Loading...
2003-7864 G a ® R City of NGINEERING SER VICES DEPARTMENT --- Encinitas Capital Improvement Projects District Support Services Field Oper Sand Rep]enishment/StormW ter Coomplian es Subdivision Engineering Tune 23, 2004 Traffic Engineering Attn: Union Bank of California 247 North El Camino Real Encinitas, CA 92024 RE: John Dewald 520 Liverpool Drive APN 260-393-12 Grading Permit 7864-GI Final release of security Permit 7864-GI authorized earthwork, private drainage improveme control, all as necessary to build described project. Final, acceptance a inspections have all been completed to r the satisfaction nts, and erosion Therefore, release of the remainder of the security deposit and warranty of the Field Operations Division. p t is merited. The following Certificate of Deposit Account has been cancell Services Manager and is hereby released for a Account#2889020976 in the amount of$ 2,956. ed by the Financial P yment to the depositor. enclosed. 80. The document original is The document originals are enclosed. Should you have an contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633-2779 or in writing attention the y questions or concerns, please Department. Engineering Sincerely, (;7 Masih Maher Senior Civil Engineer J e ach Subdivision Engineering F ance Manager Financial Service CC: Jay Lembach, Finance Manager Sheridan Homes LLC Debra Geishart File TEL 760-633-2600 / PAX 760-633-2677 5N S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas. C:aliFornia 92024- .3633 TDD 760-633-2700 recycled Paper ^ ENGINEERING C ty o f SERVICES DEPARTMENT - hncinitds Capital Improvement Projects District Support Services Field Sand Rep lenishment/Stormw ter Coomplian es Subdivision Engineering October 29, 2004 Traffic Engineering Attn: Union Bank of California 247 North El Camino Real Encinitas, CA 92024 RE: John Dewald 520 Liverpool Drive APN 260-393-12 Grading Permit 7864-GI Final release of security Permit 7864-GI authorized earthwork, private drainage improvements a control, all as necessary to build described project. Final, acceptance, and warranty Inspections have all been completed to the satisfaction o and erosion Therefore, release of the remainder of the security deposit t semeritted.Operations Division. d. The following Certificate of Deposit Account has been cancelled by Services Manager and is hereby released for payment Account#2889020968 in the amount of$8,g 0.40. to the depositors Financial enclosed. he document original is The document originals are enclosed. Should you have any questions o contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633-2779 or in writing, attention the Engineering r concerns,please Department. g rmg Sincerely, - %f Masih Maher i' Senior Civil Engineer Jayeembach Subdivision Engineering Finance Manager Financial Service CC: Jay Lembach, Finance Manager John Dewald Debra Geishart File 41- recycled paper Recording Requested By: THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DMK01 UAS RECORDED ON JUL Oi, 2003 City Engineer ) DOCKNT R 2003_ GTGORY J. SMITH, t y RE R City Clerk When Recorded Mail to: ) SM DIEGO f y RECORDERS OFFICE ) . City of Encinitas ) TIME: 4'23 PW 505 South Vulcan Avenue ) Encinitas CA 92024 ) SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER'S USE ONLY PRIVATE STORM WATER TREATMENT MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Assessor's Parcel No. 260-393-12 ProjectNo.:02-226 BA/CDP W.O.No.: —__7864-G THIS AGREEMENT for the periodic maintenance and repair of that certain facilities, the legal description and/or plat of which is set forth in Exhibit "B" part hereof, is entered into b private storm water treatment Y John Dewald (hereinafter referred to as "Devteloper") for tthe nb net of future owners who will use the private storm water treatment facilities owners"), which shall include the Developer to the extent the Developer retains a any land covered by this agreement. (hereinafter referred to as 1,ny ownership interest in WHEREAS, this Agreement is required as a condition of Grading Permit 7864-G; and approval by the City of Encinitas of use and WHEREAS. Developer is the owner of certain real property described in Exhibit enjoy the benefit of said storm water treatment facilities(s)the "property"); and ( ) (Said real Property is herreinafterareerred to as WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Developer that said private storm wa ter treatment system be maintained in a safe and usable condition by the owners, and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Developer to establish a method for t he of said private storm water treatment facilities and for the a pportionment of the expense of such ,maintenance and repair among existing and future owners; and the periodic maintenance and WHEREAS, there exists a benefit to the public the private storm wate r facilities be adequately maintained on a regular and periodic basis; and WHEREAS, it is the intention of the Developer that this Agreement constitute With the land, binding upon each successive owner of all or any portion of the property,a covenant running NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 1• The property is benefited by this Agreement, and present and successive any portion of the property are expressly bound hereby for the benefit of the land. owners of all or 2. The cost and expense of maintaining the private storm water tre atment facilities shall be paid by the owner of the heirs, assigns and successors in interest of each suc h owner. 3• In the event any of the herein described parcels of land are subdivided further, the owners, heirs, assigns and successors in interest of each such newly created parcel shall be liable under this Agreement for their then pro rata share of expenses and such pro rata shares of expenses shall be computed to reflect such newly created parcels. 4. The repairs and maintenance to be performed under this Agreement shall the following: reasonable and improvements and maintenance work to adequate) maintain storm water treatment facilities to permit access to said facilities. Repairs and maintenance limited to Agreement shall include, but are not limited to, repairing access roadbeds, repairing and said private drainage structures, removing debris, if any and other work reasonably necessary nd proper to repair Hance under this and preserve the private storm water treatment facilities for their intended purposes.ry g and maintaining 5. If there is a covenant, agreement, or other obligation imposed as a condition development, the obligation to repair and maintain the private storm water treatment facilities forth shall commence when improvements have been completed and a as herein set dition of the approved by the City. 6. Any extraordinary repair required to correct damage to said storm water facilities that results from action taken or contracted for by the owners or their successors be paid for by the party taking action or party contracting for work which caused t treatment extraordinary repair. The repair shall be such as to restore the storm water treatment in interest shall condition existing e necessity for the g prior to said damage, t facilities to the 7. Any liability of the owners for personal injury employed to make repairs or provide maintenance under this Agreement, or to third persons, any liability of the owners for damage to the property J ry to an agent hereunder, or to any worker as a result of or arising out of repairs and maintenance under this Agreement, shall be borne,as well e of agent, or any such worker, or of any third persons, owners as they bear the costs and expenses of such repairs and maintenance. responsible for and maintain their own insurance, if any. orne, by the intend to provide for the sharing of liability with respect to personal injury Owners shall be that attributable to the repairs and maintenance undertaken under this Agreement. 