City may add to the tax bill of the Benefited Property any past due financial obligation owing to city by way of this covenant. 11. Permittee waives the right to assert any claim or action against the City arising out of or resulting from the revocation of this permit or the removal of any improvements or any other action by the City, its officers, agents, or employees taken in a manner in accordance with the terms of the permit. 12. Permittee recognizes and understands that the permit may create a possessory interest subject to property taxation and that the permittee may be subject to the payment of property taxes levied on such interest. 13. As a condition precedent to Permittee's right to go upon the City Property, the agreement must first be signed by the Permittee, notarized, executed by the City and recorded with the County Recorder of the County of San Diego. The recording fee shall beYpaid btv Permittee. 14. Approved and issued by the City of Encinitas, California, this day of , 20 d r) Y� gk Dated: � � a 0�_� Owner/Permittee Signature VK ''II ner/Permittee Print Dated: J 3 I`t dodo Owner/Permittee Signature �z erg r� D. &t'S 1'O_k Owner/Permittee Print (Notarization of PERMI . gnatu ttach Dated: �n h Peter Cota-Robles Engineering Service Director, City of Encinitas ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of S D C On before me, � Szm�K - (insert name and title of the officer) personally appeared R& 19ws 1 c"S ' who proved to me on the basis.of satisfactory evidence to be the person,a)whose name b/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that&she/they executed the same in Wher/their authorized capacity(, and that by( her/their signature(,Won the instrument the personKor the entity upon behalf of which the person 'acted,executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. -- • OMCIAL SPAL WITNESS my hand and official seal. MARK SIMEK � NOTARY PU®LIO= RNIA COMM,NO,l SAN DIEGO C UNTO` .••" MY COMM.EXP.AUG.27,2010 Signature (Seal) ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of San, On Mc ti lK before me, Mmz-k Surek (insert name and title of the officer) personally appeared C-A*h t,7 D- 9(,, z who proved to me on the basis.of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose nam tare subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that h s they executed the same in his(WItheir authorized capacity4ies),and that-by his/tjgGtheir signatureW on the instrument the personi or the entity upon behalf of which the person f�J acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. OFFICIAL SEAL WITNESS my hand and official seat. MARK SIMEK �� NOTARY PU®Etta=MaII RNIA . '� SAN DIEGO COUNTY `'� MY COMM.EXP.AUG.27,2010 Signatu (Seal) EXHIBIT "A" TO COVENANT REGARDING ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. 1Q5" PARAGRAPH ONE: PERMITTEE RONALD L.BUSICK AND CATHERINE D.BUSICK,HUSBAND AND WIFE AS COMMUNITY PROPERTY WITH RIGHT OF SURVIVORSHIP. PARAGRAPH TWO: BENEFrM PROPERTY ALL THAT LAND AS DESCRIBED IN GRANT DEED DOC.NO.2008-0254621 RECORDED ON 12-MAY-2008 IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY. PARAGRAPH THREE: CITY PROPERTY THAT PORTION OF THE WESTERLY HALF OF BRAHMS ROAD LAYING ADJACENT AND EASTERLY TO THE PROPERTY AS DESCRIBED IN PARAGRAPH TWO AS DESCRIBED IN SAID DOC.N0.2008-0254621 AND AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT"B". PARAGRAPH FOUR: PURPOSE ENCROACHMENT FOR TURFBLOCK SWALE AND STREET TREES IN RIGHT- OF-WAY. r SCALE: 1'=200' .s• • 1 •.•9 • ; EXHIBIT "B" to 1 i 1 1 ! 1 t t 1 ! 1 ! t 1 1 1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 Q 1 1 t °� t �� c� i ��1 v 1 � M-v� 4 M 1 N =o ; -4-n o-n m ca 1 M0 Xn c 1 Mo 1 n0 m 1 1 i mi 1 v 1 ! rn vm 1 1 4 -4 1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 1 ! 1 ! 1 ! � 1 ! 58, 1 Q �rrrrrr r rrrr rrrrr�rr 12' rrrrrrrrr rrrrrrrrrrrr DRIVEWAY BRAHMS ROAD CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of On 4, ZlX�9 before me, R&KllaA 4/•C1,,-7Z)ye, A ti PU'�C,/G Here Insert Name and Title of the Officer Date personally appeared �7TX- Cdr �LFS Name(s)of Signer(s) e who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s�re subscribed to the �he/ instrument and acknowledged to me that RANDA G. MILl.J01 a/they executed the same iqf higher/their authorized oCt nission6t70liw capacity(ies), and that bye her/tt eeir signature(s) on the Hwy t .� instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of son MW Cow*y which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. w Exp.JUL 6,tot 1 I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature Place Notary Seal Above azure of Notary Public W�� OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑ General _ _ ❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑ General ❑Attorney in Fact . ❑ Attorney in Fact Top of thumb here El Trustee Top of thumb here El Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: ❑Other: Signer Is Representing: Signer Is Representing: 02007 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth,CA 91313-2402•www.NationaiNotary.org Item#5907 Reorder:Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-6827 CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERINL, INC. SAN DIEGO,CA SAN DIEGO,CA RMERSIDE,CA VENTURA,CA TRACY,CA SACRAMENTO,CA N.PALM SPRINGS,CA MERCED,CA 1441 Montiel Rd. 124 East 30th St 14538 Meridian Pkwy. 1645 Pacific Ave. 242 W.Larch Rd. 3628 Madison Ave. 19020 Indian Ave. 3058 Beachwood Dr. Suite 115 Suites B and C Suite A Suite 107 Suite F Suite 22 Suite 2-K Merced,CA 95348 Escondido,CA 92DM National City,CA 91950 Riverside,CA 92518 Ormard,CA 93033 Tracy,CA 95304 N.Highlands,CA 95860 N.PaIrn Springs,CA 92258 (209)388-9933 `— (760)746-4955 (619)649-4000 (951)571-4081 (805)486-6475 (2D9)839-2890 (918)331 030 (760)329-4617 (209)388-9939 FAX (760)746-9606 FAX (619)649-4039 FAX (951)571-4188 FAX (805)486-9016 FAX (209)839-2895 FAX (916)331-6037 FAX (760)328-4896 FAX PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED BUSICK RESIDENCE 1660 BRAHMS ROAD CARDIFF BY THE SEA, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: RONALD AND CATHERINE BUSICK 14071 ARBOLITOS DRIVE POWAY, CALIFORNIA 92064 Prepared by: - CONSTRUCTION TESTING& ENGINEERING, INC. 1441 MONTIEL ROAD, SUITE 115 ESCONDIDO, CA 92026 CTE JOB NO.10-9448G APRIL 7, 2008 GEOTECHNICAL I ENVIRONMENTAL I CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION AND TESTING I CIVIL ENGINEERING I SURVEYING TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF SERVICES ................................................................... 1 1.1 Introduction................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Scope of Services.......................................................................................................... 1 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................... 2 3.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS................................................................ 2 3.1 Field Investigation......................................................................................................... 2 3.2 Laboratory Investigation ............................................................................................... 3 4.0 GEOLOGY ............................................................................................................................... 3 4.1 General Setting.............................................................................................................. 3 4.2 Geologic Conditions ..................................................................................................... 4 4.2.1 Topsoils.......................................................................................................... 5 4.2.2 Quaternary Terrace Deposits.......................................................................... 5 4.3 Groundwater Conditions............................................................................................... 6 4.4 Geologic Hazards.......................................................................................................... 6 4.4.1 Local and Regional Faulting.......................................................................... 6 4.4.2 Seismic Design Criteria............................................................................................. 8 4.4.3 Liquefaction Evaluation............................................................................... 10 4.4.4 Seismic Settlement Evaluation .................................................................... 4.4.5 Tsunamis, Seiche, and Flooding Evaluation................................................ 10 4.4.6 Landsliding or Rocksliding.......................................................................... 11 4.4.7 Compressible and Expansive Soils.............................................................. 11 4.4.8 Corrosive Soils............................................................................................. 11 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................. 12 5.1 General........................................................................................................................ 12 5.2 Site Preparation........................................................................................................... 12 5.3 Site Excavation ........................................................................................................... 13 _ 5.4 Fill Placement and Compaction.................................................................................. 13 5.5 Fill Materials............................................................................................................... 14 _ 5.6 Temporary Construction Slopes.................................................................................. 14 5.7 Foundations and Slab Recommendations................................................................... 15 5.7.1 Foundations.................................................................................................. 15 _ 5.7.2 Foundation Settlement................................................................................. 16 5.7.3 Foundation Setback...................................................................................... 16 5.7.4 Interior Concrete Slabs................................................................................. 17 5.8 Lateral Resistance and Earth Pressures....................................................................... 17 5.9 Exterior Flatwork........................................................................................................ 18 5.10 Drainage.................................................................................................................... 19 5.11 Slopes........................................................................................................................ 19 5.12 Construction Observation ......................................................................................... 20 5.13 Plan Review.............................................................................................................. 20 6.0 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION ................................................................................. 21 \Cte sm er\projects\I0-9448G\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc - FIGURES FIGURE I SITE INDEX MAP FIGURE 2 EXPLORATION LOCATION MAP FIGURE 3 REGIONAL FAULT AND SEISMICITY MAP APPENDICES APPENDIX A REFERENCES CITED APPENDIX B EXPLORATION LOGS APPENDIX C LABORATORY METHODS AND RESULTS APPENDIX D STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS \\Cte_server\proj ect s\10-9448G\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 1 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California April 7, 2008 CTE Job No. 10-9448G 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF SERVICES 1.1 Introduction This report presents the results of Construction Testing and Engineering,Inc. ("CTE")preliminary geotechnical investigation for the proposed development located at 1660 Brahms Road,in Cardiff by the Sea, San Diego County, California. It is our understanding that the property is to be developed by constructing a single-family two-story residence with one underground level for parking and basement area. Additional proposed construction includes a pool and spa and associated landscaping improvements and utilities. The investigation for this report included field exploration, laboratory testing, geologic hazard evaluation,engineering analysis,and preparation of this report. Our report provides conclusions and engineering criteria for the proposed development with specific recommendations for excavations,fill placement,and foundation design for the proposed structures. Cited references are presented in Appendix A. Boring logs are located in Appendix B. Appendix C contains our laboratory methods and results. Figures 1 and 1 A are index maps showing the approximate site location. Figure 2 shows approximate locations of subsurface explorations and generalized site geologic conditions. Figure 3 shows the regional faulting and seismicity for the area. 1.2 Scope of Services The scope of services provided included: • Review of readily available geologic and soils reports pertinent to the site and adjacent areas. • Exploration of subsurface conditions to the depths influenced by the proposed construction. Laboratory testing of representative soil samples to provide data to evaluate the geotechnical design characteristics of the soils. `Cte_server\projecisU 0-9448G�Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 2 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California April 7, 2008 CTE Job No. 10-9448G • Definition of the general geology and evaluation of potential geologic hazards at the site. • Soil engineering design criteria for the proposed improvements. • Preparation of this summary report of the investigations performed including geotechnical _.. construction recommendations. 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION The site is located in the residential community of Cardiff by the Sea, at 1660 Brahms Road (APN 260-264-16-00). Presently, a single-family residence with a deck is situated on the site. This residence is surrounded by landscaping (softscape) and an asphalt parking area. It is our understanding that the existing residence will be demolished and replaced with the proposed three- story residential structure consisting of a two-story above-grade residence over a basement. Site elevations range from approximately 189 feet above mean sea level in the north side of the property to 186 feet above mean sea level on the west side of the property. This results in a slight west surface gradient across the site. 3.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS 3.1 Field Investigation Our field exploration was conducted on March 11, 2008, and included a visual site reconnaissance and the excavation of three exploratory soil borings to evaluate the condition of the underlying soil materials. The borings were advanced within accessible areas of the subject site using a limited- access drill rig equipped with continuous flight augers to the maximum explored depth of 20 feet below existing grade. Select undisturbed soil samples were collected using a modified California ,Q e_smenprojects'.10-9448C.Rpt_G eotechnical.doc Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 3 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California April 7, 2008 CTE Job No. 10-9448G sampler and disturbed soil samples were collected with a Standard Penetration Test(SPT)sampler, Bulk samples were collected from drill cuttings and stored in burlap sample bags. Soils were logged in the field by a CTE geologist and visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. Samples were transported to the CTE Certified Geotechnical Laboratory in Escondido,California for analysis. The field descriptions have been modified,where appropriate, to reflect laboratory test results. Exploration logs including descriptions of the soils encountered are included in Appendix B.Approximate exploration locations are shown on Figure 2. 3.2 Laboratory Investigation Laboratory tests were conducted on representative soil samples for classification purposes and to evaluate physical properties and engineering characteristics. Soil samples were analyzed for Particle- Size Distribution,Maximum Density and Optimum Moisture Content,Expansion Index,Atterberg Limits,and Select Chemical Characteristics Analysis(pH,resistivity and soluble sulfates/chlorides). Test method descriptions and laboratory test results are included in Appendix C. 4.0 GEOLOGY 4.1 General Setting San Diego County is located within the Peninsular Ranges physiographic province, which is characterized by northwest-trending mountain ranges, intervening valleys, and predominantly northwest-trending regional faults. The San Diego Region can be further subdivided into the coastal plain,a central mountain—valley,and the eastern mountain-valley areas. The project site lies within `,',Cte_server\projects\lo-94486'Apt_Geotechnical.doc Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 4 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California April 7, 2008 CTE Job No. 10-9448G the coastal plain an area of low relief that slopes gently toward the Pacific Ocean. The coastal plain, has undergone uplift since early Pleistocene time and is characterized by geomorphic pandforms known as marine terraces, which are erosion surfaces or abrasion platforms cut by ocean—wave processes along past coastlines. These surfaces are recognized today as the relatively flat-lying mesas and terraces that range in elevation across the coastal plain of San Diego. The elevation differences of these marine terraces are the result of sea level changes that are associated with glacial retreat and advance throughout the Pleistocene Era, and uplift associated with activity on the Rose Canyon Fault Zone (RCFZ), as well as faults of the La Nacion Fault complex over the past two million years(Figure 3).The mesas or terraces have been incised by westward-flowing drainages that - have adjusted to the relative sea level changes. The combined effect of these processes is that older marine terraces are found at progressively higher elevations. The marine terraces are typically covered with marine sediments, which are covered with non-marine terrestrial deposits. The site currently is situated on a mesa at an approximate elevation of 187 feet above mean sea level, that correlates with elevations consistent with the Party Grove terrace with Quaternary terrace deposits approximately 413,000 years old. This terrace is bounded by westward-sloping drainages including the Canyon Encinitas to the north and Encinitas Creek and San Elijo Lagoon to the south. 