Loading...
2006-413 G C I T Y OF E N C I N I T A S ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT 505 S . VULCAN AVE. ENCINITAS, CA 92024 GRADING PERMIT PERMIT NO. : 413GI PARCEL NO. 257-011-2400 PLAN NO. : 413-G JOB SITE ADDRESS : 651 QUAIL GARDENS DRIVE CASE NO. : APPLICANT NAME COLE, JOHN AND JENNIFER MAILING ADDRESS : 1042 N. EL CAMINO REAL STEB428 PHONE NO. : 760-685-0901 CITY: ENCINITAS STATE: CA ZIP: 92024- CONTRACTOR : OWNER/ BUILDER PHONE NO. : LICENSE NO. : LICENSE TYPE: ENGINEER : PASCO ENGINEERING PHONE NO PERMIT ISSUE DATE: 4/25/07 PERMIT EXP. DATE: 4/25/08 PERMIT ISSUED BY: INSPECTOR: TODD BAUMBACH ------------------------- PERMIT FEES & DEPOSITS --------- ------------------- 1 . PERMIT FEE . 00 2 . PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT: . 00 3 . INSPECTION FEE 3 , 481 . 91 4 . INSPECTION DEPOSIT: . 00 5 . PLAN CHECK FEE . 00 6 . SECURITY DEPOSIT 69, 638 . 14 7 . FLOOD CONTROL FEE 690 . 90 8 . TRAFFIC FEE . 00 ------- ---- ----- ----- - - - - DESCRIPTION OF WORK ------------ - - ----------------- PERMIT TO GUARANTEE PERFORMANCE AND LABOR/MATERIALS FOR EARTHWORK, DRAINAGE, PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS, AND EROSION CONTROL PER APPROVED PLAN 413-G. CONTRACTOR MUST MAINTAIN TRAFFIC CONTROL PER APPROVED TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN OR PER W.A. T. C. H. STANDARDS . LETTER DATED APRIL 9, 2007 APPLIES . ---- INSPECTION ---------------- DATE -------- INSPECTOR' S SIGNATURE ---- INITIAL INSPECTION 07 lodc�— COMPACTION REPORT RECEIVED - % -6-7 i ENGINEER CERT. RECEIVED /&--b ROUGH GRADING INSPECTION -Q FINAL INSPECTION - ------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------- I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ THE APPLICATION AND STATE THAT THE INFORMATION IS CORRECT AND AGREE TO COMPLY WITH ALL CITY ORDINANCES AND STATE LAWS REGULATING EXCAVATING AND GRADING, AND THE PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS OF ANY PERMIT ISSUED PURSUANT TO THIS APPLICATION. SIGNAT DA E SIGNE 5 0�'o� PRINT NAME rELEPHONE NUMBER CIRCLE ONE: 1 . OWNER 2 . AGENT 3 . OTHER T E C H N O L O G Y ENGINEERING, INC Project No. TE-2048 May 3, 2007 John& Jennifer Cole 1042 N. El Camino Real Ste. B-428 Encinitas, CA 92009 Subject: Change of Soils Engineer Proposed East Yard Area, Garage and Driveway Grading 651 Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas, California Reference: 1.) "Geologic Reconnaissance, Proposed Garage and Remodel of Existing Residence" prepared by Coast Geotechnical dated September 29, 2006 2.) "Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Eastern Yard Area Grading" prepared by Coast Geotechnical dated January 18, 2007 3.) "Clarification of Geotechnical Recommendations and Response to the City of Encinitas" prepared by Coast Geotechnical dated February 22, 2007 4.) Project Grading Plans prepared by Pasco Engineering, approved April 18, 2007 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Cole: In response to your request, we respectfully submit the following information regarding the change of Soils Engineer. We, Terra Technology Engineering, Inc., have reviewed the above referenced grading plans and soils reports prepared for the subject project. Subsequent to our review, we concur with findings, conclusions, and recommendations and are satisfied with the reports. We assume all responsibility within our purview as the new soils engineer of record. We were contracted to provide soil testing and inspection services, to certify compliance with current standard practices regarding earthwork construction. P.O. Box 301061 * Escondido, CA 92030 * (760) 740-0826 1,-AX (760) 741-6568 T E C H N O L O G Y ENGINEERING, INC Project No. TE-2048 May 3, 2007 Page 2 If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Respectfully submitted, OC� s R. Terra Technology Engineering, Inc. C GE 713 m E - 9/30/07 Ronald K. Adams Dale R. Regli President Registered Civil QAO Geotechnical Engineer 713 RKA:paj cc: (4) submitted T E C H N O L O G Y ENGINEERING, INC Project No. TE-2048 June 15, 2007 John& Jennifer Cole 1042 N. El Camino Real Ste. B-428 Encinitas, CA 92009 Subject: Report of Certification of Compacted Fill Ground Proposed East Yard Area, Garage ad Driveway Grading 651 Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas, California Reference: 1.) "Geologic Reconnaissance, Proposed Garage and Remodel of Existing Residence" prepared by Coast Geotechnical dated September 29, 2006 2.) "Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Eastern Yard Area Grading" prepared by Coast Geotechnical dated January 18, 2007 3.) "Clarification of Geotechnical Recommendations and Response to the City of Encinitas"prepared by Coast Geotechnical dated February 22, 2007 4.) Project Grading Plans prepared by Pasco Engineering, approved April 18, 2007 5.) "Change of Soils Engineer" letter prepared by Terra Technology Engineering, Inc. dated June 14, 2007 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Cole: In response to your request, the following report has been prepared to indicate results of soil testing, observations, and inspection of earthwork construction at the subject site. Testing and inspection services were performed from April 30, 2007 through June 7, 2007. Briefly, our findings reveal filled ground has been compacted to a minimum of ninety percent (90%). Therefore, we recommend construction continue as scheduled. SCOPE Our firm was retained to observe grading operations with regard to current standard practices and to determine the degree of compaction of placed fill. P0. Box 30/06/ * Escondido, CA 92030 * (760) 740-0826 FAX (760) 741-6568 T E C H N O L O G Y ENGINEERING, INC Project No. TE-2048 June 15, 2007 Page 2 Grading and stormwater management plans were prepared by Pasco Engineering, approval date of April 18, 2007. Grading operations were performed by Charles Pinckle of San Marcos, California. Approximate locations and depth of filled ground and extent of earthwork construction covered in this report are indicated on the attached Plate No. One entitled, "Test Location Sketch". Grading operations were performed to regrade the easterly yard area to accommodate a future swimming pool and to construct a level building pad to accommodate the proposed detached garage. Should the graded areas be altered in any way, we should be contacted to provide additional recommendations. The site was graded in accordance with recommendations set forth in the geotechnical report prepared by Coast Geotechnical (Reference No. 2). The site was graded to approximately conform to project plans. Actual pad size and elevation may differ. Finish grade operations are to be completed at a later date. LABORATORY TESTING Representative soils samples were collected and returned to the laboratory for testing. The following tests were performed and are tabulated on the attached Plate No. Three. 1. Optimum Moisture/Maximum Density (ASTM D-1557) 2. Expansion Potential Test (FHA Standard) SOIL CONDITIONS Native soils encountered were silty-sands. Fill soils were imported and generated from on-site excavation. Loose surficial top soils within the footprint of the proposed garage were removed to firm native ground (12 to 18 inches below finish grade) and recompacted to provide adequate garage slab support. To reduce the potential for differential settlement, we recommend garage footings be T E C H N O L O G Y ENGINEERING, INC Project No. TE-2048 June 15, 2007 Page 3 deepened as necessary to protrude through compacted fill and bear a minimum of 1 foot into firm native soil. We should be contacted to inspect footing excavations prior to pouring concrete to assure foundations will bear into the recommended soil bearing stratum. On-site soils were found to have an expansion index of less than 20 and are classified as being "very low" in expansion potential. During earthwork construction, native areas to receive fill were scarified, watered, and compacted to a minimum of ninety percent (90%) of maximum density. The key was approximately 15 feet wide, a minimum of 2 feet in depth, and inclined into the slope. Subsequent fill soils were placed, watered, and compacted in 6 inch lifts. Benches were constructed in natural ground at intermediate levels to properly support the fill. To determine the degree of compaction, field density tests were performed in accordance with ASTM D-1556 or D-2922 at the approximate horizontal locations designated on the attached Plate No. One entitled, "Test Location Sketch". A tabulation of test results and their vertical locations are presented on the attached Plate No. Two entitled"Tabulation of Test Results". Fill soils found to have a relative compaction of less than ninety percent(90%) were reworked until proper compaction was achieved. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS Continuous inspection was not requested to verify fill soils are placed in accordance with current standard practices regarding grading operations and earthwork construction. Therefore, as economically feasible as possible, part-time inspection was provided. Hence,the following recommendations are based on the assumption that all areas tested are representative of the entire prof ect. 1.) Compacted fill and natural ground within the defined building areas have adequate strength to safely support the proposed loads. 