8. Owners shall jointly and severally defend and indemnify and hold harmless engineer and its consultants and each of its officials, directors, officers, agents and employees against all liability, claims, damages, losses, expenses, personal injury and other costs including City's of defense and attorney's fees, to the agent hereunder or to any owner, any contractor, any subcontractor, from and any user of the storm water treatment facilities, or to any other third persons arising ut o lading costs y related nt the use of, repair or maintenance of, or the failure to repair or maintain the any subcontractor, treatment facilities. g for in any way private storm water Nothing in the Agreement, the specifications or other contract documents or City's a Plans and specifications or inspection of the work is intended to include a acknowledgement of a responsibility for any such matter, and City, approval of the each of its officials, directors, officers, employees and agents, shall have no responsibility review, inspection therefore. tY City s engineer and its consultants, and p nsibility or liability 11. The foregoing covenants shall run with the land and shall be deemed to be f of the land of the owners and each and every person who shall at anytime own all Property referred to herein. or the benefit or any portion of the 12. It is understood and agreed that the covenants herein contained shall be binding on the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assignees of each of the owners. 13. It is the purpose of the signatories hereto that this instrument be recorded to intent that the obligation hereby created shall be and constitute a covenant running w' subsequent purchaser of all or an the end and regardless of form, shall be deemed to have consented to and become bound ith the land and any y portion thereof, by acceptance of delivery of a deed and/or conveyance including without limitation, the right of any person entitled to enforce the terms of nd by these presents, this Agreement to 2 institute legal action as provided in Paragraph 8 hereof, such remedy to be cumulati ve and in addition to other remedies provided in this Agreement and to all other remedies at law or in equity. 14. The terms of this Agreement may be amended in writing upon ma on owners and consent of the City. 1 ty approval of the 15. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. In th any of the provisions of this Agreement are held to be unenforceable or invalid by an court jurisdiction, the validity, and enforceability of the remaining event that g provisions shall not be affected thereby. mpetent 16. If the Property constitutes a "Common Interest Development"as defined in California Code Section 1351(c) which will include membership in or ownership of an "Associ California Civil Code Section 1351 a fn Civil following provisions shall apply ( )� dthin in this Agreement to the contra"Association" st defined in pp y at and during g "Declaration" (as defined in California Civil Code Section 1351(h), ry notwithstanding the g such time as (i) the Property is encumbered by a Property (including the private storm water treatment facilities) is managed and con Association: and (ii) the Common Area y the (a) The Association, through its Board of Directors, shall repair and maintain rolled ri an storm water treatment facilities and shall be deemed the"agent"as referred to in Paragraph Association, which shall not be replaced except by amendment to the Declaration, the private compensation for performing such duties. The costs of such maintenance and repair h 7 above. The against each owner and his subdivision interest in the Property n shall receive no assessments shall be deposited in the Association's corporate account. all be assessed p rty pursuant to the Declaration. The (b) The provisions in the Declaration which provide for assessment liens in favor of the Association and enforcement thereof shall supersede Paragraph 8 of the A reeme individual owners shall have the right to alter, maintain or repair any of the Common California Civil Code Section 1351(b) in the Pro e g nt in its entirety. No p rty except as may be allowed by the Declarat onefined in (c) This Agreement shall not be interpreted in any manner, which Association's rights and duties pursuant to its Bylaws and Declaration duces or limits the IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement This_ a„� day of 2 3. Develop John Dewal 6 (Print name:) Signature of DEVELOPER must be notarized. Attach the appropriate acknowledgement. g ment. 3 Exhibit A: Legal Description of Property APN 260-393-12 LEGAL DE-56R1PT/pN SEX/STJ Lots 21, 22, 23, and vp A in the 24 in Block 44 of Cardiff Die o City of Encinitas, Count go,, State of California y of San thereof No. 1334 filed in' according to Map County Recorder the Office of the 1922 order of Son Diego County, May 1 Assessor's Parcel 2' arcel No: 260-393_12 Exhibit B: Legal Description or Plat Private Storm Water Treatment Facilities APN 260-393-12 N so se ze-w 34100, �'-- — 3 CRASS LMED WALE ( rte aravNN��rn_un^wr AjM•S 3V 6f NC U glrl nl0v,A fKlfyll/1fQy nfe Ory: n 2 I I I M �J O O I ci- I �. 7 ••...� .•`� .,� APN i •-.t >+;.� 1;� .; 250-393-12 I ,r�• PMVAIE lfORNM:1 fOf 7RG JNANA�CNr-,A CnCDI r •..': ..i.,: w /M 9/AP NOr AF \ .f•. I A�QIMI fRfW*wary •.7�.. .. •' 6 CRASS LINE SWALE RIP-RAP ,!! 