4.2 Geologic Conditions Published regional geologic mapping(Kennedy and Tan,2005),indicates that the site and immediate vicinity are underlain by marine and non-marine Quaternary-aged(middle to late Pleistocene)terrace deposits that consist of undivided interfingering paralic deposits including strandline, beach, ',Cte,server\projects l0-9448G,Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 5 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California April 7, 2008 CTE Job No. 10-9448G estuarine, and colluvial deposits composed of poorly consolidated, fine to medium grained, pale brown to reddish brown siltstone, sandstone and conglomerate. Our observations and field explorations are consistent with the regional mapping and identified Quaternary Terrace Deposits at or near the surface with a thin (less than one foot) cover of turf/topsoil. The site earth materials are further described in the following text. 4.2.1 Topsoils A thin layer of lawn/topsoil was observed to extend typically less than one foot below grade throughout the site. This soil consisted of loose to medium dense, moist, silty fine-grained SAND with abundant organics.These materials are not considered suitable for support of the proposed improvements primarily because of their high organic content. However, these materials are anticipated to be removed during construction grading activities for the proposed structures. 4.2.2 Quaternary Terrace Deposits Quaternary Terrace Deposits were observed underlying the topsoils. This material primarily consisted of medium dense to very dense, moist, red-brown, orange-brown,brown, silty to clayey fine- to medium-grained sand. These materials were encountered to the maximum explored depth of 20 feet below existing grade. These soils are considered suitable for support of the proposed structure and the addition of fill, as recommended herein. `,�Cte senenprojects,I0-9448G%Rpt_Geotechaica1.doc Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 6 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California April 7, 2008 CTE Job No. 10-9448G 4.3 Groundwater Conditions Groundwater was not encountered in any of our borings to the maximum explored depth of 20 feet below existing grade. While groundwater conditions will likely vary, especially during periods of sustained precipitation,is not expected to affect the proposed improvements if proper site drainage is maintained.However,subdrains may still be required,depending on our observations during grading and/or construction. 4.4 Geologic Hazards From our investigation it appears that geologic hazards at the site are primarily limited to those caused by violent shaking from earthquake-generated ground motion waves. The potential for damage from displacement or fault movement beneath the proposed structures is considered low. 4.4.1 Local and Regional Faulting Based on our site reconnaissance, evidence from our explorations, and a review of the referenced literature, no known active fault traces underlie or project toward the site. According to the California Geological Survey, a fault is active if it displays evidence of activity in the last 11,000 years (Hart and Bryant, 1997). This site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The California Geological Survey broadly groups faults as "Class A" or"Class B" (Cao et al., 2003). Class A faults are identified based upon relatively well defined paleoseismic activity,and a fault slip rate of more than 5 millimeters per year(mm/yr). In contrast Class B \Cte sen er\projects l0-9448GRpt_Geotechnical.doc Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 7 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California April 7, 2008 CTE Job No. 10-9448G faults have comparatively less defined paleoseismic activity and are considered to have a fault slip rate less than 5 mm/yr. The nearest known Class A fault to the site is the Julian segment of the Elsinore Fault which is approximately 46.2 kilometers northeast of the site. The closest Class B fault is the Rose Canyon Fault which is approximately 4.9 kilometers northwest of the site. The following Table 1 presents the six nearest faults to the site, including magnitude and fault classification. The attached Figure 3 shows regional faults and seismicity with respect to the site. TABLE 1 NEAR SITE FAULT PARAMETERS DISTANCE FROM MAXIMUM FAULT NAME SITE EARTHQUAKE CLASSIFICATION (KILOMETERS) MAGNITUDE Rose Canyon Fault 4.9 7.2 B Newport-Inglewood 19.8 7.1 B Coronado Bank 27.8 7.6 B Elsinore-Julian 46.2 7.1 A Elsinore-Temecula 46.3 6.8 A Palos Verdes 67.4 7.3 B The California Geological Survey,Probabilistic Seismic Hazards Mapping Ground Motion Page(on line pshamap.asp)indicates ground motions with 10%probability of exceedance in 50 years for the site,as underlain by alluvium (site Class D soil types)are as shown on Table 2 below. `,Cte_serrerprojects'\10-9448G\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 8 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California April 7, 2008 CTE Job No. 10-9448G TABLE 2 SITE GROUND MOTION WITH 10%PROBABR=OF EXCEEDANCE IN 50 YEARS UNIT GRAVITY PARAMETER (alluvium) Ground Acceleration 0.327 Spectral Acceleration at Short(0.2 second)Duration 0.786 Spectral Acceleration at Long(1.0 second)Duration 0.394 The site could be subjected to significant shaking in the event of a major earthquake on any of the faults listed above or other regional faults in the southern California or northern Baja California area. However, the seismicity of the site is similar to conditions throughout the San Diego area. 4.4.2 Seismic Design Criteria The following table summarizes seismic design parameters from the California Building Code (CBC, 2001). The values listed in Table 3 are applicable to faults listed in Table 1. \%Cte_sen e0proiects V 0-94486 Apt_Ceotechnical.doc Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 9 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California April 7, 2008 CTE Job No. 10-9448G TABLE 3 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS PARAMETER VALUE CBC REFERENCE Seismic Zone Factor 0.4 Figure 16-2 Soil Profile Type Sp Table 16-J Seismic Coefficient, Ca 0.479 Table 16-Q Seismic Coefficient,C„ 0.768 Table 16-R Near-Source Factor,Na 1.09 Table 16-S Near Source Factor,N,, 1.2 Table 16-T Seismic Source B Table 16-U The following table summarizes seismic design parameters from the most current International and California Building Codes(IBC,2006 and CBC,2007).The values listed in Table 4 are applicable to faults listed in Table 1, and site coordinates of 33.0286°N and -117.2836°W. TABLE 4 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS PARAMETER VALUE IBC REFERENCE Site Class D Table 1613.5.2 Spectral Response Acceleration Coefficient, Ss 1.409 Figure 1613.5(3) Spectral Response 0.534 Figure 1613.5(4) Acceleration Coefficient, S, Seismic Coefficient,Fa 1.0 Tables 1613.5.3(1) Seismic Coefficient,F,, 1.5 Tables 1613.5.3(2) `.Cte_smerprojects,l0-9448G\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 10 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California April 7, 2008 CTE Job No. 10-9448G 4.4.3 Liquefaction Evaluation Liquefaction occurs when saturated fine-grained sands or silts lose their physical strengths during earthquake-induced shaking and behave as a liquid. This is due to loss of point-to-point grain contact and transfer of normal stress to the pore water. Liquefaction potential varies with water level,soil type,material gradation,relative density,and probable intensity and duration of ground shaking. Due to the absence of shallow groundwater and the medium dense to dense nature of the underlying native soils, it is our opinion that the potential for liquefaction should be considered low in all areas of the project. 4.4.4 Seismic Settlement Evaluation Seismic settlement occurs when loose to medium dense granular soils densify during seismic events. We anticipate that loose surficial topsoils will be removed during grading. The underlying site materials were generally found to be dense and are not considered likely to experience significant seismic settlement. Therefore,in our opinion,the potential for seismic settlement resulting in damage to site improvements should be considered low. M 4.4.5 Tsunamis, Seiche, and Flooding Evaluation The potential for tsunami damage at the site is very low due to the site elevation(greater than 180 feet above sea level). Damage caused by oscillatory waves (seiche) is considered unlikely, as the site is not near any significant bodies of water that could produce such a phenomenon. \\Cte_smenprojects'l0-9448GApt_Geotechnical.doc Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 11 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California April 7, 2008 CTE Job No. 10-9448G 4.4.6 Landsliding or Rocksliding According to Tan and Giffen (1995), the site area is designated as generally susceptible to landsliding.However,no landslides have been mapped in the general area of the site,and no evidence of active landsliding was observed during our site investigation. In addition, the site is mapped within an urbanized boundary and it appears that grading in the vicinity of the site has been properly performed. Therefore, the potential for landsliding or rocksliding to affect the site is considered remote. 4.4.7 Compressible and Expansive Soils Based on geologic observation,the observed Quaternary Terrace Deposits materials exhibit very low to low compressibility characteristics and are considered suitable for support of fill and improvements. On site materials were tested and determined to have an expansion index ranging between 4 and 9, which corresponds to a material with very low expansion potential. Therefore, the presence of expansive materials should not affect the proposed development. 4.4.8 Corrosive Soils Laboratory tests conducted for this report indicate site soils and bedrock have a low potential for sulfate corrosion to Portland cement concrete. Soluble chloride and resistivity testing indicates that the site soils and bedrock may have a low to moderate corrosive potential to buried ferrous metal improvements. A qualified corrosion specialist could be consulted to ".Ctq se,er.projem 10-9448GIRpt_Geotechnical.doc Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 12 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California CTE Job No. 10-9448G April 7, 2008 provide recommendations for protection of metallic facilities in contact with earth, should corrosion-sensitive materials be utilized for this project. 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 General We conclude that the proposed construction on the site is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided the recommendations in this report are incorporated into the construction of the project. Recommendations for the design and construction of the proposed improvements are presented in the subsequent sections of this report. 5.2 Site Preparation Before any grading occurs, the site should be cleared of existing debris and other deleterious materials. In areas to receive shallow founded structures or distress-sensitive improvements, all topsoils, surficially eroded, desiccated, burrowed, or otherwise loose or disturbed soils should be removed to the depth of the competent native materials. CTE recommends the removal of the generally loose to medium dense and unsuitable high-organic-containing soils at the surface of the site. Organic and other deleterious materials not suitable for structural backfill should be disposed offsite at a legal disposal site. Since basement improvements are proposed beneath the residential structure,overexcavation and recompaction does not appear to be required,as all foundations will be extended to bear at depth in competent native materials. \\Cte_server\projects\I0-9448G\Rpt_Geotechnica1.doc _ Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 13 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California April 7, 2008 CTE Job No. 10-9448G Thought not anticipated,proposed slab-on-grade areas may require scarification of nine to 12 inches and recompaction at a minimum of two percent above optimum moisture content. If slab-on-grade improvements are proposed near present grades, overexcavation and recompaction to competent native materials will be required. Organic or oversize materials (greater than three inches in maximum dimension) not suitable for structural backfill within three feet of proposed grade should be disposed of off-site or placed in non- structural planter or landscape areas. 5.3 Site Excavation Based on our observations, shallow excavations in site materials will generally be feasible with heavy-duty construction equipment under normal conditions. An engineer or geologist from CTE should evaluate the subgrade to verify that mitigative measures (removal of unsuitable soils)have been properly carried out. Irreducible materials greater than three inches in maximum diameter were - not identified in the preliminary investigation;however if such materials are encountered they should not be used in shallow fills (within three feet of proposed grades) on the site. In utility trenches, adequate bedding should surround pipes. 5.4 Fill Placement and Compaction The geotechnical consultant should verify that the proper site preparation has occurred before fill placement occurs. Following removal of any loose, disturbed soils, areas to receive fills or improvements should be scarified to a depth of one foot, moisture conditioned, and properly ,Cte_sen,er\projects\10-9448G\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 14 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California April 7, 2008 CTE Job No. 10-9448G compacted. Fill and backfill should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent (as evaluated by ASTM DI 557)at moisture contents greater than two percent above optimum. The optimum lift thickness for backfill soil will be dependent on the type of compaction equipment used. Generally,backfill should be placed in uniform,horizontal lifts not exceeding eight inches in loose thickness. Backfill placement and compaction should be done in overall conformance with geotechnical recommendations and local ordinances. 5.5 Fill Materials The very low to non- expansive soils derived from the on site materials are considered suitable for reuse on the site as compacted fill. If used,these materials should be screened of organic materials and materials greater than three inches in a maximum dimension. If encountered,clayey,native soils may be blended with granular soils and reused in non-structural fill areas. Although not anticipated, imported fill beneath structures, pavements and walks should have an expansion index less than or equal to 50(per UBC 18-I-13)with less than 35 percent passing the no. 200 sieve. Imported fill soils for use in structural or slope areas should be evaluated by the soils engineer to determine strength characteristics before placement on the site. 5.6 Temporary Construction Slopes Sloping recommendations for unshored temporary excavations are provided. The recommended slopes should be relatively stable against deep-seated failure, but may experience localized sloughing. On site soils are considered Type B and Type C soils with recommended slope ratios as 'Xte_smerlprojects�10-94486\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 15 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California - April 7, 2008 CTE Job No. 10-9448G set forth in Table 5 below. TABLES RECOb04MED TEMPORARY SLOPE RATIOS SOIL TYPE SLOPE RATIO MAXIMUM HEIGHT (Horizontal:vertical) B(Formational Soils) 1:1 (MAXIMUM) 10 Feet C (Topsoils/Fills) 1.5:1 (MAXIMUM) 10 Feet Actual field conditions and soil type designations must be verified by a "competent person" while excavations exist, according to Cal-OSHA regulations. In addition, the above sloping recommendations do not allow for surcharge loading at the top of slopes by vehicular traffic, equipment or materials. Appropriate surcharge setbacks must be maintained from the top of all unshored slopes. 5.7 Foundations and Slab Recommendations The following recommendations are for preliminary planning purposes only. These foundation recommendations should be reviewed after completion of earthwork. 