2.) Slopes may be considered stable with relation to deep seated failure provided they are properly maintained. Slopes should be planted within 30 days with light groundcover(no gorilla ice plant) indigenous to the area. Drainage should be diverted away from the slopes to prevent water flowing on the face of slope. This will reduce the probability of failure as a result of erosion. "AkfAk T E C H N O L O G Y ENGINEERING, INC Project No. TE-2048 June 15, 2007 Page 4 3.) In our opinion, soil liquefaction at the site is unlikely to occur due to the following on-site soils conditions: A). Groundwater was not encountered at the time of grading. B). Fill ground and loose top soils were compacted to a minimum of ninety percent(90%) of maximum dry density. C). The dense nature of the formation underlying the site. 4.) Garage continuous footings founded a minimum of 12 inches into firm native ground will have an estimated allowable soil bearing pressure of 2000 pounds per square foot. All footings should be founded a minium of 18 inches below lowest adjacent grade and a minimum of 12 inches into firm native ground. (NOTE: footings for two-story construction should have a minimum width of 15 inches per the Uniform Building Code.) 5.) Footings located on or adjacent to slopes should be founded at a depth such that the horizontal distance from the bottom outside face of footing to the face of the slope is a minimum of 8 feet. 6.) Garage continuous footings should be reinforced with a minimum of one#4 bar top and bottom. Steel should be positioned 3 inches above bottom of footing and 3 inches below top of footing. 7.) Garage slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and reinforced with#3 bars on 16 inch centers both ways at mid-point of slab thickness. 8.) Garage slab underlayment slab underlayment should consist of visqueen installed at mid-point within a 4 inch sand barrier(2 inches sand, visqueen, 2 inches sand). Sand should be tested in accordance with ASTM D-2419 to insure a minimum sand equivalent of 30. 9.) Plumbing trenches should be backfilled with a non-expansive soil having a swell of less than two percent (2%) and a minimum sand equivalent of 30. Backfill soils should be inspected and compacted to a minimum of ninety percent (90%). T E C H N O L O G Y ENGINEERING, INC Project No. TE-2048 June 15, 2007 Page 5 10.) Completion of grading operations were left at rough grade. Therefore,we recommend a landscape architect be contacted to provide finish grade and drainage recommendations. Drainage recommendations should include a minimum fall of two percent (2%)away from foundation zones. To further protect water penetration of the zone, rain gutters should be installed to divert run-ofd Landscape planter areas within 4 feet of the foundation should be avoided and/or designed with sealed bottoms and a drain system. 11.) Unless requested, recommendations for future improvements (additions, recreation slabs, additional grading, etc.) were not included in this report. Prior to construction, we should be contacted to update conditions and provide additional recommendations. 12.) Prior to construction of the proposed pool,the pool contractor should be contacted for concrete and reinforcement design. Pool excavation spoil should be hauled off-site or properly placed on site under the supervision of our firm. Prior to pouring of concrete,Terra Technology Engineering, Inc. should be contacted to inspect foundation recommendations for compliance to those set forth. Foundation recommendations presented in this report should be considered minimal. Therefore, we recommend the project architect and structural engineer review this report to assure recommendations presented herein will be suitable with regard to the type of construction planned. When the swimming pool is constructed, we should be contacted to inspect the pool excavation to assure that adverse soil conditions do not exist. In the event foundation excavation and steel placement inspection is required and/or requested, an additional cost of$190.00 will be invoiced to perform the field inspection and prepare a "Final Conformance Letter". If foundations are constructed in more than one phase, $140.00 for each additional inspection will be invoiced. (Same applies for pool excavation inspections.) It is the responsibility of the owner and/or his representative to carry out recommendations set forth in this report. "k T E C H N O L O G Y ENGINEERING, INC Project No. TE-2048 June 15, 2007 Page 6 San Diego County is located in a high risk area with regard to earthquake. Earthquake resistant projects are economically unfeasible. Therefore, damage as a result of earthquake is probable and we assume no liability. This report covers soils testing, observations and inspection of earthwork construction from a soils engineering standpoint of view. Geologic conditions and/or hazards at the site were not surveyed. If requested, geologic stability of the site should be evaluated by a certified engineering geologist. Therefore, we assume no liability for geologic hazard. We assume the on-site safety of our personnel only. We cannot assume liability of personnel other than our own. It is the responsibility of the owner and contractor to insure construction operations are conducted in a safe manner and in conformance with regulations governed by CAL-OSHA and/or local agencies. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Respectfully submitted, . c��•�:I�=�S,SjC1 x..'1'9 Terra Technology Engineering, Inc. � ,. l�' �'F mil ' � 1 rn Ronald K. Adams Dale R. Regli President Registered Civil R Geotechnical Engin RKA:paj cc: (4) submitted TERRA TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERING, INC. Soil Testing and Inspection Services Proposed East Yard Area and Driveway No Scale r Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas,California -.� o FG 300-3 P Q D 1 �5 \ � FG 298. 1 FG 300 3 - DEIX ; x r EL! - FG i7 0 f "• TIC TAN{ MANWAY; 0 1 FS 306.6 27' L FS 304.6 i a 0 FG 298A NSTAL.L _ - DcL7C FS 305.1 GRAVEL BAGS 0 .= FG 302 3 FS 31135 r71I1JRE POOL P' :�; ` \ a nf'.iTE PFXM m 5' DG TRA FP i I N � lD O `& F5 305.6 0 1 FG 302-3 \ 1D DEW l , i f � FG 3003 HATCH FPFL- R FS 311 5 FS:305.5 FS 304' _ FS 304.6 I HYDROSF IT�3 ` n -- 41- _1 . - FS 304-1 C 1% I 0 m FG 300.3 \ _ ° FG 298- I 0 .5'-DG TAA \'' \ INSTALL _ GRAVEL BAGS .:% NOTE: Compaction tests _ are delineated in red FXT1iTT1,r TR F ATgri - TEST LOCATION SKETCH PROJECT NO. TE-2048 PLATE NO. ONE TERRA TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERING, INC. Soil Testing and Inspection Services Proposed Garage No Scale Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas, California ru oua.0 FG 302.4 r• FUTURE GARAGE - �`': (SEPARATE PERMIT' �. 0C-1E►7) FF=309.7 PAO--3x92 3093 d .FS • ,3 '' -t9.0% 'f- -r- - f• r 9.7 NOTE: Compaction tests are delineated in red TEST LOCATION SKETCH PROJECT NO. TE-2048 PLATE NO. ONE `A' T E C H N O L O G Y ENGINEERING, INC TABULATION OF TEST RESULTS Test# Date Horizontal Vertical Field Moisture Dry Density Soil Percent of Location Location %Dry Wt. LB Cu. Ft. Type Compaction 1 05/03/07 See 290.0 11.4 115.3 I 92.9 2 Plate 292.0 09.8 116.3 I 93.8 3 One 290.0 11.8 116.8 1 94.2 4 292.0 11.2 117.5 I 94.8 5 05/07/07 294.0 09.5 115.4 1 93.1 6 296.0 10.2 114.1 1 92.0 7 294.0 11.5 117.3 1 94.6 8 296.0 11.3 116.4 I 93.9 9 05/11/07 298.0 12.2 112.2 II 93.3 10 300.0 12.1 111.5 II 92.8 11 298.0 11.6 113.5 11 94.4 12 300.0 10.5 110.8 11 92.2 13 06/05/07 309.2 RFG 09.5 113.5 1 91.5 14 11 309.2 RFG 10.0 115.2 1 92.9 15 309.2 RFG 10.2 114.3 I 92.2 16 301.0 09.0 110.5 II 91.9 17 303.0 09.8 109.5 11 91.1 18 06/07/07 RFG 11.2 122.2 III 90.3 19 RFG 09.8 123.2 I1I 91.1 20 RFG 10.1 117.2 I 94.5 21 RFG 09.2 115.8 1 93.4 REMARKS: RFG=Rough Finish Grade PROJECT NO. TE-2048 PLATE NO. TWO T E C H N O L O G Y ENGINEERING, INC TABULATION OF TEST RESULTS OPTIMUM MOISTURE/MAXIMUM DENSITY SOIL DESCRIPTION TYPE MAX. DRY DENSITY OPT. MOISTURE (LB. CU. FT) (% DRY WT) Light Brown Silty Sand I 124.0 10.0 Orange Brown Silty Sand (Import) I1 120.0 09.0 Brown Red Silty Sand (Import) III 135.3 08.2 EXPANSION POTENTIAL SAMPLE NO. I II III Condition Remold 90% Remold 90% Remold 90% Initial Moisture (%) 9.7 9.0 8.1 Air Dry Moisture (%) 1.3 4.8 2.5 Final Moisture (%) 16.8 17.8 13.2 Dry Density (PCF) 111.6 108.1 121.7 Load (PSF) 150 150 150 Swell (%) .12 .000 .06 Expansion Index 12 Less than 5 6 PROJECT NO. TE-2048 PLATE Nn_ THRFF PASCO ENGINEERING, INC. WAYNE RC.E. PASCO C.E.29577 535 NORTH HIGHWAY 101,SUITE A JOSEPH YUHAS SOLANA BEACH, CA 92075 P.L.S.5211 (858)259-8212 FAX(858)259-4812 W.JUSTIN SUITER RC.E.68964 October 24, 2007 PE 1437 City of Encinitas Engineering Services Permits 505 S. Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 Re: AS GRADED CERTIFICATION FOR GRADING PLAN. 413-G To Whom It May Concern: The grading under permit No. 413-G has been preformed in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan or as shown on the attached as-graded plan. If you should have any questions in reference to the information listed above,please do not hesitate to contact this office. Very truly yours, PASCO ENGINEERING, INC.�zk Joseph Yuhas Director of Land Surveying C. LS 5211 t Etp.06/301W # 9�DF CAS\F�Q- WAYNE A PASCO PMCO ENGINEERING, INC. RC.E.295T7 535 NORTH HIGHWAY 101,SUITE A JOSEPH YUHAS SOLANA BEACH,CA 92075 P.LS.5211 (858)259-8212 FAX(858)259-4812 W JUSTIN SUITER RC.E.68964 8964 October 1, 2007 PE 1437 City of Encinitas Engineering Services Permits 505 S. Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 Re: Engineer's Pad Certification for Grading Permit No. 413-G To Whom It May Concern: Pursuant to Section 23.24.3 10 of the Encinitas Municipal Code,this letter is hereby submitted as a Pad Certification Letter for lots lthrough and including lot 1,As the Engineer of Record for the subject property. I hereby state that the rough grading for this project has been completed in conformance with the approved plan and requirements of the City of Encinitas, Codes and Standards. 