17.5' .,• N'�' Y/0801 �LL. •'. i -- 07 � IO 6YJ NO MACKINNON AVE. T/ris certificate is attached to a_ Wage document/leaded or regarding P� 4rE TM E7V f- t �� g STDem 'j PA+2cC 1, 2t­0-393- " lend dated Whe�1 s,n Acknowled meat Certi tcate State of Indiana County of Allen SS: On this-2-2 of M Aq personall y a ppeared the basis of �k�t 4 �� t before me, whose identity I have proved on i tumor s Lk r_ej-,jSL be the signer of the attached instrument, a to he he/they acknowledged that0e he/they signed the ii rument. Patricia L. Quintano, Notary Public Allen County resident My commission expires March 8, 2008 — COAST GEOTECHNICAL, CONSUI;I'ING ENCINEI:RSANI) GEOLOGIS'T'S µ- September 12, 2003 John DeWald 1855 Freda Lane Cardiff CA 92007 Subject: ROUGH GRADING _ G p D REPORT Two (2)Prod eSna Structures 520 Liverpool Drive Cardiff California _ Reference: PRELIMINARY GEOTEC Two (2)Proposed ResidentiaStructures VESTIGATION 520 Liverpool Drive Cardiff, California Prepared by Coast Geotechnical Dated April 1, 2003 Dear Mr. DeWald: — In response to your request, we have performed field observations grading phase on the above referenced ro ert . and testing during the rough testing are presented in this report. p property. The results of our density tests and laboratory Based on the results of our testing, it is our opinion that the fill was la compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry in an adequate manner and If you have any questions, Y density. ns please do not hesitate to contact us at(858) 755.8622 This o pportunity to be of service is greatly a � d _ _ pp Respectfully submitted;` COAST GEOTEC ��� � �t-04 •-� � �r,� q 2 Mark Burwell, C � " a �'�' 782 2� m M Engineering XP• 12-31-05 g Geologist Geotechniinghanet, , . t cal Enginee�F5> 7 779 ACADEMY DMI, . \` `�-- c,. SOIANA Bh: ROUGH GRADING REPORT Two (2) Proposed Residential Structures 520 Liverpool Drive Cardiff, California Prepared for: John DeWald 1855 Freda Lane Cardiff, CA 92007 September 12, 2003 W.O. G-378023 Prepared by: COAST GEOTECHNICAL 779 Academy Drive Solana Beach, California 92075 Coast Geotechnical September 12, 2003 WO• G-378023 Page 3 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our observations and field density testing on the subject property during rough grading. The project included backflling the swimming pool excavation wi compacted fill and contour grading the project f Plan th or erosion control. The field density tests are shown on the enclosed Erosion Control approximate locations of , prepared by Jackson/Cole _ Associates. LABORATORY TEST DATA _ The laboratory standard for determining the maximum dry density ASTM D 1557-91. Field density tests were perform was Performed in accordance with Performed m accordance with ASTM D 1556. The results of the laboratory maximum dry density, for the soil type used as compacted fill on the site, is — summarized below: Maximum Descri tion Dry Density Optimum c-.f. Moisture (%) Mixture of on-site soils, brown silty and fine-grained 129.0 9.8 sand GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS The property is underlain at shallow depths by Pleistocene terrace de underlain at depth by Eocene-age sedi P°sits. The terrace deposits are sedimentary rocks which have commonly been designated as Torrey Coast Geotechnical September 12, 2003 W.O. G-378023 Page 4 Sandstone and Del Mar Formation on published geologic maps. The terrace deposits are covered by residual soil deposits. DISCUSSION The grading contractor on this project was Mike Lloyd Excavating. of the general grading operations, as they were erf The following is a discussion p ormed on the project. 1) Existing structures and the swimming pool were demolished. — All surface deleterious material was removed on the building site, Prior to grading. 2) The loose and weathered terrace deposits in the swimmin '— The base of the excavation was scarified to a g pool excavation were removed. compacted. depth of 6.0 inches, moistened as required and 3) On-site materials were used for swimming Pool backfill. T placed in loose lifts of approximate) he soils were generally mixed and y 6.0 inches, moistened to about optimum moisture _ content and compacted. Compaction was accomplished by track rolling Caterpillar tractor. with a D-6 4) The remainder of the site was generally contour graded in accordance with the erosion control plan. Coast Geotechnical September 12, 2003 W.O. G-378023 Page 5 5) Based on our experience and laboratory testing, the fill deposits have a potential expansion in the low range. _ CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1) Based on selective testing, the fill was placed to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory _ maximum dry density as suggested by our test results. 2) Temporary excavations greater than 3.0 feet should be trimmed to a gradient of 1:1 (horizontal to vertical)or less, depending upon conditions encountered during temporary slope should be shored. All excavat Cal-OSHA requirements. should be grading or the constructed in accordance with 3) Additional grading should be observed and tested by a representative P ative of the geotechrucal engineer. Additional recommendations may be necessary, during the construction phase. 4) All the recommendations in the referenced Preliminary Geotechni cal Investigation which are not superseded by this report remain valid and should be implemented grading/construction phase. during the Coast Geotechnical September 12, 2003 W.O. G-378023 Page 6 LIMITATIONS This office assumes no responsibility for any alterations made without our knowledge and written approval, subsequent to the issuance of this report. All areas of disturbance placement of compacted fill to restore them to the original con which require the — backfilling operations are performed under our observation condition will not be reviewed unless such servation and tested for required compaction. It _ should be noted that density(compaction)testing is conducted on a very intent is to provide an opinion, based on selective testing and observation during fill placement. This study has been provided solely for the benefit of the client and is in or extend any right or interest to any third art no way intended to benefit party. This study is not to be used on other projects or extensions to this project except by agreement in writing with Coast Geote chrucal. Enclosures: Table I Grading Plan NC OsURES FIELD AND LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TABLE Field Dry Density and Moisture Content (Swimming pool Backfill) Test A r Moisture Dry Relative - Date No. Location *Height Content Density Hecht -0. Comoaction -- 8/13/03 1 See Map 2 . 0 ' 12 . 4 122 . 7 95 8/14/03 2 See Map 4 . 0 ' _. 11 . 2 119 . 6 8/14/03 3 93 See Map 6 . 0 ' 11 . 0 118 . 1 91 * Approximate height of fill tested G-378023 U M O M J � / 0 3 £ g L i r I w o ^^ L � Irl a h 03 8 s a Un asi o COAST GrEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING ENGINLI:RS ANI) GEOLOGIST'S June 30, 2003 John DeWald 1855 Freda Lane 4 "^ 4 2003 Cardiff, CA 92007 IBI tui: N"t�RING SERVICES CITY Of ENCINITAS Subject: GRADING PLAN REVIEW Two (2) Proposed Residential Structures 520 Liverpool Drive Cardiff, California Reference: PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNI ... Two (2) Proposed Residential Stru�resIGATION 520 Liverpool Drive Cardiff, California Prepared by Coast Geotechnical Dated April 1, 2003 Dear Mr. DeWald: As requested, we have reviewed the project grading plans ar re Associates and observed that they have in general p p ed by Jackson/Cole , included the recommendations Presented in our Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation. COMMENTS 1) All fill should be observed and tested by a representative Of the geotechnical engineer during placement. 