5.7.1 Foundations Continuous and isolated spread footings are suitable for use at this site. However, footings should not straddle cut/fill interfaces; we anticipate all structural footings will be founded entirely upon competent native materials a minimum three feet below the lowest adjacent exterior grade. Foundation dimensions and reinforcement should be based on allowable ''.Cte_sen,er.projects,10-94486',Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 16 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California April 7, 2008 CTE Job No. 10-9448G bearing values of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf). The allowable bearing value may be increased by one third for short-duration loading, which includes the effects of wind or seismic forces. Footings should be at least 15 inches wide for two- and three-story improvements, and founded at least 36 inches below the lowest adjacent exterior grade. Reinforcement for continuous footings should consist of at least four#4 reinforcing bars; two placed near the top and two placed near the bottom. The structural engineer should provide recommendations for reinforcement of any deepened spread footings and footings with pipe penetrations. Foundation excavations should generally be maintained at above optimum moisture content until concrete placement. 5.7.2 Foundation Settlement In general, for the proposed construction, the maximum post-construction compression settlement is expected to be less than 1.0 inch. Maximum differential settlement of continuous footings is expected to be on the order of 0.5 inch across the building. 5.7.3 Foundation Setback 41 Footings for structures should be designed such that the horizontal distance from the face of adjacent slopes to the outer edge of the footing is a minimum of 10 feet. Excavations for utility trenches within 10 lateral feet should not encroach within a 1:1 plane extending downward from the closest bottom edge of adjacent footings. �Cte_smenprojecis.10-9448G\Rpt_Geotechniw1.doc Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 17 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California - April 7, 2008 CTE Job No. 10-9448G 5.7.4 Interior Concrete Slabs Lightly loaded concrete slabs should be designed for the anticipated loading, but be a _ minimum of 4.5 inches thick. Minimum slab reinforcement should consist of#3 reinforcing bars placed on 18-inch centers, each way at mid-slab height. In moisture-sensitive floor areas, a vapor barrier of ten-mil visqueen (with all laps sealed or taped), overlying a - maximum two-inch layer of consolidated aggregate base(Sand Equivalent greater than 30) should be installed. A one- to two-inch layer of similar material may be placed above the visqueen to protect the membrane during steel or concrete placement. Slab areas subject to heavier than typical vehicular loads may require increased thickness and reinforcement. This office should be contacted to provide additional recommendations where actual service conditions warrant further analysis. Subgrade materials should be maintained at slightly above optimum moisture content until slab underlayment or concrete are placed. 5.8 Lateral Resistance and Earth Pressures The following recommendations may be used for shallow footings on the site. Foundations placed in firm, well-compacted fill material may be designed using a coefficient of friction of 0.30 (total frictional resistance equals coefficient of friction multiplied by the dead load). A design passive resistance value of 300 pounds per square foot per foot of depth (with a maximum value of 1500 pounds per square foot)may be used. The allowable lateral resistance can be taken as the sum of the frictional resistance and the passive resistance,provided the passive resistance does not exceed two- - thirds of the total allowable resistance. Retaining walls up to 10 feet high and backfilled using granular soils may be designed using the equivalent fluid weights given in Table 6 below. 1,Cte_sm erprojectsA 0-9448&Rpt_Geotechruca1.doc Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 18 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California April 7, 2008 CTE Job No. 10-9448G TABLE 6 BQUIVALENT FLUID UNIT VMGRTS q*unds Per cubic foot) SLOPE BACKFILL WALL TYPE LEVEL BACKFILL 2:1 (HORIZONTAL: VERTICAL CANTILEVER WALL 35 60 (YIELDING) RESTRAINED WALL 55 90 The values above assume non-expansive backfill and free-draining conditions. Measures should be taken to prevent moisture buildup behind all retaining walls. Drainage measures should include free draining backfill materials and perforated drains. These drains should discharge to an appropriate -- location. Basement wall waterproofing should be specified by the project architect. 5.9 Exterior Flatwork To reduce the potential for distress to exterior flatwork caused by minor settlement of foundation soils,we recommend that such flatwork be installed with crack-control joints at appropriate spacing as designed by the project architect. Additionally,we recommend that flatwork be installed with at least minimal reinforcement. Flatwork,which should be installed with crack control joints,includes driveways,sidewalks,and architectural features. All subgrades should be prepared according to the earthwork recommendations previously given,before placing concrete. Positive drainage should be established and maintained next to all flatwork. Subgrade materials shall be maintained at slightly above optimum moisture content until concrete placement. ^,Cte_sm—projects,10-9448G.Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 19 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California April 7, 2008 CTE Job No. 10-9448G 5.10 Drainage Surface runoff should be collected and directed away from improvements by means of appropriate erosion-reducing devices and positive drainage should be established around the proposed improvements. Positive drainage should be directed away from improvements at a gradient of at least two percent for a distance of at least five feet. We understand that some agencies are encouraging the use of storm-water infiltration devices. Use of such devices tends to increase the possibility of high groundwater and slope instability. If infiltration devices must be used, the proposed location should be re-evaluated to make sure they are not compromising the structure foundations and/or slope stabilities.The project civil engineers should evaluate the on-site drainage and make necessary provisions to keep surface water from affecting the site. 5.11 Slopes Significant slopes are not anticipated at the site. Based on anticipated soil strength characteristics, fill slopes should be constructed at slope ratios of 2:1 (horizontal: vertical)or flatter. These fill slope inclinations should exhibit factors of safety greater than 1.5. Although properly constructed slopes on this site should be grossly stable,the soils will be somewhat erodible. Therefore, runoff water should not be permitted to drain over the edges of slopes unless that water is confined to properly designed and constructed drainage facilities. Erosion resistant vegetation should be maintained on the face of all slopes. :,Cie_se,u,projects 10-9448G%Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 20 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California April 7, 2008 CTE Job No. 10-9448G Typically, soils along the top portion of a fill slope face will creep laterally. We do not recommend distress-sensitive hardscape improvements be constructed within five feet of slope crests in fill areas or that thickened edges be employed there. 5.12 Construction Observation The recommendations provided in this report are based on preliminary design information for the proposed construction and the subsurface conditions found in the exploratory boring locations. The interpolated subsurface conditions should be checked in the field during construction to verify that conditions are as anticipated. Recommendations provided in this report are based on the understanding and assumption that CTE will provide the observation and testing services for the project. All earthwork should be observed and tested to verify that grading activity has been performed according to the recommendations contained within this report. The project engineer should evaluate all footing trenches before - reinforcing steel placement. 5.13 Plan Review CTE should review the project foundation plans and grading plans before commencement of earthwork to identify potential conflicts with the recommendations contained in this report. `.,Cte_semer�projecwI 0-9448G'\.Rpt_Geotechnica1.doc Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 21 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California April 7, 2008 CTE Job No. 10-9448G 6.0 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION The recommendations provided in this report are based on the anticipated construction and the subsurface conditions found in our explorations. The interpolated subsurface conditions should be checked in the field during construction. - The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However,changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time,whether they be due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition,changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore,this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of three years. The field evaluation,laboratory testing and geotechnical analysis presented in this report have been conducted according to current engineering practice and the standard of care exercised by reputable Geotechnical Consultants performing similar tasks in this area. No other warranty, expressed or implied,is made regarding the conclusions,recommendations and opinions expressed in this report. Variations may exist and conditions not observed or described in this report may be encountered during construction. ,,Cte_senenprojecis',]0-9448G\Rpt_Geotechr&a1.doc - Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Page 22 Proposed Busick Residence 1660 Brahms Road, Cardiff by the Sea, California CTE Job No. 10-9448G April 7, 2008 Our conclusions and recommendations are based on an analysis of the observed conditions. If conditions different from those described in this report are encountered,our office should be notified and additional recommendations, if required, will be provided upon request. CTE should review project specifications for all earthwork and foundation related activities prior to the solicitation of construction bids. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service on this project. If you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Respectfully submitted, CONSTRUCTION TESTING & E ESSMMq INC ly, Martin Siem, CEG4 2311 Mark 4Ctlin, GE #2179 No. 179 r' Senior Geotechnical Engine aat ExpJ 3J "' Certified Engineering Geologist 4L 0 OF C a x+0,7.3!; G? CER'r IF�Ef cn 01-CAO1 \\Cte server\projects\I0-9448G\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc TOPOI map printed on 02/15/05 from"Callfornla.tpo"and"Untitled.tpg" 117.30000°W 117.2B333o W 117.26667°W WGS84117.250001 W o • 7 l , x I o o 1 a n Yy ✓ o a JJ i ri Rr . _ U .• E WN y� i n. T. t 1 .er, �`RClllita8 w.$;�va .9ar 4 .�� � � 3 •� t • rt il, '�_ j •eDfe .� -' )t 1: :�' e1 z t I ~ z M M Cowty Park Se CI�6 •r t 7N•..f i�-� r).r. m - � � APPROXIMATE M SITE LOCATION : ,:'`' ` ' '`\ m �7ti fPn fix_ t ,� t..•F y. � >f '' r z Cardiff-by-the-Sea a b.' +i. =' z (Cardiff) C? o r�, • � 0 D. 't J O I r f i t� z lralet � � ' 'f tl1° �C. +mss• .... ' z o Solana Beach y, o 0 0 0 0 i a so s , NI PARK Solana 8ese�11.'V k >a Aje 1(Q `i -- 117.30000°W 117.283331 W 117.26667°W •WGS84 117.25000°W TN*J)MN 0 S I MY IJ13' ��IWO FEf7 0 500 y000 MUMS Y Printed flom TOPOI C2W0 WAtflo er Prodwio (www topo corn) CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION 1441 MONTIEL ROAD,STE 115 ESCONDIDO CA.92026(760)7464955 CTE JOB NO SITE INDEX MAP 10-9448G BUSICK RESIDENCE AS SHOWN 1660 BRAHMS ROAD CARDIFF-BY-THE SEA,CALIFORNIA DA4/08 FIG uRE: 1 ate_ ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT city of Capital Improvement Projects Encinitas District Support Services Field Operations Sand Rep lent shment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering February 17, 2011 Attn: INSCO/DICO Insurance Services, Inc. 17780 Fitch Suite 200 Irvine, California 92614 RE: Ronald Lee and Catherine D. Busick 1660 Brahms Road APN 260-264-16 CDP 08-097 Grading Permit 10045-GI Release of security- 75% Grading permit 10045-GI authorized earthwork, private improvements, and erosion control, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has approved rough grade. Therefore, a release of a portion of the security deposit is merited. Performance Bond 729158P, in the amount of$49,144.00, may be reduced by 75% to $12,286.00. The document original will be kept until completion. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633- 2779 or in writing, attention this Department. SincereAy, Debra Geishart y L bach Engineering Technician inance Manager Subdivision Engineering Financial Services CC Jay Lembach,Finance Manager Cathy Busick Debra Geishart File TEL 760-633-2600 / FAX 760-633-2627 305 S. Vulcan Avenue, Fnciniias. California 92024-3633 TDD 760-633-2700 �� recycled paper 11110 negley avenue A Certified SLBE&SBE Company san diego,ca 92131 beth.reiter@vonreiter.com phone(858)232-4580 fax(858)737-2154 www.vonreiter.com VON RE/TER GROUP Civil Engineering Consultants March 27, 2012 City of Encinitas Engineering Services Permits 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 RE: Engineer's Final Grading Certification For Grading Permit No. 10045-G The grading under Grading Permit No. 10045-G has been performed in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan As-Built drawing set. Final Grading inspection has demonstrated that lot drainage conforms with the approved grading plan and that swales drain at a minimum of 1% to the street and/or an appropriate drainage system. All the Low Impact Development, Source Control, and Treatment Control Best Management Practices as shown on the drawing and required by the Best Management Practice Manual Part II were constructed and are operational. Maintenance covenants are in place,as required. F r 2¢�S,MATTER � 68285 ' ExP•9-30-2013 BY: / ' `����'�" 03./272012 Richard E. Matter, Jr. - Engineer of Record Date C1v+1 Verification by the Engineering Inspector of the above statements is documented by the inspector's signature hereon and will take place only after the above is signed and stamped; this does not relieve the Engineer of Record of the ultimate responsibility. By: Engineering Inspector Date O CD O ao II O O LLJ rA - X � 1. d wa m co yco ~rteaq X ,°a a X � U 0 x y x X ` X _ O U¢� �•z� x v ^U� X Lu m Wed >o Z W�c y U G O 2 c X 2 L C.•J y r z W • - LLJ W r W Z"= X U�� z NC/3�� o Z d x x x I m� x x x Z 0 x U �- 0 a J C9 a X Z 0 V)p m W LU ~ < m X w S O \ a k a Q • X ni X � / X X r a X m / N X A O / X > X N I U / _ u on r � Lf) j 07)1 co A I ,' tI) w C6 O /ir LL) Q 000 rn W ''�r' !a� y 1 _ •w z w -- ui O /�Y ••I LL O CO _ J} (1 gF,AW I..Ey ,/ f `,"• �� -'' '�� - Z 00 O O Q' ,• inn .eG'.,` mil; o •o w J w JC7 O � O ch •: ti r�� �,,; 1�s n: O gyyw Z O Al 0 0 0 O 4ry ay { A4 a a 3(inlwE)dw LLI I GO Q O / W __.. ,-/ PLi W f� W Cfl O J W W Y W 2 - L - / JTy e- M9 OOW LU a w y' I. .,I \ ! "I _ _ rte z` > > w OCR LLJ Q Z } Z v � � / ♦ > 1 , z� uj LU i e Wo W W Q .h N I 'o J U tY r' ,f / t o � \ �/ f atS o 0 CD ui 2 2 O LLJ Quo pArION PALL,T • h. O 1 r } r d p ,Cl A4 cr Y l .�( , � .-.]. !/ x. oar• o� a n A II i 1CJ z in 1" Al a in CL � W `L.^i a a o °. oo�� cl f A : U i APPENDIX A REFERENCES CITED \Cle_sen,er,projects`10-9448&Rpt Geotechnical.doc REFERENCES CITED 1. Blake, EQFAULT Version 3.00, 2000. Thomas F. Blake Computer Services and Software. 2. Cao, T.; Bryant, W.W.; Rowshandel, B.; Branum, D.; and Wills, C.J.; 2003, The Revised 2002 California Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Maps June 2003 3. Hart, Earl W., Revised 1994, "Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist Priolo, Special Studies Zones Act of 1972," California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42. 4. Jennings, Charles W., revised 1994, "Fault Map of California with Locations of Volcanoes, Thermal Springs and Thermal Wells." 5. Tan, S. S., and Giffen, 1995, "Landslide Hazards in the Northern Part of the San Diego Metropolitan Area,San Diego County,California: Landslide Hazard Identification Map No. 35", California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Open-File Report 95-04, State of California, Division of Mines and Geology, Sacramento, California. 6. Tan,S. S.,and Kennedy,M.P, 1996,Geologic Map of the Oceanside,San Luis Rey,and San Marcos 7.5 Minute Quadrangles, San Diego County, California",California Department of Conservation,Division of Mines and Geology,Open-File Report 96-02,State of California, Division of Mines and Geology, Sacramento, California. 