23.24.310(B). The following list provides the pad elevations as field verified and shown on the approved grading plan: Pad Elevation Pad Elevation Location Per Plan Per Field Measurement Future Garage 309.2' 309.2'avg. Pool Pad 304.1' 304.1'avg. 23.24.310(B)1. Construction of line and grade for all engineered drainage devices and/or retaining walls have been field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan. 23.24.310(B)5. The location and inclination of all manufactured slopes have been field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan. 23.24.310(B)6. The construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage have been field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan. If you should have any questions in reference to the information listed above,please do not hesitate to contact this office. Very truly yours, SCO ENGINEERING, INC. lLn Joseph ly I Director of Land Surveying y OCT 1 2007 L CITY OF ENCINITAS - ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ACTIVITY REPORT DATE: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: STREET LOCATION: PERMIT NUMBER: CONTRACTOR: TELEPHONE: .5!' At-4-' 6c.,-Z 4F7-- uL s/i-457, k,9 ,use 4�, /1lo v /tom Activi / t7rynr SS.c+' tvbt-S 6iu/e-7\) -IV ;,2-7- 7�//Z7- P�u J-D C,/�j urs Z Fc/ oc/ Ro.,�e 3I Z- U-7 `'d) G�"J cZ/1c1 af%l ,-+ 1t"�/ �j , }/L� %Z�Zl�f / ler `S i►�lC Z -,` h 4-he am le/65� c�-,�'�re • r � 3 v� Lha.-�;� u.:•.�k,.�/� ors% '7D tc.���r t���c� r�►-�c.�u L sr-r.�c. c�77 4„l/c- U/V'u J"4L- -T1D At o/F, fiu [.c J.2,C L-,Q S 'i S S .oc-i�r % L '_ /n,a/�►a�7L- -�- i Cif- T k sn1� �y�� > -5;1- 10107 Cterlo� /S es Torr25 k;�, c2" 5" on e-s S h7e 'ff-S Bch; -/ e")", + 1 GKi4 ( 4c•� i coil Ya �' f4 e1.J P� les 0-p Cf,,- v S vpw Cs4-S V,S>7— S,7'� �fr� /°►'tcTrl ru 1T� /.UitifL7fti/(v VSO L/ iC�rUS�C'C- //►C' Nit J�JC/C�/��7 S'(•f' t'� 7C- beg1k) Pads lerlL: C- Z(o TLS ��K, 5/bl� cif_ -5� // (o 07 Al.L /•?2c 5 Cv„x►C.G-0 - o..r- m14429 CITY OF ENCINITAS — ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPAR'T'MENT ACTIVITY REPORT DATE: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: STREET LOCATION• PERMIT NUMBER: CONTRACTOR: TELEPHONE: // /�—CIS, /—E7� �CcST7/✓ C"' J-►cia `oye bee, hj recl bW /Y-7 aloce �QQ� Cl�✓✓O7�'1� ® ��S e e°1 C✓ l TU r Y rY'' /Pw ,olctvl J T 0 - Plon nC' C P (/ C� 'i h ru On. t, U s, r e y i e&J . �G�� l yc�i►fS i� rtc�v tom/ 122 Sr-Q i d ,,6 -J -� 4,, a m14429 PASCO ENGINEERING, INC. WAYNE A. PASCO R.C.E.29577 535 NORTH HIGHWAY 101, SUITE A JOSEPH YUHAS SOLANA BEACH, CA 92075 P.L.S.5211 1z (858) 259-8212 FAX(858) 259-4812 W.JUSTIN SUITER R.C.E.68964 8964 4b<3 � December 4, 2006 �- '' E 1437 Engineering Department -- City of Encinitas 505 South Vulcan Ave Encinitas, CA 92024 RE: HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULICS FOR 651 QUAIL GARDENS DRIVE, ENCINITAS, CA The purpose of this letter is to address the hydrology and hydraulics of the improvements associated with a proposed development at 651 Quail Gardens Drive. HYDROLOGY This project site is an illegally graded site currently. The proposed grading for this project will be for the construction of a pool and a usable pad for recreation and no drainage patterns will be significantly altered as a result of the grading. Runoff will continue to flow from west to east as it does in the current condition. HYDRA ULICS The existing topography and drainage structures are adequate to convey and contain Q100 from the rest of the site as they did prior to the proposed work. Based on the discussion in this letter it is the professional opinion of Pasco Engineering, Inc. that the existing drainage system on the corresponding Grading Plan will function to adequately intercept, contain and convey flow from a 100 year storm to the appropriate points of discharge. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely. OQ�pfESSIpN� Gi �3 Justin Suiter, Vice President w 3 C 6$ 84 T RCE 689 4 °C t, r' * EXP=1'7 t z ��FCA�iT� COAST GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS February 22, 2007 A F John and Jennifer Cole 1042 North El Camino Real, Suite B-428 Encinitas, CA 92024 — Subject: CLARIFICATION OF GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS AND RESPONSE TO THE CITY OF ENCINITAS Proposed Eastern Yard Area, Garage and Driveway Grading 651 Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas, California References. 1) GEOLOGIC RECONNAISSANCE Proposed Garage and Remodel Of Existing Residence 651 Quail Gardens Lane _ Encinitas, California Prepared by Coast Geotechnical Dated September 29, 2006 — 2) PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Proposed Eastern Yard Area Grading 651 Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas, California Prepared by Coast Geotechnical Dated January 18, 2007 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Cole: This report has been prepared to clarify the recommendations of the above referenced reports. 779 ACADEMY DRIVE • SOLANA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92075 (858) 755-8622 • FAX (858) 755-9126 Coast Geotechnical February 22,2007 W.O. P-504086 Page 2 SITE HISTORY The original project was for the remodel of the existing residence and the construction of a detached _ garage (Reference No.1). The proposed garage is along the top of a ridge and only very minor _ grading is anticipated for the garage pad. However, subsequent to the completion of our study (Reference No. 1) illegal grading was conducted in the eastern yard area. An on-site meeting with the city of Encinitas resulted in several approaches for rectifying the situation. The owners decided to proceed with a complete grading plan for their planned exterior improvements (Pasco Engineering). RECOMMENDATIONS Garage and Drivewav Areas The garage and proposed driveway areas are located along the top of a ridge and are underlain by near surface Pleistocene terrace deposits. Only minor grading with less than 1.0 foot of cut and fill is anticipated in these areas for development. As indicated in Reference Report No. 1, proposed footings should be founded the designed depth into sedimentary rock and slabs should be cast over a dense compacted subgrade. The slab on grade recommendations and preliminary pavement design provided in Reference Report No. 2 are appropriate and should be implemented in the design and construction phases. Coast Geotechnical February 22,2007 W.O. P-504086 Page 3 Eastern Yard Area Proposed fills should be keyed and benched into the underlying sedimentary rock,as recommended in Reference No. 2. As with all grading projects, additional recommendations may be necessary based on actual conditions revealed during grading. If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact us at(858) 755-8622. This opportunity to be of service is appreciated. Respectfully submitted r °' COAST GEOTEC RpFESS/d 1/ ui 782 m Mark Burwell C.E. CER7JFpL-& Ea•12-31-0 70 �NGINEERI NG Vithaya Singhanet, P.E � � Engineering Geologi LK .-A -OtOGlST Geotechnical Engineer c/ECHN�G C,�F FOF CP,tti COAST GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGIST'S April 4, 2007 John and Jennifer Cole 1042 North El Camino Real, Suite B-428 Encinitas, CA 92024 Subject: GRADING PLAN REVIEW Proposed Eastern Yard Area, Garage and Driveway Grading, 651 Quail Gardens Lane APR j 200] Encinitas, California References. 1) GEOLOGIC RECONNAISSANCE Proposed Garage and Remodel Of Existing Residence 651 Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas, California Prepared by Coast Geotechnical Dated September 29, 2006 2) PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Proposed Eastern Yard Area Grading 651 Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas, California _ Prepared by Coast Geotechnical Dated January 18, 2007 3) CLARIFICATION OF GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS AND RESPONSE TO THE CITY OF ENCINITAS Proposed Eastern Yard Area, Garage and Driveway Grading 651 Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas, California Prepared by Coast Geotechnical Dated February 22, 2007 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Cole: Our review of the proposed grading plan prepared by Pasco Engineering,Sheet 2, suggests that they have, in general, included the applicable recommendations presented in our Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation. 779 ACADEMY DRIVE • SOLANA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92075 (858) 755-8622 • FAX (858) 755-9126 Coast Geotechnical April 4,2007 W.O. P-504086 Page 2 COMMENTS 1) All fill should be keyed and benched into competent formational rock. Additional recommendations will be necessary based on actual conditions encountered during grading. 2) Grading should be observed and tested by an engineering geologist and geotechnical engineer, or their representatives. LIMITATIONS The findings and opinions presented herein have been made in accordance with generally accepted professional principals in the fields of engineering geology and soils engineering. No warranty is provided. If you have any questions regarding this report,please contact our office. Reference to our Job No. P-476105 will help expedite a response to your inquiry. -- � Respectfully submitted �m��0 _ COAST GEOTEC fG�f 1- a CER'nFIED 782 Mark Burwell, C.E. ENGINEERING Vithaya inghanet, P. Exp.12-31-07 Engineering Geologist s GEOLOGIST Geotechnical Enginee ;ter•i.>r��-4F ��� '9TF _\ Q.