779 ACAL)EMY 1)RIVI • SOI.ANA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92075 (858) 755-8622 • FAX (858) 755-9126 Coast Geotechnical June 30, 2003 W.O. P-378023 Page 2 2) All structural footings should be founded into approved compacted fill or competent terrace deposits. LIMITATIONS The findings and opinions presented herein have been made in accordance with enerall g y accepted professional principals in the fields of engineering geology and geotechnical engineering. No warranty is expressed or implied. If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact our office. Reference to our Job No. P-378023 will help expedite a response to your inquiry. Respectfully submitt COAST GEOTECH 1I < a4t ,} anti Mark Burwell, . p�x.�f,�° • �e�t�e`'r'. '' � n �x ' ` M yVithaa ingha 31-0om Engineering Geolo , Geotechnical En i Y 17 COAST GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND QEOLOGISI S April 1, 2003 John DeWald 1855 Freda Lane ' Cardiff, CA 92007 RE: PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Two (2) Proposed Residential Structures -' 520 Liverpool Drive Cardiff, California Dear Mr. DeWald: In response to your request and in accordance with our Proposal and Agreement dated February 7, 2003, we have performed a preliminary geotechnical investigation on the subject site for the proposed residences. The findings of the investigation, laboratory test results and recommendations for foundation design are presented in this report. From a geologic and soils engineering point of view, it is our opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed development, provided the recommendations in this report are implemented during the design and construction phases. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at (858) 755-8622. This opportunity to be of service is appreciated. Respectfully submitte ', ' COAST GEOTECHN \ Mark B , C.E.�,� �- � � g urwell o=„= , Vithaya Sin hanet O. � Engineering Geolog' t '` Geotechnical Engir��r, '- 779 ACADEMY DRIVE SOI,ANA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92075 (858) 755-8622 • FAX (858) 755-9126 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Two (2) Proposed Residential Structures 520 Liverpool Drive Cardiff, California Prepared For: John DeWald P_ 1855 Freda Lane Cardiff, CA 92007 April 1, 2003 W.O. P-378023 '- Prepared By: COAST GEOTECHNICAL 779 Academy Drive Solana Beach, California 92075 TABLE OF CONTENTS VICINITY MAP INTRODUCTION SITE CONDITIONS 5 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 5 SITE INVESTIGATION 5 LABORATORY TESTING 6 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS 6 CONCLUSIONS 7 RECOMMENDATIONS 10 11 A. BUILDING PAD-REMOVALS/RECOMPACTION B. SWIMMING POOL BACKFILL 11 C. TEMPORARY SLOPES/EXCAVATION CHARACTERISTICS 12 D. FOUNDATIONS 12 E. SLABS ON GRADE (INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR) 14 F. RETAINING WALLS G. SETTLEMENT CHARACTERISTICS 14 H. SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS 15 I. SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS 15 J. UTILITY TRENCH 16 K. DRAINAGE 16 r L. GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATIONS 17 M. PLAN REVIEW 17 .r 18 LIMITATIONS REFERENCES 18 20 -- APPENDICES APPENDIX A LABORATORY TEST RESULTS EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS SITE PLAN APPENDIX B REGIONAL FAULT MAP SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRUM APPENDIX C GRADING GUIDELINES CARETTA DR �•o Q9 SA�CASiLE DR �qC P W NOLBEY ST 3 ,p NOLBEY ST « p A CO L 0 ED INA WAY O O � m O X Bd IRE AVE O p LPG �f S y TAFFO AVE O 6j • 1y D ip,�"M1i f 00 SUBJECT PROPERTY NCB y� �8 a R \p NIE 7 �G O v BRISAS y T E � v O Y �Ef�E HO 4YN 4 w� 7� PFO S VIL GE DR O 5� N ASTLE AVE .p 7 Olen �\ Park RFOLKO� H� T1O 4 495 ft Topo USA 2.0 Copyright®1999 DeLorme Yarmouth,ME 04096 Scale: 1 : 6,400 Detail: 15-0 Coast Geotechnical April 1, 2003 W.O. P-378023 Page 5 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation on the subject property. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the nature and characteristics of the earth materials underlying the property, the engineering properties of the surficial deposits and their influence on the proposed residences. SITE CONDITIONS The subject property is located south of Birmingham Drive, at the northwest corner of Mackinnon Avenue and Liverpool Drive, in the Cardiff district, city of Encinitas. The site is a residential lot approximately 100 feet by 100 feet, situated on gently sloping terrain. The site generally slopes gently to the east and south. Relief on the site is approximately 11 vertical feet. The lot includes a single story residence constructed over a basement, fronting on Liverpool Drive. A swimming pool is located in the southeastern portion of the site. Other exterior improvements include retaining walls and concrete flatwork along the rear of the residence. Residential landscaping incudes grass, shrubs and trees. Drainage is generally by sheet flow to the east and south. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Preliminary plans for development of the site were prepared by Jackson/Cole Associates. Coast Geotechnical April 1, 2003 W.O. P-378023 Page 6 The lot will be split into two (2) separate lots for residential development. The project Y includes demolition of the existing structures and construction of a new residence over M a proposed basement on each of the new lots. Exterior improvements include concrete flatwork and retaining walls, up to 6.0 feet. SITE INVESTIGATION Site exploration included four (4) exploratory borings drilled to a maximum depth of 15 feet. Earth materials encountered were visually classified and logged by our field engineering geologist. Undisturbed, representative samples of earth materials were obtained at selected intervals. Samples were obtained by driving a thin walled steel -- sampler into the desired strata. The samples are retained in brass rings of 2.5 inches outside diameter and 1.0 inches in height. The central portion of the sample is retained in close fitting, waterproof containers and transported to our laboratory for testing and analysis. LABORATORY TESTING Classification The field classification was verified through laboratory examination, in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. The final classification is shown on the enclosed Exploratory Logs. Coast Geotechnical April 1, 2003 W.O. P-378023 Page 7 M Moisture/Density The field moisture content and dry unit weight were determined for each of the undisturbed soil samples. This information is useful in providing a gross picture of the soil consistency or variation among exploratory excavations. The dry unit weight was determined in pounds per cubic foot. The field moisture content was determined as a percentage of the dry unit weight. Both are shown on the enclosed Laboratory Tests Results and Exploratory Logs. Maximum D Densi and O timum 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 at depth by Eocene-age sedimentary rocks which have commonly been designated as the Torrey Sandstone and Del Mar Formation on published geologic maps. The terrace deposits are covered by thin soil deposits