7. Kennedy, M.P.; and Tan, S.S; 2005, Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30'x60' Quadrangle, California (Scale 1:100,000). �.,.Cte_smenprojects,10-9448GApt_Geotechnical.doc CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. GEOTECHNICAL I CONSTAumom ENGINEFNING TESTING AND INSPECTION I441 MONTIEL ROAD.SUITE 115 I ESCONOT 00.CA 92016 1 760.746.1655 µ. DEFINITION OF TERMS PRIMARY DIVISIONS SYMBOLS SECONDARY DIVISIONS GRAVELS CLEAN o WELL GRADED GRAVELS,GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES _. �a GW MORE THAN GRAVELS _'��"_"'° '_ o LITTLE OR NO FINES Z HALF OF <5%FINES POORLY GRADED GRAVELS OR GRAVEL SAND MIXTURES, ¢ ! GP > LITTLE OF NO FINES O 00 H w COARSE SILTY GRAVELS,GRAVEL-SAND-SILT MIXTURES, w x N FRACTION IS GRAVELS CTM NON-PLASTIC FINES w w LARGER THAN WITH FINES CLAYEY GRAVELS,GRAVEL-SAND CLAY MIXTURES, z z a w N0.4 SIEVE GC PLASTIC FINES G4 x o SANDS CLEAN r : {� WELL GRADED SANDS,GRAVELLY SANDS,LITTLE OR NO -- w Q N MORE THAN SANDS -{ POORLY GRADED SANDS,GRAVELLY SANDS,LITTLE OR a O HALF OF <5%FINES SP 0 r� Z NO FINES COARSE 0 < FRACTION IS SANDS S1VT SILTY SANDS,SAND-SILT MIXTURES,NON-PLASTIC FINES SMALLER THAN WITH FINES CLAYEY SANDS,SAND-CLAY MIXTURES,PLASTIC FINES NO.4 SIEVE SC INORGANIC SILTS,VERY FINE SANDS,ROCK FLOUR,SILTY n w Lei N SILTS AND CLAYS ML OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS SLIGHTLY PLASTIC CLAYEY SILTS .a O a cn 0- INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, C a ¢ ; LESS THAN 50 LIQUID LIMIT IS CL GRAVELLY SANDY SILTS OR LEAN CLAYS EA x ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY z z (7T, x a c°v INORGANIC SILTS,MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS FINE U a SILTS AND CLAYS MH SANDY OR SILTY SOILS ELASTIC SILTS z O , 7Q LIQUID LIMIT IS ig INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY,FAT CLAYS w GREATER THAN 50 ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS GRAIN SIZES BOULDERS COBBLES COARSE I FINE I COARSE I MED UM I FINE T SILTS AND CLAYS 12" 311 3/4" 4 10 40 200 CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENING U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE ADDITIONAL TESTS (OTHER THAN TEST PIT AND BORING LOG COLUMN HEADINGS) MAX-Maximum Dry Density PM-Permeability PP-Pocket Penetrometer GS-Grain Size Distribution SG-Specific Gravity WA-Wash Analysis SE-Sand Equivalent HA-Hydrometer Analysis DS-Direct Shear EI-Expansion Index AL-Atterberg Limits UC-Unconfined Compression CHM-Sulfate and Chloride RV-R-Value MD-Moisture/Density Content,pH,Resistivity CN-Consolidation M-Moisture COR-Corrosivity CP-Collapse Potential SC- Swell Compression SD-Sample Disturbed HC-Hydrocollapse OI-Organic Impurities REM-Remolded FIGURE: BL1 - CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. 5dg GEOTECHNICAL I CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION 1111 NONTIEL ROAD.SUITE 115 1 ESC ONO)00.CA 920!1 1 760.716.1955 — PROJECT: DRILLER: SHEET: of CTE JOB NO: DRILL METHOD: DRILLING DATE: LOGGED BY: SAMPLE METHOD: ELEVATION: N >1 BORING LEGEND Laboratory Tests �' F. yo -a u ` N Vn .c V a DESCRIPTION Block or Chunk Sample Bulk Sample Standard Penetration Test Modified Split-Barrel Drive Sampler(Cal Sampler) Thin Walled Army Corp. of Engineers Sample s Groundwater Table - --- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Soil Type or Classification Change Formation Change((Approximate boundaries queried(?)1 "SM" Quotes are placed around classifications where the soils exist in situ as bedrock �" FIGURE: BL2 CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. GEOTECHNICAE I CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION 1111 MONIIEE ROAD,SUITE 115 1 ESCONDIDO,CA 17616 1 160.716.1566 PROJECT: 1660 BRAHMS RD.,CARDIFF DRILLER: PACIFIC DRILLING SHEET: 1 of I CTE JOB NO: 10-9448G DRILL METHOD: TRI-POD DRILLING DATE: 3/11/2008 LOGGED BY: D.RIES SAMPLE METHOD: RING,SPT,BULK ELEVATION: 187 ¢ E H a BORING: B-1 Laboratory Tests o ` y vi c6 Y 0 3 o y U a aai ' 2 e_1 Vi E2 ca m m G] c7 DESCRIPTION -0- 0-0.3'TURF: 03'QUARTERNARY TERRACE DEPOSIT(Otd): MD,El Medium reddish brown,medium dense,moist,silty to clayey SAND(SM-SC),fine to medium grained. CHEM 5 WA 8 Becomes dense. 16 _ 24 11 Becomes medium dense. WA 13 15 13 Becomes dense. WA,AL 16 _ 32 Sand percentage increasing, less silt and clayey fraction. 9 Becomes medium dense. 13 15 -20-1— fl Total depth 19.5' No groundwater Borehole backfilled with bentonite chips and capped with soil 2 B-1 CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. GE D TECHNICAL I CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION 1111 MONTIEE RDAO,SUITE 115 1 ESCONDIDO.CA 92 02 9 1 760.746.A955 PROJECT: 1660 BRAHMS RD.,CARDIFF DRILLER: PACIFIC DRILLING SHEET: 1 of I CTE JOB NO: 10-9448G DRILL METHOD: TRI-POD DRILLING DATE: 3/11/2008 LOGGED BY: D.RIES SAMPLE METHOD: RING,SPT,BULK ELEVATION: 188 H o a BORING: B-2 Laboratory Tests ? o o vi DESCRIPTION 0 0-0.3'TURF: 0.3'OUARTERNARY TERRACE DEPOSIT(Otd): Medium dense,moist,medium reddish orange brown, silty to clayey SAND(SM-SC),fine to medium grained. 5 7 11 13 WA AL 0 15 Becomes very dense. 29 36 EI 11 Becomes dense. 13 19 _m 8 13 0 17 Total depth 20' No groundwater Borehole backfilled with bentonite chips and capped with soil 2 B-2 CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. GEOTECHNICAL I CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION 144 MONTIEL ROAD,SUITE 115 1 ESCONDIDO,CA 92026 1 760.716.1155 PROJECT: 1660 BRAHMS RD.,CARDIFF DRILLER: PACIFIC DRILLING SHEET: 1 of I CTE JOB NO: 10-9448G DRILL METHOD: TRI-POD DRILLING DATE: 3/11/2008 LOGGED BY: D.RIES SAMPLE METHOD: RING,SPT,BULK ELEVATION: 189 a ¢ -ED to BORING. B-3 Laboratory Tests E Y > 3 p v DESCRIPTION - 0 0-0.3'TURF: 0.3'QUARTERNARY TERRACE DEPOSIT(Qtd): 5 7 Dense,moist,medium reddish orange brown,silty to clayey 16 SAND(SM-SC),fine to medium grained. 32 0 13 WA 16 16 7 Becomes medium dense. 8 18 Total depth 18' No groundwater Borehole backfilled with bentonite chips and capped with soil 0 2 B-3 APPENDIX C LABORATORY METHODS AND RESULTS \Cte_sen enprojects\10-9448G\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc APPENDIX C LABORATORY METHODS AND RESULTS Laboratory tests were performed on representative soil samples to detect their relative - engineering properties. Tests were performed following test methods of the American Society for Testing Materials or other accepted standards. The following presents a brief description of the various test methods used. Laboratory results are presented in the following section of this Appendix. Expansion Index Test Expansion Index Testing was performed on selected samples of the matrix of the onsite soils according to United Building Code Standard No. 18-2. Classification Soils were classified visually according to the Unified Soil Classification System. Visual classifications were supplemented by laboratory testing of selected samples according to ASTM D2487. Particle-Size Anal Particle-size analyses were performed on selected representative samples according to ASTM D422. Modified Proctor To determine the maximum dry density and optimum moisture content, a soil sample was tested in accordance with ASTMD-1557. Atterberg Limits The procedure of ASTM D4518-84 was used to measure the liquid limit,plastic limit and plasticity index of representative samples. Chemical Analysis Soil materials were collected with sterile sampling equipment and tested for Sulfate and Chloride content, pH, Corrosivity, and Resistivity_ \1Qe_sen,er,projects.10-9448G\Rpt Geoteclwica].doc CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. GEOTECNNICAL I CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION 1441 MONIIEL ROAD.SUITE 115 1 ESCONDIDO.CA 17076 1 760.716.1655 200 WASH ANALYSIS LOCATION DEPTH PERCENT PASSING CLASSIFICATION (feet) #200 SIEVE B-1 5 15.6 SM-SC B-1 10 16.5 SM-SC B-1 15 10 SP-SM B=2 5 17.3 SM-SC B-3 10 16.7 SM-SC EXPANSION INDEX TEST UBC 18-2 LOCATION DEPTH EXPANSION INDEX EXPANSION (feet) POTENTIAL B-1 2-4 4 VERY LOW B-2 12-14 9 VERY LOW ATTERBERG LIMITS LOCATION DEPTH LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX CLASSIFICATION B-1 15 NON-PLASTIC B-2 5 NON-PLASTIC MAXIMUM DENSITY _. (MODIFIED PROCTOR) LOCATION DEPTH OPTIMUM MOISTURE DRY DENSITY (feet) (%) (pcf) B-1 2-4 10 131.5 SULFATE LOCATION DEPTH RESULTS (feet) ppm B-1 5 58.1 CHLORIDE LOCATION DEPTH RESULTS (feet) ppm B-1 5 57.4 CONDUCTIVITY CALIFORNIA TEST 424 LOCATION DEPTH RESULTS (feet) us/cm B-1 5 100.1 RESISTIVITY CALIFORNIA TEST 424 LOCATION DEPTH RESULTS (feet) ohms/cm B-1 5 9990 LABORATORY SUMMARY CTE JOB NO. 10-9448G 1 4 5 \i \y,:1 1 4 0 -v 1 3 5 \ \ V I\ 130 \) \ \ 125 120 115 W � �- 110 105 I 1 100 95 A V _ 90 _ T -- a� i 85 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 PERCENT MOISTURE (%) ASTM D1557 METHOD ® A ❑ B p C MODIFIED PROCTOR RESULTS LAB SAMPLE DEPTH MAXIMUM OPTIMUM NUMBER NUMBER (FEET) SOIL DESCRIPTION DRY DENSITY MOISTURE (PCF) CONTENT(%) 18083 B_1 2-4 REDDISH BROWN SILTY 131.5 10.0 FINE SAND CTE JOB NO: CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. DATE: 04/08 GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION 10-9448G 1441 MONTIEL ROAD,STE 115 ESCONDIDO CA 92026(760)746A955 FIGURE: C-2 APPENDIX D STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Appendix D Page D-1 Standard Specifications for Grading Section 1 - General Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. presents the following standard recommendations for grading and other associated operations on construction projects. These guidelines should be considered a portion of the project specifications. Recommendations contained in the body of the previously presented soils report shall supersede the recommendations and or requirements as specified herein. The project geotechnical consultant shall interpret disputes arising out of interpretation of the recommendations contained in the soils report or specifications contained herein. Section 2 - Responsibilities of Project Personnel The geotechnical consultant should provide observation and testing services sufficient to general conformance with project specifications and standard grading practices. The geotechnical consultant should report any deviations to the client or his authorized representative. The Client should be chiefly responsible for all aspects of the project. He or his authorized representative has the responsibility of reviewing the findings and recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. He shall authorize or cause to have authorized the Contractor and/or other consultants to perform work and/or provide services. During grading the Client or his authorized representative should remain on-site or should remain reasonably accessible to all concerned parties in order to make decisions necessary to maintain the flow of the project. The Contractor is responsible for the safety of the project and satisfactory completion of all grading and other associated operations on construction projects, including, but not limited to, earth work in accordance with the project plans, specifications and controlling agency requirements. Section 3 - Preconstruction Meeting A preconstruction site meeting should be arranged by the owner and/or client and should include the grading contractor, design engineer, geotechnical consultant, owner's representative and representatives of the appropriate governing authorities. Section 4 - Site Preparation The client or contractor should obtain the required approvals from the controlling authorities for the project prior, during and/or after demolition, site preparation and removals, etc. The appropriate approvals should be obtained prior to proceeding with grading operations. STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 1 of 24 Appendix D Page D-2 Standard Specifications for Grading Clearing and grubbing should consist of the removal of vegetation such as brush, grass, woods, stumps, trees, root of trees and otherwise deleterious natural materials from the areas to be graded. Clearing and grubbing should extend to the outside of all proposed excavation and fill areas. Demolition should include removal of buildings, structures, foundations, reservoirs, utilities (including underground pipelines, septic tanks, leach fields, seepage pits, cisterns, mining shafts, tunnels, etc.) and other man-made surface and subsurface improvements from the areas to be graded. Demolition of utilities should include proper capping and/or rerouting pipelines at the project perimeter and cutoff and capping of wells in accordance with the requirements of the governing authorities and the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant at the time of demolition. Trees, plants or man-made improvements not planned to be removed or demolished should be protected by the contractor from damage or injury. - Debris generated during clearing, grubbing and/or demolition operations should be wasted from areas to be graded and disposed off-site. Clearing, grubbing and demolition operations should be performed under the observation of the geotechnical consultant. Section 5 --Site Protection Protection of the site during the period of grading should be the responsibility of the contractor. Unless other provisions are made in writing and agreed upon among the concerned parties, completion of a portion of the project should not be considered to preclude that portion or adjacent areas from the requirements for site protection until such time as the entire project is complete as identified by the geotechnical consultant, the client and the regulating agencies. Precautions should be taken during the performance of site clearing, excavations and grading to protect the work site from flooding, ponding or inundation by poor or improper surface drainage. Temporary provisions should be made during the rainy season to adequately direct surface drainage away from and off the work site. Where low areas cannot be avoided, pumps should be - kept on hand to continually remove water during periods of rainfall. Rain related damage should be considered to include, but may not be limited to, erosion, silting, saturation, swelling, structural distress and other adverse conditions as determined by the geotechnical consultant. Soil adversely affected should be classified as unsuitable materials and should be subject to overexcavation and replacement with compacted fill or other remedial grading as recommended by the geotechnical consultant. STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 2 of 24 Appendix D Page D-3 Standard Specifications for Grading The contractor should be responsible for the stability of all temporary excavations. Recommendations by the geotechnical consultant pertaining to temporary excavations (e.g., backcuts) are made in consideration of stability of the completed project and, therefore, should not be considered to preclude the responsibilities of the contractor. Recommendations by the geotechnical consultant should not be considered to preclude requirements that are more restrictive by the regulating agencies. The contractor should provide during periods of extensive rainfall plastic sheeting to prevent unprotected slopes from becoming saturated and unstable. When deemed appropriate by the geotechnical consultant or governing agencies the contractor shall install checkdams, desilting basins, sand bags or other drainage control measures. In relatively level areas and/or slope areas, where saturated soil and/or erosion gullies exist to depths of greater than 1.0 foot; they should be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill in accordance with the applicable specifications. Where affected materials exist to depths of 1.0 foot or less below proposed finished grade, remedial grading by moisture conditioning in-place, followed by thorough recompaction in accordance with the applicable grading guidelines herein may be attempted. If the desired results are not achieved, all affected materials should be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill in accordance with the slope repair recommendations herein. If field conditions dictate, the geotechnical consultant may recommend other slope repair procedures. Section 6 - Excavations 6.1 Unsuitable Materials Materials that are unsuitable should be excavated under observation and recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. Unsuitable materials include, but may not be limited to, dry, loose, soft, wet, organic compressible natural soils and fractured, weathered, soft bedrock and nonengineered or otherwise deleterious fill materials. Material identified by the geotechnical consultant as unsatisfactory due to its moisture conditions should be overexcavated; moisture conditioned as needed, to a uniform at or above optimum moisture condition before placement as compacted fill. If during the course of grading adverse geotechnical conditions are exposed which were not anticipated in the preliminary soil report as determined by the geotechnical consultant additional exploration, analysis, and treatment of these problems may be recommended. STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 3 of 24 Appendix D Page D-4 Standard Specifications for Grading 6.2 Cut Slopes - Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and approved by the regulating agencies, permanent cut slopes should not be steeper than 2:1 (horizontal: vertical). The geotechnical consultant should observe cut slope excavation and if these excavations expose loose cohesionless, significantly fractured or otherwise unsuitable material, the materials should be overexcavated and replaced with a compacted stabilization fill. If encountered specific cross section details should be obtained from the Geotechnical Consultant. When extensive cut slopes are excavated or these cut slopes are made in the direction of the prevailing drainage, a non-erodible diversion swale (brow ditch) should be provided at the top of the slope. 