� COAST GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS February 22, 2007 _ APR; 2 wi 201111 ..... John and Jennifer Cole 1042 North El Camino Real, Suite B-428 Encinitas, CA 92024 Subject: CLARIFICATION OF GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS AND RESPONSE TO THE CITY OF ENCINITAS Proposed Eastern Yard Area, Garage and Driveway Grading 651 Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas, California References. 1) GEOLOGIC RECONNAISSANCE Proposed Garage and Remodel Of Existing Residence 651 Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas, California Prepared by Coast Geotechnical Dated September 29, 2006 2) PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Proposed Eastern Yard Area Grading 651 Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas, California Prepared by Coast Geotechnical Dated January 18, 2007 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Cole: This report has been prepared to clarify the recommendations of the above referenced reports. 779 ACADEMY DRIVE • SOLANA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92075 (858) 755-8622 • FAX (858) 755-9126 Coast Geotechnical February 22,2007 W.O. P-504086 Page 2 SITE HISTORY The original project was for the remodel of the existing residence and the construction of a detached garage (Reference No.l). The proposed garage is along the top of a ridge and only very minor grading is anticipated for the garage pad. However, subsequent to the completion of our study (Reference No. 1) illegal grading was conducted in the eastern yard area. An on-site meeting with the city of Encinitas resulted in several approaches for rectifying the situation. The owners decided to proceed with a complete grading plan for their planned exterior improvements (Pasco Engineering). RECOMMENDATIONS Garage and DrivewaAreas The garage and proposed driveway areas are located along the top of a ridge and are underlain by near surface Pleistocene terrace deposits. Only minor grading with less than 1.0 foot of cut and fill is anticipated in these areas for development. As indicated in Reference Report No. 1, proposed footings should be founded the designed depth into sedimentary rock and slabs should be cast over a dense compacted subgrade. The slab on grade recommendations and preliminary pavement design provided in Reference Report No. 2 are appropriate and should be implemented in the design and construction phases. Coast Geotechnical February 22,2007 W.O. P-504086 Page 3 Eastern Yard Area Proposed fills should be keyed and benched into the underlying sedimentary rock,as recommended in Reference No. 2. As with all grading projects, additional recommendations may be necessary based on actual conditions revealed during grading. If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact us at(858) 755-8622. This opportunity to be of service is appreciated. Respectfully submitted.%' ppfESS/p COAST GEOTECH ICAL.' Nq� yP SINS F2 1 ti- 6(v �E F� i. s. ,1 u, 782 CF-Z.T.t FJ;F-0 � V �QQ � Exp.12-31-07 Mark Burwell, C.E. `; I NG0 ERogG Vithaya Singhanet, P.E. x} Engineering Geologist `s G�OsOG��T Geotechnical Engineer CFG �G3� J'� TECHN Zy�Q' C,=CAS 1� a COAST GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS January 18, 2007 John and Jennifer Cole ( :a ` ' APR 2 3 20o"! 651 Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas CA 92024 s RE: PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Proposed Eastern Yard Area Grading 651 Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas, California Reference: GEOLOGIC RECONNAISSANCE Proposed Garage and Remodel Of Existing Residence 651 Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas, California Prepared by Coast Geotechnical Dated September 29, 2006 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Cole: In response to your request and in accordance with our Proposal and Agreement dated November 14, 2006, we have performed a preliminary geotechnical investigation on the subject site for the proposed grading. The findings of the investigation, laboratory test results and recommendations for grading are presented in this report. From a geologic and soils engineering point of view, it is our opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed development, provided the recommendations in this report are implemented during the design and grading phases. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at(858) 755-8622. This opportunity to be of service is appreciated. Respectfully submitted, % nFESS/pNq� COAST GEOTEC IC.AL �`� yP•S1NG"�L`l 782 elm U4 rtp.12-31-07 L& Mark Burwell, C.E.G. r., >,;, _� 4'r.' 1V Vithaya finQghanet, P.E. tp � �' -.'t-'-a a r- Geotechnical Engineer l'9T � C Engineering Geologi FOF UFO 779 ACADEMY DRIVE • SOLANA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92075 _._....__.._,,. - in c.e] 7 CC QCOO . FAV /Q r.Q\ 7CZq Q19(. PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Proposed Eastern Yard Area Grading 651 Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas, California Prepared For: John and Jennifer Cole 651 Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas, CA 92024 January 18, 2007 W.O. P-504086 Prepared By: COAST GEOTECHNICAL 779 Academy Drive Solana Beach, California 92075 TABLE OF CONTENTS VICINITY MAP 4 INTRODUCTION 5 SITE CONDITIONS 5 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 6 PREVIOUS GRADING 6 LABORATORY TESTING 6 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS 7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 10 A. REMOVALS/RECOMPACTION/GRADING 10 B. TEMPORARY SLOPES/EXCAVATION CHARACTERISTICS 10 C. SLABS ON GRADE (EXTERIOR) 11 D. PROPOSED POOL 11 E. UTILITY TRENCH 12 F. PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT DESIGN 12 G. GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATIONS 13 H. PLAN REVIEW 13 LIMITATIONS 13 REFERENCES 16 APPENDICES APPENDIX A LABORATORY TEST RESULTS PLATE A CROSS SECTION GRADING PLAN APPENDIX B GRADING GUIDELINES Topo USAO 5.0 0 VICINITY MAP X. o _ -LEUCADLA BLVD - U GARDENS OR _ �0;0�9 w W Q 0Q� Q ¢ ¢ OQg Q P5 a w O O w UJI Z) 0 o SUBJECT PROPERTY co LU POINSETTIA PARK d _ J r --_- O O - �- EZEE ST_ a v Z 0 J OX LIJ %! _-CALLE_DE.MARIA a } m - F0_XG LOVE_.ST >- SILVER BERRY PL Z -m CALLE DE MARIA Quail Park Botanical =' t Garden H- S C3 SW XONY PL QUAIL GARDENS CT SAXONY PL Z Z p -.. X o m SAXONY LN U - o' ANGANO CIR > c> z ' =- -.._L __._ < ._....Z ._.....__} m m = z v' -< a- m z O z �_ z o 0 LU - - o CR Sg TH Scale 1:9,600 Data use subject to license. * d - - - ©2004 DeLorme.Topo USA®5.0. ia�nrmo rnm 1"=800.0 ft Data Zoom 14-0 Coast Geotechnical January 18,2006 W.O. P-504086 Page 5 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical reconnaissance in the eastern portion of the subject property. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the geotechnical conditions on the site and their influence on the proposed grading and planned exterior improvements. Pertinent geologic information derived from our previous investigation on the site is included in this study, where applicable. SITE CONDITIONS The subject property is located approximately 1/8 mile east of Quail Gardens Drive,along a private road which serves several residences, in the city of Encinitas. The subject property includes a two story residence and attached garage situated on the top of a north-trending ridge. From the relatively level to gently sloping building pad,the property descends to the east at an overall grade of about 11 percent for approximately 16 vertical feet, to an adjacent developed residential lot. However,recent grading has generated minor cut/fill pads. The property is bounded along the east by a cut slope approximately 5.0 to 6.0 feet high. The eastern portion of the site is generally void of significant vegetation due to recent grading. Drainage, in general, appears to be directed to the east by sheet flow. Coast Geotechnical January 18,2006 W.O. P-504086 Page 6 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Preliminary grading plans were prepared by Pasco Engineering. The project includes a terraced fill slope in the eastern portion of the site. The upper terrace will support a swimming pool and deck while the lower terraces will include 5.0 foot wide trails. Fill slopes, up to 7.0 feet high, with a maximum gradient of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) are planned. The maximum depth of fill will be approximately 6.0 feet. Drainage will be collected by a brow ditch along the base of the proposed 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) fill slope (eastern property line). PREVIOUS GRADING A geologic reconnaissance study for the proposed garage and remodel of the existing residence was performed by this firm on September 29, 2006. Subsequent to this study, grading was performed in the eastern undeveloped yard area. The grading consisted of minor cut and fill slopes, up to approximately 4.0 feet in height,and general contour grading to develop materials for fill placement. The grading was performed without city permits,grading plans or geotechnical services. An on-site meeting was conducted on October 3, 2006 with representatives from the city of Encinitas, the owner, DZN Partners and Coast Geotechnical. The meeting resulted in a decision by the owner to provide a grading plan and geotechnical report for proposed improvements. LABORATORY TESTING Samples of the earth materials along the eastern graded area were collected for laboratory testing. Coast Geotechnical January 18, 2006 W.O. P-504086 Page 7 Classification The field classification was verified through laboratory examination,in accordance with the Unified Soils Classification System. Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content were determined for selected samples of earth materials taken from the site. The laboratory standard tests were in accordance with ASTM D-1557-91. The results of the tests are presented in the Laboratory Test Results. GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS The subject property is located in the Coastal Plains Physiographic Province of San Diego. The property is underlain at relatively shallow depths by Pleistocene terrace deposits. The terrace deposits are underlain by Eocene-age sedimentary rocks which have commonly been designated as the Torrey Sandstone on published geologic maps. The terrace deposits are covered, in part, by minor fill deposits. A brief description of the earth materials observed on the site follows. Artificial Fill Previous grading in the eastern yard area has generated minor fill slopes up to approximately 4.0 feet in height. Fill is predominately composed of on-site fine and medium-grained sand. Coast Geotechnical January 18, 2006 W.O. P-504086 Page 8 Terrace Deposits Underlying the fill deposits, poorly consolidated Pleistocene terrace deposits are present. The sediments are composed of tan to reddish brown,fine and medium-grained sand. The sedimentary rock units are exposed,in part,along the eastern portion of the property. Regionally,the Pleistocene sands are considered flat-lying and are underlain at depth by Eocene-age sedimentary rock units. Torrev Sandstone The terrace deposits are underlain by whitish tan arkosic sandstone. The sandstone is typically massive and well indurated. Expansive Soil Based on our experience in the area and previous laboratory testing of selected samples, the fill deposits and Pleistocene sands reflect an expansion potential in the very low range. Groundwater Since the subject property is located along the top of the ridge,high groundwater conditions are not anticipated. However, it should be noted that near surface seepage problems can develop after completion of construction. These seepage problems most often result from drainage alterations, landscaping and over-irrigation. In the event that seepage or saturated ground does occur,it has been our experience that they are most effectively handled on an individual basis. Coast Geotechnical January 18, 2006 W.O. P-504086 Page 9 Tectonic Setting The site is located within the seismically active southern California region which is generally characterized by northwest trending Quaternary-age fault zones. Several of these fault zones and fault segments are classified as active by the California Division of Mines and Geology (Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act). Based on a review of published geologic maps, no known faults transverse the site. The nearest active fault is the offshore Rose Canyon Fault Zone located approximately 3.9 miles west of the site. It should be noted that the Rose Canyon Fault is not a continuous, well-defined feature but rather a zone of right stepping en echelon faults. The complex series of faults has been referred to as the Offshore Zone of Deformation(Woodward-Clyde, 1979)and is not fully understood. Several studies suggest that the Newport-Inglewood and the Rose Canyon faults are a continuous zone of en echelon faults (Treiman, 1984). Further studies along the complex offshore zone of faulting may indicate a potentially greater seismic risk than current data suggests. Other faults which could affect the site include the Coronado Bank, Elsinore, San Jacinto and San Andreas Faults. Slope Stability No evidence of deep-seated instability was observed on the site or the adjacent cut slope along the western property line. The Pleistocene terrace deposits and Eocene-age Torrey Sandstone are not problematic in regards to deep-seated landsliding. Coast Geotechnical January 18,2006 W.O. P-504086 Page 10 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Removals/Recompaction/Gradiag All existing fill in the eastern yard area should be removed and replaced as properly compacted fill. A 15 foot wide key excavated a minimum of 2.0 foot (along the outside edge) into competent sedimentary rock should be constructed along the base of the proposed fill slope. A subdrain should be constructed along the rear of the key,as indicated in Plate A. All fill should be benched into the underlying competent sedimentary rock. The existing earth deposits are generally suitable for reuse, provided they are cleaned of all roots, vegetation, debris and rocks larger than 6.0 inches, and thoroughly mixed. Fill should be placed in 6.0 to 8.0 inch loose lifts,moistened as required to 1.0- 2.0 percent above optimum moisture, and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. Fill slopes should be constructed at a maximum gradient of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). Additional recommendations will be presented should any unforeseen conditions be encountered during grading. Imported fill, if necessary, should be composed of nonexpansive granular deposits. All loose soil and weathered deposits in the proposed driveway should be removed and compacted in the manner indicated above. Temporary Slopes/Excavation Characteristics Temporary excavations which exceed a vertical height of 3.5 feet should be trimmed to a gradient of 3/4:1 (horizontal to vertical) or less. The terrace deposits and Torrey Sandstone are dense, well cemented and may contain hard concretion layers. Some degree of effort should be anticipated in Coast Geotechnical January 18,2006 W.O. P-504086 Page 11 excavating these deposits. Based on our experience, the underlying sedimentary rock units are rippable with conventional heavy grading equipment in good working order. Slabs on Grade (Exterior) Slabs on grade should be a minimum of 4.0 inches thick and reinforced in both directions with No. 3 bars placed 16 inches on center in both directions. The slab should be underlain by a minimum 4.0-inch clean sand blanket. Utility trenches underlying the slab may be backfilled with on-site materials, compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. Slabs should be reinforced as indicated above and provided with saw cuts/expansion joints, as recommended by the project structural engineer. All slabs should be cast over dense compacted subgrades. Proposed Pool Design plans for the proposed swimming pool were not reviewed as part of this study. However, the base of the swimming pool should be supported entirely on dense sedimentary rock or the pool area should be overexcavated and replaced with compacted fill such that the entire pool bottom is supported by compacted fill. Swimming pools cannot tolerate differential settlement resulting from a portion of the pool supported on rock and a portion of the pool supported on fill. Cracking will result. Coast Geotechnical January 18, 2006 W.O. P-504086 Page 12 Utilitv Trench We recommend that all utilities be bedded in clean sand to at least one foot above the top of the conduit. The bedding should be well moistened and tamped in place to fill all the voids around the conduit. Imported or on-site granular material compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction may be utilized for backfill above the bedding. The invert of subsurface utility excavations paralleling footings should be located above the zone of influence of these adjacent footings. This zone of influence is defined as the area below a 45 degree plane projected down from the nearest bottom edge of an adjacent footing. This can be accomplished by either deepening the footing, raising the invert elevation of the utility, or moving the utility or the footing away from one another. Preliminary Pavement Desien The following pavement section is recommended for proposed parking/driveways: 4.0 inches of asphaltic paving or 5.0 inches of concrete on 6.0 inches of select base (Class 2) on 12 inches of compacted subgrade soils Subgrade soils should be compacted to the thickness indicated in the structural section and left in a condition to receive base materials. Class 2 base materials should have a minimum R-value of 78 and a minimum sand equivalent of 30. Subgrade soils and base materials should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of their laboratory maximum dry density. Coast Geotechnical January 18,2006 W.O. P-504086 Page 13 The pavement section should be protected from water sources. Migration of water into subgrade deposits and base materials could result in pavement failure. Geotechnical Observations All fill should be placed while a representative of the geotechnical engineer is present to observe and test. Plan Review A copy of the final plans should be submitted to this office for review prior to the initiation of construction. Additional recommendations may be necessary at that time. LIMITATIONS This report is presented with the provision that it is the responsibility of the owner or the owner's representative to bring the information and recommendations given herein to the attention of the project's architects and/or engineers so that they may be incorporated into plans. If conditions encountered during construction appear to differ from those described in this report, our office should be notified so that we may consider whether modifications are needed. No responsibility for construction compliance with design concepts,specifications or recommendations given in this report is assumed unless on-site review is performed during the course of construction. Coast Geotechnical January 18, 2006 W.O. P-504086 Page 14 The subsurface conditions, excavation characteristics and geologic structure described herein are based on individual exploratory excavations made on the subject property. The subsurface conditions, excavation