and, in part, by fill deposits. A brief description of the earth materials encountered on the site follows. Coast Geotechnical April 1, 2003 �- W.O. P-378023 Page 8 Artificial Fill _ No evidence of significant fill deposits were observed on the site. Isolated fill deposits appear to be located along the outside edge of small graded pads and behind retaining walls. Residual Soil Site exploration suggests the underlying terrace deposits are blanketed by approximately - 12 to 18 inches of brown silty sand. The soil is generally moist and loose. The contact with the underlying terrace deposits is gradational and may vary across the site. °- Terrace Deposits Underlying the surficial materials, poorly consolidated Pleistocene terrace deposits are present. The sediments are composed of tan to reddish brown slightly clayey, fine and medium-grained sand. Regionally, the Pleistocene sands are considered flat-lying and are underlain at depth by Eocene-age sedimentary rock units. ._ Expansive Soil Based on our experience in the area and previous laboratory testing of selected samples, the fill deposits, residual soil and Pleistocene sands reflect an expansion potential in the low range. Coast Geotechnical April 1, 2003 �- W-O. P-378023 Page 9 Groundwater No evidence of perched or high groundwater tables were encountered to the depth explored. However, it should be noted that seepage problems can develop after completion of construction. These seepage problems most often result from drainage alterations, landscaping and over-irrigation. In the event that seepage or saturated ground does occur, it has been our experience that they are most effectively handled on an individual basis. Tectonic Settine 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 2.6 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 Coast Geotechnical April 1, 2003 W.O. P-378023 Page 10 (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. The proximity of major faults to the site and site parameters are shown on the enclosed Seismic Design Parameters. 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 Pleistocene 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 landsliding, liquefaction, high groundwater conditions and seismically induced subsidence. 2) The existing fill, soil and weathered terrace deposits are not suitable for the Coast Geotechnical April 1, 2003 W.O. P-378023 Page 11 support of proposed footings and concrete flatwork. These surficial deposits should be removed and replaced as properly compacted fill deposits in areas outside the proposed basement walls. 3) Disturbed soils resulting from the demolition of structures and the swimming pool should be compacted. 4) It is anticipated that the basement excavation will extend through the surficial deposits encountered on the site. However, if loose materials are encountered in the area of the proposed basement slab they should be compacted. All retaining °- wall footings should penetrate fill and weathered materials and founded the design _ depth into competent terrace deposits. ~ RECOMMENDATIONS Building Pad-Removals/Recom action In the building pad areas outside the proposed basement walls, the existing fill, soil and weathered terrace deposits should be removed and replaced as properly compacted fill. All fill should be keyed and benched into the underlying terrace deposits. Removals should include the entire building pad, extending a minimum of 5.0 feet beyond the building footprint, where applicable. The depth of removals are anticipated to be on the order of 3.0 feet. However, deeper removals may be necessary due to demolition of Coast Geotechnical April 1, 2003 W.O. P-378023 Page 12 structures and removal of existing fill deposits. Cut/fill transition pads should be undercut a minimum of 3.0 feet and replaced as properly compacted fill. Most of the existing earth deposits are generally suitable for reuse, provided they are cleared of all vegetation, debris and thoroughly mixed. Prior to placement of fill, the base of the removal should be observed by a representative of this firm. Additional overexcavation _ and recommendations may be necessary at that time. The exposed bottom should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6.0 inches, moistened as required and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. Fill should be placed in 6.0 to 8.0 inch lifts, moistened to approximately 1.0 - 2.0 percent above optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. Fill, soil and weathered terrace deposits in areas of proposed concrete flatwork and driveways should be removed and replaced as properly compacted fill. Imported fill, if necessary, should consist of non-expansive granular deposits approved by the geotechnical engineer. Swimming Pool Backfill Prior to placement of fill, the pool excavation should be observed by a representative of this firm. Fill placement should be as indicated above and as per our standard Grading Guidelines (Appendix C). Temporary Slopes/Excavation Characteristics Temporary excavations should be trimmed to a gradient of 3/4:1 (horizontal to vertical) Coast Geotechnical April 1, 2003 W.O. P-378023 Page 13 or less depending upon conditions encountered during grading. The Pleistocene terrace a deposits may contain hard concretion layers. However, based on our experience in the area, the sandstone is rippable with conventional heavy earth moving equipment in good working order. Foundations The following design parameters are based on footings founded into non-expansive approved compacted fill deposits or competent terrace deposits. Footings for the proposed residences should be a minimum of 12 inches wide and founded a minimum of 12 inches and 18 inches below the lower most adjacent subgrade at the time of foundation construction for single-story and two-story structures, respectively. A 12 inch by 12 inch grade beam should be placed across the garage opening. Footings should be reinforced with a minimum of four No. 4 bars, two along the top of the footing and two along the base. Footing recommendations provided herein are based upon underlying soil conditions and are not intended to be in lieu of the project structural engineer's design. For design purposes, an allowable bearing value of 1500 pounds per square foot may be r used for foundations at the recommended footing depths. The bearing value may be increased to 2000 pounds per square foot for subterranean retaining wall footings. The bearing value indicated above is for the total dead and frequently applied live loads. Coast Geotechnical April 1, 2003 W.O. P-378023 Page 14 This value may be increased by 33 percent for short durations of loading, including the effects of wind and seismic forces. _ Resistance to lateral load may be provided by friction acting at the base of foundations and by passive earth pressure. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 may be used with dead- load forces. A passive earth pressure of 250 pounds per square foot, per foot of depth of fill penetrated to a maximum of 1500 pounds per square foot may be used. Slabs on Grade (Interior and Exterior) - Slabs on grade should be a minimum of 4.0 inches thick and reinforced in both directions with No. 3 bars placed 18 inches on center in both directions. The slab should be underlain by a minimum 2.0-inch sand blanket. Where moisture sensitive floors are ` used, a minimum 6.0-mil Visqueen or equivalent moisture barrier should be placed over the sand blanket and covered by an additional two inches of sand. Utility trenches underlying the slab may be backfilled with on-site materials, compacted to a minimum "- of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. Slabs including exterior concrete flatwork should be reinforced as indicated above and provided with saw cuts/expansion joints, as recommended by the project structural engineer. All slabs should be cast over dense compacted subgrades. Retaining Walls Cantilever walls (yielding) retaining nonexpansive granular soils may be designed for an Coast Geotechnical April 1, 2003 W.O. P-378023 Page 15 -' active-equivalent fluid pressure of 35 pounds per cubic foot. Restrained walls (nonyielding) should be designed for an "at-rest" equivalent fluid pressure of 60 pounds per cubic foot. Wall footings should be designed in accordance with the foundation design recommendations. All retaining walls should be provided with an adequate w_ backdrainage system (Miradrain 6000 or equivalent is suggested). The soil parameters assume a level granular backfill compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. Settlement Characteristics Estimated total and differential settlement is expected to be on the order of 3/4 inch and 1/2 inch, respectively. It should also be noted that long term secondary settlement due to irrigation and loads imposed by structures is anticipated to be 1/4 inch. Seismic Considerations Although the likelihood of ground rupture on the site is remote, the property will be exposed to moderate to high levels of ground motion resulting from the release of energy should an earthquake occur along the numerous known and unknown faults in the region. The Rose Canyon Fault Zone located approximately 2.6 miles west of the property is the nearest known active fault and is considered the design earthquake for the site. A Coast Geotechnical April 1, 2003 W.O. P-378023 Page 16 - maximum probable event along the offshore segment of the Rose Canyon Fault is _ expected to produce a peak bedrock horizontal acceleration of 0.47g and a repeatable ground acceleration of 0.318. Seismic Design Parameters (1997 Uniform Building Code) Soil Profile Type - S, Seismic Zone - 4 Seismic Source - Type B Near Source Factor (NJ - 1.3 Near source Acceleration Factor (Na) Seismic Coefficients Ca = 0.43 C, = 0.73 -- Design Response Spectrum TS = 0.676 To = 0.135 Utility Trench We recommend that all utilities be bedded in clean sand to at least one foot above the top of the conduit. The bedding should be flooded in place to fill all the voids around the conduit. Imported or on-site granular material compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction may be utilized for backfill above the bedding. The invert of subsurface utility excavations paralleling footings should be located above the zone of influence of these adjacent footings. This zone of influence is defined as the Coast Geotechnical April 1, 2003 -- W.O. P-378023 Page 17 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. Drainage Specific drainage patterns should be designed by the project architect or engineer. However, in general, pad water should be directed away from foundations and around the structure to the street. Roof water should be collected and conducted to the street, via non-erodible devices. Pad water should not be allowed to pond. Vegetation adjacent to foundations should be avoided. If vegetation in these areas is desired, sealed planter boxes or drought resistant plants should be considered. Other alternatives may be available, however, the intent is to reduce moisture from migrating into foundation subsoils. Irrigation should be limited to that amount necessary to sustain plant life. All drainage systems should be inspected and cleaned annually, prior to winter rains. Geotechnical Observations Structural footing excavations should be observed by a representative of this firm, prior to the placement of steel and forms. All fill should be placed while a representative of the geotechnical engineer is present to observe and test. Coast Geotechnical April 1, 2003 W.O. P-378023 Page 18 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, r 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. Coast Geotechnical April 1, 2003 - W.O. P-378023 Page 19 - 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. 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 April 1, 2003 W.O. P-378023 Page 20 REFERENCES 1. Hays, Walter W., 1980, Procedures for Estimating Earthquake Ground Motions, Geological Survey Professional Paper 1114, 77 pages. 2. Petersen, Mark D. and others (DMG), Frankel, Arthur D. and others (USGS), 1996, _ Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State of California, California Division of Mines and Geology OFR 96-08, United States Geological Survey OFR 96-706. 3. Seed, H.B., and Idriss, I.M., 1970, A Simplified Procedure for Evaluating Soil Liquefaction Potential: Earthquake Engineering Research Center. 4. Tan, S.S., and Giffen, D.G., 1995, Landslide Hazards in the Northern Part of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, Plate 35D, Open-File Report 95-04, Map Scale 1:24,000. 5. Treiman, J.A., 1984, The Rose Canyon Fault Zone, A Review and Analysis, California Division of Mines and Geology. MAPS/AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS 1. 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. Jackson/Cole Associates, 2002, Site Plan, 520 Liverpool Drive, Encinitas, California, Scale 1"=10'. 4. San Diego County Topographic/Orthophoto Survey, 1973,Map No. 310-1683, Scale I"=200'. 5. 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 cf B-2 @ 0 . 5 ' -3 . 0 ' 128 . 3 9 . 8 TABLE II Field Dry Density and Moisture Content Sample Field Dry Field Moisture Location Density Content c f 0 B-1 @ 1 . 0 ' 102 . 1 9 . 1 B-1 @ 2 . 0 ' 109 . 2 6 . 7 B-1 @ 3 . 0 ' 112 . 1 8 . 5 B-1 @ 5 . 0 ' 111 . 7 6 . 7 B-1 @ 8 . 0 ' Sample Disturbed 5 . 9 B-1 @ 14 . 0 ' Sample Disturbed 7 . 1 B-2 @ 2 . 0 ' 109 . 6 7 . 2 B-2 @ 4 . 0 ' 112 . 1 5 . 5 B-2 @ 7 . 0 ' 113 . 8 6 . 8 B-2 @ 9 . 0 ' Sample Disturbed 11 .4 B-2 @ 11 . 5 ' Sample Disturbed 11 . 9 B-3 @ 1 . 0 ' 103 . 5 6 .4 B-3 @ 2 . 0 ' 113 . 3 5 . 8 _ B-3 @ 3 . 5 ' 114 . 2 7 . 8 B-3 @ 6 . 0 ' 111 . 7 4 . 5 B-3 @ 9 . 0 ' Sample Disturbed 6 . 7 B-4 @ 1 . 0 ' 105 . 6 7 . 5 B-4 @ 2 . 0 ' 109 . 9 4 . 1 B-4 @ 5 . 0 ' 111 . 5 3 . 5 _ B-4 @ 8 . 0 ' 112 . 8 4 .4 P-378023 LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING NO. 1 DRILL RIG: PORTABLE BUCKET AUGER PROJECT NO. P-378023 .BORING DIAMETER: 3.5" DATE DRILLED: 03-03-03 SURFACE ELEV.: 106' (Approximate) LOGGED BY: MB H x a a ° U H Oz w U U � d W a V) U Q a x U 106.0 GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION 0.00 SM SOIL(Qs):Brown fine and med.