6.3 Pad Areas All lot pad areas, including side yard terrace containing both cut and fill materials, transitions, located less than 3 feet deep should be overexcavated to a depth of 3 feet and replaced with a uniform compacted fill blanket of 3 feet. Actual depth of overexcavation may vary and should be delineated by the geotechnical consultant during grading, especially where deep or drastic transitions are present. For pad areas created above cut or natural slopes, positive drainage should be established away from the top-of-slope. This may be accomplished utilizing a berm drainage swale and/or an appropriate pad gradient. A gradient in soil areas away from the top-of-slopes of 2 percent or greater is recommended. Section 7 - Compacted Fill All fill materials should have fill quality, placement, conditioning and compaction as specified below or as approved by the geotechnical consultant. 7.1 Fill Material Quali Excavated on-site or import materials which are acceptable to the geotechnical consultant may be utilized as compacted fill, provided trash, vegetation and other deleterious materials are removed prior to placement. All import materials anticipated for use on-site should be sampled tested and approved prior to and placement is in conformance with the requirements outlined. STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 4 of 24 Appendix D Page D-5 Standard Specifications for Grading Rocks 12 inches in maximum and smaller may be utilized within compacted fill provided sufficient fill material is placed and thoroughly compacted over and around all rock to effectively fill rock voids. The amount of rock should not exceed 40 percent by dry weight passing the 3/4-inch sieve. The geotechnical consultant may vary those requirements as field conditions dictate. Where rocks greater than 12 inches but less than four feet of maximum dimension are generated during grading, or otherwise desired to be placed within an engineered fill, special handling in accordance with the recommendations below. Rocks greater than four feet should be broken down or disposed off-site. 7.2 Placement of Fill - Prior to placement of fill material, the geotechnical consultant should observe and approve the area to receive fill. After observation and approval, the exposed ground surface should be scarified to a depth of 6 to 8 inches. The scarified material should be conditioned (i.e. moisture added or air dried by continued discing) to achieve a moisture content at or slightly above optimum moisture conditions and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum density or as otherwise recommended in the soils report or by appropriate government agencies. Compacted fill should then be placed in thin horizontal lifts not exceeding eight inches in loose thickness prior to compaction. Each lift should be moisture conditioned as needed, thoroughly blended to achieve a consistent moisture content at or slightly above optimum and thoroughly compacted by mechanical methods to a minimum of 90 percent of laboratory maximum dry density. Each lift should be treated in a like manner until the desired finished grades are achieved. The contractor should have suitable and sufficient mechanical compaction equipment and watering apparatus on the job site to handle the amount of fill being placed in consideration of moisture retention properties of the materials and weather conditions. When placing fill in horizontal lifts adjacent to areas sloping steeper than 5:1 (horizontal: vertical), horizontal keys and vertical benches should be excavated into the adjacent slope area. Keying and benching should be sufficient to provide at least six-foot wide benches and a minimum of four feet of vertical bench height within the firm natural ground, firm bedrock or engineered compacted fill. No compacted fill should be placed in an area after keying and benching until the geotechnical consultant has reviewed the area. Material generated by the benching operation should be moved sufficiently away from STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 5 of 24 Appendix D Page D-6 Standard Specifications for Grading the bench area to allow for the recommended review of the horizontal bench prior to placement of fill. Within a single fill area where grading procedures dictate two or more separate fills, temporary slopes (false slopes) may be created. When placing fill adjacent to a false slope, benching should be conducted in the same manner as above described. At least a 3-foot vertical bench should be established within the firm core of adjacent approved compacted fill prior to placement of additional fill. Benching should proceed in at least 3-foot vertical increments until the desired finished grades are achieved. Prior to placement of additional compacted fill following an overnight or other grading delay, the exposed surface or previously compacted fill should be processed by scarification, moisture conditioning as needed to at or slightly above optimum moisture content, thoroughly blended and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent of laboratory maximum dry density. Where unsuitable materials exist to depths of greater than one foot, the unsuitable materials should be over-excavated. Following a period of flooding, rainfall or overwatering by other means, no additional fill should be placed until damage assessments have been made and remedial grading performed as described herein. Rocks 12 inch in maximum dimension and smaller may be utilized in the compacted fill provided the fill is placed and thoroughly compacted over and around all rock. No oversize material should be used within 3 feet of finished pad grade and within 1 foot of other compacted fill areas. Rocks 12 inches up to four feet maximum dimension should be placed below the upper 10 feet of any fill and should not be closer than 15 feet to any slope face. These recommendations could vary as locations of improvements dictate. Where practical, oversized material should not be placed below areas where structures or deep utilities are proposed. Oversized material should be placed in windrows on a clean, overexcavated or unyielding compacted fill or firm natural ground surface. Select native or imported granular soil (S.E. 30 or higher) should be placed and thoroughly flooded over and around all windrowed rock, such that voids are filled. Windrows of oversized material should be staggered so those successive strata of oversized material are not in - the same vertical plane. It may be possible to dispose of individual larger rock as field conditions dictate and as recommended by the geotechnical consultant at the time of placement. STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 6 of 24 Appendix D Page D-7 Standard Specifications for Grading The contractor should assist the geotechnical consultant and/or his representative by - digging test pits for removal determinations and/or for testing compacted fill. The contractor should provide this work at no additional cost to the owner or contractor's client. Fill should be tested by the geotechnical consultant for compliance with the recommended relative compaction and moisture conditions. Field density testing should conform to ASTM Method of Test D 1556-00, D 2922-04. Tests should be conducted at a minimum of approximately two vertical feet or approximately 1,000 to 2,000 cubic yards of fill placed. Actual test intervals may vary as field conditions dictate. Fill found not to be in conformance with the grading recommendations should be removed or otherwise handled as recommended by the geotechnical consultant. 7.3 Fill Slopes Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and approved by the regulating agencies, permanent fill slopes should not be steeper than 2:1 (horizontal: vertical). Except as specifically recommended in these grading guidelines compacted fill slopes should be over-built two to five feet and cut back to grade, exposing the firm, compacted fill inner core. The actual amount of overbuilding may vary as field conditions dictate. If the desired results are not achieved, the existing slopes should be overexcavated and reconstructed under the guidelines of the geotechnical consultant. The degree of overbuilding shall be increased until the desired compacted slope surface condition is achieved. Care should be taken by the contractor to provide thorough mechanical compaction to the outer edge of the overbuilt slope surface. At the discretion of the geotechnical consultant, slope face compaction may be attempted - by conventional construction procedures including backrolling. The procedure must create a firmly compacted material throughout the entire depth of the slope face to the surface of the previously compacted firm fill intercore. During grading operations, care should be taken to extend compactive effort to the outer edge of the slope. Each lift should extend horizontally to the desired finished slope surface or more as needed to ultimately established desired grades. Grade during construction should not be allowed to roll off at the edge of the slope. It may be helpful to elevate slightly the outer edge of the slope. Slough resulting from the placement of individual lifts should not be allowed to drift down over previous lifts. At intervals not STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 7 of 24 Appendix D Page D-8 Standard Specifications for Grading exceeding four feet in vertical slope height or the capability of available equipment, whichever is less, fill slopes should be thoroughly dozer trackrolled. For pad areas above fill slopes, positive drainage should be established away from the top-of-slope. This may be accomplished using a berm and pad gradient of at least two percent. Section 8 - Trench Backfill Utility and/or other excavation of trench backfill should, unless otherwise recommended, be compacted by mechanical means. Unless otherwise recommended, the degree of compaction should be a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum density. Within slab areas, but outside the influence of foundations, trenches up to one foot wide and two feet deep may be backfilled with sand and consolidated by jetting, flooding or by mechanical means. If on-site materials are utilized, they should be wheel-rolled, tamped or otherwise compacted to a firm condition. For minor interior trenches, density testing may be deleted or spot testing may be elected if deemed necessary, based on review of backfill operations during construction. If utility contractors indicate that it is undesirable to use compaction equipment in close proximity to a buried conduit, the contractor may elect the utilization of light weight mechanical compaction equipment and/or shading of the conduit with clean, granular material, which should - be thoroughly jetted in-place above the conduit, prior to initiating mechanical compaction procedures. Other methods of utility trench compaction may also be appropriate, upon review of the geotechnical consultant at the time of construction. In cases where clean granular materials are proposed for use in lieu of native materials or where _.. flooding or jetting is proposed, the procedures should be considered subject to review by the geotechnical consultant. Clean granular backfill and/or bedding are not recommended in slope areas. Section 9 - Drainage Where deemed appropriate by the geotechnical consultant, canyon subdrain systems should be installed in accordance with CTE's recommendations during grading. Typical subdrains for compacted fill buttresses, slope stabilization or sidehill masses, should be installed in accordance with the specifications. STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 8 of 24 Appendix D Page D-9 Standard Specifications for Grading Roof, pad and slope drainage should be directed away from slopes and areas of structures to suitable disposal areas via non-erodible devices (i.e., gutters, downspouts, and concrete swales). For drainage in extensively landscaped areas near structures, (i.e., within four feet) a minimum of 5 percent gradient away from the structure should be maintained. Pad drainage of at least 2 percent should be maintained over the remainder of the site. Drainage patterns established at the time of fine grading should be maintained throughout the life of the project. Property owners should be made aware that altering drainage patterns could be - detrimental to slope stability and foundation performance. Section 10 - Slope Maintenance 10.1 - Landscape Plants To enhance surficial slope stability, slope planting should be accomplished at the completion of grading. Slope planting should consist of deep-rooting vegetation requiring little watering. Plants native to the southern California area and plants relative to native plants are generally desirable. Plants native to other semi-arid and arid areas may also be appropriate. A Landscape Architect should be the best party to consult regarding actual types of plants and planting configuration. 10.2 - Irrigation Irrigation pipes should be anchored to slope faces, not placed in trenches excavated into slope faces. Slope irrigation should be minimized. If automatic timing devices are utilized on irrigation systems, provisions should be made for interrupting normal irrigation during periods of rainfall. 10.3 - Repair As a precautionary measure, plastic sheeting should be readily available, or kept on hand, to protect all slope areas from saturation by periods of heavy or prolonged rainfall. This measure is strongly recommended, beginning with the period prior to landscape planting. If slope failures occur, the geotechnical consultant should be contacted for a field review of site conditions and development of recommendations for evaluation and repair. If slope failures occur as a result of exposure to period of heavy rainfall, the failure areas and currently unaffected areas should be covered with plastic sheeting to protect against additional saturation. STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 9 of 24 Appendix D Page D-10 Standard Specifications for Grading In the accompanying Standard Details, appropriate repair procedures are illustrated for superficial slope failures (i.e., occurring typically within the outer one foot to three feet of a slope face). STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 10 of 24 BENCHING FILL OVER NATURAL SURFACE OF FIRM EARTH MATERIAL FILL SLOPE gLE MATERIAL � 5' MIN vt4s TPA REM 4'TYPICAL 2' MIN 2% MIN 0 TYPICAL 15' MIN. (INCLINED 2% MIN. INTO SLOPE) BENCHING FILL OVER CUT SURFACE OF FIRM EARTH MATERIAL FINISH FILL SLOPE FINISH CUT L SLOPE / MAT R A _ EM�UNSV�SP% 4'TYPICAL 2%IN 10' ol TYPICAL 15'MIN OR STABILITY EQUIVALENT PER SOIL ENGINEERING (INCLINED 2% MIN. INTO SLOPE) NOT TO SCALE BENCHING FOR COMPACTED FILL DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 11 of 24 TOE OF SLOPE SHOWN ON GRADING PLAN FILL 10'TYPICAL BENCH WIDTH VARIES 1 �' COMPETENT EARTH MATERIAL .2. 2'0 MIN TYPICAL BENCH MINIMUM 15' MINIMUM BASE KEY WIDTH HEIGHT DOWNSLOPE KEY DEPTH PROVIDE BACKDRAIN AS REQUIRED PER RECOMMENDATIONS OF SOILS ENGINEER DURING GRADING WHERE NATURAL SLOPE GRADIENT IS 5:1 OR LESS, BENCHING IS NOT NECESSARY. FILL IS NOT TO BE PLACED ON COMPRESSIBLE OR UNSUITABLE MATERIAL. NOT TO SCALE FILL SLOPE ABOVE NATURAL GROUND DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 12 of 24 \ \ J \ \ wLL \ mw 0 \ \ Q 0w O Q U p 22 \\ \\ d > Q ZU \ � \ ow og J \ W \ a aQ Of "- \ Q 0- ix U U Q -i W 0 p U < \ > \ CO w w 101 ~ Q ? L U \ N O \ 1\ } w \ 1 I Q \ \ U 1 10 z ° V 1N W 1 1 °z � \ 1 O \ m \ Q �gz oo W m \ > U- Fn z 1 JaZ 1 O Oa � J J CO s U Q \ J W z o w o1 Oz Zo \ o LL ao J ° O ) Z � J 1 oa D � z 1 U � 0 1 Q O 1 Z F \ 1 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 13 of 24 " SURFACE OF COMPETENT MATERIAL \ COMPACTED FILL /// TYPICAL BENCHING \ / \ \� // / / REMOVE UNSUITABLE G MATERIAL SEE DETAIL BELOW INCLINE TOWARD DRAIN AT 2%GRADIENT MINIMUM DETAIL MINIMUM 9 FT PER LINEAR FOOT MINIMUM 4"DIAMETER APPROVED OF APPROVED FILTER MATERIAL PERFORATED PIPE(PERFORATIONS DOWN) 6"FILTER MATERIAL BEDDING 14" MINIMUM FILTER MATERIAL TO MEET FOLLOWING APPROVED PIPE TO BE SCHEDULE 40 SPECIFICATION OR APPROVED EQUAL: POLY-VINYL-CHLORIDE(P.V.C.)OR APPROVED EQUAL. MINIMUM CRUSH SIEVE SIZE PERCENTAGE PASSING STRENGTH 1000 psi 1" 100 PIPE DIAMETER TO MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA,SUBJECT TO %4^ 90-100 FIELD REVIEW BASED ON ACTUAL GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS I 40-100 ENCOUNTERED DURING GRADING NO.4 25-40 LENGTH OF RUN PIPE DIAMETER NO. 30 18-33 INITIAL 500' 4" NO. 8 5-15 500'TO 1500' 6" NO. 50 0-7 > 1500' 8" NO.200 0-3 NOT TO SCALE TYPICAL CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 14 of 24 CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAILS SURFACE OF COMPETENT MATERIAL COMPACTED FILL TYPICAL BENCHING \ / // / / REMOVE UNSUITABLE 0 MATERIAL SEE DETAILS BELOW INCLINE TOWARD DRAIN AT 2%GRADIENT MINIMUM - TRENCH DETAILS 6"MINIMUM OVERLAP OPTIONAL V-DITCH DETAIL MINIMUM 9 FT PER LINEAR FOOT OF APPROVED DRAIN MATERIAL MIRAFI 140N FABRIC -- OR APPROVED EQUAL MIRAFI 140N FABRIC OR APPROVED EQUAL 6"MINIMUM OVERLAP O 7:24APPROVED PIPE TO BE 24" SCHEDULE 40 POLY- 0 MINIMUM VINYLCHLORIDE(P.V.C.) OR APPROVED EQUAL. MINIMUM CRUSH STRENGTH " MINIMUM 9 FT PER LINEAR FOOT 1000 PSI. MINIMUM OF APPROVED DRAIN MATERIAL 60°TO 90° DRAIN MATERIAL TO MEET FOLLOWING PIPE DIAMETER TO MEET THE SPECIFICATION OR APPROVED EQUAL: FOLLOWING CRITERIA,SUBJECT TO FIELD REVIEW BASED ON ACTUAL SIEVE SIZE PERCENTAGE PASSING GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED DURING GRADING 1 Yz" 88-100 LENGTH OF RUN PIPE DIAMETER 1" 5-40 INITIAL 500' 4" %4" 0-17 500'TO 1500' 6" V 0-7 > 1500' 8„ NO.200 0-3 NOT TO SCALE GEOFABRIC SUBDRAIN STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 