characteristics and geologic structure discussed should in no way be construed to reflect any variations which may occur among the exploratory excavations. Please note that fluctuations in the level of groundwater may occur due to variations in rainfall, temperature and other factors not evident at the time measurements were made and reported herein. Coast Geotechnical assumes no responsibility for variations which may occur across the site. The conclusions and recommendations of this report apply as of the current date. In time,however, changes can occur on a property whether caused by acts of man or nature on this or adjoining properties. Additionally, changes in professional standards may be brought about by legislation or the expansion of knowledge. Consequently, the conclusions and recommendations of this report may be rendered wholly or partially invalid by events beyond our control. This report is therefore subject to review and should not be relied upon after the passage of two years. The professional judgments presented herein are founded partly on our assessment of the technical data gathered, partly on our understanding of the proposed construction and partly on our general experience in the geotechnical field. However, in no respect do we guarantee the outcome of the project. Coast Geotechnical January 18,2006 W.O. P-504086 Page 15 This study has been provided solely for the benefit of the client and is in no way intended to benefit or extend any right or interest to any third party. This study is not to be used on other projects or extensions to this project except by agreement in writing with Coast Geotechnical. Coast Geotechnical Januan• 18,2006 W.O. P-504086 Page 16 REFERENCES 1. Hays,Walter W., 1980,Procedures for Estimating Earthquake Ground Motions,Geological Survey Professional Paper 1114, 77 pages. 2. Petersen, Mark D. and others (DMG), Frankel, Arthur D. and others (USGS), 1996, Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State of California, California Division of Mines and Geology OFR 96-08, United States Geological Survey OFR 96-706. 3. Tan, S.S.,and Giffen,D.G., 1995,Landslide Hazards in the Northern Part of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, Plate 35D, Open-File Report 95-04, Map Scale 1:24,000. 4. Treiman, J.A., 1984, The Rose Canyon Fault Zone, A Review and Analysis, California Division of Mines and Geology. MAPS/AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS 1. California Division of Mines and Geology, 1994, Fault Activity Map of California, Scale 1"=750,000'. 2. Geologic Map of the Encinitas and Rancho Santa Fe 7.5' Quadrangles, 1996, DMG Open File Report 96-02. 3. Pasco Engineering, 2006, Grading Plan, 651 Quail Gardens Drive, Encinitas, California, Scale 1"=20'. 4. U.S.G.S., 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Topographic Map, Digitized, Variable Scale. APPENDIX A LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TABLE I Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content (Laboratory Standard ASTM D-1557-91) Sample Max. Dry Optimum Location Density Moisture Content 00 c f) Eastern Yard Area 126 . 8 10 . 5 P-50408E FILL SLOPE --------------- PROJECT I TO I LINE ---------------- - FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO COMPETENT MATERIAL L L;'a-§ -------------- EXISTING GROUND SURFACE ---- ---- --- --- ---- --- REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL BENCH CL u 2 MIN.-16' MIN I KEY I LOWEST II DEPTH BENCH (KEY). et MIN. OVERLAP CLEAN GRAV 6* MIN. (If tj,/ft. MIN COVER 4' NON-PERFORATED PERFORATED 4' NONPERFOftATE.D PIPE PIPE PIPE LATERAL TO SLOPE FACE AT 100- IINTERVALS FILTER FABRIC 4' MIN ' ENVELOPE (MIRAFI BEDDING 140N OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT)* SUBDRAIN TRENCH DETAIL KEY, BENCHING AND SUBDRAIN DETAIL PLATE A / C 1 z 1 I c l 1 I / I m I I � II! a T 1 m (L / Y 67 y y r O O / 4 O I _ O CL g (L 0 1 1 1 x l LIn I Q LLJ ui C4 LQ I U Q C1.1 I � I is c r � 1 O � U xa 0 4U Vim) [ ci � I o 1 v ^I I i? II c° 7o o q U r c. yp y � I p I H I O I z N zo is low � � � � � L � •� 1 k E3 g o b jS6.93' \ I ���pp- . N '3231 �7 N I 1 \ < tp 25 14Q¢o 2e 28' p9a I I , C.0 I cd XOG a I (� W cli 3 i / 0 CL I OOE u ° I 5152 h r4 A C' IR f i 1 11 A L y w 1 UQ cq bpi /I fl � '` �� 10 • � O F-� CAL] E-' 1 I I o 8 ,. o R �I I I � � � ��^ I . . .. ' ., � -.•'! . �.mot'�' -, ' U) M1 LD y ry c ( 15 S/a0 E Cd V _ CQ Ul 01 m b APPENDIX B GRADING GUIDELINES Grading should be performed to at least the minimum requirements of the governing agencies, Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code, the geotechnical report and the guidelines presented below. All of the guidelines may not apply to a specific site and additional recommendations may be necessary during the grading phase. Site Clearing Trees, dense vegetation, and other deleterious materials should be removed from the site. Non- organic debris or concrete may be placed in deeper fill areas under direction of the Soils engineer. Subdrainaee 1. During grading, the Geologist and Soils Engineer should evaluate the necessity of placing additional drains. 2. All subdrainage systems should be observed by the Geologist and Soils Engineer during construction and prior to covering with compacted fill. 3. Consideration should be given to having subdrains located by the project surveyors. Outlets should be located and protected. Treatment of Existing Ground 1. All heavy vegetation,rubbish and other deleterious materials should be disposed of off site. 2. All surficial deposits including alluvium and colluvium should be removed unless otherwise indicated in the text of this report. Groundwater existing in the alluvial areas may make excavation difficult. Deeper removals than indicated in the text of the report may be necessary due to saturation during winter months. 3. Subsequent to removals, the natural ground should be processed to a depth of six inches, moistened to near optimum moisture conditions and compacted to fill standards. Fill Placement 1. Most site soil and bedrock may be reused for compacted fill; however, some special processing or handling may be required (see report). Highly organic or contaminated soil should not be used for compacted fill. 2. Material used in the compacting process should be evenly spread, moisture conditioned, processed, and compacted in thin lifts not to exceed six inches in thickness to obtain a uniformly dense layer. The fill should be placed and compacted on a horizontal plane,unless otherwise found acceptable by the Soils Engineer. (1) 3. If the moisture content or relative density varies from that acceptable to the Soils engineer, the Contractor should rework the fill until it is in accordance with the following: a) Moisture content of the fill should be at or above optimum moisture. Moisture should be evenly distributed without wet and dry pockets. Pre-watering of cut or removal areas should be considered in addition to watering during fill placement, particularly in clay or dry surficial soils. b) Each six inch layer should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum density in compliance with the testing method specified by the controlling governmental agency. In this case, the testing method is ASTM Test Designation D-1557-91. 4. Side-hill fills should have a minimum equipment-width key at their toe excavated through all surficial soil and into competent material (see report)and tilted back into the hill. As the fill is elevated, it should be benched through surficial deposits and into competent bedrock or other material deemed suitable by the Soils Engineer. 5. Rock fragments less than six inches in diameter may be utilized in the fill,provided: a) They are not placed in concentrated pockets; b) There is a sufficient percentage of fine-grained material to surround the rocks; C) The distribution of the rocks is supervised by the Soils Engineer. 6. Rocks greater than six inches in diameter should be taken off site, or placed in accordance with the recommendations of the Soils Engineer in areas designated as suitable for rock disposal. 7. In clay soil large chunks or blocks are common; if in excess of six (6) inches minimum dimension then they are considered as oversized. Sheepsfoot compactors or other suitable methods should be used to break the up blocks. 8. The Contractor should be required to obtain a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent out to the finished slope face of fill slopes. This may be achieved by either overbuilding the slope and cutting back to the compacted core, or by direct compaction of the slope face with suitable equipment. If fill slopes are built"at grade"using direct compaction methods then the slope construction should be performed so that a constant gradient is maintained throughout construction. Soil should not be "spilled" over the slope face nor should slopes be "pushed out" to obtain grades. Compaction equipment should compact each lift along the immediate top of slope. Slopes should be back rolled approximately every 4 feet vertically as the slope is built. Density tests should be taken periodically during grading on the flat surface of the fill three to five feet horizontally from the face of the slope. (2) In addition, if a method other than over building and cutting back to the compacted core is to be employed,slope compaction testing during construction should include testing the outer six inches to three feet in the slope face to determine if the required compaction is being achieved. Finish grade testing of the slope should be performed after construction is complete. Each day the Contractor should receive a copy of the Soils Engineer's"Daily Field Engineering Report" which would indicate the results of field density tests that day. 9. Fill over cut slopes should be constructed in the following manner: a) All surficial soils and weathered rock materials should be removed at the cut-fill interface. b) A key at least 1 equipment width wide (see report) and tipped at least 1 foot into slope should be excavated into competent materials and observed by the Soils Engineer or his representative. C) The cut portion of the slope should be constructed prior to fill placement to evaluate if stabilization is necessary, the contractor should be responsible for any additional earthwork created by placing fill prior to cut excavation. 