-grained slightly silty sand,moist,loose,roots 102.1 9.1 SM TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt): Tan Reddish brn.,fine and med.-grained sand,moist 104.0 weathered in upper 1.0' 109.2 6.7 2.00 112.1 8.5 Dry to slightly moist,dense a 102.0 4.00 111.7 6.7 a� 3 100.0 'b 6.00 6 O Z 98.00 --- 5.9 8.00 96.00 10.00 94.00 12.00 92.00 --- 7.1 14.00 End of Boring @ 15' PAGE 1 OF 1 COAST GEOTECHNICAL LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING NO. 2 DRILL RIG: PORTABLE BUCKET AUGER PROJECT NO. P-378023 BORING DIAMETER: 3.5" DATE DRILLED: 03-03-03 SURFACE ELEV.: 103' (Approximate) LOGGED BY: MB T� _ _ > U U W W U� W U A w d W o 103.0 GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION 0.00 SM SOIL(Qs):Brown fine and med.-grained slightly silty sand,moist,loose,roots 101.0 SM TERRACE DEPOSITS(Qt):Tan Reddish bm.,fine and med.-grained sand,moist 109.6 7.2 2.00 weathered in upper 1.0' Dry to slightly moist,dense 99.00 112.1 5.5 e: 4.00 (U O - 97.00 b 6.00 1a 0 113.8 6.8 6 0 z 95.00 8.00 --- 11.4 93.00 10.00 --- 11.9 91.00 . •� 12.00 s 89.00 - 14.00 End of Boring @ 15' PAGE 1 OF 1 COAST GEOTECHNICAL LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING NO. 3 DRILL RIG: PORTABLE BUCKET AUGER PROJECT NO. P-378023 BORING DIAMETER: 3.5" DATE DRILLED: 03-06-03 SURFACE ELEV.: 104' (Approximate) LOGGED BY: MB r. U U U a O vi z w w U w U Ca F U Q W p A v, rA Q C7 v, 104.0 GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION 0.00 SM SOIL(Qs):Brown fine and med.-grained slightly silty sand,moist,loose,roots 103.0 : c 103.5 6.4 1.00 SM TERRACE DEPOSITS(Qt): Tan Reddish brn.,fine and med.-grained sand,moist weathered in upper 1.0' 102.0 113.3 5.8 2.00 Dry to slightly moist,dense 1 1.0 3.00 114.2 7.8 100.0 .b 4.00 i~ 99.00 5.00 0 N cad 98.00 111.7 4.5 6.00 -b 0 C7 97.00 7.00 0 z 96.00 8.00 95.00 --- 6.7 9.00 94.00 10.00 93.00 11.00 End of Boring @ 12' PAGE 1 OF 1 COAST GEOTECHNICAL LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING NO. 4 DRILL RIG: PORTABLE BUCKET AUGER PROJECT NO. P-378023 BORING DIAMETER: 3.5" DATE DRILLED: 03-06-03 SURFACE ELEV.: 111' (Approximate) LOGGED BY: MB e a H Q rUn H w w 0 z ¢ W U a w � a a w d Un Q w 111.0 GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION 0.00 SM SOIL(Qs):Brown fine and med.-grained slightly silty sand,moist,loose,roots 110.0 : : : 105.6 7.5 1.00 SM TERRACE DEPOSITS(Qt):Tan Reddish brn.,fine and med.-grained sand,moist weathered in upper 1.0' 109.0 Dry to slightly moist,dense 109.9 4.1 2.00 108.0 3.00 O a 107.0 " 3 4.00 v _ a 0 0 106.0 111.5 3.5 z 5.00 105.0 6.00 ru 104.0 7.00 103.0 112.8 4.4 8.00 102.0 9.00 End of Boring @ 10' PAGE 1 OF 1 COAST GEOTECHNICAL EZ08LE-d 'TVD1NHD9.LOflO.I.SdOJ S,LISOdUG aDVxxas 16 'JIOS 'Tvn(jrsax Sa S.LINfl �)I9O'I0:4!) ( xoldd�)NOILVDO l ONWOg - QNJOT1 ,oz=,,[ :g'IVDS Nvrld a.LIS / INvyd0/,1071 0&ow / -9YA1'Y6V•MOU I33S6 r 77YM 3!'T 011'X7 60w&,'7 1S3A Mad 4-717�1ID•7L ON r yy� Ol 'No I!''YO gwrl3d 39VNIVaO 5w1SIx3 TN's A&US OL 3dW WAOM11 Nl 2 (SOI1Vd'+^MY�70 ONV•qy Ad'�17Y/kAY "o-9 7 smuaws SNLLSIX3 _ ..,- .' SdYX11AOJ 9AC1S[r3 W'(7 k 18-11S/X-7 Sal VWAN -90N20 9NLLSOt3 Om,ol#g 0ZOd dd Sal VJOCA#--�_ n(�•� 5N0 Z y6lggggy—ON-7977 •oo cv/ -W&ox 7J �•3tY Z-111111/9.Y/NlMI Jd.{y Atld1.,//-! :N,l/IVMCLr.(31dYdf _—_ n! 0 Y l aS147PO7SV Y NIYW GQ101S.QI �llydae/NB A Y '3nb NONNI>IDVW > I _ IZ \ I =I all A�'y I �I f \ y \� 'Al h.. 8 ,y�zo�, i I /r hot / raw Gro I 1 II I i 30rdIWJ \ I I I S"101 !! i rya I 0 - � � '.-4(11•.,. - 1� (`� •• sA II I� ".,yip �' n'I AW I I I or I I 8'101 I a I I �N '111NlirM' I I—— I I .. '• � II I —Tt I I � I �I � /►�rr�ir I I I II /� I I I ; �� f r�"r�\,1SIY7 i I I I 3,7N30x31ll�ryw II I It (66710S Xq p I I I I S.LISUdaa HZ) . SOl 1�?I?I�L I I 1 ti i I D'OU S3 I I 9funvd 3907 N i011 rd 1 8011 Sl O11 vd `• _ / 1 t �.� . ..... -1 \ MO�J 13.1 UOS .10'0941.6cor.Or OOO. 'S-�M.4L,4COf N 1' 1 II I au O -1d3�1-dNdIYI�N-.7 .—�� I (601 131TI I �`iFYDO Oi4 �L b✓d r ION -77Y41 L N3-a'rp✓J I O 11 �n I APPENDIX B _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ LLJ 72 7 cq is 3 IC If Fh AW zt _ *********************** * * * U B C S E I S * * * Version 1.03 * * *********************** COMPUTATION OF 1997 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE _ SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS JOB NUMBER: P-378023 DATE: 01-11-2003 JOB NAME: DeWALD FAULT-DATA-FILE NAME: CDMGUBCR.DAT SITE COORDINATES: SITE LATITUDE: 33.0242 SITE LONGITUDE: 117.2766 UBC SEISMIC ZONE: 0.4 UBC SOIL PROFILE TYPE: SC NEAREST TYPE A FAULT: NAME: ELSINORE-JULIAN DISTANCE: 46.1 km NEAREST TYPE B FAULT: NAME: ROSE CANYON DISTANCE: 4.2 km NEAREST TYPE C FAULT: NAME: DISTANCE: 99999.0 km _ SELECTED UBC SEISMIC COEFFICIENTS: Na: 1.1 Nv: 1.3 Ca: 0.43 Cv: 0.73 Ts: 0. 676 To: 0. 135 --------------------------- SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS --------------------------- Page 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I APPROX. ISOURCE I MAX. I SLIP I FAULT ABBREVIATED IDISTANCEI TYPE I MAG. I RATE I TYPE FAULT NAME I (km) 1 (A,B,C) 1 (Mw) I (mm/yr) I (SS,DS,BT) ROSE CANYON 1 4.2 I B ( 6.9 1 1.50 I SS NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) I 20.4 I B I 6.9 1 1.50 I SS CORONADO BANK I 27.9 I B I 7.4 I 3.00 I SS ELSINORE-JULIAN I 46.1 I A I 7.1 I 5.00 I SS ELSINORE-TEMECULA I 46.3 I B I 6.8 I 5.00 I SS EARTHQUAKE VALLEY 1 67.1 I B 1 6.5 1 2.00 1 SS PALOS VERDES 1 68.0 1 B i 7.1 I 3.00 i SS ELSINORE-GLEN IVY I 69.1 I B 1 6.8 I 5.00 1 SS SAN JACINTO-ANZA I 82.7 I A I 7.2 I 12.00 I SS ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN I 85.5 I B I 6.8 I 4.00 I SS SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK I 86.3 I B I 6.8 I 4.00 ( SS SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY I 86.4 I B I 6.9 I 12.00 I SS NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (L.A.Basin) I 88.4 I B I 6.9 I 1.00 I SS CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) I 92.0 I B I 6.7 1 1.00 I DS ELSINORE-WHITTIER I 98.2 I B 1 6.8 i 2.50 I SS SAN JACINTO - BORREGO I 102.8 I B I 6.6 i 4.00 1 SS SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO I 110.4 I B I 6.7 1 12.00 1 SS _ SAN ANDREAS - Southern 1 115.5 1 A I 7.4 I 24.00 I SS SAN JOSE I 125.3 I B I 6.5 1 0.50 1 DS PINTO MOUNTAIN I 126.0 I B I 7.0 I 2.50 I SS SUPERSTITION MTN. (San Jacinto) I 126.3 I B I 6.6 I 5.00 I SS CUCAMONGA 1 129.5 1 A I 7.0 I 5.00 I DS SIERRA MADRE (Central) 1 129.6 I B I 7.0 I 3.00 1 DS BURNT MTN. i 132.4 I B 1 6.5 1 0.60 1 SS ELMORE RANCH I 132.6 I B I 6.6 I 1.00 1 SS SUPERSTITION HILLS (San Jacinto) 1 134.1 I B i 6.6 I 4.00 1 SS ELSINORE-LAGUNA SALADA I 134.2 I B I 7.0 1 3.50 1 SS NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (West) I 136.7 1 B 1 7.0 ( 1.00 1 DS EUREKA PEAK 1 136.8 1 B I 6.5 I 0.60 I SS CLEGHORN 1 139.0 I B I 6.5 1 3.00 1 SS NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East) I 142.8 I B I 6.7 I 0.50 I DS RAYMOND 1 144.1 I B I 6.5 I 0.50 I DS CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT 1 144.7 I B 1 6.5 I 0.50 1 DS SAN ANDREAS - 1857 Rupture I 145.0 I A I 7.8 1 34.00 1 SS VERDUGO I 147.8 I B I 6.7 I 0.50 1 DS LANDERS I 149.9 I B I 7.3 I 0.60 I SS BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE I 150.7 I B I 6.5 I 25.00 I SS HOLLYWOOD I 150.8 i B I 6.5 1 1.00 I DS HELENDALE - S. LOCKHARDT 1 154.5 1 B I 7.1 I 0.60 I SS SANTA MONICA I 158.0 I B I 6.6 1 1.00 I DS LENWOOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN SPRGS I 159.5 I B I 7.3 I 0.60 I SS IMPERIAL 1 159.7 1 A 1 7.0 I 20.00 I SS MALIBU COAST I 162.0 I B ( 6.7 1 0.30 1 DS EMERSON So. - COPPER MTN. 1 162.0 I B I 6.9 I 0.60 I SS JOHNSON VALLEY (Northern) 1 163.3 I B I 6.7 I 0.60 I SS SIERRA MADRE (San Fernando) i 168.6 I B I 6.7 i 2.00 I DS --------------------------- SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS --------------------------- Page 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I APPROX. ISOURCE I MAX. I SLIP I FAULT ABBREVIATED IDISTANCEI TYPE I MAG. I RATE I TYPE FAULT NAME I (km) I (A,B,C) I (Mw) I (mm/yr) I (SS,DS,BT) ANACAPA-DUME I 170.0 I B I 7.3 I 3.00 I DS PISGAH-BULLION MTN.-MESQUITE LK I 171.2 I B I 7.1 I 0.60 I SS SAN GABRIEL I 171.6 I B I 7.0 I 1.00 I SS CALICO - HIDALGO I 175.9 I B I 7.1 I 0.60 I SS SANTA SUSANA I 183.8 I B I 6.6 I 5.00 i DS HOLSER I 192.7 I B I 6.5 I 0.40 I DS SIMI-SANTA ROSA I 199.8 I B I 6.7 I 1.00 I DS OAK RIDGE (Onshore) I 200.9 I B I 6.9 I 4.00 I DS GRAVEL HILLS - HARPER LAKE I 208.2 I B I 6.9 I 0.60 I SS SAN CAYETANO I 209.4 I B I 6.8 I 6.00 I DS BLACKWATER I 223.7 I B I 6.9 I 0.60 I SS VENTURA - PITAS POINT I 227.6 I B I 6.8 i 1.00 I DS SANTA YNEZ (East) ( 229.1 I B I 7.0 I 2.00 I SS SANTA CRUZ ISLAND I 234.7 I B I 6.8 I 1.00 I DS M.RIDGE-ARROYO PARIDA-SANTA ANA I 238.5 I B I 6.7 I 0.40 I DS RED MOUNTAIN I 241.3 I B I 6.8 I 2.00 I DS GARLOCK (West) I 246.1 I A I 7.1 I 6.00 I SS PLEITO THRUST I 251.1 I B I 6.8 I 2.00 I DS BIG PINE I 256.7 I B I 6.7 I 0.80 I SS GARLOCK (East) I 260.8 I A I 7.3 I 7.00 I SS SANTA ROSA ISLAND I 269.2 I B ( 6.9 I 1.00 I DS WHITE WOLF I 272.0 I B I 7.2 1 2.00 I DS SANTA YNEZ (West) I 273.1 I B I 6.9 I 2.00 I SS So. SIERRA NEVADA I 285.2 I B I 7.1 I 0.10 I DS OWL LAKE I 289.5 I B I 6.5 I 2.00 I SS LITTLE LAKE I 289.6 I B I 6.7 I 0.70 I SS PANAMINT VALLEY I 289.8 I B I 7.2 I 2.50 I SS TANK CANYON i 291.1 I B I 6.5 I 1.00 I DS DEATH VALLEY (South) I 297.7 I B I 6.9 I 4.00 I SS LOS ALAMOS-W. BASELINE I 314.9 I B I 6.8 I 0.70 I DS LIONS HEAD I 332.7 I B I 6.6 I 0.02 I DS DEATH VALLEY (Graben) I 339.9 I B I 6.9 I 4.00 I DS SAN LUIS RANGE (S. Margin) I 342.6 I B I 7.0 I 0.20 I DS SAN JUAN I 344.0 I B i 7.0 I 1.00 I SS CASMALIA (Orcutt Frontal Fault) I 350.9 I B I 6.5 1 0.25 I DS OWENS VALLEY I 358.2 I B I 7.6 I 1.50 I SS LOS OSOS I 372.8 I B I 6.8 I 0.50 I DS HOSGRI I 378.3 I B I 7.3 I 2.50 I SS HUNTER MTN. - SALINE VALLEY I 384.2 I B I 7.0 I 2.50 I SS DEATH VALLEY (Northern) I 393.4 I A I 7.2 I 5.00 I SS INDEPENDENCE i 394.1 I B I 6.9 I 0.20 I DS RINCONADA I 394.1 I B I 7.3 I 1.00 I SS BIRCH CREEK I 450.4 I B I 6.5 I 0.70 I DS SAN ANDREAS (Creeping) I 451.0 I B I 5.0 1 34.00 I SS WHITE MOUNTAINS I 454.9 I B I 7.1 I 1.00 I SS DEEP SPRINGS I 473.4 I B I 6.6 I 0.80 I DS --------------------------- SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS --------------------------- Page 3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I APPROX. ISOURCE I MAX. I SLIP I FAULT ABBREVIATED IDISTANCEI TYPE I MAG. I RATE I TYPE FAULT NAME I (km) I (A,B,C) I (Mw) I (mm/yr) I (SS,DS,BT) - DEATH VALLEY (N. of Cucamongo) 1 478.3 I A I 7.0 1 5.00 1 SS ROUND VALLEY (E. of S.N.Mtns.) 1 485.5 I B I 6.8 I 1.00 I DS FISH SLOUGH I 493.3 I B I 6.6 1 0.20 1 DS HILTON CREEK I 511.7 I B I 6.7 1 2.50 1 DS ORTIGALITA I 535.6 I B 1 6.9 I 1.00 I SS HARTLEY SPRINGS I 536.0 I B I 6.6 I 0.50 I DS CALAVERAS (So.of Calaveras Res) 1 541.0 1 B I 6.2 I 15.00 I SS MONTEREY BAY - TULARCITOS I 543.3 I B I 7.1 1 0.50 I DS _ PALO COLORADO - SUR I 544.0 1 B I 7.0 1 3.00 I SS QUIEN SABE I 554.3 1 B 1 6.5 I 1.00 I SS MONO LAKE I 572.0 I B 1 6.6 I 2.50 I DS ZAYANTE-VERGELES 1 572.7 I B 1 6.8 1 0.10 I SS SAN ANDREAS (1906) I 577.9 I A I 7.9 I 24.00 ( SS SARGENT I 578.1 1 B 1 6.8 I 3.00 1 SS ROBINSON CREEK I 603.3 I B 1 6.5 1 0.50 1 DS SAN GREGORIO I 618.7 I A I 7.3 1 5.00 I SS GREENVILLE I 628.0 1 B 1 6.9 I 2.00 I SS MONTE VISTA - SHANNON I 628.2 1 B I 6.5 1 0.40 I DS HAYWARD (SE Extension) I 628.4 1 B I 6.5 1 3.00 1 SS ANTELOPE VALLEY I 643.6 1 B I 6.7 I 0.80 I DS HAYWARD (Total Length) I 648.1 1 A I 7.1 1 9.00 I SS CALAVERAS (No.of Calaveras Res) I 648.1 1 B I 6.8 I 6.00 I SS GENOA I 669.0 1 B I 6.9 1 1.00 I DS CONCORD - GREEN VALLEY I 696.0 I B I 6.9 I 6.00 I SS RODGERS CREEK I 734.7 I A 1 7.0 1 9.00 I SS WEST NAPA I 735.7 I B 1 6.5 1 1.00 I SS POINT REYES I 753.4 I B I 6.8 I 0.30 I DS HUNTING CREEK - BERRYESSA I 758.2 1 B 1 6.9 I 6.00 I SS MAACAMA (South) I 797.5 I B 1 6.9 1 9.00 I SS COLLAYOMI I 814.5 I B I 6.5 1 0.60 I SS - BARTLETT SPRINGS I 818.1 1 A I 7.1 I 6.00 I SS MAACAMA (Central) 1 839.2 I A I 7.1 I 9.00 I SS MAACAMA (North) I 898.8 I A I 7.1 I 9.00 1 SS ROUND VALLEY (N. S.F.Bay) I 905.0 1 B I 6.8 1 6.00 I SS _ BATTLE CREEK 1 928.8 I B I 6.5 1 0.50 I DS LAKE MOUNTAIN I 963.5 I B 1 6.7 I 6.00 I SS GARBERVILLE-BRICELAND I 980.6 1 B I 6.9 I 9.00 I SS MENDOCINO FAULT ZONE 1 1036.8 I A 1 7.4 I 35.00 I DS .- LITTLE SALMON (Onshore) 1 1043.6 I A I 7.0 I 5.00 I DS MAD RIVER 1 1046.5 I B I 7.1 I 0.70 I DS CASCADIA SUBDUCTION ZONE 1 1050.4 I A I 8.3 I 35.00 1 DS McKINLEYVILLE 1 1056.9 I B I 7.0 1 0.60 I DS TRINIDAD 1 1058.4 I B I 7.3 I 2.50 I DS FICKLE HILL 1 1058.8 I B I 6.9 I 0.60 I DS TABLE BLUFF 1 1064.2 I B I 7.0 1 0.60 I DS LITTLE SALMON (Offshore) 1 1077.5 1 B I 7.1 1 1.00 I DS 0 - v LO oCl) M c w o LO N O O O O 'i V1 NLO f� •.w O 0001Z - H � L O W O LO_ Q o o U') o LO o _ N N � O O (6) uoileja19ooy jeajoads APPENDIX C GRADING GUIDELINES -' Grading should be performed to at least the minimum requirements of the governing agencies, Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code, the geotechnical report and the guidelines presented below. All of the guidelines may not apply to a specific site and additional recommendations may be necessary during the grading phase. — Site Clearing Trees, dense vegetation, and other deleterious materials should be removed from the site. Non-organic debris or concrete may be placed in deeper fill areas under direction of the Soils engineer. Subdrainage 1. During grading, the Geologist and Soils Engineer should evaluate the necessity of placing additional drains (see Plate A). 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. ._ (1) 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. 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 (Plate A). 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. (2) 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. 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. (3) 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. 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)