15 of 24 15' MINIMUM 4" DIAMETER PERFORATED - PIPE BACKDRAIN 4" DIAMETER NON-PERFORATED PIPE LATERAL DRAIN - - - - - SLOPE PER PLAN 2.0% FILTER MATERIAL BENCHING H/2 1' 2' MI 2% MI - AN ADDITIONAL BACKDRAIN I AT MID-SLOPE WILL BE REQUIRED FOR - SLOPE IN EXCESS OF 40 FEET HIGH. KEY-DIMENSION PER SOILS ENGINEER (GENERALLY 1/2 SLOPE HEIGHT, 15'MINIMUM) DIMENSIONS ARE MINIMUM RECOMMENDED NOT TO SCALE TYPICAL SLOPE STABILIZATION FILL DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 16 of 24 4" DIAMETER PERFORATED 15' MINIMUM PIPE BACKDRAIN 4" DIAMETER NON-PERFORATED PIPE LATERAL DRAIN SLOPE PER PLAN 2.0% FILTER MATERIAL BENCHING H/2 2' M 2% Ml ADDITIONAL BACKDRAIN AT MID-SLOPE WILL BE REQUIRED FOR SLOPE IN EXCESS OF 40 FEET HIGH. KEY-DIMENSION PER SOILS ENGINEER DIMENSIONS ARE MINIMUM RECOMMENDED NOT TO SCALE TYPICAL BUTTRESS FILL DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 17 of 24 FINAL LIMIT OF DAYLIGHT EXCAVATION LINE FINISH PAD OVEREXCAVATE T AND REPLACE WITH COMPACTED FILL OVEREXCAVATE 20' MAXIMUM 1 1 COMPETENT BEDROCK 2% MIN _y 2' MINIMUM TYPICAL BENCHING OVERBURDEN LOCATION OF BACKDRAIN AND (CREEP-PRONE) OUTLETS PER SOILS ENGINEER AND/OR ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST DURING GRADING. MINIMUM 2% FLOW GRADIENT TO DISCHARGE LOCATION. EQUIPMENT WIDTH (MINIMUM 15') NOT TO SCALE DAYLIGHT SHEAR KEY DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 18 of 24 NATURAL GROUND PROPOSED GRADING 1 1.5 COMPACTED FILL 1.5 1 ..W,. PROVIDE BACKDRAIN, PER BACKDRAIN DETAIL. AN ADDITIONAL BACKDRAIN AT MID-SLOPE WILL BE REQUIRED FOR BACK BASE WIDTH "W"DETERMINED SLOPES IN EXCESS OF BY SOILS ENGINEER 40 FEET HIGH. LOCATIONS OF BACKDRAINS AND OUTLETS PER SOILS ENGINEER AND/OR ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST DURING GRADING. MINIMUM 2% FLOW GRADIENT TO DISCHARGE LOCATION. NOT TO SCALE TYPICAL SHEAR KEY DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 19 of 24 FINISH SURFACE SLOPE 3 FT'MINIMUM PER LINEAR FOOT APPROVED FILTER ROCK* CONCRETE COLLAR PLACED NEAT COMPACTED FILL A 2.0%MINIMUM GRADIENT A 4"MINIMUM APPROVED 4"MINIMUM DIAMETER PERFORATED PIPE** SOLID OUTLET PIPE (PERFORATIONS DOWN) SPACED PER SOIL MINIMUM 2%GRADIENT ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS TO OUTLET DURING GRADING TYPICAL BENCH INCLINED BENCHING TOWARD DRAIN W DETAIL A-A TEMPORARY FILL LEVEL MINIMUM :;OMPACTEE MINIMUM 4"DIAMETER APPROVED 12"COVER BACKFILL SOLID OUTLET PIPE 12" MINIMUM *FILTER ROCK TO MEET FOLLOWING **APPROVED PIPE TYPE: SPECIFICATIONS OR APPROVED EQUAL: SCHEDULE 40 POLYVINYL CHLORIDE SIEVE SIZE PERCENTAGE PASSING (P.V.C.)OR APPROVED EQUAL. 1" 100 MINIMUM CRUSH STRENGTH 1000 PSI Y4" 90-100 e" 40-100 NO.4 25-40 NO.30 5-15 NO.50 0-7 NO.200 0-3 _. NOT TO SCALE TYPICAL BACKDRAIN DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 20 of 24 FINISH SURFACE SLOPE MINIMUM 3 FT PER LINEAR FOOT OPEN GRADED AGGREGATE* TAPE AND SEAL AT COVER CONCRETE COLLAR PLACED NEAT COMPACTED FILL A MIRAFI 140N FABRIC OR 2.0% MINIMUM GRADIENT APPROVED EQUAL A 4"MINIMUM APPROVED MINIMUM 4"DIAMETER PERFORATED PIPE SOLID OUTLET PIPE (PERFORATIONS DOWN) SPACED PER SOIL MINIMUM 2%GRADIENT ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS TO OUTLET TYPICAL BENCH INCLINED BENCHING TOWARD DRAIN DETAIL A-A TEMPORARY FILL LEVEL MINIMUM :;OMPACTEE MINIMUM 4"DIAMETER APPROVED 12"COVER BACKFILL SOLID OUTLET PIPE n1 12" *NOTE:AGGREGATE TO MEET FOLLOWING MINIMUM _,. SPECIFICATIONS OR APPROVED EQUAL: SIEVE SIZE PERCENTAGE PASSING 1 Y" 100 1" 5-40 Y" 0-17 0-7 NOT TO SCALE NO.200 0-3 BACKDRAIN DETAIL (GEOFRABIC) STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 21 of 24 FILL SLOPE - CLEAR ZONE SOIL SHALL BE PUSHED OVER EQUIPMENT WIDTH ROCKS AND FLOODED INTO VOIDS. COMPACT AROUND AND OVER EACH WINDROW. STACK BOULDERS END TO END. DO NOT PILE UPON EACH OTHER. 10' FILL SLOPE 0 0 0 10' MIN STAGGER 15' ROWS 0 0 COMPETENT MATERIAL NOT TO SCALE ROCK DISPOSAL DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 22 of 24 FINISHED GRADE BUILDING NO OVERSIZE,AREA FOR 10, FOUNDATION, UTILITIES, SLOPE FACE AND SWIMMING POOLS STREET 0 15' 4,� 15' WINDROW 5' MINIMUM OR BELOW DEPTH OF DEEPEST UTILITY TRENCH (WHICHEVER GREATER) TYPICAL WINDROW DETAIL (EDGE VIEW) GRANULAR SOIL FLOODED TO FILL VOIDS HORIZONTALLY PLACED COMPACTION FILL J PROFILE VIEW _. . . . . . . . . . . . . - NOT TO SCALE ROCK DISPOSAL DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 23 of 24 GENERAL GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS CUT LOT ORIGINAL �— GROUND —� TOPSOIL, COLLUVIUM AND 5' WEATHERED BEDROCK 5'MIN 10 ol T MIN \--OVEREXCAVATE UNWEATHERED BEDROCK AND REGRADE CUT/FILL LOT (TRANSITION) ORIGINAL GROUND i ' MIN COMPACTED FILL / [TMIN i i OVEREXCAVATE AND REGRADE UNWEATHERED BEDROCK NOT TO SCALE TRANSITION LOT DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 24 of 24 Hydrology Study 1660 Brahms Road City of Encinitas, CA APN: 260-264-16-00 SDP 08-0971 GP 08-xxx Prepared For: Donald & Catherine Busick 14071 Arbolitos Drive Poway, CA 92064 Created: October 15, 2008 Vrp raaW Exp•9-30-2009 ?F CMS 11110 negley avenue san chego,ca 92131 beth.reiter@vonreiter.com Ptxm(858)232-4580 fax(866)297-0312 VON REITER GROUP Civil Engineering Consultants TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Discussion: Purpose and Scope Project Description Study Method Project Design Conclusions It. Calculations: Existing Hydrology Developed Hydrology III. Exhibits: Exhibit A: Hydrology Map Exhibit B: Detention/irrigation Facility Exhibit C.Vegetated Swale I. DISCUSSION PURPOSE AND SCOPE: The purpose of this report is to publish the results of hydrology and hydraulic computer analysis for the proposed Busick Residence located at 1660 Brahms Road. The project proposes the demolition of an existing single family residence and the construction of a new single family residence with underground parking garage facility, drainage, landscaping and right-of-way improvements. The scope involves the study of the existing and developed hydrology and hydraulics as it influences existing and proposed storm drain system in the vicinity during a 100-year frequency storm event. For purpose of this report, the project will be referred as the °Busick Residence". PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This project is located in the City of Encinitas (APN 260-264-16) on the westerly side of Brahms Road. The existing site consists of developed lands with an approx. 2% slope to the west (rear)for much of the property. The proposed building design shall incorporate `green roof wherever possible, and drainage improvements have been designed to contain as much runoff onsite as the site will allow. A retention/irrigation system shall be used as an environmentally friendly option to mitigating runoff. Existing Condition In the existing condition, the site is developed with a single family residence and landscaping. The majority of the site drains in a westerly direction via landscaping, across neighboring properties and ultimately to San Marcos Creek. The remainder of the site drains in an easterly direction to the Right-of-Way and Brahms Road, ultimately to San Marcos Creek. The proposed development does not alter this drainage flow direction. Developed Condition A small detention/irrigation facility shall be placed in the lowest portion of the lot, in the NW comer. Vegetated bio-swales shall be placed along the northern, western and a portion of the southern property line. All swales will converge at the NW comer and empty into the holding basin, to be used for irrigation of the rear yard. Regular continual watering of the yard shall be supplemented by typical irrigation measures (sprinklers, drips, etc.) A portion of the new driveway ramp will be exposed to the elements after construction. To intercept runoff from this area prior to entering the underground parking garage, a 12"trench drain is proposed in the ramp, where the first level roof begins. This trench drain shall connect to a dual sump-pump which will pump any collected runoff outside to the vegetated swale where it will ultimately collect and be used for irrigation means. The receiving waters for the proposed project is the San Marcos Creek (904.51), a part of the Carlsbad Hydrologic Unit (904.00). A small amount of runoff from the front yard will sheet flow easterly to the right-of-way. All runoff from this area shall pass through vegetation (including a turfblock swale adjacent to the property line on Brahms Road) prior to outletting to the street. This portion of the site accounts for a very minimal amount of the total runoff and is considered negligible. The proposed site shall incorporate more pervious surfaces than the existing condition. Because of this design feature, and the small lot size in comparison to the overall drainage basin, the existing and proposed runoff values are essentially the same. STUDY METHOD: The method of analysis was based on the Rational Method according to the County of San Diego Hydrology Manual. The Hydrology and Hydraulic Analysis were done using online software provided by the San Diego State University, Engineering Department. Drainage basin areas were determined from the existing and proposed grades shown on the Hydrology Map, shown in Exhibit A. The Rational Method provided the following variable coefficients: Soil type - Hydrologic Soil Group C (per the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation report, prepared by Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. on April 7, 2008). The runoff coefficient for: • Existing Condition = Medium Density Residential (7.3 DU/A or less) = 0.54 • Developed Condition = Medium Density Residential (7.3 DU/A or less) = 0.54 Rainfall Intensity for: 100 year storm event= 2.5 in. Table 1.1 -Comparison of Existing and Developed Peak Flow Rate T(c) AREA Q(100) 1660 Brahma Road 7.40 min. 0.18 acres 0.49 cfs CONCLUSION: The Busick Residence project will not increase the developed peak runoff rate. Because retentionfirrigation facilities and vegetated swales are provided on-site, the total runoff leaving the site shall decrease after construction. Exhibits B & C provide detailed information on the proposed Detention/Irrigation facilities and Vegetated Swales to be used. II. CALCULATIONS Calculation of peak discharge by the rational method,urban hydrology,Victor Miguel Po... Page 1 of 2 rational.sdsu.edu: Calculation of peak discharge by the rational method Formula: Qp = CIA In SI Units ' (metric): L S-1, mm hr and ' hectares j t (ha). '* x In U.S. Customary Units: cfs, in hr', and acres (ac). INPUT DATA: Select: SI units(metric) U.S. Customary units Runoff coefficient C : OUTPUT: 0.54 Peak discharge Qp : 0.490 cfs Rainfall intensity 5.0 in hr-1 Drainage area A : 0.18 ac Press button to Calculate or recalculate Your request was processed at 11:55:35 pm on October 23rd, 2008 [ 081023 23:55:35 ]. http://ponce.sdsu.edu/rational.php 10/23/2008 San Die@o County Hydrology Manuld Section: 3 Date: hme 2003 Page: 12 of 26 Note that the Initial Time of Cancentration should be reflective of the general land-use at the upstream end of a drainage basin. A single lot with an area of two or less acres does not have a significant effect where the drainage basin area is 20 to 600 acres. Table 3-2 provides Iimits of the length (Maximum Length (LM)) of sheet flow to be used in hydrology studies. Initial T.values based on average C values for the Land Use Element are also included These values can be used in planning and design applications as described below. Exceptions may be approved by the "Regulating Agency" when submitted with a detailed study. Table 3-2 MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH(LM) & INITIAL TM IE OF CONCENTRATTON Ti Element* DU/ .5% 1% 2% 3% 5°r. 10% Acre LM T. LM T; LM T. LM T. LM Ti LM Ti Natural 50 13.2 70 12.5 85 10.9 100 103 100 8.7 100 6.9 LDR 1 50 12.2 70 11.5 85 10-01100 9-51100 8.0 100 6.4 LDR 2 50 113 70 10.5 85 9.2 100 8.8 100 14 100 5.8 LDR 2.9 50 10.7 70 10.0 85 8.8 1 95 8.1 I00 7-0 , 100 5.6 MDR 43 50 102 70 9.6 80 8.1 1 95 7.8 100 6.7 100 5.3 MDR 7.3 50 9.2 65 g.4 80 95 7.0 100 600 100 4.8 MDR 10.9 50 8.7 65 7.9 80 6.9 90 6.4 100 5.7 100 4.5 MDR 14.5 50 82 65 7.4 80 6.5 90 6.0 100 5.4 100 4.3 HDR 24 50 6.7 65 6.1 75 5.1 90 4.9 95 4.3 100 3.5 HDR 43 50 53 65 4.7 75 4.0 85 3.91 95 3.4 100 2.7 N. Com 50 53 60 4.5 75 4.0 85 3.8 95 3.4 100 2.7 G. Com 50 4.7 60 4.1 75 3.6 85 3.4 90 2.9 100 2.4 0.PJCom 50 41 60 3.7 70 3.1 80 29 90 2.6 100 2.2 Limited I. 50 4.2 60 3.7 70 3.1 80 2.9 fbatit 2.6 100 General 1. 50 3.7 60 3.2 70 2.7 80 2.6 *See Table 3-1 for more detailed descrOtion C ---i, mi n 3-12 f • 1 • • S 1 _ i s fL�rfS L:..Z;.r�r•'rT"rrrn'.r'�.'��'�j'�.��r ri�'�' S S. T�.r�3� rrr ii wr�r'ri'�'��rirl.�swr'i I�r� •I�s♦fi ss♦isiffslif�=��lr.r.r•sta asr��r1� �! r,wnfsssssslsr.aa=ssesslas ���'��w��•ii�r�i��s�.:.���ii�i�iis�.s+si��a-a�i��� �vussssa•aaawass,�r mfr seissHN�.as�aass.uarrr iii wl�ar.s••-����.� =�=ii•��f�ira'�ra�ufa aW aiiiiei'si•i ri�iff//.//fit♦�I/I' 1 fi1�.p',!i llf�ili•!ii - f/I�r.i f/af1•�I �Wa=FlOw"STANSEUMEME rsiaarsa"faaaai=ff=ssa ,� I Bfrrrti••■!f =fifr� •.rr�w•Arr -rr � rtl�� �a�sar�Ilm fau=� A•ii•'isiarsii•;r ii ills'.isssfaas asrf�sfa���Ar�aMINVA' �VAO iMMWA s� a� ��/Ilirt/I i►,///� gllsiss!!was gsl�S� ii • a iissr■ I.IIAW/iI/i AN rlAsssiNson ilsi y FALVAER /I A IHsssssH son ■�istl�i i�iiS i'�Sii'�'ii 'T►%i�iii�=A iii�iiii� ��� • A/ i!/i' .w�niIH Iili�i� i=i`i AK M� i AFFAMOuNFAFlullum m��i®u�i� cam= �:-===-=_ ___ - m usa:asa�uree�eauw rr�r Cesar�s...rs..arsri� � iinia=r•ff�l�saaa•,..lt=itia���a.:-li�ariar=� Y��Hii-aalpp�a PS iiw.irfs l�Irll�rnf♦i�sff.law�_.ri sis.sHSra ifaafisN.>♦�y .1li gaff ff♦�it ll• •i•i'.Ifw'•,a��r•�a I'� IS MEN i s•r_'i i' .A•W.�. .fi...�.s.a!=�f♦�a♦f♦ Hi `=� r_AW W W= t�tl W t� i/�/as i�iw_ /Yeew•lati aalseNa q��►Irlii ias� ��_��` uissHSSa lama=mar iiMasf MM /'fit f/i'� , UFAif=f/Iri rlrlrHirl iffq==�fraf ' iisirii��r�ii•'I QMMW A iri•Iir� rHSSriirlffffaifl=�ii MMMUFA s Hlss=ssA asa��grs• s = _� r.r>`a�•.r..s�•rara'tS:.—•:�r -a_ �rC��3T.�'�7ti.� i�'i<COS4�—..-i I�S•ss�:�.�.:�>tr:.asr. r i.:..r.rrrra�:.:.:..r:a rir fss ����� �ii f♦li ff•�rrtfif ta►I a!l a�.'�i/t♦�t�'_r aatli� �riai0iasiliiiirrssaail�� flall�ilaf►/i1►r.s���raur � r I�ITr wai�'f �� �asssara..la��asaa sib iftff 1=07.9 =—, as tfai lisa.Si Rii#�ifif♦=ice/� irlffffil rrirrt•Y>tr/ti•.mss ltesf♦ssf VAM�� uiosseasfa! i==r•ffar /� :W_��� ��Cpl 140001 i sf• sastusf.l.!!lam== Z= ai♦��,—.�--_i__ aala==a= �Vi•ssiA lii.�i• ��.�� rlisrsssasaaa r F i IWAC V, a fw,fl ilif t.�i Qi��� Brssisssa ilaa:Beei•sliit i i•II,I.i/,i♦—,t I �ss1,i�i ss�i s#�i•i ru.s•.••f faf�a=sraiF� ►IAIi.ssso Its�s/!�ilirs�i � s.ssssssNSlslasi�i WA t�ItAi� '=il—sts��ii•�si sssls sslslstnsNS�iss iI/s/.'�Ii Sri— _ sErslssssssslri !!i i�/s/�►ii! fAw l�rrsi�liiii� slrsaHgangs sr= ss!WA dFA►tr sss/i rA i l ss/ir ssl s■i i Hisstf ls�ii# i I/�1.//I / � ��� �uaasss�f�s�isssi � A,� �, _- •af��.��i��an+i•as.ri ryasssssauasss�sf r _ iccu ru t*1 N M �O a N h O c•1 O� tT N Fn V1 h fir.. A 'V V h h �O �O l� (� t� OD - *G OR m O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 3 O yp a � cw O %D N h () M M d IT h h b b � n 40 a�0 o�O as C O O O Cl O O O O O O O O O o u e° c c o rn a W% N 00 h eY oo h h h O et et h o N to tit eF et h V) h %p t� t� tq 00 OO OO 0 Cl 0 C N 0 rn u A +� "O o d 2 -S Qo h st on oo N v% N t'y rt cq � v to r� %o t` h no m ac oo a '00 c o 0 0 0 0 0 o c c o o c o o •� 0 c � U + o o to o o w) o rt o o to o o h O S O •-. N N t+1 'd' � h tiD q0 Ot! tap tT a O� �i�»" V-4 o o ►V.v O v o m u _ 0 � $ Pik o ,a U o 0 0 0 0 0 0 a` o o -° ° ts Q A A A A A o Z o c o o a to to o v v cn U ° ° T 0 ° O rd zt zs 1 $ 3 gg o o a c c c 0E A a o°G a a� r a oc a a a z C7 O a 0 ° o u bop o a a a c a ° �- 79 ° z � c u o u 0 0 C7 3 RZ n a �ts :� taT F dr o o to ao a A o it o 'a 0 "0 M a. au m w ee 3 3 ° G o ss ss ��aa 9 4b CA A t; o3a � � oo � 2 , � t in o.° U x ° M A, -A lowr ••f '..^/-L9 � •tit.•...-• �'�� �". �'-:•', .. M.%L . c.. _�- le fb� ' +oath �• , tt M1 �• �s; CF , - s h. St.ttt AEdtt cr OB.LLL max. � o $ ° b N � M h A a r C: 4.4 h T 45 a off a U � n /54.811 r S g- � � •1"'s ••Q`-ti _ ¢:• E1 i Wit' _ oprf- • • V. -�. _ .. Mutt - _ 1. 1 .. '••.�•: 1 SLdLL .06.LLL [ii N t•l III. EXHIBITS Z1570-L6Z (999) XV3 - 0994-ZCZ (999) 3NOHd t£lZ6 V0 '09311 NVS - 1111AV A3103N C)t l S1NV1V1SNO0 08183381083 31AI0 - dnO80 831138 NOA O h F- Z�rc mo w w O? U Q Q a W ~ Z?J ❑x W 0a0 i ME y �¢w Oow W co _ w>LL aQQ 0 CO y0 Vi W O0 O 3mwU Opa U Z Z fOmt ZZU w j a Elf oo= I�Qd w mar0 a ° U N �m zw Hob ZUN S ^ - (NOl1VOO1 3!"NOHMV)S3N11 A111110 OVIH83AO w QD a ?= moQ 6� � . .... 1 +tea Ed '44 5�r+i ,r`.$4 pl a o S mP. V �z V n m Z 05 a o zQ z o U j U w a d L o W�a z Q w ax .x �,.. 0 0 0 ow < Q WF w o z _r • ...4:1��� � rh ` r - t: fir" n <_.- —— a U ' 19 S T PARKIN * 3 � ,2 r," - -,q.,�. .� ✓ �. 0NIN8Vd1338iS.6L ' did ✓a ' '� F I ,as ''J' �:C O`'fJ "L7❑ 1S, ❑I,L❑L'Ij 'Q i[J -❑ r W� - El 'cco cncr,cc g❑ 1 1ccccc cccre a' C CJ C'G C tim 6 (-1❑LI❑L C rJ❑[J '� ^cccc crcce'c ;ccc m •' _ ,.\ zLL,ti a QwJ�i, 7'dRJVEWA Y N� 1 ¢@o z a a LL 0`� U wWa U ❑ �Q O �3 ��3a11z �❑ t OQQ^�II K~ >W y; °z >J C C s `- , _ W V ❑ Qp. pv ZUW .a N�._...wm a W W Z N m y Fw� tug _ Ed" o ❑ m O 0 ' z 30vHO1S 3� �- t v J p O Gl�-T ❑ O p Ill co QY a�0 zzN a o , 0< a- < _ �o rm 06 m c> � � woi z z rr0 1 �U QOM � R I % O � Q � ❑rN,� ' KZ II O Q 0 U , 2aO OO - NO Q r I U r Ql w ow 5 o< J d I I JJJ JJJ JJJ J_1J JJJ� 39V801S I 2 m 0 a J tJ I -OLLtld JJ JJ J.J s' N J JJJ J J JJ JJ JJJ `�. � �aS ON J JJJ J1J-JJJ JJ J.IJ _J S�YO >y t W , > U i a N w ❑ or U ND m m �o� I., x g .