10. Transition lots (cut and fill) and lots above stabilization fills should be capped with a four foot thick compacted fill blanket (or as indicated in the report). 11. Cut pads should be observed by the Geologist to evaluate the need for overexcavation and replacement with fill. This may be necessary to reduce water infiltration into highly fractured bedrock or other permeable zones, and/or due to differing expansive potential of materials beneath a structure. The overexcavation should be at least three feet. Deeper overexcavation may be recommended in some cases. 12. Exploratory backhoe or dozer trenches still remaining after site removal should be excavated and filled with compacted fill if they can be located. Grading Observation and Testing 1. Observation of the fill placement should be provided by the Soils Engineer during the progress of grading. 2. In general, density tests would be made at intervals not exceeding two feet of fill height or every 1,000 cubic yards of fill placed. This criteria will vary depending on soil conditions and the size of the fill. In any event, an adequate number of field density tests should be made to evaluate if the required compaction and moisture content is generally being obtained. 3. Density tests may be made on the surface material to receive fill, as required by the Soils Engineer. (3) 4. Cleanouts, processed ground to receive fill, key excavations, subdrains and rock disposal should be observed by the Soils Engineer prior to placing any fill. It will be the Contractor's responsibility to notify the Soils Engineer when such areas are ready for observation. 5. A Geologist should observe subdrain construction. 6. A Geologist should observe benching prior to and during placement of fill. Utility Trench Backfill Utility trench backfill should be placed to the following standards: 1. Ninety percent of the laboratory standard if native material is used as backfill. 2. As an alternative, clean sand may be utilized and flooded into place. No specific relative compaction would be required; however, observation, probing, and if deemed necessary, testing may be required. 3. Exterior trenches,paralleling a footing and extending below a 1:1 plane projected from the outside bottom edge of the footing, should be compacted to 90 percent of the laboratory standard. Sand backfill,unless it is similar to the inplace fill,should not be allowed in these trench backfill areas. Density testing along with probing should be accomplished to verify the desired results. (4) COAST GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS September 29, 2006 John and Jennifer Cole 651 Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas, CA 92024 Subject: GEOLOGIC RECONNAISSANCE Proposed Garage and Remodel Of Existing Residence 651 Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas, California Dear Mr. and Mrs. Cole: In response to your request, we have performed a geologic reconnaissance study on the subject property. No significant geologic hazards,except as disclosed,were encountered on the property which would preclude development as proposed. From a geologic viewpoint,the site is suitable for the proposed development. If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact us at(858)755-8622. This opportunity to be of service is appreciated. Respectfully submitte COAST GEOTEC 2109 VWJ EXP.5-331-08 CERTIFIED Mark Burwell, C.E. EWINEERING Engineering Geologi GEOtAGIST 779 ACADEMY DRIVE SOLANA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92075 (858) 755-8622 • FAX (858) 755-9126 Topo USA®5.0 VICINITY MAP z 0 U) __LEUCADIA BLVD E5 pUA��_GAF?DENS OR SF�" O UJ � PPS O W ( w -_ -J U w ° SUBJECT PROPERTY ° POINSETTIA PARK C9. 4— O'er', _ EZEE ST m � o G - — - -- - z z w�O _.__.. X W CALLE DE MARIA a W, _ 00 _FOXGLOVE ST -_ > SILVER BERRY PL m CALLLE DE MARIA _ SWEET PEA PL Ga de ark Botanical co - SAXONY PL QUAIL GARDENS CT ¢• w G ?s z z SAXONY_LN p �^ U D C7 _ti nt ANGANO CIR > n r j w < D U m m > o Cn z D -C L m ` X r r a W O z _ z � -_ � OZC ° O -- n 0 _ CR S9 Data use subject to license. T" Scale-1 :9,600 o eao 000 ®2004 DeLorme.Topo USA®5.0. AMN(o.r¢) www.delorme.com -_-__-- --_ 1"=800.0 ft Data Zoom 14-0 Coast Geotechnical September 29,2006 W.O. R-504086 Page 3 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geologic reconnaissance on the subject property. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the geologic conditions on the site and their influence on the proposed development. SITE CONDITIONS The subject property is located approximately 1/8 mile east of Quail Gardens Drive,along a private road which serves several residences, in the city of Encinitas. The subject property includes a two story residence and attached garage situated on the top of a north-trending ridge. From the relatively level to gently sloping building pad,the property descends to the east at a grade of about 2.5 percent for approximately 15 vertical feet,to an adjacent developed residential lot. Maximum relief on the site is approximately 19 vertical feet. The property is bounded along the west by a 2:1 (horizontal to vertical)cut slope which descends 8.0 to 10 vertical feet to a swimming pool that is part of an adjacent developed residential lot. The site is generally void of significant vegetation with the exception of several palm trees and sparse grass. Drainage, in general, appears to be directed to the east by sheet flow. Coast Geotechnical September 29,2006 W.O. R-504086 Page 4 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION Plans for construction were prepared by DZN Partners. The project includes the construction of a four (4) car detached garage in the northwestern portion of the site and remodel of the existing residence. Some new footings are proposed for the remodel. Only very minor grading is anticipated for the garage. PREVIOUS GEOTECHNICAL STUDIES A geotechnical investigation of the site was prepared by John Vernon, Property Development Engineers, dated May 24, 1989. An updated Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation was prepared by Accutech Engineering Systems, dated June 23, 1993, for development of the site. GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS The subject property is located in the Coastal Plains Physiographic Province of San Diego. The property is underlain at relatively shallow depths by Pleistocene terrace deposits. The terrace deposits are underlain at depth by Eocene-age sedimentary rocks which have commonly been designated as the Torrey Sandstone on published geologic maps. The terrace deposits are covered by minor surficial deposits. A brief description of the earth materials observed on the site follows. Artificial Fill/Soil (Undifferentiated) No evidence of significant fill deposits was observed on the site. Minor disturbed soils from site development and natural soil are present but do not appear to exceed 1.5 feet in depth. Coast Geotechnical September 29,2006 W.O. R-504086 Page 5 Terrace Deposits Underlying the surficial materials,poorly consolidated Pleistocene terrace deposits are present. The sediments are composed of tan to reddish brown, fine and medium-grained sand. Regionally, the Pleistocene sands are considered flat-lying and are underlain at depth by Eocene-age sedimentary rock units. Torrey Sandstone The terrace deposits are underlain by whitish tan arkosic sandstone. The sandstone is typically massive and well indurated. Expansive Soil Based on our experience in the area and previous laboratory testing of selected samples, the soil deposits and Pleistocene sands reflect an expansion potential in the very low range. Groundwater Since the subject property is located along the top of the ridge,high groundwater conditions are not anticipated. However, it should be noted that near surface seepage problems can develop after completion of construction. These seepage problems most often result from drainage alterations, landscaping and over-irrigation. In the event that seepage or saturated ground does occur,it has been our experience that they are most effectively handled on an individual basis. Coast Geotechnical September 29,2006 W.O. R-504086 Page 6 Tectonic Setting The site is located within the seismically active southern California region which is generally characterized by northwest trending Quaternary-age fault zones. Several of these fault zones and fault segments are classified as active by the California Division of Mines and Geology (Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act). Based on a review of published geologic maps, no known faults transverse the site. The nearest active fault is the offshore Rose Canyon Fault Zone located approximately 3.9 miles west of the site. It should be noted that the Rose Canyon Fault is not a continuous,well-defined feature but rather a zone of right stepping en echelon faults. The complex series of faults has been referred to as the Offshore Zone of Deformation(Woodward-Clyde, 1979)and is not fully understood. Several studies suggest that the Newport-Inglewood and the Rose Canyon faults are a continuous zone of en echelon faults (Treiman, 1984). Further studies along the complex offshore zone of faulting may indicate a potentially greater seismic risk than current data suggests. Other faults which could affect the site include the Coronado Bank, Elsinore, San Jacinto and San Andreas Faults. Slone Stability No evidence of deep-seated instability was observed on the site or the adjacent cut slope along the western property line. The Pleistocene terrace deposits and Eocene-age Torrey Sandstone are not problematic in regards to deep-seated landsliding. Coast Geotechnical September 29, 2006 W.O. R-504086 Page 7 Liquefaction Potential Liquefaction is a process by which a sand mass loses its shearing strength completely and flows. The temporary transformation of the material into a fluid mass is often associated with ground motion resulting from an earthquake. Owing to the moderately dense nature of the terrace deposits and the anticipated depth to groundwater,the potential for seismically induced liquefaction and soil instability is considered low. CONCLUSIONS 1) The subject property is located in an area that is relatively free of potential geologic hazards such as deep-seated landsliding, liquefaction,high groundwater conditions and seismically induced subsidence. 