✓ c�C / O ri f 2 ¢pd W 1: Cn LO W� + O Mzc, m Z C N ODU ® Z�r Vim? J Retention/Irrig ati n TC-1 2 Description sign Cossderations RebOfian/irT*ticm reifere to the capture of mwater rtmof in ■ Roil for Infltratlon a hoklt lwd and=hRVMMt use of the c mused volume for ■ Area Required lrilgetron g�c e a m of nattu-al peryirsus a eas, This . tegy" very ffective as a stormwater ley practice in slope that,for the captured water quality volume. t provides virtually ■ Environmental Side-e€Fects no discliatge to receiving Craters and high st rmwater constituent removal.efficiencies. This techn :logy mimics natural undeveloped watershed dotes wherein he vast majority of the rainfall volume during smaller rainfall e4 eats is infiltrated through the soil profile. Their main adv anti a over other infilhation twimologies is the use of an irrig;;,lion system to spread the ruwff over a larger area for nifilt ation. This allows them to be used in areas with low permeabil,-+sails. Capdrne of s tormwater can be accomplished n almost any kind of runoff storage facility,ranging from may,c mcrete-lined ponds to those with vegetated basins and perm.anei t _ pools. 1'>leptrmp Targeted Co■satit■e■ts and wet well should be automated with a rail fall sensor to provide irrigation only d Sediment ■, y�Periods s�hea Squired infiltration rates can be realised- Genwally,a spray un�ation system is Q Nutrients ■ requited to provide an adequate flow rate for distributing the Bf Trash a water quality volume(LCRA,1998). Cal-�ect,►n of roof nmoff for fiff Metals ■ subsequent use(rainwater haavesdng) also q mlifies as a 0 Bacteria ■ retention/irrigation practice. 0 Oil and Crease ■ This technology s still in its' 0 Or�ics ■ ogy� rnfancy and�her >are no published reports on its effectiveness,cost;or operation al requirements. L99IN I It lEJf2r*WP9ss1 The guidelines presented below should be cc wed tentative • Low ■ High until additional data are available. A Medium California EgNWW noe This BMP has never been implemented in C- ifornia, only in the Austin,Texas area.. The use time is limited t watersheds where no increase in pollutant load is allowed b ecat ie of the sensitive nature of the watersheds. Advantages ■ Pollutant removal effectiveness is hi Ae ae:tiomplished primarily by: (1)sedimentation in the pn;nary storage facility;(2)physical filtration of pardaila- -2s through the soil pmfe; (3)dissolved caosfihrents uptake n the vegetative mat zone by the soil-resident microbial ec.mmumty. -. January 2003 CoYfornia staom-Watt BW HaWIodc 1 of 5 brew D4 vWapff a it and Radovolopment WWW cabrr,twribooks.com TC-12 Retention/Irrigation ne li3'&do&chwacte&ticsof this t;rhni ,ar( watershed conditions through: (i)aoenteuIImettt of effective�-simulc�tit�pre-developed about a 2-year event);and(2) tiara of flaw rat velocities forte(less than erosrve flow events. • Pollutant removal rates are estimated to be nev iy lam,for all pollutants in the captured, and irrigated stmmwater volume. However,re ivei is y frequent inspection and maintenance to assure pr pe'operation of then facilities. • This t 5dmOlogy is Particularly appropriate for c real with" system is not required to went rainfall because the can reduce demand on siufaoe aud�and the jbilityy to provide stormwater for irrigation groundwate supplies. Limitations ■ Retention inigstion is a relatively mWomve te( Ww1ogy due p dmanly to mechanical systems,power requirements,and high mamte-r ante needs. is Due to the relative complexity of angshon syst�ms,they must be Inspected at regular intervals to ensure reliable system fin chon_ and maintained ■ Retentioninigatition systems use pumps requiri ;g electrical enemy inputs(which cost money, create pollution,and can be interrupted Mechanical systems are also more complex,requiring skilled maint a mce, and the q are more vulnerable to vandalism than simple',passive systems. m Retention-migatm systems require open span for inWhOn and thus may be difficult to retrofit in urban areas, Ou Effective use of retention irrigation requires sou a form of pre-treatment of runoff flows(i.e., sediment forebay or vegetated filter)to remove r parse sediment and to protect the long-term operating cePacity of the irrigation equipmeat ■ Retention fuTigati'on BMPs capture and st Dre wai rr that depending on design may be accessible to mosquitoes and other vectors for bi eding. L.leazign and Sizing Guidelines is Runoff Storage Facility Configamtion and Sim Design of the runoff storage facility is flexible as long as the water quality volume and f a app pump and wet well system can be accommodated v Pump and Wet Well System-A reliable pump, w t well, and rainfall or soil moisture sensor system should be used to distribute the water qu,lity volume. These systems should be similar to those used for wastewater effluent irrii.ation,which are commonly used in areas where"no discharge°wastewater hvab rent plan" permits are issued_ +: Detention Time-The nrigahon schedde should allow for complete drawdown of the water quality volume within 72 hours. Irrisdion shoul:l not begin within 12 hours of the end of rainfall so that direct storm nmo$has ceased aw soils are not saturated. Consequently,the length of the active hT gation.period is 6o hours. The iaigation should include a cycling factor of V2,so that each portion of the area will t�irrigated for only 3o hours during the inn--- 7�f 5 camfdnia stormwater et P i iel Jarwery 2003 New Devebpment and R=.¢evek)pment www.cebmphanZc= ks.corn Retention/Irrigation TC-12 total of 6o hours allowed far disposal of t le water quality volume. Irrigation also should not occur during subsequent rainfall events. • Irrigation System-Generally a spcaY irri ;'Mica system is required to provide an adequate flow rate for timely distribution of the wd ter quality volume. • Designs drat utilize covered water st-Dragt should be accessible to vector control personnel via access dogs to facilitate vector gixvei lance and control if needed. ■ hTMation Site Chic a.—The area selecte I for irrigation must be pervious,on slopes of less than io%. Ageological assesses is reel mid for proposed irrigation areas to assure drat there is a minimum of 12 inches of sail cc der. Rocky soils are acceptable for irrigation; however,the coarse material(diameter g eater than 0.5 inches)should not account for more than 30%of the soil volume. Optimum s:-es for irrigation include recreational and greenbelt areas as well as landscaping in eomnterci„l developments. The storrmwater irrigation area should be distinct and different bona any ueas used for wastewater effluent irrigation. Finally,the area wed far irrigation 3rauld have at least a too-foot buffer from wells, septic systems,and natural waetlands_ a Irrigation Area—The irrigation rate musi be low enough so that the irrigation does not produce any surface nma&;consequent13 the irrigation rate may not exceed the permeability of the SOIL The MMMUM rF.luwed irrigation area should be calculated using the following formda: A— 12xV Txr where: A=area required for itrig8 ion(ft2) V=water quality volume(t3) T=period of active irrigati ►n(3o hr) r=Permeability(in/lir) ■ The permeability of the soils in the area p: oposed for irrigation should be determined using a double ring infiltrometer(AS TM D 338; -94)or from county soil surveys prepared by the Natural Reece Conservation Service. I`a range of permeabilities is reported,the average vahte should be used m the calculation- Il no permeability data is available,a value of o.i inches/hour should be armed.. ■ It should be noted that the minimum aref:requires intermittent irrigation over a period of 6o hours at low rates to use the entire wa-t sr quality volume. Ibis intensive ungation may be harmful to vegetation that is not adapted!o long periods of wet conditions. In practice, a much larger irrigation area will provide be tter use of the retainer water and promote a healthy lope. January 2003 caftxnia Starr water BW Ha cbock 3 of 5 Now Oevekpme t and Redeveioprnent www.cabm*mndbooks.aom C-12 Watention/Irrigation Performance Ibis technology is still in its infancy and there are nc published reports on its effectiveness,cost, Or operational requirements. Siting Criteria °uaphae of st ormwater can be accomplished,in almos t any land of nmoff storage facility,ranging .nom dry, earic rete-lined ponds to those with vegetated basins and permanent pools. Siting is tnntingent upon the type of facility used. Additional Design Guidelines "l ks technology is still in its infancy and there Lwe no published reports on its effectiveness,cost, #7:r operational requirements. Maintenance Relatively frequent inspection and maintenance is ne xssary to verify proper operation of these f'adlities. Some maintenance concerns are specific tc the type or irrigation system practice used- BMPs that store water can become a nuisance due to 'mosquito,and other vector breeding. Preventing mosquito access to standing water source in BMPs(particularly below-ground)is the best prevention plan,but can prove challenging d i+e to multiple entrances and the need to ivaintain the hydraulic integrity of the system. Relia} ce an electrical pumps is prone to failure kind in some designs(e g.,sumps,vaults)may not pn vide complete dewaWing,both which increase the chances of water standing for over 72 ho i s and becoming a breeding place for vectors. BMPs that hold water for over 72 hours and,or rely an electrical or mechanical devices to dewater may require routine inspections and treat aenis by local mosquito and vector control err enaes to suppress mosquito production. Open stu age designs such as ponds and basins(see appropriate fact sheets)will require routine prevents We maintenance plans and may also 1*Cquire routine inspections and treatments by local r.osquito and vector control agencies. cost ?:iris technology is still in its infancy and there are no xd*shed reports on its effectiveness, cost, or operational requirements. However,O&M costts k r retention-irrigation systems are high cDmpared to virtually all other stormwater quality co:Tirol practices because of the need for: (1) frequent inspections; (2)the reliance on mechanical+quipment;and(3)power costs. References and Sources of Additional Infe.rmation R-zrrett,M.,1999,Complying with the Edwards Agph-ar Rules: Technical Guidance on Best R anagement Pte,Texas Natural Resource Com!ovation Commission Report RG-348. ��t�:/lwww.tnrcc.state.ta.u4f�ltorpdoc��` sh Lower-Colorado River Authority(LCRA),t998,Nony,)int Source Pollution Control Technical Manual,Austin,TX. Metzger,M. E.,D.F.Messer;C.L.Beitia,C.M. Dyer,and V. 1..Kramer.2002.The dark side of stormwater nmoff management disease vectors asso laved with structural BMPs.StDrmwater X4'39• 4•of 5 caufnrr"stcrmwater eu P!-landb 3aruary 2003 Nex Development and Ri ievek4xnent www.cabmphc ks.com Retention/Yrrigatic n TC-12 \\' \\\�\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ January 2003 CakAxT"Sbxr rta0a BW mandboak 5 of 5 New Deveiopme.t and Redeveknxne^` www-cabm ahandbooks oorr rr Vegetated Swam TC-30 �Jj, � �, _ � �.�- . Desii�• coa�aeratiaes ' ■ Trbutery Area ■ Area Required k ■ Slope ■ Water Availability mow.. e Description Vegetated swales are open,shallow channelt. with vegetation covering the side slopes and bottom that coll_xt and slowly Targeted Constitrestls convey r moff flow to downstream discharge points. They are 4- a Sediment designed to treat nmoff duvugh filtering by�he vegetation in the 0 NuMeMs • channel,filtering borough a subsof7 mahx,a id/or infiltration H Trash i into the underlying soils. Swales can be hatL al or manmade. H MeM They trap particulate pollutants(suspended;olids and trace 0 Bacteria • metals),promote infiltration,and reduce the flow velocity of H Oil and Grease stormwat3er nmoff. Vegetated swales can set• re as part of a stormwater drainage system and can replace mrbs,gutters and 0 Orgarics storm sewer systems. Legend#&M0WEffMC6VeW5) • Low ■ High California Experience Caltrans constructed and monitored sm v ege ated swales in • Medum southern California These swales were gene aW effective in reducing the volume and mass of pollirtnts i nmoff. Even in the areas where the annual rainfall was only, bout 10 inches/yr, the vegetation did not require additional nmr ration. One factor that strongly affected performance was the p esence of large numbers of gophers at most of the sites_ The gopher created earthen mounds,destroyed vegetation,and g merally reduced the effectiveness of the controls for TSS redu ctio. . Advantages ■ If properly designed,vegetated,and,ryper ted,swales can serve as an aesthetic,parentiaIly inexpem ive urban development or roadway draroage conve-,nice measure with significant collat aral water quality benefit 3anuary 2003 caoo wo St+orr -wator BW 1-� i of 13 New Deve#oprrwIt and Redevelopment www.cabrr:IwAbooks.corn C-3 0 Vegetated Swale it Roadside ditches should be regarded as sign.Iim l potential swale/buffer strip sites and should be utilized for this purpose whenever i.:)osR ble. i! Ow be difficult to avoid chamAmtion. it May not be appropriate for industrial sites or loci:lions where spills may occur it Grassed swales cannot treat a very large drainage area Large areas may be divided and treaded using multiple swales. ma A thick vegetative cover is needed for these pract!es to function properly. r, They are impractical in areas with steep topjwkr iy. ., They are not effective and may even erode when f ow velocities are high,if the grass cover is not properly maintained at In some places,their use is restricted by law: ma;ty local municipalities require curb and gutter systems in residential areas. ■, Swales are moves susceptible to failure if not prof erly maintained than other treatment BMPs. Design and Sizing Guidelines •, Flow rate based design detmmuned by local regm Cements or sued so that 85%of the annual runoff volume is discharged at less than the desig;:i rainfall intensity. 41 Swale should be designed so that the water level<;bes not exceed 2/3rds the height of the grass or 4 inches,which ever is less,at the design xeatment rate. it Longitudinal slopes should not exceed 2..r)% n Trapezoidal channels am normally reeommendec but other con figurations,such as parabolic,can also provide substantial waxer qua. ;ty improvement and may, be easier to mow than designs with sharp breaks in slope. s, swales constructed in cut are preferred,or in fill.reas that are far enough from an adj acent slope to minimize the potential for gopher damag?. Do not use side slopes constructed of W which are prone to stnrctsnal damage by gopl-+ens and other burrowing animals. is A diverse selection of lour growing,plaints that thl Ile under the specific sate,climatic, and watering conditions should be specified.Vegetati a whose groaning season corresponds to the wet season are preferred. Drought Count vE gelation should be considered especially for swales that are not part of a regnlady irrigaatek !lszsdscaped area is The width of the swale should be determined usi ;g Mant ings Equation using a value of 0.25 for Manning's u.. 1bf 13 CaKiamia sta'mwaker B V Handbook January 2003 New Deveiovmpnt and FR Aeveio,xnent www.cabmoh c*s.rom Vegetated Swale TC-30 Ca"ftweriD elm COnvideMtit nos ■ Include directions in the spelt runs f-ruse of appropriate f=a=r and soil amendments buM on sa proputies determined thn mb testing and compared to the needs of the vegetation requalements. ■ Install swales at the time of the year whe:z there is a reasonable chance of successful establishment without irrigation;howev r,it is recognized that rainfall in a given year may not be sufficient and temporary irrigatic, t may be used. ■ If sod tiles must be used,they should.be Aaoed so that there are no gaps between the tiles, stagger the ends of the tiles to prevent th formab m of channels along the swale or strip. a Use a roller on the sod to ensure that no tir pockets form between the sod and the soil. ■ Where seeds are used,erasion controls m X be necessary to protect seeds for at least 75 days after the first rainfall of the season. Performmwe The literature suggests that vegetated swales represent a practical and potentially effective technique for controlling urban runoff qualit While limited quantitative performance data exists for vegetated swales,it is known that e'neck dams,slight slopes,permeable soils,dense grass cover,increased contact time,and sma-1,worm events all contribute to successful pollutant removal by the Swale system. Factors decma: ng the effectiveness of swales include compacted soils,short runoff contact time,large sM.zn a dents,frozen pumd,short grass heights,steep slopes,and high rutroff velocities and dischm ge rates. Conventional vegetated Swale designs have a°hieved mixed results in removing particulate pollutants. A sturdy performed by the Nation aide Urban Runoff Program(NURP)monitored three grass swales in the WwWristou D:C., a:-ea and found no significant improvement in urban runoff quality for the pollutants analyzed- R wever,the weak performance of these swales was attributed to the high flaw velocities in the si-slew,sail compaction,steep slopes,and short grass height Another project in Durham,Nq monitored t-1e performance of a carefully designed artificial swale that received runoff from a comm.erdw parking lot The project tracked u storms and concluded that particulate concentrations of:heavy metals(Cu, Pb,Zo, and Cd)were reduced by apprcximiately 5o percent. However,the swr►e proved largely ineffective for removing soluble T,,,t,;ontc The effectiveness of vegetated swales can be c ihanced by adding check dams at approximately 17 meter(-c;o foot)in2ements along their lei;th(See Figure i). These dams maximize the retention time within the Swale,use floe velocities,and promote particulate settling. Finally,the incorporation of vegetated filters.rips parallel to the top of the channel banks can help to treat sheet flows enterQ the Swale. Only 9 sues have been conducted on all grt ased chana&dwigned for water guabty(Table 1). The data suggest relatively high removes.rate~for some pollutants,but negative removals for some bacteria,and fair vmirformanae for Dhos Thorns. January 2003 calforr"Stom water ew tianobonk 3 of 13 NPw f)wRkxnrrw t nevi RPcIevebmN ent wwwxatxn a WYhooks.nom TC-3 Q Vegetated Swale Table 1 Grassied *wale peHatawt mtcr,®w A efficiency data ReMMMI Es fildracie"(%Beuaarab T. Study � I 'P � I T 1,02 ffietak Bacteria Type itrans2002 77 8 i 67__{ 6 83-90 -33 dryswales ! �oldberg 1993 67--11 4 - , _4 42-62 -100 grassed channel reattle Metro and Wasl:bWlm 60 I 2_i6 _2_5 ssed channel epartment of ,cant'1992 Peattle Metro and Washington 83 - 46-73 _25 rassed channel epartment ofBogogy,1992 ang et A,198i l 8D ` - ! I 70-80 - dry Swale Porman et al.,1989 98 18 , ,5 37-81 - ry swale Parper,1988 f 87 1 $g 84 1 t l 88-9a - ry Swale r+elcer st ai,1983 99 99 99 99 - dry Swa le Harper,1988. 