2) Based on topography and limited exposures,the site appears to have been developed along the top and eastern flank of a north-trending ridge The northwestern portion of the ridge (proposed garage area)appears to be underlain by near surface Pleistocene terrace deposits. Minor fill deposits may be present along the eastern side of the existing residence. 3) Although the likelihood of ground rupture on the site is remote,the property will be exposed to moderate to high levels of ground motion resulting from the release of energy, should an earthquake occur along the numerous known and unknown faults in the region. The Rose Coast Geotechnical September 29,2006 W.O. R-504086 Page 8 Canyon Fault Zone is the nearest known active fault. A maximum probable event along the offshore segment of the Rose Canyon Fault is expected to produce a peak bedrock horizontal acceleration of 0.39g and a repeatable ground acceleration of 0.25g. 4) All proposed footings should penetrate surficial deposits and should be founded the design depth into competent terrace deposits. All slabs should be cast over dense, compacted subgrades. Enclosure: Site Plan Coast Geotechnical September 29,2006 W.O. R-504086 Page 9 LIMITATIONS This report is presented with the provision that it is the responsibility of the owner or the owner's representative to bring the information and recommendations given herein to the attention of the project's architects and/or engineers so that they may be incorporated into plans. If conditions encountered during construction appear to differ from those described in this report, our office should be notified so that we may consider whether modifications are needed. No responsibility for construction compliance with design concepts,specifications or recommendations given in this report is assumed unless on-site review is performed during the course of construction. The subsurface conditions, excavation characteristics and geologic structure described herein are based on individual exploratory excavations made on the subject property. The subsurface conditions, excavation characteristics and geologic structure discussed should in no way be construed to reflect any variations which may occur among the exploratory excavations. Please note that fluctuations in the level of groundwater may occur due to variations in rainfall, temperature and other factors not evident at the time measurements were made and reported herein. Coast Geotechnical assumes no responsibility for variations which may occur across the site. The conclusions and recommendations of this report apply as of the current date. In time,however, changes can occur on a property whether caused by acts of man or nature on this or adjoining properties. Additionally, changes in professional standards may be brought about by legislation or Coast Geotechnical September 29, 2006 W.O. R-504086 Page 10 the expansion of knowledge. Consequently, the conclusions and recommendations of this report may be rendered wholly or partially invalid by events beyond our control. This report is therefore subject to review and should not be relied upon after the passage of two years. The professional judgments presented herein are founded partly on our assessment of the technical data gathered, partly on our understanding of the proposed construction and partly on our general experience in the geotechnical field. However, in no respect do we guarantee the outcome of the project. This study has been provided solely for the benefit of the client and is in no way intended to benefit or extend any right or interest to any third party. This study is not to be used on other projects or extensions to this project except by agreement in writing with Coast Geotechnical. Coast Geotechnical September 29, 2006 W.O. R-504086 Page 11 REFERENCES 1. Hays,Walter W., 1980,Procedures for Estimating Earthquake Ground Motions,Geological Survey Professional Paper 1114, 77 pages. 2. Petersen, Mark D. and others (DMG), Frankel, Arthur D. and others (USGS), 1996, Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State of California, California Division of Mines and Geology OFR 96-08, United States Geological Survey OFR 96-706. 3. Tan, S.S., and Giffen, D.G., 1995,Landslide Hazards in the Northern Part of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, Plate 35D, Open-File Report 95-04, Map Scale 1:24,000. 4. Treiman, J.A., 1984, The Rose Canyon Fault Zone, A Review and Analysis, California Division of Mines and Geology. MAPS/AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS 1. California Division of Mines and Geology, 1994, Fault Activity Map of California, Scale 1"=750,000'. 2. DZN Partners,2006,Site Plan,651 Quail Gardens Drive,Encinitas,California,Scale 1"=20'. 3. Geologic Map of the Encinitas and Rancho Santa Fe 7.5' Quadrangles, 1996, DMG Open File Report 96-02. 4. U.S.G.S., 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Topographic Map, Digitized, Variable Scale. ENCLOSURE / � I I_. 062.. - � � "'� ►-� a O CA . ' I I M�■�I Wco d d --OOF / t y lesuii�' z --- ------ I 0 N- _ i I � I Ed Lo Z'S 2304 1 ------------I o ' C ., 5 - LL C ,I 4" / --q v `8664 a ' ' sa N Z COAST GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS February 22, 2007 {e" l i John and Jennifer Cole ---` + I 1042 North El Camino Real, Suite B-428 Encinitas, CA 92024 Subject: CLARIFICATION OF GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS AND RESPONSE TO THE CITY OF ENCINITAS Proposed Eastern Yard Area, Garage and Driveway Grading 651 Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas, California References. 1) GEOLOGIC RECONNAISSANCE Proposed Garage and Remodel Of Existing Residence 651 Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas, California Prepared by Coast Geotechnical Dated September 29, 2006 2) PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Proposed Eastern Yard Area Grading 651 Quail Gardens Lane Encinitas, California Prepared by Coast Geotechnical Dated January 18, 2007 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Cole: This report has been prepared to clarify the recommendations of the above referenced reports. 779 ACADEMY DRIVE • SOLANA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92075 (858) 755-8622 • FAX (858) 755-9126 Coast Geotechnical February 22,2007 W.O. P-504086 Page 2 SITE HISTORY The original project was for the remodel of the existing residence and the construction of a detached garage (Reference No.I). The proposed garage is along the top of a ridge and only very minor grading is anticipated for the garage pad. However, subsequent to the completion of our study (Reference No. 1) illegal grading was conducted in the eastern yard area. An on-site meetin g with the city of Encinitas resulted in several approaches for rectifying the situation. The owners decided to proceed with a complete grading plan for their planned exterior improvements (Pasco Engineering). RECOMMENDATIONS Garage and Drivewav Areas The garage and proposed driveway areas are located along the top of a ridge and are underlain by near surface Pleistocene terrace deposits. Only minor grading with less than 1.0 foot of cut and fill is anticipated in these areas for development. As indicated in Reference Report No. 1, ro ose P p d footings should be founded the designed depth into sedimentary rock and slabs should be cast over a dense compacted subgrade. The slab on grade recommendations and preliminary pavement design provided in Reference Report No. 2 are appropriate and should be implemented in the desi n and g construction phases. Coast Geotechnical February 22,2007 W.O. P-504086 Eastern Yard Area Page 3 Proposed fills should be keyed and benched into the underlying sedimentary rock,as recommended in Reference No. 2. As with all grading projects, additional recommendations may be necessary based on actual conditions revealed during grading. If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact us at(858) 755-8622. This opportunity pp ty to be of service is appreciated. Respectfully submitted COAST GEOTECIIICAL ,41 �',, PsjFESS/pN 2 Ui Mark Burwell, C.E. � '`'� Vd�4 q� = 782 w IENGI a " Vithaya Singhanet, P.E. Exp.12-31'07 Engineering Geologi f d , GEO,C)G3ST Geotechnical Engineer