81 17 4r, 4 t 37 ,y - et Swale x,1995 67 39 - -�_ -35 to 6 - wet Swale 11nde it is difficult to distinguish between different c esigns based on the small amount of available data,grassed channe]s gereraIly have poor:r removal rates than wet and dry swales, although some swales appear to export soluble phos;6orus(Harper,1988;Koon,1995).It is not clear why swales expos t bacteria One explana ton is that bacteria thrive in the warm Swale soils. Siting Criteria Thee suitability of a Swale at a site wiR depend on law use,size of the area serviced,soil type, slope,imperviousness of the contributing wate-shed and dimensions and slope of the Swale ;;Vstem(Schuele-et al,1992). In general,*wales car be used to serve areas of less than ro acres, With slopes no greater than r%. Use of natural al topojaplic loves is encouraged and natural drauiage courses should be regarded as siginficant lc*al resources to be kept in use(Young et al., :L,)96). 'Selection Oriteriu(NCT CBOG, 1993) a Comparable performance too wet basins is Limited to treating a few acres • Availability of water during dry periods to ma tt n vegetation • Sufficient available land area Research m the Austin area i adicates that vegetated i.mtrols are effective at removing pollutants men when dormant Theref€rre,wngettimr is not regr fired t o maintain growth during dry pmods,but may be necessary only to prevent the vet m from dying. 4'.f 13 caukrnia starmvmster a D Herd January 2003 New Devebpment and R. devebomenr www.cabm:)handbc xcs.co€- TC-3® Vegetated Swale establishment Where nuioflf diversion t`not possible,cover graded and seeded areas with suitable erosion control niatei:als. Maintenance The useful life of a vegetated swale system is directly proportional to its mamtenance frequency. if properly designed and regularly maiWained,vege ated swales can last indefinitely.The inaintenanoe objeciivoes for vegetated swale systems nclu,de keeping up the hydraulic and removal efficiency of the channel and maintaining a Tense,healthy grass cover. Maintenance activities shoo ld include periodic mow qg(with grass never cut shorter than the design flow depth)weed control,watering during d.mWht comditiovs,reseeding of bare areas, end clearing of debris and blockages. Cuttings shout d be removed from the channel and cisposed in a local composting facility. Accumulate, sediment should also be removed manually to avoid flows in the swale. -he appheatiion of ferdlim s and pesticides hould be minimal. Another aspect of a good maintenance plan is repair:,,ng damaged areas within a channel. For Example,if the channel develops ruts or holes,it sho id be repaired utilizing a suitable soil that is properly tamped and seeded. The grass cover shop yid be thick,if it is not,reseed as necessary. Any standing water removed during the mamtenaner operation must be disposed to a sanitary sewer at an approved discharge location. Residuals e.g.,silt,grass cuttings)must be disposed in accordance with local or State requirements. Mai itenmee of grassed swales mostly involves maintenance of the grass or wetland plant cover. Ty*Al maintam ce activities are SnTnmAriged belrnw ■ Inspect swales at least twice annually for emstor damage to vegetation,and sediment and debris accumulation preferably at the end of the ret season to schedule summer maintenance and before major fall rnno>if to be s-a e the swale is ready for winter. However, additional inspecti ri,after periods of heavy runo:T is desirable. The Swale should be checked for debris and litter,and areas of sediment actin- ulation. s Grass height and mowmg frequency may not hak a large impact on pollutant removal. Consequently. mowing may only be necessary or x or twice a year for safety or aesthetics or to suppress weeds and woody vegetation_ Trash tends to accumulate in swale areas,partie laity along highways. The need for litt3er removal is determined throukh per iodw msvecti, a.but litter should always be removed Dior tD mowing ® Sediment accumulating near culverts and in chat nels should be removed when it builds up to 75,mm(3 in.)at any spot or covers vegewtiork ;g Regularly inspect swales for pools of standieg7 wr .;ter. Swales can become a nuisance due to mosquito breeding in standing water if obstructit:us develop(e.g.debris accumulation, invasive vegetation)and/or if t mom drainage s14 ties are not imr1emented and maintained. ' 4 �5!of 13 Caffiforrm stamwater E+P 1-� January 2003 Now nPvPhrwnPnt And F x uwPlnrxnPnt %VVMXahrnnhar,dhf aks.cam Vegetated Swale TC-30 The topography of the site should pertrfit th design.of a channel with appropriate slope and cross-sectianel arm Site topography may v":so dictate a need for additional structural controls. Revommendati ms foir lowh din d slopes D Dap betwet n 2 and 6 past Flatter slopes can be used,if sufficient to provide adequate convt puice. Sheep slopes increase flow velocity,decrease detention time,and may regtrire MeW di -Pitmg and grade check. Steep slopes also can be managed use a series of check dams w ter 7we the swale and reduce the slope to within acceptable limits the use ai<check dams wi h swaies also promotes infiltration. Additional Design Guidelines Most of the design guidelines adopted for sy ale design specify a minimum hydraulic residence time of 9 minutes.Tills criterion is based ors the results of a single study conducted in Seattle, WashingbDn(Seattle Metro and w aShi minis TiepWMMent of Ecology,1992),and is not well supported. Analysis of the data collected m t:iat study indicates that pollutant removal at a residence time of 5 minutes was not sigific,ndy different;although there is more variability in that data. Than as additional research in he design criteria for swales is needed.Substantial pollutant removal has also been observed fo., vegetated controls desgned solely for conveyance (Barrett et a1,1998);consequently,some fie,_ability in the design is warranted. Many design guidelines recommend thaz grs.:s be fi equendy mowed to maintain dense coverage near the ground surface. Recant research(C: well et aL,2000)has shown mowing frequency or grass blight has lithe or no effect on pofiutw it removal- Ssaw arry ofDosign Reaommendatiow s 1) The swale should have a length tl:it provides a mrmmnm hydraulic residence time of at least 10 minntes. The magi mu a bottom width should not exceed 10 feet unless a dividing .ream is provided.. "a hire d.pffi of r`low should not exceed z f 3rds me height of the grass at the peak of the water 'puality design storm intensity. The channel slope should not exceed 2.5%. 211 A design grass height of 6 in e-aes F>recommended. 3) Regardless of the recommended c✓bention time,the swale should be not less than ioo feet in length- 4) The widdi of the Swale shatilc)be f a ewmi ned using Manfimg's Equation,at the peak of ire design storm,using a.Man II ae�s n of o.2_r.. 5) The swale can be sawed as both a is eatment facility for the design storm and as a conveyance system to pass the pe,k hydraulic flows of the loo-year storm if it is located"can-line." The side siones'should be no steeper bran 3:1(H:V). 6) Roadside ditches shmild be regarc.ad as significant potential swale/buffer strip sites and should be utilized for this nut•:)ose whenever possible. If flow is to be introduced through cu ib cuts,place pavemen slightly above the elevation of the vegetated areas. Curb cuts should be at least 12 me ies wide to prevent dog gong_ 7) Swales must be vegetated in order to provide adequate treatment of runoff.It is important to maximize wager coat ct with vegetation and the soil surface. For general purposes,select fine,closc;growing water-resisunt grasses. If possible, divert ru aif(oilier than uecessar°`irrigation.)during the period of vegetation January 2003 caufanva stoma water Btu Harxb 5 of 13 New Developmc it and Redeveburne-I www aim*VWXb(X*S.cor- Vegetated Swale TC-30 MWEMM Cosy Consb%et"Cost Little data is available to estimate the differs;tace in cost between various swale deagns.One study(SWRPC, 1991)estimated the eonstrw:tion cost of grassed channels at approximately $0.25 per ft?.TlAs price does not include de,ign costs or contingencies. Brown and Schuder (1997)estimate these costs at approx. E-teb 32 percent of construction costs for most stormwat er manoge practices. For swa es,however,these oasts would probably be significantly highua'since the construct on cx_sts are so low compared with other practices.A more realistic estimate would be a total cost A approximately$0.5o per ft2,which compares favorably with other stormwater mane em ej<t pracdoes. January 2003 Calif WalStm, watm BW Hwdbodc 7 of 13 New Developm A and Redevekxx—a^I, www.cabr. liarwdbooks.com �1' M use O 0 N 81� C oCoA40 m� v� 4w 60 4w M Ck CD 93 O !7A hii O7 Yf 4) 1 O g �p Op (lt�V f W- r a M N N M 11 f � C m o �C EN pppp b C3 CV yp to 6}Op O C pp� B!ii A y to.: t ® Or m o > U o f� Co�o v � � r .Sl .Q by C ro C3. otf � CL I on to CX o v �n o ou o}c _ ry°y OObi o�o�i 7 C � x ct ci w � • ® �� uj SIC *C o ci F 5 n u rl ..-. ° m 1 o n it CL wD so a @X � a 70 im COLL lr; 4 $ .2 3oio a 3 � � 3 � Co }.. 49[1,3111 Aw 1 140 a � � � V7 a � > < a M uf a o v f • „� - 0 low O co M_ Ch O C71 8� 8 D.2 }- o ON �o ti k 1 +� E + � a OU ti r o o a o 5 e Y7 i� c R E ° �y 11,G w y v°s w P M 40 � �� W o8 O �- z Ti 0 � O m fl_ O Ups Qp�� -0 NC cu V! L E-0 - U) - 0 °Im a Ll-, o©� A 53 53 € $ w o 3 s O e> g MCD r. i Y ` O Z rfl t to O O u7 + co cli ci C3 M �8 Ca 0111 elm I-- irl � 'C-30 Vegetated Swale to MaiftftKaNa Co& Caltrans(loom)estimated the end anus;.main tenance cast for a swale with a tributary area of agplinea ately 2 ha at apprwamahely#2,700 Sine almost sll manxtenance consists of mowing,the cost is fundamentally a func tim of the:-aowing fiWiency. Unit costs developed by SEWRPC are shown in Table 3. In many cases vegei< channels would be used to convey runoff and would require periodic mowing as well, s there may belittle additional cost for the vuat:er quality component. Since essentially all the as tivities are related to vegetation management,no special training is required for mai Penance personnel. References and Soumes of Additional In xmation Barrett,Michael E.,Walsh,Patrick M.,Mauna,Joset h F.,Jr.,Chsrbeneau,Randall J, 1998, "Performance of vegetative cols for testing high way runoff,"ASCE Journal of Phi ironmentalEnsgineering,Vol.124,No.u,pp. n1 1 1.1.28. Brown,W.,and T.Schueler.1997. The Economies q,'Stormwater BMPs in the Mid-Atlantic Region. Prepared for the Chesapeake Research Comortium,Edgewater, MD,by the Center for Watershed Protection,Ellicott City,MD. enter for Watershed Protection(CWP).1.996. Desk 7z of Storrawater Filtering Systems. Prepared for the Chesapeake Research Consortium, ' 4omons,MD,and USEPA Region V, Chicago,iL,by the Center for Watershed shed Protection.,Ellicott City,MD. CbIwell,Shanti R.,Honer,Richard R.,and Booth,1)=k B.,2000. Characterization of .Performance Predictors andEvaluation ofMauring Practices in Big(9tration Swales. Report obi Keg County Land And Water Resources Division and others by Center for Urban Water Resources Management;Department of Civil and Er 7ironmental Engineering,University of 'Washington,Seattle,WA Gorman,M.E.,J. Hartigan,R.F.Steg,and T. Quaseh ulk 1989.Retention,Detention and ��-�erlandj%w for Pollutant RemoaaM-om Highi ,y Stormwater Runoff_ Vol. z.FHWA/RD 89/202. Federal Highway Administration,Washings Vin,DC. oldberg 1993- Dayton Avenue Swale Bic,f ltration Study. Seattle Engineering Department, Seattle,WA- 'Harper, H.1988.Ems ofStormwater Managaner;t Systems on Groundwater Quality. :Prepared for Florida Department of Environmental l egulation,Tallahassee,FL,by Environmental Research and Design, Inc.,Orlando, 'L. :K:ercher,W.C.,J.C.Landon,and R.Massare&1983. Grassy swales prove cost-effective for Water pollution control Public Works,16: 53-75s- .9'oon,J.1995. Evaluation of Water Quality Ponds cad Swales in the Issaquah/East Lake Ssmmamish Basins. King County Surface Water M&ogement;Seattle,WA,and Wasbmgton .Department of Ecology,Olympia,WA- Metzger,M. E., D. F.Messer,C. L. Beilia,C.M. -A4yei 3,and V: L.Kramer.2oo2.The Dark Side Cif St7ormwat w Runoff Management Disease Vera Associated With Structeaal BMPs. Sr-ormwater 3(2): 24-39.041dand,P.H.1983. An eva.nation of stormwater pollutant removal 16 of 13 caukrnia stamwater E, +P Ha dx)ok 3anuay 2003 New Deveboment and F:�devebnment www.cabmphandtx 3cs.com Vegetated Swale TC-30 through grassed swale treatment In Prom dings of the International Symposium of Urban Hydrology,Hydraulics and Sediment-Cont mot,Lexington,K'-pp. 173-182. 0=q1an Walshed Mcmitaring Laboratoi y.1983. Final Report Metropolitan Washington th bcm Rumo#PMect- Prepared for the Me rapolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washmgbmn, DC,brr the Occoquan Wateesh4 d Monitoring Laboratory, Manassas,VA- Pitt,R.,and J.McLean. 1986. Toronto Are- Management Strategy Study:Humber River Pilot Watershed Project. Ontario Mir istuy of Environment,Toronto,ON. Schueler,T.1997. Comparative Pollutant RE-;moval Capability of Urban BMPs:Areanalysis. Watershed Protection TecbnigUes 2(2):,379- 383- Seatde Metro and Washie gton Department 4 Ecology.1992. Biofdtration Swale Performance: Recommendations and Design Consideratic rrs.Puublicatioau No.657.Water Pollution Contra Department; Seattle,WA Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning( remission(SWRPC).1991. Costs of Urban Nonpoint Source Water Pollution Control k easur es.Technical report no.31. Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commiwion, Waukesha,WI. U.S.EPA,1999,Stormwatw Fact Sheet Veg fated Swales,Report#832-F-99-oo6 http:jjwww W&ggi jowmjmtbjvegswale.pc Office of Water,Washington DC. Wang,T.,D.Spyri&dds,B.Mar,and R.Hon er.198L Transport,Deposition and Control of Heavy Metals in Highway Runoff.FH`WA ti" A-RD-34-1o. University of Washington, Department of Civil Engineering,Seattle,W_ Washington State Department of Transports ion,1995,Highway RunqffManual,Washington Stage Depautment of Thmpoutati,on,Olympi 4 Washington. Welborn,C., and J.Veenhui&1987. Affiects(.f Rungff Controls on the Quantity and Quality of Urban RunoJfin Tu,o Locations inAm6n, T f USGS Wader Resources Investigations Report No. 87-4004.U.S.Geological Survey,Reston;VA Youse4 Y., M.Wanielista,H.Harper,D.x'eaa�r,and R.Tolbert 1985. Best Management Practices: Removal of Highway Contami na zts By Roadside Swates. University of Central Florida and Florida Dent of Tianspor,;ation,Orlando,FL. Yu,S.,S. Barnes,and V.Gerde. 1993- Testin;t of Best Management Practices for ControtIing Highway Runoff. FHWAJVA-93-R16. Vx gi pia 1t%mspartation Research Council, Charlottesville,VA- Information Resources Maryland Department of the Environment Q{DE).2000. Maryland Stormwater Design Manual. www.mde.statemd.us/environmer fwmalsdorrmwatermamual. Accessed May 22, 2001. Reeves,E.1994. Performance and Conditiort,of Biotilt ers in the Pacific Northwest Watershed Protection Techniques 1(3):117—nq. )anuafy 2003 Caft"a ston- water Btu liaVCbodc 11 of 13 New Devetopm A and Redevek)pment www.cabs Ivy-odbooks.corn TC-30 Vegetated Swale Seattle Metro and WasliWgima Department of Ecolc dry. 1qW.Bia�f Ttrahon Swale Performance. 'Remmmendations and Design Cow, Pub icatim No.657.Scattle Metre and WashWgton Department of Ecology,Olympia,WA USEPA 1993.Guidance Specifying Management M xwo-es for Sources ofNonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters.EPA-84o-13-92-oo2.U-S.Environr,entml Protection Agency, Office of Water. Washington,DC. Watershed Management Instib (WNII).1997. Opr lion,Maintenance,andManagement of ormwaterManagement Systems.Prepared for U y.Environmental Protection Agency,Officc: (of Water.Washington,DC,by the Wabm;hed Mana ement Institntie,Ingleside,MD. 1!2 of 13 ca4fornia StormwaLer E�P Handbook .January 2003 New Deveboment and F�deve{ooment www.cabcr%3h rXatx acs.CM Vegetated swab TC-34 _A+_ t'f.sti_d:l[erYVrr r»t -rotvm imofsoakw#b dwrii dam. f notation: L =Ltn9gt oI wraiB r1P�� YH siirch daea{h} t h.1 F...sattwiwrd kctr wi s.a air ipiwttrtlma7f�rcn. 0s =DoRth of chock Gamttti S. =GOVAM slew of swak M-Rk W =Top tilmofcbrck dam;I % =Bomoin w&Wi of dick A.m iK zt,=Ratio of hoeizonW to rrrrital duwV in sov sile sbpe I:C January 2003 California Stor,►water BW Fhdxodc 13 of 13 New Develoom,;,)t and Redeveloom�^' www.cabn phandbooks.con.